Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA98-014
LOCATED IN THE SW VF OF SECTION 29 T26N R5E W AA RENTON WASHINGTON LEGEND I= _ 3-a / 17 0 IAA al I ll''''':_.:57?, tlik.4 F,.:''*"-( 71.7f:' -=—EI 1":1 C-Cli: 1 ,e'.,, ,. "a A.111 111/, i .4,„*. ' • . . . ....: 22 .ch ,( ''''''' --'— /......? .' ' .:.,......, a / . .=_,.. I er 1 . 3 11;743* :::::::K=3: i vitiNitt YAP ,..... 4*"''' ..,. II , i 4". 41‘./ ,,,..,..7 KI ) - OWNER 1 ____4,..° • -:-.-,--, M.., + Z!.-:,:t:r,T - I p .. manyucto_ PROJECT NOTES il 1 4 4' ''`444' 1,:,,. e,,,....., . , , 7: LZ.,.•:47.. ir;.;=-- ,,, . c. ., ---'-T.:.:.--:i`_-1"* 0 ii , i 0 / I) • : . / II i_—___.I t _ _ 1 ..._ I i ,Z! .4.; .1 .A'. 1 i . ... . ... ;.1=7....,„ /f40,,,, -- ii, , -- 1 ... Enz / N , , ,,.....—„,I., ,, .; , .0 ,;„1 ..;., =F.,— : ....: °-1,,,,-0,,AyL. -,7"- —., C. D H AN'$ I ' 1",.:T' lk --7 Ng., # •\, ' ' ROSA, ---P iNeTcwilli ,iN 1 - ZONING LEGER cREFT_ONDC X ,.4...,. .. _ ,... \ \ I ..„. . :4.,.. ., ', ...,. 5\,......... II g 1 .• 1'17:1 rrz.- " . . NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL YAP INN.. C+ ..."` "°•'. A _....._ I Ilitapal Enseneoleg,CRC -....,,. = A CITY OF klICROTEL NH •3333. I ,. ' •,== '."-C1 —---.........--= _,..°R iF.7.7r. -:•,•A•''••-••''''''''''''.7- NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL NAP A•A -5 • J I T z{ Ex r■ - EX It WAWA J__ _ , -e----r 1 i I ,t I �y WY s. DK.SR11H - I b-, 1 1 I NEW 1'PVC SR SAS VALVE d \`4��`,pI S770x(N.S.NE) I ````````'� I W/Y.H.�r 1 SEWER TORCEMAIN EX.-FORD-MAIN aRE OWNED 1 �� A. EK�SEWER EAS�ENi - --�Y or a RENTON EX.It WATER 1' _____ TO BE REVISED 10'WDE SEWER EASEMENT RECORDING,No.7508200650, I 4- yL._I _ J svwunuls vans n1 __ 75 5�- EX 4'PVC SEWER ‘ EX.1Y SEWER "IOSfl! F,Y�2' H ■ ., 1 1 "'�-�AE110,•E EX SAN. MOM——— _ -(r I4 -J SEMFR RAMAN1.11211"11 EX SSMH 1 1 EX SSW / "" / RIRE SPRINKLER RNI 48.53 ♦ t 1 RIM 4959 " / RISER W/DDCVA If 77.76((N,S) / 4 I.E.37.57(N,S,E) I 6'PUMPER E 77.76(NW) I �E i I / 5 SAN.SEWER♦IN 8'SPRINKLER j 4:4�'� 1 W3W3 5 $uNE s SAN.SEWER 0 1F /I I ♦ � R-42fl1V e. aq PI ,y 2'WATER SERVICE 5 C.O.7' T-16.2Y, E 40.61 1'wAIER METER. E 78.21 1 AND 1'IRRIGATION DEDUCT Fi 430 I METER W/BACKFLOW PRETENTER i I II I t i ri, -: . I ma j y 74 It, i 30 — — 21' FIRE HYDRANT 7J _ ...-1 In • �I •- - - - - W 5 1 1.. S� Mj ♦ W 11'WATER W !+I W 12'WATER IA/♦ • .! . lAN mi illi 0 il 1 I IW• +_ PL,APERZONNEDID ——— —— = _ j -.2 :I ----........... _____—--, _-......,---- . / f, Mo.os W3o•E F '. ._..— _ — ' I "� � 11111111111110111111111111011till.. . '_, � / / ill _ — _ _ - -A • _ _ _W _osYy"A, ?.I 400' l1IIiii1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIII '-- I /.. --- — \)\- EXFJi� �\ '- EX SEWER Au. __-. -.-- - III STAINN - \\i , LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD T • APO R`I T T Ii e ii- vol „03,5 Z • +� .,,. REI J086 96100 G�m�p®vt Englinesen J9 On© ..�. >�' .._10 ".N.. ;1, .„ AM CITY OF : M'6/11/97 °�P.A.D. ' MICROIEL INN CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL .,� ` + RENTON J.A.K. e�J.B.R. I�' ® Plannin�/Builtling/Pu61ic works Dept. C5 N0. REVISION BY DATE APPR ,R...,"..,...,,„„.,/y,,p 7�„e,,,,ram,7,„._„m,, ..w •� w. ' Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator WATER & SEWER PLAN 5 5 2- T � y-_f l� �_ 4 --- . x soon ' . r \ ¢p IEX.SOW6- \ 1 J ' p i I Y IiE.J8.73 R EX C.B.-� I -- .'-'''Ell 5006 9 ' -.___� ` .�`_ IT 4377 11'CNP NE l ITE 461EX a EX CB. EX CB. - it 4422 8'P\C Nw I k\ \, \ • \•e L T iLE.;37l2 CNPW a .� .". .�TE J8.78 ♦'\ \ '.'6E.44.12 12'CIIP E - 1 L J1 EX GAS VANE { I.E.J5.381YCMP N. 7 \ I.E�44�03 12'CMP S / g _ \ \ : :I _2,0v.._.0,_-+- _ ''EX.12'WATER {_.y_ ____may i__ J • VIRlitil RIM 35.5 YI - .. 11 IE 33.5 �• 12'CURB CUT V_patH / 42.9 \ 1 N..fr ` '.L ROOF ORNN CONNECTION 6'MN.FLOW .1 RIM 42 \\ I� 1 12.9 DEP1M / TRENCH DRAIN CONNECON710N;' IAIN E 41.Oi __,r, - .l21�• �-�T I eI W/GRATE , 100 I,/42.8 i f I� � _._ _ _ RIM 42.60_ ( ) /29 ' \ J 1 R.428.10' NEW CURB.GUTTER,MID 2Lr25'RY'01064 F .� L=32.52' SIDEWALK POI S % T=16JY OE REN10N 91D$ __ DEPTH OEIENTION __ __ , VAULT W/,CONIR(X • 42.5, /�r 1 �, �� 3, r I=_..I'AN CONNECTIN(TIP) STRUCTURE I a 4 4'.0 4T.0 I / 1 MATCH E%. CB `_. �, 13. , REI 40 J CB' LOT 4• CES) E 327 - -_. A 1i CURB UNE RN 118 CB ...�+ _ /1.4 Jq 3 _ CJGDE AT rn 11 RIM 35.0 y,� 41_6 n4e ` w ,' ' J IE 33.2 I�T..TA A MIPII 5� v { 11.8 Ili' DDN,ROL= Is o 19x \ , R�� STRUCTURE: 1� .4 OA R 4L5 S . I I I .A. \ J 5 �" --___ - AIE .0 _ - A\ 5 I /=no'�-_ &�-- v _0 ,-D . r I B EX C.B. _ MAltl1 - ___ .. Fk GRADE 1 �:i — sio — 7 II mEy 'orAN �1-- 3 — ' e aEmuDB Kw OUTLET -- AT FACE a RocXeRr -=--- �ATEA�KoW Rr LE.4677 8 CMP N u.oIE CRAM "I 3'ND.2 BRPA55 CON RCL E 26.0 (0011D OVERRDII) S1RUC71NF FROwOE RW RAP AT WHET - - % - r I ! — — 4E zslt E, h1'sr.; • i 7//�// I it+i IIII fh IIIIII'A I�I���IIII����I�i_" _ _ ,: _ - y IIIIi .'li 1111111111 t II I — z _ � ,,,,,,,,,..1 I Aar •, �� �� ������III�� ; ��} ���� iliiiiiiiiiiilm• _ -- -- ,«'� i S ORM w STRU ' _ _ 4. - .... : i ..? .. _......_. ,. .ram• . . �. �� \__` I f \7 - __ , , s/ EA10E WASHINGTON BLVD {' `A) r // EX CB X I.E.24.19 - • _ I.E.30.97 _ � \ A S _ wC - IE 267812•CNP EIEV 2632 TO qRi �/ \� / FULL OF SEDIMENT "� / �7 f two. ,,,w.,E I RO JOON 96100 . smalls mat. _ Gym ®P4 En �Pil®®Pini {Inc r=20, °"' CITY OF no.�,�/11i97 rR9 \ RENTON NICROTEL INN m.o P.A.D. - CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL a.! R . J.A.K. . I °®J.B.R. ••^u'..I ® Plonnin9/BuiIdinq�Public Works Oep[. C� REVISDN = APPR „„r„w,,,,.,�,,,�,,,,r„7,,,,,,r,�,�„�„�n„ ,,.r �,�.., Gragg Zimmerman P.E.,AAministra[or STORM & GRADING PLAN -^ 4' s Po�W 0 II S W C W 07 P W F g/ ABS r • R OM ,p . `. ® e® e 9 ii FMM1 fIll=L n—�- —a I- 1 r�l r—1 [ L 9 9 9 9 MEN ® IIIIIIIII® •e1Mil e '1di g VENDING- IC . i t../ . �L ,. t.� . RAM111l I• l 1.I.Ir=�I n .,o ! (4 a,i 1 ypa� CORRIDOR MA' LOE• E CORRIDOR I.r,• .. CORRIDOR E 10 'noel AEG. ' DM I3el Ifs 0 r l lml fmA.l ® and �3 1 sael OJ Lam'�T��1 lam'�J—t�l ell l���1 L�-ililf — e e e * e e e ® e e e `— h-13 e ®.Ji 0 Si I i -i •/ 7111190 Ir LS V'0 PLAN — euu. .a a v i ®€b-- t I enI rimer I 0 1oJHAI L. =m Iia I 2-I - om II. :111 o �, o r< ® I ' .; , om l'' NMI 0 IC 1 ® I DE 17 1, I > ® I go al �O, go I. i� ° 1 ]A o i. I I go 20 Im I. o I r k I liko" E. IL> 0 , � I �, DI I. 1.• 0 0 0 ® I - HI I'•> 11 I o t 1 M- Do i �- =i. • I o I • " _ ,rei _ IA •EM AI Iiii e � ig ,v -Aiiiiipilliplimoilimi k i s 'l-"-Las tI-"ta tl-..sc it--•ao IC�©TEL �N �ESYEraM STEEL 1 I IJ 116 ROOM 1[144 II�OYI'R3'L3R1V� a THREE 6TORv I I R13d1�I,WAgllNU1IUN SEATl1L WASEI NGTON 98188 1•SHAPE f>I 7 4I FLOOR PLAN ___ IH.oo->6ne u, f v� s !hi N. ® �� e te : 4e V, . Im e1 I 1 14 • M ° te4 E=' �> ill e/- o E Y 1°7 '1—, JreZ—11112 =4# i _O i_ � NiI O i,1;. — �eA r 0 ' 1} a:Ia:+e qa .. j l 0 - o lam, e. ^ r 114 ]M . e e �l e 1 0 ' �-'A en MII is Og gm� O : f_ n N.irl L m 1ik �'O'� 6i:m im .]M O t tr ill II; _ m 1ji M -orI = o •° I� A; oil i om 1I, IIYN In]°TL�L� •EN VV ES tl IEF I�'9 R ll IEELpm na ROOM KM II�OSIHY DRiIVB THREE STORY - I IHNIICN WA ➢mod SEAT Ipj WASHI GTON 98188 . 'I' SHAPE SECOND FLOOR PLAN ORME PIE COO r - =' 4'. /Cn 8 M W rip .,.1 r o .,. -.> ,. �rLft�r•L��1 ��Lf�� ��[ ;r-�^1•l �Lf�'L.., 11111�c��J = — �I AIN Nmai NCE *�. Lr _ 0 1 _ DOUBLE ` ' Hum R. �� ACCES. BM roam�1 TAIR '1' '1' '1' .1. '1' 7I' 'IY '6P 'B 7' —_— ¢ 10 m I�1 I3.I ® ® ® Ru I=„1 In,I Inal I,,,I 1111111 7` •Ir 'H' '111' •11• 111117 I ® I227I ® G+ NI I \ 11 fie' �' n II�� �. Wi. —W 1 .� ® VENDING • IT p O O O O O 6 O O O I ® ilsO 6 O O . . O O- O . O e e p O �o . —O O e O E 0 CORRIDOR •IIY_ CORRIDOR p c,=v. o 0 o a O"A 0 w c� a o,U O o �� �. O O _•Oo. o O oDy; ISO O I-11I�e Wire- oin o 1,1eo o�klileoAO o O-_�! o • �O o a c =mauo o o V �.�•BE i01 A• .A. .A. .A. .A. .A. .A. .A. .A. .A. .A. .A. .A. .A. .A. .A. A. 1 !IKE um 12J.I zoe ® 1210I I:10 I ® liri MO EDI EU EU I M I 11221 I u1 I ® I ve I I m I C Cry 9 9 9 9 9 9 ® 9 ® 9 �l 9 ^ 9 ® 9 9 � w. l l I SECOND FLOOR PUN _ - Y�Lb L0•.1'-0• _dR I - _ Yu e s 0,- 0 C W w nW_ K '_ • .Miar4,70r. r.t., dFE*EV".4I-, -13 ek IfIN",al/TE B- • ri Q I A ELECTRIC MECH. -- I-r -, N 1� � '�.Rw � 1 121 I It31aI n4. DRYER G O p DOUR. SINGLE Z ENCL o u ACC ES; 'M ACCES. NM 4I, 12a SrAI ENfRr Rn SI .R, p. .B. .R. .8. .R�. 'SI' ,R I. .81' 1ix a1] LJ I EU EH n I ion 1 ® I till I ® ® I- • IAU NORY` (61 I 173 e - O Q _ ® °EUUIP. LEY 0-- V/ ikA Flo a •e � °fi Ail liw e a o e v _ O GORR100R NISEX - C�� 0 FEL. Ilm.l GII.LT Bqy b . Ell 8 ENTRY° o C 71 O lCq --- 7 e (•7�- °IC•7 ] °I'✓[1• S•1 C' �3: a lac Awns Rp1 ® _. I l'v�o of live e g,°o�� � o- La t e ff,WCP : o I - ;�-� 4 f�2' i CEE_ 00K- L069Y = III ' 0 i i 5 _ G 0R �.A. .A. .A, .A. .�. 'A. .A. 'A' 'A� .A. DVS t7D) II A NI ��= IG, 11441 IDE ® tI INAI me IIIzI Ilu1 ® ILM - 1j A 11r1 e 9 9 9 w 9 p EK I I.A ,,,,=fl i fl- wrmIXIN wwARY I . O IQ li MST�T P64�®r� PLAN F_ - - ecxE rx-i'.m — _ da I _ --_-_ a W" - g o r 1, sms WN .-41 it 7 — r — ~ et ii, F. _,, �t�. �1 r 1' . . . . JAL 1 J U 1 L N w EELGIRIC NIGH. 8 DRYER IID O aMINny =E R LJ1 nnn I'� RI re LAUNDRY ,y l l u, = P � - ERUI � : -A i® = UR.' qui : °41i'Iooz i I c., • • CS mi : f-p — — UNISEX EY - CORRIDOR NI} DBBYfl �� dli x I 17" a,[0-, 71.0 elp,ithipi. U; i� ° °[s ,vi • v- I° ENTRY ip tiro Ai!miro Arg. CM F .., au 3 RO I LOBBY A DES ® I I .A. .IA' .A. .A. .A. �■ ani , i, Esti . - IIIK I OFFICE ' u m.. Nei I 9 40 9 9 9 — ® nb _ e ®® ®®, i .romii L —1 a ! 0 i tg PIT Ir Wfa PLAN ,CALF.II?.f-P 41A MI ¢ II I ,( 1 i' . EX 40f1lE-_w- EX CZ-\ I iE.38.73 \_ `� 7 -\ EX SDUX SONHI I I �;E.50.06 j ✓ _ EX C.B. ' S ( EX CO-"' ----,,I. 44.22 8?POLPNW I.E.N.tl� LE 43.77 '19� \ Q. I lE 43371YCYP N EX CAS VALVE \'__- '\ LE.38.78 �� fit..`./ T.E 47.87 -7-- _. F -- E 4331112'CW W. 9 JE.35,391YCMP N. ; N. Y.E.N.12 1YDIP E. / I ,I ��w \ .\ \ I.E.�N,03 12'CMP S. a'" ^ - I • I / I \ �� �� ( n-reran • I II 'I RUM EX VECETA7KI1 R.y257 g I T.1e.27 / -- ------," ---'.--\t(lAtirari.3 I f•".•.A.,. ...„6...\ A' F,/ / /' /jC. ,/,‘ / v/41,41, wiiipp-. 2`/ REMOVE EX KOETAVON.. r t // _ / ��'� UP TO 25'CREEK SUTRA UNE Pa %./ / ` - // ' �.' �'k ; i 'i / /r III II l ,/' Tom ' / _ _- Aprir T �r� - -z ��� �� //,-7: * - 2/ a LLLLLL////// _ _- L 1 • _ r -Y __ \. - >� - 1E.46.77 8 COP N. //% __ ____ ____ _� _ 2Y I IIII111111110111111111111111111 ���e -f .— � *- ,ill III�� 111111111111 - _ EX 24'STORM - - _____-' __ At EX CON � ^- t' - __. _........L./,%_ ___ _- �m�.�- _ - _ / _— sill 11 _ ___ i. 1 / l '• ( 1 \ r _ _ -- -- `i' — 1 /' • w�9#NC1QN BLw 'I EX C.B. M1/ LE 2419-__ R ( 1./ •\ I T.E.3O .97 � I \\ \ '- / 'd I.E.28.78 12'CNP ELEV 28.32 TO DIRT / / FULL CE SEDIMENT � %I I' / ,p PON AI��r_____ / / T �e z 4 - .raam. wax m JOBI 96100 �mp®P4 EP�1gBW®®PBngj9 One e� 4� CITY OF P 6/„/97 »m P.A.O. MICROTEL INN CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL J.A.K. ` �+ RENTON NO. REVISION BY DATE APPR om J.B.R. ® PIonnm�Builtling/Pu01ic Works Dept. ..C2 ....., .,..«/.,.,a/... ..�,,-w m. �' G eyyZimmermanP.E.. A°m 's" LAND CLEARING & TREE CUTTING PLAN ' 5 minimmiminsis s— 1 '-,-.,v,:. ....:o,..,...r a1,l1.l1m1v4 1111:1,111P-1V33I:'0 4I-=2.r1=‘1--,Wwii.tC._,,:::„•.;,r:.4 1 f...4....1"1.,...".M-;.T , rRiiar!a,wr_._...•,14--I-,k.T...-..-.:•,.......-....-....-._...............—...,•-.•..-•,•-.-....•,j•i....•-.••"•••• i,ro.—- 1 I T.711.1S...02.111.G;331.ES1,0S..2h.11.:4." _ - _ Naoeu►re. .12 "...2..1. C) ......— . ----- t;,%.4'. '\1 t ea .�i a ._ __ i• ; ii I " ,I 00000 0o u000$000Ooeo a ^.1000�y oeoL ^ PA P ,,. ..w=- - - - p } 1 f . C.,--4, ' %V'u..''i: .'''0/ 6..046:,6‘4 ^0.-•:.*.`,..•.e., -„,44: , , __ \-- .... .. , . i" 2 , •".. t - , II• i" Q C T ,, ,, ,.., -,,ft CI co ...,„.No g Imo. nun* i •i 'ao...nw.00ew.. '.--- .\ o r ••__. ._____.. ,,,., ,, __ , . , __L.__ ... . . _ ,,,,,..„, „..„ __...._ „„,....,i,„,„ ____ , ............_ . .....______ , I __ __ __ ____._ ... -..... .. . i ______-- .... .. „ , -�" LAKE WASIpNC+70 a,Peo� eoT.Nrx/DPna+NAFE G.a corolTKNSBTNKS awEE GRG.ncoStn\ I I TIES O. ARS1INb INEDO COMPACT.'] >GAL. e.xw*.A E,.oc ! e .NrMG.>Tw,PT/C T suN \F::2�: x.eoNx cDLOR 1 ow ■ Aces C CINAT v ey.le PT CO00 AZALEA-a].ET PING .-w e4cCN*,•n.GC. 1 d44444044440J VINE MAPLE OECIONO.WLEA ([ �i=�1 OCZNEA>TER D4YlRI aRK OE.Wn-, CONT. OG — K��L ! SEAImEIE.T CTOlASTER ALER EaIRM'OCTO>ER GLORY'/ ]•CAL 04 5OIi.cc. 0 OERSERIS TAFeE110•I1'ATRoglpllEA/ ]CNN.. S,ST.ONT.S-VI IT.OG euw.PUS EOR,VE:'A ENTE0 VAR EGATA'/ t•PT.CCTV.IV CC. 1� CCTCCER GLOB,RED MAPLE RED LEAP GAMERIG T I, �' j WSrtlR CIEEPfw MINI!a LIWIDAI'1DAR errouv LW/ S•CA.. Fe OPT AL E 0 CAMELLIA NTOLIO'SGA../IN11 GA .'/ 2 GAL DADICO T.E-1//IT.CC. j>' • I. .p CALYCPODEb nON,I ' A•pars C ...OD. a OLLEETGII. SNISNI GAGE.CA'•ELLIA .-y�O Odr. .E ® c.Wt'IAECYPANIS ODMA CLICOIDON O4UN EEDE dna T. I SD AREA!SEE NOTES, Ea N/]jt] PIRA Nlf/\M 0EINSPRAv PALE C•P�ESS M.e NM 1,20. 11612 A,STWAN SLACK PS. 14' OVORG5CALLEPVANA'CAANTIOLSEN/ WO.CA.C/V lO TT.OC 0 EJP+TWOJAPONICA'',RR PR ES9 MO/E95i :GAL. e4GO10.3 PT.00 NVRG S N!w PRNCESS EGTh,LS I.S SOACTOR TO OVENS OONOC OIANTITIES SPED ON P T AN N MALAMWAL 1MANGM-AR PATTER!AT NM SPACING LIVED beet v 0 NA,ONA DO•ESTICA CP,PSC,A'r 5 GAL. NeC0NT.A PT.CC. ]IEPER TO CINL ENGINEERING PLAN POR E.ASPENTS.PRIVATE/--LIC COMPACT NEANIIlT SA-MOO ROADS AND 4TILI'E5. APS.L.N ENAR..MT.veRKN/ 5 GAL S4C0M-l PT.OG l-1e9tw TO CINL p,Gn.[1uT,4 PLAN FOR pPpf,ATpN ON RCNG O LN]EL A.DMEWIPM 6 PLANTING BEDS ON Nob PLAN FOR RF)ERENCE PIT. (C PIEIE]TO CINL DoNEERNG PLANS TM GTE DIMENSIPI 3TArz P 0' IOODODCO.lYE DIAM030/ .-.• OM/CONT. G AGE.EM,I0NT-A PT.O SLI!DUMP.204000004DRON >ISTD®nr m 100000E01W4 P!,'/ S-.• SM!/OON,.A PT.CC PAN gJ0OODlMRON ES E e NINA.AM EOE01GODIV S GAL E.E.CONT.4-4]IT.OC VW WE 1110 e1.]Eauoo NauRa]+ II01.ED1.w um "mno 97-.317 1 11 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIjjIIIIII!IIII 1 IL iii 11° HE 01: 1 p 111 0'1€€ 0 1:; Ia fl ' 0 0 q I i n III 111111111 ,i1 i, 1 ` 1 I /, 1 m illrH.1111115 / m 0€€€ 0 i111 p;s1s I� o® o® o iii: DE OM o o I m ■ z it Sink ae:i fl e2 ° Olt' o o o ! 0 € o 0© r�— a I 1111 A la II::: _ _ _ .... liiii J.,,,� �Y 'milli' iiii I DE o ::.111. :Hill IIII I r :�inippii( 0® o® �]__:€ I!1€ 1 j��1€€iijIil r �i1 II '�€:r1� IIII'', IIIIWIllllj/ I in ,. 110... IIh 1i,i a ::°o, :i,,i i y o® A 0111� �I u® p® u® m I'1I. 1911,co iii,i ,ill / ° 1 MO I O a 1111!11111p11 I IIP r ' ' IR 1 "1,,1, -1 U_ rI® f CI ill ii:: I :> v,„1:. --- a 1 o �; I I I�di 4, ,,, ,, L, 1 1,i.I u 1 _1 . 1 la la DM M D / ,. . . 1- I I—_J—.I iI 1 _ i 11 IV1 niQwnN><ICRIT L DM WESTERN STEEL 1150.00M 1111 1 r 1044 QTIDUSI'K➢'L7RIIVH ^THREE STORY RENIC WASHING ON WATTLE,WASHINOTON WM ehr :HTF i 1 'II EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS CFPFEE>a Coe 11,1214 PLANTING NOTES IRRIGATION NOTES rya eseteg ewu.los P d w b.gad4iwwl ..n.alb En....s.d aeu .Ala Fab ro LAW Ad..PILL OF 1.10.1 W Ude A RALE'AurpuwiC wintry eR d nary dear wine•.,buss Pl. au.........•n..n Wn rn.n.1 w gas... IR.SATIW sneer. z� d ,l ne.pen.'a•mane...d�Pas.Age ran Ens. TRIAD ASSOCIATES The contractor.11.......ear any*ego 4 earning u. Nun,.a d WR gala'. v •au d 0 sp.wooawrR ...... repo••Pen W see at ran spar..w Pe bated T'••O•••'aw .wn...ppy art • L- -mar wnvetp da arty Pee es cow pear to...Ng ie.gs.res.....Ae,. .andoPst gall tars IMonnect of pan.••d.art b Sb1.w gwnYcv..Tea = • _ -a�a at wu bar R.�II.o 4 conformance . ]..g.erd.e T.ew.r4re..eg.. art -g•.e ....nrlwt..o vy Agrird.� IRRIGATION SCHEDULE -11 tine. I cesr Inure..Osman Marc]0-te•.se yst u •w.e.•roa•3 nee., reread and. e.Is.d Wet •cWaleur E. .tab'. b W R {fir M1WR.IfiT1lR RADR1 aril M1 Pen .ay.w ry paves an pay All requred fee Large and nee.grubs] sv.rem esT14 et r eM`a Pe von seer rota doll W.area..bnees.a bra..••w tiny •1®PRP-API-xor .1.14 .-U' D A] M '-ear' _a. Ise sane.ce Eon et*stood by war AAP. l u. ..beano os...rep..s.e•uw Pell bar Ew.acud..1.la.ey. a ISLO-WEST RA.. POP II 30 TYPICAL SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL •N NaIts by w Yeas.arc..to..pare.peg...d earn.w eo - "°'"��"•liven d.vpewe.wall. code..with 00 pion Moll P.••030000•J We Pea•r�ranu.vs do approves by sea.rep a ....pew w WOO-WCeT RAN.. arse WI . x NCI N SCALE •b•P.te�W.K e4aag of Pe.e4 tlnouBw.PIP corrode pare.,..• 400(1*.wn!bnn product seta aw peg..d ea For rarb 3 W00-me0R R2Yp1RD -maw 'SI 30 R ..rome a 4 rn..l s,•.bees Plan ewul.a•. 3 _ '�'CED'•Ea O 900: nn1RD .slwe..na 00 3.-95 ti . 3]] 3e (SI.,non the Wee.er oeb,rem or bvneeg�Or r•ul of tor. ....tan D 1800-225-55 11Ae23e92 20 .1 30 sr"Mw• ..0.c.vel arege.�ng p4ar nor•1u,B•mg.u.elety et me of a.t.g blare reedy to re�Bvdww�re ad gable.w V. 0.00-xxo-55 RAINSIRD x0' al 3e -Ras. arcane. .I 1 e _.......a...,...mg root.a -...tor.1......rare.aora.lN.11 one.•ppnub4 Pees.as Sun d ore neluu envaetd4•rJ•puroe or ae..erg O�0.elrO ��� D )ro ,...t buncoro of s ii,f ma WI P.e a. Gal WEp 2.10 Q RANT.NOTEb run -eN43 O.� Gan 000-13TI 3 I.Y 30 30 Z Y ou.lny A....aem b..Ww rw L p•cmg planting,ne.,KAM,*gee N cow e.stew. wee oce-nW RaINe I3' w >m ` W W A.G..w or a yae w Po r yg••b very Le ].Place Ord thoroopply�oof planing nee on ale..M terarg5Yy to nor clepin of 2 Eden C (r) 4 A'•: Par r - ..w.O co..IPA w art we Os.s.•w Deem real' 3.*grove to.w tar Y near or.11 Prue be.6-V3-1e r tnl.at•••u ree.lw Rnwei� �r ev >o y •Fail : .aoc.r...a• tars.war m'.'enly WO In tars listedtlary trade Mww� reed a are. N. ueuenm xie x O 2 0 1Ii1 • -•wear.Mon be appeal by..e..e•ppuw•. LL Mae 3 we•of Pen n.d aa,B b Fro tro•egg till.w �'�^�'n" v' 30 2 CC boll Ilkt I.ri 3. -LA labors b IaR 30 xN nN DIA.ROOTS. Ceardrte ste oarYre.osness u stab.appopreu NYgra.oboe..es moue a..mars.,rot.......... 2 TYPICAL CONIFEROUS TREE DETAIL L.10...0 PI..Pen OW.M.S.Tor.In and w.a de rs.. ,wge allo..g no war- Bare.w.e.1.w vasn'r. P yype-�-u RAaD1ro . e.R3 3d z eons Tastrg -Prig.gam Requ.r.Inu, ✓110e-I07-LA.34131R0 g' tax 30 NOT TO SCALE -Subet req•es(u.w 8111p4 of steeped wdeavailable.ped oo Of ava11able Pwenc TOW., CH' d Lab i.1.-S43Y.oretr approved w14 Mteg laboratory L Planing ins Seer 3 news Win..dyun pave and no. .WOO-IOO-LARANdRD Id 03S 30 x.beetled en areas, a art.belie SS...pavIrE are orbs PRODUCTS, L5Jdro.r05 ALL LAWS.CAD.TO OE ON 4•POP UP 0001ES.5lr..n LCADS TO OE ON 0'POP P 0001EA U NE... . are•ears.of 4'per w ybwrdag E3.055 T.v5E MEDIATEL1 AOJAC.T TO PA SO.STALLE 05LL OE CPIidPOP UP0001E6 - c -Peel.plaeu a•ewes..on..erg•. -Spay Murry canal linen Bad.at Penn ago to and r paean or nine C s erg• y -Co..ac.w Pen elan near.to, from plat.p•vrg and•..... IRRIGATION LEGEND `('��/„ nun Duly eOr tat far io.:1 or p1a�..a r•pr�e�in.A Tee a.Jo P4.nxg f�A' darer y y OiOPLQY P.1.8J1ER //x� cow ton All plant*Pen fAm.rarn w ore re1.w•ag ns4v.•.wrw.u• -Evuv.0 par pet w P.ear W cod w.r3g•. GATE VALVE �, erL e: ...WIN w by patent penes at penes uln 4BIIorn]I gam cob W,M- -5.t per PRE...REDUCES VALVE I. >W eaB ewe...w.ied upped,w W.row.. I g lIon con,3 pan a gallon can au 3 pan ead.ell.Pea a N boo' vlEorau n dra E mention.eN N erase aw Tully,eyw.remly MARIAL DRAM VALK,3TO CANSPION 100.LOCATE AT LOW POINTS Alan MN LINE .°n Flood Tl ear tee.rnPeo"nt lyegar4Y,env eI tfetr"te r". "� 2 3.b award 'y•opra.I.at oer�Pe y. Do rot p tare arc palm a.age s g'v�M 9ss • niRI aLrC r1AI LOCH IER y I I ro.avALw s. 4.Pte..Pe.a sg Pr.gu 7"" •w -M pyasa ram Ior bass•ppaaranu M w sew cne..I r111 Mtn 4 N,4lE LOCATION•aliN OWCR'S RE.PEbENrATIVE I 2 par•roe... . opruu level.Wateo.o weW'rg IlneHe Bares.h.M.Isg.. r r r dnasa4m Piny.w ewsyey reel.,but not roe.bow. S f1�I opp'pp to top. Y.Pion Ba•m6 aril Per.u NCI SiOI 0 ANON..CONTROL VALVE,RA.C11m Re EMU,03E PER PLAN �S � awe - P:AL •ppe4snri.•w.wn.to Varga Coray.et..v Wue•P uv1Bly I1t.plants W w M.o.. ®-_ 4'QUICK COUPLER VALVE.Rartl1RD 33 DOC.INST.LL ON TRIPLE SUNG 1 Y -love..rr.:tors. ti aw.vucd.. ppoarV •.Iran Pl.nyg. JOINT MR DETAIL - logo inan le 11•01111.10 IRlpp,spread.carp root b even.cent.to ANA.Earl.doss -Rstwe nn1d.ed Beds by roe..Op.L In Pau nANI.NE • Pell b epee.try Us ear.w.o,a.ut w at tan d our all utwa a.par bet•4. LATERAL L.INC CLAW]Eo,N]E AS PER SCHEDULE SELO., nC.I�_ -� Plane R.lw..eta.w W..a free L.at....d4t.ly P,..eaargaret L.e.e a d. __ SLEEVED,Tan.INSERT PIPE D.ALLow soALE Foot...Am WOG MGM-o WO a s - -Appy a accere•ro.urn u urew.a r.wa.ned u as ne peuw w 4 E LAMER ee t�3,Wvy , - .Rda...c.m ems ex. Ode LAN for•1l penes•w•f,alw.m su.M drdooppp war or• �l INDICATES NR.. I -On au no.pled v try Pan 301s Pl.ee�sa.w el sarlalR pan•.g err•Pew 4 LJ w.a: MT MIEN DIA ROOTDAu es`"'g uISOIO5Pew a`wOr`e"'g'OY'P'a"`g°I"t" "•1""'g ,n� yy, PIPE SIZING SCHEDULE �� at T - ,PPG]aa..es!eprwc..earn an.4vwlgr e es 4 _ TYPICAL DECIDUOUS TREE PLANTING 3-ray tope.en w.....by Seer*R eve ,t,a,a g••de b•11"^" •_ r ape Nor r0 SC4f Top.sus b•nee.........pion Pau.w -Tlbrw,g star wed.are w..✓e N4v..P...•..n u par w.I. in+ alas Q PIPE //�//�11. 6 F JJ//,� .p..Ion,Guar..a wens nee a-A (IA' �'/Q Prove mars,.e.we Oar .pip • ':N1 arm.wow not carer -Lev.an N.re.war nes,...t oars weary.t ...r.a. an .R r � nnow rem rood•ryrwR w cep..esressal to plant ges.Gwas paved are Glen a.Irg part.•w rulnw.oe bps•. wnb.nm LawN..nee. _ War e.w• r . •Pew Noll ewue Pe eor'e ropes .ew P'sI to otrp or •ybe•rtled are.. b0x7gco C sopanea orRprer..Pe Nue.. Wk..I O Mad Per canlem 4 w per..ILA Leone. M .N Bado wed Or b.tn. ale euleeby Pe Out Of Yea.Dept.or AB4u.w'•Guy Id Mar -n.a.ar.Rv paned Pell by Iqe begs..andapprovalby oar.. Inn Se.MoI1 be ren.Mon In suWre canners •4as'utve•..e sell be ter CO u my. y"M ]• -Upon sere request.fun.dpnuu copy d•eta.. -Meansv.c.d rear.penes Pen cern.el ewe eENISC ll ague by de ender are,.Pe.re.In or se. ben tasted by• ewes,...tug He. ]-N' COATI' �5]3 a or uppigra poet., reco...,...este0 cob a.wn Y Penn of ee.v.y w Un pens•slur �terattlen a no plan pace.etep the 4Py"g altar I COIF NET MO .yd.e bar dew n Ire.or Noes•rd • YES O M CCS - sre.ar m c.e a.and tti•Ivug ewdl.onnw Seep pen.* - ....... - c.N eared rear ag e.vee.qeL anti• A.plm '•Jarman• apply war assures a Nee*nary••recomm.a.by.awn. All plan e1 IMP Pe n teNr.g mane...gar non earn d Iwl sn3r- 97-317 Rape.all pan real 2Nd.reds est S.d...d.30...I ro.eg. L2.2 1S MI • 0 MOTEL v I v tt (CA-ZONE) ( /CWXsioERB IGUTTER • EX. TAVERN ! (CA-ZONE) I Ex.GASWLNE 6 5 I d -- ___ 20 SCREENING FENCE 1 ex�^,7'�U --—--—-- o ——' —- EX STREET NEW DRIVEWAY FURB� g N0P563'E--105.82' I 1 G / -- - - I -- - -n�waTEs_ -_-.. ..- - . ---t McDONALDS -r 5 CA-ZONE CRMRIENG RETE 5 5 3—STORY MOTEL s 6 �".-10' 24' ,5' 1.i6• 24 _. WALL,Tm rr ELEV.4.1.2. s4woNs I - I s0V- I5 / ._..ti .__ �z.42109 EMERGENCY ,4 u i 0 C 1 R•428.10' 0 -0 EVACUATION 2 II yQ ., •., t L 32.52' ASSISTANCE I _ _ [ I T 4 18.2Y AREA //''NEW CURB h Gu TIER HANDICAP STALL COMPACT STALL u I--. 8'.20'(m) - " �85'ai6'(TYP) / AND 5'SIDEWALK -I 1 SIREFT-$ f 7 7,--7" =T='� I `� - FRONTAGE VI • DENNY'S I� �_ �- 4d.j6.A'ek,R &I I ii W< Y LAWN k TREES a RESTAURANT I \FEEL srays ���/// c I V"� V 5 5' +/PER L/5 ww i (CA-ZONE) -T/ ' '� Uzi rr �, � �S r t tV //,0� :.._T w L 14 N �' y:. I 1 S 3°. STANDARD STALL I _ I i <I c " c c c n�' 0 � 9'a20'(TYP.)-- ``� Lce • g w / 2'4A%VEHICLE OVERHANG -�__.. -_— - r / .., I` _ FLUSN W/PORKINO >i / 25'41N BUFFER - • • C 7� LOi PAVING w / ROCKERY SHALL NOT INTERFERE _�H \ /I — WETLPNO EDGE wITH OVERHANG 25 41N BUffER — _ R� .----- WETLAND �' / PROJECT NOTES (OCE58'30� S !✓ 11,840 SOFT APPROX W9' STREAM EDGE 25'STREAM BUFFER-A ' 1,00' 4 a n CATEGORY 7 �wTySd • ZONING CA(COMMERCIAL R ERa) \ I Ih` -_/ - _ \ — LOT SIZE 1.80 ACRES.78,408 SF) E%S11KQ JC/ — TOTAL BUILDINFGLOORSIZE ARFA 3 FL00R5�1i,000=12,000 SF �LGHi4 ., BUILDING HEIGHT / 7JJ7J...f1CC[ EX fH —— 35'.-(50'ALLOWED) ' NEW CURB§GUTTER LOi COVERAGE IBS ` /AND 5'SIDEWALK .. .. .. SETBACKS NORTH=10'(NONE REO'D) ' .. - • SOUTH=128'(15'REVD) I - •,...' . EAST =10'(NONE REVD) WETLAND EDGE .i,. . ., •. .. ' .. NEST =102'(NONE REVD) • iX.CURB.GUT7ERJ - :: .•• •:,.. "" JF ::. '/ .. .•.,, •. LAKE 1N�,5HIN aCTON BLVO DARNING REQUIRED •' •' J�\\` 115 ROOMS 0 I PER ROOM =115 !SIDEWALK 2'VEHICLE OVERHANG - y>?a A _ 60TALPLOYEES.2 SIN IS/1 DPI OYEES=4 NEW STREET LIGHT. IB'SRN.STAI 119 STALLS 25'MIN. TYP 3 PLACES.USE SHORT 14'COMPACT STALL "d PARKING PAONDE(9 WETLAND BUFFER POLES TO REDUCE GLARE M C STANDARD(9'.20') =60 WALL SHILL NOTs. 1 WETLAND EWAY PND INTO W/ A HANDCOMPCAP((8 x 20')MIN.) =36 (30%) ONTO VEHICLE OVERHANG •,-r.� RECIPROCAL(FROM DENNY'S) =18 = NOTE_ v,l4.Y TOTAL =119 STALLS,0K. UNDISTURBED VERTICAL POURED-IN-PLACE Q NATNE PLANT A CURB(INSTEAD OF WHEEL STOPS) 1 WETLAND EDGES DELINEATED BY B TWELVE NTERK R P AKING TOT LANDSCAPING AREA =P]1 SF ROCKERY OR [REWIRES APPROVAL FOR DEVIATION ASSOCUTES,INC.,IAN-1996 (84;OF PARKING AREA 0 'KEYSTONE. FROM RENTDN STANDARDS] 2 WETLAND EDGES SURVEYED BY JOHN HARRICAN, OTHER IM'GSCAPING =4640 SF WALL JAN 1998 UNDISTURBED VEGETATED AREAS(PONO,BUFFER)=24,000 SF 2 TYP. WALL SECTION I�(� pp_� PSI JOB!96100 NA Gm�p®P4 EngOnsevIng, OIIU© ..n� N 1'=20' }f,}1 CITY OF 4/28/98 PA'0' MICROTEL INN V - CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL ...a.J.A.N �+ RENTON -...a.J.B.R. I u e.A _ i ;) ..,..M .., .,., lb �,, N ....� ®. ,, C3 SITE PLAN 3« 5 LOCATED IN THE SW 1/4 OF SECTION 29, T24N, R5E, W.M. RENTON, WASHINGTON LEGEND di ki:--• .., .410 .. DESCRIPTION NEW USING - AZ ' CORPORATE 7 Nt WIN JI EX 12'STRIA -SOX- Li ' e . STORM SEWER —D — A AN' :, i N. EX 8'SEWER ,A- SANITARY SEWER —s — 0 I .2 . .ip EX 2"WATER (.../ ,s •,, . : 1.. ./ d ''' WATER —W— ---..-•"•..,.X.i..1 , ta, 0 u , tile114,4 Co. ,.1 ,7-,.. 'IF I A- sZ• /op IT c,7 :•4" • . i : Ao . "119 _ ji .4, Ale ,7 ,, `.1 :5 CONC 4DEWALK I 1.-...I DEIENDCN POND I,'= 1 R- .t•;, , . -..AY ., . — , ,s---.-0 i . 1 . SPOT ELEVATKAS , r,,.ST.I'1:1•.• . , ._1' I O. 7''''' ., J., ci,„ ...1, • I. e 0 a.quo III 'V:• ; Eb i El- '' A CONTOURS —50— c * ',.....:, ..•'.'i . ' ,10.1›....-- SE A 76TH ST ltilill...:44 rEr4.14M '-114- ' ) ' •. 4". 1 '"" ' . " ". Stilirri STORM MANHOLE * @ / '"-.7o- 4-- - ,-. ,' ' I „d/ k _..i 7 7 • - '- ,-;w ,„ i, . . STORM CATCHEIASIN • CI VICINITY MAP . .0,,`, ---4„ 0 ,/,'• • e s ' 1111016M' ,... I •• - -s. t - 7,: , ,t —11-EM iliki,..z, i . .1.- - i'.: PE SANITARY SENER MANHOLE 0 o NTS NORTH - ._,.,n,.. • - P3,i,4141F-' ' WATER VALVE A4 A4-. 4M'.' „ ,tir. . : - '-;-'I II (7") 1-026-", • 11,.- • FIRE HYDRANT lir '0' Own.Terwmols :,, / 41150114e—ill, tr .- :-,---, ,t . • : • .,%, r.16- s ,i,o tr7,7,0,,,i___JIJ..._4- -, 1° • ,,r -,°,,, .:.- ELECTRIC VAULT [I 5 __:--..;- 4-,:-.,• i STREET UGHT HI( '.• MI , ,,,, D 0 g./ ,,-- „, :..) . 1 _ /LA - .E,.. 111.44.', ipt.N , „i - IJ UTIUTY PCLE -0- -0- OWNER ...-- ,:, • ,-;• r e e lc' ,......--.., : --)., 111in iui t ,...;,,i, ....- -,..... ......; , •sj, lit..,_; i • , 7' , FOUND CASE MON + THE HAMILTON COMPANY.LLC 3241 156TH A,,ENUE SE . ,...”' CONTACT NORIA HAMILTON C/ ,'41 N g . I 4 A -- 66 Yfl 165 :L>i 144- (206)641-1360 29.701/COS r .... ',.., \ \ % ...x.. eic„)„„ ,r 1 e..r change - • G,- , ...-2) • ,t, zsr.., \,,,,131 •,, , ABBREVIATIONS PROJECT NOTES 4 DEC BUILDING CORNER IN MANHOLE ZONING CA(COMMERCIAL ARTERIAL) .. i \ ' lel, soo.-47 i' ' loaltti ;-FA' . -V „„. C CCAPACT AU MECHANICAL JOINT LOT SIZE 180 ACRES(78,408 SF) / • .if. ,.^`-.%"'` .--. A I B17 I 1-1' • CB CATCH BASIN OVHD OVER/fAD BUILDING SIZE 14,000 SF a/- ' --- -{ - ... (!.! ''' CI CLASS Ft PROPERTY LITE TOTAL FLOOR AREA 3 FLOORS x 14,000=42,000 SF CO CLEAN OUT R RADIUS GUIDING HEIGHT 35'+/-(50'ALLOYED) g,bv.L.L.,1,,,. .- - — • D STORM DRAIN R/W RIGHT-HE-WAY LOT COVERAGE 18X ''-i 4290 Ac ft 0 id - , - ODOM DOUBLE DETECTOR CFECK VALVE SOFT SOJAAE SAMTARhET R SE1BACRS NORTH=10'(NONE REOD) 0 , .7,1-71)' . _ ,.. , Li-- , .. El 2 I ll 1 '.1 1-- , :. - DI MINE IRON DS DOINSPOUT DAN DRIVEWAY EL ELEVATION (SIC EASEMENT FD FOUNDATION DRAIN FOG FIRE DEPT CONNECTION S/N SIDEWALK TC - TOP OF CURB 7 - TEST PIT U N.0 - UN_ESS NOTED OTIERVISE PARKING REOUIRED EAST =IT'(NONE REQD) NEST =102'(NONE REDO) 115 ROOMS 0 I PER RS°'00MTII=128'(15'RE:D1)15 —, • Ail c 4 7.) . . S - SOUTH 5 EMPLOYEES A 2 STALI 5/1 FLIPI GOOFS=4 g III1M----' -'I FF FINISH FLOOR W - WEST TOTAL .118 STALLS ,, :::: _7! FHY FIRE HYDRANT E - EAST FL FLANGE JOINT ,, N - NORTH PARKING PROMDED . Mg HANDICAP NV - NORTHWEST STANDARD(9'A 20') =73 D. ' t ''Z';, • i IE INVERT ELEVAT ION SW - SOUTHIEST COMPACT(8.5'A IRON) =28 11 ' • 5 i k ..€),1 si.. . LF LINEAR FEET IC - PEND-EAST HANDICAP(8'.20') .5 1,, ........,re'' • . C. D. I-fl• ! AN'Sill! - , -iz - = MAW L/S LANOSCAP ING SE - SOUTICAST RECIPROCAL(ERN OFNNY'S) =13 TOTAL =119 STALLS,OK. V rn 4, ' f19 , ,,...•.....;-,•,/ E /,------, -_-_-_-:7 INTERIOR PARKING LOT LANDSCAPING AREA OTHER LANDSCAPING =2720 SF =4640 SF UNOSTURBED VEGETATED AREAS(POND.BUFFER)=24,000 SF i4494^ 0 TF16,. 1 u, 6,- 0 . .. g". N '",.......L,I...\,, ---" ,.". ' . I N GT• SHEET INDEX •:44 '--• •`"' N; -B- , ZONING LEGEND CI NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP C2 LAND CLEARING AND TREE CUTTING PLAN C3 SITE PLAN / ' IL 41,.•.... • Pa, ® CCRIIAEROAL ARTERIAL C4 STORM ANO GRADING PLAN C5 WATER AND SEWER PLAN , 0'77(ir b Fa tic)1 ZO -1 k 111 SE...54TH 0...ST.: • (I) MIER OFFICE RESIDENTIAL 114)5 -6, .---\ •' ' , .. hue.!AL vs OPli ,,„,, NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP _______ e RESIDENTIAL-10 DO/AC NORTI4 I: 1.,200 i REI JOBS 96100 Inupsul Englinceseng, Ono AS NOTED "11.2.t-42.1417:' igot _ CITY OF 6/H/97 - ....,p A D. MICROTEL INN I _ CONSULTING ENGINEENS/CIV,AND STRUCTURAL wax II\ Li RENTON ..“ 0.0.1./. J B R on.1—.!—:HAI MI2 I on n Inzg/B.:0 g/Pput Ic AWd0r,%1?eo,t, Cl V MINEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP•. •. • :•,- Ap=R ,,,„.„.., ..,Norm/Sid•101/4.1..m.Ila teriel/204-833-7711 0/440.414 "" 1' 5 7/13/2000 15: 44 4253138907 CREEKSIDE MGMT GROUP PAGE 02 I Denny's#1658 Renton, WA DRAWN BY AND MAIL TO: Rhonda J. Parish Flagstar Corporation 203 E. Main St. Spartanburg, SC 29319 CROSS EASEMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEED OF EASEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into on , 1997, by and among DENNY'S REALTY, INC., a California corporation ("Restaurant Owner"), DENNY'S, INC., a California corporation ("Restaurant Tenant") and THC EXIT SEVEN,^d/b/a •e.; Microtel Inn and Suites ("Hotel Owner"). r RECITALS l.LAC,. Pc WP t,JcrrotJ 1.-rb. L401431 4 1. Restaurant Owner is the owner of certain real property in King County, Washington described on attached Exhibit A, incorporated herein by reference ("Restaurant Property"). Restaurant Tenant is the tenant of the Restaurant Property under that certain lease dated as of December 29, 1989, as amended and restated July 12, 1990, between Denny's Realty, Inc., a Delaware corporation, as landlord and Denny's, Inc., a California corporation, as tenant. 2. Hotel Owner is the owner of adjacent real property described in attached Exhibit B incorporated herein by reference ("Hotel Property"). 3. The parties have agreed to establish certain easements in favor of each other over certain portions of their respective properties as set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ten and no/100s dollars ($10.00) and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are acknowledged by each party, Owner and Restaurant Owner agree as follows: 1. Hotel Owner hereby grants to Restaurant Owner and Restaurant Tenant a perpetual, non-exclusive easement for pedestrian and vehicular access, and parking on the driveways and parking areas of the Hotel Property from time to time. The foregoing easement is appurtenant to the Restaurant Property. 2. Restaurant Owner and Restaurant Tenant hereby grant to Hotel Owner a perpetual, non-exclusive easement for pedestrian and vehicular access, and parking on the driveways and parking areas of the Restaurant Property from time to time. The foregoing easement is appurtenant to the Hotel Property. 3. Hotel Owner agrees that the no food shall be served on the Hotel Property (including continental breakfast) and that the only food products available to the public on the Hotel Property shall be those found in vending machines. Esmt 1658 ui iJi LV VU JJ. ,, -rLJJ1JV JVI I,fCCCN .LLC I•IVI•II 17MUUr r--; t U.7 Denny's#1658 Renton, WA 4. Hotel Owner agrees to allow Restaurant Tenant to advertise its "to go" menu in the hotel rooms on the Hotel Property at Restaurant Owner's sole expense. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto the Hotel Owner and its successors in title to the Hotel Property and unto Restaurant Owner and Restaurant Tenant and their successors in title to the Restaurant Property. Hotel Owner and Restaurant Owner covenant that they have fee simple title to their Property described on Exhibits A and B, that they have the right to make this conveyance, and that they will warrant and defend the rights granted by this Agreement against the lawful claims of all persons. This instrument shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of Hotel Owner and Restaurant Owner and shall run with the Hotel Owner's Property and Restaurant Owner's Property. 5. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, each party shall remain solely responsible for all obligations related to its property, including taxes, assessments, maintenance, compliance with law, insurance, and third-party liability. Each party agrees to maintain its property subject to the easements created above in a manner which is timely and consistent with the operation of first-class commercial property soliciting the patronage of the general public. 6. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to be a gift or dedication of any portion of or interest in the property of either party, nor shall this Agreement create any rights in third parties, except for the successors in title to the parties. The owners reserve the right to close off portions of their property,mutual consent from time to time. a5n l� IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties as of the date first above written. RESTAURANT OWNER: DENNY' ' T , INC., a Delaware torpor• ,� ' y: ►�'tll B / kata ' •nnda J. Parish, Vice President Attest: J. Scott elto , Assistant Secretary -2- Y7/13/2000 15: 44 4253138907 CREEKSIDE MGMT GROUP PAGE 04 Denny's#1658 Renton, WA RESTAURANT TENANT: DENNY" t '•lifornia corporation i, I By: lj i..�./ i ' onda J: 'arish, Vi e President • I Attest: /Ce'', J. Scott lton, Assistant Secretary a HOTEL OWNER: L�•.,c-- I V„P e'' ' 0, THC EXIT SEVEN d/b/a Microtel Inn and V- Suites B . Its: 'NI ru a5v By: Its: -3- U7/13/2000 15:44 4253138907 CREEKSIDE MGMT GRUUP PAGE 05 Dcnny's 41658 Renton, WA STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) ) COUNTY OF SPARTANBURG ) I, ,4 u Cif,, 5/c�.4 ,-t a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that J. Scott Melton personally came before me this day and acknowledged that he is Assistant Secretary of DENNY'S REALTY, INC., a Delaware corporation and that by authority duly given and as the act of the corporation, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its Senior.Vice President sealed with its corporate seal and attested by him as its Assistant Secretary. WITNESS my hand and official stamp or seal, this 14 day of 0 I , 9' 4. �6' /vM otary Public My C mmision Expires: II I is GL,O O STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) ) COUNTY OF SPARTANBURG ) I, ,,,,,_�(4` s c/c,‘,G — , a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certifythat J. Scott Melton personally came before me this day and acknowledged that he is Assistant Secretary of DENNY'S, INC., a California corporation and that by authority duly given and as the act of the corporation, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its Senior Vice President sealed with its corporate seal and attested by him as its Assistant Secretary. WITNESS my hand and official stamp or seal, this day 199 . i otary Pub 1 7 My focus Expires: a o X -4- U7/13/2000 15: 44 4253138907 UKt.K5lllt MGMI uKUU1' mat bb Denny's#1658 Renton, WA STATE OF ) COUNTY OF I I,,O I, TI I4 l(l/l. a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certi that personally came before me this d y, and acknowledged that he is (Xof THC EXIT SEVEN, af/M1lled J,�/11 1( nd that by authority duly given s the act of the , the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its , sealed with its corporate seal and attested by him/her as its WITNESS my hand and official stamp or seal, this Ylday of 19 . otary Public .••....... .M, .�� sion Expires: f ih w : w • -5- 07/13/2000 15: 44 4253138907 CREEKSIDE MGN1T GROUP PAGE 07 • SCHEDULE "A" THAT PORTION OF TRACT 185, C. D. HILLMAN 'S LAKE WASHINGTON GARDEN OF EDEN ADDITION TO SEATTLE DIVISION NO. 3, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECCRDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 81, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: REOINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 185; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 56' 18" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE THEREOF. 367. 26 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88 DEGREES 47'17" WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT, 187 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 56' 18" WEST 4. 00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88 DEGREES 47' 17" WEST 40. 60 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1 (ALSO KNOWN AS SR-405 ) AS CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBERS 4075146 AND 5687940; THENCE NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY, ALONG SAID MARTIN, NORTH 23 DEGREES 49'27" EAST 313. 41 FEET; SOUTH 66 DEGREES 10'33" EAST 60 FEET; J NORTH 23 DEGREES 49 '27" EAST 113. 86 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 185, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE SOUTH MARGIN OF SOUTHEAST - 76TH STREET; THENCE SOUTH 8B DEGREES 47'17" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, 6. 16 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; (BEING KNOWN AS LOT 1, CITY OF RENTON LLA-015-82, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 83012590032 . , 9, 1658 07/13,2000 15: 44 4253138907 CREEKSIDE MGMT GROUP F'AGt ba ORDER NO. THE LAND RUPPP.RED TO IN `rU1S COMMITMENT IS SITUATED IN THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, COUNTY OF KING AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS PARCEL Ai THAT PORTION OF TRACT 184 , C.D. HILLMAN' S LAKE WASIEINGTON GARDEN OF EDEN ADDITION .TO '9EA±T E, DIVISION NO. 3 , ACCORDING TO THE PLAT ThEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS , PAGE 81, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING EASTERLY AND NORTPSRLY OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1 AS ESTABLISHED IN CONDEMNATION PROCEIDINGS IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. 613780 ; AND THAT PORTION OF TRACT 185 OF SAID PLAT LYING SOUTH OF A LINE DESCRIBED AS tOLLOW8 : COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 185; THENCE. SOUTH 00656' 18 " WEST 367 . 36 FEET ALONG TIlE PAST LINE OF SAID TRACT TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: THENCE NORTH 8 8°4 J' 1'7" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 187 . 00 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 00°56 ' 18° WEST 4 . 00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88 °47' 17* WEST TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT AND THE TERMINUS OF SAID DESCRIBED LINE; EXCEPT TH7i PORTION OF SAID TRACT 185 CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, FOR SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 2-A, BY DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 4075146 ; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID TRACT 185 CONVEYED TQ THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1, BY DEED RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 5687948} (ALSO KNOWN AS LOT 2, CITY OF RENTON LLA-015-82 , RECORDED UNDER KING COUNTY RECORDING NO. 8301259003... ) '• PARCEL B 71N EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS AS SET FORTH IN THAT CERTAIN STATUTORY WARRANTY DEED RECORDED IN KING COUNTY UNDER RECORDING NO. 8303140298 , RECORDS Or KING COUNTY) WASHINGTON AS CLARIFIED BY THAT CERTAIN CONFIRMATION AGREEMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 8310040742 AND AS ESTABLISHED BY INSTRUMENT' S RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NOS. 8606020945 AND 0606020946 . SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF RING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. A 3 ?)L(33 - ilSD-0 D TA, • t r c T �� • q t J M I ?G1ri Ac4 ?1H 1�11 I.Xf'I 5 47 C6EFq)•!;9P1e V CITY F RENTON wilL Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman July 20, 2000 DEV Mr. Brian R. Hamilton n'OFR PLAN The Hamilton Company ENTONNiNQ 5611 221 st Place SE JUL ? Issaquah, WA 98027 R 0 2�Q0 Re: Microtel Inn& Suites �CiV�� File No. LUA98-014,SA-H Dear Mr. Hamilton: This office has reviewed your request for an extension. Since conditions change rather rapidly, this office believes that the project should be completed in a timely fashion and will grant only a six (6) month extension of your existing permit. If this office can be of further assistance, please feel free to write. Sincerely, Fred J. Kau an Hearing Examiner FJK:mm cc: Jennifer Henning 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6515 C, This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer 07/12/2000 13: 40 4253139907 CREEKSIDE MGMT GROUP PAGE 01 ' The Hamilton Company, LLC 5611 221'PI 5E,Issaquah,WA 98027 (425)313-8905•fax:(425)313-8907 July 12, 2000 Mr. Fred Kaufman Hearing Examiner,City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton,WA 98055 SUBJECT: Microtel Inn& Suites:Project No. LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Mr.Examiner: Our records show that you approved our project on July 20, 1998. We understand that this approval is normally good for a two-year period. We also understand that you may, for good cause, grant a single two- year extension. It is our purpose at this writing to respectfully request such an extension. After opening and operating our Microtel Inn& Suites in Auburn for a period, we spent a fair amount of time working with our franchisor, USFS, Inc., to upgrade and improve some of the key design features of our proposed Microtel Inn& Suites in Renton. Working within the "footprint" approved by you, we feel were able to improve upon the hotel's prototypical layout. These delays coupled with the seasonal nature of hotel operations, therefore optimum opening dates, have caused us to wait longer than originally anticipated to proceed with the permitting process. We are confident this time delay has allowed us to produce a product better suited to our site, our guests, and the City. We are pleased with the current changes we are in the process of incorporating them into our plans and in turn, our permit application. Please grant us this extension to allow us the time necessary to submit the appropriate applications to move forward with this project. Our current goal is to develop, build and open our hotel within the next 12 months. Respectfully, Bri . Hamilton Managing Member The Hamilton Company, LLC THC—Exit Seven,LLC • •• ,. . CIT XJF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator June 21, 2000 THC-Exit Seven, LLC 3241 — 156th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98007 SUBJECT: Microtel Inn Project No. LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Dear Applicant: This letter is sent as a courtesy to advise you of the expiration period for the above subject Site Plan Approval. The City of Renton Hearing Examiner approved your project on July 20, 1998. This approval is normally good for a period of two years only. The Hearing Examiner may grant a single two-year extension for good cause. Such a request must be made in writing, however, prior to the approval of a Site Plan extension, the Hearing Examiner would require verification that the necessary parking modification has been approved. If you have not already done so, you must submit for your building permit or obtain an extension from the Hearing Examiner prior to July 20, 2000 or your Site Plan Approval will expire. Please feel free to contact me or Laureen Nicolay at (425) 430-7200, if you have any questions. Sincerely, `2` la Jennifer Toth Henning Principal Planner cc: Mr. Jeff Baker/Rupert Engineering, Inc. finalevpration 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 4CITY 1_ E' RENTON 0 Office of the City Attorney Jesse Tanner,Mayor Lawrence J.Warren MEMORANDUM c oF��C OpM r Ift E pGN To: Jennifer Toth Henning JUN �NN�Nc 16 From: Lawrence J. Warren, City Attorney 174%?. 2000 Date: June 15, 2000 e�FO Subject: Microtel Joint Use Parking Agreement I have reviewed the above-referenced document and the same is approved as to legal form. Lawrence J. arren LJW:as. cc: Jay Covington A8:174.47. Post Office Box 626 - 100 S. 2nd Street - Renton, Washington 98057 - (425)255-8678 , This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: June 13, 2000 TO: Larry Warren FROM: Jennifer Toth Henning SUBJECT: Microtel Joint Use Parking Agreement Microtel Inn is a 115-unit motel approved by the Hearing Examiner in 1998. The motel is required to have 119 parking spaces, but can provide only 101 stalls on-site. Denny's Restaurant abuts the motel property and shares an access drive from Lake Washington Boulevard. There are 64 parking stalls available at Denny's. Code requires that Denny's only provide 39 stalls to serve patrons of the restaurant. The applicant has negotiated a cross access easement with Denny's Restaurant for the additional 18 parking stalls. A shared parking analysis prepared by H. Lee & Associates indicates that Denny's has 25 excess parking stalls available for use by the motel. Please indicate if the attached Cross Fasement Agreement for parking is approved as to legal form and that it would be binding upon both parties of the agreement. Thank you. Document2\cor Denny's• • #1658 C;i; t_ '" J Renton, WA DRAWN BY AND MAIL TO: Rhonda J. Parish Flagstar Corporation 203 E. Main St. Spartanburg, SC 29319 CROSS EASEMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEED OF EASEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into on 1997, by and among DENNY'S REALTY, INC., a California corporation ("Restaurant Owner"), DENNY'S, INC., a California corporation ("Restaurant Tenant") and THC EXIT SEVEN, d/b/a Microtel Inn and Suites ("Hotel Owner"). RECITALS 1. Restaurant Owner is the owner of certain real property in King County, Washington described on attached Exhibit A, incorporated herein by reference ("Restaurant Property"). Restaurant Tenant is the tenant of the Restaurant Property under that certain lease dated as of December 29, 1989, as amended and restated July 12, 1990, between Denny's Realty, Inc., a Delaware corporation, as landlord and Denny's, Inc., a California corporation, as tenant. 2. Hotel Owner is the owner of adjacent real property described in attached Exhibit B, incorporated herein by reference ("Hotel Property"). 3. The parties have agreed to establish certain easements in favor of each other over certain portions of their respective properties as set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ten and no/100s dollars ($10.00) and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are acknowledged by each party, Owner and Restaurant Owner agree as follows: 1. Hotel Owner hereby grants to Restaurant Owner and Restaurant Tenant a perpetual, non-exclusive easement for pedestrian and vehicular access, and parking on the driveways and parking areas of the Hotel Property from time to time. The foregoing easement is appurtenant to the Restaurant Property. 2. Restaurant Owner and Restaurant Tenant hereby grant to Hotel Owner a perpetual, non-exclusive easement for pedestrian and vehicular access, and parking on the driveways and parking areas of the Restaurant Property from time to time. The foregoing easement is appurtenant to the Hotel Property. 3. Hotel Owner agrees that the no food shall be served on the Hotel Property (including continental breakfast) and that the only food products available to the public on the Hotel Property shall be those found in vending machines. Esmt 1658 Eenny's#1658 Renton, WA 4. Hotel Owner agrees to allow Restaurant Tenant to advertise its "to go" menu in the hotel rooms on the Hotel Property at Restaurant Owner's sole expense. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto the Hotel Owner and its successors in title to the Hotel Property and unto Restaurant Owner and Restaurant Tenant and their successors in title to the Restaurant Property. Hotel Owner and Restaurant Owner covenant that they have fee simple title to their Property described on Exhibits A and B, that they have the right to make this conveyance, and that they will warrant and defend the rights granted by this Agreement against the lawful claims of all persons. This instrument shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of Hotel Owner and Restaurant Owner and shall run with the Hotel Owner's Property and Restaurant Owner's Property. 5. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, each party shall remain solely responsible for all obligations related to its property, including taxes, assessments, maintenance, compliance with law, insurance, and third-party liability. Each party agrees to maintain its property subject to the easements created above in a manner which is timely and consistent with the operation of first-class commercial property soliciting the patronage of the general public. 6. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to be a gift or dedication of any portion of or interest in the property of either party, nor shall this Agreement create any rights in third parties, except for the successors in title to the parties. The owners reserve the right to close off portions of their property by mutual consent from time to time. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties as of the date first above written. RESTAURANT OWNER: DENNY'S REALTY, INC., a Delaware corporation By: Rhonda J. Parish, Vice President Attest: J. Scott Melton, Assistant Secretary -2- Denny's#1658 Renton,WA RESTAURANT TENANT: DENNY'S, INC., a California corporation By: Rhonda J. Parish, Vice President Attest: J. Scott Melton, Assistant Secretary HOTEL OWNER: THC EXIT SEVEN d/b/a Microtel Inn and Suites By: Its: By: Its: -3- Denny's#1658 Renton, WA STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) COUNTY OF SPARTANBURG ) I , a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that J. Scott Melton personally came before me this day and acknowledged that he is Assistant Secretary of DENNY'S REALTY, INC., a Delaware corporation and that by authority duly given and as the act of the corporation, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its Senior Vice President sealed with its corporate seal and attested by him as its Assistant Secretary. WITNESS my hand and official stamp or seal, this._ day of , 1997. Notary Public My Commission Expires: STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) COUNTY OF SPARTANBURG ) I , a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that J. Scott Melton personally came before me this day and acknowledged that he is Assistant Secretary of DENNY'S, INC., a California corporation and that by authority duly given and as the act of the corporation, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its Senior Vice President sealed with its corporate seal and attested by him as its Assistant Secretary. WITNESS my hand and official stamp or seal, this_day of , 1997. Notary Public My Commission Expires: -4- Denny's#1658 Renton, WA STATE OF ) COUNTY OF ) I , a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that personally came before me this day and acknowledged that he/she is of THC EXIT SEVEN, a and that by authority duly given and as the act of the , the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its , sealed with its corporate seal and attested by him/her as its WITNESS my hand and official stamp or seal, this_day of , 1997. Notary Public My Commission Expires: -5- -- SCHEDULE "A" THAT PORTION OF TRACT 185, C. D. HILLMAN 'S LAKE WASHINGTON GARDEN OF EDEN ADDITION TO SEATTLE DIVISION NO. 3, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 81, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 185; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 56'18" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE THEREOF. 367. 3,, FEET; THENCE NORTH 88 DEGREES 47'17" WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SA ) TRACT, 187 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 56'18" WEST 4. 00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88 DEGREES 47'17" WEST 40. 60 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1 (ALSO KNOWN AS SR-405 ) CCNVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBERS 4075146 AM) 5687948; i TFENCE NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY, ALONG SAID MARTIN. NORTH 23 DEGREES 49 ': " EAST 313. 41 FEET; SOUTH 66 DEGREES 10 '33" EAST 60 FEET; NORTH 23 DEGREES 49 '27" EAST 113. 86 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE SAID TRACT 185, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE SOUTH MARGIN OF SOUTHEAST 76TH STREET; THENCE SOUTH 88 DEGREES 47'17" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, 6. 16 FEET 3 TEE POINT OF BEGINNING; (BEING KNOWN AS LOT 1, CITY OF RENTON LLA-015-82, RECORDED UNDER FECORDING NUMBER 8301259003) . M. 1 )5 8 ._.__ ;Nell V ill9 . ee a p 7 ' iZ ' • /:31 I 1 ,1 fi t #tr " t. t ptr�x ' • 1 v.} ....:,-.0,,:!.....e. --8-1-N4,--0::,„.41..i.i.„Atf,,,_.A.„.,...„,,......„.. ,.::: ....., ....., ..,...140 , 1› ,-.. (ni M --"i I 1,44k 1 — • ' 44:44-171t.,14.*INNIPtti Wti y V_PARK AD N $' � 41 "E i �- *� '1a - g :i "6 brn # st to ." ti./,, I Y . yN7 Z } , :lrN MEADOW A 0 'Or � ;• B p - ' �' } :HAZELWWD LN . at ,,,.vim. ., . . •...�J0NE5— Vim® yE 14 :inv. ;._ € �A R/p 1 C `pptN R i:. P LN (� .Z m �, �� tN N�, - ---+---�'__t_-_ ` a `1 r ',. it N AV S3N0 I L I w 1 Im m I •.- -1;Iwo. 1 ti< l •_ _. -- .a/ 1O9TH 7 �`'AV SE ems. • N •=i uS� LINCCLN . 13_ 109TH PL I IOTN AV m I r /!pT LINCOLN AV) E 110TH AV -�a LAk i" Y •^o I t lTti c., S tiq` Fri N Cr)Z --1 .o A►i F rn O`er- _�_ to ~--t11-- --, 1H • F •• ��� i-�-� i11FHPLSEm r /, p,� S t1 12TH AV SE r _. �a N * 1 ' 1 I m m •• • y �/� rn I ..,_iI Z AV S E I SE Y m— NyZ�� . .. 112TH A • z h �, WASHINGTON• S • � �d I • 113TH = x ml `" N I m 1131H PLC E m 113TH EL SE E41/ -r • 4 �5 rn I :4.1 AV SE = JOT .-i� •D I. PL -yi titi' -v FS 114HPL SEF I �4; 114TH PL R, >c �i ffi- SF Z. �, 115TH AV SE "'i �'i 24= ram`' t 5rH m .1 -- m = 116TH Ni I AV II y ld 15i1 SE I A ��6TH AV gE �7, (n V) oo v+ r "N' r 11,.,, !�+ m, gTH h' m m m -1 `'. r-.� r b •L cF Z� m = AV E m I Lev lie H i st .8 _ ciTH A m _ J = 11JTH • z =AVE g� Y �N cn cn to -i 4n N6 m I 119TH q(r SF h'{ (n ,\�0T AV$E 1 1 •m I r:• '. 119 H 119 F ' _ cn ••%. PL E PL SE I ZOTH AV}'';5. -i ... 120TH : AV SE -Ii m 1d :� i OF... 121ST AV SE �� m �1t t is r = I m N A -i m PL SE R j4V 121STP SE m-1 y 1ST o A� S 5 SE — 122N — E S _ _ 3S oN4 : ,d�.8� v o 3sAvaNZLI,E `.., a 121sT N 3S r•", 3S nd aN t _ • 123RD y i. 2 y ' ��E m m tzi --,o,, SAT 1 anat K 4V SE V. 12gT I ,m1 .. = ' I23RD AVIS.E '' ~ aN '^ S AV N1� H....AV.... ISE : SF 125TH � Nl R- C SF I= •_ mac' 125TH AV SE - s N I �A� PV SE ���y7?JH 1 AV�s�3Sbtit\ 3ST v V v 3Sncnmiu dim m mfth �dy •125 H AV r SE_ H m Ito r m ?6(H SF Y -11``' , (�'� < L SE: W r, I m Al =� cn O •:r;.: CO ri ^V '� tas,,"' Er z:n cn [n m -1 v. �M r�o I26TH .kV'... _ :Cl -Nj N`PLE ti S rn - l—i fn Qp �^ -4 '�• z SE I,.". �'` Ny1tl,� Fc„nl �h�� 1 s�i li jtiAv`Ee � AV16 /t?f Li - 7' CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM DATE: June 13, 2000 TO: Microtel Inn File FROM: Jennifer Toth Henning SUBJECT: Microtel Inn Parking Issues (File No. LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF) The above-referenced land use application was approved on July 20, 1998 with a condition as follows that affected site layout particularly the configuration of parking. The condition states: "The applicant shall protect the drop-off along the western edge of the proposed parking area from accidental intrusion. This may take the form of a cantilevered walkway or deck extended over the wetland protected by a railing, or it may take the form of lowering the parking area to reduce the drop-off to an acceptable height. This office does not have sufficient information in the record to decide what would be a safe height, but would suggest building and construction codes would provide a frame of reference regarding the installation of decks, balconies and when railing are needed to protect such decks or balconies." As demonstrated in plans submitted on May 30, 2000,the retaining wall would be topped with a 3- 1/2 foot high fence, where the height of the wall exceeds four feet. The applicant would not be providing a cantilevered walkway, or deck, and the fence would protect pedestrians from falling into the wetland/stormwater area. The intent of the condition has been met, however, staff will recommend that the applicant be required to place a barrier(either a suitable fence or railing) along the length of the wall. Furthermore,the applicant will need to work with Plan Review and Building Staff to formulate an appropriate wall design, as the "keystone" wall proposed may not meet City requirements. Another condition imposed by the Hearing Examiner states: "The applicant receive (sic) full approval of its shared parking and modifications to the Parking and Loading Ordinance from the Administrator. If such approval is not forthcoming, the applicant shall reduce the size of the motel in order to accommodate all parking and all parking standards on the subject site." Through redesign of the site plan and parking areas, the applicant has eliminated the need to request a parking modification. Shared parking is proposed between the Denny's Restaurant and Microtel Inn. Code encourages shared parking and allows the Development Services Division to approve off-site parking and joint-use parking. A joint-use contract is required that must be approved by the Building Department and the City Attorney. Larry Warren reviewed and approved the Draft Cross Easement Agreement on June 15, 2000. The cross-easement agreement will need to be recorded prior to issuance of building permits. No other aspect of the parking lot triggers the need for a parking modification at this time. H:\DIVISION.S\DEVELOP.SER\DEV&PLAN.INGVTH\microtel memo to file.doc\cor CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: 06/10/00 TO: Gregg Zimmerman FROM: Jennifer Toth Henning SUBJECT: REVISED Parking Modification Request Microtel Inn,File No. LUA-98-014,SA-H, ECF) STAFF REPORT Summary of Request. Jeff Baker of Rupert Engineering, representing Microtel Inn, applied to the City in 1998 for Environmental Review and Site Plan Approval for a new motel in Northeast Renton. The Site Plan was approved by the Hearing Examiner in July 1998, subject to conditions. Those conditions required that the site plan be revised,to provide protection for pedestrians walking along the edge of a drop-off along the western edge of the parking lot. This condition required re-design of the site plan. In addition,the Examiner required that the applicant receive approval of its shared parking and parking modifications from the Adminstrator. If that seeking to deviate from the City's Parking and Loading Ordinance. The applicant is requesting the following: A) ,/ To be permitted to utilize joint-use parking with the abutting Denny's restaurant to provide 18 of the required 119 parking spaces for the 115-room motel. B) T be permitted to either exceed th um permitted percentage of mpac spa s on-site up to6%; or, averagq the pero tage of compact'. sp etween y's and Mierotel site. The applicant has requested to deviate from the Parking and Loading Ordinance via a letter submitted with the project application. In order to allow a modification from the requirements of the Parking and Loading Ordinance,the applicant must show that the proposal: a. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment;and b. Will not be injurious to other property(s)in the vicinity; and c. Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code; and d. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and e. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. The applicant has provided the City with a Shared Parking Analysis for Microtel Inn Hotel and Denny's Restaurant by H. Lee and Associates (dated March 23, 1998). Additional information regarding the existing parking counts for the Denny's Restaurant was requested by staff, and was received following the July 7th public hearing for the Microtel Inn motel. That information H:\DIVISION.S\DEVELOP.SER\DEV&PLAN.INGUTH\mcrtpk2.doc\cor consists of an analysis of existing parking stalls,that is,the number and size of existing parking stalls. BACKGROUND Project Description/Parking Requirements. Microtel Inn is a proposal for a 115-unit motel located at the corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard in northeast Renton. The subject site is vacant and is constrained by an existing stream and wetland area on the west In order to not interfere with the required wetland buffer and stream setback, and to accommodate site grades,the applicant has proposed to install a rockery generally in the center of the site, running north/south. The rockery would define the west edge of the parking lot. The difference in grade between the wetland area and the parking area varies with a maximum drop of 8 feet. Given minimum standards for 24-foot wide parking aisles, parking stall dimensions,the proposed building width, and the existing wetland and stream,the applicant is challenged in fitting the proposed development on the site. According to City Code,the proposed 115-room motel requires a total of 119 parking stalls. One stall is needed for each motel unit(115 parking stalls), and 2 additional stalls are required for each 3 employees. The applicant anticipates a total of 6 employees,therefore, 4 employee parking stalls would be required. The applicant is proposing to provide 101 parking stalls on site, and to share an additional 18 parking stalls with Denny's Restaurant,which abuts the subject site on the north. The two sites share an existing driveway. A draft parking easement and agreement between Denny's and Microtel Inn has been submitted with the project application. Joint use parking is generally encouraged within the City(Code Section 4-14-4:E.1). Joint use parking may be authorized for those uses which have dissimilar peak-hour demands during the non-peak hours of the lessor. In addition,the joint-use parking must be provided within 750 feet from the buildings or use areas it is intended to serve. A joint-use contract, covering a minimum of five years shall be approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department and by the City Attorney for such a parking arrangement to be allowed. The parking analysis provided by the applicant demonstrates the demand for the existing restaurant and the proposed motel. Staff have reviewed the study and find it acceptable. Following the public hearing,the applicant also provided a site plan documenting the existing parking at Denny's Restaurant, and a floor plan of the Denny's Restaurant which shows the seating area. The parking analysis estimates the peak parking demand by the Microtel to be 119 stalls and for Denny's parking demand is estimated to be 34 stalls. The restaurant requires one parking space for each 100 square feet of gross floor area. The gross floor area of the Denny's seating area is approximately 3,200 gross square feet, and the kitchen area is approximately 700 square feet,thus for the 3,900 g.s.f restaurant, 39 parking stalls are required. (Note: employee locker room/break room, restrooms, dish-washing area, storage rooms, and walk-in coolers were not included in the gross square footage calculation.) The Parking and Loading Ordinance requires that standard parking stalls be 9 feet wide by 20 feet long. Compact parking stalls must be 8-1/2 feet wide by 16 feet long. Compact stalls may account for use to 30%of the required parking or 40%of designated employee parking. The applicant has provoded . compact stalls on site, or 30of 101 stalls. Denny's has 22%of its parking as compact stalls, or 1 f 64 spaces. v `61.1) H:\DIVISION.S\DEVELOP.SER\DEV&PLAN.INGVTHFmcrtpk2.doc\cor ERC Consideration of Proposal. During their review of the proposal on June 9, 1998,the Environmental Review Committee instructed staff to add a"Note to the Applicant"in the staff report as follows: "The applicant will need to either: 1) demonstrate that sufficient parking is available on-site to meet City Code Requirements; or, 2) seek and successfully obtain a modification from the Parking and Loading standards to permit joint-use parking to meet required parking for both the proposed motel and restaurant; or, 3) revise the proposal such that the number of motel units proposed is reduced to match the available parking on the subject site. " Hearing Examiner's Site Plan Approval. The Hearing Examiner's Decision of July 20, 1998 approved the Microtel Inn site plan, subject to conditions. The decision requires as a Condition of Approval that: "The applicant shall receive full approval of its shared parking and modifications to the Parking and Loading Ordinance from the Administrator. If such approval is not forthcoming, the applicant shall reduce the size of the motel in order to accommodate all parking and all parking standards on the subject site." ANALYSIS A) Joint-Use Parking. City Code encourages joint-use parking where the uses have dissimilar peak-hour demands during the non-peak hours of the lessor. The applicant's study documents that the parking demand for the motel and restaurant varies based on the time of day or evening,but that there is a surplus of parking spaces available for either use throughout the day and evening. The restaurant has 64 parking spaces, and the motel would have 101 parking spaces for a total of 165 parking stalls. The parking study notes that,based on demand, a maximum of 138 parking spaces would be needed at any given time. Denny's has additional parking stalls that exceed the City's requirements for the restaurant, and that exceed both current and projected parking demand. According to Code,joint-us parking must be provided within 750 feet from the buildings or use areas it is intended to serve. The proposal would satisfy this requirement. Shared parking would be accessible from a common driveway approach. The request to utilize joint-use parking meets with the intent and purpose of Code. Microtel Inn would provide 101 parking stalls. The applicant lacks 18 parking stalls needed on the site for the proposal. The Denny's Restaurant has 164 seats and the seating area is 3,200 s.f. in size. According to the parking standard, 1 parking space is needed for each 100 square feet of gross floor area. Therefore, 32 parking stalls are needed based on the restaurant seating area. Another 7 spaces are needed for the kitchen area, for a total parking need for the restaurant of 39 parking stalls. Denny's has 64 parking stalls available on site to serve restaurant patrons. Since a maximum of 39 stalls are needed to comply with Code,the 25 excess parking stalls are available to share with the proposed Microtel Inn. And,the applicant has demonstrated through its parking demand study and documentation of existing and proposed(with motel)parking need that sufficient parking exists for the restaurant. Neither of the requested modifications from the Parking and Loading Ordinance would adversely impact off-site properties. The nearest off-site property is the Denny's restaurant and they have agreed to the joint-use of parking, recognizing it as a benefit to their operation. Part of the restrictions of the joint-use agreement keep Microtel from offering food service, thus encouraging customers of the motel to patronize surrounding restaurants. The applicant has not continued the detailed engineering and design following the issuance of the Hearing Examiner's Decision until the decision from the Administrator is issued with regard to the requested Parking Modification. The parking modification was submitted with the project H:\DI V I S ION.SIDE V ELOP.S ERODE V&PLAN.INGUTH\mcrtpk2.doc\cor VP' application,b was not forwarded to the Administrator at that time, as the site plan was being revised a hearing,and documentation of existing parking stalls for the Denny's site was not submitted until well after the hearing date. B) Exceed M: 'mum Percentage of Compact Stalls. Thirty-six(36)of the pFposed 101 parking stalls on ' - Microtel site are shown as compact stalls. This translatesio 35.6%of the stalls. Code limits c•i pact stalls to 30%of the required parking, or 40%of/designated employee parking. The Denny's ' e has 14 of the existing 64 stalls designated as compact, or 22%of the stalls. For the two sites ' a combined parking total of 165 stalls, 50'stalls or 30.3%are designated for compact. If. • one of the stalls was converted to a,standard stall, or compact spaces were provided for up to '0%of designated employee parking,then no more than 30%of the combined stalls would be comp. ••. The request to average the number of com act parkingstal between the two uses is justified. �l � � P There is not adequate space on the Microtel site to provide the required number of standard stalls, while avoiding impacts to on-site wetland,areas. Also,,there are a sufficient number of standard size parking stalls between the Microtel and.Denny's'sites. The combined number of compact stalls for both sites represents 30.3%of the total number of stalls. Microtel could convert a minimum of three compact parking stalls along,14E 44th Street frontage to standard stalls. Staff recommends that one to three compact stalls pfi th>:,south boundary of the parking lot be converted to standard stalls if the modification is appRbved. , The requested modifications from the Perking and Loading Ordinance would not adversely impact off-site properties. The nearest off-s' a property is the Depny's restaurant and they have agreed to the joint-use of parking, recogniz' it as a benefit to their operation. \ The applicant has not continue /the detailed engineering and design following the issuance of the Hearing Examiner's Decisigr(until the decision from the Adminisator is issued with regard to the requested Parking Modification. The parking modification was submitted with the project application, but was no forwarded to the Administrator at that time, as the site plan was being revised up until the ring, and documentation of existing parking stall\for the Denny's site was not submitted unti ell after the hearing date. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the applicant's requested modifications for joint-use parking. Foe lhermbre, estaff-reeemmen tted aver _part g-sta ls-betweerrhot1rthe Mitiotetand Denny's sites, such that the mnaxanum percentage of._, --compact-stalls--(30%)is no*-exceeded. This would require that the applicant convert one to three compact stalls to standard stall length. cc: Jana Hanson,Development Services Director Neil Watts,Plan Review Supervisor H:IDIVISION.S\DEVELOP.SER\DE V&PLAN.INGUTH\mcrtpk2.doc\cor CII OF RENTON „L 2,1 Planning/Building/Public Works Department J e Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator May 25, 2000 Mr. Jeff Baker Rupert Engineering, Inc. 1519 West Valley Highway North Suite#101 Auburn, WA 98001 SUBJECT: Microtel Inn Project No. LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Dear Mr. Baker: This letter is sent as a courtesy to advise you of the expiration period for the above subject Site Plan Approval. The City of Renton Hearing Examiner approved your project on July 7, 1998. This approval is normally good for a period of two years only. The Hearing Examiner may grant a single two-year extension for good cause. Such a request must be made in writing, however, prior to the approval of a Site Plan extension, the Hearing Examiner would require verification that the necessary parking modification has been approved. If you have not already done so, you must submit for your building permit prior to July 7, 2000 or your Site Plan Approval will expire. Please feel free to contact me at(425)430-7286, if you have any questions. Sincerely, {{--��^^ . V.(AAA/9 vim ' Jennifer Toth Henning Principal Planner cc: Mr. Brian Hamilton/The Hamilton Company 1055 South Grady Way- Renton, Washington 98055 ANr...aa;..e sn i me,clad mntnnat nnct rnncl imar 11 11 CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WO • • ��� NER MEMORANDUM DATE: 02/07/00 TO: Fred Kaufman FROM: Jennifer Toth Henning dill SUBJECT: Microtel Inn Parking Modification(File No. LUA-98-014) The Site Plan for the Microtel Inn was approved on July 20, 1998. The Hearing Examiner Decision specified several conditions that the project is to comply with. Condition No. 2 states that the applicant shall: "receive full approval of its shared parking and modifications to the Parking and Loading Ordinance from the Administrator. If such approval is not forthcoming, the applicant shall reduce the size of the motel in order to accommodate all parking and all parking standards on the subject site." Condition No. 4 requires redesign of the site to provide a walkway that affects the parking arrangement. The applicant has been in the process of obtaining Hydraulic Permit Approval from Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. That approval was obtained during the past few months. The applicant is in the process of redesigning the parking area to accommodate the cantilevered walkway or deck as required by Condition No. 4. The parking modification is being processed by staff and will be forwarded onto the Administrator,when it is clear as to what parking standards need to be modified to meet the condition. According to Renton Municipal Code Section 4-9-200J: "The final approval ofa site plan shall expire within two (2)years of the date of approval. A single two (2)year extension may be granted for good cause by the approval body which approved the original site plan. The approval body may, however, determine at its discretion that a public hearing may be required for such extension." Microtel Inn has until July 20, 2000 to comply with the conditions of Site Plan Approval and to obtain a building permit. The applicant is aware of this time constraint and is working with staff to meet this date. Since the Hearing Examiner Decision does not require the Examiner to review the revised site plan, or to approve the Parking Modification, it appears that the file can be closed by your office and transmitted to the City Clerk's office. cc: Jana Hanson H:\DIVISION.S\DEVELOP.SER\DE V&PLAN.INGUTH\mcrtlhx.doc\cor CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: 02/03/00 TO: Gregg Zimmerman FROM: Jennifer Toth Henning SUBJECT: Parking Modification Request Microtel Inn, File No. LUA-98-014,SA-H, ECF) STAFF REPORT Summary of Request. Jeff Baker of Rupert Engineering, representing Microtel Inn, has applied to the City seeking to deviate from the City's Parking and Loading Ordinance. The applicant is requesting the following: A) To be permitted to utilize joint-use parking with the abutting Denny's restaurant to provide 18 of the required 119 parking spaces for the 115-room motel. B) To be permitted to either exceed the maximum permitted percentage of compact spaces on-site by up to 6%;or,to average the percentage of compact spaces between the Denny's and Microtel site. The applicant has requested to deviate from the Parking and Loading Ordinance via a letter submitted with the project application. In order to allow a modification from the requirements of the Parking and Loading Ordinance,the applicant must show that the proposal: a. Will meet the objectives and safety, function,appearance, environmental protection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; and b. Will not be injurious to other property(s) in the vicinity; and c. Conform to the intent and purpose of the Code;and d. Can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and e. Will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. The applicant has provided the City with a Shared Parking Analysis for Microtel Inn Hotel and Denny's Restaurant by H. Lee and Associates (dated March 23, 1998). Additional information regarding the existing parking counts for the Denny's Restaurant was requested by staff,and was received following the July 7th public hearing for the Microtel Inn motel. That information consists of an analysis of existing parking stalls,that is,the number and size of existing parking stalls. BACKGROUND Project Description/Parking Requirements. Microtel Inn is a proposal for a 115-unit motel Document2\cor located at the corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard in northeast Renton. The subject site is vacant and is constrained by an existing stream and wetland area on the west In order to not interfere with the required wetland buffer and stream setback, and to accommodate site grades,the applicant has proposed to install a rockery generally in the center of the site, running north/south. The rockery would define the west edge of the parking lot. The difference in grade between the wetland area and the parking area varies with a maximum drop of 8 feet. Given minimum standards for 24-foot wide parking aisles, parking stall dimensions,the proposed building width, and the existing wetland and stream,the applicant is challenged in fitting the proposed development on the site. According to City Code,the proposed 115-room motel requires a total of 119 parking stalls. One stall is needed for each motel unit(115 parking stalls), and 2 additional stalls are required for each 3 employees. The applicant anticipates a total of 6 employees,therefore, 4 employee parking stalls would be required. The applicant is proposing to provide 101 parking stalls on site, and to share an additional 18 parking stalls with Denny's Restaurant, which abuts the subject site on the north. The two sites share an existing driveway. A draft parking easement and agreement between Denny's and Microtel Inn has been submitted with the project application. Joint use parking is generally encouraged within the City (Code Section 4-14-4:E.1). Joint use parking may be authorized for those uses which have dissimilar peak-hour demands during the non-peak hours of the lessor. In addition,the joint-use parking must be provided within 750 feet from the buildings or use areas it is intended to serve. A joint-use contract,covering a minimum of five years shall be approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department and by the City Attorney for such a parking arrangement to be allowed. The parking analysis provided by the applicant demonstrates the demand for the existing restaurant and the proposed motel. Staff have reviewed the study and find it acceptable. Following the public hearing,the applicant also provided a site plan documenting the existing parking at Denny's Restaurant,and a floor plan of the Denny's Restaurant which shows the seating area. The parking analysis estimates the peak parking demand by the Microtel to be 119 stalls and for Denny's parking demand is estimated to be 34 stalls. The restaurant requires one parking space for each 100 square feet of gross floor area. The gross floor area of the Denny's seating area is approximately 3,200 gross square feet, and the kitchen area is approximately 700 square feet,thus for the 3,900 g.s.f restaurant, 39 parking stalls are required. (Note: employee locker room/break room, restrooms, dish-washing area, storage rooms, and walk-in coolers were not included in the gross square footage calculation.) The Parking and Loading Ordinance requires that standard parking stalls be 9 feet wide by 20 feet long. Compact parking stalls must be 8-1/2 feet wide by 16 feet long. Compact stalls may account for use to 30%of the required parking or 40%of designated employee parking. The applicant has provoded 35.6%compact stalls on site, or 36 of 101 stalls. Denny's has 22%of its parking as compact stalls, or 14 of 64 spaces. ERC Consideration of Proposal. During their review of the proposal on June 9, 1998,the Environmental Review Committee instructed staff to add a"Note to the Applicant" in the staff report as follows: "The applicant will need to either: 1) demonstrate that sufficient parking is available on-site to meet City Code Requirements; or, 2)seek and successfully obtain a modification from the Parking and Loading standards to permit joint-use parking to meet required parking for both the proposed motel and restaurant; or, 3) revise the proposal such that Document2\cor the number of motel units proposed is reduced to match the available parking on the subject site." Hearing Examiner's Site Plan Approval. The Hearing Examiner's Decision of July 20, 1998 approved the Microtel Inn site plan, subject to conditions. The decision requires as a Condition of Approval that: "The applicant shall receive full approval of its shared parking and modifications to the Parking and Loading Ordinance from the Administrator. If such approval is not forthcoming, the applicant shall reduce the size of the motel in order to accommodate all parking and all parking standards on the subject site." ANALYSIS A) Joint-Use Parking. City Code encourages joint-use parking where the uses have dissimilar peak-hour demands during the non-peak hours of the lessor. The applicant's study documents that the parking demand for the motel and restaurant varies based on the time of day or evening, but that there is a surplus of parking spaces available for either use throughout the day and evening. The restaurant has 64 parking spaces, and the motel would have 101 parking spaces for a total of 165 parking stalls. The parking study notes that,based on demand, a maximum of 138 parking spaces would be needed at any given time. Denny's has additional parking stalls that exceed the City's requirements for the restaurant,and that exceed both current and projected parking demand. According to Code,joint-us parking must be provided within 750 feet from the buildings or use areas it is intended to serve. The proposal would satisfy this requirement. Shared parking would be accessible from a common driveway approach. The request to utilize joint-use parking meets with the intent and purpose of Code. Microtel Inn would provide 101 parking stalls. The applicant lacks 18 parking stalls needed on the site for the proposal. The Denny's Restaurant has 164 seats and the seating area is 3,200 s.f. in size. According to the parking standard, 1 parking space is needed for each 100 square feet of gross floor area. Therefore, 32 parking stalls are needed based on the restaurant seating area. Another 7 spaces are needed for the kitchen area, for a total parking need for the restaurant of 39 parking stalls. Denny's has 64 parking stalls available on site to serve restaurant patrons. Since a maximum of 39 stalls are needed to comply with Code,the 25 excess parking stalls are available to share with the proposed Microtel Inn. And,the applicant has demonstrated through its parking demand study and documentation of existing and proposed(with motel)parking need that sufficient parking exists for the restaurant. Neither of the requested modifications from the Parking and Loading Ordinance would adversely impact off-site properties. The nearest off-site property is the Denny's restaurant and they have agreed to the joint-use of parking, recognizing it as a benefit to their operation. Part of the restrictions of the joint-use agreement keep Microtel from offering food service,thus encouraging customers of the motel to patronize surrounding restaurants. The applicant has not continued the detailed engineering and design following the issuance of the Hearing Examiner's Decision until the decision from the Administrator is issued with regard to the requested Parking Modification. The parking modification was submitted with the project application, but was not forwarded to the Administrator at that time, as the site plan was being revised up until the hearing, and documentation of existing parking stalls for the Denny's site was not submitted until well after the hearing date. B) Exceed Maximum Percentage of Compact Stalls. Thirty-six(36)of the proposed 101 parking stalls on the Microtel site are shown as compact stalls. This translates to 35.6%of the stalls. Code limits compact stalls to 30%of the required parking, or 40%of designated employee Document2\cor parking. The Denny's site has 14 of the existing 64 stalls designated as compact, or 22%of the stalls. For the two sites with a combined parking total of 165 stalls, 50 stalls or 30.3%are designated for compact. If any one of the stalls was converted to a standard stall, or compact spaces were provided for up to 40%of designated employee parking,then no more than 30%of the combined stalls would be compact. The request to average the number of compact parking stalls between the two uses is justified. There is not adequate space on the Microtel site to provide the required number of standard stalls, while avoiding impacts to on-site wetland areas. Also,there are a sufficient number of standard size parking stalls between the Microtel and Denny's sites. The combined number of compact stalls for both sites represents 30.3%of the total number of stalls. Microtel could convert a minimum of three compact parking stalls along NE 44th Street frontage to standard stalls. Staff recommends that one to three compact stalls on the south boundary of the parking lot be converted to standard stalls if the modification is approved. The requested modifications from the Parking and Loading Ordinance would not adversely impact off-site properties. The nearest off-site property is the Denny's restaurant and they have agreed to the joint-use of parking, recognizing it as a benefit to their operation. The applicant has not continued the detailed engineering and design following the issuance of the Hearing Examiner's Decision until the decision from the Administrator is issued with regard to the requested Parking Modification. The parking modification was submitted with the project application, but was not forwarded to the Administrator at that time, as the site plan was being revised up until the hearing, and documentation of existing parking stalls for the Denny's site was not submitted until well after the hearing date. