The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutReport 2~iC0310F 0330F ~ €ity'of 1 J '--' > • \\11 ' I **0355Fr I I\ I {f'I i ., ~~ seatt1e i325F ZONE X • Areas of 500-year flood; areas of 100- \ \ I I z z EUIOTBAY year flood with average depths of less than 1 foot or with drainage areas less than 1 square mile; and areas protected by levees from 100-year floor. Town of , I -LI I ( Clyde O I , I I · Hill 05F.,· ~ ~ :::> :::> ~ I ~ 'tl _ I .. l'd-\j ~-tzl )'.! \S2 S2 I J. 53033C,20F \( t I ' I \::i '-' If I ,~ r ~ "-ICitv,oi ~ l ,------j--->qM\ 53033C0955F //~~ 53033C0935F City of1 ,033C0950F Normandy Parle 1 D961F City of I SeaTac Oll62FI I **0966F 1. '::: 0991F **0380FI R I\ I I ~ "0686F 1001F 0984F I 1003F * PANEL NOT PRINTED-OPEN WATER AREA ALL IN Z •• PANEL NOT PRINTED· AREA IN ZONE X *** PANEL NOT PRINTED· AREA IN ZONE D .... PANEL NOT PRINTED· PANEL 53033C1490 IS SHO MAP INDEX FIRM FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AND INCORPORATED AREAS (SEE LISTING OF COMMUNITIES TABLE) MAP INDEX PANELS PRINTED: 20, 40, 43, 44, 13, 84, 08, 89, 80, 93,811,115,120,194,213,214,310,320,327,329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 340, 352, 354, 380, 385, 388, 318, 370, 377,371,381,383,385,390, 38$, 401,405, ,10, •111, ,1a, ,11, ,m, ae, '38, 450, so2, soe, 507, 90&, 527, 828, !28, 133,810,818,820,830,838,638. 840, 845, w, 854, &58, 857, eaa, m, 884, eea, ee1, 888,889, 880,68&,887,888,689,891,892,883,88" 706, 709, 710, 715,718,717,718,719. 728, 73&, 7371 739, 741, 742, 7'3, 744,781,783,925,935,950,953, 954, 965, 957,959, INIO, 981,982,983,964,887, 9881 8811, 978. ff7, 978,979,981,982,983, n•. 988,987, 988,991,992,993,994, 1001, 1002, 1003, 1004, 1008, 1007, 1QOI, 1009, 1015, 1020, 1028, 1032, 1038, 1038, 1052,1058,1087,1058,1078,1077,1078,1079,1200, 1225,1232,1235,12'2,1250,1251,1252,1253,1254, 1257, 1258, 1281, 1282, 1283, 1284, 1288, 12117, 1288, 1219,1280,1290,1295,1315,1350.1457,1480,1485, 1'85,1!05,1515,1525,1550 MAP NUMBER 53033CIND0A MAP REVISED APRIL 19, 2005 Federal Emergency Management Agency This is an official copy of a portion of the above referenced flood map. It was extracted using F-MIT On-Line. This map does not reflect changes or amendments which may have been made subsequent to the date on the title block. For the latest product information about National Flood Insurance Lake Youngs I Program flood maps check the FEMA Flood Map Storeatwww.msc.fema.gov CitY ot Renton p1ann\n9 Q\v1s•on \\O~ 1 8 'L\M ~~(C;wJ~/~i© LAKE WASHINGTON N I . I + ~I (Cl 2008 Ktng Count)' 1:· ( ,i,+ ~ ... j>~ / ) ------- I f r-~'-;, I ,' { I 11 I ,I I: } !PROJECT SITE I 20.3 AC ' .-----.---' lr __ , ___ J '1 1--::o , __ _ l ', t ;, ' i ' l . l ,, . , 'i ;r J :f ? fr ., t -<" 1i ii _,. ·:, jl-4/s 1 ,i / i , I ,,-' ./ . / ,-i rl/T -.·-} ,. / i' .,l//! ( __ -__ J' /J // /, '(-~::-----1'~.J I~ ~ '\ / -t ·' '. y -• k _..; ;!: ,... •;r .. , J I , ) . ' t j (. ,{ 5 ,, 1 • I I I t ' :"' j1~(sl !BARBEE MILL ENTRANCE~ ... -jN 43RD ST! "! -! fr i J: i' I I City ot Renton Pianninq Division IN 42ND PL! ~ i z ~· ~ l . <f.,y~LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N ifj ' • > Nov 1 s ZDu& ,~ .f t GRAPHIC SCALE: o========i 400 ft l l t ., I" t ' i ~ !Ri~ct;~ow~10) l NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP QUENDALL TERMINALS ! i ti I f ' a " ,I QUENDALL TERMINALS LAND USE, SHORELINE & MASTER PERMIT APPLICATION MASTER SITE PLAN APPLICANT/CONTACT CENl\JRY PACIFIC, LP. 12rn THIRD AVE. SIJ11E 1680 ~TTL.f, WA 98101 CONTACT: CAIIP8EU. MATHEWSON PHONE: (206) 757-8893 PROPERTY OWNERS Al TINO PROPERTIES, INC ANO J.H. BAXTER &: CO. 800 S. THIRD ST. RENTON, WA 9B057 CIV11 KPFF CONSUL TING ENGINEERS 1601 F1F1H A.VE. SUITE 1600 SEATllf, WA 981rn COHACT: T<II JONES PHONE: (206) 622-5822 ARCHITECT LANCE MUELLER &: ASSOCIATES 130 LAKESIDE AVE. SIJ11E 250 nTTL.£, WA 98122 CONTACT: LANCE MUEillR PHONE: (206) 325-2553 GEOTECHNll;!_L ASP!:CT CONSUlTING, llC 179 MAORONE LANE N aANBRIOGE ISLANO, WA 98110 COOTACT: HEmY HASELTON PHONE: (206) 328-7443 ENVIRONMENTAL ANCHOR QEA, llC 1423 lltRO AVE. SIJ11E JOO SEATllf, WA 98101 CONTACT: PE1ER HUMMEL PHONE: (206) 90J-JJ19 TRANSPORTATION TRANSPO GROUP 11730 118TI-I AV£ NE, SUIT[ 600 K~KLANO, WA 9IIO.J4 COOTACT: JAMES Yl£88 PHONE: (425) 82hl665 GOVERNING AGENCY OTY OF RENTON 1055 S GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 98057 CONTACT: VANESSA DOl..8EE PHONE: (425) 430-7314 RENTON, WASHINGTON NOVEMBER 16, 2009 VICINITY MAP NTS INDEX C100 -COl{R SHEET 1-13 -TCFOGRAPttC SURVEY PO.O -Sil[ PlAN PI.O -P-1 PARKING IB£L P2.0 -P-2 PARKING LEVEL P~O -PREI.MINARY BUlllllNG ELEVATIONS LO.O -LANDSCAPE Pl.AN C200 -TREE IN\r'£NTCRY Pl.AN C300 -CCINC[pTUAI.. STMM MAINAGE AND GRADING PLAN C301 -CONCEPTUAL STORM DRAINAGE AND GRADING PLAN CJ02 -ROAOWAY SECTIONS C30J -ROADWAY SECTIONS C.00 -CONCEP11JAL UTUTY PU,N C401 -CONCIPTUAL UTUTY PlAN ABBREVIATIONS "' COMM CON OOCVA OOM OR E ELEV EX me IT fH HP E Lf LP MH MIN N NTS Pl PR<P PRV RO ROW RPSA s so ss TYP w WQ CATO-I BASIN COMMUNICATIONS CITY <T RENTON OOUBl.f OElECTOR CHECK VALVE ASSEMBLY OOMESTIC DRIVE EAST ELEVATION EXISTING ARE DEPARTMENT CONNECTION RNISHED FlOM ARE HYORANT HIGH P<lNT INl{Rl ELEVATION L.IHEAR FEET LOW PQNT MANHOlf Ml~MUM NORTH NOT TO SCALE PROPERTY LINE PROPOSEO PRESSURE REDUONG VAL VE ROCf' DRAIN mGHT-Of'-WAY REDUCEO PRESSURE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY ntol"\ SOUTH £ p.e STORM ORAIN c· hi O \ . · , SANITARY SEWER \~, . \)1\/\SIOI · MCAL o\,if\\'llfl9 WATER. WEST I" WATER OUALITY ''" \ '1, 1~uo 1<()~ ~~~~~~j\~\Qi NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION nRA'Mil BY 0£SIGHED BY I I I I I I ICHE~BY :-Sey DATE NOV 16, 2009 CIJ.I. 111) IIJSll(SS DAYS IEf~ YOU DIG l-800-42M555 d•iil Conwlling Engin..,. 1601 Fifth A...nud', Suilt1 ,600 StK1ttft1, Washington 98101-3665 QUENDALL TERMINALS 4350 WE WASIIIIGTON BOUL£Yo11D, RENTON, WASHINGTON LAND USE, SHORELINE & t.4ASTER PLAN PERt.41T APPLICATION COVER SHEET SHEET C100 NO. DATE BY CHO. I APPR. REVISION JO 8 No. :10911B S C A L E, AS NOTED (206) 622-5822 Fax (206) 622-BIJO c·, :_:., ' I'·":' +-s v"'?-- ~~ J I z // 39 l z,g_) 31 i32 SITE NOTES / I ·~o~ -"G ~"- ~'y--0 . // /,".. .., I ::/· C,.j f'. e O ij. :j ' ':_; G '' ·v•,; / BARBEE MILL ' ' / ( / I / / /,· I r I I ! ! / ./ / / /// // / PORT QUENDALL c/o SEATTLE SEAHAWKS 12 SEAHAWKS WAY TAX# 292405-':!001-04 -··-' I ) PORT QUENDALL TERMINAL 4350 LAkt WASHINGTON BOULEVARD TAXf 292405-9002-0J COI/ERNMENT LOT 5 SW 1/4 SECTION 29, T24N. RSE, W.M / ,/ . / M!:RCE~ ISL/\ND .~ -~ ~ 4 "" ~\ I RENTON \\I WAS!-'INGTON l \;J . 7'- ~8J' ~ VICINITY MAP "" .-} I I / / / / / / / / l / // /: / / ·"' : //1 / / ;-~.->/ I// / '.,J 17 .... / / ii _/ I// > h :,· . .i...... : I / loo, / / / 'I,..; / / oµ, / / / / J I / / I / / / : : I I I , / / / ' ./ ~ 9. ~-~ ..f ~ ~ 0 ./ // /I ,<;·_ .. i I / ~ I ; $ // ,. / i a--/ / L / I ~ / / ~.i' ~-I i ., • ~ /· ..., .. / /s: l $" I i I ! I " I I ~$ / / l~ / / "' / ./ / . . ' I /. I I I . . / '.'7 "'< ,, I .. i / / I ' i / ~ I , i I -·-• , I 4') / c• ..,. / I I -. v;; /i ~ :;,.·/ / / ~o~// 1 0 / i .~'-~G ./ i GRAPHIC SCALE J 0' I / e.."(\'.,..-/ ...... / I _.J..t&..."7 A ~,;.' · i .,..r4v• •· / 1 ..... ~<., /~-···"' : IV / 'l_.,,p , .. • : T = I ~--.I ' I /M I ( IN FEET ) tlneh•lOOtt. SW 1 /4 SEC'ION 29, / / // ,l·,._,, I / / &,;,' I / / ,.: 124N,;45E .... NW 1 /f SE¢TION 32, T;24N,45E ORIGIN.O.TING BENGIMARK: ,'.)?S.L/ l ./.: .. / I I / / / /_ : /// / // I/ _// / l VAC N 44TH (SE BOTH ST) REC. # 76~2_2~0.4;;'.! cnY OF RENTON BENCHWARK NO. 2100. USGS BRASS DISC ON S01.Jl1-IEAST CORNEil OF cct,ICRETE SPIU.WAY AT GAGING STATION, WEST SIDE OF LAKE WASl"jlNGTON 1ELECOM!,1UNICATl0NS/Fl8ER OPTIC DISCLAllol[R, ST SUR\IEY NOTE, SSE RECORD OF" stJR~ RECORDED LINDEFC REC. NO. 20000209900005 FOR BOONOARY FOR BOUNDARY INFORMATION REI..ATil'E TO SECTION INFORMATION 11-IAT IS REFERENCED IN THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION HEREON. BOOLEVARO. SOUTI-l OF MAY ~EEK ~OGE. RECORDS OF UNDERGROUND TEL..ECOMMUNICATIC4'1S ANO/OR FlBER OPTIC LINES ARE DESCRIPTION· El£VATION • 26.~1' NOT ALWAYS AV.0,11.ABL..E TO nlE PUBLIC. BRH HAS NOT CONTACTED [,',CH Of THE 11-IAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT :! IN SECTION 29, TO~SHIP 24 NORTH, MANY C0MPANl£S, IN THE COURSE OF THIS SURVEY, 'M-IICH COUUl HIIVE RANGE:! [/\ST WM. ANO SHORELAND ADJOINING L'rlNG \IESTERLY OF ThE SITE 1'DDRESS: SITE BENCHMARK ·r· UNDERGROUND LINES WlllilN ADJACENT RIGHTS-OF-WAY. Tl1EREFORE. SRH DOES NORlr!ERN PACIFIC fiA1l.ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND SOUlHERLY OF" A LINE IN KING 43~ LAI';[ W"SH!NGTON 80ULE\/11RO CH1SEL£D SQUARE sir AT SOUlHEAST CORNER or CONCRETE WALK AT EAST ENO NOT ACCEPT RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE EXISTENCE OF UNDERGROUND COUNTY WASI-IINCTON DESCRIBED AS FOl.l.OWS • RENTON. WASHINGTON OF WALK. SOUTli SIDE or NORTli 43RD STREET AT ENTRANCE TO BARBIT t.llLL TEU:COMt.lUNICATIONS/flOCR OPTIC LINES YIHICH ARE NOT MADE PUBLIC RECORD ' • . SUBDIVISION, 4.6' WEST OF \\EST EDGE OF RAILR01'D TRACK. Willi 11-IE LOC"1. .JJRISOICTIOO. AS ALWA"l'S, CALL 1-S00-42-4-~55 SUCRE BEGINNING AT Tl1E QUARTER CORNER ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 29: ~;~~;:r~-~~-· ELEVATION .. J7.J5" (SEE SHUT 11) CONSTRUCTION ZONING· 11-IENCE NORTI-1 B9'!58"J6" WEST ALONG "TJ.E SOUTH LINE OF S,oJO LOT 5. 1.113.01 SETBACl<S· SITE BENCHMARK"'(" UTILITY PROVIDERS· CCR . ~¥T~~~!"rSTERLY UNE OF SAID NORTHERN PAOFIC RAILROAD CURRDH SE1'8AC~ REQUIREt.lENT'S SUBJECT TO SHE PI...AN REVIEW. CURRENT CHISELED SQUARE SET AT NORTHEAST CORNER or CONCR~TE PAD FOR SANITARY S-'NITARY SEWERS, STORr.t ORAINAGE, WATER ZONING AGENCY: 11-IENCE NORTl1 29•0·~· EAST !!49.62 FUT ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO SETBACKS t.lAY DIFFER FROt.l THOSE IN EFFECT DURING DESIGN/CONSTRUCTION OF SEWER LIFT STATION WEST SIDE OF RIPLEY L-'NE, +/-15 WEST OF YIEST EOGE OF CITY Of RENTON CITY Of RENTON A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT A; [)CISTING IMPROVEMENT'S. ASPHALT OEVELO!>MENT SERVICES OE\IELDPt.lENT SERVICES 11-IENCE CONTINUING NORTH 29 •44•54• EAST 200 01 FEET TO "fHE TRUE POINT Of ELEVATION• '.D.56' {SEE SHEET 13) 1055 SOUTI-1 GRADY WAY 10~ SOUTH GRIIDY WAY BE[;INNING OF THE LINE HEREIN 0£SC1l1BE0; ,._ :~cl!:sAN~T~~U~~~~~ ~IS~~;~~ ~61.!~fEOGO~N~~IM~~~~~ AREA" r:;;i°'!:;\;:55 f!~~,3;~7;:ss ~~~JOU:S/~~lt;o~~~:2s!D ~~NJDA;A POINT \lt!ICH 8EARS NORTI; Ct:: ANO HElCHT REOUIREMENTS FOUO'MNG CONSlRUCTIOO. t.lAIN PARCEL IS 1,334,469 SCUARE FEET OR 30.6352 ACRES. MORE OR LESS. ) THENCE NORll, 59 °24"56" WEST TO "THE INNER HARBOR LINE ANO THE ENO or I POWER AND NATURAL GAS SAIO LINE DESCRIPTION: 0:: FLOOD ZONE: MIDOLE PARCEL CONTAINS 50,052 SQUARE FEET OR 1.1490 ACRES, MOR£ OR LESS. PUGET SOUND ENERGY ~ Tl-115 SITE APPEARS ON NATION& FLOOO INSURANCE MAP INDEX, DATED DECEMBER 355 110lH AVENUE NE "1.SD TI-IAT PORTION OF SAID GO\IERNMENT LDT 5 L"T1NG SOUTHEASTERLY Of LAKE I 6,2001, INDEX NO. SJ033CINDO. mo IS SITUATED IN ZONE ·x·, >RD, DETERMINED PARKING SP"CE COUNT: BULEWE, WA 98004 WASHINGTON BOULEVARD. WESTERLY OF SECONDARY STATE HIGliWAY NUt.lBER 2A lfl TO BE OUTSIDE 500 YEAR FLOO)PL,oJN. PARKING SPACES TOT"1. 0 INCLUDING O HANDICAP ACCESSIBLE SPACES. (206} 425-2000 mo NORTHWESTERLY OF" TllE Rl~T-OF"-WAY Of PUBlJC STATE HIGHWAY NUMBER 1 : HORIZONT,1.L DATUM: SIJ8S"TRUCTURES: (eee) 225-5773 ~B~~BLISHED BY QED) RECOROEO J-'NUARY 15, 1964 UHOER RECORDING NO. 3 NAO 83/91 ; CITY OF REN~ gu~~S UA~~TI~:iREii S~.":. f~'WJ m~wct&~~ l~~~SH~~L~y WE TEl..EPfONE T AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF COO'IEYEO TO OTY OF RENTON, A MUNICIPAL lfl VERTICAi. DATUt.l: ASSIJt.lE NO LIABILITY FOR TliE ACCURACY Of" THO$£ RECORDS. FOR THE flNAL 3i":°fSGR~~ CORPORATION BY DEED RECORDED -AJNE 19, 2008 LINDER RECORDING 110. mu: REPORT REFERENCE ™S SUR\/EY WAS COODUCTED ACCORDING TO nlE DESCRIPTION $HO""', FURNISHED BY FIRST At.lERICAN TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, COMWITMENT NO. NCS-380710-WAl, DATED MAY 26, 2009. THE EASEMENT'S SHO'M'I OR NOTED HEREON RELATE TO THIS COIAMITMENT. NOTE: EASEMENTS CREA1EO OR RESCINDED AFTER nllS DATE ARE NOT SHO'M-i OR NOTED HEREON TITI...E REPORT SCHEDULE D EXCEPTIONS: ITEMS ORCLm ARE SHO'ilt. ON ~AP J RELINQUISHMENT OF ALL EXISTING mo flJTURE RIGHTS TO LIGHT, "1EW ANO AIR, TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT'S OF ACCESS TO MID FROM THE STATE HIG!lWAY CONSTRUCTED ON LANDS CQl,jl'EY[O BY DOCUMENT IN FAVOR OF Tl-IE STATE OF" WASHINGTON: RECORDED Oclob....-16, 19~1 RECOR01NG ND.. 4178247 8 EASEUENT, INCLUDING TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED T,jEREIN RECORDING INFORMATION: MARCH 20. 1963 UNDER RECORDING NO. 5562896 IN FAVOR or· PUGET SOUND POWER mo UGHT COMPANY. A CORPORATION, ITS SUCCESSORS ANO ASSIGNS FDR: POY,ER LINE AFFECTS: lHE NOR™WESTERL Y PORTION OF THE PROP'ERTI HEREIN DESCRIBED 'M::STERL y or RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WM 0 EASEMENT, INCLUDING TERI.IS ANO PROIASIONS COOTAINED THERE,N: RECORDING INFORMATION, NO\/El,18ER 20, 1964 UNDER RECORDING NO. 5614320 IN FAVOR OF: UUNIOPAUTY OF t.lETROPOUTAN SEATil£, ITS SUCCESSORS ANO ASSIGNS FOR: UTILITI EAS,EM(NT AITTCTS, TllE NORTHEASTERLY PORTION OF" THE PRQP[RTY HEREIN DESCRIBED lloESTERLY OF RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY 7. COVENANTS, C0NDIT10NS, RESTRICTIONS AND/OR E/1.SE:l,IENT'S RECORDED: -AJLY !6, 1975 RECORDING NO.. 750716053'1 0 EASElot[NT, INCLUDING TERWS ANO PROVISlONS CONTAINED TI,EREIN RECORDING INFORI.IATION . .AJLY 7, 1980 UNDER RECORDING NO 80D7070459 IN FAVOR OF: CITY OF RENTON. A MUNICIPAL CORPORATIOO FOR: PUBLIC UTILITlES (INQ..UDING WATER ANO SEWER) AFFECTS: PORTION OF THE PROPERTY HEREIN OESCR18£0 l'<ESTERLY AND ADJACENT TO RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY 9. SUBJECT TO Tl-IE TERMS OF Tl-IE JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT BETVIEEN PUGET TIMBER COMPANY ANO AL TINO PRIYERTIES INC., DATED JUNE 15, 1971, AI.IEND1.£NT THERETO DATED SEPTEUBER 12, 1980, eoni APPEARING UNDER RECORDING NO. 11102190531, RECORDED FEBRUARY 19, 19111. ACCORDING TO REOTAL 00 EASEWENT UNDER RECORDING NO. 96021505119, RECORDED FEBRUARY \~. 1996: J.H. BAXTE!l & CO., CALIFORNIA Ut.llTEO PARTllERSl11P APPEARS TO HA\IE SUCCEEDED PUGET TIMBER COMPANY, A JOINT VENTURER. A1..L At.lENDMENTS TO SAID JOINT \IENT\JRE AGR£EMENT MUST 9E SUBMITTED PRIOR TO CLOSING TO DETERMINE TliE CURRENT SIGNATORIES. @EASEWENT, INCLUDING TERWS mo PROIASIONS CONTAIN(D lHEREIN· RECORDING INFORMATION: FEBRUARY 15, 1996 UNDER RECORDING NO. 9602150689 IN FA\IOR Of"· BARBEE MILL CO., INC., A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, AND J.H. BAXTER &: CO .. A CALIFORNIA Ur.tlTED PARTNERSHIP FOR· ROADYl'AY ANO UTILITIES AFFECTS: THE EolST 60 FEET ADJACENT TO WEST MARGIN OF RAILROAD RIGMT-OF"-WAY 11 TllE TERMS Al>IO PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE DOCUMENT ENTITUD "LANO CORNER RECORD" RECORDED MAY 29. 1997 AS RECORDING NO. 9705290636 OF DFF1CIAL RECORDS. 12. CONDITIONS, NOTES, EASElilENTS, PJ.OIASIONS CONTAINED -'ND/OR DEUIU.TED ON TH( FACE. OF THE SURVEY RECORDEO FEBRUARY 9, 2000 UNDER REC~NG NO. 2000020990~ RECORDED IN VOU!t.lE 135 OF SURVEYS, AT PAGE(S) 17tl. IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. @EASEMENT, INCLUDING TERI.IS ,\NO PROVISIONS CONTAINED TI-IEREIN: RECffiOING INFOffMATION: SEP"TEMBER 2, 200B UNDER RECORDING NO . 20080902001178 IN FAVOR OF": OTY OF RENTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, IT'S SUCCESSORS .I.NO ASSlGNS FOR· S-'NITARY SEWER UTIUTIES AND UTIUTY PIPELINES AFFECTS: AS DESCRIBED THEREIN f",7\PRI\IATE ACCESS TO SAID PREMISES IS ACROSS A RAILROAD RICHT-OF-WAY. ... QTHIS COIIIPANY ~LL REQUIRE THAT TH( °PRI\IATE ROADWAY ANO CROSSING I AGRED!ENi', mo ANY A.SSIGNWENTS OR MOOlFICATIONS THEREOF 'MilCH '11£RE ISSUED BY TliE RAILROAD COt.lP-'NY, DE SUBt.llTTE:D FDR EXAMINATION. Tl-IE COVERAGE nlEN AFFORDED UNDER ANY POUCY{IES) ISSUED, RELATI\IE TO ACCESS TO SAID PREMISES, WILL SE LIMITED BY TH( RESTRICTIONS. CONDITIONS .I.NO PROVISIONS AS CONTAINED "TJ.EREIN, If no "aGffi:EMENr EXISTS, "THE FORTl1COMING POi.JCY(IES) WILJ.. CONTAIN T,jE FDI..LO'MNG EXCEPTION· nlE LACl': OF" RIGIH OF ACCESS TO AND FROt.l 11-IE LAND ACROSS A RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY. 15. -'NY OOESTION AS TO TH£ TRUE LOCATION OF Tl-IE LATERAL BOUNDARIES OF THE SAID 2ND CLASS SHORELANDS. CERTIFlCATION: SURVEY IDENllFlCATION NO.: REGISTERED LJ,NO SUR\/EYOR NO.· SURVEYOR'S ADDRESS &: COl,IPANY: TELEPHONE: 2009050.00 ""' BUSH, RDEO & HITCHINl'..S, INC 2009 MINOR A\IENUE EAST SEATil£, WA 98102-J51J (206) 323-.+144 TO CENTURY PAOFIC, LP ANO FIRST At.lERIC-'N TITLE COt.lPANY: THIS IS TO CERTIF'r' T,jAT THIS t.lAP OR PLAT AND THE SUR\/EY ON flt-llCH IT IS BASEO \\£RE WADE IN ACCORDANCE WIT!-1 THE "MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/ACSt.1 LANO TITLE SUR'JEYS," JOINTLY ESTABUSHED ANO ADOPTED BY ALTA AND NSPS IN 2005, mo INCLUDES ITEMS 2. J, 4. 5. 6. 7a, 7b1. 7e, 8, 9, 10, 11<>, 11b, 12, 13, 1-4-, 16, 17 AND 11!, OF TABLE A THEREOF PURSUANT TO THE ACCUR-'CY STANDARDS AS ADOf'TEO BY Al Tm" ~t IN EFFECT ON THE DATE OF THIS CERTiflCATION, ~ THAT IN t.lY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, AS A LANO GI STATE OF WASHINGTON, THE TIVE POSITIONAL A A OF THIS SUR~Y • , oocs Nor EXcEEo TIW 1s SPECIF"IED ™EREIN. Plann·ing uiv1s1 DAKIN A. 61 NO~ l S 100g It~ '"' ~ Vi ~~?8 0:: " I U ui' ~ ~~~i <, ~ -'--"' 0:: ~8~.:., ~ ~ ~:r~ :I: :,;. U O '" t-z --< ::c ~ ~ ~ VI ~ '" ~ :E ::;:' 0 i3 \l;'c"" a=~ ;L :J: ~ ~;z en o g:..? :::, ::;:.i:j~ m <ill I I I I I 111 ~ ' ~ ' ~ z _J 12 " o_ <( z <JC I 2 z ~ ~ >-:!e 0 _J w 0::: "' w u I- LL " >-_J u z w _J <{ 6 > Ct: <( Q u ::, 0 >-" (11 z z (Y s, u w I ::) I·-o_ 0 L <JC ..cJ Ct: I-u G rf 0::: z 0 0 ~ 0 z f-0... w ~ a,a_, hy cMekod o: ~-BK DM3 scol• OG/OS THE ABOVE CERTIFlCATE 15 BASED UPON WORK PR[PAR~" ffiV}' WARR-'NTY, EITHER EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED. ~ V -. _ ~J ) GENERALLY ACCEPTED PJ.oFEss10NAL suRVEY PR...cTI lf 1L"""nng o cc-I ~ HA\ID 118; CITY Of RENTON LOCATION OF EXISTING UTIUTl(S IN AREAS CRITlCAL TO DESIGN CONT ... CT TI,E PO BOX 625001 20()6(]619001179. ~ UTIUTY Ol'tt./ER/ACf:NCY Utru:TOO, co 80162 >hHI 1 1 .3 LAYERSTATE: XS-SUR-R7 (/) rTJ CTl (/) I rTJ rTJ ---, vJ (/) rTJ rTJ " (/) ' . I lilt rTJ ' -~ rTJ "---l ---, CT) . ~- g -·. g <>{'~ .)l g •. I ~i. "·o ·-f ·-.---fll oo, a: .... i:, , • () '-.. ~ '-.. ~ 5 / / "' ~ ~ 1i ,, '. t ~ ~ •. 0 ~ , I i . i i ~ ~ ,,-~ ' N N cu ' t0 ,g :'".)" ,c w 0 0 ~ ()i ~ u JJ 18 ·,, !, u ~ w --,tx,.,.©!B ~ ij~..I f<•a1 s-i!ig • 1 1 un ~---t l ~ ~ ~] ._ ;; @ ! e ~ ., l • ~ " s )( 0 -&-~ ~ j & '!l !:! e § @~ 1 i ~ ~ {) ~ f.,;._j ::~ ~ ao :. > 1 lJ C ! I I ' C ' ~~~ ~"~ * •. 8 ' ~ ® ~ " !nHll!ll'j!l~1 0 g/<j•~ .•! !! :_.! 11;1n.<~1 5 I jj!!, • I ' ~ t:4,,..<: Ir, 4slt1. l\lcro,v ,, ~ ' ,o, .,,. ">:?, 'f,.""ifi f.1£'· ,, , t;- . i .y ~ t: • C ;f 1 li 1 ! 3 s>· ·!"i~~I ,_( .. i ~ ,,./, ~-" 'Y J..~ ~~ ' 0 --- ' ' 0 N,;, 8~ v·10 ~~ ~~ ' ~ < -,... 0 ~ ' ' li ~2 ~~ ' TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY PORT QUENDALL TERMINALS CF~.TI.JRY P1,C 1 IC, lP RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON ' " !ili!IIPIP!ii!li!~Hl!!llli!l'll'liPil! I!! i 1 i I -!'siin!q ~,,1·11 -1 H!1 1J;:,1 1 1l'?i!!' i1 1 i 1 i l ·1 eaH i I !1 1-jj-,; I, ' ~ 8!1:i -1 vi'ii 5 @ F I ''"' I ~,, g I • i -1 ~ ~ " ,. ' ® ' (') ::wJ "1J -· -.... ,g '< rn :z 2. O c:, (» <C :J ->-' (Q :::c ffi (:,o g ct) = --~ ::i = ~ t5 --· ;,-,+ C 0 ffi ~ ~ BUH =------i 1<'-"""~ C:A"E ~ ® ~ ' ' ' " ,~~·' . . :,: 'ij -N () 0 -w a , " ~ ' BUSH, ROED & HITCHINGS, INC. Cl\llL ENGINEERS & LAND SURVEYORS .'ll(;~ 1.1~·::>R ~,'E EAST ~iiJJ~Ej~'!l)'hi.,;•co \200 323-4144 1-ROO-OJ5-05C8 r ~t,Y?hbi"'3:~c 7~63 ~ ' ' ® ® ~ ~ :..,,,;-. '! ~ I V, ,e '--" en c; 0 _J 0 z N _<D -< "' • _7 ;u u, [" ~ s: "' N f--w w I &, (f) ® w w (f) 2 :i w ,o Q' z .. N e- Gl N z 0 u w en .. '-._ ~ S< en ! l1i,1! ii1lll ,;JoE: ~t~ )lt·~~?~1:sr?: j €0~0 SH-OOH-I ~t17-H£ ,:oc~: 1·1;;;:-COl\,'6 uc:Du,4so,¥ ·:r1u,•3S !SVJ ]AV ~(,NI~ 600l Sd0.J..3A~ns ONVl ~ Sd33Nl:JN3 111\iJ "ONI 'SONIHO!IH iv OJO!l 'Hsne 9 Ll:JHS :J:JS n :;n;,, 1 1 1 1 ~* §. , • ~ , , , "., )( • 0 ~ • T. s"?. , Ll uU 1 NOl:JNIHSVM '.J..lNnOJ :JNl>1 'NOlN}cl J-1 'JI_:] ::Nd ,\;c!r _:_I-BJ Slv'Nl~~:J:31 llv'ON3n0 lt:!Od ,!_3/\i:JnS JIHd\ldclOdOl • ~ ' 0 g ,, ~ 0 ~ 0 L[) g 0 0 N ,, ,, ,, :)") C) 0 "' ,, ,, ' ' 5 ' i tj- f--w w I (f) w w (f) " ,, ,, ,, ,, ,,. ' :, i ~; O'. z ., N e- '" ' N z D e-u co V) ., -..... " V) n f-w w I V) w w V) V<O}JNIH&I '"!.:"sew. ~1:,1->,T l~oc) fHo RO~o-s1:o-·x~-, -.t17-£i'.f (:;otl 1::<,T-?·01g5 001~0 ~SOI,\ "a'...L03S t·"~J :;,, ~Ohlr-1 GOO". StJ0;,,1/\l;JnS ONV' ]i' Scl33Nl:)N3 lllilJ "ONI 'S!>NIHO!IH ::V 030H 'Hsna 1 n 1 1 l 'H 111 l ! !,,,,, I l • I n~n, ! ! I '.l ll • I £ g ~ ~ i " ' I "' ~ 0 0 ' " " ,, ,, " " ,1d I 1 ! i-iijl!!lnili 1 1il11d::1nn~1 r 12 •~!le~~~ IB@ "i: Xi-'- ,.J'.i.l' 8 13::JHS 33S " " ' ., ® " " " " " " " N01..'.JNIHSVM 'NOlN3tl dl .JL:"'.)\'d A1-Fl1N3J SlVNl~~:31 llVON:3nO l~Od ,l,]i\dns JIHd\/d'.lOdOl ,, " ,, ,, ,,. © " C c: :-I :.I ) ' ' ' ' ' ' ' \ '· 1 "" ~ 'Z ' ' ! ' 2 3 w ,n 0: z " N >- '" N z 0 F u w U) " " " U) " I ' / ~1 / ' \ \ \ I \ ~ I ,, i I ' ! I I I " \ 0 " \ \ ~ " iz4 " ' ~ 0 l O• >• st f-w w :r: (/) w w (/) I \~ I \ \ i ,I 7 \ ~ ~ ', ;, \ \ \ \ ScJO.l..3.tUinS CNV-1 'Ti Sl:J33Nl~N3 11/11'.) ·oNI ·s~NIH:lllH 'V 03011 'Hsne \ , \ ~ "Z \ \ ', \ \ ' ! ! i " \ \ 0 00 -" ~ Cl \., ~ ; I _J J.na 8 13:JHS 33S " • ! s I j !@El' ' C ~ ' ; '<> ")( 0 O ~ • T' ... i. ' "" . .:-: N018NIHSVM 'AlN:"!OJ 9Nl>l 'NOlN3cJ dl 'JIJIJvd ;c1r,1N_:n Sl'v'Nl~tl:31 ll'v'ON3ntl ltlOd )3/\;,ms JiHdVd'.lOdOl ~. I I I I I I " ' ' I I I I I I j ' l I I I I I I I I I I I I ~ I I I I I I \. I I I \ I I I I ' I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I j ) I I I I I ' l C) C -g C _'!) (l) > a: i5 .... 0) 0 C: ·c >, c; .... JI! i:.3 ~! \ 1, " w l • go: ? I •c I .o ~~ I I ~~ ·~- ~ ·, ,i !, • ,., -~ _o '" 0 " 0 0~ _:::_ " " ,., J " Po ~t "'o ~ ~: " - " ::; ~~ ei !~ l ~~ .0 0 ~s ';. ,~ '" < 0 \ ' \ \ j i, "• -~~ " '· 1 \ = = = ~ > 0 :z ~ < u UJ u :i: ~ "' " ' ' " go: Oc .o ~ r, 00 ;;,2 \ \ \ \ \_ l 0 L{) CJ Ci) c:, () N L(; a !: ~] ' ~ u (fl sl ~ ' "' " ' z st-H' (",j ~ ,c:i f-!-:'.i --.!. a, N " ~~ ~j i3 ' ~"' ~ ~t '"' '~ n ,, " ,, / / ! " ~ " () co ' ~1y2.~~P~90¥;0r~_j !l:>so-~ze-8Qt1-, >Ht-.::;: (g.v) tcC:S:-lOI\,'~ UOjbuL;so1,1 'J IUV3S , W 1 1/,~ <>Ct<lrl 6002 S~O.J..J/1.CJnS ONVl JS' S~33Nl~N3 lli\lJ ":>NI 'SONIH:>llH :V 030H 'Hsne '· I l I I ! I 1 I $ ~~~~~?~~xa~i·r~s•~®i' y "' < I 'I ; I 'I l I I I I I I I V / / . / '< ' f / ,, / / / / / __.,.,,.Y / ~-1// ~ /// t'ii / //),/ / / y~ / / / / ' / >/ / ' / "...._ ; // "' \ jg i\ • j e ~~ ,< »J!SA3~ / / ' / )/ / / / / ,, / >-/ N018NIHSVM 'AlNf10'.) :.INl>t 'NOlNJ~ 0> -0 n " 0 re I 'JL:J J\;I J ,uw1r,T1 0 ~ U1 ] 0 0 0) S1VN1~tl31 ll\fON3nO lt!Od >co 0 'D ~ N 0 C , QJ " AJMJns ::JIHdVcJ'.JOdOl L'. -I ' 6 13::JHS 33S / / / / / / " •;;; . ' ' ' _;./ "' ,J .fi-3~ s~J! ~ ~ ~ ' ~: I / a ~~ •, ~ N >~ \.t,· ~ " "' f-w w ::r: (J) w w (J) L::l-1:JnS-SX :J1V1Scl3J..\f1 (0 f-w w :r: (J) w w (J) z " N m N z () ~ u w V, " ', ~ '• a ,, ~~ :n:r, ;:,;:: i:C.>l8 "~)OUl~'<D.~ "JlL\"L i~~1 1'.o lk>N1~ ;co: S1:l0A3Mns ON\fl ~ S<'.H3Nl8N3 ll/llJ ·oNI 'S!lNIHO!IH lf 030H 'Hsne /1 " ~"i :~; I ~ ~!Q D '> ~ ,i - "' ( / \ ' \ \ ~ • 0~ ' I I ' I I I I I I '" I I ;, NQl:JNIHSitM ' .. uNno::i ~Nl>I ,, d' 'Jl.:J!J\fd ~tH1HflJ Sl'v'Nlv\lcl:31 AJMJnS i ! I ! ' ' ' ! ll'v'ON3n0 JiHdlid::JOd01 • 'NOlNJl:l lclOd 0) .... 0 £ :..-.;,; [ ,1: ~ () 0.. o, L33HS 33S ' ' ,, ' ,/ } \ \ ,, \ \ ' \ \ ' i I I I I I I I I I I ,, ' I \ ,: ' "\" 1 "' ' ' ' ,. ' ' ' ' ' ...._ : .• 'z ..... a, ro 0 r--; 0 " c, CJ <D t.n 0 ' C, ' C1 0 [', C 0 I " "' II ,~ = = = "' 00 ·~ ;,,. C) '1 () "' ~ " •• ~ -] 0: '-' ' ' ', "' " ,, ------_.;;...,- / " ' \ ,1 \ \ ~~----~ ,, °"~ : I :/ I I I i ;,J 1 I I I I ' "" OJ I I I i I J i i ~ r, ~ I 7 I I \ \' f-V: w I w \ :r: I I I ,/ I ' I i I I I I I I j 1 I \ I I I ! I I I I I • I I I ,1 j I I I I ' l I I I , I ~ ~ /. ' 'i I I (J) w w (J) jJ ; I I L;,,-i,ns--sx :311;1..LS1f3AV1 \ ' I ; " " oi "' rY z " G C' '" N z () C' 0 w C1 " .... °' " "' f--w w I (fl w w (fl ' I -;, I ,I i I I , . ! ! ! l • " ! ! I i , I I ! I i I I I ) 1 ., I i I I I l l ' I I J 1 I I I I ,1 7 ' I ' " I ' i / I I ~; ·; I I I ' I I I ' 1 I ' I I I I I I I I I I I j ' ' I I ' 'o ~ / rf~ J1'rt~~tfM· I ooc;c s,o-arn-. n1t-1'1r (\/01) Ct~( -l01RB OOJ~c,4,oy, ']UlOJS I~~ I--,., <f()'lll" 0000 Sd0A3M(]S ONVl 7ii' Stl33NIS>N3 llfll) "ONI 'SDNIHO!IH 'i C30!1 'Hsna \ I \ ~\ '\ I ' I \;, ' I \ \~ ,o \ I " I ,. 1 a c; 13:JHS 3:JS ]1''~ a \ ' ' \ I I • I \ '; \ \ \ \ ,, ' \ \ \ \ I.· \ I F \ \ \ ' ' 1 I / / \ I I I \ ,, ' °" \ \ \ \c \ ' i ,1 I ' I \ \, i ; I I I j I I I I I NQ_:_'.)NIHSVM 'HNnOJ '.)Nl>i J 'Jl __ ~1Jv d ),~n1_NJJ Sl'v'NIV'l~:31 ll'v'ON3nO fJAtJnS " I ~ ~< I I \ \ \ \ ' I \'5 'ii ,0 ~ I' I s I I t \ I I I I I ' \ ' \ I \ \ " \ I ' I \ I I I \ I l \ I \• t \ I I • I \ \ I I I' f I I I \ I I I I I I I I \ \ I l I I I I '· ' I ', I I I "' n I I I .. II ,, ! '/ ' I I ,. f I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I \ JIHd\fd:JOdOl \ \ \ \ I I ,, !, ~ • ,, " 0 '/\J01N3~ l~Od C: ..... 0 C: (/) (!) .·~ er.: 0 'e; .a.:: ·t " " ' Set me ,o •o g;; :;:"' I " •\ 0 ~ , I; O• 0 c, ·, 0 \0 u, 0 0 ,:J) ·o 0 ,::o N 0 " (~ 1 t ~ " u "' ~: " "' ~i 0.. .,, ' "' " Z l Ll3HS 33S :, 5' w ITT I 0: z " N ,_ a, N z 0 c= u '" (D s;- " 5' (D ~ / t J I I :~ \1 I I I I I o/.f '!)/ 1r ~ I F " , I ;y I I • ' I ;! 1 ~1 ' :.-;c ' I~ i i I pl I I I I I I I 1 I 'i I I r,~,-1~.ilt uo1Du,.-,;01,1 • J tuns lS\i.l Vd ~ON!r! 60Q~ S(JO,l.3.'ldnS ON\il 7i S/:JJ3NON3 llAI:) ·oNI 'SONIHO!IH lfl 030!1 'Hsne ::'.l .., ' " tJ Ul ~: ~ •• '" -• .., ' "' "' ~ Du ! <H i j ~0§ e 0 B ! ' ' ' ~-9-0)(e " I I I I I '~ I ? f I I I I I ·; I 'I 1 I 'I J I I I I I I I ;.'./ 1 y I I I I I I I / el I I I I 'I 7 I I I ' I l ,' / I I ,, 7// I I I I ; ;:/ I / I I I I V / / / I I I I I I I ;/ I I / I I ' I >/ 9 133HS 33S NOlS>NIHSVM 'A1Nno:::i :JNl>l '~OlN]~ ' \ I, ~ I ,: I I I I dl 'JUIJ'id nHUN3J Sl'v'Nl~tl31 ll'v'ON3nb ltlOd A3MJnS '.llHd\ld::JOdOl I I I I J I _y I I '7/ I •I j ;{ l I I I' l L3 I " i m " ·~ D n (!'., 0 1-w w I Ul w w Ul 6" DfC .. .,._._ ,, ... ' l._·,c "'-....:: " " <' " ' "~·so / ; /,a,< ,, I I ' I \, ... .J, ' I ) I"" I I I _J .. , -.. GRAVEL I I / I / (,,,.~ / / /" " / / / / I ), .. I I /e,• l'"" I ' I I I I /. " ,, " + " • SEE SHEET 9 SW "1/4 S~CTICr~ 29, 124N, RSI:_, \fUJL g "' I/ / I .( //,'.',/ / I I ; /;I / ;1 1 I .,., .,: I ;/// / / / / / I I I I I / J,o,/{ I I .,: I I /')~, ( / 1 1 ·" 7.. .._ ; I I I/ "''-f... I II ; .\'-..._ / ;1 I ....... ; )' / / "'-.._. /1-M/,., I '; "' _,.....,._- r·''' !'P•40,~·,, ,,.,," '-,-I'...._ ,~,: "', I Gl1A's'c:L . '", • .,, ''-...'),~,,,_>--, I ""··" ' " -' ;;;·, I '' '-.t.-....... \,r:-..:--Zi,,, >;, ' I'"-''' I )')'" .._&'./ ,/ / / il,. / /,~ /'-/ /7," "/ ;/='' / ' / I f>'&J / / ,.../'.,{,." .' ;!"/,,,, /''·'/; 1 .l' "' ~ 0 >· q'4•; .& " ~ TWIN STUMel,a,•, ~5·,,s· Q I / '"' I /"' .J?'/.,," , ,' 16" OEC 6"0EC / / l/" } . ":i /,'.;''\. I I ; :'°" I .., 14" DEC /'!' I / '"" I i' / J,," / /"' if />, I_,. I " /-/,,'it .; /P I <,'!/'-(f; I / ;:f,,: I I I I / ,,,,, ; . I I : /'" / .. :1 ; ... •. ,,!-i,,:,1 / "':I / ,,_ .. "..,,. />;"'' f, ~\. *'!.-,, / , ,;; ' .) .,·, ~. _,.., ·,,. '". '/ · ,~.Ji<Y I _,.<> if: · 4• Cl< .._,<!J_,, · · ({if/! q,.. 4 CON ~-·------....-<,, "-t,.'\t··l·i"f:t ~ . I ... ;". !\,$.c.~" # I .l9c .. -. "i ;,._.§:_,,,,.-' ,_l I I c; ~ "'I' ,_.,, .. / }: ~" lo_.,._.,. I "' cf t' I '(CON/ ,, '~•>,,or I I"-" ~/- ,._ t' ) ,( J',"K'/ C) o.* ·"'~ p#'';,"'<: i/.G"k1""'' *'""<8' I .,:,.;/ /,,,-;/;,·• <._x,>/ /"' "'"",..1/ /j /,.,.,!'.~.;-. 'b f,., I I I 1. / RR A .t,. /. --~ I ~Gt.J / ,i .. ,":', ,o ,, 1\t "! -Q / I /~--,; I ' , .. " / /; /'" ~ I /f'" I I /v,<c ;fr '/,,,, I £!;"" ·.• • I / ; ----"" /.! 4< ;,,,, ,;:· .. ,, .. :i ... ·<;,(r",·, ... &~~/, c;;.p/7\ / / it I /'-r I"' /" I I I / / I I I I r'~-I < I / G'l~VEl ,-"'" ..... / "e··/"" / .,,,, ,:. ) / ;,. ~ ·/· . I gt{ I «J? -, .. I .· /, "' tl. I I I ""'' I ~/ /·~~ / ; ;,., / jj' /! ~-I '"' II; "!,~,. ff/ ;' I I I I .c,·, ~ • I . ,. ---' I I .-/.,_ ,• ' ---/ ., . :. . ' ' ' ; ,, , / I• ,, ,• I S"O£C"",J/_j r/ /"' ' I I l.~ ". I ". I. --' ', • /., ,,, j" 1;_g 1 ----·.-,;;:--,. .,._._ "'~ . /<if·""' . /,>if. p• --' ---~ .•. ' ' "' ., @ ' • --I "·"' "' I .1,7.,, --• --.,,_ --' I j I /· C --'•, --'" ' ._-,·~ l / I ;. , I /"' I~ I , I t '· /' I /' w ~ -'•""" ----/ --. ,__ ' ' W .,._._ .,._._ '%,,, ------~ . . . ~" / . /{;;,.,, / .,._._ -'"'-I ' .•. , ) I >_ ,, ' '"" ' ' ' ,, '" -----' ' . -- -----• I ., ' ' ,, ,. • ~ .,._._ .,._._ •, "" "'" "re· ""' I / I /,,,-~~ " " " "• '<\ " " ~ I I /, "' /i /"' I I w w (/) / / / / _,,..,,-, ______ ,,,. 1,'b .-,f,, I I ' I 1 I ' l ~ .. ·1&' ;k,, I ~·-'A. .. ' t,!i".f.'.t; I ,h '1 ./"'' . I I . I ,/ cf/ 'J /, I ~-" / /"~' '/ .· / "SPj:W LIMll 25MPH" 'NO PARKING ANYTIME" j I I EGEND '" " ---', r--_ ' «',' /, " " , I . --.... ........__ x.:?"'./ i -r o,r r. -. 4' '-\.'"'--• • )'"..., /"" 1 ! •,;,."' I# / ' " . t/. .· I I ···.; ""~,, .• "(, .. I I "" '.._ . , ~I •.,.;,/ -------I "'-..>'~<t'i II Jc~,~" / '""" ,'1,1 I 1 ,,;, ; '"' 1 &,; I j' &?i",u;,, if I /, cfe; /"" ! '•'<' I '" '1 / I " ,., I ;/ . . ;,,,-. I I "~ I I; ''<'10 I I ! ti . """ • 1~>1·.. /. {· /"" ) l.,t,, '"'( c• I I &,./ -0 '"' 0 I '''" /"' ' I , "' ss,a <O • . /,',; f / '"' I ~-n "'''°" ,j, • '"" '1c I I ;· · 1 / COCalB. ·rep N"'y ;,~,.. "" I ,._,,,,, ti " I ;;; :::'I ""I "" I i, 1 '•;,, I I .. "" Js 0 ';' ,., J ;/ . •J, I ""' I/;/ ,j> / ;l,!'1" ... , / I·,,, 1 1 / I / I I I I Ce ",·,~. II ,f' / I if !;· I I I , ;-.,, --• I • ··~ • •• ;.. I ' ,. ' ' I I ' I --I I _._-r;: / "-l}' I ;, I •,,, , ' -I • !'' I @ ,_, -• s ;, , .. , • , I , ~~'~'EC " '"' S"DEC ~ I -~· DUIG. HT. .:......'..L..: ;, ~" 1:7;,:,;&11 EZ;z,.:::2] ~ ~ -¢ = ,o,5'Plt.o,i.l1Ct;OP<CliETE Fl.lSTICPIPt ROOF" El.£VAT10N Of BUILDING BUl!Dl"G Lt,E lll.O'MlFJ' VN..VF. -=~ == ~~· COHo.)'ll1t 9,!Rrl.CE CCtlCA£11: =.iNINCWIILL =•= CENTER CII' CIWINEl. GRAPHIC SCALE I 1 ( n, FEET ) 1 incb -20 It. r =' ~, * [] m ~ CT ~a -ITT ™ ~ e, )( • ~a -• • .. 0/H E/T • ~ • ,,, ,., ~ 00 ~ -@ w _., <!, " • N • = = ~ • " • M ~ CONIFCR TREE (51ZC NOTED) == f-w w I (/) uJ w (/) t>lAIII ,__ !'DICE (OJ) l)f;G0.100$ ll'E!: (S,lE ..OJUJ) -· r,R ...... l.El El.ECllUC,,. DIJC1 ELE~N..VAIJLT ELECTI!ICAL TR1.Ml"ORUI'~ ==- S<:,JHOaRON r,oo 1.140 r:N' '1N1~£D Fl.000 El.£VA110N rOR(:£ w"'N >lR£HlDRAtlT FOONO SURVEY ~Ol<UIIEN' l'OUNO Pl< Nl,IL G.0.S Y"1.YE =~, =-~--=-M l~YERT EL.EVAllON ,lJNC:TIOOI BOX ~--O"o€1'1><£AO [L£(;1RIC;m.D'HOH[ ~, -"--= PO\EI POLE .,/ UGHT PAt<TW Uro.J1" Loc,t,,llOI< RECOR(! UTIL/T'r ,ocn,;,. s.u,,,AAY SEOOI CU:.....OUT S•JUAAY !OEII SAN<TAAY S[~ r.w<HOl.f Sl~ """'~ STORI.I DR""" .,...,....;u ="' -TtlU'l10HE DUCT IO.£PH<)NE SENTRY BOX m.El'HONE Vl,IJLT Tf.ill'HCO<E ,w<HOL.E Tl)P aE;\IATION TRN11C Fl.OW llll'!OW TrJP Of~,,.~ fO£ ~ Sl.<.X>E WAlOI l,l[l(H WATVI .. .o.N~CU WAml lJNE I/Amt VAULT >-w > 0:: ::J (fJ u I 0. <( 0:: 0 0 0. 0 f- 0 ~ (/) =~:,i?, er: _,,,;:::,.,: en~ ~~~~ " ~ ,·v' ~ ~ .:~"'~Jc :c (fl . ,:[ ~ ~ /t -~ ::c ~ ~ ,ii w ~ 0 :j ""z 00 "' '" -~ ::t: ~ V> 0 :::, m ~ ' :!, -, z ::; :ii"' ~ ~ «<tll (/) _J <( z :::;;; r ~ 0::: w u I-LL _J _J <( " ·~ <( '.l. 0 )-z cc w :::, 0 ---=· f- 7 I.ii u l-o:: ~ofReAto..P: 3 ! ' ' ~ z 0 ~ " z 'c w <( " ,: ~ L ~ 0 0 0 z " z 0 z w "' Plannino Div1~errr. I"'"""" I -L ~-,B, DAB /</ NOV l 8 100L' .. ~" I OE/09 I I , ' , I / .' ,/, 1 .. ,.,, it:;;t'?,;!h's~'~.';:,:; .•. // tf.:i. f,,t< .. / .,,, / /f' 'oo, / ,.h\""'~,, J![Y " ,,, .i·•" SEE SHEET 11 PROPERT, • / / /"'' / / {' ' \ ~ \ .. . . . . ' -· ' . " . " .. . •• < / < ' .• ' '-C " < < ' < '• , • < • ~\ '• ' ,,, ,,,.. rn· on ''" ; I ,.~ ../,.. ;,, ,, ;.. -I ~· \ <:, • I \ \; . \,.. /><·c I I ('''" (l' I I / / ,\;] a-I .,.,,,,, 'a\ I I I I I ' "' -• ' ' •• ' ' ''/ . I f,,,, 30 . ,,.,. : I I .... / qf}c,; \ , ;,• ~ r ,.. , I ~ / /I J'lf\~.,. / / a I ; I; I I ~. > ""1 ·if/V / I 1 X /"", ~ I <f" ~ ~ 20"DEC ·~-DEC / ?C0905D ~ 5 C u 3 en 0 \ \ ! \ Sl'v'Nl~H31 JIHd\leJ:)OdOl ,\3/lcJnS 1- (./) 'NOlN:3~ C: C 0 0 ... C: Q) a: 0: .,._ C o ·c >, C .... ~ ·-Cl.. (.) ' :J <( ' u "' u :i: ~ ' "' " ' ' C en CJ a; (_) 0 N " e~ •• -JI CCJ ' ' ' '3J.111S1'-'A'i'l O:J-C:lnS-SX ' ' ' ' I (Y) f---w w I ~I~ ~ w , w ~ ~ X ~ ~ , 5 ~ ~ LEGEND -!IUlG. HT. i, ~N I:'.> ,11 czci = = ¢ = = = -x-x-~, @ [Ill ro ~ CT ~o ~, ITT ~ -<) " X ' o'&\<"1.1\C: CONCl!ETE ~- ROOI' El.£\/A1ICIH Of' Bl!ILDING BUllDl<G Ult£ Ell.O>I0'1' VM._V£ -=-= =w, <XlffCR,,.. ....... ..a: COlfCRill 11£1"-G WAI.I. LJGNT POLE ,::om;ll Of"~All\l[L (:()HIFEft TREE: ($1iE ~Om>) == QI.,,. U"IK f'EHCE (CI.F') !)[CIJ<.JOU5 fflll (lllE >«>!I'll) -· tll'""'INU'.T EUCTRIC"'-!)<JCT il.ECTl<lCAl YNJLT El.ECTII/CN..'11\1,N~ El.D::lRIC ME'!ER f<llll<O Ill-ON R00 ""0 CM> F1l<ISHED R.OOR D.£VAT10N FOf<C:£ M .. N ~HY\ll<NH F<'.OJP<DSUFl'lf;'rllCH.IIEIT F(lJND Pt; N"l. (1.1,S VAI.Vf. "'°S UNE (MIC!I 0.0.S l,,£10! ~ ' ~ • 0/1< E/T • ~ " ., ., ~ 00 ~ -@ ~ _,,, ~ m • N -' = -= • @ • ~ M ~ ~-- GUY N<Cl!Olt IN~ a.E\/Al10N -oo• -'TU'l"'IG'IIEU. C'IERHt.l!) EILC1RiC/TEJ.EP,loNE ~~ ~"~ -= P(l>EI POI.£ W/ I.JGHT PAJNTD) l/TI.IT'I" LOC,l,TION "1:et::HOVTIUT'l"LOC.,n()< SANITIJIY 2'flD! (ll,lNOOT SANT...,. !lf;\lltJI SN<ITIJIY 51:IE! 1,1 ...... 0U -~~ o;TtlltM """'" ""'HOl.E =T"'T -m£PHC><E PIJCT m£P!+()NE $ENTll'T BOX TllD'HONE VAIJl T mLPHONEM"""°'-1: 1'JP llLVAl10N TRWIC >l.O* AA<tOW ~~- Ta: or SI.OPE WU~IIITTER WATI:l'i' ""'HO.£ .. .. ~ UN[ WA1Vl VNJI.T WJ,W,, VAI.Vf. Wl)(I) f£NC( {lflf) WfTl-""" Fl.A~ I I I ·,, nrnnrn,,,r,,....o,<~-~• 11<.\-n rl= • •••:?nm 7 ,.~ ·,a Ar., I I GRAPHIC SCALE I I I I SW 1/4 SECTION 29 I ' T24N R5t ' -, W.M I I I ·. I I //; /"' ·;/II I I I / / I I I I I • I ·' I I f; /1 / I I I -; I I I I I II I ;I -~~1~·---+-1 I I I (I I I I I I ~ I r I i I 1// I/ /; /, I II/ 1// I I ( IN FEET ) 1 Inch -20 rt !'''"' I I I I I I I I ff // I / Ii II I I i~ . / ~ / cJ' <:, I I I~ ,,,,. ,f_,,):. I I "/.:7' I I I I I I I I I ill /// !j./l I !1/ I / I I ,!{ / /; / ;::,. I I I I I q I I I I I " I I J I I '~ ,,/ ;.f I/ I / I'-I I '""-I I // -. RI Jo .. fl ~ '"-I . I I -I I . I Jo,,, / / . / / . f; ! / -/· I . / I"" I 1 1 / I i"'" I I I G I I / .f./ I c,_""J," / ,/' I -' 21'·' j I I I I J / 1 111:_ 1_'.-~/·1 I ,, I f / // //1,l"'; I / I .if 1 / .;, I I I " /If-' I I I & I I 1 'lr / ,.,~, // I i I I q I ~ I I I 18" CEC 10• DEC SEE SHEET 13 I I I I I II I Y, I //· l (j ,_<..""~t"'---- .......... _,. __ ... I ~· -.... --........ ,,.. 5 l<i'/1 /. x.....__.,_"'-1'·- ,r l' ... .___.\' // I ;,_'°.-~:_-----..,.......__,. /"' I " --... ....__" I I II ; I ' I ff 1,,,. j!,, I Q,'1: / I ,4'.t ::,.,.__ </ I _ 24" DEC. 8" DEC PORT 14" DEC 6" C:EC I -< / _J';' -.............. ./"' if -.. -,,. "W\.J 16 ~ ~;- (Jr UE~ 2<i" DEC / ., I j '3p CN'PED IROt,' · / PIN W/CAP -LSI .... ; 22::;33 I 'i !' c_tll ""' .,. '// ·t· ·?" .I/ •/ )' ,. ,!' 0 0' /<' l ~ /, . I / ;/ . ..., ""I I I 1\ l .~ .cf" ;/: r i ,,.. r / 4" I ~v ,.,,__) ,,? t . l 14" CEC "' 0 ~ Cb ,, ~ QUENDALL TERMINAL I I I ,"';' . ;.,-·I /"1' / I I t,11DDL.E PARCEL T/'.X# 292405-9002-0, ·ww 12· / ./ I I I ,; I I I ,· I ;'" : I I I I ' I I j/1 • ' I , j I I . J /7--'/.'.+/ .,., •/,<<f/ ,,J'/ // /'';!./ "WI..Jlf.!#4;,'_.,,, //_.:· ,4< PS( ~A5 PIPELINE MAAKER "v I / I I Cit¥~f Renton Planninq Division I . / NOV l 8 i009 I lRi!Ete~~w~- >--w > er: =, Ul u :i: [l_ <t Ct: (.'.) 0 []_ 0 f- <.> :rt;g : ~ ;;~j C, & ~g~;c ~ J -·~'ij u O " .... z :i: 5 ~ ,IS ~ ~ ';; 0 W :5c 1.i.1 8 i} 0 z «,;;; ~ ~ i:~ :::c ~ =\ . ., (/l u lo'..t? ::, R::,,~ m <ill (fl __J -< z C:L ::E j fr: w u I-LL __J C <( __J =--L -< 0 >--z cc:: w _) f-::::, z a w (_) I- fr: 0 (L ~ ! ' , ~ z 0 ~ " z r V) "' " " >· z J 0 u " z Y. z 0 ~ z w ~ dco~n ,, eh.ekoo ~Y ~B~< [)Ar:l 'CJ' OG/89 2C0905C '12 ,, , 7 _, (J) f-w w I l/l w w l/l 0 - f-w w I ~1 l/l ' ~ w f w ~ l/l ~ ~ a " ~ s SEE SHEET 12 SW 1/4 SECTION 29, T2fl, R5E, W.M I ! I ! ' / I" ! I I I I //; /;/ ;1 I I I// / I I ( "I ~1 ~ I I I , I I I / / 7'/ ' / I /"i:F / .. ' I J ,, /···.·.. ;,.. :, . I . :; I , / C . I " I I •.. ' I .ffi /c 'J't/f I; . I ,,'. I I /,, ~ 18" DEC 6" DEC 10" DEC ., I / i / a I I I I I I ;') I I "I'. +/ /''·'' C j /o / •• -. ! /., -<..S:. ' ~ / // / /y,,1 /-v <,,., -~J~7?!/ /r' ~·, .. // /9'.: // /1 ,+//· )')?' "/"/. ..c'/1' .,{ . / ''//·,! I /'/!}! /''' / 11· . j ;)I I I !•• ' I I '1 I #~ I I·,.. I ,ol , ,. ,. r· " . ,, I I I .,. I ·' I, <' ' .-,(,, I '<%'" / / ,j " f .r/ . I . I .. /"/ ·y/// / . .._/ .~ >+/ ; I 6" DEC/ / / .i!; I I ,. ~I ~ /,. ~ {;;1"1,,/ ,c/"'"· • jc / . / Jr !. ,, , .. ' ' ' '' 11 o> 1 / ff " ,. ' , ,. ,, I /" I 81 •• '°' I .1 I I~/ lg / ti / / / 1? //"" ;'./ "/"'" .,,. ' '/> / I '; , I $ "", ;/ /, , '/1' '.'.<'./'"· ~ ;/ / ' / / ( / ·'"' 20" D[C /+ "AQ Wl.J f 24" DEC ·o'" DEC ,•'1 I I 1 /•• f, occc.,c ! , ' ,.. . ' . -., ' , , , ,.. , " l_ .. ,,I I ,. ~'/ ~;·''$'' 6 I"-'';, : 1· ,,,, ... I I }' :/§:.,. I 4" CON I 1 ~· l)(C. I I 8/ /,./ / . ,,,.· // j I I /" ' rn, • / ~ I :;i, ,/' " . I 4-f 24" .ili:Ce I I . Avg/ + START / qf l)fr / ZO'E ilo" I ' / "' 20" DfC /-t ..J 22" DS:C 12" DEC I • c I ~ j .. , W I 'n,, ":, / nee ; I '', /'"' f: ·1· c I ff' I / I .· '> "" -:: /""'' I ' " i}. 1 'I ~ I , I //'"' , I, (1) , oo, · I y/ / 42"DEC ~2"0Ec: 30"DEC , e· DEC:: 18" DE2 /+ ''" e· DEC J2" otr / 111"t;Mf' .____/ . 2-24"QEC .!O" DEC / "-,") 1Em28.97' / .,~ /-t 6" DEC . ./+ 6" DEC /"" .;6" Df;C • _,/\. 20" D'ECc 12" DEC / / ' ./ ... _p,.,.... ~ / .ffe\-f. ,,il<lt.__::s H" DE /Y·-.-'.OIJND P1N WITH CAP· ~ "' -......_ _ :..8.1 !f ~ C . -+ KJ OYL~ 5524" '"!'1" / ·"" l;' / 4, ''';), ,._,, / ".,-i, ."'· V ~1 /'' <:i~ , .::.,,_,,, ir ':!f /-t "AQl'IIJ,?i, ,/-t 19• ' / / > / rou,io RON Pl~ W/CAP "l<:J 0'/lER 5524· <" ,, h C .2:::, ;',.;;: ,; I I ,/ I ' ,/ I I I ~~ ---=-::I I I ! I I I I I I I I I /' I I I !!} I 'ii'-I I I '-I I /' I I ! / I I I I / /' LEGEND '"--1."!flli -11..DG. HT • ASP>W,.'OCC~l[ =,- ROOf !llYATIOH C( Ell!ll.Oli'i~ llUUlO<G ,...., & BI.O'loQFf V"'-OE C..TV CMIU= t::<·":'.-~· n ~y [£>~ :=] C'-NOPY [::===J tot<CI0::1[ SURF..c:E Cl'\I' CONO![TE; "'"'>JHl".C W/.u. I) U(»<T ~OLC COC o.N'l\:A C( CH.o.NN£L CON 'XlNlfEI< TR£E (sm: ~OTED) COHC OOl<C!!£1[ -X-X-Cl< ... UNI( f'IMCE (Clf) OEC 0[00\KlJS 1"Rf( (S,ZE "01[0) * -· [I] llfl""" IIUT W EUC1":1¢Al OOCT EV ElD:TRIC"'-Y""l T tl Et£C-.-0Rll£J< EM DI ElEClRIC w[m, FlR(: fOUliOll!<JNROON<!lCN' Ff( fJ<'9<ID f'l.OOR £U'l'"T>Cf< Fl,I F'ORCE 1,11,tl -,¢ Fff H'rllR/,l<jT l!il FOO,f;l SUll'IEY r.1"'"-""El<T )( FOO,f;l Pl( N ... L m GAS V/,L'IE --1,1,1Q C>.S l£lER GUARD POST -----'I OI.JY ..ictlOR IE IN.OT (lE',ATION 1H -,,mCTION OOX • "°"ru!><C ..n.L O/H E/f ~u., W:CTll:IC/m,fl'HDNE • ·= PL Pftl:ffRTI' l.lNI: • -= POl!EA POL[ W/ L.IGHT (P) PMITTD UllJTY U,C,,Tlll< (S) ~ 00 ~ _., ro RCCOl'O UTit)TY LOCATION SAMITARY S£11El'1 CUA/,IQUT SAMITARY SEYt!:!I S,'1,/ITMIY !lEIIE~ WANl<Ol£ STOlhl DII ... N City of Renton~., Planning Division STORII °""'" MANHCU: =a, - NOV l 8 2009 ID • N ™" rr = ~ ~00~ ~E S0<1RY BOX m.EJ'HOHE ... AULT TUEPl10H!: l,l""HOI.I:: TtlP UF;\f .. TJON 11W1'1C fl.OW ARROW TlJl'(:j'9AMK ~~ ~$- WATER l,lNlttCU: [Ri[fi(C/g~W/~[Q) : GRAPHIC SCALE o/J 1 r I ( IN FEET ) I Inch "" 20 fL r M ~ WA"TER IJNC WATER VAULT W.0,0, ..-Al.VE 'OIJO[)Fl'..-::E("") -·= )- w > Ct'. =i U) u I (L <{ [t'. (') 0 (L 0 f- 0 !!: VJ :ff:~l vf ~ ~~~i ~ ~ ~'.~~; Q ~ ·~ I-z ' -~ ::c "' <ti m ~ cw ..,'ai 00 ""z w 'Z 5 II) G :, m ~ ., "' ii~ ::,:w~ ~~i 1\11 en _J <( z ::;;: Cl_ _J 0:: w u I-Le.. _J u _J <( <( 0 ,- z l w =- =i 0 ?: l.JJ u I- 0:: 0 o._ I I ' ' ~ z 2 0 z I " <C " .::· z ~ 0 u " z '< z' 2 z w "' orowr. o, ct.ocOeOb) JBK "JAB oo\• 1"=2::::,' 06/J9 ),~ ~~ 2D890~,C .,, .. , n ,, p '~ Buildings NW1 and NW2 -Exterior Design Goals: Provide a coordinated design language with a variety of detaib and matl:'rhlls to provide a human scale, lllghllght portal elements, and provide a visually intttesting street-Koilp<l and faca<M!. Buildings NW1 and NW2 There are 7 levels in thew mixed US<:" buildings as follows: Pl includes screened structured parking with wme retail & restaurant uS<:"s south facing in NWl. P2 lndudes screened structured parli;ing with some offke use wuth fadng In NWI. Floors. 1-5: All residential use. Floor 1 lmludesanelevated landsc.iped courtyard amenity. 0 11' JD' ., ., ~ I BUILDING NW1 1"•311',Q" Building NE1 There are 6 levels in this mixed use building u folloW§: Pl indudes screened structured parking with some retail use south facing In NWl. The office lobby is in the SW comer. P2 includes screened structured parking with some office use south facing. Floors. 1-<I: All office use. T '! :! • 'Ill' 111 1/11 • 1"•2INI' BUILDING NW1 QUENDALL TERMINALS RENTON, WASHINGTON CENTURY PACIFIC, LP Retail and Restaurant Space Features: A skll'walk orien~tion with an:hitecturaHy articulated punched openings with glass typically to sidewalk le~I. Include canopies of steel and glass for weather protection. Sconce and canopy lighting fixtures for an appropriate lighting le~!. Street lighting on public right-of-ways and intersections. Altematefacade materials and details are used for variety. To visually conceal the structured parking from street: We are providing N>lall/resta1mmt and 2nd floor office space at some street facades which completely screens parking behind. Facades with parking directly behind have the following: Architecturally articulated punched openings in-filled with grillworl,; that abo allows climbing vines. Intermittent trellis elements -vine covered. Berm and extend landscaping to sill of punched openings. Ahemate facade materials and details are used for variety. We avoid solid walls. Residential Floors Features: These floors are setback from the b;,selacade for modulation and visual interest. Additional architecturalfiK-ilde modulaUon is provided via: Horizont,111 plan modulalion with projecting decks. Projecting verliC<II elements beyond the parapet. Ahem ate facade materials and details are used for variety. Architectural facade element variety. Strong corner elements to high light the entry portal. ~ ~ ": Amenities: Large landscap,>, courtyard at level I visually screens structured parking below and provides restful areas to view or for sitting, r1eadln9, and strolling. It may indudean exi,rcise room or entertainmen1 space. Potential for rooftop plaza wilh landscaping and green root elemen1s. Exterior Finish -Buildin11s NW1 and NW2: Mark: Description: Material/Finish: 1. Coping, P;;,inted Metal, color to match siding 2. Glass & store front Graeen tint imulated glass in aluminum frames. clear system ;,nod1zed -typical. Use clear glass at retail 3a. Wdlls at Bas<' of Includes a mix of materials for vari.;,ty Building (Levels Pl Concrer .. -stained or painted finish &Pl)· Brkk veneer with random color patt<crn deM sealer fini,h 3b. Walb above Includes d mix of materrals for vanety BaseofBuilding Metal Panel Siding -painted finish !Residential Floors Stur;co -pa,nted finish 1 thru 5) Composite Panel Siding -painted finish 3c. Walls at Stair Metal Panel Siding-painted finish Penthouse& Roof Equipmeni 4. Railings, Grillwork andTrem1 Painted Met di, ace em colors TBD 5. Entry c_anopy: Painted M~al. accent colors TBD Gr<'!'n tint glazing In aluminum frame 6. Sconce Lighting Typical at Level Pl. Sele-::t1on TBD. Fi~tures, Typical at P2 Landscaped Parking Deck Selectjon TBD BUILDING NW2 EAST ELEVATION BUILDING NE1 SOUTH ELEVATION Exterior Finish -Building NE1: Mark: Description: Material/Finish: L L 3a. 3b :k. 4. s 6 Coping: Glass & storefront system: Walls at BaS<:" of Building (Levels P1&P2): Walls above Base of Building (Office Floors 1 thru 4 I: wallsatSt<lir Penthouse & Roof Equipment Painted Meta~ color to match siding. Green tint insulated glass in aluminum frames, cleat anodized -typical. Use clear glass at retail. Includes a mi:< of materials for variety: • Concrete -stained or paintedfimsh. Brick veneer with random color pattern sealer finish. lncludles a rniY of mat1erials for variety: • Metal Panel Siding -painted finish. • Sluce<.> -p, .. nted finish. dear • Composite Panel Siding -p;1H1ted fimt "t Metal Panel Siding -pain led finish. f Y of R Plannin9 D, Railings, Grill-work Painted Metal. accent colors TBD and Trellis: Entry Canopy: Sconce Lighting Fhrtl.ll'ff: Painted Metal. accent colorsTBD Green tint glazing in aluminum frame. Typical at Level Pl, Selection TBD. Typlcal at P2 Landscaped Parking Deck Selection TBD Typical building elevations concepts by building types. NOV I 8 2 Colors and certain detail elements will vary for visual vitality. ! ' i 1 ci Q 1: ~ 0 ;1~,j,JI LI ~~ V, ....I <C z -z c... :E ~ ...J' a:: \..'.J u Z LL WI U .... ~ ~ ....I 5 >-....I ' a: z ::::> <C O I-I-z c z w WU z a: w :) a -- m ~ ~ ~ -~ 4: ( ~ • N I:;; ::::; w a: "- -§ , m I . " 0 D !3 " • 5 0 ~ ~ P3.0 \l ;_; Ci J f " ~ •• SW QUAD 450 RESICENTI,',L UNITS (7118 CARSO 1 75 REQUIRED) RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS = 496,()(l()gol' +/. PARKING GIIRACE P-1 It. P-2 = 3015, .. ,ai,.r COURTYARD -64,106gsl 1<°e~i5~~rio.=w~~ARS REQUIRED) 10,(lOOgsfOFFICE ( B,571ns1) @P-2 (26CII.RS R!aQUIH.EDJ 857 MINIMUM TOTAL REQUIRED 811 TOTAL SHOl/oN ON P,1 & P-2 W/2'/o TO BE DEDUCTED FOR MA REQUIREMENTS ( .ffi IN SE & NE QUAD) SE QUAD 175 RESIOENilAL UNITS (3re CARSO 1 75AJNIT REQUIRED'/ RESIDEITTIAL BUILDINGS ~ 1112,soog.t +/· PARKINO l'.3Nt,l,OE P-1 & P 2 -250,364gsf COURTYARD~ 1• . .t:ug,,t' 117,SOCIQSIOFFICE ( B3,572n1~ (251 CARS REQUlREQI 4,5001fRETAILGIP-1 (18CAFlS REQUIREDI 10,000gsl'OFFICE (B,571ns(I @P·2 ( 215 C/\RS REQUIRED) 601 flHNIMUMTOTAL REQUIRED ' ! • ~ l~'.J 'i:~i ,- 0~ fz ,u ~~ n \ 1. \ 637 TOTAL SHOWN ON l'-1 & P-2 WI 2% fO Be Ul:DUCTED I-OR AIJA REQUIKEMloNTS (36 EXT'RA ABOVE MINIMUl,I REQUIREDl QUENDALL TERMINALS SITE PLAN "" H 1' TOF' OF ROOF • • • • \ LANCE MUELLER & ASSOCIATES CENTURY PACIFIC LP 11-16-09 ·ALL STATISTICS ARE BASED ON CONCEPTUAL PLAN WHICH ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE LAKE WASHINGTON __,, -~-:! -",-----, W'._ __ ·~ :b "' ~ @ll Ir '.'.:Sp SW 2 RWOENTIAL S FLOORS OVER PAR,(]NG "41,MllofGROUND ARE-' 190UNITS ""' Bl.DO HT. 7!>'-0"}0P_(;JF ROOF =~ HIG'"' w~if-1\ st!OllE~~ ---",----- -"'ll--~ "o u. 38 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~, I ~ :g ...... Q >-- ffii~,! ~ ;~i~!i; l'.:1~~80, u) /, • • • • • ··/ ' I ! . , i .. ~ ' ~ ~-iii ~ ..Jr..:.i 1n ;r~;; ~!ih~ t:::;~;"'~o, ('\., Iv-H ' _____,,_ ---· COURn'ARC! OVERP.-2 -' , "" " ~ ;g.li ::; ;gi! g i~! ~ ~! ~§~~~ J~ .. ~-~-~u'~89 :;:.><,1-0, _,-.----,!-'c TOTAL SITE SUMMARY ZONE:COR OCCUPANCY TYPE S & M & R-2 SITE PARKING BASED ON 800 TOTAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS@ 1, 100gef/UNIT = 680,000gsf 210,000nsfTOTA.l. NET OFFICE (245,000gsf GROSS} J0,8D0g9fTOTAL GROSS SHOPPING CENTER ( 21,600g!lf RETAIL & Sl.~f RESTAURANT) P-1 & P-2 TOTAL PARKING: ( PARKING FOR 2,030 CARS IN STRUCTURE) PARKING ON STRUCTURE = 188 CARS PARKING ON EAST TURNAROUND= 17 CARS TOTAL PARKING SH01MII -2,215 CARS TOTAL PARKING TO BE REDUCED 2% FOR ADA REQUIRED PARKING• ( -4-4) "TOTAL ADJUSTED PARKING WITH 2% DEDUCTION FOR ADA REQUIRED PARKING= 2,215 -44 = 2,171 I PARKIN GI ASSUMPTIONS: RESIDENTIAL@ 1 75 STALLS PER UNIT= 1,400 REQUIRED PARKING SPACES SHOPPING CENTER RETAIL&RETAURANT@4 STALLS PER 1,000gsf= 122 REQUIRED PARKING SPACES OFFICE@: 3 STALLS PER 1,DOOrm = GJO REQUIRED PARKING SPACES TOTAL REciLilRED = 2,152 PARKING SPACES RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE 1/1, 100gsf GROSS FLOOR AREA AVERA.OE USEABLE SITE AREA FOR RESIDENTIAL DENSITY: TOTAL SITE= B84,822gsf ( 20.J ACRES) + DETACHED PARCEL 50,0!i2gsf ( 1. 15 ACRES) = 934,874gi5f ( 21 46 ACRES) STREET'A' (&l'ROWJ -52,032gsf {1.1BACRE8) STREET'S' &STREET 'C = 107,117gsl (2.46ACRES) PRIVATE DRIVE 'D' & PRIVATE DRIVE 'E' = 14,811sf ( 0.34 ACRESJ PRIVATE DRIVE 'F' = 10,327gsf ( D.24 ACRES') TOTAL STREETS 'A' & 'B' & 'C + PRIVATE DRIVES '0' & 'E' & 'F' = 184,287g&f ( 4.23 ACRES) TOTAL USEABL£ SITE AREA= 93,U74gsf-1134.287gsf = 7S0,587gsf ( 17.23 ACRES) ALLO\NED RESIDENTIAL UNITS@ SO/ACRE = 861 BOO RESIDENTIAL UNITS SHOWN LOT COVERAGE TOT AL PARKING 8TRlJCTURE GROUND COVERAGE -471,Sll7gBI / TOT"1.. PUBLICSTRlcETS 'A.'+ 'B' + 'C.' AR£'I = 52,D32gsl + 107,117gal"' 1!i9,149ga! TOT"'-LOT COVERAGE= 834.874gsf-159.14&gsl'-775,12.SIISf TOTAi. LOT COVERAGE rTOT.o.t GROSS SITE -'RE-'~ 471,507gBI 177~.72511,f -6() 8'lli IMPERVIOUS AREA INCLUDES PRIVATE DRIVES BUT DOES NOT INCLUDING STRUCnJRES & PUBLIC WAY= 55,644sf MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT ALLO'NED IS 10 STORIES OR 125 FEET BUILDING HEIGHT SHO'A'N ~ 7 STORIES OR 80 FEET+/- NW QUAD 175 RES10ENTIAI.. UNITS (308 CARS@1 751UNIT REOUIREDJ RESIDENTI,\L BUILDINGS -192,SOOgsf +/- PARKING GAR.I.GE P-l & P-2 ~ 1~9.760gsf COURTYAffll = 71,340glf 10,500gltSHOPPING CENTER ii P-1 (~2 CARS RleQUIMED) ( 6,DOOgBI" RET,'JL 8, 4,500gaf REST-'URANl} 10,000g&l'OFFICE (6.571n6(1 @P-2 (26CARSR1e0UIREL'j 37~ MINl!,IUl,4 TDTM. REQUIRED 370 TOTAL SHOWN ON P-1 & P-2 WI 2% TO BE DEDUCTED FOR ADAREQJIRE!.IENTS (41N I-IEQUJ\D) .. .:. ,...---J,t., --~'~_,::TERl~ ~~f'EEF_·'C' -.J....~---...---------• +'"""''~' .:..J.t .. , • -•t::;~:~22' SlAl,l.'.I"~'; f"' ----~=----:-. -5 NE QUAD ' '-~ . - a-· ll; '""'''"""' """"'"" ' ~ "i " • 0 i;;: @i !z"'i ~ ~~~ . ~·s·l~' "' 1§:;8 !lj~~ici! ""' l ,,. -,~-, ,- ---,---------.----• ' "~ u ' il • .. I' I ~~ •1 • u:!i~ S::,!.;, ~,11s .1 i -<llt!l._ 11:"'l:c ~~'~ ~ 1+ ' 'f' '/ ·, ............ "--:--.. --:;µ;c ~ ~ !.:i; ~~~ o:z~ -~"" a~$. ·~r t~! -.. _, ~----€ENl'ERIJNE-NEW~TW PROf'ERTY LINE Af'TERSTREET EXISTlNG--,----.- EolSTING PROPERTY LINE :1:: .. , ... :·:u ___ .::::::::t::::~--EXISTING BNRR v,,k/2 W,4SHtN --GroN BL VD GRAPHIC SCALE S(J' r, 6(J' -.z!""----::::::Ii. SCALE· 1" = 00' -~-- U'DRIVE "I, , .. • a I " ·" ~ -:k::_-~. -:,; .. U'DRIVE : ,I_., ,.1 ' ft• I --r-};<U'o~' ~ ffi ~ H,!a. • I ~I _1,-1 • , • I· I ~ ri r ! ffi Io , I' '-' }~!' I ;f-'--,, " 97:500gsf0FFICE (63,572~ (251 CAAS REQUIRE CJ) PARKII-IOG~P-1 &P-2-167,3!11lilol COURTYARD~ 9,088gsf 4,80Dg.fRETAIL@ P-1 ( 19 CAA.S REQUIRED) 20,0Q0¢"0FFICE (IT,1-4:Jnsfl @P·2 (50CAA.SREQUIRED] 320 !.IININUM TO--"'-RlcQUIREO 380 TOT"'-SHOWN ON P-' & P-2 W.' 2% TO BE DEDUCTl:O FOR ADA R:EQUIREtJENTS (60 EXTR.'i ABOVE MINIMUM REQUIRED) ~"'% -LEGEND ·==4=···-··--·: ........ ---· ··~·..,. ":w::;t::::;:':! _Daft DUMP3TER/ RECYCLE BIN ~ u E. UTIUTYl.tt:)a~crn,cw.gp""" l!xiT EXIT&T .. R ~ L.Olllrl' LOBBY AREA PR~.§'\_TY_~-- :r ~ ,/· 50,052sf ~ JWo"EF11yLifq,-- City of Renton Plannin9 Division NOV l 8 /009 IRi@CC~llw'~fQJ ~ \ --p,RO?EJ=i:N-Ul'iE / ~ / ['.' .--'* ._ ~ a < 0 00 . < • • " J J ill ' ill u z < J ; ,; I ,1 / c', -1 ) / ,, ,,, / JJl 11' LL ~hee,I I {, ,, ~ n u C, el :._;, --~ D 0· " C / -~ <,.) ,, ., u ~ ~ ' " ~ ') ' ' , '.'j .-: ,:1 s SW QUADRANT COVERAGE }::~~!mr~2~-mCAA~ P-1 P.IIRl(ING =»4- GROSS PARKING GARAGE AREA~ 152,305gll -------------------- TOTAL BUILDING & PARKING STRUCTURE COVERAOE = 163,1D5(IGI SE _Q~~D-~T COVERAGE UOOe'l'RETAIL@.P-1 (1BCAAS) P-1 PARKING "311 •• GROSS f'ARKING GARAGE AREA ~ 121' ,Q32yd ,?'" -~- ~~ \\, • '\;. ;_~'E: \_,,. '' ,=, • • ,, TOTAL El-u1i.01NG & PARKING STRUCTURE OOvERAG-E = 132,432ijs1 -- 4-~~ LAKE WASHINGTON ----~ "eiot_ <4"011,11/E ~--~ t § ! 24' DRIVE ~ -~~--..'! u -~L_O~~~t. 1-11£)~~1,.~~51-lORf.Lltl\'. -~-~ RESTAURANT ._ .... • • RESTAURANT ,,500$1 ill! ! r «r • !;,' ~ .,, i I , ; ' ~ -.. " . • ~-. ' 24" ORIVE "E~ !I --·1 1 .. ~ t § > ,,. ~ ~-·w' J-u:-.. -·--------GelltRYNE~---GRIYE -~-----CENJERLJNE-22'-0RIVE----- -·--- ..-:._;i'. .. "• 'l, ~ \ ~) " \ ,, ,,._ ., ' i" .... ;, § i • " ____ }it: ':;icj1:;1,:;l:!'1•• -·:-1M . ~r . 24'DR1\'E "'l1 2•· ORM: • • • "" -~~;_ __ ,, __ ~-- lA.K12 VVA,sHINGroN · . -.. 8L'VD_ "" ------blR---------;,--.. . r ~--. ~~' I ~I ~ • ! I!• ' • :! ~ • ~ ~ "" 2-4' DRIVlao. . " ~;+.: .. , ' CS.Te~INE 40' DRl\lli ------ ------- EXISTING BNRR ::.::i.i!::..:!:'.:l.;::11r;111::111_ GRAPH C SCALE ~-----_°' 50" 120' ,, -/-SCALE. 1"-80' / ,H: ! -,..- • ' >.: ~ ,! ~ I 'qi i ii I I •,• I ~ ~ il ~ ~ P-1 PARKING LEVEL -GROUND LEVEL P-1 SUMMARY 21,SOOgsfTOTAL RETAIL 9,000gsf TOTAL RESTAURANT P-1 PARKING AREA=417,671gsf PARKING FOR 1,102 CAAS PARKING STRUCTURE FOOTPRINT NW QUAD AREA~ 115,130gsf NE QUAD AREA= 90,84Clgsf SW QUAD AREA= 18J,105gsl' SE QUAD AREA= 132,432glll' 471,507 TOTAL PKG. COVERAGE NW QUAD~~J CQ_'{ERAGE ~:= fil~lu~~ ~,2~ IT18l CAAS) P-1 PARKING= 1N GROSS PARKING OA!V,GE AREA 1 R530gsf TOTAL BUILDING & PARKING STRUCTURE COVERAGE = 65, 130gsf NE QUADRANT COVERAGE 4,BOOdRETAJL@IP-l [19CAR$1 P-1 PARKING -212 OROSS PA"I.KING GARAGE AREA -88,D4Ci0af TOTAL 8UILD1NG & PARKING STRUCTURE COVERAGE= 90.840gaf PROPERTY Ur,IE ~PE~11"1.,"'1: City of Renton Planning Division NOV l 8 2009 !Pd IE CC lE IlW lE rD ~ \ 50,052sf PR()i>E.R'I" C1NE -- / '" ITT w C < 0 0 ~ • • L. '.'.: ,, " , , w ' 0 L Z ' . :; l .....__..::: -·(.' " ' ,1 , , ,"]') -1 ' l " ' / ,JJ JI ! sh •el :; ~ -, ,. l ...) 11: u -~ J )j _) / .Jj \.J " ' " C ,, ., ti 1l :,: ,,, \) r.;~ i,Ll ·z SW QUADRANT COVERAGE --'IU;iio0gs10FF1CE·(B,571ns(I (ieCAAS) P·2 PAAJOJNG -~17 Gi;HJSS PARKING ~E AREA= 153,1~--__ TOTA.I.. BUILDING & PARKING STRUCTURE COVERAGE= 1e3, 105gsf SE _QUADRANT COVE~E _ 10,llOOljSl"OFFICE (8,571n~ (~CARS) P.2 PARl<li'IG = 320 •• ., i \ \. ,• GRqSE_l PARKINGGARAG~A.REA=)22.~ ________ _ ,., TOTAL BUILDING & PARKING STRUCTIJRE COVERAGE= 132,-432.gaf -~.l :we11v • • • \" \ •• LAKE WASHINGTON @l-1_~.,.,,-EP: 5W)it!,.Ll1*- E"';: bit ~ -~- UDRNE : "~ '.~ i'i ~~ ~ + I I ~r1 ~~ ;. ~ • i • . /'"'"t i r !1i! L [ ' 2~'DR1IIE : 2 0 l + :WORIVE • • . • /; ·",,, .. ,,... .... 0t'\. \ \\ \ •' -l~--:=-:- · -WflCRlfN£·2i'8RIVE-. -... ---- -----~.-,=,.--- ____ _._ ~ -24' DRIVE t • ..... ~ j. !ioj' • . 24' DRIVE e ·' -:-)·:,:::-:::11::·· '-A.I(, ··- .. E W,4Sl-f1tvGrotv ... . . BLvo. • '-~ .L ' ·- : --CEITTERUNE22'0RfVE • ·~ nl,d i -..,..,.r > • t i 0 ~ 0 I " ~-- GEN'FERI.INE W ORNE ------ EXISTt,10 BNRR . GRAPHIC SCALE w o ro ~ SC"1.E·1• • 60' 2'1'0RII/E ,, .. ., ~--"- --.. t i'i .J. 1 24'DR1VE : ~ . .'-~~-~--~: . ..::=. ,~ P-2 PARKING LEVEL .":"l ii 1 .. r . --~-- ----,.-.. , ~ j ~ "cl ~ < ' ! ! ~ .. . ~ di ! ~ P-2 SUMMARY 50.000gafTOTAL OFFICE P-2 F'ARKING AREA= 398,414gsf PAAl(]NG FOR 1,096 CAAS PARKING STRUCTURE FOOTPRINT NW QUAD AREA= 85, 130gaf ~5' i~1.i rJi-= ~r,oJr;af SE QUAD AREA= 1l2,432gaf 471,507 TorAL.-PKG~ COVERAGE NW QUADRANT COVERAGE 10,000Q9f0FFICE (8,5710S, (26CAAS) P-2 PARl<ING -191 GR~f>ARKINl)_G~~-~~:.1~,1~ __ TOTAL BUILDING & PARKING STRUCTURE COVERAGE= 65, 130gs1' NE QUADRANT COVERAGE __ _ 19,SOOgal OFFICE ( 16,71,ns~ (50 CARS] P-2 P/\RKING 168 GROSS PNUfiNG_ GARAGE AREA= 71.3.fOgsf ____ _ TOTAL BUILDING & PARKING STRUCTURE COVERAGE= 90,640gsl' PROPERTYU_fil::_ ;;~fl7),lil-J1c City ot Renton Planning Divisiorr NOV I 8 Z009 fRf ~cc~ aif!~ {Q) ~ 50,052sf \ i>ROf'E.RTV 1.ii.E '.i ~ ., ... • ....c -t; " ~ < " w < • J " .II IIJ ' ' Jj • ' • 0 \', ~ <' D .":i ,._': / _, -\.~ ('.) -1 /,,,. (\ i ~ / a ,., •, ;: :; j_:t .! lj ,-.., (._) s',~el ;:"'.,,) ·, " ' < ' 1 •p! ' ! z 0 I- C) z I i w ~ :s / ; \.' t ' / ~O~tJl\1 -,\_;\'1"'1 ''\G"'" "\'."'lC: ' \ '' \ 3Nll A.1!<3dO"lld \ ~-,, i i i ~ ~ z 1 I , !, ·1' ·1' . 11 .. ' ' -10~ ,,IQ dW .!r.J.J.. J.H clOlll \13!:fo' QNflm!E) P0();'6> 001)1!:fo'd1>3/\0 Sl:!001~ S 3:Jl~Q 13N i " ~I ~ '' ~ "' ·-:s : !f, 1~ • . . •!) ';' § j 0 • • ~ • • II H ; I '"+""" ~, ' II 1! u 1 II ,j 1 1- I( 1•; l~V I 1)\. L \ ' ~! w. ~ " I 0 0 • • \ • ' ~ . ' 1 ' r. c, ' ., r. I ! J f I l " ~ I ~ ... I ! ~ ' I ~- I / / / / 1t 1:~ ! . ' . A / /e ./ .~' >''~. / . ·.,: .·. ///.,;,,./: ' / / ,:/ :, _; ! // / :. . ,,',:'1: LAKE WASHINGTON ORAYIN BY DESIGNEO BY ,.//_/ /./ I I I I I I 1~E~ BY -!4 BY DATE NOV 16, 2009 CNJ. m m[SS DAYS llfll YOO Iii 1-800-424-5555 111•111 Consv/tmg &,gin..,. 1601 Fifth A~ue. Suite 1600 S~ttle, Washington 9810,-3665 (206) 622-5822 Fax (206) 622-8130 S C A L E: AS NOTED NO. REV1SION JOB No. ;109118 DATE BY CHO. I APPR. ~ ~ :;---,.:.,~.~ --------I I I I ;':! I TREE INVENTORY SUMMARY SIZE TYPE QTY• •• DEODUOUS 213 8" DECIDUOUS 87 10· DECIDUOUS so 12· OEODUOUS " 14" DECIOUOUS 14 16" DEODUOUS 16 18" DECIDUOUS 14 20· DECIDUOUS 4 22" DECIDUOUS 1 2,· DECIDUOUS 7 26" DECIDUOUS 1 28" DECIDUOUS 1 JO" DECIDUOUS 2 J2" DECIDUOUS 2 TOTAL DECIDUOUS 46J • TREES SMALLER lHAN 5• CALIPER NOT INCLUDED IN INOTORY . NOTE: 1. THIS lREE 1Nv£NTORY PLAN SUMMARIZES THE EXISTING TR£ES ON-SITE AT lHE TIME Of MASTER SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL lHE QUENDAl..l TERMINALS SITE Will UNDERGO EN'w'IRONMENTAL REMEDIATION AHO MITIGATION AflIR MASTER SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL AND PRIOR TO flNAL DESIGN AND COOSTRUCllON. REMEDIATION ANO MITIGATION WORK IS UNDER lHE DIRECTION Of EPA ANO Will INCWOE SIGNIFICANT ROIOVAL C1' ON-SITE TREES ANO PLACOIENT OF FlLL lHE ASSUMEO EXISTING C00DITICJ4S FOO MAS1ER SITE Pt.AN DESIGN ARE 1H[ POST REMErnATION/MITIGATION CON~TION~ LEGEND: C::) AREA 'MTH TREES Ctty Of Renton ~ Planning Division N Nov 1 s 2009 ~ ijfert:;~UW1~@ ! . .,:~.,~ 200 I NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION QUENDALL TERMINALS SHEET 4350 LAKE WASIIINGION BOUltVARD, ROlrON, WASIIINGION LAND USE, SHORELINE & MASTER PLAN PERMIT APPLICATION TREE INVENTORY PLAN C200 .r ; 6 J l I l "' ii I I ,.. t I I " j IIAlOUE ----~ -----, ___ S&::;;;.:51$U .::c:»1::.---~ ~~~~• -~----.... - lff•31.71 ,~-\.< · ·· cc ;,~ .l' _____jl"c ~ -'~ ·.,J. . ,...,~. _ .... POTENTIAL RET ~NNG WAU ,. iff•32zj . \ '\ ~ \ = J / ,rr------. ·-.--. -_;, ... _,-::::. ·-···H ~-,,, ......... ____ ".~"·"·~-,:<.\ -. '1~----~l\~! · -, ---.;..,·:. :>, --1--·<rr~ --:.l·-:... s. -! ------ ~-~ ~~)~i-- 1 -. ·"•-<. ' '· ;J:;:-"~';. ' / •-i I l l "" ~ • ~ I -• "'"" ~~[~~ ~ ~ , ~ J. . I .. ' "' ' ,,,_' ~ " ""~'" ; ' -' ;; __ , --b ~ ~ --~~. ~· _-.. ~ • ' '~ ' '"' \ L ~ ;;~~ ). , ~ ,; ::-,1 ~ ;;;.: t " " , ~ \ -,,_ ~."'~ I ... ~ "-~ "'" ~ r , .~y"" -------------~ ---------Ai-------~-L....,.-y-m-:-------.--~_...,.... ~ "!'.c·..,,.. ---.c--·-.-_ ~ __ 'v'. _____ Q... ____ _ __ _ _ · ·'·,·~:~~: ~·. ·?::~... ;;_", ···,,"'~~1~:':; ·::.:2,~>~ ~~' · ,;Llru~ ·. _ ·~~~~ :~7;. t-::f---~-~ NO. DATE ""';c.,,..,.,,__ · ' . \.. ~Sff/Nc~ : < . ''"c'. ;,, . . ~· _ NOTES: .,, . . ' ,, ,-.. :··c-~, '::-,, \. · , . . :,,-ON),t,.,0 , ... ;,;1 t / c. . . 1. ENSRONMENTAL RO.IE[NATION AND MITIGATION Of "" ., <;; . . . • , ~ tty Qf ,-. . · . 1l£ PRa'ERTY 1"1Ll 8£ CONll<JCTED P~OR ro . ' . . . ' .... ' p I rr e f. . OE',{LOPIIENT. lHE ENWlONMENTAL PROTECTION ' -.:__ .,l,f-c!flninq D. ,'I' On AGENCY (EPA) IS THE LEAD AGENCY FOR All ~ '-!\Jfs;o SITE REMEDIA 1100 ANO MITIGA TICH AC110NS YlilCH · (j ARE TO EE PERfORMED AT lHE CIUENDAU N·n · lERMNALS SITE UNDER SUPERFUNO. v V _: 8 'Ii· . 80 l.,.if}!J 0 " " 2. AOOlllOOAL BUILDING ROOF ~AIN CONNECTIONS AND ~ANG MAY 8£ RECIUIRED BY CHO. APPR. REVISION ORAIIIN BY DE9GNED BY SMB KPK a-lECICED BY APPROVED BY WTJ MAV DATE NOV 16, 2009 JOB No. :109118 ,. CALI. 00 ilJSIIESS i1i•III Consulting Engin..,. ll,\YS IW£ YOO llii I-B00-424-5555 1601 Rflh A~a. Suite 1600 SCA LL Ssattlt1, Washington 98101-3665 (206) 622-5822 Fax (206) 622-8130 AS NOTED ~~ I ~ 1hdl• 40ft. QUENDALL TERMINALS 4350 I.AKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, RENTON, WASHINGTON LAND USE, SHORELINE & MASTER PLAN PERMIT APPLICATION CONCEPTUAL STORM DRAINAGE AND GRADING SHEET C300 f ~ i f J l " § i i ~ i I ' I " ,l ~--~"~,~- or . ""'s.. STORMFlLTER MH ,,~ ). • .. , t Sl\'-aJA!)flOOF" .iNO. l'LAZi IJRAJ~ OU]$. SEE NOlE 4. o! 1,o . - POTENTIAL RETAINING WALL IFF•31.7! NOTES: 1. ENVlfflHIENTAL REMEDIATION ANO MITIGATION ~ THE PROPERTY 'Mll BE CONDUCTED PRIM TO OEvROPMENT. TH£ ENvlRONMENTAL PROlECTlON AGENCY (EPA) IS 1HE LEAD AGENCY FOR All SlE REMEDIAOON AND MITIGA TlON ACTIONS ~ICH ARE TO BE PERFCHilED AT lHE QUENDM.1. TERM~ALS SlE UNOER SUPERFUND. 2. 1l£ PAo.ECT SITE INQ.UDES APPROXIMATRY 1,58J mr Cf SHCREUNE Al.ONG LAKE WASHINGTON. A 100-fOOT A'vlRAGE WIDTH RIPARIAN BUFFER (MEASURED FROM lliE ORDNARY HIGH WATER" IIARK) IS LOCAlED ALONG THE SHORE1JNE. A SH~N[ RESTOOATICW PLAN IS BEING DESICNED AND APPROVED UNDER EPA ~RECTION. ~ ElllSTING il£1lANDS AND CONCEPlUAL ll£1LAND CREATION/RESTORATION AREAS 9iOWN HAv£ NOT RECEIVED FlNAL EPA DESIGN APPROVAL 4. ADDITIONAL BUILDING ROC'f DRAIN COONEClJONS ANO PIPING MAY BE REQUIRED. Ii-.~-. "LAKE WASHINGTON ·--~.--,· ,,-,._) ,. / ORrnNARY HIGH. WA.TER MAR .. K.~.. . . <_·· __ · . \.. \ .· ,'.. • \. STORMFILTER VAULT • E)fV-18.67 · \ , . . • . . , • . · ourr 1JJ. "• .. ,3""<~... .. --~ '> . :··· -,---;_·_ ~ -_,-'. ?'" . i ~---~ -• • • .-•• ;- ', .... ;,~. '.. ~ ;_ ----. ' ---"~ _,<--'-! ,._-;:'!: ', :.:,..-c' ' "~ \ . ,""'!: > ... ·. ;,f ·., ,. • . • . 0 • ' ;.·>""-. S£E NOlE 1 & 2 -~-'" 4 '''fj · . 1TW ENTH<E SHORELINE) • · · ; . .,. --. .. . "· "!!<;:;. .•. •" .•.. %Zr. , LEGEND: ~ ,-_ -. j L::: .... :_~ • '~~' •, ' [{!"•31.7! ----,SEE=-·sim "CJOO=---- IIACTIUf: ElllSTING ll£1LAND (srr NOlE 3) CONCEPlUAL ll£1LAND CREATION/RESTORATION (S£E NOlE 3) ORA~ BY OESIGNro BY I I I I I I 1~E~BYOA~BYl~!!N ti•lil Consulting Engineers 1601 Fifth Avenue, Suite 1600 S«Jttl~ Washington 98101-3665 NO. DATE BY CHO. I APPR. REVISION NOV 16! 2009 JO 8 No. :109118 S C A L E, AS NOTED {206) 622-5822 Fax (206) 622-81JO ,~ tJ t I rll1 ' ' ' . • . ·\ t /,~ :· -!?" 1 IFF•28.7I ' ' . ",, .. fill. ;,. ~ • I l~J . . . ' IFF•3t6! . .................. _ ... _____ ,_._ .. ----- / City of Renton' Planning Division Nov 1 s 2009 "' .. BO laid,= 40ft ~~©~nw~~OT FOR CONSTRUCTION QUENDALL TERMINALS 4350 lAICE WASIIINGION BOUL!VARD, RDIION, WASHINGTON LAND USE, SHORELINE & MASTER PLAN PERMIT APPLICATION CONCEPTUAL STORM DRAINAGE AND GRADING SHEET C301 5 ! J i I l " ~ I I 1i i i ' I " ,. NO. DATE / ;;; / . r.l' :al' ~ m ,~ if ' ' ;; BY CHO. APPR. REV1SION ~ 1~ 10' 9DEWALK/ 9DEWALK/ LANDSCAPE I LANOSCAPE I 1.:l!_ ' ..... ~ ~ / ~( VARIES 12'-21' ~/ 90EWAU</ LANDSCAPE i;; ; if / 1-1% . .. / ~ / ~,;: z VARIES 11'-19' a;;. 9DEWALK/ LANDSCAPE ~;;; ~~ 1-1% /, . DRA'/llj BY DESIGNED BY SMB KPK CHECKED BY APPROl{IJ BY WTJ MAV DATE NOV 16, 2009 JOB No. ,109118 1C ,., 1:S 60' I ROW 14' 12' LANE 14' 10' LANE 6' 6' LANE ~DEWALi</ I LANDSCAPE 1 MATI)j EX\ 4-6" CUR8 (fl!>) YAmES ~1% ~ ,/ ,'/ / ,Y //://;:)/'):>)>'/' STREET A -TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTION fA\ SCAL£, 1· = 4' \.J ... ~ ,.. / t 12' ROW 12' ,· VARIES 12'-21' ;;; ~ PARKING LANE LANE PARKING 90EWALK/ ~ w LANDSCAPE // ii z I z ii ~ : I 4-6" CUR8 (fl!>) ~ 1-1% HX 1-1% / ~ / ~ -----------, 2ll 2ll ----.,.-------' . . SIOCWAU( EXTENDS TO ROADWAY EDGE ll!!ERE NO ON-SlREET STREET B -TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTION CD PAmONG, SEE PLAN (fl!>) SCAl.£: 1· = 4' "' ~ 60' rr 11' ROW 11' :;; '..' rr YAmES 11' 19' PARKING w LANE LANE w PARKING SllEWAU</ /:al z I z LANDSCAPE a! I I /~ 4-6" CUR8 (fl!>) ~~ 1-2X 1 2ll ~ . . ----------, A 2ll . ------....----' . City 0 f P _ / ~ SIDEWALK OODIOS TO ROADWAY Pfannin ,enton q D1v1j,; EDGE ll!!ERE NO ON-S1REET .rJn STREET C -TYPICAL ROADWAY SECTION CD PARKING, SEE PLAN (fl!>) NO v I 8 _;,11/q SCALI: ,. '"' 4' ., C ff9 ,~ ((; ~c-cg W: . c;; V, fE. /fJ) NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION QUENDALL TERMINALS CALI. !WO OOSll[SS ;m SHEET l:l•id . . DAYS llfllil YOO II: Consult/fig £nl)lfltHlfS 4350 LAKE WASHINGION IIOUl!VAIID, RENION, WASIINGTON I-IID-414-5555 1601 Fifth A\llfnue, Suite 1600 LAND USE, SHORELINE & MASTER PLAN PERMIT APPLICATION C302 Seott/11, Washington 98101-3665 S C A L E: (206) 622-5822 Fox (206) 622-8130 ~,~,d'c~ ROADWAY SECTIONS AS NOTED f ~ J f I l ; I i ;; 1 I ' I " i NO. DATE BY CHO. APPR. REV1SION MATCH EX MATCH EX / ~j ~j i~ ~j / DRAll!j BY OESIGNffi BY SMB KPK CHECKED BY APPROVED BY WTJ MAV DATE NOV 16, 2009 JOB No. :109118 o:' i:l "' st ,, 10' 11' 11' 5' 20' /~ I LANDSCAPE LINE LINE SOEWALJ( LANDSCAPE ;:; a I I VARES /6' CURB (1"'~ "' ~s ~, "' ,..,_ ·" .'v ., ,, ,, , /,-//, /,'//,'//,, /,, /,, /-,,,/-.:11 ' ' ' ' ' ' STREET D -TYPICAL PRIVATE DRIVE SECTION/o\ SCAI..E: 1· = 4' \J o:' i:l "' I •t 10' 11' 11' 5' 5' :;; ~ I LANDSCAPE LANE LANE 90EWALJ( LANDSCAPE :;; ~ I I /;;: /6' CURB (1"') :;; m VARIES "' :;; A 1!... / If ., . ,, ,Y,,,'-:-/,' ,-. ' ,, " ' ' ' ' ' STREET E -TYPIC~~~~~~TE DRIVE SECTIONED o:' "' i:l 37.6'-«.8' I 10' 11' 11' V~ES 5.6' -12.8' SOEWALJ(/ LANE LANE LANDSCN'E I LANDSCN'E I I /6' OJRB (1"': I "' VARIES "' v,,,, ,,, ',,' ,-..., ,, ..... City of A STREET F -TYPICAL PRIVATE DRIVE SECTION/F\ P1an11111a Denton =1·-·· \J -, iv1sion . Nov Is •· (iliJ9 ffeB IE re IE: ow~© NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION QUENDALL TERMINALS SHEET CAIL lWO llJSISS _-.-A. YP.t 11\YS IW£ YOO II iii•ld Con$Ulfmg Eng;,,..,. "(~ ....,, ,,,, 4350 LAIC[ WASIIIIGTON 80Ul1VAIID, IIDIIIIN, WASIINGTON t-1)1-421-5555 ., .... 1601 Rfth Ai,enue,. Suite 1600 LAND USE, SHORELINE & MASTER PLAN PERMIT APPLICATION C303 St10ttle, Washington 98101-3665 ~,L:-~ S C A L E: (206) 622-S822 Fax (206) 622-BtJO ROADWAY SECTIONS AS NOTED f !?. f f I l ~ ii f i i i I ' I " ) -"S' \\ <'\\ \ ·~: . r, r '\\. --; r IFF=52.21 , IFF=32.21 BARSEEMILLENlRY ;' __ 'J,i-, '\l'"-'' / 7 r<[ ::r· m-~PR't~(' Pfli~RE}llNt_' ~ -~ •:-.,"·c,c:· '· ""' · · ·.1921& REZ~' ~.-:.· · · '-~-""·~.:.. · ' ""'.'''"'·· · •.. · ')7'£1( {t:$Js' ' : -~'"'' ,f ' ' IIA1QU£ SEE HET C401 DOM srnw,: (111') ______ ':.__ . ~'f' REL£ASE EX y. ·. '{ iii UTILITY EA!DIENT ,. . IFF=Jl21 FH (,IP) ~~ ~ I I ,__:''---) I IFF=J1.4!1 I ' I I I I I I I I • I I __ ___, lff=Jl21 ~ . sci~~":C!.'.c'·--,· s •. -~~----,.... --- I I ' , .· . r ,· y--rnsr 14• ,' MERCER ISlAND I METRO SEWER .. I .... ,,-,, 11.· .&=· ~ .t -~-~:,). -"/ --·'· ·: ·<-·L;-' ,,.,, . I· .• ,,. I "=WW ... =·'"''~------T· , I ··,. ~ •. , .• •-· -~ --•---:- -~ WATER NOTES: 1. All NEW ANO RELOCATED ARE HYDRANTS SHAL1 BE PER COR STANDARD Pl.AN 8102. 2 All PROPOSED WATER MAINS ARE LOCATrO ~THIN THE 320 PRESSURE ZDNt 7£;:;~<:\;: .. ,- •• \j:~i~ ·-.."":."e"\ -.;~ .. "c'.-\ LEGEND: MECHANICAL SERVICE ROOII, ~ , DOM PRV, METER AND RPM • ARE OOCVA • ACCESS DOOR FROM OOTSIDE • FDC ON BUILDING F~ A ARE HYDRANT H VALVE -=-=-FRANCHISE UTlUlY DUCT BANK (COMM, GAS, PDIER) IFF•3l5I RNISHED FLOOl El£'1ATIDN DRAl\N BY DE9GNED BY l-1---,1--,--+1--+-1--l-1--l1--------------l1r.HE~ BY -~~ BYI DATE NOV 16, 2009 NO. DATE BY CHO. I APPR. REVISION JOB No. :109118 -~~-,~~m()CA'fr--tt'FH TO \ : • EDGE OF ~Ell CUllll,(llP) • l,.:. . '-·- . flt,12' ,W (320 · ffl:SSUAI;'.~ .• CAil 00 IIJSIN[SS DAYS llf(l![ YOU I 1-1,00-121-ms S C A L E, AS NOTED d•lil Consul/mg Engineers 1601 Fifth AWiflUB, Suits 1600 Seottl~ Washington 98101-3665 • (206) 622-5822 Fax (206) 622-8130 .± -"".4 ,' i 1c • *i~:* ~-·1 W,S.;\o!,. , -1, . • -~B~\,S::,:: RO-V !IR!H,ILl.-'IIE lOlllRID . UFT st~-. lo----~--.c,-io,e~,,·-...... .,,,,"""""' •,_e ~ ",.:-«•= '"' - , . -~ ~";..,.'°';!:.~-.-,;-r:· Cityot / Planning ~ent-0r1 . iv1siory ,. '° L. BO I Nov 1 s 2009 1 kith " ,40 ft f~~©IEUW~© NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION QUENDALL TERMINALS 4350 LAI([ WASHINGION BOUL!YARD, RENTON, WASHINGTON LAND USE, SHORELINE & MASTER PLAN PERMIT APPLICATION CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN SHEET C400 i i ! I l " ii i i ~ 1 f ' ~ " I "~;-:~;~ ···-·-: " \ ' LAKE WASHINGTON ·' ' ', \ \ 't .,,.· ' ORDINARY ijlGl WAllRM,AIII<~ .. ~:',.~. . ?'/ -~- ~.-.. ~::.~:.-· E$/,-1o67 'y'.' ·· · ' /' ~--· ..._ • . -:;J,.,. ..· ·: . , .. ·· ··-.. "' ~-.: :· ~ . , ... ·"' ~-. . "' ' Ji" < _so--''fl! lJ _,, ____ ,o-·· >, '/ >., ' ' ,, ,. ·•'f' . "·\•", _,c--C • •,,~ • '.t· 'I"" V -. . o -* 1r w"·, . i c·~> r / o , '" : , •• /1 ' / I ''*'"''", ,,, . " IFF=31.7I j ' ' t, IFF-J1.1J ~ ' t-, ' ' -------- NO. WATER NOTES: 1. All NEW AND RaOCATID FIR£ H'1>RANTS SHAU. BE PER COR STANDARD Pl.AN 6102. 2 AU. PROPOSED WAIDl MAINS ARE LOCATED WITHIN THE 320 PRESSURE ZOOE. DATE BY CHO. I APPR. LEGEND: MECHANIC.II. SEIMCE ROOII: ~ • DOM PRV, MElIR ANO RPBA ~ • ARE DOCVA • ACCESS 0000 fRCII OUTSIDE , FDC ON BUllDING FACE -" ARE H\ORANT H VAL\IE -=-=-FRANCHISE UTILITY DUCT BANK (COMM, GAS. POWER) IFF=325I ANISHED FLGOR ELIVATION DRAI\N BY DESl<HD BY SMB Af'PRO\[J) BY DAYS llfll YOO iw.; KPK ~ CAlJ. ]II) IIJSlll[SS MAV DATE 1-D-424-5.\55 CHECKED BY WTJ NOV 16.!. 2009 S C A L E: REVISION JOB No. :109118 AS NOTED SU:HETM IIAC1IUE tl•III Consul/mg £ng>,eers 160, fifth Al1fnul!i', Suite 1600 Seattle, Woshingtew1 98101-3665 (206) 622-5822 Fox (206) 622-8130 / ·/m ' IFF=2&71 ---,-'::.. _____ _j I I I I I I I ,I I I J. l·' ·1 ':(\---~-j <~ . i' \ ., ' l I I=~uf ·:~ '~.'. .:.~· ' • IFF=31.6I ~ l I I ,~ ~ ~ I .;J._ / 02040 80 llldl• "40ft. City of Renton Planning Division Nov 1 s 2009 flfl~©~Urf~[t)) NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION QUENDALL TERMINALS 4350 WE WASHINGTON IIOUL!YAIID, RENIDN, WASIINGTON LAND USE, SHORELINE & MASTER PLAN PERMIT APPLICATION CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN SHEET C401 ' '! I ' ,1: : !;1' ,· I , < ' \ CO_ ~ F, __ _ ___ .:.__\ I 1: I II ' ii I ' )l·' . ! .. ---: --,---. ·--. I' I I I I l //,' ' --"'"'' :=a~=...---w.o,,: · ... :,::: i-~,,\,_"_ "'"t~.r'·~J,,,..::..:...s i'?.~'1 l'()t-.. ..,.;.'2,,.i ·'\.:'.aaT::0\J cg:--.~.-~~-~.~;;c1c ... ~ ~ m I :i: z G) d z PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: April 28, 2010 TO: Vanessa Dolbee, CED Associate Planner FROM: Ron Straka, Surface Water Utility Supervisor~ -~ \LS Quendall Terminals Surface Water Comments SUBJECT: The Surface Water Utility has reviewed the above referenced EIS Scoping document and has the following code related comments: 1. The project will need to comply with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual and City Amendments as adopted by City code 4-6-030. 2. Any required stormwater flow control or water quality treatment facilities are not allowed in sensitive area buffers. 3. Any impacts to the shoreline as a result of a trail or other public access must be identified with appropriate mitigation in accordance with City code. 4. Any impacts to existing wetlands as a result of the project must be identified with appropriate mitigation in accordance with City code. 5. The EIS should include an estimate of the size of stormwater facilities and show the location of the stormwater facilities on the site plan. 6. Direct discharge of stormwater runoff (flow control exempt) from the site into Lake Washington is allowed provided that it is done in accordance with the adopted surface water design standards. cc: Lys Hornsby, Utility Systems Director Allen Quynn, Surface Water Utility Engineer Arneta Henninger, Development Services Engineering Specialist H:\File Sys\SWP-Surface Water Projects\SWP 27-Surface Water Projects (Plan Review)\Quendall Teminals Project\QT EIS\Surface Water Comments.doc/HCBah \ . STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Northwest Regional Office• 3190 160th Avenue SE• Bellei1ue; Washington 98008-5452 • (42SJ 64(}c(~OO January 3, 2011 Pity of A 'Einn,n _enton g oil/is· ton JAN . 6 1011 Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner City of Renton Dept. of Community & Economic Development Renton City Hall -6th Floor ~~({;~§[~~/l)) 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Dear Vanessa Dolbee: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the December 2010 Draft DEIS for the Quendall Terminals proposal. Although we appreciate the work that has gone into this proposal, Ecology has concerns about both Alternatives 1 and 2. In summary, both alternatives are inconsistent with Renton's September 27, 2010 (Resolution 4067), a locally adopted comprehensive SMP update. This SMP update brought the City into compliance with present day wetland buffer standards and the Reach C-specific vegetation conservation regulations of this locally-adopted SMP. Patrick McGraner (425-649-4447), Ecology Wetlands Specialist, provides a brief summary of five (5) Ecology concerns regarding the proposed buffers that neither meet state wetland buffer standards nor the locally-adopted SMP wetland buffer standards for this site. I have also added a sixth comment on the vegetation conservation inconsistencies of both Alternatives 1 and 2, respective to the locally-adopted SMP (Resolution 4067). In brief summary, Patrick McGraner offers the following comments: 1) The proposed plan for EPA cleanup/remediation appears to include a portion of the compensatory wetland mitigation for wetland fills within the shoreline on a wetland that lies outside of the shoreline jurisdiction-Wetland J. This wetland is on a different parcel that lies more than 500 ft. away from the OHWM of the lake bounded on East by I-405 and Seahawks Way and the railroad tracks on the west. Ecology does not consider this to be a suitable mitigation site to compensate for impacts along the shoreline. 2) Figure 2-12 shows the prospective wetland/restoration for CERCLA remediation including the proposed wetland creation on Wetland J mentioned above. In addition, this figure shows resultant buffers that do not meet current standards for wetland buffers per BAS. These wetlands were rated using both the City of Renton's 2010 CAO and the Department of Ecology's rating system. All the wetlands onsite met the criteria for Category III wetlands per Ecology's rating system, except for Wetland D (Category II) and Wetlands C and H (Category IV) per page 3.2-2. ..... Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Pia January 3, 2011 Page 2 of2 3) The proposed replacement mitigation ratios of 1.5: 1 as discussed on page 3.2-3 is not consistent with the current standards per Ecology's guidance as found in Table 8C-11 - Mitigation ratios for western Washington found in Appendix 8-C, Wetlands in Washington State --Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands, Final, April 2005 -Ecology Publication #05-06-008. This guidance has been adopted for use by federal agencies for actions taken within western Washington. 4) The buffer widths on the proposed remediated wetland areas should be consistent with those that were recently adopted in the City ofRenton's SMP update. Ecology reviewed the buffer widths in the adopted SMP update and found them to be consistent with Ecology's buffer guidance as found in Appendix 8-C, Wetlands in Washington State --Volume 2. 