HomeMy WebLinkAboutORD 4804CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO! 4804 ^
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON
DESIGNATING A PLANNED ACTION FOR THE SOUTHPORT SITE,
APPROXIMATELY 17 ACRES LOCATED ADJACENT TO LAKE
WASHINGTON AND BETWEEN GENE COULON PARK ON THE EAST
AND BOEING MANUFACTURING OPERATIONS ON THE WEST.
WHEREAS, RCW 43.21C.031 and WAC 197-11-164, - 168, and-172 allow and govern
the application of a Planned Action designation; and,
WHEREAS, in Resolution No. 3379, the City indicated its intent to study and consider a
Planned Action designation for the Shuffleton Steam Plant site, also known as the Southport site;
and,
WHEREAS, a Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) has been prepared
for a portion of the Shuffleton Steam Plant site, entitled the Southport Development Planned
Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement, and such document considers the
potential environmental impacts of a phased mixed-use project on approximately 17 acres of
property within the City limits; and,
WHEREAS, with Ordinance No. 4796 , the City has amended the Comprehensive
Plan Land Use Map for the subject area from Employment Area - Industrial (EA-I) to Center
Office Residential (COR); and,
WHEREAS, with Ordinance No. 4800 , the City has amended the Zoning Map from
Heavy Industrial (IH) to Center Office Residential (COR) ; and,
WHEREAS, this Ordinance would designate certain land uses and activities as "Planned
Actions" which would be consistent with the Center Office Residential (COR) designation and
zone;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF RENTON DOES ORDAIN:
SECTION I. Purpose. The City of Renton declares that the purpose of this ordinance
is to:
A. Set forth a procedure designating certain project actions within the subject site as
"Planned Actions" consistent with state law, RCW 43.21C.031; and,
B. Provide the public with an understanding as to what constitutes a Planned Action
and how land use applications which qualify as Planned Actions will be processed by the City;
and,
C. Streamline and expedite the land use permit review process for this site by relying
on completed and existing detailed environmental analysis for the subject site; and,
ORDINANCE NO. 4804
D. Combine environmental analysis with land use planning.
It is the express purpose of this ordinance that all the City's development codes be
applied together with the mitigation framework described in section III of this Ordinance for the
purpose of processing Planned Actions.
SECTION II. Findings. The City Council finds that:
A. The Southport Development Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement (SEIS) addresses all significant environmental impacts associated with the Planned
Action scenarios described in the SEIS for Plans A, B, and C as referenced therein; and,
B. The mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Document, Exhibit A of this
Ordinance, together with the City's development standards, are adequate to mitigate the
significant adverse environmental impacts of the Planned Action scenarios, Plans A, B, and C;
and,
C. The expedited permit review procedure set forth in this Ordinance is and will be a
benefit to the public, protects the environment, and enhances economic development; and,
D. Opportunities for public involvement and review have been provided, and
comments have been considered which have resulted in modifications to mitigation measures
and Planned Action conceptual alternatives.
SECTION III. Procedure and Criteria for Evaluating and Determining Projects as
Planned Actions.
A. Planned Action Site. The Planned Action designation shall apply to
approximately 17 acres of property commonly referred to as the Shuffleton Steam Plan site, also
known as the Southport site, and referred to in this Ordinance as the "subject site." The property
is illustrated in Exhibit B, and legally described in Exhibit C. Additionally, the Planned Action
designation shall apply to any off-site improvements necessitated by the proposed development
on the subject site, where the off-site improvements have been analyzed in the SEIS.
B. Environmental Document. A Planned Action designation for a site-specific
permit application shall be based on the environmental analysis contained in the Southport
Development Planned Action Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) issued by
the City on September 9, 1999. The Mitigation Document, Exhibit A, is based upon the analysis
in the SEIS. The Mitigation Document, together with existing City codes, ordinances, and
standards shall provide the framework for the decision by the City to impose conditions on a
Planned Action project. Other environmental documents incorporated by reference in the SEIS
may also be utilized to assist in analyzing impacts and determining appropriate mitigation
measures.
C. Planned Action Designated. Uses and activities described in the SEIS, subject to
the thresholds described in Section III.D, and subject to the mitigation measures described in
Exhibit A, are designated Planned Actions pursuant to RCW 43.21.C.031.
ORDINANCE NO. 4804
D. Planned Action Thresholds.
1. Land Use. Subject to the mitigation measures described in Exhibit A, the
following land uses and development levels, together with their customary accessory uses and
amenities described in the SEIS, are Planned Actions pursuant to RCW 43.21.C.031:
a) Land Uses. The following uses are the primary uses analyzed
under the Proposed Action Alternatives identified in the SEIS:
(1) Office
(2) Retail commercial, including restaurants
(3) Attached residential dwellings
(4) Hotel
b) Land Use Review Threshold. The Planned Action designation
applies to future development proposals which are comparable to or within the range established
by SEIS Proposed Action Plans A, B, and C as shown below:
Use/Height
Multifamily Residential Units
Retail Area in Sq. Ft.
Commercial Area in Sq. Ft.
Hotel Area in Sq. Ft. (rooms)
Plan A
543
38,000
500,000
N/A
PlanB
581
38,000
750,000
N/A
PlanC
377
30,000
500,000
115,800(220)
If future proposed plans exceed the maximum development parameters
reviewed, supplemental environmental review may be required under SEPA Rules. If proposed
plans significantly change the location of uses in a manner which would negatively affect land
use compatibility (for example, move commercial and office uses in such a manner that they
would not buffer residential uses from the nearby manufacturing uses), additional SEPA review
would be required.
2. Building Heights and Thresholds: Building heights shall not exceed the
maximum heights allowed in the Center Office Residential (COR) Zone. The maximum
building heights reviewed in the SEIS are as shown on Exhibit D. In comparison with the
building heights reviewed in the SEIS, a proposed increase in height greater than 10% shall
required additional SEPA review addressing aesthetics and shadows.
3. Building Setbacks: Refer to Exhibit A, Land Use and Aesthetics/Light
and Glare Mitigation Measures.
4. Open Space: Refer to Exhibit A, Land Use, Aesthetics/Light and Glare,
and Parks Mitigation Measures.
ORDINANCE NO, 4804
follows:
5. Transportation:
a) Trip Ranges: The range of trips reviewed in the SEIS are as
Trip Generation
Net New Trips Reviewed in SEIS
Time
AM Peak Hour
PM Peak Hour
Daily Total
Range - Net New
Trips
355-1,273
370-1,355
2,898-11,202
b) Trip Threshold: Uses or activities which would exceed the
maximum trip levels shown above must complete additional SEPA review.
c) Road Improvements: The Planned Action would require off-site
road improvements at the Park Avenue/Garden Avenue/Lake Washington Boulevard
intersection, the intersection located at the shared Site/Gene Coulon Park entrance and Lake
Washington Boulevard, and along Lake Washington Boulevard between the two identified
intersections. These road improvements have been analyzed in the SEIS. Significant changes to
the road improvement plan that have the potential to significantly increase impacts to air quality,
water quality, fisheries resources, or noise levels beyond the levels analyzed in the SEIS would
require additional SEPA review.
6. Earth: A significant change in amount of grading assumed in the
preliminary grading plans analyzed in the SEIS which has the potential to adversely affect water
quality or fisheries shall require additional SEPA review.
7. Air Quality: A significant change in configuration, increase in building
heights, or significant decrease in setbacks between residential and manufacturing uses, which
could affect localized air quality and odor conditions would require additional SEPA review.
For the purposes of air quality analysis:
a) A significant change in configuration to the Planned Action
scenarios (Plans A, B, or C) reviewed in the SEIS, would be a 10% or greater decrease in the
minimum building setbacks between uses and the shared property line with The Boeing
Company; or, a 10% or greater change in setbacks between buildings to be constructed on the
subject site which have the potential to negatively affect building downwash.
b) A significant decrease in the setbacks between residential and
manufacturing uses would be a 10% or greater decrease in the minimum building setbacks
between residential uses and the shared property line with The Boeing Company.
ORDINANCE NO, 4804
c) Significant building height changes would equal a 10% or greater
increase in height above the maximum heights reviewed in the S^IS.
8. Water. The following changes to the Planned Action scenarios reviewed
in the SEIS would require additional SEPA review:
a) Change in peak flows to Johns Creek significantly exceeding the
options reviewed in the SEIS.
b) Increase in number of outfalls to Johns Creek or Lake Washington
beyond proposals reviewed in the SEIS.
9. Fisheries Resources: In-water construction or in-water uses or activities
shall require additional SEPA review.
10. Public Services and Utilities: A significant increase in the number of
square feet or dwelling units beyond the maximum number reviewed in the SEIS would require
additional SEPA review to address impacts to Fire, Police, Schools, Parks, Water, Wastewater,
Solid Waste, as applicable.
E. Planned Action Review Criteria.
1. The Director of Development Services, or the Director's designee, is
hereby authorized to designate a project application as a Planned Action pursuant to RCW
43.21C.031(2)(a), if the project application meets all of the following conditions:
a) The project is located on the subject site as described in section
III.A, or is an off-site improvement directly related to a proposed development on the subject
site; and,
b) The project is consistent with the Renton Comprehensive Plan
adopted under RCW 36.70A; and,
c) The project's significant environmental impacts have been
adequately addressed in the SEIS; and,
d) The project complies with the Planned Action thresholds in section
III.D of this Ordinance; and,
e) The Director has determined that the project's significant impacts
have been mitigated through the apphcation of the Mitigation Document in Exhibit A, as well as
other City requirements and conditions, which together constitute sufficient mitigation for the
significant environmental impacts associated with the proposed project; and
f) The proposed project complies with all applicable local, state and
federal regulations, and where appropriate, needed variances or modifications or other special
permits have been requested; and,
ORDINANCE NO. 4804
g) The proposed project is not an essential public facility.
\
F. Effect of Planned Action.
1. Upon designation by the Director that the project qualifies as a Planned
Action, the project shall not be subject to a SEPA threshold determination, an environmental
impact statement (EIS), or any additional review under SEPA.
