Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Shoreline Master Program Update (Public Hearing 10/25/1982)
17 9:42 WATER-DEPENDENT: Referring to uses or activities which necessarily require a shoreline location as a major and integral part of that use or activity. 9.43 WATER-ORIENTED OR WATER-RELATED: Referring to uses, activities or facilities which are not necessarily water-dependent but still incorporate in their design some kind of advantageous use of the water, for example,,walkways or view windows. 9.44 WETLANDS OR WETLAND AREAS: Those lands extending landward for two hundred (200) feet in all directions, as measured on a horizontal plane from the ' mean high-water line, and all marshes, bogs, swamps, floodways, river deltas, and floodplains associated with streams, lakes and tidal waters which are subject to the provisions of the Act. ,I I � I � I - 46 - • I i . 1 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM r- FOR OFFICE USE ONLY • l Application No. ' Envilronrental Checklist No. ECF-065-82 PROPIOSE , date: FINAL , date: 8"e5"C e., ElDeclaration of Significance Declaration of Significance 1 0 Declaration of Non-Significance Declaration of Non-Significance COMMENTS: I Introduction The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and local governmental agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private proposals . The Act also requires that an EIS be prepared for all major actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies involved determine whether or not a proposal is such a major action. Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the information presen ly available to you. Where explanations of your answers are required, or, where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision makers , include your explanation in the space provided, or use additional pages if necessary. You should include references to any reports or studies of which you are aware and which are rele- vant tq the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help all agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review with- out;uniecessary delay. Thelfo lowing questions apply to your total proposal , not just to the license for which you, ar currently applying or the proposal for which approval is sought. Your answers should include the impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed, even though completion may not occur until sometime in the future. This will allow all of thelagencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review, now, with- out du licating paperwork in the future. I NOTE: This is a standard form being used by all state and local agencies in the State rf of Washington for various types of proposals. Many of the questions may not apply to your proposal . If a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and continue on to the next qestion. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent CITY OF RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION ' 2. Address and phone number of Proponent: • 200 Mill Ave . South Renton , Washington 98055 , 3. Date Checklist submitted August 23 , 1982 4. Agency requiring Checklist City of Renton/Building & Zoning Dept . 5. Name of proposal , if applicable: Shoreline Master Program , Revision 1982 6. Nature and brief description of the proposal (including but not limited to its 'I size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of its scope and nature) : Update of basic language of Shoreline Master Program . The Program is city-wide in scope . Primary intent is clliarify l anctuac'e and make more positive statements concerning, public access , Private property rights , marinas and setbacks for commercial and industrial uses . -2- , . , 7. Location of proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal , as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts , including any other information needed to give an accurate understanding of the environ- mental setting of the proposal ) : Lake Washington , Green River , Cedar River , May Creek , Springbrook Creek , and the Black River 8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal : Ongoing 9. List of all permits, licenses or government approvals required for the proposal (federal ,' state and- local--including rezones) : City Council Approval and Department of Ecology Concurrence . 10. Do you have any plans for future additions , expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes , explain: The program must be revised under state law every few years . 1 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: The Shoreline Master Program is more restrictive than either the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Ordinance . 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- posal ; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: III ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) (1) Earth. Will the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? X 313-- MAYBE NO (b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or over- ! covering of the soil? X YES MAYBE NO (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief X features? YES MAYBE A17 (d) The 'destruction, covering or modification of .any X il. unique geologic or physical features? ii YES RAM'B E WO— (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils , either on or off the site? I X YES MAYBE NO (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or 1 changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the X bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? i TT- MAYBE Wr Explanation: 1 1I • 1 i • I _3_ • (2) Air. Will the proposal result in: (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X YET— MAYBE NO (b) The creation of objectionable odors? X YES MAYBE (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or X regionally? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: • (3) Water. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in' currents , or the course of direction of X water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? YES MAYBE NO (b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or X the rate and amount of surface water runoff? YES M-TYTE Nii— (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X YES MAYBE NO (d) Change in the.amount of surface water in any water X body? YES MAYBE NO (e) Discharge into surface waters , or in any alteration surface water quality, including but not limited to X temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? YET— MOYBE fV- (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? I X YES MAYBE NO (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either through direct additions or withdrawals , or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? X YES MAYBE NO (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents , waterborne virus or bacteria, X or other substances into the ground waters? YES MAYBE NO (i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? X YET— MAYYBE WO-- Explanation: Actual development controlled by the regulations encourage public access to shorelines and private development may ultimately modify water movement , flow of flood water , (4) Flora'. Will the proposal result in: and the surface area of a watf body . (a) Change" in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops , microflora and aquatic plants)? ' X YES MAYBE NO (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or X endangered species of flora? YES RATITE NO • (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in, a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? MAYBE WU— (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X • YES MAYBE NO Explanation: I I • -4- (5) Fauna. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in the diversity of species , or numbers of any species of fauna (birds , land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms , X insects or microfauna)? YES MAYBE NO (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered _species of fauna? X YES MAYBE NO (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area , or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? X YES MAYBE NO (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? YES MAYBE NT Explanation: (8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the X present or planned land use of an area? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Most of the land use patterns are presently established along the shoreline . Some changes are anticipated but all will have to comply the intent of the Program and (9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: the City ' s Comp . Plan . (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The Program encourages public access , which could he considered the consumption of the shoreline resource . This resource is finite and could be over utilized . ' (10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil , pesticides , chemicals or radiation) X in the event of an accident or upset conditions? YES Explanation: - I (11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density, or growth rate of the human population X of an area? TES— MITE 3 Explanation: -5- (12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing , or X create a demand for additional housing? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: (13) Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Effects on existing parking facilities , or demand for new parking? X YES MAYBE NO (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? X YET— MAYBE N- (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? X YES MAYBE NO (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X YEg— MAYBE NO (f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles , bicyclists or pedestrians? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Encouraging the public to access the shoreline will increase traffic to the new recreational resources and affect all modes of transportation except air and rail . 14 Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon , or ( ) P P result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: (a) Fire protection? X YES MAYBE NO (b) Police protection? X YES MAYBE NO (c) Schools?' X YES MAYBE NO (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? X YES MAYBE NO (e) Maintenance of public facilities , including roads? X YES MAYBE NO (f) Other governmental services? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Increasing the activity on the shoreline will place more demands primarily on the parks and police departments . (15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X YES MAYBE AO (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require X the development of new sources of energy? YE- MAYBE W Explanation: (16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: X (a) Power or. natural gas? YES TOTE NO (b) Communications systems? X YES MAYBE NO (c) Water? X YES MAYBE NO n' -^1 ox • -6- (d) Sewer ,or. septic tanks? X YES MAYBE NO (e) Storm water drainage? X Y-ESr MAYBE NU— (f) Solid waste and disposal? X YES MAYBE NO Explanation: II 1 (17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding X mental health)? . - 1 • Y — MTV1IT NU— Explanation: Increasing public use of the shoreline may result in a health hazard because it increase the potentia h '; of water borne bacteria and viruses being spread more easily . (18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of • anyanys c c,vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive X site open to public view? YES MAYBE NO • Explanation: • • • (19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the X quality or ,quantity of existing recreational opportunities? • YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The Program encourages more public access and • recreation . (20) Archeologicalf Historical . Will the proposal result in an alteration .of a significant archeological or historical X site, structure, object or building? YTS MAYBE NO Explanation: I � III.' SIGNATURE I , the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above iinformation . Iis true and complete. It is understood that .the lead agency may withdraw any' decla- ration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. c**-7Proponent: 07144 o� Wr-� • (signed) Roger J . Blaylock , Zoning Adminis (name printed) trator . Building and Zoning Department • • • • August 23, 1993 _ Renton City Council Minutes Page 379 CONENT AGENDA Items on the consent agenda are adopted by one motion whichfollows the listing. Utility: Bryn Mawr City Attorney requested approval of a contract with Bryn Mawr- . Water!&.Sewer Lakeridge Water and Sewer District to settle a claim regarding billing District practices and remove ambiguities in existing contract. Refer to Utilities Committee. Planning: Shoreline Planning and Technical Services Division requested approval of Master Program amendments to Section 3 - Shorelines of the City; designating Springbrook Creek as an urban environment; amending the definition of wetlands; and clarifying the hearing examiner appeal process of Renton's Shoreline Master Program. Refer to Planning & Development Committee. Utility: Local Solid Waste Division requested approval of an interlocal agreement with Hazardous Waste Seattle-King County Department of Public Health to obtain $19,032 in Management, Seattle- funding for the local hazardous waste management program. Refer to King County Utilities Committee. Transportation: Transportation Division requested approval of Commute Trip Reduction Commute Trip (CTR) employer program report in compliance with the CTR ordinance Reduction Plan, adopted by Council 2/22/93. Refer to Transportation Committee. WSDOT MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL APPROVE THE CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. INFORMATION ITEM City Clerk submitted City of Renton Audit report for period of January Finance: 1992 Audit 1, 1992 - December 31, 1992, and noted it is available for review in the Report City Clerk's office. Appeal: Assistant City Attorney Dan Kellogg, reported that Judge Anne Schindler Boeing/Longacres, denied the appeal filed by Chris Clifford and A.C.R.E.S., and affirmed SA-92-006 the decision of the Shorelines Hearings Board for the Boeing Customer Service Training Center, which allows the construction project to continue on the Longacres site. He also stated that this was a oral opinion and that the final order will be presented to the Court on 9/17. OLD BUSINESS Referred 8/9/93 - Community Services Committee Chair Keolker- Community Services Wheeler presented a report recommending concurrence in the staff Committee recommendation to amend Section 2 of Civil Violations of the Parks Parks::Rules and Rules and Regulations to include the additional two words "rollerblade, Regulations rollerskate." Amendment The Committee further recommended that the ordinance regarding this matter be presented for first reading. MOVED BY KEOLKER- WHEELER, SECONDED BY SCHLITZER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See later action.) Planning & Planning and Development Committee Chairman Stredicke presented a Development report of the Errata Process requests, E-13 through E-17. Committee A. Referred for public hearing: The Planning and Development Committee reviewed the following requests: E-15 and E-16, and has referred them to a public hearing and for Council consideration. { OF RENTON COUNCIL AGENL,- dILL Al#: ..� Submitting Data: Planning/Building/Public Works For Agenda of: Dept/Div/Board Planning and Technical Services Division August 23,1993 Staff Contact Kay Shoudy, Division Manager Agenda Status Don Erickson, Principal Planner Consent Subject`. Public Hearing Correspondence House-keeping Amendments to Renton's Shoreline Master Program Ordinance Resolution X Old Business Exhibits: New Business Study Sessions Issue Paper Information Recommended Action: Approvals: R � 2 TU PLR/I�Iv/iV �G I�C�CQ Pgf/yr:g 0(.//jTC, Legal Dept Finance Dept is cot ho c a_ ndm ntr to tho City's Sho eline Master Other Fiscal Impacts None Expenditure Required Transfer/Amendment Amount Budgeted Revenue Generated Summary of Action: Because public hearings on these amendments were held by the Planning Commission, pursuant to Section 2.12 of the Shorelines Management Program on June 23, 1993 and July 14, 1993, request that Council authorize the City Clerk to accept these amendments pursuant to Section 4-19-2 of the City's Building Regulations and WAC 173-19-060. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: The planning/Building/Public Works Department, first, recommends that Section 3 - Shorelines of the City, be amended to reflect the recommendation of the Department of Ecology that Springbrook Creek, south of SW Grady Way to SW 43rd Street, be designated a Shoreline of the City based upon the state's determination in 1991 that, because of an estimated annual flow of 20 cubic feet per second, this stream is now a Shoreline of the State. Those portions otl the Creek that abut City-owned wetlands would be designated "Conservation Environment" and listed under Section 5.03.03. This designation, in conjunction with the City's Wetlands Management Ordinance, would allow only low intensity use such as trails and other passive recreation types uses in these areas. Those areas along Springbrook Creek not designated "Conservation Environment" would be given an "Urban Environment" designation, which would allow major new development to occur if it complied with all other provisions of the program as well as other relevant codes and ordinances including the City's environmental, wetlands, and site plan review ordinances. Second, we recommend that Section 9 - Definitions, be amended to change the definition of "Wetland or Wetlands Areas", pursuant to WAC 90.58.030, to limit that portion of the one-hundred -year-flood plain included in the City's Shoreline Master Program to the adjacent land extending two-hundred feet landward from the "ordinary high water mark". This will make the SMP more consistent with the City's recently adopted Wetland Management Ordinance. This local option, under the Shoreline Management Act, would modify the extent of floodplains that would otherwise be included under the City's Shoreline Master Program. And finally, we are recommending that clarification be provided as to where appeals of the Hearing Examiner's actions, under the program, go. SHORAGBL.DOC CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM D.te: August 16, 1993 T Bob Edwards Council President Via: Ma or Earl C ymer Fr m: Ly Gu ann St ff Contact: Kay Sh• 'y and Don Erickson Subject: Amendments to Renton's Shoreline Master Program IS UE: In light of findings from the Department of Ecology that portions of Springbrook Creek south of SW Grady Way are now considered to be Shorelines of the State and as such have not been given a specific sh reline environmental designation, we are proposing to update our Shoreline Master Program to reflect these changes. Since the inclusion of Springbrook Creek south of Grady Way in the Valley would affect the extent of land that would come within the City's shorelines jurisdiction, because of the extent of fio dplains and floodways in this part of the City, we are also recommending that the City amend its de inition of wetlands or wetlands areas in the SMP allowed by local option in the Shoreline M nagement Act (RCW 90.58.030(2)(f). This proposed definition amendment would modify the extent of floodplain/floodways in the Valley that would automatically come under the jurisdiction of the City's Shoreline Master Program. By exercising thi local option, wetlands or wetland areas would be limited to the normal 200 foot wide shoreline zone on either side of a stream or shoreline of the state, measured from the ordinary high waterll mark. In addition to these changes, other minor amendments are proposed including: clarifying wording in the definition of'Wetland/Wetland Areas pertaining to the point from which the 200 foot area is measured; and, adding appeal language indicating that Hearing Examiner approvals are not appealable under Renton City Code, but rather the final granting or denying of the shoreline permit is appealable to the Shbrelines Hearings Board. BACKGROUND: In Vlarch 1991, the state Department of Ecology informed City staff that as a result of a meeting between Boeing and DOE, they had re-analyzed the stream flow of Springbrook Creek and determined that a 20 cubic feet per second point flow rate for this water body existed as far south as SW 43rd Street. The City was informed it would need to amend its Shoreline Master Program to reflect this change, but the change would not have to occur immediately. (Shoreline programs are typically'reviewed and updated every foir years under the provisions of the Act.) Rather, DOE explained that we could use the policies within our existing program and apply these to new developments when they came in. The City has been doing I thi An issue was raised by the appeal of the Boeing Customer Service Training Center pertained to what ar as of a site came within the jurisdiction of the City's Shoreline Master Program. Apparently, under strict interpretation, Department of Ecology shorelines representatives have asserted that areas in the Va ley that were depicted on the latest FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map as being within either the 100 memo II ye r Special Flood Hazard;..aas or Floodway Areas in Zone AE, come ..rider state shoreline jurisdiction an need to comply with the provisions of our Shoreline Master Program. Because of the, extensive ge graphy that would be affected in the Valley and the interim nature of the interpretations the City has no:interpreted these areas as being within the purview of its Shoreline Master Program. Staff believe that the City did not, in 1983, when its original shoreline ordinance was drafted; exercise the ab ve mentioned "local option"to limit the extent of the 100 year floodplain that would be included under its Program because large geographical areas were not affected at that time. The extension of sh relines jurisdiction south of SW Grady Way to SW 43rd Street in the Valley, however, would now brig a much more extensive amount of both developed and developable real estate ,under the jurisdiction of the City's SMP. It would also indirectly bring these larger geographical areas under the re I iew and authority of the DOE and the state's Shoreline Hearing Board. Whereas we want to protect ou shorelines and other environmentally sensitive areas, we do not believe it was ever the City's intent to include all areas within the Valley that are subject to one hundred (100) year flooding,1 under the pr visions of the its Shoreline Master Program. 1 U der the state imposed designation of Springbrook Creek south to S.W. 43rd Street, these flo dplains/floodways would incorporate a large portion of the Valley (see attached FEMA map), and inadvertently, slow down and possibly inhibit new development contemplated in the City's iLand Use Comprehensive Plan. Other City ordinances, such as those pertaining to surface water, SEPA, environmentally sensitive areas, and wetlands preservation, adequately ensure environmentally sound development. We therefore recommend that our current definition of "Wetlands or Wetlands Areas," citggd in the City's Shorelines Master Program be amended, pursuant to RCW 90.58.030, Definitions, to lirrlit the extent of the 100 year floodplain included under the City shorelines jurisdiction to only that area within the 200.foot mandatory shoreline zone. We will also recommend clarifying an editing error that apparently has existed for a number'of years. To be�consistent with the Act, our "Wetland or Wetlands Areas" definition should have the 200 foot m asurement taken from the "ordinary," rather than the "mean" high-water mark. The, current definition of WETLAND OR WETLANDS AREAS as defined in Section 9.44 of the 'City's, Shoreline Master Program should therefore be amended, as shown below: . 9.44 WETLAND OR WETLANDS AREAS: Those lands extending landward for two hundred (200) feet in all directions, as measured on a horizontal plane from the mean ordinary high-water-line mark; floodways and contiguous floodplain areas landward two hundred (200) feet from such ordinary high-water mark: and all marshes, bogs, swamps, floodways; and river deltas,and loodpiains associated with the streams, lakes and tidal waters which are subject to the provisions of the act. Th- new extended portion of Springbrook Creek further south in the Green River Valley will;also have to be given a shoreline environmental designation under the provisions of the Shoreline Management Act. We are recommending that, except for the major, City-owned wetlands abutting Springbrook,Creek, an "Urban Environment" designation be applied to all other portions of Springbrook Creek between SW Gr dy Way and SW 43rd Street. The major City-owned wetlands abutting Springbrook Creek would be gi en a "Conservation Environment" designation so as to be consistent with the Act and currently. an icipated uses along them. RECOMMENDATION: Thel Planning/Building/Public Works Department recommends that the Council adopt the Planning Coimmission's recommendation and authorize the City Clerk, pursuant to Section 4-19-2' of the city's building Regulations, to accept and incorporate the following amendments to the City's Shoreline Master Program (Ordinance No.3758):Thus, in summary, amendments under consideration include': 1. Amending Section 3 -- Shorelines of the City, to add that portion of Springbrook Creek between SW Grady Way to the north, and SW 43rd Street to the south, to the list of"bodies of water regulated by the Act", and amending Figure 3.1 to show this addition; 2. Designating this extension of Springbrook Creek "Urban Environment" except for,major City- owned wetlands abutting it and also covered by these amendments, which will ;be given a merro "Conservancy Environs designation as shown on amended Fig,:_ 5-1, and amending Section 5.03.03 to list these City owned wetlands; 3. Amending the definition of"Wetland or Wetlands Areas" as defined in Section 9.44 of,the City's Shoreline Master Program to limit that portion of the "one-hundred-year floodplain" to be included under its master program to those lands extending for 200 feet in all directions from any designated shoreline of the state, and clarifying that the point from which these measurements are made is the ordinary high water mark rather than the mean high water line; and, 4. Clarifying that the appeal of any decision of the Hearing Examiner is to the Shoreline Hearing Board. Section 1.03 of the City's Shoreline Master Program would be amended by adding the following language (in bold)to paragraph four of this section: Under the shoreline permit system herein established, administrative responsibility lies jointly with the Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department, but the permits are reviewed in the event of dispute by the Land Use Hearing Examiner, who has the authority to approve or deny permit applications. Liberal provisions for appeal of permit decisions to the State of Washington Shorelines Hearings Board are also provided. Any decision of the Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner under the City's Shorelines Management Program shall be appealed, if an appeal right exists, to the Shoreline Hearing Board. CC: Lynn Guttmann Kay Shoudy, Don Erickson memo FIGURE 3-1, .. . • . . r(:(I .....\___r_12) i'-\-Hil-k-11 , (1, , SHORELINE 1\ 1 - • 1 ...... _I • ! MANAGEMENT 1 . ACT OF I 971 I . . liffilgill _M _ . • . - •I CREEK: ' I •• . .-77 j. 2_ ." ---_-_Li,_.- __._r-..\\\:::::\ i : • • ____ • __-=____ WASHINGTON - • -I 1 1 i:'-'F--I \ \I • ' Tr \ . i ... li, ;,.--%,. ,. . ,,-..\ % ... ; ' ;.: .,AttrAbill • Ilk I I . ' I1 1 1M n . '.. -1 \ L___L HI ,1 — . . i rc:74 1....ry..:.. s • )HI -71 1---- --!\ j - i/- i • ' I. I -"--,,,. _ , .1 t. ) 71 1 • \I - — ,t ..( 11 ., i''.-\ — 1 if il HI ' : 1\ [ . • 11, 1 .„..-./ \ 6AHI , . • , , • • M+H-c,.... il l , -_--r.... ._ 1 Til-\• 4"1gi.ML m Iiii • ; / 7. • 1 ri ; 71 " .1 .. TAWitipr. -... S ____1 vl r-r-N ' -weir • 1.I I ) 71:011... ._. RIVERi • I--- . )- 1_ I = -. I L 1 1 RivER 7.:: ' Nrcriap. • . 1 1 1 . .. ;71 ,__ . . -.____,I , • \,N . • i . 1 ,il I ........ : ,... I --1 •• ....-7.-,, , SPRINGBRObk! YI — - - - / -.-- , \,..,:. , -< )--. HI _ ... z s -. , -_- --.Z. 1 7-----)::- --._irc- -- - . 4.* - A- . • • ! ,., pm:a- I. .. I I / ' •jf , •., .,}_. 1 .41- 1 ; \I L71. I • , . — 1 L Ft; ' I I .. 1I PI---c4 .r --7" .j ,_..- •• (..< . .... . . ............. • I , 1 - --- • 1 1 i I . , 1 .__. ._- . L 1 .-.....:•----: , 1 .. i .1i -..1 • 1 ; - 7--j (‘- 1 1 • --1 .---, -,. }-....., ! L -_,' I I : .1 GRE.EN ) , . c ..!,--1 1/. RIVER 1 1 / , • :I ,- i 1 I T` : ' I ) '-.11 0 1 1 -, -.'- - ; `?1 : . \_1".----:-.---, ; . .._ ._... i____±.i. _ __ • --•- _____________, 1 1 I I ) .. ,, -,,-T-i . , I r-LAXE e 1 :. I . —Li 0 HO ,i----::--7—(= r 1 ,... i I )) , . , •/,' , , , ,' I j .--r.v. — ' I 11 1 I 1 I • 1 0-1-/ f---'1 I !• 1 \ 1 : 1 i 1 1; 1 I 1 1 --1,1--1(1C) 1 I : , •=-• , , :: '1 1 ._7.____.:_-_L_11 - -L ' • '' ' . FIGURE --(c' , .. . . --,f R_LA'TP v----. • • - . IIIIR - t. . , , , , , 1 . , , , ENJ C.INIVIENT!:---1 '''11-11-i 1 kl.' 1-' • . , , r ,,, , , 1:. .. _,- ; ..,. , i : , ! ! , , , _ _ ,, .. ., • ' u B,.,A,,Ni . dir,- . , .-, A \1 ., , , 1 , • .. . 4 ___________„ ,.- ,,,,, \ • , , . .. a. t, • NS.ERVANCY • MAY. l .1 • CREEK \ i: I • • O. • IV TURAL I... -• •-7II � 1 I ' 1 LAKE I '� / ~�� --_ — -- WASHINGTON I. I I-r , .* ; . IR- \ i .�. 111.__Xii I 1. 1 I I I f w► 7\17._ \ , , - . • , .! i., , r• 4___, i_, ., ) : . . . .. ..,. . .. . i . , , .., . . L.E1 . i, 1 1 .1 . 11 1 : 'i— ..: 1. —11 1 . 4,1 4 , . . , , , i , . • . .f, -• , ...,„ , • ,, , •_. .... ... . ,,,.. id/ J 0 f m. 1 v ".410°' .... i..1 1 1 _11Pril rn CEDAR `�- ! f--, JBLAcK. . J $7111 :". • .': , f ► ' � I. ( C' - L. H- IRIVER . : �. �i.� I� � RIVER � � I I I t®� I I I I I E --ak I ' �.-s_ #_ SPRINGBROOK, ' — _._� ♦ {, i 1\ u `� 1 CREEK IL ' __ �r I I J- I I [ �• i '1 ins 111 I •I ti � �l�'•�-^ .- I --- ---- 1 N' 1 .1 1 � ! •,, I - �I 1 .. ._/ I I r i i •.1 1 , ,,r01.10. ,--- . ..-„,,,.-4.s., ,, • II + jigi- :` ' _. ., I1 Uhl - 1 -i—>t 1I. EEN ,... I GR 1R1 VER • ' --r 1 C. �_,...), �_ II ). Li," _ ) -LI � � � I I _( ): _ j7 I 1 . . '-.1 1 It 'H' 1 ! II, . \ [(1 r. .r , • , , IL In-rj 1 ,II II In = 1 I 4 19-1 • I 4-19-3 CHAPTER 19 • SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM ( ' A. SECTION: ; 19-1: Program Adopted, Copy Kept by Clerk, Inspection „4-19-2: Amendments 4-19-3: Authentication, Record of Program • 4-19-1: PROGRAM ADOPTED, COPY -KEPT BY CLERK, INSPECTION: The Shorea line Master Program, as issued and prepared.City of of Renton Planning Commission, of which one' grin d copy in book form has heretofore been filed and is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and made available for examination by the general ublic, is hereby adopted as the Shoreline Master program by the City of Renton. 4-19- : AMENDMENTS: Any and all amendments, additions or modifications to said master program, when printed and filed •%iith the City Clerk of the City of Renton by:" -- _ auth rization of the City Council from time to time,:. shall be considered and accepted and constitute a part of such master program without the necessity of further adoption of such amendments, modifi- 11 cations or additions by the legislative authority of the City of Renton or by ordinance. (Ord. 3758, 12-5-83) • 4J-19-3: AUTHENTICATION, RECORD OF PROGRAM: The City Clerk is hereby - apthoirized and directed to duly authenticate and record a copy of the abovementioned Shoreline Master Program together with any amendments or additions thereto, together with an authenticated copy of this Chapter. (Ord. 3094, 1-10-77, eff. 1;19-77) • • . • • May 18. 1992 Renton City Council Minutes Page 226 Based on information provided by the Development Services staff, the Committee also determined that there are sufficient existing enforcement powers to deal with junk vehicles. Additional flexibility will be provided by the new Civil Penalty Ordinance when it becomes effective on 6/8/92. The Committee therefore recommended that no action be taken at this time, and that this item be deleted from the referral list. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT.* Councilmember Stredicke expressed concerns about the enforcement of regulations pertaining to junk cars parked on private property and/or in public right-of-ways. He said his intent in bringing this issue before the Council was to initiate legislation that would improve the appearance of City neighborhoods. *MOTION CARRIED. Appeal, FAX EIS Referred 5/11/92 - Planning and Development Committee Chairman Comments; Edwards presented a report stating that the City code does not permit Environmental & facsimile filings. The proposed legislation would permit the filing of Hearing Examiner Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) comments, environmental appeals, Appeals and appeals to the Hearing Examiner by facsimile; and would establish rules as to the time of filing of the facsimile documents and payment of required filing fees. The Committee recommended approval of the proposed ordinance and presented it for first reading. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. (See ordinances for first reading on Page 227). Planning and Development Committee Chairman Edwards presented a Committee report on review of the following Committee referrals: Planning: Property Referred 8/6/90 (#10-1990) - The Planning and Development Committee Development recommended no further action on the referral regarding property Requirements development requirements. The adoption of the Civil Penalties Ordinance was the final action needed to assist in enforcing a number of development ordinances and standards. Planning: Shorelipe Referred 10/14/91 (#3-1991) - The Planning and Development. Management._P.rogram Committee recommended no action by the Council at this time regarding V1 Iodifioatia on Shoreline Management Program modification and jurisdiction over facilities in Lake Washington. The Committee recommended that the Administration meet with the Department of Natural Resources to determine the City's authority within Lake Washington. The Committee further recommended this item be removed from Committee referrals. The Planning and Development Committee also reviewed the following referrals: Planning: Building 1) Referred 6/10/91 (#18-1991) - Building Moratorium, R-3/R-4 Moratorium, R-3/R-4 Development Planning: Conditional 2) Referred 10/14/91 (#22-1991) - Conditional Use Permit Process for Use Permits & Accessory Uses Accessory Uses II r OVE J 5)ie(4� ( -4 li PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT MAY 18, 1992 PENDING REFERRALS/RECOMMENDED ACTION The Planning and Development Committee reviewed a number of referrals that have been on the agenda for some time. The Committee makes the following recommendations regarding these items. Ref#10-1990 PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS The Committee recommends no further action by the Council is necessary. The adoption of the Civil Penalties Ordinance was the final action needed to,assist in enforcing a number of development ordinances and standards. Ref #3-1991 SHORELINE REGULATIONS WITHIN LAKE WASHINGTON The Committee finds no action by the Council is required at this time and requests that the Administration meet with Department of Natural Resources to determine the City's authority within the Lake. The issue is to be removed from the agenda. Ref #18-1991 HOME DAY CARE AND R-3/R-4 MORATORIUM Ref #22-1991 RENTO.N SCHOOL DISTRICT CONDITIONAL USE Ref #12-1992 G-1 ZONE-FAIR HOUSING ACT The Committee recommends that the Administration consider these items when,rewriting,the zoning regulations to comply with the new comprehensive plan. No Council action is needed at this time. Bob Edwards, Chair � J /c Richard Stredicke, Vice-Chair J -71 Nancy Math.ws, Member cc: Lynn Guttmann Jim Hanson Ron Nelson JCH267mjp � I P I - June 25. 11990 Renton City Council Minutes Page 196 Rezone: Bakke Rezone, An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of certain R-017-88 properties located on the south side of NE 4th Street and east of Union Avenue, within the City from G-1 (General use) to R-3 (Medium Density Multi-Family) and B-1 (Business Use), James E. Bakke, Inc., P.S. (R-107- 88). MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL REFER THE ORDINANCE BACK TO WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED. Ways and Means Committee Vice Chairman Edwards presented the following resolutions for reading and adoption: Resolution #2803 A resolution was read authorizing the signing of an interlocal agreement with Police: Law Enforcement the City of Seattle for law enforcement assistance during the 1990 Goodwill Assistance, Good Will Games. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY ZIMMERMAN, Games COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. Vouchers Ways and Means Committee recommended approval of payment claims checks #70811 through #71211 and six wire transfers, totaling $890,502.37; and payroll vouchers #88405 through #88881, and 218 direct deposits, in the amount of $781,137.78. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN PAYMENT OF VOUCHERS. CARRIED. CAG-88 4 022: Oakesdale Ways and Means Committee recommended acceptance of the Oakesdale Avenue SW Street Avenue SW Street improvements project, final pay estimate in the amount of Improvements $994.52, and retainage in the amount of $116,850.65 to be released after thirty days, subject to the required authorization. The Committee further recommended that $30,000 be reserved for potential settlement of claims. MOVED BY EDWARDS, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Councilman Tanner stated that on February 5, 1990, the Planning and Planning: Shoreline Development Committee made amendments to the Shoreline Master Program Master Pro ram which were submitted to the State. MOVED BY TANNER, SECONDED BY ZIMMERMAN, COUNCIL REFER THE RESPONSE FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON ON THE SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Citizen Comment: Vaupel Councilman Zimmerman submitted correspondence received from Versie - PSCOG Growth Vaupel, P.O. Box 755, Renton, commenting on the trend toward', excessive Alternatives growth, questioning the right of the PSCOG to make decisions on growth alternatives for the area, and urging Council and staff to consider the environment and the general welfare of the City's people when planning new development. Executive Session MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL CONVENE INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION TO DISCUSS POTENTIAL PROPERTY ACQUISITION. CARRIED. Time: 8:36 p.m. Council reconvened into regular session; roll was called; all members present, except Keolker-Wheeler, previously excused. 'll ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY NELSON, COUNCIL ADJOURN THE MEETING. CARRIED. Time 8:55 p.m. MARILYN J. SEN, CMC, City Clerk Recorder Nancy Mills 06/25/90 %4% CITY OF RENTON „muv I FINANCE DEPARTMENT hEarl Clymer, Mayor Maxine E. Motor, City Clerk MEMORANDUM Date: August 22 , 1988 To: Donald K. Erickson, Zoning Administrator From: Maxine E. Motor, City Clerk Subject: Your letter of August 19 , 1988 , Correction to• Shoreline Master Program 11 Please prepare a revised Shorelines Master Program by ! replacement of 7 . 08 . 0 paragraph 1 A. with the new language as approved pprved by the City Council on July 22 , 1985. Also please "Revised Revised July �;? , 1985" to the cover of the document followingthe December -5, 1983 date of adoption. File -the document with the City, Clerk's Office for record and distribution. A copy of Ordinance No. 3758 is enclosed for your II information. cc: L. L Warren L. Springer 11 � II 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, -Washington 98055 (206) 235-2501 �I • h . AMENDS ORD. #3094 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 3758 'll AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, . AMENDING CHAPTER 25 OF TITLE IV (BUILDING BUILDING REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 1628 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON" RELATING TO THE SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON, DO h ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : SECTION I : Existing Section 4-2501 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 entitled "Code of General 111 Ordinances of the 'Cityhereby of Renton" is amended as follows : Section 4-2501 , as amended: PROGRAM ADOPTED, COPY KEPT BY CLERK, INSPECTION: The "Shoreline Master Program" , as issued and •repared by City of Renton PlanningCommission, of which one 1 ( ) , I printed copy in book form has heretofore been filed and is now on file in the office of the City Clerk and made available for examination by the general public , is hereby adopted as the 11 "Shoreline Master Program" by the City of Renton. SECTION II : Existing Section 4-2502 of Titl e IV (Building Regulations)'; of Ordinance No . 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" is hereby amended as follows : Section 4-2502 , as amended : AMENDMENTS : Any and all amendments , additions or modifications to said Master Program, when printed and filed with the CityClerk of the Cityof Renton to by authorization of the City Council from time to time, shall be considered and accepted and constitute a part of such Master Program without the necessityof further adoption of such amendments P , modifications or additions by the legislative authority of the City of Renton or by Ordinance. SECTION III : Existing Section 4-2504 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No . 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION IV: This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and thirty (30) days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 5th day of December, 1983 . .�� t Maxine E. Motor, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 5th day of ' •ciem'ber, 1983 . larACO • OC Bar a SQLra Y. Shinpoch, IMa or P Y Approved as to form: 42 Lawrernce J. Wa en CityAttorney Date of Publication: December 9 , .1983 440. 0 , CITY OF RENTON POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Earl Clymer, Mayor MEMORANDUM cm or rrwToN 22~i8. DATE: August 19, 1988 D CITY'CLEM'S OFFICE TO: Maxine Motor, City Clerk FROM: Donald K. Erickson, Zoning Administrator RE: Correction to Shoreline Master Program Recently it came to our attention that the revision for the Landfill Section of the Shorelines Master Program approved in 1985 has, not been incorporated into the master document being used to print copies of the City's Shoreline Master Program for sale to the public and for in-house use. Your assistance is needed to ensure that the revision to this master document is made together with amendment sheets to the existing copies of the Master Program. The remainder of this memo provides you with background information as well as copies of pertinent documents on the revision adopted to the Landfill Section of the City's Shoreline Master Program. Our research of the matter shows that in 1984 the Department of Ecology denied the wording for the section on landfills in the City's Shoreline Master Program (See Attachment A) . In 1985, an agenda bill was submitted to the City Council with language to modify Section 7. 08 . 01 to comply with 'State law (See Attachment B) . On JulY-15, 1985, the City Council held a public hearing on the matter. The amendment was approved and referred to the Ways and Means Committee for the preparation of an ordinance (See Attachment C) . The minutes of July 22, 1985 (See Attachment D) , show that an ordinance was not prepared due to the fact that the City attorney rioted that the "language of the Shoreline Master Program allows for its modification without adoption of amending legislation. " The new language for Section ,7 .1,08 . 01 reads as follows: For detached single family residential uses, when the property is located between two (2) existing bulkheads, the property may be filled to the line of conformity 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 - (206)235-2552 Memo to Maxine Motor, City Clerk August 15, 1988 Page Two provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty- five -y five (125) feet in length along the water' s edge and thirty-five (35) feet into the water , and provided the provisions of Section 8. 02 . 02 through 8 . 02 . 05 are satisfactorily met; Following Council action, there appears not to have been any follow-up to ensure the change was made in the Master Program documents. DKE:MCK cc: L. Warren L. Springer 1OHN SPELLMAN :s.. C Sr. t .r-- ;..., •., DONALD W. MOOS toverno," '5v 4 iu,"e' Director STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 9850-1 • (206) 459-6000 • ' • September 12, 1984 Roger J. Blaylock ipning Administrator , Clity of"Renton • Municipal Building 2,40 Mill Avenue South ' Rent n, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Blaylock: ' tie Department of Ecology has completed its review of the city of Renton's prop sed amendment to the Shoreline Master Program. the mendment adds a Natural Environment designation to an area next to the (id lack River channel; increases setbacks for commercial structures from: 25 feet to 50 feet; modifies landfill criteria for bulkheads for single family residential use; allows marinas only if parking is provided; deletes sign regulations; prohibits p',etroleum bulk storage and distribution; adds a new definition for "high rise" -- structures, local service utility), and major service utility; and changes the public hearing procedures to institute the hearing examiner system. i Our review found the proposed amendment, with one exception, to be consistent in4th the Shoreline Act and the state's guidelines for development and amendment of master programs. We are pleased to approve those consistent portions. ,-, You proposal to modify Section 7.08.01 to permit laridfilling to the line of conformity With an adjacent bulkhead on one side of a property instead of adjacent bulkheads on a ch side of a property would provide opportunities_for additional encroachment lineally along previously undeveloped shorelines. This is inconsistent with the intent of WAC 173-16-060(11)(e) which provides that the construction of bulkheads be pgrmitted only where they provide protection to upland areas and not for • the indirect purpose of creating land by filling behind the bulkhead. light of this provislon,'the change from the criteria requiring two adjacent bulkheads to that requiring only one is denied. The IIapproved portion ;of the amended program will become effective.,3.Q.days f'rorri the date of filing with the state Code Reviser. I Sincerely, - r-,- :'--------'11791., ril fE ..1. 11 ,Se----A1--,,•=.--cg") fill L... , , Glen H. Fiedler 1 Deputy Director GHF:kb For.Use By City Clerk's Office Only . • A. I . W . AGENDA ITEM • • RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING SUBMITTIIING ��� Dept./Div./ d./Comm. Building & Zoning . For Agenda Of .Ji.me 24, 1. 05 • (Meeting Date) "! Staff Contact ' Roger Blaylock (Name) Agenda Status: • Shoreline Progra Amendment Consent SUBJECT• Public Hearing Correspondence . • Ordinance/Resolution • 'Old Business • • Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc. )Attac New Business Study Session A. Program Section Change Other • B. I4etter regarding chancre • C.I • Approval : • Legal Dept. Yes No % N/A_ • COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: Finance Dept. Yes No. x N/A_ id/i; .,S.et date for a public hearing Other Clearance i FISCAL . IMPACT: -0 ExpenO ture Required $ _0_ Amount $ _0_ Appropriation- $ -0- Budgeted Transfer Required SUMMARI (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation) . ( Ittach additional pages if necessary.) The City of Renton approved a revision to the Shorelines ]taster. Program in December, • j. 1983. The State reviewed the revision and accepted proposed changes with the II exception of Section 7.08.01 on Landfills. The State's rejection of this section resulted in the need for the City to amend the approved Shorelines Master. Program with the language required by the State. The City Council decided on holding a 1;' public 'hearing to amend the Shoreline toaster Program as required by, the State. • I- • PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: • t I T...r rnnv rnn uniln cII [c 7 08 LANDFILL 7'.08.01 Landfills shall be permitted only in the following cases: A. For detached single-family residential uses adjt cent-.to efte-(13- e3is-t-ing-- -buikhe-adr the property may be filled to the line of conformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) feet in length along the water's edge and thirty-five (35) feet into the water, and provided the provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are satisfactorily met; or, B. When a bulkhead is built to protect the existing perimeter land, a landfill shall be approved to bring the contour up to the desired grade; or, C. When in a public use area, landfill would be advantageous to the general public; or, D. When repairs or modifications are required for existing bulkheads and fills; or, E. When landfill is required for flood control purposes; or, F. Justification for landfill for any other purpose than those listed in subsections A through E above will be allowed only with prior approval of the Land Use Hearing Examiner. 7.109 MARINAS 7.09.01 Marina shall be permitted only when: A. Adequate on-site parking is available commensurate with the, moorage facilities provided. [See 7.09.02(F) below] B. Adequate water area is available commensurate with the actual moorage facilities provide. C. The location of the moorage facilities is convenient to public roads. 7 1109.02 Design Requirements A. Marinas are to be designed in the manner that will minimize adverse effects on fish and shell fish resources and be aesthetically compatible with adjacent areas. B. Marinas utilized for overnight and long-term moorage are not to be located in shallow-water embayments with poor flushing action. C. Applications for permits for marina construction are to be evaluated for compliance with standards promulgated by federal, state, and local agencies. - 31 - i • •' iR t lf: '+;' F R 44,11 ,y. sA III 1, ,.�,� . ..,,.; �, O BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT RONALD G. NELSON — DIRECTOR. O ' MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 09 • gT SEP10100Q BARBAR Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR Ili II J;►Ine 20, 1985 The Honorable Barba ra ara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor. • Members of the City Council Renton, Washington 98055 Slli BECT: Shoreline Master� Program/Revision/Deletion Section 7.08.01(A) ' The lanning and Development Committee has referred to the City Council Section 7108.01 of the Shorelines Master Program relating to permit land fills for a public hearing. for detached single family residential uses adjacent to one (1) existing bulkhead, II the property may be filled to the line of conformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred and twenty-five ve (125) feet in length along the waters edge and thirty-five 35 ( ) feet into the water and provided provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are satisfactorily met; Unde>K` the Shorelines Management Act of 1971, RCW 90.58.190, the City of Renton conducted a public hearing and adopted an ordinance to amend our Master Priogram in 1983. The State Department of Ecology has final approval under this section. They conducted a separate public hearing on Tuesday, August 21, 1984, in the City Council Chambers at 7:00 p.m. and took testimony. Their decision, based upon that testimony and general policies of the Department of Ecology and the Goals and Policies for Lake W'ashington, specifically rejected Section 7.08.01(A) relating to land fills. i The Revised Code of Washington does not include specific provisions to overrule the Department of Ecology. The Department specifically stated that the proposed,revision of the City of Renton's Shoreline Master Program was inconsistent with the intent of WAC 176-16-060(11)(e), which provides that the construction of bulkheads be permitted only where they provide protection to upland areas and not for the direct purpose of creating land by filling behind the bulkhead. RJB:1607Z:c1 II } The Honorable Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Members of the City Council June 20, 1985 11 Page 2 The Planning and Development Committee at the recommendation of the City Attorney's office recommended scheduling a public hearing. The Building and Zoning Department belie,es that it is an unnecessary formality but concedes that it is absolutely procedurally corre,ct. RIECOMMENDATION: RIefer item to Ways and Means for ordinance preparation changing the language of Section 71408.01(A) to read as follows: I For detached single family residential uses when the property is located between two (2) existing x sting bulkheads, the property may be filled to the line of conformity provided the fill doestwenty-five not exceed one hundred twenty five (125) feet in length along the water's edge and thirty-five (35) feet into the water and provided the II provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are sastisfactorily met; or, Sincerely, Il Rona d G. Nelson Build ng and Zoning Director RIGN.RJB:1607Z:wr B•f�J .1607L:c1 4'80 Ac P1i�►)c. 1� , II 11RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting 9 . , July 15, 1985 Municipal Building I I Monday, 8:00 p.m: Council Chambers • ' MINUTES ; CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the 11 ' flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order: • ROLL CALL OF JOHN W. REED, Council President; RICHARD M. STREDICKE, KATHY A., . 11 COUNCIL MEMBERS KEOLKER, ROBERT J. HUGHES, EARL CLYMER, THOMAS W. TRIMM, NAN CY L. MATHEWS CITY STAFF BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney; IN ATTENDANCE MICHAEL W. PARNESS, Administrative Assistant; MAXINE E. MOTOR, ' City Clerk; RONALD G. NELSON, Building & Zoning Director; ROGER J. BLAYLOCK, Zoning Administrator; LT. CLAUDE EVANS, I' Police Department . • 1 j II MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 8, 1985. CARRIED. ,` 1 PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted , II Shoreline Master and published in accordance with State law, Mayor Shinpoch II Program opened the public hearing to consider an amendment to the 11 Amendment Shoreline Master Program regarding landfills. Correspondence . i was read from Building & Zoning Director Ron Nelson reporting , that in August of 1984, the State Department of Ecology (DOE) ' • I rejected a provision of the City's Shoreline Master Program, w . I amended in 1983, relating to landfills (Section 7.08.01 (A)). i The City's section allowed property used for single . family residential dwellings and located adjacent to one . • bulkhead to be filled to the line of conformit with certain Y , provisions: that fill not exceed 125 feet along the water's , • edge and 35 feet into the water, and that provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are met. The DOE found this II section to be inconsistent with theIntent of Washington , Administrative Code 6- 6 which e Sectton. 176 1 0 0 11 e) w is permits , S ( )( r P I construction of bulkheads only to protect upland areas and + 3 not for the direct purpose of creating land by filling behind 'ii t II the bulkhead. This decision cannot be overruled by the City. ;1.4 • Therefore, the Building and Zoning Department recommended that " Section 7.08.01(A) be changed to read as follows: • ! ° For detached single family residential uses, when , ;i the property is located between two (2) existing bulkheads, the property may be filled to the line ' of conformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) feet in length along the water's edge and thirty-five (35) feet into the water, and provided the provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are satisfactorily met;... ''I: I Continued Zoning Administrator Roger Blaylock reiterated the purpose )111 of the public hearing as a housekeeping measure to bring the City's Shoreline Master Program into conformity with 11 State law. Upon inquiry, Mr. Blaylock explained that • the City's Program complied with State law until the DOE rr made its determination in 1984 regarding landfills. Versie Vaupel, P.O. Box 755, Renton, asked if the City Continued P had issued any shoreline landfill permits from the time of the determination by the DOE and the present. Mr. - Blaylock reported no permits were Issued. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY REED, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, G : COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE BUILDING AND • ii' ZONING DIRECTOR AND REFER THIS MATTER TO WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE FOR PROPER ORDINANCE. CARRIED. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the Consent Agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing: Renton City Council • • 7/22/85 Page seven Old Business continued Utilities Utilities Committee Chairman Hughes presented a report Committee concurring in the recommendation of the Public Works Department Panther Creek that the City Join with the Soil Conservation Service to P-1 Wetland complete the Panther Creek Wetland Plan. The plan will provide Study for orderly development of wildlife and flood water retention. The Committee further recommended authorization for the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreements and referral of the subject to Ways and Means Committee to appropriate the City's share of $4,000 towards the cost of the study. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Boat Noise Transportation Committee Chairman Mathews reported that the ' Referral letter from Mercer Island Mayor regarding boat noise legislation, referred on 6/10/85, is being held pending receipt of additional information. • ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Ways and Means Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a report Committee recommending the following ordinances for second S final reading: Ordinance #3928 An ordinance was read amending a portion of Section 1-4101 Fee Schedule of Title I (Administrative) of City Code by adding a Amendments subsection requiring a $100 fee for final plat extensions, Code Section 4-2710(8) (B), and a subsection adding a $300 fee for binding site plan review, Code Section 9-1106.B(1). MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE . AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ordinance #3929 An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of Stromberg Rezone property located at 901 Sunset Boulevard from Single Family R-016-85 Residential District (R-1) to Multifamily Residential District I. • (fit-3) for Roger Stromberg, applicant, File No. R-016-85. it • MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. jWays and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a report �tt recommending the following ordinance for first reading: Street Lighting An ordinance was read providing for appropriation in the amount i Study Fund of $15,000 for Street Lighting Study from Washington State Appropriation Energy Commission Grant Revenue Account unto Street Fund/ Traffic Engineering Maintenance Administration Expenditure • Account. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL REFER THIS ORDINANCE BACK TO COMMITTEE FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED. Landfill Section Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a report of Shoreline recommending that the matter of revision of the landfill Master Program section of the Shoreline Master Program be removed from the Committee referral list since no legislation is required to • implement the amendments. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. City Attorney Warren clarified that the language of the Shoreline Master Program allows for its modification without adoption of amending legislation. Voucher's Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a report recommending approval of Vouchers 8048 through 8315 in the amount of $959,812.14, having received departmental f certification that merchandise and/or services have been �._ received or rendered. Vouchers 8047, 8049 and 8055-8058 machine voided. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL APPROVE THE VOUCHERS AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Shelley Sussman, editor of the City newsletter, "Renton City Newsletter Report," and Administrative Assistant Mike Parness, were commended and thanked by Councilman Stredice for the professional job they did in publishing and distributing • the newsletter to Renton residents last week. Mayor Shinpoch added her praise for the first issue, advised that comments from the public have been favorable, and reported the next issue will be published in October. i i OF R� v l 0 0" , ® T H—H CITY OF nisi E N T �`t N II ftr, POLICY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 0 235-2552 • p ig s+ MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,'WASH.98055 90 co. 06)4, BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH ,x ,, f t„ MAYOR IL gI �`.'_, a* : • . t ', l;�s DATE: December 8, 1987 OFJ.; 141981 TO: 'Larry Springer l t+ • ' ' .:PT. Larry Warren Ron Nelson Dick Houghton Mike Parness FROM: Nancy Laswell Morris SUBJECT: First City Equities - DOE and Shorelines Master Plan City staff including Larry Springer, Don Erickson and myself, met with Terra Prodan and Mary Berg of DOE's Shorelines Division on November 13th to discuss the shorelines issues for the First City Equities' property. The content of the meeting is memorialized in a letter from Larry and Ron Nelson to Joe Williams dated November 30, 1987, a copy of which was circulated last week to all members of the Black River Task Force. In follow-up staff discussions on the November 13th meeting, several informational items were identified as being needed so that the City could determine an appropriate course of action. (Larry Warren's memo of 11/30) This information included the extent of the SCS filling which occurred pursuant to the permit issued in 1981. The attached map indicates the areas filled by SCS and the areas identified as "natural" by the City's April interpretation of the Shoreline Master Program and the Williams/Canning study. map second is a copy of the overlay areas requested by DOE for the acre-for-acre minimum replacement. First City a E uities= OE and Shorelines December 8, 1987 Page 2 FIRST CITY EQUITIES ACREAGE FIGURES FOR DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS The acreages of the areas of interest are as follows: "Natural" Area 20.3 acres Preservation/Restoration 20.6 acres area as identified by the DOE overlays Preserve 7.7 acres Shoreline 3.5 acres Rookery 600' 5.2 acres S4 area 2.8 acres E area 1.4 acres 50' buffer 5.1 acres SCS filled area 2.4 acres including .2 acres in the Shoreline identified above The following acreage figures are also of interest: The acreage proposed to be developed under the site plan which accompanied First Cities' latest proposal was 41.24 acres. This included 15.31 acres east of the proposed Naches Ave. and 25.93 acres west of the road. The road itself encompasses 4.7 acres. The developable acreage under the overlay system proposed by DOE would include 39.38 acres including the area of the currently designated Naches Ave. The 50 foot buffer area would eliminate a further 5.1 acres. The total developable acreage would therefore be 34.28 acres. �,� , . CITY OF I'_ ENTON I ® Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney 4 - Daniel Kellogg - David M. Dean -Mark E. Barber - Zanetta L. Fontes -Theodore R. Parry Assistant City Attorneys November 30 , 1987 ,- ' ' r',. I1. - 1 : s. TO: Larry Springer, Policy Development Director Nancy Laswell Morris Ron Nelson, Building & Zoning Director Don Erickson Dick Houghton, Public Works Director Mike Parness, Administrative Assistant FROM : Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney RE: First City Equities - DOE and Shorelines Master Plan, This Memorandum is to memorialize discussions held on this topic on November 20 , 1987. It is also to establish a plan to pursue to enable us to make some further decisions on this matter . DOE believes that First City Equities has filled certain property that was to be preserved as wetlands under the City' s Shorelines Master Program. DOE has given the City a bottom line proposal for rehabilitation of certain of the wetlands properties and preservation of certain other lands so that the total protected wetlands will remain the same. f While looking at various photographs and drawings , it became cllear that DOE was making an assumption as to the extent of the Black River Riparian Forest and its associated wetlands . That assumption may or may not be correct. Additionally, DOE was assuming that certain other fill was placed on the site by First Clity Equities when there is a likelihood that the Soil Conservation Service placed some of the fill on the project. Several things were to be reviewed so that we could determine, if we can, exactly what the City' s intentions were and who had done what to the site. They are as follows: 1 PostOffice Box626 - 100 S 2nd Street - Renton, Washington - 255-8678 98057 (206) I a.. I d j November 30 , 1987 Page 2 1 . The extent of the SCS filling is to be determined . The � n� aerial photograph showed a section to the northwest of the site just up from the island that apparently was filled by • SCS. Policy Development was going to make this determination and calculate the acreage of the fill , if it was done by SCS. `2 The Counc meeting tapes were to be reviewed to determine ) what theil Council thought was going to be in the natural zone. The Council decisions, when read together with the Shorelines Master Plan, Section 5.02. 02 would seem to require that the City obtain a dedication of all land in the natural zone for flood protection, whenever there was development in the area. A review of the platting file for • this area shows that the City did obtain the dedication for flood control purposes . However , it was felt that the Williams study showed a much more extensive Black River , Riparian Forest that was to remain natural . The City Council' s intention needs to be determined from the Council Minutes, if that is possible. Build '�ng and Zoning w.as going • II to assume that task . �.% ,/�F/ � �t/�ti��� f-��1A : .!;,, KO At the same time as it reviews the Counci tapes, Building and Zoning was going to try and determine what document was approved , focusing on the Williams study and what was sent to the Department of Ecology and why. We need to determine how official the, Williams study is and for what purpose it was made an official document. ' After these answers have been determined , if possible, then we need to meet again before responding to DOE' s request. Until we ( have finalized our discussions with DOE it will be impossible to tell First City Equities what they need to do. _,\_ ?-,f �� Lawrence J. Warren L"1W o nd 4 s,, JJ p , t .R)� cc : Mayor '\. \ ` ,, N B. 14 :101 `'mot "'`' "'ram, I 4 I • • • PROJECT MEMORANDUM TO: Barbara Moss, First City Equities FROM: David Morency, Entranco Engineers, Inc. RE: Shorelines Jurisdiction for the Black River Technology Park DATE: April 13, 1987 _ city of Renton Wetlands Study (1981) is the underlying basis for designating the Black River Riparian Forest as a wetland. Field observations and mapping of wetland units were conducted by Doug Canning of 'Northwest Environmental Consultants in the fall of 1980. Mr. Canning is currently employed by the Department of Ecology.. 'Since the entire issue of shoreline jurisdiction may be based upon this. study, it would seem very appropriate to consider the validity of the (wetland determinations made as a result of this study. First, I think it is relevant to_ note that this wetland survey was not a: detailed, site-specific survey but rather a reconnaissance-level: survey.. This fact was pointed out twice in the document. On page 1, paragraph 5, 'the following statement is found: "The level of detail , however, was limited because of time and funding constraints. :. Field work was conducted' during November and December 1980, which was not the most ideal period for observing vegetation and wildlife." I On page 5, the last paragraph, the following qualification is given: "This wetland study examines twelve important wetlands within the City ,of Renton. Recause of time and funding constraints, this investigation was conducted at a reconnaissance study level of detail . Field work was completed during November and December 1980. Therefore, detailed wildlife inventories, vegetation . • sampling, and soil and water analyses were not possible." 1 It is interesting to note that this study does not include a description of ;the soils of the site that were available at the time the study was• • conducted. Yet the presence of at least periodically saturated soils is indicated as an important criteria by which wetlands are determined. jpa�ge 1, paragraph 3). • Page 6, paragraph 3 indicates that four kinds of wetland classifications were utilized in the study, as follows: . 1, emergent. wetlands (E), . 2. scrub-shrub wetlands (S) , 3. forested wetlands (F), and 4. transitional (T). • I is important to note that transitional areas were defined by the author as areas where "soil , water and vegetation conditions did not clearly " indicate a wetland or an upland". It is readily apparent from Figure, 3 of tie report that the majority of the BRTP property was classified as • forested wetland and that relatively small portions were classified as emergent or scrub-shrub wetland areas. This is particularly significant in vm9ew of the following statement recorded in the author's field notes • ( ppendix 1, page 20): "In general , I regard the Black River riparian grove as a. wetlands transition habitat, dotted with a variety of wetland types that are seasonally inundated." (Underline added for emphasis. ) ; on the basis of the author's field observations:, and notes,„ he' considered' the forest area as a transition zone.: that was:. only. ""dotted" with, wetland, types, why was it not so classified om Figure- 3? Although the. author found the Black River Riparian Forest to: be a unique and valuable hlhitat area, in large part due to its association with. the P-1 channel , it is not so obvious that he was able to make a clear determination that the forested area .was a true. wetland. Perhaps a more detailed wetland survey would. result in a different interpretation. It is extremely relevant to First City Equities and the City of Renton1that- another site-specific wetland determination was made by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers in the fall of 1985 by Rudy Pojtinger and Mike Bowlus. • It is elctremely relevant because they did not identify the riparian forest , as a wetland. The Corps of Engineers' determination was based upon site- specific evaluations of three criteria including vegetation, soils and hydrology. Site-specific soil test pits were dug to determine the presence of indicators of saturated soil conditions. The Corps of Engineers survey identified only those wetland areas that corresponded to the emergent and scrub-shrub wetland areas of the City of Renton Wetland Study (1981). (Refer to the enclosed figure from the Corps file report. ) Their file report dated December 10, 1985 makes a clear distinction between riparian forest and interior wetland habitats even in their introductory description of the site. On page 5, the second to last paragraph, the authors make the following statement: s • The project area wetlands are not part of a surface tributary system to waters. of the United States as they are separated from the Black River by a minimum of 200 lineal feet of. non-wetland (riparian forest)." (Underline added for emphasis.) • I have discussed .this information with Rex Van Wormer of Independent Ecological Services. Rex . is a well-known wetland ecologist and he " ge erally agrees that the riparian forest should not be classified as Htland h habitat. He has indicated that the majority of plant species in te riparian forest are facultative plants that may be found in areas outside of wetland habitats. • Particularly on the basis of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers survey, I would recommend that you do not concede to any definition of wetlands that includes the riparian forest. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers survey was an unbiased, independent determination conducted by reliable wetland ecologists from a federal agency. Their survey was more detailed and ,more 'specific than the 1981 wetland, survey, and should therefore be considered as more reliable and more accurate. • Sincerel Y9 EN RANCO ENGINEERS, INC. • • David A. Morency, Manager Environmental Services • • - • ' 1,17 4.... . . .. ,h., kpre!.;!.ftil.10..,,,,!i•1.5,:7.4;11'..'•h-:-'•-• '- . . — "'• r.'..r...„.",,.., ... .,H. '`' 2,764.....•••?' . -•• h h` - -'h h;•••• •./.. • • ,..., '-''•..,,„:•;.•-hr,..-..4' t'A• •••"`-',•-• - •• '• - ( / '•:'•i,..4-••V ri•;',,',1•-A 4,',:hi.,i,..-s'2,k'?- •.•-. ..• • •,' "...'":"1/4:-.••h• •• • -' `h;•:.•h.lk " _h,, . . ‘,..,-,..i.„ •-•.•• ,r:•-•••,,,.'...:•>•-rey!i;' .. .' •••.. - . . ' • . • .. • ••f . — ` '` '`` i.`'' '‘` '` • ' ': ;•Ifrkt.hlitr•I`i •' -(.•---••"- ,',-*,•••=ih'' '•'4• `''' *i."(01-71"C'•••••-• ..• •• -".•,'•-'•-- -•h• , •'• :•,7.h, --,-.---h-•••...-!,"-vh.••••. •.,•-• ••••'''.'•`•.-••'••.••'..•".;•••h••:,4':.•:.".-;4.-••'-`'----•-`.•.1.,:"l`!1,`,.•',•,h•,.`••.,.,-'."••h••..;;:-'',.:.•..:,'.•••;•';-•`,•h•.'"`,-.•-:14'4hf1 1.1;4zh::•,t',r1.,•2••,1,:1••40::.,';7:,!1.,•.••;.••h•.•i,••t•'''‘•...•-i-..'-',''• '•.j...:.•.\..r.5.;,:•,:•7e'•.,';h.•.'JA.4 7.•,4-•;../I•;,'.::".‘,.!,,•,:-••-0*;:3:,-,....'..,'i.."-,.`y:.::-.•.•h••.•-h•••.:• •••.-',.••.h • . ,. ••h' :h ih....:,' ..,.••.,•. -..`.. hs:hai,.1., ,..- t ' It . „ ,h,!,•i.Y4---?' 7.'•`,..`h 7.1.-h••- •-••-•: h • ' . ., ... .`....... ..;;•,.;•`..hiii•!t',,ki,01,,,• ",,At'A'1.„,•Oh; •k,'1,•,••:,.. 7,,,,'•' •<,,,,,,-,....•.• 1-.;. •„-...h.•••.; ,.,h •„::.::,:,...,•-•. ......,•,i .,•,....:•;,,,,•:,-.E,41:•,,t 7./::-.4,nr,..•;,,,.,,r-. j.:."..:.!•q:'... ... • ' ,. . .. .... • • . • , - . -•, ...Z.',..;,.4:,\- ..• ..*# .4••.. ',. : :..'• .'.• '.... ••••••,•''''.t'''1V•i!'•'•'•'1,r.t.j,0Lf;.;?".•As„; '...., .t1Z311...•;?::•:-•.-..:•.11;:...1.... •',.5;•;.!.1•.•..-...i'•:.1.;•.•,•;•.•?...71.•°:',;•:•...1.1.•••••.•.•''.••.:•.;14.1,i.4.-.[.;;•,....;A11.1t.,:;•'•ki''-.... • :....• '• ,..• •• . • •••••-..."..,...•-•:...,.:,1.;',..!:k'j4ki•p-,,,/..f;,3.1..w.?4,,g.,t,..,:.!::.....;..: •/:;.;.•:-..•, '••••'•••• "` •.I-7'.;!:.• . ' :••• --•..4, .• .'..••.• .• ,..••••••1:':';',.§k7,-.',.. '••••...;.- :.:•,...•..... • • . .. • • .• . . . . . . -..:. '..••::,....-,..,j-.,,,,,..i. :,,Ickf;,:4';;;',:':;.7..- • . . . . . ; • .:...: .-.......-.... •.,..:;, • :,.......--,-,•;..,-....i.:::::-,.:'. .::",.:.•;-..:.<1..,:f:',7.,:c.?:-Af..•:•.j-- : - • ..• .,- n7i,,i'..'.%. 4-• .,.•-•-:•", ,.0,,;:- ••,•.• • - ' ,•• • . • • . • • . . . , . , . . . •.. . . .• - .•:" •'.1..1,1.1.',.,;:;'1:1••:11,i.::11c.,;;i'll":1-#;,?.'V'is.';•';•:j.•;•.',.....• : '.• . . • -. .••,• •-• ::'••• (...W:1.:21•• ••,.41.,•1'44 ,,7;!".•;..;•';,••;•,-2:.::: . . .,.• .. .. ..• •• . ....,•;:.•'141•k..1-14.-;'••'• :f1•-••.;•;itC1•1•"4 .1..i'i•11'7 4,:::>" - •• -..•••''.`•,':•-•:''.. • ••• .., -1,-•'--••••••.'•h.hh.•.....,-:•3 .••••;':-„•sh4h•t•ig.',.‘••••••..••.::::::•• •`...:• • ..... ,...... ...- •••-•;-•••:``;:i.`` '::5ih'1,-•'::.`"f•'••.`•..,....h.;';'..: . .••••„-..'.-,••-,!....:„hj-h....?,•••••,,.L,..: :.•,-.1",-,•;.•,.j•...'•,.i.:,..,, -;,..,-,.•...th.,-..‘4;,•.::,:h.....,•:,,•..•.•.•• • -. ,, ••...: .::• 7-.. ,• , :• .h....•:•-,•,,,,;.-',6,:i •rer;:.,,?:•'.•:,..,,,:.14.6er.,01,•ies,;,„t:,;,,-,:•- .•••••:.,.....:,..4.17,-41;,.....,.• ••,•••,-;:h.:- ?-"- 1,•••4-:-.5,4-:••: •,-......;,, -, .'....-i:-..:••,1, ...,.-..., ,,,',;:d•. ,,,, - • •. • : •... • ....,. .• ,.. -...,?4,.:,5..,,,r,;•,...i/ v.'.;i,-•;•-•'...:!!-S1Li.-,,:1,2••4147,-•1•11...;.::-.• ---:,...;,-'..:. ,•••it t!.:.•--1.:;:$11- '•:1;.1?.:•:,..e,.si!,1.•:•:-.4::•.1•,:•,;..!!!:,..... :.',•••••:.,-•.„1-,••••?:!,1•••.•.','.•:•••!‘"•;:..-••.....: •.••‘,::„.;•.7."..4.,34,:,."••:,-.,?.•:-,,,..;.•.. . - , . . . . ::._.•:.,; .:., . ..,'• -.••;.;:::...,. ..:..ii, ,!:"Asizatif...:4t,-f,".:„ 1•:rifl.k.,,r,:::,....._,.;. ::.1.7:,:;;;.';'$.i47':Ii.'''il,:ic•,i4:2;,1i:r44;;;A;•i•C;i1;. ..i...1f;2;i'9.::;'•:fArt;i1.•.•';'•, '•:‘.;.... ''''' .:.'Ii!:.':-.?„.',„...::••‘"': .2..i.O.,.•;1'7.•••1••i.'•/ 1..--4.' ' ' • ' ,'.,. . .1......,:,''.•..., ••.,.,..i.:,'•!.',1;',.i.i.t,k, .'i,,,lel::,..t,-1::;c104.,,Ii"*. 1'74: ,,,!".k‘i:::';, ,-11...:--:•.:-...1 :..••."- ,•.-il.-•.1-i"-• 'i:‘•.;;;ILf;•'''.;1,:,•1•7:1;1.••1•.1:;,••;;;?;"i;.'',:.!.•i••';' ,-;.....'-:•••--,•-•.,. . '•••;.„...2'....',.:'::.: .-',-.••••••4:,'.1.;;;;•:i.,i'.;:.:.'..1•':11,i2 • ''f. - • *.&••••:i,,,,g-'..1,-,,V.•*;24.2..."!1„f,..!•,(a., .,;i••••;,-;:i;•%•••••••1,7•7•:-..'• ..,1%;',2,-'k.1•4-,.'.0...::::-:-it',,1•,.".•:•,1,-.-:i,:...pi,I.cii•,;;,,;••,1:1::••.1..•-.•.1'1;:ti',1%•••,:;-".•••••••""•I•,- . ,": :•.,••C::•••••••: ,•••''.!•2::!;'•• •••••-:"••••':=•••!. .' ' . • • -1''''••••••'''•••t't- :','1'1-:''•1••'1>T1- :.••••••",•,-,,, •••• ,.....•4_;;=.•:-;-.`:•- ••' . ....-.:....'. •.',.. ?-••.,, •,•? •.-..--.,•:4,-.• .,,••...•: -ty-=;;‘,„.1r7,:.•.,;21:11..',to .p....1'1•Yi4., -‘, 'AF•O'''"2.'1•!2•••`-'''.; •, • •- -•:••••,•.••••1;:•A`Z7'111.1:,,•-e..rx,,n.:(..,11:',. ,, •.1.(..1...:. ., :E.5:14't::::-..,..P.:•'.:;:i1-:-.5,?•-•:3:-.14?.3:V-4`i'-'1,,,z,:::.!:',.• ;•..,,,-..;.:.:.,•yi.f. ,1...1: •'..'.•.H,•• ..." •• •.;i,.?:.•:',..‘"...1,...1. :-.......':,';',,!,••;.„,,- .•1•••••1•:.',••• ,.,.„,,,J,L,;:p.,,,.,..1.?:.,..;,,,45,44,:.,...-...4 •:...:,, •.•.,..;;;.i.o.......,p,',..,,,,4 ••••,.'14 di.-:•;•,..- • .• • ...".Y.•..f•••,;:ir--..,44.!...;;;',...'.'•;: -.-. s4.1r2•.-..,•, . Y„,:...,•1:1:1•1"-fie,..-r-1.",.1".,•-•'.5:. .r.,,,k!"•Oh'i!'".: 1:'•••.:;:...‘.••;,:••.'..•:•:. .:',. off0,4,-"".• • . • f' . ... : .• . ..i.,::',I,..'.,,;:;*‘:3j•'-"141.;'f;-.1:4.1,1; 4,4,',., ..:,---.r . '. • • h ••.h.... -•••:' -•=••h.•-.'• •h••'"••'•"h••-hr 0. 4 F 94 1l ', k 1 41 r,--- e.1i%.' t.r'l-1f, .",:f!;;'''•'•::.;:h. ,-.....: -'',.''Vh:::`:-!:t.`'t,'i'''.-!.:'...'. • •"' '''•':.11"'''''' 2.- . ' 4-11'7 "••.• ... • •• I •. •'.•,' •-"...1i....,1:•:.•'; :. . . . ' - •;:l. : ..i-' ••••••-•-•:'••'21' • 1 - • -•''• , • I • . . ..•,- - • -. •..:,,r,...,....... • . .... .. ' . . . . ' ...:.':•:-!