Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutHEX_Exhibits_Combind_flat CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HEARING EXAMINER DECISION, EXHIBITS Project Name: Quendall Terminals Project Number: LUA09-151, ECF, EIS, SA-M, SM, DA Date of Hearing April 18, 2017 Staff Contact Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager Project Contact/Applicant Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific, L. P., 1201 Third Ave, suite 1680, Seattle, WA 98101 Project Location Parcel 2924059002. South of the Seahawks VMAC Training Facility The following exhibits were admitted during the hearing: Exhibits 1-18: Hearing Examiner Staff Report (April 2016) and Exhibits Exhibit 19 - 23: Memo to the Hearing Examiner (April 2017) and Exhibits Exhibit 24: Email from Examiner to Staff dated April 17, 2017 Exhibit 25: Email from Fred Warnock dated April 16, 2017 Exhibit 26: Email from Charles Taylor dated April 15, 2017 Exhibit 27: City of Renton COR maps and GIS data: http://rp.rentonwa.gov/SilverlightPublic/Viewer.html?Viewer=COR-Maps Exhibit 28: Google Maps: https://www.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl Exhibit 29: City of Renton power point Exhibit 30: Notebook dated April 18, 2017 "Vested Development Regulations" Exhibit 31: Notebook dated April 18, 2017 "Supplemental Applicant Exhibits" Exhibit 32: Aerial Photograph with artist rendering of project site Exhibit 33: Larry Toedtli CV Exhibit 34: Bob Wells Resume Exhibit 35: Lance Mueller Resume Exhibit 36: Street B rendering Exhibit 37: June 6, 2016 Site Plan P1. 0 Exhibit 38: June 1, 2016 Site Plan P0. 0 Exhibit 39: April 3, 2017 City Council Agenda Bill for Consolidation of Development Agreement with Land Use Applications DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: April 11, 2017 TO: Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner FROM: Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager SUBJECT: Quendall Terminal, LUA09-151 Following the canceled public hearing from April of 2016, the Applicants have requested the City consider a Development Agreement. As such, this memorandum addresses the Development Agreement and changes to the project which result from the proposed Development Agreement. This memo is intended to supplement the staff report to the Hearing Examiner which was issued in April of 2016, for the original scheduled hearing date of April 19, 2016. Only those items identified below have been changed and/or are proposed to be changed from the original staff report. Updated Project Description: The applicant has requested approval of Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and a Development Agreement for a mixed- use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 ac and is zoned COR and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46 -acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain mixed -use buildings. The Enhanced Alternative would contain 692 residential units (resulting in a net residential density of 40.95 units/acre), 42,190 sq. ft. of commercial uses [retail and restaurant], 1,352 parking spaces and 12.9 acres of parks/open space. All buildings are designed to be constructed as 3 – 5 stories over one parking/commercial level. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right -of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. The site contains approximately 0.81 acres of wetlands and 1,583 linear feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. The subject site has received a Superfund designation from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the property owners are currently working on a remediation plan with EPA. The proposed Development Agreement and associated Enhanced Alternative primarily include the following: 1.3 acres of public park space, additional retail/restaurant/office space and street activation (fountains, artwork, etc.), the addition of either a public dock/pier and/or an alternative approved by the EPA to allow for public access to Lake Washington, Building SW4 would be 4-stories, building SW3 would 5-stories, and all the remaining buildings would be 6-stories, and Extension of Land Use Permit approval term to 10-years with possible extension opportunities in which development regulation vesting would be maintained. EXHIBIT 19 Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner Page 2 of 7 April 11, 2017 The following Exhibits should be added to the Recorded: Exhibit 19 – Memorandum to Hearing Examiner, April 11, 2017 Exhibit 20 – Draft Development Agreement Exhibit 21 – Consistency Analysis Exhibit 22 – Notice of Issuance of Consistency Analysis Exhibit 23 – Councils Motion to defer the Development Agreement Public Hearing Findings of Fact (FOF): (the following FOF’s are identified with letters to eliminate and confusion with the original staff report) a. On March 16, 2017 an Enhanced Alternative and Development Agreement (Exhibit 20) was submitted to the City to consider. The Enhanced Alternative would contain 692 residential units (resulting in a net residential d ensity of 40.95 units/acre), 42,190 sq. ft. of commercial uses [retail and restaurant], 1,352 parking spaces and 12.9 acres of parks/open space. All buildings are designed to be constructed as 3 – 5 stories over one parking/commercial level. The proposed Development Agreement and associated Enhanced Alternative primarily include the following:  The addition of 1.3 acres of public park space;  Additional retail/restaurant/office space and street activation (fountains, artwork, etc.)  The addition of either a public dock/pier and/or an alternative approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to allow for public access to Lake Washington;  Building SW4 would be 4-stories, building SW3 would 5-stories, and all the remaining buildings would be 6-stories;  Extension of Land Use Permit approval term to 10-years with possible extension of 5 years in which development regulation vesting would be maintained.  A SEPA transportation re-evaluation requirement at 5 year increments. b. The Enhanced Alternative and the associated Development Agreement is the sole proposal being advanced at this time. Because the Enhanced Alternative relies upon City Council approval of the Development Agreement, Exhibit 20, the Master Site Plan, Binding Site Plan and Shoreline Permit decision shall be contingent upon the City Council approval of the Development Agreement . If the Development Agreement is not approved by City Council, the record should be reopened and another public hearing for the purpose of reconsidering the decision utilizing the Preferred Alterative analyzed in the April 2016 staff report to the Hearing Examiner should be completed. c. On March 20, 2017 the Environmental Review Committee issued an EIS Consistency Analysis for Development Agreement and the associated Enhanced Alternative (Exhibit 21 and 22). The Environmental Consistency Analysis determines that the impacts of development under the Enhanced Alternative are within the impacts analyzed under the EIS alternatives in the past SEPA review. Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner Page 3 of 7 April 11, 2017 No new mitigation measures are required beyond those identified in the 2015 FEIS and 2015 Mitigation Document, and there are no significant unavoidable impacts that cannot be mitigated. d. A detailed master site plan has not been provided incorporating the changes identified in the Enhanced Alternative. As such, staff recommends as a condition of approval that a final detailed master site plan shall be submitted to the City for Review and Approval by the Current Planning Project Manager that incorporates both the specific changes identified in the Enhanced Alternative and all the conditions of project approval. The final details master plan shall be approved prior to the approval of any site specific site plan review or recording of the binding site plan. e. Staff does not expect that the changes identified in the Enhanced Alternative would impact the analysis and associated recommended conditions of the April 2016 staff report for all Findings of Fact except as follows: i. FOF 23, Zoning Development Standard Compliance, Parking: The total parking stalls proposed in the Enhanced Alternative is 1,352 stalls an increase from the 1,337 stalls proposed in the Preferred Alternative, a 15 stall increases. There is no change in the residential and restaurant space; however there is an increase in retail space from 20,025 SF to 33,190 SF which would result in a maximum of 133 stalls required for the retail space, up from 80 stalls. Together all three uses could require up to 1,469 parking stalls. ii. FOF 23, Zoning Development Standard Compliance, Refuse