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the applicant's requested modifications for joint-use parking. Furthermore, staff recommends that the applicant be permitted to average the maximum percentage of compact parking stalls between both the Microtel and Denny's sites, such that the maximum percentage of compact stalls (30%)is not exceeded. This would require that the applicant convert one to three compact stalls to standard stall length. cc: [Click here and type name] Document2\cor �► a CI7 OF RENTON ►.LLB Hearing Examiner Jesse Tanner,Mayor Fred J.Kaufman January 24, 2000 CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. Jeff Baker Rupert Engineering 1519 West Valley Highway N, #101 Auburn, WA 98001 Re: Microtel Inn File No. LUA98-014,SA-H Dear Mr. Baker: This office issued a Decision on the above-referenced matter on July 20, 1998. That Decision required Zoning Administrator approval of the shared parking and modifications to the Parking and Loading Ordinance. If no such approval was granted, then applicant was required to reduce the size of the motel in order to accommodate all parking and all parking standards on the subject site. This office has not been notified of any such approval or site plan reduction. If we do not receive verification by February 7, 2000, this office will dismiss the application with prejudice, and it will be treated as a denial of the request. Sincerely, Fred J. Kaufman Hearing Examiner FJK:mm cc: Larry Warren, City Attorney Jennifer Henning, Development Services 1055 South Grady Way - Renton, Washington 98055 - (425)430-6515 CITY OF RENTON PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: 01/03/00 TO: Jana Hanson FROM: Jennifer Toth Henning SUBJECT: Year in Review—Residential Projects In addition to the list of residential projects that Neil has provided you with,the following projects either have been built, or were under construction in 1999. Residential Projects Built During 1999: Project Name Project Address Project Description Williamsburg Condominiums 1800 NE 40th Street 62 condominium units Residential Projects Under Construction in 1999: Project Name Project Address Project Description Talbot Ridge Plat East of 102nd Ave SE and SE 18 lot subdivision 184th Street Klinefelter Short Plat 3900 block of Meadow Ave N 4 lot short plat Briere Plat 1800 block of Duvall Ave NE 12-lot plat Demps 2 Final Plat 2302 NE 12th Street 2 lot plat Sierra Court Short Plat 1717 Union Ave NE 5 lot short plat Wilkinson Short Plat 2245 Shattuck Ave S. 4 lot short plat Manson Short Plat 2308 Duvall Ave NE 5 lot short plat City View Short Plat Sw corner ofLind Ave NW 8 lot plat and NW 2nd PI Taylor Short Plat 570 Bronson PI NE 7 lot short plat Root Short Plat 504 S. Tobin Street 3 lot short plat HADI VISIONS\DEVELOP.SER\DEV&PLAN.INGUTH\99prjlst.doc\cor 9-28-1999 3:03PM FROM RUPERT ENGINEERING 206 939 21tbM r". c RUPERT ENGINEERING, INC. 1519 West Valley Highway North, Suite 101 P.O. Box 836 Auburn, WA 98071 253-833-7776 253-939-2168 - FAX Fax Transmission To: Jennifer Henning From: Larry Krueger Company: City of Renton Date: September 28, 1999 Fax #: 425-430-7300 cc: Brian Hamilton 425-313-8907 You should receive 4 page(s) including this one. If you do not receive all pages, please call 253-833-7776 Message: • Here is a copy of the UPA for the Microtel Inn project (LUA-98-014). JVyELCP ` "'!'t'PLANttu1.... CITY OF FENTON SEs 0 1999 RECEIVED 9-28-1999 3:02PM FROM RUNtRI tNG1NttKINL, zuo y y .ion • HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL State of Washington (dr RCW 75.20.100 or RCM/75.20.108 Department of Fish and Wildlife pme,a�td Region 4 Office Fig 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard Mill Creek,Washington 98012 .W, D TE OF ISSUE Septemb rr2244 1999 LOG NVA ERR 00-E0593-01 J)ERMXTTEE AUTHORIZED AGENT OR CONTRACTOR THC Exit Seven,LLC Rupert Engineering 5611 -221"Place Southeast ATTENTION: Larry S. Krueger,P.E. Issaquah,Washington 98027 1519 West Valley Highway North, Suite 101 (425)313-8905 Auburn,Washington 98001 (253)833-7776 • PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Install Outfall PROJECT LOCATION: Northeast corner of Northeast 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard,Renton, Washington W WATER BODY TRIBUTAR,ILTO 1/4 SEC, Mc TOWNSHIP RANGE COUNTY 1 OS.MISC Gypsy Creek Subbasin Drainage Lake Washington SW 29 24 North 05 East -King PROVISIONS 1. TIMING LIMITATIONS: The project may begin immediately and shall be completed by September 30,2000, provided that construction below the ordinary high water line(OHWL)of the stream and adjacent wetlands shall on occur between June 16 and September 30. 2. Work shall be accomplished per plans and specifications entitled,"MICROTEL INN",dated October 21, 1998 and "TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT(TIR)-STORM DRAINAGE STUDY OF MICROTEL INN",dated August 1998,and submitted to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife(WDFW),except as modified by t .s Hydraulic Project Approval. These plans reflect design criteria per Chapter 220-110 WAC. These plans reflect mitigation procedures to significantly reduce o eliminate impacts to fish resources. A copy of these plans shall b€ available on site during co sstroctiior 3. The outfall structure shall be constructed to pr ent the entry of fish. 4. The point of discharge shall be armored to prevent scouring. 5. Excavation for the placement of the structure or armoring materials shall be isolated from the wetted perimeter. 6. Alteration or disturbance of the bank and bank vegetation and wetlands and wetland vegetation shall be limited t that necessary to construct the project. Within seven calender days of outfall installation,all disturbed areas sha be protected from erosion using vegetation or other means. Within one year of project completion,the banks and wetlands,including armored areas,shall have been revegetated with native woody species approved by WDFW Vegetative cuttings shall be planted at a maximum interval of three feet(on center). Plantings shall be maintair d as necessary for three years to ensure 80 percent or greater survival. 7. If at any time,as a result of project activities,fish are observed in distress,a fish kill occurs,or water quality problems develop(including equipment leaks or spills),operations shall cease and WDFW at(360) 534-8233 . .d Pam> 1 of i 9-28-1999 3:03PM FROM RUPERT ENGINEERING 205 939 2166 r. 3 IYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL State of Washington Itialsagtas Department of Fish and Wildlife `� d RCW 75.20.100 or RCW 75.20.108 Region I Office FISH 41'0, r 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard Mill Creek,Washington 98012 ..W.• DATE OF ISSUE: September 24. 1999 LOG NUMBER: 00-E0593-01 Washington Department of Ecology at(425)649-7000 shall be contacted immediately. Work shall not resume until further approval is given by WDFW. 8. Erosion control methods shall be used to prevent silt-laden water from entering the stream and/or any wetlands associated with the stream. These may include,but are not limited to,straw bales, filter fabric,temporary sediment • ponds,check dams of pea gravel-filled burlap bags or other material,and/or immediate mulching of exposed areas. 9. Prior to starting work,temporary filter fabric,straw bale,or pea gravel-filled burlap bag check dam(s) shall be installed downstream. Accumulated sediments shall be removed during the project and prior to removing the check dam(s)after completion of work. 10. Wastewater from project activities and water removed from within the work area shall be routed to an area landward of the OHWL to allow removal of fine sediment and other contaminants prior to being discharged to the stream or associated wetlands. 11. All waste material such as construction debris, silt,excess dirt or overburden resulting from this project shall be deposited above the limits of flood water in an approved upland disposal site. 12. If high flow conditions that may cause siltation are encountered during this project,work shall stop until the flow subsides. 13. Extreme care shall be taken to ensure that no petroleum products,hydraulic fluid, fresh cement,sediments,sedinae laden water,chemicals,or any other toxic or deleterious materials are allowed to enter or leach into the stream or associated wetlands. SEPA: DNS by City of Renton final on June 29, 1998. APPLICATION ACCEPTED: September 24, 1999 ENFORCEMENT OFFICER: Peck 024 [P3] Larry Fisher (425)649-7042 � — for Direct, Area Habitat Biologist WDFW GENERAL PROVISIONS This Hydraulic Project Approval(HPA)pertains only to the provisions of the Fisheries Code(RCW 75.20). Additional author _anon from other public agencies may be necessary for this project. This HPA shall be available on the job site at all times and all its provisions followed by the permittee and operator(s)perform .g the work. This HPA does not authorize trespass. The persons)to whom this HPA is issued may be held liable for any loss or damage to fish life or fish habitat which results f )m failure to comply with the provisions of this HPA. Paen7cf1 9-28-1999 3:03PM FROM RUPERT ENGINEERING 206 939 2168 P. 4 .. . HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL State of Washington � ` mow* RCW 75.20.100 or.RCW 75.20.108 Department of Fub and Wildlife p � Region 4 Office `/� 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard WILDlM Mill Creek Washington 98012 DATE OF ISSUE: September 24. 1999 LOG NUMBER; 00-E0593-01 Failure to comply with the provisions of this Hydraulic Project Approval could result in a civil penalty of up to one hundred dollars per day or a gross misdemeanor charge,possibly punishable by fine and/or imprisonment. All HPAs issued pursuant to RCW 75.20.100 or 75.20.160 are subject to additional restrictions,conditions or revocation if the Department of Fish and Wildlife determines that new biological or physical information indicates the need for such action. The permittee has the right pursuant to Chapter 34.04 RCW to appeal such decisions. All HPAs issued pursuant to RCW 75.20.103 may be modified by the Department of Fish and Wildlife due to changed conditions after consultation with the permittee: PROVIDED HOWEVER,that such modifications shall be subject to appeal to the Hydraulic Appeals Board established in RCW 75.20.130. APPEALS-GENERAL INFORMATION IF YOU WISH TO APPEAL A DENIAL OF OR CONDITIONS PROVIDED IN A HYDRAULIC PROJECT APPROVAL, THERE ARE INFORMAL AND FORMAL APPEAL PROCESSES AVAILABLE. A. INFORMAL APPEALS (WAC 220-110-340)OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 75.20.100, 75.20.103,75.20.106,AND 75.20.160: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Department actions may request an informal review of: (A) The denial or issuance of a HPA,or the conditions or provisions made part of a HPA;or (B) An order imposing civil penalties. It is recommended that an aggrieved party contact the Area Habitat Biologist and discuss the concerns. Most problems are resolved at this level,but if not,you may elevate your concerns to his/her supervisor. A request for an INFORMAL REVIEW shall be in WRITING to the Department of Fish and Wildlife, 600 Capitol Way North,Olympia,Washington 98501-1091 and shall be RECEIVED by the Department within 30-days of the denial or issuance of a HPA or receipt of an order imposing civil penalties. The 30-day time requirement may be stayed by the Department if negotiations are occurring between the aggrieved party and the Area Habitat Biologist and/or his/her supervisor. The Habitat Protection Services Division Manager or his/her designee shall conduct a review and recommend a decision to the Director or its designee. If you are not satisfied with the rest :- of this informal appeal,a formal appeal may be filed. B. FORMAL APPEALS(WAC 220-110-350)OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 75.20.100 OR 75.20.106: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the following Department actions may request an formal review of (A) The denial or issuance of a HPA,or the conditions or provisions made part of a HPA; (B) An order imposing civil penalties;or (C) Any other"agency action" for which an adjudicative proceeding is required under the Administrative Procedure Act, Chapter 34.05 RCW. A request for a FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Department of Fish and Wildlife,600 Capitol Way North, Olympia, Washington 98501-1091,shall be plainly labeled as"REQUEST FOR FORMAL APPEAL"and shall be RECEIV1 DURING OFFICE HOURS by the Department within 30-days of the Department action that is being challenged. The time p lad for requesting a formal appeal is suspended during consideration of a timely informal appeal. If there has been an informal appeal,the deadline for requesting a formal appeal shall be within 30-days of the date of the Department's written decision it response to the informal appeal. C. FORMAL APPEALS OF DEPARTMENT ACTIONS TAKEN PURSUANT TO RCW 75.20.103 or 75.20.160: A person who is aggrieved or adversely affected by the denial or issuance of a HPA,or the conditions or provisions made pa of a HPA may request a formal appeal. The request for FORMAL APPEAL shall be in WRITING to the Hydraulic Appeals Bo I per WAC 259-04 at Environmental Hearings Office,4224 Sixth Avenue SE,Building Two-Rowe Six,Lacey,Washington 98504;telephone 360/459-6327. D. FAILURE TO APPEAL WITHIN THE REQUIRED TIME PERIODS RESULTS IN FORFEITURE OF ALL APPEAL RIGHTS. IF THERE IS NO TIMELY REQUEST FOR AN APPEAL,THE DEPARTMENT ACTION SHALL BE FIN. AND UNAPPEALABLE. Page 3 of 3 CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: November 17, 1998 TO: Gregg Zimmerman FROM: Jennifer Toth Henning (x7286) SUBJECT: Microtel Inn Joint-Use Parking (File No. LUA-98-014, SA-H,ECF) During the Environmental Review Committee meeting for the Microtel Inn, concerns were raised regarding the applicant's proposal to utilize joint-use parking between the Microtel site and the abutting Denny's restaurant. Specifically,ERC questioned whether the Denny's had enough parking to satisfy Code requirements for the restaurant,while providing 18 additional spaces for Microtel Inn. This memo serves as the follow-up to you, as requested by the ERC. As you will note from reading the following summary,Denny's has 25 parking stalls beyond that which the Code requires. The applicant has provided the City with a Shared Parking Analysis for Microtel Inn Hotel and Denny's Restaurant by H. Lee and Associates(dated March 23, 1998). The parking analysis provided by the applicant demonstrates the demand for the existing restaurant and the proposed motel. Staff have reviewed the study and find it acceptable. The parking analysis estimates the peak parking demand for Microtel to be 119 stalls, and the parking demand for Denny's is estimated to be 34 stalls. Following the public hearing,the applicant also provided a site plan documenting the existing parking at Denny's Restaurant,and a floor plan of the restaurant which shows the seating area. In addition, the existing parking was checked by Rupert Engineering. The gross floor area of the Denny's seating area is approximately 3,200 gross square feet, and the kitchen area is approximately 700 square feet, thus for the 3,900 g.s.f restaurant, 39 parking stalls are required. Denny's has 64 parking stalls available on site to serve restaurant patrons. A maximum of 39 stalls are needed in order for Denny's to comply with Code. Therefore, 25 excess parking stalls are available to share with the proposed Microtel Inn. Denny's has agreed to the joint-use of parking, recognizing it as a benefit to their operation. Part of the restrictions of the joint-use agreement keep Microtel from offering food service,thus encouraging customers of the motel to patronize surrounding restaurants. The draft joint-use parking agreement was submitted with the application. The agreement is intended to run with the land and is being forwarded to the City Attorney for review. According to City Code,the proposed 115-room motel requires a total of 119 parking stalls. One stall is needed for each motel unit(115 parking stalls),and 2 additional stalls are required for each 3 employees. The applicant anticipates a total of 6 employees, requiring 4 parking stalls for employees. The applicant is proposing to provide 101 parking stalls on site,and to share an additional 18 parking \\TS SERVER\SYS2\COMMON\H:\DIVISION.S\DEVELOP.SER\DEV&PLAN.INGVTH\MCRTLGZ.DOC October 5, 1998 Page 2 stalls with Denny's Restaurant, which abuts the subject site on the north. The two sites share an existing driveway. The applicant has adequately demonstrated to Development Services Division that adequate parking is available to meet the Code requirements for both the existing and proposed use. Please feel free to contact me at Extension 7286 if you have any questions regarding this memo or the proposal. cc: Jana Huerter Project File CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: November 17, 1998 TO: Gregg Zimmerman FROM: Jennifer Toth Henning SUBJECT: Microtel Inn-- Request to Deviate From Requirements of the Parking and Loading Ordinance, and, Request to be Permitted to Utilize Joint-Use Parking to Meet a Portion of the Required Parking (File No. LUA-98-014,SA-H, ECF) STAFF REPORT Summary of Request. Jeff Baker of Rupert Engineering, representing Microtel Inn, has applied to the City seeking to deviate from the City's Parking and Loading Ordinance. The applicant is requesting the following: A) To be permitted to utilize joint-use parking with the abutting Denny's restaurant to provide 18 of the required 119 parking spaces for the 115-room motel. B) To be permitted to either exceed the maximum permitted percentage of compact spaces on-site by up to 6%; or,to average the percentage of compact spaces between the Denny's and Microtel site. The applicant has requested to deviate from the Parking and Loading Ordinance via a letter submitted with the project application. In order to allow a modification from the requirements of the Parking and Loading Ordinance,the applicant must show that the proposal: 1) conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code; and, 2) can be shown to be justified and required for the use and situation intended; and, 3) will not create adverse impacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity; and, 4) will be made prior to detailed engineering and design. The applicant has provided the City with a Shared Parking Analysis for Microtel Inn Hotel and Denny's Restaurant by H. Lee and Associates (dated March 23, 1998). Additional information regarding the existing parking counts for the Denny's Restaurant was requested by staff, and was received following the July 7th public hearing for the Microtel Inn motel. That information consists of an analysis of existing parking stalls,that is,the number and size of existing parking stalls. BACKGROUND Project Description/Parking Requirements. Microtel Inn is a proposal for a 115-unit motel located at the corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard in northeast Renton. The subject site \\TS SERVER\SYS2\COMMON\H:\DIVISION.S\DEVELOP.SER\DEV&PLAN.ING\JTH\MCRTLPK.DOC October 2, 1998 Page 2 is vacant and is constrained by an existing stream and wetland area on the west In order to not interfere with the required wetland buffer and stream setback,and to accommodate site grades,the applicant has proposed to install a rockery generally in the center of the site, running north/south. The rockery would define the west edge of the parking lot. The difference in grade between the wetland area and the parking area varies with a maximum drop of 8 feet. Given minimum standards for 24-foot wide parking aisles,parking stall dimensions,the proposed building width, and the existing wetland and stream,the applicant is challenged in fitting the proposed development on the site. According to City Code,the proposed 115-room motel requires a total of 119 parking stalls. One stall is needed for each motel unit(115 parking stalls),and 2 additional stalls are required for each 3 employees. The applicant anticipates a total of 6 employees,therefore,4 employee parking stalls would be required. The applicant is proposing to provide 101 parking stalls on site,and to share an additional 18 parking stalls with Denny's Restaurant,which abuts the subject site on the north. The two sites share an existing driveway. A draft parking easement and agreement between Denny's and Microtel Inn has been submitted with the project application. Joint use parking is generally encouraged within the City(Code Section 4-14-4:E.1). Joint use parking may be authorized for those uses which have dissimilar peak-hour demands during the non- peak hours of the lessor. In addition,the joint-use parking must be provided within 750 feet from the buildings or use areas it is intended to serve. A joint-use contract, covering a minimum of five years shall be approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department and by the City Attorney for such a parking arrangement to be allowed. The parking analysis provided by the applicant demonstrates the demand for the existing restaurant and the proposed motel. Staff have reviewed the study and find it acceptable. Following the public hearing,the applicant also provided a site plan documenting the existing parking at Denny's Restaurant,and a floor plan of the Denny's Restaurant which shows the seating area. The parking analysis estimates the peak parking demand by the Microtel to be 119 stalls and for Denny's parking demand is estimated to be 34 stalls. The restaurant requires one parking space for each 100 square feet of gross floor area. The gross floor area of the Denny's seating area is approximately 3,200 gross square feet,and the kitchen area is approximately 700 square feet,thus for the 3,900 g.s.f restaurant, 39 parking stalls are required. (Note: employee locker room/break room, restrooms,dish-washing area, storage rooms, and walk-in coolers were not included in the gross square footage calculation.) The Parking and Loading Ordinance requires that standard parking stalls be 9 feet wide by 20 feet long. Compact parking stalls must be 8-1/2 feet wide by 16 feet long. Compact stalls may account for use to 30%of the required parking or 40%of designated employee parking. The applicant has provoded 35.6%compact stalls on site, or 36 of 101 stalls. Denny's has 22%of its parking as compact stalls, or 14 of 64 spaces. ERC Consideration of Proposal. During their review of the proposal on June 9, 1998,the Environmental Review Committee instructed staff to add a"Note to the Applicant"in the staff report as follows: "The applicant will need to either: 1)demonstrate that sufficient parking is available on-site to meet City Code Requirements; or, 2)seek and successfully obtain a modification from the Parking and Loading standards to permit joint-use parking to meet required parking for both the October 2, 1998 Page 3 proposed motel and restaurant; or, 3) revise the proposal such that the number of motel units proposed is reduced to match the available parking on the subject site." Hearing Examiner's Site Plan Approval. The Hearing Examiner's Decision of July 20, 1998 approved the Microtel Inn site plan, subject to conditions. The decision requires as a Condition of Approval that: "The applicant shall receive full approval of its shared parking and modifications to the Parking and Loading Ordinance from the Administrator. If such approval is not forthcoming, the applicant shall reduce the size of the motel in order to accommodate all parking and all parking standards on the subject site. " ANALYSIS A) Joint-Use Parking. City Code encourages joint-use parking where the uses have dissimilar peak- hour demands during the non-peak hours of the lessor. The applicant's study documents that the parking demand for the motel and restaurant varies based on the time of day or evening,but that there is a surplus of parking spaces available for either use throughout the day and evening. The restaurant has 64 parking spaces, and the motel would have 101 parking spaces for a total of 165 parking stalls. The parking study notes that,based on demand, a maximum of 138 parking spaces would be needed at any given time. Denny's has additional parking stalls that exceed the City's requirements for the restaurant, and that exceed both current and projected parking demand. According to Code,joint-us parking must be provided within 750 feet from the buildings or use areas it is intended to serve. The proposal would satisfy this requirement. Shared parking would be accessible from a common driveway approach. The request to utilize joint-use parking meets with the intent and purpose of Code. Microtel Inn would provide 101 parking stalls. The applicant lacks 18 parking stalls needed on the site for the proposal. The Denny's Restaurant has 164 seats and the seating area is 3,200 s.f. in size. According to the parking standard, 1 parking space is needed for each 100 square feet of gross floor area. Therefore, 32 parking stalls are needed based on the restaurant seating area. Another 7 spaces are needed for the kitchen area, for a total parking need for the restaurant of 39 parking stalls. Denny's has 64 parking stalls available on site to serve restaurant patrons. Since a maximum of 39 stalls are needed to comply with Code,the 25 excess parking stalls are available to share with the proposed Microtel Inn. And,the applicant has demonstrated through its parking demand study and documentation of existing and proposed(with motel)parking need that sufficient parking exists for the restaurant. Neither of the requested modifications from the Parking and Loading Ordinance would adversely impact off-site properties. The nearest off-site property is the Denny's restaurant and they have agreed to the joint-use of parking,recognizing it as a benefit to their operation. Part of the restrictions of the joint-use agreement keep Microtel from offering food service,thus encouraging customers of the motel to patronize surrounding restaurants. The applicant has not continued the detailed engineering and design following the issuance of the Hearing Examiner's Decision until the decision from the Administrator is issued with regard to the requested Parking Modification. The parking modification was submitted with the project application, but was not forwarded to the Administrator at that time, as the site plan was being revised up until the hearing, and documentation of existing parking stalls for the Denny's site was not submitted until well after the hearing date. B) Exceed Maximum Percentage of Compact Stalls. Thirty-six(36) of the proposed 101 parking stalls on the Microtel site are shown as compact stalls. This translates to 35.6%of the stalls. Code October 2, 1998 Page 4 limits compact stalls to 30%of the required parking, or 40%of designated employee parking. The Denny's site has 14 of the existing 64 stalls designated as compact,or 22%of the stalls. For the two sites with a combined parking total of 165 stalls, 50 stalls or 30.3%are designated for compact. If any one of the stalls was converted to a standard stall, or compact spaces were provided for up to 40% of designated employee parking,then no more than 30%of the combined stalls would be compact. The request to average the number of compact parking stalls between the two uses is justified. There is not adequate space on the Microtel site to provide the required number of standard stalls, while avoiding impacts to on-site wetland areas. Also,there are a sufficient number of standard size parking stalls between the Microtel and Denny's sites. The combined number of compact stalls for both sites represents 30.3%of the total number of stalls. Microtel could convert a minimum of three compact parking stalls along NE 44th Street frontage to standard stalls. Staff recommends that one to three compact stalls on the south boundary of the parking lot be converted to standard stalls if the modification is approved. The requested modifications from the Parking and Loading Ordinance would not adversely impact off- site properties. The nearest off-site property is the Denny's restaurant and they have agreed to the joint-use of parking, recognizing it as a benefit to their operation. The applicant has not continued the detailed engineering and design following the issuance of the Hearing Examiner's Decision until the decision from the Administrator is issued with regard to the requested Parking Modification. The parking modification was submitted with the project application, but was not forwarded to the Administrator at that time, as the site plan was being revised up until the hearing, and documentation of existing parking stalls for the Denny's site was not submitted until well after the hearing date. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the applicant's requested modifications for joint-use parking. Furthermore, staff recommends that the applicant be permitted to average the maximum percentage of compact parking stalls between both the Microtel and Denny's sites, such that the maximum percentage of compact stalls (30%) is not exceeded. This would require that the applicant convert one to three compact stalls to standard stall length. isaSTA s=t 4rn? 1 ten* State of Washington DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Region 4 Office: 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard-Mill Creek,Washington 98012-(425)775-1311 DEVELOPMENT PLANNING November 16, 1998 CITY OF RENTON Larry S. Krueger, E.I.T. NOV 17 1998 Rupert Engineering, Inc. RCCE'VED Post Office Box 836 G Auburn, Washington 98071 Dear Mr. Krueger: SUBJECT: Microtel Inn, Stormwater Discharge, Gypsy Sub-basin Drainage Creek, Tributary to Lake Washington,King County,WRIA 08.MISC The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)received your letter regarding Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA)requirements for the above-referenced proposed project on November 10, 1998. Due to the altered hydrology which results from development, an HPA is required for the project, unless its runoff hydrographs demonstrate that the natural flow and/or bed of the stream and adjacent wetlands would not be affected. Simply discharging to the wetland buffer would definitely not satisfy this requirement, unless stormwater is prevented from reaching the wetlands and stream through infiltration or other methods. WDFW requires the design of stormwater facilities to meet or exceed the requirements of the Washington Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. If you have any questions,please contact me at(425) 649-7042_ Sincerely, Larry Fisher Area Habitat Biologist LF:lf:microtel.let cc: WDFW, Muller WDFW, Rickard City of Renton, Huerter CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: October 7, 1998 TO: Jennifer Toth Henning FROM: Gregg Zimmerman G, SUBJECT: Microtel Inn Joint Use Parking It sounds like everything is in order in terms of establishing the sufficient parking. On a recent Hotel project we(ERC)found out later that in addition to the need for guest parking,there was a ° convention center or at least a large meeting area that was not accounted for in the parking analysis. VINr Is there any such issue here? Also, I am assuming that this does not need a formal modification or deviation from the Parking and Loading Ordinance. If it does,I will need to receive from you the appropriate decision document. Thanks. II sew MwIc, :� C ecc ce: °c,,c--\)(1°..;8\)13/ - \\TS SERVER\SYS2\COMMON\Document2 CONCURRENCE DATE .144e NAME 111 ' ' J•�'�dM6/ 1 J at. CITY OF RENTON . iliAls • •,Irri2100441010 .�! PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS b' r' MEMORANDUM DATE: October 5, 1998 TO: Gregg Zimmerman FROM: Jennifer Toth Henning(x7286) O ,n SUBJECT: Microtel Inn Joint-Use Parking(File No. LUA-98-014, SA-H,ECF) During the Environmental Review Committee meeting for the Microtel Inn,concerns were raised regarding the applicant's proposal to utilize joint-use parking between the Microtel site and the abutting Denny's restaurant. Specifically, ERC questioned whether the Denny's had enough parking to satisfy Code requirements for the restaurant,while providing 18 additional spaces for Microtel Inn. This memo serves as the follow-up to you, as requested by the ERC. As you will note from reading the following summary, Denny's has 25 parking stalls beyond that which the Code requires. The applicant has provided the City with a Shared Parking Analysis for Microtel Inn Hotel and Denny's Restaurant by H. Lee and Associates (dated March 23, 1998). The parking analysis provided by the applicant demonstrates the demand for the existing restaurant and the proposed motel. Staff have reviewed the study and find it acceptable. The parking analysis estimates the peak parking • demand for Microtel to be 119 stalls, and the parking demand for Denny's is estimated to be 34 stalls. Following the public hearing,the applicant also provided a site plan documenting the existing parking at Denny's Restaurant, and a floor plan of the restaurant which shows the seating area. In addition, the existing parking was checked by Rupert Engineering. The gross floor area of the Denny's seating area is approximately 3,200 gross square feet, and the kitchen area is approximately 700 square feet, thus for the 3,900 g.s.f restaurant, 39 parking stalls are required. Denny's has 64 parking stalls _ available on site to serve restaurant patrons. A maximum of 39 stalls are needed in order for Denny's to comply with Code. Therefore, 25 excess parking stalls are available to share with the proposed Microtel Inn. Denny's has agreed to the joint-use of parking, recognizing it as a benefit to their operation. Part of the restrictions of the joint-use agreement keep Microtel from offering food service,thus encouraging customers of the motel to patronize surrounding restaurants. The draft joint-use parking agreement was submitted with the application. The agreement is intended to run with the land and is being forwarded to the City Attorney for review. According to City Code,the proposed 115-room motel requires a total of 119 parking stalls. One stall is needed for each motel unit(115 parking stalls), and 2 additional stalls are required for each 3 employees. The applicant anticipates a total of 6 employees, requiring 4 parking stalls for employees. The applicant is proposing to provide 101 parking stalls on site, and to share an additional 18 parking \\TS SERVER\SYS2\COMMON\H:\DIVISION.S\DEVELOP.SER\DEV&PLAN.INGUTH\MCRTLGZ.DOC CITY OF RENTON PLANNINGBUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS MEMORANDUM DATE: October 5, 1998 TO: Gregg Zimmerman FROM: Jennifer Toth Henning(x7286) SUBJECT: Microtel Inn Joint-Use Parking(File No. LUA-98-014, SA-H,ECF) During the Environmental Review Committee meeting for the Microtel Inn, concerns were raised regarding the applicant's proposal to utilize joint-use parking between the Microtel site and the abutting Denny's restaurant. Specifically, ERC questioned whether the Denny's had enough parking to satisfy Code requirements for the restaurant, while providing 18 additional spaces for Microtel Inn. This memo serves as the follow-up to you, as requested by the ERC. As you will note from reading the following summary, Denny's has 25 parking stalls beyond that which the Code requires. The applicant has provided the City with a Shared Parking Analysis for Microtel Inn Hotel and Denny's Restaurant by H. Lee and Associates (dated March 23, 1998). The parking analysis provided by the applicant demonstrates the demand for the existing restaurant and the proposed motel. Staff have reviewed the study and find it acceptable. The parking analysis estimates the peak parking demand for Microtel to be 119 stalls,and the parking demand for Denny's is estimated to be 34 stalls. Following the public hearing,the applicant also provided a site plan documenting the existing parking at Denny's Restaurant, and a floor plan of the restaurant which shows the seating area. In addition, the existing parking was checked by Rupert Engineering. The gross floor area of the Denny's seating area is approximately 3,200 gross square feet, and the kitchen area is approximately 700 square feet, thus for the 3,900 g.s.f restaurant, 39 parking stalls are required. Denny's has 64 parking stalls available on site to serve restaurant patrons. A maximum of 39 stalls are needed in order for Denny's to comply with Code. Therefore, 25 excess parking stalls are available to share with the proposed Microtel Inn. Denny's has agreed to the joint-use of parking, recognizing it as a benefit to their operation. Part of the restrictions of the joint-use agreement keep Microtel from offering food service,thus encouraging customers of the motel to patronize surrounding restaurants. The draft joint-use parking agreement was submitted with the application. The agreement is intended to run with the land and is being forwarded to the City Attorney for review. According to City Code,the proposed 115-room motel requires a total of 119 parking stalls. One stall is needed for each motel unit(115 parking stalls), and 2 additional stalls are required for each 3 employees. The applicant anticipates a total of 6 employees, requiring 4 parking stalls for employees. The applicant is proposing to provide 101 parking stalls on site, and to share an additional 18 parking \\TS SERVER\SYS2\COMMON\H:\DIVISION.S\DEVELOP.SER\DEV&PLAN.INGVTH\MCRTLGZ.DOC October 5, 1998 Page 2 stalls with Denny's Restaurant,which abuts the subject site on the north. The two sites share an existing driveway. The applicant has adequately demonstrated to Development Services Division that adequate parking is available to meet the Code requirements for both the existing and proposed use. Please feel free to contact me at Extension 7286 if you have any questions regarding this memo or the proposal. cc: Jana Huerter Project File AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ss. County of King ) MARILYN MOSES , being first duly sworn, upon oath, deposes and states: That on the 20th day of July ,1998, affiant deposited in the mail of the United States a sealed envelope(s) containing a decision or recommendation with postage prepaid, addressed to the parties of record in the below entitled application or petition. Signature: /VI et441 ` / SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this 2J5- day of NA , 1998. VA-eita./ /1460/t. Notary Public i and for the State of Washington, residing at P'ei , therein. Application, Petition, or Case No.: Microtel Inn LUA98-014,SA-H The Decision or Recommendation contains a complete list of the Parties of Record. HEARING EXAMINER'S REPORT July 20, 1998 OFFICE OF TILE HEARING EXAMINER CITY OF RENTON REPORT AND DECISION APPLICANT: Rupert Engineering,Inc. Microtel Inn File No.: LUA-98-014, SA-H LOCATION: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard SUMMARY OF REQUEST: To develop 115 room,three-story motel on 1.8 acre site with a creek and Category III wetland. SUMMARY OF ACTION: Development Services Recommendation: Approve with conditions DEVELOPMENT SERVICES REPORT: The Development Services Report was received by the Examiner on July 1, 1998. PUBLIC HEARING: After reviewing the Development Services Report,examining available information on file with the application,field checking the property and surrounding area;the Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows: MINUTES The following minutes are a summary of the July 7, 1998 hearing. The legal record is recorded on tape. The hearing opened on Tuesday,July 7, 1998,at 9:05 a.m. in the Council Chambers on the second floor of the Renton Municipal Building. Parties wishing to testify were affirmed by the Examiner. The following exhibits were entered into the record: Exhibit No. 1: Yellow file containing the original Exhibit No.2: Vicinity map application,proof of posting,proof of publication and other documentation pertinent to this request. Exhibit No.3: Site plan Exhibit No.4: Elevation drawing Exhibit No. 5: Landscape Plan Exhibit No.6: Zoning map Exhibit No. 7: Shared Parking Analysis dated March 23, 1998 Rupert Engineering,Inc. Microtel Inn File No.: LUA-98-014, SA-H July 20, 1998 Page 2 The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by JENNIFER HENNING,Project Manager, Development Services,City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way,Renton, Washington 98055. The applicant requests site plan approval to develop a 115-unit motel located in the northeast portion of the City in the Kennydale neighborhood. It is on the east side of I-405 north of NE 44th Street and east of Lake Washington Boulevard NE. The site is 1.8 acres in size and is presently undeveloped. There is also an approximately 12,000 square foot Category III wetland and small stream that are located on the western portion of the parcel. This stream is part of the Gypsy Creek drainage basin which drains into Lake Washington. The motel would be a single building,rectangular in shape and three stories in height. It is designed with an interior corridor with elevators to access the rooms. There would be surface parking provided on site for 101 cars. As part of the application a joint use parking agreement has been submitted in a draft form between Denny's Restaurant and Microtel. They have agreed to share not only access from Lake Washington Blvd NE with a joint access area on the north portion of this site, but also shared parking between the two uses. Each has different schedules with different peak times and both are in need of additional parking at times. The Environmental Review Committee(ERC)has requested a parking modification for this proposal,but the Zoning Administrator has not yet made a decision. There is not adequate room on site to provide the required parking. As part of this agreement,applicant would not be permitted to provide any type of food service on site. They would have vending machines and 24-hour coffee and tea service only. The height of the building would be 35 feet and the building footprint is about 14,000 square feet. The overall size of the facility is 42,000 square feet. As part of the parking modification,the applicant is asking that they be able to reduce the size of 22 of their stalls, 8 compact and 14 standard spaces. It is permitted by the code to reduce the size if a vehicle overhang is used. In order to do that they are asking to use a concrete curb rather than wheel stops. It would be overhanging but not intruding into any required wetland or stream buffer areas. For this 115-unit motel with six employees the required parking would be 119 stalls. The ERC issued a Determination of Non-Significance-Mitigated on June 9, 1998,with three mitigation measures assigned. They are required to design their storm detention system with a pre-100 year run-off rate 24 hour storm event to mitigate downstream flooding impacts that could result from the addition of new impervious surface. The ERC is also requiring fire and transportation mitigation fees. This site is classified Employment Area-Commercial on the Comprehensive Plan(CP)land use map. These sites are intended to provide for commercial uses and generally auto-oriented commercial uses that require large amounts of land or high visibility. Policies from the CP require consolidation of parcels for maximum flexibility of site design and to reduce access points. In this case the parcels are not being consolidated,but there is a shared access point from Lake Washington Blvd.NE that would serve as a secondary entrance,as well as an access point to Denny's. Landscaping is being proposed between the Microtel Inn and an adjacent motel located to the east,along the NE 44th street frontage,around the perimeter of the building and within the parking lot. This proposal meets the setback requirements,height limits and lot coverage of the zone. The applicant's plan indicates there would be a 5 foot wide landscape strip on the subject site abutting the right of way for NE 44th. It is less than what the zone requires,but there is an actual overall area of about 35 feet when the landscaped area that is included within the right-of-way is taken into account. Staff is supporting the reduction of the landscaped area from 10 feet down to 5 feet on the south portion of the property abutting NE 44th. There is a pedestrian connection proposed from NE 44th Street to the main entrance to the motel. Rupert Engineering,Inc. Microtel Inn File No.: LUA-98-014, SA-H July 20, 1998 Page 3 There is a requirement for 119 parking stalls for this proposal. If the applicant's parking modification is not granted,then they will need to revise their proposal such that the size of their structure and number of motel units is reduced to match the number of available parking. Applicant is also exceeding the number of compact stalls which is 30 percent of required parking,and must obtain approval through the modification process. If the modification is not granted,there is a possibility of converting three stalls on the NE 44th street side. The parking overhang on the west side will not overhang any pedestrian walkway or any landscaping that is in the required buffer. There is a rockery planned along the edge of the buffer at this location. The rockery drops down to the wetland so the vehicles would overhang the rockery. The curb would function as a wheel stop; it would take considerable speed to get over that and down into the wetland. A total of 8 compact spaces and 14 standard spaces would be shortened. The standard spaces would be 18 feet and would overhang the rockery by 2 feet. The compact spaces would be shortened to 14 feet and would overhang the rockery by 2 feet. A vehicle overhang is permitted as long as there is no interference with required landscaping. There are no over-sized stalls for campers or RV's,boats,nor are there requirements for those. The wetlands ordinance does apply because of the 11,840 square foot Category III wetland on site. It is considered to be small,but requires a minimum 25 foot wide buffer to be preserved. It has emergent and scrub shrub classifications of vegetation and there has been a large degree of disturbance from prior construction in the vicinity. The land clearing and tree cutting ordinance applies in this area to prohibit land clearing or tree cutting within 25 feet of the ordinary high water mark of creeks or wetlands. The applicant has established their clearing limit based on that minimum 25 foot setback. The surrounding areas are zoned for commercial arterial uses. The applicant is proposing landscaping as a buffer between existing uses. They are proposing limited curb cuts,with a new one from NE 44th, and existing from Lake Washington Blvd. for secondary access. The applicant has revised its original site plan to relocate the entrance from NE 44th as far to the east of the parcel as possible to avoid interference with the intersection. The noise from any parking areas and building entrance would be expected to blend in with the existing ambient noise in the area from the freeway traffic. There are public services and facilities to accommodate this proposal. Staff would recommend that the Microtel Inn proposal be approved, subject to conditions. Applicant must comply with the ERC's mitigation measures,revise their site plan to indicate the location of proposed garbage and recyclables collection areas,and provide a site lighting plan prior to issuance of building permit. With regard to the parking,applicant would be required to obtain the necessary approvals to deviate from parking standards or to revise the site plan to provide all the required parking onsite,or to revise the proposal such that the number of motel units proposed is reduced to match the available parking on site. With regard to the compact parking stalls specifically,the applicant would be required to revise the site plan to demonstrate that they have the number of compact parking stalls permitted and it does not exceed the parking and loading ordinance,or to seek and successfully obtain a modification from the parking code to exceed the maximum amount of compact parking stalls. Jeff Baker, Rupert Engineering, 1519 West Valley Highway N,#101,Auburn,Washington 98001,applicant herein,responded that the height of the rockery adjacent to the parking area varied in height from zero feet up to a maximum of about eight feet at the southern portion of the site. Mr.Baker also pointed out that the location of the trash dumpster is shown on the current site plan at the southeast corner of the building and is Rupert Engineering, Inc. Microtel Inn File No.: LUA-98-014, SA-H July 20, 1998 Page 4 indicated to be screened. He further stated that what is referred to as Denny's pond is northwest of this site within Lake Washington Boulevard and is downstream of the subject site. Regarding compact parking spaces,applicant intends to combine their site to Denny's to make sure they are in compliance with the required 30 percent maximum. Referring to RV parking,there are some parking stalls on the site that are front-to-front that a larger vehicle could pull into and then be able to pull straight through, obviously as long as not all the spaces are in use. As to the concerns of the wheel stop and its ability to stop vehicles from going over its edge,Mr.Rupert explained that it would be a continuous curb with a vertical edge at a standard 6 inch height to prevent smaller cars from getting hung up on it. Brian Hamilton, 5611 221st Place NE,Issaquah,WA 98027,explained that the Hamilton Company is the owner of the subject proposal,as well as facilities located in Eastgate and Auburn. He highlighted the features of this particular inn such as exterior design, interior corridor design,security aspects, its affordability,and its target market area. He explained that the inn had suites and kitchenettes. Regarding the concerns of the State over freeway noise,he stated that applicant would probably use a noise reduction wall construction along the front and ends of the building. Neil Watts,Plan Review Supervisor,Development Services Division, 1055 S. Grady Way,Renton, Washington 98055, stated that regarding the bike trail in Newcastle's future plans,the roadway is 14 feet to accommodate a shared bike lane,but it is not wide enough for a striped bike lane. However,this is a fully improved street and it would involve having to tear up curb,gutters and sidewalks on one or both sides to get the extra lane for a separately striped bike lane. Regarding the rockery located at the parking lot's edge,there is a concern over the 8 foot drop. Typically anything beyond a 4 foot drop requires a fence. Even though it is unlikely that a car can go over the vertical curb,there are concerns with people walking in this area with an unprotected drop. The Examiner brought up the subject of the City's liability pertaining to the rockery if such was approved in its present configuration. Mr. Watts stated that the City would like to see some provision where the rockery is pushed further back so a fence could be installed for that steeper portion. It was not clear where the rockery exceeded the 4 foot drop. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak,and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 10:22 a.m. FINDINGS.CONCLUSIONS&DECISION Having reviewed the record in this matter,the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicant,Jeff Baker of Rupert Engineering for Microtel Inn, filed a request for approval of a Site Plan for a 115-room motel. Rupert Engineering,Inc. Microtel Inn File No.: LUA-98-014, SA-H July 20, 1998 Page 5 2. The yellow file containing the staff report,the State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA)documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit#1. 3. The Environmental Review Committee(ERC),the City's responsible official, issued a Declaration of Non-Significance-Mitigated(DNS-M).for the subject proposal. 4. The subject proposal was reviewed by all departments with an interest in the matter. 5. The subject site is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard. The site is immediately east of the 44th Street I-405 interchange,also known as Exit 7. Lake Washington Boulevard runs along the west property line. 6. The subject site is a 1.8 acre trapezoidal parcel. The subject site is approximately 220 feet wide(east to west)at its north property line and approximately 190 feet wide at the south property line. The parcel is approximately 400 feet long(north to south). 7. The site slopes generally from the southeast to the northwest. A Category III Wetland of approximately 11,840 square feet is located on the western portion of the parcel. A small stream,part of the Gypsy Creek Drainage basin, flows through the wetland. 8. The subject site was annexed to the City with the adoption Ordinance 1823 enacted in April 1960. 9. The site was classified to its current category,CA(Commercial Arterial),with the adoption of Ordinance 4404 enacted in March 1995. 10. The map element of the Comprehensive Plan designates the area in which the subject site is located as suitable for the development of employment generating uses,but does not mandate such development without consideration of other policies of the Plan. 11. The applicant proposes erecting a 3-story motel on the eastern portion of the site. The building will be 35 feet tall. It would be approximately 269 feet long(north to south)by approximately 52 feet wide. It will have a traditional interior hallway rather than terrace access to the rooms. 12. The facade will be articulated and use fluting to give depth to the exterior treatment. There will be a gabled roofline and a peaked roof. A formal entry will be located on the west side of the building. 13. The applicant proposes sharing both a driveway and parking with the Denny's Restaurant which is located on the adjacent lot to the north. The shared parking requires approval from the Administrator of Public Works. No decision has been made and the administrator has sought additional information justifying the request. 14. The proposed use requires one parking stall for each room plus two stalls for each three employees. The applicant has indicated that there will be six employees. The 115-unit motel requires 115 stalls for patrons and 4 stalls for employees. The applicant will provide 101 stalls on-site. It proposes the remainder as shared parking on the Denny's site. 15. There are no special or larger stalls for RV's or cars towing trailers,although the applicant has suggested that there probably is room to accommodate a very limited need. Rupert Engineering, Inc. Microtel Inn File No.: LUA-98-014, SA-H July 20, 1998 Page 6 16. In addition, it appears that the proposal does not meet the appropriate ratio for compact versus full sized parking stalls. It appears that the applicant can accommodate the stalls by further reducing the landscaping or by applying for another modification to the Parking and Loading Ordinance. 17. The applicant has also proposed a modification to the Parking and Loading standards that requires wheel stops located within the stall. The applicant instead proposes poured concrete curbs that define the actual physical limits of the parking stall. In other words,the curb would be at the edge and there would be no room in the stall for an overhang. In practicality,the applicant proposes some of these curbs at the western edge of the site just above the wetland. In some instances,there would be up to an 8 foot embankment at the edge of the parking lot protected by only a 6 inch curb. 18. These bumper/curbs need special approval from the administrator. It has not been granted at this time. 19. An eight foot(8')drop protected by only a six inch(6")curb at the edge of a parking lot is unsafe. Pedestrians and particularly children and elderly people leaving cars,especially in the evening,would be unaware of such an unprotected embankment and could definitely suffer life-threatening injuries. 20. The applicant will be maintaining the approximately 11,840 square feet of wetland. There would also be a 25 foot buffer and setbacks from the wetland. The existing vegetation would remain. In addition, the stream course requires a 25 foot buffer from the high water mark. This protection will be maintained by the applicant. 21. The applicant has proposed a reduced five foot landscaping setback along NE 44th Street. While 10 feet is generally required, it may be reduced. The applicant proposes landscaping along the public right-of-way in this location for a depth of approximately 35 feet. Staff has indicated that the street and turning lanes are already designed and the right-of-way is well-established so that the landscaping proposed should remain for a reasonable period of time. The applicant would be responsible for maintaining such landscaping as if it were on the applicant's property. 22. The Washington State Department of Transportation raised concerns regarding possible noise complaints due to the site's proximity to a major freeway. It appears that noise complaints are sometimes generated,particularly for uses such as motels or sleeping accommodations. The State recommended appropriate acoustic techniques to avoid complaints. 23. Staff has indicated that while there have been problems with storm water in the area and downstream, the development of this site should not add to any existing problems. The adjacent Denny's site is subject to flooding. The applicant will be subject to appropriate storm water detention standards. 24. Staff noted that the intersection of NE 44th and Lake Washington Boulevard will be signalized. The short distance between that intersection and the applicant's NE 44th driveway was a concern. The driveway was moved to the east to increase the queuing distance. Staff determined that vehicles short- cutting the signalized intersection and using the applicant's joint driveway and access from Denny's should not be a problem. 25. The area adjacent to the interchange is developed with a series of other commercial uses including another motel east of the subject site. Rupert Engineering,Inc. Microtel Inn File No.: LUA-98-014, SA-H July 20, 1998 Page 7 CONCLUSIONS: 1. The site plan ordinance provides a number of specific criteria for reviewing a site plan. Those criteria are generally represented in part by the following enumeration: a. Conformance with the Comprehensive Plan; b. Conformance with the Building and Zoning Codes; c. Mitigation of impacts on surrounding properties and uses; d. Mitigation of the impacts of the proposal on the subject site itself; e. Conservation of property values; f. Provision for safe and efficient vehicle and pedestrian circulation; g. Provision of adequate light and air; h. Adequacy of public services to accommodate the proposed use; The proposed use satisfies these and other particulars of the ordinance. 2. It would appear that the proposed motel,a commercial venture, is compatible with the general goals of the Comprehensive Plan. At the same time, it is clear that a proposed use which is anticipated to generate approximately six employees,although shift work might increase those numbers, is not exactly an employment generating commercial use. The nature of the site and its wetland constraints, however,do need to be considered. Their useful site area is somewhat limited due to the wetlands, although an office complex generating additional jobs might have fit the site. 3. The proposal meets the height and setback standards of the CA zone. It will be checked for Building and Fire Code compliance when a building permit is approved. It does appear to need a number of modifications to meet its parking complement. None of those have been approved by the Administrator,thus making review more difficult. Clearly,this office should have the benefit of knowing if joint parking and altered wheel stops and reduced parking stalls are appropriate before Site Plan review. 4. It appears that the proposal is compatible with its general surroundings. It should not crowd the neighboring uses and clearly provides reasonable setbacks from both NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard. 5. The preservation of the wetland and stream corridor is sensitive to the environment. In addition, respecting those features should minimize any potential for exacerbating storm damage to downstream properties. 6. The proposed parking area above the wetland with the modified wheel stops and curbing is unacceptable. The design creates an unsafe configuration which will almost certainly lead to injuries. If the City were to approve the plan as proposed, including the potentially deadly 8 foot sudden drop protected by a mere six inch curb, it would be abrogating its responsibility to protect the public health. safety and welfare. Whether it is an inebriated adult or a darting toddler or someone who trips in the Rupert Engineering,Inc. Microtel Inn File No.: LUA-98-014, SA-H July 20, 1998 Page 8 wrong location,creating a situation suggested by the applicant's plan is completely unacceptable. Imagine the situation of travelers arriving after dark,opening their car and stepping to the rear or front of their vehicle and losing their step. The applicant needs to protect the drop-off from accidental intrusion. This can take the form of a cantilevered walkway or deck protected by a railing or lowering the parking area to reduce the drop-off to an acceptable height. This office does not have sufficient information in the record to decide what would be a safe height but would suggest building and construction codes would provide a frame of reference regarding the installation of decks,balconies and when railings are needed to protect such decks or balconies. 7. It would appear that other than the unprotected drop-off,pedestrian and vehicular circulation are appropriate. As noted,there could be problems for larger vehicles staying at the site as there is no specific accommodation for them in the site plan. 8. The general low-rise nature of the complex and its setting and placement appear to allow for adequate light and air to reach the site. The applicant should heed the State's advice on noise since the freeway is close to the site. DECISION: The Site Plan is approved subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the conditions imposed by the ERC. 2. The applicant receive full approval of its shared parking and modifications to the Parking and Loading Ordinance from the Administrator. If such approval is not forthcoming,the applicant shall reduce the size of the motel in order to accommodate all parking and all parking standards on the subject site. 3. The applicant shall be responsible for maintaining all landscaping adjacent to NE 44th as if it were on the applicant's property. 4. The applicant shall protect the drop-off along the western edge of the proposed parking area from accidental intrusion. This may take the form of a cantilevered walkway or deck extended over the wetland protected by a railing,or it may take the form of lowering the parking area to reduce the drop- off to an acceptable height. This office does not have sufficient information in the record to decide what would be a safe height, but would suggest building and construction codes would provide a frame of reference regarding the installation of decks,balconies and when railings are needed to protect such decks or balconies. ORDERED THIS 20th day of July, 1998. Mr I 1644/774./..._// FRED J. ItFMAN HEARING EXAMINER Rupert Engineering,Inc. Microtel Inn File No.: LUA-98-014, SA-H July 20, 1998 Page 9 TRANSMITTED THIS 20th day of July, 1998 to the parties of record: Brian Hamilton Jennifer Henning Jeff Baker 5611 221st Place SE 1055 S Grady Way 1519 West Valley Hwy N#101 Issaquah,WA 98027 Renton,WA 98055 Auburn, WA 98001 Dan Baker Neil Watts Campbell Motel Properties 1055 S Grady Way 1800 East Imperial Highway,#120 Renton,WA 98055 Brea,CA 92821 TRANSMITTED THIS 20th day of July, 1998 to the following: Mayor Jesse Tanner Gregg Zimmerman,Plan/Bldg/PW Administrator Members,Renton Planning Commission Jim Hanson,Development Services Director Art Larson,Fire Marshal Mike Kattermann,Technical Services Director Lawrence J. Warren,City Attorney Larry Meckling,Building Official Transportation Systems Division Jay Covington,Chief Administrative Officer Utilities System Division Councilperson Kathy Keolker-Wheeler Sue Carlson,Econ.Dev.Administrator South County Journal Pursuant to Title IV,Chapter 8, Section 15 of the City's Code, request for reconsideration must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m.,August 3, 1998. Any aggrieved person feeling that the decision of the Examiner is ambiguous or based on erroneous procedure,errors of law or fact,error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the prior hearing may make a written request for a review by the Examiner within fourteen(14)days from the date of the Examiner's decision. This request shall set forth the specific ambiguities or errors discovered by such appellant,and the Examiner may, after review of the record,take further action as he deems proper. An appeal to the City Council is governed by Title IV,Chapter 8, Section 16,which requires that such appeal be filed with the City Clerk,accompanying a filing fee of$75.00 and meeting other specified requirements. Copies of this ordinance are available for inspection or purchase in the Finance Department,first floor of City Hall. If the Examiner's Recommendation or Decision contains the requirement for Restrictive Covenants,the executed Covenants will be required prior to apprival_hy City Council or final processing of the file. You may contact this office for information on formatting covenants. The Appearance of Fairness Doctrine provides that no ex parte(private one-on-one)communications may occur concerning pending land use decisions. This means that parties to a land use decision may not communicate in private with any decision-maker concerning the proposal. Decision-makers in the land use process include both the Hearing Examiner and members of the City Council. Rupert Engineering,Inc. Microtel Inn File No.: LUA-98-014, SA-H July 20, 1998 Page 10 All communications concerning the proposal must be made in public. This public communication permits all interested parties to know the contents of the communication and would allow them to openly rebut the evidence. Any violation of this doctrine would result in the invalidation of the request by the Court. The Doctrine applies not only to the initial public hearing but to all Requests for Reconsideration as well as Appeals to the City Council. • ,ra SE 64th St. :1,), C (2 SE 6 1 SE 65th St/ j5thS — cw 1 w �~ I w w w d\ w d SE 68th 1St.C/) CO ' \\ 7--:1 1 �Se 66 Q) 1J SE 72nd St. i )/ \ i e 00 r4,, 1 cy `R=,8 R-8 \4- �NE 5,Oth St , .CA P . / / NE' 48t. SE 76th St. `a .--,, ,4,_,..4 % w SE] 76th Pl. f oq..& cnt C A SE 77th Pl. SEA 77 Pl th �u - 1 fVe � SE 78tt - G--; CA c 1 U , SE 80th St. [ j �f�( 7 NE 43th Fl ] , 1 7 C4 •• 32 T24N R5E E 1/2 Yo `fie T�j 4 A i�4eooONING r�rw rect cm, ssavicss 1"4 T7_4.N R KF. F. 1/7. . . • . • 9 0 DI ta I ( •9 9 X /Ix,acti,,QATER lliONE) TAVERN 1 I (CA-ZONE) 1 a.C4 rot a 4 4 I I iv i SCRINK M .1 O 14 511181•\ 4 - . ---------9 -- ..-01Sra3A•-: a3eir----41,-.-*-- Ix fun _-_. . .__...1, ' 2-C.ELQ_M.15 I a Vr •-• •1.. (CA ZONE) "-r-=- 5. fi IL. 00.0104-f...ke. 3-510•11110Ta 5" I 2t 1414.4.0 i t, - - . . i „et __ . .___. .1. Iva.TV. I rc an op :p.m; t .. •• TiFi.-6-. t:gr:'.': .- - --- - I.•UV ,,, ELOCAso 7:t 7 0 0 - ® (50C11810. 4 5..I. 111 [.. ._. .- - C 4 I•IRV . AMU/(0 '•'' KV Cu%1 0.011.0 .010CAP sou n - //,-coma suu i 1-1/Goo 5'SU.. snIT • - .:- ...,. - - ,"i '-•( ' . ! --T-i -1--I'" -'1.'1 -' uol 1- A ; ' . , ! I ••• J!' ''' 1 T PI ej 1 1, DENNY'S . /...7-1....1.1'..:4;.;6-I S..#141 f 1 i i - - I • -2 ' . V(401 VS PM :4 12_01AURANT V I IC POPS „r./..5.. ,....... .,..4 J-- _ , i 4.' . -- .i'_I_ - - 1.• /..i'f, . .7. 0.11Z .... g I I 4. ... w Wage Slat . • I ' • - 0 ' .- .e Val(n ‘ i• ir • C,C• C C .c . c ' cic ' -1 , i . "•-•:!,1 .! • / ! ' - I I Ai) I I I I 1 Iti I i(D\ f '-:--- • 1 1 • ; lc‘ -___1:01 p•cw i.•• ....... 2' 7 sou a 14'‘.ir 75'ler IWO V.V.WNW(OttlitiwiC - ..•' \ . ---"------- - -- --I" .:. 1100/01lli PWINIIII --- ----- WW1 04.111WIC •""ill Ma -- .f . [-------______ trae•ON ,---- ) ... - , I ....- ------ i -.... -- ..... / ..... .----.1 _ _ _ _ - ../ 1 ... •Inglat..34P/ g. 01,10 404 111.0 50 11 oVI101. 5104.4 ICC/-Y.' 35 MY soon / '... PROJECT NOTE$ zo...c CA(00.80Cvt WNW) 4.0Y , ts fl CANCCoT 3 ... 101 SA 10•045r.0 Sit( I l0 4C185(78 408 54) 14 OW 5/•/- e"..•••• i' sg ............................__------0.185,-.61-::46115 ... • 1010 Ii0:61 wic I ROMS.14 000•NM 54 ci-EN.glal I __.----.-. ....„......•••••-..-------------' - \ .............. --..... 1.18.0 A Col 35'.4-(50'4O4110) ••••.....•-• .. .. 101 0041.4 1118 ------ •CYO 1 WU••••••••••• SIlarc441 WAIN•10'(MX 6O.0) .... .....• MO S.SKIM scut.•in'OS P(0.01 P.. .. ... •... (41 •10'(wrt•11001 -- / WS1 •102 OAK WOO) ICIPIZ\•5 . - KUNO(812 . 44.4 11(00040 IA OA.VallY Vitt voskit4s."3"eLvp •••••, . it5 000445 0 1 FIR OAR •445 0 MIMI _if 7'%KV CMIPPAC .....r• S bfl.9ffis.2 Ilya.4 3 riatcnias•4 mix •In SlcuS it SW Si. • " r Ws SIREN WO. n'504. -4 P.PAINC PRO4C08 14 COONCI SUO 1 rrP 3 PIXIS.VA Sn001 01040 SWIM I •0 . I S1.0.000(I.on -Go Rocs,o woo(A..( ).. • .64 .1.5o4o.ROI '1,/ 1 CC4,401(8 5'.1100) •16 (Xa) C4210 1101,0'.NO ri10 WW1 Of vfl ov..ODP(I'.201 •5 0E1,00 WW1(05955RIC NORCO+I08111 1:410013 •IS malt• 1010 •119 5120I5.01. 1 L40.510880 ARICA 405480-04140 5431V HAM PVIIIS-\\ I KIL00(Mb XLRLUID ft•-114.1 wriptiri pas 101 LA050IPIC MIA •WII.I. V 1 g t local.OR 11/18044S rill.04.4!OR DE51.4/00 2.5"i.,,,,..SS2..2.Cs.as 99 VEYSKet. Me WON SNOW%I WI A. 1998 (8 48 CI Phrlat MIA suaCTO lo,Jar winsok 0114,,,...OttuSCVAA_ _ •.".0 g 0 (PC40 0.44.003 SI Z c); TIP. WALL SECTION Po pm$101 I Reilipara Engtinsevons, OnC CONSuliadG ENGINLEPS/Civ,AI. SINUCIVit... "". .1 AK ume Ela. CITY OF - II\ ;AN /,.fi,,,,.„,,,,,,,,,,.,, ......0,,,,, RENTON MICROTEL INN -:44.• 4 ,.. ... ES= 4. v.... I:J 0 ir .- ".'";';1.. C3 ,:" 1 14(80.400 -- 11-F PI AN ..• 5" 5 I i„ I„,.„ 1....„1 „,,__,__..,_ . . .. ; . ' - -- • msQr BOO sc»tJao III J S'NOIl'vn3"1E ioi x= I 41 I 1 g �� I ANOIS 3�lN11 I &1Ilffi AlininaPU POO( 1 II 111 1 „ooti s« I msis ssm M 1E,L0= 1 I III ; I. — I li r —1 —I II II 7 ® ® Dmp ®D II iffiNon-F-2.1., 1E0 mo mo imh ,; MO ®G ®G' ,,,,'�IIIUIIII�gINIIINIIf��nl�' !�Ill�i�lnl�.�lll�fl;; z I ` NBNIIIIN� 111111111111111 p Eo ®�` •'• i 11 1 Illll IL J Mo ®Q ®Q �INllulll I �IBlllllll W II • an ME M9!IN n,� Inn MD ®D �11gnlB11111011011011l 111111i 5 - j m IIII II �II �:Ii1-I�IN��IIII-N� —� • ,911111111111111gIIIgII�n k, .. Ilglliii 1 lllllq 'INIIIII m I r. wg _ D ®D VIIIII IIIII P.71' ♦ e JgIG��gNlqdlqllN�iqlilliill '® �` ®p ®D ' — — g6��ulllu�INN���al I=D ®Drt .._ IM I'm"1"112WI�IIIPINI"II�II I ►- - ;it!!I I -D ®D C r Ii. 10[I ME ® •IUD �p ®p i • 11111111111111111NIN1111111111,1 - •1 !....„..;:, . .,.., ... :11 ®D ®Q ®G ,m —If —I, p o I. D MD D ; pir II In ®D ®otIl _,I T IIIIII ILNNII 'IIIVIIII e 1. :I uFiv. = I D ®D ®G m i I jr•- All II � �� °) iNiliq�l�lqED ®ii�N®I 1 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION Kristina Thompson, being first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE the RENTON,WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC)has issued a Determination of Non- SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL Significance - Mitigated for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. 600 S. Washington Avenue, Kent, Washington 98032 MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Environmental review and approval to a daily newspaper published seven (7) times a week. Said newspaper is a legal develop a three story motel on 1.8 acres. newspaper of general publication and is now and has been for more than six months Location: NE corner of NE 44th Street and prior to the date of publication, referred to, printed and published in the English language Lake Wash.Blvd. The 15 day comment and appeal period continually as a daily newspaper in Kent, King County, Washington. The South County for this project will run concurrently. The Journal has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the comment/appeal periods for this project will State of Washington for KingCounty. end at 5:00 PM on June 29, 1998.Written 9 Y comments shall be forwarded to the The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the South County Development Services Division Land Use Journal (and not in supplemental form) which was regularly distributed to the subscribers Review Supervisor. Information on the pro- ject file and the mitigation measures during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a imposed by the city of Renton's Environmental Review Committee are Microtel Inn available at the Development Services Division, Sixth Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. as published on: 6/15/98 Phone: (425) 430-7200. Appeal pro- ceduresThe full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $60.10 ice, First are available ini the City Clerk's g g g office, Floor, Municipal Building, 200 Legal Number 4789 Mill Ave.So.,Renton,WA. A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular n / meeting in the Council Chambers on the c second floor of City Hall,200 Mill Ave.,So., L Clerk South CountyJournal Renton,WA, on July 07, 1998 at 9:00 AM to consider the Site Approval (SA). If the Environmental Determination is appealed, S the appeal will be heard as part of this pub- Subscribed and sworn before me on thi c y of A,,,.12 , 19 lic hearing. Interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing. Published in the South County Journal n _ yh /ir'd June 15,1998.4789 _owl!!!t tiff_ e---ko :---- teio „0,,xx 11. ,,',/,,„ °N5�t•a-��� '• ,/e ''. Notary Public of the State of Washington .' c;'' <-= residing in Renton "a�Y i,y_ King County, Washington _ —o— _ ,„_ i,/i,' WAS 't��•` 7'j06-1998 8=51 AM FROM RUPERT ENGINEERING 206 939 2168 P_ 1 RUPERT ENGINEERING, INC. 1519 West Valley Highway North, Suite 101 P.O. Box 836 Auburn, WA 98071 253-833-7776 253-939-2168 - FAX Fax Transmission To: Jennifer Henning From: Jeff Baker Company: City of Renton Date: July 16, 1998 Fax#: 1-425-430-7300 cc Fax Lloyd Huskey 1-425-644-7279 You should receive 3 page(s) including this one. If you do not receive all pages, please call 253-833-7776 Message: Re. Microtel Inn and Denny's parking agreement: 1. Seating area in Denny's is 3200 SF, yielding a parking need for 32 spaces. This correlates well with Hann Lee's parking study which indicated a maximum parking space use of 34 spaces. 2. Actual parking totals: Microtel Inn: Standard: 65 Compact: 36 (35.6%) Total: 101 Denny's Standard: 44 Compact: 16 (26.7%) Total: 60 Combined: Standard: 109 Compact 52 (32.3%) Total: 161 7‘.16-1998 8.51AM FROM RUPERT ENGINEERING 206 939 2168 P. 2 3. Required parking: Microtel Inn- 119 Denny's 32 Total 151 4. Compact percentage: There is an excess of 10 parking spaces. If we consider these excess spaces to be 10 of the compact spaces on the Denny's site then the mix would be 109 standard and 42 compact. This yields a compact percentage of 42/151 = 27.8%. As shown above the compact percentage of the total spaces is only 32.3%. 5. Attached is a plan of the Denny's site for reference. Please call if you have any questions. Washington State Northwest Region �1 Department of Transportation 15700 Dayton Avenue r P.O. Box 330310 LOP Sid Morrison Seattle,WA 98133-9710 Ci7, FNr Secretary of Transportation OP no,„' PIA A (206)440-4000 HOC O FNtQ, ,ING 8 fgy8 July 7, 1998 Jennifer Toth Henning, Project Manager Planning/Building/Public Works 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 SUBJECT: SR-405 MP 7.68 CS 1743 Microtel Inn May Creek I/C Dear Ms Henning: The proposed project would construct a new 115 unit motel located on the northeast quadrant of the NE 44th St./Lake Washington Blvd./I-405 NB On ramp intersection. The project has two proposed accesses. Access to the proposed project site would be provided from a new driveway on NE 44th St. and an existing Denny's Restaurant's driveway on Lake Washington Blvd. 1998 was submitted by the project developer as the horizon year for total completion and occupancy of the facility. We have reviewed the Traffic Impact Analysis and have the following comments. 1. Page 1 - The Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA)did not address pipeline growth rates. The background growth rate does provide general growth information,but including the pipeline projects would provide more accurate and"localized"traffic growth information. 2. Page 1 -The 1%general growth rate for the east leg of the NE 44th St./Lake Washington Blvd./I-405 NB On ramp intersection is unacceptable. Per WSDOT OUM, a 2% general growth would be more appropriate for the east leg. Please revise. 3. Page 1 -Projected trips for proposed developments should be derived from the ITE Trip Generation Manual, 6th Edition. Trip surveys/counts are to be used to establish trips rates for existing developments. Please revise. 4. Page 1 -According to State right of way records, it appears the Denny's Restaurant's driveway is within State right of way. The proposed use of this driveway to serve the Motel's projected trips would be considered a change of use for this driveway. Because of the need to provide these comments in something of a rush, we have not been able to determine with certainty whether some turn-backs in this area have July 7, 1998 Page SR-405 MP 7.68 CS 1743 Microtel Inn May Creek I/C occurred. If the Denny's access still remains within the State's right-of-way, please provide the following: • Application for Access Connection • Driveway analysis-Accounting for the Denny's Restaurant's existing trips and the Motel's projected trips 5. Page 1 -According to State right of way records, it appears the proposed driveway onto NE 44th St. is within the limited access area. The proposed access would require a break in limited access. Breaks in limited access must be approved by our Olympia Service Center and the Federal Highway Administration. Please provide the following: • Application for Access Connection • Distance between the intersection and the proposed driveway • Request for Deviation to break limited access. Include sufficient deviation justifications to warrant deviation. The limited access portion of 44th St. extends approximately 100 feet from the property corner. If the access point is located beyond that, a deviation would not be required for a break in limited access. 6. Page 6 - The projected 1998 horizon year seems very optimistic. Please provide verification that 1998 is the horizon year,or provide data for a more realistic horizon year. 7. Page 6-Adjusting the 1996 traffic counts to 1997 and then projecting the trips out to the horizon year is unacceptable. Please provide current 1998 traffic counts as the baseline year for projection out to the horizon year. See comments 1, 2 and 6. 8. Page 3 -Accident analysis must be provided for all proposed accesses onto State facilities. The accident history/analysis is incomplete. An accident analysis must include the following: • 3-year accident history with a collision diagram illustrating the accidents • Discussion of the predominant accident types, locations and patterns • Assessment of the development's traffic safety impact • Mitigation for its adverse safety impact. 9. We recommend improvements for pedestrian and bicycle traffic along the proposed developments frontage. Please note that all pedestrian facilities must adhere to ADA guidelines and requirements, i.e. curb ramps, etc. July 7, 1998 PagL, SR-405 MP 7.68 CS 1743 Microtel Inn May Creek I/C 10. Please provide sight distance plans for the proposed accesses on Lake Washington Blvd. and NE 44`h St. showing existing and proposed vegetation/planting areas and proposed signs for review. The sight distance plans are to address and provide proposed methods to mitigate or overcome all sight distance deficiencies. Sight distance plans must be stamped and signed by a Licensed Engineer. Because of the time constraints to review this proposal we were not able to review the potential impact this development will have on the immediate environment. We will require time to determine the impact to the local hydraulics especially. When our review is completed I will provide you with the additional information. If you have any questions please contact John Sutherland, (206) 440-4914, or Don Hurter, (206) 440-4664, of my Developer Services office. Sincerely, ROBERT A. JOSEPHSON, .E. Manager of Planning and Local Coordination Jbs:405\First review letter 07/07/98 09:04 FAX 206 440 4806 NWR OPERATIONS lj001 . jJiflwE JUL4111111. - 9 1998 eWashington State Department of Transportation HER c oN MINER 0�e..,t tv 14 FAALC S I1VIX M • Original to follow Date: July 7, 1998 #Pages,total: 5 yes X . no To: Jennifer Toth Henning From: John Sutherland Of: City of Renton Of: WSDOT NW Region/ Robert A. Josephson, P.E. • Telephone: (425) 277-6186 Telephone: (206) 440-4914 Fax: (425) 430-7300 Fax: (206) 440-4806 • Comments: Jennifer, following are the comments from a very rapidly done Traffic Review. You will notice that in the two paragraphs that deal with Access Points, I have had to hedge on right-of-way. When I have had the opportunity to look further I can tell you who will be responsible for permitting access, but until then,just be aware of what will be needed. Included with the comment pages is a copy of a portion of our right-of-way sheet for you to also see what's shown. • CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 1`' day of ata,A , 1998, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing 9e-Port •40 fit a r t vi n0Q IM IACx` documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Zie w&.k.c r" Ruizefft nstvwer K� 1C-- E3u( w v Se (Signature of Sender) r •STATE OF OF WASHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) _ JJ / I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that c t `�7 . signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act fopthe uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: 6 / S%g a X,�,, Notary LPu c in and for the State oa vvashington Notary (Print) tMAJi [�..YN KAMCI ICrr My appointmen expir COMMISSION EXPIRES 6/29/99 Project Name: yv1 kCYO e.\ `hh Project Number: LV A cis-014 I SA- EL NOTARY.DOC S 0 j A ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: MICROTEL INN PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Jeff Baker.of Rupert Engineering,Inc..has applied to develop a 115-room,three-story motel on 1.8 acres.The site is presently vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland on the western portion of No site. Parking for 108 cars would be provided on the site.Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with Denny's restaurant,located next to the subject site.Location:NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Comments regarding the environmental determination must be filed In writing on or before 5:00 PM June 29, 1993. Any aggrieved person feeling that the environmental determination of the Environmental Review Committee is based on erroneous procedure,errors of law or fact,error in judgment,or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the time of the detenninabon may submit written comments.After review of the comments,If Environmental Review Committee finds there is not sufficient evidence to amend its original determination,then there will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action would need to file a formal appeal within the original 15-day timelrame. Written comments must be filed with: Jana Hueder,Land Use Review Supervisor,City of Renton Development Services Division,200 Mill Avenue South,Renton.WA 98055. If an appeal of the environmental determination is also filed with the Hearing Examiner during the same 15-day comment period,then the Environmental Review Committee will first take action on the request for reconsideration and the appellant will be • notified that the appeal is on hold pending the Committee's decision on the reconsideration request. The City will nobly the appellant/person requesting reconsideration and parties of record and the Hearing Examiner of the Environmental Review Committee's final determination. The appeal process wig Then be continued unless the appellant notifies the. Hearing Examiner in writing that he wishes to withdraw the appeal.Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM June 29,1998. Appeals must be filed In writing together with the required 575.00 application fee with:Hearing Examiner,City o1 Renton,200 Mill Avenue South,Renton,WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11B. Additional information regarding the appeal prnross may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office,(425)-235.2501. A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular meeting In the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall,Renton,Washington,on JULY 07.1998 at 9:00 AM to consider the SITE APPROVAL(SA). If the Environmental Determination is appealed,the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. ifii.c 104,;i: TT Sik c /r: I.r le W.4'A J e :I Yi j• ._ � fly If* `I. . Mil , 4 ,.., , I .I _` ,• !p -`T-"- "C it �y.. i x a°y �'� • '.'!,si' :. ''' it 'r /l�111 q °Li. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:PLEASE CONTACT THE CDV&- NDEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT(425)235.2550. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. CERTIFICATION I, NM / iA+/4J/%( , hereby certify that 3 copies of the above document were posted by me in "3 conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on XNr/./9 9if • Signed: i i/ 3" ATTEST: Subcribed sworn before me, a Nortary Public, in and for the State of Washington residing y(g),.- , on the(p f/-7-- day of C),(4-- / -2< . t/ ,,,11.--4.L.,,,.... G/ILly MARILYN KAMCHEFF COMMISSION EXPIRES 6/29/99 CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER • PUBLIC HEARING ....... ...• • JULY 07, 1998 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 9:00 AM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, SECOND FLOOR, RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVENUE SOUTH The application(s) listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be heard Items will be called for bearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner. PROJECT NAME: Microtel Inn PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Jeff Baker, of Rupert Engineering, Inc., has applied to develop a 115- room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is presently vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland on the western portion of the site. Parking for 101 cars would be provided on the site. Another 18 parking stalls would be shared with Denny's restaurant, located next to the subject site. Location: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard. AGNDA.DOC City of Renton PUBLIC Department of Planning/Building/Public Works HEARING PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST: Public Hearing Date: July 7, 1998 Project Name: Microtel Inn Applicant/ Jeff Baker, Rupert Engineering, Inc. Address: 1519 West Valley Highway North, Suite 101 Auburn, WA 98001 Owner/ The Hamilton Company Address: attn: Brian Hamilton (THC) Exit Seven, LLC 3241 156th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98007 File Number: LUA-098-014,SA-H,ECF Project Manager: Jennifer Henning • Project Description: Jeff Baker(Rupert Engineering, Inc.), representing The Hamilton Company, has applied to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is present vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland on the western portion of the si Parking for 101 cars would be provided on the site. Another 18 parking stalls wou be shared with Denny's restaurant, located next to the subject site. Project Location: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard . vt.lot6+ • Je n. lik... ao a ,T 6 ... ,./.,"......, <,, ,,,,, /4, i ifIl . T.', ''-',h!re ' _' ' Mt OEM o ,o :. 11 • " a msl ' • •, I'' ,, ' _ , • _� 'I . ��. . °' ,, lJ 1e ' icy , 1 „ ` r • elks c4,-. Il o! Ito ,I Ga't lay `,' b 'Bi I65 ` _ I r c h a a 9 e ;.• 7 e 1 y•,,4 ..._. ..7:.,3.'1. r Q' ~ Y L7' _' ti ...�.- .N.44TN Si- —•—•—/ '•�','—•NE•-43 RO—•ST•—• N.E.— — 43RD — ,PL• - RRRR Y ® 2 /,,. ir \ , 1131'/ 1 1 :1 3 y__mw___ ctd)ii _ au z 999 ___..._ K i Y M4� y III1. • , City of Renton P/B/PW Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: JULY 7, 1998 Page 2 of 1: B. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner ofKecord: The Hamilton Company (THC) Exit Seven, LLC attn: Brian Hamilton 3241 156th Avenue SE Bellevue, WA 98007 2. Zoning Designation: Commercial Arterial (CA) 3. Comprehensive Plan: Employment Area - Commercial (EAC) Land Use Designation 4. Existing.Site Use: Vacant 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: North: commercial (Denny's restaurant, Shurgard Storage, health club)) East: commercial (Travelers Inn motel, office/retail, cleaners)) South: commercial (McDonald's restaurant) West: freeway (1-405) 6. Access via NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard 7. Site Area: 1.8 acres 8. Project Data: area comments Existing Building Area: None New Building Area: 42,000 s.f. Total Building Area: 42,000 s.f. C. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action Land Use l i/e No. Ordinance No. Date Annexation N/A 1823 4-19-60 Comprehensive Plan N/A 4498 6-7-93 Zoning Code N/A 4404 3-26-95 D. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Utilities: Water: 12-inch water main located in NE 44th Street Sewer: 12-inch sewer main is located in NE 44th Street Surface Water-Storm Water: Storm facilities are located on the site and in NE 44th Street HEXRPT.DOC • City of Renton P/B/PW Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: JULY 7, 1998 Page 3 of 1 2. Fire Protection: provided per City of Renton 3. Transit: Metro/King County Transit operates bus service on NE 44th Street (Route 240) connection to Newcastle and Factoria. Service also operates on 1-405. 4. Schools: Not applicable to the proposal. 5. Recreation: Not applicable to the proposal 6. Other: None E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Section 4-31-10.4: Commercial Arterial (CA) Zone 2. Section 4-14: Parking and Loading Ordinance 3. Section 4-32: Wetlands Ordinance 4. Section 4-9: Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element-- Employment Area Commercial policies G. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: 1 . PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND The applicant, Jeff Baker of Rupert Engineering, representing The Hamilton Company exit Seven, LLC, has applied for Site Approval in order to be permitted to develop a 115-unit 'otel on a site located on the northeast corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulk 'ard. The 1.8 acre subject site is presently undeveloped, and generally slopes from southe .t to northwest. An 11,840 square foot Category III wetland and small stream are located ( the western portion of the parcel. The stream is part of the East Lake Washington Gypsy reek Drainage Basin which drains into Lake Washington. The applicant proposes to develop the parcel with a three-story rectangular shaped mot I and surface parking for 101 cars. The dimensions of the structure would be 269 feet in length )y 52 feet in width. Microtel Inn would feature double-loaded rooms accessing from an ernal corridor. The building footprint would be approximately 14,000 s.f., while the height wail, De 35 feet. The applicant is proposing a joint-use parking agreement between Denny's restaur, and Microtel Inn. A common driveway from Lake Washington Boulevard presently provides ccess to Denny's, and cross-access would be permitted between the uses. A parking stu a was HEXRPT.DOC City of Renton P/B/PW Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examine. MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: JULY 7, 1998 Page 4 of submitted with the project application, demonstrating the current use and occupancy pattern of Denny's and the anticipated demand for Microtel Inn. Motels require one parking stall for each room, plus two parking stalls for every three employees. For a 115-room facility with employees, the required parking is 119 stalls. A total of 101 parking stalls would be provided of site, 36 of the stalls would be compact, with 60 standard stalls, and 5 to comply with AD, requirements. The applicant has requested a modification from the Parking and Loading standards to h permitted to utilize poured in place concrete curbing rather than the standard wheel stops. I addition the project requires the approval or the Development Services Division in order to l permitted to utilize joint-use parking to satisfy the parking requirements. If approved, the applicant anticipates that site preparation and construction would take about s months to complete. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21C, 1971 s amended), on June 9, 1998 the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determinatior f Non-Significance - Mitigated. 3. COMPLIANCE WITH ERC MITIGATION MEASURES The Environmental Review Committee issues the DNS-M with three mitigation measures which the applicant is required to comply with. The appeal period for the environmental determination ended of June 29, 1998. No appeals were filed. The ERC mitigation measures are as follows: 1. The applicant shall design the storm detention system to the pre-100-year run-off rate, -1- hour storm event, in order to diminish downstream flooding impacts that could result from the addition of impervious surface on the site. The applicant shall provide this information and calculations as part of the final storm drainage report to be submitted with the construction drawings. The applicant intends to comply with this mitigation measure and is required to submit drawings and calculations with the construction drawings. 2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$0.52 per squa, foot of new construction. The Fire Mitigation Fee is payable prior to the issuance of, e building permit for the project. The applicant intends to comply with this mitigation measure. The Fire Mitigation Fee must be paid nor to the issuance of the Building Permit. 3. The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee, at a rate of$75 0 per each new average daily trip attributable to the project. The fee is payable prior!, the issuance of building permits. The applicant intends to comply with this mitigation measure. The Transportation Mitigation Fee r1 1st be paid prior to the issuance of the Building Permit. 4. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application mate ,ils to identify and address site plan issues from the proposed development. These comm, ts are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments has been incorporated Ito the HEXRPT.DOC City of Renton P/B/PW Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: JULY 7, 1998 Page 5 of 1, appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of the report. 5. CONSISTENCY WITH SITE PLAN APPROVAL CRITERIA Section 4-31-33 (D.) "The Hearing Examiner and City staff shall review and act upon site plar based upon comprehensive planning considerations and the following criteria. These criteria a( objectives of good site plans to be aimed for in development within the City of Rento However, strict compliance with any one or more particular criterion may not be necessary reasonable. These criteria also provide a frame of reference for the applicant in developing site, but are not intended to be inflexible standards or to discourage creativity and innovatic The site plan Review criteria include, but are not limited to, the following:" (5A) GENERAL CRITERIA: (1) CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ITS ELEMENTS & POLICIE The project site is designated Employment Area - Commercial (EAC) on the Cit Comprehensive Land Use Map. Sites with the EAC designation are intended to provide r residential uses and generally auto-oriented commercial uses that require large amounts of L d or high visibility (Objective LU-AA). The subject site is located in an area that abuts Interst e 405 and is located on a minor arterial. Commercial development is located to the north (Deny s restaurant) and south (McDonald's restaurant). Comprehensive Plan Policies of the EAC designation that apply to the proposal are as follow' Policy LU-169. Individual parcels should be encouraged to consolidate to maximize flexibility r site design and reduce access points. The primary entrance to the motel would be from NE 44th Street. However, an existing drive ,ay from Lake Washington Boulevard NE would serve as a secondary access point, and would L. shared with the Denny's restaurant to the north. The applicant has requested that a joint-use parking agreement be approved between the motel and restaurant in order to meet a portior the required parking spaces. The use of a shared driveway for one of the access points woe meet the intent of Policy LU-169.. Policy LU-170. Individual development projects should be encouraged to: a. minimize curb cuts and share access points, b. provide for internal circulation among adjacent parcels, c. share parking facilities, d. centralize signing, e. create a unified style of development, and f. provide landscaping and streetscaping to soften visual impacts. The project would result in the sharing of a secondary access point with the adjacent Dent' restaurant. A cross-access agreement and joint parking agreement between the restaurari :mnd motel is also proposed, consistent with LU-170.a, b, and c. The applicant is proposing to I ain an existing wetland and stream area with the setbacks required per the Renton Municipal ( )de. Landscaping is proposed within the parking area and on the perimeter of the proposed mo 'I consistent with Policy LU-170.f. Policy LU-174. Parking areas should be landscaped(including street trees, buffers, berr 1, especially along the roadways, to reduce the visual impacts. HEXRPT.DOC City of Renton P/B/PW Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: JULY 7, 1998 Page 6 o113 A landscape plan has been submitted that would provide trees, shrubs and groundcovers within the parking lot. Perimeter landscaping is proposed along the NE 44th Street boundary. The applicant is proposing to limit development to generally the east portion of the site in order to preserve the existing on-site stream and wetland, including buffers. Existing vegetation in the wetland and stream buffer areas would not be disturbed, and would create a separation between the proposed motel and Lake Washington Boulevard. Policy LU-176. Increased demand for commercial uses should be accommodated through redevelopment and intensification of Employment Area - Commercial designations rather than expansion of those areas. The project site is undeveloped, and appears to be appropriate for the proposed commercial development, provided that on-site sensitive areas can be avoided. Microtel Inn would result iri the in-fill and intensification of an undeveloped parcel in the EAC designation, consistent with Policy LU-176. Policy LU-179. A unified style of commercial or residential development should be encourage through site standards, including: a. minimum lot depth of 200 feet, b. maximum height of 4-6 stories, c. parking to the side or rear of the building, d. maximum setbacks which will allow incorporating a landscape buffer, and e. common signage and lighting requirements. The proposed development would be located on a parcel that is approximately 400 feet long while the depth varies from 230 feet on the north to about 130 feet on the south. A portion of City and State right-of-way abuts the southwest portion of the site adjacent to the wetland an( where the stream and buffer are located. The proposed development would be three stories height. Parking would be located in the side yard and front yard areas, but would be separate from the streets by landscaping and/or a wetland/stream and buffer. The development prop( ,il generally meets the intent of Policy LU-179 regarding building height and development layoi. with the exception of locating parking to the rear of the building. If the location of the motel ,d the parking were reversed, the parking would be sandwiched between two motel structures, would present construction challenges to the applicant, as the area most suitable for constrt. on of a building is on the east portion of the site, away from the wetland. (2) CONFORMANCE WITH EXISTING LAND USE REGULATIONS The following requirements and development standards contained in Section 4-31-1 4 . Commercial Arterial Zone (CA) of the Zoning Code [adopted June 1993] are applicable I this proposal. Development Standards: Setbacks: The CA Zone requires a minimum setback of 10 feet from the front and/or stre, but the setback may be reduced to zero (0) through the site plan review process, provided that lank walls are not located within the reduced setback. This setback would apply to new structui s on the property. No rear and side yard setbacks are required. The proposal would result in building setbacks of at least 100 feet from the west property , e, and approximately 125 feet from the south boundary. As proposed, Microtel Inn would cc ply with applicable setback requirements of the CA Zone. HEXRPT.DOC City of Renton P/B/PW Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner . MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: JULY 7, 1998 Page 7 of 1: Height: Building height is limited to a maximum of 50 feet, but may exceed that height with special approval from the Hearing Examiner or Zoning Administrator(depending on the height of surrounding zoning). The proposal would result in a three-story, 35-foot high building on the site. As proposed, the project would comply with the height limits of the CA Zone. Lot Coverage: Lot coverage is limited to 65% but may be increased to 75% if parking is provided within the building or within a parking garage. As proposed, Microtel Inn would result in 18% lot coverage (building only). Landscaping: A minimum landscaping strip of ten feet(10) is required for lots abutting public streets except where reduced through site plan review. In addition, a pedestrian connection mu be provided from a public entrance to the street unless the reviewing official(in this instance, th, Hearing Examiner) determines that the requirement would unduly endanger the pedestrian. The applicant's landscape plan shows a five foot wide landscape strip on the subject site, abutting the right-of-way for NE 44th Street. However, the applicant has proposed lawn and street trees to be installed within the NE 44th Street right-of-way. The overall width of propose landscaping adjacent to NE 44th Street would be a minimum of 35 feet. Staff supports the applicant's proposal for a reduced landscape strip on the south boundary of the property, as it would be attached to an additional 35-foot landscaped area in the NE 44th Street right-of-way A pedestrian connection is proposed from NE 44th Street to the main entrance of the motel. Roof-top Equipment: All site surface mounted utility equipment shall be screened from pub' view. All operating equipment on the roof of any building shall be enclosed so as to be shield from view, except for telecommunications equipment. Project drawings do not indicate the location of the surface mounted utility equipment or root equipment. Should any of this type of equipment be proposed, the applicant would need to provide screening consistent with Code requirements. Refuse and Recyclable Collection and Storage: Permitted outdoor storage must be sere: led from adjacent properties and public rights-of-way. All recyclables collection and storage, garbage, refuse or dumpsters contained within specified areas shall be screened, except fot access points by a fence or landscaping or some combination thererof. The applicant's plans do not show the location of the outdoor refuse and recycling areas. Tt applicant will need to meet City Code requirements for screening this area. Staff will recommend as a condition of approval that the garbage/recyclables areas be indicated on revised site plan, and that they be appropriately screened per City Code requirements. Th( location of the recyclables/garbage area would need to be reviewed and approved by Development Services staff prior to the issuance of building permits. Parking and Loading Ordinance: The proposal is governed by Section 4-14, Parking any Loading Ordinance. Motels require a minimum of one parking space for each motel room, id an additional two parking spaces for each three employees. The proposed 115-room Microtel Inn motel requires a total of 119 parking stalls. One stall needed for each motel unit (115 parking stalls), and two additional stalls are required for e ;h three employees. The applicant anticipates a total of 6 employees, therefore 4 employee parking stalls would be required. The applicant is proposing to provide 101 parking stalls I site, and to share an additional 18 parking stalls with Denny's restaurant, which abuts the subji ' site HEXRPT.DOC City of Renton P/B/PW Departmenr Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner • MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: JULY 7, 1998 Page 8 of 1: on the north. The two sites share an existing driveway. A draft parking easement and agreement between Denny's and Microtel Inn has been submitted with the project application. Joint use parking is generally encouraged within the City (Code Section 4-14-4:E.1). Joint use parking may be authorized for those uses which have dissimilar peak-hour demands during the non-peak hours of the lessor. In addition, the joint-use parking must be provided within 750 feet from the buildings or use areas it is intended to serve. A joint-use contract, covering a minimum of five years shall be approved by the Planning/Building/Public Works Department and by the City Attorney for such a parking arrangement to be allowed. During their review of the proposal on June 9, 1998, the Environmental Review Committee added a Note to the Applicant as follows: "The applicant will need to either: 1) demonstrate tha sufficient parking is available on-site to meet City Code requirements; or, 2) seek and successfully obtain a modification from the Parking and Loading standards to permit joint-use parking to meet required parking for both the proposed motel and restaurant; or, 3)revise the proposal such that the number of motel units proposed is reduced to match the available parkir on the subject site." For the motel, a total of 119 parking spaces is required. The restaurant requires one parking space for each 100 square feet of gross floor area. A parking analysis has been provided by ti applicant which demonstrates the demand for the existing restaurant and the proposed motel. Plan Review staff and Development Services staff have reviewed the study and find is acceptable. The Parking and Loading Ordinance requires that standard parking stalls be 9'wide x 20' lone: Compact parking stalls must be 8-1/2'wide by 16' long. Compact stalls may account for up to 30% of required parking or 40% of designated employee parking. Parking aisle width for 90- degree head-in parking with one-or two-way circulation is a minimum of 24' (Code Section 4-I - 6). Wheel stops are required on the periphery of the parking lot so the cars shall not protrude into the public right-of-way of the parking lot, or strike buildings. Wheel stops shall be two fe( from the end of the stall for head-in parking (Section 4-14-4-G:3). Section 4-14-8.K. permits parking stall length to be reduced by 2 feet, provided there is sufficient area to safely allow th overhang of a vehicle and the at the area of vehicle overhang does not intrude into required landscaping areas. Staff has submitted the request for a modification from the Parking and Loading Ordinance 1 the City's Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator. The decision is pending as of the d .e of this staff report, but will be reported on at the public hearing. Wetlands Ordinance: The proposal is also governed by Code Section 4-32, Wetlands Management Ordinance. Category Ill wetlands require a minimum buffer of 25 feet from the delineated edge of the wetland. One existing wetland, 11,840 square feet in size is located on the western portion of the site The wetland consists of emergent vegetation in the center banded by a mix of shrubs and saplir along the edge. The wetland is considered to be Category 3 wetland under the City's Wetl.. _is Ordinance due to its small size, emergent and scrub-shrub classes, large degree of disturb: ice and because it is not located at the headwater of a watercourse. The proposal would not rE ult in disturbance within 25 feet of the wetland, and the minimum 25-foot wide buffer would be preserved provided that a requested modification to the City's parking standards is approv( I. Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance: The proposal is governed by Code Sect , 4-9, Land Clearing and Tree Cutting which prohibits land clearing or tree cutting within 25 fee, )f the ordinary high water mark of creeks or in wetland areas. HEXRPT.DOC City of Renton P/B/PW Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: JULY 7, 1998 Page 9 of 1 As proposed, no disturbance would occur within 25 feet of either the high water mark of the creek: or wetland. (3) MITIGATION OF IMPACTS TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND USES; The proposal would be located in an area designated for commercial uses. The proposal for motel is appropriate given the proximity of the site to an on/off ramp for 1-405. Surroundir, properties have been developed with a motel (abutting the site on the east), restaurants (abuttir the site on the north, and adjacent to the site across NE 44th Street). A tavern is located to th southeast. Interstate 405 and Lake Washington Boulevard are located directly in front of th subject site on the west. The proposal would develop a vacant site with a 115-room three-stor motel, preserving a stream and wetland area on the east portion of the site. The applicant is proposing landscaping on the east side of the structure as a buffer between tl proposed and existing motel. Access to the site would be from NE 44th and Lake Washingt( Boulevard. The access from Lake Washington Boulevard would be shared with the exist, Denny's restaurant. The entry drive from NE 44th has been moved back so that it would within five feet of the southeast corner of the site, to avoid potential conflicts with vehii queuing and turning movements at the intersection of NE 44th Street and Lake Washingt Boulevard. The proposed building height is three-stories or 35 feet in height. The structure would )t exceed the 50-foot height limit of the CA Zone. (4) MITIGATION OF IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN TO THE SITE; The proposed structure would be located on the eastern portion of the site, and would ne oriented north/south. Parking would be provided in surface lots in the front yard and side 1rd areas on the west and south. Access would be from both NE 44th Street and Lake Washin, :in Boulevard. Landscaping is proposed between the parking area and NE 44th Street; and we rid vegetation would remain undisturbed adjacent to Lake Washington Boulevard. Landsc ,ed beds would also be provided on the east side of the structure as a buffer between the adja ,,nt land use. The proposal for a motel and parking lot is an appropriate solution for a site that is commei ,illy zoned, and that is also constrained by a Category III wetland and stream. (5) CONSERVATION OF AREA-WIDE PROPERTY VALUES; The proposal would develop a vacant site that has been designated for commercial des. Microtel Inn would be expected to conserve area-wide property values as related comr rcial businesses (motel and eating/drinking establishments) are located in close proximity • the subject site. The proposal would add to the restaurant's customer base, and would pro de a choice for lodging in this portion of the City and adjacent to a major freeway. (6) SAFETY AND EFFICIENCY OF VEHICLE AND PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION; Vehicles would enter the site from both NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevar: The applicant has relocated the primary access driveway from NE 44th Street, such that it w( .Id be located five feet from the edge of the property line. This revision improves saff_ , and diminishes potential interference with queuing that could occur at the intersection of is 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard. The City anticipates that this intersection will be sic 3lized HEXRPT.DOC City of Renton P/B/PW Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: JULY 7. 1998 Page 10 of 1: in the future, and left-turn movements from NE 44th were considered in requiring the applicant to redesign the driveway. A secondary driveway from Lake Washington Boulevard would be shared with Denny'- restaurant. The applicant has submitted a draft joint-use access and parking agreement fc Microtel Inn and Denny's. Project drawings indicate a pedestrian path leading from NE 44th Street to the main entrance (. the motel. (7) PROVISION OF ADEQUATE LIGHT AND AIR; The proposed three-story Microtel Inn building would be oriented north/south and would r. create a wind tunnel effect on the site or adjacent properties. During the late afternoon, shado: from the building would extend to the east, but would in not be expected to adversely affe adjacent property. Landscaping is proposed between the proposed motel and adjacent mot Suggested landscape plantings include ornamental trees, shrubs and groundcover that is eitl native to the Pacific Northwest, or adapted to this climate. The plantings would tolerate sha and partial shade conditions and would serve to buffer the proposed structure from the adjac( it off-site use. Lighting would be provided both on the building and in the parking area for security. (8) MITIGATION OF NOISE, ODORS AND OTHER HARMFUL OR UNHEAL-- iY CONDITIONS; The proposal would avoid development in the existing wetland and stream area. A rockery ;(d difference in site grade would create a distinct separation. Parking lots would be loci ,!d adjacent to streets and oriented toward 1-405. The primary building entrance would als, :)e oriented to the west. Noise from the parking areas and building entrance would be expect( to blend in with the existing ambient noise. (9) AVAILABILITY OF PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES TO ACCOMMODATE -IE PROPOSED USE; AND Adequate public facilities and services exist to serve the proposal. (10) PREVENTION OF NEIGHBORHOOD DETERIORATION AND BLIGHT. The development of the subject site would improve the neighborhood by adding comr Icial development as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code of the City. (5B) MITIGATION OF IMPACTS TO SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND USES: As mentioned in 5A above, the orientation of the structure, proposed location of access, irking lots, building entrances, and landscaping would not result in impacts to surroundinc uses. Development of the site with a three-story motel would be compatible with existing corr ercial development in the vicinity. The applicant proposes to share a secondary access and irking with the adjacent restaurant to the north. HEXRPT.DOC City of Renton P/B/PW Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: JULY 7, 1998 Page 11 of 1: The applicant has not indicated the location of roof-mounted equipment or the location o garbage collection and recyclables areas. These are required to screened per City Code and would need to be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division staff prior to the issuance of building permits. (5C) MITIGATION OF IMPACTS OF A PROPOSED SITE PLAN TO THE SITE: The proposed structure would be oriented north/south on the site, so that one-half of th proposed rooms would face west and the remaining rooms would face east. The wester exposure would provide the most light and view potential (toward Lake Washington and the or site wetland area). Approximately 18% of the site would be covered by the proposed buildir Surface parking would result in additional impervious surface, but the wetland and stream ar. would remain undisturbed. The applicant is proposing to satisfy a portion of the parkin requirement through joint-use parking with the adjacent Denny's restaurant. (5D) CIRCULATION AND ACCESS: Access to the site would be via NE 44th Street, and from a joint-use access drive on L : e Washington Boulevard. The applicant has revised plans during staff review to locate le driveway from NE 44th on the southeast corner of the property, as far as possible from ,e intersection of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard. This intersection will .e signalized in the future, and concerns over vehicle queuing prompted the revision. Pedest n access would be from NE 44th Street, via a walkway leading to the primary building entrance Surface parking for 101 vehicles is proposed on the site. Development of a motel with employees requires 119 parking stalls per the Parking and Loading Ordinance. The apple int has proposed to jointly share 18 parking stalls with the adjacent Denny's restaurant. Joint-u- of parking is encouraged by City Code, but a decision is pending as to whether or not the appl :int will be permitted to count this parking toward meeting their requirement. Should the joint rse parking not be approved, then staff would recommend as a condition of site plan approval iat the applicant be required to revise the site plan to provide all of the required parking on sit( or, revise the proposal such that the number of motel units proposed is reduced to matcl the available parking on the subject site. In addition, the applicant has requested a modification from the City's Parking and Lo ting Ordinance in order to be permitted to utilize a poured-in-place concrete curb instead of reel stops, so that the 8 of the compact parking stalls and 14 of the standard parking stalls c r be shortened by two feet, utilizing the overhang to meet the required parking stall standar( A decision is pending on this modification request and the status of the decision will be repor d on during the public hearing. If the modification is approved, then 36 of the 101 on-site I: !king stalls (or 35.6%) would be compact spaces. Code permits compact spaces for up to 30% ,t the required parking, and up to 40% of designated employee parking to be compact stalls The applicant would either need to apply for an additional modification from the Parking and L_ :!ding Ordinance to exceed the 30% limitation on compact stalls, or convert stalls from corn :ct to standard stalls, or redesign the proposal to reduce the number of motel rooms to rm t the parking requirement. Three existing compact stalls adjacent to NE 44th Street cc 'd be converted to standard stalls if the landscape bed between the parking area and the \ _ 44th Street frontage is reduced. This reduction could occur through the Site Plan Approval r icess, and staff would recommend that the Hearing Examiner approve the reduction in the pi dosed landscape bed in order to convert three parking stalls from compact dimensions to :ndard dimensions. Additional adjustments would be needed to the site plan to convert at lea three HEXRPT.DOC City of Renton P/B/PW Departmenr Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: JULY 7, 1998 Page 12 of 13 other spaces from compact to standard to stay below the 30% limitation on compact stalls; or the applicant would need to revise the plan or seek a modification from the Parking Code as discussed above. (5E) SIGNAGE: Staff have not yet reviewed the applicant's sign plan. However, the City's Sign Code specific the size, number and location requirements for commercial sites. The applicant would need I apply for sign permits and have the sign package reviewed and approved prior to installation the signs. (5F) AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA (APA): Prior to the issuance of any permit in an Aquifer Protection Area, a finding must be made that ti proposal will not impact the quantity or quality of water in the aquifer on a short-term basis, Ion!, term basis, or cumulatively in conjunction with other existing or proposed uses. Not applicable. (5G) HAZARDOUS WASTE TREATMENT AND STORAGE FACILITIES: Not applicable. HEXRPT.DOC City of Renton P/B/PW Department Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: JULY 7, 1998 Page 13 of 13 H. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Microtel Inn, Project File No. LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF subject to the following conditions: (1) Compliance with ERC Mitigation Measures: The applicant is required to comply with the Mitigation Measures which were required by the Environmental Review Committee Threshold Determination prior to the issuance of a building permit. (2) Location of Garbage/Recyclables Areas. The applicant shall revise the site plan to indicate the location of proposed garbage and recyclables collection areas. The location of the garbage/recyclable areas is subject to the review and approval of Development Services Division staff and shall be accomplished prior to the issuance of building permits. (3) Lighting Plan. The applicant shall provide a site lighting plan to the Development Services Division Staff for review and approval prior to the issuance of building permits. Proposed lighting show be focused and directed so that spill-over light and glare does not impact off-site uses, or the wetland and stream area on and adjacent to the property. 4. Parking. The applicant shall either: a) obtain the necessary approvals to deviate from parking standards and utilize joint-use parking on the adjacent site to provide 18 joint-use parking stalls, or, b) revise the site plan to provide all of the required parking on site; or, c) revise the proposal such that the number of motel units proposed is reduced to match the available parking on the subject site. 5. Compact Parking. The applicant shall either: a) revise the site plan to demonstrate that the number of compact parking stalls does nc exceed standards of the Parking and Loading Ordinance; or, b). seek and successfully obtain a modification from the Parking Code to exceed the maximum amount of compact parking stalls. EXPIRATION PERIODS: Site Plan Approvals (SA): Two (2) years from the final approval (signature) date. HEXRPT.DOC CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF APPLICANT: Jeff Baker, Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Microtel Inn DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Jeff Baker, of Rupert Engineering, Inc., has applied to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is presently vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland on the western portion of the site. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on the site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with Denny's restaurant, located next to the subject site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The applicant shall design the storm detention system to the pre-100-year run-off rate, 24-hour storm event, in order to diminish downstream flooding impacts that could result from the addition of impervious surface on the site. The applicant shall provide this information and calculations as part of the final storm drainage report to be submitted with the construction drawings. 2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$0.52 per square foot of new construction. The Fire Mitigation Fee is payable prior to the issuance of the building permit for the project. 3. The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee, at a rate of$75.00 per each new average daily trip attributable to the project. The fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF APPLICANT: Jeff Baker, Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Microtel Inn DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Jeff Baker, of Rupert Engineering, Inc., has applied to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is presently vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland on the western portion of the site. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on the site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with Denny's restaurant, located next to the subject site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Plan Review-General 1. Garbage and recyclable deposit areas and collection points shall be easily and safely accessible to hauling trucks. 2. Construction drawings are to be per City drafting standards Plan Review -Water 3. The Water System Development Connection charge is estimated to be $7,977. 4. The available fire flow with loop is approximately 4000 to 4500 gallons per minute (gpm). 5. One fire hydrant required per each 1000 gpm of required fire flow. Fire Prevention indicates a required fire flow of 3250 gpm. Therefore, four(4) fire hydrants will be required. 6. The primary fire hydrant must be within 150 feet of the structure, but not closer then 50 feet. Any secondary fire hydrants are to be within 300 feet of the structure. 7. The irrigation meter must be tapped into the proposed loop 12-inch main. Not tapped into the domestic service line as shown. Plan Review-WasteWater 8. The Sanitary Sewer System Development Connection Charge for waste water is estimated to be $5,506.25. 9. The sanitary sewer system is required to have a minimum of 2% slope. 10. A profile needs to be provided with the construction plans submittal. 11. The northeast corner of the lot will need the utility easement readjusted for the sewer force main realignment. Microtel Inn LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Advisory Notes (Continued) Plan Review -Stormwater 12. The Special Utility System Development Connection Charge is estimated to be $6,181.18. 13. An erosion/sedimentation control plan is required. 14. Due to flooding of Lake Washington Boulevard roadway downstream of the site, the storm detention is required to be designed to the pre-100-year run-off rate, 24-hour storm event. This information and calculations are to be provided in the final storm drainage report. Plan Review-Transportation 15. The lowest acceptable trip rate per the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual is 8.7 daily trips per motel unit, with an occupancy rate of 80%. The City's Transportation Mitigation fee is charged at a rate of$75 per each new average daily trip. For the 115 units proposed the fee is estimated as follows: 115 units x 8.7 trips per unit x 0.80 rate of occupancy = 800.4 daily trips. A fee of$60,030.00 is estimated based on: 800.4 daily trips x $75 = $60.030.00. The fee is due prior to the issuance of building permits. 16. The proposed driveway access on NE 44th Street is to be located 5-feet from the site's easterly property line. The driveway would be as far from the intersection that is to be signalized in the future, and also at the beginning of the two-way left turn lane. Locating the driveway closer to the intersection would be hazardous for left turning vehicles attempting to access the site across three-lanes of opposing traffic. In addition, any vehicles queuing from the future traffic signal would block vehicles exiting the site if any other position closer to the intersection was selected. 17. Off-site improvements on NE 44th will be required. This includes curb, gutter and sidewalk located with the back edge at the property line for full length of roadway frontage. A planter strip width between the curb and sidewalk is five feet or greater. 18. Off-site improvements on Lake Washington Boulevard are required. This includes curb, gutter, sidewalks and street lighting the full length of the property frontage. 19. The first 165 feet of Lake Washington Boulevard, northerly to the turnback line from NE 44th Street intersection is Washington State Department of Transportation right-of-way. Therefore, the Washington State Department of Transportation will need to concur with the proposed roadway, sidewalk and street lighting improvement plans. 20. The applicant's draft parking cross easement agreement document has been forwarded to the City Attorney for approval as to legal form. The proposed joint parking appears to meet City Code requirements. 21. The proposed stall length does not meet City Code with wheelstop location. The proposed configuration will need a waiver from the City Code. 22. The applicant will need to either: 1) demonstrate that sufficient parking is available on-site to meet City Code requirements; or, 2) seek and successfully obtain a modification from the Parking and Loading standards to permit joint-use parking to meet required parking for both the proposed motel and restaurant; or, 3) revise the proposal such that the number of motel units proposed is reduced to match the available parking on the subject site. Fire Prevention 23. The preliminary fire flow is determined to be 3,250 gpm. One hydrant is required within 150 feet of the structure and three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the structure. 24. A fire mitigation fee of$21,840.00 is required based on $0.52 per square foot of building area. 25. Separate plans and permits are required for the installation of fire alarm and sprinkler systems. Building Department 26. The soils report should address the potential for liquefaction. Microtel Inn LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Advisory Notes (Continued) 27. The 1997 Uniform Building Code goes into effect in July, 1998. Airport 28. The site is adjacent to an existing motel. The proposed site in on the 1-405 corridor, which is • beneath the area heavily utilized by aircraft within the traffic pattern of the Renton airport. The site area is not an area from which complaints of aircraft noise have been received from the motel or from apartments further to the east. It should be minimally impacted by aircraft operations from the airport. It is considered an area and use compatible with aviation operations from the airport. Police 29. Police estimate the 21.7 calls will be received for service annually, based on the size of the business. Applicant is advised to contact Renton Police Crime Prevention to discuss security during construction and operation of the motel. Contact Audrey Moore at (425)235-2571. Also note Police comments in the project file. Development Planning 30. Site is zoned Commercial Arterial (CA). Project requires a public hearing for the site plan review. Microtel Inn Lake Washington Blvd. &NE 44th St. NE Corner Development Services May 29, 1998 • WATER: 1. Water has a System Development Connection charge of$7,977. 2. Available fire flow with loop is approximately 4000 to 4500 gpm. 3. One fire hydrant required per each 1000 gpm of required fire flow. Fire Prevention indicates a required fire flow of 3250 gpm. Therefore, four(4) fire hydrants will be required. 4. The primary fire hydrant must be within 150 feet of the structure, but not closer then 50. Any secondary fire hydrants are to be within 300 feet of the structure. 5. Drawings to be per City drafting standards. 6. The irrigation meter must be taped into the proposed loop 12-inch main. Not taped into the domestic service line as show. 98CM092W.DOC\ Microtel Inn Lake Washington Blvd. &NE 44th St. NE Corner Development Services May 29, 1998 STORM DRAINAGE: 1. The Special Utility System Development Connection charge for Storm is$6,181.18. 2. Erosion/Sedimentation control plan required. 3. Due to flooding of Lake Washington roadway down stream of the Site the Storm Detention is required to be designed to the Pre-100 year run-off rate, 24-hour storm even. .This information and calculation to be provided in the final Storm Drainage Report. 4. Construction plans to meet City of Renton drafting standards. 98CM092D 98CM092D.DOC\ Microtel Inn Lake Washington Blvd. &NE 44th St. NE Corner Development Services May 29, 1998 SEWER(Waste Water): 1. System Development Connection charge for waste water is $5,506.25. 2. Sewer system to have a minimum of 2% slope. 3. Minimum pipe cover for side sewer is 2-feet. 4. Profile to be provided with plans. 5. Northeast corn of the lot will need the utility easement readjusted for the sewer force main realignment. 98cm092s 98CM092S.DOC\ ItI it PROPERTY SERVICES FEE REVIE%_ .. 98 --b 22 - ,/ ® DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET ❑ PLAN REVIEW ROUTING SLIP 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET 0 / APPLICANT: Tk C— E'g/T- S'vvEN I LZ OTHER RECEIVED FROM CI+? 5-z7 9,< JOB ADDRESS: Nr.y ti S'rp E-6--r a,J(.Aer"4 4,,#, ;vr4 &OD N WO# e NATURE OF WORK: tvicyrrc GREEN# • SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND CONNECTION FEES APPLIED ❑ SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND CONNECTION FEES ESTIMATED NEED MSQUORE IRE FOOTAGE 0 LEGALVICINITY y MAJ'PTI ❑ NOT APPROVED FOR APPLICATION OF FEESFRONTROARE 0 OICINITY MAP ❑ VESTED 0 NOT VESTED 0 FOOTAGE 0 OTHER ❑ This fee review supersedes and cancels fee review# dated 3 3y 33 SUBJECT PROPERTY PIRA` ❑ PARENT PIN/(subject to change)_ o - //so 0 King Co.Tax Accti(new) It is the intent of this development fee analysis to put the developer/owner on notice,that the fees quoted below may be applicable to the subject site upon development of the property. MI quoted fees are potential charges that may be due and payable at the time the construction permit is issued to install the on-site and off-site improvements(t.e.underground utilities,street improvements,etc.) Triggering mechanisms for the SDC fees will be based on current City ordinanc,: and determined by the applicable Utility Section. Please note that these fees are subject to change without notice. Final fees will be based on rates in effect at time of Building Permit/Construction Permit application. The following quoted fees do NOT include inspection fees,side sewer permits,r/w permit fees or the cost of water meters. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PARCEL METHOD OF ASSESSMENT ASSESSMJ f DISTRICTS NO. NO. ASSESSMENT ' Latecomer Agreement(pvt)WATER UNITS OR FEt Latecomer Agreement(pvt)WASTEWATER Latecomer Agreement(pvt)OTHER I / Special Assessment District/WATER Special Assessment District/WASTEWATER /._. Joint Use Agreement(METRO) Local Improvement District Traffic Benefit Zones $75.00 PER TRIP,CALCULATED BY TRANSPORTATION y FUTURE OBLIGATIONS I I I SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-WATER #OF UNITS/ 0 Pd Prey. 0 Partially Pd (Ltd Exemption) ® Never Pd SDC FEE Single family residential$850/unit x SQ• FTG. Mobile home dwelling unit$680/unit in park Apartment, Condo$510/unit not in CD or COR zones x 705 93 t7977.OB Commercial/Industrial, $0.113/sq. ft. of property (not less than$850.00)x Boeing,by Special Agreement/Footprint of Bldg plus 15 ft /.,,S 8� /�perimeter(woo GPM threshold) 4 Lu;S / S SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-WASTEWATER Qo 91 s ❑ Pd Prey. 0 Partially Pd (Ltd Exemption) OP Never Pd Single family residential dwelling unit$585/unit x Mobile home dwelling unit$468/unit x Apartment, Condo $350/unit not in CD or COR zones x 70,5C� _Commercial/Industrial, $0.078/sq ft. of property (not less than$585.00)x REDEVELOPMENT CREDIT: (S-1,5-8 f 4/9 3SD 6 ,ZS (New- Old Flow)/New Flow X Above Fees SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-SURFACEWATER ❑ Pd Prey. 0 Partially Pd (Ltd Exemption) if Never Pd Single family residential and mobile home dwelling unit$385/unit x All other properties$0.129/sq ft of new impervious area of property x (not less than$385.00) '/ VG /9 / l ��, p/� -41.--- . �`` I PRELIMINARY TOTAL $ Ili(,(oc(,t.,�S7�-gSignature of Reviehority DATE < <o *If subject property is within an LID, it is developers responsibility to check with the Finance Dept. for paid/un-paid status. **The square footage figures used are taken from the King County Assessor's map and are approximate only. c:hemplate/feeapp/tgb EFFECTIVE July 16, 1995/Ord. Nos. 4506,4507,4508,4525, and 4526 A N) s. N A es City c ,nton Department of Planning/Building/PL Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 171%1(JCi COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 APPLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HENNING PROJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336 LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. &NE 44th Street SITE AREA: 1.8 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): 42,000 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is vacant and has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review and site plan a proval. A15- 1 I7i S A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing _ Air Aesthetics _ Wator Light/Glan3 Plants Recreation _ 1 Land/Shoreline Use Utilities r Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services V Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet Estimate 21.7 police calls for service annually, based on the size of the business . Constru Lion sites in Menton account for 9% of all Commercial Burglaries in our city. In addition , this .isine is going to be constructed in a high theft rate area of the City. Recommend that the site surrounded by portable, temporary fencing during the construction phase. Applicant will al: need security lighting on the site during the hours of darkness. All construction material, and tools will need to be secured as well as possible to help prevent theft. If a portable tra 'er is used for an office while construction is underway, it will need to have any doors and wi lows reinforced with metal bars to help prevent burglary. All office tools and machines need to 'De XXXXIJ(X t1MWMatatKAM t secured; computers and fax machines should be cabled to wa is or floors , and records need to be kept of all model and serial numbers in the event of thef . The correct "No Trespassing" signs need to be posted on the exterior of the temporary secur ty fencing (refer to attached flier) . The hotel itself should have electronic locks on all guest rooms , and the same lock on the exterior of the building. The only entry availalbe to non-guests or those checking in , ch Id be via the front door. Due to occasional incidents of Commercial Robbery, recommend the busi ass use a drop safe for excess cash. The business owners should also consider the use of off-- Aty police officers or private security patrols to moniter the business during the hours of d. kness , especially during the construction phase. The business will need security lighting in the aXXPXA(OINdXs parking lots and over the doors located in the side entrap s to the business. We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas In which we have expertise and have Identified areas of probable impa: "r areas where additional information Is needed to properly assess this proposal. L��<OhKE- ) ( / a� S-a0 QS Signature of Directo or A horized Representatt e Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 . City en ton Department of Planning/Building/F rVorks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEVVING DEPARTMENT: Pillf Q COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 APPLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HENNING PROJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336 LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. &NE 44th Street SITE AREA: 1.8 acres I BUILDING AREAjgross): 42,000 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is vacant and has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 parkir.g stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review and site plan approval. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Elen'ent of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earti Housing Air Aesthetics Water Llght/Glare _ Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Ani pals Transportation Enl ironmental Health Public Services _ En.lrgy/ Historic./Cultural Neural Resources Preservation _ Airport Environment 0 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet ' 6.5 The site is adjacent to an existing motel . The proposed site is on the I-405 corridor, which is beneath the area heavily utilized by aircraft within the traffic pattern of the Renton airport. The site area is not an area from which complaints of aircraft noise hE 'e been received from the motel or from apartments further to the east. It should be minis :lly impacted by aircraft operations from the airport. It is considered an area and use c3mpatible with aviation operations from the airport. El. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS Pone C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS None We have reviewed this applicati•• with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impt it areas where addition ' olmation is .ed to properly assess this proposal. QQ � � .� 22( 151� Signature of Dir or or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev 10/93 City Renton Department of Planning/Building/i- aC Works , RONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET KING DEPARTMENT: CON '/0101A. COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998 ,LICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 ,PPLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HEN��RENTON r, PROJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336 MAY 2 LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. &NE 44th Street ' '998 �IlVtr� SITE AREA: 1.8 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): 42,000 sq.ft. l71lrVIsoi SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is vacant and has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review and site plan approval. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing _ . Air Aesthetics - Water Light/Glare _ Plants Recreation _ Land/Shoreline Use Utilities _ Animals Transportation _ _ Environmental Health Public Services , Energy/ Historic./Cultural Natural Resources Preservation _ __ Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS �O / L S /Z /w j S H 0 v L_ D t3 0 a L S s TPi j—C:'TE IEtL (OIQ L✓i C U G f—/{L r L c3 t J , CJ c� o r=C I ti T-0 (_ L7 `j C�(<`; I 7 1 8 , We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have iden Pied areas of probable imp/ 'or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. �I / 7/ 78 or Au h R Signature of Directorrrese tative Date ep DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 Microtel Inn Lake Washington Blvd. &NE 44th St. NE Corner Development Services May 29, 1998 TRANSPROTATION: 1. Lowest acceptable trip rate per the Instute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual is 8.70 daily trips per unit and a occupancy rate of 80%. Proposed number of units is 115 units. The charge per know trip generated is $75 per new trip generated. Therefore: (115)(8.70)(0.80)= 800.4 Daily trips (800.4)($75)=$60.030.00 The Transportation Mitigation Fee of$60,030.00 to be deposited with the Building permit 2. The driveway access on NE 44th Street is to be located 5-feet from the site easterly property line. Reasons for this placement is as follows: (1)This places the driveway as far from the future to be signalized intersection as possible and also at the beginning of the two-2 way left turn lane. (2)Any closer to the intersection would be a hazard for left turning vehicles attempting to access the site across 3-lanes of opposing traffic. (3) Any vehicles queuing from the future traffic signal would block vehicles exiting the site if any other position closer to the intersection was chosen... 3. NE 44th St.: Off-site improvements required is curb, gutter and sidewalk located with the back edge at the property line for full length of roadway frontage.. A planter strip width between the curb and sidewalk is 5-feet or greater. 4. Lake Washington Blvd.: The off-site improvements required is curb, gutter sidewalks. and street lighting the full length of the property frontage. 5. Lake Washington Blvd.: The first 165 feet of Lake Washington Blvd. Northerly to the Turn Back Line from NE 44th St. Intersection is Washington State Department Of Transportation right-of-way. Therefore, the Washington State Department of Transportation will need to concur with the proposed roadway, sidewalk and street lighting improvements plans. 6. Parking Cross Easement Agreement ducument has been forwarded to the City Attorneys office for approval as to legal form. The joint parking arrangment does meet City code requirements. 7. The proposed parking stall length does not meet City code with wheel stop location. The proposed configuration will need a waiver from the City Code. 98cm092t 98CM092T.DOC\ / . CA Y ) . + IR + •=.,;:.. w ?TF 11' P„E R:Ty Tt 1V1_ IT 4C),V FEE ;.. :,�, Project Name M is vo te. l ib1 V) Project Address ILA E co:v 6, (,q,, Lk Uias i1 b'I✓c( t:' A) qt f'',�--1 Contact Person Peiva be Oct nilei1l kuveyt )>(;,riervi1 Address Phone Number (206) - 833 - 7-77 6, • Permit Number , LV A - `t'g - D1 y- Project Description 10 :'oo vi 3 sto✓c. WIc�7e l • Land Use Type: , Method of Calculation: Hotel C3Io) ❑ Residential L�' ITE Trip Generation Manual pafg 5/'f ❑ Retail ❑ Traffic Study D< i1 7;`r^ '` a Non-retail 0 Other , • Lc,.,,/lrc! ,l'co:vt Calculation: n ( �'.7c� da,l:� , P55��'� O /D oGGUPl1�1G�J Tole(I bit)<i. 7viP' ( I15) ( .70) (O. O ) =. 800. E Dien/. 7y,PJ R-t 1.75 etA l oe /(A) A1�, C='e_, ( WO: 4) ( 75) = 60) 030. �� •. 1 �,:�� ;� �,i,i, • -' )[%.Iq z; :,-1-1 pLcot '.I ci,,, Transportation Mitigation Fee; .. 601 0 30• 07 Calculated by: Al 6-1 4(/l g , . Date: She'/I g Account Number: 1 O S. 5 Rq. 3180. 7 0. 00. Date of Payment ,-.. l C��(SY Oft) CITY OF RENTON FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU ,vNTo� MEMORANDUM DATE: May 20, 1998 TO: Jennifer Toth Henning, Planner 91 FROM: Jim Gray, Assistant Fire Marshal I SUBJECT: Microtel Inn, Lake Washington Blvd & NE 44th St. Fire Department Comments: 1. The preliminary fire flow is 3,250 GPM, one hydrant is required within 150 feet of the structure and three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the structure. 2. A fire mitigation fee of$21,840.00 is required based on $.52 per square foot of building area. 3. Separate plans and permit are required for the Installation of fire alarm and sprinkler systems. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. City Cu Renton Department of Planning/Building/Pumlic Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: WAS COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 APPLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HENNING PROJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336 LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. &NE 44th Street SITE AREA: 1.8 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): 42,000 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is vacant and has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review and site plan approval. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information impacts Impacts Necessary impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing _ __ Air Aesthetics _ Water Light/Glare _ ._ Plants Recreation _ _ Land/Shoreline Use Utilities _ Animals Transportation . __ Environmental Health Public Services _ Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation _ _ Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet _ Z) & B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS Or 1---0 ,fie_,/h')C 7* C C2&'/? . , ce/2-0 �- ,� /(� " T`2'u�GZQ.t I717 ' > i4\._____- (,(/().a G'r2CK5-64 / �ZyN�i j2 �G� . S wit_,` �i.� / &c_ vc7c �- C. ODE-RELATED COMMENTS 1 / 1'° • We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable imp :t or areas where additional information is need to properly assess this proposal. _T%z/ 5- ignature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 r a a a :1 . Qcil a _ SE 64th St. '~ � SE 6 — SE tl a S E 65th Si 1a w - )1 1 '± k)11\ -- DD1 a j \ a. ��a w Ea �f 6 D ET-4 > SE 68th , St. kS') 66 • C4 1 C •a 1 1 1 1 J n SE 72nd St. • R-g R-8 yr a _ N LILIE 5,Oth St • • / CA • P • / NE 48t. SE 76th St. -14 --, at, ) • / w SE 76th P1-6— • 0 0 ;11.& FL] • C A SE 77th P1. S J 77th_Ly'l 1ifr4, �u - - SE 78tI a AQ/4 a r-- °' U d a CA C n • l SE 80th St. 7'?\ • I ' S: • • r 1 NE 43th 1 rn o C4 . 32 T24N R5E E 1/2 1t480 2O° o B4 ZONING 0 •tj ' P TECHNICAL ten= 29 T24N R5E E 1/2 aa Y o,nane 4 �e��27•F-1 v r/ Ex CURB.atrtR l5—L ) v / 7t 50Ew41c LX. TAVERN I (CA-ZONE) i 4 n as PUP s I 2G RELNWG FENGE ___ OE _— _- ------, 1 ORRENNr CJp� i _ g ROP5610'E--1py17 __ __ __ __ ° ff 11 nY 1 `�` i Qi . /,—————— 1..... McDONALD) --__-'——S'� E--.- ---..---- (CA-ZONE)r' ICp1Nn 6'6�� 3-STORY MOTEL s' :. io N K._`—Te'-- N• 2y 1- 11C Pr Ott 00 gl-rilaN' .. 'G.rear DOCUATON ' I .74 �' Q 0 .. 0 taZo /55iS1AN[[ I - __. c I T•16.2r :1 _ NEw cure t wntR Mu ^l*i' ____ _ . rat ( .) __ T(M�`.- • 1 /ND s vo[RALa e ' k •[=. yb. b �- 1�SIRCEI IR"""`E I)DENNY'SIr •. 1S.'yIu 11'� INN t mE[Y,..RESTAURANTI srrost •l� I © sl llj �RER t/S PlN IZ.I(CA-ZONE) 1 Ai �<-�o %6.GG7l%///;/Y p' SINbb sDEt, / /1.,74,_______:-__i__:- �� ���s'�' f �� E I c 4 c'�I c c c j ©I y�� r2o'O r 1r } I::. ... .• , 7]'W EMIR/ / 7'wR.ANGLE 011R1V+1G. —...................... _ • / — — \ 1f ROCKERY S8 I NO1 W M/4 O[NND COI[ MIM UTPoUHL ]s'W.Yip —/ ... ) i1� RCNNO ARIA / I PROJECT NOTES t� II.BIO SOn APPROR �� 9DEN EDGE l 75 SIR[N RJ[iW� — ... taNNc• CA COMMERCIAL MORAL UIEGOpt) /M\ / 101 SIF IBO(ACRES(]e.10B Y) ) _ MINK SZE I�000 Y./- SQ1 I 1 / —___—_//l_ _ . 1014 ROOK MEA 6 FLOORS.11.DID 17.000 Y ` ` NIf OWG NE4HI 15' /-(50'4lOM0) lO1R \�•iM l0I CPS ei KN OLR01 0 OUNEA SETBACKS ITORIN=10'804 1010) ��y Sa1WR SOLON•128(IS'REO DI �' R. .. .. [AST .10'(NONE ND'D) L■ NCf� I / .. .. ....••. ••.•. •. ^ , REST •102' NONE REO'0) vO NO EDR .L. .. .. ON eLw RMaNc REOJ+ED :: ..•' ':.•.•• " 115 ROM 0 1 PER ROOM •115 WAS LAME .✓ •E. TOW •119 9LE/S L' `. r •'•• .. r2'H.IG NfAVNI ,.• b EI/PIOTEES.2 STALLS/3 EIMOTEES=/ MN SWF LIONT, �,W / IB'S1D.$INl TIP.3 PLACES.USE SNOW NENtID BUFFER-1 COMPACT STALL ' 1E •d PM (9'.10T =60 POLES TO REDUCE GEME NPLL SMLL NOTIcir COIIKT(e5'.16W) •06 (30R) ONTO FRCETNT I20 INTO NIERFERE w/ � N410CM(B'.70') s IOU* ANGLE 0KP69NI ' 110990 (FROM D[)NYs) •le UN051URBED NOrE v.1 LOIN. •119 STALLS,OK. I KRrKx POURED-IV-PLACE MIM P 78\•, )Roo(NSIEAD a so stops) I.w91L.10 EDGES OE111EAIED Et 8-IK11f NRROR PARRnI L01 LYOSCIPNIG ARIA =1]11 Y a ROCNflt1 OR [REOIWES MPROr4 FOR pE1UION ASSOCtAiFs,K.JM.199e (e./R OF PARENT MU 101Si01C FROM AENiON sIMDMO$.[ 1 9E1W0 EOIES SURr01E0 91,01W W9RICN, 011(9 UNLSC PK •1610 Y 0 wALl YN.1996 UNO511A9E5 1EGEIAICD AREAS(POIORUITER)•2/p00 SF Z O TYP. WALL SECTION 0l 909/96100 ( (_ l ...� �.a A MI ROT INN .a Kw ♦ 29 9e 4.9 f�m(p®PAL C w�Bw®®QBwg9 Owc PAD. l.�p. +=:`. �.. CITY OF C EL NO ENGiN6FR5/uv1L 0 STRUCTURAY _ \ RENTON _ l JAN. L� NO Nc11..v1. • • f3. 4pATE T<P:-n I I.r ,r.•••1..a ,N�. ' „ ® n'^9/FluilG�nng/Ip F'c 690.0,OwD1 C3 ...•.IW.,Ye WI .memo SITE PLAN ' y imilinu ' • - bl OLIJY Y xw _i . Pm 01116301 10~Ye • s • ram- L A ,C,, .36, �Y 3 - .. _ + \` ..„.... M+.�"w- ����''7re`a�. .`�.�iC`� ea•�t' ` Via:• �42i� r�... , simmi r try, ai % .I,. + i ...`- r i •• i t i + g, ^ o.,eoe o Dee e000;:000� e,%i oi:ooe .r'S.i \---- .\ice �,I \ Y i 2 i , Y -• L '\ o oo II j �� % CL APIA L \ � ,.> _ - `__, ,,�`�' /i/:1////i��lr ,..—> \ �\ o er-0E \ 1. Z,^• 2 W i,o 1 Y ♦ LL-.. � 6 - 1 _ , - -_- > Ai a > - - \\ - e. 1 \ -� .. 1...1, In ,W- O CI cr) Zi: J Z r - - -- - wanes AYrrrlpnm = ---=�" +`r_ -_-_- --_ / 1!/1/'Ill Il/Il 0 R / +"^�':.- •�- �::-.r-_�_.. �`--_- -_.___a�t�ae_-__J_ 111 lllll = •// / / / / �• `--air - '/,// / I l I I W IXFR ' , /�is�' --� � - -- - —�� -�'-� ' ,` LAKE;ASiMM° 'LW) �' sc10 I I a et L rnM urTW IO ET IO DueAt tore Ya COIIIOALTIOUIq IMMO ,,1.7.10,,,E E t TOM Q. AwuT.a wmc ta+A4-A/ a GAL. D.D.COIT.A PT.OM If O A Nr rruurTRALemRRr MAN D b ,.a1 eEAeO1AL COLOR 4 vr!MA"! DM r R.oc 6 0EECCLOa AZALEA D.DTRiT,A mac. y ASTER D 1000 0ORAL DENT./ ,04. teat,a'Oe tI'. W,PImTIR awe Mee,vat-roam GLOM, !•e4. Da>r R.ae 0 DEI®Ele1e,WbE1G'I'ArROEU�AeEA'/ l 04 D1D.COM,Yvl PT.ae �� D1O.Imq ''A.r 41PO vAIDMATA'r A•ROIr GOIT-r•OG naniniManin WmLT� OCTOECR GLORr CD HARE RED LEAF DAIm[Sf. ®!a ilitiimppLMa11DA^DAR ST'T.ACRW Y GAL DAY Y R.OG O C44LL A wETKb'Sw}S GAauIRA'/ I GAL. Db�tMl•}r ET.LC. IEEE RA9A1 CAL.CMOIDEb l•ly'Ir COO.IVOL CO SIIEETGw1 GP.Waal.CA"ELL IA DR4TDLE Cr PIN.NnRA/ ••PTe cuAn<ECT.A oe,uOA FIL.00E6'/ a eAL. D4I/cwr. •I SEEDED AREA/xE wTee+ mn. n, D!.L PT.OG. 41MPRA_.-FALSE CT4ae ,yE Epd 1•_•y. ghtiF 41DTR41 EFL ACC RINE IYI- OIFfYr C4LIPFANA'CUANTICLElR/ -N•CJL,Ar,lr RT.OL. 0 El10Irr..,AE SILrER RRFPI,CA s v1R EIDNLLee.tOEae', 'GAL. D2/CCM,a R.ea MOTE} — tiC�laap PEAR MOM,* l CONTRACTOR TO OE,EIFINE GRONtscO.ER O;/./aRT ES DA4EO O. MY EG11LA7ERAL TRIAV'A:LAR EA-MAN AT nE SAAC'NG L S7E0 AoO.E O NA.OMA 00001ICA C017ACTA'/ S DAL. 041.0010_A R.CC. >.1®ER TO CIVIL ENG...SING PLAN FOR EA.E"ET,:'.P12,0•E:pat ���Q COTACT 1•EAp1 vLY 04E300 ROADS 4O 111LI'IE4. e F1RARa LAIRPCER4.M!.IT.vEPPON/ I O4 D0F0.11.>PT.OG >ROPER TO CINL MOIMERrtn RAN Fate rEOB"A-�Cw w FENCING ?' LAIIOL A.0P 400R 6 RANTING 0005 O1 TNIS R4+FOR REFERENCE OILS. RIPER TO CIY.L OONEER0G'LANE FOR SI,E>,-ENSIO: e 0 W 0YGRON all?DIAnC r O ' r-la. DADCLNT.4 IT.OM T[NOTON n D,OROW OLIO OIARCTO 0o0 0 wnoc N [ASCNI{[tt oe4 oDn rx/ rr- • D4scORr-A n.ac Erciun11f"sxs e voaab>.YR R10001lr S 04 D.YCQIT.a-1 l R.O0. 11.1r aR ea IalR63000..F rLn eee MBMlm• sIPs IBM em Si=AM 3 oilt'ATI5 elOiela.vg 11,1 1 3dVHS .1. 8BfY6 NOI.ON➢H�YA Q s►`ArIL NO.LOP�Yf®'N 1I lallIdhi 1 AtKt15 33NW1• HAIM AILINICI II rig ROOM 214 : 1�,S NU2US IM NMI �1211 fo=E , i ♦ 4 I 7 ffi M 1/-, Yv p ME ®q MISIMIIINIMil, p a ®G IuI■ e. 1111 a ®o M < Il:::i!IIIl;Il: al IIIIBINBIIIIIINNINIIIIIIIIINNIIINIC o !fin � II II -:e II ?;I p ®G a e{ Iq�mn 111111IIIIIINIIIgIIIN111111 • - IN��IIIIIIII I NII ®° ®° ®° '4',1 ::„I',i111,1i,'.0.',I,111.10 lil W Iv1 0 p ®o \ 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 o jIlIIIII I- 1111== III C IIIIIL.����II W 1 'Il11�1 III ill�I II ::: IIIlll :II ili "I�i:e �i?cil� `II wig J 11IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIINIIIIII, 'III iti.E E ®G '` ilNllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll 1::IIN",111 9' . '.01I ]1 IIIIIIII yyyaIyi II 31 p p P f 14 : t � . , ...- i ..€=p E0 ®[Ti IIIIIIIIIINIIIIIIIIIIIIN11111uNlllllllllll � �T_,III - IIII III I---- ... I�I .IlL '"IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINIIIII8IIIIIIIIIIIl im n En DI IIII NI III ".III I _o � d III IIIIIIIIIIIII""1111111 IIIIIIINIIIIIIIIIII 1 f" l ---p ®p C to l� ..c u_ii__4 ez 1 1 / I 111uu1. ' �� 4li,IIIIL.., j.. iiiiiiIIIIIiIIIIIIIIIIImIIIIIIIIIIIIIUIIII- a i ®° ®° ®° ,L11111111111., Wd 1],__-IF lL I II'IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII11111111111111I1111" El p ME ME ISO I W i 1 II' .. iiii I' =►1 ...I L Z °°p ®p ®a 1 0 ' !UEU ®E ri- i?Ei ® ® LY i1111111111p11111111I11I1111111N111NIgllIlll II==1!INI IIIIII:M I W 4 .g1ii�nlll__=I'�III Il ,',INiuIFI�IIIIIIIlIIIIL < s ' III IIII IIII =II ®E ®pen m 1 J 1111111N111111111111111111111I1111NIIIN111 1 L �,i p o a 4J M M L 1 I j 4 , C IT. OF RENTON ,.� I .N.", Planning/Building/Public Works Department J e Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator June 30, 1998 Mr. Jeff Baker Rupert Engineering, Inc. 1519 West Valley Highway North Suite#101 Auburn, WA 98001 SUBJECT: Microtel Inn Project No. LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Dear Mr. Baker: This letter is to inform you that the comment and appeal periods have ended for the Environmental Review Committee's (ERC) Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated for the above-referenced project. No appeals were filed on the ERC determination. As you know, a Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular meeting in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington, on July 07, 1998 at 9:00 AM to consider the Site Approval (SA). The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (425) 430-7286. For the Environment Review Committee, V lJ� f I en fifer Toth enning Project Manager cc: THC-Exit Seven, LLC/Owners DOCUMENT2 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ®This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION Kristina Thompson, being first duly sworn on oath states that he/she is the Legal Clerk of NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL the DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON,WASHINGTON SOUTH COUNTY JOURNAL The Environmental Review Committee (ERC)has issued a Determination of Non- 600 S. Washington Avenue, Kent, Washington 98032 Significance - Mitigated for the following gg project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. a daily newspaper published seven (7) times a week. Said newspaper is a legal LUA EL INN UA-98-014,SA-H,ECF newspaper of general publication and is now and has been for more than six months Environmental review and approval to prior to the date of publication, referred to, printed and published in the English language develop a three story motel on 1.8 acres. NE continually as a daily newspaper in Kent, King County, Washington. The South County Laketion:Wash.B vdrner of NE 44th Street and Journal has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior Court of the The 15 day comment and appeal,period for this project will run concurrently. The State of Washington for King County. comment/appeal periods for this project will The notice in the exact form attached, was published in the South County end at 5:00 PM on June 29, 1998.Written Journal (and not in supplemental form) which was regularly distributed to the subscribers comments shall be forwarded to the DeveloLnd Us during the below stated period. The annexed notice, a Review Supervisor.entl ces Information on the p oe ject file and the mitigation measures Microtel Inn imposed by the City of Renton's Environmental Review Committee are available at the Development Services as published on: 6/15/98 Division, Sixth Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. The full amount of the fee charged for said foregoing publication is the sum of $60.10 • Legal Number 4789 5) 430-7200. Appeal pro- 4p 'available in the City Clerk's Floor, Municipal Building, 200 .,Renton,WA. //� A Public Hearing will be held by the /G Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular Le lerk, S uth County Journal meeting in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall,200 Mill Ave.,So., Renton,WA, on July 07, 1998 at 9:00 AM to consider the Site Approval (SA). If the Subscribed and sworn before me on this • aay of R—+...2 , 19 Environmental Determination is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part of this pub- lic hearing. Interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing.. `\\`0tIltt►trr��' ,ram17-h ----qJ-- Published in the South County Journal `` ..k r.j• i•.L�� June 15,1998.4789 N. .�•:jsst0./C... ..�e'.,� Notary Public of the State of Washington .` ... •` •" residing in Renton =r: TA�Y <N y= King County, Washington —0— f'O C L\ti OOp.off` %i•, 2 6 2-..-c.: i DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON di! s �_ 1998 ;r:.. ,; = JUN 2 4 zane au State of Washington RECEIVED DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND WILDLIFE Region 4 Office: 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard-Mill Creek,Washington 98012-(425)775-1311 June 22, 1998 Jana Huerter, Land Use Review Supervisor City of Renton Development Services Division 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Dear Ms. Huerter: SUBJECT: Determination of Non-significance--Mitigated; Microtel Inn, File Number LUA-98-014, SA-H, ECF, Gypsy Sub-drainage Basin Creek, Tributary to Lake Washington, King County, WRIA 08.MISC The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW)has reviewed the above-referenced State Environmental Policy Act(SEPA) document received on June 15, 1998, and offers the following comments at this time. Other comments may be offered if the project progresses. A Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA; RCW 75.20, WAC 220-110; to be issued by WDFW) will be required for the project to discharge stormwater to the creek. WDFW requires the design of stormwater facilities to meet or exceed the requirements of the Washington Department of Ecology Stormwater Management Manual for the Puget Sound Basin. WDFW has documented that the Gypsy Sub-basin Drainage contains salmonid fish. The WDFW wild salmonid policy prescribes a minimum buffer of 100-150 feet on each side for streams containing salmonids and minimum buffers of 100 or 50 feet for type 4 and 5 streams, respectively. WDFW recommends that additional mitigation for this project include enhancement or restoration of riparian and wetland vegetation on the site. Please pass this information on to the project proponent. WDFW appreciates your cooperation in our efforts to preserve, protect, perpetuate, and manage the fish and wildlife resources of the state of Washington. I /. • Ms. Huerter June 22, 1998 Page 2 Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. If you have any questions, please contact me at(425) 392-9159. Sincerely, Laity Fisher er Area Habitat Biologist LF:lf:CORSW.com cc: WDFW, Muller WDFW, Rickard JUN-17-98 WED 2: 05 PM WSDOT/DAYTON 5TH PLR FAX NO. 404805 F, 1 v AIM Wia Washington State Northwest Region Department of Transportation 15700 Dayton Avenue NorthP-O.Box 330310 Sid Morrison Seattle,WA 98133-9710 Secretary of Transportation (206)440-4000 June 17, 1998 Jennifer Toth Henning City of Renton Re: Acoustical Comments Dear Ms. Henning In my review of the SEPA register of proposed developments from the Department of . Ecology- I came across the Mircotel Inn, a 115-unit motel development project in Renton. That will be adjacent to SR 405. Your Agency file number for this project is LUA-98-014. We have learned from experience that people who will own or manage these motels that are close to our right-of-way will call us up after a few months to ask what we can do about the noise. Unfortunately we are unable to even consider these locations for noise walls until we have a project to add through lanes to the adjacent highway. Even with additional lanes, the dBA level for residences would have to reach 66 dBA or above and 72 dBA or above for commercial properties or have an increase of 10 dBA for noise abatement to be considered. We would appreciate it if you would urge the developer to consider any noise mitigation measures that would be necessary to protect this development from traffic noise impacts. If you have any questions please feel free to contact me: Nathan Gillis MS 138 15700 Dayton Ave. N. Seattle WA,.98133 phone (206)440-4643 fax (206) 440-4805 gillisn@wsdot wa.gov. • Sincer e athan A. Gill' Acoustical Technician W.S.D.O.T. Washington State Northwest Region Department of Transportation 15700 Dayton Avenue North Sid Morrison P.O.Box 330310 Seattle,WA 98133-9710 Secretary of Transportation (206)440-4000 DATE: June 16, 1998 TO: Jennifer Toth Henning, Project Manager Planning/Building/Public Works 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Subject: SR-405 MP 7.68 CS 1743 Microtel Inn May Creek I/C LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF • '4 +£--_- FROM: 'obert A. Josephson, PE, Manager of Planning & Local Coordination Washington State Department of Transportation Northwest Region 15700 Dayton Avenue North, MS 122 P. O. Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 Thank you for giving us the opportunity to review this project, our response is checked below: We have reviewed the subject document and have no further comments. The project will have no significant impact on the state highway system. X Thank you for the Traffic Impact Study prepared to analyze the impact of the project's generated peak hour trips on State Highways and also determine what mitigation measures, if any, would be suggested. Please expect our response within four weeks. If you have any questions,please contact John Sutherland, (206) 440-4914, or Don Hurter, (206)440-4664 of my Developer Services section. JBS:js 1 strspns.doc CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the ``' day of uhC , 1998, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing n2.G dererMtNCV\S documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Department of Ecology Don Hurter WSDOT KC Wastewater Treatment Division Larry Fisher Washington Department of Fisheries David F. Dietzman Department of Natural Resources Shirley Lukhang Seattle Public Utilities Duwamish Indian Tribe Rod Malcom Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Joe Jainga Puget Sound Energy (Signature of Sender) SIJALULL.L. S STATE OF WASHINGTON SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for , e uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: i,z7c 7/, /y 7 g lY 7t-e-� Notary Public in and or the State of Washington Notary (Print) IAN ILYN KAMCHEFF My appointment COMMISSION EXl'IKES 6/29/99 Project Name: YvItaot'el TvIkA Project Number: a� -014, 514 — eLr NOTARY DOC 4i CITX 3F RENTON ,.u. _' Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator sk ne 11, 1998 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Clympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: Environmental Determinations Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination and Environmental Checklist for the following pr, ,ct reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on June 09, 1998: DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Jeff Baker, of Rupert Engineering, Inc., has applied to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. le site is presently vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland on the western portion of the site. Parki, for 106 cars would be provided on the site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with Denny's restaurant, located next to the subject site. Location: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard. Comments regarding the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM June 2! 998. Any aggrieved person feeling that the environmental determination of the Environmental Review Committee based on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which coul not be reasonably available at the time of the determination may submit written comments. After review of the commer if nvironmental Review Committee finds there is not sufficient evidence to amend its original determination, then thf ,vill be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action would need to file a forn it appeal within the original 15-day timeframe. Written comments must be filed with: Jana Huerter, Land Use Reviev Supervisor, City of Renton Development Services Division, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055. If an app€ of :he environmental determination is also filed with the Hearing Examiner during the same 15-day comment period, t :rn the Environmental Review Committee will first take action on the request for reconsideration and the appellant will notified that the appeal is on hold pending the Committee's decision on the reconsideration request. The City will ! ify the appellant/person requesting reconsideration and parties of record and the Hearing Examiner of the Environmer I Review Committee's final determination. The appeal process will then be continued unless the appellant notifies tt Hearing Examiner in writing that he wishes to withdraw the appeal. Appeals of the environmental determinatior nust be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM June 29, 1998. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the requir $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055. Appe to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding tI appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-235-2501. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 277-6186. he Enviro nta,Review Committee, Fo� ect,„ (,,:, vfivva9 � ifbr,Toth ginning Project Manager cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Larry Fisher, Department of Fisheries David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources Don Hurter, Department of Transportation Shirley Lukhang, Seattle Public Utilities Duwamish Tribal Office Rod Malcom, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Ordinance) Joe Jainga, Puget Sound Energy AGNCYLTR.DOC\ 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 0 This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer CITN 3F RENTON .61 N, Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator Jun.; 11, 1998 Mr. Jeff Baker Rupert Engineering, Inc. 1519 West Valley Highway North Suite#101 Auburn, WA 98001 SUBJECT: Microtel Inn Project No. LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Dear Mr. Baker: Th s letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) and is to advise you that they t ve completed their review of the subject project. The ERC, on June 09, 1998, issued a threshold Determination of t :m- Significance-Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. See the enclosed Mitigation Measures document. Comments regarding the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM June 29, 15 98. Any aggrieved person feeling that the environmental determination of the Environmental Review Committt is b(sed on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which coulc lot bE reasonably available at the time of the determination may submit written comments. After review of the commer if E ivironmental Review Committee finds there is not sufficient evidence to amend its original determination, then ` 3re w II be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action would need to file a fc nal appeal within the original 15-day timeframe. Written comments must be filed with: Jana Huerter, Land Use R, ew Supervisor, City of Renton Development Services Division, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055. If an app, ' of the environmental determination is also filed with the Hearing Examiner during the same 15-day comment period. ien the Environmental Review Committee will first take action on the request for reconsideration and the appellant v be notified that the appeal is on hold pending the Committee's decision on the reconsideration request. The City will tify the appellant/person requesting reconsideration and parties of record and the Hearing Examiner of the Environn ital Review Committee's final determination. The appeal process will then be continued unless the appellant notifi, the Hearing Examiner in writing that he wishes to withdraw the appeal. Appeals of the environmental determination ust be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM June 29, 1998. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the re, red $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055. Appt s to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additional information regardil the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-235-2501. A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular meeting in the Council Chambers the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington, on July 07, 1998 at 9:00 AM to consider the Site Approval (SA) The ,applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the stall port will be mailed to you one week before the hearing. If the Environmental Determination is appealed, the appeal II be ieard as part of this public hearing. The preceding information will assist you in planning for implementation of your project and enable you to exercif your appeal rights more fully, if you choose to do so. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, plea call me at (425) 277-6186. Fo the Enviro Wntalt Review Committee, 1/14MAD .)encf TO Henning Project Manager cc: THC-Exit Seven, LLC/Owners DNSMLTR.DOC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer A CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF APPLICANT: Jeff Baker, Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Microtel Inn DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Jeff Baker, of Rupert Engineering, Inc., has applied to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is presently vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland On the western portion of the site. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on the site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with Denny's restaurant, located next to the subject site. LOCATION )F PROPOSAL: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The applicant shall design the storm detention system to the pre-100-year run-off rate, 24-hour storm event, in order to diminish downstream flooding impacts that could result from the addition of impervious surface on the site. The applicant shall provide this information and calculations as part of the final storm drainage report to be submitted with the construction drawings. 2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$0.52 per square foot of new construction. The Fire Mitigation Fee is payable prior to the issuance of the building permit for the project. 3. The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee, at a rate of$75.00 per each new average daily trip attributable to the project. The fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF APPLICANT: Jeff Baker, Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Microtel Inn DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Jeff Baker, of Rupert Engineering, Inc., has applied to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is presently vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland on the western portion of the site. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on the site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with Denny's restaurant, located next to the subject site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Plan Review-General 1. Garbage and recyclable deposit areas and collection points shall be easily and safely accessible to hauling trucks. 2. Construction drawings are to be per City drafting standards Plan Review-Water 3. The Water System Development Connection charge is estimated to be $7,977. 4. The available fire flow with loop is approximately 4000 to 4500 gallons per minute (gpm). 5. One fire hydrant required per each 1000 gpm of required fire flow. Fire Prevention indicates a required fire flow of 3250 gpm. Therefore, four(4) fire hydrants will be required. 6. The primary fire hydrant must be within 150 feet of the structure, but not closer then 50 feet. Any secondary fire hydrants are to be within 300 feet of the structure. 7. The irrigation meter must be tapped into the proposed loop 12-inch main. Not tapped into the domestic service line as shown. Plan Review-WasteWater 8. The Sanitary Sewer System Development Connection Charge for waste water is estimated to be $5,506.25. 9. The sanitary sewer system is required to have a minimum of 2% slope. 10. A profile needs to be provided with the construction plans submittal. 11. The northeast corner of the lot will need the utility easement readjusted for the sewer force main realignment. Microtel Inn LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Advisory Notes (Continued) Plan Review-Stomnwater 12. The Special Utility System Development Connection Charge is estimated to be $6,181.18. 13. An eresion/sedimentation control plan is required. 14. Due to flooding of Lake Washington Boulevard roadway downstream of the site, the storm detention s required to be designed to the pre-100-year run-off rate, 24-hour storm event. This informatio and calculations are to be provided in the final storm drainage report. Plan Revi w-Transportation 15. The lowest acceptable trip rate per the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual is 8.7 daily trips per motel unit, with an occupancy rate of 80%. The City's Transportation Mitigation fee is charged at a rate of$75 per each new average daily trip. For the 115 units proposed the fee is stimated as follows: 115 units x 8.7 trips per unit x 0.80 rate of occupancy = 800.4 daily trips. A fe of$60,030.00 is estimated based on: 800.4 daily trips x $75 = $60.030.00. The fee is due prior to the issuance of building permits. 16. The p posed driveway access on NE 44th Street is to be located 5-feet from the site's easterly property li . The driveway would be as far from the intersection that is to be signalized in the future, and also at'the beginning of the two-way left turn lane. Locating the driveway closer to the intersection would be hazardous for left turning vehicles attempting to access the site across three-lanes of opposing traffic. In addition, any vehicles queuing from the future traffic signal would block vehicles exiting the site if any other position closer to the intersection was selected. 17. Off-site improvements on NE 44th will be required. This includes curb, gutter and sidewalk located with the back edge at the property line for full length of roadway frontage. A planter strip width between the curb and sidewalk is five feet or greater. 18. Off-site improvements on Lake Washington Boulevard are required. This includes curb, gutter, sidewalks and street lighting the full length of the property frontage. 19. The first 165 feet of Lake Washington Boulevard, northerly to the turnback line from NE 44th Street intersection is Washington State Department of Transportation right-of-way. Therefore, the Washington State Department of Transportation will need to concur with the proposed roadway, sidewalk and street lighting improvement plans. 20. The applicant's draft parking cross easement agreement document has been forwarded to the City Attorney for approval as to legal form. The proposed joint parking appears to meet City Code requirements. 21. The proposed stall length does not meet City Code with wheelstop location. The proposed configuration will need a waiver from the City Code. 22. The applicant will need to either: 1) demonstrate that sufficient parking is available on-site to meet City Code requirements; or, 2) seek and successfully obtain a modification from the Parking and Loading standards to permit joint-use parking to meet required parking for both the proposed motel and restaurant; or, 3) revise the proposal such that the number of motel units proposed is reduced to match the available parking on the subject site. Fire Prevention 23. The preliminary fire flow is determined to be 3,250 gpm. One hydrant is required within 150 feet of the structure land three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the structure. 24. A fire mitigation fee of$21,840.00 is required based on $0.52 per square foot of building area. 25. Separate plans and permits are required for the installation of fire alarm and sprinkler systems. Building Department 26. The soils report should address the potential for liquefaction. Microtel Inn LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Advisory Notes (Continued) 27. The 1997 Uniform Building Code goes into effect in July, 1998. Airport 28. The site is adjacent to an existing motel. The proposed site in on the 1-405 corridor, which is beneath the area heavily utilized by aircraft within the traffic pattern of the Renton airport. The site area is not an area from which complaints of aircraft noise have been received from the motel or from apartments further to the east. It should be minimally impacted by aircraft operations from the airport. It is considered an area and use compatible with aviation operations from the airport. Police 29. Police estimate the 21.7 calls will be received for service annually, based on the size of the business. Applicant is advised to contact Renton Police Crime Prevention to discuss security during construction and operation of the motel. Contact Audrey Moore at (425)235-2571. Also note Police comments in the project file. Development Planning 30. Site is zoned Commercial Arterial (CA). Project requires a public hearing for the site plan review. NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE RENTON, WASHINGTON The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) has issued a Determination of Non-Significance - Mitigated for the following project under the authority of the Renton Municipal Code. MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Environmental review and approval to develop a three story motel on 1.8 acres. Location: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Wash. Blvd. The 15 day comment and appeal period for this project will run concurrently. The comment/appeal periods for this project will end at 5:00 PM on June 29, 1998. Written comments shall be forwarded to the Development Services Division Land Use Review Supervisor. Information on the project file and the mitigation measures imposed by the City of Renton's Environmental Review Committee are available at the Development Services Division, Sixth Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Phone: (425) 430-7200. Appeal procedures are available in the City Clerk's office, First Floor, Municipal Building, 200 Mill Ave. So., Renton, WA. A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular meeting in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, 200 Mill Ave., So., Renton, WA, on July 07, 1998 at 9:00 AM to consider the Site Approval (SA). If the Environmental Determination is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. Interested parties are invited to attend the public hearing. Publication Date: June 15, 1998 Account No. 51067 dnsmpub.dot ! . CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF APPLICANT: Jeff Baker, Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Microtel Inn DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Jeff Baker, of Rupert Engineering, Inc., has applied to develop a 115-rc m, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is presently vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland on the we5 3m piton of the site. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on the site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared iith Denny's restaurant, located next to the subject site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable signi ant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under ;W 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under ieir authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental irrs cts identified during the environmental review process. Comments regarding the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM Jun 29, 1998. Any aggrieved person feeling that the environmental determination of the Environmental Review Commit 3 is )ased on erroneous procedure, errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which cou not 3e reasonably available at the time of the determination may submit written comments. After review of the comme Is, if Environmental Review Committee finds there is not sufficient evidence to amend its original determination, then here will be no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action would need to file a f 'mal appeal within the original 15-day timeframe. Written comments must be filed with: Jana Huerter, Land Use R view "Supervisor, City of Renton Development Services Division, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055. If an apc a/of the environmental determination is also filed with the Hearing Examiner during the same 15-day comment period then the Environmental Review Committee will first take action on the request for reconsideration and the appellant vo II be notified that the appeal is on hold pending the Committee's decision on the reconsideration request. The City will notify the appellant/person requesting reconsideration and parties of record and the Hearing Examiner of the Environr ental Review Committee's final determination. The appeal process will then be continued unless the appellant notifi :; the Hearing Examiner in writing that he wishes to withdraw the appeal. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM June 29, 1998. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the re uired $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055. App 1ls to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11B. Additional information regardi .t the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-235-2501. PUBLICATION DATE: June 15, 1998 DATE OF DECISION: June 09, 1998 SIGNATURES: �( � , E/q/�5 G eg imilrmar idmrnistrator DATE Department of Planning/Building/Public Works -1-1r m Chastain, dmini ra or DATE Comm ity Seryi�es Lee e eT r, Fire Chief-11..-W— - ?"-/C7? DATE Ren on Fire Department DNSMSIG.DOC CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF APPLICANT: Jeff Baker, Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Microtel Inn DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Jeff Baker, of Rupert Engineering, Inc., has applied to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is presently vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland on the western portion of the site. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on the site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with Denny's restaurant, located next to the subject site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The applicant shall design the storm detention system to the pre-100-year run-off rate, 24-hour storm event, in order to diminish downstream flooding impacts that could result from the addition of impervious surface on the site. The applicant shall provide this information and calculations as part of the final storm drainage report to be submitted with the construction drawings. 2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$0.52 per square foot of new construction. The Fire Mitigation Fee is payable prior to the issuance of the building permit for the project. 3. The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee, at a rate of$75.00 per each new average daily trip attributable to the project. The fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF APPLICANT: Jeff Baker, Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT NAME: Microtel Inn DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: Jeff Baker, of Rupert Engineering, Inc., has applied to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is presently vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland on the western portion of the site. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on the site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with Denny's restaurant, located next to the subject site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Plan Review-General 1. Garbage and recyclable deposit areas and collection points shall be easily and safely accessible to hauling trucks. 2. Construction drawings are to be per City drafting standards Plan Review-Water 3. The Water System Development Connection charge is estimated to be $7,977. 4. The available fire flow with loop is approximately 4000 to 4500 gallons per minute (gpm). 5. One fire hydrant required per each 1000 gpm of required fire flow. Fire Prevention indicates a required fire flow of 3250 gpm. Therefore, four(4) fire hydrants will be required. 6. The primary fire hydrant must be within 150 feet of the structure, but not closer then 50 feet. Any secondary fire hydrants are to be within 300 feet of the structure. 7. The irrigation meter must be tapped into the proposed loop 12-inch main. Not tapped into the domestic service line as shown. Plan Review-WasteWater 8. The Sanitary Sewer System Development Connection Charge for waste water is estimated to be $5,506.25. 9. The sanitary sewer system is required to have a minimum of 2% slope. 10. A profile needs to be provided with the construction plans submittal. 11. The northeast corner of the lot will need the utility easement readjusted for the sewer force main realignment. Microtel Inn LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Advisory Notes (Continued) Plan Review -Stormwater 12. The Special Utility System Development Connection Charge is estimated to be $6,181.18. 13. An erosion/sedimentation control plan is required. 14. Due to flooding of Lake Washington Boulevard roadway downstream of the site, the storm detention is required to be designed to the pre-100-year run-off rate, 24-hour storm event. This information and calculations are to be provided in the final storm drainage report. Plan Review-Transportation 15. The lowest acceptable trip rate per the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual is 8.7 daily trips per motel unit, with an occupancy rate of 80%. The City's Transportation Mitigation fee is charged at a rate of$75 per each new average daily trip. For the 115 units proposed the fee is estimated as follows: 115 units x 8.7 trips per unit x 0.80 rate of occupancy = 800.4 daily trips. A fee of$60,030.00 is estimated based on: 800.4 daily trips x $75 = $60.030.00. The fee is due prior to the issuance of building permits. 16. The proposed driveway access on NE 44th Street is to be located 5-feet from the site's easterly property line. The driveway would be as far from the intersection that is to be signalized in the future, and also at the beginning of the two-way left turn lane. Locating the driveway closer to the intersection would be hazardous for left turning vehicles attempting to access the site across three-lanes of opposing traffic. In addition, any vehicles queuing from the future traffic signal would block vehicles exiting the site if any other position closer to the intersection was selected. 17. Off-site improvements on NE 44th will be required. This includes curb, gutter and sidewalk located with the back edge at the property line for full length of roadway frontage. A planter strip width between the curb and sidewalk is five feet or greater. 18. Off-site improvements on Lake Washington Boulevard are required. This includes curb, gutter, sidewalks and street lighting the full length of the property frontage. 19. The first 165 feet of Lake Washington Boulevard, northerly to the turnback line from NE 44th Street intersection is Washington State Department of Transportation right-of-way. Therefore, the Washington State Department of Transportation will need to concur with the proposed roadway, sidewalk and street lighting improvement plans. 20. The applicant's draft parking cross easement agreement document has been forwarded to the City Attorney for approval as to legal form. The proposed joint parking appears to meet City Code requirements. 21. The proposed stall length does not meet City Code with wheelstop location. The proposed configuration will need a waiver from the City Code. 22. The applicant will need to either: 1) demonstrate that sufficient parking is available on-site to meet City Code requirements; or, 2) seek and successfully obtain a modification from the Parking and Loading standards to permit joint-use parking to meet required parking for both the proposed motel and restaurant; or, 3) revise the proposal such that the number of motel units proposed is reduced to match the available parking on the subject site. Fire Prevention 23. The preliminary fire flow is determined to be 3,250 gpm. One hydrant is required within 150 feet of the structure and three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the structure. 24. A fire mitigation fee of$21,840.00 is required based on $0.52 per square foot of building area. 25. Separate plans and permits are required for the installation of fire alarm and sprinkler systems. Building Department 26. The soils report should address the potential for liquefaction. Microtel Inn LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Advisory Notes (Continued) 27. The 1997 Uniform Building Code goes into effect in July, 1998. Airport 28. The site is adjacent to an existing motel. The proposed site in on the 1-405 corridor, which is beneath the area heavily utilized by aircraft within the traffic pattern of the Renton airport. The site area is not an area from which complaints of aircraft noise have been received from the motel or from apartments further to the east. It should be minimally impacted by aircraft operations from the airport. It is considered an area and use compatible with aviation operations from the airport. Police 29. Police estimate the 21.7 calls will be received for service annually, based on the size of the business. Applicant is advised to contact Renton Police Crime Prevention to discuss security during construction and operation of the motel. Contact Audrey Moore at (425)235-2571. Also note Police comments in the project file. Development Planning 30. Site is zoned Commercial Arterial (CA). Project requires a public hearing for the site plan review. JflQE! .n \ : ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: MICROTEL INN PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Jeff Baker, of Rupert Engineering, Inc., has applied to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is presently vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland on the western portion of the site. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on the site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with Denny's restaurant, located next to the subject site. Location: NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Comments regarding the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM June 29, 1998 Any aggrieved person feeling that the environmental determination of the Environmental Review Committee is based on erroneous procedure,errors of law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the time of the determination may submit written comments.After review of the comments, if Environmental Review Committee finds there is not sufficient evidence to amend its original determination, then there will tie no further extension of the appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action would need to file a formal appeal within the original 15-day timeframe. Written comments must be filed with: Jana Huerter, Land Use Review Supervisor,City of Renton Development Services Division,200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055. If an appeal of the environmental determination is also filed with the Hearing Examiner during the same 15-day comment period, then the Environmental Review Committee will first take action on the request for reconsideration and the appellant will be notified that the appeal is on hold pending the Committee's decision on the reconsideration request. The City will notify the appellant/person requesting reconsideration and parties of record and the Hearing Examiner of the Environmental Review Committee's final determination. The appeal process will then be continued unless the appellant notifies the Hearing Examiner in writing that he wishes to withdraw the appeal. Appeals of the environmental determination must be tiled in writing on or before 5:00 PM June 29, 1998. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75 00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton,200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-235-2501. A Public Hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner at his regular meeting in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington, on JULY 07, 1998 at 9:00 AM to consider the SITE APPROVAL(SA). If the Environmental Determination is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part of this public hearing. t. 1- . .4 X • -T J ? t .“ .---.:J'etN"-p- :1 • -Y ,, e 8iO I d 1 .. / I /, c n• i. - ;; •"', n Q! ....:- g I �YI I A--•,.:_.F..�:=._'.,311D""'-yT1�•-.,� '_b,;,. \. t II C. D H I• N'S ri-IA*7,7 � ro V6.` Fri 191.Q^� i„I lam,y' z A FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY deft Ni UN, Ut_VELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT(425)235-2550. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. I STAFF City of Renton REPORT Department of Planning/Building/Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A. BACKGROUND ERC MEETING DATE June 9, 1998 Project Name Microtel Inn Applicant Jeff Baker, Rupert Engineering, Inc. 1519 West Valley Highway North, Suite 101 Auburn, WA 98001 File Number LUA-098-014, SA-H, ECF Project Manager Jennifer Toth Henning Project Description Jeff Baker, of Rupert Engineering, Inc., has applied to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is presently vacant and has a creek and a Category III wetland on the western portion of the site. Parking for "06 cars would be provided on the site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with Denny's restaurant, located next to the subject site. The project requires environmental review and site plan approval. Project Location NE corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard Exist. Bldg. Area gsf N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area gsf 42,000 square feet Site Area 1.8 acres Total Building Area gsf 42,000 square feet RECOMMENDATION Staff Recommend that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determinat n of Non Significance-Mitigated. B. RECOMMENDATION Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommend that the Responsible Offici make the following Environmental Determination: DETERMINATION OF X DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. X Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment P riod with Concurrent 14 da A.seal Perim, Issue DNS with 15 day Comment Period Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment F -iod with Concurrent 14 day Appeal Period. followed by a 14 day Appeal Period. Project Location Map ERI rPTDOC City of RentonPB/PWDepartment onmental Review Committee Staff Report 1IICROTEL INN LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECI REPORT AND DECISION OF JUNE 9,1998 Page2 of 6 C. MITIGATION MEASURES 1. The applicant shall design the storm detention system to the pre-100-year run-off rate, 24-hour sto event, in order to diminish downstream flooding impacts that could result from the addition of impervious surface on the site. The applicant shall provide this information and calculations as pa of the final storm drainage report to be submitted with the construction drawings. 2. The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$0.52 per square foot of ne construction. The Fire Mitigation Fee is payable prior to the issuance of the building permit for the project. 3. The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee, at a rate of$75.00 per each w average daily trip attributable to the project. The fee is payable prior to the issuance of building permits. Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. Plan Review-General 1. Garbage and recyclable deposit areas and collection points shall be easily and safely accessible to hauling ti Ks. 2. Construction drawings are to be per City drafting standards Plan Review-Water 3. The Water System Development Connection charge is estimated to be $7,977. 4. The available fire flow with loop is approximately 4000 to 4500 gallons per minute (gpm). 5. One fire hydrant required per each 1000 gpm of required fire flow. Fire Prevention indicates a required fire if;hry of 3250 gpm. Therefore, four(4) fire hydrants will be required. 6. The primary fire hydrant must be within 150 feet of the structure, but not closer then 50 feet. Any secondary ire hydrants are to be within 300 feet of the structure. 7. The irrigation meter must be tapped into the proposed loop 12-inch main. Not tapped into the domestic sery e line as shown. Plan Review-WasteWater 8. The Sanitary Sewer System Development Connection Charge for waste water is estimated to be $5,506.25. 9. The sanitary sewer system is required to have a minimum of 2% slope. 10. A profile needs to be provided with the construction plans submittal. 11. The northeast corner of the lot will need the utility easement readjusted for the sewer force main realignm} Plan Review-Stormwater 12. The Special Utility System Development Connection Charge is estimated to be $6,181.18. 13. An erosion/sedimentation control plan is required. 14. Due to flooding of Lake Washington Boulevard roadway downstream of the site, the storm detention is rec red to be designed to the pre-100-year run-off rate, 24-hour storm event. This information and calculations are to be provided in the final storm drainage report. Plan Review-Transportation 15. The lowest acceptable trip rate per the Institute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual is 8.-1 daily trips per motel unit, with an occupancy rate of 80%. The City's Transportation Mitigation fee is charged at a r, of ERCRPT.DOC City of Renton P/B/PW Department onmental Review Committee Staff Repot; MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014,SA-H, ECI _ REPORT AND DECISION OF JUNE 9, 1998 Page3 of $75 per each new average daily trip. For the 115 units proposed the fee is estimated as follows: 115 units x 8.7 tr per unit x 0.80 rate of occupancy= 800.4 daily trips. A fee of$60,030.00 is estimated based on: 800.4 daily trips $75 = $60.030.00. The fee is due prior to the issuance of building permits. 16. The proposed driveway access on NE 44th Street is to be located 5-feet from the site's easterly property line. The driveway would be as far from the intersection that is to be signalized in the future, and also at the beginning the two-way left turn lane. Locating the driveway closer to the intersection would be hazardous for left turning vehicles attempting to access the site across three-lanes of opposing traffic. In addition, any vehicles queuing fro the future traffic signal would block vehicles exiting the site if any other position closer to the intersection was selected. 17. Off-site improvements on NE 44th will be required. This includes curb, gutter and sidewalk located with the L. k edge at the property line for full length of roadway frontage. A planter strip width between the curb and sidewalk i five feet or greater. 18. Off-site improvements on Lake Washington Boulevard are required. This includes curb, gutter, sidewalks an street lighting the full length of the property frontage. 19. The first 165 feet of Lake Washington Boulevard, northerly to the turnback line from NE 44th Street intersect is Washington State Department of Transportation right-of-way. Therefore, the Washington State Department of Transportation will need to concur with the proposed roadway, sidewalk and street lighting improvement plans. 20. The applicant's draft parking cross easement agreement document has been forwarded to the City Attorney approval as to legal form. The proposed joint parking appears to meet City Code requirements. 21. The proposed stall length does not meet City Code with wheelstop location. The proposed configuration will ed a waiver from the City Code. 22. The applicant will need to either: 1) demonstrate that sufficient parking is available on-site to meet City Cod requirements; or, 2) seek and successfully obtain a modification from the Parking and Loading standards to perm joint-use parking to meet required parking for both the proposed motel and restaurant; or, 3) revise the proposal oh that the number of motel units proposed is reduced to match the available parking on the subject site. Fire Prevention 23. The preliminary fire flow is determined to be 3,250 gpm. One hydrant is required within 150 feet of the stru, re and three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the structure. 24. A fire mitigation fee of$21,840.00 is required based on $0.52 per square foot of building area. 25. Separate plans and permits are required for the installation of fire alarm and sprinkler systems. Building Department 26. The soils report should address the potential for liquefaction. 27. The 1997 Uniform Building Code goes into effect in July, 1998. Airport 28. The site is adjacent to an existing motel. The proposed site in on the 1-405 corridor, which is beneath the al 3a heavily utilized by aircraft within the traffic pattern of the Renton airport. The site area is not an area from whicl• complaints of aircraft noise have been received from the motel or from apartments further to the east. It should be minimally impacted by aircraft operations from the airport. It is considered an area and use compatible with aviation operations from the airport. Police 29. Police estimate the 21.7 calls will be received for service annually, based on the size of the business. Api ;ant is advised to contact Renton Police Crime Prevention to discuss security during construction and operation of motel. Contact Audrey Moore at (425)235-2571. Also note Police comments in the project file. Development Planning 30. Site is zoned Commercial Arterial (CA). Project requires a public hearing for the site plan review. ERCRPT.DOC City of Renton P/B/PWDepartment onmental Review Committee StafRepor, MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014,SA-H,EC1 REPORT AND DECISION OF JUNE 9,1998 Page4 of 6 D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS In compliance with RCA 43.21 C. 240, the following project environmental review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards an environmental regulations. Has the applicant adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to occu conjunction with the proposed development? 1. Earth Impacts: The proposal would result in grading of the subject parcel to accommodate the proposed building and parking lot. Information provided by the applicant estimates that the amount of material to be cut or filled is 3,501 cubic yards (cy). The grading would be accomplished to create a more level area for the proposed structure and parking lot. The grading would be balanced on site, with no import of export of soil anticipated. However, approximately 600 cy or crushed rock would be imported for construction of the base for asphalt covered surface parking lots. Construction and site preparation activity could result in erosion and sedimentation. City Code requires that the applicant provide a Construction Mitigation Plan and Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan (TESCf to the Development Services Division prior to the issuance of construction and/or building permits. And the specific erosion and sedimentation control measures are to be installed and maintained throughout construction sequenc Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation measures are required. Nexus: Not applicable. 2. Air Impacts: Construction activity would result in increased levels of airborne particulate (especially dust) potential! impacting air quality in the area of the project site. Emissions from construction equipment would have a minor impact on local air quality. Construction impacts would be short-term in nature and would be regulated through st management practices of the required TESCP including measures such as spraying water to diminish dust imps s on windy or dry days. Vehicular emissions are regulated by the State of Washington. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation measures are required. Nexus: Not applicable. 3. Storm Water Impacts: The proposal would add impervious surface to the area. Approximately 61% of the site (1.1 acres)we .ald be covered with impervious surface. Localized downstream flooding has occurred on Lake Washington Boulevard An increase in impervious surface would increase the downstream impact. The applicant will need to design the st ,rm detention system to the pre-100-year run-off rate, 24-hour storm event. This information and calculations are tc: be provided in the final storm drainage report. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall design the storm detention system to the pre-100-year run-off rate, 2 ,hour storm event, in order to diminish downstream flooding impacts that could result from the addition of imperviou! surface on the site. The applicant shall provide this information and calculations as part of the final storm drai :cge report to be submitted with the construction drawings. Nexus: SEPA (Code Section 4-6) 4. Fire Protection Impacts: The proposal would add 42,000 square feet of new commercial construction to the City, which couk: potentially impact the City's Fire Protection Services. A Fire Mitigation Fee is charged to all new commercial ERCRPT.DOC • City of RentonPB/PWDepartment onmental Review Committee Staff Repori MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECl _ REPORT AND DECISION OF JUNE 9,1998 PageS of 6 development at a rate of$0.52 per square foot of building area. The fee is estimated to be $21,840.00 and is paya prior to the issuance of the Building Permit. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall pay the appropriate Fire Mitigation Fee at a rate of$0.52 per square foot new construction. The Fire Mitigation Fee is payable prior to the issuance of the building permit for the project. Nexus: Fire Mitigation Fee Resolution and Adopting Ordinance: SEPA (Code Section 4-6). 5. Transportation Impacts: The proposal would result in increased vehicular trips that would impact the City's street system. The applicant has submitted a Traffic Impact Study prepared by H. Lee and Associates to determine the number of average weekday trips the proposal would generate. The study determined that 7.67 average weekday trips woul, result, and assumed an occupancy rate of 77%. Staff has calculated the rate for the motel to be 8.7 trips per unit with an 80% occupancy rate assumed. Staff figures were derived using the Institute of Transportation Engineers Manual. Therefore, the Transportation Mitigation Fee is estimated to be: $60,030.00 based on (115 rooms)(8.7 trips/day)(0.80 occupancy) = 800.4 daily trips x $75 = $60,030.00. Parking is required by City Code at a rate of one guest parking space for each proposed motel room, plus two ix ing spaces for each three employees. The proposal requires 119 parking spaces. The applicant has propose 06 parking spaces, and has negotiated a joint-use parking agreement with the adjacent Denny's restaurant. The applicant is requesting a modification from the requirements of the Parking and Loading Ordinance in order be permitted to use the joint-use parking to count toward 13 of the required 119 spaces. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall pay the applicable Transportation Mitigation Fee, at a rate of$75.00 pE each new average daily trip attributable to the project. The fee is payable prior to the issuance of building perm' Nexus: Transportation Mitigation Fee Resolution and adopting ordinance; SEPA Ordinance (Code Section 4-6) 6. Wetlands Impacts: An existing stream and wetland have been documented and delineated on the subject site. The area the wetland is approximately 11,840 square feet in size. The wetland consists of emergent vegetation in the center banded by a mix of shrubs and saplings along the edge. The wetland is considered to be Category 3 wetland ur der the City's Wetlands Ordinance due to its small size, emergent and scrub-shrub classes, large degree of disturbance and because it is not located at the headwater of a watercourse. The required wetland buffer is 25 feet. The proposal would not result in disturbance within 25 feet of the wetland, and the minimum buffer would be preserved provided that a requested modification to the City's parking standards is approved. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation measures are required. Nexus: Not applicable. E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental/Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation Measure: nd/ Notes to Applicant. X Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. ERCRPT.DOC City of RentonPB/PWDepartment 9nmental Review Conunittee Staff Repo, MICROTEL INN LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECI REPORT AND DECISION OF JUNE 9,1998 Page6 of 6 Environmental Determination Comment Process Comments regarding the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM June 29, 1998. Any aggrieved person feeling that the environmental determination of the Environmental Review Committee is based on erroneous procedure, errors If law or fact, error in judgment, or the discovery of new evidence which could not be reasonably available at the timf of the determination may submit written comments. After review of the comments, if Environmental Review Committ finds there is not sufficient evidence to amend its original determination, then there will be no further extension oft e appeal period. Any person wishing to take further action would need to file a formal appeal within the original 15-d y timeframe. Written comments must be filed with: Jana Huerter, Land Use Review Supervisor, City of Renton Development Services Division, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055. If an appeal of the environmental determination is also filed with the Hearing Examiner during the same 15-day comment period, then the Environmental Review Committee will first take action on the request for reconsideration and the appellant will be notified that the appeal is on hold pending the Committee's decision on the reconsideration request. The City will notify the appellant/person requesting reconsideration and parties of record and the Hearing Examiner of the Environmental Review Committee's final determination. The appeal process will then be continued unless the appellant notifies the Hearing Examiner in writing that he wishes to withdraw the appeal. Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination muss e filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM June 29, 1998. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-11 B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425)-235-2501. ERCRPT.DOC City c„ r..inton Department of Planning/Building/Pt<_.._ Norks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEE REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: SwrfoLu IWwc4cvJc4.4fAr COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 APPLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HENNING _ PROJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336 LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. & NE 44th Street CtryC)Fpe rkr 't t.• SITE AREA: 1.8 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): 42,00fsgq;ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The s ,ra vacant and has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would ;pnpvided on site.`Ahother 13 par,ing stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environm gxiiew and site plan approval. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Elet lent of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessary Earta Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plan's Recreation Lane/Shoreline Use Utilities Anin als Transportation 4 _ EnvL onmental Health Public Services _ Ener iy/ Historic/Cultural Natu al Resources Preservation -, Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. l'OLICY-RELATED COMMENTS ) C fS �1 he ye O'we -24,/ ,44 /AC ctTiL.6g C. C ODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where acditional information is needed to property assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative /' Date DEVAPP.D)C Rev.10/93 Microtel Inn Lake Washington Blvd. &NE 44th St. NE Corner Development Services May 29, 1998 STORM DRAINAGE: 1. The Special Utility System Development Connection charge for Storm is$6,181.18. 2. Erosion/Sedimentation control plan required. 3. Due to flooding of Lake Washington roadway down stream of the Site the Storm Detention is required to be designed to the Pre-100 year run-off rate, 24-hour storm even. .This information and calculation to be provided in the final Storm Drainage Report. 4. Construction plans to meet City of Renton drafting standards. 98CM092D 98CM092D.DOC\ Microtel Inn Lake Washington Blvd. &NE 44th St. NE Corner Development Services May 29, 1998 SEWER(Waste Water): 1. System Development Connection charge for waste water is $5,506.25. 2. Sewer system to have a minimum of 2% slope. 3. Minimum pipe cover for side sewer is 2-feet. 4. Profile to be provided with plans. 5. Northeast corn of the lot will need the utility easement readjusted for the sewer force main realignment. 98cm092s 98CM092S.DOC\ PROPERTY SERVICES FEE REVIEW # 98 --- = ° ® DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET 0 PLAN REVIEW ROUTING SLIP 0 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST REVIEW SHEET 0 APPLICANT: Tf;C' — ii Cr ,S�vwr! I L2 OTHER RECEIVED FROM Cr-1 3-" , i7 JOB ADDRESS: /mil r v N-a s'r,,r -r .i LA,t;r-k 0.4s‘r, —,vim &ov Al w0/i (da( i— NATURE OF WORK: M0 -c GREEN# a SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND CONNECTION FEES APPLIED NEED MORE INFORMATION: 0 LEGAL DESCI "TION ❑ SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND CONNECTION FEES ESTIMATED 0 SQUARE FOOTAGE 0 VICINITY MA ❑ NOT APPROVED FOR APPLICATION OF FEES 0 FRONT FOOTAGE 0 OTHER ❑ VESTED 0 NOT VESTED ❑ This fee review supersedes and cancels fee review# dated . 0 PARENT PID#(subject to change)_ SUBJECT PROPERTY PID# 3 3y 33 0 - //sD 0 King Co.Tax Acct#(new) It is the intent of this development fee analysis to put the developer/owner on notice,that the fees quoted below may be applicable to the subject site upon development of the property. All quoted fees are potential charges that may be due and payable at the time the construction permit is issued to install the on-s and off-site improvements(i.e.underground utilities,street improvements,etc.) Triggering mechanisms for the SDC fees will be based on current City ordin :es and determined by the applicable Utility Section. Please note that these fees are subject to change without notice. Final fees will be based on rates in effect at time of Building Permit/Construction Permit application. The following quoted fees do NOT include inspection fees,side sewer permits,r/w permit fees or the cost of water meters. SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PARCEL METHOD OF ASSESSMENT ASSESS! ENT DISTRICTS NO. NO. ASSESSMENT UNITS OR F 1,", Latecomer Agreement(pvt)WATER / Latecomer Agreement(pvt)WASTEWATER Latecomer Agreement(pvt)OTHER Special Assessment District/WATER d Special Assessment District/WASTEWATER Joint Use Agreement(METRO) Local Improvement District * Traffic Benefit Zones $75.00 PER TRIP,CALCULATED BY TRANSPORTATION FUTURE OBLIGATIONS SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-WATER #OF UNITS/ SDC FEE Cl Pd Prey. 0 Partially Pd (Ltd Exemption) N Never Pd SQ. FIG. Single family residential$850/unit x _Mobile home dwelling unit$680/unit in park Apartment, Condo$510/unit not in CD or COR zones x 70,5 93 st-7977-°° Commercial/Industrial, $0.113/sq. ft. of property (not less than$850.00)x (3/�5- /lC Boeing,by Special Agreement/Footprint of Bldg plus 15 ft perimeter(.2.soo GPM threshold) Le.s5 uk„ea 15 SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-WASTEWATER lo,q15- C1 Pd Prey. 0 Partially Pd (Ltd Exemption) O9 Never Pd — Single family residential dwelling unit$585/unit x Mobile home dwelling unit$468/unit x _Apartment, Condo$350/unit not in CD or COR zones x 70/55'3 Commercial/Industrial, $0.078/sq. ft. of property (not less than$585.00)x (- 1,588 KC d -5 O6 ,ZS/ REDEVELOPMENT CREDIT: (New- Old Flow)/New Flow X Above Fees SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT CHARGE-SURFACEWATER CI Pd Prey. 0 Partially Pd (Ltd Exemption) IN Never Pd Single family residential and mobile home dwelling unit$385/unit x All other properties $0.129/sq ft of new impervious area of property x y7 q/G (not less than$385.00) , I .1 � ( �'.I g ��-� 6_45748, PRELIMINARY TOTAL $ �' (Q(oc(,y3 / Signature of Reviewing thority DATE ;! pip *!(subject property is within an LID, it is developers responsibility to check with the Finance Dept. for paid/un-paid status. ( **The square footage figures used are taken from the KingCountyAssessor's mapand areQ approximate only. )\1 c:/temp lath/fccapp/tgb EFFECTIVE July 16, 1995/Ord. Nos. 4506,4507,4508, 4525,and 4526 : N r 3` f City.., ,.enton Department of Planning/Building/P...,.., Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEE REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:van ge,00,4 COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 APPLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HENNING PROJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336 LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. & NE 44th Street CI'Ilr QF S TE AREA: 1.8 acres l BUILDING AREA(gross: 42,000 sq.ft CEIVFD SJMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. TIViteiS''i78cant anc has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environme 1Leview and site plan approv ��,v� Y•��vN A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS i_lement of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More c7nvironment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Informa;' Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necess.. =arth Housing Air Aesthetics Water !-=- Light/Glare plants Recreation .and/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation _Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet t . POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS a t c_ -eA- a CODE-RELATED COMMENTS Ne have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas vhere additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. � '' 9741G o7 771. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date )EVAPP.DOC % 10/93 . Microtel Inn Lake Washington Blvd. &NE 44th St. NE Corner Development Services May 29, 1998 WATER: 1. Water has a System Development Connection charge of$7,977. 2. Available fire flow with loop is approximately 4000 to 4500 gpm. 3. One fire hydrant required per each 1000 gpm of required fire flow. Fire Prevention indicates a required fire flow of 3250 gpm. Therefore, four(4)fire hydrants will be required. 4. The primary fire hydrant must be within 150 feet of the structure, but not closer then 50. Any secondary fire hydrants are to be within 300 feet of the structure. 5. Drawings to be per City drafting standards. 6. The irrigation meter must be taped into the proposed loop 12-inch main. Not taped into the domestic service line as show. 98CM092W.DOC\ A p Gti�Y G� i , CITY OF RENTON �, e FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU �'iVTC MEMORANDUM DATE: May 20, 1998 TO: Jennifer Toth Henning, Planner �t FROM: Jim Gray, Assistant Fire Marshal •id SUBJECT: Microtel Inn, Lake Washington Blvd & NE 44th St. Fire Department Comments: 1. The preliminary fire flow is 3,250 GPM, one hydrant is required within 150 feet of the structure and three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the structure. 2. A fire mitigation fee of$21,840.00 is required based on $.52 per square foot of building area. 3. Separate plans and permit are required for the Installation of fire alarm and sprinkler systems. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. City.,, ,.enton Department of Planning/Building/Feu,,: Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEE REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: E(.OVI• DiV. COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 _ APPLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HENNING _ PROJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336 LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. & NE 44th Street _ SITE AREA: 1.8 acres l BUILDING AREA(gross): 42,000 sq.ft. SJMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is vacant and has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review and site plan approv A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Informal Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necess,: Earth Housing —qir Aesthetics _Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation LancUShoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic./Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impa r areas wwhhefe additional information is needed to property assess this proposal. 6' '541Director or orized Representative Date Signatur !�U DEVAPP ;ev 10/93 ` City Renton Department of Planning/Building/Pam_..- Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEE REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: pit1(JG COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 APPLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HENNING PROJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336 LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. & NE 44th Street SITE AREA: 1.8 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): 42,000 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room,three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is vacant and has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review and site plan pprov A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g.Non-Code) COMMENTS \ Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major informal Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessa Earth Housing _ Air Aesthetics _Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet Estimate 21.7 police calls for service annually, based on the size of the business . Const .action sites in Menton account for 9% of all Commercial Burglaries in our city. In addition , thi busine is going to be constructed in a high theft rate area of the City. Recommend that the sitc be surrounded by portable, temporary fencing during the construction phase. Applicant will so need security lighting on the site during the hours of darkness. All construction materic s and tools will need to be secured as well as possible to help prevent theft. If a portable trailer is used for an office while construction is underway, it will need to have any doors and v ndows reinforced with metal bars to help prevent burglary. All office tools and machines need ., be XXXAXXdlitANA (etYtt/ secured; computers and fax machines should be cabled to lls or floors , and records need to be kept of all model and serial numbers in the event of th( t. The correct "No Trespassing" signs need to be posted on the exterior of the temporary sec 'ity fencing (refer to attached flier) . The hotel itself should have electronic locks on all guest rooms , and the same loc on the exterior of the building. The only entry availalbe to non-guests or those checking in, c )uld be via the front door. Due to occasional incidents of Commercial Robbery, recommend the bus ness use a drop safe for excess cash. The business owners should also consider the use of off duty police officers or private security patrols to moniter the business during the hours of d r'kness , especially durina the construction phase. The business will need security lighting in tl (XXXXXXXIMOUTMOMMMYs parking lots and over the doors located in the side entrar es to the business . We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impac or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Lglah�.� � �77C Signa ure of Directo or A horized Re resentati e Date DEVAPP.DOC ,2ev.10/93 ,1 Trespass 43,1-80Aavriftaznat"; 1: USINES Enforcement WATCH Quite often, business owners and managers are faced with crimes that occur on the property after e businesses are closed and the employees have gone home. Some of the crimes that occur are burgh- vandalism, graffiti, trespassing, drug dealing and robbery in the parking lots. There is a way for police and business owners to discourage these types of crimes from taking place ,n private property, and that is by enforcing the City of Renton's Municipal Trespass Code 6-18-10. In order for police to be able to make an arrest for Trespass, business owners or managers need to purcl :,e signs and display them in conspicuous areas on the property. These signs need to include the following language: 1. Indicate that the subject property is privately owned and; 2. Uninvited presence on the specified property is not permitted during the hours the business is clo :d, and; 3. Violators will be subject to criminal sanctions pursuant to Renton City Code 6-18-10. MOST IMPORTANTLY-THE SIGNS SHOULD BE CONSPICUOUS FROM ALL POSSIBLE POINTS OF EN ItY TO THE PROPERTY, AND ALSO BE PLACED ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDINGS. This way wh .1 a suspect is arrested, he/she will not be able to claim as a defense that he/she did not know he or she as trespassing. EXAMPLES FOR TRESPASS SIGNS: NO TRESPASSING NO TRESPASSING This is private property. Persons without specific No Trespassing after business ho -s business are not authorized to be on the premises between (insert specific times). Anyone on ,e the hours of(insert the hours your business is closed). premises after business hours is subjec :o Violators are subject to arrest and/or citation for criminal arrest and/or citation for Crim 'al Trespass pursuant to Renton City Code #6-18-10.. Trespass and/or impoundment of vehi e. Per Renton City Code #6-18-10. By enforcing the Trespass Ordinance, business owners and police will be sending a message to crimir Is that they are not allowed to conduct criminal activity on the property. In making arrests for Trespass police may be preventing the more serious crimes from taking place. cY COURTESY OF RENTON POLICE DEPARTMENT c` CRIME PREVENTION UNIT .rt\( 235 - 2571 NORTH RENTON Renton Police Department Garry C.Anderson, Chi CRIME Business WatchPREVENTIONUNIT 235-2571 May, 1998 Dear North Renton Merchants, Last month the North Renton merchants reported two incidents of Car Prowl and two incidents of finding stolen vehicles on their property. To help prevent Auto Theft and Car Prowl remember to take these easy steps: Lock your car. Keep your windows rolled up and all of your doors locked. If you have a car alarm, use it every time you leave your vehicle. Clean it up. Remove all loose objects from your car such as clothing, purses, wallets, cellular phones and cash. These items only serve to make your vehicle an attractive target for thieves. Park it wisely. When in a business district, try to park as closely to the business as possible, so that you can observe it from the inside of the business. If you're going to be away from your car when it's dark, park it under a light. Employees should try and get into the habit of checking on the parking lot several times a day. Target hardening. A car alarm or other security device, such as The Club, are always recommended. Car thieves and Car Prowlers will choose the easy targets first every time. The point in having a car alarm or theft prevention tool is that it slows down the criminal and makes it more difficult for him to conduct the theft. This increases the chance that he may choose a different target, and also increases his chances of getting caught. Sincerely, Business Watch Coordinator Renton Police Department, (425)235-2571 Citizens and Police: Partners for a Safe Community NORTH RENTON BUSINESS WATCH CRIME RECAP FOR THE MONTH OF APRIL, 1998 LOCATION: DESCRIPTION OF CRIME: $ LOSS: AUTO THEFT: 1700 NE 44th St. block '90 Honda Accord stolen from Seattle/found in Renton business parking lot. 1700 NE 44th St. block '84 Toyota van stolen from Seattle/found in Renton business parking lot. THEFTS: 1400 N 30th St. block 2 reports of suspects pumping gas and left without paying for it. $ 37.00 1700 NE 44th St. block Car Prowl/unlocked/tool bag & tools stolen. $928.00 1800 NE 44`h St. block Car Prowl/unknown entry/mail and security badge stolen. $ 30.00 1800 NE 44th St. block Sign stolen from outside of business. $150.00 WARRANT ARREST: 1800 NE 44th St. Officers contacted a man in a vehicle outside of a business. It was discovered he had two outstanding King County arrest warrants. He was arrested and taken to King County jail. The Renton Police Department is sponsoring the 24th session of the popular Citizen's Academy. This free academy is designed to educate Renton residents and business merchants in how your police department operates. Included in the academy is an optional ride-along with a patrol officer, tours of the 9-1-1 center, police department and jail. Some of the classes are: gangs, patrol operations, ESU (aka "SWAT"), hostage negotiations, homicide investigations, K-9 Unit display, shoot/don't shoot, etc. The 12-week academy meets once per week for two hours. If you are interested in attending, please complete the attached application form and mail or fax it to me. The next Academy is scheduled to begin May 21st, 1998. If you've ever been interested in police work, this will give you an opportunity to learn what it's really like. City of.ton Department of Planning/Building/Pub..... ..orks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEE ' REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: PIWr P COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 APPLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HENNING PF OJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336 LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. & NE 44th Street SITE AREA: 1.8 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): 42,000 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is vacant and hes a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 perking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review and site plan approvi A ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Informati Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessar i=arth Housing — Air Aesthetics ,Hater Light/Glare 'lents Recreation __:.and/Shoreline Use Utilities 4nimals Transportation ~_Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural _Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment W o 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet N4 E5 -he site is adjacent to an existing motel . The proposed site is on the I-405 corridor which is beneath the area heavily utilized by aircraft within the traffic pattern of t Renton airport. The site area is not an area from which complaints of aircraft noise ve been received from the motel or from apartments further to the east. It should be mir ally impacted by aircraft operations from the airport. It is considered an area and use compatible with aviation operations from the airport. — B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS None C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS None We have reviewed this applicati•• with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where addition ' ormation is ,ed to properly assess this proposal. 11Q0 . , ... VlitP 224. l7iie Signature of Dir or or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.101D3 l •�I Ji6 `� 11== -===- I L�IJL�Jl.n � � J= -i t„,,, m '--=-- -=---==-=---= a lii .,, ., x :::::::::::::::::::::::_:„.::::::::::::„_„:_:„ .r4r4 I r , .... i fa...a,........:::::::.tii:::______ li : : 4 _,________ --------__________ ,____ 1). AO 6 :::::-:-.:-:.-.:-:-::::::-::::::: 4010 . .ra--3 . il ::::::::::::::-.713.:.:-:::::::::::__::-::::::::33s)- Ao . 7 1\-, ' ,-(ik =====\4114‘ Cyr. I • :=-_========_`== Ohl Ir' fir Ah • o� ,,1 \ ri 147.11,1,N1 -___:::::::,,....::::::::::::„:„.„:,:::::::::::___ .,. ., , __::::::::::::„,„:„.„:„.„._:__•,_,:___ ..,,._ ,_ , ..,%. , ,,,, , , ,______________________________ H:-::-47----::::::-:-:-::::-:-:-:-:::-:-:-::-:-:-:-::-.1-:-.:-:-:-:-_ 11_ji I.1 m iik vit:;11-7-_-_-x.:_-_-_-_-. -,lit. i ill 1 ._ ir __-_-_ i(EL c x, r(-3-- _' ....t__� _ Y__ :AiilYllAlyi�_=��_ __ ___ � J'Rd l 1'� i �l. . • _______- ___ _ _-______________----_--__ _________________�_____ ®-�' f a V C-------::-::-:-2**" ---:-:-:-:-:-:-::-----::::-:-:-:-:-:-.7-:--H-::-.•:-H-H-:--:-.:-:::::-:-:-:::::_x_:„..,..- la _„,,,,„ . ,, ,,______.._, 4... 1 oc Jew _._.„ . .,,,,) i) :::::::::::::::::::::::_ts:::::::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::::!i, Nii tin am :7:-.:--X-r-:-:-:-:-:-:-:::::-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:: --:-:-:-:-::::::-:-.:-:-.-.-:-7.:::-:-------7.-:-7.-7.-------------:-.:::::-:,-;,-H-N Williiti. , ao, ,_. 1._ 1.71\ ir \- -:::::::::::::::::::::116:":4--::::E:3:::::::' ''''-------?-'-'-',:-::::::::::::"Ff::::::E:E:E:::-:-:.-7.-:::::3-_::::::-..:::-.2::::::‘ WI in ,...._ , .. i. ,. I.7 i a i .1 .„w,„_ ,...... ,,,, ...., .1 ! ... . ,. ,N:::---__EE3E:::::_:1,--35,---_E-EEEE:7-_-:E.,::,....:::::::,..:_sw,,,,,,....:::„§„E_,...„-_-_„,,,,,,,,.„-:„:„:„.„,„_:::::„,,, ___:_:___,_„_:_,_:_,__,_:_,..,___:::_:_ - ..,,i . \ k:-. --- .1 ' ,, _ . i - s ----------- ....v_ -- AN ::::::„:::::_ L; I Y ala' = __ _ c "v � "__- - - --_=== =- - =�� = _ _ 1111 q\,s 'c..._ "417Illk/:, ::::::::::::.:;E..:":::..:;::.::E..:::::f:::.:::::f::::.:-.-EE-EE-EE-E-E-E:_:::-E:E::1::::::::;I::.::E:3 ::::::55-3:.::::::::: 4c, BEE i 0 ; 11414 I-i- .s.-.... -,-<V7.1...i i.i4 tt.Fuf..,. Pf°FAi p1eI14t—11lti t,..,„l1I„Ei3„P.4s,(i1 EC7dli1:r=ijLn-:pA3i_11.>*li 40r.1 t:'::-:0:11::11:,.:::1_:1:1:M.-1:_-,'E-'::E-.::::b_:::-.:----::1:\:_-_ __, !oiIP I,30..,1 r n1 t4-,1,-4,.,w7-_.,--.":o,..i;, I1 .-1 1 1,i.igi.r,_ .-[ .-1 Y -�- p r... ;-- n,_i1 nf_i..,..5i.r i,,11l:) 1..f '1� ©C— ©L1J11 -1 ► ►. " lei+--' Iti; T _ tll,., lawns.. } wr Al 1' -' i 1 F ! L;b a .11 ��11r u ,-,� � x '� ! 4)Al.:, ._,, DifII n �e-_� I(`�t'`a` J nnl ' 1 I 1► 1 - "An [ .-,i . , _Q U rr _, -. . .t ....\--Vi....L.,40 -1 QO� 1 l." -. T� 1 \\ h II 'G ' ♦ • - y�1�,,,„,,• 112:■.10 .-10 _ [I] c. _g. o IL— A..rli :. E.ciEv ._.,,, .. -,..,. r f'S , DA 1 .0,.. \ INF: V!..' • ,____dt , .. ..0 i v 11)a..is 2'.1 . i!, 1,1i 44 41.-7/ 111 9, :., l'i! 5 ----0-.7,............... . ffkaliiist-,. R1 . j J-11. I� �,,�.,-__ ___ 4 ,.. . ,,.., da._ 1...00.1:L.,,,,,,,, _ 4' 11.1'17-4:1d-. . _ IM .,41 Alk ;-..\.... \ /Coo/� �..., 11 ,r1 iitioina., . tt,TT44 I 1 1.. ....7„.,.‘r- ,..„--- `� I-1 r. > . .. _... . ,. . , „, ,,„„ ... .Pf E ny" . ' '\ i — :-. - . 4111P, 4011, 11, \1 41.,...10:,1.:, r-I ,ie if lf, ^ _,..iii%‘tt lit 1 '' ) 7\ '14/n, ".. - '‘...„_ '-. [ to ..rik I:4A 1 5'1 ',... . 111.,_, :IN.- .,,,:, ‘\ , \"1,r k,- IR ige.tl" `Jw T -1�• ` _ .u � % � =J'— a c ! 4I 41 I-1 -- - q 1 • Q., ---.f., .,.. .., \\ 3:3> • _ •. .. • •• ••••.•:\ :.... -,.:,.. :• f\.) CO - '''''":•!:•"..ki';.:.,.,.. tp. ... "voc.q. Y,,, 4.< . :.;:.. Qt/ tC) <.. I tii..4•:•‘7',7:,7 , ::.:. . • en,,, ... . - ••........ 0 .74" -1 •reoe,?. 1... OSs,, .. •'• • s'all s .. ••‘I' ' 'il' D4 SC,- -*•,5', ......,.. .....z..........,., •••-•.. D> r-- . • ....:,' ' '' :..l. ".".,-57----c. s."-v.. ......- .:. ,. te,- . .41/r k-, .• .4,40. '•••.;,-...... .. •••••:"... '.. O`' °••••• Wiliiii. a >N* '', •• ".... N. • /3 ‘` ''',-;. "?i •• .....•••• .•...._.„ .—.- 1 . ;4( ':• e-5,:-.: : .... .4.‹.-„.:...... ••. •,. . •• 3/44e (1).• — -.• /4,0'•-•...... '•.: . -.:. '''':•:<, ••• . '''...••:::;•::.i...-';'•....,.. ., •:',.... • S . .• .. .. ..... q 7..r..:.•„•.:....:.:::_...,,....„ . 0 r•e: • a) :.:. .‘"•••••••4; ...-- ..*-;.:....i.f.,........ . ,..,.. .1/P' '-,:•!._ • -'':•.....!4 :.t - •i...‘..,......:-..."...14-,:::.i.,..7....,6............ •.::-..-i-‘;::..\.‘‘..1... ,i•••41.•.--":4::A:.•::'.4:..‘""1....,..z.::„....1'•.i 564.05 • 8,4-_. Vii...:1. , ' / .•• a0n.KlalATTi.a,•--\ .:•••.1•••. in (51 :•-•.:: H"I . ?...•••.•.••••-...,••••. . ''.:••••...,: 4.-1...,n.-;„.. :••i .•:.1........ U) •• •• .. POILLei- - 1 169 5 ' 341.16 ...... •.•11=066 cn I • ---1....:. •,..,.. -4-., •••• 'N..,. --:':•3:... :0 '1( ,. ' ...... -t.,•-re o -••• " :-:-..- . ::::. . CA ...). -P. 01 I ,...-4 • • . • 4 cces,„„ I N."- 18_ .3-ib,, .• . % . .vs.. , ..•-• (f) <. _. NJ [.......:2i : • • •iZ g -4,..., ... t.... E:ss. ...1•1"....'.".---; .•• • I is. h., cr ,..," Z / r-. N• :: , - 4,„ ..... -,.. , i6-111- C>in 6' -• - le, 34.1 Z. I . .. • ,..... rn •/ ta • : .1 :.••:.: (T/. -4 -.. ...e':. '-'I it' • i • / P © ' Eic !' I : •• 0 130.23 , .*: -1 g ' :::: .3. ....., ' •' • .. ' , . I 267 88 I I • 1" 337.36 :'; ....;:r::•... -...... 4.. '• 9512..-.,.., 4,.. ..,„,.I..../ __169.59,4Eirj.o.,.c4.042ormr 3461_ _ 41 - 52.27 7256 , ii.0 ______ ci, • _I ....i. •ee. ... --.4 et,", (A. •• c-1.13 . ,E .. "31.4* ." ..•. ;i4 tr, 1150 x a ;.;," 6°.„. . • cIt .....• R , . I • - e•Ft•G 4.4(.... • ••bl. =a O. 1---• • 0 I.,; •••-i r, 0 ---.1 CO • CA • o 14 c If • . I i I i. . L.tn • ..i. tv v.0 • 191 54 OCiN 11 a) '''-' t- ... Z-' ..*:: ri•1 ,(..A.L . w ,,__, I 1\--3 or No os . •!•••. . . . ••••••• -• U. 0 •••• i 0 • 1 (./) 5 _1 • •, ,.... • "---"" 1,-- I 0 I .• . a ..... 13 a , , - . - • t ...-;:• .,.. 1 k7.31 a , . !IV I .... 21 ACCKSS d'smr /J. urc. ESA•r7.• , --"--:' .Cf':.fr:".•::::''I ._____,.__ .--•___...----:—_—=----z678 ..=•=1.1 Tr. .. ......;Fr- 337.36 3.... ...-.- - 2 5 5 . (244.99) j . . .. -.1n1114°. • . 5I) 310 75 LINCOLN AVE. N.E. % .,,... .... -... . 5 , • , 70 -170 • 1% , P314-3AXI . ..e.>% \L_124.4 EFH 446 180 265.53 . 41 to IN) I ...... L.., I ' 0 main 04.----z-,.0,--, rn _ _---- - -.., , - '-ck) -t.,-.?" 1—A4-1' '• 0 ic)...1 @"'s .__. • ',Z.; CO I • C7)......i . . 1 ... • 1 1\3 d "s-...---- • Ci) rl' 41 , ,iii.._ I. ... ., . , ;7" •-, / , • -- I . . . ' ,..‘31 a 1 - / 4 , 21 1 . -.. • -• •• A 4 cm& I ' "4 M 1_,-,__I ( 7_1 EMI i • - i::-, is . .4.) • 1 • i . --,4s,. . 1JR,PORATE , LLIM/T I • L • . • to -I 111 •' ). Is 9putglapeubtliwi 5,6 ano mia ,-w----:. fill-ER10 a • .. • .f.- • 150 1 2 25 5 ?6 79• - .2 • 4,•vui..ry (sAfr. co INEWPO - . . : co• -_, ‘7.,cr. Cra t..0= 4,, r. •• ' ' XV. : : ii. :-1 14: 145.12 ' . 41--- _ ,.. • . . . . . " v. ... ,,..-. . i 4' 51.8,,i„----84 7 .. 86 7 N'''s 7."34 15 90. .':'.1 rri ii; .... cP r, ..... /••• $.' 3 '' --- K 15 129.42 4.....:(5,.. •,.f, . . '.---"•— . CI. • in . . . V. In • ,,., w ......,•L_. , N.:sairiT 84174i is r 7,osi.e. , 17 56.93. ' i. . 1 i .V. • Z.; 1 1 IQ' 1. -11: I 1 30 13 414 ', .-- --- City ... .ten ton Department of Planning/Building/I Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEE REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: COVISAWLAnOW COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 APPLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HENS " REM! L — �+lee-r PROJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336MAY o LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. & NE 44th Street 2 139` SITE AREA: 1.8 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): 42,000 sq.ft.IILI-)ervV vioi .j SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is vacant and has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review and site plan approv A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Inform., i Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necess Earth Housing _Air Aesthetics _ Water Light/Glare _Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities _Animals Transportation _Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS (.p So 1 (_s /Z. PO icy 4s. H o u I_ f 4 to 0 s TH i�G.TEi!-r/ L. Fo rz Q U t'kL-T o iv 1 9 7 / L) iB c e-7 o i) I R 8 We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impE it areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. . Signature of Director or Authorized Represe tative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 City ,, ,.enton Department of Planning/Building/ Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEE REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:'fYQYISp0140l{'O COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 APPLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HENNING _ PROJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336 C/�, OF LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. & NE 44th Street *^�REArrn. _ S TE AREA: 1.8 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): 42,000 sqY SJMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1. tafl{t The site isvant and has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided.611,site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review and-site,plan approv. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Informal Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necessv _earth Housing 4ir Aesthetics _Water _ Light/Glare plants Recreation _Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation • Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation • Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS $ Q. e. i 'a c h e,(1 & t o N- V e v 1 >.,+- J 677-0-7, 7 C C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impa r ar where additional information is needed to property assess this proposal. //i Signature of Director or Authorized Represen ive Date L DEVAPP.DOC tev.11 Microtel Inn Lake Washington Blvd. &NE 44th St. NE Corner Development Services May 29, 1998 TRANSPROTATION: 1. Lowest acceptable trip rate per the Instute of Transportation Engineers Trip Generation Manual is 8.70 daily trips per unit and a occupancy rate of 80%. Proposed number of units is 115 units. The charge per know trip generated is$75 per new trip generated. Therefore: (115)(8.70)(0.80)=800.4 Daily trips (800.4)($75)=$60.030.00 The Transportation Mitigation Fee of$60,030.00 to be deposited with the Building permit 2. The driveway access on NE 44th Street is to be located 5-feet from the site easterly property line. Reasons for this placement is as follows: (1)This places the driveway as far from the future to be signalized intersection as possible and also at the beginning of the two-2 way left turn lane. (2)Any closer to the intersection would be a hazard for left turning vehicles attempting to access the site across 3-lanes of opposing traffic. (3) Any vehicles queuing from the future traffic signal would block vehicles exiting the site if any other position closer to the intersection was chosen... 3. NE 44th St.: Off-site improvements required is curb, gutter and sidewalk located with the back edge at the property line for full length of roadway frontage.. A planter strip width between the curb and sidewalk is 5-feet or greater. 4. Lake Washington Blvd.: The off-site improvements required is curb, gutter sidewalks. and street lighting the full length of the property frontage. 5. Lake Washington Blvd.: The first 165 feet of Lake Washington Blvd.Northerly to the Turn Back Line from NE 44th St. Intersection is Washington State Department Of Transportation right-of-way. Therefore,the Washington State Department of Transportation will need to concur with the proposed roadway, sidewalk and street lighting improvements plans. 6. Parking Cross Easement Agreement ducument has been forwarded to the City Attorneys office for approval as to legal form. The joint parking arrangment does meet City code requirements. 7. The proposed parking stall length does not meet City code with wheel stop location. The proposed configuration will need a waiver from the City Code. 98cm092t 98CM092T.DOC\ • . 0-0 + 11FR JD ���(;; sty Jr •• . r `'��•+v.,- NJa.yG l.ti. ✓ Ax syxY�„h dM" L )sTRANSP RT TI N-IVIIT A O FEE'A < rwx; r<rWw..o-w ww�-wii.:sxvw:vY.:vK.sra..M.w n.nw....wa ...✓.-... � ,.wwe Tw+. ..- ,:j Project Name Micvoto ] /1'1I Project Address IQ cowl'!, c(. Lk &cisli $/tid el A)- yg11'c— • Contact Person Perivo bc c,u z mom ? kti prvZ L7)1(iiiieeviete Address Phone Number (7-06) - g33 - 7`7 7 6. . Permit Number LOA ' l - DI LI- Project Description 10 ✓oowl 3 S1o✓j mole 1 • Land Use Type: , Method of Calculation: Ho1c i 6310) 0 Residential a ITE Trip Generation Manual Paf 5iq ❑ Retail ❑ Traffic Study Nob117r�1p /a(e e-1 U Non-retail ❑ Other Occ,yied ZGY.M 7D ��' `Calculation: � 5sw<<ct • 40`7v occup wsl l -PS Tot 1 Dii,tt/ 7v,p - (115) (�.70) (0.g0 ) — IT,. 800. Li c(a /y 7r,Ps fit $75 If') t rie /(A),ye Mc l 6Z0) ( $O0: 14) ( 75) = 6 0) 0 30 • 1 r iI poi? 55D( �� in."... V( cliff I Ov Transportation Mitigation Fees .. $ 60, 030, Calculated by: 10ej 1f/e.24- Date: S/Z°A1 Account Number: W 0S. 5Ret. 3)80, 70. 00. Date of Payment REI ITOf9 FIRE DE T City or Kenton Department of Planning/Building/Pi Works FIRE PP.F1IcM l'f1R'R1,IRF ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEl �MA _ RI:VIEWING DEPARTMENT: ''IrG Pre vv.,1'hdN COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998riE(EIVE ARPLICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 APLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HENNING PROJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336 LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. & NE 44th Street _ SITE AREA: 1.8 acres BUILDING AREA(gross): 42,000 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is vacant and has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review and site plan approv / . ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Informa ,n Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Necess: Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Wafer Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ HistondCultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet /1I /� 14,000 Feet 7L , I Il/B /rL 6P 71,,fQGl /Vd lLd( B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS A)4 C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS e r'1`HC�I `1 We have revi wed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impa or ar where additio flal information is needed to properly assess this proposal. j Signature o Director or Authorized Re sentative Date DEVAPP.DO Rev. G� Y O'ft di ew CITY OF RENTON 'eP�NTTI O' FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU MEMORANDUM DATE: May 20, 1998 TO: Jennifer Toth Henning, Planner piFROM: Jim Gray, Assistant Fire Marshal SUBJECT: Microtel Inn, Lake Washington Blvd & NE 44th St. Fire Department Comments: 1. The preliminary fire flow is 3,250 GPM, one hydrant is required within 150 feet of the structure and three additional hydrants are required within 300 feet of the structure. 2. A fire mitigation fee of$21,840.00 is required based on $.52 per square foot of building area. 3. Separate plans and permit are required for the Installation of fire alarm and sprinkler systems. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. City ,:enton Department of Planning/Building/F,..,.. Works ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEE MEM REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Vag COMMENTS DUE: MAY 29, 1998 APPLICATION NO: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 18, 1998 APPLICANT: Rupert Engineering, Inc. PROJECT MANAGER: JENNIFER TOTH HENNING PROJECT TITLE: Microtel Inn WORK ORDER NO: 78336 LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Blvd. & NE 44th Street _ SITE AREA: 1.8 acres I BUILDING AREA(gross): 42,000 sq.ft. SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: Applicant proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is vacant an has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review and site plan apprc . 4. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT(e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Environment Minor Major Inform. n Impacts Impacts Necessary Impacts Impacts Neces, Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet 6 Cap B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS If 72 6g/r- 4 7i _a_c_77.6,,, e_f_Ar y ,r?q5* 4/0 /7e j2 >Cc�S�G� . /7- S Gt�/G�� dim �G1l/�e fvc-c -'4, C. ODE-RELATED COMMENTS z —"tt-D /V 1" / We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impa or areas where additional information is need to properly assess this proposal. lc/0 ignature of Director or Authorized Representative Date DEVAPP.DOC Rev.10/93 Look 4 CITY OF RENTON I DEVELOPMENT,SERVICES DIVISION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTY `OWNERS within 300 feet of the subject site f PROJECT NAME: MIGROTE\-- I N N APPLICATION NO: LUA •9$•Ol4, SPA-14 The following is a list of property owners within 300 feet of the subject site. The Development Services Division will notify these individuals of the proposed development. NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER QUENDALL TERMINALS P.O. BOX 477 292405-9002-03 RENTON, WA 98055 IDS/SHURGARD INCOME 1201 3'AVE STE 2200 334330-1125-02 GROWTH SEATTLE, WA 98101 EXIT 7 INC. 1500 114TH AVE SE#105 334330-1141-02 BELLEVUE, WA 98004 DENNY S REALTY, INC. 293 E MAIN ST 334330-1180-04 SPARTANBURG, SC 29319 HOLDINGS CAMPBELL 1800 E IMPERIAL HWY#120 334330-1120-07 BREA, CA 92621 DEITCH MICHAEL J 4126 187TH SE 334330-1140-03 ISSAQUAH, WA 98027 MCDONALD'S CORP 461176 P.O. BOX 66207 AMF O'HARE 334330-1143-00 CHICAGO, IL 60666 (Attach additional sheets, if necessary) (Continued) NAME ADDRESS ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER Applicant Certification I, lfki t ►(L , hereby certify that the above list(s) of adjacent property (Print Name) owners and their addresses were obtained from: ❑ City of Renton Technical Services Records : 3SAN ` 4 i�cTitle Company Records ��� ❑ King Count sessors Records ;Q'e` �6 �� n s y�TARY Signed U '• "fT ��iK Skit' , ((Date ( ' � P cn pUBL i (Applicant) 1►►►JF 10-01?Opp�� NOTARY ATTESTED: Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, in and for the State of Was ington, residing at 4t,A j uR.v on the /nr`�day of Iq u11FR 19cif' . Signed t u_ )trt e `g. (Notary Public) ****For City of Renton Usr'.**** CERTIFICATION OF MAILING I, I , n&.reby certify that notices of the pr.)pose.c application were mailed to (Crty Ersrployee) each listed property owner one Sc,raed Dater NOTARY A I LEST: Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public, en and for the State of Washington residing at `_4 oil the day of 19 ,„ • Signed �' '� + .r _<.. ..... . listprop.doc �' REV 07/95 MARILYN KAMCHEFF ' 2 COMMISSION EXPIRES 6/29/99 • .CITY OF.RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the VI TI1 day of , 1998, I deposited in the mails of the Unite( States, a sealed envelope containing 'ZICL" �F RRICr'r't1C documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Mr. James Harris City of Kent Mr. Charles Wlttenberg City of Newcastle King Co. - Dev. & Env. Svcs. U.S. Army Corp. of Engineers Seattle District Office Mr. Jack Pace City of Tukwila Bob Fahl U.S. West • (Signature of Sender) �� ��� Ln � — STATE OF WASHINGTON SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that l,.aL,s_Cc,_ 14-7 , signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: 111 a0 Notary Public' and for the State of Vlington Notary (Print)My �eQILVN KAMCHEFF My appointment e ` COMMISSION EXPIRES 6/29/99 Project Name: IIJ1') Project Number: "t/tiAl- CO-, H , ECF NOTARY.DOC ks: - o\ . 