Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA81-100 (2)Application for Rezone THE LAKESIDE PROPERTY Richard Carothers Associates APPLICATION FOR REZONE THE LAKESIDE PROPERTY Lake Washington Boulevard Renton, Washington Prepared for: Lincoln Property Company. N.C. , Inc. 11400 S.E. 6th Street, Suite 220 Bellevue, Washington 98004 By: Richard Carothers Associates Planners/Landscape Architects/Urban Designers 814 East Pike Street Seattle, Washington 98122 TABLE OF CONTENTS Pages Rezone Application Cover Letter 9 Rezone Application 2 Environmental Checklist Project Description 2 Environmental Impacts - Discussion 4 Appendices A. Environmental Checklist Form 6 B. Full Body of Traffic Study 19 C. Full Body of Soils Study 21 D. Affidavits 6 E. Site Map 1 F. Purchase Contract Agreements 13 Richard Carothers Associates December 4, 1981 REZONE APPLICATION COVER LETTER APPLICANT: Anna Phinney, Bruce Larson et. all , Estate of M.W. Lotto and Marjorie L. Lotto The Owners of the property described in the accompanying documents hereby apply for a rezone of the property to an R-3 classification. The property is located east of Lake Washington Boulevard, across the street from the Gene Coulon Park extension presently under construction. The site is currently in operation as a golf driving range on a lease basis. In the comprehensive plan the property is designated as R-4 for high density multi-family use. This classification would allow in excess of fifty units per acre on the site which contains approximately ten acres, thus permitting in the vicinity of 500 dwelling units at maximum site development. The owners are, however, applying for R-3 zoning with a stipulation that not more than 186 units will be constructed on the site. This R-3 application is being sought, in part, to expedite the environmental review and rezone process. Previous discussions with the City of Renton Planning Department have indicated that an R-3 rezone would likely fall below the threshold otherwise necessitating the preparation of an environmental impact statement occasioned by project size. The rezone to R-3 and subsequent development of multi-family housing on the pro- perty is appropriate. It is consistent with both the plans and policies of the City of Renton formulated in the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan foresees this pro- perty and adjacent sites along Lake Washington as developing into an affordable multi-family residential community. Such development is particularly important due to its close proximity to the central city core. Renton is experiencing overall rapid growth, much of which is in the outlying areas. Providing housing in or near the city core is recognized as an important priority for the near future, in Renton as well as many other cities. Interstate 405 provides the major traffic linkage of Renton to other parts of the greater Seattle area. As designed currently and for the foreseeable future, access to the Interstate is substantially easier from the project area than it is for many areas east of I-405. The rapid growth of residential areas in eastern Renton has created near saturation of major arterial feeders to the Interstate. Current and projected levels of traffic support the desirability of shifting additional growth to the west . The subject property is particularly well suited for development as a residential project of the type proposed. It is situated on a terrace, well above Lake Wash- ington, providing excellent views to the west while reducing its physical and visual impact on the lake and shoreline. The major portion of the site is nestled below steep slopes screening the development from Interstate 405. These slopes provide excellent buffering between the proposed development and neighboring uses Eight Fourteen East Pike Street, Seattle, Washington 98122 Telephone (206) 324-5500 Offices Seat+le.Washington / Boise. Idaho / Reston.Virginia / Portland.Oregon Rezone Application December 4, 1981 Page 2 to the northeast and southeast. These slopes would, additionally, continue to act as a defacto addition to the greenbelt prevelant in the area. The site has easy access to nearby recreational facilities and the newly developing Gene Coulon Park and the Lake Washington waterfront areas. This amenity is partic- ularly valuable to residents of multi-family developments who generally have limited access to outdoor spaces of their own. The proposed rezone and subsequent development is timely. The City of Renton is undergoing steady and continued growth as the focal point of the south Lake Wash- ington area. Rental vacancies are relatively low, particularly when compared with the neighboring areas of Kent, Auburn and Federal Way. As previously discussed, traffic patterns would suggest a preference toward concentrating near term growth in areas of continued good access to downtown Renton and I-405. With the ever increasing need for sensitivity in the area of energy conservation, particularly regarding gasoline use, encouraging housing that is close to major employment and retail areas is a worthwhile priority. The proposed project suits this end particularly well . Although in some cases access to utilities is difficult, there is no question that all the necessary utilities are available to serve the subject property, and that sufficien# 3 reserve capacity exists in order to accommodate a project of the size proposed. Copies of a traffic study and soils report are attached to this application. Neither the traffic study or the soils report indicate any significant develop- mental problems with respect to the project itself or with respect to its impact upon Lake Washington Boulevard and the surrounding community. 1 Roger Blalock, Department of Planning, City of Renton, Meeting of April 29, 1981 . 2 Roger Blalock, Department of Planning, City of Renton, Telephone communication of May 14, 1981 . 3 Don Monihan, Department of Public Works, City of Renton, Telephone communication of May 14, 1981 . Richard Carothers Associates 0 December 7, 1981 Mr. Roger Blaylock Planning Department City of Renton Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: REZONE APPLICATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE LAKESIDE PROPERTY Dear Roger: Enclosed herewith you will find duplicate originals of Lincoln Property Company's Application for Rezone on the Lakeside Property. Along with the applications themselves, we have enclosed six addi- tional cover letters together with six additional site maps as requested. Roger, as we discussed over the telephone on Friday, December 4, I want to emphasize the fact that it is our intention that the final product of this Rezone Application will be a contract type rezone. In other words, it is our desire to limit the intensity and scope of our development via the rezone document. It is also ourintention to work closely with the various departments within the City of Renton, including the Environmental Review Committee, to predefine the nature and extent of the development itself so as to satisfy not only our development goals, but the concerns of the City of Renton as well . At your request, we have included a number of additional items not ordinarily called for in the Rezone Application. These are: A. A Lake Washington Boulevard Traffic Study; B. A complete Soils Report, and; C. Our findings relative to the availability of utility services to the site. (For this item I have enclosed a recent letter from our civil engineer addressing available options in the area of utility services , most notably water and sewer. ) meow;PROPERTY cammanY n.c., inc. THE OVERLAKE BLDG., 11400 S.E.6TH ST.,SUITE 220 BELLEVUE,WA 96004 206-455-481 3 Page 2 Mr. Roger Blaylock December 7, 1981 It is my hope that the attached application, together with all the supportive information and documentation, will assist the Environ- mental Review Committee in their review of the project from an environmental standpoint. If I can provide any further assistance to you please don't hesi- tate to call me. Very t ly yours Scott B. Springe SBS:co Enclosures cc: David Hepp DODDS ENGINEERS, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS i December 7, 1981 DEI PROJECT NO. 80010 Lincoln Property Company 11400 S.E. Sixth Street Suite 220 Bellevue, WA 98004 Attention: Scott Springer Ref: Lakeside Apartment Project, Renton Dear Mr. Springer: At your request we have researched the availability of utilities (water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer) to the referenced site. A complete discussion of the alternatives available to provide the site with ade- quate fire flows is contained in the report. of 20 April 1981 by RH2 Engineering. In essence, the report states that the city' s system can be upgraded and extended to the site through one of several routes and by one of two different funding mechanisms. Sufficient water supply is therefore available to the site. Sanitary sewers are also available to the site by one of two alternatives. An existing 8" line deadends at the northwest corner of the property on the east margin of Lake Washington Blvd. The depth of the line limits the potential service area to the south. Those portions which cannot be served by the existing 8" line can be served by a tap into the METRO trunk which ties on the west side of the Lake Washington Blvd. There are now several storm sewer culverts under Lake Washington Blvd. which drain the site and adjoining lands. Studies done for the park show these structures to be more than adequate to carry the anticipated developed flows. Whether these culverts will qualify as "adequate downstream courses" so as to eliminate the need for retention on the developed sites will depend to a certain extent on the development plans, but the possibility is certainly there. In conclusion, there would seem to be no insurmountable problem with providing utilities to this site. Some extension and upgrading of existing facilities will be necessary, but this is neither unusual , nor are the improvements required so extensive that they could not be funded and installed by the developer. Very truly yours, Z;Ligci. Bruce J. Dodd- P. BJD/jk 1 B50-130TH AVE.N.E.,BELLEVUE,WA 98005 • [206)885-7877 OR 454-3743 April 20, 1981 S106.1 .0 RECEIVED HNR231981 LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY N.C. , INC. 515 116th Avenue N.E. , Suite 158 DODDS ENGINEER'' Ih2C. Bellevue, WA 98004 JOB NO. »IL — Attention: Mr. Scott Springer, J.D. Subject:. Water system improvement alternatives for the proposed Lakeside development Dear Mr. Springer: This letter summarizes water system improvement alternatives for providing various levels of water supply capability for fighting a fire (fire flow) at the proposed Lakeside development in the City of Renton. Fire flow levels of 2700, 3500 and 4200 gallons per minute (gpm) while maintaining 20 pounds per square inch pressure residual, in accordance with Insurance Services Office Criteria, have been considered at the highest development elevation of 100 feet. The attached map illustrates four alternatives for obtaining the fire flow levels mentioned. Alternative 1 and 2 each contain approximately 1 ,900 lineal feet of pipe and will require a pressure reducing station. These two alternatives can provide fire flows of 3500 or 4200 gpm by providing 12 or 16 inch diameter pipe. Alternative 3, a substantially longer length at 3700 feet, consists of two sections of pipeline improvements and can provide a maximum of 3500 gpm. Alternative 4, which can provide 2700 gpm, consists of modifying the pipeline improvements plannned by the City Park Dept. for Gene Conlon Park. The alignment would be adjusted up to Lake Washington Boulevard instead of through the park and the diameter increased to 12 inches from 8 inches. This alternative, although more expensive than Alternatives 1 and 2, could obtain participation by other property owners and the City and we anticipate that the participation would make this the least expensive alternative. The estimated cost for each alternative is summarized in the following table: 300 - 120th Avenue N.E. Suite 219. Bellevue. Wa. 98005 (206) 451-05E5 Lincoln Property Company N.C. , Inc. April 20, 1981 Page 2 Current Alternative Lsti.:,ated Cost 1 or 2 3500 gpm 1900 lineal feet of 12" diameter pipe and a pressure reducing station 80,600 1A or 2A 4200 gpm Same as 1 and 2 except 16" diameter pipe 95,800 3 3500 gpm 3720 lineal feet of 12" diameter pipe and a pressure reducing station 132,400 4 2700 gpm Realignment and size increase to 12" (Cost dependent pipe for 4250 lineal feet and one upon partici- crossing pation) Our recommendation is Alternative 2 or 2A depending on the actual fire flow required. If the fire flow requirement can be reduced to 2700 gpm, then Alternative 4 should be considered in more detail prior to making a deci- sion. (Degree of others' participation should be established). Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you desire additional information. Thank you for the opportunity to be of assistance in your planning efforts. Sincerely, r Richard H. Harbert, ' P.E. RHH:jw cc Bruce Dodds, Dodds Engineers RECEIVED APR 23 1981 DODDS ENGINEERS, INC. JOB NO. 4-I'D`4/ E1 1 I 992 I1I1--.1 1 a r 1-: Il I i :........,...i.. I IC12992I , • y i :.. IotiHS‘INA ii•— r f?•• 1: r:;,.' 147..-.,• 1.,.!., i:,. 1. fT:_ 1-.' f:*•.' r.-,:_...:.;.'; I1!•- 1- 1'. i•• 6,_ C_ I- s; 6•_-. I 1""•:": t7:•-::,-, 6- a:, 4;-,.,: • 2';:.•;.•- t.•...-_.-.".- 1-.._.•<',x„;:.-•:•, i1-t,••: 0• iNt-oo 1. i._ ty---,.:!7I•-_-.-__:-.--.. O4-• T•.y R l"- 131. 1 11 iI: •7 — L /Ic ri F -- i __ •• i/) r Li " . i ,1 01? 1 991I6ZLvt V i\:.. :... 1 s s.....:.,...... H.\ . 1 ), 7; " 02/74_ L —F.. I- 1/ 1..' . .' i :•:' ! :1 \:•... :14......•.: — IF I 1 07CGrt 1. .--(-1 , 5R2762 t. .••• 1\ 1 --; "••:- - ", i 2.".1 ... I..... i I -.• - I - 1---ri• 1//:iiz 1_1_ _ I______ 111-- •::•:;lzv ••I]Ioc 1 ----- 1 1 ‘•) -- 2 ,t7.57. ..:•;.iA,,, iii .1- .—pi- I ri,, . 6fe `?. I'l1r.-Ir2...61I-' ,e'''-‘ ace ''t• • Lc•T1:. rt+,. 1\ 11 I - 11 OCC r)2CI-2c92 _.tC,2gEtc 1.• / AA e I—ice t N \ ii - 1i6I nr....1.1.X• .4, re-- , p , t,,,,, ',A,/ 44 44\ ‘ k. k Ric4\ E 5[2 7,- 4 ii I r--LLZ CIoa r I 1hIt1 :,z!. . 4.1::.el 1 T ''' ‘\ \ 1.-, : •-• ;:\-zi:vri1 •:: ( ':11... . i1,4 1k TI i -I1Jdi-ki14: ... I1.000S . 11:1 icvvt, ct' 141I11_1111111111-11-1-MTi1,1lilt iIII - - - - - , - 11 -r-4:3= 'i-.AWYPIVITOi ... . IllTEM1111111 .11111E1.IA11.111[2_2 vo, .30,-3-2........,-,-- ..?:.,,%... .31rominx. 1, WICZ-- S -6 lt, liropkWFT11Ili11 [ 111111711111-14TITIT111 T1r611111111_1E.1-111111r1111 I - 557.-VsZ.Tit-Tri• 1, 1\1cr14• Zs 1I 4 4 1 1 A CITY OF RENTON 1;E7O"IE APPLICATION OFFICE USE ONLY LAND USE HEARING PPLICATION NO. ;12 (}O - (S{ / EXAMINER 'S ACTION PPLICATION FEE $ APPEAL FILED rECEIPT NO. CITY COUNCIL ACTION ILING DATE ORDINANCE NO. AND DATE TEARING DATE PPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 10 : Name Anna Phinney, Estate of M.W. Lotto & Marjorie L. Lotthone 455-4813 c/o Lincoln Property Co. , N.C. , Inc . Address 11400 S.E. 6th, Suite 220, Bellevue, WA 98004 property petitioned for rezoning is located on Lake Washington Boulevard bats,L?en south of N. 24th Street Rd Square footage or acreage of property 9.0 acres -+ Legal description of property (if more space is required, attach a separate sheet) Lots 35, 340, 341 , 342, 343, 357, 358 and 359 of C.D. Hillman's Lake Washington Garden of Eden Addition to Seattle. C 8. L- st the measures to be taken to reduce the impact on the surrounding area. a. Slopes: Limit vegetation clearing, grading and construction to less steep portions of site in accordance with recommendations of the soils consultant and civil engineer. Upper portions of major slopes to be left in natural condition. b. Drainage: Prepare drainage and erosion control measures to comply with City of Renton standards for runoff control , detention and entrapment of suspended hydrocarbons. 11 c. Landscape: Develop landscape plans to screen proposed project and enhance its visual character, both within site and from surroundings , in compliance with City of Renton landscape provisions. d. Traffic: Develop plans to ease traffic flow in and out of project by appropriate on-site roadway improvements. Coordinate implementation of said improvements through the City of Renton Traffic Engineer, in accordance with the attached traffic study. e. Lighting: Provide effective lighting design to reduce nighttime impact of site on adjacent areas. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PROJECT DESCRIPTION PROPON :NT Anna Phinney, Bruce Larson et. al . , Estate of M.W. Lotto and Marjorie L. Lotto Care of their Representative: Lincoln Property Co. , N.C. Inc. 11400 S.E. 6th, Suite 220 Bellevue, Washington 98004 455-4813 CHECKLIST SUBMITTED AGENCY REQUIRING CHECKLIST Renton Planning Department BACKGR(UND I .6 Nature and Description of the Proposal : Proposal site is approximately 10 acres. The proposed zoning would allow not more than 186 dwelling units to be built. Conceptual design work has started, but will not be completed pending final rezone approval . Development would not approach maximum density allowed under proposed zoning. Sufficient on-site parking would be provided, as well as resident amenities, including swimming pool , recreation building, sauna, jacuzzi and lush landscaping. I .7 Location of Proposal : The proposal site lies uphill from Lake Washington Boulevard, above Gene Coulon Park. Well upslope from the project, to the east, is Interstate-405. The bulk of the project is a gently sloping terrace, currently in use as a golf driving range. This portion of the site is largely open, in grass or pavement. Approximately one-quarter of the site is on steep slopes, covered with brush and dense tree growth. Much of this portion of the site would be left in its undisturbed condition by the proposed rezone development. The site has views across Lake Washington to the west. I.8 Estimated Date for Completion of Proposal : The estimated date for completion is 12 months following project initiation. 1 I.9 List of Permits, Licenses and Government Approvals: Rezone to R-3; Building Permit; Street Access Permit; Right-of-Way Access Permit, Burlington Northern Railroad (sewer) ; Storm Drainage Connection Permit. I.10 No future additions, expansions or further activity related to this proposal is planned. I.11 Applicant has no knowledge of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by the proposal . I.12 Rezone application is being submitted concurrently with this form. Future applications will be made as required for approvals listed under I .9, above. 2 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION See Appendix A for Checklist portion of Application Form) II.1 Earth Existing Conditions : The site has previously been used for a quarry operation. The upper substrata over much of the site is granular fill material left by this operation. The native soils below are a mix of sandy silts, gravelly and silty sands and similar compact, but unconsolidated, materials. See Appendix C for the complete text of the Preliminary Geotechnical Study prepared for the site. Impacts : Development of residential units would modify the topography to provide suitable grades for parking and building pads. This modification will include disruptions, compactions and covering of existing soils in those developed portions of the project. Mitigating Measures : The preliminary report (Appendix C) reveals no unusual or difficult problems related to earthwork development on the site. Conventional building practices, coupled with regulated control of runoff collection and release, will allow for development without creation of hazardous or unstable conditions. On-site cut and fill is projected to be roughly in balance. Excess cut would be disposed of off-site at an approved location. Moderate amounts of imported select fill will likely be needed to prepare suitable, stable subgrades for structures. II.2 Air Impacts : The addition of auto traffic generated by the project would be the only significant source of air pollutants from the proposal . Traffic volumes are addressed in the Appendix B, Traffic Analysis. Temporary particulate emissions are to be expected during construction. Mitigating Measures : No measures for auto emissions other than providing for smooth flow of traffic into and within the project are foreseen. Dust from construction work can be minimized by good operational technique as required by local regulations. II.3 Water Existing Conditions: There are no perennial or intermittent streams on the project site. The site is well vegetated, so runoff is well controlled and is largely limited to minor overland sheet flow. Substantial volumes of water are reabsorbed on the site. Impacts : Existing runoff and absorption patterns would be altered by removal of vegetation during site preparation and development of impervious surfaces. Absorption would be reduced and the rate and volume of runoff would increase. 3 Mitigating Measures: Detention and control of increased runoff would comply with City requirements (Title IV, Chapter 29) , including development of a drainage plan and submission for review and approval . II.4 Flora Existing Conditions: The site, at present, is vegetated, the lower and more level areas mostly in grasses; the upland slopes in brush and trees. Impacts: The proposal requires a major alteration to the more level portions of the site. Peripheral tree and shrub masses adjacent to property lines and Lake Washington Boulevard would be retained wherever possible. The steep forested slopes would be left largely undisturbed. Mitigating Measures: The proposal envisions generous relandscaping of the site, both for internal amenity and as screening at property lines. This landscaping would potentially increase the overall floral diversity of the site. II.5 Fauna Existing Conditions: No survey has been done of existing fauna but the site has suitable habitat for numerous common animals and birds of the Puget Sound area. Impacts: Habitat destruction would largely be limited to the areas currently in use as the golf driving range, a habitat of limited diversity and productivity. Overall faunal diversity and quantity may decrease. Mitigating Measures: Landscape development could provide new or modified habitat. Upslope forest and habitat edges would be maintained and largely undisturbed. II .6 Noise Impacts: Proposal would somewhat increase local traffic noise. Whether an increase would be measurable is unknown. There would be temporary increases in noise levels during construction. Mitigating Measures : On-site mechanical equipment and construction equipment should be muffled and maintained. Construction work could be restricted to 7 AM to 5 PM hours. II.7 Lights and Glare Existing Conditions : Golf driving range has lighting for night operation. 4 Impacts : May be reduced by proposed change in land use. Mitigating Measures: Any site lighting for proposal would be designed to minimize off-site glare. II.8 Land Use Proposal would alter present land use from golf driving range to use in accordance with the local Comprehensive Plan. II .9 Natural Resources No effect on natural resources identified. II.10 Risk of Upset No risks forseen. II .11 Population Impacts: The proposal would add not more than 186 dwelling units to a property which is not currently residential in character. Except as a component of current growth being experienced by the City of Renton, proposal should have no role as a target or trigger for additional growth or relocation in the area. II.12 Housing Impacts : The proposal will add to the number of dwelling units available in the Renton area, potentially reducing housing pressure on other units in the area. II.13 Transportation/Circulation Existing Conditions : Refer to Appendix B, Traffic Analysis, for thorough review of the existing traffic situation and impacts. No public transit currently operates on Lake Washington Boulevard. Mitigating Measures : The traffic study prepared for this proposal concludes no noticable increase in traffic volume on the surrounding streets as a result of the proposed development. Recommended measures are limited to regulating and easing flow in and out of the project with on-site roadway design. II.14 Public Services Existing Conditions : The site is within the jurisdictional area of the Renton Fire and Police Departments and within the Renton School District. The site contains a golf driving range available to the public and is adjacent to the newly expanded recreational facilities of Gene Coulon Park. 5 Impacts: The proposal would generate slight impacts on the Renton Fire and Police Departments. No special problems of significant demands are foreseen, nor would proposal effect current levels of service elsewhere in the community. The impact on school populations would depend upon the eventual population mix in the developed units, but would probably be limited. The proposal would add potential user population of park facilities in the Renton area. II .15 Energy Impacts: The proposal would increase demand on energy utilities for residential usage. II. 16 Utilities Existing Conditions : Water and sewer facilities are available in the site area, although they present some access difficulties. No storm drainage system is presently developed in the area. Reserve capacity of the utilities is reported as sufficient for project needs by the Public Works Department. Impacts : No major problems are, therefore, expected in utility acquisition. II.17 Human Health No impacts foreseen. II . 18 Aesthetics No degradation of aesthetics foreseen for proposed changes . II.19 Recreation Existing Conditions : Golf driving range currently occupies a major portion of the site. Impacts : Range would be eliminated. No other significant recreational impacts foreseen. II.20 Archeological/Historical No known archeological or historical resources occur on the site. 6 APPENDICES CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM f FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Application No. OC Environmental Checklist No. t'CF—/ C' - `% 1 PROPOSED, date:FINAL , date: 0 Declaration of Significance Declaration of Significance 0 Declaration of Non-Significance 0 Declaration of Non-Significance COMMENTS : Introductioi The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and local governmental agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private proposals . The Act also requires that an EIS be prepared for all major actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies involved determine whether or not a proposal is such a major action. Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the information presently available to you. Where explanations of your answers are required, or where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision makers , include your explanation in the space provided, or use additional pages if necessary: You should A: include references to any reports or studies of which you are aware and which are rele- vant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help all fh' agencies irvolved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review with- out unnecessary delay. ry. The following questions apply to your total proposal , not just to the license for which you are currently applying or the proposal for which approval is sought. Your answers should include the impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed, even though completion may not occur until sometime in the future. This will allow all of the agencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review now, with- out duplicating paperwork in the future. ti;P' lnral ananriaa in the State ids SdG d `NU1SSfl'JS1U - SiJVdWI 1tl1N3WNO JIAN3 - 1SI1NO3H0 1V1N3WNOdIAN3 aaS uot4PuPIdx3 X 38AVW S3A X Za)Ie I .ro 4a Iu I. ',Crq cue Jo ueaoo ayp go paq ayq .ao weaJls .ao JanL.a P to Iauueyo ayq. i'j.ipow A2w yoiq, uoisoaa .io uoi1isodep ' uoile3lis ui sa6uptp Jo ' spues yoeaq go UOLsoJa JO uotq.tsodap ul sa6ueyg (g) ON 3EAVW S3A X 44o ao uo .aatyg}a 2- 7. Location of proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal , as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts , including any other information needed to give an accurate understanding of the environ- mental setting of the proposal ) : See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST PROJECT DESCRIPTION_ Pages 1-2 8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal : See ENVIRONMFNTAI CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pages 1-2 9. List of all permits , licenses or government approvals required for the proposal federal , state and local--including rezones) : SPP ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PRO,IFCT OFSCRTPTTON, Pages 1-2 10. Do you have any plans for future additions , expansion , or further activity related to or connected with this proposal ? If yes , explain: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pages 1 -2 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: SPP FNVTRONMFNTAI CHFCKI TST - PRO,IFCT fFSCRTPTT(lN, Pages 1-2 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- posal ; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pages 1-2 II . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) 1) Earth. Will the proposal result in: a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? YES MBE NO b) Disruptions , displacements , compaction or over- covering of the soil? X YES MAYBE NO c) J Change in topography or ground surface relief features? MAYBE WO— d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? X_. YES MAYBE NO 0) Any inrroaca in winrl nr untaM arneinn n4 enile 3- 2) Air. Will the proposal result in: a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X YES M!B NO b) The creation of objectionable odors? YES MAf9E NO c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature , or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X._ YES MAYBE NO Explanation: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMFNTAI IMPACTS - DISCl1SSTON, Par3Pc 3-C 3) Water. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in currents , or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? 1L_ YES MAYBE NO b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? X YES MAYBE NO c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? YES MAYBE NO d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? YES MAYBE N-O e) Discharge into surface waters , or in any alteration surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X YES MAYBE NT? f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? YES MAYBE NO g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either through direct additions or withdrawals , or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? YES MAYBE NO gam£ Sv6!3 "NU15S JS1U - 51JVd1.41 1tl1N3WNOUTAN3 - 1SI1)!3 H3 1tl1N3WNOiiIAN3 ddS uo!.;PUPldx3 ON ; BAVW SBA X ZPa.1P UP 30 uo pP 1ndod uewnq ayq 4.0 aqe.! to.Mo.16 .l0 'lCIA.suap 'uo pnq uopPooL ayl aauP lesodo.ld aye llP,1 •uopei ndod (Ti ) uopPuPLdX3 II ON ; BAVW S3) 77 cunt iniln± Imctltl 1n 1mtaninno 11n 1n nuata au? um 4- 5) Fauna. Will the proposal result in: a)' Changes in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of fauna (birds , land animals including reptiles , fish and shellfish, benthic organisms , insects or microfauna)? X YES MAYBE NO b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of fauna? X YES MAYBE NO c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? YES MAYBE NO d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? YES MAYBE NO V Explanation: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION, Pages 3-6 6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION. Pages 3-6 7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? y X 77 IE3 . MAYBE ' ,N F Y ,,,, Explanation: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION, Pages 3-6 8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 4___ See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMFNTAI IMPACTS - nTSCUSSION, Pages 3-6 9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? L YES MAYBE NO b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil , pesticides , chemicals or radiation) 5- Y 12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or reate a demand for additional housing? X___ YES MAYBE NO xplanation: 1 Y _ See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAI IMPACTS - DISCIISSifN, Paget 3-6 13) transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in : i a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? A 4 YES MAYBE NO b) Effects on existing parking facilities , .or demand for new parking? YES MAYBE NO c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? y YES MAYBE NO ,_ d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? YES MAYBE _ NO e) Alterations to waterborne, rail .ar air traffic? L YrS MAYBE NO 4 f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , bicyclists or pedestrians? X YES MAYBE NO r. Explanation: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION, Pages 3-6 1 14) Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services t in any of the following areas : a) Fire protection? r _X__ YES MAYBE NO i i b) Police protection? X YESMAYBEBE NO f. (c) _Schools? X r+:: f Y c } ` r ; ,- }- u l YES MAYBE NO 4 luawl.i daO 5upuueld i uoluaa i.o it1.1.0 N S r Pa2uiad aweu) I,?1A/- L1 Ii ,. ri 11 J S ry f 6- d) Sewer or septic tanks? X YES MAYBE NO 1 e) Storm water drainage? YES MAYBE NO f) Solid waste and disposal?X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: SPP FNVTP.IlNMFNTAI _CHFCKJ TST _ FNVTR(INMFNIAI_ TMPArTS - fTSCUCSION, Pages 3.6 17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? X YES MAYBE Explanation: F 18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation _of an aesthetically offensive site open to public viewT X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: 19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - nTsruss TnN, paOPq 1-6' 20) Archeological/Historical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical site, structure, object or building? YES NO Explanation: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS DLSC!LSSLON, Pages 3-6 III. SIGNATURE I , the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge th above information 1 is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any decla- ration of non-significance that it might issue in r lianc upon ti checklist should f there be any willful misrepresentation or willful 1 ck o ,full di c osure on my part. i Proponent: signed) k 1 .i THE LAKESIDE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS Prepared for : Lincoln Property Company N.C. , Inc. 11400 S. E. 6th Street - Suite #220 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Prepared by: Transportation Planning & Engineering, Inc. 1126 108th Avenue N. E. , Bellevue, Washington 98004 December, 1981 THE LAKESIDE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS DECEMBER 1981 Project Description The Lakeside is a proposed residential development consist- ing of a maximum of 186 multifamily units. A mix of one and two bedroom units will be constructed in two and three story build- ings. Recreational facilities such as a swimming pool and a club-house will also be provided for residents. Construction is expected to begin in the spring of 1982 and be completed in early 1983 . The occupancy of residence units is expected to be- gin in late 1982 and the development will be fully occupied in 1983. The Lakeside site is located on the east side of Lake Wash- ington Boulevard North, approximately 0. 6 miles north of North Park Drive in Renton. Most of the site is presently occupied by the Renton Golf Range. The street network shown on Figure 1 is the study area for this traffic analysis, except for Interstate Highway 405 and its interchanges, which are shown for reference only. The proposed vehicular access to the site will be via two driveways onto Lake Washington Boulevard, one near each end of the site. The driveways will intersect a loop roadway through the site which will also serve as the aisle between rows of per- pendicular parking stalls convenient to the buildings. Parking stalls will be provided at a ratio of 1 1/2 stalls per residence unit, with a minimum of 279 stalls provided, 186 of which will be covered. Also, proposed as part of this project is the vaca- tion of portions of two existing unimproved street rights-of- way. These two rights-of-way are identified on the plat map as Lake View Boulevard, running approximately north/south through the site, and Third, running approximately east/west through the site. Existing Conditions Figure 1 illustrates the functional roadway classifica- tions, traffic control signal and stop sign locations, and perti- rent roadway characteristics of the existing street network. The functional roadway classifications shown in Figure 1 are those adopted by City of Renton Resolution #2345. Speed limits are posted for 35 MPH on Lake Washington Boulevard, and 30 KPH on Park Drive, while the remainder of the streets shown in l'igure 1 have 25 MPH speed limits. The traffic signal at the intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard North, Garden Avenue North, Park Avenue North, and North Park Drive presently operates in a four-phase fully- actuated mode, with one phase for each approach (with green arrows for left turns ) . Lake Washington Boulevard has three ap- pro,ich lanes ( left only, left or through, right only) , Garden Avenue has two approach lanes (left or through or right, right only) , the east leg has four approach lanes ( left only, left or through, through only, right only) , and the west leg has three approach lanes ( left only, through only, through or right) . Lake Washington Boulevard North has one through lane in each direction, with a northbound left turn lane into the present entrance to Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park, and a southbound left turn lane into Houser Way. The Beach Park contains a well-used small boat launchig ramp. The Burlington Nor :hern Railroad operates approximately two trains per day on the single-track railroad line located between Lake Washington BouLevard and the Lake. The railroad crossing of Lake Washington Boulevard immediately south of Houser Way is sig zalized. Figure 2 shows 1980 average daily traffic volumes in the vicinity of the Lakeside site. Figures 3 and 4 show existing AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes at the pertinent street inter- sec:ions in the vicinity of the site. Truck traffic volumes within the study area are generally low. Several Metro Transit rou:es use North Park Drive and provide convenient bus service into the Renton Central Business District and beyond. Some bicy- cli3ts use Lake Washington Boulevard as a commuter and recreational route. There is relatively little pedestrian traf- fic. Table 1 shows peak hour levels of service calculated for_ pertinent existing and proposed intersections along Lake Washing- ton Boulevard North. This street serves as a commuter route for workers from Boeing and other nearby industrial plants. Because of the proximity of these industrial plants and the distinct employee shift-change times, Lake Washington Boulevard experiences relatively high traffic volume peaking trends. Almost 20 percent of the daily traffic on Lake Washington Boulevard occurs during the PM peak hour. Because of the relatively high peak hour traffic volumes, and the long distances between gap-creating traffic control devices, vehicles turning onto Lake Washington Boulevard from side streets, such as Burnett Avenue North, experience some delays . However, during the off-peak times , traffic volumes on Lake Washington Boulevard are low and delays are minimal. City of Renton accident records indicate that the recent traffic accident history of the streets within the study area has not been unusually serious. Future Conditions Without the Lakeside Several arterial street improvement projects have been pro- posed within the vicinity of the Lakeside . The Gene Coulon Memorial Beach Park Extension project, currently under construction, will create a new driveway access into the parkoffofLakeWashingtonBoulevard, approximately one block south of the Lakeside site. This new park driveway will include two exit lanes and one entrance lane across the railroad tracks. The park extension project will also include the widening of Lake Washington Boulevard at this new driveway entrance, in order to provide a northbound left-turn lane. The Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT ) has recently reconstructed the I-405 freeway interchange at North 30th Street. The street overpass across the freeway has been widened and is now open to traffic. The Department of Transportation expects construction on the new overpass and free- way ramps to be completed by spring of 1982. The City of Renton Six Year Transportation Improvement Prog- ram (1981 to 1986 ) lists several proposed street improvement projects in the vicinity of the Lakeside site. One proposed project would improve Lake Washington Boulevard from North Park Drive to the north city limits, with drainage, paving, curbs, sidewalks, illumination, and channelization. Other proposed projects would improve Burnett Avenue North, North 30th Street, and Park Avenue North with similar types of roadway improvements. All of these projects have been assigned low priorities by the City of Renton and none of the projects are funded. Figure 5 shows projected 1983 Average Daily Traffic Volumes for the study area, without the Lakeside. These traffic volumes are based on the 1980 average daily traffic volumes plus 3 per- cent annual traffic growth, as recommended by the City of Renton. The traffic volumes shown in Figure 5 also include an estimated 1000 additional vehicle trips generated by the Beach Park Extension project on a summer weekday with sunny weather, based on information from the Beach Park Extension project Final EIS. Figures 6 and 7 show projected 1983 AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes without the Lakeside. Table 1 shows 1983 peak hour levels of service calculated for the street intersections in the study area, without the Lake- side. Somewhat higher traffic volumes on Lake Washington Boule- vard due to the park extension and normal traffic during the peak periods growth will cause somewhat longer delays to side street traffic during the peak periods, such as at Burnett Avenue. However, traffic conditions will still be tolerable and probably will not be noticeably worse than the present conditions. Impacts of the Lakeside It is estimated that approximately 1135 vehicular trips would be generated by the Lakeside on an average weekday at full occupancy. A vehicular trip is defined as "A single or one- direction vehicle movement with either the origin or destination exiting or entering ) inside the study site" (Trip Generation - An Informational Report, Institute of Transportation Engineers, Second Edition - 1979 ) . As shown in Figure 8, this estimate is based on 186 multifamily units and a rate of 6. 1 vehicular trips per unit per average weekday. Approximately 113 trips (10% of the total ) would occur during the AM peak hour, with about 80% of them leaving the site. Approximately 130 trips (11. 5% of the total ) would occur during the PM peak hour, with about 67% of them entering the site. Figure 8 shows the estimated distribution of the site- generated traffic onto the street network. Most of the site gen-erated traffic will be oriented south toward the industrial area and the Renton Central Business District. The most-used route will probably be I-405 via the interchange at N.E. Park Drive, while some site-generated traffic will also use the I-405 inter- changes at North 30th Street and at North 44th Street. Figure 9 shows projected 1983 average daily traffic volumeswiththeLakesidefullyoccupied. Figures 10 and 11 show pro-jected 1983 AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes with the Lake- side, for the pertinent street intersections within the study area. These peak hour traffic volume projections are conserv- atively high, because they assume that the peak generation hours for the site coincide with the on-street traffic peak hours. Because of the many industrial plant commuters, the on-street peak hours occur earlier than normal, perhaps actually before the Lakeside site traffic generation peak hours. Computed levels of service for these intersections, assuming the pro-jected traffic volumes, are shown in Table 1. The traffic generated by the Lakeside is not expected to cause any major traffic capacity problems. Though traffic vol- umes will increase somewhat, the signalized intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard, Garden Avenue, and Park Drive will con- tinue to operate at level of service D, with little change in traffic conditions noticeable to motorists. Vehicles turning on-to Lake Washington Boulevard during the peak hours will continue to experience delays, including those vehicles at Burnett Avenue and at the proposed site driveways. Because of the relativelylowvolumeswhichwillturnleftfromLakeWashingtonBoulevard into the site driveways, left turn lanes will not be necessaryonthearterialattheselocations. Extremely few left turns in- to the site will occur during the morning peak. Slightly more left turns will occur during the evening peak, but the PM southbound through traffic volumes delayed by left turning vehicles will be relatively low. The proposed vacation of portions of the two undeveloped rights-of-way identified on the plat map as Third and Lake View Boulevard will restrict access to some undeveloped lots immediat- ely south and east of the Lakeside site. After the proposed vacation, lots 344, 345 and 346 apparently would still have access via the undeveloped Lake View Boulevard and Morgan Avenue rights-of-way. However, this would be a circuitous route to Lake Washington Boulevard and may not be practical because of the terrain. Conclusions and Recommendations The traffic generated by the Lakeside is not expected to cause any major traffic problems. The slightly increased traf- fic volumes in the area probably will not be noticeable to motorists or residents. Increased volumes on Lake Washington Boulevard will somewhat increase the difficulty of turning onto this arterial during the peak hours, but conditions will still be tolerable. The delays expected for motorists waiting to turn from the site driveways onto Lake Washington Boulevard during the peak hours could be minimized by providing enough driveway width so that right and left turning vehicles would not impede each other. Driveway widths of about 35 feet (approximately 32 feet minimum) would allow a right turning vehicle and a left turning vehicle to wait side by side, with another lane for traffic en- tering the site. The driveways and adjacent landscaping should be designed to provide good motorist sight distances. The restriction of access to adjacent lots (#344, 345, and 346 ) due to street vacations could possibly be mitigated with ac- cess agreements. These lots could be granted access to Lake Washington Boulevard via the Lakeside site circulation roadway. r FLNCTIONAL ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION, FREEWAY MAJOR ARTERIAL i SECONDARY ARTERIAL r COLLECTOR ARTERIAL N LOCAL ACCESS m / APPROX. S.E 80TH ST.SCALE. TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES O TRAFFIC CONTROL SIGNAL A in=1600 INTERSECTIONS SIGNS AT MAJOR CO N. 40TH ST. NOTE: ALL LOCAL ACCESS ie(2) STREETS STOP AT y N ARTERIALS i RCADWAY CHARACTERISTICS j z•" 36T"ST N 0' APPROX. PAVEMENT WIDTH 1 zi --2) NO. OF LANES z P I IPAVEDSHOULDERS 1 G GRAVEL SHOULDERS L,N6---II N NO. SHOULDERS iI 11 c CURBS 1 I N.30TH ST2L r24(2)2'P IT 1 NE.?7T_ ST k C.')., Q THE V LAKESIDE" SITE m i \ i 11 Z 1y GENE CCULON L 11\ MEMORIAL qR=., 08'/•,.... BEACH PARK 40(2)C 1(y BOEING j k 4.. . 1, 82'(7)6'P J EXISTING STREET NETWORK FIGURE- \ THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS IR 1 S SOURCE: C=:TY OF RENTON 1980 illT]' FFIC FLOW MAP mI di N APPROX.11 S.E.BOTH ST. SCALE r 1"=1600' ZF 0. 0. N. 40TH ST.T.' 1 a` N.36TH 3T O z O i1(, 44 co O a 1 I N N.*- 0 ST 1t 01780 5310 N. 7TH ST s .L 0 QW v LAKTHEESIDEilL.SITE 20,930 13 m 0 fil AGENECOUPON MEMORIAL HF BEACH PARK PAR4S...`" 0 BOEING cn it AN 1980 AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUMES (ADT) FIGURE THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS IR 2 V0 N. 36TH ST. n ri if knMO N o / NOT TO o '°° SCALE a 2 v I__ a IO g If / 11. y -23 N.30TH t---/ St w 3 - - r O tD _et M O cp lwW cr 6% 0 m 04,o i.o. R AA Dc34) 1 62 k4y 2 1931 AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (6 :45 - 7 : 45 AM) FIG V I IPA 3 THE LAKESIDE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS m 1 aIP ‘C agr--- I4(/' 4 ti N. 36TH ST. aN- N NOT TO SCALE a 7 r i- 35 y N.30TH L--1 ST ui 4 •— i i J 0—•Ak tam COON z SOURCES : MANU1,L COUNTS BYriVTHECITYOFRENTON T.1'. & E. to aio O m DR. 115 41 6 Ilr .... ly4y a. P 0 9y` / c910 F2 1931 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES (3 :45 - 4 : 45 PM) F1GUe IR 4 THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 1 I II N A P Tr S.E.80TH ST. SCALE i I"=1600' ZF 0. o. Q N. 40TH ST. N.36TH STy _, h r v/ I Y " 6 tI N N.30 :I ST. ji 0210 5970TT a Nk N 1' N.E' 27TH ST kl 1°.v HEvQ illi LA ESIDE" SITE m 23,200 Zip At GENE COULON it t MEMORIAL F BEACH PAR<PAR. N Y BOEING o t PROJECTED 1983 ADT `S WITHOUT "THE LAKESIDE" IR FIGVQ` THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 5 I eoy A7‘t I if 0 N., 36TH ST. n ri lI "1MO N o' o,//( . NOT TO cV "' °° > SCALE a O2 Nti 4 5 N ) /' L. -24 N.30TH v - + ST Foui3 -r OfON J ' Ofow AJ gyp\ — pO V V O iD 1 DR. P 7P ot* 6' a \\*. \/ gyp S 1t/, c9t QP 1 PRCJECTED 1983 AM PEAK HR. TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITHOUT 1IGURi' THE LAKESIDE" IR - THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS i \ V J b A ,( A.__ 4 N. 36TH ST. 2 Ir v-- to N o- o/% NOT TO 471 ^ O.'o > SCALE a irn L_71- _N N I i' tai r'-43 N.30TH 1 I S7 cz 4) W 4 —ow I r r \ Y M—In J 2 — mm 1 Z o s\ 4er \ tom e I ii DR. 6 S I `' a kqr 04, S'P\ 2 PROJECTED 1983 PM PEAK HR. TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITHOUT FIGURE THE LAKESIDE" h1E 7 THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS ESTIMATED LAKESIDE APARTMENTS TRIP GENERATIONiii APPROX. 186 UNITS (MAX. ) X 2Q4.- N 6 . 1 VEHICLE TRIPS/UNIT* 11 APPROX. APPROX. 1135 TRIPS/AVERAGE S E BOTH ST. SALE WEEKDAY r I"=1600' m SOURCE : Q N. 40TH ST. TUIP GENERATION-AN I'1FORMATIONAL REPORT 4P I .T.E. , 2ND EDITION, 1979 . f N.36TH ST 1 / 4( s): 0( iftel t Y NTH ST. S 0 115 ( 10%) 1/4 TH N E 27ST Q O Q S.' THE vlilt LAKESIDE SITE 1135 {100°A°) 510 (45%) % ha GENE COULON itMEMORIAL Aip BEACH PARK ` PAR ' 0 % BOEING N2t 4, v it ESTIMATED DISTRIBUTION OF SITE-GENERATED TRAFFIC 1-FIG U Ri\ THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS IR 8 144- N lb c A PPROX. S.E.8OTH ST. SCALE I +I"=1600' I 0 0 Q N. 40TH ST. 1 4 N.D6TH ST_ J Y I lc- x3I N.3TH_ y ST kin 2225 60854(::( N s q. N' : ti v LAKESIDE" SITE 23,710 ipi h rn m GENE COULON it `MEMORIAL Ilk . 1!F BEACH PARK P A R "' s BOEING l PROJECTED 1983 ADT 'S WITH "THE LAKESIDE" iFIGuQE-..\ IR"THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 9 dlti. rC)If °N. 36TH ST. I 1 A i zr InM0 N o. hb0 W NOT TO SCALE a 2 a 0 - ti f- 4 26y--N.30TH J ST ui 03 —0, tr J ' 0 N 0 R W Os ue' 4 m N WW 11 v125 1 " THE la' LAKE-N SIDE" pa N_16 lit 38 DR b eP1° L- a v-1 s 03`fi"' c9' po F2 PRJJECTED 1983 AM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH FIGU RE THE LAKESIDE" 0 O THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS 4) a0) CPC I 3 N. 36TH ST. if) o_ NOT TO N` O-tio > SCALE N N IL_ 7 1 N 52 N.30TH ST W 4 — I a 2 "--" A 01 m OTr cr sp O 8 wo t r"THE 5 ASIDEE' r\b.. is tr G c4. 