/.•:.:.-Ar•;.F..::,:::1••.;.:•;;A- ,,,,,,•li,1:•,:,•.->t,: : .; - •, • ' - 1 lit-1. ' '' 11. , - . t'it,.!, . ,...-. frl, .. .... .. :.;...':;7.,... -!'.4.17,:s.,•Y.,(;.1.t.i;,11W.....--y- ,;- .. ..• ,, . . i •14, . * •hor,r, • - . '`•h'..1;1,';!::'.0.••..Shil:4•N'i.';fiit•i`4%;:c-r.',..-h.' -i-:.• - •••• "" • •' ''''....-, h.- .. '-.• . . •, .'.••...-,fi‘•,:i:.. ;:..:(1.yg,.1.4..,..c.,f.,.....„...:1:e. ;:ii;''''‘:.'S'''''"::''''. . 1 • '•' • • ''.,c".:.":',..sf:--.... :Z-..:.- ,..• ••: --..,..•'•.:•':••,' -;•-••2•'•••.4:.••'•.. • - •1..".-. -•:•,••.-.h ''.•• • ,_..•. „ • -.."•... ,.••••7-6:;:-•:$-I•ih•;:.•:`;;A•AL''' f- :ty,114,:':,-.J:-::::-'•.--i:•.'"•`',;:h' -/3.•,,•,:-.......-;::.`••`- - ' ,..h.`'. - : ••`... ,-•.•-;•:-: :;•.•.• ,i,• . ,-;„•• .. ,•....,:.... . •,-.:•, •: . , ,• •,:. -.....,/-,‘h :•:?;•:,,,-;',,,N:rthe.t.14-.:•kr,-,..---(-1e4r, vr......4 h-..,,--...••,,... :... f1:'h.;:".Z. ,„•';';'_-,,`''....'::;•. h h'-••..-..Tv.h-:::':::,-.,h,:•••.•••.. :.• -••.,:-.:•,'•:•7..`','..,..5R....,:,';',..'',2„.. fhZ.,..... .,:•',•••7-:- ',...•••"..• •-.--.'...- h. •-•,- . , •.. ,.•• • .- - . ..r,", 4--,-,•-h•-•-..,,i..-....,4,,•:1•441. iztr..".v._,,,i,- .., . .-r-•.- ' ' '• •---..::'-'1f-7-5T.141'it•••:eiXti•e&'"5,1.•...”.!•,17Tt;- •'1,'-•c.,!..,•:' "'1 .:•*.."..•-. '-:-.": ..•••.:•.!'•••;.:2,i'Vg‘,1^.'•4•:i.Wk;•re•,?;'•If'•,t.'41-4tA'Al:i••=5JP• •;,•-•'•- ,:.!-•••:.•:: ::-.,:''••1•-•-,";''- ''.. •''•'s.'•••-'12.2.':2"-. ...• .'1-;;'.•..:..,,-:•,1•.';',.;.::::::;:.._. ., .•'..,,,,.., .'•,„,-.,.•!:.:,..-.:".1.•1,,,,'. .. , r. ..• .... . :-.•.., -..-. - '.,2. ••.2...-.11••••7-2.•••••'is:•23,L.'t?.:,;;115,f- ,-.'2:-',,.,4,.','Atc.44Ni:q•• •,,...1...•:I., --:'. 1:i.--s.',..;::::2':-•'.•:•;..1-.••,*'''..,! ':."";.„'....1.";•, '.•:•••• -•-•,.":-.',..... 1.17;•':.•.:.•-•..v.".''•;'.',;•••••:;:'.-•••A',.-1.1"f''';'T- '...;-- . -• • .• . - •-....,. .••--.• - •,.....,.9,?. ....'X..17;:.•:,'4;`,,•71.14:11.1$7.',4;LW:Y11•!..sgZ..1,71-,;,i..:,:•,.. : ; -. • 1:• :••*• -'.,-.-•''''''.'.":.,•.4.7::-..1:1:1;-:,,•--1"1,-:-'the::•,ii,•:.$.:,..•ihe_.r.h.,?-r,-,‘-•k:•••,:-..:,••,..-•..:::•• ••• -,,,,,,„-•,..••,..•,..1„-.,-..--,-.,t IF,4",1/4"!.; •:':',Y.?:,-, ,...?•':F'',---' • '-'......:'''''''''''''' 'Il•.7•'Inf...--.:;::1-1•„`;‘'Ul•-ZA's'.›:-:. :,.-. •• .',".--;'•''.'i•,'''''-'•-•.j', '''''....'1::'••....,'•:,2,.. .•:::•' •';••••••••••'-',.'..;:i.''.....''';'.... ' '-.•'....''''':' •.. '• • ::';',7•',-,'•:.`...'4:-*:•.'-'..'!7•4,:•.-:',-;•:-AV,•,'..„,-...7A-,-.:....:. . . • - • . .... .•.:'%.'•!.'/..,e:•:..••..',.,.!'''.;.'','•''•i'.141,-'''•'• '••••".':. '''--• • ••'--,,Ai'l.f.r..7..,,:•0'.•:...,•,? ...,..4...'1'....:-• • . • . .. • •-.).2'.•:••%':1-;;-" .•;c:,..:••••,".,4.;.`f•-fgel:-..ki-..•-'"• ' • , . • ...`'•'-'.4 ,,'",_'.,'•'''.'l'...:1,••?'::_. ,.'...,..,,,,L'i,.:,•. . ' '...-","•,..-7.::;.:...:.f.'4,,rt41,5!;;.:,.,;':.?...'?,...`,ii.;',',,:''• ,. 1::::•:..,-.• '!1 - • - , - ...... .": ..,..7:,..7:,:: -,:....i.:‘,;.-- . ...."..'. .•'....."': ' ''' . •,'.:•..c.,- .4,:'.g F!.,41,:n,..... ;r.:_!;,:.,-,-5.'..,.:.;;; •., - 1.•;,:4,;'-:•`,':',••' `-. ..: •l'•---• •- • : •• ' ' - ••-•i 1-••..:h,";;;f-h:c••••:•1":.••••• •" .. -••,-.:••„---•••-'. - ••'. • . . . . . . , . . ..•...,.,„-...<1„;,-;......?,,n....-„,•,;,...,.*:•,.......•.:,;-......-4.0-,-..„. •. -',.....--,...••••••.,.•..:•-,- •1:,,••.:.:::,;•.•'•.3 : •, . ". .•,::::.:.1a4,..'•,•,•'-':(.:'-': . . :, .-... : •••• • . .` • . . _ . ,-..• •,•44..,-,.t.,:;:,..h-rh"i,,'•,?:•.•,•t',":•,:• ?..:eth''`t7:-.'1:'• •,h..h,-,,, ...".... •.,- : h;:•.-....-,',---•!.:'. • . . - .: .,.•,',P;h.-:h•hz:•-.f.;•1/4.1•••4 -• •--.• '- ,:-. ' '. ,• .. . ....-?•••:.:,:J...'- '•:,:•1•,?...,••-•1,-•-.•-•,-•,,..••1•-•.-..gh.:•••••.•.,.. ..-h•-• • . .• . •i:-.••••hh• -,..-,•,:r.T•h!it:':•....:-."t:=;,-• !.).4.h...'....-.h, • . . •`...,,,...;-.••,i2:-•-h.`: .:' h',' ••.•.•• • •-',. . •• .,....:-:•••••••,,n--*, .. . , . • :-,•-",........,.,-..-.h4:H-'k...•.h.••i-,-(r.-,•••?,....1;•-•-h..,k`:.z. •,• . . • -• - • -,•••••.,..•-•;•?........:•,, .:• •• •1 • - . • . . . -• . . . -,-.::•-.L'h.....,',:-:••-'.•-•; 1 • . . . -....,.....i.........,..,:::,_:;:,,..•;:::. . ., .• • . .`-•:-,•';•:•;','•-';'-••-••:1;h`rih.`":•••••::•:,,.".:::-....VI•31•1•.:•:-:'•::----., :•,. .... r:- •••-::-.:-....iii'f.'••••••,-4••:,--..- • . . • -•,9::;•!:,.,•!" •• • f • .•..: :i 1 ; ,.,.,L•31...Z.F...,,:3'FiCiel%!'`''...••:,:i.:.Z;i--r.-... .f4.3 r.,.,1,.-7'....'''. ''' ' - . '''',..''''''''''....1'''/"..";. : r .' .. •' '•-'..).:4•.;::,.'-=.••• - ' .• • •-••.• ,1'.•1'''..•.".e%S./.4"•.J..'.1 .•.:,!...i..',:.,..-',...... _. .. ''S';'.•''''''...'::1.:.-i.,...:.:A..:•;•••'("f4iti:C.'''',...7:.?if.,V;;;.::' S;•,....''.: . •l' '• .../".:' .....•.'..'''.....!;1.,;/..-.1.•.. • .. •.'..':;•:....1.1.i'•'•':''' • • • ''''.- ...i.;..,"...1,...;.fr4.1,:i:.',..:ft.it,f?-.':.:'.1..1:.;'4,°11.%:;,:li.i V;:'..'s"••1•-•‘Z.....::' ;......"*.i:;;-.••.:'..:.1' ,ri..•. ..... . "'''' ::...'!•'',!.1•";12• . ..'.."• .,:`•.''..:-''..-'':"......-•.':.. . . .': '•--..‘1:', ; s".''''..:• 1;`',... ......',i' ...'•-•'' - • •• ''''.''' .•4‘:''''''.l•' *.;'.,'• !•':',•,•••k,f',..;.••j , , . . ' • . -''`..........,:l.,.:hh':-T-fh.lr..`1•7,-?,::}•,:hT-'71-:.:`•!•tfl.hrih;'`.,•,,-.:h:;t;•-•.,... . . • H' ' • ' • • • ,.. . . • ... ,. ,. ,. • - . . . .- 1• . . . h..,:••:•••••• • I - • :: ••••••••-.•,.., ,• • - Lc". .1 • .- . 1 . •• •• - . • • . . . . : . • • 1 • ' . .. • • ... . . . . .. ,. • ` . h -:,:.. , -,`...`"••• ..,,h - .' ;•••.•••- • • ...h.- -..... . . .. .„;.-1.1.:,".:`...,,J h.,........,:-..•1,-,„•::,:.••••,-1.`,-;',.. ' •'-_.,-..•.., ,: ,, ...: ..,•-• :1.:-:..,•..;11,-..;•:.•,, .:,.....:•...:,h.,:.., h,3,..:.,.„.'••••••-.•'.i. • • . . - - -., ••:-,. --•,,..,.-:•• ,-•=•.h,•• --7 , • .-1.,'.:••:..•,-1 ...•'''''7'.' '::-.7. .: .'': '; . . • .:;'• . • .1''' •,•''•••--.:F.::•••• .:•.i.---.7A). .71. ....7.11::•:•.,•:•.••;-.. .,. • . - ';'• ••": 1 .1•••;•;:-.";•.., ,...‘,..?••tt:'•''':--.::•-••.-..., . • . .• ... , ..,.-:••-• „I,. .1••••.1Y,', •••',i,1,,...'....cr.," f'••,•,..". -. ... ••••••..ii.,..,.• : , } „:•.....,,,s•-.,;:t...:, to :.,..,..- . - . , . ... . . . . . - • • . - , "..• •••••••••••' ••-. ' , • . . . . , .. , , • .. . ..... . • • • • :•,-.:$,..-::'.. . . 1 . • ' •. • . .. .. • . . . , , • - : • ....... . . . . . . . • • - • .., -: -. ••'. '':':,....,?..i/...,`".-i':'"..•.:." ... .„ . * '...,'."'"- • . 8. , . • ' - 1 . , ' :. . . •. *'•:.'''' '!;:3;:i.'..','-.',•'.::...,;.... ;''''...-::: ::1:7-it!....!.....' . . ...:•.'.•:'..."'..•.1.:„.....,....(.,• .4.,...`•,-,',?:,,,.,r;ik,,,,,,,,r:.1 -- . . • , -..;'•-.; . -I.:,7-,-,-,,,:•.:,7••••Athz4-::-,;*70.,•,•,th.w,it“.,M;7,,-7.1-4-..:hf,..i.'-". :-.....,1•,-.;,..::_,.;i1%,.•••,••••;•-, ..• ..-,.h• •• ..... ...- ..'1•7•.h-fr.,-,:.• • : ,.. • : • ,.•:.•••• ••:•• . • -• ' '. .: .• . . h•- . ' -:-.,..,••.,S.': ••':-.`•,,h;,.;.:hh".•:,`•••hh•-:-.4.'ih..,...';:e.;•1-1,4-'41. •;'`•••!,`;;.•-•!;..: .,-.,.•..:••-T.,14,.,-..,.‘N ,,b,1-;, , ,••_.,..,.0.•." -.,•t•.;:ih•••,•••••• 4. • . , • . .. .., . . , .. - .,.• • . . •:. ..• '•,'"h•,-.4:•"1.,?.411:••••.•:-,4te•o•l!,:::4'.<:i.;;-•..4..•,,.:-.:,•,...,..,--, . . . ...• . . • :.-...'.•-•••9.1-e.,.' ii.'"•:-.•,:.'1,•fr•:,.r;i•'`'.;,'''•``',";•••••'•:'."Y••'•••• ....: - .. . ;l••I'•••,,r,..p..0.1;••4,:..-:.:.::•..z....:•;25........;•,,....,.....• •• ' ';',..-,j..".1-`::-•:',...4--..;•?••"„•..1.1.2...,,..h.::.....i,h•-4,,. . • •"'' •4;••••hr''7'..'2•``,P,".h:... 1`;`..F,re,th:,-;41-..t;:: •;,,,':h•-,:•••• . • ., ` . - •r•-..-<•••••.•...r-ih.r..t.:-.-t•1.....-,.-..%„•..••••;:h".,c--•, h-t- •.-:-.:. `,....,......,:•..:,•::ih •••:;."-ih.,hf,';‘,.:,•;•-ih:.:,:h?:•"•,[.::f.'fla.;`.':..,,,..: ::;:7-' • 1 . •r . .. . ' • h - • • ! } i:, a _.. :. F ' r �r-.,.:1,,-h-.:I..N7:.. �.r' ,fin! L _ 2p)A.,.i.7:.R'e,;l:•1.1/4-/v.--,-•,.•:..4—%,k.,..Y 1.:'e.-1•. : i q �pr m 1 6 :.g.1%° . 'IN:.0 _ q / `�.3 wild S -`` Y`* - f I SIFT 1 - - -=� ; �'t50•7 ad N o N ,..GD¢TD FI.M T • Co.+vo...T Tia qs� I VICINITY MAP i 2 R.Sgti9i l'665 AV I TYP1cPL FILL 4EcTlraw 1••800• UZ j / II ` ` y'S r Q CI W- i ••�-(�'. `- �. 097, amm.I SWIT ATATM MOW. C� ,0.1-, ---7fI------ s (` Z ASATI9 J �. T. CAM Ae0 .3L1t0 IMAM. SCOMAT0IO CDLILT= -� MILITIA TO WM SCOMNT LARa IureA OM MT OrM M >_ 6 �� uMIE CRAMS MM. M SrSiG IiST H ID 6FAATIO CC SAM PFLF Wb01 WONWA 13.i1. sco 73 t ,eTCX A[JS%.3• U mIQ TO MAIM IA OTHA OaSTDCT TON AM H NAM. f--) `\ _ t•\ uAIL MATO:S=RITE AM MUNI.r0 0-SITC ACM• INS ACM. S TO MTm OAAD.ATUS ft. As 0 M I - �J \\ •.h .__\ AA AaE AA As m MT IO.TAA¢xlan cs. n wnns m __ ..\�\ wrenr,rs AM ucnElTm(zw,ma) Im:nau-BILr.re, = WC SILTATION©TA L FACIL:TAS MT EC MA=TO MC \ con= STLTATIA CAM, THWFM. DADS M OWL. \ OTLAAIyA, IT 9.LL A M OSIGAT1ON NO MA SIBILAT A • ( _`A(- _-"' M OECSF A TO CORM YT NOT OA TMS ANT 1 Q FAST CM/MlRi - I 6T AAD IOS MAIMS AM TO AMC lmnuna 0,011- MO MA MALE A TILS, OM 00 A®4[MIAFT ImIIAfLTS.AS Mr LC MOM M E.lA • till% y✓ AV V \ TO PRAMl MAMA WSFMAS. SEATTLE.uSCMON MAJ �. t. $ OISTUI0 MT1.1 9V1L 1 OI ST35101D OT OA[A (IQS)Tas® { SIR OOSLA ATM M 051BTIO.R O.MA,TA LIMA SInT J EN OF OS �� • • `••\•\ --� OAR A 45M-19.OIT 6 MIA OURS. ��� © V _- rr --�`.•• O. TM 0112 1CTION MACE WC.R 1p 10.WOE IT I ell /� I I -•. - LDO 6r,i UDm 11�CT 6 IWAO SR115. FLA.fM5--ICADO S,IC . ,^ o—•-1 • • -:;.)-\ •• .. DSTAIl SILT(035 ALAS SAC MAMA LW(AS STOW ON 0 00100w OIQ ��a 'i a 0 / PLA4 NO AS COM.TO MILLI ROLM CAA>Q IafHS ' pt Sa!_ ` • -\•� Am AMMT RAC n MN SILT VRl matt NIL GRAMS (mm)II]-ac .11311 ,."-----.---------.11___MA \410::)...._.._} „..... . \✓ (+w\ "% Atli. '�,'' 7 ) z ' 1:1---7----, ... .. ,., / , _-- \ , �,( � m — 'av f �j ` 8 z� 8 `..e.,. -.z - 100 GO O 100 200 SO0 21 Z 13 \ �� ��: �w ti • �`J�l ��q I 5399 Q F /- / V '` ���\`� L � / \ " -_-, SCALE IN FEET O. Y\ ) \c11 , ,,.,. , V `\�A �\ veal 2.uc�J� •//J \ s.�u.v.41v ,` �-i l 'vea DI>•u. ��- O�js`.,• /lido.Oo•alOo /7 ItS:ON'aor,aa.. t•o.2L.-S•J. C -__ J}(y/� e 8 I I ® 0 1 ---}y1 _ s a �/1,�. - - � /- / m/ J '1/Ca RTC, Ig �:d'•Tr'L1orlba ���-'aA I' 7 • • ///- ` ■ _ _ �/ , ♦. • . C.,•12.00�l del ^�`'�/A C • �l _ "I 11. 0•••:I.... —.�R'�»s>� ram,:....; -.. ,;,.. a,,.ry.•,.:yxr..�er • �....a.....wc:.,..... -.,41,� .....�:•.. -r11- ........, - .--........ 1111 a �. 2i.-ul.ar.>,tD w+mw -� / 1 y +/ re 2zal.• __ \ ✓ \ as •„ ri•rceraen co Ms.. �r _R. •S7 0 o.r.T a,ire w+.rs.r ' cove v».A ac.oa B*-A1vma.Ai ♦ It-Ita0 cD NASA \ gel,_+ FG..ks, \arcs,e 1 R�e AT•v..v+ar /- \J .• G •1..o'a So+Ts TLICIL TSAaaacT ...max a 17.m... .u..r . €I LT Fr.•X.4 Comm.,tau++, A.MAX uaS 11 ■ C raw,LA.-1u Z tl H . d • f _.2 3—a u d a U . • ,f�•I S - /i../ 1"•too 4.. - • `0S7.9..04 1 ', 4.0 54.1.Cog 'a t...‘• nci-I,-C. .....1 1.33.4 NI 31V3S . -----...-6 .C....4 ..: • ...... 00. 00 001 0 061 001 rapTI ---_:' R A 0 n .00,269.0 ,L6'G 01 71 -0--- B ..: V • y, -'2V ").1.--' ...,. ,./ ' ,OcrelL•11 -777- - - ,,___ ( 'ii --AAA --i T- 15 V • ' r ----. • LI ,0011.61.II, ......,'------ ......_., ...,...:z. • ..". „ 1 tt. z .1 --- ) iC.. 6 . , . ' 7 i L . • ,69•ouz al 2 ti i) } I )% ,..., , ,463ccc '-' 2 0013 - \ • r - i --- ...c.2, .9e --0,- N--... Z/ -/ Z o -I/. ) ..--- / ---___„,----., / - 'Ill ----_151%.__-- / I', ..,.... .... ...- ,.... .1 I /..........., go .s.' 731. ,---"' "--• / k./. - /. 'N,‘ : e,"..-,:-.'-` ___,__,-.--'-. ....,..--' ...,_,./.4 •.'''.-r,.' -`‘'.:,": )11111...---":, N.U.73.ra-1771.3A.I. , ; 7" • •.),/, ,.• , - ,. \..._ - ---" .---' --,, s\ _J1 , '71..cad 3--11.• • , c---______- • • . ......,.... ,_ it.• • . • ',.-r.-.1.. '.\ \ \ \ , • ;.11. ,"..- \._ • in / &'I •• / \.\-c' :/ / • \.1 \_."--- ___) ....›...- -"•*--.----,.... / "'- , 7 I\ ---'- , ',.\ ), ' 0 4, '''-,40p.-4rd:i, „...; 3a.,:. 'r..,.,:: • , ..<-_,)..,--. --- az---\ ... 1 ......... --,....:„.„._:;;;;_,,,,,,,,N7....._ --. ,.. . 4,,•,,, 1. ----- . - - .s... ( ) --) ,-..-. el ,..,...,..., ..,- .4?3,6S 03. rroo.c. • . ...n..Vr."r4.,.-Ipt .%rt.,.., ...' Na:W". 'Tall - \ - . SP.''. 1-0C,4, -..rva. ,':\ .r..1....2:rap, /19 . LIMA 1 93 ..........- cAis.n.i.A. ) ; -1.1 N - ----v. -s___,...../ ,-_,, \\ Ac,.......... , ..- 220.0 25 3.21110 / 4's(.36223).16:6301 3.W...1/___,...../..,/ - ".". . .------7/----- 1 , .)Varns,„41/vda., ....... 00,O _....,..,,n,_... 7------f_ r ' fli \L-.. my . 'in - ___ ,.7' ((‘.L. 41. ,....d•-• • • -0.47 1133:1 1.. • • .' 1 14 li] 1 .--"" r ---, ,..- El io, .„\\- .._.7) -- ..7.: e 1r \\ v ,,- __?• ___- L .C1, "t1.6117/ 1 Ca 1 ce-isv7-71 13.13.0 321 - . 231110161 .10.111312333 TN 111:31630212:3111 ...' CMS 3 52 3 111 51010.1 131.1 2 131 336.93 1533231013133 13001 1136111133 30 13 35.23 1 W fl -......-----' ,(_ .' -,-'1 . -' 2E3332 233=13.3031 59 1113 231 03 IV.6221 SI 1330 211101121 001 30336 2 231.121=AO i C L.,.) / taiosio ,-' .• 1 I P P'"-‘-'.000.-- --7"..""-----_------- --' oc,71[1'2 1.11.51301330 23031121 30113 12361 01 53.22 IMO 0335 311 3113211 53111310 13312 536111.3203 S2 cn . .. 233111.10 13 10.1 03131352 1532 33 01103 31 31311 535131 2I 033333331 1123 3115 211 2 0 X 1 __ ,-**. IA ..-- ....------1,17111 V ___ ..--- .....--* .3saa ru®m 01 01.1.1 03333111031320 CO -5.1116. ) Ii;11-.----::V. ' - ‘. .......... ....- ----.r---" -- ,DU/S On 51115 IMMO 9 323153 1671333333 WI 030 0113 3012 -53.1105 -:_x.a..-:-----------""--- 14 Z 0 ,9.1.^-33----' ,---.. •rca - ..„--- ....---. . Ma Oat al 13 610 -50631333_ 5313 3 2333.0 1231/531631 0..... 1-... . -111 Z 207-.... --- .... ' 3233 131331 01 MEV. 2 20133121 5111 Tall 1101101051 3 101112 'I al Ci :: _,----''. .----.) '. ..1., 1.1%1" •-2-aw, .3 m 113.33130 5331 131 i a 03 I ..._. ... C---- r•le.:,,; ...."....:...4 -___.,_. ---"---21"82.11i ha DM.20115 2330 1533 33230 231515'3 6331 103.1 73'MR'121111.CI 3635 1111121 MIS 12 01 3312021 21 5 '= ------ . -- - - --> .n.a.” ri2J-1,3 rgot•SmIgt.1.3 113 211 331.321333 si tall MHO Ws.rano... •e, . ..-; ---..--:- VA 42`II :"'".° i • Z.." . . -11,1,29 73 won..2313133 0 0 'LI- -. , . I0 X VIM 1132131 3115 121 Mil DM. Z ' ' .------.------ 1521 3253 Cl 33.19 TIM nue III.13 3331133 g toll 311 112.16122 1511 3116130 al.3233 SI tat •.,„. r-'<1 GI ------ 0 cn • 233332 2513215233 1311 i IQ 33 TICS 12331 MR..113111/R0 331 6132 MP 2 n a....... • Z • 23533 131a32 031630 111I2 031335 33 T.03311.1 3312. . " MI 13,31 31 33 5102 r 52131200 01 3.233.10 51511335.3 • . -1-1 .1.120 HSvii .1.1+7•0<rai. tun la 1113.5 a-5111 24 SY 1535 Ma 1513 323 32.126 . 3.1 133 53.32 IT 736303 3111 1311 ma-21 11131 135 311 '2 2 Vt . lb,.-. ......gob. 311 21 31 22/113 11313531/1002713 21111 0312.to- SW.332 13 MU 223315 611113 931131 15 23 cn 4 ' ilitirs .., , 03130324 3 TU.1.3.92.30 3111 XI 3351 10 0111050111 - 2 _-_ % 1. AI' au4t1t, - - .i ,.., 1011111.13.1 1 V F.):). • I-7:7.1 • --,0 • `+• = 1-•�--" r. ys- 1 7 Ml • .: ,0titio-lerlilo,.1 fir' ` PAS. ,r�• r.-12•-- ..`��; -- • 4r4 • / -,, ._-_-,Appe. _------,---- . -..1 ". ",-,--_,-4_41-C-_._-_.,-,---;....-?:,- 1 - I 5 T fG � � � � Si `,, i o->L y _ Z¢• 1uMPGTfio F11_•_ M Poc,To qyA. I �IV�� C MAP -- =y Q.ggi4.g5 L•665 ''.---.Al. I T Y P I G L L c.1 L.L. 4 E CT%0.1 1••COO' 0 Z 'fi r 's - Q `4'97 IL ____YT7___r � ILI \ o rr�a/wmrta mrtra _ Q Z I. RO➢R GO RIIITW TOrWRT SIDC(alrTa 011.21ID lvTa J --fy rrcnaras m m.x snuar UM ula CCU OTT ma ra y> < . '. 31 •!� �� uTuul OUTV6 STST0. ra SRITII 961¢m lRAIiiI7 mm y0 a=00 II.mHdlD n 01Tr.•....•MT.11.0 U Rllm m aim➢6 m u➢u 110000 a 00 H 101000 v I 2 `�� .-;; /*\ urin c+unc u ma[T[w➢wrtmti rw m-ul[amlm ¢n v io➢m•a1rL cm,nvac➢a J -__\ V`'• MS rRism. M STUMM 0009.STST[A Warm m 10 CO m M. Ral•dTOTa mrtaa rC➢STff]RAT a rlmuA➢m 1010 msi • CORM 460100 001110.. 1100690. Os>IF M W➢➢L W10110, TT 5 it L M QYIGia 00 n @ • rIIET fZi1/9V W 1, \ M R010001 m 00033 ra 10 0➢OITIP6 MAT H 0 A V S _ — --- _\ •\ TIES. 1 000 rm"00 99001 mIIOD➢05 aS c11100 ry EO rIITM MI6 OW 5011 pm Cif • m 0000 a0Rm0 rA'R➢T10. 41111T¢.aom6li]010 . J / NI ; . . V _ I. eu CO201.100315021 f•a118®01 0011102 0 1➢02 (20)w4 ✓✓ 14��•i ,'•, SIM• Q6� 010.110 Q 0020 0 0100 4ITl lJ ;. CATS v 1TL11.LRRT v m10 wars. L © �1� �� • •�f�-\y 3. m 02120Ta fwmt+¢foal c m rIIT CU n 0 1IIT �— - 2 / I 1 • \ LXI 0 12➢om➢®.MT v COMM M 111. WM,R®Sc 01000•DC .:_ F` / \ • am R01f rrl¢DST 1 e� _+ S` 0 •'•.Y a. ➢601 SOLT rtla 0m➢S0m1 Ra a➢T MT 1u 900 m SUM.ra➢clm Tail➢ ,(7.1 � ' G OTtcII•, ( .....S.....c...Th/._ , ...,„.,_,._,:,:s___/,----- , 40,0'..;z.,,ivi.. \40 /' 6at1S 11 SIR Mat 2'T 1•6P rairA 0009 GJ➢➢➢ MOID-af4 1 i \ --...---.07'.t . ..._. .,,,yy / , •' z� �e, 1-. - X :oo eo, m loa zoo soo x z / `% ` / 7 -•._ _ SCALE IH FEET• dO. . A Jr./ I _137 e� I / __ i, ~ ----- .-}per .a () ':\1 1-72:::'=.1. 0uM� // SS..[lofaoTI 4., �` \_� l VCl D1TCM -S7V.S •-_• 0 j • • (/. i1I IlS• �� / i•w1L 1-..•• tea. ']V Jll 2i1-\., \ .1 \� =/ /��1( ,.y..11m----- ' '.-l._------ _ Z <: i„,r-•....\_ ,,... ,..„. ` P I' i • $ `•�--_ 111°........dJ.{-- ..r. ~/ I 1_ .//•_ .•,�� a<.• — er•1•S.PP/1 ,` �_` A —n.R.:' .. �.:ffi �:c>D L "n..rtTiw.� �....1...1wr-.:�......:.. - . '1>m7m. ....... - ry _ ai.euaraTeP T"tiEP •. /�� r/ \ +eo Comas / \ -I Z 1 ' T..ET G{%A OeY.ltyr ' Moto.INST•.1LTX GITu6JL.6 H.Ri'socATED VICGIL S J \� T L 1•L�o mvturaT �� �/ Q .. 1.) So,. L..lue • Si,-Fey[4 �ao�so',. 1t 61Js•1ecT nJT_fi a l'L m CWK.If tr a aPaf Jc /e 3 ]( Z u PCOP-u.34 — Z V O -, d F a • u e0 It u . fa - .-..-.,- :CI.- ; O01 1-ll-e.. eSiss.os ,.. • , .1.), 0 , s0•54.7.1.431 ...... SN-"N E J.33A NI 3-1T011 .. • "-7,.._e ---- % 006 002 00! 0 00 001 ------- --`., .....,,..., ..--- tp . . 0-- ,00,)6•2-a ; Z. r F_- .),,.- _.... ..i r E 1-_ --1 - ..-" - --- sovvoi.a .vv voz'a) ---. / 1- -* 4.-- Iii r• IC ! . .....--- - C 4-2-Z , ----' L .., „ 1,--- a ' •-•., ...... .00.2/•a.L L'trl 21 '( 10 ---........ '--171---• N. 2..,., A il.) ' ok.c,,,, ........t1-.... g1I- --...ii-, It P -----. 4 \ Z._ ).,- ,001LGI.a t -I 2 •% -1, , LC',02 1, / ....... `) ' ' ' ,......, •• • t c• i• ... , g •‘ . ‘ , I li % . ,, ,-"' : .. \ . a - ti -N '' ) l )% , ,,• ,-- - I . o ..14' -- -- . . b/ / 1 . I A, ep7 i •°°-.0--"1 .. \--, /..„, ..........._ / ---Z - ---- / 1/ N ---. \ .../..c, 1 -• / . 1 'C / 4? ; .1 ) :\' • . - .. ----...___..-- -15::: ---'' ''' 4 N . -• ....• : ''''' P---- I ..„......--- /- „............ .\•-'1,.. 77 r-a o 3-,5. / // ./ .1•1:1 ' --‘,'- /.<;,4,',.'i i „,„/ .„„...,Th. ••• . .......‹.:•19-04 1111141... ., 0 ,C1 13 I ../V./ ,, %, _...•..........,>--, . .....-----' .......----' _,.._%. ,, 111 393 90 '!„.. ---i, _,...--.--1/ i'V . - . 1 : '..,..... \.- . --'7 .-••..'''''- '%.* \NN. n\ --- - ,),/ o -a->r•.- J..-1 is - i , • '41. • ' .., •/ -----. - .• - "-\•. ---..-.1), 1 \ ---\ (--- . ...„,._ i 1.-/--,.... -----•0,•• __ , . -•-• -:e 2 - ••• •____I \ '''' r , , . i.-,/ ...-......c.... , , , , . , .1.a7.61 21 • 'N ! // \ \ ...->" • '''''''"..1,-../ ".....' / • ..., /-: - - z----", .., --"' .7.:' 0 ..•4 1-,r,„, ---lri ----.. , -----.--"' -' Z.'..." .N....j \._..) 11a9.ice”c") ! --__.........,....--... cowl m. / ‘.. Ara. - -\ ""' .- \ - P°;,'' .....,-....,-,,... . 3 • t93613311..',MM... , t . •.-tio 4-j>„7 . r§7 Alf .- .1504 as Tow.Of i , e ) % / •-• __ „,•ffarr, 9,11%.„31090-411 i / ../ \ -. ,• ........,,,,,,,,,, \ ..--..............,'..---_ ______ ............ . ).... ./1. ..,,...,'- No.......' 0°.N.0 I. --- 1 ••-90.17 a Ined 1 . r . °1/4_:- 01 --., ____ raj 7 --- - ---.) rri• ( -' '‘‘. ".. 7":".1. 1 - CI t E 1 a ID' •11.7 t e . i E., ,00.1-C at•Iff ^-- . 2. \6ii \-1=1 Ca 1 R -- -----'-' _ .....) r .”....7....,.... . -----/ . .- ,-- ,-- oossiA.Z in1141 W., ' - 5 -Z 91.*Lb1 -- - -- ,„/, • 3 -canraw • • , • . . ". .o.'''././ e -360111131033313 CM el 31113111.0:311-11 OW itS/1393 5-13336 119 e3.1641 le:33 1120 SI/WM T11.1 -0 LW 313136 9 001136116131313 Cl 031111100 311 TM 1611214311 . i ...Ca ri ) .------. 1..( 09.9 ./......-:....".. ...." , . -..-.......1%---- ...--... .sIncarro=MN.12 033119139 61 1113.311111991 In=man ci 142611 117213161.Gel 311101 'V -swarm DUO . • ' •. C 1.... t 4-1 9 c' •. _.,...-•-••• • IP -S IP. .....-"• .......-.. cp.7111.1.-a 11311153141111613 311.9 113301 13.32 el C6116(3d 1101 03“3.11 51111.31391 3661116103 13,19/31 on 1111:111631 • . 8 u) • 16406001,0115 ...., ----._ 1.3.111=6 33 6Mal 031233111311 163111.11 011613.1 3131.1=141 a asaaks)MA MS 341 T / __.\ ,---0)' 11 - ______•--- o• -•'•-vo •31/0)sasa)el E19161,31 .---..... 0347TO 13311111.10 131 -f916413 '.. 3. . T. m•''.' ..--:..:-7---'-Q,.7: -::co..-:----------."."---- ---'. ot,-... ....../.. /.- _.-- of„:„{..09? y MI*-134190 el Eiter9931 WI DM/01 11d CM ing111„.„,,,,......z...f „.....- .....,-.-.": .....„...,------- •sseu ia Fra.33 11211T134 - , 163 Cr11 Cl kb COM -6111161391 -rn SKIT. 0.... E"' ( ) ----- -(3----,', ..,..., _.-, -----,r - - /.1.. •,12y12 11 . 1 17 3M1A 3 311161911131 33 9l 0 131 6 __ _ ;,., ,o „. 1- L ) LIW92993¢36136034391Kl34 _ . - •1T 41 46MSM1M0 33 TN 113141K430 61111 711 34161 01044 3 20 i ,-4,..“., _ .- ---- - ___ • TEX721•11115Dtllsusssa minaaa t , _ bla ri.2/ '.... i Z -0'.150 7J -r•n?.‘ „ 311/314•4 131,03-91 .1-1.-. -------- 00 ' - C/1 I .1____I..._..-----.- C.... 131313 331319113 1111 34 11611 2•1643133 Z ' ' ....-----.- 11E41 3116113 ell 36161•23 TIM 31130 Al,10 33.3•12.1160i 113191.1 361.1 1l31,161311.91 110.1 11161143 01 03/31111 11 1.011 M r2<1 0 . . .------ 13331-1103v 1011.111111133 Mill °Cr) 34 33 T1111 IMMO 421230 111 13311110 214 MeV ILA CV T .,.. F.„-._ . . .6336336 1121111421 431410 11.119 436336 a MIA 0271,1f MS/ t Z - • - • -.....s. -rraiu,o MS.:Fa -1.4-e1PoCrac 3111 1143 14 VD 410111 123131433 el MOTO 93 11311T4361 Cl 1:1 1/34191 SI Mil 3.6 Iv ISM On 1503=Mu 2415*5 0 • 311 013 05*4 IV 136111.173 3311 WM 032m3 20 11111 3.113 31.1 7 2 • LA IT.. TM,3/41611-111 31315013 11132 03.433-31 OW 1....","..1 • 0191.6 XIS 14 WM 11393316 D.KIM SO..91 3.111 1131 KI 03111,913611 33 11119 1C061213913 1V36.110 0321 33 01'6.136131 •3 _3J' e; ei4Lti.. .... •"'", 1=1111111001311 . I..7.7 I • AI y -11A.'- . ' 9- 3 J 'o • r li .+ I , • /U1/U5 #0539 E • • RECO F 29.50 AGREEMENT CHSHSL *:*:-+:29.5u 22 .0 • This AGREEMENT (this "Agreement" ) is made this 29th day of December • _. _ , 1982, by and between • Renton Property Associates, a Washington general I partnership ( "RPA' ) , JAG-Renton Associates, a Washington general partnership (i"JAG" ) , and the City of Renton, a Washington municipal corporation (the 'City' ) . n RPA is the fee owner of that certain real property legally described on Exhibit 1 hereto ( °Parce'l A" ) and that certain' real property legally described on 10 p Exhibit 2 hereto ( 'Parcel B" ) . CD JAG is the owner of a contract vendee 's interest k in that certain real property legally described on Exhibit " 3 hereto ( 'Parcel Cu ) pursuant to that certain Real Estate Contract recorded as Instrument No. 8004240435 in the Records of King County, Washington, by' and between JAG and John B. Hansen, Inc . , a Washington corporation ( °Hansen° ) . Alterra Corporation., a Washington corporation! ( "Alterra' ) , as agent for RPA and JAG, has requested the City to rezone Parcel A, Parcel B, and Parcel C (collectively the °Rezone Property" ) from their -present classification of G-1 to the new classification of M-P under the City Municipal Code . A general diagram of the Rezone Property is attached as Exhibit 4 hereto. The ! City's Office of the Land Use Hearing Examiner has . recommended changing the zoning classification of the Rezone Property to the M-P classification upon certain terms and conditions as set forth in that certain Report and Recommendation to the Renton City Council (the 'Report' ) dated July 29, 1982, issued under File No. • R-129-80. RECORDED 1 HIS Now, therefore, the parties hereto do hereby ' JAN 5 2 68P agree as follows: • Section 1 . Condition. Pursuant to the Report, Ri1:UkD & I:LEC RPA and JAG are required to take certain actions before KING COUNT' the City ordinance on the rezone requested by Alterra .',is heard and decided. The terms and conditions of this Agreement shall be without prejudice to the City Council's deliberations on said ordinance, but this Agreement and each and every provision herein are conditioned upon the, City's changing the zoning classification of the Rezone • Property to M-P subject only to the terms and conditions • set forth in the Report . If the City fails to change the zoning classification of the Rezone Property to M-P, this Agreement shall be null and void and none of the parties • hereto shall have any rights hereunder. Section 2 . Easement Grant . The provisions of this .Section 2 are conditioned upon the City's compliance with each and every term of this Agreement . 2. 1 RPA hereby conveys and quit claims, to the City an easement for greenbelt and open-space purposes in those portions of that certain real property legally described on Exhibits 5, 6 and 7 hereto (the 'Greenbelt II . 12/17/82 7792B 1 Property' ) located within Parcel A and Parcel B and an easement for greenbelt, open-space, wildlife habitat and . flood control purposes in that portion of that certain real property described on Exhibit 8 hereto (the 'Flood Control Property' ) located within Parcel A. Prior to the conveyance anticipated by Section 4 hereof, neither RPA nor the City shall be entitled to locate any structures upon the Greenbelt Property. RPA and the City •shallieach be entitled to excavate the Flood Control Property for flood control purposes .and. locate structures serving flood control purposes, and no others, upon the Flood Control Property. ' 2.2 JAG hereby conveys and quit claims to the City an easement for greenbelt�� 9 1 and open-space purposes O in those portions of the Greenbelt Property located within rn Parcel C and an easement for greenbelt, open-space, 5 wildlife habitat and flood control purposes in that gri portion of the Flood Control Property located within I, c'7 Parcel C. Prior to the conveyance anticipated by Section GD 4 hereof, neither JAG nor the City shall be entitled to locate any structures upon the Greenbelt Property. ' JIAG and the City shall each be entitled to excavate the Flood Control Property for flood control purposes and locate structures serving flood control purposes, and no others, upon the Flood Control Property. 2 .3 JAG and RPA hereby convey and quit claim to the City an access easement over and across the Rezone Property for purposes of excavating and constructing flood control structures upon the Flood Control Property; provided, that (i) the City shall only use such portions of the Rezone Property that are not within the Greenbelt Property and or the Flood Control Property (the 'Retained Property' ) for such access purposes as may be reasonably designated for such useby RPA and or 'JAG, (ii) the City shall make reasonable .efforts to restore and repair any damage caused by its use of the Retained Property, and (iii) the City shall execute and acknowledge any and all instruments reasonably requested by RPA and or JAG for the purpose of confirming the exact location ' or locations of the easement granted the City by this Section 2.3 . 2 .4 JAG and RPA each hereby reserve the right to locate utility lines, including, without limitation, lines for water, sewer, gas, electric and telephone service, over and across the Greenbelt Property and or the Flood Control Property and the right to enter upon said properties for the purpose of installing, maintaining and relocating such lines, provided that' ( i) JAG and or RPA shall make reasonable efforts to restore such properties to their original condition after the installation of any such utility lines and (ii) such utility lines shall not be located in a manner that will unreasonably interfere with either any then existing . utility lines of the City or any utility lines which ' the City then has specific and definite plans to install in specific . locations. • Section 3 . Limitation. The easement rights granted the City herein are granted on a quit claim basis only and are subject to all rights, covenants, reservations, and restrictions applicable to the Greenbelt • 12/17/82 7792E 2 • Property and the Flood Control Property .a's of the date; hereof, including, without limitation, "those matters described in Exhibit 9 hereto. Section 4 . . Fee Title . Provided that the City is not in breach of any of the terms and conditions hereof, at such time or times as the Greenbelt Property and orl the Flood Control Property have been segregated into separate legal lots, RPA and or JAG, as appropriate, shall 'quit claim the fee title to the Greenbelt property and the Flood Control Property to the City; provided that any such conveyances shall ( i) be subject to all. matters described in Section 3 and Exhibit 9 hereof, (ii) restrict the City o), from using the subject property except as set forth in' Section 2 hereof, and (iii) reserve the rights set forth If in Section 2.3 hereof, and provided further that any conveyance of all or part of the Flood Control Property • o shall reserve a flood control easement in the Flood Control Property for the grantor, which easement shall, include the right to excavate, locate structures upon and OD maintain the subject property for flood control purposes. RPA and JAG shall also (i) make application to the City, within one year after the . fi.nal adoption by the City Council of an ordinance changing the zoning classification of the Retained Property to M-P subject only to theLterms and conditions set forth in the Report, to have the Greenbelt property in the Flood Control Property segregated into separate legal lots. Section 5. Development Credit . Notwithstanding either the easements granted the City under Section 2 hereof or a conveyance to the City pursuant to Section; 4 hereof, for purposes of all land use and or building applications of any kind related to the Retained Property, thei� Cityand each of its individual departments, offices , agencies, officers, agents and employees shall ( i) treat the Retained Property as if it included the area of the Greenbelt Property and the Flood Control Property within its boundaries and ( ii) credit the Retained Property with the flood storage capacity of the Flood Control Property, which credit shall include any increase in flood storage capacity beyond that existing on the date hereof . In . addition, no buildings or other structures or improvements located upon either the Greenbelt Property or the Flood Control Property shall in any way reduce the number of' gross square feet which may be constructed upon the Retained Property or increase any flood storage capacity or storm water retention requirements for the Retained', Property. For • example, without limitation, RPA and or. JAG shall receive credit for the development acreage equivalencies of. the Greenbelt Property and the Flood Control Property and the flood storage capacity of the! Flood Control Property when developing the Retained Property. Notwithstanding anything contained herein to the contrary, the City shall not be obligated to allow the construction of more than 995,781 .5 gross square feet upon the Retained Property. • . Section 6. Joinder . Hansen 'joins in this Agreement for the purpose of subjecting its interest in the Greenbelt Property and the Flood Control Property to the terms and conditions contained herein. Furthermore, • as long Hansen retains an interest in the Greenbelt " Property and or the Flood Control Property, it agrees to �I r. 12/17/82 • 7792B 3 • • , II , join in any future conveyances pursuant to Section 4 hereof . The provisions of this Section 6 shall be binding upon the successors and assigns of Hansen. Section 7. Miscellaneous . 7.1 The captions of this Agreement are for • convenience only and shall not be considered or referred to in resolving questions of interpretation or construction. 7.2 Each and all of the provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit v)' of each of '.the parties hereto, and their heirs, successors cl and assigns. 0 ' 7 .3 This Agreement may be executed in any cD number of counterparts and all counterparts shall be deemed to constitute a single agreement. The executign of • cn one counterpart by any party shall have the same force and GO '; effect as if that party had signed all other counterparts. IN' WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have entered • into this Agreement as of the date hereinabove first mentioned. CITY: CITY OF RENTO'N, a Washington municipal corporation u � By 11Wr _.Scoff Mayor By G� zl(o • r ty Clerk i RPA: li RENTON PROPE.:' ' ASSOCIATES a Washingt•' , -neral •ar il,.er ip Byj' ir ,‘Or ,r//° Ronald Go Neub: uer General Partner b77-digl? B 6L4 elton J. Bonds General Partner e. 444,1 Kenneth L. Thom sc�ii P General Partner B - Y \Ai /04r- __ Merton Co en General Partner 12/17/82 7792B 4 • • 11 • JAG: JAG-RENTON ASSO'CIA.TES, ; a Washingto general partne .ship Gs � Ronald G.. Neu • • er II General Pa;ttne • B B • & 1 I o) Belton J. Bonds c) I General Partner , I I. I , .-i• ® By Q 1;- 11yr , '.• , 0G�•� enneth L. Thompspp 1 General Pa,rtnet II 1 • By W. Me ton Cohen General Partner . II HANSEN: , • II JOHN pt. HANSEN, INC. ' a Washington Corporation ' 11 . By. ttlµ-, , 1- 4, v II • /r B .. y • STATE OF WASHINGTON II ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) II On this day personally appeared before me Barbara II Y. Shinpoch and P Maxine E. Motor -___, to me known to be . II the Mayor - -and _City. Clerk II ,res ectivelYoof the Cityof Renton, t e Municipal corporation that executed the within and foregoing I, g 9 instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the II free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned and . o on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument, I and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of. said corporation. Given under my hand and official seal this 29th day of December , 1982. ''•'' \\, • ..., c ite fir.,,,.,,,,i , Notary Public iP ahVfo° r:t.h'e.` State. of Washigaqsi�b..res � n u ... : , r rw Id I °. 12/17/82 ,i ;'`,',�, ra'��.•'�., • 7792E 5 �, • jro�.,, ��; .,r..' • •�. �= • STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day personally appeared before me Ronald G. Neubauer, to me known to be a General Partner, of RENTON PROPERTY ASSOCIATES, the partnership that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument . Given under my hand and official seal this 1'(�Nd 0 day of s , 1982. If) • i • ' • a Public in and. for' t•he`` ate Was '. ; '; ;,• - hi gton, re'sidinc�,' at STATE OF WASHINGTON ) •;• • ) ss. COUNTY OF KING , • On this day personally appeared before me Dalton J. Bonds, to me known to be a General Partner, of RENTON PROPERTY ASSOCIATES, the partnership that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said • instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deedlof said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument . Given under my hand and official seal this M day of �stc , . �-1 , 1982. • No Public in and for the St to Washington, residing.'' � at RI I y •� �f 'Iv, ,.• ,,•,' " , V• !.. u . • H 12/17/82 77928 . 6 'lll` J I STATE A E OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day personally appeared before me Kenneth L. Thompson, to me known to be a General Partner, of RENTON PROPERTY ASSOCIATES, the partnership that executed• the. within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrum ent to be the free and voluntary act and deed of sa id corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument . Given n under my hand and official seal this •�?''h ,i day of / , , 1982.cl � '.� . . 4i i 7 „t1'.i,� �J r. O to L• VI Y I •‘, �• I mo. / •i.•I•�. • „ •p Notary • Public 'in and`fo'r.;t; e•. .: •`, • . el l State of Washington, res'idz ' '' ` •.'• '..I1 j1111 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) 1 ) ss. COUNTY OF KING On this day personally appeared before me ,Me'rton Cohe n, to me known to be a General Partner, R of E NTONI PROPERTY 0 ERTY ASSOCIATES, the partnership that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntaryact and deed of • said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument . Given under my hand and official seal this . ? e,.‘ . day . . ,' , , J ni. 11����!� �(.%lam7 . ,.._ - • Notary �} I Public in and fo'r ,�he'�•- •1�;• I L �f , 4•J .,.. �`• State s 'n ton rest ai` Z; at / �� • 12/17/82 . 7792E . 7 c . : . • STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss . COUNTY OF KING ) On this day personally appeared before me Ronald G. Neubauer, to me known to be a General Partner, of ! JAG-RENTON ASSOCIATES, the partnership that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said • instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized �o .• execute said instrument. • ' • Given my„hand and official seal this � ,---� �� -+ day o 1t 'G� , 1982 o �_d(//fr.'"k‘^(./ �1 ..• oNot y Rublic ' r the yS to 'Wad. nesiding at STATE OF WASHINGTON . ) ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) R . On this day personally appeared before me Delton J. Bonds, to me known to be a General Partner, of JAG-RENTON ASSOCIATES, the partnership that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument . �. iven u der my hand and official seal this / " day of i(1.4�•C��vw✓", 1982.' ' , u. ti No r Public ir} d for the;7,/e :( : 7, ate sh ' n, res id4.r c • 12/17/82 7792B 8 -• • - . _4 • 'Wir I� i —+''_. ~ �vfr)�/t!/;// _- e,, I f `,tr--.` a,r . f = `• Bi + t r r f L p T�`` 1 9� •! ./• \ t © ¢��'gyp• f���p a .... I— _, � ~• r���Il- - "' r`' r Mq:i `• 4• `'--'I' • Eb Y M i`!`d iti! t .t.c£v .Y.{. ' V/�AN� - +1 '.:Yp'fjrR: - • \'"?-� i i_,_ t �y',,•Ss',i,�..�`.Si};T • �� /ri ur•;i • ' PPOPERTY LINE r 1 y=`. ' ' 'r ®/ '1. .0' -•t �% •' REMOVE R.7/'.ROAD TRsiGKg .,z ,t om�, ��• /��� !✓ �.. -- - '�• a 171•,•t _ kw-why PROPPRTY LINES +......»..»».,..... ..»»to..» a'r'rs �'`'' \i° .-����� 1 - +ram ) % EhOS10Pi CONTROL FENCE k`fi a ; y • _. -C. EROSION CONTROL. =ENCF S; _ • x $ - _ '••--tt�f[z::: ,� • ERG910//CCAITRGC / i `V' DITCH • 2 Tf PEZOID DITCH rc.Sr • IITAT9 CO VICINITY RI�AP 1 /M -RTEO-F/C[J,_ ✓/ %, 1 w � !f 7 / _ // — V/ - EMSTING DITCH imte'� m°.' ` ."'°""• "'•"°' 11, , • .......A...-...- - — — /EX/ST/Nq gROLNp'SURFACE '— -- ='i ----.CI. "cRT_ ®�o��.—®�_ o — — ----- r' 1 — i tD1J; PI-6GE WOVEN FIL`RrABRIG UNDER:RDAp 7o q2 c — (_AGH .SIDE OF CENTER-LANE- OF F2G D. / /i , - • E::ISTING GRADE — 1 �` - TYPICAL FILL SECTION / / %" :'' ! Pi OFOSED GRADE(INTERIM) i ,,,, HIS / // /'// I ��1 t.........S.i.// BI %LKRIVER BOULEVARD • / / ! :dGHT OF WAY GENERAL NOTES • • - � • • • ..:' 1. CONSTRUCTION SHALL CONFORM TO 'STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS FOR MUNICIPAL PUBLIC WORKS CONSTRUCTION,' 1981 EDITION, WASHINGTON • • STATE CHAPTER AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS. •1`J- • 2. RAILROAD TRACKS WITHIN PROPERTY LIMITS SHALL BE REMOVED. / _ ) i 3. CUT SLOPES ALONG ADJACENT TO RAILROAD ALIGNMENT SHALL HOT BE I ''' '� 'y.1• GREATER THAN 3 HORIZONTAL TO 1 VERTICAL. /•' �'./ _ Y ���;' - I 4. PILL SLOPES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED AT 2 HORIZONTAL TO 1 VERTICAL. - £� /• �` i• 'I • S. EROSION CONTROL PENCE SHALL BE PLACED PRIOR TO FILLING. ',j;'-'/ --- 1 6. SITE SHALL BE DRAINED PRIOR TO PLACING PILL.. - , 1 CZ7. SLOPES WITHIN THE SEDIMENTATION PONDS SHALL BE 1 HORIZONTAL ,• /'r! - j TO I VERTICAL. _ _ .. 4. 1 law ,..� yam' '.s''. - : - _ / 0 •EN . • ,, y / d= '� �J fir' •~J�� l_�.�_ - I �. q®�� p�}�. =• i • :1: j1 • ✓ �,;}JSD% \- -- _ -- = - I — iia in 0 taw 0:4 • e , ,,..,;.,...,........, , . . _ LE <to ,. - ,.,..., .\ :-.:,--,__ . '�' • 0 CC GRADING A FILLING ' II ) . orstias • - Key Map 20 0 ..- , .. ,-, .. .. •. - ....• 1 . -,-, ) • . .) . • • . • ' , • a . . , I , i • rcla . . . . . • . 11 . • • 91 , • . . tom . , . , • 1 1 • . 8. I• - • l' • --"--7'N.•:•::...N... ...i,i -:.. --r----!------..,--. ---v--, „.7..______ . , 1 / 4'....-••••;!.‘1'. .,.....• A.' I • • - • \.,:e• ..--,••N \ / •'.'t -;.• ' / .. . , . ••••,,, MI , \''•..All \\ %'• - • - • .- ...'s- Tk. . ,...i!.. ... • I • I • • '4 .9, • ';'':••I'l I: ::.1.1. %;1' • ••••,,; .. " .,,,. ...,d::•..4. .. % \ ‘ I • 1 •• 'a •: i ks• • I 6:.. •„,,,,, .,• . -".• . '.• \ , c. . .• • , • . . . , ' . •• ..•‘. \ ..16,,, . ' , '.' s• s. !,. .., '''. I . . • e.' ••• •,.• • \ \ • • • ''.. , • , . • ' • . , . •-r..• .•„... • • .. .\ . ..„ \,\,,s ...7........r. \ .....—i . sc., ., ... ,.. • .....‘ .1-... \ l' . ts..k , • ‘. • •... . , . ,_ . .4 ... . N . • ' • . •-•,....,- .., .. .• • ••,•• . ! . . . .....• ‘',.. •••. \`','• I\ . . • • •• I, \s. , . II, . b .• • ,.,, •-•- •-•••.•••-•`..-.,;•-•=-- --.=--...— --, • ,. . \ k • s...:„ 1 . • . 1, . , %,,. ....... . •.!f.:, \ . . s ,• ,. 1/4. , . . \ ' . , 's ...:., • \1:a . • . . , . . I . .. . . ••,7,,,.:.‘`.\\•\ I . ' . •. ..., , • ..,,,,'. \'.*. ...-' ..\ ‘.•••'.. . • . . ,. • IS ' 9 I, •. • •. . , \•::•.: o. .N . , . . .., . , . . ., • , .. • ' . .1 ''' ' , , .. \ \:'.... ., - .'• :...:*".„:"..... \ •,. . • • '-'•':•,1 '`-'‘. .\\.-., . . . (-* •:1.i.:-.-.:7'.:N •s,, \ . ,, . • .',.. :...: \• . .,, • "?.•••:, \ -_. . • \ • '•1•:•.. ,I.v,..'N', • I . , . : \''•• ‘.:.:".. . I:*""•• •::•'.‘„...7.1- • / • , .. --.../ . , , • :. • .'1..ns• — ..:—.1'.• •••••,) ‘••:er'\,' . • . . . ... 1 • . , /1‘ •,......! --•! -• ., •• . • •••,.. ! / — •r •• -\\ •'... . . ••.,, 1 k 4.:Kak / A/..',. , •' ,*" I. s•,'. / . • ' , 1 I • ' . A',If I••1 . . •s .. • i i .• \, %', .•.R\ I I 1 . I : • . ti,,N) •.• .)- '. 6-;•,, -:-.9, //'''' ' I . .• , . . 1 i i 4 (... ..• • . ;. , , i ' . I • •, '4 ,.• I . , i • I: . I . ; • , .. . - • . , . . . • --. ' • ! . . . . ; P. . . . • • • t1/4, . . / i • I. .• ' • . • . . • 1'I ./ : ' / . i .';:: • . :,, .--- • . •-: ••, 67 I : •. • t••••1 I . .. / • . I ...-.1 • _ . ; • ,./ / , I 1 . _. . . i.• .;;;•.',:•---•./ .... ---Iji- • ! 1, . - .,.... /,; /- .. 'I'. - ' ' • . /,:il . , • I . . ..„.; / . ,i/ . . • I'••/ (.. • ,,i . .-' I'' / I . . . . . 1/4 ; i I . 1/4 _ , ; ' ;# j .; I1'''. . • • I i ''.... 1 : . 9. V. . • . ' . . .. . • ',...............-- • I 1 li.;• \ o'• . . • . \ 11 .•' • \v• • • . . •-• "‘. •Nii ..--- --.'•—• ', .. ' 9. ..!... • . I. \ ,,••.• ..• • . '' • ii.•:".. . , ' 0 8 0 . . . . . • t . 1 • . . a • •••/ •, . 4 • • , , .,../ \ / - N , , 4 . ''', . ','ri . .../ • / !. to '.\I- t.. , i Ts /il•j'• • l'...\.•• V ' . ..... . ' ./ •OP 4 1 / .. . . , . • 1 \.v, \ ' , • .00 ,,• 2 .i . . . • • s. . ...7 1 . ...-i. \ . . .• V .::...../ „,.............',. to /...ii i . . • ... , . I /I ,' • \ \ .... ,. . ,•:.....:...., , . . ./ . . • . • .._._- . . / •III • \ ' ,, . . ..... . 1 . , , • \.., /8 • 1 .\ • . v.. \ i•-,- . <•10 • . 1 .;\ \•... - / .6. \ , C.• :. -‘ It tp 41,0 0, \ ,• \ • s• O \ 't . 4 , I I • 1 • • ,\,‘,. \ •• \ § ‘\ ‘\\ 4, N ....1... \ ..,...%.:1 , N \ e*• 'Z''' % 3' . k . . . 1 •••• ... •, .ril V .', • I ''.'..••.:. \ • .. i 18 1 r) t 0...- • / ...5 . 1..t, \.:.,. i .. I' N . . 7.•A C:, . I - Pi ' I . .' ..• -... • ••\ \ . •,•:. '\ \ . • I''''' ‘ • I •!') g , I I& . - . •:\-•.... •. . • . . `‘,. '', • ‘ i , . „. . . . . , \ _,......._. _......_ • '-' I 1 to ' O , , . . ••:; 1 • • O . ..,. . . • t . , (91 ' ' . . . .• - • • i (. • ; . • • • • i 1 , ''' ': - I II 1 il g . I Alik, 5,,i 3' •:. . ,!,vt,. ,A BLACKRIVER TECHNOLOGY PARK r.o ;.,, 2 '• . '''' It.1 •i•?7,i ' 1 •••••• •'•:''''.' .,•:;''k? ''J4. '- -,:c-,-/,,,q 0 ALTERRA CORPORATION . . , . ''''‘‘ . i• ":' • 5 t,V",'..' ', ,',.'r•i*.n;.-.1 '"• '.,•" ':''•-- . . ..ar,' ' ' `-• '''''.': ' %.:'''.:'; ''''Vat*,',":+.'-' 710 CHERRY STREET SEATTLE, WASHINGTON ‘i .s. or pi . ;,.. 1 VC,1;.,''',•;•I''',,,' ''•-••••ii- .4.1••_,;...V„z^. -•': ••';',1r1 r rs-' • !! ,• .'••; -,4 /,t-r•,..•'...•••c'w. • •• ,T,..,,t-in 1., 1 'RENTON, WASHINGTON . l• ...-.4',4.-,--,, ,--,.. -,-‘4 ,i,,,,-,041-. , -1.,,. ..,,,,,,••:,.„.„,„-,.. -, - • ..4.<4,,,,,1„.„,,,,„.,4 ,• • • . , • ,- , i . • • . , . I • ..) \•.r... C4412:00) la In 0 1 • . , i 1 4 1 1 h. ..ii.... ..,.. . . , . ... .. . ,. .„N - ,,!... s„'.•.k\ ....0.Cf.,71' •,,••••• .... N.:. ‘ •• \ \ ,IS . ...2., :\\ / ' \ ‘.. \s \/ .0•-t)) \ • ‘, A\ • %Rz. \ ..,.:\> • i , '.s........ • : i.,' t•.. \ ' , .•` . .... \ •\.‘ I ‘\k , • r •• . , \ ... •,`., . . ... . ., ,i, • ''.....7,‘ 1..............._2\'' \ '‘. :•.S.'‘..",\. ,, 1 \‘,.. ,.. -,.. \ .. t , ‘•'• '••,:" \ ...., ............ . eas.n Mil el licaulti:.\ • i _ , A • 4 . • • 0 \ \ \ • (")'1 • , r , , , • r . ------------- z;'.. ..---- • PO \ •• • \ , . ' \ •• ,s • • \ , \\ \ \ • .. •,, . '' , • '• I . - •• I , •4 . \ I . ,-• . .. • I -.• • ..' ' \ \ \\ ... • .. ' \\\ \ I ...... . ., . \ .• IA • ... . -`••\ \ "\ s \' . , •_. • • , s. • I 74' ' —.----, ,..S, \ • • . ' ,, • ' \ '., :1 ,...--„ ' 4- • , ---- • \ -.•( / •:: \ . .! V• ,, . •1 \ .• .. . •.:,',‘ / / , , , . 1 '• , \ ,,, I • \ , ,•\ ., 't I ‘ I i • P.) 0 . 1 0 Agir. Ma , •• Mir g I ' -14, i'• 1 ) . .,•sn'..j • 1 N i 1 BLACKMER TECHNOLOGY PARK , ..,. ,, ,,,te,..t.,,,n., . ,- ,,vi . , 3 Ilc.1,'.4••'' •4 ° ALTERRA CORPORATION r "" . .•• •, t - b r.• it• 4':'.' ,`'e':'.0..,:k 1, . '1 '' 0 tp . , R \ -'1ot•P 41. ., 710 CHERRY STREET SEATTLE, WASHINGTONV ., RENTON, wAS1-INGTON 1/4., , ,,,, iiil 1 46'!i;,),•:,:t..1‘i,..%:..:,iitp:111 walk :,,,,,.#41,7.0,7; ! ''S5ff,Z"..",:1•47.1•2`1.`e'AL.-.1-,'Oi'W.* •'''' _ _ i ) • . \......... : - ,..) • I I , IMI • ! \ i `•-e, ' k \ . 1 '••• • ` ii. - -- --\ '•1/4•.'..'•, • ' , ,.. ......5..\.. \ \ , I ' ,.'.., ' .\.. '\,, • 1.- ... '''• • . \ I c .0... ...OW I! ' I . Oa . \\ . •,i, S.N .. . • .., •. , , \ • , I . 0 \ \\`.''17.... -.:•„, ., '''• ai \ , . I 1 ' ' ‘• r:\...''I. \ \ '' RQ - 1 i . - \ ,. •„ / 1,i ' 1 % ni\• \ ' / 11.11 '''• \r!1 s \ I •,.• r .., ....' •n'i• ... : i 1 • I •.. c. : 1 I L J \ I / i,' • ' • \ '1 : . 1 i , 1 •-•-•.., - •. ,i: , ..../ i i \ i - ,94'• //I,1 / i : 1 1 .1 -.. : 7 , /'''. • • / i i , I; t i I • I 1 I • I • i'•/ i I i ! ' ' / .//' I t 1 i'c • i 1 • ', • i ,.„1 '• •., ‘.• .." ,. ' l''• .' ."1. It •••• t /t i 1 s \ / , ..., ' ..../.••• I • •.... i N •. . i I ....' I\ \ ......... , ,... . , . .„ ... .......• .. . , / ..././../... -..,. „ , ...„ . • . .._., i .• •,... : ..c./ .., ,.. • • ....._........ . i .., • -. -.... I . • ct, 1 / , // • ... ...... . • • , .:., . .. . i! i / .'. .... • , • 0 -• -..J.i i , .. • .•••. , , • . ,i. .: : . • ., ...- r \‘ k •Ve• , % ) . / ... • I '. \\\ \ti, • ..•.'.'s•.. --.,r / --, I „ I V .'.• ..... .' .... ... ..1— \ , ill ,\\\ ... , •. ...,•... .. . • . . ..• . , . . .. , ..: . ... , . • , .. . .. . . ., • 1 t .,.,. _ • .. , "" \ ,..,..: • .:, \ . • , ... , . , . .. 1 -, • , . . .., ,,,,- ••:.;] i • I . \\'. %•••• •-•••• / \.•,••\''.''••• ..1.::• •'• • , . f , li •I.. ,' ii `.7s .•;‘. . .' 1r .,., . ! '', •!.,,1 / , . • ! .., ,, . . r:, •r • . , .•,,,.. \ \. „ .• , , . / , I ...\'....'' .2 'r''' .",:•-. .., . I . ••.. ,. •. .1 1 I / I , I \.. t', \-.../ .•''-,.. '' •. .. I I , ,. .. , • ., I , ' 1 I ' \ .\ . ;‘ , s• . "....' 1 I . „ .'• i ! . • r • . , . . , “ \ \ ,..• • ••• ' ''.% . 1 1 r st.. ,i. . . •• —, --.\\ , • • \ . • .. . •• • ' -•,. . •• I • \ \ s' ‘',N‘' ••''. •.. ‘• , . .1 : ' ' .. •"'•.. \ s..\, s, • ..s, •' I I . \. •. ' . '•• ''. . -- \ / / •, • , , 1 • \ t I. •• I ; ; • ;r•--...:. '`'Z\-: I t ( t o . • • 1 .,•. I . .. ' '',. .. -.-I ,-„:: •':;•,:., \‘.''• n.-, ,:,.. ,'. •... ' ',. ••• , I , •;/..-• • ••\"s i''s."!-- ......:•••:-S.; •••• s\',-, - • . . • .%/. • . • •""•• . '''' ' • '• s'•N ...'••••..',•:.‘:‘:.•7.. ,:.. ,..... I • 1 , . • /..,„•:X.'• . . '-• • \ , I 1 •••'7•.:*. .• ';'-', • ^,::: .... •-. , 1, ' •'1•-• •••':'..; • ' \ - / • •••• . . , N''s.1".: .:....• 1 ..‘........\'''''+ n' \'. ••'..''....'1‘.• . 01 \,...., .., ., , '•.. ,.. \\I •., . • '., '• . . \\- -,- .9 r• .i r ''(. . . .' .. .• \. ‘''s•N':,....'.. \ c' ( • .- '• 1' \ '\,r. ,••'',' ! •-.. -:-.-___ . .• ••••.' , \\ • s . -:\ '''' .'....' L . I I ,. ......., . , , . tr s ,\ . , -, , _ 0.„,....„. ,. . ...-.. . , . .- . ,,.. , • ,p•,..• • ."• ' ' 1 -.....,,,.. t.„....i, .,, •....„. ...... . ..._______ BLACKR1VER TECHNOLOGY PARK 63 ALTERRA CORPORATION ,,...." : 1 710 CHERRY STREET SEATTLE, WASHINGTON ,,.../.. I. RENTO" WASHINGTON •_ „ , . . ,. qt.,_ , 1 • - , — •---,,,,..liv.: ,,,,e , , .:,1,,,,,, *4. .,,ntii,-, ,:..,:'...p•',,.., ,.. '.•.•.•'..i. ‘ ' ' 461 ; 1:rs, a.4-4, -........:-....;•!..;-t ni,., , ,,,,. , . ( 44 :9'. p ').••• 1. 1 1...*•• -: )••-", ••ea t ` l'''''!„,, ': • • 1 R ,,.' '1 A. :: ..-;r,ckfAlk,1/41,0 fi t,.., ''411.,•,,, \ ---.‘", ., 1: 4 1 I. ,. ,::t..!t rlt.1'4:4 ti ht' -: , .. • ••..,-44.1),.--.,.4 y'4,4',.,•....q/v,.:.; •-.II,o'• ..... r.... . . 4 ::'';;;",r,:^.;14,4tAl.,;4,-,,,,,,c 4,ise-;,,, ,,,,304t/' •••.“ •,,,.•,/,`;`,..?` , // 1 o �- • , �2�j - -_o_- - - I _ s - - - ".. .._.._ _:. e.'i i sue ' DITCH LE 20.1 .� - ;' _Jy u ... __ : . _ _ x ".,.+c'c 3i, . _--/ _�� ..err' t� , � - - - raa a� - - — - — - �` ,,a_. . ; _ � ...::_,._. drill - - - • -...,,"'-''-. •._.' / - fir' • j�, • DITCH •• I.C. , . -__E_-, 1 ;/ ,Y. •..'„, :_ri•*_.,.:.. 1 ,.. --� v/00 ,5•e .003 _------ --- -- . ----•- ----._._.._ ;_..;..;...,:;,.;..;,.-....-.- __,.- .-.---:.. -..-..„...-.. • _____.-;•— '_.-_--_'-'--,-..•- ---.--:__ _--"_-_----- _____.____„. —.. _—J-, . . • flOW it z. t i .i.,1, ''ter ��— ,,-.._...,;_.. .,..„..,. 7•.....-..,...y..,..:.. ,..' ....„.____...T•a sz_.4_..__t._-._—_—_.. ___' .. • . . >.Ci.4C..., . . 25 , . , / i 1 ® ` - --- /� \.............„„e..........i-a'• • •-.• ' i 0 4 Ei .in„, • IX ,, �Dircri.Le. n.� � .�- o 1• , d '' � �'�' ' wV.DIDITCH 741.9 v' . _ - /• • CC �a CC Q� a • _ 'J • DlTCl/le !B • �� - [S®a�l7t�� ® i• ammo / ��-:'�� b4,CC ® . y ......i._ ii. , , tl •t,.i lrEia 1 / ti \ • \� 1 \ � � ., r..1• •d AACE17.:1) -IPt -�®� r• - io. ®� t � B A. _ • r \ \ /2'C,6/P :GA::F1 F-".L6EkG t'• . 7..Th At.„ 7446.. ,,,,---- • ...,i \1", I. - ,'ram. • �',TcLt�- -,...._ ..!__M• .. I E. /4!G0 L. 44 n.+e...eeesr i tu.t ______- ____ ______,Ai: . • _._:: p May �P 20 0 40 I _ " �"'. .., • • • • i . •( r. . • • . . , •;:,,.,-"k-,..z:-.. ...i....,,(7-,4,'"t„ • i `'.4....'. ..... ' ..41:.;.:44;'e:7:i.;;;....:-'.:•'71.:::„:..,i,::,'•.4:41Z..s..,,,..:zi; . . „.,.--....74".;.--,-,...e,. -::,'''..•;.. . 1 ,•-•-•,-,•,,,,,; 7k.'...4: .----A. "'111.C.);\,\\\..\\..:::\\0..• , ... --.1....f._ ,..., .1,'.„..1:7,..j'.,,,..r.-2:....--11-,.40-;-:?. ' .0•.,---,W.'S" •.: '''''.f...:", • • --,..' `....gui„,:".,•44.... ...t.' 1/4,1c- ,0*,-.:•:0,4 1.......e, ',,'",e-k.:".,••`:: -;'',.'.7'..--; `,.?%..x4'..:•••`-`-'-'"-42:4'. `-'••••t",,Y,--7.--,....•:' ' ,..5 • . . Xs . .,., • —a'''. --'-..:•.;--...,:e•••-,f....4......; I . ' . " 0'.48LQW/72.0--04-12-•,: - ----—'---— - --- ---,, 1 . - - . o .., -... - VI:X\ ••. \ e -P'N ''' "---- L-_-_-7..-,=_--1-----.':".7.-_-.,-.-..z..:_-_-_-__::::::;-":......••4; \ ..., , -I • • . -. I ...."- . -7.--...1-.,-..7z....,7,..q-.- .r...=-=:-_=--:.:.',.,...... ...2'.. ...--....' .. ,! I-, - -. ..\..' • •, -\''-. ...„_...• ... A ,Z.. \) .... , • ''''' ,..\ I I . ......." . 'v-arc ... ... .,...• __ __ _ __ _ _ ____ . I 'i 'e J ....•...... —''.-- ••- ,'... .. \.\ e` .• ---- - .0 • '''''.-N••- \ i . - .... - ...c...=.....C.4.2cTrafti r ". • \I..`4%.7Z---,-,-• _,...:r-_-..-h\ '`.., \ \ ,.. : Ar• i Z - - .' . .. • '--,..!:..- N .\ \sN -----1--- :.- • .- - /9 . \ •-"-.' ••`.:6-.\.4 . .,, ,..„ ... \ ... . ..... % . .-. , . .• • . . . ..:. , • ......----\ •••,:. -\ '..... -. . , • s?"- ---.-."..\\ - , / • . .• 1 . .4, . r ....... . • • j• • Ns., • •,. '... v.!, \• . , . . [ ; E. 14.-S--..7----. . . / 11,17c.frIzell • • ' \ COMTROL FE,VCE • \•_, i '...‘.. ' ' \ .••. .. I- . ..• .• • ,.... . ./. . .•' ,,'",.'• . ..42",•...? • -...._. ‘• \ - \ ' \•• . . N • i 1 , 1 ..---i.e. ‘. 1 i. '‘..,''.. ....:• •1 . ; .• e I .. I. .". . ..• ... 1 . • 1 . .I.• ;': . \ ‘....\...• . ....,0 . . \11 1 / 0 e•-• .. • ••;t- , „. . , , 50"Ow -4,4 . . . DJ TCN /.6\05 L.4 ,-- • ...,,, ... •.. ----,. . . i .-300 e/.0•7$,2./4;, ., k .1 \ • - ,• •s I I/ -..... N`s..,...•..N..•- ,,• •.•...1/4...., . ‘.." .....`‘..NN ... i I:i1I • .1. , .• • . • •.. ',//,'.'.'-';,''..-.-e 1• .ig'•A . / _.-.-••. I/ i/i,c•...20f-s-;•. e /.'. kj • 367cw ..t.L....v._.I ,.. .\. s•1,t • ..„--,A . ... .. - ,,•f,- J - _ ZO . /III..-.:'I1".•% / .../-/ -. •;• -4;:• ..........„.......„........„.„....................-----::.:. • ." :- :•• ....- ,!. I ft.. -.Z.' „, , . . . ••• --- • : // ' \ • \ • ,. .,. ..••.... . / ; , • ., - , ,/,:' ..--'.. , ,... I ,''... ',. ••••••-- .-- 's, - • .. .4 -.... • ... E . - Aeo• . •-•.• .- _---..,... . _., ..........______________ • i CS „,, • • • ..- -•... - ‘N ' • '---„,.., .-- - WEST SEOIMEIVTAT/OA/ POMO ./." N - i 0 ZEr3 , . . .. • - •. I .s.•••',.:` et. .s...i.'( . . . • ..- i• .. , .4. . • / .,/ / • ' N." .1) .. , q) SEDIME,AITATIOM ' • \ ; -.. .- / V) . s ••• POMO dOTL-ET /I- ----- ------, .. . ••'' S . . •.... • ., - , ...., • 1.---"---..----1 t I/ le i • . • .•.--- '/ \•••• .. Di crr C-9.. , • • ...• ! • .. • I \! .. • . . , , . 1 ',. / • • • i .• '• 02 .27' , ..---""sf '! - • ,. 7"",..A... li.., ....• . i•• ••• '. • \------...-. . .. ... . . ' ‘ 4.,;',- Nf‘ 3., •t, • • . • ' A .'-l.E.• /ZOO •• - i• !,.....I .> I. -/ / .. /,/ .• e • Oa CD X i. .7 •./ . ' \ 1 \e'r \` .„. • ,. : . . .! .1 . / . • i M =I.. Cf) -; / . 4 , •• . e - ..../ , • LLI 0 LU < e ‘C.—.--N_50/7"a/LE. /4•11- -•.-------. ... •i . •.1,./; ...*: -*•'. . • • Cr/ / • .., • • • • •rs t. t .,- : • ,, .•i.''• '..7'L. \0•..... \rN-.`,..,, . •--.-\--•:.-.-.\---.N,1,:....,e.,, ...e."...---...._.-:_.._._.-,...l-...,._.et_a• _._14:.6,11,=_,2..........._z_O:uLl:seaL u:_It0iiS.:.....__•-__•.‘.•.,.•.••••.•.•.. •-•••.••••••e.-e•m...•so-».-w-•.••..e.-...... .. -. . , _______ :4'...\..:„.4.;:11-3...I.Peomanuau ....)•,'.', ."-!—r‘'1-7-,-„•-•:•4/*U-M.•../ rC..i14.,.--I.w..E..um__wm1_5_•w m5_w.u9_._s.'.W..1.4.m.y......,kW. .• 9Li.31 i c / •.-,-.e:,• .-., ••'.4 i.i•.'' ........-•••.-_-...,.•7;io•••- •••.••,•••,,.••.•' '.,• ....- S.000/74 / . °ITCH .- . . 1 iCir0x•.0C• 0Zu. -----7/7,1737.—v--.7—"--."----,,.: ,-.1-IVa*"" . munur-v7arrlerwww.l.taupci.e.,.......,,,,,p 14,PP M.VUMWALUALWWIPWMWM117.1TarirlaiqUOUWAMWAidaDWV:MMINUVALIMMDM2W.WWM61.111 ....'. .'N "..';.:!:;••:. N 'vita/ , • . .. , .0 • • 'kit <r... CC - • EROSIOA/ • .• ....,:1•;":....' . •• ,.... CONTROL PEACE \27014P SLOPE AT s•••••,;;_-• ,•,... ..,. ' 'i •• ' ,...t. . - • • 0.0/00 TO DAYL/GRT '--?I''.. EX/57711G STORM • •:- RI TREA/CM • •:? , DRAM/ TREA/C1/ GRADNO&FILLING . (..) I : • ',.'--• . • ...... WO -1".•- •._ . . •••••„, -".• . ; . ,.. ...... -............. ... "!. . ...... .. .. ) ..I • , gum.mmommlow - '''.... IKey Map . 4-,,,,:' C ••••'-'•.4.'",- 20 t) i:k.'''•:',' ....m...• 1 .. Ml. I " • . -)\'\io ' ,....1 1 = 'T..\ TT! I . . : ........ • .........__H \e...../; I I • i t • r:v 5'1)1.4 ‘, 1 . . 1.1 /:, -• - - 1 1 / oti /1)4 �. — — n .>. ._. .. /'/' : -.„, • • C e. O i / ,• // i ' • / ..' / 1 / . . , . •: N i v, % �� • • ... . . • . / .. I \ ..,.!/ ..' . :., .. I • ' `N .. .,i. / , • / 1/ • ......N .....z• / y \ \.. . . / 's, /1/ / '- ' ' / N7 1 / ,../..„ i../ "0 • ,..i , , / / • J—. .% '61%4 u'f a 0 ' , .... .. . ,/ . i''/ ,,,/, :::,... , ,: // • L. ' /41u , i ./. ... , . ,c..s/./, ,,N\N: , • .. I / I / / °4_ • / / %1-- • / I /• /:'-;::'••••••':// I I I 1 I •/ \ ..•/.... , / .'''.:. y to I. . j �� / j" , • `/ • t e�c mti�/: • 1 I. • • 2 /'/ i/j'lS / 1 14t , ../7. ,''<,'. i ' y le,� j 7, \ .s ty' I ® P. / HMir . . 8 I II r�' -' .�i* g I S a BLACKMER TECHNOLOGY PARK ik ; . ,CtW r, r a ALTERRA CORPORATION ° ij . _ ' }, , sfl710 CHERRY STREET SEATTLE, WASHINGTONS ., • c'- ..".. z L RENTON, ail{Y ASH NOm TON '� • '1t,�cy9 C i �14,F.Eg, r� ' ; �`� ''•ry _"i. 4. - 7 • x I I , . . . . .• I ... . .3 • , • I •,, \ • • INg5.321134---------3 .., . . 1 • . ' e •nr., /7/7 —• •-- •• : I r___._.________ ,7_,Th,i5i\I ..,:'Ci,;., i 1! i ,%• 1 , 0 .. 'a:'.?./0 t 1. ILk.is\ ,, • ...- ..1 ..',. ..-.. ." .7.1.1\ .... , 1Y --7/;',y _s , ...)r,'I 1 1 t t- 1 % I ;,•••'.. . • \ 'c• .7, , ' (lil i .1 1 '• .1 '/- z , • A All .:,.././...,,,,, /,- ...i . \ \ • c, : -, ,,, t,,,z):,14,40,,, , :, , ..! i ;;:, 1 , .,•,.,.....//,;•, /, ,7,--, 4 1 . - "• ]gnoi . • ' i 1 ,* / t., '',.• / .".• . .. /•:••;,./...": ..7/ , f . -...... . 1 , 4 ,• ,.,... , . , ; i ; 1 , . ID , e fi a„.,, 1 .•;,--•,. . • k g, ••• I r• • 'I.13••,,t:..•/ a /I t „•••',././ . / 4/..1.7••::/.:':;/1/ \ t, r•-•••"'' `41 , ,. ................„...2 k :,-, .g.. 11.. : i)! 1 I 'F‘). ; •E , 4 , ,,..,.t, , ,,,/ ; ..1, //,... P . „is.. (,_. 1 . 11 :•• .1. . ' ...• • , 4 ' •• "/ I // /1 ...• •• ,,... ' . ---.. '".C. I.\i I //,:',.i.S:i .1/7‘.•.---•.Z. • " ' " ' % 1.-; _,i .1//X/ ./ .'"•!. e \ :-...... . -- t".• e ' i . ..r•• z•, • • • •' A / t„ / .../.......11./ I i?, 03,, •. -. • '-., — -- ri .. ••'". '30, • , /-1—....1, i ,11 ' " • . • / se4V.k ut , ' S.:). •,', './ ., /7 /''.., •• ko :' a .. \ 4-4 • ,/.....\. '1 4 C, ". 0 \ :.....,b. •,\ ., . .'.•.•;•:',./ • • 0 •:.' / ,' 't, • o.... ; / •i a ,r..: to it.- :\. '-,,. I., .... ,..." ! P. . ../..,.: .i ,,t:',./..:.•.:1 • -- ';' :f:''''''1 /\\ • .....• .... o i '.• I i • • 4.. . • -. . ' i"•• ' ', -. ,.• 1/ ''...•.''.l'i it,.I /4-'''J . .. .. ,....-..., 1 , . .. ' •'. - . 1 1-,,:' . .. • • I ,- •.. \ ' •., . \ . :„ / • / i ./....! '':.?, :I/ ill I I i j . . • -111 ••• •••, . •--------"--- ..........°. \ I . 1, • '',1 '1."... •• '.. ‘ \ ..,,hy..... .. I 1 Pri s-, ', ' i is,-;'• '-..... '- '•..•.. , 1 /11.•:7!..., 1,.....4,..;,/1 41 ,- • ill,. •••• • , ri 9 . . ••ii ....' / ,./.. . • / ii` ".•f:', . ."t 61 I • / / ,*•3',:•••• ..1 / / / AI I 0 . / I i I .C•7 1-• „. I i I . , ' , ....,.. I . .. . /. .'1:.1.-,::,. , • . • • ,. • • i ,,,1 • / .1'.••7 ,. i //. ... . .• 1 i•• // ..... .• s...). / / • / . E ',-1 f / 1/4. t s;:.' .: /. i •J....\ • / r.,Z1 • 4 .., ! 41 .. // I 11 _ .... r I " : if 1 • 1/ :.... :::.•! •.. .11 .. n' Q,....";7 ....;•,..,../..,/ ‘.• /„ 1 • ‘43.4• .• n! P •1' i /." i i ' . . k , 1 ... 3 ,'' •••••;: ..// ;.* . .1...: • ii • .-L___ .-111 II ' •. / el • , . ----/ I '' '' l• ''' — 'I . . • . I . ... ..1 . .:[. ,ii. . . .. . . • i 'i ?A I I .... ... •• • • if . 4,, -7.,..;;,/3.-/ ,I f, . . ..•, / ' 7 7I'.. - .1' • , .:lc,,•••t- I . .. I 1 I • . , , A /sz. (4 1', , •• -, rrio . ..: •;,- , ,' .i.':,,,711///// // /1 1 . cc 1,) .. •.• • 1 • t.,,tt3 " / i.;•i .,,'•,;';•,,-;./ i; . . 0 It 3:. I 1:-. 1 . •/ 1/-,"/:•'„•111/ '/'', ','•:'! z ,, ,, „1 , . 1 . _ _ ____ ___— R- --sit -- 1. i: • - _ • 0&e, ;1,,,,t pi :I. `.. V I ' • i 'I ni •''''3',,1 li • . ' i k .-- I I :• . -,- i • 1 1../// : •; ' Vi...• • 8 :. . :v.••• , i ' 01?1..•••- k ! k•* . •.,. • il /;;PC-, I _ . , • . • ,f., 11 , 4..' „.:',.,:;,:i f /1 ... • . 1 ,i ...• • . . / 0 ,.. , , ; . . • ,... Nso.y.p.1 "-..... //v ' Y'is'';' ,,.4i , . •• hiv'' 0. 's ; ,: iit t4 ....0 i i.4•i-. :-. .i '.... , t. ' i' i' . ./ :' (Vs'N.i 1 . . i i.I . i; .:.•::::" ....;(1/ (1, , k ''• I // i"' ., ils .C4 • !, • ./ / • •'4 k /i // / t p. k ev 1 1 •1-:'. ! -.. ...I 3 ..:'•//.../l'ii.,;/../,',/:,' i .. • •„t) I / . / '•;/ //-i..'s. - : ,. .., -4 ,.c., , : / i ./ . '•• ...., 11 I. .• \ ...).,P14 I 3 .!/ / i i. • 1 I h , 1 • . I j : , ; •-•v.„.:. . ; . . --,I j •• •, •••••!., ...i. i i i,• 1 ; . t. ,.! ligitfr . j ;•• 1'; •••1.1.i . I • . , . . IF VP • Sr i • • . ••i l PO . , . , • ,. , titi •:,:.,. -.7 1 , , , 1 .z3 1 1 • :.• i i • 1 '"..1 f:-. .../ I I .7.: .. •.. 91 I . i/ / I'1,,.• I I • k t I • ..i /./ if; • 1 • .•• . . . A b /. n. / „. r --g, . \.: ,„.. . , 1 . I , , • ., '3 •• • .. 'I i A.7.,; j, ,.•,..... 7.,. .:;1 I i • . .e. .... k fd 1 .. • i ; .......,. 1 ' •. .,.....• % .• . . i / . ...'•• ;J 1/1 ..;•.:' l....,...... ,,' /1,2 • • 44,,.;,,,.. , ' . , 1 • '',...:. 8 = . . q. 1 / \ I 1 • I i:J ‘ / .' ':- •. I J • ,,,' .: ... t. ., i •i' .6• , .. :. .,' • 1, / . . ./ Na '. , C. ,.. •;.. I. / \./ ; : 0 • fa7t 4; • . ,,__ '.' ‘,..:‘ . d / !/ //• ..... \( . „.,,, ,'/ / •/ i , CD , • ,. ... • , . , , tY i 1 . t• v ,.• /• ,, ./ .../..., / ..,' • • I I J, I j L A C K R I V E R TECHNOLOGY PARK 1 .41 4,• 't e' A.-1.- '4'''''-''S.Z':' E 2 0 • its . 1 ll, '''''''''' 's' .1'3.-v 'f.— • --, ; A' ,.. . • ....,.; t,,,,,„;i ,.., 2.4 •,,:.1 e • , 0:: ....-; ALTERRA CORPORATION . 0, 710 CHERRY STREET SEATTLE, WASHINGTON . , ;;,4•,$• ,z, .,p:.,,,.,;-...., ..P,,,,,,4,-., 1.. %,--41 ' u 1-$),•L r.,1 '. 'Ail R•I'.''',b.icZref°3', ..:3‘s)':::31.-'•'; '1, g ":-3, 11:A nENTOF '-VASHINGTON .,. , •V..4 , . i '1 ......,. I,". ' , .., '• V,...e.,,A. Iii%:rib., •'il..''''' .•`•. • . ... .. , I -... I I 1 . t - EX/STING CULVERT PE4E - t '�"� -' r------ p� {Oa�YCA,. Y...741aY NO Y^ tea'. -- \ EROS/ON COVTAtlC FENCE TO BE •y �`• ow s�o'tEs eEZD^r G parr/cln E. EXISTING CULVERT FLerC /' � _{� L7/SCNARGE 7 CFS v WEST L DITCH-, H-, �� ` \ �� CONTROL a7CH -... r Y4,- -Ti,„„........ scope scope-aoofT 1 ` �- s•aon/® p l -- ------------- \ , LBj �(� _ ��ii iTTrr -- — — --- — — `_� �V°DITCH-� �® Q � - - -- ^ 0 Cic -- QG3KtT[On J ERGS/OM/ , TEi•PORAAr . CONTROL FENCE WEST SEO/LENTd T/ON --- �, CONTROL POND \ N. TEMPORARY i ® WEST TOT/L OISC/(ARE5 CEMEE EPOSION AST 5ED/MENTAT/ON / 6*7.2_9=/.i 9 CFS CONTROL D/TCN µEST EA?OS/ON POND .�P�{.L O- s-0.00/7t ' , CONTROL DITCH Vy� 5-aoofT� EXIST//.G CULVER TE/�\AA\Y� "'Ii. PEAK 7-''' ) 7çDcHAET iii"'��� DISCHARGE TO�— Er/;T DITCH. ES TI/dATEO <� 2LACK'R/VEQ �CAPAC/TY 50 TO 712 C'S TO BE CONSTRUCTED EXIST Lwow ESTIMATED BY 07/E,G5(CHGJ • C 0 APAC/Tr A22 70/ CPS PLAN � EROSION CONTROL PLAN GEOTEXT/LE {1S _ (TD DY'TURe-0 SIp .) o r 0 CC rr �-4 L.J/ EO GRAVEL `�' • 0.. ..... O - - • .. . 3/4-WASHED GRAVEL Q5-GALV- OR EA/OS TO BE WELDED - ° • AK.I/-CORIM,>Ivt TO 0.75'O/A: EPAA4E • BOLTS AND NUTS >4' G. PLACE SUPPORTS •• -•• ��`� • TRASH SCRCEN G TO 5 FEET DC. SEE DETAIL _ U 9quII z EROSION CONTROL FENCE ' twwwAlz Section NTS '�� a7s-D/A. W _� max. 9'SPACING `'`_� ' FRAME °57 Z. l g Plan Plan BLti cc 0 - --- ® Z �J !2 p a.coa = TRASH SCREEN _ TRAPEZOIDAL ®ITCH ti l s �`` Section RTTS DP I �' 1pBY .I�~I ^.. - a-- - i_EA-Q?5_'n d'a 5' _ w °Of ° ' $ 3/4`WASHED GRAVEL STRIPS WELD TO - ��- - ALL STEEL AaR7S A/UST 1 -Will .. C!TS-aA. FRAME - } BE T-A/.VAN/PED dN0 - ® @ 9 11 - SPACE UN/FORRILY ASPHALT COATED ��<kkk C -'• 1 (TREATMENT I OR -_ BETTER). �.te PERFORATED I Section PIPE ection Elevation SLI 7ACE tl91TEA 2 2 /EROS}OA1 CONTAOt - f /177. Aa 11412 SEDIMENTATION POND OUTLET TRASH SCREEN s o�' , a.rmat PETS SLOPE OP Pd-(S ' circle O Q FT- - --'�- . "V" DITCH Section PETS sMs • • . STATE OF .WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF KING ) • • • On this day personally appeared before me Kenneth L.; Thompson, to me known to be a General Partner, of JAG-RENTON ASSOCIATES, the partnership that executed the within and foregoing instrument,, and acknowledged the said • instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument . • • �Give�,n under my hand and official seal this day of / /.. C•. , 1982. CD C Notary Public an and for ,.'t'11e , State of Was ington, ,resi��.n�q ,� . • CO at _/'/4.1_, _,i/'//!) j •.4. •- • r �• •! 1• ';. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. COUNTY OF KING 4 On this day personally appeared before me Merton Cohen, to me known to be a General Partner, of JAG-RENTON ASSOCIATES, the partnership that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said • instrument. • 07.24Z. " ven ur}d er my hand and official seal this __ day of ,C(•-1flL4 .'z.S,.. 1982. • ary Public nd for the, ;';•i.' ;� • State h ton, residing ,,, ion at • • • • • • • I i • i. 12/17/82 • 77'92B • 9 • • • STATE OF WASHINGTON ) . ss . ' COUNTY OF KING ) On this .day personally appeared before me ./f: 41 and - _ _ __ to me known to be the 'I�••,. ; , /�:, t and respectively, of JOHN B. HANSEN, INC. ; the corporation thatlexecuted the within and foregoing 'instrument , and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free and ' voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses . and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument, and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of Said corporation. ro Given under my hand and official seal this 'r =1 day Of c',r , 1982. C • . • CO • ,,I�, Notary Pub1'ic in and for the � � T • State. of Washington, residing • at , . state. Al" ► I �•P fa 1 f''�,. ' I STATEIOF WASHINGTON ) ss . COUNTY OF KING ) • On this day personally appeared before me Jeanne B. Hansen to me known to be Secretary-Treasurer of JOHN R. HANSEN, INC. ,Ithe corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be the free .and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that she was authorized to execute said instrument, and that the seal affixed is the corporate seal of said corporation. Given under my hand and official seal this 31st day of December, 1982 . , J • Notary Public in and fox-.the State of Washington, ,ryes in • at King County. ., .- • • ,••• ,'••'I,IJ11111,,,',• 11 12/17i/82 • 77928 10 l OF 2 . m ...-.,...o..r►.•,,:T.• I". .,,^.,,r.....—'----•— EXHIBIT 1 TO . AGREEMENT PAR. Et A: • THA ORTION OF THE• SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13v .TOWNSHIP 23 • • NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M.v IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; AND THAT PORTION OF .JUNCTION ADDITION TO CITY OF SEATTLEv ACCORDING TO T :� PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 12 OF PLATS, PAGE 75e 'IN KING COUNTY, .. WASHINGTONv TOGETHER WITH VACATED STREETS ADJOINING WHICH WOULD ATTA TO SAID PREMISES BY OPERATION OF L= AW9 AND OF C. E. BROWNELL°S DONATI 0 CLAIM NO* 41 AND OF THAT. PORTION OfTRACT 26, RENTON SHORE LANDS 2N0 o PL SUPE'MENTAL, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: • c0 BEGINNING AT THE' SOUTH QUARTER CORNER .OF SAID SECTION 13; 1THENCE NOR 00° 8'28°' EAST ALONG THE NORM-SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SECTION 13 A DISTANCE OF 884.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OIF TRACT 26 OF RENTO SHORELANDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL MAPS, 1958 ; THENCE SOUTH ,72°37 °52" WE ALONG HE. SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 382�60 FEET; THENCE�NORTH 70°54°OZ" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A • DISTANCCE. OF: 73.50 FEET TO THE .EAST LINE OF THE CHARLES BROKNELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 42. AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING NORTH 70°54 °02" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 21 DISTANCE OF 281 .02 'FEET; THENCE SOUTH 73°56°O1" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTO BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 130.08 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 41°16°W WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 316.18 FEET THE JINOIRITH BOUNDARY OF A TRACT OF LAND DEEDED TO KING COUNTY AND DESCRIBED UNDER KING COUNTY AUDITOR°S FILE NO. 6607786; THENCE WESTERLY . ALONG SAID, NORTH BOUNDARY OM A. CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTEI OF .WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39°41°39" WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 627.46 FEET At ARC ;DISTANCE OF 434.70 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 39°41°39"; THENE NORTH A DISTANCE OF 25.00 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY; THENCE WEST A DISTANCE OF. 280.69 FEET ALONG SAID NORTH BOUNDARY; " THENCE SOUTH 59°53°47" WEST ALONG SAID NORTH . BOUNDARY A DISTANCE OF • 377.52 FEET; • THENCE SOUTH-74°13°19"._WEST ALONG .SAID NORTH BOUNDARY A DISTAN E OF 443.31 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF THE CHARLES HONSTE COUNTY ROAD; THENCE NORTH 34°18°31" WEST ALONG SAID NORTHERLY MARGIN DISTN E OF 43.46 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT—OF—WAY; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINEe THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 06°34°41" WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 696.00 FEET, AN ARC .DISTANCE OF 45.43 FEET THROUGH A CENTRA ANGLE OF 03°44°25" TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 10°19'06" WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1 ,055.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF • 209.95 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 11°24 ° 08" TO A POINT OF CON.POU CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT; ALONG SAID SOUTH LIiNE, THE CENTER DF. WHICH BEARS NORTH 21°43° 14" WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF 727.00 FEET* AN ARC DISTANCE OF 214.77 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°S5°35" TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 38°38°49 yr L t WEST HAVING A R-__US OF 1,571.00 FEET , AM ..AC DISTANCE OF 206.57 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07°32'02" TO A POINT OF TANGENCY ; THENCE 'NORTH 43°49 '09" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 91`.17 FEET TI A LINE 35 FEET SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE EXISTING HOST SOUTHERLY TRACK OF THE CHICAGO, MILWAUKEEQ ST. PAUL ALJ PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TI • THE ';RIGHT• THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 42°43° 18" EAST HAVING A • • RADIUS OF 696.89 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE Of 40.09 FEET THROUGH A CENTR&1 ANGLE � F 03°17145"; THENCE NORTH 50°34127" EAST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE AODISTANCE OF 248 .50 FEET; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHTU THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 39°25°33j EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 676.58 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 93.64 FEET THROWN GENIAL ANGLE OF 07°55°4700 TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE ALONG a) SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS 'n NORTH 1°29 '46°' WEST HAVING A RADIUS Of 428 .64 FEET9 AN ARC. DISTANCE C 0 73..32 EET THROUGH' A CENTRAL ' ANGLE OF. 0'9°48 '04f9 TO A POINT OF REVERSE o CURVE;IE THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT9 . THE .y CENTER OF WHICH• BEARS SOUTH 41°17 '50'° EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,580.74 FEET N ARC DISTANCE OF 437.40 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE1OF `� 09°42'39" TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE ALONG SAID PARALLEL LIN DN. Ar CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER Of WHICH BEARS SOUTH 31°35° 11" EAST HA ING A RADIUS OF 2,190.19 FEET9- AN ARC DISTANCE OF 784.44 FEET • . THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 16°12139" TO THEEAST LINE OF THE CHARLES BROWI EL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO.. 41 ; THENCE SOUTH 01°24 °04"I WEST ALA SAID EAST LINE A DISTANCE . OF 950.58 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNI 4G° . • , 0 • ••• • •1 I • ... .•,1 9 .. • '• it PIA di'i•,4g .•N •:?i •1t • _ • .rt. 11.d.i1• i..•r,. 1.• ..I •'i•• d 1 ..•: • •11•r!• II�Wit'•••1i•.Lt% , • 1 OF • EXHIB-1I:. 2' TO AGREEMENT` , . • • • • _-fz'-- " PARCEL B: • 0 THAT PORTION OF C. E. , BROWNELL;''5 DONATION CLAIM NO. 41, AND OF THE 0 SOUTHWST QUARTER AND . THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13v• TOWNSHIP ; o • NORTH, RANGE i EAST, W.M.v IN KING COUNTYv WASHINGTONv DESCRIBED AS 0 FOLLOWS: C0 , BEGO4N NG AT THE SOUTH QUARTER 'CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13;, THENCE NOR' 00°518' 8" EAST ALONG THE NORTHS.O'UTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SECTION 13 A DISTANCE OF 884 .84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 26 OF RENTON SHOREL4NDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL . H-APSe 1958 ; THENCE SOUTH 72°37 °52 WE; ALONG HE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 382.60 •FEET; THENCE NORTH 70°54°02" WEST. ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 26 A DISTANCE OF 73.50 FEET TO THE EAST LINE •OF THE CHARLES BROWNELL . DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41; THENCE NORTH. 01°24 °04" EAST ALONG SAID EAST LI E OF THE CHARLES BROWNE'LL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41 A DISTAZ . OF 950. 8 FEET TO A LINE 35 FEET SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE .EXISTING MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK OF THE CHICAGO, MILWAiUKEE? ST. PAUL C PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACKS AND THE TRUE POINT OF • BEGIN tli ItGr THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 1.5°22.°32" EAST HAVING A' RADIUS 11 2790.19 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 789.44 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLES 16°12p39" TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE"; THENCE CONTINUING' ALONG SAID --.-1 • 2 OF 3 PARALL L LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFTv THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 31°35e11" EAST HAVING. A RADIUS OF 2580.74 FEETv AN ARC DISTANCE OF 437!140 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°42° 39" TO A POINT OF REVERS CURIPE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 41°17' 50" WEST HAVING A RADIUS OF '028.64 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 730'42 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 0�9°48'04" TO A POINT OF REVERSE CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAI PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFTv THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 31°2i�9'46" EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 676.58 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 93. FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 07°55'47" TO A POINT OF TANGENCY; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG' SAID PARALLEL .LINE SOUTH 50°34°27" WEST A DISTANCE OF 248.50 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE ; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT THE 'CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 9°25 °33" EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 696.89 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE g3 40.09 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 03°17 '45" TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE 'BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY ; THENCE NORTH 43°49' 09" O EAST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE A DISTANCE OF 173083 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE •-1 RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 46°10° 510° EAST HAVING A RADIUS O OF' 4I030.00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 197.57 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANG1 4OF O2°48'32" TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE ; THENCE CONTINUING1ALONG SA. SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHTv THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 43.°22'19" EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1853.00 FEETv AN ARC DISTANCE OF 194.75 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 066O1° 18" TO A POINT' OF COMPOU1 CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGH' THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 37°21'0)0 EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1054'3.90 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 186.51 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE' OF O1°Q0`49" TO A POINT1 OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SA: SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHTv THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 36°210'12" EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 165700'0 FEET AN ARC DISTANCE OF 193.0 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE' OF 06642°20" TO A POINT OF COMPOUt CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO 'THE RIGH1 THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 29°37 '52" EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 6738I00 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF ([197.76 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE C 01°40°54" TO A POINT OF COMPOUND 'CCURVE;' THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 27°56'58" EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1768.00 FEETv .AN ARC DISTANCE OF 194.45 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 06°18' 06" TO A POINT dF COMPOUi CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO ,THE RIGH1 THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 21°38°52" EAST HAVING A . RADIUS OF 860300 FEETv AN ARC DISTANCE OF 204.54 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE C 01°21 '41 " TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHTv THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 2'0°1i'08" EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1922. 10 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 178.79 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 05°19'46" TO A POINT OF COMPOUN CURVE ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID CHARLES BROWNELL DONATION LAND! CLAIM NO 41 ; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 14°57'2200 'EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 2814093 FEET; AN ARC DISTANCE OF 659.42 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE 0 13°25 '19" TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE TO THE RIGHTv THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS' SOUTH 3 OF 3 . 01°32°03" EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 1165.09 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1997.05 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 53°57 °00" TO A POINT OF • TANGENCY; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE SOUTH 37°35°03" E . A 'hOI TANCE OF 308.70 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING AL SAID�SOUTH LINE ON A CURVE —TO THE LEFT® THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 52°24 °57°° EAST HAVING. A RADIUS OF 1005.37 FEET, AN ARC DISTAN •OF 45.82 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 02°36°41°' TO A LINE 35 FEE SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE EXISTING MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK OF THE CHICAGOo MILWAUKEEv STo PAUL E PACIFIC RAILR TRACKS.; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE NORTH 40°11'44" WE DISTANCE OF 126.24 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE ; THENCE CONTINUING ALON SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEAR SO TH 49°48 '16" WEST HAVING .A RADIUS OF 1829©78 FEET AN ARC DISTAN OF^ 309.67 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL . ANGLE OF• 09°41 °4809 ; THENCE NORTH C? • 49°53 '32" WEST ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE A DISTANCE OF 167.07 FEET Ti • POI NT OF CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ;ON A CUR' . TO' THE LEFTS THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 40°06° 28" WEST HAVING ',") RA'DIUS OF 1102.46 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 807. 