HomeMy WebLinkAboutHEX_Exhibits_Combind_flat
CITY OF RENTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
HEARING EXAMINER DECISION, EXHIBITS
Project Name:
Quendall Terminals
Project Number:
LUA09-151, ECF, EIS, SA-M, SM, DA
Date of Hearing
April 18, 2017
Staff Contact
Vanessa Dolbee, Current
Planning Manager
Project Contact/Applicant
Campbell Mathewson,
Century Pacific, L. P., 1201
Third Ave, suite 1680,
Seattle, WA 98101
Project Location
Parcel 2924059002. South
of the Seahawks VMAC
Training Facility
The following exhibits were admitted during the hearing:
Exhibits 1-18: Hearing Examiner Staff Report (April 2016) and Exhibits
Exhibit 19 - 23: Memo to the Hearing Examiner (April 2017) and Exhibits
Exhibit 24: Email from Examiner to Staff dated April 17, 2017
Exhibit 25: Email from Fred Warnock dated April 16, 2017
Exhibit 26: Email from Charles Taylor dated April 15, 2017
Exhibit 27: City of Renton COR maps and GIS data:
http://rp.rentonwa.gov/SilverlightPublic/Viewer.html?Viewer=COR-Maps
Exhibit 28: Google Maps: https://www.google.com/maps?hl=en&tab=wl
Exhibit 29: City of Renton power point
Exhibit 30: Notebook dated April 18, 2017 "Vested Development Regulations"
Exhibit 31: Notebook dated April 18, 2017 "Supplemental Applicant Exhibits"
Exhibit 32: Aerial Photograph with artist rendering of project site
Exhibit 33: Larry Toedtli CV
Exhibit 34: Bob Wells Resume
Exhibit 35: Lance Mueller Resume
Exhibit 36: Street B rendering
Exhibit 37: June 6, 2016 Site Plan P1. 0
Exhibit 38: June 1, 2016 Site Plan P0. 0
Exhibit 39: April 3, 2017 City Council Agenda Bill for Consolidation of Development
Agreement with Land Use Applications
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
M E M O R A N D U M
DATE: April 11, 2017
TO: Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
FROM: Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Quendall Terminal, LUA09-151
Following the canceled public hearing from April of 2016, the Applicants have requested
the City consider a Development Agreement. As such, this memorandum addresses the
Development Agreement and changes to the project which result from the proposed
Development Agreement. This memo is intended to supplement the staff report to the
Hearing Examiner which was issued in April of 2016, for the original scheduled hearing
date of April 19, 2016. Only those items identified below have been changed and/or are
proposed to be changed from the original staff report.
Updated Project Description:
The applicant has requested approval of Master Plan Review, Binding Site Plan,
Shoreline Substantial Development Permit and a Development Agreement for a mixed-
use development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 ac and is
zoned COR and located within the Urban Shoreline designation. The 21.46-acre site
would be divided into 7 lots of which 4 would contain mixed-use buildings. The
Enhanced Alternative would contain 692 residential units (resulting in a net residential
density of 40.95 units/acre), 42,190 sq. ft. of commercial uses [retail and restaurant],
1,352 parking spaces and 12.9 acres of parks/open space. All buildings are designed to
be constructed as 3 – 5 stories over one parking/commercial level. The applicant has
proposed to dedicate 3.65 acres for public right-of-way, which would provide access to
the 7 proposed lots. The site contains approximately 0.81 acres of wetlands and 1,583
linear feet of shoreline along Lake Washington. The subject site has received a
Superfund designation from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the
property owners are currently working on a remediation plan with EPA. The proposed
Development Agreement and associated Enhanced Alternative primarily include the
following: 1.3 acres of public park space, additional retail/restaurant/office space and
street activation (fountains, artwork, etc.), the addition of either a public dock/pier
and/or an alternative approved by the EPA to allow for public access to Lake
Washington, Building SW4 would be 4-stories, building SW3 would 5-stories, and all the
remaining buildings would be 6-stories, and Extension of Land Use Permit approval term
to 10-years with possible extension opportunities in which development regulation
vesting would be maintained.
EXHIBIT 19
Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
Page 2 of 7
April 11, 2017
The following Exhibits should be added to the Recorded:
Exhibit 19 – Memorandum to Hearing Examiner, April 11, 2017
Exhibit 20 – Draft Development Agreement
Exhibit 21 – Consistency Analysis
Exhibit 22 – Notice of Issuance of Consistency Analysis
Exhibit 23 – Councils Motion to defer the Development Agreement Public Hearing
Findings of Fact (FOF): (the following FOF’s are identified with letters to eliminate and
confusion with the original staff report)
a. On March 16, 2017 an Enhanced Alternative and Development Agreement
(Exhibit 20) was submitted to the City to consider. The Enhanced Alternative
would contain 692 residential units (resulting in a net residential density of 40.95
units/acre), 42,190 sq. ft. of commercial uses [retail and restaurant], 1,352
parking spaces and 12.9 acres of parks/open space. All buildings are designed to
be constructed as 3 – 5 stories over one parking/commercial level. The proposed
Development Agreement and associated Enhanced Alternative primarily include
the following:
The addition of 1.3 acres of public park space;
Additional retail/restaurant/office space and street activation (fountains,
artwork, etc.)
The addition of either a public dock/pier and/or an alternative approved by
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to allow for public access to Lake
Washington;
Building SW4 would be 4-stories, building SW3 would 5-stories, and all the
remaining buildings would be 6-stories;
Extension of Land Use Permit approval term to 10-years with possible
extension of 5 years in which development regulation vesting would be
maintained.
A SEPA transportation re-evaluation requirement at 5 year increments.
b. The Enhanced Alternative and the associated Development Agreement is the
sole proposal being advanced at this time. Because the Enhanced Alternative
relies upon City Council approval of the Development Agreement, Exhibit 20, the
Master Site Plan, Binding Site Plan and Shoreline Permit decision shall be
contingent upon the City Council approval of the Development Agreement. If
the Development Agreement is not approved by City Council, the record should
be reopened and another public hearing for the purpose of reconsidering the
decision utilizing the Preferred Alterative analyzed in the April 2016 staff report
to the Hearing Examiner should be completed.
c. On March 20, 2017 the Environmental Review Committee issued an EIS
Consistency Analysis for Development Agreement and the associated Enhanced
Alternative (Exhibit 21 and 22). The Environmental Consistency Analysis
determines that the impacts of development under the Enhanced Alternative are
within the impacts analyzed under the EIS alternatives in the past SEPA review.
Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
Page 3 of 7
April 11, 2017
No new mitigation measures are required beyond those identified in the 2015
FEIS and 2015 Mitigation Document, and there are no significant unavoidable
impacts that cannot be mitigated.
d. A detailed master site plan has not been provided incorporating the changes
identified in the Enhanced Alternative. As such, staff recommends as a condition
of approval that a final detailed master site plan shall be submitted to the City
for Review and Approval by the Current Planning Project Manager that
incorporates both the specific changes identified in the Enhanced Alternative
and all the conditions of project approval. The final details master plan shall be
approved prior to the approval of any site specific site plan review or recording
of the binding site plan.
e. Staff does not expect that the changes identified in the Enhanced Alternative
would impact the analysis and associated recommended conditions of the April
2016 staff report for all Findings of Fact except as follows:
i. FOF 23, Zoning Development Standard Compliance, Parking: The total
parking stalls proposed in the Enhanced Alternative is 1,352 stalls an
increase from the 1,337 stalls proposed in the Preferred Alternative, a 15
stall increases. There is no change in the residential and restaurant
space; however there is an increase in retail space from 20,025 SF to
33,190 SF which would result in a maximum of 133 stalls required for the
retail space, up from 80 stalls. Together all three uses could require up to
1,469 parking stalls.