041' h* qr J PF OJECTED 1983 PM PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES WITH 6IGUR E THE LAKESIDE" THE LAKESIDE" TRAFFIC ANALYSIS OM TABLE 1 Street Intersection Levels of Service During Street Traffic Peak Hours 1981 1983 1983 Intersection Without With All on Lake Existing The Lakeside The Lakeside Washington Blvd. N. ) AM PM AM PM AM PM Burnett Ave. N. * C to D D D D To E D E south intersection) north site driveway** A/A/C C/B/E south site driveway** A/A/D C/B/E N.E. Park Drive and Garden Drive D D D D D D Signalized) Level of service for left turn from Burnett only. Individual levels of service shown for right turns from driveway (assumed STOP sign)/ left turns from Lake Washington Boulevard/ left turns from driveway (assumed STOP sign) . Description of Levels of Service: Primary Reference: A Little or no delay Interim Materials on Highway Capacity B Short traffic delays Transportation Research Circular No. 212, C Average traffic delays Transportation Research Board, D Long traffic delays January 1980, p. 37. E Very long traffic delays; congestion PRELIMINARY GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING STUDY PROPOSED APARTMENT COMPLEX LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD NORTH RENTON, WASHINGTON E-1625 FOR LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY A :4.: 3 -- Earth Consultants inc. Geotechnical Engineering and Geology Ear Consu Inc.Or-Geotechnical Engineering and Geology 1805 - 136th Place N.E., Suite 101, Bellevue, Washington 98005 Phone: (206) 643-3780 /Seattle (206) 464-1584 August 24 , 1981 E-1625 Mr. Dean Henry Lincoln Property Company The Overlake Building 11400 S. E. 6th Street, Suite 220 Bellevue, Washington 98004 Subject: Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Study Proposed Apartment Complex Lake Washington Boulevard North Renton, Washington Dear Mr. Henry: In accordance with your request and within the scope of our proposal dated July 29, 1981 this report presents the results of our Preliminary Geotechnical Engineering Study for the subject project. The purpose of this study was to explore the subsurface soil condi- tions in order to provide preliminary recommendations for site prepar- ation, foundation and retaining wall design. The scope of our study included test pits, laboratory tests, geotechnical engineering analyses and the preparation of this report. Our preliminary study indicates that the site is underlain by medium dense native soils at relatively shallow depths. In the relatively level western portion of the site, the native soils are overlain by medium dense granular fills ranging in depth from about three (3) to eight (8) feet. In the southeastern section of the site including the locations of Buildings A, B, C and P ( see Plate 1) , up to fourteen (14 ) feet of fill was encountered. The proposed struc- tures may generally be supported on conventional spread footings bear- ing on the existing granular fills, firm native soils, or on structur- al fill. In the southeastern area of the site where the depth of fill approached fourteen (14 ) feet, we recommend additional explora- tion once plans are finalized. For planning purposes, it may be assumed that building areas in this portion of the site will need to be overexcavated to a depth of about four (4 ) feet and replaced by structural fill. The following sections describe the study and explain our recom- mendations in greater detail. PROJECT DESCRIPTION At the time our study was performed, the site and proposed build- ing locations were as shown schematically on the Test Pit Location Plan, Plate 1. This is based on an undated preliminary Site Plan byGoes, Guthrie & Associates. Lincoln Property Company E-1625 Aujust 24, 1981 Page 2 It is planned to construct a multi-unit apartment complex on the site. At the time of our study, the project was in the planning stage. Seventeen (17) apartment buildings are tentatively planned . The buildings will be two to three story conventional wood-frame structures with relatively light foundation loads. Typical loads for this type of construction are on the order of 2000 pounds per lineal foot for perimeter walls, and column loads of 25 kips, dead plus live loads. Cuts and fills will be dependent on final grades which had not. been developed at the time of our study. Buildings planned along the eastern margin against the hill may require cuts and retaining wails from about five ( 5) to ten (10 ) feet in height. The above design criteria are preliminary. Once final plans become available we should be consulted to review the recommendations contained in this report. In any case, it is recommended that Earth Consultants, Inc. be provided the opportunity for a general review of final design. FIELD EXPLORATION AND LABORATORY TESTING Our field exploration was performed on August 12, 1981. The sub- surface conditions were explored by excavating twelve test pits to a ma), imum depth of fifteen ( 15) feet below the existing surface at the approximate locations shown on Plate 1. The locations of the test pits were approximately determined by pacing from estimated property corners. Elevations of test pits were approximately determined by interpolation between plan contours. Hence, the locations and elevations of the test pits should be consi- dered approximate only. The field exploration was continuously monitored by a field engi- neer from our firm who classified the soils encountered, maintained a log of each test pit, obtained representative bulk soil samples , mea- sured in-situ strengths and observed pertinent site features. Shear strengths of undisturbed soils were measured where practical in the field with a penetrometer. These results are recorded on the test pit logs at the appropriate depth. Soils were classified visually in the field according to the Unified Soil Classification System which is presented on Plate 2, Legend . Logs of the individual test pits are presented on Plates 3 through 9, Test Pit Logs. The final logs represent our interpretations of the field logs and the results of the laboratory examination and tests of field samples. Representative soil samples from the test pits were placed in closed containers and returned to our laboratory for further examina- tion and testing. Visual classifications were supplemented by index tests such as sieve and hydrometer analyses on representative sam- ples. Field moisture determinations were performed on each bulk sam- ple. Results of moisture determinations together with classifica- tions, are shown on the test pit logs included in this report. The Earth Consultants, Inc. Lincoln Property Company E-1625 August 24, 1981 Page 3 results of the sieve and hydrometer analyses are illustrated on Plates 10 and 11. SITE CONDITIONS Surface The site is located at and around the existing Renton Golf Range on the east side of Lake Washington Boulevard in the 2000 block. The site covers an area of about eight (8) acres with a trailer court to the north and undeveloped land to the east and south. The golf range occupies the central portion of the site. The site has been used as a fill area for a quarry operation which previously existed on the site. Steep bluffs from the quarry operation still exist in the northeastern site margin and southeast of the southern site margin. The site generally slopes to the west. In the extreme eastern portion slopes are as steep as 0. 5:1 (Horizon- tal :Vertical) , with the relief for the eastern quarter of the site on the order of seventy ( 70) feet. The western three-quarters of the site is nearly level with a relief of approximately thirty ( 30 ) feet. A trailer and a number of structures with utilities associated with the golf driving range are present in the west central area. Recent fills have been deposited south of the golf range. No flowing water was observed at the time of our field explo- ration. A small pond of still water is located east of the southern site margin in a low area. Subsurface Subsurface conditions in the central and northern areas of the site occupied by the golf range are fairly uniform. These areas are immediately underlain by medium dense miscellaneous granular fills ranging in depth from about one (1) foot to nine (9) feet as observed in Test Pits TP-1 through TP-6. Beneath the fills are native soils. The native soils are medium dense to dense slightly silty sand and gravelly silty sand. In Test Pit TP-4 , the top four (4 ) feet of the native soil is a very dense slightly sandy silt. The southwestern portion of the site is immediately south of the golf range and parallel to Lake Washington, is underlain by native soils to the depth explored. The soils are a medium dense sand with varying amounts of silt and gravel. In the southeastern site area south of the golf range the quarry operation evidently continued deeper. Test Pits TP-9 and TP-12 en- countered miscellaneous fills ranging in depth from about eight and one-half ( 8-1/2) to fourteen ( 14 ) feet, respectively. The fill is a Earth Consultants, Inc. Lincoln Property Company E-1625 August 24, 1981 Page 4 medium dense gravelly silty sand containing some debris. Portions of the fill in Test Pit TP-12 contained large amounts of debris includ- ing organics, with moderate groundwater seepage in the last one foot of the fill. Beneath the miscellaneous fills are medium dense silty gravelly sand in Test Pit TP-9 and medium dense slightly silty sand in Test Pit TP-12. In the northeastern and east central area, the site extends into the hill. Test Pits TP-7 and TP-8 excavated in this area encountered medium dense silty gravelly sand and hard slightly sandy silt. In the bluff along the northern site margin the silty gravelly sand and hard silt can be observed with approximately ten (10 ) feet of glacial till as a cap. Moderate groundwater seepage was observed in Test Pits TP-7 and TP-12. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS General Based on our preliminary field exploration, laboratory testing and engineering analyses, it is our opinion that the site is suitable for the proposed construction. The proposed structures may be sup- ported on conventional spread footings bearing on the existing granu- lar fills, firm native soils, or on structural fill. The fills exist- ing over most of the site are generally sufficiently compact to sup- port the planned building loads without reworking. However, some recompaction of these fills may be required in localized areas. In the southeastern portion of the site, including the possible loca- tions of Buildings A, B, C and P, the existing fills are deeper and contain significant amounts of debris. At these locations, it will most likely be necessary to overexcavate about four (4 ) to five ( 5) feet of the existing fills and replace them by structural fill. We recommend that additional exploration be conducted in this area once building and grading plans have been finalized. The southeastern area where the fill is deeper, should receive additional investiga- tion as building plans are finalized. The following sections of this report present more detailed recommendations for various geotechnical engineering aspects of the project which should be incorporated into the project design and construction. This report has been prepared for specific application to this project in accordance with generally accepted geotechnical engineering practices for the exclusive use of the Lincoln Property Company and their representatives. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made. Earth Consultants, Inc. Lincoln Property Company E-1625 August 24, 1981 Page 5 Foundations Based on the design parameters outlined in the Project Descrip- tion section of this report, it is our opinion the proposed struc- tures may be supported on continuous and individual spread footings bearing on the existing granular fills, firm native soils or struc- tural fill placed in accordance with the Site Preparation section of this report. For Buildings A, B, C and P, foundations may be support- ed on a structural fill mat extending to a depth of three (3) feet below the footing bottoms, placed after removing the existing fills. Structural fill should extend a distance beyond footing perimeters equal to the depth of fill placed. Perimeter footings should extend to a minimum depth of eighteen 18) inches below the lowest adjacent final grade and may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of two thousand (2000 ) pounds per square foot (psf) , for dead plus live loads. Continuous footings should have a minimum width of sixteen (16) inches. Isolated spread footings may be designed for an allowable soil bearing pressure of two thousand (2000 ) psf, but should have a minimum width of eighteen 18) inches. A one-third increase in allowable bearing pressures is permissible when considering lateral loads due to wind and earth- quakes. Because of possible variations in the existing fill on the site it is recommended that all foundation excavations be thoroughly tamp- ed to detect any possible areas of loose soils. Loose soils, if present, should be overexcavated and replaced with structural fill or crushed rock. We recommend that all footing excavations be examined by a repre- sentative from Earth Consultants, Inc. to observe compliance with the design concepts presented in this report. Floor Slabs Floor slabs may be supported on the recompacted existing fills or firm native soils,or on structural fill placed in accordance with the Site Preparation section of this report. The top four (4 ) inches should be a free draining sand or gravel to act as a capillary break. This requirement may be waived if the fill is free draining or moisture infiltration will not be a problem. In areas where moisture is undesirable a vapor barrier may be placed beneath the slab. One (1) to two ( 2) inches of sand may be placed over the membrane for protection during construction. The slab may be isolated from foundations to reduce the detrimental effects of differential settlements between the footings and floor slab. Earth Consultants, Inc. Lincoln Property Company E-1625 August 24, 1981 Page 6 Settlements For the anticipated building loads, we expect that total settle- ments on the order of one-half ( 1/2) to one ( 1) inch will occur, with about half this amount occurring as differential settlements between spread and continuous footings, and between slabs and foundations. It is expected that this settlement should occur during construction with the remaining portion during the initial loading of the slab. Lateral Forces Short term wind or seismic forces may be resisted by passive pressures, and/or friction between concrete and the supporting sub- grade. The passive resistance may be considered as an equivalent fluid load of two hundred fifty ( 250 ) pounds per cubic foot (pcf) . This value assumes that all footing backfill is compacted in accor- dance with the Site Preparation recommendations in this report. A coefficient of friction of three tenths ( 0. 30 ) may be considered between concrete and soil. Basement and Retaining Walls Basement and retaining walls should be designed to resist late- ral earth pressures imposed by the soils retained by these struc- tures. Walls that are free to rotate one-thousandth of their height at the top should be designed to resist lateral earth pressures im- posed by an equivalent fluid with a unit weight of thirty-five ( 35) pcf. If walls are restrained from free movement at the top, they should be designed for an additional uniform pressure of one hundred 100 ) psf. The above pressures assume a maximum wall height of ten (10 ) feet and that no surcharge slopes or loads will occur above the walls. If deviations from these criteria are expected, we should be contacted for the appropriate design parameters. All walls should be provided with adequate provisions for subsur- face drainage. Slopes Varying heights of cuts will be required along the eastern site margin depending on final building locations. We recommend all temporary slopes be cut at 3 : 2 (Horizontal :Ver- tical) . Permanent slopes should be sloped at 2: 1. We recommend that all excavated slopes be examined by a representative of Earth Consul- tants, Inc. to evaluate the stability of the exposed soils. The existing slopes appear generally stable and should not be disturbed. However, all permanent exposed slopes should be vegetated to reduce erosion. Earth Consultants, Inc. Lincoln Property Company E-1625 August 24, 1981 Page 7 Moderate groundwater seepage was encountered at depth in only two test pits which were excavated during a relatively dry period. Although we encountered only minimal groundwater, groundwater seepage may be expected from cuts during rainy periods. If present, ground- water should be controlled as outlined in the following section. Groundwater Control The subject site contains fine grained soils that will make grad- ing operations difficult during wet weather. For this reason, it is important that groundwater be controlled wherever possible. Seepage should be anticipated from cuts during rainy weather. Surface inter- ceptor ditches may have to be placed along the top of all cuts. Sub- surface drains may have to be placed either along the toe or top of all cuts, whichever location appears to be more feasible. We suggest that appropriate locations of drains be established during grading operations by a representative of Earth Consultants, Inc. , at which time the seepage areas, which if present, will be more clearly defined. The site should be graded to drain at all times and all loose surfaces sealed at night to prevent the infiltration of rain into the soils. After a rainfall, equipment should remain off the soils until they have had a chance to dry sufficiently. Site Preparation All building and pavement areas should be cleared of all struc- tures, utility lines, pavements and debris, large vegetation, brush and other deleterious matter. In all areas that will receive build- ings or pavements, the subgrade should be proofrolled under the obser- vation of a representative of Earth Consultants, Inc. This procedure should indicate the presence of any exceptionally loose or unstable areas which, if present, should be overexcavated and replaced by structural fill or crushed rock. All structural fill should be placed in eight (8) to ten (10 ) inch thick loose lifts and compacted to a minimum of 95 percent rela- tive compaction as determined by ASTM D-1557-70 (Modified Proctor) . The near surface site soils contain an excessive amount of fines which when wet may be difficult to compact. We therefore do not rec- ommend their use during wet weather. If any of the grading is to be conducted during wet weather, we recommend that granular materials with a maximum size of three ( 3) inches, containing less than 5 per- cent fines, be used for structural fill. During dry weather, other granular materials may be used provided they can be properly com- pacted. Imported fill samples should be submitted to Earth Consul- tants, Inc. prior to bringing on the site. The placement of the structural fill should be observed and tested by Earth Consultants, Inc. Earth Consultants, Inc. Lincoln Property Company E-1625 August 24, 1981 Page 8 Pavement Areas Pavement areas may be supported on the recompacted subgrade or on structural fill placed in accordance with the Site Preparation section of this report. The upper six (6) inches of pavement sub- grade should be compacted to at least 95 percent of the maximum den- sity. Below this level a compactive effort of 90 percent would be adequate. The pavement section for lightly loaded traffic or parking areas should consist of two (2) inches of Asphalt Surfacing over four 4 ) inches of Crushed Rock Base or three (3) inches of Asphalt Treated Base (ATB) . Heavier loaded traffic areas will require thicker sections. Additional Services Because of the preliminary nature of this investigation, it is recommended that Earth Consultants, Inc. be provided the opportunity for a general review of the final design and specifications in order that earthwork and foundation recommendations may be properly inter- preted and implemented in the design and construction. It is also recommended than when final design is available, that additional field work be performed to delineate the extent of the fill and it' s condition in the south eastern area and develop specific recommenda- tions for building in this area. The analyses and recommendations submitted in this report are based upon preliminary the data obtained from the test pits. The nature and extent of variations between test pits may not become evi- dent until construction. If variations then appear evident, Earth Consultants, Inc. should be allowed to reevaluate the recommendations of this report prior to proceeding with the construction. It is also recommended that Earth Consultants, Inc. be retained to provide geotechnical services during construction. This is to observe compliance with the design concepts, specifications or rec- ommendations and to allow design changes in the event subsurface conditions differ from those anticipated prior to the start of con- struction. The following plates are included and complete this report: Plate 1 Test Pit Location Plan Plate 2 Legend Plates 3 through 9 Test Pit Logs Plates 10 and 11 Grain Size Analyses Earth Consultants, Inc. Lircoln Property Company E-1625 August 24 , 1981 Page 9 We trust the information presented herein is adequate for your recuirements. If you need additional information or clarification, plEase call. Il%BUTq Respectfully submitted, r wasleiPo bi c` \ EARTH CONSULTANTS, INC. r ~ a o O i\ to e°/ST P` t'' Anil Butail, P. E. NNAL ',00r Chief Engineer JRL/AB/jb Earth Consultants, Inc. MMUS 11111,0- Property 0 TP-8 O SITE i Line , WitiD Lake Approximate Scale Washington MIN TP 7 TP 4 I o ao Bo Isotr. I 1\--P TP 6 T , VICINITY LEGEND MAP., i C" O TP-3 Approximate Test Pit Location 0 Possible Building vJ Property Site N iiii\ LineTPII ill TP-2 TP-12 Z.......... °TP-5 Reference Preliminary Site Plan 1/ 4 TP-I By Goes, Guthrie 6 Associates, Inc. J Undated TP9 4011.44. 1 TP-I0 1 Earth I n re Consultants Inc. GEOIECNNICAL ENGINEERING 8 GFOLOGV Test Pit Location PlanLAKEWASHINGTONBLVD. N. Apartment Site Renton, Washington Proj No 1625 IDate Aug '81 !Plate 1 MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAPH LETTER TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS SYMBOL SYMBOL 0. • 00• 000• d GW N(U.-MAD(0 MArtLS,SAND SRAY[L 00• 0 MATUR(!, UTTLI OR NO FINES MOCLEAN MAW(L$ v 0' '0 u 0 II/IN •• •• f'•.41 RAAALLY K •.4: ` 4. .•,i • FOORLY-SRAOU SRAKLI, SRAv(L- SOILS GP SAMO WXTUN(S, UTTLC ON NO FIN[! coARSt P. •: •: :• at!m a t 0 f GM 11+ TSaLs Mw( TNYI SO%t it 11 GM SALTY MASILLT•clot TU(lSAMD- OF COARSE FRAC- GRAVELS 'ITN I1MS 1T TION R(TAiNCO Smi/4••MM. •1•409 0 ON NO• MY( lh•••) CLATCY sRAv(L!, aRAr(L-sANO- GC CLA MIXTURE! f LL-MAO(A SA. . . . NOD, aRAr[LL a SW SANDS, LITTLE OR NO FINE!lAMO CLEAN SANG ••••• ANO Mull •• r f14.41 •f• . - •• SOILS POORLY-MAO(0 SANOS, SRAv[LLT ION( TNAM 50%I SP LMO/, LITTLE OR NO FINES 01 MATERIAL IS LA*sea TNAM NO. 12•i.ti., 200 Steve WC MORE TNAM SO% I SM Mr" SAMOA, SAND-SILT MIxTURtS ANDS MTN FIN[! lion NSSIN• rim) NO. 4 SKYE dd SC CLAr[T 5AN00, SAND-cur MIXTURES ffll .' liORILMIC SILTS Aw0 PERT FINE ML SA/IO•, ROM FLOUR, SILTY OR CLAYEY neg SANDS ON CLAYEY IILT1 fins 1LMIT FLXSTICITY FINE SILTS f INOR4IMC CUTS OF LOW TO MMus. UOWO O YS, 5RAU•(0 AMA MIT CL SAMOY CLAYS, SILTY CLAYS, A LIAM SOILS CLAY! LESS IMAM !CIj // CLAY! OL OR•ANIC SILTS MO ORSAIMC SILTY CLAYS OF LOW FLASTKITY INMOAMIC SM.T1, MICACtous OR MH a r AMAroAccoosFINESO OR SILTY SOILS II OR[ TNAM SOS SILTS W M)C/ MATERIAL IS AUG UN• LIMIT / CH SASAMIC CLAYS OF NISN SMALLER TNAM NO CLAYS SR( NAATERTM s0 f7 FLASTICI TY, FAT CLAYS 100 SIEY( SIL[ ORSAUIC CLAYS OF M[DIIAI TO NISN OH PLASTIC/TT, ORSAMIC SILTS a. -'. PT FEAT, NLAS/S, SM kA 3a l! NW/LT DRSANIe SOILS y .=': ITN NISN ONSAMIC CONTENTS INr TOPSOIL Humus and Dutf Layer r- I Uncontrolled with FILL Highly Variable Constituents NOTE: DUAL SY•SOLS ARE UllE0 TO INDICATE SORO(RLINE SOIL CLASSIFICATIONS SOIL CLASSIFICATION CHART T141 DISCUS31OM IN TNL TUT OF nos REPORT IS NECESSARY FOR A PROPER UM0(RSTAMOIM OF INC "wrung of root MAr[RIAL M(SENT[0 IN TNL ATTACN(D LOSS I 2`0.D.Split Spoon Sampler 1 Ring or Shelby Sample P Sampler PushedI WOEarth40SampleNotRecoveredConsultantsInc. V Water Level (date) Ts Torvane Reading LEGEND qu Penetrometer Readings i Water Observation Well Proj.No.1625 Date Aug: '81 jPfate 2 TEST PIT NO. _I Logged By JRD Date 8/12/81 Elev. 57± Depth W ft.) USCS Soil Description 96) 0 — SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, moist 11FILL) 5 -- f I Sil Brown to gray SAND with gravel and silt, medium EI:•:•:::: SP dense to dense, moist 6 10 —, Test Pit terminated at 10.5 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. 15 — Logged By JRD Date 8/12/31 TEST PIT NO. __ L_ Elev• 65± 0 .. - SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, dry to 4 4' moist (FILL) fir ::t 5 f$, ti r }t 1. Il•. SM Gray gravelly silty SAND grading to gravelly SAND SP with silt, medium dense to dense, moist 9 10 —ri i:i:i:: Test Pit terminated at 11 .0 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. 15 i TEST PIT LOGS I APARTHIENT SITE Earth I 0RENTON, WASH I NGTON Consultants Inc. GEI)TECHNICAL ENGINEERING a GEOLOGY Proj. No. 1625 I Date Aug. '81 'Plate 3 TEST PIT NO. Logged By JRD late 8/12/81 Elev.. ± Depth yy ft.) USCS Soil Description 96) 0 —' SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, moist 11 FILL) 6 SM Brown silty SAND with gravel , medium dense, moist 15 11SMBrownSANDwithsilt, medium dense, moist 10 —%: :' : SP Test Pit terminated at 11.0 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. 15 logged By JRD oats 8/12/81 TEST PIT NO. Elev. 81± 0 ;O• SM Brown gravelly silty SAND,medium dense,moist (FILL) 21 q =4.5 ML Tan SILT with sand, hard, moist u tsf 5 - E....; 16 rr SM Brown silty fine SAND, medium dense, moist 10 20 Test Pit terminated at 12.0 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. 15 TEST PIT LOGS 41140 l APARTMENT SITE RENTON, WASHINGTON Ccarth nts Inc. I' GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 1625 1 Date Aug. '81 !Plate 4 TEST PIT NO. I.ogged By J RD I')ate 8/12/81 Elev. 67± Depth yy ft.} USCS Soil Description 96) 0 - - 8 SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, dry to 5 moist (FILL) 12 10 SM Brown SAND with silt and gravel , medium dense, 14 SP moist Test Pit terminated at 12.0 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. 15 Logged By JRD la Elev. 74± lute 8/12/81 TEST PIT NO. — 0 8 5 SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, dry to 13 moist (FILL) J' l• l 10 SM Brown silty SAND, medium dense, moist 1: :1:: 26 Test Pit terminated at 12.0 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. 15 TEST PIT LOGS 0;Earth APARTMENT SITE RENTON, WASHINGTON l Inc. ' GEO TECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 1625 1Date Aug. '81 'Plate 5 TEST PIT NO. _.I__ Logged By JRD hate 8/12/81 Elev. 100± Depth W ft.) USCS Soil Description 0 1.i. . 9 Jl JJ J ! I 5 t:l+ SM Brown silty gravelly SAND, medium dense to dense,ti" dry to moist 12 10 22 ML Tan SILT with sand, very hard, moist 22 g74.5 tsf Test Pit terminated at 13.0 feet. Moderate 15 groundwater seepage observed between 8.5 and 10.5' . Logged By JRD Date 8/12/81 TEST PIT NO. .13_ Elev. 109± 0 6" loose gravelly silty SAND) 21 qu=4.5 tsf ML Tan SILT with sand to sandy SILT, moist, hard 5 -- 27 10 `ti SM Tan silty fine SAND, dense, moist 18 fr I ML Tan SILT with sand, hard, moist 25 qi?4.5 tsf Test Pit terminated at 13.0 feet. 15 No groundwater seepage observed. TEST PIT LOGS I APARTMENT SITE EarthRENTON, WASHINGTONA -.Cc+nsultants Inc. 0 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Prof. No. 1625 [Dat. Aug. '81 1t. 6 TEST PIT NO. --a_ Logged By JRD Date 8/12/81 Elev. 45± Depth W ft.) USCS Soil Description 96) 0 — •.