5) The DEIS impact baseline is premised upon the acceptance and approval of the proposed remediation plan/mitigation plan by EPA that is depicted on Figure 2-12. Due to the issues listed in items 1-4 above, Ecology could not support either Alternative 1 or 2 because the designs are predicated upon a baseline that is not deemed to meet critical acceptable standards for compensatory wetland mitigation within the shoreline jurisdiction/western Washington. In addition to the above concerns identified by Patrick, I offer the following: 6) The September 2010 locally-adopted SMP requires: (per RMC 4-3-090 F.1.1 -Lake Washington Reach C-SMP Exhibit D-114) that "If areas redevelop, the full 100-foot buffer of native vegetation shall be provided, except where water-dependent uses are located." The proposed Alternatives 1 and 2 do not meet this standard. This is redevelopment in Reach C and, therefore, requires a full 100-foot buffer of native vegetation along that shoreline. Thank you again for this opportunity. Sincerely, Jfwvfic7u,al I~,:: //~~- Barbara Nightingale, Regional horeline Pl~ - Department of Ecology Shorelands and environmental Assistance 3190 160th A venue SE Bellevue, WA 98008 , r• Cityof. --------.1 1_ ss1 r 0s1 Quendall Terminals EIS DEIS PUBLIC MEETING, 01.04.11 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON DEIS Name Address Charles and Rebecca Taylor 1252 N. 42•• Place (Lot #1) Renton, WA 98056 Comments Traffic and Aesthetics Telephone/Email (425) 430-4473 Cw7mm@g.com Our home is located on the northeast ccrner of the Barbee Mill development (Lot #1) where 42•• and 43nd intersect. Since purchasing, there has been a noticeable difference in the amount of vehicular traffic along Lake Washington Blvd., due to a newly constructed mixed-use development (The Landing), Barbee Mill, the new Seahawks training facility and other new construction in the surrounding areas; and The Landing and Barbee Mill aren't completed yet. However, when Barbee Mill was in its planning phase, because it is in the middle of a residential area and in close proximity to Lake Washington, it was determined that construction could not exceed 30-35 feet in height for aesthetic reasons and to preserve the quality of life for all in the surrounding area. There was also a question of density which relates back to its proximity to Lake Washington Blvd., a two- lane road, with a speed limit of 25 miles per hour -a road that could not be widened to support a huge influx of traffic; and further, should not be widened due to negative environmental impacts to the lake; May Creek and the wild salmon run; and the surrounding wetlands. In fact, some of the construction at Barbee Mill has been modified in order to comply with regulations pertaining to the natural buffer zones set out along May Creek. When the current homeowners purchased at Barbee Mill, we were told that although plans for the property directly north (the Quendall site) were not finalized, any planned construction would enhance the neighborhood and aesthetically conform to already existing construction. Also, since it was declared a "Superfund" site, it would be thoroughly cleaned of contamination. We are now being shown two proposals for that site both of magnitudes that far exceed any residential dwellings in the near neighborhood in terms of density and height, and that will most assuredly have an adverse impact on the quality of life for all living in the area and definitely on the homeowners and their property values. The roadway cannot safely support the increase in traffic being proposed. Also, what environmental cleanup information we have been able to obtain certainly doesn't address a cleanup of the magnitude that was expected given the serious ccntamination present. Despite the fact that 30 years ago the area was zoned for this kind of density, drastic changes have taken place to the entire eastside and 1-405. Zoning regulations for this site need to change with the times and reflect what is happening in that area today. An independent, unbiased study should be performed looking at the traffic issues, air quality, safety and other environmental impacts of a project of this size. These are simply the wrong project proposals for this site. After reviewing the DEIS, it does not adequately address the following serious concerns: The unacceptable increase in traffic given that the current infrastructure (roadways) cannot support either of the increases being proposed, and there is no place to widen Lake Washington Blvd. It is surrounded to the west by the Lake and residential homes and to the east by 1-405. It was never meant to be a major thoroughfare, and is currently used by some vehicles, pedestrians walking their pets or their children, joggers and bicyclists. Given that there are no sidewalks along the road, such an increase would not only cause traffic gridlock and back-ups but would present a safety hazard to all using the roadway for purposes other than driving. CITY OF RENTON RECEIVED JAN 1 4 2011 BUILDING DIVISION Where in either proposal have bicyclists been taken into account (anywhere from 100-150 on weekends and weekdays using Lake Washington Blvd. and the biking trail)? And what of joggers and walkers? How can it even be suggested that this much traffic share one ingress/egress with the Barbee Mill site (the north ingress/egress at Barbee Mill), and then spill out onto Lake Washington Blvd.? What are the impacts to 1-405 -already considered to be one of the worst major roadways in the Greater Seattle/Bellevue area for traffic congestion and gridlock? Environmental Concerns Arsenic is only one of the many hazards at the Quendall site, and is present in heavy concentrations above cleanup levels. It is mixed with the ground water that enters Lake Washington, and possibly connects with the ground water at Barbee Mill. It will require constant monitoring and take years to remove. According to the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, exposure to high levels of inorganic arsenic can cause death. Studies have shown that arsenic levels at the site currently range from 20 micrograms per liter (cleanup standard) to 800 micrograms per liter. We are not comfortable placing our well-being or that of the Barbee Mill community and site in the hands of a developer or the City of Renton, when neither has adequately addressed how this massive cleanup will be handled. The other primary contaminants of concern are carcinogenic, cancer-causing substances which are currently found in the soil and groundwater throughout the site at levels well above State cleanup standards. Creosote products four to six feet thick have been found beneath the surface at many locations on the site. No one can say with certainty what the outcome of the cleanup effort will be, and once again, the issue of contamination and cleanup is not adequately addressed in the DEIS report. When Barbee Mill was built, all information related to cleanup of the site and the Lake Washington waterfront, and how cleanup efforts would continue to be monitored, was provided to prospective homeowners. It is also a matter of public record for any interested citizen. Until the EPA presents its findings in the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study and the extent of the contamination is clearly known, and subsequent cleanup has occurred to the extent that written assurance can be provided that toxic contaminants have been adequately remediated, arsenic levels remain below the 20 micrograms per liter level, and a plan for future monitoring of the soil and groundwater is in place and available to the public, no project plans should proceed. There are wetlands on the site and the proposal calls for most of those wetlands to be filled. What about the animals (such as the eagles), the fish (the wild salmon run) and vegetation that are currently part of this landscape? From 2006 to the present when the site was handed over to the EPA, no cleanup of any consequence and no posting of signs warning about the contaminated water have been done, and the arsenic does exist quite some distance out into the lake. This seems to be an indication of the lack of concern by a potential developer, and possibly the City of Renton, regarding the lake, the public's safety and the overall environment. Until all of the issues have been adequately addressed, the proposed project(s) should not be considered. As previously stated, there was a great deal of cleanup that had to happen at Barbee Mill, and that site did not have near the contamination to the soil and waterfront as the Quendall site. The proposed project(s) will significantly increase traffic congestion, air pollution, and noise pollution as a certainty, and possibly further degradation to the site and the waterfront. We would like to see a study done of the current condition of the lake at the Quendall site and the site itself. We would also request independent expert opinion about what the proposed project(s) will do with respect to the roadways, the lake and the natural habitat. All development is somewhat detrimental. However, people can live harmoniously with their surroundings when thought and care are given to "growing" an area appropriately in terms of height and density and building "green" whenever possible taking the natural landscape and wildlife into consideration as part of the plan. The proposals for this project don't even pretend to target that goal. After reviewing the DEIS, it does not adequately address the following concerns: Current contamination levels far exceeding what is safe, how the cleanup will occur and to what extent, how it will be monitored in the future going forward, and how Barbee Mill residents' groundwater and lake front will be protected during the process? An adequate plan for the wetlands, salmon run, animals in the area, and the lakefront on or near the site. The noise and vibration range during working hours from machinery and pile. How will potential structural damage to Barbee Mill homes and concrete foundations be addressed? • Erosion and Sedimentation Control for the storm drains and streets at the north end of Barbee Mill, and specifically, 42°• Street. Summary In summary, the City of Renton has a great opportunity to make the area from The Landing and Gene Coulon Park to the Seahawks training facility a neighborhood that will last far into the future providing beauty, recreational facilities, shopping and quality of life to those living in the area and the greater City of Renton. There is precious little buildable waterfront property left on Lake Washington, and certainly none at the southeast end of the Lake. Do you really want this stretch of the Lake Washington waterfront to be parking lots, cars, traffic gridlock, retail stores, and buildings that are obstructive and totally out of sync with the surrounding area in terms of height, density and aesthetics? We have a great recreational area nearby in Coulon Park. Take a look at Lake Washington on the west side and see how the sidewalks and Seward Park are used by not only the near neighbors, but also an entire city. Put in sidewalks and walking trails or bike paths along Lake Washington Blvd. The Landing is also a place for everyone in Renton and that is its intended purpose. There are apartments and retail already in place, but as you move north along the lake side, it is clearly residential and should remain so. We don't need a huge grocery store on the Quendall site. There are plenty of empty buildings at The Landing where a grocery store could be located and it would make perfect sense. Common sense needs to prevail. .. it can't just be about the bottom line. We also want to "grow Renton", but thought has to be given by the planners to the impacts of what you're doing to an otherwise quiet, peaceful residential area. Bottom line -there needs to be a better proposed use of the site. One that takes into account the natural beauty of the area and the lake, that protects the wetlands and the wild salmon run which not only needs to be maintained but enhanced if at all possible. A plan that respects and protects the eagles that make that stretch of lake their home and can often be seen perched both at Barbee Mill and the Quendall site. The plan should fully address the huge cleanup that will have to happen and how that will be accomplished and monitored in the future. Apartment dwellers will have no interest in paying for ongoing monitoring of the land once cleanup has been done. Nor do we believe they will have the same kind of investment in the area as the homeowners. And by the way, the plan also needs to consider and respect the homeowners already in place and their property values. Many of the Barbee Mill homeowners down-sized and purchased their residences as retirement homes believing what we were told -that the Quendall site would fit seamlessly with Barbee Mill and not be a development of this magnitude and poor aesthetics. At the risk of repeating myself, there are many vacant spots at The Landing for apartment dwellers and commercial retail. That's what it was built for and it was built on land that was previously commercial buildings so it made sense. The Quendall site is residential no matter what the zoning may say. We respectfully ask that you halt any further activity on the current proposals, review and if necessary, rezone the area. The proposed plan(s) is ill-conceived on a number of levels: safety concerns regarding proper cleanup of the area; environmental concerns having to do with the lake, the salmon runs and the filling in of all of the wetlands on that site (or most of them); noise pollution both during and after the development has been built; and unbelievable traffic congestion and gridlock far beyond anything that Lake Washington Blvd. can handle or was ever intended to handle. Last but certainly not least, neither of these proposals will serve the greater good of the entire Renton community in the long run. Thank you for your consideration. ~dj~ Charles and Rebecca Taylor c~~~ Comments on the DEIS can be given verbally at the public scoping meeting or in writing at any time during the comment period, which ends at 5:00 PM on January 10, 2011. Written comments can be sent to: Ms. Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 email: VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor r t. ;...a Cityof .. .f'Jlrujj February 18, 2010 Department of Community an.d Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Attn: John Lefotu and Ramin Pazooki Washington State Department of Transportation 15700 Dayton Avenue North PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 SUBJECT: Quendall Terminals LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M Dear Sirs: Enclosed is a copy of the TIA for the subject land use application along with a copy of the proposed site plan. If you have additional comments or concerns, you may either send them via mail or email them to me at vdolbee@rentonwa.gov. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on February 15, 2010, issued a Determination of Significance and has determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required under RCW 43.21C.030{2)(c). This decision was made by the ERC under the authority of Se~tion 4-6-6, Renton Municipal Code, after review of a· completed environmental checklist and other information, on file with the lead agency and is available to the public on request. Agendes affected are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS and must be submit comments by 5:00 p.m. on March.12, 2010. Sincerely, ~-DJbeJL Vanessa Dolbee (Acting) Senior Planner Enclosures cc: Project File Arneta Henninger, City of Renton -Plan Revie.w Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Rentori, Washington 98057. • rentonwa.gov Denis Law r City of - ____ :Ma:y:or _____ ............. _!.._~JJWJJ February 17, 2010 Campbell Mathewson Century Pacific, LP. 1201 Third Avenue #1680 Seattle, WA 98101 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL THRESHOLD (SEPAi DETERMINATION Quendall Terminals, LUA09-1Sl, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M Dear Mr. Mathewson: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and is to inform you that they have completed their review of the environmental impacts of the above-referenced project. The Committee, on February 15, 2010, decided that your project will be issued a Determination of Significance. The City of Renton ERC has determined that it may have a significant adverse impact on the environment and has determined that an Environni.ental Impact Statement (EIS) is required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made by the ERC under the authority of.Section 4-6-6, Renton Municipal Code, after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information, on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Appeals ofthe environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on March 5, 2010. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required 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 inf?rmation 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. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call me at {425) 430-7314. For the Environmental Review Committee, Planner Name (Acting) Senior Planner cc: Altino Properties, :nc. & J.H. Baxter & Co./ Owner Renton City Hall • 1055 South_Grady Way -. Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov J Denis Law Mayor · February 18; 2010 . Washington State· Department of Ecoltigy Environmental ReviewSection. PO Box47703 Olympia, WA 98.504-7703 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator · . Subject: . . E~VIRONMENTAL (SEPAi DETERMINATION . ·· Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following •. project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on February 15, 2010: ' . . . ' . -.·· . DETERMiNATION OF SIGNIFICANCE . PROJECT NAIi/iE: · Quendall Terminals . PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M · LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N . . DESCRIPTION: 'The applicant is requestfng Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Dl:!velopment Permit and ~EPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd; The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned cciinmerdal/Office/Residential {COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided into 7 lots of whkh4 wouJd contain 6-7 story mixed-use b~ildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units (resul~ing in a . . n~i residential density of 46.4. units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet-~f retail and 9,000 squa~e feet ·of reStilurant: The appiicant has proposed to declicate 3 .. 65 acres for publii: right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would J>e provided for 2,171 vehicles. The site contains approximately . 0.81 .acres of wetlands and 1,583 linear feet of Sho.reli11e along Lake. Washington. . The . subject site has received.a Superfund de~ignation from the u.s: Environment.al · · Protection Agency (EPA) and the property owners are currently Working on a. remediation plan with. EPA,. Proposed improvements include {einediaiion of· .. existing contamination, stormwater and sewer impr<>vements. · · · · · Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in ~riting on or before s:oo p.m. on March. S, 2010. Appeals must be filed i.n writing together with the. requ.ired fee · with: Hearing.Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 . . Appeals to the Examiner are governeciby City of Renton Muriicipai Code Section 4°8- Renton City Half •· lOSS South Gredy Way · • Renton, Washington 98057. • renton"(igov ·~. . . 110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, {425) 430-6510. . . 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 Revie,w Committee,·· ~-DJ~ Vanessa Dolbee · (Acting} Senior Planner Enclosure cc: King County Wastewater Trecltmen.t Division· Boyd Powers, Department of Natura1 Resources , Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckle·shoot Indian Tribe . Melissa calve rt; Mi.Jckleshoot C~ltural Re?oUrces _Program Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Rami_n Pazooki, WSDOT, NW _Region· · Larry Fisher, WDFW Duwa~lsh Tribal Office_ US Army Corp·. of Engineers '. DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT • ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA} DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (DS) AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) APPLICATION NUMBER(S): APPLICANT: PROJECT NAME: LUA09-151, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific, L.P. Quendall Terminals DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units (resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of- way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. 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. Proposed improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N EIS REQUIRED: The lead agency has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c) and will be prepared. An environmental checklist, or other materials indicating likely environmental impacts, can be reviewed at our offices. LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division The lead agency has identified the following areas for discussion in the EIS: Earth, Asthetics/Views, Critical Areas, Land and Shoreline Use, Recreation/Public Shorline Access, Public Services Utilities, and Transportation/Traffic. SCOPING: Agencies, affected tribes, and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses of other approvals that may be required. Your comments must be submitted in writing and received before March 12, 2010. ERC DETERMINATION Of SIGNIFICANCE/ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PAGE 2 of 2 Responsible Official: • Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 APPEAL: You may appeal this determination of significance, in writing, pursuant to RMC 4-8-110.B, accompanied with the non-refundable required appeal fee, no later than 5:00 p.m. on March 5, 2010, to: Renton Hearing Examiner City Clerk's Office 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 To appeal this Declaration, you must file your appeal document with the hearing examiner within fourteen (14) days of the date the Declaration of Non-significance is final or the Declaration of Significance has been published in the official city newspaper. See City Code Section 4-8-110.E, RCW 43.21C.075 and WAC 197-11-680 for further details. There shall be only one appeal of a Declaration of Non-Significance or Declaration of Significance, and if an appeal has already been filed, your appeal may be joined with the prior appeal for hearing or may be dismissed if the other appeal has already been heard. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the above office to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services Department February 19, 2010 February 15, 2010 2./ 171w10 ~k Dafe Mark Peterson, Interim Administrator Fire & Emergency Services &f?/;tfl Date -Z...)i5 )i D Date Al ,pfe,d,,Admiois<ra< , vC,iD:,! 'r/!G Department of Community & Economic Development • DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO: FROM: MEETING DATE: TIME: LOCATION: Quenda/1 Terminals ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator Mark Peterson, Interim Fire & Emergency Services Administrator Alex Pietsch, CED Administrator Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Monday, February 15, 2010 3:00p.m. Sixth Floor Conference Room #620 LUA09-l5l, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M (Dolbee} Location: 4503 Ripley LaneN. Description: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and located within the Urban shoreline designation. The 21.46- acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain large mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units, 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant, resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. The site contains approximately 0.81 acres of wetlands and 1,583 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. The subject site has received a Superfund designation from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and is currently working on a remediation plan with EPA. The results of the remediation would potentially change the existing environment on the subject site scientifically, including but not limited to trees, soils, and wetlands. Proposed improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. cc: D. Law, Mayor J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer S. Dale Estey, CED Director• W. Flora, Deputy Chief/Fire Marshal • P. Hahn, Transportation Director C. Vincent, CED Planning Director• N. Watts, Development Services Director• L. Warren, City Attorney • F. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner D. Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal J. Medzegian, Council DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: M E M O R A N D U M February 15, 2010 Environmental Review Committee (ERC) Vanessa Dolbee, (Acting) Senior Planner LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SA-M, SM Quendall Terminals This memorandum is intended to provide the ERC with a short project description and staff's recommendation for a Environmental Determination for the subject project. Project Description: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units (resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant space. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. The site contains 1,583 linear feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. Proposed improvements include stormwater and sewer improvements. 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 site presently contains approximately 0.81 acres of wetlands some of which would be filled as part of the remediation process. Environmental Threshold Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a Determination of Significance with a 14-day Appeal Period. Staff anticipates that the subject project may have a probable significant impact based on the projects size, scope and intensity of the proposed use, which could result in significant impacts to the City's Fire, Police, and Public Works Departments; in addition to views and aesthetics. LUA09-151, ElS, ECF, BS Page 2 of2 February 15, 2010 ,-M,SM The proposed development is subject to the approval of a remediation plan by EPA, which is unknown at this time and is expected to address in varying degrees the following environmental issues: • Off-site trip traffic generation, the project is anticipated to generate approximately 8,570 daily trips, 905 PM peak hour trips, and 837 AM peak hour trips, potentially significantly reducing the LOS at many locations along Lake Washington Blvd. and 1-405 Exit 7. • A geotechnical study of the site indicates weak, compressible soil with considerable static and seismic settlement potential, liquefaction potential, and liquefaction-induced lateral spreading potential. The site occupies the middle portion of a roughly 70-acre alluvial plain, which was historically formed as a delta where May Creek enters Lake Washington. • The site contains contaminated soils; the primary contaminants of concern are carcinogenic polyaromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) compounds and benzene. These contaminants are found in the soil and ground water throughout the site. Releases of these contaminants to Lake Washington are of particular concern. • Additional geotechnical concerns include the shallow ground water table with potential ground water contamination and post seismic differential settlement may adversely affect the performance of conveyance pipes. • Potential impacts to the 1,583 linear feet of Lake Washington shoreline and other critical areas such as wetlands. Vanessa Dolbee From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: To: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 11 :45 AM 'sonya tobeck' Subject: RE: Quandall Terminal! Property Dear Robert and Sonya Tobeck, Thank you for your comments on the Quendall Terminals DEIS. Your comments will be placed in the official project file and will be addressed in the Final EIS. Once again, thank you for your comments and providing your address in the signature line. Sincerely, 'v'anessa (})o(6ee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430. 7314 From: sonya tobeck (mailto:stobeck61@hotmail.com1 Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 7:14 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Quandall Terminal! Property Vanessa: I am writing to you with concerns as to the above captioned project. My husband and I are current residents of the Barbee Mill community, and are concerned with the current vehical access road to the Quandall Terminal property. 43rd st should not be used as an access road for this property. Barbee Mill is a residential community with many children and elderly. Using this access road inside of our community would be too dangerous and would pose too high of a risk to both the Barbee Mill Residents and the many people that run walk and bicycle along Lake Washington Blvd. Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to hearing from you. Robert and Sonya Tobeck Barbee Mill Residents 1003 N. 41st Pl Renton WA 98056 1 ' Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: sonya tobeck [stobeck61@hotmail.com] Monday, January 10, 2011 6:22 PM Vanessa Dolbee Subject: RE: Quandall Terminall Property From: VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov To: stobeck6l@hotmail.com Date: Mon, 10 Jan 2011 08:00:17 -0800 Subject: RE: Quandall Terminal! Property Rob and Sonya Tobeck, Thank you for your comments on the Quendall Terminal DEIS. However, it is City policy to only accept comments that are accompanied by both your full name and mailing address. Please re-send your comments below with your mailing address in the signature line. Once I receive the second e-mail, we will place your comments into the City's official file. Thank you for taking the time to comment on this project. Vanessa <Do{6ee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430. 7314 From: sonya tobeck [mailto:stobeck61@hotmail.com1 Sent: Sunday, January 09, 2011 7:14 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Quandall Terminal! Property Vanessa: I am writing to you with concerns as to the above captioned project. My husband and I are current residents of the Barbee Mill community, and are concerned with the current vehical access road to the Quandall Terminal property. 43rd st should not be used as an access road for this property. Barbee Mill is a residential community with many children and elderly. Using this access road inside of our community would be too dangerous and would pose too high of a risk to both the Barbee Mill Residents and the many people that run walk and bicycle along Lake Washington Blvd. Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to hearing from you. 1 Robert and Sonya Tobeck Barbee Mill Residents 1003 N. 41st Pl Renton WA 98056 2 Vanessa Dolbee From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: To: Tuesday, January 11, 2011 11 :31 AM 'Mike and Susie Gero' Subject: RE: Quendall Terminal DEIS Statement Dear Mike and Susie Cera, Your comments have been accepted for the Quendall Terminals Draft EIS. They will become a part of the official record for the project and you will become a party of record. Your comments will be addressed in the Final EIS. If you have any additional questions or comments please feel free to contact me via e-mail or phone. Sincerely, 'Vanessa <Dof5ee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Mike and Susie Cero [mailto:mscero@comcast.net1 Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 1: 18 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: 'Rich Conrad'; 'Jim Pearman'; 'El Jahncke' Subject: Quendall Terminal DEIS Statement Ms Dolbee, Please accept the attached statement concerning glare from Quendall Terminals on Mercer Island. Do not hesitate to call. Thanks. Mike. Mike & Susie Gero 206.419.0657(M) 206.605.4919($) 1 From: To: Mike Cero 8300 Avalon Drive Mercer Island, WA 98040 206.419.0657 mscero@comcast.net Vanessa Dolbee Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 vdolbee@renton.gov A tf't,O;, J. C S-i°tJotv 8. '4N J () f::'D U;L.D11t;. <011 G Div. l'S101\1 Date: January 10, 2011 Subject: Quendall Terminals (LUA09-15!, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M) DEIS Statement Dear Ms Dolbee, As a Mercer Island resident and Councilmember, I am concerned with the increased glare or light the development will spill on Mercer Island. It is the purpose of this DEIS statement that the project uses the most advanced and effective design minimizing glare especially but not limited to security lighting, parking lot lighting and vehicular lights. Page 1-11 of the Draft EIS December 2010 identifies that the development will "add new sources of light and glare ... " and " ... general lighting levels on the site would be higher." Throughout the DEIS, mitigating glare and lighting to adjacent properties is suggested rather than directed, ie • P 1-22: Reflectivity of glazing materials, as well as the use of shading devices, could be considered as part of the facade design in order to minimize the potential glare impacts to surrounding uses. • P.3.6-4: Exterior building lighting, parking lot lighting and pedestrian lighting could be directed downward and away from surrounding buildings and properties to minimize the impacts to adjacent uses. Reflectivity of glazing materials, as well as the use of shading devices, could be considered as part of the facade design in order to minimize the potential glare impacts to surrounding uses. • P.3.6-16: Exterior building lighting, parking lot lighting and pedestrian lighting could be directed downward and away from surrounding buildings and properties to minimize the impacts to adjacent uses. Reflectivity of glazing materials, as well as the use of shading devices, could be considered as part of the facade design in order to minimize the potential glare impacts to surrounding uses. • P.3.7-24: Exterior building lighting, parking lot lighting and pedestrian lighting could be directed downward and away from surrounding buildings and adjacent properties to minimize the impacts to adjacent uses. • P.3.7-24: Reflectivity of glazing materials, as well as the use of shading devices, could be considered as part of the facade design in order to minimize the potential glare impacts to surrounding uses. I disagree with the DEIS's characterization on P3.7-24 that "From the west (i.e. Mercer Island), lighting on the Quendall Terminals site would generally appear as a continuation of urban lighting associated with the City of Renton. In practice, a continuation of urban lighting consistent with development south of the Terminals will require strict and adherence with the most up-to-date building materials and design for minimizing glare at its present urban levels. I also request documentation supporting the statement that, "no significant light, glare or shadow impacts would be anticipated" (P3.7-26). Thank you for addressing my concerns. Sincerely, Michael R. Cero Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Mr. Pearce, Vanessa Dolbee Tuesday, January 11, 2011 8: 13 AM 'Roger Pearce' RE: Quendall Terminals DEIS Comment Letter luAo9-/6/ Thank you for your comments on the Draft EIS for the Quendall Terminals development. These comments will be placed in the official file for the project and you will become a party of record. Your comments will be addressed in the Final EIS. Once again, thank you for your comments and feel free to call or e-mail if you have any questions. Sincerely, 'Vanessa (J)o{6ee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430. 7314 From: Roger Pearce fmailto:PearR@foster.com1 Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 4:50 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: FW: Quendall Terminals DEIS Comment Letter VANESSA: We faxed this as well to you so you would have a hard copy today. Hard copy also will arrive to snail mail. Please call with any questions. Roger A. Pearce FOSTER PEPPER PLLC 1111 Third Avenue, Suite 3400 Seattle, WA 98101-3299 Phone: 206-447-4676 Mobile: 206-226-1623 Fax: 206-749-1997 pearr@foster .corn www.foster.com @B FOSTER PEPPER 1 From: E Copy Sent: Monday, January 10, 2011 4:20 PM To: Roger Pearce Subject: Quendall Terminals DEIS Comment Letter 2 ii I FOSTER PEPPER". Direct Phone (206) 447-4676 January 10, 2011 VIA EMAILto vdolbee@rentonwa.gov Direct Facsimile (206) 749-1997 PearR@foster.com HARD COPY TO FOLLOW C,'ityof R P1a,,1· enton ·'//190· · !Vis· ron Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: Comment Letter Quendall Terminals Draft Environmental Impact Statement Dear Ms. Dolbee: 1A!v l · . -1 [ii.' .£,,: We represent Football Northwest LLC ("FNW") FNW is the owner and operator of the Virginia Mason Athletic Center ("VMAC") at 12 Seahawks Way in Renton, Washington. The VMAC has been the home of the Seattle Seahawks since August 2008, and is the second-largest such facility in the National Football League. The VMAC consists of over 200,000 square feet of buildings, including approximately 124,000 square feet of administrative oflice and training facilities. In addition to team training facilities, all phases of the Seahawks organization are housed at VMAC. The VMAC also regularly hosts radio and television media shows related to the Seahawks, and events such as the annual Seahawks training camp. During the two-week training camp in August of each year at VMAC, the Seahawks host over 20,000 Seahawks fans at the VMAC facility. The VMAC is located immediately to the north of the Quendall Terminals site, and the only transportation access for VMAC is through the intersection of Ripley Lane with NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard. Because the operations of the VMAC will be significantly affected by the development of the Quendall Terminals described in the City's Draft Environmental Impact Statement ("DEIS"), FNW is submitting this comment letter and request for the City to consider additional alternatives. DEIS Timing Assumptions and Assumptions About Work by Other Agencies Under the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA"), the City is required to disclose the likely significant impacts of the development on the Quendall Terminals site. In order to do that, the City must make a realistic assessment of when those impacts will occur, especially for transportation impacts which will add to the background transportation impacts when the development actually comes on line. The DEIS assumptions about when development will occur, however, are unrealistic. All the analysis in the DEIS assumes that the cleanup of the site TEL 206.447.4400 FAX: 206.447.9700 1111 THIRD AVEJ'\UE, SUITE 3400 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON CJSHll-329\J www.POSTEH.co.\1 51120477 \ SEATTLE WASHIJ'\GTOJ'\ SPOK.A .. NE W:\SHJNGJO!\ Ms. Vanessa Dolbee January 10, 2011 Page 2 will be complete and the site will be fully built out by 2015 -even though the DEIS goes on to admit that the timing of build out will depend on market conditions. Given the history of the site, the lack of budget at both the Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") and Washington State Department of Transportation ("WSDOT"), and the current development market in the City of Renton area, assuming full buildout by 2015 is unrealistic. With respect to the contamination on the site, the owners have been working with the environmental agencies since at least the mid-1990s. At the request of Ecology, EPA took over responsibility in 2005 and added the site to the National Priorities List in 2006. Since that time, as shown on the EPA website, there has been little or no progress. EPA indicates that responsible parties have begun a Risk Assessment/Feasibility Study for submission to EPA and that it was expected to be completed by December 2010. There is no indication that even this preliminary step has been taken, and EPA has no timetable for consulting affected agencies and tribes, deciding on a final cleanup plan, and implementing that plan. Even if the preliminary studies are promptly done, it is likely to take considerable time and expense to get to a resolution on the cleanup, which will involve affected tribes because of the need to cleanup the in-water pollution at the site. Any in-water cleanup work, which will be considerable, will also have to be done during applicable fish windows and will take considerable time. The DEIS also variously states both (a) that the site will be cleaned up prior to the work described in the DEIS, so the DEIS assumes a cleaned up site as a baseline, and (b) that some of the development work could be undertaken as part of the cleanup. The second statement seems more realistic because of the expense of the cleanup of this site. But the inconsistent statements in the DEIS are troubling because they show that the City does not know what the project will actually consist of, and what parts of the development will be included in the cleanup. Given the scope of the cleanup required, especially the potential for moving pollutants around and recontaminating other property when doing the in-water cleanup work, and the likelihood that the cleanup will have to be undertaken as part of development, the cleanup should be discussed and impacts of proposed cleanup plans disclo,ed in the Final EIS. The DEIS and the development also depend upon WSDOT rebuilding the 1-405 Interchange at NE 44th Street. It is unrealistic to assume that WSDOT would allow any other party to rebuild WSDOT's interchange on WSDOT's right-of-way, and the City cannot allow anything near this scale of development without (at a minimum) the improvements described in the DEIS for the 1-405 Interchange with the attendant re-routing of ramps, additional ramp capacity, and signalization of the various intersections described in the DEIS. With respect to the timing of that work, WSDOT completed an environmental assessment in 2006, which may need updating, but the project is not yet fully funded and there is no timetable for completion. With respect to the transportation impacts without the 1-405 Interchange improvements, the City should make it clear in the Final EIS that the Quendall Terminals project will not be approved for any final construction by the City until and unless all the proposed WSDOT 1-405 Interchange improvements are completed. 511204771 Ms. Vanessa Dolbee January 10, 2011 Page 3 Given the uncertainty of EPA timing, of the difficulties of the cleanup of the site, the uncertainty of when WSDOT will reconstruct the 1-405 Interchange improvements, and of the depressed real estate market for housing and office development in the North Renton area, the City has not justified assuming that the site will be fully built out by 2015. That assumption needs to be justified, and should be revised until at least 2020 or beyond. Transportation Impacts FNW's primary concern regarding traffic impacts is the ability of our players, coaches, staff, fans and guest to access the VMAC facility. The choke point for that access is the intersection of Ripley Lane with NE 44'" Street/Lake Washington Blvd. The City should recognize that there are other uses beyond VMAC as well, including a number of condominium/multifamily developments that will also be impacted. Even with the unrealistically rosy assumption in the DEIS of full buildout by 2015, the DEIS underestimates those impacts because it focuses on overall intersection level of service, rather than looking at how the individual operations into Ripley Lane and exiting Ripley Lane would operate. Even with WSDOT's 1-405 Interchange improvements, those impacts would be severe: • The number of trips entering Ripley Lane during the peak hour will increase from 8 times to IO times over existing conditions. • The number of trips exiting Ripley Lane during the peak hour will increase from IO times to 11 times over existing conditions. • With a signal, the average delay at the intersection goes up to almost 30 seconds, but this doesn't tell you much about what happens to cars entering/exiting Ripley. • Even with the I-405 improvements, queues waiting to turn out of Ripley Lane would be 425 feet during the AM peak hour and 375 feet during the PM peak hour. This would have a significant effect on the VMAC site. • Even with the 1-405 improvements, queues going eastbound through the Ripley Lane/Lake Washington intersection would by 625 feet in the AM peak hour and going westbound 1hr0ugh that intersection would b,;: 425 feet during the PM peak hour. • All of these numbers are measured at an assumed buildout in 2015. They will likely be significantly worse because that assumption is so unrealistic, so additional background traffic should be added into the calculations. • All of these numbers fail to take into account events at VMAC, such as training camp, which adds additional traffic to that intersection. Given the severity of these impacts, the City should consider alternatives that have other access to the Quendall Terminals site. Currently, all the build alternative have a major access off Ripley Lane, which has severe impacts to the Ripley Lane intersection with NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Blvd. Because that intersection is so close to the intersection of the 1-405 on and off ramps with NE 44111 Street, the queueing through those intersections will cause significant traffic difficulties. The City should explore placing the primary site accesses further south along NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Blvd and not having a primary access from Ripley Lane. S1!204771 Ms. Vanessa Dolbee January I 0, 2011 Page 4 Alternately, the City should explore less dense alternatives that would reduce the unacceptable traffic impacts at the Ripley Lane intersection. cc: Mr. Clint Chase Mr. Lance Lopes 51120477 I Very truly yours, y;~ Roger A. Pearce SECO DEVELOPMENT, INC. 1083 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. N • SUITE 50 • RENTON • WASHINGTON • 98056 TEL: 425/282-5833 • FAX: 425/282-5838 January 6, 2011 Vanessa Dolbee City of Renton Senior Planner, Planning Division, 6th floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Dear Ms. Dolbee: LUA Cf/-i5' I have reviewed the Draft EIS for the Quendall Terminals site and would like to offer a comment regarding the reported future year 2015 LOS at the intersection at Lake Washington Boulevard and Garden and Park A venues. The City has improvements planned that would increase capacity and improve the overall operation of this intersection. The DEIS did not mention the City's long-term plans at this intersection; I have seen the design plan for the 100% review submittal developed by KPG and dated February 2010. The DEIS analysis of the LOS at this intersection and transportation analysis should incorporate the City's planned improvements at this intersection as referenced in the Six-Year TIP and its corresponding grant application. The planned improvements have been 100% designed by KPG so the analysis should not be a great effort, but addressing the intersection with all the pertaining efforts by the City and anticipated changes by 2015, are pertinent to an accurate study. I am excited by the prospect of this improvement within Renton, but want the complete picture of its traffic impacts to be analyzed consistent with the City's future plans to improve this intersection. Thank you for your time. President u)I\ o9 -15 / Denis Law · C't f -~M=ayor------J .. if!tn·t1 January 10, 2011 Michael Christ Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator 1083 Lake Washington Blvd. N, Suite 50 Renton, WA 98056 SUBJECT; Quendall Terminals DEIS, Comment Received Dear Mr. Christ: Thank you for your comments on the Quendall Terminals Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS). Your comments will be placed in the official project file, and will be addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS). In addition, you have been added to the party of record list for the subject project, and will receive information as it is available. If you have any questions about the project please feel free to contact me at 425-430- 7314. Sincerely, '-1l~Vdk Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner cc: File Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law Mayor January 10, 2011 Cyrus M. McNeely 3810 Park Ave. N Renton, WA 98056 r t ·- City o .· ... ---.l -.····· 2trt011 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator SUBJECT: Quendall Terminals DEIS, Comment Received Dear Mr. McNeely: Thank you for your comments on the Quendall Terminals Draft Environmental Impact Statement {DEIS). Your comments will be placed in the official project file, and will be addressed in the Final Environmental Impact Statement {FEIS). In addition, you have been added to the party of record list for the subject project, and will receive information as it is available. If. you have any questions about the project please feel free to contact me at 425-430- 7314. Sincerely, <-1£~dJk Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner cc: File Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Felix, Vanessa Dolbee Thursday, January 06, 2011 2: 17 PM 'Palisoc, Felixberto' RE: Quendall Terminals DEIS comments !»ACJf -I 5 ( Thank you for your comments, they will be included in the official file for the Quendall Terminals Draft EIS. Your comments will be addressed in the Final EIS. Regards, 'Vanessa <Dor6ee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Palisoc, Felixberto (mailto:PalisoF@wsdot.wa.gov1 Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 2:11 PM To: vdolbee@rentonwa.gov. Subject: Quendall Terminals DEIS comments FYI. J'e{ix 'Pa{isoc WSDOT -NW Region Sno-King Development Services Engineer PO Box 330310 (MS 240) 15700 Dayton Avenue North Seattle, WA 98133 email: palisof@wsdot.wa.gov office: 206-440-4713 fax: 206-440-4806 I January 4, 2010 Vanessa Dolbee City of Renton Development Services 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Subject: Quendall Terminals LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M, BSP SR 405 MP 7.47 (NE 44th Ramps vicinity) Dear Ms. Dolbee: City of Renton P!c1nning Division The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has reviewed the Draft EIS - Transportation Section and the Transportation Technical Report (Appendix H) for the subject project and we offer the following comments: I. Planned Transportation Facilities (DEIS page 3.9-5, Appendix H page 11 ): for clarification and LOS calculation verification purposes, please be more specific on the WSDOT I-405 improvements elements accompanying with a conceptual sketch of the planned improvements (i.e. "relocating both NB and SB ramps with additional through and tum-lane" are too general). 2. Trip Distribution and Assignment (page 3.9-7) and Figure 8 (Appendix H): the trip distribution assumption stated in the report: "Given significant freeway/interchange congestion forecasted at the I-405/NE 44th Street interchange without I-405 Improvements, traffic assignments to and from the south of the site are not forecasted to utilize the adjacent interchange, but instead would access I-405 at NE 30th Street and travel on parallel corridors" is unrealistic. Due to the close proximity of the project with the NE 44th St interchange, and allowing the left-tum out movement at Ripley Lane/ N 44th St, a large percentage of the 20% distributed to Burnett Ave N and NE 30'h St interchange and a portion of the I 0% distributed southbound on Lake WA Blvd N to Park Ave N will access SR405 via NE 44th St instead. Based on the current channelization at the NE 44th interchange, the movements to the south I-405 are unrestricted (i.e. free SB on-ramp RT movement). Please revisit the project trip distribution assumptions and revise. All associated project assignment and LOS calculations should also be updated. 3. Figure 8 and Figure 10 (Appendix H): under the two scenarios, without and with I-405 improvements, why are the distribution percentages to the eastside of SR405 via Lincoln Ave NE different (10% vs. 5%)? In either scenarios, the trip distribution to Lincoln Ave NE should be the same ( 5% is more realistic) as this is a local street that should not alter any traffic patterns. SR 405 (NE 44th vicinity) Quendall Terminals Page 2 of2 4. As previously commented on the Draft Traffic Impact Analysis, for better visualization of the proposed mitigation measures, please include conceptual channelization plans NE 44 th St IN 44th St mainline and site accesses, with and without I-405 improvements. Coordination with Hawks Landing's access plan is a must due to potential conflicts. Note that any channelization proposals within WSDOT Limited Access will require Channelization Plan review and approval. 5. Required/Proposed Mitigation Measures -Without I-405 Improvements -Alternative 1 and Alternative 2 (DEIS page 3.9-20): the proposed traffic signals at the intersections of the I-405 NB and SB ramp intersections and at the intersection of Ripley Lane N/Lake WA Blvd need to be interconnected/coordinated as well as well planned channelization elements. The signal operations at Ripley Lane N/Lake WA Blvd intersections should not be impacting the operations of the I-405 NB and SB ramp intersections, especially the I-405 SB off-ramp movement. 6. To determine the Project's mitigation measures sufficiency, LOS and delay results must be provided in the report (in tabular format) for the 2015 With Project with Mitigation option(s). Note that mitigations must be provided to keep the operations above the LOS threshold. LOS threshold for I-405 (Highways of Statewide Significance) is LOS D. Where the LOS is already below the applicable threshold, the pre-development LOS and delay is the condition that must be preserved. 7. Due to the anticipated high level of project impacts on State highway system, please provide electronic traffic simulation models for all alternatives (Synchro and Sim Traffic) for verification purposes. If you have any questions, or require additional information please contact Felix Palisoc of our Developer Services section by phone at 206-440-4713, or via e-mail at palisof@wsdot.wa.gov. Sincerely, Ramin Pazooki Local Agency and Development Services Manager RP:fsp cc: Day file / Project File R. Roberts, MS 120 C:\Users\vdolbee\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.OuUook\Q329R7HC\sepaRENTON_SR405MP747Quendall_TIAr22Cily.doc ' . . Vanessa Dolbee From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: To: Thursday, January 06, 2011 9:33 AM 'borgy1943@comcast.net' Subject: RE: Quendall Terminals Mr. Borgeson, Thank you for your comments, they will be placed in the City's official file for the Quendall Terminals project (LUA09- 151). Your comments will be addressed in the final EIS. If you have any additional questions and/or comment please do not hesitate to e-mail or call. Regards, 'v'anessa <Do(6ee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: borgyl 94 3@comcast.net (mailto: borgyl 94 3@comcast.net] Sent: Thursday, January 06, 2011 9:14 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Susan Siegmund; Linda Scarvie Subject: Quendall Terminals Attached are comments on the Quendall Terminals Development EIS plan. In short, we support a much lower density approach, nothing like either of the proposed plans. I might add, although not likely part of the EIS process, it is disturbing as a tax payer that this property is almost tax free at $1000 per year since 1997 when taxes in 1997 and earlier were over $1.5mm per year. I am sure that this is due to the contamination issue. I also know from my own experience in industry for similar facilities for Weyerhaeuser company that these things can be resolved in much much less time than this has taken. This kind of contamination has years and years of precedence solutions which have been developed and evaluated nationally in hundreds of cases. One was our own at Weyerhaeuser in Everett, WA for an almost identical case on the water front and all. There should be no big mystery to resolving a remediation solution. I know it sounds like it is resolved now for Quendall and I trust the remediation part of the study is over!! The time involved has delayed getting back to a solid tax base for this property to share our tax burden as area residents. I encourage you to help potential investors for this property to come up with solutions which comply with all the input you are getting ASAP so they can develop acceptable plans for the property. I believe there are good solutions which can easily accomplish this and would gain community support. 1 J Thank you for the chance to provide input. Larry R. Borgeson 1013 N 42nd Pl Renton, WA 98056 360-918-3371 2 To: Vanessa Dolbee City ot Renton Planning Divisior: Sr Planner . . rgi~~[E~~[Efb) Dept of Community & Economic Development · - Planning Division I (Larry Borgeson) attended the public hearing on 1/4/2011 but did not speak. I did agree with almost all other input you received however. I have since discussed this with my wife Linda and we have the additional thoughts as follows: 1. We are curious about the superfund site designation. was involved in a superfund project in the Hylebos waterway about 8 yrs ago. People who both caused the issues, or gained advantage of the project, had to pay for the costs which provided the tax payers at least substantial payback. I would ask in this case how the tax payers are reimbursed for the clean up effort and how much the developer is contributing to this effort since he is gaining some prime real estate unavailable almost anywhere on the lake. He should be paying at least a prime property price. This aspect should be addressed in the EIS. Financial impact on the tax payers should be one of the environmental impacts. 2. Also, other financial impacts that must be considered include: a. Impact on surrounding real estate values and pricing. -The proposals affect surrounding homeowner investments by mixing in high density smaller housing which changes the nature and associated value of the surrounding neighborhoods. b. The nature of this project as presented would include a serious impact on the City and County tax base as well since taxes are based on values. -Impacts due to such things as traffic impacts, sewer system impacts, area aesthetics and views, etc. will stretch for at least a mile in all directions. All of Ripely lane, all of Barbee Mill and a major portion of Kennydale as a minimum will be affected. > Traffic issues all the way to Exit 5 must be evaluated. > Apartment and Condo values and high vacancy issues will be worsened all the way from 1-90 to downtown Renton. 3. Other impacts of the high density housing proposed: a. Due to the fact that there is a very large vacancy issue in apartment and condo style housing as proposed in the area, this project will quickly turn a sour market to a very very poor market rendering not only the Quendall project a slum area but other similar properties in the area as well. -This would result in high vacancy incentives to fill the units at any cost, much of which may be section 8 and other affordable housing situations. -Crime and other slum type impacts would result b. Impact on schools and bussing must be considered c. Recreation facilities for children and adults must be considered. Coulon Park is already out of parking capacity and this would totally make it inaccessible for area residents. d. Impact on sewer systems must be addressed e. Impact on fire protection must be addressed f. Impact on police protection must be addressed g. Noise due to density and high buildings will increase and change the character of our neighborhood h. Added load on hospital and medical services in the area must be considered i. Emergency services issues with congestion will affect our services for emergency medical, etc. J. The entire character of the area will be changed from what we know today and have invested in. k. Access and egress from our own homes will be greatly affected I. Proposed transportation systems to be added at some point is totally out of character with the area and will further restrict access to our homes. m. Area lighting will render city like atmosphere for those of us closer to the development n. Have any shadow studies been done? -we know there will be some impact here for those close areas o. Impact on all other public services must be addressed p. In short, the density proposed is not only disturbing - it is shocking !! 4. I am concerned that the adequacy of communication of this project for the public hearing and solicitation for input may have been lacking possibly due to a lack of recognition of the far reaching impacts of this project. a. Since no one was represented from Ripely Lane and no one from the other side of Hwy. 405 and only a few people from Kennydale, I would assume they were not aware of the nature of this development and what it may mean to them. b. What is the zoning for this area? We would suggest this must be first resolved before any development is allowed. Typically this would address many of these issues and would prevent such a development proposal in the first place. 5. What would happen if the Barbee residents elected to gate our community and block the north entrance to Barbee? Would this project eliminate that future option for Barbee residents? Would it not block access to the south entrance proposed to the Quendall property? We should not be denied that future option due to any development on the Quendall property. 6. We think that doing something positive with the Quendall property is a good thing and better than leaving it as empty property but any project options should provide the following options and features: a. Option one: If the tax payers have paid for the superfund clean up, then perhaps we would favor making this a park area with nature features using existing wet lands, etc. b. Option two: If there is to be commercial development, then we would favor the following criteria: -Residential density and quality mirroring Barbee Mill. In fact, expanding Barbee Mill would be a desirable idea. -Some retail activity would be welcome including a nice waterfront restaurant, coffee house, specialty shops, deli store, and even some small professional offices. No big grocery stores, department stores, etc -that belongs in the Landing. -Some recreation area on site for residents, walkers or bikers only may be worked in if it can be coordinated with the wetlands challenges. (We believe this kind of development would be a positive, vs a negative, addition to our neighborhood and would address many if not most of the concerns raised with a high density development -and proof is in the positive sales experience in Barbee to date which has been much better than the general economy) 7. In looking over the proposal quickly, we see a few things that are not properly evaluated: a. The up to 9000 trips per day identified are to result in 700 -800 ft line ups on our one lane roads!! -Well if you took a good moving line at 5 sec per car, 9000 cars result in 12.5 hrs of traffic lines -half the a 24 hr clock !!! Traffic would be backed up to our doors!! Traffic would be forced south and impacts would result all the way to Exit 5 or even 4. There are already back ups exceeding 700 -800 ft.!!! b. The wet lands buffers are being encroached on by buildings on the drawings. The explanation we heard that this can work due to averaging is nonsense. I have dealt with wet lands issues nationwide for 30 yrs and never have had that accommodation available. I am an engineer and worked as a design engineer and project manager for Weyerhaeuser for 38 yrs. I know that most of the EPA wet land rules are delegated to the states to manage and perhaps some inappropriate accommodations are being provided. I am sure if the EPA were brought in, this accommodation would disappear. c. I see very little if any run off mitigation from this project to the lake involved in the proposals. In effect nearly the entire site will be paved, and as such, run off must be properly treated before draining into the lake. We appreciate your very tough coordination role on this -it is really quite important to all of us. We thank you for your service to us. Larry & Linda Borgeson 1013 N 42nd Pl Renton, WA. 98056 Phone: 360-918-3371 Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Mr. and Mrs. Sihon, Vanessa Dolbee Tuesday, January 04, 20111:31 PM 'Winnie Sihon' RE: Quendall site development ' . ' I / ~,-/ I . '.,,,,·. Thank you for your comments, these will be addressed in the Final EIS and made a part of the official Record. 'Vanessa (J)o(6ee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Winnie Sihon (mailto:wsihon@comcast.net1 Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2011 12:49 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Re: Quendall site development Dear Ms Dolbee, As longtime Eastside residents in Bellevue and now in Barbee Mill, we wish to express our concerns for the development of this waterfront location. Originally this land was to be similar to Carollan Point in.Kirkland with shops, restaurants, some housing and some business, spacious and luxurious. Our big complaint for the proposed development is that it is too dense, generating too much traffic, too many cars and the need for too much parking. The visual blight will be horrendous as well as the environmental impact ofthat much construction and density. Think about Whistler village or Carollan Point rather than "The Landing" or downtown Renton. The last open land should be a place of beauty. Please keep us informed of any decisions. Winnie and Yura Sihon 1211 N. 42nd Place, Renton, WA, 98056 1 CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 5th day of January, 2011, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Notice of Comment Period Extension for DEIS documents. This information was sent to: Parties of Record (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING Name ) ss ) See Attached I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker Representing signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the mentioned in the instrument. Dated: ';¥M~ 5 1 j}.cJ\\ Notary Publcinandfor the State of Washington Notary (Print): ____ \_,_-\:_:·c_:'l:.1...=-......!.b-2:!r.ce:.,...\o~·2..-=1·.:..r ___________ _ My appointment expires: j:\ '4 ~~ \ ·::l '" 1 &.o ,3 Quendall Terminals LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SA-M, SM ' \ NOTICE OF PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD EXTENTION TO JANUARY 25. 2011 FOR THE FOLLOWING DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT {DEIS) Notice is hearby given under WAC 197-11-510 and RMC 4-9-070 that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposal described below was issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee on Monday, December 6, 2010, and is available for public review and comment. Copies are available for review at the Renton Main Library, located at 100 Mill Avenue South, and the Renton Highlands Branch Library, located at 2902 NE 12'h Street, and at Renton City Hall, Customer Service Counter, 6th floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton WA 98057, and on the City of Renton web site: (www.rentonwa.gov). PROJECT NAME: Quendall Terminals PROPONENT: Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific, L. P. PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SA-M, SM LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd DESCRIPTION: The Quendall Terminals mixed use development DEIS considers potential development concepts for the redevelopment of a 21.46 acre Superfund site located along the shoreline of Lake Washington. The DEIS evaluates potential impacts resulting from the proposed development. The following are alternatives evaluated within the DEIS: Alternative 1, which consists of 800 residential units, 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant; Alternative 2, which consist of a less dense alternative where the office component is eliminated and residential units are reduced to 708 units; and a no action alternative. DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: The Draft Environmental Impact Statement is available for purchase from the Finance Department on the l't Floor of Renton City Hall for $25 per hard copy or $10.00 per CD, plus tax and postage (if mailed). COMMENT PERIOD: The written 30-day comment period on the DEIS has been extended an additional 15 days, now ending 5:00 p.m .. on Tuesday. January 25, 2011, and all comments should be addressed to: CITY OF RENTON PLNNING DEPARTMENT ATIN: VANESSA DOLBEE, SENIOR PLANNER 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, SIXTH FLOOR RENTON, WA 98055 If you have further questions, please contact Vanessa Dolbee at (425)430-7314; vdolbee@rentonwa.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE PROJECT MANAGER: VANESSA DOLBEE AT (425) 430-7314. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. PARTIES OF RECORD Quendall Terminals LUA09-151, SM, ECF, SA-M, BSP, EIS Winnie & Yuri Sihon 1211 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 eml: wsihon@comcast.net (party of record) Larry & Linda Boregson 1013 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 eml: borg41943@comcast.net (party of record) Len Reid 1217 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 572-0474 (party of record) Larry Reymann 1313 N 38th Street Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 228-8511 eml: fulmen8@hotmail.com (party of record) Campbell Mathewson Century Pacific, L.P. 1201 Third Avenue ste: # 1680 Seattle, WA 98101 tel: (206) 757-8893 eml: cmathewson@centurypacificlp.com (contact) John Hansen 4005 Park Avenue N Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 430-1498 eml: johsamm@comcast.net (party of record) Updated: 01/06/11 Bruce & Mimi MacCaul 1246 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (949) 489-8261 eml: bgmc2@cox.net (party of record) Carol O'Connell 1241 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 254-2796 (party of record) Ron Brazg 1019 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 746-7768 (party of record) Gary R. Sanford 1102 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 276-5848 eml: garys@loziergroup.com (party of record) Altino Properties, Inc. & JH Baxter & Co. 800 S Third Street Renton, WA 98057 tel: (425) 226-3900 (owner) Lance Lopes Vice President General Counsel Seattle Seahawks I Seattle Sounders FC I First & Global Inc. 12 Seahawks Way Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 203-8010 eml: lancel@seahawssoundersfc.com (party of record) Ross & Ava Ohash 1018 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 890-3045 eml: taryhtanie@gmail.com (party of record) Gary C. Pipkin 1120 N 38th Street Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 271-2009 (party of record) Amy & Kevin Dedrickson 1012 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 970-3799 eml: aimerdoll@yahoo.com (party of record) Mark Hancock PO Box 88811 · Seattle, WA 98138 (party of record) Ryan Durkin 500 Galland Building 1221 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 tel: (206) 623-1745 (party of record) Steve Van Til Vulcan 505 5th Avenue S ste: #900 Seattle, WA 98104 tel: (206) 342-2119 (party of record) (Page 1 of 3) PARTIES OF RECORD Quendall Terminals LUA09-151, SM, ECF, SA-M, BSP, EIS Winnie & Yuri Sihon 1211 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 eml: wsihon@comcast.net (party of record) Larry & Linda Boregson 1013 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 eml: borg41943@comcast.net (party of record) Len Reid 1217 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 572-0474 (party of record) Larry Reymann 1313 N 38th Street Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 228-8511 eml: fulmen8@hotmail.com (party of record) Kelly Smith 6811 Ripley Lane N Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 917-3316 (party of record) Campbell Mathewson Century Pacific, L. P. 1201 Third Avenue ste: #1680 Seattle, WA 98101 tel: (206) 757-8893 eml: cmathewson@centurypacificlp.com (contact) Updated: 01/06/11 Bruce & Mimi Maccaul 1246 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (949) 489-8261 eml: bgmc2@cox.net (party of record) Carol O'Connell 1241 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 254-2796 (party of record) Ron Brazg 1019 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 746-7768 (party of record) Gary R. Sanford 1102 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 276-5848 eml: garys@loziergroup.com (party of record) Jim Hanken 15543 62nd Avenue NE Kenmore, WA 98028 (party of record) Altino Properties, Inc. & JH Baxter & Co. 800 S Third Street Renton, WA 98057 tel: ( 425) 226-3900 (owner) Ross & Ava Ohash 1018 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 890-3045 eml: taryhtanie@gmail.com (party of record) Gary C. Pipkin 1120 N 38th Street Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 271-2009 (party of record) Amy & Kevin Dedrickson 1012 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 970-3799 eml: aimerdoll@yahoo.com (party of record) Mark Hancock PO Box 88811 Seattle, WA 98138 (party of record) Cyrus M. McNeely 3810 Park Avenue N Renton, WA 98056 eml: cmikeathom@msn.com (party of record) Ryan Durkin 500 Galland Building 1221 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 tel: (206) 623-1745 (party of record) (Page 1 of 3) • John Hansen 4005 Park Avenue N Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 430-1498 eml: johsamm@comcast.net (party of record) Dan Mitzel 111 Cleveland Avenue Mt Vernon, WA 98040 tel: (360) 404-2050 (party of record) Kevin Iden 5121 Ripley Lane N Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 444-4336 eml: idenkr@comcast.net (party of record) Charlie Conner 846 108th Avenue NE Bellevue, WA 98004 tel: (425) 646-4433 (party of record) Jessica Winter 7600 Sand Point Way Seattle, WA 98115 tel: (206) 623-1745 (party of record) John Murphy Director of Operations New Home Trends, Inc. 4314 148th Street SE Mill Creek, WA 98012 tel: (425) 953-4719 (party of record) Updated: 01/06/11 PARTIES OF RECORD Quendall Terminals LUA09-151, SM, ECF, SA-M, BSP, EIS Lance Lopes Vice President General Counsel Seattle Seahawks I Seattle Sounders FC I First & Global Inc. 12 Seahawks Way Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 203-8010 eml: lancel@seahawssoundersfc.com (party of record) Spencer Alpert Alpert International, LLP 2442 NW Market Street ste: #722 Seattle, WA 98107 tel: (206) 915-7200 (party of record) Anne Simpson 3001 Mountain View Avenue N Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 572-6344 eml: annsimpson@comcast.net (party of record) Rich Wagner 2411 Garden Court N Renton, WA 98056 (party of record) Ronald & Sachi Nicol 1030 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 891-6169 eml: rfnucik@comcast.net & msnicol@gmail.com (party of record) c/o Brad Nicholson SEGB 2302 NE 28th Street Renton, WA 98056 (party of record) Steve Van Til Vulcan 505 5th Avenue S ste: #900 Seattle, WA 98104 tel: (206) 342-2119 (party of record) Laurie Baker 3107 Mountain View Avenue N Renton, WA 98056 tel: (206)772-6284 eml: laurieb@mvseac.com (party of record) Jim Hanken Wolfstone, Panchot & Bloch, P.S., Inc. 1111 Third Avenue ste: 1800 Seattle, WA 98101 tel: (206) 682-3840 (party of record) Paul & Susan Siegmund 1006 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 572-5892 eml: macmund@mac.com (party of record) Paul & Mary Becker 1007 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 970-3385 eml: mbfamily6@gmail.com & rgb@beckerarch.com (party of record) Patty Witt 14107 SE 45th Street Bellevue, WA 98006 tel: ( 425) 890-1880 eml: pwitt55@aol.com (party of record) (Page 2 of 3) Bob & Mary Becker 1007 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 970-3385 PARTIES OF RECORD Quendall Terminals LUA09-151, SM, ECF, SA-M, BSP, EIS Roy & JoAnn Franncis 1000 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 827-9246 Laura & James Counsell 1122 N 41st Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 203-1281 eml: mbfamily6@gmail.com & rgb@beckerarch.com eml: royfrancis@msn.com (party of record) eml: yyluan@yahoo.com & j.diddly@gmail.com (party of record) Ricardo & Maria Antezana 1025 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 eml: ricardoadlc@msn.com (party of record) Updated: 01/06/11 (party of record) (Page 3 of 3) Cit},' of Renton Pl;i,,,·,1',1 • D' , • · ' 'd 1v1sion 'AN ., 6 2U11 IJov-Ms_ /J 0 \h,e _ 0 1~ ~JJ~Jtu!~ 1-l--!u.. oh«µ J::;]:~ q-1 ~ i~~ ~ t'7c~~/ ~, ·-/v /ChMc,J ~ Ir~~ A-u~6:eJ"s {/)? r CJ-t,li Uv-( no. -~ +kv5,,e.. --fv" ,J, .:..7 ·Jr, C'---<--d /Z<n-, _L • '-f () s J,I; -+ (;' ii I~ ?c..1-· k-b h-LtU,_, "3c> 'U, "* lf-o 'fl. N °. - 0~ ~ --v,p -f-!:tu_....._, --5)-Vtdu~I /-c,) dc~~J u -f- G~ 1 ~c,· 4u.~ Qu.;,,,.,ck/ ~..(/~cl SJ _L-4-e. ~ \Mr,c+s / . VU .A.PJ Cvv,J ~,./rv~. ---y1u 7 k"€/v 1cL.../1{;;c/J &..,j 1/»c&:v,f ftvccf.vv,./ct;.,,. ~f -*0 f• 0;J t/J ~ ~<Y7 z:;,j};_, h,.,_j 1,,,/-Ut../ Mo f-O de,/{_,V),j/f'/, My ~,'JJ C'..c-ut..-,.,,u,113, uf.€.JU ~ {ljj( 'e~ , M wJ fAAJ t/ 1c,_ x 'J ~ 1.. /,,Jw1 ~ --lit_y i2,.,t-11",w= - i~ ? )cui.-<---n 1°v1J b..i,L1..,4e4..d ') "\--<, S~(-' cfl c~ .'' ' hvp-,1 ~u, ~J Eis ~ -fo-Jv -fl;_,, '~ J..V-t.1 ~-V--c> !J c,.,,.,,[/ /f-~~jp G.--vi ae.:k, J tv-UL-J4A,,~J 1,-f o-<-v'J P'°Ufdc,,J ~ o --I , ~ ' ~c Is h-, ?U'l1c-Alk. Vlo .. ..:v.~~ CJ:r"" vV/. '/JJ,b /YJ, ~ I Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Hi Vanessa - markmark@email.com Monday, January 03, 2011 5:27 PM Vanessa Dolbee markmark@email.com Please extend Quendall Terminals public hearing I am unable to attend the Quendall Terminals hearing on Tuesday night due to prior travel plans, and am writing to ask the City for an extension of the public hearing for this project, which I only became aware of at the end of last week. Preferably you can extend to a future evening when the public can give informed input in person, and at least for a few more weeks to provide informed written input (at least to the end of January). The extension of time is reasonable for a number of reasons: 1) This is a huge project for the neighborhood to absorb, and should not be rushed. 2) The neighborhood is not even aware of it, due to minimal (the minimum) public notice and no coverage in the media. 