ii. FOF 23, Zoning Development Standard Compliance, Refuse and Recycling:
Based on a proposal for a 9,000 SF of restaurant and 33,190 SF of retail a
combined total of 210.95 SF for recyclables deposit areas and 421.90 Sf
of refuse deposit areas shall be provided for the overall project.
iii. FOF 25, Critical Areas, b.: The reference to “NRD settlements” should be
eliminated because the EPA does not approve and is not party to an NRD
settlement. Therefore, Condition 44. IV, should be amended to remove
the reference to “NRD settlements”.
iv. FOF 26, Master Site Plan Review, f. On Site Impacts, Structure and Scale:
With the addition of retail/commercial space along the Lake Washington
side of the development it is anticipated that the parking garage would
no longer be the dominate structure viewed from the Lake or shoreline
trail.
v. FOF 26, Master Site Plan Review, j. Distinctive Focal Points: The “street
activation” identified in the development agreement are anticipated to
provide distinctive focal points throughout the development. However,
the specifics have not been identified at this time. As such staff
recommends as a condition of approval that Public Art, fountains, or
other street activation features proposed to be located in the roadways
shall be identified with the detailed master site plan and constructed and
installed as a part of the associated roadway/infrastructure construction.
Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
Page 4 of 7
April 11, 2017
vi. FOF 26, Master Site Plan Review, Phasing: Staff recommends that the
project duration be consistent with the time frames established in the
Development Agreement, Exhibit 20.
vii. FOF 28 Availability and Impact of Public Services, Stormwater: The
Development Agreement would extend the project beyond January 1,
2022, as such specific requirements tying compliance with an updated
stormwater manual to this date are no longer applicable. Therefore staff
recommends that condition of approval 32 of the staff report be
removed. The project will be required to comply with all applicable
stormwater requirements at the time of building and construction.
viii. FOF 28 Availability and Impact of Public Services, Transportation: The
Enhanced Alternative is estimated to generate 5,829 daily, 435 AM peak
hour and 545 PM peak hour vehicular trips at full buildout. These would
represent approximately 173 more daily trips, no net change in AM peak
our trips and 15 more PM peak hour trips than the Preferred Alternative.
Additionally, the center left-turn lane that was included as a part of
Street ‘A’ is eliminated in the Enhanced Alternative. The removal of this
turn lane was evaluated by TranspoGroup, in a memorandum dated
January 12, 2017, Appendix A of the Consistency Analysis, Exhibit 21. The
analysis concluded that the center turn lane is not needed under the
Enhanced Alternative because single-lane approaches at each of the
Street ‘A’ intersections would provide acceptable traffic operations. As a
result condition of approval 44. XIV should be amended accordingly.
Additional transportation analysis was included in the EIS Consistency
Analysis to evaluate changes in trips from the Preferred Alternative. The
Consistency Analysis concludes that transportation impacts of the
Enhanced Alternative would be within the range of impacts identified in
the DEIS, EIS Addendum and FEIS for the EIS alternatives. With
implementation of the project mitigation measures, with or without the
I-405 improvements, significant transportation impacts are not
anticipated
ix. FOF 28 Availability and Impact of Public Services, Parks: The Development
Agreement adds 1.3 acre Public Park to the proposal. The hours of public
use of the park should be consistent with the public trail and should be
determined by the City’s Community Services Administrator. Currently
public park hours are dawn to dusk, signage shall be installed identifying
that the park is for public use and the hours of public use. The signage
shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager
and Parks Planning and Natural Resources Director prior to insulation. An
easement for public access shall be recorded on with the binding site
plan. Similar to the trail, the park shall be installed prior to Temporary
Occupancy of the first building on the site.
Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
Page 5 of 7
April 11, 2017
x. FOF 29 Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Time Requirements for
Shoreline Permits: The Draft Development Agreement extends the time
for all land use permit applications including the Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit. Time frames identified in the Development
Agreement should be applied accordingly.
f. Condition of Approval 14 should remove the word “east” as this has been
included in error.
g. Condition of Approval 22 contains a minor error, the word “East” should be
“West”. Condition of Approval 22 should be amended accordingly.
h. Condition 43 requires an easement be recorded to all for public access for
vehicles and pedestrians to cross the King County rail-road right-of-way. This
requirement for an easement limits the type of legal documents that could be
drafted to accomplish the intended purpose of the condition. As such, this
condition should be amended as shown below.
i. The word “Public Promenade” should be removed throughout the staff report
and replaced with “fire lane and utility maintenance access road” to be
consistent with the Consistency Analysis and Development Agreement.
Therefore Condition of approval 41. and 44. XVI should be amended accordingly.
Conclusions: All conclusions in the April 2016 staff report are to remain except as
identified below:
10. The project An expiration date shall be as identified in the Development
Agreement, Exhibit 20set by the Hearing Examiner for the Master Site Plan, see FOF 26.
12. The Development Agreement as drafted in Exhibit 20 is compliant with RCW 36-70B-
170.
New Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends approval of the Master Site Plan,
Binding Site Plan, and Shoreline Substantial Permit for the Enhanced Alterative
described in Exhibit 19, subject to all the conditions of approval of the April 2016 staff
report and any new conditions or modified conditions below.
Because the Enhanced Alternative relies upon City Council approval of the Development
Agreement, Exhibit 20, staff recommends that the Hearing Examiner add a condition
that if the Development Agreement is not approved by City Council, the Hearing
Examiner will reopen the record and the public hearing for the purpose of reconsidering
the decision utilizing the Preferred Alterative analyzed in the original April 2016 staff
report to the Hearing Examiner.
Amended Conditions of Approval:
14. The private access at the Barbee Mill Access shall include frontage
improvements matching the south side of the access, including a landscaped
planter and sidewalk to be provided on the east north side. The new private
Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
Page 6 of 7
April 11, 2017
access to be located at the Ripley Lane (Seahawks Way) access shall include 8
feet wide landscape planter and 6 foot wide sidewalk on south side of the
access. These off-site improvements shall be designed, permitted, constructed,
and substantial complete as determined by the Current Planning Project
Manager and the Construction Inspector, prior to Temporary Occupancy of the
first building on the project site
22. East West elevations of the building proposed on Lots 2 and 5 shall be re-
designed to reduce to the parking garage walls view from Lake Washington to
ensure the structures on the lake maintain a relation to the natural characteristic
and site amenities (trail, etc.). Design features could include landscape berming
and/or architectural details. Detail design of these buildings shall be completed
at site plan review.
32. Any extension to the project approved beyond January 1, 2022 or building and
construction permits submitted that would extend the project beyond January
1, 2022 shall be subject to the updated stormwater manual, in effect at the
time.
41. A public promenade fire lane and utility maintenance access road along Lake
Washington extending along the front of Lots 2 and 5, connecting to Road B
terminus and the surface parking at either end shall be incorporated into the
design of the buildings on Lots 2 and 5. This promenade fire lane and utility
maintenance access road shall feature pedestrian amenities such as furniture,
public art, water features, etc. Design of the promenades fire lane and utility
maintenance access road compliance with this condition shall be reviewed at
the time of lot specific site plan review.
43. An easement shall be secured from King County or other future property owners
of the rail-road right-of-way to provided vehicular and pedestrian access to the
proposed development across the right-of-way. The easement shall be noted on
the final binding site plan and shall be recorded concurrently with the binding site
plan. Documentation shall be provided to the City of Renton identifying rights for
public vehicular and pedestrian access to the proposed development across the
right-of-way. This legal documentation shall be noted on the final binding site plan
and shall be recorded concurrently with the binding site plan, if not already
recorded. The City of Renton shall have final approval of acceptable legal access
documentation.