2. Being designated a Planned Action means that a proposed project has been
reviewed in accordance with this Ordinance, and found to be consistent with the development
parameters and environmental analysis included in the SEIS.
3. Planned Actions will not be subject to further procedural review under
SEPA. However, projects will be subject to conditions designed to mitigate any environmental
impacts which may result from the project proposal, and projects will be subject to whatever
permit requirements are deemed appropriate by the City under State and City laws and
ordinances. The Planned Action designation shall not excuse a project from meeting the City's
code and ordinance requirements apart from the SEPA process.
G. Planned Action Permit Process. The Director shall establish a procedure to
review projects and to determine whether they meet the criteria as Planned Actions under State
laws and City codes and ordinances. The procedure shall consist, at a minimum, of the
following:
1. Development applications shall meet the requirements of RMC Chapters
4-8 and 4-9. Applications shall be made on forms provided by the Department and shall include
a SEPA checklist or revised SEPA checklist [where approved through WAC 197-11-315(2)] or
such other environmental review forms provided by the Plaiining/Building/Public Work
Department. The checklist may be incorporated into the form of an application;
2. The Director shall determine whether the application is complete as
provided in RMC Chapter 4-8.
3. If the project apphcation is within an area designated as a Planned Action,
the application shall be reviewed to determine whether the proposed application is consistent
with and meets all of the qualifications specified in section HI of this Ordinance.
4. Upon review of a complete apphcation by the City, the Director shall
determine whether the project qualifies as a Planned Action. If the project does qualify, the
Director shall notify the applicant, and the project shall proceed in accordance with the
appropriate permit procedure, except that no additional SEPA review, threshold determination,
or EIS shall be required.
5. Public notice for projects that qualify as Planned Actions shall be tied to
the underlying permit. If notice is otherwise required for the underlying permit, the notice shall
state that the project has qualified as a Planned Action. If notice is not otherwise required for the
underlying permit, no special notice is required.
ORDINANCE NO. 4804
6. If a project is determined not to be a Planned Action, the Director shall
notify the applicant and prescribe a SEPA review procedure consistent with the City SEPA
procedures and state laws. The notice to the applicant shall describe the elements of the
application that result in disqualification as a Planned Action.
7. Projects disqualified as a Planned Action may use or incorporate relevant
elements of the environmental review analysis in the SEIS prepared for the Planned Action, as
well as other environmental documents to assist in meeting SEPA requirements. The
Environmental Review Committee may choose to limit the scope of the SEPA review to those
issues and environmental impacts not previously addressed in the SEIS.
SECTION IV. Time Period. This Planned Action Ordinance shall be reviewed no
later than December 1, 2004 by the Development Services Director to detennine its continuing
validity with respect to the environmental conditions of the subject site and vicinity and
applicability of Planned Action requirements. Based upon this review, this Ordinance may be
amended as needed, and another review period may be specified.
SECTION V. Conflict. In the event of a conflict between the Ordinance or any
mitigation measures imposed pursuant thereto and any ordinance, or regulation of the City, the
provisions of this Ordinance shall control, EXCEPT that provision of any Uniform Code shall
supersede.
SECTION VI. Severability. Should any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence,
clause or phrase of this Ordinance or its apphcation be declared unconstitutional or invalid for
any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Ordinance
or its application to any other person or situation.
SECTION VII. This ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval, and five
days after publication.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 25th day of October 1999.
Marilyn J. Petersen, City Clerk
APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this ?^th day of October , 1999.
Jes^Tanner, Mayor
ORDINANCE NO. 4804
Approved as to form:
Lawrence J. Wakeh, City Attorney
Date of Publication: 10/29/99 (Summary Only)
ORD.813:10/13/99.
EXHIBIT A
SOUTHPORT PLANNED ACTION
MITIGATION DOCUMENT
Prepared By:
City of Renton
Economic Development/Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Department
With Assistance By:
Bucher, Willis and Ratliff Corporation
September 17,1999
Jesse Tanner, Mayor
CITY OF RENTON
Planning/Building/Public Works Department
Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator
September 17,1999
Dear Reader:
Attached is a copy of the Mitigation Document for the Southport Planned Action, City of Renton,
Washington.
The proposed Southport Planned Action, considers potential redevelopment concepts for the
redevelopment of approximately 17 acres located adjacent to the Lake Washington shoreline.
Redevelopment concepts review changes from the current industrial uses to a mixed use
development including, residential, commercial, and office uses as well as recreational
amenities, which will require a Comprehensive Plan Amendment/rezone, and several
development permits. A Planned Action Ordinance is anticipated to be adopted for the
proposal. The proposal is located adjacent to Lake Washington between Gene Coulon Park on
the east and Boeing manufacturing operations on the west. Access is located from Lake
Washington Boulevard.
A Planned Action designation by the City would reflect a decision that adequate environmental
review has been completed and further environmental review under SEPA, for each specific
development phase, would not be necessary if it is determined that each phase is consistent
with the development levels specified in the Planned Action Ordinance.
A Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement (SEIS) was required for the proposal under
43.21 C.030(2)(c) and RMC 4-9-070. The impacts described in the Southport Development
Planned Action SEIS and other information on file with the City of Renton are the basis for the
mitigating measures established in the Mitigation Document. This Mitigation Document is
designated by the City of Renton as the first decision document for the proposal.
Upon issuance of this Mitigation Document, a twenty (20) day appeal period commences.
Pursuant to WAC 197-11-680 and RMC 4-8-110.E, the adequacy of the Supplemental
Environmental Impact Statement and the Mitigation Document may be appealed. Appeals
must: 1) state specific objections of fact and/or law; 2) be submitted in writing by 5:00 p.m.
October 7, 1999; and 3) be accompanied by a filing fee of $75.00. Appeals should be
addressed to Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, Renton Municipal Building,
1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055.
If you would like additional information, please contact Sue Carlson, City of Renton, Economic
Development/Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning Department at 425-430-6591.
For the Environmental Review Committee,
§// *\&14 ^ll^mzJfo*^^
Gregg Zirrtmerr
Administrator, Planning/Building/Public Works
1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055
lr£\ TW! -—„•„:«« coo/ „,,„.,,,i
MITIGATION DOCUMENT
SOUTHPORT PLANNED ACTION
INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) requires environmental review for project and non-project
proposals that may have significant impacts upon the environment.
In order to meet SEPA requirements, the Environmental Review Committee for the City of Renton issued
a Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Southport Development Planned Action on
June 29, 1999, and a Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement on September 9, 1999. The
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement and the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact
Statement are referenced collectively herein as the "SEIS". The SEIS has identified significant impacts
that would occur with the future redevelopment of the subject site together with a number of possible
measures to mitigate those significant impacts.
The purpose of this Mitigation Document is to establish specific mitigation measures, based upon
significant impacts identified in the SEIS. The mitigation measures would apply to future development
proposals which are comparable to the Proposed Action reviewed in the SEIS, and which are located on
the approximately 17 acre subject site (see the attached illustrative map). The mitigation measures may
also apply to off-site improvements where analyzed in the SEIS.
USE OF TERMS
As several similar terms are utilized in this Mitigation Document, the following phrases or words are
defined briefly:
SEPA Terms
The discussion or mitigation measures may refer to the words action, proposed action, or proposal, and
for reference these terms are identified below. Since Planned Action may be confused with Proposed
Action, these phrases are also explained below.
• "Action" means projects or programs financed, licensed, regulated, conducted or approved by
an Agency. "Project actions" involve decisions on a specific project such as a construction or
management activity for a defined geographic area. "Non-project" actions involve decisions
about policies, plans or programs, (see WAC 197-11-704)
• "Planned Action" refers to types of project actions that are designated by ordinance for a
specific geographic area and addressed in an EIS, in conjunction with a comprehensive plan
or subarea plan, a fully contained community, a master planned resort, a master planned
development or phased project, (see WAC 197-11-164)
• "Proposal" means a proposed action which may be actions and regulatory decisions of an
agency, or any actions proposed by applicants, (see WAC 197-11-784)
Other Terms Utilized in Mitigation Document
The subject site may be referenced as "Southport" or "site" or "subject site" in this document. Mitigation
measures may also apply to off-site improvements analyzed in the SEIS.
Southport Planned Action 2 Mitigation Document
This document includes mitigation measures which are tied to the approval of site plans, termed Level II
or Level I site plans. Current City regulations require a "master development plan" for development in
Center Office Residential (COR) Zones (RMC 4-2-120.B and 4-2-120.C). Site plan regulations are found
in RMC 4-9-200 and 4-9-210 and defined in RMC 4-8-120.D. The Proposed Action includes proposed
code amendments which would consolidate permit procedures and clarify terminology. A Level II site
plan is equivalent to the "master development plan" or "master site plan." A Level I site plan is
equivalent to the current definition of "site plan." The mitigation measures that refer to Level I and Level
II site plans assume adoption of proposed code amendments that consolidate and clarify site plan
procedures.
General Interpretation
Where a mitigation measure includes the words "shall" or "will" the requirement is mandatory. Where
"should" or "would" appear the words convey the City's expectation and desires given circumstances
presently known, with recognition that pertinent alternate or equivalent requirements may be imposed as
more detailed design or reports are conducted consistent with the mitigation measures.
Unless stated specifically otherwise, the mitigation measure requirements to prepare plans, conduct
studies, construct improvements, conduct maintenance activities, etc., are the responsibility of the future
developer(s) to fund and/or carry out.
SEPA REQUIREMENTS
State regulations (Washington Administrative Code 197-11) and local regulations (City of Renton Title 4,
Chapter 9) govern the development of mitigation measures to address identified environmental impacts.
The primary regulatory chapters are cited below. As appropriate, key sections of those chapters are
described.
• WAC 197-11-060, titled Content of Environmental Review states in part, that agencies shall
"carefully consider the range of probable impacts, including short-term and long-term
effects," including "those that are likely to arise or exist over the lifetime of a proposal" or, in
some cases, continue beyond the life of the proposal.
