The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutORD 3037 � .. - r r :.,t . • ♦ � � . , - v y� �+ _R � �� .. . . ... f �. � i '!1;1"'Y..+. � � , w �-,+�:'�:";`�vl�� r�rL* e ,,��` LL f��'e'�,��+T--� , CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE N0. 3037 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, ANDNMAPS AND DATA' INCCONJUNCTIONE.TH�E��H PLAN RELATING TO CERTAIN PROPERTIES DESCRIBED AS THE "GREEN RZVER VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN" , ALL LOCATED IN RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON , WHEREAS the Planning Commission of the City of Renton and � the City Council have heretofore adopted and filed a "CompreYiensive �r�� Plan" as evidenced by Resolution No, 1240 and Ordinance No . 2142 and as same has heretofore been amended and implemented from time to time, to.gether with. the adoption of various codes, reports and --£ records , and � --� WHEREAS since said adoption th.e Planning Commission and {^=� � its staff has heretofore held various pub�ic hearings and duly recommended tT} � � to the City Council certain amendments to said City� s "Comprehensive Lx��xt�g Plar�" as it affects certain properties here'inafter more particu.larly described, and WHEREAS the City Council, after publication and notices :fi� provided by law, held a public hearing on such proposed ameridment at its regular meeting on May 17 , 1976, and all persons having been heard..� in connection therewi.th,and WHEREAS the City Council has duly determined, after considera- tion of all the testimony and .evidence before it, th.at it is advisable and appropriate to amend and modify the City' s "Comprehensive I�� t� Plan" and such amendment being .in the public intere.st and for the public benefit, no�a the.refore THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REN.TON, WASHINGTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : SECTION I : The aforestated findings and recitals are hereb Y found to be true and correct in all respects . � ,-�� °, � , � a r.� C� �J�U� �J ` i -1- F��.ca��'��a r;c ��c�,:�:, I _ � � ,- , . ^ . . �I �1 Y •;`�.._ • A , • r a I . � �"� � . � lt � "' � � - F . . , .. _ _ a�' �_�=� ��-�� ISECTION II: The City of Renton' s "Comprehensive ��.X�� Plan" , maps , data and reports in conjunction therewith, are hereby modified and amended, pursuant to the public hearings held in connection j therewith as hereinabove specified relating to the following described properties generally known as the "Green River Valley Planning Area" and described as follows: That certain parcel of property, .the southerly boundary of which is S .W. 43rd Street,. the westerly boundary;be- ing Greeri River: and the Railroad tracks, the northerly boundary- �e�ng B1ack River and the Railroad tracks , and the easterly boundary being Hardie S.W. , Rainier Avenue � S. , the base of Talbot Hill and SR 167 (Valley Freeway) all situated in Renton, King County, Washington. and all as more particularly described by. the attached Exhibit, labeled � Exhibit 'rAr' which is incorporated herein and made a part hereof as if ,,._., :� full set forth. i �.,,,, Y � SECTTON TII: The Planning Departmerit ��x��]��s��xia�c�� ,� ��a�� is hereby author'ized and directed to make the necessary changes an said City' s. "Compreherisive #�a��34�xI��€�x�'�an�t and the maps in conjunction therewith to evidence the aforedescribed amendmerit. SECTION �IV: The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to file this Ordinance as provided by law, and a complete copy thereof likewise being filed with .the office of the City Clerk, City ' of Renton. SEC'TTON V: This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after its publication. � " _.;='� , • p:'E�.ts ',' . . PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 14th day of J ��, 1976 . ,,,��.., .c'' _�� - . ._..._. • . < cc r - -... . - -� �� OC�LC��/Ui�/l 'Q, ../•-//�,\.�'✓GL�iI„�-• , Delorea A. Mead, ,C3��y. Cl�er•k - - , ,,. .. , ti APPROVED BY THE MAYOR th�s 14th day of June; .19.76 . � . c ., C'��..�:�" �/ ..-- �' .` y..' � `� � !�-��L��"L/ � App ed as to form: Charles J�Delaurenti,' Mayor ' �y�/j!( ��."� . Getard M. Shellan, City Attorney Date of Publication: 6-18-76 � �, � ENVIRONMENTAL IIV�PACT STATEMENT C011�IPREHENSIVE PLAN CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTIVfENT APRIL 1975 �ll� Fl�, ��' �� 1- TI �E CITY OF RFNTON � � MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 �pA � AVERYGARRETT, MAYOR � p�ANNiNG DEPARTMENT 235 - 2550 o��Tf� SEP�E�� RE: Final Environmental Impact Statement �or The Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan Dear Recipient: This document is the final environmental impact state- ment (EIS) for the proposed Green River Valle� Comprehensive Plan. , The draft EIS was disi:ributed on February 10 , 1975 for a 30 day review period. Twelve comments were received. Changes have been made in the final EIS to reflect this input. Review of the draft EIS by interested agencies and �ersons and attendance of public hearings on the proposed Plan has been appreciated by this Department. IIecause of this interest the quality of the final EIS and the proposed Plan is anticipated to be enhanced. Very trul yours , G' /` _ /Z�L�� rdon Y ricksen � lannin irector FINAL ENVIRONMENT�L IMPACT STATEMENT FOR A REVISED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE GREEN RIVER VALLEY PLANNING AREA CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT APRIL 1975 STATEMENT SUMMARY Nature of this report: Final Environmental Impact Statement Sponsor: City of Renton Planning Department Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue 5outh Renton, Washington 98055 Telephone: 235-2550 Contact: Gary Kruger, Associate Planner �e of Proposed Action: Legislation Official Title of Proposed Action: Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan SummarY of Proposed Action: The Renton Planning Commission will recom- mend to the City Council that an amendment to the City' s Comprehensive Plan in the Green River Valley planning area be adopted. The pro- posed amendment consists of maps and goals and policies which are attached. The proposed action updates the existing Plan by incorporating the U. S. Soil Conservation Service ` s drainage plans and requirements for the Valley; redesignating existing and proposed land uses to reflect the existing and probable uses; and is intended to upgrade the quality of development. Summary of Im ap cts: 1. Soils and Veqetation - The original soils (which have �r'arying degrees of agricultural capabilities) will be covered with several feet of fill material to raise the land above flood level and provide a firm base for develop- ment. Prior to the fill being placed on the land, the original vegetation must be removed to permit firm compaction of the fill. 2 . Greenbelt and Wildlife - About 250 acres are proposed to be designated as greenbelt which will help mitigate the loss of wildlife habitat; provide open space and recre- ational opportunites; and reduce potential densities and provide amenities . 3. HXdrology - Development will reduce water storage capa- bilities; increase the runnoff and temperature of water; I and enhance the possibilities of pollutants entering the water. 4. Traffic - Considerable traffic is expected to be generated by the proposed manufacturing park uses. This volume ' . is expected to tax the arterial and freeway systems in that area. 5 . Air Quality - The traffic generated by the uses in the planning area along with some of the manufacturing park uses will adversely effect the quality of air in the Green River Valley which has a history of air pallution problems. 6. Noise - An increase in the present level of noise can • be anticipated, due to trains, motor vehicles and some industrial uses . 7. Human - A tax and employment base will be created that will positively benefit many people and governmental agencies while at the same time making demands on those agencies. The quality of development will be enhanced that will benefit recreational opportunities , aesthetics and the image of the City of Rer.ton. 3ummar� of Alternatives : 1. No Action - This alternative involves the continuation of present trends which is light and heavy industrial, manufacturing park and some commercial uses throughout the planning area. 2 . Open Space , Recreation and Agriculture - This alternative involves the re-establishment of agrarian activities and the reservation of areas for recreation, wildlife habitat and other open space activities . 3 . Commercial and High Densit� Residential - This alternative assumes thL construction of a major retail facility with adjacent high rise apartments . Recipients of the Document: District Engineer, Seattle District, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Max Fulner, U.S. Soil Conservation Service John Harter, Special Projects Coordinator, Department of Commerce and Economic Development Dennis L. Lundblad, Head Environmental Review, Department of Ecology John Mercer, Green for Tomorrow Gil Hollan3, Fisheries Research Coordinator, Department of Fisheries Eugene S. Dziedzic, Assistant Chief , Environmental Management Division, Departsnent of Game Bruce Davidson, Environmental Planner, Department of Highways John Van Amburg, Director of Operations , Seattle King County Health Department Brad Gillespie, Division Engineer, Division of Hydraulics , King County Department of Public Works James P. Harris , Director, Planning Department, Kent, Washington William Cokely, U.S. Soil Conservation Service Gerald M. Bacon, Director, Planning Department, I�4ercer Island, Washir�aton Kjell Stoknes, Director, Planning Department, Tukwila, Washington James Smith, Director, Planning Department, Bellevue, Washington Director, Department of Planning and Community Development, King County Brian Beam, Environmental Planning Division, Puget Sound Governmental Conference General Manager, Port of Seattle Engineer Division, Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency Charles Kirkwood, Deputy Supervisor, Department of Natural Resources or Bill Boxter, Environmental Coordinator, Department of Natural Resources Emil Jensen, Chief , Office of Environmental Programs , Department of Social and Health Service Kay Johnson, Greater Renton Chamber of Commerce Dwayne Nikulla, Green for Tomorrow Victoria Park Homeowners Association, Renton, Washington John Lamb, Municipal Research and Service Center, Seattle , Washington William A. Bush, Chief, Research and Planning, Parks and Recreation Commission Gerald D. Probet, Planner, Local Planning Assistance, Planning and Community Affairs Agency � Donald A. Cowles , Regional Manager, Industrial and Real Estate Development Department, Burlington Northern Railroad Audubon Scciety, Seattle, Washington Broadacres, Inc. , Seattle , Washington Sierra Club, Seattle , Washington Olympic Pipe Line Company, Bellevue, Washington Planning �irector, Auburn, Washington Ken Mauerman, Environmental Quality Division, Department of Ecology Lo H. Bjorseth, Seattle Water Department, Seattle, Washington League of Women Voters of South King County Record-Chronicle, Renton, Washington Greater Renton News, Renton, Washington Patricia Seymour, Renton, Washington Paul Scott, Milwaukee Railroad, Seattle, Washington John Phillips, Seattle, Washington A. Wesley Hodge, (Shell Oil Company) , Seattle, Washington The Austin Company, Renton, Washington Sternoff Metals Corporation, Renton, Washington Metro Industrial District, Seatt.le, Washington Chris Palzer, Redondo, Washington Puget Sound Power & Light Company, Bellevue, Wash�ngton Arlene B. Balcom, Renton, Washington W. M. Lotto, Renton, Washington George Jonientz , Renton, Washington F. Bartow Fite , Mercer Island, Washington Robert L. Edwards, Renton, Washington Mission Supply Company, Portland, Oregon Robert W. Edwards , Seattle, Washington Golden Grain Macaroni , Seattle, Washington Craig Taylor Equipment CoMpany, Renton, Washington Sam Younker, Renton, Washington Delores Kohl, Seattle , Washington Merlino Construction Company, Seattle, Washington The Lumber Market, Renton, Washington Tom Sconzo, Manson, Bennett & Associates , Seattle, Washington R. J. Hanavan, Group Health Co-op of Puget Sound, Seattle, Washington , Douglas R. Spencer, Renton, Washington � James M. �aker, Renton, washington Sherwood B. Martin, Renton, Washington Vernon Guay, Bellevue , Washingtori Liz Greenhagen, Raymond, Washington Linda L. Ritzau, (A.A.U.W. ) , Renton, Washington William T. Miller, Seattle , Washington Foremost Foods Company, Seattle, Washingtorl Office of Public Archeology, Seattle , Washington Mobil Oil Corporation, H. E. Bailey, 5eattle, Washington Don Dally, Caldwell, Banker & Company, 5eattle, Washington R. W. Thorpe, Mercer Island, Washington Olympic Pipeline Company, I. I. Kamar, Renton, Washington Scarsella Brothers, Inc. , Seattls , Washington Shell Oil Company, Jim Fletcher, Seattle , Washington Pat M. Getzel, C.P. S. Economic Development District, Seattle , Washington Donald W. Custer, Ren}on, Washington Carol Goff, Puyallup, Washington TABLE OF CONTENTS Page A. The Proposed P.ction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 1 . Type of Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 2 . Location and Justification . . . . . . . . . 