4Nz? NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DATE: MAY 18,1998 A Master Application has been Bled and accepted with the Development Services Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. • PROJECT NUMBER/NAME: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF I MICROTEL INN DESCRIPTION: The applicant,Rupert Engineering,Inc.,proposes to develop a 115-room,three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site Is vacant and has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 108 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review end site plan approval. GENERAL LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Boulevard and NE 44th Street . STUDIES REQUIRED/OR AVAILABLE: Wetland Report;Traffic Impact Study;Geotechnicai Study PUBLIC APPROVALS: Environmental Review(ECF) Site Plan Approval(SA-H) Building Permit • Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms.Jennifer Toth Henning,Project Manager, Development Services Division,200 MITI Avenue South,Renton,WA 98055,by 5:00 PM on June 29,1998.This matter • is also scheduled for a public hearing on July 07.1998 at 9:00 AM,Council Chambers.Second Floor Municipal Building, 200 Mill Ave.South. If you are interested in attending the hearing,please contact the Development Services Division, • (425)277.5582,to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled. If comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above,you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments on the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional Information by mail,contact Ms.Henning at(425)277-6186.Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. • 'PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION I DATE OF APPLICATION: FEBRUARY 04,1998 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: MAY 18,1998 DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: MAY 18.19981 jr / / •/ _ : 'if/..o.... .5 t ....e. j.......,: 7....---Et._ ,,::•_ • . 1. .j R A r�s�1�.-��t_' i, I _.. ,:fit t2 ,, MUM CERTIFICATION ..... I, /t'1i. r /(lf,/,J;77 , hereby certify that 3 copies of the above document were posted by me m 3 conspicuous places on or nearby the described property on /�,i,y 2Z/1/995' • Signed: ATTEST: Subcribed and sworn before me, a Nortary Public,in and for the State of Washington residing in`F $.71 , on the GI,- day of L1. / g 1 2 . "—Yr) a-Air- 74---4).-----14-0---A- --6 MARILYN KAMCHEFF COMMISSION EXPIRES 6/29/99 NOTICE OF APPLICATION PLANNING/BUILDING/PUBLIC WORKS DATE: MAY 18, 1998 • A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Development Services Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. PROJECT NUMBER/NAME: LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF/MICROTEL INN DESCRIPTION: The applicant, Rupert Engineering, Inc., proposes to develop a 115-room, three-story motel on 1.8 acres. The site is vacant and has a creek and Category III wetland on the Western boundary. Parking for 106 cars would be provided on site. Another 13 parking stalls would be shared with the abutting Denny's restaurant. Project requires environmental review and site plan approval. GENERAL LOCATION: NE corner of Lake Washington Boulevard and NE 44th Street STUDIES REQUIRED/OR AVAILABLE: Wetland Report;Traffic Impact Study;Geotechnical Study PUBLIC APPROVALS: Environmental Review(ECF) Site Plan Approval(SA-H) Building Permit Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Ms.Jennifer Toth Henning,Project Manager, Development Services Division,200 Mill Avenue South,Renton,WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on June 29,1998. This matter is also scheduled for a public hearing on July 07,1998 at 9:00 AM,Council Chambers,Second Floor Municipal Building, 200 Mill Ave.South. If you are interested in attending the hearing,please contact the Development Services Division, (425)277-5582,to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled. If comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above,you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments on the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal,or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, contact Ms. Henning at(425)277-6186. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION DATE OF APPLICATION: FEBRUARY 04, 1998 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: MAY 18, 1998 DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: MAY 18, 1998 - - LOOM,«M[S.x M YCTIP.29.,]w.4Y..V 90•929.....490. - • i o ,.I / If�e ' pi M ' •'snm-rb' • /I tr 0... 1.ruwms • 0. ELIIIMINUALSLY1f aft =— GENMALOT.DG.. ' y CIT _ OF RENTON ai ' \ Planning/Building/Public Works Department Jesse Tanner,Mayor Gregg Zimmerman P.E.,Administrator May 18, 1998 Mr. Jeff Baker Rupert Engineering, Inc. 1519 West Valley Highway North Suite#101 Auburn, WA 98001 SUBJECT: Microtel Inn Project No. LUA-98-014,SA-H,ECF Dear Mr. Baker: The Development Planning Section of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee on June 9, 1998. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is • required to continue processing your application. Please contact me, at (425) 277-6186, if you have any questions. Sincerely, -- -J nnifer Toth Henning Project Manager cc: THC-Exit Seven, LLC/Owners ACCPTLTR.DOC 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 .5 This paper contains 50%recycled material,20%post consumer M Ci'C/I/ 1 • PROPERTY OWNERS) PROJECT.INFORMATION Note' (f there js more then one legal owner,please attach an additional' nofarizeil Master Application or each owner. :>: PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: MtL2o-rEL In)N NAME: JJ �g•J PROPERTY/PROJECT ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION: ADDRESS: I N1. ST2rtT A-ND Lr4( 4i) c-E WPrSNr�JGr�rJBu 1cb-rt- (5W 'J4 aF Sr-- 29r Ta4r.1i 25E KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): CITY: ZIP: 334350 -It So -oo TELEPHONE NUMBER: EXISTING LAND USE(S): (42'c � 664 v cP�T APP ICANT (lf other than owner}: PROPOSED LAND USES: NAME: • (vLO �0.L_ • COMPANY (if applicable): EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: CA - Co"Nen YLc.�A1 lk2TCr2,At_ ADDRESS: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicabl CITY: ZIP: EXISTING ZONING: - C A - Co.-v‘ ' e-n..c TELEPHONE NUMBER: PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): CONTACT>PERSON R eF/VP.1) SITE AREA (SQ. FT. OR ACREAGE):_ NAME: pEot2O DE t.IZvtiP.rJ 1.4, /OGRES `E9 0 1998 • Ut CL OI Iv;cry 1 p COMPANY(if applicable): � )P ,'� ),-)61 n) -12iN or LNC. PROJECT VALUE: T% O�RI!'NONN/NG • ADDRESS: I5-I9 \JEST ✓PrLLc Y Ht,J 1. tJ. IS THE SITE LOCATED IN THE AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA? Cuk TT lot. NO CITY: iktJB()(Ln) ZIP: Cic&P O IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY OTHER TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVE AREA? NO TELEPHONE NUMBER: (Zp(o) g 33 - "7 77 i M LEG• AC DESCRI ON OF PROPERTY (Attach sepa sheet if necessary,)'>' ' " . set: t TTac3-t om TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES ,.._., Check all application;:types.#hatapply- City;staffwill determine fees ANNEXATION S SUBDIVISION: _ COMP. PLAN AMENDMENT $ _ REZONE $ _ LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT $ SPECIAL PERMIT $ _ SHORT PLAT $ _TEMPORARY PERMIT $ _TENTATIVE PLAT $ _ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT $ _ PRELIMINARY PLAT $ 7/SITE PLAN APPROVAL $ /06 _ FINAL PLAT $ _GRADE & FILL PERMIT $ (NO. CU. YDS: ) PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT: $ _ VARIANCE $ (FROM SECTION: ) _ PRELIMINARY _ WAIVER $ _ FINAL _WETLAND PERMIT $ ROUTINE VEGETATION MOBILE HOME PARKS: $ MANAGEMENT PERMIT $ _ BINDING SITE PLAN $ SHORELINE REVIEWS: _ SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT $ _ CONDITIONAL USE $ • VARIANCE $ _ EXEMPTION $No Charge VENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW $ r3 i-€ REVISION $ • • AFFIDAVIT'OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name)^'beU) Q^ 41474.14441clare that I am (please check one)_the owner of the property involved in this application,_ authorized representative to act for the property owner(please attach proof of authorization), and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. , • �( ^ , ( _ y�IL�D� ATTEST: Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public,in and ��JC� for the State of 6/11SN,sra7oNiesiding at ( - if Owner/Representative) �..�� 14tt4iga , on the .i day of _ � Ai2'i 19°is. !j J�P ON MCC1,'i fir.- .f Owner/Representati t?, Q o ND1p '� /�� � �.� (Signature of Notary Public) art # a Wit. . °� ,� � ► 'aa Q amid,.`" mpleted by City Staff )City Fie Number ''�1 S R SHPL CU LLA PP! FP `TP $P RUMP V W F..PU, S SME MHP BSP A CPA TOTAL FEES $ '"�'"' TOTAL POSTAGE PROVIDED S MASTERAP.DOC REVISED 9/96 PROJECT NARRATIVE The Hamilton Company proposes to construct a 115 room, 3 story motel on a 1.8+/-acre lot. The site is located adjacent to Interstate 405 at the intersection of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Blvd (a portion of the SW 1/4 of SEC. 29, T24N, R5E, W.M. in Renton, Washington). Building footprint area is approximately 14,000 sf. Building height is approximately 35'with a wood exterior siding. Parking is provided on-site, but is 13 spaces short of meeting the zoning code requirements. These 13 spaces will be provided from a shared parking agreement between the adjacent Denny's restaurant and the Microtel Inn. Access is provided on NE 44th Street and the access drive on the south side of the existing Denny's Restaurant off of Lake Washington Blvd. —he site is currently vacant. The eastern portion of the site generally slopes to the north with grades up to 3%. An on-site creek, located along the west property line and varying from 10 to 20' below the eastern ,portion of the site, conveys runoff from a large tributary area southeast of the site. The creek is part of the east Lake Washington Gypsy Drainage Basin which drains to Lake Washington. There is minimal on-site vegetation with the exception of the wooded and brushy area along the creek. This area has steep grades Df up to 66%, but appears to be stable at this time. Per City of Renton requirements, a 25-foot buffer will be equired from the edge of the existing creek. On-site grading is proposed to provide a more level area for the new building and parking lot; no import or export is anticipated. Approximately 61% of the site (1.1 acres) will be covered with impervious surfaces upon full development of the site. Stormwater detention to be provided by an underground detention vault. Stormwater treatment to be provided by an underground wet-vault. Storm detention vault and wet-vault to be designed per the King County Surface Water Design Manual (surface area subject to vehicle traffic< 1.0 acres). Total employee amount unknown, although 6 persons maximum during any one shift. Street improvements include a driveway, sidewalk, curb and gutter and street lighting along NE 44th Street frontage. DEVELOPMENT PLAN.\iiNG CITY OF RENTON APR 14 1998 RECEIVED r � CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION DESCRIPTION A. GENERAL . PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION STARTING DATE:AS SOON AS PERMIT IS ISSUED " ENDING DATE: APPROXIMATELY 7 MONTHS AFTER PERMIT IS ISSUED 2. HOURS OF OPERATION : MONDAY THRU FRIDAY, 7AM TO 5PM 3. PROPOSED HAULING I TRANSPORTATION ROUTES: APPROXIMATELY 3500 CY OF EARTHWORK CUT AND FILL WILL BE KEPT ON-SITE, WITH MINIMAL IMPORT OR EXPORT EXPECTED. APPROXIMATELY 600 CY OF CRUSHED ROCK WILL BE IMPORTED FOR ASPHALT PAVING BASE. ANY IMPORTED FILL WILL BE HAULED FROM A CITY OF RENTON APPROVED SITE AND TRANSPORTATION ROUTE. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL BE NOTED ON THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS. B. GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1. AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES, TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (TESC) MEASURES, IN ADDITION TO THOSE SHOWN ON THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND IN THESE NOTES, SHALL BE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED TO ADEQUATELY CONTROL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MONITOR THE CONDITION OF THE TEMPORARY MEASURES AND CLEAN THEM AS DIRECTED BY CITY OF RENTON OFFICIALS OR THE ARCHITECT TO CONTROL THE ACCUMULATION OF SILT AND ENSURE PROPER FUNCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO INSTALL SUCH ADDITIONAL TESC FACILITIES AS DIRECTED BY CITY OFFICIALS OR THE ARCHITECT TO ADEQUATELY CONTROL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION, AND SHALL ADJUST PREVIOUSLY INSTALLED FACILITIES AS MAY BE INDICATED BY SITE CONDITIONS AND AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY, AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES. NO ADDITIONAL PAYMENTS SHALL BE MADE TO THE CONTRACTOR FOR SUCH EFFORTS OR SUCH ADDITIONAL MATERIALS. NO UNTREATED RUNOFF SHALL BE ALLOWED TO LEAVE THE SITE AT ANY TIME DURING THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COST OF ANY CLEANUP EFFORTS REQUIRED IF THE TESC MEASURES FAIL. 2.THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE REQUIRED TO WATER THE SITE,AS NECESSARY, TO REDUCE DUST EMISSIONS AS A RESULT OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO SWEEP ALL AFFECTED PUBLIC ROADS AND ACCESS EASEMENTS, AS NECESSARY, TO REMOVE MUD DEPOSITED AS A RESULT OF PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. THESE ACTIONS WILL BE GOVERNED AND DIRECTED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL. ( REQUIREMENTS FOR EXPOSED SOIL STABILIZATION 1. DENUDED AREAS AND SOIL STOCKPILES MUST BE STABILIZED ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE OR EXCEPTED IN THE FIELD WHEN IN THE JUDGEMENT OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL OR THE OFFICIAL'S REPRESENTATIVE, SUCH SCHEDULE IS NOT WARRANTED: FROM APRIL 1 TO OCTOBER 31, ALL DENUDED AREAS AT FINAL GRADE AND ALL EXPOSED AREAS THAT ARE SCHEDULED TO REMAIN UNWORKED FOR MORE THAN 30 DAYS SHALL BE STABILIZED WITHIN 10 DAYS. FROM NOVEMBER 1 TO MARCH 31,ALL EXPOSED SOILS AT FINAL GRADE SHALL BE STABILIZED IMMEDIATELY USING PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY MEASURES. EXPOSED SOILS WITH AN AREA GREATER THAN 5000 SQUARE FEET THAT ARE SCHEDULED TO REMAIN UNWORKED FOR MORE THAN 24 HOURS AND EXPOSED AREAS OF LESS THAN 5000 SQUARE FEET THAT WILL REMAIN UNWORKED FOR MORE THAN 7 DAYS SHALL BE STABILIZED IMMEDIATELY. 2. STABILIZATION METHOD: HYDROSEEDING & MULCHING PER THE FOLLOWING: a. TIME OF PLANTING - DURING THE TIME PERIOD BETWEEN APRIL 1 THROUGH JUNE 30 AND SEPTEMBER 1 THROUGH OCTOBER 31. (NOTE: IF PLANTING BETWEEN JULY 1 AND AUGUST 31, IRRIGATION MAY BE REQUIRED. IF PLANTING BETWEEN NOVEMBER 1 AND MARCH 31, MULCHING WILL BE REQUIRED IMMEDIATELY AFTER PLANTING.) b. SEEDBED PREPARATION -THE SEEDBED SHOULD BE FIRM, BUT NOT COMPACT. WITH A FAIRLY FINE SURFACE FOLLOWING SURFACE ROUGHENING. SURFACE ROUGHENING SHOULD BE DONE AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE SLOPE AND PREFERABLE"CAT WALKED" UP SLOPE. c. FERTILIZATION -AS PER SUPPLIER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. DEVELOPMENTS ADJACENT TO WATER BODIES AND WETLANDS MUST USE NON-PHOSPHOROUS FERTILIZER. d. SEEDING-APPLY THE FOLLOWING MIXTURE TO THE PREPARED SEED BED AT A RATE OF 120 LBS/ACRE: PROPORTIONS PERCENT PERCENT NAME BY WEIGHT PURITY GERMINATION REDTOP(AGROSTIS ALBA) 10% 92 90 ANNUAL RYE (LOLIUM MULTIFLORUM) 40% 98 90 CHEWINGS FESQUE 40% 97 80 (RESTUCA RUBRA COMMUTATA) (JAMESTOWN,BANNER,SHADOW OR KOKET) WHITE DUTCH CLOVER 10% 96 90 (TRIFOLIUM REPENS) e. "HYDROSEEDING"APPLICATIONS WITH APPROVED SEED-MULCH- FERTILIZER MIXTURES MAY ALSO BE USED. f. MAINTENANCE- SEEDING SHOULD BE SUPPLIED WITH ADEQUATE MOISTURE. SUPPLY WATER AS NEEDED, ESPECIALLY IN ABNORMALLY HOT OR DRY WEATHER, OR ON ADVERSE SITES. WATER APPLICATION RATES SHOULD BE CONTROLLED TO PREVENT RUNOFF. INADEQUATE AMOUNTS OF WATER MAY BE MORE HARMFUL THAN NO WATER. CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION DESCRIPTION A. GENERAL I. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION STARTING DATE:AS SOON AS PERMIT IS ISSUED " ENDING DATE: APPROXIMATELY 7 MONTHS AFTER PERMIT IS ISSUED 2. HOURS OF OPERATION : MONDAY THRU FRIDAY, 7AM TO 5PM 3. PROPOSED HAULING/TRANSPORTATION ROUTES: APPROXIMATELY 3500 CY OF EARTHWORK CUT AND FILL WILL BE KEPT ON-SITE, WITH MINIMAL IMPORT OR EXPORT EXPECTED. APPROXIMATELY 600 CY OF CRUSHED ROCK WILL BE IMPORTED FOR ASPHALT PAVING BASE. ANY IMPORTED FILL WILL BE HAULED FROM A CITY OF RENTON APPROVED SITE AND TRANSPORTATION ROUTE. THIS REQUIREMENT WILL BE NOTED ON THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS. B. GRADING AND EROSION CONTROL NOTES 1. AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES, TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL (TESC) MEASURES, IN ADDITION TO THOSE SHOWN ON THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND IN THESE NOTES, SHALL BE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED TO ADEQUATELY CONTROL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL MONITOR THE CONDITION OF THE TEMPORARY MEASURES AND CLEAN THEM AS DIRECTED BY CITY OF RENTON OFFICIALS OR THE ARCHITECT TO CONTROL THE ACCUMULATION OF SILT AND ENSURE PROPER FUNCTION. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO INSTALL SUCH ADDITIONAL TESC FACILITIES AS DIRECTED BY CITY OFFICIALS OR THE ARCHITECT TO ADEQUATELY CONTROL EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION,AND SHALL ADJUST PREVIOUSLY INSTALLED FACILITIES AS MAY BE INDICATED BY SITE CONDITIONS AND AS REQUIRED BY THE CITY, AS CONSTRUCTION PROGRESSES. NO ADDITIONAL PAYMENTS SHALL BE MADE TO THE CONTRACTOR FOR SUCH EFFORTS OR SUCH ADDITIONAL MATERIALS. NO UNTREATED RUNOFF SHALL BE ALLOWED TO LEAVE THE SITE AT ANY TIME DURING THE DURATION OF THE PROJECT. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE COST OF ANY CLEANUP EFFORTS REQUIRED IF THE TESC MEASURES FAIL. 2. THE CONTRACTOR WILL BE REQUIRED TO WATER THE SITE, AS NECESSARY, TO REDUCE DUST EMISSIONS AS A RESULT OF CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. THE CONTRACTOR SHALL ALSO SWEEP ALL AFFECTED PUBLIC ROADS AND ACCESS EASEMENTS,AS NECESSARY, TO REMOVE MUD DEPOSITED AS A RESULT OF PROJECT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. THESE ACTIONS WILL BE GOVERNED AND DIRECTED BY THE BUILDING OFFICIAL. i:. REQUIREMENTS FOR EXPOSED SOIL STABILIZATION 1. DENUDED AREAS AND SOIL STOCKPILES MUST BE STAB►LIZED ACCORDING TO THE FOLLOWING SCHEDULE OR EXCEPTED IN THE FIELD WHEN IN THE JUDGEMENT OF THE BUILDING OFFICIAL OR THE OFFICIAL'S REPRESENTATIVE, SUCH SCHEDULE IS NOT WARRANTED: FROM APRIL 1 TO OCTOBER 31, ALL DENUDED AREAS AT FINAL GRADE AND ALL EXPOSED AREAS THAT ARE SCHEDULED TO REMAIN UNWORKED FOR MORE THAN 30 DAYS SHALL BE STABILIZED WITHIN 10 DAYS. FROM NOVEMBER 1 TO MARCH 31, ALL EXPOSED SOILS AT FINAL GRADE SHALL BE STABILIZED IMMEDIATELY USING PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY MEASURES. EXPOSED SOILS WITH AN AREA GREATER THAN 5000 SQUARE FEET THAT ARE SCHEDULED TO REMAIN UNWORKED FOR MORE THAN 24 HOURS AND EXPOSED AREAS OF LESS THAN 5000 SQUARE FEET THAT WILL REMAIN UNWORKED FOR MORE THAN 7 DAYS SHALL BE STABILIZED IMMEDIATELY. 2. STABILIZATION METHOD: HYDROSEEDING & MULCHING PER THE FOLLOWING: a. TIME OF PLANTING- DURING THE TIME PERIOD BETWEEN APRIL 1 THROUGH JUNE 30 AND SEPTEMBER 1 THROUGH OCTOBER 31. (NOTE: IF PLANTING BETWEEN JULY 1 AND AUGUST 31, IRRIGATION MAY BE REQUIRED. IF PLANTING BETWEEN NOVEMBER 1 AND MARCH 31, MULCHING WILL BE REQUIRED IMMEDIATELY AFTER PLANTING.) b. SEEDBED PREPARATION -THE SEEDBED SHOULD BE FIRM, BUT NOT COMPACT, WITH A FAIRLY FINE SURFACE FOLLOWING SURFACE ROUGHENING. SURFACE ROUGHENING SHOULD BE DONE AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE SLOPE AND PREFERABLE"CAT WALKED" UP SLOPE. c. FERTILIZATION -AS PER SUPPLIER'S RECOMMENDATIONS. DEVELOPMENTS ADJACENT TO WATER BODIES AND WETLANDS MUST USE NON-PHOSPHOROUS FERTILIZER. d. SEEDING-APPLY THE FOLLOWING MIXTURE TO THE PREPARED SEED BED AT A RATE OF 120 LBS/ACRE: PROPORTIONS PERCENT PERCENT NAME BY WEIGHT PURITY GERMINATION REDTOP(AGROSTIS ALBA) 10% 92 90 ANNUAL RYE (LOLIUM MULTIFLORUM) 40% 98 90 CHEWINGS FESQUE 40% 97 80 (RESTUCA RUBRA COMMUTATA) (JAMESTOWN,BANNER,SHADOW OR KOKET) WHITE DUTCH CLOVER 10% 96 90 (TRIFOLIUM REPENS) e. "HYDROSEEDING"APPLICATIONS WITH APPROVED SEED-MULCH- FERTILIZER MIXTURES MAY ALSO BE USED. f. MAINTENANCE- SEEDING SHOULD BE SUPPLIED WITH ADEQUATE MOISTURE. SUPPLY WATER AS NEEDED, ESPECIALLY IN ABNORMALLY HOT OR DRY WEATHER, OR ON ADVERSE SITES. WATER APPLICATION RATES SHOULD BE CONTROLLED TO PREVENT RUNOFF. INADEQUATE AMOUNTS OF WATER MAY BE MORE HARMFUL THAN NO WATER. IftUEP® @TI J9 UE@o CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL May 6, 1998 City of Renton 200 Mill Ave. S. Renton, WA 98055 Attn. Mr. Greg Zimmerman RE: Microtel Inn - Renton, WA (R.E. Job No. 96100) Dear Mr. Zimmerman: We respectfully request permission to deviate from one of the requirements of Chapter 14 of the city code. Section 4-14-4:G.3.b. requires wheel stops to be placed 2 feet from the end of head-in parking stalls. Please see the attached site plan. The parking stalls along the west side of the proposed development are shown with a 2-foot overhang. We propose to use a continuous cast-in-place concrete curb in place of the required wheel stops. And we propose the curb to be at the end of the stalls instead of 2-feet from the end. This layout is particularly important where the length of the paved stall has been shortened by 2-feet due to the 2-foot overhang. We have already discussed this proposal with the Renton project manager, Jennifer Toth Henning. Please let us know of your decision as soon as possible. Feel free to call if you have any questions. Sincerely, Rupert Engineering, Inc. ,4/ \ ff Baker, P.E. cc Lloyd Huskey, owner's representative 1519 West Valley Highway North/Suite 101 Post Office Box 836/Auburn, WA 98071 253-833-7776 Fax 253-939-2168 Denny's#1658 Renton, WA 1 DRAWN BY AND MAIL TO: Rhonda J. Parish APR 14 1998 Flagstar Corporation RECEIVED E. Main St. Spartanburg, SC 29319 CROSS EASEMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEED OF EASEMENT ("Agreement") is made and entered into on 1997, by and among DENNY'S REALTY, INC., a California corporation ("Restaurant Owner"), DENNY'S, INC., a California corporation("Restaurant Tenant") and THC EXIT SEVEN, d/b/a Microtel Inn and Suites ("Hotel Owner"). RECITALS 1. Restaurant Owner is the owner of certain real property in King County, Washington described on attached Exhibit A, incorporated herein by reference ("Restaurant Property"). Restaurant Tenant is the tenant of the Restaurant Property under that certain lease dated as of December 29, 1989, as amended and restated July 12, 1990, between Denny's Realty, Inc., a Delaware corporation, as landlord and Denny's, Inc., a California corporation, as tenant. 2. Hotel Owner is the owner of adjacent real property described in attached Exhibit B, incorporated herein by reference ("Hotel Property"). 3. The parties have agreed to establish certain easements in favor of each other over certain portions of their respective properties as set forth below. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration ten and no/100s dollars ($10.00) and other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are acknowledged by each party, Owner and Restaurant Owner agree as follows: 1. Hotel Owner hereby grants to Restaurant Owner and Restaurant Tenant a perpetual, non-exclusive easement for pedestrian and vehicular access, and parking on the driveways and parking areas of the Hotel Property from time to time. The foregoing easement is appurtenant to the Restaurant Property. 2. Restaurant Owner and Restaurant Tenant hereby grant to Hotel Owner a perpetual, non-exclusive easement for pedestrian and vehicular access, and parking on the driveways and parking areas of the Restaurant Property from time to time. The foregoing easement is appurtenant to the Hotel Property. 3. Hotel Owner agrees that the no food shall be served on the Hotel Property (including continental breakfast) and that the only food products available to the public on the Hotel Property shall be those found in vending machines. Esmt1658 Denny's#1658 Renton, WA 4. Hotel Owner agrees to allow Restaurant Tenant to advertise its "to go" menu in the hotel rooms on the Hotel Property at Restaurant Owner's sole expense. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD unto the Hotel Owner and its successors in title to the Hotel Property and unto Restaurant Owner and Restaurant Tenant and their successors in title to the Restaurant Property. Hotel Owner and Restaurant Owner covenant that they have fee simple title to their Property described on Exhibits A and B, that they have the right to make this conveyance, and that they will warrant and defend the rights granted by this Agreement against the lawful claims of all persons. This instrument shall be binding on and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns of Hotel Owner and Restaurant Owner and shall run with the Hotel Owner's Property and Restaurant Owner's Property. 5. Except as expressly provided in this Agreement, each party shall remain solely responsible for all obligations related to its property, including taxes, assessments, maintenance, compliance with law, insurance, and third-party liability. Each party agrees to maintain its property subject to the easements created above in a manner which is timely and consistent with the operation of first-class commercial property soliciting the patronage of the general public. 6. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to be a gift or dedication of any portion of or interest in the property of either party, nor shall this Agreement create any rights in third parties, except for the successors in title to the parties. The owners reserve the right to close off portions of their property by mutual consent from time to time. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Agreement has been executed by the parties as of the date first above written. RESTAURANT OWNER: DENNY'S REALTY, INC., a Delaware corporation By: Rhonda J. Parish, Vice President Attest: J. Scott Melton, Assistant Secretary -2- Denny's#1658 Renton, WA RESTAURANT TENANT: DENNY'S, INC., a California corporation By: Rhonda J. Parish, Vice President Attest: J. Scott Melton, Assistant Secretary HOTEL OWNER: THC EXIT SEVEN d/b/a Microtel Inn and Suites By: Its: By: Its: -3- Denny's#1658 Renton, WA STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) COUNTY OF SPARTANBURG ) I , a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that J. Scott Melton personally came before me this day and acknowledged that he is Assistant Secretary of DENNY'S REALTY, INC., a Delaware corporation and that by authority duly given and as the act of the corporation, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its Senior Vice President sealed with its corporate seal and attested by him as its Assistant Secretary. WITNESS my hand and official stamp or seal, this_day of , 1997. Notary Public My Commission Expires: STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA ) COUNTY OF SPARTANBURG ) I , a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that J. Scott Melton personally came before me this day and acknowledged that he is Assistant Secretary of DENNY'S, INC., a California corporation and that by authority duly given and as the act of the corporation, the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its Senior Vice President sealed with its corporate seal and attested by him as its Assistant Secretary. WITNESS my hand and official stamp or seal, this_day of , 1997. Notary Public My Commission Expires: -4- Denny's#1658 Renton, WA STATE OF ) COUNTY OF ) I, , a Notary Public for said County and State, do hereby certify that personally came before me this day and acknowledged that he/she is of THC EXIT SEVEN, a and that by authority duly given and as the act of the , the foregoing instrument was signed in its name by its , sealed with its corporate seal and attested by him/her as its WITNESS my hand and official stamp or seal, this_day of , 1997. Notary Public My Commission Expires: -5- SCHEDULE "A" THAT PORTION OF TRACT 185, C. D. HILLMAN 'S LAKE WASHINGTON GARDEN Of EDEN ADDITION TO SEATTLE DIVISION NO. 3, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THERE 7F RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 81, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS : BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 185; THENCE SOUTH CO DEGREES 56'18" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE THEREOF, 36 36 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88 DEGREES 47'17" WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF ;AID TRACT, 187 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00 DEGREES 56 ' 18" WEST 4. 00 FEET; THENCE NORTH Be DEGREES 47'17" WEST 40. 60 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1 ( ALSO KNOWN AS SR-405 AS CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER RECORD INC NUMBERS 4075146 AND 5687948; THENCE NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY, ALONG SAID MARTIN, NORTH 23 DEGREES 44 27" EAST 313. 41 FEET; SOUTH 66 DEGREES 10 '33" EAST 60 FEET; NORTH 23 DEGREES 49 '27" EAST 113. 86 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE )F • SAID TRACT 185, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE SOUTH MARGIN OF SOUTHEAS 76TH STREET; THENCE SOUTH 88 DEGREES 47'17" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE, 6. 16 FEET '0 eg THE POINT OF BEG INNING; • (BEING KNOWN AS LOT 1, CITY OF RENTON LLA-015-82, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8301259003) . ap Oo 1 65 H. Lee & Associates Traffic Engineering,Transportation Planning,Intelligent Transportation Systems March 23, 1998 APR 14 +. Mr. Clinton E. Morgan REC E 3 Development Services City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Subject: Shared Parking Analysis for Microtel Inn Hotel and Denny's Restaurant Dear Mr. Morgan: This letter documents the shared parking analysis conducted for the above referenced project. The intent of this analysis is to justify the proposed hotel parking supply with a shared parking agreement with the adjacent Denny's restaurant. Hotel and restaurant uses could share parking because the different land uses may have different peak parking characteristics and one of the sites may under utilize its available parking supply. The shared parking concept is based on the rationale that combinations of land uses require less parking than the same uses in free standing locations and that most existing zoning regulations are based on single use parking demand that would be inappropriate for mixed use developments. The remainder of this letter describes the shared parking analysis conducted for the Microtel Inn hotel and Denny's restaurant. Project Description The proposed project is a 115-unit hotel with 106 on-site parking spaces in Renton, Washington. The project site is located on the northeast corner of the Lake Washington Boulevard/NE 44th Street intersection. Project access would be obtained from two driveways. There will be one project driveway on Lake Washington Boulevard and the other driveway on NE 44th Street. Based on information from Jeff Baker of Rupert Engineering, Inc., the City of Renton zoning code requires one parking space per room plus two parking spaces per three employees. We are assuming that an average of six employees would operate the hotel and that 119 parking spaces would be required by the City of Renton. The project site is 13 parking spaces short of meeting the zoning code requirements. It is being proposed that these 13 spaces be provided from a shared parking agreement between the adjacent Denny's restaurant and the Microtel Inn hotel. This parking study will determine whether the 13 additional spaces can be accommodated by a shared parking agreement between the Denny's restaurant and the Microtel Inn hotel. Analysis Methodology The first step in the shared parking analysis was to establish the maximum hourly parking generation for the various land uses. The maximum hourly parking generation rate for the hotel use was taken P.O. Box 56267 Portland, Oregon 97238-6267 (503) 226-7920 Fax (503) 226-8598 • Mr. Clinton E. Morgan March 23, 1998 Page 2 from the City of Renton zoning code. The Denny's restaurant was surveyed by H. Lee & Associates on March 19, 1998 to derive its maximum hourly parking generation. The second step of the shared parking analysis was to develop a daily parking demand profile by hour for each use. This information was obtained from Shared Parking, Urban Land Institute, 1983 for the hotel use. The daily parking demand profile by hour for the Denny's restaurant use was collected by H. Lee & Associates on March 19, 1998. The third and final step of the shared parking analysis was to combine the peak parking generation with the daily parking demand profile information. The daily parking demand profile information was collected or derived in an hourly breakdown of the parking demand throughout the day by a percentage of the peak parking demand. These parking demands by hour for the various land uses were then combined to determine the total parking demand by hour for the Microtel Inn hotel and Denny's restaurant. The maximum parking demand was then compared with the proposed parking supply of 164 parking stalls (106 from Microtel Inn and 58 from Denny's restaurant) to determine whether a sufficient amount of parking is being proposed between the two uses. Peak Parking Demand The peak parking demand by the Microtel Inn hotel and Denny's restaurant are summarized in Table 1. As shown in Table 1, the peak parking demand of the Microtel Inn hotel is projected at 119 stalls. This peak parking demand is based on the City of Renton's zoning code requirements and assumes 100 percent occupancy and two parking stalls per three employees. The Denny's restaurant peak parking demand is 34 stalls and is based on a survey conducted by H. Lee & Associates at the restaurant on March 19, 1998. Table 1. Peak Parking Demand by Individual Land Uses Land Use Source Peak Parking Generation Hotel 1 spaces per room plus 2 119 stalls spaces per three employees from City of Renton zoning code Restaurant survey 34 stalls Daily Parking Demand Profile By Hour Each land use has a daily parking demand profile that varies by hour. The daily parking demand profile by hour for the hotel use was taken from Shared Parking, Urban Land Institute, 1983. The daily parking profile for the restaurant was developed from the parking survey information collected during the H. Lee & Associates survey at the Denny's restaurant on March 19, 1998. As shown in Table 2, the daily parking demand profile by hour is expressed in terms of percent of the maximum peak parking demand. Mr. Clinton E. Morgan March 23, 1998 Page 3 Table 2. Daily Parking Demand Profile By Hour Time Beginning Hotel Restaurant 8:00 A.M. 65% 100% 9:00 55% 88% 10:00 45% 88% 11:00 35% 82% 12:00 P.M. 30% 82% 1:00 30% 56% _ 2:00 35% 29% 3:00 35% 24% 4:00 45% 32% 5:00 60% 62% 6:00 70% 82% 7:00 75% 79% _ 8:00 90% 35% 9:00 95% 74% Shared Parking Analysis By combining the peak parking demand information with the daily parking demand profile information, the parking demand by hour for the combined parking demand of the Microtel Inn hotel and Denny's restaurant was obtained. The results are shown in Table 3. Table 3. Shared Parking Demand by Hour Time Beginning Hotel Restaurant Total Demand Surplus 8:00 A.M. 77 34 111 53 9:00 65 30 95 69 10:00 54 30 84 80 11:00 42 28 70 94 12:00 P.M. 36 28 64 100 1:00 36 19 55 109 2:00 42 10 52 112 3:00 42 8 50 114 4:00 54 11 65 99 5:00 71 21 92 72 6:00 83 28 111 53 7:00 89 27 116 48 8:00 107 12 119 45 9:00 113 25 138 26 • Mr. Clinton E. Morgan March 23, 1998 Page 4 As shown in Table 3, the maximum parking demand would occur at 9:00 P.M. with a demand of 138 spaces. With the combined parking supply of 164 spaces (106 hotel spaces and 58 restaurant spaces) between the Microtel Inn hotel and Denny's restaurant uses, a surplus of 26 spaces would occur during the peak demand. Based on the shared parking analysis, the supply of 164 spaces between the Microtel Inn hotel and Denny's restaurant would be adequate to meet the parking demands of these two land uses. Based on the analysis above, the applicant has proposed sufficient parking supply with a shared parking agreement with the adjacent Denny's restaurant. Please call me if you have any questions, comments, or need additional information regarding this analysis. Sincerely, H. Lee & Associates J. Hann Lee Principal APPLICATION NO: APPLICATION FEE: DATE FILED: T.R. RECEIPT: A. BACKGROUND: 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Microtel Inn 2. Name of Applicant: Hamilton Company, LLC 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Agent (if applicable): Hamilton Company, LLC Rupert Engineering, Inc. 3241 156th Avenue SE 1519 W. Valley Hwy. N. Suite 101 Bellevue, WA 98007 Auburn, WA 98001 Attention: Norm Hamilton Attention: Pedro DeGuzman (206) 641-1360 (206) 833-7776 4. Date checklist prepared: 2/27/97 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): A.S.A.P. Building process to start immediately upon issuance of building permit. Completion within 6 months. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes explain. No 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. No 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, known. City of Renton Preliminary Site Plan Approval. City of Renton Building Permit and Facility Extension Agreement RECEIVED FEB j 4 199$ DEVELOPMENT PL.A NNiNING • • • Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. Construction of a 115 room, 3 story motel on a 1.8+/- acre lot. Building footprint area is approximately 14,000 sf. Parking provided on-site plus a reciprocal parking agreement with the adjacent Denny's Restaurant. Acce' provided on NE 44th Street and the access drive on the south side of the Denny's Restaurant. Parking lot to be constructed up to the edge of the 25 foot setback from the existing creek located along the west property line. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any and section, township and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonable available, While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Located in the SW 1/4 of SEC. 29, T24N, R5E, W.M. in Renton, Washington. See attached plans, legal description, and vicinity map. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS: 1. Earth: A. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other B. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? 40% C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Existing soils consist of Bellingham Silt Loam per the King County Soil Survey. D. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Existing steep slopes along the existing creek appear to be stable at this time. • Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT E. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Material Quantity Purpose Cut/Fill 3500 CY On-site grading to provide a more level area for the new building and parking lot, no import or export anticipated. Import Crush. Rock 600 CY Base for asphalt paving. F. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes. Erosion and sedimentation during site construction. G. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction ( for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 61% of the site (1.1 acres) will be covered with impervious surfaces upon full development of the site. H. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth. On site erosion control per City of Renton requirements. 2. Air A. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. During construction, only minimal dust and exhaust emissions associated with construction equipment is expected. After completion, normal exhaust emissions from commercial areas can be expected. B. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odors that may affect your proposal? If so generally describe. No C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 3. Water: A. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of tt site (including year round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands): If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. An on-site creek conveys runoff from a large area upstream of the si . The creek is part of the East Lake Washington Gypsy Drainage Basin wh,, 1 drains to Lake Washington. 2) Will the project require any work over, in or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes. Site to be developed to the edge of the 25° creek buffer line. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be place in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. None 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No B. Ground 1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No. Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground frc septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domestic sewage; industrial, containing any toxic chemicals; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) is (are) expected to serve. None C. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method c collection and disposal, if any (including quantities, if known). Where will , water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Runoff from the site will be detained within the proposed detention vaults and released at a controlled rate per the 1990 King C ,inty Surface Water Design Manual. Runoff will be discharged to the on-sit creek. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any. Stormwater detention to be provided as stated above. Stormwater treatment to be provided by an underground wet-vault. Wet-vault to b designed per the King County Surface Water Design Manual (surface )a subject to vehicle traffic < 1.0 acres). 4. Plants: A. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X_deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other. evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other. Xshrubs. X_grass. pasture. crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other. water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other. other types of vegetation. B. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? All vegetation will be removed within the limits of work. No work will bt done within the creek area or 25' buffer, with the exception of the new storm pipes discharging to the creek. • Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site: None D. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to present or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Typical commercial landscaping per the requirements of the City of Renton. 5. Animals: A. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the sit or are known to be on or near the site: Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other: Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: B. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the sit( None C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. No D. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None 6. Energy and Natural Resources: A. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity, natural gas. B. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: W.S.E. code compliance Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 7. Environmental Health: A. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this proposal.? If so, describe. Not known at this time. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required: None 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None B. Noise: 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? None 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short-term or long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Short term construction noise would be generated between 7am-5pm for a 9 month period during construction. At this time, minimal noise is expected from the future building users or customers. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impact, if any: None 8. Land and Shoreline Use: A. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Site is vacant. Adjacent sites uses: North - Denny's restaurant South - commercial center West - 1-405 East - motel, tavern B. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe: Not known C. Describe any structures on the site: None Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT D. Will any structures be demolished? If so, What? No E. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Commercial Arterial (CA) F. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Commercial Arterial (CA) G. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A H. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify: No Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed prs ct? Total employee amount unknown, although 6 persons maximum durir any one shift. J. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None K. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: N/A L. Proposed measures to insure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land use and plans, if any: The proposed motel complies with zoning requirements and is compa ile with the nearby land uses. 9. Housing: A. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None B. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 10. Aesthetics: A. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material) proposed? Approximately 40' high. Wood exterior proposed. B. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Landscaping per City of Renton requirements. 11. Light and Glare A. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Typical evening parking lot lighting B. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None D. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Parking lot lighting will be directed down and away from surrounding buildings. 12. Recreation A. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? No recreational opportunities exist in the immediate vicinity. B. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation A. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe: No B. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: N/A 14. Transportation: A. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Access to be provided by a new driveway along NE 44th Street and the existing access drive off of Lake Washington Blvd. passing through tf Denny's property. B. Is site currently served by public transit? If no, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? No public transit provided in the immediate vicinity. C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? 106 parking stalls provided on-site plus 13 reciprocal stalls from the Denny's Restaurant parking lot to the north. None eliminated. D. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private): Yes. New driveway, sidewalk, curb and gutter and street lighting alone lE 44th Street frontage. E. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of ) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe: No Environmental Checklist (continued) TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT F. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. 1172 trip ends per day (Calculated assuming "motel"; weekday; per occupied room from Trip Generation, pg. 550, January 1991). Peak volumes would occur between 7 to 9 a.m. G. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None proposed. 15. Public Services: A. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, others)? I` so, generally describe: The proposed project will have a minor impact on public services. B. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impact on public services, I tny: The parking lot will be well lighted to provide customer safety. 16. Utilities: A. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other B. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed: Electrical - Puget Power Natural gas - Washington Natural Gas Water - City of Renton Refuse - available, but unknown at this time Sanitary Sewer - City of Renton Telephone - available, but unknown at this time C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand thz the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. OWNER /AGENT SIGNATURE: PZ- DATE: ( - IZ• q� 6(t eAr CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY ',00 COLUMBIA CENTER, 701 5TH A\ SEATTLE, WA 98104 Policy No.: 457579 EXTENDED OWNER POLICY SCHEDULE A Amount of Date of Policy: JULY 3 0, 1997 at 3 :3 3 PM Insurance: $9 0 0, 0 0 0.00 1, Name of Insured: THC - EXIT SEVEN, L.L.C. , A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 2. The estate or interest in the land which is covered by this policy is: FEE SIMPLE 3. Title to the estate or interest in the land is vested in: THC - EXIT SEVEN, L.L.C. , A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 4. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: SEE ATTACHED DESCRIPTION RECEIVED FEB 0 4 1998 cYtW�'fvitN(PLANN%NC C�N OF R TON CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Iiip® SSITM Undo CONSULTING ENGINEERS/CIVIL AND STRUCTURAL PRELIMINARY TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) - STORM DRAINAGE STUDY OF - MICROTEL INN NE 44' STREET AND LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD RENTON, WASHINGTON - .: - ..RECEIVED ' ' FOR . :FE8.,0 4 199a -DEVELOPMEN1PLANNING . CITY QF RENTON THE HAMILTON COMPANY `.,��0{ • 3241 156TH AVENUE SE ^° � �� BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 'N �++u i _ .�b 'r 1` . , .. � t11103� o srrR JAI, a r` FEBRUARY 1997 - EXPtF ES (p,S .q R.E. JOB NO. 96100 1519 West Valley Highway North/Suite 101 Post Office Box 836/Auburn, WA 98071 206-833-7776 Fax 206-939-2168 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1) PROJECT OVERVIEW 2) 1990 KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL CORE REQUIREMENTS SECTION I. DISCHARGE AT THE NATURAL LOCATION SECTION II. OFF-SITE ANALYSIS SECTION III. RUNOFF CONTROL SECTION IV. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM SECTION V. TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN SECTION VI. MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION SECTION VII. BONDS AND LIABILITY 3) STORM DRAINAGE REPORT STORM DETENTION CALCULATIONS STORM TREATMENT CALCULATIONS APPENDIX A TIR WORKSHEET AND SITE LOCATOR MAP APPENDIX B STORM AND GRADING PLAN (PRELIMINARY) PROJECT OVERVIEW The Hamilton Company proposes to construct a 115 room, 3 story motel on a 1.8+/-acre lot. The site is located adjacent to Interstate 405 at the intersection of NE 44 th Street and Lake Washington Blvd (a portion of the SW 1/4 of SEC. 29, T24N, R5E, W.M. in Renton, Washington). Building footprint area is approximately 14,000 sf. Building height is approximately 35'with a wood exterior siding. On-site grading is proposed to provide a more level area for the new building and parking lot; no import or export is anticipated. Approximately 61% of the site (1.1 acres)will be covered with impervious surfaces upon full development of the site. Stormwater detention to be provided by an underground detention vault. Stormwater treatment to be provided by an underground wet-vault. Storm detention vault and wet-vault to be designed per the King County Surface Water Design Manual (surface area subject to vehicle traffic < 1.0 acres). The TIR Worksheet (Figure 1) and Site Location Map (Figure 2) are included in Appendix A. The preliminary Storm and Grading Plan is included in Appendix B. This Technical Information Report also includes an analysis of the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual Core Requirements and Special Requirements and the storm drainage calculations. None of the Special Requirements apply to this project. 1990 KING COUNTY SURFACE WATER DESIGN MANUAL CORE REQUIREMENTS SECTION I. DISCHARGE AT A NATURAL LOCATION The site is currently vacant. The eastern portion of the site generally slopes to the north with grades up to 5%. An on-site creek, located along the west property line and varying from 10 to 20' below the eastern portion of the site, collects site runoff and conveys it downstream towards Lake Washington. There is minimal on-site vegetation with the exception of the wooded and brushy area along the creek. The eastern edge of the on-site creek has steep grades of up to 66%, but appears to be stable at this time. Per City of Renton requirements, a 25-foot buffer will be required from the edge of the existing creek. Existing soils consist of Bellingham Silt Loam per the King County Soil Survey. SECTION II. OFF-SITE ANALYSIS During storm events greater than the 10-year storm, runoff release rates will increase as a result of the development. Runoff will be discharged to the on-site creek along the west property line. The creek is part of the East Lake Washington Gypsy Drainage Basin which drains to Lake Washington. Due to periodic flooding problems along Lake Washington Boulevard near the northeast property corner, a storm drainage analysis is being conducted by Entranco Engineers for the City of Renton to solve the backwater problems. No off-site analysis will be done within this report due to the analysis already underway. SECTION III. RUNOFF CONTROL Stormwater detention to be provided by an underground detention vault. The vault will be constructed of concrete and designed per the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The control structure to be installed within the vault will restrict the post-development release rates per the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The restriction criteria, using the s.b.u.h. method (scs type la distribution), is as follows: 1. 2 year predeveloped release rate during the 2 year post developed storm with a 30% factor of safety 2. 10 year predeveloped release rate during the 10 year post developed storm with a 30% factor of safety A wet-vault will be constructed to treat stormwater runoff from the paving areas which are subject to vehicle traffic. The wet-vault is allowed by the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual since the site's surface area subject to vehicle traffic is less than one acre. The water quality design flow rate will be the peak rate of runoff for the 2-year, 24-hour design storm event. Additional runoff, during larger storm events, will bypass the wet-vault and discharge directly to the storm detention vault. SECTION IV. CONVEYANCE SYSTEM All new storm drainage pipe will be sized to convey the 25yr, 24hr storm, based upon the Rational Method analyis. SECTION V. TEMPORARY EROSION AND SEDIMENTATION CONTROL PLAN Project construction will include temporary erosion and sedimentation control (TESC) measures to prevent discharge of sediment laden runoff to other properties or the downstream storm drainage system. TESC measures will include perimeter filter fabric fencing, gravel construction entrances, TESC ponds, soil stabilization and defined construction limits. Refer to the erosion control notes shown on the plans. SECTION VI. MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION Storm drainage maintenance is the responsibility of the property owner. A Storm Drainage System Maintenance and Operation Manual will be provided during submittal of the final construction drawings. SECTION VII. BONDS AND LIABILITY Not provided at this time. STORM DRAINAGE REPORT STORM DETENTION CALCULATIONS NOTE: 1) SOIL GROUP D 2) ONLY THE AREA TO BE DEVELOPED (1.3 ACRES)WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE DESIGN CALCULATIONS. THE ONSITE-CREEK AND ITS 25-FOOT SETBACK WILL NOT BE INCLUDED. EXISTING CONDITIONS AREA= 1.3 AC, CN = 89 PASTURE/GRASS EXIST TC = * REFER TO PRELIMINARY STORM AND GRADING PLAN IN APPENDIX B GRADUAL SLOPE AREA: L = 180 FT. Ns = 0.13 (RANGE, NATURAL) SO = 0.011 FT/FT P2 = 2.0 INCHES Tt FOR 180' = 0.42*[.13*(180')]^0.8 (2.0)1'0.5*(.011)1'0.4 =22.5 min STEEP SLOPE AREA: L = 50 FT. Ns = 0.13 (RANGE, NATURAL) SO = 0.42 FT/FT P2 = 2.0 INCHES Tt FOR 50' = 0.42*L 13*C50')J^0.8 (2.0)1'0.5* (.42)1'0.4 = 1.9 min Tc EXIST= 24.4 MIN < DEVELOPED CONDITIONS CN= 98 BLDG & PAVING = 90 LANDSCAPING 86.2% IMPERVIOUS WITH CN = 98, AREA= 1.12 AC. 13.8% PERVIOUS LANDSCAPING WITH CN = 90, AREA= 0.18 AC. DEVELOPED TC = * REFER TO PRELIMINARY STORM AND GRADING PLAN IN APPENDIX B 145' PAVING: Ns = 0.011 (PAVING) So = 0.050 FT/FT P2 = 2.0 INCHES Tt FOR 145' = 0.42*[.011*(145')J^0.8 (2.0)1\0.5* (.050)1\0.4 = 1.4 min 305 LF 8" PIPE @ S = 0.02 FT/FT, V= 5.2 FPS Tt = U60V = 1.OMIN Tc DEV= 2.4 MIN <---------------- THE HYDROGRAPH DATA FOR THE EXISTING AND DEVELOPED SITE ARE ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE. THE SUMMARY OF THE DATA IS AS FOLLOWS: EXISTING CONDITIONS FOR MICROTEL INN SITE STORM PERV. IMPERV. Tc PEAK-Q (YEAR) A CN A CN (MINI (CFS) 2 1.3 89 0 0 24.4 0.24 10 1.3 89 0 0 24.4 0.46 DEVELOPED CONDITIONS FOR MICROTEL INN SITE STORM PERV. IMPERV. Tc PEAK-Q (YEAR) A CN A CN (MIN) (CFS) 2 0.18 90 1.12 98 2.4 0.70 10 0.18 90 1.12 98 2.4 1.05 S.C.S. TYPE-1A RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION ENTER: FREQ(YEAR), DURATION(HOUR), PRECIP(INCHES) 2,24,2.0 ******************** S.C.S. TYPE-1A DISTRIBUTION ******************** ********* 2-YEAR 24-HOUR STORM **** 2.00" TOTAL PRECIP. ********* ENTER: A(PERV), CN(PERV), A(IMPERV), CN(IMPERV), TC FOR BASIN NO. 1 1.3,89,0,98,24.4 DATA PRINT-OUT: AREA(ACRES) PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS TC(MINUTES) A CN A CN 1.3 1.3 89.0 .0 98.0 24.4 PEAK-Q(CFS) T-PEAK(HRS) VOL(CU-FT) .24 7.83 4829 ENTER [d:] [path]filename[.ext] FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: C:\96100\2PRE.HYD SPECIFY: C - CONTINUE, N - NEWSTORM, P - PRINT, S - STOP N S.C.S. TYPE-1A RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION ENTER: FREQ(YEAR), DURATION(HOUR), PRECIP(INCHES) 2,24,2.0 ******************** S.C.S. TYPE-1A DISTRIBUTION ******************** ********* 2-YEAR 24-HOUR STORM **** 2.00" TOTAL PRECIP. ********* ENTER: A(PERV), CN(PERV), A(IMPERV), CN(IMPERV), TC FOR BASIN NO. 1 0.18,90,1.12,98,2.4 DATA PRINT-OUT: AREA(ACRES) PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS TC(MINUTES) A CN A CN 1.3 .2 90.0 1.1 98.0 2.4 PEAK-Q(CFS) T-PEAK(HRS) VOL(CU-FT) .70 7.67 7931 ENTER [d:] [path]filename[.ext] FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: C:\96100\2POST.HYD SPECIFY: C - CONTINUE, N - NEWSTORM, P - PRINT, S - STOP N S.C.S. TYPE-1A RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION ENTER: FREQ(YEAR), DURATION(HOUR), PRECIP(INCHES) 10,24,2.9 ******************** S.C.S. TYPE-1A DISTRIBUTION ******************** ********* 10-YEAR 24-HOUR STORM **** 2.90" TOTAL PRECIP. ********* ENTER: A(PERV), CN(PERV), A(IMPERV), CN(IMPERV), TC FOR BASIN NO. 1 1.3,89,0,98,24.4 DATA PRINT-OUT: AREA(ACRES) PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS TC(MINUTES) A CN A CN 1.3 1.3 89.0 .0 98.0 24.4 PEAK-Q(CFS) T-PEAK(HRS) VOL(CU-FT) .46 7.83 8487 ENTER [d:] [path]fi[ename[.ext) FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: C:\96100\10PRE.HYD SPECIFY: C - CONTINUE, N - NEWSTORM, P - PRINT, S - STOP N S.C.S. TYPE-1A RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION ENTER: FREQ(YEAR), DURATION(HOUR), PRECIP(INCHES) 10,24,2.9 ******************** S.C.S. TYPE-1A DISTRIBUTION ******************** ********* 10-YEAR 24-HOUR STORM **** 2.90" TOTAL PRECIP. ********* ENTER: A(PERV), CN(PERV), A(IMPERV), CN(IMPERV), TC FOR BASIN NO. 1 0.18,90,1.12,98,2.4 DATA PRINT-OUT: AREA(ACRES) PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS TC(MINUTES) A CN A CN 1.3 .2 90.0 1.1 98.0 2.4 PEAK-Q(CFS) T-PEAK(HRS) VOL(CU-FT) 1.05 7.67 12090 ENTER Ed:] [path]fi[ename[.ext] FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: C:\96100\10POST.HYD STORM DETENTION: Stormwater detention to be provided by an underground detention vault. The vault will be constructed of concrete and designed per the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The control structure to be installed within the vault will restrict the post-development release rates per the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual. The restriction criteria, using the s.b.u.h. method (scs type la distribution), is as follows: 1. 2 year predeveloped release rate during the 2 year post developed storm with a 30% factor of safety 2. 10 year predeveloped release rate during the 10 year post developed storm with a 30% factor of safety VAULT DIMENSIONS 18' X 18' X 7' STORAGE DEPTH BOTTOM OF STORAGE AT ELEV. 27.5 ORIFICE CONTROL STRUCTURE BOTTOM ORIFICE: 1.83" DIA. AT EL. 27.5 TOP ORIFICE: 2.33" DIA. AT EL. 32.25 (H=4.75') OVERFLOW: 15" DIA. @ 34.5 FEET ROUTE 2YR AND 10YR DEVELOPED STORM EVENTS THROUGH DETENTION SYSTEM REFER TO THE ROUTING DATA ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE. A SUMMARY OF THE RESULTS ARE AS FOLLOWS: STORM CALCULATED MAX. WATER MAX. FLOW (YEAR) STORAGE (CF) ELEV. (FEET) (CFS) 2 1400 < 1539 4.34 <4.75 0.19 < 0.24 10 2120 < 2268 6.55 < 7.00 0.43 < 0.46 ADDITIONAL STORAGE REQUIREMENTS INCREASE THE VAULT LENGTH AND WIDTH DIMENSIONS FROM 18' X 18' TO 20' X 20' TO ACCOUNT FOR THE 30% STORAGE FACTOR OF SAFETY DURING THE 2-YEAR AND 10-YEAR STORM EVENTS. STORM REQUIRED PROVIDED (YEAR). STORAGE (CF) STORAGE (CF) 2 1400*1.30= 1820 1900 10 2120*1.30= 2756 2800 KING COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Surface Water Management Division RESERVOIR ROUTING INFLOW/OUTFLOW ROUTINE SPECIFY Ed:] [path]filename[.ext] OF ROUTING DATA c:\96100\stor-ini.dat DISPLAY ROUTING DATA (Y or N)? y ROUTING DATA: STAGE(FT) DISCHARGE(CFS) STORAGE(CU-FT) PERM-AREA(SQ-FT) .00 .00 .0 .0 1.00 .09 324.0 .0 2.00 .13 648.0 .0 3.00 .16 972.0 .0 4.00 .18 1296.0 .0 4.75 .20 1539.0 .0 5.00 .28 1620.0 .0 6.00 .39 1944.0 .0 7.00 .46 2268.0 .0 AVERAGE PERM-RATE: .0 MINUTES/INCH ENTER Ed:l [pathlfilename[.ext] OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: c:\96100\2post.hyd INFLOW/OUTFLOW ANALYSIS: PEAK-INFLOW(CFS) PEAK-OUTFLOW(CFS) OUTFLOW-VOL(CU-FT) .70 .19 7952 INITIAL-STAGE(FT) TIME-OF-PEAK(HRS) PEAK-STAGE-ELEV(FT) 27.50 8.50 31.84 PEAK STORAGE: 1400 CU-FT ENTER Ed:) Epath]filename[.ext] FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: c:\96100\route SPECIFY: C - CONTINUE, N - NEWJOB, P - PRINT, S - STOP, R - REVISE c ENTER Ed:] [path]filename[.ext] OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: c:\96100\10post.hyd INFLOW/OUTFLOW ANALYSIS: PEAK-INFLOW(CFS) PEAK-OUTFLOW(CFS) OUTFLOW-VOL(CU-FT) 1.05 .43 12080 INITIAL-STAGE(FT) TIME-OF-PEAK(HRS) PEAK-STAGE-ELEV(FT) 27.50 8.00 34.05 PEAK STORAGE: 2120 CU-FT ENTER Ed:] [path]filename[.ext] FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: c:\96100\route STORM TREATMENT A wet-vault will be constructed to treat stormwater runoff from the paving areas which are subject to vehicle traffic. The wet-vault is allowed by the 1990 King County Surface Water Design Manual since the site's surface area subject to vehicle traffic is less than one acre. The water quality design flow rate will be the peak rate of runoff for the 2-year, 24-hour design storm event. Additional runoff, during larger storm events, will bypass the wet-vault and discharge directly to the storm detention vault. The sizing criteria listed in Section 1.3.5, within the Special Requirements, is as follows: 1) The design water surface area in the wetvault shall be a minimum of one percent of the impervious surface area in the drainage sub-basin contributing to the facility. 2) The design volume of the wetvault shall be a minimum of the total volume of runoff from the tributary sub-basin proposed developed conditions using a water quality design storm event have a total precipitation (Pt-wq), where Pt-wq is one-third of the two-year, 24-hour total precipitation. This water quality design storm event approximates the runoff from the mean annual storm event. TREATMENT CALCULATIONS 1) SITE SURFACE AREA SUBJECT= SITE IMPERVIOUS AREA- BUILDING AREA TO VEHICLE TRAFFIC = 48,787- 14,000 = 34,787 SF THEREFORE, THE MINIMUM WET-VAULT SURFACE SHALL BE 34,787 SF * 1.0% = 348 SF 2) TOTAL VOLUME OF RUNOFF DURING THE Pt-wq DESIGN STORM = 1975 CF , USING A PRECIPATION RATE OF 1/3 *2.0 = 0.66 IN/HR. Pt-wq Hydroqraph Data S.C.S. TYPE-1A RAINFALL DISTRIBUTION ENTER: FREQ(YEAR), DURATION(HOUR), PRECIP(INCHES) 2,24,0.66 ******************** S.C.S. TYPE-1A DISTRIBUTION ******************** ********* 2-YEAR 24-HOUR STORM **** .66" TOTAL PRECIP. ********* ENTER: A(PERV), CN(PERV), A(IMPERV), CN(IMPERV), TC FOR BASIN NO. 1 0.18,90,1.12,98,2.4 DATA PRINT-OUT: AREA(ACRES) PERVIOUS IMPERVIOUS TC(MINUTES) A CN A CN 1.3 .2 90.0 1.1 98.0 2.4 PEAK-Q(CFS) T-PEAK(HRS) VOL(CU-FT) .17 7.67 1975 ENTER [d:] [path]filename[.ext] FOR STORAGE OF COMPUTED HYDROGRAPH: c:\96100\cLwetvault.hyd CONCLUSION PROPOSED WET-VAULT : 20'X 20'X 5' PERMANENT POOL DEPTH WITH A DIVIDING WALL ALONG THE MIDDLE TO ACHIEVE THE NECESSARY LENGTH TO WIDTH RATIO. SURFACE AREA = 400 SF > 348 SF (OK) PERMANENT POOL VOLUME = 2000 CF > 1975 CF (OK) LENGTH TO WIDTH RATIO = 4.4 > 3 (OK) APPENDIX "A" Pz le l of 2 King County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET PART 1 PROJECT OWNER AND PART 2 PROJECT LOCATION PROJECT ENGINEER AND DESCRIPTION Project Owner TH 6 NA rvt t tr'Con1 COrn-PA-N y Project Name NI I C.2¢YTE I.. i i•1 n1 Address 32-44't I So T•( A-ut✓, s E/ ae"LL ,vJA Location Phone (Zo(a) Co q 1- I3 6 o Township o H NI Project Engineer RED 20 O ECwvl-!/rA1 Range R 5 E Section '2-9 Company 2v PEf1T Gib eE7Zir'& L-n1G. Project Size 1, AC Address Phone 151 4 (.J. vP•--tiey Hu)fAi. /01 Upstream Drainage Basin Size UN)iLtJM,)J / Itv3,./2.^1 • 9; • ' Zo .) r' 3 - 6 PART 3 TYPE OF PERMIT APPLICATION PART 4 OTHER PERMITS 11 Subdivision I I DOF/G HPA I I Shoreline Manage lent 1. I Short Subdivision I I COE 404 I I Rockery I I Grading I I DOE Dam Safety I j Structural Vaults 5K Commercial I I FEMA Floodplain 11 Other I I Other I I COE Wetlands 11 HPA NOtJE, PART 5 SITE COMMUNITY AND DRAINAGE BASIN - . . . I.. Community GITY of rt,t�To,..l _ Drainage Basin FA--5 LA,c,e wH-5ttan)G'7-v%J 6Y,aSy -Da 74-,Nf4•xt,e £ ,45inl• _ PART 6 SITE CHARACTERISTICS ., I I River I I Floodplain ® Stream STe. /na,..)L7 LJ£S-; en-se, writ- I I Wetlands I I Critical Stream Reach I I Seeps/Springs I I Depressions/Swales I J High Groundwater Table I-1 Lake I I Groundwater Recharge ® Steep Slopes , -ot-1b5L0t O''«-H I I Other I Lakeside/Erosion Hazard PART 7. SOILS (.. Soil Type Slopes Erosion Potential Erosive Veloc s BEt..LA,/t,-t-iPr+,n 5'ir£405r oPE_S /kt-omit MEV, / S7'1'/✓L.cf A T S I L.T t4Y,,-\ C4 s1-c.., 7i?C J T/,”E I I Additional Sheets Attatched 1/90 Page 2 of 2 King.County Building and Land Development Division TECHNICAL INFORMATION REPORT (TIR) WORKSHEET PART 8 DEVELOPMENT LIMITATIONS REFERENCE LIMITATION/SITE CONSTRAINT C� -0711,-4—DAWAstr-oam,A4alysis— 5 6orFer',- Fes,. O6� o� c2��-►t [D CD [] Additional Sheets Attatched PART 9 ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS MINIMUM ESC REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION FOLLOWING CONSTRUCTION Sedimentation Facilities Stabilize Exposed Surface Stabilized Construction Entrance 1211 Remove and Restore Temporary ESC Facilities Perimeter Runoff Control 1R1 Clean and Remove All Silt and Debris [g Clearing and Grading Restrictions 'SZT Ensure Operation of Permanent Facilities Cover Practices E * Flag Limits of NGPES .e Construction Sequence IT Other [: Other •ART 10 SURFACE WATER SYSTEM CD Grass Lined Channel 1 1 Tank I I Infiltration Method of Analysis [] Pipe System Ifgl Vault I 1 Depression [ Open Channel I I Energy Dissapator I 1 Flow Dispersal Compensation/Mitigation [ Dry Pond L I Wetland I I Waiver of Eliminated Site Storage [ Wet Pond I 1 Stream I 1 Regional Detention Brief Description of System Operation 5 i o rZw. ozT 1 a n,7 1 P vN 0 -6 ft 0L)'0 !ems(N.)c v2E T Q "-)ZISv\i vrsv1/4-t—" S? 2W' T+2-CF{Trvtrr (PP, t/rJ tnii-(0. ) c r' r t rC (A/C Facility Related Site Limitations I I Additional Sheets Attatched Reference Facility Limitation PART 11 STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS PART 12 EASEMENTS/TRACTS (May require special structural review) [ I Drainage Easement ('Cast in Place Vault ] Other I I Access Easement [] Retaining Wall Ti Native Growth Protection Easement E -Rockery>4'High [ I Tract EZ Structural on Steep Slope n Other • PART 14 SIGNATURE OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER I or a civil engineer under my supervision have visited the site. Actual , !cite conditions as observed were incorporated into this worksheet and the L� (��iZ,•a7 attatchments. To the best of my knowledge the information provided tere is accurate. I sy •t. 1/90 APPENDIX "B" ._ 99,1$.7 J 1 1 Il'.-'l,jA'+lilg.v, 44 !: 1/bd;n !t,fol. l!ln,1�IOA h/I See Map 27 1�) iMt- ` Z •41 l h• Apk3:'gi&.n tkiyr,. 1 ,F• }�v'3_ "a2' 'slri •` ,,47. s i 0 Z • 1 * 2 0z)x 10 fix. .dt r s i. otig • MEADO AV Ij u>" CT� I ••• • x'fa Xe*� U " R1s.fi; F�: e'1' AI .HAZELWOOD LN_ - ( Pt ,.•"".E� . ... JONES--AVM® WE !9 ��H r,-�--6— ►- A � N<<NC. F;� N AV S3HD 1 PL ti I "'J :m m I r 4'. `11-a �..ar 109TH 7 r AV SE � K a N .,, LINC•LN ........ 110T AV m TO Ipjy LINCOLN AV E ' 110TSEAV_ -1 1r •• ii LA,' . . _^' y Z a lIITh�AV 9L� `` ` m _ • _ r c� �. ,n _ - o_-1 III H • Se \� r y0` 111THPLSEm A - - - 112 AV SE �Sf m 2TH AV SE _ • �a� : rn � I••.. • m m I WASHINGTON N SF y yZ 112TH A I rn m ILtH PL SE "'113TH 'L SE B(1/ 1 •■ .' 1d 113TH x r x =/ N L��'Z 1.13TH i -1${ S D IA A5 II ,�. AV E Syr r I� SE 4�4T0 AV SE�r SE -Ni m�'� i m 114TH PL SE '9LSti .. -4. m 1 4TH ' I X U1. `i Z ✓� I ray N 18• AySEi N I 1, 115TH AV SE -11 `�1= r��s 1 6TH "' I I h�d N1-5" C SE I ? . 6TH AV $e '' I1 n m i -1 1 16TH ...1 I AV ~ `m 2 tinell 2 m m m -1 d NL ffi = m , . 118 H •$ "' $' $ x 1�iTH m m = = IiJTH AV i Ave D.33co 1n 1n" E w 1119TH q� a: 'P D.~ U1 ,��gT AV SE —1'i -+ 0 tn -1 '� '1 1' m I �:. j 119 H 119 SE- TH m N PL •E PL 5 I ZO A .;S 120TH AV ...... seE. -+ Icn �, 1d �S Al 8' I -71 121ST •V SE �� m I cn �? Its a r~ — — I -r- - - - - -b � 121STP mm 1ST 0. o q� SE I _ i :a r,1 PLSE R SE 122NQ- HIV- S.. I m o N A9 s / r ' •......�.. r' • N 123RD s �N¢\: A;.•6j"y •...': i o 3S/\`d Q l = =ti 1 SE m m CiOrt ir•� 3S os S ^- Q11 L� • 1 t • l?4 N I _ I23RD AV S.E �., m .0z?,t' O• N ' N G n in 0- -4 125TN AV SE -1 0 4V SE• N v \ r ....AV ISE i SF 125TH rya SF -1 = �z i 1 ittB ' . m m S AY aS 'v v SE yszl 125TH • 3S LU 3S' $ d S-40 A� ti� '��.-'' : D-ti (l•1 -1 I Ty A ^a a,> >p rn 4� 1 qm \d � u) H = 'ON NAoSo o� 176SH SE to s�Y ��� �,41 _ta __ '90 i ,n I �h AV --1 l -.T E .7 cn r^ i.. m _ -1 - �+, ij' 'r.'' ; '`•' . .IZbli1 .w... . y' .p -i' `� `'" r '1h1 Av . ... .-i , 1•{lltL� i .;1 '":_ 7c SE ' 1CLl N 2 - • u J m AV SE LN 2 'j$nd -• •• rT .,.::.�(.•: •: , m Y\ .x, m 4� m F jH AV S tnw 127 F1 d mat �'i: �• •1. :5:4`4,•.,...... .? .:. ' z.,. �--•� �11 '-i L.,' (n 3S t'�J• -1_.1 .11� nV !�1 r'�\'11< •.'�0� 3 1�1•.. •:_s:::; _ •� it..,.{)7 -i(:'..pi••S l_7V= r m inTH PL E �` .. 29P�.J �m3 AV PL SE :� S nV.H � : •0...e :128TH AV .....SEI ' . ... i v 7y�. ' SE�nP 128TH P E =v,� m �m " S ��. Hl ► f . . :�: � O?:r : ;:; �. • m r ��o .� -4 , z ,.3S•'ld HAR-.'•::•.::. 1 �m ... 2 I . : 1 i29-1141x AV•o Pn Cr r r 3rr.. �//�. C] AGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY A.L.TA.COMMITMENT SCHEDULE A Order No.: 457579 (Continued) Your No.: PINNACLE LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT (Paragraph 4 of Schedule A continuation) THAP PORTION OF TRACT 184, C. D. HILLMAN'S LAKE WASHINGTON GARDEN OF EDEN • ADDITION TO SEATTLE, DIVISION NO. 3, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 81, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING EASTERLY AND NOFTHERLY OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1 AS ESTABLISHED IN CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NUMBER 613780; TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF TRACT 185 OF SAID PLAT LYING SOUTH OF A LINE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: CCMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 185; THENCE SOUTH 00°56'18" WEST A DISTANCE OF 367.36 FEET ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID TRACT TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 88°47'17" WEST PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT A .DISTANCE OF 187.00 FEET; TAENCE SOUTH 00°56'18" WEST A DISTANCE OF 4.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°47'17" WEST TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT AND THE TERMINUS OF SAID DESCRIBED LINE; EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID TRACT 185 CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, FOR SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 2-A BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 4075146; ALSO EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF SAID TRACT 185 CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, FOR PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1, BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 5687948. (BEING KNOWN AS LOT 2, CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NUMBER LLA-015-82, RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8301259003.) TOGETHER WITH AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES AS RESERVED IN DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8303140298 OVER, UNDER, UPON AND ACROSS THAT PORTION OF TRACT 185, C. D. HILLMAN'S LAKE WASHINGTON GARDEN OF EDEN ADDITION TO SEATTLE DIVISION NO. 3, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF, RECORDED IN VOLUME 11 OF PLATS, PAGE 81, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT Tah NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT 185; THENCE SOUTH 00°56'18" WEST, ALONG THE EAST LINE THEREOF, A DISTANCE OF 367.36 FEET; - THENCE NORTH 88°47'17" WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID TRACT A DISTANCE OF 187.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00°56'18" WEST A DISTANCE OF 4.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 88°47'17" WEST A DISTANCE OF 40.60 FEET TO A POINT ON '1'xr EASTERLY MARGIN OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1 (ALSO KNOWN AS SR-405) AS CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON BY DEEDS RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBERS 4075146 AND 5687948; THENCE NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY, ALONG SAID MARGIN, NORTH 23°49'27" EAST A DISTANCE ,, '99 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY wLTAcMA6/11•LIA0/11X I.ov of R � DE4E 014 a pry: • C AGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY A.L.TA COMMITMENT SCHEDULE A Order No.: 457579 (Continued) Your No.: PINNACLE LEGAL DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT (Paragraph 4 of Schedule A continuation) OF 313.41 FEET; TF•IEN_E SOUTH 66°10'33" EAST A DISTANCE OF 60 FEET; THEN:E NORTH 23°49'27" EAST A DISTANCE OF 113.86< FT TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF S.UID TRACT 185, SAID POINT ALSO BEING ON THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF SOUTHEAST 76TH STREET; THEN:E SOUTH 88°47'17" EAST, ALONG SAID NORTH LINE <ADO 6.16 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEG=4NING; (BEING KNOWN AS LOT 1, CITY OF RENTON LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT NUMBER LLA-015-82, RECOIIDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8301259003) ; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING NORTHERLY OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: COMM]NCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID TRACT; THENCE SOUTH 00°56'18" WEST A DISTANCE OF 338.36 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGIIINING; THENCE NORTH 88°47'17" WEST TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED TRAC AND THE TERMINUS OF THE LINE HEREIN DESCRIBED. • CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY wumnA a sAwswim I ti 7 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY A.L.TA COMMITMENT SCHEDULE B Order No.: 457579 Your No.: PINNACLE Schedule B of the policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following matters nnle s the same arc disposed of to the satisfaction of the Company. GENERAL EXCEPTIONS A. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. B. Encroachments,overlaps,boundary line disputes,or other matters whichwould be disclosed by an accurate survey and inspection of the premises. C. Easements,or claims of easements,not shown by the public records. D. Any lien,or right to a lien,for contributions to employee benefit funds,or for state workers' compensation,or for services,labor,or material heretofore or hereafter furnished,all as • imposed by law,and not shown by the public records. E. Taxes or special assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the public records. F. Any service,installation,connection,maintenance,tap,capacity or construction charges for sewer,water, electricity,other utilities,or garbage collection and disposal G.Reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; Indian tribal codes or regulations,Indian treaty or aboriginal rights,including easements or equitable servitudes. 13.Water rights,claim',or title to water. Defects,liens,encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters,if any,created,first appearing in the public records,or attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment_ SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS FOLLOW T1(YIi/R a;. _ _ CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY A.L.TA COMMITMENT SCHEDULE B Order No.: 457579 (Continued) Your No.: PINNACLE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS 1. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: CITY OF RENTON PURPOSE: PUBLIC UTILITIES (INCLUDING WATER AND SEWER) AREA AFFECTED: PORTION OF SAID PREMISES LYING WITHIN THE EAST 10 FEET OF TRACT 184 AND OTHER PROPERTY RECORDED: AUGUST 20, 1975 RECORDING NUMBER: 7508200650 B 2. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: CITY OF RENTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION PURPOSE: PUBLIC UTILITIES (INCLUDING WATER AND SEWER) AREA AFFECTED: A 10 FOOT WIDE STRIP THROUGH THE EASTERLY AND NORTHERLY PORTIONS OF SAID PREMISES RECORDED: SEPTEMBER 16, 1983 RECORDING NUMBER: 8309160605 • C 3. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: • GRANTEE: KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 107 PURPOSE: SEWER LINES AREA AFFECTED: PORTION OF SAID PREMISES AS DESCRIBED IN SAID INSTRUMENT RECORDED: MAY 18, 1988 RECORDING NUMBER: 8805180714 D 4. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BETWEEN: CITY OF. RENTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND: JOHN PIETROMONACO AND/OR JOHN W. MCKENNA, JR. ) GENERAL PARTNERS BUSINESS PARKS NORTHWEST) RECORDED: JANUARY 8, 1987 RECORDING NUMBER: 8701080852 REGARDING: UTILITIES SYSTEM AND ADDITIONAL TAP OR 4 • CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY A.L.TA COMMITMENT SCHEDULE B Order No.: 457579 (Continued) Your No.: PINNACLE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS CONNECTION CHARGES TO BE ASSESSED 5. AGREEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BETWEEN: CITY OF RENTON, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND: CAMPBELL HOLDINGS RECORDED: AUGUST 21, 1987 RECORDING NUMBER: 8708210749 REGARDING: REIMBURSEMENT OF DEVELOPER COSTS F PROVIDES FOR A SHARE OF ASSESSMENT COST OF $6,836.71 AS TO SAID PREMISES. G 6. RELINQUISHMENT OF ACCESS TO STATE HIGHWAY NUMBER 1 (SR 405) AND OF LIGHT, VIE AND AIR BY DEED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: RECORDED: NOVEMBER 2, 1950 RECORDING NUMBER: 4075146 H AFFECTS: NORTHERLY PORTION OF SAID PREMISES LYING WITHIN TRACT 185 7. RELINQUISHMENT OF ACCESS TO STATE HIGHWAY NUMBER 1 (SR 405) AND OF LIGHT, VIES. AND AIR BY DEED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: RECORDED: JANUARY 16, 1964 RECORDING NUMBER: 5687948 AFFECTS: PORTION OF SAID PREMISES LYING WITHIN TRACT 185 AND OTHER PROPERTY. K 8. CONDEMNATION OF ACCESS TO STATE HIGHWAY NUMBER 1 (SR 405) AND OF LIGHT, VIEW AND AIR BY KING COUNTY DECREE TO STATE OF WASHINGTON: ENTERED: MAY 15, 1964 SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NUMBER: 613780 WLTA0.1ffi/11.26A0/ux rulrA n Tri'I_E INSURANCE COMPANY • • CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY A.L.TA.COMMITMENT SCHEDULE B Order No.: 457579 (Continued) Your No.: PINNACLE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AFFECTS: PORTION OF SAID PREMISES LYING WITHIN TRACT 184 AND OTHER PROPERTY 11 9. NOTICE OF ADOPTION OF SEWER GENERAL CONNECTION CHARGE, AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: BY: KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 107 RECORDED: DECEMBER 27, 1989 RECORDING NUMBER: 8912270593 N 10. PAYMENT OF THE REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX, IF REQUIRED. THE PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SITUATED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF LOCAL TAXING AUTHORITY OF CITY OF RENTON. PRESENT RATE IS 1.78%. ANY CONVEYANCE DOCUMENT MUST BE ACCOMPANIED BY THE OFFICIAL WASHINGTON STATE EXCISE TAX AFFIDAVIT. THE APPLICABLE EXCISE TAX MUST BE PAID AND THE AFFIDAVIT APPROVED AT THE TIME OF THE RECORDING OF THE CONVEYANCE DOCUMENTS. 0 11. GENERAL AND SPECIAL TAXES AND CHARGES, PAYABLE FEBRUARY 15, DELINQUENT IF FIRST HALF UNPAID ON MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT IF UNPAID ON NOVEMBER 1 OF THE TAX YEAR (AMOUNTS DO NOT INCLUDE INTEREST AND PENALTIES) : YEAR: 1996 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 334330-1150-00 LEVY CODE: 2151 ASSESSED VALUE-LAND: $ 734,300.00 ASSESSED VALUE-IMPROVEMENTS: $ 0.00 GENERAL & SPECIAL TAXES: BILLED: $10,334.01 PAID: • $ 5,167.01 UNPAID: $ 5,167.00 P 12. RIGHT, TITLE AND INTEREST OF KAO FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, PRESUMED BY THE APPLICATION FOR TITLE INSURANCE TO HAVE AN INTEREST IN SAID PREMISES. Q NOTE: SAID INTEREST, IF ANY, IS SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING MATTER(S) SHOWN AT PARAGRAPH(S) 13, 14, AND 15. R 13. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT FOR KAO FAMILY PARTNERSHIP. WLTAC7.IH2/11-2690/EK CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY • • • CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY A.L.TA.COMMITMENT SCHEDULE B Order No.: 457579 (Continued) Your No.: PINNACLE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS S NOTE: A COPY OF THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT, AND AMENDMENTS THERETO, IF ANY, MUST BE SUBMITTED. T 14. ANY CONVEYANCE OR MORTGAGE BY KAO FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, MUST BE EXECUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT AND BY ALL THE GENERAL PARTNERS Al THEIR RESPECTIVE SPOUSES AS OF THE DATE OF ACQUISITION, OR EVIDENCE MUST BE SUBMITTED THAT CERTAIN DESIGNATED PARTNERS HAVE BEEN AUTHORIZED TO ACT FOR PARTNERSHIP. • u 15. MATTERS OF RECORD, IF ANY, AGAINST THE NAMES OF THE UNDISCLOSED GENERAL PARTNERS OF KAO FAMILY PARTNERSHIP. V 16. TITLE IS TO VEST IN THE HAMILTON COMPANY, L.L.C. , AND WILL THEN BE SUBJECT 7 THE FOLLOWING MATTERS SHOWN AT PARAGRAPH(S) 17 AND 18. Y 17. TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT FOR THE HAMILTON COMPANY, L.L.C. . K NOTE: A COPY OF THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT, AND AMENDMENTS THERETO, IF ANY, MUST BE SUBMITTED. 1 18. ANY CONVEYANCE OR MORTGAGE BY THE HAMILTON COMPANY, L.L.C. , MUST BE EXECUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT AND BY ALL THE MEMBERS AND THEIR RESPECTIVE SPOUSES AS OF THE DATE OF ACQUISITION, OR EVIDENCE MUST BE SUBMITTED THAT CERTAIN DESIGNATED MANAGERS/MEMBERS HAVE BEE AUTHORIZED TO ACT FOR THE LIMITED LIABILITY. 19. TO PROVIDE AN EXTENDED COVERAGE OWNER'S POLICY, GENERAL EXCEPTIONS A THROUGH WILL BE CONSIDERED WHEN OUR INSPECTION AND/OR REVIEW OF SURVEY, IF REQUIRED, IS COMPLETED. GENERAL EXCEPTIONS E THROUGH H WILL REMAIN IN THE OWNER'S POLICY TO ISSUE. A SUPPLEMENTAL COMMITMENT WILL FOLLOW. IF THE ANTICIPATED CLOSING DATE IS LESS THAN 4 WEEKS FROM THE DATE OF THIS COMMITMENT, PLEASE CONTACT YOUR TITLE OFFICER IMMEDIATELY. IA NOTE NUMBER 1: A SURVEY HAS BEEN RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8809129005, A COPY OF WHICH IS HERETO ATTACHED. s3 AFFECTS: THE EAST LINE OF SAID PREMISES AND ADJOINING PROPERTY. END OF SCHEDULE B (I-Tu.-A )TIT!P.INSURANCE COMPANY TAC?lffi/11-3690/FJC . o..yx .ter::.Z,.. :„ aj, •.;'y`.. . f;,, f i CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY A.L.TA.COMMITMENT • SCHEDULE B Order No.: 457579 Your No.: PINNACLE • (Continued) SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS AD THE FOLLOWING PARTIES HAVE BEEN SENT A COPY OF THIS COMMITMENT: CHICAGO TITLE ESCROW-SCOTT SMOUSE SCOTT SMOUSE 2/1 PINNACLE REALTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY MR. TIMOTHY R. CAMPBELL 1/1 LEIBSOHN & COMPANY MR. STEVEN BALRMAN 1/1 • • • • wL.TACMR2/11-2640/EX CHICAGO TTILE INSURANCE COMPANY .• + The sketch is for your aidm m -ling your land with reference to streets an parcels.While it is believed to be correct,the Company assues``„lability for any loss occurring by reason of reit. _e thereon. .y / L�LC A't^O TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 1_aKs-wAKl,4cI-�o Gr.,. 1-4ILLMANts Gne�sa of" .ac i S :7G-rx SC , V : ' ; t Lorslgtl. A- CYS Do� _� �_'� Q'0. 1- ir $A E N I ;u t - PN l •1 EI 1 'I L_ J ' r —L---..—t. .— —_. — -- — —! • er:. 