• WAC 197-11-330, titled Threshold Determination Process requires, in part, that the
responsible official take into account the direct, indirect and cumulative effects of a proposal
when determining whether a proposal has significant adverse impacts. In reaching a decision,
SEPA states that the responsible official shall not balance whether the beneficial aspects of a
proposal outweigh its adverse impacts, but rather shall consider whether a proposal has any
probable significant adverse environmental impacts.
• WAC 197-11-448, title Relationship of EIS to Other Requirements states, in part, that SEPA
"contemplates that the general welfare, social, economic, and other requirements and
essential considerations of state policy will be taken into account in weighing and balancing
alternatives and in making final decisions." The EIS provides a basis upon which the
responsible agency and officials can make the balancing judgment mandated by SEPA,
because the EIS provides information on environmental costs and impacts.
• WAC 197-11 -768 titled Definition of Mitigation. This section defines mitigation as:
(1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action;
Southport Planned Action 3 Mitigation Document
(2) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its
implementation, by using appropriate technology! or by taking affirmative steps to
avoid or reduce impacts;
(3) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected
environment;
(4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance
operations during the life of the action;
(5) Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute
resources or environments; and/or
(6) Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures.
• WAC 197-11-660(1) Substantive Authority and Mitigation.
Decision-makers may impose mitigation measures designed to mitigate the environmental
impacts, subject to the following limitations:
(a) Mitigation measures or denials shall be based on policies, plans, rules, or regulations
formally designated by the agency;
(b) Mitigation measures shall be related to specific, adverse environmental impacts
clearly identified in an environmental document on the proposal and shall be stated in
writing by the decision maker;
(c) Mitigation measures shall be reasonable and capable of being accomplished.
(d) Responsibility for implementing mitigation measures may be imposed upon an
applicant only to the extent attributable to the identified adverse impacts of its
proposal. Voluntary additional mitigation may occur.
(e) Before requiring mitigation measures, agencies shall consider whether local, state, or
federal requirements and enforcement would mitigate an identified significant
impact.
(g) If, during project review, a jurisdiction's development regulations or comprehensive
plan adopted under chapter 36.70A RCW, or in other applicable local, state or federal
laws or rules, provide adequate analysis of and mitigation for the specific adverse
environmental impacts of the project action under RCW 43.21C.240, the jurisdiction
shall not impose additional mitigation under this chapter.
DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVES
Proposed Action
The Proposed Action reviewed in the SEIS includes:
• Adoption of a Planned Action Ordinance
• Comprehensive Plan Map and Text Amendments and concurrent Rezone (from Heavy
Industrial to Center Office Residential)
• Municipal Code Text Amendments
• Preliminary Conceptual Master Plan approval
Southport Planned Action 4 Mitigation Document
The City through Resolution 3379 identified the subject property as a site under consideration for a
Planned Action designation pursuant to SEPA (WAC 197-11-168( c % The Planned Action designation,
when adopted by the City, would reflect a decision that adequate environmental review has been
completed and further environmental review under SEPA, for each specific development phase, would
not be necessary if it is determined that each phase is consistent with the development levels specified in a
Planned Action Ordinance.
This process assumes that a final Master Plan (Level II Site Plans) and site plan (Level I Site Plan) for
individual phases, as well as shoreline substantial development permit applications, will be submitted at a
later stage as Planned Actions. Applications for construction-related permits from the City of Renton and
other state and federal agencies, including U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404, 401 permits,
stormwater discharge/NPDES, building and construction permits, etc., required for long-term
redevelopment of the site would also be requested for approval subsequent to the adoption of the Planned
Action Ordinance. Issuance of these and other required development permits is included within the scope
of environmental review for the Proposed Action.
To facilitate the City's consideration of the Planned Action designation and environmental review of
implementation of the Planned Action, a preliminary Conceptual Master Plan for the site has been
formulated. The Master Plan provides conceptual information on the potential mix of uses, building
density and height, access/circulation, recreation and open space opportunities and other development
features.
The intensity of site development would fall within the range of development represented by Conceptual
Master Plan scenarios A (Plan A), scenario B (Plan B) and scenario C (Plan C). Plans A and C represent
the lower end of the development range, with Plan A consisting of 543 multifamily residential units,
38 000 square feet of retail area, and 500,000 square feet of office space, and Plan C consisting of 377
multifamily residential units, 220 hotel units, 30,000 square feet of retail area, and 500,000 square feet of
office space (refer to Chapter 2 of the Final Supplemental EIS for a description of the Plan Alternatives).
Plan B represents the upper end of the development range and would consist of 581 multifamily
residential units, 38,000 square feet of retail area, and 750,000 square feet of office space. Each plan calls
for substantial public spaces and amenities including provisions for public access to Lake Washington.
Summary of Alternatives
Two alternatives to the Proposed Action are analyzed in the SEIS:
No Action - No Development Alternative - Under this alternative, the existing steam plant building would
remain and storage use of the site would continue for the foreseeable future.
No Action - Future Industrial Development - Under this alternative, industrial redevelopment of the site
consistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan land use designation of Employment Area - Industrial
and zoning classification of Industrial-Heavy (IH), is assumed. Industrial redevelopment under this
alternative is assumed to consist of approximately 230,000 square feet of manufacturing (high bay style)
space and approximately 70,000 square feet of associated office space.
Applicability of Mitigation Document
This mitigation document applies to the Proposed Action, Plans A, B, or C, analyzed in the SEIS. For the
mitigation document to apply to future development proposals, they must be comparable to or within the
range established by Plans A, B, and C as shown below:
"s^Tthport Planned Action 5 Mitigation Document
Use/Height
Multifamily Residential Units
Retail Area in Sq. Ft.
Commercial Area in Sq. Ft.
Hotel Area in Sq. Ft. (rooms)
Residential Building Heights in Stories (feet)1
Hotel Building Height in Stories (feet)
Office Building Heights in Stories (feet)
Plan A
543
38,000
500,000
N/A
5 (50 ft.)
N/A
8-10 (105-125 ft)
Plan B
58 fl
38,000
750,000
N/A
5 (50 ft.)
N/A
10 (125 ft.)
Plan C
377
30,000
500,000
115,800(220)
5 (50 ft.)
7(75')
8-10 (105-125 ft)
Residential buildings would be 50 feet above finished grade and 58 feet above existing grade.
If future proposed plans exceed the maximum development parameters reviewed, supplemental
environmental review may be required under SEPA Rules.
MITIGATION DOCUMENT
Based upon the SEIS, this Mitigation Document identifies significant adverse environmental impacts that
are anticipated to occur in conjunction with the development of the Proposed Action. Mitigation
measures are hereby established under SEPA rules to address specific impacts identified in the SEIS,
based upon the Proposed Action.
As indicated in the SEIS, numerous state and local regulations will govern development of the subject
site, and application of those regulations will also serve to mitigate certain significant adverse
environmental impacts. Pertinent regulations will be applied to future specific development applications.
Additional consistency review under the Planned Action, site plan review, shoreline permits, and other
permit approvals will be required for specific development actions under the Proposed Action.
Additional conditions may be imposed based upon the analysis of the proposal in relationship to code
requirements or review criteria. '
Seco Development or another future applicant may request modifications to mitigation measures
established herein, if appropriate and as a result of changed circumstances, in order to allow an equivalent
substitute mitigation or removal of a mitigation requirement. Such modifications would be evaluated
prior to adoption by the City, based upon SEPA Rules.
As permitted under SEPA Rules (WAC 197-11-660), it is recognized that there may be some adverse
impacts that are unavoidable because reasonable or feasible mitigation cannot be achieved for the
Proposed Action.
Provided below for each element of the environment analyzed in the SEIS for the Proposed Action are:
(a) summary of significant environmental impacts (direct, indirect, and cumulative); (b) a summary of
unavoidable adverse impacts; (c) mitigation measures established by this Mitigation Document; and (d) a
list of federal and state laws and local policies/regulations on which mitigation measures are based. In
combination, regulations applicable to each element of the environment and mitigation measures imposed
by this Document will mitigate all significant environmental impacts caused by the Proposed Action,
except for those impacts that are identified as "unavoidable adverse impacts."
Southport Planned Action 6 Mitigation Document
1. EARTH A
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS includes an examination of significant
impacts to soils, geology, erosion conditions, and seismic conditions. A summary of impacts is provided
below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter
3/Appendix A of the SEIS.
• Clearing and grading operations during construction could increase the erosion potential on
the site.
• Loose to soft soils underlying the site would be susceptible to settlement under normal
building loads, necessitating use of pile foundations for all buildings.
• Proposed buildings would be subject to liquefaction potential during seismic events,
necessitating use of pile foundations for all buildings.
• Removal of existing underground features (including piles supporting the steam plant and
utilities) could result in areas of soft soil or ground depressions.
• Based upon preliminary grading plans, areas of grading would extend into Gene Coulon Park.
b. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: Provided that reasonable mitigation measures are properly
followed, no significant unavoidable impacts are anticipated.
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended
mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by
the future developer(s):
Erosion
• A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESC) and Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be required to prevent and control erosion and discharge,
according to City of Renton (RMC 4-4-030 and 4-6-030) and Department of Ecology
standards. The Plan Review Supervisor shall determine appropriate standards in accordance
with adopted requirements and the recommendations of the SEIS. To mitigate and reduce the
sheet and channel erosion hazard potential on the Southport site under the Proposed Action,
the TESC and SWPPP would include, but are not limited to the following measures:
- Surface water and domestic discharge, either during or after construction, would not
randomly daylight on the site. All temporary and/or permanent devices used to collect
surface runoff shall be directed into tightlined systems that would discharge into an
approved stormwater facility, unless the Plan Review Supervisor determines that an
alternate measure providing equivalent control is permissible.
- Soils to be used around the site during construction would be stored in such a manner to
minimize erosion. Protective measures could include, but are not necessarily limited to,
use of strawbales, covering with plastic sheeting or the use of silt fences.
Southport Planned Action 7 Mitigation Document
- The majority of the site would be covered with impervious surfaces under the Proposed
Action with roughly 15 percent of the site to consist^pf landscaping and vegetated areas.