1 3 . Historical Perspective and Projections . . . . . 4 4. Public Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5 . Proposed Method of Financing . . . . . . . . . . 5 6 . Relationship with Existing Laws , Policies and Plans . . . . . . . . . . e . . . . . 5 7 . Actions Remaining for Implementation . . . . . . 5 B. Existing Conditions . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 1. Area Directly Involved . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2 . Human Uses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 C. Environmental Impact of Proposed Action . . . . . . . 11 l. Soils and Vegetation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2 . Greenbelt and Wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3 . Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 � 4. Land Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 5 . Streets and Traffic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 6 . Community Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 7. Noise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 8 . Air Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 9 . Human Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 D. Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Effects . . . . . . 15 l. Soils and Vegetation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 2 . Greenbelt and Wildlife . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 3 . Hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 4 . Land Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 5 . Streets , Traffic and Noise . . . . . . . . . . . 16 6 . Air Quality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 7 . Human Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 E. Alternatives to the Proposed Action . . . . . . . . . 17 1. No Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 � 2 . Open Space, Recreation and Agriculture . . . . . 17 3 . Commercial and High Density Residential . . . . . 18 F . Relationships Between Loca1 Short-Term Environmental Uses and the Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Productivity . . . . . . . . 19 G. Any Irreversible and/or Irretrievable Resource Commitments with the Proposed Action . . . . . . . . 19 H. References. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 APPENDIX A Responses Received �hat Do Not Require Comments APPENDIX B Responses Received That Require Comments • FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE GREEN RIVER VALLEY COMPREHENSIVE �LAN A. The Proposed Action 1. Type of Action The City of Renton Planning Commission will make a recom- mendation to the City Council to adopt an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan in the Green River Valley which is attached. The amendment includes revised maps and goals and objectives intended to influence the type and quality of development desired in the Valley. The City Council will take this recommendation and adopt an ordinance amend- ing the Comprehensive P1an. This proposed action is in conformance with the City' s Codes (5ection 4-1405) . 2 . Location and Justification The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is for the Green River Valley planning area which is a small portion of the City of Renton consisting of about 2 ,200 acres . The planning area is illustrated in Figure l. The southerly boundary is S.We 43rd Street; the westerly boundary is the Green River and the railroad tracks; the northerly boundary is the Black River and the railroad tracks; and the easterly boundary is Hardie Avenue S.W. , Rainier Avenue South, the base of Talbot Hill (edge of wetlands) and the Valley Freeway. Presently the Valley is facing increasing pressures for industrial development. Some of the Valley already has been developed for industrial purposes , the primary area b eing Earlington Industrial Park. Commercial and industrial develop- ment has occurred along the periphery of the planning area and adjacent to FAI-405 . TI� largest non--industrial uses in the area are Longacres Race Track, the Metro sewerage treatment plant and the commercial enterprises east of Earlington Industrial Park. TYie majority o� tYie planning area is in Renton but there are small areas in the City of Tukwila and uninCorporated King Countye About 1, 600 acres or three quarters (3/4} of the planning area is undeveloped plus there are large parcels of low intensively used land that is considered suitable for i industrial development. The undeveloped parcels have manu- ' facturing park and heavy industrial designation on the City` s existing comprehensive plan which is illustrated in Figure 2 • I To develop this land most parcels require landfill and the I extension of utilities , streets and perhaps railroad spurs . i o ��i�wI .�� . � v �'��•�� ' ' ' � �\� �^ _ � v� .•�� -„ "�_" . � �J � � � 1 �• ��: /�a �Il,�all ! � � 11 �ll �� P \\��♦ \ N /I : � `� •s'd a HI'T nqH 'f P�� iNi M b��♦ \� .�� G�` M.N\ �4iR� �� MN a\�' \ � I �� I PG �H N ,!� ��: ±�b�=M+ � ` � � ` - i N = !sA'u x♦ !M� a= N � 011�\ev II�11� ,�i11 A+ �M�sMa�a��t�A�� .� a t r - _a�_ ��s =�� Ms H� H.�+s a4 = _ �all N A ��@ � .-... ��r-�' _��,:a'\\' a' iiiP ;,/i.� ��w+s��: M - ,� / _�_'�� . , .... sii . , ii= �u = a��_ �o s '� \pc / , ' •o� i J _ .i P`a � � n ' � - N o �� \ �,�.�� l / ; � �i _ '!�a ` _��1� � 'VA �\�//y.i yM=N 3� II �N 11 ��- � � - �a � _/ ,y i � M♦ \ _ �P-N�� _ � �\a�`/�-\I I p�� I I p U �\� \�„M N M M�H+�'� ` .\��\ll= o��0 /� II l/��l•d/i 1 1 1 - - _` 11 1 4 M C�\'`\II�Q 1 \\= II _i\_ .�� II � N��11 �_ �1\�'\, ii M �/M�tla�ayll=�11�i �a/1�11%.Y �\\ N�\�� li \� \\\� , I � � �p��'_ _ p \�qc � II p'ii M p��n , 0 .�% .��a n p�� t � � . 1 + N !a 1 �- �+'�� a e n x,� +x��ao u O '�o=n�. \\�• ` n c•'" =` �•°"\ \ N � � =--�- � \ ��_ . ' �� - �y, 4 � N HN�� H. ��- _� II \\11�\ 1 1 � _ \ ,�L\'„11/��+N� �+'11 ��H a��' � \� ��Y ! ��\`s P ._�_;llh��.11 �t \ � • � Or M � II�\ 1�� i Y T,t I s IIM� 't�N��\M h y� n�N II\N♦ \/ ' /`� �� II %� \11! '� �� , r'� - �'._". � ��,,,,,.�� ,;�� _ „ FA1= __ - �d 4 N�� N�� ,�, D q 0 M�M// '�� \ J\� / 1 M N . � //y ll .� il 11 MY\ `�N N y��N .��"1 NNan. \\ ` - -\ ' � � II „ M 1♦ \� �`� `'M N �N _d \\ = =��N '1 ��I/ IIN II//11 ♦//\ \II � '` N N'y♦ i N o i Ii`�' f�� \� �.� I / 1 u��\� � � �11 � � = o� ' � ��.l.N M�� ♦ � �l 11 � �` ��'�U ii a�11��J y//11�,i/I"/- p . M�t =+i y p �yPM� ��'�; \�y�l�l'�� \�,.P� 11N�M "lli//��UH�/n ' _1p ' �N.� � ' ♦ n •� N� q�t9o`1N11 M y /in�'tl��ll�\i\\ \ �.N � . . . \\ ll� Y`.'f' �a 6��Y llf�\�M. `y \' . �� i�l��Iilp��Qp\ �\�l`Nl�Il�ii ' • `� `� q M ' -A I� N y♦ y �P��PA'� .. yn �� ' I b li I ! H�� y, ' M 1 I , 11 �� N / ��i 11�� \\ i � a II '�N i0�♦ I11 . \� = / // _ _ - 11 M -�Q�%�� y q._ �� ` ro11 snyO��N rX� I a .My'1+M'1 .��`�� ,/=d��44 Il�lli��_Y \\ \Il��b\\II�/i��ii_\INN� VS1k �� \��NII �N�=Np��i ��l.s+`�NM,1 -`N„NIIN�.'11M:NPNN N// ��"11 �\II\PI� 0/11\\ll\`iil/�� M�N� II �'M \\ N �1 M y • + \� = / = i u t Y YN�_�iMP 1� „ NN ll NM4, �iNi�'YMy�,tN '�.� �`\� p`N\\=pq\�/��N`�� N �� 11 .3 � x� .yll \\N�y, � 11 % �� II M`i =\\ �.�\Iry=1i � a" �� y��lrZ NMh � N�' �,`��, qn,yy0'�F NMM��4\d�y laMMs p``n=y\\NpcP�� il�� AcN N i N I�\� y 11 //II 4 '►pNM\yHI HM,MM\��q\3iiN+l�� 11��\\ � \I+ . M / II%N♦r\011 ,lli 11 II ''�NMII�is �tY 4dNpM �� `!N/�ll ��.i1-11� 1�` � � 11 NNNII n ` C �� f II N 4 ,Z�,1= N yT.��s M`/Ils� 11 ��_\� V�//�.�� /i� _ ,,. _■ , _ � �� 7ALB 07 h D�lI 11/�f�� ,/�` M II M t��Slly.11 x a u��c t1;N\�N`4�'I�� . � \t lI 4 M W ;u � ,�uni a„�erM`iie°u,� _Ny _„\u°^Nen,No�,�a' ,��"" HILL " - `„�� ` J,° .xi.,/i 1ii„,,I ,i � °y N� u u° '�o.` o n\ _'y",,N11�nn �..u"yoi " \'i x �� \/lI J '�//I b//� % N��/r��iilll �\ II �N 11 � 1\��111=��•`1�.� `• , //�. `�1/„ \\'x 1:-1+ . , y N -tl la o I 4 s��N y4 M i.`0=Y'11= A x;/\:�'N_ „=`n b`� `i �'f`N I//�y h p \_N+ �` �� y' M��y�y a �i �f P�'H u \\y ` \-y M��y��a�n/ i�Q �.*N // \ � � � hsy \`/Ic `N �I:�,%,�W ,''P�NM N ! M 2 N , "� �1\N''Yr��1'°��'7'fi�"r'�p��u�� °\�%o = � '. ii u <N 1�1 a, y X r � aYv a =s �u `iuch�p ,, _ �'_ , ��" :.s�+ a`♦` N ��1►� / \\/ ` H M ry � ',r�+: i' i11 /\�// lI:M1/A��1�N, _�.1\\ . �\`llj1�l\Y�s��+ I yM = e �/ 1 lI � N w Y's g s\1�� s II\1 f� ' " � . �. �Q 1�M"n ! � �Y `II ` // lis/ill�//: � �i/.pii��1\ _ 1 ��\g�La`�:" _ �=+ M'� �� b � 5 \% \u��ucno ..�+�°x" , .-e - _=`±�'e��`} ' +` 1 ��..��..a.� ~ ` p CITY LIMITS 4�?� /�� II s �\\�/C • \\- r�I�� \/A��I/�'�M+11+1M�y�tl =M+.W „1�F Z�1\, �',. � N `' F 4`\ '4 + 4a ` u s W �_° �i��'�° �n n�i� , �� ;��.,�� ,'�n��u�. ,u a __ J _ � �II\3 ��li I � �I�� II�i = 11 G/�� i d C _p�\se i��_ X M . �*a� N�P :s \ � II�, % /�II/i I/ \\'ii N,��\� �Ii..M � = _ -6'\ _ a ��Q 1=M'� : s I �� { , � ./z'Ilol/'�11��\�b0 � ��II\\. N-Pou , . n�s,�=N+�a�`y�MMi'y ♦ s a��'� �(/ \\\/t 11 s �/ `�II.Ir�`��//.11�11 a l��_\�i fl `ii\M\�� \ a s 4 L I ♦ Yn 11 s��I -l+=Py II :4 11 `i lA � \� N 11! T U K W I L A 4N� � ,d\s il C ' ��.//�� ll+n s x M s i i" N r X 11 i�' �.. _ J'//� �� Ni;t.u�{�s�la�r�:iif�.V.%�,'�:.�s Y.a•i�`'- w'ii� �M��x ii �r/,��/�(/:,sp��' M M a ou��„"= RENTON '�'��",; u_ '�"-„�,�`�_y:n�,�;;�'ay� : � �a i,�J �a: � s _n, �aw 2 ��s: H��'v i . %°� �n / � sll�i�� /� �"//o�q= 5� ��i4/i� �1 W � \ /, _ _11� s ii x�x x b'x�� - \� 9 N s�6 11 �� ii q� J - . V �//lill!`1 ii p i a�f\\ii _ !z .�,� \\�ii �� ii +! �!/-lI�� /� F Y\ '//y\1` `\, .'3 /, Q. �9��N� s = P11��11��isll a�y M� =a II c II� � "�11: !y= �is� M p/� - ll� � :' sM4 i ~N�'�z �// �� =` �� = . // �� 116 �� < lll�ill = r11N� N Il //� i' x M P ll; '.O : �0�� 1� ii II� :�� c �9 ./'Il y,_. //H !h b //'�se�a' H � _�'r=11/4l�h:ll,'iiP �\y11',M�ON`.��I//i,ll/I/Q- //sy/i - y4 I 11 +M s i i� � �M 4=M N I��./s��y 11 � p=��= I I = //a s,a H .`_ :N i i�\��'„/;N'x \�/� F1\1,sN y�14.'M�iNy�\PNIl�rMHl�/4N��tiN1�aii��=�,y pniiaV.�M�p��iiiii �/i 1 s `s �u �i�M+�,, � y.�.s �i� naua.n . "�� . o = na � .._ ,�ry� � > � �� p p 4 M M M a��aQ U tl M� �� pp ��H � ..N;;r,i n_a X�'a/i z ry �Ne + a . p NM`4'y� :.,p b��i; `r yyl'��3 ii� \ ��ii,i N x M a o -�'ii h s n, �M \� KENT h r—� , l tegend: CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPT'. � „�°�_ ,-'��= PLANNING AREA I . ; .. - H FICURE , GREEN RIVER VALLEY � � ' � COMPREHEN � IVE PLAN scaie �" = 2000' � , -3— �� „ - - -.- -• ,�..�L , j \� �\,��,. � �� ^:�� _ \�- _ \ ,�-t , :�:�:::::::�:::::::::::::�:.:.:.:.:�:�:�:•. d ,/� - --- . .� �� ;:;:�:�•��:�:�:�:�:jr��.�.•.•.•'�''�'�''�.:•:�:.:::;:�;:�::.:•:.. _ —� ---�- �:��.�''�'�•��`' � _ �� ,\ _� _ . ..�a> �: . _,,, _ -- �' ,__... � _ ::�;: ..ti.... '.+ � � � - :;�'`:'>;:�>':?'�'�� ' _ . �. � � _ :'•�j:<::::::�»::: ( � 1 I :�:�. � \� �:�:.:_ _,,_,......, , _ \ �•:};:•�.�� >�::�:�:�:�.,:�.,: > � , �._ � ::�:�:�:�::�>:>:�:�:�>:�>:�>:�::�:�:: ::�{�:�..:..�._.......�...`;.�........'. '.'`�.' �.�...... ._.•..�:'��.;: � • . �� :. � FAI- � \�J ''%»:•:•:�:�:•:•�• :: " . .. • '� - ;.:I;I;.; ••I•I:. .•�... �� v;:.'• = �:�:-:•. , i.,`. ::�::•'.';•.�� ... , � ��• •�:�.:::.:.:.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:':�:�:':�:�•:•:•:�:�:�: :" i'i . .. _ . — — • • �.�•� — • � • � �_, � � �� }:�1 • •��• • :•:� • •��• • ;.•.•::•:•::;',• • •��• • �� ' . • •:� • •••• • . .. ..; •> • •••. . �'':'�''�••'•'.�:.�'::;:'�':�'•' • •••• • ,. � , . •.•. . .S ....... . .., , •.•. . . . . . ��.�':�:�`:::::��::::�::::'::�i :• •:•' : � '''�'�:'�'� .• . ��+ +��.�� 7ALBOT — j ;�;�� HILL ::�?. � ` :•t•::� :,. � . � _ '•'� :::y: :�: � I � � ��:: :�� ' � .::: ::� :�: _.� /.:::�::; �:�k: : _._._._. ..._._._.s. :�:<�:t7�;:?�< .•. :':::: , C I T Y L i M I T S � � ` :`::'::::: :::::::::::::•:: :::' ;:;:::;� '•:•;.;:;•;•: ......_.,:. .•: :�:•:x •:•:•:�:�:�:• 6�j�`�:�: �:;:��'� � �4 �id, ` ::��': •::::r: •:�:>:�>: .:..y, �:•:•:•tin :::::::a:; ;:;:;:;j; �::�:�!4 :•:�:�i `•`•'•!� '�';:at �? `'k � ' , �� '''`'•'• �:<� � ��.....� •:��• �"':::•'•'��''''��'�:1 I. i � .