1 N/\ 1.\ �tA�T �{ -VT- nzs• m itvl co 1. N 1 ;1 . • . i L _ • i ` . • 184" • • �� testa IdiV-'�, ro- N E. ST - • __----- ----- . . S,t29-2. -5 S. TO-6 R1 1/74 �— • • LIMITED LIABILITY AGREEMENT • OF THC-EXIT SEVEN, L.L.C. THIS L]M1T3D LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT (the "Agreement") is made and entered into this ZZ —day of July, 1997, by and among the Persons whose signatures appear on the signature page hereof. ARTICLE 1-- DEFINITIONS The following terms used in this Agreement shall have the following meanings (unless otherwise expressly provided herein): "Act" means the Washington Limited Liability Company Act enacted October 1, 1994. "Capital Account" means the capital account determined and maintained for each Unit Holder pursuant to Section 8.3. "Capital Contribution" means any contribution to the capital of the Company in cash or property by a Member whenever made. "Certificate of Formation" means the certificate of formation pursuant to which the • Company was formed, as originally filed with the office of the Secretary of State on July 1, 1997, and as amended from time to time. "Code" means the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or corresponding provisions of subsequent superseding federal revenue laws. "Company" means THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C., a limited liability company formed under the laws of the State of Washington. "Distributable Cash" means all cash received by the Company, less the sum of the • following to the extent paid or set aside by the Company: (i) all principal and interest payments on indebtedness of the Company and other sums paid or payable to lenders; (ii) all cash expenditures incurred incident to the normal operation of the Company's business; and (iii) Reserves. "Economic Interest" means a Unit Holder's share of Net Profits, Net Losses, and other tax items of the Company and distributions of the Company's assets pursuant to this Agreement and the Act, but shall not include any right to participate in the management or affairs of the Company, including, the right to vote on, consent to or otherwise participate in any decision of the Members. Limited Liability Company Agreement RECEIVED ® of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 1 of 25 FEB 0 4 1999 DEVELOPMENT CITY OF RENT PLANNING 1111 "Economic Interest Owner" means the owner of an Economic Interest who is not a Member. "Entity" means any general partnership, limited partnership, limited liability company, corporation,joint venture, trust, business trust, cooperative or association or any other organization that is not a natural person. "Involuntary Purchase Event" means any one or more of the following events or conditions: (a) the filing of a petition in bankruptcy by a Member; (b) any assignment by a Member for the benefit of his or her creditors; (c) any transfer, award, or confirmation of any Membership Interest to a Member's spouse who is not a Member pursuant to a decree of divorce, dissolution, or separate maintenance, or pursuant to a property settlement; or (d) any other event which, were it not for the provisions of this Agreement, would cause any Member's Membership Interest, or any interest therein, to be sold, assigned, pledged, encumbered, awarded, confirmed, or otherwise transferred, for consideration or otherwise, to any Person not already a Member or a Member's lineal ancestor or descendant, whether voluntarily, involuntarily, or by operation of law under circumstances that would not bring such event within Section 12 of this Agreement. "Manager" means the Member elected and appointed as the Company's Manager by Members holding a Majority Interest. The Manager shall be responsible for operating the Company's business and for making and implementing the day-to-day decisions of the Company. The initial Manager shall be Brian Hamilton. • "Majority Interest" means, at any time, more than fifty percent (50%) of the then outstanding Units held by Members. "Member"means each Person who executes a counterpart of this Agreement as a Member and each Person who may hereafter become a Member. If a Person is a Member immediately prior to the acquisition by such Person of an Economic Interest, such Person shall have all the rights of a Member with respect to such Economic Interest. "Membership Interest" means all of a Member's share in the Net Profits, Net Losses, and other tax items of the Company and distributions of the Company's assets pursuant to this Agreement and the Act and all of a Member's rights to participate in the management or affairs of the Company, including the right to vote on, consent to or otherwise participate in any decision of the Members. 411 Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven,L.L.C. Page 2 of 25 "Net Profits" and "Net Losses" shall have the meaning ascribed to those terms in Section • 9.5. "Percentage Interest" means with respect to any Unit Holder the percentage determined based upon the ratio that the number of Units held by such Unit Holder bears to the total number of outstanding Units. "Person" means any individual or Entity, and the heirs, executors, administrators, legal representatives, successors and assigns of such "Person" where the context so permits. "Regulations" includes proposed, temporary and final Treasury regulations promulgated under the Code and the corresponding sections of any regulations subsequently issued that amend or supersede such regulations. "Reserves" means, with respect to any fiscal period, funds set aside or amounts allocated during such period to reserves which shall be maintained in amounts deemed sufficient by the Manager, in his sole discretion, for working capital and to pay taxes, insurance, debt service or other costs or expenses incident to the ownership or operation of the Company's business. "Unit Holder" means a Person who is a Member or who holds an Economic Interest but is not a Member. "Units" means the Units issued to any Member under this Agreement as reflected in attached Schedule 1, as amended from time to time. The initial number of Units to be authorized • and issued by the Company shall be 1000. The number of authorized Units for issuance may be increased upon the affirmative vote of a Majority Interest. Units may not be divided into fractional shares or interests. ARTICLE 2 -- FORMATION OF COMPANY 2.1 Formation. The Company was formed on July 1, 1997, when the Certificate of Formation was executed and filed with the office of the Secretary of State of Washington in accordance with and pursuant to the Act. 2.2 Name. The name of the Company is "THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C." 2.3 Principal Place of Business. The principal place of business of the Company shall be 3241 156th Avenue S.E., Bellevue, Washington, 93007. The Company may locate its places of business at any other place or places as the Members may from time to time deem advisable. 2.4 Registered Office and Registered Agent. The Company's initial registered agent and the address of its initial registered office in the State of Washington are as follows: • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven,L.L.C. Page 3 of 25 • Kirt W. Montague Vance, Romero & Montague, P.S. Pacific First Plaza 155-108th Avenue, N.E., Suite 202 Bellevue, Washington, 98004-5901 The registered office and registered agent may be changed by the Members from time to time by filing an amendment to the Certificate of Formation. 2.5 Term. The term of the Company shall be from the date the Certificate of Formation was filed to the 30th day of June, 2037, unless the Company is earlier dissolved in accordance with either Article 12 or the Act. 2.6 Units of Ownership. Units shall be issued to each Member in accordance with his or her percentage ownership interest in the Company. Units may not be divided into fractionalized shares or interests. All Units issued must be reflected on the books and records of the Company with the name and address of the person to whom such Units are issued together with the number of Units issued. No certificates or other written documentation evidencing the issuance of Units is required, although the Manager may issue such certificates or other written documentation if the Manager chooses to do so. ARTICLE 3 -- BUSINESS OF COMPANY • The business of the Company shall be to: (a) develop, own and operate a Microtel Inn in Renton, Washington; (b) carry on any lawful business or activity which may be conducted by a limited liability company organized under the Act; and (c) to exercise all other powers necessary to or reasonably connected with the Company's business which may be legally exercised by limited liability companies under the Act. ARTICLE 4 -- NAMES AND ADDRESSES OF MEMBERS The names and addresses of the Members are set forth on attached Schedule 1, as amended or restated from time to time. ARTICLE 5 -- MANAGEMENT 5.1 Managers. The business and affairs of the Company shall be managed by a Member appointed as Manager of the Company. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, the Manager shall have full and complete authority, power and discretion to manage and control the business, affairs and properties of the Company, to make all decisions regarding those matters and to perform any and all other acts or activities customary or incident to the management of the Company's business. The Manager shall have full power and authority to execute, for and on behalf of the Company, any and all documents and instruments which may be necessary to carry on the business of the Company, including, without limitation, any and all • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 4 of 25 • deeds, contracts, leases, mortgages, deeds of trust, promissory notes, security agreements, and financing statements pertaining to the Company's assets or obligations. No person dealing with the Manager need inquire into the validity or propriety of any document or instrument executed in the name of the Company by the Manager, or as to the authority of the Manager in executing the same. 5.1.1 Limitation of Authority of Manager. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, the Manager shall not, without the approval of the holders of two-thirds (2/3) of the Units then held by Members, (i) sell the Company's business or substantial portion thereof, or sell, exchange or otherwise dispose of all, or substantially all, of the Company's assets; (ii) engage in any merger, reorganization or recapitalization of the Company; (iii) discontinue the Company business; (iv) take any acts that would render the Company bankrupt or insolvent or, except as expressly provided in this agreement, cause the termination, dissolution, liquidation, or winding up of the Company. 5.1.2 Removal of the Manager. The Manager may be removed only under the following procedure. If any one or more of the following events occurs, the Members may remove the Manager, and elect a new Manager: 5.1.2.1 the Manager's willful or intentional violation or reckless disregard of the Manager's duties to the Company; or 5.1.2.2 the Manager is subject to an Involuntary Purchase Event. 41111 The determination of whether one or more of such events exist shall be made by those Members holding two-thirds of the Units then held by Members and shall be final, binding, and not reviewable unless the decision was based on a material mistake of fact or law or was arbitrary and capricious. The Manager may not be removed for any other reasons or under any other procedure. 5.1.3 Compensation. In connection with his services in managing the Company's business and affairs, the Manager shall be entitled to receive a reasonable fee from the Company as shall be fixed from time to time by Members holding a Majority Interest. In addition, the Manager also shall be reimbursed by the Company for reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred by the Manager in connection with the Company's business, including without limitation, expenses incurred in the organization of the Company and the placement of the Units. 5.1.4 Resignation. The Manager may resign at any time by giving written notice to the Members. The resignation of the Manager shall take effect upon receipt of that notice or at such later time as shall be specified in the notice; and, unless otherwise specified in the notice, the acceptance of the resignation shall not be necessary to make it effective. The resignation of the Manager shall not affect the Manager's rights as a Member. • Limited Liability Companv Agreement of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 5 of 25 • 5.2 Limitation on Liability; Indemnification. Neither the Manager nor the Manager's agents or employees, as the case may be, shall be liable, responsible or accountable in damages or otherwise to the Company or the Members for any act or omission by such Person performed in good faith pursuant to the authority granted to such Person by this Agreement or in accordance with its provisions, and in a manner reasonably believed by such Person to be within the scope of the authority granted to such Person and in the best interest of the Company; provided that such act or omission did not constitute fraud, bad faith, or gross negligence. The Company shall indemnify and hold harmless a Manager and any of such Manager's employees or agents, as the case may be, against any liability, loss, damage, cost or expense incurred by them on behalf of the Company or in furtherance of the Company's interests without relieving any such Person of liability for fraud, bad faith or gross negligence. No Member shall have any personal liability with respect to the satisfaction of any required indemnification of the above-mentioned Persons. Any indemnification required to be made by the Company shall be made promptly following the fixing of the liability, loss, damage, cost or expense incurred or suffered by a final judgment of any court, settlement, contract or otherwise. In addition, the Company may advance funds to a Person claiming indemnification under this Section 5.2 for legal expenses and other costs incurred as a result of a legal action brought against such Person only if(i) the legal action relates to the performance of duties or services by the Person on behalf of the Company, (ii) the legal action is initiated by a party other than a Member, and (iii) such Person undertakes to repay the advanced funds to the Company if it is determined that such Person is not entitled to 1111 indemnification pursuant to the terms of this Agreement. 5.3 No Exclusive Duty to Company. The Manager shall not be required to manage the Company as his sole and exclusive function, but may have other business interests and may engage in other activities in addition to those relating to the Company. Neither the Company nor any Member shall have any right, by virtue of this Agreement, to share or participate in such other investments or activities of a Manager or in the income or proceeds derived therefrom. A Manager shall incur no liability to the Company or to any of the other Members solely as a result of engaging in any other business or venture. ARTICLE 6 -- RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS OF MEMBERS 6.1 Limitation of Liability. Each Member's liability shall be limited as set forth in this Agreement and the Act. 6.2 Liability for Company Obligations. Members shall not be personally liable for any debts, obligations or liabilities of the Company beyond their respective Capital Contributions and any obligation of the Members under Section 8 1 or 8.2 to make Capital Contributions, except as otherwise provided by law. e Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 6 of 25 • • . IMill • 6.3 Limitation of Authority to Act. Unless authorized to do so by this Agreement or by the Manager in writing, no Member, employee or other agent of the Company shall have any power or authority to bind the Company in any way, to pledge its credit or to render it liable for any purpose. 6.4 Inspection of Records. Upon reasonable request, each Member shall have the right to inspect and copy at such Member's expense, during ordinary business hours the records required to be maintained by the Company pursuant to Section 11.5. 6.5 No Priority and Return of Capital. Except as expressly provided in Article 9 or 10, no Unit Holder shall have priority over any other Unit Holder, either as to the return of Capital Contributions or as to Net Profits, Net Losses or distributions; provided, that this Section 6.5 shall not apply to loans made by a Member to the Company. ARTICLE 7 -- MEETINGS OF MEMBERS 7.1 Meetings. A meeting of the Members may be called at any time by the Manager or by those Members holding a Majority Interest. 7.2 Place of Meetings. The Manager or the Members may designate any place, either within or outside the State of Washington, as the place of meeting for any meeting of the Members. If no designation is made, or if a special meeting is called, the place of meeting shall be • the principal office of the Company specified in Section 2.3. 7.3 Notice of Meetings. Written notice stating the place, day and hour of the meeting and, in the case of a special meeting, the purpose or purposes for which the meeting is called shall be delivered not less than ten (10) nor more than fifty (50) days before the date of the meeting, either personally or by mail, by or at the direction of the Manager or the Members calling the meeting, to each Member entitled to vote at such meeting. If mailed, such notice shall be deemed to be delivered two calendar days after being deposited in the United States Mail, addressed to the Member as specified in Section 16.1, with postage thereon prepaid. 7.4 Record Date. For the purpose of determining Members entitled to notice of or to vote at any meeting of Members or any adjournment thereof, or Members entitled to receive payment of any distribution, the date on which notice of the meeting is mailed or the date on which the resolution declaring such distribution is adopted, as the case may be, shall be the record date for such determination of Members. When a determination of Members entitled to vote at any meeting of Members has been made as provided in this Section, such determination shall apply to any adjournment thereof. 7.5 Quorum. A Majority Interest represented in person or by proxy shall constitute a quorum at any meeting of Members. In the absence of a quorum at any such meeting, Members holding a majority of Units held by Members so represented may adjourn the meeting from time • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven,L.L.C. Page 7 of 25 • to time for a period not to exceed sixty (60) days without further notice. However, if the adjournment is for more than sixty (60) days, or if after the adjournment a new record date is fixed for the adjourned meeting, a notice of the adjourned meeting shall be given to each Member of record entitled to vote at the meeting. At such adjourned meeting at which a quorum shall be present or represented, any business may be transacted which might have been transacted at the meeting as originally noticed. The Members present at a duly organized meeting may continue to transact business until adjournment, notwithstanding the withdrawal during such meeting of that number of Units whose absence would cause less than a quorum. 7.6 Manner of Acting. If a quorum is present, the affirmative vote of Members holding more than fifty percent (50%) of the Units represented at the meeting in person or by proxy shall be the act of the Members, unless the vote of a greater or lesser percentage is required by this Agreement or the Act. 7.7 Proxies. At all meetings of Members, a Member may vote in person or by proxy executed in writing by the Member. Such proxy shall be filed with the Manager before or at the time of the meeting. No proxy shall be valid after eleven (11) months from the date of its execution, unless otherwise provided in the proxy. 7.8 Action by Members Without a Meeting. Action required or permitted to be taken at a meeting of Members may be taken without a meeting if the action is evidenced by one or more written consents describing the action taken, executed by Members entitled to vote • thereon and delivered to the Manager for inclusion in the Company's minutes. Action taken under this Section 7.8 is effective when all Members entitled to vote thereon have signed such consents, unless such consents specify a different effective date. The record date for determining Members entitled to take action without a meeting shall be the date the first Member signs a consent. 7.9 Waiver of Notice. When any notice is required to be given to a Member, a waiver thereof in writing signed by the Member entitled to such notice, whether before, at, or after the time stated therein, shall be equivalent to the giving of such notice. ARTICLE 8 -- CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE COMPANY AND CAPITAL ACCOUNTS 8.1 Member's Capital Contributions. Each Member shall contribute such amount as is set forth in attached Schedule 1 as such Member's share of the Members' initial Capital Contribution. Members shall not be paid interest on their Capital Contributions. 8.2 Additional Contributions. Each Member shall be required to make such additional Capital Contributions as shall be determined by the Manager from time to time to be reasonably necessary to meet the expenses of the Company; provided, however, that such additional Capital Contributions shall not be required unless the Manager and Members holding two-thirds (2/3) of the Units then held by Members have determined that such additional capital contributions are necessary. • Limited Liability Company.4greement of THC-Exit Seven,L.L.C. Page 8 of 25 • The Manager shall give written notice to each Member of the amount of any required additional Capital Contribution, and each Member shall pay to the Company such additional Capital Contribution no later than thirty (30) days following the date such notice is given. In the event any Member does not contribute the additional contribution called for, the amount of the unpaid additional Capital Contribution shall become a continuing obligation of the noncontributing Member to the Company and shall bear interest at the prime commercial borrowing rate offered by the Company's principal bank, plus three percent (3%) commencing on the date such additional Capital Contribution is due until paid in full. The Manager may withhold the amount of any such unpaid additional Capital Contribution from any distribution to be made to such noncontributing Member. Additionally, the Manager may, in his sole discretion, diminish the nonpaying Member's Economic Interest to the ratio which the noncontributing Member's total contribution bears to the total contribution made by all Members until such time as the additional Capital Contribution is paid in full. The Manager also may grant the other Members the right to pay all or a part of the noncontributing Member's contribution, in which case the noncontributing Member's Economic Interest shall be reduced and the Economic Interest of each Member who makes up the unpaid additional Capital Contribution shall be increased accordingly. Nothing contained in this Section 8.2 is or shall be deemed to be for the benefit of any Person other than the Members and the Company, and no such Person shall under any circumstances have any right to compel any actions or payments by the Members. 8.3 Capital Accounts. A separate Capital Account will be maintained for each Unit • Holder throughout the term of the Company. 8.4 Withdrawal or Reduction of Members' Contributions to Capital. A Member shall not receive out of the Company's property any part of its Capital Contribution until all liabilities of the Company, except liabilities to Members on account of their Capital Contributions, have been paid or there remains property of the Company sufficient to pay them. A Member, irrespective of the nature of its Capital Contribution, has only the right to demand and receive cash in return for its Capital Contribution. ARTICLE 9 -- ALLOCATIONS OF NET PROFITS AND LOSSES 9.1 Allocation of Net Profit and Loss - In General 9.1.1 Allocation of Net Profit and Loss. The Net Profit or Net Loss for any fiscal year of the Company shall be allocated among the Unit Holders in accordance with their respective Percentage Interests. 9.1.2 Limitation. The Net Loss allocated to each Member for any Company fiscal year pursuant to Section 9.1 .1 shall not exceed the maximum amount of Net Loss that can be so allocated without causing such Member to have a Deficit Capital Account, as defined in Exhibit A, at the end of the fiscal year. All Net Losses in excess of the limitatio! • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 9 of 25 • set forth in this Section 9.1.2 shall be allocated to the other Unit Holders who do not have Deficit Capital Accounts in proportion to their respective Percentage Interests. 9.2 Additional Allocations and Adjustments. Allocation of Net Profits and Losses further shall be subject to the provisions set forth in Exhibit A. 9.3 Determination of Net Profit or Loss. The Net Profit or Net Loss of the Company, for each fiscal year or other period, shall be an amount equal to the Company's taxable income or loss for such period, determined in accordance with Code Section 703 (a) (and, for this purpose, all items of income, gain, loss or deduction required to be stated separately pursuant to Code Section 703 (a) (1), including income and gain exempt from federal income tax, shall be included in taxable income or loss). The Company's Net Profit and Net Loss shall be adjusted, as necessary, in accordance with Section 5 of Exhibit A attached hereto. ARTICLE 10 -- DISTRIBUTIONS 10.1 Cash Distributions. 10.1.1 Nonliquidating Distributions. Distributions of Distributable Cash, other than distributions in liquidation pursuant to Section 10.1.2, shall be made to the Unit Holders pro rata in proportion to the respective Economic Interests of the Members on • the record date of the distribution. Except as provided in Section 10.4, all distributions of Distributable Cash shall be made at such times as are determined by the Manager in his sole discretion, giving due consideration to any limitations imposed by the Company's lender. 10.1.2 Distributions in Liquidation. Notwithstanding Section 10.1.1, distributions in liquidation of the Company shall be made to each Unit Holder in the manner set forth in Section 14.3 (c). 10.2 Distributions in Kind. Non-cash assets, if any, shall be distributed in a manner that reflects how cash proceeds from the sale of such assets for fair market value would have been distributed (after any unrealized gain or loss attributable to such non-cash assets has been allocated among the Unit Holders in accordance with Article 9). 10.3 Withholding; Amounts Withheld Treated as Distributions. The Manager is authorized to withhold from distributions, or with respect to allocations or payments, to Unit Holders and to pay over to the appropriate federal, state of local governmental authority any amounts required to be withheld pursuant to the Code or provisions of applicable state or local law, or such amounts as may be necessary to satisfy a Member's obligations to make additional Capital Contributions pursuant to Section 8.2 above. All amounts withheld pursuant to the preceding sentence in connection with any payment, distribution or allocation to any Unit Holder • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 10 of 25 • shall be treated as amounts distributed to such Unit Holder pursuant to this Article 10 for all purposes of this Agreement. 10.4 Limitation Upon Distributions. No distribution shall be declared and paid unless, after the distribution is made, the assets of the Company are in excess of all liabilities of the Company. ARTICLE 11 --ACCOUNTING, BOOKS AND RECORDS 11.1 Accounting Principles. The Company's books and records shall be kept, and its income tax returns prepared, under such permissible method of accounting, consistently applied, as the Manager determines is in the best interest of the Company and its Members. 11.2 Interest on and Return of Capital Contributions. No Member shall be entitled to interest on its Capital Contribution or to return of its Capital Contribution, except as otherwise specifically provided herein. 11.3 Loans to Company. Nothing. in this Agreement shall prevent any Member from making secured or unsecured loans to the Company. 11.4 Accounting Period. The Company's accounting period shall be the calendar year. 11.5 Records, Audits and Reports. At the expense of the Company, the Manager shall maintain records and accounts of all operations and expenditures of the Company. At a minimum the Company shall keep at its principal place of business the following records: (a) A current list and past list, setting forth the full name and last known mailing address of each Member, Economic Interest Owner and Manager; (b) A copy of the Certificate of Formation and all amendments thereto; (c) Copies of this Agreement and all amendments to it; (d) Copies of the Company's federal, state and local tax returns and reports, if any, for the three most recent years; (e) Minutes of every meeting of the members and any written consents obtained from Members for actions taken by Members without a meeting; and (f) Copies of the Company's financial statements for the three most recent years. 11.6 Tax Matters Partner 11.6.1 Designation. The Manager or if the Manager is ineligible to serve, then thc • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven,L.L.C. Page 11 of 25 ,,ram eligible Member with the largest interest in Company profits, shall be the "tax matters • partner" of the Company for purposes of Code Section 6221 et seq. and corresponding provisions of any state or local tax law. The initial tax matters partner shall be Brian Hamilton. 11.6.2 Expenses of Tax Matters Partner; Indemnification. The Company shall indemnify and reimburse the tax matters partner for all reasonable expenses, including legal and accounting fees, claims, liabilities, losses and damages incurred in connection with any administrative or judicial proceeding with respect to the tax liability of the Unit Holders attributable to the Company. The payment of all such expenses shall be made before any distributions are made to Unit Holders (and such expenses shall be taken into consideration for purposes of determining Distributable Cash) or any discretionary Reserves are set aside by the Manager. Neither the tax matters partner nor any Member shall have any obligation to provide funds for such purpose. The provisions for exculpation and indemnification of the Manager set forth in Section 5.3 of this Agreement shall be fully applicable to any Member acting as tax matters partner for the Company. 11.7 Returns and Other Elections. The Manager shall cause the preparation and timely filing of all tax and information returns required to be filed by the Company pursuant to the Code and all other tax and information returns deemed necessary and required in each jurisdiction in which the Company does business. Copies of such returns, or pertinent information therefrom, shall be furnished to the Unit Holders within a reasonable time after the end of the Company's • fiscal year. Except as otherwise expressly provided to the contrary in this Agreement, all elections permitted to be made by the Company under federal or state laws shall be made by the Manager in his sole discretion. ARTICLE 12 — RESTRICTIONS ON TRANSFERABILITY 12.1 In General. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, neither a Member nor an Economic Interest Owner shall have the right to: (a) sell, assign, transfer, exchange or otherwise transfer for consideration, (collectively, "sell" or"sale"), (b) gift, bequeath or otherwise transfer for no consideration whether or not by operation of law, except in the case of bankruptcy (collectively "gift"), all or any part of his or her Membership Interest or Economic Interest. Each Member and Economic Interest Owner hereby acknowledges the reasonableness of the restrictions on sale and gift of Membership Interests and Economic Interests imposed by this Agreement in view of the Company's purposes and the relationship of the Members and Economic Interest Owners. • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven,L.L.C. Page 12 of 25 Accordingly, the restrictions on sale and gift contained herein shall be specifically enforceable. In • the event that any Unit Holder pledges or otherwise encumbers any of its Membership Interest or Economic Interest as security for repayment of a liability, any such pledge or hypothecation shall be made pursuant to a pledge or hypothecation agreement that requires the pledgee or secured party to be bound by all the terms and conditions of this Article 12. 12.1.1 Permitted Transfers. Notwithstanding Section 12.2, but subject to Section 12.5, any Member may at any time, and from time to time, transfer all, or any portion (but not less than 1%) of, or any interest or rights in, the Member's Membership Interest to any other Member or to the transferor Member's lineal ancestors or descendants by birth or adoption, and trusts for the exclusive benefit of such Member or such Member's lineal ancestors, or descendants. Upon the death of any Member, the deceased Member's Membership Interest also may be transferred to any of the foregoing transferees. 12.2 First Refusal Rights 12.2.1 Subject to the restrictions set forth in Section 12.5 below, a Unit Holder desiring to sell all or any portion of his or her Membership Interest or Economic Interest to a third-party purchaser not described in Section 12.1.1 shall obtain from such purchaser a bona fide written offer to purchase said Membership Interest or Economic Interest, stating the terms and conditions upon which the purchase is to be made and the • consideration offered therefor. Such Unit Holder shall give written notice to the other Unit Holders and the Manager of his intention to so transfer such Membership Interest or Economic Interest. Such notice shall set forth the complete terms of the written offer to purchase and the name and address of the proposed purchaser. Once such notice has been provided, the Unit Holder desiring to sell may not offer his or her Membership Interest or Economic Interest to any other party for a lower price or on more favorable terms than those offered to the Unit Holders unless such new price or terms have been first offered to the other Unit Holders in accordance with Section 12.2. 12.2.2 The Company shall have the first right to purchase all or any part of the Membership Interest or Economic Interest proposed to be sold by the selling Unit Holder upon the same terms and conditions offered to the proposed purchaser. The Company must exercise this first right to purchase by giving written notice of its intent to purchase the Membership Interest or Economic Interest to the selling Unit Holder within twenty (20) days after receiving the written notice required by Section 12.2.1 from the selling Unit Holder. If the Company does not elect to acquire all or any portion of the Membership Interest or Economic Interest offered to be sold, the selling Unit Holder shall offer the Membership Interest or Economic Interest to the other Unit Holders. The other Unit Holders, shall, on a basis pro rata to the Units of those Unit Holders exercising their first refusal rights, have the right to purchase all or any portion of the Membership Interes or Economic Interest upon the same terms and conditions offered to the proposed Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 13 of 25 purchaser. The failure of the Company or a Unit Holder, as the case may be, to notify the • selling Unit Holder of his or her desire to exercise first refusal rights within the respective time period set forth above shall result in the termination of such first refusal rights. If the Company or the other Unit Holders have elected to purchase all or any portion of the Membership Interest or Economic Interest offered by the selling Unit Holder, such purchase shall be consummated within thirty (30) days after receipt of notification that the Company or the other Unit Holders have elected to exercise their first refusal rights to purchase the selling Unit Holder's Membership Interest or Economic Interest. If the Company or the other Unit Holders do not elect to purchase all of the Membership Interest or Economic Interest offered by the selling Unit Holder, then the selling Unit Holder shall be entitled to sell such Membership Interest or Economic Interest to the third party purchaser in accordance with the exact terms and conditions upon which the purchase is to be made as specified in the notice under Section 12.2.1; provided, that in under no circumstances may such sale be consummated at a lower price or on more favorable terms than those set forth in the notice required under Section 12.2.1. However, if such sale is not completed within thirty (30) days following expiration of the first refusal rights described above, then the selling Unit Holder shall not be entitled to complete the sale to such third party purchaser and the selling Unit Holder's Membership Interest or Economic Interest shall continue to be subject to the rights of first refusal set forth in this Section 12.2 with respect to any proposed subsequent transfer. 12.2.3 Upon the purchase of a Membership Interest or an Economic Interest, and as a condition to recognizing the effectiveness and binding nature of any such sale and (subject to Section 12.5, below) substitution of a Person as a new Unit Holder, the Manager may require the transferring Unit Holder and the proposed purchaser to execute, acknowledge and deliver to the Manager such instruments of transfer, assignment and assumption and such other agreements and to perform all such other acts that the Manager may deem necessary or desirable to: (i) constitute such Person as a Unit Holder; (ii) confirm that the Person desiring to become a Unit Holder, has accepted, assumed and agreed to be subject to and bound by all of the terms, obligations and conditions of this Agreement; (iii) maintain the status of the Company as a partnership for federal tax purposes; and (iv) assure compliance with any applicable state and federal laws, including securities laws and regulations. • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 14 of 25 • 12.2.4 Any sale of Units or admission of a Member in compliance with this Article 12 shall be deemed effective as of the last day of the calendar month in which the required number of Members' consents are obtained pursuant to Section 12.5 below and the transferor and the transferee both comply with Section 12.2 3 above. The transferring Unit Holder hereby indemnifies the Company and the Manager against any and all loss, damage or expense (including, without limitation, tax liabilities or loss of tax benefits) arising directly or indirectly as a result of any transfer or purported transfer in violation of this Article 12. 12.3 Involuntary Purchase Event. Upon the occurrence of an Involuntary Purchase Event, first the Company, then the other Unit Holders shall have the right to purchase the affected Member's Membership Interest on the same terms and conditions as if such Member had made an offer to sell such Membership Interest pursuant to Section 12.2 at a price computed in accordance with Section 12.3.2. 12.3.1 Offer Notice. Within thirty (30) days after the occurrence of an Involuntary Purchase Event, the affected Member or his or her trustee in bankruptcy, personal representative, guardian, executor, or administrator, as the case may be, shall give notice to the Manager of such event, specifying the date of such event, describing in reasonable detail the nature of the event and the Membership Interest affected. If the Manager has not received this notice upon the expiration of the thirty-day period, any Member who has knowledge of such event may give notice to the Manager at any time after the end of such period, and the notice shall be deemed to be proper notice for purposes of this Section 12.3.1. 12.3.2 Purchase Price. The Manager shall promptly request the Company's accountant to prepare a certificate stating the net book value of the affected Member's Membership Interest at the end of the last fiscal year preceding the notice described in Section 12.3.1. The book value of the affected Member's Membership Interest shall be a figure that bears the same proportionate relationship to the net book value of the Company that the affected Member's Membership Interest bears to the total value of all Membership Interests in the Company. In computing such net book value, no value shall be assigned to any intangibles of any nature. The accountant shall make such adjustments as he or she deems necessary in accordance with the accounting principles consistently applied from year to year in order to reflect accurately the net book value of the affected Member's Membership Interest. The accountant's certificate with respect to such value shall be conclusive and binding on all parties concerned absent manifest error. 12.3.3 Payment for Membership Interest. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties to the purchase and sale, the purchase price determined in accordance with Section 12.3.2 shall be paid in five (5) equal annual installments, together with interest on the declining balance at the minimum rate of interest necessary to avoid the imputation of interest under federal income tax laws on the date on which the Membership Interest is • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Eric Seven,L.L.C. Page 15 of 25 transferred, commencing on April 1 immediately following the end of the fiscal year in . which the Involuntary Purchase Event occurred. 12.4 Purchase in Event of Death. In the event of the death of a Member and the deceased Member's Membership Interest is not passed pursuant to the provisions of Section 12.1. 1 above, first the Company, then the other Unit Holders shall have the right to purchase the deceased Member's Membership Interest on the same terms and conditions as if such Member had made an offer to sell such Membership Interest pursuant to Section 12.2. If the deceased Member's Membership Interest is not purchased, then the deceased Member's personal representative may sell such Membership Interest to any other party or distribute such Membership Interest with the deceased Member's other property; provided, however, that any such sale or distribution shall be subject to the provisions of Section 12.5 below. 12.4.1 Purchase Price. The purchase price shall be established by mutual agreement of the purchaser and the seller. In the event the purchaser and the seller are unable to reach agreement within ten (10) days of the date upon which the purchaser delivered notice of the purchaser's intent to purchase, and if the offer to purchase is not then withdrawn, each side shall select an arbitrator' and the two arbitrators so selected shall select a neutral third arbitrator. The three person arbitration panel shall schedule a hearing within ten (10) days of the selection of the third arbitrator. The purchaser and the seller shall present oral and/or documentary evidence to support their proposed purchase price. Written appraisals may be utilized, but the purchaser and the seller shall pay all costs • of obtaining and presenting their own appraisals. The panel shall determine the purchase price by selecting any value between and including the values proposed by the purchaser or the seller. Said determination shall be binding on the purchaser and the seller. The purchaser and the seller shall equally share all costs of arbitration including the fees of the arbitrators. In the event more than one party is to be a purchaser, all purchasers may appoint only one arbitrator to represent their collective interests on the arbitration panel. 12.4.2 Payment of Purchase Price. Each purchaser shall pay to the estate of the deceased Member the purchase price as set in Section 12.4.1 above on the following terms and conditions: 12.4.2.1 The purchaser shall have the absolute right to pay the full purchase price in cash within ninety (90) days of the date of death of the deceased Member, or within thirty (30) days after qualification of the legal representative of the deceased Member, whichever occurs first. 12.4.2.2 In the event the purchaser and seller desire payment terms other than an all cash transaction, such an agreement shall be permitted so long as it is contained in a written agreement signed by both the purchaser and seller with copies provided to the Manager within thirty (30) days after qualification of the legal representative for the deceased Member's estate. • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven,L.L.C. Page 16 of 25 • 12.4.3 Conditions to Payment of Purchase Price. Notwithstanding the foregoing, 411 the purchaser shall not be required to pay the purchase price until the estate of the deceased Member is able, in the opinion of the purchaser's counsel, to transfer to the purchaser full legal and equitable tax-free title to the deceased Member's Membership Interest; and delivery to the purchaser of the Certificate representing the deceased Member's Membership Interest, if such a Certificate exists, properly endorsed in the manner required to transfer full legal and equitable tax-free title to the deceased Member's Membership Interest. 12.2.4 Costs; Indemnification. The estate of the deceased Member shall bear, and hold the purchaser harmless from, all costs and expenses required for securing any court orders, court decrees, court approvals, and tax clearances required to enable the estate of the deceased Member to transfer to the purchaser full legal and equitable tax-free title to the deceased Member's Membership Interest. 12.5 Transferee Not Member in Absence of Consent 12.5.1 Two-thirds Majority Approval Required. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Article 12, if the transfer of a Member's Membership Interest or Economic Interest to a transferee is not approved in writing by Members holding sixty percent (60%) of the Units held by Members, in their sole and absolute discretion, then the proposed transferee shall have no right to participate in the management of the business and affairs of the Company or to become a Member. Such transferee shall be merely an Economic Interest Owner. 12.5.2 Purchase of Remaining Rights. Promptly following any transfer of a Member's Economic Interest which does not at the same time transfer the balance of the rights associated with such Person's Membership Interest, the Company shall purchase from such Person, and such Person shall sell to the Company for a purchase price of$100, all such remaining rights and interests retained by such Person which immediately prior to such sale were associated with the transferred Economic Interest. The acquisition by the Company of such Person's rights shall not cause a dissolution of the Company and such Person shall no longer be a Member. ARTICLE 13 — ADDITIONAL MEMBERS 13.1 Admission to Membership. From the date of the formation of the Company, any Person or Entity accepted and approved in writing by Members holding sixty percent (60%) of the Units held by Members may become a Member in the Company either by the issuance by the Company of Units for such consideration as the Manager shall determine, or as a transferee of a Member's Membership Interest or any portion thereof, subject to the terms and conditions of this Agreement. • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 17 of 25 13.2 Financial Adjustments. No new Members shall be entitled to any retroactive allocation of losses, income, or expense deductions incurred by the Company. The Manager may, at the Manager's option, at the time a new Member is admitted, close the Company's books (as though the Company's tax year had ended) or make pro rata allocations of loss, income, and expense deductions to a new Member for that portion of the Company's tax year in which a new Member was admitted in accordance with the provisions of the Code and the Regulations. ARTICLE 14 -- DISSOLUTION AND TERMINATION 14.1 Dissolution. The Company shall be dissolved upon the occurrence of any of the following events: (a) upon expiration of the term specified in Section 2.5; or (b) upon the sale of the Apartments; or (c) upon the death, bankruptcy, or the occurrence of any other event which otherwise terminates the continued membership of a Member in the Company, unless the business of the Company is continued with the consent of Members holding sixty percent (60%) of the Units held by Members within ninety (90) days following the occurrence of such event. • 14.2 Allocation of Net Profit and Loss in Liquidation. The allocation of Net Profit, Net Loss and other items of the Company following the date of dissolution, including but not limited to gain or loss upon the sale of all or substantially all of the Company's assets, shall be determined in accordance with the provisions of Articles 9 and 10 and shall be credited or charged to the Capital Accounts of the Unit Holders in the same manner as Net Profit, Net Loss and other items of the Company would have been credited or charged if there were no dissolution and liquidation 14.3 Winding Up, Liquidation and Distribution of Assets. Upon dissolution, the Manager shall immediately proceed to wind up the affairs of the Company, unless the business of the Company is continued as provided in Paragraph (c) of Section 14.1. The Manager shall sell or otherwise liquidate all of the Company's assets as promptly as practicable (except to the extent the Manager may determine to distribute any assets to the Unit Holders in kind) and shall apply the proceeds of such sale and the remaining Company assets in the following order of priority: (a) Payment of creditors, including Members and Managers who are creditors, to the extent otherwise permitted by law, in satisfaction of liabilities of the Company, other than liabilities for distributions to Members; (b) To establish any reserves that the Manager deems reasonably necessary for contingent or unforeseen obligations of the Company and, at the expiration of such period • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 18 of 25 as the Manager shall deem advisable, the balance then remaining in the manner provided in • Paragraph (c) below; (c) By the end of the taxable year in which the liquidation occurs (or, if later, within ninety (90) days after the date of such liquidation), to the Unit Holders in proportion to the positive balances of their respective Capital Accounts, as determined after taking into account all Capital Account adjustments for the taxable year during which the liquidation occurs (other than those made pursuant to this Paragraph (c)). 14.4 No Obligation to Restore Negative Capital Account Balance on Liquidation. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in this Agreement, upon liquidation within the meaning of Regulation Section 1 704-1 (b) (2) (ii) (g), if any Unit Holder has a negative Capital Account balance (after giving effect to all contributions, distributions, allocations and other Capital Account adjustments for all taxable years, including the year during which such liquidation occurs), such Unit Holder shall have no obligation to make any Capital Contribution to the Company (except for such Unit Holder's obligation to pay-any additional Capital Contribution previously requested of such Unit Holder pursuant to Section 8 2 above), and the negative balance of such Unit Holder's Capital Account shall not be considered a debt owed by such Unit Holder to the Company or to any other Person for any purpose whatsoever 14.5 Termination. The Manager shall comply with any applicable requirements of applicable law pertaining to the winding up of the affairs of the Company and the final distribution • of its assets. Upon completion of the winding up, liquidation and distribution of the assets, the Company shall be deemed terminated. 14.6 Certificate of Cancellation. When all debts, liabilities and obligations have been paid and discharged or adequate provisions have been made therefor and all of the remaining property and assets have been distributed to the Unit Holders, the Manager shall file a certificate of cancellation as required by Section 203 of the Act. Upon filing the certificate of cancellation, the existence of the Company shall cease, except as otherwise provided in the Act. 14.7 Return of Contribution Nonrecourse to Other Members. Except as provided by law or as expressly provided in this Agreement, upon dissolution each Unit Holder shall look solely to the assets of the Company for the return of its Capital Contribution. If the property remaining after the payment or discharge of liabilities of the Company is insufficient to return the contributions of Members, no Unit Holder shall have recourse against any other Unit Holder. ARTICLE 15 -- INDEPENDENT ACTIVITIES OF MEMBERS Any Member may engage in or possess an interest in other business ventures of every nature and description, independently or with others, including but not limited to, the ownership, financing, management, employment by, lending to or otherwise participating in businesses which are similar to the business of the Company, and neither the Company nor any of the Unit Holders • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven,L.L.C. Page 19 of 25 shall have any right by virtue of this Agreement in and to such independent ventures or to the • income or profits therefrom. ARTICLE 16 -- MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 16.1 Notices. Any notice, demand or communication required or permitted under this Agreement shall be deemed to have been duly given if delivered personally to the party to whom directed or, if mailed by registered or certified mail, postage and charges prepaid, addressed (a) if to a Member, to the Member's address specified on attached Schedule 1, (b) if to the Company, to the address specified in Section 2.3, and (c) if to the Manager, to the address specified in Section 2.3. Except as otherwise provided herein, any such notice shall be deemed to be given when personally delivered or, if mailed, three (3) business days after the date of mailing. A Member, the Company or the Manager may change its address for the purposes of notices hereunder by giving notice to the others specifying such changed address in the manner specified in this Section 16.1. 16.2 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the internal laws, and not the law of conflicts, of the State of Washington. 16.3 Amendments. This Agreement may not be amended except by the unanimous written agreement of all of the Members. • 16.4 Construction. Whenever the singular number is used in this Agreement and when required by the context, the same shall include the plural and vice versa, and the masculine gender shall include the feminine and neuter genders and vice versa. 16.5 Headings. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for convenience only and shall not affect the interpretation of this Agreement. 16.6 Waivers. The failure of any Person to seek redress for violation of or to insist upon the strict performance of any covenant or condition of this Agreement shall not prevent a subsequent act, which would have originally constituted a violation, from having the effect of an original violation. 16.7 Rights and Remedies Cumulative. The rights and remedies provided by this Agreement are cumulative and the use of any one right or remedy shall not preclude or waive the right to use any or all other remedies. Said rights and remedies are given in addition to any other rights the parties may have by law, statute, ordinance or otherwise. 16.8 Severability. If any provision of this Agreement or the application thereof to any Person or circumstance shall be invalid, illegal or unenforceable to any extent, the remainder of this Agreement and the application thereof shall not be affected and shall be enforceable to the fullest extent permitted by law. • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 20 of 25 16.9 Heirs, Successors and Assigns. Each of the covenants, terms, provisions and • agreements herein contained shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and, to the extent permitted by this Agreement, their respective heirs, legal representatives, successors and assigns. 16.10 Creditors. None of the provisions of this Agreement shall be for the benefit of or enforceable by any creditors of the Company. 16.11 Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. 16.12 Estoppel Certificate. Each Member shall, within ten (10) days after written request by the Manager, deliver to the requesting Person a certificate stating, to the Member's knowledge, that: (a) this Agreement is in full force and effect; (b) this Agreement has not been modified except by any instrument or instruments identified in the certificate; and (c) there is no default hereunder by the requesting Person, or if there is a default, the nature and extent thereof. If the certificate is not received within that ten (10) day period, the Manager shall execute and deliver the certificate on behalf of the requested Member. 16.13 Legends. If certificates are issued that evidence a Person's Ownership of Units, each such certificate shall bear such legends as may be required by applicable federal and state laws, or as may be deemed necessary or appropriate by the Manager to reflect restrictions upon • transfer contemplated herein. 16.14 Arbitration of Deadlock. If any vote is required on any matter under this Agreement, and there are neither sufficient votes to approve nor disapprove of the matter, then either party may require that the matter be submitted to arbitration at the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Service ("JAMS") in Seattle, Washington in accordance with JAMS's then prevailing rules for such disputes. 16.15 Investment Representations. The Units have not been registered under the Securities Act of 1933 or any other federal or state securities laws (collectively, the "Securities Acts") because the Company is issuing the Units in reliance upon the exemptions from the registration requirements of the Securities Acts, and the Company is further relying upon the fact that the Units are to be held by each Member for investment. Accordingly, by execution of this Agreement, each Member hereby confirms that the Units have been acquired for such Member's own account, for investment and not with a view to the resale or distribution thereof and may not be offered or sold to anyone unless there is an effective registration or other qualification relating thereto under all applicable Securities Acts or unless such Member delivers to the Company an opinion of counsel, satisfactory to the Company, that such registration or other qualification is not required. The Members understand that the . Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven,L.L.C. Page 21 of 25 Company is under no obligation to register the Units or to assist any Member in complying with any exemption under the Securities Acts. 16.16 Community Property Interest. The community one-half(1/2) interest of each individual who executes this Agreement as a spouse of a Member shall, for all purposes of this Agreement, be included in, deemed part of, and bound by the same terms hereof as the interest of the Member holding record title to such Membership Interests. Each Member's spouse shall consent to the terms of the Agreement by executing a Spousal Consent substantially in the form attached hereto as Schedule 2. Each individual signing such Spousal Consent thereby appoints such individual's spouse who holds record title to the Membership Interests as such individual's true and lawful attorney-in-fact for such individual and in such individual's place to amend this Agreement and to do and perform every act necessary to carry out its purposes, including voting or giving consent as Member, with full power of substitution and revocation. Such power of attorney shall not be affected by disability of the principal. Each such individual shall further agree that upon legal separation from such individual's spouse who holds record title to the Membership Interests, or upon dissolution of such individual's marriage, or upon such individual's death or the death of the individual's spouse, neither such individual nor anyone claiming on such individual's behalf will seek to partition any community property interests in any Membership Interests, if any, and shall have no claim or right to the Membership Interests themselves. • [ THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY] • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 22 of 25 • EXECUTED by the undersigned Members effective as of the date first above written. S THE HAMILTON COMPANY, L.L.C. GARY R. DEDERER TRUST Brian Hamilton Gary Dederer, Trustee Its:`'Manager Felix Chu • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit 7, L.L.C. Page 23 oJ25 • EXECUTED by the undersigned Members effective as of the date first above written. • THE HAMILTON COMPANY, L.L.C. GARY R. DEDERER EXEMPT TRUST Brian Hamilton Gary R. Dederer Its: Manager Its: Trustee • - � / • ' . i �ttt,tt /J) / \ Felix Chu / / • • S Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven,L.L.C. Page 23 of 25 EXECUTED by the undersigned Members effective as of the date first above written. • THE HAMILTON COMPANY, L.L.C. GARY R. DEDERER EXEMPT TRUST Brian Hamilton Gary R. Dederer Its: Manager Its: Trustee Felix Chu • • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven, L.L.C. Page 23 of 25 SCHEDULE 1 MEMBER ILNFORMATION Names and Initial Addresses of Capital Percentage Members Contribution Units Interest The Hamilton Company, L.L.C. Contributions of cash, 875 87.5% 3241 156th Avenue S.E. franchise rights, land, and Bellevue, Washington 98006 past and future services related to the development and operation of a Microtel Hotel in Renton, Washington Gary R. Dederer Exempt Trust S200,000 100 10% Gary R. Dederer, Trustee 4016 NE 38th Street Seattle, Washington 98105 • Felix Chu S50,000 25 2.5% • Limited Liability Company Agreement of THC-Exit Seven,L.L.C. Page 2=1 of 25 , **************************************************************** City of Renton WA Receipt **************************************************************** Receipt Number: R9802947 Amount 1,000.00 05/14/98 09:35 Payment Method: CHECK Notation: #2181 N.HAMILTON Init: LMN Project #: LUA98-014 Type: LUA Land Use Actions Parcel No: 334330-1150 Location: NE CORNER OF NE 44TH ST & LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD Total Fees: 2,502.24 This Payment 1,000.00 Total ALL Pmts: 2,502.24 Balance: .00 **************************************************************** Account Code Description Amount 000.345.81.00.0017 Site Plan Approval 1,000.00 **************************************************************** City of Renton WA Receipt **************************************************************** Receipt Number: R9800678 Amount : 1, 502 .24 02/04/98 09 :46 Payment Method: CHECK Notation: #2115 N.HAMILTON Init : LMN Project # : LUA98-014 Type: LUA Land Use Actions Total Fees : 1, 502 .24 This Payment 1, 502 . 24 Total ALL Pmts : 1, 502 .24 Balance: . 00 **************************************************************** Account Code Description Amount 000 . 345 . 81 . 00 . 0007 Environmental Review 500 . 00 000 . 345 . 81 . 00 . 0017 Site Plan Approval 1, 000 . 00 000 . 05 . 519 . 90 . 42 . 1 Postage 2 . 24 Rupert Engineering, Inc. LETTER OF TP n NSMITTAL P.O. Box 836 / Zip 98071 If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once. 1519 West Valley Hwy. N. #101 Date: 1/7/98 Job Number: 96100 Auburn, WA 98001 Attention: Norm Hamilton (206) 833-7776 RE: Microtel Inn FAX (206) 939-2168 TO: The Hamilton Company, LLC WE IRE SENDING YOU X Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following ite ,: ❑ Shop drawings X Prints ❑ Calculations X Reports ❑ Specifications X Copy of letter ❑ Change Order ❑ Addendum Copi Ds Date Revision No. Description 11 MASTER APPLICATION 11 2/27/97 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 1 6/12/97 MAILING LABELS 2 LIST OF CURRENT PROPERTY OWNERS 3 LEGAL DOCUMENTS 11 6/11/97 PROJECT NARRATIVE 11 6/11/97 CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION DESCRIPTION 11 6/11/97 CIVIL PLANS (NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP, LAND CLEARING AND TREE CUTTING MAP, SITE PLAN, STORM AND GRADING PLAN, WATER AND SEWER PLAN) 5 6/11/97 STORMWATER DRAINAGE REPORT 1 6/11/97 CIVIL PLANS (REDUCED TO 8-1/2"X 11") - ORIGINAL PMT 1 6/11/97 CIVIL PLANS (REDUCED TO 8-1/2" X 11") - COPY 1 NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP (REDUCED TO 4"X 6") PMT 1 6/11/97 COLOR DISPLAY MAP (NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP, SITE PLAN, ELEVATIONS, AND LANDSCAPE PLAN) 5 12/8/97 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION nuACP I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT t. I : — SE " CITY OF RENTON SE 651h St _..... i; ,t Wfr • sE ZONING AP ft A w; �, M ... i VI1I 'tP. . cn LEGEND 4 i3 .Gi1 id c ti +-+[ 7 ¢ RC Resource Conservation y 4 t7 If(' ..: .- R-I Residential l du/ac II "" .: i` R-5 Residential 5 du/ac ,..,:E SE m SE 68th St : ,,; Sp- R-8 Residential 8 du/ac .Gf � ,,, RMM Residential Manufactured Homes � ' R-ID Residential 10 du/ac i. � / f ot% # # R-Ie Residential 24 du/ac - - - - - '- ' J N€ RM-I j Residential Multi-Family Infiil t i Q RM-N Residential Multi-Family Neighborhood Center .- - -- - - -- --- :` I RM-C Residential Multi-Family Suburban Center r.— ; ._�� = I y .0 Ian-uJ Residential Multi-Family Urban Center t ; I SE 7•r?Rd St• CC Convenience Commercial _ --- "'""'` - [TN Center Neighborhood R 8 CO ± CS Center Suburban 111# CD Center Downtown \ Center Office Residential i/ R � R_8 ` E 50th St ' CDR LCa I Commercial Arterial --- ` I CO Commercial Office i / CA ( if, FIT Industrial - Heavy j. IC Industrial - Medium CDR NE 48rfi SL SE 76th( St. 1 I IL Industrial - Lig ht nt L>a 1 CD I P-I Public Use -- / - Q, SE 76th Pt •-% lP1 Publicly Owned ow" , SE £77th PI. SE 77th PI. School0 :. ! :,-,� tw_wa Renton City Limits 1 1: "I' ^' SE 78 0 600 1200 A, CA �`' Q Y 1:7200 I y oe °.6 LONG RANGE PLANNING SE 80th St. • -� . P/H/PW TECHNICAL SERVICES AI 4 ___"�.. ! �. .Q_a 08/02/96 NE 43th a I k 0 L A•N10 5429 5432 ..<.. . . A=xA,. Co Rupert Engineering, Inc. LETTER OF TIC A NSMITTAL P.O. Box 836 / Zip 98071 If enclosures are not as noted,kindly notify us at once. 1519 West Valley Hwy. N. #101 Date: 1/7/98 Job Number: 96100 Auburn, WA 98001 Attention: Norm Hamilton (206) 833-7776 RE: Microtel Inn FAX (21)6) 939-2168 TO: Tie Hamilton Company, LLC WE ARE SENDING YOU X Attached ❑ Under separate cover via the following items: ❑ Shop drawings X Prints ❑ Calculations X Reports ❑ Specifications X Copy of letter ❑ Change Order ❑ Addendum Copies Date Revision No. Description 11 MASTER APPLICATION 11 2/27/97 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 1 6/12/97 MAILING LABELS 2 LIST OF CURRENT PROPERTY OWNERS 3 LEGAL DOCUMENTS 11 6/11/97 PROJECT NARRATIVE 11 6/11/97 CONSTRUCTION MITIGATION DESCRIPTION 11 6/11/97 CIVIL PLANS (NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP, LAND CLEARING AND TREE CUTTING MAP, SITE PLAN, STORM AND GRADING PLAN, WATER AND SEWER PLAN) 5 6/11/97 STORMWATER DRAINAGE REPORT 1 6/11/97 CIVIL PLANS (REDUCED TO 8-1/2" X 11") - ORIGINAL PMT 1 6/11/97 CIVIL PLANS (REDUCED TO 8-1/2"X 11") - COPY 1 NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP (REDUCED TO 4" X 6") PMT 1 6/11/97 COLOR DISPLAY MAP (NEIGHBORHOOD DETAIL MAP, SITE PLAN, ELEVATIONS, AND LANDSCAPE PLAN) 5 12/8/97 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION nuoctp 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT 1% - ol4 Gs) Report Microtel Inn & Suites Traffic Impact Study 06-v,:4 i)e.o ,„, 4,949- 9�To�N�MG November 1997 H. Lee & Associates in association with JB Engineering Consultants, Inc. MICROTEL INN & SUITES TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY Prepared for: Mr. Brian Hamilton THC - Exit Seven, LLC q. O A, 3241 - 156th Avenue SE k' ` 'F ,Q O Bellevue, WA 98007 -. .ti- :�;: .•0� " O•' fo 4 i • SAL ErG Prepared by: H. Lee & Associates in association with JIB Engineering Consultants, Inc. 5518-A NE 92nd Court Vancouver, Washington 98662 (800) 354-2687 November 1997 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION I - STUDY SUMMARY 1 Introduction 1 Summary Of Findings 4 SECTION II - EXISTING CONDITIONS 6 Site Condition and Adjacent Land Use 6 Transportation Facilities 6 Existing Traffic Volumes 6 Existing Level Of Service 9 Accident History 10 Existing Public Transit Service 10 Non-Motorized Transportation/Circulation 10 Planned Transportation Improvements 10 SECTION III - TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS 11 Analysis Methodology 11 1998 Without Project Traffic Volumes and Levels Of Service 11 Development Plans 12 Trip Generation 12 Trip Distribution and Assignment 14 1998 With Project Traffic Volumes and Levels of Service 14 Site Access 17 Conclusions 18 APPENDIX LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Site Vicinity Map 2 Figure 2. Site Plan 3 Figure 3. Traffic Controls and Lane Configurations 7 Figure 4. 1997 Existing PM Peak Hour Traffic Volumes 8 Figure 5. 1998 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Without Project 13 Figure 6. Trip Distribution and Assignment 15 Figure 7. 1998 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes with Project 16 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. LOS for Two-Way and All-Way Stop Controlled Intersections 9 Table 2. Existing Levels of Service 9 Table 3. Summary of Traffic Accident History in Study Area 10 Table 4. 1998 Without Project Levels of Service 12 Table 5. Daily Trip Generation Survey Summary 14 Table 6. P.M. Peak Hour Trip Generation Survey Summary 14 Table 7. 1998 With Project Levels of Service 17 SECTION I STUDY SUMMARY INTRODUCTION This traffic impact analysis has been prepared to assess transportation impacts related to the proposed Microtel Inn & Suites Renton, Washington. The project site plan calls for the construction of a 115 unit motel. The project site is located on the northeast corner of the NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard/I-405 Northbound Ramps intersection. Figure 1 shows the project vicinity. Project Description The proposed project consists of a 115 unit motel. Access to the project site would be provided from a new driveway on NE 44th Street and an existing Denny's restaurant driveway on Lake Washington Boulevard. Initial site construction is expected to 1998. Figure 2 shows the project site plan. Scope of Traffic Impact Study The scope of the traffic impact study was developed from a phone conversation with Clint Morgan of the City of Renton. Based on that conversation, the NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard/I-405 Northbound Ramps intersection will be studied. The remainder of this report presents the following analysis: • Existing traffic conditions in the project study area. • 1998 "Without Project" condition to establish the future baseline condition. To forecast the 1998 Without Project condition, historical growth trends were researched. Based on this research, both NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard traffic have been decreasing between 1994 and 1996. Therefore, to develop a conservative analysis, a nominal one percent annual traffic growth factor was used to forecast the 1998 Without Project condition. • Trip generation estimates for the proposed development were derived from surveys of similar motel uses in Auburn, Kent, and Bellevue. • 1998 "With Project" condition to determine the project traffic impacts. • Site access characteristics. Microtel Inn & Suites-Renton, Washington 1 November 1997 Traffic Impact Study Z 0 IP O En b t. - '= c Q tEi r/-�i ♦----•�`~fit • i� _ _ _ ADEN= `,� r,: N ��v�9 v b N Is f N "'� FRWY AV N MEADOW AV -. N �t _ o _ _ '` JOMES.411k HIGH AV '�. 1 _-_-- — o E -tee.``'it m` lZ '.'0 1 ICK AV NE • At --- ��- - .__ _ /� 1 -- -----A- 70 Al--------,- a _ •••• _ -. _._ m3 ., 4 m rn 2 ��.r j \ � ii i��1N�rtN'_^ - F r. n/�_—- 110TH AV SE LINEO.:- •.' ♦ _ - /� m .4....na 1 w rn IOiTEREY ., Yt. Is. 'WAV NE •Yn L r r _, -' BLYO z � _ LL AV NE :!C. •. - V IS o .,... SE RAaeA�`-:o I AV Z `� 1,)1[v.,n,ta- Ail o - _ � V' 112TTH AV SE 'NA I urt v A'� 'b`''`'Av . SE 1 '-� BLAINERPM m ,t. V- Y m �N1 --—-- k N 1 ;1 • _ • ...-...A.,__. CAMAS AY NE ''AlYR' fii .? 1 ' 117TH PL s . . armor rJ DAM AT NE v� 0 ' AY b�Jt-NE • -4' _441.Nit, .} :ae rLr- r �w -o 114 C% ® Sf - ivsn s`n m ✓ EDHDNDS A A Wm I TH i� si AV 4=- y NE � y IL - 116 � SE On N i i ,•.,, t ME 4it',:.. Ar St !118TM rbF u t, ':1,4 "...f -- ,_., --:- i ILARRIitir etY rvvwtxctot y y c, —T� - I :::,,,.._,...0 t;`L�-'. .,lr 1 Pt � _ n 1..4, I -• ry"ir �'A: 4, •�n:` N1sl-'i m � n d :�sFl � - .•n. i,4 "�'�-t�f. 1201N-xeS[i .�.. 4• Inrx :re' le \f •♦ JEFFERSON AV ,, wu a ?Ir-' A; '1 1= I� 'fi r' )tOtF i_•;irstEixs[ v ,�, ■ NE nruu r N[ r ! Ar 2 n ', rr = MST r �ii"•!= • \\ �•Y . / ld �l +.�_.. �sF I .''uln "R. •.r` 'x AY NE f\ KIRRWp } 'Vvi 3S = �_ v IN y K is /�AY sr / vim., A `ri .� '.,�.v.:,1 ..122NC. .by.. ....SE... a :.K �s 1215T PL= SE ti.� IYNNI1000 .AY _ NE \. :y: r. *[.t ( ...: Iv', �.` -414 4ir! <: �2 i:i.S a�`�• I 122ND AV -/ 'ROE _ NE ; : 1 .11 ' I . an.. �y .�1..j. 3S ld 0 'Z 123RDI AV SE;SE_�h! ig—_`— dr 1 , AV Sk t r l: - _ - _II -- .- i�Y ' .; 35 AY ,yJ. uA Gvir .v k n4 V,T(P ir.,.., t,-4 N.. `AY ^_` j� �r Ntitl Iv Ik.y l`__ T� 1 t '�_ Y_ a .t r• ' I I Z r Y 4.4 ■ y �`r 2' rr Ar''tUSit - t_ � .a;,t.vr,.r, x 127TN AV z �S rt� e r _IIY hs'vj+� h iJ� r .. r AY r IiTdi $ 3S „r N�Nis �2 •'• � y t:s :y; V,.fir•`=t-j '�� $ —29111 v-fb �Y SE CID •AI i,♦/ A Willi y �.. AY SE i .c ,f- Y` :i. Ar �` ,N vnta A i[ E: Il�p IN Ar �� .�� swnr n .�,- 1 ti 1. • fD L j N - AV■ A NE 1 t Il 1 132ND AV SE ' `�, 6AEE1 ) __ ., ..�r, -07 v N 1321b PL J A,r. t v .1.. ** '�- Ar !-. r uta�r 1 c)Ntl VAN=CT -1 ,� .$ ` L�S qg �;A, �INEkCASTE f 1. .>f _ CAA' 'rREEK PKWY AY �` u ( ��+ -a ,s.. + ,e!fir..raf\ A , \ '‘i I / .- I / \ \ i • • • , • / 7 \ i a \, \ • , a PM,WIN AO=mar .. 1 • • \ IN 2 I ; , c .1..."—. .._-- il'7,4F ,) ..Fr.j,:,"' c- *-1 ; . ''" . ,,,...•• •.,•.• •, . .. ^ it I -""--—.—:.•-• --.... .., ,.)\1 1-- • . . =-.----- ---- .._-:. __. ......... -__ • PO ___________'\ —.—: i :...,e i ... 1 1 r-.. ---- CON I '!.. •:, I 1 --) _ ---- --..---- a—="--- ••:. It/ - • 1 1 - i 1 I . ---• .----*— ----- -. ... • . a'.,•,...____ -• t •;•.:.• --=-." .. I••' \ -.-- ---- i 1 1 I it ---=:_.--.----=_---------- .:.; I ? \ t t -7=...=- . iSs I ------------ i R• .. I I 1 t ... .---:--------=--:, 1 •.;.':* )1_. 1 i 1 I Illar) ,. ..\\0.;N:-; ':.. ..„....\\.s.... \ I'"- --. -...=- a • I, — t I 71 4.11h \ i . . ! . \-\\.\-\\,:.• c•11\ ` •t.'..! 1 i ,, \ r •1 I 1 i••1. .,`,:\NI\X\:•.:' .t..) • • • : • — :It .,. *.--') 1 .• .. '., .. , I! . . - ! t• / 1 i.c.....:.; :.11-1-1 ------- i . / t I \ /i::' e..3.11 i ' .• : (\ l " % A,:04.;;;:f•:• •..,J.•,-.4a.:,..,..,:.-•:.,,,..:-;:-t,,,• I-- i i f•-• . i -7 1 i - 11 S 1 ; 1 1,_ H I . i 6 [' e, ‘M :i • i \ I •:. i'; 14 . ; , 74:417 1 0 ix 1it': I i .% i•;..: I% 1 H \ II ::: ••• :ri' gildolaillo a 0111 1 i „, _,...., \ i 1 ; t I $ it'' : ger! a ;sto al, t c : 1 I k i•4, r•,.,i06';'.i.:f: 1 i U . i !!. \ \ i:2, 10 •:'-::•• t 4' ::. It , .; \ 1 %4,i•'' ° Q 1.••••••••• ''‘t • k i %. \ \ 1.-77,..• !!:. I .+-.3 \ : t ,, (8, ::,,,:•e,..! •„. 't, .,.../ , 4,...,r, ::., .,..:.,,••,,,,'.....•::.•;,,.... .;..r.;..• r.•:::,...,:..k....,r ......±...--.-- _____ . 1'7!.°•,.':':,.:.: ',.;' .-- - ''"'--....... . ., 1 ....,. :.. • . ... .•••••• I•s MI A ]':'. N _..i::. . . •,-..' ::, trATicarg.40P400mft oevua _ NOT TO SCALE Figure 2. Site Plan SUMMARY OF FINDINGS The following paragraphs summarize the major findings of the traffic impact analysis. The findings are broken down into two parts: a) summary of the traffic impact analysis methodology; b) the general impact analysis conclusions and recommended on-site and off-site improvements. Traffic Analysis Methodology 1. Existing traffic conditions within the project vicinity were documented to define the attributes of the area that would be impacted by the proposed project. 2. 1998 Without Project condition was established by applying a one percent annual growth rate to the existing traffic count. 3. Project-generated daily and p.m. peak hour trips were estimated from rates derived from survey data at similar motel uses in Auburn, Kent, and Bellevue. Predicted site-generated trips were then assigned to the roadway network and added to the 1998 Without Project traffic volumes to develop the 1998 With Project traffic volumes. 4. 1998 With Project traffic conditions were established and compared to the 1998 Without Project traffic conditions to determine the project's traffic impact in the project vicinity. 5. The level of service at the study area intersection was compared with the City of Renton's LOS D level of service standard to determine whether any off-site mitigation measures are necessary. Findings The following are the findings from the traffic analysis: 1. The proposed development is expected to generate 679 daily and 52 p.m. peak hour trips. 2. The study area intersection at NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard/I-405 Northbound Ramps is projected to operate at LOS D or better for the 1998 Without Project and With Project conditions. Therefore, no off-site mitigation measures are being proposed. 3. Entering sight distance is adequate based on a posted speed limit of 30 mph for NE 44th Street project driveway. Microtel Inn & Suites -Renton, Washington 4 November 1997 Traffic Impact Study The entering sight distance from the north is adequate at the Lake Washington Boulevard/Denny's-Microtel Inn driveway. However, the entering sight distance to the south is not adequate. It is restricted by trees and vegetation encroaching on the right-of-way. 4. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities are limited on NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard. Sidewalks exist only along the frontages of developments an no bicycle lanes exist in the project vicinity. Recommendations 1. Based on the traffic impact analysis documented in this report, no off-site mitigation is needed. 2. The traffic impact fee imposed on this development should be based on a daily trip generation rate of 7.67 trips per occupied room and an occupancy rate of 77 percent. These rates were derived from survey data collected at similar motels in Auburn, Kent, and Bellevue. Based on these rates, the proposed project would generate 679 trips per day. 3. The entering sight distance problem at the Lake Washington Boulevard/Denny's - Microtel Inn driveway intersection can be mitigated by trimming and/or removing the vegetation and trees encroaching on the public right-of-way. The elimination of the trees and vegetation is likely to occur with the construction of the proposed project and would eliminate the entering sight distance problem. Microtel Inn & Suites-Renton, Washington 5 November 1997 Traffic Impact Study SECTION II EXISTING CONDITIONS SITE CONDITION AND ADJACENT LAND USE The proposed project site is vacant. Denny's restaurant and Traveler's Motel exists to the north, McDonald's fast food restaurant exists to the south, a retail development exists to the east, and I- 405 exists to the west of the project site. TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES The following provides a'description of the existing street system in the study area including a description of street classifications and characteristics. NE 44th Street: NE 44th Street is designated as a collector based on the City of Renton's roadway classification. This roadway is a three lane roadway west of Lake Washington Boulevard. East of Lake Washington Boulevard, NE 44th Street is a five lane roadway with curb, gutter and sidewalks along both sides of the road. The posed speed limit is 30 mph. Lake Washington Boulevard: Lake Washington Boulevard is a two lane minor arterial with left turn pockets at major driveways and intersections. Sidewalks exist along the east side of the roadway along existing developments. The posted speed limit is 35 mph. The NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard/I-405 Northbound Ramps intersection was analyzed as part of this study. This intersection is stop controlled at the Lake Washington Boulevard and I-405 Ramps approaches. Figure 3 shows the existing roadway system in the study area including number of lanes at the study area intersection and traffic control features. EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES The P.M. peak hour traffic volumes for the NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard/I-405 Northbound Ramps intersection were obtained from the City of Renton. This 1996 traffic count was adjusted to 1997 by a historical growth factor. Based on historical traffic count information, both NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard traffic have been decreasing between 1994 and 1996. Therefore, to develop a conservative analysis, a nominal one percent annual traffic growth factor was used to adjust the 1996 traffic count to a 1997 base year. The 1997 p.m. peak hour turning movement count for the NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard/I-405 Northbound Ramps intersection is presented in Figure 4. Microtel Inn & Suites -Renton, Washington 6 November 1997 • Traffic Impact Study ti m 1 c c • • 3 •_ N.E. 44th St. J_ I-405 NOT TO SCALE LEGEND —� Lane Usage Figure 3. Existing Lane Configurations •� Stop Sign and Traffic Control ^NN `_27 4i 7 49 4 89__! t t { 111-* 89-• • • N.E. 44th St. k 2_ I-405 A N NOT TO SCALE LEGEND XXX P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volume Figure 4. Existing P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes EXISTING LEVEL OF SERVICE Based on the traffic volumes presented in Figure 4, p.m. peak hour traffic operations were analyzed at the study intersection identified above using the methodologies outlined in the 1994 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). According to the HCM, there are six levels of service (LOS) by which the operational performance of an intersection may be described. These levels of service range between LOS "A" which indicates a relatively free-flowing condition and LOS "F" which indicates operational breakdown. LOS "D" is considered as a minimum acceptable standard in the City of Renton. The HCM methodology for 2-way and all-way stop-controlled intersections was used to analyze the study area intersection. At unsignalized intersections, level of service is related to average delay. The relationship between various levels of service and average delay is shown in Table 1. Existing p.m. peak hour level of service for the study area intersection is summarized in Table 2. As indicated in Table 2, the study area intersection is currently operating at LOS B or better. Table 1. LOS Criteria for Two-Way and All-Way Stop Controlled Unsignalized Intersections Average Delay Level of Service (Seconds per Vehicle) A < 5.0 B > 5.0 - < 10.0 C > 10.0 - < 20.0 D > 20.0 - < 30.0 E > 30.0 - < 45.0 F > 45.0 Table 2. Existing Levels of Service P.M. Peak Hour Unsignalized Intersection LOS Delay (sec) NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard/I-405 Northbound Ramps Northbound Approach B 8.4 Southbound Approach B 6.0 Eastbound Left A 2.6 Westbound Left A 2.8 Microtel Inn & Suites -Renton, Washington 9 November 1997 Traffic Impact Study ACCIDENT HISTORY Accident data was obtained from the Washington Department of Transportation for the three year period between January 1994 and December 1996. The data includes total accidents and accidents by type (i.e. fatal, injury or property damage only). This accident data is summarized in Table 3. Table 3. Summary of Traffic Accident History in Study Area Intersection PPO' Injury Fatal Rate2 NE 44th St/Lake Washington Blvd/I-405 1.0 1.7 0.0 2.7 Northbound Ramps PPO = property damage only 2 The accident rate is in average annual accidents per year. As shown in Table 3, the study area intersection has an average annual accident rates of 2.7 accidents per year. Typically, an accident rate below 3.0 accidents per year is considered acceptable. Also, based on the accident data, no fatalities have occurred in the study area from January 1994 to December 1996. EXISTING PUBLIC TRANSIT SERVICE No transit service is available in the project vicinity. NON-MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION Pedestrian and bicycle facilities are limited on NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard. Sidewalks exist only along the frontages of developments an no bicycle lanes exist in the project vicinity. PLANNED TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS Based information received from the City of Renton, there are not planned capital improvement projects planned in the study area. Microtel Inn & Suites -Renton, Washington 10 November 1997 • Traffic Impact Study SECTION III TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY The traffic impacts generated by the proposed Microtel Inn & Suites during the P.M. peak hour were analyzed as follows: • 1998 Without Project traffic volumes were established to define a baseline by which future project impacts could be determined. These traffic volumes were estimated by applying a growth rate based on historical traffic count information. Based on historical traffic count information, both NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard traffic have been decreasing between 1994 and 1996. Therefore, to develop a conservative analysis, a nominal one percent annual traffic growth factor was used to forecast the 1998 Without Project traffic volumes. • Project-generated daily and p.m. peak hour trips were estimated from rates derived from survey data at similar motel uses in Auburn, Kent, and Bellevue. • Trip distribution of site-generated traffic was developed from existing count information as well as logical travel paths to the major transportation facilities. • Predicted p.m. peak hour site-generated traffic from the proposed development were assigned to the roadway network and added to the 1998 Without Project traffic volumes to develop the 1998 With Project traffic volumes. • Future traffic demands at the study area intersection was analyzed to identify any capacity or roadway deficiencies with the build out of the site. • Site access was analyzed. A detailed discussion of the methodology summarized above and the analysis results are contained in the remainder of this section. 