3) The Port Quendall page on the City's website, which citizens use to monitor progress on the property, does not even mention it: http://www.rentonwa.gov/business/default.aspx?id=2062 4) The DEIS was issued less than 30 days ago, and is huge at 482 pages. It is too long and complex to be studied, discussed and understood in that period of time. 5) The holidays have interfered with peoples' ability to learn about the project, or to spend the time required to study it. Thank you for considering my request, Mark Hancock PO Box 88811 Seattle, WA 98138 1 Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Vanessa, YVONNE AND GARY PIPKIN [pipkinsea@msn.com] Monday, January 03, 2011 6: 10 PM Vanessa Dolbee Request to Extend Quendall Terminals Public Hearing & Comment Period Last week we were just made aware of the public hearing for Quendall Terminals scheduled to be held tomorrow (Tuesday, January 4th). Due to the holiday activities and the short notice, my husband and I have not had the time to read the complete 482 page DEIS document to understand the full development impact on the surrounding neighborhoods/area. We hereby request an extension to the public hearing for a few weeks, and to also extend the comment period for a month. Thanks for your consideration to this request. Yvonne and Gary Pipkin 1120 N. 38th St. Renton, WA 98056 1 In The Matter Of: Quendall Terminals DEIS Comment Meeting Public Comments January 4, 2011 Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows Court Reporters 401 Second Avenue South, Suite 700 Seattle, Washington 98104 Original File DEIS Transcription 1-4-11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Public Comments -January 4, 2u11 QUENDALL TERMINALS DEIS COMMENT MEETING PUBLIC COMMENTS 6:00 P.M. Tuesday, January 4, 2011 Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, Washington WILLIAM A. MCLAUGHLIN CCR #3128 Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 88S-4WA-dep 1 2 1 I N D E X 2 Speaker Page 3 4 5 Carol o' Connell 6 1241 N. 42nd Place 7 Gary Pipkin 8 1120 N. 38th Street 9 Len Reid 10 1217 N. 42nd Place 11 Ron Nicol 12 1030 N. 42nd Place 13 Bob Becker 14 1007 N. 42nd Place 15 Paul Siegmund 16 1006 N. 42nd Place 17 Rich Wagner 18 2411 Garden Court North 19 Larry Reymann 20 21 22 23 24 25 1313 North 38th Street Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 3 Commer tor 1 4 Commer tor 2 6 Commentor 3 B Commer tor 4 9 Commer tor 5 14 Comme1 tor 6 24 Comme1 tor 7 2 8 Commer tor 8 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 3 P U B L I C C O M M E N T S Carol O'Connell Commentor 1 Thank you. I have three areas that I'm concerned about with regard to this proposal. The first is with traffic. I do live in Barbee Mill. And right now, trying to get out of our development on 43rd onto Lake Washington in the mornings, it's a backup and it is already difficult. Add another 1,000 to 2,000 cars, it's going to be impossible. The next one issue is that I haven't heard anything in all this about the bikers. And this area is very popular with the bike riders, and it is actually promoted because we have the trail that goes around Lake Washington, they then turn onto Ripley, and then they catch up with the bike trail. That turn --because from my home I can watch that --is already a problem for the bikers to get across that road on Lake Washington. And I don't know if you're aware, but in a two-hour period, I counted 148 bikers bicyclists, excuse me --on a Saturday morning. It is a very popular trail and a very popular area. That whole intersection, the Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 whole thing with the traffic on Lake Washington, is just an accident waiting to happen. The last issue I have is the height of the buildings. Seven stories is far too high for the environmental impact, the visual impact, all of that with that area. And it's my understanding from some of the other neighbors that even Conner Homes tried to do something higher and was not allowed to do that. So I don't understand why this is going through with that number, that height of complex. Thank you. 4 2 conf 3 Gary Pipkin Commento1 2 My name is Gary Pipkin. I live at 1120 North 38th Street in Renton, Lower Kennydale. I have four points to make. First point is the building height. Four stories above the ground at this location is a known limit for not encroaching upon views of people east of that location. Other building organizations that have completed projects in that area were made to keep their buildings shorter than a four-story building with a flat roof. Otherwise it would encroach on the view. The street needs to be dictated as remaining a Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 1 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 two-lane, one-lane each direction, 12-foot traffic lane width, residential and scenic street with a maximum 25 mile-an-hour speed limit. That retains the scenic character of what we're trying to keep on Lake Washington Boulevard. for the walkers, the bicycle riders, and the people that enjoy the view just driving up Lake Washington Blvd. We want to make sure that there are no added turn lanes, no widening of Lake Washington Blvd. for any reason to access the new development at all. This will discourage people using Lake Washington Boulevard. from the south to the north as a sort of time shortcut because traffic gets too busy from the north. If you add turn lanes in there, it will encourage them to come up Park Street, down 40th and then onto Lake Washington Blvd., or straight up Lake Washington Blvd. The Park Street shortcut that will be used, if people are allowed to do that, is extremely hazardous. And on previous construction projects, no construction traffic was allowed to use Park Street because of the school children, the preschool children. And adding the additional hazard of people late to work using Park Street to by-pass all the stop signs would be even more of a hazard in addition Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 5 2 cont. 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 to what was considered before on other projects. The parking at the site that's provided, the parking garages that are provided, needs to guarantee that it shall always remain free parking, no fee. If that is not done, traffic will spill onto Lake Washington Blvd, be parked on both sides of the street to avoid parking fees. And younger folks who are in good shape won't mind a quarter of a mile hike to the building to save 50 bucks a month. So we have to make sure that the parking remains free in that location that they're building. The fourth point I want to make is, again, reiterate that no construction traffic should be allowed to use North Park Street to access the site. A study was done on a couple of other projects there and an extreme hazard with small children was recognized. Thank you. 6 14 cont. 5 6 Len Reid Commento 3 My name is Len Reid. My address is 1217 North 42nd Place in Renton, which is the Barbee Mill Estate. A couple of the items I wanted to address have already been addressed. That was the access for the bicyclists. It's already a hazard. Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 The other thing is lighting along that area, as well, is very inadequate street lighting. I'm not sure if that is being proposed to improve that. The traffic egress from Barbee Mill is already getting quite difficult now in the mornings when you leave for work or if you're coming back at night. I don't see any plans to put traffic lights on that access onto Lake Washington Blvd. If it does, it starts to destroy the local environment of why we moved to Barbee Mill in the first place. The other thing is the recreational facilities for children. Imagine with 800 residents moving in there, or families, it's going to be some sort of access or requirements for recreation facilities for children. I didn't see anything proposed on the plans for that either. The other thing is the height of the buildings being five stories adjacent to the Barbee Mill Estate. It then starts to destroy our privacy with people living in the upper floors can look straight down into our estate. And I think that needs to be considered for the residents who already moved to that location because it was never discussed that something would be built that tall on the adjacent property. Thank you. Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 7 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 8 Ron Nicol Commentor4 My name is Ron Nicol. I live at 1030 North 42nd Place, Barbee Mill, and I have the same concerns that are basically being expressed. The traffic, right now on a sunny day in the SUllliller, Lake Washington Blvd. is gridlock going southbound. That's without the additional traffic. I think if you build a project of this density where there's only one egress, it's pretty much landlocked except one exit. And there will be incredible jam-ups trying to get in and out of that area. I'm a bike rider. And when you make that --going north on Lake Washington Blvd. making that left turn to go past the Seahawks, it's already quite hazardous with the traffic that's already the:c-e. I think the other thing is the height of the buildings. I think that it's certainly a variation from the aesthetics of anything along the lake. And it, I think, would be oppressive. The views have been mentioned. I think proposal 2 is at least better than proposal 1. I'd like to at least compliment them that they have moved the buildings away from the Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 property line, and if something of that proposed density does get passed, I'd like to at least encourage them to put them a little more to the center of the property and give a little buffer for the Barbee Mill people. And that's about it. 9 Bob Beck.er. Commento1 5 My name is Bob Becker. I'm an architect and urban planner. I live at 1007 North 42nd Place, Barbee Mill. I'd like to address three things, the scale, the traffic, and the height. For the scale, the proposed project is out of scale with all other residential development from I-90 to Gene Coulon Park with the height limits of 35 feet typically all along Lake Washington with the exception of the Seahawks Center. The stated comment on page 3.5-12 states, "The proposed height and bulk and setbacks of development under Alternative 2 would be consistent with the existing urban character of the area and the applicable provisions of the City of Renton regulations, therefore, no significant height and bulk or land use compatibility impacts would be anticipated.• Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 5 cont. 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 This is probably one of the most blatant untrue statements I've ever seen in an EIS. Barbee Mill to the south has a density of 5 units per acre. 10 Quendall Terminals with Alternative 2, which is reduced, has 37 units per acre, seven times, plus an additional over a quarter of a million square feet of office, plus another retail space, plus another 9,000 square feet for restaurant space. The density in this isn't even close. So I don't know who prepared this EIS with that comment, but it seems to be blatantly untrue. Also, in terms of scale, one of the things that's unusual is the main lookout for this Quendall development is a semicircular unit that protrudes out toward Lake Washington, and it's a parking lot. It's a semicircular parking lot. And that's the feature on one of the most beautiful lakes in this country. Traffic, I'd like to address that. On 3.9-1, under roadway condition, it does not list Northeast 43rd Street, which is the main north entry to the Barbee Mill and the main south entry to Quendall Terminals. 3.9-8, states without the I-405 exit number 7 improvement, southbound entry and exit traffic to the Quendall Terminals project would head south on Lake Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 2 cont 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 11 Washington Blvd. Lake Washington Blvd. is a two-lane road and there's just no way that it will handle this traffic. It would push the traffic down to 30th and then it would drive all that traffic up through that residential area. We're suggesting that the development not be considered until all the I-405 improvements are made. And that's stated in your EIS, that this project should not go forward until I-405 improvements are made. There will easily be up to 700 to 800 feet of traffic blockages along Lake Washington Blvd. as stated in the EIS, 700 to 800 feet. And that's going to back up onto Ripley Lane without serious modifications. South traffic from Quendall Terminals would exit out onto North 43rd Street and there needs to be at least two easterly lanes so that you can turn to the north or to the south. And that whole entrance into 43rd would have to be redone in order for this to work properly. You can back up between Lake Washington Blvd. and, coming onto the Barbee Mill, you can back up about 2-1/4 cars. So I don't know where all these cars are going to back up that are coming from Barbee Mill or coming from Quendall development. There's Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 5 cont 6 7 8 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 just no space. It's just not possible. There will be a major traffic jam, especially during peak traffic hours. And, as people mentioned, not only that but then we've got the bicyclists to consider. At this intersection, without proper Quendall Terminals existing distances further, it would be possible for Quendall traffic to shortcut the traffic. So, if they're backed up at 43rd and they can't get onto Lake Washington Blvd., since --these are city streets, they're not private streets as I understand it, they were all granted to the City of Renton. So the City of Renton controls it. So, people could take a shortcut through Barbee Mill and go off the south exit to get on Lake Washington Blvd. and then go up through those residential areas. I think that this would be an impossible traffic situation. This excess traffic does not belong in either the Barbee Mill residential area or through the residential areas heading up and on east to 30th Street. 12 The number of proposed additional cars will also greatly impact the safety of the pedestrians and bike traffic that frequent the Lake Washington Blvd. bike lanes. On any given swmner weekend there are Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 10 11 12 13 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 hundreds of bikers, joggers, and pedestrians with children that frequent these lanes. There are no sidewalks on Lake Washington Blvd. in that area and it's really a traffic hazard as it is. 13 The last thing I'd like to address is the height. The proposed south buildings are shown over 35 feet above the existing Barbee Mill Homes, which is the development to the south. This is completely out of sea.le with the neighborhood, completely out of scale with all the neighborhoods from I-90 all the way down to Gene Coulon Park. Other than the Seahawks training center, there are no other developments along the water with this proposed height or density. It resembles an industrial park and lacks any resemblance to a residential neighborhood. We do not want a development to mimic the proposed hotel along the freeway and the athletic training facility which are referenced in the EIS as the quality that's to be in this area, that's outlined in green on your comprehensive plan. So, in conclusion, the scale, we believe, is completely out of scale with all residential developments. It doubles the height of the Barbee Mill residential development. Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 14 cont. 15 16 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 14 And further, there was a rendering that was in the EIS that was this rendering right here. Our home is right here. And we're 35 feet. And if I draw a straight line across, this is 35 feet. So someone needs to go back and redo parts of the EIS to bring it up to the full 70 foot of height. That's figure 3.7-2. In conclusion, the five units per acre in Barbee Mill versus 37 units per acre at Quendall Terminals is just totally out of scale. This bears no resemblance to what is stated in the guidelines from the City of Renton. And I've already addressed the traffic. What I'm recommending is that this proposed project be put on hold until all the improvements are made on I-405, until the density and height are reduced, and further impact studies are considered. Thank you. Paul Siegmund Commentor6 I'm Paul Siegmund from 1006 North 42nd Place, so the Quendall Terminals property is my back fence, and I'm a registered PE in Washington with some observations on that. I'd like to make points about the size and scale and density and the height, the Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 18 19 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 15 impact, environmental as well as the impact to traffic, and the presentations within the EIS itself. I have to say Alternative 2 is not significantly different from Alternative 1. It's 85 to 90 percent the size of the first alternative. So I take issue with the applicant's assertion that they have, in fact, created an alternative that serves the required function in the EIS. The entire concept is inappropriate for the character of the local area. At Alternatives 1 and 2, the applicant is asserting that it's compatible with the character of the Seahawks and the Landing. Neither of those is relevant or appropriate for what we've got here. The design, the height, the size, and the density would be appropriate, potentially, in a truly urban setting such as you have down near the Landing; but that has it sandwiched between a half-built shopping mall and the country's second largest airplane factory. It would look okay down there. If you look at the drawings, you'll see it rather greatly resembles the apartment complexes which are 6 to 7 stories built on top of one and two-story garages that are halfway to downtown along Factoria. It wouldn't look good in a residential area. It Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 1 2 3 14 l 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 is destructive to our value and our character. It's essentially a fully urban conglomerate shoehorned into the middle of a residential neighborhood, which is what surrounds this on all sides with the exception of the water. 16 Renton and east side, by the way, already have a fairly large glut of empty offices and small residences. I'm not sure we need any of these as neighbors. And they only get worse when they begin to fill up. Talking about the height and the bulk, not just from the perspective of the presentations that are in the EIS itself, but you have to remember the proposed heights of Alternative land Alternative 2 --which is only a smidge shorter --is 3/4ths the height of the Seahawks hanger facility, their indoor football field. And it's more than twice that of any of which local residences including Barbee Mill and any of the multiunit, multistory, multifamily complexes that are nearby. Look at the same photo that Bob Becker showed and I will be making some of the same points as others have made because we're coming later in the evening --those heights are not representative. Again, you can't tell by scale from the picture of Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 4 cont 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Alternative 1 or Alternative 2 that it is such a large fraction of the height of the Seahawks facility. And it looks like it's only 10 to 20 percent taller than the houses at Barbee Mill. It's not. It's twice the size, twice the height of everything that's near it. Nothing on the lake south of 90 exceeds 35 to 40 feet with the exception of the big green Seahawks facility. This dwarfs everything nearby with the one exception that doesn't really belong along the side of the lake anyway. Look at the density of the development, the character. Again, Barbee Mill has 114 residential units on 22 acres. That's approximately 5 residential units per acre, and there's nothing else there. The Quendall property is looking at 37 residential units per acre plus, potentially, up to 2000 daily transient people, depending on whether or not the office option is chosen. Even if that's not, the retail and commercial complexes would generate a significant amount of traffic. The residential units that are being proposed average, apparently, around 1,000 square feet. That's pretty high-density housing. Even the nearby high-density housing units along Lake Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 17 7 cont. 8 9 10 11 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 18 Washington Blvd. are bigger than that. That invites --we'll call it a transient commercial or business population that doesn't make a significant local investment in the area, potentially. And it wasn't specified whether those are apartments or condos. But, again, this is a residential neighborhood. It needs to be slung down and it needs to be made a whole lot lower, around 35 to 40 feet, which is what's being built in the area with all that's permitted now. Pardon, it's 30 to 35 feet, where the Barbee Mill properties are 32 to 35 feet in height. Compare it against the Seahawks. Look again at the perspective drawings which I argue make the proposals both look Alternatives 1 and 2 a bit smaller than they actually are. They dwarf the Seahawks facility. Look at the perspective shot from Mercer Island that was in Bob Becker's comments and we'll put it in written comments here as well. I think it's 3.5-12. The complex is 2 to 3 times the width of the huge buildings that the Seahawks built and it's nearly as tall, about through 3/4th the height. That's not apparent in that photo. I take issue with that presentation. Another point to remember about traffic and L__ __________________________________ __J Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 111 con1 12 13 14 115 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 19 about the existence of the Seahawks in our neighborhood, they've got a property that's about 15 to 20 acres in size, roughly comparable to the Quendall property, roughly comparable to the Barbee Mill property. They employ 100 to 200 people or so, never all at once, and they're seasonal. They're simply not all there all the time and they're not all there together. Consider the exhibition days that they do in August. A lot of us who live in the north end of town have seen those. All right, according to the Seattle Times, approximately 25,000 people visited the Seahawks on 15 days in August. That's 1,500 to 2,000 people on a peak day, probably lower end of that. The Hawks mitigate that by forbidding everybody from driving in and parking. They run security. They run buses. They lease parking down at the Landing, that's it. They even have their own people park off site in the vacant properties over where the hotel might or might not get built one day. Consider this for scale; the normal day at the proposed Quendall property is going to be bigger than the biggest exhibition day that the Seahawks have ever held, every day, seven days a week. Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 15 cont. 16 17 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 20 Traffic --segue to that --none of the roads are anywhere near adequate to handle the load now. And it's not clear, from my perspective, that any of the proposed improvements to 405 or to 44th Street, which were not all that well addressed in the EIS, the proposals are a little hard --the State's proposals and plans are hard to estimate, but the estimates aren't there. There's no clarity that says that another, potentially, 2000 cars can fit anywhere in there. What we can see now is that 44the Street exit 7 is not adequate. 43rd Street and Ripley Lane can't handle the traffic that would be generated. Even the Seahawks don't try to bring that in now. If you were to do something, you'd want to consider building another road. They can buy a right of way across the trail. The two proposed roads right at the entrance to Barbee Mill and all the way up at the far end by the powerline right of way are probably the wrong way to gain access to this, but they're at the far end of the complex, so they're not an inconvenience to the associated neighbors. We'd still love to see trails along the rail right of way once, presumably, the trails are removed. There's an awful lot of bike traffic as a couple of people have noted along Lake Washington Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com • 888-4WA-dep 18 19 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 21 Blvd. now. That and walking traffic along what is now the rail right of way, but isn't going to be a rail right of way forever, most likely, that would be a very desirable residential area usage for bicycles and pedestrians to pass by. Their safety would be degraded by the large amount of traffic that this development has proposed would create. There's also some sloppy work in the EIS. The one intersection that we were most concerned about from Barbee Mill was 43rd Street because it's the one that leads into our neighborhood. It's missing from the data tables. It's tagged as number 4, intersection number 4, for the studies, but there are no data presented. It's just gone when the tables were put together. And further, they even proposed using 30th Street, the ramp to 405 as freeway access for the proposal. In order to get there, are they talking about high-speed traffic through the Kennydale neighborhoods. Come on. You can't be serious about that. Issues with the presentation, again. They speak of buildings shown at 64 feet in height. There are dimensional drawings done by the architect. The dimension marks don't even go all the way to the tops Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 20 cont. 21 22 23 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of the buildings. Buildings that are shown as 64 feet in height and labeled as such have elevator machinery rooms, roof peaks, and the final grade that's not accounted for, the building tops that are written at 64 in Alternative 2, are really closer to 80 feet above the current grade. 22 That doesn't show. It's not even stated in the pictures. Remember, Barbee Mill is only 32 to 35 feet above the grade as you see now. The Seahawks are 115 feet. The applicant is speaking of 64, but doing math that adds up to more like 80, drawing photo renderings of --I'm not exactly sure what, but looks more like 45 to 50 feet in the picture taken from Mercer Island. That one is simply inaccurate. There is no mention in the EIS of wildlife that are on the property. There are at least three bald eagles, a family of osprey, there are deer. We see them every day. There's no mention of their existence. There's no mention of potential mitigations to, or harm against them, as a result of a property that gets built. Also, it looks like the wetland areas that are cited on the map are a lot smaller than they truly are. If anybody cares to take a look at the property, borrow a helicopter or just drive along the Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 23 cont. 24 25 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 edge of it. You'll see a lot more water there today than shows on those maps. 23 None of that, of course, is suitable for a parking lot or for buildings. There is at least, my estimation, at least an acre of water along the southwest corner of the property colIIIllencing at about, I'd say, 50 feet north of the south fence and extending well across the point. We don't have the map up, but extending east and extending north. And, again, ·the impact statement is simply• false. It shows up on in section 3.5 and the similar assertions show up throughout the document. 6 The proposed height and bulk would be consistent with the existing urban character of the area and the applicable provisions of the City of Renton regulations?" Not exactly sure what the regulations limit, but the existing character is not urban and it certainly doesn't accommodate 9 more buildings that look like the apartment complexes down at the Landing. "And therefore no significant height and bulk or land use compatibility impacts would be anticipated.• They could very easily be anticipated if one were to look. But, my goodness, the statement is patently false and the whole EIS appears to rest on that. Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 26 cont. 27 28 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 24 Thank you. Rich Wagner Commentor7 Good evening. I'm Rich Wagner, 2411 Garden Court North. I live in Lower Kennydale, Renton. I'm a fellow in the American Institute of Architects. I've been living in Renton now since 1983 when I married a Renton girl. I have a little more years here than I might look. I spent four years on the Renton Board of Adjustment and 14 years on the Renton Planning Commission. I desperately want to agree with much of what the last speaker said in terms of the adequacies and the accuracies, but I'm not going to repeat all that, which was very well put, thank you. But I would like to add a little history. And I think it's the history that's really missing in this whole discussion. And I totally agree that much of the history will not be in agreement with the comments that I've already heard tonight. It was 1981, 30 years ago, that the Renton Planning Commission and the City Council approved the project known then as Port Quendall. That project, for this particular portion of the site, not the Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 25 whole site, but just this portion, was approved for 200,000 square feet of office; 120,000 square feet of retail; and 220 housing units. I think that's part of the context that this site should be viewed in. 1 cont. Furthermore, in 1993, the commission and the 2 council approved a rezone for this site to COR. Now, I think the most important thing to know about COR was nobody knew exactly what the market would demand, but this site and one other site in the city were thought to be prime redevelopment sites in a major and dramatic way. I remember certain comments about the Port Quendall site was that should be the site where Sound Transit would stop, somewhere between downtown Renton and downtown Bellevue. I think that's the drama which is really missing in this. Now, one could argue, well, 30 years is a long time ago. Doesn't matter anymore. I think I could also argue that some of the development that has happened in the other COR properties basically underbuilt. And I'm not so sure this last piece should be penalized because of others' choices. So, let me say that I do support this application. Let me also say that I think it's got some room for improvement. Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 • www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 In particular, I personally would have liked to have seen the EIS analyze up to 100,000 square feet of retail. I know that whatever will go there will be market driven, but this area is severely underserved by retail services. If a large retail, either a gym or a health club or a grocery store which everybody says will never come --but even if they wanted to come, that would trigger a revisiting of this document because of its size. And I think that would be most unfortunate. 26 The other thing that I'd like to highlight in the traffic report, with all deferences to my friends at TENW, the traffic engineers; I'm not clear how the calculation can show that the diverted traffic --I understand the internal traffic diversions because, you know, if you're working upstairs and you go down to get a cup of coffee, then that is not a vehicle trip to the coffee shop. But they indicate that the diverted trips from the Lake Washington Blvd. come up to about 9 and as high as 17 percent of all the traffic on Lake Washington Blvd. That seems like a real stretch to me, particularly when one recognizes that it's not like you're just --in most traffic analysis, you're simply turning off the driveway into the shopping Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 . 27 center. In this particular one, you're turning off the driveway onto the side lane, then down a path, then into a retail center. And to get that much diversion traffic, which is actually subtracted then from the calculation of traffic, I think is flawed. Most importantly, I want to --I've not heard any comments tonight about the traffic report and how it deals with Park Avenue North. And I think this definitely needs to be reviewed. I do agree with the comments that the mitigations that are proposed for the 405 Lake Washington Blvd, they seem inadequate. But, not being a traffic engineer, however, being a user, they continue to seem inadequate. The link that I'm most concerned about is if you're going down Lake Washington Blvd. and you're headed to downtown Renton, yes, you probably would take the route that they show south of Lake Washington Blvd. However, if you're headed south to 405, that's not the path of first choice even today. The path is you go up the hill at 40th and go south along Park Avenue North until it hits 30th, and then you enter the freeway from there. Park Avenue North isn't even discussed. And on Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 7 cont. 8 9 10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 some maps, it's not even named. And it is a minor arterial in the city, and I think it needs to be addressed. Even with those comments, though, I believe 28 that --no, I think that these impacts can be properly mitigated if they're properly identified and properly managed. Thank you. Larry Reymann Commentor 8 Hi, my name a Larry Reymann. I live at 1313 North 38th Street in Kennydale, Renton, and I really do appreciate the opportunity to provide some input here. And I also appreciate the opportunity to hear the other people's points of view. I think there are some extremely valid questions that are being raised about this. They seem to come from the density that the applicant is trying to accomplish. And the things that I want to talk about are habitat, about --I know that there is mention of access to the shoreline. The devil is in the details on that. There is probably less than 10 percent of the shoreline Lake Washington as natural habitat. And if you took Coulon Park out of that equation, you would probably have even a smaller percentage of Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 10 11 1 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 shoreline. And this shoreline, with native species landscaping that enhances habitat rather than competes with it, are critical for the species that live in May Creek and inhabit that shoreline. 29 I am a salmon watcher on May Creek and there are Sockeye runs, there are Chinook runs, there are Coho runs. The Chinook and the Coho are hanging on by their fingernails. I saw one Coho this year in that creek. I saw no Chinook. There were Sockeye, but these species require native plants along the shoreline. And you can see what's happened in Bellevue and Kirkland where development has taken place without accoI!Dilodating habitat concerns. What it appears, from what people have said, is that this kind of density can't be accoIIDilodated with single occupancy vehicles. I think there has to be some sort of mechanism to get people out of their cars and some sort of mechanism to allow mass transit if you're talking about any kind of development with this level of density. The neighborhood is already gridlocked for long stretches of time. 405 is gridlocked for 5 or 6 hours out of the day. And until we address the reality of the necessity of mass transit, development is only going to aggravate a very, very negative Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 2 cont 3 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 situation. So those are the things that I want to address and the concerns I have, is a developing that shoreline in terms of habitat, public access to that shoreline public access that is meaningful. I'm not talking about, Here's a path and you've got 10 feet of shoreline have a nice picnic. It has to be available for the city's citizens. Tax dollars are what's paying for this cleanup. The public has a right to see a benefit from that kind of expenditure. So we would very much like to see public access to the shoreline and development with a very strong sensitivity to the habitat that these native species require in order to survive. And, again, thank you for the opportunity. I look forward to this process moving forward because it is obviously a lot of people with strong, strong stake in this development, and I think they are obviously very, very committed to making Renton a better place to live. Thank you. Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep 30 4 cont 5 6 7 31 1 C E R T I F I C A T E 2 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss 3 COUNTY OF KING ) 4 I, William McLaughlin, a Notary Public in and for 5 the State of Washington, do hereby certify: 6 That these proceedings were recorded 7 electronically and thereafter transcribed stenographically 8 under my direction; 9 That the foregoing transcript is a true record of 10 all public col!Dilents made on the record to the best of my 11 ability. 12 I further certify that I am in no way related to 13 any party to this matter nor to any of counsel, nor do I 14 have any interest in the matter. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Witness my hand and seal this 20th day of January, 2011. William McLaughlin, Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Seattle. Col!Dilission expires July 10, 2011. Van Pelt, Corbett, Bellows 206-682-9339 * www.vanpeltdep.com * 888-4WA-dep Quendall Terminals EIS DEIS PUBLIC MEETING, 01.04.11 SPEAKER SIGN-UP SHEET Name Address Telephone/email Wish to Speak ' . V i LJ'Jv' £'° 77 O/',/ /\// ( ()L fc+ s -:)-':/ '/ - :J7'ib I-? 17 ;v 4z,,_.,.D ,Pt_ 4'2 5-T7<'-047<; :i]_-N 7u..J Iv 4 C ;J'o ~6 lo 3 o Iv .c/J ~ Pl y ,2 )--tr 9/6/f )<e ,,,/ VI/' 9 f O re ( (JO 1 H 2,-f'lJ)fL L/ i,._,--'*1-tl (Z--E:-/'-ftDJ-1-q· f!;,c; s:£, 3 :n c;- , I Oc?C 1v· L-,_,, · c 4h' g:z 1' _ ll. L-sf:; u11lt N, j( &7YT07 7 {:t?~ 6 579?__-- '2.-+ll q~~ 1'). ,t-i:s--'l-55- e, W5lP f-1t.:,1 /P/? ;f/, ~Z,A,., ~. ~~/t!, :s;.,.,,,,,/ '144-~ -~~ 7/ I o 12-. N 4-2.n..t 'PL- ~eK:n>n \/Vb ~ Yes/No Name Quendall Terminals EIS DEIS PUBLIC MEETING, 01.04.11 SPEAKER SIGN-UP SHEET Address Telephone/email Wish to Speak Yes/No 015 a lv~,y..cl . ?--.-i /~~ tr2.. · 7<:--_f:Jy,5 Name Kc I k1 Sr,~ ,-h,. Quendall Terminals EIS DEIS PUBLIC MEETING, 01.04.11 SPEAKER SIGN-UP SHEET Address Telephone/email (,,'3 I I R.q::ile L \ L \"\ w )+1<:; qn- Re v,h>n , \.,l) A q ~ ~311,, Wish to Speak (Yes/Nol 1Jo Name Ji""'-f1-r"' k CV\ Quendall Terminals EIS DEIS PUBLIC MEETING, 01.04.11 SPEAKER SIGN-UP SHEET Address Telephone/email l$S'f3-,~ tel'" .J J:,t Ken .,., • tt. iJA-)OJ.·;.JS: )(r/ Wish to Speak (Yes/Nol ,A/r:, ----r• City of ------~ <Prrrt 11r1 ,J-. .,..,...;.; ___ ~-~ -~ ...... "',,,.,,; Quendall Terminals EIS FINAL EIS OVERVIEW Washington's State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) and the associated implementing regulations govern the EIS process. The three major steps in the EIS process are: • EIS Scoping • Draft EIS • Final EIS EIS Scoping has occurred and the Draft EIS was published on December 10, 2010. What is the Final EIS? • The Final EIS is the third and final part of the EIS process. • The Final EIS provides the following: -changes or clarifications to the project/alternatives since the Draft EIS was issued, as applicable; -revisions or clarifications to the analysis of impacts that was contained in the Draft EIS, if warranted; and -responses to written comments and public testimony that was received concerning the Draft EIS from agencies, organizations and individuals • The Final EIS, together with the Draft EIS, is the document that the City of Renton will use --along with previous and ongoing public input and other analyses --to make a decision regarding the Quendall Terminals redevelopment project. • It is anticipated that the Final EIS will be issued in the first quarter of 2011. What is the Purpose of Tonight's Meeting? • The purpose of the meeting tonight is to gather your comments on the Draft EIS. • Input can be given verbally at this public meeting or in writing at any time during the comment period. The DEIS comment period on this project will run through January 10 1 2011. 1 of 2 .. . • Written comments can be sent to: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 email: VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov What happens after the Final EIS? • City staff will make recommendations to the decision-makers on the Quendall Terminals project. • A public hearing will be held as part of the decision-making process on the project. • Ongoing opportunities for public input will occur as part of the decision-making process. 2 of 2 Name Comments: Quendall Terminals EIS DEIS PUBLIC MEETING, 01.04.11 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON DEIS Address Telephone/email Comments on the DEIS can be given verbally at the public scoping meeting or in writing at any time during the comment period, which ends at 5:00 PM on January 10, 2011. Written comments can be sent to: Ms. Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 email: VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov • Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Barbara, Vanessa Dolbee Thursday, December 30, 2010 9:33 AM 'Nightingale, Barbara (ECY)' RE: Comments on Draft DEIS Port Quendall Thank you for the second e-mail. lUA ()Cf-16/ As a reminder, we will be holding a commenting public meeting on the DEIS for Quendall Tenminals, on January 4, 2011 at 6:00 PM, in the Renton City Hall Council Chambers (7'' Floor). Once again thank you for taking the time to comment on the DEIS for Quendall Terminals. Vanessa {J)o[6ee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Nightingale, Barbara (ECY) (mailto:bnig461@ECY.WA.GOV1 Sent: Thursday, December 30, 2010 8:34 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Comments on Draft DEIS Port Quendall Vanessa, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the December 2010 Draft DEIS for the Quendall Terminals proposal. Although, we appreciate the work that has gone into this proposal, Ecology has concerns about both Alternatives 1 and 2. In summary, both alternatives are inconsistent with Renton's September 27, 2010 (Resolution 4067) regarding both the wetland regulations and the Reach (-specific vegetation conservation regulations of the locally-adopted SMP. Patrick McGraner (425-649-4447), Ecology Wetlands Specialist, provides a brief summary of five (5) Ecology concerns regarding the proposed buffers that neither meet state wetland buffer standards nor the locally-adopted SMP wetland buffer standards for this site. I have also added a comment on the vegetation conservation inconsistencies of both Alternatives 1 and 2, respective to the locally-adopted SMP (Resolution 4067). In brief summary of concerns with the DEIS for Port Quendall, Patrick McGraner offers the following comments: 1 1) The proposed plan for EPA Jp/remediation appears to include . tion of the compensatory wetland mitigation for wetland fills within the shoreline on a wetland that lies outside of the shoreline jurisdiction -Wetland J. This wetland is on a different parcel that lies more than 500 ft. away from the OHWM of the lake bounded on East by 1-405 and Sea hawks Way and the railroad tracks on the west. Ecology does not consider this to be a suitable mitigation site to compensate for impacts along the shoreline. 2) Figure 2-12 shows the prospective wetland/restoration for CERCLA remediation including the proposed wetland creation on Wetland J mentioned above. In addition, this figure shows resultant buffers that do not meet current standards for wetland buffers per BAS. These wetlands were rated using both the City of Renton's 2010 CAO and the Department of Ecology's rating system. All the wetlands onsite met the criteria for Category Ill wetlands per Ecology's rating system, except for Wetland D (Category II) and Wetlands C and H (Category IV) per page 3.2-2. 3) · The proposed replacement mitigation ratios of 1.5:1 as discussed on page 3.2-3 is not consistent with the current standards per Ecology's guidance as found in Table SC-11-Mitigation ratios for western Washington found in Appendix 8-C, Wetlands in Washington State --Volume 2: Guidance for Protecting and Managing Wetlands, Final, April 2005 -Ecology Publication #05-06-008. This guidance has been adopted for use by federal agencies for actions taken within western Washington. 4) The buffer widths on the proposed remediated wetland areas should be consistent with those that were recently adopted in the City of Renton's SMP update. Ecology reviewed the buffer widths in the adopted SMP update and found them to be consistent with Ecology's buffer guidance as found in Appendix 8-C, Wetlands in Washington State --Volume 2. 5) The DEIS impact baseline is premised upon the acceptance and approval of the proposed remediation plan/mitigation plan by EPA that is depicted on Figure 2-12. Due to the issues listed in items 1-4 above, Ecology could not support either Alternative 1 or 2 because the designs are predicated upon a baseline that is not deemed to meet critical acceptable standards for compensatory wetland mitigation within the shoreline jurisdiction/western Washington. In addition to the above concerns identified by Patrick, I offer the following: 6) The September 2010 locally-adopted SMP requires: (per RMC 4-3-090 F.1.1-Lake Washington Reach C- SMP Exhibit D-114) that "If areas redevelop, the full 100-foot buffer of native vegetation shall be provided, except where water-dependent uses are located." The proposed Alternatives 1 and 2 do not meet this standard. This is redevelopment in Reach C and, therefore, requires a full 100-foot buffer of native vegetation. Ecology will also submit a formal letter with these comments. Thank you again for this opportunity. Barbara Nightingale, Regional Shoreline Planner Department of Ecology Shorelands and environmental Assistance 3190 1601h Avenue SE 2 Bellevue, WA 98008 3 WACR-161 website: www.rentonwa.gov ±'jff.l. l}j·L·'],. 1 •· 1 ."P.. m, . . . .1w.·.'.·.'\ "'. . . . I!! ... ··.• B!1J!l !' ~1.7]~~1J City of Renton -1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 December 15, 2010 For more information contact: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, 425-430-7314 Preeti Shridhar, Communications Director, 425 430-6569 WHAT: WHO: WHEN: WHERE: CONTACT: Public Hearing Scheduled on Quendall Terminals Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Public Hearing on Quendall Terminals, Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) The Environmental Review Committee has issued the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Quendall Terminals mixed use development, for public review and comment. The proposed project is located adjacent to Lake Washington on 21.46 acres of Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) zoned property. The DEIS evaluates potential impacts resulting from the proposed development. Copies are available for review at the Renton Main Library, located at 100 Mill Avenue South, and the Renton Highlands Branch Library, located at 2902 NE 121h Street, and at Renton City Hall, Customer Service Counter, 6th floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton WA 98057, and on the city's website rentonwa.gov. City of Renton Planning Division January 4, 2011, at 6:00 p.m. Renton City Hall -Council Chambers 1055 S. Grady Way Renton WA. 98057 Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner 425 430-7314 vdolbee@rentonwa.gov Written public comment on the DEIS will be accepted until 5:00 p.m., Monday, January 10, 2011, and should be addressed to: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, Planning Division, 61 h floor Renton City Hall; 1055 South Grady Way; Renton, WA 98057. AHEA]) OF THF. Ct.'RV~: 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 Renton Reporter 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: Public Notice was published on December 10, 2010. CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF ISSUANCE & AVAILABILITY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS) Notice is hearby given under WAC 197-11-510 and RMC 4-9-070 that the Draft Environ- mental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposal described below was issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review Commit- tee on Monday. December 6, 20 IO. and is available for public revie\\' and comment. Copies are available for review at the Renton Main Library, located at JOO Mil! Avenue South, and the Renton I lighlands Branch Library. located at 2902 NE 12th Street, and at Renton City Hall, Customer Service Counter, 6th floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton WA 98057, and on the City of Renton web site (W\VW.RENTONWA.GOV). PROJECT NAME: Quendull Terminals PROPONENT: Campbell Malhe\\'son,Century Pacific, LP. PROJECT NUMBER: LU/109-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SA-M, SM , Location: 4350 Lake Washington .-J ,Y ' Bl,d , , ,.. -1, DESCRIPTION: The QuendaJI • • • • • _ . •-_,..' .:.1,.,., · Tem1inals mix use development The full amount of the fee charged for said foregomg pub!Jcat10n 1s =: < · ,~~ .. > DEIS considers potential the sum of $168.00. ~ d . . development concepts for the :;.. _ ·?.. ··. redc,,.dopment of a 21.46 acre ~? ~·-i' o O ;::: Sup<rfund s,te located along the ':-'_ V; · ,, · ··..-"-' .~ 1--.... -= shon:11111.! of Lake Washington. ~,, ;:?J ~ '';, ,:;, · ' ·,?' :? cc The DEIS e,aluates potential /, //.c<A'1 . ,j ' 0'0 - ti'nda M. Mills '. 1, 12' or w r,. s ,,,-- Legal Advei:tising-Repr.esentati¥e, Re!ltO!l Reporter .,,, ,,,, Subscribed and S>"\Orn to me this 10th day December, 2010. _ eg, Notary P&blic for the State of Washington, Residing in Covington, Washington P. 0. Number: impacts resulting from the proposed development The following are alternatives eval- uated within the DEIS: Alter- native I, which consists of 800 residential units, 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant; Alternative 2, which consist of a less dense alternative where the office component is eliminated and residential units are reduced to 708 units; and a no action alternative. DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION The Draft Environmental Impact Statement is available for purchase from the Finance Department on the 1st Floor of Renton City Hall for $25 per hard copy or $ \0.00 per CD, plus tax and postage (if mailed). COMMENT PERIOD: Writlen comments on the DEIS will be accepted for a 3Q..day comment period, ending 5:00 p.m., on Monday, January IO, 2011, and should be addressed to: City of Renton Planning Department ATTN: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner 1055 S. Grady Way, 6th Floor Renton, WA 98055 A public hearing has also been scheduled to accept written and oral comments on the DEIS and will be held on Tuesday, January 4, 2011, at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 7th floor Renton City Hall, !055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA. Published in the Renton Reporter on December JO, 2010. #441957. Denis Law Mayor December 10, 2010 Dear Reader: .city of l . .... _]..~. r · r rr re,,· ,·1' r -, . \ !-~~~ Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch.Administrator Attached is a copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Quendall Terminals mixed use development. The proposal is located adjacent to Lake Washington on 21.46 acres of Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) zoned property. The DEIS evaluates potential impacts resulting from the proposed development. The following are alternatives evaluated within the DEIS: Alternative 1, which consists of 800 residential units, 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant; Alternative 2, which consist of a less dense alternative where the office component is eliminated and residential units are reduced to 708 units; and Alternative 3, a no action alternative. In November 2009, Campbell Mathewson of Century Pacific, LP. submitted a Land Use Master Application (LUA09-151) for Environmental Review, Master Site Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Significance (DS) on February 15, 2010. On April 27, 2010, a public scoping meeting was held to receive written and oral comments on the proposed scope of study for the EIS. A scoping summery is provided in Appendix B. The issues identified through the scoping process are addressed in the DEIS. These include: earth, critical areas, environmental health, energy-greenhouse gas emissions, land and shoreline use, relationship to plans, policies and regulations, aesthetics/views, parks and recreation, and transportation. For each environmental issue, an analysis is provided and significant environmental impacts attributable to the Alternatives 1 & 2 are reported. Where significant impacts were determined to potentially exist, options for possible mitigation were suggested. Written public comment on the DEIS will be accepted for a 30-day review period, starting on Friday, December 10, 2010, and ending at 5:00 p.m. Monday, January 10, 2011. Written comments should be addressed to: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner; Planning Division, 61h floor Renton City Hall; 1055 South Grady Way; Renton, WA 98057. A public hearing has been scheduled to accept both written and oral comments on the DEIS. It will be held on Tuesday, January 4, 2011, at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 7'h floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way; Renton, WA. Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Following the public comment period, the City will prepare and issue a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) that will include responses to the comments received during the public comment period and any additional analysis necessary to adequately evaluate the proposal. The City will then issue a Mitigation Document which will set forth the necessary conditions to diminish or eliminate environmental impacts as one portion of the approval of the Proposed Action. If you have any question or require clarification of the above, please contact Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, at (425) 430-7314. The City of Renton appreciates your interest and participation. For the Environmental Review Committee, J!j1e91 31111;&-//U tr-- Gregg Zimmerman, P.E. Public Works Administrator -----1P{~m1~@fill e NIOTICE NOTICE OF ISSUANCE & AVAILABILITY DR:AFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT {DEIS) Notice is hearby given under WAC 197-11-510 and RMC <1-9-070 that the Dra~ Environmental Impact Statement !DEIS) for the proposal described below was l5Sued by the Cify of Renton Environmental Review Committee on Monday, Dea;mber 6, 2010, and is available for public ,.eview and comment. Copies are available for review at the Renton Main Library, located at 100 Mill Avenue South, and the Renton Highlands Branch Library, located at 2902 NE 12,. Street, a,nd at Renton City Hall, Cu;comer Service Counter, 6th floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton WA 98057, and on the City of Renton web site: (www.rentonwa.gov). PROJECT NAME: Quendall Terminals PROPONENT: Cllmpbell Mathewson, Century Pacific, L P. PROJECT NUMBER: LUA.09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SA.-M, SM LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washingtoo Blvd DESCRIPTlON: The Quendall Terminals mixed use development OEIS considers potential development co~pts for the redevi!lopment of a 21.46 acre SUperfund site located along the shoreline of Lake Washington. The OEIS ('Vllluate§ potential Impacts resulting from the propo!ied development. The following are alternatives evalu.ated within the DEIS: Alternative 1, which consists of 800 residential units, 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant; AltematiVf! 2, which consist of a less denSI! alternatm!, where the office component is eliminated and residential units are reduced to 708 units; and a nc;, actio11 alternative. DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: The Draft Environmental Impact Statement is available for purchase from the Finance Department on the 1" Floor of Renton City Hall for $25 per hard copy or $10.00 per CD, plus ta~ and postage (if mailed]. COMMENT PERIOD: Written comments on the DEIS will be accepted for a 3o-.:lay comment period, ending 5:00 t).m. on Monday January 10 2.011 and should be addressed to: arv OF RENTON PLNNING DEPARTMENT ATTN: VANESSA DOLBEE, SENIOR PlANNER 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, SIXTH FLOOR RENTON, WA 98055 A pybjj,; hearing has also been scheduled to accept written and oral comments on the DEIS and will be held on Tuesday January 4 2011, at 6;00 p.m .• ln the City Coundl Chambers, fh floor, Renton Crty Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA.. If you have further questions, please contact Vanessa Dolbee at (425}430-7314; vdolbee@lrentonwa.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION. PLEASE CONTACT THE PROJECT MANAGER VANESSA DOLBEE AT (425) 430-7314. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AlJTHORJZATION Please tncludlll the, prajoet NUMBER when callln; for prop6r n11111dantffication. CERTIFICATION I, hereby certify that G copies of the above document were posted in ___ · -conspicuous places or nearby ::ibed property on Date: /1./9/ZDID Signed:':i!a£JR.bMdJd2~ ~. STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ) ) ss ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that \/,u, e 5s <L no\ lo~<' signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the -b Notary Public i and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): 1-J A My appointment expires: __ ;_~-':j-"l-'-1,'-5"-·'-\ _,,..;1_,1..,_,-";1.,._c""·,-"L..,_S _____ _ CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 9th day of December, 2010, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Quendall Terminals Draft EIS documents. This information was sent to: Name Represeritirig Agencies See Attached Campbell Mathewson Applicant Allina Properties, Inc. & JH Baxter & Co. Owner Parties of Record See Attached (s;goaw«ofSeodec), ~ Jn .Judt,v STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) mentioned in the instrument. Dated : .Jl .... ·....._..wtM"'¥ :i.:t :i, _q.._)u.c~, ''-'-'-" I 0 \ -, ~No~ry ;ziti~1 and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): ___ _.,c......,o...,.....L.ZC_._.c..l(,l..u' '-' -------------- My appointment expires: Qendall Terminals LUA09-151, ECF, EIS, SM, SA-M, BSP, template -affidavit of service by mailing ;J_ q ,)013 I Dept. of Ecology * Environmental Review Section PO Box47703 Olympia, 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 Box47015 Olympia, 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 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY (DOE) LETIER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Larry Fisher• 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 Duwamish Tribal Office* 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Environmental Planning Supervisor Ms. Shirley Marroquin 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 City of Newcastle Attn: Steve Roberge Director of Community Development 13020 Newcastle Way Newcastle, WA 98059 Puget Sound Energy Municipal Liaison Manager Joe Jainga PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-OlW Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. * Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015 -172"' Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program * Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015 172"' Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Attn: Gretchen Kaehler PO Box48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Kent Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Acting Community Dev. Director 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 City ofTukwila Steve Lancaster1 Responsible Official 6200 5outhcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 *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 • Attn: SEPA Coordinator Puget Sound Clean Air Agency 1904 Third Avenue, Suite 105 Seattle, WA 98101 NOAA Fisheries 1401 Constitution Avenue NW Room 5128 Washington, DC 20230 Attn: Janna Steedman or SEPA Responsible Official City of Bellevue Planning & Community Development 450 1101 h Avenue NE Bellevue, WA 98009 Seattle Times PO Box 70 Seattle, WA 98111 Rick Olson, Director Government Relations & Communications Puget Sound Regional Council 1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500 Seattle, WA 98104 NOAA Fisheries 7600 Sand Point Way NE Seattle, WA 98115-0070 Attn: Tim Stewart, Development Services Director City of Mercer Island 9611 SE 361h Street Mercer Island, WA 98040 Puget Sound Business Journal 801 2°' Avenue #210 Seattle, WA 98104 Attn: Unda Priddy, Project Manager Environmental Protection Agency 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98101 Harold S. Taniguchi, Director KC Department of Transportation 201 S Jackson Street, KSC-TR-0815 Seattle, WA 98104 Roger Tabor U.S. Department of Fish & Wildlife 510 Desmond Drive SE, Suite 102 Lacey, WA 98503 PARTIES OF RECORD Quendall Terminals LUA09-151, SM, ECF, SA-M, BSP, EIS Winnie & Yuri Sihon 1211 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 eml: wsihon@comcast.net (party of record) Larry & Linda Boregson 1013 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 eml: borg41943@comcast.net (party of record} Ryan Durkin 500 Galland Building 1221 Second Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 tel: (206) 623-1745 (party of record) Steve Van Til Vulcan 505 5th Avenue S ste: #900 Seattle, WA 98104 tel: (206) 342-2119 (party of record) Laurie Baker 3107 Mountain View Avenue N Renton, WA 98056 tel: (206)772-6284 eml: laurieb@mvseac.com (party of record) Jim Hanken Wolfstone, Panchot & Bloch, P.S., Inc. 1111 Third Avenue ste: 1800 Seattle, WA 98101 tel: (206) 682-3840 (party of record) Updated: 12/09/10 Bruce & Mimi MacCaul 1246 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (949) 489-8261 eml: bgmc2@cox.net (party of record} Campbell Mathewson Century Pacific, L.P. 1201 Third Avenue ste: #1680 Seattle, WA 98101 tel: (206) 757-8893 eml: cmathewson@centu rypacificl p. com (contact) John Hansen 4005 Park Avenue N Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 430-1498 eml: johsamm@comcast.net (party of record) Dan Mitzel 111 Cleveland Avenue Mt Vernon, WA 98040 tel: (360) 404-2050 (party of record) Kevin Iden 5121 Ripley Lane N Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 444-4336 eml: idenkr@comcast.net (party of record) Charlie Conner 846 108th Avenue NE Bellevue, WA 98004 tel: ( 425} 646-4433 (party of record) Ross & Ava Ohash 1018 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 890-3045 eml: taryhtanie@gmail.com (party of record) Altino Properties, In. & JH Baxter &Co. 800 S Third Street Renton, WA 98057 tel: (425) 226-3900 (owner) Lance Lopes Vice President General Counsel Seattle Sea hawks I Seattle Sounders FC I First & Global Inc. 12 Seahawks Way Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 203-8010 eml: lancel@seahawssoundersfc.com (party of record) Spencer Alpert Alpert International, LLP 2442 NW Market Street ste: #722 Seattle, WA 98107 tel: (206) 915-7200 (party of record) Anne Simpson 3001 Mountain View Avenue N Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 572-6344 eml: annsimpson@comcast.net (party of record) Rich Wagner 2411 Garden Court N Renton, WA 98056 (party of record) (Page 1 of 2) Paul & Susan Siegmund 1006 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 572-5892 eml: macmund@mac.com (party of record) Paul & Mary Becker 1007 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 970-3385 PARTIES OF RECORD Quendall Terminals LUA09-151, SM, ECF, SA-M, BSP, EIS Jessica Winter 7600 Sand Point Way Seattle, WA 98115 tel: (206) 623-1745 (party of record) John Murphy Ronald & Sachi Nicol 1030 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 891-6169 eml: rfnucik@comcast.net & msnicol@gmail.com (party of record) c/o Brad Nicholson SEGB eml: mbfamily6@gmail.com & rgb@beckerarch.com Director of Operations New Home Trends, Inc. 4314 148th Street SE Mill Creek, WA 98012 tel: (425) 953-4719 (party of record) 2302 NE 28th Street Renton, WA 98056 (party of record) (party of record) Patty Witt 14107 SE 45th Street Bellevue, WA 98006 tel: ( 425) 890-1880 eml: pwitt55@aol.com (party of record) Laura & James Counsel! 1122 N 41st Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 203-1281 eml: yyluan@yahoo.com & j.diddly@gmail.com (party of record) Updated: 12/09/10 Bob & Mary Becker 1007 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: (425) 970-3385 eml: mbfamily6@gmail.com & rgb@beckerarch.com (party of record) Ricardo & Maria Antezana 1025 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 eml: ricardoadlc@msn.com (party of record) Roy & JoAnn Franncis 1000 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 tel: ( 425) 827-9246 eml: royfrancis@msn.com (party of record) (Page 2 of 2) NOTICE OF ISSUANCE & AVAILABILITY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS) Notice is hearby given under WAC 197-11-510 and RMC 4-9-070 that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposal described below was issued by the City of Renton Environmental Review Committee on Monday, December 6, 2010, and is available for public review and comment. Copies are available for review at the Renton Main Library, located at 100 Mill Avenue South, and the Renton Highlands Branch Library, located at 2902 NE 1th Street, and at Renton City Hall, Customer Service Counter, 6th floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton WA 98057, and on the City of Renton web site: (www.rentonwa.gov). PROJECT NAME: PROPONENT: PROJECT NUMBER: LOCATION: Quendall Terminals Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific, L. P. LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SA-M, SM 4350 Lake Washington Blvd DESCRIPTION: The Quendall Terminals mixed use development DEIS considers potential development concepts for the redevelopment of a 21.46 acre Superfund site located along the shoreline of Lake Washington. The DEIS evaluates potential impacts resulting from the proposed development. The following are alternatives evaluated within the DEIS: Alternative 1, which consists of 800 residential units, 24S,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant; Alternative 2, which consist of a less dense alternative where the office component is eliminated and residential units are reduced to 708 units; and a no action alternative. DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: The Draft Environmental Impact Statement is available for purchase from the Finance Department on the l't Floor of Renton City Hall for $25 per hard copy or $10.00 per CD, plus tax and postage (if mailed). COMMENT PERIOD: Written comments on the DEIS will be accepted for a 30-day comment period, ending 5:00 p.m., on Monday, January 10, 2011, and should be addressed to: CITY OF RENTON PLNNING DEPARTMENT ATTN: VANESSA DOLBEE, SENIOR PLANNER 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, SIXTH FLOOR RENTON, WA 98055 A public hearing has also been scheduled to accept written and oral comments on the DEIS and will be held on Tuesday. January 4. 2011. at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 7th floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA. If you have further questions, please contact Vanessa Dolbee at (425)430-7314; vdolbee@rentonwa.gov. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE PROJECT MANAGER: VANESSA DOLBEE AT (425) 430-7314. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. December 9, 2010 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Department of Community and Economic Development _Alex Pietsch, Administrator Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL {SEPAi DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on December 6, 2010: NOTICE OF ISSUANCE AND AVAILABILITY-DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS) PROJECT NAME: Quendall Terminals PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-151, ECF, EIS, SM, SA·M, BSP LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N DESCRIPTION: The Quendall Terminals mix use development DEIS considers potential development concepts fpr the redevelopment of a 21.46 acre Superfund site located along the shoreline of Lake Washington. The DEIS evaluates potential impacts resulting from the proposed development. The following are .alternatives evaluated within the DEIS: Alternative 1, which consists of 800 residential units, 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant; Alternative 2, which consist of a less dense alternative where the office component is eliminated and residential units are reduced to 708 units; and Alternative 3, a no action alternative. Written public comment on the DEIS will be accepted for a 30-day review period ending at 5:00 p.m., Monday, January 10, 2011. Written comments should be addressed to Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, Planning Division, 61h floor -Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton WA 98057. A public hearing will be held on Tuesday, January 4, 2011 at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, th floor. Please refer to the enclosed Notice for complete details. If you have any additional questions, please call me at (425) 430-7219. Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Washington State Department logy Page 2 of 2 December 9, 2010 For the Environmental Review Committee, Vanessa Dolbee Senior 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 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NOTICE OF ISSUANCE AND AVAILABILTY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (DEIS) Notice is hearby given that the City of Renton has issued the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS} for Quendall Terminals mixed use development on December 10, 2010 pursuant to WAC 197-11- 510 and RMC 4-9-070, and is available for public review. Copies are available for review at the Renton Main Library,the Renton Highlands Branch Library, and Renton City Hall, Customer Service Counter, 6'h floor, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton WA 98055, and on the City of Renton website (www.rentonwa.gov}. APPLICATION NUMBER(S}: PROJECT PROPONENT: PROJECT NAME: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SA-M, SM Campbell Mathewson Century Pacific, L. P. 1201 Third Ave, Suite 1680 Seattle, WA 98101 Quendall Terminals DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: The Quendall Terminals mix use development DEIS considers potential development concepts for the redevelopment of a 21.46 acre Superfund site located along the shoreline of Lake Washington. The DEIS evaluates potential impacts resulting from the proposed development. The following are alternatives evaluated within the DEIS: Alternative 1, which consists of 800 residential units, 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant; Alternative 2, which consist of a less dense alternative where the office component is eliminated and residential units are reduced to 708 units; and Alternative 3, a no action alternative. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton,WA 98057 DOCUMENT PURCHASE INFORMATION: The Draft Environmental Impact Statement is available for purchase from the Finance Department on the 1" Floor of Renton City Hall for $25 per hard copy or $10.00 per CD, plus tax and postage (if mailed). ERC Signature Sht Issuance of DEIS.doc ERC ISSUANCE & AVALABILITY/ DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PAGE 2 of 2 PUBLIC REVIEW: Written public comment on the DEIS will be accepted for a 30-day review period ending at S:00 p.m. Monday. January 10, 2011. Written Comments should be addressed to: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, Planning Division, 61h floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. A public hearing will be held on Tuesday. January 4. 2011. at 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 7'h floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: If you would like additional information, please contact Vanessa Dolbee, City of Renton at (425)430-7314 PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Community Services Department ERC Signature Shi Issuance of DEIS.doc December 10, 2010 December 6, 2010 Date 12..l~ 1~1) Date Mark Peterson, Administrator Fire & Emergency Services Alex Pietsch, Administrator Department of Community & Economic Development Jv(C{ (19 Date Name ,Jes.stco.-. uJ,-Vl-kr l-A,u. RtEPAK£fl- ~ 'Rj C\ (\ '1::M<(C\.I"\ /7~ Quendall Terminals EIS PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING, 04.27.10 SPEAKER SIGN-UP SHEET Address Telephone/email Wish to Speak -z.<JC -?::t7-~'rJ c tnt;-r-A, e .... s.o,, e al~T-.tA ....... 71'2/ .,t..//'Cef 4-,ji; AJ. 4-l-s-f<?f-"'331,, Yes/No /Vo ,z G,..1-r • ,.// w .4-? ii (j ..r ( / devi krGco""<:S!S; ,,el-/V (:, -,~co 5:w. Po;...+ 00•~ ~~~ GJ'\ q-z S" !J(j ?Ji07 )A V [ie'C c) lx>[, -v-J f) t'o~ 72 -t"Jslf "*2;;67~~ ~i:>-42:0 nJ.-~ 1496 I ldd-\ -a <¥1 AJc__ "Sk-SbO Wl.9-JN:'l-l }'-IS fVo Sc.qtf\c. q 'i;\ oS ~kt? ID~ µ£ Name Comments: r• cityor, --------1{sJJI DJJ Quendall Terminals EIS PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING, 04.27.10 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF EIS Address Telephone/email Input to the scope of the EIS can be given verbally at the public scoping meeting or in writing at any time during the comment period, which ends at 5:00 PM on April 30, 2010. Written comments can be sent to: Ms. Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 email: VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov Quendall Terminals EIS Proposal and Alternatives • Proposal -The applicant has requested a Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Approval to build a mixed-use development. The 21.46-acre site would be divided into seven lots; four would contain six ?-story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units, 245,000 sq.ft. of office, 21,600 sq.ft. of retail, and 9,000 sq.ft. of restaurant. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. The site has received a Superfund designation from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the property owners are currently working on a remediation plan. • No Action Alternative -This alternative assumes that no development would occur on the site at this time. • Additional Alternative -A lower density alternative, with fewer residential units and less commercial development could be studied in the EIS. I U) -"' C ·-E .. ~ --"' ,, C a> :::s a C "' -D. a> .. ·-fl) z 0 1---u z I (J) < s w ~ < .J ! \ \ • --· \ ' 0 \ QUENDALL TERMINALS EIS Elements of the Environment to be Studied • • • • Earth -soils, geology & topography AestheticsNiews -character, views, light & glare Critical Areas -wetlands & riparian habitat Land Use and Shoreline Use/Relationship to Plans, Policies and Regulations • Recreation/Shoreline Public Access • Public Services -fire service and access • Utilities -stormwater, sewer & water • Vegetation -wetlands and shoreline habitat • Transportation and Traffic -motorized and non- motorized -r • r Cityot , . • , '. --------1 ( s> .fl I. u, r1 SEPA Process Quendall Terminals What is SEPA? • SEPA is the State Environmental Policy Act, a state law that directs agencies to consider environmental information before committing to a particular course of action on a project and encourages public involvement in agency decisions. • For projects located in the City of Renton, the City typically implements the SEPA process. The City has the authority to decide whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required for a given project located in the City. What is an EIS? • An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is an objective, impartial evaluation of the environmental consequences of a proposed project. o An EIS is a tool that is used by the City, other agencies and the public in the decision- making process; o An EIS does not recommend for or against a particular course of action. What are the major steps of the EIS process? 1) Scoping-a 21-day public comment period is required. This period may be extended at the discretion of the lead agency. 2) Draft EIS -includes a required 2nd public comment period (30 to 45 days). 3) Final EIS What is the purpose of EIS scoping? • Scoping provides notice to agencies, organizations and the public that an EIS will be prepared for the proposed project. • The intent of scoping is to gather public and agency comments on the environmental issues and alternatives to be addressed in the EIS. How can the public provide input during scoping? • The scoping comment period on this project will run through April 30, 2010. 