HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 1Stonegate Composite -CMU
DEVELOPMENT Pl.ANN/MG
CITY OF RENTON
APR 2 1 2009
RECEIVED
--
~'11~1.o!'tA~~~~:\l'IG C\1'1 QI' ... ~ ...
. ~\>R1 \ 10~
f\'E.C~\\IEO
r
1 :
e
r • ',
'· < ~
I
!
!
~
~
~
;i
8 .
I
!
C
~
~
8
" • " '
J
I • " ~
t
~
' ~
i
~
RACT "H" I
I
I
I
l
I
I
i I
I r -----i :
---'-'-,
I
!
f
I
' '
I
I
I
TRACT "A"
r _ 100' Wt:TLAND BUFFER ___ /
I
GENERATOR
I
'-'-, ,,
I ' ---I '
I '
I ',
I '
I ' I
I
I
I
I
' I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
NE 3-23-5
-------r ,1
', 1· 1,/ '-1, '-.
'-'
--------------1. ,I I i:
-IJ!
I I
I .. "'-------____;~~-·II CONTROL ~ I '>V ', -Ll... a a BUILDING
LOT 1
"' ' ... ... ' ' I ',, I
' i ... "' ' t I ... ... w
' r w ... ... I
I
~~ I ... "¥ ... ... , r-... ... w
' lw I ... ... ~
"" T , ... w v ,.
I
l"' I ... ... ...
m ... , lw w ... ... ... e '
~ /-., I ... .. "' .. ) I'¥ ~ "' "' "' a ~I I ~·"' ... .. w
' w1 I
~ ~ w ... "' ...
w <, I
§ ~I W ... ... "' ;t I ... ... ... ...
... , •v ... ,,
I" ,; w ...
"'I ... .• V
!IL I "' "' ... <· ... , ... ... ,,
~
N
" ' " ~
b+i f%l ,M I
SC\I.E IN FEET
Rolh Hill Engineering Partners, LLC
_........-.... 2600116lhA-etiueNEt100
IR@tlhl IHI o ~ ~ Balewe, Waslwogtc,n 98(XM
TeU25..1!69_9'48 ...._........
F;o,;•2!>.869.1190
"'
... ... "'
•v ... ....
w ... ... ... ...
... ... ... ... ... ,. ... ... • ... "' ... • ... 0 ... ... ... ...
0
'+" ~ 'I'-'V w ... "' C ,. ... ... "' ...
... w "' ... "'
w "' ... ... ...
' ... V TRA(;,T "r('
+ ... SIONE(i.ATE ...
<· ... "' ... ...
... ... .. "' w
... "' ·• "' "'
,.
...
"'
"' ...
"' ...
...
"'
w
"'
'ii
...
... ... / 11~:1:_·i-------~-
"" 1-J,, ""•""/ 'l'
~r·:~1-v
"' I 1 i /'¥
... ...
...
.., ;""I ........ J "" • I
, .
t~""\!
<
----L" ____ i
//"' /"'; <· ,J,,/ : .... I "" -v
'V -t;..,-.;f ~:~;_:,\-., . '
I "'/ "',,, .... ~ "'
/W . W _ft ...;,/
• ...
... ...
NO. REVISION "'
:H:
~
~
l'..l ~
" ,j
"
DATE I APPR
-~
-= -
I
I
j
I
I
I
l
I
l
I
j
I
I
I
j
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
I
i
I
I
j
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
i
I
I
j
I
'
I
' I
' I
I
I
I
' I
I
'
I
I
I
I
m/
~I Ir-f-,
~I --,
I
' I
' I
I
AS NOTED
1,,.~-;,_1
-~
PLANTING LEGEND
0
SPECIES
MALUS#1
(SEE NOTES FOR CULTIVARS)
MALUS#2
(SEE NOTES FOR CUL TIVARS)
THUJA OCCIDENTAUS
'EMERALD GREEN'
8 BERBERIS THUNBERGII
'AffiOPURPUREA'
SI HEMEROCALLJS FULVA
'STELLA D'ORO'
(v HELJCTOTRICHON
SEMPERVIRENS
0 LAVAN DULA ANGUSTIFOLJA
0 PHORMIUM TENAX
E9 POL YST1CHUM MUNJTUM
8 RHODODENDRON #1
(SEE NOTES FOR CULTIVARS)
8 RHODODENDRON #2
(SEE NOTES FOR CUL TIVAR$)
0 VIBURNUM DAVIDII
(SEE NOTES FOR CULTlVARS)
COMMON NAME QUANTITY CONDITION & SIZE
CRABAPPLE 3 B&B OR CONTAINER
6' HEIGHT MIN
B&B OR CONTAINER
CRABAPPLE 3 6' HEIGHT MIN
B&B OR CONTAINER
EMERALD ARBORVITAE 57 6' HEIGHT MIN
RED-LEAF BARBERRY 4 5 GAL. CONTAINER
DAYLILY 152 1 GAL. CONTAINER
BLUE OAT GRASS 15 1 GAL. CONTAINER
LAVENDER 36 2 GAL CONTAINER
NEW ZEALAND FLAX 5 GAL. CONTAINER
SWORD FERN 26 2 GAL. CONTAINER
RHODODENDRON 2 5 GAL. CONTAINER
RHODODENDRON 2 5 GAL. CONTAINER
DAVID'S VIBURNUM 84 2 GAL CONTAINER
• m
FRAGARJA CHILOENSIS
POTENTILLA FRUTJCOSA
'SUTTER'$ GOLD'
WILD STRAWBERRY xx 2"POT
POTENTILLA xx 1 GAL.
'I I
·~::~-
®
NOTES:
CRABAPPLES
FOR BOTH MALUS 1 AND MAL US 2, SELECT CUL TIVARS FROM THE FOLLOWING
LIST:
CORAL BURST
FIREBIRD
LOLLIPOP
SARGENT
PINK PRINCESS
RHODODENDRONS
FOR BOTH RHODODENDRON 1 ANO RHODODENDRON 2, SELECT CUL TIVARS
FROM FOLLOWING UST: Of\f~,
MRS. FURNIVAL "-l..0PMt:
FURNIVAL'S DAUGHTER Clfy OF NTF! P!,JW.,,.,,;..
COTTON CANOY . c!l{top,j•~ ....
TWIGHUGHT PINK
BOW BELLS APR 2 1 2009
RECEIVED
~R CITY OF
RENTON
Plcnniog/Building/Public Wonts Dept.
STONEGATE
LIFT STATION REPLACEMENT
LANDSCAPING PLAN
9/12/2008
LI
·-I •
<'
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
M E M O R A N D U M
February 3, 2011
Carrie Olson, Engineering Specialist -CED
(_ oA,l./2._ndy Moya, Records Management Specialist
V · Returned Recorded Documents:
Bill of Sale -#20101214000289
(NW WA Synod of the Evangelical Lutheran Church)
The attached document has been recorded with King County and is being returned to
you, Please forward copies to parties of interest. The original will be retained by the City
Clerk's Office.
Thank you.
Attachment
cc: SA-08-049
h:lcityclerklrecords specialist\correspondence & memos -cindy\recorded documents\bill of
sale -olson.doc
Return Address:
11111111111111111
2010121~006~i89 City Clerk's Office
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
CITY OF RENTON BS
PAGE-001 OF 002 IZ/14/2010 11:00
KING COUNTY, IJA
BILL OF SALE I Proj Name:Ve~ ,.r,...: S -Co,...,,L!.!•pertyTax Parcel Number:?01.//'dOOO"lS. SID.~
Project File#: w~ 'a; ,5""[ f O l Streetlntersection'\t,)h,.\....> _ -1.L / z~dress: lf ['? $. ?,,...R 5-J..
Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference numbers are on page __ .
Grantor(s): . Grantee(s):
1. rJ W IN"" J...,~.,.t.,... SY"' 0 cl o~ 1. City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation
2. +-1-.., fN "',,. '? <I~" ..f L.::.. f/.. .. ,,. ..,.. t.'t.. .. --..r....
The Grantor, as named above, for, and in consideration of mutual benefits, hereby grants, bargains, sells and delivers to the
Grantee, as n~ed above, the following described personal property:
WATER SYSTEM: Length Sizei ~
~o L.F. of ,, 't>.:r'. Water Main
L.F.of ,, Water Main
L.F. of ,, Water Main
I each of b ,, Gate Valves
each of ,, Gate Valves
each of Fire Hydrant Assemblies
SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM: L=th ~ Tvpe
L.F.of ,, Sewer Main
L.F. of ,, Sewer Main Ill/ ,4 L.F. of ,, Sewer Main
each of ,, Diameter Manholes
each of ,, Diameter Manholes
each of ,, Lift Stations
STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEM: !&ngth Size ~
L.F.'of " Storm Main
L.F. of " StonnMain ,.,. /A-L.F. of ,, Storm Main
each of ,, Storm Inlet/Outlet -each of ,, Storm Catch Basin
each of ,, Manhole
STREET IMPROVMENTS: (Includi1 Curb, Gutter, Sidewalk, Asphalt Pavement)
.Qi,!,, ~ Sidewalk S-c> t:f: '7. y,
Width Asphalt Pavement: SY or L. F. of
STREET LIGHTING: e-;2u,o-oo7i.f 11,b> # of Poles
By this conveyance, Grantor will warrant and defend the sale hereby made unto the Grantee against all and every person or persons,
whomsoever, lawfullv claimino-or to claim the same. This convevance shall bind the heirs, executors, administrators and assio-ns forever.
O:\Forms\PBPW\BILLSALE2.D0C\bh Pagel
r
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Granter has caused this instrument to be executed this !2. day of )2g, 20 IT>.
v....?5 ~ _;::> ~
INDIVIDUAL FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Notary Seal must be within box STATEOFWASHINGTON )ss
COUNTY OF KING ) ~
T __ .... • ::.. that I know or have satisfactory evidence that L · A. 'i. \ ~ e.
IIANCY GREENING MCKENZlEc :u ..\-o<\ signed this instrument and
NOT A RY PLJBLffid.vledged itto be his/her/their free aod voluntary act for the uses and purposes
STATE Of WASHINGR~i ned in the instrument ~
COMMISSION EXPIRE l\o 1 , 1,., • \) d oa'": . ., · '
FEBRUARY 25 2 · ,
• .v " .· , Public m al\d for~tate dfWlishington
Notary (Print) N,ci__'<\c.. 'i C' <LM'\, f\c, ~~e:r-2.• i::..
My appointmeri ex\ires: 2-\ z S-\2.05
Dated: \ '2--'1. I D
REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Notary Seal must be within box STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS
COUNTY OF KING )
l certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
signed this instrument, on oath
stated that he/she/they was/were authorized to execute the instrument and
acknowledged it as the and
of to be the free and voluntary act of such
party/parties for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Notary (Print)
My appointment expires:
Dated:
CORPORATE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Notary Seal must be within box STATEOFWASHINGTON )ss
COUNTY OF KING )
On this ___ day of 20 _, before me personally appeared
to me known to
be of the corporation that
executed the within instrument, and acknowledge the said instrument to be the free
and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein
mentioned, and each on oath stated that be/she was authorized to execute said
instrument and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation.
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Notary (Print)
My appointment expires:
Dated:
O:\Fonns\PBPW\BILLSALE2.D0C\bh Page2
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
STATE OF W ASHfNGTON )
) ss.
County of King )
Nancy Thompson being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states:
That on the 25th day of August 2009, affiant deposited via the United States Mail a sealed
envelope(s) containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to
the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition.
Signature:
Application, Petition or Case No.: Stonegate Lift Station Appeal of SEPA Determination
LUA 09-049, ECF
The Decision or Recommendation contains a complete list of the Parties of Record
August 25, 2009
OFFICE OF THE HEARING EXAMINER
CITY OF RENTON
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
APPELLANT: Douglas Chappelle
Stonegate Lift Station Appeal of SEPA Determination
LUA-09-049, ECF
After reviewing the Appellant's written requests for a hearing
and examining available information on file, the Examiner
conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows:
The following minutes are a summary of the August 4, 2009 hearing.
The legal record is recorded on CD.
The hearing opened on Tuesday, August 4, 2009, at 9: 16 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of
the Renton City Hall. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner.
The following exhibits were entered into the record:
Exhibit No. 1: Hearing Examiner's file containing Exhibit No. 2: Impervious surface diagram
the original appeal letter and notification of this
hearing.
Exhibit No. 3: Black & white Aerial Photo with Exhibit No. A: Photo of the Critical Areas Report
Wetland boundaries and l 00' Circles to show dated August 2008, Fig 4 and Ex. 7 to the SEPA
location of buffer. report showing correct location ofDP4
Exhibit No. B: Photo of the Critical Areas Report Exhibit No. C: Diagram in relation to Exhibits A
dated August 2008, Fig 4 and Ex. 7 to the SEPA & B showing Lots I and 2.
report.
Exhibit No. D: Vicinity Map showing proposed Exhibit No. E: Aerial photograph showing
lift station and utilities. existing lift station and Location of new lift station.
Exhibit No. F: Copv of Stonel.!ate Plat Exhibit No. G: Note 18 which refers to Exhibit F
Exhibit No. H: Chart showing what lift station Exhibit No. I: Landscape Plan
would include.
Exhibit No. J: Stream and stream buffer Exhibit No. K: Drawing of new lift station with
buffer boundary.
,,......._,
Stonegate Lift Station Appcu,
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 2
Exhibit No. L: Enlargement of Exhibit K.
Parties Present:
Vanessa Dolbee
Ann Nielsen, Assistant City Attorney
Douglas Chappelle (Appellant)
•
Exhibit No. M: Stonegate Homeowners'
Association/City of Renton Letter of Agreement
regarding the easement on Tract H.
Preliminary Matter: Ms. Nielsen stated that as part of the yellow file there is a critical areas report dated
August 2008, in that report there is a Fig. 4, which is a diagram that she believed was in error. The error at
issue is the location ofDP4, the DP4 is correctly located in the NE quadrant of Exhibit A.
Douglas Chappelle stated that he was here because of three fundamental areas that as an impacted citizen, as a
tax payer and also as a professional engineer these areas are very important to him.
As an impacted citizen, this project is taking place in his neighborhood and he has been involved with this
project from the time it became publicly known. There have been a number of concerns that he has raised
throughout the process.
One concern seems that his concerns have not been heard. Some were not addressed in the final package and
he hopes that those might be corrected or explained through this hearing.
As a tax payer, the question appears to be how badly does the City really need this lift station given the
changing circumstances. A quick calculation says that every man, woman and child is $50 into this project.
There is a financial interest in the right thing being done the first time, and finally as a professional engineer he
is very much interested in seeing projects that impact the community being completed with professional
confidence, completely and accurately well done from the very beginning.
He hopes to see that the City has accurately thought through this and that the project has accurately been
assessed as being appropriate and the impacts that this will have on the community.
He is not here to shut down the project, it will ultimately be needed somewhere, some place and at some time.
He would like to be assured that this is the right place and time for such a project. Based on current data, that
does not appear to be entirely clear.
In his appeal, there are seven bullet points that he is most concerned about:
1. Incomplete and inaccurate package. There were several inaccurate calculations with respect to impervious
area. The traffic control and safety plans are more important to the neighborhood. This neighborhood has
been particularly hard hit with the Duvall Road, Coal Creek Parkway construction. The ERC simply stated
that the traffic plan needed to be improved prior to starting the project. However, the traffic control plan was
not required to be a part of the application for public comment. RCW does require obtaining and including
information regarding significant impacts.
Stonegate Lift Station Appeal
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 3
In terms of the impervious surface calculation, the City provided a landscaping plan with a calculation of
several hundred square feet of impervious surface being added. The overlay of the grid on top of the
landscaping (Ex. 2) plan shows that a more accurate calculation of the impervious area would be closer to
3,500 square feet. The report stated that the new impervious surface would be approximately 1,000 square
feet.
The scale of the grid pattern indicates each square is exactly JO-feet. On the diagram, the light grey area is
concrete, the light grey without any data is the existing building, and the dark grey area is pavement.
3. Wetland Downgrade Buffer Description. The first map he presented was a photo from the critical areas
report that had been layered over with a map downloaded from Google, and on top of that were four drawn
circles.
NE 261h is to the South and 148'h is to the East. The solid black areas are the generator areas, control areas and
pavement areas that were noted in the landscaping plan. The solid black line is the wetland boundary
delineation, slightly below that is a dashed line for the wetland buffer boundary. The circles are all I 00-foot
radius circles and the photo shows that the JOO-foot arcs overlap the installation of the facility and that the
facility would encroach into the buffer.
4. Was withdrawn due to the City offering a correction to this issue.
5. Noise Standards. The ERC determined that an emergency generator would create a certain amount of noise
at the property between Tract Hand Lot I, the City did not get an easement to, and the use of that would
amount to trespass. The actual easement was recorded with King County and subsequently revised and
corrected
Ms. Nielsen interjected that #5 is not an issue with SEPA and not a part of the SEPA determination and so
would be beyond the jurisdiction of the Hearing Examiner. Item 2and 7 are also not appropriate issues to be
before the Hearing Examiner. Item 6, the Noise, Traffic Control and Traffic Safety Plan, while it is noted
under appellant's concerns, these are premature at this point. Those are items that will be taken up at a later
date prior to the commencement of the construction. They are not SEPA based issues.
Doug Chappelle continued that the noise calculation from the generator to the property line was not done
correctly, it should be at the easement boundary rather than the lot line between Tract Hand Lot I. The
applicant would have to add 6dBA of attenuation to the generator in order to meet the WAC required noise on
top of the property that they control. The ERC has erred due to considering the wrong property boundary.
6. ERC failed to impose sufficient conditions to mitigate impact. There is no Traffic Control plan in
existence. It appears that the public is being denied the opportunity to review, comment or object to
documentation with respect to the Traffic and Safety Plans. There should be more attention to schedule and
accuracy. In particular there should be more concern for the school children that gather in that location
waiting for a school bus. Children from kindergarten through high school would gather and wait just a few
feet from the construction site.
It appears that the ERC failed in their duties to ensure the completeness of the package such that it addressed
the communities concerns under this applicant.
/~
Stonegate Lift Station Appc_,
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 4
7. There are allowances within the RCW that state, if there are utilities projects then all the noise regulations
and all other regulations do not apply. That does make sense, because a person does not need to file an
injunction against a tractor making noise while installing a sewer line for an occupied house. Legislature has
stated that if it is an essential utilities project, there cannot be nuisance stoppages of critical work.
This is not an essential utility project, as there is no one that is dependent upon this project being implemented
that exist today. This has been shown by responses to emails and briefings at homeowner's association
meetings. The City will not be able to point to a single person today that would suffer if this project did not
move forward. On that basis, the ERC should have identified this as not being subject to the essential utilities
exclusion within the RCW and assured that the applicant would conform to all applicable regulations
regarding environmental, occupational safety and health as implemented in the RCW.
This then falls under the category of omission or failure to impose sufficient conditions.
The Examiner stated that it had been earlier stated that they did attempt to meet noise standards. They have
not exempted themselves from complying with SEPA or other regulations because this is an essential project.
This does not appear to be relevant at this point.
Mr. Chappelle further stated that the 45 dBA that they referred to is the day to day normal operations after they
are finished with the construction. What the package is silent on is the construction activities. The ERC
should have made a declarative statement one way or the other as to whether or not this project qualifies as an
essential utility project.
Review of the record showed that some of the areas that fall under parks, recreational and open space came
back with no comment. There were a number of public comments received that suggest that the community
was concerned about these areas that are addressed by the SEPA with respect to animals, plants etc. The
construction of the sanitary lift facility in this area, Tract H had been dedicated to open space. The
Comprehensive Plan states that each department has certain responsibilities to defend these interest areas
within the City and the ERC determination as published is not at all clear that such things were being done.
There are bobcats, deer and bear running through that area, that space should be preserved and yet with this
application, that space would be destroyed.
After discussion regarding Item #2, the Examiner stated that 2 was not a valid SEPA appeal issue based on the
explanation given. The Examiner further stated that# 2 and #7 are out in regards to today's hearing.
A short break was taken ---Returned at I 0:43 am
Ms. Nielsen stated that she had no cross examination for Mr. Chappelle. Ms. Dolbee would give background
information, John Hobson would talk about project related issues and Mr. Christensen would discuss other
efforts regarding the mitigation for the actual construction.
Ms. Dolbee gave a brief overview of the project and entered exhibits. The applicant asked for a SEPA
determination for the replacement of the existing Stonegate Lift Station and the Summerwind Lift Station for
one combined lift station and approximately one thousand linear feet of 12 inch and 15 inch sanitary sewer
pipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8 inch sanitary sewer pipe. The sanitary sewer pipes are located within the rights-
of-way of NE Sunset Boulevard, NE 261h Street, Lyons Ave NE, NE 22"d Court, NE 20'" Street and Field Ave
NE. The new lift station would be located in the northeast corner of the parcel.
Stonegate Lift Station Appeal
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 5
The ERC issued a DNS-M with 2 mitigation measures.
With SEPA, if something is a code requirement, safety plan, traffic plan, times of construction, etc., those are
not made additional mitigation measures because they are subject to appeal and those requirements must stand.
In this circumstance, the safety and traffic plan are not required submittals for the SEPA review but are
required prior to commencement of construction. Those will have to be reviewed and approved.
Just north of26'" Street is the existing Stonegate lift station that will be removed. It is approximately the size
of a large dog house. North of that is Tract H, the location of the n_ew Stonegate lift station. There is a note on
the plat that states that Tract H is for open space and for signs and lighting and shall be owned and maintained
by the Stonegate Homeowners' Association and is subject to an easement for sanitary sewer and storm
drainage in favor of the City of Renton. The lawn area would not be impacted and would remain the same.
The area for the new lift station is currently overgrown with blackberries and other vegetation.
The new Stonegate lift station would include a control building, a generator, both of which would be above
ground. Below ground to the east would be an overflow storage, a wet well and a valve vault.
The landscape shows landscaping to the east, west and south, which would provide substantial screening from
the neighborhood and the asphalt driveway. The lift station would be accessed directly off of l 48'h Avenue
SE.
There were two streams identified in the critical areas report and two wetlands. Within the area of the lift
station there are two streams and one wetland, one stream is a Class 4 stream on the west side of Lots I and 2.
The sewer division will fence the wetland buffer and the easement to provide protection during construction.
Ann Nielsen asked questions of Vanessa Dolbee regarding the process of the critical area study and the
geotechnical study and the fact that both were based on expert studies and analysis. The reports meet the City
code requirements. These studies were also evaluated as a part of the SEPA process.
Mr. Chappelle asked questions of Vanessa Dolbee regarding the traffic control plan and that it is required by
ordinance and not SEPA, and wondered why SEPA asked for proposed measures to reduce or control
transportation impacts.
Ann Nielsen stated that Ms. Dolbee had indicated that the traffic mitigation plan was not required as part of
this particular SEPA evaluation The basis for that determination is that it will be evaluated at a later date
prior to the commencement of construction. Traffic impacts are reviewed if the impacts increase by the
construction as a direct result of this project. There may be some temporary construction traffic impacts, but
that would end when the construction ends.
Mr. Chappelle stated that the open space was the only recreation area in the area. On the right hand leg of
Tract H there is a note that shows the existing sanitary station.
The Examiner stated that the easement covers the entirety of Tract H, not just a portion of it.
John Hobson stated that he is the project manager for the design construction for the Stonegate lift station
project. Currently the Stonegate station is serving more than it was originally designed for, it is at the low end
of the basin and there are new neighborhoods that flow into the system. It no longer has the overflow capacity
that is required. It currently pumps up to the Summerwind lift station and relies on the Summerwind lift
~
Stonegate Lift Station Appc«1
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 6
station to pump all the sewage to Duvall Avenue. Summerwind lift station is 25-years old, it is at the end of its
lifecycle. It does not make any sense to replace the Summerwind lift station when it can be removed, run
gravity down to the Stonegate lift station and rebuild the Stonegate station big enough to take the entire basin
and serve it with one station rather than two and have the required overflow capacity. Should there be some
type of shutdown by the facility or generator failure there would still be two hours of time for maintenance
crews to get out and hook up a portable generator as well.
This new design has two backups, an on-site generator and a connection for a portable generator. If the new
station is not put in now, there would be a sewer moratorium and no further development in the area would be
allowed. The new station would be designed to serve the entire basin at full build out, a 20 year anticipated
growth.
Recently a developer attempted to build a new house on 148th and in the process of putting in the sewer line,
the road was chewed up quite badly, as part of this project, that part of 148'" that was damaged would be
resurfaced
A new drawing of the lift station with regards to the wetland boundary was presented, the circular arcs were
incorporated into the new drawings. The I 00-foot arcs show that projecting I 00 feet off the center, the buffer
is protected in all directions. They will be building a fence along the buffer line and will have no construction
in the buffer area. There will be no permanent construction within the buffer area. The actual temporary
construction will also stay outside of the buffer area.
Regarding the impervious surface, Mr. Chappelle is correct, the actual addition of impervious surface is just
slightly under 4,400 square feet. That additional impervious surface is under the required surface for doing
any type of mitigation to it under the 2005 King County Surface Water Manual, however, the City is going
above and beyond and will be installing an oil/water separator on the site for water quality purposes and the
water will be dispersed using a level spreader, which will slow the rate down so it does not come out in a fixed
small point, it will be spread out and flow into the buffer area through a long spread pipe.
Mr. Chappelle stated that he appreciated that the City is recognizing that there were some errors, it was his
feeling that those errors are not going to have any outcome in the mitigation area. There is one concern
remaining and that would be with the animals that are in the area, in particular a bobcat that has moved in the
area. He asked if anything was being done to protect those animals.
lion Logan stated that she is with ESA Adolfson, 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Ste. 200, Seattle 98106. She is
a professional wetland scientist and she did the field work on the wetland boundary, she visited the site on
June 5, 2007 and a second time on February 14, 2008.
The incorrect figure within the SEPA report on Exhibit 7 (fig 4), the error was DP4 located at the NE corner of
the exhibit. DP4 showed an intrusion that was not in the wetland area, it showed it just outside of the wetland,
and that is incorrect.
DP stands for Data Plot -pits are dug into the ground data sheets are written up that characterize the wetland
or upland areas. She was unaware that the location on the map was incorrect until the appellant's letter. She
went back to the original sketch map that was made after the site visit. The original map shows that DP4 was
meant to be within the wetland. She worked with the CAD technician in the office, pulled up the original land
survey data, went through each of the flag points and tried to figure out if there was an error made on their
part. There was an error. There was a flag on the map that read "DP" they were not sure _where it had come
Stonegate Lift Station Appeal
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 7
from, most likely from some previous flagging, it is an unidentified point that was picked up by the surveyors
and later on incorrectly labeled as DP4.
A corrective figure, which was entered at the beginning of the hearing, shows DP4 in the correct location and
titled "corrected Figure 4".
They follow the Arrny Corps of Engineers 1987 Wetland Delineation Manual, which is adopted by the City of
Renton Municipal Code. It is based on the soil, vegetation and general hydrology. The wetland is determined
by digging the data plots in the upland and wetland and then it is determined where the boundary lies between
the two. The soils would be probed to find the edge of the wetland, everything has to meet the criteria that is
outlined in the Army Corps of Engineers manual.
It is not significant that it was misplaced on the exhibit, the wetlands seem to have been defined in the same
place in both exhibits.
Ms. Nielsen concluded that appeal items 2, 3, 4, and 7 could be withdrawn from the appeal. This was agreed
by both parties, leaving items I, 5, and 6 still at appeal.
Lunch Break: Return I :32 pm.
Dave Christensen, City's Waste Water Utilities, Engineering Supervisor stated the efforts that the City has
gone through with the neighborhood in negotiations for the easement that was obtained and in order to
mitigate neighborhood concerns.
He has been meeting with this neighborhood for approximately a year and a half trying to understand what the
issues are with the project and identifying the things that could be taken care of as part of the project. As for
the easement for the new lift station location, six specific items were found agreeable to the homeowners'
association. There is a written agreement that includes the following:
Roadway improvements on 148'" including pavement, curb, gutter and sidewalks.
Where the sewer line would be installed on the roadway, they are required to grind and overlay
those portions that were disturbed, including a five foot grind on the edges and a repave of the rest
of the roadway. They preferred to have a subdivision that looks like it has new roadways, so it
was agreed that they would grind to a 2" grind and overlay on all of the public roadways contained
within the Stonegate plat.
Restore all trench work with a hot mix patch.
Landscaping would be installed to blend with the existing landscaping on Tract H around the lift
station in order to buffer the station from the surrounding Stonegate neighborhood.
As part of the new lift station there is an emergency generator that will be on the site, they agreed
to not exceed 45 dba on the property line between Tract H and Lot I on Stonegate. This generator
will only operate when the other generator cannot operate.
When they exit the Stonegate neighborhood and enter into the Summerwind neighborhood they go
through Tract G, which is an emergency Fire Department access road. There are two gates on that
road, one on each end. They have agreed to replace those gates with more current conforming
gates that allow for better pedestrian access and bicycle passage.
These agreements are listed in a letter of agreement between the City of Renton and the Stonegate
Homeowners' Association.
'· Stonegate Lift Station Appeal
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 8
Currently the existing lift station is accessed off of NE 261h Street, that access has now been moved to 148'"
Ave SE in order to not have maintenance affect the neighborhood when they are working and doing
maintenance on the lift station. The intersection of NE 26 1
" and 148'" is the location where the Issaquah School
District picks up the school children. It has been agreed that the contractor will not start work in that
intersection area until after 9:00 am to allow the school children to be picked up.
They have also established an e-mail contact and a phone contact with the Stonegate Homeowners'
Association and the Summerwind Homeowners' Association so that as activities occur within the
neighborhood they can be kept up to date on what is happening with the project. The scheduled hours of work
are standard for the City of Renton of7:00 am -5:00 pm Monday through Friday with the additional safety
concession of9:00 am at the entrance to accommodate the school children. They do not anticipate any
weekend work, but it cannot be completely excluded. It would have to be by special request from the
contractor. Code does not allow work on Sunday for any reason.
Mr. Chappelle asked about the safety plan that appears to protect the workers with no focus on the
neighborhood. If a construction mitigation plan is required then one of the things attached would be a
preliminary traffic control plan. It appears that these plans do exist in some circumstances prior to the final
application process.
The Examiner questioned Mr. Christensen regarding safety standards for the general public.
Mr. Christensen stated that those standards are identified in their construction documents and the state has
documentation for the public safety through their L&I documents. The City and the State have requirements
that not only protect the workers but as well the general public that are around the project. They have traffic
cones, one or two tlaggers depending upon the length of the trench. This project is not unique in any manner,
this standard construction that is done in neighborhoods throughout the City.
Mr. Chappelle stated that he has stated his desires for communication so that there is no misunderstanding of
expectations on either side.
Mr. Christensen stated that the generator would be run once a week or once a month during normal daytime
hours to ensure that its operation is there when the emergency does occur. It is there for emergency purposes
only, but it does require testing to make sure it is operational when an emergency does occur. Most likely it
would be once a month.
Mr. Chappelle questioned the start time of9:00 am, but what about when the children return from school,
which normally occurs between 2:30 and 4:00 pm.
Mr. Christensen stated that was not an issue expressed by the homeowners' association, it appeared to not be
as critical a time as the morning, so no modifications were made to the afternoon work schedule. If it was
brought up by the homeowners' association, they would make every effort to accommodate. The impo,tant
thing to remember is that the work being done at the intersection would take 1-3 days and then they will be
moving up the street.
Mr. Chappelle stated that he did not know about the agreement with the homeowners' association and the City
for the easement and therefore, he would withdraw issue #5.
Stonegate Lift Station Appeal
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 9
The Examiner explained the SEPA appeal process and the fact that sometimes the City adds some code
provisions, but those provisions are not part of the SEPA and therefore are not subject to appeal. As each
section of street is torn up, people living in that section will be inconvenienced when coming or going. Those
things have to be coordinated. It appears that there is an e-mail and phone list to help do that. So while the
concern for the neighborhood is understood, some of the issues are not really SEPA issues, hopefully these
issues can be settled prior to construction
Mr. Chappelle stated that he did understand, but since they are not addressed anywhere else he has no other
recourse. He would like that concern to be reflected in the record, he would not belabor the issue any further.
Upon questioning by Mr. Chappelle, Mr. Christensen stated that he is not a licensed engineer but within the
staff there are multiple professional engineers and this project was designed by an outside consultant and the
people working on it are registered professional engineers.
In closing, Mr. Chappelle stated that his concern with the incomplete and inaccurate application package has
had several of the omissions and errors corrected. He is still concerned with the impacts to wildlife, it appears
that the particular department reviewed the package prior to the received comments in that area. It is not
entirely clear that the public comment was available to the ERC when that determination was made, it may not
have resulted in any mitigation, but it should be included in the record.
With respect to the comprehensive plan concerns and how priorities are balanced it appears that would be best
covered in another venue, he would welcome the Examiner's findings in that area based on the arguments
presented today.
He welcomed the City's correction on the 100' buffer depiction to more accurately make that calculation. He
also welcomed the correction on the DP 4 as it was in the critical areas report to explain the error and make it
clear that the City is conforming to the requirements.
As to the noise standards, he has withdrawn that concern.
With respect to the failure to impose sufficient conditions on noise, traffic, and safety, he still has concerns
that the planning is not complete nor an accurate depiction of what is going to happen within the community.
They appear to be a long ways from an acceptable standard in terms of communicating with the community.
He would like to see the City step up to a much higher standard of coordination to make sure there are no
tragedies in the neighborhood.
With respect to the schedule, there still exist some discrepancies within the application package regarding how
long this will take. He recalled a statement being made at one of the homeowners' meetings that this project
could take as long as IS months. That makes it appear that the project has not been planned out. There just is
not a lot of evidence that good planning has been done.
In closing, Ms. Nielsen stated that she would like to clarify that what is left in this appeal is # I and #6
everything else has been stipulated to or withdrawn.
It appears that the main issue today is a simple fact of inconvenience of construction that must be dealt with in
this neighborhood. There is an inconvenience with highway repair that everyone that drives those roads must
deal with, there is inconvenience when bridges get shut down for a Seafair festival. The bottom line is, this is
~
Stonegate Lift Station Appc~,
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 10
catalyzed by inconvenience, which is not necessarily unjustified. Anyone who lives on this residential or
public street would obviously be inconvenienced.
What is before the Examiner is a limited issue, whether this project and in particular the determination that
SEPA came to, that is DNS-M, whether the Appellant has shown that there is a significant adverse impact, if
so was it not mitigated by the mitigation conditions that were put upon by SEPAs evaluation and issuance ofa
DNS-M. In the first instance, with # I it does not appear that the Appellant has come close to meeting his
burden to overcome the SEPA determination, he made general categorizations of what he believes is missing
or erroneous information without being able to substantiate what is basis for those allegation. The City has
shown the documentation, methodology and information that it relied on, there has been no concrete evidence
or showing any inconsistencies or omissions.
#6 brings the point of have the impacts been mitigated, there are going to be impacts and they are an
inconvenience. The inconvenience will not only be to the people living there, but the people having to travel
along I 48'" as well. Has the City done everything to mitigate those potential impacts, not only did they meet
those impacts, but they went above and beyond taking into consideration the inconveniences that are going to
be caused to the nearby residents.
The King County Surface Water and Design Manual only requires a standard ofup to 5,000, the City has taken
more mitigation efforts in dealing with the impervious surface issues.
The noise and traffic control plans were addressed, they were contemplated and reviewed and they were
assessed all during the ERC process. Until the project actually begins, there will be no specific traffic control
plan in place, they would not be able to consider the specifics during the SEPA process.
The appellant must show that there was significant error that this project did of itself as it was presented to the
ERC constitutes a significant impact, the appellant has fallen far short of meeting that burden. They ask that
the Examiner affirm the decision of the ERC.
Mr. Chappelle stated that the City has acknowledged minor errors and he believes that ERC deserves the
opportunity to re-evaluate with the corrected infonnation and with full benefit of the complete public
comment. With respect to #6 the absence of the information speaks for itself. If the information does not exist
as of yet, how can ERC rule on whether or not the mitigation is adequate. Those are elements of concern to
the community and the community needs to have input and a voice on those issues.
The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak,
and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 2: 18 am.
FINDINGS. CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION
Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following:
FINDINGS:
I. The appellant, Douglas E. Chappelle, filed an appeal of a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated
(DNS-M) that the City issued for the proposed Stonegate Sewer Lift Station. The appellant filed the
appeal in a timely manner.