and Recycling: Based on a proposal for a 9,000 SF of restaurant and 33,190 SF of retail a combined total of 210.95 SF for recyclables deposit areas and 421.90 Sf of refuse deposit areas shall be provided for the overall project. iii. FOF 25, Critical Areas, b.: The reference to “NRD settlements” should be eliminated because the EPA does not approve and is not party to an NRD settlement. Therefore, Condition 44. IV, should be amended to remove the reference to “NRD settlements”. iv. FOF 26, Master Site Plan Review, f. On Site Impacts, Structure and Scale: With the addition of retail/commercial space along the Lake Washington side of the development it is anticipated that the parking garage would no longer be the dominate structure viewed from the Lake or shoreline trail. v. FOF 26, Master Site Plan Review, j. Distinctive Focal Points: The “street activation” identified in the development agreement are anticipated to provide distinctive focal points throughout the development. However, the specifics have not been identified at this time. As such staff recommends as a condition of approval that Public Art, fountains, or other street activation features proposed to be located in the roadways shall be identified with the detailed master site plan and constructed and installed as a part of the associated roadway/infrastructure construction. Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner Page 4 of 7 April 11, 2017 vi. FOF 26, Master Site Plan Review, Phasing: Staff recommends that the project duration be consistent with the time frames established in the Development Agreement, Exhibit 20. vii. FOF 28 Availability and Impact of Public Services, Stormwater: The Development Agreement would extend the project beyond January 1, 2022, as such specific requirements tying compliance with an updated stormwater manual to this date are no longer applicable. Therefore staff recommends that condition of approval 32 of the staff report be removed. The project will be required to comply with all applicable stormwater requirements at the time of building and construction. viii. FOF 28 Availability and Impact of Public Services, Transportation: The Enhanced Alternative is estimated to generate 5,829 daily, 435 AM peak hour and 545 PM peak hour vehicular trips at full buildout. These would represent approximately 173 more daily trips, no net change in AM peak our trips and 15 more PM peak hour trips than the Preferred Alternative. Additionally, the center left-turn lane that was included as a part of Street ‘A’ is eliminated in the Enhanced Alternative. The removal of this turn lane was evaluated by TranspoGroup, in a memorandum dated January 12, 2017, Appendix A of the Consistency Analysis, Exhibit 21. The analysis concluded that the center turn lane is not needed under the Enhanced Alternative because single-lane approaches at each of the Street ‘A’ intersections would provide acceptable traffic operations. As a result condition of approval 44. XIV should be amended accordingly. Additional transportation analysis was included in the EIS Consistency Analysis to evaluate changes in trips from the Preferred Alternative. The Consistency Analysis concludes that transportation impacts of the Enhanced Alternative would be within the range of impacts identified in the DEIS, EIS Addendum and FEIS for the EIS alternatives. With implementation of the project mitigation measures, with or without the I-405 improvements, significant transportation impacts are not anticipated ix. FOF 28 Availability and Impact of Public Services, Parks: The Development Agreement adds 1.3 acre Public Park to the proposal. The hours of public use of the park should be consistent with the public trail and should be determined by the City’s Community Services Administrator. Currently public park hours are dawn to dusk, signage shall be installed identifying that the park is for public use and the hours of public use. The signage shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager and Parks Planning and Natural Resources Director prior to insulation. An easement for public access shall be recorded on with the binding site plan. Similar to the trail, the park shall be installed prior to Temporary Occupancy of the first building on the site. Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner Page 5 of 7 April 11, 2017 x. FOF 29 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Time Requirements for Shoreline Permits: The Draft Development Agreement extends the time for all land use permit applications including the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. Time frames identified in the Development Agreement should be applied accordingly. f. Condition of Approval 14 should remove the word “east” as this has been included in error. g. Condition of Approval 22 contains a minor error, the word “East” should be “West”. Condition of Approval 22 should be amended accordingly. h. Condition 43 requires an easement be recorded to all for public access for vehicles and pedestrians to cross the King County rail-road right-of-way. This requirement for an easement limits the type of legal documents that could be drafted to accomplish the intended purpose of the condition. As such, this condition should be amended as shown below. i. The word “Public Promenade” should be removed throughout the staff report and replaced with “fire lane and utility maintenance access road” to be consistent with the Consistency Analysis and Development Agreement. Therefore Condition of approval 41. and 44. XVI should be amended accordingly. Conclusions: All conclusions in the April 2016 staff report are to remain except as identified below: 10. The project An expiration date shall be as identified in the Development Agreement, Exhibit 20set by the Hearing Examiner for the Master Site Plan, see FOF 26 . 12. The Development Agreement as drafted in Exhibit 20 is compliant with RCW 36 -70B- 170. New Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Master Site Plan, Binding Site Plan, and Shoreline Substantial Permit for the Enhanced Alterative described in Exhibit 19, subject to all the conditions of approval of the April 2016 staff report and any new conditions or modified conditions below. Because the Enhanced Alternative relies upon City Council approval of the Development Agreement, Exhibit 20, staff recommends that the Hearing Examiner add a condition that if the Development Agreement is not approved by City Co uncil, the Hearing Examiner will reopen the record and the public hearing for the purpose of reconsidering the decision utilizing the Preferred Alterative analyzed in the original April 2016 staff report to the Hearing Examiner. Amended Conditions of Approval: 14. The private access at the Barbee Mill Access shall include frontage improvements matching the south side of the access, including a landscaped planter and sidewalk to be provided on the east north side. The new private Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner Page 6 of 7 April 11, 2017 access to be located at the Ripley Lane (Seahawks Way) access shall include 8 feet wide landscape planter and 6 foot wide sidewalk on south side of the access. These off-site improvements shall be designed, permitted, constructed, and substantial complete as determined by the Current P lanning Project Manager and the Construction Inspector, prior to Temporary Occupancy of the first building on the project site 22. East West elevations of the building proposed on Lots 2 and 5 shall be re- designed to reduce to the parking garage walls view from Lake Washington to ensure the structures on the lake maintain a relation to the natural characteristic and site amenities (trail, etc.). Design features could include landscape berming and/or architectural details. Detail design of these buildings shal l be completed at site plan review. 32. Any extension to the project approved beyond January 1, 2022 or building and construction permits submitted that would extend the project beyond January 1, 2022 shall be subject to the updated stormwater manual, in e ffect at the time. 41. A public promenade fire lane and utility maintenance access road along Lake Washington extending along the front of Lots 2 and 5, connecting to Road B terminus and the surface parking at either end shall be incorporated into the design of the buildings on Lots 2 and 5. This promenade fire lane and utility maintenance access road shall feature pedestrian amenities such as furniture, public art, water features, etc. Design of the promenades fire lane and utility maintenance access road compliance with this condition shall be reviewed at the time of lot specific site plan review. 