HomeMy WebLinkAboutLUA14-000645 (Add'l Docs)FS '
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM CH2MHILL®
Odor Assessment at SECO Southport Development
PREPARED FOR:SECO Development, Inc.
PREPARED BY: CH2M HILL ivECEIVED
DATE: May 18, 2015
JUL 1 0 2015
PROJECT NUMBER: 660134.01.01
CITY OF RENTON
Summary PLANNING DIVISION
Odor Results
I
SECO Development, Inc. (SECO) is v orking in coordination with The Boeing Company(Boeing)to evaluate
odors at their development,Southport, located adjacent to the Boeing Renton facility.
The perception of odor depends on both the characteristics and concentration of the odorant and the odor
sensitivity of the person smelling it.IThe odor threshold is typically determined by an odor panel consisting
of a specified number of people,and the numerical results are typically expressed as occurring when 50
percent of the panel correctly detects the odor.
It was determined that two scenarios were to be modeled: a 2015 configuration scenario and a 1999
configuration scenario.The 2015 air dispersion modeling scenario consisted of projected Boeing operational
emissions,and the SECO 2015 office and hotel configuration.The 1999 air dispersion modeling scenario
consisted of the same projected Boeing operational emissions,and the SECO 1999 office and hotel
configuration. For both the 1999 and 2015 configuration scenarios,the air dispersion modeling analysis
showed that impacts are predicted to be less than documented odor thresholds. In addition,the 2015
configuration air dispersion modeling scenario odor impacts are predicted to be less than the 1999
configuration air dispersion modeling scenario for most chemicals modeled; however,the magnitude of
modeled impacts are similar between the 2015 and 1999 air dispersion modeling configuration scenarios.
The predicted air dispersion results, as discussed in this document,show impacts less than the applied
thresholds. However,due to the subjectivity of odor perception,the results of the analysis cannot
guarantee that there will be no odor complaints in the area.Also, it is important to note that multi-chemical
interaction could potentially lead to a perception of odor.The interaction of chemicals was not considered
or accounted for in this study.
Table 1 below shows that Methyl n- myl ketone is the most likely to be recognized as the maximum
predicted concentration is in the same order of magnitude as the odor threshold. Methyl n-amyl ketone
odor is often described as smelling fruity, banana-like,and spicy. Butyl acetate, cyclohexanone,
ethylbenzene, isopropyl alcohol, methyl ethyl ketone, methyl isobutyl ketone, propyl alcohol,toluene,and
xylene are all within one order of magnitude of the thresholds. Therefore there is higher risk that these
chemicals may be detected or recognized at the SECO development. A description of their odor is shown in
Table 1.
EN0515151028SEA/660134(SECO_ODOR_TM_20150518) 1,
i COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
TABLE 1
Chemicals with the Highest Risk of Odor Detection in the 2015 Configuration,µg/m3
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
Maximum Predicted Odor
Chemical Impact 3-minute Thresholda Odor Description
Same Order of Magnitude
Methyl n-amyl ketone 1,285 1,634 Fruity,banana-like,spicy
One Order of Magnitude Below the Threshold
Butyl acetate 351' 1,853 Fruity,banana-like
Cyclohexanone 507, 3,533 Peppermint and acetone
Ethylbenzene 27 399
Aromatic,pungent,sweet,
gasoline-like
Isopropyl Alcohol 1,251 54,078
Mixture of ethanol,acetone,
rubbing alcohol
Methyl ethyl ketone 6,827 50,138 Acetone
Methyl isobutyl ketone 140' 3,605
Pleasant,faint,ketonic,and
camphor
Propyl alcohol,N-301 6,391 Similar to ethanol
Toluene 5,917 10,552
Sweet,pungent,sour/burn
benzene-like
Xylene 125 3,170 Sweet odor
a The odor threshold is typically determined by an odor panel consisting of a specified number of people,and the numerical results
are typically expressed as occurring when 50 percent of the panel correctly detects the odor. Refer to the Odor Threshold section of
this document for details on the thresholds.
2 EN0515151028SEA/660134
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL.INC.
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
Project Background
SECO is evaluating potential odor impacts emitted by the adjacent Boeing facility in the Southport
Development.Two development scenarios were evaluated:the development as approved in the 2014
Master Plan Minor Modification (2015 Southport Development)and the development designed in 1999
1999 Southport Development). In addition,a design comparison between the 2015 Southport Development
and 1999 Southport Development was conducted by evaluating the predicted air dispersion impacts for
each of the development designs.This technical memorandum details the methodology and results of this
air dispersion odor analysis.
Boeing Emissions
Boeing provided an emissions inventory for the air dispersion modeling odor analysis.The emissions
inventory included emission sources immediately adjacent to the Southport Development.This emissions
inventory and sources were used in both air dispersion modeling scenarios.The emission sources included
were:
4-86 Building—Wing paint and treatment operations,including:
In-Spar vertical booth emissions
Spar horizontal booth emissions
Test booth emissions
Seal and paint mix emissions
Wastewater Treatment Plant(WWTP), including:
Air stripping stack emissions
Emissions were based on 2014 data and projected to reflect the predicted Boeing operation increase to
occur in the near future. In addition,,a 25 percent increase in emissions were included as a safety factor.
Attachment A provides the emission's inventory and calculation assumptions prior to the 25 percent
increase.Details on specific emission source characteristics and locations are discussed in the Modeling
Methodology Section.
SECO Configurations and Receptors
The two air dispersion modeling scenarios are based on two Southport office and hotel configurations.The
scenarios were as follows:
2015 office and hotel configuration
1999 office and hotel configuration
Receptor locations were provided by SECO and intended to identify locations in the development where
individuals would be exposed to odors from the adjacent facility.
The following sections detail the layouts and key differences between the two scenarios.
2015 Southport Development Site Layout
The 2015 site layout is SECO's current development plan, as approved in the 2014 Master Plan Minor
Modification. Figure 1 shows the 2015 site layout.Table 2 lists the receptors associated with the 2015 site
layout and used in the air dispersion',odor analysis. In addition to the receptors,the three office buildings
and the hotel were included to account for building downwash parameters in the air dispersion analysis.The
office buildings and the hotel were modeled at a 32 foot base elevation.