2. The City is in the process of replacing two existing lift stations. One of the stations, Springbrook, is old
Stonegate Lift Station Appeal
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 11
and in need of replacement. The second station is the original Stonegate Lift Station and the City
determined that it was inadequate to serve the vicinity surrounding it. The City determined that its best
course of action was to install one larger station to replace those two older ones.
3. The City by its Public Works Department is the proponent of the lift station. The City is also the SEPA
review agency. The City's Environmental Review Committee (ERC) reviewed the proposal and issued
the DNS-M.
4. The ERC imposed the following two conditions:
I. The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations included in the geotechnical
report, "Final Geotechnical Report" prepared by HWA GeoSciences Inc., dated November 7,
2008.
2. Temporary construction fencing shall be placed along the portion of the I 00-foot buffer area of
Wetland A that is immediately north of the Stonegate lift station construction site prior to
commencement of construction.
5. The proposed lift station will be built on an easement in the Stonegate Subdivision's Tract H. It will
cover approximately 4,500 square feet (corrected from a figure of approximately 1,000 square feet-see
below). In addition to the actual lift station approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary
sewer pipe and approximately 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch sanitary sewer pipe will be installed or replaced
in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Boulevard, NE 26th Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, NE
20th Street and Field Avenue NE. The old lift station and the Summerwind Lift Station will be removed
as part of this project.
6. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as part of this proposal.
7. The project is located near two wetlands and two streams. One wetland feeds May Creek which is north
of the proposed lift station. A critical areas report was prepared for this project. As it currently stands, no
work will occur within the critical areas buffers for either wetland or either creek. There was some initial
information that showed that the required wetland buffer was not appropriately delineated and that work
might occur within that buffer.
8. The appellant originally submitted seven (7) issues on appeal. All but two of these issues were resolved
at the public hearing. Nonetheless, some of the resolved issues are what the appellant indicated were
indicative of the erroneous or misleading information that the ERC relied on when making its
determination. Therefore, the appellant still believed that the ERC should be re-reviewing the proposal in
light of all of the information.
9. The appeal letter raised the following seven issues:
I) Incomplete and Inaccurate application Package -Numerous material errors and omissions
exist in the application and several were identified by timely public comments. These errors
and omissions included inaccurate calculations (egg. impervious area) inconsistencies (egg.
schedule durations) incomplete statements (e.g. subject 5. Animals), and omissions (e.g.
traffic control and safety plans). Failure to demand a correct and complete package damages
the credibility of the determination. By WAC 197-1 1-080 (Renton adoption through RMC 4-
9-070D), the ERC are required to obtain and include information regards significant adverse
'\
Stonegate Lift Station App._,
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 12
impacts in their environmental documents. In the absence of this vital information, the ERC
must make clear that such information is lacking or that substantial uncertainty exists. If the
costs are not exorbitant nor the means to obtain it speculative or not known then the
information must be obtained.
2) Violation of Comprehensive Plan -During the public comment period the ERC was notified
of certain impacts or inconsistencies the subject project makes to the City of Renton
Comprehensive Plan [e.g. Comprehensive Plan Elements P-6, P-4I, P-E, P-53, P-56]. The
City requires themselves to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan per RMC 4-I -070A.
In the event the Comprehensive Plan as implemented by Chapter 4 of the PMC conflicts or
overlaps, the provisions of RMC 4-1-080 govern and an interpretation of requirements is
required. There is no evidence in the ERC Report that the conflicts were considered much
less an implementation interpretation made and documented. Note that RMC 4-1-070D
requires that the most restrictive/higher standard govern in the event of conflict.
3) Incorrect Wetland Bounds 100 ft Buffer Depiction -The 100 ft wetland boundary buffer
depicted in Exhibits 3, 6 and 7 of the ERC Report is incorrectly constructed [even assuming
the wetland boundary has been correctly identified in the ERC Report -see item 4) below].
As a result the lift station facility encroaches into the buffer area by several feet. This
encroachment defeats the intent ofRMC 4-3-050A7. Such a result was clearly not intended
by the ERC in their report however the lament error in the materials supplied by the applicant
and adopted by the ERC has apparently passed unnoticed to date. The ERC should correct the
depiction of the Wetland Buffers to comply with RMC 4-3-050.M.6.
4) Failure to use 'Best Available Science' -The ERC failed to provide proper consideration to
the Critical Areas Report finding that DP-4 was within a wetland. As pointed out in public
comments, the depicted boundary excludes point DP-4 by a substantial amount indicating that
the wetland boundary is significantly different than that mapped in exhibits 3, 6 and 7 of the
ERC Report. Through RCW 36.70A. I 72 the City, in designating and protecting critical areas
are required to include the best available science in developing policies and development
regulations to protect the functions and values of critical areas. In addition, the City is
required to give especial consideration" to conservation or protection measures necessary to
preserve or enhance anadromousl fisheries. The Administrator (as referred to in RMC 4-3-
050.M.4.d.i), presumably embodied by the ERC, upon being made aware of be science
contained within the Critical Areas Report should have determined that reconditions have
changed old orders a new delineation of Regulatory Edge of Wetlands in accordance with
RMC 4-3-050.M .4.a. in order to fully comply with RCW 36.70A. l 72.
5) Noise Standards -The ERC Report in paragraph D.4 presumes to declare the point at which
the noise measurement of the emergency power generator should be made is at the property
line between Tract Hand Lot I of Stonegate. The value of 45 dBA is correct in accordance
with WAC 173-60-040(2)(a) and (b ). However, conducting the measurement at the property
line between Tract Hand Lot I would probably constitute a trespass by the applicant.
Endorsing the measurement at this location through the ERC Report rises to the level of an
unconstitutional "taking" by the City. The correct location for the measurement is defined by
the boundary of the easement granted by the Stonegate HOA, beyond which the applicant has
not secured any rights.
Stonegate Lift Station Appeal
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 13
6) Failure to impose sufficient conditions to mitigate impacts -The ERC Report fails to
adequately address several aspects of the SEPA checklist.
a. Noise -The ERC Report fails to address allowable noise criteria during construction
merely characterizing the noise as short germ's and "temporary." As such the applicant
has violated RMC 4-9-070L.9 and the ERC has allowed this violation to pass uncorrected
thus violating their duty under 4-l-070A and WAC 197-1 I in general and WAC 197-11-
660 in particular.
b. Traffic Control Plan -The omission of the traffic control plan noted in ERC Report
paragraph D.6. and the validation thereof by merely requiring that "a traffic control plan
would be required prior to construction" serves to deny the Public any meaningful
recourse as to its content. As the traffic control plan was not available during the public
review period nor was it available to the ERC for attachment to their report (or was
omitted ifit was), the contents of the eventual traffic control plan are not subject to
redress through this appeal process as the time limits for appeal will have expired long
prior to its availability. As such, the applicant has violated RMC 4-9-070L.9 and the ERC
has allowed this violation to pass uncorrected thus violating their duty under 4-l-070A
and WAC 197-11 in general and WAC 197-11-660 in particular.
c. Safety Plan/Considerations -The omission of any mention of a safety control plan or
the safety monitored and their duties responsibilities and powers as cited by the applicant
in his response to Public Comment serves to deny the public any meaningful recourse as
to its content or lack thereof. As the ERC Report fails to mention safety planning as a
topic nor the safety monitor volunteered by the applicant it can only be concluded that
such artifices don't actually exist or are constrained by the limits of existing
developmental standards and environmental regulations. Either way, the ERC Report
fails to adequately consider and mitigate for the applicant's proposed introduction of
certain attractive nuisances and health hazards into the particular and peculiar
environments of Stonegate and Summerwind. By virtue of this omission the subject of
enhanced or tailored safety mitigation measures beyond to limits of existing
developmental standards and environmental regulations is not subject to redress through
this appeal process or through future enforcement action (since nothing is required of the
applicant), By allowing this omission to pass, the ERC has failed in their duty under 4-l -
070A and WAC 197-1 I in general and WAC 197-11-660 in particular.
d. Schedule -The ERC Report fails to place a constraint on allowable schedule for the
accomplishment of primary construction. As such, the applicant is presumed to have a
free hand to take as long as he wants or even to abandon the project up to the limits of
existing developmental standards and environmental regulations. By virtue of this
omission, the subject of how long the disruption to the neighborhoods might last up to the
limits of existing developmental standards and environmental regulations is not subject to
redress thorough this appeal process or through future enforcement anion (since nothings
optic is required of the applicants. By allowing this omission to pass, the ERC has failed
in their duty under 4-1-070A and WAC 197-11 in general and WAC 197-11-660 in
particular.
7) Failure to determine 'essentialness' of the project -As the WAC make special allowances in
r-,
Stonegate Lift Station App,_,
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 14
certain criteria when a construction project concerns an "essential utility" it is vital to make a
determination as to whether or not this project is in fact "essential" as proposed. To fail to
make this determination introduces uncertainty into which criteria should be used when and
how. As the City (as applicant) has proposed this project it substantially exceeds the threshold
criteria of RCW 36.70A.020 ( 12) " ... that those public facilities and services decease to
support development shall be adequate to serve the development at the time the development
is available for occupancy ... " By this project being a matter of choice and not imminent
necessity, the ERC should find that the proposed project, while unquestionably a utility
project, is not, in fact "essential."
I 0. The appellant believed that the concerns of the neighborhood were not heard and the City did not respond
to those concerns. While it is not necessary to rehash the history of this project, the City indicated that it
met with the community for over one and a half years and met with Stonegate's residents over the
easement and conditions for granting it. The City agreed in advance to certain conditions that became
part of the background mitigation measures for the proposal. Those included: upgrading 148th Street
immediately east of the site to include curbs, gutters and sidewalks; grind and repave the entire plat so
that the road was not merely patched; restore the trench with hot mix so it is not left open; install and
modify landscaping on Tract H to blend with the existing landscaping and restore the work areas;
emergency power generators would not exceed 45 dBA at Lot I, the nearest residential parcel; and
upgrade the pedestrian gates on Tract G. The City also decided that access would be via 148th and not
through the plat other than when working on specific segments. Additionally, the work would be
scheduled to not interfere with the school bus stop in the morning hours; work would be governed by the
code on hours of operation which are 7a.m to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday and no Sunday work;
establish an e-mail and phone tree to inform residents of both Stonegate and Summerwind of activities;
and open only 150 feet at any one time and restore that area as they progress. The City indicated it was
amenable to addressing the afternoon school bus schedule.
11. In addressing the appeal issues, the appellant more specifically objected to the absence of a Traffic
Control Plan and a Safety Plan. The appellant believed that in order to review this project for its
environmental impacts both plans needed to be available for the ERC. The City noted that both plans are
generally formulated with the contractor and that, at this point, or when the ERC review was done, no
contractor had been selected. It was explained to the appellant that those measures usually come out of
the contracting for a project.
12. Certain SEPA guidelines may be used to create special review criteria or limitations on the review for
"essential" utilities. The City presented testimony that it was not enlisting any exceptions for this
proposal. It was not going to be declared an essential utility.
13. The appellant alleged that the City did not determine that the project was needed and was merely a matter
of choice. This office has no ability to second guess decisions of the City on capital improvement
projects as a primary appeal issue. If on review it was determined that an EIS were required, then
alternatives including a "no build" option might be included in such analysis but not as a standalone issue
in a SEPA appeal.
14. The City noted that its calculations for impenneable surfaces were incorrect. The correct value should
have been 4,400 square feet. The City noted that this value still falls under the threshold in the 2005 King
County Storm Water Manual for special considerations but that the City will still be providing an oil
water separator and a spreader pipe system.
Stonegate Lift Station Appeal
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 15
15. The City, through its wetlands consultant, admitted that Data Plot 4 (DP4) was inadvertently misdrawn on
the Exhibit J. It was depicted as displaced to the west and outside of the wetland area. It was correctly
located in the field and on the new exhibits.
16. The City testified that the wetland buffer's I 00 foot setback will be observed in all directions from the
wetland boundary. The buffer's boundary had been depicted as merely displaced to the south I 00 feet
which would not have provided the appropriate l 00 foot buffer to the portions of the wetland that
projected south. The actual plans for the lift station will observe the buffer and no work will occur within
the buffer.
l 7. The appellant was concerned that the project or portions of it or its equipment would represent an
"attractive nuisance" to children. These issues are not any different for this project than any other
construction project. While those concerns may be legitimate, they do not rise to creating more than a
moderate impact on the quality of the environment. The City also noted that each segment of trench will
be filled at the end of the day and that there should not be any portions left open.
18. The appellant was concerned about noise created by the emergency generators that serve as backup power
in the event of a general power failure. These generators are tested periodically, once a week or once a
month. Testing reveals that noise at the perimeter or the closest receiving residential structure will meet
code requirements.
CONCLUSIONS:
l. The decision of the governmental agency acting as the responsible official is entitled to substantial
weight. Therefore, the determination of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC), the city's
responsible official, is entitled to be maintained unless the appellant clearly demonstrates that the
determination was in error. The appellant has failed to demonstrate error.
2. The Detennination of Non-Significance in this case is entitled to substantial weight and will not be
reversed or modified unless it can be found that the decision is "clearly erroneous." (Hayden v. Port
Townsend, 93 Wn 2nd 870, 880; 1980). The court in citing Norway Hill Preservation and Protection
Association v. King County Council, 87 Wn 2d 267, 274; 1976, stated: "A finding is 'clearly erroneous'
when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the
definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed."
Therefore, the determination of the ERC will not be modified or reversed if it can meet the above test.
For reasons enumerated below, the decision of the ERC is affirmed.
3. The clearly erroneous test has generally been applied when an action results in a DNS since the test is less
demanding on the appellant. The reason is that SEPA requires a thorough examination of the
environmental consequences of an action. The courts have, therefore, made it easier to reverse a DNS. A
second test, the "arbitrary and capricious" test is generally applied when a determination of significance
(DS) is issued. In this second test an appellant would have to show that the decision clearly flies in the
face of reason since a DS is more protective of the environment since it results in the preparation of a fu 11
disclosure document, an Environmental Impact Statement.
~
Stonegate Lift Station App~-·
LUA-09-049, ECF •
August 25, 2009
Page 16
4. An action is determined to have a significant adverse impact on the quality of the environment if more
than a moderate impact on the quality of the environment is a reasonable probability. (Norway, at 278).
Since the Court spoke in Norway, WAC 197-11-794 has been adopted, it defines "significant" as follows:
Significant. (I) "Significant" as used in SEPA means a reasonable likelihood
of more than a moderate adverse impact on environmental quality.
(2) Significance involves context and intensity .. .Intensity depends on the
magnitude and duration ofan impact.... The severity of the impact should be
weighed along with the likelihood of its occurrence. An impact may be
significant if its chance of occurrence is not great, but the resulting environmental
impact would be severe if it occurred.
5. Also redefined since the Norway decision was the term "probable."
Probable. "Probable" means likely or reasonably likely to occur, ...
Probable is used to distinguish likely impacts from those that merely
have a possibility of occurring, but are remote or speculative. (WAC I 97-11-782).
6. The appellant did not provide a basis that could be used to reverse the City's determination. The proposal
will undoubtedly create impacts to the community. There will be impacts from constructing the lift
station although it is more remote, and more impacts from the ripping up of pavement, trenching and pipe
laying, backfilling and eventual repavement but these activities and their disruption in an urban
environment will be localized, temporary and eventually hidden. In an urban environment streets arc
periodically repaved, and water and sewer lines replaced. It is true that the applicant made some mistakes
and submitted some erroneous information to the ERC. But even those mistakes do not amount to errors
that require re-review by the ERC. The question is, overall, did the ERC reach a reasonable conclusion or
is the conclusion clearly erroneous or arbitrary and capricious. The applicant's map shows DP4 displaced
from its true position. The impermeable surface area was also miscalculated. DP4's position had no real
bearing on the issue. While the actual impermeable surfaces do exceed those submitted by a factor of 3 or
4, those numbers still fall within the guidelines of the Stormwater Manual requiring no special conditions
and the applicant is doing more than required by Code. The project is modest and its more profound
effects, digging and trenching in front of peoples' homes, are transient. Although its linear footprint runs
about a mile, trenching will be done in short, 150 foot segments and closed up. The roadway will be
regraded at the completion of the project. The lift station itself will be replacing one already on the
subject site that is insufficient and another offsite lift station that is getting antiquated. The lift station
will be landscaped to blend in with the immediate area. No work will occur in the wetland or wetland
buffer areas. Noise meets code requirements. Transportation and safety plans are generally drawn up
when the contract is signed. These are not issues generally addressed by the ERC but other code
requirements.
7. Looking at the entire project and the current urban environment of homes, streets and sidewalks and the
Tract H open space, the reviewing body has to determine if this proposal would have more than a
moderate impact on the quality of the environment. It does not appear that the proposal has the level of
impacts or potential impacts that demand additional environmental scrutiny. The appellant has not shown
that the ERC was substantially misled by some of the information it had when reviewing this proposal.
While there were errors in submittals, they were not substantial in a manner to have misled the ERC to the
Stonegate Lift Station Appeal
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 17
overall consequences of this proposal. This office does not believe that the decision of the ERC needs to
be reversed or modified.
8. The appealing party has a burden that was not met in the instant case. The decision of the ERC must be
affirmed.
DECISION:
The decision of the ERC is affirmed.
ORDERED THIS 25th of August 2009
TRANSMITTED THIS 25th of August 2009 to the parties of record:
Vanessa Dolbee Ann Nielsen Douglas Chappelle
Development Services Assistant City Attorney 2208 Lyons Avenue NE
City of Renton City of Renton Renton, WA 98059
Phil Gesner Mike & Mai Haynes Joseph & Sara Brester
5005 NE 13th Place 5109 NE 20t Street 2202 Lyons Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059
Jennifer Young Madonna Messina Konrad Hee
2084 Ilwaco Avenue NE 2218 Lyons Avenue NE 5150 NE 20th Street
Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059
Vonni Sytsma Trey & Kiersten Byus Greg & Peg Schmeer
5320 NE 22"a Court 5602 NE 26th Street 5213 NE 23'a Court
Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059
John & Stacy Tribble Dan Slaton Marty Ryber~
2106 Lyons Avenue NE 5511 NE21"Court 5309 NE 22" Court
Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059
Tad & Melissa Willoughby Stonegate Homeowners' Assn. lion Logan
5512 NE 26th Street PO Box 2691 ESA Adolfson
Renton, WA 98059 Renton, WA 98059 5309 Shilshole Avenue NW, Ste. 200
Seattle, WA 98106
Dave Christensen John Hobson
Utility Engineering Supvr Civil Engineer
City of Renton City of Renton
Stonegate Lift Station Appca,
LUA-09-049, ECF
August 25, 2009
Page 18
TRANSMITTED THIS 25'" day of August 2009 to the following:
Mayor Denis Law
Jay Covington, Chief Administrative Officer
Julia Medzegian, Council Liaison
Gregg Zimmerman, PBPW Administrator
Alex Pietsch, Economic Development
Jennifer Henning, Development Services
Stacy Tucker, Development Services
Renton Reporter
Dave Pargas, Fire
. Larry Meckling, Building Official
Planning Commission
Transportation Division
Utilities Division
Neil Watts, Development Services
Janet Conklin, Development Services
Pursuant to Title IV, Chapter 8, Section IOOGofthe City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in
writing on or before 5:00 p.m.1 September 8 1 2009. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the
Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the
discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written
request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen (14) days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This
request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant, and the Examiner may,
after review of the record, take further action as he deems proper.
An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV, Chapter 8, Section 110, which requires that such appeal
be filed with the City Clerk, accompanying a filing fee of $75.00 and meeting other specified requirements.
Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department, first floor of City
Hall. An appeal must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.1 Septemher 8 1 2009.
If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants, the
executed Covenants will be required prior to approval by City Council or final processing of the file.
You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants.
The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte (private one-on-one) communications may
occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not
communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use
process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council.
All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all
interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the
evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court.
The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as
Appeals to the City Council.
Phil Gesner
5005 NE 13th Place
Renton, WA 98059
tel: (425) 255-3161
(party of record)
Jennifer Young
2084 Ilwaco Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059
tel: (425) 255-5879
(party of record)
Vonni Sytsma
5320 NE 22nd Court
Renton, WA 98059
tel: ( 425) 277-8835
(party of record)
John & Stacy Tribble
2106 Lyons Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Tad & Melissa Willoughby
5512 NE 26th Street
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Updated: 05/20/09
PARTIES Of RECORD
Stonegate lift: Station
LUA09-049, ECF
Mike & Mary Haynes
5109 NE 20th Street
Renton, WA 98059
tel: (425) 271-7538
(party of record)
Madonna Messina
2218 Lyons Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Douglas, Carol & Christine
Chappelle
2208 Lyons Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Dan Slaton
5511 NE 21st Court
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Stonegate Home Owners'
Association
PO BOX 2691
Renton, WA 98059
(owner)
Joseph & Sara Brester
2202 Lyons Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Konrad Hee
5150 NE 20th Street
Renton, WA 98059
tel: (206) 412-9705
(party of record)
Trey & Kiersten Byus
5602 NE 26th Street
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Marty Ryberg
5309 NE 22nd Court
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
0r"-~ 'i' Pe'1 'Sc.hrv-.<Le..v-
5:i.1 ~ NE. ;I".,'°' Ch
t~l-c-,--. We.. q Y os-Ci
1../.:;.s-a?:,,-/oS'-Y-3
(Page 1 of 1)
A notefrom ...
Greg & Peg Schmeer
t:) y-( 1-:;;..c:o9
·-WE A I tic l't)E-l r 7D p;£
c.!U /l../Z,VJT '5Eu)0t-/ ud-r.t' @-
23 /:::2e,_'f. suµ~i(},,J-ZJ I .
-:~· ~D 1,.1~e P see
Jll15 ''pflWJ.t3rl-17C-" POHi' J!,€
-f<t31VC-6D Bl:f 5o,4C77'h,Jb
;¢iTE/2 µo/.erR£~1~Lca-d..
• I I µor ;/J ott/L i:,cA.J11:;Jn l?4J fl)JJo. --p _,; /;K ,<tc,v,,,.Jl-,X)l.lb~
J)o ;;-g;l,CArJOfs ,J/JA41~T/t'~1iJ,b
·wis f)cJ//?T' ~d ;r.1'J-£/'l#6 I 1 '
iorpjl,, J)lL/2.~;vb @TflEn6 .. .<-j .
:i)I rr1Cbtf..-l lt)0'17'~,0Z I c,c;,,.J;J/77aJ.5. . '.
, 52-13 NE. BifS ,Jc.~cr_. i , ·
~;~i~ ~--ii!;~--'-
~
u . ~~ CITY< TRENTON
Hearing Examiner
Fred J. Kaufman
·~·\'.Y~O ~~.: ~ ~ ~ Denis Law, Mayor 0NC\'Or-----------------------------
July 7, 2009
Douglas E. Chappelle
2208 Lyons Ave NE
Renton, WA 98059
Re: Appeal ofSEPA Detennination-Stonegate Lift Station
LUA 09-049, ECF
Dear Mr. Chappelle:
The appeal hearing on the above matter has been scheduled for Tuesday, August 4, 2009, at
9:00 a.m. The hearing will take place in the Council Chambers on the seventh noor of the
Renton City Hall. The address is 1055 S Grady Way in Renton.
If this office can provide any further assistance, please address those comments in writing.
Sincerely,
Fred Kaufman
Hearing Examiner
City of Renton
FJK/nt
cc: Ann Nielsen, City Attorney
Chip Vincent, Director, Planning Division
Neil Watts, Development Services Director
Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager
Vanessa Dolbee Associate Planner
Parties of Record
-----l-05_5_S_o_u_th_G_r_ad_y_W_a_y ___ R_e_nt-o-n,-W-a-s-hi_n_gt_on-9-80_5_7---(4-2-5)_4_3_0_-6_5_15 ____ ~
@ This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% post comumer
,\HEAD OF THE Cl.'.R\'E
Phil Gesner
5005 NE 13th Place
Renton, WA 98059
tel: ( 425) 255-3161
(party of record)
Jennifer Young
2084 Ilwaco Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059
tel: ( 425) 255-5879
(party of record)
Vonni Sytsma
5320 NE 22nd Court
Renton, WA 98059
tel: ( 425) 277-8835
(party of record)
John & Stacy Tribble
2106 Lyons Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Tad & Melissa Willoughby
5512 NE 26th Street
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Updated: 07/07/09
IP'ArRTJIIE§ OIF rRIECOrRID>
Stonegate lift Station
LUA09-049, ECF
Mike & Mary Haynes
5109 NE 20th Street
Renton, WA 98059
tel: (425) 271-7538
(party of record)
Madonna Messina
2218 Lyons Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Douglas, Carol & Christine
Chappelle
2208 Lyons Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Dan Slaton
5511 NE 21st Court
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Stonegate Home Owners'
Association
PO BOX 2691
Renton, WA 98059
(owner)
Joseph & Sara Brester
2202 Lyons Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Konrad Hee
5150 NE 20th Street
Renton, WA 98059
tel: (206) 412-9705
(party of record)
Trey & Kiersten Byus
5602 NE 26th Street
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
Marty Ryberg
5309 NE 22nd Court
Renton, WA 98059
(party of record)
} t/
(Page 1 of 1)
2208 Lyons Ave NE
Renton, WA 98059
4 June 2009
Fred Kauftnan
Hearing Examiner, City of Renton
1055 S Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
CITY OF RENTON
JUNO 6 2009
RECe,veo
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
3·. f 7 /di k--·
i:C'. -4vw• ,f/,elsi,t1, c,f'f llf/i;
ttl!, I Wt.#s, fe-.!>
Subject :
Cci.t, P Vi"tt!'n , t!ED
Jenrt, k, tk11//1nr,-c[:i)
Environmental Threshold (SEPA) Determination -Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049, ECF S ·b.cf welt,:; cE]>
Sir; i?Orll'(I(' i.>.J ICi't'I c,yex,..
In regards the subject Environmental Threshold (SEPA) Determination, I am writing to notify you of my desire to
exercise my right of appeal. This letter is intended to serve as the filing of that appeal in accordance with the
instructions I received from the City Clerk and RMC 4-8-110.
The Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049, SEPA review and comment period uncovered several material errors and
omissions in the application package. The determination reached by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC)
is inconsistent with the proper consideration and disposition of these defects as required by City and State codes. In
no particular order and not necessarily mutually exclusively, these defects are each summarized as follows:
I) Incomplete and Inaccurate Application Package -Numerous material errors and omissions exist in the
application and several were identified by timely public comments. These errors and omissions
included inaccurate calculations [e.g. impervious area], inconsistencies [e.g. schedule durations],
incomplete statements [e.g. subject 5. Animals], and omissions [e.g. traffic control and safety plans].
Failure to demand a correct and complete package damages the credibility of the determination. By
WAC 197-11-080 (Renton adoption through RMC 4-9-070D), the ERC are required to obtain and
include information regarding significant adverse impacts in their environmental documents. In the
absence of this vital information, the ERC must make clear that such information is lacking or that
substantial uncertainty exists. If the costs are not exorbitant nor the means to obtain it speculative or
not known, then the information must be obtained.
2) Violation of Comprehensive Plan -During the public comment period the ERC was notified of certain
impacts or inconsistencies the subject project makes to the City of Renton Comprehensive Plan [e.g.
Comprehensive Plan Elements P-6, P-41, P-E, P-53, P-56]. The City requires themselves to be
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan per RMC 4-l -070A. In the event the Comprehensive Plan as
implemented by Chapter 4 of the RMC conflicts or overlaps, the provisions ofRMC 4-1-080 govern
and an interpretation ofrequirements is required. There is no evidence in the ERC Report that the
conflicts were considered much less an implementation interpretation made and documented. Note
that RMC 4-l-070D requires that the most restrictive/higher standard govern in the event of conflict.
3) Incorrect Wetland Boundary JOO ft Buffer Depiction -The I 00 ft wetland boundary buffer depicted in
Exhibits 3, 6 and 7 of the ERC Report is incorrectly constructed [even assuming the wetland boundary
has been correctly identified in the ERC Report-see item 4) below]. As a result, the lift station
facility encroaches into the buffer area by several feet. This encroachment defeats the intent of RMC
4-3-050A 7. Such a result was clearly not intended by the ERC in their report however the latent error
in the materials supplied by the applicant and adopted by the ERC has apparently passed unnoticed to
date. The ERC should correct the depiction of the Wetland Buffers to comply with RMC 4-3-050.M.6.
4) Failure to use 'Best Available Science' -The ERC failed to provide proper consideration to the
Critical Areas Report finding that DP-4 was within a wetland. As pointed out in public comments, the
depicted boundary excludes point DP-4 by a substantial amount indicating that the wetland boundary is
significantly different than that mapped in Exhibits 3, 6 and 7 of the ERC Report. Through RCW
36. 70A. l 72, the City, in designating and protecting critical areas, are required to include the best
available science in developing policies and development regulations to protect the functions and
values of critical areas. In addition, the City is required to give "special consideration" to conservation
or protection measures necessary to preserve or enhance anadromous fisheries. The Administrator (as
referred to in RMC 4-3-050.M.4.d.i), presumably embodied by the ERC, upon being made aware of
the science contained within the Critical Areas Report should have detennined that '"conditions have
changed" and ordered a new delineation of Regulatory Edge of Wetlands in accordance with RMC 4-
3-050.M.4.a. in order to fully comply with RCW 36.70A. I 72.
5) Noise Standards -The ERC Report in paragraph D.4 presumes to declare the point at which the noise
measurement of the emergency power generator should be made is at the property line between Tract
Hand Lot l of Stonegate. The value of 45 dBA is correct in accordance with WAC l 73-60-040(2)(a)
and (b ). However, conducting the measurement at the property line between Tract H and Lot l would
probably constitute a trespass by the applicant. Endorsing the measurement at this location through the
ERC Report rises to the level of an unconstitutional "taking" by the City. The correct location for the
measurement is defined by the boundary of the easement granted by the Stonegate HOA, beyond
which the applicant has not secured any rights.
6) Failure to impose sufficient conditions to mitigate impacts -The ERC Report fails t.o adequately
address several aspects of the SEPA checklist.
a. Noise-The ERC Report fails to address allowable noise criteria during construction merely
characterizing the noise as "short tenn" and "temporary." As such, the applicant has violated
RMC 4-9-070L.9 and the ERC has allowed this violation to pass uncorrected thus violating their
duty under4-l-070A and WAC 197-l l in general and WAC 197-11-660 in particular.
b. Traffic Control Plan -The omission of the traffic control plan noted in ERC Report paragraph
D.6. and the validation thereof by merely requiring that "a traffic control plan would be required
prior to construction" serves to deny the Public any meaningful recourse as to its content. As the
traffic control plan was not available during the public review period nor was it available to the
ERC for attachment to their report (or was omitted ifit was), the contents of the eventual traffic
control plan are not subject to redress through this appeal process as the time limits for appeal will
have expired long prior to its availability. As such, the applicant has violated RMC 4-9-070L.9
and the ERC has allowed this violation to pass uncorrected thus violating their duty under 4-1-·
070A and WAC 197-11 in general and WAC 197-11-660 in particular.
c. Safety Plan/Considerations -The omission of any mention of a safety control plan or the "safety
monitor" and their duties, responsibilities and powers as cited by the applicant in his response to
Public Comment serves to deny the Public any meaningful recourse as to its content, or 'lack
thereof. As the ERC Report fails to mention safety planning as a topic nor the safety monitor
volunteered by the applicant it can only be concluded that such artifices don't actually exist or are
constrained by the limits of existing developmental standards and environmental regulations.
Either way, the ERC Report fails to adequately consider and mitigate for the applicant's proposed
introduction of certain attractive nuisances and health hazards into the particular and peculiar
environments ofStonegate and Summerwind. By virtue of this omission, the subject of enhanced
or tailored safety mitigation measures beyond the limits of existing developmental standards and
environmental regulations is not subject to redress through this appeal process or through future
enforcement action [since nothing is required of the applicant]. By allowing this omission to pass,
the ERC has failed in their duty under 4-l-070A and WAC 197-11 in general and WAC 197-11-
660 in particular.
d. Schedule -The ERC Report fails to place a constraint on allowable schedule for the
accomplishment of primary construction. As such, the applicant is presumed to have a free hand
to take as long as he wants or even to abandon the project up to the limits of existing
developmental standards and environmental regulations. By virtue of this omission, the subject of
how long the disruption to the neighborhoods might last up to the limits of existing developmental
standards and environmental regulations is not subject to redress through this appeal process or
through future enforcement action [since nothing specific is required of the applicant]. By
allowing this omission to pass, the ERC has failed in their duty under 4-l-070A and WAC 197-11
in general and WAC 197-11-660 in particular.
7) Failure to determine 'essentialness' of the project-As the WAC make special allowances in certain
criteria when a construction project concerns an "essential utility," it is vital to make a determination
as to whether or not this project is, in fact, "essential" as proposed. To fail to make this determination
introduces uncertainty into which criteria should be used, when and how. As the City (as applicant)
has proposed this project, it substantially exceeds the threshold criteria ofRCW 36.70A.020(12) " ...
that those public facilities and services necessary to support development shall be adequate to serve the
development at the time the development is available for occupancy ... " By this project being a matter
of choice and not imminent necessity, the ERC should find that the proposed project, while
unquestionably a utility project, is not, in fact "essential."
Douglas E. Chappelle
" ' \
/, ' l',
' •t ',
CITY OF RENTON
City Clerk Division
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
425-430-6510
D Cash Q Copy Fee
_%'Check No.~3~q--=8"c.i0£___ JI Appeal Fee
Description: Ar,()ec, ( to flea ., I"?'
Lu A -D ';,-oq°(,
Funds Received From:
~f",. --/1 /. ; 1
Name }A-;i..c. I AS . t::: • C. /114 Rt;}( ff
Address z Zo ~ G/-p .. ~ ::, ;;,,, I{/€
,# I T ·
1r kid UD,:1 , s !O S:1 City/Zip
Receipt 1391
D Notary Service o _________ _
I Amount $ 7-S-. O O
City Staff Signature
Denis Law, Mayor
July 7, 2009
Douglas E. Chappelle
2208 Lyons Ave NE
Renton, WA 98059
Re: Appeal of SEPA Determination -Stonegate Lift Station
LUA 09-049, ECF
Dear Mr. Chappelle:
Hearing Examiner
Fred J. Kaufman
The appeal hearing on the above matter has been scheduled for Tuesday, August 4, 2009, at
9:00 a.m. The hearing will take place in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the
Renton City Hall. The address is 1055 S Grady Way in Renton.
If this office can provide any further assistance, please address those comments in writing.
Sincerely,
Fred Kaufman
Hearing Examiner
City of Renton
FJK/nt
cc: Ann Nielsen, City Attorney
Chip Vincent, Director, Planning Division
Neil Watts, Development Services Director
Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager
Vanessa Dolbee Associate Planner
Parties of Record
----------------~RE "NT() N''
1055 South Grady Way-Renton, Washington 98057 -(425) 430-6515
@ Thi;;paperco11t,i'ns 50'.'o recycled material, 30%pcstcorisurner _
.\llE.-\{) OF THE .:;CP\'E
·• City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Ec&nnn'ic. T)o,v, COMMENTS DUE: MAY 14, 2009
APPLICATION NO: LUA09-049, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 30, 2009
APPLICANT: John Hobson, Citv of Renton PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Stoneaate Lift Station PLAN REVIEWER: Kavren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 5,000 sauare feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (aross): N/A
LOCATION: 5610 NE 261
" Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA loross) 240 square feet
I WORK ORDER NO: 78056
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station located at 5610 NE 26th Street
(parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary sewer pipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch
sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, N 20th Street,
and Field Avenue NE. The above ground portion of the Stonegate lift station is approximately 240 square feet The existing lift
station on the subject site is proposed to be removed in addition to the Summerwind lift station, which is not located on the subject
site. Access to the new lift station would be off of 148th Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands (wetland A and wetland
B). Wetland A is connected to May Creek and is classified as a Category I wetland; Wetland B is a Category Ill wetland. As such, the
applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part
of this project
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housinn
Air Aesthetics
Water Lioht/Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transoortation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/ Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.
STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING }
AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION
PUBLIC NOTICE
Linda M Mills, being first duly sworn on oath that she is the Legal
Advertising Representative of the
Ren-nton Reporteir
a weekly newspaper, which newspaper is a legal newspaper of
general circulation and is now and has been for more than six months
prior to the date of publication hereinafter referred to, published in
the English language continuously as a weekly newspaper in King
County, Washington, The Renton Reporter has been approved as
a Legal Newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the State of
Washington for King County.