11 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 41°56'46" TO A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE ; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFTgl THE CEN• OF'IIWHICH BEARS SOUTH 01°50'18" EAST HAVING A RADIUS OF 27901.19 FEETI ARC DISTANCE OF 659.24 FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13°3'2° 14°':_ TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. • • • . • • • • • ' I • • . • j • • • • • • • • • • • • I 1of2 EXHIBIT 3 Cr) I TO AGREEMENT � I � I PARCEL "C" THAT PORTION OF TRACT 25, RENTON SI-IORELANDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL; AND D THAT PORTION OF' THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SECTION 13, AND THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 13 IN TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST W.M., AND THE SOUTHW EST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, TOW NSIIIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 5 EAST W.M. IN KING COUNTY, WASI-IINGTON DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT 'TUE BOUT( QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 13; 'TIIENCI.'; NORTH 00°58'28" EAST ALONG THE NORTH—SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 884.84 FEET TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF TRACT 26 OF RENTON S1IORELANDS SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL MAPS, 1958, AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 72°37'52" WEST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID TRACT 26, A DISTANCE OF 382.60 FEET; THENCE NORTH 70°54'02" W EST ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF SAID. TRACT 26, A DISTANCE OF 73.51 FEET 'I'O THE EAST LINE OF' THE CHARLES BROW NELL DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 41; THENCE NORTH 01°24'04" EAST ALONG SAID EAST LINE, A DISTANCE OF 950.58 FEET TO A iLINE 35 FEET SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH TI•lE CENTERLINE OF THE EXISTING MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK OF THE CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, S'T. PAUL AND n PACIFIC RAILROAD TRACTS; THENCE ALONG SAID LINE 35 FEET • SOUTHERLY OF AND PARALLEL WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE MOST SOUTHERLY TRACK, ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 15°22'32" EAST, HAVING A RADIUS OF 2,790.19 FEET, AN ARC • i i I r I f 2 OF 2 • DIET NCE OF 659.24 FEET THROUGH A, CENTRAL ANGLE OF 13°32° 14" TU A POINT OF COMPOUND CURVE; THiENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINED TH'E CENTER OF WHICH BEARS SOUTH 01°50' 1.801 EAST HAVING A RA;�DIUIIS OF 1 .102.46 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 807.11 FEET TH;ROl7GH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 41°56°4'6"; THENCE SOUTH 49°53'32" �.j EAT ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINED A DISTANCE OF 167.07 FEET ; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT, ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE, . 7 HAVING A RADIUS OF 1,829:78 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 309.67 p 'FEET THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 09°4.1 °48'' ; THENCE a LVING SAID PARALLEL LINE, SOUTH 40°1.1.'44" EAST, A DI�ST ONCE 'OF .126.24 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF THE BURL�NGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT=OFNAY; - THENdE ! ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE, THE CENTER OF WHICH BEARS NORTH 49°48916" EAST HAVING A RADIUS • OFI'' 1,005.37 FEET, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 5549.02 FEET THROUGH! A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 31°17 °19" TO A POINT •OF TANGENT ON SAID ' ' • SO��UTh LINE OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTH LINED SOUTH 71°29°03" , EAST ALONG A LINE 50 FEET SOUTH O'F AND PARALLEL WITH THE EXISTING SOUTHBOUND TRACK4-'A DISTANCE OF 826. 56 FEET• TO THE - • WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG ' SAID SOUTH LINE SOUTH 71°29 °03" EAST, A DISTANCE TIF 85.52 FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF THE SOUTH 650 FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE S UTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 18; THENCE NORTH 89°10'25" WEST 'ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OFi;THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 18, A DISTANCE OF 81.57 FEET TO THE EAST LINE OF .THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTIION 13;h THENCE NORTH 88°15 °00°' WEST ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THE NORTHr650 FEET OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 13, A DISTANCE OF 29261 .41 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT ON THE SOUTH BOUNDARY OF TRACT 25 .0F RENTON SHORE LANDS, 1958; THENCE . NORTH 33°07 '25" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 15 .51 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE, NORTH 27°21 °32" EAST LONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 387.32 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT; THENCE NORTH 83°17 °.25'9 WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH • BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OP- 171.17 FEET;• THENCE • SOUTH 46°22'22D1- --- • • - • WEST •LONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DISTANCE OF 324.66 FEET ; - THE �NC SOUTH 72°37'52" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH BOUNDARY, A DIS' A CE OF 76.33 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. • • . . • • • - • • . EXHIBIT 4 TO AGREEMENT •• s . The Company has not surveyed the premises described In The sketch below is •furnished without charge solely for the purpose or of assisting in locating said premises and the Company assumes no liability therein. It does.not purport to show all highways, roads and casements adjoining or affecting said premises, _ • o I uo 1 2:1• 1 N 1 ‘ , . 1.- , g ' , : . . .• .., .. 1 1 . , 8 ,', .- , '` . . ., • I o ,, .. 1, �i. , � ‘D• • . . ., v . . 0 �,® � o ;f �e • • 0 • • -4,3% . . . . o — •• . 1 \ , .. . 111•IP6 / . - .---. ..,.. . 1 ... l'( % . ;N, •i \\ ,`N. • • • \ a• % • • i ' j , ' o •. . , ,. i I . i ' /� 4 ck - , W • 4 ®' ' � ' o � o I 1 ® A 4 • • • • i r . LEA .. • \ VI 1 . "... "."' `• • 0 ' •N•`•, • •vr°'e'Q/•. v r.. • t • 1 N , 1 • 61 The Company has not surveyed the premises described in 12-�Li'ZZ without charge solely for the purpose of assisting � The sketch below is furnished In locating said premises and the Company assumes no liability for inaccuracies 0 therein. ' It does not purport to show all highways, roads and easements adjoining • or affecting said premises. % ‘ Jsz-c.IN LIME_ —;- � \• • `� `®, . v • r •- .{ . / -. ,,.,;(if , . . il g .t. 0 . 1 . _, , I .4 , S . 1 i / / ��a�isI roi rQ L ® 1 P I — `� i • .4 - - --I - - -' , v3 I I v I . . ° . I ' .I • • 0 .. j.• • I - I I I 0 . I 1 • o Alb EXHIBIT 5 TO AGREEMENT 7-7 . - ... • .._.__ •. That portion of the south.balf_of Section 13, Town-ship 23 North, Range 4 East, W.K. in King Coulnty; Washington and of Junction Additiott to the City of Seattle, accordins to plat i•eclierded in Volume 12 of Plats, page 75, records 'of said King County, and of C.E. Bro nell's Donation Claim No; 41 described as follows: 0 1 Beginning at the south quarter corner of said Section 13; thence NO0*58128"E along :*J the north-south centerline thereof 1092.82 feet; thence N68°03 '54"E 224.45feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence s68°03'54"W 575.56 feet; thence N7200034'1/ 389.92 feet; thence S68Q06'46"W 429.32 feet; thence south 85.47 feet 6, a point of .11 curve; thence on a curve to the left, having a radius of 60.00 feet, thru central angle of 126°52' 10"p an arc distance of 132.86 feet; thence N53°07 '50"E 199.18 feet to a pointilof curve; thence on a curve to the right, having a radius of 200.00 feet thru a cenlral angle of 53°59'30'b® an arc distance of 188.47 feet; thence S72°52140"1 • 290.00 feet to a point of curve; thence on a curve to the left, having a r- dius of 197.00 feet, thru a central angle 'of 39°08'51", an arc distance of 134.60 feet; thenc N675829"E 380.92 feet; thence N31°27'12"E 204.86 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNI1 • Containing 165,263 square feet or 3.794 acres more or less. . • • • • • • • EXHIBIT 6 TO ` AGREEMENT That portio of the south half of Section 13, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M.in King County, Washington, of Junction Addition to the City of Seattle, according to the plat recorded In Volume 12 of Plats, page 75, records of said King County, and of C4E. Brownell 's Donation Claim No. 41 , described as follows: Beginning at the south quarter corner of said Section 13; thence NOD°58128"EIalong the north-south centerline thereof 1092.82 feet; thence 568°03'54"W 351. 11 feet to the TRUE IPOINT OF BEGINNING; thence N68°'03'54"E 575.56 feet; 'thence N12°01 '00"W 40.75 feet; thence S77°59'00"W 133.01 feet to a point of curve; thence a'longia curve to ,the right having a radius of 230. 00 feet, through a central angle of 27°47'3i'1 an arc distance of 111.56 feet to a point of compound curvature; the center of said curve bears N15°46'31"E 160.00 feet.; thence along said curve to the :n right, through a central. angle of 70°48' 19" an arc distance of 197.73 feet; thence ►'� S82°15'00"W 67.68 feet; thence S31°32°22"W 71 .06 feet; thence NB1°11 °35"W 193.00 feet; thence S82°15'00"W 92.99 feet; thence S35°29°30'°W 143. 18 feet; thence O N74°44'00"W 84.85 feet; thence 560°16'00"W 67.00 feet; thence S12°16'00"E 9735 feet; thence N68°06'46"E 53.79 feet to a point which bears N72°04'341°W from the p TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence 572°04'34"E 389.92 feet to the TRUE POINT OP . c0 BEGINNING. Containing 182,206 square feet or 4. 1829 acres more or less. • • • ' I TRIAD ASSOCIATES _ 11416 N..E. 128TH STREETWRITTEN BY KiRKLAND, IPA 98033 CHECKED GY � COMPARED • . i . EXHIBIT 7 Ta . • AGREEMENT • • That .portion of the southwest u west quarter of Section 13 Township 23 Noi th. Range of East, W.H. 1'n Kinq County. Washington and that portion of Junction Addition to City ecorCs of faid Seattle. according to plat recorded in Volume 12 of Plats, page 75, King County together with vacated streets adjoining which would attach to said 7) remises 'by operation of' law,. and of C.E. Brownell 's Donation Claim No. 41. 1des � • as fol•lows.. In Beginning at the south quarter corner of said, Section 13; thence NOO°58'28"E along ® cmi the north-south centerline ,thereof 884•84 feCt t® the southeast corner 2°f Tract 60 feet to p 8; thence S72 37 S 3 ® Renton .SEaorelands Second Supplemental Maps 195 . � of said Tract 4 'oz''W 354.53 feet to ,;,q an angle point in the south line of said Tract 26; thence S73°56'01' V 130.0B feet to an angle point in the so an angle, point in the south line of said Tract 26; thence S iiboundary ofoagtractsouth line of said Tract 26 a distance of 316.18 feet to f land deeded to King County and described under King Conty Recording 1umeel667786; thence westerly along said north boundary on a curve u tr th arccenter b whic of bears S39°4i °39"W 627.46 feet. thru a central. angle of 39°ehe left,1 39 , 434.70 fet; thence north along said norRhEbP boundary BEGONNING; thence north feet; thence west a156913 said north boundary 245.69 feet to the T feet; thence N50°39'19"E 330.21 feet; thence N33_O0'y 4"W 109.4d 7oie feet t bto heisoutherly margin of t�e Burlington Northern Railroad E°�853.00' f eat• thence westerly along said int on a curve, the center which bears. 539° 3' �� southerly margin and curve to the left, thru a central angle et of 3°59'of 19",c an arcars • distance of 129.00 feet to 'a point of compound curet, the ce543'22' 19"E 4030.00 feet; thence westerly along said srlyf margin and curve point the left, thru a central angle of 2°48'32", an arc distance •of tange�j�cy thence S43°49;09"W along said said utherlyuth margin lma®ginpthaving to a pa�iradius of curve; thence on a curve to the right along southerly arc distance of 206.57 feet to of 1571 .00 feet, thru a central angle of 7°32'02°e° a point of compound curve, the center which bears N38°38'ht"ld727.00cfeet; then a of westerlyIalong said southerly margin and curve to the g o 16'55'35 ', n arc distance .of 214.77 feet to a point of compound curve, the center which bears N21.43'14"W 1055.00 feet; thence westerly longasaidesoutherly oamargin n.95 and curve to the right, thru a central angle of , feet to a po i nt.of_ compound curve; the center which bears N 10°19°06"1 696.00 feet; thence westerly along said southerly margin and curve to erighttthre a central of 3°44'25", an arc distance of 45.43 feet to the easterlymargin ter County Road thence 534°18'31"E along said easterly margin 4 .46 t to the e northd- boundary" of; 36 Kie said tract deeded to King County and described g ou in Number 6607786; thence N74°13' 19"E along said north boundary 443.3311 feet; hence ' N59°53'47"E along said north boundary 377.52 feet; thence along boundary 35r 00 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Contain 114.401 square feet or 2. 626 acres more or less. Containing 1 • • ij EXHIBIT 8 TO AGREEMENT. That partiion of the south half of Section 13, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.H. in King Cunty, Washington; and of Junction Addition to the City of Seattle, accordi to the pltrecorded in Volume 12 of Plats, page 75, records of said. King .County, together with vacated streets adJoining which would attach to said premises by opera 01 tion of Lalw; and of C.E. Brownell s Donation Claim No. 41 , and of Tracts 25 and 26, c� Renton Sh re Lands 2nd Supplemental Maps 1958, described as follows: O 0 Beginning at the south quarter corner of said Section 13; thence NOO°58'28"E along 1 .-{ north-south centerline thereof 1092.82 feet; thence N68°03 '54"E 224.45 feet to a pol C•1 hereinftr-called "Point A"; 568°03 'S4°PbJ 57.5.56 feet; thence N72°U4'34"N jo 389.92 felt; thence 568 06 46��W 429.32 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence south 85.47 feet to a point of curve; thence on a curve to the left, having a radius of 60.00 feet, thru a central angle of 126°52' 10", an arc distance of 132.86 feet; thence N53°07'50"E 199.18 feet to a point of curve; thence on a curve to the right, having ,a radius of 200.00 feet•thru a central angle of 53°59'30", an arc distance of 188.47 feet; thence 572°52'40"E 290.00 feet to a point of curve; thence on a curve t the left having a radius of 197.00 feet, thru a central angle of 39°08;51'j, an arc distance cif 134.60 feet; thence N67°58'29"E 380.92 feet;. thence N31°27'12"E 204.86 feet to aforementioned "Point A"; thence N80°04'48"E 232.00 feet; thence S42'06'08"E 215.00 'fe t; thence S31°14'05"W 358.99 feet; thence S47°10'01"E 71 .34 feet; thence east 114.27 feet; thence south 68.91 feet to the southerly line of said Tract 25; thence 'along the southerly line of said Tracts 25 and 26, the following courses and d i stances. N88°15'00"W 180.65 feet; U33°07 '25"b1 154.51 feet; N27°21 '32"E j387.32 feet; N83°i7'25"W 1711 .17 feet; S46°22'22"W i24.66 feet; S72°37 '52"W 458.93 feet; N70°54''102"W 354.53 feet; 573°56'01"W 130.08 feet; and S41° 16'07"W 316.18 feet to the north boundary of a tract of land deeded to King County and described under King County (Receiving Number 6607786; thence westerly along said north boundary on a cury to the left, the center which bears S3:9°41 '39"W 627.46 feet thru a central angle of 35.4113r, an arc distance of 434.70 feet; thence north along said north boundary 25.00 feet thence west along said north boundary 245.69 feet; thence north 156.13 . feet; tlgie4e N50°39' 19"E 330.21 feet; thence 578°41 °24"E 180.00 feet to a iipoint of curve; thence on a curve to the right, having a radius of 195.01 feet, th u a contra • angle of 78°41 '24", an 'arc distance of 267.83 feet to the_TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. •Containing 382,725 square feet or 8.786 acres more or less. EXHIBIT 9 TO AGREEMENT L The portions of the Greenbelt Property and the Flood Control Property located within Parcel A are subject to the following : ( i ) Rights, reservations, covenants and rtstrictions contained in that certain Supplemental Agreement, recorded as Instrument No . 6012230800 in the Records of King County, Washington; ( ii) Rights, reservations, covenants and .0 restrictions contained in that certain Real Estate C) Contract recorded as Instrument No, 8009300609 in the C) Records of King County, Washington; r, QD ( iii ) Easement recorded under Instrument No. 6626569 in the Records of King County! Washington; ( iv) Easement granted to the City of Renton on Nov mber 14, 1962, under Application No. 27583 ; and (v) Easement granted to King County Drainage District No. 1 on August 11, 1960, under Application No. 25422 . 2 The portion of the Greenbelt Property located within Parcel B is subject to the following: ( i) Rights, reservations, covenants and restrictions contained in that certain Real Estate Contract recorded as Instrument No . 8009300611 in the Records of King County, Washington; and ( ii ) Easement recorded under Instrument No. 6626569 in the Records of King County, Washington. 3 . The portions of the Greenbelt Property and the Flood Control Property located within Parcel C are subject to the following : ( i ) Rights, reservations, covenants and restrictions contained in that certain Real Estate d Contract recorded as Instrument No . 8002220257 and in that certain Quitclaim Deed recorded as Instrument No. 81102i0021 in the Records of King County, Washington; ( ii ) Rights, reservations , covenants and restrictions contained in 'that certain Real Estate Contact recorded as Instrument No . 8004240435 in the Records of King County, Washington ; •... 12/27/82 7794B 1 • d i �• r • I ( iii) Rights, reservations, covenants and restrictions contained in that certain deed recorded under Instrument No . 5780049 in the Records Of King County, Washington; ( iv) Easement granted to the City of Renton on November 14, 1962, under Application No. 27583 ; (v) Easement recorded under Instrument No. 8108200425 in the Records of King County, Washington ; and • (vi) Easement granted to King County Drainage n District No . 1 on August 11 , 1960 , under Application No. 25422 . qr-{ O • C''` CO • . • I JO TZ3L 3-II TA CP03J57 hQ ra ►1'1 JL'iii 1+19NN Alii •! :502AWMIc..�� ) 2/27/82 7794B 2 I � ►e • } 1• [3a !J � h J1 !u; F[ C. '11 -* EA" MES April, 10, 1987 HAND 'DELIVERED 4/13/87 • Mr. Donald Erickson Zoning Administrator CITY 1OF RENTON • Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: Shoreline Designation BLACKRIVER CORPORATE PARK Dear Doh: I am writing' in regard to the Renton Shoreline Master Program designation for the Black River Technology Park property. The Department of Ecology (DOE) is presently preparing a written determination on the extent of associated wetlands on the property. This determination will identify the portion of the Black River Technology Park property, which in the opinion of DOE, requires a substantial development permit in order to proceed with any development on the site. Mr. Joe Williams indicated to me in a telephone conversation we had on April 9, 1987 , that he believes that DOE' s determination on wetland boundaries does not preclude development. Joe Williams further indicated that the clarification of the boundary between the Urban and._ Natural shoreline designation in the Renton Shoreline Master Program must be made by the City of Renton., This clarification must be substantiated by the City with ,documentation based on the historical record. It is the purpose of this letter to address this issue and to providelto the City of Renton First City Equities ' understanding of the historical record as it relates to the boundary between the Urban and Natural shoreline designation on the Black River Technology Park property. 800 Fifth Avenue•Suite 4170 Seattle,Washington 98104•(206)624-9223 Real Estate Development and Investments Mr. Donald Erickson April 10, 1987 Page Two SUMMARY ! II First, it is clear that, to the extent that there are Natural shorelines on the property, all property designated as Natural is on the north bank of the Black River "west of its confluence with Springbrook Creek. " (Section 5.02. 03) The Renton Master Program applies to "shorelines. " "Shorelines" is defined to include "associated wetlands. " (Section 9.34) Therefore, inasmuch as the Natural designation only applies to "shorelines" • west of ! the confluence, then, by definition, only "associated wetlands" west of the confluence could be part of the Natural designation. Second, it is also clear that it was the City of Renton' s intent in designating certain shorelines west of the confluence as Natural only to include those shorelines dedicated to the City of Renton. The History section below, discusses this in detail. In summary, there are two main factors which support this conclusion: (1) In discussing the Natural designation, the Renton Master Program states: "The City of Renton recognizes that preservation of Natural shoreline areas can only be assured through public acquisition. Therefore, where private development is proposed in areas designated, the City shall require dedication as necessary for flood storage. " (Section 5 . 02. 02) This confirms that it was the City Council' s intent to limit the Natural designation to shorelines which had been dedicated, or which the City would require to be dedicated as a condition of development. ( 2) The Natural designation basically prohibits any development in the Natural shoreline. The Natural designation in this area was adopted in 1983 . Yet, in late 1984, after the designation was adopted by the City Council, the City granted its approval to First City Equities ' predecessor' s (Alterra Corporation) Preliminary Plat for the property and grade and fill permit. The approved preliminary plat provided for full development of the property outside the areas dedicated to the City. This is a clear indication that the City considered the property, fully developable except for the dedicated riparian forest and buffer I I Mr. Donald Erickson April 10, 1987 Page Three strip -- i.e. in the Urban designation; since the ; Natural designation would not have allowed the plat or ' the grade and fill permit. HISTORY 1981 WETLANDS STUDY In February, 1981 the City of Renton published a reconnaissance study of selected wetlands in the City of Renton. The study was conducted by the City of Renton Planning Department with the assistance of Doug Canning of Northwest Environmental Consultants. (I might point out that in the introduction to the study'the very credibility of the study itself was questioned in that "the level of detail, however, was limited because of time and funding constraints. Fieldwork was conducted during November' and December of 1980 which was not the most ideal perioel for observing vegetation and wildlife. " ) Nevertheless, this report ranked the existing City wetlands according to their natural habitat value. "Based on this ranking and on knowledge of feasible protective measures, recommendations for city action were made. " (p. 1) . The Study anticipates that future development will fill portions of wetlands in the City: "Although the East Side Watershed Project will preserve 110 acres of wetlands in the Green River Valley ( including the Panther Creek Wetland) as mitigation for the project, completion of this project will create conditions that allow filling and draining of remaining wetlands. The necessity for retaining existing wetlands for flood storage will be removed. " (p. 4) . A dislcuslsion of the then current policies and plans relating to wetlandslcommences on page 14 of the wetland study. The discussion outlines the history and intent for environmental mitigation connected with the East Side Watershed Project and clearly states that the Black River Riparian Forest was not included in the mitigation plan. The areas of wetlands to be preserved by the City of Renton and the Soil Conservation Service included 20 acres of the Renton Wetland with an option for 39 rqore acres including the portions of the Renton Wetland and UnitI F of the East Valley Wetlands as well as the Panther Creek wetland. Mr. Donald Erickson April 10 , 1987 • Page Four The rOport indicates that the Green River Valley Comprehensive Plan adopted by the City of Renton in 1976, partially in 11 response to the environmental mitigation agreement for the East ' Side Watershed Project, designates most of the Valley within RentOn as Manufacturing Park (p. 15) . It is this designation in the Omprehensive plan which led eventually in 1982 to approval by the City Council of a rezone request from General Class!ification to Manufacturing Park for the entire Black River Technology Park property. The study clearly states that " of the wetlands identified in H this 'study, only a portion of the Black River Riparian Fores . . .are within the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Master Program." (p. 15) At that time, the shorelines were shown as Urban'. 'That study further clarifies that the Shoreline Master Program jurisdiction extends 200 feet into the Riparian Forest bordering the Black River which was interpreted to be inclusive Of the wetlands of the old Black River channel. (p. 15) ALTERRA ACTIONS The p'rev4ous owners of the Black River Technology Park property were the Alterra Corporation whose president is Mr. Delton Bonds'. In 1984 Mr. Bonds filed a Preliminary Plat (PP-089-84) , a Speipal Permit for grade and fill (SP-090-84 ) and a Variance for a' cul-de-sac (V-091-84 ) . In 1980 the Alterra Corporation requested a rezone of the property from General to Manufacturing ' Park designation. The City Council approved that rezone request , in Or4inance No. 3694 dated December 27, 1982. (R-129-80) A letter dated July 16, 1982 to Mr. Bonds from the Environmental Reviek Committee (copy enclosed) clearly states that the rezone would!' be predicated upon dedication of 9. 14 acres for storm drainage purposes and preservation in perpetuity by open space easement of approximately 10 . 5 acres for "wildlife and natural vegetation mitigation purposes" . It is clear from the very start the intent of the City of Renton was to allow development on the Black River Technology Park property exclusive of the acres; preserved and/or dedicated for environmental mitigation and flood control, purposes. • • I � Mr. Donald Erickson April 10 , 1987 Page Five On December 29, 1982 an agreement was prepared (Recording No. 83010�50539) between the Renton Property Associates, JAG-Renton Associates and the City of Renton. Alterra Corporation acted as agent for RPA and JAG in that agreement. This agreement was recorded on the condition that the property be rezoned to MP. The agreement grants easements to the City of Renton for the property outlined by the ERC as mitigation for the rezone. The JAG agreement reiterates in paragraph after paragraph the intent for the easement area to be used as greenbelt, open space, wildlife habitat, and flood control purposes. On page ' 3 , section 5 of the JAG Agreement, the previous owners secured development credit for the property exclusive of the greenbelt and flood control easement properties by crediting the retained property with development rights which would have accruuedhto the easement preservation areas. A limit was specified of no more than 995,781. 5-gross square feet upon the retained property. It is clear that the definition of retained property is that land remaining once the greenbelt property and flood control properties easements were granted to the City of Renton. Those legal descriptions are included in this agreement and tlieintent is clear, not requiring clarification . SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM In December of 1983, the City of Renton amended its Master Program ; and designated the Black River "west of the confluence with Springbrook Creek" as Natural. The City' s intent regarding natural areas is clarified on page 20 of the Shoreline Master Program, paragraph 5. 02. 02 in which is indicated that in order • to preserve the natural areas of the shoreline, the City should require .dedication of the properties as necessary for flood storage. It is clear that dedication of the greenbelt easement areas and flood storage easements by JAG Associates, was in compliance with the intent of the City' s purpose to acquire natur!alLareas. PRELIMINARY PLAT (PP--089-84) GRADE & ; FILL PERMIT (SP-090-84) VARIAINCE (V-091-84 In 1984 ,Mr. Bonds filed a Preliminary Plat (PP-089-84) a Special PermiIt for grade and fill (SP-090-84 ) and a Variance for a cul-de-sac (V-091-84) . • i I Mr. Donald Erickson April' 10, 1987 Page Six ! On December 4, 1984 the Land Use Hearing Examiner issued an approval for the special permit for fill and grade. This special ',permit approval was issued along with approval of the preliminary plat and approval of a variance to construct a cul-de-sac on the property. Approval of these three actions was predicated upon a specific site plan, which included a 46 lot plat of ,approximately 71 acres. The Hearing Examiner' s decision to approve the variance, special permit and preliminary plat is enclosed. The findings clearly specify that all of the property outside ;of the greenbelt preserve and flood control property, ident“ied in the agreement between the City and JAG Associates will be developed. It is interesting to note that the decision includes a statement from the Zoning Administrator that the fill plan will assure water quality in "natural areas south and west.!' !(An Environmental Impact Statement was prepared for the proposal. ) Enclosed is a copy of the grading and filling drawings on which the! special permit for grade and fill was approved. Clearly, those drawings specify full development of all of the retained property outside of the easement areas. As supplemental information, I am enclosing a copy of the Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner dated November 20 , 1984 regarding Alterra' s request for the approval of the preliminary plat, special permit and variance. Specifically, please note a copy of'lthe preliminary plat is included which clearly !depicts full development of the property outside of the easement areas. The 'staff comments included in the preliminary report to the examiner shed light on the intent of the Policy Development Department ( specifically Gene Williams, Associate Planner) . In Gene' s memorandum dated October 15 , 1984, he clearly :states that: "approval of the Special Permit for fill and grade will transform the Riparian Forest environment. Therefore, to preserve the amenities of the site, the Special Permit siould be conditioned to require no disturbance of the dedicated greenbelt or restricted preserve areas and maintenance of the tree preservation pockets detailed on the plans. " Clearly, the City of Renton' s staff intended full development of , the Black River Technology Park property to surround the dedicated and preserved buffer easement areas and flood control property. Further, the final Declaration of Non-Significance (ECF094784) published! October 1, 1984 conditioned the DNS on preservation of the designated greenbelts. Full development surrounding those greenbelt areas was approved. 1'1 1 Mr. Donld Erickson April! 10, 1987 I Page Seven I I VALLEY REZONE In 1985 the City of Renton City Council undertook a major rezone of the Valley area inl which the Black River Technology Park property was upgraded! from the zoning category of Manufacturing Park to ;Office Park. At that time, the original recommendation by Gene Williams, Policy Development Department staff member was to zoiejthe easement ;greenbelt and flood storage areas P-1. The retained property of Alterra Corporation was to be rezoned OP. Clearly,: the staff' s intent (which was to implement direction of the council) was to allow development of an office park on the property outside of the easement areas . In December of 1985, First City Equities purchased the property in the midst of the Valley Rezone. At that time, I attended the City Council Public Hearing on the rezone for the Valley plan, and requested in testimony that the Council consider rezoning the entire property to OP without designating the easement areas as P-1 lands, thus allowing First City Equities the opportunity to review the history of the easement areas and their current environmental significance. Rezoning of the property occurred by City Council action in 1986 and th'e entire property was zoned OP. i SCS P.-1 CHANNEL PHASE' I CONSTRUCTION In June 1984, Phase I of the P-1 channel project commenced construction. Specific areas for spoils placement of materials coming out of the channel were identified and approved by the City With right-of-entry agreements signed by the private property owners to receive the material. The City acquired a shoreline permit at that time to allow filling to occur within the shoreline on Alterra' s property. Clearly, such a permit and right-of-entry agreement would not have been issued had it not been the intent of the City of Renton to see eventual development occur on the land outside the easement areas. CONCLUSION In addition to the specific facts set set forth above, it is important to point out that I have continually provided current information regarding First City Equities ' intent to develop the entire Blackriver Corporate property to the City Council, Mayor Shinpbch and the relevant City department heads. At no time has' anyone questioned our plans to develop the entire property outside of the Riparian Forest and Easement Areas. In fact, a moreitypical comment Was on whether we would actually follow i � I i it Mr. Donald Erickson 1 April 101, 1987 Page Eight i throu4h and develop a project of as high a caliber and quality as that ',depicted in our master site plan concept. These communications along with the regulatory and permit actions, including SEPA documentation, clearly indicate that the City consOered the property fully developable -- therefore, not in a Natural ,shoreline. Rather, the Natural designation clearly was intended to protect the very dedication and easements which had been negotiated. It It must te assumed that the City Council understood that the Natural designation prohibits all development. We believe that the examination of the historical record clarifies that it was the City' s intent, when adopting the Natural de:dgnation, to limit, its boundary to the Riparian Forest and Easement Area as defin'edlin the legal descriptions of the JAG Agreement with the City. This is also the only conclusion which is consistent with the subsequent action's of the City on this property -- including the 4ty' s approval of Alterra' s preliminary plat and grade and fill permit, the ADMAC permits and First City Equities ' grade and fill permit. I hope rty recounting of the facts in this letter will serve to assist the City in not only reaching their conclusion that the Natural larea was intended to be defined as the dedication and easemnnt areas only but also to support that finding. It would appear that the record is clear and that no amendment of the Master Program is neciessary. With regards, FIRST1I1 CITY EQUITIES I Barbara ;E. Moss Director of Planning ' I BEM/bic Enclosures cc: RodiMack/D.O.E. Royce Berg 'Yoe 'Williams/D.O.E. David Morency Mayor Barbara Shinpoch Robert Roed Rlpn iNelson Rex Van Wormer Richard Houghton ) David Schuman Larry Springer Neil Hokonson Larry Warren, Esq. Elliott Severson Charles Blumenfeld, Esq. j , . Gam' ,- CiZ4,.l'. ,' '"i CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO . 3097 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON , WASHINGTON, AMENDING • CITY OF RENTON ORDINANCE NO. 3094 RELATING TO THE ADOPTION AND ESTABLISHMENT OF THE "SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM" BY REFERENCE AND ESTABLISHING CERTAIN FEES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAI;: AS FOLLOWS : SECTION f : • Existing Section 2 . 02 . 01 of the SHORELINE MASTER PROCRAM heretofore adopted by reference by Ordinance No. 3094 is hereby amended to read as follows as to fees : Fee Value of Development $50 . 00 Less than $10 , 000 . 00 $100 . 00 $10 , 000 but less than $50 ,000 $150 . 00 $50 , 000 to $100 , 000 $200 . 00 plus 0 . 01% of More than $100 , 000 value over $100 , 000 The remainder of Section 2 . 02 . 01 relating to application forms shall remain in full force and effect . SECTION II: Any and all Ordinances or parts of Ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby repealed . SECTION III: This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and five days after its publication. DASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 17thday of January , 1977 . Delores A. Mead, City (, erk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 17th day of January, 1977 . _..,---; e /-1 97- Cat.„.„11. "-' . Charles . Delaurenti, Mayor Apprd- as to f Gerd ' �e 5 t y Att orney Date of Publication : 1-21-77 • AMe_-iti.d 3 ORD . #278`) & #2823 CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 30e4 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON , ADOPTING AND ESTABLISHING BY REFERENCE THE "SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM" , REPEALING ANY AND ALL ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH.: WHEREAS not less than three ( 3) printed copies in book form of the "SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM" as issued and prepared by City of Renton Planning Department under date of March, 1976 , have heretofore been filed and are now on file in the office of the City Clerk of the City of Renton for use and examination by the general public , and WHEREAS it is deemed advisable and in the public interest to adopt said Master Program as hereinabove described, by reference, NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : SECTION I : The, "SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM" as issued and prepared by City of Renton Planning Department, of which not less than three ( 3) printed copies in book form have heretofore been filed and are now on file in the office of the City Clerk and made available for examination by the general public, is hereby adopted as the "Shoreline Master Program" by the City of Renton. SECTION II : Any and all amendments , additions or modi- fications to said Master Program,when printed and filed with the City Clerk of the City of Renton by authorization of the City Council from time to time, shall e considered and accepted and constitute a part of such Master Program without the necessity of further adoption of such amendments, modifications or additions by the legislative authority of the City of Renton or by Ordinance. -1- SECTIO:N 'II'I : The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to. duly authenticate and record a copy of the abovementioned "SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM"to.g.ether with any amendments or additions thereto, together with an authenticated copy of this Ordinance. SECTION IV: Whenever reference is made in said "Shoreline Master , Prpgram" to: the term "Planning Commi s on" the term "Hearing Examiner." shall be substituted therefor.. 'SECTION 'V::: Any.,and all Ordinances or parts of Ordinances in conflict herewith are hereby. repealed, including Chapter 25 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of. Ordinance. No. 1628 entitled "Code of , General • Ordinances of the City of Renton. " I : SECTION VI : This. Ordinance -shall• be effective upon its passage and five days after itspublication. ' PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL This 'lothday of January , 1977 . Delores. A. Mead, City Clerk 1APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 10th day of January, 1977 . -/-GGT GL^ed . Charles /. Delaurenti, Mayor Approved as to form: e9:211i/A A4 Gerard :M. iShellan, City Attorney Date of Publication: 1-14-77 -2- i I enton City Council -7/22/85 'P//lirage seven Old Business continued Utilities Utilities Committee Chairman Hughes presented a report Committee, concurring in the recommendation of the Public.Works Department Panther Creek that the City join with the Soil Conservation Service to P-1 Wetland complete the Panther Creek Wetland Plan. The plan will provide Study for orderly development of wildlife and flood water retention. The Committee further recommended authorization for the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreements and referral of the 1 subject to Ways and Means Committee to appropriate the City'is share of $4,000 towards the cost of the study. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Boat Noise Transportation Committee Chairman Mathews reported that the Referral letter from Mercer Island Mayor regarding boat noise legislation, referred on 6/10/85, is being held pending receipt of addititonal information. ORDINANCES A D RESOLUTIONS I Ways and Means Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a report ) Committee recommending the following ordinances for second & final reading: Ordinance' #3928 An ordinance was read amending a portion of Section 1-4101, Fee Schedule of Title I (Administrative) of City Code by adding a Amendment's subsection requiring a $100 fee for final plat extensions, Code Section 4-2710(8) (B) , and a subsection adding a $300 fee for binding site plan review, Code Section 9-1106.6(1) . MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE - AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. ,j Ordinance': #3929 An ordinance was read changing the zoning classification of Stromberg, Rezone property located at 901 Sunset Boulevard from Single Family ; R-016-85 , Residential District (R-1) to Multifamily Residential District (R-3) for Roger Stromberg, applicant, File No. R-016-85. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a report ] recommending the following ordinance for first reading: Street Lighting An ordinance was read providing for appropriation in the amount Study Fund of $15,000 for Street Lighting Study from Washington State Appropriation Energy Commission Grant Revenue Account unto Street Fund/ Traffic 'Engineering Maintenance Administration Expenditure li Account. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL REFER, THIS ORDINANCE BACK TO COMMITTEE FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED. Landfill Section Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymerpresented a report Y Y P � of Shorelkkne recommending that the matter of revision of the ,landfill Master Program section of the Shoreline Master Program be removed from the Committee referral list since no legislation is required to implement the amendments. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, .000NCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. City Attorney Warren clarified that the language of the ' Shoreline Master Program allows for its modification without), adoption of amending legi'slation.' I Vouchers Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a report II recommending approval of Vouchers 8048 through 8315 in the, amount of $959,812.14, having received departmental certification that merchandise and/or services have been received or rendered. Vouchers 8047, 8049 and 8055-8058 machine voided. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL APPROVE THE VOUCHERS AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. • NEW BUSINESSI Shelley Sussman, editor of the City newsletter, "Renton City Newsletter Report," and Administrative Assistant Mike Parness, were commended and thanked by Councilman Stredice for the professional job they did in publishing and distributing the newsletter to Renton residents last week. Mayor Shinpoch added her praise for the first issue, advised that comments from the public have been favorable, and reported the next issue will be published in October. , 1 1 I _ WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT JULY 22, 1985 ORDINANCES'IAND RESOLUTIONS The Ways and Means Committee recommends the following ordinances for second and final reading: Amending Fee Schedule (Final PUD Extension Fee and Binding Site Plan Filling Fee) Stromberg Rezone (R-016-85) - 901 Sunset Blvd. N.E. The Ways and Means Committee recommends the following ordinance for first reading;: I Street Lighting Study Funding Grant LANDFILL SECTION OF SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM (Referred 7/15/85) The Way ald Means Committee recommends that this matter be removed from the committee as no legislation is required to implement the amendments. APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS !I I The Ways and Means Committee recommends approval of Vouchers No. 8048 through No. 8315 in the amount of $959,812.14. i Ea �C firmer, alma Thomas 1rri mm ? i 1,7 '20 2 Robert�l;ughes ! I I RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting July 15, 'h985 Municipal Building Monday, 8:00 p.m. Council Chambers 1 I ! MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF JOHN W. REED, Council President; RICHARD M. STREDICKE, KATHY A. COUNCIL MEMBERS KEOLKER, ROBERT J. HUGHES, EARL CLYMER, THOMAS W. TRIMM, NANCY L. MATHEWS CITY STAFF BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney; IN ATTENDANCE MICHAEL W. PARNESS, Administrative Assistant; MAXINE E. MOTOR, City Clerk; RONALD G. NELSON, Building & Zoning Director; ROGER J. BLAYLOCK, Zoning Administrator; LT. CLAUDE EVANS, Police Department MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF JULY 8, 1985. CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted Shoreline Master and published in accordance with State law, Mayor Shinpoch Program I opened the public hearing to consider an amendment to the Amendment Shoreline Master Program regarding landfills. Correspondence was read from Building & Zoning Director Ron Nelson reporting II that in August of 1984, the State Department of Ecology (DOE) rejected a provision of the City' s Shoreline Master Program, amended in 1983, relating to landfills (Section 7.08.01 (A)) ,I . The City's section allowed property used for single family residential dwellings and located adjacent to one } bulkhead to be filled to the line of conformity with certain provisions: that fill not exceed 125 feet along the water' s edge and 35 feet into the water, and that provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are met. The DOE found this section to be inconsistent with the intent of Washington Administrative Code Section 176-16-060(11) (e) , which permits construction of bulkheads only to protect upland areas and not for the direct purpose of creating land by filling behind ' the bulkhead. This decision cannot be overruled by the City. Therefore, the Building and Zoning Department recommended that Section .7.08.01 (A) be changed to read as follows: For detached single family residential uses, when the property is located between two (2) existing bulkheads, the property may be filled to the line of conformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) feet in length along the water's edge and thirty-five (.35) feet into the water, and provided the provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are satisfactorily met; . . . Continued Zoning Administrator Roger Blaylock reiterated the purpose of the public hearing as a housekeeping measure to bring the City's Shoreline Master Program into conformity with State law. Upon inquiry, Mr. Blaylock explained that the City's Program complied with State law until the DOE made its determination in 1984 regarding landfills. Continue Versie Vaupel , P.O. Box 755, Renton, asked if the City had issued any shoreline landfill permits from the time of the determination by the DOE and the present. Mr. ! Blaylock reported no permits were issued. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY REED, COUNCIL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE BUILDING AND ZONING DIRECTOR AND REFER THIS MATTER TO WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE FOR PROPER ORDINANCE. CARRIED. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the Consent Agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing: 1 OF •• ` ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT c.) 4$ . ); z Z 'r RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR NIL O WIMP �� MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RENTON, WASH.98055 • 235-2540 OOA rQ �TFO SEP+ �e BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MAYOR June 20, 1985 The Honorable Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Members of the City Council Renton, W ;Fshington 98055 SUBJECT: Shoreline Master Program/Revision/Deletion Section 7.08.01(A) The Planning land Development Committee has referred to the City Council Section 7.08.01 of the Shorelines Master Program relating to permit land fills for a public hearing. for ;detached single family residential uses adjacent to one (1) existing bulkhead, the property may be filled to the line of conformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred and twenty-five (125) feet in length along the yvatJer's edge and thirty-five (35) feet into the water and provided provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are satisfactorily met; Under the :Shorelines Management Act of 1971, RCW 90.58.190, the City of Renton conducted public hearing and adopted an ordinance to amend our Master Program in 1983. The' State Department of Ecology has final approval under this section. They conducted a separate public hearing on Tuesday, August 21, 1984, in the City Council Chambers et 7:i00 p.m. and took testimony. Their decision, based upon that testimony and general policies of the Department of Ecology and the Goals and Policies for Lake Washington,r specifically rejected Section 7.08.01(A) relating to land fills. The Revised Code of Washington does not include specific 9 p provisions to overrule the Department of Ecology. The Department specifically stated that the proposed revision of the City of Renton's Shoreline Master Program was inconsistent with the intent of WAC 176-16-060(11)(e), which provides that the construction of bulkheads be permitted only where they Ilprolvide protection to upland areas and not for the direct purpose of creating land by filling blehind the bulkhead. i I RJB:1607Z:c1 I ' ` I The Honorable Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Members'of the City Council June 20, 1985 Page 2 The Planning and Development Committee at the recommendation of the City Attorney's office recommended scheduling a public hearing. The Building and Zoning Department! believes that it is an unnecessary formality but concedes that it is absolutely procedurally correct. RECOMMENDATION: Refer item to Ways and Means for ordinance preparation changing the language of Section 7.08.01(A) toll read as follows: For detached single family residential uses when the property is located between two (2) existing bulkheads, the property may be filled to the line of conformity, provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) feet in length along! the Water's edge and thirty-five (35) feet into the water and provided the provislions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are sastisfactorily met; or, Sincerely, Ronald G. Nelson Building and Zoning Director RGN:RJB:1607Z:wr ! I ! 1 II I � I i RJB:1607Z:c1 i I ` I ' 1 7.08 LANDFILL 7.08.01 Landfills shall be permitted only in the following cases: A. For detached single-family residential uses aElla-cent erre-{13- a ist.}ng-. bulkhe-adr the property may be filled to the line of conformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) feet in length along the water's edge and thirty-five (35) feet into the water, and provided the provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are satisfactorily met; or, B. When a bulkhead is built to protect the existing perimeter land, a landfill shall be approved to bring the contour up to the desired grade; or, C. When in a public use area, landfill would be advantageous to the general public; or, I . I). When repairs or modifications are required for existing bulkheads and fills; or, E. When landfill is required for flood control purposes; or, F. Justification for landfill for any other purpose than those listed in subsections A through E above will be allowed only with prior approval of the Land Use Hearing Examiner. 7.09 MA R INA S 7.09.01 Marina shall be permitted only when: A. Adequate on-site parking is available commensurate with the moorage facilities provided. [See 7.09.02(F) below] B. Adequate water area is available commensurate with the actual moorage facilities provide. C. The location of the moorage facilities is convenient to public roads. 7.09.02 Design Requirements A. Marinas are to be designed in the manner that will minimize adverse leffects on fish and shell fish resources and be aesthetically compatible with adjacent areas. B. Marinas utilized for overnight and long-term moorage are not to be located in shallow-water embayments with poor flushing action. II Ci Applications for permits for marina construction are to be evaluated for compliance with standards promulgated by federal, state, and local agencies. - 31 - I AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Audrey De Jo 4.e , being first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Chief Clerk of the giR7CP RENTON NO'Tr10E�P _. • HEARING VALLEY NEWSPAPERS RENTON igilff COUNCIL NOTICE (p HEREBY WM that(lam Daily News'Journal, Daily Record Chronicle, Daily Globe News Renton city Council BEAM:2015th day CQ July, 1985,Eft8:00 pa egeduncil Daily newspapers published six(6)times a week.That said newspapers d;' Chambers ' ;ing o o amErg g »Renton, are legal newspapers and are now and have been for more than six nnunicipal Build Washington, m[N lT+aJ pace months prior to the date of publication referred to,printed and published . . hearing consider ilk°following: n�O-- Shoreline Master in the English language continually as daily newspapers in Kent, King Amendment St) fprogram{ taC �jdPGconeernin9 h County, Washington. Valley Newspapers have been approved as legal 'landfills. J, newspapers order of the Superior Court of the State of Washington for G j t l interested persons•t o by p g CO by present'n voice.approval, King County. disapproval'CQ opinions CB same. .of ARENTON • ' Maxine`!E. a The notice in the xact form attached, was published in the Daily News City CI •Journal , Daily Record Chronicle , Daily Globe News , (and June Published1985.R99 5 R j Recor i Chronicle 9976-- not in supplement form) which was regularly distributed to its subscribers during the below stated period. The annexed notice a Nntice nf' Publ 7 C HA ring was published - • - on June 28, 1985 9 71 The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $14'85 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 8th day of1T111y 19 85 • (-*/ Not ry Public for the State of Washington, residing at Federal Way, King County, Washington. VN#87 Revised 10/84 I j CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 15th day of July , 19 85, at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington, as the time and place for a public hearing to consider the following: Amendment to the Shoreline Master Program for the City of Renton concerning landfills. Any and all interested persons are invited to be present to voice approval , disapproval or opinions on same. CITY OF RENTON Maxine E. Motor City Clerk DATE OF PUBLICATION: 6/28/85 PLib) is IY1e +in �� S e9 y y1 , 1 85 Purpose 01; Can 5;derin 1� pro a d ,9rncridirn,S) 7e s4orrike Movie, Ptcftr "orleC�' o eo> Cow er�i Lo,e//iiiiGe eiie 4' o//o� ea f �® ��. C7/P cr Cc orf�ycr 0B44R *c J,o./ d vde C/Erg MQy creme Iii' r%,�� l 0cglivrJ,4 �r7 ' s' /Jo�P Z.4 2 P 3,. /955 */Is4,4 , ii o vv/ O>< �ei3/ 0Maf J6d W44 % 1/ 1 "7/0,#��P41 e51r/ �410 x 5.E. )))) S Q 4�� j , Z4)� WOJ4I .614. Q5 L cote W6cy.4,. 8Jy0! N. 3ov f' N. at May Greer 8r;dir ram /I've /1!E � 'f. y`3 '�- St: ® Powell Ave sw r 740Y e Po' AveJw. 11'S.w. )pV-S 1VIoncs�er R J 1N: loot' N. O71'f W_Orady imy ,�iy ��r,qd j ZU �4 o re �a Coe/6*er Co9r�no"Of� Pjic� 1411 5•W M (5/1/ 1°froze Lo iJ c> ,evi4 e'9i' S.li//( 'c cSeEt O/.fo � 1 SAY) 0 Ouh'escla)e Aye Sul /9/4o'i lAvoir tree r " / . - .1 - , I . , � "" ,-%" I-. .�,,, , ,".�;". "�' �: , . . . *�'...,,`.j`,-l- .,:..,,, C.JTIY,;:,��.�i"-.'� ,`,:`;`;-`�--:,zt�!,,-' , I - . , ' c - � . .�, , ,-: , � "' '. - . ' '."'. . __,_ .1 _-__1 .� _ ''RE TON -, .", ". . _;i :�.� - � , , ';.%,,,�Nl"I�1_1_:; � .- . - , I ._�_ , '.�: ,___. _ ,��_- - :. '. I , � , .j , , ': :;:;�_ - , ",z -I'7 �'.'fl :... __ � :- , ''"'"' I ',:� , . . - .B - * 1. ,,q � I'll 11 , , I 1� . - , ��,i. I _..� . ", . I,, �. ��%�- - - Vj D11 )ON I�*O_I, . I " ' . � "...-.I I 1. __ - - �.�:;:�,--.!"",-,..:,��*,.'i�'.."; - .� � . .C.v. ! , .,i,7�,,_�,' - 1 -1 , 1, :�.",* :t.,.,:�. . 7- _._ .1 I .- ,, , , P_ , . _ , ._".. �, I _ RENTON.,,,-, C A� ' , .',,:,.�, .- �.Itj M -�, .�IP 4. , �,..,, , ": ,::".. ,""7-�'!��,,__,�te� _,'-.'� ..., , , , _ , I :, .,.i.,- .: � , I. I , ,,, `� , pllt.-� "-; I ., .11, "; . ' ' .,.7 ,�,,,�� .." ,. ,:�.�,,�,,-::�,,.', ..";,; ," ,"'. ., __:- '. 1;4." - _ . 1. . , ` "� � t` __, � _ , I "' . . , " ,, ., . I. � _._ . .., . . . . . t, : ,t.,'��!.::.-_� _., r. . - . ." . -.,:.:r,:�.�v .", . .:, , ,,, � . . � .. - _, - I .... . � - , . . I , ,1__ ,',,,, .� . !�Z,i . - � -' '. 'I �: I . . . .. ". .. 1. ' , _,-_. , ,:"..''., - :Il'.. : '.',-.,: �' ._- I I ,� I �, I .1 - -__', , 11, ": I , ,� - -' ' ; . . — I - I- - 1 . .. I ,__' '...",, .,`_,.* -,-,,�.;, " l..""""'.,-.:!,.?. - ."_�. " _ . . 11'.1 - _ .1- '. � �!�, ,z � ..� . , , , ' " :,.' '. x"."', ;.'�c..",: ,�,��', � � I : . '' .1 .,� .'. - I %' ,-,�' I . :.. ,;:, :,: 11, I . .. - I I .1 -�.�-,.",�%-.`,., 'VI � , , ,�. -"' .",- . .i. 1, �" . .. .. . I" .. , ll..:_,:l '.%,�_:, �,:... .. .'.-..,�,,-, � I _ ., -, ' ' .." :....�..�". -.� �"..." ,".:.." !...:"' '..,,-�....;., - I �.� . � " . 1. .. . :. '.:� ... .. - --- AVEN v )Op.,TT H ---�`%I�"'""':".-"L�l .-� -.,-,-,, .,� ;�, I , . I I � l200 �. MJ4 ,r7%T, �. .�PL . ... - .; I 4 ,j . . . 1� . 1 . " ".. ,,, �' - 1'_�'� - _`�,,;-;, -...": . �_, 1. . � I. . . . . . , 1 ,-� .... . I . .1 I , . :, �,�l'.�,;:�l., ,. .- .,.,�" :' '.'',....,. .. . . . ",. . . . . .. . . I � : %' .*� I . I - : I- ''"'� ..�..,.,�., .., ...,:.�,.,.. . ,. , .A. * M 1 * :-, . ,I" '' " " .. , ' - 1 _;� -:�, ...''"', :.. ',..�,;',;� " � ' �l � .." _ -, ,� , ' - _-Z tt,_�;,�,,.� .. . i . � , ", �-."-, , , -'�.-:, ",:":,,�-z� -...�--.,"'_!11''. �,_ , , I , - -, ''I' " - � . I OPO . .� __. �.,:� ;: . ,..:,. _I� _-, - $ � 1, ... ,' . � . "" ' :.,l;` -, , "_� �.,!,,'.-,.i__',j- , � ':, . _ .,�.. ..%..I... � - ,'' : ;I .; '. . '_,�,�.-,- " """ I �' ,,� I 'R � . "'.! "',.,,.,-�"-- . iY, ,.�,,,�: ,-'.'- " . .. , . - . . . , __I ,1�11_ �-,-",�-- ...'...�'��, CERT|F|CAT|ON ! i- � �TATE 0F �A�H�NG�UN) ' ' a, | CDUNTY 8F KING \ | / HEREBY CERTIFY THAT ��� C0P| E3 OF THE ABOVE NOTICE WEKE P /nn�� ux^nUK� C0NSP| CUUU� PLACES ON THE PKUP[RTY DESCRIBED AND | �U- COP|ES �E O�TED AT THE RENT8W MUN}C�PAL BU|LO|NG 20O M|LL AVENUE � RENTON WA Owu � DATE U �� ���� | � � " ^ , v m - � NOTICE . . � , PUBLIC ME— E- TING ;ij 11 �� �l "' .1 'r � .�11 '11 � "I "" 1 ; - "' � .; 11 _.lla "' _.. ,21- 1 �1 --, ^~"^��, ^~ . ^� �~�«��.� . / � ^ | ' / SUBSCRIBEP AND SWORN ITO BEFORE ME A . S|GNEP ~� �� �w�� ----~ o��^ --� .--- ' -- '~ ' ^~~ ^~ ~`~ — - �r Nw��� PoW� io��� of Washington, ' . ~ �� � -4001k L (N, 1 1 • Renton City Council June 24, 1985 Page five' , AUDIENCE COMMENT - Continued I Reconvened , Council reconvened at 10:12 p.m. ; roll was taken; .all members previously listed were present. I Victoria Hills Moved by Mathews, seconded by Keolker, the charge for appeal Remand Appeal be waived for both the Victoria Hills Homeowners Association PPUD-008-85 and for, the Luckey Company. Councilman Trimm'questioned whether u (Luckey Company) this would establish permanent Council policy for all similar ' Continued ' future situations. Councilwoman Keolker voiced opposition to creating a blanket policy, noting special circumstances in this instance. Councilman Hughes spoke against the motion, I recommending policy be established before a precedent is set. Roll call requested: 3 aye's: Reed, Mathews, Keolker; 3 no's: Trimm, ,Clymer, Hughes; Stredicke abstained.. Councilman Stredicke indicated he had abstained from action on this matter due to potential violation of Appearance of Fairness Doctrine (see minutes of 5/06/85) and intended to remain neutral in this vote. Motion failed (lack of majority) . City Attorney Warren clarified that, if both document and fee deadlines are met, . an appeal would exist. (See later motion, page 7. ) 1 Quendall erminals Alex Cugini addressed Council regarding a letter from James C. Well #5 1fl' Hanken, 1218 Third Avenue, Seattle, attorney for Quendall 1 Terminals. Mr. Cugini apologized for Council not receiving' the i letter earlier; Councilman Clymer explained the letter had been addressed to his home and he would furnish Council with copies. ' Mr. Cugini explained that Quendall Terminals is under consideration by the Environmental Protection Agency to be included in a "Superfund site" due to the existence of Renton Well #5, located approximately 1-1/2 miles from Quendall Terminals; however, Well #5 was terminated in the early 1960's because of high mineral content. Quendall Terminals requests 1 the City notify the EPA that Well #5 is dormant and no current established plans exist to rehabilitate and/or redevelop the well. Continued] Councilwoman Mathews noted Well #5 had been included in theCity Well Study and recommended investigation of those conclusions. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, THIS CORRESPONDENCE WITH REGARD TO WELL #5 BE REFERRED TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, THE UTILITIES COMMITTEE, AND THE BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS FOR REVIEW AND REPORT BACK TO COUNCIL. CARRIED. I CONSENT AGENDA Items on the Consent Agenda are adopted by one motion which , follows the listing. i Lot Line Adjustment Building and Zoning Department submitted proposal for payment Application Fee of recording fee and inceased application fee to $100 for lot Increase II line adjustments due to revision of the Lot Line Adjustment procedure. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Shoreline ,Master Building and Zoning Department 'submitted amendment to Shoreline Program Anendmene t Master Program regarding Section 7.08.01 on Landfills, as ' required by the State Department of Ecology, and recommended the public hearing be set for 7/15/85 for review. Council concur. Tunnel Systems Court case filed by John D. Blankinship, attorney for Tunnel, Court Case Systems, Inc. , as action to foreclose against Public Works Mond in the name of H. L. Jacobson Construction Company; work completed by Tunnel Systems at an agreed value of $7,800, due 12/17/84 and remaining unpaid. Refer to City Attorney and insurance service. Claim foriDamLges Claim for damages in the amount of $15,000 filed by Andrew B. M. Lindsey Weiner, attorney for Melinda Lindsey, 17010 - 29th -Avenue South, Seattle, for stress and other effects of alleged false arrest and imprisonment by Renton Police Department on 9/06/84. Refer to City Attorney and insurance service. . 1 • O 1 Re �zl 1 A J �' OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY• RENTON,WASHINGTON POST OFFICE BOX 626 100 S 2nd STREET • RENTON,WASHINGTON 98057 255-E675 z p $ LAWRENCE J.WARREN, CITY ATTORNEY DANIEL KELLOGG, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY DAVID M. DEAN, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY A A1rFO SEP4 -neat,. 0� • MARK E.BARBER, ASSISTANT CITY'ATTORNEY ZANETTA L.FONTES, ASSISTANT,CITY ATTORNEY January. 2 4, 1985 MARTHA A.FRENCH,ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY RECEIVED TO:, Ways and Means Committee JAN 2 51985 FROM: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney CITY OF RENTON RE: evision to Shoreline Master Program CITY COUNCIL The,' Shoreline Master Program was adopted by reference as a part of the City Code. No ,legislation is necessary to amend the, Shoreline Master Program pursuant to Section 4-2502 of the Code which states as follows: ' Amendments: Any and all amendments, additions or modifications to said Master Program, when printed and filed with the City Clerk of the City of Renton by authorization of the City Council from time to time, shall be considered and accepted and constitute a part of such Master Program without the necessity Of further adoption of such amendments, modifications orsadditions by the legislative authority of the City ;I of Renton or by ordinance. " . • i The• Ways and Means Committee should recommend the changes to the Shoreline Master Program to the Council for approval. Lawrence J. arren . LJWII nd • • • � I SHOREL. MASTER PROGRAM (ADOPTED 5, 1983) 7.08 LANDFILL 7.08.01 Landfills shall be permitted only in the following cases: A. For detached single-family residential uses adjacent to one (1) existingi bulkhead, the property may be filled to the line of conformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) feet in length along ! the water's edge and thirty-five (35) feet into the water, and provided the provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are satisfactorily met; or, B. When a bulkhead is built to protect the existing perimeter land, a landfill shall be approved to bring the contour up to the desired grade; or, C. When in a public use area, landfill would be advantageous to the general public; or, D. When repairs or modifications are required for existing bulkheads and 1 fills; or, E. When landfill is required for flood control purposes; or, F. Justification for landfill for any other purpose than those listed in subsections A through E above will be allowed only with prior approval of the Land Use Hearing Examiner. 7.09 MARINAS 7.09.01 Marina shall be permitted only when: A. Adequate on-site parking is 'available commensurate with the moorage facilities provided. [See 7.09.02(F) below] B. Adequate water area is available commensurate with the actual moorage facilities provide. C. The location of the moorage facilities is convenient to public roads. 7.09.02 Design Requirements A. Marinas are to be designed in the manner that will minimize adverse effects on fish and shell fish resources and be aesthetically compatible with adjacent areas. B. Marinas utilized for overnight and long-term moorage are not to be located in shallow-water embayments with poor flushing action. C. Applications for permits for marina construction are to be evaluated for compliance with standards promulgated by federal, state, and local agencies. - 31 - FORM OF ORDER AND =__ANSMITTAL BY AGENCY HA1 G SINGLE HEAD State of Washington Department of Ecology • (agency name) Administrative Order No. DE 84-14 (1) I. Glen H. Fiedler Deputy director of The Department of Ecology do promulgate and adopt at Lacev. Washington • • (place) the annexed rules relating to: • W4C 173-19-2520 RENTON, City of (2) ALTERNATIVE A. Vat only for Adoption of Permaieot Rules. This action is taken pursuant to Notice No. 84-14-1p1 filed with the code reviser on 7/3/84 .These rules shall take effect: ® thirty days after they are filed with the code reviser pursuant to RCW 34.04.040(2). 0 at,a later date,such date being (2) ALTERNATIVE B. Use only for Adoption of Emergency Riles. " --- I. , find that an emergency exists and that this order is necessary for the preservation of the public health, safe!), or general• . welfare and that observance of the requirements of notice and opportunity to present views on the proposed action would be contrary to public interest. A statement of the facts constituting the emergency is. These rules arc therefore adopted as emergency rules to take effect upon filing with the code reviser. • AMENDATORY SECTION (Amending Order DE 79-34, filed 1/30/80) . WAC 173-19-2520 RENTON, CITY OF. City of Renton master program approved January 23, 1976. Revision approved February 23, 1977. Revision approved September 12, 1984. ' I T• 1 For.Use .By City Clerk's Office Only A. I . # G• b . AGENDA ITEM RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING 1 .coca . =sssaaa ......... aria...:.== SUBMITTING 1 ZONING DIVISION Dept./Div./Bd./Comm. BUILDING AND ZONING DEPT. For Agenda Of I • (Meeting Date) Staff Contact I �oD r Blaylnrk (Name) Agenda Status: • SUBJECT: Shoreline Master Program/ Department Consent • of Ecology Partial Approval of Revisions and Public Hearing Correspondence Rejection of Section 7.08.01 (Landfills) Ordinance/Resolution Old Business Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc.)Attach New Business A. D.O.E. Transmittal Letter Study Session Other B. Shoreline Master Program/Sec. 7.08.01 $ (page 31 ) C. Approval : Legal Dept. Yes No_ N/A COUNCIL ACTIONRECOMMENDED: Revise Shoreline Finance Dept. Yes No. N/A Master Program and Ordinance No. 3758 to Other Clearance reflect D.O.E,a decision. Refer to Ways & Means for Ordinance preparation. FISCAL IMPACT: Expenditure Required $ O Amount $ O Appropriation- $ O Budgeted Transfer Required SUMMARY (Backgrounld information, prior action and effect of implementation) (Attach additional pages if necessary.) The (Shoreline Management Act of 1971 established a procedure for reviewing amendments to local masten programs. The City of Renton revised ours in December 1983 (Ord. 3750. The Department of Ecology held a public hearing to consider our amendment requests. D.O.E. rejected the proposed change in Section 7.08.01 dealing with landfills. The I,Cit,' must change the specific language of the Master Program back to the 1976 approved version. The phrase "adjacent to one (1 ) existing bulkhead" needs to be replaced by " when the property is located between two (2) existing bulkheads". I I I I I PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: Versie Vaupel , Peggi DuBois, Betsy Crawford, Richard Houghton (ate W • c G� . ) SUBMIT THIS COPY TO CITY CLERK BY NOON ON THURSDAY WITH DOCUMENTATION. I fA J , Renton City Council 1/21/85 flag- two Public Heari g Shane (RAMAC, Inc.) Street Vacation continued Continued of the vacation request would alleviate existing traffic congestion in that area, eliminate illegal dumping of garbage now occurring, and allow improved policing and protection of apartment buildings. - Continued Phyllis LaRue (address above) questioned the depth dimension of the vacation property. She advised that access to her property to the east had been assured in 1972 by the State from their right-of-way south a distance of 200 feet. Mr. Shane indicated that he had no objection to provision of a full width street on the northeast corner of Mrs. LaRue's property. Continued Mr. Lee noted that the decision of the Board of Public Works 1 to deny the street vacation was based upon location of utility lines, and the Board had not addressed the issue of future access to abutting property owners. Continued During Council discussion of the matter, the following information was requested: emergency access requirements; dimensions of the property requested for vacation; whether the petitioner could be granted the entire parcel or only one-half if the vacation is approved; whether or not limited access could be achieved by fencing off aisles between existing apartment buildings; underlying zoning of all abutting properties; history of the zoning of the apartment site and whether or not the looped roadway had been required to assure access to buildings; status and location of utilities in the area; whether or not there is a latecomer , agreement allowing utility connection by Mrs. LaRue; and provision of an accurate site plan showing distances and dimensions. Continued Responding to one of the questions, City Attorney Warren advised that only the City Council has the authority to authorize the barricading of a public street. MOVED BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY CLYMER, REFER THIS MATTER BACK TO THE BOARD OF PUBLIC WORKS FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED. MOVED BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED. Consideration of the two letters of correspondence from abutting property owners and Council requests for Hearing C.ntinued additional information were requested in the Board' s review. CONSENT A! ENDA Items on the Consent Agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing: Comp Plan an. Building and Zoning Department requested modification of fees Zoning Map F-es for Comprehensive Plan Compendium and Zoning Maps to cover increased production costs. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Shoreline; Building and Zoning Department requested revision of Shoreline Master Master Program to conform with the recommendations by the Program State Department of Ecology regarding landfills (Section 7.08.01) , replacing phrase referring to one existing bulkhead with phrase referring to two existing bulkheads. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. City of Tacoma Claim for damages in the amount of $1 ,457.15 filed by the City Claim for of Tacoma, Office of the City Attorney, 740 St. Helens Avenue, Damages ! Suite 1120, Tacoma, alleging damages to Tacoma police patrol CL 41-84 ! car caused by collision with Renton police patrol car (11/i11,/84) . Refer to City Attorney and insurance service. Donnelly Rezone Hearing Examiner recommended approval with restrictive covenants R-098-84 ! , of Michael Donnelly Rezone Request, File No. R-098-84, for 0. 17 acre of property at 636 Shattuck Avenue S. from R-4, High Density Multifamily, to B-1 , Business Use. Refer to Ways an,d Means Committee. WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT JANUARY 28, 1985 ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS The Ways and Means Committee recommends the following ordinance for second and final reading: Squire Annexation (north side of SE 200th St. approximately 1/2 mile, east of Talbot Road S) The Waysl and Means Committee recommends the following ordinances for first readiing: Appropriation and Transfer of Funds to Golf Course Fund Modifying Fees for Comprehensive Plan Compendium and Zoning Maps Donnelly Rezone, R-098-84 (from R-4 to B-1 - 636 Shattuck Ave. So.) Crown Pointe Partnership Rezone, R-067-84 (from B-1 to R-3 - Between Monroe Ave NE and Union Ave NE near the 3700 block of NE 4th St) SHORELIfJE MASTER PROGRAM (Referred 1-21-85) Upon advice from the City Attorney, the Ways and Means Committee recommends that no legislation is required to amend the Shoreline Master Program. The amendment requires approval by the City Council . APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS The Ways and Means Committee recommends approval of Vouchers No. 4576 through No. 4862 in the amount of $769,992.04. ( ` Earl Clymer, C irman Thomas Trimm PPe42,_ Robe Hughes 1 I Renton Cilty Council 1/28/85 !Pa e eight Ordinances nd Resolutions continued Shoreline Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a report: Master Program regarding the Shoreline Master Program referred on 1/21/85. : Upon advice from the City Attorney, the Ways and Means Committee recommended that no legislation is required to amend the Shoreline Master Program. The amendment requires; approval by the City Council . MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY REED, THIS SUBJECT BE REFERRED TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Councilman Stredicke ! questioned delay in revising the Shoreline Master Program' to comply with State DOE requirements, noting notification by that agency to City last fall . Vouchers, Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a report recommending approval of Vouchers 4576 through,4862 in .the amount of $769,992.04, having received departmental certification that merchandise and/or services have been received/rendered. Vouchers 4567 through 4575 machine voided. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. NEW BUSINESS Council President Reed questioned whether utility tax reductions Utility Tax are being monitored for compliance. Mayor Shinpoch indicated she will review the matter with Finance Director Mulcahy. I Dochnahl Noting that the 75% petition for the Dochnahl Annexation has Annexation already been filed with the City, it was MOVED BY STREDICKE,, Public Hearing SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL ACCEPT AND CERTIFY THE 75% PETITION FOR THE DOCHNAHL ANNEXATION, AND CITY CLERK SET PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED. (See earlier action.) Crown Pointe Councilman Stredicke requested the Administration to provide Development a report indicating the setback from the centerline of NE 4th Setback Street to the Crown Pointe Limited Rezone property, located:: between Monroe and Union Avenue NE. Annexation MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, THAT THE Policy RESOLUTION OUTLINING CITY ANNEXATION POLICIES BE REFERRED T0 WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE FOR LEGAL CLARIFICATION OF LANGUAGE. CARRIED. ADMINISTRATIVE Mayor Shinpoch reported that efforts by Traffic Engineering REPORT to improve traffic flow along Bronson Way by installation Bronson ,Way of lane marking buttons for channelization have not been Buttons successful . The buttons will be removed to allow vehicles to travel straight through the intersection at Park/N. 1st. Hughes Mayor Shinpoch relayed thanks from Fire Department officials Thanked to Councilman Hughes for use of his 6th floor City Hall office window to monitor a two-engine aircraft in distress. Assembly, of A proposal was made in December to the City for purchase of the God Church Assembly of God Church located at the corner of Hardie and Offered for Taylor NW in Skyway for possible use as a community center.1 Sale 1 Following review of the proposal , the Park and Building Departments cannot recommend purchase of the facility due to asking price, need for extensive remodeling, and congested ! parking area. AUDIENCE COMMENT Judy Hastings, 14621 SE 138th Place, felt that non-resident) Library Policies ) library users should have equal service as residents if they pay required fee. She indicated that the courtesy card j available to her as a non-resident owning property in Renton does not meet her needs since it must remain on file at the main library and cannot be carried on her person. Mayor 1 Shinpoch indicated that Mrs. Hastings concerns and suggestions for improved service should be directed to the Library Board as the City Council does not have jurisdiction in this matter. ADJOURNMENT MOVED BY REED, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL ADJOURN. CARRIED. Time: 10:45 p.m. MAXI E E. MOTOR, City Clerk i i M PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT JUNE 10, 1985 ' SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM AMENDMENT (Referred 1 -28-85) The P1annng and Development Committee reconsidered an amendment to the City' s Shoreline Master Program which was disallowed by the. State Department of Ecology, nd recommends that the City Council hold a public hearing to amend the Shoreline Plan in a manner consistent with DOE mandates. POLICY;, FOR GRANTING VARIANCES FROM SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM (Referred 7-2-84) The Planning and Development Committee discussed the Hearing Examiner' s letter of July 2 1984, concerning acceptable criteria for allowing variances to the ; City'sjShoreline Master Program. In spite of the fact that the Council overturned one of the Examiner's recent variance decisions, the Commmittee believes hat the Examiner is correctly applying the conditions for granting variances and the provisions of the Shoreline Master Plan. The Committee concluded that no further guidance is necessary for the Examiner at this time and recommends that the Council take no action and that this item be deleted from the Planning and Development Committee Referral Agenda. i'i Richard MJ Stredicke, Chairman Kathy Ieolker Nancy Mathews Renton City1 Council 6/10/85 Page five Old Business continued Community Services be approved by the City before installation and can be Committee , removed at the City's request at any time. The Committee Maplewood Golf further recommended authorization for the Mayor, City Clerk Course TeeSigns and Park Board Chairman to sign the contract. MOVED BY continued KEOLKER, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Chairman Keolker clarified that the proposal approved by the Council would not be allowed under current City Code requirements ; however, the Maplewood property is still within King County boundaries. (Sign regulations in P-1, zone will be reviewed by Planning & Development Committee on 6/13/85 at 4:30 p.m.) Honey Creel Councilman Stredicke requested a periodic status report be Sewer Project supplied to Councilmembers on the Honey Creek sewer project to assess progress for purposes of lifting building moratorium. Honey Creek For the record, Councilman Stredicke submitted a letter from Associates 'Rezone Hearing Examiner Fred Kaufman dismissing the Honey Creek R-014-84 and Associates Rezone, R-014-85, and Preliminary Planned Unit ' PPUD-015-84 Development, PPUD-015-85, located in the 2200 block of ' Jefferson Avenue NE, as a result of requirement of substantial plan revisions. The applicant has been directed to resubmit plans for review and public hearing. Councilwoman Mathews noted that an annexation was filed concurrently with the rezone and PPUD for the subject site; and questioned status of the annexation. Mayor Shinpoch will research matter. Status of LID 326 Councilman Stredicke requested a status report on LID 326, NE 4th Street widening of NE 4th Street between Monroe and Union Avenue NE. Mayor Shinpoch indicated plans to provide a report to Councilmembers at the Council workshop of all Public Works projects, but efforts will be made to provide the requested status report at the Council meeting of 6/17. , Planning and Planning and Development Committee Chairman Stredicke presented Development a report indicating that the Committee has reconsidered ani Committee amendment to the City's Shoreline Master Program disallowed Shoreline Master by the State Department of Ecology, and recommended that 1 Program Amendment the City Council hold a public hearing to amend the Shoreline Plan in a manner consistent with DOE mandates. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE ` REPORT. CARRIED. ShorelineP1as=er Planning and Development Committee Chairman Stredicke presented Program Variance a report indicating review is complete of the Hearing Examiner' s Policy letter of 7/2/84 concerning acceptable criteria for, allowing ' variances to the City's Shoreline Master Program. Although Council overturned one of the Examiner's recent variance I decisions, the Committee believes the Examiner is correctly applying the conditions for granting variances and the ; provisions of the Shoreline Master Plan. The Committee concluded that no further guidance is necessary for the Examiner at this time and recommended no action be taken by j the Council . MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, ' COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. ' ORDINANCESIAND RESOLUTIONS Ways and Means Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a report Committee recommending the following ordinance for second & final reading: Ordinance , 39p6 An ordinance was read amending Section 6-2401 of Title VI Criminal Attempt (Police Regulations) of City Code related to conspiracy Ordinance to commit a crime. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS READ. City Attorney Warren) clarified the, intent of the ordinance to thwart group shop lifting attempts. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a report recommending the following ordinances for first reading:; 1 _ 1 For.Use B City Clerk's Office Only A. I . # �, . AGENDA ITEM RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING =--s == s -------==aaaasa==a ==:saws:=== SUBMITTING 1 Dept./Div./Bd./Comm. Building & Zoning For Agenda Of June 24, 1985 (Meeting Date) Staff Contact Roger Blaylock I (Nalme) Agenda Status: SUBJECT: Shoreline Program Amendment Consent Public Hearing Correspondence Ordinance/Resolution Old Business Exhibits: (Legal Dscr. , Maps, Etc.)Attach New Business Study Session A. Program Section Change Other B. Letter; regarding change I � , C. i Approval : Legal Dept. Yes No .x N/A COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: Finance Dept. Yes No. x N/A Set date or a public hearing Other Clearance N/A July 15. 1985 FISCAL IMPACT: 1 -0- Ex enditure Re wired _ Amount _ Appropriation- Expenditure q $ -0 Budgeted $ _O Transfer Required $ -O- SUMMARY (Backgrund information, prior action and effect of implementation) ' I I (Attach,ladditional pages if ,necessary.) The City of Renton approved a revision to the Shorelines Master Program in December, 1983. ;ITh State reviewed the revision and accepted proposed changes with the exception of Section 7.08.01 on Landfills. The State's rejection of this section resulted in the need for the City to amend the approved Shorelines Master Program with the language required by the State. The City Council decided on holding 'a publicl hearing to amend the Shoreline Master Program as required by the State. I • 1 PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: it SUBMIT THIS COPY TO CITY CLERK BY NOON ON THURSDAY WITH DOCUMENTATION. 1 t I - tlTATp -. $• Uu'u'!o 0,�, L I o s .�•, f Jul IN SI'LLMAN , Governor �y oo UUNALD W. MOOS d Mg a Director STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504 • (206) 459-6000 September 12, 1984 ciTY OF RENTON 1 [ 11HUN Roger J. Blaylock D Zoning Administrator $EP 13 1984 City of Renton Municipal Building BU1lu4NGiZONING DEPT. 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Blaylock: The Department of Ecology has completed its review of the city of Renton's proposed arisen:dment to the Shoreline Master Program. The amendment adds a Natural Environment designation to an area next to the old Black Rive1r channel; increases setbacks for commercial structures from 25 feet to 50 feet; modifies landfill criteria for bulkheads for single family residential • use; allows marinas only if parking is provided; deletes sign regulations; prohibits petroleum bulk storage and distribution; adds a new definition for "high rise" structures, ;local service utility, and major service utility; and changes the public hearing procedures to institute the hearing examiner system. Our review:found the proposed amendment, with one exception, to be consistent with the Shoreline Act and the state's guidelines for development and amendment of master programs. We are pleased to approve those consistent portions. Your proposal to modify Section 7.08.01 to permit landfilling to the line of conformity with an adjacent bulkhead on one side of a property instead of adjacent bulkheads on each side of a property would provide opportunities for additional encroachment lineally along previously undeveloped shorelines. This is inconsistent with the intent of WAC 173-16-060(11)(e) which provides that the construction of bulkheads be permitted only where they provide protection to upland areas and not for the indirect purpose of creating land by filling behind the bulkhead. In light of Phis provision, the change from the criteria requiring two adjacent bulkheads to that requiring only one is denied. The approved portion of the amended program will become effective 30 days from the date of filing with the state Code Reviser. Sincerely, ,r,„„Qej Glen H. Fiedler Deputy Director GHF:kb ♦ JOHN SPELLMAN s �� �, •i = DONALD W. MOOS ?w y uovernor d>4 4 J8K9 d� Director STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV-11 • Olympia, Washington 98504 • (206) 459-6000 • September 12, 1984 Roger J. Blaylock Zoning Administrator City of Renton Municipal ;Building 200 Mill /�'verue South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Blaylock: The Department of Ecology has completed its review of the city of Renton's proposed amendment to the Shoreline Master Program. The amendment adds a Natural Environment designation to an area next to the old Black :River channel; increases setbacks for commercial structures from 25 feet to 50, feet; modifies landfill criteria for bulkheads for single family residential use; allows marinas only if parking is provided; deletes sign regulations; prohibits petroleum, bulk storage and distribution; adds a new definition for "high rise" structures,' local service utility, and major service utility; and changes the public hearing procedures to institute the hearing examiner system. Our review found the proposed amendment, with one exception, to be consistent with the Shoreline Act and the state's guidelines for development and amendment of master ',programs. We are pleased to approve those consistent portions. Your proposal to modify Section 7.08.01 to permit landfilling to the line of conformity with an adjacent bulkhead on one side of a property instead of adjacent bulkheads on each side of a property would provide opportunities for additional encroachment lineally along previously undeveloped shorelines. This is inconsistent with the intent of WAC 173-16-060(11)(e) which provides that the construction of bulkheads be permitted only where they provide protection to upland areas and not for the indirect purpose of creating land by filling behind the bulkhead. In light of this provision, the change from the criteria requiring two adjacent ,bulkheads ;'to that requiring only one is denied. The approved portion of the amended program will become effective,y3Q•_days fp ET Oki:- from the date of filing with the state Code Reviser. Sincerely, 2 if Glen H. Fiedler rg7 Deputy Director GHF:kb i ruz•.:N1 Vr'i VI 1J n.'u • rn.NJ..4i • • :.•.. .. . - - - - - .• < e Stitt of Waibington Department of Ecology (agency name) Administrttire Order No. DE 84-28 • Glen H. Fiedler • Deputy , dircnor of The Department of Ecology do promulgate andiladopt at Lacey. Washington (puce) the anmeicd rules relating to: • WAC 173-19-2520 RENTON, City of • • • • • (2) ALTER' ATl VE A. Use only for Adoption of Permiteat Rules. This action it taken pursuant to Notice No. 84-14-1D1 filed with the code reviser on 7/3/84 . These rules thall take effect: ® thirty days after they arc filed with t code reviser pur u.ant to RCW 34.04.04.0(2). 0 at 'a later date, such date being (2) ALTERNATIVE B. Use oxnll for Adoptism of Emergency Ralcs. ---- 1, . find that an emergcncylexists and that this order is neo`ssary for the preservation of the public health, safety. or.general • welfare and that observance of the requirements of notice and opportunity to present views on the proposed action would be contrary to public interest. A statement of the facts constituting the emergency is: • • These rules arc therefore adopted as emergency rules to take effect upon filing with the wde reviser. (3) Pursuant to the requirements of RCA` 34.04.026' that 'every agency shall incorporate the most specific, but in no case omit all, of the following language alternatives when adopting or amending rules' fill in statement (a), (b), or (c) as rppropriatc: (a) hisrule is promulgated pursuant•to RCW 90.58.120 & 200 -f and is intended to administratively implement that statute. • v (b) This rule is promulgated pursuant to RCW which directs that the : (agency) has authority to implement the provisions of • . (name of act or RCW citation) • D (c),Tbis rule is promulgated under the general rule-making authority of the (agency) • as authorized in RCW (4) The undersigned bereb) declares that the agency has complied with the provisions of the'' Open Public Meetings Act (chapter 42.30 RCW), the Administrative Procedure Act (chapter 34.04 RCW) and the State Register Act (chapter,34.Q<s RCW) in the adoption of these telex. SIht Orp. "•�� . (3)`?biVP6ItA c'ii3l�eing first recorded in the order register of this agency, is herewith transmitted to the Code Reviser foFhlittg�ipursuant to chapter 34.04 RCK' and chapter 1-12 WAC. SkPoPRdVE,D41/41,4D ADOPTED September 12 19 84 CODE i%1.C'Fp'Q nrrtrr By 22(------7q• •• 'i CITY OF RENTON I . RESOLUTION NO. 1912 THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS : SECTION I : Pursuant to the requirements of the SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF. 19'71 , as amended, (_chapter 90 . 58 RCW) the City her*A06; ftd ti At. MfflAV Ir.'r ogra © a true cop thereof being attached hereto and made a part of this Resolution as if fully set orth. 1 I All requirements of RCW 90 . 58 .080 et seq have been duly complied with and al_l ,of the provisions of said "Shoreline Master Program" having been duly approved by the City of Renton 's Shoreline Citizens Advisory Committee . SECTION II : The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to 1 forward a 'copy of this I%s.olution , together with a copy of the "Shoreline Master Program" to the. DeparLment of Ecology, Olympia, Washington , for its consideration and approval. Upon such final approval, the provisions of said Master Program shall constitute use regulations for the various a , g affected shorelines located within the City of Renton and as further set forth lin said "Shoreline Master Program" . PASSEiD .gY THE CITY COUNCIL this 3rd day of aune ,1974 elores Af l d, ??M1Kk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 3rd day of June ,1974 } --;0/1- 14--0/1 /kke" A ery Garr tt , Mayor App ed as to pyylv sle'ro(A? (6eWt'4. Ge and M. ,IShellan , City Attorney 1 hl' 0,71 oL& 369/ CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 3787 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, AMENDING SECTION 1-4101 OF TITLE I (ADMINISTRATIVE) C. ORDINANCE NO. 1628 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON" RELATING TO SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM FEES THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, DO, ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : SECTION I : Existing Section 1-4101 of Title I (Administrative) of Ordinance No . 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City f Renton" is hereby amended by adding the following : Section 1-4101 (20) T •e of A• •lication Fee Code Section "reline Filing Fee $ 75.00 if value less than $10,000 4-2501 $150.00 if value $10,000 but less than $50,000.00 $200.00 if value $50,000 to $100,000 $250.00 if value more than $100,000 plus .02% of value over $100,000.00 SECTION II : This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passa:e, approval and thirty (30) days after publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 23rd day of January, 1984. Maxine E. Motor, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 23rd day of January, 1984. , ��Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Approved as to form: 64.41.0.4.4.4 )6.41,4en... Lawrence J.Wa en, City Attorney Date df Publication: January 27, 1983 1 , t 1 Renton City Council 1 /16/84 Piage Three Old Business continued Utilities Committee Utilities Committee Chairman Mathews presented a report Washingto Technical concurring in the recommendation of the Public Works Center Request for Department to release the utility easement within new Lot 1 Easement (Relase , of the Washington Technical Center (portion of old Lots 9. and 10) created by Lot Line Adjustment LLA-016-83, and further recommends the Mayor and City Clerk be authorized to sign the document. MOVED BY MATHEWS, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE UTILITIES COMMITTEE '; REPORT. CARRIED. I Transportation Transportation Committee Chairman Stredicke presented a Committee; report advising withdrawal of request for lease of Airport Bryn Mawr Properties property by Bryn Mawr Properties (referred 12/1/83) . Request to Lease Thecompany is now proposing that an easement be granted Airport Property by the City to enable fire engines to exit from the apartment parking lot onto West Perimeter Road in the event of an emergency response. A formal submittal of the new proposal will be required which should include the name of the contact at the King County Fire District. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Ways and Means Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a Committee report recommending the following ordinances for first reading: Shoreline Master An ordinance was read amending Section 1-1401 of Title ,I Program Fees; (Administrative) relating to Shoreline Master Program Fees. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, REFER :THIS ORDINANCE BACK TO COMMITTEE FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED. Limited Talx An ordinance was read relating to contracting indebtedness,; General Obli ation providing for the issuance, specifying the maturities, maximum Bond, 198i4 effective interest rate, terms and covenants of a $240,000 par value "Limited Tax General Obligation Bond, 1984", of the City for strictly City purposes to provide funds with which to pay the cost of planned equipment purchases of the City; and providing for the sale of such bond. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY. HUGHES, REFER THIS j ORDINANCE BACK TO COMMITTEE FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED. Sign Regulations Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a of Shoreli� a Master report recommending that the Shoreline Master Program Sign Program i! Regulations be referred to the Administration for drafting l with referral to the Planning and Development Committee; for review to follow. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, THIS MATTER BE REFERRED TO THE ADMINISTRA- TION FOR DRAFTING. CARRIED. NEW BUSIESS Council President Hughes announced on-going PSCOGg g g County- PSCOG Coun y- wide cost of services study to assess advantages and dis- Wide Cost, of advantages of coordinating bond sales, etc. with Metro, the( Services Stu y Port of Seattle, school districts and other governmental agencies. Firearm Li gislation Council President Hughes indicated that the Legislature is considering a bill which will void the City's ordinance` which prohibits the carrying of firearms in taverns and bars. I Mayor Shinpoch advised the City will be represented at the Judiciary hearing 1/17/84 by the Police Chiefs' Association. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED BY KEOLKER, ADMINISTRATION BE AUTHORIZED TO NOTIFY THE LEGISLATURE OF I;Hk CITY COUNCIL'S OPPOSITION TO LEGISLATION WHICH !VOIDS THE CITY'S ORDINANCE TO PROHIBIT THE CARRYING :OF Stricter Fireworks WEAPONS. CARRIED. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED; BY Control 1 MATHEWS, THE ADMINISTRATION NOTIFY THE LEGISLATURE 1 _ OF THE CITY COUNCIL'S SUPPORT OF STRICTER FIREWORKS ' CONTROL. CARRIED. Bird Hazing Councilman Stredicke reported that a Bird Hazing Program Program is being prepared by Public Works staff . The question of whether reference to live ammunition can be deleted from the program is being reviewed by the City Attorney. \ ,me;n e J h C WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE COMMITTEE REPORT JANUARY 16, 1984 ORDI VANCES T e Ways and Means Committee recommends the following ordinances f r first reading: Shoreline Master Program Fee Schedule Limited Tax General Obligation Bonds, 1984 SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM - SIGN REGULATIONS (Referred 1 _9-84) The Ways and Means Committee recommends that this matter be referred to the Administration for drafting with referral to the Planning and Eevelopment Committee for review. II Earl Clymer, Chairman • Fobe rt Hughes Pickard Stredicke AMENDS ORD. #3094 • CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON ! ORDINANCE NO . 3758 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON,' AMENDING CHAPTER 25 OF TITLE IV (BUILDING BUILDING REGULATIONS) OF ORDINANCE NO. 1628 ENTITLED "CODE OF GENERAL ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF RENTON" RELATING TO THE SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON,WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS : j SECTION I : Existing Section 4-2501 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" is hereby amended as follows . Section 4-2501, as amended: PROGRAM ADOPTED, COPY KEPTBY CLERK, INSPECTION: The "Shoreline Master Program" , as issued and prepared by City of Renton Planning Commission, of which one (1) printed copy in book form has heretofore been filed and is now . on 'file in the office of the City Clerk and made available for examination by the general public, is hereby adopted as the . "Shoreline Master Program" by the City of Renton. SECTION II : Existing Section 4-2502 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No . 1628 entitled "Code. of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" is hereby amended as follows : f Section 4-2502 , as amended: AMENDMENTS : Any and all , amendments , additions or modifications to said Master Program, ,when printed and filed with the City Clerk of the City of Renton by authorization of the City Council from time to time, shall be r considered and accepted and constitute a part of such Master Program without the necessity of further adoption of such amendments , modifications or additions by the legislative authority of the City of R nton or by Ordinance. SECTION III : Existing Section 4-2504 of Title IV (Building Regulations) of Ordinance No. 1628 entitled "Code of General Ordinances of the City of Renton" is hereby repealed in its entirety. SECTION IV: This Ordinance shall be effective upon its passage, approval and thirty (30) days after its publication. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 5th day of IleceMber, 1983 . e. Maxine E. Motor, City Clerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 5th day of ;Dgmenibbe , 1983 . 1 Bar ara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor. Approved as to form: La ence J. Wa en, City Attorney Date of Publication: December 9 , .1983 - I Ask Renton City Council 12/05/83 Page Two Special Presentation Continued Reporter Jan effective December 12, 1983. Mrs. Hinman has reported the , Hinman Honored news of City Hall with the utmost accuracy, impartiality, intelligence, wit and humor; and the Council , Mayor and staff of the City offer their appreciation for a job well-done for Renton and sincere congratulations for her promotion. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS, COUNCIL ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS READ. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Pat Houlbjerg, 14319 SE 100th Place, Renton, inquired regarding LID 326/NE Fourth timing of LID 326 (left turn lane on NE Fourth Street between Street Project Monroe and Union Avenue NE) . Administrative Assistant Parness advised progress is being made on preliminary designsand funds and approvals continue to be sought through the State. Lake Terrace Ken Shellan, Attorney, 3820 38th Avenue SW, Seattle, requested Park Associates the Lake Terrace Park Associates rezone ordinance be held for Rezone Ordin nce one week. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL SUSPEND R-090-81 THE RULES AND ADVANCE TO ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. CARRIED. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, LAKE TERRACE PARK ASSOCIATES REZONE ORDINANCE BE HELD ONE WEEK TO ALLOW CORRECTION OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION. CARRIED. Shoreline! Andy Padvorac, Puget Sound Power & Light Company, Puget Power Master Pro ram Building, Bellevue, requested advancement to Shoreline Master Program ordinance. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADVANCE TO ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. CARRIED. Ordinance #3758 An ordinance was read amending Chapter 25 of the City Code, Shoreline Master relating to the Shoreline Master Program. MOVED BY CLYMER, 1 Program SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. :Councilman Mathews suggested deleting the language specifying certain number of feet from Section 7.08.01 , Issue 3.d. on Page ;43 of the Program to allow owners of single family residential ; lakeside lots to fill to the line of conformity with existing ibulkheads , develop their property, and increase Renton's tax! base. !Councilman Stredicke questioned clarity of Section 7.07.02 which ,states industrial structures should be permitted where they are set back 25 feet from the water's edge. City Attorney Warren felt the language would allow replacement of structures within the setback should they be destroyed. Mr. Padvorac indicated ,his opinion that the verb "should" implies permissiveness and !certain flexiblity in interpretation of that section. ROLL CALL: 4 AYES: TRIMM, MATHEWS, HUGHES, CLYMER. 2 NAYS: REED, STREDICKE. CARRIED. CONSENT AGENDA Executive Department requested study of municipal access cable TV Municipal Access programming in the City of Renton to determine use of $74, 100 Cable TV , contained in the city's Cable Communications Development Fund. Programming Refer to Community Services Committee for analysis and report back. Fund Transfer Parks Department requested fund transfer to purchase self-propelled to Purchase sweeper for Coulon Beach Park to remove fowl droppings and, refuse Sweeper from sidewalks and lawns in the amount of $8,416.20. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Cost Revenu Policy Development Department submitted Cost Revenue Summary to Summary evaluate the current fiscal effect of on-going services to their different land uses. Refer to Committee of the Whole for briefing at December 15th meeting. Washington Land Use Hearing Examiner recommended approval of rezone i Horsebreeders' requested by Washington Horsebreeders' Assocaition, File No. Association R-066-83, from G-1 to B-1 for property located adjacent to Rezone 2600 Oaksdale Avenue SW to allow construction of seven low- R-066-83 rise barn buildings. Refer to Ways and Means Committee for ordinance. Seaplane Ramp Public Works (Airport) Department recommended reduction in Rental Rate Seaplane Ramp rental rate for Renton Aviation, Inc. due to Reduced ' 40% reduction in ramp capacity because of siltation deposit.' Refer to Transportation (Aviation) Committee. !i I RENTON CITY COUNCIL.L Regular Meeting November 28, 1983 Municipal Building Monday, ;8:00 p.m. Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF THOMAS W. TRIMM, Council President; EARL CLYMER, COUNCIL MEMBERS ROBERT J . HUGHES, RANDALL ROCKHILL, RICHARD M. STREDICKE, JOHN W. REED, NANCY L. MATHEWS. CITY STAFF IN BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; LAWRENCE J. WARREN, ATTENDANCE City Attorney; MAXINE E. MOTOR, City Clerk; MICHAEL W. PARNESS, Administrative Assistant; RONALD G. NELSON, Building & Zoning Director; BATTALION CHIEF JAMES ' MATTHEW, Fire Department; LT. H. RAY CALDWELL, Police Department. PRESS Deeann Glamser, Renton Record-Chronicle MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL ADOPT THE MINUTES OF NOVEMBER 21, 1983 AS WRITTEN. CARRIED. SPECIAL Mayor Shinpoch presented a special award to Felix PRESENTATION Campanella in grateful appreciation for his twelve years Board of Adjustment of dedicated service to the Renton community on the Member and jChairman Board of Adjustment as a member and as its chairman. Felix Campaitiella Mr. Campanella, who came here from Italy at the age of ten, graduated from the University of Washington, and started his architectural business in Renton in 1954, is responsible for the architecture of the Renton Municipal'I Building and the Main Library, and, more recently, the new McLendon building on South Second Street. In addition to membership on the Board of Adjustment, he has belonged to the Planning Association of Washington, Washington State Vocational Association, and American Institute of Architects. Building Director Ronald Nelson introduced other board members in attendance, Frank Holman and Chairman Dave Young. Mr. Campanella expressed appreciation for the opportunity to serve on the Board of Adjustment, and praised other board members for their professionalism and contribution to the city. AUDIENCE COMMENT Francis A. Holman, 1624 Ferndale Avenue SE, Board of Cable TV', Manholes Adjustment member, indicated his privilege in serving with Mr. Campanella on the board. He also requested assistance with an ongoing safety problem in his Tiffany Park neighborhood resulting from installation of manholes several months ago to accommodate cable TV connection • wires. Mayor Shinpoch indicated the complaint would be forwarded immediately to the city's cable consultant, Lon Hurd, 3-H Management and Consultants. Shoreline Master Andy Padvorac, Puget Sound Power and Light Company, Program Puget Power Building, Bellevue, requested advancement to Ordinances and Resolutions, specifically to the ordinance adopting the Shoreline Master Program. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADVANCE TO ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. CARRIED. Ways and Means Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a Committee report recommending the following ordinances for first reading: _Shoreline A Master An ordinance was read amending Chapter 25 of the City Program Code relating to the Shoreline Master Program. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, THIS ORDINANCE BE REFERRED BACK TO COMMITTEE FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED. RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting November 7, 1983 Municipal Building Monday, 8:00 p.m. Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF THOMAS W. TRIMM, Council President; EARL CLYMER, ROBERT J. HUGHES, COUNCIL MEMBERS RANDALL ROCKHILL, RICHARD M. STREDICKE, JOHN W. REED, NANCY L. MATHEWS. CITY STAFF 'IN BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; LAWRENCE J. WARREN, City Attorney; ATTENDANCE MAXINE E. MOTOR, City Clerk; MICHAEL W. PARNESS, Administrative Assistant; DAVID R. CLEMENS, Policy Development Director; ' RICHARD C. HOUGHTON, Public Works Director; JOHN E. WEBLEY, Parks Director; LT. CLAUDE EVANS, Police Department. PRESS Jan Hinman, Renton Record-Chronicle MINUTE APPRpVAL MOVED BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 24, 1983 AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. PROCLAMATION A proclamation by Mayor Shinpoch endorsed efforts of Renton Antishoplifltin• Chapter of Distributive Education Club of Renton High 'Schooli '83 Campaign (DECA) in its Antishoplifting '83 Campaign to increase awareness that shoplifting hurts our community. The proclamation urged . consumers, retailers, law enforcement officials and courts to ! treat shoplifting as a crime which will not be tolerated. Kelly 8iesold.accepted the proclamation on behalf},of Renton High School ' s DECA Chapter. `' AUDIENCE COMMENT James Hanken, 1500 Seattle Tower, Seattle, representing Quendell Advance to Terminals, requested advancement to the subject matter of Old Business Shoreline Management Plan under Planning and Development Committee (Planning 6, report (Old Business) . MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY HUGHES, Development) COUNCIL SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADVANCE TO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT Committee Report) COMMITTEE REPORT. CARRIED. Planning an,d ' Planning and Development Committee Chairman Rockhill presented Development', a report recommending specific revisions to the Shoreline Committee ' , Master Program. Following submission of the proposed program .11= 6 ; by the Planning Commission to the City Council on 9/8/82, public Master Program ; hearing on 10/25/82, and referral to Planning and Development ' Committee on 10/25/82, the Committee extensively studied the. I J IMaster Program. The Planning and Development Committee report, I reflects the consensus of the Committee members as follows: , Issue #1 : represents those sections of Shoreline regulations. which the Committee unanimously recommends revisions of the Planning Commission recommendation; Issue #2: represents sections lof the regulations upon which the Committee could not agree and can be characterized as the difference between the 1976 regulations which are more permissive and the Commission' s recommendation which is more restrictive; and Issue #3: ; represents those sections upon which the Committee could not agree. The Committee recommended approval of the Shoreline Master Program as recommended by the Planning Commission and, as amended by the Committee report, subject to Council review of items contained in Issue #2 and Issue #3. (Planning and Development Committee report is attached to City Council minutes. ) Continued ' MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL CONCUR WITH THE REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE CONCERNING THE SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM REVISION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1) ITEMS LISTED UNDER ISSUE I OF THE REPORT (see pages 2-5) BE.I : ACCEPTED AS STATED IN THE REPORT; 2) ITEMS LISTED UNDER ISSUE II (pages 5-6) AS RECOMMENDED BY THE MINORITY REPORT BE ACCEPTED; 3) ITEMS LISTED UNDER ISSUE III (pages 7-9) BE ACCEPTED AS RECOMMENDED IN THE MINORITY REPORT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF ITEM 7.08.01 .A (3.d--page 8) IN WHICH CASE THE WORDING OF THE MAJORITY REPORT BE ACCEPTED. Councilman Stredicke drew Council 's attention to the fact that the motion represents, the minority report, not the majority report. 1 1 1111• Renton City Council Page Two ' November 7, 1983 OLD BUSINESS Mr. Hanken spoke in favor of the motion, supported control by Planning and the local jurisdiction rather than the State, concurred in the Development use of the word "should" rather than the word "shall" to allow Committee greater flexibility in interpretation of provisions, and requested continued that accessory uses, repairs and remodeling consistent with existing operations be allowed in the setback area. City Attorney Shoreline Warren explained intent of referenced verbs, "shall" implying Master Pro 'ram mandatory requirement and "should" giving direction. Continued Councilman Stredicke pointed out that both the minority and majority reports recommend a 25-foot setback from the water' s edge for industrial structures. Councilman Mathews noted the word "permitted" had been inadvertently omitted from the first line of the minority language of Section 3.c. , page 7. Continued ( Andy Padvorac, Puget Sound Power and Light Company, Bellevue, supported the Chairman's motion, requested uses accessory to water-related industry be allowed in the setback area, and suggested outright prohibition of power lines be changed to allow review of each individual installation by the city } (Section 3.f) . He presented slides designating location of existing Puget Power transmission line easements near shorelines: 1 ) Cedar River, one mile east of 1-405; 2) north of 1-405 by Springbrook Creek; 3) north of 1-405 by Green River; and 4) south of 1-405 along East Valley Highway at Green River. Power lines proposed for installation are planned in urban areas with minimal vegetation or in conservancy areas where height of lines will create little visual impact. Continued Upon inquiry, Policy Development Director David Clemens explained language of minority report would allow latitude for administrative review of power line installations as requested by Mr. Padvorac; language of the majority report would create need for variance application for that use. He also corrected Sections 9.20 and 9.21 of the Master Plan to reflect consistency with city' s underground ordinance in changing voltage requirements from 15 KV to 55 KV. Councilman Reed suggested new power lines be allowed in existing transmission corridors. Continued Susan Ringwood, 16841 124th Avenue SE, Renton, representing Renton Municipal League of Women Voters, supported choosing language which best identifies and regulates areas of critical concern. The major consideration of the Council should be that the fragile shoreline in Renton is recognized as a unique and valuable asset, and the mandatory language of the Master Program should be adopted to ensure local control . Continued j Dick Houghton, 3716 Lake Washington Boulevard S. , Bellevue, owner of lakefront property at 3300 Lake Washington Boulevard S. , explained difficulties encountered in obtaining a fill permit to extend property into the lake a distance of 85 feet to the line of conformity on each side. He noted that while the majority report on Issue 3.d. , page 8, reduces the bulkhead requirements from two to one, filling is limited to 35 feet into the water. ' He requested Council consideration of his request to fill to the line of conformity. Continued I Councilman Stredicke opposed)minority reportr-language which irs' directional in intent rather than mandatory, and leaves compliance 'to the discretion of the property owner. Councilman Hughes felt that minority language offers the city certain flexibility and opportunity to review attractive, quality development which may otherwise be prohibited. Councilman Rockhill assured that the minority language reflects the existing Shoreline Master Program adopted in 1976 with "bugs" ironed out, and disagreed that the 60-page document is permissive. Councilman Clymer recalled voters had approved the ballot measure in 1971 to retain local control of shorelines in Renton and mandatory language of the majority report would transfer control from the City to the State. Councilman Stredicke disagreed that directional language would ensure only quality development. Upon inquiry by Councilman Clymer, Mr. Clemens reported his opinion that repairs or remodeling to structures within the 25-foot setback would be acceptable under proposed regulations. Councilman Clymer also questioned prohibitive I Renton City Council Page Three! November 7; 1983 OLD BUSINESS intent of restricting man-made structures within the 25-foot Planning add setback. Development Committee I Motion was restated. ROLL CALL: 4 AYES: TRIMM, CLYMER, HUGHES, continued ROCKHILL. 3 NAYS: STREDICKE, REED, MATHEWS. CARRIED. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, DEFINITION OF UTILITIES ON PAGE Shoreline 63, SECTIONS 9.20 and 9.21 BE REVISED FROM 15KV TO 55KV. CARRIED. Master Program MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM BE Approved ` REFERRED TO WAYS AND MEANS COMMITTEE. CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Joan Walker, 1433 Monterey Avenue NE, addressed the Council continued regarding proposed Board of Ethics ordinance, and indicated, Board of Eri •s support of review by a citizens Board of Ethics of infractions by city department heads. rather than an administrative board. Continued ' Mary Mattson, 7273 S. 128th Street, Seattle, Board of Ethics member, opposed establishment of a separate administrative ethics committee in addition to citizen Board of Ethics. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY CLYMER, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADVANCE TO ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS. CARRIED. ORDINANCES Ordinance amending a portion of Section I-3102(A) of the City RESOLUTIONS Code relating to definition of city official was read for the Code of Ethics second and final time on October 25, 1983. Moved by Trimm, I Policy for Elected seconded by Mathews, Council adopt the ordinance as read. Roll Officials, Boards call : 3 Ayes: Trimm, Rockhill , Mathews. 4 Nays: Clymer, Hughes, & Commissions Stredicke, Reed. Motion failed. AUDIENCE COMMENT Pat Houlbjerg, 14319 SE 100th,Place, Renton, requested Council continued discussion of the Transportation Committee report regarding NE Left turns .on Fourth Street left turn movements. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED NE Fourth Street BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADVANCE TO OLD BUSINESS (TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT) . CARRIED. Transportation Transportation Committee Chairman Stredicke presented a report Committee-77 recommending that the Public Works Department proceed immediately NE Fourth Street with plans, specifications, and acquisition of right-of-way on Left Turns the easterly one-half of NE Fourth Street conditioned upon approval by the Department of Transportation of the lane-width variation. The Committee further recommended that the Public Works Department immediately investigate the possibility of a temporary left turn lane. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE REPORT. Councilman Trimm cited instances in which C-curbing has been removed without repercussions from Rainier Avenue and Grady Way; therefore, he supported removal of the double yellow line on NE Fourth Street between Monroe and Union Avenue NE. Upon inquiry, Public Works Director Richard Houghton explained high costs preclude certain roadway modifications, and the proposal which will be implemented, a short storage pocket to accommodate left turn movements for westbound traffic into the Highlands Lumber Co. facility, will allow access to all businesses upon removal of barricades between parking areas. Costs for that improvement are anticipated at under $5,000. MOTION CARRIED. AUDIENCE COMMENT Sandy Webb, 430 Mill Avenue S. , cited violations of City Code Politico' Sig-s provisions governing political signs, and requested removal of illegally posted signs. CONSENT AGENDA Items on the Consent Agenda are adopted by one motion which follows the listing: 1982-1983 Planning Planning Commission submitted 1982-1983 City of Renton Planning Commission Annulal Commission Annual Report. In addition to normal committee reports, Report in Memory also included are excerpts from the Community Opinion Survey ,which of Commissioner follows up Federal 1980 census data. The report was prepared in Frank Jacobs memory of Planning Commissioner Frank Jacobs, who recently passed away. The Commission conveys their sincere appreciation for Mr. Jacobs' good work on behalf of the community. Wick Homes, Inc.I Land Use Hearing Examiner recommended approval with restrictive (Fernwood North) covenants of a preliminary plat containing 70 single family lots PP-035-83 and a variance to allow six pipestem lots in the vicinity of ;174 Union Avenue NE; File No. PP-035-83, V-049-83;' Wick Homes, Inc. (Fernwood North) . Council concur. • (1 ►- . - REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Shoreline Master Program Revision Recommended by the Planning Commission on September 8, 1982. City Council Public Hearing on October 25, 1982. Referredjto the Planning and Development Committee on October 25, 1982. ReferredIto Committee-of-the-Whole for policy direction. Committee-of-the-Whole Public Meeting, January 13, 1983. Referred'back to the Planning and Development Committee for final recommendation. The Planning and Development. Committee, after extensive study and numerous public meetings, has completed'. its deliberations on the Shoreline. Master Program. ' After considerable debate and discussion, the Committee was unable to unanimou ly, agree on all issues. In order to simplify the Council's final action, the Committee has separated this report into three (3) separate issues. IIssue #1 represents those sections of the Shoreline regulations which the Commt+ unanimously recommends revisions of the Planning Commission recommendat4n. Issue #2 represents sections of the regulations upon which the Committee could not agree and can be characterize as the difference between the 1976regulations which are more permissive and the Commission's recommendation which is more restrictive. Lastly, Issue #3 are sections where various technical issues upon which the Committee could not agree. • Rllport of the Planning and Development Committee N vember 5, 1983 Ise 2 ISSUES #1 A Iter deliberations, the Committee unanimously recommends the following r visions to the Planning Commission's recommendation on the revised Shoreline Hster Program. For clarity, the amended language is capitalized and underlined. I I sue Page tt Section Language l.a 22 4.02.02C(2) The contamination of existing water courses will be prevented OR CONTROLLED. 1. 22 4.02.02F(2) The existing waterway of May Creek east of FAI-405 should be left in an undeveloped-natural state AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. ! 1. 23 4.03.02F Containment OR MITIGATION of pollutants shall be required of all economic activities on the shoreline by property owner AND/or operator. 1. . 24 4.04.02C (The provisions in Sub-Section 2 dealing with street vacations 4e pre-empted by state law and this sentence is recommended for deletion) . 1.- 24 4.04.02D D. RdgdZdldd public access to and along the water's edge should be available throughout publicly owned shoreline areas. 1. 24 4.04.02D F. Future multi-family, planned unit developments, subdivisions) commercial and industrial developments shall be tdejditdd ENCOURAGED to provide tdgdZdldd public access along the water's edge. 1. 27 4.07.02D RESIDENTIAL structures near the shorelines shall be set back from the water's edge at least twenty feet. Report of t e Planning and Development Committee November 5, 1983 Page 3 . . Issue 1 Pa:e # Section Language, l.h 4.07.02H All further development. on the shorelines 'of May Creek east of FAI-405 SHOULD be compatible with' the existing , natural state of the shoreline. 1. Low-density development SHOULD be ', ' encouraged to the extent that such- - - development would permit and provide for the continuation of the. existing natural character of . . the shoreline. i . . . .2..: .. ..The existing .waterway of May=Creek • east of FAI-405 SHOULD be left in ..._ .... . ..,an-undeveloped-state as much as possible. 1.i 130 5..03.02D(1)-(a). Public hiking AND`BICYCLES trails. 5.03.02D(2) USES ALLOWED BY HEARING EXAMINER. i .I 5.03.02D(2)(a) . PUBLIC OVERNIGHT CAMPING AREAS. l.j ' 31 . . . 5.04.O1B High-intensity Land Use: The urban • environment is an area of high- intensity.land-use:.:including residen- tial, commercial,:. and industrial devel- . opment. The 'env.ironment does not.nec- . essarily include .:all shorelines within : . . .-an, incorporated city, BUT IS PARTICU- LARLY SUITABLE TO THOSE AREAS PRESENTLY -SUBJECTED TO EXTREMELY INTENSIVE USE . PRESSURE, as well as areas planned- to _ accommodate intensive urban expansion. - On certain shorelines planned for ' future urban expansion, there should be limitations based on 'the bid PHYSICAL aspects of the site. 1.k I . .5-.04.O1D . _ To enhance waterfront and ensure . . . ... maximum-public -use, industrial and commercial facilities shall be tE DESIGNED to permit pedestrian waterfront activities where ' practicable, AND THE various access points ought to be .linked to • non-motorized transportation routes' such as bicycles and hiking paths. I ' I rd sport of the Planning and Development Committee ovember 5, 1983 Page 4 Issue Page # Section Language 1.1 37 7.03.O1B Site adaptation SUCH AS DREDGING shall be minimized. BEidtd/MEflldd/i/iIEI dtddgidg4/dte/A61/AMWEdl l.m 38. 7.04.01 General All bulkheads are subject to the regulations set forth in this Master Program, except that bulkheads common to a single family residence are exempted from the permit system set forth in this Master Program and Building Code. ddffiEE/dte/dd! EdddidEted/16andddghbid/dtd/pidBUZEdd WfMi MAigCEt/PtdgtAd/ l.n 44 7.09.01 Delete definition - can be found in appendix. l,o 46 7.11.02 A. Private parking facilities are to be located away from the water's edge. WHERE POSSIBLE. 1.p 46 7.12.02 Allowable Construction A. PERMITS FOR the following ' construction of piers or docks will be allowed: 1.q 48 7.12.06 A. The following dock specifications shall be allowed: (1) Unless otherwise determined or directed by any Sate agency having jurisdiction thereover, the dock nay extend into the water one hundred fifty (150) feeti if the depth of thirty (30) feet is not reached,( the dock may be extended until a depth of thirty (30) feet is reached, provided the dock does not exceed two hundred fifty (250) feet. 1.r 51 7.16 Delete sign regulations - locate in side code. 1 Report pf the Planning and Development Committee November 5 1983 Page 5 I i , Issue P ge # Section ' Language l.s � 52 7.17.01 Definition: Stream alteration is the ' 1 relocation or change in the flow of a river, stream or creek. A river, stream or creek IS surface water runoff flowing in a natural or modified channel. 1.t 54 7.19.O1A (2) When utility projects are completeD in the water or wetland, the disturbed. area shall be restored and landscaped as nearly, as possible to the original condition, unless new landscaping, is determined to be more desirable. 1 l.0 55 7.19.03(2) Electrical Distribution Substations: Electrical::distributiond SUBSTATIONS shall be at a wetland location only when the applicant proves there exists no other site out of the , wetland area and when the screening requirements. of Section 7.19.O1C are ' met. 1 1.v . 62 ..9.17(Following) . High Rise: A structure exceeding seventy-five (75) feet in height. ISSUE #2i . The majority of the Committee recommends adoption of the Planning Commission's restrictivelanguage represented in "the following sampling of sections of the Master Pros am. The minority report recommends adoption of the more permissilve. .anguage contained in the original 1976 adoption of the Shoreline Master Prog am. For- clarity, the minority report language is represented in parenthesis in the following sections. Issue 1Page # ..._.Section . Language 1 2.a 27 4.07.02B Residential development shall (should) not be constructed in unique and fragile areas. 2.b 4.07.02E ; Future shoreline subdivision and planned unit developments shall (should) provide regulated public access to and/or along the water's edgel. I , 1 1 deport of the Planning and Development Committee ovember 5, 1983 •age 6 (issue Page L Section Language 2.c 35 7.01.02A(2) Tiedown areas shall (should) be no closer than TWENTY feet from the water's edge for Mid/8dW ai craft. 2.d 39 7.05.O1C Commercial developments are to (should) incorporate recreational opportunities along the shoreline for the general public. 2.e 40 7.05.02 A commercial building shall (should) be located no closer than fifty fret to the water's edge. 2.f 45. 7.09.03F 1. Parking shall (should) be provided in accordance with the following ratio: private and public marinas: 2 per 3 slips; p ivate marina associated with residential complex: 1 per 3 slips. 2. Special designated loading areas shall (should) be provided near piers in the amount of one (1) parking space per twenty-five (25) slips; all other parking yeas are to be located one hundredfi(100) feet from the water's edge. 2.g 50 7.15.02 Design Requirements A. Shoreline roadways are to (should) be scenic boulevards and are to be restricted to existing rights-of-way, WHERE POSSIBLE. B. Roadways located in wetland areas shall (should) be limited and designed and maintained to prevent soil erosion and to permit natural movement of ground water. 2 h 55 . 7.19.03A(1) (b) Structure of overhead power lines shall (should) be single-Pole type or other aesthetically compatible design. Report of the Planning and Development Committee November: 5! 1983 Page 7 ISSUE #3 The following are technical and similar requirements which the majority of the Committee recommends adoption. In order to clarify the differences, this section of the Committee's report has both the majority and minority recommendations side-by-side. Where the differences can be established with a change of sword or phrase, that word or phrase recommended in the minority report is shown in parenthesis. Issue Page # Section Language 3.a 17 2.12 The Planning Commission may (shall) make a recommendation to the City Majority Council which shall(may) hold at least (Minority)_., . one ..public hearing before making a determination. 3.b 35 7.01.02A(l) Future hangars shall be SET BACK A MINIMUM OF TWENTY feet from the water's edge BUT NOT LESS THAN A SETBACK EQUIVALENT TO THE BUILDING Majority HEIGHT, and shall be designed and spaced to allow viewing of airport activities from the area along the water's edge. Future hangars should be SET BACK A MINIMUM OF TWENTY feet from the water's edge and shall be designed and Minority spaced to allow viewing of airport activities from the area along the water's edge. 3.c 43 7.07.02 Industrial structures are to be permitted ONdtd/irld.dtttiaZ/d2di ddttdAEZ//dAftf/dt where they are set Majority back A MINIMUM OF 25 FEET FROM THE WATER'S EDGE, BUT NOT LESS THAN A SETBACK EQUIVALENT TO THE BUILDING HEIGHT. Industrial structures should be Oxdtd iliddatiaZ/dgd!/ldttdAZZ//dildt/dt Minority where they set back 25 FEET FROM THE WATER'S EDGE. eport of the Planning and Development Committee ovember 5, 1983 age 8 ssue Page # Section Language 3.d 43 7.08.01 A. For detached single-fami y residential uses drlicd/it ,/i6tdtdtEl fd/Zdddt'did/&520ddd/E0d/121 Majority ADJACENT TO ONE (1) existing bulkhead, the property may be filled to the line of conlformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) feet in length along the water's edge and thirty-five (35) feet into the water and provided the provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are satisfactorily met; or, A. For detached single-family residential uses, when the Minority property is located between two (2) existing bulkheads, t e property may be filled to the line of conformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) feet in length along the water's edge an thirty-five (35) feet int the water and provided the pr visions of Section 8.02.01 througI 8.02.05 are satisfactorily met; or, 3,e 51 7.16 Signs (NOTE: Committee unanimously recommends relocating sign regulations to Sign Ordinance. ) 7.16.01 Design requirements A. Visual access to water an shoreline from vistas and Majority viewpoints shall not be imparied (Minority) by the placement of signs Unless absolutely necessary (where feasible,) signs are to be constructed against existing buildings or structures to minimize visual obstruction of the water and shoreline. 4. Report Qf he Planning and Development Committee Noveinbe' 5 1983 Page 9 Issue P- ;e # Section Language ' I B. Outdoor advertising signs are to be limited to areas of high Majority intensity industrial and commercial use, are to be stationary, non-blinking, and a size commensurate with the structure to which they are fixed, but in no event larger than fddt , THREE hundred IA007 (300) -.square .feet. B. Outdoor advertising signs are to be limited to areas of high tt(-Minority) intensity industrial and commercial use, are to be stationary , and of a size commensurate with the structure to which they are fixed. 3.f 55 7.19.03A(1) - (a) New overhead power lines are prohibited in scenic areas, Majority recreational areas, AND public roadways ddd/t2gMfdAdf,0d1. Overhead power lines may be permitted insensitive wetlands, when undergrounding is not TECHNICALLY FEASIBLE ¢dgEikaE. I _ (a) New overhead power lines are prohibited in scenic areas, (Minority) -. SENSITIVE-WETLANDS recreational areas, AND public roadways Add tXgMfdAdfA0dJ except when undergrounding is not TECHNICALLY ' FEASIBLE fidddfdl d. 3.g 63 9.22 MARINA: A use providing moorages for pleasure craft, which also may include ' Majority, boat launching facilities, storage, (Minority) (sales) and other. related services. • i 4 I ' eport of the Planning and Development Committee ovember 5, 1983 age 10 ECOMMENDATION: r•ased upon the foregoing sections, the Planning and Development Committee ecommends approval of the Shoreline Master Program as recommended by the rlanning Commission and as amended above, subject to Council review of those tems contained in Issue #2 and Issue #3. 'andall Rockhill John W. Reed aichard M. Stredicke I Renton City' Concil January 17,, 1983 Page Three ; Reappointment clergy) ; Donald 0. Jacobson (representative from King County Labor to Board of Council) ; June Leonard (representative from Renton School Board) ; and Ethics j Ray Peretti (representative from Greater Renton Chamber of Commerce. continued MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY REED, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE APPOINTMENT OF MRS. MARY MATTSON TO THE BOARD OF ETHICS. CARRIED. Reappointment Mayor Shinpoch reappointed the following persons to the Fire/Police to Fire/Police! Civil Service Commission: Donald Holm for a two-year term effective Civil Service to December 31 , 1984; B. J. Richardson for a two-year term effective Commission to December 31 , 1984; Barbara Little for a four-year term effective to December 31 , 1986; and Norma Jean Cugini for a four-year term effective to December 31 , 1986. Appointment Mayor Shinpoch appointed Mr. Louis Barei , 614 South 18th Street, to Fire/Police Renton, to the Fire/Police Civil Service Commission for a six-year Civil Service ' term effective to December 31 , 1988. Mr. Barei is a life-long Commission resident of Renton, former City Council member, teacher, and works for Highline Public Schools. These reappointments and appointment constitute the entire roster of the Commission. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY REED, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE REAPPOINTMENT OF MR. HOLM, MR. RICHARDSON, MRS. LITTLE AND MRS. CUGINI , AND THE APPOINTMENT1OF MR. BAREI TO THE FIRE/POLICE CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION. CARRIED. Appointment to Mayor Shinpoch appointed Mrs. Margaret Rose Anderson, 6827 Ripley Municipal Arts Lane North, Renton, to the Municipal Arts Commission for a three' Commission I year term effective to December 31 , 1985. Mrs. Anderson will succeed Dr. Hal Kloes, who has resigned. Mrs. Anderson is the Fine Arts Specialist for the Renton School District and previously served on the Commission from 1971 through 1979.. Other members of the Commission are: Charmaine Baker, Sylva Coppock, Gerald Edlund, Karen Lunder, Ronald Ringwood, Connie Tajon, Clark Teegarden, Joan Yoshitomi and Peggy Ziebarth. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY REED, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE APPOINTMENT OF MRS. MARGARET ROSE ANDERSON TO THE MUNICIPAL ARTS COMMISSION. CARRIED. OLD BUSINESS ' Council President Trimm presented Committee of the Whole report Committee of recommending approval of the Park Board Ordinance as revised by Mayor the Whole ' Shinpoch and referral to Ways and Means Committee for amendment.' Park Board MOVED BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION Ordinance OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. CARRIED. Feasibility Council President Trimm presented Committee of the Whole report Study for recommending that the Administration begin a study investigating the Self- Insurance feasibility of self insurance. Funds to hire a consultant shall be drawn from self insurance reserve fund, and the results of the study along with recommendations shall be presented- before Committee of the Whole. MOVED BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, AMEND THE MOTION TO REQUIRE REPORT BACK WITHIN SIX MONTHS. CARRIED. ORIGINAL MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED. el_LCLe s Council President Trimm presented Committee of the Whole report Management ,] recommending remand of the Shoreline Management Program to the ozgam Planning and Development Committee for further discussion and , recommendation. MOVED BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TO REMAND SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM TO PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Productive Mayor Shinpoch commended Council members for a most productive C/W Meeting Committee of the Whole meeting on January 13, 1983. Registration At the request of Councilman Clymer who will be attending National Fee at N.L.C. League of Cities conference in Washington,_D.C. this year at his Conference his own expense, it was MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, COUNCIL AUTHORIZE PAYMENT OF $190.00 REGISTRATION FEE FOR COUNCILMAN CLYMER1S ATTENDANCE AT NATIONAL LEAGUE OF CITIES CONFERENCE. CARRIED. Public Safety, Public Safety Committee Chairman Hughes presented a report recommending Committee . that the City of Renton enter into an agreement with the City of Des Moines Des Moines for the housing of their prisoners and the Ci,ty Council Jail Agreement authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to sign the agreement. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Ren on City Council Jantary 17, 1983 Pag Four OLD BUSINESS continued Pub is Safety Public Safety Committee Chairman Hughes presented a report advising Com ,ittee transmittal of information related to number of employees, salary of Val ey Com employees and number of calls recorded for each jurisdiction at the Censer Valley Communications Center operation to each Councilmember. No Council action is required--for information purposes oly. Secondhand Public Safety Committee Chairman Hughes presented a report recommending Dea'ers that only a single business license be required for each place of business for secondhand dealers. Also recommended were amendments pertaining to high theft risk items and identification of sellers and purchasers of these items, and referral to the Way and Means Committee for amendment of the ordinance and preparation of a summary ordinance. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE AND REFER THE MATTER TO THE WAYS AND MEANS, COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Platy-ling and Planning and Development Committee Chairman Rockhill presented a Development report recommending the Hearing Examiner's Recommendation on the Committee One Valley Place Properties appeal (FPUD-061-82) be adopted with OneValley Place the amendment of Condition No. 1 to read as follows: Properties Appeal 1 . The applicant provides proof to the satisfaction of the FPU'I-061-82 Environmental Review Committee that a mechanism, whether city initiated LID or otherwise, will provide that the roads in the area are improved to accommodate the projected traffic of Phase I of the subject development prior to the issuance of a uilding permit. Moved by Rockhill , seconded by Reed, Council concur in the recommendation of the Planning and Development Committee. Joel Haggard, Suite 1700, 720 Olive Way, Seattle, legal counsel for the appellant, apprised the Council of an additional matter of appeal relating to disallowance of a 10% parking space credit to compromise the developer for required increase in parking stall size to city standards, not previously required in preliminary PUD approvals. Also discussed were possibility of implementing joint dse parking for. employees with different work schedules, conflict between state and city laws governing expiration of preliminary plats, and the ultimate necessity to reduce square footage of proposed buildings if the parking requirement recommended by the Examiner is imposed. Following Council discussion regarding need for additional review by committee due to new information, a substitute motion was made: MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY REED, REFER THE ONE VALLEY PLACE APPEAL BACK TO PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FOR RECONSIDERATION. CARRIED. Eve ling Council Councilman Stredicke requested committee meetings be scheduled during Com ittee evening hours for benefit of those Council members unavailable during Meeuings the day, noting attendance by staff at night meetings during past years. ORD NANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Way,; and Means Ways and Means Committee Chairman Clymer presented a report Committee recommending the following ordinances for second and final reading: Ord nance #3700 An ordinance was read vacating a portion of Hardie Avenue N.W. south Christopherson of N.W. 5th Street (Christopherson - VAC 06-82) . MOVED BY CLYMER, Str et Vacation SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL VAC 06-82 CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ord nance #3701 An ordinance was read amending Ordinance No. 3660 concerning revocable Use of Public permits and use of the public right-of-way, and granting the Board of Right of Way Public Works right to deny such permit. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Group W Cable An ordinance was read approving an increase to $10.35/mo. in basic Rat' Increase service charge for cable TV service for Group W Cable. ; Inc. MOVED BY CLYMER, SECONDED BY STREDICKE, COUNCIL SUSPEND THE RULES AND ADVANCE THIS ORDINANCE TO SECOND AND FINAL READING. CARRIED. Ord ,Hance #37C2 An ordinance was read approving an increase to $10.35/mo. in basic Gro p W Cable service charge for cable TV services for Group W Cable, Inc. MOVED BY Rat 1 Increase CLYMER, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. 1 J S r M COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE COMMITTEE MEETING JANUARY 17, 1983 REVISION OF PARK BOARD ORDINANCE (Referred 12-20-82) The Committee of the Whole recommends that the Park Board ordinance be approved as revised by Ithe Mayor. No further changes are suggested. The Committee further recommends 'that the ordinance be referred to the Ways and Means Committee for amendment. CITY' S IiNSURANCE PROGRAM (Referred 12-2-82) The Committlee of the Whole recommends that the Administration begin a study investigating the feasibility of self insurance. Funds to hire a consultant shall be drawn from the self insurance reserve fund. The results of the study and recommendations shall be brow ht before the Committee of the Whole. _.> a. a. 6 rI f— FINANCIAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR LID'S (Referred 12-2-82) The Committee of the Whole recommends that the matter be referred to the Ways , and Means Committee for preparation of a formal policy. The Committee further : recommends that a public hearing be held on this issue prior to Council approval . SHORELINE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM (Referred 12-20-82) The Committee of the Whole recommends that the •issue be remanded to the Planning and Developlment Committee for further discussion and recommendation. L4z G7N/YtC/ Thomas Trimm, Council President � I I � Renton City Council December 20, 1982 Page 3 OLD BUSINES' continued Group W Cable Councilman Stredicke reported that, according to prior agreement Rate Incr;ea e with Group W Cable, a rate increase request had been withheld Request from Council consideration until after December 15, 1982; but, as stated in that same agreement, the increase must be acted upon before January 1 , 1983. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY CLYMER, THE RATE INCREASE REQUEST WITH REGARD TO GROUP W CABLE BE SET AS AN AGENDA ITEM FOR NEXT MONDAY'S COUNCIL MEETING. CARRIED. dI Proposed ; As requested by Planning and Development Committee Chairman Rockhill , Shoreline it was MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY HUGHES, TO HAVE AN INFORMA- Management TIONAL MEETING AT THE JANUARY COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING WITH Master Program REGARD TO THE PROPOSED SHORELINE MANAGEMENT MASTER PROGRAM. CARRIED. Public Safety Public Safety Committee Chairman Hughes presented a report recommend- Committee ing Council concur in the Administration's request to consolidate Police and Fire the Police and Fire Civil Service Commissions into one five-person Civil Service commission to provide more flexibility resulting in consistent' Commission policy direction and increased efficiency. This proposal has been Consolidati.n accepted by both current commissions and representatives of the uniformed departments. Committee also recommended this matterlbe referred to the Ways and Means Committee for ordinance. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED BY TRIMM, COUNCIL CONCUR IN THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE. CARRIED. Mayor Shinpoch announced she has asked former Council Member Louie Barei to consider serving on this revised commission. Public Safety Public Safety Committee Chairman Hughes presented a report recom- Committee mending concurrence in the Administration's recommendation to 1950 Kenwor h purchase a 1950 Kenworth 1500 gallon per minute fire pumper truck Pumper Truck from the Seattle Fire Department. The truck has been on loan from Purchase Seattle for the past two+ months for testing. Cost, including ;an additional ladder, is $4,000. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL ACCEPT THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE PUBLIC SAFETY COMMITTEE REGARDING PURCHASE OF THE 1950 KENWORTH PUMPER TRUCK. CARRIED: ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS Ways andlMeans At the request of Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke, Iit Committee was MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY HUGHES, THE SUBJECT MATTERIOF Park Director/ THE PARK DIRECTOR AND PARK COMMISSION WITH REGARD TO THEIR AUTONOMY Park Commission AND THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE ORDINANCE BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE Changes COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE IN JANUARY. CARRIED. Ordinance #00 A mock ordinance was read providing for appropriation and transfer Ted Bennett of funds from the Ted Bennett Personal Welfare and Golf Fund. to Welfare the Dr. C. U. Well , Providence Hospital , Retirement Fund (Unantici- Appropriation pated Revenue) . Mr. Bennett, Deputy Finance Director, recently underwent heart by-pass surgery. The mock ordinance was signed, with well-wishes, by the Mayor, City Council Members, City Attorney's office and the City Clerk. Mayor Shinpoch joined Council Members (and the entire City staff) in wishing Mr. Bennett a speedy recovery. First Reading Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke presented a report recommending the following ordinances for first reading: Cooks Strjeet An ordinance was read vacating a portion of Government Lot 11 , , Vacation legal description received and 1/2 assessed valuation ($11 ,347.56) VAC 05-82 paid by James Cook. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, r THIS MATTER BE REFERRED BACK TO COMMITTEE FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED. Halsen Street An ordinance was read vacating a portion of South 17th Place, Renton, Vacation King County, Washington; Halsen Street Vacation (VAC 08-82) . . MOVED VAC 08-82, BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY HUGHES, THIS MATTER BE REFERRED BACK 'TO COMMITTEE FOR ONE WEEK. CARRIED. ' nton City Council J 1 cember 20, 1982 • ge 4 • 'DINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS continued Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke presented a report recommending the following ordinances for second and final reading: • dinance #3688 An ordinance was read amending the Uniform Fire Code, Article 25, flspection Chapter 9, of the City Code relating to inspection permits for -rmits for places of assembly. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY HUGHES, Paces of COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. sembly CARRIED. 0 dinance #3689 An ordinance was read amending a portion of Sections 4-709A and B RI3 and R- of the City Code relating to conditional uses and Ri3 and R-4 D nsity District density standards. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY S andards/ ROCKHILL, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: C nditional Use ALL AYES. CARRIED. - Ordinance #3690 An ordinance was read amending Chapter 2 of Title III of the City 1 3 Water , Code relating to metered water services. MOVED BY HUGHES, SECONDED Rites BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: 5 AYES: CLYMER, MATHEWS, REED, ROCKHILL, HUGHES; 2 NOS: TRIMM, STREDICKE. CARRIED. 0 dinance #3691 An ordinance was read amending a portion of Section 8-715 of Title 1 3 Sewer VIII of the City Code relating to sewer charges. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, R tes SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: 5 AYES: CLYMER, MATHEWS, REED, ROCKHILL, HUGHES; 2 NOS: TRIMM, STREDICKE. CARRIED. 0 dinance #3692 An ordinance was read amending Chapter 3 of Title VIII of the City 1u 3 Garbage Code relating to revised garbage collection rates. MOVED BY MATHEWS, R-tes SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, COUNCIL ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: 6 AYES: CLYMER, TRIMM, MATHEWS, REED, ROCKHILL, HUGHES; 1 NO: STREDICKE. CARRIED. Ordinance #3693 An ordinance was read establishing and adopting equipment rental Equipment Rental rental rates. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL R!'tes 1983 ADOPT THE ORDINANCE AS PRESENTED. ROLL CALL: ALL AYES. CARRIED. Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke presented a report recommending the following resolution for reading and adoption: Resolution #2486 A resolution was read authorizing the appropriate City officials F�US Funding to execute and deliver any documents necessary for federal funding P_rk Avenue N. for traffic signal interconnect and coordination on Park Avenue North from North Sixth Street to FAI-405 northbound on/off ramps. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY HUGHES, COUNCIL ADOPT THIS RESOLUTION AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. M_rine Patrol Ways and Means Committee Chairman Stredicke presented a report Fending recommending no action is required by the Committee et this time as the Administration is seeking support and assistance from the Association of Washington Cities in an effort to draft and implement legislation allowing a long-term funding solution for marine patrol services. Mayor Shinpoch reported she had received a copy of a 14- point program drafted by the King County Council in conjunction with the King County Executive which will be presented to the legislature, one point being a funding source for marine patrol services. Mayor Shinpoch will keep Council informed as to progress in this matter. At INISTRATIVE Mayor Shinpoch reported a presentation from Metro Staff which R:rORT indicated Metro ridership down 2.4 million trips in 1982 from Metro what was projected. This decrease is thought to be c'ue purely R dership to economics: Unemployment, increased fares, more ride sharing, lower gasoline prices. Possible decrease in s_ervice 'or route changes may result from lack of ridership. 1 1 � NOTICE RENTON CITY COUNCIL Lic HEARING D O'N October 25, 1982, AT 8:00 P.M. RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH For the purpose of consideringa proposed Shoreline Master .Program Pro ram update P P P P g p 4 GENERAL LOCATION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: The Shoreline Master Program, .originally adopted in 1976, provides regulations for areas within 200 feet of Lake Washington, Cedar and Green Rivers, and portions of Springbrook and May Creeks. Revisions for the purpose of clarificc tions; also proposes "natural environment" designation to area abutting Black River Riparian Forest . Complete legal description &further information available in the City Clerk's Office - 235-250C • Theorco removalncealment, mutilation,ofthisnotice i desstructiamis- on Wairning . demeanor punishable by fine and imprisonment. NOTICE RENTON CITY COUNCIL pu„ i LW HEARING ON October 25, 1982, AT 8:00 P.M. RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING COUNCIL CHAMBERS 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH For the purpose of considering a proposed Shoreline Master 'Program update GENERAL LOCATION OF SUBJECT PROPERTY: The Shoreline Master Program, originally adopted in 1976, provides regulations for areas within 200 feet of Lake Washington, Cedar and Green Rivers, and portions of Springbrook and May Creeks , Revisions for the purpose of clariflci tions; also proposes "natural environment" designation to area abutting Black River Riparian Forest, 'Complete legal description &further information available in the City Clerk's Office - 23�5-250 4Cee removal, mutilation, des*ruc*ion ® 111 orconcealmentofthisnotice isamis- W ; rnIndemeanor punishable by fin• and imprisonment. CERTIFICATION J''l . Si. P u b l i c Hearing October 25,1982 ,II I 3horenne Mos-ter Program Update L ocatjorl O- Pos- i n9 S Done October ) 1, 1982 0 L,Ue ) IsAeN. 4PN.5 - St. © Pc r�C' Ave N. 1 N . 8 St. 0 N.!i 1)Igtr�5 Ave N. f N. ) st St. j 9 BwrrteLL Ave S. f52 st C Morris Ave. S. P S 4 - s . © W) 11)an' s Ayes. P S. i St. ® Mi)) Ave S. P6. 319!St. 3 Sm1Thers Ave 5. P5. 6m. St: 9 5hotttCX Ave S. te, S. )5tti St. !o Totho-C Rd. 5. / S. 3i5711 St. f SenecQ A ve. S.W. P S.W. )2 - St. g Ear)in9Lon Ave. S.W. r S.W. Longs-Lon Rd. 1 "TQq )or Ave N.W. / N. 4/— SZ. (a -PcirK Ave NoP N . ) - : St a MQp)e wood Ave. 3.E. P 5.E, 6 M St. S. E.5 th 5t. Front. OP 3308 !? L aKe wash. 3)vd N. A N. yd t St . -Tones AYe N.E. 4F N.E. 'S- S/ N. 3 0 S� 1cV�' E. OP PcarK' liff N. Edmonds Ave N. E.. r N.E. 2 _ St. i Kirkland Ave N.F. i N. E. 2& St. Piu neon Ave. N.-E. ; N. E. 7 St. Te-rite r5on Ave. N. E. t 1I.E. 10 St. S r onjjn WayN.E. ¢ W ndsor I N.E_ M onfere Dr. N.E. o t4.E. 3 Ed St. Pare' AveN. 7. N tdS . CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY RENTON CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Renton City Council has fixed the 2cth day of October , 19 82, at 8:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington, as the time and place for a public hearing to consider the following: Update of the Shoreline Master Program originally adopted in 1976 pro- viding regulations for areas within two hundred feet of Lake Washington, Cedar' and Green Rivers and portions of Springbrook and May Creeks. Revisions for purpose of clarification;also proposes "natural environ- ment" designation to area abutting Black River Riparian Forest. Any arid 11 interested persons are invited to be present to voice approval , disapproval or opinions on same. CITY OF RENTON Maxine E. Motor Acting. City Clerk DATE OF PUBLICATION: 10/8/82 n - RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting 1 October125 , 1982 Municipal Building Monday , 8 : 00 P . M . Council Chambers 1 MINUTES 1 J CALL TO ORDER Mayor Pro-tem Earl Clymer led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF EARL CLYMER, Council President, ROBERT J. HUGHES, RANDALL ROCK ILL, COUNCIL MEM:ERS RICHARD M. STREDICKE, JOHN W. REED, NANCY L. MATHEWS, THOMAS W. TRIMM. CITY STAFF LAWRENCE WARREN, City Attorney; MICHAEL PARNESS, Administrative IN ATTENDANSE Assistant;. MAXINE E. MOTOR, Acting City Clerk; DAVID CLEMENS, Policy Development Director; ED HAYDUK, Housing and Community Development Coordinator; ROGER BLAYLOCK, Zoning Administrator; CAPT. DONALD PERSSON, Police Department.; JOHN WEBLEY, Park Director. PRESS Jan Hinman, Renton Record Chronicle MINUTE APPROVAL Councilman Stredicke noted error in spelling of C. J. Delaurenti on Permits. Issued attachment. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY REED, COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 18, 1982 AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING Councilman' Reed noted he had spoken before the Planning Commission 1 regarding the definition portion of the Shoreline Master Program and to avoid possible claims of pre-judgment or possible, future litigation, he disqualified himself from the following public. hearing and left Council Chambers. I Shoreline Master This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and Program Update published ,according to law, Mayor Pro-tem Clymer opened the public hearing to consider update of the Shoreline Master Program. This program, originally adopted in 1976, was created to_p_rovide_spe9ific_ development regulations for-1areas within 200 feet of Lake Washington;, the Cedar and Green Rivers, and portions_of Springbrook and_.May'J";Cr-eeks. Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator, outlined the program changes, not itng_the f i.ve_main areas_of revision: .1_)_ _ Fees;_2) - High_ rises; 3) State estab.l i shment of .our__separate-shore-l-i nes: - Natura l; Con rseFvancy, Ruraland_.U_rban;--14) Marinas; and 5) Public Access. Blay[ock_reported the Planning Commission Public Hearing had been held`.6/09/82' and all Shoreline Committee meetings had been open to the public with extensive periods of discussion held. Councilman 1 Stredicke noted he would have preferred more detailed comparison of the proposed changes as they relate to the initial Shoreline Plan. Corresponds ce A letter was read from Richard C. Houghton, 3716 Lake Washington Blvd. SE, Bellevue, requesting reconsideration of existing regula- tions regarding landfill of shoreline lots as they apply to pre- existing platted lots. Audience Comment Jocelyn Jones, 1424 North 40th Street, requested the southeast shore of May Creek from 405 to Lake Washington Boulevard be included in the Conservancy designation. Versie Vaupel , 400 Cedar Avenue South, reported that the request contained in the letter from Mr. Houghton had also been submitted to the Shoreline Committee (while Mrs. Vaupel was a member). The request was voted against there and not acted on at all by the Planning Commission. Mrs. Vaupel noted the Department of Ecology 1 had indicated their disfavor with this type of proposal . Mrs. Vaupel also indicated she had been present at the Planning Commission meeting referred to by Mr. Reed prior to this public hearing and felt his 1 disqualification unnecessary. 1 a i I ' Renton City Council October 25, 1982 Page 2 PUBLIC HEARING continued Audience Comment Peggy DuBois, 2907 Mountain View Avenue North, questioned the continued inclusion of view windows under "water-related" items. She also questioned a statement made at the Planning Commission meeting that, unless major alterations were being made to the Shoreline Program, only one public hearing may be required. Mrs. DuBois strongly supported public hearings being held before both the Planning Commission and City Council , this being the only oppor- tunity for public input. (See paragraph 5 below*.) Councilman Stredicke requested clarification from Policy Development Director Clemens as to why the May Creek area mentioned by Mrs .Jones had not been designated as Conservancy or why part of May Creek had not been designated Natural . Policy Development Director Clemens responded that the Planning Commission and the Special Studies Committee had concluded the westerly side of 1-405 would be more extensively developed; thus, the Urban designation. continued Jim Hanken, 1300 Seattle Tower, Seattle, attorney for Barbee Milll Company, submitted a letter from David C. Crosby, 500 Maynard Building, Seattle, attorney for Pan Abode, Inc. (and requested addition to record). This letter, dated 9/13/82, was addressed to Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator, and requested the desig- nation presently assigned to May Creek west of 1-405 remain Urban. Mr. Hanken complimented the Planning Commission and staff on the proposed Shoreline Master Program update presently before Council and encouraged adoption. Peggy DuBois, 2907 Mountain View Avenue North, asked Council to consider a compromise regarding the May Creek area: To designate the Pan Abode/Barbee Mill side as Urban and the other side as Conservancy. Versie Vaupel , 400 Cedar Avenue South, noted that this is not a new problem; it had been considered by the original Shoreline Committee. Councilmen Rockhill and Stredicke questioned the building of single- ! family residences on pre-platted waterfront lots. Policy Develop- ment Director Clemens indicated that, after allowing for front and back yard setbacks, not enough land remained for building and that any variance to the shoreline area would be granted by the State, not the City of Renton. *Director Clemens also explained that the Planning Commission had recommended that the requirement for two public hearings on Shoreline Master Program changes be reduced to one (to be held before the Planning Commission) . Councilman Stfredicke spoke against this revision and it was found that the change had not been incorporated into the proposal before Council . There being no further audience comment, it was MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY HUGHES, THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CLOSED. CARRIED. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY TRIMM, SUBJECT BE REFERRED TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FOR STUDY AND RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. Planning and Development Committee Chairman Rockhill invited all Council input regarding this matter and asked Council President Clymer to meet with the Committee in place of Councilman Reed who had disqualified himself. Council President Clymer agreed. Council- man Reed returned to chambers at 8:53 p.m. PUBLIC HARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and Federal Revenue published according to law, Mayor Pro-tem Clymer opened the public Sharing j hearing to consider the City' s proposed use of Federal Revenue 1 Sharing monies for the year 1983 and proposed (1) Re-appropriation of $98,030 Federal Revenue Sharing Funds committed in 1982 for Municipal Lease Payments for computer replacement, word processing equipment, backhoe, sewer inductor, aerial ladder truck; and (2) Re-appropriation of $243,404 Federal Revenue Sharing Funds committed in 1982 which will not be spent for the following: Police Capital it it I LAW OFFICES OF 1 WICKWIRE, LEWIS, GOLDMARK THOMAS J.BREWER DAVID C.CROSY S[ SCHORR CHARLES A.GOLDMARK A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 800 MAYNARD BUILDING JOHN W.HANLEY,JR. SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 98104 B.GERALD JOHNSON KEVIN F. KELLY (206) 622-9603 O.YALE LEWIS,IJR. WENDY F. LIEHOW September 13, 1982 THOMAS J.LUCAS CHRISTOPHER G.OEiCHSLI GREGORY M.O'LEARY JON M.SCHORR! JAMES WICKWIBE PEGGY J.WILLIAMS 1 i Roger JI. Blaylock Zoning 'Administrator City of' Renton Building and Zoning Department Municipal Building 200 Milli Avenue South Renton,' Washington 98055 Re:1 Pan Abode Comments to May Creek Conservancy Proposals Dear Mr Blaylock: John Hubbard, President of Pan Abode, Inc. , has asked me to respond t your letter of September 3, 1982, soliciting comments on citize proposals to' change the designation of May Creek west of I-40,5 rom Urban to Conservancy. 1 I heave reviewed the minutes of the June 9, 1982, public hearingla which these proposals were made. The most comprehen- sive prop sals were suggested by John DuBois. He suggests not only chan ing the designation of May Creek, but also revising several, other provisions of the Renton Shoreline Master Program so as to prohibit multi-family and high-rise structures in this area. For the reasons set forth below, Pan Abode strongly opposes1the proposals put forth by Mr. DuBois and other area residents relative to May Creek west of I-405. The,! existing Pan Abode cedar home manufacturing complex has been iniplace for approximately 20 years. It is situated on an irregular 311,000 square foot parcel of land lying southeast of the intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard North and N.E. 44th Street. ' The southern boundary of the property lies at a distance of approximately 35 to 50 feet from May Creek. The property has at all times been zoned for heavy industrial development. That portion of the property line within 200 feet of May Creek was designated "Urban Environment" by the. Renton Shoreline Master Program adopted in 1976. The land is presently assessed by King County at $630,800. Pan Abode pays taxes in 1' 1 1 Roger J. Blaylock September 13, 1982 Page Two excessl'of $28,000 on its land and improvements. The property is presently pledged as security for an $865,000 bank loan that pro- vides a major source of Pan Abode 's operating capital. I am enclosing a copy of a Substantial Development Permit issued 'to Pan Abode on November 24, 1976, attached to which is a site plan depicting the property. As can be seen from the site plan, approximately one-third to one-quarter of the Pan Abode property falls within the 200 foot zone affected by the Master Program'. Portions of two existing structures lie within this zone, and a proposed lumber storage building, for which the 1976 Substantial Development Permit was obtained, would lie entirely within ',the zone. (Due to economic conditions, the proposed storage' bailding was not erected, although Pan Abode did the pre- liminary fork necessary to satisfy conditions numbered 1 and 2 of the permit relating to storm drainage retention, oil/water separation and landscape screening. Pan Abode has every inten- tion ofl constructing this facility, and will apply for a new Substantial Development Permit in the very near future. ) Whe!,n the Renton Shoreline Master Program was adopted in March, 1976, it was intended to be "general, comprehensive and long-range." Section 1 . 04 of the Master Program defines "long-range" to mean "that the program is to be directed at least twenty ( 20) to thirty ( 30) years into the future." The Master Program, created two "environments" -- Conservancy and Urban. The designation given to specific areas in 1976 was based , in part, "on theexisting development pattern" at that time. Section 5.01. Thel ConservancyEnvironment designation is designed to "protect, conserve and manage existing areas with irreplaceable, naturallor aesthetic features in essentially their native state while providing for limited use of the area. " Section 5.02.01. Areas selected for designation in 1976 had to satisfy at least one of the six criteria set forth in Section 5.02.01(B) . Within areas designated for conservancy, industrial uses are totally prohibiited (Section 5.02.02(C) ) and residential uses are limited to low-density single family residences. Section 5.02.02(E) . The Urban Environment designation, on the other hand, was reserved for existing areas of high-intensity land use, including • residential, commercial., and industrial development. Section 5.03.01(B) . ' Roger J. Blaylock September 13, 1982 Page Three � f Based on the criteria set forth in the Master Program, the 20-member citizen advisory committee in 1976 correctly recognized that May creek west of I-405 was not appropriate for conservancy designa�ltion. The Master Program expressly excludes this area from the conservancy designation (Section 5.02.03 and Section 4 .02.02(F) ) and likewise exempts this area from low-density resi- dential; goals. Section 4.07.02(H) . l Iflanything, the area is less suitable for conservancy designation today than it was in 1976. Id addition to the Pan Abode plant, the Bar B Mill and the railroad tracks that were in place i'n 1976, developers have recently completed a multiple- structurel condominium complex in the area opposite Pan Abode, south Of May Creek. Improper placement of a sewer main in the area between May Creek and the Pan, Abode property line causes a storm drain. emptying into May Creek near Lake Washington Boulevard to back up and flood the Pan Abode property. Changing the designation of May Creek west of I-405 to con- servancy could have disastrous economic effects on Pan Abode, already' h rd hit by the depression in the building industry. It would immediately deprive Pan Abode of the only location for a projected lumber storage building that has been planned since 1976. IThe proposal would render one-fourth to one-third of Pan Abode'sj p operty unusable and reduce the economic value of the entire arcel by hundreds of thousands of dollars, reducing the security on Pan Abode's bank loan and possibly forcing Pan Abode into default. In the long range, the staggering reduction in property value will affect Pan Abode's ability to obtain future f inanci'ng. Pad Abode recognizes that May Creek is a valuable natural resource. Indeed, Pan Abode cooperated with the City in designing conditions to protect May Creek from any adverse impacts caused by the construction proposed in 1976. In this regard, we stress that a substantial portion of the Pan Abode property remains within the 200 foot zone subject to the Shoreline Management Act substantial development permit provi- sions. ; Consequently, neither Pan Abode, nor any successor in interesjt, could undertake any substantial development within this zone without obtaining a Substantial Development Permit. This requirement gives the City an opportunity to monitor development of the Pan Abode property and to impose suitable conditions to 1 Roger J. Blaylock September 13, 1982 Page Fo,lur protect May Creek. This is a much more sensible and flexible approach to the problem than an outright prohibition on all future development of the parcel . To ,summarize, imposing the kinds of restrictions suggested by Mr. DuBois and others on development of lands adjacent to May Creek west of I-405 would be inconsistent with the long-range goals and criteria established in 1976. These proposed changes would have disastrous economic consequences for Pan Abode . Moreover, since it is highly unlikely that May Creek west of Lake Washington Boulevard would be suitable for conservancy designa- tion in any event, the likely result would be to single out Pan Abode for unfair, discriminatory, and confiscatory treatment. London v. Seattle, 93 Wn.2d 657 (1980) ; 6 Nichols, Law of Eminent Domain,, § 6.351111 at p. 6-109 .14 (rev. 3d ed. 1968 ) . Thank you very much for allowing Pan Abode the opportunity to • submit its comments in writing to the citizen proposals made at the June 91, 1982, public hearing of the Renton Planning Commission. I note that, although these suggestions were made more than three months ago, Pan Abode was given less than two weeks to submit its written comments . Accordingly, if the obser- vations made in this letter are deemed insufficient to refute the suggestions made at the June 9 , 1982, hearing, I respectfully request, that Pan Abode be given an additional opportunity to marshal; its arguments prior to the final recommendation of the committee reviewing proposed revisions to the Shoreline Master Program! Sincerely yours, WICKWIRE, LEWIS, GOLDMARK & SCHORR sgt,A;468_ David C. Crosby Enclosure cc: John Hubbard 1 J 1 • . For.Use By City Clerk's Office Only A. I . # 4a 41 AGENDA ITEM RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING 1 1 it SUBMITTING Dept./Div./Bd./C mm. Policy Development For Agenda Of October 25, 1982 (Meeting Date) Staff Contact ,; David R. Clemens (Name) Agenda Status: SUBJECT: PUBLIC. HEARING - Shoreline Master Consent Program update Public Hearing i Correspondence I I Ordinance/Resolution Old Business Exhibits: (Legal' Descr. , Maps, Etc. )Attach New Business Study Session A. Letter Other B. Proposed Shoreline Master Program revisio Approval : Legal Dept. Yes_ No N/A COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: Following Public Finance Dept. Yes No. N/A I _ Hearing, refer. to Planning and Development Other Clearance Committee for report and recommendation. FISCAL IMPACT: 1 Amount Appropriation- Expenditure Requ'' red $ Budgeted $ Transfer Required $ SUMMARY (Backgrol,undjinformation, prior action and effect of implementation) (Attach additional pages if necessary.) , On September 8, 11982, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the attached update to the Shoreline Master Program. This document was originally adopted in 1976 to provide specific development regulations for areas within 200 feet of Lake Washington, th'e Cedar and Green Rivers, and portions of Springbrook and May Creeks. • PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: f October 20, 1982 3716 Lake Washington Blvd.', SE Bellevue, WA e C OWE r'`1 Honorable Barbara Shinpoch, Mayor o Members of the City CouncilOCT I I 22, P 02 Subject: Shoreline Master Program Dear Ma or Shinpoch and Council Members: CITY CLERK We are :owners of 3 platted single family lots on Lake Washington, platted in the ven early 1900's. As you are aware the Shoreline Master program of the City regullates what can be done along the shorelands within the City limits. During the recent review and update of the City' s program we asked if consid- eration could be given to the area where our lots are located. The existing Master Proram allows filling out 35 feet but only between existing bulkheads. , In our case, no bulkhead exists to the north precluding the filling of our lots as others have done to the south. The specific area lies adjacent to and south of Kennydale Beach. Although we own only 3 lots, we have talked to other owners who are also interested in developing their property. We feel. we should not be denied the right to use our property and the Shore- land Master Program should address the issue. At least set a policy in this last remaihing area on the lakeshore which would allow limited development for single family homes. It is Painfully apparent that the existing regulations fail to take into consideration the rights of owners of pre-existing platted lots. We believe that reasolable development standardsshould be established for the few non- conforming lots within the shoreline zone which are not currently developable due to ,the prohibition of filling. We feel the Council can establish reason- able limits to development of the lots which will insure our private property rights without injuring the rights of others. Very truly yours, fj d Houghton Richard C. Hough o ; For Use By City Clerk's Office Only A. I . # (1 AGENDA ITEM 1 RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING I _:_ :=g..==== ....... SUBMITTING Dept./Div./Bd./Comm. Policy Development For Agenda Of October 4, 1982 ' (Meeting Date) Staff Contact 1 David R. Clemens (Name) Agenda Status: SUBJECT: SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE Consent X it Public Hearing 1 Correspondence Ordinance/Resolution I Old Business it New Business Exhibits: (Legalll Descr. , Maps, Etc. )Attach Study Session A. Attached letter. Other Proposed Shoreline B. Master Program Revision - Approval : C. Legal Dept. Yes No_ N/A_ COUNCIL ACTION �RECOMMENDED: Hold a public Finance Dept. Yes_ No. N/A_ hearing pursuant to the Shoreline Master Other Clearance Program on October 25, 1982, at 8:00 p.m. , and at the close of the public hearing, refer the Master Program to the Planning and Development Committee for report and final recommendation. FISCAL IMPACT:! I Expenditure Req'liired $ Amount $ Appropriation- $ Budgeted Transfer Required SUMMARY (Backgfl and information, prior action and effect of implementation) (Attach additional pages if necessary. ) - 1 ,On September 8, 1982, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the attac1ied update to the Shoreline Master Program. This document was originall adopted in 1976 to provide specific development regulations for areas within two hundred feet of Lake Washington, the Cedar and Green Rivers, and portions of Springbrook and May Creeks. ,I' PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: RENTON CITY CLERK SUBJECT: HEARING RENTON SHORELAND MASTER PROGRAM • , r I � 1 1 1 RENTON CITY COUNCIL / Regular Meeting October 4 , 11982 Municipal Building Monday , 8: 00, P .M . Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER Mayor Barbara Y. Shinpoch led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF I RICHARD M. STREDICKE, Council President Pro tem, ROBERT J. HUGHES, COUNCIL MEMBERS RANDALL ROCKHILL, JOHN W. REED, NANCY L. MATHEWS, THOMAS W. TRIMM. I MOVED BY TRIMM, SECONDED BY REED, COUNCIL PRESIDENT CLYMER BE EXCUSED. CARRIED. CITY STAFF I BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, Mayor; LAWRENCE WARREN, City Attorney; MICHAEL IN ATTENDANCE PARNESS, Administrative Assistant; MAXINE E. MOTOR, Acting City Clerk; CAPT. DONALD PERSSON, Police Department. / PRESS I Jan Hinman, Renton Record Chronicle 1 MINUTE APPROVAL MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY MATHEWS, COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES i OF SEPTEMBER 27, 1982 AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. r CONSENT AGENDA The following items are adopted by one motion which follows the items included. Deleted item Mayor Shinpoch announced that item 5b had been withdrawn from the Consent Agenda. LID 320 Interim Finance Department recommended interim financing be provided from Financing I the Waterworks Utility Fund for LID 320, water main extension on / NE 27th Street just east of Edmonds Avenue NE (Devils Elbow Road) . 1 Interest rate to be established at the prevailing rate at the time of the initial draw down; financing shall be repaid from Bond pro- p i ceeds after project completion. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. I I Cumulative Finance Department requested an ordinance to establish a Cumulative Reserve Fund - Reserve Fund for deposit of Special Utility Connection Charges. Specitl 'Utility Monies received to be used for support and/or betterment of the Charges I Water and Sewer Utility. Refer to Ways and Means Committee.; Shoreline Master Policy Development Department requested Public Hearing be sett for Program Update October 25, 1982 to consider the Shoreline Master Program update. This program, originally adopted in 1976, is to provide specific development regulations for areas within 200 feet of Lake Washington, the Cedar and Green Rivers and portions of Springbrook and May Creeks. Council concur. Unincorporated Policy Development Department requested review of City policy re- Territoryl Sewer garding sewer service to unincorporated territories within the city, Service 1 specifically the "Liberty View" project. Refer to Utilities Committee. Repeal of Finance Department/City Clerk requested repeal of Ordinance, #3383. Ordinance/ #3383 Change in Federal law to Social Security reporting requirements i removes present exemption of sick pay. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. I 1 Handicapped Proclamation by Mayor Shinpoch declared the month of October, 1982, Parking Awareness as DAV Handicapped Parking Awareness Month, sponsored by Disabled Month' I American Veterans. Council concur. 1 Claim before Legal Department requested ordinance be established requiring a Suit Ordinance Claim for Damages be filed prior to suit against the City.; Refer to Ways and Means Committee. II o 11 Renton City Council October 4, 1982 Page 2 I CONSENT AGENDA continued I 1 Holvick deRegt Holvick deRegt Koering requested a Latecomers Agreement be Koering established for the construction of the traffic signal at the Latecomers intersection of SW Seventh Street and Edwards Street, pursuant Agreement to Hearing Examiner Report and Decision for sitelplan approval , SA-094-81 , SA-095-81 and Ordinance 3622. Refer to Transportation Committee. Holvick deRegt Holvick deRegt Koering requested a Latecomers Agreement be Koering established for. the construction of the traffic signal at the Latecomers intersection of Powell Avenue SW and SW Grady Way, pursuant to Agreement Hearing Examiner Report and Decision for site plain approval , SA-094-81 , SA-095-81 and Ordinance 3622. Refer to Transportation Committee. Common Holvick deRegt Koering requested review by Councill committee of Furb Cuts requirements for common curb cuts as they apply to industrial equirements and commercial sites. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. ons'truction Holvick deRegt Koering requested a construction funding agreement funding be established for the construction of the traffic signal at SW greement Seventh Street and Edwards Street. Refer to Planning and Develop- ment Committee and City Attorney. . Clifford Land Use Hearing Examiner submitted report on thelJ. Clifford Gray pay Rezone Request for Rezone #R-051-82 of the north side of SW 12th Street -051-82 between Maple Avenue SW and Lind Avenue SW. Applicant seeks rezone from R-1 to L-1 to construct a warehouse. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Iii'lanning Mayor Shinpoch announced reappointment of Virginia Houser to the ommission Planning Commission for a three-year term effective to June 30, li reappointment 1985. Mrs. Houser has served on the Commission since 1980. Other members of the Planning Commission include: Frank\ Jacobs, Eugene Ledbury, Michael Porter, Barbara Schellert, Joan Walker and Anita Warren. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. W. Bitney Appeal filed by Dean Bitney regarding Hearing Examiner Decision lezone Appeal of 9/14/82 - D. W. Bitney Rezone, Variance and Preliminary Mobile RILI023-82 Home Park Applications (Files No. R-023-82, PMH-029-82, V-041-82, PIMH-029-82 V-042-82, V-043-82, V-044-82) . Applications requested rezoning VT041-82 of the west side of Union Avenue SE and adjacent to the southerly VI�042-82 boundary of the existing Leisure Estates Mobile Home Park from VIr043-82 G-1 to T along with preliminary mobile home park approval to con- y 044-82 struct a 203-lot mobile home park. Four varianceslfrom design criteria were sought. Refer to Planning and Development Committee. D Wald E. Land Use Hearing Examiner submitted report on the Donald E. Mc MWilliams Williams Preliminary Plat (File #PP-031-82) for approval of a Preliminary nine-lot subdivision to allow construction of 18 dwelling units on Plat 1 .88 acres located on the east side of Union Avenue, NE between NE P -031-82 Fourth Street and NE Sixth Street (extended). Hearing Examiner Street Forward recommendation: Approval with conditions. Council Finance Department requested , concur. I resolution authorizing', up to an Tlyust Fund additional 5500,000 being borrowed from the Street Forward Thrust Borrowing Fund. Refer to Ways and Means Committee. Clilnsent Agenda MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY ROCKHILL, COUNCIL APPROVE THE Ap.roved CONSENT AGENDA AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. i I I , OF R4,1 �' 41 ' O PLANNING COMMISSION • RENTON. WASHINGTON I; MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 • 235- 2550 o^Irn � 4) • O147. SEPT�00 I --- October 4, 1982 ' • The Honorable Barba Members of the City Renton, Washington t 1 l) �_-'� RE: SHORELINE MASTS ,1. Dear Mayor land Counc 1 On September 8, 1982 r1� )f the attached update to t L,S.~ ,.LX 4� `(� origi- nally adopted in 197 (Z c_6�,� >r areas , within twolhundred f W / :rs, and portions of Spri: k\e �U' �� I The revisions incorp( ations of existing Master Ph elements. I In addi;tioa, the pros " desig- i ' nation on the norther annels, where they abut the E had reviousl y been desic VkAIL rt 1(..iiit • It is 'recommended th a at to , the Shoreline Master t the close of the public h Lanning and Development Commi Very truly yours, Michael 1 xter .,--ion __ ___ — — - - — - Chairm ,i Planning Commi ion C' 7L/ : . X_ • '. By: David R. Clemens Policy Development Director cc: ;Planning Commissioners , • I 1 I /) For:Use By City Clerk's Office Only . A. I . # AGENDA ITEM I RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING a am=s rm. ==c ===asp=a=== 1 SUBMITTING 1 Dept./Div./Bd./Comm. Policy Development For Agenda Of October 4, 1982 (Meeting Date) Staff Contacts David R. Clemens (Name) Agenda Status: JJ SHORELIINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE 1 ' SUBJECT: Consent Public Hearing Correspondence 1i Ordinance/Resolution ,i Old Business I Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc.)Attach New Business Study Session A. Attach d letter. Other ' Proposed Shoreline B. Master Program Revision C. Approval : Legal Dept. Yes No N/A COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: Hold a public Finance Dept. Yes___ No. N/A hearing pursuant to the Shoreline Master Other Clearance Program on OcFtober 25, 1982, at 8:00 p.m. , and at the close of the public hearing, refer the Master Program to the Planning and Development Committee for report and final recommendation. FISCAL IMPACT: Expenditure Required $ Amount $ Appropriation- $ Budgeted Transfer Required 1 ir SUMMARY (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation) (Attach additional pages if necessary.) 1 1 II On September 8, 1982, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the attached update to the Shoreline Master Program. This document was originally adopted in 1976 to provide specific development regulations for areas within two hundred feet of Lake Washington, the Cedar and Greek Rivers, and portions of Springbrook and May Creeks. I 1 PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: 1 I ' SUBMIT THIS COPY TO CITY CLERK BY NOON ON THURSDAY' WITH DOCUMENTATION. ! I OF R4 A e% Oz PLANNING COMMISSION • RENTON, WASHINGTON zo ea MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235- 2550 90 co. q 11 •0 SEpr�Q j� October 4, 1982 li The Honorable Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Members Of the City Council Renton, Washington RE: SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE Dear Mayor and Council Members: • On September 8, 1982, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the attached Iupdateto the Shoreline Master Program. This document was origi- nally adopted in 1976 to provide specific development regulations for areas within two hundred feet of Lake Washington, the Cedar and Green Rivers, and portions of Springbrook and May Creeks. The revisions incorporated into this document are primarily clarifications of existing Master Program language and updating certain procedural elements. In addition, the proposed revision will place a "natural environment" desig nation on the northerly side of the Springbrook Creek/Black River Channels, where they abut the existing Black River Reparian Forest. This area had previously been designated in an "urban environment. " It is recommended that the City Council hold a public hearing pursuant to ' the Shoreline Master Program on October 25, 1982, at 8:00 p.m. and at the close of the public hearing, the Master Program be referred to the Planning and Development Committee for report and final recommendation. Very truly yours, Michael rter Chairm Planning Commi sion 66<(: By: David R. Clemens Policy Development Director cc: Planning Commissioners I I I ' I I Recommended by the Planning Commission for City Council Adoption on September 8, 1982. I. SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM I CITY OF RENTON I � I • SEPTEMBER 1, 1982 � I • I � SECTION L INTRODUCTION 1.01 j BACKGROUND For several years there has been growing concern among citizens, local government and state government about the increasing pressures affecting the utilization of the shorelines within the state. In general, shorelines are of limited supply and are faced with rapidly increasing demands for such traditional uses as ports,] fising, swimming and scenic views, as well as new demands for recreational subdivisions, private housing, commercial and industrial uses. More people, higher incomes, more leisure time, and general business growth have combined to create la heavy, use of the shorelines. In the fall of 1970, the Washington Environmental Council circulated an initiative petition known as the Shorelines Protection Act, or Initiative 43, and gathered enough signatures to certify it to the legislature meeting in 1971. Initiative 43 placed the primary responsibility for the planning and implementation of the Act with Sta1Je government. The legislature then had the choice of accepting Initiative 43, passing a substitute measure, or taking no action whatsoever. They chose the second optio 9 a d enacted engrossed substitute House Bill #584, which was .called the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and it subsequently became Initiative 43BI . Initiative 43B called for local control of planning and implementation of the Act. In November of 1972, both measures were placed on the ballot, and the States v ters selected the Shoreline Management Act.of 1971 (RCW 90.48). This Act is based on the philosophy that the shorelines of our State are among our most "valuable" and "fragile" natural resources and that unrestricted development of these resource.1 is not in the best public interest. Therefore, planning and management are necessary in order to prevent the harmful effects of uncoordinated and piece-meal development of our State's shorelines. -1- , 02 REQUIREMENTS OF THE SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT , Under the Washington State Shoreline Management Act, local governments ve the primary responsibility for initiating the planning program and administering t I e regulatory requirements of the act, with the Department of Ecology acting in a sl�pportive and review capacity. As set forth in the provisions of the Pct, local vi vernments must fulfill the following basic requirements: 1. Administration of a shoreline permit system for proposed substantial development on wetlands of designated water bodies. 2. Compilation of a comprehensive inventory which includes a survey of natural characteristics, present land uses and patterns of ownership. 3. Development of a Master Program to provide an objective guide for regulating the use of shorelines. 1.13 COMPLIANCE IN RENTON The Washington State Shoreline Management Act of 1971 directs,all local grvernments to develop a Master Program for the management of all shorelines and a l ociated wetlands lying within the corporate limits. This Master Program has been p pared to comply with the requirements of that Act and to formulateguidelines wi ich will regulate the future utilization and development of the shorelines lying w' hin the corporate limits of the city of Renton. Specifically, this Master Program a ects the shorelines of Lake Washington, Cedar River, Green River, Black River, Su ingbrook Creek and May Creek, and any other shoreline later coming under the ju isdiction of the Act. In compliance with the first requirement of the State Act, and a part of t Is Master Program, the City of Renton is establishing a permit system, under which a mit would have to be obtained for any substantial development proposed within of I rementioned shorelines, within the city limits of Renton. Substantial development, a ording to the law, means any development on which the fair market value exceeds $1.000.00, or any development which would interfere with the normal public uses of th water or shorelines. As part of that permit system, the following are considered g:. eral exceptions to the permit requirement*: -2- I l 1. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures. 1 2. Construction of the normal protective bulkhead common to single family 1 residences. 3. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by I1 the elements. 14. Construction of barns or similar agricultural buildings. 15. Construction or modification of navigational aids. 16.. Construction on wetlands by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single family residence for his own use or for the use of his family, which residence does not exceed a height of thirty-five (35) feet above average grade level. 17. Construction of a dock designed for pleasure craft only, for the non-commercial use of the owner of a single family residence, the cost of which does not exceed $2,500.00. * (Applications for Exceptions must still be submitted to and approved by the Building and Zoning Department.) However, any development which occurs within the city's shoreline, as defined by the Act, whether it requires a permit or not, must be consistent with the intent of the State Ilaw. Under the shoreline permit system herein established, administrative responsibility lies jointly with the Building and Zoning Department and the Policly Development Department, but the permits are reviewed in the event of dispute by the Land 1 Use Hearing Examiner, who has the authority to approve or deny permit applications. Liberal provisions for appeal of permit 'decisions to the State of Washington Shorelines Hearings Board are also provided. 1 In compliance with the second requirement of. the Act, the Renton Planning Department conducted a comprehensive inventory of the natural chara terlistics, present land uses, and patterns of ownership along the City's shoreline. The inventory was completed in October, 1972, and provided a substantial basis for ,the development of this Master Program. The environments and specific use regulatior's refleCt the local conditions,that are documented in that inventory. 1' I -3- In compliance with the third requirement of the Act, the City of Renton, with the help of its local citizens, has developed a Shoreline Master Program to serve ai a guide for regulating use of the City's shorelines. Included therein is a description o' the goals, objectives, policies, environments, use regulations, and provisions for v=riances and conditional uses, that were enacted as part of an overall plan which will rl gulate the future utilization and development of the shorelines lying within the cl rporate limits of the city of Renton. 1 .4 DEVELOPMENT OF THE MASTER PROGRAM The Shoreline Management Act requires that Renton's Shoreline jnagement Program serve as an objective guide for regulating use of the City's s orelines. As defined by the Act, the Master Program is to be general, comprehensive, and long-range (20-30 years) in order to be applicable to all of •I-nton's shorelines. "General" means that the policies, proposals and guidelines are nrt directed towards any specific sites. "Comprehensive" means that the Pi ogram is dr ected toward all land and water uses, their impact on the environment and logical eIItimates of future growth, and it also means that the Program shall recognize the p ans and programs of other governmental units, and adjacent jurisdictions. "Long r:nge" means that the Program is to be directed at least twenty (20) to thirty (30) years into the future, look beyond immediate uses, and follow creative objectives rther than a simple projection of current trends and conditions. The basic intent of this Master Program is to provide for the management of our City's shorelines by planning for and fostering all reasonable and appropriate u es and to ensure, if development takes place, that it is done in a manner which will plomote and enhance the best interests of the general public. This Master Program h.•s further been formulated to protect the public interest and general welfare in the - C ty's shorelines and, at the same time, to recognize and protect owners' legal p i operty rights consistent with the public interest. The goals and policies of this M:ster Program are formulated so as to enhance the public use and enjoyment of the s relines so long as that public use is consistent with, and does not impair, legal p r vate property rights. It is recognized that the shorelines of the city of Renton are 1•gated within a major urbanized area and that they are subject to ever increasing -4- r pressures of additional uses necessitating increased coordination in the management and development of the shorelines. An attempt has, therefore, been made to present a planned, rational and concerted effort to increase coordinated and optimum utilization of then shorelines of the city of Renton. Additionally, this Master Program has also been formulated so as to provide for uses of our shorelines in the following order of preference: 1. Recognize and protect the state-wide interest over local interest oh II shorelines of state-wide significance. 2. Preserve the natural character of the shorelines. 3. Result in long-term over short-term benefits. 4. Protect the resources and ecology of the shorelines. 5. Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines. 6. Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shorelines. 7. Provide for any other element deemed appropriate or necessary. It should also be noted that the Department of Ecology has designated Lake Washington as a "region" for the purpose of shoreline planning. The Lake Washington Regional Shoreline Goals and Policies adopted by the Regional Citizens Advisory Committee on October 31, 1973, have been considered in the formulation of this Master Program. I I This Master Program should be read in its entirety and be considered as la whole. ..The goals and policies and specific uses of.this Master Program were developed in an attempt to provide long-range planning which would govern the future utilization and development of our shorelines. Although it is anticipated that this Master Program • will need to be revised from time to time as additional shorelines are annexed and become subject to the provisions of this Act, as planned unit developments are established and as additional experience is gained working with this Act during iits initial itinplementation period, it is felt that the general goals and policies of this Master Program provide the general guidelines under which future utilization and develop ent might occur. We feel confident that these final guidelines are expressive of the concerns of the citizens of the city of Renton for the management of their II -5- s orelines. This Master Program has been written with the spirit of optimism; with the g P P , .pe that our legacy of natural grandeur in the city of Renton will be more wisely ed in the brief period of time it is entrusted to us, so that succeeding generations ight have it to enjoy. -6- SECTION 2. PROCEDURES 2.01 INFORMATION PRIOR TO SUBMITTING APPLICATION Prior to submitting an application for a substantial development permit or an exemption from a. substantial development permit, the applicant should informally discuss a proposed development with the Building and Zoning Department. This will enable: the applicant to become familiar with the requirements of this Master Program, Building and Zoning procedures, and enforcement procedures. 2.02 SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMITS 2.02.01 Application Forms and Fees No substantial development shall be undertaken on shorelines of the City without first obtaining a "substantial development permit" from the Building and Zoning Department. Applications for such permits shall be made on forms and in a procedure prescribed by the Building and Zoning Department. Application forms may be revised from time to time by the Building and Zoning Department without prejudice to any existing applications. Such forms should be designed to obtain for the Building and Zoning Department such information as is necessary to determine whether such a permit is justified. Applications shall be made by the property owner, or his authorized agent, lessee, contract purchaser, or other person entitled to possession of the property and, except for applications filed by or on behalf of the City or other governmental agencies, shall be accompanied by a receipt issued by the Finance Department showing payment of the applicable fees which are hereby imposed as follows: FEE VALUE OF DEVELOPMENT $75 Less than $10,000 $150 $10,000 but less than $50,000 $200 $50,000 to $100,000 $250 More than $100,000 + .02% -7- . I � 4.02.02 Publishing and Posting The applicant shall cause to be published notices thereof once a week for two (2) consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the area where said development is proposed, provided, however, that the Building and Zoning Department shall have the right to require additional publications by the applicant in a newspaper of general circulation in a neighboring jurisdiction if it appears that the proposed project may affect the environment of such neighboring jurisdiction. The applicant shall bear the cost of publication. Three (3) copies of the notice shall be posted prominently on the property concerned and in conspicuous public places within three hundred (300) feet thereof. Each such notice shall include a statement that persons desiring to present their vie is to the Building and Zoning Department with regard to said applicatior may do so in writing to that Department and persons interested in the Building and Zoning Department's action on an application for a permit may submit their views in writing or notify the Building and Zoning Deparment in writing of their interest within thirty (30) days from the last date of publication of such notice. Such notification or submission of views to the Building and Zoning Department shall entitle those persons to a copy of the action taken on the application. The applicant shall submit proof of publication to the Building and Zoning Department within ten (10) days after the last date of publication. An affidavit of publication by the newspaper shall be sufficient. 2.02.03 Review Guidelines Unless exempted or authorized through, the variance or conditional use permit provisions of this Master Program, no substantial development permit and no other permit shall be granted unless the proposed development is consistent with the provisions of this Master Program, the Shoreline Management. Act of 1971, and the rules and regulations adopted by the Department of Ecology thereunder. e -8- 2.02.041 Burden of Proof on Applicant The burden of proving that the proposed substantial development is consistent with the criteria which must be met before a permit is granted shall be on the applicant. 2.02.05 Conditional Approval Should the Building and Zoning Director and/or the Policy Development it Director find that any application does not substantially comply with criteria imposed by the Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, he may deny such application or attach any terms or condition which he deems suitable and reasonable to effect the purpose and objective of this Master Program. 2.02.06 Administrative Appeals Where an application is denied or changed, per 2.02.05, an applicant may appeal the decision denying or changing a "substantial development permit" to the Land Use Hearing Examiner. The Land Use Hearing i Examiner shall have the final authority to interpret this Master Program for the City of Renton. See Section 2.10 for appeal procedures to the Shoreline Hearings Board. 2.02.07 Notification of City Departments It shall be the duty of the Building and Zoning Department to timely furnish copies of all applications and actions taken by said department unto the Public Works Department and City Clerk and such other officials or departments whose jurisdiction may extend to all or any part of the proposed development. -9- ,.02.08 Bonds The Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department may require the applicant to post a bond in favor of the City of Renton to assure full compliance with any terms and conditions imposed by said department on any substantial development permit. Said bond shall be in an amount to reasonably assure the City that any deferred improvement will be carried out within the time stipulated. 2 03 EXEMPTIONS 2 03.01 Exemptions from Permit System The following shall not be considered substantial developments for the purpose of this Master Program: A. Any project with a certification from the governor pursuant to Chapter 80.50 RCW. B. Any development of which the total cost or fair market value does not exceed $1,000, if such development does not materially interfere with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. C. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by accident, fire or elements. D. Construction of the normal protective bulkhead common to single-family residences. E. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements. F. Construction of a barn or similar agricultural structure on wetlands. G. Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor buoys. H. Construction on wetlands by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single-family residence for his own use or for the use of his family, which residence does not exceed a height of -10- thirty-five (35) feet above average grade level and which meets all requirements of the state agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed pursuant to this chapter. Construction of a dock designed for pleasure craft only, for the non-commercial use of the owner of a single-family residence, the cost of which does not exceed $2,500. J. Any development on shorelines of the City included within a preliminary or final plat approved by the City prior to April 1, 1981, if: (1) The final plat was approved after April 13, 1961, or the preliminary plat was approved after April 30, 1969; or (2) Sales of lots to purchasers with reference to the plat, or substantial development incident to platting or required by the plat, occurring prior to April 1, 1.971; and (3) The development to be made without a permit meets all requirements of the City, other than requirements imposed pursuant to this Master Program; and (4) The development does not involve construction of buildings, or involves construction on wetlands of buildings to serve only as community, social, or recreational facilities for the use of owners of platted lots and the buildings do not exceed a height of thirty-five (35) feet above grade level; and (5) The development is completed by June 1, 1973. 2.03.02 Exemption Certificate Procedures Any person claiming exemption from the permit requirements of this Master Program, as a result of the exemptions specified in this Section, may make application for a no-fee exemption certificate to the Buildinlg and Zoning Department in the manner prescribed by that department. I � -11- 2 04 REVIEW OF APPLICATION 2..4.01 Review Criteria The Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department shall review an application for a permit based on the following: A. The application. B. The environmental impact statement, if one is required. C. Written comments from interested persons. D. Information and comments from other City departments affected. E. Independent study by the Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department. F. Evidence presented at a public hearing, should the Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department decide • that it would be in the public interest to hold a public hearing. The Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department shall have powers to prescribe rules and regulations for such hearings. 2.04.02 Additional Information The Building and Zoning Department may require an applicant to furnish information and data in addition to that contained or required in the application forms prescribed. Unless an adequate environmental statement has previously been prepared for the proposed development by another agency, the City's Environmental Review Committee shall cause to be prepared such a statement, prior to granting a permit, when the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 would require such a statement. 2.04.03 Administrative Standards In addition to the criteria hereinabove set forth in this Section, the Policy Development Department may from time to time promulgate additional procedures or criteria and such shall become effective, when reduced to writing, and filed with the City Clerk and as approved by the City Council and the Department of Ecology. -12- " 2.05 APPLICATION TO THE PERMIT SYSTEM TO DEVELOPMENT UNDER- TAKEN PRIOR. TO JUNE 1, 1971 2.05.01' Permit Required Substantial development undertaken on the shorelines of the City, prior to June 1, 1971, shall not require a permit except under the following circumstances: A. Where the activity was unlawful prior to June 1, 1971. B. Where there has been an unreasonable period of dormancy in the project between its inception and June 1, 1971. C. Where the development is not completed prior to June 1, 1973. D. Where development occurred prior to June 1, 1971, on a shoreline and continued onto a different lake, river or tributary after June 1, 1971, a permit shall be required for the substantial development undertaken after June 1, 1971. 2.05.02 Phasing Substantial development undertaken prior to June 1, 1971, shall not continue without a permit until other phases that were not an integral part of the development being followed at the time construction commenced. 2.06 1 TIME REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMITS 2.06.01 Construction Commencement Construction of a project for which a permit has been granted pursuant to this Master Program must be commenced within two (2) years after the approval of the permit by the City, or the permit shall terminate. if such progress has not been made, a new permit shall be necessary. [WAC 173-14-060(1)] -13- 2 06.02 Construction Completion A permit authorizing construction shall extend for a term of no more than five (5) years; provided, however, that a project for which a permit has been granted has not been completed within five (5) years after the approval of the permit, the Building and Zoning Department shall, upon such expiration, review the permit and upon a showing of good cause may extend the permit for a period up to one (1) year. Otherwise said permit shall terminate provided, however, that no permit shall be 'extended unless the applicant has requested such review and extension prior to the expiration date of said permit. [WAC 173-14-060(2)] 2 06.03 Review Period No construction pursuant to such permit shall begin or be authorized and no building, grading or other construction permits or use permits shall be issued by the City until thirty (30) days from the date of final approval and granting of the permit, or until all review proceedings are completed as were initiated within the thirty (30) days of the date of final approval by the City of Renton. 2.0 6.04 Transferability of Permit If a parcel which has a valid substantial development permit is sold to another person or firm, such permit may be transferred to the new owner upon proper application to the Building and Zoning Department. The Building and Zoning Department may transfer said permit provided there will be no change in the proposed development. 2.07 RULINGS TO STATE Any ruling on an application for a substantial development perrrjit under a hority of this Master Program, whether it is an approval or denial, shall, (with the tr nsmittal of the ruling to the applicant, be filed concurrently with the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General by the Building and Zoning Department. -14- 2.08 ENFORCEMENT All provisions of this Master Program shall be enforced by' the Building and ZoninlIg Department. For such purposes the Building and Zoning Director or hi duly authdrized representative shall have the power of a police officer. 2.09 RESCISSION OF PERMITS 2.09.01 Non-compliance with Permit Any substantial development permit issued by the City under the terms of this Master Program may be rescinded or suspended by the Building and Zoning Department of the City upon a finding that a permittee has not complied with conditions of the permit. If the holder of the permit chooses, he shall be entitled to a hearing before the Land Use Hearing Examiner. I 2.09.02 Notice of Non-compliance �I I Such rescission and/or modification of an issued permit shall be initiated by serving written notice of non-compliance on the permittee, which notice shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the address listed on the application or to such other address as the applicant or permittee may have advised the City; or such notice may be served on the applicant or permittee in person or his agent in the same manner as service of summons as provided by law. 2.09.03 Posting In addition to such notice, the Building and Zoning Department shall cause to have notice posted in three (3) public places of which one (1) posting shall be at or within the area described in the permit. -15- .09.04 Public Hearing Before any such permit can be rescinded or modified, a public hearing may be held at the permittee's written request by the Land Use Hearing Examiner. Such written request must be made by said permittee not later than 1.4 calendar days following service of notice upon permittee. 09.05 Final Decision The decision of the. Land Use Hearing Examiner shall be the final decision of the City on all applications. A written decision shall be transmitted to the Department of Ecology, the Attorney General's office, the applicant, and such other departments or boards of the City as are affected thereby and the legislative body of the City. . 10 APPEALS Any person aggrieved by the granting or denying of a substantial d:velopment permit on shorelines of the City, or by the rescinding of a permit pi rsuant to the provisions of this Master Program, may seek review from the State of '-shington Shorelines Hearing Board by filing a request for the same within thirty (30) d=1ys of receipt of the final order and by concurrently filing copies of such request th the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General's office as provided in S Iction 18(1) of the Shorelines Management Act of 1971. A copy of any such appeal notice shall likewise be filed with the Building and Zoning Department and the City • erk of the City of Renton. 2 ) 1 PENALTIES 2., 1.01 Prosecution Every person violating any of the provisions of this Master Program or the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 shall be punishablle under conviction by a fine not exceeding five hundred ($500) dollars, or by imprisonment not exceeding ninety (90) days, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and each day's violation shall constitute a separate punishable offense. -16- 2.11.02,; Injunction The City Attorney may bring such injunctive, declaratory or other actions as are necessary to insure that no uses are made of the shorelines within the City in conflict with the provisions and programs of this Master Program or the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and to otherwise enforce provisions of this Ordinance and the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. 2.11.03 Public and Private Redress Any person subject to the regulatory program of this Master Program who violates any provision of this Master Program or the provisions of a permit issued pursuant thereto shall be liable for all damages to public or private property arising from such violation, including the cost of restoring the affected area to its condition prior to such violation. The City Attorney may bring suit for damages under this subsection on behalf of the City. Private persons shall have the right to bring suit 'for damages under this subsection on their own behalf and on behalf of all persons similarly situated. If liability has been established for the cost of restoring an area affected by violation, the Court shall make provision to assure that restoration will be accomplished within a reasonable time at the expense of the violator. In addition to such relief, including monetary damages, the Court in its discretion may award attorney's fees and costs of the suit to the prevailing party. 2.12 AMENDMENTS The City shall review this Master Program every four (4) years hereafter, or sooner if necessary. Any amendments to this Master Program shall be reviewed first by the Planning Commission, which shall conduct at least one (1) public hearing on the proposed amendment. The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council, which shall hold at least one (1) public hearing before making a determination. Any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Department of Ecology for approval in accordance with Section 19 of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. -17- SECTION 1 SHORELINES OF THE CITY 3.11 Approximately 18 miles of shoreline in the City of Renton are under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. By State standards, the Green River and Lake Washington are classified as Shorelines of State-wide Significance and comprise approximately 5.8 miles of the shorelines of the city of Renton. In addition, the horelines of the Cedar River, Black River, Springbrook Creek, and May Creek are shorelines within the City. These 18 miles of shoreline in the city of Renton are considered an extremely valuable resource not only to the City of Renton but also to the Seattle Metropolitan Area of which Renton is an integral part. 3.02 Each shoreline has its own unique qualities which make it valuable and preference is, therefore, given to the following uses in descending order of priority (as established by Chapter 90.5.020 RCW): 1. Recognize and protect the state-wide interest over local interest for shorelines of state-wide significance. 2. Preserve the natural character of the shorelines. 3. Result in long-term over short-term benefits. 4. Protect the resources and ecology of the shorelines. 5. Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines. 6. Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the Shoreline. 3.013 In the city of Renton, the following bodies of water are regulated by the Act: 1. Cedar River. 2. ' Green River. 3. Lake Washington. 4. May Creek from the intersection of May Creek and 1\.E. 31st Street in the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 32-24-5E WM downstream in a northeasterly direction to its mouth at Lake Washington. -18- I � _ I I 5. Springbrook Creek north from S. W. Grady Way to the Black River. 6. • Black River. The above information is illustrated in Figure 3-1. � I 3.04 The jurisdiction of this Master Program -includes shorelines and wetlands as defined in Section 9. � I I � I ' -19- SECTION 4. GOALS AND POLICIES .01 SHORELINE USES AND ACTIVITIES ELEMENT ill01.01 Goals: A. Shorelines of the City are to be planned and coordinated to afford best use of the limited water resource. B. Shorelines of the City are to provide natural amenities within an urban environment. 4.01.02 Policies: A. Reasonable and appropriate shoreline uses and activities should be planned for: (1) Short-term economic gain or convenience in development should be evaluated in relationship to potential ong-term effects on the shoreline. (2) Preference should be given to those uses or activities which enhance the natural amenities of the shorelines and which depend on a shorelines location or provide public access to the shorelines. (3) . Planning, zoning, capital improvements and other policy and regulatory standards should not increase the density of intensity of shoreline uses or activities except on a demonstrated need considering the shorelines and then only in accordance with the policies contained herein. (4) Plans should be developed for shorelines particularly suited for water-dependent uses or activities. (5) Multiple use of shorelines should be planned where location and integration of compatible uses or activities are feasible. (6) Aesthetic considerations should be encouraged when contemplating new development, extensive redevelopment of existing facilities or for general enhancement of shoreline areas. -20- 1 • I - I I . • (7) Shoreline uses and activities should be discouraged if they , are objectionable due to noise or odor or if they create offensive or unsafe conditions in relation to reasonable and appropriate uses and activities. B. Those shoreline uses or activities which are not water related should be encouraged to relocate away from the shoreline. 1 C. All shoreline developments shall be designed and constructed to protect the rights and privacy of adjacent property owners. 4.02 CONSERVATION ELEMENT 4.02.01, Goal: The resources and amenities of all shorelines situated in the city of Renton are to be protected and preserved for use and enjoyment by present and future generations. 4.02.02 Policies: A. Existing natural resources should be conserved. (1) Water quality and water flow should be maintained at la level to permit recreational use, to provide a suitable habitat for desirable forms of aquatic life, and to satisfy other required human needs. (2) Aquatic habitats and spawning grounds should be protected, improved and, if feasible, increased. (3) Wildlife habitats should be protected, improved and, if feasible, increased. (4) Unique natural areas should be designated and maintained as open space for passive forms of recreation. Access and use should be restricted, if necessary, for the conservation of these areas. B. Existing and future activities on all shorelines and wetlands within the city of Renton should be designed to minimize adverse effects on the environment. -21- 1 C. The City of Renton should take aggressive action with r ponsible governmental agencies to assure that the discharges from all drainage basins are considered an integral part of shoreline planning. (1) Soil erosion and sedimentation which adversely affect any shoreline within the city of Renton will be pre ented or controlled. (2) The contamination of existing watercourses will be prevented. D. Shoreline areas having historical, cultural, educational or scientific value should be identified and protected. (1) Public and private cooperation should be encouraged in site preservation and protection. (2) Suspected or newly discovered sites should be ept free from intrusions for a reasonable time until their value is determined. E. Festivals and temporary uses involving public interest and not substantially or permanently impairing water quality, water flow or unique and fragile areas may be permitted per Chapter 5-21 of the Renton Municipal Code. F. All further development of the shorelines of May Creek east of FAI-405 should be compatible with the existing natural state of the shoreline. (1) Low density development should be encouraged to the extent that such development would permit and provide for the continuation of the existing natural characte of the shoreline. (2) The existing waterway of May Creek east of FAI-405 should be left in an undeveloped natural state. 4.•; ECONOMIC ELEMENT 4.0 .01 Goal: Existing economic uses and activities on the shorelines arel to be recognized and economic uses or activities that are water related are to be encouraged. -22- 4.03.021 Policies: A. Economic uses and activities which are not water related should be discouraged. In those instances where such uses or activities are permitted reasonable public access to and along the water' edge should be provided. B. Future economic uses and activities should utilize the shoreline in • an efficient manner. (1) Economic uses and activities should minimize and cluster that water-related portion of their development along the shoreline and place inland all facilities which do not require a water's edge location. (2) The length, width, and height of over-water structure should be limited to the smallest reasonable dimensions. ! (3) Shoreline developments should be designed to enhance the scenic view. C. Multiple use of economic developments on the shoreline should be encouraged to provide public recreational opportunities wherever feasible. D. ' Shoreline facilities for the moorage and servicing of boats and other vessels should be prohibited in single family. zoned areas wherever feasible. (1) Commercial dockings and marinas shall meet all health standards. (2) Marinas and other economic activities shall be required to contain and clean up spills or discharges of pollutants associated with boating activities. E. The expansion of log raft storage on Lake Washington should be discouraged. F. Containment and clean-up of pollutants shall be required of all economic activities on the shorelines by property owner or operator. -23- .04 PUBLIC ACCESS ELEMENT 1. L.04.01 Goal: Increase public accessibility to shorelines, and preserve and improve the natural amenities. 4.04.02 Policies: A. Public access should recognize and be consistent with legal property rights of the owner. B. Just compensation shall be provided to property owners for land acquired for public use. C. Public access to and along the water's edge should be consistent with public safety and preservation/conservation of the natural amenities. Public right-of-way cannot be vacated, except where other access provided by that property owner is deemed to be in the public interest by the Land Use Hearing Examiner after holding a public hearing. D. Regulated public access to and along the water's edge should be available throughout publicly owned shoreline areas. E. Public access from public streets shall be made available over public property or by easement. F. Future multi-family, planned unit developments, subdivisions, commercial and industrial developments shall be required to provide regulated public access along the water's edge. G. Private access to the publicly owned shoreline corridor shall not be denied to owners of property contiguous to said corridor. H. When making extensive modifications or extensions to existing structures, multi-family, planned unit development, subdivision, commercial and industrial developers should be encouraged to provide for public access to and along the water's edge if physically feasible. -24- 4.07 RESIDENTIAL ELEMENT I , 4.07.01 1 Goal: Existing residential uses are to be recognized, but future residential development should optimize regulated public access to and along the shorelines consistent with legal property rights of the owner. 4.07.02 Policies: A. Residential uses over water shall not be permitted. B. Residential development shall not be constructed in unique and fragile areas. C. New residential developments along or impinging upon the shoreline should be permitted only where sanitary sewer facilities are available. D. Multi-family structures near the shoreline should be set back from the water's edge at least twenty(20) feet. E. Future shoreline sub-division and planned unit developments (P.U.D.) shall provide regulated public access to and/or along the water's edge. F. Low density development should be encouraged in future residential developments along the shoreline. G. New residential developments should optimize utilization of open space areas. H. All further development of the shorelines of May Creek east of FAI-405 will be compatible with the existing natural state of the shoreline. (1) Low density development will be encouraged to the extent that such development would permit and provide for the continuation of the existing natural character of the ffl shoreline. (2) The existing waterway of May creek east of FAI-405 will lie left in an undeveloped state as much as possible. -27- I I SECTION 5, ENVIRONMENTS JOI THREE ENVIRONMENTS Three environments, Natural, Conservancy and Urban, shall be cesignated to provide a uniform basis to apply policies and use regulations within dis' inctively d ferent shoreline areas. The environmental designation to be given any spe ific area s all be based on the existing development pattern, the biophysical capabilities and lild itations of the area being considered for development and the goals and aspirations ol� local citizenry. Shorelines have been categorized according to the natural c.laracteristics and use regulations have been designated herein. 5 02 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 5.02.01 Designation of the Natural Environment A. Objective: The objective in designating a natural environment is to protect and preserve unique and fragile shoreline or wetland environments in their natural state. The natural environment is intended to provide areas of wildlife sanctuary and habitat preservation. B. Areas to be Designated as a Natural Environment: (1) Areas that are unique or fragile. (2) Floodways areas. C. Acceptable Activities and Uses: The only human activity that is acceptable is for floodway drainage or storage. All other human activities including recreation are considered inappropriate. 5.02.02 Acquisition of Natural Areas: The City of Renton recognizes that preservation of Natural Shoreline Areas can only be assured through public acquisition. Therefore, where private development is proposed in areas SQ 'designated, the City shall require dedication as necessary for flood storage. -28- 5.03 CONSERVANCY ENVIRONMENT 5.03.01 i Designation of the Conservancy Environment A. Objective: The objective in designating a conservancy environment is to protect, conserve, and manage existing areas with irreplaceable natural or aesthetic features in essentially their native state, while providing for limited use of the area. The conservancy environment is intended to provide a pleasant break in the surrounding urban community. This environment shall seek to satisfy a portion of the present and future needs of Renton. B. Areas to be Designated as a Conservancy Environment: (1) Areas of high scenic value. (2) Valuable areas for wildlife habitat. (3) Hazardous slope areas. (4) Flood-prone areas. (5) Areas which cannot provide adequate utilities for intense development. (6) Areas with unique or fragile features. C. Acceptable Activities and Uses: Activities and uses considered to be acceptable in a conservancy environment are those of a nonconsumptive nature which do not degrade the existing character of the area. Uses that are to be predominant in a conservancy environment are low density residential, passive agricultural uses such as pasture or range lands, and passive outdoor recreation. 5.03.02 Use Regulations in the Conservancy Environment A. Commercial Uses: Commercial uses shall be limited to home occupations, which shall be contained wholly within the dwelling unit. B. Fish and Game Reserve and Breeding Operations: Any such activity shall be allowed only by the Land Use Hearing Examiner. � I -29- li � C. Industrial Uses: All industrial activities are prohibited in a conservancy environment. D. Recreation Use: In the conservancy environment recreation uses shall be limited to passive recreation. (1) Permitted Uses: (a) Public hiking trails. (b) Non-motorized public fishing. (c) Public wading and swimming spots. (d) Public areas for nature study. (e) Public picnic areas. E. Residential Uses: (1) Permitted Uses: Low-density single family residences. (2) Prohibited Uses: Multi-family residences of two (2) units or more. F. Utilities: (1) Local Service Utilities: The necessary local service utilities shall be permitted for approved activities and uses within the conservancy environment and shall be underground per City code requirements. (2) Major Utilities: Major utilities may be allowed only by approval of the Land Use Hearing Examiner and only if they cross the conservancy area in the shortest feasible route. 533.03 Jurisdiction That portion of May Creek east of FAI-405 and that portion of the south bank of the Cedar River, 2,500 feet east of FAI-405, shall be designated conservancy (see figure 5-1). 5.04 URBAN ENVIRONMENT 5.04.01 Designation of the Urban Environment A. Objective: The objective of the urban environment is to ensure optimum utilization of shorelines within urbanized areas by -30- providing for public use, especially access to and along the water's edge and by managing development so that it enhances and maintains shorelines for a multiplicity of viable and necessary urban uses. B. High-intensity Land Use: The urban environment is an area of high-intensity land-use including residential, commercial, and industrial development. The environment does not necessarily include all shorelines within an incorporated city as well as areas planned to accommodate intensive urban expansion. On certain shorelines planned for future urban expansion there should be limitations based on the biophysical aspects of the site. C. Water-dependent Activities: Because shorelines suitable for urban uses are a limited resource, emphasis shall be given to', development within already developed areas and particularly to water-dependent industrial and commercial uses requiring frontage on shorelines. D. Public Access: In this Master Program, priority is also given to planning for public visual and physical access to water in the urban environment. Identifying needs and planning for the acquisition of urban land for permanent public access to the water in the urban environment shall be accomplished through the Master Program. To enhance waterfront and ensure maximum public use; industrial and commercial facilities shall be redesigned to permit pedestrian waterfront activities. Where practicable, various access points ought to be linked to non-motorized transportation routes, such as bicycle and hiking paths. I I 5.04.02 Use Regulations in the Urban Environment All uses shall be allowed as indicated by Section 7 of the Master Program. 5.04.03! Jurisdiction All shorelines of the City not designated as Conservancy or Natural are designated as Urban (see figure 5-1). � I -31- I SECTION 6. GENERAL USE REGULATIONS • =.01 APPLICABILITY This section shall apply to all Shoreline uses whenever applicable. Items i cluded here will not necessarily be repeated in Section 7, Specific Use Regulations, a l d shall be used in the evaluation of all permits. 6 2. ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 6 02.01 Pollution and Ecological Disruption The potential effects on water quality, water and land vegetation, water life and other wild life (including, for example, spawning areas, Ynigration and circulation habits, natural habitats, and feeding), soil quality and all other environmental aspects must be considered in the design. plans for any activity or facility which may have detrimental effects on the environment. 6. 2.02 Burden on Applicant Applicants for permits must explain the methods that will be used to abate, avoid or otherwise control the harmful effects. 6.12.03 Erosion Erosion is to be controlled through the use of vegetation rather than structural means where feasible. 