EN0515151028SEA/660134 3
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL.INC.
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
TABLE 2
Receptors Associated with the 2015 Development Configuration
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
Receptor Height Receptor Base
Above Grade Elevation at Easting X Northing Y
Receptor Description feet) Grade(feet) meters)a meters)a
Promenade 0 22 559855.59 5261428.44
Outdoor Seating Area 0 22 559831.96 5261397.17
Hotel Rooftop Air Intake 125 32 559861.30 5261366.40
Office Building 1 Rooftop Air Intake 125 32 559893.50 5261261.22
Office Building 2 Rooftop Air Intake 125 32 559937.15 5261300.57
Office Building 3 Rooftop Air Intake 1125 32 559995.82 5261316.32
Bristol 1 Façade 30 32 559913.23 5261374.45
Bristol 2 Façade 30 32 560031.18 5261328.35
Circular Drive 0 32 559863.3 5261333.08
Notes:
a Based on Universal Transverse Mercator(UTM')North American Datum 83(NAD83)Zone 10 projection
4 EN0515151028SEA/660134
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
I
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
FIGURE 1
2015 Southport Development Building and Receptor Layout
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
h tttUrIDT8 WIF.'lR. r,,„,
N
TkkifA69 i
44444
d J _
r_ ------- Key:
i/ A Receptors
4
SY krNY.WG
CWtlkET6 WALL 1._._,. - '- .- __
s/i f.
j '
p I. - 1
1;GPtM1FHY1'111df r.. ;.-_ 1... ,i
u° I _ 4"
Mumma.. , I 1H"''l 0 i '— )fi ff;i i 1
i.TSS NOTEii 1 l
cut.'4€11r , N I
1 r
LI
r-iJ----- ii MU Ems? y '.3y` '. T ;.
o• '
3
1
L,,; HjJ i_-! Giii ni' 'sty. §"'•
44; -:.."
4::
j a_
1 _
ILV
r l'j If'-., e I • '' a j it 1._z'
KM
i
I=
uttornsv oe , y ms.®«a.Texx.1 I J noM.:w..7111 RM
5167Ct1KR.it.x1;:t BULBOsB HDhG
1 'iy \`' j `_
r _ _-^
lGFRbhptZTY .
1 (
p...
I
O 4 6,Mt
1
f ii '1s' '\,
f Hi i111B4' Ia
a \•' 4P- T E I I .'
y
J
t CFrCE I{y '
rk,t
sole•
lSi I Gn4a 1 F1 2 '',s- -''':.'ici 0 -..
L
r.
a / El11111 1111 4 , --
a y.,1111
I;
rrrr 1111 —
IKWIWl....'. . 1"i Vleb......
ill Sul-I I it. l l ll r i
5 1rrr . TI T rl.r iliTrIr I,11,lire r'1 f'iTf"T1T—
A -Cfl 1_I 11 I I Q41. I i 1111-111-111-1.11T11 B 11 1 1?7 I 11 I I I 1 I I .____ .t I
69.6-
PAS
6
somis oety-.% aatsw+z.-'
I
4FRIF
o. I
n
I 4T l•-- I I-1 N. . ' ,.!
EN0515151028SEA/660134 5
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
1999 Southport Development Site Layout
The 1999 Southport Development site layout was included in the air dispersion analysis to determine if
there might be odor threshold exceedances.The 1999 site layout predicted air dispersion impacts were also
compared to the 2015 site layout predicted air dispersion impacts to determine if design changes in the
2015 site layout affect the air dispersion. Figure 2 shows the 1999 site layout.The differences between the
2015 and 1999 site configurations are:
Layout of locations for the hotel and three office buildings
Shapes, including tiers of the hotel land three office buildings
Hotel building heights(75 feet for the 1999 site layout and 125 feet for 2015 site layout)
Table 3 lists the receptors associated with the 1999 site layout and used in the air dispersion odor analysis.
In addition to the receptors,the three ollffice buildings and the hotel were included to account for building
downwash parameters in the air dispersion analysis.The office buildings and the hotel were modeled at a 32
foot base elevation.
TABLE 3
Receptors Associated with the 1999 Development Configuration
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
Receptor Description Receptor Height Receptor Base Easting X Northing Y
Above Grade Elevation at meters)a meters)a
fleet) Grade(feet)
Promenade 0 22 559855.59 5261428.44
Outdoor Seating Area 0 22 559793.77 5261358.00
Hotel Rooftop Air Intake 75 32 559866.31 5261371.41
Office Building 1 Rooftop Air Intake 125 32 559851.28 5261302.01
Office Building 2 Rooftop Air Intake 125 32 559917.11 5261309.88
Office Building 3 Rooftop Air Intake 125 32 559989.38 5261317.75
Bristol 1 Façade 30 32 559913.23 5261374.45
Bristol 2 Façade 0 32 560031.18 5261328.35
Circular Drive 0 32 559863.58 5261334.77
Notes:
a Based on UTM NAD83 Zone 10 projection
6 EN0515151028SEA/660134
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
a
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
FIGURE 2
1999 Southport Development Building and Receptor Layout
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis',
1Wl r.1 -l
pomp
E..
p oop .
er=.;<ra._ il iv. -_1
5 4' Receptorsr —
7 - {
1.9c
IE {
1'ip :_p—i.p.ei 1 f.,..,,,,„. iNcl
ILO F.1
e y31 I
i
I•
i
14
I s .. `p
il
Liiii .„.0. 1 1a r ` .
t .
1
I
rxFS ' .n
fi
IIIi ,
I
l' I t sip;
i i
21p /L : - ..1 .. :•._ .1 . , i__,_g . ii /
t 't / 3 - ., !! ',. 1 ; i lL! I { ii i
1
I _
PAW* 1 1 i
f r--•
j I t i i "'.r`..-'i r1I iM'
HIV!