The notice in the exact form annexed was published in regular issues
of the Renton Reporter (and not in supplement form) which was
regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period.
The annexed notice, a:
lPublic Notice
was published on May 22, 2009.
The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is ~$;;~4-
Linda M. Mills
Legal Advertising Representative, Renton Reporter
Subs,rjbed and swwn to me this 22nd day of May, 2009.
for the State of Washington, Residing
,,,,,\\\\11111,,
,,, OALS.s ,,,,
:::'<"'-..( '"'"'''"•• Ge ,,, : " $~ON E~/:J1,,,, ~
-~ .;::~.I ~,, /. = ~ =~ 1.P.1'J,, ~\ ~ ; E:s ~o tP ~ ~ .,.. ~o ... ~ z ~ ,,,,. .,, ... . .,, ,,,,,.
:::::: :-;l) <., E O ..,. ~ \ '°us"'" ,ff'-:: / ,, '\.;::c,= ~ <l',,.'11,,, 10-\9' f" ~ = 11 "'1,-, r11,m,,,,,,,,, ~ .::
1111 I:: OF 'J',J f'.S .§" ''1 ,,, l\\\\\\\\''''
NOTICE OF
ENVIRONMENTAL
DETERMINATION
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
COMMITTEE
RENTON, WASHINGTON
The Environmental Review
Committee has issued a
Determination of Non-
Significunce-Mi1igated for the
following project under the
authori1y of the Renton Municipal
Code.
Stonegate Lift Station
LUA09-049, ECF
Location: 5610 NE 26th
St. SEPA review for the
replacement of the Stonegate
lift station at 5610 NE 26th St.
and the insmllacion of 5,900
linear ft. of sewer pipe in NE
Sunset Blvd, NE 26th St, Lyons
Ave NE, NE 22nd Cc, N 20th St,
and Field Ave NE. 2 wetlands
and May Creek are located in
the vicinity of the site.
Appeals of the environmental
determination must be filed in
writing on or before 5:00 PM on
June 5, 2009. Appeals must be
filed in writing toge1her with the
required $75.00 application fee
with: Hearing Examiner, City of
Renton, I 055 South Grady Way,
Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to
the Examiner are governed by
City of Renton Municipal Code
Section 4-8-110.B. Additional
information regarding the appeal
process may be obtained from the
Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)
430-6510.
Published in the Renton Reporter
on May 22, 2009. #225412.
f.
.,
City of~enton Department of Community & Economic o;velopment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: MAY 14, 2009
APPLICATION NO: LUA09-049, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 30, 2009
APPLICANT: John Hobson, Cit of Renton PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Stone ate Lift Station PLAN REVIEWER: Ka ren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 5,000 s uare feet EXISTING BLDG AREA ross: N/A
LOCATION: 5610 NE 26 1h Street uare feet
ORDER NO: 78056
PLEASE RETURN T CURRENT PLANNING 6TH FLOOR
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applica t is requesting SEPA revie or the Stonegate Lift Station located at 5610 NE 26th Street
(parcel #8035400580) and approximat y 1,000 linear feet of and 15-inch sanitary sewer pipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch
sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-way of NE Suns vd., NE 26th Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, N 20th Street,
and Field Avenue NE. The above groun · e Stonegate lift station is approximately 240 square feet. The existing lift
station on the subject site is proposed to be removed in addition to the Summerwind lift station, which is not located on the subject
site. Access to the new lift station would be off of 148th Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands (wetland A and wetland
B). Wetland A is connected to May Creek and is classified as a Category I wetland; Wetland Bis a Category Ill wetland. As such, the
applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part
of this project.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housina
Air Aesthetics
Water Linht/Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transoortation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/ Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources PreseNation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
8. POL/CY-RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
We have reviewed this application with particular atte ion to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas where additional information is eded to properly ssess this proposal.
Signature of Director or Authorize Date
OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE· MITIGATED (ONS-M)
POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENV\RONMENTAL ACTION
PROJECT NAME: Stonegate Lift Station
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09•049, ECF
LOCATION: 5610 NE 26'° Street
DESCRIPTION: Applicant IS requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station !oceted at
5610 NE 26th Street (parcel #8035400580) and appro~lmately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-lnch unitary sewer
plpe and 4,900 linear fut of B-lnch sanitary sewer pipe located In the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th
Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, NE 201h Street,end Field Avenue NE. The abova ground p<>rtlo11 of 1he
Slonegate lift station (1 approximately 240 square fa.t. The u(st!ng lift station on th• subJ•ct sit• ls p1opoud to
t>• r•moved ln addition lo the Summarwlnd lift station, which Is not located on the ,ubject site. Access to the
new lift station would be off of 148th Av•nu• SE. Th• project le located near two wetlands (Wetland A and
Wetland B) and two str.ama, Wetland A Is connected to May Creek and Is dasslllad as a Category 1 wetland;
Wetland 8 Is a Category 3 w•tland. As such, th• applicant provided a Critical Aren Rep on and a Geotechnlcal
Report. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a parl of this project.
THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVJEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT
THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT.
Appeals of the anvlronmental determination must be filed In writing on or before 5;00 PM on June 5, 2009. Appeals
must be filed In writing together with the required $75.00 application tee withs Hearing Examiner, City of Renton,
1055 South Grady Way. Renton, WA 98057, Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Munlcipal Code
Section 4-8-110.B. Additional lnfonnatlon regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City
Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510.
IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND
All PARTIES NOTIFJEDr. --~------=-------,
Ple11se Include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file Identification.
CERTIFICATION
I, VUJA e__",,St:< n1 bl.e. . hereby certify that ,:; copies of the above docume;~'''""''''1
were posted by me in _a_ conspicuous places or near1;/e descnbed property f1.'i1Jml'~~~f,,~
DATE:'o -1/-09 SIGNErY/l()l!JM&6./lis~<:,;,"lx-., '':~~t
;; ~(.) -. .. ': ~
ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Washington rcsidin~ i~. ,J 4 ,v j;,: j 1v·•, I.IF.I'\.. :O-~ i,,, .? .. 19~\C,.,""-.l-~.:"
'/1,., ....... ~c,.:::-
f:WAS~, .... ..::-
""""''"
:w 0• ;rt DO r,: ~~~~e _;_l '!>_.,._day or
OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M)
POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION
PROJECT NAME: Stonegate Lift Station
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-049, ECF
LOCATION: 5610 NE 261h Street
DESCRIPTION: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station located at
5610 NE 26th Street (parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary sewer
pipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th
Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, NE 20th Street, and Field Avenue NE. The above ground portion of the
Stonegate lift station is approximately 240 square feet. The existing lift station on the subject site is proposed to
be removed in addition to the Summerwind lift station, which is not located on the subject site. Access to the
new lift station would be off of 148th Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands (Wetland A and
Wetland B) and two streams. Wetland A is connected to May Creek and is classified as a Category 1 wetland;
Wetland B is a Category 3 wetland. As such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical
Report. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part of this project.
THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITIEE (ERG) HAS DETERMINED THAT
THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE
ENVIRONMENT.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM on June 5, 2009. Appeals
must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton,
1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code
Section 4-8-110.8. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City
Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510.
IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND
ALL PARTIES NOTIFIED.
Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification.
Denis Law
-Mayor
May 20, 2009
John Hobson
City of Renton
1055 S Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
Department of Community & Economic Development
SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL THRESHOLD {SEPAi DETERMINATION
Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049, ECF
Dear Mr. Hobson:
This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) to advise you that
they have completed their review of the subject project and have issued a threshold
Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. Please refer to the
enclosed ERC Report and Decision, Part 2, Section B for a list of the Mitigation Measures.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.
on June 5, 2009. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application
fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057.
Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B.
Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City
Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510.
If the Environmental Determination is appealed, a public hearing date will be set and all parties
notified. The preceding information will assist you in planning for implementation of your
project and enable you to exercise your appeal rights more fully, if you choose to do so. If you
have any questions or desire clarification of.the above, please call me at (425) 430-7314.
For the Environmental Review Committee,
Vanessa Dolbe
Associate Planner
Enclosure
cc: Stonegate HOA/ Owner(s)
Phil Gesner, Mike & Mary Haynes, Joseph & Sara Brester, Jennifer Young, Maddona Messina, Konrad Hee,
Vonni Sytsma, Oouglas, Carol & Christine Chappelle, Trey & Kiersten Byus, John & Stacy Tribble, Dan
Slaton, Marty Ryberg/ Party(ies) of Record
Renton City Hall o 1055 South Grady Way o Renton, Washington 98057 o rentonwa.gov
Denis Law
Mayor
May 20, 2009
Washington State
Department of Ecology
Environmental Review Section
PO Box 47703
Olympia, WA 98504-7703
Department of Community & Economic Development
Subject: Environmental Determination
Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project
reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on May 18, 2009:
DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED
PROJECT NAME: Stonegate Lift Station
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-049, ECF
LOCATION: 5610 NE 26th Street
DESCRIPTION: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift
Station located at 5610 NE 26th Street (parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000
Unear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary sewer pipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch
sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th Street,
Lyons Avenue 'NE, NE 22nd Court, NE 20th Street, and Field Avenue NE. The above
ground portion of the Stonegate lift station is approximately 240 square feet. The
existing lift station on the subject site is proposed to be remo_ved in addition to the
Summerwind lift station, which is not located on the subject site. Access to the new
lift station woufd be off of 148th Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands
(Wetland A and Wetland B) and two streams. Wetland A is connected to May Creek
and is classified as a Category 1 wetland; Wetland B is a· Category 3 wetland. As such,
the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report arid a Geotechnical Report. The
applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part of this project.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.
on June 5, 2009. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application
fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057.
Appeals to th·e Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B.
Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City
Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. ·
Renton City Hall o 1055 South Grady Way o Renton, Washington 98057 o rentonWa.gov
ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) De 11NATION
Stonegate Lift Station / LUA0~-... 49, ECF
Page 2 of 2
Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete details. If you
have questions, please call me at (425) 430-7314.
For the Environmental Review Committee,
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
Enclosure
cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division
Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources
Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe
Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program
Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation
Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region
Larry Fisher, WDFW
Duwamish Tribal Office
US Army Corp. of Engineers
CITY OF RENTON
DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED
MITIGATION MEASURES
APPLICATION NO(S}:
APPLICANT:
PROJECT NAME:
LUA09-049, ECF
City of Renton, Utility Systems
Stonegate Lift Station
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station
located at 5610 NE 26th Street (parcel #8035400580} and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-
inch sanitary sewer pipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way
of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, NE 20th Street, and Field Avenue
NE. The above ground portion of the Stonegate lift station is approximately 240 square feet. The
existing lift station on the subject site is proposed to be removed in addition to the Summerwind lift
station, which is not located on the subject site. Access to the new lift station would be off of 148th
Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands (Wetland A and Wetland B) and two streams.
Wetland A is connected to May Creek and is classified as a Category 1 wetland; Wetland Bis a Category
3 wetland. As such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. The
applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part of this project.
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
LEAD AGENCY:
MITIGATION MEASURES:
5610 NE 26th Street
The City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
Planning Division
1. The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations included in the geotechnical report,
"Final Geotechnical Report" prepared by HWA GeoSciences Inc., dated November 7, 2008.
2. Temporary construction fencing shall be placed along the portion of the 100-foot buffer area of Wetland A
that is immediately north of the Stonegate lift station construction site prior to commencement of
construction.
ERC Mitigation Measures Page 1 of 1
CITY OF RENTON
DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED
ADVISORY NOTES
APPLICATION NO(S):
APPLICANT:
PROJECT NAME:
LUA09-049, ECF
City of Renton, Utility Systems
Stonegate Lift Station
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station
located at 5610 NE 26th Street (parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-
inch sanitary sewer pipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way
of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, NE 20th Street, and Field Avenue
NE. The above ground portion of the Stonegate lift station is approximately 240 square feet. The
existing lift station on the subject site is proposed to be removed in addition to the Summerwind lift
station, which is not located on the subject site. Access to the new lift station would be off of 148th
Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands (Wetland A and Wetland B) and two streams.
Wetland A is connected to May Creek and is classified as a Category 1 wetland; Wetland Bis a Category
3 wetland. As such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. The
applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part of this project.
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
LEAD AGENCY:
5610 NE 26th Street
The City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
Planning Division
Advisory Notes to Applicant:
The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental
determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal
process for environmental determinations.
Planning:
1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless
otherwise approved by the Development Services Division.
2. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an
appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no
further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding,
or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as
adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of
each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection
and approval of the permit.
Plan Review -Surface Water:
1. Erosion control shall comply with the Department of Ecology's latest edition of the Stormwater
Management Manual.
ERC Advisory Notes Page 1 of 2
Plan Review -Transportation:
1. Paving and trenching shall comply with the City of Renton's Trench and Overlay Requirements.
2. An approved traffic control plan is required.
ERC Advisory Notes Page 2 of 2
CITY OF RENTON
DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED)
APPLICATION NO(S):
APPLICANT:
PROJECT NAME:
LUA09-049, ECF
City of Renton, Utility Systems
Stonegate Lift Station
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station
located at 5610 NE 26th Street and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary sewer pipe and
4,900 linear feet of 8-inch sanitary sewer pipe in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd, NE 26th St, Lyons Ave NE,
NE 22nd Ct, NE 20th St, and Field Ave NE. The above ground portion of the lift station is approximately 240 sq ft.
The existing lift station is proposed to be removed. Access would be off 148th Ave SE. The project is located
near two wetlands (Wetland A and Wetland B) and two streams. Wetland A is connected to May Creek and is
classified as a Category 1; Wetland B is a Category 3. As such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and
a Geotechnical Report. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part of this project.
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL:
LEAD AGENCY:
5610 NE 26th Street
The City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
Planning Division
The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee 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). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under
their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental
impacts identified during the environmental review process.
Appeals of the. environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on June 5, 2009. Appeals
must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055
South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section
4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office,
(425) 430-6510.
PUBLICATION DATE:
DATE OF DECISION:
SIGNATURES:
Terry Higashiyama, Administrator
Community Services
May 22, 2009
May 18, 2009
I. David Daniels, Administrator
Fire & Emergency Services
s!ta/(£1
' Date
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEETING NOTICE
May 18, 2009
To: Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator
Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator
I. David Daniels, Fire & Emergency Services, Administrator
Alex Pietsch, CED Administrator
From: Jennifer Henning, CED Planning Manager
Meeting Date: Monday, May 18, 2009
Time: 3:00 PM
Location: Sixth Floor Conference Room #620
Agenda listed below.
THE FOLLOWING IS A CONSENT AGENDA
Stoneqate Lift Station (Dolbee J
LUA09-049, ECF
location: 5610 NE 26th Street. Applicant Is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station located at 5610
NE 261" Street (parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-lnch sanitary sewer pipe and
4,900 linear feet of 8-lnch sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 261
" Street, Lyons
Avenue NE, NE 22°• Court, NE 201• Street, and Field Avenue NE. The above ground portion of the Stonegate lift
station Is approximately 240 square feet. The existing lift station on the subject site Is proposed to be removed in
addition to the Summerwind lift station, which Is not located on the subject site. Access to the new lift station would
be off of 1481" Avenue SE. The project Is located near two wetlands (Wetland A and Wetland B) and two streams.
Wetland A Is connected to May Creek and is classified as a Category 1 wetland; Wetland B is a Category 3 wetland.
As such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnlcal Report. The applicant does not propose
to remove any trees as a part of this project.
cc: D. Law, Mayor
J, Covington, Chief Administrative Officer
S. Dale Estey, CED Director®
D. Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshall
N. Watts, Development Services Director ®
F. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner
W. Flora, Deputy Chief/Fire Marshal®
J. Medzegian, Council
P. Hahn, Transportation Systems Director
C. Vincent, CED Planning Director®
L. Warren, City Attorney ®
ERG
REPORT
City of Renton
Department of Community and Economic Development
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT
ERC MEETING DATE: May 18, 2009
Project Name: Stonegate Lift Station
Owner: Stonegate Homeowners Association, P.O. Box 2691, Renton, WA 98059
Applicant: City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057
Contact: John Hobson, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057
File Number: LUA09-049 , ECF
Project Manager: Vanessa Dolbee, Associate Planner
Project Summary: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station located at 5610
NE 26th Street (parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and
IS-inch sanitary sewer pipe and 4,900 linear feet of8-inch sanitary sewer pipe
located in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th Street, Lyons Avenue NE,
NE 22"• Court, NE 20th Street, and Field Avenue NE. The above ground portion of
the Stonegate lift station is approximately 240 square feet. The existing lift station
on the subject site is proposed to be removed in addition to the Summerwind lift
station, which is not located on the subject site. Access to the new lift station
would be off of 148th Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands
(Wetland A and Wetland B) and two streams. Wetland A is connected to May
Creek and is classified as a Category I wetland; Wetland B is a Category 3
wetland. As such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a
Geotechnical Report. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part
of this project.
Project Location: 5610 NE 26th Street
Exist. Bldg. Area SF:
Site Area:
STAFF
RECOMMENDATION:
Stonegate lift station,
underground.
5,000 square feet
Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint):
Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross):
Total Building Area GSF:
240 square feet
240 square feet
240 square feet
Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a
Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M).
Project Location Map
ERC REPORT 09-049
City of Renton Department o/Com•-·•nity & Economic Development
STONEGATE LIFT STATION
Report of May 18, 2009
i PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION / BACKGROUND
£•~";,.onmental Review Committee Report
LUA09-049, ECF
Page 2 of?
The applicant is requesting a SEPA Environmental Review for the replacement ofStonegate Lift Station located
at 5610 NE 26'" Street {parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary
sewer fipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd.,
NE 26 Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, NE 20'" Street, and Field Avenue NE. This project is located
in both the Stonegate and Summerwind neighborhoods, which are single-family residential neighborhoods. The
Stonegate neighborhood is zoned Residential I (R-1) Dwelling Unit per net acre, and has a land use designation
of Residential Low Density. The Summerwind neighborhood is zoned Residential 8 (R-8) dwelling units per net
acres and has a land use designation of Residential Single Family.
As proposed, no construction would be on private property except the lift station. The City has secured two
easements for the lift station from the Stonegate Homeowners Association, which are as follows: 1) Right of
Entry Agreement which allows the City the Right-of-Entry for the purpose of collecting survey, geotechnical,
wetlands, and related data for the project; and, 2) Sanitary Sewer Lift Station Easement which permits the
construction, reconstruction, installation, repairers, replacement, enlarging etc ... for the Stonegate lift station.
Both easements are tied to the parcel #8035400580, which is identified as "Tract H" herein.
Currently, the existing residential developments known as Summerwind and Stonegate are served by separate
gravity collection systems, lift stations, and force main conveyance systems. The purpose of this project is to
combine the flows and utilize a single force main system. The project would provide a sanitary sewer lift station
that has the capability of providing sanitary sewer service to the entire area at full build-out. This project is a part
of"The City of Renton Facilities Plan", which designates the project as a "future service improvement project".
After the installation of the new lift station the existing Summerwind sanitary sewer lift station and the existing
Stonegate sanitary sewer lift station would be removed, as the new Stonegate lift station would be capable of
providing sanitary sewer service to both of these neighborhoods in addition to surrounding neighborhoods. The
existing Stonegate lift station is located on the same parcel as the new lift station would be constructed, but sited
north of the existing lift station. The new lift station would include a control building, overflow storage, wet
well, valve vault and a generator. From the new Stonegate lift station, flow would be conveyed via force main
uphill to the west, and southwest along NE 26'" Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22°d Court, and along an easement
between the two developments connecting to NE 20'" Street, then the new lines would transition into a gravity
system on NE Field Avenue. Between the existing gravity sewer system along Field Avenue NE and the
proposed new Stonegate lift station the applicant proposes to construct approximately 4,900 feet of 8-inch
diameter PVC force main along with 370 feet of 8-inch diameter HDPE pipe. In addition, approximately 1,000
feet of 12-inch and 15-inch diameter gravity sewer pipe along Field Avenue would be installed to replace the
existing smaller diameter pipe.
As a result of the lift station construction, the existing landscaping on the private property would be removed.
The project area is currently vegetated with grass and shrubs, no trees would be removed as a part of this project.
The City has proposed to provide landscaping that blends with the existing landscaping on Tract H, around the
new lift station to provide screening and act as a buffer to the Stonegate neighborhood. The City has also
proposed the following mitigation/restoration for the new sewer system:
1. Install Curb, gutter and sidewalk and adjacent asphalt paving from the existing curb return on the north
side of NE 26th Street, along 148'" Avenue SE to the northerly edge of the property entrance, after the
entrance the sidewalk would taper to match existing asphalt along 148'" Avenue SE.
2. Provide a complete 2-inch grind and 2-inch asphalt overlay to all existing public roadways within the
plat of Stonegate.
3. The City would also fully restore Roadways Sections, which include NE 26'" Street from Lyons Avenue
NE to 148'" Avenue SE, Lyons Avenue SE from the south end of the plat to NE 26'" Street, NE 24'"
Court from cul-de-sac to Lyons Avenue NE, NE 23'd Court from cul-de-sac to Lyons Avenue NE, NE
22nd Court from cul-de sac to Lyons Avenue NE, NE 21" Court from Lyons Avenue NE to cul-de-sac,
and the existing emergency access road from NE 22nd Court to NE 201
" Street.
ERC REPORT 09-049
City of Renton Department of Com-"nity & Economic Development
STONEGATE LIFT STATION
£,, ... ;ronmental Review Committee Report
LUA09-049, ECF
Report of May 18, 2009 Page 3 of7
4. The Contractor would be required to restore all trench work with hot-mix asphalt in accordance with City
Standards as they progress and would not be allowed to exceed 1,000 linear feet of temporary trench
patch at any one time.
5. The lift station emergency power generator would not exceed 45 dBA at the property line between Tract
H and Lot 1 of Stonegate.
6. The City would replace both Fire Access Gates in Tract G with current Fire Department standards, with
an emphasis on allowing pedestrians and bicyclists passage.
The lift station is located within the vicinity of two wetlands and two streams as identified by the provided
"Critical Areas Report". Wetland A, is identified as a Category I wetland and would have a JOO-foot buffer,
Wetland B, is identified as a Category 3 wetland and would have a 35-foot buffer. May Creek, which is located
north of the project site is a Class 2 stream with an JOO-foot buffer and the second stream is a tributary to May
Creek, which is considered to be a Class 4 stream with a 35-foot buffer. The applicant has indicated that
construction for this project would not impact the wetlands, streams, or their associated buffers.
i PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
In compliance with RCW 43.21C.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project
impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations.
A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation
Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials:
Issue a DNS-M with a 14-day Appeal Period.
B. Mitigation Measures
C.
1. The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations included in the geotechnical
report, "Final Geotechnical Report" prepared by HWA GeoSciences Inc., dated November 7,
2008.
2. Temporary construction fencing shall be placed along the portion of the 100-foot buffer area of
Wetland A that is immediately north of the Stonegate lift station construction site prior to
commencement of construction.
Exhibits
Exhibit I
Exhibit 2
Exhibit 3
Exhibit 4
Exhibit 5
Exhibit 6
Exhibit 7
Exhibit 8
Project file ("yellow file") containing the application, reports, staff comments, and other
material pertinent to the review of the project.
Vicinity Map
Lift Station Site Plan
Stonegate lift station replacement control building elevations
Stonegate Composite -CMU
Landscaping Plan
Figure -4, of Critical Areas Report
Figure -5, of Critical Areas Report
D. Environmental Impacts
The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether
the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in
conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to
have the following probable impacts:
ERC REPORT 09-049
City of Renton Department ofCow-·•nity & Economic Development
STONEGATE LIFT STATION
Report of May 18, 2009
1. Earth
E•"'ronmental Review Committee Report
LUA09-049, ECF
Page 4 of7
Impacts: The applicant submitted with their application a Final Geotechnical Report prepared by HWA
GeoSciences Inc. ('HWA'), dated November 7, 2008. HWA's investigation included 18 borings to explore
the subsurface conditions along the proposed project alignment. The drillings were conducted by Gregory
Drilling of Redmond, Davies Drilling of Snohomish, and Holocene Drilling of Graham in depths ranging
between approximately 5 and 41.5 feet below the ground surface. HWA personal observed and recorded
pertinent information including stratigraphy, soil engineering characteristics and ground water occurrences at
different locations along the project alignment. The results of their study varied dependent upon location of
the borings. Although, in general, glacial till was encountered in most locations. Man-modified fill
materials were encountered above the existing sewer trench on Field Avenue, and along the proposed
alignment beneath roadways. Recent alluvium, recessional glacial outwash, recessional glacial lacustrine,
glacial till and advance glacial outwash soils were encountered at locations near May Creek, such as the
culvert crossing at NE 26th Street and the area proposed to accommodate the new Stonegate lift station.
HWA observed ground water seepage along 147th Avenue SE, 148th Avenue SE, at the Stonegate-
Summerwind connection, NE 26th Street culvert under crossing, and the location for the new Stonegate lift
station. The depths at which groundwater was encountered ranged from 7.5 feet below the surface (location
for the new lift station) to 31 feet below the surface (location of the Stonegate-Summerwind connection site).
No groundwater was encountered along the rest of the proposed project alignment.
In addition, the Final Geotechnical Report provided conclusions and recommendations based on the soil and
ground water conditions encountered during their explorations. HWA's conclusions and recommendations
addressed the following geotechnical issues: temporary shoring, ground water control/dewatering, lift station
excavation, buoyancy, pipe bursting, horizontal directional drilling, open cut trenching, soil excavation
characteristics, sloped open-cut excavations, shored excavations, ground water and construction dewatering,
pipeline and manhole settlement, pipeline support and bedding, trench backfill materials and compaction,
pipeline and buried structure design considerations, jacking and insertion pits, seismic considerations, wet
weather earthwork, and drainage and erosion considerations. As such, staff recommends a mitigation
measure that the applicant shall comply with the recommendations included within the provided
Geotechnical Report.
The applicant has indicated that approximately l, I 00 cubic yards of excavation would be conducted for the
construction of the proposed facilities and the excavated native material would be used as backfill where
possible. In addition, the applicant has indicated that a temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan
would be prepared for the proposal based on the Geotechnical Report recommendations and the City of
Renton requirements. This temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan prepared for this project would
include the installation of drainage structure protection devices, fabric filters, sedimentation
control/dewatering facilities, dewatering splash pads, stabilized construction entrances, check dams and
trenchless installation methods. To further reduce erosion potential the applicant has proposed to
immediately back fill the trenches and provide timely restoration.
Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall be required to comply with the recommendations included in the
geotechnical report, "Final Geotechnical Report" prepared by HWA GeoSciences Inc., dated November 7,
2008.
Nexus: SEPA, RMC 4-4-060 Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations.
2. Water
a. Wetland, Streams, Lakes
Impacts: The subject site is located within the vicinity of two wetlands (indentified as Wetland A and
Wetland B herein) and two streams. As such, the applicant provided a Critical Areas Report ('CAR'),
prepared by ESA Adolfson, dated August 2008. The wetland and stream investigation focused on the
area proposed for the new lift station and the undeveloped areas along the proposed force main
alignment.
ERG REPORT 09-049
City of Renton Department of Cow·-·•nity & Economic Development
STONEGATE LIFT STATION
Report of May 18, 2009
E,,. .. ;ronmental Review Committee Report
LUA09-049, ECF
Page 5 of7
The CAR indicated that Wetland A is part ofa large 142 acre wetland that extends offsite to the north,
east and west. This large wetland was preliminarily identified in the Critical Areas Inventory (Jones
& Stokes, 1992) and is mapped along the main stem of May Creek. The vegetation in this wetland is
dominated by reed canarygrass and Douglas spirea, with scattered clumps of evergreen blackberry
primarily along the boundaries of the wetland. The CAR indentified Wetland A as a Category 1
wetland because it is greater than 10 acres in size, and has three or more vegetation classes. The
wetland also includes May Creek, which contains listed salmonids, resulting in a Category 1 rating.
Category 1 wetlands have a required standard buffer of 100-feet.
Wetland B is associated with a tributary of May Creek and is located near the intersection of SE 104th
Street and 148th Avenue SE (outside of Renton City limits). This wetland experiences seasonal
saturation and/or inundation, and is connected to the tributary of May Creek that flows under SE 104th
Street via a 24-inch culvert. The vegetation in this wetland is dominated by red alder, black
cottonwood, Indian plum, reed canarygrass, with chattered slough sedge. The CAR indentified
Wetland B as a Category 3 wetland because it is small in size, has low plant species richness and
minimal wildlife use, and is surrounded by human disturbance. Category 3 wetlands have a required
standard buffer of25-feet.
The CAR also identified two streams within the proximity of the subject project. The first stream is
May Creek, which is located north of the proposed Stone gate lift station. May Creek flows under the
148th Avenue SE Bridge and continues offsite to the west. May Creek is approximately 10 to 15 feet
wide where it crosses 148th Avenue SE and narrows slightly, to approximately 5 to 8 feet as it travels
west. May Creek is perennial or intermittent with known salmonid presence. The May Creek basin
supports five species of salmonids: Chinook, sockeye, and coho salmon, and settlhead and cutthroat
trout. May Creek is considered a Class 2 stream because it is not a Shoreline of the state, has
perennial flow with salmonid presence, and is mapped on Water Class Map as Class 2; buffers for
Class 2 streams are 100-feet.
The second stream identified is a tributary of May Creek. This tributary is a seasonal channel with an
estimated 5-foot width and !-foot depth in the vicinity of NE 26th Street. In the vicinity of May
Creek, this tributary has a less defined bed and banks, dispersing flow over a broad area. The
tributary also contains dense herbaceous vegetation in this area. Therefore, the CAR concluded that
salmonid presence in the tributary is unlikely. Furthermore, this tributary has been channelized ,
culverted and the banks have been armored in many locations. This tributary of May Creek is
considered a Class 4 stream because it is a non-salmon-bearing intermittent stream and is mapped on
Water Class map as Class 4; buffer widths for Class 4 streams are 35-feet. A portion of the forced
main is proposed to cross this tributary within the right-of-way of NE 26th Street (where the tributary
is located within a culvert under the right-of-way). The applicant has indicated that this portion of the
sewer system would be constructed using tunneling/directional drill methods, which would not
require in-water work or cause impacts to the stream buffer or the stream itself.
As proposed, the applicants would not impact either stream or wetland and their associated buffers.
Although, the location of the new Stonegate lift station is within close proximity to the 100-foot
buffer of Wetland A, as such staff recommends as a mitigation measure that prior to construction,
temporary construction fencing be placed along a portion of the 100-foot buffer area of Wetland A
that is immediately north of the Stone gate lift station construction site.
Mitigation Measures:
1. Temporary construction fencing shall be placed along the portion of the 100-foot buffer area of
Wetland A that is immediately north of the Stonegate lift station construction site prior to
commencement of construction.
Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Critical Areas Regulations
3. Vegetation
Impacts: The majority of the project site is located under rights-of-way; as such, these areas do not have any
vegetation. Although, the new Stonegate lift station is located on a vacant parcel that is owned by the
Stonegate neighborhood Home Owners Association. This parcel is vegetated mainly with lawn and
ERC REPORT 09-049
City of Renton Department of Com=•mity & Economic Development
STONEGATE LIFT STATION
Report of May 18, 2009
E"""'ronmental Review Committee Report
LUA09-049, ECF
Page 6 of7
ornamental planting that surround the existing lift station. The grass and shrubs in the new location for the
lift station would be cleared as a part of construction. No trees would be removed as a part of this project.
The applicant has proposed to re-landscape areas of the site that are not used for the above ground portions of
the lift station. The landscape plan provided with the application includes 63 new trees, 322 new shrubs and
wild strawberry and potentilla ground cover.
Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required
Nexus: NIA
4. Noise
Impacts: It is anticipated that short-term noise would occur during regular operation hours of construction.
Many comments were received from the residents that live in the Summerwind and Stonegate
neighborhoods that indicated they have concerns about the noise impacts of the construction. Construction
times for this project shall be restricted to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., Monday through
Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between 9:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. and no work
shall be permitted on Sundays. In order to further reduce temporary noise impacts to the residents of the
Summerwind and Stonegate neighborhoods the applicant has indicated that all construction, in residential
areas, is intended to be completed daily by 5:00 p.m. instead of 8:00 p.m ..
There could potentially be long term sound impacts to the residence of the Stone gate neighborhood created
when the emergency generator for the new lift station is in use. In order to mitigate this potential impact the
applicant has proposed to enclose the generator in sound attenuated housing. This would reduce the noise
impacts to allowable levels when in operation. The emergency power generator would not exceed 45 dBA at
the property line between Tract H and Lot I of Stonegate. This generator would only be in operation during
power outages and occasionally for short periods during normal working hours for regular servicing.
Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required
Nexus: NIA
S. Aesthetics
Impacts: The majority of this project would be underground, specifically under existing rights-of-way, as
such aesthetic impacts would be minimal. Open trench construction within the rights-of-way could result in
a patchwork effect, in the road pavement, when the trenches are filled and re-paved. In order to reduce this
potential visual impact the applicant has proposed to provide a complete 2-inch grind and 2-inch asphalt
overlay to all existing public roadways within the plat of Stonegate and the applicant would also fully restore
Roadways Sections, which include NE 26"' Street from Lyons Avenue NE to 148"' Avenue SE, Lyons
Avenue SE from the south end of the plat to NE 26"' Street, NE 24"' Court from cul-de-sac to Lyons Avenue
NE, NE 23'd Court from cul-de-sac to Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22ruJ Court from cul-de sac to Lyons Avenue
NE, NE 21" Court from Lyons Avenue NE to cul-de-sac, and the existing emergency access road from NE
22"d Court to NE 20th Street.
In addition to the right-of-way impacts the new above ground portions of the Stone gate lift station could have
aesthetic impacts to the Stonegate neighborhood as well. In order to screen the above ground lift station
building the applicant has provided a landscape plan that provides visua61 screening to the single-family
residences within the Stonegate neighborhood. The landscape plan includes 63 new trees, 322 new shrubs
and wild strawberry and potentilla ground cover in addition to a small block wall that borders the south and
west side of the lift station.
Mitigation Measures: No additional mitigation is required.
Nexus: NIA
6. Transportation
Impacts: During construction, the project is anticipated to have temporary impacts on transportation. Many
comments were received from the residents of the Summerwind and Stone gate neighborhoods that indicated
concern about traffic interruptions during construction. In order to mitigate for this temporary impact the
ERC REPORT 09-049
City of Renton Department o/Com,..,mity & Economic Development
STONEGATE LIFT STATION
Report of May 18, 2009
E""ironmental Review Committee Report
LUA09-049, ECF
Page 7 of7
applicant has indicated that two-way traffic would be maintained on NE Sunset Boulevard and flagged one-
way traffic would be maintained through the work zone on the residential streets. In addition to maintaining
one-way traffic on the residential streets, the applicant has indicated that no more then 150 feet of trench
would be exposed at one time and a traffic control plan would be required prior to construction.
Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation is required.
Nexus: NIA
E. Comments of Reviewing Departments
The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their
comments have been incorporated into the text of this report and/or "Advisory Notes to Applicant."
v' Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File and may be attached to this
report.
Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed
in writing on or before 5:00 PM, June 5, 2009.
Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner. Appeals must be filed in
writing at the City Clerk's office along with a $75.00 application fee. Additional information regarding the
appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall -7th Floor, 1055 S. Grady Way,
Renton WA 98057.
ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT
The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land
use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for
the land use actions.
Planning:
I. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless
otherwise approved by the Development Services Division.
2. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate
ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further
construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic
covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by
the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November I st and March 31st of each year. The
Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of
the permit.
Plan Review -Surface Water:
I. Erosion control shall comply with the Department of Ecology's latest edition of the Storrnwater
Management Manual.
Plan Review -Transportation:
I. Paving and trenching shall comply with the City ofRenton's Trench and Overlay Requirements.
2. An a roved traffic control Ian is re uired.
ERC REPORT 09-049
-
ICI
IEXHIIBIT 2
---------
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING Ot1Y OF RENTON
APR2 1 2003
RECEIVED
______ L
-----,--====---~ :.""."' ---·-·
(/::---,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,, ,,
1,
-:
I
JlO~ HS l:lOi I .