6.12.04 Geology Important geological factors - such as possible slide areas - on a site must be considered. Whatever activity is planned under the application for the development permit must be safe and appropriate in view of the geological factors prevailing. -32- I. High-rise structures on the shoreline shall be prohibited, but could be permited adjacent to the shoreline if: (1) Views of the shoreline would not be substantially obstructed due to topographic conditions, and (2) Some overriding considerations of the public interest would be served. I Shoreline low-rise development should provide substantial grade level views of the water from public shoreline roads running generally parallel to the water's edge. J. Both passive and active public areas shall be designed and provided. K. In order to encourage public use of the shoreline corridor, public parking shall be provided at frequent locations. L. Preservation or improvement of the natural amenities shall be a basic consideration in the design of shoreline areas to which public access is provided, including the trail system. M. In planning for public access, emphasis should be placed on foot and bicycle paths rather than roads, except in areas where public boat launching would be desirable. 1 4.05 RECREATION ELEMENT 4.05.O1l Goal: Water-related recreational activities available to the public are to be encouraged. I � 4.05.02 Policies: A. Water-related recreational activities should be encouraged. (1) Accessibility to the water's edge should be improved. (2) Shoreline park areas should be increased in size and number. (3) Areas for specialized recreation should be developed. (4) Both passive and active recreational areas shall be provided. B. Recreational fishing should be supported, maintained and increased. -25- C. Public agencies should be encouraged to buy shorelanld, as it becomes available for sale, based upon an established plan declaring public intent. D. Local jurisdictions should join in a cooperative effort to expand recreational opportunities through programs of acquisition, development and maintenance of waterfront areas. E. Subject to state and federal regulations, the water's depth may be changed to foster recreational aspects. 4.06 CIRCULATION ELEMENT 4.06.01 Goal: Minimize motor vehicular traffic and encourage pedestrian traffic within the shorelines. 4.06.02 Policies: A. Shoreline roadways should be scenic boulevards where possible and should be restricted to existing rights-of-way. B. Public transportation should be encouraged to facilitate access to shoreline recreation areas. C. Pedestrian and bicycle pathways, including provisions for maintenance, operation and security, should be developed. (1) Access points to and along the shoreline should be linked by pedestrian and bicycle pathways. (2) Separate pedestrian and bicycle pathways should be included in new or expanded bridges or scenic boulevards within the shorelines. (3) Separate pedestrian and bicycle pathways should be included in publicly financed transportation systems or rights-of-way, consistent with public interest and safety. D. Commercial boating operations, other than marinas, should be discouraged, but if permitted, should be limited to commercial and industrial areas. -26- 6.03 USE COMPATIBILITY AND AESTHETIC EFFECTS , I 6.03.01 , The potential impact of any of the following on adjacent, nearby and! possibly distant land and shoreline users shall be considered in the design! plans and efforts made to avoid or minimize detrimental aspects: A. View Obstruction: Buildings, smokestacks, machinery, fences, piers, poles, wires, signs, lights and other structures. B. Community Disturbances: Noise, odors, night lighting, water and land traffic, and other structures and activities. C. Design Theme: Architectural styles, exterior designs, landscaping patterns and other aspects of the overall design of a site shall be a uniform or coordinated design, planned for the purpose of visual enhancement as well as for serving a useful purpose. D. Visually Unpleasant Areas: Landscaped screening'shall be used to hide from public view any area that may impinge upon the visual quality of a site, for example, disposal bins, storage yards and i ! outdoor work areas. E. Outdoor Activities: Work areas, storage and other activities on a li site in a residential area shall be in enclosed buildings, as is • reasonably possible, to reduce distractions and other effects on surrounding areas. Outdoor activities of commercial and industrial operations shall be limited to those necessary for the operation olf it the enterprise. Outdoor areas shall not be used for storage of more than minimal amounts of equipment, parts, materials, products or other objects. 6.04 ' PUBLIC ACCESS 6.04.011 Where possible, space and right-of-way shall be left available on the immediate shoreline so that trails, non-motorized bike paths, and/or other means of public use may be developed providing greater shoreline. utilization. 6.04.02 Any trail system shall be designed to avoid conflict with private residential property rights. -33- 1.04.03 No property shall be acquired for public use without just compensation to ' the owner. I05 FACILITY ARRANGEMENT - SHORELINE ORIENTATION =' 05.01 Where feasible, shoreline developments shall minimize and cluster the water-dependent portion of their developments along the shoreline and place inland all facilities which do not require a water's edge location. 06 LANDSCAPING 6 06.01 General The natural and proposed landscaping should be representati e of the indigenous character of the specific types of waterway (stream, lake edge, marshland) and shall be compatible with the Northwest image. The scenic, aesthetic, and ecological qualities of natural and developed shorelines should be recognized and preserved as valuable resources. 6,07 UNIQUE AND FRAGILE AREAS Unique features and wildlife habitats should be preserved and incorporated into the site. Fragile areas shall be protected from development and encroachment. -34- SECTION 7. SPECIFIC USE REGULATIONS 7.01 AIRPORT - SEAPLANE BASES - I 7.01.011 Location A. Airports: A new airport shall not be allowed to locate within the shoreline. However, an airport already located within a shoreline shall be permitted to upgrade and expand its facilities provided such upgrading and expansion would not have a detrimental effect on a shoreline. B. Seaplane Bases: (1) Private: A single private seaplane is permitted per residence. (2) Commercial: New commercial seaplane bases may be allowed in industrial areas provided such bases are not ij contiguous to residential areas. 7.01.02 Facilities I I A. Airports (1) Future hangars shall be no closer than one-hundred (100) feet to the water's edge and shall be designed and spaced to allow viewing of airport activities from the area along the water's edge. (2) Tie-down areas shall be no closer than one-hundred (100) feet to the water's edge, for land-based aircraft. B. Seaplane Bases (Commercial) (1) Docks for the mooring of seaplanes are permitted. Seaplanes may be stored on the dock or ramps. (2) Tie-down areas may be provided on seaplane ramps. -35- `J 01.03 Landscaping A. Landscaping shall be required around parking areas in accordance with City ordinances. • B. The landscaping shall be compatible with the activities and characteristics of aircraft in that it should be wind resistant, low profile and able to survive under adverse conditions. 7 01.04 Services Services of aircraft shall conform to FAA standards, which include fuel, oil spill, clean-up, safety and fire fighting equipment, and vesicle and pedestrian separation. 7 02 AQUACULTURE 7 02.01 Location A. Aquaculture operations may be located on streams and rivers, EXCEPT in Natural and Conservancy Environments [WAC 173-16-060(2)], and along urban areas developed with residential uses. 7.02.02 Time Facilities shall be allowed on a temporary basis only. 7.02.03 Design and Construction A. All structures over or in the water shall meet the following restrictions: (1) They shall be securely fastened to the shore. (2) They shall be designed for a minimum of interference with the natural systems of the waterway including, for example, water flow and quality, fish circulation, and aquatic plant life. -36- (3) They should not prohibit or restrict other human uses of the water, such as swimming and/or boating. (4) They shall be set back appropriate distances from other) shoreline uses, if potential conflicts exist. 7.03 ii BOAT-LAUNCHING RAMPS 7.03.01 1 Site Appropriateness and Characteristics A. Water and Shore Characteristics (1) Water depth should be deep enough off the shore to allow use by boats. (2) Water currents and movement and normal wave action shall be suitable for ramp activity. B. Topography: The proposed area should not present major geological or topographical obstacles to construction or operation of the ramp. Site adaptation shall be minimized. Severe methods', i.e., dredging, are not allowed. 7.03.02 Dimensions and Location The ramp should be designed so as to allow for ease of access to the water with minimal impact on the shoreline and water surface. 7.03.03 Surface and Construction A. Surface Materials: The surface of the ramp may be concrete, precast concrete, or other hard permanent substance. Loose materials, such as gravel or cinders, will not be used. The material chosen shall be appropriate considering the following conditions: (1) Soil characteristics. (2) Erosion. (3) Water currents. (4) Waterfront conditions. -37- (5) Usage of the ramp. B. The material shall be permanent and non-contaminating to the water. 7 03.04 Review Engineering design and site location approval shall be obtained from the appropriate City department. 7 .4 BULKHEADS 7.a 4.01 General All bulkheads are subject to the regulations set forth in this Master Program, except that bulkheads common to a single family residence are exempted from the permit system set forth in this Master Program and Building Code. Jetties are not considered bulkheads and are prohibited by this Master Program. 7.'4.02 Bulkhead Permitted A bulkhead may be permitted only when: A. Required to protect upland areas or facilities. B. Riprap cannot provide the necessary protection. C. The bulkhead design has been engineered by an appropriately State licensed professional engineer, and the design has been approved by the Renton Department of Public Works. 7.0 .03 Bulkhead and Fill A bulkhead for the purpose of creating land by filling beh nd the bulkhead shall be permitted only when the landfill has been approved. The application for a bulkhead shall be included in the application for the landfill in this case. (See Section 7.08.01, Landfills) -38- 7.04.04 ; General Design Requirements i I A. The burden rests upon the applicant for the permit to propose a specific type of bulkhead design which has been engineered by an appropriately State licensed professional engineer. B. All approved bulkheads are to be constructed in such a manner as to minimize damage to fish and shell fish habitat. In evaluating, the application for a proposed bulkhead, the Building and Zoning', Department and the Policy Development Department are to consider the effect of the bulkheads on public access to publicly owned shorelines. Where possible, bulkheads are to be designed so as not to detract from the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. C. Bulkheads are to be constructed in such a manner as to minimize alterations of the natural shoreline and to minimize adverse effects on nearby.beaches. D. In cases where. bulkheading is permitted, scientific information suggests a rock riprap design is preferred. The cracks and openings in such a structure afford suitable habitats for certain forms of aquatic life. If there is determined to be a severe rat population, consideration must be given to construction of a solid bulkhead to eliminate cracks and openings typical to a riprap structure. 7.05 ! COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS 7.05.01 Location of Developments A. New commercial developments are to be encouraged to locate in those areas where current commercial uses exist. B. New commercial developments on Lake Washington which are neither water dependent nor water related will not be permitted upon the shoreline. C. Commercial developments are to incorporate recreational opportunities on the shoreline for the general public. -39- • D. The applicant for a shoreline development permit f?r a new • commercial development must indicate in his application the effect which the proposed commercial development will have 'upon the scenic view prevailing in the given area. Specifically, the applicant must state in his permit what steps have been taken in the design of the proposed commercial development to reduce to a minimum interference with the scenic view enjoyed by any significant number of people in the area. 7 05.02 Setback A commercial building shall be located no closer than fifty (50) feet to the water's edge; however, the Land Use Hearing Examiner may reduce this requirement for good reason for those structures that allow public access to and along the water's edge. 7 #6 DREDGING 7 #6.01 Definition The removal of earth or sediment from the bottom or banks of a body of water. 7.06.02 Permitted Dredging Dredging is to be permitted only when: A. Dredging is necessary for flood control purposes, if a definite flood hazard would exist unless dredging were permitted. B. Dredging is necessary to correct problems of material distribution and water quality, when such problems are adversely affecting aquatic life or recreational areas. C. Dredging is necessary to obtain additional water area so as to decrease the intrusion into the lake of a public, private or marina dock. This type of dredging may only be allowed, if the following conditions are met: -40- (1) The water of the dredged area shall not be stagnant or' polluted. (2) The water of the dredged area shall be capable of supporting aquatic life. D. Dredging may be permitted where necessary for the development and maintenance of public shoreline parks and of private shorelines to which the public is provided access. Dredging may be permitted where additional public access is provided and/or where there is anticipated to be a significant improvement to fish or wild life habitat, provided there is no net reduction upon the surface waters of the lake. E. Dredging may be permitted to maintain water depth and navigability. 7.06.03 Prohibited Dredging I A. Dredging is prohibited in unique or fragile areas (see Section 9.38). B. Dredging solely for the purpose of obtaining fill or construction material, which dredging is not directly related to those purposes permitted in Subparagraph .02 above, is prohibited. 7.06.04 Regulations on Permitted Dredging A. All proposed dredging operations shall be planned by an appropriate State-licensed professional engineer. An approved engineering report shall be submitted to the Renton Building and Zoning Department as part of the application for a shoreline permit. B. The responsibility rests solely with the applicant to demonstrate the necessity of the proposed dredging operation. C. The responsibility further rests with the applicant to demonstrate that there will be a minimal adverse effect on aquatic life and/or on recreational areas. D. The timing of any dredging operation shall be planned so that it has minimal impact or interference with fish migration. -41- • E. Adjacent bank protection: (1) When dredging bottom material of a body of water, the banks shall not be disturbed unless absolutely necessary. The responsibility rests with the applicant to propose and carry out practices to protect the banks. (2) If it is absolutely necessary to disturb the adjacent banks for access to the dredging area, the responsibility rests with the applicant to propose and carry out a method of restoration of the disturbed area to a condition minimizing erosion and siltation. F. Adjacent properties: (1) The responsibility rests with the applicant to demonstrate a method of eliminating or preventing conditions that may: (a) Create a nuisance to the public or nearby activity. (b) Damage property in or near the area. (c) Cause substantial adverse effect to plant, animal, aquatic or human life in or near the area. (d) Endanger public safety in or near the area. G. The applicant shall demonstrate a method to control contamination and pollution to water, air and ground. H. Disposal of dredged material: (1) The applicant shall demonstrate a method of disposing of all dredged material. (2) In no instance shall dredged material be deposited in a lake or stream. (3) In no instance shall dredged material be stockpiled in a wetland area. (4) If the dredged material is contaminant or pollutant in nature, the applicant shall propose and carry out a method of disposal that does not contaminate or pollute water, air or ground. 7.0 7 INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT 7..7.01 Industrial developments are to be permitted only when: -42- A. They are water related or they provide reasonable public access to and along the water's edge; and, B. They minimize and cluster those water-related portions of their development along the shoreline and place inland all facilities which are not water dependent; and, C. Any over-water portion is water dependent, is limited to the smallest reasonable dimensions, and is approved by the Land Use Hearing Examiner; and, D. They are designed in such manner as to enhance the scenic view; as E. It has been demonstrated in the permit application that a capability exists to contain and clean up spills or discharges of pollutants associated with the industrial development. 7.07.02 Industrial structures are to be permitted only when they are located on land parcels, where industrial uses currently exist, or where they are set back more than one hundred (100) feet from the water's edge. 7.08 II LANDFILL I , 7.08.011, Landfills shall be permitted only in the following cases: A. For detached single-family residential uses, when the property is located between two (2) existing bulkheads, the property may be filled to the line of conformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) feet in length along the water' edge and thirty-five (35) feet into the water and provided the provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are satisfactorily met; or, B. When a bulkhead is built to protect the existing perimeter land, a landfill shall be approved to bring the contour up to the desired grade; or, C. When in a public use area, landfill would be advantageous to the general public; or, D. When repairs or modifications are required for existing bulkheads and fills; or, -43- E. When landfill is required for flood control purposes; or, F. Justification for landfill for any other purpose than thosq listed in subsections A through E above will be allowed only with prior approval of the Land Use Hearing Examiner. 7 ,9 MARINAS 7 9.01 Definition: The term "marina" shall be a use providing moorages for pleasure craft, which also may include boat-launching facilities, storage and other related services. 7.09.02 Marinas shall be permitted only when: A. Adequate on-site parking is available commensurate with the moorage facilities provided. (See 7.09.03(F) below) B. Adequate water area is available commensurate with the actual moorage facilities provided. C. The location of the moorage facilities is convenient to public roads. 7.09.03 Design Requirements A. Marinas are to be designed in the manner that will minimize adverse effects on fish and shell fish resources and be aesthetically compatible with adjacent areas. B. Marinas utilized for overnight and long-term moorage are not to be located in shallow-water embayments with poor flushing action. C. Applications for permits for marina construction are to be evaluated for compliance with standards promulgated by Federal, State and Local agencies. D. Marinas and other commercial boating activities are to equipped with receptacles to receive and adequately dispose of sewage, waste, rubbish, and litter from patrons' boats. -44- • E. Applications for development permits for the construction of marinas must affirmatively indicate that the marina will be equipped to contain and clean up any spills or discharges of, pollutants associated with boating activities. � I F. 1. Parking shall be provided in accordance with the following! ratio: private and public marinas: 2 per 3 slips.; private marina associated with residential complex: 1 per 3 slips. 2. Special designated loading areas shall be provided near piers in the amount of one (1) parking space per twenty-five (25) slips; all other parking areas are to be located one hundred (100) feet from the water's edge. 7.09.04 Location of Marinas - A. Marinas shall be permitted only upon Lake Washington. Marinas must provide adequate access, parking, and surface water area in relation to the number of moorage spaces provided. 7.10 I MINING 7.10.01 All mining, including surface mining, shall be prohibited. 7.10.02 Surface mining shall mean all or any part of the process involved in extraction of minerals by removing the overburden and mining directly from the mineral deposits thereby exposed, including open pit mining of minerals naturally exposed at the surface of the earth, mining by the auger method, and production of surface mining refuse. The surface mining shall not include reasonable excavation or grading conducted for farming, on-site road construction, or on-site building construction. 7.11 PARKING 7.11.01 Public Parking A. In order to encourage public use of the shoreline, public parking is to be provided at frequent locations. -45- B. Public parking facilities should be discouraged along the water's edge. C. Public parking facilities are to be designed and landscaped to minimize adverse impact upon the shoreline and adjacent lands and upon the water view. 7.11.02 Private Parking A. Private parking facilities are to be located away from the water's edge. 7.112 PIERS AND DOCKS 7. 2.01 Purpose: A. A pier or dock is a structure built over or floating upon the water, used as a landing or moorage place for marine transport or for residential purposes. B. The use of floating docks in lieu of other types of docks is to be encouraged in those areas, where scenic values are high and where substantial conflicts with recreational. boaters and fishermen will not be created. 7.12.02 Allowable Construction A. The following permits for construction of piers or docks will be allowed: (1) Piers and docks which provide for public use or marinas. (2) Community piers and docks in new major waterfront subdivisions. (3) Piers and docks which are constructed for private joint use by two or more waterfront property owners. (4) Private single family residence piers and docks. (5) Water-dependent commercial and industrial uses. -46- • B. The responsibility rests upon the applicant to affirmatively demonstrate in his application for a permit the need for the proposed pier or dock. C. The design of all piers and docks shall be approved by a licensed engineer or licensed architect. I I 7.12.03 Design Criteria for Single-family Docks A. Pier Type (1) All piers and docks shall be built of open pile construction except that floating docks may be permitted where there is no danger of significant damage to an ecosystem, where scenic values are high, and where one or more of the following conditions exist: a. Extreme water depth, beyond the range of normal length piling. b. A soft bottom condition, providing little support for piling. c. Ledge rock bottom that renders it not feasible to install piling. B. Covered moorage, both permanent and temporary, shall consist of no more than a roof. I C. Dock Size Specifications (1) The following dock specifications shall be allowed: a. The dock may extend thirty (30) feet into the water or until a depth of eight (8) feet is reached, provided the dock length does not exceed one hundred (100) feet. b. The maximum width of a dock shall be eight (8) feet. it (2) Any greater dimension than those listed above may be allowed by the Land Use Hearing Examiner for good reason, which shall include, but is not limited to, conditions requiring greater dock length and construction. -47- D. Dock Location and Spacing (1) No portion of a pier or dock for the sole use of a private, single-family residence may lie closer than five (5) feet to an adjacent property line. (2) Two (2) contiguous waterfront properties may locate a joint dock facility on either such property, provided there are appropriate restrictive covenants filed for record running with the land. 7 12.04 Multi-family Residence Docks A. Resident Moorage (1) Moorage at the docks shall be limited to residents of the subdivison, apartments, condominiums, or similar developments for which the dock was built. B. Maximum Number of Berthing Spaces (1) The ratio of moorage berths to residential units shall be a fraction less than one. 7.12.05 Use of Buoys and Floats A. Where feasible, the use of buoys and floats for moorage should be encouraged as an alternative to the construction of piers and docks. Such buoys and floats are to be placed as close to shore as possible in order to minimize hazards to navigation. 7..2.06 Commercial and Industrial Docks A. The following dock specifications shall be allowed: (1) Unless otherwise determined or directed by any State • agency having jurisdiction thereover, the dock may extend into the water one hundred fifty (150) feet, if the depth of thirty (30) feet is not reached; the dock may be extended until a depth of thirty (30) feet is reached, provided the dock does not exceed two hundred fifty (250) feet. -48- I I I I (2) The maximum width shall be twelve (12) feet. B. Docks shall be placed no closer than thirty (30) feet to a side property line. 7.13 RECREATION 7.13.01 Definition: The refreshment of body and mind through forms of play, amusement or relaxation. The recreational experience may be active, such as boating, fishing, and swimming, or may be passive, such as enjoying the natural beauty of the shoreline or its wildlife. 7.13.02 Public Recreation Public recreation uses shall be permitted within the shoreline o� when the following criteria are considered: A. Accessibility to the water's edge is provided; and B. Recreational development shall be of such variety as to satisfy the diversity of demands of the local community; and C. Just compensation is provided to the owner for property acquired for the public use; and D. It is designed to avoid conflicts with owner's legal property rights and create minimum detrimental impact on the adjoining property; and 1 E. It provides parking spaces to handle the designed public use, and it will be designed to have a minimum impact on the environment. 7.13.03 Private Recreation Private recreational uses open to the public shall be permitted only when the following standards are met: A. There is reasonable public access to and along the water's edge if necessary to have access to such uses; and -49- B. The primary proposed facility is water dependent; and C. The secondary proposed facilities are water oriented; and D. The proposed facility will have no significant detrimental effects on adjacent parcels; and E. Adequate, screened and landscaped parking facilities that are separated from pedestrian paths are provided. 7 14 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 7 14.01 Residential developments shall be allowed only when: A. Adequate public utilities are available; and B. Residential structures are set back inland from the water's edge a minimum of twenty (20) feet; and C. Density shall not increase beyond the zoning density outlined in the Renton Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. 7 4.02 No floating residences are to be allowed. 7 5 ROADS AND RAILROADS 715.01 Location A. Major highways, primary arterials, freeways and railways -re to be located away from shorelands, except in industrial areas in order that shoreland roads may be reserved for slow-moving, recreational traffic. 7 15.02 Design Requirements A. Shoreline roadways are to be scenic boulevards and ate to be restricted to existing rights-of-way. B. Roadways located in wetland areas shall be limited and designed and maintained to prevent soil erosion and to permit natural movement of ground water. -50- I i I C. All debris and other waste materials from construction are to be disposed of in such a way as to prevent their entry by erosion into any water body. D. Road locations are to be planned to fit the topography, where possible, in order that minimum alteration of existing natural conditions will be necessary. 7.16 SIGNS 7.16.01 Design Requirements A. Visual access to water and shoreline from vistas and viewpoints shall not be impaired by the placement of signs. Unless absolutely necessary, signs are to be constructed against existing buildings or structures to minimize visual obstruction of the water and shoreline. B. Outdoor advertising signs are to be limited to areas of high intensity industrial and commercial use, are to be stationary, non-blinking, and a size commensurate with the structure to which they are fixed, but in no event larger than four hundred (400) square feet. C. Off-premises and non-appurtenant signs are prohibited on the shoreline. D. Illuminated or free-standing signs, or any signs extending above rooflines, are. prohibited on the shoreline except for required navigational aids. 7.16.02 Design Standards A. Sign restrictions are to conform with the standards set. forth on the Renton City Sign Code, which is hereby incorporated by reference into this Master Program except as provided in 7.16.01: I I -51- 717 STREAM ALTERATION • 7t17.01 Definition: Stream alteration is the relocation or change in the flow of�a river, stream or creek. A river, stream or creek are surface wat r runoff flowing in a natural or modified channel. 7 17.02 Prohibited Stream Alteration A. Stream alteration is prohibited in unique and fragile areas. B. Stream alteration solely for the purpose of enlarging the develop- able portion of a parcel of land or increasing the economic potential of a parcel of land is prohibited. C. Stream alteration is prohibited, if it would be significantly detri- mental to adjacent parcels. 7. 7.03 Regulations on Stream Alteration A. All proposed stream alteration shall be designed by an appropriate- ly State-licensed professional engineer. The design shall be submitted to the Building and Zoning Department as part of the application. B. The responsibility rests solely with the applicant to demonstrate the necessity of the proposal. C. The timing and the methods employed will have minimal adverse effects on aquatic life. D. Pollution is to be minimized during and after construction. E. The project must be designed so that the low flow is maintained and the escapement of fish at low water is possible. F. No permanent over-water cover or structure shall be allowed unless it is in the public interest. -52- 7.18 TRAILS 7.18.011 Definition: For the purposes of the Shoreline Master Program, trails are a non-motorized transportation route designed primarily for pedestrians and bicyclists. 7.18.02 Permitted Uses Trail uses shall be permitted within the Shoreline, when the following standards are met: A. Provisions for maintenance operation and emergency access have been provided. B. They link water access points along the shoreline, or they link water access points along the shoreline with upland community facilities. C. They are designed to avoid conflict with private property rights and to create the minimum objectionable impact on adjacent property owners. D. Just compensation is provided to the owner for property to be acquired by the public. E. They insure the rights and privacy of the adjoining property owners. F. Over-water structures required by the trails are determined to be in the public interest. G. They are designed with a surface material which will carry the actual user loads and will have a minimum impact on the environment. 7.19 , UTILITIES 7.19.01 Landscaping If -53- A. Native Vegetation • (1) The native vegetation shall be maintained whenever possible. (2) When utility projects are complete in the water or wetland, the disturbed area shall be restored and landscaped as nearly as possible to the original condition, unless new landscaping is determined to be more desirable. B. All vegetation and screening shall be hardy enough to withstand the travel of service trucks and similar traffic in areas where such activity occurs. C. Site Screening of Public Utilities: When a public utility building, telephone exchange, sewage pumping operation or a public utility is built in the shoreline area, the requirements of this Master Program shall be met and the following screening requirements shall be met. If the requirements of Section 7.19.OIA, Native Vegetation, and the requirements of this section are in disagreement, the requirements of this section shall take precedence. (1) If the installation is housed in a building, the building shall conform architecturally with the surrounding buildings and area or with the type of building that will develop due to the zoning district. (2) An unhoused installation on the ground or a housed installation that does not conform with (1) above, shall be sight screened with evergreen trees, shrubs, and landscaping planted in sufficient depth to form an effective and actual sight barrier within five (5) years. (3) An unhoused installation of a dangerous nature, such as an electrical distribution substation, shall be enclosed with an eight (8) foot high open wire fence. Such installations shall be sight screened with evergreen trees, shrubs, and landscaping planted in sufficient depth to form an effective and actual sight barrier except at entrance gate(s), within five (5) years. -54- • 7.19.02 Special Considerations for Pipelines Installation and operation of pipelines shall protect the natural conditions of adjacent water courses and shorelines. A. Water quality is not to be degraded to the detriment of marine life • nor shall water quality standards be violated. B. Native soils shall be protected from erosion and natural conditions restored. Water course banks and bottoms shall be protected, where necessary, with suitable surface treatment. C. Petro-chemical or toxic material pipelines shall have automatically controlled shutoff valves at each side of the water crossing. D. All petro-chemical or toxic material pipelines shall be constructed in accordance with the regulations of the Washington State Transportation Commission and subject to review by the City Public Works Department. 7.19.03 Major Utilities -- Specifications A. Electrical Installations (1) Overhead High Voltage Power Lines (a) New overhead power lines are prohibited in scenic areas, recreational areas, public roadways and rights-of-way. Overhead power lines may be permitted in sensitive wetlands, when undergrounding is not possible. (b) Structure of overhead power lines shall be single-pole type or other aesthetically compatible design. (2) Electrical Distribution Substations: Electrical distributions shall be at a wetland location only when the applicant proves there exists no other site out of the wetland area and when the screening requirements of Section 7.19.OIC are met. B. Communications: This section applies to telephone exchanges including radar transmission installations, receiving antennas for cable television and/or radio, and any other facility for the -55- transmission of communication systems. Communications installations may be permitted in the shoreline area only when there exists no feasible site out of the shoreline and water area and when the screening requirements of Section 7.19.O1C are met. In an aesthetic interest, such installations shall be located as far as possible from residential, recreational and commercial activities. C. Pipeline Utilities: All pipeline .utilities shall be underground. When underground projects are completed on the bank of a water , body or in the wetland or a shoreline, the disturbed area shall be restored to the original configuration. Underground utility installations shall be permitted only when the finished installation shall not impair the appearance of such areas. D. Public Access: All utility companies shall be asked to provide pedestrian public access to utility owned shorelines , hen such areas are not potentially hazardous to the public. Wheke utility rights-of-way are located near recreational or public use areas, utility companies shall be encouraged to provide said rights-of-way as parking or other public use areas for the adjacent public use area. E. All-inclusive Utility Corridor: When it is necessary for more than one (1) major utility to go along the same general route, the common use of a single utility right-of-way is strongly encouraged. It would be desirable to include railroad lines within this right-of-way also. 7.19.04 Local Service Utilities, Specifications. A. Waterlines: Sizes and specifications shall be determined by the Public Works Department in accordance with American Water Works Association (AWWA) guidelines. B. Sanitary Sewer: The existence or use of outhouses or privies is prohibited. All uses shall hook to the municipal sewer system. There shall be no septic tanks or other on-site sewage disposal -56- • systems. Storm drainage and pollutant drainage shall not enter the iisanitary sewer system. During construction phases, commercial sanitary chemical toilets may be allowed only until proper plumbing facililities are completed. All sanitary sewer pipe sizes and materials shall be approved by the Renton Public Works Department and METRO. C. Storm Sewers: A storm sewer drainage system shall be required. Pre-treatment of storm run-off or diversion to sanitary sewers may be required to keep deleterious substances out of neighboring water courses. Storm sewer sizes and specifications shall be determined by the Public Works Department in accordance with A.P.W.A. guidelines. If D. Discharges of Pollutants and Petroleum Products (1) Discharges of pollutants into water courses and ground water shall be subject to the Department of Ecology, Corps of Engineers, and the Environmental Protection Agency for review of permits for discharge. (2) Oil Separations: These units shall be required at sites that I - have oil waste disposal into sanitary or storm sewer. These units shall be built to Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (METRO) or State of Washington Department of Public] Health specifications. 11 (3) Petroleum Bulk Storage and Distribution: Petroleum, facilities shall hereafter not be allowed. 7.19.05; All-inclusive Utility Tunnels it For the distribution of local utilities, utility tunnels under the street right-of-way are recommended to carry all local utility services. Fo'r 'I new development, the tunnel could be built at the time of road .1 construction. The tunnel would include all utility services, both public and private, necessary for use in the public right-of-way, such as wiring for street lighting and water lines for fire hydrants and all utility services necessary for the private uses of the area. -57- SECTION S. VARIANCES AND CONDTITONAL USES 8.01 VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS The Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner shall have authority to grant conditional use permits and variances in the administration of the Renton Master Program. The power to grant variances and conditional use permits should be utilized in a manner which, while protecting the environment, will assure that a 7rson will be able to utilize his property in a fair and equitable manner. It shall be recognized that a lawful use at the time the Master Program is adopted is to be considered a permitted use, and maintenance and restoration shall not require a variance or a conditional use permit. Both variances and conditional use permits are forwarded to the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General's Office for approval or denial. 8.02 VARIANCES Upon proper application, a substantial development permit may be :ranted which is at variance with the criteria established in the Renton Master 'rogram where, owing to special conditions pertaining to the specific piece of property, the literal interpretation and strict application of the criteria established in II Renton Master Program would cause undue and unnecessary hardship or practical uifficulties. The fact that the applicant might make a greater profit by using his i+ operty in a manner contrary to the intent of the Master Program is not, by itself, , fficient reason for a variance. The Land Use Hearing Examiner must find each of t l e following: 8102.01 Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applyi g to the subject property, or to the intended use thereof, that do not apply generally to other properties on shorelines in the same vicinity. 8.02.02 The variance permit is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant possessed by the o Iwners of other properties on shorelines in the same vicinity. I 1 1 I -58- � I 8.02.03 The variance permit will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property on the shorelines in the same vicinity. 8.02.04 The variance granted will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of this Master Program. 8.02.05 JThe public welfare and interest will be preserved; if more harm will be done to the area by granting the variance than would be done to the applicant by denying it, the variance will be denied, but each property owner shall be entitled to the reasonable use and development of his lands as long as such use and development is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 and the provisions of this Master Program. I I 8.03 j j CONDITIONAL USE • I I Upon proper application, a conditional use permit may be granted. The objective of a conditional use provision is to provide more control and flexibility for implementing the regulations of the Master Program. With provisions to control• undesirableI effects, the scope of uses can be expanded to include many uses. Uses classified ds conditional uses can be permitted only after consideration and by. meeting such performance standards that make the use compatible with other permitted uses within that area. A conditional use permit will be granted subject to each of the' following conditions: 8.03.01 The use must be compatible with other permitted uses within that area. 8.03.02; The use will not interfere with the public use of public shorelines. 8.03.03' I Design of the site will be compatible with the surroundings and the City's Master Program. 8.03.04 The use shall.be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City's Master Program. I ' -59- i � i • 8.04 TIME LIMIT Conditional Permits and Variances shall be deemed to be approved within thirty (30) calendar days from the date of receipt by the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General's Office unless written communication is received by the applicant and the City indicating otherwise. 1 1 1 i -60- 1 • • SECTION 9. DEFINITIONS 1 For the purpose of this Master Program, certain terms and their derivations shall be construed, as(specified in this section. Words in the singular include the plural and the plural, the sin mandatory; the word "may" is singular. The words "shall" and "will" are P � g permissive.. I ' 9.01 ACT: The Shoreline Management Act of 1971, Chapter 9058 RCW. 9.02 ACTIVITY: A happening associated with a use; the use of energy toward a specific action or pursuit. Examples of shoreline activities include but are not limited to fishing, swimming, boating, dredging, fish spawning, wildlife nesting, or discharging of materials. Not all activities necessar- ily require a shoreline location. 9.03 I AQUACULTURE: The culture or farming of aquatic animals and plants. 9.04 j BOAT LAUNCHING RAMP: A facility with an inclined surface extending into the water which allows launching of boats directly into the water from trailers. 9.05 BREAKWATER: A protective structure, usually built off-shore for the purpose of protecting the shoreline or harbor areas from wave action. I ' 9.06 ; BUILDING: Any structure having a roof intended to be used for the shelter or enclosure of persons, plants, animals or property. i I 9.07 i BULKHEAD: A wall or embankment•used for holding back earth. 9.08 ; BUOY: A floating object anchored in a lake, river, etc., to warn of rocks, shoals, etc., or used for boat moorage. 9.09 CIRCULATION: Those means of transportation which carry passengers or goods to, from, over, or along a corridor. -61- 1 9.10 CORRIDOR: A strip of land forming a passageway, between two • otherwise separate parts. 9.11 DEVELOPMENT: A use consisting of the construction of exterior alteration of structures; dredging; drilling; dumping; filling; removal of any sand, gravel or minerals; bulkheading, driving of piling); placing of obstructions; or any other projects of a permanent or temporary nature which interferes with the normal public use of the surface of the waters overlying lands subject to the Act at any state of water levelL 9.12 DOCK: A fixed or floating platform extending from the shire over the water. 9.13 DREDGING: The removal of earth from the bottom or banks of a body of water. :.14 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: A development which provides la service, produces a good, retails a commodity, or engages in any other use or activity for the purpose of making financial gain. .15 FLOOD CONTROL: Any undertaking for the conveyance, control, and dispersal of flood waters. I 9 16 FLOODPLAIN: The area subject to a 100-year flood. 9 17 HEARINGS BOARD: The Shorelines Hearings Board established by the Act. 9. 8 LANDFILL: Creation or maintenance of beach or creation of dry upland area by the deposit of sand, soil, gravel or other materials into shoreline areas. 9. • LICENSED ENGINEER: A professional engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Washington. -62- 9.20 LOCAL SERVICE UTILITY: Public or private utilities normally servicing a neighborhood, i.e., telephone exchanges; sewers, both storm and sanitary; distribution lines, electrical less than 15 KV, telephone, cable TV; etc. 9.21 MAJOR SERVICE UTILITY: Public or private utilities which provide services beyond the City's boundaries, i.e., pipelines, natural gas, water, sewer, petroleum; electrical transmission lines 15 KV or greater; and regional sewer or water treatment plants; etc. 9.22 MARINA: A use providing moorages for pleasure craft, which also may include boat launching facilities, storage, sales and other related services. 9.23 MASTER PROGRAM: The comprehensive shoreline use plan for the City of Renton and the use regulations, together with maps, diagrams, charts or other descriptive material and text, and a statement of desired goals and standards developed in accordance with the policies enunciated in Section 2 of the Act. 9.24 MOORAGE: Any device or structure used to secure a vessel for temporary anchorage, but which is not attached to the vessels. Examples of moorage are docks or buoys. 9.25 MULTIPLE-USE: The combining of compatible uses within one development, of which the major use or activity is water dependent. All uses or activities other than the major one are directly related and necessary to the major use or activity. 9.26 ONE-HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD: The maximum flood expected to occur during a one-hundred (100) year period. 9.27 OPEN SPACE: A land area allowing view, use or passage which is almost entirely unobstructed by buildings, paved areas, or other man-made structures. -63- 9.28 PIER: A general term including docks and similar structures consisting of a fixed or floating platform extending from the shore over the water. 9.29 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: Special contractua agreement between the developer and a governmental body governing development of land. 9.30 PUBLIC ACCESS: A means of physical approach to and along the shoreline available to the general public. This may also i clude visual approach. 9.31 RECREATION: The refreshment of body and mind through forms of play, amusement or relaxation. The recreational experience may be active, such as boating, fishing, and swimming, or may be passive such as enjoying the natural beauty of the shoreline or its wildlife. 9.32 RESIDENTIAL USES: Developments where persons reside including but not limited to single-family dwellings, apartments, and condominiums. '.33 SHORELINES: All of the water areas of the city of Renton, including reservoirs, and their associated wetlands, together with the lands underlying them, except: A. Shorelines of state-wide significance. B. Shorelines on segments of streams upstream of a point I here the mean annual flow is twenty (20) cubic feet per second or less and the wetlands associated with such upstream segments. C. Shorelines on lakes less than twenty (20) acres in size and wetlands associated with such small lakes. 9. 4 SHORELINES OF STATE-WIDE SIGNIFICANCE: Those shorelines described in Section 3 of the Act. 9. 5 SHORELINES OF THE CITY: The total of all "shorelines of state-wide significance" within the city of Renton. -64- 9.36 STRUCTURE: A combination of materials constructed or erected on the ground or water or attached to something having a location on the ground or water. 9.37 SUBDIVISION: A parcel of land divided into two or more parcels. 9.38 SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT: Any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds one thousand (1,000) dollars or any development which materially interferes with the normal public use of the shoreline. 9.39 SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT: The Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit provided for in Section 14 of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 (RCW 90.58.140). 9.40 UNIQUE AND FRAGILE AREAS: Those portions of the shoreline which (1) contain or substantially contribute to the maintenance of endangered or valuable forms of life and (2) have unstable or potentially hazardous topographic, geologic or hydrologic features (such as steep slopes, marshes). 9.41 WATER-DEPENDENT: Referring to uses or activities which necessarily require a shoreline location as a major and integral part of that use or activity. 9.42 WATER-ORIENTED OR WATER-RELATED: Referring to uses, activities or facilities which are not necessarily water-dependent but still incorporate in their design some kind of advantageous use of the water, for example, walkways or view windows. 9.43 WETLANDS OR WETLAND AREAS: Those lands extending landward for two hundred (200) feet in all directions, as measured on a horizontal plane from the mean high-water line, and all marshes, bogs, swamps, floodways, river deltas, and floodplains associated with streams, lakes and tidal waters which are subject to the provisions of the Act. -65- Recommended by the Planning Commission for City Council Adoption on September 8, 1982. SHORELINIE MASTER PROGRAM CITY OF RENTON � I SEPTEMBER 1, 1982 a TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page 1 Introduction 1 2 Procedures 7 3 ; Shorelines of the City 18 4 Goals and Policies 20 5 Environments 28 6 ' General Use Regulations 32 7 Specific Use Regulations 35 7.01 Airport - Seaplane Bases 35 7.02 Aqualculture 36 7.03 Boat-launching Ramps 37 7.04 Bulkheads 38 7.05 Commercial Developments 39 7.06 Dredging 40 7.07 Industrial Development 42 7.08 Landfill 43 7.09 Marinas 44 7.10 Mining 45 7.11 Parking 45 7.12 Piers and Docks 46 7.13 Recreation 49 7.14 Residential Development 50 7.15 Roads and Railroads 50 7.16 Signs 51 7.17 Stream Alteration 52 7.18 Trails 53 7.19 Utilities 53 8 Variances and Conditional Uses 58 9 , Definitions 61 LIST OF FIGURES (MAPS) 'I I 5-1 Map of Environments 31A a SECTION L INTRODUCTION 1.01 BACKGROUND For several years there has been growing concern among citizens, local government and state government about the increasing pressures affecting the utilization of the shorelines within the state. In general, shorelines are of limited supple and are faced with rapidly increasing demands for such traditional uses as ports,'. fishing, swimming and scenic views, as well as new demands for recreational siibdivisi Ins, private housing, commercial and industrial uses. More people, higher incomes, more leisure time, and general business growth have combined to create a heavy use of the shorelines. In the fall of 1970, the Washington Environmental Council circulated an initiative petition known as the Shorelines Protection Act, or Initiative 43, and gathered enough signatures to certify it to the legislature meeting in 1971. Initiative 43 placedd the primary responsibility for the planning and implementation of the Act with 'State government. The legislature then had the choice of accepting Initiative 43, passing substitute measure, or taking no action whatsoever. They chose the second option and enacted engrossed substitute House Bill #584, which was called the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and it subsequently became Initiative 43B. Initiativ 43B called for local control of planning and implementation of the Act. In November of 1972, both measures were placed on the ballot, and the State's voters selected the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 (RCW 90.48). This Act is based on the philosophy that the shorelines of our State are among our most "valuable" and "fragile" natural resources and that unrestricted development of these resources is not in the best public interest. Therefore, planning and management are necessary in order to prevent the harmful effects of uncoordinated and piece-meal development of our State's shorelines. -1- 1.02 REQUIREMENTS OF THE SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT Under the Washington State Shoreline Management Act, local governments have the primary responsibility for initiating the planning program and administering the regulatory requirements of the act, with the Department of Ecology acting in supportive and review capacity. As set forth in the provisions of the Act, local governments must fulfill the following basic requirements: 1. Administration of a shoreline permit system for proposed substantial development on wetlands of designated water bodies. 2. Compilation of a comprehensive inventory which includes a survey of natural characteristics, present land uses and patterns of ownership. 3. Development of a Master Program to provide an objective guide for regulating the use of shorelines. 1.03 COMPLIANCE IN RENTON The Washington State Shoreline Management Act of 1971 directs all local govern'nm-nts to develop a Master Program for the management of all shorelines I and associated wetlands lying within the corporate limits. This Master Program has been prepared to comply with the requirements of that Act and to formulate guidelinles which will regulate the future utilization and development of the shorelines lying with* the corporate limits of the city of Renton. Specifically, this Master Program affects theI shorelines of Lake Washington, Cedar River, Green River, Black River, Sprin'gbrbok Creek and May Creek, and any other shoreline later coming under the jurisdiction of the Act. In compliance with the first requirement of the State Act, and as part 'of this Masser Program, the City of Renton is establishing a permit system, under which a permit would have to be obtained for any substantial development proposed within aforementioned shorelines, within the city limits of Renton. Substantial development, according to the law, means any development on which the fair market value exceeds $1,000.00, or any development which would interfere with the normal public uses ;of the iwati r or shorelines. As part of that permit system, the following are considered general iexceptions to the permit requirement*: -2- 1. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures. 2. Construction of the normal protective bulkhead common to single family residences. 3. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements. 4. Construction of barns or similar agricultural buildings. 5. Construction or modification of navigational aids. 16. Construction on wetlands by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of la single family residence for his own use or for the use of his family, which residence does not exceed a height of thirty-five (35) feet above average grade level. 7. Construction of a dock designed for pleasure craft only, for the non-commercial use of the owner of a single family residence, the cost of which does not exceed $2,500.00. * (Applications for Exceptions must still be submitted to and approved by the Building and Zoning Department.) However, any development which occurs within the city's shoreline, as defined by the Act, 'whether it requires a permit or not, must be consistent with the intent of the State law. Under the shoreline\ permit system herein established, administrative responsibility lies jointly with the Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department, but the permits are reviewed in the event of dispute by the Land Use Hearing Examiner, who has the authority to approve or deny permit ,i applications. Liberal provisions for appeal of permit 'decisions to the State of Washington Shorelines Hearings Board are also provided. In compliance with the second requirement of the Act, the Renton Planning Department conducted a comprehensive inventory of the natural characteristics, present land uses, and patterns of ownership along the City's shoreline. The inventory was completed in October, 1972, and provided a substantial basis for the development of this Master Program. The environments and specific use regulations reflect the local conditions that are documented in that inventory. I' I , I -3- In compliance with the third requirement of the Act, the City of Renton, with the help of its local citizens, has developed a Shoreline Master Program to serve as a guide for regulating use of the City's shorelines. Included therein is a description of the; go ls, objectives, policies, environments, use regulations, and provisions foilI variances and conditional uses, that were enacted as part of an overall plan which will regulate he future utilization and development of the shorelines lying within the corporate limits of the city of Renton. 1.04 DEVELOPMENT OF THE MASTER PROGRAM The Shoreline Management Act requires that Renton's Shoreline Management Program serve as an objective guide for regulating use of the City's shorelines. As defined by the Act, the Master Program is to be general, comprehensive, and long-range (20-30 years) in order to be applicable to all of Renton's shorelines. "General" means that the policies, proposals and guidelines arie not direted towards any specific sites. "Comprehensive" means that the Program is directed toward all land and water uses, their impact on the environment and logical estimates of future growth, and it also means that the Program shall recognize the plans and programs of other governmental units, and adjacent jurisdictions. "Long range" means that the Program is to be directed at least twenty (20) to thirty (30) years! into the future, look beyond immediate uses, and follow creative objectives rather than a simple projection of current trends and conditions. The basic intent of this Master Program is to provide for the management of our City's shorelines by planning for and fostering all reasonable and appropriate uses 'and to ensure, if development takes place, that it is done in a manner which will promote and enhance the best interests of the general public. This Master Program has further been formulated to protect the public interest and general welfare in the City's shorelines and, at the same time, to recognize and protect owners' legal property rights consistent with the public interest. The goals and policies of this Master Program are formulated so as to enhance the public use and enjoyment of the shorelines so long as that public use is consistent with, and does not impair, legal priva1te property rights. It is recognized that the shorelines of the city of Renton are located within a major urbanized area and that they are subject to ever increasing -4- I - - pressures of additional uses necessitating increased coordination in the management and development of the shorelines. An attempt has, therefore, been made to present planned, rational and concerted effort to increase coordinated and optimum utilization of the shorelines of the city of Renton. Additionally, this Master Program has also been formulated so as to provide for uses of our shorelines in the following order of preference: 1. Recognize and protect the state-wide interest over local interest; on shorelines of state-wide significance. 2. Preserve the natural character of the shorelines. 3. Result in long-term over short-term benefits. 4. Protect the resources and ecology of the shorelines. 5. Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines. ' 6. Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the shorelines. , 7. Provide for any other element deemed appropriate or necessary. It should also be noted that the Department of Ecology has designated Lake Washington as a "region" for the purpose of shoreline planning. The Lake Washington Regional Shoreline Goals and Policies adopted by the Regional Citizens Advisory Committee on October 31, 1973, have been considered in the formulation of this Master Program. This Master Program should be read in its entirety and be considered as a whole. The goals and policies and specific uses of.this Master Program were developed in an attempt to provide long-range planning which would govern the future utilization and development of our shorelines. Although it is anticipated that this Master Program will kneed to be revised from time to time as additional shorelines are annexed and become subject to the provisions of this Act, as planned unit developments are established and as additional experience is gained working with this Act during its initial implementation period, it is felt that the general goals and policies of this Master Program provide the general guidelines under which future utilization and development might occur. We feel confident that these final guidelines are expressive of the concerns of the citizens of the city of Renton for the management of their -5- • shorelines: This Master Program has been written with the spirit of optimism, with the hope that our legacy of natural grandeur in the city of Renton will be more wisely used in the brief period of time it is entrusted to us, so that succeeding generations might have it to enjoy. I i • I ' I j I • -6- SECTION 2 PROCEDURES 2.01 INFORMATION PRIOR TO SUBMITTING APPLICATION Prior to submitting an application for a substantial development permit or an exemption from a substantial development permit, the applicant should informally discuss a proposed development with the Building and Zoning Department. This will enable the applicant to become familiar with the requirements of this Master Program, Building and Zoning procedures, and enforcement procedures. 2.02 SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMITS 2.02.01 Application Forms and Fees No substantial development shall be undertaken on shorelines of the' City without first obtaining a "substantial development permit" from the Building and Zoning Department. Applications for such permits shall be made on forms and in a procedure prescribed by the Building and Zoning Department. Application forms may be revised from time to time by the Building and Zoning Department without prejudice to any existing applications. Such forms should be designed to obtain for the Building and Zoning Department such information as is necessary to determine whether such a permit is justified. Applications shall be made by the property owner, or his authorized agent, lessee, contract purchaser, or other person entitled to possession of the property and, except for applications filed by or on behalf of the City or other governmental agencies, shall be accompanied by a receipt issued by the Finance Department showing payment of the applicable fees which are hereby imposed as follows: FEE VALUE OF DEVELOPMENT $75 Less than $10,000 $150 $10,000 but less than $50,000 $200 $50,000 to $100,000 $250 More than $100,000 + .02% I -7- 'I i 2.02.02,j Publishing and Posting The applicant shall cause to be published notices thereof once a week f o two (2) consecutive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the area where said development is proposed, provided, however, that th Building and Zoning Department shall have the right to require additional publications by the applicant in a newspaper of general circulation in neighboring jurisdiction if it appears that the proposed project may affect the environment of such neighboring jurisdiction. The applicant shall bear the cost of publication. Three (3) copies of the notice shall be posted prominently on the property concerned and in conspicuous public places within three hundred (300) feet thereof. Each such notice shall include a statement that persons desiring to present their views to the Building and Zoning Department with regard to said application may do so in writing to that Department and persons interested in the Building and Zoning Department's action on an application for a permit may submit their views in writing or notify the Building and Zoning Deparment in writing of their interest within thirty (30) days from the last date of publication of such notice. Such notification or submission I of views to the Building and Zoning Department shall entitle those persons to a copy of the action taken on the application. The applicant shall submit proof of publication to the Building and Zoning Department within ten (10) days after the last date of publication. An affidavit of publication by the newspaper shall be sufficient. 2.02.013 Review Guidelines Unless exempted or authorized through the variance or conditional use permit provisions of this Master Program, no substantial development permit and no other permit shall be granted unless the proposed development is consistent with .the provisions of this Master Program, the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and the rules and regulations adopted by the Department of Ecology thereunder. -8- 2.02.04 Burden of Proof on Applicant The burden of proving that the proposed substantial development, is consistent with the criteria which must be met before a permit is granted shall be on the applicant. 2.02.05 Conditional Approval Should the Building and Zoning Director and/or the Policy Development Director find that any application does not substantially comply with criteria imposed by the Master Program and the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, he may deny such application or attach any terms or condition which he deems suitable and reasonable to effect the purpose and objective of this Master Program. II 2.02.06 Administrative Appeals Where an application is denied or changed, per 2.02.05, an applicant may appeal the decision denying or changing a "substantial development permit" to the Land Use Hearing Examiner. The Land Use Hearing Examiner shall have the final authority to interpret this Master Program for the City of Renton. See Section 2.10 for appeal procedures to the Shoreline Hearings Board. 2.02.0,7 Notification of City Departments It shall be the duty of the Building and Zoning Department to timely furnish copies of all applications and actions taken by said department unto the Public Works Department and City Clerk and such other officials or departments whose jurisdiction may extend to all or any part of the. proposed development. I i i I -9- _ � I 2.02.08 Bonds The Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department may require the applicant to post a bond in favor of the City of Renton to assure full compliance with any terms and conditions imposed by said department on any substantial development permit. Said bond shall be in an amount to reasonably assure the City that any deferred improvement will be carried out within the time stipulated. 2.03 EXEMPTIONS 2.03.01 Exemptions from Permit System The following shall not be considered substantial developments for the purpose of this Master Program: A. Any project with a certification from the governor pursuant to Chapter 80.50 RCW. B. Any development of which the total cost or fair market value does not exceed $1,000, if such development does not materially interfere with the normal public use of the water or shorelines of the state. C. Normal maintenance or repair of existing structures or developments, including damage by accident, fire or elements. D. Construction of the normal protective bulkhead common to single-family residences. E. Emergency construction necessary to protect property from damage by the elements. F. Construction of a barn or similar agricultural structure on wetlands. G. Construction or modification of navigational aids such as channel markers and anchor buoys. H. Construction on wetlands by an owner, lessee or contract purchaser of a single-family residence for his own use or for the use of his family, which residence does not exceed a height of -10- thirty-five (35) feet above average grade level and which meets all requirements of the state agency or local government having jurisdiction thereof, other than requirements imposed pursuant to this chapter. Construction of a dock designed for pleasure craft only, for the non-commercial use of the owner of a single-family residence, the cost of which does not exceed $2,500. J. Any development on shorelines of the City included within a preliminary or final plat approved by the City prior to April 1, 1981, if: (1) The final .plat was approved after April 13, 1961, or the preliminary plat was approved after April 30, 1969; or (2) Sales of lots to purchasers with reference to the plat, or substantial development incident to platting or required by the plat, occurring prior to April 1, 1971; and (3) The development to be made without a permit meets all requirements of the City, other than requirements imposed pursuant to this Master Program; and (4) The development does not involve construction of buildings, or involves construction on wetlands of buildings to serve only as community, social, or recreational facilities for the use of owners of platted lots and the buildings do not exceed a height of thirty-five (35) feet above grade level; and (5) The development is completed by June 1, 1973. 2.03.02 Exemption Certificate Procedures Any person claiming exemption from the permit requirements of this Master Program, as a result of the exemptions specified in this Section, may make application for a no-fee exemption certificate to the Building and Zoning Department in the manner prescribed by that department. � I -11- I • 2.04 REVIEW OF APPLICATION 2.04.01 Review Criteria The Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department shall review an application for a permit based on the following: A. The application. B. The environmental impact statement, if one is required. C. Written comments from interested persons. D. Information and comments from other City departments affected. E. Independent study by the Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department. F. Evidence presented at a public hearing, should the Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department decide that it would be in the public interest to hold a public hearing. I ' The Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department shall have powers to prescribe rules and regulations � I for such hearings. 2.04.02 Additional Information The Building and Zoning Department may require an applicant to furnish information and data in addition to that contained or required in the application forms prescribed. Unless an adequate environmental statement has previously been prepared for the proposed development by another agency, the City's Environmental Review Committee shall cause to be prepared such a statement, prior to granting a permit, when the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 would require such a statement. 2.04.03 Administrative Standards In addition to the criteria hereinabove set forth in this Section, the Policy Development Department may from time to time promulgate additional procedures or criteria and such shall become effective, when reduced to writing, and filed with the City Clerk and as approved by the City Council and the Department of Ecology. -12- 2.05 APPLICATION TO THE PERMIT SYSTEM TO DEVELOPMENT UNDER- TAKEN PRIOR TO JUNE 1, 1971 2.05.01 Permit Required it Substantial development undertaken on the shorelines of the City, prior to June 1, 1971, shall not require a permit except under the following circumstances: A. Where the activity was unlawful prior to June 1, 1971. B. Where there has been an unreasonable period of dormancy in the project between its inception and June 1, 1971. C. Where the development is not completed prior to June 1, 1973. D. Where development occurred prior to June 1, 1971, on a shoreline and continued onto a different lake, river or tributary after June 1, 1971, a permit shall be required for the substantial development undertaken after June 1, 1971. 2.05.0211 Phasing Substantial development undertaken prior to June 1, 1971, shall not continue without a permit until other phases that were not an integral part of the development being followed at the time construction ! commenced. 2.06 TIME REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMITS 2.06.01 Construction Commencement Construction of a project for which a permit has been granted pursuant to this Master Program must be commenced within two (2) years after the approval of the permit by the City, or the permit shall terminate. If such progress has not been made, a new permit shall be necessary. [WA;C 173-14-060(1)] -13- 2.06.02;' Construction Completion A permit authorizing construction shall extend for a term of no more; than five (5) years; provided, however, that a project for which a permit! has been granted has not been completed within five (5) years after the approval of the permit, the Building and Zoning Department shall, upon' such expiration, review the permit and upon a showing of good cause may extend the permit for a period up to one (1) year. Otherwise said permit shall terminate provided, however, that no permit shall be extended unless the applicant has requested such review and extension prior to the expiration date of said permit. [WAC 173-14-060(2)] 2.06.03' Review Period No construction pursuant to such permit shall begin or be authorized and no building, grading or other construction permits or use permits shall be issued by the City until thirty (30) days from the date of final approval and granting of the permit, or until all review proceedings are completed as were initiated within the thirty (30) days of the date of final approval by the City of Renton. 2.06.04 Transferability of Permit If a parcel which has a valid substantial development permit is sold to another person or firm, such permit may be transferred to the new owner upon proper application to the Building and Zoning Department. The Building and Zoning Department may transfer said permit provided there will be no change in the proposed development. 2.07 I RULINGS TO STATE it Anyrulingon an application for a substantial development permit under PP authority of this Master Program, whether it is an approval or denial, shall, with the transmittal of the ruling to the applicant, be filed concurrently with the Departme p t of Ecology and the Attorney General by the Building and Zoning Department. �I -14- 2.08 ENFORCEMENT All provisions of this Master Program shall be enforced by the Building and Zoning Department. For such purposes the Building and Zoning Director or his duly authorized representative shall have the power of a police officer. 2.09 RESCISSION OF PERMITS 2.09.01 Non-compliance with Permit Any substantial development permit issued by the City under the terms of this Master Program may be rescinded or suspended by the Building and Zoning Department of the City upon a finding that a permittee has not complied with conditions of the permit. If the holder of the permit chooses, he shall be entitled to a hearing before the Land Use Hearing Examiner. 2.09.02 Notice of Non-compliance Such rescission and/or modification of an issued permit shall be initiated by serving written notice of non-compliance on the permittee, which notice shall be sent by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, to the address listed on the application or to such other address as the applicant or permittee may have advised the City; or such notice may be served on the applicant or permittee in person or his agent in the same manner as service of summons as provided by law. 2.09.03 Posting In addition to such notice, the Building and Zoning Department shall cause to have notice posted in three (3) public places of which one (1) posting shall be at or within the area described in the permit. -15- _ II 2.09.04 Public Hearing Before any such permit can be rescinded or modified, a public hearing may be held at the permittee's written request by the Land Use Hearing Examiner. Such written request must be made by said permittee not later than 14 calendar days following service of notice upon permittee. 2.09.05 Final Decision The decision of the. Land Use Hearing Examiner shall be the final decision of the City on all applications. A written decision shall be transmitted to the Department of Ecology, the Attorney General's office, the applicant, and such other departments or boards of the City as are affected thereby and the legislative body of the City. 2.10 1 APPEALS 1 Any person aggrieved by the granting or denying of a substantial development permit on shorelines of the City, or by the rescinding of a permit pursuant to the provisions of this Master Program, may seek review from the State of Washington Shorelines Hearing Board by filing a request for the same within thirty (30) days I of receipt of the final order and by concurrently filing copies of such request with the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General's office as provided In Section 18(1) of the Shorelines Management Act of 1971. A copy of any such appeal notice shall likewise be filed with the Building and Zoning Department and the City Clerk of the City of Renton. 2.11 PENALTIES 2.11.01 Prosecution Every person violating any of the provisions of this Master Program or the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 shall be punishable under conviction by a fine not exceeding five hundred ($500) dollars, or by imprisonment not exceeding ninety (90) days, or by both such fine and imprisonment, and each day's violation shall constitute a separate li punishable offense. -16- 1 2.11.02: Injunction The City Attorney may bring such injunctive, declaratory or other actions as are necessary to insure that no uses are made of the shorelines within the City in conflict with the provisions and programs of this Master Program or the Shoreline Management Act of 1971, and to otherwise enforce provisions of this Ordinance and the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. 