43. An easement shall be secured from King County or other future property owners of the rail-road right-of-way to provided vehicular and pedestrian access to the proposed development across the right-of-way. The easement shall be noted on the final binding site plan and shall be recorded concurrently with the binding site plan. Documentation shall be provided to the City of Renton identifying rights for public vehicular and pedestrian access to the proposed development across the right-of-way. This legal documentation shall be noted on the final binding site plan and shall be recorded concurrently with the binding site plan, if not already recorded. The City of Renton shall have final approval of acceptable legal access documentation. 44. IV. A site plan application, construction permit application or the recording of the Binding Site shall not be submitted to the City for Review and approval prior to a Record of Decision (ROD) and NRD Settlement completed by the EPA. A copy of the final ROD and NRD Settlement issued by the EPA shall be submitted to the City of Renton to verify the assumed baseline assumptions were correct and additional SEPA review or major project changes are not necessary as required in Mitigation Measure C10. Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner Page 7 of 7 April 11, 2017 44. XIV. A transportation study shall be completed to analyze the need for a center turn lane in Road A. Depending upon the outcome of this study, Road A street designs shall be amended to remove the center turn lane accordingly and the design shall be reflected on the required updated site plan, as conditioned above under XIII. 44. XVI. If the EPA ROD and any NRD settlement eliminates the significant public access from the project, which includes: 1) A shoreline trial with viewpoints, interpretive signage, and amenities as identified in the Mitigation Document; 2) A public promenade fire lane and utility maintenance access road along the lake side of the development of Lots 2 and 5; 3) Large plazas at the terminus of Road B; and 4) Public parking a new public access plan shall be submitted identifying compliance with the significant public access standards of the Shoreline Master Program. The new public access plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager New Conditions of Approval: (The following numbering picks up at the end of the April 2016 staff report.) 45. An easement for public park access shall be recorded with the binding site and public access shall be noted on the binding site plan prior to recording. 46. Public park signage shall be installed identifying that the park is for public use and the hours of public use. The park signage shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager and the Community Services Administrator with the construction permit application. The park and associated signage shall be installed prior to Temporary Occupancy of the first building on the project site. 44. XVIII. A final detailed master site plan shall be submitted to the City for Review and Approval by the Current Planning Project Manager that incorporates both the specific changes identified in the Enhanced Alternative and all the conditions of project approval. The final detailed master plan shall be approved prior to the approval of any site specific site plan review or recording of the binding site plan. 44. XIX. Public Art, fountains, or other street activation features proposed be located in the roadways shall be identified with the detailed master site plan and constructed and installed as a part of the associated roadway/infrastr ucture construction. 44. XX. A detailed public park design, identifying compliance with the Development Agreement, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager and the Community Services Department prior to the approval of any site specific site plan review or recording of the binding site plan . EXHIBIT 24 EXHIBIT 25 EXHIBIT 26 Quendall Terminals (LUA09-151) HEX Public Hearing Date Names/TitlesVanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager April 18, 2017 EXHIBIT 29 Presentation Overview Approximate Location •Project Description –Enhanced Alternative & Development Agreement •Background •Renton Municipal Code Analysis –Compliance –Conditions •Staff Recommendation Approximate Location Approximate Location Applications: 1) Master Site Plan 2) Binding Site Plan 3) Shoreline Substantial Development Permit 4) Development Agreement Environmental Impact Statement Completed −FEIS issued August 2015 −Mitigation Document issued August 2015 −Consistency Analysis For Enhanced Alternative issued March 2017 The application is vested to regulations from February 10, 2010, ORD 5520 (including the SMP –amended in 1983) Site Characteristics SITE Isolate Property Lake Washington PanAbode SiteBarbee Mill VMAC King Co. rail-road ROW Proposal Enhanced Alternative •COR Zone and Urban Shoreline Environment •21.24 acre site •7 lots –4 with mixed use buildings •692 multi-family residential units •33,190 SF of retail/Commercial •9,000 SF of restaurant •Density 40.95 du/ac •Parking for 1,352 vehicles •*Superfund site subject to EPA regulations Proposal Enhanced Alternative Pedestrian Trail Road C Road BRoad A Road E100 ft. shoreline setback N 42nd Place Ripley Lane (Seahawks Way) Rail road ROW –King. Co. Access Point Access Point Proposal Enhanced Alternative Building Design – * Ground floor Parking or Retail/Restaurant along Road B and Lake Washington * 3, 4, or 5 stories above for residential units and semi-private plaza space *Final elevation design will be reviewed at Site Plan review. **Graphics were prepared for Preferred Alternative Quendall Terminals Quendall Terminals Overview •Applicant: Extended time frame beyond the 5 years permitted by code and associated vesting of development regulations •City/Public: Project Enhancements –designed to provide a public benefit Development Agreement Provisions –Project Timing •Following 5 years of the initial term a SEPA Transportation Update would be required. –New transportation mitigation for the project may be required based on changed conditions and associated project impacts. •Vest the development regulations effective on the vesting date, which is February 10, 2010 for the term of the agreement. •Extends code authorized land use approval time lines from 5 years to 10 years from the earlier of: –(i) the date of issuance of the EPA’s Record of Decision, or –(ii) The Hearing Examiners Decision and/or subsequent appeal decision dates •Extension to the 10 years up to 5 additional years, could be authorized by the City if 51% of the residential and commercial space has been constructed and received Certificate of Occupancy, following a second SEPA Transportation Update. •s Development Agreement Enhanced Alternative Project Elements Collaborate with the developer on a public dock/pier •Permitting –City •Funding, construction, mitigation -developer 1.3 acres of a public park in the southwest corner of the site Project Elements Additional retail/restaurant/office space •Minimum 50 percent of the building street frontage •Minimum of 20 feet in depth Required along: •Lakeside frontage •Street B •Other street frontages as necessary to meet 50% Street activation; such as fountains and artwork will be provided along street B and lakeside frontage Enhanced Alternative Background •Former creosote manufacturing facility that operated from 1917-1969 •Past coal tars and creosote have contaminated soil, groundwater, surface water and lake sediments •In 2005 DOE transferred the oversight to the EPA •The site received a Superfund designation from EPA •The EPA is conducting a remedial investigation and feasibility study. Which will lead to a ROD. Background •Clean up work is being conducted under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. (CERCLA; i.e. Superfund) •EPA Contact –Clair Hong, hong.claire@epa.gov. Background (baseline assumptions) Figure 2-6 DEIS Shoreline Restoration Conceptual Design Soil Cap Wetland Recreation •This figure shows a conceptual design with a 50 ft. buffer not a 100 ft. buffer, which was required by the EPA after Public Comment on the DEIS. •Assumptions are unchanged in the Addendum beyond 100 ft. setback. Background (baseline assumptions) Figure 2-7 DEIS Buffer Width Averaging Wetland D Wetland Recreation •This figure shows a conceptual design with a 50 ft. buffer not a 100 ft. buffer, which was required by the EPA after Public Comment on the DEIS. •Assumptions are unchanged in the Addendum for the Preferred Alternative Buffer Averaging Trail with view points Background (EIS Process) Determination of Significance (DS) issued on February 19, 2010 –EIS Process began: Date EIS Action, see Exhibits 2, 3, 15, and 21. 