*. 13 SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, dry to 5 —. •• moist (FILL) 10 10 r3 SM Brown silty gravelly SAND, medium dense, moist 9 Test Pit terminated at 13.0 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. 15 —' Logged By JRD Data8/12/81 TEST PIT NO. —IQ._ Elev. 45± 0 6 At 5 •E:4 SM Brown SAND with gravel and silt, loose grading to 6x: SP medium dense, dry to moist 10 --..a.:::: 5 Test Pit terminated at 12.0 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. 15 — TEST PIT LOGS APARTMENT SITE RENTON, 41ASH I NGTONEarth4.Gmnsultants Inc. GEC TECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Pro). No. 1625 [Date Aug. '81 'Plate 7 TEST PIT NO. , II Logged By JRD Date 8/12/81 Elev. 70± Depth W ft.) USCS Soil Description 0. 4 5 _ SM Tan SAND with silt and gravel , loose to medium SP dense, dry to moist 13 10 22 Test Pit terminated at 12.0 feet. No groundwater seepage observed. 15 TEST PIT LOGS 1 APARTMENT SITE RENTON, WASHINGTON CEasnsuitants Inc.1111 GEC TECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 1625 I Date Aug. '81 'Plate 8 TEST PIT NO. Logged By. J RD pie 8/12/81 Elev. 58± Depth yy ft.) USCS Soil Description 96) 7 OV 5 SM Brown gravelly silty SAND, medium dense, dry to moist, with some organic debris and asphalt (FILL) 17 10 — %, 21 15 — 1 H SM Tan SAND with silt, medium dense, wet 33 Test Pit terminated at 15.0 feet. Moderate groundwater seepage at 14.0 feet. 20— i TEST PIT LOGS APARTMENT SITE RENTON, WASHINGTON Consultants Inc. r GE')TECHNICAL ENGINEERING & GEOLOGY Proj. No. 1625 J Data Aug. '81 [Plate 9 SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSISSIZEOFOPENINGININCHESINUMBEROFMESHPERINCH. U.S.STANDARD GRAIN SIZE IN MM 0 0 0 p O O O O O OgMOtDaC) N M t .- C.) a N a (0 O OO O O O OIGlnA100,I I I rti 0, nH 90 10Z02 m 4.6 80 20 zy m 2L1 T 70 0 m m rZ 2 30 XI m • Om IN- III O Z 40 ""1 czo m c m 50 D O CO i 50 r o Cn O I m 40 t m so p CO 30 1 70 m O 20 L L') 80 „-1 z 0 o 10 I-. 90 rn N 70 c i zn 70 0 1 Li 1 1 I I I fill 11 1 1 1 I111 1 1 1 1 I 111_1 0 0 0 g 0 0 0 0 O O lD st C) N p <D c D) N 7 O CD ty 2 N O O M N 100 I .--' 0 0 0 W fD O C) N O O QoC) N O O O 0 0 0 O O O O 0 z GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS o 0 0 0 0 0 CD CD V ? '-' COBBLES COARSE l FINE COARSE 1 MEDIUM I FINE FINESI. z Fil r...1 GRAVEL SAND 3> (o --I C = 0 I-. (/) z I KEY Boring or DEPTH USCS DESCRIPTION MoistureTestPitNo. (ft.) Content (%) LL PLco —i m z m 13-- TP-1 2 SM Gravelly silty SAND 11 o-- TP-5 6 SM Gravelly silty SAND 12a,— TP-9 2 SM Gravelly silty SAND 13 TP-11 7 SP/SM SAND with gravel and silt 13 0 SIEVE ANALYSIS HYDROMETER ANALYSIS SIZE OF OPENING IN INCHES 1 NUMBER OF MESH PER INCH. U.S.STANDARD GRAIN SIZE r r I I 1 1 11 1 IN MMMI l I t1VCdNCOCrI-OOO ONO 0 M O OO O O O O OOOOO OOtDeMN .- M V e- C.) V' N p omAloosI 1 gffi r 1 J m imp A% H 90 10 S• fi W Aso 20 O 0 IllmN Z '„i m 70 30 n m 2 mRI 2 z TI 60 40 O P m 0 m • 73 50 50li!!! corm o 400 60 m_CO GI 30 70 r m G) 20 80 =o 1 Z 0 10 No 90 cm NJ U' 70 m 70 0 I 1 I l i l i 1 1 I HI I.11 1 1 1 I I 11 1 1 1 1 1 I I II I I 10o z n _r O 0 O O O O O O O CD CD O f`') N r- CO (D O M N 7 2 8 M N 00 /D s• M N CJ Z 0 0 0 CO tD V M N O O O O O O O O O O O E. N GRAIN SIZE IN MILLIMETERS o 0 0 0 0 0 rt I N COARSE I FINE COARSE I MEDIUM I FINE CD T. z m COBBLES GRAVEL SAND FINES cn —1 c m n z " 1. Boring or DEPTH Moisture r- KEY Test Pit No. (ft.) USCS DESCRIPTION Content (%) LL PL o —I m -< z N C1--TP-12 8 SM Gravelly silty SAND 17 IIIMMIIIIII 1:3 o— TP-8 2,ML Sandy SILT 21Et7 CDCD I AFFIDAVIT Marjorie L. Lotto, individually, and as Personal Rep. for Estate of M. W. Lotto , being duly sworn, declare that I am the owner of tEie property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief . Subscribed and 'sworn before me this s day of September 19 81 Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Y.) l)))ll Estate of. M. W. Lo to By r Y N e of Notary Public)Sid' Fe°f g;Individuall 6, 6 21771 S .E. 259thTAdress)Address) Maple Valley, WA 98038 City) State) 206)432-9977 Telephone) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found to be thorough and complete in every particular and to conform to the rules and regulations of the Renton Planning Department governing the filing of such application. Date Received 19 By: Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 AFFIDAVIT 1 , Anna Phinney being duly sworn, declare that I am the owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and sworn before me this 9th day of April 1981 , Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Renton 1 LIOY(40-- "7/,elelaziNamefet.r Pu• is Signature of Owner) 0e-. I. LEWIS Anna Phinney c/o her representative P.O. Box 273 Lincoln Property Company N.C. , Inc. Renton, Wa. 98055 Attn: Scott B. Springer 515 116th Ave. N.E. , Suite 158 Address) Address) Bellevue, WA 98004 City) State) 206) 455-4813 Telephone) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found to be thorough and complete in every particular and to conform to the rules and regulations of the Renton Planning Department governing the filing of such application . Date Received 19 By: Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 AFFIDAVIT I, Bruce Larson being duly sworn, declare that I am the lessee of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Subscribed and sworn before me this 3rd day of April 19 81 , Notary Public in and for the tate of Washington, residing at N oZet L-•/ NotaryPublic)Signature of Lessee)Bruce Larson, Partner - Renton Driving Range c/o their representative Lincoln Property Company N.C. , Inc. ATTN: Scott B. Springer 15 116th ve. N.E. . Suite 158 Address) Address) Bellevue, WA 98004 City) State) 206) 455-4813 Telephone) FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found to be thorough and complete in every particular and to conform to the rules and regulations of the Renton Planning Department governing the filing of such application . Date Received 19 By: Renton Planning Dept . 2-73 Ia'"1i. l.O"' I 1 qeJ" YC V. 0: •s PAP' 4 0 1 ' ; ' ill I/i.i 11 il.•:'3' °I# l'i A. 11E , / '/,pE yd i • Q4 C! tY Gi • ' • . Q 1r" 0. 1 i O I 44 , t •i0.s e 6 G.76 ji,('•p tra 1 •grelre...*-6.- 1.0" •—•"_---i- ril JA rI 1.,. .0 4' nimturnimillittil . 10 4 T H Y t 04% te . \‘ ‘ i (1)'"V r.0.1 tr• ' A rs I rk‘ IP 1 ._L _. 0 II '‘ kifj tat:‘ i '6 11 1 1 14it'I r13. I).,.-..N ar Ti:-‘,-...7.-„- e. . uo••e U w p h L O N. R,,,.e h m 1 1 Act!>/3 77f .Qe ifTpN.,!l.t70 !NO•MY T7Y//t ! to Iq 1 rats.• p 5«u, r° -- a.,.+ 1 r°•4r'.• o w i PRIM --- 1—i tl-r - _ —'--f rt @---T. 1 a..,,w. 1 i_-- Jr TATE HWv 10. 2-A) l RENT04•TO KENNYDALE . ?lam~ (HIGH AVE. • 11 r. ( FLY. SEC S s.y+. A•/ROVEQ APRIL It,I1•{r.... rfrfr...-••.N4•2i•••: P r, + sass n 4 " ^ r-. J ii J i r ..yV.'ryfab'.7...il1ii 7./ n\. iw 1 a.Vir est 3 01 V Opr(y 1/445M 1: t k Aafr+r• ej...." Y 4„ t ono /, . .-. 1: D. 3 • 30 t it: or La e t t 4' 1 ,),,•-t . % ( 1, N L I \ !Y 1 d103) l N •AN J • • -N• ":1 t ..• ` .. ADDENDUM C REAL ESTATE PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT WITH EARNEST MONEY PROVISION) This contract controls the terms of sale of the property. Read carefully before signing. Bellevue Washington _ Octo5er 3G.19 8Q Lincoln Property Company N.C. , Inc. Purchaser") hereby agrees to purchase,and the undersigned Seller agrees to sell,the followin real estate located in the Cityy of Renton countyof Kim]Stzte of Washington, commonly known as 16.25 acres - Lots 340, 341 , 342, 343 359 nd legally described as:Proper legal description to be attached by Seller's agent prior to Sellert's acceptance hereof. ERNS OF SALE Ei ht Hundred Twenty Five Thousand and No/100 Dollars($ 825,000.00 . 1. The sr, price is g a payabbllee aass fellows: $ 30,000.00 as an Earnest Money Deposit (Deposit"),which sum is in the form of promissory note and which Deposit,together with this Agreement,shall be held by Agent for the benefit of the Darties hereto. The balance of the purchase price shall be payable as follows: a. The- pr ' 11 be adjusted up or down as per Purchaser's curve o 100,( 00 per acre, pro uste upward only if any ACIP ,C ui1Cjrahle. in Purchaser's so e r_. P. S`e1ler shall fun ish to Purchaser at Seller's expense a«'ashineton and Tit Asssoc tion standard form of Purchaser's Policy of Title Insurance. As soon as reasonably possible following Purchaser shall be furnished with a Preliminary Commitment f 31 the issuance of such a policy of title insurance covering the subject property,together with full copies of any Exception set forth therein. Title of Seller is to be free of encumbrances or defects except: Those acceptable to Purchaser. Purchaser shall have Sixty 60 ) days after receipt of said Preliminary Commitment within which to notify Seller and Escrow in writing of Purchaser's disapproval of any Exceptions shown in said Preliminary Commitment;provided,however, that rights reserved in Federal patents or State deeds,building or use restrictions general to the district,existing easements not inconsistent w th Purchaser's intended use,and building or zoning regulations or provisions shall not be deemed Exceptions which Purchaser may disapprove. In the event of disapproval of any Exceptions as set forth in the Preliminary Commitment,Seller shall have unti the date for closing of escrow within which to attempt to eliminate any disapproved Exception (s) from the Policy of Title Insurance to be issued in favor of Purchaser and,if not eliminated,the escrow shall be cancelled unless Purchaser then elects to waive its prior disapproval. Failure of Purchaser to disapprove any Exceptions within the aforementioned time limit shall be deemed an approval of said Preliminary Commitment. Agent shall not be responsible for delivery of title. 5 ronr year rents_insurance,interest,mortgage reserves,water,oil,gas and other utilities constituting liens as well 6. 7. 9. r ' 15. Upon removal of all contingencies in writing, including zoning contingency, Purchaser shall convert the $30,000 Note to cash and the same shall be de- posited into escrow with Transamerica Title Insurance Company - Bellevue, Washington. Closing of the transaction shall take place not later than Sixty (60) Days from the removal of all said contingencies by Purchaser. Copies of all documents are to be furnished to Seller's attorney for ap- proval at least three (3) working days before they are to be signed by Se- l er. 16. During the course of this agreement, Seller agrees to cooperate fully with Purchaser in obtaining any and all Federal , State, County, and Municipal approvals necessary to develop the property, including but not limited to the rezone application, and Seller will sign all documentation required by the aforesaid authorities where necessary. 17. Purchaser and Seller are aware that the property is currently improved as a !golf driving range and that the operator of the golf driving range has a lease on the property with a remaining term of approximately Thirteen (13) Years. Seller is aware that Purchaser is currently in negotiation with the lessee for the purpose of purchasing the leasehold interest. In the event _ slid' interest is assigned to Purchaser, then, during the term of this Purchase and Sale Agreement, Purchaser will assume secondary responsibility for payment of the monthly lease amount to Seller, provided that said amount does not exceed $415 per month. This transaction is subject to release of lessee's contingent option to purchase the premises. 18. The parties agree that it would be diffic& to determine damages in the event Purchaser fails to perform its obligations hereunder. Therefore, upon removal of all contingencies as aforesaid and upon full tender of per- foinance by Seller, if Purchaser fails to perform its obligations hereunder then the forfeiture of said earnest money deposit shall be the sole remedy available to Seller, and the same earnest money shall constitute liquidated dariages to Seller. Seller hereby expressly waives all other remedies, including the right to sue for specific performance. 14. Tine is of the essence With. this Agreement. ADDENDUM D s Tracts 340, 341, 342, 343, and 359, all in C.D. Hillman's Lake Washington Garden of Eden, No. 5, as recorded in Volume 11 of plats, page 83, records of King County, TOGETHER WITH that portion of Southeast 104th Street vacated by Order of the County Commissioners which attached thereto by operation of law; EXCEPT that portion of vacated Tract 359, conveyed to King County for road bydeedrecordedunderAuditor's File No. 1029408; TOGETHER WITH that portion, if any, of Government Lot 5, Section 5, Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , lying between 104th Avenue Southeast and Renton-Kennydale-Newport Road and north of Tract 359 as delineated on Plat of C.D. Hillman's Lake Wash- ington Garden of Eden Division No. 5, according to plat thereof recorded in Volume 11 of PLATS, page83, records of said County, all situated in the CityofRenton, County of King, State of Washington. I ct! ASSIGNMENT OF LEASE AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH EARNEST MONEY PROVISION) This contract controls the assignment of the lease for the property. Read carefully before signing. Bellevue, Washington January Z9 , 1981 Lincoln Property Company N.C. , Inc. ("Purchaser") hereby agrees to purchase, and the undersigned Seller agrees to sell and assign that "lease attached hereto as Addendum B (with the exception of any right of first re- usal conta:.ned therein) and the buildings and leasehold improvements found in the real estate located in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington, commonly known as 8. 25 acres - Lots 340, 341, 342, 343 and 359, nd legally described as: Proper legal description to be attached by Seller' s agent prior to Seller' s acceptance hereof. (See attached Addendum Dr TFRMS OF SALE: The purchase priceis Two Hundred Fifty Thousand and Nn/1 rill Dollars(S 290 .001)_ 00 ) payable as id ows: S 20 , 000. 00 as an Earnest Money Deposit(Deposit'),which sum is in the form of_a_. tDromi s s c ry note and which Deposit,together with this Agreement,shall be held by Agent for ie benefit of the p,rties hereto. The balance of the purchase price shall be payable as follows: a. All cash at closing, less any earnest money payments advanced prior to closing. b. Purchaser shall have Sixty (60) business days from the date of the acceptance of the attached Addendum C by the Seller referenced therein Phinney) (if that time has not already expired) in which to conduct nrPliminary development investigations. Such investigations shall be As a condition of tl; agreement the Seller 1•ist - in Ar^e d L (Ph • rw ) s s`,all fan is h to Purchaser at :doe's cxpcnsz a Waslinrton nd Tit c Ares ;ion nand rd lormo! Drover a roll: of Title Insuranc As soon as reasonably possible follo•-int5F.iii Purchaser tall be furnished with a Preliminary Commitment far the issuance or such a policy of title irsurancs covering the subject property,to:ether with full copies of any Exception: set forth therein. Title of Seller is to be fret of encumbrances or defects except: Those acceptable to Purchaser. her ' n un yPurchaser's xty -60 ) days after receipt of said Preliminary Commitment within which to notify Seller an now L o rchasef s disapproval of any Exceptions shown Ice said Preliminary Commitment;provided,howerer, That rights rese-ved in Federal patents or State deeds,building or use restrictions general to the district,existing easements not inconsistent with Purchaser's intended use,and building or zoning regulations of provisions shall not be deemed Exceptions which Pur Lscarsnry die pprove. In the anent of disapproval of any E.xrxptions as set forth in the Preliminary Commitment,Seller here s hzflhavehave'unUf date for dosing of escrow within which to attempt to eliminate any disapproved Exception(s)from the Policy of Title Insure irx to be issued in favor of Purchaser and,if not eliminated,the escrow shall be cancelled unless Purchaser then elects to waive its prior disapproval. Failure of Purchaser to disapprove any Exceptions within the aforementioned time limit dull be deemed an approval of said Preliminary C.amndtmenL Agent shall not be responsible for delivery of tick. Seller herein warrants that all leasehold interests past and present, actual and contingent.will be conveyed and assigned to assignee in this assignment - and sale. 1 Taxes for the r srrrent year,rents,Insurance,interest,mortgage rearm,water,all,gas and other utilities constituting liens as;well shall other liens of income and expense shall be pro-rated as of date of dosing. Purchaser slhai. be entitled to possession on date of dosing, 7. lr4?xci: xexx:ika:peg; taRi•Ttr : S4k pax x tkwpfxxtAgt x mixolc t [a gtxxx lctzk xe#:d 4ke L x 1t :extut' lxIx xxe.,: xk x acns Est 1-:ri t?:>;a xis C4l4xtccxetc 1 3; xxb:ttXthftxattx ic; yrxi-t 4> a :AKylxtak, xxk cxxx ;trxxv > tccxxv oiglttxxx mImlv.15voiAolvyticilwPi,rrtaaca'- ffcrc to nnrrhaq_o f•hP n•-nprf-y rpgarr7lpec of f•hp condition of the buildings or leasehold imerovements t.heseon. itCc x i axxtK 7,:ry:I4LY:a3tsCfi YtTiX5F4am t iK21 K. 2.1a7zY aMiliAidX1 CM-Ii {t .X yxX ,Zq "; I,. I 1' : 1' ADDENDUM A 15. Upon removal of all contingencies in writing, including zoning contingency, Purchaser shall convert the $20, 000. 00 Note to cash and the same shall be deposited into escrow with Transamerica Title Insurance Company - Bellevue, Washington. Closing of the transaction shall take place not later than Sixty (60) Days from the removal of all said contingencies by Purchaser. Copies of all documents are to be furnished to Seller' s attorney for ap- proval at least three (3) working days before they are to be signed by Seller. 16. During the course of this agreement, Seller agrees to cooperate fully with Purchaser in obtaining any and all Federal, State, County, and Municipal approvals necessary to develop the prop- erty, including but not limited to the rezone application, and Seller will sign all documentation required by the aforesaid authorities where necessary. 17. The Seller herein shall keep all lease payments on the lease obligation current, through and including the actual date of closing. 18. The parties agree that it would be difficult to determine damages in the event Purchaser fails to perform its obligations hereunder; therefore, upon removal of all contingencies as aforesaid and upon full tender of performance by Seller, if Purchaser fails to per- form its obligations hereunder then the forfeiture of said earnest money deposit shall be the sole remedy available to Seller, and the same earnest money shall constitute liquidated damages to Seller. Seller hereby expressly waives all other remedies, in- cluding the right to sue for specific performance, provided that Purchaser pays into escrow the face value of the promissory note 20, 000. 00) for the benefit of the Seller within seven (7) days of Purchaser' s removal of contingencies. In the event Purchaser fails to pay into escrow the face value of the promissory note 20,000. 00) for the benefit of Seller within seven (7) days of Purchaser' s removal of contingencies, then all legal remedies, i r,r•l tirai nrr crc r i fi r r cr t-srm. cln=l l cocci rrrsrw C Seller: Buyer: LINCOLN PROPERTY N.C. , INC. BRUCE E. LARSON tv(?064._,By: DEAN HENRY, ' e President PAMELA D.O. LARSON RICHARD L. LAR ' N i% FRANCES A. LARSON RICHARD C. LARSON SHARON Y. ,LARSON PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is between the ESTATE OF M. W. LOTTO and MARJONIE L. LOTTO, a single person , ( "Seller" ) and LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY N. C . , INC . , ( "Purchaser") , and is made of the purpose of purchase and sale of the following described real property . In consideration of the covenants and agreements hereinafter made , the parties agree as follows : 1 . Description of Property: Purchaser agrees to purchase from seller , and Seller agrees to sell unto Purchaser , the following described real property commonly known as unimproved property in 1O400 block of Lake Washington Boulevard , Renton , King County , Washington , and referred to in this Agreement as "the premises" : Lots 357 and 358 , C. D. Hillman ' s Lake Washington Garden of Eden , Division No . 5 , situate in King County , Washington . Purchaser hereby authorizes the insertion over his signature of the correct legal description of the above-designated property if unava: lable at time of signing , or to correct the legal description previously entered if erroneous or incomplete . 2 . Earnest Money : Purchaser hereby deposits Five Thousand Dollars ( $5 , 000 . 00) in the form of a promissory note , as earnest money which shall be held by Warren & Kellogg , P. S. , Attorneys for the Seller , for the benefit of the parties , receipt of which is acknowledged by Seller . 3. Purchase Price : The purchase price of the property shall 4. 1 Purchase Price : The condition mentioned in Paragraph 3 above relating to the determination of the purchase price . In the event of the termination of this Agreement at the option of Seller as a result of the failure of this condition , then the earnest money and all other deposits paid by Purchaser to Seller shall be refunded to Purchaser . 4 . 2 Development Investigation : Approval by Purchasers within thirty ( 30) days of this Agreement of preliminary development investigations , which shall include a survey of the premises in order to ascertain and fix the purchase price . Such investigations shall be at the Purchaser ' s expense . Purchaser shall be given access to the property to conduct all necessary engineering and other investigative studies . In the event that the Purchaser elects not to proceed with the purchase of the property as a result of the investigations , then Purchaser shall notify the Seller in writing of suchdecision , and the earnest money deposited herein shall be refunded to Purchaser and this Agreement shall be null and void . Purchaser further agrees in such event to transmit to the Sellers all of the studies , including but not limited to , engineering and soils investigations , and survey, relating to the premises and to the adjacent parcels of real estate owned by Cook and the driving range , at no expense to the Seller . In the event that the Purchaser fails to notify the Sellers of Purchaser ' s election not to proceed prior to the expiration of thirty ( 30) days from the date of this Agreement , then Purchaser shall be conclusively deemed to have furnish and deliver to Purchaser a WLTA standard form policy of title insurance , and as soon as practicable prior to closing , a preliminary commitment therefor issued by Transamerica Title Insurance Company. The parties authorize the closing agent to apply for such title insurance upon the removal of all contingencies to this transaction . Seller agrees to assume any cancellation fee for the respective commitments or policies . The title policy to be issued shall contain no exceptions other than those provided in this standard form plus the encumbrances or defects noted in this paragraph . If title is not so insurable as above provided and cannol, be made so insurable by the termination date set forth herein , this Agreement shall be terminated . 6 . Conveyance : Transfer of Seller ' s interest in the premises shall be by Statutory Warranty Deed . 7. Prorations : Taxes for the current year , rents , insurnce , interest , mortgage reserves , water and other utilities constituting liens on the property shall be prorated as of date of closing . 8. Closing : This purchase shall be closed in the office of Transamerica Title Insurance Company , Bellevue office , within 30 days after removal of all contingencies unless extended pursuant to this paragraph . The parties will deposit in escrow with the closing agent all instruments and moneys necessary to complete this purchase in accordance with this Agreement . The cost of escrow shall be paid one-half ( 1/2 ) each by the parties . If for any reason the Purchaser 10 . Condition of Property : The Purchaser agrees to accept the premises in their present condition on the terms noted herein . Seller warrants that to the best of its knowledge the premises and the improvements thereon do not materially violate the applicable building or zoning regulations and that they are unaware of any material defect in the premises or improvements thereon . 11 . Default : The parties agree that it would be difficult to determine damages in the event Purchaser fails to perform its obligations hereunder . Therefore , upon removal of all contingencies and upon tender of full performance by Seller , if Purchaser fails to perform its obligation under this Agreement then the forfeiture of the earnest money and other deposits for extension of the closing as liquidated damages shall be the sole remedy available to Seller . Seller expressly waives all other remedies , including the right to sue fcr specific performance . 12 . Miscellaneous : Notices given under this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be delivered personally with written receipt therefor , or sent by certified mail , return receipt requested , to the fcllowing addresses : Seller : c/o Daniel Kellogg Attorney at Law P. 0. Box 626 100 South Second Street Renton , WA 98057 Piirnh 7 cor • The commission shall be divided equally between Century 21 Homeco Realtcrs , as listing agent , and Wallace and Wheeler , Inc . , as selling agent . In the event that this transaction shhall fail to close for any reason , then no commission shall be due under this Paragraph . The provisions of this paragraph are accepted by the realtors as evidenced by the execution of this Agreement below. Dated : May 1981 . Seller : Purchaser : ESTATE OF M. W. LOTTO LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY N. C . , INC. By //By JDRI L. LO f/lG, W. DEAN HENRY, Pers3na Representative Vice-President 27. MA JO E L. L TTO , individually Listin ; Agent : Selling Agent : CENTUR ( 21 HOMECO, INC . WALLACE AND WHEELER , INC . By By. , ,// //L!•. /// /Z(Cit 7!- BEGINNING OF FILE ii.