Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 1Tony Sieger 1150 Raymond Avenue SW Renton, WA 98057 tel: (425) 251-8483 (party of record) PARTIES OF RECORD WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD Gretchen Kaehler Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation PO Box 48343 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 (party of record) Updated: 08/23/12 (Page 1 of 1) Q� 4 a NOUVIOOSSV Sa31V30 O1f1V 31V1S NOIJNIHSVM J V "JNq'11f165tl31Wl,POY]4M3N � lig <II 0 a EF EM a $v Ig 1 M 99 l s y kg� Ep NOIIVIOOSSV SH3lV3❑ O1f1V 31ViS NOlONIHSVM x. v ewir,— — w , - — 11 rc — — T NOUVIOOSSV S83lV3❑ OinV 31V1S NO NIHSVM o a m l J U) i' $O O 3 Q o o v G k v y l 1 l5 1 -auoaa,aomaa°aapvaa ao- .s, I K a *— 3df]6dY - -- wed: - Lice 'P: n '.-- S S g 8 3 U) i' $O O 3 Q o o v G k v y l 1 l5 1 -auoaa,aomaa°aapvaa ao- .s, I K a *— 3df]6dY - -- wed: - Lice 'P: n '.-- iE)N �I¥!oo As egco A� �soiemvs&2, , ! ml r -BMW|� . |E| ■ ® , B |!§�` � � ) §! ■�■ IN u 1 ; ��• � / . Hi§ !§E . § , § a . _ za E //�'� ' - � § � �� §||||2)E�f(|�|. \ | § E z § .�� 2,�|| § ||� = E L & zm k MI })< § IL o�, xmiebovrrwe.[rmrcaiwwer ■I -__. - ��11N15N0 ` NOj iQN _ Ninn as 1SCPo YM'HOlN3tl aYM ndM]15'3MIW�Os ciB � Z O ]1� ® a �� �� " NOIIVIOOSSV 1 9 3 s E a V V y ;,y S213lV3aoinV 31VIS N019NIHSVM 'Iaaroad f 4 wminpTl,YMwxnma��av�nm� W �i _ LL�11��211.410 K moi ioN _ LSOM YM'HOlN3tl nYM xa�lri lS3wuLoos cip O Q mmr�d` NOIIVIOOSSd g V s SM3'1V3OO1f1V 31VIS NOIJNIHSVM # p m 31 iaarmd # a I� ® )OVS = Y r i �dil z � W b c r !IVT a� !q jog fillx o� Y r i z g -- b R A"'""Ud" NOIIVIOOSSV sd3-1' aoinV 31VIS NOIJNIHSVMp 1 y � a z g p i ? !IVT a� !q jog fillx o� Q 0 U m� a i R C33 Q 0 U m� a C33 9�3�J 9072 0033 ow Dow 9062 W41 0020 0010 ujvxm 9082 9076 9007 SW ORPO 9025 9099 4�T0 #880 9113 705 090 4730 5:34845 800 SX C V�m 4T85 #805'4148 41 W 070 4395 6626 4900 4925 .7100 4K 4970 4265 Ir =;Wtrr 5140 5191 4035 3805 62 0101% , L�92 County IC -111 CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: August 6, 2013 To: City Clerk's Office From: Stacy M Tucker Subject: Land Use File Closeout Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City Clerk's Office. Project Name: Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) Headquarters LUA (file) Number: LUA-12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD Cross -References: AKA's: Project Manager: Rocale Timmons cceptance Date: August 8, 2012 pplicant: r Washington State Auto Dealers wner: WSADA Property LLC Contact: Mat Bergman, BCRA PID Number: 3340404730 ERC Decision Date: August 27, 2012 1 Minor Modification: July 24, 2013 ERC Appeal Date: September 14, 2012 1 August 7, 2013 Administrative Approval: August 27, 2012 Appeal Period Ends: September 14, 2012 I Public Hearing Date: Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental i (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two -story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. Location: 621 SW Grady Way Comments: DEPARTMENT OF COI.....UNITY CityaF �, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ""`$" MINOR MODIFICATION OF AN APPROVED SITE PLAN APPROVAL L DE EVALUATION FORM & DECISI PROJECT NAME: WSADA Site Plan Modification PROJECT NUMBER: LUA12-062, MOD PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner APPLICANT: BCRA Matt Berg 2106 Pac' is a #300 Tacoma, $402 ZONING DESIGNATION: Commercial Arterial (CA) PROJECT LOCATION: 621 SW Grady Way SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant received Administrative Site Plan approval on August 27, 2012 for the construction of a two story office building for Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of 33,577 square feet of Commercial Arterial zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grady Way and another access point is proposed along the existing public alley, abutting the property to the south, connecting Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave SW. There are no critical areas located on site. The requested revisions are summarized below: 1) A 54 square foot addition to the eastern fagade of the proposed structure in order to construct a private bathroom to be attached to an existing office. 2) In order to accommodate the addition, two bicycle stalls have been relocated to just north of the proposed addition. Analysis of Request The following table contains an analysis of the criteria outlined in RMC 4-9-2001: Criteria Criteria Met The adjustment does not involve more than a ten percent (10%) increase in area or scale of the development in the approved site X plan; or DEPARTMENT OF COIL-..-.UNITY r Ckyof, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MINOR MODIFICATION OF AN APPROVED SITE PLAN APPROVAL ❑DENIAL EVALUATION FORM & DECISION PROJECT NAME: WSADA Site Plan Modification PROJECT NUMBER: LUA12-062, MOD PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons, Senior Planner APPLICANT: BCRA Matt Bergman 2106 Pacific Ave #300 Tacoma, WA 98402 ZONING DESIGNATION: Commercial Arterial (CA) PROJECT LOCATION: 621 SW Grady Way SUMMARY OF REQUEST: The applicant received Administrative Site Plan approval on August 27, 2012 for the construction of a two story office building for Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of 33,577 square feet of Commercial Arterial zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grady Way and another access point is proposed along the existing public alley, abutting the property to the south, connecting Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave SW. There are no critical areas located on site. The requested revisions are summarized below: 1) A 54 square foot addition to the eastern fagade of the proposed structure in order to construct a private bathroom to be attached to an existing office. 2) In order to accommodate the addition, two bicycle stalls have been relocated to just north of the proposed addition. Analysis of Request The following table contains an analysis of the criteria outlined in RMC 4-9-2001: Criteria Criteria Met The adjustment does not involve more than a ten percent (10%) increase in area or scale of the development in the approved site X plan; or City of Renton Department of Con ity and Economic Development AdministratiVL ification Request Report & Decision WSADA 51TE ALAN MODIFICATION LUA12-062, MOD Report of July 24, 2013 Page 2 of 2 The adjustment does not have a significantly greater impact on the X environment and facilities than the approved plan; or The adjustment does not change the boundaries of the originally X approved plan. DECISION The proposal satisfies 3 of the 3 criteria listed in RMC 4-9-2001. Therefore, the WSADA Site Plan modification, Project Number LUA12-062, MOD (as shown in Exhibit 1), is approved and subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. Prior to Building Permit approval, 3 full size copies and an 8'/: x 11 inch reduction of a revised site plan shall be submitted to the Current Planning project manager. K C.E. "Chip" Vincent, CED Administrator 1/-Z i-3 Date The decision to approve the modification(s) will become final if not appealed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 on or before 5:00 pm, on August 7, 2013. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's office, Renton City Hall -- 7 1 Floor, (425) 430-6510. If you have any further questions regarding this decision, feel free to contact the project manager, Rocale Timmons, at 425.430.7219 or rtimmons@rentonwa.gov. d'dDIa it R NO1iV13OSSV Sd31V3(3 O1f1V 31V1S NOiONIHSVM mi w wirwen�....ei �-sin v.• axY �C Q O C W a ut a)_ w mi w wirwen�....ei �-sin v.• axY 2706 f'.OHE AVVMM. Suite 300 �� f racoma. Wk "402 * (253} 627-4367 tr i Jurne 25, 2013 Roeale Timmons City of Renton, Associate Planner 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Site Plan Modification - Washington State Auto Dealers Association (#EJ120102) Dear Ms. Timmons, The owner has requested a revision to the project that slightly impacts the site plan. They would like to add a small private restroom off of an office. The additional private bathroom is being added on the east side of the building directly north of Office 103. This is a 54 SF. addition. We removed some planned sidewalk to allow for this addition. We relocated the two bike stalls to just north of the restroom, next to the main entrance. All affected plana Both architecturally and structurally have been updated to show the addition and have been sent to the building department for review. Sincerely, Mat Bergman Project Manager SCRADESIGN.COM 4^. R", n # w� r Z _ NEWMFA9QIIANIERSBUL T 4 BC RA s ! {7 WASHINGTON STATE AUTO DEALERS ASSOCIATION 1 I® y ��mr gar. wLw Aw.,�r y yy 1 � y S� 4 1 1 � y 1 a k 1 t y y t D A - n y t y t ` t a D Y m � n 4 z if a s k y e y _ a y a � � k R G § n 6 S S9y9 8 V _ n ... ... m I _ _- - aD g Z 4�S m 9 c m z O ti m cn ,� a' C n # w� r Z _ NEWMFA9QIIANIERSBUL T 4 BC RA s ! {7 WASHINGTON STATE AUTO DEALERS ASSOCIATION 1 I® y ��mr gar. wLw Aw.,�r o ,rs a rc cra va r'r-m, e� rr i O Illi �J �J `CJ"C I YJ Y�� "•x - q - O� - k4 „ -- --- I H- IL - 'A I I I r-u• ,r-n --- 1, � r+• i � r4 4 � ml - Ll �R �J �i Irr `�1lTi I d1 I 4 i ■ �� Ir+ i6al�R` � ��Z�.S�J q 4 5 4� �-r r.r- �raed r-0• _ a,2 �'`--4s `ry..� {{.__ 8 Q g �N€ 8 h �� 94� v Z 99 Ade � acr- F V m m (�qa ^— i IN;; I! K C P M.1 11 -7. "E _ �'5� ' I` I lil I WASHINGTON STATE AUTO DEALERS ASSOCIATION I ( t5Ld KA IM `If nn nmr gar. wl aq rv, r rw RECEIPT EGO0009943 cityof Transaction Date: June 25, 2013 BILLING CONTACT WSADA Property LLC 16000 CHRISTENSEN RD, 150 TUKWILA, WA 98188 REFE=RENCE NUMBER FEE NAME �m TRANSACTION PAYMENT TYPE METHOD AMOUNT PAID LUA12-062 I PLAN - Modificabon Technology Fee Fee Payment her -k#52412 $100.00 Fee Payment heck #52412 $3-00 SUB TOTAL $103.00 TOTAL 5103.00 Printed On: 6125/2013 Prepared By: Rocate Timmons � w Page 1 of 1 Denis Law �1tV O Mayor ` 11��— r� . i ;.7V Department of Community and Economic Development September 28, 2012 C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Mat Bergman BCRA 2106 Pacific Avenue #300 Tacoma, WA 98402 SUBJECT: WSADA Headquarters LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD. Dear Mr. Bergman: This letter is to inform you that the appeal period ended September 14, 2012 for the combined Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated and the Administrative Site Plan Development Review and Parking Modification approval for the above - referenced project. No appeals were filed on the combined ERC determination and administrative decision therefore, these decisions are final and application for the appropriately required permits may proceed. Please note that the advisory notes, ERC mitigation measures, and site plan conditions of approval listed in the City of Renton Report and Decision dated August 27, 2012 must be adhered to during construction and prior to . final inspection. Furthermore, the Administrative Site Development Pian Review and Parking Modification decision will expire two (2) years from the date of decision. If you are unable to finalize the development within the two-year time -frame, a single two (2) year extension may be requested in writing, pursuant to RMC 4-9-200. In regards to the vesting of the above referenced project, please be aware that as long as the development of the project conforms to the approved plans and building permits are submitted within the relevant time limits, the zoning. regulations in effect at the time of the original approval shall continue to apply. However, all construction shall .conform to the International Building Code and Uniform Fire Code regulations in force at the time.of building permit application. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (425) 430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, Roc a Timmo As ociate Planner Enclosure cc Washington State Auto Dealers Association / owner(s) Tony Sieger, Gretchen Kaehier / Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall I - 1.055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 . rentonwa.gov 73 �, 5;yi N'�. O r+. ami Y 2 �ZQFF q•� E 2,6' " G t r ri :S v .o U Q ca o r- L n °'� oo .1 0.' �4 CLLJ Oc6�a'} � � o� U � K;n�[l: c�i•r' diQ3 � �us ���' � � of gra rL ° r D i s o c E s F:J s= o ��3'�. �.av:Ya-a vv.� a.¢� aon=Q aU cs 0, o CL as CL wz Im cu U � o ar 3 In. C a-0 Is paq SI 12 5" Cc y p'+ y R to o u ,¢Z 0�� rr.Q� W E� °' O� 00 bi)wa.�34,o�a a Lol CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 28th day of August, 2012,1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Combined ERC Determination, Site Plan, and Parking Modification Report & Decision documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Agencies See Attached Mat Bergman Contact WSADA Owner Tony Seiger Party of Record Gretchen Kaehler Party of Record (Signature of Sender): �;• .�s'4A..F•� G''►, STATE OF WASHINGTON ) = N°TAp�, SS S u� PUBLI C COUNTY OF KING23, ) =��' -oR�C certify that E know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker "�.�FWASH\`'��4 signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses an"WOU`rposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated:II Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): My appointment expires: FrojecthNaiie: WSADA Headquarters Project] um4er: '. LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD template - affidavit of service by mailing AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology ** WDFW - Larry Fisher* Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Environmental Review Section 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer PO Box 47703 Issaquah, WA 98027 39015 — 172od Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Auburn, WA 98092 WSDOT Northwest Region * Duwamish Tribal Office * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Attn: Ramin Pazooki 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn; Ms Melissa Calvert King Area Dev. Serv., MS -240 Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015172 nd Avenue SE PO Box 330310 Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Gretchen Kaehler Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin PO Box 48343 PO Box C-3755 201 S. Jackson 5T, MS KSC-NR-050 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Boyd Powers * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Steve Roberge Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Renton, WA 98055-1219 13020 Newcastle Way 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liaison Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6200 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: KRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 *Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov template - affidavit of service by mailing .�xyytt C1iy Of OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS -M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: WSADA Headquarters PROJECT NUMBER: LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD LOCATION: 621 SW Grady Way DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two-story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) headquarters, approximately 9,473 square feet in size. The project site consists of 33,577 square feet of Commercial Arterial zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grady Way and another access point is proposed along the existing public alley, abutting the property to the south, connecting Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave SW. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on September 14, 2012, 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 RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 930-6510. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION NOTIFIED. IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. City Of, Denis Law Mayor Department of Community and Economic Development August 28, 2012 C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on August 27, 2012: DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED PROJECT NAME: WSADA Headquarters PROJECT NUMBER: LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD LOCATION: 621 SW Grady WAV DESCRIPTION: Site Plan, SEPA review and parking modification for 2 - story 9,073 square foot Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) Administration building on 0.77 acre Commercial Arterial zoned site. Access provided via SW Grady Way and an existing public alley. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on September 14, 2012, 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 RMC 4-8-110 and 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) 430-7219. For the Environmental Review Committee, Roc a Timmons Associate Planner Enclosure Renton City Hall ■ 1055 South Grady Way 0 Renton, Washington 98057 * rentonwa.gov Washington State Departme Ecology Page 2 of 2 August 28, 2012 cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Ramin Pazooki, W5DOT, NW Region Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Larry Fisher, WDFW Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Duwamish Tribal Office Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program US Army Corp. of Engineers Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation City f ;, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY Cit�;'; AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1�atan ��' DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD APPLICANT: Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) PROJECT NAME: WSADA Headquarters DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two-story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of Commercial Arterial zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 521 SW Grady Way LEAD AGENCY: The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. All earthwork performed, implemented by the applicant, shall be consistent with the recommendations of the geotechnical report, prepared by E3RA, dated April 4, 2012. 2. A survey shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager that conforms to the requirements and standards of the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and must be conducted under the on-site supervision of a state -approved archaeologist prior to building permit approval. 3. The applicant shall pay a Transportation Impact fee, as determined by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of payment based on 70 additional daily trips. The fee shall be payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of Building Permit application. 4. The applicant shall pay a Fire Impact fee, as determined by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of payment. The fee shall be payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of Building Permit application. ERC Mitigation Measures Page 1 of 1 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNI I D ciryof <' , AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED ADVISORY NOTES & CONDITIONS APPLICATION NO(S): LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD APPLICANT: Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) PROJECT NAME: WSADA Headquarters DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two-story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of Commercial Arterial zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 621 SW Grady Way LEAD AGENCY: The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. The Development Services Division reserves the right to rescind the approved extended haul hours at anytime if complaints are received. 2. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 3. Commercial, multi -family, new single-family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. ERC Advisory Notes Page 1 of 3 4. All landscaping shall be irrigated by an approved irrigation system prior to final occupancy permits Water: 1. Per the City Fire Marshal, the fire flow requirement is 1,500 gpm based on a fully fire sprinklered building. A minimum of two fire hydrants are required. One fire hydrant is required within 150 -feet of the proposed building, and one hydrant is required within 300 -feet. This distance is measured along the travel route. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code. The existing hydrants all need 5 -inch storx fittings in order to meet code, and they currently do not have them. It appears adequate fire flow exists in this area. One new hydrant will be required within 50 -feet of the fire department connection. The number of additional hydrants required is dependent on the calculated fireflow. 2. Per City of Renton code, the lateral spacing of fire hydrants shall be predicated on hydrants being located at street intersections. 3. A Reduced Pressure Backflow Prevention Assembly (RPBA) will be required behind each domestic water meter. The RPBA's shall be installed in an above -ground "Hot -Box" per City standard plan number 350.2. Sewer. 1. Any use in the building that may require the installation of a grease interceptor or oil/water separator shall be determined at the time of plan review. 2. System Development Charges (SDC) are based on any and all domestic water meters. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued. Sanitary Sewer System Development Charges are triggered if there is an increase in the domestic water meter size. Surface Water: 1. The project is required to comply with the new City of Renton Amendments to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual. A conceptual drainage plan and report was submitted with the formal application. Per the report, the project will comply with City of Renton Amendments to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual. 2. Per the TIR, the project proposes to use StormTech drainage products facilities. This use will require additional review and approval. Staff has not supported requests to this use in the past. 3. Plans will be reviewed in detail prior to issuance of a construction permit, following land use process. 4. Payment of Surface Water System Development Charges of $0.405 per square foot of new impervious area will be required. This fee is collected prior to the issuance of the construction permit. Transportation: 1. Installation of street improvements will be required across the full frontage of both SW Grady Way and Raymond Ave SW. 2. Staff would support a street modification request for a 5' sidewalk and S' planter strip on SW Grady Way. 3. There is existing street lighting on SW Grady Way. 4. Additional right-of-way is not required on SW Grady Way. 5. There is no existing curb on Raymond Ave SW. The street section on Raymond Ave SW needs a curb 18 feet to centerline, a 7 -foot planter strip, and a 5 -foot sidewalk. ERC Advisory Notes Page 2 of 3 6. The conceptual utility plan that was submitted does not show the above improvements; hence, the conceptual utility plan is not approved. Fire: 1. The fire flow requirement is 1,500 gpm based on a fully fire sprinklered building. A minimum of two fire hydrants are required. One fire hydrant is required within 150 -feet of the proposed building and one hydrant is required within 300 -feet. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code. The existing hydrants all need 5 -inch storz fittings in order to meet code and they do not have them at present. It appears adequate fire flow exists in this area. One new hydrant will be required within 50 -feet of the fire department connection. 2. Both an approved fire alarm and fire sprinkler system is required throughout the building. Separate plans and permits are required to be submitted to the Renton Fire Department for review and permitting. Fire alarm system shall be fully addressable and full detection is required. A direct outside door is required to the fire sprinkler riser control room. 3. Fire department apparatus access is adequate. 4. An electronic site plan is required to be submitted to the Renton Fire Department for pre -fire planning purposes prior to occupancy of the building. General : 1. 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. 2. All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two horizontal and vertical controls per the City's current horizontal and vertical control network. CONDITIONS: 1. The applicant shall comply with the 4 mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non - Significance Mitigated, dated August, 2012 (Exhibit 6). 2. The applicant shall be required to submit elevations for the refuse and recyclable enclosure depicting a roof. The revised elevations shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 3. The applicant shall revise the site plan to depict a differentiation in materials for all pedestrian connections within parking areas and/or drive lanes on site. The revised site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 4. The applicant shall be required to provide a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties at the time of building permit review. Pedestrian scale and downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On -Site. The lighting shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 5. The applicant shall revise the site plan to comply with the bicycle requirements outlined in RMC 4-4- 080F.11. The revised site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. ERC Advisory Notes Page 3 of 3 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY u1tV OE��on AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS -M) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD APPLICANT: Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) PROJECT NAME: WSADA Headquarters DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two-story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of Commercial Arterial zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 621 SW Grady Way LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on September 14, 2012. 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 RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: August 31, 2012 DATE OF DECISION: August 27, 2012 SIGNATURES: Gregg Zimmer A nistrat r Mark P erson, Adm nistrator Public Works Dep rt ent Date Fire & Emergent Services Ferry Higa iyam , Admini trator Community Services Department i�d1112-7112- C�l 1�� G.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator/ Date Planning Director Department of Community & Economic Development A 2 z Date <� 2 , Date DEPARTMENT OF COl____IUNITY p Q City of AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT C ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TO: Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator Mark Peterson, Fire & Emergency Services Administrator C. E. "Chip" Vincent, CED Administrator/Planning Director FROM: Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager MEETING DATE: Monday, August 27, 2012 TIME: 3;00 p.m. LOCATION: Sixth Floor Conference Room #620 THE FOLLOWING IS A CONSENT AGENDA WSADA Headquarters (Timmons) LUA12-061, ECF, SA -A, MOD Location: 621 S Grady Way. Description: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two-story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of Commercial Arterial zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces.. cc: D. Law, Mayor J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer S. Dale Estey, CED Director I D. Jacobson, Deputy PW Administrator- Transportation C. Vincent, CED Planning Director I N. Watts, Development Services Director L. Warren, City Attorney Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner D. Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal J. Medzegian, Council City °f DEPARTMENT OF COM NITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT AND ADMINISTRATIVE SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN REPORT & DECISION ERC MEETING DATE; August 27, 2012 Project Name: Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) Headquarters Owner/Applicant: WSADA; 16000 Christensen Rd #150; Tukwila, WA 98188 Contact: BORA; Mat Bergman; 2106 Pacific Ave #300; Tacoma, WA 98402 File Number: LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD Project Manager: Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner Project Summary: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two-story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of 33,577 square feet of Commercial Arterial zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grady Way and another access point is proposed along the existing public alley, abutting the property to the south, connecting Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave SW. Project Location: 621 SW Grady Way Site Area: 33,577 SF Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): 9,073 SF STAFF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a RECOMMENDATION: Determination of Non -Significance (DNS -M). Project Location Map CRC and Site Plan Report. docx City of Renton Deportment of Community nomic Development Environmental h Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS _ LUA22-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 2 of 26 A. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Zoning Map Exhibit 2: Site Plan Exhibit 3: Landscape Plan Exhibit 4: Elevations Exhibit 5: Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Comment Letter Exhibit 6: Environmental "SEPA" Determination Exhibit 7: Drainage Report Exhibit 8: Geotechnical Report Exhibit 9 Aerial Photograph B. GENERAL INFORMATION. WSADA 1. Owner(s) of Record: 16000 Christensen Rd #150 Tukwila, WA 98188 2. Zoning Designation: Commercial Arterial (CA) 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Commercial Corridor (CC) 4. Existing Site Use: Vacant 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: a. North: Medical/Dental Office (IM zone) b. East: General Office (CA zone) c. South: Warehouse (IM zone) d. West: Warehouse (IM zone) 6. Site Area: 0.77 acres G. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND. Action Land Use File No. Ordinance No. Date Comprehensive Plan N/A 5099 11/01/2004 Zoning N/A 5100 11/01/2004 Annexation N/A 1745 04/19/1959 D. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Existing Utilities a. Water: This project is served by the City of Renton. It is in the 196 Water Pressure Zone. The static water pressure at the street level is approximately 75 psi. There is an existing 12 -inch water main located in Raymond Ave 5W and in SW Grady Way. ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Enwrornmentai Re­ew Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 3 of 26 b_ Sewer: There is an existing 12 -inch sanitary sewer main in Raymond Ave SW and an existing 12 - inch sewer main in the alley adjacent to the south property line. c. Surface/Storm Water: There is an existing 12 -inch storm pipe in Raymond Ave SW and in the alley adjacent to the site. Also fronting SW Grady Way is a 12 -inch storm pipe. 2. Streets: There is partial sidewalk, curb, gutter, or street lighting fronting the site. 3. Fire Protection: City of Renton Fire Department APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE. 1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts a. Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts b. Section 4-2-070: Zoning Use Table c. Section 4-2-120: Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Classifications 2. Chapter 3 Land Use Districts a. Section 4-3-050: Critical Area Regulations b. Section 4-3-100: Urban Design Regulations 3. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards 4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards a. Section 4-6-060: Street Standards S. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria a. Section 4-9-200: Site Plan Review 6. Chapter 11 Definitions G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element 2. Community Design Element H. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW In compliance with RC W 43.210.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. 1. Environmental Threshold Determination Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS with a 14 -day Appeal Period. 2. Mitigation Measures 1. All earthwork performed, implemented by the applicant, shall be consistent with the recommendations of the geotechnical report, prepared by E3RA, dated April 4, 2012. 2. A survey shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager that conforms to the requirements and standards of the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and must be conducted under the on-site supervision of a state -approved archaeologist prior to building permit approval. ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS [UA12-062_, SA_ -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 4 of 26 3. The applicant shall pay a Transportation Impact fee, as determined by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of payment based on 70 additional daily trips. The fee shall be payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of Building Permit application. 4. The applicant shall pay a Fire Impact fee, as determined by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of payment. The fee shall be payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of Building Permit application. 3. Environmental Impacts The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: a. Earth Impacts: The site is nearly level with a 6 -foot relief from the north to the south of the site with an average slope of 0.5 percent. The steepest slope on the site is along the south boundary line where a stockpile of dirt and debris has been mounded on the adjacent alley right-of-way. Following development, impervious surface coverage will be approximately 75 percent. According to the Geotechnical Engineering Report, prepared by BRA, dated April 4, 2012, the soils encountered during field exploration are varying amounts of fill under approximately 3-6 inches of topsoil. The fill consists of medium dense to dense silty sand with varying amounts of gravel, organics, and construction debris. On the south part of the site, underlying the fill is alluvium, comprised of soft to medium stiff silt and loose, silty fine sand. Under that is a second alluvial layer of medium dense to very dense sand with gravel. The applicant proposes to excavate approximately 1,500 cubic yards and bring in 1,200 cubic yards of fill to the site. The fill would be imported structural fill as the on-site soils are not suitable for structural fill. Exposed cover during construction would leave soils susceptible to erosion. The applicant will be required to design a Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCP) pursuant to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual Erosion and Sediment Control Requirements. The site is located within the moderate to high potential for liquefaction hazard area. However, the geotechnical report states that based upon the fill type the soils are not likely to liquefy (Exhibit 8). The provided geotechnical report recommended measures to be implemented by the applicant to mitigate the proposal's potential impact to soils and related conditions. Staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring all earthwork performed, implemented by the applicant, be consistent with the recommendations of the geotechnical report, prepared by E3RA, dated April 4, 2012, Mitigation Measures: All earthwork performed, implemented by the applicant, shall be consistent with the recommendations of the geotechnical report, prepared by E3RA, dated April 4, 2012. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations b. Water I. Storm Water Impacts: A preliminary drainage plan and drainage report has been submitted with the site plan application, prepared by BCRA, dated July 20, 2010 (Exhibit 7). The report addresses compliance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and any special requirements were discussed in the report. The applicant is proposing a complete storm drain facility, including water quality treatment and ERCISite Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmentai Re--iew Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-061, SA -A, ECF, MOD_ Report of August 27, 2012 mm Page 5 of 26 detention. Stormwater would be treated with a StormFilter manhole, bioretention swale, and detained with StormTech Detention chambers. This use of StormTech facilities will require additional review and approval. Staff has not supported requests to use these types of facilities in the past. Plans will be reviewed in detail prior to issuance of a construction permit, following the land use process. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation recommended. Nexus: Not applicable. C. Historic and Cultural Preservation Impacts: Staff received comments from the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation; regarding the potential for an archaeological site in the area (Exhibit 5). It is possible that archaeological artifacts or a historic site could be encountered during project construction. This is due to the site's proximity to former archaeological discoveries. Archaeological sites are protected from disturbance on both public and private lands in Washington State. Staff recommends, as a mitigation measure, that a survey be submitted that conforms to the requirements and standards of the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and must be conducted under the on-site supervision of a state -approved archaeologist prior to construction permit approval. In addition to the survey, should evidence of a historic site be found during site development, work shall immediately cease and the Washington State of Archaeology and Historic Preservation shall be contacted at (360) 556-3065. In the event that cultural artifacts are found, work cannot recommence until approval is received from the Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Mitigation Measures: A survey shall be submitted to the Current Planning Project Manager that conforms to the requirements and standards of the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and must be conducted under the on-site supervision of a state -approved archaeologist prior to building permit approval. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations d. Transportation Impacts: The site has two public street frontages, SW Grady Way (Principal Arterial) and Raymond Ave SE and is bordered to the south by a public alley. The applicant is proposing two curb cuts; one along SW Grady Way and the other along the public alley. The applicant provided a Traffic impact Analysis, as part of the site plan application, prepared by the Transpo Group, dated April 26, 2012. Based on the traffic generation analysis the proposed final project is anticipated to generate approximately 70 additional daily trips. In order to mitigate transportation impacts, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to pay an appropriate Transportation Impact Fee. Currently this fee is assessed at $75.00 per net new average daily trip attributed to the project. However, the City is planning an adjustment to the Transportation Impact fees in the near future. Therefore the fee, as determined by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of payment, shall be payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of Building Permit application. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall pay a Transportation Impact fee, as determined by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of payment based on 70 additional daily trips. The fee shall be payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of Building Permit application. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Resolution 3100, RMC 4-1 Administration and Enforcement. e. Fire & Police Impacts: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicated that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; subject to the condition that the applicant provides Code required improvements ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Reu ew Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 6 of 26 and fees. Therefore, staff recommends a mitigation measure requiring the applicant to pay an appropriate Fire Impact Fee. Currently this fee is assessed at $0.52 for every new square foot of commercial area. However, the City is planning an adjustment to the Fire Impact Fee in the near future. The fee, as determined by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of payment shall be payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of Building Permit application. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall pay a Fire Impact fee, as determined by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of payment. The fee shall be payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code at the time of Building Permit application. Nexus: Fire Impact Fee Resolution 2895, SEPA Environmental Regulations, RMC 4-1 Administration and Enforcement. 4. Comments of Reviewing Departments The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their comments have been incorporated into the text of this report and/or "Advisory Notes to Applicant." 1. ADMINSTRATIVE SITE FLAN REVIEW FINDINGS OF FACT. 1. The applicant, WSADA, is requesting Administrative Site Plan Review and Environmental `SEPA' Review for the construction of a 9,073 square foot administration building and associated improvements. 2. The proposed structure would have a height of 32 feet at the tallest point. 3. The applicant is proposing 43 surface parking stalls. 4. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to increase the maximum stalls allowed from the maximum of 41 to 43 stalls. 5. The Planning Division of the City of Renton accepted the above master application for review on July 24, 2012 and determined it complete on August 8, 2012. The project complies with the 120 -day review period. 6. The subject site is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of SW Grady Way and Raymond Ave SW and is abutted to the south by a public alley. 7. The property is located within the Commercial Corridor (CC) Comprehensive Plan land use designation and the Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning classification. 8. The site is currently is vacant. 9. Access to the site would be provided via a new curb cut along SW Grady Way and direct access from the alley abutting the property to the south. 10. The site is nearly level with the steepest slope with an average slope of less than one percent. 11. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 as amended), on August 27, 2012, the City's Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non - Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M) (Exhibit 6). A 14 -day appeal period will commence with this Administrative Site Plan Review Decision on August 31, 2012 and end on September 14, 2012. 12. Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments have been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of this report. ERC/Site Plon Report City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmentai Review Committee & Administrative Site Pion Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 7 of 26 13. Staff received comments from the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation; regarding the potential for an archeological site in the area (Exhibit 5). 14. The proposal requires Site Plan Review. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with Site Plan Review decision criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-200.E: a. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE AND, CONSISTENCY: , The site is designated Commercial Corridor (CC) on the Comprehensive plan Land Use Map.: The purpose of CC is to evolve from "strip commercial" linear business districts to.business areas characterized by enhanced site planning incorporating efficient parking lot design, coordinated access, amenities, and boulevard treatment. The proposal is compliant with the following Comprehensive Plan policies: Objective LU -AAA: Create opportunities for intensive office uses in portions of Commercial Y� Corridor designations including a wide range of business, financial, and professional services supported by service and commercial/retail activities. Policy LU -262. Support the redevelopment of commercial business districts located along principal arterials in the City. Policy LU -264. New development in Commercial Corridor designated areas should be encouraged to implement uniform site standards, including: 1) Parking preferably at the rear of the building, or on the side as a second choice; Y� 2) Setbacks that would allow incorporating a landscape buffer; Front setback without frontage street or driveway between building and sidewalk; and 3) Common signage and lighting system. Policy LU -266. Development within defined activity nodes should be subject to additional design guidelines as delineated in the development standards. Policy LU -268. Public amenity features (e.g. plazas, recreation areas) should be encouraged ✓ as part of new development or redevelopment. b '2ONl1VC� COMPLIANCE AND �OlfiSf5T1EI11C11, 4 }�� � _ """ # Ttie subject site:is classified Commercial li<rterial {CA;� c:t the City of RenTortoning'Map The following_ - N ileve iapient Standards are applicablec> tie proposal - 5 Density: Per RMC 4-2-120A the allowed density range in the CA zoning classification is a minimum of 20 dwelling units per net acre (du/ac) up to a maximum of 60 du/ac. Net density is calculated after public rights-of-way, private access easements, and critical areas are deducted from the gross acreage of the site. Not applicable. Lot Dimensions: Per RMC 4-2-120A the minimum lot size, in the CA zone, is 5,000 square feet. Not applicable. Setbacks: Per RMC 4-2-120A the CA zoning classification requires a minimum front yard setback of 10 feet which may be reduced to zero feet during the site plan development review process, provided blank walls are not located within the reduced setback. There is a maximum front yard setback of 15 feet. The CA zone has no rear or side yard setback except 15 feet if lot abuts.or is adjacent to a residential zone. FRC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & economic Development Environmental Re'^w Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS _ LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 _ Page 8 of 26 The following table contains setbacks for the proposed structures: Front Yard Setback East Side Yard Setback West Side Yard Setback Rear Yard Setback 15' 200' 10' 10' The proposal complies with the setback requirements of the zone. Building Height: Per RMC 4-2-120A building height is restricted to 50 feet unless a conditional use permit is obtained. The height of the proposed structure would be 32 feet at the tallest point of the shed roof element (Exhibit 4). The proposal complies with the height requirements of the zone. Building Standards: Per RMC 4-2-120A the allowed lot coverage is 6.5 percent for proposals within the CA classification_ The proposed building would have a footprint of 6,370 square feet on the 0.77 acre resulting in a building lot coverage of approximately 19 percent. Landscaping: Per RMC 4-4-070 ten feet of on-site landscaping is required along all public street frontages, with the exception of areas for required walkways and driveways or those projects with reduced setbacks. The applicant is proposing a range of 15-25 feet of landscaping along SW Grady Way and Raymond Ave SW. A conceptual landscape plan was submitted with the project application (Exhibit 3). The landscape plan includes a planting plan; the proposed tree species largely consist of red sunset maple, Saskatoon serviceberry, Pacific dogwood, and shore pine trees. The shrubs proposed largely consist of: salal, Oregon grape, wild rose, and Oregon boxleaf. Refuse and Recyclables: Per RMC 4-4-090 for office uses require a minimum of 5 square feet per every 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for recyclable deposit areas and a minimum of 10 square feet per 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for refuse deposit areas with a total minimum area of 100 square feet. Based on the proposal for a total of 9,073 square feet of the administration building; a minimum area of 135 square feet of refuse and recycle area would be required. The applicant is proposing a 260 square foot refuse and recyclable deposit area in the southwestern portion of the site, just east of the building. The proposal complies with the refuse and recyclable standards. Vehicles: Per RMC4-2-120 a connection shall be provided for site -to -site vehicle access ways, where topographically feasible, to allow a smooth flow of traffic across abutting CA parcels without the need to use a street. Access may comprise the aisle between rows of parking stalls but is not allowed between a building and a public street. This section of code is intended to provide vehicular connections to abutting commercial uses. The proposal is bordered by right-of-way to the north, south, and west. An established office use exists on the property to the east. A vehicular connection to the abutting property would not be appropriate at this time. Critical Areas: The site is located within the moderate to high potential for liquefaction hazard area. However, the geotechnical report states that based upon the fill type soils are not likely to liquefy (Exhibit 8). I Parking: The parking regulations, RMC 4-4-080, require a specific number of off-street parking stalls be provided: ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & r-onomic Development Fnvironmentai Re -'-w Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MoD Report of August 27, 2012 _ Page 9 of 26 The following ratios would be applicable to the site: Use Dining Area Ratio Required Spaces SF Office 9,073 Min: 2.5 spaces / 1,000 SF Min: 23 Max: 4.5 spaces/ 1, 000 SF Max: 41 Based on these use requirements a maximum of 41 parking spaces would be allowed in order to meet code. The applicant is proposing a total of 43 spaces. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a parking modification to allow more than the maximum of 41 spaces. Section 4-4-080.F.10.d allows the Administrator to grant modifications from the parking standards for individual cases, provided the modification meets the following criteria (pursuant to RMC 4-9- 250.D.2): a. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; and b. Will not be injurious to other property(iesj in the vicinity; and c. Conform to the intent and purpose of the Cade; and d. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and e. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. The requested modification conforms to the intent and purpose of the parking regulations by providing sufficient on-site parking for the amount necessary for the new administration building. The applicant is increasing the number of allowed parking spaces (41) by 2 stalls therefore it is unlikely that the allowance of more than the code required stalls would have a negative impact relative to the environment. Staff supports a modification to the maximum number of parking spaces. The parking conforms to the minimum requirements for drive aisle and parking stall dimensions and the provision of ADA accessible parking stalls. Sidewalks, Pathways, and Pedestrian Easements: The applicant has proposed an entry plaza along 5W Grady Way which is connected to the public sidewalk with an ADA accessible stairway accessing the site. Additional pedestrian connections are provided throughout the parking lot and to the secondary entrance. {Ai#IEAa 1' , '-tAUTOMALL,OVER-AYDiSiR,ICTCOMPI.IANCEAND'CON51STtkCY � s- _ The propeS ,7s.,located within Area `A' of the Automall Overlay District Tte following Standards, per RMC 4-3-0410, are applicable to the proposal Allowed uses within this Area A , when located in the CA zone are: Auto, motorcycle, snowmobile, lawn and garden equipment, and passenger truck sales. Secondary uses include: licensing bureaus, car rentals, public parking, and other uses determined by the Zoning Administrator to directly support dealerships. Staff Comment: In a letter dated January 4, 2008, a determination was made by the City that the use would be allowed in the zone and district. ✓ 1 Service areas shall not face public street frontage. ✓ A 15 -foot -wide landscape strip along these street frontages. This frontage requirement is in lieu of the frontage requirement listed for the zone in chapter 44=2 RMC Minimum 2.596 of the gross site area shall be provided as on-site landscaping. Landscaping ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & rconomic Development Environmental Re,,iew Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 10 of 26 ERCfSite Plan Report shall be consolidated and located at site entries, building fronts, or other visually prominent locations as approved through the site plan development review process. Customer parking shall be designated and striped near entry drives and visible from public ✓ streets. Where possible, customer parking shall be combined with adjacent dealership customer parking and shared access. Once completed, all development shall coordinate with a right-of-way improvement plan. A ✓ right-of-way improvement plan shall be completed by the City in coordination with adjacent property owners, and shall address gateways, signage, landscaping, and shared access. All development shall coordinate with the Automall improvement Plan adopted by Resolution No. 3457. d 7ifSJ �E6ii N1 CFk�ONJYiicoIRV.FNcY. ,—M �srtels Wilted wrthinr�sJgn arsfrrc#'Q` "fit � '�- SP1 k q EE , 4��`� .'% , o'extsure#ild�nreatec[ refoon tri stlaeets dr�d other buildings sa that the {lisiart of the City of Aento sarr lie r�eairzedr,u hrg -density urban evrrorment, so that businesses enjoy `v�srbrlity from .0 -a- bird torrorrrage pedestrfgn activity throughout the:distrrct .'`As demonstrated in the ia6le beloul the proposal, meets'theJaen of the Design Regulations on the basis` of individual merit if ali conditions of approval are`met 1. SITE DESIGN AND BUILDING LOCATION: Intent: To ensure that buildings are located in relation to streets and other buildings so that the Vision of the City of Renton can be realized far a high-density urban environment; so that businesses enjoy visibility from public rights-of-way; and to encourage pedestrian activity. 1. Building Location and Orientation: Intent: To ensure visibility of businesses and to establish active, lively uses along sidewalks and pedestrian pathways. To organize buildings for pedestrian use and so that natural light is available to other structures and open space. To ensure an appropriate transition between buildings, parking areas, and other fond uses; and increase privacy for residential uses. Guidelines: Developments shall enhance the mutual relationship of buildings with each other, as well as with the roads, open space, and pedestrian amenities while working to create a pedestrian oriented environment. Lots shall be configured to encourage variety and so that natural light is available to buildings and open space. The privacy of individuals in residential uses shall be provided for. Standard: The availability of natural light (both direct and reflected) and direct sun exposure to nearby buildings and open space (except parking areas) shall be considered when siting structures. Standard: Buildings shall be oriented to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. Standard: Buildings with residential uses located at the street level shall be set back from the N/A sidewalk a minimum of ten feet (109 and feature substantial landscaping between the sidewalk and the building or have the ground floor residential uses raised above street level for residents privacy. 2. Building Entries: Intent: To make building entrances convenient to locate and easy to access, and ensure that building entries further the pedestrian nature of the fronting sidewalk and the urban character of the district. Guidelines: Primary entries shall face the street serve as a focal point, and allow space for social interaction. All entries shall include features that make them easily identifiable while reflecting the architectural character of the building. The primary entry shall be the most visually prominent entry. Pedestrian access to the building from the sidewalk, parking lots, and/or other areas shall be provided and shall enhance the overall quality of the pedestrian experience on the site. Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing a street, shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, ERCfSite Plan Report Gty of Renton Department of Community & ­ onomic Development WSADA HEADQUARTERS Report of August 27, 2012 Environmental Re -,;-w Committee & Administrative Site Pion Report LUAI2-062, SA -A, ECF, MOL) Page 11 of 25 FRC/Site Plan Report and include human -scale elements. _ Standard. A primary entrance of each building shall be made visibly prominent by incorporating architectural features such as o facade overhang, trellis, large entry doors, and/or ornamental lighting_ Standard Building entries from a street shall be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, or landscaping and include weather protection at least four and one-half feet (4-1/2') wide (illustration below). Buildings that are taller than thirty feet (30') in height shall also ensure that the weather protection is proportional to the distance above ground level. Standard: Building entries from a parking lot shall be subordinate to those related to the street. Standard: Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows shall be oriented to a street or pedestrian -oriented space, otherwise, screening or decorative features should be incorporated. Standard: Multiple buildings on the same site shall direct views to building entries by N/A providing a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping. Standard. Ground floor residential units that are directly accessible from the street shall N/A include entries from front yards to provide transition space from the street or entries from an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. 