�r:� ,� :��:�::S:c�:�:�:�:�:�:�::�:5:ti•r':::��:t��':�:��:T�:�:::��:�:��;:�:�::::�:::;:;:::::�:::;:�:�:�:;:;:;:�'•::;::' 1 ,, . �� i \ 'I KENT � I lj '{ tegend: EXISTING CITY OF RENTON � I COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN PLANNING DEPT. ' ............. Light Industry or M-P ::::::� Recreation FlGURE Z Y Y ••� Greenbelt Heav Industr ' Commercial GREEN RIVER VALLEY , , � COMPREHENSIVE PLAN scaie �" = 2000' � _4_ The area has excellent access via freeways (I-5 , FAI-405 and the Valley Freeway, ) is close to three airports (Seattle-Tacoma Airport, Boeing Airfield and Renton Municipal Airport) and is served by two railroads (Burlington Northern and the Milwaukee Railroad} . 5ewer and water, the basic utilities required for any development, are available and can be extended. The Valley is close to 5eattle and yet is located so that it can easily service Tacoma as well as the eas� side of Lake Washington and I Everett. T�e U.5. Soil Conservation Serv.ice (SCS) is proposing to construct channels to drain the Valley which will facilitate development. For all these reasons and many more there is a concer�ed effort being made to industrialize the Valley. ' 3 . Historical Perspective and Projections �, The City o� Renton adopted its first Comprehensive Plan in ' 1965 and made extensive revisions , primarily of an interpretative I nature in 1968e A great deal of the p�ilosophy regarding land, , development and public interest has changed or is at least open ' to serious ques�ioning since the initial Comprehensive Plan I was adopted. Special interest groups have been formed which I demand that environmental considerations be injected in�o the ' decision making processm Land is now considered an exhaustible ', resource and �herefore should be used wisely for the benefit ' of all peopleF Legislation has been passed and courts have I rendered decisions requiring the consideration of many factors besides spatial' relationships and economics in land development. In short, the ground rules along with the expectations and involvement of people have changed. A further factor for this I revisicn is the U. S. Soil Conservation Services ' (SCS) require- I ments of local government participation in the mitigation of the ', loss of wildlife habitat as a condition of financing drainage '� channels in the Valley. I� There appears to be a belief that development is imminent in I; the ValZey. Andover Industrial Park in Tukwila is approaching i saturation and Earlington Industrial Park in Renton is almost i completely developed and the developer (Burlington Northern) has indicated that additional land may have to be subdivided soon for expansion. The projections below suggest development in the planning area. GREEN RIVER VALLEY PLANNING AREA PROJECTIONS YEAR POPULATIOIV HOUSEHOLDS MANUFACTURING TOTAL EMPLOYMENT EMPLOYMENT 1970 315 135 120 1,100 1980 140 60 450 1, 750 1990 70 30 640 3 , 000 i Source : Puget Sound Governmental ConferenCe , Preliminary Interim � -5- Regional Development Plan Forecasts 1970 through 1990 : A Comparison of Initial Versus Revised Forecasts and Revised Forecasts by District and Super District (adjusted for greater area. ) 4 . Public Participation There has been considerable encouragement from the public to revise the Comprehensive Plan on the Valley. During the review of the Shell impact statement and the publ�c hearings on Shell, many people indicated that the Comprehensive Plan in the Valley should be updated. To gather public input on the eventual development of the Valley, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 31, 1974 . The group which sub- mitted ideas included the Seattle Audubon Society, Green for Tomorrow, South King County League of Women Voters , Burlington Northern and the Greater Renton Chamber of Conunerce . The revised Comprehensive Plan will he submitted as per State law and City ordinances which require a public hearing be held for amending the Comprehensive Plan. 5 . Proposed Method of Financing This proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is financed by the City of Renton. 6 . Relationship with Existing Laws , Policies and Plans The Comprehensive Plan is the basis for determining the zoning in the Valley. Besides zoning the other City regulations that primarily would be employed in the development in the Valley are subdivision; mining, excavation and grading; and parking and loading. The U. S. Soil Conservation Service (SCS) is proposing to con- struct the P-1 and P-9 Channels in the Valley to alleviate a drainage problem in the Valley. The environmental impact I statement being prepared by SCS will explain that project. State laws , including Shoreline Management, State Environmental �!, Policy Act and those concerning flood plains , will be observed. ' The Burlington Northern and Milwaukee Railroads are in the planning phase to develop their property in the Valley. 7 . Actions Remaining for Implementation Prior to amending the Comprehensive Plan in the Valley, the Planning Commission must make a recommendation to the City Council. The Council must adopt the amendment by ordinance. -6- ' ' B. Existinq Conditions l. Area Directly Involved a. Site The area primarily influenced by the proposed amend- ment to the Comprehensive Plan will be the Green River Valley planning area which is illustrated in Figure l. Secondary influences will be along the periphery of the planning �rea including adjacent hillsides . b. Topography The plann}ng area is located in the mature flood plain of the Green River Valley. Natural relief on the f?ood plain varies from about eight to 25 feet based on Mean Sea i,ev�l Datum {MS�I?) arsd the slope is -five percent or less . There is one area of high relief that increases in elevation from nine to 152 �eet comprised of 20 to 2S a�res aler.� *�!onst�r P.o�d ozai3ed primarily by Container Corporation and the Metro sewage treatment plant in the northwest corner of the plannir�g area; i� this area the slope is up to 45 percent. c. Geology and Soils The Valley has been subject to glaciatio� and the under- lying materials and soils reflect this . Most of the soils are alluvial having been forme3 by the deposition of materials in moving water. The alluvial soils in the planning area are generally characterized by poor drainage • sometimes suhjec� t� fl�odin5 �nci �rz suitable f�r agrarian purposes of various intensities from grazing to raw crops. A1luvial soils such as those in the Valley are regarded �s poor when considering seismic stability. In the Renton a�ea, fault lines exist, but it has been determined that � these fault lines are not historically related to any of the recent earthquakes and may r�ot be indicative of a l.ocation of a future earthquake. The non-alluvial soils are located in the area noted above owned by Container Corporation and Metro that has topographic relief. These soils are m�re stabie than alluviaZ soils and presently ' have good drainage. Large portions cf the planning area have b�en filled I covering the alluvial soi.ls to facilitate urban develop- ments as roads and �tructures . d. Biologzcal �'h3�ac�er_istics The plann�ng area presently is ira a biological transitional period that formerly was an agricultural-open space use and w�11 eventual.ly develo� as a mar�ufacturing park area with � ' -7- wildlife habitat and drainage channels . It is speculated that the number and perhaps species of wild plants and animals has increased substantially since agriculture has has ceased being a viable use and the land has been fallow pending industrial development. Please refer to pages 18 through 20 of the Summary Final Environmental Impact State- ment for Shell Oil' s Distribution Plant, City of Renton, Planning Department, July 1974 for a listing of plants and animals. There are no known animals on the endangered species list in the Valley. e. Atmospheric Conditions (1) Weather and Climate Rainfall: The average rainfall for the vicinity of the subject site is 36 inches . Yearly extremes are 24 to 55 inches . On a long-term average there are 151 days per year with over 0 . 01 inches precipitation; 93 days with more than 0 . 1 inch; 18 days in excess of 0. 5 inches; and 4 days with over 1. 0 inches a day. Average yearly snowfall is 8 inches . Temperatures : The mean temperature in January is 31 degrees and in July, 67 degrees. Generally temper- atures vary from an all-time high of 100°F in August to a record low of 3°F in January. Winds : The winds were found to be light and variable 14 . 6 percent of the time. About 36 percent of the I time the winds are either from the south or south by southwest and about 12 percent of the time the winds are from either north or north by northwest, most of these winds are less than 11 knots per hour. (2) Winds and Atmospheric Stability Weather conditions at the subject site are similar to those at Seattle-Tacoma Airport, which is two miles west and 400 feet higher in elevation. Therefore , data for Sea-Tac is indicative of the site meteorology, with minor modifications due to topographic differences . The north-south orientation of the Green River Valley will tend to channel the winds . During extended pollutant build-up periods (eight hours to several days) polluted air masses move up and down the Valley under a channeled flow regime. Under these conditions , pollutant background concentrations can increase significantly, especially under a northerly flow which brings in air from urban Seattle. Nocturnally, under calm conditions , drainage air will flow into the valley from surrounding high ground. -8- The spreading and dilution of pollutants throuqhout the atmosphere is caused by tur- bulence . The ability of the atmosphere to support turbulence depends on how the atmos- phere is structured with regard to �emperature. Temperature inversions (temperature increasing i with height) in�<ibit turbulence, whereas strong temperature lapse rates (temperature decreasing with height) enhance turbulence. An atmosphere exhibiting a temperature inversion is therefore termed "stable, " whereas that showiny a strong lapse rate is termed "unstable. " By convention, the normal range of atmospheric stability is descxibed in terms of six stability "categories , " labeled A through F in ascending order, i.e. , categories A and F describe the most unstable and the most stable atmospheric conditions , respectively. The "average" atmospheric state is described by category D, also termed the "neutral" stability condition. Because the efficiency of pollutant dispersion is related to stability, the stability category designations provide a convenient basis for the specification of "worst case" meteorological conditions relative to the degradation of local air quality. Given the specified "worst case" stability con- dition, the remaining factor which determines the local air quality is the strength and the direction of the mean wind. The lighter the wind, the poorer the ciispersion and the greater the pollution build-up. A wind direction directly from remote pollutant sources to the area in question assures the introduction of those pollutants to that area. The conditions most conducive to "`aorst case" pollutant build-up are a light wind and F atmospheric stability for one hour, and a l.ight wind and D atmospheric stability for eight or more hours I during daylight hours . These conditions may be � modified slightly in l�ocalized areas on the valley '� floor by local topography. TIie frequency of occur- rence of "worst case" conditions will be three to six times per year. -9- (3) Air Pollution Sulfur Trioxide averaged: .4 - .5 mg/100 cm2/day Renton area . 7 - . 9 mg/100 cm2/day Seattle (Industrial and Commercial Area) Sulfur Dioxide . 