Source control mitigation measures would be conducted for cleared areas. All exposed
subgrades would be seeded, covered with plastic sheeting, or otherwise protected during
inclement weather or the wetter, winter months.
- During construction, silt fences, or other methods such as straw bales, would be placed
along the boundaries to Lake Washington, John's Creek, and Gene Coulon Park to reduce
the potential of sediment-laden runoff discharging into these areas. In addition, rock
check dams would be established along roadways during construction.
- Temporary sedimentation traps or ponds would be installed to provide erosion and
sediment transport control during construction.
• Details of the TESC and SWPPP shall be determined as part of the construction permit
review process.
• A qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the developer(s) shall review the grading,
erosion, and drainage plans prior to final design. The geotechnical engineer shall be retained
by the developer in order to further assist in mitigating erosion and sediment transport
hazards during and after development. Additional erosion mitigation measures may be
required at the time of final design in response to site-specific plans. Certification of the
installation, maintenance and proper removal of the erosion control facilities shall be required
prior to finalization of construction permits.
Seismic
• Mitigation measures are required to reduce the risk of potential liquefaction on any proposed
structures. In general, this would require utilizing a deepened foundation system as discussed
under Geotechnical Engineering Considerations below.
Geotechnical Engineering Considerations
Potential geotechnical impacts would be adequately mitigated through characterization of surface
and subsurface conditions, proper geotechnical engineering, structural design, and proper
construction implementation of the design. The preliminary geotechnical report prepared by
Geotech Consultants, Inc. (1999) addresses potential geotechnical mitigation measures. Such
measures are presented below. As part of the building design process, additional, specific
measures could be identified, or the measures below could be modified upon review and
acceptance by the City Building Official, unless the measure is written as mandatory.
Foundations
• A deepened foundation would be required for support of the proposed buildings to reduce
potential differential settlement and liquefaction impacts.
• Floor slabs would be pile supported if settlement to the slabs would be a concern.
• The necessity of a vibration monitoring program for structures on and off the site as a result
of pile driving shall be determined by a qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the
Southport Planned Action 8 Mitigation Document
developer(s) during the design phase as more detailed information on construction techniques
are finalized. The geotechnical engineer recommendations shall be subject to review and
acceptance by the City Building Official.
• If impact pile driving is proposed, the qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the
developer(s) shall survey existing structures surrounding the site, including buildings, surface
improvements, bulkheads, and buried utilities, to determine if pile-driving vibrations pose a
potential threat to any existing structures, as part of the building design review process.
• If existing foundation piles are to be reused, the soundness of the piles shall be tested to the
satisfaction of the geotechnical and structural engineers retained by the developer(s) and to
the satisfaction of the City Building Official. If piles are not to be reused, they should be
exposed, and cut off at an elevation to be determined by the geotechnical and structural
engineers.
Site Preparation
• A minimum of 12 inches of structural fill, compacted and proofrolled per the geotechnical
engineer's recommendations, would be placed beneath the pavement, non-pile supported
slabs, or structural fill areas to reduce potential settlement impacts. Alternatively, the
subgrade could be chemically treated utilizing lime, kiln dust, or cement. The use of
geotextile fabric or overexcavation of soft soils and replacement with structural fill could also
be required to obtain a firm unyielding subgrade. The exact construction methodologies
utilized would be dependent on final design plans.
• Excavations to remove or demolish below-grade structures could encounter ground water and
require excavation shoring and dewatering to reduce settlement hazards. Dewatering shall be
conducted in a manner that would minimize potential impacts due to settlement. The quantity
of water removed could be reduced along with the magnitude of the resulting settlement
through proper design of the dewatering system and construction sequencing. In addition,
proper disposal of dewatering effluent shall be stipulated in the design specifications for the
placement of utilities.
Structural Fill
• Up to 7 feet of fill would be required to support roadway areas, and in some cases, slab-on-
grade floors that are not a settlement concern. All structural fill shall be placed and
compacted as recommended by the qualified geotechnical engineer retained by the
developer(s). Proper subgrade preparation and drainage control would be necessary for the
roadways, utilities, or structural fill bodies.
• The on-site sediments are moisture-sensitive and subject to disturbance when wet. These
sediments would require drying prior to their use in structural fills, and the use of these soils
in structural fills would be limited to favorable dry weather conditions. If fill is placed in wet
weather, or if proper compaction cannot be obtained, imported backfill consisting of free-
draining granular material shall be required.
• Some areas such as utility trenches, manholes, vaults, and heavy traffic roadways could still
be susceptible to settlement under these soil conditions, and long-term maintenance of
roadway areas is required.
Southport Planned Action 9 Mitigation Document
• Geotechnical oversight will be an integral part of the site'i design and construction process.
Geotechnical reports prepared by future developers will require City review and acceptance.
A geotechnical review of the design plans would be performed before the plans are finalized
to assist in reducing potential geotechnical impacts. Construction monitoring will be required
during the foundation and earthwork activities. In this manner, the adequacy of the
foundation and earthwork would be evaluated as construction progresses, and appropriate
responses to site conditions would be addressed in the field.
d. Nexus: City of Renton Uniform Building Code (RMC 4-5-050); City of Renton Grading,
Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060); King County Stormwater Management Manual
(adopted by the City of Renton, RMC 4-6-030); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan.
2. AIR QUALITY
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix B of the SEIS includes an examination of significant
impacts to air quality in terms of construction activities, generated traffic, and indirect air emissions and
odors from adjacent property. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary
Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/Appendix B of the SEIS.
• Building demolition and grading would generate suspended particulate matter.
• Removal of asbestos from the steam plant building would be required and would comply with
EPA and PSAPCA regulations.
• Site population could be exposed to air pollutants from the adjacent Boeing facility. Based
on recent Boeing modeling analysis, Boeing emissions comply with PSAPCA's Acceptable
Source Impact levels. Effects would be unlikely under reasonably assumed Boeing
operations.
• Air pollutants from the Boeing facility could enter HVAC systems of proposed office
buildings. Adverse health effects within proposed buildings would not be anticipated under
reasonably assumed operation.
• Proposed office building could induce existing Boeing emissions to reach the ground more
often (building downwash effect). Effects would be unlikely under reasonably assumed
Boeing operations.
• Odors from The Boeing Company operations could be perceived as a nuisance by site
population. Modeling conducted by Boeing indicates potential odors would be below
recognized thresholds.
b. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts from construction or operation
of future development on the site would result.
Emissions from existing industrial sources in the area could potentially affect on-site locations and cause
adverse impacts. Modeling completed by Boeing indicates that no adverse health impacts or significant
odor effects would result under any reasonably assumed operations at Boeing facilities. Ultimately, it is the
responsibility of Boeing to protect human health from harmful exposures to any air pollutant emitted at their
Southport Planned Action 10 Mitigation Document
facility, as well as from nuisance impacts related to odors. Mitigation measures identified below would
likely preclude significant adverse impacts. \ -
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3/Appendix B of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended
mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by
the future developer(s):
Construction
• Dust produced by construction will be reduced by using a number of best management
practices and techniques, exemplified in the remainder of this paragraph. Areas of exposed
soils such as storage yards and construction roadways could be sprayed with water or other dust
suppressants. Soils carried out of the construction area by exiting trucks could be minimized by
wheel washing and covering dusty truckloads. Finally, soil that does escape the construction
area on exiting vehicles could be reduced with an effective street-cleaning effort.
Indirect Impacts
The Air Quality analysis of the SEIS indicated a potential range of impacts in terms of indoor air
quality impacts, ground-level air quality impacts, and odors. Modeling conducted by The Boeing
Company concluded that air pollutant concentrations would not exceed allowed levels (either
NAAQS or ASIL's), and would not exceed recognized odor thresholds. The modeling was based
upon reasonably assumed Boeing operations. Under normal circumstances, impacts are not
anticipated. To respond to the range of potential impacts, and because future operations may
change, and because some recommended air quality mitigation measures require consideration
during design, the following measures shall be implemented by future developer(s):
• Filters on the roof HVAC systems shall be installed. The filter system would need to filter
particulates as well as volatile organic compounds (VOCs). A synthetic fiber filter media
would remove the particulate load while an activated carbon filter would remove most VOCs.
Other filter types or technologies providing equal or greater protection may be approved for use
upon authorization by the City.
• HVAC systems shall be placed at a location where plumes from the Boeing facility would be
less likely to reach the air intake vents. To accomplish this, a detailed study would need to be
conducted by the developers, with Boeing's cooperation, to assess the optimum locations for
intake vents. As needed, the City will assist in efforts to obtain sufficient data from The Boeing
Company.
d. Nexus: City of Renton Grading Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060); City of
Renton Comprehensive Plan.
3. WATER
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS includes an examination of significant
impacts to water quantity and quality. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS
Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS.
Southport Planned Action 11 Mitigation Document
Surface Water Quantity
'A
• The proposal would eliminate the western ditch.
• Potential for stream bank erosion along John's Creek could increase, requiring on site
detention for this area, unless drainage from the on site John's Creek basin area is discharged
to the Lake Washington system.
Groundwater Quality
• Shallow groundwater table could require dewatering during placement of utilities. No
adverse impacts to the underlying aquifer would result.
Surface Water Quality
• Construction could increase potential for sedimentation and increased levels of pH to John's
Creek and Lake Washington. To preclude such impacts, Temporary Erosion Control
Measures could be implemented.
• Development of the preliminary conceptual master plan would increase the amount of area in
vehicle-access surface (roadways and parking) increasing potential for stormwater-related
pollutants to reach surface waters.
• With the proposed water quality wet vault, stormwater discharge to Lake Washington would
be within state standards, with the exception of zinc, lead, and fecal coliforms. Adequate
dilution in the lake would be achieved to prevent significant impacts from these sources.
• Widening of Lake Washington Blvd. would require lengthening of culverts passing John's
Creek under the roadway and increase roadway area subject to traffic. With water quality
treatment, no significant water quality impacts are anticipated.