2/19/10 – 4/30/10 EIS Public Scoping Period, 70 days (extended) 4/27/10 Public Scoping Meeting 12/10/2010 DEIS Issuance 12/10/10 – 2/09/11 DEIS Public Comment Period, 60 days (extended) 1/04/11 DEIS Public Hearing 10/19/12 EIS Addendum Issuance 10/19/12 – 11/19/12 EIS Addendum Public Comment Period 8/31/15 FEIS Issuance 8/31/15 – 9/24/15 EIS Public Appeal Period 9/24/15 Appeal submitted to EIS, Appellant South End Gives Back 2/18/16 Receipt of Joint Stipulation & Proposed Order Dismissing Appeal signed by the Appellant and Applicant 2/22/16 Joint Stipulation & Proposed Order Dismissing Appeal signed by the Hearing Examiner. Appeal Dismissed. 3/20/17 Consistency Analysis Issuance for Enhanced Alternative and Development Agreement Renton Municipal Code Analysis •Comprehensive Plan Compliance •Zoning Compliance •Design District Review •Critical Areas •Master Site Plan Review •Binding Site Plan •Availability of Public Services •Shoreline Regulations Staff Analysis/Conditions 64 Conditions of Approval Recommend by Staff Primary: •Compliance with the Mitigation Document •Phasing/Site Plan Review •Design Standards Compliance •Access/Roadways (vehicular and pedestrian) •Binding Site Plan (recording) Secondary: •Utilities •Code/Landscaping Staff Analysis/Conditions Condition 20 and 21: Setbacks from parent parcel edges shall be as follows: a.100 ft. from the OHWM of Lake Washington b.40 feet from the south (adjacent to Barbee Mill) c.38 feet from the north (adjacent to Seahawks Training Facility) View Corridors – a.74 ft. width for Road B b.80 ft. width for semi-private plaza space. Site Plan Staff Analysis/Conditions Condition 6 and 27: Critical Areas Regulations Baseline Assumptions, assumed all recreated wetland and their associated buffers would fit within Binding Site Plan lots 1 and 6. Baseline Assumptions Staff Analysis/Conditions Condition 27: Critical Areas Regulations 1)The outcome of the ROD and NRD Settlement details are not known at this time. 2)This conditions is need so impacts of the proposed development will comply with the City’s critical areas regulations following the ROD and NRD Settlement. Staff Analysis/Conditions Condition 41: Requires a fire lane and utility maintenance access road along Lake Washington Staff Analysis/Conditions Condition 41: Satisfies the following code requirements: 1.Fire Access is required along the Lake a.Required to be 20 ft. in width. b.Shall be constructed to support the weight of a fire apparatus. c.Critical Areas regulations may not permit the trail to be built to meet fire access standards. Maximum width permitted per code is 12 feet. (RMC4-3-050C7.a.) 2.Looped waterline required 1.Located along the west side of the 2 lake front buildings. 2.15 feet minimum width needed for maintenance access. 3.Maintenance access shall be a paved surface. 4.Not permitted within wetlands, wetland buffers, or shoreline buffer. Staff recommends approval of the Master Site Plan, Binding Site Plan, and Shoreline Substantial Permit for the Enhanced Alterative described in Exhibit 19, subject to all the conditions of approval of the April 2016 staff report and any new conditions or modified conditions. Because the Enhanced Alternative relies upon City Council approval of the Development Agreement, Exhibit 20, staff recommends that the Hearing Examiner add a condition that if the Development Agreement is not approved by City Council, the Hearing Examiner will reopen the record and the public hearing for the purpose of reconsidering the decision utilizing the Preferred Alterative analyzed in the original April 2016 staff report to the Hearing Examiner. Recommendation QUENDALL TERMINALS ENTITLEMENTS HEARING MASTER PLAN REVIEW BiNDING SITE PLAN SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT CITY OF RENTON APRIL 18, 2017 EXHIBIT BINDER #2: VESTED DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS EXHIBIT 30 Entire Document Available Upon Request EXHIBIT 31Entire DocumentAvailable UponRequest Birdseye View Quendall Terminals - Enhanced Alternative Renton, Washington Century Pacific, LLLP I-405 Barbee Mill Lake Washington Public Park Seahawks VMAC Denny’s EconoLodge NE 44th StreetLake Wa s h i n g t o n B l v d .Promen a d e EXHIBIT 32 Larry Toedtli, PE Principal (Retired) Expertise: • Development traffic impact analyses under SEPA • Transportation analyses of large master planned developments • Experience managing multiple team members • Experience managing on-call contracts • Multimodal transportation planning under GMA • Experience in facilitating stakeholder engagement and public outreach programs Years Employed by Transpo: 30 Education: MS, Civil Engineering (Transportation), University of Washington,1983 BS, Civil Engineering, University of Colorado, 1977 Professional registrations and licenses: PE, Washington, #25888, 1989 PE, Colorado, #23125, 1985 Professional Associations Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Contact larry.toedtli@comcast.net Larry recently retired as a principal at Transpo with over 30 years of experience developing area-wide and corridor level transportation plans. He directed Transpo’s efforts in GMA-based transportation plans, transportation financing strategies, and concurrency programs. He also had project management responsibilities for transportation analyses supporting EISs for subarea plans, planned action ordinances, and transportation corridor projects. He has a thorough knowledge of travel forecasting and traffic operation analyses techniques. Larry also served local agencies in reviewing traffic impact studies for developments within and outside of their jurisdiction. He recently assisted the Cities of Duvall and Ferndale in this role. Larry was appointed as a member of King County’s Transportation Concurrency Expert Review Panel. The panel includes County staff, citizens, and representatives from the development community. The panel developed recommendations to refine the Concurrency program to reflect the changes in King County to a more rural County and also to improve the interface between the County’s concurrency program and SEPA processes. Tehaleh Employment Based Planned Community, Pierce County Larry directed Transpo’s transportation planning and traffic engineering assistance for this large master Planned Community located in Pierce County between Bonney Lake and Orting. When fully developed, the community will have over 6,500 residences, a retail center, business park, schools, and golf course. Transpo’s assistance has included sizing of on-site roadways, design of roundabouts and street lighting, and roadway channelization for internal roadways. Transpo has also assisted in monitoring the transportation mitigation triggers based on the approved development agreement. Transpo has assisted the project team and agency staff in defining the off-site roadway and mitigation strategies to support future development phases. Larry also led the initial tasks for the detailed transportation analyses to support the Phase 2 application for the development. Redmond Ridge/Trilogy/Redmond Ridge East Master Planned Communities EISs, King County, WA Larry managed the analysis of traffic impacts and development of a subarea transportation improvement program for the EIS for a large mixed-use community planned for rural King County. At buildout, the development will include 5,400 dwelling units, neighborhood retail, 1.2 million SF of business park, golf course and soccer fields. The analysis included assessing roadway improvement needs and non-motorized system facilities, transit opportunities, and financing. Key issues included accommodating urban traffic levels in an otherwise rural area and potential traffic impacts on other jurisdictions. Larry supported the projects through coordination with WSDOT and Redmond. EXHIBIT 33 Orton Junction Urban Growth Area EIS, Sumner, WA Larry managed the transportation analysis for the EIS for this subarea located south of SR 410 in Sumner. The City proposed to increase densities and expand the Urban Growth Area (UGA) to accommodate a mix of residential, commercial, and industrial land uses. The analysis addressed impacts and transportation improvement needs in the immediate vicinity of the subarea. Overlake Urban Center Residential Traffic Impact Analysis, Redmond Larry managed an analysis of the potential traffic impacts of the additional multi- family residential development within the proposed Overlake Urban Center. The analysis focused on evaluating the impacts within the Overlake Transportation Management District (TMD) and surrounding area of Bellevue. The City of Redmond’s proposal to change the designation for the Overlake area from a Manufacturing/Industrial Center to an Urban Center would not affect zoning or the potential for residential