1 of 2 • Input can be given verbally at the public meeting or in writing at any time during the comment period. Written comments can be sent to: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 email: VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov What happens next after scoping? • Based on the comments received during the scoping process, the City will finalize the EIS Scope. • The City will then direct preparation of the Draft EIS. What is the Draft EIS? • The Draft EIS is the City of Renton's initial comprehensive analysis of environmental impacts of the Proposed Actions and alternatives for a range of topics, such as: earth, land use, transportation, etc. • The Draft EIS is issued and distributed to agencies, organizations, and the public for review as part of a public comment period. • A public meeting will be held following issuance of the Draft EIS to gather comments regarding the Draft EIS. Comments on the Draft EIS can be given verbally at the public meeting or in writing at any time during this second comment period. What is the Final EIS? • Based on the comments received on the Draft EIS, the Final EIS is prepared as the third and final step in the EIS process. The Final EIS provides responses to comments received on the Draft EIS from agencies, organizations and the public, and may contain clarifications to the analysis of environmental impacts. • The Draft and Final EIS together comprise the document that the City will use -along with other analyses and public input -regarding decisions on the project. What happens after the Final EIS? • City staff will make recommendations to the decision-makers on the Quendall Terminals project. • A public hearing will be held as part of the decision-making process on the project. • Ongoing opportunities for public input will occur as part of the decision-making process. 2 of 2 Name Quendall Terminals EIS PUBLIC SCOPING MEETING, 04.27.10 PUBLIC COMMENTS ON SCOPE OF EIS Address ,Jo H:tJ 8ANf@J :11)S PAv.kAv1;;, ~ . f?-a.rrcij q§:)E5(o Comments: Telephone/email First and foremost, the proposed Quendall Terminals development must provide significant public access to the 1,50o+ feet of Lake Washington that the property fronts on. I've watched the other majo& lakefront developments on either side of the Quendall property get developed over the last several years, and it has been disappointing, to say the least, how little public access is provided. The Barbee Mill development has a tiny little point on the south side of May Creek's entrance into Lake Washington, that allows public access. The Seahawks facility has no apparent public access, and they don't even use most of their waterfront -just block it off from the public. There may be intended public access at the far NW corner, but the only signage near that gate says "Authorized Personnel Only". That May Creek point, and the swimming beach at the base ofN. 36"' Street, provide the only apparent public access points to Lake Washington between Coulon Park and Newcastle Beach Park, in south Bellevue, a distance of approximately 4 miles. All the rest of that waterfront area is private houses or apartments. The Quendall Terminals development will be the City's last opportunity to create some public access or lakefront parkland on Lake Washington in the next 30 years or more. Secondly, a few comments on the site plan for the proposed developmertt The developer should be encouraged to step the building height up as they move back from the lake -7 story buildings adjacent the lake are too tall for this location. They should keep the lakefront buildings at 3 to 4 stories, then step up to 7 or more stories on the back/east side. This would improve the overall appearance of the development, both from the lake and from landside, while providing better views for the residents in the taller buildings on the east side. There also should be more open space than shown on the proposed site plan, particularly on the lakefront side, where two large U-shaped buildings would completely cut off views towards the lake, from the east. Improving this situation will likely require a somewhat less dense development, which I strongly encourage, to accomplish the objectives. It might also be better to move the large surface parking lot to the south, more in the center of the site, or break it into two smaller lots; to improve views and lessen the single large expanse of asphalt. Input to the scope of the EIS can be given verbally at the public scoping meeting or in writing at any time during the comment period, which ends at 5:00 PM on April 30, 2010. Written comments can be sent to: Ms. Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 email: VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov 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 Renton Reporter 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: Public Notice was published on April 9, 2010. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $182.00. ,' ~~llsd2,Jrd{~ Legal Advertising Representative, Renton Reporter Subscribed and swqrn to me this 9th day April, 2010. Kathy Dalsi,g, Notary Pub!\(/ for the State of Washington, Residing in Covington, Washington P. 0. Number: ,,,,\\\\\\11, '" 11 I -,.'' QP..LSE; 11 1 2 -0 , ......... ':',\''111 11,1 G 111 = J:::, ·~\~.___\'i EXp1_;_11 11 1f ; ~ ~-~ :,• .... 'r<. 1 11 / ;:. ,) f.',,/ o.r,,,t-.-,:;r \r,\ ~ ::;:--~-~~ ~.z-::::: .:;; -~ -0 ::"." 1 t ~i--/ ·'/ _(,' ........ __ CJ .:: 11 ui... ri \' _ ::::,"" ~ I; /' ..• 0· // <. C:) JI , ., ·11, NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Conunittee has issued a Determination of Significance for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. Quendall Terminals LUA09-151. EIS, ECF, BSP, SA-M,SM Location: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N. The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Review for a mixed- use development. The site is 21.46 ac, zoned COR, and would be divided into 7 lots; 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings consisting of 800 residential units ( density would be 46.4 du/ac), 245,000 SF of office, 21,600 SF of retail and 9,000 SF of restaurant. Parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. The site contains approximately 0.81 ac of wetlands and 1,583 linear ft of shoreline along Lake Washington. The site has received a Superfund designation from the EPA. THE LEAD AGENCY HAS INITIALLY IDENITIFIED THE FOLLOWING AREAS FOR DISCUSSION IN THE EIS: Earth, Aesthetics/Views, Critical Areas, Land and Shoreline Use, Recreation/Public Shoreline Access, Public Services Utilities, Vegetation, and Transportation/ Traffic. SCOPING: Agencies, affected tribes, and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. Your comments must be submitted in writing and received before 5:00 p.m. on April 30. 2010. All written EIS scoping comment,;, must be sent to Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner at Department of Community & Economic Development, Planning Division, I 055 S Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. PUBLIC MEETING: Agencies, affected tribes, and member of the public are invited to an EIS scoping meeting which will be held to provide an opportunity for the public to learn more about the proposed actions and to provide input into the environmental review process. An EIS public scoping meeting will be held at Renton City Hall in the Council Confrencing Center, 7th floor, on Tuesday, April 27, 2010 from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 23, 2010. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required 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 April 9, 20!0. #349279. NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (OS) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Queni:1911 Tmnlnala PROJECT NUMBER: LUMl-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M LOCATION· 4JIO lak• Washington BMI N DESCRIPTION· The applicant la r.quntlnQ Master Plan RnWW, 8lndln11 Sita Plan, Shor.line subttanUal o,;..-,1opmtm P11nnlt and Emrlronmantal (SEPA) Review for • mixed..,.. dav.lopmtmt. Thi ,na 11 21AI acrt9 .. d la zoned cormnerc1alf0fllce1Rasldentlal tCORJ end loeat.d within the Urban Shonillna designation. The 21.46-al.re ,n, WQUld be dl~kl•d Into 7 kM of which 4 WO\lld contain six· 7 etol)' mixed-use b lldl Ovan\l, the deYelopment would cone 1st of BOO reeldentlal units jresulllng In • net resldentlal denalty 0f "'-4 ~~ltllacrti) 245,.000 aqUU* INt of offlce, 11,800 square faat of retail and 9,000 square fut of rHtaur111~ TIie appllc.ant h• 'pr,;,poud to ditdlcate 3.85 acno, for publlo. right-of-way, which would plVY!ra ac1:en to the ed 1oi. Surf.lu and s1tllctur.d parklllll would be provld9d for 2,171 v.hlcln. Tb• •It• contains proi;:1,na1,1y·o.s1 acrn of W9ttand1 end 1,583 Unear rut of shontlne e1ong LeM W•shlngton. Tll1 eubJIICl 11lta app IY9d supertund dnlsrnatlan from the U.S. Envlronm,ntal Prolletlon Aglncy (f.PA) •nd 1'"' property ::~;:;:111 cu'rr.ntty working on I remediation plan with the EPA. Proposed lmprovemants lncluda r11medletlon of uletlng contamination, 1tomiweter and sew., lmprovemenis. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. The lead agency has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant impact on th~ environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required ?nder RCS 43.21 C.030(~}(c) and will be p_repared. An environmental checklist, or other materials indicating likely environmental impacts, are available for viewing in the lead agency's office. LEAD AG EN.CY: City ol Renton Environmental Review CoownlttH THE LEAD AGENCY HAS !N!TIALL y IDENTIFIED THE FOLLOWING AREAS FOR DISCUSSION IN THE EIS: Earth, Aesthetlc:s/ViewS. Critical Areas, ~and and Shore!ne Use, Recreation/Public Shoreline Access, Public Serv~es unties. Vegetation, and Tran,portationffrafflc. IVES· TIils I&, roposal lor a prlvata project. Th• ,:,,pplh::ant may •1udy reuonabi. altamatJvn that :~!Rr:ibty att91n or aptoxlmahl tha propo1111'11 objedlvn, but at• lowll1" environmental coa~r de<::;•:~~ leval ol environmental degradation. In this caH, th• altematlvae wlll Include the l\0-&Ctlon 11tem va. denAlty alt,m.attve, with r.w.,. rnldentlal units and !en cnmmereial devalopment, m;iy al10 b, Included. . In ,N..cted trtbae, and members of tha public are ll'IYLted to comment on tM acope of the EIS. ;;~~~:~:~=nt ~n altematlvH, mlllgetlon nteUUl'III, probable e]gnlflcanl adverae lmrclll,1 an: ~n,:,•:; othe rovale lh•t may be required Y<.>Ur comments mu,t be 1ubmllted In writing an n,ce va o p m-r 0',;',,o,:11 30 2,010 All written Eis ecoplng ,;ommenta must be uni to Vannu Dolbee, (AcUng) Senior Planner at ltle ;addrne noted below. PUBLIC MEETING: A public EIS 1cop1n11 meeting/open houae will be held to provide an opportunity publl<:: to leem more abc 10posed actions and to provide Input Into the environ mental rsvlaw pnx:ns. EIS public scoping mNII • held at Renton City Hall. PROJECT PROPONENT: RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL.: SEND COMME.ITTS TO: Where: The Council Conferencing Center, 71J1 floor. When: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. C1mpbtH Mathewson, Century P1clfl<::, LP. City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economk:: Development Plennlng Division 10!5 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 V1nHu Dolbee, !Acting I S11nlor Ptanner ()epl:rtment of Community I. Ei:onomlc Davalopment Plannlll{I Dlvl81on 10311 S Grady Way Ranton, WA 98057 Phone: ("26) ~-7314 Ta appeal thlll Determination, you mull fllll your BPfl"II document with tho HeaTlng Exllmlner within raurteen ( daya of Ute dat. lhe O.C.mtlnatlon of Slgnlflcence IDS) ha• been publl8h..:I In the ol'lklll city ._.ptpar. SN c Cod• S.CUOO 4-8-110.E., RCW .u.21C.D75 and WAC 197-11-680 for further detalla. Tllere •hall be only on• ,:,,pp,,,al tha De1itrmln1t1on of S1t111l11cance end II an app$el has lll'Udy been flied, your 1pp11af may b1 Joined with It'll pr appe.i for hlarlng or may be dl1ml11ad If th• other app,9el hae already been ti .. rd. You ahoukl be prepam:I maM 1pa,clflc factuel obJKtlone. Contact the al>off vfflc• to 111ed ornk about th• procldurn for SEPA :rippealll. Appeals of the envlnmmentlil delennlnallon must ha flied In writing on or 119fore 1;00 p.m. on AprB 23, 20 Appeals lllUlll be flied In writing 1ogether with the requll"9d fee with: HHring Eumlner, City of Rtnton, 1066 Sell Gr11dy Wey, Renton, WA 98-057. Appeal• to the Examlnel' ire governed by City of Rllnton Munlclpsl Coda Sactlofi M10.B. Addlllonal htfomlallon regarding the 1ppeal proca11 may be obtained from the Rentori City Cillrk'I Off! l421f (30-8510. CERTIFICATION I, / ksoa._ Do/ bee_ . hereby certify that S 5 copies of the above document were posted in _..5.._ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: Y /?J /ID Signed~.PMa-dJdbee,,,,,,;~. : -~ ~'J I ss :-~ ,,u.if,. COUNTY OF KING ) -• -~ I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that V,'-e s 5 c~ ~~" 'J signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be .Ai.,/her/tlileif free and voluntary ac,,f -,;._: ,~ uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. ''111,""""""'" STATE OF WASHINGTON Dated: Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): My a p poi ntm ent expires : __ ""A"'"''"':!l+'-'r '"""'""''--=..2"'--''l~_:2_-=c'--·, ""i ... 3 _____ _ J J ' . . CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT· PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 8th day of April, 2010, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing ERC Determination & Public Scoping Meeting Notice documents. This information was sent to: . • ... , .. .. , ,,.,. -,-_.,-...• re,."• "."":"'v:e '""'""~·~'-""":""·'""'~~-,-_!"""''~-"-~---'""""',a,~,;,-.,,., '"'·".'"'""''.",' . ' Name ,. !-i __ ' ·. '/Y: • . ·. . ,Repres~nting ·, · .. . .. Agencies See Attached 300' Surrounding Property Owners See Attached Campbell Mathewson Contact Altino Properties, Inc. & JH Baxter & Co. Owners Ryan Durkin POR John Hansen POR Lance Lopes POR Steve Van Til POR Dan Mitzel POR Spencer Alpert POR Laurie Baker POR (Signature of Sender): • ·ff:u-//1 ~y' 7t-:•'·~ ~ io ~~ r STATE OF WASHINGTON i • " -. ) 55 ,~ ~~ --COUNTY OF KING ) \ ., ~ .: ~ .. ,,. .... it I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker ''''"\\"'"'''''' signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: Ai;, , I '< .) c lP Notary Pulic in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): ____ _,,\-\.!.... ~-.::..A"'.-"'-6..,,,.:.,,~=<"'•-" -------------- My appointment expires: /\ "'':l c., t ;:;t 'JI Jc i3 ~~~~:~/~-~~-~ Quendall Terminals ~")''t,lr:cr~, >!!11,;1~i}l LUA09·151, ECF, EIS, SM, SA-M, BSP -- template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology ' Environmental Review Section PO Box47703 Olympia, 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: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box47015 Olympia, 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 2015outh Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Larry Fisher' 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 Duwamish Tribal Office • 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 KC Wastewater Treatment Division • Environmental Planning Supervisor Ms. Shirley Marroquin 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 City of Newcastle Attn: Steve Roberge Director of Community Development 13020 Newcastle Way Newcastle, WA 98059 Puget Sound Energy Municipal Liaison Manager Joe Jainga PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-OlW Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.* Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015-172"' Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program * Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015 172"' Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Attn: Gretchen Kaehler PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Kent Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Acting Community Dev. Director 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 City a/Tukwila Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 *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 • ' . 334330082002 621 COMPANY PO BOX 1925 BELLEVUE WA 98009 322405900505 BNSF PO BOX 961089 FORT WORTH TX 76161 051850114003 CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL 846 108TH AVE NE BELLEVUE WA 98004 334330114003 DEITCH MICHAEL J 4613 LK WASH BLVD NE KIRKLAND WA 98033 334330115000 EASLEY THOMAS A 2611 181ST AVE NE REDMOND WA 98052 334330114300 GIA MANAGEMENT INC 10575 NE 4TH ST BELLEVUE WA 98004 334330110001 KIEWIT CONSTRUCTION CO %R J 1000 KIEWIT PLAZA OMAHA NE 68131 051850019004 OHASHI ROSS W+AVA W 1018 N 42ND PL RENTON WA 98056 292405900203 QUENDALL TERMINALS PO BOX 477 RENTON WA 98055 334330300008 THOMAS DAVID L+SUZANNE E 25618 NE 100TH ST REDMOND WA 98053 334330080006 AIMCO/TIA MS 235 PO BOX 111397 CARROLLTON TX 75011 051850079008 BRAZG RONALD L+VANESSA J 1019 N 42ND PL RENTON WA 98056 334330288005 CROSETIO FRED A 5025 RIPLEY LN N RENTON WA 98056 322405903806 DIEU RANDY+JULIE 1312 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334330112007 E & J INCORPORATED 4710 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD NE RENTON WA 98056 322405905405 HAUER ALFRED H 1330 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334330110506 KIM BARO 4800 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD NE RENTON WA 98056 292405901508 PORT QUENDALL COMPANY C/0 VULCAN INC 505 5TH AVE S #900 SEATILE WA 98104 322405908102 ROBCLARISSA PARTNERSHIP LL PO BOX 402 FALL CITY WA 98024 322405905009 THOMSON NEIL PO BOX 76 MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 • 051850080006 ANTEZANA RICARDO+MARIA T 1025 N 42ND PL RENTON WA 98056 051850054001 BYRON MICHAEL W+STACEY E 1009 N 41ST PL RENTON WA 98056 051850020002 DEDRICKSON KEVIN L+AMY J 1012 N 42ND PL RENTON WA 98056 334330118004 DWO LLC 1 CENTERPOINTE DR #315 LA PALMA CA 96023 334330114508 EXIT 7 INC 4425 FOREST AVE SE MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 334330084206 HUSON JUNE OLIVE+HOOF KATRI 11030 SE 76TH ST NEWCASTLE WA 98056 334570005903 KOREAN ANTIOCH PRESBYTERIAN 4308 JONES AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 292405901201 PUGET SOUND ENERGY/ELEC PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 90868 BELLEVUE WA 98009 334330112502 SHURGARD STORAGE CENTERS DEPT PT WA 08170 PO BOX 25025 GLENDALE CA 91201 051850053003 TOBECK ROBERT L+SONYA R 1003 N 41ST PL RENTON WA 98056 OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (DS) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Quendall Terminals PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and Environmental (SEPA) Review for a mixed-use development The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided Into 7 lots of which 4 would contain six • 7 story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units {resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre}, 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. 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 the EPA. Proposed improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERG) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. The lead agency has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required under RCS 43.21C.030(2)(c) and will be prepared. An environmental checklist, or other materials indicating likely environmental impacts, are available for viewing in the lead agency's office. LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Environmental Review Committee THE LEAD AGENCY HAS INITIALLY IDENTIFIED THE FOLLOWING AREAS FOR DISCUSSION IN THE EIS: Earth, AestheticsNiews, Critical Areas, Land and Shoreline Use, Recreation/Public Shoreline Access, Public Services Utilities, Vegetation, and Transportation/Traffic. ALTERNATIVES: This is a proposal for a private project The applicant may study reasonable alternatives that could feasibly attain or approximate the proposal's objectives, but at a lower environmental cost or decreased level of environmental degradation. In this case, the alternatives will include the no-action alternative. A lower density alternative, with fewer residential units and less commercial development, may also be included. SCOPING: Agencies, affected tribes, and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. Your comments must be submitted in writing and received before 5:00 p.m. on April 30, 2010. All written EIS scoping comments must be sent to Vanessa Dolbee, (Acting) Senior Planner at the address noted below. PUBLIC MEETING: A public EIS scoping meeting/open house will be held to provide an opportunity for the public to learn more about the proposed actions and to provide input into the environmental review process. An EIS public scoping meeting will be held at Renton City Hall. PROJECT PROPONENT: RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: SEND COMMENTS TO: Where: The Council Conferencing Center, 11• floor. When: Tuesday, April 27, 2010 from 6:00 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific, L.P. City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Vanessa Dolbee, (Acting) Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Phone: (425) 430-7314 To appeal this Determination, you must file your appeal document with the Hearing Examiner within fourteen (14) days of the date the Determination of Significance (OS) has been published in the official city newspaper. See City Code Section 4-8-110.E, RCW 43.21C.075 and WAC 197-11-680 for further details. There shall be only one appeal of the Determination of Significance and if an appeal has already been filed, your appeal may be joined with the prior appeal for hearing or may be dismissed if the other appeal has already been heard. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the above office to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on April 23, 2010. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required 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. 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 Renton Reporter 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: Public Notice was published on February 19, 2010. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum oJ $164.50. _,.,..,,.:, /7 ,>;1ttl; ~/ /,-/t_{_J tinda M. Mills Legal Advertising Representative, Renton Reporter Subscrjbed and sworn to me this 19th day February, 2010. t--:, , ,,; /;) .1 ~,/ ~,,I'd, athy Da}¥'g,'Notary Publi6for the State of Washington, Residing in Covingfon, Washington P. 0. Number: d U!\Ls -\ \ '_._ ,'.\•',".'11 1111,/ ~Q \"" -'~_-,__;;·,8N ,e-4'-o\ ' • .:: _, J ;'_ 1, 't°"" _:--..:,·· 0 1· At;. i ~ f {:' :-0 "') 6 j 1 {Ji l· , \-2 /...;_ .::-// ..... \ r o .. \..._-.."'rA - / ,, • ,> ,, _,~ -'l; ,>,.~ "\\\\\\,,,,\),,\"'-..._..::-1,,, Of: vvAS ,.,'' I ,, 1 11l\\\\\\\\\'- NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee has issued a Determination of Significance for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. Quendall Terminals LUA09-l5l, EIS, ECF, BSP, SA-M,SM Location: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N. The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Review for a mixed-use development. The site is 21.46 ac, zoned COR, and would be divided into 7 lots; 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings consisting of 800 residential units (density would be 46.4 du/ac), 245,000 SF of office, 21.600 SF of retail and 9,000 SF of restaurant. Parking would be provided for 2, 171 vehicles. The site contains approximately 0.81 ac of wetlands and 1.583 linear ft. of shoreline along Lake Washington. The site has received a Superlund designation from the EPA. THE LEAD AGENCY HAS INITIALLY IDENITIFIED THE FOLLOWING AREAS FOR DISCUSSION IN THE EIS: Earth, Aesthetics/Views, Critical Areas, Land and Shoreline Use, Recreation/Public Shoreline Access, Public Services Utilities, Vegetation, and Transportation/ Traffic. SCOPING: Agencies, affected tribes, and members of the public are invited to comment on 1he scope of the EIS. You may conunent on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals 1hat may be required. Your comment-. must be submitted in writing and received before 5:00 p.m. on March 12, 2010. All written EIS scoping conunents must be sent to Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner at Department of Community & Economic Development, Planning Division, 1055 S Grady Way. Renton. WA 98057. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on Man:h 5, 20l0. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee Yllth: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, I 055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeal-. to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4·8- l lO.B. Additional infonnation regarding the appeal proce~s may be obtained from the Remon City Clerk's Office. (425) 430-65 IO. Published in the Renton Reporter on February 19, 2010. #329035. e . ' NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (OS) POSTED TO NOTIFY t!'ITERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECTNAIIE: ciuffldlinTermmi. PRO.reCTNUIIB!!R: LUAD9-1S1, EIS, Ea=, BSP, SIi, SA-M LOCATION: 4350 Lab WMllln!Jll;>n Blvd. DESCRIP110N: The~ Is -ru..rlng Matar Plan Rwt.., Blndln9 Site Plan, Sho~ Subatantial Devalopment P9mlt and SEPA Envtnimn.nt:111 Rrtlew for• m!Md-une denlopmenl located at 4350 ulle Wahlnglotl Blvd. n.. •'-i. 21,411 aeru and la :zanad Comrnen:laL'Ofl•ld•ntial (CORI and kK:sl9cl .tthln .,,. Urban ShoNllM clMlgnatioll. Toe 21~ dt wguld be ,;!f,rided Into 7 Jots of whlcb 4 would contain I • 7 slory ~ build.._ Onran, thti dawlopmant would ,:onsJat of SOD l'Mld•ntlal ua11b, j1111Sultlng In a Mt ,-fd91111al dansily of46.A 11nltar.lGl'IIJ, 246,0DCI IJClllilntfNt of office. 21,.&00 squar.r.et of ll!tllII md !,000 aqua .. fNt of ...taurant. The applk;ant ha p......,. to dRlc:ata :J.65 acrn for pubic right-of.way, which would pfO'lid• ~ to Ibo 7 prapoaad IDt!I.. SUifa<» ancl structul'fil parking WDUld be pn:nrldecl for%, 171 nhlda. Th•"-eantalnto approxlmataly O.B1 ..,,.. of lftllanct. ;ind 1~ anur fHt of 1honiln6 alonli L.akll Washington. The aui,;.,:t stt. hn r.calvwd • Buperfund dnignatlon. from th• U.S. envltonmlPlbl pn;rt,,ction Age~ (EPAI and th• proparty. OWll8n are cumin11y worting on • ""'1..:itatlc>n plan with EPA. Proposed lmpr"OYlln'lfflts Include nmadlatlon c,f Hlatfn11,:ontamlrtat:1an, sta-.r and -• ltnprav-nta. TI-IE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC} HAS DETERMINED THAT TI-IE PROPOSED ACTION MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON TI-IE ENVIRONMENT. The lead agency has delefT?lined this proposal is likely lo have a significant impact on the environmenl An Environmental Impact Strtemem: (EIS) is required under RCS 43.21C.030(2)(c) and wiU be p~ared. An environmental checklist, or other materials indicating likely environmental impacts, &Ill available for viewing in the lead agency's office. LEAD AGENCY, THE LEAD AGENCY HAS INIT!AlL Y IDENTIFIED THE FOLLO\NlNG AREAS FOR DISCUSSION IN THE'EIS: Earth, AesthellcsfV-. Critit::81 Aral. Land and Shoreine UH, ReaulkWPltllc 51\arenne Acoea!I, Pubic Servloes UUlltie&, Vegatatim1, and Ttumparlallan/Trafflc.. ALTERHATIVES: T1tNI la a pn,poRI for• prlnta pnljact. TIM 1pplcanl: may 111.idy rnaonabla ~ lhli could 1-!biJ -In <II' ~ Ille ,r,;,poal'1 llbjKtlv9s. but It 1 ,,_.,. ..,..ifgnment,,I i:oll or d~ level flf -lnmlll9fltll ~ In thill ~ the alt8rnatlns wlll Include a. no-actlan altlrDatlvL A i.... dandJ' abmatl¥a, wllll ,._ l'Nldentlal unltl ...i i-. ~ d.velopment, may 1i..i bl lnclllded. &COf'ING: AglflCia, aflacud lrlbla, and lnNlllen ol Iba pv!lllc: -lnvlled to C01111TN1nt on UN acope ol th1 EIS. Yw m-, Cll:lftlllllllf Ofl altMnalMI, mlllgllk,n-. probabla ~nt ...,,.. lmpada, 1nd lkiM• or olher app!'O'RII that,_, INi raqund. YCAJ/t -.ianta must lie submlttld In writing •d l'ICll'nd belorl l:l!!l pm qn ¥ml! 12. ZP:IQ, Al wrtlt8n EIS acoplng comn.a mollit ba Mitt lo 'hneu1 Dalbff, hnfor Planllll' 11: lbll lddrlu noCed below. P\IBU:: lll:ETINGK)PEN HOU8E: A publh: 1!13 scopin9 ......clng(opn h-wll 1M held to prvvldll an opportunity for the public lo i-m....,... lbaut 1h11 prapond KtkNIS lll1d Iv pruvtd11 Input Into the erl¥ironmlntal rw1ri1-~ An BS pubic ecoplng ~II will ba ltltl at ftmd<rn City Hill at I claw and linlll tv Ii. detamlled, addttlonilll nc,1a wil bl pi,wldld o1 the 11»1t1ng clat9 and am1. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL! SEMO COMMENTS TO: v ..... DotbH, Selnor Planner ~ of C<;,mmunlty & E..-le Oe\lelalffllllnt Planning Division 1055 8 GradJ 'Nay ftanlun, WA 118D57 To •PPHI thla DetMmlnatlan, you must ftla ya..-appal doeumant with 11:11 Hnrtng Eumlnar wllhln fowt.n 11"1 da)'I of th. ~ the ~ of Slgnlllcance jDS] bas bffn publlst.d In U. offlcllli city -paper. S.. Cly Codi $aelloli 44-11~.E, RCW 43.21C.ll7S and WAC 197-11-68'1 lor furthar detlllla. T11111 ahall bl only on, appul of a Dnarmlnatlon or Slgnlllcan<.cl and II' 111 .ppaJ All 1irwldy b9en lllld, .,,,..,, appeal may be /olnld with the pnof" 1ppnl tor llnrtng gr lhlY bl dllmlsNd If lhl othlr app,nl h,:a alra.dy bean haid.. YOIII 1hould 1M prwp..-.d lo make spadfk fad,.w objactla111. Contld Iba alMJtt offlCI-to Nad or •k abol!lt Iha pro,;aduns fDr SEPA app.,o.lL Appeals of the 1nvfron-W da....,,.,lnatlon must 1M llled ln wrttlng on or befofl &;00 p.m. oa Mardi 15., 2910. Appo,111 II-* bl 11W In wrttlng logether with lhl rwqu"-d r... with; Haring Enmlner, City ol ftantDII, 10&15 Soulll Grady Way, Renton, WA 9'Q$T, Appat. tv U. Euonlnm-ar1 govamlld by City ol ~nton Municipal Codi Set::lk>n 4- 1--110.S. AddllloMI lnfonmtlon ngardlng lhl IPl>Mi pn;ICHI 111111 ba obbilad from the Raritan City ct.rt'• Ofllc:a. (.Wl..:I0-6510. CERTIFICATION I, l)(J,lJ(3SyJ_ J),1 ( be£.-. hereby certify that lJ copies of the above document were posted in --1.z_ conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Signed:~ -V~~--••1t . ... t.. It A~-·'!.'',,,,,,. ~~~ I ft'----::.. "-J1 z \ Date: 1 / 11 / 2{,YO I I STATE OF WASHINGTON 55 COUNTY OF KING \ -...~'!I E 3 I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that cu, es"'"'-:i.> o \ \, '-29 ~" signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary a'&t, o,.:w,.s uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. 1111 "\\'""'' Dated : __ ~__,_/..il..c'l.,/~::i.=o"-'\""l""-2 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): ___ V>._._A _ __:&_r_o.l>_-e'--~----------- My appointment expires:, ___ .'...A.:.:~~,..c=:::.'...:"-.:::~::.q-'-f-, .:.:;;,.==-=c:,'--'::..::3=------------ CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 18th day of February, 2010, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing ERC Determination (DS), ERC Notice, Environmental Checklist, PMT's documents. This information was sent to: cc ,_-·,:--'.· ... ' ,. ' .. · '' ,., -. ':·. Name .. : -·-"Representing Agencies See Attached 300' Surrounding Property Owners See attached Campbell Mathewson Contact Altino Properties, Inc. & J.H. Baxter & Co. Owners // '/)~I /"£/v +:~~ (Signature of Sender): _;~1L1l , // .. .,., l./ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ss COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker ~~~" -- signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: 1"' •, '· · · _, oto • .!:,_ CC '()> .C(cvj ,,l Notary Publfc in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): ____ 1_1_. _."1-'-_.:.b_r..:.u_b_.£_,c../ _____________ _ My appointment expires: Av.'.i ", + J C/ 1 ;;, o i 3 Quendall Terminals template ~ affidavit of service by mailing .. Dept. of Ecology * Environmental Review Section PO Box47703 Olympia, 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: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Boyd Powers * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box47015 Olympia, 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 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 AGENCY (DOE) LEITER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) WOFW -Larry Fisher* 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Issaquah, WA 98027 Ouwamish Tribal Office * 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98106-1514 KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Environmental Planning Supervisor Ms. Shirley Marroquin 201 s. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 City of Newcastle Attn: Steve Roberge Director of Community Development 13020 Newcastle Way Newcastle, WA 98059 Puget Sound Energy Municipal Liaison Manager Joe Jainga PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-OlW Bellevue, WA 98009--0868 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. * Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer 39015 -172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program * Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015 172"' Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Attn: Gretchen Kaehler PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Kent Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Acting Community Dev. Director 220 Fourth Avenue South Kent, WA 98032-5895 City ofTukwila Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 *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 334330082002 621 COMPANY PO BOX 1925 BELLEVUE WA 98009 322405900505 BNSF PO BOX 961089 FORT WORTH TX 76161 051850114003 CONNER HOMES AT BARBEE MILL 846 108TH AVE NE BELLEVUE WA 98004 334330114003 DEITCH MICHAEL J 4613 LK WASH BLVD NE KIRKLAND WA 98033 334330115000 EASLEY THOMAS A 2611 181ST AVE NE REDMOND WA 98052 334330114300 GIA MANAGEMENT INC 10575 NE 4TH ST BELLEVUE WA 98004 334330110001 KIEWIT CONSTRUCTION CO %R J 1000 KIEWIT PLAZA OMAHA NE 68131 051850019004 OHASHI ROSS W+AVA W 1018 N 42ND PL RENTON WA 98056 292405900203 QUENDALL TERMINALS PO BOX 477 RENTON WA 98055 334330300008 THOMAS DAVID L+SUZANNE E 25618 NE 100TH ST REDMOND WA 98053 334330080006 AIMCO/TIA MS 235 PO BOX 111397 CARROLLTON TX 75011 051850079008 BRAZG RONALD L+VANESSA J 1019 N 42ND PL RENTON WA 98056 334330288005 CROSETTO FRED A 5025 RIPLEY LN N RENTON WA 98056 322405903806 DIEU RANDY+JULIE 1312 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334330112007 E & J INCORPORATED 4710 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD NE RENTON WA 98056 322405905405 HAUER ALFRED H 1330 N 40TH ST RENTON WA 98056 334330110506 KIM BARO 4800 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD NE RENTON WA 98056 292405901508 PORT QUENDALL COMPANY C/0 VULCAN INC 505 5TH AVE S #900 SEATTLE WA 98104 322405908102 ROBCLARISSA PARTNERSHIP LL PO BOX 402 FALL CITY WA 98024 322405905009 THOMSON NEIL PO BOX 76 MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 051850080006 ANTEZANA RICARDO+MARIA T 1025 N 42ND PL RENTON WA 98056 051850054001 BYRON MICHAEL W+STACEY E 1009 N 41ST PL RENTON WA 98056 051850020002 DEDRICKSON KEVIN L+AMY J 1012 N 42ND PL RENTON WA 98056 334330118004 DWO LLC 1 CENTERPOINTE DR #315 LA PALMA CA 96023 334330114508 EXIT 7 INC 4425 FOREST AVE SE MERCER ISLAND WA 98040 334330084206 HUSON JUNE OLIVE+HOOF KATRI 11030 SE 76TH ST NEWCASTLE WA 98056 334570005903 KOREAN ANTIOCH PRESBYTERIAN 4308 JONES AVE NE RENTON WA 98056 292405901201 PUGET SOUND ENERGY/ELEC PROPERTY TAX DEPT PO BOX 90868 BELLEVUE WA 98009 334330112502 SHURGARD STORAGE CENTERS DEPT PT WA 08170 PO BOX 25025 GLENDALE CA 91201 051850053003 TOBECK ROBERT L+SONYA R 1003 N 41ST PL RENTON WA 98056 OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE (DS) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Quendall Terminals PROJECT NUMBER: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site Is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided Into 7 lots of which 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use bulldlngs. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units {resulting In a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Sur1ace and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. 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. Proposed Improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION MAY HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. The lead agency has determined this proposal is likely to have a significant impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is required under RCS 43.21 C.030(2)(c) and will be prepared. An environmental checklist, or other materials indicating likely environmental impacts, are available for viewing in the lead agency's office. LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Environmental Review Committee THE LEAD AGENCY HAS INITIALLY IDENTIFIED THE FOLLOWING AREAS FOR DISCUSSION IN THE EIS: Earth, AestheticsMews, Critical Areas, Land and Shoreline Use, Recreation/Public Shoreline Access, Public Services Utilities, Vegetation, and TransportationfTraffic. ALTERNATIVES: This is a proposal for a private project The applicant may study reasonable alternatives that could feasibly attain or approximate the proposal's objectives, but at a lower environmental cost or decreased level of environmental degradation. In this case, the alternatives wlll Include the no-action alternative. A lower density alternative, with fewer residential units and less commercial development, may also be included. SCOPING: Agencies, affected tribes, and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS. You may comment on altematlves, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. Your comments must be submitted in writing and received before 5:00 p.m. on March 12, 201Q. All written EIS scoping comments must be sent to Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner at the address noted below. PUBLIC MEETING/OPEN HOUSE: A publlc EIS scoping meeting/open house will be held to provide an opportunity for the publlc to learn more about the proposed actions and to provide Input Into the environmental review process. An EIS public scoping meeting will be held at Renton City Hall at a date and time to be determied, additional notice wlll be provided of the meeting date and time. PROJECT PROPONENT: Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacifica, LP. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: SEND COMMENTS TO: City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Vanessa Dolbee, Seinor Planner Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Phone: (425) 430-7314 To appeal this Determination, you must flle your appeal document with the Hearing Examiner within fourteen (14) days of the date the Determination of Significance (DS) has been published in the official city newspaper. See City Code Section 4-8-110.E, RCW 43.21C.075 and WAC 197-11-680 for further details. There shall be only one appeal of a Determination of Significance and If an appeal has already been filed, your appeal may be Joined with the prior appeal for hearing or may be dismissed If the other appeal has already been heard. You should be prepared to make specific factual objections. Contact the above office to read or ask about the procedures for SEPA appeals. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed In writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on March 5, 2010. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required 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. • UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY REGION 10 Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner 1200 Sixth Avenue, Suite 900 Seattle, WA 98101-3140 March 13, 2012 Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall -6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 Subject: EIS "On Hold" Notice Quendall Terminals, LUA09-151, ECF, SA-M, SM, BSP Dear Ms. Dolbee: OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL CLEANUP This letter responds to the City of Renton 's letter dated December 21, 2011, and supplements EPA's prior correspondence concerning the DEIS for Quendall Terminals. The City of Renton asked EPA if the environmental baseline (post-clean-up conditions/ included in the DEIS is reasonable given the expected general outcome of the ROD. As indicated in our prior correspondence, EPA will not select a final remedy until it issues the ROD, likely in 2014, and until the ROD is issued, EPA cannot say with certainty what cleanup actions will be required and what the post-clean-up site conditions will be. With that in mind, EPA has reviewed the environmental baseline to identify assumptions that do not appear consistent with the expected general outcome of the ROD. The post-clean-up conditions assumed in this DEIS were developed using the 1983 Renton Shoreline Management Plan and other relevant information as described in Appendix E of the DEIS. It is EPA's position, that the Agency can require more stringent environmental standards, such as greater mitigation ratios, larger buffers and setbacks, if they are in place at the time the ROD is developed. This may result in larger or higher quality wetlands and shoreline restoration. These more stringent requirements do not need to be articulated in this EIS because they are specifically unknown at present. Final mitigation/restoration requirements will be established based on the regulations in place at the time EPA issues its Record of Decision for the Quendall cleanup. Based on even current regulations and standards, the wetland and shoreline restoration areas would be larger than depicted in DEIS Figures 2-6 and 2-11. 1 Post-clean-up conditions specifically means "post-remediation/post-NRD restoration conditions". • Because the size and location of the wetlands as well as the setbacks and buffers will not be finally determined until the ROD is issued, EPA suggests the City identify a 100 foot area, extending from the shoreline, I 00 feet landward along the entire shoreline, that would be designated as future wetlands as well as buffers and setbacks. Note that EPA has directed Quendall, in the Feasibility Study, to also assume a 100 foot area along the shoreline landward as reserved for habitat for the purposes of evaluating and selecting a remedy for the Quendall Site. If the environmental baseline is modified to reflect these assumptions, EPA believes the environmental baseline would be reasonable given the expected general outcome of the ROD and that the City should proceed with the DEIS process for Quendall redevelopment. Sincerely, ;; I '+-f)_!JA L,{_; .reJ.c~ / ;U,[X1v ( iynda Priddy Remedial Project Manager cc: Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific, L.P. Altino Properties, Inc., and J.H. Baxter & Co./ Owner(s) EPAParty(ies) of Record EA I Blumen Cara Steiner-Riley, EPA ORC-158 ·' .. MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE Fisheries Division 39015 -172nd Avenue SE• Auburn, Washington 98092-9763 Phone: (253) 939-3311 • Fax: (253) 931-0752 Ms. Vanessa Dolbee City of Renton Planning Department I 055 S. Grady Way, Sixth Floor Renton, WA 98055 January 25, 2011 RE: Quendall Terminals, LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SA-M, SM, Draft Environmental Impact Statement Dear Ms. Dolbee: The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division (MITFD) has reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the proposed redevelopment project at the Quendall Terminals. We are forwarding the attached comments in the interest of protecting and restoring the Tribe's fisheries resources. This project proposes to redevelop 21.46 acres of a Superfund site located along the Lake Washington shoreline and an area near I-405. Th.; action alternatives, Alternatives I and 2, propose to construct 708 to 800 residential units, 0-245,000 square feet of office; 21, 600 square feet of retail; and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. As noted, the majority of the project site will undergo remediation and mitigation under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA; i.e., Superfund) administered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study report process leading to a Proposed Plan and ultimately a Record of Decision specifying clean-up actions has begun but is not yet completed. Per EPA's 13 January 2011 letter in response to this DEIS, they anticipate the Record of Decision (ROD) to be issued in mid-2012. The DEIS assumes a specific baseline against which the DEIS evaluates the proposed action alternatives and the no-action alternative. It is premature to make assumptions about the environmental baseline since there is no remedial action yet chosen for this Superfund Site. The details of the remediation work, including th~ !1ature and extent of the upland cleanup, sediment cleanup, land use restrictions to protect any cleanup, stormwater outfalls, setbacks and mitigation work and the proposed trail are all eleJnents anticipated to be discussed in EPA's ROD (EPA 13 January 2011 letter). As a result, the MITFD is unable to make comprehensive specific comments on the project's proposed filling, mitigation, shoreline restoration, trail, and stormwater outfalls because the remediation plan and details are unknown. We will evaluate the project proposals in more detail once the remediation remedy is finalized and reserve the right to MITFD Comments on Quendall Terminals DEIS Page 2 1/25/2011 provide additional comments accordingly. Furthermore, we recommend that the environmental review process for the redevelopment project be put on hold until the ROD has been issued by EPA so that the details of the environmental base;,ne are known and the action alternatives can be sufficiently analyzed in a subsequent environmental review document (i.e. Final EIS or Supplemental DEIS). While we are unable to provide specific comprehensive comments on the project action alternatives' proposed filling, mitigation, shoreline restoration, trail, and storm water outfalls, we do have some initial comments on the DEIS that should be addressed in the subsequent environmental review documents once the remediation action is chosen to be implemented at the site. These initial comments are attached for your review and consideration. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal. Please call Karen Walter at 253-876- 3116 if you have any questions regarding these comments. Glen St Amant Habitat Program Manager cc: Lynda Priddy, EPA Remedial Project Manager Jessica Winter, NOAA Stewart Reinbold, WDFW Barbara Nightingale, WA Department of Ecology, NW Region MITFD Comments on Quendall Terminals DEIS Preliminary Comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Quendall Terminals Page 3 J /25/2011 1. The potential to construct piers and docks to provide moorage and access to Lake Washington is not addressed in this DEIS. Based on our experience with the Barbee Mill plat, its DEIS and subsequent permitting, ;t seems highly likely that lake access and moorage may be proposed at this site in the future and should be analyzed now as part of this environmental review so potential site.specific and cumulative impacts can be adequately assessed. Discussion of this issue is also contingent on the requirements by EPA in the shoreline area to ensure that the cleanup is successful over the long-term. 2. Since the City of Renton has adopted its r~vised Shoreline Master Program on September 27. 2010, the environmental review should include an alternative that is consistent with these shoreline revisions as they are more protective of the wetlands associated with the Lake Washington shoreline, as well as the shoreline itself. For example, if the 2010 Shoreline Master Program were followed on the project site, wetlands A, F, D and potentially others would be required to have at least 75 to 100 foot buffer around them per Renton's code 4-30-090(D)(2)(d)(iv)(c). Instead, the project proposes to establish a 50 foot buffer on Wetlands A and D and allow for some buffer averaging on Wetland D, which will reduce portions to 25 feet. Furthermore, the newly adopted Shoreline Master Program regulations would require a 100 foot setback from the Ordinary High Water Mark of Lake Washington, not the 50 foot setback as proposed by Alternatives l · and 2 in the DEIS. 3. The DEIS should discuss potential lighting effects to Lake Washington and the restored wetlands from adjacent built uses. Exterior building lighting, office building lighting, parking lot lighting, and pedestrian walkway/trail lighting should be directed downward to avoid lighting the lakeshore and wetland buffers and potentially Lake Washington. 4. On page 2-10, the DEIS notes that currently surface runoff infiltrates or is conveyed to Lake Washington via surface flow or swales. If the project fills the majority of the existing wetlands, pipes treated stormwater directly to Lake Washington without detention, and constructs berms around the mitigation wetlands, then the subsequent environmental review document should analyze the likelihood of successful wetland reestablishment/mitigation on the project site. 5. The subsequent environmental review document should discuss the potential for stormwater discharges and outfalls to adversely affect the remediation. Any fill in Lake Washington for stormwater outfalls shoula be quantified and impacts and necessary mitigation measures discussed in the document. 6. The subsequent environmental review document should discuss the fate of the former creosote plant water supply well. This well is described on page 3.1-6. We recommend MJTFD Comments on Quei1dall Terminals DEIS Page 4 1/25/2011 that this well be decommissioned and any existing water rights relinquished as a pem1it condition for the project. 7. As noted on page 1-3, the project proposes to use 53,000-133,000 cubic yards of fill. The DEIS also notes on page 3 .1-7 that large amounts of fill placed at the site could induce settlement in the soil caps and underlying sediments, as well as, mobilization of contaminants present beneath the caps. The DEIS also concludes that these impacts are not anticipated because the project does not require a "large" amount of fill. There needs to be further analysis to indicate why the proposed amount of fill is not sufficiently large enough to cause potential impacts to the soil caps. EPA should be consulted to see if they agree that the amount of fill will not cause settlement in the soil cap and underlying sediments and/or mobilize contaminants beneath the caps. 8. The subsequent environmental review document should include a table that summarizes the following information for each wetland: classification, size, regulated buffer, and proposed filling. There should also be a to.1Jle that summarizes the proposed mitigation for impacts to each impacted wetland. 9. At a minimum, the project should follow Ecology's mitigation ratios for filling on-site wetlands. As described in the DEIS, the project proposes to use al.5: I ratio for all wetlands, except for those that are exempt from critical area regulation (e.g. Wetland G) which is proposed to be mitigated at a I: I ratio per City of Renton critical areas regulations (RMC 4-3-050.C(f)), due to its small size and physical isolation. I 0. The subsequent environmental review document should analyze the potential for the future 1-405 widening and NE 44th Street interchange improvement project needed for this project to adversely affect this proposed mitigation site at Wetland J. (see page 3.2-4 and Section 3.9). If improvements at 1-405 and NE 44th are needed and may impact the isolated property and wetlands I and J, then the subsequent environmental review document should evaluate these potential impacts as direct impacts from the project to avoid phasing the environmental review of potential project impacts inappropriately. 11. On page 3 .2-6, the DEIS notes that roof runoff ( considered to be non-pollution generating) would be collected and discharged directly to the lake separately. However, if zinc materials are used in roofing components (i.e. gutters and downspouts), then there could be pollution generated from roofs. In addition, there may be fertilizers and pesticides used to manage the landscape areas that will run off the site as stormwater. The FEIS should discuss the potential for the project to generate pollution from all potential sources; how pollution will be avoided, and the level of treatment for stormwater. Finally, the FEIS should analyze the potential cumulative impacts from additional stormwater discharges to Lake Washington and to the sediment cleanup. CITY OF RENTOl\ 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 City of Renton ------------Planning Division Pri,1ccd· 11-18-2009 Payment Made: Land Use Actions RECEIPT Permit#: LUA09-151 Receipt Number: Total Payment: 11/18/200910:36AM 5,000,00 Payee: Quendall Terminals Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Trans Accounc Code Description Amount SlJ 10 000. 345. 81. 00. 0007 Environmental Review 5019 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev 5020 000.345.81.00.0017 Site Plan Approval Payments made for this receipt Trans Pay:nent Method Check Account Balances Trans Account Code Description 2237 Description 3021 303.000.00.345.85 Park Mitigation Fee 5006 OOD.345.81.00.0002 Annexation Fees 5007 000.345.Bl.OO.DOD3 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 000.345.8:.00.0013 Mobile Home Parks 5017 000.345.81.00.0014 Rezone 5018 000.345.81.00.0015 Routine Vegetation Mgmt 5019 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev 5020 000.345.81.00.0017 Site Plan Approval 5021 000.345.81.00.0018 Temp Use, Hobbyk, Fence 5022 000.345.81.00.0019 Variance Fees 5024 000.345.81.00.0024 Conditional Approval Fee SC36 OOC.345.81.00.0005 Comprehensive Plan Amend 5909 000.341.60.00.0024 Booklets/EIS/Copies 5941 000.341.50.00.0000 Maps (Taxable) 5954 650.237.00.00.0000 DO NOT USE -USE 3954 5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 Postage 5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Tax Remaining Balance Due: $0.00 Amount 5,000.00 1,000.00 2,000.00 2,000.00 Balance Due .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .OD .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .DO .DO .00 .OD .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 NOV 1 8 1009 R0905012 CITY OF RENTON 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Printed: 01-28-2010 --------------------Pity of Renton P\anning Division Payment Made: Land Use Actions RECEIPT Permit#: LUA09-151 Receipt Number: Total Payment: 01/28/2010 12:28 PM 1,800.00 Payee: Quendall Terminals Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Trans Account Code Description Amount 5008 000.345.81.00.0004 Binding Site/Short Plat 1,800.00 Payments made for this receipt Trans Method Description Amount Payment Check 2259 1,800.00 Account Balances Trans Account Code Description Balance Due 3021 5006 5007 5008 5009 5010 5011 5012 5013 5014 5015 5016 5017 5018 5019 5020 5021 5022 5024 5036 5909 5941 5954 5955 5998 303.000.00.345.85 000.345.81.00.0002 000.345.81.00.0003 000.345.81.00.0004 000.345.81.00.0006 000.345.81.00.0007 000.345.81.00.0008 000.345.81.00.0009 000.345.81.00.0010 000.345.81.00.0011 000.345.81.00.0012 000.345.81.00.0013 000.345.81.00.0014 000.345.81.00.0015 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 000.05.519.90.42.1 000.231.70.00.0000 Park Mitigation Fee Annexation Fees Appeals/Waivers Binding Site/Short Plat Conditional Use Fees Environmental Review Prelirn/Tentative Plat Final Plat PUD Grading & Filling Fees Lot Line Adjustment Mobile Home Parks 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 Postage Tax Remaining Balance Due: $0.00 .00 .OD .00 .00 .00 .OD .OD .00 .00 .OD .DO .00 .00 .OD .00 .OD .00 .OD .00 .OD .OD .00 .00 .00 .00 R1000483 ... VI ..I c( z -z II. :E ~ ~ -1:1 V -z-w _ ... ::c C I-~ :f ..I;:>-..... a: c( is~ Q !z ! YIU z a: w ::, a -dl ')lcJDVd AMnlND N019NIHSVM 'NOlN3M S1VNIWH31 llVON30l:> i l t! l I I .tj I ~ ft 'I I ! ~It-111 z 1 1 I 1 J I i !J!l f1 t !1n, U I J'.U J ,,,•, • A. 1. Quendall Terminals PLANNING DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST BACKGROUND City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 Name of proposed project, if applicable: Quendall Terminals 2. Name of applicant: Campbell Mathewson Executive Vice President Century Pacific, LP. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Campbell Mathewson Executive Vice President Century Pacific, LP 1201 Third Ave, Suite 1680 SeaWe, WA 98101 Phone: (206) 757-8893 cmathewson@centurypacificlp.com 4. Date checklist prepared: November 2009 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton, Washington 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): SEPA / Master Plan Approval / Shorelines EPA Timeline -Feasibility Study November 2009 -February 201 O Early 2011 Site Remediation and Cap Building & Infrastructure Construction 2011 following EPA selected site remediation 2 years following site remediation 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No plans for future additions or expansion are anticipated with this proposal. Development activity is expected lo include remediation/mitigation of site contaminants along with final design, permitting, and construction of the proposed Master Plan. C:\NrPortbl\CREA\MA'IHS\6558_1.00C • 1 • 02108 Quendall Terminals 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. A Wetland Assessment, Standard Lake Study, Habitat Data Report, and Conceptual Restoration Plan have been prepared for the Quendall Terminals property. These have been prepared in accordance with City criteria {RMC Section 4-3-050) to support the development proposed and evaluated in this SEPA checklist. Prior to selection of a remediation remedy by EPA, the Quendall Terminals owners {Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Company) will submit a Remedial Investigation (RI) Report and a Feasibility Study (FS) Report to the EPA. The RI Report will summarize the results of environmental investigations on the property and is anticipated to be submitted to the EPA in summer 2010. The FS Report is anticipated to be submitted to EPA in early 2011, after which, EPA will select a preferred remedy. 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. The Environmental Protection Agency {EPA) is the lead agency for all remediation, site remediation and mitigation actions which are to be performed at the Quendall Terminals site under Superfund. The remediation actions selected by EPA will comply with substantive elements of SEPA and other applicable, relevant and appropriate environmental reviews and permitting requirements, though the remediation actions are exempt from procedural requirements of SEPA. 1 O. List any governmental approvals or pennlts that will be needed for your proposal, if known. City of Renton Land Use approvals and permits: Master Plan Approval Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Critical Areas Review Environmental Review (SEPA) Binding Site Plan Review Remaining site remediation and mitigation will be performed under Consent Decrees between EPA and the Quendall Terminals ownership as part of the initial work on the property. As a result, certain state and local permits are preempted although substantive requirements of those statutes and regulations will be satisfied by the remediation and mitigation approval. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. Proposed Uses A mixed use development with the following: 800 residential units 245,000 SF office 21,600 SF retail 9,000 SF restaurant Size of the Site C:~rPortbllCREAIMATHS\6558_1.DOC ·2-02/08 Quendall Terminals The project site is approximately 21.46 acres (934,874 square feet) in size. This includes the main parcel and an isolated parcel (50,052 Square feet) east of Ripley Lane that will be improved as a mitigation site. Parking 2,171 cars in structures and on grade 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 avallable. 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. Location The property is located at 4350 Lake Washington Boulevard in the northern portion of Renton, Washington. It is located within the Southwest Y. of Section 29, Township 24 North, Range 5 East, King County. The main site occupies approximately 20.3 acres adjacent to Lake Washington and has approximately 1,583 feet of shoreline. The site is located 3.5 miles south- southwest of the junction of Interstate Highways 405 and 90. The legal description is provided below. Site Plan, Vicinity Map, and Topographic Map Please refer to the attached site plan, vicinity map, and topographic survey for additional detail. Access Interstate 405 provides regional vehicle access to the site via the 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard interchange. Direct site access is provided by Lake Washington Boulevard and Ripley Lane, both located to the east of the site. Legal Description THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 5 IN SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP 24 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST, W.M., AND SHORELAND ADJOINING LYING WESTERLY OF THE NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND SOUTHERLY OF A LINE, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE QUARTER CORNER ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 29; THENCE NORTH 69°56'36" WEST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID LOT 5, 1,113.01 FEET TO THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY; THENCE NORTH 29°44'54" EAST 849.62 FEET ALONG SAID RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE TO A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT A; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 29°44'54" EAST 200.01 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE LINE HEREIN DESCRIBED; THENCE SOUTH 56°26'50" WEST 222.32 FEET TO A POINT WHICH BEARS NORTH 59°24'56" WEST 100.01 FEET FROM SAID POINT A; THENCE NORTH 59"24'56" WEST TO THE INNER HARBOR LINE AND THE END OF SAID LINE DESCRIPTION; ALSO THAT PORTION OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 5 LYING SOUTHEASTERLY OF LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD, WESTERLY OF SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NUMBER 2A AND NORTHWESTERLY OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF PUBLIC STATE HIGHWAY NUMBER 1 C:\NrPortbl\CREA\MATHS1B558_ 1 DOC -3. 02/08 Quendall Terminals AS ESTABLISHED BY DEED RECORDED JANUARY 15, 1964 UNDER RECORDING NO. 5687408; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO CITY OF RENTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION BY DEED RECORDED JUNE 19, 2008 UNDER RECORDING NO. 20080619001179. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other. The site is located on the shore of Lake Washington and is generally flat. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) Site slopes are generally 0-5% with localized slopes up to 2H:1V at debris piles and up to 1H:1V at the bank of the lake. 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. Site soils consist of highly heterogeneous shallow alluvial and lacustrine silts, sands and peat underlain by a coarser sand-gravel alluvium. The shallow alluvial depostts are ove~ain by years of fill deposits. Refer to the geotechnical study submitted with this Environmental Checklist for additional detail. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable sous in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Surface and near surface conditions are especially variable across the site. Soils from the surface to a depth of 25 feet contain Fill and Shallow Alluvium soils which are relatively weak with variable compressibility, permeability and contain a low bearing capacity. Refer to the geotechnical study submitted with this Environmental Checklist for additional detail. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Filling and grading will proceed pursuant to the Consent Decrees and Cleanup Action Plan as subject to review and approval by the EPA. Filling will also be required to achieve proposed site grades. It is assumed that fill will be imported. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. C:\NrPortbl\CREAIMATHS\6558_ 1.DOC .4. 02/08 Quendall Terminals The relatively flat grade of the site will minimize the potential for erosion as a result of site construction. The near-suliace soils are considered to have moderate to high moisture sensitivity if disturbed by construction actiVity. Soils with high moisture sensibvity tend to degrade easily upon exposure to weather. While these soils have the potential for erosion during wet weather conditions, mitigation will be accomplished with the use of appropriate best management practices (BMPs}. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 75% of the site is considered impervious surface which includes buildings, roads and sidewalks. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: 2. AIR Approved best management practices (BMPs) shall be specified and used during construction to minimize soil erosion and environmental impacts as a result of development activity. a. What types of emissions to the air would "'8ult 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. Construcbon activ~ies may generate dust Construction equipment and hauling vehicles will create emissions from internal combustion engines. b. Are there any off-eite sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. There are no known off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect this proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, If any: Dust suppression techniques, including water sprinkling, will be used during construction as necessary. Stockpiles will be covered to the extent practicable to minimize construction-related dust. Emissions impacts during construction will be minimized through efficient use of equipment and minimizing equipment idling. 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. The project site includes approximately 1,583 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. 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 following work is anticipated within 200 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline: C:\NrPortbl\CREAIMATHS\6558_ 1.DOC -5-02/08 Quendall Terminals Activifies related to shoreline restoration, contaminant remediation and mitigation, including capping of the site. Construction of mixed-use buildings, roads, retaining walls, hardscape/landscape areas. 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. Earthwork impacts to surface waters and wetjands will be determined through the EPA directed site remediation effort that precedes development No additional filling is proposed by the Master Plan. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general de11cription, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The proposal will not require surface water withdrawals or diversions. 5) DOe11 the proposal lie within a 100-year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. The proposal does not lie within a 100-year flood plain. 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. The proposal does not involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters. b. Ground Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general de11cription, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The project does not propose groundwater withdrawal or discharge. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; Industrial, containing the following chemicals ... ; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. No waste materials as identified above are anticipated. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (Including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantitie11, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow Into other waters, If so, describe. Stormwater runoff will be collected from impervious surfaces and will be conveyed to lake Washington through a piped storm drainage system. Pollution-generating impervious surfaces will be treated prior to discharge to Lake Washington in accordance with City of Renton and Washington State Department of Ecology (WSDOE) stormwater regulations. Best management practices will be used in accordance with WSDOE. C:\NrPorthl\CREAIMATHS\6558_ 1.DOC . e -02108 Quendall Terminals 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Waste material is not anticipated to enter ground or surface waters. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Runoff from pollution-generating impervious surfaces will be treated prior to discharge to Lake Washington. Best management practices will be used to prevent erosion and sedimentation during construction and at project completion. Stormwater conveyance and treatment systems will be designed in accordance with City of Renton and WSDOE requirements. 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: _x_ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other _ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other _x_ shrubs _x_ grass _ pasture _ crop or grain _x_ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bull rush, skunk cabbage, other _x_ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other _ other types of vegetation Please refer to the Wetland Assessment, Standard Lake Study, Habitat Data Report. b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Site vegetation planting and removal will be determined per the future EPA approved site remediabon, mitigation and shoreline restoration plan. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. No threatened or endangered species were observed or are known to occur on or near the project site. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: As part of the development project, native and regional climate zoned ornamental plants will be installed as landscaping throughout the development. The intent is to create a landscape that is functional, aesthetically pleasing, diverse, and water efficient. Plant material will be selected for hardiness, size, texture and color. The development will be adjacent to a riparian buffer along Lake Washington that averages 100-feet in width. The buffer will be enhanced with native vegetation as a result of remediation-related impacts to existing wetlands through the EPA. Revegetation will focus on species diversity, species density allowing for varied light penetration, and the creation of different successive stages along the lake. Willow and water-tolerant shrub vegetation along the shoreline and in existing and restored wetland habitat would provide shade for aquatic species. Deciduous-dominated forests would include open areas where sunlight can penetrate to the forest floor. Coniferous-dominated forests would provide important habitat for upland species. The proposed development will not impact C:\NrPortbl\CRi,AIMATHS\6668_ 1.00C -7 -02/08 Quendall Terminals any of the areas of enhanced vegetation within the 100-foot average width riparian buffer along Lake Washington. Please refer to the Wetland Assessment, Standard Lake Study, Habitat Data Report and Conceptual Restoration Plan prepared by Anchor QEA. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the sits or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other _______ _ Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, olher=-=----:------- Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other _____ _ Please refer to the Wetland Assessment, Standard Lake Study, Habitat Data Report and Conceptual Restoration Plan prepared by Anchor QEA. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. Puget Sound Chinook salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha), steelhead (0. mykiss), and bull trout ( Salvelinus confluentus) use Lake Washington as part of their migration corridor. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain Yes, it lies within the Pacific flyway. Also, anadromous salmonids, steelhead, and bull trout migrate through Lake Washington. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Measures to improve and restore wildlife habitat will be conducted as part of remediation activities prior to development of the property. The riparian buffer and the creation/restoration of existing wetland habitat will provide detritus inputs, insect drop, and woody debris inputs for aquatic species to support prey resources and provide cover for juvenile salmon. In addition, woody debris and substrate enhancement of the shoreline would support these aquatic ecological functions in the short term. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electrlc, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it wlll be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity is anticipated to be used for heating, cooling, lighting, and other energy demands. Natural gas is anticipated to be used primarily for healing and cooking. Oil and woodstoves are not anticipated to be energy sources for the site. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. The project will not affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties. 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: C:\NrPortbnCREAIMA THS\6558_ 1.DOC -8-02/08 Quendall Terminals Specific conservation measures have not been identified at this time but are anticipated to be included on a limited basis as building programming is developed. 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? lf so, describe. The site is contaminated with hazardous substances as a result of past industrial uses. N; part of this development, a site remediaUon/mitigation plan will be executed to prevent the exposure and spread of hazardous substances to humans and the surrounding environment Proposed measures to prevent environmental health hazards include minimal disturbance to contaminated soils and capping of the site. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Emergency services will be provided by the City of Renton. No special emergency services are anticipated. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: N; part of this development, a site remediation/mitigation plan will be executed to prevent the exposure and spread of hazardous substances to humans and the surrounding environment. Proposed measures to prevent environmental health hazards include minimal disturbance to contaminated soils and capping of the site. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist ln the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? There are no known noises in the area that may affect the project. Traffic noise from Interstate 405, which is located approximately 500 feet east of the site's east boundary, is not expected to adversely affect the project. 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 and activity will generate noise during daylight hours. During initial construction, noise will be generated outside. Once the buildings are enclosed, construction noise will be contained within the buildings. Normal construction noise is not anticipated to have a significant impact to adjacent uses. Impact-type noises and other high-noise activities will be limited and will occur during restricted hours to minimize impact to adjacent uses. Hours of construction operation are anticipated to be 7:00 AM- 5:00 PM, Monday-Friday. Adjoining property owners will be notified in advance of any weekend work that may take place. Long-Term Low-speed vehicle traffic noise is anticipated in the long-term and is not anticipated to adversely impact adjacent uses. C:\NrPortbl\CREA\MATHS\655&_ 1.00C -g -02108 Quendall Terminals 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Exterior construction hours are anticipated to be 7:00 AM-5:00 PM, Monday-Friday. Adjoining property owners will be notified in advance of any weekend work that may take place. Impact-type noises and other high-noise activities will be limited and will occur during restricted hours to minimize impact to adjacent uses. Contacl with adjacent neighbors who may be adversely impacted will be made and information provided when loud noises, if any, will occur. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is currently vacant. Adjacent uses: Seahawks Training Facility, a football training facility, to the north Barbee Mill, a residential development, to the south Pan Abode, an existing cedar home manufacturing facility, to the southeast. Future planning includes a hotel Lake Washington Blvd, Ripley Lane, and Interstate 405 are to the east Lake Washington is located to the west b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. The site has not been used for agriculture. c. Describe any structures on the site. A wooden platform with metal stairs, a shack, a one-story brick building of approximately 835 square feet, and a sewer pump station are located at the east edge of the project site. Various small docks, structures, and pilings are located at the west edge of the project site along Lake Washington. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No, site is vacant, with exception of the sewer pump station which is to remain. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The site is zoned (COR) Commercial/Office/Residential per the City of Renton. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The site currently has the designation COR-Commercial-Office-Residential. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? The current shoreline master program designation of the s~e is "urban." h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. C:\NrPortMCREAIMATHS\6558_ 1 .DOC -10-02/06 Quendall Terminals Areas on the site are currently identified as Critical Areas by the City of Renton, based on the proximity to Lake Washington and the presence of wetlands. However, existing wetlands will be impacted as part of remediation activities that will be conducted as part of a separate project prior to development. The riparian buffer and we~ands along the Lake Washington shoreline will be enhanced and restored as part of remediation-related activities. Following remediation activities, no environmentally sensitive or Critical Areas will be present within the development area, but the riparian buffer along Lake Washington would qualify as an environmentally sensitive area that contains wetlands and shoreline buffers. I. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? The office space will most likely accommodate up to about 1,000 workers. The retail and restaurants would have 40 to 50 employees, and the apartments are estimated to have 1,200 to 1,300 residents. This would be with 100% occupancy which is rarely achieved, so the totals may be up to 10% less than noted with normal vacancy rates. J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? The completed project will not displace people since the site is currently vacant. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement Impacts, If any: Not applicable-see response to line j, above. I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Landscape buffers and potential fencing will be used to provide a visual separation and buffer between the project and adjacent sites. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-Income housing. Approximately 800 middle-to high-income units will be provided. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No units will be eliminated, as the site is currently vacant. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not applicable-see response to line c, above. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the talle$1 height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. C:\NrPortbllCREAIMATHS\6558_ 1.DOC -11 • 02108 Quendall Terminals We expect the tallest building to be 5 stories over 2 floors of parking. Assuming there is some roof modulation, we would estimate the tallest building would be approximately 85 to 90 ft from grade to top of roof or parapet. The parking structures will be concrete with some structure exposed, some painted and with some walls or structure clad with brick or other masonry. The office building will be concrete and glass in the upper floors and concrete, brick or other masonry around the base and retail shops. The residential portions will have a combination of brick or other masonry, stucco, architectural factory finished metal panels with aluminum framed windows and metal railings at outdoor decks and balconies. b. What views In the Immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? The site is currently vacant so construction of the proposed development will create potential pariial obstructions from certain vantage points around the site such as surface streets and 1-405 to the east, adjacent residential development to the south and the Seahawks facility to the north. The design of the project will maintain view corridors between the proposed buildings. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The proposed buildings will not be taller than allowed per the zoning requirements; this will minimize potential for any view obstructions. The buildings will have a variety of materials and textures and modulation of wall surfaces or other grills, screens or trellises that will add visual interest. Roof lines will be varied for modulation and interest as well. Plaza or courtyard areas over the residential garages will feature landscape planters and pavers for color, texture and pattern. There may be small water features incorporated in the final landscaped courtyard designs. The shoreline zone will be landscaped during the site remediation process. Other streetscape landscaping, sidewalks, perimeter landscaping and street trees will be designed to enhance the building designs, provide a pleasant sidewalk experience and buffer between the Quendall development and the adjacent properties. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Sources of light and glare will include interior lights shining through windows, street lights along roads, outdoor pedestrian lights along sidewalks/hardscape areas, and lighted signage at retail/restaurant areas. Light and glare from these sources will occur from sundown until sunrise and are not expected to be significant. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light or glare from the completed project is not expected to be a safety hazard or interfere with views. C \NrPortbl\CREAIMATHS\6558_ 1.DOC -12 -02108 Quendall Terminals c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? There are no known existing off-site sources of light or glare that may affect the proposal. The Seahawks Training Facility located to the north of the project site does not have permanent field lighting. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not applicable. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Lake Washington borders the west side of the project site and provides informal recreational opportun~ies such as boating, swimming, fishing, and other lake-related recreational activities. Other potential recreation opportunities have not been identified at this time and will be addressed with the future EPA site remediation / mitigation action plan. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? H so, describe. The proposed project will not displace any existing recreational uses. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not applicable-see response to line b, above. 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? H so, generally describe. There are no known places or objects on or next to the site that are listed on or proposed for national, state, or local preservation registers. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. A Cultural Resource Assessment (Larson, 1997) was performed for the project site in 1997. This assessment did not identity any cultural resources eligible for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. The report concludes that the historic mouth of May Creek was likely located at the Port Quendall Log Yard and that a Duwamish site may have been located there. All portions of the Port Quendall Log Yard are identified as an area that may contain archeological deposits. Please refer to the Cultural Resource Assessment prepared by Larson Anthropological Archaeological Services (March, 1997). c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any; Monitoring for archeological materials will be included if/Where native site soils are disturbed. However, previous geotechnical explorations have indicated that the project C:\NrPortbllCREA\MATHS\6558_ 1.DOC -13-02/08 Quendall Terminals site is overlain with fill, and the project's grading approach includes minimal disturbance to existing site soils due to the presence of hazardous substances. A fill cap will be added to the site as part of remediation/mitigation efforts, and buildings will use piling foundation systems. 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 site is principally served by the following three roads: Interstate 405 -Located approximately 500 feet east of the site. Lake Washington Blvd -Located at the southeast comer of the site. Ripley lane -Located at the eastern edge of the site. Interstate 405 provides regional access to the project site via the Lake Washington Blvd I 44'" Street interchange. lake Washington Blvd provides access at the southeast comer of the site where it runs east to Interstate 405 or south to the City of Renton. At the southeast comer of the site, Ripley Lane runs north from Lake Washington Blvd and serves the east side of the site. Greater detail on all transportation and parking issues can be found in the Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by The Transpo Group. b. Is site currently served by public tram;it? If not, what is the approximate distance to the neareet transit stop? The site is not currently served by public transit. The nearest transit stop is located approximately 0.9 miles east-northeast at 116"' Ave SE and SE 76"' St (Metro Route 219). c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The completed project would have parking for approximately 2,171 cars in structures and on grade. The project would not eliminate any parking. d. WIii 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? Yes. In addition to the improvements to the 1-405/NE 44th Street interchange identified as part of the planned WSDOT 1-405 Renton to Bellevue improvement project, several additional improvements are needed to mitigate project impacts. These include: • A southbound left-turn lane, a dedicated westbound right-turn lane, and an eastbound left-turn lane would be needed at the Ripley Lane/Lake Washington Blvd intersection • A northbound left-tum lane at the Main Project Access/Barbee Mills/Conner Homes Access intersection With Lake Washington Blvd, and • A westbound k!ft-turn lane would be needed at the Hawks Landing Access/Lake Washington Blvd intersection. Note: Improvements listed are based on full build-out, initial phased development will not require all improvements. C:\NrPortb~CREA\MATHS\6558_1.DOC -14 -02/08 Quendall Terminals e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The project will not use water, rail. or air transportation. The project site is in the immediate vicinity of water transportation {Lake Washington borders the site to the west) and an existing BNSF railroad track which borders the site to the east and is no longer used for rail transport. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. The proposed project is anticipated to generate approximately 8,570 net new off-site daily trips, w~h approximately 837 occurring during the AM peak hour (446 inbound trips and 391 outbound trips), and 905 occurring during the PM peak hour trips (410 inbound trips and 495 outbound trips). g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Consistent with the Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by Transpo and attached to this submittal, traffic mitigation measures considered include additional turn lanes, channelization and traffic calming measures. In addition, a transportation management plan (TMP) for the site will be prepared. 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. An increased need for public services is anticipated as a result of the project. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Coordination of the development plan and future phasing with public service personnel. Coordination and timing of future development will assist public services in determining when additional demand will be needed as result of development. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle or underline utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water. refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. The following utilities are proposed for the project Water -City of Renton Sewer -City of Renton Electricity -Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas -Puget Sound Energy C:\NrPortbl\CREAIMA THS\6558_ 1.DOC • 15 • 02/08 Quendall Terminals Phone, DSL, and Fiber-Optic Communications -Qwest C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: = Name Printed: Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific, LP. Date: November 12, 2009 D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS Not Used C:INrPortbl\CREA\MATHS\6558_ 1.DOC -16 -02/08 ~Al-+ .. F-}_ Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: Mathewson, Campbell [cmathewson@CenturyPacificLP.com] Tuesday, June 08, 2010 11 :22 AM To: Gretchen Brunner; Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Ryan Durkan Subject: Quendall alternative Attachments: P1-0REV4 DELETE OFFICE-700R RES Model (1).pdf; P1-0REV4 DELETE OFFICE-700R RES Model (2).pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Gretchen and Vanessa, Attached is what I hope to be the final version of a proposed alternative for consideration in the EIS. This plan consists of the following: Residential: 708 units Retail: 21,600 gsf retail and 9,000 gsf restaurant as originally proposed Office: 0 square feet Parking: 1,364 stalls (1,242 stalls for residential + 122 stalls for retail), please note the parking on the SW, NW and NE portions of the site are "at grade" Elevation drawings should be completed tomorrow and I will forward upon receipt. Thanks. Sincerely, Campbell Mathewson CenturyPacific, LP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 1680 Seattle, WA 98101 + I 206 757 8893 work + I 206 910 2448 mobile + I 206 757 7890 facsimile cmathewson@centurypacificlp.com http://www.centurypacificlp.com 1 !ri t' \ ~ I u1; P' . 1 l Pi :11 I • i . . i I i rn 1; !!I I • t' i ; I i 115• • !~ i , It <l"'"<:i""'!:!°fl 111;0 ~ 111l~, ; . ! ' < ;,i;il ·!·~· " !1 !ii=,: u· 1i • < 'I :'.i:j r )> " 01 ~ (/) I z C) --< 0 z LAKE WASHINGTON ~ ........... (Jtl..-•1.""""'r.......,,) ..-on.._.,,_,!••-'°""-•--- QUENDALL TERMINALS SITE PLAN LANCE MUELLER & ASSOCIATES CENTURY PACIFIC LP 6-7-10 _ - lAK0 •ALL STATISTICS ARE BASED ON CONCEPTUAL PLAN ~Sf-/~/ WHICH ARE APPROXIMATE AND SUB..£CT TO CHANGE --!i.E.!.oN 8lvo '\ ·c:- TOT AL PARKING SHOWN ON GRADE ~ 375 CARS TOTAL PARKING SHOWN @ P-1 ~ 989 CARS --·IHI!:· --/ t[f'f oc,u, , •• ., TOTAL SHOPPING REQUIRED PARKING ~ 122 CARS TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED FOR 708 RESIDENTIAL UNITS 1,242 TOTAL PARKING REQUIRED & SHOWN ~ 1,364 CARS l I ~-(Ill,!-·,.~-==-:=-~-------- ~-,-- lillil ...... ------!5!-- ~··,,a] - ' • Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Clay Patmon! [cpatmont@anchorqea.com] Friday, June 11, 2010 04:55 PM Gretchen Brunner UJAm-1s1 Cc: Mathewson, Campbell; Rick Lundquist; Vanessa Dolbee; Chip Vincent; Ryan Durkan; Peter Hummel; Anna Hook; Dan Berlin; Tim Flynn; Lynn Manolopoulos; James Hanken Subject: RE: Quendall Terminals EIS Information Needs Memo Attachments: QUENDALL FIGURE 8.1_ 061010.pdf; City of Renton EIS Clarification Responses 6-11-10.doc; QUENDALL FIGURES 8 & 8.1 GADD.zip; QUENDALL FIGURE 8_061010.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Gretchen - Attached are our responses to Vanessa's and Rick's wetland-related Quendall EIS clarification questions that your forwarded to us on Tuesday. I've also attached updated figures (in pdf) as well as CADD files that reflect recent updates and (hopefully) provide further clarification. As always, please let Campbell or me know if you have any questions. Have a great weekend - Clay Clay Patmont ANCHOR QEA, LLC www.anchorgea.co m Please consider the environment before printing this email, -,·,1..s 1''.:f'ctn;'1:c r"ses:;;:;g(' t°'d:':.1s·y;:c"\ ::cn'.:air'.s infon:atiol'; :·r'i;,·c rray l:Ji' confde:1ti:al <nd/cv DCV i,.:r,;cd \fJD!""'. ;,rndt''. .. ~ n::,;;:,re:i in a;1i:::!·:·, '.Cl ct :tig::.t,C""I J'h':" :n;or:T;J1·Jor 0 i::. 1,r:;~nde'.i for the ,E(! oflf,e i:-1div1duol c >2;!:::tv r;v1:ec ::i>ove, If you ,n<0 nn·s ::he 1,1::dded f?c-pif:,1L p:r,;;:s::: b,--? :~vvJ.-~; '.'iii'.·""! d1.s,cl:)SU"P : ··,;jv1:1g d;<;tf:b . .;t'ioro or "se. G1 the ::011\t!nts 01" this irr\Jrrna~,or h Droh•bi:2::. 1f 'f'.)U h;ve 1cu0,ivH1 t'* eiec·'.,onic :.,~1>r>·i1<:s1Y1 ·1 .;;,:c, ;!li,:s1:,;: ;,:;'. 1,; t::; hv·c:(::0:nLoi'e <)'.: ()Jri) 28/.91:Jl"L From: Gretchen Brunner [mailto:gretchenb@blumencg.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 08, 2010 9: 13 AM To: Clay Patmon! Cc: Mathewson, Campbell; Rick Lundquist Subject: PN: Quendall Terminals EIS Information Needs Memo Clay- Please see Vanessa's (from City of Renton) concerns/questions about the new wetland/shoreline figure that you sent me last week. I also am wondering about the trail, lookouts and beach access points that this figure shows. Campbell had indicated that these would not be part of the proposal. Has this approach changed? Thanks. Gretchen From: Vanessa Dolbee [mailto:VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 2: 13 PM To: Gretchen Brunner 1 ' Cc: Chip Vincent Subject: RE: Quendall Terminals EIS Information Needs Memo Gretchen, Thank you for sending over the RI documentation. To follow up on our phone conversation, the City has the following concerns/questions about the new wetland/shoreline Figure 8. 1) In the response from Aspect/Anchor, imbedded in the information needs memo, under item 1. bullet point five, the following statement is made: The wetland function of each of the wetlands restored/created along Lake Washington will be driven by the hydrology of Lake Washington. This statement indicates these newly created wetlands would be hydrologically connect to Lake Washington, a shoreline of the state. As such the wetlands would also be considered "shorelines", therefore the black dashed line in Figure 8, identifying a 50-ft. setback would be incorrect. This line should be measured from the OHWM when no wetland is present along the shoreline and from the edge of the new wetland in areas were a wetland is present. As such, the red line depicting "average setback", in Figure 8, would change based on the new shoreline measurements, ultimately reducing the average setback from the shoreline. These items should be corrected in Figure 8. 2) The buffer around wetland D, in Figure 8, is proposed to be averaged pursuant to RMC buffer averaging provisions. However, the figure should identify where the 50-ft buffer would be without the averaging as well as identify the loss of square footage of buffer area and identify the addition of square footage of buffer area when averaging is completed. A detailed graphic of wetland D and its buffer may be the best solution to these unanswered questions. 3) Has the EPA seen Figure 8? Do we have approval from EPA that this proposal is an acceptable wetland recreation ratio? Thank you for forwarding our questions on to Campbell and/or the appropriate consultants. Vanessa Dolbee (Acting) Senior Planner City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 (425)430-7314 From: Gretchen Brunner [mailto:gretchenb@blumencg.com] Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 12:42 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: FW: Quendall Terminals EIS Information Needs Memo 2 VANESSA'S COMMENTS: The City has the following concerns/questions about the new wetland/shoreline Figure 8. 1) In the response from Aspect/Anchor, imbedded in the information needs memo, under item 1. bullet point five, the following statement is made: The wetland function of each of the wetlands restored/created along Lake Washington will be driven by the hydrology of Lake Washington. This statement indicates these newly created wetlands would be hydrologically connect to Lake Washington, a shoreline of the state. As such the wetlands would also be considered "shorelines", therefore the black dashed line in Figure 8, identifying a 50-ft. setback would be incorrect. This line should be measured from the OHWM when no wetland is present along the shoreline and from the edge of the new wetland in areas were a wetland is present. As such, the red line depicting "average setback", in Figure 8, would change based on the new shoreline measurements, ultimately reducing the average setback from the shoreline. These items should be corrected in Figure 8. The water level and hydrology of the wetlands to be restored and/or created for Wetlands A and D will be controlled by the water surface elevation of Lake Washington, but surface water connection will only be present between the lake and portions of Wetland A. The Wetland D restoration/creation area will be protected by a small continuous wave attenuation berm that will separate all of the wetland from the lake with a narrow upland area composed of permeable material such as sand and gravel. This berm will serve to protect the wetland from wave energy to minimize erosion and associated habitat disturbances. The water levels of Wetland D restored/created areas will thus be controlled by Lake Washington elevations via a groundwater connection. As a result, while both Wetlands A and D will be "associated" with the shoreline, Wetland D will not be contiguous with the lake, and the OHWM in this area thus follows the wetland boundary for wetlands contiguous with Lake Washington as depicted in the updated Figure 8 (attached). A similar wave attenuation berm will be constructed along the lake for portions of Wetland A, but because of its different setting it need not be continuous. Thus, the OHWM in the Wetland A area follows the restored/created wetland boundary. Using the revised OHWM boundary, the total shoreline setback area is 124,764 sqft. The shoreline is 1,423 ft long, which results in an average shoreline setback area of 78 ft. The shoreline setback area will be greater than 50 feet for all commercial buildings. 2) The buffer around wetland D, in Figure 8, is proposed to be averaged pursuant to RMC buffer averaging provisions. However, the figure should identify where the 50-ft buffer would be without the averaging as well as identify the loss of square footage of buffer area and identify the addition of square footage of buffer area when averaging is completed. A detailed graphic of wetland D and its buffer may be the best solution to these unanswered questions. The attached Figure 8.1 shows additional details of the proposed buffer width averaging approach. The total buffer area associated with the standard 50 foot buffer is 5,400 sqft. Using averaging, the resulting buffer area is 5,994 sqft, which exceeds the area associated with the standard buffer. The buffer for Wetland D is equal to or greater than 25 feet using buffer width averaging. 3) Has the EPA seen Figure 8? Do we have approval from EPA that this proposal is an acceptable wetland recreation ratio? We provided EPA with a copy of the wetland report, including Figure 8, and EPA has sent the report to other stakeholders for review. EPA is aware of the basis for the wetland mitigation ratios used in the wetland report (i.e., the product of earlier interagency discussions specific to the Quenda/1 site). EPA will determine the appropriate wetland ratios as part of its forthcoming cleanup decisions (i.e., after completion of the RI/FS), consistent with the substantive elements of applicable or relevant and appropriate environmental reviews and permitting requirements. The wetland report provides appropriate assumptions for purposes of the EIS. RICK'S COMMENTS: 1 (wetlands) -the response indicates that an averaged SO-foot buffer would be provided on each of the wetland areas (after completion of remediation). However, this buffer is not clearly shown on the enhanced/enlarged Wetland D area on Figure 8, other than a 2S-foot minimum at the closest points. It would be helpful to see how the SO-foot buffer relates to the edge of the riparian area as with the other wetlands (i.e., how much area of reduced buffer vs. wider buffer, and does area of averaged buffer exceed standard SO-foot buffer). Also, could the same be said of the overall riparian buffer on the lake, that the total area exceeds the area of a standard 100- foot buffer? See the responses above with respect to wetland and shoreline setback area and widths. Also, the response states that Wetland J will require a 25-foot buffer, yet Figure 8 seems to show a SO-foot buffer on most of the enlarged wetland (south and west sides). Please clarify. Wetland J will have a SO foot buffer fa/lawing restoration/creation. Wetland J is currently a Category Ill wetland, but will be a Category II wetland following restoration/creation. With respect to the next to last bullet items under #1 (see also #27), would same riparian area be re-vegetated and enhanced as part of the remediation plan, regardless of EIS alternative (i.e., the same area under the No Action alternative as it would under the Proposed Action or Alternative 1, including both wetland and non-wetland areas)? Or would only the wetland enhancement/creation occur under the No Action scenario? Only the wetland restoration/creation area and associated buffer would be required under the no action scenario. 8 (&10), Trail Access --would trails be built in the enhanced riparian area under the Proposed Action and Alternative 1? Would they include beach access, as indicated in the updated Figure 8. Is it correct to assume that no trail would be built under the No Action alternative? Under the No Action alternative, no trails would be built in the enhanced riparian area, but they would be included as part af Alternative 1. Note that trails along the shoreline have value from a number af perspectives. Public shoreline access is encouraged by the shoreline management regulations that Renton is working from. Connecting the future development to the length of the vegetated buffer via a trail is a primary means of achieving this objective. Specifics of the location, width and construction of the trail will be developed during design. However, trails will likely be 10 feet wide with a surface that would support a maintenance pickup truck and ambulance, and also meet ADA guidelines. Another benefit of trails is that while primarily serving pedestrians, it could also double as the primary means of access for maintenance of the vegetated buffer and shoreline, including potential cleanup operations, maintenance, and monitoring. It is reasonable to assume that this trail would only be located in proposed wetland buffers, and would not cross wetlands. 14 (& 26), Stormwater Plan --Figure 1B of the KPFF stormwater plan document appears to show the stormwater outfall pipes extending through the enhanced/created wetland areas A and D before reaching the lakeshore. Is it correct to assume that these would be located to avoid crossing through the wetland areas (the updated Figure 8 appears to show a modified configuration of the enlarged wetland areas to avoid this)? The proposed stormwater outfall pipes will be situated to avoid crossing the restored/created wetland areas. The outfalls will not cross the wetlands shown on Figure 8. / //:"'-, ,/ '"' /' ' J ,r---. '/,) See Figure 8.1 ,o" .;.,/"° ,sf , --j / I WetlaodD -- ' Continuous w / Atten,at;on ,:;~ , .. /'\..... I ,~\ >-:-~~-~ -~ ·. i;rnum 2:~~ is-eJ~~ 8~, ,1 i l i // / /' // "'Wetland 1 ~ .-,.ANCHOR \/..,,QEA~ ..... '-. ,; ' -. ' .... ,.. J ;0 _ Bu;!d;ng,;etbackj, f;<; ·-"',, / ~'. (li1 ' . ,i':¥5l Wetland F ·y t !:: ''>1// · ,1? I ( · ;._?< :--~ ,":' ' --"-,.~ 01;;~? l; -1!. / "~;,:.{ .<'-r Wetland G ~<<--_:/ / "'.~tlandB \\ '/J ; '•, ,, · · •.{-,, / t .. ::~·~Yt1~:\,:,:;::{:/t' r·~ 10-ft B'btllding,,!ietback h , .;: -..., "'·...: //-' ,,; .. •·.1 '. ,;-...... '·~J" /t/ I-./:: ""-~ '',,1;,: IJ ' _<....:._,, , (...,,. J '<. '< .. C.• •• ' 1..._...._ ,_ , ,, • '-'... ./ I' ·-.. !/' --,.,. --l;jY -.,_ ~.!;:.:, '../' Wetland I s:11,';1.~--·-.1.-'.,--,e·:'i•'\C/ .. ·.-.::o :·:_--o::.· -- LEGEND: Minimun 25-ft Existing Shoreline OHWM Proposed Shoreline OHWM Following Remediation I -... ~ ~ ~ Existing Shoreline OLWM Existing Wetland to Remain Elusting Wetl~nd to be Filled for Remediation (to be Performed under CERCLA) Prospective Wetland Creation/ Restoration for CERCLA Remediation (31,805 sf) Wave Attenuation Berm Shoreline SQ...ft Setback Prospective Shoreline Setback, 78-ft average width Prospective Riparian Habitat Restoration area, Work to be Performed under Separate Agreement (124,764 sf) Prospective Wetland Creation/ Restoration Buffer for CERCLA Remediation (70,627 sf) (See Figure 8.1) Proposed Public and Shoreline Access Trails Proposed Educational Wetland Viewpoint Proposed Beach Access Point HORIZONTAL DATUM: Washington State Plane North, NAD83/91. VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 n 0 160 L.......r-I Scale in Feet =.n:1.".'.;:.;;i,,'::,:f:'."!!!l:IC:.,"TC·P.' Flgure·s Shoreline Resloration Conceptual Design Port Quendall Terminal ' ~ 0 0 ~ • E • m 9 m ~ 0 N .., N -~ ., / / ., Wave Attenuation Berm -- OHWM Existing Shoreline OLWM Existing Wetland to Remain Existing Wetland to be Filled for Remediation (to be Performed under CERCLA) / ·:·· ,-0 ,•'" :., ... x.-,:..-',· ,:.a HORIZONTAL DATUM: WA State Plane North, NAD83/91 . VERTICAL DATUM: NAVD88 () 0 80 Scale in Feet , __ ·. i~· <.1 ; """" ') Reduced Wetland Buffer Area Wetland Buffer Area •. ( " Increased Wetland Buffer Area Prospective 50-ft Wetland Buffer for CERCLA Remediation .,,1,.~ ~ Prospective Increased Buffer Width (5994 sf] NOTES: Wetland D (Category 2 Wetland) achieves a 50-ft buffer with Buffer Width Averaging. The buffer associated with Wetland Dis narrowest at 25-ft and widest at 95-ft. The overall buffer area is equal to a continuous SO-ft buffer. Figure 8.1 Wetland D Buffer Width Averaging Shoreline Restoration Conceptual Design Port Quendall Terminal June 29, 2010 City of Renton Attn: Chip Vincent Attn: Vanessa Dolby Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Blumen Consulting Group, Inc. Attn: Mike Blumen Attn: Gretchen Brunner 720 Sixth Street South, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98033 Re: , Quendall Terminals EIS Consultant Selection and Payment Dear Sirs and Madams: L,uAcA -I SJ City of Renton Planning Division JUL O 1 IU1U Thank you for your continued efforts to process the master plan application for the Quendall Terminals property located This letter will confirm thut Lhe owners of the Quendall Terminals property are agreeable to the selection of Blumen Consulting Group ("Blumen'') to conduct the Environmental Impact Statement ("EIS") on behalf of the City of Renton for our master plan development project. We are also agreeable to paying the cost of the EIS at $172,975 with a not to exceed without further authorization. Fifteen '.housand dollars ($15;000) was previously remitted to the City of Renton for Phase L Phase II consists of $125,975 and Phase III is estimated to cost $32,000 per the proposals submitted by Blumen dated March 12, 2010 and May 24, 2010. In addition, we are agreeable to remitting one-half of the remaining cost, or $78,988, now and the remainder upon reasonable notice from the city. We are hopeful this letter will suffice for Blumen to continue its work until receipt of official notice from the city after its council meets in mid-July. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact Campbell Mathewson at CenturyPacific at 206-757-8893 or cmathewson@cenrurypacificlp.com. Sincerely, . QUENDALL TERMINALS, by Ms. Vanessa Dolbee (Acting) Senior Planner MUCKLESHOOT INDIAN TRIBE Fisheries Division 39015 -172"d Avenue SE • Auburn, Washington 98092-9763 Phone: (253) 939-3311 • Fax: (253) 931-0752 April 30, 2010 Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Quendall Terminals, LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M, Determination of Significance, Scoping Notice Dear Ms. Dolbee: The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division has reviewed the Scoping Notice for the Quendall Terminals Determination of Significance. We offer the following comments in the interest of protecting and restoring the Tribe's treaty protected fisheries resources. The project proposes to develop 21.46 acres for residential, office, retail and restaurant uses at 4350 Lake Washington Boulevard, a property abutting Lake Washington. We have several comments that should be addressed in the forthcoming Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the project as follows: 1. The EIS project alternatives need to be compatible with the potential remediation options and ultimately align with the preferred remedy option. 2. The February 17 2000 Mitigation Analysis Memorandum showed a trail to be located within the outer edge of the 100 foot shoreline buffer. The EIS should discuss the potential for a trail. If a trail is to be constructed onsite, it should be located outside of all mitigation areas and sensitive shorelines and avoid adversely affecting lakeshore buffer restoration options. 3. The EIS should discuss the potential for overwater or lake access structures. It is our understanding that there will be no overwater or lake access structures. 4. The EIS should identify which wetlands will be modified due to remediation requirements and which wetlands will be modified as a result of the development proposal. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comments to the Scoping Notice for Ouendall Terminals April 30, 2010 Page2 5. The EIS should discuss in detail how stormwater routed onto the site and stormwater generated by the development proposal will be managed. Stormwater discharges cannot jeopardize the remediation work or cause adverse impacts to fisheries resources. 6. The EIS should discuss the proposed mitigation swale to be constructed as part of Wetland A and how this swale will avoid stranding fish and potential water quality conditions from this swale. We recommend that other alternatives that could be more beneficial for juvenile Chinook salmon should also be discussed, including but not limited to improving shoreline substrate along the project site, adding native inwater species such as bulrush (Scirpus sp.), and improving the mouths of nearby Gypsy and May Creeks. 7. The EIS should discuss the potential impacts to Wetlands I and J that may occur due to the widening of 1-405 as part of the Renton to Bellevue improvements. We appreciate the opportunity to review this scoping notice and look forward to reviewing an EIS that addresses these comments. Please let me know if you have any questions. You can reach me at 253-876- 3116 or via email. Sincerely, ~UJQ_. Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader 4005 Park Ave. North Renton, WA 98056 425-430-1498 11 March 2010 City of Renton Planning Department 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Attention: Vanessa Dolbee, Project Manager City of Renton Planning Division MAR l l ,ulO I'm writing in regard to the Quendall Terminals master plan proposal. My wife and l live in NW Kennydale, where we can sec the subject property from about y., mile away. I'm very interested in the Quendall Terminals property finally being cleaned up and developed, and looking forward to that happening. At the same time, I'm very concerned about whether, and how much, lakefront is allowed ( or required by the City) to provide public access. As I've watched the other major lakefront developments on either side of the Quendall property get developed over the last several years, it has been disappointing, to say the least, how little public access has been provided. The Seahawks facility has virtually no public access, and they don't even use most of their waterfront -just block it off from the public. The Barbee Mill development has a tiny little point on the south side of the May Creek entrance to Lake Washington that allows public access, and that's all! And that little May Creek point is the onlrpublic access to Lake Washington btllween the swimming beach at the base ofN. 36' Street (which is quite small, and only used for about 5 months out of the year} and Newcastle Beach Park, in south Bellevue, a distance ufapproximately 3.5 miles. All Ute rest of that waterfront area is private houses or apartments. When the City Council was deciding to purchase the Quendall property, back in 1999, to facilitate cleanup and development, there was a crucial Council meeting on May 17. During a special presentation at that meeting, on "Port Quendall Development", Susan Carlson, then the City's Administrator for Economic Development, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning, stated "-that the public benefits of cleaning up the property include retaining the shoreline for permanent public access and restoration and improvement of the fish and wildlife habitat." Based largely on this presentation, the Council (with King Parker and Randy Connan moving and seconding the motion) voted to extend the deadline and continue the purchase and sale process. Obviously much has transpired in the intervening 1 o+ years since that vote, and now the cleanup is progressing, and we have ar1 owner and developer who wants to build a large mixed use development on the property. I believe it's the City of Renton's duty to make sure any development on that property include full access and significant public amenities along the lakcfront, to serve the NW Renton neighborhoods and all the citizens of Renton. Now is the time, while most of the approvals and permitting are still in front of us, for the City to take a strong position on requirements for public lakefront access. Sincerely, ~~ John Hansen johsamm@comcast.net ps: I would like to become a pruiy of record on the Quendall Tcnninals property/project, to receive notices of all planned actions, decisions, changes, etc. •• DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM February 25, 2010 Vanessa Dolbee Sonja J. Fesser .j)f Quendall Terminals Binding Site Plan Format and Legal Description Review Bob Mac Onie and I have reviewed the above referenced preliminary binding site plan submittal and have the following comments: The dedication of land for street purposes on binding site plans requires approval by the City Council. Said dedication is achieved via a recorded City of Renton Dedication Deed document (form is provided by the city). If the dedication is to be recorded with the binding site plan, the dedication process needs to be timed in such a way that Council approval and all other matters pertaining to the dedication have been addressed and resolved, and said document is ready to record. The Deed of Dedication document includes both a legal description exhibit and a map exhibit. The legal description exhibit should be prepared, stamped, dated and signed by the applicant's surveyor. The surveyor should also prepare the map exhibit. The dedication process requires an updated title report, to be dated within the 45 days prior to Council action on said dedication. Talk to the Project Manager if there are questions or further information is needed. Information needed for final binding site plan approval includes the following: Note the City of Renton land use action number and land record number, LUA-OX-XXX- FBSP and LND-3S-0018, respectively, on all the drawing sheets. The type size used for the land record number should be smaller than that used for the land use action number. Please note that the land use action number for the final binding site plan will be different from the preliminary binding site plan and is unknown as of this date. Provide bearings for all interior boundary lines. Indicate what has been, or is to be, set at the corners of the proposed lots. h;\fik sys\lnd -land subdivision & surveying rccords\lnd-35 -binding site plans\0018\rv I 00225.<lm.: Addressee Name Page 2 of3 Date of Memo Note discrepancies between bearings and distances of record and those measured or calculated, if any. Note whether the adjoining properties are platted (give the plat name and lot numbers) or "UNPLAITED". Tax account numbers are not needed. Note i!l! easements, covenants and agreements of record on the final binding site plan submittal. The city will provide addresses for the proposed lots after approval of the preliminary binding site plan. The addresses will need to be noted on the drawing. Complete City of Renton Monument Cards, with reference points of all new right of way monuments set as part of the binding site plan. Remove the "OWNER", "APPLICANT", "LAND SURVEYOR" and "ENGINEER" blocks on the final submittal (Sheet 1 of 5). Note the bearings and distances for the northeasterly north line of LOT 2. There appears to be a gap in the dimensions given along the south line of the binding site plan (from the SE corner of the subject property easterly to the centerline of N. 42"d Place). Said gap is approximately 36.6' in length. Please review and revise as needed. Provide a "LEGEND" for the binding site plan drawing, detailing the symbols used therein. The required City of Renton signature needed on the final binding site plan submittal is the Administrator of the City of Renton Public Works Department. Note appropriate King County approval blocks. The "KING COUNTY FINANCE DIVISION CERTIFICATION" block should be removed from the submittal. All vested owners of the subject binding site plan, at the time of recording, need to sign the final submittal. The Land Use Permit Master Application, submitted to the city on November 18, 2009, lists the property owners as Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Co. First American Title Insurance Company Second Report, dated May 28, 2009, states that the property is vested in Quendall Terminals (a joint venture between Puget Timber, Inc. and Altino Properties, Inc.). The first submittal of the binding site plan notes the owner as Century Pacific, L.P. An updated title report will be needed when the binding site plan is ready for final approval -the city does not have a copy of the December 14, 2009 report used as a basis for the current binding site plan submittal). h:\file sys\lnd -land subdivision & surveying records\lnd-35 -binding site plans\0018\rvl00225.doc • ·. Addressee Name Page 3 of 3 Date of Memo Include an acknowledgment block for the owner's signature. Remove all references to the landscaping, all of the individual buildings, the building footprint, percentage of lot coverage, impervious surfaces and total pavement. Item No. 14 under "TITLE REPORT SCHEDULE B EXCEPTIONS" (Sheet 1 of 5) needs to be corrected -both uppercase and lowercase letters are used indiscriminately throughout said item. Remove Item Nos. 15, 18, 19 and 21 from said Schedule B Exceptions block (Sheet 1 of 5) Note that if there are restrictive covenants, easements or agreements to others (City of Renton, etc.) as part of this subdivision, they can be recorded concurrently with the plat. The plat drawing and the associated document(s) are to be given to the Project Manager as a package. The recording number(s) for the associated document(s} will be referenced on the plat in the appropriate locations. Clearly note who is to own and have maintenance interests in the access tracts (Tract D and Tract F) on the final submittal. Include a maintenance agreement statement if needed. Some of the text included in the "VICINITY MAP" do not conform to WAC 332-130-050 (B)(d)(iii}. It is assumed that only Sheets 1 and 2 of this submittal will be recorded as the binding site plan. Note bearings as radial or provide bearings to radius point. Does the common lot line between Lots 1 and 6 extend to the Inner Harbor line, or is the shore the boundary? If the latter, then label the waters as a track and provide a Table of Courses for said track. Fee Review Comments: The Fee Review Sheet for this review of the preliminary binding site plan is provided for your use and information. Wie .L ·i::,r "P,"tcl 1: bt < ... , Lr'...: :c::F-,-· , .. ,. i I'.:...-· lJ".::r~+<-. , h:\file sys\lnd -land subdivision & surveying records\lnd-35 -binding site plans\0018\rvl 00225.doc City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT EIS SCOPING COMMENT SHEET Please provided comments on the scope of the EIS for the following project. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, 3robable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be require . COMMENTING DEPARTMENT: 0 i~ '" -,1, I f')V( <- I J APPLICATION NO: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M APPLICANT: Campbell Mathewson PROJECT TITLE: Quendall Terminals SITE AREA: 21.46 acres {159,149 SF) LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N EIS SCOPING COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 12, 2010 DATE CIRCULATED: FEBRUARY 19, 2010 PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PLAN REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): None PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) 1,155,600 SF SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units (resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. 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. Proposed improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING COMMENTS: Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Eanh Housinn Air Aesthetics Water Uaht!Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Trans nation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Natural Resources Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000Feet 14,00DFeet B. POL/CY-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. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Vanessa Dolbee From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: To: Thursday, April 01, 201 O 08:44 AM 'Palisoc, Felixberto' Subject: RE: Quendall Terminals Felix, Thank you for getting back to me. We will notify you of the meeting date for further Quendall Terminals EIS Scoping; which is tentatively set for Tuesday, April 27th at Renton City Hall Council Conferencing Center (7th floor) from 6:00 pm to 7:30 pm. Thank you, Vanessa Dolbee (Acting) Senior Planner City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 (425)430-7314 From: Palisoc, Felixberto [mailto:PalisoF@wsdot.wa.gov] Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2010 02:39 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Roberts, Rick Subject: Quendall Terminals Vanessa, The person from our Region that you really need to talk to is our South King Traffic Person -Rick Roberts (cc'd). From looking at his schedule, he should be available most of the days from the 19th until the end of the month. You can also send me the invitation in case my Manager would like to attend. Felix 1 Working Gantt Chart for Quendall Terminals RI/FS April 27, 2010 Update ID; "i.fame -~-----Start _I Finish->2(!~0 eF--M ___ A _-M __ J,· J __ A" s -0 __ N" ___ o __ 20J}-·-__ '(M!• M "]:!,"·_,""1,f_.-"J"_' J __ . ___ A __ -____ s _____ o ______ N ... ' r , ••omltt,1 or'"" RI"' Rl•k AHmmo .. ,..rt """ """ Moo""" '"""""'1,1 P"" RI'"' R•k ,..,..,m,m R•port , m R,... olD"ft R1 ,., '" ""'"~"' Roport "'" ""'° "" srao,,o _ 1"A r•• o!Dra, R1 a,d R•"'""mooORoport Draft Final RI and Risk AsH11m111nt Report Sun Sr:30/10 Thu 7129/10 Draft Final RI and RlskA11essm11nl Report ~-Prei.m1na~-TecMlcal l~b1Dfy ~a-~s~-T~ch-M~~ M~n-~'.1.'.10... . .FM 41~~/10' c=Jf ]~.~llllmmllnanaryry T TeecctmJcal lmpraclicablllty Analy1l1 Tach Memo · ·5 EPA r ~view of Tech Memo Oncl. worl<group mee1ings) F~ 4116110 Tue 6115110, t1==:=J-ElfA Review of Tech Memo (incl. WOfkgroup mnllflglJ -,-Technology Screening and Alisessl!'bly or Remedial A118mat1Yl's Tue SJ.4J10 Mon6J26/10i : I h Tachnology Screening and Aneumbly of Reme~al Abemall>ns p,." Feaslblllty Siudytri Walwir Rlj,ort Man 6/28110 · TUti 'foizaiii;i': EPA Reviaw of Oran FaaslblMy Study/TI WalYer Repor1 Tue 101:26/10 Ssl 12125/10; &"": ··,r··; 1 .. 1.,-, " Proj!lcl: Quendall S0WT!l1e Line -M, I D11111: Tue 412..7/iO Final Fanlblllty Study/Tl WaiYllr Report &al 12/25/10 Wed 2123111 : Pl'Oi:iii58ii'Plaii-6Mlaiirrieiil Wed 2123111 tu85124111 1 Public Review al RIIFS end Proposi,d Plan Tu11 Sf.2~111 Sat 7123111 ' Task Split RecClrd Qi 08cision Sat 7f.23/11 Suri ·i"t/2itii'1 I Progress Milestone • Draft Feasibility Btlfdy:1 Waiver R~porl I l-·-·"-----~ EPA R!•viaw of Draft Fn.slblllty Studym Waiver Report; ] j Summary • Projed Summary 119' Page 1 • • Final ffllslblllty Studym WalYllr Report I 1 Exlamal Ta,b Exlemal Milestone + Proposed Plan Development r] '"'"' ... -"RVFO ·"' "''''" '"" i":===:::tl Record of Decislan I Oeadlrle 9 ililill Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: Paul R Siegmund [paulrsiegmund@gmail.com] Tuesday, May 25, 2010 09:44 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Fwd: Update 2: Quendall Terminal project proposal Attachments: Aerial-Q-GoogleEarth_lmage.jpg; East-Q-GoogleEarth_lmage.jpg; North-Q- GoogleEarth_lmage.jpg; South-Q-GoogleEarth_lmage.jpg; West-Q-GoogleEarth_lmage.jpg Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi, Vanessa. Thank you again for your help and for additional info last week. I updated the graphics and my Google model based on what I learned since. Here are the graphics I created from Google Earth. I can send you the raw model from home, if you are a GE user. Let me know. If you aren't, it is just a big useless .Jani file. But if you are, it is a useful tool and even has some feeds into other GIS tools. Best, Paul ----------Forwarded message ---------- From: Paul R Siegmund <paulrsiegmund@gmail.com> Date: Mon, May 24, 2010 at 10:34 PM Subject: Update 2: Quendall Terminal project proposal To: Paul R Siegmund <paulrsiegmund@gmail.com> Hi again Barbee Mill neighbors. Here's a quick, mostly visual, update from my last note about the proposed project next door at Quendall Terminal. Just to reiterate, not to worry this is in the very early proposal stages and we are far from anything being approved by the city or being built. The city of Renton (Vanessa Dolbee, City Planner) shared some more information after I sent you the last note with photos. Thanks to Vanessa I received additional information that has given me the ability to send you these refinements of the simulated photos. I had missed, actually forgot to look at, some details of the proposed garages. They are not just confined to the footprints of the buildings as I drew them, but are much larger. Vanessa also clarified some details for me. And I added a little detail after reading other neighbors' comments and questions. New information & pictures: • I've attached 5 new Google Earth photos showing what we know at this time. The views are from the south & west (as before but with new detail) and now also from the north & east, plus a bonus from the south that is a bit higher in elevation. • There are 4 garages, each of two stories, each covering a city block. Three garages have multiple buildings growing up from them, while one garage has just one building. • I drew in the garages and refined the shapes of the buildings. The buildings' overall heights are unchanged from version 1, ranging from 75 to 80 feet above grade. • The Seahawks big green box is a bit taller than I guessed, which alters the proportions a bit. Thanks to Vanessa, it is now correctly shown at 115 feet tall. 1 • I added more Barbee Mill houses. I think I have caught all the homes that are built or are in work. • I added the roadways within the project. • I didn't show the retail facades or the landscaping atop the garages. I'm striving to show you outlines & proportions. What you see is accurate, but is stretching the limits of Google's drawing tools. It can only make representative one-color flat-tops. I can't draw an uneven or angled roof. Cheers, Paul Paul R Siegmund 2 Vanessa Dolbee From: Jim Seitz Sent: To: Cc: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 12:39 PM 'Michael Read'; Bob Mahn; Neil R. Watts Vanessa Dolbee Subject: RE: [Fwd: Quendall Terminals EIS -Transportation Scoping Analysis Follow Up] Michael, Your study area and trip distribution look fine to me. No hurry at this time, but when do you think you will be able to return our EMME2 key? Jim Jim Seitz Transportation Planning & Programming Supervisor Renton City Hall -5th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 (425) 430-7245 Note Address Change: jseitz@rentonwa.gov From: Michael Read [mailto:mikeread@tenw.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 12:33 PM To: Jim Seitz; Bob Mahn; Neil R. Watts Cc: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: [Fwd: Quendall Terminals EIS -Transportation Scoping Analysis Follow Up] You guys all changed your e-mail addresses:-) Here is a copy of a noted I just sent. Thanks ! --------Original Message-------- Subject:Quendall Terminals EIS -Transportation Scoping Analysis Follow Up Date:Wed, 02 Jun 2010 12:30:25 -0700 From:Michael Read <mikeread@tenw.com> Organization:Transportation Engineering Northwest To:Vanessa Dolbee <VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov>, Jim Seitz <JSeitz@ci.renton.wa.us> CC:Bob Mahn (City of Renton) <bmahn@ci.renton.wa.us>. 'Neil Watts' <Nwatts@ci.renton.wa.us>. Gretchen Brunner (Blum en Consulting Group) <gretchenb@blumencg.com> References:<762BE6CB56CC064D986ECF24F5112507291376@SERVER.blumencg.loca1> <722781AEAACOOF4D944A34D05E709C01AEBCF95947@REXCH-Ol.Renton.local> Jim/Vanessa: I need to have the following reviewed and approved by the City so we can confirm the study intersections. The following trip distributions assumptions were derived by TENW using the City's 2008 EMME model developed by Rishi Rao: 1 2008 -30% Lake Washington Blvd to/from the south and 70% to/from 1-405 and areas east of 1-405. 2015 without RTID (without 1-405 improvements) -35% Lake Washington Blvd to/from the south and 65% to/from 1-405 and areas east of 1-405. 2015 with RTID (with 1-405 improvements) -15% Lake Washington Blvd to/from the south and 85% to/from 1-405 and areas east of 1-405. As shown above, with RTID improvements that include both interchange and widening along the 1-405 corridor, result in significant differences in future use of Lake Washington Boulevard by the site area. We would propose to utilize different trip distribution assumptions depending on the scenario of with and without 1-405 improvements. The previously applied trip distribution assumptions (15% to/from the south via Lake Washington Boulevard) are consistent only with RTID improvements being in place. Without these improvements, an additional 20% of project traffic would utilize the Lake Washington Boulevard corridor. As such, without RTID/1-405 Improvements, we would recommend the following intersections be added to the traffic analysis: Lake Washington Boulevard at Burnett Avenue N 30th Street at Burnett Avenue Lake Washington Boulevard/Garden at Park Avenue With RTID/1-405 Improvements, we recommend to add the Lake Washington Boulevard/Garden at Park Avenue intersection only. Please confirm use of these trip distribution results and study intersections south of the Project Site area. If you need further information regarding the source of this data, please let me know and we can circulate assignments generated by the City's EMME model. Thanks! Vanessa Dolbee wrote: Gretchen, Thank you for the estimate, the City will be getting back to you about the next steps in the process if we choose to move forward with the additional study. The City has no problem with Mike contacting our transportation staff directly; but please cc me on all e-mail communication. Thank you, Vanessa Dolbee x7314 From: Gretchen Brunner [mailto:gretchenb@blumencg.coml Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 10:07 AM 2 To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Mike Blumen Subject: FW: Quendall Terminals EIS Hi Vanessa- Mike Read has responded to your request for him to estimate the costs to separately analyze the additional alternative generated by the City (see below). Please let us know if you would like him to proceed with either of the analysis approaches that he describes, and if so, how you would like to arrange contracting. Also, Mike has asked if it's OK for him to communicate directly with City of Renton staff that are knowledgeable about transportation issues regarding the EIS analysis (cc'ing you and me). I assume that this would be fine, right? Thanks. -Gretchen From: Michael Read [mailto:mikeread@tenw.com1 Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 9:00 AM To: Gretchen Brunner Cc: Mike Blumen Subject: Re: Quendall Terminals EIS Gretchen: The trip generation potential of this alternative exceeds the preferred alternative by the applicant by at least 30 percent on a net basis and over 70 percent in gross (i.e., when considering pass-by trips associated with a retail shopping center of this size). As such, this scenario would definitely trigger a new EIS scenario and could also result in new mitigation being needed at site access or intersections in the immediate vicinity beyond those needed for the preferred alternative by the applicant. Given this, I would recommend we prepare a separate memorandum that would address this alternative only for City consideration, unless they just want to know the trip generation of the alternative and potential implications to traffic. Memo evaluating the alternative using EIS methods, but just not in the EIS -$4,500. Memo with trip gen and potential traffic implications -$2,000. Call with any questions. Thanks ! Also, we got the preliminary modeling done over the weekend, and I need to start communicating with Traffic folks at Renton. Can I do that directly with cc: to you/Vanessa or do I need to do that through Blumen? Gretchen Brunner wrote: Hi Mike- I just got a call from Vanessa Dolbee at City of Renton. She would like you to provide an estimate of what it would take to add an additional alternative to the EIS transportation analysis. Please don't share this information with anyone else at this point, because the City is considering funding this additional analysis themselves. The alternative would include the following: 250,000 sq. ft. of retail 705 residential units (MF) 3 Thanks, and give me a call if you have any questions. -Gretchen Gretchen Brunner I Senior Associate Blumen Consulting Group, Inc. 720 Sixth Street South, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98033 Voice: 425.284.5401 Fax: 425.284.5402 Email: gretchenb@blumencq.com www.blumencg.com Michael Read, PE Principal Transportation Engineering Northwest POBox65254 Seattle, WA 98155 Office -206.361.7333 ext. 101 Mobile -206.999.4145 Fax -206.361.7333 Michael Read, PE Principal Transportation Engineering Northwest POBox65254 Seattle, WA 98155 Office -206.361.7333 ext. 101 Mobile -206.999.4145 Fax -206.361.7333 Michael Read, PE Principal Transportation Engineering Northwest POBox65254 Seattle, WA 98155 Office -206.361.7333 ext. JOI Mobile -206.999.4145 Fax-206.361.7333 4 Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Jim/Vanessa: Michael Read [mikeread@tenw.com] Wednesday, June 02, 201 o 12:30 PM Vanessa Dolbee; Jim Seitz Bob Mahn; Neil R. Watts; Gretchen Brunner {Blumen Consulting Group) Quendall Terminals EIS -Transportation Scoping Analysis Follow Up I need to have the following reviewed and approved by the City so we can confirm the study intersections. The following trip distributions assumptions were derived by TENW using the City's 2008 EMME model developed by Rishi Rao: 2008 -30% Lake Washington Blvd to/from the south and 70% to/from 1-405 and areas east of 1-405. 2015 without RTID (without 1-405 improvements) -35% Lake Washington Blvd to/from the south and 65% to/from 1-405 and areas east of 1-405. 2015 with RTID (with 1-405 improvements) -15% Lake Washington Blvd to/from the south and 85% to/from 1-405 and areas east of 1-405. As shown above, with RTID improvements that include both interchange and widening along the 1-405 corridor, result in significant differences in future use of Lake Washington Boulevard by the site area. We would propose to utilize different trip distribution assumptions depending on the scenario of with and without 1-405 improvements. The previously applied trip distribution assumptions (15% to/from the south via Lake Washington Boulevard) are consistent only with RTID improvements being in place. Without these improvements, an additional 20% of project traffic would utilize the Lake Washington Boulevard corridor. As such, without RTID/1-405 Improvements, we would recommend the following intersections be added to the traffic analysis: Lake Washington Boulevard at Burnett Avenue N 30th Street at Burnett Avenue Lake Washington Boulevard/Garden at Park Avenue With RTID/1-405 Improvements, we recommend to add the Lake Washington Boulevard/Garden at Park Avenue intersection only. Please confirm use of these trip distribution results and study intersections south of the Project Site area. If you need further information regarding the source of this data, please let me know and we can circulate assignments generated by the City's EMME model. Thanks! Vanessa Dolbee wrote: Gretchen, 1 • Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: Mathewson, Campbell [cmathewson@CenturyPacificLP.com] Wednesday, May 19, 2010 04:44 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Tom Jones; T Flynn; Clay Patmon! Subject: Quendall Terminals Drainage & Water Quality Parameters Attachments: TIR-Figure 1B -Storm Drainage Map.pdf; sf816-0S-dtl5-Model.PDF Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Vanessa. Following up on one loose end from our discussions, our detention and water quality parameters for Quendall Terminals are summarized by KPFF below: The Quendall Terminals main site is approx. 20.3 acres with 1583 feet of shoreline alon Lake Washington. Detention (Flow Control): Quendall Terminals is exempt from flow control via the "direct discharge exemption" as defined in Sec 1.2.3.1 of the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM). Water Quality: Runnoff from pollution generating surfaces will collected and conveyed to water quality treatment facilities for treatment prior to discharge to Lake Washington. A water quality design flow of 60% of the 2-year peak flow rate will be used in accordance with the 2009 KCSWDM. Flows greater than the water quality design flow rate will bypass the water quality facilities and discharge directly to Lake Washington. The water quality BMP proposed is a Stormwater Filter within a concrete vault or manhole with a presettling vault, see attached example. Conveyance of Stormwater: The proposed conveyance system is anticipated to be a closed piped system due to the sensitive nature of the Quendall soils. Conveyance piping will outfall at the Lake Washington shoreline offshore of existing and created/restored wetlands. See attached drainage map showing piped systems and outfall points to Lake Washington. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks. Sincerely, Campbell Mathewson CenturyPacific, LP 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 1680 Seattle, WA 98101 + 1 206 7 57 8893 work +1 206 91 O 2448 mobile +1 206 757 7890 facsimile cmathewson@centurypacificlp.com http://www.centurypacificlp.com 1 s;: z 0 C: ("> "' o!" ii; "' i ~. ~!al ~!i i ~~ I! 0 ... "' lC lC ;~ ,. 0"' ~"1 Ji z"' ,. .,, S! :.1 !iii ,. z.,, i 0~ "'lC ~=a z~ "' i:: ~ z ...., G'5 ~ a a, / ' ' , ' ' §;! ig ,•' • s ~ • • I ~ • CONTECH ~~-STORMFILTER DESIGN TABLE ~--.._ .fil.Q.r:rnfilter• • THE 8' I! 16' STORM=ll TER TREATMENT CAPACrrY VARIES BY NUMBER OF FLTER CARTRIDGES INSTAl..L.EDAND BY REGION SPECIFIC INTERNAL FlOW CONTROLS. CONVEYf.NCE CAPACITY IS RATED AT1.8 CFS. • THE STANDARD CONFIGURATION IS SHOWN. ACTUAL CONFIGURATION OF THE SPECIFEO STRUCTURE{SJ PER CML ENGINEER WILL BE SHOWN ON SUBMITIAL DRAWING{S~ • ALL PARTS PROVIDED AND INTERNAL ASSEMBLY BY COmECH STORMWATER SOLUTIONS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. CARTRIDGE HEIGHT 27" t8" 1T SYSTEMHYDRAULICDROP -REQ'D.MIN. 3.05' 2.3' 1.B' TREATMENT BY MEDIA URFACEAREA 2 1 rnllt" 2 J 1 gpm CARTRIDGE FLOW RATE 22.5 11.25 A L !"£;'. IM..ETPIPE (SEENOTE1) AL TERNA TE PIPE LOCATION (TYP OF 4) (SEENOTE1) FRAME AND COVER (TYPOF2) (SEE NOTE 0) STEP INSPECTION ANO MAINTENANCE ACCESS (SEE FRAME AND COVER DETAIL) ,. ----------! FILTRATION BAY PLAN (ACCESS FRAME ANO~ OMITIED FOR CLARITY) SECTION A-A GRADE RING {TYP OF2) •• A ~J OL!TLET PIPE (SEE NOTE1) OVERFLOW GENERAL NOTES 1. INLET ANO OUTLET PIPING SHALL BE SPECIFIED BY SITE CIVIL ENGINEER (SEE PLANS) AND PROVIDED BY CONTRACTOR. STORM FILTER IS PROVIDED WITH OPENINGS AT INLET AND OUTlET LOCATIONS. 2. IF Tl-tE PEAK FLOW RATE, AS DETERMINED BY THE SITE CIVIL ENGINEER, EXCEEDS THE PEAK HYDRAULIC CAPACITY OF THE PRODUCT, AN UPSTREAM BYPASS STRUCTURE IS REQUIRED. PL.EASE CONTACT CONTECH STORM"IVATER SOLUTIONS FOR OPTIONS. 3. THE FILTER CARTRIDGE(SJ ARE SIPHON-ACTUATED AND SELF-CLEANING. THE STANDARD DETAIL DRAWING SHOWS THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF CARTRIDGES. THE ACTUAL NUMBER SHALL BE SPECIFIED BY THE SITE CIVIL ENGINEER ON SITE PLANS OR IN DATA TABLE BELOW. PRECAST STRUCTURE TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASTM C657 AND casa. -4. SEE STORMFIL TER DESIGN TABLE FOR REQUIRED HYDRAULIC DROP. FOR SHAU.OW, LOW DROP OR SPECIAL DESIGN CONSTRAINTS, CONTACT CONTECH STORMWATER SOLUTIONS FDR DESIGN OPTIONS. ti. AU. WATER QUALITY PRODUCTS REQUIRE PERIODIC MAINTENANCE AS OUTLINED IN THE D&M GUIDELINES. PROVIDE MINIMUM CLEARANCE FOR MAINTENANCE ACCESS. 6. STRUCTURE AND ACCESS COVERS TO MEET AASHTO H-20 lDAO RATING. 7. THE STRUCTURE THICKNESSES SHOWN ARE FOR REPRESENTATIONAL PURPOSES AND VARY REGIONAI..L Y. 8. ~y BACKFILL DEPTH, SUB-SASE. AND OR ANTI-FLOTATION PROVISIONS ARE SITE-SPECIFIC DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS AND SHALL BE SPECIFIED BY SITE CML ENGINEER. Ii. STANDARD CARTRIDGE HEIGHT IS 2r (SHOWN). CARTRIDGE HEIGi-IT mD ASSOCIATED DESIGN PARAMETERS PER STORM FILTER DESIGN TABLE. 10. STORMFILTER BY CONTECH STORMWATER SOLUTIONS: (BOO) 825-5240. C~~CH· SIORMWAmt ~. -- SITE SPECIFIC DATA REQUIREMENTS STRUCTURE ID WATER QUALITY FLOW RATE rcrs· PEAK FLOW RATE (c:13' RETURN PERIOD OF PEAK FLOW # OF CARTRIDGES REQUIRED CARTRIDGE FLOW RATE M!=DIA TYPE (CSF, PERLITE ZPG PIPE DATA: LE. MATERiAL I DIAMETER INLETPIPE#1 INLETPIPE1'2 OUTLETPJPE UPSTREAM RIM ELEVATION CENTER RIM ELEVATION RIMEi ANTI-FLOTATION BAll.AsT I WIDTH I Hl:iGRf I NOTES/SPECIAL REQUIREMENTS: • PER SITE CIVIL ENGINEER __['" " "t FRAME AND COVER (DIAMETER VARIES. SEE SUBMITIAL DRAWINGS} THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT STORMFILTER ® 8' x 16' STORMFILTER STANDARD DETAIL '"'. Thi• dl3Wlng an<llor e4eclronk> ftl• llh•II nat IHI rna<lflad wHt,o,;t 1he approval of CONTECH Slennwalar Sclullcna. Thie proch,cl may be pn,l'llcilld by one <>e mon, i crl"tha following US P'lll'llnlll: 11,322,=; !5,1124,!576; 11,707,627; 11,11615, 1157; 6,027,639; 6,6411,048; n!llat11d fon!l!gn p,,t,,nle, or other patuflUI pandlr,g. Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Follow Up Flag: Flag Status: Vanessa- Gretchen Brunner [gretchenb@blumencg.com] Friday, June 04, 201 O 09:30 AM Vanessa Dolbee FW: Quendall Terminals EIS Information Needs Memo QT Info Needs -AO and Aspect Responses_June 2, 2010.doc; 020027-03.zip Follow up Flagged Here are the responses to our Info Needs Memo that we received from Anchor and Aspect this week. -Gretchen From: Clay Patmont [mailto:cpatmont@anchorqea.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 02, 2010 7:54 AM To: Gretchen Brunner Cc: Tim Flynn; Mathewson, Campbell; Ryan Durkan; Lynn Manolopoulos; James Hanken Subject: RE: Quendall Terminals EIS Information Needs Memo Gretchen - Attached are the Anchor QEA and Aspect responses to your requests for further information regarding the Quendall Terminals EIS. Because of file size, the updated Shoreline Restoration Conceptual Design (Figure 8 from our earlier report), along with the associated CADD file, will be send separately. Please let Tim or I know if you have any questions. Thanks - Clay Clay Patmon! ANCHOR QEA, LlC www.anchorgea.com Please consider the environment before printing this email. .,..h ,; '.' (ctrG:f1.: ;:,,~:,sagi·' tnrn,;,1 n:s;\\C'l <:cn:airs inbrrn,.1tlon th.;: Tciy be crn:i:d, '1ti,:,l ;rid/c pi"v':q;:-d W(Jr'< r:ircch,:::: nrr:pa:<(:( i·1 ,:in:, , n1 :,-;,·,. iTe ··,l'f,:wrati:)r, is i->'.21'.d,::u lu, Cik J'.iE! d tf,c iridivid\L~I e:·0:r~.t'y" f'<l'n-::: -.0 b; 'ff::, ll yuu :~1e r>:>t :··1(~ inre;,dci I' ;s:!pE)··i:. ::.< )Sf L,:: -.'v;J th;:,•·::;:":: rk,z:bs•.,rt.':;, copymg d;:;.J:r,bcitior: '.)f' d'.,e of the rnr'1<:)n'.:, ;/ this. i,1•cr,rr:i'.;ur: 1s n {>hibit(~d. !i' yol· h1ve n~•.:eiveu '.;1L l::t--;;t;;:: < .• M,:,m1:ssr:::·, · 1 rnc, ;:,it:J·A\' :scrt:fy u:: '.;y reL;:J·,or.2 c,; \2.06) 2.S/-9130 From: Gretchen Brunner [mailto:gretchenb@blumencg.com] Sent: Tuesday, May 25, 2010 2:23 PM To: Tim Flynn Subject: Quendall Terminals EIS Information Needs Memo Tim- Attached is the Memo that I sent to Campbell last Wednesday with a list of the information that we will need for the EIS; I had asked him to coordinate with you about this. Item 1 in the table describes assumptions regarding cleanup/remediation of the site that we will need confirmed/provided by Aspect and Anchor. Items 2 and 4 are maps 1 that you may already have developed for the 2009 application package. Ideally, we would like to receive this information by this Friday, May 281h. Other information that we will need from you is labeled with your name and relates to the proposed redevelopment. Give me a call if you have any questions. Regards, -Gretchen Gretchen Brunner I Senior Associate Blumen Consulting Group, Inc:. 720 Sixth Street South, Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98033 Voice: 425.284.5401 Fax: 425.284.5402 Email: qretchenb@blumencg.com www.blumencg.com 2 '•""BLUMEN ·~CONSULTING 5'.GROUP, INC MEMORANDUM To: Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific 720 Sixth Street S Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98033 Ph: 425-284-5401 Fax: 425-284-5402 From: Gretchen Brunner and Kristy Hollinger, Blumen Consulting Group (BCG) CC: Vanessa Dolbee and Chip Vincent, City of Renton Date: May 19, 2010 Subject: Quendall Terminals Preliminary Draft EIS Information Needs The purpose of this Memo is to provide a list of information needs for the Quendall Terminals Draft EIS and related technical reports. The following is a list of the information that we will need for the Draft EIS and tentative dates for receipt of information. This list includes the technical analysis needs of TENW, Raedeke, AESI and Primedia. The three columns included in the following matrix indicate: 1) the information needs; 2) the team member(s) assumed to be responsible for providing the requested information; and, 3) a date the information is needed to comply with the targeted EIS schedule. When more than one name is provided in the source column, the first name listed has the primary responsibility for coordinating provision of the information. We will periodically update the status of items in the status column, if warranted. We realize that a considerable base of information and analysis has been prepared to date on the site and proposed project for the remediation and master planning efforts. This information includes technical reports (geotechnical, wetlands and transportation) and architectural plans/elevations provided with the application submitted to the City in November 2009. We have reviewed this information and assume that it satisfies a number of specific items requested in this Memo (as noted in the third column). If this is not the case (i.e., if changes have been made to the proposal) then we will need new information. There are several critical dates that are identified in this Memo that will drive the schedule for completion of the Preliminary Draft EIS (PDEIS). In particular, the dates associated with preparation of the draft technical reports are keyed to receiving: • Access to the City's transportation model, and associated items by May 26th. 1 • Remaining assumptions regarding the cleanup/remediation of the site from Anchor and Aspect by May 281". • Information on redevelopment under the proposal and alternative (one redevelopment alternative is assumed) from Century Pacific and Aspect by June 11'". With this information, the technical reports in support of the EIS will be prepared as follows: • Draft technical reports on the natural environment will be submitted to BCG by July ff'. • The draft transportation report will be submitted to BCG by July 9'". • Final technical reports on the natural environment will be submitted to BCG by July 2rf-h. • The final transportation report will be submitted to BCG by July 23'd. Assuming all of these dates are met, the PDEIS could be submitted to the City of Renton and the applicant by August 11'" (see the detailed Quendall Terminals schedule for more information). Please call if you have any questions or would like to discuss these information needs further. INFORMATION NEEDS Existing (Baseline) Conditions 1. Please describe the cleanup/remediation assumptions that will be used to characterize the existing (baseline) site conditions for the EIS prior to redevelopment. Specifically: • Describe the cap characteristics (extent and depth of the upland and shoreline caps) Upland cap -2-foot-thick sand cap over entire site Sediment cap -2 to 3-foot-thick cap comprised of organoclay, sand, gravel and topsoil extending across most of the site shoreline area • Specify where isolated soil removal would occur, if any. Shoreline soil would be removed to accommodate the shoreline cap and maintain the existing shoreline location; localized soil removal and backfill maybe performed in the former railroad loading area and in utility corridors ( see #22 below). • Explain the characteristics and purpose of the shoreline wall, if one will be provided. If a shoreline wall is determined to be needed, it would likely consist of a permeable shoreline groundwater treatment wall, and would be located adjacent to the lake, spanning the entire shoreline. It would be comprised of a vertical trench backfilled with permeable media to provide treatment of contaminated groundwater and additional source control to Lake Washington. It would have characteristics similar to the permeable shoreline groundwater treatment wall recently installed at the adiacent Conner Homes site. The oermeable SOURCE Aspect, Anchor DATE NEEDED May 28'" Rcv'd Nov. 2009 geotechnical and wetland assess- ments; need confirmation of basic cleanup/re- mediation assumptions 2 INFORMATION NEEDS SOURCE DATE NEEDED wall would not provide structural support. • Indicate the assumed minimum, maximum and average width of the shoreline buffer, its location and extent across the site. The shoreline buffer will extend along the entire shoreline of the property. Th~uffer will range from 41 to 215 feet wide, _...l,J d f ,16 S and Will average(9~'"''"-· c~d -tD 1!3+-/ 1'/'\ ')).>'--,._, C ' , • Describe the on-sl'te wetlands that will be retained or created following site remediation (including their assumed size, classification, required buffer and source of hydrology) All existing wetlands on the property will likely be affected by site remediation (Wetlands A through H). Following remediation, wetlands will be created in the current location of Wetlands A and D, along with creation of expanded wetland area along Lake Washington to mitigate for wetland impacts throughout the site. Existing Wetlands A and D will be expanded, and a third wetland will be added just north of Wetland A to provide the required mitigation (see updated Figure 8 -Shoreline Restoration Conceptual Design). Following restoration/creation of wetlands impacted by remediation, Wetland A will be approximately 9,000 square feet ( sqrt), the newly created wetland north of Wetland A will be approximately 5,600 sqrt, and Wetland D will be approximately 13,500 sqrt Wetlands restored/created along Lake Washington following remediation will all be classified as Category II wetlands per the Renton Municipal Code, similar to existing wetland characteristics. These wetlands will not be classified as Category I wetlands because they: 1) will not have listed species or habitat; 2) will not have 40 to 60 percent permanent open water; 3) will be less than 10 acres in size; and 4) will not have plant associations of infrequent occurrence. The wetland function of each of the wetlands restored/created along Lake Washington will be driven by the hydrology of Lake Washington. The Category II wetlands stored/created following remediation will have a required buffer width of 50 feet measured as a buffer-width average, as generally depicted on the attached Figure 8 (updated June 2, 2010). Wetlands I and J will not be impacted by remediation and will be retained. Wetland I is approximately 2,400 sqrt and Wetland J is approximately 990 sqrt (plus additional wetland area off-site). Additional wetland area will be created adjacent to Wetland J and will add approximately 16,000 sqrt in area. Wetlands I and J are both Category Ill wetlands and therefore will require 25 foot buffers. Groundwater is the 3 INFORMATION NEEDS primary source of hydrology of Wetlands I and J. • Describe other riparian habitat that would be created in the shoreline area. Following site remediation, existing riparian habitat will be replaced to provide functions currently being provided by the riparian area. • Describe the site cleanup/remediation assumptions for the No Action Alternative. That is, if redevelopment of the site did not occur, describe cleanup assumptions, cap characteristics, etc. Also, describe stormwater control features following remediation. Please describe these assumptions to the same level of detail as requested above. Site cleanup/remediation assumptions for the No Action Alternative were summarized in the May 4th memo submitted under separate cover. Also refer to Interim Stormwater Management Closure Report dated July 6, 2009. 