005 ppm 1973 Annual Arthimetic Mean Southcen�er Suspended Particulates 61 ug/m3 1970 Ann. Geo. Mean Renton 43 ug/m3 1971 Ann. Geo. Mean 44 ug/m3 1972 Ann. Geo. Mean 42 ug/m3 1973 Ann. Geo. Mean f. Hydrology The historic drainage pattern of the Valley is one of a mature flood plain. Numerous cut-offs , oxbow lakes , and point-bar deposits characterize the area. Drainage was canalized locally in response to agricultural needs to reduce flooding. The Springbrook Creek-Black River waterway primarily will be involved while the Green River will be secondarily involved. Springbrook Creek-Black River waterway has a relatively low flow, especially during the dr�er months, and has been modified to facilitate drainage. The water- way has a low gradient and is characterized as having relatively low dissolvec� oxygen levels during significant periods of time during the late summer. There are several pools along the stream which may enrich the amount and variety of aquatic life. In that surface runoff for the planning area enters the Green River, the water quality parameters of that major river are critical to future development. The Green River undergoes its most critical biological, physical and chemical stress in summer months . In the vicinity of the planning area the river's high summer temperature and low flows result in major physiological stresses on aquatic organisms . Current plans are to rechann�l Springbrook Creek to the west (P-1 Channel) along the railroad tracks, Longacres and Metro as a part of the drainage program being developed by the Soil Conservation Service. This proposed action would drastically alter the nature of the ecosystem found along Springbrook Creek-Black River waterway. The effects -10- of the Soil Conservation Service project will. be covered in that agency ' s environmental impact state- ment for the channels. g. Noise At the present time the planning area is a relatively quiet area except near arterials, freeways , railroad tracks and some industrial operations . It has been estimated that the planning area low noise level is about 50 decibels (dba) and ranges about 80 decibels (dba) at 100 feet for freight trains . 2 . Human Uses The planning area formerly was used primarily for various intensities of agricultural uses from grazing to row crops depending on how wet the soil was . To increase production various projects such as drainage ditches and dykes along the Green River were constructed which attempted to mini- mize the wet period that farmers could not work on the land. A smaller portion of the Valley north of FAI-405 was recreational (Earlington Golf Course) . At the present time the Valley is developing industrial. This trend has become a possibility due to the development over the last eighty or more years of : 1. ) the excellent available arterials, freeways , airports (Sea-Tac, Boeing Field, and Rentan Municipal Airport) , and railroads; 2 . ) the availability of basic utilities as sewer, water and access streets ; and 3 . ) flood control projects as the Howard A. Hanson Dam, dykes alang • the Green River and the proposed Soil Conservation Service ' s East Green River watershed project. The general breakdown of the basic uses in the planning area is listed below: � LAND USE ACRES PERCENT DEVELOPED 600 ± 2� • 2$ Commercial 25± 1. 1� Residential 25+ l.l� Public 30+ 1. 4$ Industrial 165± 7 . 5� Recreation 130± 5 •9� Streets 210± 9 . 5$ Railroad 15± • 7� UNDEVELOPED 1,600 ± 72 , g� Total 2 ,200 ± 100 . 0� �� -11- The above information indicates that about three-quarters (3/4) of the planning area is yet to be developed. This does not include the remnant of the Earlington Golf Course, the property along FAI-405 and the land between the East Valley Highway and SR-167 (Valley Freeway) that is suitable for redevelopment due to the transitional characteristics of some of the existing development and the spatial location of the property. Utilities (water, sanitary sewer, storm sewer, and natural gas) are available primarily where there is existing develop- ment. However, these are capable of being extended (and expanded if necessary) to meet future development needs. There are no known historical sites in the planning area. There is one documented archaelogical site along the Green River but this was eliminated during the construction of FAI-405 . C. Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action l. Soils and Vegetation Several feet of fill will be required to develop the planning area. To obtain the compaction required by City ordinance, the original vegetation will have to be removed which means that the existing wildlife will be displaced. Most of the fill will come from off-site but some land along the proposed drainage channels will probably be filled by the spoils (or material) from the construction of the channels . Selected areas for roads , buildings, etc. may be surcharged or have additional fill temporarily placed to hasten the compaction process allowing construction sooner than if the fill were allowed to settle naturally. In those areas where vegetation is proposed topsoil probably wil� be placed. On June 3, 1974 th� City of Renton adopted Resolution No. 1923 agreeing to several conditions of the Soil Conservation Service for financing the drainage channels. The following conditions are concerned with vegeta�ion restoration and are to be in- cluded in the City ' s commercia�-industrial permit process : • A landscape development plan that will provide reasonable consideration for wildlife and aesthetic values (environmental quality) for the area planned for buildings and parking lots; • A significant portion (not less than two percent) _ of the land involved be designated and commerce- industry managed for the life of the project to produce wildlife habitat for species best suited to site, conditions , and location; The 5oi1 Conservation Service will produce a suggested list of vegetation suitable for wildlife habitat that probably will be in association with the usual aesthetically oriented landscaping. -12- , � '� ;? . Greenbelt and Wildlife Another condition of ResoJ.ution No. 1923 is that a m�nimum of 110 acres of suitable wetland habitat be placed in a permanent wildlife habitat in the Green River Valley. This 110 acres is supposed to be spread from Auburn to Renton wherever suitable sites are found and could include existing habitat or land converted to that use. The Resolution further specifies that all land not needed for development be " . . . . . planned and managed for wildlife open space until such time as it is utilized in additional developments. " Also the Resolution specifies that wildlife habitat is to be preserved or replaced along drainage channels . The City of Renton intends to adher ,-� to this agreement. The proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan includes about 250 acres or about 11 percent of the planning area designated as greenbelt. This is an increase of about l85 acres more than the existing Comprehensive Plan which consists of just the wetland east of SR-167 . Some greenbelts are intended for multi-purpose use kthich will � include , but are not limited to, wildlife habitat, maintenance roads, recreation, landscaping and visual buffers . Other green- belts are intended primarily for wildlife habitat. Of course these areas will serve other secondary uses as screening and water retention. These wildlife habitat greenbelts probably will require some wildlife management commitment. The funding and management of the wildlife habitat has not been determined. Generally all greenbelts will serve to provide open space, decrease potential development densities and i.ncrease the amenities in the Valley. The plants will produce a small amount of oxygen. This is considered an improvement over the existing comprehensive plan and is intended to upgrade the quality of development but is not expected to cause a financial hardship on the property owners and developers . Further this policy recognizes that wildlife has a right to exist in the Valley. 3. Hydrology The P-1 and P-9 Channels to be constructed by the Soil Con- servation Service are intended to alleviate the drainage problem in the Valley, thereby facilitating industrial development. The environmental impact statement on the project should be reviewed for detailed information on this subject. ', It is anticipated that industrial development will have an adverse effect on water quality. There will probably be a reduction in the amount of dissolved oxygen in the water, increased amounts of sediment, insecticides , fertilizers , . -13- and other nutrients from the developed area. Petroleum products from streets and parking lots probably can be expected to run into the waterways , and the water temper- atures are expected to increase due to a faster runoff. A11 of the above conditions would be detrimental to the quality of the water and aquatic life. 4. Land Uses The primary land use in the proposed Land Use Element is manufacturing park. Manufacturing Park is defined as an area that is primarily having light and certain compatible heavy industrial uses wi�h selected commercial uses in a manufacturing park type development which includes, but is not iimited to, adequate setbacks, landscaping, functional design, compatibility with adjacen� uses , open space, wild- life habitat and perhaps joint use of facilities. About 1, 400 acres or slightly more than 60 percent of the planning area is designated as manufacturing park. Future access roads and other utili�ies are included in this designation. Manufacturing park replaces about 770± acres of land desig- nated on the existing Land Use Element as heavy industrial and about five acres designated as commercial. This change is intended to upgrade the quality of development which will benefit both the propert� owners and the City. The commercial designation in the northeast portion of the Land Use Element remains unchanged but approximately five acres of commercial was �mended to manufacturing park north of Longacres Race Track . The recreation designation (Longacres Race Track) was extended southwar_d replacing 60± acres of heavy industrial to reflect a recent change in ownership to Longacres and anticipat�d racetrack development. 5 . Streets and Traffic Several arterials and an interchange for SR-167 are included in the proposed Circulation Element. The Washington State Highway Commission has scheduled improvement of the interchance for SR-167 (Valley Freeway) at S.W. 43rd Street between the years 1981 and 1987 . The East Valley Highway probably will need to be relocated as part of the improved interchange. These are intended to facilitate the mov�ment of motor vehicles in, throua� and out of the planning area. Streets necessary to provide access to individual sites are not presented in this element but will be considered at a later phase when the land is subdivided. It is difficult to project the volume of traffic that will be generated by the proposed Land Use Element. Manufacturing park will allow a wide variety of uses �nd each would generate a different amount of traffic. According to a study by Wilsey and Ham, Inc. , Koll Business Center in Tukwila, which could be characteristic of much of the development in the planning area, generates about 100 week-day trips per acre; about 17 percent , of these trips are truck trips . This amount of traffic -14- is expected to tax the existing arterial and freeway systems whicfi are operating close to capacity. During the horse racing season, Longacres. generates a con- siderable amount of traffic. On high attendance daXs about 5,000 automobiles are parked on the existing grounds. Wit� expansion this figure and t�e resulting traffic would increase substantially. Since the area designated commercial in the northeast corner of the planning area is substantially developed tfiere probably won't be any great increases in traffic. 6 . Community Failities Development in the planning area requires that certain public service facilities be constructed. 5ome facilities such as the Black River Pumping Station are necessarX before develop- ment while others such as a fire station will be needed after development occurs. No source of funding has been established for the propased fire station. 7 . Noise Some noise of various intensities can be expected during con^ struction of roads , utilities and structures but these will be just for the duration of the indiv�dual projects. Permanent sources of noise in addition ta t�lose already present ean be anticipated from the new manufacturing park type uses and the additional train and motor vehicle traffic generated by those uses. The noise generated by the manufacturing park uses will be dependent upon the specific uses that located in the planning area, the standards specified by the State, and the technology available at that time . It is the intention of the City to employ the State standards and the latest technology to minimize noise as a problem in tne planning area and that might disturb adjacent areas. The noise generated from motor vehicles is dependent upon State regulations . 