I
I
I '3
I
·.-,·.-::::-:-::-:: _ -----
'
'·. ' '
. ' ii
I
,,.., .• .,.. • ..,. -..... <.O<lll•v• :i,.,o ""'"o"'
------~,,ii ~; ·t
r:,u·. ,:-. (,)
\'\1;-, ~ OJ ~t:. ~. ~ c~
{;0
;J
•
!
'
0 ~ i
C ; I
• I I ! ; • I j
' ! l ' ' .: I ;U
' -
?(~)
I 0 ~ 1111:
0EV~~Af€Nr P!::N-J,v/NG "" , r OF RENto/1/
APR l 120og
RECEIVED
z
"
" z
" z
n.
!
I
'
I
l
!
I
i
I I I I
1 ! l l i l
'
'
I '
-·--------------------I " ·---.L. ________ _
~
'" "·--·--·7--•
M I
!)! /
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I /
I '
.,----------------
I ' I /
/ ----------
I ; __
I
I
I
~I ,1
•1
01 •1 "1 •1 81
·1
',
,----;··-
' // I
·/
I
I
3S ·311 Hl8P I
--T---·----·----·----·----
""""""'"'""" ... '°"O\l<<W
I
I
' ' ........ •,
'
........... 'f\,,.,,, .... ,o\..,,I000\,<00\, ..... ,. ..
.,
' rl
•I@ Ii 2
11 '
I
" ' I ~ Ii I' ~ ! l ' ! : I :_ !
-~ -(~) i w
" 0
" I:!::
.,., ---. .,.,, 00.W<I" ........ ,o ....
u
a
11
1
.. 1
;J
n
n
·--r I I
I --I
I
·-' .·., ' ,00·~,=
0
,..._ I · --..._ I I
' .... ' .... " ' '!' I I '"'" ..._ 'II ' . '·1 !
' ..._ ,, : ' '1 I / · , · ..._ •rn ..._ ..._ I 11 ' I 11 111' '-,._
1
~rn•m"!'_ I ..._ ,oo w="""" 7 "-"-{_ ·1 :; : : '/ '11/ ..._ •--• -, ..._ ' ..._ '"· I r I ,
" --' , -... ,.... .... 'I i I I i
I ._ , ' ,, ' I ' i .._ ' "'-...._/ ~ ....,,____ -/ )oe,"l ,i I ,/1
1
1, .._ , -. ' . ' ' '" ,..........._ '"'"' r.L I ~. _J I, l-11:L1
1
,
~
, '7----.. , -...,"-s -----""-'--.c_-• / ,\7 I ii ,
I I ~---, " I , ,_ -I ---...., ... J/ ,, ' ' I ) _
' I ' :-_,:::. _ '--.""' :::J I --ll I ,. ' /.J. I, 'I 1
! ,· !; .._ -';;:-':/..._ I (':l, -----~~ .. I J / I I II,
\ II r-----"-,-S; ' JI 'lj°"!-'I ·1,:'1,,,
' I ' II ,,c'M 'l "• tillf'" ' ' ' ' ' " "--._ I " 'i -I' ~-
PROPOSED LIFT STATION
n
n
ll
LI
g
!
a
~ ' ' ' ' --' ' : J /: ,_,m,~ If , _ ._ · ,, ~ :----__ ,/1 f'/-J/i!i
~1 n // _ -----.:--;.,.1:./ / JI ;1 / "I ' • -,. I 1-I j ,-' '' --', '
I I , I , , , ,-
1 11 ' I I -·· Ii I 'I· ., ! 1_!
I "/ I ' I I ---, 'i I ·-11 _Ll;I l ' ':l
I I ' ' ! ' --_ .. -·. ·/ ii.· 1 / ~ I /! • i~~ I
I 11 /, ~ ·1)! LL Ji .
I~ /·.r --_ -I\; , J/ -' . ...._ __ ·· / ' '°"' " ' ~ " I I , 1 _ --._c_,d_"''~ )_i,Jw __ .·-'_.-'d
1
.,./_ ' ' -' , .. ~' • , I I / ' 11 l-7-;;:,;.)"~~".'o . --_ :r;,_:;-,.-·_ ·1' J: I {___ ''" ' 'I. ' '-' ' , -"·---.. , I 1!--1
1
'\ ,!I , I I -+ ,--,, ,
1
I , , I' ao-' I I I ------------. ' ', ! 1, _.qo_/-1'
1
,I r 1 ____ --------· --· -\ , , _ --11 l ___ l__
1
'---------NE 26TH ST -j --[ C ._.,.... ___ ~, //
-, ' , ·---' -. -' '
' , I ' ---·=_ --··-_--__ ."'""_-_-· ~_,l .1-,J,\1 ' , ' ' ·-·--~ ., ""..::: .· ,J,, )~-., '-:,. I " ' , -·-------
iJ_ s t ~ --1----1 -------! • ' I L. .. .. ---~ Fee'. / 1 _I I
11 L
:·,
! i
!ii::11. '"' az~
S0J.JRCE: ESAA<loll$on; 2008, t<rng County: 2007
i..l :
IEXIHIXIBX1f" 7
' ..
h
Renton Stonegate lf . 2007
Figure 4
Wetlands and Streams
-lift Station
Renton. WA
• maa m • SiE c::;:;J c:::::r c::::r i=:r m ~ ~ r::f r:!?J' ~ E1I' G
10
iH
la
r
a
[J
a
·n
~
0
D
IJ
0
11
g
a
!"j
[j ..
!]
q
lJ
u
t
i ? 115 J ,.
[
UNNAMED::::: B
\ 35' WETLAND BUFFER FC,mO R(.~;p \'Fl
'"'°'"'''°'' j)\~ ''" ~ r-\ . 1/'/'.''"' y /
\
,I •• • ,\
~· /'\ \.:-, '1 ~-
// f--~ I ( _) i I 1 · G=--==5"~~ ", . D ~!;~ \ -' ,
__ . ., ,-J; .-.;.~ ~·, =~_))/,,...,.'""...L....--· j ~-'
~-\ ').;,---I _ ,;~}. _ _ O"Q~/0 \ -· ~ ( ,,, -r· I J ,;, ..__ ~ . ;, .. --' --·. ~
--,--1-,·-~-~ <'.. ---,
~
~ I !I I __ / " : 0 8 7'
I. ( LC1Ji\/£RI / ():{' ::,
rOUNo RE/C ' •( j46 8\ 6
·, ~"'" '""( / I ,,·,., ,' ;, / I
I I I o" I I r ~ 35·m1eurARv0uFFER / ~
/'I I I/ o
UNNAMED-r:R!BlITARY ___/"'
1
'
LEGEND
WETLAND
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY
WETIAND ANO STREAM BUFFER
SOURCE:·, """ ... 200! ---I . 20101~ 01
IEX!lilCBX11" 8
Figure 5
Welland B and S11eam
R~ton, Washington
' ,.
~
~~iffl'-~ ~ BJ ea1 Lt3 ~
_. \\ft ~ ~ t::] l.21 ~ ~ w er ~
L..;;;;.J f'?""7 L...J DQD0El
Vanessa Dolbee
From: John D. Hobson
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Tuesday, May 19, 2009 09:05 AM
'mryberg1@comcast.net'
Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: RE: Stonegate Lift Station
Mr. Ryberg,
Thank you for your email about the sidewalk. I will make a site visit with someone from the transportation department
to inspect your sidewalk and determine a suitable repair. I will email you afterwards to let you know our course of
action.
John Hobson
Stonegate Lift Station Project Manager
City of Renton Wastewater Utility
From: Vanessa Dolbee
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 7:42 AM
To: Stacy Tucker
Cc: John D. Hobson
Subject: FVV: Stonegate Lift Station
Stacy,
Could you please add the following to the Party of Record list for the subject project.
Thank you,
Vanessa Dolbee
x7314
From: Marty Ryberg (Comcast) [mailto:mrybergl@comcast.net]
Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 08:33 AM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Stonegate Lift Station
Hi,
I had a question on the Stonegate lift station. Well -it's not really a question on the lift station itself-I have lived in
Renton the last 20 years, trust them to do what is right, and I am all for it. But there is a loose connection. And maybe
you need to put me in touch with someone else at Renton as a start ...
The sidewalk in front of our house is deteriorating faster than most. When we lived off Union Ave just east of here,
Renton took ownership for the sidewalks -including repair/replacement and sealing the cracks with a rubber sealant
which was really nice. And I think this is one of the reasons I'm having trouble -water is getting under the sidewalk
causing it to settle and crack.
1
The questions are, who maintains my sidewalk? If its Renton, can my sidewalk be repaired concurrent with the lift
station work (since the sidewalks at the top of my street (just yards away from mine) will be affected anyway)? If it is my
responsibility, can I work with the lift station contractor to have the work done concurrently? And, if Renton is the
owner of our sidewalks, they really should consider that sealant again -it was nice work.
Thanks!
Marty Ryberg
5309 NE 22"' CT
Renton, WA 98059
2
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mr. and Mrs. Willoughby,
John D. Hobson
Tuesday, May 19, 2009 10:46 AM
'TadWilloughby@msn.com'
Vanessa Dolbee
RE: Stonegate Sanitary lift station at Stonegate entrance
The sewer construction that was done on 1481h Ave SE near the entrance to your neighborhood was constructed
by a private developer in a roadway that is currently under the jurisdiction of King County. As part of his
project, it was the developers responsibly to repair 148th Ave SE, the damaged sidewalk and the irrigation
system. The developer has recently experienced financial difficulty and is unable to complete the restoration.
Since 148 1h Ave SE is due to become a part of the City of Renton on May 31, 2009, the City will be replacing
the damaged sidewalk and irrigation system and overlaying 1481h Ave SE with new asphalt as part of the
Stonegate Lift Station Project.
Once the new Stonegate Lift Station's "force main" sewer pipe is installed through your plat, the contractor will
grind off the top two inches of asphalt throughout the entire Stonegate neighborhood and repave so that there
are no trench patches visible.
We will also be investigating the source of the water that is surfacing near the existing lift station. Once we
have determined the source, we will implement a solution as part of the Lift Station Project. Water District 90,
the water provider to this area, tested this water and determined that it does not contain chlorine or fluoride so it
is unlikely that it is coming from a broken pipe.
Our current schedule is to begin the pipeline installation in early August. This work will take place in the
streets of the Stonegate neighborhood. This work, including the repaving, should take approximately 3 months
to complete. The Lift Station portion of the project will begin in late September/early October and should be
completed by early summer 2010. This work will take place adjacent to !48'h Ave NE approximately 150 feet
north of the entrance to the Stonegate neighborhood. Access to the lift station project will be from !48'h Ave
NE.
Standard working hours are 7:00 AM to 5:00PM, Monday through Friday.
If you have any more questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to email me.
John Hobson, Project Manager
City of Renton Wastewater Utility
From: Vanessa Dolbee
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 7:32 AM
To: John D. Hobson
Subject: FW: Stonegate Sanitary lift station at Stonegate entrance
From: TAD KEVIN WILLOUGHBY [mailto:TadWilloughby@msn.com]
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 07:56 AM
I
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Stonegate Sanitary lift station at Stonegate entrance
To whom it may concern;
I have lived in the Stonegate subdivision from day one, being the first homeowner in the subdivision. I
have some serious concerns about what is about to happen in the area at the front entrance to
Stonegate.
First, I have seen several projects that we were told would be done according to the regulations of the
City of Renton that obvioulsy were not. The largest of those projects was with the builder putting in the
connecting sewer line on 148th Avenue to several houses. After a long and tiresome process arguing with
the City of Renton Debra Rogers finally made some headway and the City stepped in and at least laid
some temporary pavement along the sidewalk area and flower beds where dozens of our preschoolers
through high schoolers walk everyday. Was this a serious liability issue? You bet it was and thankfully no
one was injured prior to the completion of the temporary work. The City has claimed the work would be
done prior to the start of school this year. Status: It still stands in the temporary resolution phase to the
problem at this time.
Second, the City of Renton City Council urged the Stonegate Homeowners Association to negotiate with a
third party who has a small easement off of NE 26th Avenue regarding his easement and including two
homes behind the subdivision into his easement. After several hearings and negotiations an agreement
was reached. Unfortunately, the other party in the deal pulled a typical "screw them" manuever and filed
for bankruptcy and never paid the money owed to the Homeowners Association. In addition to that, the
third party dug up some of our underground sprinkler system and damaged the line along the easement.
To this day, which is now nearly two years later, this damage had never been repaired. According to one
of the Stonegate Homeowners Association board members, the City of Renton claimed they would step up
and repair this damage. Well I can tell you it hasn't happened yet! Status: No sprinkler system in that
common area of the subdivision and another year of brown dead grass is coming with the summer months
approaching.
Third, we have a new problem at the front of the subdivision that just recently came into being due to the
front entrance sewer project. In the flower bed and grass area to the north of NE 26th Avenue, we have a
constant stream of water coming out of the ground and causing a large green slime and messy looking
sludge pond. We have been told this is typical runoff and not a broken pipe. However, this runoff has
continued since the repaving of 148th Avenue and has continued even during weeks with sunny/cloudy
weather with no rain. This "runoff" should slow and come to a stop if that's what it really is. It has not
stopped or slowed and is making a real mess in our common area. This problem is a result of the laying
of the sewer line and the damage cause under the ground where the sprinkler system pipes run. Is there
a broken pipe there? I would certainly bet there is.
Finally, as should be the case with any project, where is the timeline of events. How long is this going to
mess up our front entrance? When do you plan to start the project, after school ends? What is this
substation going to look like. Are you planning on placing an ugly structure on our common area? Will
the repairs to roadway make the roadway a mess or willl they actual repair the roadway to a better
condition than it currently is in now. Will you be flagging the intersection for traffic control? What hours
and days do you plan on doing the work?
I am very hopeful this project will not negativley impact the residents of the Stonegate subdivision as
have these past other situations.
Respectfully,
Tad and Melissa Willoughby
2
Vanessa Dolbee
From: Vanessa Dolbee
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Tuesday, May 19, 2009 06:50 AM
'TAD KEVIN WILLOUGHBY'
John D. Hobson
Subject: RE: Sanitary lift station at Stonegate
Mr. and Mrs. Willoughby,
Thank you very much for your comments on the Stonegate Lift Station Environmental Review. Your
comments will be placed into the official file and you will be added to the interested parties list, which will keep
you informed about the project until the environmental review is complete. John Hobson will be responding to
any questions within your e-mail. If you have any additional questions and/or comments please feel free
contact me.
Thank you,
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
From: TAD KEVIN WILLOUGHBY [mailto:TadWilloughby@msn.com]
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 05: 10 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Sanitary lift station at Stonegate
To whom it may concern;
I have lived in the Stonegate subdivision from day one, being the first homeowner in the subdivision. I
have some serious concerns about what is about to happen in the area at the front entrance to
Stonegate.
First, I have seen several projects that we were told would be done according to the regulations of the
City of Renton that obvioulsy were not. The largest of those projects was with the builder putting in the
connecting sewer line on 148th Avenue to several houses. After a long and tiresome process arguing with
the City of Renton Debra Rogers finally made some headway and the City stepped in and at least laid
some temporary pavement along the sidewalk area and flower beds where dozens of our preschoolers
I
,. -..:.\,
through high schoolers walk everyday. Was this a serious liability issue? You bet it was and thankfully no
one was injured prior to the completion of the temporary work. The City has claimed the work would be
done prior to the start of school this year. Status: It still stands in the temporary resolution phase to the
problem at this time.
Second, the City of Renton City Council urged the Stonegate Homeowners Association to negotiate with a
third party who has a small easement off of NE 26th Avenue regarding his easement and including two
homes behind the subdivision into his easement. After several hearings and negotiations an agreement
was reached. Unfortunately, the other party in the deal pulled a typical "screw them" manuever and filed
for bankruptcy and never paid the money owed to the Homeowners Association. In addition to that, the
third party dug up some of our underground sprinkler system and damaged the line along the easement.
To this day, which is now nearly two years later, this damage had never been repaired. According to one
of the Stonegate Homeowners Association board members, the City of Renton claimed they would step up
and repair this damage. Well I can tell you it hasn't happened yet! Status: No sprinkler system in that
common area of the subdivision and another year of brown dead grass is coming with the summer months
approaching.
Third, we have a new problem at the front of the subdivision that just recently came into being due to the
front entrance sewer project. In the flower bed and grass area to the north of NE 26th Avenue, we have a
constant stream of water coming out of the ground and causing a large green slime and messy looking
sludge pond. We have been told this is typical runoff and not a broken pipe. However, this runoff has
continued since the repaving of 148th Avenue and has continued even during weeks with sunny/cloudy
weather with no rain. This "runoff" should slow and come to a stop if that's what it really is. It has not
stopped or slowed and is making a real mess in our common area. This problem is a result of the laying
of the sewer line and the damage cause under the ground where the sprinkler system pipes run. Is there
a broken pipe there? I would certainly bet there is.
Finally, as should be the case with any project, where is the timeline of events. How long is this going to
mess up our front entrance? When do you plan to start the project, after school ends? What is this
substation going to look like. Are you planning on placing an ugly structure on our common area? Will
the repairs to roadway make the roadway a mess or will! they actual repair the roadway to a better
condition than it currently is in now. Will you be flagging the intersection for traffic control? What hours
and days do you plan on doing the work?
I am very hopeful this project will not negativley impact the residents of the Stonegate subdivision as
have these past other situations.
Respectfully,
Tad and Melissa Willoughby
2
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
TAD KEVIN WILLOUGHBY [TadWilloughby@msn.com]
Monday, May 18, 2009 05:10 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
Sanitary lift station at Stonegate
To whom it may concern;
I have lived in the Stonegate subdivision from day one, being the first homeowner in the subdivision. I
have some serious concerns about what is about to happen in the area at the front entrance to
Stonegate.
First, I have seen several projects that we were told would be done according to the regulations of the
City of Renton that obvioulsy were not. The largest of those projects was with the builder putting in the
connecting sewer line on 148th Avenue to several houses. After a long and tiresome process arguing with
the City of Renton Debra Rogers finally made some headway and the City stepped in and at least laid
some temporary pavement along the sidewalk area and flower beds where dozens of our preschoolers
through high schoolers walk everyday. Was this a serious liability issue? You bet it was and thankfully no
one was injured prior to the completion of the temporary work. The City has claimed the work would be
done prior to the start of school this year. Status: It still stands in the temporary resolution phase to the
problem at this time.
Second, the City of Renton City Council urged the Stonegate Homeowners Association to negotiate with a
third party who has a small easement off of NE 26th Avenue regarding his easement and including two
homes behind the subdivision into his easement. After several hearings and negotiations an agreement
was reached. Unfortunately, the other party in the deal pulled a typical "screw them" manuever and filed
for bankruptcy and never paid the money owed to the Homeowners Association. In addition to that, the
third party dug up some of our underground sprinkler system and damaged the line along the easement.
To this day, which is now nearly two years later, this damage had never been repaired. According to one
of the Stonegate Homeowners Association board members, the City of Renton claimed they would step up
and repair this damage. Well I can tell you it hasn't happened yet! Status: No sprinkler system in that
common area of the subdivision and another year of brown dead grass is coming with the summer months
approaching.
Third, we have a new problem at the front of the subdivision that just recently came into being due to the
front entrance sewer project. In the flower bed and grass area to the north of NE 26th Avenue, we have a
constant stream of water coming out of the ground and causing a large green slime and messy looking
sludge pond. We have been told this is typical runoff and not a broken pipe. However, this runoff has
continued since the repaving of 148th Avenue and has continued even during weeks with sunny/cloudy
weather with no rain. This "runoff" should slow and come to a stop if that's what it really is. It has not
stopped or slowed and is making a real mess in our common area. This problem is a result of the laying
of the sewer line and the damage cause under the ground where the sprinkler system pipes run. Is there
a broken pipe there? I would certainly bet there is.
1
,. ' '~ .'C>-
Finally, as should be the case with any project, where is the timeline of events. How long is this going to
mess up our front entrance? When do you plan to start the project, after school ends? What is this
substation going to look like. Are you planning on placing an ugly structure on our common area? Will
the repairs to roadway make the roadway a mess or willl they actual repair the roadway to a better
condition than it currently is in now. Will you be flagging the intersection for traffic control? What hours
and days do you plan on doing the work?
I am very hopeful this project will not negativley impact the residents of the Stonegate subdivision as
have these past other situations.
Respectfully,
Tad and Melissa Willoughby
5512 NE 26th Street
Renton Wa 98059
2
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mr. and Mrs. Slayton
John D. Hobson
Monday, May 18, 2009 12:35 PM
'sbslaton@comcast.net'
Vanessa Dolbee
RE: Comments on Stonegate proposed sanitary lift station project.
Thank you for your email concerning the Stonegate Lift Station Project. There is no doubt that this project is going to be
disruptive to the neighborhood. There will be noise from the construction activities and traffic through the work zone
will have to be reduced to one lane. A traffic control plan will be established for the project to minimize impacts to the
residents as they enter and leave the neighborhood. The Stonegate neighborhood, like all neighborhoods, have utilities
under the road ways that need to be maintained, repaired, replaced and added to at times.
The good news is that the new pipeline that is going to be installed in the roads is only going to be 4 feet deep. This
means that the contractor will be able to install more pipe per day thereby reducing the overall time for the disruption
to the roadways. Once the pipe is installed, the contractor will grind off the top two inches of asphalt throughout the
entire plat and repave so that there are no trench patches visible. The construction will also repair the sidewalk and that
portion of 1481h Ave NE that was disturbed as part of the developer project.
Safety is always a major concern when the City initiates any construction activities. Prior to construction, the contractor
will be informed of all safety issues and concerns regarding the residents and their children. The City will have a full-
time construction inspector on site during the construction and he will monitor the safety of the construction work
during the project. The City does utility construction projects in neighborhoods every year so we are familiar with the
safety requirements to protect the public during these activities.
These construction activities will be a new experience for many of the children in the neighborhood. I cannot stress
enough that parents should explain to their children the dangers of entering a construction site and to stay away from
the construction activities. As in all neighborhood construction, the City's inspector and the contractor's workers will
watch for children and adults and help them navigate through the construction site.
The following information should help you understand the reason and timing for this project.
The existing Stonegate lift station currently pumps to the west into another lift station in the Summerwind Plat. The
Summerwind lift station then pumps this wastewater into the existing 8" diameter gravity sewer in Duvall Ave NE which
then flows south to Sunset Blvd. The Summerwind lift station has reached the end of its operational life. Additionally,
the existing sewer main in Duvall Ave NE has reached its maximum capacity. Therefore, the City has determined that
the most economical and best engineering solution is to abandon the Summerwind lift station by installing a gravity
sewer pipe to allow it's wastewater to flow toward a new Stonegate Lift Station. This new Stonegate Lift Station will
then pump this wastewater through a new "force main" sewer pipe within the Stonegate neighborhood and
Summerwind neighborhood and directly into the Sunset Blvd sewer line which is large enough to handle these flows.
This project allows the City to use one lift station to do the job that is currently being done by two, will replace the
current Stonegate lift station with one that will handle all future wastewater requirements for the area, and frees up
capacity in the existing Duvall Ave NE sewer main.
Our current schedule is to begin the pipeline installation in early August. This work will take place in the streets of the
Stonegate neighborhood. This work should take approximately 3 months to complete. The Lift Station portion of the
project will begin in late September/early October and should be completed by early summer 2010. This work will take
place adjacent to 148'h Ave NE approximately 150 feet north of the entrance to the Stonegate neighborhood. Access to
the lift station project will be from 1481h Ave NE.
1
Standard working hours are 7:00 AM to 5:00PM, Monday through Friday.
If you have any more questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to email me.
John Hobson, Project Manager
City of Renton Wastewater Utility
From: Vanessa Dolbee
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 7:15 AM
To: Stacy Tucker
Cc: John D. Hobson
Subject: FW: Comments on Stonegate proposed sanitary lift station project.
Stacy,
Could you please add the following to the Party of Record List for the subject project.
Thank you,
Vanessa Dolbee
x7314
From: Susan Slaton [mailto:sbslaton@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 05:01 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Comments on Stonegate proposed sanitary lift station project.
The subject project has some serious safety issues that should be fully addressed by the City. These include providing
adequate safety measures for school bus pick up and drop off. There are lots of kids in this neighborhood and a
thorough plan u must be prepared, documented and implemented. Sidewalk access and passability also need to be
addressed.
There are also quality of life topics that must also be addressed including traffic, hours of construction, and duration of
the project. Without addressing these issues in a thorough plan, implementation will not be achieved.
Please have the plan address these items so there are no safety issues.
Thank you.
Dan Slaton
5511NE 21" Court
Renton WA 98059
2
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mr. and Mrs. Tribble
John D. Hobson
Monday, May 18, 2009 11 :35 AM
'jstribble@comcast.net'
Vanessa Dolbee
RE: Sanitary Lift Station Project
Thank you for your email concerning the Stonegate Lift Station Project. There is no doubt that this project is
going to be disruptive to the neighborhood. There will be noise from the construction activities and traffic
through the work zone will have to be reduced to one Jane. A traffic control plan will be established for the
project to minimize impacts to the residents as they enter and leave the neighborhood. The Stonegate
neighborhood, like a11 neighborhoods, have utilities under the road ways that need to be maintained, repaired,
replaced and added to at times.
Safety is always a major concern when the City initiates any construction activities. Prior to construction, the
contractor will be informed of all safety issues and concerns regarding the residents and their children. The
City will have a full-time construction inspector on site during the construction and he will monitor the safety of
the construction work during the project. The City does utility construction projects in neighborhoods every
year so we are familiar with the safety requirements to protect the public during these activities.
These construction activities will be a new experience for many of the children in the neighborhood. I cannot
stress enough that parents should explain to their children the dangers of entering a construction site and to stay
away from the construction activities. As in all neighborhood construction, the City's inspector and the
contractor's workers will watch for children and adults and help them navigate through the construction site.
The following information should help you understand the reason and timing for this project.
The existing Stonegate lift station currently pumps to the west into another lift station in the Surnmerwind Plat.
The S ummerwind lift station then pumps this wastewater into the existing 8" diameter gravity sewer in Duvall
Ave NE which then flows south to Sunset Blvd. The Summerwind lift station has reached the end of its
operational life. Additionally, the existing sewer main in Duvall Ave NE has reached its maximum capacity.
Therefore, the City has determined that the most economical and best engineering solution is to abandon the
Summerwind lift station by installing a gravity sewer pipe to allow it's wastewater to flow toward a new
Stonegate Lift Station. This new Stonegate Lift Station will then pump this wastewater through a new "force
main" sewer pipe within the Stonegate neighborhood and Summerwind neighborhood and directly into the
Sunset Blvd sewer line which is large enough to handle these flows. This project allows the City to use one lift
station to do the job that is currently being done by two, will replace the current Stonegate lift station with one
that will handle all future wastewater requirements for the area, and frees up capacity in the existing Duva11 Ave
NE sewer main.
The sewer construction that was done on 148'h Ave NE near the entrance to your neighborhood was not done by
the City of Renton. This was a private developer installed sewer main that was done in a King County street.
The developer has experienced financial difficulty and is unable to complete the restoration. Since 148th Ave
SE is due to become a part of the City of Renton on May 31, 2009, the City will be replacing the damaged
sidewalk and irrigation system and overlaying 148th Ave SE with new asphalt as part of the Stonegate Lift
Station Project.
1
Once the new Stone gate Lift Station-, s "force main" sewer pipe is installed, the contractor will grind off the top
two inches of asphalt throughout the entire plat and repave so that there are no trench patches visible.
If you have any more questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to email me.
John Hobson, Project Manager
City of Renton Wastewater Utility
------
From: Vanessa Dolbee
Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 7:11 AM
To: Stacy Tucker
Cc: John D. Hobson
Subject: FW: Sanitary Lift Station Project
Stacy,
··---·--·----------------
Could you please add the following to the Party of Record list for the subject project.
Thank you,
Vanessa Dolbee
x7314
From: John and Stacy Tribble [mailto:jstribble@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:46 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Sanitary Lift Station Project
To The City of Renton:
We are writing to express our extreme dissatisfaction with the City of Renton for using our neighborhood of Stonegate for
the Sanitary Lift Station. The disruption to our neighborhood for many reasons is unacceptable.
First, we are concerned with our children's safety. We have a very large population of school age children who use our
street and sidewalks to bike and to get to our bus stop at the entrance to our neighborhood every day. We have no
alternate route. When the city tore up our streets last summer and fall, the bus stop was left completely unsafe, with no
sidewalk for the kids to wait at, so cars drove dangerously close to them on 148th. The workers on that project were rude
and vulgar and none of us felt safe with our kids around them. Our roads and sidewalks were not passable, so there was
no safe way to take our kids for walks or bike rides.
Second, we are concerned about how we are going to get in and out of our neighborhood and how long it will take. Last
year the workers would keep us from entering and exiting our own neighborhood for 15-20 minutes at a time many times a
day EVERY DAY! We have to get our kids to school, ourselves to work and have a way out in case of emergency. We
have already dealt with Coal Creek and May Valley traffic for 1 1/2 years, 148th traffic at our enterance last summer and
now traffic in our neighborhood for up to 2 more years. We are really frustrated by this!
We are also concerned about the aesthetics of our neighborhood. The road and sidewalk at our enterance has still not
been repaired by the city from last year, and this does not leave us hopeful that the rest of our roads will be left in any
better condition. This directly effects the value of our homes.
2
Finally, we worry about the noise. Some of us do shift work and must sleep during the day or have children that nap
during the day. The loud machinery will impact the quality of our lives enormously.
We bought our house in Stonegate ten years ago because we loved the quiet and safe environment on a side road
without much traffic. We specifically bought it to raise our small children. We would appreciate the City's reconsideration
of the project. We would also like to know who is making this decision. If it is something that is voted on by council
members, we would like to know how each of them votes. We hope that they will look at this project as if they had to live
here during it!
Thank you for your time,
Stacy and John Tribble
2106 Lyons AVE NE
Renton WA 98059
425-227-7645
3
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Ms. Ryberg,
Vanessa Dolbee
Monday, May 18, 2009 09:44 AM
'Marty Ryberg (Comcast)'
John D. Hobson
RE: Stonegate Lift Station
Thank you very much for your comments on the Stonegate Lift Station Environmental Review. Your comments will be
placed into the official file and you will be added to the interested parties list, which will keep you informed about the
project until the environmental review is complete. John Hobson will be responding to any questions within your e-
mail. If you have any additional questions and/or comments please feel free contact me.
Thank you,
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
From: Marty Ryberg (Comcast) [mailto:mrybergl@comcast.net]
Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 08:33 AM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Stonegate Li~ Station
Hi,
I had a question on the Stonegate lift station. Well -it's not really a question on the lift station itself-I have lived in
Renton the last 20 years, trust them to do what is right, and I am all for it. But there is a loose connection. And maybe
you need to put me in touch with someone else at Renton as a start ...
The sidewalk in front of our house is deteriorating faster than most. When we lived off Union Ave just east of here,
Renton took ownership for the sidewalks -including repair/replacement and sealing the cracks with a rubber sealant
which was really nice. And I think this is one of the reasons I'm having trouble -water is getting under the sidewalk
causing it to settle and crack.
The questions are, who maintains my sidewalk? If its Renton, can my sidewalk be repaired concurrent with the lift
station work (since the sidewalks at the top of my street Uust yards away from mine) will be affected anyway)? If it is my
responsibility, can I work with the lift station contractor to have the work done concurrently? And, if Renton is the
owner of our sidewalks, they really should consider that sealant again -it was nice work.
Thanks!
Marty Ryberg
5309 NE 22nd CT
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mr. Slaton,
Vanessa Dolbee
Monday, May 18, 2009 09:42 AM
'Susan Slaton'
John D. Hobson
RE: Comments on Stonegate proposed sanitary lift station project.
Thank you very much for your comments on the Stonegate Lift Station Environmental Review. Your comments will be
placed into the official file and you will be added to the interested parties list, which will keep you informed about the
project until the environmental review is complete. John Hobson will be responding to any questions within your e-
mail. If you have any additional questions and/or comments please feel free contact me.
Thank you,
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
From: Susan Slaton [mailto:sbslaton@comcast.net]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 05:01 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Comments on Stonegate proposed sanitary lift station project.
The subject project has some serious safety issues that should be fully addressed by the City. These include providing
adequate safety measures for school bus pick up and drop off. There are lots of kids in this neighborhood and a
thorough plan u must be prepared, documented and implemented. Sidewalk access and passability also need to be
addressed.
There are also quality of life topics that must also be addressed including traffic, hours of construction, and duration of
the project. Without addressing these issues in a thorough plan, implementation will not be achieved.
Please have the plan address these items so there are no safety issues.
Thank you.
Dan Slaton
5511NE 21'' Court
Renton WA 98059
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Vanessa Dolbee
Monday, May 18, 2009 09:40 AM
'Chappelle, Douglas E'
John D. Hobson
Subject: RE: LUA09-049, Stonegate Lift Station -Construction Mitigation
Mr. Chappelle,
Thank you very much for your comments on the Stonegate Lift Station Environmental Review. Your comments will be
placed into the official file and you will be added to the interested parties list, which will keep you informed about the
project until the environmental review is complete. John Hobson will be responding to your questions within all of your
e-mails. If you have any additional questions and/or comments please feel free contact me.
Thank you,
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
From: Chappelle, Douglas E [mailto:douglas.e.chappelle@boeing.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:35 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: LUA09-049, Stonegate Lift Station -Construction Mitigation
Ms Dolbee,
In regards to the subject proposal, I appreciate that the applicant is willing to restrict work to the hours of 7AM to 5PM
Monday to Friday and that Ms Illian (of Development Services Division?) in her review has further restricted haul hours to
8:30 am to 3:30 pm.
However, I remain concerned that these hours leave children in our neighborhood exposed to the movement of large
trucks and hazardous construction activities at times that the children are required to be out and in the immediate vicinity
of the proposed lift station in order to catch the school bus.
I would like to see a restriction added to the project that prohibits the movement of any vehicle over 10,000 lbs GVW or
the operation of any equipment that produces noise in excess of 81 dBA when measured from any sidewalk related to any
of the applicants activities upon Tract E, NE 26th Street, NE 24th Court, NE 23rd Court, NE 22 Court, NE 21st Court or
Lyons Ave NE in the interval starting 15 minutes before any school bus pickup as scheduled by the Issaquah School
District to immediately after the pickup actually occurs and the interval starting from the time a school bus drop off actually
starts until 15 minutes later.
In addition, I would like to see and be able to comment on the details of the applicants proposed safety and traffic
management plan(s) especially as they pertain to preserving a safe environment for our children. I am interested, for
1
example, in what the applicant proposes for flaggers/safety monitors to assist the children at these times or the applicant's
intent to preserve at least one contiguous sidewalk surface at all times.
The project should be placed on hold until such time as the applicant can provide the safety and traffic management plans
and another public comment period can be conducted.
Douglas E Chappelle
2208 Lyons Ave NE
Renton, WA 98059
+1-206-719-3351
2
Vanessa Dolbee
From: Vanessa Dolbee
Sent:
To:
Monday, May 18, 2009 09:38 AM
'CarolABC@aol.com'
Subject: RE: Stonegate Lift Station
Mrs. Chappelle,
Thank you very much for your comments on the Stonegate Lift Station Environmental Review. Your comments will be
placed into the official file and you will be added to the interested parties list, which will keep you informed about the
project until the environmental review is complete. John Hobson has responded to many of your questions already, if
you have any additional questions and/or comments please feel free contact me.
Thank you,
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
From: CarolABC@aol.com [mailto:CarolABC@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:18 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Stonegate Lift Station
Dear City of Renton:
As a resident of the Stonegate neighborhood, I have concerns over the proposed Stonegate Lift Station project. First of
all, this project is potentially very disruptive to our neighborhood. The project requires tearing up the streets that run the
entire length of our neighborhood. This will pose not only a major inconvenience to the people coming and going from the
neighborhood, but it will be noisy, dirty, and potentially very dangerous to the flow of traffic in our residential
neighborhood. The Stonegate neighborhood is a residential area and as such, is not equipped nor is it accustomed to
handle the activities of heavy machinery and equipment that will be a day to day reality for our small neighborhood.