- f" fdOFR MED FILE TITLE If100 - 81 it4 icttejt; swim / 71(X rooJ Car-I i53-S000 61s. mar;// ao%ehs&-- X. 1 ' , 1.r $ t 4‘ Kr x pra., h 44t* vor 1 Applicant LTNCOTN PROPERTY File No. R-100-81 Project Name Property Location Lake Washington Blvd. No. , north of North Park Drive HEARING EXAMINER: Date Recommendation Req./Rec. Date Received Date Response Appeal - Date Received Council Approval - Date Ordinance/Resolution # Date Mylar to County for Recording Mylar Recording # Remarks: Building and Zoning letter attached. No further action needed. OF R ,/ 1/ CD° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR Z o 09 co MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 09gT D SEP-C '° BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR MEMORANDUM September 10, 1984 TO: Maxine Motor, City Clerk FROM: Jeanette Samek, Zoning Research Technician SUBJECT: Transmittal of Closed File, R-100-81 The applicant, Lincoln Properties, has resubmitted their rezone application. Therefore, I am transmitting this file to your office for placement with the permanent records. JS/dm f 0 June 3, 1982 CITY OF RENTON Mr. Roger J. Blaylock JUN - 4 1982 Zoning Administrator Building & Zoning Department BUILOING/ZONiNGD:±FT.City of Renton Munidpal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: LAKESIDE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND REZONE Dear Roger: Pursuant to our meeting of this date with you and Ron Nelson , please be advised that Lincoln Property Company is hereby requesting that the Environmental Review Committee reconsider its previous issuance of the Declaration of Significance for our Lakeside project. We believe that there are several reasons why the committee should recorsider its determination and issue a Declaration of Nonsignificance. 1 . The primary underlying reason expressed by the committee for its prior decision was that of "public disclosure". Under- standably, the committee wishes to allow the opportunity for public input on important issues, especially those pertaining to design sensitivity and asthetics. We agree that interested parties should indeed have such an opportunity for input. However, during the rezoning of the property there will be one or more public hearings whereby such a forum will be available. Moreover, interested parties can be invited to a "courtesy hearing" prior to the hearing of the rezone. Such a courtesy hearing should be of record and would require the attendance of the developer and the developer's consultants in order to respond to any and all questions brought up by those in attendance. While this procedure may take two to three weeks in order the make the arrangements and give proper notice, this is in contrast to an Environmental Impact Statement which would take approximately five to six months. We believe that this approach would show a sensitivity to the timing and needs of the landowners and developer while, at the same time, giving the citizens an opportunity to be heard, thereby satisfying full disclosure requirements. wearily PROPER; +L amPana n.e., MC. THE OVERLAKE BLDG., 11400 S.E.6TH ST.,SUITE 220 BELLEVUE,WA 98004 206-455-481 3 Page 2 June 3, 1982 s < "Mr. Roger J. Blayloci` 2. Other areas of concern previously expressed by the Environmental Review Committee, namely traffic, utilities , slopes and soils, have been previously addressed in studies submitted to the commit- tee. It is our understanding that non, of the facts set forth in the studies presented a significant adverse environmental effect which would necessitate the requirement of an Environmental Impact Statement. 3. As you have suggested, it would be reasonable for the committee to identify any specific areas where mitigating measures might be appro- priate so that the developer could adhere to same. As the aforegoing discussion suggests, we believe that the ERC has been presented with sufficient technical information, a willingness to cooper- ate in the identification and implementation of mitigating measures, and alternatives for gathering additional citizen input so that an Environmental Impact Statement should not be necessary on the facts. If, however, the ERC were still to determine that a Declaration of Significance is in order, then we wculd request that the developer be permitted to complete an EIS which is a document independent of any EIS which may be required for the Lake Terrace Mobile Home Park. There are a number of reasons for taking this approach. 1 . Lincoln Property Company is a developer and will seek to rezone the property, obtain financing and commence with the construction of a residential project on the site. This will take place in the fairly short term. However, the Lake Terrace Mobile Home Park is a group of investors who are not developers and have no clear cut intention of pursuing a specific development scheme within the near future. Rather, they are seeking to rezone property which they already own so that its value will be enhanced thereby. Thus , the the respective proponents' timing and objectives are highly dissimilar. The public policy issues relative to the displacement of long term residents at an established mobile home park will be very signifi- cant. In view of the fact that our development will involve the voluntary displacement of an existing business (the driving range) , there will be no public policy issues in this very sensitive area. A case in point cited by you and Ron Nelson was the Hub Trailer Park matter which resulted in significant media coverage and time delays due to litigation. We do not believe it would be equitable to expose our development plans to the similar issues which will surround the Lake Terrace Mobile Home Park. Roger , will you please present these matters to the Environmental Review Committee for its consideration at their next meeting. Please emphasize the fact that it is our desire to seek a sensitive and equitable resolution of thus matters at hand. Yours truly, Scott B. Springer SBS:co cc: Bruce Larson Rick Acton Tom Phinney Kathleen Mohseni Paul Zane Roger Lewis T7-jTn2 CITY®F RC,VTON Ed IF MAR 2 5 1982 March 24, 1982 BUILDING/ZONING DEPT. Mr. Steve Monson, Asst. Planner City of Renton Zoning Department Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: LAKESIDE REZONE APPLICATION Dear Steve: Pursuant to our telephone conversation of this date, please be advised that Lincoln Property Company is hereby withdrawing its Application for Rezone on the above project. Briefly stated, we are withdrawing the application because of the City's insistence upon a joint Environmental Impact Statement in conjunction with the mobile home park to the North of our project. We believe that such a requirement would prejudice our environmental review process and the expeditious processing of our Rezone Application as well . If, for any reason, the City determines that concurrent but separate Environmental Impact Statements would be acceptable please don't hesi- tate to let me know. Very trul yours , Scott B. Springer SBS:co cc: Estate of M. W. Lotto & Marjorie L. Lotto c/o Mr. Daniel Kellogg Ms. Anna Phinney - c/o Mr. Roger I. Lewis Mr. Bruce Larson Iiincabn PROPERTY company n.c., mc, THE OVERLAKE BLDG., 11400 S.E.6TH ST.,SUITE 220 BELLEVUE,WA 98004 206-455-481 3 CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF BUILDING AND ZONING EIS CONSULTANT SERVICES The Renton Building and Zoning Department will consider Letters of Interest and a Statement of Qualifications from consulting firms interested in providing environmental consulting services for the following project: LAKE TERRACE MOBILE HOME PARK REZONE, R-090-81 LINCOLN PROPERTIES REZONE, R-100-81 This project involves the preparation of a draft environmental impact statement that concentrates on the issues of traffic, soils, public services, and affect on adjacent residential and public uses for a combined 21.5 acre rezone, which could ultimately allow a development of 645 multiple family dwelling units. Selection of a consultant will be based on interviews with the best qualified firms. Letters of Interest should clearly indicate present capabilities and past experience in projects of similar scope and magnitude. Supporting materials such as brochures and photos are not required. Letters of Interest should be mailed to Zoning Administrator, Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Cut off date for receipt of this material is March 5, 1982. Additional information may be obtained from the Zoning Administrator at 235-2550. The City of Renton is an equal employment opportunity employer. In- volvement of minority business enterprises will be one of the criteria used in consultant selection. Ro er J, Blayladk Zoning Administrator Published: February 23, 1982 Date circulated :/ //J/Si Comments due : 41/ 87/9, ENVIRONWENTAL CHECKLIST REVIE11 SHEET ECF - /09 - APPLICATION No (s ) . Rr,C0'13j PROPONENT : LiAcdsi fhper 41'Q TaKy PROJECT TITLE : Brief Description of Project : lteflie tiore261/1e .SialeeMM ir,,6 " 3 G 'ufy to m offige r dev.hsp ed-ebti f$6 rar.4s LOCATION :E.SideOil. WasAi1tg7O i Bliti /r• sot.fAOf I..ZS tbf7 SITE AREA : l -jacre s BUILDING AREA (gross ) DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : y- 3 ) Water & water courses : y/ 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : 1/ 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9 ) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : v 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : e 0. 0,,,.a ,i .y. o..• Cr,[.... . 4 7&t &..ti-.J, Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information Reviewed by : {.tear- t Date : FORM: ERC-06 1 Revision 3/1981 WNW RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application:_2DME A 10010 A' w f LLest.rez_ [e_al l e_fA " 6"!_i_o___A!!_a___Ar47ctivre.ntubiAkfasotitydftelebid-40860 Location :Lzitie dft L•... /AutitestiQ_etVd EV. S&PJ it 7 V 64 Applicant :_ TO :Public Works Department Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE:AA Traffic Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: //s`/ 9fUtilitiesEng. Division ire Department Parks Department Building Department Police Department Others: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRTTINGG. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 :00 P .M. ON 4(2 4 RLVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved (rApproved with Conditions Not Approved DATE: Signature of Director r Aut rized Representative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved ApprJved with Conditions fl Not Approved DATE: S ;gnature of Director or Authorized representative Revision 3/1981 / f///49, RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: PrZ i CR' 6 ' ; e t• ecr. P-10 "6" io A3 Location: E.Side df L...leA_ife .4.18lvd•N. soot-Aire ay ask Applicant:_LMo4 A Public Works Department Eriiittring Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: l.1//p/ rj•Wrraffic Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: //i/6i Utilities Eng. Division Fire Department Parks Department Building Department Police Department Others: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P .M. ON 47lal4l411/ REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: ne/41, ,F ITC 1GIN E EIzIIL Approved [I-Approved with Conditions Not Approved w t fv 131id , -road LJ J 48jace. 4 r e, .a.r- +Nr c_,v r b v e r 6 j 5 c e IIt J'' a j( 9 ',, ,z r E C „tiff igk V l tit S4"a 'd 4 I :se e aid-a wctie+n.±', c-Azvv. 7 DATE: / h'510 Signature of Director or Authorized Represese tGr REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved ['Approved with Conditions ['Not Approved DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative 1,04.,%;%, t,is vIrr 44%;1?, .5 35A.c..,... (3\- srv,t3 .146. (le'''.lk%-, —5k%) s aVt6 ra9k i1 es,41,A40\4"1VOSha."11.%* F.+. tli• "Z" ''Ir %Siri 141 f4 IbtiVAZ •i k N.tkek*ft rek4V11 . . Ntos; .t 1 REZONE DEVELOPMENT THE LAKESIDE PROPERTY Due to the poor projected traffic service levels at the following critical locations, the Traffic Engineering Division requests that funding for the following traffic improvements be provided to improve traffic conditions as follows to accommodate the projected growth by the new development: 1 . Lake Washington Blvd. between Park Drive and Houser Way -- provide 15 percent of the construction funds to widen 800 linear feet of Lake Washington Blvd. at its approach to the intersection of North Park Drive. Width of roadway widening would require approximately 9 to 10 feet. 2. Provide 15 percent of the funds to update the traffic signal control at the intersection of Lake Washington Blvd. and North Park Drive. 3. Provide total cost of installing a center lane left-turn opposite the south entrance to the Lakeside site. 4. Provide 6% of the cost for improving the intersection of Burnett Ave. North and Lake Washington Blvd. to accommodate left turn cross traffic southbound toward the proposed development. Date circulated :AA/!J/M Comments due : /?/Isig' ENIVIRONMENITAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - /09 - ft/ APPLICATION No (s ) . Rqao—ral PROPONENT : Lo',Icdfrt P. erly iptipasy PROJECT TITLE : RE24*AlC Brief Description of Project : RefUesf re26ae $i4e'QneM ram/ ' " 40 R•3 461-f't ivre inutiege devvlepai. i* f 186 n:fs LOCATION :t,Sj4'Cif 1• WatAilibriB/ I. Nsa fitbf N..Zytbir7 SITE AREA : { "acres BUILDING AREA (gross ) 'mil DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : r 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : l/ 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 7 9 ) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : I 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : I TYi E d traffic impacts T -- r W4v+ S -lata 41,417a.. 1-.o ' P w crL >art- w -L -r n 1 e--a.b S S' f;5 0 14 ) Public services : 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : v` 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information Reviewed by : t'' I:L T G rd l itle : j7,-=c i a i •5 Date : / //6 t e j FORM: ERC-06 Revision 3/1981 /42J'//e9/ REN-ON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application:_ t tgLr Cam_zoote SI'/efee Sti_v sw_ 3 4eiw. tobi'j(e f it ' eni ii Location : of L,.ifeey4 8lve . xi&SAcet N. V b.S Applicant :_4l cdr_-e,O ,r ----- - ------------7 Pub c Works Department Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE:la/44P/ Traffic Eng. Division s/SiSCHEDULEDNEARINGDATE: Utilities Eng. Division U Fire Department Parks Department Building Department Police Department Others: - COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved .0 Approved with Conditions Not Approved et.1- 5 1 3 A#1, zi-c iy } s "' „e et-- wvfo W C. P:43 Yam- a <iC o'er .r./ G r4S lip Q?/v.Q w•, - se C«.1 04 a,/b ) op/ w-s cK(o e 9". ox Jet wis s 3/ P-e 7 ATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION : Approved ['Approved with Conditions n Not Approved p 1, t., S,'-tL e•.._ H-t Irk' DATE: t2../<s/ Signature of Di ctor or Author z Representative Revision 3/1981 A uilly RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application: Pexi . t .._.jQQ.1I qptuf e_z_o _e Sty/e cr& 1 Ali' 1_1_6 3____Ar4).dvr_entalksiettlittlystel 41._ te.J(96 Location : Liyek.ce 4.-/ e 1ly• xdoc, ete Avavaus Applicant :_ r_ /rofrer .._ Cif",n --- ID:Public Works Department Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE:1///4/ Fl]Traffic Eng. Division SCHEDULED NEARING DATE: Utilities Eng. Division Fire Department Parks Department ph. ing Department Police Department Others: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 :00 P .M. ON RLvIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: POT,TCE Approved [ Approved with Conditions [ Not Approved The police dept. can not handle the increased calls that this development will generate. However if the complex is allowed to continue then the following would be necessary so that the police could respond without having to make a major cut in response time to other parts of the city. 1) All units equiped with burglar alarms, security doors , windows & locks. 2) Lk. Wash. Blvd. be increased in width to five lanes from the complex to Park Dr. No. w/out this no emergency equip could respond during Boeing rush hail] DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative 3) Parking_lots have security lighting- & lights_be so positioned that thy are on _ the outside edges of-the-parking--lot--shining-inward. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: Approved Approved with Conditions O Not Approved 4) During construction hours of work would be: Mon. thru. Fri. 0700--1800 hrs. No work on Sat. or Sun. 5) No stero or other loud electronic equip. to be allowed on the site. Workmen now try & play the music louder than the skilsaw & then we get calls. 6) $3, 000 street cleaning bond be posted prior to any site preparation, or haulinc_ of fill material in or out of site. DATE: Signature of Director or Authorized Representative 7) parking lot & driveways be paved prior to the building of any units so workers do not track d o to roadway, adjoining streets be kept clean at ail times. Lt. D.R.sson 12/15/81 Revision 3/1981 /42J11/49/ RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Applicati on : UICLEYfZ" /0_0700 !f.LC 1/5_?_6_Arn_a_iorer_ i Cithirg.nioRojellatilycieylitopme"teisno Location :L s,*Qf e_•.4*thins Net N. SI, tet N. V 6.S Applica.it : inatl_erpfrerirastAdi ny Publ i c Works Department ElEn. 'neering SCHEDULED ERC DATE:la/400 pi affic Eng. Division SCHEDULED HEARING DATE: //SAWdrAUtilitiesEng. Division BI Firt Department Parks Department Q Building Department Police Department Others: _ -- COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 : 00 P .M. ON REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: D Approved Ipproved with Conditions (] Not Approved ALJ 'JZ/ d/ l L , T g? iS 4 C SS ,ec5-d cv e-r3, frZat4grAio DATE: /.2 44/Signatu - o 'Director or Author're• Representative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: UT/t-/TY Approved [ pr.ved with Conditions fNot Approved SO REVERSE 5/IDA jg..._DATE:j2 --_/¢ S ;gnature of Direct r or Authorized Representative AMA's,'uALQ 1.._OLSE UTILITY APPROVAL SUBJECT TO 2'41•0/ LATE COMERS AGREEMENT WATER LATE COMERS AGREEMENT - SEWER NO SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE • WATER Comm. PAC. roNN• CA*. SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE • SEWER SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREA CHARGE - WATER istio SPECIAL ASSESSMENT AREA CHARGE - SLIVER vo APPROVED WATER PLAN ES , APPROVED SEWER PLAN APPROVED FIRE HYDRANT LOCATIONS BY FIRE DEPT. PS FIRE FLOW ANALYSIS yEs Date circulated :L41JJM8/Comments due : /cf 1S/9' E\IVIRO\HE\ITAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET E C F - /08 - 8i APPLICATION No (s ) . R-IQ0-131 PROPONENT : Liircdpi errerIfy OVAItk PROJECT TITLE : RE2dAtE Brief Description of Project : Ref uestlarezewesif e' ,'i P-/ ett6 4o R•3 iCarfuivre n fi f'i lr develvmeated /96 can 4.c LOCATION :6'.gat.tiF . Wdtlli R* '1 B/ I• ' SOif of N.2 t/16bar7f SITE AREA : { 9acres BUILDING AREA (gross ) ""' DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : -+ IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9 ) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : xxxx 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : The police dept. is currently operating at capacity and can not continue to absorb the calls for service that come with major developments without cutting back on services. Recommendation : DNSI DOS xxxx More Information Reviewed by : Lt‘ . Persson title : Date : 12/15/81 FORM: ERC-06 Date circulated :/ L/l//S/Comments due : /?f Jj /9/ EKVIROXHE\ITAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - /09 - R/ APPLICATION No (s ) . R lQo ff PROPONENT ; LjIirdL roioer 64Nye N I y PROJECT TITLE : P&2dAJ'E Brief Description of Project : Refuestlereeewesileerer" P. I . 6 4, R`3 r'FU t o IM liwitir i L i ty deveI t p/'M P*n( 196"r LOCATION : .5%efdef 1. WatAjR 'i if so bE 4'tST SITE AREA : f 9acres BUILDING AREA (gross ) "'r DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes :ye 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 1' 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : ve 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9 ) Natural resources : I 10 ) Risk of upset : ye 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : l 14 ) Public services : I v 15 ) Energy : t/ 16 ) Utilities : V 17 ) Human health : of 18 ) Aesthetics : V( 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : NSI DOS More Information Reviewed by :g Title : aralry Date : DECiitiASER AL 982 FORM: ERC-06 Date circulated :/ /// Y Comments due : /?/457/9/ EXVIROXME\ITAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - /09 - 8/ APPLICATION No (s ) . R-100.-I31 PROPONENT : LaAirdpL gap early ooa.1y PROJECT TITLE : &2Q//E Brief Description of Project : Ref esfferezeae _Sife Ml'+/ r,I 6 " 4D k 3 rfvuute m te'FGo d, elevehommtek 196brafs LOCATION :E.sae Q'F1. WAtAi SDtolL teE 1/.2yft&rs7f 11. 11SITEAREA :1 ,CreS BUILDING AREA (gross ) '1' DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : ewe IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : indb;/eesi.o east : liar south : MOS-44y U 'erD._` pf west : `. .,_Ik#l [ ,(X l'1*r k Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9 ) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : J 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : 113s4-,3r traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : I 15 ) Energy : 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI DOS More Information_ Reviewed by :,,AL 1 1 i t 1 e : lJr, 1-//7/I eI— Date : 0-lNNig/ FORM: ERC-06 Date circulated :0L/11/R Comments due : /pali "/9i E\VIROXHE\'TAL CHECKLIST REVIEII SHEET ECF - /Dg - y APPLICATION No (s ) . R—/00—e/ PROPONENT : Ls,icc6i ti• a CQMpQyM PROJECT TITLE : RE2e)AtE limy Brief Description of Project : Retuesfferezewexile et / • 6 41112afarfiduzLnafige'Gouty developotemfet !86tiAi4.c LOCATION ,sideoi . Las CAij 1D,t BARI #SOto14of N.2 gitto.$31 4 eaSITEAREA : " t,Cres BUILDING AREA (gross ) .". DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : 7 View obstruction :obstruction : 9 ) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : x 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : x 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : I Energy : 15 l 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : ' DNSI DOS More Information_ Reviewed by : eJ/ 6- 1 itle : j 017 Date : FORM: ERC-06 Date circulated :i //J/$/Comments due : / fis/9/ E1 6UIR0XHE\ITAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET E C F - /08 - RI APPLICATION No (s ) . R",t04,"13f PROPONENT : LiArdP ProJer7ewOMy,any PROJECT TITLE : Rig24144,E J Brief Description of Project : RetueS( larezellesile4LIA "./ f,"6'' o R-3 4 Glut,dev Ibpw i* iE /96 Uri;fs LOCATION :6.6;40e(L, kiatAil,//loci &VI #SDOA De 1/.gtare SITE AREA : 9a,Crs BUILDING AREA (gross ) `"+ DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : •r IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : 3 ) Water & water courses : t 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : 7 ) Light & glare : 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : i 9 ) Natural resources : t/ 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : I 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : I 15 ) Energy : t 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation : DNSI x DOS More InformationC Reviewed by : litle : Date FORM: ERC-06 Date circulated :`p&11J/I Comments due : /?/js/8, ERVIR0I HENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - /l - IV APPLICATION No (s ) . R-Ioo-cal PROPONENT : Liiiirdh gopter eO QM 7'y PROJECT TITLE : RE2(2doe Brief Description of Project : Ref yeti'lare hRen,4e MA or'I 6 " 40 R-3.Ceir folur e malt*'Goal dmorel ebifef /96, .-fs LOCATION :e.Sae Coif 1, Wit tAiilAiln B/j. Al SDbTAeof N2 /I J7 SITE AREA : f 9acres BUILDING AREA (gross ) 'mm+ DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : X 3 ) Wat"er & water courses : 4 ) Plant life : 5 ) Animal life : 6 ) Noise : l/ 7 ) Light & glare : t./ 8 ) Land Use ; north : east : south : west : Land use conflicts : View obstruction : 9 ) Natural resources : 10 ) Risk of upset : 11 ) Population/Employment : 12 ) Number of Dwellings : 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : traffic impacts : 14 ) Public services : i T 15 ) Energy : 1 16 ) Utilities : 17 ) Human health : f 18 ) Aesthetics : 19 ) Recreation : f 20 ) Archeology/history : COMMENTS : Recommendation :6fl SI / DOS ^ More Information_ I Reviewed by : r-; -- T— o it l e : = 7e/= 54.40 zA Date : /_J/y/// FORM: ERC-06 Revision 3/1981 ARAtiPs' RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET Application:_2 ,Y QQ' j f vettmZa/le St• ec A__j_f__ 6_' am Locaticn: i L.,41AttiI Net LLhi el(lZv1 App 1 i cant :_ mar Dp_pri - __an&tut_ IIl:Public Works Department Engineering Division SCHEDULED ERC DATE: / //O/ Traffic Eng. Division tiSCHEDULEDHEARINGDATE: Utilities Eng. Division Fire Department i arks Department Building Department Police Department Others: COMMENTS OR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN WRITING. PLEASE PROVIDE COMMENTS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT BY 5 :00 P.M. ON 4-42941 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: -L1 j Approved Approved with Conditions Not Approved DATE: 1/ Siyna of Director or uthorized Representative REVIEWING DEPARTMENT/DIVISION: A roved ['Approved with Conditions IPpppNotApproved DATE: S ;gnature of Director or Authorized Representative OF RA,A o © ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT riL RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR o09 co MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 o9,4 ft SEPIE BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR March 12 , 1982 Jon Potter R. W. Thorpe & Associates 815 Seattle Tower Seattle, Washington 98101 RE: EIS CONSULTANT SELECTION/LINCOLN PROPERTIES AND LAKE TERRACE MOBILE PARK REZONES Dear Mr. Potter: The EIS Consultant Selection Committee has scheduled interviews for Thursday, April 1 , 1982. Attached is the time schedule. In addition to the oral interview, a written proposal must be submitted. Part of the evaluation is how closely your presentation fills the time allocated. Sincerely, 9:—.86.1theARogerJ. Blaylock Zoning Administrator RJB:ci OF I A. BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTORma20 O MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 O44>. SEP E,1% BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR March 12 , 1982 Tom Hauger Triad Associates 11415 N.E. 128th Street Kirkland, Washington 98033 RE: EIS CONSULTANT SELECTION/LINCOLN PROPERTIES AND LAKE TERRACE MOBILE PARK REZONES Dear Mr. Hauger: The EIS Consultant Selection Committee has scheduled interviews for Thursday, April 1 , 1982. Attached is the time schedule. In addition to the oral interview, a written proposal must be submitted. Part of the evaluation is how closely your presentation fills the time allocated. Sincerely, t?ell.Ae.. • AI We Roger J. Blaylock Zoning Administrator RJB:cl OF R4,4, II oy BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 0, 94, SEP1E. O P BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR March 12 , 1982 William Derry Wilsey & Ham Central Park Building 1980 112th Avenue N.E. Bellevue; Washington 98004 RE: EIS CONSULTANT SELECTION/LINCOLN PROPERTIES AND LAKE TERRACE MOBILE PARK REZONES Dear Mr. Derry: The EIS Consultant Selection Committee has scheduled interviews for Thursday, April 1 , 1982. Attached is the time schedule. In addition to the oral interview, a written proposal must be submitted. Part of the evaluation is how closely your presentation fills the time allocated. Sincerely, Ccrelede .