8. Air Quality The anticipated development and the resultant traffic dis- cussed above �robably will have an adverse effect on the quality of the air in the planning area. The amount of derogation of air quality from development will be dependent on the standards required by the City and the technology available to handle industrial activities . The City intends to ernploy high standards to maintain as high air quality as feasible. The amount of pollution emitted by motor vehicles and trains will be dependent on federal regulations. , , -15- 9. Human Uses The primary human use of the planning area will be employ- ment in manufacturing, warehouse, office and selected commercial and service enterprises . Current trends in the planning area indicate that there will be between 10 and 20 people employed per acre or between 1,400 and 2 ,800 additional jobs. It is not known what will be the proportion between new positions and those transferred from other areas with the Seattle metropolitan area. Many of these jobs probably will be in basic industries that will generate additional jobs here and elsewhere. Some employees can be expected to live nearby which may necessitate the construction of additi�nal homes, commercial establishments, streets, etc. Secondary human uses will be recreational. Trails , bicycle paths and the drainage channels will enaourage active recre- ation while wildlife and open space will be available for the more passive forms of re�reation. It is the intention of the City that wherever possible to implement regional plans for recreational activities such as for trails. Industrialization will farm a tax base that will enhance the c�ffers of the State of Washington, King County, the City of Renton, Hospital District No. l, tne Port of Seattl� and the Rent�n School District. Of course development will also require that either directly cr in��rectly services be pro- vided from thzse governments . D. Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Effects l. Soils and Vegetation The existing vegetation will be removed and the soils, if they already have not been filled, will be covered by several feet of fill. As a practical matter the agricultural capa- bilities of the original soils will be lost forever because it is not economic to remove fill material for agrarian purposes. The original vegetation will be replaced by landscaping intended to support wildlife and for aesthetic purposes. Most af the landscaping will be planted along the public right-of-way, around buildings, in large parking lots and in those areas set aside for future expansion. The cost for landscaping will be borne by the developer. 2 . Greenbelt and Wildlife At the present time a substantial portion of the planning area is functioning as greenbelt. Development will transform much of this area into manufacturing park nullifying much of the open space and wildlife habitat uses presently there. -16- However, Soil Conservation Service requirem�nts �or lan�� scaping and wildlife habitat and City development standards and efforts to preserve land for open space areas will set ' aside a greater proportion of land for greenbelt and wild- life habitat than the existing Land Use Element. The exist- ' ing Plan suggests about 65 acres while the proposed Plan ' recommends approximately 250 acres be reserved as greenbelt. 3 . Hydrology Industrial development will adver�ely effect the water I� quality in the Valley. It is anticipated that the amount of dissolved oxygen will decrease, the temperature will ', increase, the rate of runoff will increase and various '� pollutants (petroleum products , insecticides , etc. ) will increase. Some of these problems will be minimized by employing adequate engineering and design principles. ' These will include, but are not limited to, oil/water separators and settling ponds. Other problems will involve the judicious use of chemicals and proper maintenance of equipment which are considered on-going operational procedures . 4. Land Uses Presently the planning area is in large part lying fallow in anticipation of industrial development. The development of the planning area wi11 have unavoidable adverse environ- mental effects. These specific effects are covered in other subsections of this section. Genera�ly it can be indicated that the developmental procedures and policies suggested will tend to minimize this difficulty. � 5. Streets, Traffic and Noise Streets are needed to provide access to property which will � generate traffic and noise. The unavoidable adverse effects , of these can only be considered in general terms . Streets ' will convey some water pollution to the drainage facilities as was mentioned above. Motor ��ehicles and trains will gener- ate noise and air pollution; this wi11 be subject to State and Federal regulations. The individual firms , depending an the specific type of activity, and the available technology could produce noise and air pollution and perhaps heat, glare and vibration. It is reasonable to assume that even with high development standards , some of these adverse effects will be present. The volume of the traffic generated will tax the surrounding arterial and freeway systems . � � -17- 6 . Air QuaZity � Because the planning area is in a valley that has a history of air pollution, additional pollution can be anticipated with manufacturing park development. The � specific type of manufacturing park activities will be an important factor in the quality of air as some uses are more polluting than others and some generate more traffic than others . Traffic will be a major contributor to air pollution. The amount and type of pollution from traffic will in large part be dependent upon federal regulations. 7. Human Uses Development of the planning area will mean that hundreds of acres of open space will no longer be available to the public. Soil Conservation Service wildlife and develop- ment standards plus City policies regarding development and recreation will mitigate some of this loss . Moreover, there is some tradeoff to the public for this loss in the form of a tax and employment base that will benefit the entire Seattle metropolitan area. ' E. Alternatives to the Proposed Action 1. No Action � This alternative involves tha continuation of present trends of heavy and light, industrial and manufacturing park with some commercial throughout the planning area. Developmen�. would continue on a private basis and provide approximately about the same tax base and employment opportunita:es as tfie proposed Comprefiensive Plan. However, th.is alternative would not require amenities as setbacks , landscap�ng and screening that would protect the adjacent properties and enhance the image of the City. Wildlife Yiabitat would be destroyed with minimal mitigation. In addition, the same commitment would be required for utilities, as tlie proposal and would require filling the entire area which would destroy all existing vegetation and cause increased water runoff and pollution. The drainage channels and the Soil Conservation Service requirements for mitigation of the loss of wildlife fiabitat wauld Be superimposed on the existing plan. 2. Open space , Recreation and Agriculture This alternative involves the re-establishment af agrarian activities and the reservation af areas for recreation and -18- other open space activities . A major land use and zoning change would be required along with the phasing out of existing industrial areas. Rehabilitation of existing filled � areas would be a pre-requisite and agriculture would require adequate drainage facilities (probably six foot ditches) which could possibly drain adjacent wetlands designated by the Soil Conservation Service as important. Water quality could be polluted through the usage (leaching) of fertilizers . The area, in tr.e past, was primarily poor for agriculture, supporting small amounts of row crops and grazing. Con- sequently, acriculture would probably be uneconomical due to . drainage limitations, market conditions, and property taxes. This alternative use would eliminate an area previously planned for regional industrial use and would cause additional �ndustrial areas to be established elsewhere. On the other hand this might be the first in preserving the Green River Valley for agrarian uses. In addition the tax base would be greatly reduced and greater job opportunities would be eliminated. Open space, recreation and agriculture would improve the air quality, preserve wildlife habitats , reduce development densities and traffic impacts . 3. Commercial and High Density Residential This alternative assumes the construction of a major retail facility with adjacent high rise apartments . This would require the phasing out of incompatible (industrial) uses , filling much of the planning area, and the reduction or removal of wildlife habitats. Drainage channels and wildlife habitat. would be included. A substantial change of the Comprehensive Plan would be required and since the existing Land Use Element indicates industrial use; it would not be compatible with long range goals for the reqion. The retail facility must compete with Southcenter, Seattle , Renton and Kent business establishments and would not seem � economically feasible in this locatinn. Traffic and parking densities would increase substantially contributing to increased surface runoff and possibly causing pollution of groundwater by materials washed off parking lots which may reach nearby bodies of water. Air and noise impact would be similar to the proposed amendment with the possible reduction of noise because of fewer truck and train trips. The mixed use would probably provide increased open space and recreation. In addition it would provide job opportunities and possibly provide a close work/home travel base . �19- F. Relationshi� Between Local Short-Term Environmental Uses and The Maintenance and Enhancement of Long-Term Productivit� The proposed amendment to the C�mprehensive Plan is for satu- ration development and is no� anticipated for any given year. It is conceivable that the planning area might still have vacant parce�s by the year 2000 . Of course this depends on a variety of economic and other fact�rs that will effect the developability of the planning area. The adoption of th� amendment to the Comprehensive Plan is aimed at insuring the continued use and en�oyment of the planning area by the citizens of Renton, the Seattle metropolitan area and the State of Washington. Furthermore �doption will be environ- . mentally protective, and although immediate bene�icial results may be impossible to guantify over �he next few years, proper implem�ntation and enforcement of development should provide continued benefits for many generations. G. A� Irreversible and/or Irretrievable Resource Commitments With the Prapased Action The proposed actian does not call for .resource commitments in the same sense as a developm�nt project would. The proposed amendment to the Comrehensive Plan is aimed at promating quality development and preserving amenities in the planning area. The action is nct irreversible and if adopted as proposed can be modified and amer.de� as neces�ary at a��y future date it is found that such acti�n would be in the public interest. H. Referencess l. Summary Final Environmental Impact Statement for She1Z Oil' s Distribtion P_lant, City of Renton Planning Departm�nt, July i974. 2 . Unpublished report on the Orillia lndustrial Park by Wilse� and Ham, Inc., �975 3 . Puget Sound Governmental Ca�ference, Preliminary Interim Regional Development Plar� �orecasts 1970 through I990 . 4. Resolution No. 1923 adaz�;=n:� ��; t�hQ �..�r��cn City Council on June 3 , 1974 .� i 5 . Letter dated April 7 , 1975 from L�er.rlis E, Lewarch, Office of Public Arcfieolagy, University of Wash_ington 6 . Puget Sound Air Polluticn Control Agency, 1973 Air Quality Data Summary, June 1, 1974 . APPENDIX A COMMENTS RECEIVED NOT REQUIRING RESPON5E �_ _ Marc� 12, 1Q75 ' •I<d(t � �t . 9' ' !:t , !i'• �; � %t '� �.il il ' )t '1 1i .;'4 � , iia r� '. ��:?aT;ri p f4 �< �Y !� s^� 1 ( `_ � J ��t a.i8�;�t �� o L,_��:k,fa,`s��iy �l��ning Director ��i ty og �enton P1 a�r�i n� Depa r�rroes�t �I�nicipal auilding ��0 Mi11 Avenue Sou�h Re�tQn, Wash�ngton �8055 ��: �ra�t Environm��ta� I�pact Statem�nt �r°��n Ri r.�er Val i�y Ccasnpr�her�s i v� P�an ��r ��9r� Erickson: Thank you for s�br�itting �he Dr�ft EIS for our review. We do not have �ny speci fi c corrsnnents ta rr�a�C� at thi s ti me, but wi 11 uti 1 i ze the i n- ��rmat�an contained �n the �mpact stat�ment if the Department's ,;i[!Y'15�9��.``�53� �?""dw�t'S 3ki�� C1V 3fla��C'C 0� ��1� �:�'fl�iQS�'� �Y`��@Ct li1 t�'?� 7u��,;i'�. v 38i��Y'�I,�, f� ' �L,ll� . � � � �� oser�ary L( al rod Comsnunity Affairs Consuitant ��i�on:nental Revi ew and E�al�atiora Section �.�._�;::�� F � RCC��j�D �.� M'q,q !4 2 �� 5 � .� � � ��U �� EPA'R lsfcl!14S e.,�.-'.i17i3�Oi4�'6°if'��F'�E�,�`_-��n�l�"$$r�6l�P.'�tLlk;'rS:.��:i:�.�.'i.;��2s5tL�c� FL"�:k"s(19!'