My priority concern is for the safety of the children in this neighborhood. The project is slated to start at the beginning of
summer, just the time when school children ride around on their bikes, or play games outside. The children in our
neighborhood are not accustomed to having heavy construction equipment in the neighborhood and don't fully understand
the potential dangers of this equipment. Children darting around on bicycles or chasing balls are difficult to see and their
movements are difficult to predict. When children are unaccustomed to having to play around construction equipment,
they may not fully understand how to successfully play around it-without getting hurt-or worse. We as a neighborhood
have been accustomed to letting our kids ride their bikes freely, run to neighbors' houses, play in yards or on the sidewalk.
All of this could change. II would require the parents lo be extremely vigilant in tending to the safety of our children. All ii
would take is for one careless worker to not see a small child on a bicycle or to not notice a child chasing a ball and the
unthinkable could happen. I'm not sure the city wants to bear that responsibility.
Finally, during this time of economic recession, it would make sense for the city to reconsider its expenditures. Does it in
fact make sense to move forward with such an expensive project at a time when many of the building construction
projects in our area have been put on hold, or gone into receivership or bankruptcy? It would be fiscally responsible for
1
the city to reconsider whether this project is absolutely necessary and makes sense to start at this time. Is forecasted
· growth at the same level as it was when this project was originally proposed? If not, what will be the revised sanitary lift
station needs of the community? Will the community absolutely benefit from this project as is or could there be a revision
that could potentially save millions of tax dollars? As economic conditions and growth projections change, so much
change the plans of our municipalities.
Thank you for your consideration,
Carol Chappelle
2208 Lyons Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059
Dell Mini Netbooks: Great deals starting at $299 after instant savings!
2
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Vanessa Dolbee
Monday, May 18, 2009 09:37 AM
'Trey Byus'
Subject: RE: Comment from Stonegate re: sanitary lift station project
Mr. and Mrs. Byus,
Thank you very much for your comments on the Stonegate Lift Station Environmental Review. Your comments will be
placed into the official file and you will be added to the interested parties list, which will keep you informed about the
project until the environmental review is complete. John Hobson has responded to many of your questions already, if
you have any additional questions and/or comments please feel free contact me.
Thank you,
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
-·-·-----------·--------
From: Trey Byus [mailto:treyb@expeditions.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 03:36 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Comment from Stonegate re: sanitary lift station project
Dear City of Renton,
We are concerned citizens from the Stonegate neighborhood.
I understand our Homeowner's Association has already granted the city an easement to conduct this project. I am
simply writing to voice concern about certain issues I hope you have -or will -consider mitigating during the project:
o We've already been fairly significantly impacted by the year long Coal Creek Project and so are now concerned
about another considerable length of time where our quality of life will be disrupted.
• We are very concerned about excessive noise and dust, as well as other forms of pollution.
• We are concerned about much more than just disruption to songbirds, but also other birds, rabbits, squirrels,
bobcats, bear, deer, etc ...
• We are concerned about safety for the kids at the bus stop at the corner of 26'" & 148'".
Obviously any measures you can take to address these issues will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you very much,
l
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Vanessa Dolbee
Monday, May 18, 2009 09:36 AM
'ChappelleChrs@aol.com'
Subject: RE: Stonegate lift station LUA09-049, ECF
Christine Chappelle,
Thank you very much for your comments on the Stonegate Lift Station Environmental Review. Your comments will be
placed into the official file and you will be added to the interested parties list, which will keep you informed about the
project until the environmental review is complete. John Hobson has responded to many of your questions already, if
you have any additional questions and/or comments please feel free contact me.
Thank you,
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
From: ChappelleChrs@aol.com [mailto:ChappelleChrs@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 03:24 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Stonegate lift station LUA09-049, ECF
Please do not put the sanitary lift station building right in the middle of the field at the beginning of the
Stonegate neighborhood. Myself and many ofmy friends in the neighborhood enjoy going to the field to play
and run around. It is one of the only open green spaces nearby as there are no community parks in our area. It's
a wide open space. I enjoy having a place to play soccer or run around where I do not disturb anything. I'm
worried that once this project is underway, the kids in our neighborhood won't have a green space to play in.
Please do not build there,
Christine Chappelle
11 years old
Lives in Stonegate
2208 Lyons Ave NE Renton, WA 98059
Recession-proof vacation ideas. Find free things to do in the U.S.
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Hi,
Marty Ryberg (Comcast) [mryberg1@comcast.net]
Sunday, May 17, 2009 08:33 AM
Vanessa Dolbee
Stonegate Lift Station
I had a question on the Stonegate lift station. Well -it's not really a question on the lift station itself-I have lived in
Renton the last 20 years, trust them to do what is right, and I am all for it. But there is a loose connection. And maybe
you need to put me in touch with someone else at Renton as a start ...
The sidewalk in front of our house is deteriorating faster than most. When we lived off Union Ave just east of here,
Renton took ownership for the sidewalks-including repair/replacement and sealing the cracks with a rubber sealant
which was really nice. And I think this is one of the reasons I'm having trouble -water is getting under the sidewalk
causing it to settle and crack.
The questions are, who maintains my sidewalk? If its Renton, can my sidewalk be repaired concurrent with the lift
station work (since the sidewalks at the top of my street Oust yards away from mine) will be affected anyway)? If it is my
responsibility, can I work with the lift station contractor to have the work done concurrently? And, if Renton is the
owner of our sidewalks, they really should consider that sealant again -it was nice work.
Thanks!
Marty Ryberg
5309 NE 22"' CT
Renton, WA 98059
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mr. and Mrs. Byus,
John D. Hobson
Friday, May 15, 2009 12:24 PM
'treyb@expeditions.com'
Vanessa Dolbee
Stonegate Lift Station Project
Thank you for your email concerning the Stonegate Lift Station Project. There is no doubt that this project is going to be
disruptive to the neighborhood. There will be noise from the construction activities and traffic through the work zone
will have to be reduced to one lane. A traffic control plan will be established for the project to minimize impacts to the
residents as they enter and leave the neighborhood.
The good news is that the new pipeline that is going to be installed in the roads is only going to be 4 feet deep. This
means that the contractor will be able to install more pipe per day thereby reducing the overall time for the disruption
to the roadways. Once the pipe is installed, the contractor will grind off the top two inches of asphalt throughout the
entire plat and repave so that there are no trench patches visible. The construction will also repair the sidewalk and that
portion of 1481h Ave NE that was disturbed as part of the developer project.
Safety is always a major concern when the City initiates any construction activities. Prior to construction, the contractor
will be informed of all safety issues and concerns regarding the residents and their children. The City will have a full-
time construction inspector on site during the construction and he will monitor the safety of the construction work
during the project. The City does utility construction projects in neighborhoods every year so we are familiar with the
safety requirements to protect the public during these activities. However, I cannot stress enough that parents should
explain to their children the dangers of entering a construction site and to stay away from the construction activities. As
in all neighborhood construction, the City's inspector and the contractor's workers will watch for children and adults and
help them navigate through the construction site.
The current construction schedule has the installation of the new sewer pipe beginning in early August so that we can
get most of the pipe work and asphalt restoration done to minimize the time that we are working in the streets when
the school year begins. The lift station work will begin in late September or early October. The access to the site will off
1481h Ave NE and north of the intersection of 261h and 1481h so it should not interfere with the school bus stop.
If you have any more questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to email me.
John Hobson, Project Manager
City of Renton Wastewater Utility
1
--
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mrs. Chappelle,
John D. Hobson
Friday, May 15, 2009 12:02 PM
'CarolABC@aol.com'
Vanessa Dolbee
Stonegate Lift Station Project
Thank you for your email concerning the Stonegate Lift Station Project. There is no doubt that this project is going to be
disruptive to the neighborhood. There will be noise from the construction activities and traffic through the work zone
will have to be reduced to one lane. A traffic control plan will be established for the project to minimize impacts to the
residents as they enter and leave the neighborhood. The Stonegate neighborhood, like all neighborhoods, have utilities
under the road ways that need to be maintained, repaired, replaced and added to at times.
The good news is that the new pipeline that is going to be installed in the roads is only going to be 4 feet deep. This
means that the contractor will be able to install more pipe per day thereby reducing the overall time for the disruption
to the roadways. Once the pipe is installed, the contractor will grind off the top two inches of asphalt throughout the
entire plat and repave so that there are no trench patches visible. The construction will also repair the sidewalk and that
portion of 14S'h Ave NE that was disturbed as part of the developer project.
Safety is always a major concern when the City initiates any construction activities. Prior to construction, the contractor
will be informed of all safety issues and concerns regarding the residents and their children. The City will have a full-
time construction inspector on site during the construction and he will monitor the safety of the construction work
during the project. The City does utility construction projects in neighborhoods every year so we are familiar with the
safety requirements to protect the public during these activities.
You are correct, these construction activities will be a new experience for many of the children in the neighborhood.
cannot stress enough that parents should explain to their children the dangers of entering a construction site and to stay
away from the construction activities. As in all neighborhood construction, the City's inspector and the contractor's
workers will watch for children and adults and help them navigate through the construction site.
The following information should help you understand the reason and timing for this project.
The existing Stonegate lift station currently pumps to the west into another lift station in the Summerwind Plat. The
Summerwind lift station then pumps this wastewater into the existing 8" diameter gravity sewer in Duvall Ave NE which
then flows south to Sunset Blvd. The Summerwind lift station has reached the end of its operational life. Additionally,
the existing sewer main in Duvall Ave NE has reached its maximum capacity. Therefore, the City has determined that
the most economical and best engineering solution is to abandon the Summerwind lift station by installing a gravity
sewer pipe to allow it's wastewater to flow toward a new Stonegate Lift Station. This new Stonegate Lift Station will
then pump this wastewater through a new "force main" sewer pipe within the Stonegate neighborhood and
Summerwind neighborhood and directly into the Sunset Blvd sewer line which is large enough to handle these flows.
This project allows the City to use one lift station to do the job that is currently being done by two, will replace the
current Stonegate lift station with one that will handle all future wastewater requirements for the area, and frees up
capacity in the existing Duvall Ave NE sewer main.
The upside to an economic recession is that construction costs are cheaper. Since there are less private construction
projects taking place, there are more contractors looking for work and this translates to lower bid prices for the limited
number of public works projects.
If you have any more questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to email me.
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Christine,
John D. Hobson
Friday, May 15, 2009 09:56 AM
'ChappelleChrs@aol.com'
Vanessa Dolbee
Stonegate Lift Station
Thank you for your email about the Stonegate Lift Station. The new Stonegate Lift Station will not be built in the existing
grass area that you referred to in your email. The lift station will be built next to the road (1481
" Ave SE) and just to the
north of the existing grass in an area that is currently covered with blackberry and other bushes.
The Construction of the Lift Station is scheduled to begin in late September or early October of this year. The Stonegate
Lift Station construction area will be fenced off for everyone's protection and this may include a small portion of the
grass area. There is no doubt that the construction activities will cause some inconveniences but we will do our best to
minimize these impacts to your use of the area. The construction of the lift station should be completed before next
summer so you should be able to use this area during the dry summertime this year and next.
We will begin installing the new pipe line for this lift station beginning in early August but this work will be entirely
within the roadways of your neighborhood and will not affect your use of the grass area.
If you have any more questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to email me.
Thank you.
John Hobson, Project Manager
City of Renton Wastewater Utility
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Vanessa Dolbee
Monday, May 18, 2009 07:31 AM
'TAD KEVIN WILLOUGHBY'
Subject: RE: Stonegate Sanitary lift station at Stonegate entrance
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Willoughby,
Thank you for your comments of the Stonegate lift station SEPA review. The official comment period ended at 5:00 pm
on Thursday May 14, 2009. In addition, it is the City's policy is that the City only accepts official comments by e-mail if
they are accompanied by the senders full name and mailing address. Please include this information and resend your
comment. We will add your comment to the official file and you will also be added to the interested parties list and
receive updates on the project until the environmental review is complete. Although, if we received this information
after all decisions are final you may not receive a copy of the decision. Although, your comments will be placed into the
file.
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
From: TAD KEVIN WILLOUGHBY [mailto:TadWilloughby@msn.com]
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2009 07:56 AM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Stonegate Sanitary lift station at Stonegate entrance
To whom it may concern;
I have lived In the Stonegate subdivision from day one, being the first homeowner in the subdivision. I
have some serious concerns about what is about to happen in the area at the front entrance to
Stonegate.
First, I have seen several projects that we were told would be done according to the regulations of the
City of Renton that obvioulsy were not. The largest of those projects was with the builder putting in the
connecting sewer line on 148th Avenue to several houses. After a long and tiresome process arguing with
the City of Renton Debra Rogers finally made some headway and the City stepped in and at least laid
some temporary pavement along the sidewalk area and flower beds where dozens of our preschoolers
through high schoolers walk everyday. Was this a serious liability issue? You bet it was and thankfully no
one was injured prior to the completion of the temporary work. The City has claimed the work would be
done prior to the start of school this year. Status: It still stands in the temporary resolution phase to the
problem at this time.
Second, the City of Renton City Council urged the Stonegate Homeowners Association to negotiate with a
third party who has a small easement off of NE 26th Avenue regarding his easement and including two
homes behind the subdivision into his easement. After several hearings and negotiations an agreement
was reached. Unfortunately, the other party in the deal pulled a typical "screw them" manuever and filed
1
... _ .....
for bankruptcy and never paid the money owed to the Homeowners Association. In addition to that, the
third party dug up some of our underground sprinkler system and damaged the line along the easement.
To this day, which is now nearly two years later, this damage had never been repaired. According to one
of the Stonegate Homeowners Association board members, the City of Renton claimed they would step up
and repair this damage. Well I can tell you it hasn't happened yet! Status: No sprinkler system in that
common area of the subdivision and another year of brown dead grass is coming with the summer months
approaching.
Third, we have a new problem at the front of the subdivision that just recently came into being due to the
front entrance sewer project. In the flower bed and grass area to the north of NE 26th Avenue, we have a
constant stream of water coming out of the ground and causing a large green slime and messy looking
sludge pond. We have been told this is typical runoff and not a broken pipe. However, this runoff has
continued since the repaving of 148th Avenue and has continued even during weeks with sunny/cloudy
weather with no rain. This "runoff" should slow and come to a stop if that's what it really is. It has not
stopped or slowed and is making a real mess in our common area. This problem is a result of the laying
of the sewer line and the damage cause under the ground where the sprinkler system pipes run. Is there
a broken pipe there? I would certainly bet there is.
Finally, as should be the case with any project, where is the timeline of events. How long is this going to
mess up our front entrance? When do you plan to start the project, after school ends? What is this
substation going to look like. Are you planning on placing an ugly structure on our common area? Will
the repairs to roadway make the roadway a mess or willl they actual repair the roadway to a better
condition than it currently is in now. Will you be flagging the intersection for traffic control? What hours
and days do you plan on doing the work?
I am very hopeful this project will not negativley impact the residents of the Stonegate subdivision as
have these past other situations.
Respectfully,
Tad and Melissa Willoughby
2
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
TAD KEVIN WILLOUGHBY [TadWilloughby@msn.com]
Friday, May 15, 2009 07:56 AM
Vanessa Dolbee
Stonegate Sanitary lift station at Stonegate entrance
To whom it may concern;
I have lived in the Stonegate subdivision from day one, being the first homeowner in the subdivision. I
have some serious concerns about what is about to happen in the area at the front entrance to
Stonegate.
First, I have seen several projects that we were told would be done according to the regulations of the
City of Renton that obvioulsy were not. The largest of those projects was with the builder putting in the
connecting sewer line on 148th Avenue to several houses. After a long and tiresome process arguing with
the City of Renton Debra Rogers finally made some headway and the City stepped in and at least laid
some temporary pavement along the sidewalk area and flower beds where dozens of our preschoolers
through high schoolers walk everyday. Was this a serious liability issue? You bet it was and thankfully no
one was injured prior to the completion of the temporary work. The City has claimed the work would be
done prior to the start of school this year. Status: It still stands in the temporary resolution phase to the
problem at this time.
Second, the City of Renton City Council urged the Stonegate Homeowners Association to negotiate with a
third party who has a small easement off of NE 26th Avenue regarding his easement and including two
homes behind the subdivision into his easement. After several hearings and negotiations an agreement
was reached. Unfortunately, the other party in the deal pulled a typical "screw them" manuever and filed
for bankruptcy and never paid the money owed to the Homeowners Association. In addition to that, the
third party dug up some of our underground sprinkler system and damaged the line along the easement.
To this day, which is now nearly two years later, this damage had never been repaired. According to one
of the Stonegate Homeowners Association board members, the City of Renton claimed they would step up
and repair this damage. Well I can tell you it hasn't happened yet! Status: No sprinkler system in that
common area of the subdivision and another year of brown dead grass is coming with the summer months
approaching.
Third, we have a new problem at the front of the subdivision that just recently came into being due to the
front entrance sewer project. In the flower bed and grass area to the north of NE 26th Avenue, we have a
constant stream of water coming out of the ground and causing a large green slime and messy looking
sludge pond. We have been told this is typical runoff and not a broken pipe. However, this runoff has
continued since the repaving of 148th Avenue and has continued even during weeks with sunny/cloudy
weather with no rain. This "runoff'' should slow and come to a stop if that's what it really is. It has not
stopped or slowed and is making a real mess in our common area. This problem is a result of the laying
of the sewer line and the damage cause under the ground where the sprinkler system pipes run. Is there
a broken pipe there? I would certainly bet there is.
Finally, as should be the case with any project, where is the timeline of events. How long is this going to
mess up our front entrance? When do you plan to start the project, after school ends? What is this
substation going to look like. Are you planning on placing an ugly structure on our common area? Will
the repairs to roadway make the roadway a mess or willl they actual repair the roadway to a better
condition than it currently is in now. Will you be flagging the intersection for traffic control? What hours
and days do you plan on doing the work?
I am very hopeful this project will not negativley impact the residents of the Stonegate subdivision as
have these past other situations.
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms Dolbee,
Chappelle, Douglas E [douglas.e.chappelle@boeing.com]
Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:46 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
LUA09-049, Stonegate Lift Station -Noise
In regards to the subject proposal, the applicant in item B.7.b.2) states that "the emergency generators ... will be enclosed
in sound attenuated housing to reduce noise emission to allowable levels .... "
It is not acceptable for the applicant to be non-specific regarding what the allowable levels are and where they are
measured. Allowable levels in publically accessible areas could be as high as 93 dBA. The applicant needs to state what
their design criteria will be. I would suggest that the allowable noise emissions at the fence surrounding the sanitary lift
station be less than 43 dBA given the surrounding areas public accessibility and history of utilization by both people and
animals.
Further, in item B.7.b.3), the applicant states that the sole mitigation to construction noise impacts will be by limiting
working hours. Again, this is an unacceptable mitigation strategy given that residents will have no practical alternative to
avoid excessive noise. Children transit the sidewalks twice a day on school days, play in their front yards and so on.
Equipment and techniques are commercially and economically available to mitigate construction noise, and doing so
should be a requirement of a project of this nature.
I would suggest that the applicant be compelled to utilize equipment and techniques that do not result in violating any
OSHA allowable exposure criteria, derated by an additional 6 dB to allow for the residential aspect of the neighborhoods,
when measured from any sidewalk or private property (essentially the road curbs.)
The project should be placed on hold until the project is appropriately amended, or if the applicant refuses to comply, the
application should be rejected.
Douglas E Chappelle
2208 Lyons Ave NE
Renton, WA 98059
+1-206-719-3351
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
To The City of Renton:
John and Stacy Tribble Ustribble@comcast.net]
Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:46 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
Sanitary Lift Station Project
We are writing to express our extreme dissatisfaction with the City of Renton for using our neighborhood of Stonegate for
the Sanitary Lift Station. The disruption to our neighborhood for many reasons is unacceptable.
First, we are concerned with our children's safety. We have a very large population of school age children who use our
street and sidewalks to bike and to get to our bus stop at the entrance to our neighborhood every day. We have no
alternate route. When the city tore up our streets last summer and fall, the bus stop was left completely unsafe, with no
sidewalk for the kids to wait at, so cars drove dangerously close to them on 148th. The workers on that project were rude
and vulgar and none of us felt safe with our kids around them. Our roads and sidewalks were not passable, so there was
no safe way to take our kids for walks or bike rides.
Second, we are concerned about how we are going to get in and out of our neighborhood and how long it will take. Last
year the workers would keep us from entering and exiting our own neighborhood for 15-20 minutes at a time many times a
day EVERY DAY! We have to get our kids to school, ourselves to work and have a way out in case of emergency. We
have already dealt with Coal Creek and May Valley traffic for 1 1 /2 years, 148th traffic at our enterance last summer and
now traffic in our neighborhood for up to 2 more years. We are really frustrated by this I
We are also concerned about the aesthetics of our neighborhood. The road and sidewalk at our enterance has still not
been repaired by the city from last year, and this does not leave us hopeful that the rest of our roads will be left in any
better condition. This directly effects the value of our homes.
Finally, we worry about the noise. Some of us do shift work and must sleep during the day or have children that nap
during the day. The loud machinery will impact the quality of our lives enormously.
We bought our house in Stonegate ten years ago because we loved the quiet and safe environment on a side road
without much traffic. We specifically bought it to raise our small children. We would appreciate the City's reconsideration
of the project. We would also like to know who is making this decision. If it is something that is voted on by council
members, we would like to know how each of them votes. We hope that they will look at this project as if they had to live
here during it!
Thank you for your time,
Stacy and John Tribble
2106 Lyons AVE NE
Renton WA 98059
425-227-7645
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms Dolbee,
Chappelle, Douglas E [douglas.e.chappelle@boeing.com]
Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:45 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
LUA09-049, Stonegate Lift Station -Surface Water
In regards to the subject proposal, it appears that there are at least two significant errors and at least one significant
omission with respect to the SEPA subject of Surface Water. One of the errors, if not corrected, should require that an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be prepared.
1.) The SEPA checklist item 3.a.2) states that the proposed lift station near NE 26th Street and 148th Ave SE has been
located outside the 100-foot buffer of Wetland A.Based on the diagrams in the CAO report and the landscaping plan.
Based on the diagrams available in the CAO report and the landscaping plan showing references to the wetland boundary
this statement is not correct. It appears that the proposed lift station infringes on the 100 ft buffer by at least 2 feet (i.e.
the 100 buffer line to the wetland boundary on the plan is incorrectly constructed).
2) The CAO report itself identifies a point (TP-4) outside of the illustrated Wetland A boundary and then determines that
TP-4 is in a wetland. This suggests that the wetland boundaries for Wetland A are incorrectly drawn based on current
conditions.
3) A year round substantial source of water in the vicinity of the proposed sanitary lift station exists and was omitted from
all analysis, including the CAO and geotechnical reports. This water has existed for at least a year and its source has
been investigated by various agencies at various times with varying thoroughness -the source remains unexplained. It is
apparent above ground in the immediate vicinity of the existing lift station (the water emerges from the ground about 10
feet to the south east of the existing lift station). The water flows and puddles around the existing lift station facility and
has led to the growth of algae and other species indicative of long term ponding and flowing water in that immediate area.
Farther downhill the water is largely, but not always completely absorbed by the terrain resulting in at least a saturated
surface layer of the landscaped portion of Tract H (the parcel the sanitary lift station is proposed to exist in, install a
retaining wall in and partially pave over).
The applicant needs to conduct a study and revaluation of the wetland boundary that accounts for recent changes in the
nature of the wetland. The applicant needs to adjust the siting and/or design of the sanitary lift portion of the project to
correctly accommodate a 100 foot wetland buffer based on the updated wetland boundary determination or complete an
EIS. And, the source of the unexplained water impacting the project site needs to be evaluated; and corrected if it is a
water main leak, or accommodated in the design of the project if natural. This project should be placed on hold until such
time as these actions are complete.
Douglas E Chappelle
2208 Lyons Ave NE ,
Renton, WA 98059
+1-206-719-3351
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Vanessa Dolbee
Monday, May 18, 2009 07:06 AM
'Chappelle, Douglas E'
Subject: RE: LUA09-049, Stonegate Lift Station -Impervious Surface Calculation
Mr. Chappelle,
Thank you for your comments and the one specific comment below. Although this comment did not have the
illustration attached that you have identified. If you would like to re-send this comment with the image attached please
do so. This way I can have the illustration for the official file.
Thank you,
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
From: Chappelle, Douglas E [mailto:douglas.e.chappelle@boeing.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:44 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: LUA09-049, Stonegate Lift Station -Impervious Surface Calculation
Ms Dolbee,
In regards to the subject proposal, it appears that the applicant has not performed to the standard required by the
environmental checklist whereby the applicant is instructed to "answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best
of your knowledge." on item B.1.g regarding the percent of the site covered with impervious surfaces.
The applicant states that "the proposed lift station will add approximately 1000 square feet of impervious surface."
Considering the landscaping plan attendant to the application, a more accurate estimate would be 3500 square feet based
on the attached illustration (each colored square is 100 square feet). This is to say that project will result in roughly 60%
of the lift site being made impervious.
The applicant owes the affected residents and public an accurate and realistic assessment of the impacts of the project as
part of the application package. Of slightly greater concern, the calculations and assessment of hydrological effects of the
additional run off/loss of absorbing surface may be impacted by an error of 350% and should be updated and reassessed
with a more accurate estimate of the additional impervious surface.
The project application should be updated to be accurate.
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms Dolbee,
Chappelle, Douglas E [douglas.e.chappelle@boeing.com]
Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:44 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
LUA09-049, Stonegate Lift Station -Impervious Surface Calculation
In regards to the subject proposal, it appears that the applicant has not performed to the standard required by the
environmental checklist whereby the applicant is instructed to "answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best
of your knowledge." on item 8.1.g regarding the percent of the site covered with impervious surfaces.
The applicant states that "the proposed lift station will add approximately 1000 square feet of impervious surface."
Considering the landscaping plan attendant to the application, a more accurate estimate would be 3500 square feet based
on the attached illustration (each colored square is 100 square feet). This is to say that project will result in roughly 60%
of the lift site being made impervious.
The applicant owes the affected residents and public an accurate and realistic assessment of the impacts of the project as
part of the application package. Of slightly greater concern, the calculations and assessment of hydrological effects of the
additional run off/loss of absorbing surface may be impacted by an error of 350% and should be updated and reassessed
with a more accurate estimate of the additional impervious surface.
The project application should be updated to be accurate.
Douglas E Chappelle
2208 Lyons Ave NE
Renton, WA 98059
+1-206-719-3351
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms Dolbee,
Chappelle, Douglas E [douglas.e.chappelle@boeing.com)
Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:43 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
LUA09-049, Stonegate Lift Station -Schedule
In regards to the subject proposal, it appears that the applicant has not performed to the standard required by the
environmental checklist whereby the applicant is instructed to "answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best
of your knowledge." on item A.6 Proposed timing or schedule.
On item A.6 the applicant states the schedule is Summer/Fall 2009. Elsewhere in the package, the Construction
Mitigation Plan states that the proposed project is planned to begin in July, 2009 with completion scheduled for April
201 O. During easement discussion with the Stonegate HOA, the applicant stated that the project was planned for 15
months.
The disruption by this project to the affected households is enormous: traffic will be interrupted/delayed, driveways may be
blocked, kids may not be able to ride their bikes, sidewalks might be torn up, noise, dust, etc. It will be a construction
zone for an extended period of time. What bothers me is that the City appears to not have any concept of how long this
condition will really last or at least not one they're willing to advertise. There is a difference of 250% in the durations that
have been thrown around and at least a four month disconnect in the application itself. The City has a notoriously poor
record in performing construction projects in the time frames originally proposed and there seems to be no accountability.
Weather is often offered up as the excuse -but this package reflects what I believe is the true root cause of schedule
overuns -poor up-front planning and a cowboy approach to execution!
The applicant owes the affected residents a detailed and realistic assessment of the construction activities and when and
where they are planned to occur as part of the application package. This project should be placed on hold until such time
as the applicant can produce such a schedule and the public is allowed an opportunity to comment on it.
Douglas E Chappelle
2208 Lyons Ave NE
Renton, WA 98059
+1-206-719-3351
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms Dolbee,
Chappelle, Douglas E [douglas.e.chappelle@boeing.com)
Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:42 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
LUA09-049, Stonegate Lift Station · Discharge of Waste
In regards to the subject proposal, I'd like to comment that the applicant's response to B.3.a.6 Discharge of Waste and
B.7.a Environmental Health Hazards is inadequate given the very nature of the facility and the applicant's response to
B.3.c.2) is not credible.
While I accept that the design of the facility is intended to prevent the intentional discharge of sanitary waste, I believe it is
in the public's interest to have visibility into the plans, assumptions and calculations pertaining to the design and reliability
of the proposed lift station. For example, what are the expected failure rates of the generators and pumps; how are these
failures detected, what is the reponse plan and time of the city in the event of a significant failure, how much margin is in
the system before it exceeds its design capacity, how will the facility likely fail when it exceeds its design capacity (i.e.
where will the spillage occur), is there any berming or retention ponds planned to provide additional margin before the
wetland or May Creek is contaminated, how will residents (in the neighborhood and downstream) be notified of a
significant spill and the appropriate actions to take?
This project should be placed on hold until such time as the applicant can more completely explain the design and its
safety features and the public is allowed an opportunity to comment on it adequacy.
Douglas E Chappelle
2208 Lyons Ave NE
Renton, WA 98059
+1-206-719-3351
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms Dolbee,
Chappelle, Douglas E (douglas.e.chappelle@boeing.com]
Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:40 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
LUA09-049, Stonegate Lift Station -Animals
In regards to the subject proposal, Item 8.5.a of the SEPA Checklist -Animals should include hawks, eagles, geese,
ducks, deer, bear, bobcat and salmonids.
I personally have seen (on a regular basis) hawks, eagles, and deer either upon Tract Hor circling immediately above and
in the areas immediately adjacent to Tract H. There are nesting pairs of ducks and geese in and around Wetland A, and
Tracts B, D, F and J. There is probably at least one nesting pair in Tract H, I just haven't looked recently.
Black bear have been reported in Stonegate Tracts F and J (i.e. within 500 feet of the lift station, and within 150 feet of the
proposed sewer line construction path.) A cub was darted and killed last year. Its presumed mother lingered in the area
for several days. There is no evidence of a permanent presence.
My wife has seen and photos exist of a bobcat in the immediately vicinity of Tract H. Washington Fish and Game have
reportedly speculated that at least one bobcat has denned in the immediate vicinity of Tract H.
The CAO report identifies May Creek as supporting salmonids.
The project application in item B.5.a should be updated to be accurate and the applicant should be required to reconsider
their response to 8.5.d -Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife.
Douglas E Chappelle
2208 Lyons Ave NE
Renton, WA 98059
+1-206-719-3351
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms Dolbee,
Chappelle, Douglas E [douglas.e.chappelle@boeing.com]
Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:37 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
LUA09-049, Stonegate Lift Station -Open Space
In regards to the subject proposal, the proposed sanitary lift station appears to violate various policies in the Parks,
Recreation, Open Space, and Trails Element of the City of Renton's Comprehensive Plan by destroying a significant
fraction of Stonegate Tract H. Tract H is dedicated to Open Space by the Stonegate Plat (See King County File No
S90P0068, Project LUA-96-043-FP & LND-10-0304 Note 18).
Namely, I believe the applicant, if allowed to proceed as proposed will violate at least the following:
Policy P-6: Maintain and develop underdeveloped public rights-of-way for public access and passive recreation where
appropriate.
Policy P-41: Steward the City's open space network to protect the City's natural character ....
Objective P-E: Conserve, enhance, and create a variety of open space, wildlife, and natural resource areas.
Policy P-53: The function of the open space network should: Protect land resources ... Maintain a habitat for wildlife ...
Provide public access to creeks, rivers, and lakes.
Policy P-56: Structures should be minimized within public open space areas.
At a minimum, the applicant should be required to provide mitigating open space to the affected neighborhood of like kind
in a suitable ratio (such as 3:1 ). If that is not possible, the applicant should be required to amend the project to utilize
either an alternate site or to reduce the surface footprint of the project to not exceed the existing sanitary lift station's
surface footprint (by, perhaps, building under ground or by not being so luxurious with above ground space allocations.)
The project should be placed on hold until such time as the applicant can amend the proposal and another public
comment period can be conducted, or if the applicant is unwilling to make reasonable accommodations to conform to the
the City's published Comprehensive Plan, then the proposed project should be rejected.
Douglas E Chappelle
2208 Lyons Ave NE
Renton, WA 98059
+1-206-719-3351
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Ms Dolbee,
Chappelle, Douglas E [douglas.e.chappelle@boeing.com]
Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:35 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
LUA09-049, Stonegate Lift Station -Construction Mitigation
In regards to the subject proposal, I appreciate that the applicant is willing to restrict work to the hours of 7AM to 5PM
Monday to Friday and that Ms Illian (of Development Services Division?) in her review has further restricted haul hours to
8:30 am to 3:30 pm.
However, I remain concerned that these hours leave children in our neighborhood exposed to the movement of large
trucks and hazardous construction activities at times that the children are required to be out and in the immediate vicinity
of the proposed lift station in order to catch the school bus.
I would like to see a restriction added to the project that prohibits the movement of any vehicle over 10,000 lbs GVW or
the operation of any equipment that produces noise in excess of 81 dBA when measured from any sidewalk related to any
of the applicants activities upon Tract E, NE 26th Street, NE 24th Court, NE 23rd Court, NE 22 Court, NE 21st Court or
Lyons Ave NE in the interval starting 15 minutes before any school bus pickup as scheduled by the Issaquah School
District to immediately after the pickup actually occurs and the interval starting from the time a school bus drop off actually
starts until 15 minutes later.
In addition, I would like to see and be able to comment on the details of the applicants proposed safety and traffic
management plan(s) especially as they pertain to preserving a safe environment for our children. I am interested, for
example, in what the applicant proposes for flaggers/safety monitors to assist the children at these times or the applicant's
intent to preserve at least one contiguous sidewalk surface at all times.
The project should be placed on hold until such time as the applicant can provide the safety and traffic management plans
and another public comment period can be conducted.
Douglas E Chappelle
2208 Lyons Ave NE
Renton, WA 98059
+1-206-719-3351
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear City of Renton:
CarolABC@aol.com
Thursday, May 14, 2009 04:18 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
Stonegate Lift Station
As a resident of the Stonegate neighborhood, I have concerns over the proposed Stonegate Lift Station project. First of
all, this project is potentially very disruptive to our neighborhood. The project requires tearing up the streets that run the
entire length of our neighborhood. This will pose not only a major inconvenience to the people coming and going from the
neighborhood, but it will be noisy, dirty, and potentially very dangerous to the flow of traffic in our residential
neighborhood. The Stonegate neighborhood is a residential area and as such, is not equipped nor is it accustomed to
handle the activities of heavy machinery and equipment that will be a day to day reality for our small neighborhood.
My priority concern is for the safety of the children in this neighborhood. The project is slated to start at the beginning of
summer, just the time when school children ride around on their bikes, or play games outside. The children in our
neighborhood are not accustomed to having heavy construction equipment in the neighborhood and don't fully understand
the potential dangers of this equipment. Children darting around on bicycles or chasing balls are difficult to see and their
movements are difficult to predict. When children are unaccustomed to having to play around construction equipment,
they may not fully understand how to successfully play around it-without getting hurt-or worse. We as a neighborhood
have been accustomed to letting our kids ride their bikes freely, run to neighbors' houses, play in yards or on the sidewalk.
All of this could change. It would require the parents to be extremely vigilant in tending to the safety of our children. All it
would take is for one careless worker to not see a small child on a bicycle or to not notice a child chasing a ball and the
unthinkable could happen. I'm not sure the city wants to bear that responsibility.
Finally, during this time of economic recession, it would make sense for the city to reconsider its expenditures. Does it in
fact make sense to move forward with such an expensive project at a time when many of the building construction
projects in our area have been put on hold, or gone into receivership or bankruptcy? It would be fiscally responsible for
the city to reconsider whether this project is absolutely necessary and makes sense to start at this time. Is forecasted
growth at the same level as it was when this project was originally proposed? If not, what will be the revised sanitary lift
station needs of the community? Will the community absolutely benefit from this project as is or could there be a revision
that could potentially save millions of tax dollars? As economic conditions and growth projections change, so much
change the plans of our municipalities.
Thank you for your consideration,
Carol Chappelle
2208 Lyons Avenue NE
Renton, WA 98059
Dell Mini Netbooks: Great deals starting at $299 after instant savings!
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear City of Renton,
Trey Byus [treyb@expeditions.com]
Thursday, May 14, 2009 03:36 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
Comment from Stonegate re: sanitary lift station project
We are concerned citizens from the Stonegate neighborhood.