44. IV. A site plan application, construction permit application or the recording of
the Binding Site shall not be submitted to the City for Review and approval prior
to a Record of Decision (ROD) and NRD Settlement completed by the EPA. A
copy of the final ROD and NRD Settlement issued by the EPA shall be submitted
to the City of Renton to verify the assumed baseline assumptions were correct
and additional SEPA review or major project changes are not necessary as
required in Mitigation Measure C10.
Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner
Page 7 of 7
April 11, 2017
44. XIV. A transportation study shall be completed to analyze the need for a center
turn lane in Road A. Depending upon the outcome of this study, Road A street
designs shall be amended to remove the center turn lane accordingly and the
design shall be reflected on the required updated site plan, as conditioned above
under XIII.
44. XVI. If the EPA ROD and any NRD settlement eliminates the significant public
access from the project, which includes: 1) A shoreline trial with viewpoints,
interpretive signage, and amenities as identified in the Mitigation Document; 2)
A public promenade fire lane and utility maintenance access road along the lake
side of the development of Lots 2 and 5; 3) Large plazas at the terminus of Road
B; and 4) Public parking a new public access plan shall be submitted identifying
compliance with the significant public access standards of the Shoreline Master
Program. The new public access plan shall be reviewed and approved by the
Current Planning Project Manager
New Conditions of Approval: (The following numbering picks up at the end of the April
2016 staff report.)
45. An easement for public park access shall be recorded with the binding site and
public access shall be noted on the binding site plan prior to recording.
46. Public park signage shall be installed identifying that the park is for public use
and the hours of public use. The park signage shall be reviewed and approved by
the Current Planning Project Manager and the Community Services
Administrator with the construction permit application. The park and associated
signage shall be installed prior to Temporary Occupancy of the first building on
the project site.
44. XVIII. A final detailed master site plan shall be submitted to the City for Review
and Approval by the Current Planning Project Manager that incorporates both
the specific changes identified in the Enhanced Alternative and all the conditions
of project approval. The final detailed master plan shall be approved prior to the
approval of any site specific site plan review or recording of the binding site plan.
44. XIX. Public Art, fountains, or other street activation features proposed be located
in the roadways shall be identified with the detailed master site plan and
constructed and installed as a part of the associated roadway/infrastructure
construction.
44. XX. A detailed public park design, identifying compliance with the Development
Agreement, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Current Planning
Project Manager and the Community Services Department prior to the approval
of any site specific site plan review or recording of the binding site plan.
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
2
4
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
2
5
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
2
6
Quendall Terminals
(LUA09-151)
HEX Public Hearing
Date
Names/TitlesVanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager
April 18, 2017
EXHIBIT 29
Presentation Overview
Approximate Location
•Project Description –Enhanced
Alternative & Development Agreement
•Background
•Renton Municipal Code Analysis
–Compliance
–Conditions
•Staff Recommendation
Approximate Location
Approximate Location
Applications:
1) Master Site Plan
2) Binding Site Plan
3) Shoreline Substantial
Development Permit
4) Development Agreement
Environmental Impact Statement
Completed
−FEIS issued August 2015
−Mitigation Document issued
August 2015
−Consistency Analysis For
Enhanced Alternative issued
March 2017
The application is vested to
regulations from February 10,
2010, ORD 5520 (including the
SMP –amended in 1983)
Site Characteristics
SITE
Isolate
Property
Lake Washington
PanAbode
SiteBarbee Mill
VMAC
King Co.
rail-road
ROW
Proposal
Enhanced Alternative
•COR Zone and Urban
Shoreline Environment
•21.24 acre site
•7 lots –4 with mixed
use buildings
•692 multi-family
residential units
•33,190 SF of
retail/Commercial
•9,000 SF of restaurant
•Density 40.95 du/ac
•Parking for 1,352
vehicles
•*Superfund site subject
to EPA regulations
Proposal
Enhanced Alternative
Pedestrian Trail
Road C
Ro
a
d
B
Road A
Ro
a
d
E
100 ft. shoreline setback
N 42nd Place
Ripley Lane (Seahawks
Way)
Rail road ROW –King. Co.
Access Point
Access Point
Proposal
Enhanced AlternativeBuilding Design –
* Ground floor Parking or Retail/Restaurant along Road B and Lake Washington
* 3, 4, or 5 stories above for residential units and semi-private plaza space
*Final elevation design will be reviewed at Site Plan review.
**Graphics were prepared for Preferred Alternative
Quendall Terminals
Quendall Terminals
Overview
•Applicant: Extended time frame beyond the 5 years permitted by code
and associated vesting of development regulations
•City/Public: Project Enhancements –designed to provide a public
benefit
Development Agreement
Provisions –Project Timing
•Following 5 years of the initial term a SEPA Transportation Update would be
required.
–New transportation mitigation for the project may be required based on changed
conditions and associated project impacts.
•Vest the development regulations effective on the vesting date, which is
February 10, 2010 for the term of the agreement.
•Extends code authorized land use approval time lines from 5 years to 10 years
from the earlier of:
–(i) the date of issuance of the EPA’s Record of Decision, or
–(ii) The Hearing Examiners Decision and/or subsequent appeal decision dates
•Extension to the 10 years up to 5 additional years, could be authorized by the
City if 51% of the residential and commercial space has been constructed and
received Certificate of Occupancy, following a second SEPA Transportation
Update.
•s
Development Agreement
Enhanced Alternative
Project Elements
Collaborate with the
developer on a public
dock/pier
•Permitting –City
•Funding, construction,
mitigation -developer
1.3 acres of a public park
in the southwest corner
of the site
Project Elements
Additional
retail/restaurant/office space
•Minimum 50 percent of the
building street frontage
•Minimum of 20 feet in depth
Required along:
•Lakeside frontage
•Street B
•Other street frontages as
necessary to meet 50%
Street activation; such as
fountains and artwork will be
provided along street B and
lakeside frontage
Enhanced Alternative
Background
•Former creosote manufacturing
facility that operated from
1917-1969
•Past coal tars and creosote
have contaminated soil,
groundwater, surface water
and lake sediments
•In 2005 DOE transferred the
oversight to the EPA
•The site received a Superfund
designation from EPA
•The EPA is conducting a
remedial investigation and
feasibility study. Which will
lead to a ROD.
Background
•Clean up work is being
conducted under the
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act. (CERCLA; i.e.
Superfund)
•EPA Contact –Clair Hong,
hong.claire@epa.gov.
Background (baseline assumptions)
Figure 2-6 DEIS
Shoreline Restoration Conceptual Design
Soil Cap
Wetland Recreation
•This figure shows a
conceptual design
with a 50 ft. buffer
not a 100 ft. buffer,
which was required
by the EPA after
Public Comment on
the DEIS.
•Assumptions are
unchanged in the
Addendum beyond
100 ft. setback.
Background (baseline assumptions)
Figure 2-7 DEIS
Buffer Width Averaging Wetland D
Wetland Recreation
•This figure shows a
conceptual design
with a 50 ft. buffer
not a 100 ft. buffer,
which was required
by the EPA after
Public Comment on
the DEIS.
•Assumptions are
unchanged in the
Addendum for the
Preferred Alternative
Buffer Averaging
Trail with
view points
Background (EIS Process)
Determination of Significance (DS) issued on February 19, 2010 –EIS Process began:
Date EIS Action, see Exhibits 2, 3, 15, and 21.