• With potential future waterfront improvements subject to a separate permit process (to the
dock at the west end and pedestrian improvements at the east end), no in-water work or
dredging is assumed. Impacts would be limited to accidental spills during construction,
localized increases in hydrocarbons from increased boat traffic and resuspension of sediments
due to prop wash.
b. Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: With implementation of mitigation measures, none are
expected.
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended
mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by
the future developer(s):
Surface Water
• Future developer(s) shall design, implement and maintain a stormwater control system which
is consistent with City requirements and which achieves comparable stormwater control as
the system analyzed in the SEIS.
Southport Planned Action 12 Mitigation Document
Groundwater \
• Groundwater may be encountered during construction of utility trenches or any other below-
grade earthwork activities. Dewatering shall be conducted in a manner that would minimize
potential impacts due to settlement. The quantity of water removed would be reduced along
with the magnitude of the resulting settlement through proper design of the dewatering
system and construction sequencing. Construction techniques such as reducing the length of
trench open at one time could be required. The specific location, extent, and depth of utilities
would dictate the dewatering design, and in turn the quantity of water that should be
removed. Specific recommendations shall be determined during the design phase once plans
are finalized, as part of more detailed geotechnical evaluation. In addition, proper disposal of
dewatering effluent shall be stipulated in the design specifications for the placement of
utilities.
Water Quality
• A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESC) and a Stormwater Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will be prepared and implemented to prevent introduction of
sediment, turbid water, construction waste, or accidental spills of hydrocarbons to Lake
Washington or John's Creek during construction. Details of these plans shall be prepared
during the construction permit review process with the City of Renton (RMC 4-4-030; 4-6-
030) and Department of Ecology (refer to the EARTH section for identification of possible
TESC measures). The TESC plan shall include restricting mass grading to the dry season,
and if grading activities are proposed in the wet season, the future developer shall prepare a
grading plan for City review and approval that minimizes erosion. The plan shall also
address capture and filtration of silted water before release, and prohibit on-site release of
concrete wash-out, unless it is to temporary, lined ponds.
• The 1992 Department of Ecology (DOE) Manual standards for stormwater quality treatment
shall be utilized for treatment system design; these standards are more stringent than the 1990
King County Manual requirements that the City of Renton has adopted. Water quality
treatment of surfaces routinely accessible to motor vehicles would be provided by wet
vault(s) designed to the 1992 DOE standards. Or, upon City authorization or requirement,
future developer(s) may utilize a future amended DOE manual for stormwater quality or
future adopted or amended City stormwater manual, with equal or greater standards.
• Four inches of compost shall be tilled to an approximate depth of 6 inches under all
landscaped areas to be lawn. This organic layer would: a) increase infiltration and water
retention under the turf rooted zone, which would reduce leaching and enhance
evapotranspiration; b) create organic binding sites for organic pesticides and metals; and c)
create an organic substrate for microbial growth, which would biodegrade organic pesticides
and reduce leaching of nitrogen through uptake and denitrification.
• If pesticides are to be used, they shall be selected from low-mobility products.
• If (1) the ratio of roof/walkway/fire lane to parking/roadway surfaces falls substantially
below those identified for the Proposed Action in the SEIS, and if (2) there is a corresponding
potential increase in average daily trips, then additional metals removal shall be required for
Southport Planned Action 13 Mitigation Document
discharge to Lake Washington. Additional removal could ,be achieved by use of a compost
filter or other underground filter insert added to the wet vauij: system for Lake Washington.
Native vegetation or locally adapted landscaping species shall be used, where possible, to
avoid the need for pesticides. This shall be addressed in any required landscape plans.
Any plans for future construction of waterfront improvements shall be reviewed and
approved by appropriate agencies, such as the City of Renton, Department of Fish and
Wildlife, National Marine Fisheries Service, Department of Ecology and the US Army Corps
of Engineers.
Water quality impacts from operation of a future guest dock would be limited as no
permanent moorage, haul-out or fueling facilities would be allowed. Resuspension of
sediments from prop wash would be mitigated by control of boat speeds near the dock and
shore and other measures which would be identified at the time of a future application.
Nexus: King County Stormwater Management Manual (adopted in RMC 4-6-030); Grading,
•
Excavation, and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060); City of Renton Zoning Code (RMC 4-2); City of
Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090; Ord. 4716); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan.
4. FISHERIES & AQUATIC ANIMALS
a; Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS includes an examination of significant
impacts to water quantity and quality. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS
Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS.
Fisheries
• Site grading and filling of intake/return tunnels (Lake Washington) would increase potential
sedimentation in Lake Washington and John's Creek. With proposed erosion control
measures, impacts to fisheries habitat would not be significant.
• The limited existing riparian vegetation (consisting of exotic grasses and blackberry with
little fisheries habitat value) along Lake Washington and John's Creek would be impacted by
construction.
• No new in-water or over water structures are proposed. However, the waterfront promenade
would result in increased human activity and lighting near the Lake Washington shoreline.
With proposed mitigation measures, no significant impacts are anticipated.
• Future waterfront improvements or enhancement of pedestrian connections on the east and
west sides of the site could be made, subject to a separate permit process. Potential future
improvements could increase over-water structures, impact water quality from increased boat
traffic on a localized basis, and increase lighting levels, which could impact fisheries
resources.
• Widening of Lake Washington Boulevard would require lengthening of culverts passing
John's Creek. Pond habitat would temporarily be eliminated and could displace fish currently
using that portion of the creek. Water quality degradation from sediments or turbidity could
occur during construction. No permanent impacts would be anticipated.
Southport Planned Action 14 Mitigation Document
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: With implementation of mitigation measures, no
significant unavoidable adverse impacts would result.
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended
mitigation measures identified-in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by
the future developer(s):
Fisheries
The following mitigation measures are intended to minimize the potential for impacts to fisheries
resources from redevelopment of the site.
• Directional lighting and shading provisions for all light standards along the promenade on the
Lake Washington shoreline side shall be implemented.
• The cooling water tunnel entrances shall be permanently sealed prior to backfilling the
tunnel. The plug would consist of a pre-constructed structure made of concrete or other non-
corrosive material and would be placed in the tunnel from above.
• Native shrub and tree species shall be planted along the shoreline of John's Creek to replace
the existing blackberry bushes. Native species such as sallal (Gaultheria shallon), Oregon
grape (Berberis nervosa), snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus), salmonberry (Rubus
spectabilis), elderberry (Sambucus sp.), willow (Salix sp.) and western redcedar (Thuja
plicata) would be considered to provide some additional benefit from allochthonous (non-
native) contribution and insect productivity to fisheries resources in the creek and Lake
Washington.
• As part of the required Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESC) and a
Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), mass grading shall be limited to the dry
season, and there shall be collection and treatment of turbid water. Or, if grading activities
are proposed in the wet season, the future developer shall prepare a grading plan for City
review and approval that minimizes erosion. Additional water quality measures, identified in
the EARTH and WATER sections of this Mitigation Document would also benefit fisheries
resources.
Future Waterfront/Dock Improvements
• The preliminary conceptual development plans reviewed in the SEIS do not include plans for
waterfront improvements on the west or east side. Such improvements shall be subject to
separate, future applications sponsored by the City or the developer(s). Measures generally
applicable to the minimization of impacts to fisheries resources from future potential
waterfront improvements at the west side, and potential future access improvements to the
Park on the east side, would be required at the time such improvements would be permitted.
Dependent upon specific future applications, the following measures shall be considered and
applied where appropriate:
- Minimize over-water structure.
Southport Planned Action 15 Mitigation Document
- Construct all walking surfaces to allow as much natural light penetration as possible.
i
- Remove unnecessary structures such as abandoned or unused pilings, dolphins, finger
piers, sheetpile, etc.
- Minimize vertical structures (e.g., pilings, walls) in the water column. Use light colored
materials.
- Minimize structure in the nearshore area used by salmonids during migration.
Nexus: King County Stormwater Manual (adopted by Renton in RMC 4-6-030); Land Clearing
and Tree Cutting Regulations (RMC 4-4-130); City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090;
Ord. 4716); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan.
5. NOISE AND VIBRATION
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix C of the SEIS includes an examination of significant
impacts to noise and vibration. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary
Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/Appendix A of the SEIS.
• Construction activities, including pile driving and use of heavy equipment, would generate
noise through much of the 5 year construction period. These activities would generate
maximum sound levels that would be higher than existing sound levels.
• Pile driving activities have the potential to cause ground-borne vibration at nearby structures
at the Boeing Plant. Nearby Boeing buildings are not anticipated to be impacted; however,
the wastewater treatment plant could be susceptible to vibration impacts. Multiple pile
driving at anyone time would be precluded to minimize the potential for impacts.
• Residential areas east of the site could be affected by HVAC noise above allowable night-
time noise levels, depending on the type and location of the HVAC units.
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: Redevelopment would increase sound levels at off-
site locations as a result of pile driving and other construction activities. The relative impact of these
increases would depend on the specific timing and the duration of noise events. If construction activities,
including equipment start-ups and other noisy preparations are limited to daytime hours, and other
reasonable mitigation measures are employed to reduce on-site production and off-site transmission of
construction noise, off-site impacts related to construction noise would be minimized.
Complying with the state noise rule limit restricting construction activities to 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. would
preclude construction noise impacts during legally defined nighttime hours. Other mitigation measures to
reduce noise generation and/or off-site transmission of pile-driving, vibration from pile driving and other
construction noise employed by construction contractors would reduce the potential for significant off-site
impacts.
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3/Appendix C of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended
mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by
the future developer(s):
Southport Planned Action 16 Mitigation Document
Construction Noise
Although the conservative nature of the construction noise analysis likely overstates actual
construction noise levels at nearby sensitive receivers, there remains a potential for noise impacts
from uncontrolled construction noise sources on-site. Because construction noise during daytime
hours is exempt from the limits in Washington's noise rule, no mitigation is required in order to
comply with the state or local noise limits. However, due to the potential for noise impacts, and
because construction might take place over five years, the use of mitigation measures to reduce
potential noise impacts is warranted. The following construction practices shall be used to help
minimize potential noise impacts.
• Construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and
eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to
the hours between nine clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be
permitted on Sundays. Or, the Development Services Division Director may authorize
alternate construction hours for reasonable cause, consistent with City regulations where
applicable.
• Properly sized and maintained mufflers, engine intake silencers, engine enclosures, and
turning off idle equipment shall be required in construction contracts.
• Construction contracts shall specify that all equipment and especially mufflers be maintained
in good working order. Contracts shall further specify that engine enclosures be used on non-
portable equipment when the engine is the dominant source of noise, and that stationary
equipment shall be placed as far away from sensitive receiving locations as possible. Where
this is infeasible, portable noise barriers shall be placed around the equipment with the
opening directed away from the sensitive receiving locations such as Gene Coulon Park, or
future on-site residential dwellings which may be constructed prior to construction of other
uses on-site.
• To the extent feasible, the substitution of hydraulic or electric models for impact tools such as
jack hammers, rock drills and pavement breakers shall be required in construction contracts
to reduce construction and demolition noise.
• Construction contracts shall require, to the extent feasible, that ambient-sensing vehicle back-
up alarms meeting OSHA standards shall be used.
Pile Driving Noise
• Pile driving shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight
o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. No pile driving work shall be permitted on
Saturdays or Sundays. Or, the Development Services Division Director may authorize
alternate construction hours for reasonable cause, consistent with City regulations where
applicable.
• A grout injected pile system or other equivalent system which would not require impact
driving shall be evaluated. If the grout injected pile system or equivalent is not chosen, the
following mitigation measure shall be applied to the impact pile driving activities.
Southport Planned Action I7 Mitigation Document
- Where a grout pile driving system or equivalent system is not selected, and impact pile
driving activities are conducted, at least one of the fallowing noise reduction measures
shall be used to mitigate potential pile driving noise:
Insert a wooden or plastic dolly between the pile head and the hammer.
Apply a damping compound to steel piles to reduce the vibration/ringing.
Silence exhaust gas pulsations from the engines of diesel-powered hammers.
Remove any unnecessary hanging chains; fix any loose bolts, panels, or over-slack
leader guides.
Use a cushioned method in conjunction with a "heavy hammer-short drop" practice.
This requires using interference fit guides to prevent kicking, rolling and vibration in
the pile. While the overall sound level is not substantially reduced, the nature of the
sound may be less annoying to people.
Regular equipment service and maintenance.
Use a Hoesch Noise Abatement Tower.
Pile Driving Vibration
• As part of the detailed building design process, a qualified geotechnical engineer retained by
the developer(s) shall survey existing structures in the surrounding area to more thoroughly
determine the potential for vibration related impacts. In addition, a pile driving test near the
western site boundary shall be conducted while vibration measurements are taken at the
closest Boeing facilities. The City will facilitate cooperation/coordination between the
developer and The Boeing Company as needed.
• As stated previously, a grout injected pile system or equivalent system which would not
require impact driving shall be evaluated. The geotechnical survey and test pile drive in the
previous mitigation measure will determine whether a grout pile driving system or equivalent
is warranted. If warranted, the grout pile driving system or equivalent shall be utilized for the
area within 100 feet of the wastewater treatment facility to protect against potential structural
damage, or within an alternate distance/area as recommended by the geotechnical engineer,
upon acceptance by the City.
• To reduce potential vibration impacts at the nearest Boeing facilities, multiple pile driving
activities shall be precluded from occurring very near the western site boundary. The
distance shall be determined as part of the survey by the qualified geotechnical engineer
retained by the developer(s).
Operational Noise
• Specific studies on the potential for significant HVAC noise impacts shall be conducted by
the developer as part of the building design process. If such studies indicate that HVAC
equipment noise could cause noise impacts at the nearest residences overlooking the site, the
Southport Planned Action 18 Mitigation Document
following mitigation measures could be employed. The need for such measures shall be
determined as part of the building permit process. ^
- Place noise barriers around the HVAC units.
- Choose quieter equipment.
- Provide silencers on the air intake and exhaust.
d. Nexus: City of Renton Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations (RMC 4-4-060); City of
Renton Comprehensive Plan.
6. LAND USE
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to
land use. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more
detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS.
• The Proposed Action would result in the permanent conversion of 14.2 acres of existing
industrial land to office, residential and commercial retail land uses.
• The Proposed Action would result in a trade-off between industrial land and Center Office
Residential (COR) lands in the city. A one percent reduction in total industrial land and an
11 percent increase in COR land would result.
• The proposed building area would be greater than the existing building area on the site.
• Planned uses would provide a land use transition between industrial use to the west and
park/residential use to the east. Densities would be greater than nearby residential areas,
however.
• The proposed land uses would increase the level of human activity on the site.
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: Implementation of the Proposed Action would
result in the intensification of development on the site, displacement of some existing industrial uses, and
permanent conversion of industrial land to a mixed use redevelopment. A substantial difference in
building scale between on-site development and Gene Coulon Park would result.
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation
measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future
developer(s):
• The preliminary Conceptual Master Plan includes approximately 4.7 acres (Plan A) to 4.6
acres (Plan C) to 4.2 acres (Plan B) of open space which would help offset proposed
intensification of the site. Of the total amount of open space provided on the site,
approximately 3.2 acres (Plans A and C) to 3.0 acres (Plan B) would be located at ground-
level and outside of structures (i.e., excluding courtyards above parking structures). If future
site plans propose less amounts of open space, the City shall determine if the proposal is
consistent with City policies and standards.
Southport Planned Action 19 Mitigation Document
• Along the subject site perimeter, minimum building setbacks of 10 to 30 feet shall be
provided between proposed buildings and adjacent properties. Along the subject site
perimeter, the minimum average side setback shall equal 20 feet. Minimum setbacks from
Building B, or similarly situated structures, to the Gene Coulon Park property boundary shall
be 10 to 22 feet, with a minimum average setback of 16 feet. Building setbacks from Lake
Washington would be a minimum of 35 feet.
d. Nexus: City of Renton Zoning Code (RMC 4-2); City of Renton Shoreline Master Program
(RMC 4-3-090; Ord. 4716); City of Renton Comprehensive Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan; City
of Renton Comprehensive Plan.
7. RELATIONSHIP TO PLANS AND POLICIES
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to
relevant plans and policies. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary
Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS.
• The Proposed Action, which includes needed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and
Municipal Code, would be generally consistent with relevant City plans, policies and regulations.
• In order to accommodate redevelopment under the Proposed Action, modifications to City
parking and surface water regulations may be needed. Additionally, a variance could be needed
from Land Clearing and Tree Cutting regulations if vegetation is removed within 25 feet of Johns
Creek. Either a conditional use permit, variance, and/or an administrative determination of the
Shoreline Master Program would be needed relative to setbacks for mixed use (residential and
commercial) buildings if proposed as shown in Plans A or B. Plan C would not require special
permits or authorizations related to shoreline setbacks. Other permits required for the proposal
are listed in the Fact Sheet of the SEIS.
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: None are anticipated.
c. Mitigation Measures: No specific mitigation measures are warranted. See discussion of needed
modifications, variances, and other permits.
d. Nexus: Non-applicable.
8. POPULATION, HOUSING AND EMPLOYMENT
si; Significant Impacts:
• Proposed residential use would increase the population by between 720 and 1,037 people, 5%
to 8% of the City's population forecasted to be added between 1990 and 2010. Dwellings
would help meet City's housing targets. The Proposed Action would add between 1,751 to
2,584 employees, 6% to 9.5% of City's 1990-2010 employment target.
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No significant unavoidable adverse impacts are
anticipated.
c. Mitigation Measures: No mitigation measures would be necessary.
Southport Planned Action 20 Mitigation Document
Nexus: Non-applicable.
9. AESTHETICS, LIGHT & GLARE
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to
aesthetics and light and glare. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary
Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS.
• The visual character of the site would change from low density industrial use to higher
density mixed use.
• From distant viewpoints, site development would appear as a continuation of the building
mass of the Boeing Plant. Office buildings would step-down in height, from west to east, and
would provide a height transition from Boeing to the proposed residential buildings and Gene
Coulon Park to the east.
• From the playground in Gene Coulon Park, residential Building B would significantly affect
the visual character of the immediate area.
• The optional fire lane along east side of Building C could encroach upon the drip line of
certain trees along the west boundary with Gene Coulon Park. With implementation of
arborist recommendations, no significant impacts to trees would be anticipated from the
optional fire lane.
• Proposed buildings would increase the amount of shade east over the Park playground. The
greatest increase in shade would occur late in the afternoon during the winter months - the
time of year with lowest number of sunny days and lowest park utilization.
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: The scale and height of buildings on the site would
increase subsequent to redevelopment. Some increase in shading and glare conditions at the adjacent
Gene Coulon Park children's playground area would occur. Regarding identified impacts to Gene Coulon
Park, additional mitigation considered could include increased setbacks, reduced heights, or
stepped/graduated heights for Building B. These measures are not proposed as they could affect other
building placements/heights as well as the achievement of sponsor objectives. However, the Proposed
Action includes code amendments addressing building modulation and articulation for buildings
immediately adjacent to public parks, open space and trails. This measure could help to partially offset
some identified impacts depending on specific building designs developed for site plan and building
permit applications.
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation
measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future
developer(s):
• The preliminary Conceptual Master Plan includes approximately 4.7 acres (Plan A) to 4.6
acres (Plan C) to 4.2 acres (Plan B) of open space and public amenities which would help
offset proposed intensification of the site. Of the total amount of open space provided on the
site approximately 3.2 acres (Plans A and C) to 3.0 acres (Plan B) would be located at ground
level and outside of structures (i.e. excluding courtyards and above parking structures). If
Southport Planned Action 21 Mitigation Document
future site plans propose less amounts of open space, the City shall determine if the proposal
is consistent with the City's policies and standards. \
• Along the subject site perimeter, minimum building setbacks of 10 to 30 feet shall be
provided between proposed buildings and adjacent properties. Along the subject site
perimeter, the minimum average side setback shall equal 20 feet. Minimum setbacks from
Building B, or similarly situated structures, to the Gene Coulon Park property boundary shall
be 10 to 22 feet, with a minimum average setback of 16 feet. Building setbacks from Lake
Washington would be a minimum of 3 5 feet.