I understand our Homeowners Association has already granted the city an easement to conduct this project. I am
simply writing to voice concern about certain issues I hope you have -or will -consider mitigating during the project:
o We've already been fairly significantly impacted by the year long Coal Creek Project and so are now concerned
about another considerable length of time where our quality of life will be disrupted.
o We are very concerned about excessive noise and dust, as well as other forms of pollution.
o We are concerned about much more than just disruption to songbirds, but also other birds, rabbits, squirrels,
bobcats, bear, deer, etc ...
o We are concerned about safety for the kids at the bus stop at the corner of 25th & 148th.
Obviously any measures you can take to address these issues will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you very much,
Trey and Kiersten Byus
5602 NE 26th St.
Renton, WA 98059
1
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear City of Renton,
Trey Byus [treyb@expeditions.com]
Thursday, May 14, 2009 03:36 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
Comment from Stonegate re: sanitary lift station project
We are concerned citizens from the Stonegate neighborhood.
I understand our Homeowner's Association has already granted the city an easement to conduct this project. I am
simply writing to voice concern about certain issues I hope you have -or will -consider mitigating during the project:
o We've already been fairly significantly impacted by the year long Coal Creek Project and so are now concerned
about another considerable length of time where our quality of life will be disrupted.
o We are very concerned about excessive noise and dust, as well as other forms of pollution.
o We are concerned about much more than just disruption to songbirds, but also other birds, rabbits, squirrels,
bobcats, bear, deer, etc ...
o We are concerned about safety for the kids at the bus stop at the corner of 26th & 148th.
Obviously any measures you can take to address these issues will be greatly appreciated.
Thank you very much,
Trey and Kiersten Byus
5602 NE 26th St.
Renton, WA 98059
1
.. ...__.
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
Karen Walter [Karen.Walter@muckleshoot.nsn.us]
Thursday, May 14, 2009 01 :23 PM
To: John D. Hobson; Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: RE: Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed
Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (MONS)
John,
Thanks for your email. Your eyes are much better than mine! With the information you have provided we have no further
questions or comments about this proposal.
Karen Walter
MITFD
From: John D. Hobson [mailto:Jhobson@Rentonwa.gov]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 10:55 AM
To: Karen Walter; Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: RE: Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-
Significance, Mitigated (MDNS)
The area that is marked as landscaping is an area that will receive new landscaping as part of the project. Everything to
the south of the area marked "landscaping" is lawn. If you look about an inch to the northwest of the "TRACT "H"
STONEGATE" text you will see the text "grass area" crossing the 326 contour line. The autocad hatching pattern used to
depict the lawn area in this plan is called "grass" however, I have seen some people use this same hatch pattern to
denote wetland and/or swamp so it can be confusing.
From: Karen Walter (mailto:Karen.Walter@muckleshoot.nsn.us]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 10:29 AM
To: John D. Hobson; Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: RE: Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non-
Significance, Mitigated (MDNS)
Thanks for the emails. Please see the attached site plan that we received from the City. I can see the area that is clearly
marked as landscaping, which John indicates is lawn, but the large area south of this portion labeled as Stonegate Tract
"H" looks like wetland symbols to me. Is the site plan in error?
Karen Walter
-----original Message-----
From: John D. Hobson [mailto:Jhobson@Rentonwa.gov]
sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 10:10 AM
To: Vanessa Dolbee; Karen Walter
Subject: RE: Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed
Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (MDNS)
Karen,
The area immediately to the south of the Lift Station Site is lawn.
John Hobson, Project Manager
City of Renton Wastewater Utility
425-430-7279
-----Original Message-----
From: Vanes·sa Dolbee
1
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 9:39 AM
To: Karen Walter
Cc: John D. Hobson
Subject: RE: Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed
Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (MDNS)
Karen,
In response to your second questions: As the NOA is a preliminary determination of
anticipated SEPA mitigation measures, we anticipated that "compliance with
recommendations within the Critical Areas Report" would be a mitigation measure of the
project. Although, after further review, there is no recommended mitigation within the
report and therefore, we are not including this mitigation measure for SEPA. Although,
we are including the following mitigation measure as it pertains to wetlands and streams:
Temporary construction fencing shall be placed along the portion of the 100-foot buffer
area of Wetland A that is immediately north of the Stonegate lift station construction
site prior to commencement of construction.
John Hobson will be getting back to you on your first question.
Thank you for your comments.
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
-----Original Message-----
From: Karen Walter [mailto:Karen.Walter@muckleshoot.nsn.us]
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 04:25 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed
Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (MDNS)
Vanessa,
The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the Notice of Application
materials for the above referenced project. We have a couple of questions about this
project.
1. The site plan that we received is confusing. It shows what appears to be wetland
immediately south of the project area adjacent to an area marked as "landscaping", yet
Figure 4 in the Critical Areas report does not show this feature. Please clarify.
2. The NOA indicates that the applicant will be required to comply with the
recommendations within the Critical Areas Report. We were unable to find any
recommendations in this report; please clarify.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. We may have comments based on the
responses to the items noted above.
Karen Walter
Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division
2
Vanessa Dolbee
From: John D. Hobson
Sent:
To:
Thursday, May 14, 2009 10:55 AM
'Karen Walter'; Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: RE: Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed
Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (MONS)
The area that is marked as landscaping is an area that will receive new landscaping as part of the project. Everything to
the south of the area marked "landscaping" is lawn. If you look about an inch to the northwest of the "TRACT "H"
STONEGATE" text you will see the text "grass area" crossing the 326 contour line. The autocad hatching pattern used to
depict the lawn area in this plan is called "grass" however, I have seen some people use this same hatch pattern to
denote wetland and/or swamp so it can be confusing.
From: Karen Walter [mailto:Karen.Walter@muckleshoot.nsn.us]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 10:29 AM
To: John D. Hobson; Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: RE: Stonegate Li~ Station, LUA09·049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non·
Significance, Mitigated (MONS)
Thanks for the emails. Please see the attached site plan that we received from the City. I can see the area that is clearly
marked as landscaping, which John indicates is lawn, but the large area south of this portion labeled as Stonegate Tract
"H" looks like wetland symbols to me. Is the site plan in error?
Karen Walter
-----Original Message-----
From: John D. Hobson [mailto:Jhobson@Rentonwa.gov]
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 10:10 AM
To: Vanessa Dolbee; Karen Walter
Subject: RE: Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09·049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed
Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (MDNS)
Karen,
The area immediately to the south of the Lift Station Site is lawn.
John Hobson, Project Manager
City of Renton Wastewater Utility
425-430-7279
-····Original Message·····
From: Vanessa Dolbee
Sent: Thursday, May 14, 2009 9:39 AM
To: Karen Walter
Cc: John D. Hobson
Subject: RE: Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09·049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed
Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (MDNS)
Karen,
In response. to your second questions: As the NOA is a preliminary determination of
anticipated SEPA mitigation measures, we anticipated that "compliance with
recommendations within the Critical Areas Report 11 would be a mitigation measure of the
project. Although, after further review, there is no recommended mitigation within the
report and therefore, we are not including this mitigation measure for SEPA. Although,
we are including the following mitigation measure as it pertains to wetlands and streams:
1
Temporary construction fencing shall be placed along the portion of the 100-foot buffer
area of Wetland A that is immediately north of the Stonegate lift station construction
site prior to commencement of construction.
John Hobson will be getting back to you on your first question.
Thank you for your comments.
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
-----Original Message-----
From: Karen Walter [mailto:Karen.Walter@muckleshoot.nsn.us]
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 04:25 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed
Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (MDNS)
Vanessa,
The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the Notice of Application
materials for the above referenced project. We have a couple of questions about this
project.
1. The site plan that we received is confusing. It shows what appears to be wetland
immediately south of the project area adjacent to an area marked as 11 landscaping", yet
Figure 4 in the Critical Areas report does not show this feature. Please clarify.
2. The NOA indicates that the applicant will be required to comply with the
recommendations within the Critical Areas Report. We were unable to find any
recommendations in this report; please clarify.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. We may have comments based on the
responses to the items noted above.
Karen Walter
Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division
39015 172nd Ave SE
Auburn, WA 98092
2
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Karen,
Vanessa Dolbee
Thursday, May 14, 2009 09:39 AM
'Karen Walter'
John D. Hobson
RE: Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed
Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (MDNS)
In response to your second questions: As the NOA is a preliminary determination of
anticipated SEPA mitigation measures, we anticipated that "compliance with recommendations
within the Critical Areas Report" would be a mitigation measure of the project. Although,
after further review, there is no recommended mitigation within the report and therefore, we
are not including this mitigation measure for SEPA. Although, we are including the following
mitigation measure as it pertains to wetlands and streams:
Temporary construction fencing shall be placed along the portion of the 100-foot buffer area
of Wetland A that is immediately north of the Stonegate lift station construction site prior
to commencement of construction.
John Hobson will be getting back to you on your first question.
Thank you for your comments.
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
-----Original Message-----
From: Karen Walter [mailto:Karen.Walter@muckleshoot.nsn.us]
Sent: Wednesday, May 13, 2009 04:25 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed
Determination of Non-Significance, Mitigated (MONS)
Vanessa,
The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the Notice of Application
materials for the above referenced project. We have a couple of questions about this
project.
1. The site plan that we received is confusing. It shows what appears to be wetland
immediately south of the project area adjacent to an area marked as "landscaping", yet Figure
4 in the Critical Areas report does not show this feature. Please clarify.
1
2. The NOA indicates that the applicant will be required to comply with the recommendations
within the Critical Areas Report. We were unable to find any recommendations in this report;
please clarify.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. We may have comments based on the
responses to the items noted above.
Karen Walter
Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division
39015 172nd Ave SE
Auburn, WA 98092
2
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Vanessa,
Karen Walter [Karen.Walter@muckleshoot.nsn.us]
Wednesday, May 13, 2009 04:25 PM
Vanessa Dolbee
Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049,ECF, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of
Non-Significance, Mitigated (MDNS)
The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the Notice of Application
materials for the above referenced project. We have a couple of questions about this
project.
1. The site plan that we received is confusing. It shows what appears to be wetland
immediately south of the project area adjacent to an area marked as "landscaping", yet Figure
4 in the Critical Areas report does not show this feature. Please clarify.
2. The NOA indicates that the applicant will be required to comply with the recommendations
within the Critical Areas Report. We were unable to find any recommendations in this report;
please clarify.
Thank you for the opportunity to review this proposal. We may have comments based on the
responses to the items noted above.
Karen Walter
Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division
39015 172nd Ave SE
Auburn, WA 98092
1
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ·en COMMENTS DUE: MAY 14, 2009
APPLICATION NO: LUA09-049, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 30, 2009
APPLICANT: John Hobson, Cit of Renton PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Stone ate Lift Station PLAN REVIEWER: Ka ren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 5,000 s uare feet EXISTING BLDG AREA ross : N/A
LOCATION: 5610 NE 26'h Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA ~INGt DIVISION
I WORK ORDER NO: 78056
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station located at 5610 NE 26th Street
(parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary sewer pipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch
sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, N 20th Street,
and Field Avenue NE. The above ground portion of the Stonegate lift station is approximately 240 square feet. The existing lift
station on the subject site is proposed to be removed in addition to the Summerwind lift station, which is not located on the subject
site. Access to the new lift station would be off of 148th Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands (wetland A and wetland
B). Wetland A is connected to May Creek and is classified as a Category I wetland: Wetland Bis a Category Ill wetland. As such, the
applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part
of this project.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housinn
Air Aesthetics
Water LiahVG/are
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transoortation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/ Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
c.
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas w re additional informati is need d to properly assess this proposal.
Date
~
\
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 'Parlls COMMENTS DUE: MAY 14, 2009
APPLICATION NO: LUA09-049, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 30, 2009
APPLICANT: John Hobson, Citv of Renton PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Stoneqate Lift Station PLAN REVIEWER: Kavren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 5,000 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA lnross\: NIA
LOCATION: 5610 NE 26 1h Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA lnross\ 240 sauare feet
I WORK ORDER NO: 78056
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station located at 5610 NE 26th Street
(parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary sewer pipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch
sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, N 20th Street,
and Field Avenue NE. The above ground portion of the Stonegate lift station is approximately 240 square feet. The existing lift
station on the subject site is proposed to be removed in addition to the Summerwind lift station, which is not located on the subject
site. Access to the new lift station would be off of 148th Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands (wetland A and wetland
B). Wetland A is connected to May Creek and is classified as a Category I wetland; Wetland Bis a Category Ill wetland. As such, the
applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part
of this project.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housina
Air Aesthetics
Water Liaht!Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transoortation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy! Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14.000 Feet
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
c. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
~t:W,/U)~ 1:,b;h
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas where additional information is n ded to properly assess this proposal .
. d-5-/-or
Date
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: May 5, 2009
TO: Vanessa Dolbee, Planner
FROM: ~an Illian, Plan Review
SUBJECT: Stonegate Lift Station LUA 09-049
I have reviewed the application for the Stonegate Lift Station located at 5610-NE 26'h Street and have the
following comments:
EXISTING CONDITIONS
WATER
SEWER
STORM
STREETS
Water service is provided by City of Renton.
Sewer service is provided by City of Renton.
Storm conveyance is City of Renton.
All streets are within the City of Renton.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
SURFACE WATER
1. Erosion control shall comply with the Department of Ecology's latest edition of the Stormwater
Management Manual.
TRANSPORTATION
1. Paving and trenching shall comply with the City of Renton 's Trench and Overlay Requirements.
2. An approved traffic control plan is required.
3. Haul hours shall be restricted to 8:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. unless approved in advance by the Development
Services Division.
Cc Kayren Kittrick
LUA 09-049 PRComments.doc
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM
DATE: May 4, 2009
TO: Vanessa Dolbee, Planner
FROM: Jan Illian, Plan Review
SUBJECT: Stonegate Lift Station LUA 09-049
I have reviewed the application for the Stonegate Lift Station located at 5610-NE 26th Street and have the
following comments:
EXISTING CONDITIONS
WATER
SEWER
STORM
STREETS
Water service is provided by City of Renton.
Sewer service is provided by City of Renton.
Storm conveyance is City of Renton.
All streets are within the City of Renton.
CODE REQUIREMENTS
SURFACE WATER
I. Erosion control shall comply with the Department of Ecology's latest edition of the Stormwater
Management Manual
TRANSPORTATION
I. Paving and trenching shall comply with the City of Renton 's Trench and Overlay Requirements.
2. An approved traffic control plan is required.
3. Haul hours shall be restricted to 8:30 a.m. to 3 :30 p.m. unless approved in advance by the Development
Services Division.
cc; Kayren Kitttick
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: MAY 14, 2009
APPLICATION NO: LUA09-049, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 30, 2009
APPLICANT: John Hobson, Cit of Renton PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Stone ate Lift Station PLAN REVIEWER: Ka ren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 5,000 s uare feet EXISTING BLDG AREA
LOCATION: 5610 NE 26 1
h Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA WIOO DIVISION
I WORK ORDER NO: 78056
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station located at 5610 NE 26th Street
(parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary sewer pipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch
sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, N 20th Street,
and Field Avenue NE. The above ground portion of the Stonegate lift station is approximately 240 square feet. The existing lift
station on the subject site is proposed to be removed in addition to the Summerwind lift station, which is not located on the subject
site. Access to the new lift station would be off of 148th Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands (wetland A and wetland
B). Wetland A is connected to May Creek and is classified as a Category I wetland: Wetland Bis a Category Ill wetland. As such, the
applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part
of this project.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the
Environment Minor Major Information Environment
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housino
Air Aesthetics
Water Lioht!Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transoortation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/ Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
B. POL/CY-RELA TEO COMMENTS
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have ex
areas where additional infor ation is needed to properly assess this proposal.
Date
Probable Probable More
Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
and have identified areas of probable impact or
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: MAY 14, 2009
APPLICATION NO: LUA09-049, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 30, 2009
APPLICANT: John Hobson, Cit of Renton PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee RECEIVED
PROJECT TITLE: Stone ate Lift Station PLAN REVIEWER: Ka ren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 5,000 s uare feet EXISTING BLDG AREA ross : N/A
LOCATION: 5610 NE 26 1h Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA
I WORK ORDER NO: 78056
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station located at 5610 NE 26th Street
(parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary sewer pipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch
sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, N 20th Street,
and Field Avenue NE. The above ground portion of the Stonegate lift station is approximately 240 square feet. The existing lift
station on the subject site is proposed to be removed in addition to the Summerwind lift station, which is not located on the subject
site. Access to the new lift station would be off of 148th Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands (wetland A and wetland
B). Wetland A is connected to May Creek and is classified as a Category I wetland; Wetland Bis a Category Ill wetland. As such, the
applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part
of this project.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housina
Air Aesthetics
Waler Liahl/Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transoortation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy! Historic!Cu//ural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.
Date
City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: J:' i ('E, COMMENTS DUE: MAY 14, 2009
APPLICATION NO: LUA09-049, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: APRIL 30, 2009
APPLICANT: John Hobson, City of Renton PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee
PROJECT TITLE: Stoneqate Lift Station . PLAN REVIEWER: Kavren Kittrick
SITE AREA: 5,000 sauare feet EXISTING BLDG AREA tnross\: N/A
LOCATION: 5610 NE 26th Street PROPOSED BLDG AREA loross\ 240 sauare feet
I WORK ORDER NO: 78056
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station located at 5610 NE 26th Street
(parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary sewer pipe and 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch
sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th Street, Lyons Avenue NE, NE 22nd Court, N 20th Street,
and Field Avenue NE. The above ground portion of the Stonegate lift station is approximately 240 square feet. The existing lift
station on the subject site is proposed to be removed in addition to the Summerwind lift station, which is not located on the subject
site. Access to the new lift station would be off of 148th Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands (wetland A and wetland
B). Wetland A is connected to May Creek and is classified as a Category I wetland; Wetland Bis a Category Ill wetland. As such, the
applicant provided a Critical Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part
of this project.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth Housina
Air Aesthetics
Water Lioht!Glare
Plants Recreation
Land/Shoreline Use Utilities
Animals Transnortation
Environmental Health Public Services
Energy/ Historic/Cultural
Natural Resources Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS
/)/t?
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or
areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal_
Sign~~sentative Date
Vanessa Dolbee
From: Vanessa Dolbee
Sent:
To:
Thursday, May 07, 2009 06:58 AM
'llkkstewart@comcast.net'
Cc: John D. Hobson
Subject: RE: Stonegate Neighborhood
Ms. Stewart,
Thank you for your comments. John Hobson in the City's Utilities Services Division will be responding to your questions.
However, our policy is that the City only accepts official comments by e-mail if they are accompanied by the senders full
name and mailing address. Please include this information and resend your comment. You will also be added to the
interested parties list and receive updates on the project until the environmental review is complete.
Thank you.
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Pia nner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
From: llkkstewart@comcast.net [mailto:llkkstewart@comcast.net]
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 08:05 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Stonegate Neighborhood
Hello, I live in Stonegate and I want to voice my dismay that the City of Renton will be coming in and tearing up our streets
for a pump station. I do know there was another area that was considered but the homeowners there do not want this
either. Although they would have been payed for access. I do not want all the traffic, dust, bad roads and inconvenience
here either. I heard this is going to take a year. Please tell me this is not so. Our streets in disarray for a year. I can't
believe it.I am a very unhappy homeowner right now.
Leda Stewart
I
~..,_:.:: ...... ,.
Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mr. Brester,
Vanessa Dolbee
Thursday, May 07, 2009 07:04 AM
'Joe Brester'
John D. Hobson; Stacy Tucker
LUA09-049 Stonegate lift station.
Thank you very much for your comments on the Stonegate Lift Station Environmental Review. Your comments will be
placed into the official file and you will be added to the interested parties list, which will keep you informed about the
project until the environmental review is complete.
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
From: Joe Brester [mailto:bresterl@hotmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 06, 2009 11:55 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject:
We would like to voice our concern over the proposed sanitary lift station & sewer conveyance project at
the entrance to our Stonegate neighborhood.
We moved to this neighborhood just under 3 years ago from the Issaquah, Klahanie neighborhood. We
choose to move here for the larger lot sizes, esthetically pleasing surroundings, location to the greater
eastside area and what we found to be an amazingly quiet and low traffic neighborhood. We thought to
ourselves that this would be an wonderful place to raise our new family (we have 2 small children ages 2
& 3).
However, although we do love the neighborhood, in the short time that we have been here we have
endured 3 construction projects that have made life, needless to say, much less enjoyable. These are as
follows: a) the Bob Holmes mess (new home sites/retention pond construction behind our neighborhood)
in which their trucks constantly were up and down our streets, b) the tear up of 148th street to make
some underground connections to a new home site on 148th that has yet to be finished and is an eye soar
and c) the Coal Creek Parkway shut down which has been ongoing for over a year and diverting enormous
amounts of traffic down 148th (our entrance & exit). Now this in our neighborhood once more with all of
the noise, nuisance, equipment, worker's vehicles and additional traffic in a neighborhood full of children.
We fail to see how you have addressed our interest in your planning. We do not support this project and
believe it is misplaced at best. We are very unhappy taxpayers & registered voters.
Joseph & Sara Brester
2202 Lyons Ave. NE
1
Renton, WA 98059
Stonegate Neighborhood
Lot 42
Hotmail® has a new way to see what's up with your friends. Check it out.
2
.. Vanessa Dolbee
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Mike and Mary Haynes,
Vanessa Dolbee
Tuesday, May 05, 2009 10:07 AM
'Mike and Mary Haynes'
John D. Hobson
RE: Sewer system
To answer some of your questions about the project,
-"What will this entail.. Will there be closures/ Cut to 1 lane???"
LU-A ,,CJ-olj q
Yes, this project will limit traffic only in the "work zone". Traffic will be manages with a flagger. Although, in
the neighborhood streets, approximately 100 to 150 feet is anticipated to be closed at one time. Then they
will open up the next 100 to 150 feet. Near your address an 8-inch pipe will be placed in the right-of-way
approximately 3-feet deep, depending on local utility lines.
-"Is there a hearing or more information you can give us?"
The City's Utilities Systems Division will be holding a neighborhood meeting for the Summerwind Home
Owners Association on Thursday, May 21. This meeting is intend to explain the project to the residents and let
people know what to expect during construction.
Construction is anticipated to begin at the end of July or the beginning of August.
You arc welcome lo come into the 6th floor at City Hall and take a look al the project file. This would provided
you with infonnation as it pertains to wetlands and the geoteclmical report in addition to the technical drawings
of the lift station and the proposed sewer line.
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425 )430-7314
From: Mike and Mary Haynes [mailto:kuddlebug@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 07: 15 PM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Re: Sewer system
Mike and Mary Haynes
425-271-7538
5109 NE 20th ST
Renton, WA 98059
1
.. Please put us on record.
From: Vanessa Dolbee
Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 12:42 PM
To: Mike and Mary Haynes
Subject: RE: Sewer system
Mike and Mary Haynes,
Thank you for your comments/questions, at this time I am working on getting the information to provide you with a
detailed response to your questions below. Although I would like to know, if you both would like to be parties of record
for this project? This means that you will receive copies of all correspondence, decisions, and other
documents/notifications on this project until the environmental review is complete. If you would like to be a party of
record please send me an e-mail back with your phone number in addition to your address and full names.
Once again, thank you for your comments and questions on this project, I will be getting back to you again in the near
future.
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
City of Renton
Department of Community & Economic Development
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
(425)430-7314
From: Mike and Mary Haynes [mailto:kuddlebug@comcast.net]
Sent: Monday, May 04, 2009 09:22 AM
To: Vanessa Dolbee
Subject: Sewer system
Dear Vanessa,
We received a notice of a sewer system that is supposed to be going thru our road NE 20th ST.
What will this entail.. Will there be closures/ Cut to 1 lane???
We are the only road into Summerwind development and have been dealing with the Duvall road closure
since last Summer.
I am thru with Construction and absolutely object to anymore inconvenience. We have had enough road
closure to last for the next 10 years.
Is there a hearing or more information you can give us?
Respectfully
Mike and Mary Haynes
5109 NE 20TH ST
Renton, WA 98059
2
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF
NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M)
DATE:
LAND USE NUMBER·
PROJECT NAME:
AprLl 30. 2009
LUA09-049. ECF
Ston~gal,1 Lill Stat,on
::~~~hCT DESCRIPTION: Applicanl ,s •E1<1uesl.ng SEPA reoiew for lhe Stonegate Loft Staiion located at 5610
linear te 7('~:t .(p~cel #8035400580) and approxlmal~ly 1,000 I.near feet of 12 end \5.inch sarnlary sewer pipe Jnd 4 900
NE l?n~ ~ -;nc N s;~itar5 sewer P•;>e l~caled 1n the rights-of-v.ilyo1 NE Sunsol Bled. NE 261h Street, Lyons A,enue,NE
O<J !. lh l•eel. an<,l Field Avenue NE The above ground PQrtJOn of lhe Stonegale hit s1ation ,~
;~~~:·~:,~e~\~t~t;ii~r:,~eei , The lerostmg l•fi slahon on lhe Subject site 1S proposed to be fQntOved 1n iJdd:\LOrL to the
Av n _ , . 1c' 1s no OCJte,1 on lhe sulJiect site Access to the new 1,n stal,on would l>e oft ol 14sth ~ .ue
1
5E. The Pro/~I ,s located near Two wetlands. (wetland A and wetland B). Welland A is connecled lo May Creek.
: <s cass,hed as a Calego,y I wetland; Wetland B 1s a Categor1· Ill wetlanrl. As such the appljcant pro.ided a CnHcol
reas Report and~ Geolechn1cnl Repmt. The appltcant doe~ nnl propos" 10 remove an/trees ;,s;, part o1 this proiec\
PROJECT LOCATION: S610 NE 2•3"' S1reet
~PTIONAL DETERMl~ATION OF N_ON-S!GNIFTCANCE, MITIG_ATED {DNS-MI: As 1he Lead Agency lhe C,ly o1 Renion
as d
1
~1;m,ned Iha! s,gruf,cant enwonmental impacts are unhkely 10 result from the proposed project Therelore os
~"'.:;
1
k:I under ttie RCW 43 21C.110 .. the C,ty or Ren_ton IS usrng 11,e Optional DNS,1,·I process lu ~,,e no!Lce Iha\" oNs.
per,od j~o ,be 15
1:u:ed, Comment periods for the pro1ec1 ~nd lhe proposecr DNS·M are inlegraled into 3 single comment
Miltgated JD~;.;:;) A /:d~:;Pe~:1
1 ~:::: :~1
1::;~~ :~: ;~:i:~;: 0~1
1~:e0~~:hold Oete,minat,on of Non-Sigrnf,cance.
PERMIT APPL/CATION DATE:
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION:
Apr,I 21, 2009
April 30, 2009
APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON· John Hobson. City of Re'1ton Utility Systams: Tel; (425) 430•7279:
Eml; Jhobson@rentor,wa gov
Permi!s/Review Requested Environmental (SEPA) Roviow
Other Permits which may be required·
R&quested Studies;
Building Permit
Wellan<.l Study and Goatochnical Report
Location wt.ere appllca!ion may
be reviewed:
PUBLIC HEARING
CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW:
Zoning/Land Use:
Environmental Documents that
Evaluate the Proposed Project:
Development Regula!ions
Uud For Project Mitigation:
Depa.t1men.t ot Community Ii Econornic Development (CED)-Plar,nir,g ~~~·;;o"· S1,th Floor Ren!on City Hall. 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA
N.'!\
The sub1ect a.le ,s de_s19nat11d Resident,ai Low Oens,ty (RLO) on lhe c,1y of
;;~i~; ~;p,ehens,ve Land Use Map and Residential. 1 (R·1) on t1,e City's
Enwonme11tal (SEPAJ Checkl,sl
The PfDJecl will be subJe<::l lo tile City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4·3-050, RMC 4·2·
110A nnd ot~er nprhcable codes and rng1Jlat1ons ns appropriMe
Proposed Mitigation M11asurns: The !ollowmg M,hgahon Measures w,111,Kely be 1111posed on the proposed project
These recommended M,t,gat,on Measures address pro1ect ,mpacls n<)l co,ered
by ex,stmg codes ar.d regulat,ons as c:ot!!<I atiove.
The app/1canr shall comply w1rh rhe recommendarions w11hi11 t/>fJ pro\/fd6 a Ct1/ical Areas Reper/
The eppl,cenl shall comply wrlil the ,ewrmnendar,ons w,rhin Iha prowler/ Geo/echnicaf Engineerrng Re,x,r/
Com":'ents .o~ .the above applicMion must be submitted in wr,ting to Vanessa Dolb&Q, Associate Planner. CEO_
Planning O,vrs,on, 1055. South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on May 14, 2009. If you have questions
aDOul thrn pmposal. or 'MSh to be made a party of record and receive acd,t1onal nol1/1catLon by mn,1, contnct the Proiect
~e:7~'.~~r ~:~:i:•;
0
7;~; subm,ls v,,r11len commen1s w,11 a,itoma\lcally become a party of record and '"'ill be '1DlLf•ed ot any
CONTACT PERSON: Vanessa Dolbee, Associate Planner: Tel: (425) 430-7314;
Eml: 11dolbee@rentonwa.gov
PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IOENTJFICATION
--.1 -::,,
ii!~'",
FX' .Jt~<I:.;~\\ ..
'-=-1r'°1 ~·!------
1 J;i:,]~:~i/_/~~:-,''," I ,\1 if ,::) /1 1h.c-~; ·1 ,,-•• ~,..,,_\'. • _.) f ~
I! ~1r~ Ji. -p-
-:r ·-·. 1
1 i -"~·,1r 11_,
ii--\/1c1~iTY
-'
.".:-
'
:;·~\-
,!
If _you would l1Ke 10 lie .mude a party ol record 10 receive further information ori this proposed project complete
this form and relurn to. City of Renton, CED-Planning D1\l\sion. 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057
Name/File No Stonegate Lift S1ation1LUA09-049. ECF
NAME: -----~~-------------~------
MAILING ADDRESS
TELEPHONE NO.:
CERTIFICATION
I, ~ il hereby certify that ..:1_ copies of the above document
were posted by me in--+--conspicuous places or nearby the descnbed property on ,.,,,,'"""'11 11
UJ 14" \.. 'fNN 1-f. 111
DATE:4-30-09
J7 11 ,.,,·,,\IB\111 11 ~,,,.
SIGNED· ~ ~ 'iU-L ~',: · IV 1/, .. ·~\ --.;.r:· r.,._.,..,,. >.l\ : ~ . ·-:~
A TIEST Subscnbed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, m and for the State of Washmgton residing m ~ ~ ... · ·· . · · ~ ..a E =
~\ V&L"" f E
..!!5.u.l(l!J•L,1:tM,,~(plL._,, on the
ill /1~. ~ 0 36 day of .,,~-=iF'-'=c.:...-----
.,, ,,, ..,_ 9.~i::i ... -i'.'-;._""<f.8:
. o.,;:111,"''''""'~~
r1 1 WASl'l'i,,"<
1\11'""''"
•
• ~c
CITY OF RENTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the 30th day of April, 2009, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope
containing Acceptance Letter, NOA, Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT documents. This
information was sent to:
Name
Agencies -Env. Checklist, NOA, PMT See Attached
Stonegate HOA Owner
John Hobson ContacUApplicant
Surrounding Property Owners -NOA only See Attached
(Signature of Sender):.,... ~ti 1'Jt,~
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss
COUNTY OF KING )
Dated: s/, Lr.z't
Project Name: Stonegate Lift Station
Project Number: LUA09-049, ECF
template -affidavit of seivice by mailing
Representin!'.I
..
Dept. of Ecology •
Environmental Review Section
PO Box 47703
Olvmoia, WA 98504-7703
WSDOT Northwest Region •
Attn: Ramin Pazooki
King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240
PO Box 330310
Seattle, WA 98133-9710
US Army Corp. of Engineers •
Seattle District Office
Attn: $EPA Reviewer
PO Box C-3755
Seattle, WA 98124
Boyd Powers •
Depart. of Natural Resources
PO Box 47015
Olvmoia, WA 98504-7015
KC Dev. & Environmental Serv.
Attn: SEPA Section
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW
Renton, WA 98055-1219
Metro Transit
Senior Environmental Planner
Gary Kriedt
AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
WDFW • Larry Fisher• Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. •
1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer
Issaquah, WA 98027 39015 -172"' Avenue SE
Auburn, WA 98092
Duwamish Tribal Office • Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program •
4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert
Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172"' Avenue SE
Auburn, WA 98092-9763
KC Wastewater Treatment Division • Office of Archaeology & Historic
Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation*
Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Gretchen Kaehler
201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box48343
Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Olvmoia, WA 98504-8343
City of Newcastle City of Kent
Attn: Steve Roberge Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP
Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director
13020 Newcastle Way 220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895
Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila
Municipal Liaison Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
Joe Jainga 6200 Southcenter Blvd.
201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188
Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868
Seattle Public Utilities State Department of Ecology
Real Estate Services NW Regional Office
Attn: SEPA Coordinator 3190 160th Avenue SE
700 Fifth Avenue. Suite 4900 Bellevue. WA 98008-5452
PO Box 34018
Seattle, WA 98124-4018
·Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and
cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the notice of application.
template -affidavit of service by mailing
..
516970005000
1520 DUVALL LLC
13200 LAKE KATHLEEN RD SE
RENTON WA 98059
807903024006
ATKINSON GERALD G
5105 NE 20TH ST·
RENTON WA 98059
109131005000
BAUER ALAN W+CATHI A
18335 E SPRINGLAKE DR SE
RENTON WA 98058
807900010008
BEHRENDS DENNIS A
2024 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903022000
BISHOP KATHERINE S+STEVEN M
1918 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
329540001008
BOOK MIKE J
1726 DUVALL AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901065001
BRANDT JEFFREY & DEBRA
5131 NE 21ST ST
RENTON WA 98059
523000009002
BRUNDAGE TERRY
10262 147TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98056
109130006009
CALLERO JOSEPH+ERIKA
4809 NE 18TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807901004000
CARRINGTON ANDREW O+MATTIE
2064 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305913108
ADAO CIRILO P+PERLA R
11011 142ND AVE SE
RENTON WA 98056
329540012005
BALES GEORGE H
PO BOX 3015
RENTON WA 98059
807905008007
BEANE DARRELL F+MONIQUE J
2003 HOQUIAM AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807902004009
BENZ JEAN+KURT
5112 NE 19TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807902019007
BOLDEN SANDRA R
5163 NE 20TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
803540051007
BOYDSTON TAMIE
2508 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540042006
BRESTER JOSEPH
2202 LYONS AVE NE
NEWCASTLE WA 98059
022305908208
BUTTAR BAUINDER S+ RASPHAL
6529 161ST PL SE
BELLEVUE WA 98006
803540027007
CAMP RANDOLPH C III+HEIDI
5308 NE 22ND CT
RENTON WA 98059
807904074000
CASTANEDA ANACLETO R
CASTANEDA REMEDIOS C
PO BOX 20182 BARRIGADA GUAM
807903018008
ANDERSON ROBERT R+MELISSA A
1902 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901039006
BARRIGAN THOMAS C
2219 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305923305
BECK STEVEN A
19244 39TH AVES
SEATAC WA 98188
807900014000
BEVAN PHILIP N+MARJORIE A
5007 NE 21ST ST
RENTON WA 98059
032305903802
BONWELLJAMES L+JULIE P
9616 146TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98056
807903011003
BRADY BROCK J+BETHANY M
1817 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903037008
BROWNELL DAVID
1815 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540002000
BYUS DEAN T lll+KIERSTEN G
5602 NE 26TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807901017002
CAMPBELL RAMONA
5124 NE 23RD ST
RENTON WA 98059
803540043004
CHAPPELLE DOUGLAS & CAROL
2208 LYONO AVE
RENTON WA 98059
..