2/19/10 –
4/30/10 EIS Public Scoping Period, 70 days (extended)
4/27/10 Public Scoping Meeting
12/10/2010 DEIS Issuance
12/10/10 –
2/09/11 DEIS Public Comment Period, 60 days (extended)
1/04/11 DEIS Public Hearing
10/19/12 EIS Addendum Issuance
10/19/12 –
11/19/12 EIS Addendum Public Comment Period
8/31/15 FEIS Issuance
8/31/15 –
9/24/15 EIS Public Appeal Period
9/24/15 Appeal submitted to EIS, Appellant South End Gives Back
2/18/16 Receipt of Joint Stipulation & Proposed Order Dismissing Appeal signed by the Appellant and Applicant
2/22/16 Joint Stipulation & Proposed Order Dismissing Appeal signed by the Hearing Examiner. Appeal
Dismissed.
3/20/17 Consistency Analysis Issuance for Enhanced Alternative and Development Agreement
Renton Municipal Code Analysis
•Comprehensive Plan Compliance
•Zoning Compliance
•Design District Review
•Critical Areas
•Master Site Plan Review
•Binding Site Plan
•Availability of Public Services
•Shoreline Regulations
Staff Analysis/Conditions
64 Conditions of Approval Recommend by Staff
Primary:
•Compliance with the Mitigation Document
•Phasing/Site Plan Review
•Design Standards Compliance
•Access/Roadways (vehicular and pedestrian)
•Binding Site Plan (recording)
Secondary:
•Utilities
•Code/Landscaping
Staff Analysis/Conditions
Condition 20 and 21:
Setbacks from parent parcel edges shall be as follows:
a.100 ft. from the OHWM of Lake Washington
b.40 feet from the south (adjacent to Barbee Mill)
c.38 feet from the north (adjacent to Seahawks Training Facility)
View Corridors –
a.74 ft. width for Road B
b.80 ft. width for semi-private plaza space.
Site Plan
Staff Analysis/Conditions
Condition 6
and 27:
Critical Areas
Regulations
Baseline Assumptions,
assumed all recreated
wetland and their
associated buffers
would fit within
Binding Site Plan lots 1
and 6.
Baseline
Assumptions
Staff Analysis/Conditions
Condition 27:
Critical Areas Regulations
1)The outcome of the ROD and NRD Settlement details
are not known at this time.
2)This conditions is need so impacts of the proposed
development will comply with the City’s critical areas
regulations following the ROD and NRD Settlement.
Staff Analysis/Conditions
Condition 41:
Requires a fire lane and utility maintenance access road along
Lake Washington
Staff Analysis/Conditions
Condition 41:
Satisfies the following code requirements:
1.Fire Access is required along the Lake
a.Required to be 20 ft. in width.
b.Shall be constructed to support the weight of a fire apparatus.
c.Critical Areas regulations may not permit the trail to be built to meet
fire access standards. Maximum width permitted per code is 12 feet.
(RMC4-3-050C7.a.)
2.Looped waterline required
1.Located along the west side of the 2 lake front buildings.
2.15 feet minimum width needed for maintenance access.
3.Maintenance access shall be a paved surface.
4.Not permitted within wetlands, wetland buffers, or shoreline buffer.
Staff recommends approval of the Master Site Plan, Binding Site Plan, and Shoreline
Substantial Permit for the Enhanced Alterative described in Exhibit 19, subject to all the
conditions of approval of the April 2016 staff report and any new conditions or modified
conditions.
Because the Enhanced Alternative relies upon City Council approval of the Development
Agreement, Exhibit 20, staff recommends that the Hearing Examiner add a condition that
if the Development Agreement is not approved by City Council, the Hearing Examiner
will reopen the record and the public hearing for the purpose of reconsidering the
decision utilizing the Preferred Alterative analyzed in the original April 2016 staff report
to the Hearing Examiner.
Recommendation
QUENDALL TERMINALS
ENTITLEMENTS HEARING
MASTER PLAN REVIEW
BiNDING SITE PLAN
SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
CITY OF RENTON
APRIL 18, 2017
EXHIBIT BINDER #2: VESTED
DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS
EXHIBIT 30
Entire Document
Available Upon
Request
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
3
1
E
n
t
i
r
e
D
o
c
u
m
e
n
t
A
v
a
i
l
a
b
l
e
U
p
o
n
R
e
q
u
e
s
t
Birdseye View
Quendall Terminals - Enhanced Alternative
Renton, Washington
Century Pacific, LLLP
I-405
Barbee Mill
Lake Washington
Public
Park
Seahawks
VMAC
Denny’s
EconoLodge
N
E
4
4
t
h
S
t
r
e
e
t
Lake Wa
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
B
l
v
d
.Promen
a
d
e
EXHIBIT 32
Larry Toedtli, PE Principal (Retired)
Expertise:
• Development traffic impact
analyses under SEPA
• Transportation analyses of
large master planned
developments
• Experience managing multiple
team members
• Experience managing on-call
contracts
• Multimodal transportation
planning under GMA
• Experience in facilitating
stakeholder engagement and
public outreach programs
Years Employed by Transpo: 30
Education:
MS, Civil Engineering
(Transportation), University of
Washington,1983
BS, Civil Engineering, University of
Colorado, 1977
Professional registrations
and licenses:
PE, Washington, #25888, 1989
PE, Colorado, #23125, 1985
Professional Associations
Institute of Transportation
Engineers (ITE)
Contact
larry.toedtli@comcast.net
Larry recently retired as a principal at Transpo with over 30 years of experience
developing area-wide and corridor level transportation plans. He directed
Transpo’s efforts in GMA-based transportation plans, transportation financing
strategies, and concurrency programs. He also had project management
responsibilities for transportation analyses supporting EISs for subarea plans,
planned action ordinances, and transportation corridor projects. He has a
thorough knowledge of travel forecasting and traffic operation analyses
techniques.
Larry also served local agencies in reviewing traffic impact studies for
developments within and outside of their jurisdiction. He recently assisted the
Cities of Duvall and Ferndale in this role.
Larry was appointed as a member of King County’s Transportation Concurrency
Expert Review Panel. The panel includes County staff, citizens, and representatives
from the development community. The panel developed recommendations to
refine the Concurrency program to reflect the changes in King County to a more
rural County and also to improve the interface between the County’s concurrency
program and SEPA processes.
Tehaleh Employment Based Planned Community, Pierce County
Larry directed Transpo’s transportation planning and traffic engineering
assistance for this large master Planned Community located in Pierce County
between Bonney Lake and Orting. When fully developed, the community will have
over 6,500 residences, a retail center, business park, schools, and golf course.
Transpo’s assistance has included sizing of on-site roadways, design of
roundabouts and street lighting, and roadway channelization for internal
roadways. Transpo has also assisted in monitoring the transportation mitigation
triggers based on the approved development agreement. Transpo has assisted
the project team and agency staff in defining the off-site roadway and mitigation
strategies to support future development phases. Larry also led the initial tasks
for the detailed transportation analyses to support the Phase 2 application for the
development.
Redmond Ridge/Trilogy/Redmond Ridge East Master Planned
Communities EISs, King County, WA
Larry managed the analysis of traffic impacts and development of a subarea
transportation improvement program for the EIS for a large mixed-use
community planned for rural King County. At buildout, the development will
include 5,400 dwelling units, neighborhood retail, 1.2 million SF of business park,
golf course and soccer fields. The analysis included assessing roadway
improvement needs and non-motorized system facilities, transit opportunities,
and financing. Key issues included accommodating urban traffic levels in an
otherwise rural area and potential traffic impacts on other jurisdictions. Larry
supported the projects through coordination with WSDOT and Redmond.
EXHIBIT 33
Orton Junction Urban Growth Area EIS, Sumner, WA
Larry managed the transportation analysis for the EIS for this subarea located
south of SR 410 in Sumner. The City proposed to increase densities and expand
the Urban Growth Area (UGA) to accommodate a mix of residential, commercial,
and industrial land uses. The analysis addressed impacts and transportation
improvement needs in the immediate vicinity of the subarea.