I
II v ,
fli
1 i111 LI lllllllllllli..i3
I ---\-- -- - -- f - 1: A' --at—.4i, — iAli
EN0515151028SEA/660134 7
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
Odor Thresholds
Odor is a human response. It is the perception experienced when one or more chemical substances in the air
come in contact with the various human sensory systems.Odor threshold refers to the minimum
concentration of an odorant that produces an olfactory response or sensation.This threshold is typically
determined by an odor panel consisting of a specified number of people, and the numerical results are
typically expressed as occurring when 50 percent of the panel correctly detects the odor.Therefore,the
odor thresholds are very subjective,since the values depend on the sensitivity of the panelists, detectability
criterion,the method of presenting the odor stimulus to the panelists, and the purity of the chemical
odorant being tested.
A couple of different approaches are used to quantify the odors.One is to quantify an overall odor of a
collected sample using dilution-to-threshold (D/T) ratio.This approach does not identify any specific
compounds.The other approach is based on the concentrations of individual compounds that contribute to
the odorous perception. Different regulatory agencies adopt different approaches and standards.
Washington State does not have a numerical value for ambient odor thresholds. In this study,the individual
chemical compounds emitted from the Boeing facility were evaluated using the dispersion modeling and
then compared with their corresponding odor thresholds. It is important to note that multi-chemical
interaction could potentially lead to a perception of odor, and the interaction of chemicals was not
considered or accounted for in this stud' y.
Because no local,state,or federal odor thresholds are established for any of the chemical compounds
evaluated,a literature review was conducted on various ambient air odor threshold documents.The odor
thresholds used in the air dispersion odor analysis were based on the following three references:
1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA). 1992.Reference Guide to Odor Thresholds for Hazardous
Air Pollutants Listed in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. March.
2. Amoore,John E., and Earl Hautala.i 1983. "Odor as an Aid to Chemical Safety:Odor Thresholds
Compared with Threshold Limit Vailues and Volatilities for 214 Industrial Chemicals in Air and Water
Dilution."Journal of Applied Toxic logy.Volume 3, No.6.
3. 3M.2010.Occupational Health and Environmental Safety Division 2010 Respirator Selection Guide.
The majority of the odor thresholds used in the air dispersion odor analysis are based on the USEPA and
Journal of Applied Toxicology references.These two references summarize literature reviews and document
various odor thresholds and ranges based on reputable publications.When available,the geometric mean
detection level was used from the USEPA reference. If the USEPA reference did not include chemicals
modeled in the analysis,the Journal of Applied Toxicology odor thresholds were used. If the chemicals were
not found in either the USEPA or Journal of Applied Toxicology references,the 3M reference was used.
However, because the 3M reference provides specific guidance'for changing respirator gas cartridges and
not ambient air,these odor thresholds could potentially be overly conservative for the air dispersion odor
analysis.
Table 4 lists the odor thresholds used in the air dispersion analysis.The predicted air dispersion odor
impacts from each chemical modeled were compared to their respective thresholds,as listed in the table.
8 EN0515151028SEA/660134
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
TABLE 4
Odor Thresholds
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
Odor
Chemical Modeled CAS Threshold(pg/m3)a Reference
Ammonia 7664-41-7 3,622 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Acetone 67-64-1 30,881 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Benzene 71-43-2 194,876 USEPA
Benzyl Alcohol 100-51-6 24,547 3M
Butanol,N- 71-36-3 2,516 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Butyl acetate 123-86-4 1,853 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Chloroform 67-66-3 937,463 USEPA
Cumene 98-82-8 157 USEPA
Cyclohexanone 108-94-1 3,533 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Dimethylacetamide N-,N 127-19-5 167,470 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Ethanol 64-17-5 158,277 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Ethyl benzene 1100-41-4 399 USEPA
Hexamethylene Diisocyanate 822-06-0 34 3M
Isobutyl Acetate 110-19-0 3,041 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Isobutyl Alcohol 78-83-1 4,851 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Isopropyl Alcohol 67-63-0 54,078 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Methanol 67-56-1 209,669 USEPA
Methylene chloride 4 75-09-2 500,201 USEPA
Methyl ethyl ketone 78-93-3 50,138 USEPA
Methyl isobutyl ketone 1i08-10-1 3,605 USEPA
Methyl n-amyl ketone 110-43-0 1,634 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Methyl propyl ketone 107-87-9 38,750 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Propyl alcohol,N-31-23-8 6,391 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Tetrachloroethene 127-18-4 318,773 USEPA
Toluene 108-88-3 10,552 USEPA
Trimethylbenzene,1,2,4-95-63-6 11,798 3M
Trimethylbenzene,1,3,5-108-67-8 2,704 Journal of Applied Toxicology
Xylene • • 1330-20-7 3,170 USEPA
Notes:
a Documented parts per million converted to µg/m3
µg/m3—microgram per cubic meter
CAS-Chemical Abstracts Service
EN0515151028SEA/660134 9
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
1 /
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT I
Modeling Methodology
Odor Study Methodology
This section describes the modeling methodology used in the air dispersion odor analysis.
Model Selection
The AERMOD model (Version 14134)was used with regulatory default options,as recommended in the
USEPA Guideline on Air Quality Models(USEPA,2005).AERMOD was run with regulatory default options.
The following supporting preprocessin programs for AERMOD were used:
AERMET(Version 14134)
AERMINUTE(Version 14337)
AERSURFACE(Version 13016)
AERMAP (Version 11103)
BPIP(Version 04112)
All chemicals were modeled with a 1-hour averaging period. In addition,the 1-hour averaging period
predicted impacts were calculated to 3r and 5-minute averaging period impacts using the factors outlined in
The Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates(Turner, 1970)and in Estimating Odor Impact With
Computational Fluid Dynamics(Ruby and MacAlpine,2004).The factor of 1.7 was used for the 1-hour to
3-minute conversion,and the factor of;1.4 was used for the 1-hour to 5-minute conversion.