3. Transition to Surrounding Development: intent: To shape redevelopment projects so that the character and value of Renton's long-established, existing neighborhoods are preserved. Guidelines: Careful siting and design treatment shall be used to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height, bulk and scale. Standard: At least one of the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: (a) Building proportions, including step -backs on upper levels; (b) Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller increments; or (c) Roof lines, roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. Additionally, the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may require increased setbacks at the side or rear of a building in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and/or so that sunlight reaches adjacent and/or abutting yards. 4. Service Element Location and Design: Intent: To reduce the potential negative impacts of service elements (i.e., waste receptacles, loading docks) by locating service and loading areas away from high-volume pedestrian areas, and screening them from view in high visibility areas. Guidelines: Service elements shall be concentrated and located so that impacts to pedestrians and other abutting uses are minimized. The impacts of service elements shall be mitigated with landscaping and an enclosure with fencing that is made of quality materials. Standard. Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the '� pedestrian environment and adjacent uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where they are accessible to service vehicles and convenient far tenant use. Standard: in addition to standard enclosure requirements, garbage, recycling collection, and Not utility areas shall be enclosed on all sides, including the roof and screened around their Compliant perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors. Staff Comment: The applicant's submittals do not include elevations for the proposed refuse FRC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & 'conomic Development Environmental R " _ w Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 12 of 26 ERC/Site Plan Report and recyclable enclosure. Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval, the applicant be required to submit elevations for the refuse and recyclable enclosure depicting a roof. The revised elevations shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. ,/ Standard: Service enclosures shall be made of masonry, ornamental metal or wood, or some combination of the three (3). N/A Standard: if the service area is adjacent to a street, pathway, or pedestrian -oriented space, a landscaped planting strip, minimum 3 feet wide, shall be located on 3 sides of such facility. S. Gateways: Not Applicable ii. PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS: intent. To provide safe, convenient access to the.. Urban Center and the Center Village; incorporate various modes of transportation, including public mass transit, . in order to reduce traffic volumes and other impacts from vehicles; ensure sufficient parking is provided, while encouraging creativity in reducing the impacts of parking areas; allow an active pedestrianenvironment by maintaining contiguous street frontages, without parking lot siting along sidewalks and building facades, minimize the visual impact of parking lots; and use access streets and parking to maintain an urban edge to the district. 1. Surface Parking: Intent: To maintain active pedestrian environments along streets by placing parking lots primarily in back of buildings. Guidelines: Surface parking shall be located and designed so as to reduce the visual impact of the parking area and associated vehicles. Large areas of surface parking shall also be designed to accommodate future infill development. Standard: Parking shall be located so that no surface parking is located between a building and the front property line, or the building and side property line, on the street side of a corner lot. Standard.- Parking shall be located so that it is screened from surrounding streets by buildings, landscaping, and/or gateway features as dictated by location. 2. Structured Parking Garages: Intent. To promote more efficient use of land needed for vehicle parking, encourage the use of structured parking, physically and visually integrate parking garages with other uses; and reduce the overall impact of parking garages. Guidelines: Parking garages shall not dominate the streetscape, they shall be designed to be complementary with adjacent and abutting buildings. They shall be sited to complement, not subordinate, pedestrian entries. Similar forms, materials, and/or details to the primary building(s) should be used to enhance garages_ N/A Standard: Parking structures shall provide space for ground floor commercial uses along street frontages at a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the building frontage width. Standard: The entire focade must feature a pedestrian -oriented facade. The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development may approve parking structures that do not feature a pedestrian orientation in limited circumstances. If allowed, the N/A structure shall be set back at least six feet (6') from the sidewalk and feature substantial landscaping. This landscaping shall include a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground cover. This setback shall be increased to ten feet (1D') when abutting a primary arterial and/or minor arterial. N/A Standard: Public facing facades shall be articulated by arches, lintels, masonry trim, or othJer architectural elements and/or materials. N/A Standard: The entry to the parking garage shall be located away from the primary street, either the side or rear of the building. ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & `-onomic Development Environmental Rev` -vv Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUAI2-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 13 of 26 ERC/Site Plan Report Standard: Parking garages at grade shall include screening or be enclosed from view with NSA treatment such as walls, decorative grilles, trellis with landscaping, or a combination of treatments. Standard: The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may allow a reduced setback where the applicant can successfully demonstrate that the landscaped area and/or other design treatment meets the intent of these standards and guidelines. Possible treatments to reduce the setback include landscaping components plus one or more of the following integrated with the architectural design of the building: (a) Ornamental grillwork (other than vertical bars); N/A (b) Decorative artwork; (c) Display windows; (d) Brick, tile, or stone, (e) Pre -cast decorative panels; (f) Vine -covered trellis; (g) Raised landscaping beds with decorative materials, or (h)Other treatments that meet the intent of this standard.. 3. Vehicular Access: Intent: To maintain a contiguous and uninterrupted sidewalk by minimizing, consolidating, and/or eliminating vehicular access off streets. Guidelines: Vehicular access to parking garages and parking lots shall not impede or interrupt pedestrian mobility. The impacts of curb cuts to pedestrian access on sidewalks shall be minimized. ✓ Standard: Access to parking lots and garages shall be from alleys, when available. if not available, access shall occur at side streets. Standard: The number of driveways and curb cuts shall be minimized, so that pedestrian circulation along the sidewalk is minimally impeded. iii. PED,frSTRlAN:ENVlRONMFNT. Intent: To enhance the `urban character of development in the Urban Center and the. Center Village by creating pedestrian networks and by providing strong links from streets and drives to building entrances; make the pedestrian environment safer and more convenient, comfortable, and pleasant to walk between businesses, on sidewalks, to and from access points, and through parking lots; and promote.. the use of multi -modal and public transportation systems in order to reduce other vehicular traffic. 1. Pedestrian Circulation: Intent: To create a network of linkages for pedestrians to improve safety and convenience and enhance the pedestrian environment. Guidelines: The pedestrian environment shall be given priority and importance in the design of projects. Sidewalks and/or pathways shall be provided and shall provide safe access to buildings from parking areas. Providing pedestrian connections to abutting properties is an important aspect of connectivity and encourages pedestrian activity and shall be considered. Pathways shall be easily identifiable to pedestrians and drivers. Standard: A pedestrian circulation system of pathways that are clearly delineated and connect buildings, open space, and parking areas with the sidewalk system and abutting properties shall be provided. (a) Pathways shall be located so that there are clear sight lines, to increase safety. (b) Pathways shall be an all-weather or permeable walking surface, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed surface is appropriate for the anticipated number of users and complementary to the design of the development. Standard: Pathways within parking areas shall be provided and differentiated by material or Not texture (i.e., raised walkway, stamped concrete, or pavers) from abutting paving materials. Compliant permeable materials are encouraged. The pathways shall be perpendicular to the applicable building facade and no greater than one hundred fifty feet (150') apart. ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of community & Fconomic Development Environmental Re•-ew Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS ZUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 14 of 26 ERC/Site Plan Report Staff Comment. The applicant has proposed a pedestrian connection from the entrance of the structure through the parking area. However, there is not a differentiation in materials (Exhibit 2). Therefore, staff recommends as a condition of approval the applicant revise the site plan to depict a differentiation in materials for all pedestrian connections within parking areas and/or drive lanes on site. The revised site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. Standard: Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of buildings shall be of sufficient width to accommodate anticipated numbers of users. Specifically: (a) Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of mixed use and retail buildings 100 or more feet in width (measured along the facade) shall provide sidewalks at least 12 feet in width. The walkway shall include an 8 foot minimum unobstructed walking surface. (b) interior pathways shall be provided and shall vary in width to establish a hierarchy. The widths shall be based on the intended number of users; to be no smaller than five feet (5) and no greater than twelve feet (12'). (c) For all other interior pathways, the proposed walkway shall be of sufficient width to accommodate the anticipated number of users. N/A Standard: Mid -block connections between buildings shall be provided. 3. Pedestrian Amenities: Intent: To create attractive spaces that unify the building and street environments and are inviting and comfortable for pedestrians; and provide publicly accessible areas that function for a variety of activities, at all times of the year, and under typical seasonal weather conditions. Guidelines: The pedestrian environment shall be given priority and importance in the design of projects. Amenities that encourage pedestrian use and enhance the pedestrian experience shall be included. J Standard. Architectural elements that incorporate plants, particularly at building entrances, in publicly accessible spaces and at facades along streets, shall be provided. Standard. Amenities such as outdoor group seating, benches, transit shelters, fountains, and public art shall be provided. (a) Site furniture shall be made of durable, vandal- and weather -resistant materials '/ that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. (b) Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. Standard: Pedestrian overhead weather protection in the form of awnings, marquees, canopies, or building overhangs shall be provided. These elements shall be a minimum of 4.5 feet wide along at least seventy 75 percent of the length of the building facade facing the street, a maximum height of 15 feet above the ground elevation, and no lower than 8 feet above ground level. iv. .RECREATION AREAS AND COMMON OPEN SPACE Intent Tv ensure that areas for both passive and active recreation are available to residents, workers, and visitors a.nd that these areas are of sufficient sire for -the , intended activity and in convenient locations. Tocreate usable and inviting open space that isaccessible to the public; and to promote pedestrian activity on streets particularly at street corners Guidelines: Developments located at street intersections.should provide pedestrian -oriented space at the street corner to emphasize pedestrian activity (illustration below). Recreation and common open space areas are integral aspects of quality development that encourage pedestrians and users. These areas shall be provided in an amount .that is adequate to be functional and usable; they shall also be landscaped and located so that they are appealing to users and pedestrians N/A Standard: All mixed use residential and attached housing developments of ten (10) or more ERC/Site Plan Report City of Ren ton Department of Community & Economic Development WSADA HEADQUARTERS Report of August 27, 2012 Fnvironmentol Review Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report Lu_A_1_2-0_6_2_, SA -A, ECF, MOD Page 15 of 26 ERC/Site Plan Report dwelling units shall provide common opens space and/or recreation areas. N/A Standard: Amount of common space or recreation area to be provided: at minimum fifty (50) square feet per unit. _ Standard: The location, layout, and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall N/A be subject to approval by the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee. Standard: At least one of the following shall be provided in each open space and/or recreation area (the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may require more than one of the following elements for developments having more than one hundred (100) units): (a) Courtyards, plazas, or multi-purpose open spaces, (b) Upper level common decks, patios, terraces, or roof gardens/pea-patches. Such spaces above the street level must feature views or amenities that are unique to N/A the site and are provided as an asset to the development; (c) Pedestrian corridors dedicated to passive recreation and separate from the public street system; (d) Recreation facilities including but not limited to, tennis/sports courts, swimming pools, exercise areas, game rooms, or other similar facilities; or (e) Children's play spaces that are centrally located near a majority of dwelling units and visible from surrounding units. They shall also be located away from hazardous areas such as garbage dumpsters, drainage facilities, and parking areas. Standard: All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of N/A nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas) shall provide pedestrian - oriented space. Standard. The pedestrian -oriented space for buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses shall include all of the following: (a) Visual and pedestrian access (including barrier free access) to the abutting structures from the public right-of-way or a nonvehicular courtyard; and N/A (b) Paved walking surfaces of either concrete or approved unit paving; and (c) On-site or building -mounted lighting providing at least four (4) foot-candles (average) on the ground; and (d) At least three (3) lineal feet of seating area (bench, ledge, etc.) or one individual seat per sixty (60) square feet of plaza area or open space. Standard. The following areas shall not count as pedestrian -oriented space for buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses: (a) The minimum required walkway. However, where walkways are widened or enhanced beyond minimum requirements, the area may count as pedestrian - N/A oriented space if the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee determines such space meets the definition of pedestrian -oriented space. (b) Areas that abut landscaped parking lots, chain link fences, blank walls, and/or dumpsters or service areas. N/A Standard: Outdoor storage (shopping carts, potting soil bags, firewood, etc.) is prohibited within pedestrian -oriented space. Ii. BUILDING DESIGN intent: To encourage: building design. that Is unique andrrhan in.! character, comfortable on a human scale,, and uses appropriate. building' materials that are suitable for the Pacific Northwest climate. To discourage franchise retail architecture. 1. Building Character and Massing: ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development WSADA HEADQUARTERS Report of August 27, 2012 Environmental Review Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOL? Page 16 of 26 Intent: To ensure that buildings are not bland and visually appear to be at a human scale, and ensure that all sides of a building, that can be seen by the public, are visually interesting. Guidelines: Building facades shall be modulated and/or articulated to reduce the apparent size of buildings, break up long blank walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood. Articulation, modulation, and their intervals should create a sense of scale important to residential buildings. Standard: Ali building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than forty feet (40). / Standard. Modulations shall be a minimum of two feet (2) deep, sixteen feet (16) in height, and eight feet (S) in width. Standard: Buildings greater than one hundred sixty feet (160') in length shall provide a N/A variety of modulations and articulations to reduce the apparent bulk and scale of the facade,- acade;or orprovide an additional special feature such as a clock tower, courtyard, fountain, or public gathering area. 2. Ground -Level Details: intent: To ensure that buildings are visually interesting and reinforce the intended human -scale character of the pedestrian environment, and ensure that all sides of a building within near or distant public view have visual interest. Guidelines: The use of material variations such as colors, brick, shingles, stucco, and horizontal wood siding is encouraged. The primary building entrance should be made visibly prominent by incorporating architectural features such as a facade overhang, trellis, large entry doors, and/or ornamental lighting (illustration below). Detail features should also be used, to include things such as decorative entry paving, street furniture (benches, etc.), and/or public art. Standard: Human -scaled elements such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature shall be provided along the facade's ground floor. Doesn't depict human scaled elements_ Standard. On any facade visible to the public, transparent windows and/or doors are ✓ required to comprise at least 50 percent of the portion of the ground floor facade that is between 4 feet and 8 feet above ground (as measured on the true elevation). An acortes Standard: Upper portions of building facades shall have clear windows with visibility into Vand out of the building. However, screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency. The minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be 50 percent. N/A Standard. Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of merchandise, rather than permanent displays. Standard. Where windows or storefronts occur, they must principally contain clear glazing. Standard: Tinted and dark glass, highly reflective (mirror -type) glass and film are prohibited. Standard. Untreated blank walls visible from public streets, sidewalks, or interior pedestrian pathways are prohibited. A wall (including building facades and retaining walls) is considered a blank wall if: (a) it is a ground floor wall or portion of a ground floor wall over 6 feet in height, has N/A a horizontal length greater than 15 feet), and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing, or (e) Any portion of a ground floor wall has a surface area of 400 square feet or greater and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing. Standard. if blank walls are required or unavoidable, blank walls shall be treated with one or N/A more of the following: (a) A planting bed at least five feet in width containing trees, shrubs, evergreen ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-_062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 17 of 26 ERCISite Plan Report ground cover, or vines adjacent to the blank wall; (b) Trellis or other vine supports with evergreen climbing vines; (c) Architectural detailing such as reveals, contrasting materials, or other special detailing that meets the intent of this standard; (d) Artwork, such as bas-relief sculpture, mural, orsimilar, or (e) Seating area with special paving and seasonal planting. 3. Building Roof Lines: Intent: To ensure that roof forms provide distinctive profiles and interest consistent with an urban project and contribute to the visual continuity of the district. Guidelines: Building roof lines shall be varied and include architectural elements to add visual interest to the building. Standard: Buildings shall use at least one of the following elements to create varied and interesting roof profiles: (a) Extended parapets; (b) Feature elements projecting above parapets; (c) Protected cornices; (d) Pitched or sloped roofs (e) Buildings containing predominantly residential uses shall hove pitched roofs with ❑ minimum slope of one to four (1:4) and shall have dormers or interesting roof forms that break up the massiveness of an uninterrupted sloping roof. 4. Building Materials: intent: To ensure high standards of quality and effective maintenance over time, encourage the use of materials that reduce the visual bulk of large buildings; and encourage the use of materials that add visual interest to the neighborhood. Guidelines: Building materials are an important and integral part of the architectural design of a building that is attractive and of high quality. Material variation shall be used to create visual appeal and eliminate monotony of facades. This shall occur on all facades in a consistent manner. High quality materials shall be used. if materials like concrete or block walls are used they shall be enhanced to create variation and enhance their visual appeal. Standard: All sides of buildings visible from a street pathway, parking area, or open space shall be finished on all sides with the some building materials, detailing, and color scheme, or if different, with materials of the same quality. ,/ Standard: All buildings shall use material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns or textural changes. Standard: Materials shall be durable, high quality, and consistent with more traditional urban development, such as brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre finished metal, stone, steel, glass and cast-in-ploce concrete. N/A Standard: If concrete is used, walls shall be enhanced by techniques such as texturing, reveals, and/or coloring with a concrete coating or admixture. Standard: If concrete block walls are used, they shall be enhanced with integral color, N/A textured blocks and colored mortar, decorative bond pattern and/or shall.incorporate other masonry materials. Standard: All buildings shall use material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns, or textural changes. vi. SIGNAGE: Intent: To provide a means of identifying and advertising businesses; provide directional assistance; encourage signs that are both clear and of appropriate scale for the project, encourage quality signage that contributes to the character of the Urban Center and the Center Village, and create color and interest. Guidelines: Front -lit, ground -mounted monument signs are the preferred type of freestanding sign. Blade ERCISite Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development WSADA HEADQUARTERS Report of August 27, 2012 Environmental Review Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Page 18 of 26 type signs, proportional to the building facade on which they are mounted, are encouraged on pedestrian -oriented streets. Alteration of trademarks notwithstanding, corporate signage should not be garish in color nor overly lit, although creative design, strong accent colors, and interesting surface materials and lighting techniques ore encouraged. Standard. Entry signs shall be limited to the name of the larger development. Not Staff Comment: The sign package has yet to be submitted for the proposal. All sign permits Compliant will be reviewed separately and will be required to comply with the design standards for signs within Design District'D' and Area 'A' of the Automall District. N/A Standard: Corporate logos and signs shall be sized appropriately for their location. N/A Standard: in mixed use and multi -use buildings, signage shall be coordinated with the overall building design. N/A Standard: Freestanding ground -related monument signs, with the exception of primary entry signs, shall be limited to five feet (5') above finished grade, including support structure. Standard: Freestanding signs shall include decorative landscaping (ground cover and/or N/A shrubs) to provide seasonal interest in the area surrounding the sign. Alternately, signage may incorporate stone, brick, or other decorative materials as approved by the Director. Standard: All of the following are prohibited: a. Pole signs; b. Roof signs and N/A c. Back -lit signs with letters or graphics on a plastic sheet (can signs or illuminated cabinet signs). Exceptions: Back -lit logo signs less than ten (10) square feet are permitted as area signs with only the individual letters back -lit (see illustration, Pen. subsection G8 of this Section). nsure saifety andsecurit ; provide adequate' lighting'levels in pedestrian areas such as walkways, parking areas, building entries, and. other;public places; and increase the visual attractiveness of the area at all times of the day and night : - Guidelines: Lighting. that improves' pedestrian safety and also that creates visual interest in the -building and site during the evening hours shall be provided. Standard: Pedestrian -scale lighting shall be provided at primary and secondary building entrances. Examples include sconces on building facades, awnings with down -lighting and decorative street lighting. Staff Comment: A lighting plan was not provided with the project materials. Staff recommended, as a condition of approval, the applicant be required to provide a lighting Not plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent Compliant properties at the time of building permit review. Pedestrian scale and downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On -Site. The lighting shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. Not Standard: Corporate logos and signs shall be sized appropriately for their location. Compliant Staff Comment: See discussion and condition above. Standard: Accent lighting shall also be provided on building facades (such as sconces) and/or to illuminate other key elements of the site such as gateways, specimen trees, other significant landscaping, water features, and/or artwork. Not Standard: Downlighting shall be used in al/ cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular Compliant movement unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC4-4-075, Lighting, Exterior ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report W5ADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-052, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 19 of 26 ERC/Site Plan Report On -Site (i. e., signage, governmental flogs, temporary holiday or decorative lighting, right -of - way -lighting, etc_). Staff Comment: See discussion and condition above. e. PLANNED ACTION ORDINANCE AND ©FVELOPMENT AGREEMENTCOMPLIANCE AND CONISTENCY: Not applicable. f. OFF SITE IMPACTS: Structures: Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a particular portion of the site. The single structure is located in the western portion of the site and there is not a concentration of development on the site. Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and adjacent properties. The applicant has proposed an entry plaza along SW Grady Way which is connected to the public sidewalk with an ADA accessible stairway accessing the site. Additional pedestrian connections are provided throughout the parking lot and to the secondary entrance. Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities, rooftop equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from surrounding properties. Site and landscaping has been thoughtfully incorporated into the site plan in order to screen refuse and recyclable areas. All rooftop equipment would be screened from public view. Views: Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to attractive natural features. There are no large attractive natural features on or near the site for which to maintain visual accessibility. The applicant has proposed to limit the height of the proposed structure to below 32 feet which mitigate view impacts from surrounding properties. The applicant is proposing a 15 -foot landscape buffer along the northern, eastern, and western property lines to buffer the use from abutting properties. Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between development and surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance the appearance of the project. See Landscaping discussion under Findings Section 14.b. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets As stated above a lighting plan was not provided with the project materials. Staff recommended, as a condition of approval, the applicant be required to provide a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties at the time of building permit review. Pedestrian scale and downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On -Site. F- �i•.�Il�i9�P��J r . s Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement, spacing and orientation. The proposed structure would be located on the western portion of the site with an orientation to the intersection of SW Grady Way and Raymond Ave SW. The proposed structure is located as far ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUAI2-061, SA A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 20 of 26 from abutting properties as possible. The applicant is proposing a total of 43 surface parking stalls to the east of the structure. Service elements have been located away from the pedestrian oriented spaces in order to minimize their impact on the pedestrian environment. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian and vehicle needs. The scale and bulk of the building is reduced through the use of differing materials on the building facades, building articulation and modulation and differing roof profiles. The applicant has proposed trellis architectural elements which wrap around the northwestern portion of the structure with additional trellises on the center section and western side of the building which break the massing of the structure(Exhibit 4). The proposed building is designed appropriately to allow adequate light and air circulation to the buildings and the site. The design of the structures would not result in excessive shading of the property. In addition, there is ample area surrounding the building to provide normal airflow. Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation and soils, using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious surfaces. The site contains 80 trees of which all are proposed for removal. Renton Municipal Code requires that 5 percent of the trees on site be retained. Of the 80 trees, 4 trees are required to be retained at the 5 percent retention rate. Therefore the applicant is required to replace the number of trees that were required to be retained at a 6 to 1 ratio. Therefore the applicant is required to plant a total of 24 replacement trees. The submitted landscape plan indicates that a total of 24 trees are proposed to be planted on site thereby complying with tree retention standards (Exhibit 3). Topographically, the site is relatively flat. A geotechnical report for the site was submitted. Information on the water table and soil permeability with recommendations of appropriate flow control BMP options were included. Grading and the bringing in of fill would be necessary in order to prepare the site for the proposed improvements. The applicant is proposing the excavation of approximately 1,500 cubic yards of on-site material that 1,200 cubic yards of fill would be brought in to balance the site (Exhibit 6). Following construction the site would have an impervious surface cover of approximately 75%. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide shade and privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to enhance the appearance of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and protection of planting areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements. The landscaping is used to provide a transition between the proposed development and SW Grady Way and Raymond Ave SW. Landscaping has also been incorporated into to the surface parking (Exhibit 3). The landscaping softens the appearance of the parking areas and generally enhances the appearance of the project. � -.3.. e lrl. .• f. * 't._7f.{A �r ..-.LS; t �_. l� E,.��.,lf r Yl�;�!� _' �� �-. Location and Consolidation: Providing access points on side streets or frontage streets rather than directly onto arterial streets and consolidation of ingress and egress points on the site and, when feasible, with adjacent properties. The site has two public street frontages, SW Grady Way (Principal Arterial) and Raymond Ave SW. The proposed development is expected to maintain the safety and efficiency of pedestrian and ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Devefopment WSADA HEADQUARTERS Report of August 27, 2012 Environmentol Review Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MDQ Page 21 of 26 vehicle circulation on the site if all conditions of approval are complied with. Internal Circulation: Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways. See Location and Consolidation discussion above. Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas. There is a loading area located on the southwestern portion of the site, along the southern facade of the structure. The loading area is separated from the parking and pedestrian areas. Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access. Per RMC 4-4-080F.11 the number of bicycle parking spaces shall be 10% of the number of required off-street parking spaces. Based on the proposal which requires a minimum of 14 vehicle parking stalls, 2 bicycle parking stalls are required to be provided. The applicant has not depicted bicycle parking stalls. Therefore, staff recommends the applicant revise the site plan to comply with the bicycle requirements outlined in RMC 4-4-080F.11. The revised site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. Pedestrians: Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties - The applicant has proposed an entry plaza along SW Grady Way which is connected to the public sidewalk with an ADA accessible stairway accessing the site. Additional pedestrian connections are provided throughout the parking lot and to the secondary -entrance. �.�PCM�PAC�'� Jricvi�vr�ratrr?�q� openf spaces tom, et-�� e�,�t�ufl�i�ar"�ro�r`ec��f oc�Y�',�v,"iL' arrd{ tdr< "d�` ir�f`"'i!4`i*y '�_ ade�-tequate nreas: or passive pnd,actrve rec�eatlon abye�caupani*s�rsers o the srie;�ttrt The applicant is proposing an entry plaza along SW Grady Way which is tied into the pedestrian connections on site. The plaza is partially covered and includes low concrete walls for seating. VIPWSAND;PUBLIC ACCESS:1Nher1possible, providing view cv:r.yrrdars to sh&ifiht Ralfrrer, and -- `.,. - incorpvratmg pubrrc access t4i.shore11nes ; - The proposed structure would not block view corridors to shorelines or Mt. Rainier. The public access requirement is not applicable as the site is not adjacent to a shoreline. k ;NATURAL 3YSTE-MS° . Arranging project elements to prat et ext na nuturats errs where applicable There are no natural systems located on site with the exception of drainage flows. See Drainage discussion under Findings Section 14.k. 4.3 VICES iNtar llVfR;4STRUCTt, of Making'avarlab7e�pi !���er s brn� fati7it�es to accammbdat �ffi' yq �- proposed use �_W..y r: j Police and Fire: Fire Prevention staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; subject to the condition that the applicant provides Code required improvements and fees. A Fire Impact Fee, based on new square foot of non-residential area, was recommended as part of the SEPA review, in order to mitigate the proposal's potential impacts to City emergency services. Parks and Recreation: Not Applicable Drainage: A preliminary drainage plan and drainage report has been submitted with the site plan application, prepared by BCRA, dated July 20, 201 (Exhibit 5). The report addresses compliance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Devefopment Environmental Review Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 22 of 26 KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and any special requirements were discussed in the report. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Flow Control Duration Standard, Existing Conditions.. The applicant is proposing a complete storm drain facility, including water quality treatment and detention. Stormwater would be treated with a Storm Filter manhole, bioretention swale, and detained with StormTech Detention chambers. This use of StormTech facilities will require additional review and approval. Staff has not supported requests to use these types of facilities in the past. Plans will be reviewed in detail prior to issuance of a construction permit, following the land use process. Transportation: The site has two public street frontages, SW Grady Way (Principal Arterial) and Raymond Ave SE and is border to the south by a public alley. The applicant is proposing the two curb cuts; one along SW Grady Way and the other along the public alley. The applicant provided a Traffic Impact Analysis, as part of the site plan application, prepared by the Transpo Group, dated April 26, 2012. Based on the traffic generation analysis the proposed final project is anticipated to generate approximately 70 additional daily trips. The proposed development is anticipated to generate additional traffic on the City's street system. A Transportation Impact Fee, per net new average daily trip attributed to the project, was recommended as part of the SEPA review. The fee would be used to mitigate the proposal's potential impacts to City's transportation system and is payable to the City as specified by the Renton Municipal Code. Schools: Not Applicable. Water and Sewer: This project is served by the City of Renton. It is in the 196 Water Pressure Zone. The static water pressure at the street level is approximately 75 psi. There is an existing 12 -inch water main located in Raymond Ave SW and in SW Grady Way. There is an existing 12 -inch sanitary sewer main in Raymond Ave SW and an existing 12 -inch sewer main in the alley adjacent to the south property line. The applicant will be required to submit separate utility plans, prepared according to City of Renton drafting standards by a licensed Civil Engineer. PHASING Theapplicant is r}it regtaestrrigry additional phas'irlg request ;} p !. CONCLUSIONS: 1. Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the responsible officials issue a Determination of Non -Significance -Mitigated with four mitigation measures (Exhibit F). 2. The proposal complies with the Site Plan Review Criteria if all conditions of approval are met and modification for approval. 3. The proposal is compliant and consistent with the plans, policies, regulations and approvals. 4. Staff does not anticipate any adverse impacts on surrounding properties and uses as long as the conditions of approval are complied with. 5. The proposed use is anticipated to be compatible with existing and future surrounding uses as permitted in the CA zoning classification. 6. The scale, height and bulk of the proposed buildings are appropriate for the site. 7. Safe and efficient access and circulation has been provided for all users. ERC/Site Plan Report City of Ren ton Deportment of Comm urnty & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS [UA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 23 of 26 8. There are adequate public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use. 9. Adequate parking for the proposed use has been provided. 10. The proposed site plan ensures safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians and has mitigated potential effects on the surrounding area if all conditions of approval are complied with. 11. The proposed development would not generate any long term harmful or unhealthy conditions. Potential noise, light and glare impacts from the proposed use have been evaluated and mitigated if all conditions of approval are complied with. 12. Landscaping has been provided in all areas not occupied by the building or paving. Additional landscaping has been provided in order to buffer adjacent properties from potentially adverse effects of the proposed use. !. DECISION. The proposed Site Plan and Parking Modification for WSADA Headquarters, File No. LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD- are approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the 4 mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non - Significance Mitigated, dated August, 2012 (Exhibit 6). 2. The applicant shall be required to submit elevations for the refuse and recyclable enclosure depicting a roof. The revised elevations shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 3. The applicant shall revise the site plan to depict a differentiation in materials for all pedestrian connections within parking areas and/or drive lanes on site. The revised site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 4. The applicant shall be required to provide a lighting plan that adequately provides for public safety without casting excessive glare on adjacent properties at the time of building permit review. Pedestrian scale and downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On -Site. The lighting shall be submitted to, and approved by, the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. 5. The applicant shall revise the site plan to comply with the bicycle requirements outlined in RMC 4-4- 080F.11. The revised site plan shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager prior to building permit approval. C.E. "Chip" Vincent, CED Administrator/Planning Director ERC/Site Plan Report Date City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee & Administrative Site Plant Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 T _ Page 24 of 26 TRANSMITTED this 2e day of August 2012 to the Contact/Applicant/Owner: Contact: Owner/Applicant: BCRA WSADA Mat Bergman 16000 Christensen Rd #150 Tukwila, 2106 Pacific Ave #300 WA 98188 Tacoma, WA 98402 TRANSMI7TED this 27`t' day of August 2012 to the Parties of Record: Gretchen Koehler Tony Seiger Department of Archaeology and 1150 Raymond Ave SW Historic Preservation Renton, WA 98057 PO Box 48343 Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 TRANSMITTED this 27`6 day of August 2012 to the following: Neil Watts, Development Services Director Larry Meckling, Building Official Kayren Kittrick, Development Services Jennifer kenning, Current Planning Fire Marshal Renton Reporter Land Use Action Appeals, Request for Reconsideration, & Expiration The Environmental Determination and the Administrative Site Development Plan Review decisions will become final if the decisions are not appealed within 14 days of the decision date. Environmental Determination Appeal: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 p.m., September 14, 2012. Administrative Site Development Plan Approval Appeal: Appeals of the administrative site development plan review decision must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 p.m. on September 14, 2012. Parkins Modification Approval Appeal: Appeals of the parking modification decision must be filed in writing to the Hearing Examiner on or before 5:00 p.m. on September 14, 2012. APPEALS: An appeal of the decision(s) must be filed within the 14 -day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the $250.00 application fee to Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall - 7th Floor, (425) 430-6510. RECONSIDERATION: Within 14 days of the decision date, any party may request that a decision be reopened by the Administrator (Decision -maker). The Administrator (Decision -maker) may modify his decision if material evidence not readily discoverable prior to the original decision is found or if he finds there was misrepresentation of fact. After review of the reconsideration request, if the Administrator (Decision -maker) finds sufficient evidence to amend the original decision, there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action must file a formal appeal within the 14 -day appeal timeframe. EXPIRATION: The Administrative Site Development Plan Review decision will expire two (2) years from the date of decision. A single two (2) year extension may be requested pursuant to RMC 4-9-200. ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee & Administrative Site Non Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA12-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 25 of 26 THE APPEARANCE OF FAIRNESS DOCTRINE: provides that no ex parte (private ane -on -one) communications may occur concerning the land use decision. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial decision, but to Appeals to the Hearing Examiner as well. All communications after the decision/approval date must be made in writing through the Hearing Examiner. All communications are public record and this permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence in writing. Any violation of this doctrine could result in the invalidation of the appeal by the Court. ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. The Development Services Division reserves the right to rescind the approved extended haul hours at any time if complaints are received. 2. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 3. Commercial, multi -family, new single-family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m_ No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 4. All landscaping shall be irrigated by an approved irrigation system prior to final occupancy permits Water: 1. Per the City Fire Marshal, the fire flow requirement is 1,500 gpm based on a fully fire sprinklered building_ A minimum of two fire hydrants are required. One fire hydrant is required within 150 -feet of the proposed building, and one hydrant is required within 300 -feet- This distance is measured along the travel route. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code. The existing hydrants all need 5 -inch Storz fittings in order to meet code, and they currently do not have them. It appears adequate fire flow exists in this area_ One new hydrant will be required within 50 -feet of the fire department connection. The number of additional hydrants required is dependent on the calculated fireflow. 2. Per City of Renton code, the lateral spacing of fire hydrants shall be predicated on hydrants being located at street intersections. 3. A Reduced Pressure Backflow Prevention Assembly (RPBA) will be required behind each domestic water meter. The RPBA's shall be installed in an above -ground "Hot -Box" per City standard plan number 350.2. Sewer_ 1. Any use in the building that may require the installation of a grease interceptor or oil/water separator shall be determined at the time of plan review. 2. System Development Charges (SDC) are based on any and all domestic water meters. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued. Sanitary Sewer System Development Charges are triggered if there is an increase in the domestic water meter size. Surface Water: 1_ The project is required to comply with the new City of Renton Amendments to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual. A conceptual drainage plan and report was submitted with the formal application. Per the report, the project will comply with City of Renton Amendments to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual. 2. Per the TI R, the project proposes to use StormTech drainage products facilities. This use will require additional review and approval. Staff has not supported requests to this use in the past. 3. Plans will be reviewed in detail prior to issuance of a construction permit, following land use process. 4. Payment of Surface Water System Development Charges of $0.405 per square foot of new impervious area will be required. This fee is collected prior to the issuance of the construction permit_ Transportation: 1. Installation of street improvements will be required across the full frontage of both SW Grady Way and Raymond Ave ERC/Site Plan Report City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee & Administrative Site Plan Report WSADA HEADQUARTERS LUA22-062, SA -A, ECF, MOD Report of August 27, 2012 Page 26 of 26 SW_ 2. Staff would support a street modification request for a S' sidewalk and 8' planter strip on SW Grady Way_ 3. There is existing street lighting on SW Grady Way. 4. Additional right-of-way is not required on SW Grady Way. 5. There is no existing curb on Raymond Ave SW. The street section on Raymond Ave SW needs a curb 18 feet to centerline, a 7 -foot planter strip, and a 5 -foot sidewalk. 6. The conceptual utility plan that was submitted does not show the above improvements; hence, the conceptual utility plan is not approved. Fire: 1. The fire flow requirement is 1,500 gpm based on a fully fire sprinklered building. A minimum of two fire hydrants are required. One fire hydrant is required within 150 -feet of the proposed building and one hydrant is required within 300 -feet- Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code. The existing hydrants all need 5 -inch storz fittings in order to meet code and they do not have them at present. It appears adequate fire flow exists in this area. One new hydrant will be required within 50 -feet of the fire department connection. 2_ Both an approved fire alarm and fire sprinkler system is required throughout the building. Separate plans and permits are required to be submitted to the Renton Fire Department for review and permitting_ Fire alarm system shall be fully addressable and full detection is required. A direct outside door is required to the fire sprinkler riser control room. 3. Fire department apparatus access is adequate. 4. An electronic site plan is required to be submitted to the Renton Fire Department for pre -fire planning purposes prior to occupancy of the building. General : 1. 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. 2. All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two horizontal and vertical controls per the City's current horizontal and vertical control network- ERC/Site Plan Report F2 - 13 T23N R4E E 112 co 5w� N 1 Im :9\\.� !M rM rM rm N , II II N rm III cQ l EXHIBIT 1 .._ .... ........ r 1N - ZONING MAP BOOR H2 - 25 T23N R4E E 112 PW TECHNICAL SERVICES PRINTED ON 11/13/09 tii du�menl n a paPn� �tW ne�irt4n. mi gurimeeEso wrvry iuJrJq. ird n braid on min,iP�PP.e.am cme�a.rP.«�r- 0 200 400 Ckrynf Feet24 T23N R4E E 112 I AMD 4324 ZONING MAP BOOK 74 92 93 455 466 459 __._._ �B 1 s_ 8= B1.:. ;� f 26 T24N R4Ey, B.,. 25 T24N ,R4E =I, 36 T24N R5E 9 T24N R5 I+ ' 28 T24N ASE, ` 27 T24N RISE.,.-� 26 T24N F±5E 94W 456W J45 I 464 480 _ 1 C� r ���� r �/ �j I� �, _ — C6,DC7 3} Y 4N R4E'. 36 T24N R4E 31 T24N R5E 35 124N R5E 307„ g 3 D3D '14 Ilt: — �_ w� �� D7 A i.�I �I]I'�—��` rtA 6323N R5E : ' T23N Fist 4 T23N RISE 7. 3 T23N R5E1 f 2 T23N R5E _LuI_74J 319 369 7 Al 315 N7_ a T A4E z.' 1F T23N 44E. '� J I C li III i23til R5E 23N R5E r P _ ;; 23N R5E { I 10 T23N Ra —; N R5E ' L 10 32' • ` ( 26 � - 1 l '� 370 $fi� - 8 1 _ i tl 1�4 T23N R4�23fd W'f 1' 5E 16 T23 IIG8'T23N R5E ,� it f��� �N R5E 1 .:T23N R5E i 14_1j2 N 1 35 r 336 _ 337' 371 $15 816 r �- _ T23N R4 = 4'' ` j, 1 -2, T23f� R4E 19 T23N Fl r­,.20;T23N A51i 21 T23N R5E 22 T23 R5E 23 T23N 2 4 - 34 �I 600' 641 '- 602 I _ _� ..� 820 821 -- - - -5 = H- = 6 �,: f ,�, T23N R4E 2 T23fG R4E H7'" , 5 _30 T23 RIS 29 T23N`RSE 28 T23N .V t T23N A5E 26 T23N R5E 25 0 �51� it = 0 644 I 60 825 826 i i, • �r, - 3 E 36 T23N R4F� ! 31 T23 R5E �, ff7 �I _. 32223N R5E -i' 33 T23N R 34 T23N R5E 35 T23N R5E 36 647 �608' r, 609j' 4(� ` 6;1`0 �� 6 833 I J.nrr 1 — J r »riifL 7 22N R4E 1 T22NR3E y"s 6 T22N R5E,.._ 5 T22 R5E 4T R5E 3 T22N RSE r 2 T22N RYT RESIDENTIAL MIXED USE CENTERS INDUSTRIAL Rc (RC) Resource Conservatlon cv (CV) Center Village ry (IL) Industrial -Light R -i (R-1) Residential 1 du/ac uc- (UC -N1) Urban Center - North 1 EM (IM) Industrial -Medium R-4 (R-4) Residential 4 du/ac uc-va (UC -N2) Urban Center - North 2 (IH) Industrial - Heavy R-$ (R-81 Residential 8 du/accr. (CD) Center Downtown PHH (RMH) Residential Manufactured Homes REo {11-10) Residential 10 du/ac COMMERCIAL R -w (R-14) Residential 14 du/ac --- Renton City Limits RM -r (RM -F) Residential Multi-FamilyFEF] (COR) Commercial/Office/Residential ---- Adjacent City Limits RM -r (RM -T) Residential Multi -Family Traditional F -7A (CA) Commercial Arterial FRw-u (RM -U) Residential Multi -Family Urban Center cc : (CO} Commercial Office Kraou PAGE Y cN (CN) Commercial Neighborhood PAGE# INDEX T- a �mm, a o grop�K rese�wn:r. mot goavn,eed Tns o• dspay purposes on'y. SECTITOWN/RMCE LJ� b �g 5 4 0 & u 5 1 � 4 } X4 541 d W Z, F H cc I_ W a I d gyp/ /�Jaow.o,o-.wvrw�xav N011b'IOOSSV 5H3wnQ Olfib' 31tl15 Np1JNIHS'dM 8 r �. :. LJ� b �g 5 4 0 & u 5 1 � 4 } X4 541 d W Z, F H cc I_ W — _-- --- l l 11 :�W ■ bM o ® " Ds +` I NOIlVIOSSV Sa3lVa■ o1f1V 31V15 N�IJNIU HI� a ; 01 1I -j J 0 U1 U U3 1 � Jill, s IO a 0 0 0 o G(D® C b s 1 O7w 4 -� a 'raver 40 t. •a. [rwi, e'p� i ni e..v pa G e; •� aq a a�o4ac°uoi �ya�~°' o ]y{L �If11 c�sII moo° [� ae • �a ro. a.1QO�" e 6a Gp sa �--i`Oa'�Vd0040Gfl ::;:i'p4A :::�a4Q�Y ' F s.pereay.. esusraa'. A�®. nos anN3AV ■ • V, x W b ^ `o `a ^ 'n 9 9 9 4 ? a v _ !3 1 � Jill, s IO a 0 0 0 o G(D® C b s 1 O7w 4 -� a 'raver 40 t. •a. [rwi, e'p� i ni e..v pa G e; •� aq a a�o4ac°uoi �ya�~°' o ]y{L �If11 c�sII moo° [� ae • �a ro. a.1QO�" e 6a Gp sa �--i`Oa'�Vd0040Gfl ::;:i'p4A :::�a4Q�Y ' F s.pereay.. esusraa'. A�®. nos anN3AV ■ • V, x W �- 5 A --- 111111!'!!!11111111111911!11' -. ■ ims � • Nili a) W w7 1� a III N011b'IZ)OSSV S831VAC1 Oir[V 31t/IS NOIJNIHS `JNIPIOlB SN31NY1106Y3NM3N • 1111 S �j w m IIEE a �- 5 A --- 111111!'!!!11111111111911!11' -. ■ ims � • Nili a) W O ! nau' IIIIIilunw�mwnnunnwEunoumi w7 1� a III • 1111 jj �i pp�� II p IIEE �I�16lI�Il��II�III�II fl4l @ �, y ' • Illllill � aa � � �7 IIIIIIIII ■ ■ III © ! li IIhI -: ����� , IIE•I �jjIIII • � �IIlFl�r -- �� iil� [[11�� • II� IIIF :�ulln O O ! nau' IIIIIilunw�mwnnunnwEunoumi w7 1� �_ 1111 jj O � \ r a uric ., — , - ['a'x . sow - STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 • Olympia, Washington 99501 Mailing address: PO Sox 48343 • Olympia, Washington 99504-8343 (360) 586-3065 • Fax Number (360) 586-3067 • Website: www.dahp. wa.gov August 21, 2012 Ms. Rocale Timmons Associate Planner City of Renton, CED 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 48507 in future correspondence please refer to: Log: 082112 -20 -KI Property: LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD WSADA Headquarters Re: Archaeology - Survey Requested Dear Ms. Timmons: We have reviewed the materials forwarded to our office for the proposed project referenced above. The area has a high potential for archaeological resources. Please be aware that archaeological sites are protected from knowing disturbance on both public and private lands in Washington States. Both RCW 27.44.and RCW 27.53.060 require that a person obtain a permit from our Department before excavating, removing, or altering Native American human remains or archaeological resources in Washington. Failure to obtain a permit is punishable by civil fines and other penalties under RCW 27.53.095, and by criminal prosecution under RCW 27.53.040. Chapter 27.53.045 RCW allows the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation to issue civil penalties for the violation of this statute in an amount up to five thousand dollars, in addition to site restoration costs and investigative costs. Also, these remedies do not prevent concerned tribes from undertaking civil action in state or federal court, or law enforcement agencies from undertaking criminal investigation or prosecution. Chapter 27.44.050 RCW allows the affected Indian Tribe to undertake civil action apart from any criminal prosecution if burials are disturbed. The SEPA documentation suggests that a professional archaeological assessment or evaluation performed. However, this has not been submitted to DAHP for review and archiving. We request that this document be submitted to DAHP and the interested Tribes for review prior to any ground disturbance. Further, if an a professional archaeological survey that includes subsurface survey techniques has not been performed, we request that one be conducted and provided to DAHP and the interested Tribes for review prior to ground disturbance We also recommend consultation with the concerned Tribes' cultural committees and staff regarding cultural resource issues. EXHIBIT 5 Thank you and we look forward to receiving the survey report. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (360) 586-3088 or Gretchen.Kaehler@dahp.wa.gov. Sincerely, Gretchen Kaehler Assistant State Archaeologist (360) 586-3088 etchen.kaehler dah .wa. ov cc. Cecile Hanson, Chair, Duwamish Tribe Laura Murphy, Archaeologist, Muckleshoot Tribe Dennis Lewarch, THPO, Suquamish Tribe 2 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITYD o Cityof O Q AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Date ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS -M) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD APPLICANT: Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) PROJECT NAME: WSADA Headquarters DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Pian and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two-story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of Commercial Arterial zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 621 SW Grady Way LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on September 14, 2012. 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 RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: Gregg Zimmer ient Enistrat r Public Works Dep rt erry Higa , iyam Admini trator EXHIBIT 6 August 31, 2012 August 27, 2012 2o/2- Mark Pelierson, Adm nistrator Date Fire & Emergenc Services t 1 1112-7112— [ L712— v C.E. "Chip' Vincent, Administrator/ Date Planning Director Department of Community & Economic Development z Date Bate r� u 0 M, C+ ENGINEERING i. r •3 [ Pf »Tl;f?(3 E):v;riClf1 LAND SURVEYING ARCGTtlRE y ! - Ji BUILDING SCIENCE :J illli LAND USE PLANNING LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE INTERIOR DE5IGN CT v GRAPH1C.11E'16N STRATEGICMARKMMG CONSTRUCTION ADM;N 1*118 • . �.. iii � �„ �`� y C.� ,1r '� 1�l • l EXHIBIT 7 t y ! - Ji i •. Imo., Cite ') Jule LG1j Geotechnical Letter Report New Office Building 621 Southwest Grady Way Renton, Washington Submitted to: Vickie Fabre Washington State Auto Dealers Association P.O. Box 58170 Seattle, Washington 98738 Submitted by: MRA, Inc. PO Box 44840 Tacoma, Washington 98448 April 4, 2012 Project No. T12019 EXHIBIT 8 a m y o W Z5 vN No " 11 ° a J; rJ w m zz r 0 _ CU U C C w w � U r-, 5l t. •� �� -o v +g1�I. � ■ _ !JF w 46 c � fn ID E O O W i■1■i ,r^-�i�^�� ,4$y Lo ••■■44 L + �� "Ago LU e All 1 Y ca 3 i. � _ � lrl .-1.r !L�{. �t �� rf dL•t � Yy..' • � f ' ' :^�L T i INa1 v � - - e11 � S •sl.I .iw- { �1�..4' A � �� CD aj QI 4-100* + ,3 u a va l♦ [wl �I i- ! �",• , �:3r_� � ; I�� dry, E � n CD CO JF LL J s L 4" Cl = i ■9� E IT cv cv t s� / c+ i En I o Q to �� �.- 00 C3 ZZ City Of on Department of Community & Economic lopment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT; COMMENTS DUE: AUGUST 22, 2012 APPLICATION NO: LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD DATE CIRCULATED: AUGUST S, 2012 APPLICANT: Washington State Auto Dealers Association PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons PROJECTTITLE: WSADA Headquarters PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 33,577 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 9,073 square feet LOCATION: 621S Grady Way PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two -story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of CA zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grady Way and another access point is proposed along the existing public alley, abutting the property to the south, connecting Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave SW. There are no critical areas located on site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Environment Mirror Impacts Probable More Major Information Impacts Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major information Impacts impacts Necessary Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas to which we have expertise and hav rdentified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. 2 1,12 - Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: August 21, 2012 TO: Rocale Timmons, Planner FROM: Arneta Henninger, Plan Review 'TW SUBJECT: Washington State Auto Dealers Headquarters 621 SW Grady Way — Parcel 334040-4730 LUA 12-062 I have completed the review for the above -referenced proposal for the Washington State Auto Dealers Headquarters, located at the southeast corner of the intersection of SW Grady Way and Raymond Ave SE, in Section 19, Township 23N, Range 5E. The following comments are based on the submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant: EXISTING CONDITIONS WATER: This project is served by the City of Renton. It is in the 196 Water Pressure Zone. The static water pressure at the street level is approximately 75 psi. There is an existing 12" DI water main located in Raymond Ave SW and in SW Grady Way. See City of Renton water drawing W1904 As -Built for details. SEWER: There is an existing 12" sanitary sewer main in Raymond Ave SW and an existing 12" sewer main in the alley adjacent to the south property line. STORM: There is an existing 12" storm pipe in Raymond Ave SW and in the alley adjacent to and south of the development. See City of Renton drawing R-1450. Also fronting SW Grady Way is a 12" storm pipe; see of Renton drawing R-1904. CODE REQUIREMENTS WATER 1. Per the City Fire Marshal, the fire flow requirement is 1,500 gpm based on a fully fire sprinklered building. A minimum of two fire hydrants are required. One fire hydrant is required within 150 -feet of the proposed building, and one hydrant is required within 300 -feet. This distance is measured along the travel route. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code. The existing hydrants all need 5 -inch storz fittings in order to meet code, and they currently do not have them. It appears adequate fire flow exists in this area. One new hydrant will be required within 50 -feet of the fire department connection. The number of additional hydrants required is dependent on the calculated fireflow. 2. Per City of Renton code, the lateral spacing of fire hydrants shall be predicated on hydrants being located at street intersections. Washington State Auto Dealers H carters - LUA 12-062 Page 2 of 3 August 21, 2012 3. A Reduced Pressure Backflow Prevention Assembly (RPBA) will be required behind each domestic water meter. The RPBA's shall be installed in an above -ground "Hot -Box" per City standard plan number 350.2. 4. Installation of a DDCVA on the fire service line is required. The City has a standard detail for installation inside the building if it's proposed in the project design. If the project does want to install an inside DDCVA, it must be located in a room that has outside ingress. In addition, the distance from the main to the DDCVA shall not exceed 50 feet. 5. Water System Development Charges (SDC) are based on the size of the (each and all) water meter(s). These fees are triggered by an additional water or upsizing an existing water meter. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued. If there is no construction permit, then fees are collected prior to the issuance of the building permit. SEWER 1. The applicant submitted a conceptual utility plan showing the location of a sanitary sidesewer. 2. Any use in the building that may require the installation of a grease interceptor or oil/water separator shall be determined at the time of plan review. 3. System Development Charges (SDC) are based on any and all domestic water meters. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued. Sanitary Sewer System Development Charges are triggered if there is an increase in the domestic water meter size. STORM 1. The project is required to comply with the new City of Renton Amendments to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual. A conceptual drainage plan and report was submitted with the formal application. Per the report, the project will comply with City of Renton Amendments to the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual. 2. Per the TIR, the project proposes to use StormTech drainage products facilities. This use will require additional review and approval. Staff has not supported requests to this use in the past. 3. Plans will be reviewed in detail prior to issuance of a construction permit, following land use process. 4. Payment of Surface Water System Development Charges of $0.405 per square foot of new impervious area will be required. This fee is collected prior to the issuance of the construction permit. STREET IMPROVEMENTS 1. Construction of a commercial building will trigger a separate review. 2. Installation of street improvements will be required across the full frontage of both SW Grady Way and Raymond Ave SW. 3. Staff would support a street modification request for a 5' sidewalk and 8' planter strip on SW Grady Way. 4. There is existing street lighting on SW Grady Way. 5. Additional right-of-way is not required on SW Grady Way. HICED\Planning\Current Planning\PROJECTS\12-062.Rocale\Plan Review Comments LUA 12-062.doc Washington State Auto Dealers H carters - LUA 12-062 Page 3 of 3 August 21, 2012 6. There is no existing curb on Raymond Ave SW. The street section on Raymond Ave SW needs a curb 18 feet to centerline, a 7 -foot planter strip, and a 5 -foot sidewalk. 7. The conceptual utility plan that was submitted does not show the above improvements; hence, the conceptual utility plan is not approved. 8. The Traffic Mitigation Fee for this project is $7,873.00 and shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. 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. 2. All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two of the City of Renton Horizontal and Vertical Control Network. 3. 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 may be additional fees for water service related expenses. See Drafting Standards. HICED\Planning\Current Plan ning\PROJECTS\12-062.Rocale\PIan Review Comments LUA 12-062.doc City of on Department of Community & Economic lopment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:' COMMENTS DUE: AUGUST 22, 2012 APPLICATION NO: LUA12-062,1 ECF, SA -A, MOD DATE CIRCULATED: AUGUST 8, 2012 APPLICANT: Washington State Auto Dealers Association PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons PROJECTTITLE: WSADA Headquarters PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 33,577 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 9,073 square feet LOCATION: 621S Grady Way PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two -story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of CA zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use_ The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grady Way and another access point is proposed along the existing public alley, abutting the property to the south, connecting Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave SW. There are no critical areas located on site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Air Water Plonts Land/Shoreine Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C: CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major information Impacts impacts Necessary Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation Utilities Trans ortotion Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 feet 14,000 feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areos of probable impact or areas where ditiona information is needed to properly assess this proposal. i VA Signature of Director or Authorized Re sentative Date S# 899 TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FEE Project Name: Project Address: Contact Person: Permit Number. Project Description: Land Use Ty": d al ❑ Retail 2lon-retail Calculation: WA State Auto Dealers Assn. Office 621 S. Grady Way WSADA LUA12-062 9.073 x 11.57 = 104.97 ADT 104.97 x $75.00 = $7,873.00 Transportation Mitigation Fee: Calculated by: Date of Payment: 9073 sq ft office building Method of Calculation: X ITE Trip Generation Manual, 8th Edition X Traffic Study ❑ Other (715) Single Tenant Office Bldg. (11.57 per 1000 sq ft) $7,873.00 K.KittrickJ Date: 8/14/2012 V`V �- � '� I -"o> City of on Deportment of Community & Economic lopment �'b-�'ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS DUE: AUGUST 22, 2012 APPLICATION NO: LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD DATE CIRCULATED: AUGUST 8, 2012 APPLICANT: Washington State Auto Dealers Association PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: WSADA Headquarters PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 33,577 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 9,073 square feet LOCATION: 621 S Grady Way PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two -story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size_ The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of CA zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grady Way and another access point is proposed along the existing public alley, abutting the property to the south, connecting Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave SW. There are no critical areas located on site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Air Water Plonts Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources TraF SWT 4 811 'V5 B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major information Impacts Impacts Necessary Housing Aesthetics Li ht/Giare Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/Culturoi Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we hove expertise and have identified areas of proboble impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date Leslie A Betlach From: Terrence J. Flatley Sent: Friday, August 17, 2012 2:01 PM To: Leslie A Betlach Subject: Washington Auto Dealers Hi Leslie, Here are my comments on this project green folder you placed on my chair: 1.) Select other non -maple species for those shown along Grady Way. 2.) Trees along Grady Way are spaced too close together. If spaced this closely the future health of the trees will be impacted and maintenance costs will be higher than if planted 30 to 50 feet on -center. 3.) There are overhead electric transmission lines along the north side of Grady Way. If frontage trees are to be planted below those lines, select species that mature at a height of less than 18 feet tall and obtain authorization to use species by PSE prior to final plan approval. 4.) Submit revised landscape plans that show exact location of overhead transmission lines and frontage trees for approval. 5.) Note: City is currently working with PSE on a project that removes trees below the transmission lines and replaces them with trees that mature to less than 18 feet along the entire length of Grady Way where overhead lines exist. Terry Flatley Urban Forestry & Natural Resources Manager ISA Certified Arborist #PN -7272A City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 TFlatlevPRentonWa.Gov 425-766-6187 (ctrl -click to forestry web page) City oJ ton Department of Community & Economic lopment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: po- COMMENTS DUE: AUGUST 22, 2012 APPLICATION NO: LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD DATE CIRCULATED: AUGUST 8, 2012 APPLICANT: Washington State Auto Dealers Association c� PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons o PROJECTTITLE: WSADA Headquarters PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger c SITE AREA: 33,577 square feet - EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 9,073 square f4t xarn LOCATION: 621 S Grady Way PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review Nr the construction of a two -story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of CA zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grady Way and another access point is proposed along the existing public alley, abutting the property to the south, connecting Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave SW. There are no critical areas located on site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information impacts impacts Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Lond/ShoreHne Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Naturol Resources J�11_' al*eAl B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable Mare Environment Minor Major information Impacts Impacts Necessary Housing Aesthetics Li hVGlore Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment IQ000Feet 14, 000 Feet 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 whel-e additional informatig" needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COMMENTS D E: AUGUST 22, 012 APPLICATION NO: LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD DATE CIRCULATED: AUGUST 8, 2012 APPLICANT: Washington State Auto Dealers Association PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: WSADA Headquarters PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 33,577 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 9,073 square feet LOCATION: 621 S Grady Way PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two -suffice building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of CA zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. T�applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grad Wa and another access point is proposed along the existing public alley, abutting the property to the south, connecting Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave SW. There are no critical areas located on site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major information impacts impacts Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major information impacts Impacts !Necessary Housing Aesthetics Li htJGlare Recreation utilities Trans ortation Public services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,00OFeet 14, 000 Feet B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS 'I i S i S c �? I Irl e II �� i 1� GI'f S ��DVr-t-� Oct V1 0I'YI�G 0J rn-o'Of C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS -FvN �- ) a 0'� � + I F'1 r W, I "Cl eieo�Gi a is Ipo+rm-hal ra��P M �� Giem co n s i d-c.,H v)'j Ioca-h. o I" Rem r) we have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and hove identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. signature Dire or or Authorized Representative Date Jr Id FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT CAV of . M E M O R A N D U M DATE: June 5, 2012 TO: Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner FROM: Corey Thomas, Plans Review Inspector SUBJECT: Washington State Automobile Dealers Association Environmental Impact Comments: 1. The fire mitigation impact fees are currently applicable at the rate of $0.52 per square foot of building area. Fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. Code Related Comments: 1. The fire flow requirement is 1,500 gpm based on a fully fire sprinklered building. A minimum of two fire hydrants are required. One fire hydrant is required within 150 -feet of the proposed building and one hydrant is required within 300 -feet. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code. The existing hydrants all need 5 -inch storz fittings in order to meet code and they do not have them at present. It appears adequate fire flow exists in this area. One new hydrant will be required within 50 - feet of the fire department connection_ 2. Both an approved fire alarm and fire sprinkler system is required throughout the building. Separate plans and permits are required to be submitted to the Renton Fire Department for review and permitting. Fire alarm system shall be fully addressable and full detection is required. A direct outside door is required to the fire sprinkler riser control room. 3. Fire department apparatus access is adequate. 4. An electronic site plan is required to be submitted to the Renton Fire Department for pre -fire planning purposes prior to occupancy of the building. City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: R rp, COMMENTS DUE: AUGUST 22, 2012 APPLICATION NO: LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD DATE CIRCULATED: AUGUST 8, 2012 APPLICANT: Washington State Auto Dealers Association PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons PROJECTTITLE: WSADA Headquarters PROJECT REVIEWER. Arneta Henninger SiTE AREA: 33,577 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 9,073 square feet LOCATION: 621 S Grady Way PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two -story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of CA zoned property and is currently vacant_ Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grady Way and another access point is proposed along the existing public alley, abutting the property to the south, connecting Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave SW. There are no critical areas located on site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Air Water Plants LandlShoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts !Necessary Housing Aesthetics Light/Glare Recreation Utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we hove expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is need to proper assess this proposal. 047/1 Signature of Director or Authorized Re esentative Date City 4 nton Department of Community & Econom velopment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:B-1 vc COMMENTS DUE. AUGUST 22, 2012 APPLICATION NO: LUA12-062, ECF, 5A -A, MOD DATE CIRCULATED: AUGUST 8, 2012 APPLICANT: Washington State Auto Dealers Association PROJECT MANAGER: Rocale Timmons PROJECT TITLE: WSADA Headquarters PROJECT REVIEWER: Arneta Henninger SITE AREA: 33,577 square feet EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 9,073 square feet LOCATION: 621 S Grady Way PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Pian and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two -story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association headquarters; approximately 9,073 square feet in size. The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of CA zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use_ The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grady Way and another access point is proposed along the existing public alley, abutting the property to the south, connecting Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave SW. There are no critical areas located on site. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources S. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS O CODE -RELATED COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information impacts impacts Necessary Housing Aesthetics tight/Glare Recreation utilities Transportation Public Services Historic/Cultural Preservation Airport Environment 10, 000 Feet 14,000 Feet 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 in Qthgn is- needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of rector or Authorized Representative to 2c3 l Date CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 8th day of August, 2012, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Acceptance Letter, Notice of Applicatin (NOA), Environmental Checklist, Site Plan documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Agencies See Attached Mat Bergman Contact WSADA Owner 300' Surrounding Property Owners See attached (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON ) r SSS s COUNTY OF KING ) ive, i 7 8-29A 1 certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker �i��►a�„�+ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary acl(kq[-,A. eW# mentioned in the instrument. Dated: kf, $ o f2 '' C Notary Public and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): N . A- �'r My appointment expires: A + K'” �— act ` III_0 L-3 urposes Project Name WSADA Headquarters 04ect'Nu (fiber. v LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD template - affidavit of service by mailing AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) Dept. of Ecology ** WDFW - Larry Fisher* Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. Environmental Review Section 1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201 Attn. Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer PO Box 47703 Issaquah, WA 98027 39015 — 172nd Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Auburn, WA 98092 WSDOT Northwest Region * Duwamish Tribal Office * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Attn: Ramin Pazooki 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn., Ms Melissa Calvert King Area Dev. Serv., MS -240 Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015172 nd Avenue SE PO Box 330310 Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation* Seattle District Office Environmental Planning Supervisor Attn: Gretchen Kaehler Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms. Shirley Marroquin PO Box 48343 PO Box C-3755 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Boyd Powers * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Serv. City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: SEPA Section Attn: Steve Roberge Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director Renton, WA 98055-1219 13020 Newcastle Way 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Metro Transit Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Senior Environmental Planner Municipal Liaison Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Gary Kriedt Joe Jainga 6200 Southcenter Blvd. 201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431 PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 Bellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Real Estate Services Attn: SEPA Coordinator 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 *Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov template - affidavit of service by mailing 1150 RAYMOND LLC 17816 WEST LAKE DESIRE DR, SW AGBAR TECHNOLOGIES INC 444 N MICHIGAN AVE STE 1110 CHICAGO, IL 60611 CUMMINS NORTHWEST LLC 4711 N BASIN AVE PORTLAND, OR 97208 HILL DOUGLAS H 20611 SE 192ND RENTON , WA 98058 JOHNSTON GEORGE+NANCY 6831 RIPLEY LN RENTON , WA 98057 RENTON WEST INC PO BOX 5067 KENT, WA 98064 WASHBURN WAYNE 1150 RAYMOND LLC 1150 RAYMOND AVE SW RENTON , WA 98057 BALA EARLINE M+EDWARD J 3121 SE 5TH ST RENTON , WA 98058 D & C INVESTMENTS LLC 720 RAINIER AVE S RENTON , WA 98055 JOHN C RADOVICH L L C 2835 82ND AVE SE STE 300 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 MCLAUGHLIN PROPERTIES LLC 13620 SE 251 ST ST KENT, WA 98042 SANDOR THOMAS R SANDOR VERA M 600 SW 13TH RENTON , WA 98055 WONG DARYL G A C R INVESTMENTS INC 7683 SE 27TH ST #368 MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 CARLSON CLAUDIA R 8208 S 116TH ST SEATTLE, WA 98178 GRADY WAY II LLC P 0 BOX 27069 SEATTLE, WA 98125 JOHNSTON GEORGE & NANCY 6831 RIPLEY LN N RENTON , WA 98056 PRUSS JOSEPH M 15643 SE 303RD PL KENT, WA 98042 TIMELESS HOLDINGS PARTNERSH 85 CASCADE KY BELLEVUE , WA 98006 WSADA PROPERTY LLC 7025 288TH ST NW 5745 110TH AVE SE 16000 CHRISTENSEN RD #150 STANWOOD , WA 98292 BELLEVUE , WA 98006 TUKWILA , WA 98188 City Of, NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS -M) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: August S, 2012 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA12-052, ECF, SA -A, MOD PROJECT NAME: WSADA Headquarters PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Administrative Site Plan and Environmental (SEPA) Review for the construction of a two-story office building for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association headquarters; approximately 9,473 square feet in size. The project site consists of a 33,577 square feet of CA zoned property and is currently vacant. Surface parking, in the amount of 43 stalls, would be provided just east of the proposed structure. RMC 4-4-080 allows a maximum of 41 stalls for the proposed use. The applicant is requesting a parking modification in order to exceed the maximum number of parking stalls by two parking spaces. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grady Way and another access point is proposed along the existing public alley, abutting the property to the south, connecting Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave 5W. There are no critical areas located on site. PROJECT LOCATION: 621 S Grady Way OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS -M): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted underthe RCW 43.210.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS -M process to give notice that a DNS - M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS -M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non - Significance -Mitigated (DNS -M). A 14 -day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS -M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: July 24, 2012 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: August 8, 2012 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Mat Bergman, SCRA; 2106 Pacific Avenue #300; Tacoma, WA 98402; Eml: mbergman@bcradesign.com Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review, Administrative Site Pian Review, Modification Review Other Permits which may be required: Building and Construction Permits Requested Studies: Geotechnical and Drainage Reports Location where application may be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 PUBLIC HEARING: N/A If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, CED -- Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, Name/File No.: WSADA Headquarters/LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD NAME; MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: The subject site is designated Commercial Corridor (CC) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Commercial Arterial (CA) on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2-120A and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. Proposed Mitigation Measures: The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. ■ The applicant will be required to pay the appropriate Transportation Mitigation Fee; and ■ The applicant will be required to pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner, CED — Pianning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 99057, by 5:00 PM on August 22, 2012. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7219; Eml: rtimmons@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION Denis Law City or - Mayor Department of Community and Economic Development August 8, 201.2 C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Mat Bergman BCRA 2106 Pacific Avenue #300 Tacoma, WA 98402 Subject; Notice of Complete Application WSADA Headquarters, LUA12-062, ECF, SA -A, MOD Dear Mr. Bergman: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on August 27, 2012. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. Please contact me at (425) 430-7219 if you have any questions. Sincerely, , Roc a Timmons Associate Planner cc: Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) / owner(s) Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way . Rento nr Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov ] "TITLE COMPANY vE'NuF, a#M, s rii F, wA 48104 PLAT CERTIFICATE Order No.: 1346651 Certificate for Fining Proposed Plat: In the matter of the plat submitted for our approval, this Company has examined the records of the County Auditor and County Clerk of KING County, Washington, and the records of the Clerk of the United States Courts holding terms in said County, and from such examination hereby certifies that the title to the following described land situate in said KING County, to -wit - SEE SCHEDULE A (NEXT PAGE) VESTED IN: WSADA PROPERTY, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY EXCEPTIONS: SEE SCHEDULE B ATTACHED CHARGE: $350..00 TAX: $33.25 Records examined to JULY 24, 2012 at 8:00 AM 41J C TITLE C Y By k DARSAVIDIS Title O cer (206)628-5620 FIATCRTA/RDA/0999 WCAGOUTLE COMPANY PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE A► (Continued) Order No.- 1.346651 LEGAL DESCRIMON LOTS 6 THROUGH 16, INCLUSIVE, BLOCK 28, C. D, HILLMAN'S EARLINGTON GARDENS ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SEATTLE, DIVISION NO. 1, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 17 OF PLATS, PAGE(S) 74, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. FLATCRTL/RL}AjM0 CHICAGO TITLE COMPANY PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULB $ Order No.: 1346651 This certificate does not .insure against loss or damage by reason of the following exceptions: GENERAL EXCEP'T`IONS: A. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires for value of record the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment. B. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. C. Encroachments, overlaps, boundary line disputes, and any other matters which would be disclosed by an accurate survey and inspection of the premises. D. Easements or claims of easements not shown by the public records. E. Any lien, or right to lien, for contributions to employee benefit funds, or for state workers' compensation, or for services, labor, or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, all as imposed by law, and not shown by the public records. F. Liens under the Workmen's Compensation Ad not shown by the public records. G. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, electricity or garbage removal. H. General taxes not now payable; matters relating to special assessments and special levies, if any, preceding or in the same becoming alien. L Reservations or exceptions in patents or in Ads authorizing the issuance thereof, Indian tribal codes or regulations, Indian treaty or aboriginal rights, including easements or equitable servitudes. J. 'Water rights, claims, or title to water. K THIS REPORT IS ISSUED AND ACCEPTED UPON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THE LIABILITY OF THE COMPANY SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS($I000.00). P[AT'CRWRDAJV999 OVCAGO TITLE COMPANY 0 PLAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE $ (Continued) Order No- 1346651 EXCEPTIONS A 1. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAKES AND CHARGES, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF FIRST HALF UNPAID ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT IF UNPAID ON NOVEMBER 1 OF THE TAX YEAR (AMOUNTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST AND PENALTIES): YEAR: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: ASSESSED VALUE -LAND - ASSESSED VALUE -IMPROVEMENTS - GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES 2012 334040-4730-04 2100 $ 588,000.00 $ 0.00 BILLED: $ 7,803.94 PAID: $ 3,901.97 UNPAID: $ 3,901.97 s 2. PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT OUR SEARCH DID NOT DISCLOSE ANY OPEN DEEDS OF TRUST OF RECORD. IF YOU SHOULD HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF ANY OUTSTANDING OBLIGATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE TITLE DEPARTMENT IMMEDIATELY FOR FUR'T'HER REVIEW. C 3. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT FOR WSADA PROPERTY, LLC: 4. THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IN THIS CERTIFICATE IS BASED Ox INFORMATION PROVIDED WITH THE APPLICATION AND THE PUBLIC RECORDS. THE PARTIES RECEIVING THIS CERTIFICATE MUST NOTIFY THE TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY TF THE DESCRIPTION DOES NOT CONFORM TO THEIR EXPECTATIONS. is NOTE 1: ANY MAP FURNISHED WITH THIS CERTIFICATE IS FOR CONVENIENCE IN LOCATING THE LANE} INDICATED HEREIN WITH REFERENCE TO STREETS AND OTHER LAND. NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED BY REASON OF RELIANCE THEREON. a* NOTE 2: EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1997, DOCUMENT FORMAT AND CONTENT REQUIREMENTS HAVE BEEN IMPOSED BY WASHINGTON LAW. FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS MAY RESULT IN REJECTION OF THE DOCUMENT BY THE COUNTY RECORDER OR IMPOSITION OF A $50.00 SURCHARGE. FOR DETAILS OF THESE STATEWIDE REQUIREMENTS PLEASE VISIT THE KING COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE WEESITE AT WWW.KINGCOUt,TTY.GOV/BUSINESS/RNCORDERS.ASPX AND SELECT ONLINE FORMS AND DOCUMENT STANDARDS. THE FOLLOWING MAY BE USED AS AN ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIP'T'ION ON THE DOCUMENTS TO BE RECORDED TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF RCW 65.04. SAID ABBREVIATED LEGAL DESCRIPTION IS NOT A SUBSTI'T'UTE FOR A COMPLE'T'E LEGAL DESCRIPTION WHICH MUST ALSO APPEAR IN THE BODY OF THE DOCUMENT: FLATCRTM/1 3A/0M WCAGO TITLE COMPANY 0 PIAT CERTIFICATE SCHEDULE B (Continued) Order No.: 1346651 TATS 6-16, BLOCK 28, VOLUME 17 OF PLATS, PAGE 74. SND OF SC$BDVLN 8 PLA'PCM2/RDA JM Assessor -Map � � Wage 1 of 1 ��yr j9 �0'Ck6 SZ c� - sw l to st SP REN SP.13"ll ac's' s �'' i91U5149Dt73 _ - -"* I c4�1l=A°��1�rnv DT 1 Gr adY W aV sn n O� A� Oxy rj 3i'Ilk Uj �.. �' Sw GRp �.-• Uf 4'M+'�"- 3 N, {'�s ;. • iS �2 �3 lt3 ; ...t;ri A•1 �r Vf _a 5 A A i x 257 c Q Ii a 't� zt 2�5t 4 a X37 : 1 gVO �t 31 5� , 26,�.o' i ,,A ' zi 5 • � 5w V. `;� 4L71 TT 14 iA k .. k� ^�� �7 ar 11 ?23 CVS3t 3 0 161 ?� r� i3iki 23 d ?r. Z This maphas been copied from the public records and is provided solely for the purpose of assisting in locating the premises. No liabilities are assumed for inaccuracies contained herein or for Variadons, if any, in dimenslons, area a location of the premises or the iooation Of improvements ascertained by actual survey. http://P-eo.sentrvdvnarnics.net/WA Kinn/n.5,,rman1arop acnY'?nnro..P1ir1=';140404710 7177/'?01') • WHEN FOECOFOED F1ETUW TO NftSH*4GTON $TATEAt1TO MVJW ASSOD. 10004 {�9iEN8EH RDJID, SURE 16b lM t4tA, WA 901M 70081x12QpOp69,OQ1 E2373872 ! I ". 1:W:: STATS OP /"1 as courPY OP ) 20081212000M,002 I CERTIFY THAT I 819091 OR HAVE SATISPA=RY 3VIDRIP3 THAT X02= D. LA19>?JiJiRR a. FS THE PERSON XHO APPEARED 86PORE TSE, AND ah1D PERSON AC1O7D►7LEOORD THAT HE SIGNED TRIS I9MSTRUMBNT, CO OATH STATED THAT NB WAS AUTEDRISED TO ERZ= M INSTRUNEWT AND ACKPOKbUDGKO IT AS INUIPMO OF LAXPR101R ENTEURIERS 01 "ASUMMOU. M., A 1PURZXMM OD"QRATIUX TO BE THE PREP AIM VOLMnARX ACT OF SUCU PARTY FOR THE USES AND PURPOSES VZK71091M IN THE INSTRUMSNP. DATER: �Jy�f 11, 19(YTARY SIQUATURP, PRIRPED NANRI NOTARY PUBLIC 11 ASD PSR TIM STATS OP (yr r aj RESIDING AT 1'4111 '{ MY APPOIWWr)1T zKylRES OFFKM SEAL CHERT SHOWELL NOTARYi'LSUC ORaSM OOMMISSIOX X0.+[18078 Ow GOWISSION EXPIRFS,R111E 5.2011 Public Record 0 0 2DOSi212DD0059,003 CMCAco TME 1NSXIRANCL COMPANY EXHiBrr A SxrOWNO,: 2273210 BOHSSCI TO I. COVBAASTS, CDYDITIONS AND RRSTRICTIOUS CW TMNRD IM ISMOMM, 9UT CNITTIM ANY C0VB1gWS OR RSSIRICTIOHS, IF ANY, RASED 11POR RACE, COIAR, MIGION, SE[, SEaM OtIBSTATION, FAMILIAL STATW, MUlTAL STA7W, DISABILM, HWDICAF, NATICKRL DAICIS, ANCEMT, OR SOMCS OP IACiM$, AS SRT MRl41 IS APPLICABLE STAT8 OR FBDSRAL LAWS, BXCM TO 7M EKTBNT THAT SAID CVU UNT OR Ag RICTIOM I$ PRRMITTSD By AppLICUL8 I"t RSCORDBDc APRIL 30, 1964 RECORDING UMMOR; 8404300577 SAID IOSTR04MT =TAINS HBISK LIMITATIONS :` � - `� • f ��` 11: 5 11 1 .,j fi'5 ueares-BT. men- 'r 1 0 C.D.HILLMAN',S ,ARLRmToN GAPDmms AiDvkq TO THE CITY OF 5EATTI—E. DIV1.510N NP I I W. L, Horpmorrz r -.F - 1� kw—v M AE. .0 , I&:/ nmz ve, "74M fcd *X Acr 03"W.3 74 X MT. la.73kd i&,v k ffm2 d-kdii7 14f, 0&w J. 417 * -, A;x h pox -Q-v c *--A,r or -*061 0 LIM 7-W 0 Apro,& i".6 zi "&Y V/ X D. ",gx W4 X brju�o %darha%6 aid jca6 Api P""/ly C A led by Wx 6oam afa,-1 olom?"vr-o A15 43",aaj vfPece-Lrr, Hf//m4v, ii/,rc HrIl , 7 eArvh4m 0si ft iv he . 9G C1aau mmr Cu.. 0. OF -5 C -Ml fc, 911,11/impo Ew4,ftZW AjAv A 4 AflAN. J 1� kw—v M AE. .0 , I&:/ nmz ve, "74M fcd *X Acr 03"W.3 74 X MT. la.73kd i&,v k ffm2 d-kdii7 14f, 0&w J. 417 * -, A;x h pox -Q-v c *--A,r or -*061 0 LIM 7-W 0 G".�67rr1:�S!07TSP'L.17(d7{arly71J0110 _a0KNOWLEDGEMENT a4f &n -*5 nw� ffx,4 Cow 4�Mmrw -td' 0 211 apr A7, f "f me gr ir , q7x5w'zff& YAM -6mr+u /* 4w�� it�YJA�b CA. lb -z' 64V Tlx N ow-rr#fp,orAw.,*,P* �� L "'V &w4w //x a-wpwlxx.3 okerw, nxnwwd A f0k � and fAe irr avaev _wk 1w k. cl6wa wbv,+ /XtA, dmdw*i Apro,& i".6 zi "&Y V/ X D. ",gx W4 X brju�o %darha%6 aid jca6 Api P""/ly C A led by Wx 6oam afa,-1 olom?"vr-o A15 43",aaj vfPece-Lrr, Hf//m4v, ii/,rc HrIl , 7 eArvh4m 0si ft iv he . 9G C1aau mmr Cu.. 0. A t ...... .... -2— G".�67rr1:�S!07TSP'L.17(d7{arly71J0110 _a0KNOWLEDGEMENT a4f &n -*5 nw� ffx,4 Cow 4�Mmrw -td' 0 211 apr A7, f "f me gr ir , q7x5w'zff& YAM -6mr+u /* 4w�� it�YJA�b CA. lb -z' 64V Tlx N ow-rr#fp,orAw.,*,P* �� L "'V &w4w //x a-wpwlxx.3 okerw, nxnwwd A f0k � and fAe irr avaev _wk 1w k. cl6wa wbv,+ /XtA, dmdw*i Apro,& i".6 zi "&Y V/ X D. ",gx W4 X brju�o %darha%6 aid jca6 Api P""/ly C A led by Wx 6oam afa,-1 olom?"vr-o A15 43",aaj vfPece-Lrr, Hf//m4v, ii/,rc HrIl , 7 eArvh4m 0si ft iv he . 9G C1aau mmr Cu.. 0. 6WK9 13 XAf a,,xf,*Xac V gfwm 170'13kj,pa3c 74 corQs arffw� Lawxy. ONO vur :17RUNEW A"" —SURWYVOL ,w Pm 71 Ftrc:,nSP0GR0UP WHAT TRANSPORTATION CAN BE. MEMORANDUM Date: April 26, 2012 :: TG: 12057.00 To: Mat Bergman, BCRA Architects From: Dan McKinney, Transpo Group tf�1 Brent Turley, Transpo Group Subject: WSADA Office Renton — Traffic Impact Analysis This report summarizes our analysis of transportation related impacts for the proposed Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) Office in Renton. The purpose of this analysis is to identify potential traffic related impacts the proposed project may have on the roadway network in the site vicinity and to identify mitigation measures, if necessary, to mitigate those impacts. Project Description The project site is generally located on the southeast corner of SW Grady Way and Raymond Avenue SW (approximately 1,100 feet west of Lind Avenue SW). The proposed site plan is included as an attachment. The proposed project would construct a new 6,000 square -foot office building, with 44 parking stalls. It is anticipated that the new office would be operating by 2013. The site is currently undeveloped. The site would have two driveways, one to SW Grady Way to the north and one to the alley on the southern boundary of the site. These driveways provide access to 27 parking stalls. The remaining 17 parking stalls would be accessed directly from the alley. This alley provides access to nearby Raymond Avenue SW and other local streets in the area. Study Approach The study area includes the SW Grady Way/Raymond Avenue SW intersection, site driveways, and surrounding roadways. Both the weekday AM peak hours and PM peak hours were evaluated for this analysis. The study includes an inventory of the existing roadway network, review of traffic volumes, and analysis of traffic operations. Existing & Future Without -Project Conditions This section describes existing 2012 and future without -project conditions within the identified study area. This includes the road network, traffic volumes, traffic operations, and transit. Roadway Network Within the study area, all streets except for SW Grady Way are classified as local streets. SW Grady Way is classified as a Principal Arterial with five lanes and a posted speed of 35 mph. A two way center left turn lane on Grady Way provides for refuge for left turning vehicles to and from the proposed driveway. The remaining roadways are two lanes with assumed speeds of 25 mph. No specific planned roadways improvements or nearby developments were assumed for this analysis. Transpo Group 11730118th Avenue N.E., Suite 600 Kirkland, WA 98034 425-821-3665 Fax: 425-825-8434 Transit and Pedestrian Facilities There is an existing bus stop located near the intersection of SW Grady Way and Raymond Avenue SW. This stop provides access to Metro Route 140 which connects riders to the Renton Transit Center, Burien Transit Center, Tukwila International Blvd Link Station, Tukwila Sounder Station, and Southcenter Mall. Route 140 operates at a frequency of 15 to 20 minutes throughout the day on weekdays. For pedestrian travel, sidewalks are currently provided along both sides of SW Grady Way in the vicinity of the site_ Along adjacent local roads, sidewalks are more intermittent. Traffic Volumes Existing 2012 peak hour traffic volumes were collected at the study intersection. The volumes were collected during two peak hour periods: the AM peak period (6:30 to 8:30 a.m.) and afternoon PM peak period (4:00 to 6.00 p.m.), which coincide with the peak commute periods. Volumes were collected Wednesday. April 11, 2012. Traffic count summary sheets are included as attachments. Figure 1 shows traffic volumes at the study intersection. To forecast future traffic volumes, existing background volumes were grown by an annual rate of 3 percent. Figure 1 also shows future 2013 without -project conditions. Figure 1 - Existing & Future Without -Project Traffic Volumes Traffic Operations Level of service (LOS) for intersection operations is described alphabetically (A through F). LOS is measured in average control delay per vehicle and is typically reported by approach movement for two-way, stop -controlled intersections. Existing peak hour LOS results were calculated at study intersections based on methodologies contained in the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000). Synchro 7.0 (Build 773) was used for the calculations. Table 1 summarizes the LOS results at study intersections for existing conditions, and shows that all intersection operate at LOS C or better in both the AM and PM peak periods. LOS worksheets are included as attachments. Existing 2012 Without4hoject 2013 4)� SW GRADY WAY � SW GRADY WAY RAYMONDAVENUE SW 4) RAYMOND AVENUE SW )DO( = PM Peak Hour (XX)Q = AMI Peak Hour (405)1010 875 (SKI (415j 1W —10- 900 (825j (10) 5� ( s (10) (10) 5 � � 5(le) -*N f '1 (5) 10 5 (5) (5) 10 5151 Figure 1 - Existing & Future Without -Project Traffic Volumes Traffic Operations Level of service (LOS) for intersection operations is described alphabetically (A through F). LOS is measured in average control delay per vehicle and is typically reported by approach movement for two-way, stop -controlled intersections. Existing peak hour LOS results were calculated at study intersections based on methodologies contained in the Highway Capacity Manual (Transportation Research Board, 2000). Synchro 7.0 (Build 773) was used for the calculations. Table 1 summarizes the LOS results at study intersections for existing conditions, and shows that all intersection operate at LOS C or better in both the AM and PM peak periods. LOS worksheets are included as attachments. Table 1 summarizes the LOS results at study intersections for existing 2012 and future 2013 without -project conditions. These results show that all intersection operate well at LOS C or better under both the AM and PM peak periods. LOS worksheets are provided as attachments. Table 1, Existing and Future Without -Project LOS Table 2012 Existing 2013 Without -Project Intersection LOS' Delay' WMLOS Delay WM Weekday AM Peak Hour SW Grady Way/ Raymond Ave SW B 11.6 NB B 11.7 NB Weekday PM Peak flour SW Grady Way/ Raymond Ave SW C 16.9 NB C 17.3 NB 1, Level of service, based on 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology 2 Average delay in seconds per vehicle. 3. Worst movement, Future With -Project Conditions This section documents the potential impacts of the proposed office on study area roadways and intersections. It includes an estimate of the office's vehicular trip generation, a summary of future traffic volumes, and the potential impacts to traffic operations. Trip Generation Trip generation estimates were developed using rates in Trip Generation 8th Edition (ITE, 2008), The ITE Land Use type #715 "Single Tenant Office Building" was assumed based on characteristics of the proposed development. Table 2 summarizes the trip generation results. Table 2. Trip Generation Project Trips Land Use Square Feet Trip Rate' Total In Out Weekday AM Peak Hour 6,000 1.80 11 10 Weekday PM Peak Hour 1.73 10 2 Weekday Daily 11.57 70 35 35 1. Source: Tnp Generation 8th Edition (ITE, 2008)_ Rate is trips per 1,000 square feet. As shown in Table 2, approximately 11 trips would be generated during the AM peak hour, 10 trips during the afternoon PM peak period, and 70 daily trips. Trip Distribution and Traffic Volumes Project trips were distributed to the network based on existing counts. Approximately 55 percent of trips were oriented to the west along SW Grady Way, and 45 percent oriented to the east. As a conservative worst-case scenario, all project trips were assumed to use the SW Grady Way site driveway_ In reality, project trips could be dispersed via both driveways and local streets. New project trips and background traffic volumes were combined to establish future 2013 with -project conditions as shown in Figure 2. rtranspo _: iA;, P With Project 2013 Cfy SW GRADY WAY SSW GRADY WAY RAYMOND AVENUE SW SITE DRIVEWAY (4213;1D41 4— 904 (826) (420)1045 --s 905 (835) 5 (10) (5)1 t (5) LOS Delay (5)10 5(5} (114 4(0) Figure 2 - Future With -Project Traffic Volumes Traffic Operations Table 3 summarizes the LOS results at study intersections for future 2013 with -project conditions and shows that all intersection operate at LOS C or better in both the AM and PM peak periods. LOS worksheets are provided as attachments. Table 3. Future Without -Project and With -Project LOS Table 2014 Without -Project 2014 With -Project Intersection LOS' Delay WM' LOS Delay WM Weekdav Ali? Peak Hour SW Grady Way/ Raymond Ave SW B 11.7 NB B 11.7 NB SW Grady Way/ Site Driveway — --- --- B 13.0 NB Weekday PM Peak Hour SW Grady Way Raymond Ave SW C 16.9 NB G 17.3 NB SW Grady Way/ Site Driveway -- - - C 16.1 NB 1. Level of service, based on 2000 Highway Capacity Manual methodology. 2. Average delay in seoonds per vehicle. 3. Worst movement Parking The project would provide 44 parking stalls on-site that would be more than sufficient for the anticipated 4 to 5 office employees. The high number of stalls being provided is to accommodate monthly meetings where up to 50 people could be on-site. Conservatively assuming a meeting with 50 people arriving by vehicle with an average vehicle occupancy of 1.2, a demand for 42 parking spaces would be generated. National surveys suggest this AVO is consistent with work- related trips (2401 National Household Travel Survey, USDOT), which most closely match the type of trip made by meeting attendees_ The on-site parking supply of 44 should be sufficient for the anticipated monthly meetings. Ftranspoc,H(�:_jr; Pedestrian Facilities With the construction of the proposed site plan, on-site pedestrian sidewalks will be constructed to provide direct connections to the proposed parking areas and existing sidewalks along SW Grady Way. Impact Fees The City of Renton assesses a Transportation Impact Mitigation fee of $75 per new average daily trip. Based on the assumed trip generation of 70 new daily trips, the transportation impact fee would be $5,250. Findings This traffic impact analysis evaluates the project impacts of the proposed WSADA Office in Renton. The following outlines the general findings of the analysis. • The proposed project is anticipated to generate 11 trips during the AM peak hour and 10 trips during the PM peak hour, and approximately 70 daily trips. • With or without the project, all study intersections are anticipated to operate at LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak periods with or without a meeting occurring during the PM peak hour. • The project would have enough parking spaces on-site for normal business operations and for anticipated monthly meetings_ • The Transportation Impact Mitigation fee is estimated at $5,250. rte ui IspaGPOUP WHAT TRANSPORTATION CAN BE. Attachments Peak Hour Summary r r Mark Skaggs (206)251-0300 Raymond Ave SW & SW Grady Way 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM Wednesday, April 11, 2012 SW Gra& Way Peds 9 FeO4] A` o Q V CL sIL 475 407 8 �1 Peds 0 R Al F 2 F11 m a 78 ❑3 ¢ .o c 0 m 0: Approach PHF HV% Volume EB 0.89 12.3% 415 WB 0.$1 3.7% 812 NB 0.38 33.3% 3 SB 0.00 0.0% 0 Intersection 0.86 6.7% 1,230 Count Period: 6:30 AM to 8:30 AM +802 F812 it70 [408] SW Grady Way Total Vehicle Summary 1 1 - Mark yMark Skaggs (206)251-D300 Raymond Ave SW & SW Grady Way Wednesday, April 11, 2012 6:30 AM to 8:30 AM 15 -Minute Interval Summary 6:30 AM to 8:30 AM o g 0 0 In 0 Norlhbound _Raymond Ave SW R out 0 Eastbound SW Grady Way T I R M 7 a 14-' ♦ Ll�� HV 3.7% 0 0 0 0.0% _ 0.00 Pedestrians Crosswalk 612 1 408 1,220 30 3.7% 0.81 North South East PHF 0.81 6:30 AM 645 AM 7:00 AM __7:15 AM 7.30 AM 145 AM 8'00 AM 6:15 AM 9 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 47 2 70 3 a2 1 84 2 __ 104 4 104 1 115 1 116 2 9 5 7 11 9 16 15 19 6 8 5 3 3 3 1 7 163 _ _195 164 206 788 ! 249 _ 159 162 Out 804 218 278 254 295 300 357 278 268 2 0 0 812 In 407 ♦ a r. �,r o 802 In 415 0 1 D 0 Total Survey 4 08 Out B� 3 S 91 �iD 1,486 0 1-- 1 D 2,266 11 HV 12.3% 0 1,206 1,235 1,223 8 _ D Q PHF Q_89 9 0 0 8 1 0 1 W 2 1 m o Out In 7 18 3 a Peak Hour Summary 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM Interval Start Time L Norlhbound _Raymond Ave SW R Southbound Raymond Ave SW HV Eastbound SW Grady Way T I R HV L Westbound SW Grady Way T HV Interval Total 0 0 0 0.0% _ 0.00 Pedestrians Crosswalk 612 1 408 1,220 30 3.7% 0.81 North South East West 6:30 AM 645 AM 7:00 AM __7:15 AM 7.30 AM 145 AM 8'00 AM 6:15 AM 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 _ 2 0 D D _ 0 1 0 47 2 70 3 a2 1 84 2 __ 104 4 104 1 115 1 116 2 9 5 7 11 9 16 15 19 6 8 5 3 3 3 1 7 163 _ _195 164 206 788 ! 249 _ 159 162 6 4 5 8 6 9 7 6 218 278 254 295 300 357 278 268 2 0 0 0 _ 0 0 0 D 0 0 —30 D 0 1 0 6 0 0 1 _ 0 0 1 0 0 D 0 0 0 1 D 0 Total Survey 4 4 3 722 16 91 36 1,486 0 1-- 1 53 2,266 11 1 0 0 Peak Hour Summary 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM By Approach Northbound Raymond Ave SW In Out ' Total HV Southbound Raymond Ave SW In Out Total Eastbound SW Grady Way In Out Total HV Westbound SW Grady Way In Out I Total HV Total Pedestrians Crosswalk North South East West Volume %HV 3 16 21 1 33.3% 0,36 0 0 0 0.0% _ 0.00 415 - 804 1 1,219 1 51 12.3% 0.89 612 1 408 1,220 30 3.7% 0.81 1,230 9 0 0 0 6.7% PHF 0.86 By Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound ulovemenl Raymond Ave SW Raymond Ave SW SW Grad Way SW Grady Way TOW L R Total Total T R Total L T 7olal Volume 2 1 3 _ 0 407 a 415 10 802 812 1,230 PHF —D so 025 -0.38 North 0 O 0.99 1 0,50 0,89 0.83 0.81 ;D.B1 0,86 Rolling Hour Summary 6:30 AM to 8:30 AM Interval Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Pedestrians Start Raymond Ave SW Raymond Ave SW SW Grady Way SW Grady Way Interval Crosswalk Time L R HV ' T R HV L T HV Total North South East West 8:30 AM 6:45 AM 2 3 2 _ 2 2 2 _ _ 283 8 344 10 32 32 22 19 726 753 23 23 1,045 1.127 3 7 0 0 D 0 0 0 7:00 AM 7:15 AM 7�30AM 2 2 2 1 1 2 0 1-- 1 374 8 407 8 439 8 43 51 59 14 iD 14 607 602 758 28 3D _ 3p 1,206 1,235 1,223 8 _ D Q 0 9 0 0 8 1 0 _ D 0 Peak Hour Summary All D. Marc Skaggs (206)251-0300 Raymond Ave SW & SW Grady Way 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM Wednesday, April 11, 2012 SW Grad Way Peds 2 889 F BT7 883 It s 66' F_ 0 yN p�j d1 9 a S a 9099 7008 4 F 011 3 y Peds 3 SW Grady Way R 7! 72I F31 H] Fa 951 b C 4 A t� Approach PHF HV% Volume EB 0.92 1.7% 1,011 WB 0.95 1.7% 883 NB 0.47 0.0% 15 SB 0.00 0.0% 0 Intersection 0,96 1.7% 1,909 Count Period: 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM Total Vehicle Summary Mark Skaggs (206)251-0300 Raymond Ave SW & SW Grady Way Wednesday, April 11, 2012 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM 15 -Minute Interval Summary 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM spa In Out 0 0 0 0 6 p 7 M = a HV 1.7% PHF 0.95 2 L J Southbound Raymond Ave SW HV Eastbound SW Grady Way T R HV L Out 889 HV interval Total SW Grady Wa In , Out Total HV 883 In 1.008 ♦ a in !' o 877 Ir 1,011 D _ 0 D 0 0 _ 0 _ 0 1 244 0 224 1 2 273_ 2 -222 0 275 0 238 1_ 229 3 184 1 6 7 5 5 4 3 2 5 1,011 Oui 3� 7 6 2 4 6 3 _3 2 5. 0 �6 HV 1.7% 3 0 0 0 PHF 4.92 t r* o v 12 3 0 0 Out Ir = _ 9 15 a 0 Peak Hour Summary 0 1 0 0 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM Total Surrey Interval Star Titre L Northbound Raymand Ave SW R Southbound Raymond Ave SW HV Eastbound SW Grady Way T R HV L Westbound SW Grady Way T—Tr 1 HV interval Total SW Grady Wa In , Out Total HV Pedestrians Crosswalk Total North South I East West 4:00 PM_ _ 4:15 PM 4.30 PM 4.45 PM 5'00 PM _ 5.15 PM 5.30 PM 5'.45 PM 1 3 1 3 2 5 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 3 0 2 3 D _ 0 D 0 0 _ 0 _ 0 1 244 0 224 1 2 273_ 2 -222 0 275 0 238 1_ 229 3 184 1 6 7 5 5 4 3 2 5 2 0 0 3 0 3 1 1 173 1 197 1 211 _ 221 216 229 180 175 7 6 2 4 6 3 _3 2 423 _ 425 489 448 499 _ 473 417 364 0 1 i 0 0 0 0 0 D 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0_ 0 1 0 0 _ 0 Total Surrey 18 10 1 1,689 9 37 10 1,602 33 3.538 4 5 0 0 Peak Hour Summary 4:30 PM to 5:30 PM By Northbound Southbound Eastbound Weatbound Movement Pedestrians Approach Raymond Ave SW Ra mond Ave SW SW Grady Wa In , Out Total HV SW Grady Way Ir Out I Total HV Total Crosswalk North South Easf West In Out Total HV In Out Total Volume 15 9 24 0 - 0 D 0 1,011 889 1.900 17 883 1,011 1,894 15 1,909 2 3 0 1 0 %HV 0.0% 0.096 1.7% -1.70A 1.796 0.95 0.96 PHF 0.47 0.00 0.92 0,95 0.96 19 By Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Movement Ra mond Ave SW Raymond Ave SW SW Grady Way SW Grady way Total L R Total Total Crasswalk T R Total L T Total Volume 12 1 1 3 115 10 _ 1,008 3 1,011 B 877 863 1,909 PHF 0.60 025 0.47 0.00 South I East 0.92 0,38 0,92 0.50 0.96 0.95 0.96 Rolling Hour Summary 4:00 PM to 6:00 PM Interval Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound Pedestrians Start Raymond Ave SW Raymond Ave SW SW Grady Way SW Grady Way Interval Crasswalk Time L R HV I T I R I HV L I T HV Total North South I East West 4:00 PM 9 2 C _ 963 4 23 5 1 802 19 1.785 0 2 0 - 0 4:15 PM 11 4 0 _ 994 4 _ 21 3 1 845 18 1.661 2 2 0 0 4:30 PM 12 3 0 - 1,006 3 17 6 877 15 1.909 2 3 0 0 4 45 PM 11 _ 5 0 984 4 14 7 _ 846 18 1,837 3 3 0 0 5:00 PM 9 8 1 926 5 14 5 800 14 1,753 4 3 0 0 «! RF Al / f ILI f® )\]$2y;2HI\3!]