Overlake Urban Center Residential Traffic Impact Analysis, Redmond
Larry managed an analysis of the potential traffic impacts of the additional multi-
family residential development within the proposed Overlake Urban Center. The
analysis focused on evaluating the impacts within the Overlake Transportation
Management District (TMD) and surrounding area of Bellevue. The City of
Redmond’s proposal to change the designation for the Overlake area from a
Manufacturing/Industrial Center to an Urban Center would not affect zoning or
the potential for residential growth in the area. Actual development of additional
residential units in the area would, however, result in some traffic impacts. The
impacts would primarily be in the immediate vicinity of the Overlake Urban
Center, with impacts decreasing further from the site.
Transportation Concurrency Expert Review Panel; King County, Washington.
Larry serves on the King County Transportation Concurrency Expert Review Panel.
The panel provides policy and technical guidance to King County staff as part of
their ongoing refinement of County policies and programs related to level of
service standards and concurrency. The panel has assisted in defining changes to
the programs as the County focuses on rural areas as annexations and
incorporations have greatly reduced the suburban areas under the jurisdiction of
King County.
Ferndale Main Street Master Plan and Planned Action EIS, Ferndale, WA
Larry managed the transportation analysis for the planned action EIS for
Ferndale’s Main Street near the I-5 interchange. The planned action would allow
over 1 million square feet of commercial developments. The EIS evaluated the use
of roundabouts vs. traffic signal improvements to address potential traffic
operations and safety impacts due to the increased level of development. The
analysis included comparison of levels of service, corridor travel speeds and cost
differences. The EIS also identified development mitigation strategies including
potential updates to the City’s transportation impact fee and concurrency
programs. He also coordinated with WSDOT on improvements related to impacts
on I-5 and interchanges at Main Street and Slater Road.
Pacific Ridge Subarea Plan and Planned Action EIS, Des Moines
Larry assisted the City of Des Moines in evaluating the transportation-related
impacts associated with 4,200 additional dwelling units and 6,900 additional
employees located within the Pacific Ridge subarea. To mitigate impacts, a variety
of strategies were identified, including a reduction in the amount of new
development, creation of a transit and transportation demand management
program, and/or funding and building necessary improvement projects through
one or more Local Improvement Districts (LIDs) or Transportation Benefit Districts
(TBDs). The Planned Action Ordinance took into account the City’s impact fee
requirements and street standard requirements.
L A N C E M U E L L E R & A S S O C I A T E S
B O B W E L L S
A S S O C I A T E
Education: Bachelor of Architecture - 1969
University of Idaho, Moscow, ID
Professional
Registrations: Licensed Architect, State of Washington, USA - 1975
Experience: Bob has worked full-time in architecture since college graduation.
Consequently, he has many years of varied experience in the Seattle
area with project types including low and mid-rise commercial
structures and industrial structures.
Responsibility: Bob has been with Lance Mueller & Associates since 1973 and an
associate since 1980. His responsibilities have been for the design,
documentation and contract administration of numerous office, retail,
flex-tech, industrial, residential, and corporate facilities.
Representative
Projects: ROCKWELL COLLINS, Wilsonville, OR
This 221,000 sf manufacturing and office consolidated Rockwell’s
Portland area operations in one building in a wonderful natural
setting. Our roll was shell architect and coordinating shell revisions
with the TI Architect. Later we assisted Rockwell on a number of
smaller tenant improvements.
DWFRITZ PRECISION AUTOMATION, Wilsonville, OR
From 2009 to 2017 we were the Architects on three separate projects
totaling 273,000sf for this hi-tech manufacturer. The first two are new
2-story buildings and the last is a conversion of an existing industrial
building into an office and manufacturing facility filled with natural
light.
EXHIBIT 34
L A N C E M U E L L E R & A S S O C I A T E S
B O B W E L L S
P A G E 2
COMPACT INFORMATION SYSTEMS, Redmond, WA
This 50,000 sf two story for a very sophisticated mailing label
business. In addition to the usual office, warehousing, and
expansion requirements, the facility included a nursery for the
employee's children, a very high-end lunch area, and adjacent
private park. If needs change, the park can convert to parking.
ONVIA BUILDING, Seattle, WA
The Onvia.com Building is a full block corporate development with
95,000 sf of office plus structured parking with many employee
amenities in Seattle. The four-story office ells around a large
naturally landscaped plaza and integrates with a separate
conference center building at the street corner. The restful plaza
includes a pond and seating for relaxing or strolling opportunities.
The service area and parking are underground on two levels.
ZETRON BUILDING, Redmond, WA
Zetron centralized their office and manufacturing headquarters into
this four-story 210,000 sf facility. The facility includes basement
parking and storage area and substantial areas dedicated to
greenbelt and wetlands.
THE GILBERT, Seattle, WA
A 3-story traditional brick apartment complex on top of bustling
Queen Anne hill with 54 units and 9,500 sf of street front retail with
the basement parking accessed from the alley.
L A N C E M U E L L E R & A S S O C I A T E S
L A N C E M U E L L E R , A I A
P R E S I D E N T
Education: University of Washington
College of Architecture - 1962-1967
Professional
Registration: Licensed Architect, State of Washington, 1973.
Other States; California, Nevada, Idaho and Oregon.
Certificate - National Council of Architectural Registration Boards,
1974.
Professional
Affiliations: Member - American Institute of Architects
Lambda Alpha International Land Economics Honorary
International Conference of Building Officials
Experience: 1965 to 1970: Worked in three small Seattle architectural
firms.
1970 to present: Joined Richard Bouillon & Assoc./Architects in 1970.
Became owner of firm in 1973 upon death of R. Bouillon. Renamed
firm in 1975. Experience covers a wide variety of project types
including shopping centers, large retail stores, apartments, banks,
business parks, distribution centers, manufacturing buildings, offices,
parking garages and restaurants and planning of major office and
business parks.
Responsibility: Project conceptual and preliminary design and design development.
Project administration, contractual agreements and general office
administration.
Honors: National Association of Industrial and Office Parks
2005 Hall of Fame Inductee
EXHIBIT 35
EXHIBIT 36
Wetland A
O
L
W
M
O
H
W
M
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
D
C
o
n
t
i
n
u
o
u
s
W
a
v
e
A
t
t
e
n
u
a
t
i
o
n
B
e
r
m
Wav
e
A
t
t
e
n
u
a
t
i
o
n
B
e
r
m
s
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
I
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
2
5
-
f
t
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
B
u
f
f
e
r
L
A
K
E
W
A
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
LEGEND
R
E
N
T
O
N
,
W
A
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
C
E
N
T
U
R
Y
P
A
C
I
F
I
C
,
L
L
L
P
G
R
A
D
E
L
E
V
E
L
P
L
A
N
100' SHORELINE SETBACKLOT 7 (ISOLATED)
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
3
7
Wetland A
O
L
W
M
O
H
W
M
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
D
C
o
n
t
i
n
u
o
u
s
W
a
v
e
A
t
t
e
n
u
a
t
i
o
n
B
e
r
m
Wave
A
t
t
e
n
u
a
t
i
o
n
B
e
r
m
s
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
I
M
i
n
i
m
u
m
2
5
-
f
t
W
e
t
l
a
n
d
B
u
f
f
e
r
L
A
K
E
W
A
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
R
E
N
T
O
N
,
W
A
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
C
E
N
T
U
R
Y
P
A
C
I
F
I
C
,
L
L
L
P
LEGEND2ND LEVEL PLAN
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
3
8
AB - 1881
City Council Regular Meeting - 03 Apr 2017
SUBJECT/TITLE: Quendall Terminals Public Hearing
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Council Concur
DEPARTMENT: Community & Economic Development
STAFF CONTACT: Vanessa Dolbee, Current Planning Manager
EXT.: 7314
FISCAL IMPACT SUMMARY:
N/A
SUMMARY OF ACTION:
The proponents for the Quendall Terminals land use application have requested the City consider a
Development Agreement. The Land Use application consists of a request for Master Site Plan, Binding Site
Plan, a Shoreline Permit, and now a Development Agreement for the construction of a mixed-use
development located at 4350 Lake Washington Blvd. The site is 21.46 acres and is zoned
Commercial/Office/Residential (COR). The Enhanced Alternative would contain 692 residential units, 42,190
square feet of commercial uses (retail and restaurant), 1,352 parking spaces, and 12.9 acres of parks/open
space.