Meteorological Data
Surface meteorological data in Renton,Washington were used for this air dispersion odor analysis.Surface
observation data from the National Weather Service(NWS) Renton Municipal Airport Automated Surface
Observing System (ASOS)station for the years 2010-2014 were used.The Renton Airport meteorological
tower is less than 2 kilometers southwest of the Southport Development. No major land features separate
the meteorological tower from the emission sources.The 1-minute wind data from this ASOS station were
processed with AERMINUTE and supplemented into the surface data.This surface dataset was then
processed in conjunction with concurrent twice daily upper air data collected at the NWS Quillayute,
Washington observation station using the AERMET preprocessor.Additionally,surface characteristics used
in AERMET for the area surrounding the Renton Airport meteorological tower were determined with the
AERSURFACE preprocessor using U.S. Geological Survey National Land Cover Data. Figure 3 shows a wind
rose of the AERMET processed data.As seen in the Figure 3,the predominant winds are blowing from the
south south-east direction.
10
I
EN0515151028SEA/660134
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
1
r- '
i
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
FIGURE 3
Renton Municipal Airport 2010—2014 AERMET Processed Wind Rose,Direction(blowing from)
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
NORTH
i
25%
20%
c
15%
a v
10% _
WEST ;
4:
0®
t FAST;
WIND SPEED
Knots)
22
17-21
SOUTH lit11-17
III 7-11
1 ':''1 1-4
Calms:1.69%
I
EN0515151028SEA/660134 11
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
I
1.
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
Modeling Emission Sources
Tables 5 and 6 list source characteristics for each source modeled.Table 7 lists the associated emission
rates. Each odor chemical was modeled for a 1-hour averaging period.
TABLE 5
Point Source Stack•Characterizations
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
Base Stack Exit Stack
Eastinga Northinga Elevation Height Temperature Velocity Diameter
Stack ID Description meters) (meters) (feet) (feet) F) fps)feet)
PP_1 Spar Booth Stack 1 559I854.5 5261176 22 73 65.0 65.8 6
PP_2 Spar Booth Stack 2 559853 5261181 22 73 65.0 65.5 6
PP_3 Spar Booth Stack 3 559856.1 5261169 22 73 65.0 65.9 6
PP_4 Spar Booth Stack 4 559855.3 5261173 22 73 65.0 65.6 6
PP_5b Dinol Booth Stack 5 559860.8 5261153 22 73 65.0 67.9 6
PP_6b Dinol Booth Stack 6 559860 5261156 22 73 65.0 65.7 6
PP_7 Spar Booth Stack 7 559863.1 5261145 22 73 65.0 62.7 6
PP_8 In-Spar Booth Stack 8 559862.3 5261150 22 73 65.0 64.0 6
PB_1A In-Spar Booth Stack 1A 559859.6 5261107 22 75 65.0 23.2 8
PB_1B In-Spar Booth Stack 1B 559867.4 5261084 22 75 65.0 23.2 8
PB_2A In-Spar Booth Stack 2A 559874.2 5261114 22 75 65.0 23.7 8
I
PB_2B In-Spar Booth Stack 2B 559882.6 5261105 22 75 65.0 23.7 8
PB_3A In-Spar Booth Stack 3A 559827.4 5261161 22 75 65.0 23.0 7.78
PB_3B In-Spar Booth Stack 3B 559830.3 5261161 22 75 65.0 23.0 7.78
PB_4A In-Spar Booth Stack 4A 559907.2 5261049 22 85 70.0 43.6 6
PB_4B In-Spar Booth Stack 4B 559903,9 5261049 22 85 70.0 43.6 6
PB_5A In-Spar Booth Stack 5A 559880.3 5261026 22 85 70.0 43.6 6
PB_5B In-Spar Booth Stack 5B 559877 5261026 22 85 70.0 43.6 6
PB_6A In-Spar Booth Stack 6A 559887 5261046 22 85 70.0 43.6 6
PB_6B In-Spar Booth Stack 6B 559883.6 5261046 22 85 70.0 43.6 6
PB_7A In-Spar Booth Stack 7A 559870.8 5261067 22 85 70.0 • 43.6 6
PB_7B In-Spar Booth Stack 7B 559867.5 5261067 22 85 70.0 43.6 6
PT_1 Test Booth Stack 1 559843.7 5261200 22 73 65.0 55.2 5
PT_2 Test Booth Stack 2 559838.3 5261215 22 73 65.0 55.2 5
PT_3 Test Booth Stack 3 559846 5261196 22 73 65.0 55.2 5
PT_4 Test Booth Stack 4 559840.6 5261209 22 73 65.0 55.2 5
Wastewater Treatment
WWTP 559826.5 5261269 22 31 Ambient 10.6 2
Air Stripper
14_SM1 Seal Mix Stack 1 559892 5261112 22 90 Ambient 10.6 2
12 EN0515151028SEA/660134
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
TABLE 5
Point Source Stack Characterizations
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
Base Stack Exit Stack
Eastinga Northinga Elevation Height Temperature Velocity Diameter
Stack ID Description meters) (meters) (feet) (feet) F) fps)feet)
14_SM2 Seal Mix Stack 2 559890.1 5261118 22 - 90 Ambient 10.6 2
Notes:
a UTM NAD83 Zone 10 projection and datum
b No odor emissions associated with this stack
F—degree Fahrenheit
fps—foot per second
ID—identification
TABLE 6
Volume Source Ventilation Characterizations
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
Base
Easting(X)a Northing(Y)a Elevation Initial Horizontal Initial Vertical
Stack ID Description meters) ) (meters) feet) Dimension(feet) Dimension(feet)
PM Paint Mix Vent 559894.6 5261119 22 0.70 32.33
Note:
a UTM NAD83 Zone 10 projection and datum
EN0515151028SEA/660134 13
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
1 1.w,mc
TABLE 7
Source Emission Rates
Southport Alr Dispersion Odor Analysis
Stack ID
ACET MECH TOLD MEK MNAK KYLE MIRK BOAC NOIM BEAL MPK ETHY 1241 CUME 1351 ETHA HEDI CYCL NPRO ISAL ROUT METH NH3
Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr)
PP 1 0 0 13.6 12.0 3.32 0.038 0.095 1.65 0 0 0 0.038 0.017 0 0 0 5.59E-09 2.71 1.61 0.41 0.20 0.020 0
PP 2 0 0 13.6 12.0 3.32 0.038 0.095 1.65 0 0 0 0.038 0.017 0 0 0 5.59E-09 2.71 1.61 0.41 0.20 0.020 0
PP 3 0 0 13.6 12.0 3.32 0.038 0.095 1.65 0 0 0 0.038 0.017 0 0 0 5.59E-09 2.71 1.61 0.41 0.20 0.020 0
PP_4 0 0 13.6 12.0 3.32 0.038 0.095 1.65 0 0 0 0.038 0.017 0 0 0 5.59E-09 2.71 1.61 0.41 0.20 0.020 0
PP 5. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PP 6' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PP_7 0 0 13.6 12.0 3.32 0.038 0.095 1.65 0 0 0 0.038 0.017 0 0 0 5.59E-09 2.71 1.61 0.41 0.20 0.020 0