• Trail and outdoor area design elements of the preliminary Conceptual Master Plan (e.g.,
benches, gates, waste receptacles, plant materials, lighting, handrail details) shall be
compatible with the Gene Coulon Park design theme as determined by the City.
• Modulation and articulation of buildings adjacent to or abutting public parks, open space or
trails shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City, and where applicable, shall be
consistent with City regulations.
• If the optional fire lane along the east side of Building C were to be constructed, instead of
providing emergency access via the Coulon Park parking lot drive aisle to the east as
proposed, arborist recommendations limiting intrusions within the drip line of trees along the
western edge of the park shall be implemented to help ensure the long-term survival of the
trees. Arborist recommendations include minimizing disruptions within the tree root zone
(drip-line), minimizing the amount of fill within root zone areas, and possibly utilizing
pervious paving materials for the fire lane (refer to Appendix E of the Draft SEIS for detail).
Nexus: City of Renton Zoning Code (RMC 4-2); City of Renton Land Clearing and Tree Cutting
Regulations (RMC 4-4-130); City of Renton Comprehensive Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan; City
of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090, Ord. 4716); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan.
10. TRANSPORTATION
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3/Appendix D of the SEIS includes an examination of significant
impacts to the transportation system. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS
Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3/Appendix D of the SEIS.
• Plan A, B and C would generate between 9,367 and 11,202 net daily trips, including between
1,005 to 1,273 AM peak hour trips, and between 1,061 and 1,355 PM net peak hour trips in
2004.
• The' number of new trips generated by Plans A and C would be less than the City's
concurrency ordinance estimated annual average, and all plans would meet the 1999 trip bank
forecasts. Plans A, B, and C would pass the City's concurrency test.
• Without off-site roadway improvements, proposed development would result in decreased
LOS compared to 2004 background conditions at the following intersections: Park
Drive/Garden Avenue/Lake Washington Blvd. during the a.m. and p.m. peak hours; and Lake
Washington Blvd./Site Access/Houser Way and N. 30th Street/I-405 northbound ramps during
the p.m. peak hour.
Southport Planned Action 22 Mitigation Document
Proposed roadway improvements would be provided at the Park Drive/Garden Ave/Lake
Washington Boulevard and Lake Washington BoUtevard/Houser Way/Site Access
Intersections to achieve acceptable levels of service.
• Vehicles exiting the site during the PM peak-hour would experience significant delay at the
site driveway.
• Proposed parking supply for residential and commercial uses does not meet City rates for
Plans A and B. Proposed parking rates for the hotel use does not meet City rates in Plan C.
• In terms of the parking demand analysis, proposed parking supply for retail uses in Plans A
and B would be insufficient on weekdays.
• If paid parking is implemented for office uses on the subject site, it could have a spillover
effect on the free parking provided at Gene Coulon Park.
• With increased traffic, additional conflicts could result for vehicles crossing at the existing
railroad crossings (no impact to trains would be anticipated). The City and the developer(s)
would work with BNSF and the WUTC during the design of improvements on Lake
Washington Blvd. to determine the best railroad crossing solution (i.e., automatic gates
and/or signals).
• The Proposed Action would generate demand for area transit, pedestrian and bicycle
facilities. On-site pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including sidewalks, promenade,
crosswalks and connections to existing pedestrian and bicycle facilities would be provided.
Transit incentives could be provided as part of a TDM program.
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: The Proposed Action would increase the number of
vehicles using area roadways. With implementation of mitigation measures, no significant impacts would
be anticipated.
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3/Appendix D of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended
mitigation measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by
the future developer(s):
• A traffic/road improvement plan shall be prepared and approved prior to approval of a site
plan (Level-I). Improvements shall be implemented at the time demand or safety warrants.
The road improvements shall be consistent generally with the following features:
- At the Park Drive/Garden Avenue/Lake Washington Boulevard intersection, the existing
channelization on the Park Avenue approach would be restriped to accommodate one
shared through/right lane, one through lane, and two left-turn lanes. On the Lake
Washington Boulevard approach, the approach would be restriped to accommodate one
right-turn lane and two left-turn lanes. The westbound free right-turn lane from Park
Drive to Lake Washington Boulevard would yield to the eastbound left-turning vehicles
from Park Avenue to Lake Washington Boulevard.
- A signal would be provided at the Lake Washington Boulevard/Houser Way/Site Access
intersection.
Southport Planned Action 23 Mitigation Document
- The Subject Site/Gene Coulon Park shared access approach would be widened to three
lanes (one left-turn, one right-turn and one entering lane).
- The section of Lake Washington Boulevard between Park Drive and the joint Site/Gene
Coulon Park shared access would be widened by approximately 12 feet to accommodate
two southbound lanes, one northbound left turn lane, and one northbound through lane.
- To minimize the safety hazard from left-turns in and out of the Boeing parking lot, left
turns may need to be restricted. One solution could be placement of a c-curb along the
centerline of Lake Washington Boulevard just north of Park Drive to restrict left-turns
into and out of the Boeing parking lot. Alternate parking lot access may be available
from N 10th Street. Prior to final design, coordination with Boeing shall occur to
determine specific mitigation. The City shall assist with coordination efforts as needed.
- The improvements shall be funded by the future developer(s), or through a City Local
Improvement District.
Traffic impact mitigation fees shall be paid to the City of Renton at the rate of $75 per daily
trip generated, consistent with the City of Renton Resolution No. 3100. Appropriate fees shall
be determined in accordance with Resolution 3100 prior to approval of a site plan (Level II).
Because the traffic/road improvements would also address traffic growth unrelated to the
development of the subject site, the City will use all or a portion of the traffic impact
mitigation fees to fund the portion of the traffic/road improvements required that the City
determines will provide benefit to the public.
The City and the future developer(s) shall continue to work with the BNSF railroad during
the design of improvements on Lake Washington Boulevard to determine the most
appropriate railroad crossing solution. Potential solutions could include signal pre-emption
and cantilever-mounted flashing lights with or without gates.
The specific design of the internal intersection of the Site access driveway and the Gene
Coulon Park access road shall be formulated prior to approval of Level I site plan(s) that
necessitate the improvements. The design shall minimize queue lengths within Gene Coulon
Park. The design shall insure that traffic into both properties would not spill back onto Lake
Washington Boulevard.
The future developer(s) shall prepare a parking management plan for review and approval by
the City prior to the issuance of building or construction permits.
Based upon any supplementary information during the preparation of Level I site plans or the
traffic/road improvement plan, "Children at Play" signs could be installed in and around the
Gene Coulon Park access road and near the site's residential areas, and/or speed bumps could
be installed on the internal roadways to encourage slower speeds and enhance overall safety.
A traffic monitoring plan shall be conducted for two years after full buildout to determine if
any modifications to traffic/road improvements are warranted based upon actual travel
patterns. The monitoring would be conducted as part of the City's regular traffic count
program. Where feasible, the road design shall consider potential contingency measures to
Southport Planned Action 24 Mitigation Document
ensure that road improvements will function as designed to encourage traffic movements to
the south of the project site. • N\
d. Nexus: City of Renton Parking Regulations (RMC 4-4-080); City of Renton Six Year
Transportation Improvement Program; City of Renton Street Arterial Plan; City of Renton Traffic
Mitigation Resolution and Fee (Resolution 3100); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan.
11. FIRE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to fire
department services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix.
For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS.
• The Proposed Action would generate additional fire protection and emergency
demands on the City of Renton Fire Department.
service
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated.
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation
measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future
developer(s):
• Per Resolution 2913, fire mitigation fees shall be paid to the City at Hie rate of $388 per
multi-family unit, and $0.52 per square foot of commercial building area. Credit shall be
given for existing structure square footage.
d. Nexus: City of Renton Uniform Fire Code (RMC 4-5-070); City of Renton Uniform Building
Code (RMC 4-5-050); Fire Department Master Plan; Fire Mitigation Resolution and Fee (Resolution
2913); City of Renton Comprehensive Plan.
12. POLICE
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to
police services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a
more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS.
• The Proposed Action would generate additional demands for police protection.
• Due to the additional population, demand for police security in Gene Coulon Park could
increase.
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated.
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation
measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future
developer(s):
Southport Planned Action 25 Mitigation Document
• Prior to the issuance of building permits, future developer(s) of the site shall coordinate with
the Police Department to include on-site safety features that would help lower the demand for
service.
Nexus: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan.
13. SCHOOLS
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to
school facilities and services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary
Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS.
• Residential use would generate additional students in the Renton School District.
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated.
£ Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation
measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future '
developer(s):
• Prior to issuance of residential building permits, the future developer(s) shall coordinate with
the school district to ensure safe and efficient bus transportation to and from the site.
• Prior to issuance of residential building permits, adequate provisions shall be provided on-site
for bus turn-around(s) or on Lake Washington Boulevard for a bus pull-out as applicable.
d. Nexus: City of Renton Comprehensive Plan.
14. PARKS
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to
parks and recreation facilities and services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the
SEIS Summary Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS.
• Plans A, B, or C would increase the demand on nearby park and recreational facilities. Using
the City of Renton's Parks level service standards, approximately 20 to 31 acres of parks and
recreational facilities would be required to serve the site population. Residents would likely
use nearby park and recreational facilities for active needs.
• The Gene Coulon Park playground would experience higher levels of activity.
• Increased level of activity at Gene Coulon Park could cause need for additional security in the
Park. However, presence of resident population could enhance perception of security at the
park.
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse park impacts would occur
with implementation of mitigation measures. Refer to the Aesthetics section above regarding other
unavoidable impacts.
Southport Planned Action 26 Mitigation Document
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation
measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future
developer(s):
• Subject to City approval, future site plans (Levels II and I) shall include substantial on-site
public and private recreational features, including public access to Lake Washington, a
waterfront promenade, public plaza areas and courtyards. The promenade shall serve as an
extension of the trail in Gene Coulon Park and would provide an opportunity for a future
connection to properties to the west and the Cedar River Trail.