A Public Hearing is tentatively scheduled for the subject land use application on April 18, 2017. The requested
Development Agreement establishes the new Enhanced Development Alternative and allows for an extended
time frame for the land use entitlements and associated development standard vesting from 5 years to 10
years, with a possible 5 year extension, for a total of 15 years. A public hearing is required to be held by City
Council when considering a Development Agreement. However, there is an opportunity to consolidate the
required public hearing for the Development Agreement with the public hearing for the land use entitlements
with the City’s Hearing Examiner. By consolidating the public hearing process for both the land use
entitlements and the development agreement, the public will be able to comment on both the development
project and the associated development agreement at one public hearing. Second, the Hearing Examiner
would have the benefit of considering all aspects of the project and associated public comments when making
a decision on the land use entitlements and a recommendation to City Council. A consolidated public hearing
process would streamline and simplify the public process for the overall project. The final decision authority
on the Development Agreement would remain with City Council, following a recommendation provided by the
City’s Hearing Examiner.
EXHIBITS:
A. Draft Development Agreement
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
The Administration recommends consolidating the public hearing process for both the land use entitlements and the
development agreement and deferring this process to the City's Hearing Examiner.
EXHIBIT 39
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 1
When Recorded, Return to:
CITY CLERK’S OFFICE
City of Renton
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98055
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR QUENDALL TERMINALS
Grantors: The City of Renton and Quendall Terminals
Grantees: The City of Renton and Quendall Terminals
Abbreviated Legal Description: TO BE INSERTED
Additional Legal Description on Page 15 of Document (Exhibit A)
Assessor’s Property Tax Parcel/Account Number: 2924059002 OR □ NOT YET ASSIGNED
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (“Agreement”) by and between the CITY OF
RENTON, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of
Washington (“City”), and QUENDALL TERMINALS, a Washington joint venture, its
successors and assigns (“Developer”), is made and entered into this ____ day of
________ , 2016 (the “Effective Date”) pursuant to the authority of RCW 36.70B.170 et
seq. The City and Developer are the Parties to this Agreement.
RECITALS
A. Developer is the developer of that certain real property comprising 20.3
acres more or less located between Lake Washington and Lake Washington Boulevard,
and that certain real property comprising 1.2 acres more or less across the railroad right
of way to the east, both within the municipal boundaries of the City of Renton in King
County, Washington, and legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto and depicted on
Exhibit A-1 (the “Quendall Property” or “Property”)).
B. Developer intends to develop the Quendall Property as a mixed-use
multi-family residential development (the “Project”), as more particularly described in
land use applications, LUA09-151, on file with the City of Renton and, subject to this
Agreement, including the Enhanced Alternative described herein. Project development
may be phased, subject to the conditions of the Hearing Examiner’s Decision.
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 2
C. The Quendall Property has received a Superfund designation from the
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and Developer is currently working on a
remediation plan with the EPA. This Agreement pertains to redevelopment of the
remediated Property. The Parties intend that this Agreement be construed to enable
development authorized by the Hearing Examiner’s Decision on the Master Plan and
subsequent necessary and/or appealed land use decisions. Such development shall
contain at minimum the attributes identified as Project Elements in Section 3 and
comply with all conditions and amenities identified in the approved Master Plan.
Development would occur in a manner consistent with post-remediation site conditions
and such controls as are imposed by or agreed to with the EPA. For instance, if
remediation is undertaken in phases, then Project phasing may be coordinated to occur
first on remediated areas of the Property, pending a City approved final phasing plan
that is consistent with the phasing conditions of the Master Plan Decision or any
subsequent land use actions.
D. Developer submitted Project applications for a Master Plan approval,
Binding Site Plan approval and Shoreline Substantial Development permit, which
applications were deemed complete by the City on February 10, 2010 (together, the
“Initial Project Applications”).
E. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, Ch. 43.21C RCW (“SEPA”),
the City issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (the “DEIS”) on December 10,
2010, on the Initial Project Applications and alternatives. In response to comments on
the DEIS, Developer developed a Preferred Alternative that was downsized from the
DEIS, and office space was removed from the proposal. Key Project specifications of the
Preferred Alternative are set forth in the Master Plan application materials, LUA09-151
and attached to the Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner as Exhibits. The City issued an
addendum to the DEIS on October 19, 2012, which addressed the Preferred Alternative
(the “Addendum”). A Final Environmental Impact Statement (the “FEIS”) and Mitigation
Document were issued on August 31, 2015.
F. In January 2016, at the City’s request, Developer updated the Initial
Project Applications plan sets to reflect the Preferred Alternative and incorporate plan
set level components of the specified SEPA mitigation measures.
G. Pursuant to the Revised Code of Washington Chapter 36.70B.170 et seq.
(“the Development Agreement Statute”), the City may enter into a development
agreement with an entity having ownership or control of real property within its
jurisdiction.
H. A development agreement can provide for an extended duration of
approvals. The Developer is willing to incorporate more public benefits into the Project,
as specified in the Enhanced Alternative set forth herein, in exchange for extended
permit duration.
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 3
I. It is the intent of this Development Agreement to provide for
development of the Project using the Enhanced Alternative addressed herein, together
with all other terms and conditions of this Agreement, provided, however, that the
Parties acknowledge that Project applications for the Enhanced Alternative are subject
to hearing and decision by the Renton Hearing Examiner as provided under Renton
Municipal Code Sections 4-9-200(D)(1) and 4-8-070(J).
J. The City’s Responsible SEPA Official has reviewed the Project changes
proposed under the Enhanced Alternative and this Development Agreement in
accordance with SEPA, and has issued a determination of consistency with the existing
SEPA review. The DEIS, Addendum, FEIS, and Determination of Consistency together
constitute the “Project-level SEPA Review.”
K. The City Council held a public hearing on this Development Agreement on
____________, 2017.
L. The City has found that development of the Enhanced Alternative of all or
portions of the Quendall Property consistent with this Agreement and the associated
land use decisions will benefit the community at large including the Quendall Property.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual agreements of the Parties set
forth herein, as well as other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of
which is hereby acknowledged, the Parties hereby covenant and agree as follows:
AGREEMENTS
1. ADDITIONAL DEFINITIONS.
Development Regulations mean those regulations encompassed in Title IV of
the Renton Municipal Code (“RMC”) in effect on the Vesting Date.
Enhanced Alternative means the Project substantially as described in the Project
Elements at Section 3 and on the Master Plan and associated conditions of approval as
approved by the Hearing Examiner.
Land Use Policies and Regulations mean Renton Comprehensive Plan land use
designations and policies, and the Development Regulations, in effect on the Vesting
Date.
Master Plan Decision means the decision of the Hearing Examiner on the Master
Plan, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, and Binding Site Plan applications
under LUA09-151.
RMC means the Renton Municipal Code.
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 4
The Vesting Date is February 10, 2010, the date that the City determined that
Developer’s applications for a Master Plan approval, Binding Site Plan approval and
Shoreline Substantial Development permit were complete.