PP_El 0 0 14.4 17.4 3.08 0.48 0.44 0.20 ;0.18 0.15 0.12 0.088 0.048 0.026 0.026 1.13E-03 1.83E-05 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB]A 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24 0.22 0.10 '0.089 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB 1B 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24 0.22 0.10 0.089 D.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB 2A 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24 0.22 0.10 0.089• 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB 28 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24 0.22 0.10 0.089 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB 3A 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24 0.22 0.10 0.089 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB 3B 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24 0.22 0.10 0.089 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB 4A 0 0 7.20 8.72 1,54 0.24 0.22 0.10 1 0.089 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB 4B 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24 0.22 0.10 •0.089 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB_5A 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24 0.22 0.10 10.089 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9,17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB 5B 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24 0.22 0.10 '0.089 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB_6A 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24' 0.22 0.10 0.089 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0,013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
P8 68 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24 0.22 0.10 0.089 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB_7A 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24 0.22 0.10 0.089 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PB 78 0 0 7.20 8.72 1.54 0.24 0.22 0.10 ,0.089 0.073 0.058 0.044 0.024 0.013 0.013 5.67E-04 9.17E-06 0 0 0 0 0 0
PT_1 0 0 0 3.72 0 0 0 0 i 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.90 0 0 0.56
PT_2 0 0 0 3.72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.90 0 0 0.56
P7_3 0 0 0 3.72 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.90 0 0 0.56
PT_4 0 0 0 3.72 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5.90 0 0 0.56
WWTP 0.042 5.45E-04 2.42E-03 2.75 0 0 0.13 0 0 0 2.42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14 SM1 0 0 0.72 0.68 0 0 0 0 / 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
14_SM2 0 0 0.72 0.68 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
7-
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SP/WORT DEW/OMEN,
TABLE 7
Source Emission Rates
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
Stack ID
ACET MECH TOLU MEN MNAK XYLE MIRK BOAC 'NDIM BEAL MPK ETHY 124T CUME 135T ETHA HEDI CYCL NPRO ISAL NBUT METH NH3
Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (lb/hi') (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (lb/hr) (lb/hr) (Ib/hr) (lb/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr) Ilb/hr) (Ib/hr) (Ib/hr)
PM 0 0 0,89 0.84 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Notes:
No odor emissions associated with this stack
ACET-acetone
MECH-methylene chloride
TOLU-toluene
MEK-methyl ethyl ketone
MNAK-methyl N-amyl ketone
XYLE-xylene
MIRK-methyl isobutyl ketone
BUAC-butyl acetate
NDI M-dimethylacetamide N-,N
BEAL-benzyl alcohol
MPK-methyl propyl ketone
ETHY-ethylhenzene
124T-trimethylbenzene,1,2,4-
CUME-cumene
135T-trimethylbenzene,1,3,5-
ETHA-ethylbenzene
HEDI-hexamethylene diisocyanate
CYCL-cydohexanone
NPRO-propyl alcohol,N-
SAL-isopropyl alcohol
NBUT-butanoi,N-
METH-methanol
NH3-ammonia
lb/hr—pound per hour
MEMO TITLE
Modeling Layout
For both modeling scenarios, Boeing buildings,emission points,Southport buildings,and receptors were
included.The Southport development buildings and receptors are discussed in the SECO Configurations and
Receptors Section.The Boeing buildings included for both scenarios are:
WWTP building
4-86 building
4-82 building
All Boeing buildings and stacks were modeled at a 22-foot base elevation. Figures 4 and 5 display the
modeling layouts for the 2015 and 1999 modeling scenarios, respectively.
EN0515151028SEA/660134 16
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.•COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
FIGURE 4
2015 Scenario Model Setup
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
I
p.
I
v.
1111111 ).
WWTP
T
PP_
PT
T13
PP_ P_0
PP - P_5
PP_ r+
r
P_8
P8_3• ilia"P2
4 SM2PB3=
PB_2A •+ 4 SM1PB_1A+ + r
B^IB
PB2B
B
B7B
7A
PB saw B 4A 0 Sources
PS_BB" B 4B Receptors
a 5 0 Buildings
B-5B Property Fence-line
poies
0 100 200 300 400
meters)
EN05151510265EA/660134 17
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
FIGURE 5
1999 Scenario Model Setup
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
Ip 0
O
1
WWTP
T 2
PP
PT4., T 1
T
PP I P_6
PP_, f -P 5
PP_ I'P_8
PB_3 T'P_7
PB 3: I 4_SM2
PB_2A
PS1A¢ 1{ 4_SM1
PB 1B
PB_2B
T + B 7B
B_7A
PB_116AA,B-4A ED Sources
PB6B B_4B
B 5
Receptors
BuildingsPB5BProperty Fence-line
0 1001 200 300 400
meters)
18 EN0515151028SEA/660134
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL.INC.•COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
Odor Study Results
Each odor chemical was modeled and compared to their respective odor thresholds.Table 8 lists the air
dispersion odor impacts for the 2015 scenario and 1999 scenario.All modeled 2015 and 1999 scenario
impacts are predicted to be less than their respective odor thresholds at the chosen receptor locations.The
overall maximum impacts of all chemicals,with the exception of ammonia and isopropyl alcohol,are
predicted to be less in the 2015 scenario compared to the 1999 scenario. Maximum predicted 3-minute
impacts by receptor are displayed in Table 9 for the 2015 scenario and Table 10 for the 1999 scenario.