/NN{\)a|/ k>wa}IfiJ,f Ia#=<)gw{)i \ } k fE ƒf\ +]f )f! \\ Him � }( / } / / { S 5� 271 ®ew§`§-2°\ \ - - }\ / § � / - gal , z ^ ■i f ` _ . \ƒ\.{ \� �A£ :�£f■99\m £"_, tl22/Bi=i§#f#= HIM -a2 3° Ala 3Iƒ}!7JƒMUNI SKO N&§ � 7;;®ee f/ƒlass/$ƒ }k{ )\ 4�. /0 f )§§§»&=E5 z !f}.IFS s21-91 2 'f E31&,4�amet�-•�:zw�ata& £2:Dv5, / ^ ■r E29.9 ffq!]3�#% \ ! k k m■<m,��e= a� )§§§»&=E5 z !f}.IFS s21-91 2 'f E31&,4�amet�-•�:zw�ata& £2:Dv5, / ^ ■r E29.9 ffq!]3�#% \ ! k k M @° efr§p�2;� i7«/!){�� ®f � \ dE �z \>waz«z�Jlaal/&9i99QQ�2� �7 )\■ r�,®,M ƒ)fqf)]\$#| M c CC?o m M Q oosa mo m _ � 4 �h NTf~ t0 �O Oe d r c V e N T r r Q m 4 y �O � G<D 000 00 o � O L c V � U m = 'o }9 '3 � 36�� 19 p N .2S w C gnC$a2a 777 ami? Qc_i¢a � C r r g o C:! T � c o m G r N¢ 0 o ns1°4 oowo�o �¢� h 1[a p ^ O c ^ o 0 0 0 0 a C O m e o 0 O WE 88ymy_w \L vl 8 � C 000 F � � yam. 9 m m b C C IO C w b ncma t"___'_m fN m 1109 � � O o F tw o 4 W N O t o 0 0 J N 11�-- � C r r g o C:! T � c o m G r N¢ 0 o ns1°4 oowo�o �¢� h 1[a p ^ O c ^ o 0 0 0 0 a C O m e o 0 a m z O m U O h O V 3 ? a E A 7 7� smi7QU�¢ ¢ �> WE 88ymy_w o c p 15 m e w ^� p yam. 9 m m b C C IO C w b ncma t"___'_m F �_T °' wY cmatav rw� a m z O m U O h O V 3 ? a E A 7 7� smi7QU�¢ ¢ M 4 a o m B 6 P i 1� O `v {QPM O O �eso�e�n��oo -2 d' $ D U U E E J o 0 o Q5 2 `s `3 `� r e O 2 777 �ao'vJ a � r c r ^ 4 0 { Tr 4 Yl o O o 4 LL N F}may e m Na oo u�ao ao 0 0o mNo CQ T bu'yMON � r O + 4 4 0 ry 0 0 O O O O P c O 4 G O O O : m G?Y =? T s m B 6 P i 1� O `v {QPM O O _N pma c C o m w ^C C -2 d' $ D U U E E J o 0 o Q5 2 `s `3 `� > > J7�C�d2 � a� 2 �i�� s 777 �ao'vJ a o 0 /G M m o 0 o n o 0 !o O Q O � � o o 0 0o Q c G o Q N m — n m a m t g g -p U m U c a fiyy tom E M E E-2 o m a m T N 7SLs USo a P o G 4 ry a a �7tn Gla xd�3a���� a ���SS n 777 7C7U q6 Q W L /I, f /( a \ k »@/K2m©§», []■{___�§ �� ,_ _ } &&ƒ£�2®A2° ) % /, I� _\ `{� \\ ■!■ - !»f2■;2m-,= Exe777-7-�� ««ƒm) >, e Geotechnical Letter Report New Office Building 621 Southwest Grady Way Renton, Washington Submitted to; Vickie Fabri Washington Stage Auto Dealers Association P.O. Box 58170 Seattle, Washington 98138 Submitted by: E311A, Inc. Po Box 44840 Tacoma, Washington 98448 April 4, 2012 Project No. T12019 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. 1.0 SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION...............................................................................----.. 1 2.0 EXPLORATORY METHODS................................................................................................... 1 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS ..................................... ................. 2 3.1 Surface Conditions....................................................................................................... 2 3.2 Soil Conditions..............................................................................•-•---......................... 3 3.3 Groundwater Conditions.............................................................................................. 3 3.4 Seismic Conditions ........................................... ........................................ ••................. 3 3.5 Liquefaction Potential................................................................................................... 3 4-0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................... 3 4.1 Site Preparation----------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------- --- ............. 4 4.2 Spread Footings........................................................................................................... 5 4.3 Slab on Grade Floors ...................................... ............................................................. 7 4.4 Asphalt Pavement........................................................................................................ 7 4.5 Structural Fill................................................................................................................ 8 5.0 RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL SERVICES.......................................................................... 9 6.0 CLOSURE.....................................••-------•-•----......................................----.........--..---.-----------...10 List of Tables Table 1- Approximate Locations, Elevations and Depths of Explorations....................................................2 List of Figures Figure 1. Topographic and Location Map Figure 2. Site and Exploration Man APPENDIX A Logs of Kleinfelder Explorations and Laboratory Test Resutts 11 w—J r ■ 11 Ik � 11 ■ ---I -rw r I:' rw rr, i 1 1 MEMO" irkiii. `. i t 6w& ■ ( = ■ m ILI A ■1 _.11Jk it ARON- u ■1 al Ago M�mn - u i:=1 m •f`j u0 � � a r. ! Y ` II ! April 4, 2012 T120191 WSADA Renton Office Building Report E3RA, Inc, Review of the six test pit logs (TP -1 through TP -6) and two boring logs (B-1 and B-2), used in the March 10, 2006 and January 28, 2008 Kleinfelder reports; Review of two sieve analyses and two Atterberg Tests conducted for the Kleinfelder reports; and A review of published geologic and seismologic maps and literature. Table 1 summarizes the approximate functional locations and termination depths of Kleinfelder's subsurface explorations, and Figure 2 depicts their approximate relative locations. TABLE 1 APPROXIMATE LOCATIONS, ELEVATIONS AND DEPTHS OF EXPLORATIONS USED FOR THIS REPORT Depthan Exploration Functional Location Elevation (feet) (feet) TP -1 Northeast site 23 13 TP -2 North -central site 23 15 TP -3 Northwest site 23 14 TPA Southeast site 22 13 TP -5 South-central site 23 11 TP -6 Southwest site 23 12 B-1 Southeast site 23 44 B-2 Northwest site 21 44 Elevation information_ From Kleinfelder logs It should he realized that the explorations performed and utilized for this evaluation reveal subsurface conditions only at discrete locations across the project site and that actual conditions in other areas could vary. Furthermore, the nature and extent of any such variations would not become evident until additional explorations are performed or until construction activities have begun. if significant variations are observed at that time, we may need to modify our conclusions and recommendations contained in this report to reflect the actual site conditions. 3.0 SITE CONDITIONS The following sections present our observations, measurements, findings, and interpretations regarding, surface, soil, groundwater, seismic, and liquefaction conditions. 3.1 Surface Conditions The site is 4 to 5 feet lower than the right of way of S W Grady Way, which forms the north site boundary. The remainder of the site is relatively level, except at the central part of the south boundary, where the edge of an offsite soil stock pile overlaps the boundary line and grades rise a few feet, and the west part of the south boundary area, where grades descend a foot or two. Vegetation on the day of our site visit (March 15, 2012), consisted of scattered, 1 to 2 foot diameter cottonwood trees with under brush growth comprised mostly of blackberries. No ponds streams or other surface hydrologic features were observed. No seeps, springs or other surface expressions of groundwater were observed. A graveled turnout extends onto the site from Raymond Avenue SW on the west boundary. April 4, 2012 ORA, Inc. T12019 I WSADA Renton Office Building Report 3.2 Soil Conditions The exploration logs indicate that the site is overlain by 3 to 6 inches of topsoil. On the north part of the site, south of SW Grady Way, 4 to 5 feet of fill, consisting of medium dense to dense silty sand with varying amounts of gravel, organics, and construction debris, was encountered. The fill thinned to foot in thickness, or completely disappeared, on the south part of the site. Near the surface on the south part of the site, and underlying the fill, at depths of 4 to 5 feet on the north part of the site, alluvium, comprised of soft to medium stiff silt and loose, silty fine sand, was encountered. This alluvial layer extended down to a depth of 13'/z feet below existing grades on the east part of the site and 24 feet below existing grades on the west part ofthe site. Underlying the soft/loose alluvial layer, a second alluvial layer, comprised of medium dense to very dense sand with gravel was encountered in the two auger borings. The exploration logs and laboratory soil tests in the attached Kleinfelder reports (Appendix A) provide a detailed description of the soil strata encountered in the subsurface explorations used for our report. 3.3 Groundwater Conditions Groundwater was observed at depth ranging from 6 to 9 feet below existing grades during the times of exploration (January 11, 2006 and February 7, 2006). Because the explorations were conducted during the middle of the wet season, these levels likely approximate the seasonal high groundwater level; groundwater levels would likely be lower during the summer and early fall. 3.4 Seismic Conditions Based on our analysis of subsurface exploration logs and our review of published geologic maps, we interpret the onsite soil conditions to correspond with site class D, as defined by Table 1613.5.2 of the 2009 International Building Code (IBC). 3.5 Liquefaction Potential Liquefaction is a sudden increase in pore water pressure and a sudden loss of soil shear strength caused by shear strains, as could result from an earthquake. Research has shown that saturated, loose sands with a fines (silt and clay) content less than about 20 percent are most susceptible to liquefaction. Based on the grain size analyses, the upper, soft/loose alluvium is too silty to easily liquefy and the deeper, more granular alluvium is too well consolidated to liquefy. 4.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Plans call for the construction of a one or two story building that might include an elevator. It is unknown if grades will be raised. We offer these conclusions and recommendations: Foundation Qptions: Over -excavation of spread footing subgrades and construction of structural fill bearing pads will be necessary for foundation support of the building. If foundation construction occurs during wet conditions, it is likely that a geotextile fabric, placed between bearing pads and in situ soils, will also be necessary. If fill is to be placed to raise grades, we recommend that the bearing pads be constructed before fill placement. Recommendations for Spread Footings are provided in Section 4. Floor Options: Floor slab sections should be supported on a subbase of structural fill at least 2 feet thick. If floor construction occurs during wet conditions, it is likely that a geotextile April 4, 2012 T12019 I WSADA Renton Office Building Report ORA, Inc. fabric, placed between subbase and in situ soils, will also be necessary. Recommendations for Slab -on -Grade Floors are provided in Section 4. • Elevator Support: Because it is possible that an elevator would need pile support, we recommend that E3 RA be notified to provide elevator support recommendations if an elevator is part of development plans. • Filling to Raise Grade: We recommend that fill placed to raise grade consist of compacted structural fill that confirms to structural fill described in Section 4. To pre -induce settlement, we recommend that any fill placed to raise grades be Ieft in place for a minimum of 3 months. tf fill placement occurs during wet conditions, it is likely that a geotextile fabric, placed between under the placed fill and in situ soils, will be necessary. • Asphalt Pavement: We recommend that at a subbase at least 2 feet thick of compacted structural fill be used to support asphalt pavement sections onsite. Properly compacted structural fill used to raise grades can be used for pavement subbase. if construction occurs during wet conditions, it is likely that a geotextile fabric, placed between subbase fill and in situ soils, will also be necessary. Pavement recommendations are provided in Section 4. The following sections of this report present our specific geotechnical conclusions and recommendations concerning site preparation, spread footings, slab -on -grade floors, pin piles, drainage systems, and structural fill. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) Standard Specifications and Standard Plans cited herein refer to WS DOT publications M41-10, Standard Specifications for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, and M21-01, Standard Plans for Road, Bridge, and Municipal Construction, respectively. 4.1 Site Preparation Preparation of the project site should involve erosion control, temporary drainage, clearing, stripping, cutting, filling, excavations, construction equipment access, and subgrade compaction. Erosion Control: Before new construction begins, an appropriate erosion control system should be installed. This system should collect and filter all surface water runoff through silt fencing. We anticipate a system of berms and drainage ditches around construction areas will provide an adequate collection system. Silt fencing fabric should meet the requirements of W SDOT Standard Specification 9-33.2 Table 3. In addition, silt fencing should embed a minimum of 6 inches below existing grade. An erosion control system requires occasional observation and maintenance. Specifically, holes in the filter and areas where the filter has shifted above ground surface should be replaced or repaired as soon as they are identified. Temporary Drainage: We recommend intercepting and diverting any potential sources of surface or near -surface water within the construction zones before stripping begins. Because the selection of an appropriate drainage system will depend on the water quantity, season, weather conditions, construction sequence, and contractor's methods, final decisions regarding drainage systems are best made in the field at the time of construction. Clearing and Stripping: The construction areas should be cleared and stripped of all organic soils after surface and near -surface water sources have been controlled. The explorations used for this report indicate that 3 to 6 inches of topsoil overlies the site. 4 April 4, 2012 E3RA, Inc. T12419 / VIlSADA Renton Office Building Report Site Excavations: Based on our review of site explorations, we expect that excavations will medium dense fill and soft loose in situ soils. No special equipment will be necessary to rapidly excavate site soils. Dewatering: Explorations indicate that groundwater can generally be found within 6 to 9 of the surface during the wet season. We anticipate that an internal system of ditches, sumpholes, and pumps will be adequate to temporari ly dewater excavations down to depths of 6 feet during the wet season, but excavations deeper than 6 feet will likely require expensive dewatering equipment, such as well points. These depths can likely be extended a foot or two during the dry season. Site Excavations: Based on our review of site explorations, we expect that excavations will medium dense fill and sofUloosc in situ soils. No special equipment will be necessary to rapidly excavate site soils. Construction Equipment Access. Because native soils at or near the surfaced of the site are comprised mostly of soft silt, a temporary construction access roadway or work pad might he necessary to support heavy construction equipment, during wet conditions. The temporary roadway/ work pad should consist of a layer of quarry spalls placed over an approved geotextile fabric. The need for and thickness of the quarry spall layer will depend on whether and to what extent site grades will be raised. Temporary Cut Slopes: All temporary soil slopes associated with site cutting or excavations should be adequately inclined to prevent sloughing and collapse. Temporary cut slopes in site soils should be no steeper than 1 `fz H:1 V, and should conform to WIS14A regulations. Subarade Compaction: Exposed subgrades for footings and floors should be compacted to a firm; unyielding state before new concrete or fill soils are placed_ Any localized zones of looser granular soils observed within a subgrade should be compacted to a density commensurate with the surrounding soils_ in contrast, any organic, soft, or pumping soils observed within a subgrade should be overexcavated and replaced with a suitable structural fill material. Site Filling: Our conclusions regarding the reuse of on-site soils and our comments regarding wet -weather filling are presented subsequently. Regardless of soil type, all fill should be placed and compacted according to our recommendations presented in the Structural Fill section of this report. Specifically, building pad fill soil should be compacted to a uniform density of at feast 95 percent (based on ASTM:D-1557). On -Site Soils: We offer the following evaluation of these on-site soils in relation to potential use as structural fill: 7_ opsoil: Topsoil and other organic -rich soils are not suitable for reuse as structural fill. Reuse for topsoil should be limited to landscape areas or other nor -structural areas. Fill. The fill that overlies the site contains construction debris and some organic material, so is not reusable as structural fill. If areas of debris and organic -free fI I are encountered during the construction process and are thought to be reusable, we recommend that E3 RA evaluate their potential for reuse. Alluvial Silt and Silty Sand: The alluvial silt and silty sand that underlies the site is very moisture sensitive and will be impossible to reuse during most weather conditions. April 4, 2012 EARA, Inc. T120191 WSADA Renton Office Building Report Permanent Slopes: All permanent cut slopes and fill slopes should be adequately inclined to reduce long-term raveling, sloughing, and erosion. We generally recommend that no permanent slopes be steeper than 214:1 V_ For all soil types, the use of flatter slopes (such as 21H:IV) would further reduce long-term erosion and facilitate revegetation. Slope Protection: We recommend that a permanent berm, swale, or curb be constructed along the top edge of all permanent slopes to intercept surface flow. Also, a hardy vegetative groundcover should be established as soon as feasible, to further protect the slopes from runoff water erosion. Alternatively, permanent slopes could be armored with quarry spalls or a geosynthetic erosion mat. 4.2 Spread Footings In our opinion, conventional spread footings will provide adequate support for the proposed structure if the subgrades are properly prepared_ We offer the following comments and recommendations for purposes of preliminary footing design. Footing Depths and Widths: For frost and erosion protection, the base of all exterior footings should bear at least 24 inches below adjacent outside grades. To limit post -construction settlements, continuous (wall) and isolated (column) footings should be at least 18 and 24 inches wide, respectively. Bearing Subprades: Structural fill bearing pads, 4 feet thick and compacted to a density of at least 95 percent (based on ASTM:D-1557),should underlie spread footings on this site. if foundation construction occurs during wet conditions, it is possible that a geotextile fabric, placed between the bearing pad and in situ soils, will be necessary. Lateral Overexcavations: Because foundation stresses are transferred outward as well as downward into the bearing soils, all structural fill placed under footings should extend horizontally outward from the edge of each footing a distance equal to the depth of the over -excavation. For instance, an over -excavation of feet should extend 4 feet horizontally from both edges of the footing. Subgrade Observation: All footing subgrades should consist of either fun, unyielding, native soils or suitable structural fill materials. Footings should never be cast atop loose, soft, or frozen soil, slough, debris, existing uncontrolled fill, or surfaces covered by standing water. Bearing Pressures: In our opinion, for static loading, footings that bear on properly prepared, structural fill bearing pads 4 feet thick can be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of 2,000 ps£ Footing and Stemwall Backfill: To provide erosion protection and lateral load resistance, we recommend that all footing excavations be backfilled on both sides of the footings, retaining walls, and stemwalls after the concrete has cured. Lateral Resistance: Footings and stemwalls that have been properly backfilled as recommended will resist lateral movements by means of passive earth pressure and base friction. Footings backfilled with granular structural fill may be designed using a preliminary passive earth pressure of 270 pef (equivalent fluid weight) and abase friction coefficient of 0.35. April 4, 2012 ORA, Inc. T12019 / WSADA Renton Office Building Report 4.3 Slab -On -Grade Floors We offer the following comments and recommendations concerning slab -on -grade floors. Floor Subbase. A structural fill subbase at least 2 feet thick will be needed for floor slabs. All subbase fill should be compacted to a density of at least 95 percent (based on A STM:D- 155 7). . If floor construction occurs during wet conditions, it is likely that a geotextile fabric, placed between the floor subbase and native soils, will be necessary. Capillary Break and Vapor Barrier: To retard the upward wicking of moisture beneath the floor slab, we recommend that a capillary break be placed over the 2 foot thick subbase. This capillary break should consist of a 4 -inch -thick layer of pea gravel or other clean, uniform, well-rounded gravel, such as "Gravel Backfill for Drains" per WSDOT Standard Specification 9-03.12(4), but clean angular gravel can be used if it adequately prevents capillary wicking. In addition, a layer of plastic sheeting (such as Crosstuff, Visqueen, or Moistop) should be placed over the capillary break to serve as a vapor barrier. During subsequent casting of the concrete slab, the contractor should exercise care to avoid puncturing this vapor barrier. Subfloor Drains: We do not recommend the use of subfloor drains for the building Discharge Considerations: If possible, all perimeter drains should discharge to a municipal storm drain; or other suitable location by gravity flow. Check valves should be installed along any drainpipes that discharge to a sewer system, to prevent sewage backflow into the drain system. Runoff Water: Roof -runoff and surface -runoff water should not discharge into the perimeter drain system. Instead, these sources should discharge into separate tightline pipes and be routed away from the building to a storm drain or other appropriate location. Grading and Capping: Final site grades should slope downward away from the building so that runoff water will flow by gravity to suitable collection points, rather than ponding near the building. Ideally, the area surrounding the building would be capped with concrete, asphalt, or low -permeability (silty) soils to minimize or preclude surface -water infiltration. 4.4 Asphalt Pavement Since asphalt pavements will be used for the driveways and parking areas, we offer the following comments and recommendations for preliminary pavement design. Subgrrade Preparation: Structural fill subbases appear to be needed under pavement sections. We recommend a minimum subbase fill thickness of 2 feet. Because of the sensitivity of site soils to moisture and disturbance, and depending on site conditions at the time of subgrade preparation, a geotextile fabric, placed between fill and native soils, may be necessary to provide extra support for the pavement. All structural fill should be compacted according to our recommendations given in the Structural Fill section. Specifically, the upper 2 feet of soils underlying pavement section should be compacted to at least 95 percent (based on ASTM D-1557), and all soils below 2 feet should be compacted to at least 90 percent. All soil subgrades should be thoroughly compacted, then proof -rolled with a loaded dump truck or heavy compactor. Any localized zones of yielding subgrade disclosed during this proof -rolling operation should be over excavated to a minimum depth of 12 inches and replaced with a suitable structural fill material. April 4, 2012 E3RA, Inc. T12019 / WSADA Renton Office Building Report Pavcment Materials: For the base course, we recommend using imported crushed rock. For the subbase course, we recommend using imported, clean, well -graded sand and gravel such as recommended in Section 4.6. Conventional Asphalt Sections: A conventional pavement section typically comprises an asphalt concrete pavement over a crushed rock base course. On a preliminary basis, we recommend using the following conventional pavement sections: Minimum Thickness Pavement Course Parking Areas Driveway Areas Asphalt Concrete Pavement 2 inches 3 inches Crushed Rock Base 4 inches 6 inches Granular Fill Subbase 24 inches 24 inches Com action and Observation: All subbase and base course material should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the Modified Proctor maximum dry density (ASTM D-1557), and all asphalt concrete should be compacted to at least 92 percent of the Rice value (ASTM D-2041). We recommend that an E3RA representative be retained to observe the compaction of each course before any overlying layer is placed. For the subbase and pavement course, compaction is best observed by means of frequent density testing. For the base course, methodology observations and hand -probing are more appropriate than density testing. 4.5 Structural Fill The term "structural fill' refers to any material placed under foundations, retaining walls, slab -on -grade floors, sidewalks, pavements, and other structures. Our comments, conclusions, and recommendations concerning structural fill are presented in the following paragraphs. Materials. Typical structural fill materials include clean sand, gravel, pea gravel, washed rock, crushed rock, well -graded mixtures of sand and gravel (commonly called "gravel borrow" or "pit -run"), and miscellaneous mixtures of silt, sand, and gavel. Recycled asphalt, concrete, and glass, which are derived from pulverizing the parent materials, are also potentially useful as structural fill in certain applications. Soils used for structural fill should not contain any organic matter or debris or any individual particles greater than about 6 inches in diameter. Because pervious pavement may be planned, import fill should be granular and well draining. Fill Placement: Clean sand, gravel, crushed rock, soil mixtures, and recycled materials should be placed in horizontal lifts not exceeding S inches in loose thickness, and each lift should be thoroughly compacted with a mechanical compactor. Compaction Criteria: Using the Modified Proctor test (ASTM:D-1557) as a standard, we recommend that structural fill used for various onsite applications be compacted to the following minimum densities: 8 April 4, 2012 ORA, Inc. T12019 / WSADA Renton Office Building Report Fill Application Minimum Compaction Footing subgrade and bearing pad 95 percent Foundation backfill 90 percent Slab -on -grade floor subgrade and subbase 95 percent Asphalt pavement base 95 percent Asphalt pavement subgrade (upper 2 feet) 95 percent Asphalt pavement subgrade (below 2 feet) 90 percent Subgrade Observation and Compaction Testing: Regardless of material or location, all structural fill should be placed over firm, unyielding subgrades prepared in accordance with the Site Preparation section of this report. The condition of all subgrades should be observed by geotechnical personnel before filling or construction begins. Also, fill soil compaction should be verified by means of in-place density tests performed during fill placement so that adequacy of soil compaction efforts may be evaluated as earthwork progresses. Soil Moisture Considerations: The suitability of soils used for structural fill depends primarily on their grain -size distribution and moisture content when they are placed. As the "fines" content (that soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 200 Sieve) increases, soils become more sensitive to small changes in moisture content. Soils containing more than about 5 percent fines (by weight) cannot be consistently compacted to a firm, unyielding condition when the moisture content is more than 2 percentage points above or below optimum. For fill placement during wet weatber site work, we recommend using "clean" fill, which refers to soils that have a fines content of 5 percent or less (by weight) based on the soil fraction passing the U.S. No. 4 Sieve. 5.0 RECOMMENDED ADDITIONAL SERVICES Because the future performance and integrity of the structural elements will depend largely on proper site preparation, drainage, fill placement, and construction procedures, monitoring and testing by experienced geotechnical personnel should be considered an integral part of the construction process. Consequently, we recommend that E3RA be retained to provide the following post -report services: • Review all construction plans and specifications to verify that our design criteria presented in this report have been properly integrated into the design; • Prepare a letter summarizing all review comments (if required by the City of Renton); • Check all completed subgrades for footings and slab -on -grade floors before concrete is poured, in order to veri fy their bearing capacity; and • Prepare a post -construction letter summarizing all field observations, inspections, and test results (if required by the City of Renton). April 4, 2012 T120191 WSADA Renton Office Building Report E3RA Inc. 6.0 CLOSURE The conclusions and recommendations presented in this report are based, in part, on the exploration logs that we analyzed for this report; therefore, if variations in the subgrade conditions are observed at a later time, we may need to modify this report to reflect those changes. Also, because the future performance and integrity of the project elements depend largely on proper initial site preparation, drainage, and construction procedures, monitoring and testing by experienced geotechnical personnel should be considered an integral part of the construction process. E3RA is available to provide geotechnical monitoring of soils throughout construction. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service on this project. if you have any questions regarding this report or any aspects of the project, please feel free to contact our office. Sincerely, E3RA, Inc. as 7 ON Fred Emelt RennebzuM Fred E_ Rmnebaum, L. B.G_ Soujor Geologist James E. Brigham, P.E_ Principal Engineer FER:JEB:dj TACOIITacoma-serverlcV0B FILESI12000 JOB FILESVF 12019 WSADA - Kenton Office BldeFI2019 WSADA REntnn Office Building Report.doc Two copies submitted cc: Jeff Stroud Mountain Construction 7457 S Madison St Tacoma, WA 98409 Mark Bergman BCRA Architects 2106 Pacific Ave Tacoma, WA 98402 10 I ill mill iiiiiiis as Is iiiiiiin will :. ,• . , I '� wCJ- 16 re; +I 4r, M 1 ill .•1f 4. '.�"t •. i + i } 11 r;,- ' � if �•. � � �J ��,�.. - ` - - ` �•• �•+`- `-V ill`=,._.—.._ - r Ir i� I If � j`; :;J �_i_ � .ILS �f S L• 11 _ .. I ill mill iiiiiiis as Is iiiiiiin will m m cn C tq N O N 0 a 0 O w w LJ 0 E o U CD -i D m ❑ m w w n - Q 'o L'Vd d3dd1 $ O N lMM _ W.No3 I tlNMISvtl I� a U3 y Q; LY W O a" (17 U U -1 N a.4j W >- 04ry hk dOl e� H (fm F- Z LU uj C4 O 2 QQ U LLJ 2 W {r 2 Q 1 cor� x c�' co .2 �Qoo o p LO m y ervc OAA {+i} W d H N N N 1 1 5 (n N �O Q LLJ 0 ll 11 6 0� h l I � ��(nra Nf 13L Cf) W LL.i mm0to y O 07 LdQ< 1 aa�> "U) <II � zp::) wLLI❑ OFw L�� elf¢0wF- �a- ', 1 ❑ _ o rDz F--�aor z CL m m m 1 1 z 1 �N I 1 � r z V I e O q 4 l i 1 N c0CL u o ti 4 I F EL Ix CD � � 4 ` LS F 3.95.SC.O z C�OtlN ` � t z 99` _I o � F7a_i 0 r z 0 O KLEIN' FEL DER APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATION Soil samples were collected from the borings at 5 -foot intervals using Standard Penetration Test (SPT) sampling techniques (ASTM D1586). The SPT consisted of driving a 1 -318 -inch inside -diameter split spoon'sampier a distance of 18 inches into the bottom of the boring. The sampler was driven with a 140 -pound hammer falling 3C inches. The number of blows required to drive the sampler each of three 6 -inch increments was recorded on the boring logs. The number of blows required for the last 12 inches of penetration is called the standard penetration resistance (N -value). This value is an indicator of the relative density of granular soils or the consistency of fine- grained soils. Soil samples were collected from the test pits at changes in material type. Soil samples collected during the field exploration were classified in accordance with ASTM D2487. Ail samples were sealed in plastic bags to limit moisture loss, labeled, and returned to our iaboratory for further examination and testing. The boring and test pits were monitored by our geologist/engineer who examined and classified the materials encountered, obtained representative soil samples, and recorded pertinent information including soil sample depths, stratigraphy, soil engineering characteristics, and groundwater occurrence. Upon completion of drilling, the borings were backfilled with a combination of native soil and bentonite chips. Sol[ classifications were made in the field in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System, presented on Appendix A-1. Sample classifications and other related information were recorded on the boring and test pit logs, which are included in this appendix. The stratification lines, shown on the individual fogs, represent the approximate boundaries between soil types; actual transitions may be either more gradual or more severe. The conditions depicted are for the date and location indicated only, and it should not necessarily be expected that they are representative of conditions at other locations and times. 649231SEAMD59.doc Page 1 of 1 March 10, 2005 Copyright 20D5 Kleinfelder, Inc. 'Is GRAVEL - 159. 5, C% TO AVEL- GRAVEL- WELLY 5 }57 ,-GRAVEL TTY ORRE 3LAYEY CITY V TO ELLY TY WIC STICKY DUS OR l OR H )m TO AILS WRH APPENDIX A-1 5- 15.0 10- Is- 20 - 35.0 25 Efo c� w j 30 DATE DRILLED: 2.7-06 u LOGGED BY. F. Reinart REVIEWED BY: F. Reinart u.S,C.s. L I TESTING PROGRAM i N LABORATORY 2 FIELD `c I J "� Surface: Carestdut7 WELUPIEZO a H CONSTRUCTION O z D 0 w 5- 15.0 10- Is- 20 - 35.0 25 Efo c� w j 30 DATE DRILLED: 2.7-06 u LOGGED BY. F. Reinart REVIEWED BY: F. Reinart u.S,C.s. L I SOfL DESCRIPTION i N 2 { `c I J "� Surface: Carestdut7 j I ML 2 SI -I 2 { 3 f 1 2 NIL S SM 20 24 26 40 27 32 51-4 S1-5 SI -6 SILT WITH SAND (ML) gr y - brown with red -brown mottling, wet, medium stiff, low plasticity, some organics observed (rootlets and leaf fiber), 0.0 tsf unconfined compressive strength (pocket penetrometer)_ (YOUNGER ALLUVIUM) - grades lu wet, occasional lenses of sand with silt. — SILT (ML): gray with orange -brawn rnottling, wet, medium stiff to stiff, low to moderate plasticity, soma organics (rootlets), 0.75 to I.0 tsf unconfined compressive strength (pocket penetrometer). t ,()Di1NGER ALLUVIi.±lvJj� SILTY SAINT] {5M): gray, wet, very loose, fine- to mediurn-grained. YOIJNGER AGI UV IUM SILT WITH SAND (ML): gray, wet, very soft, low plasticity, 0.0 tsf unconfined ci)mpressive strength (pocket penetrometer)_ (YODNGER ALLUVIUM) SM III+SILTY SAND (SM): gray, wet, dense, SP fine-grained, trace organics (rootlets), trace I gravel. I I OLDER ALLUVLUM SANS WITH GRAVEL (SP): gray, wet, dense, medium -to coarse-grained. (OLDER ALLUVIUM) I grades to very dense, medivan-grained, small lenses ofsilry sand. SURFACE ELEVATION (feet): 23.0 DRILLING METHOD: ISA TOTAL DEPTH (feet}: 44.0 DRILLER: Subterranen Dr0ling DIAMETER OF BORING (in): ti inches CASING SIZE: NIA Proposed Auto Body Shop SW Grady Way &Raymond Ave a vv k4KLEINFELDER Renton, Washington GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS BORING LOG SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING I � C x a C a Appendix A -2a } PAGE 1 of 2 35 40 I 24 �, �� SI -7 30 37 31 ` sI -7 35 SOIL DESCRIPTION I - grades to medium- to coarse-grained, no silty sand observed. 1 26 1, I S1-9 24 Y 44 L 30 Baring was completed to a depth of 44 feet below ground surface. Groundwater was encountered at a depth oil feet below ground surface during drilling. Boring was backfilled with a mixture of cuttings and bentonite chips. SAMPLER 8 Cal. ( "OD) TYPE Split 0 SPT (2" OD) Split Spoon TESTING PROGRAM_ _ No Recovery pooh LABORATORY FIELD] 140 lbs (30" Drop) Proposed Auto Body Shop Appendix WF.LLlPIEGO We Ew+ C7� En iy E '!; u W CONSTRUCTION GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL EN'CINEERS =E: BORING LOG 6ti W J F v7— PAGE 2 of 2 JECT NUMBER- 64923 ❑ 3 �O < ° 'z o w 35 40 I 24 �, �� SI -7 30 37 31 ` sI -7 35 SOIL DESCRIPTION I - grades to medium- to coarse-grained, no silty sand observed. 1 26 1, I S1-9 24 Y 44 L 30 Baring was completed to a depth of 44 feet below ground surface. Groundwater was encountered at a depth oil feet below ground surface during drilling. Boring was backfilled with a mixture of cuttings and bentonite chips. SAMPLER 8 Cal. ( "OD) TYPE Split 0 SPT (2" OD) Split Spoon � Core , Shelby � Grab � Sample Tube No Recovery pooh "HAMMER WEIGHT 300 lbs (30" Drop) 140 lbs (30" Drop) Proposed Auto Body Shop Appendix SW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW k"KLEINFIELD-ER Renton, Washington A -2b GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL EN'CINEERS BORING LOG SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING B_1 PAGE 2 of 2 JECT NUMBER- 64923 5 10 15 20 25 '1 3o.a I 5c 30 DATE DRILLED. 2-7-06 LOGGED BY: F. Rein art REVIEWED BY: F. Reinart 32 S2 -I 34 !1 19 2 '1 S2-2 3 f I �.7 S2-3 1 l 2 � 52-5 2 6iI SS2-6 14 19 i SM I SOIL DESCRIPTION Nres tduff Topsail�6 inches tltic�,_ SILT Y SAND(5M)' light g. ay -brown with orange -brawn mottling, moist, dense, fine-grained, occasional construction debris abserved in cuttings. (FILL-) ------------ ML SILT WITii SAND (ML): light gray -brown with orange to red -orange mottling, moist to wet, medium stiff, low plasticity, thin (118 to 1/4 inch thick) seam of brown peat, trace organics observed (rootlets), 0.25 to 0.5 tsf unconfined conipressive strcnblh (pocket Penetrometer). (YOUNGER ALLUVIUM..) grades to wet. SM 1 i SILTY SANT) (SM): gray, wet, very i I loose, fine-grained, seams of gray sandy slit. (YOUNGER ALLUVIUM) SM i SILTY SAND (SM): gray, tinct, loose,-- fine-grained, trace organics (rootlets). (YOUN(iER ALLUVIUM) SP &AND WITH GRAVE%(5P):^gray to black, wet, medium dense, medium- to coarse-grained, trace silt. (OLDFR .ALLUVIUM) - grades to dense, coarse-grained, no observable silt in sampler. SURFACE ELEVATION (feet)- 21.0 DRILLING METHOD: HSA TOTAL DEPTH (feet): 44.0 DRILLER: Subterranen Drilling DIAMETER OF BORING (in): S inches CASING SIZE: N/A Proposed Auto Body Shop rSW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW ItK -LEINFELDER Renton, Washington GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING BORING LOG c a a a Appendix A -3a } $_ I PAGE 1 _of 2 ECTNUMBER: 64923 _ TESTING PROGRAM U.S.C.S. LABORATORY FIELD I WELL(PIEZO CONSTRUCTION p c e, q Oo � ,o w" S 5 10 15 20 25 '1 3o.a I 5c 30 DATE DRILLED. 2-7-06 LOGGED BY: F. Rein art REVIEWED BY: F. Reinart 32 S2 -I 34 !1 19 2 '1 S2-2 3 f I �.7 S2-3 1 l 2 � 52-5 2 6iI SS2-6 14 19 i SM I SOIL DESCRIPTION Nres tduff Topsail�6 inches tltic�,_ SILT Y SAND(5M)' light g. ay -brown with orange -brawn mottling, moist, dense, fine-grained, occasional construction debris abserved in cuttings. (FILL-) ------------ ML SILT WITii SAND (ML): light gray -brown with orange to red -orange mottling, moist to wet, medium stiff, low plasticity, thin (118 to 1/4 inch thick) seam of brown peat, trace organics observed (rootlets), 0.25 to 0.5 tsf unconfined conipressive strcnblh (pocket Penetrometer). (YOUNGER ALLUVIUM..) grades to wet. SM 1 i SILTY SANT) (SM): gray, wet, very i I loose, fine-grained, seams of gray sandy slit. (YOUNGER ALLUVIUM) SM i SILTY SAND (SM): gray, tinct, loose,-- fine-grained, trace organics (rootlets). (YOUN(iER ALLUVIUM) SP &AND WITH GRAVE%(5P):^gray to black, wet, medium dense, medium- to coarse-grained, trace silt. (OLDFR .ALLUVIUM) - grades to dense, coarse-grained, no observable silt in sampler. SURFACE ELEVATION (feet)- 21.0 DRILLING METHOD: HSA TOTAL DEPTH (feet): 44.0 DRILLER: Subterranen Drilling DIAMETER OF BORING (in): S inches CASING SIZE: N/A Proposed Auto Body Shop rSW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW ItK -LEINFELDER Renton, Washington GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING BORING LOG c a a a Appendix A -3a } $_ I PAGE 1 _of 2 ECTNUMBER: 64923 _ 35 40 144 I J 24.0 16 S2.7 29 29 is ' S2 -S 36•. 24 14 S2-9 37 SOIL DESCRIPTION - grades to very dense. Boring was completed to a depth of 44 teet below ground surface. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 4 feet below ground surface during drilling. Boring was hackfillcd with a mixture of cuffings and bentonite chips. * SAMPLERp Cal. (3"OD) SPT?" OD) n Core 1 Shelby Grab No TYPE H Split Spoon 9 Split poon !!!! Sample Tube � Recovery "YAMMER WEIGHT 300 lbs 140 lbs 00 Drop) (30" Drop) _ Proposed Auto Body Shop Appendix SW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW Y k4KLEINFELDER Renton, Washington A -3b r GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS BORING LOG SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING PAGl; 2 of 2 3 PROJECT NUMBER: 64923 TESTING PROGRAM _ U.S.C_S_ LABORATORY_I rtELD w WGLLIPTEZD y s]o - U5 CONSTRUCTION � — �F. � � zw 'ate U j O 0. 35 40 144 I J 24.0 16 S2.7 29 29 is ' S2 -S 36•. 24 14 S2-9 37 SOIL DESCRIPTION - grades to very dense. Boring was completed to a depth of 44 teet below ground surface. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 4 feet below ground surface during drilling. Boring was hackfillcd with a mixture of cuffings and bentonite chips. * SAMPLERp Cal. (3"OD) SPT?" OD) n Core 1 Shelby Grab No TYPE H Split Spoon 9 Split poon !!!! Sample Tube � Recovery "YAMMER WEIGHT 300 lbs 140 lbs 00 Drop) (30" Drop) _ Proposed Auto Body Shop Appendix SW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW Y k4KLEINFELDER Renton, Washington A -3b r GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS BORING LOG SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING PAGl; 2 of 2 3 PROJECT NUMBER: 64923 0 r SOIL DESCRIPTION _i__... i i �i QSurface: forest duff µl Tupsoil (5 inches thick). SM SII 'T Y SAND WITH GRUIVEL (SM): gray-bro'-- i wet, medium detsse, fine-grained, occas.onai eobhlc to $ inches in longest dimension. (F1LL) i- grades to moist. �ML T 5 II 4 t0 SM 13 i I SILT WITH SAND (ML)i gray with red-brown— mottling, moist, medium stiff, low plasticity, trace organics observed (rootlets). (YOUNGER ALLUVIUM) - grades to wet. - grades to gray- S11,TY SAND (SM): gray. we,., loose, 5f)r-grained (YOUNGER ALLUVTT.3M) Test pit was completed to a depth of 13 feet below ground surface- Groundwater was encountered a1 a depth of6 feet below ground surface during excavations. Test pit was back Mird with excavated soil and tamped `vith backhoe sbcvel. b DATE EXCAVATED: 1111/2006 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: 23 a REWEWED BY:r. Reina t 5+ SAMPLE `TYPE: Bulk T Gr-Gb I� Sherby rubs W x Ali 0 Proposed Auto Body Shop Appendix i KT EINFELDER SW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW o GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMYNTAL ENGINEERS �g��4n Washington A - 4 = SOTLS AND MATERIALS TESTING x r PROJECT NO. 64P23 TEST PIT LOG TF -1 STPI-t STPI-2 20 i LOGGED DY: F. Reinart EQUIPMENT: Backhoe 'rTESTS: h1=Moisf,,!-e nfenti SJ, D -Dry Drirvir (pcf), Tv=To+vale, Pp=Pvcke� Peyer: ometer, G—Gr a n r ,5liC, r =ol_P'—' oVn 2M.14— A=4tterbervLimits w� H ¢z o OTHER TESTS* I STPI-t STPI-2 20 i LOGGED DY: F. Reinart EQUIPMENT: Backhoe 'rTESTS: h1=Moisf,,!-e nfenti SJ, D -Dry Drirvir (pcf), Tv=To+vale, Pp=Pvcke� Peyer: ometer, G—Gr a n r ,5liC, r =ol_P'—' oVn 2M.14— A=4tterbervLimits - SOIL DESCRIPTION F+ q uSurface: forest duff 07 0Topsoil 16 inches thick). ----- - - - - -- SM SILT Y SAND WITH GRAVEL (SM)`T gray -brown, wet, medium dense, fine-grained, occasional cobbles to 8 inches in longest dimension. 11 IJ - grades to mo'sst. (FILL) SILT WITH SAND (ML)gray with red -brown mottling, moist, medium stiff, low plasticity, trace organics observed (rootlets). (YOUNGEK ALLUVIUM) - slight groundwater seepage observed during excavation. - graaes IO wet, - grades to gray- _ --____ _.__-___-_.__.----y SILTY SAND (SI,,!): gray, wet, loose, fine-grained. (YOUNGER ALLUVIUM) t 5 Test -Olt was completed to a depth of 15 feat below ground surface. Groutidwatet was eucoumered at a depth of 7 feel below ground surface during excavation_ Tesi pit was backfilled with excavated soil and tamped with backhoe shovel. STP2-1 STP2-2 STP2-3 DATE EXCAVATED' 1/1 1/2006 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: 23 LOGGED BY: F. Reinart REVIEWED BY.F. Reinart EQUIPMFN'f: Backhoe +SAMPLE TYPE- j , I Eulk Grab Shelby Tube *TEST'S:l,-MoisiurvConrent(%). D-DryDersiry(pcj;, Tv=Torvune, 1� PpmFos:kci Peneu-amerer, G=Grain Size, e77=dA Ar, NMR;"'. A=Rrenrhnre 1 i -i" IM l KLEINFELDER GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL. ENGINEERS SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING PROJECT NO. 64923 Proposed Auto Body Shap Appendix SW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW Renton, Washington A - 5 TEST PIT LOG TP -2 I � R z OTITER 'TESTS" - STP2-1 STP2-2 STP2-3 DATE EXCAVATED' 1/1 1/2006 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: 23 LOGGED BY: F. Reinart REVIEWED BY.F. Reinart EQUIPMFN'f: Backhoe +SAMPLE TYPE- j , I Eulk Grab Shelby Tube *TEST'S:l,-MoisiurvConrent(%). D-DryDersiry(pcj;, Tv=Torvune, 1� PpmFos:kci Peneu-amerer, G=Grain Size, e77=dA Ar, NMR;"'. A=Rrenrhnre 1 i -i" IM l KLEINFELDER GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL. ENGINEERS SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING PROJECT NO. 64923 Proposed Auto Body Shap Appendix SW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW Renton, Washington A - 5 TEST PIT LOG TP -2 I 5 y SOYL DESCRIPTION Surface: forestdufr t ppsoi f �4 inches thick _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — SILT Y SAID WITFI ORAVEL (SM): light -brown, wet, medium dense, fine-grained, with organics (rootlets and wood fragments). _ __ __TF _)__--------J SILT WITH SAND (Mi,): light gray -brown, moist with occasional lenses of %ve( siity sand obscrvcd in cuttings, medium stiff, tow plasticity, trace gravel, trace organics observed (rootlets). (YOUNGER ALLUVIUM) - grades to wet, some sidewall sloughing observed during excavation. - grades to gray with red -brown motlling. 1 I ! grades to gray. 11 i I 10 14 Test pit was completed to a depth of 14 feet below ground surface. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 6.5 feet below ground surface during excavation. Test pit was backlit#ed with excavated soil and ramped with backhoe sibovel, STP3-1 STP3-2 31 STP3-3 i ! DATC EXCAVATED: UI 112406 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: 23 LCGGFD BY: F. Rcirart REVIEWED BYT. Reinart EQUIPMENT: 83ckhoc SAMPLE TYPE: X Bulk I Grah U Shelby TuBp AM f KIIEZNFELDER GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING PROJECT NO. 64923 OTHER TESTS" *TESTS: M=Moisture Correnf(%), O—Dry DehsiP,,(pefi, T —Torvane, Pp=Pother Penerromefer, G— Gram Size, G2=V0 PassinP No. 200 Siew, A=Atrerber Lomas Proposed Auto Body Shop Appendix SW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW Renton, Washington A - 6 TEST PIT LOG TP -3 vz L t ppsoi f �4 inches thick _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ — SILT Y SAID WITFI ORAVEL (SM): light -brown, wet, medium dense, fine-grained, with organics (rootlets and wood fragments). _ __ __TF _)__--------J SILT WITH SAND (Mi,): light gray -brown, moist with occasional lenses of %ve( siity sand obscrvcd in cuttings, medium stiff, tow plasticity, trace gravel, trace organics observed (rootlets). (YOUNGER ALLUVIUM) - grades to wet, some sidewall sloughing observed during excavation. - grades to gray with red -brown motlling. 1 I ! grades to gray. 11 i I 10 14 Test pit was completed to a depth of 14 feet below ground surface. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 6.5 feet below ground surface during excavation. Test pit was backlit#ed with excavated soil and ramped with backhoe sibovel, STP3-1 STP3-2 31 STP3-3 i ! DATC EXCAVATED: UI 112406 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: 23 LCGGFD BY: F. Rcirart REVIEWED BYT. Reinart EQUIPMENT: 83ckhoc SAMPLE TYPE: X Bulk I Grah U Shelby TuBp AM f KIIEZNFELDER GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING PROJECT NO. 64923 OTHER TESTS" *TESTS: M=Moisture Correnf(%), O—Dry DehsiP,,(pefi, T —Torvane, Pp=Pother Penerromefer, G— Gram Size, G2=V0 PassinP No. 200 Siew, A=Atrerber Lomas Proposed Auto Body Shop Appendix SW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW Renton, Washington A - 6 TEST PIT LOG TP -3 tv e GU ZO Qa a� oN M� Oq W� v,• •"j 2 U �D y tiNZ 10- 13 SOIL DEBCRYY7'TC1N a, Surface: forest duff i I r�ir tnZ To2soii 4 inches thick . Y i --———)————————— — — — —- L H I Z U SILT WITH SAND (ML): gray -brown. wet, medium stiff, low plasticity, organics observed (rootlets and leaf i fragments), some sidewall sloughing during excavation. (YOUNGER ALLUVIUM) STP4-1 f I 19 - grades to gray with red -brown mottling, trace organics (rootlets), - grades tc wet. - grades to gray. ,I Tesi pit was completed to a depth of 13 feet below ground s:uface, Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 6.5 feet below ground surface during excavation. Test pit was backfilled with excavated soil and tamped with backhoe shovel - DATE EXCAVATED: 1/1:/2066 APPROXIMATE ELEVATION: 22 C REVIEWED $Y:F. Reinart +SAMPLE TYPY: Buik�[ Graba Shelby Tube cc Vv l 0 STP4-2 STP4-3 LOGGED BY: F. Reinart EQUIPMENT: Backhoe OTHER TESTS* *TESTS: M=Moisture Conrenr(i ), D -Dry Densi,y(pgP, Tv=Torvane, Pp=Pocket Penelromerer, G=Grain Size, G2= a PassimP Nr) 200 Sieve A=Aimrbere Limris 1 Proposed Auto Body Shop I Appendix IU KLEINFELDER SW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW GEOTECHNICAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS Renton Washington A-7 a a4 SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING f r - W PROJECT NO. r`i4923 TEST PIT LOG TP -4 . +t -grades to gray with red-broxr mottling, trace organics (rootlets). - grades to wet. grades to gray. STPS-1 STPS-2 1 25 Test pit was terminated at a depth of I I feet �Clow ground surfact because of excessive sloughing of the test pit sidcwAls. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 6 feet below ground surface during excavation. Test pit was backfilled with excavated soil and lumped with backhoe shovel. DATE EXCAVATED: 111 112006 APPROXIMATE EL REVIEWED BYT. Reinart y w +SAMPLE TYPE:�jy Bulk ;Ti Grab Shelby o �V N k"KLEINFELDER GEOTECHNI CAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS q SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING Y PROTECT NO. 64923 EVATI Tube OTHER TESTS* ON: 23 LOGGED BY: F. Reinar. EQUIPMENT: Backhoe *TESTS: M—kfoisiureConrenl(Olo), D=DryDensily(pgq, Tv=Torvare, Pp=PocketPene�rvmeler, G=Grain Size: G2=5e'iarshr Ir' o.200Irene.A=,4lrerber Proposed Auto Body Shop Appendix SW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW Renton, Washington A - 8 TEST PIT LOG TP -5 T SOIL DESCRIPTION 4 o. Surface: {'crest duff a z Uy Toflsoil 4 inches thick . ML i � � SILT WiTN SAND (ML): gray -brown, wet, medium J stiff, low plasticity, organics observed (rootless and Ieaf Ragmon(s), sidewall sloughing during excavation. (YOUNGER ALI-UVIUM) -grades to gray with red-broxr mottling, trace organics (rootlets). - grades to wet. grades to gray. STPS-1 STPS-2 1 25 Test pit was terminated at a depth of I I feet �Clow ground surfact because of excessive sloughing of the test pit sidcwAls. Groundwater was encountered at a depth of 6 feet below ground surface during excavation. Test pit was backfilled with excavated soil and lumped with backhoe shovel. DATE EXCAVATED: 111 112006 APPROXIMATE EL REVIEWED BYT. Reinart y w +SAMPLE TYPE:�jy Bulk ;Ti Grab Shelby o �V N k"KLEINFELDER GEOTECHNI CAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS q SOILS AND MATERIALS TESTING Y PROTECT NO. 64923 EVATI Tube OTHER TESTS* ON: 23 LOGGED BY: F. Reinar. EQUIPMENT: Backhoe *TESTS: M—kfoisiureConrenl(Olo), D=DryDensily(pgq, Tv=Torvare, Pp=PocketPene�rvmeler, G=Grain Size: G2=5e'iarshr Ir' o.200Irene.A=,4lrerber Proposed Auto Body Shop Appendix SW Grady Way & Raymond Ave SW Renton, Washington A - 8 TEST PIT LOG TP -5 Geotechnical Engineering Water Resources Environmental Assessments and Remediation Sustainable Development Services Geologic Assessments Associated Earth Scienc�nc. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment WSADA Renton, Washington Prepared for Washington State Auto Dealers Association Project No. KV070850A January 29, 2008 AsF ,gated Earth Sciences, I--. LAI LE ISJ Cefekrab j aer25 years o fS'emee January 29, 2008 Project No. KV070850A Washington State Auto Dealers Association 16000 Christensen Road, # 150 Tukwila, Washington 98118 Attention: Ms. Vicki Giles Fabre Subject. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment WSADA 621 Grady Way SW Renton, Washington Dear Ms. Fabre: This letter accompanies a report by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) documenting the results of a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) performed on the above -referenced property. The findings and conclusions in this report are based on our interpretation of information currently available, and are subject to the limitations in the attached report. We appreciate the opportunity to work with you on this project. If you have any questions regarding the scope of our study or our conclusions, please do not hesitate to contact us at (425) 827-7701. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland, Washington :od Kindred, P. E. or Engineer ysxns KV070650A2 PrnjectsU0070MWVIW P Kirkland e Everett Tacoma 425-827-7701 425-259-0522 253-722-2992 www.aesgeo.com PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT WSADA Renton, Washington Prepared for: Washington State Auto Dealers Association 16000 Christensen Road, #150 Tukwila, Washington 98118 Prepared by: Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. 911 5"' Avenue, Suite 100 Kirkland, Washington 98033 425-827-7701 Fax: 425-827-5424 January 29, 2008 Project No. KV070850A WSADA Phase wironmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Table of Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LISTOF FIGURES........................................................................................... ii EXECUTIVESUMMARY................................................................................. iv 1.0 INTRODUCTION....................................................................................... 1 1.1 Purpose and Scope of Services.................................................................. 1 1.2 Scope of Services ...................................... •......... _................................. 1 1.3 Significant Assumptions.......................................................................... 2 1.4 Limitations and Exceptions...................................................................... 2 1.5 Special Terms and Conditions................................................................... 2 1.6 User Reliance ................................. ...................................................... 2 2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION.. . ............................... ............................................... . 3 2.1 Location and Legal Description................................................................ . 3 2.2 Site and Vicinity General Characteristics......................................................3 2.2. I Regional Topography and Geologic Setting .......................................... 3 2.2.2 Site Dimensions and Topography...................................................... 3 2.3 Current Use of the Property..................................................................... 3 2.4 Description of Structures, Roads, and Other Improvements ............................... 4 2.5 Current Uses of the Adjoining Properties.....................................................4 3.0 USER -PROVIDED INFORMATION...............................................................4 3.1 Title Records ............................ ........................................................... 4 3.2 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations ............................... . ...... 4 3.3 Specialized Knowledge...........................................................................5 3.4 Commonly Known or Reasonably Ascertainable Information ............................. 5 3.5 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues ............................................... 5 3.6 Owner, Property Manager, and Occupant Information ..................................... 6 3.7 Reason for Performing Phase I ESA...........................................................6 3.8 Other.. . ......................................................................... 6 4.0 RECORDS REVIEW...................................................................................6 4.1 Standard and Additional Environmental Record Sources ................................... 6 4.1.1 Orphan Sites Summary...................................................................6 4.1.2 Listed and Orphan Sites Within the Search Radii ................................... 