109130005001
CHEN JUIGANG & LEE JEAN
4805 NE 18TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807904001003
CLABAUGH RUTH
1803 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
342405905106
COLE GARY
9517 146TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
032305929005
COOKJAMESJ+CAROLL
10419 145TH PL SE
RENTON WA 98059
807903012001
CRUEGER ANNE E+BRETT P
1809 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
606140023007
CURTIN TRUDY M
25409 LAKE WILDERNESS CC DR SE
MAPLE VALLEY WA 98038
803540011001
DALY MICHAEL
5305 NE 24TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
807904006002
DEVLIN TIMOTHY F+JACQUELYN
1631 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901068005
DING JUDY N
5180 NE 20TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
032305923107
ELLSWORTH STEVEN K
10423 145TH PL SE
RENTON WA 98059
807902026002
CHEN XUSHENG+LIMAN ZHUANG
1818 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807902032000
CLARK DAVID E+SHERRI L
1912 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807900011006
COLLINS NATHANIEL
2028 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98056
807902008000
COOK JASON A
5007 NE 19TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
032305931704
CULBERTSON JASON ET AL
20211 126TH PL SE
KENT WA 98031
807903005005
CUTBIRTH ERIC R+KATHERINE L
1704 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
177623027006
DAVIS & ROBINSON INC
1201 MONSTER RD #430
RENTON WA 98057
803540029003
DHALIWAL NAVJOT S+MINNIE
5303 NE 22ND CT
RENTON WA 98059
022305907606
DUNVEGAN TRUST
MALCOLM & EUNICE MCLEOD TTEE
122 LUMM! CIR
LA CONNER WA 98257
606140022009
ELY MARCO P&IVANOVA EMILIYA
5208 NE 24TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
803540053003
CHRISTOPHERSON BRUCE K
5502 NE 24TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
109130007007
COATES SALLY A+GARY J HAGEN
1800 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305912902
CONWELL MICHAEL G+CHARLOTT J
CONWELL
11027 142ND AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
523000012006
COSTANTINI MAURICE l+ JENNY
10228 147TH AVE SE
NEWCASTLE WA 98059
803540014005
CURRAN KELLY M+LEANORE
2303 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98056
022305902201
DALPAY PROPERTIES LLC
PO BOX 2436
RENTON WA 98059
109131003005
DAVISON ROBERT W+KRISZTINA
4721 NE 19TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807903013009
DILLEY JENNIFER+TURNEY MART
1808 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807904073002
EKSTRAND HANS l+MARIAN
5006 NE 18TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
109131007006
ENG WARREN+AMY
1820 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
..
807901038008
ERICKSEN CRAIG+KATHLEEN L
2229 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807904067004
FARR RAND+CARLSON
CHERYL D
1704 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903004008
FLECK RONALD K
1700 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540006001
FRIEDRICH HOWARD R+BARBARA
2401 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901009009
GIFFORD CURTIS R
2210 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
109131004003
GOLDENSHTEYN YEVGENY
1829 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305919907
GOODMAN DUANE D+N!COLE M
14701 SE 100TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807901015006
GREEN ROBERT A+KIMBERLY K
5210 NE 23RD CT
RENTON WA 98059
807901057008
HANNON JEFFRY N+JO ANN B
5039 NE 21ST ST
RENTON WA 98059
032305925805
HAUGEN GENE+COUTTS, LEESA
9855 148TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98056
516970007303
FACILITIES & OPERATIONS CTR
OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIR
300 SW 7TH ST
RENTON WA 98055
807901054005
FELICETTI FRANCIS J+LORI A
5023 NE 21ST ST
RENTON WA 98059
803540048003
FOHRELL WILLIAM B & JAN E
2400 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903016002
GEHRIG STEPHEN J+FREEMAN ME
1828 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807902022001
GINSBURG ROBERT H+GAIL F
1907 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903031001
GONZALEZ RACHAEL E
4902 NE 19TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
109130003006
GORES LARRY & SONJA
4711 NE 18TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807901063006
GUNDERSON JOHN+LINDA
2068 HOQUIAM CT NE
RENTON WA 98056
523000011008
HARRJSONBROWN SANDRA
12019 46TH AVES
TUKWILA WA 98178
606140020003
HAYES RANDALL K
14322 SE 100TH PL
RENTON WA 98056
109131010000
FAN KAI S+APRIL S
1836 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540016000
FICCA PAULS
5306 NE 23RD CT
RENTON WA 98059
807901055002
FOOTE ROBERT A+SUSAN E
5027 NE 21ST ST
RENTON WA 98056
032305922901
GESNER PHILLIP G
5005 NE 13TH PL
RENTON WA 98055
807903042008
GOEDHARD JEFFERY N+CHERYL
1713 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540035000
GOO MICHAEL J
2003 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903036000
GOSDEN RAYMOND J+SHARON M
1903 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540033005
HA OANH N
5401 NE 22ND CT
RENTON WA 98059
803540034003
HATLER WADE+AMALIA SANCHAG
2009 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903025003
HAYNES MICHAEL J+MARY ANN
5109 NE 20TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
803540010003
HAYS PAUL T
5304 NE 24TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
807903048005
HERRERO GARY+ROSEMARIE
1601 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901061000
HOLT STEVEN ELLIOT
2059 HOQUIAM CT NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903029005
HU JASON XIAODONG
4906 NE 19TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
516970002205
HUFF SHAWN D+MAUREEN L
4706 NE 18TH ST.
RENTON WA 98056
516970007501
INDIGO REAL ESTATE SERVICES
7525 SE 24TH ST
MERCER ISLAND WA 98040
807901071009
JIMENEZ JUAN A
5154 NE 20TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807903032009
JONES RONALD R+CAROL M
4900 NE 19TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
807900009000
KASIK MILLICENT D
2025 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540005003
KIM BARO
5500 NE 26TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807901072007
HEE KONRAD W H
5150 NE 20TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807903007001
HJELMAA JERRY
1712 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540031009
HOPKINS RONALD W
5315 NE 22ND CT
RENTON WA 98059
803540046007
HUDGINS DAVID ]+KELLY A
2302 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903010005
HUIE BRYANT H
CHOIHUIE ADA W
1833 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807902030004
ITURBE MANUEL+CELINE J
1904 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903020004
JOHNSON SIMONE M
1910 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98055
807901037000
JUCKER MARKUS T
5131 NE 23RD ST
RENTON WA 98059
516970008509
KAZEMI MANCOUCHEHR+LAURA A ET
AL
4715 NE SUNSET BLVD
RENTON WA 98056
807903039004
KIM STEVEN HYUNGSUB
1807 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540049001
HENRY MICHAEL+HEIDI
2406 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305910203
HOLMES ROBERT A+TAMARA J
14610 SE 99TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
032305922109
HORNE WILLIAM E LIVING TR
HORNE WILLIAM E+MARY A TTEE
14704 SE 100TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
109131006008
HUE SALLY
1819 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540019004
ICE LARRY J
5307 NE 23RD CT
RENTON WA 98059
606140017009
JACKMAN DONALD C JR
14319 SE 100TH PL
RENTON WA 98059
807902025004
JONDAHL NICHOLAS+KRISTIN
1821 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
109130010001
KANDKRAT PHAN WISAWAS
1818 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
109130001000
KHTEY ANDRIY+VIKTORIYA
4703 NE 18TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807901040004
KOH BONG & JANE
18302 NW MONTREUX DR
ISSAQUAH WA 98027
...
807901006005
KREMER MATIHEW M+KRISTI A
2086 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901058006
KUMAR RAJESH+SHAMILA
2069 HOQUIAM CT NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903027009
LAM RAYMOND KIN CHUNG+OHKAE
1923 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807904005004
LANGRUD MICHAEL H
1635 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
109130004004
LAU CHIN CHIT +CHAN JUDY
4717 NE 18TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807905007009
LEE ANDY J+ZHAO MIN YI
2009 HOQUIAM AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540001002
LIEN LAURIE A
29928 PACIFIC HWY S
FEDERAL WAY WA 98003
807905002000
LOCKLEY JUDITH M
PO BOX 2955
RENTON WA 98056
803540013007
LONGFELLOW HAPPY D+CHRISTIN
5405 NE 24TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
109130008005
LUN WING TUNG+YIN LING
1806 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
606140018007
KRUGAR KARL DANA+BERNADETIE
5620 165TH PL SE
BELLEVUE WA 98006
803540020002
LAM DICKSON
5313 NE 23RD CT
RENTON WA 98059
807901016004
LANA PEDRO+ROBIN M
5208 NE 23RD CT
RENTON WA 98059
803540028005
LARKIN DANIEL J+WENDY M
5302 NE 22ND CT
RENTON WA 98059
109130009003
LE HOA
1812 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
516970004102
LEE SEUNG & EUN
C/0 PACIFIC ASSET ADVISORS
600 108TH AVE NE #530
BELLEVUE WA 98004
807903034005
LIU Ll+WANG QUANJIAN
PO BOX 2443
RENTON WA 98056
803540023006
LOFGREN WILLIAM W+ABNER JUL
2205 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903015004
LUEDKE ANDREW J+MONICA K
1822 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305925706
MACKAY PAUL F JR+TAMMY L
14725 SE 99TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
523000019001
KUBEJA JOHN MARK
10241 147TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
807903014007
LAM JOHN KIN FA!
1816 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
418720032006
LANGLEY DEVELOPMENT GROUP
6450 SOUTHCENTER BLVD STE 106
SEATILE WA 98188
803540052005
LARSON DAVID TROY
5505 NE 24TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
032305908504
LEE ALAN CK
4940 NE SUNSET BLVD
RENTON WA 98059
807902021003
LETIERER ALEC E+REBECCA A
5185 NE 20TH ST
RENTON WA 98056
807905005003
LIU WAI SAMSON+EVA W.LT.
2021 HOQUIAM AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807902029006
LONG DAVID J
C/0 JOSEPH GONZALEZ !!+JULIA
1830 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901070001
LUI SIULING
LAI SHUN WING
5160 NE 20TH ST
RENTON WA 98056
803540018006
MACKEY JOHN M+JODI L
5301 NE 23RD CT
RENTON WA 98059
807901002004
MAGGIORE NICOLAS C+REBECCA
2060 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807902006004
MANIO JAIME A+LIZA L
5006 NE 19TH ST
RENTON WA 98056
032305908702
MARTIN DOUGLAS M+JOAN M
11049 142ND AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
032305919402
MCDOWELL ESTATES LLC
12528 NE 117TH PL #E4
KIRKLAND WA 98034
807904012000
MEAD BRIAN J+LYNDA M
1609 HOQUIAM PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305914601
MENDOZA RAFAEL F+MARY J
14042 SE 112TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
109131012006
MIKHAEL !SIS
1908 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
606140016001
MIODUSZEWSKI VINCE L+GLINDA
5209 NE 24TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807901073005
MOJI KATHERINE A
5140 NE 20TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
109131009002
MUI SANDY WAI PU!
1830 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
109131008004
MAH CAROLINE S
1824 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903030003
MANN GREGORY+SIPHIA
4904 NE 19TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
807901014009
MAYER DAVID E+COLLEEN M
5214 NE 23RD CT
RENTON WA 98059
022305909107
MCFARLAND RODNEY D+LAUREL
15019 SE MAY VALLEY RD
RENTON WA 98059
807903043006
MEBRAHTU GHRMAl+MANA KAHSSA
1709 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 9.8059
032305910807
MERRITT MICHAEL M+CYNTHIA L
2505 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305929203
MILLER DAVID R & KATRINA J
10411 145TH PL SE
RENTON WA 98059
807903003000
MIRALDI VINCENT
1610 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
109130002008
MOK RAYMOND & TSO SWAN
4709 NE 18TH
RENTON WA 98059
803540040000
MULLENS JULIE N
5504 NE 21ST CT
RENTON WA 98059
807901060002
MANDHARE VIJAYSINHA A+SANDH
2061 HOQUIAM CT NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305922802
MARTIN DOUG
1215 HOQUIAM AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305914304
MCCOY LARRY
PO BOX 3042
RENTON WA 98056
807900015007
MCKINNEY NORMA BETH+PATRICK C
ROLEY
5009 NE 21ST ST
RENTON WA 98059
807902003001
MEI PHILIP HT +NANCY
5116 NE 19TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
803540045009
MESSINA MARC & MADONNA
2218 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305921705
MILO EDMUND C
5030 NE SUNSET BLVD
RENTON WA 98059
032305917109
MITCHELL AARON M+KASSANDRA
7912 129TH PL SE
NEWCASTLE WA 98056
523000022005
MORSE PEG! E
10269 147TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
807901036002
MUNGARA DHANUI+HIMA
5129 NE 23RD ST
RENTON WA 98059
803540047005
MUTTART GEORGE M+GINGER A R
2310 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
177623009004
NEIGHBORS CORY
4825 NE 13TH PL
RENTON WA 98059
807905006001
NG PAUL & MARGARIA
2015 HOQUIAM AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903019006
NGUYEN KHEIM DINH+HOA THI
1906 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
523000013004
OKESON CHRISTINA M
10218 147TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
032305919303
ORANGE DAVID T
9833 148TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98055
807902020005
PERRIN DANIEL K
5179 NE 20TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
803540026009
PHILPOT DANIEL
5314 NE 22ND CT
RENTON WA 98059
803540037006
PRICE RANDALL E
5505 NE 21ST CT
RENTON WA 98059
807901011005
REED DONNA L
2230 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
523000016007
NAGEL MAXINE M
10217 147TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
803540017008
NEILSON DEREK G+ANNETTE M
5300 NE 23RD CT
RENTON WA 98059
807904011002
NG SHUNG PU!
1613 HOQUIAM PL SE
RENTON WA 98059
807901013001
OBRIEN STEVEN P+KELLIE
5219 NE 23RD CT
RENTON WA 98059
807903041000
ONG HUE DUC
1717 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807904002001
ORTON STEVEN M
1711 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903021002
PHAM ALLEN
1914 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540032007
PHUNG THANH VAN+ THI THI PHU
5321 NE 22ND CT
NEWCASTLE WA 98059
803540039002
RATTIE DENNIS L+ELIZABETH S
5510 NE 21ST CT
RENTON WA 98059
102305920104
RENTON SCHOOL DISTRICT #403
300 SW 7TH ST
RENTON WA 98055
807903046009
NAPOLITANO ANGELA+CHRISTOPH
1609 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807902027000
NELSON JOHN C+APRIL L
1822 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807902015005
NGUYEN DUCT +HANG B
1810 HOQUIAM PL NE
RENTON WA 98056
807902016003
OKERLUND WENDI R
1816 HOQUIAM PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901001006
OR RINGO WINGWAH
2050 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807904003009
PATTEN JAMES D+BROOKS SANDRA A
1707 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305917406
PHAM CHUNG P
11055 142ND AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
523000010000
PREDA ION & ESTERA
10250 147TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
803540050009
REAMY ELIZABETH A+REAMY
CHARLES L III
2502 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901007003
RHODES RONALD G+CORIANNE
2122 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98056
. ., '
807901008001
RICHARDSON DANIEL WAYNE
2200 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540024004
ROGERS WILLIAM L+DEBRA L H
5326 NE 22ND CT
RENTON WA 98059
807903002002
ROZSONITS DONALD J+LAURA M
1606 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540003008
SALAS MELISSA
C/0 WILLOUGHBY
5512 NE 26TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
032305922406
SAUNIER RENA M
9845 148TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
807900013002
SCHMIDT TRISHA L
4909 NE 21ST ST
RENTON WA 98056
032305907605
SCHUTZ STEVE W
5024 NE SUNSET BLVD
RENTON WA 98059
807901003002
SHAH NIGAM & RESHMA
2062 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807902031002
SHERMAN ARTHUR F+GLORIA G
1908 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903017000
SHOLAND RONALD C
1834 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
523000020009
RIDDELL JUDITH C
10257 147TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
807901056000
ROSE RICHARD H+ROSALIE B
5035 NE 21ST ST
RENTON WA 98059
803540030001
RYBERG MARTY +SANDRA HOWE
5309 NE 22ND CT
RENTON WA 98059
177623024003
SAM ANNIE
1369 ELMA PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807902007002
SAYER WILLIAM R+LAURIE A
5000 NE 19TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807901059004
SCHROEDER EDGAR H+MARCIA I
2065 HOQUIAM CT NE
RENTON WA 98059
516970005109
SEUNG LEE & EUN
C/0 PACIFIC ASSET ADVISORS
600 108TH AVE NE #530
BELLEVUE WA 98004
523000018003
SHARP MICHAEL+NINA
12824 SE 265TH ST
KENT WA 98050
803540009005
SHERMAN KIMBERLY SUE+SCHWAR
5310 NE 24TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
807902005006
SILVERSTONE VLADIMIR
5012 NE 19TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807901041002
ROBERTSON RICHARD W+REBECCA
5120 NE 21ST ST
RENTON WA 98056
807903035002
ROSENFELD NICHOLAS+JENNIFER
4905 NE 19TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
803540022008
SAFLEY THOMAS S+SARA E
2211 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807905001002
SAMS ANDREW C+KARISSA E
5112 NE 20TH
RENTON WA 98059
807901012003
SCHMEER GREGORY E+MARGARET
5213 NE 23RD CT
RENTON WA 98059
807902011004
SCHULTZ DONALD R
1809 HOQUIAM PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
109130012007
SHABALOV LEV
1815 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98056
807903040002
SHEARER JEFFREY R+ TRAN TAM N
1803 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540015002
SHERMAN RONALD G+STEPHANIE
5312 NE 23RD CT
RENTON WA 98059
803540038004
SLATON DANIEL B+SUSAN B
5511 NE 21ST CT
RENTON WA 98059
...
807903028007
SMITH DENNIS+LESLIE A
1917 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540004006
SPIER ROBERT+MONIQUE BLOCH
5506 NE 26TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
523000023003
STEMWELLA
20715 SE 119TH
ISSAQUAH WA 98027
803540055008
STONEGATE HOMEOWNERS ASSOC
PO BOX 2691
RENTON WA 98056
803540025001
SYTSMA BRENT R+VONNI D
5320 NE 22ND CT
RENTON WA 98059
807902018009
THO VU DUC
LE NGUYET NGA THI
1906 HOQUIAM PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901042000
TIEDE MILTON A+ERJKA
5110 NE 21ST ST
RENTON WA 98059
807903033007
TRAN THAI TAN+HIEN THI
4901 NE 19TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
807903044004
TRUONG THONG V
LANANH T BUI
1705 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901062008
TVERSKOY BORIS.& MARINA
2064 HOQUIAM CT NE
RENTON WA 98059
523000014002
SMITH NORMAN W
14705 SE 102ND ST
RENTON WA 98059
807903008009
STANFILL CAROL A+BROWN COLLENE
J
1802 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540021000
STEWART LONNIE R+LEDA K
2217 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
606140015003
STRASSER CARL
14151 SE 100TH PL
RENTON WA 98059
807905004006
TABERT SHAWN P & ANNE E
2020 HOQUIAM AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807900012004
THOMAS JOHN !+SUSAN D
2030 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540008007
TODDERUD JOHN D+BRIDGET M
5316 NE 24TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
803540041008
TRIBBLE JOHN+STACY
2106 LYONS AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
022305907507
TSEGAY TSEGE+AYELE KIDANE
10008 148TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
177623028004
UNION SQUARE TOWNHOMES LLC
1201 MONSTER RD SW #320
RENTON WA 98055
032305921101
SNODGRASS GRACE
4922 NE 20TH PL
RENTON WA 98056
807905003008
STAYNER PETER+STEPHANIE
15100 SE 38TH ST PMB 721
BELLEVUE WA 98006
807903001004
STONE GEORGE
1602 FIELD AE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903023008
SUN MICHAEL
1922 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
342405905304
TEO PENG HENG+KITTY KITBING TAM
14716 SE MAY VALLEY RD
NEWCASTLE WA 98059
807902017001
THURESON MARY A+ROY A
1902 HOQUIAM PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901066009
TOMOKIYO ROLAND T+ANN K
2067 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98056
032305909007
TRIDELT INC
6840 112TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98056
523000017005
TUPOU ELIZABETH
10221 147TH AVE SE
RENTON WA 98059
807902001005
URECHE OCTAVIAN TONY+MIHAEL
1909 HOQUIAM PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
,, ~ . . '
803540007009
VADNEY BRYAN L+KENDRA A
5404 NE 24TH CT
RENTON WA 98059
807901057007
VEVANG JAMES S
2053 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
803540035008
WANG TEH YU
5501 NE 21ST CT
RENTON WA 98059
807901054004
WILLIAMS DAVID D
2072 HOQUIAM CT NE
RENTON WA 98059
807902023009
WILLIAMS RICHARD
1903 ILLWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305913207
WILLMOTT JENNIE+FISCHER STE
5004 NE 13TH PL
RENTON WA 98059
807901010007
WOLCOTT JEFFREY J
2220 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807904004007
WONG EUGENE J + LUCIE T
1703 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903038005
WOOD MICHELLE LEE
1811 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
177623025000
YEUNG PETER+YEUNGLI JULIA+
1403 ELMA PL NE
RENTON WA 98055
807901059003
VANDEWAY TIMOTHY M
5170 NE 20TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
177623026008
VU PHUNG+DAM LY
1409 ELMA PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
109130011009
WEI SHENG & WAN XIA LIN
1805 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807902024007
WILLIAMS JOHN C Ill+LESLIE
1825 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98055
807902002003
WILLIAMS SCOTT F+AUDREY M
1905 HOQUIAM PL
RENTON WA 98056
803540012009
WINGERSON BRENT
5311 24TH CT
RENTON WA 98056
032305901400
WOLF RA
1815 NILE AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903047007
WONG KAREN S
1605 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903009007
WOODRUFF ALAN+GAYLE
1839 FIELD PL NE
RENTON WA 98059
807901005007
YOUNG FRANK N Ill+JENNIFER
2084 ILWACO AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
032305908207
VATSA SUBHASH & SITA
PO BOX 65156
SEATTLE WA 98155
807902009008
WALTON BRENT C
5013 NE 19TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807903025001
WHITTINGTON DAVID H+RUTH AN
5113 NE 20TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807904072004
WILLIAMS KEVIN B+DEBORAH J
5010 NE 18TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
032305901905
WILLIAMSON ALAN
1028 REDMOND AVE NE
RENTON WA 98055
803540044002
WINN STEPHEN G
2212 LYONS AVE NE
NEWCASTLE WA 98059
032305915905
WOLF RA
14702 SE 105TH ST
RENTON WA 98059
807903045001
WOO JERRY CHUI
1613 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
807903006003
YEE WOON SUEY+PHYLLIS FWIE
FOON
1708 FIELD AVE NE
RENTON WA 98005
109131011008
YURAKOV DENIS
1902 ELMA AVE NE
RENTON WA 98059
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF
NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED (DNS-M)
DATE:
LAND USE NUMBER:
PROJECT NAME:
April 30, 2009
LUA09-049, ECF
Stonegate Lift Station
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Applicant is requesting SEPA review for the Stonegate Lift Station located at 5610
NE 26th Street (parcel #8035400580) and approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary sewer pipe and 4,900
linear feet of 8-inch sanitary sewer pipe located in the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd., NE 26th Street, Lyons Avenue NE,
NE 22nd Court, N 20th Street, and Field Avenue NE The above ground portion of the Stonegate lift station is
approximately 240 square feet The existing lift station on the subject site is proposed to be removed in addition to the
Summerwind lift station, which is not located on the subject site. Access to the new lift station would be off of 148th
Avenue SE. The project is located near two wetlands (wetland A and wetland B). Wetland A is connected to May Creek
and is classified as a Category I wetland; Wetland B is a Category Ill wetland. As such, the applicant provided a Critical
Areas Report and a Geotechnical Report. The applicant does not propose to remove any trees as a part of this project.
PROJECT LOCATION: 5610 NE 261h Street
OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS-M): As the Lead Agency, !he City of Renton
has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as
permitted under the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M process to give notice that a DNS-
M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS-M are integrated into a single comment
period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non-Significance-
Mitigated (ONS-M). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M.
PERMIT APPLICATION DATE:
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION:
April 21, 2009
April 30, 2009
APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: John Hobson, City of Renton -Utility Systems; Tel: (425) 430-7279;
Eml: jhobson@rentonwa.gov
Permits/Review Requested:
Other Permits which may be required:
Requested Studies:
Location where application may
be reviewed:
PUBLIC HEARING:
CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW:
Zoning/Land Use:
Environmental Documents that
Evaluate the Proposed Project:
Development Regulations
Used For Project Mitigation:
Environmental (SEPA) Review
Building Permit
Wetland Study and Geotechnical Report
Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) -Planning
Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA
98057
N/A
The subject site is designated Residential Low Density (RLD) on the City of
Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Residential -1 (R-1) on the City's
Zoning Map.
Environmental (SEPA) Checklist
The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-3-050, RMC 4-2-
11 DA and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate.
Proposed Mitigation Measures: The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project.
These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered
by existing codes and regulations as cited above.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations within the provided Critical Areas Report.
The applicant shall comply with the recommendations within the provided Geotechnical Engineering Report.
Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Vanessa Dolbee, Associate Planner, CED -
Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on May 14, 2009. If you have questions
about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project
Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any
decision on this project.
CONTACT PERSON: Vanessa Dolbee, Associate Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7314;
Eml: vdolbee@rentonwa.gov
Ii PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION i
If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete
this form and return to: City of Renton, CED-Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057.
Name/File No.: Stonegate Lift Station/LUA09-049. ECF
NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE NO.:
Denis Law
Mayor
April 30, 2009
John Hobson
City of Renton
1055 5 Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
Department of Community & Economic Development
Subject: Notice of Complete Application
Stonegate Lift Station, LUA09-049, ECF
Dear Mr. Hobson:
The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is
complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review.
It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on May
18, 2009. Please provide two copies of the easement documentation, from the properties HOA
prior to May 17, 2009. You will be notified if any other additional information is required to
continue processing your application.
Please contact me at (425) 430-7314 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Vanessa Dolbee
Associate Planner
cc: Stonegate Homeowners Association/ Owner(s)
Renton City Hall o 1055 South Grady Way o Renton, Washington 98057 o rentonwa.gov
-•-·
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Department Chareed:
Account Number
.?lzi~:a'· /,,0h-i,;.-./;_~-x7
J/~1(.b
CREDIT:
Account Number
OOo. <l-. 131. 00.0007
Reason:
/
FINANCE AND INFORMATION SERVICES
DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM
Y-Z.\ -09
Sue Olson, Finance & Information Services Department
~_Gl\ess~Tu\b~e._,_ __ WA ~9___-0}{~ ______ .
Re: INTERFUND TRANSFER REQUEST
Instructions: Please note that failure to provide all digits will result in processing
delays. All Signatures and correct documentation must be included.
Please prepare the following inter-fund transfer:
Project, function, task, sub-task Description f Amount
~IOH;;;b./C~~ L. ·-_c>-:-':L.. --,. -.---,-:;:-orn .oo
--· ~ V I
/' /f
/ . ,,f /
/ // // / / / Total
Project, function, task, sub-task Description c$ Amount
"'' --l / i L \. Sm-HM ~E\'A t:~-1,000.00
u
Total
Note: Documentation to support this transfer request must he al/ached and all signatures are required.
Cash Transfer Form/Finance/bh Revised O I /09
_...
Printed: 04-27-2009
Payment Made:
CITY OF RENTON
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
Land Use Actions
RECEIPT
Permit#: LUA09-049
Receipt Number: R0901672
Total Payment:
04/27/2009 02:40 PM
1,000.00 Payee: INTER OFFICE TRANSFER
Current Payment Made to the Following Items:
Trans Account Code Description
5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review
Payments made for this receipt
Trans Method Description Amount
Payment IOT DAVE C 1,000.00
Account Balances
Amount
1,000.00
Trans Account Code Description Balance Due
3021 303.000.00.345.85 Park Mitigation Fee
5006 000.345.81.00.0002 Annexation Fees
5007 000.345.81.00.0003 Appeals/Waivers
5008 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short Plat
5009 000.345.81.00.0006 Conditional Use Fees
5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review
5011 000.345.81.00.0008 Prelim/Tentative Plat
5012 000.345.81.00.0009 Final Plat
5013 000.345.81.00.0010 PUD
5014 000.345.81.00.0011 Grading & Filling Fees
5015 000.345.81.00.0012 Lot Line Adjustment
5016 000.345.81.00.0013 Mobile Home Parks
5017 000.345.81.00.0014
5018 000.345.81.00.0015
5019 000.345.81.00.0016
000.345.81.00.0017
000.345.81.00.0018
000.345.81.00.0019
000.345.81.00.0024
000.345.81.00.0005
000.341.60.00.0024
000.341.50.00.0000
650.237.00.00.0000
Rezone
Routine Vegetation Mgmt
Shoreline Subst Dev
Site Plan Approval
Temp Use, Hobbyk, Fence
Variance Fees
Conditional Approval Fee
Comprehensive Plan Amend
Booklets/EIS/Copies
Maps (Taxable)
DO NOT USE -USE 3954
5020
5021
5022
5024
5036
5909
5941
5954
5955
5998
000.05.519.90.42.l Postage
000.231.70.00.0000 Tax
Remaining Balance Due: $0.00
.oo
.oo
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.00
.oo
.00
.00
.00
.00
.oo
.00
.oo
.00
,:--·.·>1a·· ,·r 'f .: ''le • :;---,, ... '. -· ·,>0/'<1 't
City of Renton
lAND USE PERM~T
1;
.. ·, .. '-' ~-, -. .--., -·,i ,, .•• , •..• _ -b·-.,,. ,, .,, MASTER APPLICATION
..-.......... ~
PROPERTY OWNER($) PROJECT INFORMATION
NAME: PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME:
c:S·-. 01-.!E""'-A ,-c:= \..\-01..., Ii:: O , • ' --~ AS!.oC., '$101.JEoG.A~ L1F, .s,Alio,,.i ~~~-' ADDRESS:
\;:,o Eov z_(pCJ I PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE:
6(.:,10 NE '2..~ !:!:: .ST_ l.?.:r-1...-v..J 9'Bc,S-(p
CITY: ZIP:
Pe"l..rn=,, I, ct So!S"<=J
TELEPHONE NUMBER: KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S):
APPLICANT (if other than owner) ~o3S"4oo S6o
NAME: CrT'( R6-.lm"-' OF
EXISTING LAND USE(S):
19Pa-.l S~--=-
COMPANY (if applicable): PROPOSED LAND USE(S):
NIA
'
ADDRESS: ID$"~ -S ~1>Y WIJ..''(
EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION:
Re51C>Ei-,i'r1AL-Lo\;.J ':be/.J.SiT._(
CITY: l<.El--/"n:rtJ ZIP: '1f>o~7 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION
(if applicable): t-1/;,..
TELEPHONE NUMBER
4Z5 4-3 C 7 2.,CI
EXISTING ZONING: R-\
CONT ACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): /..J, I A
NAME: ..Jot'"' 1--I l+s 'B.So JJ SITE AREA (in square feet): 5"ooo+f=_'l..
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE
COMPANY (if applicable):
C....•r--c oF Rei~J
DEDICATED: ,JJA
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS:
ADDRESS:
µ ,.
•
l05'S-6 C.R-Ao'-1 WA'-1
CITY: ~~'Tb.J ZIP: 9 ~() :S:7
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET
ACRE (if applicable): /J IA-
NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable):
TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS:
l>J I 11.
4'l.G" 4-?.o 7l.,Cj NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable):
...1hebson f.J_ re"·tonv--1'1.. Aov ,.J /1:1..
H:\Fonns\Planning\mastcrapp.doc . I . 08/07
PR< :CT INFORMATION (continr'd) ~------------
NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable):
1--1/A
PROJECT VALUE: $ 2_5 1-\ll .. '-lo,-l
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A
IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF
ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE
SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable):
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): J.J/A D AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable): fl $1 I ~ ,:;, ' -.f-1-!-
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL
D AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO
D FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. fl.
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 1J /A D GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft.
NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if
applicable): liltA..2:ft..._ Z4D ~
D HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. fl.
D SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES sq. fl.
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE
NEW PROJECT (if applicable): N/ll
D WETLANDS sq. fl.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
/Attach legal descriotion on seoarate sheet with the following information included)
SITUATE IN THE iJ'=" QUARTER OF SECTION ,3, TOWNSHIP Z.3, RANGE 5', IN THE CITY
OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON.
TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES
List all land use applications being applied for:
1. 3.
2. 4.
Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $
(Signature of Owner/Representative)
H:\Fonns\Planning\masterapp.doc
AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP
Notary (Print)
My appointment expires:~ILc:i_"_,\~~-"'j~._l~[,_.,[e-----
-2 -08/07
\>.!!~1\'IG
oftt-~~~o~
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION t)E.'<I~~ O'r B
WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS t,.?\l-1 \ 1.~
FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS ~r;:.cfi.\'Jf/:.0
Calculations 1
c:616red ~~iis toi [)isp1~,j y • • · > · · · ·
Construction Mitigation Description 2 AND•
./ ......... ··.···.·.·.················· ...... .
Drainage Control Plan,
berisityWorksheeiJ <••
,/
Existing Covenants (Recorded Copy)•
Existing .Easeme11ts(Flecorded• Copy) i • • •. • •. •. • •·• ...
Grading Plan, Detailed,
1-Jabi@•p~ia Report.+•·•••••·····
King County Assessor's Map Indicating Site•
Landscapif ~1ah, Conc~ptual, ?
Landscape Plan, Detailed,
t:,e 9a1•De$criptiClil~t·······
List of Surrounding Property Owners,
Main ng Lat>el.s tcir !'iope~)lbwners ) > . • · · • ...
Map of Existing Site Conditions,
f.iia.sterAPp1icati6n@rMr···
Monument Cards (one per monument) 1
Neighb6,ti6octt@~uf.iiaii) ··
This requirement may be waived by:
1. Property Services Section
2. Public Works Plan Review Section
3. Building Section
4. Development Planning Section
PROJECT NAME: 0mf'e~Q ui4 &h-hlvl_
DATE: L{-'Z,\ -09
H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\waiver.xls 02/1212009
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS
i t,WlfLJSEP.~~\\:11"1"$1.lB\\:I.ITIAL •>••••··••r tWAiVE[) .•.• )i,i(?[)l~IED\
•·••·••••••••••••••••·••·•···•••.•)REQUIREMENTS:• •.• U • LU t·ev; •• .. >. ? ... ·BY:••••··•
Parking, Lot Coverage & Landscaping Analysis,
Piaci •Reductions• (Plv1TsJW • · • · •·····•·•···•·•·•·· ··· ·
Postage,
preappiic:atioci Meeting Summary{••••
Public Works Approval Letter,
Street Profiles 2
fitiE)Reportai•piai c;eriific~te)H·····
Topography Map,
Tree Cutting/Land Clearing Plan,
./ Utilities Plan, Generalized 2
w~ti~~cls MitJ·•a1ie11 P1~11Yi=111ai•4 +•·······
Applicant Agreement Statement , AND,
Inventory of Existing Sites , AND,
Lease Agreement, Draft 2 AND 3
Map of Existing Site Conditions , AND,
Map of View Area , AND,
Photosimulations 2 AND 3
This requirement may be waived by:
1 . Property Services Section
2. Public Works Plan Review Section
3. Building Section
PRoJ EcT NAME: """'SJ]y\(7'-'-"'-''-"'B'l""cv±_,_,/2.__._,/ 1"--'!4----=o=±c ...... th,.,,,IJVJ'-+, _
DATE: LI -Z.1-09
4. Development Planning Section
H:\CED\Data\Forms-Templates\Self-Help Handouts\Planning\waiver.xls 02/12/2009
Project Narrative
Stonegate Lift Station Replacement
The project proposes to install approximately 1,000 linear feet of 12 and 15-inch sanitary sewer
within the rights-of-way of NE Sunset Blvd, approximately 4,900 linear feet of 8-inch sanitary
sewer force main in the rights-of-way of NE 26'h St, Lyons Ave NE, NE 22"d Ct, N 20 1h St and
Field Ave NE. The project also proposes to construct a sanitary sewer lift station on Tract H in
the plat of Stonegate to replace the existing lift station.
The purpose of the project is to abandon the existing Summerwind sanitary sewer lift station and
install a section of gravity sewer main to allow sewage to flow to the proposed Stonegate Lift
Station replacement. The existing Stonegate Lift Station will be replaced by a new Stonegate Lift
Station that is capable of providing sanitary sewer service to the entire area at full build-out.
When completed, the proposed Stonegate Lift Station will add one above ground buildings
(20'xl2') and one emergency generator. The remainder of the Lift Station will be below ground
level.
The project will be within existing right-of-ways and easements that will be adjacent to single
family residential neighborhoods. All roadways within the Stonegate plat and NE 201h St and
Field Ave NE within the Summerwind plat will receive full overlays.
The proposed lift station will be located on the same property as the existing lift station. This
property is an open-space tract within the Stonegate plat. This site and the surrounding properties
are zoned R-1.
The proposed project is estimated to cost $2.5 million.