As stated previously odor perception is very subjective and depends on many factors, including people's
sensitivity and preference,and odor frequency and duration. Background odor could also complicate
matters. In summary,the odor analysis does not show that any chemical compounds emitted solely from
the Boeing facility would be recognized by greater than 50%of people at the receptor locations. However,
the results of the analysis cannot guarantee that there will be no odor complaints in the area.The chemical
compound concentrations that are within one order of magnitude of the threshold are flagged with the
footnote in Table 8.
EN0515151028SEA/660134 19
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
TABLE 8
2015 and 1999 Air Dispersion Odor Analysis Predicted Impacts,pg/m3
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
2015 Maximum Predicted Impacts 1999 Maximum Predicted Impacts
1-hour 3-minute 5-minute 1-hour 3-minute 5-minute Thresholds
Ammonia 68 116 96 67 114 94 3,622
Acetone 7 13 10 10 17 14 30,881
Benzyl alcohol 22 37 30 23 40 33 24,547
Butanol,N- 22 38 31 24 41 33 2,516
Butyl acetate' 207 351 289 223 380 313 1,853
Cumene 4 7 5 4 7 6 157
Cyclohexanonea 298 507 417 318 541 445 3,533
Dimethylacetamide N-,N 26 44 37 28 48 40 167,470
Ethanol 0.17 0.28 0.23 0.18 0.31 0.25 158,277
Ethylbenzenea 16 27 22 18 30 25 399
Hexamethylene Diisocyanate 0.003 0.005 0.004 0.003 0.005 0.004 34
Isopropyl Alcohol' 736 1,251 1,030 732 1,244 1,025 54,078
Methanol 2 4 3 2 4 3 209,669
Methylene chloride 0.098 0.167 0.138 0.128 0.217 0.179 500,201
Methyl ethyl ketone' 4,016; 6,827 5,622 4,883 8,302 6,837 50,138
Methyl isobutyl ketone' 82 140 115 95 161 133 3,605
Methyl n-amyl ketone' 756 1,285 1,058 853 1,451 1,195 1,634
Methyl propyl ketone 443 753 620 581 987 813 38,750
Propyl alcohol,N a 177 301 248 189 322 265 6,391
Toluene' 3,481 5,917 4,873 3,796 6,454 5,315 10,552
Trimethylbenzene,1,2,4- 8 14 12 9 16 13 11,798
Trimethylbenzene,1,3,5- 4 7 5 4 7 6 2,704
I
Xylenea 74 1 125 103 79 135 111 3,170
Note:
a Predicted impacts within 1 order of magnitude of odor threshold
20 EN0515151028SEA/660134
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.•COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL
I
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
TABLE 9
2015 Air Dispersion Odor Analysis 3-minute Predicted Impacts Per Receptor,µg/m3
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
Office Office Office
Outdoor Hotel Building 1 Building 2 Building 3 Maximum
Seating Rooftop Rooftop Air Rooftop Rooftop Bristol 1 Bristol 2 Circular Predicted Impact
Chemical Promenade Area Air Intake Intake Air Intake Air Intake Facade Facade Drive 3-minute Thresholds
Ammonia 78 69 90 50 116 91 98 73 83 116 3,622
Acetone 13 12 5i 6 8 2 5 5 5 13 30,881
Benzyl Alcohol 31 34 26 26 26 24 28 27 37 37 24,547
Butanol,N- 28 28 34 12 34 32 27 17 38 38 2,516
Butyl acetate 272 272 304 125 297 281 249 156 351 351 1,853
Cumene 6 6 5, 5 5 4 5 5 7 7 157
I
Cyclohexanone 378 371 446 162 451 424 356 231 507 507 3,533
1
Dimethylacetamide N-,N 38 41 31 31 31 29 34 33 44 44 167,470
Ethanol 0.24 0.26 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.18 0.22 0.21 0.28 0.28 158,277
I
Ethylbenzene 24 25 21 17 20 19 20 18 27 27 399
Hexamethylene
0.004 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.004 0.003 0.005 0.005 34
Diisocyanate
Isopropyl Alcohol 871 763 997 533 1,251 1,005 1,065 794 924 1,251 54,078
Methanol 3 3 3 1 3 3 3 2 4 4 209,669
I
Methylene chloride 0.167 0.153 0.