7 4.2 Physical Setting Sources........................................................................ 14 4.3 Historical Use Information on the Property and Adjoining Properties ................. 14 4.3.1 Aerial Photographs ............................... ....................................... 14 4.3.2 King County Assessor Records ............................................ . .......... 16 4.3.3 Sanborn Map and City Directory Review ........................................... 17 4.3.4 Historical Topographic Map Review ................................................ 17 January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAMS - KV070850,1? - Project o200708501KViWP Page i WSADA Phase . EnVi1.017117e1rtal Site Assessment Renton, Washington Table a Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) Page 5.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE— ....................................................................... 18 5.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions .................................. . .................... 18 5.2 General Site Setting............................................................................. 18 5.2.1 Ground Water Conditions.............................................................. 18 5.2.2 Surface Water Conditions.............................................................. 18 5.3 Exterior Observations........................................................................... 19 5.4 Interior Observations............................................................................ 20 6.0 INTERVIEWS ............................................... ............................... 20 6.1 Interview With Owner(s)... ..................................... ....................... ...... 20 6.2 Interview Property Manager(s)................................................................ 21 7.0 FINDINGS.............................................................................................. 21 8.0 DATA GAPS........................................................................................... 22 9.0 CONCLUSIONS....................................................................................... 22 10.0 DEVIATIONS........................................................................................ 22 11.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES........................................................................ 22 12.0 QUALIFICATIONS................................................................................. 23 13.0 CLOSURE.............................................................................................23 14.0 REFERENCES ................................................... .................................... 24 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Listed and Orphan Sites Within the Search Radii with Documented or Likely Chemical Releases.................................................................. 8 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Vicinity Map Figure 2. Site Plan January 24, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAHlrs — KV070850A3 — Projecrs1300708501KViWP Page ii WSADA Phase virontnental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Table o Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A. King County Assessor Records Appendix B. User -Provided Questionnaire Appendix C. Title Report, Chain -of -Title, Purchase Agreement Appendix D. Environmental Data Resources, Inc. Environmental Lien Search Appendix E. Environmental Data Resources, Inc. Radius Map With GeoChece Appendix F. Washington State Department of Ecology Site Records Appendix G. Environmental Data Resources, Inc. Historical Topographic Map Report Appendix H. Historical Aerial Photographs Appendix I. Environmental Data Resources, Inc. City Directory Abstract Appendix J. Site Photographs Appendix K. Resumes of Environmental Professionals January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAHM - KV070850A2 - Projects1200708501KVIWP Page iii WSADA Phas,, . invironinental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Executive Sa� EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the WSADA property located at 621 Grady Way SW in Renton, Washington. Historical records and historical aerial photographs indicate that the 0.75 -acre, vacant site has not been previously developed. AESI observed one plastic 5 -gallon bucket approximately one-quarter full with what appeared to be heavy grease and motor oil along the southern edge of the subject property. The container was partially buried and covered by dead branches and leaf debris. The container was covered by a plastic lid. No signs of holes or cracks were observed in the visible portions of the plastic bucket. The bucket was labeled heavy grease. The container was not excavated from its location at the time of this assessment. No obvious staining was observed in the leaf debris around the container. We recommend that the bucket containing petroleum products is removed from the property and disposed prior to purchase. Any stained surface soil beneath the container should be excavated and disposed of properly. No other obvious visual evidence of hazardous materials contamination was discovered in surficial areas of the site examined during our site reconnaissance. There was no information from environmental records, historical information, or interviews that identified the actual or potential release of hazardous materials on the property. Several off-site properties of potential environmental significance within the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) -specified search radii were identified in the Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) database report. One of these sites, Cummins Northwest, Inc., is located adjacent to the southwest of the subject property. Files reviewed at the Washington State Department of Ecology indicate that soil and ground water contamination are present at the site due to a leaking oil/water separator and an aboveground storage tank (AST). Ground water monitoring conducted at the site indicates that ground water below the site flows northeast toward the subject property. Follow up ground water sampling indicated that concentrations were below MTCA cleanup levels and Ecology issued a NFA for the site in 2003. In our opinion, this site does not appear to pose an environmental risk to the subject property. For a variety of reasons (e.g., no documented release; downgradient, crossgradient, or too far from the subject property), all other off-site properties, in our opinion, are unlikely to pose an environmental risk to the subject property. In our opinion, based on the information gathered during this Phase I ESA, this assessment has revealed no recognized environmental conditions in connection with the property. January 24, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. C,lHlrs -- KV070850,12 - Projects M0708501KVI WP Page iv WSADA Phase vironmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose and Scope of Services The purpose of this Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) is to identify, to the extent practicable using standard methods, the presence, or likely presence, of hazardous substances or petroleum products under conditions that indicate an existing release, a past release, or a material threat of a release into structures on the property or into the ground, ground water, or surface water of the property. 1.2 Scope of Services This Phase I ESA was performed by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM):E-1527-05, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. The scope of this Phase I ESA included the following specific tasks: • Reviewing regulatory agency databases for both the site and for surrounding properties. Databases searched included, but were not limited to, the ASTM standard specified lists. If deemed necessary, based on information obtained from regulatory agency databases, reviewing relevant records at the Washington State Department of Ecology (Ecology). a Researching past site use through a review of historical records, including aerial photographs, local assessor records, and historical topographic maps. • Reviewing published maps for topographic and geologic information. Conducting a reconnaissance to observe existing site conditions and activities at neighboring parcels. • Interviewing property owners, property managers, and occupants associated with the subject property. IP Preparing this report summarizing the results of data research, site observations, interviews, and providing our interpretation regarding the potential for adverse environmental conditions or environmental risks. No surface or subsurface samples of environmental media were collected or analyzed at the subject property as part of this site assessment. January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAH/ls - KV070850A2 - Projects l_'00708SOIKVIWP Page 1 WSADA Plias„ ..:nvirwunental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Residispf Assessment 1.3 Significant Assumptions Phase I ESAs cannot eliminate all uncertainty regarding the potential for recognized environmental conditions. This assessment was performed in general accordance with ASTM:E-1527-05, Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: .Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process. Consistent with ASTM -E-1527-05, this Phase I ESA is intended to reduce, but not eliminate, uncertainty regarding the potential for recognized environmental conditions. The level of effort was not exhaustive, but was designed to balance reduction of uncertainty regarding environmental conditions with time and costs. Note that conducting this Phase I ESA does not eliminate the potential for future identification of recognized environmental conditions. Judgments leading to the enclosed general conclusions are based on available information, including information provided by the client, interviews with knowledgeable personnel, and site conditions as they existed at the time of our assessment. While striving to present the most accurate scenario of the condition of the property, this assessment may reflect inaccurate or incomplete information provided by others. Other information on the subject property or adjacent surrounding properties may exist, and more extensive studies may reduce the uncertainties associated with this assessment. The assessment is subjective, qualitative, and based mainly on the professional judgment and experience of the AESI project team after review and consideration of available information. 1.4 Limitations and Exceptions In accordance with ASTM:E-1527-05, this Phase I ESA does not address a number of issues considered outside of the scope of the Phase I ESA process, including (but not limited to): asbestos -containing building materials, radon gas, lead-based paint, lead in drinking water, wetlands, regulatory compliance, cultural and historic resources, industrial hygiene, health and safety, ecological resources, endangered species, indoor air quality, biological agents, and mold. 1.5 Special Terms and Conditions There were no special terms or conditions attached to this Phase I ESA. 1.6 User Reliance This report is certified to, can be relied upon by, and has been prepared for the exclusive use of the following entities: • Washington State Auto Dealers Association • The Robinson Company January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAHIts - KV070850A2 - Prajeas1200708501KOWP Page 2 WSADA Phase ivironmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment Any of the named entities above can convey this report to an affiliate, related entity, subsidiary, lender, title insurer, regulatory/city agency or current property owner(s) and their agents, but further dissemination requires prior written approval from AESL 2.4 SITE DESCRIPTION 2.1 Location and Legal Description As shown on Figure 1, the subject property is located in Renton, King County, Washington west of Seneca Avenue SW, south of Grady Way SW, and east of Raymond Avenue SW. The property is located in Section 19, Township 23 North, Range 5 East. For a complete legal description of the subject property, refer to the King County assessor records located in Appendix A or the title records in Appendix C . Parcels included in this assessment are listed below by King County parcel identification number: • 3340404730 The total acreage is approximately 0.75 acres. 2.2 Site and. Vicinity General Characteristics 2.2.1 Regional Topography and Geologic Setting The WSADA site is located within the glacial terrain of the Puget Sound Lowlands. Surficial geology near the subject property is mapped as Quaternary Alluvium consisting of moderately sorted deposits of cobble, gravel, pebbly sand, and sandy silt. A belt of land adjacent to the north of the subject property is mapped as artificial fill, showing the previous location of the Northern Pacific Railroad bed (Pacific Northwest Center for Geologic Mapping Studies [P. N. C. G. M.S.], 2006). 2.2.2 Site Dimensions and Topography As shown on Figure 2, the subject property is rectangular shaped and approximately 340 feet by 100 feet. The topography of the site is generally flat. The elevation of the property is approximately 20 feet above mean sea level (amsl). 2.3 Current Use of the Property The subject property is currently a vacant lot covered by trees and brush. January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC CA[Yes - KW70850A2 - ProjectsC0070850XIOW' Page 3 WSADA Phas- - _nvironnaental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment 2.4 Description of Structures, Roads, and Other Improvements No structures or evidence of previous structures are found on the property. A sidewalk borders the property on the north side, along Grady Way SW. A portion of the western edge of the subject property is clear of vegetation and appears to be used as a turnout off of Raymond Avenue SW. 2.5 Current Uses of the Adjoining Properties The property adjacent to the east of the subject property is developed as a multi -story office building. The property adjacent to the southeast is developed as a parking lot for the office building. The property adjacent to the south is undeveloped and covered with fill material. The property adjacent to the southwest is developed as a small warehouse with an office/showroom. The property to the west is developed as a maintenance garage for large vehicles. Grady Way SW is located adjacent to the north of the subject property 3.0 USER -PROVIDED INFORMATION A representative of the user of this report, Mr. Kirk Robinson, completed a user questionnaire that is attached in Appendix B. Information in this questionnaire is summarized below. 3.1 Title Records AESI was provided a copy of the title report for use in this assessment. Selected portions of these title reports are provided in Appendix C. No relevant environmental information was found in the title report. A chain -of -title was conducted through Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). A copy of the chain -of -title is also available in Appendix C. The current owners of the subject property, Lanphere Enterprises of Washington, acquired the property from the Penta Group, LLC in 1998. The Penta Group, LLC acquired the property from the estate of Ms. Jessie Macris in 1983. The property was owned by Ms. Jessie Macris from at least 1980 to 1983. No transactions were identified before 1980. 3.2 Environmental Liens or Activity and Use Limitations The user is not aware of any environmental cleanup liens against the property that are filed or recorded under federal, tribal, state or local law. The user is not aware of any Activity and Use Limitations (AULs), such as engineering controls, land use restrictions, or institutional controls that are in place at the site and/or have been filed or recorded in a registry under federal, tribal, state or local law. January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CA Hits - KV070850A3 - Projects 1200708501KVIWP Page 4 WSADA Phan ivirownental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment A search for environmental liens was conducted through EDR. Copies of these reports are available in Appendix D. No environmental liens or AULs were identified in the lien search. 3.3 Specialized Knowledge The user does not have any specialized knowledge or experience related to the property or nearby properties that would facilitate the identification of environmental hazards on the subject property. 3.4 Commonly Known or Reasonably Ascertainable Information • The user does not know the past uses of the subject property. • The user does not know of any specific chemicals, including petroleum, which are present or were once present at the property. • The user does not know of any spills or other chemical releases that have taken place at the property. + The user does not know of any environmental studies and/or cleanups that have taken place at the property. • The user does not know of any underground storage tanks (USTs) that are, or once were, on the property. + The user is not aware of any previous Phase I ESA conducted for the subject property. + The user is not aware of any automotive/industrial batteries, pesticides, paints, or other chemicals in individual containers are currently located on the subject property. • The user is not aware of any industrial drums (55 gallon) on the property. • The user is unaware of any soil that has been brought onto the property in large quantities. The user is aware that the lot adjacent to the south has been filled with stockpiled soil. • The user has not observed any dumping or staining of the soil on the property. 3.5 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues It is the user's opinion that the purchase price being paid for this property reasonably reflects the fair market value of the property. During the assessment, AESI did not become aware of any valuation reductions associated with environmental issues. January 29, 2008 _ ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAH11s - KY070850A3 - Projecis1200708501KVIWP Page 5 WSADA Plias ;nvirownental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment 3.6 Owner, Property Manager, and Occupant Information The subject property is owned by Lanphere Enterprises, Inc. and is unoccupied. 3.7 Reason for Performing Phase I ESA The WSADA has contracted AESI to conduct a Phase I ESA as part of the due diligence process for purchase of the subject property. The purpose of the Phase I ESA is to qualify for Landowner Liability Protections under CERCLA and identify any environmental conditions that could materially impact the operation of the business. 3.8 Other No other relevant user information was provided. 4.0 RECORDS REVIEW This section provides the results of our review of available records for the subject property. 4.1 Standard and Additional Environmental Record Sources The purpose of the environmental record review was to obtain and review records that would help evaluate recognized environmental conditions in connection with the subject property and potential off-site contamination sources. A detailed review of pertinent regulatory agency database records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR, 2007) according to ASTM:E-1527-05 for facilities that currently or previously have occupied the subject site and properties within the specified ASTM search radii from the subject site. In addition to the standard ASTM:E-1527-05 environmental records, a number of additional records sources were searched. A list of the reviewed databases, the search radii, number of sites, and complete results of the records search are provided in Appendix D. A total of 52 database listings (representing 52 sites) were identified for surrounding properties within the specified search radii. The subject property was not listed in any database. The listed sites are evaluated in Section 4.1.2. 4.1.1 Orphan Sites Summary The EDR report included 20 listings with incomplete address information that may or may not be within the prescribed ASTM distance from the subject property. AESI conducted further research to locate each site and assess its likelihood to impact to the subject property. Most of January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. C tWrs - KV07085OA2 - Projea lX00708501KVIWP Page 6 WSADA Phase vironmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results Lf Assessment the sites were outside the search radii for the database(s) where they were listed. Sites that were within the search radii are listed below: • Black River Corp Park Tract A • Family Fun Center • Renton Sand and Gravel Riverview • Chevron #9 These sites are addressed in Section 4.1.2. 4.1.2 Listed and Orphan Sites Within the Search Radii Each listed and orphan site within the search radii was evaluated for its potential to impact the subject property. The primary criteria for assessing the potential impact of surrounding sites include: * Whether or not a release has been reported, whether or not ground water has been impacted by the release, and the status of remediation. • Direction of ground water flow: Based on information from nearby ground water monitoring sites, the regional water table aquifer is believed to flow north to northeast. • Distance from the subject property. Sites that are located far from the subject property are considered to pose insignificant environmental risk unless a large release of contaminants to ground water has been documented. The Black River Corp Park Tract A, Family Fun Center, and Renton Sand and Gravel Riverview were determined to be downgradient from the subject property and too far away to have any impact on the subject property. All of the listed and orphan sites within the search radii that may pose a hazard to the subject property based on the above criteria are summarized in the following table: January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CA H11 - KV070850.12 - Proje[1s1200708501KV1WP page 7 WSADA Phase. _nvironmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment Table 1 Listed and Orphan Sites Within the Search Radii with Documented or Likely Chemical Releases Site Lists Distance from Site (ft) Map ID Potential Impact on Subject Property Cummins Northwest, Inc. CSCSL NFA, VCP 213 W 2 Unlikely Ryerson Store ICR 589 NE A Unlikely J.T. Ryerson & Son, Inc. LUST 589 NE A Unlikely Alliant Foodservice, Inc. ICR 1067 WNW F Unlikely Group Health Distribution & Support Services CSCSL, LUST, VCP 1146S G Unlikely Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound CSCSL, LUST, VCP 1146S G Unlikely K&N Meats LUST 1646 NNE 33 Unlikely Rainer Disposal Co. Inc. LUST, ICR 1699 SE H Unlikely Allied Battery Co. Inc. SWF/LF 2033 E 38 Unlikely Puget Sound Bus CSCSL NFA, VCP 1971 WSE I Unlikely US West/ ICR 2345 NE J Unlikely US West Renton Admin CSCSL NFA 2345 NE i Unlikely Sound Ford LUST 2623 ENE 42 Unlikely Chevron #9 SPILLS, ICR 3000E J Orphan Unlikely Records for the following sites were reviewed at the Washington State Department of Ecology Northwest Regional Office Division of Site Records. A copy of relevant records obtained at the Department of Eology can be found in Appendix F Cummins Northwest, Inc. -- A Phase I ESA was conducted in 1998 by SF.COR, Inc. to assess potential sources of contamination on the engine repair and maintenance facility site. A subsequent Phase II ESA was conducted to assess potential contamination of soil and ground water from the following sources: A used oil Above Ground Storage Tank (AST), an underground sand trap used to collect oily waste water, a sump, and an underground oil/water separator. Soil samples collected from the near -surface areas in the vicinity of the oil/water separator and AST were reported to contain levels of heavy oil and diesel Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) below MCTA Method A cleanup levels. Ground water samples collected January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CA M5 — KV070850A? — Projecdsl'0070850WVlWP Page 8 WSADA Phase ivironmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment from the shallow aquifer in the vicinity of the oiI/water separator were reported to contain Ievels of heavy oil and diesel TPH, as well as Benzene, and Napthalene above MCTA Method A cleanup levels. Ground water samples also contained levels of cholorobenzene and 1,4 dichlorobenzene above MCTA Method B cleanup levels. In October and December 2001, Cummins Northwest, Inc. removed and upgraded the existing AST and oil/water separator. A total of approximately 85 cubic yards of soil were excavated from the two areas and confirmation samples were collected from the base and sidewalls of the excavations. Methylene chloride was detected in three confirmation samples taken from the AST excavation at levels above the MCTA Method A levels. The SECOR report speculated this result was due to contamination of samples during laboratory analysis_ Based on laboratory results, additional excavation was conducted around the former oil/water separator. Additional confirmation samples analyzed contained levels of benzene above MCTA Method A cleanup levels and a calculated Method B Cleanup level of 0.049mg/kg. Four ground water monitoring wells were installed at the site in December 2001 and sampled in January 2002. At that time, ground water elevations indicated aquifer flow to the north- northeast. Levels of PAHs, chrysene, and chromium below MCTA Method A cleanup levels were detected in ground water samples collected from the monitoring wells. Additionally, the total carcinogenic PAH concentration in the ground water collected from MW -1 (approximately 230 feet to the southwest of the subject property) exceeded the MCTA Method A cleanup level of 0.1 pg/l. Additional soil sampling by geoprobe borings was conducted in .lune 2003 to address methylene chloride and benzene contamination. Ground water monitoring well MW -1 was also re -sampled. Water levels measured in the four monitoring wells indicated shallow aquifer flow toward the north-northeast. Laboratory results indicated benzene concentrations below the Practical Quantification Limits (PQL) in soil samples. Methylene chloride levels below MCTA Method A cleanup levels were detected in one soil sample collected from the area to the east of the former AST. Detectable levels of 1-methylnapthalene, 2-methylnapthalene, acenapthylene, florene, and phenanthrene were detected in the sample collected from MW -1. Concentrations of Carcinogenic PAHs greater than the PQL were not detected. Additionally, the total carcinogenic PAH concentration was below the MCTA Method A cleanup level o f 0.1 I,gll. Based on this analysis, the Department of Ecology (Ecology) determined that no further action at the site was necessary and issued the NFA status in October 2003. In our opinion, this site is unlikely to pose an environmental hazard to the subject property given the ground water results indicating that concentrations are below MTCA cleanup levels. Ryerson Store/J.T. Ryerson & Son, Inc. (listed in Ecology riles as Ryerson Steel) -- Four ground water monitoring wells were installed around two 8,000 -gallon, diesel USTs in 1989 to accommodate an automated liquid sensor system. One soil and one ground water sample taken January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. O[H/u - KV070850A2 - Projects000708501KOWP Page 9 WSADA Phase. -nvironmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment at the time of installation were analyzed for benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and total xylenes (BTF.X). Total xylene concentrations in the ground water sample were measured to be slightly greater than the 1989 cleanup standard of 20ppb. Ground water flow direction was not indicated in the Hazcon, Inc. report. The two diesel USTs (installed in approximately 1975) and associate fuel lines and pumps were removed in August 1993. Soil samples taken from soil stockpiled during the excavation contained concentrations of diesel TPH above MCTA Method A cleanup levels. Approximately 225 cubic yards of soil were excavated and transported off-site as petroleum contaminate soils. Soil samples taken from the sidewalls and base of the excavations contained detectable levels of Diesel TPH below MCTA Method A cleanup levels. The site received an NFA from Ecology in January 1994. It is our opinion that this site is unlikely to pose an environmental hazard to the subject property due to its distance and position in the local watershed. Alliant Foodservice, Inc, -- No records found by the Department of Ecology at the time of this assessment. It is our opinion that this site is unlikely to pose an environmental hazard to the subject property due to its distance and position in the local watershed. Group Health Distribution & Support Services/Group Health Cooperative of Puget Sound - Two USTs were removed from the site in August 1991. One of the tanks, a 250 - gallon capacity leaded gasoline tank, was confirmed to have released petroleum products into the soil and ground water. Further investigation and sampling at the site included the installation of 11 ground water monitoring wells. A remediation system, consisting of 9 vapor extraction wells and a ground water recovery well was installed in 1993. Sampling was conducted semi-annually to measure petroleum hydrocarbon concentrations in the ground water. The remediation system was determined not to be functioning to the best of its ability and an additional investigation was conducted to re - characterize petroleum contaminated ground water on the site. The investigation included addition soil borings, hand augers and ground water monitoring wells. The results of the investigation determined that concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbon constituents in the vadose zone and ground water exceeded MCTA Method A cleanup levels. Based on the results of the re -characterization, 3000 cubic yards of soil were removed from the site. Residual concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in the floor and sidewalls of the excavation. Addition soil was not removed because the base of the excavation intercepted ground water, and because further excavation toward the main building would undermine the integrity of the structure. Ground water samples collected since the time of the excavation have had concentrations of Benzene above MCTA Method A cleanup levels. Shallow ground water at the site was determined to flow toward the west-southwest, toward Springbrook Creek. The creek is located approximately 1,500 feet to the west of the subject property and flows to the northwest. January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAHAT - xv07085DA2 - ProjecW2007085MKV1WP Page 10 WSADA Phase vironmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment It is our opinion that this site is unlikely to pose an environmental hazard to the subject property due to its distance and position in the local watershed. K&N Meats - A 10,000 gallon Gasoline UST, a 10,000 gallon diesel UST, and a 500 -gallon waste oil UST were removed from the site in January 1990. Levels of TPH in one soil sample exceeded the 1990 state action level of 200 parts per million (ppm). Benzene and TPH concentrations in a water sample collected from within the excavation exceeded the 1990 state action levels. Additional excavation was conducted in February 1990 and soil samples were collected from the base and sidewalls of the excavation. A second water sample was collected from standing water in the excavation. TPH concentrations in the water sample were measured to exceed the 1990 state action level. The excavation was dewatered and allowed to recharge before a third water sample was collected approximately 1 week after the second sample was collected. TPH and BTEX concentrations were determined to be below detection limits in the third water sample. Approximately 200 cubic yards of petroleum contaminated soil were transported off-site. It is our opinion that this site is unlikely to pose an environmental hazard to the subject property due to its distance and position in the local watershed. Rainer Disposal Co. Inc, - A 1,000 -gallon gasoline UST was removed from the site in April 1989. Concentrations of BTEX and TPH in composite soil samples collected from above and below the tank exceeded 1989 state action levels. Additional investigations were conducted at the site in the form of a soil vapor survey, subsurface soil sampling, and ground water monitoring well installation. Concentrations of BTEX and TPH in the soil samples collected at the site were below 1989 state action levels. Concentrations of TPH and BTEX in ground water samples collected at the site exceeded the 1989 state action levels. The shallow water table beneath the site was determined to be a non -usable aquifer, so contamination was left in place because it was unlikely to impact to any drinking water supplies. Quarterly ground water monitoring was conducted at the site. In 1991 benzene concentrations in ground water samples began to increase. A concrete pad located adjacent to the former gasoline tank was thought to be impeding volatilization of underlying petroleum hydrocarbon constituents. The pad was removed. In 1993, approximately 550 cubic yards of soil were excavated from an area adjacent to the concrete pad and removed from the site. Soil samples collected from the sidewalls and base of the excavations were shown to contain concentrations of BTEX and TPH-G below MCTA Method A levels. Quarterly monitoring of ground water was abandoned in 1996 after concentrations of contaminates were determined to be below MCTA Method A cleanup levels. Water in the shallow aquifer beneath the site was determined to flow toward the southeast in the1989 and in 1993 reports. In 1996 three additional USTs were removed from the site. Approximately 800 cubic yards of petroleum contaminated soils were excavated from the tank area and removed from the site. Approximately 150,000 gallons of water were removed from the excavation during dewatering. TPH-G, benzene and xylene concentrations in ground water samples collected from the excavation after the dewatering exceeded MCTA Method A cleanup levels. Additional ground water sampling was conducted in ,September 1997 at 10 locations near the January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAHRs - KV070850A2 - ProjecW20070850WVIWP Page I 1 WSADA Phase , Environmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results9fAssessinent eastern edge of the site. Benzene concentrations above MCTA Method A cleanup levels were measured in two of the samples collected. TPH-G and xylenes concentrations above MCTA Method A cleanup levels were also present in one of these samples. Concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbon constituents in the remaining samples were below detection limits. As of February 1998, no NFA had been issued by the Department of Ecology. It is our opinion that this site is unlikely to pose an environmental hazard to the subject property due to its distance and position in the local watershed. Puget Sound Bus - The site is a former gasoline station. USTs of unknown capacity were reported to have been excavated and removed in the late 1960s or early 1970s. Petroleum contaminated soils were encountered during demolition of the pump islands and canopy in April 1996. An unknown quantity of soil was excavated and removed from the site. Additional characterization was conducted at the site in December 1996 to determine the extent of petroleum contamination to soil and ground water. Results of this assessment are not well documented, but were the basis for the installation of an air delivery remediation system that included three air -sparge wells and three bio -vent wells. The remediation system was continuously operated for approximately two years. Soil and ground water samples were collected from the site in August 2001. Concentrations of BTEX and TPH-G were below detection limits in all of the ground water and soil samples analyzed. An NFA was issued by the Department of Ecology in April 2003. It is our opinion that this site is unlikely to pose an environmental hazard to the subject property due to its distance and position in the local watershed. Allied Battery Co. Inc. - No records were available at the Department of Ecology at the time of this assessment. It is our opinion that this site is likely to pose an environmental hazard to the subject property due to its distance and position in the local watershed._ US West/US West Renton Admin - Three USTs were excavated and removed from the site in March 1994. One soil sample collected from a stockpile of excavated material contained concentrations of TPH-G above MCTA Method A cleanup levels. Concentrations of TPH-G, TPH-D, and BTEX concentrations in the sidewalls and base of the excavations were below detection limits. At the Department of Ecology's request, a monitoring well was installed at the site to assess the potential presence of petroleum contaminated ground water. The monitoring well was installed in January 1995. Concentrations of BTEX and TPH-G in soil samples collected during the well installation were below detection limits. Concentrations of BTEX and TPH-G in ground water samples collected in February 1995 were below detection limits. It is our opinion that this site is unlikely to pose an environmental hazard to the subject property due to its distance and position in the local watershed. Sound Ford - Three USTs, a 2,000 gallon fuel tante, a 500 -gallon lubricating oil tank, and a 500 -gallon automatic transmission fluid tank were excavated and removed from the site in August 1989. A distinct petroleum odor was observed at the time of the excavations, and January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC_ CA HIrs - KV070850112 - 11rojea020070850X"WP Page 12 WSADA Phase ivironniental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment liquid was observed leaking from one of the tanks during removal. Composite soil samples were collected from each excavation and analyzed for petroleum hydrocarbon constituents. Laboratory analysis of the soil samples measured concentrations of TPH above 1989 state action limits in soils taken from around the 500 -gallon tanks, and BETX concentrations above 1989 state action limit in soils taken from around the 2,000 gallon tank. The area was re - excavated and additional soil samples and a ground water sample were collected. Concentrations of TPH were measured in all soil samples. Concentrations of TPH in the ground water sample exceeded the 1989 state action limit. Additional soil was excavated from the area and taken off-site. Installation of thee monitoring wells to assess the extent of ground water contamination was recommended by the consultant, but no evidence of installation or further remediation was found in the record. A letter dated January 2008 addressed to Sound Ford from the Department of Ecology was included in the site record. The letter stated that Ecology had not received any additional reports about remediation at the site since 1989, and that additional cleanup work is still required at the site. It is our opinion that this site is unlikely to pose an environmental hazard to the subject property due to its distance and position in the local watershed. Renton Junction Landfill - The landfill operated from approximately 1946 to 1961. The landfill was tested for methane and trace gas in January 1985. Methane gas levels were observed ranging between 17 and 33 percent from test holes located at the northerly half of the former landfill. Lower levels of methane ranging from 3 to 5 percent were observed within the southern section. Trace gas levels were observed ranging between -4.8 ppm to 0 ppm relative to the ambient air. A surface water sample was retrieved along the shoreline of the Green River immediately adjacent to the former landfill. Leachate contamination was not indicated. It is our opinion that this site is unlikely to pose an environmental hazard to the subject property due to its distance and position in the local watershed. Chevron #9 - Environmental sampling was conducted at the site in March of 1991 during the exposure of product lines that connected the on-site USTs to six existing dispenser pumps. Laboratory analysis of the soil samples revealed TPH-G concentrations ranging from ND to 2,900 mg/kg. Additional soil samples were collected at the site in July of 1991 during the removal of a heating oil UST. Laboratory analysis of the soil samples revealed TPH-D concentrations ranging from ND to 28,000 mg/kg. Six ground water monitoring wells were installed at the site in August 1991. Initial TPH-G ground water concentrations ranged from 2.6 to 28 mg/l. Initial THP -D concentrations ranged from ND to 9.0 mg/1. Initial Benzene concentrations ranged from 0.05 to 7.9 mg/1. Subsequent ground water sampling has been conducted at the site through November, 2007. Detectable levels of petroleum constituents are present in several wells to date. Ground water elevation contours found in the records indicate that the flow direction of the shallow aquifer located beneath the site migrates between north and east-southeast. It is our opinion that this site is unlikely to pose an environmental hazard to the subject property due to its distance and position in the local watershed. January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAUlls - KV070850A2 - Project 0200708501K"WP Page 13 WSADA Phas- _ _nvirownental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment 4.2 Physical Setting Sources A copy of the most recent United States Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5 -Minute topographic Map showing the area on which the subject property is located is provided in Appendix G. Geology and topography for the subject property are discussed in Section 2.2. 4.3 Historical Use Information on the Property and Adjoining Properties The history of the subject property and adjoining properties was compiled from a combination of aerial photographs, historical records, and previous studies for the site. 4.3.1 Aerial Photographs Aerial photographs for various years from 1936 through 2004 were reviewed for this assessment and are provided in Appendix H. Aerial photographs were obtained from Aerometric in Tukwila, Washington. Following are notes from our review of the photographs. 1936 - Photo 437, B&W, 1 "=800' The subject property appears partially clear of trees and without structures in this photograph. A stand of trees is visible on the western portion of the site. The eastern portion of the site appears to be pasture land. A railroad is visible adjacent to the north of the subject property. Adjacent land to the south, east and west is cleared of vegetation and appears to be pasture land. The predecessors to Grady Way SW, Raymond Avenue SW, and Seneca Avenue SW appear as unfinished roads in this photo. The surrounding area is developed as agricultural land. A racetrack with several dozen out buildings is visible approximately 2,000 feet to the southwest. 1946 - Photo A 46-474, B&W, I"= 1000' The subject property appears clear of trees and structures. Three residential structures are visible on the property adjacent to the south of the subject property. Grady Way SW is visible adjacent to the north of the subject property. One rail line is visible trending parallel to Grady Way SW on the north side of the road. Land adjacent to the east and west of the subject property is clear of trees and structures. A large agricultural plot that appears to contain produce or a tree nursery is visible approximately 750 feet to the northeast. The surrounding area to the east and southeast appears to be developing as a residential neighborhood. 1960 -Photo KC60-16S-11, 6-27-60, B&W, I "=.1000' No changes to the subject property or adjacent properties are visible in this photograph. The City of Renton is visible to the northeast of the subject property. The edge of the urban development is approximately 2,500 feet to the northeast of the subject property. January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAHm - KV07085OA2 - Projec16200708501KV)WP Page 14 WSADA Phase ivironrnental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment 1965 - EDR Photo, B& W, 1 " = 750' Some small trees or brush is visible on the subject property. No structures are visible on the site. No changes to the adjacent properties are visible in this photograph. Interstate 405 is visible in this photograph, located approximately 600 feet to the south of the subject property. One small commercial or industrial building is visible to the south of Interstate 405, approximately 800 feet to the south of the subject property. 1968 - Photo KC -68 5-23, B&W I"= 1500' Some small trees or brush is visible on the subject property. No structures are visible on the site. No changes to the adjacent properties are visible in this photograph. The property located approximately 275 feet to the east of the subject property is developed as a parking lot. Approximately one dozen delivery truck - sized vehicles are visible on the lot. A small warehouse type structure is visible to the south of the lot, approximately 300 feet to the east- southeast of the subject property. Several large warehouse or manufacturing structures are visible to the north of the subject property, on the north side of the railroad. Interstate 405 is visible in this photograph, located approximately 600 feet to the south of the subject property. Two small commercial or industrial buildings are visible to the south of Interstate 405, approximately 800 feet to the south of the subject property. 1974 - Photo KC -741-8-22, 3-20-74, B&W, 1 "=1500' No changes to the subject property are visible in this photograph. One of the residential structures adjacent to the south of the subject property is no longer visible. The land where the structure was located appears undeveloped. No changes to the other adjacent properties are visible in this photograph. Several additional large warehouse or manufacturing type structures are visible to the north of the railroad. 1977 - EDR Photo, B&W, I"= 750' The subject property appears undeveloped and partially covered by trees and brush. The property adjacent to the west appears to be developed as a parking lot. A large warehouse or manufacturing structure is visible adjacent to the south of the lot. The railroad adjacent to the north of Grady Way SW appears to be no longer operational as a section of the bed appears cleared and graded for development. 1980 - Photo KC80A -5534 15-33, Color, 1 "=1500' The subject property appears undeveloped and partially covered by trees and brush. A commercial structure is visible on the land adjacent to the south of the subject property, replacing one of the previously existing residential structures. A large warehouse or manufacturing structure is visible approximately 750 feet to the west of the subject property. A commercial structure is visible in the railroad bed, approximately 450 feet to the northeast of January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAHIts - Kv07085oA2 - Project 0200708501KV WP Page 15 WSADA Phase, Environmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment the subject property. Several new commercial or industrial structures are visible on the south side of Interstate 405, within 3,000 feet of the subject property. The surrounding area is mostly developed as a mixture of residential, commercial and industrial areas. 1985 - Photo SKP-85 15 62, 3-8-85, B&W, 1 "=1500'IEDR Photo, B&W, 1 "=750' A small clearing on the western edge of the subject property is visible in this photograph. A commercial building and parking lot are visible adjacent to the east and southeast of the subject property. Several new commercial buildings are visible adjacent to the north and northwest of the subject property, on the north side of Grady Way SW. Commercial and Industrial development densities are increasing to the north, northeast, and northwest of the subject property. 1990 - Photo KC -90 15 39, 7-10-90, Color, 1 "=1000' EDR Photo, B& W, I "= 750' No changes to the subject property, or adjacent properties are visible in this photograph. Several vehicles are visible parked on the western edge of the subject property. Additional commercial or industrial structures are visible to the south of Interstate 405. 1995 - Photo KC -95 8-18, 9-22-9.5, Color, 1 "=2000' No changes to the subject property, or adjacent properties are visible in this photograph. No significant changes to the surrounding area are visible in this photograph. 2000 -Photo KC -00 8-18, 10-7-00, Color, I"= 2000' No changes to the subject property are visible in this photograph. A new commercial building is visible adjacent to the northeast of the subject property, on the north side of Grady Way SW. The commercial neighborhood located 600 feet to the east-southeast of the subject property has been redeveloped into three commercial or industrial buildings with large parking lots. The lots are mostly full of vehicles. 2004 - Photo KC -04 8-23, 4-25-04, Color, 1 "=1680' No changes to the subject property or adjacent properties are visible in this photograph. Additional re -development from residential to commercial or industrial is visible to the southeast of the subject property. 4.3.2 King County Assessor Records Copies of the King County Assessor Records that were reviewed for this report are located in Appendix A. These records indicate that the subject property is currently vacant Iand zoned for commercial use. The property is connected to the public water and sewer system. The January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAHRs - KV07085OA2 - Pr0/eUs12007085MK1AWP Page 16 WSADA Phase virontmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results gLAssessment present owner, Lanphere Enterprises of Washington, purchased the subject property from the Penta Group in February of 1998. The property adjacent to the southwest is occupied by Automotive Engine Warehouse and is classified as light industrial manufacturing. The structure was built in 1979. The building is heated by space heaters. The fuel source for the heaters is not listed. The property adjacent to the east is occupied by the Renton West Office Building. The structure was built in 1983. The building is heated by a heat pump. No structures are recorded by the Assessor on the properties adjacent to the south and southwest. AESI also reviewed pre -1974 King County Assessor records available at the Washington State Division of Archives and Records Management. These records, also provided in Appendix A, indicate that no structures were constructed on the subject property prior to 1974. The property was previously subdivided into Lots 6 through 16 of Block 28 of the C.D. Hillman's Earlington Gardens Division #1. No structures were recorded on Lots 1 and 2, adjacent to the east of the subject property prior to 1974. The records indicate that the structures located adjacent to the south of the subject property, on former Lots 17 to 32, were all heated by stove heat. No evidence of the existence or previous existence of USTs on those parcels was found in the records. 4.3.3 Sanborn Map and City Directory Review EDR conducted a review of available Sanborn fire insurance maps. No Sanborn fire insurance maps were available for the subject property. Business directories including city, cross-reference, and telephone directories were reviewed, as available, at approximately 5 -year intervals for the years spanning 1964 through 1996.. A summary of the information obtained is provided in the City Directory Abstract located in Appendix 1. The Cummins Northwest site is listed at 811 Grady Way SW from 1980 through 1996. Restorations by St. Charles Place Workshop is listed at 1150 Raymond Avenue SW in 1980. Automotive Engine Warehouse and Quality Wood Service were listed at 1150 Raymond Avenue SW in 1996. An unnamed office building was listed at 607 Grady Way SW in 1996. 4.3.4 Historical Topographic Map Review Historical topographic maps that cover the subject property were reviewed and are provided in Appendix G. Results of this review are provided below. 1900: No roads or structures are shown in the vicinity of the subject property. The Black River is shown to the northeast of the subject property. The scale of this map is too small to obtain any detailed information about the subject property or adjacent properties. January 24, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAH/t5 - KV07085OA2 - Projects1200708501KOWP Page 17 WSADA Phase, nviropmiental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment 1949: No structures are shown on the subject property, Three small structures are shown on the properties adjacent to the south, southeast, and southwest of the subject property. No structures are shown on the properties adjacent to the east or west of the subject property. An arterial road (Grady Way NW) and the Northern Pacific Railroad are shown adjacent to the north of the subject property. The remains of the Black River are shown approximately 1,000 feet to the north of the subject property. 1968: No changes to the subject property are shown on this map. Six large structures are shown to the north, northeast, and northwest of the subject property, within 2,000 feet of the site. A sewage treatment plant is shown 3,000 feet to the west of the subject property. Interstate 405 and State Route 167 are shown on this map. 1973: No changes to the subject property are shown on this map. An additional small structure is shown on the property adjacent to the south of the subject property. An alley is shown on this map adjacent to the south of the subject property, between the site and the adjacent properties. 5.0 SITE RECONNAISSANCE 5.1 Methodology and Limiting Conditions The subject property and general vicinity were visited by a site assessor from AESI on January 11, 2008, Photographs were taken during the site visit to document current site conditions and are provided in Appendix J. Items of potential or recognized environmental significance to the property, if any, were noted. The site visit was limited to non -intrusive observations, and no sampling of soil, ground water, or other types of media was conducted. 5.2 General Site Setting The subject property is undeveloped and covered in vegetation. The surrounding area is developed mostly with commercial and industrial structures and parking areas, with a few residential properties existing to the south and southeast. 5.2.1 Ground Water Conditions No ground water seeps or springs were observed at the subject property. 5.2.2 Surface Water Conditions No standing pools of water, flowing water, or stream channels were observed on the subject property at the time of the site visit. January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAN/1s — KV0705OA2 — ProjecW 2007R85MK"WP Page 18 WSADA Phase ivironmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington-- Results af Assessment 5.3 Exterior Observations During the site visit, the following conditions were noted on the subject property: • One plastic, 5 -gallon bucket approximately one-quarter full with what appeared to be heavy grease and motor oil was observed along the southern edge of the subject property. The container was partially buried and covered by dead branches and leaf debris. The container was covered by a plastic lid. No signs of holes or cracks were observed in the visible portions of the plastic bucket. The bucket was labeled heavy grease. The container was not excavated from its location at the time of this assessment. No obvious staining was observed in the leaf debris around the container. • Several other empty containers of 5 (or fewer) gallon capacity were observed on the subject property. The containers were almost exclusively located along the southern edge of the subject property. All of these containers were observed to be empty. No chemical residues were observed on the interior or exterior of the containers and no obvious staining was observed on the ground beneath the containers. The containers were mostly buckets or landscaping pots, but one motor oil container and one chain oil container were observed. A section of plastic pipe was also observed on the ground in the vicinity. The pipe did not appear to be connected to anything and no chemical residue was observed in the interior at the ends of the section. • A cleared area, approximately 20 square feet in size, was observed on the western edge of the subject property. No staining was observed in the dirt and gravel surface. No signs of dumping were observed in the area or in the brush adjacent. * A pile of concrete rubble was observed in the center of the subject property. No chemical containers or other trash were observed in the pile. No chemical residue was observed on the concrete. No staining was observed on the ground in the area. During the site visit, the following conditions were noted on adjacent properties: • Some paper and plastic trash was observed on the property adjacent to the east of the subject property, along the western edge of the office building. • A red -brown stain was observed on the pavement adjacent to the dumpster located at the southwest corner of the previously mentioned office building. A plastic cartridge was observed on the ground adjacent to the dumpster area. • A large quantity of fill soil was observed on the property adjacent to the south of the subject property. The fill material measured approximately b to 7 feet above the grade of the subject property at the border between the properties, and sloped down toward January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAHA5 - KV070850A3 - Projects l_'00708 OW"WP Page 19 WSADA Plias,.. - nviroimental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment the south. Some asphalt and plastic debris was observed in the exposed face of the fill soil. • A storage yard was observed on the property to the southwest of the subject property. Wood and metal building materials, light machinery, and unidentified material covered in plastic tarps were observed in the paved lot adjacent to the property. No chemical containers were observed in the storage yard. No obvious signs of staining were observed on the exposed portions of the pavement in the yard. 5.4 Interior Observations No structures were observed on the subject property at the time of the assessment. 