2. Provide a to-scale base map for the entire site following remediation (baseline) that identifies: • Site boundaries. • Topography and relevant natural features. • Shoreline wall, if provided. • Retained/created wetlands and their buffers. • Any other relevant site features. The base map should represent the site following cleanup/remediation and account for the entire Quendall Terminals site and surrounding area within approximately 0.10 mile. The map should be provided in CADD format to the BCG technical team. It should be able to be printed at 8'h x 11 inches. BCG should be sent a version in PDF or JPG format. GADD file of current site features is attached. See #1 above (e.g., a 2-foot-thick cap would be placed over the entire site uplands under the No Action Alternative). Note that the permeable shoreline groundwater treatment waif would be located on uplands within approximately 25 to 50 feet of the shoreline, and would extend across the entire site shoreline. 3. Provide an aerial photo of the site with the entire site boundary indicated (please don't provide any additional information on this photo). The aerial photo should account for the entire site area, as well as the surrounding area within approximately 0.25 mile. The photo should be in JPG format and be sized for printing at 8'h x 11 inches. 4. Provide a map and descriotion of existina infrastructure at the SOURCE Aspect, Anchor Century Pacific Aspect DATE NEEDED May 28'" May21:f' Mav 28'" 4 INFORMATION NEEDS SOURCE DATE NEEDED remediated site (including roads and utilities --water, sewer and stormwater). Included as part of base map (see #2 above) Permits 5. Provide a list of pending permits/approvals that would affect Aspect, May 28'" the site area, if any (i.e., related to cleanup/remediation efforts). Anchor Response actions performed under CERCLA must either comply with the substantive elements of applicable or relevant and appropriate environmental reviews and permitting requirements and/or justify a waiver from such requirements. Although a response action performed under formal CERCLA authorities would be exempt from the procedural requirements of federal, state and local environmental laws, the action must nevertheless comolv with the substantive reauirements of such laws. 6. Provide a list of all City of Renton permits and approvals that Ryan May 28'" would be required as part of the Proposed Actions. Durkan, Aspect 7. Provide a list of Federal and/or State permits and approvals Ryan May 28'" that could be ultimately required as part of the Proposed Actions, Durkan, if any. Aspect Proposed Action and Alternatives 8. Provide a list of the "Proponent's Objectives" for the Proposed Century Rcv'd Action. This list is required by SEPA and should include the Pacific 5.10.10 primary project goals. At this point it is assumed that the EIS will evaluate three (3) City of May 28'" alternatives: the Proposed Action; a Lower Density Alternative; and, a Renton (confirm EIS No Action Alternative. The Proposed Action and Lower Density alternatives) Alternative will likely consider a similar primary infrastructure system (i.e. roads and utilities), with a different mix of uses, densities, heights etc. It is assumed that the preliminary alternatives are as follows: • Proposed Action -Six 7-story mixed use buildings, 800 residential units, 245,000 sq.ft. of office, 21,600 sq.ft. of retail, 9,000 sq.ft. of restaurant, and 2,171 structure parking spaces. • Alternative 1, Lower Densit't. Alternative -800 residential units, no office, 21,600 sq.ft. of retail, and approximately 1,585 structured parking spaces. • No Action Alternative -No redevelopment at this time. The EIS Alternatives will need to be confirmed by City of Renton staff. 5 INFORMATION NEEDS The No Action Alternative will assume that that no infrastructure (roadways, water, sewer, stormwater systems etc.) would be built, and that no Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan or Shoreline Substantial Development Approval would be required. The following information is required for the Proposed Action, Alternative 1 and the No Action Alternative (as applicable): 9. Provide a general description of the infrastructure assumed for the EIS Alternatives, as well as general assumptions regarding phasing of infrastructure, if applicable (i.e., will certain new roadways be developed at the outset, with other infrastructure provided concurrent with ongoing redevelopment) and identification of areas of the site that could be developed in later phases, as applicable. The information should address each type of infrastructure (including roads, water, sewer and stormwater). 10. Provide graphics depicting redevelopment plans for the site under both the proposal and redevelopment alternative. The plans should show the following at full buildout: • Primary roadway network and circulation/access points; • Location of proposed buildings; • Parking -structured and surface; • Locations of open space/recreational areas/public access points (including along the shoreline)/any other community amenities; • Retained/created wetlands and their buffers; and, • Other relevant redevelopment features. 11. Provide a table for each alternative that identifies the assumed post-development acreages of the following: Built Area {Impervious Area) • Building footprint area (assumed new structures); • Paved rights-of-way, roads, pedestrian/bicycle paths; • Surface parking areas; and, • Plazas. Pervious Area • Designated natural/open space areas; • Unpaved trails, if any; and, • Landscaped areas. SOURCE Century Pacific Century Pacific Century Pacific DATE NEEDED Recv'dfor Proposed Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg.; provide info. on phasing, as applicable. Recv'd for Proposed Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg.; need to show shoreline access for Proposed Action; need plans for Alternative 1 June 11'" 6 INFORMATION NEEDS The sum of all acreages shown in this table should equal the gross site area. 12. Provide text and/or table(s) describing the following features for the Proposed Action and Alternative 1. • Description of overall building development concepts and intensity. • Assumed building square footages by use (i.e., residential, retail, office, parking etc.). • Assumed maximum building heights for each building. • Description of building setbacks from shoreline. • Assumed number of housing units, type of units (i.e., townhouse, mid-rise, etc.) and residential density. • Description of open space concept (including passive vs. active, public vs. private, connection of open spaces, recreational amenities, etc.). • Description of circulation (both motorized and non- motorized) as well as any transit features/connections. • Number of parking spaces* and type of facility (surface or structured; confirm that no underground parking is proposed). *Indicate parking ratios for all proposed uses, and provide a description of any assumptions regarding shared parking or other assumed arrangements that vary from the assumed parking ratios or were used in determining parking ratios. 13. Generally describe the proposed construction and development plan and schedule, and confirm that 2015 is the assumed year of full buildout. 14. Provide conceptual temporary and permanent stonnwater control plans for proposed redevelopment of the site (i.e. identify vaults, ponds, outfalls/discharge points, swales/conveyance, as applicable). Describe the anticipated construction stormwater quality treatment facilities (i.e. ponds, portable filtration, etc.) and construction BMPs anticipated for the site. Describe any LID features or other innovative features. See KPFF report. 15. Describe through text and illustrations/sketches any sustainability features for the site, including LEED, native landscaping, water reuse, etc. Describe anv "low-impact SOURCE Century Pacific Century Pacific Aspect Aspect, Century Pacific DATE NEEDED Recv'd for Proposed Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg.; need similar info. for Alternative 1; need info. on open space/recrea- tional facilities for Proposed Action June 11'" Rcv'd July 2009 Interim Stonnwater Mgmt. Report;need specific information on stonnwater control with redevelop- ment June 11'" 7 INFORMATION NEEDS development" measures, including stormwater, water/resource conservation, alternative energy, or other measures. Aesthetics 16. Provide site elevations and/or character sketches to depict possible views (building and landscape character) from key viewpoints adjacent to the site. 17. Describe proposed exterior building materials, including glazing materials. 18. Describe through text and plans the landscape concept for the site, including the use of native and ornamental landscape materials. 19. Provide CADD data on the site and proposed buildings for the visual simulations. 20. Confirm visual analysis viewpoints selected by BCG. Earth 21. Describe assumed foundation designs for the proposed buildings, including the use of deep pilings and vapor barriers. See preliminary geotechnical study report (Aspect Consulting, November 11, 2009) for information concerning foundations. SOURCE Century Pacific Century Pacific Applicant's Landscape Architect Lance Mueller City of Renton Aspect 22. Describe any excavations for utility installations and how the Aspect potential for environmental health hazards would be addressed. Utility corridors will likely be identified prior to implementation of the cleanup remedy, and design details of the utility installations to ensure environmental health protection will be incorporated into remedial action work plans to be approved by EPA. The final cleanup plans will include an Ooerations, Maintenance and DATE NEEDED Recv'dfor Proposed Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg. June 11 1n Recv'dfor Proposed Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg. June 11rn June 9th Recv'd for Proposed Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg.; confirm assumptions for EIS Recv'd for Proposed Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg.; confirm assumotions 8 INFORMATION NEEDS SOURCE DATE NEEDED Monitoring Plan (OMMP) that will describe the process for for EIS obtaining EPA approval if future excavations, utility installations, and other site disturbances, not specifically addressed in the c/eanuo o/an, are necessarv. 23. Describe proposed seismic hazard control measures. Aspect May21:r See preliminary geotechnica/ study report (Aspect Consulting, November 11, 2009). 24. Describe the groundwater depth, direction of flow, etc. and the Aspect Recv'dfor potential need for dewatering of contaminated groundwater Proposed with redevelopment. Identify measures to control environmental Action in Nov. health risks from dewatering. 2009 See Section 3 of the draft RI report provided on May 25'". No application dewatering is anticipated associated with redevelopment, pkg.; confirm consistent with redevelopment operations at the adjacent Conner assumptions Homes site. Also see response to #22 above. for EIS WetlandsNegetation/Habitat 25. Confirm that no direct impacts to wetlands retained or created Anchor Recv'd for with remediation would occur with redevelopment. Describe any Proposed proposed encroachment into wetland buffers. Action in Nov. Impacts of Aft. 1 are same as Proposed Action. 2009 Application pkg.; need similar info. for Alt. 1; need description of any buffer encroach- men/under Proposed Action and Alt. 1. 26. Describe the hydrologic patterns that would exist on the site Aspect, Interim following the cleanup/remediation. Describe how hydrology to Anchor Stormwater retained/created wetlands would be maintained/impacted by Mgmt. Report proposed stormwater control facilities and redevelopment onsite. recv'd on Existing wetland function in Wetlands A and D are driven by Lake 5.13.10; need Washington hydrology and therefore will not be affected by info on hydrologic changes in the upland areas following remediation. maintenance Following remediation and development, stormwater will be of wetland collected and treated in stormwater vaults. Following treatment, hydrology wl stormwater will flow directly into Lake Washington. No surface redevelop- flow from impervious surfaces of the development will flow directly ment into the restored/created wetlands followina remediation. 9 INFORMATION NEEDS SOURCE DATE NEEDED Vegetated wetland and shoreline buffer areas will not affect wetland hydrology Wetlands I and J will be unaffected by remediation, but wetland area will be created adjacent to Wetland J. This created wetland area will be excavated to the same general elevation as the existing elevation of Wetland J. Because the hydrology of Wetland J is driven by groundwater, no hydrology changes are expected as part of this action. 27. Provide basic assumptions about the wetland mitigation plan Anchor Recv'dfor and riparian habitat plan. Proposed The purpose, goals, and objectives of the riparian buffer and Action in Nov. wetland restoration are included in the Wetland and Ordinary 2009 High Water Mark Delineation Report (September 2009). application pkg.; need to confirm basic assumptions. Transportation 28. Confirm the approach to the transportation analysis described City of Rdv'dMay in the revised outline submitted by TENW on 5.14.10. Renton 1gt" 29. Provide traffic counts at study area intersections. Transpo May 26'" 30. Provide Synchro model from previous transportation analysis. Transpo May 26'" 31. Provide transportation analyses for the Barbee Mill and Hawks City of May 26'" Landing hotel project. Renton 32. Provide access to the City's model documentation (electronic City of May 2tl'"" or otherwise). Renton 33. Provide the City's EMME databanks in electronic form and the City of May 26'" City's EMME key. Renton 10 Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Brad, Vanessa Dolbee Monday, June 28, 2010 09:36 AM 'brad nicholson' Party-of-Record LUA09-151, Quendall Terminals L.vA09-15/ SEBG and yourself have been added to the party-of-record list for LUA09-15l, Quendall Terminals. In your e-mail you also stated, "recieve additional notifications by mail reference", I am unaware of what it is you are looking for in this additional request. Could you please clarify your request Thank you. Additionally, we appreciate you providing us with advanced notification of the information you may be interested in seeing. However, please remember to make an official Public Records Request through the City Clerks office. If you have any questions about the project please feel free to contact me. Regards, Vanessa Dolbee (Acting) Senior Planner City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 (425)430-7314 From: brad nicholson [mailto:brad827@hotmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 22, 2010 11:18 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: I notice you are out of the office. For your information, I am/will be requesting yellow file documents prior to the hearings for adequacy and master plan approval in addition to being placed on the list for parties of record. Please include the application materials, checklist, copy of EIS etc. Brad Nicholson Hotmail is redefining busy with tools for the New Busy. Get more from your inbox. See how. 1 . . Vanessa Dolbee From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: To: Thursday, May 20, 201010:16AM 'paulrsiegmund@gmail.com' Subject: RE: Quendall Terminal project proposal update Mr. Siegmund, Thank you for submitting comments and graphics on the Quendall Terminals project, these comments will be placed in the project's official file. The 3-D graphic was very informative, although we is interested to know if you took into account the parking garage? We would like the clarification for our files. Furthermore, the City recognizes your concerns and has included an analysis of Aesthetics in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) scope for the Quendall Terminals project. Within the additional aesthetics analysis the EIS would look at such issues as bulk and scale, views, light and shadow, etc ... Once the Draft EIS is completed you will have another opportunity to comment. Unfortunately, your comments were received after the EIS scoping comment period had closed; although, your concerns have been identified and are included in the initial scope of the EIS. Furthermore, staff has added you to the Party-of-Record list for the subject project, which means you will receive copies of all notification materials to the mailing address provided in the below e-mail. If this information is incorrect please responded with the address you would like to receive mail and I will update your information. If you have any questions or additional concerns please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee (Acting) Senior Planner City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 (425)430-7314 From: Paul R Siegmund [mailto:paulrsiegmund@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 3: 19 PM To: Denis Law Cc: Randy Corman Subject: Fwd: Quendall Terminal project proposal update Mayor Law, I live in Barbee Mill, in Renton and not far north of you, and recently learned more about the most recent proposal for the Quendall Terminal property. We are of course concerned about the nature and scope of the proposal. I made some new unique graphics. Please have a look at my attached 3-D renderings I made of the project, and I welcome you to read the lengthy note as well. We have shared it with everyone in our development. Most everybody had seen the plan views and thought they were too obtrusive. Nobody had thought about re-drawing them, so I did it. When you look at un-embellished, simply accurate 3-D renderings from Google Earth, it is 1 scary! I made these from the applicant's plan and elevation views, King County plat maps, Google Earth's aerials, and geometric modeling tools provided by Google. I want to make sure you all have access to this additional view. Please share freely. And you'll see in the summary how at least a few families in our growing neighborhood feel about having something THAT big. May I add also: Your senior city planner Vanessa Dolbee and an assistant named Rachel ( or Raquel) were simply top-notch in their willingness to make time and to help me. I appreciate the effort they each took to help me understand enough to create for my neighbors a summary and these graphics. Also, I used to work with Randy Corman while I was with Boeing, and as I think he lives somewhere in the north end of town as well, I included him. Randy, fyi: it's been a big and excellent year! I recently married my college sweetheart and moved to Renton. Disclosure--! also joined the FAA Transport Directorate but I feel I should reassure all that this is only citizen & city business. We likely will cross paths again at work but I, and I'm sure you also, understand this is completely separate. Thanks. If I remember you mentioning your location eons ago, then this affects you at home and as a councilman. Thanks also for having a look. Do either of you have any comments or any information that you can add for us? Best regards, Paul Paul R Siegmund 1006 N 42nd Place Renton, WA 98056 m) 425-329-5195 ----------Forwarded message ---------- From: Paul R Siegmund <paulrsiegmund@gmail.com> Date: Tue, May 18, 2010 at 1:55 PM Subject: Quendall Terminal project proposal update Hello, neighbors. I spoke to the Renton city planner about the development proposal for the vacant property to the north ofus. The developer is thinking BIG! The city seems to be thinking smaller, which is good. We as potential neighbors have an interest, and some ability, to directly influence the course of the project. The time scale is years, but we need to start thinking and learning now. I'll summarize what I learned in two conversations. I also made some quickie 3-D graphics of the project, which I've attached. I did not like the 2-D plot maps that were in the developer's submittal to the city. Then I found that I liked the 3-D version even less, enough so that I felt I should share. Below I offer simulation photos and a description of what I found. With visuals and bullet points, I hope I can give you a clear concept. I used Google Earth to make 3-D models of buildings with aerial/satellite photos of the northern half of Barbee Mill, the Seahawks' camp, and the project proposal because I wanted to get a feel for what it would look like. Google provided the color photographs and the terrain models. King County furnished the Barbee Mill plat map. The Quendall developer and the city gave the proposed plat map. The building footprints are traced from 2 the maps and photographs. Although the buildings are a little cartoon-ish looking, the comparative heights and bulks are accurate. The attached files are: 1) A simulated aerial view looking north--imagine being in a helicopter above Coulon Park. 2) Another view to the east, as if hovering above the beach park across the channel on Mercer Island. 3) The 3-D Google Earth model itself. You can view, pan, twirl it as you like, if you have and are comfortable with the tool. If not, just ignore the ".kmz" file. City of Renton's point of contact: Vanessa Dolbee Acting Senior Planner, City of Renton 425-430-7314 vdolbee@rentonwa.gov The current proposal: (The attached images may help you walk through these notes.) • 7 buildings, each with 2 decks of parking beneath 5 occupied storeys. And there is an option for a garage at the far northeast comer. • They are almost as high as the Seahawks' indoor training hangar, which I estimate is around 90 feet tall. • The proposed buildings would range in height from approximately 75 feet to 80 feet above grade. "Approximately" because the first parking deck may be allowed partly below ground, saving 5-10 feet overall and ... • The finished ground level is not known. It may be raised to about the elevation of 42nd Place in a similar environmental remediation as Barbee Mill had done. That is a guess from the city. The US Environmental Protection Agency has not weighed in on the remediation allowances or requirements. They remain a wildcard. • 5 buildings including the pair nearest to us would be residential with some light retail on the first story. • Two on the northeast near the Seahawks would be retail & offices; I colored them in blue. • One access road running along the back fence on 42nd Place. • The comers of the two southerly buildings would be placed 42 feet from the back property line of Lot 17 (west end) and 57 feet from the back oflots 1, 2, 3 & 4 (east end.) I think the property line is a few feet beyond our fence. • A public access day-use dock, which was not pictured in the developer's docs. My impressions from talking to Vanessa, the city planner: • This is just Round 1. • The proposed configuration, or anything else that big, seems unlikely to be approved or built. She did not and surely could not say directly, and she is not the only decision maker, but she seemed disinclined to recommend approval. • Nothing will be built in 2010. Most of 2011 even sounds short for the number of approvals that would be needed for anything. • The April meeting that we all missed had two purposes: 1) to unveil, and possibly hear a protest of, the determination that the proposal is likely to have a significant environmental impact and therefore will require an Environmental Impact Study. [The applicant did not object.] And 2) to identify the required content of the EIS. 3 • Vanessa briefly outlined the EIS scope and the nature of some public comments. This is not my specialty and I was writing fast... • The city will review the project and alternatives with respect to: environmental impact, wetland & shoreline protection, public access to the waterfront (will be required), light & glare, noise, traffic, aesthetics & views, footprint and bulk. • The city knows the area roads are not adequate. • *** Footprint & bulk will be evaluated in comparison to the Barbee Mill development, and NOT to the Seahawks' facility. (She told me this unprompted, before I told her where I live. Excellent, I think!!!) • Drafting an EIS would take several months, at least. Factual/editorial critique, notes from the maps: • The proposed plot plan shows few green or wet spaces. • The majority of the property would be covered with buildings or pavement. • The buildings are very bulky & big. • The southern road looks like it would carry some notable traffic, but mostly residential and not the majority for the complex. • Lake Washington Blvd, Ripley Lane, NE 44th Street and the freeway ramps do not presently have the capacity to support a project this big. • (OK, this one isn't exactly factual) I can't imagine the local market, or a lender, supporting something this big in the near future. It seems about twice the size of Carillon Point, and they have always had vacancies. • I did not ask about the status of the warehouse property between the boulevard and the freeway, where there is (or was) a plan for a hotel. Steps you can take to become informed and to stay informed: • The city maintains a postal mailing list of interested parties. Anybody may join it. Just ask Vanessa and provide her your details. They will send meeting notices and news updates. Those are also posted on poles in fluorescent pink, but mail will allow us to stop monitoring the lampposts, which doesn't always work. • Participate actively in our local grapevine. If you learn something, share it with neighbors. Susan and I will. You would be surprised how effective that is. • Ask me more if I left anything unclear. Any time, no worries. I'm an engineer, so I happily realize that my brain and my writing style are a little "different." • Think about what you want, or don't want, next door to your community. • Request more information directly from Vanessa. She is busy but she makes time to talk to the public. There is a huge pile of documents about the project--her assistant needed two trips to carry them. I only wanted two photocopies. • On the last point, a coordinated community effort, rather than a mass approach, with a single point of contact more technically qualified than I am, would give us better results without burning up a valuable contact. Suggestions, volunteers ... ? Getting al!ead of a question I've heard in the past couple days: no, the helicopter noise last week had nothing to do with the project other than a rare need for a big vacant lot near water. That was a training exercise. The Sheriff was qualifying rescue pilots for the busy summer season. They seem to be done. Bless them and hope we're never the ones who need them. I sent this to the only set of email addresses that I have. Feel free to forward. 4 Thanks! Paul Paul R Siegmund ************************ If you use Google Earth, or you want to, I included the 3-D model (.kmz) that I used to render the photographs: Google Earth streams the world over wired and wireless networks enabling users to virtually go anywhere on the planet and see places in photographic detail. This is not like any map you have ever seen. This is a 3D model of the real world, based on real satellite images combined with maps, guides to restaurants, hotels, entertainment, businesses and more. You can zoom from space to street level instantly and then pan or jump from place to place, city to city, even country to country. Get Google Earth. Put the world in perspective. (http://earth.google.com) Paul R Siegmund 5 Vanessa Dolbee From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: To: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 08:00 AM 'rfnicol@comcast.net' Subject: RE: Port Quendall Project Dr. Nichol, Thank you for submitting comments on the Quendall Terminals project, these comments will be placed in the project's official file. The City recognizes your concerns and has included an analysis of Aesthetics in the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) scope for the Quendall Terminals project. Within the additional aesthetics analysis the EIS would look at such issues as bulk and scale, views, light and shadow, etc ... Once the Draft EIS is completed you will have another opportunity to comment. Unfortunately, your comments were received after the EIS scoping comment period had closed; although, your concerns have been identified and are included in the initial scope of the EIS. Furthermore, staff has added you to the Party-of-Record list for the subject project, which means you will receive copies of all notification materials to the mailing address provided. If you have any questions or additional concerns please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee (Acting) Senior Planner City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 (425)430-7314 From: rfnicol@comcast.net [mailto:rfnicol@comcast.net] Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 2:27 PM To: Denis Law Cc:me Subject: Port Quendall Project Hello, I met you at the recent Barbee Mill open house and we talked for 5-10 minutes. I would like to express my concerns about the proposed development at Port Quendall. As I am sure you know, they plan to build at least 6 seven story buildings for 800 residential units and something like 245,000 sq feet of offices. I feel this is totally out of character for anything close to the lake. It will create severe traffic issues as people already use Lake Washington Blvd as a 405 overflow. Just last Sunday it was stop and go traffic the whole way from exit 7 to Renton on Lake Washington Blvd. Just improving the interchange will not solve the future problems. 1 The enormous buildings will dwarf the residential property around it and ruin the aesthetics and character of the adjacent areas. Buildings this size belong in a downtown area and not in a residential area with mostly single family homes. There are many empty business and residential buildings at The Landing. It is not in Renton's or either developers best interest to exacerbate the over-supply problem. This project will have too much of an environmental impact and needs to be modified. I am on the list for future comments as I just became aware of this issue and the comment period is over. No one in Barbee Mill was aware of this until after the comment period had ended. The notice they placed was identical to the notice for the proposed dock and everyone including me did not know it was a new notice. Thanks for your time. Regards, Ron Nicol MD Berbee Mill 2 Vanessa Dolbee Jim Seitz From: ,ent: To: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 10:15 AM Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Bob Mahn Subject: Port Quendall -EIS Scoping Vanessa, We have reviewed the WSDOT comment letter dated March 12, 2010 and we concur with their comments with the exception of the following: Comment #2 -We do not understand WSDOT comments regarding the control of these intersections. Comment #4 -Although we agree the trip generation will be higher due to lack of transit in the area, the suggested 25% increase is somewhat significant given the lack of sample studies for 800 units. Therefore a more modest increase of 10% would be more appropriate. With that please incorporate WSDOT comments into the scoping for the Port Quendall EIS along with our other comments dated December 16, 2009. We would however like the trip distribution from the site south on Lake Washington to be increased. We suspect it could be much higher. Given the applicant will have use of our traffic model they should be able to come up with a more realistic number. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments. Jim Seitz Transportation Planning & Programming Supervisor Renton City Hall -5th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 (425) 430-7245 Note Address Change: jseitz@rentonwa.gov 1 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT EIS SCOPING COMMENT SHEET Please provided comments on the scope of the EIS for the following project. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. COMMENTING DEPARTMENT: l l '1: v;~~ EIS SCOPING COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 12, 2010 APPLICATION NO: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M DATE CIRCULATED· H l::1, .ztilO APPLICANT: Campbell Mathewson PLANt,IE!(:vanfua Dolbee ) \ . -J PROJECT TITLE: Quendall Terminals SITE AREA: 21.46 acres (159,149 SF) LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N t PLAN " • a nenninger EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): None PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) 1,155,600 SF I u~ PLEASE RETURN TO VANESSA DOLBEE IN CURRENT PLANNING 6TH FLOOR SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units (resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. 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. Proposed improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING COMMENTS: Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Ma/or Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinn Air Aesthetics Water Liaht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Trans"''Ytation Envirorimentul Health Efiergy/ Natural Resources Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000Feet 14,000Feet C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in whi e have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional informa · is needed to properly assess this pf al. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT EIS SCOPING COMMENT SHEET Please provided comments on the scope of the EIS for the following project. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. COMMENTING DEPARTMENT: f=,:n(v',ffi\c f)=_,v, EIS SCOPING COMMENTS Dlft: MARCH 12, 20~ -7 APPLICATION NO: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M DATE CIRCULATED: FEBRUARY 19, LUW APPLICANT: Campbell Mathewson PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: Quendall Terminals PLAN REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 21.46 acres (159,149 SF) EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): None LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) 1,155,600 SF SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units (resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. 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. Proposed improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING COMMENTS: Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Mo/or Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Linht/Glore Plants Recreation land/Shoreline Use Animals Utilities Tran511ortation Environmental Health Public 5ervice5 Energy/ Natural Resources Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,00DFeet 14,000Feet 8. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS Whi~ -this IS tl lovio-&-+twm. p~-ed-;?(VJ,,,A ~. ,afAVl{; V)-ced -m be, lrefin-ed 1n covi.c;uHa+ion w/+oc C+t~) 1+ Wov1IA holr;z d)'\119n;i(y and s~ :the Ci:ttJ's-eco wrn1C:: c. CODE-RELATEDCOMMENTS l?a.se <;;t(JVl.rhCflvtil-0. We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where add;t;onal information is needed to properly assess this proposal. al I I 10 Date I I City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT EIS SCOPING COMMENT SHEET Please provided comments on the scope of the EIS for the following project. You may - comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. 0 .,rt COMMENTING DEPARTMENT: -~ ]A •; EIS SCOPING COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 12~ . APPLICATION NO: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M DATE CIRCULATED: FEBRUARY 19, 2010 APPLICANT: Campbell Mathewson PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: Quendall Terminals PLAN REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 21.46 acres (159,149 SF) EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): None - LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) 1,155,600 SF SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units (resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. 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. Proposed improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING COMMENTS: Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element a/ the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Linht/Gfare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transoortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Natural Resources Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000Feet 14 OOOFeet 8. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS ~~~/ZD~~ -13 ~41, We have reviewed this application with particular attent;on to those areas in which we have expe,t;se and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional informatio. 1 needed to properly assess this proposal. Date PUBLIC WORKS DEPAR" .NT DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: M E M O R A N D U M December 16, 2009 Arneta H~~tger, CED/Development Services Bob Mah~nsportation Systems Division Quendall Terminals Draft Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) As you requested, we have reviewed the subject TIA (dated November 2009) and have the following comments: • The TIA needs to be stamped by a licensed professional transportation/traffic engineer. • We again request that the planned.Hawks Landing Hotel site southern access on Lake Washington Boulevard be aligned opposite the Lake Washington Boulevard/Barbee Mills access. These two access points are closer together (approximately 100-foot separation) than depicted on various figures in the TIA. The TIA should recognize this close proximity and discuss the potential influence on traffic operations and level of service at these two locations, particularly the-conflict between a northbound left-turn lane at the Barbee Mills/Lake Washington Boulevard access and the proposed southbound left-turn lane at the Hawks Landing/Lake Washington Boulevard access. • Page 20, Identified Improvements and Project Mitigation Measures -suggest including, for added clarification, a figure(s) depicting the three additional mitigation measures described on this page. • We question including as potential mitigation for the Quendall Terminals development traffic impacts the 1-405 mainline and 1-405/NE 44th Street Interchange Improvements identified by WSDOT. These WSDOT improvements are currently unfunded and will most likely be implemented beyond 2020. We suggest interim improvements be considered and analyzed in the TIA (such as traffic signals on NE 44th at the 1-405 northbound and southbound ramp intersections and additional lanes on the 1-405 northbound and southbound ramps as were proposed in the Hawks Landing development traffic study). • Coordination with local and regional transit agencies to provide transit service to the development site is an important element of a Transportation Management Plan (TMP) for the development. However, it is unlikely that public transit service to the development site will occur by 2015. • Suggest reducing the parking supply (estimated to exceed City Code requirements by 40%) to encourage a reduction in SOV travel to the development site. • The Project Trip Generation and LOS methodology and calculations are acceptable. • Page 6, Existing Inventory-suggest a minor revision at the beginning of the second sentence in the description for Lake Washington Boulevard as follows: To the north, Lake Washington Boulevard ... cc: Jim Seitz, Transportation Planning and Programming Supervisor Vanessa Dolbee, CED File J{:\Division.s\TRANSPOR TA"JWI ./\NNIN(i\RLM\REVIEWS\2009\Quendall Tenninals TIA.doc DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: December 15, 2009 Vanessa Dolbee TO: FROM: Arneta Henninger ,1# SUBJECT: UTILITY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMENTS FOR QUENDALL TERMINALS LUA 09-151, 4503 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N I have reviewed the application for this 5 story residential units (approximately 800) development above two levels of above grade parking along with retail/restaurant space located in the vicinity of N 45th St and Ripley Lane north, west of Lake Washington Blvd N, all in Section 29-24-05 and have the following comments:. Existing Water: This project is located in the City of Renton water service area. This project site is located in the 320 Water Pressure Zone. The static pressure is approximately 124 psi at the street level. Pressure reducing valves shall be installed at each domestic meter since the pressure exceeds 80 psi. This proposed development site is not located in the Aquifer Protection Zone. Sanitary Sewer: There is an existing 12" sanitary sewer main on the site. Storm Drainage: There are some storm drainage facilities in N 42nd Pl and in Lake Washington Blvd N. See City of Renton drawing R-3330. REQUIREMENTS Water: Additional water main improvements will be required to provide the required fireflow demand for the development .. • Per the City of Renton Fire Marshal the preliminary fireflow for this project is 5,000 GPM. An automatic fire sprinkler system will be required for this development. • The maximum available capacity, in GPM at 20 psi residual pressure from the existing City's water system in the vicinity of the development is 5,600 GPM. • There is an existing 12" water main west of existing railroad tracks within BNRR right-of-way. See City of Renton water drawing W-0400 for detailed engineering plans. • Additional water main improvements will be required to provide the required fireflow demand. • A looped water main 12" in diameter around the buildings will be required including additional fire hydrants as shown on the attached red-lined conceptual h:\ced\planning\current planning\projects\09-151.vanessa\quendall terminals eis\scoping comments\plan review comments.doc Quendall Terminals Page 2 of3 utility plan. • Existing fire hydrants along the railroad tracks shall be relocated approximately 18" behind the new curb and access road west of the existing railroad tracks. • A portion of the existing 12" water main under the new site access road on the north side must be relocated and raised to be at 4' of cover under new roadway finished grade. • Construction of a commercial building will trigger a separate review. • Per the City of Renton code when the required fire flow is over 2500 GPM the fire hydrants shall be served by a main which loops around the building or complex of buildings and reconnects back into a distribution supply main. • Any new construction must have one fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM and shall be located within 150 feet of the structure and additional hydrants (also capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM) within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measured along the travel route. The number of additional hydrants required is dependent on the calculated fireflow of the new commercial building. Existing fire hydrants shall be retrofitted with a quick disconnect Stortz fitting if not existing. • Buildings that exceed 30 feet in height shall install backpressure devices at the back of each domestic water meter. A separate domestic meter is required per building. • A Reduced Pressure Backflow Assembly (RPBA) is required behind each domestic water meter. The RPBA shall be installed inside an above ground heated and insulated enclosure "Hot-Box". • The existing 10-inch water line through the site will need to be abandoned. A release of the existing easement will be required (refer to City water project plan no. W-0586). • A backflow prevention assembly (DDCVA) is required for fire sprinkler system for each building (refer to City Standard Details for external DDCVA in vault or for special requirements for DDCVA inside building). The location of the fire department connections (FDC's} must be approved by the Fire Marshal. • A separate water meter and DCVA is required for the landscape irrigation system. • The Water System Development Charge fees are based on the total number and size of any and all water meters. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued.GPM. Sanitary Sewer: • A commercial building permit will trigger a separate review. The applicant needs to show how this site will be served with sanitary sewer. • The project will need to provide an analysis of the capacity of the existing Baxter Lift Station including how to accomplish the additional flows above the capacity currently available at the Station. Additional comments have been provided in the margins of the Sewer Report (Quendall Terminals kpff, November 2009) attached. h:\ced\planning\current planning\projects\09·151.vanessa\quendall tenninals eis\scoping comments\plan review comments.doc Quendall Tenninals Page 3 of3 • Any use in the building subject to oils or grease shall require the installation of a grease interceptor or oil/water separator per the current UPC as determined at the time of plan review. • The Parking garage will require an oil water separator. • System Development Charges based on the size of the domestic water meter are required. The Development Charges are collected at the time the construction permit is issued. Storm Drainage: • A conceptual drainage plan and report is required to be submitted with the formal application for a commercial project. A drainage control plan designed per the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual is required. • The project will need to comply with the 2009 KCSWDM. The project will need to provide flow control, water quality treatment and conveyance system improvements. Any offsite runoff will need to be accounted for in the drainage analysis. • The Surface Water SOC fees are $0.405 (but not less than $1012) per square foot of new impervious area. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued. Street improvements: • Construction of a commercial building will trigger a separate review. • Projects that are more than 20 units residential and/or 10,000 square feet in size are required to provide full pavement width per standards with curb, gutter and sidewalk on the project side. • Street lighting is required to be installed on the project side. All street lighting shall be per City of Renton standards and specifications. Private street lighting (including PSE) is not allowed. • The streets will need to be dedicated as public right-of-way. • Transportation Mitigation fees apply. Traffic Mitigation fees are based on the ITE Manual s'h edition and final plans. Transportation comments: • See memo from Transportation. General: • All required utility, drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. • All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two horizontal and vertical controls per the City's current horizontal and vertical control network. • Additional information regarding detailed plan review will be provided at the time of formal application. • Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. Half of the fee must be paid upon application for building and construction permits, and the remainder when the permits are issued. There will be additional fees for water service related expenses. See Drafting Standards. h:\ced\planning\current planning\projects\09-151.vanessa\quendall tenninals eis\scoping comments\plan review comments.doc ' , . 'trm j , J ,..~ /, / w ~I 1. Introduction Quendall Terminals is a proposed mixed-use development in Renton, Washington. The development includes five stories of residential or office space above two levels of above-grade parking or retail and restaurant space. The development project anticipates entitlement of the following: Table 1-1.: Proposed Development Use I Quantity/ Area Residential . 800 Units ' Office 245,000 Square Feet Retail 21,600 Square Feet Restaurant . 9,000 Square Feet Parking ' 2,215 Spaces Note: All areas sbo'W!l are gross building areas (GBA), The project site is located west of Interstate 405 near the northern city limits of Renton. The site is bounded by the Seahawks Training Facility to the north, BNSF railroad tracks to the east, and the Barbee Mill residential community to the south. Ripley Lane is located east of the BNSF railroad tracks and Lake Washington Boulevard is located southeast of the project site. See Figure 1 in the Appendix for the site location. This report is intended to support City of Renton entitlement processing for Master Site Plan Approval. The scope of this report is to address the sanitary sewer system for the proposed development. Design criteria will be outlined and a sewerage approach will be evaluated. 2. Predeveloped Site Conditions The existing site is vacant and is the former location of a log sorting and storage yard. The main site is approximately 20.30 acres in size, and the parcel east of the main project site across Ripley Lane North is approximately 1.15 acres in size. An existing 12-inch sanitary sewer main runs from south to north along the east side of the site within a 60-foot roadway and utility easement. The invert elevation of the existing sewer pipe is generally 10 to 13 feet below the existing ground surface. The existing Baxter Lift Station serves Quendall Terminals as well as the Seahawks Training Facility to the north and Barbee Mill to the South. There are no other sewers located on the project site. An 84-inch ( Metro sewer main is located approximately 100 feet east of the site's east property line. See Figure 2 in the Appendix for existing site conditions . . _ _;~~A_ L,) A /C1µ&&~~µ tk-~ ~ ~lk61tL1a OF W--~ 1'A>efi£Ct 44£_ CenturyPaclfic,. LP Quendall Terminals 3. Developed Site Conditions The proposed site improvements include a mixed-use development consisting of residential, office, retail, and restaurant uses, as well as new public and private streets and parking. Sewer mains will be constructed within the proposed public streets. Sewage from the buildings will discharge to the new sewer mains via side sewers. The new sewer mains will discharge to the existing 12-inch sewer main at the east side of the project site at a new manhole constructed over the existing main. No improvements are planned for the 1.15-acre parcel east of Ripley Lane. See Figures 3 and 4 in the Appendix for proposed site plan and proposed sewer plan, respectively. 4. Basis of Design An on-site sanitary sewer system will collect and convey flows from Quendall Terminals. Adjacent sites are already developed and served by separate sanitary sewer systems. This report has utilized programmed project areas and Department of Ecology (DOE) criteria to establish projected sewer flows without provisions for future growth or connections. See Figures 3 and 4 in the Appendix for proposed site plan and proposed sewer plan, respectively. Gross building areas have been used for this report. An allowance of 1,100 gallons/acre/day (gpad) has been made for infiltration and inflow since the proposed sanitary sewer system is expected to be below seasonal high groundwater elevations. The 1.15-acre parcel east of Ripley Lane has not been included in the infiltrat!on calculation. A peaking factor of 4.0 was included in the design flows. This factor should account for the daily and seasonal fluctuations in waste generation. This factor should also mitigate the impact of the varying flow generations for the different uses proposed with this project. The sanitary sewer system was designed to convey the estimated peak flows by gravity to the project discharge location at a new manhole installed on an existing City of Renton sanitary sewer pipe. The sewer capacities were established using Manning's Equation, with an "n" factor of 0.013. Sewer lines have been designed using the minimum slope requirements of the Washington State DOE. The pipe slopes used in the final design and future construction documents may be greater than the minimum slope to accommodate potential settlement, depending on the recommendation of the geotechnical engineer. ~~ Lw~ ~ ~~J&-~? ?. f; ~~{~ V' )\ y:: ~~ ~~~~,----re: 2, 0" (;) I l,v-u f"" \" Vf JvV 2 CenturyPaclflc, LP Quendall Terminals ~ .·. EXISTING BAXTER LIFT STATION The Baxter Lift Station is an existing sewer lift station located at the northeast corner of the project site within a sanitary sewer easement. The lift station was designed in 2006 and was constructed in 2009. The lift station was designed for an overall peak flow of 594 gpm for the Seahawks Training Facility, Barbee Mill community, and the Quendall Terminals site. The lift station was designed and constructed with the following assumptions for future development of the Quendall Terminals site: Table 5-3· Lift Station Design Assumptions for Quendall Terminals (per Figure 6) Developable Acres 5 Tributary Area 5.0 Acres Flow Rate 2,800 gpad Number of Units 75 Tributary Area 3.0 Acres Persons/LI nit 2.4 • Flow Rate 100 gpad . Average Sewerage Flow 22.2 gpm Design 1/1 Rate 1,500 gpad Peaking Factor 4 Design Sewage Flow 88.9 gpm Design 1/1 Flow 8.3 gpm Total Design Flow 97.2 gpm Total Design Flow Q peak hourly The sewer lift station was designed for a flow of 97.2 gpm from the Quendall project site. The anticipated flow from the Quendall project site is 614 gpm. The sewer lift station capacity will need to be increased by approximately 517 gpm to 1,111 gpm to accom~date development of the Quendall Terminals site. Per discussion with the City of Renton Public Works, the existing lift station has the ability to be modified to increase capacity by changing pump impellers and increasing the wet well capacity. -$ee Figure 6 in the Appendix for Baxter Lift Station design details and Figure 7 for a record of discu7on with the City. . { Lu.ow~u-i &•'llW---r-~~ t~ tu. -rl,$.,;1 ~/Z._.- Vlibt.-~~ ~ -'Iv ~ ffe.,Aeb t===vu.>t. ~ 6u<~~7 ~Aw~~-~ ~ 12tf:fl,xa= t?i_:;:-~rtznu. Lri,~l?-A ~u__.. M,Mf;,1,5 ~--r;; ~. ~.~ hl/Je-MAY bkt~ ~qi~~ Ar-r~ ~t>..J µ;u.) ( ~ LLJk~ ~ ~ Ari~~~ 4 tA£.-\j:,.{A.AL ~"' --r~ ·· L,L),~ ~~'?~ fvryAa,, /~~ 16 4 • Other available options are installing larger pumps but Dave did not believe that would be necessary as the existing pumps were specifically chosen to allow impeller modifications as they anticipated the need for additional capacity in the future. Fees: • Quendall has reoentiy been assessed a capacity charge of $166k for their "fair share" of the Baxter Pump Station. This assessment was based on 111gpm of capacity. I asked Dave ~ future assessments would be required if the flows exceeded the 111 gpm. Dave indicated there would be NO additional capacity charge assessments for the Quendall site only mechanical pump slafion upgrades to increase the pump station_pa~acity to_ meef 04,' proposed site demand. · ~ ~1 ~;,;Wi+Jr ~ l}-)1,t.v-~ ~ Urm4- 9o~t ~6~"' --- KPFF Consulting Engineers Page2 Telephone Record November 17, 2009 Figure 7 -· -· KPFF Consulting Engineers November, 2009 BUILDING USE AND DISCHARGE POINT PER TRIBUTARY AREA UNIT FLOW AND PEAK FACTOR PER BUILDING USE Trib. Area ID Resfd. Ofllce Retail Rest. Discharge To Use Unit Flow, [GPDJ Peak Factor [UNITS] [SF] [SF] [SF] Residential 175 [per unitz! 4 NE Trib. Area 0 117500 4800 0 Reach 3 Office 0.2 [per sq ft] 4 SE Trib. Area 175 107500 4500 0 Reach 2 Reta11 0.3 fper sq ftJ 4 SW Trib. Area 1 360 0 0 0 Reach 2 Restauranh 50 per seat] 4 SW Tr1b. Area 2 90 10000 6300 4500 Reach 4 NW Tr1b. Area 1 100 0 0 0 Reach 3 11, c 1rno 1ut,f acre] 1 /~6 NW Trib. Area 2 75 10000 6000 4500 Reach 4 NOTES Total 800 245000 21600 9000 Reach 1 11 Unit flows include normal JnflltraUon 12 Assumes 1.75 residents per unit BUILDING USE PER REACH fJ Restaurant conversion: 1 seat= 22.7 square feet of restaurant Reach ID Resld. Office RetaH Rest. Rest. Infiltration due to high groundwater [UNITSJ [SF] [SF] [SF] (SEATS3J Reach f BOO 245000 21600 9000 396 FLOW PER REACH Reach 2 535 107500 4500 0 0 Reach ID Resld. Offlce Retan Rest m Total Reach 3 100 117500 4800 0 0 [GPM] [GPM] [GPMJ [GPM] [GPM] [GPM] Reach 4 165 20000 12300 9000 396 Reach 1 389 136 18 55 16 614 .m::~;,:c~zrr1~1:~~V:"";;;o,< '""<~ 4 67',Y ~ Reach 2 260 60 4 0 4 32B Reach 3 49 65 4 0 4 122 Reach 4 80 11 10 55 4 161 20.3 PIPE CALCULATIONS Reach ID Upstrm. MH Downstrm. MH Length Inner DJa Upstrm. IE Downstrm. IE Slope " a~ a., O.;, % Cap. VM Origin of Flow [FT] [IN] [FT] [FT] [FT/FT] [CFS] ' [GPM] [GPM] [FPS] REACH 1 REACH 2, REACH 3, REACH 4 SSMH #2 SSMH#f 335 12 19.23 18.49 0.0022 0.013 1.68 754 614 81% 2.14 REACH2 SE Tdb. Area, SWTrlb. Area 1 SSMH #3S-2 SSMH #3S·1 27' a 21.88 20.77 0.0040 0.013 0.77 344 328 95% 2.19 SSMH #3S-1 SSMH#2 278 a 20.67 19.56 0.0040 0.013 0.77 344 328 95% 2.19 REACH3 NE Trib. Area, NW Trlb. Area 1 SSMH #3N SSMH #2 340 B 20.92 19.56 0.0040 0.013 0.77 344 122 35% 2.20 REACH4 SW Trib. Area 2, NW Trib. Area 2 SSMH#3W SSMH#2 271 a 20.64 19.56 0.0040 0.013 0.76 343 161 47% 2.19 Quendall Terminals Sewer Report Figure 5: Calculations -· /1 11 ! 11, '' '' ;i ,, ' PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM DATE: September 14, 2009 , EP 182009 TO: Arneta Henninger, Plan Reviewer FROM: 1'1{ ~ Ronald J. Straka, Surface Water Utility Supervisor QUENDALL TERMINALS STORMWATER REQUIREMENTS SUBJECT: Please see my comments below regarding the drainage report and plans, dated August 27, 2009, for Quendall Terminals. 1. The project shall be required to comply with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) standards as a condition of SEPA. 2. A compete TIR for the project site will be required with submittal of the civil engineering plans for the site that includes all information required by the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual. This includes information related to satisfying all core requirements and applicable special requirements in the 2009 KCSWDM. 3. The proposed projects must submit an offsite analysis report that assesses potential offsite drainage and water quality impacts associated with development of the project site and proposes appropriate mitigation of those impacts. 4. The report must include a KCRTS printout of all land use input values for pre-and post-developed Impervious and pervious areas. The report should also include a basin summary table for the existing condition and developed condition land use. The basin summary table should identify the wetlands. 5. The wetland area needs to be included in the pre-and post-developed time series analysis. 6. Since the project will result in more than 5,000 square feet of new impervious surface, the project must comply with section 1.2.3 of the 2009 KCSWDM Flow Control. The direct discharge exemption may apply to the project if it meets all of the following criteria: a. The flowpath from the project site discharge point to the edge of the 100-year floodplain of the major receiving water will be no longer than a quarter mile. b. The conveyance system between the project site and the major receiving water will extend to the ordinary high water mark, and will be comprised .. Henninger/Quendall Terminal Stormwater Requirements Page 2 of 2 September 14, 2009 of manmade conveyance elements (pipes, ditches, etc.) and will be within public right-of-way or a public or private drainage easement c. The conveyance system will have adequate capacity per Core Requirement #4, Conveyance System, for the entire contributing drainage area, assuming build-out conditions to current zoning for the equivalent area portion and existing conditions for the remaining area d. The conveyance system will be adequately stabilized to prevent erosion, assuming the same basin conditions as assumed in Criteria (c) above. NOTE: The major receiving waters do not include wetlands. 7. The engineer proposes to discharge runoff from the north and west portions of the site into the wetlands located at the north and west corners of the site. The engineer needs to conduct an analysis ofthe wetland to determine the existing hydrology, including the hydroperiod, and base the recharge on that analysis. Typically, the wetland report would include a recommendation from the biologist as to the proper recharge rate. 8. The proposed roadway improvements shall be taken into consideration when calculating the post development site condition and sizing the water quality and flow control facilities, if required. 9. The project will be required to provide enhanced water quality treatment per section 1.2.8.1. Application of the Enhanced Basic Water Quality menu may be waived for treatment of any runoff that is discharged entirely by pipe all the way to the ordinary high water mark to the major receiving waters, listed on pages 1- 37 of the 2009 KCSWDM. Enhanced Basic Water Quality treatment is required for any discharges to the existing wetlands on site. 10. Does the project have an expected average daily traffic (ADT) count of 100 or more vehicles per square feet of gross building area, per section 1.2.8.1 of the 2009 KCSWDM? If yes, the project must provide oil control in addition to any other water quality facility required. If you have any questions contact Hebe Bernardo, Surface Water Utility Engineer (x7264). cc: Lys Hornsby, Utility Systems Director Kayren Kittrlck, Development Engineering Supervisor Chip Vincent, Planning Director Neil Watts, Development Services Dlrector h:\fils sys\swp -surface water projects\swp 27-surface water projects (plan review)\quendall terminals\flrst review.doc\HBaw Vanessa Dolbee From: Sent: To: Subject: Corey W Thomas Monday, December 14, 2009 10:23 AM Vanessa Dolbee Quendall Terminals LUA09-151 As an official follow up to our conversation last week, the Renton Fire Department has no revised comments for the subject project at this time. Will retain the information and await the official routing of the LUA comment sheet. 1 Denis Law Mayor December 7, 2009 Campbell Mathewson Century Pacific, LP. 1201 Third Ave., Suite 1680 Seattle, WA 98101 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Subject: Quendall Terminals Notice of Incomplete Application LUA09-151, ECF, SA-M, SM Dear Mr. Mathewson: After reviewing the materials submitted for the Quendall Terminals application, staff has determined that the application is incomplete according to the City's submittal requirements. The following information is required to accept the application as complete: • Included within this proposal for Master Site Plan review would be the dedication of new streets to the City of Renton. The proposed new street pattern would effectively divide the larger parcel into+/-4 smaller developable areas. Because the new proposed developable areas, would be separated by public streets the applicant shall submit an application to subdivide the land. Multiple mechanisms can active this goal including platting or a binding site plan. Once you choose the mechanism that best fits your situation, please submit to the City all the required material for that type of application. Once the above requested information is received, review of your application will begin. Please contact me at (425} 430-7314 if you have any questions. Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner cc: Altino Properties, Inc., and J.H. Baxter & Co. /Owner Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov ... DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM March 2, 2010 Vanessa Dolbee, Associate Planner Corey Thomas, Plans Review Inspector, Community Risk Reduction Comments for Quendall Terminals Environmental Impact Statement Scoping Comments: I. FIRE MITIGATION FEES: Fire mitigation fees shall be $388.00 per residential unit and $0.52 per commercial square foot. Fire mitigation fees shall not be required for the parking structure. Fire mitigation fees shall be paid at the time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. FIRE FLOW: The preliminary fire flow has been calculated and determined to be 5000 gallons per minute for 4 hours. In order to conduct a more accurate calculation I shall need the applicant to provide more accurate information on the square footage and type of construction to be used. 2. REQUIRED HYDRANTS & SPACING: The minimum number of hydrants that shall be required for this project shall be 6. The primary hydrants shall be within 150 feet of the buildings and all other hydrants shall be located within 300 feet of the buildings. All hydrants servicing this project shall be required to be equipped with a five inch Storz fitting. Structures requiring a fire flow greater than 2500 gallons per minute shall require the fire supply line to be looped. 3. FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS: Fire apparatus access roadways appear to be within 150 feet of all portions of the building exterior, with 2 exceptions. The first exception relates to the area along west side of the building in where currently there is no area provided for fire apparatus access. The entire length of the west side that may not be accessible is approximately 600 feet in length. Some provision needs to be made to allow access such as using grasscrete. The second exception shall require, at the west end of the north access, a hammerhead turnaround. Fire apparatus access roads shall be a minimum of20 feet wide on a surface capable of sustaining the weight of a fire apparatus. The turning radius shall be 45 feet to the outside and 25 feet to the inside. Cul-de-sac turnarounds .. shall require a 90 foot radius. Fire lane signage shall be required throughout the project. 4. FIRE PROTECTION & DETECTION REQUIREMENTS: Approved fire sprinkler, fire alarm and dry standpipe systems shall be required. Separate plans and permits are required for the installation of these systems. The fire sprinkler riser room shall be accessible through a dedicated exterior door. 5. ELEV A TORS: Elevators shall be in compliance with section 3002.4 of the 2006 International Building Code. 6. HGH RISE BUILDINGS: This project shall be required to comply with all provisions set forth in the 2006 or 2009 International Building Code as it pertains to high rise buildings. 7. PRE-FIRE PLANNING: A copy of the site and floor plan shall be provided for the purpose of assisting fire operations in conducting the pre-fire planning of this project. CT/ct ... City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT EIS SCOPING COMMENT SHEET Please provided comments on the scope of the EIS for the following project. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, 3robable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be require . COMMENTING DEPARTMENT: \-I r-f EIS SCOPING COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 12, 2010 APPLICATION NO: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M DATE CIRCULATED: FEBRUARY 19, 2010 APPLICANT: Campbell Mathewson PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: Quendall Terminals PLAN REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 21.46 acres (159,149 SF) EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): None LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) 1,155,600 SF SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units (resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. 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. Proposed improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING COMMENTS: Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housiiin Air Aesthetics Water Linht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Animals Utilities Transnortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Natural Resources Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000Feet 14,000Feet 8. 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 a ss this proposal. 1/z /_; o Signature of Director or Authorized Representative ,7 Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT EIS SCOPING COMMENT SHEET Please provided comments on the scope of the EIS for the following project. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. COMMENTING DEPARTMENT: {1 i"w, ,;, 1 lrh1r, EIS SCOPING COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 12, 2010 APPLICATION NO: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M DATE CIRCULATED: FEBRUARY 19, 2010 APPLICANT: Campbell Mathewson PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: Quendall Terminals PLAN REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 21.46 acres (159,149 SF) EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): None LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) 1,155,600 SF SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units (resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. 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. Proposed improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING COMMENTS: Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Eanh Housina Air Aesthetics Water Uaht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transnortation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Natural Resources Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,00DFeet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS J,L ~~~~J!;n We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional 'nformation is neede to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date • City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT EIS SCOPING COMMENT SHEET Please provided comments on the scope of the EIS for the following project. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. COMMENTING DEPARTMENT: -lr7U'°¥.'-l'JC , ; ' ' ---; 1/ V 'I, APPLICATION NO: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M APPLICANT: Campbell Mathewson PROJECT TITLE: Quendall Terminals SITE AREA: 21.46 acres (159,149 SF) LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N EIS SCOPING COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 12, 2010 DATE CIRCULATED: FEBRUARY 19, 2010 PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PLAN REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): None PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) 1,155,600 SF SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units (resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. 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. Proposed improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING COMMENTS: Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinn Air Water Aesthetics Lriiht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Trans rtation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Natural Resources Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet 8. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS att2l _Jx, ~ 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 wh re addition nform ion is needed to properly assess this proposal. Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT EIS SCOPING COMMENT SHEET Please provided cqm'!lents on.thetsc::ope•of:thec:EISk,fc>,r,.\!ti!ll;JoJl.oWJ/lt:Pr<U~~t.')'.!ili roay .. comment on alternatives, mit1gatlon·.meas.ures;cprol:ial>le•slgnifl.ca.rit:adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be,.requlred. COMMENTING DEPARTMENT: EIS SCOPING COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 12, 2010 APPLICATION NO: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M DATE CIRCULATED: FEBRUARY 19, 2010 APPLICANT: Campbell Mathewson PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: Quendall Terminals PLAN REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 21.46 acres (159,149 SF) EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): None LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) 1,155,600 SF SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicar\ is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (CORI and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units (resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles. 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. Proposed improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING COMMENTS: Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water Liqht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transaortation y Environmental Health Public Services . Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport En1,1ironment 10,000Feet · 14,000 Feet 8. POL/CY-RELATED COMMENTS The Transportation Division requests that the scope of the EIS for the proposed Quendall Terminals development (Port Quendall site) include a comprehensive transportation analysis of the current development proposal, any alternative proposals, and the potential development of the Hawks Landing site (current hotel proposal and remainder of the site) and any other pending development projects in the vicinity. We anticipate the transportation section of the EIS would include discussion of: 1) transportation impacts on the existing transportation network (i.e., Lake Washington Blvd, 1- 405/NE 44'" Street interchange, NE 44'" Street, etc) in the vieinity of the development site; 2) cumulative impacts of other pending developments; and, 3) proposed mitigation measures. At this time, we have no specific concerns that need to be addressed . The Traffic Impact Analysis previo, ,~ly prepared and reviewed by us can serve as the~ for the EIS comprehensive transportation analysis. (. COOE-RELATEO COMMENTS We anticipate ~hat Code requirements related to abutting off-site improvements ( curb and gutter, sidewalk, street lightrng, etc) wrll be applicable for this proposed development. We nave 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 i e d to properly assess this proposal. .3 -3 -20/0 Date Washington State Department of Transportation Paula J. Hammond, P.E. Secretary of Transportation March 12, 2010 Vanessa Dolbee City of Renton Development Services 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Subject: Quendall Terminals LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M SR 405 MP 7.47 (NE 44th Ramps vicinity) Dear Ms. Dolbee: Northwest Region 15700 Dayton Avenue North P.O. Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 206-440-4000 / Fax 206-409-7250 TTY 1-800-833-6388 www.wsdot.wa.gov The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) has reviewed the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) submitted for the above referenced project. The project site is located just north of Lake Washington Blvd, west of SR405 and NE 44th Street interchange. The proposed project includes the development of 21,600 square foot (sf) of retail, 245,000 sf of office, 800 apartments, and a 9,000 sf restaurant. Off-site trip generation for the proposed project is approximately 8,570 daily trips, 837 AM peak hour trips, and 905 PM peak hour trips_ The following are our comments: 1. Page 2 -Executive Summary: the identified 1-405/NE 44th St interchange improvements project is not funded and the possibility of funding in the foreseeable future is unlikely. Thus, the planned elements at the interchange will not be constructed within the time frame that Quendall Terminals is planned to be finished. Therefore, the assumption that WSDOT will rebuild the existing 1-405/NE 44th St interchange into a tight-diamond configuration is invalid. The analysis assumptions for the project should only be based on the existing interchange configurations_ Any mitigation measures for the project impacts on State highway system will be estimated from the baseline condition. 2. Page 7 -Peak Hour Traffic Operations: the two-way stop-control operations at the ramp intersections as stated are incorrect. The 1-405 SB ramps intersection is two-way operation while the NB ramps intersection is operating as all-way stop-control. Please revise. 3. Page 8 -Table I: For better determination of the current traffic operations, please.also report the worst movement for all A WSC intersections_ This comment applies ib other LOS reporting tables throughout the report. 4. Page 12 -Trip Generation: the provided trip generation calculations (Appendix C) show that the Average Rate of 0.51 and 0.62 (ITE Trip Generation Manual, g<h Edition) were SR 405 (NE 44th vicinity) Quendall Terminals Page 2 of 3 used to estimate the AM and PM peak trips generate by the apartment units. Based on the ITE Data Plot and Equation graph, choosing an adequate average for the above average proposed 800 apartment units can have great variation as most data were collected for 500 units or less. For example, the highest data point for PM peak yield 475 trips for 430 units while the lowest data point yield 110 trips. For the subject project location where no public transit connection is offered, a lack of alternative transit modes, and no minimum walking-distance businesses, WSDOT believes that the Average Rate(s) suggested by the ITE is under estimated as most tenants will rely on vehicular mode. Higher average rates for estimating the AM and PM trips should be used. Suggest using 25% higher values than the ITE recommended rates, 0.64 for AM and 0.77 for PM trips. 