-8(.4.1,Loc. Roger J. Blaylock Zoning Administrator RJB:cl OF RA, y 4 ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR0 09 co MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 Ao9 TFD SEP1Gt,10 BARBARA V. SHINPOCH MAYOR March 12 , 1982 Lyn Keenan Sea Engineers/Planners 33811 9th Avenue South Federal Way, Washington 98003 RE: EIS CONSULTANT SELECTION/LINCOLN PROPERTIES AND LAKE TERRACE MOBILE PARK REZONES Dear Mr. Keenan: The EIS Consultant Selection Committee has scheduled interviews for Thursday, April 1 , 1982. Attached is the time schedule. In addition to the oral interview, a written proposal must be submitted. Part of the evaluation is how closely your presentation fills the time allocated. Sincerely, Ver1/2.4q.:-BLett Roger J. Blaylock Zoning Administrator RJB:cl OF R4, BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR O MUNICIPAL BUILCING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-254090o• 0, 9gTD SEP1 ; 3 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR March 12 , 1982 John E. Anthony Ch2M Hill 1500 114th Avenue S.E. Bellevue, Washington 98004 RE: EIS CONSULTANT SELECTION/LINCOLN PROPERTIES AND LAKE TERRACE MOBILE PARK REZONES Dear Mr. Anthony: The EIS Consultant Selection Committee has scheduled interviews for Thursday, April 1 , 1982. Attached is the time schedule. In addition to the oral interview, a written proposal must be submitted. Part of the evaluation is how closely your presentation fills the time allocated. Sincerely, e. Wtc Roger J. Blayloc Zoning Administrator RJB:cl OF y © ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT aL RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR UNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 P 94T O SEPS• February 19, 1982 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR Lyn Keenan SEA, Engineers & Planners 33811 9th Avenue South Federal Way, Washington 98003 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS - DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PREPARATION Dear Mr. Keenan: You are invited to present a proposal for the provision of Environmental Consulting Services in connection with the following rezone applications: 1) Lake Terrace Mobile Home Park T" to R-3 (12.5 acres) 2) Lincoln Properties G" to R-3 (9.0 acres) We have supplied herewith a copy of the Scope of Work and the procedure established under Resolution No. 2186 of the City of Renton. Letters of Interest should be mailed to: Zoning Administrator Renton Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 The cut-off date for receipt of this material is 5:00 p.m., Friday, March 5, 1982. Additional information may be obtained from Roger Blaylock at 235-2550. Sincerely, Roger J. Blaylock Zoning Administrator RJB:cl Enclosure Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ss. G i.nx y- .Rab.aga being first duly sworn on oath,deposes and says that she is the chief clerk of THE DAILY RECORD CHRONICLE,a newspaper published six(6)times a Public Noticeweek.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to, ECF-100-81) printed and published in the English language continually as a newspaper Application for Shoreline ' published four(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington,and it is Management Substantial now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the Development Permit to al- aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper.That the Daily Record low construction of mechan- Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior ical boat lift which sets on Court of the County in which it is published,to-wit,King County, lake bottom(Lake Washing- ton)adjacent to 75'dock at a Washington.That the annexed is a Notice or E vjronmgn al single family residence, file SM-097-81; property lo- Determination R6904 cated at 3 71 7 Lake Washington Boulevard North. The Environmental Re- as it was published in regular issues(and view Committee (ERC) has not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period also issued a final declara- tion of significance for the following project: LINCOLN PROPERTY of consecutive issues,commencing on the NOTICE OF ECF-108-81) ENVIRONMENTAL Application for rezone 11 fihday of January DETERMINATION from P-1 and G to R-3 to 19 82 ,and ending the ENVIRONMENTAL allow future multiple family REVIEW COMMITTEE development of 186 units, RENTON,WASHINGTON file R-100-81; property lo- The Environmental Re- cated on the east side of day of 19 both dates view Committee (ERC) has Lake Washington Boulevard inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- issued a final declaration of North south of North 24th scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee non-significance for the fol- Street. lowing projects: Further information re- 27 0(( CITY OF RENTON(ECF- garding these actions is avchargedfortheforegoingpublicationisthesumof $ • , 'Cvhich 099-81) ailable in the Building and has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the Application for Shoreline Zoning Department,first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent insertion. Management Substantial Municipal Building, Renton, Development Permit to al- Washington,235-2550.Any low construction of altera- appeal of ERC action must ing to and Cedar f park- be file withy th Hearing ing on the Cedar River Trail Examiner by January 25, adjacent to Riverside Drive 1982. ch aF i3 erk near the mouth of the Cedar Published in the Daily Re- River,file SM-096-81.cord Chronicle January 1 1, th UNGER, CHARLES R. 1982. R6904 Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of January 82 19 Notary Public in and f the State of Washington, resi ing at Mgt King County. Federal 'way Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June 9th, 1955. Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, adopted by the newspapers of the State. V.P.C.Form No.87 Rev.7-79 NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a final declaration of non-significance for the following projects: CITY OF RENTON (ECF-099-81) Application for Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit to allow construction of alterations to and paving of parking on the Cedar River Trail adjacent to Riverside Drive near the mouth of the Cedar River, file SM-096-81. UNGER, CHARLES R. (ECF-100-81) Application for Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit to allow construction of mechanical boat lift which sets on lake bottom Lake Washington) adjacent to 75' dock at a single family residence, file SM-097-81; property located at 3717 Lake Washington Boulevard North. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has also issued a final declaration of significance for the following project: LINCOLN PROPERTY (ECF-108-81) Application for rezone from P-1 and G to R-3 to allow future multiple family development of 186 units, file R-100-81; property located on the east side of Lake Washington Boulevard North south of North 24th Street. Further information regarding these actions is available in the Building and Zoning Department, Municipal Building, Renton, Washington, 235-2550. Any appeal of ERC action must be filed with the Hearing Examiner by January 25, 1982. Published: January 11, 1982 1 1 NOTICE ENVIRONMENTAL DECLARAT I O N PROPOSED ACTION REQUEST TO RF7ONF SITF FROM P-1 & G To R-3 FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF 186 MULTIPLE FAMILY UNITS GENERAL LOCATION AND OR ADDRESS EAST SIDE OF LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD , N . , SOUTH OF N . 24TH STREET POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION. THE CITY OF RENTO ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 44COMMITTEE [ E.R.C. AS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION, DOES pDOES NOT, HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRON- MENT. AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT, ILL WILL NOT, BE REQUIRED. AN APPEAL OF THE ABOVE DETERMINATION MAY BE FILED WITH THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER BY 5:00 P.M., JANUARY 25, 1982 FOR FURTHEI- INFORMATION CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT 235-2550 DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION mac FINAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE Application No(s) : R-100-81 Environmental Checklist No. : ECF-108-81 Description of Proposal: Request to rezone site from P-1 & G to R-3 for future development of 186 multiple family units. Proponent: Lincoln Property Location of Proposal:East side of Lake Washington Blvd. N. , south of N. 24th Street. Lead Agency: Building & Zoning Department This proposal was reviewed by the ERC on December 30, 1981 , following a presentation by Roger Blaylock of the Building Zoning Department. Oral comments were accepted from: Ronald Nelson, Richard Houghton, David Clemens, James Matthew, Roger Blaylock, Steve Munson and Gary Norris. Incorporated by reference in the record of the proceedings of the ERC on application ECF-108-81 are the following: 1 ) Environmental Checklist Review Sheet, prepared by: Steve Munson DATED: December 14 , 1981 2) Applications : R-100-81 3) Recommendations for a declaration of non-significance: Traffic Engineering Division, Utilities Engineering Division, Building Department, and Design Engineering Division. Recommendations for a declaration of significance: Police Department and Zoning Administration. More information: Fire Department and Parks & Recreation Department. Acting as the Responsible Official, the ERC has determined this development does have significant adverse impact on the environment. An EIS is required under RCW 43. 21C. 030 (2) (c) . This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a complete environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Reasons for declaration of environmental significance: The proposal will have major impacts upon (1 ) topography, 2) drainage, (3) noise, (4) population and employment, (5) number of dwellings, (6) traffic, (7) utilities, and (8) recreation. Signatures : 7 I irl 100431te t ill< 7 Ro al G. Nelson vid R. Clemens Building Official Policy Development Director PR ' hit/HoU hton blic Works Directo DATE OF PUBLICATION: January 11 , 1982 EXPIRATION OF APPEAL PERIOD: January 25, 1982 Date circulate December 11 , 1981 Comm......s due : December 15, 1981 ENVIRO!WME TAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET ECF - 108_ 81 APPLICATION No(s) . R-100-81 PROPONENT : Lincoln Property PROJECT TITLE : Rezone Brief Description of Project : Request to rezone site from P-1 & G to R-3 for future development of 186 multiple family units. LOCATION : East side of Lake Washington Blvd N. , south of N. 24th Street. SITE AREA : + 9. 0 acres BUILDING AREA (gross) DEVELOPMENTAL COVERAGE (%) : IMPACT REVIEW NONE MINOR MAJOR MORE INFO 1 ) Topographic changes : X 2 ) Direct/Indirect air quality : X 3 ) Water & water courses : DRAINAGE 4 ) Plant life : X 5 ) Animal life : X 6 ) Noise : X 7 ) Light & glare : X 8 ) Land Use ; north : Mobile Home Park east :I-405 south : Mostly undeveloped west : Lake Washington Beach Park Land use conflicts : X View obstruction : POSSIBLE 9 ) Natural resources : X 10 ) Risk of upset : X 11 ) Population/Employment : X 12 ) Number of Dwellings : X* 13 ) Trip ends ( ITE ) : 1135 average daily trips traffic impacts : Lake w„hjngtnn Blvd, Park N. 405 14 ) Public services : I X 15 ) Energy : X 16) Utilities: X 17) Human health: X 18) Aesthetics: X 19) Recreation : X 20) Archeology/history : X COMMENTS : Density not consistent with Comprehensive Plan = implications on housing supply, location, transport tion, energy Signatures:and public services. EIS ' to be c mbined with Terrace Mobile Home Park. City select co 17tant as per State law. onald G. Nelson vid R. Clemens Building Official Policy Development Director Richard C. Houghton, Public Works Director ENVIRONMENTALREVIEW COMMITTEE DECEMBER 30, 1981 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 10:00 A.M. THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM NEW BUSINESS ECF-101-81 KOERING, HOLVICK de REGT SA-094-81 Application for site approval to locate four (4) one-story buildings (12-15) on the subject site to be used as a business park or for light warehousing; property located at the southwest corner of S.W. 7th Street & Powell Avenue S.W. ECF-102-81 KOERING, HOLVICK de REGT SA-095-81 Application for site approval to locate five (5) one-story buildings (1-5) on the subject site to be used as a business park or for light warehousing; property located at the northwest corner of Powell Avenue S.W. & S.W. 7th Street ECF-108-81 LINCOLN PROPERTY R-100-81 Application for rezone from P-1 and "G" to R-3 for future multiple family development of 186 units; property located on the east side of Lake Washington Blvd. N. , south of North 24th Street OLD BUSINESS ECF-095-81 LAKE TERRACE PARK ASSOCIATES (Steve Harer) R-090-81 Application to rezone site from "T" to R-3 for future development as condominiums or adult apartments; property located in the vicinity of 2100 Lake Washington Blvd. N. (Purpose is to discuss EIS consultant selection. ) 110RG I AE +- DECEMBER 30, 1981 7 m r rg1i mortibi . 1,me ,....... 4.17 ed 1 1 LAKE TERRACE PARK ASSOCIATES 1 L - T i"\ LAKE LINCOLN PROPERTY s ! 1 jam 1 WASHINGTON i r- + imp -- 4, ;-- maim • -; , L 1 4N, N , MO 1411 Siiire lip'121111111.11 IL till.° n•, i .• killgi .m b. i AllmlamorP- T____ --- 7•, 4 ---'• Ihtri; '1-7) -------1 ri". 407, Inc : v r is D. \,__ KOERING, HOLVICK de REGT ',lr ,. i T-7--- n F TIM. i L KOERING, HOLVICK de REGT 1 I4.2 - gintielfli*VP.,.. 'v LT 7\\' / 1 --"IIIIIIIIIII- . allik I ..'--7.) ' I: 1ttfer ,_ 111, \; ,! sX [ _ ag 1. lel 41.-"±: si,,,‘ dilligirilt‘ ilk air U.. p1i1 — ,i' 11II - a P-\\ c- 7' ./ 1 ''''\ 4-1:11 7-Z ' i AKE I 1 li l Lf, Y0UNG5 1 j 1 EM 1 ALLr REVIEWIENW COMMITTEE DECEMBER 16, 1981 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 10: 00 A.M. : THIRD FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM NEW BUSINESS ECF-104-81 AUSTIN COMPANY SP-097-81 Application for special permit to fill subject site in the amount of +118 , 000 cubic yards to prepare for future commercial development; property located at the southwest corner of S.W. 19th Street and East Valley Road. ECF-105-81 McCARTHY, TERRANCE C. CU-098-81 Application for conditional use premit to allow use of a condominium unit, located in a R-4 zone, as a professional office; property located at 1425 Puget Drive S. E. , Suite 204 . ECF-106-81 MOBILE OIL CORPORATION SP-099-81 Application for special permit to fill site in the amount of +12 ,000 cubic yards in building a roadway for fire access and protection; property located in the vicinity of 2423 Lind Avenue S.W. ECF-108-81 LINCOLN PROPERTY R-100-81 Application for rezone from P-1 and "G" to R-3 for future multiple family development of 186 units; property located on the east side of Lake Washington Blvd. N. , south of N. 24th Street. CANDLEWOOD RIDGE Proposal for a planned unit development for 406 multiple-family dwellings; property located north of S.E. Petrovitsky Road and between 148th Avenue S. E. and 152nd Avenue S.E. (CF/CHG Associates Number Three) . Ina °il \i 1• "Ir I ill 40, l' IIIIII fi % ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 4- "rt I COMMITTEE 6b IC n,r1114 'DECEMBER 1 6, 1 981 1 I. 14/ / ."-I J S._,....2..\*%... Am. L 1 ti 4 I LAKE LINCOLN PROPERTY ill 1 lik _ 1 P B Or.%• -••\ WASHINGTON t 1 N. I 1-- 1 rg t! a% & _ ,il , 03 ,,lAlla REF 7 611 IMPMR -110•E=1, ' .--\ ". - \\ r ‘..4 -V, 4 r - a ilwaill twc,..4 • ....zErt., 0, 1=1 - : ! ' i-i-4ksm.., i VII ' ',2=_ J-I 1 11111111n lin !,..;`, ,- A k . i - 1 i 171 III ,,,,1 -' ,-i P\ ....,."Alliitoblinvi IF ' Ilinifiri r7- i_Ti1 ' 121-...... W ..)- 1'. . Weillilir 7.4* 411111bNile hillit114114 titiV1*. 1 i II.............. L.,- -1 ,) 1 0 j 1- • — IlAfresill4111.111 I 1111% = 4,416. L 11*- - in. nil - , . , 4:1 ,c_2: d in iadi . N4.,111P1,..A._ . '1 51111 -',, ,- lW : 'AESOP ' . S ..-- ---- -.-1 11% R'''..:,' ' - 'fit,. 7.--. .---------- .- 1.0111L_ --..-A . I - Mil 0 ' ---• , 1..0" A 41,.......,..b.. 11:.gi 11_ I417.- AUSTIN COMPANYliffI ' i Aln McCARTHY y) ',.. • . t MOBILE OIL CORPORATION I 41.1 r---"ath, s'. T-1 1 1.7-, . n j 4s. i II , ...... .,A4 i i ilk, tb_L • _ 1.3..1\ I sit CANDLEWOOD RIDGE - - ---- 4 t i 1 i I 1 1 t.. ...i...1 i_ ..._) 4____.....\---,---, r------/ I r-, 1 L 14 T1 -- 1 I --• Ir - t-T---- I. 1 LAKE1: you.,Gs, l• 1 1 4=1(2 II4i - II Olt...A Fi I_. I . A O kf 4b o THE CITY OF RENTONUtill0Z POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 0z , 0235 2552 9 "4, MUNICIPAL OUILD!NG 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 co- O e4' December 11, 19819' TFD SEPT00 BARBARA Y, SHINPOCH MAYOR Mr. Ron McConnell, Acting Manager Building and Land Development Division 450 King County Administration Building Seattle, Washington 98104 RE: CANDLEWOOD RIDGE - A PUD 406 MULTI-FA:4ILY DWELLINGS Dear Mr. McConnell: The City of Renton has just received the "SEPA Register" and noted that a proposeddeclarationofNON-significance has been issued for the above project. Having notreceivedanyotherreferralbyKingCounty, we are very concerned about the implica-tions of this decision. Due to the short notice, the City's Environmental Review Committee has not had theopportunitytoconsiderthisproposal. However, in light of past actions in thisvicinity (Carriagewood and Shadowood) , this department must strongly recommend an environmental impact statement to consider the following potentially adverse effects: 1. Traffic and associated impacts (noice and air quality)2. Public services, particularly police and fire 3. Project scale 4. Impacts upon the site 5. Storm drainage 6. Ut_Llities, particularly sewers and water 7. Recreation We believe that the items above have "more than a moderate" effect upon the environ-ment, and thus the project requires evaluation and full public disclosure through anEIS. This matter is set for Environmental Review Committee review on December 16,at which time a formal City position will be formulated. Very ,uly you,. Accif il David R. Clemens Policy Development Director DRC:wr cc: Mayor Council Environmental Review Committee a.-mat- e e 1 vat y Page 2 - Week of Nov. 30-Dec. 4. 1981 eangvi1ondeista,1 A-95• Date End of'i: Policy G - CH 7 Lead Agency ao o_a_ PROPOSED DECLARATIONS Issued Review S//1 41.O F N 0 N S I C N I F I CAN C E(2) t G— I Whatcom County reunit renideatlal condominium, er; l2/1/E1 12';7'r:rra.r..r..ras+eeere++ae:r directly east and south of Lntersectton Published weekly in accordance with WAC 197-10-831. Listings fee public a;w;u of Iyee Dr. and APA Rd. (Point RobertsinthisRegistershouldbesenttotheDepartmentofEcolnry, Er.vir,n- -cal Yacht Basin Realty, Inc.) Review Section, Mail Stop Pt'-II, Olympia, WA 9850... Photo: (:0b) .15)_t..•I Wh tcom County Expansion of a nonconforming use by 12/I/61 i:'!7!B:eeeeeeeaeH+e'esi addition of 24x56 ft. to an existing building used fur commercial purposes Doc-rents Received During Week of Nov. 30-7)e:. 4. 1981 in an Agricultural zoned area (Valley Pl,aabing I F.lertrir) 3 Port of Skagit Co. a Conner Mart,.a Master Plan Ii/23 8: A-95•Nye En' ;f‘., M IP Lead Agee,'_ Proposal Ins,_ kevl,: 5 King Count- Two 60:100-ft, warehouse buildings and 11/24!81 four underground fuel storage tanks, DRAFT E I Ss 11525..E. Marglnal.Way S. (Harbor Island Investments) S Ling County Dry Boat Storage Facility, 7 one-st-ry I:'./B1 l'9i92 5 King County Candlevond Ridge, • pl.^ned unit'1l/25'8' 1: 14'u'buildings with a capacity far 382 boats, development for 406 multLple-familyanoffice, caretaker's accommodations, dwellings, north of SF. Petroviteky Rd. aid between 148th Ave. SE and 1525 ve.boat lifts and parking, Kenmore Community, east of 68th Ave. NE and south of NE St-f It-both-am tcnd .{soc es175thSt. at 7007 NE 175th -_. (Plywood Number Three) Supply Inc.). S King County Kingsgrove, a subdivision of 37.07 11/:S1l 12'19/8:5 City of Bellevue Evergreen Highlands SubareA Plan, 12/1/81 1!5/S2 acres into 121 lots, vest of Kit Cor- adoption of a land use and annexation ner Rd. S. between S. 376th St. and S. plan for t'a Evergreen Highlands Sub- 390th St. (if both extended' (Deon Corp.)area S King County Panther Lake North, • planned unit 11/25/81 2718'8:9 7.5. Army Corps Wynoochee Hydrapover/Fish Hatchery, 12/3/81 1/31/82 development for 77 townhouses andofEngineers10.2-megawatt hydropower addition to apartments, north of SE 200th St. on NWWynoocheeDamanda396,000-pound side of Panther Lake. 650 ft. east ofhatcheryforanadromnusfish, 35 mi. 108th Ave. SE (SR 515) (Charles north of Montesano in Grays Harbor Henderson Co., Inc.)County 5 King County Terra Glen, a subdivision of 14.63 \-11/25/81 12/15'8127PendOreilleCountySullivanCreek6,draelectric Project, 12/1/81 1/4/f: acres Into 58 lots, vest side of 124thP.C.'. No. I and construct a new dam near the cun- Ave. SE, between SE 203d and 205th Ste.WA State Dept. of fluence of Sullivan and Outlet Creeks if both extended) (Bruits Zinc andEcologyforgenerationof18mg, near Town of Mildred Carmichael) Xetalfoe Falls 5 King County Construct a 38.5-ft. high dish antenna 12/3/81 12/23'8: FINAL II Ss and an equipment building, 1550 ft.Se rest of Issaquah Hobart Rd. SE, wet of the BPA easement and south of SE 111th5Cit. ' Poulsbo Liberty Bat' Marina, installation of a 1''81 St. (Western Yele-Connunicatiooa, Inc.)marine complex to include both land- based and floating structures end S King County Eart Station Antenna , support System, 37.5-1t. 12/3!91 12t23 activities, 250 ft. NW of ]unction of high microwave antenna. support 3d Ave. with 6th St. (Earl L. riillec) structure and irterconnect! g cabling occupying 400 sq. ft., 1000 ft. east of10ThuostcnCountyReplatofCapitolCityEstatesto11/251B1 91st Ave. SW, 500 ft. north of SW 159thcreate7lots. 5 for single-family St. (Fisher Broadcasting,attached townhouse-style units and 2 Inc.) for commercial lots, south of Yelm Hwy. an! east of Rainier Rd. (Lyle Anderson/ Associates) 2) Only proposed declarations of oonsignificance for proposals wtere tho Department24CityofSpokaneNorthRiverbankUrbanDesignPlan,12'2/S! of Ecology 1s an agency with jurisdiction are required to be transmitted to c'r.e guidelines for public and private Department of Ecology. Environmental EAa) received from a Federalactionandincentivesfordevelopmentagencyarealsolisted. 1) These dates are supplied by the lead agency. Requests fur infareat.on or subeftcal of comments should be directed to the lead agency. The SETA Guidelines provide for a 35-dsy review of draft CISe and a 15•d an review of proposed declarations of non.ignificance. This time period say be extended by the lead agency. These numbers refer to the number of the A-95 Clearinghouse within whose jurisdiction the project lies. 1 -- K.,e)gT Or•OKT V-2-4, 1I /1 e. tp f I ti 7?" ill C i I I--) 1 i 1 Ill N, 111 ' 1 1 1 ; I 1 j-a .,....:.......... 1, If 0' .... 5\V 21""trKee,:r etvo. E.3 M-0C K. a• 4 . Z.,..t, .7' f`ssi .'. .r.,........ SITE PLAN &FILL SECTIQNSejTHEAUSTIN - ! 46 vaLL" °f-rict01-KtvinuALPARg-- c-z RENTQN WASH.A 2.1......•Er•owinv•S•instts0•11 rit II N.Lii i[!'.. i 1 fKw w[ LIllI SW 16M ST H'r r _ .__i NI•fOwN«.S.T.D.Tills., «Gar a•ns ae1r terd a CI.T•(Su...N.I.I.n IS. I. r I CI.moo..In wl.•n ..•f rl•a., M.. 2210 a w[µtw yIw[TlM[,C...Wll.••'•[Manes w...,,..n.ft.e.. City• r..tt 1•,TI•Nas T•,I.•.m aly I 1 y, co .Tr I„ —._ two..I.w1•r u..y a L.lip o.LeT. f-7 c T CJ p, IS I u• auw- T \ C t- r T Q I O N WU c 7 [- r_ I ZOi j o:iu i WaM.w a cava moi ae[m+tOw a a.c. 1 C- r= `7 ' I a4tarW 0 woof a.00.01.WIDI AL(KIST.OAT RT.WI, W lCat•aoTa W.a.LtRTTa,r[alaw.wDOTI1O1OTITT UCniJ1=7 L dl Z i T•aaTIYTI•ra•RI..ILL O.TR•Taf.f"C J j 4.ILLT«ALL...LACED•<C•af.CTT*TO LLSV.T.Orm$. I a"..ra.o•Tae.LL DRCRT a.•Dw eo.a.LTTIDw[+TR.awa i N wiw.011'iN OleDIN& CO{.0"iRl.[a iR«.LwtwrOM•LTw.LIWII+o WO.[T..wr..w.a.aJwfa D.awo•w,clOaT•C•l! J W wTIMITTA.ti.T SAIO..T.•A444.4144.J.d•.[wiwww[•ti.r"'i•airiTC[ T..LI.tIKIC RD•DwTT.w.crwr To AND MOVIo-wO AtMACSSW19ISST1Om.T TITT Tway M•••ws.ITO*I•CLEAN...CcT•. 1 I w+arraw. t, 1 11 CIT. y ti D[a aim coma ep[w.ow ` X Ia7a.ar[ I IVi•.TI l.• I moo.MIMI SRAM mDDR t T' I RYAS.WON mnDR I a rI' SW SW ST 1 I. Ps I ISCa..1 1a to..1 Dov oCt'••w.w• lat..) 1 s l w snow Lt. YIaLLA tT11t.D1 }T8['[L_--}f_Jn oo ..... VICINITY PLAN e 73 OITHE AUSTIN ."•' VALLEY OiFILE_S NDUITW PARK_ r-- COMPANY 64. — K•T.6 AENTO11. a1. 6.--AoT.a•wlnf'e.o.m.am •mot...-cots OC-ccmpuier Icf ,,ping, inc. 142 uget driv n 20 5-4599pQS.Q. S'_.? _ 4 fl-cfltC n, ;^ ' ltJB'xS3fr3t''Sa'.:'.. t .:. ,.r: .. ... _ s • 4 .... v,.. y mcm; November 4 8 L: .C 1 9 1 20c, 271-50cX; Mr. Roger Blaylock Associate Planner City of Renton Municipal Building 200 Mill Road South Renton , WA 98055 Dear Roger : Enclosed are two copies of the completed Application for SpecialPermit , two copies of the Affidavit of Ownership and two copiesoftheEnvironmentalChecklistForm. We have not encluded a site plan , since all of the building plansfortheBensonCondominiumarecurrentlyonfileattheCityofRenton , and no physical changes are planned. Our request for a conditional use permit , is under the provisionsoftheCityofRentonzoningordinances (4-7094 ) wherein premiseszonedforresidentialusemaybeusedforprofessionalofficesparagraphA3(a) ) . The professional office will be occupied by Pacific ComputerLeasing , Inc . (PCL) of which I am the President , and sole shareholder.PCL , as the name implies , arranges financing for medium and largeIBMcomputersystemsinthenorthwest. These financial servicesrequire (1 ) marketing , which is my responsibility and which takesplaceoutsideoftheunit , and (2) administration which is donebytheonlyotheremployeeattheunit. Our offer to purchase the unit from its previous owner was made subject to The Benson Board of Directors approving our occupancyasaprofessionaloffice , which c;a„ given prior to the sale .letter attached) The unit appears to meet the commercial code in terms of its fireseparationbarriersandloadingrequirements . The Fire Marshallforseesnoproblemswithourutilization. Please call if you have any questions . Ve y tr ly yours , T.C. McCarthy President cc : George Akers Montgomery , Purdue , Blankinship 6, Austin LETTER OF UNDERSTA.'N'DING May 12, 1981 Mr. Terrance C. McCarthy c/o Mr. Dave Ballard The Benson Sales Office 1425 S. Puget Dr. , Unit 1/401 Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Mr. McCarthy: As a condition of your closing, you have requested permission from The Benson Condominium Board of Directors to establish an office within condominium Unit 11204 in The Benson condominium project. Given the facts in your case, we therefore grant permission for you to establish an office within your unit as long as the following conditions are ob- served: 1. No signage is to be displayed which is visible from the outside of the unit. 2. Any walk-in traffic which may be associated with the office is to be discouraged. Such traffic, if there is any, shall be restricted to no more than normal traffic from invited guests and acquaintances. 