6.0 INTERVIEWS During the performance of this Phase I ESA, AESI conducted the following interviews: 6.1 Interview With Owner(s) AESI interviewed Mr. Robb Walther, the CFO of Lanphere Enterprises, the current owner of the subject property. The information provided by Mr. Walther is summarized below. • Mr. Walther stated that Lanphere Enterprises purchased the property in 1997. At that time the property was vacant of structures and covered in trees and brush. To his knowledge, the previous owner did not use the subject property for any purpose. The previous owner included a warranty against environmental liability in the purchase agreement (See Appendix Q. • Mr. Walther stated that the property has not been used for any purpose since purchase. • To his knowledge, there have been no incidents of dumping of chemical containers on the subject property. He has not been contacted by the City of Renton, King County, or Washington State concerning environmental hazards on or near the subject property. • Mr. Walther is unaware of any environmental liens filed against the subject property. January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. GIN/I.S - KV070850A2 - ProjecW 200708501K0WP Page 20 WSADA Phase ivironmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment 6.2 Interview Property Manager(s) AESI interviewed Mr. Tom Hunt, the General Manager at Renton Honda, who is associated with Lanphere Enterprises. The information provided by Mr. Hunt is summarized below: • Mr. Hunt has been associated with the subject property since it was purchased by Lanphere Enterprises. He observes the property on a regular basis when he passes it on his commute to work. • Mr. Hunt stated that he has not observed any signs of dumping of chemical containers on the property. Mr. Hunt stated that the property was undeveloped at the time of purchase and has remained in the same state to the present. 7.0 FINDINGS Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. (AESI) conducted a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) of the WSADA property at 621 Grady Way SW in Renton, Washington. Historical records and Historical aerial photographs indicate that the 0.75 -acre, vacant site has not been previously developed. AESI observed one plastic, 5 -gallon bucket, approximately one-quarter full with what appeared to be heavy grease and motor oil, along the southern edge of the subject property. The container was partially buried and covered by dead branches and leaf debris. The container was covered by a plastic lid. No signs of holes or cracks were observed in the visible portions of the plastic bucket. The bucket was labeled heavy grease. The container was not excavated from its location at the time of this assessment. No obvious staining was observed in the leaf debris around the container. We recommend that the bucket containing petroleum products is removed from the property and disposed prior to purchase. Any stained surface soil beneath the container should be excavated and disposed of properly. No other obvious visual evidence of hazardous materials contamination was discovered in surficial areas of the site examined during our site reconnaissance. There was no information from environmental records, historical information, or interviews that identified the actual or potential release of hazardous materials on the property. Several off-site properties of potential environmental significance within the ASTM -specified search radii were identified in the Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR) database report. One of these sites, Cummins Northwest, Inc. is located adjacent to the southwest of the subject property. Files reviewed at the Washington State Department of Ecology indicate that soil and ground water contamination were present at the.site due to a leaking oil/water separator and an January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAMS - KV070850A2 - Projea 02007085MVI WP Page 21 WSADA Phas_ _ Environmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment aboveground storage tank (AST). Ground water monitoring conducted at the site indicates that shallow ground water below the site flows northeast towards the subject property. Follow up ground water sampling indicated that concentrations were below MTCA cleanup levels and Ecology issued a NFA for the site in 2003. In our opinion, this site does not appear to pose an environmental risk to the subject property. For a variety of reasons (e.g., no documented release; down gradient, cross gradient, or too far from the subject property), all other off-site properties, in our opinion, are unlikely to pose an enviromnental risk to the subject property. 8.0 DATA GAPS No aerial photographs taken between 1946 and 1960 were available for review at the time of this assessment. However, since there is no evidence that the subject property has been developed at any time, we do not consider this data gap to be significant. Records for two requested sites were not available for review at the Department of Ecology at the time of this assessment. However, due to the distance of the properties from the subject property and their position in the local watershed relative to the subject property, we do not consider this data gap to be significant. No significant data gaps that would affect our ability to identify recognized environmental conditions on or around the subject property were identified in this assessment. 9.0 CONCLUSIONS We have performed a Phase I ESA in conformance with the scope and limitations of ASTM Practice E 1527-05 of the WSADA property located at 621 Grady Way SW in Renton, Washington. Any exceptions to, or deviations from, this practice are described in Section 10.0 of this report. In our opinion, based on information gathered during this Phase I ESA, this assessment has revealed no recognized environmental conditions in connection with the property. 10.0 DEVIATIONS No deviations from ASTM Practice E 1527-05 were requested by the user for this assessment. 11.0 ADDITIONAL SERVICES No additional services were provided as part of the Phase I ESA. January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CANFrs — KV07085OA2 — Projects 1 2 00 7085 01 MP Page 22 WSADA Phase vironmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington Results of Assessment 12.0 QUALIFICATIONS We declare that to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of environmental professional as defined in §312.10 of 40 CFR312. We have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a property of the nature, history, and setting of the subject property. We have developed and performed all of the appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312. Resumes of the environmental professionals who performed this Phase I ESA are included in Appendix K. f IXG-1LIL1iI, M AESI personnel performed this assessment in accordance with generally accepted standards of care that existed in the State of Washington at the time of this study. Our findings and conclusions have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted professional practice in the area at this time. We make no other warranty, either express or implied. We appreciate the opportunity to be of service to you on this project. If you should have any questions or require additional information, please feel free to contact us. Sincerely, ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. Kirkland, Washington Charles A. Hampton Senior Staff Geologist J. Scott Kindred, P.E. Senior Engineer J J Jon. Sonder aard, P.G. , P.E.G. January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAM; - KV07085N2 - ProjecW20070850XV1WP Page 23 WSADA Phas_ environmental Site Assessment Renton, Washington References 11FlU;■41111 D) W D) .111 DQ101 �1 Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR), 2007, The EDR radius map with GeoCheckTm, WSADA 601 Grady Way SW, Renton Washington: Milford, Connecticut, December, 2007. Pacific Northwest Center for Geologic Mapping Studies, 2006, Geologic map of King County, Washington: D.B. Booth and A. P. Wisher, compilers, scale 1:100,000 (available at hup: //geomapnw. ess. washington. edufservices/publications/map/data/KiiigCo_contposi te. pd, ) . January 29, 2008 ASSOCIATED EARTH SCIENCES, INC. CAR115 - KV07085OA2 - ProjerfO200708501KVYWP Page 24 Associated Earth Sciences, Inc. VICINITY MAP FIGURE t ra �, - WSADA DATE tion � � L RENTON, WASHINGTON RRoT NO Kv070aso LU Q 7D 0 LL a Draft Report !"!J' 4�g Sgt t -D) Potential for Archaeological at the WSADA Parcel on SW Gray Way City of Renton, King County., Washington Submitted to The Robinson Company Submitted by Gretchen Kaehler and Gail Thompson Seattle, Washington February 2008 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction........................................................................................................................1 2.0 Environment and Cultural Context.................................................................................1 2.1 Environment................................................................................................................................1 2.2 Ethnography.................................................................................................................................5 2.3 History.........................................................................................................................................6 2.4 Previous Cultural Resource Studies.............................................................................................8 3.0 Research Methods and Results.......................................................................................12 4.0 Recommendations............................................................................................................13 5.0 References Cited ..............................................................................................................14 List of Figures Figure 1. Location of WSADA parcel..........................................................................................................2 Figure 2. Locations of geotechnical borings and test pits at the WSADA parcel.......................................4 Figure 3. Winter villages and ethnographic place names in the vicinity of the WSADA parcel.................7 List of Tables Table 1. Previous Cultural Resources Studies and Archaeological Sites on Former Channels of the Black and Cedar Rivers Within 2 miles [mi] (3.2 km) of the WSADA parcel.................................................8 1.0 Introduction The Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) is considering the acquisition of an approximately 0.5 -acre parcel at 135 SW Grady Way in Renton, for the construction of a 5 - story office building. The property is located in the northwest quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 19 of Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian (Figure 1). WSADA contracted with Historical Research Associates, Inc. (HRA) to review information related to the archaeological setting of the project vicinity and provide an opinion about the potential of the parcel to contain unknown archaeological resources. HRA checked several documents provided by WSADA contractor The Robinson Company and conducted a background records and literature search on previous archaeological and cultural resources studies. Staff members analyzed the results of the background research and formed an opinion about the likelihood of the WSADA parcel to contain buried archaeological remains. A brief description of the methods and results of HRA's work appears in the following report sections: Environmental and Cultural Context, including previous cultural resources studies (Section 2), research methods and results (Section 3), recommendations (Section 4), and references cited (Section 5). 2.0 Environment and Cultural Context The environmental and cultural history of the parcel's vicinity can help to reveal its potential for containing archaeological remains. The following sections discuss the environment, ethnography, and previous cultural resource investigations in the vicinity of the WSADA parcel. 2.1 Environment The availability of the WSADA parcel area for prehistoric and historic Native American peoples was affected both by environmental factors and historic land modifications. Changes in habitat, and the types of resources available in these habitats, influenced the prehistoric and historic use of the project area. Climatic changes and seismic events throughout the Pleistocene and Holocene Epochs conditioned shifts in the alignment of the Black and Cedar River channels. The WSADA parcel area is located on the south bank of the historic Black River channel. The project area vicinity is part of the Duwamish River -Green River Valley, a landform carved from the glacial ice of the Puget Lobe of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet (Dragovich et at. 1994; Galster and Laprade 1991). As the Puget Lobe retreated northward, approximately 16,000 years ago, the Duwamish River Valley was blocked by an ice dam to the north and filled with glacial meltwaters and waters supplied by the ancestral channels of the Duwarnish, Cedar and Green rivers (Dragovich et al. 1994; Porter and Swanson 1998). By 14,000 to 15,000 years ago, the retreating glacier had reached the north end of Puget Sound. Marine water broke through the ice dam, and flowed under the glacier and into the Duwamish River -Green River Valley, turning it into a marine fjord that geologists call the Duwamish Embayment. Lake Washington was part of the Duwamish Embayment until approximately 14,000 years ago, when the embayment was cut off from Puget Sound by an alluvial delta deposited by the Cedar River (Dragovich et al. 1994). Laked dgw y 1 I Bryn Ma'�jr* dl t will ;hiihasatw s SKYWAY ; A+t�Lno ti 7 ♦ 11 _ i�iQr. ~`h _ all °S RIE1 K t� v, x Si Anthune a 16 ••, tLei 11 NJ E , 1 i to �I Rim; WSADAparcel,=;,<; - •+ rlt � r t .� _� _.. L mak. ( 1 • TaVV 0 0.5 1.0 Mile Scale 0 0.5 9.0 Kilometer Base Map: Renton, WA USGS Quadrangle King County, 7.5 Minute Series (1994) Figure 1. Location of WSADA parcel, Historical Research Associates, Inc., December 2006 2 The Duwamish Embayment filled with alluvial sediments when deposits from the Osceola Mudflow, a massive lahar that swept down the slopes of Mount Rainier approximately 5,800 years ago, formed the ancestral delta of the Duwamish River (Dragovich et al. 1994). Alluvial sediments transported by the Cedar River formed the ancestral delta of that river, which gradually moved north as it was pushed by the continued deposition of reworked Osceola Mudflow deposits. By approximately 2,500 years ago, the ancestral Duwamish River had filled the Duwamish Embayment from the Auburn area to Renton (Mullineaux 1970). Flood deposits from the ancestral Duwamish and Cedar rivers formed a floodplain surface that was higher than the surface of Puget Sound. After approximately 2,500 years ago, the Renton vicinity was an active floodplain of the Cedar, Black, and Duwamish rivers. Between 2,000 and 2,500 years ago, the Cedar River continued to change position through a process known as avulsion, by which a large segment of a river channel changes position rapidly, leaving the old river channel abandoned. According to local archaeologist Dennis Lewarch (personal communication 2006), based on evidence for multiple avulsion events, the Black River is probably an old channel of the Cedar River. The erratic movement of the Cedar River continued well into the historic period as a GLO surveyor noted in 1873. "the river has manifestly changed its bed .... which it is still doing..." (United States Surveyor General 1873). The complex tapestry of Black and Cedar River migration can be seen in geotechnical borings in the project area as well as in cultural resources studies in the vicinity, which identified alternating layers of clay, silt, sand, and gravel deposits (Kramer et al. 2001; Reinart and Byers 2006; see also U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1907). Data from two borings and six test pits (Reinart and Byers 2006) show gravelly sands at between approximately 21 feet [ft] (6.4 meters [m]) in the eastern portion of the project site (Boring B-1) and 23 ft (7 m) in the west-southwest portion of the site (Boring B-2), overlain by gray silty clay massive flood deposits. The depths of the six test pits (TP -1 to TP -6) reached between 11 and 15 ft (3.3 to 4.6 m), with only massive flood deposits present at those depths. Fill to a depth of 1.5 to 5 ft (0.5 to 1.5 m) covers most of the project area, excluding the southern boundary. Along the southern boundary, flood deposits are present immediately beneath the approximately 3 to 4 inches [in] (8 to 10 centimeters [cm]) of topsoil (Figure 2). Depending upon shifts in the main channel of the Cedar and Black rivers, the WSADA parcel area was sometimes located on a flat floodplain, and at other times was within an active river channel. When the Black River shifted and abandoned its channel in the project area, subsequent flood episodes filled the channel with sands and silts. Soils in the project area are listed as Urban Land (Ur) which, according to Snyder et al. (1973), are soils that "have been modified by disturbance of the natural layers with additions of fill material several feet thick to accommodate large industrial and housing installations." This is consistent with the results of geotechnical borings that showed between 1.5 and 5 feet of fill material over flood and river channel deposits. Underlying soils consist of Puyallup Series well - drained soils that formed in alluvium, under grass, hardwoods, and on natural levees adjacent to stream and river valleys (Snyder et al. 1973). In 1916, construction of the Hiram S. Chittenden Locks and Lake Washington Ship Canal lowered the level of Lake Washington by 9 feet (2.7 meters) (Chrzastowski 1983). The Cedar River was channelized at the same time the lake level lowered, and lack of flow from the Cedar River and Lake Washington dried up the Black River. K W # � Y Steward 83ddn TNM 313kOJ R35Y9 3.21dCLL, Z4 &� N o- Ms -n$ na m n q a m � a `l 0 0 � miff o c7 N � J V E E Z --gqgp.— a M m ff O c - a a a a as Q Q Y M L � � m Z Z � cl +m H Y w m FOR o o lJy m NN l 4 T � � 1 m ,i S'Snl 3,�i,Ct-OOM G6 4 Climate and vegetation in the project vicinity have remained relatively stable over the past 2,500 to 2,000 years. The project vicinity probably supported stands of deciduous trees such as black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa), bigleaf maple (Acer macrophyllum), red alder (Alnus rubra), willow (Salix sp.), and Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia). Marshy areas in abandoned river channels and back swamps would have supported willow, cattail (Typha latifolia), bulrush (Scirpus sp.), and hardback (Spirea douglasii). At least five species of salmon have been documented running upstream from the Duwamish River to the Black and Cedar rivers. The Cedar River has documented runs of coho (Onchorynchus kisutch), pink (O. gorbushcha), sockeye (O. nerka), and Chinook (O. tshawytcha) (Williams et al. 1975). After construction of the Lake Washington Ship Canal in 1916, reports described silver salmon swimming up the Black River to spawn and die in the shallow pools formed as the river dried up (Slauson 1976). 2.2 Ethnography The WSADA parcel is located within the aboriginal territory of the Duwamish people (Lane 1975; Smith 1940:15-16; Waterman ca. 1920). The Duwamish, a Puget-Salish speaking group lived in winter villages situated along the shores of the Black River, Cedar River, Duwamish River, Lake Washington, Lake Union, Salmon Bay, and Elliott Bay. However, the cluster of villages along the Black River was the densest concentration of Duwamish villages in their territory (Duwamish Tribe of Indians v. the United States of America 1927:33). Duwamish winter villages usually consisted of one or more cedar plank houses that sheltered from four to six nuclear families, often collateral kin. The plank house was the fundamental unit of polity in the Northwest Coast region (Ames and Maschner 1995). Plank house villages along the Black River were in the enviable position of having a productive salmon fishery and root food resources, but also at the convergence of a native trail system. The extensive trail system radiated from the Black and Cedar rivers to Snoqualmie Falls, Muckleshoot Prairie, and Yakima Pass, as well as Elliott Bay (United States Surveyor General 1856a). In a society where status could be enhanced by the accumulation of wealth (Ames and Maschner 1995), the position of the Black River villages as the nexus of the trail system allowed at least the high-ranking residents of the villages to profit from trade. The position and relative wealth of the Black River villages also meant that they played host to numerous intertribal gatherings, ceremonial events, and gambling matches (Bagley 1929:1:138-139). The primary food source of the Duwamish in the Black River villages was salmon, which were taken in rivers through the use of traps and weirs, especially during the migratory runs in the late summer, fall, and early winter (Lane 1975:14). The Black and Cedar rivers provided excellent spawning habitat. Great numbers of salmon were dried and stored to provide winter food, as well as to support the influx of visitors to the village during the late summer and early fall. In addition to salmon, the Duwamish harvested freshwater fish species such as trout and eel, and gathered shellfish including clams, mussels, and oysters at local beaches. Land game including deer and elk were hunted for meat and hides, and their bones were used for ceremonial and recreation items. A wide variety of plant foods were gathered. PIant foods included berries, ferns, and tubers such as camas and wapato. The latter two foods were especially important, and the prehistoric Black River environment would have supported marshes and wet meadows where these plants grew. The Indians practiced aeration and weeding to cultivate camas that grew near 5 their winter villages. This practice predated the Hudson Bay Company's introduction of the potato, which the Indians also cultivated (Paige 1857; Stevens 1854:453). Four villages and three place names are located within 1.2 miles [mi] (1.9 kilometers [km]) of the WSADA parcel (Figure 3). d�iuudud�w, meaning "little Cedar river" was the name of a Duwamish village on the east bank of the Black River approximately 0.75 mi (1.2 km) north of the project area (Hilbert et al. 2001; Waterman ca. 1920). The village was named for a large spring, also called "little Cedar river," which ran parallel to the Cedar River and flowed into the area that makes up the present City of Renton (Waterman ca. 1920; Figure 3). A second village site, d�ubru, meaning "confluence" (Waterman ca. 1920) or "place where fresh water thrown [sic]" (Hilbert et al. 2001:151), is located at the historic confluence of the Black and Cedar rivers, approximately 1.2 mi (19 km) northeast of the WSADA project area. According to Slausen (1967:2), a burial ground was associated with the village; it was exposed during construction grading in 1930. Sbabadid, meaning "crags" (Waterman ca. 1920) or "small hill" (Hilbert et al. 2001:148), is located approximately 0.5 mi (0.8 km) northeast of the project area. According the United States Surveyor General (I 865b), Sbabadid was formerly near a deep pool in the Black River with sharp cliffs or "crags" on each side. Historic surveyors go on to state that the Indian houses present at Sbabadid in 1865 were the probable historic remnants of the original Sbabadid village (United States Surveyor General 1865b). A historic period Native American settlement i k � t � 1 ubc, meaning a "place of the monster people," was 0.8 miles (1.3 km) north of the project area. It was believed that skaitaw, a monster who could take human form, lived in the vicinity deep within the Black River (Harrington ca. 1909:Frame 0242). The monster could be seen if a person fasted and purified his or herself for five days. That person would then acquire the power to become wealthy. Three additional ethnographic place names are identified within 0.5 mi (0.8 km) of the WSADA parcel (Harrington ca. 1909; Hilbert et al. 2001; Waterman ca. 1920). No Lushootseed orthography was given for a place name on the Black River that meant "rocky or full of boulders." Waterman (ca. 1920:149) states that "there is a high trestle there now." A second place, i t u l � - � 1 i, means "resembling a trail" or "place of a river" for a creek draining a swamp approximately 0.27 mi (0.43 km) north of the WSADA parcel. tu... az �dal.Ait , or "King salmon house," is named for a deep place in the river approximately 0.5 mi (0.8 km) northeast of the WSADA parcel. According to Waterman (ca. 1920) the "salmon were just 'loaded in' there in the summer." 2.3 History Renton's early economy was industrial, relying primarily on lumber and coal. The area's rich coal deposits allowed early settler Erasmus Smithers, who obtained financing from Captain William Renton (after whom the city was named), to establish the Renton Coal Company (Bagley 1929; Slauson 1976). Smithers and other members of the coal mining enterprise decided to plat the City of Renton in 1875; the area of Smithers and Tobin donation land claims were platted northeast of the WSADA parcel. The parcel remained largely outside of city limits until the mid -1900s (U.S. Geological Survey 1949, 1983). 6 F ! r` At 104 yf ( s.��►i9 �f ] 3� - _ ILi j+'L ''i � $ r / ih .�' ',J��''f4 %ti i. E i iloL jf -0 4 . �� .1cC. � � � x72? y ./� ffrail to,Raes kera ri&anl .-. .� _. I �' =-_ ;"� yr.� i sew,,' '"=;, •'�y' -- ?£A. 77 s - .s>L ijV f — ! I �J]I village place name Base Map from United States surveyor General 1865b 0 WSADA parcel N A dax"wbgwu? "confluence" or "place where freshwater thrown" *B to kwakwd tlab "dogfish water" a 0.5 1.0 Mile NC dax" ududow "little Cedar River" Scale 0 0.5 1.0 Kilometer *D pa px'atsut "riffle" or "place where water is swift" S E sbabadid "crags" or "small hills" N OF skata lube "place of the monster people" �G"rocky" or "full or boulders" E WASHINGTON H to?afadaRte "king salmon house" W* f stulag"'ali "resembling a trail" or "place of a river" s Figure 3. Winter villages and ethnographic place names in the vicinity of the WSADA parcel. 7 The WSADA parcel is within land purchased by William Keister in 1872 (Bureau of Land Management 2007). By 1926, the project area was owned by C. D. Hillmans but no buildings were present (Metsker Map Company 1926). A rail track associated with the Columbia and Puget Sound Railroad is shown approximately 0.45 mi (0.7 km) north of the parcel (Hudson 1996; Metsker Map Company 1926). According to historical maps (Sanborn Map Company 1927-1944; United States Geological Survey 1949), the project area has been undeveloped, although buildings were constructed to the east and south of the WSADA parcel (United States Geological Survey 1940). 2,4 Previous Cultural Resource Studies An archival and literature review of site forms, cultural resources surveys, and National Register of Historic Places (NRNP) documentation on file at the State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) revealed 16 archaeological studies that have been conducted on landforms analogous to that of the WSADA parcel, on or near former channels of the Black and Cedar rivers (Table 1). Nine of the studies (Berger 2007; Hedlund 1981; Hodges 2004; Hodges and Piston 2004, 2005; Juell 2001; Shong and Hodges 2003; Trudel and Larson 2003; Trudel et al. 2004) did not identify any cultural resources. Two other studies were undertaken to evaluate previously identified archaeological resources, and four studies recorded previously unidentified cultural resources. In addition, eight historic and prehistoric archaeological sites have been identified within 2 mi (3.2 km) of the WSADA parcel. Table 1. Previous Cultural Resources Studies and Archaeological Sites on Former Channels of the Black and Cedar Rivers Within 2 miles rmil (3.2 kml of the WSADA nareel 0 Cultural Resource Eligibility Authors Date Title Identified Status" Hanley 1979 Earlington Woods Site, 45KI51, Sbabadid Determined Washington State Archaeological (45KI51) eligible Site Inventory Form Chatters 1981 Archaeology of the Sbabadid Site, Sbabadid Determined 45KI51, King County, Washington 45KI51 eligible Hedlund 1981 Archaeological Resources at the None NIA Mouth of the Black River. A Survey Conducted for the King County Department of Public Works Cavazos 1985 Site 45KI285H. Master Site File Abandoned Not evaluated railroad grade Chatters 1988 Tualdad Attu (45KI59): A 4th Tualdad Altu Determined Century Village on the Black River, (45KI59) eligible King Count , Washington Lewarch 1994 Cultural Resources Field Renton -Sears- Not evaluated Assessment of the Fred Meyer Fred Meyer Store Corporation Building Project Area, Site (45KI439) Renton, King County, Washington Hudson 1996 Columbia and Puget Sound Railroad line and Not evaluated Railroad (45KI538) associated features 0 Cultural Resource Eligibility Author(s) Date Title Identified Status* Lewarch et al. 1996 Cultural Resources Field Additional Not evaluated Assessment of the Schneider deposits of Homes Renton Apartments Sbabadid Project Renton, King County, (45KI 151) Washington Juell 2001 Cultural Resources Inventory of None NIA the proposed Washington Light Lanes Project Route 5 Backbone Interstate -405 (MPD to MPI 1) from Interstate -5 to Interstate -90 Lewarch 2001 Renton High School Indian Site Midden with Eligible (45K1501) possible hearth features Kramer at al. 2001 Renton High School Additional Eligible Archaeological Resources and deposits Traditional Cultural Places associated with Assessment, King County, the Renton High Washington School Indian Site 45KI501 Shong and Hodges 2003 Results of the Cultural Resources None NIA Assessment for Renton Fitness (Fred Meyer Shopping Center) King County, Washington Trudel and Larson 2003 Renton Retail Site, Archaeological None NIA Resources and Traditional Cultural Places Assessment, King County, Washington Hodges 2004 Cultural Resources Assessment None NIA for the Salvation Army Food Bank Warehouse/Office Building Renton, King County, Washington Hodges and Piston 2004 Cultural Resources Assessment None NIA for the Parkside at 95 Burnett Development, Renton, King County, Washington Lewarch 2004 Dexudidew, the Little Cedar River FMR, charcoal, Not eligible+ Fishing Site (45K1587) Washington fishbone, shell, State Archaeological Site lithic flakes Inventory Form Trudel et al. 2004 Community Health Care Facility, None NIA Archaeological Resources and Traditional Cultural Places Assessment, City or Renton, King County, Washington Cavasos (1985) recorded an abandoned railroad grade associated with the Seattle and Walla Walla Railroad constructed in 1874. The railroad grade is approximately 300 ft (91 m) north of the WSADA parcel. The Sbabadid Site (45K151) is on the west bank of the historic channel of the Black River, approximately 0.7 mi (1.1 km) northeast of the WSADA parcel. The site was identified between 1 and 3 in (3.28 and 9.8 ft) below ground surface (Chatters 1981). Chatters (198 1) conducted the first extensive archaeological excavation near the confluence of the Black and Cedar rivers. Archaeological resources identified included multiple shallow, basin -shaped hearths with ash and fire -modified rock (FMR), concentrations of food refuse such as bone and shell, chipped stone tools, and historic -period items such as copper and iron tools, and glass beads. Chatters 10 Cultural Resource Eligibility Authorlsj Date Title Identified Status" Hodges and Piston 2005 Cultural Resources Assessment None NIA for the Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre, Renton, King County, Washington Boersma 2006 Archaeological Investigations for Historic artifacts Not eligible+ Fifth and Williams Apartments, mixed with Renton, King County, Washington modern construction debris Berger 2007 Cultural Resources Assessment None for the Rainier Avenue/Hardie Avenue Project. RainierAvenue and Shattuck Avenue Railroad Bridge Replacements, City of Renton, King County, Washington Bundy 2007 Puget Sound Railroad Company Railroad grade Not eligible' Grade(45KI768)_ Master Site File associated with the Puget Sound Shore Railroad Company Bundy and Chidley 2007 Talbot Road and Dams Retaining Concrete dam Not evaluated Wall (45KI767) and retaining walls Kaehler 2007a Archaeological Assessment of the Historic artifacts, Not eligible+ Bob Bridge Toyota Expansion Site 45KI759 Project, Renton, King County Washington Kaehler 2007b Bob Bridge Toyota Site (45KI759). Historic artifacts Not eligible+ Master Site File dating between ca. 1920 and 1940 Tingwall et al. 2007 Renton Civic Dump (45K1766) Historic landfill Not evaluated with deposits dating between 1920 and 1970 'NRHP-National Register of Historic Places NIA -Not Applicable +-Author's Opinion FMR -Fire -modified rock Cavasos (1985) recorded an abandoned railroad grade associated with the Seattle and Walla Walla Railroad constructed in 1874. The railroad grade is approximately 300 ft (91 m) north of the WSADA parcel. The Sbabadid Site (45K151) is on the west bank of the historic channel of the Black River, approximately 0.7 mi (1.1 km) northeast of the WSADA parcel. The site was identified between 1 and 3 in (3.28 and 9.8 ft) below ground surface (Chatters 1981). Chatters (198 1) conducted the first extensive archaeological excavation near the confluence of the Black and Cedar rivers. Archaeological resources identified included multiple shallow, basin -shaped hearths with ash and fire -modified rock (FMR), concentrations of food refuse such as bone and shell, chipped stone tools, and historic -period items such as copper and iron tools, and glass beads. Chatters 10 (1981:33) interpreted the site as the remnant of a village reported in the area in 1865 (United States Surveyor General 1865a and b); however, Butler (I 990) disagreed, interpreting the site as a seasonal fishing camp, occupied only during salmon runs. Chatters (198 1) dated the site to between AD 1790 and AD 1865 based on historic -period map data and the presence of European trade goods. In 1996, Lewarch and associates identified additional archaeological deposits associated with the Sbabadid Site (45KI51) along a former Black River channel approximately 0.45 mi (0.7 km) southwest of the WSADA project area. The deposits were identified during an assessment for the Schneider Homes Renton Apartments project. Tualdad Altu (45KI59) is 0.5 mi (0.16 km) north of the WSADA parcel, on a former channel of the Black River at 1.5 m (4.9 ft) below ground surface. Chatters (1988:57-87) recorded over 90 features including hearths, pits, and postmolds. Artifacts included chipped lithic tools such as "arrow" points, atlatl points, harpoon points, and knives. Also present were bone implements including awls, animal effigies, and beads. Calibrated radiocarbon dates indicate the site was occupied between 1,700 and 1,400 years ago. Butler (1990) suggested the features and subsistence data from Tualdad Altu (45KI59) were typical of a seasonal fishing and/or hunting camp with temporary shelters and processing features such as hearths and drying racks. In 1994, the Renton -Sears Fred Meyer Store Site (45KI439) was identified during construction activities for a warehouse building. Archaeologists recorded cultural deposits between approximately l and 3 m (3.28 and 9.8 feet) below ground surface. Site 45KI439 is 1.5 mi (2.4 km) northeast of the WSADA parcel. The site consisted of prehistoric midden deposits, hearth features, FMR, ash, and calcined bone. The archaeological deposits were within a partially filled, abandoned river channel below a thick, gray clay stratum with alternating silts, sands, and clays. The infilling of the channel took place during a large flood episode that covered the Black River -Cedar River delta (Lewarch 1994). The site was not excavated but Lewarch (1994) noted that the archaeological features and cultural deposits were found at a lower elevation than those at the Sbabadid Site (45KI51) suggesting that the Renton -Sears Fred Meyer Store Site (45KI439) was the older of the two sites. Hudson (1996) identified rail grades and other railroad features associated with the Columbia and Puget Sound Railroad. A portion of the rail line is approximately 0.45 mi (0.7 km) north of the WSADA parcel. The resources were not evaluated for NRHP or Washington Heritage Register (WHR) eligibility. Construction excavations at Renton High School in 2001 exposed archaeological deposits and features later designated as the Renton High School Indian Site (45KI501) approximately 1.75 mi (2.8 km) northeast of the WSADA parcel (Lewarch and Kramer 2001). The Renton High School Indian Site (45KI501) is adjacent to a partially filled former channel of the Black River (Kramer et al. 2001). Archaeological deposits included features such as hearths with FMR, charcoal, ash, calcined fish and mammal bone deposits, as well as artifacts including chipped lithic tools. Similarity in elevation of cultural deposits on the floodplain suggests that occupation of the Renton High School Indian Site (45KI501) was probably contemporaneous with the Renton -Sears Fred Meyer Store Site (45KI439). Lewarch (2004) identified Dexudidew, the Little Cedar River Fishing Site (45KI587) approximately 1.25 mi (2 km) northeast of the project area on an old channel of the Black River. The site consisted of two thin, superimposed occupation surfaces consisting of charcoal, FMR, and isolated chalcedony and jasper flakes. Lewarch (2004:3) suggested that use episodes at the 11 site dated to between 500 and 200 years ago "based on stratigraphic position, geomorphicaI setting, and similarity to other sites in Renton..." Lewarch interpreted the site as a seasonally reoccupied fishing camp or locality based on the presence of calcined fish bone, FMR, low density lithics, and proximity to a recorded ethnographic village, Dexudidew, on the east bank of the Black River. The site was determined not significant by Lewarch (2004) who felt that the site would not provided information important to prehistory. Archaeologists completely removed the site deposits prior to the completion of construction. Boersma (2006) identified, but did not record, historic artifacts mixed with modern construction debris during an assessment for the Fifth and Williams Apartments, located 1.1 mi (1.8 km) northeast of the WSADA parcel on the floodplain of the historic Black River. The historic artifacts were contained in fill and were not considered significant (Boersma 2006:7). The Puget Sound Shore Railroad Company Grade (45KI768) was recorded 0.6 mi (0.9 km) southwest of the WSADA parcel. The segment recorded consisted only of modern railroad tracks and Bundy (2007) suggested that it was not eligible for the NRHP or WHR based on the fact the only modern tracks were present. Bundy and Chidley (2007) recorded the Talbot Road Dam and Retaining Walls approximately 1 mi (1.6 km) southeast of the parcel. The dates of site construction were unknown and it was thought to be between 1910 and 1980. Kaehler (2007a, b) identified the Bob Bridge Toyota Site (45KI759) during coring at the proposed Bob Bridge Toyota Expansion project area. The site consisted of historic period artifacts dating from ca. 1920 to 1940 within an old backswamp, or abandoned channel of the Black River. The site was recommended not eligible for the NRNP or WHR because the deposits could not be associated with a specific person or family and did not have potential to provide information important to history or prehistory The Renton Civic Dump (45KI766) was identified approximately 1 mile (1.6 km) northeast of the WSADA parcel. The dump consisted of a surface landfill deposit of 1920 to 1970 refuse on top of tailings from the Renton Coal Mine (Tingwall et at. 2007). 3.0 Research Methods and Results HRH's archaeologists compiled and reviewed several types of information to form an opinion about the sensitivity of the WSADA parcel for containing archaeological resources. The information reviewed included that about soils on and near the parcel (Snyder et at. 1973) and sediments underlying it (Reiart and Byers 2006). Historical Government Land Office and U.S. Geological Survey maps provide data on the landforms of the parcel area (U.S. Geological Survey 1949, 1983; U.S. Surveyor General 1865a, 1865b). HRA staff also considered information on Indian land use and ethnographic place names for the vicinity of the WSADA parcel. Archaeologists reviewed archaeological reports to understand the types of nearby archaeological sites and the landforms on which they have been recorded. Information on historical land use of the parcel area came from maps of Donation Land Claims, King county, and the City of Renton. 12 The sensitivity for containing archaeological deposits is based on the proximity of a project area to water bodies and subsistence resources as well as its proximity to ethnographic place names and its similarity and proximity to landforms containing identified archaeological sites. The WSADA parcel is on the east side of a former Black River channel in an area that was subject to flooding and shifting of the river channel. The shining river channel would have, at varying times, created flat alluvial floodplains, natural levees above and adjacent to the channel, and/or level unvegetated areas in abandoned river channels. All of these types of landforms were used intensively by prehistoric and historic period Native Americans. The area was probably available for prehistoric Native American groups between 2,500 and 2,000 years ago. Archaeological resources in the project area could include the remains of villages with plank houses and features such as postmolds and hearths. Because there are documented ethnographic villages, as well as corresponding archaeological evidence for these villages within 0.25 miles (0.4 km) of the project area, archaeological resources would be more likely to be the remains of fishing camps rather than villages. Cultural materials associated with these camps could include features such as hearths and postmolds for temporary shelters and drying racks to process fish. Artifacts could include FMR, calcined fish bone, chipped lithic tools and lithic debris from tool manufacturing. Historic Euroamerican trade items such as metal tools and glass beads may be also included with the artifacts listed above, representing historic period Native American use of the area. Seven ethnographic places, four of which are villages or settlements, are within 1.2 miles (1.9 km) of the WSADA parcel. The Black River and its vicinity provided the Duwamish people with locations to harvest five species of salmon as they migrated upriver, as well as access to land game for hunting and a variety of food, technological and medicinal plant resources. It is the opinion of HRA's archaeologists that a high potential exists for the WSADA parcel to contain buried prehistoric and/or historic Native American archaeological remains. Such materials could include stone, bone, shell, and other artifacts, as well as the possibility of human remains. The WSADA parcel area has a high sensitivity for containing prehistoric and/or historic Native American archaeological resources. The WSADA parcel has a low probability for historic Euroamerican archaeological resources. A review of historic maps suggests that the location was not the site of historical homesteading and that the location has remained undeveloped. 4.0 Recommendations HRA staff members recommend that subsurface exploration on the property, such as the excavation and archaeological analysis of larger diameter (up to S inches) borings, might provide information on buried archaeological materials and their implications for construction at the parcel. 13 5. Q References Cited Ames, Kenneth M., and Herbert D. G. Maschner 1995 Peoples of the Northwest Coast: Their Archaeology and Prehistory. Thames and Hudson, Ltd, London. Bagley, Clarence B. 1929 History of King County, Washington. 4 Vols. S.J. Clarke Publishing Company, Chicago. Berger, Margaret 2007 Cultural Resources Assessment for the Rainier Avenue/Hardie Avenue Project: Rainier Avenue and Shattuck Avenue Railroad Bridge Replacements, City of Renton, King County, Washington. Western Shore Heritage Service Technical Report 4308. Report prepared for Widener and Associates, Everett, Washington. Boersma, Jana L. 2006 Archaeological Investigations for Fifth and Williams Apartments, Renton, King County, Washington. Cascadia Archaeology, Seattle. Report prepared for Renton Fifth and Williams Limited Partnership, Bellevue, Washington. Bundy, Barbara 2007 Puget Sound Railroad Company Grade (45KI768). Washington State Archaeological Site Inventory Form, on file at the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. Bundy, Barbara, and M. Chidley 2007 Talbot Road Dam and Retaining Walls (45K1767). Washington State Archaeological Site Inventory Form, on file at the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. Bureau of Land Management 2007 Land Patent Details for William Keister. Electronic resource, http://www.glo.bim.gov. Accessed December 17, 2007. Burge, David 1989 Renton: Where the Water Took Wing. Windsor Publications, Chatsworth, California. Butler, Virginia 1990 Fish Remains from Black River Sites (45KI 59 and 45KI51-D). Archaeology in Washington 2:49-65. Cavasos, Valentina A. 1985 Master Site Fide for 45K1285H. On file, State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia, Washington. Chatters, James C. 1981 Archaeology of the Shabadid Site, 45KI51, King County, Washington. Office of Public Archaeology, Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Washington, Seattle. 1988 Tualdad Altu (45KI59): A 4th Century Village on the Black River, King County, Washington, First Equities, Seattle. Chrzastowski, Michael 1983 Historical Changes to Lake Washington and Route of the Lake Washington Ship Canal, King County, Washington. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Water Resources Investigation, Open -File Report 81-811.2. 14 Dragovich. Joe D., Patrick T. Pringle, and Timothy J. Walsh 1988 Extent and Geometry of the Mid -Holocene Osceola Mudflow in the Puget Lowland: Implications for Holocene Sedimentation and Paleogeography. Washington Geology 22(3):3-26. Galster, Richard W., and William T. Laprade 1991 Geology of Seattle, Washington, United States of America. Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists 28:235-302. Hanley, John R. 1979 Earlington Woods Site (45KI51). Washington State Archaeological Site Inventory Form. On file at Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. Harrington, John P Ca. 1909 John P. Harrington Papers. National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution. Reel 15, 1907-1915, on microfilm at Suzzallo Library, University of Washington, Seattle. Hedlund, Gerald C. 1981 Archaeological Resources at the Mouth of the Black River: A Survey Conducted for the King County Department of Public Works. On file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. Harrington, John P 1909 John P. Harrington Papers. National Anthropological Archives, Smithsonian Institution. Reel 15, 1907-1915, on microfilm at Suzzallo Library, University of Washington. Hilbert, Vi, Jay Miller, and Zalmai Zahir 2001 Puget Sound Geography, Original Manuscript from T. T. Waterman. Lushootseed Press, Federal Way, Washington. Hodges, Charlie 2004 Cultural Resources Assessment for Salvation Army Food Bank Warehouse/Office Building Renton, King County, Washington. NWAA Report Number WA 03-69. Northwest Archaeological Associates, Inc. Seattle. Prepared for TSA Architects, Bellevue, Washington. Hodges, Charlie, and Victoria Piston 2004 Cultural Resources Assessment for the Parkside at 95 Burnett Development, Renton, King County, Washington. NWAA Report Number WA 04-85. Northwest Archaeological Associates, Inc. Seattle. Prepared for TSA Architects, Bellevue, Washington. 2005 Cultural Resources Assessment for the Merrill Gardens at Renton Centre, Renton, King County, Washington. NWAA Report Number WA 04-85. Northwest Archaeological Associates, Inc. Seattle. Prepared for Friedman Development, Mercer Island, Washington. Hudson, Lorelea 1996 Columbia and Puget Sound Railroad, (45K1538). State of Washington Archaeological Site Inventory Form on file, Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia, Washington. Juell, Kenneth E. 2001 Cultural Resources Inventory of the proposed Washington Light Lanes Project, Route 5 Backbone Interstate -405 (MPD to MP 11) From .Interstate -5 to Interstate 90. NWAA Project WA01-6. Northwest Archaeological Associates, Inc. Seattle. Prepared for David Evans and Associates, Inc. Bellevue, Washington. 15 Kaehler, Gretchen 2007a Archaeological Assessment of the Bob Bridge Toyota Expansion Project, City of Renton, King County, Washington. Historical Research Associates, Inc., Seattle. Report prepared for Bob Bridge Toyota, Renton, Washington. 2007b Bob Bridge Toyota Site (45KI759). Washington State Archaeological Site Inventory Form, on file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia, Washington, Kramer, Stephenie, Leonard A. Forsman, Dennis E. Lewarch, and Lynn L. Larson 2001 Renton High School Archaeological Resources and Traditional Cultural Places Assessment, King County, Washington. LAAS Technical Report#2001-23. Larson Anthropological Archaeological Services, Limited, Gig Harbor, Washington. Submitted to Renton School District No. 403, Renton, Washington. Lane, Barbara 1975 Identity and Treaty Status of the Duwamish Tribe of Indians. Report prepared for the U. S. Department of the Interior and the Duwamish Tribe. Ms. on file at Special Collections, Allen Library, University of Washington, Seattle. Lewarch, Dennis 1994 Cultural Resources Field Assessment of the Fred Meyer Corporation Building Project. Larson Anthropological/Archaeological Services, Seattle. Letter report to Ken Booster, Fred Meyer Incorporated, Portland, Oregon. 21 December. 2001 Renton High School Indian Site (45KI501). Washington Archaeological Site Inventory Form, on file, Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia, 2004 Dexudidew, the Little Cedar River Fishing Site (45KI587). Washington State Archaeological Site Form, on file at the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia. Lewarch, Dennis E., Eric W. Bangs, and Lynn L. Larson 1996 Cultural Resources Field Assessment of the Schneider Homes Renton Apartments Project, Renton, King County, Washington. Letter report from Larson Anthropological/Archaeological Services, Seattle to Kenneth Peckham, Schneider Homes, Incorporated. 17 July. Metsker, Charles 1926 Metsker's Atlas of King County, Washington. Metsker Map Company, Tacoma. Mullineaux, Donald 1970 Geology of Renton, Auburn, and Black Diamond Quadrangles, King County, Washington. United States Geological Survey, Professional Paper 672. Paige, George 1857 Annual Report. Letter to Col. J. W. Nesmith, Superintendent of Indian Affairs, Washington Territory, from G. A. Paige, Local Indian Agent, Fort Kitsap, Washington Territory, 1 August. In Report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs Accompanying the Annual Report of the Secretary of Interior far the Year 1857, pp. 329-332. William A. Harris Printer, Washington D.C. Porter, Stephen C., and Terry W. Swanson 1998 Radiocarbon Age Constraints on Rates of Advance and Retreat of the Puget Lobe of the Cordilleran Ice Sheet during the Last Glaciation. Quaternary Research 50: 205-213. Reinart, Frank, and Marcus Byers 2006 Geotechnical Engineering Report Proposed Automotive Body Shop SW Grady Way and Raymond Avenue SW, Renton Washington. Kleinfelder, Inc. Report No. 64923. Prepared for Pharr Company, Bellevue, Washington. 16 Sanborn Map Company 1927 Insurance Maps of Renton, Washington. Sanborn Map Company, New York. 1944 Insurance Maps of Renton, Washington. Sanborn Map Company, New York. Shong, Michael and Charlie Hodges 2003 Results of the Cultural Resources Assessment for Renton Fitness (Fred Meyer Shopping Center) King County, Washington n. NWAA Report Number WA 03-53. Northwest Archaeological Associates, Inc. Seattle. Prepared for Fred Meyer, Incorporated, Portland, Oregon. Slauson, Morda 1967 Where was the Black River? Article on file at the Renton Public Library, Renton, Washington. 1976 Renton, from Coal to Jets. Renton Historical Society, Renton, Washington. Snyder, Dale E., Philip S. Gale, and Russell F. Pringle 1973 Soil Survey of King County Area, Washington. Soil Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture, in Cooperation with the Washington Agricultural Experiment Station. Smith, Marion W. 1940 The Puyallup Nisqually. Columbia University Contributions to Anthropology, Volume 32. Columbia University Press, New York. Stevens, Isaac I. 1854 Report on Tribes between the Head of Navigation of the Mississippi River to the Pacific Ocean: Indian Tribes West of the Cascades. Letter from Isaac 1. Stevens, Governor and Superintendent of Indian Affairs, Washington Territory to George W. Maypenny, Commissioner of Indian Affairs, Washington D.C., 16 September. In Message from the President of the United States to the Two Housed of Congress, Part 1, pp. 392-459. A.O.P. Nicholson Printer, Washington D.C. Tingwall, D., L. N. Goetz, J. D. Raber, and B. Bundy 2007 Renton Civic Dump Site (45KI766). State of Washington Archaeological Site Inventory Form. On file at the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia, Washington. Trudel, Stephanie E. and Lynn L. Larson 2003 Renton Retail Site Archaeological Resources and Traditional Cultural Places Assessment, King County, Washington. LAAS Technical Report 42003-23. Larson Anthropological Archaeological Services, Limited, Gig Harbor, Washington. Submitted to Trace and Associates, Issaquah, Washington. Trudel, Stephanie E., Dennis E. Lewarch, and Lynn L. Larson 2004 Community Health Care Facility Archaeological Resources and Traditional Cultural Places Assessment ,City of Renton, King County, Washington. LAAS Technical Report 42003-14. Larson Anthropological Archaeological Services, Limited, Gig Harbor, Washington. Submitted to Trace and Associates, Issaquah, Washington. United States Army Corps of Engineers 1907 Duwamish-Puyallup Survey of 1907 (Black River to Lake Washington). United States Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District, Seattle. United States Court of Claims 1927 Number of Duwamish Villages on Duwamish River and Lake Washington. In the Court of Claims of the United States, the Duwamish et al. Tribe of Indians v. the United States of America, 17 Claimants Exhibit w-2, filed October 2, 1927. Records Group 123. Records of the U.S. Court of Claims No. F.-275. On file National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, D.C. United States Geological Survey 1949 Renton, Washington Quadrangle. 7.5 -minute Series (Topographic). United States Geological Survey, Denver. 1983 Renton, Washington Quadrangle. 7.5 -Minute Series (Topographic). United States Geological Survey, Denver. United States Surveyor General 1865a General Land Office Map, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Olympia. 1865b Field Notes of the Survey of Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Olympia. 1873 Field Notes of the Survey of Township 23 North, Range 5 East, Willamette Meridian. Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Olympia. Waterman, T. T. ca. 1920 Puget Sound Geography. Unpublished manuscript on file Pacific Northwest Collection, Allen Library, University of Washington, Seattle. Williams, Walter R., Richard M. Laramie, and James J. Ames 1975 Catalog of Washington Streams and Salmon Utilization, Volume 1, Puget Sound Region, Washington State Department of Fisheries, Olympia. 18 Archaeological Sampling of Property at 621 SW Grady Way, Renton, Washington DRAFT REPORT David T. Francis, Ph.D. and David V. Ellis, M.P.A. November 3, 2005 Prepared for the Washington State Auto Dealers Association Seattle, Washington Willamette Cultural Resources Associates, Ltd. Portland, Oregon Wi1lametteCRA Report 08-13 fl ` '�r7ing �ivlsi�, r. 24 7�1 I �] Introduction The Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) is considering purchase of a property at 621 SW Grady Way in Renton, Washington. To assist the WSADA in this decision, an assessment of the potential for archaeological resources on the property was conducted by Historical Research Associates, Inc. (HRA). HRA reviewed the literature on previous archaeological studies in the Renton area and other information. Based on their research, HRA concluded that the property had a high potential for archaeological resources and recommended that subsurface probes be excavated across the property to determine if such resources are present (Kaehler and Thompson 2008). The WSADA recently decided to proceed with implementing the HRA recommendations and has contracted with Willamette Cultural Resources Associates, Ltd. (WillametteCRA) to undertake subsurface exploratory excavations on the property. In addition to the field investigations, Willamette CRA has reviewed records of the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation (DAHP) to update the research conducted by HRA. WillametteCRA has also undertaken coordination with four Indian Tribes on behalf of the WSADA regarding the proposed excavations. WillametteCRA completed the archaeological sampling at the Renton property on October 27, 2008. 