• The playground in Gene Coulon Park shall be redesigned to ensure that the pedestrian
connection between the park and the subject site would not direct pedestrians into the
playground area. A conceptual redesign shall be prepared by the developer(s) prior to
approval of a site plan (Level II) with oversight by the City.
• Future developer(s) shall comply with the City's Park Mitigation Fee Policy (Resolution
3082), which allows a variety of approaches to mitigate impacts (e.g. dedication, fees,
provision of on-site facilities). The impact fee is equal to $354.51 per multi-family dwelling
unit. The fee shall be determined and applied in accordance with Resolution 3082.
• Trail and outdoor area design elements of the preliminary Conceptual Master Plan (e.g.,
benches, grates, waste receptacles, plant materials, lighting, handrail details) shall be
compatible with the Gene Coulon Park design theme, as determined by the City, to achieve
an effective transition.
• The property owner(s) and developer(s) as appropriate, shall dedicate, develop, and maintain
a public recreation easement for physical access along the promenade and shall dedicate a
public recreation easement for physical access to and use of the dock to ensure long-term
opportunities for public access to the shoreline.
• If the optional fire lane along the east side of Building C were to be constructed instead of
providing emergency access via the Gene Coulon Park parking lot drive aisle to the east as
proposed, arborist recommendations limiting intrusions within the drip line of trees along the
western edge of the park shall be implemented to help ensure the long-term survival of the
trees. Arborist recommendations include minimizing disruptions within the trees' dnp-lme,
minimizing the amount of fill within the drip-line area, and possibly utilizing pervious pavmg
materials for the fire lane (refer to Appendix E in the Draft SEIS for detail).
d Nexus: City of Renton Shoreline Master Program (RMC 4-3-090; Ord. 4716); Comprehensive
Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan; City of Renton Parks Mitigation and Fee (Resolution 3082); City
of Renton Comprehensive Plan.
15. WATER SUPPLY
a Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to
water supply. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix. For a
more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS.
• Development will result in additional domestic water demand.
Southport Planned Action 27 Mitigation Document
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: None would be expected.
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation
measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future
developer(s):
• Redevelopment will require construction of a minimum 10-inch line looped through the site.
This line would connect to the existing 6-inch line serving Gene Coulon Park. The 6-inch
connection to Lake Washington Boulevard would be replaced with a minimum 10-inch line.
These improvements would insure adequate water pressure and fire flow capacity for future
development on the site.
• Construction beneath Burlington Northern Railroad's tracks and in the public right-of-way
will be required to install the new connection. The following mitigation measures shall
apply:
Construction plan review and scheduling with all affected utilities and the railroad shall
be coordinated well in advance of construction.
Dependent upon final approved plans and methodologies, boring and jacking would
likely be required for construction underneath the existing rail lines.
• A minimum 15-foot wide utility easement shall be provided to allow City access to water
lines for maintenance/repair.
d. Nexus: City of Renton Uniform Fire Code (RMC 4-5-070); City of Renton Comprehensive
Water System Plan; City of Renton Comprehensive Plan.
16. WASTEWATER
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to
wastewater utility service. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary
Matrix. For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS.
• Peak sanitary sewer flows would increase.
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: None would be expected.
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3 of the SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation
measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future
developer(s):
• The existing 8-inch sewer line shall be replaced with a minimum 10-inch line to insure
adequate capacity to handle the estimated flows.
Southport Planned Action 28 Mitigation Document
• Installation of the minimum 10-inch sewer line will require construction beneath Burlington
Northern Railroad's tracks, as well as construction ihthd\public right-of-way. The following
mitigation measures shall apply:
- Construction plan review and scheduling with all affected utilities and the railroad shall
be coordinated well in advance of construction.
- Dependent upon final approved plans and methodolgies, boring and jacking would likely
be required for construction underneath existing rails.
• A minimum 15-foot wide utility easement shall be provided to allow City access to sewer
lines for maintenance/repair.
d. Nexus: City of Renton Long Range Wastewater Management Plan; City of Renton
Comprehensive Plan.
17. SOLID WASTE
a. Significant Impacts: Chapter 3 of the SEIS includes an examination of significant impacts to
solid waste services. A summary of impacts is provided below based upon the SEIS Summary Matrix.
For a more detailed discussion of impacts, see Chapter 3 of the SEIS.
• Residential uses and commercial uses would generate additional tons of solid waste annually
b. Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts: No unavoidable adverse impacts are anticipated.
c. Mitigation Measures: The mitigation measures established below address impacts identified in
Chapter 3 of Hie SEIS. These measures are based upon the proposed and recommended mitigation
measures identified in the SEIS. The following mitigation measures will be implemented by the future
developer(s):
• Future developer(s) shall develop a plan for waste reduction, reuse and recycling both during
construction and post-development to reduce solid waste disposal demands. The plan shall
be reviewed and approved by the City of Renton Solid Waste Utility prior to issuance of
building and construction permits.
d. Nexus: Comprehensive Solid Waste Management Plan; City of Renton Comprehensive Plan.
Southport Planned Action 29 Mitigation Document
ADVISORY NOTES TO DEVLOPER/APPLICANT
The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the Mitigation
Document. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal
process.
The SEIS did not list all potential applicable code requirements, but identified the key code requirements
that would act to mitigate identified environmental impacts. It is assumed that all applicable federal,
state, and local regulations would be applied. The primary set of applicable local regulations is found in
Title 4 of the Renton Municipal Code which addresses Administration and Enforcement, Land Use
Districts, Environmental Regulations and Special Districts, Property Development Standards, Building
and Fire Prevention Standards, Street and Utility Standards, Subdivision Regulations, Permits and
Decisions, Procedures and Review Criteria, and Non-conforming Structures, Uses and Lots. Specific
code requirements identified in the SEIS that would act as mitigation include:
EARTH
Seismic
• All proposed structures will be designed in accordance with the Uniform Building Code
(RMC 4-5-050)
Geotechnical Considerations - Stuctural Fill
• Final grading plans shall ensure that existing grades are met at Hie property line with Gene
Coulon Park. (RMC 4-4-060.H.4)
AIR QUALITY
General - Construction and Operation
• Rules and regulations as promulgated by Federal and State Clean Air Acts, the State DOE
(RCW 70.94; WAC 173-400), and PSAPCA (RCW 70.94; PSAPCA Regulations I, II, and
III) would apply to the Proposed Action as well as to activities of adjacent and abutting sites.
NOISE
Construction Noise
• Washington's noise limits apply to construction noise during nighttime hours; therefore,
construction activities could be limited to daytime hours to the extent practicable. This
restriction could include all noisy start-up and preparatory activities such as starting engines
before 7:00 a.m., which can disturb people trying to sleep. Noise from any work during
nighttime hours (after 10 p.m.) received in residentially zoned areas would be subject to the
nighttime noise limits in the Washington Administrative Code. (WAC 173-60)
• Maximum noise levels during construction would be required to comply with City of Renton
Development Regulations for Grading, Excavation and Mining (RMC 4-4-060).
Southport Planned Action 30 Mitigation Document
TRANSPORTATION
A Transportation Demand Management (TDM) program will be implemented. TDM is a tool
for managing the amount of traffic a development generates. Through various TDM
programs, traffic could be reduced overall or shifted to non-peak times of the day. The State
of Washington's Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) program, implemented through the City's
Commute Trip Reduction regulations in RMC10-13, requires employers who have 100 or
more employees commuting to a single location, between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 9:00
a.m., to implement TDM programs. Some TDM programs could include:
- Transit incentives
- Guaranteed ride home program
- Flex-time hours
- Telecommuting
- Preferential parking for vanpools and carpools
- Parking pricing
- Secured bicycle parking
- Financial Incentives
Haul Routes and Hours: A construction plan showing haul routes and hours will be required.
(RMC 4-4-030.C)
FIRE SERVICES
Approved fire sprinkler systems and fire alarm systems will be installed throughout all
structures. (RMC 4-5-070)
City ordinances require a minimum of two access roadways into the project. An emergency
access would be provided via the 45-foot wide pedestrian plaza located immediately south of
Building B with access from Gene Coulon Park's southern parking lot. Removable vehicle
barriers would block ordinary vehicle traffic. (RMC 4-5-070)
Fire department apparatus access is required within 150 feet of all points on the building.
The fire lanes along the secondary access, and along the south/southwest site perimeter,
would meet fire department requirements by having widths of 20 feet. Roadways would be
signed as fire lanes. If later proposals require access along the promenade for emergency
apparatus, then the access shall meet applicable code requirements and ensure the access
areas are distinguishable. (RMC 4-5-070)
A designated fire lane, to serve the eastern side of the development, would be provided by the
existing drive aisle in the Gene Coulon Park parking lot to the immediate east. The park
drive aisle would be signed as a fire lane. (RMC 4-5-070)
Southport Planned Action . 31 Mitigation Document
/
SOUTHPORT VICINITY MAP
Gene Coulon Park
Lake Washington
Shoreline
SOUTHPORT
Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning
ED/N/SP
0. Dennison.
23 February 1999 EXHIBIT B
ILLUSTRATIVE MAP
0
— Site boundary
400 800
T6M««««M
1:4,800
EXHIBIT C
LEGAL DESCRIPTION l
New Lot B of City of Renton Lot Line Adjustment No. 98-176-LLA, as recorded under
King County Recording No. 9902019014, Records of King County, Washington.
Situate in Government Lots 1 and 2 of Section 18, Township 23 North, Range 5 East,
W.M., City of Renton, King County, Washington.
Maximum ]
'•"'."**•"'.*•"•"'."*"•'**'
•
HI
m
3uilding Heights
75'
125'
35*
58' (g|)
Southport Planned Action e Neighborhoods & Strategic Planning EXHIBIT D
ED/N/SP
L. Grueter, 0. Dennlson
16 August 1999 MAXIMUM BUILDTNG HEIGHTS
0 200 400
1:2,400
H