?j5ffiti��ji'%��'lu�':�(!d�".'�-7:3"�� et SQ�a�d �overrirnental Confer��c�e I�ia r c h �8, I 3';5 _------ r��j� RE� � �� R�C�� , r Gord�:� Y. Eric�en, Plaa�ning �irector � C ity of R�nton �� 9 1�75 Mur�ici�al Build��g - 20�c:�iilc Av�:nue Sc�uth j��, �" _ ._ . ,.., �� I, c� � Rer�to�, �'as�hzn�;t�r� �� ,� ,�e�., 'I I��r R,�� ,� � •, ti�� EF_�'��`� ��~---__ '�hank yo�a for �aroviding the C�anference �ith �.� op�artunity ta �eview an� A,' ra�:r.�ment orz rhe �roposed Green R€ver ��l�e�T �;c��npreherzs i`le �1an arx� its c�ra� envirc�7ment�.l impac� stateine��. My �t�.�f has examined the �� envu_ronme�ta.l impac� �tater-��nt and ha.s �oun� that it ad�q�aate�y addresse� I the physicalp social, and ecc�nar�ic cr�ang�s that can reasonabiy be exla�cte� to occur should the amende� Comgrehens ive Plan be i��piemen�ec. VVe, there�ore, have no substa�tive co�rnent� for you to �vnsider ir, preparir�g a fznal envi�canme�tai impact s�:ateme�i�. The Confe�ence staff does wi�h� to lend its support to sev�ral l�ey objec� tives Qf th� �re�n �i��r Valley Com�rehensiv��e Flat�. L.and t1�r� Qb��ctYY-w � (3} �ega�ding rL�enti�n o� yvetland area� desi�nated �;y SC;S is cli�ectl� su��po�i�e of Qpen Space �Ulicies of th� In�e�im Re�ionai �v��opme�� i't�n. �hi1e specifiL str�:�t and traf�ic irnpravernents �eed to be identifiec.�3 � ar�d revz�v�ed, o3�jectives regardiz�� circul�.tion ir� th� �'a��eY �eflect the �, fntent of �olicies �f thp 1990 Trans�ortation Systern Pia€� for the regi�n r��r�din.� (l� the developrrz�nt of p�destrian watk�a�r� ;�nd �;icycie t�acks i �.� � p�rt oz thL ��elc�pmer�t of nev�� or e�i�ti�� ran�pc�rrati�n racil:ties; (2) enc��ragi�� ade sep�.rar.e�i �i��,!�ts-o�pway �t raalrc�a�.: and hi�tiwa� I crc�sings; and �3) �nccu�aging th� stud�r anu us� of rna�s tx�a.nsit syste�s. ' In �ddition, the G`onferencE sur��o�� tI�P �ity af ��nton's deCermin�.�i�n ' t� pr�v�nt p�erna��r� exp�.rasio� �f �rilit�es s� as t� m�niz�.i�e the ��- �iiit:i�� of va.c�nt par•�:els �c��rr�n�o Tt�e d�Lisi�sr� to a��ept greswth only ' ir� a 1c�gic�i, s�sr_en:atf� mann��° hy m�.in.taining area� a� a wildlif� habi- tat ran�it they a.�ea �ea�3� f�r d��el�pmen"t i.s a ra.tional �.p}�roach �n �Sc�t�� .� a��t:�etic ar��d econa��c sen�e. I �lish 3�ou success in the development of a comprehensive glan for the `Taltey. If the Conference can be of assistance please contact �arbara H�stings ar Steve Hott at 464-7548. - y t�ul�* yours, . 1Via�t �Cask • ��ztiae Directo� . 1 � , ' � Mr. Ericksen -2- March 6, 1975 Thank you for sending your sta�.ement to us. We hope aur corr�ents wi�7 � , be helpful . Sincerely, THE DEPARTM T OF G E � ` . , , F e C, Eugene S. Dziedzic, Asst. Chief Environmental Management Division ESD:jb � �.EAGUE �F WOMEN VOTERS OF KlNG COUNTY SOUTH . . . _ �.re-ee��- 505 North Central, Kent, Wa. 98031, 852-7515 March 7, 1975 City of Renton Planning Department Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 �e: Draft e.i.s. - "Gxe�r� Ri.�er V�11 ey �o�r�'rs�::�.��-,-: p7�,r�" ThiB environmental im}�act $taterc�nt appears to us to m�e�t t�� .^-. �'�q;uis er:i��t� as a guide to the local gavernment for planning purposes. We woz.ildalike to remind those involved in the planning process of the pointa set f�rth in RCW �3.21C.020, section 2. It states that "i� is the continuing responsibility of the state". . ."and all agencies of the a�tate" to among other charges "fulfill the respo�sibilities of eacb generation as trustee of the environment for succeeding generQti�ns." The fact ttiat this plan proposes 25Q acres of greenbelt as opposed to 65 acres in the current plan is a definite imprUvement as far as League positiona go. `de believe that priorities for open spaces and greenbelts should be based upon tbe ch�,racter and needs of th� population. We would like to see land being acquired now in developed areas and reserved in undeveloped areas for fu�ture gro�th. We believe that finsucin� should be by any f°easible method, includin� an advanced land acquisition fund. i�e hope th�t �11 avenues gossible to get citizens to p�irticipate in this �lannirig �};ocest� wi11 be utilized. Sincerel� yours, �'n.� � ��-�.� �irso Pau1 D. Shafer Jr. Presi3�nt �� R f�'C.,�� RE�� ` /�� ,;- � ��i �,�,� 1 � l91� �� -� '�� r' _-...u�- � 92� ... �. \�� ,�"� ''�:� ��P AR�� I �,'___ i A rron-partism orqa�n�aalion wl�se purpsse i�e fo�rrasw4�pol6ticsl responsibility throuyP� intormed and active¢srficips4ion of citi:ens an governmer�t UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SO1L CONSERVATION SERVICE Room 360 U.S. Courthouse, Spokane, Washington 99201 March 3, 1975 � City of Renton Planning Department Municipai Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Sirs: _ A field review of your draft environrnental impact statement for Renton's _ Comprehensive Plan has been made. At this time we have nothing further to add in comment other than we notice you have increased green-belt and other environmental considerations, which we feel to be an improve- ment over the previous plan. The opportunity to review this �tatement is appreciated. Sincerely, ��,a/g..�.1�,.. Galen S. Brid�e State Conservationist C F_� �'�y ��~ . � R�CF��.� �,;\ .� �1�N .S � O r. •- ; , 2 /! �\,y�'�-- � �,�i�, ��,/ ��V�EPAR��`'� � , �T�. s \ � Q �C1,. (.OJY1A1lJIl0It f)rrec:�>r / Curl ,'�� Croure ,9rthr�r S. Cri�rt. Yakirrta. (:barrntan l.�i/�� l:. .iLru. ld(.,ir��:er {rri��na/ 1)ir��;or� , /�.r/J'h ll�'. l�nr.�nrt k � .n Iilnrrr G. C�er en. Qutrtr R�>>i�r;d '� ,q��lrr:� � ' C;laucie Reki�u, Sealtle Gle�trt Ga/bruitl�. If'ellpinit � i � Prank L Carrid��, Jr. Vare�ouc�e. DE PARTM E NT OF GAME C�00 Nn*tl� Caf�it�l U`"a} Ol��mpia, tE"urhington 9850� �� . ' March 6, 1975 ��y �f�' ��!>„ Elll�d � ,` M�R 7 i� 1 19I5 � Gordon Y. Ericksen ,� ; P1 anni ng Di rector ',92 -. � - Ci ty of Renton 2� ��,C; ` 200 Mi 11 Avenue South �G DEP�R��° Renton, Washington 98055 .,,�"� Dear Mr. Ericksen: Your draft environmental impact statement - Green River Ual le.y Corr;�r��6��!�,si �-F� Plan - was reviewed by our staff as requested. Our comments follow. This statement gives the reader a general understanding of t6�e pr°cpost:� comprehensive plan. Environmental impacts which may accompany industrial de`��:a�- ment recommended by the plan are not discussed in detail . However, brief � characterization of major adverse impacts on natural resources is presente�_.' The policy changes included in the proposed comprehensive plan appe�. _� allow greater opportunity for minimizing adverse effects which would be sustai. . ; with industrial development of the planning area. Such administrative action is potentially beneficial to fish and wildlife, , ' The proposed comprehensive plan alters the recommended classification of a large portion of the project site from that of heavy industry to manufacturing park. Substantial acreage (250 acres) is recorr�nended for reservation as wildlife habitat, whereas only 65 acres was formerly reserved. Increased acreage would be allocated to recreational and public use. Overall , policy changes reflect a � greater consideration of the natural environment and associated public needs. At the same time, the statement implies that the recommended plan of develop- ment would obliterate the larger segment of wildlife habitat existing in the planning area. Water quality and aquatic biota will be subjected to degradation. Agricultural values will be eliminated. The acknowledgement you have given these � adverse effects is very important; we appreciate your efforts to spell out these undesirable aspects of the proposed comprehensive plan. �� 3 LA �Frank Todd,Mayor ,�J C I TY o F T U ICW I LA � ' �' 6230 SOUTHCENTER D� BLVD. �i TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98067 z • � PLANNING DEPARTMENT �006 `,`.� O F ,Q� February 25, 1975 � REC�I�iFo �� ro FFe 2� 19 � 1 � �5 ``�2 Mr. Gordon Y. Ericksen `� � Planning Director 2/�G D RK�� EPA 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 RE: Preliminary Green River Ualley comprehensive plan Dear Mr. Ericksen: Thank you for the opportunity to respond to the above dpcument and its associated preliminary environmental impact statement. I tend to personally feel that impact statement comments are mostly negative. � This is unfortunate since so much useful information is also included in them. Let me start by making my positi�e comments, they are as follows: 1 . I feel the format used, that is the goals and objectives and associated maps give a basis for future implementing legislation. 2. There appears to be a need for this document in order for Renton to make future decisions on growth in the valley area based upon deliberation rather than default. I would make the following recommendations: 1 . Figure 1 shows the planning area to include that area between the railroad tracks and the Green River, however, tao attempts are made to provide access. (see figure 3) No alternatives to the circulation element have been proposed. In addition, a corridor study appears underway in the subject area. Recommend action not be taken on circulation element until consulting firms circulation study is completed and considered in the final impact statements under alternatives. 2. The objectives in the document appear to be vague- relating to open space yet Figure 2 is quite specific � (it does not appear to be backed up by policies) . Recommend policies supportive to Figure 2 be added or Figure 2 be deleted and open space requirements per site or similar concepts be instituted. Mr. Gordon Y. Ericksen Page 2 February 25, 1975 Our department wauld have been pleased to have been involved in you� preparation of this document since it daes include partions within the city limits of Tukwila. I hope these comments will be taken �onstructively. Thank you for the opportunity to respond. Very truly yours, • ' 11 Stoknes Planning Director cc: Mayor Frank Todd Steve Hall � APPENDIX B RESPONSES TO C�MME�TS -��F R��'?� �� o U `Z� PI.ANNIN(3 DEPARTMENT • R�NTUN,WA9HIN(3T01� ., � � MUNICIPAL SUIIOfNG • RENTON,WASMINGTON 9dOSS • 235-ISSO � `p. ��o ��,�� RE�PONSE TO CO � �IENTS RESPONSE TO TUKWILA PLANNING DEPIIRTD4ENT l. Your review of the draft EIS is appreciated. 2 . The West Valley Highway has been designated as an arterial which should adequately handle circulation needs of land between the railroad tracks and the Green River. Minor access streets should be planned and installe3 at the development phase and as such do not need to be designated on the Circulation Element of the Comprehensive Plan. P�oreover it is very difficult to designate such access on the Circu- lation Element since it is almost impossible to accurately determine how land will develop and there- fore the location or the level of facility neecled. The circulation study yau probably are referring to is for S.W. 43rd 5treet between East Valley �Iighway and tY�e West Valley Highway. This study is for an east-west arterial while your area of concern is basically a north-south corYzdc,ro 3 . i ol:ic�es �.re ��;} ir.t;�.:�acd ir -�he r?-�pQa�d Cc:e�prehensive P1an. Enforcement vehicles of the Plan will be the policies. This includes the Zoning Ordinance , Sub- division Ordinance, etc. GOVERNOR � D,4NlEl J. EVAkS COMMISSIONERS: � WASHZNC".TON �iTA'TE 1EFF D. DOMASKIN A A 'rT /��T ThIOMAS C. GARRETT _ PAR�� Q�G ��CR�L�TYON CO��iMi�SYV.Lt K[�Y GREEN sEN HAYES - �,y�ATION: ?HURSTON AIRDUS1RIAl CENTER PNONE 753-5755 RALPH E. MACKEY ' - �� EL'STACE VYNhE � '. WILFRED R. WOODS P O. SOX 112$ OLYMPIA, WASHINGTON 98504 DIRECiOR: � CF9ARlE5 H. ODEGAARD February 27, 1975 � IN REPLY REfER TO: I Mr. GUrdO►� Y. Ericksen Planning Director ' The City of Renton Municipal Building I 200 hti11 Avenue South �'I Renton, Washington 98055 i Draft Environmental Impact Statement - Prapo�ed Green River Valley I Comprehensive Pian Dear Mr. Ericks�n: 'i The Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission has reviewed the above- I� noted document and can find no adverse impact on existing or proposed ' recreational areas under the jurisdiction of the Commission. This statement does not give an indication of what type of research was done to determine the location and value of possible archaeological or ' historical sites. There is no indi�cation that a qualified person was able to survey the proposed project sites. Further, staff finds that this pro- pased action has no impact on known historical sites (sites either on/or proposed for the State or National Registers of Historic Places) . The ' registers, however, provide only a small amount of information and should �ot be construed to be a complete inventory. In short, it appears that this statement does not adequately identify whethe�r significant archaeological or historical sites are located in the area where the proposed action will occur. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this statement. Sincerely, �__._.... .v4'f r > Y ?�/4. .� C�� {-�..._ l.t � David W. Heiser, Chief y.•-'" �R�, Environmental Coordination /;,�y ��, � f ��,� F � � O -� R �_ ��E�D =� � � . �_ ti ,_�-;� � �- 2 , , , , : � , D�Gi d� Nansen, Chi ef of ,��, Archaeol ogy and Hi stori c �� i�r� I Preservation ,,� �.� q � �'' �� l�,, Sg '✓��`�EP�R��/ �_-- -� �F R��'a ,`,`S O U `Z PLANNIN�3 DEPARTMENT • RENTON,WABHYN(3TON .., „y MUNICIPAL SUIIDING • RENTON,WASNING�ON 9EOSS • 235-2550 �O' ��rEDSE�`�� RESP011T �E TO CO � �dENTB RESPONSE TO WASHINGTON STATF PARK AND RECREATION COMMISSION 1 . Your review of the draft ETS is appreciated. 2 . The historical and archaeological shortcomings you noted have been rectified in the text of the EIS . A letter by Dennis F. Lewarch of the Office of Public Archaeology from the University of Washington is included for docu- mentation. UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98105 lr�stitute for Environmental Studies 112 Sieg Hall , FR-40 April 7, 1975 Mr•. Gary R. Kruger Associate Planner Planning Department (;ity of Renton, Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 D��ar Mr. Kruger: E:�;amination of our site survey records for King County indicates that at ��:ast one site, 45-KI-6, is located within the area encompassed by the Green • itiver Valley Comprehensive Plan. The site, a shell midden along the banks of the Green River, was located during survey activities in 1963. Field survey �'orms filled out at the time of discovery indicate that the site was destroyed during construction of SR 405. Thus, further f�eld work, such as preservation or� salvage, would appear to be unwarranted at this time. On-site reconnaissance �in the project area during late 1974 and early 1975 failed to locate any fur- �ther archaeological material . Given the high potential for prehistoric aboriginal occupation along the Green River, there is a good possibility that other sites as yet unreported to our o¢fice, exist in the comprehensive plan project area. In this regard, it would 1�e well to contact Mr. Gerald Hedlund, Department of Anthropology, Green River i�orrgnunity College. Mr. Hedlund and his students have carried out extensive �urveys and excavations in the C�reen River drainage in recent years. He would be able to give you additional information regarding the archaeological resources in the comprehensive plan area. I hope the above informatian helps you in preparing the final Environmental • Impact Statement for the Green River Valley. Feel free to contact the Office of Public Archaeology in the future regarding any aspect of archaeological resource management. Sin rely, � ,G�ilf� .� o� De ni s E. Lewarc �� R�� Offi ce of Publ i c Archaeol ogy (��///��2�, �Q �. DEL:ch � �q,�� O�� '`r•. ��5 � 2. 2. � � �/ �� G ��P A R'�M�i -�.�- • 1 410 West Harrison Street,Seattle,Washington 98119 (206)344•7330 March 4, 1975 � � � � �+ � � �N� -�" F�� O 4 ��y � �F�. v R�CEI��p Q �%v� Z � ,.� � I�TS ��- ..�_._�. � v ---...,_._ ��Ir. G��uc�n Y. Erickson �' ' �� Plannirzg Director ?/�G DEPAR�� City of Renton ` , I�funicipal Building 20U Mill AiTenue South R�ntan, W�sh�ngton 98055 Su?�j�c u: Green River tijailey Comprehensive Plan Draft �nuironmental Impact Statement Dear M�. irickson: i�'e have reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposed Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan circulated with your letter of February 1C, 1975. In addition, the proposed cornprehensive plan itself was reviewed. We are of necessity 1.imiting our cornments to the air ^ollui.ior1 aspects o£ the p1an and the statem��nt. The "riznimization of air pollution" is a goal to which this A�er�cy can of course subscribe. It appears, however, that at `�.his peint the plan zs so general that there are no means available for achieving this goal. We understood that the plan, as is stated on page 2, is intentionally general in - SERVING� 1"�S proposals; however, unless a method. of limiting air KING COUNTV pollutaa�t emissions is specified, we cannot estimate the 410 West Harrison St. tot�.l r.iass of ollutan:t emissions t�iat will be revented Seattle, 98119 p p � (206) 344-7330 n�r ��.n '�1�e estirnate the resulting concentrations of air poliutants that will occur. We tlierefore are unable to esti- KITSAP COUNTY mate the ampact of this proposal. Dial Operetor for Toll Free Number Zenrth 8385 Bainbrldge Island, ��S Agency is xequired to participate in EPA-mandated program Dial 3a4-7330 f�r ;�xairztera.nce of the ambient air quality standards through � PIERCE COUNTY 213 Hess Builtling Tacoma, 98402 �� (206) 383-5051 SNOHOMISH COUNTY 506 Medical-Dental Bldg. I Everett, 98201 '' (206) 259-02R9 ''i BOARD OF DIR[CTORS I CHAIRMAN- Evere;t Foster, A'ter„�t• f, rzt��.c��. ,a ��,q�` � �r_s�i�ne� Pi �� Co��ty: VICt CNAIRM.4N: N R�:�,�.z�d Fo�sg-e Cemnissioner Snoh�m��5h County; Robert C. Anderso�., Mayor Everett�. .. -� .. n, Jara'.z:i. r.ayor E�remerton: Gordon N. JOY:nston, Mayor Teccma: Genr LoCe. Comm�<_sione� Kltsap County: � �Cryntr_Executive�. Wes Uhlrnan Mayor Seatt�.e� .4. R. Dammkoenler, Alr Pollution Controi Officer. Mr. Gordon Y. Er�cksen March 4, 1975 Page 2 ' land use planning. Undaubtedly yo�zr department will also be participating in this procedure which began with the designa- tion by the State of Washington af air qua.lity maintenance planning areas in our three cotmties. As you may be aware, ' a maintenance arsa for the cantrol of suspended particulate has been designated, and it cwers the area included in your Green River Valley Cart�rehensive P1an. This pragram may be able to etffect many of ttie goals and objectives you have listed. The air quality section titled "Atmospheric Conditions" on page 7 of the EIS requires sane modifications and aclditions. The differences between prevailing wind speeds and directions at the site and at the Seattle Tacama Airport may be consider- able. Records fram this Agency's station at 227 Andover Park East in Zlzkwila show that winds were light and variable 14.6 percent of the time in 1973. We suggest that studies requir- ing the use of wind data consider the records of our station at 'h�kwila, since it is certainly closer to, and probably more typical of, the actual wind conditions to be found in the Renton Green Ri.ver Valiey Co�prehensive Planning Area. Thank yau for the opportuni�y to comnent on this statement. Very truly yours, A. R. Danmkoehler Air Pollution Control Officer 1 .7. R. Pears Senior Air Pollution Engineer , ARD:JRP:et I • -� �F R��'a ,`,� O () � P'LAN�i INC3 DEPARTMENT � RENTUN, WABHINQTON � ,ti MUNlC1PAL BUILDING • RENTON.WASMIP6GYQN 9SOSS • 2S5-Z550 (O' �q,�TE �,�� 7�iESPO1�T8� TO �� ENT� D SE P� RESPONSE TO THE PUGLT SOUIID AIR POLLUTION COiJTROL FGENCY 1. Your review of the draft LIS is appreciated. 2 . The atmospheric section has been modified to incorporate the 1973 wind information at Andover Park i.n Tukwila. At a station in Tukwila the winds were found to be light and variavle I4 . 6 perr,ent of the time. About 36 percent of the ti_me the winds are either from th� south or scuth by southwest or about 12 percent of the time the winds are from either the nortri or ilorth by northwest; most of these winds are less than 11 knots per hour. Because these winds are located in a valley this infers that at times there are inadequate �ainds available to disperse the air pollutants that tend �o collect. � _; ll� ��f+ �� ,�. �. � � � THE CITY OF REIiIT�N Z o MUNICtPAL BUILDING 200 MiLI AV�E. SO. RENTON, WASH.98055 o� � AVERY GARRETT, MAYOR , • PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 'O �� Warren C. Gonn.�son, Oirector o��TE� SEP'�E�O Tlarch 5 , 1��?5 r;embers of the Renton Planning Commission P,lunicipal Building Renton , Washington 98055 Subject : Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan llcar Commissioners : � R.eference is made tca your Figure 3y the circulation element of the preliminary Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan. This circulation element indicates Oaksdale Sly, Lind Avenue SW, S�ti` 16th, SW 43rd Street , and the ��`est Valley Highway as arterials within the comprehen.sive plan study area. 'I'he City ' s Arteriai Street Plan, adopzed in i974 , indicates an east/west arterial fr�m Oaksdale Avenue easterly , with a crassing af the Valley Freeway and a connection to Springbrook Road in the 'I'albot Iiill area. It is therefore recommended that an east/west arterial be indicated an the Green River Vall�y Comprehensive Plan providirig for ar� extension of Strander Boulevard at the West Valley tiibhway easterly , ��ith grade intersecxions at Oaksdale SW , Lind Avenue SW, and the East Valley Highway, with an Qvercrossing of the Valley Freeway �nd a connection to Sgringbrook Road in the Talbot fiill area. We feel that this additional arterial will provide the additional circulation element required to adequately serve the Comprehensi�,re Development Plan. Ypur favorable consideration of this addition W�ill be appreciat�d. Sincerely, � � _--�,f% � ��.-�/�- ; - h�ARREN G. GONNASON, P.�. I'ublic Itiorks Director WCG: cah � c.c : rlayor City Council Planning Director ; Traffic Engineer ; Design Engineer �. °� R��► �� o � ~G PLA:�NINCi D�:PARTM�NT • RENTON,WABHIrd(3TO1V � MUNIC1PAl .UIl.DING A RENT0�1,wASHINtSTON 9iOSS • 21S-2S50 ti �O' ��'OSEP'�'��'t�'� � Fi$��8AT8�'i °ro C'sO�d �I �'iNTs , RESPONSE TO WARREN C. GONNASON, PUBLIC WORKS DSRECTOR l. Your review of the drait EIS is appreciated. 2 . The Planning Commission is reviewing thn possibility of designating an east-west arterial that would extend from 5trander Boulevard to Springbrook Road in Talbot Hill. r INTER-OFFICE MEMO T0: (.'�rdon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director DATE 'i/8/75 � rROM: rire Prevention Bureau ' SUBJE�CT: Green River Valley Comprehensive &lan and it�s draft enviromental Impact Statement After :review of above mentioned copy ahd attending the Public Hearing held at B:Op PM on March 5, 1975 in Council Chambers, our only comment would be, that there is a definite need f��r an East and West arterial which would cross at�or near 9trander Blvds in Tukwila. This �wuuld greatly lessen Fire Suppression�s response time to this area for Renton, Kent and Tu�Cwila Fire Departments. , �� RFti �'��. ��:.�.� c,� RECFIVE� o . �°� G.H. Williams. Chief MAR 1 2 0 1915 -c � � . � v22'N ��, \G DEPPR I OY1 R��, �� G U �L PI.ANNIN�3 DEPARTMENT s REN'rON, WABHIN�iTON � � � ,,,"'� MUNICIPAL BUIlO1NG • RENTON, WASHIfrGTON 9aOS5 • 235-2550 0 �• �q,�Tf �,�� RESPONSE TO CO � MENTS 0 SE P'�' RFSPONSE TO RENTON FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU l . Your review of the draft FIS is anpreciated. 2 . The Planning Commission is reviewinq the possibility of designating an east-�,�est arterial leading east from Strander Boulevard. WASHI'�'GION �TATE � �"�'� '�""' ' � `�;� ' H i G H WA Y C O 10�1 M I S S I O N �� °�""`�' , �`��„� -�°��`��r � G H.Anclr��ti�5 - Dire��tor DEPART�ti1E.'�I OF HIC�tiV4'A15 Higtiwey Adminietration Building 6 ' Olympia, Weshington 98504 [206] 753-6000 ' �'; r��h ii, 1975 � � ��°F �F� Mr. Gordon Y. Ericksen V� R�CEI�/ED �� Planning Director ,� City of Renton MqR 12 �� Municipal Building „� 200 Mill Ave. So. ,9 � Renton, Washington 98055 �y � � City of P.enton y,�G DEPAi � Green River Valley Plan Draft Environmental Statement Dear Mr. Ericksen: Reference is made to your letter af Feb�uary 10, 1975, requesting our review of the draft environmental statement for the above project. We have completed our review and offer the following co�ents : The statement sums up well, the considerable impact that this pro�ect will have on state highways. However, there is one problem that hasn`t been adequately discussed. The East Valley highway will• need to be relocated at the same time the ramp improvements are being made to SR 167. We would recommend that the City of Renton, City of Kent, and the Highway Department coordinate their efforts to insure that the project is compatible with associated transportation planning. The SR 167 ramp improvements are currently scheduled in the highway pragram for the period between 1981 and 1987, Thank you for the opportunity to review this infor�tion. Sincerely, G. H. ANDREWS Director of Highways �� ,� ��z �� By: H. R. GOFF Assistant Director for Planning, Research and State Aid HRG:eh RA/RBD Bdl.