2.11.03 Public and Private Redress I I Any person subject to the regulatory program of this Master Program who violates any provision of this Master Program or the provisions of a permit issued pursuant thereto shall be liable for all damages to public or private property arising from such violation, including the cost of restoring the affected area to its condition prior to such violation. The City Attorney may bring suit for damages under this subsection on behalf 1 of the City. Private persons shall have the right to bring suit for damages under this subsection on their own behalf and on behalf of all persons similarly situated. If liability has been established for the cost of restoring an area affected by violation, the Court shall make provision to assure that restoration will be accomplished within a reasonable time at the expense of the violator. In addition to such relief, including monetary damages, the Court in its discretion may award attorney's fees and costs of the suit to the prevailing party. i 2.12 AMENDMENTS The City shall review this Master Program every four (4) years hereafter, or sooner if necessary. Any amendments to this Master Program shall be reviewed first lby the Planning Commission, which shall conduct at least one (1) public hearing on ttie proposed amendment. The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council, which shall hold at least one (1) public hearing before making l'a determination. Any proposed amendment shall be submitted to the Department of 1 Ecology for approval in accordance with Section 19 of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. I � -17- � I SECTION 3, SHORELINES OF THE CITY it 3.01 1 Approximately 18 miles of shoreline in the City of Renton are under the jurisdiction of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971. By State standards, the Green River and Lake Washington are classified as Shorelines of State-wide Significance and comprise approximately 5.8 miles of the shorelines of the city of Renton. In addition, the shoreline's of the Cedar River, Black River, Springbrook Creek, and May Creek are shorelines within the City. These 18 miles of shoreline in the city o'lf Renton are considered an extremely valuable resource not only to the City of Renton but also to the Seattle Metropolitan Area of which Renton is an integral part. 3.02 Each shoreline has its own unique qualities which make it valuable and preference is, therefore, given to the following uses in descending order of priority (as established by Chapter 90.5.020 RCW): 1. Recognize and protect the state-wide interest over local interest for shorelines of state-wide significance. 2. Preserve the natural character of the shorelines. 3. Result in long-term over short-term benefits. 1 4. Protect the resources and ecology of the shorelines. 5. Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines. 6. Increase recreational opportunities for the public in the Shoreline. 3.03 In the city of Renton, the following bodies of water are regulated by the Act: 1. Cedar River. 2. Green River. 3. Lake Washington. 4. May Creek from the intersection of May Creek and N.E. 31;st Street in the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 32-24-5E WM downstream in a northeasterly direction to its mouth at Lake Washington. - -18- 5. Springbrook Creek north from S. W. Grady Way to the Black River. 6. Black River. The above information is illustrated in Figure 3-1. 3.04 The jurisdiction of this Master Program includes shorelines and wetlands as defined in Section 9. ,I I � I I I . -19- • SECTION it. GOALS AND POLICIES , I 4.01 SHORELINE USES AND ACTIVITIES ELEMENT I I 4.01.01 Goals: A. Shorelines of the City are to be planned and coordinated to afford best use of the limited water resource. B. Shorelines of the City are to provide natural amenities within an urban environment. 4.01.02 Policies: A. Reasonable and appropriate shoreline uses and activities should be planned for: (1) Short-term economic gain or convenience in development should be evaluated in relationship to potential long-term effects on the shoreline. (2) Preference should be given to those uses or activities which enhance the natural amenities of the shorelines and which depend on a shorelines location or provide public access to the shorelines. (3) . Planning, zoning, capital improvements and other policy and regulatory standards should not increase the density of intensity of shoreline uses or activities except on a demonstrated need considering the shorelines and then only in accordance with the policies contained herein. (4) Plans should be developed for shorelines particularly suited for water-dependent uses or activities. I (5) Multiple use of shorelines should be planned where location and integration of compatible uses or activities are feasible. (6) Aesthetic considerations should be encouraged when contemplating new development, extensive redevelopment of existing facilities or for general enhancement of shoreline areas. -20- (7) Shoreline uses and activities should be discouraged if they are objectionable due to noise or odor or if they create offensive or unsafe conditions in relation to reasonable and appropriate uses and activities. B. Those shoreline uses or activities which are not water related should be encouraged to relocate away from the shoreline. C. All shoreline developments shall be designed and constructed to protect the rights and privacy of adjacent property owners. 4.02 CONSERVATION ELEMENT 4.02.01 Goal: The resources and amenities of all shorelines situated in the city of Renton are to be protected and preserved for use and enjoyment by present and future generations. 4.02.02 j Policies: A. Existing natural resources should be conserved. (1) Water quality and water flow should be maintained at a level to permit recreational use, to provide a suitable habitat for desirable forms of aquatic life, and to satisfy other required human needs. (2) Aquatic habitats and spawning grounds should be protected, improved and, if feasible, increased. (3) Wildlife habitats should be protected, improved and, if feasible, increased. (4) Unique natural areas should be designated and maintained as open space for passive forms of recreation. Access and use should be restricted, if necessary, for the conservation of these areas. B. Existing and future activities on all shorelines and wetlands within the city of Renton should be designed to minimize adverse effects on the environment. -21- C. The City of Renton should take aggressive action with responsible governmental agencies to assure that the discharges from all drainage basins are considered an integral part of shoreline planning. (1) Soil erosion and sedimentation which adversely affect any shoreline within the city of Renton will be prevented or controlled. (2) The contamination of existing watercourses will be prevented. D. Shoreline areas having historical, cultural, educational or scientific value should be identified and protected. (1) Public and private cooperation should be encouraged in site preservation and protection. (2) Suspected or newly discovered sites should be kept free from intrusions for a reasonable time until their value is determined. E. Festivals and temporary uses involving public interest and not substantially or permanently impairing water quality, water flow or unique and fragile areas may be permitted per Chapter 5-21 of the Renton Municipal Code. F. All further development of the shorelines of May Creek east of FAI-405 should be compatible with the existing natural state of the shoreline. (1) Low, density development should be encouraged to the extent that such development would permit and provide for the continuation of the existing natural character of the shoreline. (2) The existing waterway of May Creek east of FAI-405 should be left in an undeveloped natural state. 4.03 ECONOMIC ELEMENT I I 4.03.01 Goal: Existing economic uses and activities on the shorelines are to be recognized and economic uses or activities that are water related are to be encouraged. -22- 4.03.021 Policies: i I A. Economic uses and activities which are not water related should be discouraged. In those instances where such uses or activities are permitted reasonable public access to and along the water's edge should be provided. B. Future economic uses and activities should utilize the shoreline in an efficient manner. (1) Economic uses and activities should minimize and cluster that water-related portion of their development along the shoreline and place inland all facilities which do not require a water's edge location. (2) The length, width, and height of over-water structures should be limited to the smallest reasonable dimensions. (3) Shoreline developments should be designed to enhance the scenic view. C. Multiple use of economic developments on the shoreline should be encouraged to provide public recreational opportunities wherever feasible. D. Shoreline facilities for the moorage and servicing of boats and other vessels should be prohibited in single' family zoned areas wherever feasible. (1) Commercial dockings and marinas shall meet all health standards. (2) Marinas and other economic activities shall be required to contain and clean up spills or discharges of pollutants associated with boating activities. E. The expansion of log raft storage on Lake Washington should be discouraged. F. Containment and clean-up of pollutants shall be required of all economic activities on the shorelines by property owner or operator. I I -23- ' I i I 4.04 II PUBLIC ACCESS ELEMENT 4.04.011 Goal: Increase public accessibility to shorelines, and preserve and improve the natural amenities. 4.04.02 Policies: A. Public access should recognize and be. consistent with legal property rights of the owner. B. Just compensation shall be provided to property owners for land acquired for public use. C. Public access to and along the water's edge should be consistent with public safety and preservation/conservation of the natural amenities. Public right-of-way cannot be vacated, except where other access provided by that property owner is deemed to be in the public interest by the Land Use Hearing Examiner after holding a public hearing. D. Regulated public access to and along the water's edge should be available throughout publicly owned shoreline areas. E. Public access from public streets shall be made available over public property or by easement. F. Future multi-family, planned unit developments, subdivisions, commercial and industrial developments shall be required to provide regulated public access along the water's edge. I G. Private access to the publicly owned shoreline corridor shall 'not be denied to owners of property contiguous to said corridor. H. When making extensive modifications or extensions to existing structures, multi-family, planned unit development, subdivision, commercial and industrial developers should be encouraged to provide for public access to and along the water's edge if physically feasible. I I, -24- . i I I. High-rise structures on the shoreline shall be prohibited, but could be permited adjacent to the shoreline if: (1) Views of the shoreline would not be substantially obstructed due to topographic conditions, and (2) Some overriding considerations of the public interest would be served. Shoreline low-rise development should provide substantial grade level views of the water from public shoreline roads running generally parallel to the water's edge. 3. Both passive and active public areas shall be designed and provided. K. In order to encourage public use of the shoreline corridor, public parking shall be provided at frequent locations. L. Preservation or improvement of the natural amenities shall be a basic consideration in the design of shoreline areas to which public access is provided, including the trail system. M. In planning for public access, emphasis should be placed on foot and bicycle paths rather than roads, except in areas where public boat launching would be desirable. 4.05 RECREATION ELEMENT 4.05.0'1 Goal: ilI Water-related recreational activities available to the public are to be i I encouraged. 4.05.02 Policies: If A. Water-related recreational activities should be encouraged. (1) Accessibility to the water's edge should be improved. (2) Shoreline park areas should be increased in size and number. (3) Areas for specialized recreation should be developed. (4) Both passive and active recreational areas shall be provided. B. Recreational fishing should be supported, maintained and increased. ' I -25- C. Public agencies should be encouraged to buy shoreland, as it becomes available for sale, based upon an established plan declaring public intent. D. Local jurisdictions should join in a cooperative effort to expand recreational opportunities through programs of acquisition, development and maintenance of waterfront areas. E. Subject to state and federal regulations, the water's depth may be changed to foster recreational aspects. 4.06 Ij CIRCULATION, ELEMENT 4.06.01 Goal: Minimize motor vehicular traffic and encourage pedestrian traffic within the shorelines. 4.06.021 Policies: A. Shoreline roadways should be scenic boulevards where possible and should be restricted to existing rights-of-way. B. Public transportation should be encouraged to facilitate access do shoreline recreation areas. C. Pedestrian and bicycle pathways, including provisions for maintenance, operation and security, should be developed. (1) Access points to and along the shoreline should be linked by pedestrian and bicycle pathways. (2) Separate pedestrian and bicycle pathways should be included in new or expanded bridges or scenic boulevards within the shorelines. (3) Separate pedestrian and bicycle pathways should be included in publicly financed transportation systems or rights-of-way, consistent with public interest and safety. D. Commercial boating operations, other than marinas, should be discouraged, but if permitted, should be limited to commercial and industrial areas. I ; -26- • 4.07 RESIDENTIAL ELEMENT 4.07.01 Goal: Existing residential uses are to be recognized, but future residential development should optimize regulated public access to and along the shorelines consistent with legal property rights of the owner. ' 4.07.02 Policies: A. Residential uses over water shall not be permitted. B. Residential development shall not be constructed in unique and II fragile areas. it C. New residential developments along or impinging upon the shoreline should be permitted only where sanitary sewer facilities are available. D. Multi-family structures near the shoreline should be set back from the water's edge at least twenty (20) feet. E. Future shoreline sub-division and planned unit developments (P.U.D.) shall provide regulated public access to and/or along the water's edge. F. Low density development should be encouraged in future residential developments along the shoreline. G. New residential developments should optimize utilization of open space areas. H. All further development of the shorelines of May Creek east of FAI-405 will be compatible with the existing natural state of the shoreline. (1) Low density development will be encouraged to the extent that such development would permit and provide for the continuation of the existing natural character of the shoreline. (2) The existing waterway of May creek east of FAI-405 will be left in an undeveloped state as much as possible. � I I -27- SECTION 5. ENVIRONMENTS 5.01 THREE ENVIRONMENTS Three environments, Natural, Conservancy and Urban, shall be designated to provide a uniform basis to apply policies and use regulations within distinctively different shoreline areas. The environmental designation to be given any specific area shall be based on the existing development pattern, the biophysical capabilities and limitations of the area being considered for development and the goals and aspirations of local citizenry. Shorelines have been categorized according to the natural characteristics and use regulations have been,designated herein. 5.02 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT 5.02.01 Designation of the Natural Environment A. Objective: The objective in designating a natural environment is to protect and preserve unique and fragile shoreline or wetland environments in their natural state. The natural environment is intended to provide areas of wildlife sanctuary and habitat preservation. B. Areas to be Designated as a Natural Environment: (1) Areas that are unique or fragile. (2) Floodways areas. C. Acceptable Activities and Uses: The only human activity that is acceptable is for floodway drainage or storage. All other human activities including recreation are considered inappropriate. 5.02.02 Acquisition of Natural Areas: The City of Renton recognizes that preservation of Natural Shoreline Areas can only be assured through public acquisition. Therefore, where private development is proposed in areas so designated, the City shall require dedication as necessary for flood storage. i I -28- 5.02.03 Jurisdiction That portion of the north bank of the Black River lying west of its confluence with Springbrook Creek, shall be designated Natural (see figure 5-1). I i I I � 5.03 i CONSERVANCY ENVIRONMENT 5.03.01 Designation of the Conservancy Environment A. Objective: The objective in designating a conservancy environment is to protect, conserve, and manage existing areas with irreplaceable natural or aesthetic features in essentially their native state, while providing for limited use of the area. The conservancy environment is intended to provide a pleasant break in the surrounding urban community. This environment shall seek to satisfy a portion of the present and future needs of Renton. B. Areas to be Designated as a Conservancy Environment: (1) Areas of high scenic value. i (2) Valuable areas for wildlife habitat. (3) Hazardous slope areas. (4) Flood-prone areas. (5) Areas which cannot provide adequate utilities for intense development. (6) Areas with unique or fragile features. i C. Acceptable Activities and Uses: Activities and uses considered to be acceptable in a conservancy environment are those of a nonconsumptive nature which do not degrade the existing character of the 'area. Uses that are to be predominant in conservancy environment are low density residential, passive agricultural uses such as pasture or range lands, and passive outdoor recreation. 5.03.02 Use Regulations in the Conservancy Environment A. Commercial Uses: Commercial uses shall be limited to home ii occupations, which shall be contained wholly within the dwelling i, unit. B. Fish and Game Reserve and Breeding Operations: Any such activity shall be allowed only by the Land Use Hearing Examiner.! -29- C. Industrial Uses: All industrial activities are prohibited in a conservancy environment. D. Recreation Use: In the conservancy environment recreation use shall be limited to passive recreation. (1) Permitted Uses: (a) Public hiking trails. (b) Non-motorized public fishing. • (c) Public wading and swimming spots. (d) Public areas for nature study. (e) Public picnic areas. E. Residential Uses: (1) Permitted Uses: Low-density single family residences. (2) Prohibited Uses: Multi-family residences of two (2) units or more. F. Utilities: • (1) Local Service Utilities: The necessary local service utilities shall be permitted for approved activities and uses within the conservancy environment and shall be underground per City code requirements. (2) Major Utilities: Major utilities may be allowed only by approval of the Land Use Hearing Examiner and only if they cross the conservancy area in the shortest feasible route. 5.03.0,3 Jurisdiction • That portion of May Creek east of FAI-405 and that portion of the south bank of the Cedar River, 2,500 feet east of FAI-405, shall be designated conservancy (see figure 5-1). 5.04 URBAN ENVIRONMENT 5.04.01 Designation of the Urban Environment ' I A. Objective: The objective of the urban environment is to ensure optimum utilization of shorelines within urbanized areas by -30- i I providing for public use, especially access to and along the water's edge and by managing development so that it enhances and maintains shorelines for a multiplicity of viable and necessary urban uses. B. High-intensity Land Use: The urban environment is an area of high-intensity land-use including residential, commercial, and industrial development. The environment does not necessarily include all shorelines within an incorporated city as well as areas planned to accommodate intensive urban expansion. On certain shorelines planned for future urban expansion there should be limitations based on the biophysical aspects of the site. C. Water-dependent Activities: Because shorelines suitable for urban uses are a limited resource, emphasis shall be given to development within already developed areas and particularly to water-dependent industrial and commercial uses requiring frontage on shorelines. D. Public Access: In this Master Program, priority is also given to planning for public visual and physical access to water in th;e urban environment. Identifying needs and planning for the acquisition of urban land for permanent public access to the water in the urban environment shall be accomplished through the Master Program. To enhance waterfront and ensure maximum public use, industrial and commercial facilities shall be redesigned to permit pedestrian waterfront activities. Where practicable, various access points ought to be linked to non-motorized transportation routes, such as bicycle and hiking paths. 5.04.02 Use Regulations in the Urban Environment All uses shall be allowed as indicated by Section 7 of the Master Program. 5.04.03 Jurisdiction I I All shorelines of the City not designated as Conservancy or Natural are designated as Urban (see figure 5-1). -31- _ I SECTION & GENERAL USE REGULATIONS 6.01 APPLICABILITY This section shall apply to all Shoreline uses whenever applicable. Items included here will not necessarily be repeated in Section 7, Specific Use Regulations, and shall be used in the evaluation of all permits. ' I 6.02 I ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS 6.02.011 Pollution and Ecological Disruption The potential effects on water quality, water and land vegetation, water life and other wild life (including, for example, spawning areas, migration and circulation habits, natural habitats, and feeding), soil quality and all other environmental aspects must be considered in the design plans for any activity or facility which may have detrimental effects on the environment. 6.02.02 Burden on Applicant Applicants for permits must explain the methods that will be used to abate, avoid or otherwise control the harmful effects. 6.02.03 Erosion Erosion is to be controlled through the use of vegetation rather than structural means where feasible. 6.02.04 Geology Important geological factors - such as possible slide areas - on a site must be considered. Whatever activity is planned under the application for the development permit must be safe and appropriate in view of the geological factors prevailing. -32- 6.03 ' USE COMPATIBILITY AND AESTHETIC EFFECTS 6.03.01, The potential impact of any of the following on adjacent, nearby and possibly distant land and shoreline users shall be considered in the design' plans and efforts made to avoid or minimize detrimental aspects: A. View Obstruction: Buildings, smokestacks, machinery, fences, piers, poles, wires, signs, lights and other structures. B. Community Disturbances: Noise, odors, night lighting, water and land traffic, and other structures and activities. C. Design Theme: Architectural styles, exterior designs, landscaping patterns and other aspects of the overall design of a site shall be a uniform or coordinated design, planned for the purpose of visual enhancement as well as for serving a useful purpose. D. Visually Unpleasant Areas: Landscaped screening'shall be used. to hide from public view any area that may impinge upon the visual quality of a site, for example, disposal bins, storage yards and outdoor work areas. E. Outdoor Activities: Work areas, storage and other activities on a site in a residential area shall be in enclosed buildings, as is reasonably possible, to reduce distractions and other effects olIn surrounding areas. Outdoor activities of commercial and industrial operations shall be limited to those necessary for the operation of the enterprise. Outdoor areas shall not be used for storage of more than minimal amounts of equipment, parts, materials, products or other objects. 6.04 PUBLIC ACCESS 6.04.01 Where possible, space and right-of-way shall be left available on the immediate shoreline so that trails, non-motorized bike paths, and/or other means of public use may be developed providing greater shoreline utilization. I I 6.04.02 Any trail system shall be designed to avoid conflict with private residential property rights. -33- 6.04.03i No property shall be acquired for public use without just compensation to the owner. 6.05 Ij FACILITY ARRANGEMENT - SHORELINE ORIENTATION 6.05.01 Where feasible, shoreline developments shall minimize and cluster the water-dependent portion of their developments along the shoreline and place inland all facilities which do not require a water's edge location. 6.06 LANDSCAPING 6.06.01 General The natural and proposed landscaping should be representative of the indigenous character of the specific types of waterway (stream, lake edge, marshland) and shall be compatible with the Northwest image. The scenic, aesthetic, and ecological qualities of natural and developed shorelines should be recognized and preserved as valuable resources. 6.07 ii UNIQUE AND FRAGILE AREAS Unique features and wildlife habitats should be preserved and incorporated into the site. Fragile areas shall be protected from development and encroachment. it 'I I I � I � II . i ! -34- II SECTION 7. SPECIFIC USE REGULATIONS 7.01 AIRPORT - SEAPLANE BASES 7.01.01! Location A. Airports: A new airport shall not be allowed to locate within the shoreline. However, an airport already located within a shoreline shall be permitted to upgrade and expand its facilities provided such upgrading and expansion would not have a detrimental effect on a shoreline. •B. Seaplane Bases: (1) Private: A single private seaplane is permitted per residence. (2) Commercial: New commercial seaplane bases may be 1I allowed in industrial areas provided such bases are not contiguous to residential areas. I I 7.01.02 Facilities i I A. Airports (1) Future hangars shall be no closer than one-hundred (100) feet to the water's edge and shall be designed and spaced to allow viewing of airport activities from the area along the water's edge. 1 (2) Tie-down areas shall be no closer than one-hundred (100) feet to the water's edge, for land-based aircraft. B. Seaplane Bases (Commercial) ! 1 (1) Docks for the mooring of seaplanes are permitted. II Seaplanes may be stored on the dock or ramps. (2) Tie-down areas may be provided on seaplane ramps. 1� -35- 7.01.03,, Landscaping A. Landscaping shall be required around parking areas in accordance with City ordinances. - B. The landscaping shall be compatible with the activities and characteristics of aircraft in that it should be wind resistant, low profile and able to survive under adverse conditions. 7.01.04 Services Services of aircraft shall conform to FAA standards, which include fuel, oil spill, clean-up, safety and fire fighting equipment, and vehicle and pedestrian separation. 7.02 AQUACULTURE 7.02.01 Location A. Aquaculture operations may be located on streams and rivers, EXCEPT in Natural and Conservancy Environments [WAC 173-16-060(2)], and along urban areas developed with residential uses. 7.02.02 Time � I Facilities shall be allowed on a temporary basis only. 7.02.03 Design and Construction A. All structures over or in the water shall meet the following restrictions: (1) They shall be securely fastened to the shore. (2) They shall be designed for a minimum of interference with the natural systems of the waterway including, for example, water flow and quality, fish circulation, and aquatic plant life. -36- I � (3) They should not prohibit or restrict other human uses of the water, such as swimming and/or boating. 1 (4) They shall be set back appropriate distances from other shoreline uses, if potential conflicts exist. 7.03 BOAT-LAUNCHING RAMPS i 7.03.01i Site Appropriateness and Characteristics A. Water and Shore Characteristics (1) Water depth should be deep enough off the shore to allow use by boats. (2) Water currents and movement and normal wave action shall be suitable for ramp activity. B. Topography: The proposed area should not present major geological or topographical obstacles to construction or operation 1 of the ramp. Site adaptation shall be minimized. Severe methods, i.e., dredging, are not allowed. 1 7.03.0,2 Dimensions and Location The ramp should be designed so as to allow for ease of access to the water with minimal impact on the shoreline and water surface. 7.03.03 Surface and Construction II 1 A. Surface Materials: The surface of the ramp may be concrete, precast concrete, or other hard permanent substance. Loose materials, such as gravel or cinders, will not be used. The material chosen shall be appropriate considering the following conditions: I i II (1) Soil characteristics. 1' (2) Erosion. (3) Water currents. (4) Waterfront conditions. I I -37- - I ' (5) Usage of the ramp. B. The material shall be permanent and non-contaminating to the water. 7.03.04' Review Engineering design and site location approval shall be obtained from the appropriate City department. 7.04 BULKHEADS 7.04.01 General All bulkheads are subject to the regulations set forth in this Master Ij Program, except that bulkheads common to a single family residence are exempted from the permit system set forth in this .Master Program and Building Code. Jetties are not considered bulkheads and are prohibited by this Master Program. 7.04.0? Bulkhead Permitted A bulkhead may be permitted only when: A. Required to protect upland areas or facilities. B. Riprap cannot provide the necessary protection. C. The bulkhead design has been engineered by an appropriately State licensed professional engineer, and the design has been approved by the Renton Department of Public Works. Ii 7.04.013 Bulkhead and Fill I I A bulkhead for the purpose of creating land by filling behind the bulkhead shall be permitted only when the landfill has been approved. The application for a bulkhead shall be included in the application for the landfill in this case. (See Section 7.08.01, Landfills) -38- � I 7.04.04 I General Design Requirements A. The burden rests upon the applicant for the permit to propose a specific type of bulkhead design which has been engineered by an appropriately State licensed professional engineer. B. All approved bulkheads are to be constructed in such a manner as to minimize damage to fish and shell fish habitat. In evaluating the application for a proposed bulkhead, the Building and Zoning Department and the Policy Development Department are td consider the effect of the bulkheads on public access to publicl owned shorelines. Where possible, bulkheads are to be designed so as not to detract from the aesthetic qualities of the shoreline. C. Bulkheads are to be constructed in such a manner as to minimize alterations of the natural shoreline and to minimize adverse effects on nearby.beaches. D. In cases where bulkheading is permitted, scientific information suggests a rock riprap design is preferred. The cracks and openings in such a structure afford suitable habitats for certain forms of aquatic life. If there is determined to be a severe rat population, consideration must be given to construction of a solid bulkhead to eliminate cracks and openings typical to a riprap structure. 7.05 I COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENTS 7.05.011 Location of Developments II II A. New commercial developments are to be encouraged to locate in � I those areas where current commercial uses exist. B. New commercial developments on Lake Washington which are neither water dependent nor water related will not be permitted upon the shoreline. C. Commercial developments are to incorporate recreational opportunities on the shoreline for the general public. -39- D. The applicant for a shoreline development permit for a new 1 commercial development must indicate in his application the effect 1 which the proposed commercial development will have upon the 1 scenic view prevailing in the given area. Specifically, the applicant must state in his permit what steps have been taken in the design of the proposed commercial development to reduce to a minimum interference with the scenic view enjoyed by any significant number of people in the area. 1 7.05.02 Setback I 11 1 A commercial building shall be located no closer than fifty (50) feet to the water's edge; however, the Land Use Hearing Examiner may reduce this requirement for good reason for those structures that allow publicl pl access to and along the water's edge. I I 7.06 DREDGING 7.06.011 Definition II The removal of earth or sediment from the bottom or banks of a body of 1 water. 7.06.02 Permitted Dredging II I Dredging is to be permitted only when: A. Dredging is necessary for flood control purposes, if a definite flood hazard would exist unless dredging were permitted. 1 B. Dredging is necessary to correct problems of material distribution and water quality, when such problems are adversely affecting aquatic life or recreational areas. II C. Dredging is necessary to obtain additional water area so as Ito i I decrease the intrusion into the lake of a public, private or marina dock. This type of dredging may only be allowed, if the following conditions are met: 1 1 i -40- II l . II II II I I I 1, I (1) The water of the dredged area shall not be stagnant or j polluted. h I (2) The water of the dredged area shall be capable of I 4 ir supporting aquatic life. 1, D. Dredging may be permitted where necessary for the development it I, and maintenance of public shoreline parks and of private shorelines; I 1I to which the public is provided access. Dredging may be permitted; it where additional public access is provided and/or where there is II anticipated to be a significant improvement to fish or wild life; habitat, provided there is no net reduction upon the surface il waters of the lake. 1i E. Dredging may be permitted to maintain water depth and Ij I Ii navigability. I, li 7.06.03 Prohibited Dredging I I ii A. Dredging is prohibited in unique or fragile areas (see Section 9.38) 1, B. Dredging solely for the purpose of obtaining fill or construction u 1, material, which dredging is not directly related to those purposes permitted in Subparagraph .02 above, is prohibited. n it 7.06.04 Regulations on Permitted Dredging II ii 0 A. All proposed dredging operations shall be planned by an Ii appropriate State-licensed professional engineer. An approved it I, engineering report shall be submitted to the Renton Building and iI Zoning Department as part of the application for a shoreline ei if permit. ', B. The responsibility rests solely with the applicant to demonstrate II the necessity of the proposed dredging operation. 0I j C. The responsibility further rests with the applicant to demonstrate il that there will be a minimal adverse effect on aquatic life and/or el on recreational areas. II D. The timing of any dredging operation shall be planned so that it has minimal impact or interference with fish migration. I I, II li I, -41- II I, E. Adjacent bank protection: it (1) When dredging bottom material of a body of water, the banks shall not be disturbed unless absolutely necessary. I The responsibility rests with the applicant to propose and carry out practices to protect the banks. (2) If it is absolutely necessary to disturb the adjacent banks' II for access to the dredging area, the responsibility rests with the applicant to propose and carry out a method of restoration of the disturbed area to a condition minimizing erosion and siltation. F. Adjacent properties: (1) The responsibility rests with the applicant to demonstrate al method of eliminating or preventing conditions that may: it (a) Create a nuisance to the public or nearby activity. (b) Damage property in or near the area. (c) Cause substantial adverse effect to plant, animal, aquatic or human life in or near the area. (d) Endanger public safety in or near the area. Ij G. The applicant shall demonstrate a method to control contamination and pollution to water, air and ground. H. Disposal of dredged material: I'I (1) The applicant shall demonstrate a method of disposing of all dredged material. (2) In. no instance shall dredged material be deposited in a lake g or stream. ij t(3) In no instance shall dredged material be stockpiled in a wetland area. g (4) If the dredged material is contaminant or pollutant in nature, the applicant shall propose and carry out a method it of disposal that does not contaminate or pollute water, air or ground. 7.07 � INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT 1' 7.07.0�1 Industrial developments are to be permitted only when: II I II -42- A. They are water related or they provide reasonable public access to and along the water's edge; and, B. They minimize and cluster those water-related portions of their development along the shoreline and place inland all facilities which are not water dependent; and, C. Any over-water portion is water dependent, is limited to the smallest reasonable dimensions, and is approved by the Land Use Hearing' Examiner; and, D. They are designed in such manner as to enhance the scenic view; and' E. It has ' been demonstrated in the permit application that a capability exists to contain and clean up spills or discharges of pollutants associated with the industrial development. 7.07.02 Industrial structures are to be permitted only when they are located on land parcels, where industrial uses currently exist, or where they are set back more than one hundred (100) feet from the water's edge. 7.08 LANDFILL 7.08.01 Landfills shall;be permitted only in the following cases: A. For detached single-family residential uses, when the property is locatedi between two (2) existing bulkheads, the property may be filled to the line of conformity provided the fill does not exceed one hundred twenty-five (125) feet in length along the waters edge and thirty-five (35) feet into the water and provided the provisions of Section 8.02.01 through 8.02.05 are satisfactorily met; or, B. When a bulkhead is built to protect the existing perimeter land, la landfill: shall be approved to bring the contour up to the desired grade; or, C. When in a public use area, landfill would be advantageous to the general public; or, D. When repairs or modifications are required for existing bulkheads and fills; or, -43- E. When landfill is required for flood control purposes; or, F. Justification for landfill for any other purpose than those listed in subsections A through E above will be allowed only with prior li approval of the Land Use Hearing Examiner. 7.09 1; MARINAS Ij 7.09.011 Definition: I1 The term "marina" shall be a use providing moorages for pleasure craft 1 which also may include boat-launching facilities, storage and other related services. II 7.09.02 Marinas shall be permitted only when: I i 1 A. Adequate on-site parking is available commensurate with the moorage facilities provided. (See 7.09.03(F) below) II B. Adequate water area is available commensurate with the actual moorage facilities provided. C. The location of the moorage facilities is convenient to public roads. q 1 I 7.09.03 Design Requirements 11 I I A. Marinas are to be designed in the manner that will minimize adverse effects on fish and shell fish resources and be aesthetically compatible with adjacent areas. B. Marinas utilized for overnight and long-term moorage are not to be located in shallow-water embayments with poor flushing action. 11 C. Applications for permits for marina construction are to be evaluated for compliance with standards promulgated by Federal, it State and Local agencies. D. Marinas and other commercial boating activities are to equipped with receptacles to receive and adequately dispose of sewage, waste,' rubbish, and litter from patrons' boats. � I 1 -44- E. Applications for development permits for the construction of marinas! must affirmatively indicate that the marina will be equipped to contain and clean up any spills or discharges of pollutants associated with boating activities. F. 1. Parking shall be provided in accordance with the following ratio: private and public marinas: 2 per 3 slips.; private marina associated with residential complex: 1 per 3 slips. 2. Special designated loading areas shall be provided near piers in the amount of one (1) parking space per twenty-five (25) slips; all other parking areas are to be located one hundred (100) feet from the water's edge. 7.09.04 Location of Marinas A. Marinas' shall be permitted only upon Lake Washington. Marinas must prjovide adequate access, parking, and surface water area in relation to the number of moorage spaces provided. 7.10 MINING 7.10.01 All mining, including surface mining, shall be prohibited. 7.10.02 Surface mining shall mean all or any part of the process involved in extraction of , minerals by removing the overburden and mining directly from the mineral deposits thereby exposed, including open pit mining of minerals naturally exposed at the surface of the earth, mining by the auger method; and production of surface mining refuse. The surface mining shall not include reasonable excavation or grading conducted for farming, on-site road construction, or on-site building construction. 7.11 PARKING 7.11.01 Public Parking A. In order to encourage public use of the shoreline, public parking is to be provided at frequent locations. -45- ' I B. Public parking facilities should be discouraged along the water's edge. C. Public parking facilities are to be designed and landscaped to minimize adverse impact upon the shoreline and adjacent lands and upon the water view. 7.11.02 Private Parking A. Private parking facilities are to be located away from the water's edge. 7.12 PIERS AND DOCKS 7.12.01 Purpose: A. A pier or dock is a structure built over or floating upon the i I water, used as a landing or moorage place for marine transport or for residential purposes. B. The use of floating docks in lieu of other types of docks is to be encouraged in those areas, where scenic values are high and where substantial conflicts with recreational boaters and fishermen will not be created. 7.12.02 Allowable Construction A. The following permits for construction of piers or docks will be allowed: (1) Piers and docks which provide for public use or marinas. (2) Community piers and docks in new major waterfront subdivisions. (3) Piers and docks which are constructed for private joint use by two or more waterfront property owners. (4) Private single family residence piers and docks. j I (5) Water-dependent commercial and industrial uses. -46- B. The responsibility rests upon the applicant to affirmatively demonstrate in his application for a permit the need for the proposed pier or dock. C. The design of all piers and docks shall be approved by a licensed engineer or licensed architect. 7.12.03 Design Criteria for Single-family Docks A. Pier Type (1) All piers and docks shall be built of open pile construction except that floating docks may be permitted where there is no danger of significant damage to an ecosystem, where scenic values are high, and where one or more of the following conditions exist: a. Extreme water depth, beyond the range of normal length piling. b. A soft bottom condition, providing little support fol r piling. e. Ledge rock bottom that renders it not feasible to install piling. B. Covered moorage, both permanent and temporary, shall consist of no more than a roof. C. Dock Size Specifications (1) The following dock specifications shall be allowed: a. The dock may extend thirty (30) feet into the water or until a depth of eight (8) feet is reached, provided the dock length does not exceed one hundred (100) feet. P. The maximum width of a dock shall be eight (8)'feet. (2) Any greater dimension than those listed above may be allowed by the Land Use Hearing Examiner for good reason, which shall include, but is not limited to, conditions requiring greater dock length and construction. II -47- D. Dock Location and Spacing II (1) No portion of a pier or dock for the sole use of a private, single-family residence may lie closer than five (5) feet to an adjacent property line. (2) Two (2) contiguous waterfront properties may locate a joint dock facility on either such property, provided there are appropriate restrictive covenants filed for record running with the land. 7.12.04 Multi-family Residence Docks A. Resident Moorage I I I (1) Moorage at the docks shall be limited to residents of the subdivison, apartments, condominiums, or similar developments for which the dock was built. B. Maximum Number of Berthing Spaces (1) The ratio of moorage berths to residential units shall be a fraction less than one. 7.12.05 Use of Buoys and Floats A. Where feasible, the use of buoys and floats for moorage should be encouraged as an alternative to the construction of piers and docks. Such buoys and floats are to be placed as close to shore as possible in order to minimize hazards to navigation. 7.12.06 Commercial and Industrial Docks al lowed: The following dock specifications shall be al owed: (1) Unless otherwise determined or directed by any State agency having jurisdiction thereover, .the dock may extend into the water one hundred fifty (150) feet, if the depth oif thirty (30) feet is not reached; the dock may be extended until a depth of thirty (30) feet is reached, provided the dock does not exceed two hundred fifty (250) feet. I ' -48- n , (2) The maximum width shall be twelve (12) feet. B. Docks shall be placed no closer than thirty (30) feet to a side property line. 7.13 RECREATION 7.13.01 Definition: The refreshment of body and mind through forms of play, amusement or relaxation. The recreational experience may be active, such as boating, fishing, and swimming, or may be passive, such as enjoying the natural beauty of the shoreline or its wildlife. 7.13.0E Public Recreation Public recreation uses shall be permitted within the shoreline o� when the following 'criteria are considered: A. Accessibility to the water's edge is provided; and B. Recreational development shall be of such variety as to satisfy the diversity of demands of the local community; and C. Just compensation is provided to the owner for property acquired for the public use; and D. It is designed to avoid conflicts with owner's legal property rights and create minimum detrimental impact on the adjoining property; and E. It provides parking spaces to handle the designed public use, and it will be,designed to have a minimum impact on the environment. 7.13.03 Private Recreation i I Private recreational uses open to the public shall be permitted only when the following standards are met: A. There is reasonable public access to and along the water's edge if necessary to have access to such uses; and -49- j B. The primary proposed facility is water dependent; and C. The secondary proposed facilities are water oriented; and D. The proposed facility will have no significant detrimental effects on adjacent parcels; and I, E. Adequate, screened and landscaped parking facilities that are separated from pedestrian paths are provided. 7.14 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 7.14.01 Residential developments shall be allowed only when: A. Adequate public utilities are available; and B. Residential structures are set back inland from the water's edge la minimum of twenty (20) feet; and C. Density shall not increase beyond the zoning density outlined in the Renton Urban Area Comprehensive Plan. 7.14.02 No floating residences are to be allowed. 7.15 ROADS AND RAILROADS 7.15.01 Location A. Major highways, primary arterials, freeways and railways are to be located away from shorelands, except in industrial areas, in ordier that shoreland roads may be reserved for slow-moving, recreational traffic. I , 7.15.02 Design Requirements A. Shoreline roadways are to be scenic boulevards and are to Ibe restricted to existing rights-of-way. B. Roadways located in wetland areas shall be limited and designed � I and maintained to prevent soil erosion and to permit natural movement of ground water. -50- 1 II � I C. All debris and other waste materials from construction are to be disposed of in such a way as to prevent their entry by erosion into any water body. D. Road locations are to be planned to fit the topography, where possible, in order that minimum alteration of existing natural conditions will be necessary. I � 7.16 SIGNS 7.16.01 Design Requirements A. Visual access to water and shoreline from vistas and viewpoints shall not be impaired by the placement of signs. Unless absolutely necessary, signs are to be constructed against existing buildings Or structures to minimize visual obstruction of the water and II i shoreline. B. Outdoor advertising signs are to be limited to areas of high intensity industrial and commercial use, are to be stationary, non-blinking, and a size commensurate with the structure to which they are fixed, but in no event larger than four hundred (400) square feet. C. Off-premises and non-appurtenant signs are prohibited on the shoreline. D. Illuminated or free-standing signs, or any signs extending above rooflines, are prohibited on the shoreline except for requirled navigational aids. 7.16.02 Design Standards II I � I A. Sign restrictions are to conform with the standards set forth on the Renton City Sign Code, which is hereby incorporated by reference into this Master Program except as provided in 7.16.011 II -51- I ,,11 7.17 STREAM ALTERATION 7.17.0�1 Definition: Stream alteration is the relocation or change in the flow of a river, 11 stream or creek. A river, stream or creek are surface water runoff flowing in a natural or modified channel. 7.17.02 Prohibited Stream Alteration 11 A. Stream alteration is prohibited in unique and fragile areas. B. Stream alteration solely for the purpose of enlarging the develop- 11 able portion of a parcel of land or increasing the economic potential of a parcel of land is prohibited. C. Stream alteration is prohibited, if it would be significantly detri- mental to adjacent parcels. 7.17.03 Regulations on Stream Alteration 11 A. All proposed stream alteration shall be designed by an appropriate- ly State-licensed professional engineer. The design shall be ;, submitted to the Building and Zoning Department as part of the application. B. The responsibility rests solely with the applicant to demonstrate the necessity of the proposal. C. The timing and the methods employed will have minimal adverse effects on aquatic life. D. Pollution is to be minimized during and after construction. E. The project must be designed so that the low flow is maintained and the escapement of fish at low water is possible. F. No permanent over-water cover or structure shall be allowed unless it is in the public interest. -52- 7.18 TRAILS 7.18.01 Definition: For the purposes of the Shoreline Master Program, trails are a non-motorized transportation route designed primarily for pedestrians and bicyclists. 7.18.02 Permitted Uses Trail uses shall be permitted within the Shoreline, when the following standards are, met: A. Provisions for maintenance operation and emergency access ha',e been provided. B. They link water access points along the shoreline, or they lick water ',access points along the shoreline with upland community facilities. C. They are designed to avoid conflict with private property rights and to create the minimum objectionable impact on adjacent property owners. D. Just compensation is provided to the owner for property to be acquired by the public. E. They insure the rights and privacy of the adjoining property owners. F. Over-water structures required by the trails are determined to be in the public interest. G. They are designed with a surface material which will carry the actual user loads and will have a minimum impact on the environment. 7.19 UTILITIES I i 7.19.0,1 Landscaping II -53- A. Native Vegetation (1) The native vegetation shall be maintained whenever possible. (2) When utility projects are complete in the water or wetland, the disturbed area shall be restored and landscaped as nearly as possible to the original condition, unless new landscaping is determined to be more desirable. B. All vegetation and screening shall be hardy enough to withstand the travel of service trucks and similar traffic in areas where such activity occurs. C. Site Screening of Public Utilities: When a public utility building, telephone exchange, sewage pumping operation or a public utility is built in the shoreline area, the requirements of this Master Program shall be met and the following screening requirements shall be met. If the requirements of Section 7.19.O1A, Native Vegetation, and the requirements of this section are i n disagreement, the requirements of this section shall take precedence. (1) If the installation is housed in a building, the building shall conform architecturally with the surrounding buildings and area or with the type of building that will develop due to the zoning district. (2) An unhoused installation on the ground or a housed installation that does not conform with (1) above, shall be sight screened with evergreen trees, shrubs, and landscaping planted in sufficient depth to form an effective and actual sight barrier within five (5) years. (3) ;An unhoused installation of a dangerous nature, such; as an electrical distribution substation, shall be enclosed with an eight (8) foot high open wire fence. Such installations shall 'be sight screened with evergreen trees, shrubs, and ;landscaping planted in sufficient depth to form an effective and actual sight barrier except at entrance gate(s), 'within five (5) years. !' I -54- 7.19.02 Special Considerations for Pipelines Installation and operation of pipelines shall protect the natural conditions of adjacent water courses and shorelines. A. Water quality is not to be degraded to the detriment of marine life nor shall water quality standards be violated. B. Native soils shall be protected from erosion and natural conditions restored. Water course banks and bottoms shall be protected, where necessary, with suitable surface treatment. C. Petro-chemical or toxic material pipelines shall have automatically controlled shutoff valves at each side of the water crossing. D. All petro-chemical or toxic material pipelines shall be constructed in accordance with the regulations of the Washington Stat',e Transportation Commission and subject to review by the City Public Works Department. 7.19.03 Major Utilities -- Specifications A. Electrical Installations (1) Overhead High Voltage Power Lines (a) New overhead power lines are prohibited in scenic areas, recreational areas, public roadways and rights-of-way. Overhead power lines may be permitted in sensitive wetlands, when undergrounding is not possible. (b) Structure of overhead power lines shall be single-pole type or other aesthetically compatible design. (2) Electrical Distribution Substations: Electrical distributions shall be at a wetland location only when the applicant proves there exists no other site out of the wetland area and when the screening requirements of Section 7.19.01C are met. B. Communications: This section applies to telephone exchanges including radar transmission installations, receiving antennas for cable television and/or radio, and any other facility for the I I -55- I i I transmission of communication systems. Communications installations may be permitted in the shoreline area only when there exists no feasible site out of the shoreline and water area and when the screening requirements of Section 7.19.OIC are met. In an aesthetic interest, such installations shall be located as far as possible from residential, recreational and commercial activities. C. Pipeline Utilities: All pipeline utilities shall be underground. When underground projects are completed on the bank of a water body or in the wetland or a shoreline, the disturbed area shall be jl restored to the original configuration. Underground utility installations shall be permitted only when the finished installation shall not impair the appearance of such areas. D. Public Access: All utility companies shall be asked to provide pedestrian public access to utility owned shorelines , when such areas are not potentially hazardous to the public. Where utility rights-of-way are located near recreational or public use areas, utility companies shall be encouraged to provide said rights-of-way as parking or other public use areas for the adjacent public use area. E. All-inclusive Utility Corridor: When it is necessary for more than one (1) major utility to go along the same general route, the common use of a single utility right-of-way is strongly encouraged. It would be desirable to include railroad lines within this right-of-way also. 7.19.014 Local Service Utilities, Specifications A. Waterlines: Sizes and specifications shall be determined by the Public Works Department in accordance with American Water Works Association (AWWA) guidelines. B. Sanitary Sewer: The existence or use of outhouses or privies is prohibited. All uses shall hook to the municipal sewer system. There shall be no septic tanks or other on-site sewage disposal -56- - I systems. Storm drainage and pollutant drainage shall not enter the sanitary sewer system. During construction phases, commercial sanitary chemical toilets may be allowed only until proper plumbing facililities are completed. All sanitary sewer pipe sizes and materials shall be approved by the Renton Public Works Department and METRO. C. Storm Sewers: A storm sewer drainage system shall be required. Pre-treatment of storm run-off or diversion to sanitary sewers may be required to keep deleterious substances out of neighboring water courses. Storm sewer sizes and specifications shall be determined by the Public Works Department in accordance with A.P.W.A. guidelines. D. Discharges of Pollutants and Petroleum Products (1) Discharges of pollutants into water courses and ground water shall be subject to the Department of Ecology, Cores of Engineers, and the Environmental Protection Agency for review of permits for discharge. (2) Oil Separations: These units shall be required at sites that have oil waste disposal into sanitary or storm sewer. These units shall be built to Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (METRO) or State of Washington Department of Public Health specifications. (3) Petroleum Bulk Storage and Distribution: Petroleum facilities shall hereafter not be allowed. 7.19.015 All-inclusive Utility Tunnels For the distribution of local utilities, utility tunnels under the street right-of-way are recommended to carry all local utility services. For new development, the tunnel could be built at the time of road construction. The tunnel would include all utility services, both public and private, necessary for use in the public right-of-way, such as wiring for street lighting and water lines for fire hydrants and all utility services necessary for the private uses of the area. -57- II SECTION L VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL. USES 8.01 VARIANCES AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS The Renton Land Use Hearing Examiner shall have authority to grant conditional use permits and variances in the administration of the Renton Master Program. The power to grant variances and conditional use permits should be utilized in a manner which, while protecting the environment, will assure that a person will be able t h utilize his property in a fair and equitable manner. It shall be recognized that a lawful Muse at the time the Master Program is adopted is to be considered a permitted use, and maintenance and restoration shall not require a variance or a conditional use permit. Both variances and conditional use permits are forwarded to the Department of Ecology and the Attorney General's Office for approval or denial. 8.02 VARIANCES Upon proper application, a substantial development permit may be granted which is at variance with the criteria established in the Renton Master Program where, owing to special conditions pertaining to the specific piece of] property, the literal interpretation and strict application of the criteria established in the Renton Master Program would cause undue and unnecessary hardship or practical difficul'lties. The fact that the-applicant might make a greater profit by using his property in a manner contrary to the intent of the Master Program is not, by itself; sufficient reason for a variance. The Land Use Hearing Examiner must find each of the following: 8.02.01!I Exceptional or extraordinary circumstances or conditions applying to the subject property, or to the intended use thereof, that do not apply generally to other properties on shorelines in the same vicinity. 14 I 8.02.02: The variance permit is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant possessed by the owners of other propertie's on shorelines in the same vicinity. � I I I i ! I -58- li 8.02.03 The variance' permit will not be materially detrimental to the public � I welfare or injurious to property on the shorelines in the same vicinity. 8.02.04 The variancegranted will be in harmonywith the general purpose and � intent of this Master Program. 8.02.05 The public welfare and interest will be preserved; if more harm will be done to the area by granting the variance than would be done to the applicant by denying it, the variance will be denied, but each property 'II owner shall be entitled to the reasonable use and development of his lands as long as such use and development is in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 and the ' provisions of this Master Program. 8.03 , CONDITIONAL USE • it Upon proper application, a conditional use permit may be granted. The objective of a conditional use provision is to provide more control and flexibility for implerneni'ting the regulations of the Master Program. With provisions to control undesirable effects, the scope of uses can be expanded to include many uses. Uses I classified as conditional uses can be permitted only after consideration and by meeting such 'performance standards that make the use compatible with other permitted uses within that area. A conditional use permit will be granted subject to each of the follovF ing conditions: 8.03.0,11 The use must be compatible with other permitted uses within that area. 8.03.02 The use will not interfere with the public use of public shorelines. 8.03.03 Design of the site will be compatible with the surroundings and the City's Master Program. 8.03.04 The use shall be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City's Master Program. i . -59- 8.04 I TIME LIMIT Conditional Permits and Variances shall be deemed to be approved within thirty; (30) calendar days from the date of receipt by the Department of Ecology and the i ttorney General's Office unless written communication is received by the applicant and the City indicating otherwise. I , I II I , -60- SECTION 9. DEFINITIONS For the purpose of this Master Program, certain terms and their derivations shall be const iued as specified in this section. Words in the singular include the plural and the plural; the singular. The words "shall" and "will" are mandatory; the word "may" is permissive. 9.01 ACT: The Shoreline Management Act of 1971, Chapter 90.58 RCW. 9.02 ACTIVITY: A happening associated with a use; the use of energy toward a specific action or pursuit. Examples of shoreline activities include but are not limited to fishing, swimming, boating, dredging, fish spawning, wildlife nesting, or discharging of materials. Not all activities necessar- ily require a shoreline location. 9.03 AQUACULTURE: The culture or farming of aquatic animals and plants. 9.04 BOAT LAUNCHING RAMP: A facilitywith an inclined surface extending 4 � into the water which allows launching of boats directly into the water from trailers. ' 9.05 BREAKWATER: A protective structure, usually built off-shore for the purpose of protecting the shoreline or harbor areas from wave action. 9.06 BUILDING: Any structure having a roof intended to be used for the shelter or enclosure of persons, plants, animals or property. 9.07 'i BULKHEAD: A wall or embankment used for holding back earth. 9.08 1 BUOY: A floating object anchored in a lake, river, etc., to warn of rocks, shoals, etc., or used for boat moorage. 9.09 CIRCULATION: Those means of transportation which carry passengers or goods to, from, over, or along a corridor. -61- 9.10 I CORRIDOR: ' A strip of land forming a passageway between two otherwise separate parts. 9.11 DEVELOPMENT: A use consisting of the construction of exterior alteration of structures; dredging; drilling; dumping; filling; removal of any sand, gravel or minerals; bulkheading, driving of piling; placing of obstructions; or any other projects of a permanent or temporary nature which interferes with the normal public use of the surface of the waters overlying lands subject to the Act at any state of water level. 9.12 DOCK: A fixed or floating platform extending from the shore over the water. 9.13 ' DREDGING: The removal of earth from the bottom or banks of a body ,� Y 1 of water. 9.14 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: A development which provides a service, produces a good, retails a commodity, or engages in any other use or activity for the purpose of making financial gain. 9.15 ' FLOOD CONTROL: Any undertaking for the conveyance, control, and dispersal of flood waters. 9.16 I FLOODPLAINe The area subject to a 100-year flood. 9.17 HEARINGS BOARD: The Shorelines Hearings Board established by the Act. 9.18 LANDFILL: Creation or maintenance of beach or creation of dry upland area by the deposit of sand, soil, gravel or other materials into shoreline areas. 9.19 � LICENSED ENGINEER: A professional engineer, licensed to practice in the State of Washington. -62- I � I I 9.20 LOCAL SERVICE UTILITY: Public or private utilities normally servicing a neighborhood, i.e., telephone exchanges; sewers, both storm and sanitary; distribution lines, electrical less than 15 KV, telephone, cable TV; etc. 9.21 MAJOR SERVICE UTILITY: Public or private utilities which provide services beyond the City's boundaries, i.e., pipelines, natural gas, water, sewer, petroleum; electrical transmission lines 15 KV or greater; and regional sewer or water treatment plants; etc. 9.22 MARINA: A use providing moorages for pleasure craft, which also may include boat, launching facilities, storage, sales and other related services. 9.23 MASTER PROGRAM: The comprehensive shoreline use plan for the City of Renton and the use regulations, together with maps, diagrams, charts or other descriptive material and text, and a statement of desired goals and standards developed in accordance with the policies enunciated in Section 2 of the Act. ' I 9.24 MOORAGE: j Any device or structure used to secure a vessel for temporary anchorage, but which is not attached to the vessels. Examples of moorage are docks or buoys. 9.25 MULTIPLE-USE: The combining of compatible uses within one development, of which the major use or activity is water dependent. All uses or activities other than the major one are directly related and necessary to the major use or activity. 9.26 ONE-HUNDRED YEAR FLOOD: The maximum flood expected to occur during a one-hundred (100) year period. 9.27 OPEN SPACE: A land area allowing view, use or passage which I,is almost entirely unobstructed by buildings, paved areas, or , other man-made structures. I I -63- 11 9.28 PIER: A general term including docks and similar structures consisting of a fixed or ifloating platform extending from the shore over the water 1, 9.29 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: Special contractual agreement between the ;developer and a governmental body governing development of land. 9.30 PUBLIC ACCESS: A means of physical approach to and along the shoreline available to the general public. This may also include visual approach. 9.31 RECREATION: The refreshment of body and mind through forms of play, amusement or relaxation. The recreational experience may be active, such as boating, fishing, and swimming, or may be passive such as enjoying the natural beauty of the shoreline or its wildlife. 9.32 RESIDENTIAL USES: Developments where persons reside including but not limited to single-family dwellings, apartments, and condominiums. 1 9.33 SHORELINES: All of the water areas of the city of Renton, including reservoirs, and their associated wetlands, together with the lands underlying them, except: A. Shorelines of state-wide significance. B. Shorelines on segments of streams upstream of a point where the mean annual flow is twenty (20) cubic feet per second or less a i d the wetlands associated with such upstream segments. C. Shorelines on lakes less than twenty (20) acres in size and wetlands associated with such small lakes. 1 9.34 SHORELINESI OF STATE-WIDE SIGNIFICANCE: Those shorelines described in Section 3 of the Act. l � i 9.35 SHORELINES'; OF THE CITY: The total of all "shorelines of state-wide significance" within the city of Renton. • -64- 9.36 STRUCTURE: A combination of materials constructed or erected on the ground or water or attached to something having a location on the ground or water. 9.37 SUBDIVISION: A parcel of land divided into two or more parcels. 9.38 SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT: Any development of which the total cost or fair market value exceeds one thousand (1,000) dollars or any development which materially interferes with the normal public use of the shoreline. 9.39 SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT: The Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit provided for in Section 14 of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 (RCW 90.58.140). 9.40 UNIQUE AND FRAGILE AREAS: Those portions of the shoreline which (1) contain on substantially contribute to the maintenance of endangered or valuable forms of life and (2) have unstable or potentially hazardous topographic, geologic or hydrologic features (such as steep slopes, marshes). 9.41 WATER-DEPENDENT: Referring to uses or activities which necessarily require a shoreline location as a major and integral part of that use or activity. 9.42 '! WATER-ORIENTED OR WATER-RELATED: Referring to uses, activities or facilities which are not necessarily water-dependent but still incorporate in their design some kind of advantageous use of the water, for example, walkways or view windows. 9.43 WETLANDS OR WETLAND AREAS: Those lands extending landward for two hundred :(200) feet in all directions, as measured on a horizontal plane from the mean high-water line, and all marshes, bogs, swamp's, floodways, river deltas, and floodplains associated with streams, lakes and tidal waters which are subject to the provisions of the Act. -65- r i Figure 5-1 imLia, IL _.— CITY] OF RENTON r ; a , URBAN /Ir:J T ; , I CONSERVANCY �/L moot NATURAL I ,1 t I k ! i I Ai:....11 MAY I CREEK .�; cat_ lli r\ \ !Ill"! I ' a LAKE r1. i J�-,Jy �� .. WASH I NGTON'1' I':•A titIk&'il.t:` 1 A '� ► �' \\ 1111111111EMOFil—.— - :— . - 41W4I MI"II ill I :,_t_ ____ :, Id M". Ekt • :T-- . . - -- 1 1 '. frilyZafia. LIM la 1:.7.-,--------..4 -3. 1 14%. EN. • ••3 , ariuld&POINT r— _ ; I, * alsAilmi m ; - 1` ... --IAdellar,ti 1, CEDAR RIVER _ iJ - il . \ jl . '7 s - �\1.►i Ali _'11,11(.. •L.- C� \ BACK -�:. iili_mind �. .- : ,��\'.-,\ j RIVER "��=�..�! PSI •�-. . \I. li I' '� ` -11 - SPR I NGBROOK - 41 I— . ��- �;�il CREEK i ! ..... 11'. ,---- , . r,- -, \ • I .4A41.4•V 71111 V11214,61-1 , ''.: -... .1 -,-\\-, ..--.--,---. um IF' lei a yr 41_24r..„--- ( IN iit riarral ii Jill , ,.., .r 101 AMP' ...d..' 6 .**••••11. k vv / ‘ - —� —--- - / . .., .,_ _ ) t fr.tii ;� GREEN s ,..' RIVER •. - 1 I E , M ' / Mg - ) \ LAKE *—s l rowws 1 1 I \\\ For.Use By City Clerk's Office Onky A. I . # I \ AGENDA ITEM RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING SUBMITTING Dept./Div./Bd./Comm. Policy Development _ For Agenda Of October 4, 1982 ' (Meeting Date) Staff Contact David R. t lea:$eno (Name) Ag SUBJECT: t a:IQRELINE MASTER PRO(3 ? . U?DAT A Q s/er / Q rtQ/'J� ai// • Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc.)Attach A. A't'cached letter. Proposed Shoreline „Y. B- i a; to.rr Program Pevimion • r� C Approval : Legal Dept. Yes No_ N/A_ COUNCIL ACTION RECOMMENDED: Hold a public Finance Dept. Yes No. N/A hearing eu .ouant to the -Shor°e:4.ine Ma€ >r' .', .y . .. s . , .,Other Clearance Program on. October 25, 1982, at 8 OO P.m., and at the elope of the public hearing, ' refer the V amter Program to t.ae Planning and Development Committee for ropprt and final. rocos�riende ion FISCAL IMPACT: x Amount Appropriation- Expenditure Required $ $ $ Budgeted Transfer Required SUMMARY (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation) (Attach additional pages if necessary. ) On September 8, 1982 t the P1annr3.ng .Coax .onion recommonded adoption of the attached update to the Shoreline,Mastoryroqram. }hie document. was originally nall.y adopted in 1976 to_ Srov9.cle specific ,devc1ap ent regulations for areas within two hundred feet of Lake Washington, true Cedar and Green Rivers, and portions of i mwpringbrcok and 1 ay,_Creeks. . PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: THIS COPY TO BE SUBMITTED ON TUESDAY AT DEPARTMENT HEAD MEETING. = OF , RSA U 41 PLANNING COMMISSION • RENTON. WASHINGTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 • 235-2550' o ' A co 0 0,9gT�O SEPSES • October , 1982 I • The Honoriable Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Members Of the.City Council Rentoni, Washington RE: SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE • Dear Mayoir and Council Members: II On September 8, 1982, the Planning Commission recommended adoption. of the attached update to the Shoreline Master Program. This document was origi- nallyiladopted in 1976 to provide specific development regulations for areas within tWo hundred feet of Lake Washington, the Cedar and Green Rivers, and portions of Springbrook and May Creeks. The revisions incorporated into this document are primarily clarifications of existing Master Program language and updating certain procedural elements., In additilon, the proposed' revision will place a "natural environment" desig- nation onl the northerly side of the Springbrook Creek/Black River Channels, . where „they abut the existing Black River Reparian Forest. This area had previously been designated in an "urban environment. " It isl'recommended that the City Council hold a public hearing pursuant to the Slorelline Master Program on October 25, 1982, at 8:00 p.m. and at the closeiof the public hearing, the Master Program be referred to the Planning and Development Committee for report and final recommendation. - . Very truly yours, Michael Porter Chairman, Planning Commission By: David R. Clemens Policy Development Director cc: Planning Commissioners • 1 RENTON CITY COUNCIL Regular Meeting October 25 , '1982 Municipal Building Monday , 8 : 00 P . M . Council Chambers MINUTES CALL TO ORDER; Mayor Pro-tem Earl Clymer led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag and called the meeting of the Renton City Council to order. ROLL CALL OF EARL CLYMER, Council President, ROBERT J. HUGHES, RANDALL ROCKHILL, COUNCIL MEMBERS RICHARD M. STREDICKE, JOHN W. REED, NANCY L. MATHEWS, THOMAS W. TRIMM. CITY STAFF LAWRENCE WARREN, City Attorney; MICHAEL PARNESS, Administrative IN ATTENDANCE, Assistant; MAXINE E. MOTOR, Acting City Clerk; DAVID CLEMENS, Policy Development Director; ED HAYDUK, Housing and Community Development Coordinator; ROGER BLAYLOCK, Zoning Administrator; CAPT. DONALD PERSSON, Police Department ; JOHN WEBLEY, Park Director. PRESS Jan Hinman, Renton Record Chronicle MINUTE APPROVAL Councilman Stredicke noted error in spelling of C. J. Delaurenti on Permits Issued attachment. MOVED BY STREDICKE, SECONDED BY REED, COUNCIL APPROVE THE MINUTES OF OCTOBER 18, 1982 AS PRESENTED. CARRIED. PUBLIC HEARING Councilman Reed noted he had spoken before the Planning Commission regarding the definition portion of the Shoreline Master Program and to avoid possible claims of pre-judgment or possible future litigation, he disqualified himself from the following public hearing and left Council Chambers. Shore! nE•' Master This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and ProgP iJ ( pdali;® e published according to law, Mayor Pro-tem Clymer opened the public 4 hearing to consider update of the Shoreline Master Program. This program, originally adopted in 1976, was created to provide specific development regulations for areas within 200 feet of Lake Washington, the Cedar and Green Rivers, and portions of Springbrook and May Creeks. Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator, outlined the program changes, noting the five main areas of revision: 1 ) Fees; 2) High rises; 3) State establishment of our separate shorelines: Natural , Con- servancy, Rural and Urban; 4) Marinas; and 5) Public Access. Blaylock reported the Planning Commission Public Hearing had been held 6/09/82 and all Shoreline Committee meetings had been open to the public with extensive periods of discussion held. Councilman Stredicke noted he would have preferred more detailed comparison of the proposed changes as they relate to the initial Shoreline Plan. Correspondence A letter was read from Richard C. Houghton, 3716 Lake Washington Blvd. SE, Bellevue, requesting reconsideration of existing regula- tions regarding landfill of shoreline lots as they apply to pre- existing platted lots. Audience Comment Jocelyn Jones, 1424 North 40th Street, requested the southeast shore of May Creek from 405 to Lake Washington Boulevard be included in the Conservancy designation. Versie Vaupel , 400 Cedar Avenue South, reported that the request contained in the letter from Mr. Houghton had also been submitted to the Shoreline Committee (while Mrs. Vaupel was a member) . The request was voted against there and not acted on at all by the Planning Commission. Mrs. Vaupel noted the Department of Ecology had indicated their disfavor with this type of proposal . Mrs. Vaupel also indicated she had been present at the Planning Commission meeting referred to by Mr. Reed prior to this public hearing and felt his disqualification unnecessary. L Renton City Council October 25„1982 Page 2 I PUBLIC HEARING continued Audience Comment, Peggy DuBois, 2907 Mountain View Avenue North, questioned the continued ' inclusion of view windows under "water-related" items. She also questioned a statement made at the Planning Commission meeting that, unless major alterations were being made to the Shoreline Program, only one public hearing may be required. Mrs. DuBois strongly supported public hearings being held before both the Planning Commission and City Council , this being the only oppor- tunity for public input. (See paragraph 5 below-`. ) Councilman Stredicke requested clarification from Policy Development Director Clemens as to why the May Creek area mentioned by Mrs. Jones had not been designated as Conservancy or why part of May Creek had not been designated Natural . Policy Development Director Clemens responded that the Planning Commission and the Special Studies Committee had concluded the westerly side of 1-405 would be more extensively developed; thus, the Urban designation. continued I Jim Hanken, 1300 Seattle Tower, Seattle, attorney for Barbee Mill Company, submitted a letter from David C. Crosby, 500 Maynard Building, Seattle, attorney for Pan Abode, Inc. (and requested addition to record) . This letter, dated 9/13/82, was addressed to Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator, and requested the desig- nation presently assigned to May Creek west of 1-405 remain Urban. Mr. Hanken complimented the Planning Commission and staff on the proposed Shoreline Master Program update presently before Council and encouraged adoption. Peggy DuBois, 2907 Mountain View Avenue North, asked Council to consider a compromise regarding the May Creek area: To designate the Pan Abode/Barbee Mill side as Urban and the other side as Conservancy. Versie Vaupel , 400 Cedar Avenue South, noted that this is not a new problem; it had been considered by the original Shoreline Committee. Councilmen Rockhill and Stredicke questioned the building of single- family residences on pre-platted waterfront lots. Policy Develop- ment Director Clemens indicated that, after allowing for front and back yard setbacks, not enough land remained for building and that any variance to the shoreline area would be granted by the State, not the City of Renton. `Director Clemens also explained that the Planning Commission had recommended that the requirement for two public hearings on Shoreline Master Program changes be reduced to one (to be held before the Planning Commission) . Councilman Stredicke spoke against this revision and it was found that the change had not been incorporated into the proposal before Council . There being no further audience comment, it was MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY HUGHES, THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CLOSED. CARRIED. MOVED BY ROCKHILL, SECONDED BY TRIMM, SUBJECT BE REFERRED TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE FOR STUDY AND RECOMMENDATION. CARRIED. Planning and Development Committee Chairman Rockhill invited all Council input regarding this matter and asked Council President Clymer to meet with the Committee in place of Councilman Reed who had disqualified himself. Council President Clymer agreed. Council- man Reed returned to chambers at 8:53 p.m. PUBLIC HEARING This being the date set and proper notices having been posted and Federal Revenue published according to law, Mayor Pro-tem Clymer opened the public Sharing ' hearing to consider the City' s proposed use of Federal Revenue ' Sharing monies for the year 1983 and proposed (1 ) Re-appropriation of $98,030 Federal Revenue Sharing Funds committed in 1982 for Municipal Lease Payments for computer replacement, word processing equipment, backhoe, sewer inductor, aerial ladder truck; and 1(2) Re-appropriation of $243,404 Federal Revenue Sharing Funds committed in 1982 which will not be spent for the following: Police Capital LAW OFFICES OF WICKWIRE. LEWIS. GOLDMARH THOMAS J.BREWER BC SCHORR DAVID C.CROSBY CHARLES A.GOLDMARH A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION 500 MAYNARD BUILDI NO JOHN W. HANLEY,JR. SEATTLE,WASHINGTON 01i104 B. GERALD JOHNSON, KEVIN F. KELLY O.YALE LEWIS,JR. WENDY F. LIEBOW September 13, 1982 (2061 6e2-e803 THOMAS J.LUCAS CHRISTOPHER G, OECHSLI GREGORY M. O'LEARY JON M. SCHORR JAMES WICKWIRE PEGGY J.WILLIAMS Roger J. Blaylock Zoning Administrator City of Renton Building and Zoning Department Municipal , Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Re: Pan Abode Comments to May Creek Conservancy Proposals Dear Mr. Blaylock: John Hubbard, President of Pan Abode, Inc. , has asked me to respond to your letter of September 3, 1982, soliciting comments on citizen proposals to change the designation of May Creek west of I-405 from Urban to Conservancy. I have reviewed the minutes of the June 9, 1982, public hearing at which these proposals were made. The most comprehen- sive proposals were suggested by John DuBois. He suggests not only changing the designation of May Creek, but also revising several other provisions of the Renton Shoreline Master Program so as to prohibit multi-family and high-rise structures in this area. For the reasons set forth below, Pan Abode strongly oppose's the proposals put forth by Mr. DuBois and other area residents relative to May Creek west of I-405. The existing Pan Abode cedar home manufacturing complex has been in place for approximately 20 years . It is situated on an irregular 311,000 square foot parcel of land lying southeast of the intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard North and N.E. 44th, Street. ' The southern boundary of the property lies at a distance of approximately 35 to 50 feet from May Creek. The property has at all times been zoned for heavy industrial development. That portion of the property line within 200 feet of May Creek was designated "Urban Environment" by the Renton Shoreline Master Program adopted in 1976. The land is presently assessed by King County at $630,800. Pan Abode pays taxes in it Roger J. Blaylock September 13, 1982 Page Two excess of $28,000 on its land and improvements . The property is presently pledged as security for an $865,000 bank loan that pro- vides almajor source of Pan Abode 's operating capital. I am enclosing a copy of a Substantial Development Permit issued to Pan Abode on November 24, 1976, attached to which is a site plan depicting the property. As can be seen from the site plan, approximately one-third to one-quarter of the Pan Abode property falls within the 200 foot zone affected by the Master Program, Portions of two existing structures lie within this zone, and a proposed lumber storage building, for which the 1976 Substantial Development . Permit was obtained , would lie entirely within the zone. (Due to economic conditions, the proposed storage building was not erected, although Pan Abode did the pre- liminary work necessary to satisfy conditions numbered 1 and 2 of the permit relating to storm drainage retention, oil/water separation and landscape screening. Pan Abode has every inten- tion of [ constructing this facility, and will apply for a new Substantial Development Permit in the very near future. ) When the Renton Shoreline Master Program was adopted in March, 1976, it was intended to be "general, comprehensive and long-range. " Section 1.04 of the Master Program defines "long-rangle" to mean "that the program is to be directed at least twenty ( 20) to thirty ( 30) years into the future." The Master Programcreated two "environments" -- Conservancy and Urban. The designation given to specific areas in 1976 was based , in part, "on the existing development pattern" at that time. Section 5.01. 1 The' Conservancy Environment designation is designed to "protect, (conserve and manage existing areas with irreplaceable, naturalJoi aesthetic features in essential-Ty their native state while proviiding for limited use of the area." Section 5.02.01. Areas selected for designation in 1976 had to satisfy at least one of the six criteria set forth in Section 5.02.01(B) . Within areas designated for conservancy, industrial uses are totally prohibited (Section 5.02.02(C) ) and residential uses are limited to low-density single family residences. Section 5.02.02(E) . The Urban Environment designation, on the other hand, was reserved for existing areas of high-intensity land use, including residential, commercial, and industrial development. Section 5.03.01j(B) . p i II I i 11P fib i I Roger J;! Blaylock September 13, 1982 Page Th�i.ee� I I Ij I I Based on the criteria set forth in the Master Program, the 20-member citizen advisory committee in 1976 correctly recognized that May Creek west of I-405 was not appropriate for conservancy designation. The Master Program expressly excludes this area from th;e conservancy designation ( Section 5. 02.03 and Section 4 .02.02i(F) ) and likewise exempts this area from low-density resi- dential goals. Section 4. 07.02(H) . If anything, the area is less suitable for conservancy designation today than it was in 1976. In addition to the Pan Abode plant, the Bar B Mill and the railroad tracks that were in place in 1976, developers have recently completed a multiple- structuire6 condominium complex in the area opposite Pan Abode, south of May Creek. Improper placement of a sewer main in the area between May Creek and the Pan Abode property line causes a storm drain emptying into May Creek near Lake Washington Boulevard to back up and flood the Pan Abode property. Changing the designation of May Creek west of I-405 to con- servancy would have disastrous economic effects on Pan Abode, already hard hit by the depression in the building industry. It would immediately deprive Pan Abode of the only location for a projected lumber storage building that has been planned since 1976. The proposal would render one-fourth to one-third of Pan Abode' s! property unusable and reduce the economic value of the entire 'parcel by hundreds of thousands of dollars, reducing the security on Pan Abode's! bank loan and possibly forcing Pan Abode into defalt. In the long range, the staggering reduction in property value will affect Pan Abode's ability to obtain future financing. Pan' Abode recognizes that May Creek is a valuable natural resource. , Indeed, Pan Abode cooperated with the City in designing conditions to protect May Creek from any adverse impacts; caused by the construction proposed in 1976. In this regard,, we stress that a substantial portion of the Pan Abode property remains within the 200 foot zone subject to the Shoreli'nelManagement Act substantial development permit provi- sions. Consequently, neither Pan Abode, nor any successor in interest, could undertake any substantial development within this zone without obtaining �a Substantial Development Permit. This requirement gives the City an opportunity to monitor development of the Pan Abode property and to impose suitable conditions to 1 I � j I iI Roger J'! Blaylock September 113, 1982 Page Four ; I i it protect'JMay Creek. This is a much more sensible and flexible approach to the problem than an outright prohibition on all futureldevelopment of the parcel . I I Tolsummarize, imposing the kinds of restrictions suggested by Mr. DuBlois and others on development of lands adjacent to May Creek west of I-405 would be inconsistent with the long-range a.goals ndlcriteria established in 1976. These proposed changes would have disastrous economic consequences for Pan Abode. Moreover, Isince it is highly unlikely that May Creek west of Lake Washinglton Boulevard would be suitable for conservancy designa- tion in; any event, the likely result would be to single out Pan Abode for unfair, discriminatory, and confiscatory treatment. Londonly. Seattle, 93 Wn.2d 657 (1980) ; 6 Nichols, Law of Eminent Domain;' S 6.351111 at p. 6-109 .14 (rev. 3d ed. 1968 ) . Thanklyou very much for allowing Pan Abode the opportunity to submit its comments in writing to the citizen proposals made at the June 9, 1982, public hearing of the Renton Planning Commission. I note that, although these suggestions were made more thanI three months ago, Pan Abode was given less than two weeks to submit its written comments. Accordingly, if the obser- vations made in this letter are deemed insufficient to refute the suggestions made at the June 9, 1982, hearing, I respectfully request that Pan Abode be given an additional opportunity to marshal its arguments prior to the final recommendation of the committee! reviewing proposed revisions to the Shoreline Master Program. II I Sincerely yours, I I II WICKWIRE, LEWIS, GOLDMARK & SCHORR David C. Crosby Enclosure; cc: John Hubbard II I I �I I li I i I I For Use By City Clerk's Office Only A. I . 1l 4a AGENDA ITEM RENTON CITY COUNCIL MEETING SUBMITTING Dept./Div./Bd./Comm'. Policy Development For Agenda Of October 25, 1982 (Meeting Date) Staff Contact David R. Clemens (Name) Agenda Status: SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING - Shoreline Master Consent Public Hearing Program update Correspondence Ordinance/Resolution Old Business Exhibits: (Legal Descr. , Maps, Etc. )Attach New Business Study Session A. Letter Other B. Proposed Shoreline Master Program revi si o .. _ . .. _ _ — ._ . C Approval : Legal Dept. Yes No N/A COUNCIL ACTION ',REC,OMMENDED: Following Public Finance Dept. Yes No. N/A Hearing, refer to Planning and Development Other Clearance Committee for report and recommendation. FISCAL IMPACT:' Amount Appropriation- Expenditure Required $ Budgeted $ Transfer Required SUMMARY (Background information, prior action and effect of implementation) (Attach additional pages if necessary. ) On September 8,! 1982, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the attached update to th,e Shoreline Master Program. This document was originally adopted in 1976 to provide specific development regulations for areas within 200 feet of Lake Washington, 'the Cedar and Green Rivers, and portions of Springbrook and May Creeks. PARTIES OF RECORD/INTERESTED CITIZENS TO BE CONTACTED: October 20, 1982 3716 Lake Washington Blvd: SE Bellevue, WA Honorable Barbara Shinpoch, Mayor D LEE E U V Members of the City Council 1OCT 2 2, i'q`?? Subject: Shoreline Master Program Dear Mayor Shinpoch and Council Members: CITY CLERK We are owners of 3 platted single family lots on Lake Washington, platted in the very early 1900's. As you are aware the Shoreline Master program of the City regulates what can be done along the shorelands within the City limits. During the recent review and update of the City's program we asked if consid- eration could be given to the area where our lots are located. The existing Master Program allows filling out 35 feet but only between existing bulkheads. In our case, no bulkhead exists to the north precluding the filling of our lots as others have done to the south. The specific area lies adjacent to and south of Kennydale Beach. Although we own only ;3 lots, we have talked to other owners who are also interested in developing their property. We feel we should not be denied the right to use our property and the Shore- land Master Program should address the issue. At least set a policy in this last remaining area on the lakeshore which would allow limited development for single family homes. It is' painfully apparent that the existing regulations fail to take into consideration the rights of owners of pre-existing platted lots. We believe that reasonable development standardsshould be established for the few non- confo'rming lots within the shoreline zone which are not currently developable due to the prohibition of filling. We feel the Council can establish reason- able :limits to development of the lots which will insure our private property rights without injuring the rights of others. Very truly yours, CO • � Richard C. Houghton C_) �(_ 77 _ s� n rr '1 1i OF iRF A ir 0 0 O j . 4— z PLANNING COMMISSION 0 RENTON, WASHINGTON Z sal , MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235- 2550 O m 0,9 Io., -17-FO SEP.V I.° it I I October 4 1982 ,I II „ ir The Honorable Barbara Y. Shinpoch, Mayor Members of the City Council Renton, Washington I 11 I RE: SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM UPDATE 1, 1 Dear Mayor and Council Members: On September 8, 1982, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the attached lupdate to the Shoreline Master Program. This document was origi- nally ;iadopted in 1976 to provide specific development regulations for areas within two hundred feet of Lake Washington, the Cedar and Green Rivers, and portions of Springbrook and May Creeks. The revisions incorporated into this document are primarily clarifications of existing Master Program language and updating certain procedural elements;. In addition, the proposed revision will place a "natural environment" desig- nation on the northerly side of the Springbrook Creek/Black River Channels, where;ithy abut the existing Black River Reparian Forest. This area had previously been designated in an "urban environment. " I It is recommended that the City Council hold a public hearing pursuant to the Shoreline Master Program on October 25, 1982, at 8:00 p.m. and at the closeilofIthe public hearing, the Master Program be referred to the Planning ; and Dlevelopment Committee for report and final recommendation. ,I Very (truly yours, Michael ' 7 ter Chairm , Planning Commi Sion iii /jf� (.. ; {l " f��F ,O By: ;David R. Clemens . 1[Pol'icy Development Director '(cc: Planning Commissioners j� i ,I I, 1 ,I i 'I / 1 � I I I i i I 6 if ir REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Shoreline Master Program Revision • IF I I I ,L I I a ! I Recommended by the Planning Commission on September 8, 1982. City Council Public Hearing on October 25, 1982. Referred to the Planning and Development Committee on October 25, 1982. Referred to Committee-of-th'e-thole for policy direction. I I Committee-of-the-Whole Public Meeting, January 13, 1983. 1' I Referred back to the Planning and Development Committee for final recommendation. I i I 1, u 1 The Planning and Development Committee, after extensive study and numerous public meetings, has completed its deliberations on the Shoreline Master PrograuL After considerable debate and' discussion, the Committee was unable to unanimously agree on all issues. In order to simplify the Council's final action,:ithe Committee has separated this report into three (3) separate issues.�l Iissue #1 represents those sections of the Shoreline regulations which) the Committee unanimously recommends revisions of the Planning Commission recommendaton. Issue #2 represents sections of the regulations upon which the' Committee could not agree and can be characterize as the difference between the 1976 regulations which are more permissive and the Commission's ir recommendation which is more restrictive. Lastly, Issue #3 are sections where various technical issues upon which the Committee could not agree. I i , I II I I! I q I i !I I �I I i I II i I I it I' I it i RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC MEETING SEPTEMBER 8, 1982 MINUTES COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Virginia Houser, Gene Ledbury, Michael Porter, Barbara Schellert, Versie Vaupel, Joan Walker, Anita Warren. COMMISSIOD MEMBERS ABSENT: Frank Jacobs. PRESS: Keith Ervin, Daily Record Chronicle. CITY STAFF PRESENT: David Clemens, Policy Development Director; Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator; Gene Williams, Associate Planner; Willis Roberts, Recording Secretary. 1. CALL T) ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairman Porter at 8:00 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL was taken by Secretary Houser. All responded present with the exception of Commissioner Jacobs (illness) . IT WAS MOVED BY VAUPEL, SECONDED BY SCHELLERT, TO EXCLSE THE ABSENT MEMBER. MOTION CARRIED. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The Chairman called for additions or corrections to the minutes of the July 14, 1982, meeting. None were offered, and IT WAS MOVED BY WALKER, SECONDED BY SCHELLERT, THAT THE MINUTES BE APPROVED AS PRESENTED. MOTION CARRIED. 4. AUDIENC3 COMMENT: None. 5. CITY OF RENTON SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM Noting that the public hearing had been held in June and the matter referred back to the Shoreline Master Program Committee, the Chairman requested a report from the com- mittee chairwoman. Commissioner Vaupel noted committee membership and advised that it is the committee's recommendation that the proposed revision dated September 1, 1982, be approved and submitted to the Council for adoption. A detailed discussion was requested of Mr. Blaylock, committee advisor. He indica- ted that all comments received at the public hearing had been reviewed and con- sidered : n the revised edition. It was also noted that the City strictly observes the StatE 's 200 foot from the shoreline limitation, and these regulations do not apply to that area behind the 200 feet. There were several primary areas of con- cern: high rises, wetlands, and the designation of certain shorelines - May Creek and the Elack River Forest area near the P-1 Channel. These concerns were ad- dressed as follows: (1) high rises-The committee did not provide a specific defini- tion but chose to leave it to be indicated in the Fire and Building Codes. Mr. Blaylock especially noted that high rises are prohibited within 200 feet of the shoreline; and, as indicated earlier, there is no requirement within the Program for the property behind it. (2) wetlands - The matter has been addressed in the proposed Program and State law in that any associated wetlands would fall within the jurisdiction of the Shorelines Act. A new category, Natural Environment, has been added to the Program to protect such areas. It was explained that the intent is to preserve the area in a natural condition, precluding human use. (3) the designation of certain shorelines - With specific reference to the area along May Creek, Mr. Blaylock reported that the committee had deferred a final decision because of potential impact to another property owner, Panabode, which has been given until September 15th for comment. Potential impacts to existing businesses in the vicinity were also noted. The final recommendation will be held in abey- ance until a response is received. Further changes were noted: the addition of an environment designated as "natural, " revisions to setbacks in residential, commercial and industrial areas to provide more public access, and the possibility of additional shoreline areas along the Cedar River to the east. Procedure for adoption and enforcement provisions were also explained. Renton Planning Commission • September 8, 1982 Page Two For clarification, Commissioner Vaupel advised that the majority of the committee members felt that they did not have the right to define high rise for the City, as it should be a City policy and that a declaration of non-significance had 'been published.! Questions !from the Commission were then invited. Responding to Commissioner Walker, Mr. Blaylock indicated that the committee felt it appropriate to reserve a decision concerning the area along May Creek for a response from Panabode, inasmuch as writ- ten inputlhad already been considered from the Barbee Mill Company, and these comments should be made available to the Council. However, the Commission may approve the document this evening. (See Addendum. ) There wasjdiscussion concerning the requirement for an additional public hearing by the City Council in accordance with Section 2.12, Amendments. It was suggested that the sentence reading, "The Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council, which shall hold at least one (1) public hearing before making a determination." be changed to read: "The Planning Commission shall make a recom- mendation,to the City Council, which may hold at least one (1) public hearing before making a determination." Considerable discussion ensued in which it was noted that changing "shall" to "may" would make the procedure consistent with the adoption of other City Zoning Ordinance amendments and, while it would be appro- priate for the Commission to recommend the change, the Council will have to conduct a public hearing in accordance with existing requirements. As there was no further discussion, IT WAS ACTION: MOVED BY VAUPEL, SECONDED BY HOUSER, THAT WE ADOPT THE PROPOSED SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM AS SUBMITTED. An amendment was offered, as follows: ACTION: MOVED BY WALKER, SECONDED BY SCHELLERT, THAT THE FIFTH LINE OF SECTION 2.12, AMEND- MENTS,, CONCERNING THE CITY COUNCILS HOLDING A PUBLIC HEARING BE REVISED FROM "WHICH SHALL HOLD AT LEAST ONE (1) PUBLIC HEARING" TO "WHICH MAY HOLD AT LEAST ONE (1) PUBLIC HEARING." Discussion followed. Commissioner Vaupel expressed her feeling that the City Council, ;as a representative of the people, should hold at least one public hearing concerning the mandated review of the Master Program every four years. As there was no further discussion, the Chairman called for the vote as follows: On the amendment - MOTION CARRIED, Commissioner Vaupel dissenting. On the original motion to adopt - MOTION CARRIED. The Committee was then commended for their work. There was 'discussion concerning the order of the agenda, and IT WAS ACTION: MOVED BY WALKER, SECONDED BY HOUSER, THAT AGENDA ITEM #6, REGARDING THE CENTRAL RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BE CONSIDERED AFTER ITEM #8, AUDIENCE COMMENT, AND THAT THE COM- MISSION PROCEED TO ITEM #7, ADMINISTRATIVE. MOTION CARRIED. 7. ADMINISTRATIVE: A. COMMITTEE REPORTS 1. ORDINANCE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Commissioner Walker advised that the committee has been working on the commercial zones of the Zoning Ordinance and has been meeting with repre- sentatives of the Chamber of Commerce and Downtown Merchants Association. Items under discussion were noted. The committee will meet next with ' these groups at 7:00 p.m. on September 16th. She also reported that they had met this evening and will be requesting that the regular October meeting of the Commission be held on October 20th rather than October 13th. i Y ' Renton Planning Commission September 8, 1982 Page Three 2. SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM COMMITTEE Commissioner Vaupel advised that they will have one more meeting follow- ing receipt of the correspondence from Panabode. 3. CENTRAL AREA STUDY COMMITTEE Commissioner Warren indicated that, as the committee had not met since June, she would defer a further report. Commissioner Vaupel received permission to be excused at this time, 8:40 p.m. B. PLANNING COMMISSION ANNUAL REPORT Mr. Clemens reminded Commissioners of the need for any personal comments and committee reports for the Annual Report. Last year's format and that proposed for this year were discussed. It was decided to defer the matter until the October meeting. C. PAW FALL CONFERENCE - 1982 The Planning Association of Washington will hold its fall conference at Fort Worden, Port Townsend, September 29 - October 1. Commissioner Schellert will be attending as a representative of the PAW Board and will provide a report. D. PAW FALL CONFERENCE - 1983 Mr. Clemens referred the Commissioners to a letter from the City of Tukwila in which they are advised that the Tukwila Planning Commission has indicated interest in the invitation to participate in sponsorship of the PAW 1983 Fall Conference. However, they will consider it further at their meeting of Sep- tember 23rd. He advised that the matter has also been discussed with Planning Directors in Kent, Tukwila and Auburn; and an opportunity for further discus- sion may be presented at a meeting of the directors on September 14th. The Renton City Council has agreed that, if the Commission wishes to take on the responsibility of sponsoring this conference, they may do so. Mr. Clemens expressed his concerns, however, regarding staff time and budget constraints but offered all possible assistance. Discussion followed among the Commissioners relative to providing Commissioner Schellert with a letter to the Planning Association of Washington to be pre- sented at the Port Townsend conference concerning Renton's sponsorship. As the Commission will not meet again until after the conference, IT WAS ACTION: MOVED BY SCHELLERT, SECONDED BY HOUSER, THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION PREPARE A LETTER OF INVITATION TO THE PLANNING ASSOCIATION OF WASHINGTON TO HAVE THE 1983 FALL CONFERENCE IN RENTON, HOSTED BY THE VALLEY CITIES, SUBJECT TO CON- FIRMATION BY THE REST OF THE COMMISSION BY TELEPHONE OR OTHER MEANS THAT IT IS, APPROPRIATE TO PROCEED. MOTION CARRIED. 8. AUDIENCE COMMENT: Audience comment was invited by the Chairman. Peggi DuBois, 2907 Mountain View North, Renton, in regard to the Shoreline Master Program, expressed her concerns relative to the Commission's decisions involving the May Creek area. She inquired specifically regarding decisions concerning existing businesses in that vicinity and high rises in shoreline areas. In response, Mr. Blaylock noted restrictions governing existing business within two hundred feet of the shoreline would limit further development and additional constraints imposed by State jurisdiction. Mr. Clemens indicated his agreement with decisions made by the committee in this regard. Mrs. DuBois indicated further her feeling that more than three environmental classifications be considered in Renton and that the waterfront park and resi- dential areas be more restrictive. • I • Renton Planning Commission September 8, 1982 Page Four • Jocelyn Jones, 1424 North 40th Street, Renton, questioned the adequacy of provisions for protection of May Creek in the area of Panabode. She was advised that the •ques- tion had been considered at length by the committee and that the guidelines for the Program have been provided by the State. The urban designation along 900 of Ren- ton's shorelines was also noted as being in keeping with State guidelines for high usage areas. Mrs. DuBois indicated her opinion that Kennydale should be designated as a conserv- ancy due to its scenic value and wildlife and also noted her concern about a public hearing at the Council level. There was further discussion regarding the review process and State's appeal proce- dures. Discussion followed regarding the possibility of a recess and reassembly as the Central Area Committee-of-the-Whole, and IT WAS ACTION: MOVED BY WALKER, SECONDED BY SCHELLERT, TO ADJOURN THE FORMAL MEETING AND RETURN AS THE COMMITTEE-OF-THE-WHOLE TO DISCUSS THE CENTRAL RENTON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. MOTION CARRIED. The meeting was adjourned at 9:11 p.m. • Michael Porter, Chairman • • /e?/// • 657 // • • Virgi • Houser, Secretary ADDENDUM: A poll of ,the Commission was conducted by Mr. Blaylock on September 16, 1982, and it was the een-sere-sts to designate the shoreline from the mouth of May Creek to I-405 as Urban. �i'aja,-,1/ o1,1/'on • • • F. Affidavit of Publication , STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING SS. ", 'Publici.Notice I., ,,Further--..Information :re-..„ Audrey De Jo i e being first dulysworn on garding this action'is'avall-`', g able in the i Building-and she chief clerk Zoni.ng.; Department;';: ."Municipal'Building, Renton,' oath,deposes and says that is the of • Washington,235-2550.,Any THE DAILY RECORD CHRONICLE,a newspaper published six(6)times a :appeal of ERC action must: week.That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been re!.b filed ,with' the;:Hearing for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to, T .'" Examiner,by September 13, printed and published in the English language continually as a newspaper ` ' NOTICE`OF •;:1982.,, published four(4)times a week in Kent,King County,Washington,and it is i" ENVIRONMENTAL : Published in the Daily Re-.=: now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the DETERMINATION!: :r cord'Chronicle August 30, aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper.That the Daily Record - EVIRONMENTAL 1982. R8190.:, ._: i; :, Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior ,:t•,REVIEW COMMITTEE ,r.. :..r•, :: Court of the County in which it is published,to-wit,King County, I RENTON,•WASHINGTON. ..�'� " ' ` ,.` r,..:The'•Environmental Re- Notice of Environmental `.view Committee,(ERC),has,:; Washington.That the annexed is a it issued a final declaration of). •,', the tot- . Determination R8190 t lowing projects: " :•• . ,; `JERRY HARDEBECK• (ECF-063-82) ' : i'.� Application'•to' rezone..: as it was published in regular issues(and '5,720 square feel of proper not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period 'ty from R-ltoL-1;fileR-062-,' 82;•property located at 412'1 • 1'S.W.'16th:Street:• . of 1 consecutive issues,commencing on the •.`CITY OF RENTON PLAN,-• .NING:COM AissioN"(ECF 30th August 82 :"-,shoreline',Master:Pro day of ,19 ,and ending the i ram,'Revision 1982:Update .' ;•of,basic language of i Shoreline Master, Program. Sot August 82 `,'The•primary. intent is to y of 19 both dates ,clarify language'and make ' inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub- `•'more' positive..statements scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee '.concerning public access, . 27.00 ...private property rights, , charged for the foregoing i',marinas.and setbacks:for g g g publication is the sum of $ , which commercial and: industrial has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the :woes.•The-program is,city= first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent wide in sco insertion. ', ` The' Environmental Re- •// view'Committee(ERC)has'' G �'�i % i� issued a final declaration of , non-significance With condi tions• for 'the ,following •. Chief Clerk , project: , .. 'JERRY AMON(ECF-048- • 31st Application to rezone Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 8,160 square feet of rezone Proper- ty from G-1 to B-1'for a small '• August 19 82 business .building,.:file R 047-82;property located on;,. ( ----g...leecvney"21.,, r,the•north.side of.N.E: 4th ` ;Street;.approximately 200'•',i Notary Public in and for the S Gof Washington, 'feet west of Duvall Avenue• . residingg a rft, King County. N.E. —Passed by the Legislature,1955,known as Senate Bill 281,effective June 9th, 1955. —Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, adopted by the newspapers of the State. 1.I CI R f ' VN#87 Revised 5/82 Renton Planning Commission Public Mee-:ing July 14, 1982 Page Two Mr. Warren continued with a discussion of conflict of interest, providing examples of potential problems, and then offered to respond to questions. Questions and answers were presented concerning comment by Commission members at Council meetings with regard to matters previously acted upon by the Commission, requests by Coun- cil members of Commissioners for information, minority reports by Commissioners, involvement of Commissioners' family members in a public hearing, politicking by Commissioners, Commission members supporting an action of another applicant being heard . y another board, and application of Appearance of Fairness and conflict of int=_rest to staff members. The Ci:y Attorney then offered to respond to correspondence from Commissioners con- cernin3 these subjects or by telephone should there be an immediate question. 6. ADMINISTRATIVE: A. COMMITTEE REPORTS (1) ORDINANCE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Commissioner Walker reported that review is continuing concerning business zoning. In an effort to obtain input from the business community, con- tacts have been made with the Chamber of Commerce and Renton Merchants Association inviting them to a meeting tentatively scheduled for 7:00 p.m. , August 3rd. Three business zones are being contemplated: the central business zone, community commercial zone and neighborhood commercial zone. (2) SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM COMMITTEE Responding for the committee, Mr. Blaylock advised that they had met since the public hearing and resolved most of the issues. However, they plan to defer their report until the September 8th meeting to allow time to formulate definitions for greenbelt and high rise. Mr. Clemens noted receipt of the following correspondence since the public hearing: letters dated June 16 and June 28, 1982, from James C. Hanken of Lenihan, Ivers and McAteer, attorneys, 1218 Third Ave. , Seattle, dealing with the Barbee Mill site; a letter from Gloria Minnick, 11215 S.E. 74th St. , Renton, dated June 22, 1982, regarding a number of issues, in particular density and height limitations; an undated letter from the Open Space Coalition of South King County, signed by Sylvia Langdon, Temporary Chairperson, 312 S.W. Langston Rd. , Renton, dealing with wetlands, specifically the Black River Riparian Forest, creek wetlands and wetlands on East Renton Hill; and a letter dated July 3, 1982, from William H. Marr, 910 No. 36th St. , Renton, relating to the various zone designations in the Shoreline Master Program, height restrictions, location of highways, and preserva- tion of wetlands. It was noted that copies had been provided to all Commission members, including the committee. (3) CENTRAL AREA STUDY COMMITTEE Mr. Clemens indicated that the committee had met twice during the previous month. At the first meeting they reviewed North Renton and developed a number of preliminary findings. The second meeting was devoted to the South Renton area; however, no conclusions were reached in view of limited attendance. The next committee meeting date was tentatively scheduled for August 4th. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designations A memorandum from Associate Planner Williams regarding Comprehensive Plan land use designations was distributed to the Commissioners. It was noted that as a result of some comments received on the draft environmental impact statement for the Central Area Plan, it seemed appropriate to more precisely define the land use categories of the Comprehensive Plan and the intent is to include these in the final environmental impact statement so they can be adopted by the Commission. Also distributed was a draft of a greenbelt policy for Commission consideration which responds to the Commission's discussion about greenbelts on steep slopes in the Central Area. Explanations of the proposals were provided by Mr. Williams, who then responded to questions from the members. RENTON PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING JUNE 9, 1982 MINUTES COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Virginia Houser, Frank Jacobs, Michael Porter, Barbara Schel- lert, Versie Vaupel, Joan Walker, Anita Warren. COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT: Gene Ledbury. PRESS: Jan Inman, Daily Record Chronicle 1 CITY OFFICIALS: John Reed, Councilman. CITY STAFF PRESENT: David Clemens, Policy Development Director; Roger Blaylock, Zoning Administrator; Willis Roberts, Recording Secretary. 1. CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order by Chairman Porter at 8:03 p.m. 2. ROLL CALL was taken by Secretary Schellert. All responded present with the exception of Commissioner Ledbury (other commitment) . IT WAS MOVED BY VAUPEL, SECONDED BY WAR- REN, THAT THE ABSENT MEMBER BE EXCUSED. MOTION CARRIED. 3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The Chairman called for additions or corrections to the minutes of the April 27, 1982, meeting. As none were offered, the minutes were declared approved as written. 4. AUDIENCE COMMENT: The Chairman invited comments from the audience on subjects other than the subject of the public hearing this evening. Sandford Webb, 430 Mill Ave. So. , Renton, noting that the Commissioners are recipients of Hearing Examiner decisions, presented them with copies of his request for reconsid- eration of a decision by the Board of Public Works concerning his request for construc- tion of a staircase on the Mill Avenue South public right-of-way medium. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: A REVIEW AND UPDATE OF THE CITY OF RENTON SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM AS REQUIRED BY THE STATE ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT, RCW 90.58 It was noted that copies of the proposed Shoreline Master Program were available for audience review, and a report from the Chairwoman of the Shoreline Master Program Study Committee was requested. Commissioner Vaupel introduced committee members Jacobs and Houser and advised that this is the first general review and update of the Shoreline Master Program since its adoption, which was originated through the efforts of a twenty-member citizens advisory committee of diverse backgrounds in 1976. It was noted that the revision is an attempt to reduce ambiguity and designate responsibilities that have been changed since adoption. The preliminary nature of the document and serious con- sideration to be given all public comment was stressed. Mr. Blaylock, Zoning Admini- strator, who provided technical assistance, was then invited to review the proposed revisions. Mr. Blaylock provided a brief overview of the history of the Shoreline Master Program, noting authority, study process, original adoption, and minor modifications since inception. The City' s inventory of shorelines was pointed out and designated environ- " :j ments identified and explained. It was noted that these are unchanged. Mr. Blaylock then reviewed the Program section-by-section, identifying proposed revisions and providing background concerning the intent and rationale. Specific revisions and/or additions to the following sections were noted: 1.03, Compliance in Renton; 1.04, Development of the Master Program; 1. , Procedures; 3. , Shorelines of the City; 4. , Goals and Policies; 5. , Environments; 6. , General Use Regulations; 7. , Specific Use Regulations; 8. , Variances and Conditional Uses; and 9. , Definitions. In addition, it was noted that references to the Building and Zoning Department and Policy Development Department had been made throughout the document. Renton Planning Commission Public Hearing, June 9, 1982 Page Two The Committee's review process was described. Mr. Blaylock indicated that the origi- nal program established two environments, conservancy and urban, and that a natural environment had been added to include areas designated by the City as wetland. A recess was declared by the Chairman at 9:10 p.m. The meeting was resumed at 9:20 p.m. with all members noted above in attendance. The Chairman requested that the recording secretary read into the record any corres- pondence that had been received. Mrs. Roberts noted receipt of a letter from Jocelyn C. Jones, 1424 No. 40th St. , Renton, requesting delay of any action concerning proposed development at the Port Quendall complex until after completion of the Shoreline Master Program review. It was pointed out by Commissioner Walker that the Port Quendall complex is not before the Commission and, therefore, they have no authority to comply with this request. Public comments were invited by the Chairman. John DuBois, 2907 Mountain View Avenue North, Renton, requested that definitions of high rise structure and what constitutes a shoreline area be included in the program. It was also suggested that the Coulon Beach Park and most of Kennydale be considered for a conservancy designation rather than urban. Comments and suggestions were made on the following specific sections as well: (1) 2.03.01.I. regarding limiting the cost of a dock designed for pleasure craft only to $2500, it was suggested that the amount not be included in view of the effects of inflation and careful delineation of what is acceptable. Mr. Blaylock advised that the value limit was stipulated by state law. (2) 2.04.01 concerning review criteria, establishment of jurisdiction by the Building and Zoning Department was questioned, and it was requested that the Policy Development Department replace Building and Zoning throughout the document. (3) 4.01.02(7) relative to objectionable uses and activities in shoreline areas, it was requested that visual impact be included, specifically light pollution. In addition, it was requested that an item D. be added to Section 4.01.02 to read, "Maximum height limitations for any proposed structure shall be no more than 35 feet. " (4) 4.02, Conservation Element. Environmental designation of May Creek west of FAI-405 was questioned with the request that the entire creek be left in an undeveloped state. Specifically, relative to 4.02.02.F. (2) , it was requested that the words, "east of FAI-405" be deleted. (5) 4.04.02.I concerning high-rise structures, it was requested that the section be revised to read, "High-rise structures on the shoreline shall be prohibited." and that paragraphs (1) and (2) be deleted. (6) 4.06.02 concerning shoreline roadways, it was requested that "should" be changed to "shall." (7) 4.07.02.D concerning multi-family structures near the shoreline, revision of "should" to "shall" was requested; 4.07.02.F relating to low density development near the shoreline, revision of "should" to "shall" was asked; and 4.07.02.H. (2) regarding May Creek, the deletion of "east of FAI-405" was requested. (8) 5.04.01.B concerning high-intensity land use, it was requested that "should" be revised to "shall. " (9) 6.02.01 regarding pollution and ecological disruption it was suggested that the period at the end be changed to a comma and the following added: "shall not be considered when detrimental effects may occur. " (10) 7.02.01 concerning aquaculture, Mr. DuBois noted that commercial fishing for crayfish in shallow water had occurred in the past and requested that it be con- sidered. (11) 7.04.01 relative to bulkheads, agreement with the committee's posi- tion on jetties was indicated. (12) 7.05.02 regarding setbacks for commercial building, the need for the phrase "for good reason" was questioned. (13) 7.07.02 relating to industrial structures, it was requested that the third and fourth lines be deleted beginning with the word "or" and be changed to read, "Industrial structures are to be permitted only when they are located on land parcels where industrial uses currently exist." (14) 7.12.03.C. (2) concerning dock size specifi- cations for single family docks, elimination of "not limited to conditions requiring greater dock length and construction" was suggested. (15) 7.15.01 regarding loca- tion of roads and railroads, it was requested that a specific distance from the shoreline be indicated and that Lake Washington Boulevard be considered for designa- tion as a scenic route. Phyllis LaRue, 2505 Maple Valley Highway, Renton, noting her different view concern- ing public access and 35 years of having lived on the Cedar River, indicated her feeling that public accessibility to shorelines and preservation of natural amenities are not compatible. She provided before and after pictures of property formerly owned by her husband and herself and now publicly owned to illustrate her conten- tion. She noted destruction of natural habitat for wildlife and that much of the Renton Planning Commission Public Hearing, June 9, 1982 Page Three wildlife is no longer present. In addition, she complained about erosion in her front yard as the result of drainage problems associated with property acquired by', the City and requested that people with private property around public sites be provided protection. It was indicated that more specific comments and recommenda- tions will be submitted in writing later. Lou Bergan, 5029 Ripley Lane, Renton, indicated his approval of additions to the pro- gram from Mercer Island and Bellevue programs. He also offered comments concerning specific sections as follows: (1) 4.01.02.7.D, a paragraph proposed by Mr. DuBois regarding maximum height limitations. It was noted that the City of Bellevue regula- tions also stipulate 35 feet except in land use districts with more restrictive height limitations. (2) 4.07.02.H. (2) and 5.03.03 relating to May Creek. It was requested that the area of May Creek west of FAI-405, including the mouth, be designated as a conservancy environment to protect wildlife. Objections were raised to proposals for development in the area, and it was suggested that Gypsy Creek also be included in the conservancy designation. (3) 7.09.03 concerning design requirements for marinas. It was requested that an addition to item D or sub-paragraph 1. be made to provide protection for property owners adjoining a marina or anyone else affected by pollution, oil spills, etc. Vikki Littleman, 3805 Lake Washington Boulevard North, Renton, offered the following comments regarding specific sections: (1) 7.09.04 relating to location of marinas. To avoid redundancy, it ,was suggested that this section be placed under 7.09.02. (2) 7.09.02 itemizing criteria for establishment of marinas. Mrs. Littleman requested that item D. be added to read: "Marinas shall be permitted only after full evaluation of all environmental impacts. All adverse impacts are to be mitigated including con- siderations of water quality, public use of surface water, nearby shoreline areas, parking, visual and noise pollution, adequate police protection, and other factors deemed appropriate." Relative to item B under the same section, Mrs. Littleman asked for clarification of the statement, particularly as it concerns determination of the number of boats in a marina. Additionally, she inquired if the program provided some guidelines to determine appropriate boat density for a certain area. The staff indi- cated that these matters would be reviewed further. Jocelyn Jones, 1424 North 40th Street, Renton, expressed her support for requests made that May Creek from FAI-405 to the mouth be included in the conservancy environment. Peggi DuBois, 2907 Mountain View North, Renton, reiterated her husband's concern regard- ing designation of the Coulon Beach Park addition as a conservancy environment, noting the large public investment. She also advised that Shoreline Master Programs for Kirk- land, Bellevue and Mercer Island provide several classifications of urban environments and suggested this be considered. Betsy Crawford, 5117 Ripley Lane North, Renton, requested that all of May Creek be con- sidered for designation as a conservancy environment to provide protection for existing wildlife. She also requested consideration of a similar designation for Gypsy Creek, noting recent pollution from development in the area. John Reed, Renton City Council, requested that definitions be more specific, especially the definition of water-related and in particular view windows. Sanford Webb, 430 Mill Avenue South, Renton, indicating his concern regarding review by more than one department and increased fees, requested that responsibility be fixed and there be deletion or reduction of fees. Mrs. DuBois' indicated approval of responsibility by the Building and Zoning Departments for permits but requested that overall jurisdiction be maintained by the Policy Devel- opment Department wherever possible. Mr. Bergan, referring to Section 7.12.06.A. (1) concerning the maximum length of a com- mercial dock, inquired if that could be changed through a variance. It was noted by Mr. Blaylock that variances are granted by the state under more strict criteria than the City's. Responding to Mr. Bergan, Mr. Blaylock also advised that the requirement that docks be parallel to the shore in the existing program had been omitted in the proposed revision because of the number of small lots in residential areas. Mrs. Littleman, noting the thought given to criteria for signs, requested a definition of a high-rise structure. Mr. and Mrs. LaRue asked that responsibility be specified for cleanup of public areas along the water. Renton Planning Commission ‘' Public Hearing,' June 9, 1982 Page Four Generalddiscussion followed concerning policing of public areas. As there was no further public comment, IT WAS ACTION: MOVED BY WARREN, SECONDED BY JACOBS, THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CLOSED. MOTION CAR- RIED. Following a brief discussion by the Commission and staff, IT WAS THEN ACTION: 1 MOVED BY WALKER, SECONDED BY HOUSER, THAT THE SUBJECT BE REFERRED BACK TO THE SHORE- LINE MASTER PROGRAM COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. 6. ADMINISTRATIVE: A. COMMITTEE' REPORTS SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM It was decided to schedule a meeting in approximately two weeks to allow for Com- mission review of ,the input received this evening. A definite meeting time will be announced. CENTRAL STUDY AREA COMMITTEE Commissioner Warren reported that the committee-of-the-whole had met on May 26th and discussed the West Hill. They will meet next on June 16th to discuss the North Renton residential area. There was discussion concerning procedures to be followed upon completion of each review. ORDINANCE DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE Commissioner Walker advised that• the committee had met three times since the last meeting and will meet next at 7:00 p.m. on June 17th. At the request of the Renton Chamber of Commerce, they will meet with them after July 7th to discuss commercial and industrial areas needed for development. B. ELECTION OF OFFICERS There was discussion concerning a more appropriate time for election of officers, and IT1WAS ACTION: MOVED ,BY WARREN, SECONDED BY WALKER, THAT WE HAVE THE ELECTION OF OFFICERS AT THE JULY MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. C. OTHER Commissioner Vaupel advised that the article in the Daily Record Chronicle concern- ingmPlanning Commission membership and herself in particular was unsolicited. Commissioner Schellert advised that the Planning Association of Washington would like the City to host its 1983 fall conference. It was suggested that adjacent cities could be invited to co-sponsor. Discussion followed concerning the likely' attendance, funding, potential speakers, and impact on the staff and facili- P;; ties. It was decided to table the matter until the July 14th meeting. Mr. Clemens responded to inquiries from the Commission relative to the pending wetland study and the status of recent revisions to the Zoning Ordinance. There was general discussion concerning the City°s review of the Newcastle Plan and other public meetings scheduled in the area. As there was no further business before the Commission, IT WAS MOVED BY SCHELLERT, SECONDED BY JACOBS, THAT THE MEETING BE ADJOURNED. MOTION CARRIED. The meeting was adjourned at 10:31 p.m. Barbara Schellert, Secretary 1 Michael Porter, Chairman I 1 PUBLIC INPUT: PUBLIC HEARING, SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM, JUNE 9, 1982 .. John- DuB;ois, 2907 Mt. View Ave N. 1 Asked for definition of high rise as used in this program. If you don't have one, I would like you to include one. i Definition of what constitutes a shoreline area. (DRC established by state law - 200' from high'wa.ter1line. i DuBois: It might be helpful to have that in here as a definition. ! Why isn't the park that we're putting all this money into and most of Kennydale con- sidered to be part of the conservancy area-rather than urban? It would fit within the definition. I would really hate to see something done to the park sometime in the future. Specific things!: • l 1. 2.03.01 Construction of a dock limited to $2500.00 - I put in a dock four years ago, and you haven't changed the amount; you haven't taken into consideration , inflation. You have very careful delineation of what's acceptable; I see no reason to have an amount stated as well. 1 RJB: Unfortunately we don't the authority - the value was stated by state law. It should be noted that this has been increased. Originally I believe, when the Act was passed, it was $1500.00. ,2. 2.04.01 Review Criteria - I question putting this underneath the Building and Zoning Department. I feel it should be under the Policy Development Department. In every place Building and Zoning should be changed to Policy Development. 1 3. 4.01.02 (7) - In addition to noise and odor, add visual impact, for a couple of reasons: not just esthetics, but if you will note at any time there is a boat moorage, one of the things that every boat owner feels, for security reasons, is a light by their boat. If you have any substantial kind of moorage, that amount of light pollution will put an incredible impact on anybody in the surrounding area. 1 Add item D.; - Maximum height limitations for any proposed structure shall be no more than 315 feet. 4. 4.02, Conservation Element: Question throughout - why just the existing waterway of May Creek east of 405 left in an undeveloped state - why not May Creek. 4.02.02.F. (2) - delete "as much as possible." Note: Deleted by committee. Then just delete "east of FAI-405." 1 5. 4.04.02.I -I Limit to "High-rise structures on the shoreline shall be prohibited." Delete (1) and (2) . There are no topographic conditions within the Renton city, limits that would justify being an exception. . 4.06.02, Po',licies - A. Change "should" to "shall. " 641' " Z. ( ka4.07.02,- del Policies - D. Change "should" to itiggpr F. Change should to "shall." H. (2) delete "east of FAI-405. " O 01 5.04.01.B -I Last sentence - change Coul)to "shall." �.=-4 1 PA (9 . 6.02.01 change period to a comma and add, "shall not be considered when detri- 3 r mental effeIcts may occur." 10. 7.02.01 - Aquaculture - You may not be aware of - has happened in the past in the city of Renton - commercial fishing for crayfish on Lake Washington. It's not okk happening at present to my knowledge, but it has happened in the past, and it(..: ) would fit under the definition of aquaculture, and you may wish to consider that. There was allot of problem when it was happening because the people that were doing it - (secondary shorelines are not exactly defined - and because of the nature of the beast they had to in fact fish in shallow water where the crayfish were located. RJB: Were they actually leasing the land under the water. . .? No, They were just fishing; they got a permit from the state to fish, and they were ; putting the' traps down in water depths usually of 10'-12' because about-the maximum depth for crayfish is about 30' - 35' . RJB: They were fishing and note actually farming where they, were restocking. . . There was a proposal for that, but they never got that far. They were fishing them and shipping them to Sweden and there Was a proposal to go into but it fell through. ' 7. a24. I , I PUBLIC INPUT: PUBLIC HEAR., SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM, JUNE 9, 1982 - Pg. , 2 John DuBois'' (Cont'd) 1 I 11. 7.04.01' - ICI would second your conclusion of jetties. 12. 7.05.02 - The phrase "for good reason" is used a lot of places, and I realize that these have to be written ambiguous, but since you can specifically consider water related commercial development and otherwise, I don't see why a commercial building OP - ; lt the resrilction for 50' setback would be waived unless it was water related. DRC: To get !to the Hearing Examiner, it would have to be a variance or conditional use; "for good reason" is more precisely established under those criteria that. 1 • 7 07.02 - Delete the third and four lines beginning with the word "or" to read, YO �'Industrial structures are to be permitted only when they are located on land parcelslwhere industrial uses currently exist." iI 14. 7.12.03C.i(2) - Dock Size Specifications - Question this "not limited to conditions requiring greater dock length and construction." When we're talking about docks, we're really only talking about Lake Washington. I live on Coleman Point, which is 0V the shallowest place within the Renton jurisdiction. I have a hundred foot dock, which oi;s the maximum allowed, and it gives me 8' of water at the end of the dock. I cannot consider a situation that would require somebody to have a dock longer than your required 100 feet. That's why I question why that would be necessary. Vaupel: ll Your suggestion is that be eliminated? Yes. RJB: We do have some I situations;where that has happened, and we have granted variances. Some of them are up to 180' in length, and we have only 4}' of water, and there are two or I three of them side by side. I 15. 7.15.011i - Roads and Railroads. It says they are to be located away from shorelines, but youllare not at all specific about how far away, when you're talking about major 0 highways and primary arterials. I'm going to show my prejudice because I think 4 that Lake Washington Boulevard should be designated as scenic route, and certainly it is right along the shore. But I think you might consider some number in there. .I • I 1 Phyllis LaRue, '2505 Maple ValleyHighway, Renton I have a little different view from other people. I have lived on the Cedar River for 35 years, and I have seen the development along it. I notice that you stress in this study thaty,ou ,want to increase the public accessibility to the shoreline and to pre- serve and improve the natural amenities. These are not compatible, particularly in'I, the areas where you have more wildlife, a more natural area. You might want`to consider that. Unfortunately, I have had several pieces or property condemned for parks, and I spent quitea few years taking care of the area along the Cedar River, which was quite beautiful. And now I have pictures of how public access has destroyed what we took, care of for many;lyears - displayed pictures: half-bridge area, area made into a park and was once time a grassy area, the private access bridge. You might want to considers that public ,access destroys wildlife, destroys the natural zone. The first thing the crew did, when ithey came over to start cutting the Cedar River Trail, we to roll rocks into the river, and cut down trees. We have blue herons, otters, deer that have been over there. And now we're having problems. The blue herons have been killed; we ' don't see the otters any more; and deer are on the far side of the highway now, and one got killedlthe other night. So you might want to consider that improving public access is net necessarily going to improve the environment. 1 The other thing that I'd like to inquire about is does the City have to conform to the rules for development that they pub on the person who is developing his property? DRC: The answer is most definitely yes. Soil erosions, bank erosion, drainage from new drainage installations - all that should be taken care oif by the City then? It's not the case.. The piece of property that was acquired bythe' City required a channel change, and a road change. My front yard is now eroded. IIThe City, in fact, may not be the culprit; but in condemnation, the state says it's not theirs. The other agencies that control the shorelines say it's not their responsibility. Consequently, our front yard has eroded. When you have a heavy rain storm, theiwater comes off the half-bridge, pours down into the Cedar River and pollutes the river. So if you are thinking of buying more property along the river; then you have to protect the people with private property that surrounds this piece of property.', You might want to look at what has happened in the past along that line. I have more specific things, but I will write those for you. i I 1 PUBLIC INPUT: PUBLIC H ENG, SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM, NE 9, 1982 - Page 3 Lou Bergan, 5029 Ripley Lane, Renton I was glad to hear that you had borrowed a few paragraphs from Mercer Island and Bellevue. I also read 'a few of them and thought some of them ought to be included. Re. 4.01°102:7.D - Referred to suggestion by Mr. DuBois re. maximum height limitations. Read same paragraph by the City of Bellevue, which is under their general regulations applicable to all land use districts and activities which is paragraph B under Shoreline Use Regulations. It states, "Maximum height limitations of any proposed structure within the shoreline overlake (?) district shall be 35 feet except in land use districts with more restrictive height limitations. . . . . They mention variances can be applied for. Re. 4.07.02.H. (2) -5.03.03 - You're calling out where the May Creek, and I think also Gypsy Creek out to be included, in conservancy areas. I see no reason why the mouth of the creek shouldn't also be conservancy, since it's the most important part of the creek, if you wantito maintain any kind of wildlife or fish habitat - any kind of fish going qr back up to spawn. That's obviously the most important part to, control. That property 4 4 where the mouth of the river is, is up for re-development. They're going to change the i old existing use of that property. The property was brought into the City of Renton under an old G-6000 zoning and changed to what it was at the time. Now they're changing that whole intent of that property - the whole intent of the shoreline. I really think the Renton Shoreline Management Act wasn't written to allow the type of development they're talking about putting in. Re. 7.09.03 ,- add D.1. - or add a sentence to that (D) . Anybody who puts in a marina ught to post a bond that they will take care of adjoining property owners or anybody else affected by pollution, oil spills and the like, as we all know that marinas are ®t some of the biggest polluters of the lakes. They all claim to have septic tanks or 1' sewage transfer facilities, etc., that are never used. Obviously, the pollution is going into the lakes. I think there should be something in thereto protect the property owners and the City. They're all saying they will do this, but none of them do it. It's time to put a little more teeth into the program. imikki Littleman, 3805 Lake Washington Blvd. No., Renton ie. 7.09104/7.09.02 - I'd like to see Sec. 7.09.04, Location of Marinas, placed under 0� � -c. 7.09.02. The sentence on location of marinas really doesn't add anything new. ', ,i t's just stating points A. , B. , and C. over again. �� Re. 7.09.02 - Also I would like to see point D added so it would read: "Marinas ,pp shall be permitted only after full evaluation of all environmental impacts. All 6 adverse impacts are to be mitigated including considerations of water quality, public se of surface water, nearby shoreline areas, parking, visual and noise pollution, ��� adequate police protection, and other factors deemed appropriate. " Also, I have a concern in the marina area as far as what kind of regulation, what kind of criteria are you using to determine the number of boats in a marina? I don't know if Section B is speaking to that or not. Could someone clarify Section B to me? (iik RJB: Actually the public hearing is to help clarify it. The way it's written, "adequate" is subjective, adequate to the person who has a 60-foot boat, or adequate to a person who has a ski boat or dingy. It's something that has to be evaluated in any environmental review. The intent is to set a goal. The goal may be very general, but you're sug- gesting certain policies that they would have to comply with to reach that goal, "adequacy. " So I can't come up with a specific definition. What's the actual point of the statement? RJB: It's a goal - it's assumed in a lot of cases, but it's stated just to assert that assumption that there has to be a determination that it's adequate. , DRC: It's certainly a legitimate question. Maybe we could come up with better language. It just seems very unclear. Also, from this do you feel there are some guidelines to determine appropriate boat density for a certain area? DRC: That one's a lot tougher but it again falls into "we need to do something with it." Mrs. Littleman: I think that would be a very important concern. Jocelyn Jones, 1424 No. 40th St, Rento� 1 I would like to add my voice to Mr. DuBois and the other gentleman on their concern for May Creek from the I-405 bridge to the mouth. That area is close to my house. I was under the impression since we moved there that it was a protected area, but evidently it is not. I would like to add my voice to having that portion of May Creek be included, in the conservancy/protected area. 1 PUBLIC INPUT: ' PUBLIC HEAF , SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM, JL 9, 1982: pg. 4 Peggi DuBois, 2907 Mountain View North, Renton I would like to question that in the addition - my husband previously made a brief comment about 'it, but I would like some more clarification - we add a natural delineation for property that we really don't have but that we might possibly have some day - and I think that's terrific. But, when you look at the shores of Lake Washington under Urban, it clearly says it's high intensity land use including commercial and industrial. As a Renton resident - and I contacted people from Lakeridge Community Club, Renton Hill, and Victoria Park ;- people who utilize the Park - I don't use it much or haven't yet. We spend $9,000,000 for a park, and yet it is listed under urban usage. The majority of the land on our shoreline is residential except for a very small part of it, and I looked in Kirkland's and Bellevue's and Mercer Island's Shoreline Master Plans, and they have urban, but it's broken down into several different classifications. I think that that might be a really wise thing for us to do because about 8 or 9 years ago it was brought up very frankly to sell the area that our park was on, and even though I think that the City residents would have a heart attack at the thought of that ever happening, the possibility under urban delineation for that park - it could happen. It is listed that is one of the usages of that shoreline. I think we have such a small area that it would serve a very strong purpose if we went through and did see actually what the feasibility of future use of that land is and then perhaps break down the urban into something more specific. It really terrifies me to think that two miles of beach at a cost of i$9,000,000 is still listed as being able to have industrial and commercial development on it. That was the only reiteration I would like to make. IBetsy Crawford, 5117 Ripley Lane North, Renton Re: May Creek - kids go up there fishing all the time. It's a nice place to keep as a wildlife preserve. I see lots of rabbits, beavers - a lot of wildlife down there. And also we live next to Gypsy Creek. Since we lived down there - at first the creek was nice and clear all the time. Since they started developing across Exit 7, it is no longer clear; it is murky. The mouth of it is full of sediment. We can't even walk in it anymore. Talking to people they say it isn't caused from that, but I don't where it would be coming from because that's the only development that's going on. And I just think it should be looked at and considered. John Reed, Renton City Council Re: Definitions - It would appear that many of the definitions are drawn from the definitions in the Regional Plan. It is my opinion that those definitions on a local level should be more specific and define more exactly what we're trying to do with it. I point specifically to the definition of water related - more specifically to a point where it say's, view windows. . . . . could be made, and I am sure will be, that a restaurant is an appropriate use of land on the lakefront because indeed the water enhances the profitability of restaurants. To me that is just an enhancement to that restaurant that makes it more profitable for a restaurant owner. In that sense you can argue that that is an appropriate use. It's not as far as I'm concerned. Same thing would apply to a motel or "Sandy Webb All of the detail points that I could think of were taken care of. The one thing that does disturb me a little bit is that the City, I believe, was supposedly reorganized for efficiency. And yet I find that we are cranking in additional reviews. In other words, we have two departments reviewing something while only one reviewed it before. And the statement was made that the fees have been increased to take care of this. I think we should fix responsibility and delete or reduce unnecessary fees for double review. 1,Peggi DuBois All the way; through you seem have given a lot of responsibility over to Building and Zoning, and' from a mechanical standpoint that would be fine. But I would appreciate it, and 'granted we didn't have a lot of time to go through this, if you would really check very closely areas that can be maintained under the Planning Department so that just because Building and Zoning take care of the mechanics that the Planning Depart- ment still has an overall - a fair amount of control over things that are regarded on the shoreline. And I missed some of the exact points, but I notice there were so many places where the responsibility had changed, and I would think a lot of us feel quite comfortable with the Planning Department having a certain amount of jurisdiction and say-1 so. i I • PUBLIC INPUT: PUBLIC H] ;NG, SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM, 1E 9, 1982 - Pg. 5 Lou Bergan: e/• have a couple of quick questions. Under Commercial and Industrial Docks, 7.12.06.A. (1) you call out the maximum length of a commercial dock as 250' . Is that maximum, orcan VQyou get that changed,by variances? RJB: Variances are possible but it should be noted that variances are granted by the state, and their review criteria is even stricter than the City's. If we're doing a variance on shoreline, we have I believe seven under our variance criteria under our zoning that we apply, and the state has eight; and they must comply with all 15. Bergan: Is it safe' to' assume then that if a marina was to be put into the city of Renton that the maximum length of the dock would be 250 feet? RJB: I don't think we have specifically considered that. . . Bergan: Would marina fall under commercial or industrial lots? (??) I must also point out in the old plan you had an A 1,2, and 3 which have been left out where docks should be put in parallel to the shore rather than out into the lake. RJB: Our problem there was we have a lot of small lots in residential areas that wouldn't quite fit, very difficult. Bergan: Another think on commercial you wouldn't Vikki Littleman: I was wondering why there really is not a definition of a high-rise structure. I'm looking at the section on signs, design requirements. The same type of thought given to signs should be given to high rise structures. It seems there should be more thought into that section, and it should be more clearly defined. Porter: Do you have a suggestion? Littleman: No, but I'll think about it. DRC: Going back to the point that Mr. DuBois was making, I would like to point out that one of the reasons that the reorganization took place was to put all the permit process in one place - the responsibility for that. We still have the review requirement as does about six other departments. If we're not satisfied, if we've got a problem we can't resolve internally, we will champion the point that you are concerned about. Mrs. LaRue: I have a question where you are encouraging the public use of the waterways, which I understand is really nice in some areas, who is responsible for cleanup of the public areas? Please specify who will be responsible for cleanup of public areas along the water. Mr. LaRue: I'd like to make a case in point of what my wife is talking about - the east end of the half-bridge on Maple Valley Highway. We have some pictures of how it's usually torn up by four-wheel drives in the winter time, and when it's hard and dry in the summer time the lawn is destroyed. But during the summer, they come down to the east end of the half-bridge and picnic there, and this is at the east end of our property, and they leave a mess. There are no facilities there. It's just a nice place to be! down by the river. It's not tended, and it's the City of Renton property. A case in point for cleaning up these areas. Walker: Can't somebody answer now who they should call. Shouldn't they call the Police? Mrs. LaRue:' We have called the Police. We have people camping underneath the bridge. In fact, a woman was living underneath there - no established facilities, of course. We called the Police, and the Police said there wasn't anything they could do because it's public access right at that area. Consequently, children playing in the area can't go.up there now. . . Mr. LaRue: ' They seem to know the lady; she wanders around town quite a bit. They were well aware of her. Mr. Bergan: What's wrong with the idea of putting a littering thing into the Shoreline Management Act? There's a $500 fine for littering. Walker: Suggest you talk to the City Council on Monday night. LaRues: B,e happy to. PUBLIC INPUT: PUBLIC H] NG, SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM, dE 9, 1982 - Pg.. 6 DRC: I suspect we'll flag that at staff and expect comment from the e public on that. Webb: I really don't know how you guard against littering. Noted at Mill and Bronson Way observed a large sack of garbage stuck in a fork in a bush. MOTION: WARREN/JACOBS: MOVED THE PUBLIC HEARING BE CLOSED. MOTION CARRIED. MOTION: WALKER/HOUSER: MOVE THAT THE SUBJECT BE REFERRED BACK TO COMMITTEE. MOTION CARRIED. 1 i Ir 1 RESOLUTION NO . 2003 WHEREAS the CITY OF RENTON heretofore adopted that certain "SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM" in June of 1974 ,. pursuant to City of Renton Resolution No . .1912 ; and in compliance with the requirements of the SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1971,as amended, (Chapter 90 . 58 RCW) , and WHEREAS the Department of Ecology thereafter requested the 1 consideration and adoption of certain amendments , and WHEREAS such matter was duly considered by the City and various committees and departments , and WHEREAS it is deemed proper and advisable and in the public interest to provide for certain amendments as per the recommendation of the Community Services Committee of the City Council , dated August 13 , 1975 , and WHEREAS the City heretofore issued its draft Environmental Impact Statement relating to the adoption of such "SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM" , now therefore , THE ;CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION I : The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward a copy of this Resolution; together with the City' s "SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM" , as amended, to the Department of Ecology, Olympia,, Washington, for its final approval. 1 Upon such final approval , the provisions of said Master Program shall constitute use regulations for the various affected 1 shorelines located within the City of Renton and as further set forth in said I"SHORELINE MASTER PROGRAM" , as amended. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL this 20th day of october,1975 . `4-P-411'te-'1 Delores A. Mead, City tlerk APPROVED BY THE MAYOR this 20th ay of .octobei 1975 . 44/2g41--- 1 r G arre a3j e G � Y Ap. oved as to form: -AP �/'j i�. /fit -rarl1 N. bhellan.; City Attorney