3. Noise levels associated with the proposed office shall not create a threat to the quiet enjoyment of the other residents in the project. 4. Any special electrical or other equipment needed shall not constitute an immediate or continual hazard to other residents and shall be inspected by management prior to operation and from time to time as requested by the Board of Directors. 5. Such office shall be in compliance with local zoning ordinances. Please sign below and return the original to Ralph D. Brinton & Associates, Inc. , c/o Richard P. Dunn, 46D South Tenth East, Suite 300, Salt Lake City, Utah 84102. Signed: BENSON CONDOMINIUM BOARD OF DIRECTORS Date By: ire or (Ire behalf of enson oar of Directors) ACKNOWL GED: By:— R/k.rcE: (14 C- y..l 20, 1a4?I DC NOS ENDINEE IS, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS December 7, 1981 DEI PROJECT NO. 80010 Lincoln Property Company 11400 S.E. Sixth Street Suite 220 Bellevue, WA 98004 Attention: Scott Springer Ref: Lakeside Apartment Project, Renton Dear Mr. Springer: At yourrequest we have researched the availability of utilities (water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer) to the referenced site. A complete discussion of the alternatives available to provide the site with ade- quate fire flows is contained in the report of 20 April 1981 by RH2 Engineering. In essence, the report states that the city' s system can be upgraded and extended to the site through one of several routes and by one of two different funding mechanisms. Sufficient water supply is therefore available to the site. Sanitary sewers are also available to the site by one of two alternatives. An existing 8" line deadends at the northwest corner of the property on the east margin of Lake Washington Blvd. The depth of the line limits the potential service area to the south. Those portions which cannot be served by the existing 8" line can be served by a tap into the METRO trunk which ties on the west side of the Lake Washington Blvd. There are now several storm sewer culverts under Lake Washington Blvd. which drain the site and adjoining lands. Studies done for the park show these structures to be more than adequate to carry the anticipated developed flows. Whether these culverts will qualify as "adequate downstream courses" so as to eliminate the need for retention on the developed sites will depend to a certain extent on the development plans, but the possibility is certainly there. In conclusion, there would seem to be no insurmountable problem with providing utilities to this site. Some extension and upgrading of existing facilities will be necessary, but this is neither unusual , nor are the improvements required so extensive that they could not be funded and installed by the developer. Very,-truly yours, Ctj Bruce J. Dodd P. BJ D/j k 1050-13OTH AVE. N.E..BELLE VUE.WA 98OO5 • 1206)885-7B77 OR 454-3743 r ff April 20, 1981 S1061 .0 RECEIVED 23 1981 LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY N.C. , INC. 515 116th Avenue N.E. , Suite 158 DODDS ENGINEERS It"C Bellevue, WA 98004 JOB NO. 8761U Attention: Mr. Scott Springer, J.D. Subject: Water system improvement alternatives for the proposed Lakeside development Dear Mr. Springer: This letter summarizes water system improvement alternatives for providing various levels of water supply capability for fighting a fire (fire flow) at tne proposed Lakeside development in the City of Renton. Fire flow levels of 2700, 3500 and 4200 gallons per minute (gpm) while maintaining 20 pounds per square inch pressure residual, in accordance with Insurance Services Office Criteria, have been considered at the highest development elevation of 100 feet. The attached map illustrates four alternatives for obtaining the fire flow levels mentioned. Alternative 1 and 2 each contain approximately 1 ,900 lineal feet of pipe and will require a pressure reducing station. These two alternatives can provide fire flows of 3500 or 4200 gpm by providing 12 or 16 inch diameter pipe. Alternative 3, a substantially longer length at 3700 feet , consists of two sections of pipeline improvements and can provide a maximum of 3500 gpm. Alternative 4 , which can provide 2700 gpm, consists of modifying the pipeline improvements plannned by the City Park Dept. for Gene Conlon Park. The alignment would be adjusted up to Lake Washington Boulevard instead of through the park and the diameter increased to 12 inches from 8 inches . This alternative, altnour,h more expensive than Alternatives 1 and 2 , could obtain participation by other property owners and tne City and we anticipate that the participation would make this the least expensive alternative. The estimated cost for each alternative is summarized in the following table: 300 - 120th Avenue N E Suite 219 psflievue. Wa. 92005 (206) 451-05E5 Lincoln Property Ce ny N.C. , Inc . April 20, 1981 Page 2 Current Alternative Estimated Cost l or 2 3500 gpm 1900 lineal feet of 12" diameter pipe and a pressure reducing station 80,600 lA or 2A 4200 gpm Same as 1 and 2 except 16" diameter pipe 95,800 3 3500 gpm 3720 lineal feet of 12" diameter pipe and a pressure reducing station 132,400 4 2700 gpm Realignment and size increase to 12" (Cost dependent pipe for 4250 lineal feet and one upon partici- crossing potion) Our recommendation is Alternative 2 or 2A depending on the actual fire flow required. If the fire flow requirement can be reduced to 2700 gpm, then Alternative 4 should be considered in more detail prior to making a deci- sion. (Degree of others ' participation should be established). Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you desire additional information. Thank you for the opportunity to be of assistance in your planning efforts. Sincerely, Richard H. Harbert, P.E. RHH:jw cc Bruce Dodds, Dodds Engineers RECEIVED APR 23 1981 DODCS ENGINEERS, INC. JOB NO._ 1 kall . 1':VA..4!!!!. :._ 5 i: Trritr'litiri 1 FITITITII 111 1 1-1-11 yr rl rf NL=._. _ if 1,1.1,1_1,1.1.1 f i,121,114.111 I 1 LI 11 LI LI [ I LLLL11.1 II 11 40 41 42 ‘ I\ / 7°." 1tl. .!;4. killt1IIMIC .'"••L_CT—C.:(JA-__5- 11 'ri FT -rt 1-I 1 I 1 F[Irri 1 1 1 ril t; , CL L/.1[NUM' '' .------. 1, I ::i1.21'!1,1[5 ri I Ili 11_1111111111111111 43 .14 45 li • 5C-HOOL 4 Ir I 7- . _.:_. ::'.:'.11.•.:_.. z : 1 111.'ii I: l:'- i:.'...: 7; 77. 1• , ' i...;1''i.i.." ' 5--1-,--17-\ c4_, 1 z ° _ --.:1 1:). I.:1: Z79 11 . 1 s 42. a 27d cl Z77 z 16 I -- I i c_ _ _. _ • 1 b%\%• -\ .,.\,\\ , 1., , \_I 1.1 ', .: v:-...*; A — • 13 - t,.. :':..fft, 2 5 D f c1 N -\\ •%,‘\ -,..... n.. s. 14;.../ 4.,./'?;47----s-i---, , 4 -!... i3:FiZ-1 II ' —I A) a 4 28 In 1 t•II d Z 95 202 •:/4 t 1 4 • 40 LI --i I 1t. 1 1L__-- III i — 3s....- iA\ 11 il A 0 C II II I1:\132. 1 331 4 J I )4 2t3 213 339 r) I r•I' Ii7 ...'IIiI/ I 1 I— ;-- --.1 \ --*- - - 1'-% • "- t • 1 11-11., II1 1: - :• \ . 444 1 i . I r• z , 1.\\\, ''-.<11 t,\\.,,,\ .;:i 29Z 2 b 5 /.;,,,,. , i• -- i 1 \ • H S'45 I, f•-•-t. - ! I A ,..\,„it_‘, 7--... ...„- ,.,....:.:.- , ,,: -...:., .,i. 352.„\. . 316.1 1 3.( 1.' '' \ '':::•.*::\ \ ‘' t"•> ' t irri 4.7. 1 \ I\ 71 1- 1 51 266 -.1- ti \- \ 34, l......;I .\;;;;).\••• . C.: 11.". o...i I . I) 1 7.1 .-- 8 1 1 n. i.4 0 r 1 .0:. qt\.. ,‘ \\ \\ , 7 1.1: 1,, z• 21- - 4. 1 4 .I •;: •:' -i...1 4 - 1 1 I/ s 11:. 11. 5so 1 3 34, EB 0: - -.pi I.-I.• flc7314 \ 7 L7,h - i 1 s-d' s -.• 2-- e I• I -/ s '•!$s-?!,...•-.•• l- Richard Carothers Associates December 4, 1981 REZONE APPLICATION COVER LETTER APPLICANT: Anna Phinney, Bruce Larson et. all , Estate of M.W. Lotto and Marjorie L. Lotto The Owners of the property described in the accompanying documents hereby apply for a rezone of the property to an R-3 classification. The property is located east of Lake Washington Boulevard, across the street from the Gene Coulon Park extension presently under construction. The site is currently in operation as a golf driving range on a lease basis. In the comprehensive plan the property is designated as R-4 for high density multi-family use. This classification would allow in excess of fifty units per acre on the site which contains approximately ten acres , thus permitting in the vicinity of 500 dwelling units at maximum site development. The owners are, however, applying for R-3 zoning with a stipulation that not more than 186 units will be constructed on the site. This R- 3 application is being sought, in part, to expedite the environmental review and rezone process. Previous discussions with the City of Renton Planning Department have indicated that an R-3 rezone would likely fail below the threshold otherwise necessitating th? preparation of an environmental impact statement occasioned by project size. The rezone to R-3 and subsequent development of multi-family housing on the pro- perty is appropriate. It is consistent with both the plans and policies of the City of Renton formulated in the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan foresees this pro- perty and adjacent sites along Lake Washington as developing into an affordable multi-family residential community. Such development is particularly important due to its close proximity to the central city core. Renton is experiencing overall rapid growth, much of which is in the outlying areas. Providing housing in or near the city core is recognized as an important priority for the near future, in Renton as well as many other cities. Interstate 405 provides the major traffic linkage of Renton to other parts of the greater Seattle area. As designed currently and for the foreseeable future, access to the Interstate is substantially easier from the project area than it is for many areas east of 1-405. The rapid growth of residential areas in eastern Renton has created near saturation of major arterial feeders to the Interstate. Current and projected lgvels of traffic support the desirability of shifting additional growth to the west . The subject property is particularly well suited for development as a residential project of the type proposed. It is situated on a terrace, well above Lake Wash- ington, providing excellent views to the west while reducing its physical and visual impact on the lake and shoreline. The major portion of the site is nestled below steep slopes screening the development from Interstate 405. These slopes provide excellent buffering between the proposed development and neighboring uses Eight Fourteen East Pike Street, Seattle, Washington 98122 Telephone (206) 324-5500Jtl(.eS +tstl' WH'.r'(j,r fS , ,r• LJ;i r, {b-slip yrun.:f :, Rezone Application December 4, 1981 Page 2 to the northeast and southeast. These slopes would, additionally, continue to act as a defacto addition to the greenbelt prevelant in the area. The site has easy access to nearby recreational facilities and the newly developingGeneCoulonParkandtheLakeWashingtonwaterfrontareas . This amenity is partic- ularly valuable to residents of multi-family developments who generally have limited access to outdoor spaces of their own. The proposed rezone and subsequent development is timely. The City of Renton is undergoing steady and continued growth as the focal point of the south Lake Wash- ington area. Rental vacancies are relatively low, particularly when compared with the neighboring areas of Kent, Auburn and Federal Way. As previously discussed , traffic patterns would suggest a preference toward concentrating near term growth in areas of continued good access to downtown Renton and I-405. With the ever increasing need for sensitivity in the area of energy conservation, particularly regarding gasoline use, encouraging housing that is close to major employment and retail areas is a worthwhile priority. The proposed project suits this end particularly well . Although in some cases access to utilities is difficult, there is no question that all the necessary utilities are available to serve the subject property, and that sufficient reserve capacity exists in order to accommodate a project of the size proposed. Copies of a traffic study and soils report are attached to this application. Neither the traffic study or the soils report indicate any significant develop- mental problems with respect to the project itself or with respect to its impact upon Lake Washington Boulevard and the surrounding community. 1 Roger Blalock, Department of Planning, City of Renton, Meeting of April 29, 1981 . 2 Roger Blalock, Department of Planning, City of Penton, Telephone communication of May 14, 1981 . 3 Con Monihan, Department of Public Works , City of Renton, Telephone communication of May 14, 1981 . Richard Carothers Associates t= • L 14e, OFI,r,;%/ ` k 3 a 1 era i ` i • y`', f{ • T)<IIIiTIT177iE1• • o--- Isit.a—tom! t r • T'4 I 0 4 T H AVE. 1/.v N 1 l 1. 14. e:1i2e-- - - I ‘ 1 * , -Ha 1 .. 1110i si t. % ‘, iott-".' - • ...- - 0."...1, 0 s i‘ C) \ 04441, v pleR-• ED-1. 16r, ___----0-Vjr w it t ittp,_ .tit s - i ' • f:N. o i 1. V , n }. iftI7r il 1. 44)' 1 A t. r 1., i1.4 J_ u,0 of Y.4.,o O f, j- r-r--7,-7T'T'7TT7 T T7TTT)• < 7i' / Y>' 7t17< 7,,, s7 ,, < 7i ,7 r, 1 __ ir ii .6 ,„, 1/` L. 1'. I • I Wr'7 f`111 ) 7.,riffs P. j,f•/11 •- i., ,. 0 4 I•n 1 N srY' ACGL 3 ,I, 410 "r0oV/gI O !Ne•WI 77YYt y ki r••.. 1 f p(. e•.,w f'' PRIM--- 1. HIGHWAY - - - ttile.,... J (Flv SEC ST E NWY AENTO .TO KENNYDALE ; h e fWO2- )• es., •4 Q,% (HIGH AVG. • N• AMROYLQ APRIL IR,MO I- 7 C I Jam. D • I Sheol 3 of 6 aryi t — Trt., ,.. 1...,f\ 4 (I h n....•. ogee.... r A rr.rY mac. ` S e4 t<c<t..- — cl t..f-7 {` itti N l.e7 AAI V J I N ere 0 w11 ,11.--. I A/i. I N N r N N N• N j i r...-r V t q4 •It:•E1 / . . 0 December 7, 1981 Mr. Roger Blaylock Planning Department City of Renton Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: REZONE APPLICATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF THE LAKESIDE PROPERTY Dear Roger: Enclosed herewith you will find duplicate originals of Lincoln Property Company's Application for Rezone on the Lakeside Property. Along with the applications themselves, we have enclosed six addi- tional cover letters together with six additional site maps as requested. Roger, as we discussed over the telephone on Friday, December 4, I want to emphasize the fact that it is our intention that the final product of this Rezone Application will be a contract type rezone. In other words, it is our desire to limit the intensity and scope of our development via the rezone document. It is also our intention to work closely with the various departments within the City of Renton, including the Environmental Review Committee, to predefine the nature and extent of the development itself so as to satisfy not only our development goals, but the concerns of the City of Renton as well . At your request, we have included a number of additional items not ordinarily called for in the Rezone Application. These are: A. A Lake Washington Boulevard Traffic Study; B. A complete Soils Report, and; C. Our findings relative to the availability of utility services to the site. (For this item I have enclosed a recent letter from our civil engineer addressing available options in the area of utility services , most notably water and sewer. ) incaLn PRUPeRTY camPany n.c., /nc. THE OVERLAKE BLDG.. 11400 S.E.6TH ST.,SUITE 220 BELLEVUE.WA 96004 206-455-481 3 Page 2 Mr. Roger Blaylock December 7, 1981 It is my hope that the attached application, together with all the supportive information and documentation, will assist the Environ- mental Review Committee in their review of the project from an environmental standpoint. If I can provide any further assistance to you please don't hesi- tate to call me. Very t 1 y yours , Scott B. Springe SBS:co Enclosures cc: David Hepp DDDDS ENGINEErtS, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS • PLANNERS December 7, 1981 DEI PROJECT NO. 80010 Lincoln Property Company 11400 S.E. Sixth Street Suite 220 Bellevue, WA 98004 Attention: Scott Springer Ref: Lakeside Apartment Project, Renton Dear Mr. Springer: At your request we have researched the availability of utilities (water, sanitary sewer and storm sewer) to the referenced site. A complete discussion of the alternatives available to provide the site with ade- quate fire flows is contained in the report. of 20 April 1981 by RH2 Engineering. In essence, the report states that the city' s system can be upgraded and extended to the site through one of several routes and by one of two different funding mechanisms. Sufficient water supply is therefore available to the site. Sanitary sewers are also available to the site by one of two alternatives. An existing 8" line deadends at the northwest corner of the property on the east margin of Lake Washington Blvd. The depth of the line limits the potential service area to the south. Those portions which cannot be served by the existing 8" line can be served by a tap into the METRO trunk which ties on the west side of the Lake Washington Blvd. There are now several storm sewer culverts under Lake Washington Blvd. which drain the site and adjoining lands. Studies done for the park show these structures to be more than adequate to carry the anticipated developed flows. Whether these culverts will qualify as "adequate downstream courses" so as to eliminate the need for retention on the developed sites will depend to a certain extent on the development plans, but the possibility is certainly there. In conclusion, there would seem to be no insurmountable problem with providing utilities to this site. Some extension and upgrading of existing facilities will be necessary, but this is neither unusual , nor are the improvements required so extensive that they could not be funded and installed by the developer. Very,-truly yours, { K ) f <A,C.. -- Ck. Bruce J. Dodd- P. BJD/jk 11350-130TH AVE.N.E.,BELLEVUE.WA 98005 • [206J 885-7877 OR 454-3743 April 20, 1981 S 106.1 .0 4S,1\1TO`'' RECEIVED MFR 23 1981 LINCOLN PROPERTY COMPANY N.C. , INC. 515 116th Avenue N.E. , Suite 158 DODDS ENGINEERS Bellevue, WA 98004 JOB NO. 81E)JJ Attention: Mr. Scott Springer, J.D. Subject:. Water system improvement alternatives for the proposed Lakeside development Dear Mr. Springer: This letter summarizes water system improvement alternatives for providing various levels of water supply capability for fighting a fire (fire flow) at the proposed Lakeside development in the City of Renton. Fire flow levels of 2700, 3500 and 4200 gallons per minute (gpm) while maintaining 20 pounds per square inch pressure residual, in accordance with Insurance Services Office Criteria, have been considered at the highest development elevation of 100 feet. The attached map illustrates four alternatives for obtaining the fire flow levels mentioned. Alternative 1 and 2 each contain approximately 1 ,900 lineal feet of pipe and will require a pressure reducing station. These two alternatives can provide fire flows of 3500 or 4200 gpm by providing 12 or 16 inch diameter pipe. Alternative 3, a substantially longer length at 3700 feet, consists of two sections of pipeline improvements and can provide a maximum of 3500 gpm. Alternative 4, which can provide 2700 gpm, consists of modifying the pipeline improvements plannned by the City Park Dept. for Gene Conlon Park. The alignment would be adjusted up to Lake Washington Boulevard instead of through the park and the diameter increased to 12 inches from 8 inches. This alternative, although more expensive than Alternatives 1 and 2, could obtain participation by other property owners and the City and we anticipate that the participation would make this the least expensive alternative. The estimated cost for each alternative is summarized in the following table: 300 - 120th Avenue N.E. Suite 219. Bellevue. Wa. 98005 (206) 451-05E-15 Lincoln Property Cc ny N.C. , Inc. April 20, 1981 Page 2 Current Alternative Estimated Cost 1 or 2 3500 gpm 1900 lineal feet of 12" diameter pipe and a pressure reducing station 80,600 IA or 2A 4200 gpm Same as 1 and 2 except 16" diameter pipe 95,800 3 3500 gpm 3720 lineal feet of 12" diameter pipe and a pressure reducing station 132,400 4 2700 gpm Realignment and size increase to 12" (Cost dependent pipe for 4250 lineal feet and one upon partici- crossing pation) Our recommendation is Alternative 2 or 2A depending on the actual fire flow required. If the fire flow requirement can be reduced to 2700 gpm, then Alternative 4 should be considered in more detail prior to making a deci- sion. (Degree of others' participation should be established). Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you desire additional information. Thank you for the opportunity to be of assistance in your planning efforts. Sincerely, Richard H. Harbert, P.E. RHH:jw cc Bruce Dodds, Dodds Engineers RECEIVED APR 23 1981 DODDS ENGINEERS, INC. JOB NO. i11i atJ a lfrINVM. IIFT FL[ LI I 111 III I - 11 FI [ I I] 1 . KiltSi?.. 2_ 55 1 : :-.....:•_ -. .. 1-, : ..-.•. • — .••- - Ir- 7' 7 7 . I 1[ 1' 1114' 1A I I I LI I LW II Ii LLL1111 11 40 41 4E II 54. ._ .. 1.. 1, i 7 Dr_ _ _ _ a9 it __ i . K11110DALE '* , ...------ 00C. CoAS7' lc irri.,- 1 [ 1 ' id 1 [ r1 in Fl I 1 I [ I m I LI IP — — . 7. i ! camiNTAky * . 9; 1' ------- i' 7 - . - 7,_ - 7 " 1[ 21, 11, k Li 11E111111 11 I I I LI I I I I 111 41_ 4LallaulaL1111111............ 4--. 4., o. .__.. _ _ _ pc, _ 45 44 45 li * a SCHOOL e 1-,, SI. 52 11 I . 11 1 C —-- 7 4 I1 • i I A 0 ztll 0 1-••-• I ,.. i:: ,;•:.. .,-,:.:.!::.::: A i am I it• 0 .... ..;..., i, - k' .. je... t. .. p. . 4: 0, -------...... e. gr- 7--, izi;..., A 0 " . 1 u: A 1 8 ' N. • itr'. 17- 7. 8 14 0 A 11 t d 295 2oZ 2/ 4 4 s r- B 7 . i! VTIL iu 11 k Ala C11 i 32. 231 ttt it\. \, , 273 262 i 0 0 . ei\\ c.,,.,• i .., i It 1.... i t\ C 339 : 1' d 1 i- v (, , .‘ c..„: 2, ,,,, 1 , \ . or. 1 2 ... .. ..1.7 1) \ 000. • I •-----"\--,.\\• 1 8„. 24. . 7 \ \\,. 11. 1,--- 1- 2 . 3 .:' 1.. 1._ 1_:)..- ; L . .: Id-- 1.... F.. •.....:,..)..::. Z9Z IA i. : 345 I ''."‘ 1....i v ! 4.: MID 35,> 1. k , 711r2),- L: i.:•._ 1 Yk., ‘ 347 tn \F, i \ 1110". 31 I) i?. 1 ' ‘ 333 I A 1,= I 0 A 3. 2 — - 1.- _. „, .... .,....___,,.,., ,_, 4., , 4 I. . \ ..'; 2. \ \ „ „ 4‘ \ vt. -• • . : .,. -:. :: •'. A !..",: i„. F. 2) C..,;.. E_ 4 s. .; $... • se , s 1,,.;!:... i! 294 0 .-- 5.,•..' s•-. ., , 1 I .-- b to ... •.. E 0 t I- -''•." 7" 2 I 1-^ 117 I Lig. v tfi 9 i. 1,.., t!" i—•••• J ^.-----. 4 I • s. f„... 13, 34, . I [ I') •••••.• .: I I L A. i< E W— ASH. • S 1 1% 0 I i) cl d I 7 i bb 314 b. 0 I-- I I : FiE.- Ac.. ti i Richard Carothers Associates December 4, 1981 REZONE APPLICATION COVER LETTER APPLICANT: Anna Phinney, Bruce Larson et. all , Estate of M.W. Lotto and Marjorie L. Lotto The Owners of the property described in the accompanying documents hereby apply for a rezone of the property to an R-3 classification. The property is located east of Lake Washington Boulevard, across the street from the Gene Coulon Park extension presently under construction. The site is currently in operation as a golf driving range on a lease basis. In the comprehensive plan the property is designated as R-4 for high density multi-family use. This classification would allow in excess of fifty units per acre on the site which contains approximately ten acres, thus permitting in the vicinity of 500 dwelling units at maximum site development. The owners are, however, applying for R-3 zoning with a stipulation that not more than 186 units will be constructed on the site. This R-3 application is being sought, in part, to expedite the environmental review and rezone process. Previous discussions with the City of Renton Planning Department have indicated that an R-3 rezone would likely fall below the threshold otherwise necessitating thq preparation of an environmental impact statement occasioned by project size. The rezone to R-3 and subsequent development of multi-family housing on the pro- perty is appropriate. It is consistent with both the plans and policies of the City of Renton formulated in the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan foresees this pro- perty and adjacent sites along Lake Washington as developing into an affordable multi-family residential community. Such development is particularly important due to its close proximity to the central city core. Renton is experiencing overall rapid growth, much of which is in the outlying areas. Providing housing in or near the city core is recognized as an important priority for the near future, in Renton as well as many other cities. Interstate 405 provides the major traffic linkage of Renton to other parts of the greater Seattle area. As designed currently and for the foreseeable future, access to the Interstate is substantially easier from the project area than it is for many areas east of I-405. The rapid growth of residential areas in eastern Renton has created near saturation of major arterial feeders to the Interstate. Current and projected lvels of traffic support the desirability of shifting additional growth to the west'. The subject property is particularly well suited for development as a residential project of the type proposed. It is situated on a terrace, well above Lake Wash- ington, providing excellent views to the west while reducing its physical and visual impact on the lake and shoreline. The major portion of the site is nestled below steep slopes screening the development from Interstate 405. These slopes provide excellent buffering between the proposed development and neighboring uses Eight Fourteen East Pike Street, Seattle, Washington 98122 Telephone (206) 324-5500 Offices Seat'le,Washington / Boise, Idaho / Reston.Virginia / Portland.Oregon Rezone Application December 4, 1981 Page 2 to the northeast and southeast. These slopes would, additionally, continue to act as a de'acto addition to the greenbelt prevelant in the area. The site has easy access to nearby recreational facilities and the newly developing Gene Coulon Park and the Lake Washington waterfront areas. This amenity is partic- ularly ialuable to residents of multi-family developments who generally have limited access to outdoor spaces of their own. The proposed rezone and subsequent development is timely. The City of Renton is undergoing steady and continued growth as the focal point of the south Lake Wash- ington area. Rental vacancies are relatively low, particularly when compared with the neighboring areas of Kent, Auburn and Federal Way. As previously discussed, traffic patterns would suggest a preference toward concentrating near term growth in areas of continued good access to downtown Renton and I-405. With the ever increasing need for sensitivity in the area of energy conservation, particularly regarding gasoline use, encouraging housing that is close to major employment and retail areas is a worthwhile priority. The proposed project suits this end particularly well . Although in some cases access to utilities is difficult, there is no question that all the necessary utilities are available to serve the subject property, and that sufficien# 3 reserve capacity exists in order to accommodate a project of the size proposed. Copies of a traffic study and soils report are attached to this application. Neither the traffic study or the soils report indicate any significant develop- mental problems with respect to the project itself or with respect to its impact upon Lake Washington Boulevard and the surrounding community. 