growth in the area. Actual development of additional residential units in the area would, however, result in some traffic impacts. The impacts would primarily be in the immediate vicinity of the Overlake Urban Center, with impacts decreasing further from the site. Transportation Concurrency Expert Review Panel; King County, Washington. Larry serves on the King County Transportation Concurrency Expert Review Panel. The panel provides policy and technical guidance to King County staff as part of their ongoing refinement of County policies and programs related to level of service standards and concurrency. The panel has assisted in defining changes to the programs as the County focuses on rural areas as annexations and incorporations have greatly reduced the suburban areas under the jurisdiction of King County. Ferndale Main Street Master Plan and Planned Action EIS, Ferndale, WA Larry managed the transportation analysis for the planned action EIS for Ferndale’s Main Street near the I-5 interchange. The planned action would allow over 1 million square feet of commercial developments. The EIS evaluated the use of roundabouts vs. traffic signal improvements to address potential traffic operations and safety impacts due to the increased level of development. The analysis included comparison of levels of service, corridor travel speeds and cost differences. The EIS also identified development mitigation strategies including potential updates to the City’s transportation impact fee and concurrency programs. He also coordinated with WSDOT on improvements related to impacts on I-5 and interchanges at Main Street and Slater Road. Pacific Ridge Subarea Plan and Planned Action EIS, Des Moines Larry assisted the City of Des Moines in evaluating the transportation-related impacts associated with 4,200 additional dwelling units and 6,900 additional employees located within the Pacific Ridge subarea. To mitigate impacts, a variety of strategies were identified, including a reduction in the amount of new development, creation of a transit and transportation demand management program, and/or funding and building necessary improvement projects through one or more Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) or Transportation Benefit Districts (TBDs). The Planned Action Ordinance took into account the City’s impact fee requirements and street standard requirements. L A N C E M U E L L E R & A S S O C I A T E S B O B W E L L S A S S O C I A T E Education: Bachelor of Architecture - 1969 University of Idaho, Moscow, ID Professional Registrations: Licensed Architect, State of Washington, USA - 1975 Experience: Bob has worked full-time in architecture since college graduation. Consequently, he has many years of varied experience in the Seattle area with project types including low and mid-rise commercial structures and industrial structures. Responsibility: Bob has been with Lance Mueller & Associates since 1973 and an associate since 1980. His responsibilities have been for the design, documentation and contract administration of numerous office, retail, flex-tech, industrial, residential, and corporate facilities. Representative Projects: ROCKWELL COLLINS, Wilsonville, OR This 221,000 sf manufacturing and office consolidated Rockwell’s Portland area operations in one building in a wonderful natural setting. Our roll was shell architect and coordinating shell revisions with the TI Architect. Later we assisted Rockwell on a number of smaller tenant improvements. DWFRITZ PRECISION AUTOMATION, Wilsonville, OR From 2009 to 2017 we were the Architects on three separate projects totaling 273,000sf for this hi-tech manufacturer. The first two are new 2-story buildings and the last is a conversion of an existing industrial building into an office and manufacturing facility filled with natural light. EXHIBIT 34 L A N C E M U E L L E R & A S S O C I A T E S B O B W E L L S P A G E 2 COMPACT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, Redmond, WA This 50,000 sf two story for a very sophisticated mailing label business. In addition to the usual office, warehousing, and expansion requirements, the facility included a nursery for the employee's children, a very high-end lunch area, and adjacent private park. If needs change, the park can convert to parking. ONVIA BUILDING, Seattle, WA The Onvia.com Building is a full block corporate development with 95,000 sf of office plus structured parking with many employee amenities in Seattle. The four-story office ells around a large naturally landscaped plaza and integrates with a separate conference center building at the street corner. The restful plaza includes a pond and seating for relaxing or strolling opportunities. The service area and parking are underground on two levels. ZETRON BUILDING, Redmond, WA Zetron centralized their office and manufacturing headquarters into this four-story 210,000 sf facility. The facility includes basement parking and storage area and substantial areas dedicated to greenbelt and wetlands. THE GILBERT, Seattle, WA A 3-story traditional brick apartment complex on top of bustling Queen Anne hill with 54 units and 9,500 sf of street front retail with the basement parking accessed from the alley. L A N C E M U E L L E R & A S S O C I A T E S L A N C E M U E L L E R , A I A P R E S I D E N T Education: University of Washington College of Architecture - 1962-1967 Professional Registration: Licensed Architect, State of Washington, 1973. Other States; California, Nevada, Idaho and Oregon. Certificate - National Council of Architectural Registration Boards, 1974. Professional Affiliations: Member - American Institute of Architects Lambda Alpha International Land Economics Honorary International Conference of Building Officials Experience: 1965 to 1970: Worked in three small Seattle architectural firms. 1970 to present: Joined Richard Bouillon & Assoc./Architects in 1970. Became owner of firm in 1973 upon death of R. Bouillon. Renamed firm in 1975. Experience covers a wide variety of project types including shopping centers, large retail stores, apartments, banks, business parks, distribution centers, manufacturing buildings, offices, parking garages and restaurants and planning of major office and business parks. Responsibility: Project conceptual and preliminary design and design development. Project administration, contractual agreements and general office administration. Honors: National Association of Industrial and Office Parks 2005 Hall of Fame Inductee EXHIBIT 35 EXHIBIT 36 Wetland AOLWMOHWMWetland DContinuous WaveAttenuation BermWave Attenuation BermsWetland IMinimum25-ftWetlandBufferLAKE WASHINGTONLEGENDRENTON, WASHINGTONCENTURY PACIFIC, LLLPGRADE LEVEL PLAN100' SHORELINE SETBACKLOT 7 (ISOLATED)EXHIBIT 37 Wetland AOLWMOHWMWetland DContinuous WaveAttenuation BermWave Attenuation BermsWetland IMinimum25-ftWetlandBufferLAKE WASHINGTONRENTON, WASHINGTONCENTURY PACIFIC, LLLPLEGEND2ND LEVEL PLANEXHIBIT 38 AB - 1881 City Council Regular Meeting - 03 Apr 2017 SUBJECT/TITLE: Quendall Terminals Public Hearing RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council Concur DEPARTMENT: Community & Economic Development STAFF CONTACT: Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager EXT.: 7314 FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY: N/A SUMMARY OF ACTION: The proponents for the Quendall Terminals land use application have requested the City consider a Development Agreement. The Land Use application consists of a request for Master Site Plan, Binding Site Plan, a Shoreline Permit, and now a Development Agreement for the construction of a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR). The Enhanced Alternative would contain 692 residential units, 42,190 square feet of commercial uses (retail and restaurant), 1,352 parking spaces, and 12.9 acres of parks/open space. A Public Hearing is tentatively scheduled for the subject land use application on April 18, 2017. The requested Development Agreement establishes the new Enhanced Development Alternative and allows for an extended time frame for the land use entitlements and associated development standard vesting from 5 years to 10 years, with a possible 5 year extension, for a total of 15 years. A public hearing is required to be held by City Council when considering a Development Agreement. However, there is an opportunity to consolidate the required public hearing for the Development Agreement with the public hearing for the land use entitlements with the City’s Hearing Examiner. By consolidating the public hearing process for both the land use entitlements and the development agreement, the public will be able to comment on both the development project and the associated development