060I
0.084 0.101 0.027 0.071 0.068 0.067 0.167 500,201
Methyl ethyl ketone 6,753 6,827 5,613 3,549 5,046 4,801 5,276 4,209 6,681 6,827 50,138
1
Methyl isobutyl ketone 139 140 97 80 89 85 95 85 122 140 3,605
Methyl n-amyl ketone 1,116 1,164 1,066 644 975 915 942 759 1,285 1,285 1,634
Methyl propyl ketone 753 694 277 371 449 125 320 306 295 753 38,750
21 EN0515151028SEA/660134(SEGO ODOR2M_20150518)
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.•COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL
I
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
TABLE 9
2015 Air Dispersion Odor Analysis 3-minute Predicted Impacts Per Receptor,µg/m3
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
Office Office Office
Outdoor Hotel Building 1 Building 2 Building 3 Maximum
Seating Rooftop Rooftop Air Rooftop Rooftop Bristol 1 Bristol 2 Circular Predicted Impact
Chemical Promenade Area Air Intake Intake Air Intake Air Intake Facade Facade Drive 3-minute Thresholds
Propyl alcohol,N- 225 221 26 96 268 252 211 138 301 301 6,391
Toluene 5,116 5,429 4,712 3,002 4,347 4,086 4,314 3,502 5,917 5,917 10,552
Trimethylbenzene,1,2,4- 12 13 11 9 11 10 11 10 14 14 11,798
Trimethylbenzene,1,3,5-6 6 5
i
5 5 4 5 5 7 7 2,704
Xylene 107 116 88 85 89 81 95 91 125 125 3,170
1
I
TABLE 10
1999 Air Dispersion Odor Analysis 3-minute Predicted Impacts Per Receptor,µg/m3
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis I
Office Office Office
Chemical
Outdoor Hotel Building 1 Building 2 Building 3 Maximum
Thresholds
Seating Rooftop Rooftop Air Rooftop Rooftop Bristol 1 Bristol 2 Circular Predicted Impact
Promenade Area Air Intake Intake Air Intake Air Intake Facade Facade Drive 3-minute
Ammonia 89 82 60 38 100 93 70 63 114 114 3,622
Acetone 6 9 8 5 9 "2 4 11 17 17 30,881
Benzyl Alcohol 31 40 29 30 23 24 27 26 37 40 24,547
Butanol,N- 27 27 20 19 26 29 21 24 41 41 2,516
Butyl acetate 261 259 202 191 231 255 199 227 380 380 1,853
I
Cumene 6 7 5 5 4 4 5 5 7 7 157
Cyclohexanone 359 361 269 255 347 383 273 316 541 541 3,533
Dimethylacetamide N-,N 38 48 35 37 28 29 33 32 45 48 167,470
22 ENO 515151028SEA/660134
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.•COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
TABLE 10
1999 Air Dispersion Odor Analysis 3-minute Predicted Impacts Per Receptor,µg/m3
Southport Air Dispersion Odor Analysis
Office Office Office
Chemical Thresholds
Hotel Building 1 Building 2 Building 3 Maximum
Thresholds
Seating Rooftop Rooftop Air Rooftop Rooftop Bristol 1 Bristol 2 Circular Predicted Impact
Promenade Area Air Intake Intake Air Intake Air Intake Facade Facade Drive 3-minute
Ethanol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 158,277
Ethylbenzene 24 28 21 21 18 19 18 20 30 30 399
Hexamethylene
0.004 0.005 0.004 0.004 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.003 0.005 0.005 34
Diisocyanate
I
Isopropyl Alcohol 971 906 6614 439 . 1,095 994 767 684 1,244 1,244 54,078
I
Methanol 3 3 21 2 3 3 2 2 4 4 209,669
Methylene chloride 0.080 0.117 O.
1I
2 0.069 0.117 0.026 0.055 0.146 0.217 0.217 500,201
Methyl ethyl ketone 6,243 6,967 5,359 5,098 4,675 4,673 4,347 5,448 8,302 8,302 50,138
1
Methyl isobutyl ketone 117 150 108 108 92 81 88 , 122 161 161 3,605
Methyl n-amyl ketone 1,091 1,196 931 918 884 914 846 931 1,451 1,451 1,634
Methyl propyl ketone 365 535 464 319 523 117 246 670 987 987 38,750
Propyl alcohol,N- 213 214 160 151 207 228 . 162 188 322 322 6,391
I
Toluene 5,041 5,516 4,269 4,170 3,945 4,067 3,857 4,198 6,454 6,454 10,552
I
Trimethylbenzene,1,2,4- 12 15 11 11 10 10 10 10 16 16 11,798
I
Trimethylbenzene,1,3,5-6 7 5 5 4 4 5 5 7 7 2,704
Xylene 107 135 97 100 80 82 91 90 130 135 3,170
EN0515151028SEA/660134 23
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.•COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL
ODOR ASSESSMENT AT SECO SOUTHPORT DEVELOPMENT
Works Cited
3M.2010. Occupational Health and Environmental Safety Division 2010 Respirator Selection Guide.
Amoore,John E.,and Earl Hautala. 1983. "Odor as an Aid to Chemical Safety:Odor Thresholds Compared
with Threshold Limit Values and Volatilities for 214 Industrial Chemicals in Air and Water Dilution."Journal
of Applied Toxicology.Volume 3, No.6. 1
Ruby, Michael, and MacAlpine,J.D.2004. Estimating Odor Impact with Computational Fluid Dynamics.
Proceedings of the Water Environment Federation, WEF/A&WMA Odors and Air Emissions. pp 200-224.
Seattle,Washington: Envirometrics, Inca
Turner, D. Bruce. 1970. The Workbook of Atmospheric Dispersion Estimates.AP-26. NC: U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA). 1992.Reference Guide to Odor Thresholds for Hazardous Air
Pollutants Listed in the Clean Air Act An rendments of 1990. March.
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(JSEPA).2005. Guideline on Air Quality Models.
24 EN0515151028SEA/660134
COPYRIGHT MAY 2015 BY CH2M HILL,INC.•COMPANY CONFIDENTIAL
Rocale Timmons
From: Molly Lawrence <mol@vnf.com>
Sent:- Friday,August 14, 2015 10:31 AM
To: Rocale Timmons
Cc: Greg Krape'; Brent Carson; Michael Christ(MChrist@secodev.com); Bill Stelzer
bstalzer@seanet.com)
Subject: FW: Southport Hotel Building Permit- Condition Items 3 &22
Attachments: COR Ltr Items 3 and 22 -Bldg Permit Conditions -Southport Hotel Dev 7-29....doc
Importance: High
Dear Rocale,
I noted that you were not on the email sting below. Can you-please be sure to include the attached letter,
together with Chip's email response, in the record and file for the hotel building permit,as they relate to the
City's interpretation of the building permit conditions.
Let me know if that does not make sense) to you for any reason. Otherwise, appreciated.