2. BASIS OF AGREEMENT.
2.1 Intent. This Agreement establishes certain roles and
responsibilities for the potential redevelopment of all or a portion of the Quendall
Property under the Enhanced Alternative described in Section 3 herein, including but
not limited to Developer commitments that development of the Master Plan shall be
consistent with the vested Land Use Policies and Regulations and the terms and
conditions of this Agreement and any associated land use decisions for the project. It is
the intent of this Agreement that redevelopment may be phased according to the
principles set out in this Agreement, subject to City of Renton approval and the
conditions set forth in the Master Plan Decision.
3. PROJECT ELEMENTS. The Project Enhanced Alternative shall include the
Project Elements which includes the following:
3.1 Enhanced Alternative. The Parties agree that the following
enhancements to the Preferred Alternative are in the public interest and support Project
objectives. The Parties agree that the Project with the Enhanced Alternatives should be
taken through the Hearing Examiner process in accordance with RMC 4-9-200(D)(1) and
4-8-070(J).
3.1.1 1.3 acres of the southwest corner of the Project shall be a
public park constructed by the Developer and maintained by the Homeowners’
Association, open for public use between the hours of dawn to dusk;
3.1.2 Retail/restaurant/office space and street activation
(fountains, artwork, etc.) shall be required at street level along Street B and along the
lakeside frontage of residential buildings and other street frontage as necessary to
qualify for a minimum of 50 percent of the building street frontage at a minimum depth
of 20 feet of the project site;
3.1.3 The developer and the City will collaborate in the
development of a public dock/pier associated with the public park. The Developer and
City shall jointly develop a future dock proposal for permitting and environmental
review that addresses public and Project interests to the parties’ mutual satisfaction
(“Future Dock Proposal”). The City will be responsible for obtaining all required permits.
The Developer shall fund permitting costs for the Future Dock Proposal and construct
the dock and any required mitigation, provided that both the City and Developer
approve of the final dock design, budget, and all dock permit conditions. Should the EPA
or either party not approve the dock location and design the City and the developer will
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 5
work together to develop an alternative proposal to allow for access to Lake
Washington while meeting the requirements of the EPA. The Future Dock Proposal,
design and permitting shall be completed within the first five (5) years of the term if this
agreement. The Future Dock Proposal shall be constructed and completed for public
access within this first ten (10) years of the term of this agreement. All work related to
the Future Dock Proposal shall be permitted, constructed, and final inspection
completed prior to final occupancy of the last building in the Master Plan.
3.1.4 The Parties agree that the City shall have the right and the
Developer is required, following year five of the Initial Term of this Agreement as
defined in Section 4, to conduct an updated transportation analysis in compliance with
SEPA (the “SEPA Transportation Update”), which shall be subject to City review. In
order to impose requirements of the SEPA Transportation Update, the property owner
shall be required to provide written notice to the City, after the foregoing time trigger
has occurred, that the SEPA Transportation Update (the “Update Notice”) will be
performed. The Transportation Update shall result in written findings and conclusions,
and may result in a recommendation for reasonable new future permit conditions and
mitigations for the Project, if required based on changed conditions and associated
Project impacts. If the SEPA Transportation Update identifies significant adverse
transportation impacts of the Project that are not mitigated in the original SEPA
transportation analysis, then the City may impose additional mitigation to address such
unmitigated Project impacts.
3.1.5 Building SW4 shall be constructed at no more than 3 floors over
parking, building SW3 shall be constructed at no more than 4 floors over parking, and all
other buildings shall be constructed at no more than 5 floors over parking.
3.2 Mitigation Plan. The Mitigation Plan consists of the mitigation
document issued on August 31, 2015 and any mitigation conditions added by the
Hearing Examiner in the Master Plan Decision. In addition the mitigation plan will
include any new transportation permit conditions and transportation mitigation
requirements for the Project as a result of the Transportation Update following year
five. The Mitigation Plan also will include any new transportation permit conditions and
transportation mitigation requirements for the Project as a result of the Transportation
Update following year 10 of the Initial Term of this Agreement, if a permit extension
under Section 4 of this Agreement is requested and permitted.
3.3 Project Phasing. Development of the Project may be phased
consistent with the approved Master Plan and SEPA Mitigation Document and any
subsequent land use approvals such as site plan review, both during remediation and for
purposes of Developer’s development program, including in response to market
conditions. The City and the Developer acknowledge that, generally, site remediation
under EPA’s oversight will occur before Project development, provided, however, that
during remediation the Developer may install certain Project infrastructure
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 6
components. The Parties further agree to allow phasing according to the following
phasing principles, provided, however, that the Parties may determine that a more
detailed Project Phasing Plan will be prepared to govern Project Phasing:
3.3.1 A Project Phase may include one or more Project Lots.
Alternatively, a Project Phase may include one or more Project Buildings, as such
Buildings are defined and depicted in the Quendall Terminals Master Plan, LUA09-151.
3.3.2 Each Project Phase shall have all required infrastructure
and mitigation for the phase in place at the time of certificate of occupancy, or final
inspection if the phase or use does not require a certificate of occupancy, sufficient to
provide pedestrian and vehicular access, utilities and public facilities including parking
areas for bicycles and vehicles, site amenities identified for the phase and semi-private
open space.
3.3.3 Development of Lots or Buildings abutting Street B may be
prioritized to be the first Project Phase(s) of development, provided, however, that the
Parties agree to consider alternative Project Phasing priorities if needed in response to
sequenced remediation.
3.4 Duration of Project Permits. Provided that Project permits are
approved by the Hearing Examiner, all City land use permits and approvals issued for the
Project shall enjoy a duration through the term of this Agreement, including any
extensions under Section 4.
4. TERM. The term of this Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and
continue for ten years from the earlier of (i) the date of issuance of the EPA’s Record of
Decision, or (ii) the Hearing Examiners Decision and/or any subsequent appeal decision
dates (“Initial Term”). This Agreement shall remain in effect during its term unless and
until Developer (owning at least 51 percent of the Quendall Property by assessed value
((excluding any City-owned land)) gives notice of termination. If 51 percent of the
residential and commercial space has been constructed and received a Certificate of
Occupancy (CO) then the City may extend this Agreement, following a second SEPA
Transportation Update, upon Developer’s request 30 days in advance of the sunset
date, for one additional five-year period of time.
5. VESTING.
5.1 Project Elements, Development Standards and Implementing
Approvals. In accordance with the Development Agreement Statute, Developer is
vested to the Development Regulations in effect on the Vesting Date, which extends to
City of Renton ordnance number 5523.
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 7
5.2 Vesting Exceptions. During the term of this Agreement, the City
shall not impose on the Project any modified or new or additional Development
Regulations, except any new federal or state statutes, rules, regulations, administrative
interpretations or court decisions that add regulatory requirements on the City that it
must enforce that are not subject to a “grandfather” or “safe harbor” clause that would
delay the City’s enforcement responsibility beyond the life of this Agreement.
5.3 City’s Reserved Authority. In accordance with the Development
Agreement Statute, RCW 36.70B.170(4), the City reserves the authority to impose new
or different Development Regulations to the extent required by a serious threat to
public health and safety.
6. GENERAL PROVISIONS.
6.1 Authority; Severability. The City and Developer each represent
and warrant it has the respective power and authority, and is duly authorized to
execute, deliver and perform its obligations under this Agreement. The Parties intend
this Agreement to be interpreted to the full extent authorized by law as an exercise of
the City’s authority to enter into such agreements, and this Agreement shall be
construed to reserve to the City only that police power authority which is prohibited by
law from being subject to a mutual agreement with consideration. This Agreement shall
be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of Developer and
the City. If any provision of this Agreement is determined to be unenforceable or invalid
by a court of law, then (i) this Agreement shall thereafter be modified to implement the
intent of the Parties to the maximum extent allowable under law, (ii) the Parties agree
to seek diligently to modify the Agreement consistent with the court decision, and (iii)
neither party shall undertake any actions inconsistent with the intent of this Agreement
until the modification to this Agreement has been completed.