5. Page 17-Traffic Operations Impact: due to such tightly spaced intersections and complex geometry/channelization at the project vicinity, it is critical that a queuing analysis is provided. Queuing analysis results are important in determining the adequacy of the network operations as a whole. As the LOS analysis results indicate, the current configuration of the NE 44th St interchange is not sufficient to handle the additional traffic. Longer delays will be experienced not only on NE 44th St, but also at the I-405 NB and SB off-ramp. Analysis shows the amount of delay at both NB and SB ramp can be double or triple during AM and PM peak hours. These longer delays have great potential of creating off-ramp queues extending to I-405 northbound and southbound mainline. This is unacceptable from both operations and safety standpoint. In both baseline and with project conditions, WSDOT requests that queuing results generated by SimTraffic (microsimulation model) be reported. 6. Page 20 -Planned Transportation Improvements: the listed "additional improvements identified beyond the WSDOT improvements" will need to be revised per above comment. Channelization elements accommodating development's traffic will need to be carefully designed due to such close proximity of the project access and the interchange intersections. For better visualization, please include a conceptual channelization plan including proposed mainline improvements and site access. Coordination with Hawks Landing's access plan is a must due to potential conflicts. Note that any channelization proposals within WSDOT Limited Access will require Channelization Plan review and approval. 7. Page 22-Transportation Mitigation Fees: project impacts to the existing I-405 /NE 44th St interchange are considered significant adverse impacts per WSDOT Development Service Manual Section 4.1.06. These impacted state highway intersections would be considered deficient to support the development. Mitigations must be provided to keep the operations above the LOS threshold. Where the LOS is already below the applicable threshold, the pre-development LOS and delay is the condition that must be preserved. The time delay associated with the pre-development LOS is used rather than the otherwise applicable deficiency level (e.g. the appropriate mitigation is to make the C:\Felix_DevSeN\SEPA_Aesponses\sepaAENTON_SR405MP747Quendall_TIA2City.doc SR 405 (NE 44th vicinity) Quendall Terminals Page 3 of 3 necessary improvements to bring the time delay back to the delay under baseline condition). 8. Due to the anticipated high level of project impact on State highway system, electronic traffic simulation models (SimTraffic) are requested for verification purposes. There may be additional comments coming from our I-405 team and we could forward you those to you once received. If you have any questions, or require additional information please contact Felix Palisoc of our Developer Services section by phone at 206-440-4713, or via e-mail at palisof@wsdot.wa.gov. Z 1 ~1 Ramin Pazooki Local Agency and Development Services Manager RP:fsp cc: Day file/ Project File R. Roberts, MS 120 C:\Felix_DevServ\SEPA_Responses\sepaRENTON_SA405MP747Quendall_TIA2City.doc City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT EIS SCOPING COMMENT SHEET Please provided comments on the scope of the EIS for the following project. You may comment on alternatives, mitigation measures, probable significant adverse impacts, and licenses or other approvals that may be required. coMMENTING DEPARTMENT= 'P\o .. ri'?ieview EIS SCOPING COMMENTS DUE: MARCH 12, 2010 APPLICATION NO: LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M DATE CIRCULATED: FEBRUARY 19, 2010 APPLICANT: Campbell Mathewson PLANNER: Vanessa Dolbee PROJECT TITLE: Quendall Terminals PLAN REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 21.46 acres {159,149 SF) EXISTING BLDG AREA {gross): None LOCATION: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd N PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) 1,155,600 SF SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and SEPA Environmental Review for a mixed-use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd, The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential {COR) and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21-46-acre site would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain 6 -7 story mixed-use buildings. Overall, the development would consist of 800 residential units {resulting in a net residential density of 46.4 units/acre), 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail and 9,000 square feet of restaurant, The applicant has proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to the 7 proposed lots. Surface and structured parking would be provided for 2,171 vehicles, 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 Proposed improvements include remediation of existing contamination, stormwater and sewer improvements. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING COMMENTS: Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housinn Air Aesthetics Water Liaht/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Animals Utilities Transnortation Environmental Health Public SeNices Energy/ Natural Resources Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,0DOFeet 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. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Vanessa Dolbee From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: To: Monday, March 15, 2010 09:06 AM 'Karen Walter' Subject: RE: Quendall Terminals, LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M Determination of Significance Karen, Thank you for the request. At this time the City is working on identifying a consultant to work on the EIS for the subject project. Once we identify a consultant, the City will be conducting further scoping comment opportunities of which will include a meeting with. interested agencies. As such, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe would be i_ncluded in this list of agencies. Therefore, we will be conducting an extended scoping period for this project, although the meeting date has not yet been identified. Please submit your written comments as soon as possible for the subject project and the City will inform you of the date and time of future scoping commenting opportunities . Thank you, Vanessa Dolbee (Acting) Senior Planner City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 (425)430-7314 From: Karen Walter [mailto:Karen.Walter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Friday, March 12, 2010 02:20 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Quendall Terminals, LUA09-151, EIS, ECF, BSP, SM, SA-M Determination of Significance Vanessa, The Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division is reviewing the threshold determination (DS), environmental checklist, and Wetland Assessment, Standard Lake Study, Habitat Data report, and Conceptual Restoration plan for the Quendall Terminals proposal. We need additional time to review these materials and are requesting an extension to the comment period so that we may fully review these materials and provide any comments that we may have. We would appreciate it if the City would extend the comment deadline until Friday March 19, 2010. Please let us know if this is possible. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muck/eshoat Indian Tribe Fisheries Division 39015 172"d Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 1 King County Wastewater Treatment Division Environmental Planning and Community Services King Street Center, KSC-NR-0505 201 South Jackson Street Seattle, WA 98104-3855 March 2°°, 2010 Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Quendall Terminals Dear Ms. Dolbee; City of Renton Planning Division MAR -8 2010 The King County Wastewater Treatment Division (WTD) has reviewed the Determination of Non-Significance dated February 18'", 2010. King County's Eastside Interceptor and South Mercer Forcemain are located within or near the proposed location of your project (see attached drawings). In order to protect this wastewater facility, King County is requesting that the City of Renton do the following: • Submit construction drawings for the project to our Asset Management section for review during design development so that King County staff can assess project impacts. Please send drawings to: Bob Isaac, Local Public Agency Administrator King County WTD Asset Management 201 South Jackson Street, KSC-NR-0508 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 , Thank you for th/pportunitY. o review and comment on this proposal. Sinc71''1y, I(' -.----/ ___ _ !·0 / 'Alliso 'untj(j, 1 / Environmental P a~fng & munity Services cc: Bob IsaalLocal Public Agency Administrator, Engineering & Asset Management [Attachment(s)J CREATING RESOURCES FROM WASTEWATER N :f: >' ->-r ~~~ -, 0 f; z 0 0 -0 .... oz~ w"' ~ :> >-~ "'~ 0 oz ~ow <rw >-~~ ~ :> w >--u rx z ~ 0 -«"' ~ a::2::: (I) ""' w 0 " >-W Z o<r"' r « r ~~ u "' .... ~~ u « 0 w ->-~ <rz ~ WOW « u "' ~£XISTINGi __!!. _!.2_6, 404_ 93 ; / !.'.4!NTAIN 'Jk' C()'·J";'':-·-, 5Ef'" JAi -1/,.4 ' - 34 "#A.~ER 5ERV!C£ c.:wsr Nore .3 \ ~F:-151-1 l4DDER AOOEIJ -...._'-----....; SEE DWG 10/3 ----, -;---," \ --·, E/662_ 361 00 I . // ;~~·J:g: :f 1'/LET -!-.AccEPS~r R/W t!NE_,,,/Al TEL£1:'~NE: ~ I N -Ac, E 5r'cC , / CABL£. 5 [,T£ ~ DwG. ,! -V 1 L --coN~c N -/ ' ' -j------c--' -' FERM E5MT I '1 Ii' -----..=:.._.-::::._-~----;=~.-,"I~. --. "-~\\ ----L--_--_ ' --/1_ ~I o f / 'i ---I , _\\ -J ' '364&.; \ \_ ---·1s:-__j / ~-=----1 -' o-'. -1, \ ------__ =--,-:::;:~ --=, ~/-___ _ ----- ' -/ ,_ I'---/ --' -----.. E-~ --';' 1_-='+,.·...C--,;,_;,~53 'Si · .------~----_,... " _ _...__r-;,J I I -----,----... -- " -~· / lFtT-6. ----~ -e IU ' " -r----T L 4KEi NASH BLVD --1/11 /\0£\4=-------~-==--~ __,__ -:::-_-=-::----_-_ -~~ (< ·IJPRY R/1¥ / -----·--: V ·- ''I LWE 'h'WYR/W '· \ -.....__ LINE ___...-~ --------"'---.:: ------- CcNrRAO"OR 5J-IAL:~fr0£---- APPROX 70 L.r Of: 24"'?CP CULVERT UNDER SE 80TH 5T. SCALE: HORIZONTA.!,,_ M 8/ P.'f!_t" . '""LASS :IY l:1ACl·.~FILL s;i: --------I-. ' f ~ -------~.-;.,b· '-. ---------__ -",\---' WATER METFR -1 AA-F -» -SEE SPEC COIi/Si. _____ ,, __ A'_OTE .2. D1"~6 .3 ~ --1--~-_-_c-7_". --~_L-~\~\-~-~----1~- MH ,f0,!'.,?4 I F.,I'.':,"."': ,;,J' "<::t~ \ 1 -- 5,f"A. 331r:: .• :o 1 ,?CP C{_liY I\ SEE ~,;,c:o.ti1. l N. 196,3 I ,01,0!-PLUG \CONtil" NOTC £" l66i'. BOTH END5 ~, L\WG .3 -'...Rll1NAGE ROUT£ -;:"LE.AN I"=, AND SLOP£ TO N.:-w ~ULVE~'r r: ' I I __ _J ,, [~ ~ Plt,.E ~UP~QRTED P/r'£ (SE£ 0YVG S) r'IJ.£ DR/WNG BFTWCEN~ i--: ____ _/ \---'..st..-OPE FILL r'ROM_ Hl(;;HW,,O{ TOWARO \ ,RR OVE"R. PIPE. PJ;fOY/0£ Ol?AIJJAGE .I ' ' ' j ""-UTURE M£/?C€R ISLAND CONNECT/ON I j!_ t .--PIPE <t 6 ,-i2'°5TU8 .\ ,VPR)"',{'/,i, . ' I ,· LI/\/£ ---~ ·!-f- -~----__:::_;: :-:-"--.:.._ ~----~ ~ ~@B67 ----, ---- ----__ ' WASI-I c!LVO ..JL, LI 11 L_I -_, ;-------- 1i · I-IWr' Ml/ ROZ-ZS ___ 'i_R/W 5rA 391'-:J7C' I ,l/J.JE '-N 197 SJ '~ :/i,6~0 . ~lf.'l'6f1$ T0:5TA.27f9$ I 5H"'1LL 8£ DOVE PRIOR n.., I 40 I ro.cau.,rev=o.c ~ Mil'/ CREEK CRO$.SIAIG ~ ' . :o,rCH 8£',_TWEE"IJ PIPE AUD 'RR TO ':lJR;,.f"l/:J'TO"CPEEX' • -·,·- /SLOP£ FILL FROM Hl(JJ-IWA-V TO WAR/) /: RR OVER PIP£ PROVIDE DPAIJ.IAGE / ., .. DITCH 8ETWEEY-PIPE A.UO R'R'TO "" ~- a, IQ I o 5Tl<'UCTU/?C 1tMh'Y CR~EK CR0Sf!NG i \ STRt/CTf/RE-5EE DW6: /0 --E"Xl5TII./G PAV£.0 Access ROAD t;f,;'ft,~ 1~u~ffc/°t,J/%iH2 1 / DRAII..J TO CREE'l( \ .PROVIDE DITCN £A'C/.I ~/0£ 0~ PIPE 70 $TORM W"ATER IAILers IJEA/l 5TA 47.,._40 5££ DWG.S. 4,!: 5 . --~IIY ()W(j ___A"f:W ! l'6ICO :\ r,,...,.-...,..' ~-?~£.P.Yf.Cf._lC::.f __ c,p_~R~A. . -FILL d. OfAIIJAGE EUY27..5----, SHAU. 8£'. CLA.55 J!£ 8.4("KFl,/..L (I.Ye:Fafi:'Al...L. ACCE.$5'~ -~~~:~. ~o I k:\ !14"'//'CP :,,_,t;1J2Q/71, !Jr\ 84"RCP 5,ooom '\:' I a_J ..,., C \ 7 'V IZ".5TUBTOH'EST-_.. l:! ,, V. /NV /8.20 -----~ I ~ ~---------- 271-00 28-fOO Z9f00 30f00 L P/LE TIP ELE"J/,4T/0A/ FOR OE/C/?MINIA/6 I. UMP 5l-'M 8!/J (SCE 5PCC5) -, L----------- .'?/.,..00 .5 • .,.....,...,, 33'00 .,,KXJ ;tyV 19 • .31 / -SEE C0/./5TRUChOIJ ;:'1'C5 roR _l_ -:5 BUILT PIU TIP EI.EY,tr/O.U5 35-fOO .. 'itdW -TO -10 ftlUU 1~44 /NV. ~I.SC PPi:JnDE ~·...., ?O.:JZ APP.ROVED COAIC. :_i.,~ PLUG. ~:~· ~:1i ... S ((•t,-1 (. r "'· •~'' "i:,~. ',.. " . -r. ._. ~lir\_ 38'<.>J JnOU ,o J M:'Te?CPOLl 1 AN i:.NGINt"fRS MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN SEATTLE R 202 C ! REN TON EASTSIDE INTERCEPTOR-SECTION 4 STATION 27 TO STATION 40 8 ·.~h'fY ,-,-~, ,:1,C,jjC r,r,, .·."r ,~,~/,,~,1~,-,L~:-.-, -. .,,.-.. ,-~:-.{ A-,/hr"j., ..... ". -----4-,. ~·-'_._·,'.!~ j, -,, ··-----· . ,:_ ..-./ / ,-/,,, --I SYSTEM --AS NOTED JUNE,1963 ' 8 II a£ {JO .,, 70 §g AUGLE PT PUGET SOU,V/J POWER ~TA. , .. 00.1,Z ti t..lG.LIT ()UEAl/)ALL I 'I-I /91559.2Z CABLE STAT/OAI El"R;!J53.0d 5~·1,:ooW { _ L ~t __-~PPRO..r. DliTER EKTE/o./T 0,:-1..oG 1 , _____ ,If. t.1 l!JOous DAI OCT. ,,, 1964. COUT~lfCTOR fl_/_ SJ.IAt.l, C'CM/TACT .),MflAxrER d! ca '£.A'/5 7/,V~ p ~ L,. 70 IJET~,i'MI/.IC £-,<ACT LOCATIOAI AA/0 , IJOI..P.1-1/,1./,5 ~5 -"/iEi,UtREI) NETJ.100 OF MDV'//.JG LOGS , !TYPICAL) FROM Rt~r-c:u=·wAr' PRIOE' TO / ' --------.. (Jll, j -------COMS'TA'UCT/0,V, 1 . • JI~ -------' ,. t:.A~ --------' z~ ,.,_y!!-f-· ~PPi'OK. (. PllfiET SOUA/1' p~~ • !5-'' J!S'' W' POWE.Ii' 4 UGH T CO, _-Y t,J_ ~/ STA .i?~;oo -&, 'J"a- • 'Pl/GET 50Ulll) PfjW£J; ,f Llt,#T ca EASEMCAlr JACYED o,e TVJ../AIELED AJ./(hE PT 45• • • Allt-1..E PT. STA (J~(i~40 /J 196 Clll: Sci E l~t:Z, 3'14.i'O I LAKE .SUl!MAR!NE CA,,Le.S . ~ ~--~ PIP£ UUD IJ/510£. IJ ·APPRO%. t/ "1El.L TEL CO. MAii.! 1..//../C rRUAIK .SLJRMARIA.1£ CA,9t.E. E.YERCISE E..YrREME CAUr/01..1 WI-IEAI WORK/HG' A/EAR CARLE SEcr10A1 SEE NT.411.. 61':4 , .. ~~-40 OIJ l)Wt;; .? J.I 197 9W4, 91 AAK,1..£ P/'5. TOe'llM-AA!Gi.E PT WASl-l/1./GTOJ../ ~ E /6lii', .,_69. 20 N---l-"METRO ~4-.li'CP EAST5/I)£ /Al TERCCProg (.$£C7'/0,U 4) I'--/IJllCR J.IAR80R J.IIJE .. .. -. = ... k '.·.·.-.1.---·)"'S·"J". ~'W=C' C ,.,., ·~-f -r · ·---· -e-"/FY J.1-1 =~~ ~JJJ.cs JU ¥~Cle.: · er..= ---"-"~--~~.-::~·--· --.-1-0-~o-ct-~ ·' ?:1'~-~~£""~-f-:·.:.::t:"~,lttfTH~-""' -~ ~r, a-~-d t ==s=m= ~ l ,;-rp, t>~L \."" "' ,,; t -----,· ..... =~1 ~ctP.o«:? ·~---~~~~-.::~-~~~~.._.!'_1:'_+-~--·:=--r-·-~=-J~=:_-:_:-~_·::--------:--~Eif74"#~~,g-=-==t:-::l=••t•=~-:=:: !i~t --+- -!-- " -·---f----1--------t- ,~oo.,z, ~ -1--c.2.40, J.J J9tJ. 1;,21. 09 INATl /"ITT/NliHP STA /(, ~44,40 ij u;;+#.40 .f :J4+Ai,.5ti, E /~~/, !58 ==--=-r=:: . ~ --t~ ----=+==-__ L_ -2~.:=: =---=1=. ::..Ct_ 1-==i"-,.mL. ;, ·1-_, __ ~· I: +---t t -i-: j :,z ,aWN::n , • ·-"""'""<'I Effl-:_~ "GUt.';41""e,. .-o:i"_ ~ ~,:tJ:T· C =t-=t =_ j--c::~ -+-,.-~ ,__t_J--. ··-.-1=. --<--. =:f_ -= _:_:_,.cc: -.=4=-=·t:=.:.:c{==., __ , .:--:i. ~ ·-- :1=...:::- -t-=-·~=t-'~"""" >---:>. ---=-+~- --+---+----< ·-.::_J.:__ ~1:~~~ ---r . . -. •-=t-_:----- .j TR~f,;,4,.,s., -sr -·-.1-.- . . I _, L£--·ti.~ ----~-- :.... . -_· _:-:__~-:---·. l --~.,~ .. yf-~------------t--~~~J:S~c;;y'Ji 1"'~4t#"-.. ...:.--::--t--=-.:::-F~==-·..:. -1 ·-------=·:.:-=-:. _:_ :..:..::~f=--=t---=-=- ". =t= --~--+-=::: :_::1-~ ' .:.i.:.:":·.-·-+- 'C1 -:r::-:.· 1 ---+ ~~=c ·4 :i -..... ~~ r.---r :t .:r:=-:: "1~·- +-~-=-~--~- ·~ F--4-_~~t~~¥;l~~~~ .-=F~ -+- ~- ~,,:: _·-"J ·- ·~ --=1 -'-- ··tw' ... -. :.~··. -~ -· --. ------ -·--··~ --· --. -·----·--·----· -----±-.. --+----c: . .c: )____ ··-:± ):.:_ .. .. =r=, -i--·-- :-:. -1-::-:.~· :f~ t---cj'_ =i=-t .. ---+ --=J:· t-· ··+- ~fcJrn=~1~tt.~st ft'-t ~ -r4:1•·1 -t=:fil~£~'c:~~~i:£-:Cf ~:,c::J::c;;~f::,~::_;~-:1:- .. ~-i---= =r~ c~~i ~~~~· ~t~t~~~ @+:·. _-----~--.4 ___ _ ··~= :---1------ o,oo 5,00 10 .. 00 !5rOO ro .. oo _____-I .-' ,. ,. •• 75.47 -=i --:: ~---:::t==t:=·---t---[ ..... j. -i\----J-=~ . s-;:,•tffe=!=f s,;;,'f:.,>;:;;t.icj,f~~~~-.:"!;._:""'f= , . -~-···· ~-·I~:.=:~. ~~==- ·-<·--· • "'I';:-:--~-= -i. c.l: = 1o 1:..,L-:1- - f --r-~..t.Q_--r-· --.. \-::-'-+ -1=,+.=:i.:_-_:_ + ==t="~-=f-·-=:.:;-==l·=-..:"t=- ·:-i ·~ ----I- +- ' ~ --+-· f- .::r:: +- -·· -t-- es,oo .VOTE: --±---- ---+---=:: -- ~Q ,;o 40 ·~ 0 LAKE WAS/.1/IJGTON £,VL) OF , :r/ COIJTP4CT coNM~cr ro~rl5TM.t5 .:STA :a~~04_05 1f!:R.t5cve11 / .Y i 11 [ ~\ ILFM STA •• ,,.,,,. V ~HO.PL' LIIJL! /JOT/,1:"Y Tl-IE FOii.OWIA/ti A~EAIC/£5 P.R/oe TO l!IEGIJ./1.1/.WG' A.VY WORK /JJ LAKE NASK!I./GT"ON: U.S. ARUY, CORP.5 o,<: £µQ1AJEEli'.$..1. 1519 ,,u.ASKAAJ WAY SOi.11"!1, SL'A1"7.t.EJ LI. 5. .&0AS1" t:UA.e'/JL '-14 ,..,,"'AYE., SEATTLE,; A,1.//;J PACIF.IC JJ02TI-I- W~$1" IJ~i.J. Trt.~PA'O.V~ co., Mir. -'AY MA.eEC.t.£" Ar Ko" FLAA/GEi) F.M. AA//) ,V /99 ,4(;9 . .f'2' E,t, SEW.!.e/ : 24"FLA/l/&CD 0//ERFLOWIJNe E /~(pQ/37.98 , · I IV/fl.I Fl.eKIIJl.E-COUPL!JK:,S ' -----~ rA5A CLA'5'S' h?5 Fi.AA/SES) ________ fZ.,JD5f 1l J.1 8tJ. 3-,· t?~~w s! ,, ~ ~ : STA e~,-oo ll ,.,. 5~· IO· ,v ~' ~ l ,<n -~ 40 "" Q I===!= ~ i __ ":d t---1-· --! '. -4: .. .... =: - P/€_~--=-dll "- --+-- !""S'f"".L< . =± .• , · t==t''" '-··t·':j;: -----------------------·--- MET.C,O SOLJTH MERCER ES. 1~ SEWA(i£" 1J , PI../MPI.VG V \ STArlOM • iAAIGLE PT ~TA ,34 •40. Sb ~/994t:i~._I!!, E 1660,30/.42 JI ' METRa C~CT, ;t ~" I I """--=~,r: l=-,,,-······ia,·:: ,=r~-·~·~-·-···q{ ·-r,• "· ~ -. . --. -··--__ ~. ··• · ... :.·.·.·. : _:~:+···· -,,--:_:·-.. 3 r;;.., ,,,,1.-~I,=:1~"$±=--~-- -.c:i-_:_cc-- ~h~w-ir,t:U4l-:_g_m1n-~--1~1~04ff~~~ 2·. s_~ _ _:_:_--I -----!·--~~--1-== 4==--=j:-~ ·-~~·: . .--~-~---~:=~~+=~~-----.. --···- i=+ .:j:=..-1••= --,~.sti·x;.j'·ca~ .. i<t/rR!fi·-'-· ···r-....:.1-== -· -H<IG--FI-F,7;hf.'G--A-F---· -1--=.;. ------·:_c:t··· -·.:. :.j.,-: ---:r=·-·· .. ~--~---···------li.:.:}::..~i:.:::...=t:j::~\---' 'i'. f.=f t~-' =:c·!c:c:~-.. -:=;:::= r~ it :r-,-· --, ---·------· . I :~_-:: ---=:•_.._-.-===:f'-:_ t- t _,__-:--_--:.± ~-==i:.~.-- --'. i: · _:;_ -=fc.c::j':'-::'i="c:.t:.4-=!==l=c:1= ·-- -~ .:30+00 35,,.00 ( ~~o i/10 , .,, 70 OQ I'! el / ci '-ME/A.~~ CO/JP. SrDP fJAll VAlV~ METER sr~u,r. :";l-.. :r.;fflf;£/:J~ RA ~-1010 pr·,r %:.ftJ'-,rw e"AST ~ COI.ITROt. -....-.,. ·. \,,,.-! \ ~~4~~0 _, ::~4~~:r~ (Piflr'!J~f./1~: w .,P ,·-54-nr ~-'~ ___k,ff·-~"'-------------------·---~ w-"'~"""' . ·-·- :w. "°~ 57' "0$'' E F'M STA -esr COl,./T. ~ .. "°"~~ R'Oi. A.I,;;,•~~, l~O.Td Q 15•• W !JEAJCJI M4PK ' BeJ./C# UAJlK Ii •A~ 0£5C~ 151' .r.R. '//!IT/ON f' • SPK SO .I .P. ~I/OM L·A~~ACi; OF R"'° EtE/l"AT!OII ,P..P. .5PK. 11' COU. fll~ n,,, CO" OF · 051 .,,. tr~.4'jf ·r FOl?CE ,v. . ,~s· Rr: "aF r;AJ Tl:'. IA/ ,l.) . Ir~ SURVEY SLM';;'· ,u. COE! 01' CONTROL INFOR o,oo rJ'OR~-s_5 co~ou. MATION ·'· 1 --c-).JC.0~4 SCALE I": 300' JJOTE : PROJECT ElEYAf'IOJ.J 100 £C,UAtS ME"AJ./ SEA I.EVffi.. lJATUM I/. ~.C. d G. 5. l9Z9 11947 AOJU'STMEI./T) Tl-IE WATER SURFACE OF I.I:. WASJ.IIA/GTOM IS MAIA! TAJA/E/J A 1' eL. /14.0 :I: Irr. 1044~ AS CONSTRUCTED DATE NOV. 4, 196:S oc:;,a~w _WYY DRU!< /ol..kC __ P<fCKEO R~ii,r_ METROPOLITAN ENGINEEHS MUNICIPALITY OF METROPOLITAN "" R2148 ::~w~i.AN~ ~:~%WfLL c:R~: <l~D KR:~[R sua .. ,,Ho_w,_y,_y._ --Rfco'""'""fD J.~--~l.t/f__ .,.,,;,:N,u ,~~,< HORIZ l'"e;IOO: AN 1965 RENTON SYSTEM SOUTH MERCER FORCE MAIN o~~"'"~ NcYS[~ p 3 D N R w BlC D ssoc ES "'"""' {••'"'" "'''"""'''"' l••·"'"' ''""" , .. ~~;"~..... "'''""'''''"'''' VERT. ,·:a 20 OA•C _..,_ ··----L_,,. __ 4 PLAN AND PROFILE $H[( f ><e)"16[~ - ----D~e~:'.:~o:L:_w ___ .............. r City O • _!-~µi!WJl February 5, 2010 Campbell Mathewson Century Pacific, LP. 1201 third Ave., Suite 1680 Seattle, WA 98101 Department of Community and Economic Development Alex Pietsch, Administrator Subject: Notice of Complete Application Quen-:'all Terminals, LUA09-151, ECF, SA-M, SM, BSP Dear Mathewson: 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. If additional materials are required for review of the subject project, you will be notified. Please contact me at (425) 430-7314 if you have any questions. Sincerely, /~tL~ Vanessa Dolbee (Acting) Senior Planner cc: Altino Properties1 Inc., and J.H. Baxter & Co/ Owner(s) Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057. • rentonwa.gov •, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DATE: TO: CC: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM December 21, 2009 Vanessa Kayren Kittrick ~ Arneta x7298 ~ QUENDALL TERMINALS LUA 09-151 4503 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD N This memo is a preliminary review on the above project. Drafting Standards: The development did not include datum on the utility plans that were submitted for a preliminary review. All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two horizontal and vertical controls per the City's current horizontal and vertical control network. Water: Conceptually the water utility plan appears to be in order. When submitted with the formal application the water plan needs to be on its own plan and profile sheet. A Reduced Pressure Backflow Assembly {RPBA) is required behind each domestic water meter. The RPBA shall be installed inside an above ground heated enclosure "Hot-Box". The following are standard review comments. The plans need to clearly show the stationing of all valves, fittings, meters, hydrants, blow off assemblies and bends. Show the stationing of all angle points. The profile needs to include all crossings, vertical bends, blocking and shackle rods. Use vertical bends to clear conflicts. Install a blow-off at the end of all dead-end lines. Install air-vac release at high points. The water main shall have {and callout) a minimum cover of 3 feet for 10" lines and smaller and 4' for 12 inch lines and larger. Plans need to show a 'Before and After' connection details for all new connections. Plans need to show station and location and size of DDCVA for the fire sprinkler vaults. Install vertical crosses for polypigging of new main. i:\projects\qtmemo.doc , ' Quendall Tenninals Page 2 of2 Plans need to include details in the plan set. Sewer: Sewer needs to be on a separate sanitary sewer plan and profile. Additional comments have been provided in the margins ofthe Sewer Report (Quendall Terminals kpff, November 2009) attached. All utilities shall show (the same) stationing tied to a known survey point. Storm: See memo attached from Ronald Straka, Surface Water Utility Supervisor. Streets: There will be dedicated right-of-way. The typical sections shown appear to be in order. Street lighting per City of Renton standards and specifications will be required. This is not intended to be a complete review. i:\projects\qtmcmo.doc '•"BLUMEN •.:1coNSULTING 5'.GROUP, INC MEMORANDUM To: Campbell Mathewson, Century Pacific 720 Sixth Street S Suite 100 Kirkland, WA 98033 Ph: 425-284-5401 Fax: 425-284-5402 From: Gretchen Brunner and Kristy Hollinger, Blumen Consulting Group (BCG) CC: Vanessa Dolbee and Chip Vincent, City of Renton Date: May 19, 2010 Subject: Quendall Terminals Preliminary Draft EIS Information Needs The purpose of this Memo is to provide a list of information needs for the Quendall Terminals Draft EIS and related technical reports. The following is a list of the information that we will need for the Draft EIS and tentative dates for receipt of information. This list includes the technical analysis needs of TENW, Raedeke, AESI and Primedia. The three columns included in the following matrix indicate: 1) the information needs; 2) the team member(s) assumed to be responsible for providing the requested information; and, 3) a date the information is needed to comply with the targeted EIS schedule. When more than one name is provided in the source column, the first name listed has the primary responsibility for coordinating provision of the information. We will periodically update the status of items in the status column, if warranted. We realize that a considerable base of information and analysis has been prepared to date on the site and proposed project for the remediation and master planning efforts. This information includes technical reports (geotechnical, wetlands and transportation) and architectural plans/elevations provided with the application submitted to the City in November 2009. We have reviewed this information and assume that it satisfies a number of specific items requested in this Memo (as noted in the third column). If this is not the case (i.e., if changes have been made to the proposal) then we will need new information. There are several critical dates that are identified in this Memo that will drive the schedule for completion of the Preliminary Draft EIS (PDEIS). In particular, the dates associated with preparation of the draft technical reports are keyed to receiving: • Access to the City's transportation model, and associated items by May 26'1'. 1 • Remaining assumptions regarding the cleanup/remediation of the site from Anchor and Aspect by May 28 1h. • Information on redevelopment under the proposal and alternative (one redevelopment alternative is assumed) from Century Pacific and Aspect by June 11th. With this information, the technical reports in support of the EIS will be prepared as follows: • Draft technical reports on the natural environment will be submitted to BCG by July 6th. • The draft transportation report will be submitted to BCG by July fih. • Final technical reports on the natural environment will be submitted to BCG by July 2d". • The final transportation report will be submitted to BCG by July 23"1. Assuming all of these dates are met, the PDEIS could be submitted to the City of Renton and the applicant by August 11th (see the detailed Quendall Terminals schedule for more information). Please call if you have any questions or would like to discuss these information needs further. INFORMATION NEEDS SOURCE DATE NEEDED Existing (Baseline) Conditions 1. Please describe the cleanup/remediation assumptions that will Aspect, May 28"' be used to characterize the existing (baseline) site conditions for Anchor the EIS prior to redevelopment. Specifically: Rcv'dNov. • Describe the cap characteristics (extent and depth of the 2009 upland and shoreline caps). geotechnical • Specify where isolated soil removal would occur, if any . and wetlands • Explain the characteristics and purpose of the shoreline wall, assess- if one will be provided. ments; need • Indicate the assumed minimum, maximum and average width confirmation of the shoreline buffer, its location and extent across the site. of basic • Describe the on-site wetlands that will be retained or created cleanup/re- following site remediation (including their assumed size, mediation classification, required buffer and source of hydrology). assumptions • Describe other riparian habitat that would be created in the shoreline area. • Describe the site cleanup/remediation assumptions for the No Action Alternative. That is, if redevelopment of the site did not occur, describe cleanup assumptions, cap characteristics, etc. Also, describe stormwater control features following remediation. Please describe these assumptions to the same level of detail as requested above. 2. Provide a to-scale base map for the entire site following Aspect, May 28'" remediation (baseline) that identifies: Anchor • Site boundaries . • Tooooraohv and relevant natural features . 2 INFORMATION NEEDS SOURCE DATE NEEDED • Shoreline wall, if provided . • Retained/created wetlands and their buffers . • Any other relevant site features. The base map should represent the site following cleanup/remediation and account for the entire Quendall Terminals site and surrounding area within approximately 0.10 mile. The map should be provided in GADD format to the BCG technical team. It should be able to be printed at BY, x 11 inches. BCG should be sent a version in PDF or JPG format. 3. Provide an aerial photo of the site with the entire site boundary Century May 28'" indicated {please don't provide any additional information on this Pacific photo). The aerial photo should account for the entire site area, as well as the surrounding area within approximately 0.25 mile. The photo should be in JPG format and be sized for printing at BY, x 11 inches. 4. Provide a map and description of existing infrastructure at the Aspect May 28'" remediated site (including roads and utilities --water, sewer and stormwater). Permits 5. Provide a list of pending permits/approvals that would affect Aspect, May 28'" the site area, if any (i.e., related to cleanup/remediation efforts). Anchor 6. Provide a list of all City of Renton permits and approvals that Ryan May 28'" would be required as part of the Proposed Actions. Durkan, Aspect 7. Provide a list of Federal and/or State permits and approvals Ryan May 28'" that could be ultimately required as part of the Proposed Actions, Durkan, if any. Aspect Proposed Action and Alternatives 8. Provide a list of the "Proponent's Objectives" for the Proposed Century Rcv'd Action. This list is required by SEPA and should include the Pacific 5.10.10 primary project goals. At this point it is assumed that the EIS will evaluate three (3) City of May 28'" alternatives: the Proposed Action; a Lower Density Alternative; and, a Renton (confirm EIS No Action Alternative. The Proposed Action and Lower Density alternatives) Alternative will likely consider a similar primary infrastructure system (i.e. roads and utilities), with a different mix of uses, densities, heights 3 INFORMATION NEEDS etc. It is assumed that the preliminary alternatives are as follows: • Proposed Action -Six 7-story mixed use buildings, 800 residential units, 245,000 sq.ft. of office, 21,600 sq.ft. of retail, 9,000 sq.ft. of restaurant, and 2, 171 structure parking spaces. • Alternative 1. Lower Density Alternative -800 residential units, no office, 21,600 sq.ft. of retail, and approximately 1,585 structured parking spaces. • No Action Alternative -No redevelopment at this time. The EIS Alternatives will need to be confirmed by City of Renton staff. The No Action Alternative will assume that that no infrastructure (roadways, water, sewer, stormwater systems etc.) would be built, and that no Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan or Shoreline Substantial Development Approval would be required. The following information is required for the Proposed Action, Alternative 1 and the No Action Alternative (as applicable): 9. Provide a general description of the infrastructure assumed for the EIS Alternatives. as well as general assumptions regarding phasing of infrastructure, if applicable (i.e., will certain new roadways be developed at the outset, with other infrastructure provided concurrent with ongoing redevelopment) and identification of areas of the site that could be developed in later phases, as applicable. The information should address each type of infrastructure (including roads, water, sewer and stormwater). 10. Provide graphics depicting redevelopment plans for the site under both the proposal and redevelopment alternative. The plans should show the following at full buildout: • Primary roadway network and circulation/access points; • Location of proposed buildings; • Parking -structured and surface; • Locations of open space/recreational areas/public access points (including along the shoreline)/any other community amenities; • Retained/created wetlands and their buffers; and, • Other relevant redevelopment features. SOURCE Century Pacific Century Pacific DATE NEEDED Recv'dfor Proposed Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg.; provide info. on phasing, as applicable. Recv'd for Proposed Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg.; need to show shoreline access for Proposed Action; need plans for Alternative 1 4 INFORMATION NEEDS 11. Provide a table for each alternative that identifies the assumed post-development acreages of the following: Built Area {Impervious Area) • Building footprint area (assumed new structures); • Paved rights-of-way, roads, pedestrian/bicycle paths; • Surface parking areas; and, • Plazas. Pervious Area • Designated natural/open space areas; • Unpaved trails, if any; and, • Landscaped areas. The sum of all acreages shown in this table should equal the gross site area. 12. Provide text and/or table(s) describing the following features for the Proposed Action and Alternative 1. • Description of overall building development concepts and intensity. • Assumed building square footages by use (i.e., residential, retail, office, parking etc.). • Assumed maximum building heights for each building. • Description of building setbacks from shoreline. • Assumed number of housing units, type of units (i.e., townhouse, mid-rise, etc.) and residential density. • Description of open space concept (including passive vs. active, public vs. private, connection of open spaces, recreational amenities, etc.). • Description of circulation (both motorized and non- motorized) as well as any transit features/connections. • Number of parking spaces• and type of facility (surface or structured; confirm that no underground parking is proposed). *Indicate parking ratios for all proposed uses, and provide a description of any assumptions regarding shared parking or other assumed arrangements that vary from the assumed parking ratios or were used in determining parking ratios. 13. Generally describe the proposed construction and development plan and schedule, and confirm that 2015 is the assumed year of full buildout. 14. Provide conceptual temporary and permanent stormwater control plans for proposed redevelopment of the site (i.e. identify vaults, nonds, outfalls/discharoe points, swales/convevance, as SOURCE Century Pacific Century Pacific Century Pacific Aspect DATE NEEDED June 11'" Recv'd for Proposed Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg.; need similar info. for Alternative 1; need info. on open space/recrea- tional facilities for Proposed Action June 11 1h Rcv'd July 2009 Interim Storm water 5 INFORMATION NEEDS SOURCE DATE NEEDED applicable). Describe the anticipated construction stormwater Mgmt. quality treatment facilities (i.e. ponds, portable filtration, etc.) Report;need and construction BMPs anticipated for the site. Describe any LID specific features or other innovative features. information on stormwater control with redevelop- ment 15. Describe through text and illustrations/sketches any Aspect, June 11'" sustainability features for the site, including LEED, native Century landscaping, water reuse, etc. Describe any "low-impact Pacific development" measures, including stormwater, water/resource conservation, alternative energy, or other measures. Aesthetics 16. Provide site elevations and/or character sketches to depict Century Recv'd for possible views (building and landscape character) from key Pacific Proposed viewpoints adjacent to the site. Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg. 17. Describe proposed exterior building materials, including glazing Century June 11'" materials. Pacific 18. Describe through text and plans the landscape concept for the Applicant's Recv'dfor site, including the use of native and ornamental landscape Landscape Proposed materials. Architect Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg. 19. Provide CADD data on the site and proposed buildings for the Lance June 11'" visual simulations. Mueller 20. Confirm visual analysis viewpoints selected by BCG. City of June 9th Renton Earth 21. Describe assumed foundation designs for the proposed Aspect Recv'dfor buildings, including the use of deep pilings and vapor barriers. Proposed Action in Nov. 6 • INFORMATION NEEDS SOURCE DATE NEEDED 2009 application pkg.; confirm assumptions for EIS 22. Describe any excavations for utility installations and how the Aspect Recv'dfor potential for environmental health hazards would be addressed. Proposed Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg.; confirm assumptions for EIS 23. Describe proposed seismic hazard control measures. Aspect May 28'" 24. Describe the groundwater depth, direction of flow, etc. and the Aspect Recv'd for potential need for dewatering of contaminated groundwater Proposed with redevelopment. Identify measures to control environmental Action in Nov. health risks from dewatering. 2009 application pkg.; confirm assumptions for EIS WetlandsNegetation/Habitat 25. Confirm that no direct impacts to wetlands retained or created Anchor Recv'd for with remediation would occur with redevelopment. Describe any Proposed proposed encroachment into wetland buffers. Action in Nov. 2009 Application pkg.; need similar info. for Alt. 1; need description of any buffer encroach- mentunder Proposed Action and Alt. 1. 7 INFORMATION NEEDS SOURCE DATE NEEDED 26. Describe the hydrologic patterns that would exist on the site Aspect, Interim following the cleanup/remediation. Describe how hydrology to Anchor Stormwater retained/created wetlands would be maintained/impacted by Mgmt. Report proposed stormwater control facilities and redevelopment onsite. recv'd on 5.13.10; need info on maintenance of wetland hydrology wl redevelop- men/ 27. Provide basic assumptions about the wetland mitigation plan Anchor Recv'dfor and riparian habitat plan. Proposed Action in Nov. 2009 application pkg.; need to confirm basic assumptions. Transportation 28. Confirm the approach to the transportation analysis described City of Rdv'd May in the revised outline submitted by TENW on 5.14.10. Renton 1gth 29. Provide traffic counts at study area intersections. Transpo May26"' 30. Provide Synchro model from previous transportation analysis. Transpo May 26'" 31. Provide transportation analyses for the Barbee Mill and Hawks City of May 2o"' Landing hotel project. Renton 32. Provide access to the City's model documentation (electronic City of May26"' or otherwise). Renton 33. Provide the City's EMME databanks in electronic form and the City of May26" City's EMME key. Renton 8 Quendall Terminals EIS SCHEDULE Milestone Phase 1 -EIS Scoping 1. EIS Scoping Meeting 2. EIS Scoping Ends 3. BCG Circulates Info. Needs Memo 4. TENW Gains Access to City's Transportation Model Phase 2A-Prepare Preliminary Draft EIS 5. Cleanup/Remediation Assumptions to BCG 6. City Executes Phase 2 Contract 7. City Approves BCG-Selected Viewpoints for Aesthetics Analysis 8. Info on Redevelopment under Proposal and Alternative to BCG 9. Draft Geotechnical and Wetlands/Habitat Reports to BCG 10. Draft Transportation Report to BCG 11. BCG Submits Comments on Geotechnical & Wetlands/Habitat Reports 12. BCG Submits Comments on Transportation Report 13. Final Geotechnical and Wetlands/Habitat Reports to BCG 14. Final Transportation Report to BCG 15. BCG Submits 1•1 PDEIS to City and Applicant QUENDALL TERMINALS EIS Schedule Blumen Consulting Group, Inc. May 19, 2010 27 Apr. 30 Apr. 19 May 26 May 28 May 1 June 9 June 11 June 6 July 9 July 13 July 16 July 20 July 23 July 11 Aug. 1 Milestone Phase 28 -Prepare and Issue Draft EIS 16. Comments on 1•1 PDEIS from City and Applicant to BCG (assumes 2-week review period) 17. BCG Submits 2nd PDEIS to City and Applicant* 18. Comments on 2nd PDEIS from City and Applicant (assumes 1-week review period) 19. BCG Submits For-Publication DEIS to City** 20. DEIS PUBLISHED Phase 3 -Prepare and Issue Final EIS 21. DEIS 30-day Public Comment Period 22. Public Comments to BCG 23. City Executes Phase 3 Contract 24. BCG Circulates Comments to Technical Team 25. Draft Technical Responses to BCG 26. BCG Submits 1'1 PFEIS to City and Applicant 27. Comments on 1•1 PFEIS from City and Applicant to BCG (assumes a 2-week review period) 28. BCG Submits 2nd PFEIS to City and Applicant* 29. Comments on 2nd PFEIS from City and Applicant to BCG (assumes a 1-week review period) 30. BCG Submits For-Publication FEIS to City** 31. FEIS PUBLISHED 25 Aug. 8 Sept. 15 Sept. 22 Sept. 28 Sept. 28 Oct. 5 Nov. 10 Nov. 10 Nov. 24 Nov. 10 Dec. 23 Dec. 7 Jan. 14 Jan. 21 Jan. 28 Jan. • Assumes that City/Applicant comments are not substantial and do not require new analysis •• Assumes that City/Applicant comments are edit-level QUENDALL TERMINALS EIS Schedule Blumen Consulting Group, Inc. May 19, 2010 2 '• ..... BLUMEN t;lcoNSULTING ~GROUP, INC Environmental Impact Statement - Summary of the Public Scoping Process QUENDALL TERMINALS Prepared by: BLUMEN CONSULTING GROUP, INC. Prepared for: City of Renton May 19, 2010 Project Overview Century Pacific, the project applicant, is requesting Master Plan, Binding Site Plan and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit approval for the Quendall Terminals mixed-use development on an approximately 21-acre site in the City of Renton. Under the proposal, the site would be divided into 7 lots; 4 would contain six 7-story mixed-use buildings with 800 residential units, 245,000 sq. ft. of office, 21,600 sq. ft. of retail and 9,000 sq. ft. of restaurant uses. Surface and structured parking for 2,171 vehicles would be provided. The 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 Remediation of the site would be completed before any potential redevelopment of the property occurs. EIS Scoping Process For purposes of the Quendall Terminals project, the City of Renton is responsible for performing the duties of a lead agency, as required by the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA). The City's Environmental Review Committee is serving as the Responsible Official for the SEPA review. The lead agency has determined that the proposed project would result in probable significant impacts. As such, an environmental impact statement (EIS) is required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c) and will be prepared consistent with WAC 197-11-400 through 460. The EIS will evaluate potential impacts at the site from the proposed redevelopment. On February 19, 2010, the City of Renton initiated the EIS scoping process for the Quendall Terminals project by issuing a Determination of Significance (DS) and Request for Comments on the Scope of the EIS. The DS indicated that a public meeting would be held to provide an opportunity for the public to learn more about the proposed action and to provide input into the environmental review process, and that the scoping period would end on March 12, 2010. However, the scoping period ended before the public scoping meeting could be held. As a result, a second scoping period was opened in order to accommodate a public meeting (this scoping period ended on April 30, 2010). The two scoping periods comprise expanded EIS scoping 1 during which the City of Renton carried out the following actions: • Mailed copies of the OS/Request for Comments to numerous agencies and organizations, as well as property owners within a 1,000-foot radius of the site (versus the 300-foot radius required by City of Renton regulations); • Published notice of the OS/Request for Comments in the WA Department of Ecology's SEPA Register; • Published notice of the OS/Request for Comments on the City of Renton's Current Land Use Applications List; • Published notice of the OS/Request for comments in the following newspaper: Renton Reporter; • Posted Notice of Proposed Land Use Action signs at the site. The EIS Scoping notification actions comply with applicable noticing requirements. See Appendix A to this EIS Scoping Summary, as well as the City of Renton's website at http://rentonwa.gov/business/default.aspx?id-5458 for copies of the OS/Request for Comments. 1 SEPA requires a 21-day public scoping period, which can be extended at the discretion of the lead a enc . QUENDALL TERMINALS Summary of Public Scoping Process Blumen Consulting Group, Inc. May 19, 2010 1 An EIS Public Scoping meeting was held on April 27, 2010, to provide the public with opportunities to comment on the range of environmental issues, alternatives and actions that should be considered in the EIS. The meeting included an introduction to the project and EIS process provided by City of Renton staff. During the EIS Scoping meeting, the public was encouraged to provide both written and/or oral comments on the scope of the EIS. A total of 9 people signed in and a total of 4 people spoke at the public meeting. The meeting was held from 6 PM to close of comments. During the EIS scoping comment period, a total of five comment letters/emails were received, including: two comment letters from agencies (Washington State Department of Transportation and King County}, one comment letter from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, and two comment letters from an individual. All of the comment letters/emails are available for review at City of Renton Department of Community and Economic Development. For the DS, the City of Renton preliminarily determined that the following elements of the environment should be analyzed in the Draft EIS: • Earth; • AestheticsNiews; • Critical Areas; • Land and Shoreline Use; • Recreation/Public Shoreline Access; • Public Services; • Utilities; • Vegetation; and, • Transportation/Traffic. The City also preliminarily determined that the proposal, one redevelopment alternative and the No Action Alternative should be evaluated in the Draft EIS. Summary of EIS Scoping Comments The following summary highlights the major issues that were raised during the scoping process and is organized by elements of the environment headings. This summary does not reflect every individual comment received and recorded, but rather is intended to address the primary subjects of concern. In some cases, several people offered similar comments on a given subject, or one individual repeated the same comment several times. No comments focused on earth-related issues other than to state that the EIS alternatives should be compatible with potential remediation options. QUENOALL TERMINALS Summary of Public Scoping Process Blumen Consulting Group, Inc. May 19, 2010 2 AestheticsNiews Several comments expressed concern about how the proposed development would change existing views of Lake Washington from nearby private property and roadways. The quality of shoreline views within the proposed development was another issue that was raised. Specific comments included: • Building heights should step up as they move back from the lake. Seven-story buildings adjacent to the lake are too tall for this location. Lakefront buildings should be kept at 3 to 4 stories, then step up to 7 or more stories on the east side of the site. This would improve the overall appearance of the development, from both the lake and from landside, while providing better views for the residents in the taller buildings in the east portion of the site. • More open space should be provided, particularly on the lakefront side, where two large U-shaped buildings would completely cut off views towards the lake, from the east. • The large surface parking lot to the south should be moved towards the center of the site, or broken it into two smaller lots, to improve views and lessen the single large expanse of asphalt. Critical Areas Specific wetlands and riparian habitat-related comments included: • The EIS should identify which wetlands will be modified due to remediation requirements and which wetlands will be modified as a result of the redevelopment proposal. • The proposed mitigation swale to be constructed as part of Wetland A should be described, including how stranding of fish will be avoided and water quality preserved in the swale. Other mitigation that could be more beneficial for juvenile Chinook salmon should also be discussed, including but not limited to improving shoreline substrate along the project site, adding native in-water species, such as bulrush, and improving the mouths of nearby Gypsy and May Creeks. • Potential impacts to Wetlands I and J that may occur due to the widening of 1-405 as part of the Renton to Bellevue improvements should be discussed. • If a trail is to be constructed along the shoreline, it should be located outside of all mitigation areas and sensitive shorelines and avoid adversely affecting lakeshore buffer restoration options. Land and Shoreline Use/ Relationship to Plans, Policies and Regulations Specific land and shoreline use scoping comments included: • Any impacts to the shoreline as a result of a trail or other public access should be described, and appropriate mitigation identified, in accordance with City code. • How public access could be enhanced to fulfill policies, including those required by the City, should be analyzed. • The Quendall Terminals project will be the City's last opportunity to create some public access or lakefront parkland on Lake Washington in the next 30 years or more. QUENDALL TERMINALS Summary of Public Scoping Process Blumen Consulting Group, Inc. May 19, 2010 3 Recreation/Public Shoreline Access Numerous comments related to recreation/public shoreline access were conveyed during scoping. Several individuals stated that they would like the development to include a public dock, and provide public access/amenities to the Lake Washington shoreline (also see the comments on Land and Shoreline Use above). Other specific comments included: • It is the City of Renton's duty to make sure any development on the property includes full access and significant public amenities along the lakefront, to serve the NW Renton neighborhoods and all of the citizens of Renton. • There is very limited public access to Lake Washington in proximity to the site, and there will be limited opportunities to provide additional public access areas in the future, due to the extent of current development along the shoreline. • The potential for a trail within the outer edge of the 100-foot shoreline buffer should be considered. • The potential for overwater or lake access structures should be discussed. • Since mixed-use development including restaurant and retail uses is proposed onsite, a public access dock should be provided where boaters can pull up and access these businesses. • This development will be built on private property; there is no need for more public access, Renton already has public access at Coulon Park and Kennydale. • The City should partner with the developer to put in a dock so boaters from all over the lake can access and enjoy the property. Public Services No public comments were received on this element of the environment. Utilities Utilities comments were mainly keyed to stormwater issues. Specific comments included the following: • The EIS should discuss in detail how stormwater routed onto the site and stormwater generated by the redevelopment proposal will be managed. Stormwater discharges cannot jeopardize the remediation work or cause adverse impacts to fisheries resources. • The King County Eastside Interceptor and South Mercer Forcemain wastewater facility is located within or near the proposed project. To protect this facility, the City should submit construction drawings to King County for review, so that potential impacts from the project can be assessed. QUENDALL TERMINALS Summary of Public Scoping Process Blumen Consulting Group, Inc. May 19, 2010 4 Vegetation Specific scoping comments related to vegetation primarily related to wetlands (see the Critical Areas section above for details). Transportation/Traffic The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) was the only agency that provided comments on transportation/traffic-related issues. Their comments focused on the transportation analysis methodology. They requested that electronic traffic simulation models and queuing analysis be provided, and that worst traffic movement for AWSC intersections and Level of Service (LOS) reporting tables be included in the analysis. WSDOT also observed that cumulative transportation impacts should only evaluate planned projects that would be completed by the time the Quendall Terminals project is fully developed. Finally, they indicated that potential impacts of the project on the existing 1-405/NE 44'" Street interchange should be analyzed, and mitigation identified in order to maintain interchange operations at or above the applicable LOS threshold. Additional specific comments included the following: • The potential 1-405/NE 44'" St. interchange improvements project is not funded, and is not likely to be funded in the foreseeable future; the transportation analysis should not assume that this project is complete or will occur • Higher than average rates for estimating AM and PM peak trips should be used to calculate the project's impacts on streets in the site vicinity, since the project is not located within walking distance of other businesses, and no public transit connection is proposed. • The current configuration of the NE 44th Street interchange is not sufficient to handle the additional traffic that would be generated by the proposed project. Longer delays will result on NE 44'" Street and also the 1-405 northbound and southbound off-ramps. Delays during peak hours could create off-ramp queues extending to the 1-405 northbound and southbound mainline, which is unacceptable from an operations and safety standpoint. • Channelization of access streets providing access to the Quendall Terminals project will need to be carefully designed due to proximity of the project access to the interchange intersections. Conclusions/Revisions to the DEIS Scope The majority of the comments that were received during the public scoping period for the Quendall Terminals EIS related to Recreation/Public Shoreline Access, Utilities (stormwater control), Critical Areas, and Transportation/Traffic. Agencies and individuals did not identify any new elements to be added to the EIS in their scoping comments. However, based on WA State Department of Ecology requirements, the lead agency has determined that a Greenhouse Gases (GHG) analysis should be added to the EIS. QUENOALL TERMINALS Summary of Public Scoping Process Blumen Consulting Group, Inc. May 19, 2010 5 DRAFT QUENDALL TERMINAL REDEVELOPMENT APPLICANT'S OBJECTIVES • Create a compact, urban residential development that allows for inclusion of a compatible mix of small scale office and retail uses, as the market allows. • Consistent with the Growth Management Act, establish housing at high densities in close proximity to existing employment centers in downtown Renton and other primary employment centers on the Eastside. • Create an overall urban design concept that is consistent throughout the site. • Provide appropriate visual corridors through the site to the shoreline. • Create a development that provides opportunities, such as public walkways or a plaza, for visitors and residents to visually or physically access the shoreline of Lake Washington. • Allow for remediation of the site and ensure that redevelopment is compatible with the environmental remediation effort. • Work cooperatively with the City of Renton to adopt a binding site plan and development agreement that provides the necessary predictability, consistency and expediency for long term success of the redevelopment and allow for flexibility to respond to market factors overtime. • Coordinate with state, federal and local agencies, tribes, organizations, institutions, public and private sector interests and other interested parties to facilitate implementation of a successful remediation and redevelopment plan in an expeditious manner that returns the property to productive use. • Allow for redevelopment of the property that is financially viable from a real estate market perspective and allows financial return in a timely fashion. Quendall Terminal.docx Quendall Terminal.docx page 1 March 30, 201 O Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner City of Renton Planning Division, 6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Quendall Terminals EIS Scope and Budget Dear Vanessa: 425-284-.5401 fAX 42.1-284-.1402 wwvv.blumencg.com 720 Sixth St. S. Suite 1 00 Kirkland, VI/A 980.n It was a pleasure meeting with you, Chip and Campbell Mathewson on the Quendall Terminals project last week. Blumen Consulting Group (BCG) is interested and available to provide environmental review services to the City on this project. We have prepared this Letter describing our specific proposed Scope of Work, Schedule and Budget for services on Phase 1 -Project Initiation/EIS Scoping of the EIS, and assumed general scopes of work for the subsequent phases of the EIS: Phase 2A -Prepare Preliminary Draft EIS, Phase 28 - Complete and Issue Draft EIS, and Phase 3 -Prepare and Issue Final EIS. We propose to use the following consultants for certain elements of the EIS: AESI -geotechnical, Raedeke Associates -wetlands/habitat, TENW -transportation, and Primedia Group -visual simulation. SCOPE OF WORK Because of uncertainties regarding the final scope for the EIS and eventual comments from the City, other agencies and the public during the various review cycles associated with the Draft and Final EIS documents, we propose to use a phased approach to prepare the Quendall Terminals EIS. With this approach, we will be able to provide a more accurate identification of our scope of work and formulation of specific not-to-exceed budgets, prior to initiating work on a given phase. We propose to complete the Quendall Terminals EIS as follows: Phase 1 - Project Initiation/EIS Scoping, Phase 2A -Prepare Preliminary Draft EIS, Phase 28 -Complete and Issue Draft EIS, and Phase 3 -Prepare and Issue Final EIS. As such, we have provided a specific scope of work for Phase 1 and assumed general scopes of work for Phases 2A, 2B and 3 below. Our Phase 1 Scope of Work covers services through final definition of the EIS scope. The following identifies a list of tasks associated with completing Phase 1 of the EIS and the accompanying deliverables to the City by BCG. Phase 1 -Project Initiation/EIS Scoping In order to Initiate the EIS Process, BCG proposes to undertake the following tasks during Phase 1: • Task 1-Complete a thorough review of the technical studies prepared for the Quendall Terminals SEPA Checklist (AESI, Raedeke and TENW will also complete this review in their respective disciplines). Quenda/1 Terminals EIS Blumen Consulting Group Scope Letter 1 SEPA/t.,./EPA Complic111ee Land Use [ntitlemcnl ProjPCf Coordination • Task 2-Review the City's comments on the SEPA Checklist and associated technical studies (AESI, Raedeke and TENW will also complete this review, as applicable). Also, review all public/agency comments received during the previous scoping period. • Task 3-Attend a meeting with the City, the applicant's representative and their natural environment consultants (Anchor and Aspect) to discuss their previous technical analyses for the SEPA Checklist and specifically the relationship to the cleanup plan and process (one two-hour meeting with up to two BCG professional staff and professional staff from AESI and Raedeke is assumed). • Task 4-Attend a meeting with the City to discuss the scope of the transportation analysis for the EIS (one one-hour meeting attended by up to two BCG professional staff and TENW professional staff is assumed). • Task 5-Attend a meeting with the City, EPA and the applicant's representative to discuss the status of the cleanup effort and its relationship to the EIS (one two-hour meeting with up to two BCG professional staff is assumed). • Task 6-Identify additional project and/or alternative information needed to prepare the EIS impact analyses (we will prepare an Information Needs Memo that lists the needed descriptive information on the proposal/alternative. This Memo will be the framework for moving forward with the technical analyses for the EIS). • Task 7-Prepare a detailed schedule for the EIS. BCG will assist the City through the extended EIS Scoping period (we understand that an extended public scoping period will be established in order to conduct one public scoping meeting). Specific tasks that BCG would accomplish for EIS Scoping include the following. • Task 8-Prepare for and help conduct the EIS Scoping meeting (one public scoping meeting attended by one BCG professional staff is assumed). • Task 9-Review all additional written comments received during the extended EIS Scoping and verbal comments at the EIS Scoping meeting and compile a brief EIS Scoping Summary (this would be an internal document for use by City of Renton that briefly outlines comments received during scoping). • Task 10-Assist the City in finalizing the EIS scope. • Task 11-Coordinate and communicate with the City via telephone and email throughout this initial phase of the EIS. Quenda/1 Terminals EIS 2 Blumen Consulting Group Scope Letter Deliverables The following deliverables will be produced by BCG during Phase 1 -Project Initiation/EIS Scoping: • Information Needs Memo -for the EIS team • Detailed EIS Schedule -for the EIS team and the City • EIS Scoping Summary -for the City • Final EIS Scope -for the City The above scope covers our team's services through the conclusion of the public scoping process and finalization of the EIS scope. After this phase of work, we will be in a position to formulate a detailed scope of work and not-to-exceed budget for Phase 2A -Prepare Preliminary Draft EIS. Assumed general tasks that we would accomplish during Phase 2A are described below. Phase 2A -Prepare Preliminary Draft EIS BCG would manage preparation of the Preliminary Draft EIS, including: • Prepare a Description of the Proposed Actions and Alternatives chapter of the PDEIS, based on information from the SEPA Checklist, site plans and information provided in response to our Information Needs Memo, subsequent to the identification of a redevelopment alternative. We will circulate this chapter to the EIS team and the City for review and use. • Coordinate the technical analyses prepared in support of the EIS by AESI, Raedeke Associates, TENW and Primedia Group. • Serve as the principal author of the PDEIS, prepare the Fact Sheet, directly prepare certain sections of the impacts analysis (i.e. AestheticsNiews, Land and Shoreline use, Recreation/Public Shoreline Access and Public Services), and incorporate the technical analyses into the PDEIS. • Produce the PDEIS for review by the City and the applicant. Specific tasks that we and our consultants would accomplish during Phase 2A would depend upon resolution of the final EIS scope, including the formulation of an alternative. After this phase of work, we will be in a position to formulate a detailed scope of work and not-to-exceed budget for Phase 2B -Complete and Issue Draft EIS. Assumed general tasks that we would accomplish during Phase 28 are described below. Quenda/1 Terminals EIS 3 Blumen Consulting Group Scope Letter Phase 28 -Complete and Issue Draft EIS BCG would finalize the Draft EIS for publication, including: • Revise the Preliminary Draft EIS based on pertinent comments received from the City and applicant. Coordinate with the City regarding their review and additional comments. • Coordinate production of the Draft EIS for issuance and public comment. • Prepare and help conduct the DEIS public hearing during the public comment period to obtain oral comments. Specific tasks that we and our consultants would accomplish during Phase 28 would depend upon the level and substance of comments from the City/applicant on the Preliminary Draft EIS. After this phase of work, we will be in a position to formulate a detailed scope of work and not- to-exceed budget for Phase 3 -Prepare and Issue Final EIS. Assumed general tasks that we would accomplish during Phase 3 are described below. Phase 3 -Prepare and Issue Final EIS BCG would manage preparation of the Final EIS, including: • Review all written and oral comments received on the Draft EIS and distribute applicable comments to the EIS team. • Determine whether any of the comments require further EIS analysis. • Meet with the City to discuss our approach to responding to key comments and any further analysis. • Assemble responses to comments and summaries of any additional analysis in the format of a Preliminary Final EIS for review and comment by the City and applicant. • Revise the Preliminary Final EIS base on pertinent comments received. • Coordinate production of the Final EIS for issuance. Specific tasks that we and our consultants would accomplish during this phase would depend upon the level and substance of comments from the public and agencies on the Draft EIS. Schedule We are prepared to begin work on Phase 1 immediately upon your authorization of this Agreement. We understand that an extended EIS scoping period will begin in early April, and will encompass the scoping meeting scheduled for April 27 1 h. Phase 1 -Project Initiation/EIS Scoping will likely end with finalization of the EIS scope in early May. We will prepare a detailed schedule for the entire EIS during Phase 1, in collaboration with the City. Quenda/1 Terminals EIS 4 Blumen Consulting Group Scope Letter Budget Phase 1 -Project Initiation/EIS Scoping We propose to provide services on an hourly basis during Phase 1 -Project Initiation/EIS Scoping, according to our current Fee Schedule and those of our consultants (see Attachment A to this Letter). We propose to establish a not-to-exceed amount of $11,500 for all labor and expenses during Phase 1 (see Attachment 8 for a breakdown of our costs and those of the consultants who will assist us on this phase of the EIS: AESI, Raedeke and TENW). We will bill you on a monthly basis. Phase 2A -Prepare Preliminary Draft EIS Specific costs for Phase 2A will be determined upon resolution of the final EIS scope and preparation of a detailed scope of work and schedule in collaboration with City staff. Phase 28 -Complete and Issue Draft EIS Specific costs for Phase 28 will be formulated based on comments from the City/applicant on the Preliminary Draft EIS and preparation of a detailed scope of work and schedule in collaboration with City staff. Phase 3 -Prepare and Issue Final EIS Specific costs for Phase 3 will be formulated based on comments from the public and agencies on the DEIS and preparation of a detailed scope of work and schedule in collaboration with City staff. Again, Blumen Consulting Group appreciates the opportunity to assist the City of Renton on this project. We look forward to continuing our successful working relationship with the City. If this proposed Scope of Work and Budget are acceptable, we assume that you will incorporate this Agreement into the City's contract and return a copy to us for review and execution. We are prepared to initiate work immediately upon contract authorization. Please call either of us if you have any questions. Fo f',, hen Brunner, Senior Associate Attachments Quenda/1 Terminals EIS 5 Blumen Consulting Group Scope Letter Michael Blumen Terry Mccann Deborah Munkberg Rich Schipanski Gretchen Brunner Karen Swenson Michele Sarlitto Amy Gritton Jeff Ding Kristy Hollinger Susan Mueller Jenny Claflin ATTACHMENT A Quendall Terminals EIS BLUMEN CONSULTING GROUP, INC. 201 O Billing Rates Blumen Consulting Group Senior Principal Principal Principal Principal Senior Associate Senior Associate Senior Associate Associate Associate Associate Office Manager -Administrative Administrative Other Rates Auto mileage, per mile $0.55 In-house photo copies, per page $0.15 Handling charge on subcontractors and expenses 10% Rates are valid through December 2010 Quenda/1 Terminals EIS Blumen Consulting Group Scope Letter $165 160 160 150 135 125 120 95 90 80 65 50 6 Principal Engineer/Scientist Sr. Associate Engineer/Scientist Associate Engineer/Scientist Sr. Engineer/Scientist Sr. Project Engineer/Scientist Project Engineer/Scientist Sr. Staff Technician Staff Technician CAD Operator and Workstation Project Assistant Laboratory Assistant Clerical, Word Processing Computer Services/GI$ AESI Inc. Raedeke Associates Senior Principal Associate Principal Senior Scientist & Planner Staff Scientist & Planner Technical Staff Ill Technical Staff II Technical Staff I ProjecUContract Administrator Technical & Administrative Support Staff Field Technician • Transportation Engineering Northwest, LLC Principal Design Manager/Senior Project Manager Project Manager Project Engineer/Design Engineer Staff Engineer Drafting Technical Support Dean Alker Joseph Ferry Quenda/1 Terminals EIS Primedia Group Partner Partner Blumen Consulting Group Scope Letter $160 145 135 125 115 105 90 75 84 70 65 53 80 $185 145 120 105 90 82 78 80 60 52 $165 145 130 120 110 110 75 $95 95 7 ATTACHMENT B Quendall Terminals EIS • BLUM EN CONSUL TING GROUP, INC. Phase 1 -Project Initiation/EIS Scoping Budget Breakdown Blumen Consulting Group Professional Labor Hours Hourly Rate Total($) M. Blumen 7 165 1,155 G. Brunner 30 135 4,050 K. Hollinger 28 80 2,240 Administration 6 65 390 Subtotal $7,835 Reimbursable Expenses (including mileage, copying, etc.) Subtotal $165 BCG Sub-Consultants* AESI 1,000 Raedeke 1,000 TENW 1,500 Primedia Q Subtotal $3,500 Total $11,500 • Includes 10 percent handling charge on subconsultants. Quenda/1 Terminals EIS Blumen Consulting Group Scope Letter 8 • • ---------------------------------------------------------------------------· • Parcel name: EXTERIOR BOUNDARY• • North: 197667.6261 East ; 1303174, 7926 • Line Course: s 30-56-16 w Length: 899.63 • North: 196895. 9906 East 1302712 .2855 Line Course: N 59-03-44 w Length: 60.00 • North: 196926.8371 East 1302660.8220 Line Course: s 30-56-16 w Length: 184.30 • North: 196768.7604 East ; 1302566.0731 Line Course: N 88-48-56 w Length: 1016.36 • North: 196789.7694 East ; 1301549.9323 Line Course: N 01-06-32 E Length, 637.06 • North: 197426.7120 East ; 1301562.2595 Line Course: N 45-26-32 E Length: 878. 91 • North: 198043.3806 East ; 1302188.5187 Line Course: s 58-13-14 E Length, 939.23 • North: 197548.7333 East ; 1302986.9400 Line Course: N 57-40-12 E Length: 222.32 • North, 197667.6261 East ; 1303174. 7926 • Perimeter: 4837.80 Area: 1,324,440 sq . ft. 30.40 acres• • • • • • • • • • • City of Renton P/ann,n9 D1vis1or; ---------------------------------------------------------------------------· • Parcel name: LOT l• • North: 197854.0976 East ; 1302494. 0447 • Line Course: N 58-13-14 w Length, 66.24 • North: 197888.9818 East 1302437.7372 • Line Course: s 07-38-56 w Length: 2.74 • North: 197886.2649 East 1302437 .3723 • Line Course: s 43-16-19 w Length, 12.70 • North: 197877.0164 East 1302428.6655 • Line Course: s 32-27-09 w Length: 32.94 • North: 197849.2232 East 1302410.9916 • Line Course: s 09-20-44 E Length, 22.65 • North: 197826.8722 East 1302414.6699 • Line Course: s 83-27-05 E Length: 2.13 • North: 197826.6290 East 1302416.7886 • Line Course: s 15-57-55 E Length; 11.15 • North, 197815.9091 East 1302419.8554 • Line Course: s 88-49-38 E Length: 1. 72 • North: 197815.8740 East 1302421.5713 • Line Course: s 44-03-07 w Length: 3.65 • North: 197813.2513 East 1302419. 0340 • Line Course: s 23-39-39 w Length, 21.73 • North: 197793.3516 East 1302410. 3148 • Line Course: s 01-26-16 w Length: 14.09 • North: 197779.2682 East 1302409. 9614 • Line Course: s 35-30-51 w Length: 9.81 • North: 197771.2855 East 1302404.2644 • Line Course: s 14-37-26 w Length: 6.75 • North, 197764.7565 East 1302402.5608 • Line Course: s 79-07-44 w Length: 90.79 • North: 197747.6341 East 1302313.4036 • Line Course: s 73-24-53 w Length, 4.86 • North: 197746.2461 East 1302308.7433 • Line Course: s 88-17-21 w Length, 13.64 • North: 197745.8388 East 1302295.1074 • Line Course: s 85-01-45 w Length, 4.29 • North: 197745.4673 East 1302290.8360 • Line Course: s 51-35-14 w Length, 7.95 • North: 197740.5276 East 1302284. 6064 • Line Course: s 36-14-26 w Length, 14. 76 • North: 197728. 6211 East 1302275.8792 • Line Course: s 55-17-19 w Length, 8.68 • North: 197723.6758 East 1302268. 7403 • Line Course: s 66-47-02 w Length: 2.27 • North: 197722.7793 East 1302266. 6501 • Line Course: s 74-42-44 w Length: 28.90 • North: 197715.1583 East 1302238.7691 • Line Course: s 56-10-17 w Length: 4.78 • North: 197712. 4973 East 1302234.7985 • Line Course: s 74-01-06 w Length: 9.55 • North: 197709.8685 East 1302225. 6194 • Line Course: s 18-11-58 w Length: 7.88 • North: 197702.3799 East 1302223.1574 • Line Course: s 02-32-46 E Length: 8.86 • North: 197693.5331 East 1302223. 5508 • Line Course: s 38-26-39 w Length: 14.82 • North: 197681.9264 East 1302214.3368 • Line Course: s 21-37-38 w Length: 0.65 • North: 197681.3222 East 1302214.0973 • Line Course: s 22-04-43 w Length: 19.72 • North: 197663.0517 East 1302206.6863 • Line Course: s 23-45-35 w Length: 2.70 • North: 197660.5840 East 1302205.6000 • Line Course: s 22-52-56 w Length: 0.22 • North: 197660.3794 East 1302205.5137 • Line Course: s 05-25-17 E Length: 4.04 • North: 197656.3526 East 1302205.8958 • Line Course: s 04-07-28 E Length: 7 .96 • North: 197648 .4141 East 1302206.4683 • Line Course: s 24-47-40 w Length: 0.13 • North: 197648 .2960 East 1302206.4137 • Line Course: s 00-48-57 E Length: 2.04 • North: 197646.2575 East 1302206.4427 • Line Course: s 08-20-28 w Length: 11. 76 • North: 197634.6257 East 1302204.7373 • Line Course: s 15-05-23 E Length: 4.28 • North: 197630. 4972 East 1302205. 8504 • Line Course: s 44-49-26 w Length: 4.02 • North: 197627.6473 East 1302203. 0180 • Line Course: s 24-09-52 w Length: 9. 91 • North: 197618.6031 East 1302198. 9602 • Line Course: s 33-53-39 w Length: 9.61 • North: 197610.6263 East 1302193.6011 • Line Course: s 44-22-12 w Length: 0.77 • North: 197610.0783 East 1302193.0650 • Line Course: s 18-30-56 w Length: 10.40 • North: 197600.2170 East 1302189. 7625 • Line Course: s 28-50-16 w Length: 9.67 • North: 197591.7453 East 1302185.0979 • Line Course: s 05-56-18 w Length: 2. 92 • North: 197588.8403 East 1302184.7957 • Line Course: s 67-59-32 w Length: 0.44 • North: 197588.6743 East 1302184. 3850 • Line Course: s 21-31-23 w Length: 6.88 • North: 197582.2722 East 1302181.8602 • Line Course: s 25-25-56 w Length: 15.48 • North: 197568.2893 East 1302175.2110 • Line Course: s 16-42-49 w Length: 0.05 • North: 197568.2444 East 1302175.1975 • Line Course: s 59-03-44 E Length: 41. 33 • North: 197546.9951 East 1302210. 6494 • Curve Length: 115. 95 Radius: 76.00 • Delta: 87-24-56 Tangent: 72 .65 • Chord: 105. 03 Course: N 74-38-44 E• Course In: s 59-03-44 E Course Out: N 28-21-13 E• RP North: 197507.9229 East 1302275.8365 • End North: 197574.8055 East 1302311. 9296 • Line Course: N 30-56-16 E Length: 72. 96 • North: 197637.3878 East 1302349.4406 • Line Course: s 61-10-35 E Length: 12.63 • North: 197631. 2984 East 1302360.5066 • Line Course: N 30-56-13 E Length: 259.75 • North: 197854.0976 East : 1302494. 0447 • • • • Perimeter: 1056.60 Area: 34,963 sq. ft. 0.80 acres• ---------------------------------------------------------------------------· • Parcel name: LOT 2• • North: 197806.4659 East : 1302570. 9280 • Line Course: N 58-13-14 w Length: 90.44 • North: 197854.0976 East : 1302494.0447 • Line Course: s 30-56-13 w Length: 259.75 • North: 197631.2984 East 1302360.5066 • Line Course: N 61-10-35 w Length: 12.63 • North: 197637.3878 East 1302349. 4406 • Line Course: s 30-56-16 w Length: 72.96 • North: 197574.8055 East 1302311. 9296 • Curve Length: 13. 97 Radius: 76.00 • Delta: 10-31-51 Tangent: 7.00 • Chord: 13. 95 Course: s 56-22-52 E• Course In: s 28-21-13 w Course Out: N 38-53-04 E• RP North: 197507. 9229 East : 1302275.8365 • End North: 197567.0824 East : 1302323.5456 • Curve Length: 12.93 Radius: 20.00 • Delta: 37-03-13 Tangent: 6.70 • Chord: 12. 71 Course: s 32-35-20 E• Course In: s 38-53-04 w Course Out: N 75-56-16 E• RP North: 197551.5141 East 1302310. 9905 • End North: 197556.3736 East 1302330. 3912 • Line Course: s 14-03-44 E Length: 43.48 • North: 197514.1944 East 1302340.9562 • Curve Length: 15. 71 Radius: 20.00 • Delta: -45-00-00 Tangent: 8.28 • Chord: 15.31 Course: s 36-33-44 E• Course In: N 75-56-16 E Course Out: s 30-56-16 W• RP North: 197519.0539 East : 1302360.3569 • End North: 197501.8994 East : 1302350.0747 • Line Course: s 59-03-44 E Length: 184.18 • North: 197407.2109 East 1302508.0506 • Line Course: N 75-56-16 E Length: 42.43 • North: 197417.5195 East 1302549.2056 • Line Course: N 30-56-16 E Length: 300.00 • North: 197674.8371 East : 1302703.4381 • Line Course: N 59-03-44 w Length: 181. 68 • North: 197768.2392 East 1302547 .6083 • Line Course: N 31-23-05 E Length: 44.78 • North: 197806.4659 East 1302570.9280 • • Perimeter: 1274.95 Area: 93,065 sq . ft. 2 .14 acres• • • ---------------------------------------------------------------------------· • Parcel name: LOT 3• • North: 197495.9275 Line Course: N 59-03-44 W North: 197643.9906 Line Course: S 30-56-16 W North: 197386.6766 Line Course: S 14-03-44 E North: 197345.5158 Line Course: S 59-03-44 E North: 197212.8781 Line Course: N 30-56-16 E North: 197495.9275 • East ' Length: Length: Length: Length: Length: 1303001.9265 • 288.00 • East : 1302754. 9016 300.00 • East 1302600. 6713 42.43 • East 1302610.9813 258.00 • East : 1302832. 2708 330.00 • East : 1303001.9265 Perimeter: 1218.42 Area: 94,590 sq. ft. 2.17 acres• • • • • • • • ---------------------------------------------------------------------------· • Parcel name: LOT 4• • North: 197156.2682 Line Course: N 59-03-43 W North: 197288.9075 Line Course: S 75-56-16 W North: 197278.5990 Line Course: S 30-56-18 W North: 196831.9319 Line Course: S 88-48-56 E North: 196825.0747 Line Course: N 30-56-16 E North: 197156.2682 • East : Length: Length: Length: Length: Length: 1302798.3397 • 258.00 • East 1302577.0498 42.43 • East 1302535.8948 520.76 • East : 1302268.1654 331. 