DEVELOPMENT PLANNING
CITY OF RENTON
APR 21 2009
RECEIVED
Construction Mitigation
Stonegate Lift Station Replacement
oEV~'t,~We~irlNG
~PR 2 \ 2009
RECE\"EO
The proposed project is planned to begin construction in July, 2009 with completion scheduled
for April 2010. All work will be performed during the regular working hours of7 AM to 5 PM,
Monday through Friday.
Transportation of materials to and from the construction site will utilize 148th Ave SE and NE
Sunset Blvd.
Water trucks and street sweeps will be utilized to minimize dust. Standard erosion control
practices (silt fencing, catch basin "socks", etc.) shall be employed to minimize erosion.
Two-way traffic will be maintained on NE Sunset Blvd. and flagged one-way traffic will be
maintained through the work zones on the residential streets. A city approved traffic control plan
will be required prior to beginning construction.
• t
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
STONEGATE II LIFT STATION AND CONVEYANCE IMPROVEMENTS
2. Name of applicant:
CITY OF RENTON
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
1055 S GRADY WAY
RENTON, WASHINGTON 98057
425-430-7279
JOHN HOBSON, PROJECT ENGINEER
4. Date checklist prepared:
APRIL 10, 2009
5. Agency requesting checklist:
CITY OF RENTON
1055 S. GRADY WAY
RENTON, WA. 98057
WASHINGTON STATE DEPT. OF ECOLOGY
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
POBox47703
OLYMPIA WA 98504-7703
AnN: Ms. BARBARA RITCHIE
WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE
1775 12THAVE.NWSUITE201
ISSAQUAH, WA98027
AnN: LARRY FISHER
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
SUMMER/ FALL 2009
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or 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.
A DRAFT CRITICAL AREAS REPORT, PREPARED BY ESA ADOLFSON, MAY 2008
HWA GEOSCIENCES WILL BE PREPARING A GEOTECHNICAL REPORT FOR THE LIFT STATION SITE
9. Do· you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals
directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
NONE KNOWN
W:\WWP-27-3473 Summerwind-Stonegate LS Replacement\SEPA\SEPA chklst 052208 emd.doc . 2. 02/1
10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
CITY OF RENTON BUILDING PERMIT
CITY OF RENTON RIGHT OF WAY PERMIT
CITY OF RENTON GRADING PERMIT
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL
WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM PERMIT
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the
project and site.
THE PROPOSED NEW FORCE MAIN WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED BETWEEN THE EXISTING GRAVITY SEWER
SYSTEM ALONG FIELD AVE NE AND THE PROPOSED NEW STONEGATE LIFT STATION WITH APPROXIMATELY
4,900 FEET OF 8-INCH DIAMETER PVC FORCE MAIN ALONG WITH APPROXIMATELY 370 FEET OF 8-INCH
DIAMETER HOPE PIPE. IN ADDITION APPROXIMATELY 1,000 LINEAL FEET OF 12-INCH AND 15-INCH DIAMETER
GRAVITY SEWER PIPE ALONG FIELD AVE WILL BE INSTALLED TO REPLACE THE EXISTING SMALLER DIAMETER
PIPE. THE CONSTRUCTION WILL ALSO INCLUDE A NEW SEWAGE LIFT STATION TO REPLACE THE EXISTING
LIFT STATION AT STONEGATE. THE NEW LIFT STATION WILL INCLUDE A CONTROL BUILDING, OVERFLOW
STORAGE, WET WELL, VALVE VAULT, AND GENERA TOR.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise
location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and
range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries
of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if
reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not
required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this
checklist.
THE NEW LIFT STATION WILL BE LOCATED AT THE SAME RELATIVE LOCATION AS THE EXISTING LIFT STATION
SITE LOCATED WITHIN PARCEL NUMBER 803540-0580, AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF NE 26'" STREET
AND 148'" AVE SE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. NEW SEWER FORCE MAINS WILL BEGIN JUST WEST OF
THE INTERSECTION OF NE 26'" ST AND 148'" AVE SE AND CONTINUES SOUTH WESTERLY TO THE
INTERSECTION OF FIELD AVE NE AND NE SUNSET BLVD. NEW GRAVITY LINES ARE ALONG NE SUNSET BLVD.;
REFERENCE VICINITY MAP.
W:\WWP-27-3473 Summerwind-Stonegate LS Replacement\SEPA\SEPA chklst 052208 emd.doc -3-02/1
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. EARTH
a. General description of the site (circle one); flat,! ROLLING!, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other ------
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?)
APPROXIMATELY 15 PERCENT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPOSED LIFT STATION
PROPERTY GRADUALLY SLOPING TO MAY CREEK
c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any
prime farmland.
BELLINGHAM SILT LOAM AND RAGNAR-INDIANOLA ASSOCIATION
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe.
No
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed.
Indicate source of fill.
WHERE POSSIBLE, EXCAVATED NATIVE MATERIAL WILL BE USED AS BACKFILL. IMPORTED AND
APPROVED CRUSHED GRAVEL OR FOUNDATION ROCK MAY BE UTILIZED WHEN NECESSARY TO
SUPPORT NEW FACILITY STRUCTURES. ALL EXCAVATED MATERIALS NOT UTILIZED AS BACKFILL, AS
WELL AS DISPLACED MATERIALS RESULTING FROM TRENCHING ACTIVITIES, WILL BE EXPORTED TO
AN APPROVED DISPOSAL SITE PROVIDED BY THE CONTRACTOR. THE PROPOSED STONEGATE LIFT
STATION WILL INCLUDE APPROXIMATELY 1100 CUBIC YARDS OF EXCAVATION FOR THE PROPOSED
FACILITIES.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe.
THE POTENTIAL EXISTS FOR THE MIGRATION OF SOILS AS A RESULT OF TRENCHING ACTIVITIES,
CLEARING, AND/OR OTHER RELATED CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. ALL EXPOSED SOIL SURFACES
WILL BE SUBJECT TO EROSIVE FORCES DURING CONSTRUCTION AND BEFORE RESTORATION
EFFORTS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED. A TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN
WILL BE PREPARED FOR THIS PROPOSAL BASED ON THE GEOTECHNICAL REPORT AND CITY OF
RENTON REQUIREMENTS. THE PLAN WILL LIMIT EROSION POTENTIALS AND IMPACTS TO ADJACENT
PROPERTIES AND NATURAL FEATURES.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSED LIFT STATION WILL ADD APPROXIMATELY 1000 SQUARE
FEET OF NEW IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. THE PROPOSED SEWER PIPE CONSTRUCTION WILL NOT ADD
ADDITIONAL IMPERVIOUS SURFACE.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
A TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN WILL BE PREPARED FOR THIS
PROJECT TO INCLUDE THE INSTALLATION OF DRAINAGE STRUCTURE PROTECTION DEVICES, FABRIC
FILTERS, SEDIMENTATION CONTROL/DEWATERING FACILITIES, DEWATERING SPLASH PADS,
W:\WWP-27-3473 Summerwind-Stonegate LS Replacement\SEPA\SEPA chklst 052208 emd.doc -4 -021,
2. AIR
STABILIZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES, CHECK DAMS AND TRENCHLESS INSTALLATION METHODS.
ALL OTHER TRENCH AND EXCAVATION WIDTHS AND DEPTHS WILL BE KEPT TO A MINIMUM DURING
CONSTRUCTION. IMMEDIATE BACKFILL OF TRENCHES, ALONG WITH TIMELY RESTORATION, WILL
FURTHER REDUCE EROSION POTENTIAL.
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 ENGINE EMISSIONS FROM CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WILL BE PRESENT DURING
CONSTRUCTION. WHEN IN OPERATION, THE STANDBY GENERATOR WILL PRODUCE DIESEL
COMBUSTION BY PRODUCTS.
b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
No
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
STANDARD EMISSION CONTROL DEVICES WILL BE UTILIZED BY CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT AND
STANDBY GENERATORS WILL BE USED DURING CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATIONAL PHASES OF THIS
PROPOSAL. AS NEEDED, DUST CONTROL MEASURES WILL BE IMPLEMENTED TO LIMIT DUST DURING
CONSTRUCTION. THE FACILITY WILL INCORPORATE BOTH LIQUID PHASE CHEMICAL INJECTION TO
REDUCE THE PRODUCTION OF HYDROGEN SULFIDE GAS AND AIR-PHASE CARBON FILTRATION TO
REMOVE ODORS.
3. WATER
a. Surface Water:
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.
PER THE ESA ADOLFSON REPORT, Two WETLAND AREAS AND TWO STREAMS ARE LOCATED IN
THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT AREA. WETLAND A IS PART OF A LARGE 142 ACRE WETLAND THAT
EXTENDS OFFSITE TO THE NORTH, EAST, AND WEST, IS CONSIDERED A CATEGORY 1 WETLAND AND
HAS A REQUIRED STANDARD BUFFER OF 100-FEET. MAY CREEK IS LOCATED IN THE NORTHERN
PORTION OF THE PROJECT AREA AND TRAVELS THROUGH WETLAND A. THE STREAM IS
CONSIDERED A CLASS 2 STREAM WITH 100 FOOT BUFFERS. WETLAND BIS ASSOCIATED WITH A
TRIBUTARY OF MAY CREEK AND IS LOCATED NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF SE 104TH STREET AND
148TH AVENUE SE
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.
THE PROPOSED LIFT STATION NEAR NE 26TH STREET AND 148TH AVENUE SE HAS BEEN LOCATED
OUTSIDE THE 100-FOOT BUFFER OF WETLAND A. CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEW FORCE MAIN
ALONG NE 26TH STREET WILL INVOLVE TUNNELING/DIRECTIONAL DRILL METHODS IN THE VICINITY
OF THE TRIBUTARY. THIS WOULD NOT REQUIRE IN-WATER WORK OR CAUSE IMPACTS TO THE
STREAM BUFFER.
W:IWWP-27-3473 Summerwind-Stonegate LS Replacement\SEPAISEPA chklst 052208 emd.doc -5-021,
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
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
No
5) Does the proposal lie within a 1 OD-year flood plain? 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 Water
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
SHALLOW GROUNDWATER MAY BE WITHDRAWN AS NECESSARY TO DEWATER THE GROUND WHERE
TRENCHING FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE LIFT STATION AND PIPE OCCURS AT OR BELOW THE
WATER TABLE. ANY WITHDRAWN WATER (UNKNOWN QUANTITY) WILL BE ROUTED THROUGH A
SEDIMENTATION/DEWATERING FACILITY TO REMOVE EXCESS SEDIMENT AND THEN WOULD LEAVE
THE SITE VIA THE EXISTING NATURAL DRAINAGE COURSE OR THE EXISTING STORM DRAINAGE
SYSTEM.
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.
RUNOFF CONSISTING OF STORM WATER AND TEMPORARY DISCHARGE FROM DEWATERING
ACTIVITIES RESULTING FROM THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS PROJECT WILL NOT PERMANENTLY
CHANGE THE HYDRAULIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE PROPOSAL SITE. RUNOFF QUANTITY AND
QUALITY CONTROL MEASURES WILL BE IMPLEMENTED DURING CONSTRUCTION AND BEFORE
RESTORATION EFFORTS HAVE BEEN ESTABLISHED TO REDUCE AND CONTROL RUNOFF WATER
IMPACTS.
W:\WWP-27·3473 Summerwind-Stonegate LS Replacement\SEPA\SEPA chklst 052208 emd.doc -6-02/1
2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
No
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if
any:
THE INSTALLATION OF DRAINAGE STRUCTURE PROTECTION DEVICES, FABRIC FILTERS,
SEDIMENTATION CONTROLiDEWATERING FACILITIES, DEWATERING SPLASH PADS, STABILIZED
CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCES, CHECK DAMS AND TRENCHLESS INSTALLATION METHODS. ALL OTHER
TRENCH AND EXCAVATION WIDTHS AND DEPTHS WILL BE KEPT TO A MINIMUM DURING
CONSTRUCTION.
4. PLANTS
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
_x_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
_x_ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
_x_ shrubs
_x_ grass
__ pasture
__ crop or grain
__ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
__ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other
__ other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
THE LIFT STATION SITE IS VEGETATED WITH GRASS (LAWN) SCRUB/SHRUBS THAT WILL HAVE TO
BE CLEARED FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES. NO TREES WILL BE REMOVED AS PART OF THIS
PROJECT.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
NONE KNOWN
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any:
A CLEARING AND GRADING AND RESTORATION PLAN WILL BE PREPARED FOR THIS PROPOSAL AND
PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION, CLEARING AND GRADING LIMITS WILL BE DELINEATED ON PLANS AND
ONSITE TO LIMIT VEGETATION REMOVAL AND/OR DISTURBANCE.
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, ~ongbirds!, other---------
Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other----------
Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other _____ _
W:\WWP-27-3473 Summerwind-Stonegate LS Replacement\SEPA\SEPA chklst 052208 emd.doc -7 -021,
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
NONE KNOWN
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain
UNKNOWN
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
DOES NOT APPLY
6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the
completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc.
THE COMPLETED LIFT STATION WILL REQUIRE ELECTRICITY TO POWER THE SEWAGE PUMPS AND
LIGHTS. WATER SERVICES WILL BE REQUIRED TO CLEAN THE LIFT STATION FACILITIES AND AS
NEEDED TO IRRIGATE LANDSCAPING.
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:
LIFT STATION PUMP EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCIES WILL BE OPTIMIZED TO FURTHER CONSERVE
ENERGY.
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.
THERE IS A POTENTIAL RISK FROM THE HAZARDS ASSOCIATED WITH MACHINERY OPERATION AND
GENERAL CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, SPILLS OF MACHINE FLUIDS, RISK OF FIRE AND EXPLOSION
AND OTHER SIMILAR, NORMAL CONSTRUCTION HAZARDS EXIST.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
NONE ARE ANTICIPATED. IN THE EVENT OF AN EMERGENCY, LOCAL FIRE, AID OR RESCUE
SERVICES AND PERSONNEL MAY BE REQUIRED.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
TRENCH BOXES, BRACING, SUMP PUMPS AND OTHER ASSOCIATED CONSTRUCTION SAFETY
EQUIPMENT AND PROCEDURES WILL BE UTILIZED DURING CONSTRUCTION TO REDUCE THE
W:\WWP-27-3473 Summerwind-Stonegate LS Replacement\SEPA\SEPA chklst 052206 emd.doc -8 -02/1
POTENTIAL FOR PERSONAL INJURY. SOUND ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUE WILL
ENSURE THAT THE LIFT STATION AND ASSOCIATED APPURTENANCES ARE INSTALLED PROPERLY
DURING CONSTRUCTION, USE OF CONTAINMENT MEASURES AND/OR MONITORING OF MOVEMENT
OUTSIDE OF WETLAND BUFFERS WILL BE REQUIRED BY THE CONTRACTOR DURING REPAIR OR
MAINTENANCE OF CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT.
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic,
equipment, operation, other)?
NONE
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a
short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)?
Indicate what hours noise would come from the site.
SHORT TERM
CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT WOULD BE OPERATED DURING NORMAL WORKING HOURS DURING THE
CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THIS PROPOSAL, UNLESS APPROVED OTHERWISE BY PERMITIING
AGENCIES.
LONGTERM
THERE WILL BE NO LONG-TERM NOISE IMPACTS RESULTING FROM THIS PROJECT. NOISE FROM ALL
EQUIPMENT WILL BE WITHIN ALLOWABLE RESIDENTIAL LIMITS AND WILL OCCUR ON AN "AS NEEDED"
BASIS DICTATED BY SEWAGE FLOWS. THE EMERGENCY GENERATORS LOCATED AT THE PROPOSED
LIFT STATION SITE WILL BE ENCLOSED IN SOUND ATIENUATED HOUSING TO REDUCE NOISE
EMISSIONS TO ALLOWABLE LEVELS AND OPERATED DURING POWER OUTAGES AND OCCASIONALLY
FOR SHORT PERIODS DURING NORMAL WORKING HOURS FOR REGULAR SERVICING.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULES WILL BE LIMITED TO NORMAL WORKING HOURS TO REDUCE
NOISE IMPACTS TO SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
RESIDENTIAL
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so. describe.
UNKNOWN
c. Describe any structures on the site.
EXISTING STONEGATE LIFT STATION LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF PARCEL.
RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES AT 24'" CT AND 22"° CT
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
YES, THE EXISTING STONEGATE LIFT STATION WILL BE REMOVED FOLLOWING THE COMPLETION OF
THE PROPOSED NEW LIFT STATION STONEGATE 2.
W:\WWP-27-3473 Summerwind-Stonegate LS Replacement\SEPA\SEPA chklst 052208 emd.doc -9 -02/<
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
R-1 RESIDENTIAL, LOW DENSITY, ONE DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE AT THE NORTH PROJECT SITE
ON NE 26'" ST AND LYONS AVE. R-8 RESIDENTIAL, EIGHT DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE AT THE
SOUTH PROJECT SITE STARTING ON NE 20'" AND FIELD AVE NE
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL-LOW DENSITY.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
DOES NOT APPLY
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so,
specify.
THE MAY CREEK TRIBUTARY AS DESCRIBED ABOVE.
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:
DOES NOT APPLY
I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land
uses and plans, if any:
THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS IDENTIFIED IN THE CITY OF RENTON FACILITIES PLAN, WHICH
DESIGNATES THE PROJECT AS A FUTURE SERVICE IMPROVEMENT PROJECT. PRESENTLY SEWER
SERVICE IS AVAILABLE WITHIN THE IMMEDIATE PROJECT AREA AND PROVIDED BY THE EXISTING
STONEGATE LIFT STATION LOCATED ON THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE PROJECT PARCEL
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:
W:\WWP-27-3473 Summerwind-Stonegate LS Replacement\SEPA\SEPA chklst 052208 emd.doc -10 · 02/1
'
DOES NOT APPLY
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.
LESS THAN 20 FEET
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
NONE
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
THE PROPOSED LIFT STATION AND SURROUNDING LANDSCAPING WILL BE DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE
AESTHETIC IMPACTS
11. LIGHT AND GLARE
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur?
DURING NIGHT HOURS AT THE SEWER LIFT STATION, LIGHTING WILL ONLY BE OPERATED WHEN CITY
PERSONNEL ARE PRESENT.
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
No
c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
NONE
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
THE LIGHTS WILL BE DIRECTED TO ENSURE SAFE TRAVEL ON ADJACENT ROADS AND MINIMAL OR NO
DISTURBANCE TO ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
12. RECREATION
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
MAY CREEK PARK IS LOCATED APPROXIMATELY 1 MILE NORTHWEST OF THE PROJECT SITE.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
No
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
DOES NOT APPLY
W:IWWP-27-3473 Summerwind,Stonegate LS Replacement\SEPAISEPA chklst 052208 emd.doc • 11 • 02/1
.,
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.
NONE KNOWN
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:
DOES NOT APPLY
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.
THE PROPOSED LIFT STATION AND PIPE ALIGNMENT SITE CAN BE ACCESSED VIA 148'" AVE SE
TO THE EAST AND TO THE SOUTH.
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the
nearest transit stop?
NO. THE CLOSEST PUBLIC TRANSIT AVAILABLE IS .87 MILES AT COAL CREEK PKWY SE & SE 91"
ST.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
THE PROPOSED NEW LIFT STATION WILL HAVE A GRAVEL SURFACE DRIVEWAY AND PARKING
AREA WITH APPROXIMATELY 2-3 PARKING SPACES.
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
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation?
If so, generally describe.
A PORTION OF THE NEW SEWER FORCE MAIN WILL CROSS UNDER THE MAY CREEK TRIBUTARY
WITHIN NE 26'" ST.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
UPON COMPLETION, THE LIFT STATION WOULD GENERATE LESS THAN 1 TRIP PER DAY BY CITY
PERSONNEL FOR MAINTAINING THE LIFT STATION.
W:\WWP-27-3473 Summeiwind-Stonegate LS Replacement\SEPA\SEPA chklst 052208 emd.doc -12 -02/1
.,
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
DOES NOT APPLY
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.
DOES NOT APPLY
16. UTILITIES
a. Circle utilities currentl available at the site: ELECTRIC! , natural gas, ~. !REFusel
~ERVICei, trELEPHON§, ANITARY SEWE ' EPTIC 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.
THE SEWAGE LIFT STATION AND SEWER SERVICE WILL BE MAINTAINED AND OPERATED BY THE
CITY OF RENTON. PUGET SOUND ENERGY WILL PROVIDE ELECTRICAL SERVICE REQUIRED FOR
THE OPERATION OF THE LIFT STATION. KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT 90 WILL PROVIDE THE
WATER REQUIRED FOR CLEANING THE LIFT STATION.
C. SIGNATURE
I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and
complete. II 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 a~r~ my part.
Proponent: ~ b__
Name Printed: :.__] aH.., Ho5sc,Af
j '
Date: 4-t4--o9
W:\WWP-27-3473 Summerwind-Stonegate LS Replacement\SEPA\SEPA chklst 052208 emd.doc -13 -0211
ClT'\' OJ.~ RENT(_)N
Public Works Department
Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator
The City of Renton, in exchange for two utility easements over a portion of Tract H (Lift
Station Easement and Pipeline Easement), agree to include the following improvements
to the construction project as compensation for the two easements:
I. Install Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk and adjacent asphalt paving from the existing
curb return on the north side of NE 26th Street, along I 48'h Ave SE, to the
Northerly edge of our proposed entrance driveway for the new lift station. From
this point, the sidewalk will have an asphalt taper to match the new asphalt
roadway, which will also taper to meet the existing pavement in 148'h Ave SE.
2. Provide a complete 2-inch grind and 2-inch asphalt overlay to all existing public
roadways within the plat of Stonegate. (The City's standard restoration would
have covered a 5-ft from curb grind and 2-inch asphalt overlay for only those
portions of the existing full-width roadway disturbed by the project work).
Roadways Sections include: NE 26th St from Lyons Av NE to 148th Av SE,
Lyons Av SE from south end of plat to NE 26th Street, NE 24th Ct from cul de sac
to Lyons Av NE, NE 23rd Ct from cul de sac to Lyons Av NE, NE 22nd Ct from
cul de sac to Lyons Av NE and NE 21st Ct from Lyons Av NE to cul de sac.
Existing emergency access road from NE 22nd Ct to NE zoth Street will also be
fully restored as part of the construction work.
3. The City will require the Contractor to restore all trench work with hot-mix
asphalt in accordance with City Standards as they progress and will not be
allowed to exceed one thousand linear feet of temporary trench patch at any one
time.
4. The City will install landscaping that blends with the existing landscaping on
Tract H around its new lift station to act as a buffer from the Stonegate
neighborhood. The landscaping will have a full time automated irrigation system
to help ensure survival of the landscaping.
5. The lift station emergency power generator will not exceed 45 dba at the property
line between Tract H and Lot I of Stone gale.
6. Replace both Fire Access Gates in Tract G with current Fire Department standard,
//)Vith·a~-~'B,hasis on a~Th, pedestrians and bicyclists passage.
Ai,it'ee <iby):::ityJ ot RentoJ. · . Agreed to By Stonegate HOA
I .·• I ,I ' / . ' I
Happf Longfeflow
I
/ /·: ;' /(·/\.~-; ~., ;'. f. /t~·1/ •·. I / -(; ,_'..'.//\ I
Date
---·-----.....
--·-···---·-··-·--;;;~5-S-ou~~-Gr-ad_y_W_a;~ Renton·-. W-as-h-in_g_t_o_n_9_8_0_5_7 ________ RE NT() N'
February 16, 2009
Dave Christenson, Wastewater Utility/Technical Services Supervisor
City of Renton. Util~y Systems Division
Mr. Christensen,
Enclosed please find a copy of the Sewer Lift Station Easement and sanitary sewer easement. We have
signed the easement agreements and anticipate that you will execute it on your end as well.
In our previous discussions with you, we relayed our concern for some of the details that will affect our
neighborhood while you are completing this project. We are still very interested in those items and ask
that you keep us involved and informed on the following:
1. School bus stop/child safety
2. Scheduling of Construction Activities (including any gross revisions to the schedule)
3. What to expect on various days/weeks/months
4. Construction Traffic Control
5. Construction Work hours
6. Significant design changes
7. Utility Interruptions
We appreciate the time you have taken with these easements and in listening to our concerns for the
neighborhood.
Best Regards,
11
d
,,
I , .,.•1 /_; I --::-~· o 'll1f0:'/' i~ ~
President, Stonegate HOA
January 15, 2009
Stonegate HOA
P.O. Box 2691
Renton, WA 98059
Public Works Department
Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator -..----·-----------------------
SUBJECT: EASEMENT ACQUISITION ON TRACT H
STONEGATE LIFT STATION REPLACEMENT
Dear Stonegate HOA:
The City of Renton is interested in obtaining two easements from the Stonegate HOA within
Tract H that allows us to reconstruct a new sewage lift station. Attached please find the easement
documents along with the City's agreed upon conditions for the easements. If this is acceptable
to the HOA, please execute and return the easement documents for recording by the City.
Per our recent meeting on this subject, we are aware that the HOA is working on potential
amendments and/or slight alterations to these documents. Since the City needs to move forward
with our project, we can only allow 30 days from the date of this letter to finalize any such
changes. If we cannot come to an agreement by that time, the City will be required to proceed
with a revised design for the new station that is constructed within the existing right-of-way and
easements currently owned by the City. While certainly not our preferred option, we are at a
point where we need to move forward to assure that we have a facility in place to handle the
anticipated flows coming to this facility.
We have greatly appreciated the efforts of the Stonegate HOA as we have worked through issues
the neighborhood will have as we move forward with this project. It is my sincere hope that we
are able to come to a satisfactory agreement related to those issues in time to allow for the City to
continue to proceed with our preferred option within the new easement area. As such, please
provide me with any potential amendments as soon as possible so that we can finalize this
acquisition. Please contact me at 425.430.7212 or dchristen@rentonwa.gov .
.. ----. ,.--··! ;·1
s. i.1J.oeieJy, A· ·/; 1
/ ,/ / .... .,
,/ -/~i / g_..,· / Yi~
vrcf .. ~hrisi'en .. --
~aerte · niiy Supervisor
Attachments
------_H:\File Sy_s\WWP •. WasteWater\WWP-27-3473 Summcrwind-Stoncgate LS Replaccmcnt\HOA Easement Le:ttcr,ft.DEtpN 11 .., () ~N'·,
1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98057 !.>I,. .• _. -',i-\~A:.' ()F T~!E ,:;r.,i,:·,J;.:
Return Address:
Wastewater Utility
City of Renton
I 055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
RIGHT OF ENTRY AGREEMENT
Project File#:
Pro ert Tax Parcel Number:803540-0580
Street Intersection: NE 26 1 St·arid Nite /1.v NE
Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference numbers are on page NIA
Grantor(s): Grantee(s):
I. Stone ate Homeowners Association I. Ci of Renton, a Munici al Co oration
This agreement made this __ 9~_ day of bu e v\A ~ og,
named above.
, 20~7by the Grantor(s) and Grantec(s) as
That the said Grantor does by these presents grant unto the Grantee Right-of-Entry over the following described property for
the purpose of collecting survey, gcotechnical, wetlands, and related data:
Tract A and Tract H of the Plat of Stonegate, portion of Gov't Lot I and the SE Y, of the NE Y, of
Section 3, Township 23N, Range SE, WM, City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington.
That said Grantee shall have the right without prior institution of any suit or proceeding at law, at times as may be necessary,
to enter upon said property for the purpose of collecting survey, gcotechnical, wetlands and related data without incurring
any legal obligation or liability therefore; provided that such work shall be accomplished using ordinary care to avoid
unnecessary disturbance or damage to the property. In the event that there is disturbance or damage, the property will be
restored to the same condition as it was before the property was entered upon by the Grantee
The term of this a reement shall be 12-months from the date of execution of the a reemenl.
Authorized Signature for Stoncgate HOA
and and seal the day and year as written below.
'
C:\Documents and Settings\R.ogers\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi!es1Contcnt.lE5\571D7723\Right of Entry.doc\ R Page I
FORM 01 0013/bh
Return Address:
City Clerk's Office
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
SAN. SEWER LIFT STATION EASEMENT Pronertv Tax Parcel Number: 803540-0580
Project File #: \VWP-27-3473 Project Name: Stonegate Lift Station Replacement
Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference numbers are on page __ .
Grantor(s): Grantee(s):
I. Stonegate Homeowners Association I. City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation
The Grantor(s), as named above, for and in consideration of mutual benefits, do by these presents, grant, bargain, sell,
convey, and warrant unto the above named Grantee, its successors and assigns, an easement for a public sanitary sewer lift
station with necessary appurtenances over, under, through, across and upon the following described property (the right·of-
way) in King County, Washington, more panicularly described as follows:
A sanitary sewer easement over that portion of Tract "H", Stonegate, as recorded in Volume 177 of
Plats, Pages 62 -68, records of King County, Washington, more particularly described as follows:
Commencing at the northeast corner of said Tract "H";
Thence S I 0 25'22" W, along the east line of said Tract "H", a distance of 11.48 feet;
Thence S 14°44'53" W, along said east line, a distance of27.56 feet, to the True Point of Beginning
of the easement area description;
Thence continuing S 14°44'53" W, along said east line, a distance of37.52 feet;
Thence S O I °25'22" W, a distance of 19.09 feet;
Thence N 88°34 '38" W, a distance of 40.00 feet;
Thence N 53°58'47" W, a distance of70.40 feet;
Thence N 01°25'22" E, a distance of30.00 feet;
Thence S 88°34'38" E, a distance of 47.95 feet;
Thence S 74°48'09" E, a distance of 60.38 feet, to a point on the east line of said Tract "H"and the
True Point of Beginning;
All situate in the Northeast quarter of Section 10, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the
City of Renton, King County, Washington.
Easement Lift Station.doc\ Page I of3 FORM 03 0008/bh
For the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, installing, repairing, replacing, enlarging, operating and
maintaining a sanitary sewer lift station, together with the right of ingress and egress thereto without
prior institution of any suit or proceedings of law and without incurring any legal obligation or
liability therefor. Following the initial construction of its facilities, Grantee may from time to time
construct such additional facilities as it may require.
This easement shall run with the land described herein, and shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs,
successors in interest and assigns. Granters covenant that they are the lawful owners of the above properties and
that they have a good and lawful right to execute this agreement.
This conveyance shall bind the heirs, executors, administrators and assigns forever.
IN WI1NESS WHEREOF, said Grantor has caused this instrument to be executed this Jl:day of jd-;_p () J.
{)g7t/~~
Notary Seal must be within box
Easement Lift Station.doc\
REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT
STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS
COUNTY OF KING )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that')), H ~~ t (5
--,-c--~cc----,-,----,---,----~-,.-----signed this instrument, on oath
stated that he/she/they was/were authorized to execute the instrument and
acknowledged it as the Vice President of the Stonegate HOA, to be the free and
voluntary act of such party/parties for the uses and purposes mentioned in the
instrument.
Notary Public m and or the State Washington
Notary (Print) Arola-eJ: J,, ti l:'.\1/\, No"""'""'
My appointment expires:_.,(yz..._~__,t"---'-t--=------'l..,P..._ ______ _
Dated: ~ \ ,,. O 'I
Page 2 of3 FORM OJ 0008/bh
-
,_;
::e
"' w
w
"' ~ w ~ I I 0 .
-------TRACT' A" ~
. ,' t~~, . \ Ji '
,40:ooc· /~s/ ~-,, ..
z G'i
LOT1 1 / //
TRACT"H" !I;
I STONEGATE / / I
23.74' N88'01'50"W-\ / / //
EX. SEWER-.. ,, r I
EASEMENT , '·y~ ;Y
.,'%"'"' .· ' f .,/ 7c;.w" .-,. ~~
~'o / ~gJ
/ ~
b
0 g
31.35'
NE 26TH STREET
99.62/ N88'01'50"W
/
--------{>• -( --------
-SITE
FILE: f:· \
PAGE ::,oF ;J
EASEMENT NO.
I
~J m
~ ,~
"
0 z I
N.T.S
30'
45'
I
I
I
-11-l
EASEMENT NO.
·--
Return Address:
City Clerk's Office
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
SANITARY SEWER UTILITY EASEMENT Propertv Tax Parcel Number: 803540-0580
Project File#: WWP-27-3473 Project Name: Stonegate Lift Station Replacement
Reference Number(s) of Documents assigned or released: Additional reference numbers are on page __ .
Grautor(s): Grantee(s):
I . Stonegate Homeowners Association I. City of Renton, a Municipal Corporation
The Grantor(s), as named above, for and in consideration of mutual benefits, do by these presents, grant, bargain, sell,
convey, and warrant unto the above named Grantee, its successors and assigns, an easement for a public sanitary sewer with
necessary appurtenances over, under, through, across and upon the following described property (the right-of-way) in King
County, Washington, more particularly described as follows:
A 15-foot wide sanitary sewer easement strip over that portion of Tract "H", Stonegate, as recorded in
Volume 177 of Plats, Pages 62 -68, records of King County, Washington, more particularly
described as follows:
Commencing at the northeast corner of said Tract "H";
Thence S O l "25'22" W, along the east line of said Tract "H", a distance of 11.48 feet;
Thence S 14°44'53" W, along said east line, a distance of65.08 feet;
Thence S 01°25'22" W, along said east line, a distance of 19.09 feet;
Thence N 88°34 '38 W, a distance of 26.61 feet, to the beginning of the centerline description of said
15-foot wide sanitary sewer easement strip, with 5 feet lying northwesterly of the centerline and I 0
feet lying southeasterly of said centerline;
Thence S 23°04'39" W, a distance of62.22 feet, to the tenninus of the centerline description.
The sidelines of the IS-foot easement strip are to be lengthened or shortened, as needed, to adjoin
with the Stonegate Sanitary Sewer Easement "A" area to the north, and an existing sanitary sewer
easement to the south, granted per said plat.
All situate in the Northeast quarter of Section I 0, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M., in the
City of Renton, King County, Washington.
Easement Pipeline.doc\ Page I of 3 FORM 03 0008/bh
-
For the purpose of constructing, reconstructing, installing, repairing, replacing, enlarging, operating and
maintaining a sanitary sewer pipeline, together with the right of ingress and egress thereto without prior
institution of any suit or proceedings of law and without incurring any legal obligation or liability therefor.
Following the initial construction of its facilities, Grantee may from time to time construct such additional
facilities as it may require. This easement is granted subject to the following terms and conditions:
l. The Grantee shall, upon completion of any work within the property covered by the easement, restore the surface of
the easement, and any private improvements disturbed or destroyed during execution of the work, as nearly as
practicable to the condition they were in immediately before commencement of the work or entry by the Grantee.
2. Grantor shall retain the right to use the surface of the easement as long as such use does not interfere with the easement
rights granted to the Grantee.
Grantor shall not, however, have the right to:
a. Erect or maintain any buildings or structures within the easement; or
b. Plant trees, shrubs or vegetation having deep root patterns which may cause damage to or interfere with the
utilities to be placed within the casement by the Grantee; or
c. Dig, tunnel or perfonn other forms of construction activities on the property which would disturb the
compaction or unearth Grantee's facilities on the right-of-way, or endanger the lateral support facilities.
d. Blast within fifteen (15) feet of the right-of-way.
This easement shall run with the land described herein, and shall be binding upon the parties, their heirs,
successors in interest and assigns. Grantors covenant that they are the lawful owners of the above properties and
that they have a good and lawful right to execute this agreement.
This conveyance shall bind the heirs, executors, administrators and assigns forever. _,;
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Grnntor has caused this instrument to be executed this / "rday of -:;,<-.,v'\·--:Jilllo 9-.
Notary Seal must be within box
Easement Pipeline.doc\
REPRESENTATIVE FORM OF.4CKNOWLEOGMENT
STA TE OF W ASHJNGTON ) SS
COUNTY OF KING ) ~ ·-.,
r certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that .lJ• \:'\ ' T\~yLJ
--c-c--c~~~--~---,--.,---c---signed this instrument, on oath
stated that he/she/they was/were authorized to execute the instrument and
acknowledged it as the Vice President of the Stonegate HOA, to be the free and
voluntary act of such party/parties for the uses and purposes mentioned in the
instrument.
Page 2 of3 FORM 03 0008/bh
....
g
0
"'
31.35' '•
TRACT "H"
STONEGATE
TRACT"A"
NE 26TH STREET
99.62/ N88'01'50'W
/
--------
-SITE
PAGE ? Of?
EASEMENT NO.
w
-~ "'' "'"' -"' -. 0 z
w
U)
~
I
l-
a) v
~
45'
30'
EASEMENT NO.