6.2 Amendment; Minor Modifications. Any amendment to this
Agreement must be approved by the City and Developer so long as it owns any portion
of the Quendall Property or retains any responsibility for off-site mitigation, other
obligations under this Agreement, or obligations pursuant to any Record of Decision or
any NRD settlement. Notwithstanding the foregoing, upon request of Developer, a
designated City official may approve administrative minor modifications to the
Development Standards, which administrative modifications shall not be deemed
amendments to this Agreement. Administrative minor modifications mean those
changes to the Development Standards that do not materially increase impacts on
transportation or utility systems or the environment, taking into account agreed upon
mitigation, and those modifications which do not materially reduce buffers or open
space. Any modifications of Development Standards shall require the written consent of
Developer and the City, including administrative minor modifications under this section.
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 8
6.3 Recording; No Third Party Beneficiary. Pursuant to the
Development Agreement Statute, RCW 36.70B.190, this Agreement or a memorandum
thereof shall be recorded with the King County Recorder’s Office. This Agreement is
made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the Parties, their
successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any
provision of this Agreement.
6.4 Notices. All communications, notices and demands of any kind
which a party under this Agreement requires or desires to give to any other party shall
be in writing and either (i) delivered personally (including delivery by professional
courier services), (ii) sent by facsimile transmission with an additional copy mailed first
class, or (iii) deposited in the U.S. mail, certified mail postage prepaid, return receipt
requested, to the addresses set forth with each signature. Notice by hand delivery or
facsimile shall be effective upon receipt. If deposited in the mail, notice shall be
deemed delivered 48 hours after deposited. Any party at any time by notice to the
other party may designate a different address or person to which such notice or
communication shall be given.
If to the City of Renton:
Renton City Hall
Attn: Mayor
Attn: Development Services Director
1055 S. Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
If to Quendall Terminals:
Quendall Terminals
Attn: Robert Cugini
P.O. Box 359
Renton, WA 98057
and to
J.H. Baxter & Co.
Attn: Georgia Baxter
P.O. Box 5902
San Mateo, CA 94402-0902
With a copy to:
Campbell Mathewson
CenturyPacific, LLLP
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 9
1201 Third Avenue, Suite 1680
Seattle, WA 98101-3029
Davis Wright Tremaine
Attn: Lynn Manolopolous
777 108th Avenue NE, Suite 2300
Bellevue, Washington 98004-5149
Cable Huston LLP
Attn: James E. Benedict
1001 SW Fifth Avenue
Suite 2000
Portland, Oregon 97204-1136
T. Ryan Durkan
Hillis, Clark, Martin & Peterson P.S.
999 Third Avenue, Suite 4600
Seattle, WA 98101
6.5 Applicable Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be governed by
and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Any action with
respect to this Agreement shall be brought in King County Superior Court, Washington.
6.6 Multiple Originals. This Agreement may be executed in two (2) or
more facsimile or .pdf counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of
which together shall constitute one instrument.
6.7 Headings; Recitals and Attachments. The headings in this
Agreement are inserted for reference only and shall not be construed to expand, limit or
otherwise modify the terms and conditions of this Agreement. The recitals to this
Agreement and Exhibits A are incorporated in this Agreement by this reference as if fully
set forth.
6.8 Dispute Resolution.
6.8.1 If any dispute arises out of any aspect of this Agreement,
the Parties must first try in good faith to settle the dispute through mediation. This
mediation must commence within 60 days after any party to the Agreement notifies the
other party requesting mediation to resolve a dispute.
6.8.2 If the Parties are not able to resolve their dispute through
mediation, they agree to submit the matter for resolution through binding arbitration.
The arbitrator shall be mutually chosen by both Parties. In no case may a mediator who
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 10
has mediated a claim serve as the arbitrator on the same claim. If the Parties cannot
agree on an arbitrator, either party or the Parties jointly may apply to the presiding
judge of the King County Superior Court to appoint an arbitrator. The arbitrator will
consult with the Parties and establish the rules and procedures for the arbitration that,
in light of the nature of the matter under dispute, will provide an efficient and fair
means for each of the Parties to present its case. Among other things, the arbitrator will
establish a schedule for completing the arbitration and issuing a decision. The decision
of the arbitrator will be final and may be enforced by an action brought in King County
Superior Court. In such an action, the prevailing party is entitled to recover all costs and
expenses, including all legal fees, incurred in that action.
6.8.3 The Parties will bear the costs of retaining a mediator or
an arbitrator equally.
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 11
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been entered into by the City and
Developer effective on the last date of signature below.
DATED this _____ day of ____________________, 2017
Joint Venture known as QUENDALL TERMINALS
By:__________________________
Altino Properties, Inc.
Its:Authorized Representative
By:__________________________
Robert Cugini
Its: Vice President
Date: ________________________
CITY OF RENTON
By:
Denis Law
Mayor
Date: ________________________
ATTEST:
By:___________________________
Jason A. Seth
City Clerk
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 12
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
STATE OF ___________ )
) ss:
COUNTY OF ___________ )
On this _____ day of _______, 2016, before me, a Notary Public in and
for the State of _______, County of ________, personally appeared ________________,
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be
the person who executed this instrument, who has produced sufficient proof of his/her
power and authority to execute and sign the instrument in the name of and on behalf of
QUENDALL TERMINALS, to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said association for
the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and
year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the state of
______________________.
Notary (print):______________________
My appointment expires: _____________
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 13
STATE OF ___________ )
) ss:
COUNTY OF ___________ )
On this _____ day of _______, 2017, before me, a Notary Public in and
for the State of Washington, County of King, personally appeared Denis Law, Mayor,
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be
the person who executed this instrument, who has produced sufficient proof of his
power and authority to execute and sign the instrument in the name of and on behalf of
CITY OF RENTON, to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said association for the
uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and official seal the day and
year first above written.
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the state of
______________________.
Notary (print):______________________
My appointment expires: _____________
Draft Quendall Terminals Development Agreement Page 14
List of Exhibits:
Exhibit A – Legal Description of Property
Exhibit A-1-Map
11/11/2016
Exhibit A
Page 15
9
8
1
0
2
-
3
5
1
3
B
U
S
H
,
R
O
E
D
&
H
I
T
C
H
I
N
G
S
,
I
N
C
.
2
0
0
9
M
I
N
O
R
A
V
E
.
E
A
S
T
S
E
A
T
T
L
E
,
W
a
s
h
i
n
g
t
o
n
L
A
N
D
S
U
R
V
E
Y
O
R
S
&
C
I
V
I
L
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
S
(
2
0
6
)
3
2
3
-
4
1
4
4
S
W
1
/
4
S
E
C
T
I
O
N
2
9
,
T
2
4
N
,
R
5
E
,
W
.
M
.
L
E
G
A
L
D
E
S
C
R
I
P
T
I
O
N
E
X
H
I
B
I
T
C
E
N
T
U
R
Y
P
A
C
I
F
I
C
,
L
L
L
P
.
C
I
T
Y
O
F
R
E
N
T
O
N
,
W
A
S
H
I
N
G
T
O
N
D
A
T
E
:
1
1
/
1
1
/
1
6
J
O
B
N
O
.
:
2
0
0
9
0
5
0
.
0
3
11/11/2016
E
x
h
i
b
i
t
A
-
1
P
a
g
e
1
6