73 • East : 1302599. 8271 386.13 • East 1302798.3397 Perimeter: 1539.05 Area: 134,461 sq. ft. 3.09 acres• • • • • • • • ---------------------------------------------------------------------------· • Parcel name: LOT 5• • North: 197309.4461 East : 1302484.4280 • Line Course: s 30-56-16 w Length: 572.33 • North: 196818.5409 East : 1302190.1866 • Line Course: N 88-48-56 w Length: 271. 99 • North: 196824.1632 East : 1301918. 2565 • Curve Length: 15. 71 Radius: 10.00 • Delta: 90-00-00 Tangent: 10.00 • Chord: 14 .14 Course: N 43-48-56 W• Course In: N 01-11-04 E Course Out: N 88-48-56 W• RP North: 196834 .1610 East 1301918.4632 • End North: 196834. 3677 East 1301908.4654 • Line Course: N 01-11-04 E Length: 38.55 • North: 196872.9107 East 1301909.2623 • Line Course: N 88-48-56 w Length: 2.55 • North: 196872. 9635 East 1301906.7098 • Line Course: N 30-56-13 E Length: 601.39 • North: 197388.7986 East 1302215.8834 • Line Course: N 59-03-44 w Length: 13.25 • North: 197395.6087 East 1302204. 5216 • Line Course: N 30-56-16 E Length: 57.08 • North: 197444.5639 East 1302233. 8647 • Curve Length: 13. 97 Radius: 76.00 • Delta: -10-31-51 Tangent: 7.00 • Chord: 13.95 Course: s 61-44-36 E• Course In: N 33-31-20 E Course Out: s 22-59-29 W• RP North: 197507.9229 East : 1302275. 8365 • End North: 197437. 9600 East : 1302246.1515 • Curve Length: 12.93 Radius: 20.00 • Delta: -37-03-13 Tangent: 6.70 • Chord: 12.71 Course: s 85-32-07 E• Course In: N 22-59-29 E Course Out: s 14-03-44 E• RP North: 197456. 3713 East 1302253. 9633 • End North: 197436.9706 East : 1302258.8228 • Line Course: N 75-56-16 E Length: 43.48 • North: 197447.5357 East : 1302301.0020 • Curve Length: 15. 71 Radius: 20.00 • Delta: 45-00-00 Tangent: 8.28 • Chord: 15.31 Course: s 81-33-44 E• Course In: s 14-03-44 E Course Out: N 30-56-16 E• RP North: 197428.1350 East : 1302305. 8614 • End North: 197445.2895 East : 1302316 .1436 • Line Course: s 59-03-44 E Length: 184.18 • North: 197350.6011 East 1302474 .1195 • Line Course: s 14-03-44 E Length: 42.43 • North: 197309.4461 East 1302484.4280 • • Perimeter: 1885.55 Area: 182,643 sq. ft. 4.19 acres• • • ---------------------------------------------------------------------------· • Parcel name: LOT 6• • North: 197395.6087 Line Course: N 30-56-16 E North: 197444.5639 Curve Length: 115.95 Delta: 87-24-56 Chord: 105.03 Course In: N 33-31-20 E RP North: 197507.9229 End North: 197546.9951 Line Course: N 59-03-44 W North: 197568.2444 Line Course: S 16-42-49 W North: 197548.4251 Line Course: S 21-32-32 W North: 197538.7193 Line Course: S 12-04-02 E North: 197522.8886 Line Course: S 10-41-29 W North: 197521.6917 Line Course: N 89-28-20 W North: 197521.6960 Line Course: S 10-05-34 W North: 197517.0141 Line Course: S 24-45-37 w North: 197510.2468 Line Course: S 22-20-29 E North: 197497.4053 Line Course: s 30-31-25 W North: 197468.4832 Line Course: S 33-26-13 W North: 197465.3278 Line Course: S 01-34-47 W North: 197462.8681 Line Course: S 02-36-02 W North: 197439.4025 Line Course: S 05-17-30 W North: 197421.3152 Line Course: S 19-23-36 W North: 197420.9343 Line Course: S 31-50-57 W North: 197420.3196 Line Course: S 22-05-12 W North: 197418.8009 Line Course: S 41-14-06 W North: 197416.6221 Line Course: S 38-22-22 W North: 197396.1650 Line Course: S 29-55-22 W North: 197371.4915 Line Course: S 31-31-33 W North: 197369.1043 Line Course: S 53-28-26 W North: 197368.8831 Line Course: S 41-11-30 W North: 197366.8810 Line Course: S 51-34-35 W North: 197360.4367 Line Course: S 50-29-30 W North: 197306.2784 Line Course: S 29-54-55 W North: 197297.0735 Line Course: S 41-03-36 w North: 197290.7224 Line Course: S 26-41-53 W North: 197289.8370 Line Course: S 16-16-12 W North: 197259.6847 East : 1302204.5216 Length: 57. 08 • • East : Radius: Tangent: Course: Course Out: East East Length: 41.33 East Length: 20.69 East Length: 10.43 East Length: 16.19 East Length: 1.22 East Length: 0.47 East Length: 4.76 East Length: 7.45 East Length: 13.88 East Length: 33.57 East Length: 3.78 East Length: 2.46 East Length: 23.49 East Length: 18.16 East Length: 0.40 East Length : O . 72 East Length: 1. 64 East Length: 2.90 East Length: 26.09 East Length: 28.47 East Length: 2.80 East Length: 0.37 East Length: 2.66 East Length: 10.37 East Length: 85.13 East Length: 10.62 East Length: 8.42 East Length: o. 99 East Length: 31.41 East 1302233. 8647 76. 00 • 72.65 N 12-46-12 W• N 59-03-44 W• 1302275. 8365 1302210.6494 • 1302175.1975 • 1302169. 2463 • 1302165. 4148 • 1302168. 7992 • 1302168. 5732 • 1302168.1074 • 1302167.2741 • 1302164.1528 • 1302169.4303 • 1302152.3779 • 1302150. 2944 • 1302150.2265 • 1302149 .1608 • 1302147.4855 • 1302147 .3515 • 1302146. 9696 • 1302146.3533 • 1302144 .4436 • 1302128.2452 • 1302114. 0443 • 1302112. 5799 • 1302112. 2812 • 1302110. 5291 • 1302102 .4052 • 1302036. 7257 • 1302031.4294 • 1302025. 8968 • 1302025.4515 • 1302016.6515 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Line Course: s 25-06-01 w Length: 2.22 • North: 197257. 6726 East 1302015.7090 • Line Course: s 24-41-47 w Length: 2.85 • North: 197255.0802 East 1302014. 5168 • Line Course: s 14-41-10 w Length: 5.89 • North: 197249. 3792 East 1302013.0226 • Line Course: s 04-13-02 E Length: 11. 52 • North: 197237.8873 East 1302013. 8700 • Line Course: s 02-20-05 E Length: 2.51 • North: 197235.3809 East 1302013. 9722 • Line Course: s 57-58-26 w Length: 54.04 • North: 197206. 7249 East 1301968.1593 • Line Course: s 47-20-58 E Length: 20.58 • North: 197192.7817 East 1301983.2956 • Line Course: s 45-32-07 E Length: 21. 56 • North: 197177.6808 East 1301998.6813 • Line Course: s 05-13-15 w Length: 16.03 • North: 197161. 7130 East 1301997. 2222 • Line Course: s 34-46-55 w Length: 23.05 • North: 197142.7820 East 1301984.0737 • Line Course: s 40-41-54 w Length: 12.64 • North: 197133 .2013 East 1301975. 8334 • Line Course: s 60-35-34 w Length: 7.96 • North: 197129.2910 East 1301968. 8959 • Line Course: N 29-58-44 w Length: 15.80 • North: 197142.9784 East 1301961.0003 • Line Course: s 20-40-42 w Length: 16.40 • North: 197127.6388 East 1301955.2106 • Line Course: s 37-38-07 w Length: 24.78 • North: 197108.0183 East 1301940.0815 • Line Course: s 61-18-13 w Length: 26.68 • North: 197095.2072 East 1301916.6782 • Line Course: s 34-49-08 w Length: 1.01 • North: 197094.3764 East 1301916 .1004 • Line Course: s 61-17-44 w Length: 8.47 • North: 197090.3073 East 1301908.6693 • Line Course: s 41-58-53 w Length: 12.53 • North: 197080. 9913 East 1301900.2866 • Line Course: s 79-34-45 w Length: 6.19 • North: 197079.8709 East 1301894.1945 • Line Course: N 01-26-20 w Length: 3. 94 • North: 197083.8102 East 1301894.0956 • Line Course: N 75-45-33 w Length: 25.02 • North: 197089.9648 East 1301869.8457 • Line Course: N 75-09-34 w Length: 9 .30 • North: 197092. 3459 East 1301860.8595 • Line Course: N 75-39-28 w Length: 1. 70 • North: 197092.7657 East 1301859.2173 • Line Course: s 26-28-03 w Length: 1. 52 • North: 197091.4076 East 1301858.5411 • Line Course: s 09-03-28 w Length: 6.45 • North: 197085.0366 East 1301857. 5254 • Line Course: N 72-13-52 E Length: 4.36 • North: 197086.3660 East 1301861.6737 • Line Course: s 28-27-24 E Length: 18.95 • North: 197069.7027 East 1301870.7048 • Line Course: s 73-42-48 E Length: 3.58 • North: 197068.6983 East 1301874 .1427 • Line Course: s 37-04-08 w Length: 9.89 • North: 197060.8093 East 1301868.1831 • Line Course: N 74-47-13 w Length: 3.21 • North: 197061.6519 East 1301865.0843 • Line Course: s 76-31-56 w Length: 12.07 • North: 197058.8402 East 1301853.3434 • Line Course: s 63-51-41 w Length: 2.73 • North: 197057.6383 East 1301850.8943 • Line Course: s 81-26-45 w Length: 15.65 • North: 197055.3105 East 1301835. 4191 • Line Course: s 46-50-28 w Length: 14.64 • North: 197045.2990 East 1301824.7426 • Line Course: N 76-14-43 w Length: 21. 65 • North: 197050.4463 East 1301803. 7148 • Line Course: s 71-42-43 w Length: 13. 91 • North: 197046.0810 East 1301790.5063 • Line Course: s 32-46-11 w Length: 4.25 • North: 197042.5048 East 1301788.2042 • Line Course: s 47-17-58 w Length: 4.33 • North: 197039.5686 East 1301785.0223 • Line Course: s 65-01-13 w Length: 5.21 • North: 197037.3669 East 1301780.2965 • Line Course: s 53-34-53 w Length: 1. 85 • North: 197036.2708 East 1301778.8108 • Line Course: s 53-35-25 w Length: 17.77 • North: 197025. 7245 East 1301764. 5113 • Line Course: s 47-56-49 w Length: 1.40 • North: 197024.7894 East 1301763.4746 • Line Course: s 52-01-30 w Length: 19.19 • North: 197012.9814 East 1301748.3474 • Line Course: s 33-27-52 w Length: 0.73 • North: 197012.3712 East 1301747 .9441 • Line Course: s 35-39-27 w Length: 31.62 • North: 196986.6766 East 1301729.5096 • Line Course: s 34-02-45 w Length: 1. 37 • North: 196985.5424 East 1301728.7432 • Line Course: s 33-33-33 w Length: 14 .52 • North: 196973.4394 East 1301720. 7145 • Line Course: s 35-06-18 w Length: 10.56 • North: 196964. 8002 East 1301714.6416 • Line Course: s 38-45-10 w Length: 8.80 • North: 196957.9355 East 1301709 .1315 • Line Course: s 19-52-51 w Length: 14.26 • North: 196944. 5285 East 1301704.2833 • Line Course: s 27-47-56 w Length: 0.87 • North: 196943.7600 East 1301703.8782 • Line Course: s 49-12-37 w Length: 1.20 • North: 196942. 9757 East 1301702. 9693 • Line Course: s 48-21-39 w Length: 20.92 • North: 196929.0785 East 1301687.3380 • Line Course: s 47-04-57 w Length: 9.16 • North: 196922.8387 East 1301680. 6273 • Line Course: s 45-37-34 w Length: 9.44 • North: 196916. 2336 East 1301673. 8763 • Line Course: s 56-30-09 w Length: 10.15 • North: 196910.6322 East 1301665.4127 • Line Course: s 32-20-37 w Length: 5.97 • North: 196905.5902 East 1301662.2199 • Line Course: s 27-11-16 w Length: 10.60 • North: 196896.1620 East 1301657.3770 • Line Course: s 40-54-24 w Length: 2.06 • North: 196894.6037 East 1301656.0269 • Line Course: s 34-37-29 w Length: 26.99 • North: 196872.3968 East 1301640. 6933 • Line Course: s 16-52-34 w Length: 10.40 • North: 196862.4418 East 1301637.6732 • Line Course: s 33-04-47 w Length: 15.84 • North: 196849.1653 East 1301629.0251 • Line Course: s 00-29-24 w Length: 3.20 • North: 196845.9621 East 1301628.9977 • Line Course: s 54-03-37 w Length: 9.55 • North: 196840.3549 East 1301621.2630 • Line Course: s 09-02-00 E Length: 5.42 • North: 196834.9991 East 1301622 .1144 • Line Course: s 33-24-05 E Length: 2.24 • North: 196833.1276 East 1301623.3486 • Line Course: s 19-58-30 E Length: 10.83 • North: 196822.9485 East 1301627.0484 • Line Course: s 13-27-16 E Length: 0.33 • North: 196822.6300 East 1301627.1246 • Line Course: s 02-07-23 E Length: 0.24 • North: 196822. 3879 East 1301627 .1336 • Line Course: s 14-43-46 E Length: 0.38 • North: 196822. 0209 East 1301627.2300 • Line Course: S 56-23-35 W North: 196815.5312 Line Course: S 37-36-07 E North: 196804.3405 Line Course: S 37-14-29 E North: 196802.9428 Line Course: S 70-13-31 E North: 196801.2313 Line Course: S 57-06-49 W North: 196795.8862 Line Course: S 84-05-27 W North: 196795.5971 Line Course: S 83-52-15 W North: 196794.0842 Line Course: S 86-16-14 W North: 196793.8053 Line Course: S 80-22-02 W North: 196792.7892 Line Course: N 70-27-19 W North: 196796.1233 Line Course: S 72-15-40 w North: 196790.5900 Line Course: S 66-12-27 W North: 196789.4299 Line Course: S 51-21-54 W North: 196789.4134 Line Course: S 88-48-56 E North: 196783.6370 Line Course: N 01-11-04 E North: 196825.6280 Line Course: S 88-48-56 E North: 196825.1967 Curve Length: 15.71 Delta: -90-00-00 Chord: 14.14 Course In: N 01-11-04 E RP North: 196835.1946 End North: 196834.9879 Line Course: N 01-11-04 E North: 196873.5308 Line Course: s 88-48-56 E North: 196872.9635 Line Course: N 30-56-13 E North: 197388.7986 Line Course: N 59-03-44 W North: 197395.6087 • Length: 11.73 East Length: 14.12 East Length: 1. 7 6 East Length: 5.06 East Length: 9.84 East Length: 2.81 East Length: 14. l 7 East Length: 4.29 East Length: 6. 07 East Length: 9. 97 East Length: 18.16 East Length: 2.88 East Length: 0.03 East Length: 279.45 East Length: 42.00 East Length: 20.87 East Radius: Tangent: Course: Course Out: East East Length: 38.55 East Length: 27.45 East Length: 601.39 East Length: 13.25 East • 1301617.4648 • 1301626. 0834 • 1301627 .1459 • 1301631.9063 • 1301623.6397 • 1301620.8465 • 1301606.7582 • 1301602.4788 • 1301596.4921 • 1301587.0999 • 1301569. 8022 • 1301567.1709 • 1301567 .1503 • 1301846.5375 • 1301847.4057 • 1301868.2672 10. 00 • 10.00 N 46-11-04 E• S 88-48-56 E• 1301868.4739 1301878.4718 • 1301879.2687 • 1301906.7098 • 1302215.8834 • 1302204.5216 Perimeter: 2476.41 Area: 113,599 sq. ft. 2.61 acres• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • ---------------------------------------------------------------------------· • Parcel name: LOT 7• • North: 197713.2958 Line Course: N 23-47-48 E North: 197896.2924 Line Course: N 66-12-12 W North: 197939.6707 Line Course: S 30-56-16 W North: 197476.3981 Line Course: S 59-03-44 E North: 197463.5064 Line Course: N 47-37-47 E North: 197713.2958 • East : 1303542.0609 • Length: 200. 00 • East : 1303622.7594 Length: 107.51 • East : 1303524.3921 Length: 540 .12 • East 1303246.7133 Length: 25. 08 • East 1303268.2214 Length: 370. 65 • East : 1303542.0609 Perimeter: 1243.35 Area: 50,725 sq. ft. 1.16 acres• • • • • • • • ---------------------------------------------------------------------------· • Parcel name: PRIVATE DRIVE D• • North: 196825. 074 7 East ' 1302599.8271 • Line Course: s 30-56-16 w Length, 65.66 • North: 196768. 7604 East ' 1302566.0731 • Line Course: N 88-48-56 w Length: 719.69 • North: 196783.6370 East 1301846.5375 • Line Course: N 01-ll-04 E Length, 42.00 • North: 196825.6280 East 1301847.4057 • Line Course: s 88-48-56 E Length, 20.87 • North: 196825 .1967 East 1301868 .2672 • Curve Length, 15. 71 Radius: 10.00 • Delta: -90-00-00 Tangent: 10.00 • Chord, 14 .14 Course: N 46-11-04 E• Course In: N 01-11-04 E Course Out: s 88-48-56 E• RP North, 196835.1946 East 1301868.4739 • End North: 196834.9879 East 1301878 .4718 • Line Course: N 01-11-04 E Length, 38.55 • North, 196873.5308 East 1301879.2687 • Line Course: s 88-48-56 E Length, 30.00 • North: 196872.9107 East 1301909.2623 • Line Course: s 01-11-04 w Length, 38.55 • North, 196834.3677 East 1301908.4654 • Curve Length, 15.71 Radius: 10.00 • Delta: -90-00-00 Tangent: 10.00 • Chord, 14 .14 Course: s 43-48-56 E• Course In: s 88-48-56 E Course Out: s 01-11-04 W• RP North, 196834.1610 East ' 1301918.4632 • End North, 196824 .1632 East ' 1301918.2565 • Line Course: s 88-48-56 E Length, 271. 99 • North, 196818.5409 East 1302190.1866 • Line Course: N 30-56-16 E Length, 17.28 • North: 196833.3605 East 1302199.0692 • Line Course: s 88-48-56 E Length, 400.84 • North: 196825.0747 East ' 1302599.8271 • • Perimeter: 1676.84 Area: 38,243 sq . ft. 0.88 acres• • • ---------------------------------------------------------------------------• • Parcel name: PRIVATE DRIVE F• • North, 197806.4659 Line Course: S 58-13-14 E North, 197548.7333 Line Course: N 57-40-12 E North, 197596.2919 Line Course: S 30-56-16 W North, 197495.9275 Line Course: N 59-03-44 W North, 197768.2392 Line Course: N 31-23-05 E North, 197806.4659 • East , 1302570.9280 Length, 489.38 • • East 1302986.9400 Length, 88.93 • East 1303062. 0835 Length, 117. 01 • East ' 1303001.9265 Length, 529.68 • East 1302547.6083 Length, 44.78 • East 1302570.9280 Perimeter: 1269.78 Area: 23,252 sq. ft. 0.53 acres• • • • • • • • ---------------------------------------------------------------------------· • Parcel name: PUBLIC STREETS• • North, 197667.6261 Line Course: S 30-56-16 W North, 196895.9906 Line Course: N 59-03-44 W North, 196926.8371 Line Course: N 30-56-16 E North, 197156.2682 Line Course: N 59-03-43 W North, 197288.9075 East ' Length, Length, Length, Length: 1303174.7926 • 899.63 • East 1302712.2855 • 60.00 • East 1302660. 8220 • 267.49 • East ' 1302798. 3397 • 258.00 • East ' 1302577.0498 • Line Course: s 75-56-16 w Length: 42.43 • North: 197278.5990 East 1302535. 8948 • Line Course: s 30-56-18 w Length: 520.76 • North: 196831.9319 East 1302268.1654 • Line Course: N 88-48-56 w Length: 69.11 • North: 196833.3605 East 1302199. 0692 • Line Course: N 30-56-16 E Length: 555.06 • North: 197309.4461 East 1302484.4280 • Line Course: N 14-03-44 w Length: 42.43 • North: 197350.6011 East 1302474 .1195 • Line Course: N 59-03-44 w Length: 184.18 • North: 197445.2895 East : 1302316 .1436 • Curve Length: 15. 71 Radius: 20.00 • Delta: -45-00-00 Tangent: 8.28 • Chord: 15.31 Course: N 81-33-44 W• Course In: s 30-56-16 w Course Out: N 14-03-44 W• RP North: 197428.1350 East 1302305. 8614 • End North: 197447.5357 East 1302301. 0020 • Line Course: s 75-56-16 w Length: 43.48 • North: 197436.9706 East 1302258.8228 • Curve Length: 12.93 Radius: 20.00 • Delta: 37-03-13 Tangent: 6.70 • Chord: 12.71 Course: N 85-32-07 W• Course In: N 14-03-44 w Course Out: s 22-59-29 W• RP North: 197456. 3713 East : 1302253. 9633 • End North: 197437. 9600 East : 1302246.1515 • Curve Length: 259.84 Radius: 76.00 • Delta: 195-53-35 Tangent: 544.45 • Chord: 150.54 Course: N 30-56-16 E• Course In: N 22-59-29 E Course Out: N 38-53-04 E• RP North: 197507. 9229 East : 1302275.8365 • End North: 197567.0824 East : 1302323. 5456 • Curve Length: 12. 93 Radius: 20.00 • Delta: 37-03-13 Tangent: 6.70 • Chord: 12.71 Course: s 32-35-20 E• Course In: s 38-53-04 w Course Out: N 75-56-16 E• RP North: 197551.5141 East 1302310.9905 • End North: 197556.3736 East 1302330 .3912 • Line Course: s 14-03-44 E Length: 43.48 • North: 197514 .1944 East 1302340. 9562 • Curve Length: 15.71 Radius: 20.00 • Delta: -45-00-00 Tangent: 8.28 • Chord: 15.31 Course: s 36-33-44 E• Course In: N 75-56-16 E Course Out: s 30-56-16 W• RP North: 197519.0539 East : 1302360.3569 • End North: 197501.8994 East : 1302350. 0747 • Line Course: s 59-03-44 E Length: 184.18 • North: 197407 .2109 East 1302508.0506 • Line Course: N 75-56-16 E Length: 42. 43 • North: 197417. 5195 East 1302549. 2056 • Line Course: N 30-56-16 E Length: 300.00 • North: 197674. 8371 East 1302703.4381 • Line Course: s 59-03-44 E Length: 60.00 • North: 197643.9906 East 1302754. 9016 • Line Course: s 30-56-16 w Length: 300.00 • North: 197386.6766 East 1302600. 6713 • Line Course: s 14-03-44 E Length: 42.43 • North: 197345.5158 East 1302610.9813 • Line Course: s 59-03-44 E Length: 258.00 • North: 197212.8781 East : 1302832.2708 • Line Course: N 30-56-16 E Length: 447.01 • North: 197596.2919 East : 1303062.0835 • Line Course: N 57-40-12 E Length: 133.39 • North: 197667.6261 East 1303174. 7926 • • Perimeter: 5070.59 Area: 159,834 sq. ft. 3.67 acres• November 11, 2009 Vanessa Dolby Acting Senior Planner City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: Quendall Terminals Master Plan Application Dear Vanessa: City of Renton Planning Division DEC -1 ZD09 Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Co. together own the 21.46 acre property commonly known as Quendall Terminals located at 4350 Lake Washington Boulevard in Renton, Washington. Per your request, this letter will confirm that CenturyPacific is authorized to submit the Land Use Permit Master Application and other related applications on our behalf. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, ~~- Altino Properties, Inc. Its: -~\l~I f'~---- Cc: CenturyPacific J.H. Baxter & Co. By:---------- Its: ---------- C:\Documents and Settings\robertc\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\KXOZQ3UZ\Quenda1l letter of authorization[l}.OOC November 11, 2009 Vanessa Dolby Acting Senior Planner City of Renton I 055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Re: QuendaU Terminals Master Plan Application Dear Vanessa: City of Renton Piilnning Division DEC -1 20D~ Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Co. together own the 21.46 acre property commonly known as Quendall Terminals located at 4350 Lake Washington Boulevard in Renton, Washington. Per your request, this letter will confirm that CenturyPacific is authorized to submit the Land Use Permit Master Application and other related applications on our behalf. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, Altino Properties, Inc. By:---------- Its: _________ _ Cc: CenturyPacific lliBax &Co. By: (;:-roQ.c£1CL \(ra..u&e,_ 1ts: CEO C:\Documents and Settings\gbaxter\local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\OLK5B\Quendall letter ofauthoriz:ation.DOC • City of Renton City of Renton Planning Division LAND USE PERMIT DEC -1 ZDOY MASTER APPLICATIONIR1~~,~,i\\J7rer"" PROPERTY OWNER(S) TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS: (206) 757-8893 NAME: Altino Properties, Inc., and J.H. Baxter (206) 757-7899 (fax) &Co cmathewson""centurvoacificlo.com ADDRESS: 800 S. Third Street PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: Quendall Terminals CITY: Renton, WA ZIP: 98057 TELEPHONE NUMBER: (425) 226-3900 PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 4350 Lake Washington Blvd., Renton, WA 98045 APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: Campbell Mathewson KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 2924059002 COMPANY (if applicable): Centruy Pacific, L.P. EXISTING LAND USE(S): Vacant ADDRESS: 1201 Third Ave, Suite 1680 PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Commercial/Office/Residential CITY: Seattle, WA ZIP: 98101 EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: TELEPHONE NUMBER (206) 757-8893 Commercial/Office/Residential PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION CONTACT PERSON (if applicable): Commercial/Office/Residential (unchanged) NAME: Campbell Mathewson EXISTING ZONING: COR: Commercial/Office/Residential COMPANY (if applicable): Century Pacific, LP. PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): COR SITE AREA (in square feet): 934,874 SF, 21.46 Ac ADDRESS: 1201 Third Ave, Suite 1680 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED: 159,149 SF CITY: Seattle, WA ZIP: 98101 SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: NIA PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable): 46.4 C:\Documents and Settings\robertc\LocaJ Settings\Ternporary Internet Files\ContentIE5\ADWJOPGJ\Quendall Terminals Master Application City ofRenton[1].doc-1 - Pl ·-JECT INFORMATION contin..ied . NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): N/A NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): N/A NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 800 PROJECT VALUE: IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL CJ AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A [J AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A [J FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL CJ GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. BUILDINGS(if appl):245,000 SF (Office) 30,600 SF Retail/Rest [J HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL ll1I SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES 1 583 lin. ft. BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A - NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if ll1I WETLANDS 38 768 sa. ft. appl): 210,000 SF (Office) 27,500 SF Retail/Rest LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach leaal descriDtion on separate sheet with the following information included\ SITUATE IN THE Southwest QUARTER OF SECTION 29, TOWNSHIP~ RANGE_§, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. Master Site Plan 3. Environmental Review 2. Site Plan Review 4. Shoreline Substantial Development Review 5. Binding Site Plan Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) \_1 l) I • {; I I r, "" ·, , declare that I am (please check one) X the current owner of the property involved in this a lication or the authorizeO"'Te resentative to act for a co oration lease attach roof of authorization and that the fore oin pp --p rp (p p ) g g statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that :BoW C,u.a; r\i (""\ . I k . signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary a'& for the '!-(]--' V/n'-"-,..oJ)L..a.;:..;;''---L-=-.,..-L,,.....__,=.._· _...:VL..LP--J-lf}J;t./rt~s and purposes mentioned in the instrument. (~ignature of Owner/Re~pres tative) ~ «2::£:J "'"'"" """ . ~ ,,, ,,,. ~I. _,,,,-<-' cCA l. li ", .. rt .o' ,,__<.;:, " ,. ., VI. . -4V .., ... "t$10J1;: ·•11, ·-,.. '."111.l ~' .,.l ~~. ', .. / (Signature of Owner/Representative) ·" (1:: .•• 9 ~ .. ·••· ,- Notary Public in and for the S~te of Washingt!Jn: :ff J +or..-'9'J. \;· _·-~ 1"i htJ GO. -lt&n--1-UJ:/ ,> · "' " Notary (Print) ~efR:cq L '&tlh My appointment expires: rob OJ. , c?0 II .) C:\Documents and Settings\robertc\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Files\ContentIE5\ADWJOPGJ\Quendall Terminals Master Application City of Renton[l].doc• 2 • P .. ~JECT INFORMATION (continued) NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): N/A NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): N/A NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): 800 PROJECT VALUE: IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL D AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A D AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): N/A D FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL D GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. BUILDINGS(if appl):245,000 SF (Office) 30,600 SF Retail/Rest D HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL IRl SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES 1.583 lin. ft. BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (ff applicable): N/A - NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if IRl WETLANDS 38 768 SQ. ft. appl): 210,000 SF (Office) 27,500 SF Retail/Rest LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach legal descriotion on separate sheet with the followina information included\ SITUATE IN THE Southwest QUARTER OF SECTION 29. TOWNSHIP £1. RANGE__§.. IN THE CITY OF RENTON. KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON. TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. Master Site Plan 3. Environmental Review 2. Site Plan Review 4. Shoreline Substantial Development Review 5. Binding Site Plan Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I. (Print Name/s) 1"'.'jec~Q. ~ krtLl'.)"' , declare that I am (please check one) _X_ the current owner of the property involved in this application :____ the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that 'ru~~'--¥tu r j JQ.R Si d this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the ses an urposes mentioned in the instrument. , (Signature o:wner/Representative) * Notary Public in and for the State of Washin ton ~~~ () o+ev1 vJ hJ"1"n . (Signature of Owner/Representative) Notary (Print) My appointment expires: C:\Documents and Settings\gbaxter\Local Settings\Temporary htternet Files\OLK58\Qucndall Terminals Master Application City of Renton.doc -2 - CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT e:<>@<'~~.£<".,c('....CC@~~m~·S;o@@r<w~r-~@«~@~@ State of California County of So.o \:Y)cctf (; } On Ocve m h:r II, 2W1efore me, personally ap::~red 1_~G~' -e~t~Y.~4,.,_ ~i~C<~-~fr-~cJn=~1 ~Z~-·-"~j-t_r,~"~"~;~,~~~'~~-itle_,_ 11 _h,_ 0 _·_ice_, _______ _ y" Name(s) oi Signer(s) Place Notary Seal Above who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person/s1 whose name~) is/ate._ subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that ~shelth)y executed the same in1'1i_s/her/tfl&r authorized capacity(ieii), and that by l'ril,/her/their signatureW on the instrument the person'(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person1s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature ~~~~~~~~~~~-OPTIONAL~~~~~~~~~-,."-~~ Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the doc, ent and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document: City of uclz.vi: Utnd US-€ penn'1-I fYIOw±f1" AppUcazho, . Document Date: A)ovem/x r· q 2 0,::>'7 Number of Pages:--+-0~'f~J~----- Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s) Signer's Name: bectf'',,-, 8ec,lf,·z 1){ Individual I ,k,6('Signer's Name: ______________ _ ::J Corporate Officer -Title(s): ::J Partner -::J Limited C General ::J Attorney in Fact _J Trustee _J Guardian or Conservator :J Other: ________ _ Signer Is Representing: ___ _ RIGHT THUMBPRINT OF SIGNER Too of thumb here D Individual ::J Corporate Officer -Title(s): ________ _ ::J Partner -C Limited ::J General D Attorney in Fact D Trustee D Guardian or Conservator D Other: __________ _ Signer Is Representing: ____ _ RIGHT THUMBPRINT OF SIGNER Top ol thumb here ~·™~ ©2007 Na1ional Notary Association• 9350 De So1o Ave., P.O. Box 2402 • Chatsworth, CA 91313-2402 • www.NationalNotary.org 11em #5907 Reorder: Gall Toll-Free 1-800-876-6827 • i \ ( ' PREAPPLICATION MEETING FOR ~;!;;o,f.?. l!)fi1 Bt,~ QUENDALL TERMINALS .9D1 . •o.., 11,8 . •, 4'0y 10!/ 18 4503 RIPLEY LN N ~~~ )(/(Jg CITY OF RENTON ~#[v~D Department of Community and Economic Development KJJ Current Planning Division PRE09~045 September ;!.D, 2009 Contact Information: Planner: Vanessa Dolbee Public Works Reviewer: Arneta Henninger Fire Prevention Reviewer: Dave Pargas Building Department Reviewer: Craig Burnell Phone: 425,430.7314 Phone: 425.430.7298 Phone: 425.430,7023 Phone: 425.430, 7290 PIE;iase retain this packet throughout the course of your project as a reference. Consider giving copies of it to any engineers, architects, and contractors who work on the project. You will need to submit a copy of this packet when you apply for land use and/or environmental permits. Pre-screening: When you have the project application ready for submittal, call and schedule an appointment with the project manager (planner) to have It pre- screened before making all of the required copies. The pre-application meeting is Informal and non-bii:,dlng. The comments provided on the proposal are based on the codes and policies in effect at the time of review. The applicant is cautioned that the development regulations are regularly amended and the proposal will be formally reviewed under the regulations In effect at the time of project submittal. The Information contained in this summary is subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Planning Director, Development Services Director, Department of Community and Economic Development Administrator, Public Works . Administrator and City Council). DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Fl ee?rv~lo AUG l! 'l 2009 BUILDING DIVISION Construction Services, Economic Development, Fire Prevention, Plan Review, Project Planner Neil Watts, Development Services Division Director "' W{ I ' A New Preliminary Application: I.Y. _;v--, l,12,v""'' ..-, LOCATION: __ 4-_<;_o_"J __ L._~ __ w_~_L..,;;_-_J-=-·~--'B_L_...,A_~ __ _ PREAPP NO. p ~E-. e;iq -0 '{~ A meeting with the applicant has been scheduled for ~..f-( U , Thursday, at / 6 ~AM DPM, in one of the 51n floor conference rooms. If this meeting is scheduled at 10:00 AM, the MEETING MUST BE CONCLUDED PRIOR TO 11:00 AM to aUow time to prepare for the i 1 :00 AM meeting. ' . Please review the attached project plans prior to the scheduled meeting with the applicant. You will not need to do a thorough "permit level" review at this time. Note only major issues that must be resolved prior to fomial land use and/or building permit application submittal. Plan Reviewer assigned is~ Please submit your written comments to V ~ (Pia nner) at least two (2) days before the meeting. Thank you . ..-{q;,zo-rl:iOHfJIC//-1..-/l.&f0 ,e_ r -Cd DI:': 1-o06 I g c... -Aff~OVl\"C... PdV<._ f;: s:ro~Y l'rl..re"~..._i,n-1v<'; H:\Division.s\Develop.ser\Dev & Plan.ing\Template\Preapp2 Revised I-OS ( ! ,. • FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPART1\1ENT MEMORANDUl\1 DATE: S BJ)temb er 3, 200 9 TO: Amela Henninger, Plan Reviewer FROM: David Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal, Commm1ity Risk Reduction SUBJECT: PRE-APP 09-045 Quei1dall Tenninals A review of the plans and material regarding the Quendall Terminals has been conducted a11d completed. Please review the Renton Fire & Emergency Services Fire Code and Policy comments and concerns. 1. FIRE FLOW: The preliminary fire fl.ow has been calculated a11d detennined to be 5000 gallons per minute for 4 hours. It is important to note that the fire flow calculation provided is merely a preliminary calculation. -In order to conduct a more acc11rate calculation I shall need the applicant to provide more accurate inforn1ation on the square footage a11d type of construction to be used. 2. REQUIRED HYDRANTS & SPACING: The mh:umum number ofbydra11ts that shall be required for this project shall be 6. The primary hydrants shall be required to be located within iso feet to the front of the buildings a11d all otber hydrants shall be loc[l.ted within 300 feet to tl,e front oftl1e building. All hydrants servicing this project shall be required to be equipped with a five inch Storz fitting. Structures requiring a fire flow greater than 2500 gallons per minute shall require the fire supply line to be looped, 3, FIRE APPARATUS ACCESS: Fire Apparatus access roadways apperu· to be witl:un 150 feet of all po1iions of the building exterior, with 2 exceptions. The first exception relates to the ru·ea along west side of the building in where cunently there is no area provided for fire apparatus access. The entire lengtl1 of the west side that may not be accessible. is approximately 600 feet hi lengtl1. Some provisioll'needs to be made to allow access such as using grasscrete. TI1e second exception shall require at the west end oftl1e north access a Hammerhead turnaround. Fire Apparatus access roads shall be a minimum of20 feet wide on a sU1face capable of sustaining the weight of a fire apparatus. The turning radius shall be 45 feet to the outside and 25 feet to the inside. Circ.le tumarounds shall require a 90 degree radius Arneta Henninger, Plan Reviewer September 3, 2009 Page 2 of3 4. FIRE LANE SIGNAGE: Fire Lane signage and marking shall be required in areas where the road widths are 20 to 28 feet wide. See attached Fire Lane gLJidelines. 5. FIRE PROTECTION & DETECTION REQUIREMENTS: Approved fire sprinkler, fire alarm and Dry Standpipe systems shall be required. Separate plans and permits are required for the installation of these systems. 6. SPRINKLER RISER ROOM ACCESS: The fire sprinkler riser room shall be accessible through a dedicated exte1ior door. The sprinkler riser room shall be located with heat and lighting. The fire sprinkler riser room and access may be provided in the parking garage. 7. STANDPIPE SYSTEM: A Class III Standpipe with a valve and a single 2 Y, inch fitting located on each floor landing shall be required for buildings 3 stories or greater or for buildings 20 feet or more in height. 8. ELEY A TORS: Elevators shall be in compliance with section 3002.4 of the 2006 International Building Code. 9. HGH RISE BUILDINGS: This project shall be required to comply with all provisions set forth in the 2006 or 2009 International Building Code as it pertains to High Rise Buildings 10. FIRE MITIGATION FEES: Fire mitigation fees shall be $388.00 per residential unit and $.52 per commercial square foot. Fire mitigation fees shall not be required for the parking structlrre. Fire mitigation fe:,es shall be paid at the time of securing building permits. 11. GENERAL NOTES: RECOMMENDATON: LADDER/AERIAL ACCESS: Buildings exceeding 30 feet in height should be provided with approved fire access roads capable of accommodating fire department aerial apparatus. Overhead utility and power lines should not be located within the fire department aerial apparatus access roadways. The ability to set up a 35 foot ground ladder at a 70 degree angle should be provided. h:lced\planninglcurrent plannin1!1Jreapps\09-045. vanessa\pre-•pp-09-045 (j\lendall terminals.doc I C ,A,111eta H.cnniDgcr 1 Pl1m Rcvicv,.rer September 3, 2009 Page3 of3 12. PRE -FIRE PLANNING: A copy of the site and floor plan shall be provided for the purpose of assisting Fire Operations in conducting tl1e pre-fire planning of tl1is project. See attached sheet. '\.,/ \A. ~e,\\ DP/kc c: Vanessa Dolbee, Plaiu1er h:\ced\plannin g\current planning\preapps\09-045. van essa \prc-app-09-045 quendall terminals. doc CITY OF RENTON REQUIREMENTS -FIRE LANE ORDINANCES Fire lanes as required by the adopted Fire Codes shall meet the following design criteria as outlined in Renton Municipal Code 4-4-080 F.6. 1. ldentffication: Fire lanes shall be identified by curbs painted bright RED. If no curb is present a RED four (4) inch wide line shall be painted on the edge of the lane/road surface. 2. Signage: (a) Block letters stating "FIRE LANE -NO PARKING", 18 inches in height with at least a 3 inch brush stroke, painted in WHITE, approximately 12 inches from curb face or lane edge at 50-foot intervals. (b) Or signs stating "FIRE LANE-NO PARKING", 12x18 inches in height, with letters on background of contrasting color for ease of readability at 50-feet. (Red letters on white background recommended.) Signs shall be placed 50-feet apart, and no less than 5-feet, nor more than 7-feet from the ground. 3. Width and Clearance: A minimum unobstructed width,of 20-feet and minimum vertical clearance of 13-feet 6-inches. ' 4. Turning Radius: A minimum of 45-feet outside and 25-feet inside radius. firelane 8/09 I / C DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM September 9, 2009 Vanessa Dolby · Arneta Henninger, Plan Review /t# UTILITY AND TRANSPORTATION COMMENTS FOR QUENDALL TERMINALS PRE 09-045, 4503 LAl<E WASHINGTON BLVD N NOTE: The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary is preliminary and non-binding and may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official city decision-makers. Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. I have reviewed the pre-application for this 5 story residential units (approximately 800) development above two levels of above grade parking along with retail/restaurant space located in the vicinity of N 45th St and Ripley Lane north, west of Lake Washington Blvd N, all In Section 29-24-05 and have the following comments: WATER: • This project is located in the City of Renton water service area. • This project site is located in the 320 Water Pressure Zone. The static pressure is approximately 124 psi at the street level. Pressure reducing valves shall be installed at each domestic meter since the pressure exceeds 80 psi. • Per the City of Renton Fire Marshal the preliminary fireflow for this project is 51 000 GPM. An automatic fire sprinkler system will be required for this development. • The maximum available capacity, in GPM at 20 psi residual pressure from the existing City's water system in the vicinity of the development is 5,600 GPM. • There is an existing 12" water main west of existing railroad tracks within BNRR right-of- way. See City of Renton water drawing W-0400 for detailed engineering plans. • Additional water main improvements will be required to provide the required fireflow demand. • A looped water main 12" in diameter around the buildings will be required including additional fire hydrants as shown on the attached red-lined conceptual utility plan. • Existing fire hydrants along the railroad tracks shall be relocated approximately 18" behind the new curb and access road west of the existing railroad tracks. Qucndal I T enninal • A portion of the existing ·12" water main under the new site access road on the north side must be relocated and raised to be at 4' of cover under new roadway finished grade. • Construction of a commercial building will trigger a separate review. • Per the City of Renton code, when the required fire flow is over 2500 GPM the fire hydrants shall be served by a main which loops around the building or complex of buildings and reconnects back into a distribution supply main. • Any new construction must have one fire hydrant capable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM and shall be located within 150 feet of the structure and additional hydrants (also tapable of delivering a minimum of 1,000 GPM) within 300 feet of the structure. This distance is measured along the travel route. The number of additional hydrants required is dependent on the calculated fireflow of the new commercial building. Existing "fire hydrants shall be retrofitted with a quick disconnect Stortz fitting If not existing. • Buildings that exceed 30 feet in height shall install backpressure devices at the back of each domestic water meter. A separate domestic meter is required per building. • A Reduced Pressure Backflow Assembly (RPBA) is required behind each domestic water meter. The RPBA shall be installed inside an above ground heated enclosure "Hot-Box". • The existing 10-inch water line through the site will need to be abandoned. A release of the existing easement will be required (refer to City Water Project Plan, No. W-0586). • A backflow prevention assembly (DDCVA) is required for fire sprinkler system for each building (refer to City Standard Details for external bDCVA in vault or for special requirements for DDCVA inside buildjng). The location of the fire department connections (FDC's) must be approved by the Fire Marshal. • A'separate water meter and DCVA is required for the landscape i.rrigation system. • The Water System Development Charge fees are based on the total number and size of any and all water meters. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued. • This proposed development site is not located in the Aquifer Protection Zone. SEWER: • There is an existing 12" (gravity} sanitary sewer main on the site. • A commercial building permit will trigger a separate review. The applicant needs to show how th Is site will be served with sanitary sewer. • The project will need to provide an analysis of the capacity of the existing Baxter Lift Station including how to accomplish the additional flows above the capacity currently available at the Station. • Any use in the building(s) subject to oils or grease shall require the installation of a grease Interceptor or oil/water separator per the current UPC as determined at the time of plan review. • The parking garage will require an oil water separator. ( \ ( •' • ( Q~endall Tenninnl , System Development Charges per lot based on the size oHhe domestic water meter are required. The Development Charges are collected at the time the construction permit is issued. STORM DRAINAGE: , There are some storm drainage facilities in N 42°0 Pl and in Lake Washington Blvd N. See City of Renton drawing R-3330. • A conceptual drainage plan and report Is required to be submitted with the formal application for a commercial project. A drainage control plan designed per the~ -Z.oo ~ King County Su1face Water Manual is required"?::oo'=\ , The project will need to comply with the 25Q!i_KCSWDM. The project will need to provide flow control, water quality treatment and conveyance system improvements. Any offsite runoff will need to be accounted for in the drainage analysis. The Surface Water SDCfees are $0.405 (but not less than $1012) per square foot of new impervious area. These fees are collected a.t the time a construction permit is issued. STREET IMPROVEMENTS: • Construction of a commercial building will trigger a separate review. • It appears that there are not any existing public streets and that there will not be any right-of-way dedication hence the code on street improvements does not apply. • If the project does not front any public right-of,way then street lighting is not required to be installed on the project side. , • A Traffic Study will be required for this project to be submitted with the formal -... application.' , Traffic Mitigation fees will apply. These fees are calculated perthe ITE Manual, 7th ~ .~· edition. · ,' , GENERAL: ,,,.. .. "I. • All required utility, drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. • All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two horizontal and vertical controls per the City's current horizontal and vertical control network. • Additional information regarding detailed plan review will be provided at the time of formal application. • Permit application must include an itemized cost estimate for these improvements. Half of the fee must be paid upon application for building and construction permits, and the remainder when th.e permits are issued. There will be additional fees for water service related expenses. See Drafting Standards. CC: Keyreu lGttrick Quendall Terminals September 10, 2009 Page 1 of7 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: CITY OF RENTON Community and Economic Development MEMORANDUM September 10, 2009 Pre-Application file No. 09-045 Vanessa Dolbee, Assoctate Planner Quendall Terminals, 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre-application for the above- referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre-appllcotion submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes in effect on the date of revle.w. The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision-makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Development Services Director, Planning Director, Community and Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall or online at www.rentonwa.gov Project Proposal: The subject property is located at 4503 Lake Washington Boulevard North. The subject site is approximately 19 acres in area and is within the Commercial/Office/ Residential (COR) zone as well as Urban Design Overlay District "C". The subject site has been given the "Superfund'' designation by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and therefore cleanup pursuant to EPA and the Department of Ecology (DOE) would be required as a part of its development. The applicant has divided the.19-acre site into four quadrants, the SW Quad, SE Quad, NW Quad, and NE Quad delineated by an internal street system. The first floor of all quads would be structured parking with the exception of the street frontage facing the east/west internal drive that would be lined with retail/restaurant uses creating a commercial corridor that terminates at Lake Washington in a round.about. The second floor of all quads would also contain structured parking with the exception of office above the ground floor retail/restaurant uses. As proposed, the SW Quad would contain approximately 10,800 square feet of retail/restaurant space, 10,500 square feet of office space, and three residential towers containing 450 multi-family units, with 831 parking spaces. The SE Quad would contain approximately 4,500 square feet of retail ( \. Quendall Terminals September 1.0, 2009 Page 2 of 7 space, 10,000 square feet of office space, and three residential towers containing 175 units, with 665 parking spaces. The NW Quad would contain approximately 10,500 square feet retail/restaurant space, 10,000 square feet of office space, and two residential towers containing 174 units, with 373 parking spaces, Finally, the NE Quad would contain approximately 4,800 square feet of retail space, 24,000 square feet of office and no residential units, with 395 parking spaces. Access to the site would be provided by two access points along Lake Washington Blvd. N. These access points would cross the BNSF rail right-of-way located between the site and Lake Washington Blvd. N. One access currently is built and accesses the Barbee Mill development located south of the subject site. Current Use: The subject site is vacant, although; it is the site of a former creosote manufacturing facility that operated from 1917 to 1969. Past releases of coal tars and creosote have contaminated soll,_groundwater, surface water, and Jake sediments. The subject site has been designated a Superfund site by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and therefore cleanup pursuant to EPA and the Department of Ecology (DOE) would be required as a part of its development. Zoning/Density Requirements: The subject property is zoned Commercial/Office/Residential (COR) and is within Urban Design Overlay District "C" overlay. The COR zone allows retail, eating and drinking establishments, general office and attached residential uses. Minimum residential density Is 30 dwelling units per net acre and maximum density is 50 dwelling units per net acre. The same area used for commercial and office development may be used to calculate residential density. Where commercial and/or office areas are utilized in the calculation of density, the City may require restrictive covenants to ensure the maximum density is not exceeded should the property be subdivided or in another manner made available for separate lease or conveyance. The area of public and private streets and critical areas would be \~II.. <;- deducted from the gross site area to determine the "net" site area prior to calculating ~~> ~~ density. The provided information indicated that the usable site area after the :,:,.Ill'<. \II.',) '"C,--'- deductian of the new proposed street system would be 18.90 acres and 800 residential ~1't. units are proposed resulting in a "net" density of 42.33 dwelling units per acre, which ~f~ ~ \_ is within the permitted density range for the COR zone. At the time of formal "~~'<:...; · application, for projects which include a residential component, a density worksheet is required so that an accurate density calculation is submitted. Development Standards: The project would be subject to RMC 4-2-12DE, "Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Designations" and RMC 4-3-100 "Urban Design Regulations" effective at the time of complete application. A copy of these standards is included herewith. Minimum Lot Size, Width and Depth No minimums are specified for the COR zone. Lot Coverage-65 percent of the total area or 75 percent if parking is provided within the building or within a parking garage. All parking for each Quad is enclosed within a parking garage; the only surface parking is located along the proposed street system. As \ I ,/ Quendall Terminals September 10, 2009 Page 3 o/7 such, the proposed development would qualify for 75 percent lot coverage. The applicant did not provide ex;ict calculations for building coverage although staff estimated building coverage to be approximately 450,000 square feet, with a 19-acre site the approximate lot coverage would equate to 54.37 percent which is less then the maximum lot coverage permitted by code. Site data submitted at the time of application must indicate site coverage by buildings and by impervious area. Setbacks -Setbacks in the COR zone are determined at the time of site development plan review. Building Height-The maximum building height in the COR zone is 10 stories and/or 125 feet. The applicant did not provide enough information to determine compliance with building height restrictions. Design Standards -For development within the COR zoning designation, projects shall , be designed to the standards of the Urban Design Regulations for District C, as provided in RMC 4-3-100 (handout enclosed) As proposed, many sections of Design District 'C' could not be review by staff because elevations were not provided. Although, the section-s that refer to parking and access could be review. As proposed, it appears that the applicant conceptually complies with these sections of Design District 'C'. As the design of the proposed development progress, City staff would be happy to review the design prior to official submittal. Screening -Screening must be provided for all surface-mounted and roof top utility and mechanical and equipment, loading, repair, maintenance, storage and work areas per RMC 4-4-095 (enclosed). Refuse and Recycling Areas -Refuse and recycling areas need to meet the requirements <' '\. 1f RMC4-4-090, "Refuse and Recyclables Standards" (enclosed). In office developments, a minimum of two square feet per every 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for recyclables deposit areas and a minimum of four square feet per 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for refuse deposit areas. A total minimum area of 100 square feet shall be provided for recycling and refuse deposit areas. The proposed development would have 266,300 gross square feet of office space, which would require 532.60 square feet {266,300 X 2 / 11 000} for recyclables deposit area and 1.,065.20 square feet (266,300 X 4 / 1,000} for refuse deposit areas. In retail developments, a minimum of five square feet per every 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for recyclables deposit areas and a minimum often square feet per 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for refuse deposit areas. A total minimum area of 100 square feet shall be provided for recycling and refuse deposit areas. ( ( ( ' Quendall Terminals September 10, 2009 Page 4 of 7 Tile proposed development would have 30,600 square feet of retafl/restaurant space which would require 153 square feet (30,600 X 5 / :woo " 153.00) of recyclables deposit area and 306 square feet {30,600 X 10 / 1000 "306.00) of refuse deposit areas. · Furthermore, outdoor refuse and recyclables deposit areas and collection points shall not be located within fift)I feet of an)! residential zone property. Multi"family projects must provide screened areas for refuse and recyclables at a rate of 1.5 sq. ft. per unit for recyclables and 3 sq. ft. per unit for refuse. A total minimum area of 80 square feet shall be provided for refuse and recycl,ibles deposit areas. There shall be at least one deposit area 01· collection point for every 30 dwelling units. Furthermore, when a residential development comprises of more than one building the required deposit areas shall be dispersed though out the site. They must not be located within the required setback areas. The proposed development would have 800 residential units which would require 1,200 square feet (1.5 X 800 units= 1,200) of recyclables deposit area and 2,400 square feet /3 X 800 units= 2,400} of refuse deposit areas. If the above requirements cannot be met by the development, with official application submittal the applicant shall request a refuse and recycling modification, with justification as to why the dimensional requirements stipulated above can not be met. Landscaping -On"site landscape requirements are determined through site development plan review . . A conceptual landscape plan and landscape analysis meeting t/Je requirements in RMC 4-8-120D.12, shall be submitted at the time of land use permit application. Fences -If the applicant intends to install any fences as part of this project, the location must be designated on the landscape plan. A fence detail should also be included on the plan as well. Access/Parking-The parking ratios required of the project depends on the specific uses proposed. Parking calculations for commercial uses must be based on the net area of the building. The proposed retaii/restaurant area would meet the City's definition of Shopping Center, which results in a minimum parking standard of 0.4 spaces per 100 square feet of net floor area and a maximum of 0.5 per 100 square feet of net floor area. Attached residential developments must heve 1.75 parking spaces per unit If tandem spaces are not provided and office shall have a minimum of 3 spaces per 1,000 square feet of net floor area and a maximum of 4.5 spaces per 1,000 squ~re feet of net . floor area. Based on the proposed total gross square footage, the following parking would be required: Office-266,300 square feet would require a minimum of799 space and a maximum of 1,198 spaces. Quendall Terminals September 10, 2009 Page 5 of7 Shopping Center-30,600 square feet would require a minimum of 122 spaces and a maximum of 153 spaces. Attached Residential -800 units would require 1,400 spaces. The total minimum parking required for the proposed development would be 2,321 parking spaces; the proposal indicates 2,264 parking spaces, which is less then the minimum required per Renton Municipal Code. The applicant should be aware that the parking ratio is based on net square footage; the total of all floor area of a building, excluding stairwells, elevator shafts, mechanical equipment rooms, interior vehicular parking or loading, and all floors below the ground floor, except when used for human habitation or service to the public. If the proposal provides more or less parking than required by code, a request far a parking modification would need to be applied for and granted. This detailed written request can be submitted before or concurrently with a master site plan application. It should be noted that the parking regulations specify standard stall dimensions of 9 feet x 20 feet for surface lots, 8 feet, 4 inches x 15 feet for structured parking, compact dimensions of 83', feet x 16 feet for surface lots, 7 }I feet by 12 feet for structured parking and parallel stall dimensions of 9 feet x 23 feet. The maximum number of compact spaces within a parking garage cannot exceed 50 percent. ADA accessible stalls must be a minimum of 8 feet in width by 20 feet in length, with an adjacent access aisle of 8 feet in width for van accessible spaces. The appropriate amount of ADA accessible stalls based on the total number of spaces must be provided. For one row and two rows of 90-degree head-in parking using the same aisle in a one way or two-way circulation pattern, the minimum width of the aisle shall be 24 feet. In the requirements for Loading Space Standards, RMC 4-4-080J (enclosed), all buildings shall provide off-street loading space if the activity carried in the building requires deliveries to it of people or merchandise. Loading space is in addition to required off- street parking. If the proposal is not able to meet loading space standards a separate request for a modification would need to be applied for and granted. Driveway design standards are specified in RMC 4-4-0801 which, in part, states that there shall be a minimum of 40 feet between driveway curb returns where there is more than one driveway on property under one ownership or control and used as one ..I premises. Parking standards are specified in RMC 4-4--080. \., Significant Tree Retention: A tree inventory and a tree retention plan along wJth a tree retention worksheet shall be provided with the formal land use application. The tree retention plan must show preservation of at least 30 percent of significant trees, and indicate how proposed building footprints would be sited to accommodate preservation of significant trees that would be retained. If the trees cannot be retained, they may be replaced with minimum 2-inch caliper trees at a ratio of six to one. ( ( Quenctall Ten11inals September 10, 2009 l)age Go'; 7 Critical Areas: The project site is within the Shoreline area of Lake Washington and would therefore be subject the 1·egulatio11s within the City's Shoreline lv1aster Prngrillll. The site is also located with·1r, a Seismic Hazard Area and contains minor steep slopes. Lake W;ishington is a Class j_ water of the state and anv development within 200-feet of the ordina1·y high water mark ot the Lake would be required to comply with the \ Shoreline Master Progrn111, as proposed many portion, of the development would be located within 200-feet of the shoreline, as such a lafre study would be required, in ' / additiori'to a habitat Assessment. Furthermore, th~ potential for wetlands on the ' subject site, as such, a wetland reco1111aissance shall be provided, clarif{1ng the presence of wetlands on site. If wetlands are, determine to be located on or near the subject site, a wetland assessment and delineat'1on wouid also be required. The seismic hazard is related to potential liquefaction of soils during an earthquake event. A geatechnica/ analysis for the site is required. The analysis needs to assess soil conditions and detail construction measures to assw·e building stability. Environmental Review: 5EPA review would be required. Permit Requirements: ll/12ster Plan Review is required for all development within the COR zone and a Substantial Shoreline Development Permit (SSDP) is Required tor development within 200-feet of a Shoreline of the State. The purpose of the Master Plan process is to guide phased development projects with multiple buildings on a single large site. The II/laster Plan is requ·1red to demonstrnte how major elements of a developme11t are proposed on the site at sufficient detail to demonstrate the overall project concept. In addition, the lv1aster Plan must illustrate how the major project elements, combined, create an urban environment that implements City goals. An additional purpose ·1s to allow consideration and mitigation of potential impacts that could result from large-scale site and. facility development, and to allow coordination with City capital imprnvement planning. lv1aster Plan 1·ev·1ew should occur at an early stage in the development of a project, when the scale, intensity and layout of a project are known. A public hearing before the Hearing Examiner is _required for Master Plans. Where a Master Plan is approved, subsequent Site Plans submitted for future phases may be submitted and approved administratively without a public hearing. The fee for a Master Plan Review would be $2,000.00, the Environmental Review would be $500.DO (1/2 the full fee of $1,000.DO), and the 5SDP fee would $500.00 (1/2 the full fee of $1,000.00). The applicant indicated that they would like to apply for a Binding Site Plan, the application fee for the Binding Site Plan would be $1,DDD.DD or $500.00 if submitted concurrently with the above applications. With concurrent review of these applications, the process would take an estimated time frame of 12 weeks and an additional 4 weeks for Shoreline Review. fees: In addition to the applicable building and construction permit fees, the following mitigation fees would be required prior to the lssu,rnce of building permits. ,, Quendalt Terminals September 10, 2009 Page 7 of7 • A Transportation Mitigation Fee based on S75.00 per each llfill' average daily trip attributable to the project; and, • A Fire Mitigation Fee based on $0.52 per new square foot of commercial space (this would include hotel and office/ retail uses). For future multi-family uses the Fire Mitigation Fee would be based on $388.00 for each new multi-family unit. • A Parks Mitiga;!:ion Fee ba~d OQ $354.50 for each multi-family 11nit. \_ 1 <> '1i?.<t~ ";,0/\"" \ IC>, •H ¢' ~ \ <J;>Q Iv VI~~ ~-('\, Ni;.\~~ A handout listing all cif"the·afv,s Development r lated fees is included foryo6r review. ;.._, _,1. ,)_ """I"\\',-' I -.It Expiration: For a non-phased Master Plan or a non-phased Master Plan/Site Plan combined approval the Hearing Examiner shall determine an appropriate expiration date for the Master Plan which may exceed two years, but shall not exceed five years. An applicant shall submit a complete Site Plan application for development within the specified time frame if a Site Plan was·not combined with the Master Plan application. A two-year time extension may be granted. cc: Jennifer Henning ) ~ ""' µa\ ~ ~ ~ <'1 f-1 (' = ffi ' ffi p; A4 -2(1 T24N RSE \V 1/2 C4 -32 T24N RSE W 1/2 {) 0 200 4DO ' '.' ' 1,-W IF,,! . 1:o1,80D I J B4 29 T24N RSE W 1/2 5429 City of Renton 1 . . . . n . ( Q11"SIO TREE RETENTIQNP\anninJ ,,, NOV l 8 2UO~ WORKSHEET 1. Total number of trees over 6" in diameter1 on project site: 1. ----'4-=-6-=-3* __ trees 2. Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dead, diseased or dangerous2 Trees in proposed public streets Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts Trees in critical areas 3 and buffers Total number of excluded trees: 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1: trees ----____ trees ____ trees trees ---- 2. ______ trees 3. ______ trees 4. Next, to determine the number of trees that must be retained 4 , multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones RC, R-1, R-4, or R-8 0.1 in all other residential zones 0.05 in all commercial and industrial zones 4. ______ trees 5. List the number of 6" or larger trees that you are proposing 5 to retain 4 : 5. ______ trees 6. Subtract line 5 from line 4 for trees to be replaced: 6. ______ trees (If line 6 is less than zero, stop here. No replacement trees are required). 7. Multiply line 6 by 12" for number of required replacement inches: 7. ______ inches 8. Proposed size of trees to meet additional planting requirement: (Minimum 2" caliper trees required) 8. ------inches 9. Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees 6 : (if remainder is .5 or greater, round up to the next whole number) per tree 1 · Measured at chest height. 9. ______ trees "Note: The Quendall Terminals site will undergo environmental remediation and mitigation after Master Site Plan submittal and prior to final design and construction. The remediation/mitigation work is under the direction of EPA and will include significant removal of on-site trees and placement of fill. The assumed existing conditions for Master Site Plan design are the post remediation/ mitigation conditions. Therefore this tree retention worksheet is not applicable to the project. X:\l 09000-109250\109118 (Quendall Terminals)\PROJECT DOCUMENTS\City of Renton\Submittal Documcnts\TrccRctcntionWorkshcct.doc 12/08 DENSITY WORKSHEET City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way-Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 1. Gross area of property: 1. ____,9=3'-'-4=8.,_7 4-'---_ square feet( 21 .46Ac) 2. Deductions: Certain areas are excluded from density calculations. These include: Public streets** (Streets A, B & C) Private access easements** (D,E,F) Critical Areas* Total excluded area: 3. Subtract line 2 from line 1 for net area: 4. Divide line 3 by 43,560 for net acreage: 5. Number of dwelling units or lots planned: 6. Divide line 5 by line 4 for net density: 159.149 square feet 25.138 square feet ____ square feet (3.65Ac) (0.58Ac) 2. 184 287 square feet(4.23Ac) 3. 750,587 square feet 4. 17.23 acres 5. 800 units/lots 6. 46.4 = dwelling units/acre *Critical Areas are defined as "Areas determined by the City to be not suitable for development and which are subject to the City's Critical Areas Regulations including very high landslide areas, protected slopes, wetlands or floodways." Critical areas buffers are not deducted/excluded. ** Alleys (public or private) do not have to be excluded. X:\109000-109250\109118 (Quendall Tenninals)\PROJECT DOCUMENTS\City of Renton\Submittal Documents\Files to be Copied\Quendall Terminals Density Worksheet.doc -I -03/08 Overlay Design District C Stateme~!i~; ~~nton · 1s1on Nov Centuiy Pacific, LP I 8 2/iOg Compliance Statement li;g~t§~t{tJ) The Quendall Terminals master site plan submittal and all supporting documents shall meet or exceed the minimum compliance requirements included in the Overlay Design District C. This includes the following: • Site design and building location • Building location, character, massing, rooflines and materials • Transition to surrounding development • Parking and vehicular access • Location of surface and structured parking • Pedestrian building entries • Pedestrian circulation • Landscaping • Common space • Signage • Lighting As specific site development plans are prepared the applicant and design team will continue to coordinate the proposed design with the City of Renton to ensure compliance. Quendall Terminals Project Narrative -November 2009 1 I Century Pacific, LP Project Narrative Project Overview TEAM This entitlement submittal has been prepared for property owners Altino Properties, Inc. and J.H. Baxter & Co. The project developer and applicant is: • Century Pacific, L.P. Contact: Campbell Mathewson The following consultants contributed to preparation of the plans and documents: • KPFF Consulting Engineers -Entitlement Lead, Civil Site Development Contact: Tom Jones • Lance Mueller & Associates -Architecture and Landscaping Contact: Lance Mueller • The Transpo Group -Transportation and Traffic Contact: James Webb • Anchor QEA -Environmental Contact: Peter Hummel • Aspect Consulting -Geotechnical Contact: Henry Haselton PROJECT SIZE AND LOCATION The Quendall Terminals project is located at 4350 Lake Washington Boulevard in the northern portion of Renton, Washington. The project site is bordered by Lake Washington to the west, the Sea hawks Training Facility to the north, Ripley Lane North to the east. and the Barbee Mill site to the south. The site area is approximately 21.46 acres (20.3 acre main parcel and an isolated 1.15 acre parcel east of Ripley Lane). The site includes approximately 1,583 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. EPA ROLE Environmental remediation and mitigation of the property will be conducted prior to development. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is the lead agency for all site remediation, and mitigation actions, which are to be performed at the Quendall Terminals site under Superfund. The actions selected by EPA must comply with substantive elements of SEPA and other applicable, relevant, and appropriate environmental reviews and permitting requirements, though the remediation and mitigation actions are exempt from procedural requirements of SEPA. Quendall Terminals Project Narrative -November 2009 1 Century Pacific, LP PERMITS AND ZONING The following permits are anticipated to complete the City of Renton Land Use, Shoreline and Master Site plan entitlement for the Quendall Terminals project: Permits • Master Site Plan Approval • Shoreline Substantial Development Permit • Critical Areas Review • Environmental Review (SEPA) • Binding Site Plan Zoning The current zoning classification and comprehensive plan designation for the site is (COR) Commercial/Office/Residential. The current shoreline master program designation for the site is "urban." The Seahawks Training Facility to the north and the Barbee Mill site to the south have the same COR zoning classification and designation per the City of Renton comprehensive plan. ACCESS Interstate 405 provides regional access to the project site via the Lake Washington Boulevard/44th Street interchange. Lake Washington Boulevard and Ripley Lane front the eastern boundary of the site. Two entrances to the project are proposed from these public rights of way. To the south an existing entrance to the Barbee Mill site will be used as a primary site access. A second site access will be provided at the northeast end of the site by connection to Ripley Lane. Both site access points cross a now abandoned Burlington Northern Santa Fe at-grade railroad line. New on-site public streets and private access tracts will be constructed to provide site access to the buildings. CURRENT USE The site is currently vacant with the exception of a small shed used during past logging operations. The site has been used for various industrial purposes in the past, most recently as a log sorting and storage yard. Historical industrial uses have included a refinery, and have resulted in hazardous substances and soil contamination. Various small docks, structures, and pilings are located at the west edge of the project site along Lake Washington. Adjacent Uses • Sea hawks Training Facility, a football training facility, to the north. • Barbee Mill, a residential development, to the south. • Pan Abode, an existing cedar home manufacturing facility, to the southeast. Future planning includes a hotel (Hawks Landing). Quendall Terminals Project Narrative -November 2009 \ 2 Centuiy Pacific, LP • Lake Washington Boulevard, Ripley Lane, and Interstate 405 are to the east. • Lake Washington is located to the west. PROPOSED USES The proposed development includes construction of four mixed-use buildings with structured and surface parking for 2,171 vehicles. The development will include 800 residential units, 245,000 square feet of office, 21,600 square feet of retail, and 9,000 square feet of restaurant. Density The gross site area totals 934,874 SF (21.46 Ac) Deductions for Public Streets total 159,149 SF (3.65 Ac) Deductions for Private Access total 25,138 SF (0.58 Ac) This results in a Net Site Area of 750,587 SF (17.23 Ac) Based on a proposed density of 800 dwelling units provides a net density of 46.4 units/Ac SPECIAL SITE FEATURES The site contains approximately 0.81 acres (35,181 square feet) of wetlands and has approximately 1,583 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. Site slopes are generally Oto 5 percent with localized slopes up to 2H:1V at debris piles and up to 1H:1V at the bank of the lake. PROPOSED OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS WSDOT has identified future improvements to the 1-405/Northeast 44th Street interchange as part of the WSDOT 1-405 Renton to Bellevue improvement project; several additional improvements are proposed or identified by the project to mitigate project generated impacts. These include: • A southbound left-turn lane, a dedicated westbound right-turn lane, and an eastbound left-turn lane at the Ripley Lane/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection. • A northbound left-turn lane at the Main Project Access/Barbee Mill/Conner Homes Access intersection with Lake Washington Boulevard. • A westbound left-turn lane at the Hawks Landing Access/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection. Note: Improvements listed are based on full build-out, initial phased development will not require all improvements. Quendall Terminals Project Narrative -November 2009 3 Century Pacific, LP SOILS AND DRAINAGE CONDITIONS Soils Site soils consist of highly heterogeneous shallow alluvial and lacustrine silts, sands and peat underlain by a coarser sand-gravel alluvium. The shallow alluvial deposits are overlain by years of fill deposits. Drainage Conditions Stormwater runoff from the existing site either infiltrates or flows overland to Lake Washington with no known flooding problems. Stormwater runoff from the proposed development will be collected and conveyed via a piped stormwater system to new outfalls at Lake Washington. Runoff from pollution- generating surfaces will be treated prior to discharge to the lake. SHORELINE The project site includes approximately 1,583 feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. The existing shoreline varies from gently sloping wetlands to steep (1H:1V) banks. Various docks and structures are located along the bank and in the water along the shore. The shoreline includes a 100-foot average width riparian bu/fer upland from the ordinary high water mark. A shoreline restoration plan is being designed and approved under EPA direction. The following work is anticipated within 200 feet of the Lake Washington shoreline: Activities related to shoreline restoration, contaminant remediation and mitigation, including capping of the site, and construction of mixed-use buildings, roads, retaining walls, hardscape/landscape areas. VIEW CORRIDORS The site is currently vacant, so construction of the proposed development will create potential partial obstructions from certain vantage points around the site. The design of the project will maintain view corridors between the proposed buildings. TREE RETENTION The Quendall Terminals site will undergo environmental remediation and mitigation for on-site contaminated soils after Master Site Plan submittal and prior to final design and construction of the development included in this proposal. The site remediation is under the direction of the EPA and will include significant removal of on-site trees and placement of fill. The assumed existing conditions for Master Site Plan design are the post remediation and mitigation conditions. Quendall Terminals Project Narrative -November 2009 4 Century Pacific, LP CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION DESCRIPTION Construction is anticipated to commence following EPA approval of a site cleanup action plan. Full project build out is expected two years following the commencement of site remediation and mitigation construction. The following construction mitigation measures are anticipated: • No special hours of construction activity are anticipated outside what is allowed under the current City of Renton Municipal Code. • A proposed haul route plan will be developed prior to construction. • A Temporary Erosion Sedimentation Control Plan will be developed prior to construction to minimize erosion. • A traffic control plan will be developed prior to construction to address traffic and transportation impacts. CONSTRUCTION ESTIMATE Estimated Fill: A fill cap is anticipated to be placed over the site as part of EPA site remediation and mitigation. The combined volume of the fill cap and additional fill required to achieve building grades is estimated to be approximately 50,000 to 100,000 cubic yards. Actual volumes will be determined by the final EPA site remediation plan and final site design. Estimated Costs: Total estimated construction cost and estimated fair market value: • Construction is estimated to total $390 million • Project Fair Market Value is $390 million Quendall Terminals Project Narrative -November 2009 5