agreement at one public hearing. Se cond, the Hearing Examiner would have the benefit of considering all aspects of the project and associated public comments when making a decision on the land use entitlements and a recommendation to City Council. A consolidated public hearing process would streamline and simplify the public process for the overall project. The final decision authority on the Development Agreement would remain with City Council, following a recommendation provided by the City’s Hearing Examiner. EXHIBITS: A. Draft Development Agreement STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The Administration recommends consolidating the public hearing process for both the land use entitlements and the development agreement and deferring this process to the City's Hearing Examiner. EXHIBIT 39 Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 1 When Recorded, Return to: CITY CLERK’S OFFICE City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR QUENDALL TERMINALS Grantors: The City of Renton and Quendall Terminals Grantees: The City of Renton and Quendall Terminals Abbreviated Legal Description: TO BE INSERTED Additional Legal Description on Page 15 of Document (Exhibit A) Assessor’s Property Tax Parcel/Account Number: 2924059002 OR □ NOT YET ASSIGNED THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) by and between the CITY OF RENTON, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Washington (“City”), and QUENDALL TERMINALS, a Washington joint venture, its successors and assigns (“Developer”), is made and entered into this ____ day of ________ , 2016 (the “Effective Date”) pursuant to the authority of RCW 36.70B.170 et seq. The City and Developer are the Parties to this Agreement. RECITALS A. Developer is the developer of that certain real property comprising 20.3 acres more or less located between Lake Washington and Lake Washington Boulevard, and that certain real property comprising 1.2 acres more or less across the railroad right of way to the east, both within the municipal bo undaries of the City of Renton in King County, Washington, and legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto and depicted on Exhibit A-1 (the “Quendall Property” or “Property”)). B. Developer intends to develop the Quendall Property as a mixed-use multi-family residential development (the “Project”), as more particularly described in land use applications, LUA09-151, on file with the City of Renton and, subject to this Agreement, including the Enhanced Alternative described herein. Project development may be phased, subject to the conditions of the Hearing Examiner’s Decision. Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 2 C. The Quendall Property has received a Superfund designation from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and Developer is currently working on a remediation plan with the EPA. This Agreement pertains to redevelopment of the remediated Property. The Parties intend that this Agreement be construed to enable development authorized by the Hearing Examiner’s Decision on the Master Plan and subsequent necessary and/or appealed land use decisions. Such development shall contain at minimum the attributes identified as Project Elements in Section 3 and comply with all conditions and amenities identified in the approved Master Plan. Development would occur in a manner consistent with post-remediation site conditions and such controls as are imposed by or agreed to with the EPA. For instance, if remediation is undertaken in phases, then Project phasing may be coordinated to occur first on remediated areas of the Property, pending a City approved final phasing plan that is consistent with the phasing conditions of the Master Plan Decision or any subsequent land use actions. D. Developer submitted Project applications for a Master Plan approval, Binding Site Plan approval and Shoreline Substantial Development permit, which applications were deemed complete by the City on February 10, 2010 (together, the “Initial Project Applications”). E. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Ch. 43.21C RCW (“SEPA”), the City issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (the “DEIS”) on December 10, 2010, on the Initial Project Applications and alternatives. In response to comments on the DEIS, Developer developed a Preferred Alternative that was downsized from the DEIS, and office space was removed from the proposal. Key Project specifications of the Preferred Alternative are set forth in the Master Plan application materials, LUA09-151 and attached to the Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner as Exhibits. The City issued an addendum to the DEIS on October 19, 2012, which addressed the Preferred Alternative (the “Addendum”). A Final Environmental Impact Statement (the “FEIS”) and Mitigation Document were issued on August 31, 2015. F. In January 2016, at the City’s request, Developer updated the Initial Project Applications plan sets to reflect the Preferred Alternative and incorporate plan set level components of the specified SEPA mitigation measures. G. Pursuant to the Revised Code of Washington Chapter 36.70B.170 et seq. (“the Development Agreement Statute”), the City may enter into a development agreement with an entity having ownership or control of real property within its jurisdiction. H. A development agreement can provide for an extended duration of approvals. The Developer is willing to incorporate more public benefits into the Project, as specified in the Enhanced Alternative set forth herein, in exchange for extended permit duration. Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 3 I. It is the intent of this Development Agreement to provide for development of the Project using the Enhanced Alternative addressed herein, together with all other terms and conditions of this Agreement, provided, however, that the Parties acknowledge that Project applications for the Enhanced Alternative are subject to hearing and decision by the Renton Hearing Examiner as provided under Renton Municipal Code Sections 4-9-200(D)(1) and 4-8-070(J). J. The City’s Responsible SEPA Official has reviewed the Project changes proposed under the Enhanced Alternative and this Development Agreement in accordance with SEPA, and has issued a determination of consistency with the existing SEPA review. The DEIS, Addendum, FEIS, and Determination of Consistency together constitute the “Project-level SEPA Review.” K. The City Council held a public hearing on this Development Agreement on ____________, 2017. L. The City has found that development of the Enhanced Alternative of all or portions of the Quendall Property consistent with this Agreement and the associated land use decisions will benefit the community at large including the Quendall Property. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements of the Parties set forth herein, as well as other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby covenant and agree as follows: AGREEMENTS 1. ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS. Development Regulations mean those regulations encompassed in Title IV of the Renton Municipal Code (“RMC”) in effect on the Vesting Date. Enhanced Alternative means the Project substantially as described in the Project Elements at Section 3 and on the Master Plan and associated conditions of approval as approved by the Hearing Examiner. Land Use Policies and Regulations mean Renton Comprehensive Plan land use designations and policies, and the Development Regulations, in effect on the Vesting Date. Master Plan Decision means the decision of the Hearing Examiner on the Master Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, and Binding Site Plan applications under LUA09-151. RMC means the Renton Municipal Code. Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 4 The Vesting Date is February 10, 2010, the date that the City determined that Developer’s applications for a Master Plan approval, Binding Site Plan approval and Shoreline Substantial Development permit were complete. 2. BASIS OF AGREEMENT. 2.1 Intent. This Agreement establishes certain roles and responsibilities for the potential redevelopment of all or a portion of the Quendall Property under the Enhanced Alternative described in Section 3 herein, including but not limited to Developer commitments that development of the Master Plan shall be consistent with the vested Land Use Policies and Regulations and the terms and conditions of this Agreement and any associated land use decisions for the project. It is the intent of this Agreement that redevelopment may be phased according to the principles set out in this Agreement, subject to City of Renton approval and the conditions set forth in the Master Plan Decision. 