'Phis report provides the results of the sampling, which can be quickly summarized as not identifying any prehistoric or historic archaeological remains older than 50 years. Further details of environmental and cultural history help illuminate the significance of these results. In addition, a narrative review of the project background helps clarify the process by which properties like the property of interest to the WSADA came to be developed. A third and fourth section provide a thorough account of the methods and results that enabled WillametteCRA to make this determination, as well as recommendations and references. Environmental and Cultural History As part of their work to assess the potential of archaeological resources on the property, HRA provided a detailed overview of both environmental and cultural context. The brief treatment of these topics that follows below is intended to re -familiarize readers with only the most salient features of the overview. The Renton area was buried under several thousand feet of ice of the Puget Lobe of Cordilleran ice between about 15,000 and 12,000 years ago (ht www.ec -.wa. v ro ams sea u etsound tour colo .ht"). Glacial meltwaters formed massive lakes and helped accumulate thick beds of sediment that are still very much in evidence at the property. Runoff from mountain streams also played a dynamic role in the project neighborhood, as both the Black and Cedar rivers funneled into the Renton valley, their courses often changing over time. The floodplain between these competing rivers probably stabilized enough to provide an occupation surface by about 2,500 years ago (Kaehler and Thompson 2008:3). Although prehistoric populations existed in the Puget Sound area soon after the retreat of the glaciers, the surrounding high-energy landscape of postglacial meltwater and flood deposit, has made detection of such ancient cultures highly problematic. 'Tellingly enough, all of the eight sites that Historical Research Associates (HRA) identified within 2.0 miles from the site, are fairly recent, dating between 200 — 500 years ago (Lew -arch 2004:3) based on stratigraphy. In their 2008 report, HRA speculated that the area "was probably available for prehistoric Native American groups between 2,500 and 2,000 years ago" (Kaheler and Thompson 2008:13) by the same tribe (the Duwamish) that lived in the area when Euroamericans first began filing land claims along the Black and Cedar river corridor. For the 8,000 years prior to that time when people lived in western Washington, the property area was probably not accessible for occupation due to drainage patterns or swamp - like conditions that would have discouraged settlement. The Duwamish relied on salmon runs along these rivers, living in a series of villages located close to traditional fishing grounds. Moreover, edible plant foods such as camas and wapato, which favor wet environments similar to floodplains, contributed substantially to native diets. Historic development of the Renton area (first platted in 1875) occurred in tandem with the discovery of coal beds at the south end of Lake Washington as early as 1853 (http://www.burgesslegacy.org/coalhst.htrn). As HRA's report mentions, the property on Southwest Grady Way was not part of the city of Renton until the mid -twentieth century (Kaehler and Thompson 2008:6). The property itself (Figure 1 — photo of site) treasures approximately half an acre, characterized by a fairly flat landform with minor dips and mounds caused by previous disturbance. It is wooded primarily with mature bigleaf maple (/icer mae mphyllum), along with occasional alder (Alms sp.), cottonwood (Populus sp.), English holly (Ilex aquifolium), and spurge laurel (Daphne laurrola). Understory shrubs include natives such as swordfern (Polysticbum munitum) and salal (Gaultheria sballon), as well as invasive blackberries (Rubes- sp.) and Scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius), particularly on the western edge. Project Background The undeveloped, half -acre project site on has been available for purchase and development for the past several years (Figure 2). The environmental firm Kleinfelder first performed geotechnical evaluation of the property for the Pharr Company, which had proposed the construction of an automotive body= shop. When, in late 2007/early 2008, the WSADA expressed interest in acquiring the property for construction of a multi-level conference center, it contracted with Kleinfelder (through The Robinson Company) to re- evaluate the site with the specific development needs of the WSADA. The HRA study referenced above was undertaken following the geotechnical studies and incorporated the results of geotechnical excavations. The WillametteCRA sampling on October 27 consisted of excavation of a series mechanical auger probes and a backhoe pit at the direction of WillametteCRA staff archaeologist David Francis, Ph.D. Rather than repeat the research work completed by 2 HRA in terms of the site's environrnent, ethnography, and history, this report focuses more narrowly on the sampling, further details of which are provided below ("Methods and Results" section). While the bulk of WCRA's work consisted of examining the sediments from the subsurface explorations, Dr. Francis also reviewed DAHP records to determine if any= new data regarding cultural resources in the area had been submitted to the DAHP in the eight months since HRA's report of February 2008. Methods and Results Updated Records Review Prior to the sampling work on October 27, WillametteCRA conducted an updated records review at DAHP in Olympia on October 14. Previous review of DAHP records by HRA indicated that 16 archaeological studies over the past 30 years focused on the floodplain of the Black and Cedar rivers, the same general landform as the property occupies. These studies had identified eight prehistoric and historic sites within two miles of the present project location. Updated research conducted by WillametteCRA revealed that a single additional study had recently been completed in the vicinity (Hoyt et al. 2008), which had not identified any no new archaeological resources within two miles of the property. WillametteCRA also identified several additional (previously undertaken) archaeological studies in the area (Shong and Miss 2004; Smith and Hoffman 2007) that had also not resulted in any new sites- Archaeological ites_ Archaeolo cal Sam lin In order to obtain a representative sample of the property's subsurface deposits as fully as possible, WCRA determined that eight mechanical auger probes (.MAs) should be excavated across the property (Figure 3). Since several of the previously identified sites in the vicinity (Tualdad Altu, 45KI59 and the Renton Sears Fred Meyer Store site, 45KI439) concealed deeply buried deposits up to 3 meters (m) (9.8 feet [ft]) beneath the surface (Kaehler and Thompson 2008:11), our MAs were excavated to depths of 3.7-4.6 in (12-15 ft). As mentioned at the outset of this report, no cultural resources older than 50 years were observed in any of the bore holes. A single ceramic fragment, with a blue-green glaze and floral pattern, possibly from a cup or bowl, appeared in the first 50 centimeters (cm) (20 inches [in] D of MA -1. This fragment is consistent with other modern debris on the surface of the site and was not interpreted as historic. Fragments of clear glass, both bottle and probable window glass, occurred as deep as 1.5 m (5 ft) in MA -2, associated with the fill that characterized MA -2. While the dense blackberry underbrush on the property must have been cleared to enable geotechnical evaluation in 2006, significant re -growth prevented easy access. Kevin Waller of Northwest Excavating cleared a path for the drill rig, operated by Codey Fernandez and Kevin Rogers of Gregory Drilling. Removal of one or two smaller trees enabled the drill rig to access pockets in the southwest corner of the property. The extreme southeast corner, densely crowded by trees and overgrown logs, could not be accessed. All other areas of the site accommodated the drilling equipment. Once the brush had been cleared, Dr. Francis inspected the surface, noting abundant cobbles among the humus and leaves, as well as modern refuse around the edges and especially along the west side of the property where the shoulder of Raymond Avenue offers parking. A pile of concrete foundation blocks (Figure 4), possibly the remains of a cistern or trough, fortes a mound in the central western portion of the property, although no buildings have been known to exist on the property (Kaehler and Thompson 2008:8, 13). It is likely that this material was introduced or dumped on the property as a convenient means of disposal. With a diameter of 16 cm (6'/4 in), the auger created a hole measuring approximately 30 cm (12 in) in diameter. Soil would quickly mound up around the perimeter of the bore. In order to sample sediments without slowing the progress, Mr. Rogers shoveled off the spoils that the rotating auger continually brought to the surface over to Dr. Francis, who inspected the soil and recorded notes approximately every 50 cm (18-24 in). The location of each NIA was recorded with GPS and photographed. GPS data for the eight 14LA's is as follows: Bore Hole# Wl' UTM Elev. , X-1 0558324 5257380 3m MA -2 0558331 5257363 13m MA -3 0558401 5257388 12m MA -4 0558392 5257386 8m NU -5 0558369 5257390 15m MA -6 0558362 5257378 10m MA -7 0558349 5257374 5m MA -8 0558337 5257375 Stn To better view the stratigraphy of the site down to a depth of 3.7 m (12 ft), Dr. Francis directed Mr. Waller to open a west -east trench of approximately 3.7 m in length and 0.9 in (3 ft) in width along the central northern edge of the property. At a depth of 1.8 m (6 ft), Dr. Francis cleaned the west wall of the trench and photographed three primary strata below the topsoil (Figure 5): a light brown silty -sand with 20% gravels and occasional fist - sized cobbles (stratum 1) extending to a depth of 0.9 m (3 ft); a medium brown silty -sand with 10% gravels and no cobbles (stratum 2) extending to a maximum depth of almost 1.8 m, and a grey -blue silty clay= without gravels or cobbles (stratum 3) sloping to the south to a minimum depth of 1.5 m (5 ft) and maximum depth of 1.8 m in the north. The grey -blue clay bears a strong resemblance to Lawton clay, the dark blue -grey clay and silt that many Northwest geologists attribute to accumulation in a massive freshwater lake created by glacial meltwaters (see http: / /www.ecy.wa.gov/progratns / sea /pugetsound/tour/geology.html). The gravelly sands above the clay likewise bear a striking resemblance to what is termed in local geological parlance Esperance Sand, a loose, yellow sand desposited by glacial meltwater and mountain stream run-off. The boundary between the sand and the clay, is clearly visible in the west wall profile of the trench. 4 Mr. Waller continued excavating the trench down another 1.8 m (6 ft), bringing the bucket up to the surface for macro -photographs of stratum 3, which below 1.8 m graded into a grey silty clay mottled with red clays. The trench was then backfilled_ While minor differences occurred between the eight MAs, the three basic strata observed in the trench were also typically present across the property. All three strata correspond to what Ward and Hyllseth (2008:3) interpreted as "younger alluvium" typical of low energy environments. Below the topsoil, a layer of light brown silty -sand with 20% rounded gravels, rootlets, and occasional fist -sized cobbles extended to a depth of about 2.4- 3.0.m (8-10 feet), when an increase in clay content could be detected by a sudden "balling" of sediments into small pebble -sized clumps by a depth of 3.7 m (12 ft). Below this depth, gravels and cobbles were absent and the "balling" increased in size to become fist -sized by about 4.0 m (13 feet). Moments after the appearance of larger clumps of medium brown silty clay loam, the auger would bring up a distinctive grey -blue silty clay, often wet to the touch (Figure 6). This grey -blue silty clay is probably the same "deltaic mud" that has been abundantly documented throughout the Green and Duwamish valleys (see, for example, Shong and Miss 2004:3). Holes were terminated at this stratum and backfilled with bentonite. Six of the eight NLA s reached depths of 4.6 m (15 ft) below the surface. Two others, MA -1 and MA -2, in the western portion of the site, were terminated at 3.7-4.0 m (12-13 ft) in recognition of the fact that alluvial sands are much deeper in the western portion of the site, as established by former geotechnical analysis. Indeed, in these two MAs, the grey -blue clay was not detected on even the tip of the drill teeth at 4.0 in below the surface. It should be noted that the relatively shallow depth of the archaeological borings did not at any time reach the 9-12 m (30-40 ft) range that many of the geotechnical borings did, and that the "older alluvium" observed by Ward and Hyllseth below depths of 6.1 m (20 ft) was not in evidence. Based on the 2008 geotechnical report, WillatnetteCRA staff had an expectation that native soils lay deeply buried on the property, possibly as much as 1.5 m (5 ft) beneath fill consisting of sand, gravel, and construction debris. With the single possible exception of MA -2, WCRA did not observe fill to extend below 0.75 m (2.5 ft) at any point across the site. Particles of sheetrock or drywall, as well as blacktop macadam and clear glass fragments, appeared in the soil as deep as 1.5 in in MA -2, but because the surface area surrounding the top of this MA was densely littered with the same material, it seems just as likely that such debris was falling in from the sidewall or otherwise contaminating the sample and that the fill did not extend as deeply as it might appear. While Kleinfelder's report (2008, Appendix A -3b and A-6) indicates that the depth of fill in hole B-2 extended to about 1.5 m (5 feet), the immediately adjacent '1'1'-3 shows fill extending only 35 cm (14 in) below the surface. Since MA -1 was also placed in the same area in the northwest corner of the property, it would have been reasonable to expect to see fill material similar to the Kleinfelder's B-2 or TP -3, yet the light brown silty sands with 20% gravels that occurred in MA -1 from beneath the topsoil down to more than 2 m (6 ft) did not contain any of the modern debris characteristic of fill. 5 Dr. Francis observed that the ground surface lies below street level at least 1 m (3.3 ft) on both sides of Southwest Grady Way. This difference in elevation suggests that perhaps the upper portion of the soil on the property had been pushed north to create a berm or raised platform for the road, possible in the 1920s when a Metsker Map first records a spur of the Columbia and Puget Sound Railroad about half a mile north (Kaehler and Thompson 2008:8). With these observations taken into consideration, along with the direct evidence offered by the NIAs, it would seem most likely that the light brown gravelly sands across the site are NOT fill, but more consistent with floodplain deposits of the Slack and Cedar rivers. Fill is more commonly associated in the area with the continuous presence of artificial materials in the sediment such as asphalt (see, for example, Smith and Hoffman 2007:4). As Kaehler and Thompson (2008:3) emphasize in their reading of Kleinfelder's work, the absence of fill along the southern boundary is noteworthy due to flood deposits occurring immediately beneath the topsoil. In Dr. Francis' interpretation, this is in fact true for much of the site, not just the southern boundary. Klein£cldet's Ward and Hyllseth (2008:3) also observed that during the winter of 2006, when they conducted the geotechnical evaluation, "groundwater was generally encountered ... at depths ranging between 6 and 9 feet below ground surface." During WCRA's investigation, groundwater was not detected until 4-5 m (13-16 ft), consistent with Kleinfelder's hypothesis that seasonal fluctuation of groundwater could be anticipated. To be precise, WillametteCRA interpreted the presence of groundwater as a very wet blue -grey clay that fell or ran freely off the drill bit. Tribal Coordination WillarnetteCRA sent certified letters on October 13, 2008, to the cultural resource contacts with the Duwarnish, .Muckleshoot, Puyallup, and Suquamish Tribes informing the Tribes of the proposed field investigations and inviting Tribal representatives to be present. We also requested any information or concerns the Tribes might have regarding the location. Postal Service receipts indicated all four letters were delivered. The letters were followed up with telephone calls and emails informing theTribes of the scheduled fieldwork and reiterating the invitation for Tribal representatives to be present. None of the Tribes responded to these communications. Copies of this report will be provided to all four Tribes. Recommendations The WillametteCRA field investigation observed no evidence of archaeological or historical resources on the surface or in the subsurface samples. None of our observations indicated that archaeological or historical resources are likely to be present. It is therefore our professional opinion that development on the property is unlikely to encounter any archaeological or historical resources. No further archaeological studies are therefore recommended. Should evidence of archaeological resources be encountered during construction that may be undertaken by the WSADA, all ground -disturbing activity should ccasc immediately in the vicinity of the discovery and the DAHP and Tribes promptly notified. Further ground -disturbing activity should not resume until approved by the DAHP and Tribes. 0 Should evidence of human remains be encountered, all ground -disturbing activity should cease immediately in the vicinity of the discovery and the City of Renton Police Department, the King County Coroner, DAHP, and the Tribes promptly notified to ensure compliance with RCW 27.44.055 and RCW 68.60.055. Further ground -disturbing activity should not resume until approved by the appropriate agencies and Tribes. References Hoyt, Bryan, James B. Harrison III, and Paula Johnson 2008 Cultural Resources Survey of the Cedar Ra pids Floodplain Restoration Project, King County, Wlashington. Submitted to King County Water and Land Resources Division, Seattle. Kaehler, Gretchen and Gail Thompson 2008 Potential for Arehaeological Resources at the VSADA Parcel on SWC Gray [sic] ray, City of Renton, King Count, Wlashington. Historical Research Associates, Inc. Submitted to The Robinson Company, Seattle, Washington. Lewarch, Dennis E. 2004 Dexudidew, the Little Cedar River Fishing Site. Site inventory form on file at the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, Olympia, Washington. Shong, Michael, and Christian Miss 2004 Cullural Resource Manitoring for the South Treatment Plant Cogeneration Facility, City of Renton, King County, Wlashington. Northwest Archaeological Associates inc., Seattle. Prepared for King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks, Seattle.. Smith, Craig S., and Robin Hoffman 2007 Cultural Resource Inventory of the Columbia Bank Parcel, King County, lllashington. Entrix, Inc. Seattle. Prepared for Zenczak & Partners, Architects, Tacoma, Washington. Ward, Scott, and Rolf Hyllseth 2008 Preliminary Geotechnical Evaluation, Proposed Development, 621 South Grady Wray, Renton, Washington. Klemfelder West, Inc.. Submitted to Washington State Auto Dealers Association, Seattle. Washington State Department of Ecology, Puget Sound Shorelines (website) 2008 htip://www.ecy.wa.gov/t)rogranis/sea/pugetsoundltour/geology.html 7 s ' It evil �4 ark OW i 56rrpinq 51aWSADA LG.+Cb KU Property _. 7 ry, � ,, �� 1 S P y n}'ems I�5" S:II ; �}� y • � _ _ � : � �.,,,,�,1 � - I � _ � . -i. �� + �: �. � •� � _ � fir'+ 4. � Y+L, PWk 1 aP^A ZF ` #1 Tukwila ,�r V.1Base map from Renton, WA 1994. USGS j!7 -r7!.0 7.5 -minute topographic quadrangle. rl', , :..• 0 180 360 720 1.080 1.440'Meters f r,' N t / Figure 1. WSADA project location. 8 Figure 2. Northern portion of the project property, looking east along SW Grady Way from Raymond Avenue SW. WSAOA '1 0 60 Feet Property N 0 20 Meters 00 MechanlcalAuger Figure 3. location of archaeological exploratory subsurface probes at the project site. 6 Figure 4. Concrete debris in the western portion of the project site. IR Figure 5. West wall of the backhoe trench indicating the three strata identified in the trench. 11 Figure 6. 'Typical exposure of blue-gray silty clay during augering. 12 r 9p City of Renton`;q-� LAND USE PERMIT rj: 2'7�, MASTER APPLICATIOF40f, - PROPERTY OWNER(S) Washington State Auto Dealers Association NAME: 16000 Christensen Rd. #150 ADDRESS: Tukwila 98188 CITy: ZIP: 206-433-6300 TELEPHONE NUMBER: APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: COMPANY (if applicable): ADDRESS: CITY: ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER: CONTACT PERSON Mat Bergman NAME: BCRA COMPANY (if applicable): 2106 Pack Ave. #300 ADDRESS: Tacoma 98442 CITY: ZIP: TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: 253-627-4367 mbergman@bcradesign.com PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: Washington State Auto Dealer Association Headquarters PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)ILOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 621 SW Grady Way KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 334040-4730 EXISTING LAND USE(S): Vacant Land PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Office Building EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: Commercial Corridor PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable) EXISTING ZONING: CA w/ Auto Mall Overlay PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): SITE AREA (in square feet): 33,577 sf SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED: NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: N/A PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable) NIA NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable) NIA NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable). N/A C:' UserslvfabrelAppDatalL.ocal%MicrosoftlWindows"Temlaurary Internet FileslContent.Outkwk\QVB75UON',.maslerapp.doc X0 P. _JJECT INFORMA NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): 9,073 SF SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NIA NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): NIA NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): S TION contll sued PROJECT VALUE: 1.95 MIL. IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): ❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE ❑ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA TWO ❑ FLOOD HAZARD AREA sq. ft. ❑ GEOLOGIC HAZARD sq. ft. ❑ HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. ❑ SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES sq. ft. ❑ WETLANDS sq. ft. I LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY I [Attach leaal description on separate sheet with the following information included) SITUATE IN THE _NW QUARTER OF SECTION _19, TOWNSHIP _23N_, RANGE _5E_, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s)1 { 6 • �'� "J r e- , declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) the current owner of the property involved in this application or the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements ;?nd answers herein contain and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. '7116 L /'- r Signature of Owner/Re'presentative Date Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that V, C_vL k (2) 4 A�or <1 �) () ( y signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be histherltheir free andylluntary act for the J uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. Dated 110 N �4 iOUsb�4 Public in and forXe Stat(yof Washington Notary (Print): Lee S9_ My appointment expires: Q I `7 a��✓� Internet Files',.Cuntent.Outlook'',QVB75UON',masterapp.doc - 2 - I LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY I [Attach leaal description on separate sheet with the following information included) SITUATE IN THE _NW QUARTER OF SECTION _19, TOWNSHIP _23N_, RANGE _5E_, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s)1 { 6 • �'� "J r e- , declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) the current owner of the property involved in this application or the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements ;?nd answers herein contain and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. '7116 L /'- r Signature of Owner/Re'presentative Date Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that V, C_vL k (2) 4 A�or <1 �) () ( y signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be histherltheir free andylluntary act for the J uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. Dated 110 N �4 iOUsb�4 Public in and forXe Stat(yof Washington Notary (Print): Lee S9_ My appointment expires: Q I `7 a��✓� Internet Files',.Cuntent.Outlook'',QVB75UON',masterapp.doc - 2 - Reft m Address: City Clerk's Office City of Renton 1455 South Grady Way Renton WA 98057 20090603000594.009 JIMP SE OF RYSrRICrWt COVENANTSFroperty Tyr Psnet Number. 334044473004 ProjectF'de#: NIA Stred Inteaccum: SW Grady Way &Raymond Ave SW Rrttarenec Nua+begtq of Docummta assigned or released: Additional reference nrwrbers are on page Grantor(s): Grantee(s): 1. City of Renton 1. )Frederick L Stieuer, Thomas McFarlan LEGAL DESCRIPUON: Lots 6 -16 inchrsrve, Block 28, D. C. Mlman's Eadington Gardens Addition to the City of Seattle, Vol. 17, Pge'74, Icing County, Washington. All situate in the Northeast Quarter of 3oction 19, Township 23 North 5 fit, King County, W Wheteas the Granter, as named above, is the holder of a restrictivc covenant acquired from the above maned Grantor dated April 30, I984 and recorded under Reoonding Number 8444300577 of Kong County, State of Washington; and WHEREAS, the City of Renton, WasbhWon did require certain restrictive covenant as a condition of approval far the rar6ning of the subject property in 1994; and, WREREAS, said restrictive covonant applied to the then orront zoning; and, WHEREAS, the zoning of this site has subsequently changed; and, WHEREAS, the City Council atdlmmil the removal of the restrictive covenant on March 16,2009; NOW, TFMUTORE, the City of Recton does hcteby authorize the release of the restrictive covenant descrM above on the land described above. IN YM7 ESS WHEREOF, said City has caused this instrument to be executed this day -A ' 124�- City of n I P SEAL A T .�'.rl�.i.i 1b: ,�is�l.rt.c c� J. Bonnie Walton, City t:lerl< i Public Record LQUIMviewage I -of 2 Createa: avi . 20090603000594.002 STATE OF WASHINGTON )Ss COUNTY OF KING ) jrir,�rir. 1 certify that I Imuv or have nfisfictwy evidence that t� i�e.r, ik. � +�►ti fl b yc It fp; R - Af �� signed this insbvaiw and tSt; O�'- z wl wwledged that hel aulhariud ro exxute the inshn►Fn t and a*wwl ed it as the and U, �, ARY ,�, + -kf s. o be the fives and vohmtary of such y ' ci f••'� 1 RSCS and pnrpases iWentioned in the instrument. PUBV ' O _+9jF 4FLW PiKi`�c�t�; Notary mint} m and for the Sffite Washington Myappointmentexpires: Dated. � OLQl— 0-100 _ PREAPPLICATION MEETING FOR AUTO DEALERS ASSOC HEADQUARTERS SEC OR GRAD Y AND RAYMOND AVE SW CITY OF RENTON Department of Community and Economic Development Planning Division PREY 2-040 June 07, 2012 Contact Information: Planner Rocale Timmons Public Works Reviewer: Arneta Henninger Fire Prevention Reviewer: Dave Pargas Building Department Reviewer: Craig Burnell Phone: 425.430.7219 Phone: 425.430.7298 Phone: 425.430.7023 Phone: 425.430.7290 `: -fty of 13 !e��ta� an,, r- -Division U[ 2 4 2012 t'' rfcJf�-1i�� ��� rE Please retain this packet throughout the course of your project as a reference. Consider giving copies of it to any engineers, architects, and contractors who work on the project. You will need to submit a copy of this packet when you apply for land use and/or environmental permits. Pre-screening: When you have the project application ready for submittal, call and schedule an appointment with the project manager to have it pre-screened before making all of the required copies. The pre -application meeting is informal and non-binding. The comments provided on the proposal are based on the codes and policies in effect at the time of review. The applicant is cautioned that the development regulations are regularly amended and the proposal will be formally reviewed under the regulations in effect at the time of project submittal. The information contained in this summary is subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision -makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Planning Director, Development Services Director, Department of Community and Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator and City Council). FIRE & EMERGENCY SERVICES DEPARTMENT r City of M E M O R A N D U M DATE: June 5, 2012 TO: Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner FROM: Corey Thomas, Plans Review Inspector SUBJECT: Washington State Automobile Dealers Association The fire flow requirement is 1,500 gpm based on a fully fire sprinklered building. A minimum of two fire hydrants are required. One fire hydrant is required within 50 fe the proposed building and one hydrant is required within 3 eet. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code. The existing hydrants all need 5 -inch storz fittings in order to meet code and they do not have them at present. It appears adequate fire flow exists in this area. One new hydrant will be required within 50-.,.— feet 0-�feet of the fire department connection. 2. The fire mitigation impact fees are currently applicable at the rate of $0.52 per square foot of building area. Fee is paid at time of building permit issuance. 3. Both an approved fire alarm and fire sprinkler system is required throughout the building. Separate plans and permits are required to be submitted to the Renton Fire Department for review and permitting. Fire alarm system shall be fully addressable and full detection is required. A direct outside door is required to the fire sprinkler riser control room. 4. Fire department apparatus access is adequate. 5. An electronic site plan is required to be submitted to the Renton Fire Department for pre -fire planning purposes prior to occupancy of the building. pvw dol-- OF -V- T7" 1% Q <�Ma - 3o�u sF }�tt City DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITYof AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: June 7, 2012 TO: Rocale Timmons, Planner FROM: Arneta Henninger, Plan Review SUBJECT: Washington State Auto Dealers Headquarters 621 SW Grady Way — Parcel 334040-4730 PRE 12-040 NOTE: The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary is preliminary and non- binding and may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official city decision -makers. Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. I have completed a preliminary review for the above -referenced proposal for the Washington State Auto Dealers Headquarters at the southeast corner of the intersection of SW Grady Way and Raymond Ave SE in Section 19, Township 23N, Range 5E. The following comments are based on the pre -application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant. Water 1. This site is located in the City of Renton Water service area. 2. This project site is located in the 196 Water Pressure Zone. The static water pressure at the street level is about 75. 3. There is an existing 12" DI watermain located in Raymond Ave SW and in SW Grady Way. See City of Renton water drawing W1904 as -built for details. 4. The project will need to provide domestic service with a Reduced Pressure device in a Hot Box, irrigation service and fire service with a DDCVA. 5. Per the City Fire Marshal, the fire flow requirement is 1,500 gpm based on a fully fire sprinklered building. A minimum of two fire hydrants are required. One fire hydrant is required within 150 -feet of the proposed building and one hydrant is required within 300 -feet. This distance is measured along the travel route. Existing hydrants can be counted toward the requirement as long as they meet current code. The existing hydrants all need 5 -inch storz fittings in order to meet code and they do not have them at present. It appears adequate fire flow exists in this area. One new hydrant will be required within 50 -feet of the fire department connection. The number of additional hydrants required is dependent on the calculated fire flow. ICA �1 Washington State Auto Dealers Heac 'ers— PRE 12-040 Page 2 of 3 June 7, 2012 6. The Water System Development Charges are based on the size of the (each and ali) water meter(s). These fees are triggered by an additional water or upsizing an existing water meter. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued, if there is no construction permit then prior to the issuance of the building permit. Sanitary Sewer 1. A commercial building permit will trigger a separate review. 2. There is an existing 12" sanitary sewer main in Raymond Ave SW and an existing 12" in the alley adjacent to the south property line. 3. The proposed project needs to show how they propose to serve the new development with sanitary sewer service for a commercial site (minimum 6" in diameter). 4. Any use in the building subject to oils or grease shall require the installation of a grease interceptor or oil/water separator as determined at the time of plan review. 5. The Sanitary Sewer System Development Charges are based on the size of any and all domestic water meter(s). These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued, if there is no construction permit then prior to the issuance of the building permit. Storm Drainage 1. 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. 2. The Surface Water SDC fees are $0.405 (but not less than $1,012) per square foot of new impervious area. These fees are collected at the time a construction permit is issued. Street Improvements 1. Construction of a commercial building will trigger a separate review. 2. Street improvements will be required to be installed across the full frontage of both SW Grady Way and Raymond Ave SW. 3. Staff would support a street modification request for a 5' sidewalk and 8' planter strip on SW Grady Way. 4. There is existing street lighting on SW Grady Way. 5. Additional right-of-way is not required on SW Grady Way. 6. There is no existing curb on Raymond Ave SW. The street section on Raymond Ave SW requires a curb set 18' from centerline, a 7' planter strip, and a 5' sidewalk. General Comments 1. 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. 2. All plans shall be tied to a minimum of two of the City of Renton Horizontal and Vertical Control Network. H.\CED\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPPS\12-040.Rocale\Plan Review Comments PRE 12-040.doc Washington State Auto Dealers Hk- iarters —PRE 12-040 Page 3 of 3 June 7, 2012 3. 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 permits are issued. There will be additional fees for water service related expenses. See Drafting Standards. H:\CED\Planning\Current Plan ning\PREAPPS\12-040.Roca le\Plan Review Comments PRE 12-040.doc DEPARTMENT OF City of COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC � (e��j-'�� DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: . lune 7, 2012 TO: Pre -Application File No. 12-040 FROM: Rocale Timmons, Associate Planner SUBJECT: Washington State Auto Dealers Headquarter Parcel #: 334040-4730 General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre -application for the above - referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre -application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes in effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision -makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator, Planning Director, Development Services Director, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall or online at www.rentonwa.gov Project Proposal: The subject property is located on the southeast corner of the intersection of Raymond Ave 5 and SW Grady Way at 621 SW Grady Way. The project site totals 32,672 square feet (0.75 acres) in area and is located within the Commercial Arterial (CA) zone. The pre - application packet indicates that the proposal is to construct a 9,000 square foot commercial building on site to be occupied by the Washington State Auto Dealers as their headquarters. The applicant is proposing a total of 44 parking stalls within a surface parking lot to the west of the proposed structure. Access to the site is proposed via a curb cut along SW Grady Way and an alley, along the southern border of the subject property, extending from Raymond Ave SW to Seneca Ave SW. The project site does not appear to contain any critical areas. Current Use: The property is currently vacant. Zoning: The property is located within the Commercial Corridor (CC) land use designation and the Commercial Arterial (CA) zoning classification. The property is also within Area 'A' of the Automall overlay district. In a letter dated January 4, 2008, a determination was made by the City that the use would be allowed in the CA zone and the Automall overlay district as it is an auto -oriented use. h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\12-040.rocale\12-040 (ca wasad association).doc Washington State Auto De -.-.s Headquarters Page 2 of 6 June 7, 2012 The property is also located within Urban Design District V, is subject to additional design elements. Proposals are required have unique, identifiable design treatment in terms of landscaping, building design, signage and street furniture. Development Standards: The project would be subject to RMC 4-2-120A, "Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Designations" effective at the time of complete application (noted as "CA standards" herein). Minimum Lot Size, Width- and Depth — There are no minimum requirements for lot size, lot width or depth within the CA zone at this location. Lot Coverage —The CA zone allows a maximum building coverage of 65 percent, or 7S percent if parking is provided within a building or within an on-site parking garage. The proposal appears to comply with the lot coverage requirements of the zone. Setbacks — Setbacks are the distance between the building and the property line or any private access easement. Setback requirements in the CA zone are as follows: 10 feet minimum for the front yard but may be reduced to zero feet through the Site Plan Review process provided blank walls are not located within the reduced setback; and a 15 foot maximum front yard setback. It appears the proposal complies with the setback requirements of the zone. Gross floor Area —There is no minimum requirements for gross floor area within the CA zone. Building Height —The maximum building height that would be allowed in the CA zone is 50 feet. It appears the existing structure is 2 -stories and has a height well beneath the 50 -foot maximum. Building elevations and detailed descriptions of elements and building materials are required with your conditional use permit review submittal. Screening — Screening must be provided for all surface -mounted and roof top utility and mechanical equipment. The site plan application will need to include elevations and details for the proposed methods of screening. Refuse and Recycling Areas— Refuse and recycling areas need to meet the requirements of RMC 4-4-090, "Refuse and Recyclables Standards" (enclosed). For commercial developments a minimum of 5 square feet per every 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for recyclable deposit areas and a minimum of 10 square feet per 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for refuse deposit areas with a total minimum area of 100 square feet. The location and sire of the refuse and recyclable area could not be verified with the pre - application materials. Landscaping — Except for critical areas, all portions of the development area not covered by structures, required parking, access, circulation or service areas, must be landscaped with native, drought -resistant vegetative cover. The development standards require that all pervious areas within the property boundaries be landscaped. Properties located within Area W of the Automall overlay district are required to provide a 1S - foot -wide landscape strip along SW Grady Way. This frontage requirement is in lieu of the frontage requirement listed for the zone in chapter 44=2 RMC Unimproved portions of the right-of-way may be used in combination with abutting private property to meet the required / 15 -foot landscape strip width. The landscaping shall include a minimum 30 -inch -high berm and red maples (Acer rubrum) planted 25 feet on center. h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\12-040.rocale\12-040 (ca wasad association) doc Washington State Auto Deaf ?adquarters Page 3 of 6 June 7, 2012 A 10 -foot onsite landscape strip would be required along the frontage of Raymond Ave 5W. In addition, in Area 'A' of the Automall overlay, a minimum of 2.5 percent of the gross site area shall be landscaped. The landscaping must be consolidated and located at site entries, the front of the building, or other visually prominent locations as approved through the Site Plan Review process. Please refer to landscape regulations (RMC 4-4-070) for additional general and specific landscape requirements (enclosed). A conceptual landscape plan and landscape analysis meeting the requirements in RMC 4-8-120D.12, shall be submi Washington State Auto De s Headquarters Page 4 of 6 June 7, 2012 property frontage that is occupied by the business. In no case shall the sign exceed a total of 300 square feet (150 square feet per face). The ground/monument sign is limited to 5 feet in height. In addition to the permitted freestanding sign, wall signs with a copy area not exceeding 20% of the facade, to which it is applied, are also permitted. Building Design Standards — Compliance with Urban Design Regulations, District 'D; is required. See the attached checklist and Renton Municipal Code section 4-3-100. The following bullets are a few ' of the standards outlined in the regulations. All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than forty feet (40'). • A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing a street, shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human -scale elements. • Parking shall be located so that no surface parking is located between a building and the front property line, or the building and side property line, on the street side of a corner lot. • The number of driveways and curb cuts shall be minimized, so that pedestrian circulation along the sidewalk is minimally impeded. • All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than forty feet (40'). • Modulations shall be a minimum of two feet (2') deep, sixteen feet (16') in height, and eight feet (S') in width. • On any facade visible to the public, transparent windows and/or doors are reqs to comprise at least fifty percent (50%) of the portion of the ground floor facade that is between four feet (4') and eight feet (S') above ground (as measured on the true elevation). • Buildings shall use at least one of the following elements to create varied and interesting roof profiles (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.15f): (a) Extended parapets; (b) Feature elements projecting above parapets; (c) Projected cornices; (d) Pitched or sloped roofs. • Buildings shall employ material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns, or textural changes. Critical Areas There are no critical areas located on site. Environmental Review The proposed project would be subject to Washington State Environmental Polity Act (SEPA) review due to the size of the project and number of parking stalls. Therefore, an environmental checklist is a submittal requirement. An environmental determination will be made by the Renton Environmental Review Committee. This determination is subject to appeal by either the project proponent, by a citizen of the community, or another entity having standing for an appeal. h_\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\12-040.rocale\12-040 (ca wasad association).doc Washington State Auto Deal eadquarters Page 5 of 6 June 7, 2012 Permit Requirements The proposal would require Administrative Site Plan Approval and Environmental (SEPA) Review. The purpose of the Site Plan process is the detailed arrangement of project elements so as to be compatible with the physical characteristics of a site and with the surrounding area. An additional purpose of Site Plan is to ensure quality development consistent with City goals and policies General review criteria includes the following: a. Compliance and Consistency. Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and approvals, including: b. Off -Site Impacts. Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses. c. On -Site Impacts. Mitigation of impacts to the site d. Access and Circulation. Safe and efficient access and circulation for all users. e. Open Space. Incorporation of public and private open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site; f. Views and Public Access. Provision of view corridors to shorelines and Mt. Rainier, incorporates public access to shorelines, and arranges project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable. g. Services and Infrastructure. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use; h. Signage. Use of signs primarily for the purpose of identification and management of sign elements — such as the number, size, brightness, lighting intensity, and location — to complement the visual character of the surrounding area, avoid visual clutter and distraction, and appear in proportion to the building and site to which they pertain; and L Phasing. Inclusion of a detailed sequencing plan with development phases and estimated time frames, if applicable. The applicant will also be subject to Design Review as part of the Site Plan Review and a Design Checklist shall be completed and submitted as part of the application materials. All applications can be reviewed concurrently in an estimated time frame of S weeks once a complete application is accepted. The Site Plan Review application fee is $1,000. There will also be a technology fee, of 3 %, based on the total land use application fees for the project. The application fee for SEPA Review (Environmental Checklist) is $1,000. Detailed information regarding the land use application submittal is provided in the attached handouts. In addition to the required land use permits, separate construction, building and sign permits would be required. The review of these permits may occur concurrently with the review of the land use permits, but cannot be issued prior to the completion of any appeal periods. Impact. Mitigation Fees: In addition to the applicable building and construction fees, the following mitigation fees would be required prior to the issuance of building permits. Impact h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\12-040.rocale\12-040 (ca wasad association).doc Washington State Auto De Headquarters Page 6 of 6 June 7, 2012 fees, which would replace mitigation fees, may be adopted prior to construction. Those fees are to be determined. ♦ A Transportation Mitigation Fee based on $75.00 per new daily trip attributed to the development; ♦ A Fire Mitigation Fee based on $0.52 per .square foot of new commercial building area. Expiration: Upon site plan approval, the site plan approval is valid for two years with a possible two-year extension_ h:\ced\pianning\current planning\preapps\12-U40.rocale\12-040 (ca wasad association) -doc PLANNING DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS I Density Worksheet 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ b -n'''&] '0?6­ ........ ....... .. ...... Drainage Report 2 siA Ito ... ..... .. .. . ........ Environmental Checklist 4 ......... .. . ............... .. .......... 6 - , 'C , ......... §qg 6 .. ....... ... ....... . ...... .......... ......................... . KEi . ......... e :4: in (Mting� It 'A ........... , u�ny.;., ssos�.Or:5.Mp ;.. This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAM E: A14T_0 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section DATE: X27"z a 4. Planning Section QAWE MPYADE VSER\AForm s%Planni nqlwaiverofsub mittalreqs. A s 02/08 PLANNING DIVISION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS Rehabilitation Plan 4 Wireless: Applicant Agreement Statement 2 AND 3 Inventory of Existing Sites 2AND 3 Lease Agreement, Draft 2 AND 3 Map of Existing Site Conditions 2 AND 3 Map of View Area 2 AND 3 Photosimulations 2 AND 3 This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: _ kV+ A-47Do-A--9z" f -ff- ea(4,xrT2(' 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section DATE: &12Z2 -a12, 4- 12 2-al2- 4_ Planking Section 0:1WEB%PWIDEVSER\AFormslPlanninglwaiverofsubmiltalregs.xls 02108 Project Narrative: Washington State Auto Dealers Association Headquarters Building [WSADA] -WSADA , a new 2 -story 9,073 sf office building with a 6,370 sf foot print at 621 SW Grady Way. -il)l -Land use permits include Site Plan Review X`' -The site is located in the Commercial Corridor land use designation and is zoned CA, with and an Aal�e< "A" Automail overlay. In addition we are in the Urban Design District "D". Adjoining properties to the east is fully developed and zoned CA as well. The properties to the south, west and north are all zoned IM. -The current site is undeveloped. It is covered in brush and cotton woods. This includes the alley on the south side of the site. -No special site features. There is an existing stock pile of soil on the south side of the site, mostly in the alley. - The soils logs show that the site is overlain by 3-6 inches of topsoil. Under that is varying amounts of fill, consisting of medium dense to dense silty sand with varying amounts of gravel, organics and construction debris. On the south part of the site, underlying the fill, is alluvium, comprised of soft to medium stiff silt and loose, silty fine sand. Under that is a second alluvial layer of medium dense to very dense sand with gravel. -The proposed use is an office building for WSADA. The first floor will house the offices for the 5 staff members. There will also be a training room and a board room for use by the association and its members and vendors. The project includes a parking lot with 43 stalls to allow for parking during the associations events. -Access to the site will be from a new drive way on SW Grady Way and also from the alley on the south side. Pedestrian access will be from the sidewalk on SW Grady Way to a new entry plaza at the front door. -Off site improvements include complete improvement of the city's alley on the south side and re- development on the east half of Raymond Ave along our east property line. This work will include re- paving of half of Raymond, new curb, gutter and sidewalk and a new planter strip_ All utilities will be new stubs to the site. -The estimated construction cost for the project is 1.95 million and the fair market value of the project is 1.7 — 1.8 million -We are planning on importing 1,200 yards of structural fill. We are planning to export about 1500 yards of poor soils. -We will be removing approximately 80 cotton wood trees ranging in size from 6" to 30" trunks -During construction, the General contractor will have a Job Shack on site. -We are requesting a modification to the maximum parking allowed. For an office use, we are allowed a max of 4.5 per 1000 sf (9073 /1000 = 9.07 9.07x4.5=41 Stalls) We would like a slight modification to allow for 43 stalls of which two are ADA compliant. Because the association houses a training room that seats about 55 people and a board room that will seat about 30 people, there will be regular times they will not be able to accommodate all of the needed parking and therefore I have tried to maximize the site which left us with 43 stalls. Mountain Construction A geeeer 141,7 4/ of 9ui/d/179 X11 July 11, 2012 Construction Mitigation Description.: Proposed construction dates Site clearing and grading is planned to start late summer or early fall of this year. It will take approximately 3 weeks to complete. At that point the site will be demobilized until April 2013 for the completion of the site work and construction of the building. It is anticipated that this work will take approximately 6 months, completing in October 2013. Hours and days of operation Normal work hours will be used starting at 7:00 am and ending at 4:00 pm, Monday through Friday. Proposed_ hauling/ transportation routes Access from the site will be to SW Grady Way via Raymond Ave. The only significant hauling to or from the site will be in the first phase for the import of fill material. It is anticipated that will take one week. The source of the fill material has not been determined at this time. Measures to be implemented to minimize dust, traffic, and transportation impacts, erosion, mud, noise, and other noxious characteristics The site will be in full compliance of all environmental requirements. Prior to the start of site work full TESC will be in place and inspected by the jurisdiction. Any potential dust created during the site work phase will be controlled through the use of water trucks- There will be no significant impacts to transportation. The structure to be built is standard wood construction and will not create any significant noise. Any special hours proposed for construction or hauling No special hours will be required. Preliminary traffic control plan With the exception of the ncw approach on SW Grady Way and the improvenwilt work on Raymond Ave, a I I work will I)e contained to the site. Specific traffic plans for 11)ese two work items will be submitted for i ,view and approval prior to work commencing. Any quetitions can be directed tr , Jeff Stroud, 253 254-0402, jeff@MOUntainconst.co:11 "dowTtain Construcli(m Inc, 7457 L,oWh Madison ,nia, V%';1 98.109 / re lephow, (253) 474-72181 / FaN (.' 1 70L19 Vv- tic1%.11nu11tai11C0 11t.r0m 1w City of Renton TREE RETENTION WORKSHEET 1. Total number of trees over 6" in diameter' on project site:'. 2. Deductions: Certain trees are excluded from the retention calculation: Trees that are dead, diseased or dangerous2 trees Trees in proposed public streets trees Trees in proposed private access easements/tracts trees Trees in critical areas and buffers trees Total number of excluded trees: 3. Subtract line 2 from line ?: a trees 3. S C> trees 4. Next, to determine the number of trees that must be retained4, multiply line 3 by: 0.3 in zones RC, R-1, RA 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 proposing5 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. _ 1' inches per tree 9. Divide line 7 by line 8 for number of replacement trees6: (if remainder is .5 or greater, round up to the next whole number) 9. Z trees 1. Measured at chest height. 2. Dead, diseased or dangerous trees must be certified as such by a forester, registered landscape architect, or certified arborist, and approved by the City_ 3_ Critical Areas, such as wetlan8s, streams, floodplains and protected slopes, are defined in Section 4-3-050 of the Renton Municipal Code (RMC). 4. Count only those trees to be retained outside of critical areas and buffers- -5 uffers_s. The City may require modification of the tree retention plan to ensure retention of the maximum number of trees per RMC 4-4-130H7a s' Inches of street trees, inches of trees added to critical areas/buffers, and inches of trees retained on site that are less than 6" but are greater than 2" can be used -to meet the free replacement requirement. H: Division/Forms/TreeRetentionW orksheet I U07 Landscape Analysis: Total Square footage of site Building footprint Existing Impervious Area Proposed Impervious Area Building Square Footage (Office Use) Percentage of Lot covered by structures Required Parking Parking Parking Lot Landscaping Automall Overlay "A" 33,579 sf 6,370 sf 0 sf 25,978 sf (77% coverage) 1'` Floor 6,370 sf 2"d Floor_ 2,703 sf Total SF 9,073 sf 7,339/33,579 =22% 9,073/1000=9.073 x 4.5 = 41 Stalls Standard Stalls (9'x20')- 41 Stalls ADA Van Stall (10'x20') —1 Stall ADA Stall (9'x20') —1 Stall Total Stalls -43 Stalls Perimeter 4,232 sf Interior 3,015 sf 33,579 x 2.5% = 840 sf Required 1,150 sf Provided in front of building PLANNING DIVISION DESIGN DISTRICT "D " CHECKLI City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: ir,f7;?life VlSlon 'cUl 2 4 2012 Ensure compliance with design review regulations located in the Renton Municipal Code in order to: a. Maintain and protect property values; b. Enhance the general appearance of the City; c. Encourage creativity in building and site design; d. Achieve predictability, balanced with flexibility; and e. Consider the individual merits of proposals. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This design district checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. The City will use this checklist to determine whether the proposal complies with the Urban Design Regulations in the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4-3-100). There are two categories that have been established: (a) "minimum standards" that must be met, and (b) "guidelines" that, while not mandatory, are considered by the Planning Director in determining if the proposed action meets the intent of the design guidelines if the standard cannot be met. Please describe how your proposal meets each standard. If you are not able to meet the standard, please describe how the proposal meets the intent and guidelines of the applicable section. if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "does not apply". Complete answers may avoid unnecessary delays in the processing of your review. environment. Lots shall be configured'to encourage variety and so that natural light is'aVAilable to ;buildings and open space. The privacy of individuals in residential uses shall be provided'for. . Standard: The availability of natural light (both direct and reflected) and direct sun exposure to nearby buildings and open space (except parking areas) shall be considered when siting structures. We set our building on the corner of the lot per the guidelines for corner lots Standard: Buildings shall be oriented to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. Our building sits on the required setback along the street. We have an extra wide stair and walk that connects our entry plaza to the sidewalk. We have also connected a smaller patio off our secondary entry to the public right away. Standard: The front entry of a building shall be oriented to the street or a landscaped pedestrian -only courtyard. We have provided an entry plaza that is partially covered, will have low concrete walls for seating, will have some exterior lighting and will have landscaping. Standard: Buildings with residential uses located at the street level shall be set back from the sidewalk a minimum of ten feet (10') and feature substantial landscaping between the sidewalk and the building or Have the ground floor residential uses raised above street level for residents' privacy. Does Not Apply . Guiidelirres : Primary entries shall face the street, serve as a focal point, and allow space for social ` interaction. All entries shall include features that make them easily identifialale`:while reflecting the architectural character ofthe building; The primary entry shall be the most uistally prominent entry: Pedestrian access to the'building from the sidewalk, parking lots, and/or other areas shalt be, provided and shall enhance. the overall quality irf'the pedestrian experience on the site. Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing a street, shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human - scale elements. We have an entry plaza on the main street front that is connected to the sidewalk with an extra wide stair and a path for ADA access. We will have wall sconces, low cont. walls for seating and landscape. There will also be a lower open trellis canopy below the main roof structure for an architectural element Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be made visibly prominent by incorporating architectural features such as a facade overhang, trellis, large entry doors, and/or ornamental lighting. We have a large roof overhang with free standing columns and kicker, we have a separate lower open trellis structure for scale, and we have a large door, and will have some wall sconces. Standard Building entries from a street shall be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, or landscaping and include weather protection at least four and one-half feet (4- 1/2') wide (illustration below). Buildings that are taller than thirty feet (30') in height shall also ensure that the weather protection is proportional to the distance above ground level. We have a large roof overhang with free standing columns and kicker, we have a separate lower open trellis structure for scale, and we have a large door, and will have some wall sconces. Standard: Building entries from a parking lot shall be subordinate to those related to the street. Given the orientation of our site, the parking lot entrance shares the main entry plaza Standard: Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows shall be oriented to a street or pedestrian -oriented space; otherwise, screening or decorative features should be incorporated. Our lobby is located on the main street side and is a wrapped by a large glazed wall that opens on to our entry plaza Standard: Multiple buildings on the same site shall direct views to building entries by providing a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping. Does Not Apply Standard: Ground floor residential units that are directly accessible from the street shall include entries from front yards to provide transition space from the street or entries from an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. Does Not Apply Guidelines: careful siting and design treatment shall be,used to acfijeve �r carripatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height; bulk and scale. Standard: At least one of the following design elements shall be used to promote a transition to surrounding uses: 1) Building proportions, including step -backs on upper levels in accordance with the surrounding planned and existing land use forms; or 2) Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller increments; or 3) Roof lines, roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. Additionally, the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may require increased setbacks at the side or rear of a building in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and/or so that sunlight reaches adjacent and/or abutting yards. Our site has right-of-way on three sides and our building is on the opposite end of the site that abuts another property dines: Service elements shall be concentrated and located so that impacts to pedestrians and other ,.abutting' uses are minimized. The impacts of service elements shall be mitigated with landscaping and an enclosure with fencing that is made of .quality materials. Standard: Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the pedestrian environment and adjacent and/or abutting uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where they are accessible to service vehicles and convenient for tenant use. Our loading area is off the back alley and our dumpster enclosure is accessed from the back alley Standard: In addition to standard enclosure requirements, garbage, recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed on all sides, including the roof and screened around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors. Our dumpster/recycling is enclosed on all sides Standard: Service enclosures shall be made of masonry, ornamental metal or wood, or some combination of the three (3). It will be made of CMU to match the base of the building Standard: If the service area is adjacent to a street, pathway, or pedestrian -oriented space, a landscaped planting strip, minimum three feet (3') wide, shall be located on three (3) sides of such facility. Our service area is not on a street, or pedestrian area Guidelines Development that occurs at gateways shi6uld fie d�st'riguiskei with. features that visually indicate to both:pedestians and vehicular traffic th'e uniqueness and prominence of their locations in .: ..:. the City. Examples of these types of features include monuments, public art, and public plaza'--. Standard: Developments located at district gateways shall be marked with visually prominent features. Does not Apply I Standard: Gateway elements shall be oriented toward and scaled for both Pedestrians and vehicles. Does not Apply Standard: Visual prominence shall be distinguished by two (2) or more of the following: 1) Public art; 2) Special landscape treatment; 3) Open space/plaza; 4) Landmark building form; 5) Special paving, unique pedestrian scale lighting, or bollards; 6) Prominent architectural features (trellis, arbor, pergola, or gazebo); 7) Neighborhood or district entry identification (commercial signs do not qualify). Guidelines: Surface parking shall be. located and designed so as to reduce the visual impact of the parking area and associated vehicles. Large areas of surface parking shall also be designed to', accommodate future infill development. Standard: Parking shall be located so that no surface parking is located between a building and the front property line, or the building and side property line, on the street side of a corner lot. The parking lot is located behind the building from Raymond Ave. and is located behind and below a 15' landscape buffer with street trees along Grady Way. in addition, the parking lot is two tiered to help break it up with a pedestrian path, rockery and landscape strip separating the upper from the lower parking areas. A large landscaped area also greats visitors as they drive into the parking lot from Grady Way Standard: Parking shall be located so that it is screened from surrounding streets by buildings, landscaping, and/or gateway features as dictated by location. A 15' landscaping buffer separates the parking lot from the sidewalk, per the code. Guidelines: Parking garages shall not dominate the streetscape; they shall be designed to be complementary with adjacent and abutting buildings. They shall be sited to complement, not subordinate, pedestrian entries. Similar forms, materials, and/or details to the primary building(s) should be used to enhance garages. Standard: Parking structures shall provide space for ground floor commercial uses along street frontages at a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the building frontage width. Does not apply Standard: The entire facade must feature a pedestrian -oriented facade. The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development may approve parking structures that do not feature a pedestrian orientation in limited circumstances. If allowed, the structure shall be set back at least six feet (b') from the sidewalk and feature substantial landscaping. This landscaping shall include a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground cover. This setback shall be increased to ten feet (10') when abutting a primary arterial and/or minor arterial. Does not apply Standard: Public facing facades shall be articulated by arches, lintels, masonry trim, or other architectural elements and/or materials. Does not apply Standard: The entry to the parking garage shall be located away from the primary street, to either the side or rear of the building. Does not apply IStandard: Parking garages at grade shall include screening or be enclosed from view with treatment I such as walls, decorative grilles, trellis with landscaping, or a combination of treatments. Does not apply Standard: The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may allow a reduced setback where the applicant can successfully demonstrate that the landscaped area and/or other design treatment meets the intent of these standards and guidelines. Possible treatments to reduce the setback include landscaping components plus one or more of the following integrated with the architectural design of the building: 1) Ornamental grillwork (other than vertical bars); 2) Decorative artwork; 3) Display windows.- 4) indows;4) Brick, tile, or stone; 5) Pre -cast decorative panels; 6) Vine -covered trellis; 7) Raised landscaping beds with decorative materials; or S) Other treatments that meet the intent of this standard. Does not apply ......................................... Guidelines: Vehicular access toparking p g gauges and parking lots shall not impede, or interrupt.- pedestrian mobility. The impacts of curb cuts to pedestrian access on sidewalks shall be minimized. Standard: Access to parking lots and garages shall be from alleys, when available. If not available, access shall occur at side streets. Access is both off of Grady Way and off the alley. Access from Grady Way was critical for the operation of the association as they have guest and members stopping by. Standard: The number of driveways and curb cuts shall be minimized, so that pedestrian circulation along the sidewalk is minimally impeded. Only one curb cut was added along the existing sidewalk. In addition, this project is providing the city with sidewalk and planter strip along Raymond. We are also completing the city's alley. Guidelines: The pedestrian environment shall be given priority and importance in the design of projects. Sidewalks and/or pathways shall be provided and shall provide safe access to buildings from parking areas. Providing pedestrian connections to abutting properties is an important aspect of connectivity and encourages pedestrian activity and shall be considered. Pathways shall be easily identifiable to pedestrians and drivers. Standard: A pedestrian circulation system of pathways that are clearly delineated and connect buildings, open space, and parking areas with the sidewalk system and abutting properties shall be provided. a. Pathways shall be located so that there are clear sight lines, to increase safety. b. Pathways shall be an all-weather or permeable walking surface, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed surface is appropriate for the anticipated number of users and complementary to the design of the development. A sidewalk is being provided along the lower stalls in the alley to provide pedestrian access to the building entrance. This will keep the pedestrians out of alley. Standard: Pathways within parking areas shall be provided and differentiated by material or texture (i.e., raised walkway, stamped concrete, or pavers) from abutting paving materials. Permeable materials are encouraged. The pathways shall be perpendicular to the applicable building facade and no greater than one hundred fifty feet (150') apart. This side walk will be raise 6" above the parking. Standard: Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of buildings shall be of sufficient width to accommodate anticipated numbers of users. Specifically: a. Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of mixed use and retail buildings one hundred (100) or more feet in width (measured along the facade) shall provide sidewalks at least twelve feet (12') in width. The pathway shall include an eight -foot (8') minimum unobstructed walking surface. b. Interior pathways shall be provided and shall vary in width to establish a hierarchy. The widths shall be based on the intended number of users; to be no smaller than five feet (5') and no reater than twelve feet (121. The entry sidewalk, ADA access and stair from the public sidewalk are extra wide and connect directly to the entry plaza. Sidewalks from secondary exits are all 5' wide Standard: Mid -block connections between buildings shall be provided. Does not apply Guidelines: The pedestrian environment shall; be given priority and importance. in the design of projects. Amenities that encourage pedestrian use,and enhance the pedestrian experience shall be ir�cl►�de¢: ; . _.. . Standard: Architectural elements that incorporate plants, particularly at building entrances, in publicly accessible spaces and at facades along streets, shall be provided. We have provided a covered entry plaza for year round pedestrian use. The plaza connects directly to the public way, the parking lot and the main building lobby and is the center point for pedestrian inaction on this site. A secondary patio is provided at the back door for pedestrian use, this patio is surrounded by landscaping to provide a buffer to surrounding roadway traffic but still has a connection to the public sidewalk to encourage public /private interaction. At all possible locations we have brought landscaping up to the building to provide a buffer for users of the spaces. Standard: Amenities such as outdoor group seating, benches, transit shelters, fountains, and public art shall be provided. a. Site furniture shall be made of durable, vandal- and weather -resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. b. Site furniture and amenities shall not impede or block pedestrian access to public spaces or building entrances. We have our entry plaza with cone. walls for bench seating and we have a rear patio for staff to use during the day Standard: Pedestrian overhead weather protection in the form of awnings, marquees, canopies, or building overhangs shall be provided. These elements shall be a minimum of four and one-half feet (4- 1/2') wide along at least seventy five percent (75%) of the length of the building facade facing the street, a maximum height of fifteen feet (15') above the ground elevation, and no lower than eight feet (8') above ground level. Our entry plaza has a 12' deep roof overhang for weather protection. In addition we have a lower open trellis architectural element that wraps around to the street side. We also have a shallow trellis section for an architectural element in the center section of the building on the street side. We have also provided trellis elements on the west side of the building to help with sun control. Required setbacks keep our building off the side walk and eliminate the need for weather protection along the street frontage. Gu idelines ,Developments located at street intersections shouldf.provide_pedestrian-oriented space at the street`ciirner to emphasize pedestrian activity (illustration below). Recreation and common open space asare'integral aspects of quality development that encobrage'pedestrians and users. These areas shall, be provided in an amount that is adequate to be functional'and usable; they shall also be landscaped and located so that they are appealing to users and pedestrians. Standard: All mixed use residential and attached housing developments of ten (10) or more dwelling units shall provide common opens space and/or recreation areas. Does not apply Standard: Amount of common space or recreation area to be provided: at minimum fifty (50) square feet per unit. Does not apply Standard: The location, layout, and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall be subject to approval by the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee. Does not apply Standard: At least one of the following shall be provided in each open space and/or recreation area (the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may require more than one of the following elements for developments having more than one hundred (100) units): 1) Courtyards, plazas, or multi-purpose open spaces; 2) Upper level common decks, patios, terraces, or roof gardens/pea-patches. Such spaces above the street level must feature views or amenities that are unique to the site and are provided as an asset to the development; 3) Pedestrian corridors dedicated to passive recreation and separate from the public street system; 4) Recreation facilities including, but not limited to, tennis/sports courts, swimming pools, exercise areas, game rooms, or other similar facilities; or 5) Children's play spaces that are centrally located near a majority of dwelling units and visible from surrounding units. They shall also be located away from hazardous areas such as garbage dumpsters, drainage facilities, and parking areas. Does not apply Standard: The following shall not be counted toward the common open space or recreation area requirement: 1) Required landscaping, driveways, parking, or other vehicular use areas; 2) Required yard setback areas. Except for areas that are developed as private or semi -private (from abutting or adjacent properties) courtyards, plazas or passive use areas containing landscaping and fencing sufficient to create a fully usable area accessible to all residents of the development; 3) Private decks, balconies, and private ground floor open space; and 4) other required landscaping and sensitive area buffers without common access links, such as pedestrian trails. Does not apply Standard: All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas) shall provide pedestrian -oriented space. Does not apply Standard: All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas) shall provide pedestrian -oriented space. Does not apply Standard: The pedestrian -oriented space for buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses shall include all of the following: 1) Visual and pedestrian access (including barrier -free access) to the abutting structures from the public right-of-way or a nonvehicular courtyard; and 2) Paved walking surfaces of either concrete or approved unit paving; and 3) On-site or building -mounted lighting providing at least four (4) foot-candles (average) on the ground; and 4) At least three (3) lineal feet of seating area (bench, ledge, etc.) or one individual seat per sixty (60) square feet of plaza area or open space. Does not apply Standard: The following areas shall not count as pedestrian -oriented space for buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses: 1) The minimum required walkway. However, where walkways are widened or enhanced beyond minimum requirements, the area may count as pedestrian -oriented space if the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee determines such space meets the definition of pedestrian -oriented space. 2) Areas that abut landscaped parking lots, chain link fences, blank walls, and/or dumpsters or service areas. Does not apply Standard: Outdoor storage (shopping carts, potting soil bags, firewood, etc.) is prohibited within pedestrian -oriented space. Does not apply Standard: At each corner of the intersections listed below, a public plaza shall be provided: 1) Benson Area: Benson Drive S./108th Avenue S.E. and S.E. 176tH 2) Bronson Area: Intersections with Bronson Way North at: a) Factory Avenue N./Houser Way S.; b) Garden Avenue N.; and c) Park Avenue N. and N. First Street. 3) Cascade Area: Intersection of 116th Avenue S.E. and S.E. 168th Street. 4) Northeast Fourth Area: Intersections with N.E. Fourth at: a) Duvall Avenue N.E.; b) Monroe Avenue N.E.; and c) Union Avenue N.E. 5) Grady Area: Intersections with Grady Way at: a) Lind Avenue S.W.; b) Rainier Avenue S.; c) Shattuck Avenue S.; and d) Talbot Road S. 6) Puget Area: Intersection of S. Puget Drive and Benson Road S. 7) Rainier Avenue Area: Intersections with Rainier Avenue S. at: a) Airport Way/Renton Avenue S.; b) S. Third Street/S.W. Sunset Boulevard; c) S. Fourth Street; and d) S. Seventh Street. 8) North Renton Area: Intersections with Park Avenue N. at: a) N. Fourth Street; and b) N. Fifth Street. 9) Northeast Sunset Area: Intersections with N.E. Sunset Boulevard at: a) Duvall Avenue N.E.; and b1 Union Avenue N.E. Does not apply IStandard: The public plaza shall measure no less than one thousand (1,000) square feet with a minimum dimension of twentv feet (20') on one side abuttine the sidewalk. I Does not apply IStandard: The public plaza must be landscaped consistent with RMC 4-4-070, including at minimum I street trees, decorative paving, pedestrian -scaled lighting, and seating. Does not apply Guidelines: Building facades shall be modulated and/or articulated to reduce the apparent size of buildings, break up long blank walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood. Articulation, modulation, and their intervals should create a sense of scale important to residential buildings. Standard: All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than forty feet (40'). We have no single walls great than 40' in length on both the Grady Way and Raymond Elevations. Both of these elevations are broken up by change in planes, change in materials, and change of roof lines Standard: Modulations shall be a minimum of two feet (2') deep, sixteen feet (16') in height, and eight feet (8') in width. The modulation of the elevations along Grady Way and Raymond Ave. meet these standards of elevation modulation Standard: Buildings greater than one hundred sixty feet (160') in length shall provide a variety of modulations and articulations to reduce the apparent bulk and scale of the facade (illustration in District B, below); or provide an additional special feature such as a clock tower, courtyard, fountain, or public gathering area. Does not apply Guidelines: The use of material variations such as colors,'brick; shingles, stucco, and horizontal wood siding is encouraged. The primary building entrance should be made visibly.prominent by incorporating architectural features such as a facade overhang, trellis, large entry doors, and/or ornamental lighting (illustration below). Detail features should also be ised, to include things such as decorative.entry paving, street. furniture (benches, etc.-): And/or public art. ........... .... _............ .. .. Standard: Human -scaled elements such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature shall be provided along the facade's ground floor. We have an entry plaza, we have wall mounted sconces around entry ways, we have trellis features Standard: an any facade visible to the public, transparent windows and/or doors are required to comprise at least fifty percent (50%) of the portion of the ground floor facade that is between four feet (4') and eight feet (8') above ground (as measured on the true elevation). We meet this min. requirement along Grady Way( 85' of wall with 45' of glazing) and Raymond (73' of wall with 38' of glazing) Standard: Upper portions of building facades shall have clear windows with visibility into and out of the building. However, screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency. The minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be fifty percent (50%). We will have clear windows on our upper floor. Standard: Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of merchandise, rather than permanent displays. We do not have display windows Standard: Where windows or storefronts occur, they must principally contain clear glazing. Our windows will have clear glazing Standard: Tinted and dark glass, highly reflective (mirror -type) glass and film are prohibited. We do not have any Standard: Untreated blank walls visible from public streets, sidewalks, or interior pedestrian pathways are prohibited. 1) A wall (including building facades and retaining walls) is considered a blank wall if: a) It is a ground floor wall or portion of a ground floor wall over six feet (6') in height, has a horizontal length greater than fifteen feet (15'), and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing; or b) Any portion of a ground floor wall has a surface area of four hundred (400) square feet or greater and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing. We have no blank walls other than the alley side and along this side we have a planter strip where able Standard: If blank walls are required or unavoidable, they shall be treated. The treatment shall be proportional to the wall and use one or more of the following: 1) A planting bed at least five feet (5') in width containing trees, shrubs, evergreen ground cover, or vines abutting the blank wall; 2) Trellis or other vine supports with evergreen climbing vines; 3) Architectural detailing such as reveals, contrasting materials, or other special detailing that meets the intent of this standard; 4) Artwork, such as bas-relief sculpture, mural, or similar; or 5) Seating area with special paving and seasonal planting, nes shall be varied s to add visual interest to the,?,building.. Standard: At least one of the following elements shall be used to create varied and interesting roof profiles: 1) Extended parapets; 2) Feature elements projecting above parapets; 3) Projected cornices; and/or 4) Pitched or sloped roofs. 5) Roof mounted mechanical equipment shall not be visible to pedestrians 6) Buildings containing predominantly residential uses shall have pitched roofs with a minimum slope of one to four (1:4) and shall have dormers or interesting roof forms that break up the massiveness of an uninterrupted sloping roof. We have parapets, we have sloped roofs and we have a spot for Mech. Equipment that is hidden from the streets. Guidelines: Building materials are art,r%nportnt and' integral part of the architectural design o'f a budding that is attractive and of high.quality Material variation shall be used to create vrisuai a<ppe�i ted .eliminate monotony of facades -This shall occur on all facades in a consistent manner. High q[ ality materials shall be used. if materials like -concrete or block walls are used they shall beenhan.ced to .. ... create variation and enhance theirvisual appeal. Standard: All sides of buildings visible from a street, pathway, parking area, or open space shall be finished with the same building materials, detailing, and color scheme_ A different treatment may be used if the materials are of the same quality. We are using a pallet of lap siding with a ground face CMU base and metal siding with two different profiles around the building Standard: All buildings shall use material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns or textural changes. We will have 3 primary body colors and three textural changes. Trim work and architectural features will be done in the same color to tie ail three sidings together. Standard: Materials shall be durable, high duality, and consistent with more traditional urban development, such as brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre -finished metal, stone, steel, glass and cast -in-place concrete. We are using pre -finished fiber cement siding, pre -finished metal siding and pre -finished flashing. IStandard: If concrete is used, walls shall be enhanced by techniques such as texturing, reveals, and/or colorine with a concrete coatine or admixture. Our low concrete walls will have a smooth architectural finish and reveals in it. Standard: If concrete block walls are used, they shall be enhanced with integral color, textured blocks and colored mortar, decorative bond pattern and/or shall incorporate other masonry materials. We have a ground face CMU base at portions of the building and we will use matching CMU for the dumpster enclosure. Standard: All buildings shall use material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns, or textural changes. We will have 3 primary body colors and three textural changes. Trim work and architectural features will be done in the same color to tie all three sidings together. Guideliines: Front -lit; ground -mounted monument signs are the preferred type of freestanding sign: Blade type signs, propartional to the building facade on which they are mounted, are encouraged on pedestrian -oriented streets. Alteration of trademarks notwithstanding, corporate signage should not be garish in color nor overly lit, although creative design, strong;accent colors, and interesting surface materials and lighting techniques are encouraged. Standard: Signage shall be an integral part of the design approach to the building. We are proposing two building mounted signs, one facing Grady Way with decorative lights and possible a second light one on the stair tower facing 405. We are planning on a monument sign on Grady as well Standard: Entry signs shall be limited to the name of the larger development. OK Standard: Corporate logos and signs shall be sized appropriately for their location. We size according to the sign code and the appropriate for the elevations Standard: In mixed use and multi -use buildings, signage shall be coordinated with the overall building design. Does not apply Standard: Freestanding ground -related monument signs, with the exception of primary entry signs, shall be limited to five feet (5') above finished grade, including support structure. All such signs shall include decorative landscaping (ground cover and/or shrubs) to provide seasonal interest in the area surrounding the sign. Alternately, signage may incorporate stone, brick, or other decorative materials as approved by the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee. Our monument sign will meet this criteria Standard: All of the following are prohibited: 1) Pole signs; 2) Roof signs; and 3) Back-lit signs with letters or graphics on a plastic sheet (can signs or illuminated cabinet signs). Exceptions: Back-lit logo signs less than ten (10) square feet are permitted, as are signs with only the individual letters back-lit. We do not plan on these du€delines Light ng that Emproye pedestrian safety and also that creates visual tnter�st err the btr►18ing and:site during h evening hours shag b�, prayided Standard: Pedestrian-scale lighting shall be provided at primary and secondary building entrances. Examples include sconces on building facades, awnings with down-lighting and decorative street lighting. We will have wall sconces at the building entries. We will have additional can lights in the entry soffit. We will have some uplights at the entry plaza columns. Standard: Accent lighting shall also be provided on building facades (such as sconces) and/or to illuminate other key elements of the site such as gateways, specimen trees, other significant landscaping, water features, and/or artwork. We will have wall sconces. We will have uplights at our entry plaza architectural columns Standard: Downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075, Lighting, Exterior On-Site (i.e., signage, governmental flags, temporary holiday or decorative lighting, right-of-way-lighting, etc.). We will have code compliant parking lot lighting far safety. PLANNING DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKU$T,, r, r, FI .7rVI1 City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, WA 98057 iW 2 4 1112 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases, you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need to hire experts. If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write "do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary delays later. Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can assist you. The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant adverse impact. USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal," "proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively. - 1 - 06109 X: IProjents%Arch111000111477.A1 00 - WA State Auto Dealers AssociationTAND USE FOLDERSILand Use Proce"%SEPA.doc A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) Headquarters Building 2. Name of applicant: BCRA 2106 Pacific Avenue, Suite 300 Tacoma, WA 98401 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: BCRA: Christine Phillips, Planner; Mat Bergman, Architect (253) 627-4367 4. Date checklist prepared: July 13, 2012 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Work to begin as soon as building and site development permits are in hand. Clear and rough grade the site and bring in fill, Summer 2012. Construction to begin, Spring 2013. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No future additions or expansion is anticipated. However, building second floor is planned to be built to shell only with future TI as additional space build -out becomes necessary. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Boundary & Topographical Survey; prepared by FAR Co, Jan 6, 2006 ALTA Survey drawing; Jan 16, 2008 Traffic Impact Analysis, prepared by Transpo Group, April 26, 2012 Phase 1, Environmental Site Assessment; prepared by Associated Earth Sciences, Inc., Jan 29, 2008 Draft Historical Artifacts Report; prepared by Historical Research Assoc Inc.; Feb 2008 Geotechnical Letter Report; prepared by E3RA, April 4, 2012 Stormwater Technical Information Report; prepared by BCRA, July 2012 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No other governmental applications are pending or planned that we are aware of. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Typical Building and Site Development Permits; City of Renton. 11, Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. Existing site is currently undeveloped and is mostly heavily vegetated with trees and underbrush growth comprised mostly of blackberries. Parcel is approximately 100' x 343' or approximately 0. 77 acres. -2- Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) — SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 Work includes construction of a 2 -story office building totaling just over 9,000 SF, with a footprint of 6,000 SF, and with associated parking and site development including utilities, landscaping and right of way improvements. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Property address: 521 SW Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 Parcel ##334040-4730 Legal Description: HILLMANS EARLINGTON GARDENS #t1 Q -S -T -R NW 19-23-5 Vicinity Map SW Sunset Blvd SW 4th P1 v SIrP s S1, r z SW 7th St i � 4 O a E E a � yya'I S SSS 5 Ath PI �jO`� 5 c S 6th z 5 � � 5 7th St S 7th 5t 5 C',dl VJaY SW 19th St -3- Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) -- SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 S 19th st 5 19tr LL 167 1 1 5 20th RI 1 a 23'2 NAvrEc a 20'2 to msoh C�ror#ioe sW etn" 5t J�- °'% 1 J 515th St 5 i5th 5< SW lfitn Si D SW 16th St b h ~ R = E 5 18th St Q A' 7. J SW 19th St -3- Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) -- SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 S 19th st 5 19tr LL 167 1 1 5 20th RI 1 a 23'2 NAvrEc a 20'2 to msoh C�ror#ioe B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other Site is relatively flat, falling a total of approximately 5-6 feet from the north to the south with an average site slope of f/--5%. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) The steepest slope is along the south boundary line where a stockpile of dirt and debris has been mounded on the adjacent alley right-of-way. Most of this is outside of the subject parcel but a small amount overlaps on creating a slope of approximately 45% at the property line edge. Most of this will be removed with the work to open up the alley for through access. 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. The soils logs show that the site is overlain by 3-6 inches of topsoil. Under that is varying amounts of fill, consisting of medium dense to dense silty sand with varying amounts of gravel, organics and construction debris. On the south part of the site, underlying the fill, is alluvium, comprised of soft to medium stiff silt and loose, silty fine sand. Under that is a second alluvial layer of medium dense to very dense sand with gravel. See Geotechnical Report. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. According to the City of Renton's mapping, the site is located within an area of moderate to high potential for liquefaction hazard. However, the Geotechnical Report states that based on the grain size analysis, the upper, soft/loose alluvium is too silty to easily liquefy and the deeper, more granular alluvium is too well consolidated to liquefy. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. There will be approximately 1,500 cubic yards of cut and 1,200 cubic yards of fill on the site. The fill for the site will be imported structural fill as the on-site soils are not suitable for structural fill. A building surcharge will also occur in the footprint proposed building. A large pile of soil will be placed in the area of the building for a number of months to compact soils to adequately support a building. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. There is a potential of erosion as a direct result of clearing or construction activities on the subject site. Temporary erosion control measures will be ZZ Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) — SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 implemented during construction to minimize potential erosion and to control sedimentation. 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 will be covered with building and impervious surfaces. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Erosion control system will be installed prior to construction. Silt fencing surrounding the site, inlet protection and proper site management will collect and filter all surface water runoff. 2. AIR What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Some emissions during construction are anticipated as a direct result of the construction workers use of personal, company and/or subcontractor vehicles to and from the site. Once the building is occupied, delivery trucks, employees and customer automobile exhaust as is typical for an office building, along with emissions from the source of heating equipment for the building, will be the main source of emissions. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? if so, generally describe. Off-site sources of emissions will be the similar uses on the adjacent properties and they are not anticipated to affect this proposal. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None needed. 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. According to the Geotechnical Report, prepared by BRA, Inc., no ponds, streams or other surface hydrologic features were observed on site and no seeps, springs or other surface expression of groundwater were observed. The nearest off-site water body is Springbrook Creek, approximately 0.3 mile west of the site. -s- Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) — 5EPA checklist July 13, 2012 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. No work will occur near any water body. 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. Not applicable. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. The proposed project does not require any surface water withdrawals or diversions. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year flood plain? if so, note location on the site plan. The subject site is not within an identified 100 -year floodplain. 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 proposed project does not involve discharges of waste materials into surface waters. b. Ground Water: 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No ground water withdrawals will be required as a direct result of the proposed project. No water will be discharged to ground water as a direct result of the proposed project. 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. The subject property will be served by public sanitary and storm sewers. It is anticipated that no waste materials will enter the ground from the subject site. C. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters, If so, describe. -6- Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) — SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 The source of runoff will be storm water runoff from building roof tops, concrete walks and asphalt pavement areas. Runoff from the project will be collected by roof downspouts and catch basins and then conveyed by underground storm pipe to an underground water quality treatment system prior to discharging to an underground detention system and ultimately the stormwater system located in the alley south of the site. 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. It is unlikely that significant amounts of waste material could enter ground or surface waters. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: During the construction phase, temporary erosion control measures, ongoing maintenance, soil stabilization and other best management practices will be implemented to help reduce and control impacts from the project. Permanent measures to reduce and control runoff from the completed project will include catch basins, underground conveyance pipe, detention and water quality treatment as determined necessary. 4. PLANTS Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs _ grass pasture crop or grain _ wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other _ water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other X other types of vegetation — underbrush of weeds and blackberries b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Entire site will be cleared for proposed work. Site vegetation consists of scattered 1-2 foot diameter cottonwood trees with underbrush growth comprised mostly of blackberries. C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Landscaping within buffers and parking areas will be designed and installed in accordance with all applicable City of Renton regulations. New plantings will emphasize native species selected for water and winter hardiness, appropriate for the Northwest climate growing zone. wa Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) — SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 5. ANIMALS Circle any birds and animals, which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: birds typical of urban environments such as jays, crows, sparrows etc. are likely to be seen on or near site. Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: small mammals typical of urban environments such as rodents/squirrels, raccoons are likely to be seen on or near the site. Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: None. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain The City of Renton is within the Pacific Flyway for migratory birds. Migrating species of geese and ducks can be found in lakes, ponds, wetlands and waterways of the area. However, key rest stops are not known to be located within this site. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None proposed. b. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electric — Power and lighting; also for heat in the event that natural gas is not available. Natural Gas — Will be used for heat, with confirmation that it is available in the street. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. The proposed project will not adversely affect the potential use of solar energy by the adjacent properties as the proposed 1 -story structure is located at the west end of the site and any properties to the north are located across SW Grady Way, a minimum of 100' from the proposed building. 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: Washington State energy requirements will be met when designing building shell, lighting, heating, and ventilation equipment. -s- Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) — SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment done in January 2008 revealed no recognized environmental conditions in connection with this property. No proposed work on the property is anticipated to create any new environmental health hazards. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None anticipated. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None proposed. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Noise from surrounding roads, businesses and residences are not expected to 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 noise would result from construction activities. Long term noises associated with the proposed project will include those typically generated by an office use and will be generated during typical daytime hours of operation. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None needed. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is vacant as are several in the vicinity. The property is located on the edges of commercial and industrial zones and the majority of nearby properties are commercial and industrial in nature with some service type buildings and some office buildings. There are also a few residential properties. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. The site has not been used for agriculture in recent history. C. Describe any structures on the site. There are no structures on the site. -9- Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) — SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Not applicable. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? CA, Commercial Arterial with AutoMall overlay. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? CC, Commerical Corridor g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Not applicable. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. There are no environmentally sensitive areas on the site. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Project is anticipated to have 4-5 office employees on a regular weekday with once a month meetings of up to 50 staff assembling on site. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None needed. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The project will be built pursuant to City Zoning code requirements. Building will conform to applicable height and coverage requirements. Landscaping and buffers will be provided per City requirements. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No housing is being provided. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. No housing is being eliminated. -10- Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) — SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None needed. 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. Building height allowed by code is S(?' -0". Maximum height of proposed building is at most 32'. Proposed exterior building materials are smooth Hardi-plank siding, concrete masonry units, metal siding & roofing. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? No views in the vicinity will be altered or obstructed. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Building materials will be of high quality and in keeping with the appearance of similar building types in the area. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Typical low-level parking lot lighting will be directed downward and away from adjacent uses. Light from vehicle headlights as cars navigate the parking area will be emitted from the site during early evening and morning business hours. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? It is not anticipated that the glare resulting from the proposed project will create a safety hazard or interfere with views. C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Existing off-site sources of light are not expected to affect this proposal. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None needed. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The property is less than Y; mile from the Black River Riparian Forest and related Metro Waterwork Park. It is also approximately 1 mile south of Farlington Park which is small but has basketball courts and playground equipment, and 1 mile to -11- Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) — SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 Renton High School which has baseball diamonds and tennis courts. For more formal recreation opportunities there is the Family Fun Center approximately 1 mile to the west and Fort Dent Park which has the Starfire Soccer sports complex. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No existing recreational uses occur on the site. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None needed. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. According to the Draft Historical Artifacts Report, the WSADA parcel is located within the aboriginal territory of the Duwamish people. The Duwamish, a Puget- Salish speaking group lived in winter villages situated along the shores of the Black River, Cedar River, Duwamish River, Lake Washington, Lake Union, Salmon Bay, and Elliott Boy. However, the cluster of villages along the Black River was the densest concentration of Duwamish villages in their territory. Four villages and three place names are located within 1.2 miles of the WSADA parcel. Also, three additional ethnographic place names are identified within 0.5 mi of the WSADA parcel. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. The Draft Historical Artifacts Report describes in detail the found evidence at several nearby sites. it is the opinion of HRA's archaeologists that a high potential exists for the WSADA parcel to contain buried prehistoric and/or historic Native American archaeological remains and resources. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: By Washington State law, Native American remains and archaeological resources are protected. If any cultural or historical resources are discovered during construction activity, construction shall cease until the find can be assessed and appropriate measures taken as may be determined. 14. TRANSPORTATION Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. The main highways serving the site are State Hwy 167 & 405. Main access to the site would be from SW Grady Way with secondary and service access from the alley directly to the south of the parcel. -12- Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) — SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? There is an existing bus stop located near the intersection of SW Grady Way and Raymond Avenue SW. This stop provides access to Metro Route 140 which connects riders to the Renton Transit Center, Burien Transit Center, Tukwila international Blvd Link Station, Tukwila Sounder Station, and Southcenter Mall. Route 140 operates at a frequency of 15 to 20 minutes throughout the day on weekdays. C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? No parking currently exists on the site. The completed project will have a total of 43 parking stalls including Z that are handicap accessible. This number was projected to handle the load of the once -a -month meeting of 50 staff members. See Traffic impact Analysis. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private? No new roads or streets will be required, however, the alley behind the property will be completed and on-site pedestrian sidewalks will be constructed to provide direct connections to the proposed parking areas and existing sidewalks along SW Grady Way. Currently the alley behind the property is accessible from either end but does not connect all the way through. Also, with this work, �4 of Raymond Avenue will be repaved along with new curb, gutter, planting strip and sidewalk. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. The proposed project does not require the use of, nor will it occur in the immediate vicinity of water, rail or air transportation systems. 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 11 trips during the AM peak hour and 10 trips during the PM peak hour, and approximately 70 daily trips. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None needed. With or without the project, all study intersections are anticipated to operate at LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak periods with or without the proposed monthly meeting occurring during the PM peak hour. 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. -13- Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) — SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 The building will be provided with an automatic sprinkler system and built in fire alarm. Since the property currently is undeveloped there will be some increase in fire protection if only for inspections of the systems. There is no anticipated expectation for required services of police, health care services or schools. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Alarm systems will be licensed as required but no other measures are proposed. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity. natural gas, water, refuse service tele hone sanitary sewer, septic system, other. All public utilities are currently available along the edges of the property and will be extended into the building. Natural Gas service is being verified. Refuse service collection will be provided off the back alley. 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 proposed building will require all common utilities currently provided at the subject site. Electricity- Puget Sound Energy Natural Gas? - Puget Sound Energy Refuse Service - Waste Management Northwest thru City of Renton Telephone - Qwest Cable - Comcast Water Utility - City of Renton Wastewater Utility - City of Renton Surface Utility - City of Renton C. SIGNATURE I, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true, correct, 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 Signature:,'-.�"`-'' Name Printed: Christine Phillips. Planner / BCRA Date: �..t -14- Washington State Auto Dealers Association (WSADA) —SEPA checklist July 13, 2012 CITY OF RENTON Yf 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Printed: 07-24-2012 Land Use Actions RECEIPT �Ll� Permit#: LUA12-062 Payment Made: 07/24/2012 04:17 PM Receipt Number: R1203361 Total Payment: 2,163.00 Payee: WSADA PROPERTY LLC Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Trans Account Code Description Amount ------ 3080 ------------------ 503.000000.004.322 ------------------------------ Technology Fee ---------------- 63.00 5010 000.000000.007.345 Environmental Review 11000.00 5020 000.000000.007.345 Site Plan Approval 1,000.00 5022 000.000000.007.345 Variance Fees 100.00 Payments made for this receipt Trans Method Description Amount ---------- -------- --------------------------- --------------- Payment Check 1013 2,163.00 Account Balances Trans Account Code Description Balance Due ------ 3021 ------------------ 303.000000.020.345 ------------------------------ Park Mitigation Fee --------------- .00 3080 503.000000.004.322 Technology Fee .00 3954 650.000000.000.237 Special Deposits .00 5006 000.000000.007.345 Annexation Fees .00 5007 000.000000.011.345 Appeals/Waivers .00 5008 000.000000.007.345 Binding Site/Short Plat .00 5009 000.000000.007.345 Conditional Use Fees .00 5010 000.000000.007.345 Environmental Review .00 5011 000.000000.007.345 Prelim/Tentative Plat .00 501.2 000.000000-007.345 Final Plat .00 5013 000.000000.007.345 PUD .00 5014 000.000000.007.345 Grading & Filling Fees .00 5015 000.000000.007.345 Lot Line Adjustment .00 5016 000.000000.007.345 Mobile Home Parks .00 5017 000.000000.007.345 Rezone .00 5018 000.000000.007.345 Routine Vegetation Mgmt .00 5019 000.000000.007.345 Shoreline Subst Dev .00 5020 000.000000.007.345 Site Plan Approval .00 5021 000.000000.007.345 Temp Use, Hobbyk, Fence .00 5022 000.000000.007.345 Variance Fees .00 5024 000.000000.007.345 Conditional Approval Fee .00 5036 000.000000.007.345 Comprehensive Plan Amend .00 5909 000.000000.002.341 Booklets/EIS/Copies .00 5941 000.000000.007.341 Maps (Taxable) .00 5958 000.000000.000.231 Tax Remaining Balance Due: $0.00 00