� . , +r.0 . �iurnar H,;r. �'n Ih"d!�;. 1 H_ 1 �iket �v�rv,ir�r n (,�.�it , ��1,�t�ar�. Suren�-e�n Ndn�1�11-- BOu/dC� �t�,� ��., �.r,�. -�°F ��'a �� o (� � PLANNYN(3 DEPARTMENT o R�NTQN.WAIBHIN(3TO1�I ,,,"�� AIUNlC1rAl �UIIDING • RENTON,WASNIPaGTOW 9iOS5 � 23S-2SS0 �O' �� SE9P��'� R �iS�oN��e' �o C�� i�Z'� RESPONSE TO WASHINGTON STATE HIGHWAY COMMISSION l. Your review of the draft EZS is appreciated. 2 . The improvement of the interchange for SR-167 at S.W. 43rd Street and the possible need to relocate the East Valley Highway has been noted in the text of the FIS . OLYMPIC PIPE LINE COMPANY P. O. BOX 236, RENTON, �NASHINGTON 98055 ..!�`--_ April l , 1975 ,j" �F RE/�/�O ;:�� a�CFI�IE� � �v � �� .�, City of Renton Planning Commission ,,.,.�� _ �00 Mill Avenue South Renton, Wa. 98055 {'9,yN P�� NG DEe Attention : Norman L. Ross , Chairman 270 - STUDIES CITY OF RENTON ZONING ORDINANCE Dear Mr. Ross : This letter reflects the concerns of the Olympic Pipe Line Company about the proposed amendments to the Renton Comprehensive Plan and the draft Environmental Impac�x: Statement published by the Planning Department in February, 1975 in connection with the proposed amend- ments. At the Planning Commission Public Hearing on March 5 , 1975 , the following information was given by members of the Planning Comm- ission and the staff of the Planning Department : l . ZONING CHANGES : There has been no downzoning in the City of Renton in the past ten ( 10) years and no down- zoning is expected to result from adoption of the pro- posed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan . The purpose of the amendments to the Comprehensive Plan is to provide a general planning framework for the City , not to restrict uses being made currently or to impose restrictions on similar future uses by industry. 2 . IMPACT ON CURRENT USES : The proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan would have impact prospectively only via the provision of a planning framework. No changes in current uses would be required of industries whose use was not consistent with the revised plan . However, future uses and expansion of current facilities would be approved so long as compliance with beautification and set back standards was assured. In sum, industry currently in Renton was advised that downzoning was not being proposed and that future heavy industrial use would be allowed, but that such use would be subject to Manufacturing Park development suandards . Mr. Norman L. Ro�.� Page Two April l , 1975 After the hearing, however, we noted that the principal uses perrnitted under t�ie r�2anufacturing Park classific�.tiori would not permit the present use we are making of our property , which use is specifically authorized under the current Heavy Industry zoning classification . Our propert� would be placed in a non-conforming use status if i_ts zoning classification is changed to Manufacturing Park . We therefore object to any change in the zoning classification of our property a�id to any amendment to the Comprehensive Plan pre- limina.ry to such a zoning change . If , as we have been advised, no change i.n the zoning classification for our property is contemplated, � we see no need to include our property in any amendment to the Com- - prehensive Plan . We further note i:hat any use under the Manufacturin� Park classi- fication would require a special permit . No standards are provided to determine which heavy industrial uses are compatible with the Manufacturing Park classific�,tion . In our judgment , the delegation oi' authority to City personnel to determine allowable uses should be coupled with clear standards which provide �irection . Those planning development are also entitled to notice of development requirements which are clearly spell.ed aut . Without clear standards in this area , any special permit procedure of this nature is un- workable . We also have the following comments on the draft Environmental Impact Statement that has been distributed: l . INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THE IMPACT STATEMENT: As mentioned above, industry� was advised at the Public Hearing that no zoning changes were anticipated. However , the Impact Statement on page 5 , subheading 6 states , "The Comprehensive Pl.an is the basis for determining the zoning ol the Vall.ey" . We take this to mean that future zoning changes are to be made in accordance with the revised Comprehensive Plan , and if our property is classed as MP in the Comprehensive Plan , t'he change c�f its zoning to that classification would be a logical result . 2 . LITTLE CQMPARATIVE ANALYSIS BETWEEN HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AND MANUFACTURING PARK DEVELOPh7ENT : There � is little comparative analysis in the Impact Statement . For the mast part , the impact of the Manufacturing Park designation alone is ass�ssed. The City should not. alter the current Plan until such time ' as the benefits and adverse effects of the change , relative i to the current use , are adequately assessed. No statistical i, impact information and little economic impact inforrriation ' is provided in the Impact Statement . Mr. niarman L. Ross Page Three April 1 , 1975 3. NO DIFFERENCE IN TAX B�SE �R EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES : The major comparative information between the Heavy In- dustry and Manufacturing Park designations is provided on page 17 of the Impact Statement under the heading "No Action" . This section states that there is na expected difference in tax base or employment opportunities as a result of the propo�ed change. This is an important consider�tion , espec- ially in light of the complete changes prop�sed in allowable uses in the area. We question the conclusian set forth if the zoning is changed in accordance with �he proposed amendments to the plan . 4 . ALTERNATIVE APPROACHES TO ACCOMPLISHING THE STATED IMPROVE- MENTS TO BE GAINED BY THE PROPOSED CHANGE : The "No Action" section of the Impact statement states that setback and similar requirements and benefits to wildlife habitat are the major differences between the proposed amendments to the Pian and the current Plan . If this is an accurate statement , the addition of greenbelt arE�as and the imposition of setback and simil ar re�uirements , without the massive zoning re- classification of the area , seems a simpler and rnore direct method of accomplishing the effects desired. 5 . LACK OF IDEI�'TIFICATION 0�' EXPENSE TO DEVELOPERS IN THE PRO- POSED PLAN : Throughout the Impact Statement , the cost of complyin� with the proposed amendmerzts to the Plan is sug- �ested to be significant , but not discouraging. H�wever, nowhere does the Impact Statement provide inf�rmation as to the magnitude of such costs . Such information is essential • to a fair assessment , especially sinc.e such costs are con- ceded to be significant . It is possible that such costs would make industrial development economically infeasible . In any event , there should be sc�me information concerning the pro,jected magnitude of such costs and an assessment of the disincentives tc� development whic;h such costs might pro- i dixce . 6 . PROCED�:JRAL VARIATIONS NOT MENTIONED IN THE PLAN OR IMPACT STATEMENT: One of the major advantages of the current Heavy Industry� d�signation is its clarity and notice to the de��eloper with plans for future develc.>pment . Speci.al permit requirements and general development requirements are set forth in the regulations so that the developer can , with some certainty , plan construction that complies with the r��ulations . The j'act that the proposed am�ndments to the Plan may impos� special permit requirements for every development in the planning area is sigriificant . First , the uncertainty crc�ated by a special permit Mr. Norman L. Ross Page Four April l , 1975 procedure is unfair to the developer and costly to administer by the City . Secondly, the absence of notice of this change in the Impact Statement is a major oversight . In summation , Olyn.pic Pipe Line Company is extremely concerned about t,he proposed amendments to the Comprehensive Plan and opposed to any zoning change of its property . Further , an assessment of the Environmental Impact Statement requires that a more thorough and i.nformative pr�sentation of the projected impact of the proposed changes should be made and publicly aired prior to any further action on the proposed changes . Very truly yours , ��_ _ _-�_s `--�i` ._..,.,......_w`-�-�' IIK/bl I . I . Kamar Manager cc : Community Services Committee Renton City Council Attention : bir. Earl Clymer, Chairman �� ,`, O U ~Z PLA:�TNINF3 DEPART�YENT o R�NTON, WABHIN(3T01�7 .. � „"',� MUNIC1PAl SUILDING i RENTOP/.WASHINGTON 9dOS5 • 235-2550 0 �• ��,�rf �,�� RESPOA� +B� TO C�� d �NTB D SE P� RE5PONSE TO OLYMPIC PIPELI?�1E COMPANY 1. Your review of the draft EIS is appreciated. 2 . The draft EIS is concerned with the proposed amend- ment to the Comprehensive Plan in the Green River Valley plannir.g area and is not addressed to zoning which is anly one of several vehicles for implement- ing the Con,r�rehensive ?�lan. 3. The Comprehensive Plan will be employed as a general guide for future z:�ning, if and when a parcel is pro- posed to be rezoned. For further �ackground inform- ation concerning what a comprehensive plan is , what purposes of the Plan are, and the characteristics of • the plan are, this information is briefly stated in the Introduction (pages 1 and 2) of the preliminary Gre�n River Valley Comprehensive Plan. 4 . Upon the adoption of the proposed Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan, any zone that is not consistent wirh the Plan would be considered non-conforming with tne Comprehensive Plan. However, this would not effect the exist�ng zoning on a parcel. Each parcel would retain its existing zoning until it is rezoned. Should a parcel be rezoned and the use became non- conforming, then Subsection 4-726 (B) P1on-conforming Uses of the Renton Zoning Ordin�:nce would apply. This Subsection should be reviewed for the rights and limitations of non-conforming uses for zoning. 5 . A minor correction to your letter is that the M-P zone requires a "site approval" of the proposed development plan, not a "special permit" . For additional information on the M-P zone , including the permitted uses , Section 4-73C� of the Renton Zoning Ordinance should be reviewed . 6 . There seems to be very little cost differential between the existing and proposed Plan. Some of these differ- i � ences {including from a cost-benefit basis) cannot be I 1 FtESPf�:v�E TO �LYMPIC PIPEL��1E COMPAIvTY PAGE Tlti7� campared in dol�ar �ir�ures , rirst, the Zand �regar- � aticn casts (fiZs , streets , utilities , etc. ) would be the same for both types of development. Second, there are such a variety of uses allowed and most of these uses are the same that it is impossible to quantify cost differences , if there are any. Third, there are development standards (Subdivision Ordinance, Pa.rking and Loac�ina Ordinance , Building Codes , etc� ) that would apply equally tc� both ty�es af development so these costs wo�sld be the same. Fourth, such factc�rs as image (both corporate and City) , aesthics and prid� (again both corparate and City) L�hich usually are can- sidered unquantifiable (and may cr may no�. cost more to incorporate amenities into the development) must be part of the overall evaluation. Fifth, the greenbelt require- ments (minim��;m of two percent wildlife habitat per de- velopment and 110 acres of wildlife habitat) are reruired by the Soil Conservation Service as a condition of the clrainage and will eftect both the existing and proposed Plan. Only a small amount of land in addi}ion to the Soil Conservation Service requirements are noted as greenbelt. And �ixth, a portion of the existing Plan presently is desiqnat�d as Manufacturing Park so there would be no change in development costs in those areas . 7 . The no action alternative indicates that comparing heavy industrial and manufacturinc� park type developmen� " . . . . approximatel�� about the same tax base and employFnent opportunities . . . , . " would occur, This appears to be a reasanable statement since many of the allowed uses in both typ�s of development are the same. It is not the intention of the Planning Commission to initiate rezones in the Green Riv�r Valley so that the existing H-1 zoned areas would be consistent with the proposed Plan; the Commissicn anticipates that future rezones fror�� '"G" would conform to the Plan when the rezones w�re requested.