3. PROJECT ELEMENTS. The Project Enhanced Alternative shall include the Project Elements which includes the following: 3.1 Enhanced Alternative. The Parties agree that the following enhancements to the Preferred Alternative are in the public interest and support Project objectives. The Parties agree that the Project with the Enhanced Alternatives should be taken through the Hearing Examiner process in accordance with RMC 4-9-200(D)(1) and 4-8-070(J). 3.1.1 1.3 acres of the southwest corner of the Project shall be a public park constructed by the Developer and maintained by the Homeowners’ Association, open for public use between the hours of dawn to dusk; 3.1.2 Retail/restaurant/office space and street activation (fountains, artwork, etc.) shall be required at street level along Street B and along the lakeside frontage of residential buildings and other street frontage as necessary to qualify for a minimum of 50 percent of the building street frontage at a minimum depth of 20 feet of the project site; 3.1.3 The developer and the City will collaborate in the development of a public dock/pier associated with the public park. The Developer and City shall jointly develop a future dock proposal for permitting and environmental review that addresses public and Project interests to the parties’ mutual satisfaction (“Future Dock Proposal”). The City will be responsible for obtaining all required permits. The Developer shall fund permitting costs for the Future Dock Proposal and construct the dock and any required mitigation, provided that both the City and Developer approve of the final dock design, budget, and all dock permit conditions. Should the EPA or either party not approve the dock location and design the City and the developer will Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 5 work together to develop an alternative proposal to allow for access to Lake Washington while meeting the requirements of the EPA. The Future Dock Proposal, design and permitting shall be completed within the first five (5) years of the term if this agreement. The Future Dock Proposal shall be constructed and completed for public access within this first ten (10) years of the term of this agreement. All work related to the Future Dock Proposal shall be permitted, constructed, and final inspection completed prior to final occupancy of the last building in the Master Plan. 3.1.4 The Parties agree that the City shall have the right and the Developer is required, following year five of the Initial Term of this Agreement as defined in Section 4, to conduct an updated transportation analysis in compliance with SEPA (the “SEPA Transportation Update”), which shall be subject to City review. In order to impose requirements of the SEPA Transportation Update, the property owner shall be required to provide written notice to the City, after the foregoing time trigger has occurred, that the SEPA Transportation Update (the “Update Notice”) will be performed. The Transportation Update shall result in written findings and conclusions, and may result in a recommendation for reasonable new future permit conditions and mitigations for the Project, if required based on changed conditions and associated Project impacts. If the SEPA Transportation Update identifies significant adverse transportation impacts of the Project that are not mitigated in the original SEPA transportation analysis, then the City may impose additional mitigation to address such unmitigated Project impacts. 3.1.5 Building SW4 shall be constructed at no more than 3 floors over parking, building SW3 shall be constructed at no more than 4 floors over parking, and all other buildings shall be constructed at no more than 5 floors over parking. 3.2 Mitigation Plan. The Mitigation Plan consists of the mitigation document issued on August 31, 2015 and any mitigation conditions added by the Hearing Examiner in the Master Plan Decision. In addition the mitigation plan will include any new transportation permit conditions and transportation mitigation requirements for the Project as a result of the Transportation Update following year five. The Mitigation Plan also will include any new transportation permit conditions and transportation mitigation requirements for the Project as a result of the Transportation Update following year 10 of the Initial Term of this Agreement, if a permit extension under Section 4 of this Agreement is requested and permitted. 3.3 Project Phasing. Development of the Project may be phased consistent with the approved Master Plan and SEPA Mitigation Document and any subsequent land use approvals such as site plan review, both during remediation and for purposes of Developer’s development program, including in response to market conditions. The City and the Developer acknowledge that, generally, site remediation under EPA’s oversight will occur before Project development, provided, however, that during remediation the Developer may install certain Project infrastructure Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 6 components. The Parties further agree to allow phasing according to the following phasing principles, provided, however, that the Parties may determine that a more detailed Project Phasing Plan will be prepared to govern Project Phasin g: 3.3.1 A Project Phase may include one or more Project Lots. Alternatively, a Project Phase may include one or more Project Buildings, as such Buildings are defined and depicted in the Quendall Terminals Master Plan, LUA09-151. 3.3.2 Each Project Phase shall have all required infrastructure and mitigation for the phase in place at the time of certificate of occupancy, or final inspection if the phase or use does not require a certificate of occupancy, sufficient to provide pedestrian and vehicular access, utilities and public facilities including parking areas for bicycles and vehicles, site amenities identified for the phase and semi-private open space. 3.3.3 Development of Lots or Buildings abutting Street B may be prioritized to be the first Project Phase(s) of development, provided, however, that the Parties agree to consider alternative Project Phasing priorities if needed in response to sequenced remediation. 3.4 Duration of Project Permits. Provided that Project permits are approved by the Hearing Examiner, all City land use permits and approvals issued for the Project shall enjoy a duration through the term of this Agreement, including any extensions under Section 4. 4. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and continue for ten years from the earlier of (i) the date of issuance of the EPA’s Record of Decision, or (ii) the Hearing Examiners Decision and/or any subsequent appeal decision dates (“Initial Term”). This Agreement shall remain in effect during i ts term unless and until Developer (owning at least 51 percent of the Quendall Property by assessed value ((excluding any City-owned land)) gives notice of termination. If 51 percent of the residential and commercial space has been constructed and received a Certificate of Occupancy (CO) then the City may extend this Agreement, following a second SEPA Transportation Update, upon Developer’s request 30 days in advance of the sunset date, for one additional five-year period of time. 5. VESTING. 5.1 Project Elements, Development Standards and Implementing Approvals. In accordance with the Development Agreement Statute, Developer is vested to the Development Regulations in effect on the Vesting Date, which extends to City of Renton ordnance number 5523. Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 7 5.2 Vesting Exceptions. During the term of this Agreement, the City shall not impose on the Project any modified or new or additional Development Regulations, except any new federal or state statutes, rules, regulations, administrative interpretations or court decisions that add regulatory requirements on the City that it must enforce that are not subject to a “grandfather” or “safe harbor” clause that would delay the City’s enforcement responsibility beyond the life of this Agreement. 5.3 City’s Reserved Authority. In accordance with the Development Agreement Statute, RCW 36.70B.170(4), the City reserves the authority to impose new or different Development Regulations to the extent required by a serious threat to public health and safety. 6. GENERAL PROVISIONS. 