Molly A.Lawrence
Partner
Van Ness Feldman LLP
719 Second Avenue,Suite 1150
Seattle,WA 98104-1700
Phone: 206-623-9372
Fax: 206-623-4986
www.vnf.com
Sign Up for,Iorthwest Land Matters,VINF's email newsletter featuring news and commentary art land use,tea!estate,and environntental Matters
in the Pacific Northwest,
j Please consider the environment before printing this.e-mail
PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL:This e-mail is intended only for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain confidential,privileged
information.If the reader of this e-mail is not the addressee,please be advised that any dissemination,distribution or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.If you receive
this communication in error,please call 206-623-9372 and return this e-mail to,Van Ness Feldman at the above e-mail address and delete from your files.Thank You.
From: Chip Vincent [CVincent@Rentonwa.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2015 12:52 PM,
To: Greg Krape
Cc: Larry Warren
Subject: RE: Southport Hotel Building Permit- Condition Items 3 &22
Greg, I have reviewed your attached letter wherein you seek clarification and confirmation of building permit conditions
3 and 22 of building permit 614006571.This e-mail serves as confirmation that conditions 3 and 22 have been satisfied
as clarified in your letter. Chip
C.E. "Chip "Vincent
Administrator
Department of Community& Economic Development
City of Renton
1055 South Grady Way, 6th Floor
1
Renton;WA=98057;
Phone:425-430-6588
Fax:425-430-7300
cvincent@rentonwa.gov
www.rentonwa.gov
From: Greg Krape [mailto:gkrapeCasecodev.com]
a .•. .,.,..,,. ..,... w•b,m.._.., ..
Sent: Wednesday, July 29, 2015 3:55 PM
To: Chip Vincent
Subject: Southport Hotel Building Permit- Condition Items 3 &22
Hi Chip
Please see the attached draft letter regarding condition items 3 and 22 of the Hotel Building Permit. It is my `
understanding that you are expecting this letter that has been coordinated with Larry Warren. This is very time sensitive
issue as I am sure you understand. We need to get your confirmation before the appeals deadline which ends on August
4, 2015.
If you have any questions please feel free to call and or email.
Thank you,
Greg
Greg Krape
Development Manager
SECO Development, Inc. 11083 Lake Washington Blvd. N., Suite 50 I Renton, WA 98056
www.secodev.com I t: 425.282.5833 ext. 308 I c: 206.910.8779 I gkrape@secodev.com
2
SECO DEVELOPMENT® INC .
1083 LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD. N • SUITE 50 • RENTON • WASHINGTON • 98056
TEL: 425/282-5833 • FAX: 425/282-5838
July 29, 2015
Hi Chip,
I am writing to seek your written clarification on the Hotel at Southport LLC's ("Southport")
compliance with Conditions'3 alb nd 22,of Building Permit B 14006571 (the "Building Permit") issued
on Friday July.24, 2015.
Condition 3 of the Building Permit concerns air handling and filtration system requirements for the
Hotel to address odors from the adjacent facilities owned and operated by The Boeing,Company.
As you know from our Building Permit application, Southport has proposed to use a three stage
filter system in the rooftop HVAC system, which includes MERV 8 outer-filters,MERV 13 middle
filters, and Activated Carbon Filters, to remove particulates and volatile organic compounds
VOCs). The Activated Carbon Filters are high quality, and high performance Flanders/r'FI FCP 300
Series-High Capacity 4 Inch Depth (FCP Carbon Pleated Activated Carbon Filters -Nonwoven
Media Absorbers) filters. Southport has included MERV 8 and MERV 13 filters within other non-
roof located air handling equipment for the Hotel as shown in our building permit application plans.
Southport agrees to properly maintain these air handling and filtration systems throughout the life of
the Hotel building.
Please confirm in writing that;Southport's air handling and filtration systems, as described in the
preceding paragraph and as documented in our Building Permit application, complies with
Condition 3 and that no additional or modified air handling or filtration equipment are considered
necessary by the City for Southport to comply with Condition 3.
Condition 22 concerns landscaping between the Southport development property and the Boeing
property to the west to disrupt air flow. As you know, Southport's landscaping plans, which were
part of the building permit, show along the property boundary between the Southport Property and
the Boeing Facility a combination of Lombardy Poplar trees planted 12 feet on center, which grow
up to 40 to 60 feet in height at a rate of 3 to 4 feet per year, and Leyland Cyprus trees planted 6 feet
on center, which grow up to 50 feet in height at a rate of 3 to 4 feet per year.
Page 1 of 2
Southport agrees to maintain these trees along the Southport/Boeing property line (marked on
Exhibit A and referred herein as the "Tree Barrier") for the life of the Southport Hotel for the
purpose of disturbing the airflow from the Boeing Facility to the Southport Property. Over the life
of the Southport Hotel, Southport will need to thin the Tree Barrier by removing certain trees to
avoid overcrowding and to encourage tree growth and replace one or more of the trees if they die,
become diseased or are no longer in place for other reasons. In light of this anticipated thinning and
replacement of trees, whenever there is a gap between the trunks of existing trees in the Tree Barrier
greater than 15 feet,
Southport agrees to plant within this gap Lombardy Poplar trees (or equivalent) at an initial height
of no less than 12 feet or Leyland Cyprus trees (or equivalent) at an initial height of no less than 10
feet.
Please confirm in writing that Southport's landscaping plans, including the area along the property
boundary between the Southport Property and Boeing, as described in the preceding paragraph and
as documented in our approved landscaping plans, comply with Condition 22 and that no additional
or modified landscaping are considered necessary by the City to comply with Condition 22.
Finally, your note to Condition 22 makes reference to issues related to the use of hotel rooms on a
semi-permanent or permanent basis. As you know, the hotel has been designed for and permitted as
a hotel, which your code defines as "a building or portion thereof designed or used for transient
rental for sleeping purposes" and has not been designed for nor permitted to contain dwelling units,
which your code defines as "a structure or portion of a structure designed, occupied or intended for
occupancy as separate living quarters with cooking, sleeping and sanitary facilities provided for the
exclusive use of a single household."
Your expeditious response to this clarification request is appreciated.
Sincerely,
Greg Krape
Development Manager
Page 2 of 2