1 Roger Blalock, Department of Planning, City of Renton, Meeting of April 29, 1981 . 2 Roger Blalock, Department of Planning, City of Renton, Telephone communication of May 14, 1981 . 3 Don Monihan, Department of Public Works, City of Renton, Telephone communication of May 14, 1981 . Richard Carothers Associates vt, V , 1 r - • . - sow •... 1 I 5S I . , f h.1 i ' LC. O e, IIj I I 5 C r. op, ' H. T Nsi I Fa1t1i ? r fir-- t fil 4.t L.;'CI ..,1:1,'%It tleet4 il i'a, t 0.0, 0! r r PN iI%l:i._ `,• i Q a Syr" r ' / / ^,e9C S - '• ; •i\ " OO® ,i -.. "+ i _64.,:,,,,,. s r /' / rrr//rr r' r/ / rr •' L'. iii f, •'YtC ° r0,, i af) • i^." • 1, kt I / r ram l pi =,,I EI2) 77,. .. .4:: 11 0101 Off°_...„.........,'--"--,__r * ‘ s-1'-- . ... LA,:1 v• p,.4.; I)I iii4,-.:_tlit. f. r , . ..: it.$ 1 Rialilia. i• e 1 I.:*•'; I o 4 T H AVE. 5if .e,"07 __._____:0. . 6.„14 \. : 1 " , _-,.bee Y ts 0 „ oce ---4 , 4 ill v. ,..1r d3 i yam q <"/ vLI it; 11 0'7 t..,U l'.., 11 .• lei t* 114 I % '' A'-‘7 C) i ICA Y- off• e - -_-_ N • \"` S'S/J/ M a i 0 cv 1--i.zsi...7 .;;11: N.V% 1. r5:" a. T. a/,.is tip D o•..' LAA a %I` ` 71 I R.41Ia I/ N ACCLa.! 7b deg PA'bN/A/t70 .4.01 V TWitt L/I+ • / /'A I 1 _ '-- — NO. II ,vn•w»' W ..• PRIMi-----1 ---- -- i. I-I STATE HWY 1J0. 2-A) JJ) RENT.. ' KENNYDALE vti (HIGH AVE. a N • O r, ( FLV. SEC 5.., N 7 a.• _ _ __ j()) ••T•J Ll...AM'110VEq A IIIL It,1 i0 Z I", r ' y r P n . i I Sheet .;Of s 1 Lpyiy LM IN 1 y : `/k,hwr+r• o/.w.N. r i • ORO /S 4, 2l LI c[ -L--/V'.T1i.. , i•,2 hN • J N i I L7• V nl I Ia _ i J14)1. II; j ti ui 4y I l::/ 00 li r 1 \i:l INI_ ' da) 1 AI .I KI I - • N• \ CITY OF P,,ENTON OR OFFICE USE ONLYREAMAPPLIC4TJON PPLICATION NO. LAND USE HEARINGf - / EXAMINER 'S AC PPLICATrON FEE $ TION APPEAL FILED RECEIPT NO. CITY COUNCIL ACTION 117ILING DATE ORDINANCE NO. AND DATETEARINGDATE CPPLICA'JT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 1 J ; Name Anna Phinney, Estate of M.W. Lotto & Marjorie L. Lot phone 455-4813c/o Lincoln Property Co. , N.C. , Inc .Address 11400 S.E. 6th, Suite 220, Bellevue, WA 98004 S. property petitioned for rezoning is located on Lake Washington Boulevard bQt a south of N. 24th Street a.Ad Square footage or acreage of property 9,0 acres -IL Legal description of pro ert separate sheet) P Y (if more space is required , attach a Lots 35, 340, 341 , 342, 343, 357, 358 and 359 of C.D. Hil lman'ss Lake Washington Garden of Eden Addition to Seattle. I I I Existing Zoning P-1 Zoning Requested R-3 TOTE TO APPLICANT: The following factors are considered in reclassifyingproperty. Evidence or additional information to substantiateyourrequestmaybeattachedtothissheet. (See ApplicationProcedureSheetforspecificrequirements . ) Submit this forminduplicate. Proposed use of site Multi-family residential development I i. List the measures to be taken to reduce impact on the surrounding area. In brief, the apparent major issues would be dealt with as follows: (Please see attached sheet) . How soon after the rezone is granted do you intend to develop the site? Development would be initiated within 6 months . Two copies of plot play and affidavit of ownership are required. Planning Dept. 1-77 1 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM FOR OFFICE USE ONLY • Application No. DO ; 5-/ Environmental Checklist No. /=CIF - /0: -5-/ PROPOSED, date:FINAL , date: Declaration of Significance Declaration of Significance QDeclaration of Non-Significance Declaration of Non-Significance COMMENTS: Introduction The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requiresallstateandlocalgovernmentalagenciestoconsiderenvironmentalvaluesbothfortheirownactionsandwhenlicensingprivateproposals . The Act also requires that an- EIS be Thepreppurposefor oflthisl ,checklist actions isitoihelpnthtlye agencies affecting involvthe edldeitytermf ineewhethernornnt.ot aproposalissuchamajoraction, r•, • Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the informationpresentlyaeaflabletoyou. Where explanations of your answers are required, or whereyoubelieveanexplanationwouldbehelpfultogovernmentdecisionmakers , include yourexplanationinthespaceprovided, or use additional pages if necessary. You shouldincluderefarencestoanyreportsorstudiesofwhichyouareawareandwhicharerele-vant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help allagenciesinolvedwithyourproposaltoundertaketherequiredenvironmentalreviewwith- out unnecessary delay. The following questions apply to your total proposal , not just to the license for whichyouarecurrentlyapplyingortheproposalforwhichapprovalissought. Your answersshouldincludetheimpactswhichwillbecausedbyyourproposalwhenitiscompleted,even though completion may not occur until some'..ime in the future. This will allow alloftheagencieswhichwillbeinvolvedtocompletetheirenvironmental ,review now, with-out duplicating paperwork in the future. NOTE: This is a standard form being used by all state and local agencies in the StateofWashingtonforvarioustypesofproposals. Many of the questions may not apply toyourproposal . If a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and continue on to thenextquestion. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I . BACKGROUND 1. -- Name-of- Proponent Anna Phinney, Estate of M.W. Logo & Marjorie L. Lotto 2. Address and phone number of Proponent: c/o their representative: Lincoln Property Co. , N_C_ , Inc_ 11400 S. E. 6th. Suite 220 Bellevue, WA 98004 455-4813 3. Date Checklist submitted 4. Agency requiring Checklist Renton Planning Department 5. Name of proposal , if applicable: 6. Niture and brief description of the proposal (including but not limited to itss• ze, general design elements , and other factors that will give an accurateunderstandingofitsscopeandnature) : SEe ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pages 1 -2 f' 2- 7. Location of proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal , as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts , including any other information needed to give an accurate understanding of the environ- mental setting of the proposal ) : See ENVIRONMENTAL. a KL_LST PROJECT DESCRIPTLQN. Pages 1-2 8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal : See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pagee 1-2 9. List of all permits , licenses or government approvals rr*quired for the proposal federal , state and local--including rezones) : SPp JNVIRONMFNTAI_ CHFCKI TST -• PROJECT DESCRIPTION_ Paget T-2 IO- Oo you have any plans for future additions , expansion, or further activity reiatee to or connected with this proposal? If ycs , explain: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pages 1 -2 11t .DO you'know' of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes. explain: SPp FNVTRONMFNTAI CHFCKI TST - PRn,1FCT OFSCRTPTTON, Pagac 1-2 - 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- posal ; if none has been completed. but is expected to be filed at sore future date, describe the nature of such application form: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - PROJECT DESCRIPTION, Pages 1-2 II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) 11) Earth. Will the proposal result 'in: a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geclogic substructures? YES MAYBE ri b) Disruptions, displacements , compaction or over- covering of the soil? X YES- MAYBE WT— CO' Change in topography or ground surface relief features? Y 5 FI A Y B E w- d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? FED MAYBE. N0 e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of sous , either on or off the site? X YES MAYBENE- f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands , or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? YES MAYBE Explanation: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - CTSCtISSTnN pa ac_ 3 3- 2) Air. Will the proposal result in: 1 a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air X quality?YES MAYBE NO b) The creation of objectionable odors? YES RAT NO c) Alteration of air mover• Int, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate , either locally or regionally? YES (CBE N IExplanation: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - FNVTRONMFNTAI TMPACTS - DISCUSS1nN, Pagec I I 3) Water. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? 11 Tn.- MAYBENO b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? X c) , Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? YES- MAYBE No X YES Wilt' NO d) . Change In the amount of surface water in any water ybody? YES MAYBE NO e) Discharge into surface waters, ,or in any alteration II surfaca water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X y-_- MAYBE 57 f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of II ground waters?YES MAYBE NO Il g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either through direct additions or withdrawals , or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? Yam_ MAYBE NO I h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through dire t injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents , waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? YES MAYBE NO I i ) reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? r- MAYBE f ill Explanation: III SPP FNVTRfNMFNTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAI TMPAcTS - nTSCUSSION, Paps 3- 6 I Flora. Will the proposal result in: a) Change in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of flora (including trees , shrubs, grass , crops , microflora and aquatic plants)?yam- II o) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare oi endangered species of flora? YES MAYBE N0 c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing X species? TE'S— MAYBE d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Y- — MAYBE NO Expl anati oh: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION, Paps 3-C 4- n. 5 ) Fauna. Will the proposal result in: a) Changes in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of fauna (birds , land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms , insects or microfauna)? X YES MAYBE 0 b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or Xendangeredspeciesoffauna? Y'E°S MAYBE Mr c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? MT" MAY N d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? YES MAYBE Nb- Explanation: See ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION_ Parpc 1-F 6) Noise Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? -X YES M YBT Explanation: See _ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - DISCUSSION_ Parrc 3-6 7) Light and Glared Will the proposal produce new- light or glare? X YE' _ MAYBE Ntr Expl.a.nation: See. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:- DISCUSSION., pagpc 376 i 81-T Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? Ter um Y See_ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMFNTAI TMPACTS _ nrcrncs.LQN., Pages 3.6 . 9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? YE- MAYBE N b,) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? YES MAYBE r• Explanation: 10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil , pesticides , chemicals or radiation) in the event of en accident or upset conditions? X E S MAYBE 0— Explanation: 11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 'X YES MAYBE AO-- Explanation: Spp ENVIRONMENTAL- CHECKLIST - FNVIRONM NTA IMPACTS nTSrttccrnm 6 r 12)- Housing. 1411 e proposal affect existing, hou , or create a demand for additional housing? r YES MAYBE NO t y.. . Explanation: B See ENVIRONMENTAL CHE .K IST - NVIRONMENTAI TMPAf TS flTSCIISSIflN1 P g c fi I 3) Transportati ovE/Ci rcul ati on. Will the' propo5.al resul t` i n ter ''1 a) GIllenerationofaddftionalvehicularmovement? x O Y E S . M Y-B ti Effects on existingr parking facilities, or' demand` a for new parking?. i Y N / $01 J ay'Nil f R ,1 , c), Impact upon existing transportat{on systems' f ay R ';; r ' ' t MAY BE tee, 1 (dr Alterations to present patterns of ci rcul at.ion or ;_ r t. . ccl't 'e ; y tix ( f movement of. people and/or coops? 1- r y:a ; „x y7 x r •. , y s- •, -. ' ,- , ;- >.,. , , f Spa x y. t, „,a 4:r iterations for waterborne, .rail_ar al r traff icl s-I tit'` ;x t rr -" II n i" 'R">ri` t t ;e til t 3i-'r1e' :h, 1 a+ ara q f¢ ., + „., , t r." }'° k,k' t YES a M fin IIIY }}` - '7 rncrehSe id traffic hazards motor`vehiclesr s r+'^ s"_ y,, `4` r•' " ''V i F e .hi e.lzi;sts or pedestartares? + gi,-,, ~ r s , i,..„: ' , a 1F '"' a t w 3,,,t ''v.. c r ti ; ,-weap5 s, y .rQ , ..••• "'t" , Ag 7 1 ,`(•• - f tr e, • YES MA-Y E r „ y ? .. I'li•b S' 4.,"a '' „ SOa•" ', t .;t • rr S tk• ,f >•:• Y 3 iN• 1'. S t• II ,- .x } Explanation:a : f e.' xo tj See- NVIRb VMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL:-IMPACTS - Dl.SctlscthN1 pages 1 6r .. y . 14 fir+ µk'lt+S,y p 4 ar `` ';''. 1,.+ .:, t. * S N•' •,. N,p.''..iti'• r s ,7 .: 4.,, f4'"* i 'i c,,,,, c i .ti,,•-Y 'eaa ; - h ^•„.. i'as' t` 4 e \ P y, r .1q,-.yt• .c S a' a"wa:5. .4 ` ?.i. .'.1. • •,i+. ...'^r 'i ' t' 4, x li ,'' ; ('141 '{ Ptibiit aerv'Ytcess-k-+ 1itT.. "the-propGosal have- an effect upon,.•or'‘* ti'; -,•%wrk1 4- Tresult:in a -need'. for new. or altered,governmental services a ; ',:t' i• r ' ' in any .of-the following areas: r A w a) Fire protection?• r-, NI , , ,' . : r t: YES _ _MAYBE Nam' '^`"? 4• '• i dt, palf'ce protection? k, G . , s . 4•.47 r .. . s ' a ' , v; tg r y . tx " 7 t i•• i f y Y r 4 i',1 •7: y% , L 4 AY BE rt }.,;' 1i. 1 ! ate + qq r ti, Yp'y r y. t r. ' L ti••ilr 1 Y ( c) S C h o o1 s P •" _,J. 1 i P.- ya r r. 71 + '.i i .'` i x ." 3:f•"?*4 •Y'44' +`r tZ. f 4*-- " r 7t'. A. , i, 4 a r x r " 1c''ti r i k tvMAYBE N(Ts, " r. i +f..t•'';.- via }` :8ryf d) Parks r other recr a i n I f0etoa acil ityyies S MAY NQ IF,..Yam. e) Maintenance of public facilities, inctudin roads? X r, I 1 @ AYES . MAYBEr N ''`' 3 e II f) Other governmental services?' x y d,+ NO zr- r. Explanation: - ' Y1 See` ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENVIRONMENTAL,'IMPACTS bISC11SSrON_ PagP 3'-6 z S 15) Energy. .Will 'the proposal ,result i n: - a) Use of. substantial amounts of fuel or energy? irrr. MAYBE NO b) Demand' upon ,existing sources of' energy, or -require _ 1 c' ,, r •• the !level opment.,;of_ new sources of ,energy? X r MAYBE Vr. Explanation: ; See FNVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST -- ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - nrcr..iiccrpN, page 3-6 16) U4ilities. Will' the proposal -result in a need for new„, " r ';L, systems, or alterations to the following utilities: I s 1• a)/ '• Power or natural gas? YES - , MAYBE N3 -s`'i x; b) . Communications 's stems? XYr i } T MAYBE N g c)' ' Water?' r ti YES MAYBE NO__ 5•,.6- a_.„7.,- ,. -1.41. . . r. L'- ..-____. XX . : '... .•.;. d) Sewer or septic tanks? Vrr- MAY BE NO,• e) Storm water drainage? TM MAYBE( EY- y , - • ' 7 -' f1 Solid waste and disposal? 4- ‘. 4, ,, • '* • 4•;...15r. ".**-• S. MAYBE s_.--' • • .• ,i-. •-. , s.• - . . ,.., 4....•:.i.„...s..,_04,4,.....,... „... . ,.. :... .I. .. 4felefiattiV:1 Ici0' 1..."' . 4 , & .1,i „ Explanation: Spp FNVIPIINMFNTAI ri4Fcxt TST _ FNVIRM•IMFNTAI TMPACTS- • •-,L, - DISrliC.SION, Pages 3 .6 1 4...'•14•z LT)\.•.Human' Health. Will the proposal resuI t .in the creation of'i.': --'..;!•;'41.‘'17#:.?..,,, c. ;,:4:11C. ........,...,.,,. . any• heal th hazard, or- potential health hazard (excluding •• . .,-,-_---,,,,'•,,, • ,-, , •„.":'7:k. . cjc-'..'''',•:-....f'--,"?.-.;.-meatil health)?_ 1,.•, .. ,•..4,:1...4-••:s....,,,,1/2.1.,,,44,,,I,i -,,<„,,,i.,....,.4.c. . . t . . 4,„- . , 4,;.',. 's,'.'....,"-',...' ' vtV,..4:4,',•,r,•,,,-.,-firip,•„:2 .•••i--. •••‘'--is.i,ii...4i..4 .,--7:4.W.,...,'.'-'4,1.'t'# 4tiT.i . ., ,W Trr NunT .71.4i•s. .,,...1 fn' a....--„,• ,,,,-:.•,5.-..,t,• •if4t,-,..4,4,......Lot_14,-,e.r., :NI,„....,,,,• a.,:i,i,...1...0;...,4, .Nr-!•-;.12t„, ,z,4,:; . 4 :.„,..,,cp..0.,....IL,,:., :4,4, •...,.. ., L.-; -,••••.,:,',',, i,T..•• ,fl......-...,"4,1F...•-•.F..,"\,0,,,.. -51-,',19z-- - Jp.7• 1...,,,_••4. ',1.'A tv,e14,tA.4 ( ...... .‘.4s,',•-!?, , ,s ,-1.4 ,.-1"1,,,Ii;•...s .', 017„,.."''4,f•••V -, s• -7-,--'7.. :-..;',---"`•,-11,..,';!';''''' r.'-•• .,..•-,',.. ..* ...,!,..c.,..."...,3• 4'....,, 4 ,..‘Zr..ii4 ,,,,.•:,-4m.74,1-,'.,,,,.,*,.,,,,:-.1..,'lir.' t,;,.',..1•••,'"',., y'?"-..-i-,',.-•:":*•"Irkt-z•;',A. -- ':i• "•-• : xp 1 anati on: : -. -..- .-,,-- .--- -,..:-., ••# —--•••. ,- , • .. , . 4.-•. , , •-,,,,,, •-•-.:':,,,..„„:,.-,-..z.lsf,-. .),..,...,,,i;#1014,,-tis.',,- -„ , • ji,40-.,6,44'.1.4`k‘E-4..1,:-"v.lii..-..:104-eit,,0),..i."...,•,,,•:::• :.P4-sitt4,(4•At '-''',.. -f- - -ite-•-••••-.,,..:,••;••••=1,'",,.0.,; :::.47.4-qtrAT.ri:c--,T.,iirg2,,..,-.,,.......,,,,,,,,-,7,p , ,,, . ..r.v..,4„..4...-f-f, 1*,,,c.;,.s ,:,'-. .^,, %, 7.p <1,4,A ...r.--, •-:::1- ,... -. . , 4,4,.. vo. 74",,1 c-' --.4 ..•f.14,•"':gi.•;.1"*;:,•:',* '•.1 rr6"..'-, ''''.1-Al'-':'•",-,;Ai tilt' ...... •`' "1. 4.;.:44;,-,, r.-..,,,.., .....,.:-0-_-4:-:.'''..,_:-',.-4,-,,,....: i-kt,r...,4'..,'...,-,,,,, i,", •*".1,,**,• '47.it''''‘fi-r":'1/41.-' ?,'‘ VI"i'' 'Ac.., s si7ti,t'IV't••• •,'1* (41.1t.'-{•.' •1;‹,,,,*• •-,Jrr- ..41`..-•.,'!",,i,... -.1"^ 1 ':eft'17,"...' '•••-*, 4tk••, • -4,-..r,-i ..•ist'.4;•••",t;•""eit,..'*•%, ;J' '.c. ' _i - .. - t, tv174**4 ,,•/..„ . !•1.,/:,,04.•!vs,:ttki,f...***.'* 4,*..(E•k:. r.,.„re‘.:‘40..;,.Ar.i$*t'., '.,iii4,1-i.,-. ,:.: ...--'`•••'''''''‘'' '.''1* f.'.,1''''''''••'' '' :^".:;''' iAti‘..'rb1.4:::27:4;,.,..z0'1'..te,,5 t V311r.:Aesthetics.- .,:s`-'Wf llT--.the, protioser result In-\the obstruction,of i-..i.,,,m,',4-W.c ..,•.,,,„. .- ..3i.: {Y„,,,any scenic vista or view open..,'titi the'pub 1,1 c...,.or wi I T...thsv' ......--..-•-•' ,•:•,411t,....r?;:elt::,,... t,„..,,,• 4:41;t7,,.t,ft, ...., 4%.. .-41',P:74 4'.:' s;`. 140.,,,,;.proposal reset In' the creation of an aesthetically offensive - •-•:,,,.„'.44'."„-.',.--c': •i'...i, t' • s,,i-IL1' :.'. **v.'', ".-, •;'• -ye',rj Si te open to peel 1 c:vialvrr.k.. ,-'; :.'' l '-t r,it'. 1 ' ,„:;!...S 1.„,e- .441.4)s44$'. '4";;'•'%,-`"--tliir.!' k• 7,.- • .-- i.44:..,74-4-, 1: 4,...:,,,:;„,-,--. 4:„• ,-.4.4„:,,....74 „.'4.4.,,,,,,-4.",„;,,I.s. ,,,,,, i, 4r..::. =7„,--- -kl! "r1.0.7--- toy RE, .: m ,f .4,..,„ '-`.1,4,4,1"t-,3•. •,-';1•`;',41.01.4•:k.-`,4•-•0^:.74. -,,_.- ..„7 • # 44 t-",.544.,_,.•,,, ,:r44.- ' ' ,.`,.....4.-,, , ,e7.-1/44*** ,,g, ''' '' '''' ' .. - i'}'•:., 1.,t'''•,„)P 1. !.-^'`:-.''''1.*:'c,47it:PtIti:','0••• .e..s'. '-'70,••7: ',..• ..4:0Vit.4,,,,,-!:"V'‘' ,,.t.srWt•./.21-17.•rtz.''''•.N ' '-,47‘:tkitolit • ..'1,,, - .0-,', .,.1"i".'iti'V.,,i•-if:,*-"N4,.,,,,-Isei 0,,,,.,,‘„, ..4-,,,4.t,,r , _.4.,,,Ti-krt.-4.0.,z...,1. A'' ..,",irst.;'.17/ .:4! 4. •''''-CX a nat. 0 FT'''.;.,;::....'. ..'. ..•'''''"C.,,e,.44'1'•••-•.•-.'•••"'''':'''''''''')1, .:.'.N..'. "." ' . .' ' 5"-:'-'.; :•'-=•.:.(4.' Aki'k):.„4.14-'411,.=4'• 'Aillitiiii,44.:,-,;=x44-.1,•10P=',,::',h-Yi=' ,7-,•:•••,",--, :*-.=','•. '4''q.•:`'.. ''•'-;-.... ''114` ak,;•-•:ff;:,'11,,ftg., : .„t.,,,,,,w,,,,,,,40 4*' ,gtz.•2•14.!"7,,r .•. ,;t•,,,•!•..s,".:..73', „ 4..4*,..•.,,,-."•• ,,,,,' .,.."-',+'•"' 1 ` •":"-` 4• • . `••^ • . - L ` -" • ' .• 4"`':• 14.:te.:t.,:-,•:",*•44•1. A :14(....Ss.4.41Tatip.e...;,-/,....i4P-14,103zkirit.t...'y,`,..... , ,,'::-,--. .--, ,,:',.,tivt-,-- '4 r4 .• - •-•!•-7,.. .... . , , .,- 3i-e --A - =- .. = -, ..,,,,,. -, --, . r,,,,,v.,-..-,,..."•„,,,)•;-•,4.„-,„;=o, ,, .:Jtkl'!.:17. .-•,-,`..,!,v,t,r4.* *,47,f--,.? ,,73t,,',! *-'4,-,,..,ti ‘,, ..,0N;.-.t1.,,„-,. ,.•,- .--• ....,.„':),-}',„•:..„,,,-."''7.; ".k.: .i.-,4,1 ','..,•':';,.,".'r •-AA,N".„,. 5,....,r. •...,. . ^: - .;.-,'„.t. : ,-,•..... --:, , : t .•:. ,., •i -:' , .•t,' . _. ,...: . ' . • ' . A191 Recreation Will the proposal result In an impact upon the .. ti;-,.. ::'.,4..,-•.•r.:-•,:,•,..-•;: jti i., tm>1..,...,. .>:f:'•!.•*,...,*%..•%'•'", r quantity of existing.recreational oppOrtuni ties? t. , •, '' - ••• ,,,...., 1 4,.,--`.,.. •-.).-._,--.,..,...., .:., -,...,-,•,•,..- 7-,..•••,•.,:•••'... •-: ‘,.,-•,•,..-,.0..,...,-..•:-. •- ,".....-.• . .si,• -..-,-.,- .•.;•• ,, . '. '.•. „, ,... •:-...YES ,.. !• MAYBE. . NO .., ...;..`7,-••• ', ----,•,:•‘;',..ur•:7•-•••sie.. f,-', *47 ...`";It,°).,•••• '.;`,`"--'14••,. ...:'7;--;r-,..;ck--1 ,.-1.-..' i.,-. .- r."-„..'""v, ,-ti ,T1',',.„..",..,'• ,,......, or,1-..‘.,...,,,..:,...,,. 2„,,--,. u,,,i,..„4.44...b.„.,..s....e,„,,,,.„. „„ ,0 '...,. 1:-..(?!.:!..4,.."'•:• +'' ' ':"';;; 4.•""I'try't;‘`;14,04-N '14.- ','"••;;;‘'1".,; ateAtt4,41,1.1* V•.:kf,sr, ?,r,*14,,,,t,.....,'yjo°,,,,„v"- ; 1,..r.,,.':,' '.,.,,'., . •'.1,:`..;-":..•`•:, r ,•,,,c". ,,,,,,,,..x...7".., -.1;"*„..„,•,,,k „.,-;":4,gr,-•,r",*,, , 4,,,,,......1,0,,•,-...,,,*/*. ..-:! -'•••-''',.. "-'!' ,,'-':.'":." •,..,-0,744V,-*."'irlil, -ko`..i,;(,,,,t, -, r q'.. f '$.., . . , ,.ti,, ,,.., ,... t ,. ,,,...; ,, . 4, t -.• 46..N,„/-•7E1,0'•'•' -Explanati on t..-•%'A' . .--,-`'. '''''' '''''''' '•'• '''''' ‘-' '''' '''''•• '''''''" ' '' ''' '' ' ' • ' ' ' ' • 1 Y•C -)k;•;9,.4. : z •..... 1. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST - ENV IRONMFNTAT IMPACTS -- RIScInSInft,.. Zig/3c /.. t4se.:,!,,,eieli 411,;.•- 4,, '''• .I.,•,;e', :,..,3‘.'4,''',. ''. ...,,,,j,,i 'i„,,49:4,„•-•'...=;,„........ ..„--,.--;`,, .. •.4'. : ',--4i,-„:.:,-..)1..„.--;',•,'e.--.;/ '.--'.... - 4.!.- .-1, ',.,?r• t, ''. ''‘., 9) "1.--- s--. t,•,,,---.,-. -,-.'4.•=-.i''''-***'• '''''''-.46'';.;* .••':7t \e -*'''''A'-).e'r*7.""'''')14'f• -'4,"*I'e.: X••:,;•Ai`4"-..,At'.'.:.%;-•,'..7•:•:.”,t '''''.1". ..1*‘-'7•••7-: • '''•*)**' . ' -- ..^:''T' * - -•`. ,:' * "'• -t. ' ••- •,`,.`'.f.**,""4-.....: " ' "" - , -,. - -`• . i.:-",•.,.-,,:,•,.-•••,,,,;-!..-.-...,.,.'K'.. f.( t, i)zo,...,' a p„- A.- E' s;• Ar che-„o, l.o gicarif,i,storicar ITT t heproposal result n,;-a.;.n.:..•-;.,, ..•-.,,.,., 5,e.;..(..to.o...t.$•, T--•''•, 7ri--x..alteration of a significant archeological or historical i site, structure' object or building? 7,•••' v.••. L'.;'..-. i4-'•„•t"--- 1. , ..,, ,,-; .„ .,„4-,,...:.-•r,.....-, i,•,.. . .4., :r. •:•,,,•ir..- 1...•, -;:, ...„..., :. ..: • ..,.1 i.,,•:.• - .-.,f,...' ' TarT1.1AYBE M7.;':..-,ty...-'o''..;4-v•,•'• ,-,•,-..- e-•: **.i4A-,,iki,94.4)r--; .i•,.'.t•-•••,•'pi " • -il,t),..,% L.A'...Y..;•-•-'..-itt,)••% .: „,,,,,.,-.- : •..., ...,,,, . . :.,.. .,: - • .• , - - ,."'.4 M"7.4'..'cz" ..0.1ii.Vt. 'Wt4•14r.i.e*.in'-'*"r, •.*-"*r' : -.. ' '• "• * " ;it'. '1,:'•• .i ,,• 2*.:,1•."* i "-ill'.%*• -i',I4'...7•'''' '. l' J. .,'c'' *':;^ t'.` .";‘:' .'''• '''-:-,,;-^". ' ' 1' 4'..". i4e;•.** Explanation , 1. .: - - \ - ,., -- ,..•• fSee 'ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLISTENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS — orsctissrnN. pagps 1_6A.'4',,.4.c.:•. ,:,.,-.. i t',... , i'• , ' . ' ,,,...N, SIGNATURE- - . s .• ..--; .. ,,. .- ..•„- .•••• .:. , , : ; s. ... . - .• -. I the•undersigned, state that to the. best of my,.kn wledge th above information is. true and, ;_pmpl te. , It is understood that the ,le d ag cy may w thdraw any decl•a ration' of non-significance that it might issue in r 1 ianc •upon-• 1 checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful l a o full di osure on my part, 1 I. . ,•• 1. . 1......, 3 - J‘. '.. =•-• .-•'.'''''', '.: . . . --..:''' ..':. P..roponent: s gne • jk . . V . I-- ii-- .PY14tyi,, ;-_, :.,....., '-.-.,..,_ s•4 -....,•• --.4,_ .•• .•-, :• (name printed) ., 10;9.. ';'.,' '''''''';., -.'kr,- t ..,'i'..)..41 . • ,.-. *.,..,-.,.. • • '•• 73.:7‘;.:;1 cet:-.'''.. • i •.*• .. ...,,.., ,,.., " . • - r. s.:,1/4...-.1.f.': s,.;''. ',.,- '' *. : 1 • '\' ' !, 1,-; ,,^ ' '- ' ' 4 ,..'', • . ..,:,•'...),"-if',.....-7.„,. , , .., „._- 1- • -,, „," e ' ' ' '.' • ' : ' '''';-:' ' ''... •:.'' City of Rentons,- - • - • , - : •• ._'• - 7 .-. '. Planning -Department • -"sirAz. 5-76 ., ,.• ' . , - . •,_-,-403.'v,ti . • ._ 2 - ,. ' )„, . ...,'"Vsi.7,2t; f." s eceipt # CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT NAME ICOUJ 1 1 o//c/iOT/ DATE /z/8,/81 PROJECT & LOCATION ccvP_ C"--7 b &'-3,119/K -S:2-V&A f /ti/95f12&6TaLl 15411,0 Application Type Basic Fee Acreage Fee Total c - 64 / Lc, i IUO. Zvo. oc; Environmental Checklist v- 4 Environmental Checklist Construction Valuation Fee 4189, 00 fyB?Ooco TOTAL FEES 27 7'/ o' Please take this receipt and your payment to the Finance Department on the first floor. Thank you. eceipt # CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT NAME DATE PROJECT E LOCATION Q 4. iel ? / fra/./tr " ii,,, Application Type Basic Fee Acreage Fee Total Environmental Checklist Environmental Checklist Construction Valuation Fee TOTAL FEES Please take this receipt and your payment to the Finance Department on the first floor. Thank you. ENDING ' OF FILE FILE nru: fi - IDD ôI