6.1 Authority; Severability. The City and Developer each represent and warrant it has the respective power and authority, and is duly authorized to execute, deliver and perform its obligations under this Agreement. The Partie s intend this Agreement to be interpreted to the full extent authorized by law as an exercise of the City’s authority to enter into such agreements, and this Agreement shall be construed to reserve to the City only that police power authority which is proh ibited by law from being subject to a mutual agreement with consideration. This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of Developer and the City. If any provision of this Agreement is determined to be unenforceable or invalid by a court of law, then (i) this Agreement shall thereafter be modified to implement the intent of the Parties to the maximum extent allowable under law, (ii) the Parties agree to seek diligently to modify the Agreement consistent with the court decision, and (iii) neither party shall undertake any actions inconsistent with the intent of this Agreement until the modification to this Agreement has been completed. 6.2 Amendment; Minor Modifications. Any amendment to this Agreement must be approved by the City and Developer so long as it owns any portion of the Quendall Property or retains any responsibility for off-site mitigation, other obligations under this Agreement, or obligations pursuant to any Record of Decision or any NRD settlement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon request of Developer, a designated City official may approve administrative minor modifications to the Development Standards, which administrative modifications shall not be deemed amendments to this Agreement. Administrative minor modifications mean those changes to the Development Standards that do not materially increase impacts on transportation or utility systems or the environment, taking into account agreed upon mitigation, and those modifications which do not materially reduce buffers or open space. Any modifications of Development Standards shall require the written consent of Developer and the City, including administrative minor modifications under this section. Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 8 6.3 Recording; No Third Party Beneficiary. Pursuant to the Development Agreement Statute, RCW 36.70B.190, this Agreement or a memorandum thereof shall be recorded with the King County Recorder’s Office. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the Parti es, their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision of this Agreement. 6.4 Notices. All communications, notices and demands of any kind which a party under this Agreement requires or desires to give to any other party shall be in writing and either (i) delivered personally (including delivery by professional courier services), (ii) sent by facsimile transmission with an additional copy mailed first class, or (iii) deposited in the U.S. mail, certified mail postage prepaid, return receipt requested, to the addresses set forth with each signature. Notice by hand delivery or facsimile shall be effective upon receipt. If deposited in the mail, notice shall be deemed delivered 48 hours after deposited. Any party at any time by notice to the other party may designate a different address or person to which such notice or communication shall be given. If to the City of Renton: Renton City Hall Attn: Mayor Attn: Development Services Director 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 If to Quendall Terminals: Quendall Terminals Attn: Robert Cugini P.O. Box 359 Renton, WA 98057 and to J.H. Baxter & Co. Attn: Georgia Baxter P.O. Box 5902 San Mateo, CA 94402-0902 With a copy to: Campbell Mathewson CenturyPacific, LLLP Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 9 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 1680 Seattle, WA 98101-3029 Davis Wright Tremaine Attn: Lynn Manolopolous 777 108th Avenue NE, Suite 2300 Bellevue, Washington 98004-5149 Cable Huston LLP Attn: James E. Benedict 1001 SW Fifth Avenue Suite 2000 Portland, Oregon 97204-1136 T. Ryan Durkan Hillis, Clark, Martin & Peterson P.S. 999 Third Avenue, Suite 4600 Seattle, WA 98101 6.5 Applicable Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Any action with respect to this Agreement shall be brought in King County Superior Court, Washington. 6.6 Multiple Originals. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or more facsimile or .pdf counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one instrument. 6.7 Headings; Recitals and Attachments. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for reference only and shall not be construed to expand, limit or otherwise modify the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The recitals to this Agreement and Exhibits A are incorporated in this Agreement by this reference as if fully set forth. 6.8 Dispute Resolution. 6.8.1 If any dispute arises out of any aspect of this Agreement, the Parties must first try in good faith to settle the dispute through mediation. This mediation must commence within 60 days after any party to the Agreement notifies the other party requesting mediation to resolve a dispute. 6.8.2 If the Parties are not able to resolve their dispute through mediation, they agree to submit the matter for resolution through binding arbitration. The arbitrator shall be mutually chosen by both Parties. In no case may a mediator who Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 10 has mediated a claim serve as the arbitrator on the same claim. If the Parties cannot agree on an arbitrator, either party or the Parties jointly may apply to the presiding judge of the King County Superior Court to appoint an arbitrator. The arbitrator will consult with the Parties and establish the rules and procedures for the arbitration that, in light of the nature of the matter under dispute, will provide an efficient and fair means for each of the Parties to present its case. Among other things, the arbitrator will establish a schedule for completing the arbitration and issuing a decision. The decision of the arbitrator will be final and may be enforced by an action brought in King County Superior Court. In such an action, the prevailing party is entitled to recover all costs and expenses, including all legal fees, incurred in that action. 6.8.3 The Parties will bear the costs of retaining a mediator or an arbitrator equally. Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been entered into by the City and Developer effective on the last date of signature below. DATED this _____ day of ____________________, 2017 Joint Venture known as QUENDALL TERMINALS By:__________________________ Altino Properties, Inc. Its:Authorized Representative By:__________________________ Robert Cugini Its: Vice President Date: ________________________ CITY OF RENTON By: Denis Law Mayor Date: ________________________ ATTEST: By:___________________________ Jason A. Seth City Clerk Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 12 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS STATE OF ___________ ) ) ss: COUNTY OF ___________ ) On this _____ day of _______, 2016, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of _______, County of ________, personally appeared ________________, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed this instrument, who has produced sufficient proof of his/her power and authority to execute and sign the instrument in the name of and on behalf of QUENDALL TERMINALS, to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said association for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the state of ______________________. Notary (print):______________________ My appointment expires: _____________ Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 13 STATE OF ___________ ) ) ss: COUNTY OF ___________ ) On this _____ day of _______, 2017, before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, County of King, personally appeared Denis Law, Mayor, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed this instrument, who has produced sufficient proof of his power and authority to execute and sign the instrument in the name of and on behalf of CITY OF RENTON, to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said association for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and year first above written. NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the state of ______________________. Notary (print):______________________ My appointment expires: _____________ Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 14 List of Exhibits: Exhibit A – Legal Description of Property Exhibit A-1-Map 11/11/2016 Exhibit A Page 15 98102-3513BUSH, ROED & HITCHINGS, INC.2009 MINOR AVE. EASTSEATTLE, WashingtonLAND SURVEYORS & CIVIL ENGINEERS(206) 323-4144SW 1/4 SECTION 29, T24N, R5E, W.M.LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBITCENTURY PACIFIC, LLLP.CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTONDATE: 11/11/16JOB NO.:2009050.0311/11/2016Exhibit A-1Page 16