1998 WITHOUT PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LEVELS OF SERVICE The year 1998 was chosen as the future analysis year based on the likely build out and occupancy of the proposed motel project. The 1998 Without Project traffic volumes were estimated by applying a growth rate based on historical traffic count information. Based on historical traffic count information, both NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard traffic have been decreasing between 1994 and 1996. Therefore, to develop a conservative analysis, a nominal one percent annual traffic growth factor was used to forecast the 1998 Without Project traffic volumes. Microtel Inn & Suites-Renton, Washington 11 November 1997 Traffic Impact Study Figure 5 shows the 1998 Without Project traffic volumes for the p.m. peak hour. Level of service was calculated at the study area intersection. The results of the analysis for the 1998 Without Project traffic volumes are shown in Table 4. As shown in Table 4, the level of service for all the movements at the NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard/I-405 Northbound Ramps intersection would be LOS B or better in the 1998 Without Project condition. Table 4. 1998 Without Project Levels of Service P.M. Peak Hour Unsignalized Intersection LOS Delay (sec) NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard/I-405 Northbound Ramps Northbound Approach B 8.5 Southbound Approach B 6.0 Eastbound Left A 2.6 Westbound Left A 2.8 DEVELOPMENT PLANS As stated in the previous section, the proposed project consists of a 115 unit motel. Access to the project site would be provided by a new driveway on NE 44th Street and an existing Denny's restaurant driveway on Lake Washington Boulevard. Site construction and occupancy is expected in 1998. TRIP GENERATION Estimates of daily and p.m. peak hour trips generated by the proposed project were derived from rates derived from survey data collected at similar motel uses in Auburn, Kent, and Bellevue. The trip generation surveys at these three motels were collected on Thursday, October 23, 1997. The proposed development is expected to generate 679 daily and 52 p.m. peak hour (30 in, 22 out) trips. Tables 5 and 6 summarize the results of daily and p.m. peak hour trip generation data collected. As shown in Tables 5, the daily trip generation rate derived from the three similar motel uses is 7.67 trips per occupied room. The accompanying average occupancy rate of these motels was 77 percent. Table 6 shows that the p.m. peak hour trip generation rate is 0.59 trips per occupied room with an average occupancy rate of 77 percent. Microtel Inn & Suites -Renton, Washington 12 November 1997 Traffic Impact Study (-4ININ 4._28 tv) I � I ! 00 5 3 191o12—�► �t1 cv, 90 � • • N.E. 44th St. I-405 A 1 \ NOT TO SCALE LEGEND XXX P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volume Figure 5. 1998 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes Without Project Table 5. Daily Trip Generation Survey Summary Occupied Percent Daily Trips Daily Trip' Hotel Location Units Rooms Occupancy Generated Generation Rate Comfort Inn (Auburn) 53 40 75% 347 8.68 Days Inn (Kent) 82 46 56% 332 7.22 Days Inn (Bellevue) 110 110 100% 782 7.11 Average 77% 7.67 ` Daily trip generation rate is in trips generated per occupied room. Table 6. P.M. Peak Hour Trip Generation Survey Summary Occupied Percent Daily Trips Daily Trip' Hotel Location . Units Rooms Occupancy Generated Generation Rate Comfort Inn (Auburn) 53 40 75% 32 0.80 Days Inn (Kent) 82 46 56% 24 0.52 Days Inn (Bellevue) 110 110 100% 50 0.45 Average 77% 0.59 P.M. peak hour trip generation rate is in trips generated per occupied room. TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT A generalized trip distribution for the p.m. peak hour was developed from the existing traffic counts and logical travel paths to the major transportation facilities. The trip distribution pattern and assignment of project generated traffic are shown in Figure 6. 1998 WITH PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND LEVELS OF SERVICE The traffic volumes shown in Figures 5 and 6 were combined to arrive at the 1998 With Project p.m. peak hour traffic volumes. These traffic volumes are shown in Figure 7. Based on the traffic volumes shown in Figure 7, level of service analyses were conducted for the 1998 With Project traffic volume conditions for the p.m. peak hour. The results of the analysis for the 1998 With Project traffic volumes are shown in Table 7. As shown in Table 7, the level of service at the NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard/I- 405 intersection is LOS B or better for all movements in the 1998 With Project condition. Both project driveways are also projected to operate at LOS B or better in the 1998 With Project condition. Microtel Inn & Suites -Renton, Washington 14 November 1997 Traffic Impact Study 40% na to 0 .44 13 iYi/% .'' 4--IN.- I o en /%//////// 0 -i, o o M ///. ilUPY//.' //'/./ %'/. /'/,;//'.'4 /,// ,�/''' j/' /, "///' %' /; / N.E. 44th St. /V 15% [ . LO 0 7 __4 0 —*. I-405 45% LEGEND 40%] Peak Hour Trip Distribution XXX/XXX A.M./P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volume A NFigure 6. Trip Distribution and Assignment NOT TO SCALE I (I: .= vZ, ctt �� �`� 17 3 � �y � 523 cu • (11. rvy Nm 11% ; t:m ;; N.E. 44h3St.-44 /IF .L tn F- 178 7 235 -* I-405 A N NOT TO SCALE LEGEND XXX/XXX A.M./P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volume Figure 7. 1997 P.M. Peak Hour Traffic Volumes With Project Table 7. 1998 With Project Levels of Service P.M. Peak Hour Unsignalized Intersection LOS Delay (sec) NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard/I-405 Northbound Ramps Northbound Approach B 9.5 Southbound Approach B 6.6 Eastbound Left A 2.7 Westbound Left A 2.9 Lake Washington Boulevard/Denny's-Microtel Inn Driveway Southbound Left • A 0.0 Westbound Approach B 6.6 NE 44th Street/South Project Driveway Eastbound Left A 2.7 Southbound Approach B 7.0 SITE ACCESS Access to the project site would be provided from a new driveway on NE 44th Street and an existing Denny's restaurant driveway on Lake Washington Boulevard. The entering sight distance is restricted by trees and vegetation encroaching the public right-of- way at the northbound approach of the Lake Washington Boulevard/Denny's-Microtel Inn driveway. Based on field measurements, slightly less than 200 feet of entering sight distance exists to the south from the Lake Washington Boulevard/Denny's-Microtel Inn driveway intersection. From the north, over 500 feet of entering sight distance exists. Based on AASHTO standards, the required entering sight distance is 350 feet for a 35 mph roadway. The entering sight distance from the south at the Lake Washington Boulevard/Denny's-Microtel Inn driveway intersection is not sufficient based on a 35 mph roadway speed and AASHTO standards. This entering sight distance can be mitigated by trimming and/or removing the vegetation and trees encroaching on the public right-of-way. The elimination of the trees and vegetation is likely to occur with the construction of the proposed project and would eliminate the entering sight distance problem. The entering sight distance at the NE 44th Street/south project driveway intersection is over 500 feet in both directions. Based on AASHTO standards, the required entering sight distance is 300 feet for a 30 mph roadway. Therefore, the entering sight distance is considered adequate based on the AASHTO standards Microtel Inn & Suites -Renton, Washington 17 November 1997 Traffic Impact Study CONCLUSIONS The following are the findings and recommendations from the traffic analysis: 1. The proposed development is expected to generate 679 daily and 52 p.m. peak hour trips. 2. The study area intersection at NE 44th Street/Lake Washington Boulevard/I-405 Northbound Ramps is projected to operate at LOS D or better for the 1998 Without Project and With Project conditions. Therefore, no off-site mitigation measures are being proposed. 3. Entering sight distance is adequate based on a posted speed limit of 30 mph for NE 44th Street project driveway. The entering sight distance from the north is adequate at the Lake Washington Boulevard/Denny's-Microtel Inn driveway. However, the entering sight distance to the south is not adequate. It is restricted by trees and vegetation encroaching on the right-of-way. 4. Pedestrian and bicycle facilities are limited on NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard. Sidewalks exist only along the frontages of developments an no bicycle lanes exist in the project vicinity. Recommendations 1. Based on the traffic impact analysis documented in this report, no off-site mitigation is needed. 2. The traffic impact fee imposed on this development should be based on a daily trip generation rate of 7.67 trips per occupied room and an occupancy rate of 77 percent. These rates were derived from survey data collected at similar motels in Auburn, Kent, and Bellevue. Based on these rates, the proposed project would generate 679 trips per day. 3. The entering sight distance problem at the Lake Washington Boulevard/Denny's - Microtel Inn driveway intersection can be mitigated by trimming and/or removing the vegetation and trees encroaching on the public right-of-way. The elimination of the trees and vegetation is likely to occur with the construction of the proposed project and would eliminate the entering sight distance problem. Microtel Inn & Suites -Renton, Washington 18 November 1997 Traffic Impact Study Trip Generation Survey Data SITE CODE : BELLEVUE, WA. TRAFFICOUNT PAGE: 1 : DAYS INN DRIVEWAY BETWEEN FILE: HL2987f : HOTEL AND RESTAURANT : TOTAL TRAFFIC DATE: 10/20/ MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY WEEKDAY SATURDAY SUNDAY WEEK 20 21 22 23 24 AVERAGE 25 26 AVERAGI 12:00 AM + + + 2 0 1 * * 1 1:00 + * * 0 5 2 * + 2 2:00 * * * 0 3 1 * * 1 3:00 * * * 0 1 0 * * 0 4:00 * * + 0 2 1 * * 1 5:00 * * + 1 0 0 * * 0 6:00 * * * 6 8 7 * * 7 7:00 + * * 8 4 6 r + 6 8:00 * * * 6 8 7 + * 7 9:00 * * * 8 8 8 + * 8 10:00 * * * 4 4 4 + * 4 11:00 * * * 19 8 13 + + 13 12:00 PM * * * 28 21 24 * * 24 1:00 + * * 9 9 9 * + 9 2:00 * * + 7 5 6 * + 6 3:00 * * * 5 7 6 r * 6 4:00 * * + 7 3 5 * * 5 5:00 + * * 6 8 7 r + 7 6:00 * * * 15 10 12 * * 12 7:00 * * * 8 14 11 * * 11 8:00 * * + 10 7 8 * * 8 9:00 + * * 10 4 7 * * 7 10:00 * * + 10 7 8 * * 8 11:00 * * * 7 2 4 + + 4 LS + * * 176 148 157 * * 157 0 �JG WKJAY * * + 112.1 94.3 % AVG DA: * * * 112.1 94,3 * * AM PEAK 3R * * + 11:00 6:00 11:00 * * 11:00 VOLUME + * * 19 8 13 + * 13 PM PEAK iR * * + 12:00 12:00 12:00 * + 12:00 VOLUME * + + 28 21 24 * * 24 SITE CODE : BELLEVUE, WA. TRAFFICOUNT PAGE: 1 : DAYS INN DRIVEWAY BETWEEN FILE: HL298703 : HOTEL AND RESTAURANT : TOTAL TRAFFIC DATE: 10/23/97 THURSDAY -23 FRIDAY -24 SATURDAY -25 Daily Average BEGIN AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 12:00 0 9 0 8 * * 0 8 12:15 0 10 0 5 * * 0 7 12:30 1 3 0 3 * t 0 3 12:45 1 6 0 5 * * 0 5 1:00 0 2 0 2 * t 0 2 1:15 0 1 5 2 * * 2 1 1:30 0 4 0 2 * * 0 3 1:45 0 2 0 3 * * 0 2 2:00 0 3 0 0 * t 0 1 2:15 0 0 0 4 * * 0 2 2:30 0 1 1 0 * t 0 0 _, 2:45 0 3 2 1 * * 1 2 3:00 0 3 0 2 * * 0 2 3:15 0 1 0 4 * t 0 2 3:30 0 1 0 0 * t 0 0 3:45 0 0 1 1 * t 0 0 4:00 0 2 0 1 * * 0 1 4:15 0 1 0 2 t t 0 1 4:30 0 2 0 0 * * 0 1 4:45 0 2 2 0 * t 1 1 5:00 0 5 0 1 t * 0 3 5:15 1 0 0 4 * t 0 2 5:30 0 0 0 1 * * 0 0 5:45 0 1 0 2 * t 0 1 6:00 2 3 0 2 * t 1 2 `•15 0 8 2 2 t t 1 5 1 3 6 1 * t 3 2 ••-3 3 1 0 5 * t 1 3 7:00 1 6 1 2 * t 1 4 7:15 0 1 3 2 * * 1 1 7:30 5 0 0 6 * * 2 3 7:45 2 1 0 4 * * 1 2 8:00 2 2 0 4 t t 1 3 8:15 0 5 1 2 * t 0 3 8:30 0 3 5 1 t t 2 2 8:45 4 0 2 0 * t 3 0 9:00 1 1 1 0 t * 1 0 9:15 0 5 1 3 * * 0 4 9:30 4 1 3 0 * t 3 ' 0 9:45 3 3 3 1 * •t 3 2 10:00 3 3 2 4 * * 2 3 10:15 1 0 1 3 * * 1 1 10:30 0 2 1 0 * * 0 1 10:45 0 5 0 0 * * 0 2 11:00 0 4 1 1 * * 0 2 11:15 5 0 2 0 t * 3 0 11:30 5 3 2 1 * t 3 2 11:45 9 0 3 0 * * 6 0 TOTALS 54 122 176 51 97 148 * * -2 43 97 PEAK HOUR 9:30 12:00 8:15 12:00 * t 9:30 12:00 VOLUME 11 28 9 21 * t 9 23 P.H.F. 0.69 0.70 0.45 0.66 * * 0.75 0.72 SITE CODE : BELLEVUE, WA. TRAFFICODNT PAGE: 1 : DAYS INN MAIN DRIVEWAY W/O FILE: HL29871" : 156TH AVENUE S.E. : TOTAL TRAFFIC DATE: 10/20/9' MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY WEEKDAY SATURDAY SUNDAY WEEK HUN 20 21 22 23 24 AVERAGE 25 26 AVERAGE 12:00 AM t t * 4 2 3 * * 3 1:00 * * * 1 7 4 t t 4 2:00 * * t 3 2 2 * * 2 3:00 t * * 5 0 2 * * 2 4:00 * t * 5 12 8 * * 8 5:00 * * * 14 7 10 * * 10 6:00 * * t 13 16 14 * * 14 7:00 * * * 37 40 38 t * 38 8:00 * * * 52 65 58 t * 58 9:00 t * t 51 38 44 * t 44 10:00 * t * 34 28 31 * * 31 11:00 * * * 20 35 27 * * 27 12:00 PM * * * 38 31 34 t * 34 1:00 * * t , 32 34 33 * * 33 2:00 * * * 24 25 24 * t 24 3:00 * * t 38 33 35 * * 35 4:00 * * * 32 29 30 t * 30 5:00 t t * 23 27 25 * * 25 6:00 * * * 35 30 32 * t 32 7:00 t * * 32 54 43 t * 43 8:00 * * * 26 30 28 * * 28 9:00 t * t 27 35 31 * * 31 10:00 t * * 29 37 33 * * 33 11:00 * * t 21 6 13 * * 13 LS * * * 596 623 602 * * 602 I. AVG WKDAY * t t 99.0 103.5 AVG DAY * * * 99.0 103.5 * t AM PEAK HR * * t 8:00 8:00 8:00 t * 8:00 VOLUME t * t 52 65 58 * * 58 PM PEAK HR * t * 12:00 7:00 7:00 * * 7:00 VOLUME * * * 38 54 43 * * 43 SITE CODE : BELLEVUE, WA. TRAFFICOUNT PAGE: 1 : DAYS INN MAIN DRIVEWAY W/O FILE: HL298717 : 156TH AVENUE S.E. : TOTAL TRAFFIC DATE: 10/23/97 THURSDAY -23 FRIDAY -24 SATURDAY -25 Daily Average BEGIN AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 12:00 2 7 0 5 * t 1 6 12:15 0 9 0 6 t t 0 7 12:30 2 12 2 11 t * 2 11 12:45 0 10 0 9 * * 0 9 1:00 0 8 1 6 * t 0 7 1:15 1 10 6 4 * t 3 7 1:30 0 10 0 13 * * 0 11 1:45 0 4 0 11 * t 0 7 2:00 0 7 0 3 * t 0 5 2:15 2 5 0 8 * t 1 6 2:30 0 8 2 10 * t 1 9 2:45 1 4 0 4 * * 0 4 3:00 0 11 0 13 * * 0 12 3:15 0 7 0 5 * t 0 6 3:30 2 7 0 9 * * 1 8 3:45 3 13 0 6 * t 1 9 4:00 0 0 4 11 * t 2 5 4:15 0 4 1 3 * t 0 3 4:30 2 14 5 6 * t 3 10 4:45 3 14 2 9 * t 2 11 5:00 2 5 4 5 * t 3 5 5:15 6 15 1 9 * t 3 12 5:30 0 2 0 6 * t 0 4 , 5:45 6 1 2 7 * * 4 4 6:00 2 1 4 7 * t 3 4 `.1.5 2 10 3 5 * * 2 7 0 3 15 3 13 * * 3 14 ...5 6 9 6 5 * t 6 7 7:00 7 6 8 13 * t 7 9 7:15 13 11 19 26 * t 16 18 7:30 15 6 7 6 t t 11 6 7:45 2 9 6 9 * t 4 9 8:00 22 8 15 8 t t 18 8 8:15 10 9 16 8 * t 13 8 8:30 10 5 16 7 * t 13 6 8:45 10 4 18 7 * * 14 5 9:00 19 6 8 8 t t 13 7 9:15 8 7 15 8 * t 11 7 9:30 6 5 7 11 * t 6 8 9:45 18 9 8 8 t . + 13 8 10:00 12 6 9 10 * t 10 8 10:15 6 4 7 15 * * 6 9 10:30 1 7 11 7 * * 6 7 10:45 15 12 1 5 * t 8 8 11:00 5 11 13 0 t t 9 5 11:15 3 7 5 3 * t 4 5 11:30 5 2 7 2 * t 6 2 11:45 7 1 10 1 * * 8 1 TOTALS 239 357 596 252 371 623 * t -2 237 354 PEAK HOUR 7:15 4:30 8:00 6:30 * t 8:00 6:30 VOLUME 52 48 65 57 t t 58 48 P.H.F. 0.59 0.80 0.90 0.55 * t 0.81 0.67 SITE CODE : KENT, WA. TRAFFICODNT PAGE: 1 : DAYS INN MAIN DRIVEWAY N/0 FILE: HL2987( - : WEST MEEKER STREET : TOTAL TRAFFIC DATE: 10/20/: MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY WEEKDAY SATURDAY SUNDAY WEEK uuuiN 20 21 22 23 24 AVERAGE 25 26 AVERAG 12:00 AM * * * 0 0 0 * * 0 1:00 * * t 0 5 2 * * 2 2:00 t * * 3 2 2 * t 2 3:00 * * t 5 1 3 t t 3 4:00 * * * 4 1 2 * t 2 5:00 * * * 5 4 4 t t 4 6:00 * * * 4 3 3 * * 3 7:00 * t * 14 12 13 * * 13 8:00 * * t 13 12 12 t * 12 9:00 * t * 1 7 4 * * 4 10:00 * * t 11 9 10 * * 10 11:00 * * * 12 13 12 * * 12 12:00 PM * * t 18 7 12 * * 12 1:00 * * t , 10 8 9 t t 9 2:00 * * * 7 11 9 t t 9 3:00 * * * 6 8 7 t t 7 4:00 t * t 8 12 10 t * 10 5:00 * * * 13 10 11 * * 11 6:00 * * * 18 19 18 * * 18 7:00 * * * 20 8 14 t t 14 8:00 * * * 19 13 16 * * 16 9:00 * * * 10 4 7 * t 7 10:00 * * * 2 12 7 t * 7 11:00 * t t 4 4 4 * * 4 LS * * t 207 185 191 * * 191 AVG WKDAY * * * 108.4 96.9 % AVG DAY * * * 108.4 96.9 * * AM PEAK HR * * * 7:00 11:00 7:00 t * 7:00 VOLUME * * * 14 13 13 * t 13 PM PEAK HR * * t 7:00 6:00 6:00 * * 6:00 VOLUME * * * 20 19 18 t * 18 SITE CODE : KENT, WA. TRAFFICOUNT PAGE: 1 : DAYS INN MAIN DRIVEWAY N/0 FILE: 1E298707 : WEST MEEKER STREET : TOTAL TRAFFIC DATE: 10/23/97 THURSDAY -23 FRIDAY -24 SATURDAY -25 Daily Average BEGIN AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 12:00 0 14 0 0 * * 0 7 12:15 0 0 0 2 * * 0 1 12:30 0 1 0 1 * * 0 1 12:45 0 3 0 4 * * 0 3 1:00 0 3 2 1 * * 1 2 1:15 0 4 2 1 * * 1 2 1:30 0 1 0 3 * * 0 2 1:45 0 2 1 3 * * 0 2 2:00 1 0 0 0 * * 0 0 2:15 1 1 0 2 * * 0 1 Z:30 1 3 0 6 * * 0 4 2:45 0 3 2 3 * * 1 3 3:00 1 1 0 2 * * 0 1 3:15 3 2 0 4 * * 1 3 3:30 1 2 1 1 * * 1 1 3:45 0 1 0 1 * * 0 1 4:00 0 2 0 5 * * 0 3 4:15 1 1 1 2 * * 1 1 4:30 0 3 0 2 * * 0 2 4:45 3 2 0 3 * * 1 2 5:00 0 0 0 7 * * 0 3 -- 5:15 0 6 1 2 * * 0 4 5:30 3 3 0 1 * * 1 2 5:45 2 4 3 0 * * 2 2 6:00 0 3 1 3 * * 0 3 `•15 0 6 0 5 * * 0 5 3 2 8 1 3 * * 1 5 _S 2 1 1 8 * * 1 4 :00 4 1 5 5 * * 4 3 :15 1 3 2 2 * * 1 2 :30 6 3 2 1 * * 4 2 :45 3 13 3 0 * * 3 6 :00 5 8 4 5 * * 4 6 :15 5 7 0 5 * * 2 6 :30 3 0 4 0 * * 3 0 :45 0 4 4 3 * * 2 3 :00 0 2 3 0 * * 1 1 :15 1 7 1 3 * * 1 5 :30 0 0 2 0 * * 1 0 :45 0 1 1 1 * . * 0 1 1 :00 6 0 6 6 * * 6 3 1 :15 5 2 2 0 * * 3 1 1 :30 0 0 1 4 * * 0 2 1 :45 0 0 0 2 * * 0 1 1 :00 1 1 4 0 * * 2 0 1 :15 0 0 0 1 t * 0 0 1 :30 3 3 5 1 * * 4 2 1 :45 8 0 4 2 * * 6 1 TOTALS 72 135 207 69 116 185 * * -2 59 115 PEAK HOUR 7:30 7:30 7:00 6:15 * * 7:30 7:30 VOLUME 19 31 12 21 * * 13 20 P.H.F. 0.79 0.60 0.60 0.66 * * 0.81 0.83 SITE CODE : KENT, WA. TRAFFICOUNT PAGE: 1 : DRIVEWAY ALONG RESTAURANT TO FILE: HL29870, : ACCESS OVERFLOW HOTEL PARKING : TOTAL TRAFFIC DATE: 10/20/9' MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY WEEKDAY SATURDAY SUNDAY WEEK BEGIN 20 21 22 23 24 AVERAGE 25 26 AVERAGE 12:00 AM t * * 1 0 0 t * 0 1:00 * t * 1 1 1 t * 1 2:00 * t t 0 0 0 t * 0 3:00 t * * 0 0 0 * * 0 4:00 * t t 2 1 1 * * 1 5:00 t * * 0 1 0 * * 0 6:00 t t * 1 2 1 t t 1 7:00 * * t 5 3 4 * * 4 8:00 t t * 4 5 4 * * 4 9:00 t t t 4 2 3 t * 3 10:00 * * * 4 6 5 t * 5 11:00 * * * 10 10 10 * * 10 12:00 PM * t t 4 7 ' 5 t * 5 1:00 * t t , 7 4 5 t * 5 2:00 * t * 2 7 4 t * 4 3:00 * * * 10 9 9 * t 9 4:00 t t t 4 5 4 * * 4 5:00 * * t 7 7 7 t * 7 6:00 * * t 4 4 4 * t 4 7:00 t t * 4 6 5 t * 5 8:00 * * * 4 2 3 t * 3 9:00 t * * 1 1 1 t * 1 10:00 * * t 3 0 1 * * 1 11:00 * * * 1 1 1 t * 1 LS * t * 83 84 78 * * 78 e AVG WKDAY t * * 106.4 107.7 t AVG DAY t * t 106.4 107.7 t * AM PEAK HR * * t 11:00 11:00 11:00 t t 11:00 VOLUME * * * 10 10 10 t * 10 PM PEAK HR t * * 3:00 3:00 3:00 t * 3:00 VOLUME * * t 10 9 9 t t 9 SITE CODS : KENT, WA. TRAFFICOUNT PAGE: 1 : DRIVEWAY ALONG RESTAURANT TO FILE: HL298708 : ACCESS OVERFLOW HOTEL PARKING : TOTAL TRAFFIC DATE: 10/23/97 THURSDAY -23 FRIDAY -24 SATURDAY -25 Daily Average BEGIN AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 12:00 0 4 0 3 * * 0 3 12:15 0 0 0 2 * * 0 1 12:30 0 0 0 0 * * 0 0 12:45 1 0 0 2 * * 0 1 1:00 0 4 0 1 * * 0 2 1:15 0 1 0 0 * * 0 0 1:30 1 2 0 0 * * 0 1 1:45 0 0 1 3 * * 0 1 2:00 0 0 0 1 * * 0 0 2:15 0 0 0 2 * * 0 1 2:30 0 1 0 1 * * 0 1 2:45 0 1 0 3 * * 0 2 3:00 0 2 0 0 * * 0 1 3:15 0 0 0 0 * * 0 0 3:30 0 3 0 3 * * 0 3 3:45 0 5 0 6 * * 0 5 4:00 0 0 0 2 * * 0 1 4:15 0 2 0 0 * * 0 1 4:30 0 2 1 1 * * 0 1 4:45 2 0 0 2 * * 1 1 5:00 0 4 0 3 * * 0 3 5:15 0 3 1 2 * * 0 2 5:30 0 0 0 0 * * 0 0 5:45 0 0 0 2 * * 0 1 6:00 1 1 0 1 * * 0 1 19 0 3 1 3 * * 0 3 I 0 0 1 0 * * 0 0 .,.i 0 0 0 0 * * 0 0 :00 0 1 0 0 * * 0 0 :15 1 2 2 2 * * 1 2 :30 1 0 1 1 * * 1 0 :45 3 1 0 3 * * 1 2 :00 0 1 2 0 * * 1 0 :15 3 0 1 0 * * 2 0 :30 1 2 0 0 * * 0 1 :45 0 1 2 2 * * 1 1 :00 3 0 1 0 * * 2 0 :15 1 1 1 0 * * 1 0 :30 0 0 0 1 * * 0 0 :45 0 0 0 0 * .* 0 0 1 :00 3 0 2 0 * * 2 0 1 :15 0 1 3 0 * * 1 0 1 :30 1 2 0 0 * * 0 1 1 :45 0 0 1 0 * * 0 0 1 :00 3 0 1 0 * * 2 0 1 :15 0 1 2 0 * * 1 0 1 :30 1 0 2 0 * * 1 0 1 :45 6 0 5 1 * * 5 0 TOTALS 32 51 83 31 53 84 * * -2 23 43 PEAK HOUR 7:15 3:30 11:00 3:30 * * 11:00 3:30 VOLUME 5 8 10 11 * * 9 10 P.H.F. 0.42 0.40 0.50 0.46 * * 0.45 0.50 SITE COIF : KENT, WA. TRAFFICOUNT PAGE: 1 : DRIVEWAY BETWEEN HOTEL AND FILE: HL2987G : RESTAURANT PARKING LOTS TOTAL TRAFFIC DATE: 10/20/c MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY WEEKDAY SATURDAY SUNDAY WEEK 13uG1N 20 21 22 23 24 AVERAGE 25 26 AVERAG 12:00 AN * * * 0 0 0 * * 0 1:00 * * * 0 1 0 * * 0 2:00 * * * 3 0 1 * * 1 3:00 * * * 3 3 3 * * 3 4:00 * * * 3 2 2 * * 2 5:00 * * * 2 2 2 * * 2 6:00 * * * 0 2 1 * * 1 7:00 * * * 3 2 2 * * 2 8:00 * * * 3 5 4 * * 4 9:00 * * * 3 4 3 * * 3 10:00 * * * 4 3 3 * * 3 11:00 * * * 3 2 2 * * 2 12:00 PN * * * 5 8 6 * * 6 1:00 * * * 1 2 1 * * 1 2:00 * * * 2 3 2 * * 2 3:00 * * * 0 2 1 * * 1 4:00 * * * 0 1 0 * * 0 5:00 * * * 2 3 2 * * 2 6:00 * * * 2 1 1 * * 1 7:00 * * 0 4 2 * * 2 8:00 * * * 3 1 2 * * 2 9:00 * * * 2 1 1 * * 1 10:00 * * * 2 1 1 * * 1 11:00 * * * 1 0 0 * * 0 �S * * * 47 53 42 * 42 AVG WKDAY * * * 111.9 126.2 's AVG DAY * * * 111,9 126.2 * * AM PEAK 3R * * * 10:00 8:00 8:00 * * 8:00 VOLUME * * * 4 5 4 * 4 PM PEAK 3R * * * 12:00 12:00 12:00 * * 12:00 VOLUME * * * 5 8 6 * * 6 SITE CODE : KENT, WA. TRAFFICOUNT PAGE: 1 : DRIVEWAY BETWEEN HOTEL AND FILE: HL298706 : RESTAURANT PARKING LOTS : TOTAL TRAFFIC DATE: 10/23/97 THURSDAY -23 FRIDAY -24 SATURDAY -25 Daily Average BEGIN AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 12:00 0 4 0 4 t * 0 4 12:15 0 0 0 2 * * 0 1 12:30 0 1 0 2 * * 0 1 12:45 0 0 0 0 * * 0 0 1:00 0 1 0 0 * * 0 0 1:15 0 0 1 0 * * 0 0 1:30 0 0 0 1 * * 0 0 1:45 0 0 0 1 * * 0 0 2:00 2 0 0 0 * * 1 0 2:15 0 2 0 2 * * 0 2 2:30 1 0 0 1 * * 0 0 2:45 0 0 0 0 * * 0 0 3:00 0 0 1 1 * * 0 0 3:15 1 0 1 0 * * 1 0 3:30 2 0 0 1 * * 1 0 3:45 0 0 1 0 t * 0 0 4:00 1 0 0 0 * * 0 0 4:15 0 0 0 0 * * 0 0 4:30 2 0 1 0 * t 1 0 4:45 0 0 1 1 t * 0 0 5:00 0 2 0 2 * * 0 2 5:15 0 0 0 0 * * 0 0 5:30 1 0 2 0 * * 1 0 5:45 1 0 0 1 t * 0 0 6:00 0 0 0 1 * t 0 0 r 15 0 1 0 0 * * 0 0 ) 0 0 0 0 t t 0 0 _._3 0 1 2 0 * t 1 0 7:00 0 0 1 2 * * 0 1 7:15 2 0 0 0 * * 1 0 7:30 1 0 1 0 * * 1 0 7:45 0 0 0 2 * * 0 1 8:00 1 2 0 1 t * 0 1 8:15 2 0 2 0 * t 2 0 8:30 0 1 3 0 * * 1 0 8:45 0 0 0 0 * t 0 0 9:00 2 0 0 1 * * 1 0 9:15 0 0 2 0 t * 1 0 _ 9:30 0 1 1 0 * t 0 0 9:45 1 1 1 0 * ,t 1 0 10:00 1 0 0 0 * * 0 0 10:15 1 0 2 0 * * 1 0 10:30 0 0 1 0 * t 0 0 10:45 2 2 0 1 * t 1 1 11:00 0 0 1 0 t * 0 0 11:15 0 0 0 0 * * 0 0 11:30 0 1 0 0 * * 0 0 11:45 3 0 1 0 t * 2 0 TOTALS 27 20 47 26 27 53 * * -2 18 14 PEAK HOUR 3:15 12:00 8:15 12:00 * * 8:15 12:00 VOLUME 3 4 5 8 * * 3 6 P.H.F. 0.38 0.25 0.42 0.50 * * 0.38 0.38 SITE CO1E : AUBURN, WA. TRAFFICOUNT PAGE: 1 : COMFORT INN DRIVEWAY N/0 FILE: HL29871 : 16TH STREET : TOTAL TRAFFIC DATE: 10/20/9' MONDAY TUESDAY WEDNESDAY THURSDAY FRIDAY WEEKDAY SATURDAY SUNDAY WEEK nstiN 20 21 22 23 24 AVERAGE 25 26 AVERAGE 12:00 Al, * * 2 2 * 2 * * 2 1:00 * * 2 0 * 1 * * 1 2:00 * * 3 3 * 3 * * 3 3:00 * * 0 4 * 2 * * 2 4:00 * * 7 2 * 4 * * 4 5:00 * * 2 0 * 1 * * 1 6:00 * * 9 10 * 9 * * 9 7:00 * * 28 31 * 29 * * 29 8:00 * * 25 15 * 20 * * 20 9:00 * * 23 12 * 17 * * 17 10:00 * * 10 18 * 14 * * 14 11:00 * * 23 13 * 18 * * 18 12:00 PN * * 32 14 * 23 * * 23 1:00 * * 8 9 * 8 * * 8 2:00 * t 8 16 * 12 * * 12 3:00 * * 36 31 * 33 * * 33 4:00 * * 32 39 * 35 * * 35 5:00 * t 28 29 * 28 * * 28 6:00 * t 32 14 * 23 * * 23 7:00 * * 20 10 * 15 * * 15 8:00 * * 17 15 * 16 * * 16 9:00 * * 5 5 * 5 * * 10:00 * * 17 13 * 15 * * 15 11:00 * * 2 7 * 4 * * 4 ..,S * * 371 312 * 337 * * 337 . AVG WKDAY * * 110.1 92.6 * % AVG DAY * * 110.1 92.6 * * * AM PEAK HR * * 7:00 7:00 * 7:00 * * 7:00 VOLUME * * 28 31 * 29 * * 29 PM PEAK 3R * * 3:00 4:00 * 4:00 * * 4:00 VOLUME * * 36 39 * 35 * * 35 SITE CO[E : AUBURN, WA. TRAFFICOUNT PAGE: 1 : COMFORT INN DRIVEWAY N/0 FILE: HL29871 : 16TH STREET : TOTAL TRAFFIC DATE: 10/22/9" WEDNESDAY -22 THURSDAY -23 FRIDAY -24 Daily Average BEGIN AM PM AM PM AM PM AM PM 12:00 0 4 1 1 * * 2 12:15 2 6 1 4 t t 5 12:30 0 12 0 7 t t 9 12:45 0 10 0 2 t * 6 1:00 0 5 0 2 t t 3 1:15 0 0 0 4 * t 2 1:30 2 1 0 1 * * 1 1:45 0 2 0 2 * t 2 2:00 3 1 0 1 t * 1 2:15 0 2 3 2 * t 2 2:30 0 3 0 6 * * 4 2:45 0 2 0 7 r * 4 3:00 0 4 0 8 * * 6 3:15 0 2 0 14 * t 8 3:30 0 10 0 6 * t 8 3:45 0 20 4 3 t t 11 4:00 5 4 0 8 t * 6 4:15 0 6 0 13 * t 9 4:30 2 9 0 6 t * 7 4:45 0 13 2 12 * * 12 5:00 0 4 0 12 t * 8 5:15 0 13 0 3 t * 8 5:30 1 4 0 6 * * 5 5:45 1 7 0 8 * t 7 6:00 0 10 0 3 * * 6 p•15 1 10 3 1 t * . 1 4 5 3 6 * * 5 ,.,5 4 7 4 4 * * 5 7:00 7 4 14 1 * * 1 2 7:15 7 9 9 4 * * 6 7:30 3 6 5 2 * * 4 7:45 11 1 3 3 * * 2 8:00 3 4 4 6 t t 5 8:15 4 2 0 1 * t 8:30 5 4 3 0 * t 2 8:45 13 7 8 8 t * 1 7 9:00 5 1 2 1 t * 1 9:15 4 2 0 1 * * 9:30 3 0 10 3 * * 1 9:45 11 2 0 0 t ' t 1 10:00 2 1 8 6 t * 3 10:15 6 7 7 2 * * 4 10:30 2 1 3 1 * * 1 10:45 0 8 0 4 t * 6 11:00 2 0 1 4 t t 2 11:15 3 1 2 0 t * 0 11:30 14 1 3 2 * * 1 11:45 4 0 7 1 * * 0 TOTALS 134 237 371 110 202 312 * t -2 112 207 PEAK HOUF 7:00 3:30 6:45 4:15 * * 7:00 4:15 VOLUME 28 40 32 43 * * 29 36 P.H.F. 0.64 0.50 0.57 0.83 * * 0.73 0.75 A/3,/R A/ 5./7-6- - 44-z Ae.-04›,- CeAl% STD 3 G oca7ios5 ;--J i $ ---/- , Oiri-- / C-11/W(lia,-4fty —___ -4)\\itif\ lk(ri\4 P. iki p44_,, - / t-7 —'- X ctfri/'/ i 0. Pr'' eoi-IF') -61 /''- i-J,,,,1 frd 0A4 ati6 I s APPENDIX Level of Service Calculations T- HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1d Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets : (N-S) LK WA BLVD/I-405 NB (E-W) NE 44TH STREET Major Street Direction EW Length of Time Analyzed 15 (min) Analyst JHL Date of Analysis 11/17/97 Other Information 1997 EXISTING CONDITION - PM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No . Lanes 1 1 . < 0 1 1 1 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 89 111 89 49 99 27 13 116 97 23 27 125 PHF . 85 . 85 . 85 . 93 . 93 . 93 . 89 . 89 . 89 . 95 . 95 . 95 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC' s (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV' s (%) 1 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 CV' s (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PCE' s 1 . 01 1 . 02 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 . 50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 . 30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 . 50 3 . 40 1 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1d Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection t Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 184 106 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1117 1224 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1117 1224 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 90 0 . 89 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 236 135 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1323 1478 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1323 1478 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 96 0 . 93 Step 3 : TH from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 476 500 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 614 596 Capacity Adjustment Factor -- due to Impeding Movements 0 . 89 0 . 89 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 547 531 Prob . of Queue-Free State : 0 . 76 0 . 95 Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 528 582 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 524 487 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 . 84 0 . 68 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 88 0 . 75 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 78 0 . 68 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 411 329 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 15 411 > NB T 131 547 > 684 8 . 4 1 . 9 B 8 . 4 NB R 110 1117 > SB L 24 329 > SB T 28 531 > 789 6 . 0 1 . 0 B 6 . 0 SB R 133 1224 > EB L 106 1478 2 . 6 0 . 1 A 0 . 8 WB L 54 1323 2 . 8 0 . 0 A 0 . 8 Intersection Delay = 3 . 8 sec/veh HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1d LKW44WO.HCO Page Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets : (N-S) LK WA BLVD/I-405 NB (E-W) NE 44TH STREET Major Street Direction EW Length of Time Analyzed 15 (min) Analyst JHL Date of Analysis 11/17/97 Other Information 1998 WITHOUT PROJECT - PM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 1 . < 0 1 1 1 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 90 112 90 50 100 28 13 117 98 23 28 126 PHF . 85 . 85 . 85 . 93 . 93 . 93 . 89 . 89 . 89 . 95 . 95 . 95 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC' s (o) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV' s (o) 1 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 CV' s (o) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PCE' s 1 . 00 1 . 02 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (t f) Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 . 50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 . 30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 . 50 3 . 40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1d LKW44WO.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 185 108 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1116 1221 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1116 1221 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 90 0 . 89 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 238 138 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1320 1473 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1320 1473 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 96 0 . 93 Step 3 : TH from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 483 506 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 609 592 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 89 0 . 89 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 542 527 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 76 0 . 94 Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 534 588 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 520 483 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 . 84 0 . 67 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 88 0 . 75 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 78 0 . 67 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 406 325 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 15 406 > NB T 132 542 > 679 8 . 5 1 . 9 B 8 . 5 NB R 111 1116 > SB L 24 325 > SB T 29 527 > 784 6 . 0 1 . 0 B 6 . 0 SB R 134 1221 > EB L 106 1473 2 . 6 0 . 1 A 0 . 8 WB L 55 1320 2 . 8 0 . 0 A 0 . 8 Intersection Delay = 3 . 9 sec/veh HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1d LKW44WP.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets : (N-S) LK WA BLVD/I-405 NB (E-W) NE 44TH STREET Major Street Direction EW Length of Time Analyzed 15 (min) Analyst JHL Date of Analysis 11/17/97 • Other Information 1998 WITH PROJECT - PM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 1 1 , < 0 1 1 1 0 > 1 < 0 0 > 1 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 103 116 90 52 103 28 13 127 103 23 35 136 PHF . 85 . 85 . 85 . 93 . 93 . 93 . 89 . 89 . 89 . 95 . 95 . 95 Grade 0 0 0 0 MC' s (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SU/RV' s (%) 1 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 CV' s (%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 PCE' s 1 . 00 1 . 02 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 1 . 01 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 . 50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 . 30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 . 50 3 . 40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1d LKW44WP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 189 111 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1111 1216 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1111 1216 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 89 0 . 88 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 242 141 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1315 1469 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1315 1469 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 96 0 . 92 Step 3 : TH from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 507 530 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 591 575 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 88 0 . 88 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 519 505 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 72 0 . 93 Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 567 622 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 497 462 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 . 81 0 . 63 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 86 0 . 72 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 76 0 . 64 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 375 296 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) NB L 15 375 > NB T 144 519 > 653 9 . 5 2 . 2 B 9 . 5 NB R 117 1111 > SB L 24 296 > SB T 37 505 > 752 6 . 6 1 . 2 B 6 . 6 SB R 144 1216 > EB L 121 1469 2 . 7 0 . 2 A 0 . 9 WB L 57 1315 2 . 9 0 . 0 A 0 . 8 Intersection Delay = 4 . 3 sec/veh HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1d LKWDNYWP.HCO Page 1 Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets : (N-S) LK WA BLVD/I-405 NB (E-W) DENNY' S DRIVEWAY Major Street Direction NS Length of Time Analyzed 15 (min) Analyst JHL Date of Analysis 11/17/97 Other Information 1998 WITH PROJECT - PM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Northbound Southbound Eastbound Westbound L T R L T R L T R L T R --- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- ---- No. Lanes 0 1 . < 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 235 23 0 177 17 0 PHF . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 . 9 Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (%) 0 0 0 SU/RV' s (o) 2 0 0 CV' s (o) 0 0 0 PCE' s 1 . 01 1 . 00 1 . 00 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5 . 00 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 . 50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 00 3 . 30 Left Turn Minor Road 6 . 50 3 . 40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1d LKWDNYWP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 274 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1006 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1006 Prob. of Queue-Free State: 1 . 00 Step 2 : LT from Major Street SB NB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 287 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1251 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1251 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 1 . 00 Step 4 : LT from Minor Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 471 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 565 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 1 . 00 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 1 . 00 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 565 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) WB L 19 565 > 565 6 . 6 0 . 0 . B 6 . 6 WB R 0 1006 > SB L 0 1251 2 . 9 0 . 0 A 0 . 0 Intersection Delay = 0 . 2 sec/veh HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1d 44SDRWP.HCO Page Center For Microcomputers In Transportation University of Florida 512 Weil Hall Gainesville, FL 32611-2083 Ph: (904) 392-0378 Streets : (N-S) NE 44TH STREET (E-W) SOUTH DRIVEWAY Major Street Direction EW Length of Time Analyzed 15 (min) Analyst JHL Date of Analysis 11/17/97 Other Information 1998 WITH PROJECT - PM PEAK HOUR Two-way Stop-controlled Intersection Eastbound Westbound Northbound Southbound L T R L T R L T R L T R No. Lanes 0 > 2 • 0 0 2 < 0 0 0 0 0 > 0 < 0 Stop/Yield N N Volumes 7 235 178 0 5 PHF . 85 . 85 . 93 . 93 . 9 . Grade 0 0 0 MC' s (%) 0 0 SU/RV' s (%) 1 2 CV' s (%) 0 0 PCE' s 1 . 00 1 . 01 1 . 0 Adjustment Factors Vehicle Critical Follow-up Maneuver Gap (tg) Time (tf) Left Turn Major Road 5 . 50 2 . 10 Right Turn Minor Road 5 . 50 2 . 60 Through Traffic Minor Road 6 . 50 3 . 30 Left Turn Minor Road 7 . 00 3 . 40 HCS : Unsignalized Intersections Release 2 . 1d 44SDRWP.HCO Page 2 Worksheet for TWSC Intersection Step 1 : RT from Minor Street NB SB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 96 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1238 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1238 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 1 . 00 Step 2 : LT from Major Street WB EB Conflicting Flows : (vph) 191 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 1354 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 1354 Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 99 TH Saturation Flow Rate : (pcphpl) 3400 RT Saturation Flow Rate : (pcphpl) Major LT Shared Lane Prob. of Queue-Free State : 0 . 99 Step 4 : LT from Minor Street NB SB -- Conflicting Flows : (vph) 475 Potential Capacity: (pcph) 526 Major LT, Minor TH Impedance Factor: 0 . 99 Adjusted Impedance Factor: 0 . 99 Capacity Adjustment Factor due to Impeding Movements 0 . 99 Movement Capacity: (pcph) 523 Intersection Performance Summary Avg. 95% Flow Move Shared Total Queue Approach Rate Cap Cap Delay Length LOS Delay Movement (pcph) (pcph) (pcph) (sec/veh) (veh) (sec/veh) SB L 6 523 > 523 7 . 0 0 . 0 B 7 . 0 SB R 0 1238 > EB L 8 1354 2 . 7 0 . 0 A 0 . 1 Intersection Delay = 0 . 1 sec/veh ///Ik./viiiI .a1\\\ II/III�'�II... 7I&t/III\ mum1UUI iUI■Iu1iII INOIMMSMA AIM IIIIMr" AV GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION MICROTEL HOTEL INTERSTATE 405 AND KENNYDALE HILL RENTON, WASHINGTON PROJECT No. 066-97070 DECEMBER 8, 1997 Prepared for: MR. MICHAEL CABE WESTERN STEEL,INC. 1044 INDUSTRY WAY G`‘I • SEATTLE, WA 98188-4801 1230 � G SON Prepared by: KRAZAN& ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING DIVISION 25418 SEVENTY-FOURTH AVENUE SOUTH KENT, WASHINGTON 98042 (253) 854-1300 azari & ASSOCIATES, INC. GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING AND INSPECTION ===IKraZ2ulT1.. & ASSOCIATES , INC . GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION December 8, 1997 KA Project No. 066-97070 Mr. Michael Cabe Western Steel, Inc. 1044 Industry Way Seattle, WA 98188-4801 RE: Geotechnical Engineering Investigation Microtel Hotel Interstate 405 and Kennydale Hill Renton,Washington Dear Mr. Cabe: In accordance with your request, we have revised our Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the above-referenced site, dated March 6, 1997. The results of our investigation are presented in the attached report. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (253) 854-1330 or(800) 800-6039. • Respectfully submitted, Ex.4 KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. of WA.sf�i 4'c; d E • 4,f, 0 7) C aft( ' DEAN ALEXANDER 44, R°t%030508 O �`° Registered Professional Engineer OA. QNAI.QvS> RPE No. 30508 DA:kcp EXPIRES. CT 1 2 1998' Offices Serving The Western United States 25418 Seventy-Fourth Avenue South•Kent, WA 98042•(253)854-1330•(800)800-6039•Fax:(253)854-1757 06697070.D02 �aZarl & ASS o CIATES , INC . GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 PURPOSE AND SCOPE 1 PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION 2 SITE DESCRIPTION AND SITE HISTORY 2 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS 3 SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS 3 GROUNDWATER 3 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 4 Administrative Summary 4 Groundwater Influence on Structures/Construction 4 Site Preparation 5 Engineered Fill 6 Drainage and Landscaping 7 Utility Trench Backfill 7 Excavation Stability 8 Shallow Foundations 9 Foundations-Caissons 9 Foundations-Driven Piles 10 Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork 11 Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Walls 11 R-Value Test Results and Pavement Design 12 Compacted Material Acceptance 13 Testing and Inspection 14 LIMITATIONS 14 SITE PLAN 16 LOGS OF BORINGS (1 THRU 3) Appendix A LOGS OF TEST PITS (1 THRU 8) Appendix A GENERAL EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS Appendix B GENERAL PAVING SPECIFICATIONS Appendix C Offices Serving The Western United States 215 West Dakota Avenue•Clovis CA 93612•(209)348-2200•(800)800-0711•Fax:(209)348-2201 06697070.D02 1- TKrazanASSOCATES , INC . GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION December 8, 1997 KA Project No. 066-97070 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING INVESTIGATION MICROTEL HOTEL INTERSTATE 405 AND KENNYDALE HILL RENTON,WASHINGTON INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for the proposed Microtel Hotel to be located at Interstate 405 and Kennydale Hill in Renton, Washington. Discussions regarding site conditions are presented herein, together with conclusions and recommendations pertaining to site preparation, Engineered Fill, utility trench backfill, drainage and landscaping, foundations, concrete floor slabs and exterior flatwork, retaining walls, soil corrosively, and pavements. A site plan showing the approximate boring locations is presented following the text of this report. A description of the field investigation, boring logs, and the boring log legend are presented in Appendix A. Appendix A contains a description of laboratory testing phase of this study; along with laboratory test results. Appendices B and C contain guides to earthwork and pavement specifications. When conflicts in the text of the report occur with the general specifications in the appendices, the recommendations in the text of the report have precedence. PURPOSE AND SCOPE This investigation was conducted to evaluate the soil and groundwater conditions at the site, to make geotechnical engineering recommendations for use in design of specific construction elements, and to provide criteria for site preparation and Engineered Fill construction. Our scope of services was outlined as follows: • A site reconnaissance by a member of our engineering staff to evaluate the surface conditions at the project site. • A field investigation consisting of placing 3 exploratory soil borings, ranging in depth from 30 to 35 feet, and 8 backhoe pits to depths of 10 and 15 feet. A field investigation was performed to evaluate the subsurface soil conditions at the project site. Offices Serving The Western United States 25418 Seventy-Fourth Avenue South•Kent, WA 98042•(253)854-1330•(800)800-6039•Fax:(253)854-1757 06697070.D02 l KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 2 • Performing laboratory tests on representative soil samples obtained from the borings to evaluate the physical and index properties of the subsurface soils. • Evaluation of the data obtained from the investigation and an engineering analysis to provide recommendations for use in the project design and preparation of construction specifications. • Preparation of this report summarizing the results, conclusions, recommendations and findings of our investigation. PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION We understand that design of the proposed development is currently underway, and structural load information and other final details pertaining to the structures are unavailable. On a preliminary basis, it is understood that the development will consist of a three-story wood frame structure. The hotel will have a total of 115 rooms. On-site parking and landscaping are also planned. Footing loads are anticipated to be light to moderate. In the event these structural or grading details are inconsistent with the final design criteria, the Soils Engineer should be notified so that we may update this writing as applicable. SITE DESCRIPTION AND SITE HISTORY The proposed site for the Renton Microtel hotel is a vacant, 1.8-plus-acre parcel east of Interstate 405 at the northeast corner of northeast 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard, in the southwest quadrant of Section 29, Township 24 North, Range 5 East. The site is located in the Arterial Commercial Zone at the northwestern extremity of the city of Renton. The site is currently undeveloped and never has been developed. An on-site creek is located along the western property line. There is minimal vegetation with the exception of the wooded area along • the creek which is overgrown with blackberry bushes; the remainder of the property currently serves as a graveled temporary parking area. The eastern portion of the site slopes to the north with grades up to 5 percent. The topography of the site suggests that the property has been raised with fill. The fill placement is like related to the construction of Interstate 405. GEOLOGIC SETTING A review of topographic, geologic, and hydrologic data was conducted to determine the regional setting and environmental conditions within the area of the subject property. The site is in the Puget Sound Lowland just east of Lake Washington. Geologically, the site is located on the Newcastle Promontory, underlain by fine-gained arkosic sandstone containing subordinate amounts of siltstone, shale, and coal (Galster & LaPrade, 1991). Native site soils are mapped as Bellingham Silt Loam (SCS, 1967). Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 3 FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS A field investigation, consisting of placing 11 test holes, ranging in depth from 15 to 35 feet, was performed to evaluate the subsurface soil conditions at the project site. Three of the test holes were borings drilled to depths of approximately 30 to 35 feet. Eight of the test holes were test pits dug to depths of approximately 15 feet. In addition, 1 bulk subgrade soil sample was obtained from the pavement area for laboratory R-value testing. The approximate boring sample locations are shown on the site map. During drilling operations, penetration tests were performed at regular intervals to evaluate the soil consistency, obtain information regarding the engineering properties of the subsoils, and to retain soil samples for laboratory testing. The soils encountered were continuously examined and visually classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. A more detailed description of the field investigation is presented in Appendix A. Laboratory tests were performed on selected soil samples to evaluate their physical characteristics and engineering properties. The laboratory testing program was formulated with emphasis on the evaluation of natural moisture, density, gradation, shear strength, consolidation potential, and moisture-density relationships of the materials encountered. Details of the laboratory test program and the results of laboratory test are summarized in Appendix A. This information, along with the field observations, was used to prepare the final boring logs in Appendix A. SOIL PROFILE AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS The upper soils within the site consisted of 13 to 15 feet of fill. The fill consisted of sandy clayey silt and sandy silt with clay. A minor to moderate amount of construction debris was associated with the fill. Field and laboratory tests indicate that this fill material has been loosely placed and not properly compacted. Below 13 to 15 feet, 12 to 15 feet of loose sandy silt, sandy silty clay, or silty sand were encountered. Field and laboratory tests suggest that these soils have moderate strength characteristics and are • slightly compressible. Below 27 to 30 feet, a medium dense clayey sand, silty sand, or silty clay was encountered. Field and laboratory tests suggests that these soils are moderately strong and only slightly compressible. These soils extended to the termination depth of our test borings. For additional information about the soils encountered, please refer to the logs of borings in Appendix A. GROUNDWATER Test boring locations were checked for the presence of groundwater during and immediately following the drilling operations. Free groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from 12 to 25 feet. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 4 It should be recognized that water table elevations may fluctuate with time, being dependent upon seasonal precipitation, irrigation, land use, and climatic conditions as well as other factors. Therefore, water level observations at the time of the field investigation may vary from those encountered during the construction phase of the project. The evaluation of such factors is beyond the scope of this report. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on the findings of our field and laboratory investigations, along with previous geotechnical experience in the project area, the following is a summary of our evaluations, conclusions and recommendations. Administrative Summary Of primary importance in site development is the existence of 13 to 15 feet of fill over the site. The fill material is predominantly sandy silt with clay and sandy clayey silt. A minor to moderate amount of the construction debris is associated with the fill. This fill material has been loosely placed and not properly compacted. Accordingly, for shallow foundation systems, it is recommended that this fill material be removed and recompacted. Prior to re-use, the fill material should be cleansed of excessive organics and debris. Inert construction debris less than 6 inches in diameter may be re-used within the fill. The fill material has a moderate swell potential in a recompacted state. This fill material should be compacted at or above optimum moisture. In addition, it is recommended that the upper 12 inches of soil within the building area consist of non-expansive Engineered Fill. The non-expansive Engineered Fill should have a Uniform Building Code Expansion Index less than 15. In lieu of the removal and recompaction of the fill material, the building can be supported on a deep foundation system. The deep system can consist of drilled cast-in-place concrete piers or driven piles. . If a deep foundation system is utilized, no deep removal and/or recompaction is required. Depending on the specific site preparation, the proposed building can be supported on a shallow or a deep foundation system. Allowable bearing pressures for each alternative is provided within the Foundations sections. Groundwater Influence on Structures/Construction During our field investigation, groundwater was encountered at depths ranging from 12 to 25 feet. If groundwater is encountered, our firm should be consulted, prior to de-watering the site. Installation of a stand pipe piezometer is suggested prior to construction should groundwater levels be a concern. It is anticipated that groundwater will be encountered in the construction of drilled piers. The presence of water may require that the caisson be cased. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 5 In addition to the groundwater level, if earthwork is performed during or soon after periods of precipitation, the subgrade soils may become saturated, pump, or not respond to densification techniques. Typical remedial measures include discing and aerating the soil during dry weather; mixing the soil with dryer materials; removing and replacing the soil with an approved fill material; or mixing the soil with an approved lime or cement product. Our firm should be consulted prior to implementing remedial measures to observe the unstable subgrade conditions and provide appropriate recommendations. Site Preparation General site clearing should include removal of vegetation, existing utilities, structures including foundations, basement walls and floors, existing stockpiled soil, trees and associated root systems, rubble, rubbish and any loose and/or saturated materials. Presently, the site is occupied by several structures and pavement. It is suspected that demolition activities of the existing structures will disturb the upper soils. It is recommended that disturbed soils be removed and/or recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Thirteen to fifteen feet of fill is located within the site. This fill material does not have sufficient strength characteristics to support the proposed structure. It is recommended that this fill material be removed and recompacted. This fill material has a minor to moderate amount of construction debris and wood. This fill material will be suitable for re-use as an Engineered Fill provided that it is cleansed of excessive organics and debris. Inert construction debris less than 6 inches in diameter may be re-used within the fill. The fill material should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. The moisture content within the fill should be at or above optimum moisture. The upper 12 inches of the building should consist of non-expansive Engineered Fill. The fill material should be a silty sand or sandy silt with a Uniform Building Code Expansion Index of less than 15. The fill material should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. In lieu of removal and recompaction of the fill material, the building may be supported on a deep foundation system. The deep foundation system should consist of drilled cast-in-place concrete piers or driven piles. Within the proposed pavement areas, it is recommended that the fill material be removed and/or recompacted. The fill materials should be compacted to near optimum moisture to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. As an alternative, the owner may elect not to recompact the existing fill within paved areas. However, the owner should be aware that the paved areas may settle, which may require annual maintenance. At a minimum, it is recommended that the upper 12 inches of subgrade soil be moisture-conditioned to near optimum moisture and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 6 The upper soils, during wet winter months, become very moist due to the absorption characteristics of the soil. Earthwork operations performed during winter months may encounter very moist unstable soils, which may require removal to grade a stable building foundation. Project site winterization consisting of placement of aggregate base and protecting exposed soils during the construction phase should be performed. Excavations, depressions, or soft and pliant areas extending below planned finished subgrade levels should be cleaned to firm, undisturbed soil and backfilled with Engineered Fill. Any buried structures encountered during construction should be properly removed and backfilled. In general, any septic tanks, debris pits, cesspools, or similar structures should be entirely removed. Concrete footings should be removed to an equivalent depth of at least 3 feet below proposed footing elevations or as recommended by the Soils Engineer. Any other buried structures should be removed in accordance with the recommendations of the Soils Engineer. Resulting excavations should be backfilled with Engineered Fill. A representative of our firm should be present during all site clearing and grading operations to test and observe earthwork construction. This testing and observation is an integral part of our service as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction of the material and the stability of the material. The Soils Engineer may reject any material that does not meet compaction and stability requirements. Further recommendations of this report are predicated upon the assumption that earthwork construction will conform to recommendations set forth in this section and the Engineered Fill section. Engineered Fill The organic-free on-site native soil is predominantly silty sand, sandy silt, clayey silt, and silty clay. The sandy soils will be suitable for reuse as non-expansive Engineered Fill provided it is cleansed of excessive organics and debris. The clayey soils, however, will not be suitable for re-use as non- expansive Engineered Fill. These soils will be suitable for re-use as general Engineered Fill provided they are moisture conditioned at or above optimum moisture and cleansed of excessive organics and debris. The organic-free on-site fill material is predominantly clayey silt and sandy silt with debris. The clayey soils will not be suitable for re-use as non-expansive Engineered Fill. These fill soils will be suitable for use as Engineered Fill provided that they are cleansed of excessive organics and debris. Inert construction debris may be used within the fill provided that the diameter of the material is less than 6 inches. These soils should be moisture conditioned to at or above optimum moisture. The preferred materials specified for Engineered Fill are suitable for most applications with the exception of exposure to erosion. Project site winterization and protection of exposed soils during the construction phase should be the sole responsibility of the Contractor, since he has complete control of the project site at that time. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 7 Imported fill material should be predominantly nonexpansive granular material with a plasticity index less than 10 and a UBC Expansion Index less than 15. Imported fill should be free from rocks and lumps greater than 4 inches in diameter. All import fill material should be submitted for approval to the Soils Engineer at least 48 hours prior to delivery to the site. Fill soils should be placed in lifts approximately 6 inches thick, moisture-conditioned as necessary and compacted to achieve at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density as determined by ASTM D1557. Additional lifts should not be placed if the previous lift did not meet the required dry density or if soil conditions are not stable. Drainage and Landscaping The ground surface should slope away from building pad and pavement areas toward appropriate drop inlets or other surface drainage devices. It is recommended that adjacent exterior grades be sloped a minimum of 2 percent for a minimum distance of 5 feet away from structures. Subgrade soils in pavement areas should be sloped a minimum of 1 percent and drainage gradients maintained to carry all surface water to collection facilities and off site. These grades should be maintained for the life of the project. Utility Trench Backfill Utility trenches should be excavated according to accepted engineering practice following OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration) standards by a contractor experienced in such work. The responsibility for the safety of open trenches should be borne by the contractor. Traffic and vibration adjacent to trench walls should be minimized and cyclic wetting and drying of excavation side slopes should be avoided. Depending upon the location and depth of some utility trenches, groundwater flow into open excavations could be experienced, especially during or shortly following periods of precipitation. Sandy soil conditions were encountered throughout the site. These cohesionless soils have a tendency to cave in trench wall excavations. Shoring or sloping back trench sidewalls may be required within these sandy soils. Utility trench backfill placed in or adjacent to buildings and exterior slabs should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density(ASTM D1557). The upper two feet of the utility trench backfill placed in pavement areas should be compacted to at least 90 percent of the maximum dry density (ASTM D1557). Pipe bedding should be in accordance with pipe manufacturer's recommendations. The contractor is responsible for removing all water sensitive settlement from the trench regardless of the backfill location and compaction requirements. The contractor should use appropriate equipment and methods to avoid damage to the utilities and/or structures during fill placement and compaction. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 8 Excavation Stability Temporary excavations planned for the removal of fill material may be excavated, according to the accepted engineering practice following Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards by a contractor experienced in such work. Open, unbraced excavations in undisturbed soils should be made according to the table below. ... ........:.:::..::::...: ;> ccayatyon:;iiopes:>;;;::»»:::::.::::>:::.>::::::::;:.:::::::::::><:: P ( ) pe�Hor.izontal 'fi�ertrcal�: Temporary 0-5 1:1 5-10 1-1/4:1 10-15 1-1/2:1 15-20 1-3/4:1 If, due to space limitation, excavation near existing structures or roads are performed in a vertical position, braced shorings or shields may be used for supporting vertical excavations. Therefore, in order to comply with the local and state safety regulations, a properly designed and installed shoring system would be required to accomplish planned excavations and installation. A specialty shoring contractor should be responsible for the design and installation of such a shoring system during construction. Braced shorings should be designed for a maximum pressure distribution of 30H, (where H is the depth of the excavation in feet). The foregoing does not include excess hydrostatic pressure or surcharge loading. Fifty percent of any surcharge load, such as construction equipment weight, should be added to the lateral load given herein. Equipment traffic should concurrently be limited to an area at least 4 feet from the shoring face or edge of the slope. The excavation and shoring recommendations provided herein are based on soil characteristics driven from 10 test borings within the area. Variations in soil conditions will likely be encountered during the excavations. Krazan & Associates, Inc. should be afforded the opportunity to provide field review to evaluate the actual conditions and account for field condition variations not otherwise anticipated in the preparation of this recommendation. Slope height, slope inclination, or excavation depth should in no case exceed those specified in local, state, or federal safety regulation, (e.g. OSHA) standards for excavations, 29CFR part 1926, or Assessor's regulations. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 9 Shallow Foundations 1/11 The proposed structures may be supported on a shallow foundation system bearing on Engineered Fill. Thirteen to fifteen feet of fill is located within the building area. Overexcavation and recompaction of the fill is required for a shallow foundation system. Spread and continuous footings 111 can be designed for the following maximum allowable soil bearing pressures: Dead Load Only 1,875psf Dead-Plus-Live Load 2,500 psf Total Load, including wind or seismic loads 3,325 psf Exterior footings should have a minimum depth of 18 inches below pad subgrade (soil grade) or adjacent exterior grade, whichever is lower. Interior footings should have a minimum depth of 12 inches below pad subgrade (soil grade) or adjacent exterior grade, whichever is lower. Footings should have a minimum width of 12 inches regardless of load. The total settlement is not expected to exceed 'h inch. Differential settlement, along a 20-foot exterior wall footing, or between adjoining column footings, should be less than inch, producing an angular distortion of 0.002. Most of the settlement is expected to occur during construction, as the loads are applied. However, additional post-construction settlement may occur if the foundation soils are flooded or saturated. Providing the site is prepared as recommended in our report, seasonal rainfall, water run-off, or normal watering practice of trees and landscaping areas, around the proposed building, should not flood and/or saturate the footings, and consequently produce additional post-construction settlement. Resistance to lateral footing displacement can be computed using an allowable friction factor of 0.4 acting between the base of foundations and the supporting subgrade. Lateral resistance for footings can alternatively be developed using an allowable equivalent fluid passive pressure of 350 pounds per cubic foot acting against the appropriate vertical footing faces. The frictional and passive resistance of the soil may be combined without reduction in determining the total lateral resistance. A 1/3 increase in the above value may be used for short duration, wind or seismic loads. Foundations - Caissons The proposed building can be supported on drilled caissons. Since groundwater was encountered 12 to 27 feet below grade, casing of the caisson may be required. The allowable bearing capacity for a 3-foot and 4-foot diameter caissons are provided below. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 10 ...... ................ .. iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii €>ALL Dead-Plus-Live Load (kips) 70 95 Total Load, including Wind or Seismic Loads (kips) 93 125 The drilled piers should have a minimum embedment of 30 feet. The bottom of the piers should be cleansed of loose material. The total settlement of the footings is not expected to exceed 1 inch. Differential settlement between the caissons should be 'h inch. Differential settlement between caissons and shallow foundations are discussed in the foundations-conventional section. Casing and shaft diameter should match. Undersized casing should not be used and the casings should have adequate strength to reduce earth pressure. The casings should be progressively pushed before drilling. Precautions should accordingly be taken to minimize caving. Drilling speed and timing of concrete placement should be coordinated. Concrete pumps with adequate hose length to allow gradual impact-free filling of pier cavities is recommended. Concrete in the sandy area should not be allowed to fall freely more than 3 feet and should be prevented from striking the walls of the drilled hole, thus, creating soil sloughing and caving. Concrete with a slump on the order of 5 to 6 inches should be used. Foundations - Driven Piles The proposed structure can be supported on driven piles. The allowable bearing capacity for 12-inch and 14-inch pre-cast concrete piles are present below. Dead-Plus-Live Load (kips) 40 48 Total Load, including Wind or Seismic Loads (kips) 53 60 The allowable bearing and uplift capacities provided herein may be increased 1/3 for short duration loads, such as wind or seismic. Piles should be spaced at least 3 pile diameter apart. The piles should have driven continuously without interruption. Minimum hammer energy rating recommended for the • Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 11 12 and 14 inch pre-cast concrete piles are 24,000 and 32,000 foot-pound respectively. The Soils Engineer should observe the pile driving to see the adequate depth reached. Dynamic measurements should be performed during pile driving. It is recommended that test piles with dynamic measurements be performed. The dynamic measurements and analysis will verify design assumptions, assess pile driving performance, estimate bearing capacities, and evaluate the effectiveness of different hammer pile combinations. Pre-drilling through the existing refuse is recommended to prevent damage to the piles during driving. In addition, a Type II cement should be used for all concrete piles to minimize the potential for attack by leachate. The total settlement of the footing is not expected to exceed 1 inch. Differential settlement should be less than 'A inch. Most of the settlement is expected to occur during construction as the loads are applied. Floor Slabs and Exterior Flatwork Slab-on-grade construction should be appropriate for the portion of the building constructed outside the landfill area. Slab-on-grade construction should have a moisture barrier incorporated into the floor slab design. Interior slabs-on-grade should have at least 2 inches of clean free-draining concrete sand placed below the floor slab. The sand should conform to ASTM C33 requirements for fine aggregate. An impervious membrane (vapor barrier) should be placed under the 2 inches of sand. This system of 2 inches of sand and a vapor barrier should be underlain by an additional 2 inches of clean concrete sand to prevent capillary moisture rise. Prior to pouring concrete, the sand should be thoroughly consolidated. The upper 2 inches of sand should be wetted during or just before the concrete pour to aid in concrete curing. The exterior slabs should be poured separately in order to act independently of the walls and foundation system. All fills required to bring the building pads to grade should be Engineered Fills. The floor slab should be reinforced at a minimum with #3 reinforcement bars at 24 inches on-center each way. Lateral Earth Pressures and Retaining Walls Walls retaining horizontal backfill and capable of deflecting a minimum of 0.1 percent of its height at the top may be designed using an equivalent fluid active pressure of 39 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Walls incapable of this deflection or are fully constrained walls against deflection may be designed for an equivalent fluid at-rest pressure of 62 pounds per square foot per foot of depth. Expansive soils should not be used for backfill against walls. The wedge of non-expansive backfill material should extend from the bottom of each retaining wall outward and upward at a slope of 2:1, horizontal to vertical, or flatter. The stated lateral earth pressures do not include the effects of Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 12 hydrostatic water pressures generated by infiltrating surface water that may accumulate behind the retaining walls; or loads imposed by construction equipment, foundations or roadways. During grading and backfilling operations adjacent to any walls, heavy equipment should not be allowed to operate within a lateral distance of 5 feet from the wall, or within a lateral distance equal to the wall height, whichever is greater, to avoid developing excessive lateral pressures. Within this zone, only hand operated equipment ("whackers", vibratory plates, or pneumatic compactors) should be used to compact the backfill soils. R-Value Test Results and Pavement Design Two R-Value samples were obtained from the project site at the location shown on the attached site plan.. Results of the test are as follows: t.. ..................................................... •• ...t. >::::>::::::::::::>:>:>. 1 12-18" Sandy Silt with Clay(ML) 18 These test results are moderate and indicate fair subgrade support characteristics under dynamic traffic loads. The following table shows the recommended pavement sections for light duty and heavy duty. ASPHALTIC CONCRETE PAVEMENT LIGHT DUTY <:: As::halti Concrete' <g> ' A...,,re ate Bas >::>::;:;:::: ... 2.5" 6.5" 12.0" HEAVY DUTY iii s alticConcrete :;; ; .A reateBast ; :<> > Cotn acted::::: :;iii :: : .. ... . : . : .. . iknom .................................................................................. :::::::::::Sub::::::::<: >:>'> > » 4.0" 11.0" 12.0" * 95% compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557 **90% compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557 Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 13 The following recommendations are for light-duty and heavy-duty Portland Cement Concrete pavement sections. PORTLAND CEMENT PAVEMENT LIGHT DUTY .11111 Portland Cement ............................................................................. 5.0" -- 12.0" HEAVY DUTY onceete::::::.::.:.:::::::::::::::: ::::::::::.::.ease::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::. 6.5" -- 12.0" * 95% compaction based on ASTMD1557 **90% compaction based on ASTM D1557 ***Minimum compressive strength of 3000 psi Within the proposed pavement areas, it is recommended that the fill material be removed and/or recompacted. The fill materials should be compacted to near optimum moisture to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. As an alternative, the owner may elect not to recompact the existing fill within paved areas. However, the owner should be aware that the paved areas may settle, which may require annual maintenance. At a minimum, it is recommended that the upper 12 inches of subgrade soil be moisture-conditioned to near optimum moisture and recompacted to a minimum of 90 percent of maximum density based on ASTM Test Method D1557. Compacted Material Acceptance Compaction specifications are not the only criteria for acceptance of the site grading or other such activities. The compaction test is the most universally recognized test method for assessing the performance of the Grading Contractor. However, the numerical test results from the compaction test cannot be used to predict the engineering performance of the compacted material. Therefore, the acceptance of compacted materials will also be dependent on the stability of that material. The Soils Engineer has the option of rejecting any compacted material regardless of the degree of compaction if that material is considered to be unstable or if future instability is suspected. A specific example of rejection of fill material passing the required percent compaction is a fill which has been compacted with an in-situ moisture content significantly less than optimum moisture. This type of dry fill (brittle fill) is susceptible to future settlement if it becomes saturated or flooded. • Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 14 Testing and Inspection A representative of Krazan & Associates, Inc., should be present at the site during the earthwork activities to confirm that actual subsurface conditions are consistent with the exploratory field work. This activity is an integral part of our services as acceptance of earthwork construction is dependent upon compaction testing and stability of the material. This representative can also verify that the intent of these recommendations is incorporated into the project design and construction. Krazan & Associates, Inc., will not be responsible for grades or staking, since this is the responsibility of the Prime Contractor. LIMITATIONS Soils Engineering is one of the newest divisions of Civil Engineering. This branch of Civil Engineering is constantly improving as new technologies and understanding of earth sciences improve. Although your site was analyzed using the most appropriate current techniques and methods, undoubtedly there will be substantial future improvements in this branch of engineering. In addition to improvements in the field of Soils Engineering, physical changes in the site either due to excavation or fill placement, new agency regulations or possible changes in the proposed structure after the time of completion of the soils report may require the soils report to be professionally reviewed. In light of this, the Owner should be aware that there is a practical limit to the usefulness of this report without critical review. Although the time limit for this review is strictly arbitrary, it is suggested that two years be considered a reasonable time for the usefulness of this report. Foundation and earthwork construction is characterized by the presence of a calculated risk that soil and groundwater conditions have been fully revealed by the original foundation investigation. This risk is derived from the practical necessity of basing interpretations and design conclusions on limited sampling of the earth. The recommendations made in this report are based on the assumption that soil conditions do not vary significantly from those disclosed during our field investigation. If any variations or undesirable conditions are encountered during construction, the Soils Engineer should be notified so that supplemental recommendations can be made. The conclusions of this report are based on the information provided regarding the proposed construction. If the proposed construction is relocated or redesigned, the conclusions in this report may not be valid. The Soils Engineer should be notified of any changes so the recommendations can be reviewed and reevaluated. This report is a geotechnical engineering investigation with the purpose of evaluating the soil conditions in terms of foundation design. The scope of our services did not include any environmental site assessment for the presence or absence of hazardous and/or toxic materials in the soil, groundwater or atmosphere, or the presence of wetlands. Any statements, or absence of statements, in this report or on any boring log regarding odors, unusual or suspicious items, or conditions observed are strictly for descriptive purposed and are not intended to convey engineering judgment regarding potential hazardous and/or toxic assessment. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 KA No. 066-97070 Page No. 15 The geotechnical data presented herewith is based upon professional interpretation utilizing standard engineering practices and a degree of conservatism deemed proper for this project. It is not warranted that such data and interpretation cannot be superseded by future geotechnical developments. We emphasize that this report is valid for this project as outlined above, and should not be used for any other site. If you have any questions, or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (253) 854-1330 or(800) 800-6039. tewAx� Respectfully submitted, o 4C KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. r uet'� � ° � ` " O pig • F e ` ��Fss oNA Ee�?�� DEAN ALEXANDER Geotechnical Engineer EXPIRES. OCT 1 2 1998 Washington RPE No. 30508 DA:kcp Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 . .. ...••• 73 \I .... ......•.•.•.•••••••••••••• jc0(1 .... ..••••• •• •••••••• .......••••••• ••• ••• ......•••• ••••• • .. ........... ...... ••• ......••"••••••••••• ................... ... . .. ...............•••••••"•••• ••• .• .................*;.*;.• • ................ ..... .................. •••• ••••••••••••••••••• • • .. .. . .. ............... •••• •• •• • •••••••••••••• •• ....................... •••••••••••••••••••••••• •••............ .. ............. ••••••••••••••• • •••••• •••...... ......... . ...... .....•• •••••••••••••••• ••••• ••••••••••••••• ••••••••...... . . . ... .. . . .. .. .. .• •••• DenHeavily vegetated low lying water Filled depression. Trees grass, and McDonald's ••••••..................... ......••••••••••••••••••• ••• •••••••••••••••••••• •••• ••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••• ••••••• ••• ••••••• • ••••• ••• .............. .. .............. ...................... ....... ..... .. ..... .. .. .... •••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••• •••••••••••••••••• •••••••• ••••••••••••••••-••••••......................... ....................... ..... .... ....... .. ..... .. ..... . •• •• •••••• • ••••••••••••• ••• •••••••• •••••••• •• ••••••• •••• ••• •••••• •• ••••••• ••••••• •.. ................ ....... ......... ......... ..... .. ... ......... .. .... . .. . •••••••••••• ••••••• ••• •••• •••• ••• •• ••••• •• •• •• ••• •• ••• •••••• • •.'••' •••••••• • • ••• • • 71 T.133. • ••• • •- •TP1 .. - • • •. . • Dir:t Riles . • • •. • , 1 . • „LE/51, , ....• • PPB. • •• • ••• .7:13 2 1=1.4_•. . .• TP5 ... • Debris •• Standing • -•-:>"), C21. . • Water • TP • TP6 •• • •• :1=1 . TP4 • • • • • • • • • • •.. •. . . . . : . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .•. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .•. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . Traveler's Inn • SITE MAP EXPLANATION 4- APPROXIMATE BORING LOCATION 0' 80' 1 6 =I APPROXIMATE TEST PIT LOCATION SCALE IN FEET (±) 4 .MMEWAIM : M I C R O T E L INN Scatei Dote AS SHOWN 12/97 11Kir by Approved by: J, NE 44 AND LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD Drown DA ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIAI PS Project No. Figure No. DENTON, WA. 070-97066 2 Offices Serving the Western United St:. s Appendix A Page A.1 APPENDIX A FIELD AND LABORATORY INVESTIGATIONS Field Investigation The field investigation consisted of a surface reconnaissance and a subsurface exploratory program. Three 4-inch exploratory borings were advanced. In addition, five test pits were excavated. The boring and test pit locations are shown on the site plan. The soils encountered were logged in the field during the exploration and, with supplementary laboratory test data, are described in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System. Modified standard penetration tests were performed at selected depths. This test represents the resistance to driving a 2 'A-inch diameter core barrel. The driving energy was provided by a hammer weighing 140 pounds falling 30 inches. Relatively undisturbed soil samples were obtained while performing this test. Bag samples of the disturbed soil were obtained from the auger cuttings. All samples were returned to our Fresno laboratory for evaluation. Laboratory Investigation The laboratory investigation was programmed to determine the physical and mechanical properties of the foundation soil underlying the site. Test results were used as criteria for determining the engineering suitability of the surface and subsurface materials encountered. In-situ moisture content, dry density, consolidation, and direct sieve analysis tests were determined for the undisturbed samples representative of the subsurface material. These tests, supplemented by visual observation, comprised the basis for our evaluation of the site material. The logs of the exploratory borings and laboratory determinations are presented in this Appendix. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 I-- DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B 1 I PROJECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-9707C CLIENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 11/29/97 LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WA ELEVATION: DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: Acker DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: 23' AT COMPLETION: 23' ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density C U R V E DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pcf DEPTH N 0 • _ 10 30 FILL - Fine to medium SILTY — — SAND ISM), brown, damp, drills — 'moderately easily - _ FILL - SANDY CLAYEY SILT (ML); brown, damp, drills firmly With DEBRIS (concrete, metal, wood,), moist below 4 feet FILL - SANDY SILT (ML) with — DEBRIS; dark brown, damp, ' — drills easily 0 l — il 15 f� 12/6 _ 14.5-16 6 _ f` i/A Fine SILTY SAND with CLAY (SW/SC); gray, very moist, drills — moderately firmly 2) 12%6 — 19.5-21 30 18/6 Fine SILTY SAND with CLAY • (SW/SC); olive green, very moist, drills firmly T Saturated below 23 feet _ 2! — 3( 18/6 29.5- 25 • 25/6 Bottom of Boring 30.5 I — This infcrrnation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. L- Krazan and Associates Figure A-1 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B2 I PROJECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-970 CLIENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 1 1/29/97 I LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WA ELEVATION: DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: Acker I DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: 25' AT COMPLETION: 25' ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST — SAMPLERS Description Content Density C U R ' DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA °,6 pcf DEPTH N I --0 — 10 30 0 I] FILL - Fine to medium SILTY SAND ISM); green, damp, drills I — easily FILL - Fine SANDY CLAYEY SILT (ML); grey, moist, drills — easily --5 Damp at 5 feet I - — = 10 _ M Fine SANDY SILTY with CLAY 13.0- 3 1/6 (ML); olive green, moist, drill 14.5 — 15 easily — 5/6 — 5/6 17.5-19 10 — I _ 5/6 _ 20 - II I — — 5/6 Fine SILTY CLAY (ML); blue 24.5 12 Nr �/6 green, very moist, drills easily ,5 7.7 — l'IP/2 27.5-29 20— ^ Very fine SANDY CLAY (SC); — green, saturated, drill :,o • moderately easily This inlorrnation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates Figure A-2 PAGE 1 of 2 Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B2 PROJECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-9707 CLIENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 1 1/29/97 I LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WA ELEVATION: DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: Acker DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: 25' AT COMPLETION: 25' ELEV!TION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST _ SAMPLERS Description Content Density CUR V DEF TH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pcf DEPTH N 10 30 -35 Bottom of Boring — 40 — i 45 !,o � — 55 6(' 65 This info•rnation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates Figure ,'a-2 PAGE 2 of 2 Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B3 IPROJECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-9707 CLIENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 1 1/29/97 LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WAill ELEVATION: DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: Acker DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: r— I ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATIONN TEST _ iSAMPLERS Description Content Density CUR V DEFTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA °� pcf DEPTH 0 - 10 30 �� FILL - Fine to medium SILTY — SAND (SM); light brown, — 'slightly moist, drills easily — _ FILL - Fine to medium SANDY _ SILT with CLAY (ML); light _ brown, slightly moist, drills — 5 easily _ Dark grey at 5 feet 10 - _ 7/6 — 11.5-13 6 ^ '3/6 FILL - Fine to medium SANDY SILT with CLAY (ML); light — brown, slightly damp, drills - , 5 easily Fine SANDY SILT with CLAY — $/6 (ML); light grey/green, moist, 17.5 1 s 15 drills easily _ '7/6 Fine SANDY SILTY CLAY and _ SANDY CLAY layers (SW/SC); ill _ blue green, damp, drills easily I : j 2 j Fine CLAY (CL); brown, saturated, drills moderately 2/6 _ 2/6 firmly 27.5-2s 5 111 3/6 30 4II 4/6 29.5-31 41 9/6 _ 22/6 4 This info•mation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. IIII Krazan and Associates Finn ira ,1_1 PAC,F 1 of 9 Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: B3 PROJECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-9707 CLIENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 1 1/29/97 LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WA ELEVATION: DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: Acker DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST _ SAMPLERS Description Content Density CUR V DEPTH DETAIL- AND TEST DATA pcf DEPTH N 10 30 — 35 I Bottom of Boring 40 I J 45 - I — , i0 I — • 5 6) I _ 6E This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates Figure A-3 PAGE 2 of 2 Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: Ti PROJECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-970 CLIENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 1 1/29/97 I LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WA ELEVATION: DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: ELEVLTION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density CUR V DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pcf DEPTH N 10 30 0 FILL - Loose, fine to medium SILTY SAND/SAND (ML/SC) with layers of peat and debris (concrete & asphalt); moist, digs easily --5 Fine SILT SAND (ML) and roots; 111 10 gray, moist, digs easily — _ Concrete DEBRIS at 8 feet Bottom of Boring • I T 15 I � - 20 I — 3) This inflrrnation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates Figure A-4 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates F DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: T2 I PROJECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-9707 CLIENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 11/29/97 LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WA ELEVATION: DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: ELEVATION/ WELL D SOIL SYMBOLS DEF rH DETAILATA AND TEST , Water Dry PENETRATIONN TEST _ SAMPLERS Description Content Density CUR V % pcf DEPTH _-0 — 10 30 _ :ter-. - G SILTY SAND ISM) with rounded - gravel and debris (concrete & 1- asphalt), moist, digs easily 5 4-: , 'k .. ; — Fine to medium SILTY SAND/ - _ SANDY SILT (SM/ML) with trace of organics and wood debris; mottled olive gray, - _ I . moist, digs easily _ I _ 10 Wet at 9 feet - Bottom of Boring _ 5 I 20 i 1 I 2' _ I 30 I — I This info-mation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. I Krazan and Associates Figure A-5 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: T3 I PROJECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-970: CLIENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 1 1/29/97 LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WA ELEVATION: I DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density C U R DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA g6 pcf DEPTH N r 0 _ _ 10 30 30 FILL - Dense, fine to medium SILTY SAND (SM) with cobbles; moist, digs easily •e f I ii — Fine to medium SILTY SAND/ SANDY SILT ISM/MU with trace of organics and wood ` ' Lf debris; mottled olive gray, ^-' moist, digs easily _10 1 Wet at 9 feet _ I _ Bottom of Boring — 15 I - H 20 - 30 This infprrnation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates Figure A-6 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates r- DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: T4 I PROJECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-970 CL'ENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 1 1/29/97 I LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WA ELEVATION: DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: I DEDTH TO WATER> INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: ELEV kTION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density C U R V DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA °% pcf DEPTH N 0 — 10 30 )0 1 .: FILL - Dense, fine to medium — SILTY SAND ISM) with gravel, «J cobbles, asphalt, brick, straw; - tan, moist, digs easily — , ._. Moderately dense at 2 feet I 5 mas Fine to medium SILTY SAND/ SANDY SILT ISM/MU with h. trace of organics; mottle olive � ' gray, moist, digs easily Wet at 9 feet =-10 Bottom of Boring — — I _ — --15 — I I — _ 20 - 25 - I — _ I - I This in ormation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. I. Krazan and Associates Figure A-7 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: T5 I PROJECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-9707 CLIENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 11/29/97 I LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WA ELEVATION: DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: I DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: — ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density C U R V DEF TH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pcf DEPTH N I _ 10 30 ) FILL - Dense, fine to medium '- SILTY SAND (SM) with gravel, ` — I - 7.ti cobbles, concrete, asphalt, ., brick; moist, digs easily - ,. 1 Moderate to dense at 2 feet - I --5 : , Fine to medium SILTY SAND/ , " SANDY SILT ISM/MU with trace of organics; mottled olive - gray, moist, dig easily - _ Wet at 9 feet r 10 Bottom of Boring - 15 20 z, . 3( 11/ This infc-mation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates Figure A-8 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: T6 I PROJECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-970- CLIENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 1 1/29/97 LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WA ELEVATION: I DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: ELEVATION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST SAMPLERS Description Content Density C U R \ DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pcf DEPTH N -0 I ^ - 10 30 50 - �: « FILL - Dense, fine to medium SILTY SAND (SM) with gravel, I — cobbles, concrete, asphalt; tan, r,; _ "k i' moist, digs easily fiA'Al. Moderately dense at 2 feet I5 r. Fine to medium SILTY SAND/ SANDY SILT (SM/ML) with trace of organics; mottle olive - •r gray, moist, digs easily --10 1 Wet at 9 feet Bottom of Boring --15 I 20 — I I 25 — I I I This in ormation pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates Figure A-9 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: T7 I PROJECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-9707 CLIENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 1 1/29/97 1 LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WA ELEVATION: DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: I DE'TH TO WATER> INITIAL: 12' AT COMPLETION: 12' ELEV aTION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry PENETRATION TEST CUR \ SAMPLERS Description Content Density DEPTH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pcf DEPTH N Ir 0 _ 10 30 SO ` FILL - Dense, fine to medium - i SILTY SAND (SM) with gravel, - r cobbles, concrete, asphalt, old _ road sign; tan, moist, digs easily Moderately dense at 2 feet _—5 : Dense, fine to coarse SILTY SAND/SAND (SM/SC) with - _ . gravel (3/4"); olive gray, moist, digs easily - Fine to medium SILT (ML) with fine SAND, laminated with fine - SAND stringers; olive gray, I -10 moist, digs easily 2-inch sand layers at 9-1/2 feet T 77 I - Bottom of Boring --15 I I — 20 I -- I25 I — I -30 .._ This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates .......... Figure A-10 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates DRILL HOLE LOG BORING NO.: T8 F JECT: Microtel PROJECT NO.: 066-9707i ENT: Western Steel, Inc. DATE: 11/29/97 LOCATION: Microtel 1-405 & Kennydale Hill Renton, WA ELEVATION: DRILLER: Subcontractor LOGGED BY: J. Skiwot DRILL RIG: DEPTH TO WATER> INITIAL: AT COMPLETION: PENETRATION TEST ELEV?TION/ WELL SOIL SYMBOLS, Water Dry C U R V F. SAMPLERS Description Content Density DEF TH DETAIL AND TEST DATA % pcf DEPTH N 10 30 50 -—0 ,-% _ FILL - Fine to medium SILTY — i * SAND (SM) with gravel, -- cobbles, concrete chunks (> 2- 1/2 feet); tan, moist, digs easily — _rti Moderately dense at 2 feet `-- —5 , " Fine to medium SILTY SAND/ _ -r SANDY SILT ISM/MU with root — '.;' (> 4" diameter); mottle olive — — y gray, moist, digs easily — ,h —- u�a Fine to medium SAND at 6 feet — —10 Tree (6" diameter) 9 to 14 feet ,_— } .— — C jr , — - 1 L 1 i - T15 Bottom of Boring — —20 —25 — 30 — This information pertains only to this boring and should not be interpreted as being indicitive of the site. Krazan and Associates Figure A-1 1 PAGE 1 of 1 Krazan and Associates Appendix B Page B.1 APPENDIX B EARTHWORK SPECIFICATIONS GENERAL SCOPE OF WORK: These specifications and applicable plans pertain to and include all earthwork associated with the site rough grading, including but not limited to the furnishing of all labor, tools, and equipment necessary for site clearing and grubbing, stripping, preparation of foundation materials for receiving fill, excavation, processing, placement and compaction of fill and backfill materials to the lines and grades shown on the project grading plans, and disposal of excess materials. PERFORMANCE: The Contractor shall be responsible for the satisfactory completion of all earthwork in accordance with the project plans and specifications. This work shall be inspected and tested by a representative of Krazan and Associates, Inc., hereinafter known as the Soils Engineer and/or Testing Agency. Attainment of design grades when achieved shall be certified to by the project Civil Engineer. Both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer are the Owner's representatives. If the Contractor should fail to meet the technical or design requirements embodied in this document and on the applicable plans, he shall make the necessary readjustments until all work is deemed satisfactory as determined by both the Soils Engineer and the Civil Engineer. No deviation from these specifications shall be made except upon written approval of the Soils Engineer, Civil Engineer or project Architect. No earthwork shall be performed without the physical presence or approval of the Soils Engineer. The Contractor shall notify the Soils Engineer at least two (2) working days prior to the commencement of any aspect of the site earthwork. The Contractor agrees that he shall assume soil and complete responsibility for job site conditions during the course of construction of this project, including safety of all persons and property; that this requirement shall apply continuously and not be limited to normal working hours; and that the Contractor shall defend, indemnify and hold the Owner and the Engineers harmless from any and all liability, real or alleged, in connection with the performance of work on this project, except for liability arising from the soil negligence of the Owner or the Engineers. TECHNICAL REQUIREMENTS: All compacted materials shall be densified to a density not less that 90 per cent relative compaction based on ASTM Test Method D1557-78, UBC, as specified in the technical portion of the Soil Engineer's report. The location and frequency of field density tests shall be as determined by the Soils Engineer. The results of these tests and compliance with these specifications shall be the basis upon which satisfactory completion of work will be judged by the Soils Engineer. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 Appendix B Page B.1 SOILS AND FOUNDATION CONDITIONS: The Contractor is presumed to have visited the site and to have familiarized himself with existing site conditions and the contents of the data presented in the soil report. The Contractor shall make his own interpretation of the data contained in said report, and the Contractor shall not be relieved of liability under the contractor for any loss sustained as a result of any variance between conditions indicated by or deduced from said report and the actual conditions encountered during the progress of the work. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.DO2 Appendix B Page B.2 DUST CONTROL: The work includes dust control as required for the alleviation or prevention of any dust nuisance on or about the site or the borrow area, or off-site if caused by the Contractor's operation either during the performance of the earthwork or resulting from the conditions in which the Contractor leaves the site. The Contractor shall assume all liability, including court costs of codefendants, for all claims related to dust or windblown materials attributable to his work. SITE PREPARATION Site preparation shall consist of site clearing and grubbing and the preparations of foundation materials for receiving fill. CLEARING AND GRUBBING: The Contractor shall accept the site in this present condition and shall demolish and/or remove from the area of designated project, earthwork all structures, both surface and subsurface, trees, brush, roots, debris, organic matter, and all other matter determined by the Soils Engineer to be deleterious. Such materials shall become the property of the Contractor and shall be removed from the site. Tree root systems in proposed building areas should be removed to a minimum depth of three (3.0) feet and to such a extent which would permit removal of all roots larger than one (1) inch. Tree root removed in parking areas may be limited to the upper one and one-half (11/2) feet of the ground surface. Backfill or tree root excavation should not be permitted until all exposed surfaces have been inspected and the Soils Engineer is present for the proper control of backfill placement and compaction. Burning in areas which are to receive fill materials shall not be permitted. SUBGRADE PREPARATION: Surfaces to receive Engineered Fill, building or slab loads shall be prepared as outlined above, scarified to a depth of six (6) inches, moisture-conditioned as necessary, and compacted to 90% relative compaction. Loose and/or areas of disturbed soils shall be moisture conditioned and compacted to 90% relative • compaction. All ruts, hummocks, or other uneven surface features shall be removed by surface grading prior to placement of any fill material. All areas which are to receive fill materials shall be approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of any of the fill material. EXCAVATION: All excavation shall be accomplished to the tolerance normally defined by the Civil Engineer as shown on the project grading plans. All over excavation below the grades specified shall be backfilled at the Contractor's expense and shall be compacted in accordance with the applicable technical requirements. FILL AND BACKFILL MATERIAL: No material shall be moved or compacted without the presence of the Soils Engineer. Material from the required site excavation may be utilized for construction site fills provided prior approval is given by the Soils Engineer. All materials utilized for constructing site fills shall be free from vegetable or other deleterious matter as determined by the Soils Engineer. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 Appendix B Page B.2 PLACEMENT, SPREADING AND COMPACTION: The placement and spreading of approved fill materials and the processing and compaction of approved fill and native materials shall be the responsibility of the Contractor. However, compaction of fill materials by flooding, ponding, or jetting shall not be permitted unless specifically approved by local code, as well as the Soils Engineer. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 I Appendix B Page B.3 Both cut and fill shall be surface compacted to the satisfaction of the Soils Engineer prior to final acceptance. SEASONAL LIMITS: No fill material shall be placed, spread, or rolled while it is frozen or thawing or during unfavorable wet weather conditions. When the work is interrupted by heavy rains, fill operations shall not be resumed until the Soils Engineer indicates that the moisture content and density of previously placed fill are as specified. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 Appendix C Page C.1 APPENDIX C PAVEMENT SPECIFICATIONS 1. DEFINITIONS - The term "pavement" shall include asphalt concrete surfacing, untreated aggregate base, and aggregate subbase. The term "subgrade" is that portion of the area on which surfacing, base, or subbase is to be placed. 2. SCOPE OF WORK - This portion of the work shall include all labor, materials, tools and equipment necessary for and reasonable incidental to the completion of the pavement shown on the plans and as herein specified, except work specifically notes as "Work Not Included." 3. PREPARATION OF THE SUBGRADE - The Contractor shall prepare the surface of the various subgrades receiving subsequent pavement courses to the lines, grades, and dimensions given on the plans. The upper six (6) inches of the soil subgrade beneath the pavement section shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 90%. The finished subgrades shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of additional pavement courses. 4. UNTREATED AGGREGATE BASE - The aggregate base course shall be spread and compacted on the prepared subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The base course material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95%. The material shall be spread in layers not exceeding 6 inches and each layer of base course shall be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers. 5. AGGREGATE BASE - The aggregate subbase shall be spread and compacted on the prepared subgrade in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The subbase material shall be compacted to a minimum relative compaction of 95%. Each layer of subbase shall • be tested and approved by the Soils Engineer prior to the placement of successive layers. 6. ASPHALTIC CONCRETE SURFACING - Asphaltic concrete surfacing shall consist of a mixture of mineral aggregate and paving grade asphalt, mixed at a central mixing plant and spread and compacted on a prepared base in conformity with the lines, grades, and dimensions shown on the plans. The viscosity grade of the asphalt shall be AR-4000. The mineral aggregate shall be Type B, 'A inch maximum size, medium grading. The drying, proportioning, and mixing of the materials shall conform to State Specifications. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 Appendix C Page C.2 The prime coat, spreading and compacting equipment, and spreading and compacting the mixture shall conform to State Specifications, with the exception that no surface course shall be placed when the atmospheric temperature is below 50 degrees F. The surfacing shall be rolled with a combination steel-wheel and pneumatic rollers, as described in State Specifications. The surface course shall be placed with an approved self-propelled mechanical spreading and finishing machine. 7. FOG SEAL COAT - The fog seal (mixing type asphaltic emulsion) shall conform to and be applied in accordance with the requirements of State Specifications. Krazan&Associates,Inc. Offices Serving The Western United States 06697070.D02 ((.4 ) , t f c _ o14 \\ II'II IIi1111gi10►IIII� , -r �' _ � ,�,;; , B-twelve Associates, Inc. �m�u/-1=!II!li1Ipu' 1103 W.Meeker St. (v)253-859-0515 11111—Illlil=ll�' Suite C (f)253-852-4732 Kent,WA 98042-5751 (e)bl2assoc@compuserve.com MICROTEL INN CITY OF RENTON WETLAND ANALYSIS REPORT PREPARED FOR: THE HAMILTON COMPANY, LLC 3241 156TH AVENUE SE BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON 98007 oFVctop 1998m, B-TWELVE ASSOCIATES INC. c>>yo RUNNING 1103 WEST MEEKER STREET, SUITE C °N KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 FEBRUARY 3, 1998 JOB#98-100 1 IIU'I � I ���IlpUllllll u ` IlUlio ,,, A,,, � �� B-twelve Associates, Inc. 1103 W.Meeker St. (v)253-859-0515 du !Illil=ilon Suite C (f)253-852-4732 Kent,WA 98042-5751 (e)bl2assoc@compuserve.com • MICROTEL INN CITY OF RENTON WETLAND ANALYSIS REPORT 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1.1 General This report describes jurisdictional wetlands and streams at the site of the proposed Microtel Inn, located on the north side of NE 44th Street near the intersection of Lake Washington Boulevard in the City of Renton, Washington (the "site" - see Exhibit A). Specifically, the site consists of an irregularly shaped 1.8 acre parcel located in Section 29, Township 24 North, Range 5 East of W.M., King County, Washington. The site is situated along a west facing hillside and is bordered by commercial properties on the north, east and south sides. Lake Washington Boulevard and SR 405 are located to the west of the site. The site contains a small stream as well as a small Category 3 wetland on the west side. 1.2 Proposed Use The proposed project consists of construction of a 115 room motel and associated parking and stormwater facilities. 2.0 METHODOLOGY The wetland boundaries along the site were delineated by Ed Sewall on January 15 and 22, 1998. A combination of field indicators, including vegetation, soils, and hydrology were used to determine wetland edges. The wetland on site were identified using methodology described in the Washington State Wetlands Identification Manual (WADOE, March 1997). This is the methodology currently recognized by the City of Renton and the State of Washington for wetland determinations and delineations. The wetland area identified would also be considered a wetland using the'methodology Microtel/Renton-Job#98-100 B-twelve Associates, Inc. February 3, 1998 Page, 2 described in the Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual (Environmental Laboratory, 1987), as required by the US Army Corps of Engineers. The Washington State Wetlands Identification Manual as well as the 1987 Federal Manual requires the use of the three parameter approach in identifying and delineating wetlands. A wetland should support a predominance of hydrophytic vegetation, have hydric soils and display wetland hydrology. To be considered hydrophytic vegetation, over 50% of the dominant species in an area must have an indicator status of facultative (FAC), facultative wetland (FACW), or obligate wetland (OBL), according to the National List of Plant Species That Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9) (Reed, 1988). A hydric soil is "a soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the upper part". Anaerobic conditions are indicated in the field by soils with low chromas (2 or less), as determined by using the Munsell Soil Color Charts; iron oxide mottles; hydrogen sulfide odor and other indicators. Generally, wetland hydrology is defined by inundation or saturation to the surface for a consecutive period of 12.5% or greater of the growing season. Areas that contain indicators of wetland hydrology between 5%- 12.5% of the growing season may or may not be wetlands depending upon other indicators. Field indicators include visual observation of soil inundation, saturation, oxidized rhizospheres, water marks on trees or other fixed objects, drift lines, etc. Under normal circumstances, indicators of all three parameters will be present in wetland areas. Wetland and data points were subsequently surveyed by John Harrigan (see Exhibit B). 3.0 OBSERVATIONS 3.1 Existing Site Documentation. Prior to visiting the site, a review of several natural resource inventory maps was conducted. Resources reviewed included the King County Soil Survey (Snyder et al. 1973-see Exhibit C), the National Wetlands Inventory Map (see Exhibit D) and the City of Renton Critical Areas Inventory. 3.1.1 Soil Survey According to the Soil Survey for King County Area, Washington (Snyder et al. 1973), the site is mapped as containing Bellingham (Bh) soils on the west and Kitsap (KpC) soils on the east (see Exhibit C). Bellingham soils are poorly drained soils and are considered hydric soils according to the publication Hydric Soils of the United States (USDA NTCHS Pub No.1491, 1991). Kitsap soils are moderately well drained soils Microtel/Renton-Job#98-100 B-twelve Associates, Inc. February 3, 1998 Page, 3 that are not considered hydric. 3.1.2 National Wetlands Inventory Map (NWI) According to the NWI map for the site, there is a small scrub-shrub wetland located on the west side of the site (see Exhibit D). This wetland corresponds to the area depicted as Bellingham soils in the Soil Survey. 3.1.3 City of Renton Wetland Inventory This area was not included in the City of Renton Wetland Inventory. 3.2 Field Observations The west side of the site consist of a large area of compacted soil, possibly including some fill, that vehicles drive through between several commercial properties. This area slopes down to the west in a disturbed plant community comprised primarily of scotch broom (Cytisus scoparius), reed canary grass (Phalaris arundinacea), orchard grass (Dactylis glomerata), tall fescue (Festuca arundinacea), teasel (Dipsacus fullonum), thistle (Cirsium arvense) and large expanses of Himalayan blackberry (Rubus discolor). A narrow band of red alder (Alnus rubra) is located immediately bordering the wetland and stream located on the west side of the site. 3.2.1 Wetlands A small stream flowing to the north passes through the west end of the site. This stream enters and leaves the site in culverts. An area of scrub-shrub and emergent wetland is located along the north end of the stream on-site. This area of wetland is approximately 11,840 sf in size and was delineated with sequentially numbered pink flagging labeled A l-A 14. The wetland consists of areas of emergent vegetation in the center banded by a mix of shrubs and saplings along the edge. The emergent wetland class contains cattail (Typha latifolia), reed canary grass, nightshade (Solanum dulcamera), speedwell (Veronica americana), and yellow iris (Iris pseudacorus). The scrub shrub band around the edge of the wetland is comprised primarily of pacific willow (Salix lasiandra), dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) and some Himalayan blackberry. According to the United States Fish and Wildlife (USFWS) classification method (Cowardin et al. 1979), this wetland contains areas that would be classified as PEM1C (palustrine, emergent, persistent, seasonally flooded) and PSS1C (palustrine, scrub- shrub, broad leaved deciduous, seasonally flooded). Microtel/Renton-Job#98-100 B-twelve Associates, Inc. February 3, 1998 Page, 4 According to the criteria described in the City of Renton Ordinance No. 4346 (Chapter 22 Wetland Management), Wetland "A" appears to meet the criteria of a Category 3 wetland due to small size, emergent and scrub-shrub classes, large degree of disturbance and because it is not located at the headwater of a watercourse. Typically, Category 3 wetlands have a 25 foot buffer measured from the wetland edge. 4.0 FUNCTIONS AND VALUES The overall functional value of Wetland "A" is low due to small size, lack of species richness and highly disturbed location. It does serve to store a small quantity of stormwater as well as filter out contaminants from the water column. Habitat functions of this wetland have been reduced by the blackberry/scothc broom dominated buffer. In addition, the close proximity to major roads including SR 405 poses a hazard to wildlife as well as increasing noise in the wetland dramatically. 5.0 REGULATIONS In addition to City of Renton wetland regulations previously described for wetlands and streams, certain activities (filling and dredging) within "waters of the United States" may fall under the jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE). The ACOE regulates all discharges into "waters of the United States" (wetlands) under Section 404(b) of the Clean Water Act. Discharges (fills) into isolated and headwater wetlands up to 3.0 acres are permitted under the Nationwide 26 Permit (NWP 26). However, discharges that result in over 1/3 acre of fill require "Notification" and mitigation at a ratio of 1:1. Washington State Department of Ecology has placed Regional Conditions on the Nationwide 26 permit that are more restrictive than the Federal regulations. The Washington State Regional Conditions on NWP 26 include a maximum fill of 2 acres, no authorization of fill into any water containing documented habitat for a State-listed endangered, threatened or sensitive animal species, and no fill in any wetlands adjacent to any stream with a channel width >2 feet at the ordinary high water mark. Additionally, State 401 certification is required for,any of the following; 1. Discharges affecting more than 1/3 acre of wetlands; 2. Discharges affecting greater than 1/3 acre to 1 acre of wetlands that do not include a wetland mitigation plan approved by the certifying agency; or; 3. Discharges in wetlands in the 100-year floodplain unless the proposed project: a. Is consistent with the local floodplain management comprehensive plans and Microtel/Renton-Job#98-100 B-twelve Associates, Inc. February 3, 1998 Page, 5 _ ordinances; and; b. Through design/ and/or mitigation, results in no increase in water levels and no loss in live storage during flood events up to and including the 100 year flood. Wetlands adjacent to streams with mean annual flows >5cfs and other waters of the United States or with channel widths at the ordinary high water mark greater than 2 feet may be considered "adjacent" and would require going through the Individual Permit process. However, the Corps has requested that all consultants refrain from making recommendations as to whether a wetland is isolated, headwaters or adjacent. These determinations can only be made by the Corps. 6.0 PROPOSED PROJECT The proposed project will avoid impacting the wetland and stream and will provide a buffer ranging in width from 18-25 feet along the east edge. If you have any questions or need additional information in regards to this report, please call us at (253) 859-0515. Sincerely, B-twelve Associates, Inc. Ed Sewall Senior Wetland Ecologist File:Ed/98100wa.doc Microtel/Renton-Job#98-100 B-twelve Associates, Inc. February 3, 1998 Page, 6 REFERENCES Cowardin, L., V. Carter, F. Golet, and E. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, FWS/OBS-79-31, Washington, D. C. Environmental Laboratory. 1987. Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1. U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, Mississippi. Franklin, J.F. and C.T. Dryness. 1987. Natural Vegetation of Oregon and Washington. OSU Press. Hitchcock, C. and A. Cronquist. 1976. Flora of the Pacific Northwest. University of Washington Press, Seattle, Washington. Jones and Stokes Associates, City of Renton Critical Areas Inventory, June 1991. King County Sensitive Areas Folio Maps. Munsell Color. 1988. Munsell Soil Color Charts. Kollmorgen Instruments Corp., Baltimore, Maryland. National Technical Committee for Hydric Soils. 1991. Hydric Soils of the United States. USDA Misc. Publ. No. 1491. Reed, P., Jr. 1988. National List of Plant Species that Occur in Wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). 1988. U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Inland Freshwater Ecology Section, St. Petersburg, Florida. Reed, P.B. Jr. 1993. 1993 Supplement to the list of plant species that occur in wetlands: Northwest (Region 9). USFWS supplement to Biol. Rpt. 88(26.9) May 1988. Renton City of, Ordinance #4346, Chapter 32, Wetland Management. . Snyder, D., P.. Gale, and R. Pringle. 1973. Soil Survey King County Area Washington. U.S.D.A., Soil Conservation Service, Washington, D.C. EXHIBIT A. Vicinity Map ,..,• j el A _70 HI �Q9 72ND 1 I s',S T Q<t 50TH red t #31TE-- I o/ , / T Ter I :? I 00 e 79TH co 78TH ( \C-IC.- ' ,I 3RD ^80TH Z `4r J 0 Lr'�' 82� 1 .j I 84TH 40TH 4S r- 85TH TH a �' 86TH 3 H. o O1 m o // cow 37TH w _ z_ ! 87TH INORTH B-twelve Associat ,Inc. CiiJ, Reproduced with permission granted by THOMAS BROS.MAPS. This map is copyrighted by THOMAS BROS.MAPS. It is unlawful Ecological Systems Design&Management ®® copy or reproduce all or anyt part thereof,whether for personal use or resale,without permission. 1103.W.Meeker St..Suite.C • Kent,WA 98032 (253)859-0515 Fax(253)852-4732 Job# : cl f-ioo Date: l/21/ 98 MICROTEL INN Drawn by: V5 Scale: CITY OF RENTON, WA Revised: Checked by: EXHIBIT C : Soils Map Base map per Soil Survey, King County Area Washington, (Snyder et al. 1973). sr t_JlV - ,1 '- ..�% ,,.ottfit^��e� 1,r J 9` Il ' '„I+ I '�i "e iT I i '., i ,k-, ii 7 w• Z nY s-rr^,iL i _ I .iiv • ' °Bhp 'Ilk,. \ q . . I ((` y7yy, I A.' ,.= N W+' — \L � III ..// =1 -^-K __i• • f .... I F :✓c -i q X . u IN I I •' r ,A�.• to N N ` r� B +ai w> k •y* • ' ~ s } - .1, S t v .,„;.# ' •,. - '- a , t - 7.ill.------1,1_,_..i.„4::44,...., ..-. _ ••-.-.. -4,- mak ..1 I\ IV ; .ill,: , , .... .............._.....;_. ot , • / ` , : • '.>`'T'i `74 lip 5/: y :iitii { `.,,,p. .,e.gti —li ..•:: 17;..4:11A;_ .'- 11 : • l'' • _ , '`...... ..:- .41114 )// if\ : I_ ...1%., .—•- •`••. . fir I /7/ 8'i \ AmC+ 1 • . : Cs� N.(- s;� !«� I� f' •si,l ( '+s.{i,+5� ..q.• „', -May •'; i if i - � fa `' : •-'• - ••••' 141 • • . ••• Igt. -' '!°-°I' 1 t , ••• " '''.. Wel:.: ":--",:f. 60E- -- '- •:.''''..:•,1 i,1 • - • 4 b y /�Iy1� -.J 4. I. '' /'�\ ,,,r I,. f .`e}I 1.- t- yy x ?. EvB \ �„ ' rC GRAVEL `� •__ _ • ti AtI��.. --�, _ , PIT Wei NORTH B-twelve Associates,Inc. v��� Y -. illiii Ecological Systems Design &Management 1103 W.Meeker St..Suite.C • Kent,WA 98032 (253)859-0515 Fax(253)852-4732 Job# : 9 c -ioo Date: 1/21 /93 MICROTEL INN Drawn by: i/5 Scale: CITY OF RENTON, WA Revised: Checked by: EXHIBIT D: National Wetlands Inventory Map 4 n . 4K s 1 1 t'' LIUBH ;i ' g - f�,��,� i1 v1 ,, .,. 1$; ; ! Y 1 • ; 1.. 1• .✓ '1 • Cat • ,_ 411: • ��" �`..�; ^9PEMC I ',,! „ , ,: 3 =t"j ',"ate ` `45BC ` '•` ` .,;,'P• es �/ n' ) ' ii •' J1Jr ~s , ii i /- •• t i / lip\ em 41i' A1 .,: „..---i'�,'- � � .;_-. ' � )� get ' r— 4.9. -1py .,, • 'Ta- iv . i -ThN \`\`'' ' i/7,. "646 IT s; 'K S ► /I u' \''\1 ' 1'J. Ts / i' •r• ` 1 1 P.i . 1, Lam\rl. 44, R4'$S�"r W �c \6.‘ -' "• '„?..Z1g;PN\ • 1-'•1'" ( ,• •,. il.I .,,, , ..„,, \\\% \ ,,,. 1 , i 7-1r: :; \ `\ ''' a .; .. ,I ram\ \\, • �.f•�q �I 1 _ ���•''� • i C I.. .,•,-^ .;i' Kennydale �r4 , • .:'' -a,, iIr 5'-',' !r / ;�. .;�•�, r Coleman Perin dit C.e -. `' \ � NORTH B-twelve Associates,Inc. ���� \'\I= /® NWI quadrangle: Ecological Systems Design&Management ®® Mapping Date: 1103 W.Meeker St..Suite.C • Kent•WA 98032 (253)859-0515 Fax(253)852-4732 Job# : 9g -(or`D Date: 1/2//98 MICROTEL INN Drawn by: V5 Scale: CITY OF RENTON WA , Revised: Checked by:. EXHIBIT E: Wetlands I Base map per "King County Sensitive Areas Folio" (King Co. 1990) jib l 1,,,iik,_, ,,. r 'g s k-`'k, .4,.. r,.. - . 2, I. -;:inip..',;. . '',. ''' ', • ,-. ,. .i.,,,,-41-6Ay)...;,t_.„.,___,Ish,, . ' ':••• . - &INV i...: --'''' 6,45,70?, -- .7tx:-.„..--- - :I g C) ,r . ti, 11 - : . ,&..t-Attfillii ..-illif - , _._ - ,k- r I r • —. - I t—N.7'—'•_.7.-_,- 77544,v;" _ . i iI' le, l.., L�, f -4 , :---. • -:.•:;..-1..1.•.-'-'." Wjia.L..i.e•,:'--.:;,'-..........,,,1.1,. ;" r r- •u' `k ' . ''' ' '- 11 *i_‘'-...4 : '2 . ---'-, - -7 : -,-,..-k,A...--__-}-_-„_.-!-,-,-„,„ - -- rIran. I na iiYw a _ - • .. .--i.,.•,: .,. .1,., piii. gime itt-,--No,- -_-_, , -TT. .,, , .. ,-..., ---,-,..-.,,.,..._.-......,.,--:is.mgii, — ,-,-..--....,.....-.- \.., --,,,,..414,,-'74., ' ...311Elimilia.' . 1 -.-''" . .\ ..` • - • '',I, ‘... ,.... I. :--.=04' 1 4,t.i -- Ill . . .1Air, .9 ,,... 2 20 t. . ;),....i. limmilk -/,' : -'.-.;-• ''—'r-..1 t ':':--I—J --- • m--- • .- , . 1.-.4.410010 - - -Fit _- _Xliteihttkr Ad; tf)..'•. ,...„- . • r _ • } - tojpoo _1 .!'- oaf t. i err ,III,. I w ,ds �`� N1)RTH Open Water B-twelve Associates.Inc- ��"10,11 ,,, r Ecological Systems Design&Management �® mamma Basin Boundaries 1103 W.Meeker St..Suite.C • Kent,WA 98032 Sub-basin Boundaries (253)859-0515 Fax(253)852-4732 ,lob# : q h-/ors Date: i,i21,/qg MICROTEL INN ,drawn by: V, Scale: CITY OF RENTON, WA ,?evised: Checked by: EXHIBIT F : Streams and 100- Year Floodplains 4644110.1111. 'iii '' �.. . ell �� ' � h F�;. ti�1 ILI -E r t. ,ri.i!,i--p.. ..111_* 1,0 r s w 1 1 ;,� -\ , --z. • — T '+%er _ jam'„_lb :. ' \� may. l p c d _ ,yam t!. • .�"/ A, �,, .-.Ao :`t •n—.Mawr /� ji V. r.,,,., ,,,..,.... ,. , . . , ., .,........_,„ ,„....„ _. • ., .\. , ,,, , , _ — , , . ,,,,,,,..e ....41 ., - , , ,-. , . ..„ .. , ..),,, ,, . ,.... . .._. „..., ._ • •.. , ., 1..c.,,,-7-.. ..•;.- ,.-_-- ..4. tii- ._.. _ . , .. ,....:::. ....: ,' �'Nt N- i' ' .' 3111111iit 14 �:: it r7p. ;. . �a116 p r i _`may-I �' •- NOME Pih 1R/ r m` /�• ot ; -.:_f a ea ta.,..,:,'"•..,4_, ...,•••-i‘.7., a eSen liBil -..,;,-vr.7, , ---:. -,‘zili.4 -. ,„....:* ,,4.41 I IE . simemnial class 1 ,1'1 �1i7, •-•-•-�• Gass 2(with saknor»ds) �I' y \ NORTH pass 2 ;�; n;d B-twelve Associates,Inc. 1 ` i �- use"^�°Oer , Ecological Systems Design&Management �® • • • • • Class 3 1103 W.Meeker Si.Suite.C • Kent,WA 98032 Unclassified (253)859-0515 Fax(253)852-4732 Job# : 9R-r(3,0 Date: (, 2 / 9 ' MICROTEL INN Drawn by: V Scale: CITY OF RENTON, WA Revised: Checked by: ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM (Washington State Wetlands Identification & Delineation Manual, 1997) B-TWELVE ASSOCIATES, INC. 1103 West Meeker Street Kent, Washington 98032 (206)859-0515 Project Name/#: (v1icr•,+e- Date: 03"y g Investigator: '("" S Data Point: Jurisdiction: G' • F /24.i , State: WA," Atypical Analysis: ' -0 Problem Area: A' VEGETATION Dominant plant species Stratum Indicator Coverage % 1. /r/^..".s f .to Pa T I A->_ 2.6 2. 1t b„s dd.rr€iu it Ff!-C � g o 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. % of species OBL, FACW and/or FAC: 5?) Hydrophytic vegetation criteria met: Yes No arginal) Comments: SOILS Mapped Soil Series: '" ' /' On Hydric Soils List?: Yes PO Drainage Class: Depth(0 in) Matrix color Redox concentration color Texture in. /t'YX 3/2_ 3- �n in. in. in. Organic soil_, Histic epipedon_, Hydrogen sulfide , gleyed_, redox concentrations_, redox depletions_,pore linings_, iron concretions_, manganese concretions_, organic matter in surface horizon (sandy soil)_, organic streaking (sandy soils)_ organic pan (sandy soil)_. Hydric soil criteria met: Yes Basis: N. 'l-0/1 e Comments: HYDROLOGY Recorded data_, inundation , saturation ,watermarks , drift lines , sediment deposits drainage patterns . Wetland hydrology criteria met: Yes 129 Basis: NU i:- 'e 1-4''f Comments: SUMMARY O1 CRITERIA Soil Temp. at 19.7" depth: /✓, Growing Season?: YlIV Hydrophytic vegetation: Y/N? Hydric soils: We land hydrology: Y/,�1 Data point meets the criteria of a jurisdictional wetland?: Yes es ROUTINE WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM (Washington State Wetlands Identification & Delineation Manual, 1997) B-TWELVE ASSOCIATES, INC. 1103 West Meeker Street Kent, Washington 98032 (206)859-0515 Project Name/#: M'cr• Date: / 5 8- Investigator: Data Point: 17 / Jurisdiction: C. h G State: t•'/1- Atypical Analysis: Problem Area: N� VEGETATION Dominant plant species Stratum Indicator Coverage % 1. Rc.+v,-wlvs rtrv✓� {mil Fit;L.J g G 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. of species OBL, FACW and/or FAC: /°t) Hydrophytic vegetation criteria meth No Marginal Comments: SOILS Mapped Soil Series: Ze/4"14— On Hydric Soils List?:-No Drainage Class: )›D Depth(0 in) Matrix color Redox concentration color Texture T in. /D Y/2 -/Z fr et- lG in. 'SCrY.4// t"•+✓rrG S-../ in. in. Organic soil_, Histic epipedon_, Hydrogen sulfide_, gleyed k redox concentrations-K redox depletions_,pore linings_, iron concretions_, manganese concretions_, organic matter in surface horizon (sandy soil)_, organic streaking (sandy soils)_, organic pan (sandy soil) Hydric soil criteria met No Basis: Comments: HYDROLOGY Recorded data_, inundation , saturation )C ,watermarks , drift lines _ , sediment deposits drainage patterns Wetland hydrology criteria met: No Basis: S^ "� 't f - / Y Comments: SUMMARY OF CRITERIA Soil Temp. at 19.7" depth: fr- Grow' g Season?: Y/(a) Hydrophytic vegetation la Hydric soil �i Wetland hydrology Data point meets the criteria of a jurisdictional wetland?: es No ' o 14 G' Amor .ism AM: 4-1V, pq/�►���.- 7�2FY0v1 htpNL 711M1 1�1111"A'I Willa11111 am saiw N\�IKW1 BN/BOWAI041I PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT MICROTEL INN NE 44TH STREET& LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD RENTON,WASHINGTON 1 Project No. 066-97070 November 21, 1997 �. f Prepared for: Western Steel, Inc. Mr. Mike Cabe 1044 Industry Drive Seattle, Washington. 98188-4801 Prepared by: Krazan & Associates, Inc. 25418 74th Avenue, South Kent, Washington 98032 Fes 4998 OEV ELOpw CI ry" OAN/NG v I(raZaI & ASSOCIATES, INC. i GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING AND INSPECTION TABLE OF CONTENTS Project No. 066-97070 Page No. INTRODUCTION 1 PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION 2 SITE LOCATION 2 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING SITE RECONNAISSANCE 3 Table 1: Summary of Physical Observations 3 Site Reconnaissance Summary 3 Adjoining Properties 4 Table 2: Adjoining Property Use 4 LITERATURE AND INFORMATION SURVEY 5 Site History 4 Aerial Photograph Interpretation 5 Local Regulatory Agency Interface 5 Regulatory Agency Lists Review 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 10 LIMITATIONS 10 REFERENCES 11 Photographs following Site Map Mans Figure 1: Site Location and Adjacent Properties following text Figure 2: Site Map following.text Figure 3: Identified Hazardous Waste Sites included in Appendix A Appendices EDR- Radius Map A KraZalTl & ASSOCIATES , INC . GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION November 21, 1997 KA Project No. 066-97070 PHASE I ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT MICROTEL LVN NE 44TH STREET & LAKE WASHINGTON BOULEVARD RENTON,WASHINGTON INTRODUCTION This report presents the results of our Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) for the property located at NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard in Renton, Washington, the proposed site for construction of a 115 room, three-story Microtel Inn. On October 20, 1997, Western Steel, general contractor for the project, authorized Krazan &Associates, Inc. (Krazan) to proceed with the Phase I ESA. PURPOSE OF INVESTIGATION The purpose of a Phase I ESA is to conduct appropriate inquiry into the previous uses of a subject property consistent with good commercial or customary practice. This Phase I ESA was conducted in accordance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process E1527. Objectives of a Phase I ESA include identification of historic or current activities at the site and surrounding.- properties that could have contributed or may currently be contributing to the degradation of the subject property soil and/or groundwater and to permit the client to satisfy one of the requirements to qualify for what is commonly known as the "innocent landowner" defense to the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act(CERCLA) liability as described by 42 U.S.C. Sec. 9601 (35) (B). Offices Serving The Western United States 25418-74th Avenue South• Kent, WA 98032• P.O. Box 7335 • Everett, WA 98201 (800) 800-6039•Fax: (206) 854-1757 97070.ESA KA Project No. 066-97070 Page No. 2 SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION The Phase I ESA included visual reconnaissance of existing site conditions, observation of adjacent properties, review of existing regulatory agency databases and files, review of available local geologic and hydrologic information, evaluation of historic information including aerial photographs. and preparation of this report summarizing our findings. SITE LOCATION The proposed site for the Renton Microtel Inn is a vacant, 1.8 plus acre parcel east of Interstate 405 at the northeast corner of NE 44th Street and Lake Washington Boulevard, in the southwest quarter of Section 29, Township 24 North, Range 5 East (Figure 1). The site is located within the Arterial Commercial Zone at the northwestern extremity of the City of Renton. The site is currently undeveloped and never has been developed. An on-site creek is located along the western property line. There is minimal vegetation, with the exception of the wooded area along the creek which is overgrown with blackberry bushes; the remainder of the property currently serves as a graveled temporary parking area. The eastern portion of the site slopes to the north with grades up to 5%. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING A review of topographic, geologic, and hydrologic data was conducted to determine the regional setting and environmental conditions within the area of the subject property. The site is in the Puget Sound Lowland just east of Lake Washington (see Figure 1). Geologically, the site is located•on the Newcastle Promontory, underlain by fine-grained arkosic sandstone containing subordinate amounts of siltstone, shale, and coal (Galster & LaPrade, 1991). Native site soils are mapped as Bellingham Silt Loam (SCS, 1967). A recent soils investigation of the site (Krazan, 1997) indicates that over 15 feet of fill may be present above the original ground surface of the site. The site is currently at an elevation of approximately 50 feet above mean sea level and has a relief of about 30 feet. The linear water-filled depression located along the western property line, which varies in elevation from 10 to 20 feet below the eastern portion of the site, collects site runoff. Based on site setting, groundwater is assumed to flow in a westerly direction beneath the site toward the creek and Lake Washington. KRAZAN& ASSOCIATES,INC. Offices Serving the Western United States 97070.ESA KA Project No. 066-97070 Page No. 3 SITE RECONNAISSANCE A site reconnaissance, which included a visual observation of the subject site, was conducted by Mr. Eric Paukstaitis of Krazan on October 22, 1997. The subject property was observed for specific indicators of possible environmental concern, including evidence of use, storage, handling, treatment, or disposal of hazardous materials. This involved walking the site and observing the property for the presence of debris, soil staining, or other signs of activities that could impact soil or groundwater on the property. Conditions encountered during the site visit are summarized in Table 1 and are described in the site reconnaissance summary following the table. TABLE 1 Summary of Physical Observations Feature Observed Not Observed Structures (existing) X Structures (evidence of former) X Heating/Cooling System X Elevators X Stained Floors, walls, or drains (not water stains) X Floor drains X Aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) X Underground storage tanks(USTs) or evidence of USTs X Pipes of unknown use or origin X Large quantities of cleaning products X Storage drums X Dumpsters X Sumps X • Hydraulic hoists X Chemical/pesticide mixing or storage areas X Discolored or stained soils X Discharges/disposal areas X Debris or unidentified waste materials X Standing water X Major depressions X Pits, ponds, or lagoons for waste disposal X Waste or wastewater discharges to surface or surface waters on subject site X (other than stormwater) Vegetation X Stressed vegetation X Unusual odors X Water wells (agricultural, domestic) X Pad-mounted transformers X Pole-mounted transformers X KRAZAN (Sc ASSOCIATES, INC. • Offices Serving the Western United States 97070.ESA KA Project No. 066-97070 Page No.4 High-Voltage tower-mounted electrical transmission lines X Pole-mounted utility lines µ-� X Site Reconnaissance Summary The site consists of vacant, undeveloped land. There is no evidence of present or previous development or other activity at the site which could lead to degradation of site soil or groundwater, except for the apparent unauthorized dumping of waste material on the site. At the time of the site reconnaissance, the presence of discarded sacks of garbage, used drywall, and a number of wet, black, silty soil piles was noted. The garbage and drywall are mainly nuisance items which will have to be removed prior to construction. The source of the soil piles is unknown and, therefore, the potential of the piles containing hazardous materials is also unknown. The piles contain what appear to be wetland vegetation and degraded sandbags. A sheen was visible on seepage emanating from the piles, however, the source of the sheen is unknown. The piles appear to the accumulated sediments removed from the bottom of some unidentified waterway or channel. Refer to the Site Map located at the end of the text. Adjoining Properties A windshield survey of the adjacent properties and businesses was conducted to evaluate whether any of these businesses or properties showed obvious evidence of hazardous materials handling or storage. The survey revealed the area to be occupied predominately by small retail businesses and restaurants. See Figure 1 for • adjoining property locations and refer to Table II for adjacent property information. Other than a dry-cleaning facility, none of these businesses likely use or handle hazardous materials. TABLE II Adjoining Property Use • Approximate Distance Direction Property Use (Relative to Estimated Groundwater Flow Direction) North • Denny's Restaurant adjoining N (cross-gradient) • ShurGard Self Storage 600 ft NE (up-gradient) • Health Club 400 ft NE (up-gradient) East • Traveler's Inn adjoining E(up-gradient) • Office/Retail Plaza adjoining E (up-gradient) • Apple Cleaners adjoining E(up-gradient) • Cedar Run Apartments 800 ft E (up-gradient) South • NE 44th Street adjoining S (cross-gradient) • McDonald's 300 ft S (cross-gradient) KRAZAN&ASSOCIATES, INC. Offices Serving the Western United States 97070.ESA KA Project No. 066-97070 Page No. 5 • Office/Retail Plaza 400 ft S (cross-gradient) • Vacant Parcel 500 ft S (cross-gradient) (parcel 183 lot 3) West • Lake Washington Blvd. adjoining W (cross-gradient) • DOT soil stockpile * 400 ft SW (down-gradient) • Stormwater Detention Pond 200 ft S (down-gradient) * Soil pile is clean fill utilized in general highway maintenance. Apple Cleaners Adjacent east 1800 NE 44th Street This facility is noted to handle or store hazardous materials such as chlorinated solvents, including perchloroethylene (PCE). Due to the relatively swift migration of these compounds in soil and groundwater, and its anticipated location hydraulically up-gradient of the subject site, it is possible that the subject site could be impacted if a release occurs or has occurred in the past. In the event of a release, if contamination attributable to this site does migrate beneath the subject site, the expense and/or liability associated with the investigation and remediation would typically fall upon the responsible party (i.e., Apple Cleaners). LITERATURE AND INFORMATION SURVEY The Phase I ESA included a literature and information survey consisting of an evaluation of historical aerial photographs, a review of various regulatory agency files, and a search of relevant published regulatory agency r— lists. The findings of the survey are described in the following sections. Site History An evaluation of historical aerial photographs and review of Renton Planning, Building, and Engineering Department records were used to assess the subject site history. I_ Aerial Photograph Interpretation Historical aerial photographs, dated 1936, 1941, 1961, 1965, 1970, 1985, 1989 and 1995, were reviewed to help establish site history. These photographs were obtained from the University of Washington Special Collections and the Washington Department of Transportation. The following observations were made during the aerial photograph review: KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Offices Serving the Western United States 97070.ESA KA Project No. 066-97070 Page No. 6 • Year 1936 - Freeway alignment did not exist Lake Washington Blvd. occupied portions of the existing alignment Subject site was undeveloped • Year 1941 - The area was unchanged from the 1936 photo • Year 1961 - Subject site had been cleared but was undeveloped Surrounding area was undeveloped except for scattered residences I405 alignment was single lane each direction • Year 1965 - I405 and 44th Street interchange under construction All trees removed from subject site • Year 1970 - Interchange complete- no development Scattered brush on site along stream • Year 1985 - Residences to the east of the site have been removed Denny's Restaurant(north of site) constructed Site wooded with small trees • Year 1989 - Area directly east of site (Traveler's Inn, retail plaza) developed Area south of 44th Street(McDonald's, retail plaza) developed Site partially cleared for parking area • Year 1995 - Area northeast of site (ShurGard) developed Site partially wooded and overgrown with brush on western half; Bare with gravel on eastern half City of Renton Planning Department Records of the City of Renton Planning Department, including the Comprehensive Master Plan,were reviewed to determine the environmental and regulatory setting of the site. City records indicated the following information: • The site is in the Arterial Commercial Zone (CA), set aside to provide a suitable environment for "strip" commercial development primarily oriented to automobile traffic along selected arterials within the city. A Critical and Resource Areas Evaluation Summary Report was prepared as part of the City's process of developing a Critical Areas Ordinance. The following information was obtained from that report and accompanying maps. • Landslide Hazards - Landslides include a variety of processes by which masses of soil or rock move downslope under the force of gravity. The rate of movement may be slow or rapid. The report ranks landslide hazards from low to very high. The subject site is classified as having a low landslide potential. • KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. . Offices Serving the Western United States 97070.ESA KA Project No. 066-97070 Page No. 7 • Seismic Hazard - Ground shaking and liquefaction potential are the two primary seismic hazards in the Renton area. The subject site is mapped as having a high seismic hazard because of possible loose or soft saturated soils. • Erosion Hazard - Erosion generally creates economic and environmental, rather than life- threatening impacts. The subject site is mapped as having a low erosion potential. • Coal Mine Hazards - The primary hazards presented by abandoned underground coal mines are the presence of improperly sealed openings, venting of gases, ground collapse, and regional subsidence of the ground surface. Mapping indicates that there are no abandoned coal mine in the vicinity of the site. Additional mapping provided the following information: • The site is not considered a wildlife habitat. • The site is not mapped as a wetland. City of Renton Engineering Department City engineering maps and a conversation with City personnel indicated that the subject site is served by City water, storm and sanitary sewers. The sanitary sewer has been in place since 1989. City of Renton Fire Department On November 14, 1997, Mr. Chris Pope with the City of Renton Fire Department (RFD) was contacted regarding records of underground storage tanks (USTs) on the subject site or adjacent properties. According to Mr. Pope, no records for registered USTs were on file for the subject site or adjacent properties. City of Renton Building Department On November 14, 1997, the City of Renton Building Depaituient (CRBD) was contacted regarding building permit records for the subject site. According to CRBD officials, permit records are file by street address. No street address was obtained; therefore, no building permit records could be reviewed. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Questionnaire/Interview On November 12, 1997, a Phase I ESA Questionnaire was submitted to Mr. Mike Cabe of Western Steel, and forwarded to Mr. Brian Hamilton of Day's Inn, the owner of the subject site. The questionnaire is designed to provide pertinent information regarding environmental and historical impacts associated with the subject site. A completed questionnaire has not been received from Mr. Hamilton. Additionally, attempts to interview Mr. Hamilton regarding the history of the subject site have been unsuccessful. If information is received, an addendum letter will be submitted to Mr. Cabe. KRAZAN &ASSOCIATES, INC. Offices Serving the Western United States 97070.ESA KA Project No. 066-97070 Page No. 8 Local Regulatory Agency Interface A review of local regulatory agency records was conducted to help determine if hazardous materials have been handled, stored, or generated on the subject site and/or the adjacent properties and businesses. Regulatory Agency Lists Review On October 29, 1997, Krazan contracted with Environmental Data Resources (EDR Sanborn) Inc. of Southport, Connecticut, to conduct an environmental database search meeting the government records search requirements of ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments E1527-97. The database search provided a review of local regulatory agency records to help determine if hazardous materials have been handled, stored, or generated on the subject site and/or the adjacent properties and businesses. Search distances are per ASTM standards. A copy of the EDR report is provided in Appendix A. The subject property is not listed on any of the regulatory databases searched. However, the search did identify a number of sites in the surrounding_ area which have been listed as having. the potential for impacting their surrounding environment. All identified sites are located down-gradient of the subject site and, therefore, have little potential for impacting the site (see Figure 2). No listings were found for the subject site or within the ASTM E 1527-97 search radius in the review of the following regulatory databases: NPL National Priority List Delisted NPL NPL Deletions RCRIS-TSD Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System CERC-NFRAP Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liabiliry Information System CORRACTS Corrective Action Report SWF/LF Solid Waste Facilities Handbook UST Statewide UST Site/Tank Report RAATS RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System HMIRS Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System PADS PCB Activity Database System ERNS Emergency Response Notification System FINDS Facility Index System TRIS Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System NPLO Lien Federal Superfund Liens TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act MLTS Material Licensing Tracking System KRAZAN &ASSOCIATES, INC. Offices Serving the Western United States 97070.ESA KA Project No. 066-97070 Page No. 9 ROD Record of Decision CONSENT Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees • Air Emissions Washington Emissions Data System Coal Gas Former Manufactured Gas (Coal Gas) Sites Search Results: Subject Property The subject property was not listed in any of the searched databases. Surrounding Properties Tile following sites were identified in the vicinity of the subject site: CSCSL- Department of Ecology Confirmed and Suspected Contaminated Sites List Quendall Terminals 4503 Lake Washington Blvd. S00 feet west J.H. Baxter& Co 5015 Lake Washington Blvd. 1.500 feet northwest CERCLIS - Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Information System J.H. Baxter& Co 5015 Lake Washington Blvd. 1.500 feet northwest LUST- Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports Heath Custom Press 4308 Jones Ave NE 1,000 feet south RCRIS - Resource Conservation and Recovery Act database Quendall Terminals 4303 Lake Washington Blvd. 800 feet west Heath Custom Press 4308 Jones Ave NE 1,000 feet south Independent Cleanup Reports - These are remedial action reports the Department of Ecology has received from either the owner or operator of the site. These actions have been conducted without department oversight or approval and are not under an order or decree. Heath Custom Press 4308 Jones Ave NE 1,000 feet south All of these sites are located down-gradient and topographically downslope of the subject site and, therefore, have little potential for impacting the site (see Figure 2). For details of these sites, see the EDR report provided in Appendix A. KRAZAN&ASSOCIATES,INC. • Offices Serving the Western United States 97070.ESA KA Project No. 066-97070 Page No. 10 JSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ro conducted a Phase I ESA in conformance with the scope and limitations of the current ASTM Standard for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process E1527 for the I Microtel Renton site. This assessment has revealed no evidence of adverse environmental conditions . 1 I with the subject site except for the following: le source of soil piles found on the site deposited through unauthorized dumping is unknown. lerefore, the potential of the piles containing hazardous materials is also unknown. Conservatively, 2 ese materials should be tested to evaluate for the presence of hazardous substances. Testing should dude at a minimum, diesel range hydrocarbons and heavy metals analyses. If hazardous materials are ..3 und, the soil should be properly disposed according to state regulations. ..3 ..4 ..4 ..5 'IONS ..4 naissance and review of the subject property has been limited in scope. This type of investigation is :: with the calculated risk that the presence, full nature, and extent of contamination, if present, would sealed by visual observation alone. Although a thorough site reconnaissance was conducted in 10 ; with ASTM guidelines and employed a professional standard of care, no warranty is given, either 10 or implied, that hazardous material contamination or buried structures, which would not have been hrough this investigation, do not exist at the subject site. Therefore, the data obtained are clear and 11 ily to the degree implied by the sources and methods used. This report does not provide a Guarantee or n that the property is free of hazardous material contamination. ap • gs presented in this report were based upon field observations during a single site visit, review of :xt Iata, and discussions with local regulatory and advisory agencies. Observations describe only the :xt A present at the time of this investigation. The data reviewed and observations made are limited to present at the time of this investigation, accessible areas, and currently available records searched. .A not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the regulatory agency records reviewed. Additionally, ,g the property, Krazan has relied in good faith upon representations and information provided by noted in the report with respect to present operations and existing property conditions, and the :d of the property. It must also be understood that changing circumstances in the property usage, roperty usage, subject property zoning, and changes in the environmental status of the other nearby KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Offices Serving the Western United States 97070.ESA KA Project No. 066-97070 Page No. 11 properties can alter the validity of conclusions and information contained in this report. Therefore, the data obtained are clear and accurate only to the degree implied by the sources and methods used. This report is provided for the exclusive use of the client noted on the cover pace and is subject to the terms and conditions in the applicable contract between the client and Krazan. The client is the only party to which Krazan has explained the risks involved and has been involved in the shaping of the scope of services needed to satisfactorily manage those risks, if any, from the clients point of view. Any third party use of this report, including use by client's lender, will be subject to the terms and conditions governing the work in the contract between the client and Krazan. Any unauthorized release or misuse of this report will be without risk or liability to Krazan. Conclusions and recommendations contained in this report are based on the evaluation of technical information made available during the course of this assessment. Krazan does not warrant that future environmental, legal, Qeotechnical or technical developments cannot supersede such data. If you have any questions or if we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact our office at (253) 354-1330. Respectfully submitted, Ex�9 • KRAZAN & ASSOCLA.TES, a� wAs • _ La,". Z 563 Dean Alexander oe �cr3srsv- Q� 4'4 Geotechnical Engineer sSIONAL BAG RGE T002051 / RCE34274 r • -. J 1 EXPIRES. I O-9e KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. Offices Serving the Western United States 97070.ESA KA Project No. 066-97070 Page No. 12 REFERENCES Galster, R.And W. LaPrade, 1991. Geology of Seattle, Washington. Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists. Vol XXVII No 3. GeoEngineers, Inc., 1992. Summary report: Critical and resource Areas Evaluation (draft). Krazan &Associates, Inc., 1997. Soils Report for the Proposed Microtel Site, Renton WA. (unpublished). Soil Conservation Service, 1967. Soil Survey of King County. Rupert Engineering, 1997. Drainage Study for the Proposed Microtel Site, Renton. WA. • • KRAZAN &ASSOCIATES,INC. Offices Serving the Western United States 97070.ESA t'F.fit>. f i. •, t•, clm'tti,i�.i j �_�+Yt'1 j.i.VrZW ,f.1 '� l 1•a� �y i r3X'1,,..i 1"K fa. I .yi 'Ji ��1i17�J CI ',7M.�fYy iJ f 1 kJ�i�^. 4,,;Lake�1lahngto ,. }; /1 .1', t «. 1y`.�i, RAJ 4•7 ♦ 4, ii fi,��,�t a F., ,A ."f '.47r ljt`/ �1 ,,,,.YIM / _ ,, •v, '•\:�.ii 1,4-4. yyyy�"t 91, t j (;!wp :'it 'N�. /I/ 1 rtt _ _t f`f]'� ixit,I t Nuf 41:4, :44?. rtilaAI,. ,' 1`IfI _�, u 1 .,M ` ' f EA Health Club L � a , - J t , lt..ryx a,, . ., « Shur Gard Storage_,7 1 a' ': t , iJi r^„ Denny's �1 .., Detention Ponds �,; J 4, _l 1^ -`L I � , ,'; , Travelers Inn r ra a .1) J, ,r �: R eta it Plaza r.. 4'p.' '-- �� McDonalds 1 DOT Soil Stockpile ,`'•4';rf, � } Retail Plaza ir 1i �� - ( i.r 1 �. 1 ; ;. -. / ,w rr w9: is — • SITE L OCA TIO_!V AND _4DJ4 CENT..PROPERTIES 1 ( "iII111 O iiii111. ' NORTH 11111111111111111 0' 500' 1 ,000, SCALE IN FEET (±) M I C R O T E L_ INN SCn1p Date, AS SHOWN 11/97 y- NE 44 AND LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD Drawn CWY Approved bY azan Project No. Figure No. ENGINEERS. GEOLOGISTS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALISTS DENTON, WA. 070-97066 1 Offices Serving the western United States .,• . WV • {' • t••fie •rAr ti-•w zc6 y t r: n J•ti Y aal o • . s>" • F��"f� '. • • t .Prr ter w• i • _ • t`�+6 .Asp ,• pM Jw idi^ Photo 1: North facing view of the subject site. • • • • 4 s .•-tee:+— - _ > :y. a.a,•xy.,+ .. yaw -,' .- r r _ V ,r • Photo 2: South facing view of the subject site. Project No. 070-97066 Proposed Microtel Inn Northeast 44th Ave. And Lake _ ,Date: 11 97 azan Washington Blvd. r Renton, Washington Approved by. TED N*3,,,. .....::.....-40.,,, ,,-;•.i:, „:211„ • • • --_gigf..---. F...''.1%.?7,^ ,-g.A.Y. 4-."..."-tii.,1 /.1.."%14"--,,,,,:?..-.(4-,...•• . s. ., [; �, ' .� 44 r • • e is • ♦ ••": • -Fj r +A:.••., . - :- ar, >u.'fit •`. „. • ,,- :r i• _A• 't. • ';l et's•;tot,e: • Y► '1 ' 'a• s�+ .r N+� L �.�•. - :'?jay / ; ,j. At' � " ' i •.1''' • ,,:s •,fir-- s : a•it, _� :�- 1�Ry7 � �� '.. —Y+ .... • i1, • ` .w ;aiY : a y,. .� • -a .r• , Photo 3: East facing view of the western portion of the subject site. ; . . tr ._ _ -r 9 ..,. Y '' •".'h.. t� a rr- i F S r 5`�� ,�"�1,. �i�.+r �e,7,�� v i ,irt�• 'k'aA•w;eh`4T�e �r �•' s••�,r +. <' ` - �•,-�+ ,Y,r1 d r • .. ' '': 7 ' • _ r .ti` ''i' • '� ;'` `h. • •' 't, ♦5•` • r _ .4' • (''5•..4` � -�a•..,r._.. ti�. yr. ra.rT 7T� t " r • - �'• `.', ...+s- •"ti ` .�..c :'. ,.�... .,{+r . 9�• '„• r.• ,a ' `. ,• !. it i.';S a 4,x+F▪ y r ,+5- "= • • � •. * ..:' R �' �{ '� y+r t5t`x.r'� As A N ?; r 4L"w"� 1 ;a▪ s• lt•e i.1.:. " + c R ^ •+ 1'•t,;ri 44... .. ,. yS • am • � * ,.. • • r ,l . t*: s1.1-� 4S.: y , •yi , - ati_ 7 • Photo 4: West facing view of the subject site. Note the soil piles in the background. Project No. 070-97066 Proposed Microtel Inn Northeast 44th Ave. And Lake Late: 11-97 MOM. MN azan Washington Blvd. Renton, Washington Approved by: TED OVERVIEW MAP - 207337.1 s - Krazan & Associates, Inc. / ( I_N....) I 7 \ -----. .1,7:::-.:., - - - .,- --:....- - 1 A i , ,...._.-- , \ . . . . I a .., , _ oI .,..j,...., _________ „.4.___.,. . . . ._ ... .. .. .. .....: . _, ..., 1 1 ______ ___ • . .. .. . .. .. , . __,-;•,-..:. -_, ._ .- ..:. __ ._ _.„..- .„ i i , . ! s,E 6 9- i r• j So m - fI I ? i 1 i \.A • l \ '\ L H I �I 1 1/ I i J I t _ a`; j N - I I i LI:' ••••7 I �+ ). /*:•,1. • 0 \...; ; .; - F � --.., a r I J % 7 1 / / I I 1 _,-,:„.. .i...z...„...i.l...._ _:._,,,_________:...:__„....„....,..„....._._, A 1 )/—. 1 . 1 / .r....-2-_,-„,--„,_,...„=„\--„:„,-..:•_,--,___-___-.-_,..„-,...._-___„,- 1/4,,i, I , II\\ ;" \ 1 *it , { I it 1 ,---- -.., 440 ,.. _� I,, • ei, I \ ___. I ' \; V L _ I 1 \ 1/... I 1 -E7,---;-,y,::::_-_f___=:.=_- .:.::_--,.„.. _ r,...:, ..... ,.,„______,_,,.:, „........„...„..i_r___,...,.„..„::::„:_,..,,.. ,„,,_ ---,__ „::;....,._______„:4:::„.: 4 / L a /_. „„ K___L.....„,_- ...-1,-,.,;.,..-:,„_ .,_2....„,_____,.„..._,, 4.; ,,,..„...,...._______.f...... ...„....„,..„.__ I', , N S O T N Si I I,......,„..._:: :.____...c.,..._„_,.:..:.:__ 2. �/ �"i' �I , '....2-.,---:•;;:.-.7:: i.-:.--t7--fr \ \ ' V \2V \ \ ✓ x Target Property o v4 la uIW A Sites at elevations nigher an or eoual to the target orooery II • Sites at elevations lower than /\,/ Power transmission fines the target property N oil&Gas pipelines 1 Coal Gasification Sites(if reouested) 100-year flood zone...__ .- _ ---- National Priority List Sites - // 500-year load zone Landfill Sites ElWetlands per National L Wetlands Inventory(1894) Figure 2 - Identified Hazardous Waste Sites TARGET PROPERTY: SW 1/4 Section 29 T25N RSE CUSTOMER: Krazan&Associates,Inc. ADDRESS: NE 44th/Lake Washington Blvd CONTACT: Eric Paukstaitis CITY/STA i E/ZIP: Renton WA 9805E INQUIRY#: 207337.1s ===IKiizari & ASSOCIATES , INC . GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING • ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION APENDEY A EDR - Radius Map • Offices Serving The Western United States 25418 -74th Avenue South•Kent,WA 98032• P.O. Box 7335 • Everett, WA 98201 -L;.: ed r e data resources, inc. The EDR-Radius Map with GeoCheckTM SW 1/4 Section 29 T25N RSE NE 44th/ Lake Washington Blvd Renton, WA 98056 Inquiry Number: 207337.1s The Source For Environmental October 29, 1997 Risk Management Data 3530 Post Road Southport, Connecticut 06490 Nationwide Customer Service Telephone: 1 -800-352-0050 Fax: 1 -800-231 -6802 Internet: www.edrnet.com TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE Executive Summary_ ES1 Topographic Map. 2 GeoCheck Summary 3 Overview Map 5 Detail Map. 6 Map Summary - All Sites_ 7 Map Summary- Sites with higher or the same elevation as the Target Property_ _ 8 Map Findings_ 9 Orphan Summary_ 18 APPENDICES GeoCheck Version 2.1_ Al Government Records Searched / Data Currency Tracking Addendum A6 Thank you for your business. • Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050 with any questions or comments. • • Disclaimer This Report contains information obtained from a variety of public sources and EDR makes no representation or warranty regarding the accuracy,reliability,quality,or completeness of said information or the information contained in this report. The customer shall assume full responsibility for the use of this report. No warranty of merchantability or of fitness for a particular purpose,expressed or implied,shall apply and EDR specifically disclaims the making of such warranties. In no event shall EDR be liable to anyone for special, incidental,consequential or exemplary damages. Copyright(c) 1997 by EDR. All rights reserved. • TC207337.1s Page 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY A search of available environmental records was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR). The report meets the government records search requirements of ASTM Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments, E 1527-97. Search distances are per ASTM standard or custom distances requested by the user. The address of the subject property for which the search was intended is: NE 44TH/ LAKE WASHINGTON BLVD RENTON, WA 98056 No mapped sites were found in EDR's search of available ( "reasonably ascertainable ") government records either on the subject property or within the ASTM E 1527-97 search radius around the subject property for the following Databases: NPL: National Priority List Delisted NPL: NPL Deletions RCRIS-TSD: Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System CERC-NFRAP: Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Lability Information System CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report SWFJLF: Solid Waste Facilities Handbook UST: Statewide UST Site/Tank Report RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System PADS: PCB Activity Database System ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System FINDS: Facility Index System TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System NPL Lien: Federal Superfund Liens TSCA: .Toxic Substances Control Act MLTS: .Material Licensing Tracking System ROD: .Records Of Decision CONSENT: .Superfund (CERCLA) Consent Decrees Air Emissions: .Washington Emissions Data System Coal Gas: Former Manufactured gas (Coal Gas) Sites. Unmapped (orphan) sites are not considered in the foregoing analysis. Search Results: • • Search results for the subject property and the search radius, are listed below: Subject Property: The subject property was not listed in any of the databases searched by EDR. • • TC207337.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1 • EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Surrounding Properties: Elevations have been determined from the USGS 1 degree Digital Elevation Model and should be evaluated on a relative (not an absolute) basis. Relative elevation information between sites of close proximity should be field verified. EDR's definition of a site with an elevation equal to the subject property includes a tolerance of -10 feet. Sites with an elevation equal to or higher than the subject property have been differentiated below from sites with an elevation lower than the subject property (by more than 10 feet). Page numbers and map identification numbers refer to the EDR Radius Map report where detailed data on individual sites can be reviewed. Sites listed in bold italics are in multiple databases. CSCSL: The State Hazardous Waste Sites records are the states' equivalent to CERCLIS. These sites may or may not already by listed on the federal CERCLIS list. Priority sites planned for cleanup using state funds (state equivalent of Superfund) are identified along with sites where cleanup will be paid for by potentially responsible parties. The data comes from the Department of Ecology's Confirmed & Suspected Contaminated Sites List. A review of the CSCSL list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/09/1997 has revealed that there are 2 CSCSL sites within approximately 1 Mile of the subject property. Lower Elevation Address Dist/ Dir Map ID Page QUENDALL TERMINALS 4503 LK WASHINGTON BLVD 1/8- 1/4W 2 9 J H BAXTER& CO RENTON 5015 LK WASHINGTON BLVD 1/4- 1/2N 3 13 CERCLIS:The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Information System contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities, private companies and private persons, persuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List (NPL) and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL A review of the CERCLIS list, as provided by EDR, and dated 06/01/1997 has revealed that there is 1 CERCLIS site within approximately 0.5 Miles of the subject property. Lower Elevation Address Dist/ Dir Map ID Page J H BAXTER& CO RENTON 5015 LK WASHINGTON BLVD 1/4- 1/2N 3 13 • LUST: The Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports contain an inventory of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents. The data comes from the Department of Ecology's Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Site List. A review of the LUST list, as provided by EDR, and dated 05/01/1997 has revealed that there is 1 LUST site within approximately 0.5 Miles of the subject property. Lower Elevation Address Dist/ Dir Map ID Page . _ HEATH CUSTOM PRESS 4308 JONES AVE NE 1/8- 1/4SW 1 9 TC207337.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY RCRIS: The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act database includes selected information on sites that generate, store, treat, or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Act. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA. A review of the RCRIS-SQG list, as provided by EDR, and dated 04/01/1997 has revealed that there is 1 RCRIS-SQG site within approximately 0.25 Miles of the subject property. Lower Elevation Address Dist/Dir Map ID Page HEATH CUSTOM PRESS 4308 JONES AVE NE 1/8- 1/4 SW 1 9 RCRIS: The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act database includes selected information on sites that generate, store, treat, or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Act. The source of this database is the U.S. EPA. A review of the RCRIS-LCG list, as provided by EDR,and dated 04/01/1997 has revealed that there is 1 RCRIS-LQG site within approximately 0.25 Miles of the subject property. Lower Elevation Address Dist/Dir Map ID Page QUENDALL TERMINALS 4503 LK WASHINGTON BLVD 1/8- 1/4W 2 9 ICR: These are remedial action reports Ecology has recieved from either the owner or operator of the site. These actions have been conducted without department oversight or approval and are not under an order or decree. A review of the WA ICR list, as provided by EDR, and dated 03/01/1997 has revealed that there is 1 WA ICR site within approximately 0.5 Miles of the subject property. Lower Elevation Address Dist/Dir Map ID Page HEATH CUSTOM PRESS 4308 JONES AVE NE 1/8- 1/4 SW 1 9 • TC207337.1s EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Due to poor or inadequate address information, the following sites were not mapped: Site Name Database(s) SUNSET PARK SWF/LF VASHON ISLAND SWF/LF KENT SWF/LF NORTH BEND SWF/LF FALL CITY SWF/LF WDOE NRO MAY VALLEY DRUMS RCRIS-SOG,FINDS ELECTRONICS FACILITY 616 SW 41ST ST. ERNS ELECTRONICS FACILITY 616 SW 41ST ST. ERNS 607 SW GIRDY WAY ERNS MIDWAY AUTO (EXXON) WA ICR MT. OLIVET LANDFILL WA ICR KING CO. FIRE STN =1 WA ICR • TC207337.ts EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 OVERVIEW MAP - 207337.1 s - Krazan & Associates, Inc. r---Ni ____ §.. 1 . j _ t I I. ���Y;�. a K ~ ' ��' trite 'L.� 7e /U __4_______I I xam� }SAnyr �� �R% r Sa ma . k��,-,-1•:',,,,,4%.4,- 4.?.%:.41.1felkitft14,3,:*44 1... / r)01--- / ....... 1 o °t, . r a , as 01 .:, - . y------1......._ ,L) a . • 6 9 H �r'� �. Ir g ti \ L rTT .1.. is?? 1K 1 / / i A4c"94;.L'''' .4.aVIZ7"43 e.. ''-. i,Fk . * I ff.::: i N . , < iµy; / ,,,,.. I o 1 1,,,/ , , , ou_ •-=-L..• •-'.%"..r..,--,.-"--SWt14,irit-AZ:z,ti-'1,-;:k. r A, i , . ,,,,.....„.....„.„,..„.........., _ ,__ : , ..„, , , , , ,, _ .__,.:.,„._,.: :.„,.....„,,,,........„„:„ . _ . _, , _ , ,,.....,.., ,... .,..,__„,....„, ..„„ ._ .„ �,,.,,...„. _ . \ , I I, oI .. ? % ' nti , /---( ,.::,_,:-,-.7_,-.:_._ .,,,,,:4.3_,--,-,-.._:-.-=,--,-.7-_-:.---_-..--E,_-.,,,,,-1 1 -, A I :, 1 OI �� E 3 1,• I r- .\e o / I i „ \ •:.,..„..„...T.b5..1E.,._ ,E.41.,,_ .. _. 4. 1 I \__/ --- _;, - v- _# ( / 1 " - , / @``; 1, N 00TH ST -' 1 L �� \yam' \!, / o • * Target Property 0 1/4 irz uiw. A Sites at elevations higher than • or equal to the target property • Sites at elevations lower than j`./ Power transmission lines the target property A/ Oil&Gas pipelines i Coal Gasification Sites(If requested) /// 100-year flood zone - National Priority List Sites f C-71 Landfill Sites �/ 500-year flood zone M] Wetlands per National Wetlands Inventory(1994) 0. ' TARGET PROPERTY: SW 1/4 Section 29 T25N R5E CUSTOMER: Krazan&Associates, Inc. ADDRESS: NE 44th/Lake Washington Blvd CONTACT: Eric Paulcstaitis CITY/STATE/ZIP: Renton WA 98056 INQUIRY#: 207337.1s TOPOGRAPHIC MAP - 207337.1 s - Krazan & Associates, Inc. Z5 l t' * '(rt1+w�+•t r4 �f1 z../i $i 1 .,I i .I;; %i / ' \w 7`` J! / 1 'i� I I i L �91,r3.�y. '!r/t-zr.es. .., / i+ i t ' Ili ':,,,,�'fI:/i.�'\ .�i t� i r f I I . r'r^a'r.+'w. a �' 11 ; ,I,i i i;/a,// ,,\, GN t 5! 11 a ; 1 1 x tsar r .K� a,ay - ;7i f{� ' i 1 1 I I , i 11 I �Vit5°; , °�µ»,� 11 / �v `1 ,�\11;;Ij'1I(lb': i ; N ,,e1 a. V\` 1 I U I i„j,1 ;t) s azn� rt per } i / j� II\ `1 \;J�\�\�\ /r �s R*, � �xLyia� 5£�, / `,,,�' 2� .y'f,x.r / i I I \ • \ \ham/%./ -4' , F 1 I i— I I • y S• •l / 7 ��,i I I 11 \ 1f / ii � / l 7 1� ,1v�\ 111 f..9 / 1 l I ,�ee�[ i / / / ( '4. 1/ y I .,I 11 - .. ,-, ,✓/ / / ^ \J� / i 1 \i`t`' v\` \ \\���\. `/ 'yam / \ // 1 1 \ r 11 i 11 11 1 .1 C.' aF iv' / /, / / / / ^^`�\ i 1 It\ �, \\� �\\. /_ / _ I I III 1 T, � t / I i l' l / \\.-.i/ 7 1 11\�•\ ,�\',• \�. \, •ti 8 - =/ •/ •\ 2 I I 1 :1 I 1 E `.- 3`1 , i i' / SE e1TH 5t Se 60TN\e� 1 ` \\ /I 1 III "h a-` 4 _t 1 I / / �...• 1\',.`\\� .\.\, / •'/a////� �`�\I I II . I iC F -4:147- t I e i !'' /'/ ^` �\�\\ .?.!/1, e :! /I / \1II 1 I I I I _ �'€ ! v is1 i' �\� ) ti' �// J.!:1 11 i1 Ili i t I I 1 t ; . /l/I •i , II i1 ' Ii 1 .. iw4 m \31\ I t I -I ��= / I Ii1!' II -i-, �� \ \ ///ir////i/ I I I i 1�i!/' 1; �` s3 �r - \\I I E 69TH WAY //, /% 1// !,/ 5�' Sr I :• lij / ^2k,___ ' 1• 011•' I ,/ ;I I:„. , �/j•- ' '•'i ;;2 } ', Il/ji a '' ,_ � ? L ,.,,li I I i i , . / /I i ,%l i // '�— -,4_. e' / •Iiflf!/I ?.., r / i • I 1 / i �/./( 1 1 / •!,I 11• 11 F I I. I ' I j1 i i I lfr/f t`.�\\\�\ j//f//��� ¢ � z� / �/ 1 1 I 1 1 •1 1 1 i i , I i •• ., .I \\ `\\ \ ,, r /� ,// / �i.�� ;,, i- ' / r'i I ! 1 !l \ tif'L; r I j I / • '//, I �✓ i%/•// k1 /', ,, _ •,A-,,,,-„?..-:„:.,.... .- / I - I I i t, I . , •`''\ /.. • , I I \1'•1 \'I i i y.,,#� -,,.t - w- •/ 3 ,......\.. ,, `} ',- SOT ,j �.• 1 I I 1 1 \ \t, \t / �P\`\'`',\,\„.. `�\'\� - ="vim S,r.y j . I \ • . ‹v � �/ . t A ,` . � . i , % \\ \ 1 \ �% ``\-y-w - 4""gw .7-r i xx` �'E ; i . `t \ Y; ; ; / IA 1 e2 L � �,E=l h / . 1 . � i �a-K C� t O S . � \ 11 z a1 -y�I j ` S te- , t1 \ t I \ � EMgyVgCl: Ei '� ,� �� - �' �.`Z' \ I 11 NE ZT}($T Ali I . /' of '>• z ^c-4 x-erg .-`z. �` `\\ I / ..1• \ • �lL a € � ice, I I WA \\\ s3Y"e a.Zsa .Ai ,F,, tgf I' / / / 1' '� I I \\\ •c - 'sr._ ->„ _-„ '.: .I i \ / i• '' % !/ /1 / Nf SUNSc \\\ =Kr..s "';_ ..�. / 'F J, \ i ! / NE.12TH./'T ,%/ 2TH6T• / `\ I'\ 1 I I I i I f /\/ Major Roads 0 1/2 1 z Inu.� V Contour Lines , Waterways Ai Airports 0 Earthquake epicenter,Richter 5 or greater © Closest Federal Well in quadrant Closest State Well in quadrant P3 Closest Public Water Supply Well TAP GET PROPERTY: SW 1/4 Section 29 T25N R5E CUSTOMER: Krazan&Associates, Inc. ADE RESS: NE 44th/Lake Washington Blvd CONTACT: Eric Paukstaitis CIT'/STATE/ZIP: Renton WA 98056 INQUIRY#: 207337.1s GEOCHECK VERSION 2.1 SUMMARY TARGET PROPERTY COORDINATES Latitude(North): 47.532280-47'31'56.2" Longitude(West): 122.192886- 122' 11'34.4" Universal Transverse Mercator: Zone 10 UTM X(Meters): 560750.7 UTM Y(Meters): 5264414.0 GEOLOGIC AGE IDENTIFICATIONt Geologic Code: ITa Era: Cenozoic System: Tertiary Series: Lower Tertiary andesite ROCK STRATIGRAPHIC UNIT' Category: Volcanic Rocks GROUNDWATER FLOW INFORMATION Groundwater flow direction for a particular site is best determined by a qualified environmental professional using site-specific well data.If such data is not reasonably ascertainable,it may be necessary to rely on other sources of information,including well data collected on nearby properties, regional groundwater flow information(from deep aquifers), or surface topography. General Topographic Gradient: General West General Hydrogeologic Gradient: No hydrogeologic data available. USGS TOPOGRAPHIC MAP ASSOCIATED WITH THIS SITE Target Property: 2447122-E2 MERCER ISLAND,WA FEDERAL DATABASE WELL INFORMATION WELL DISTANCE DEPTH TO QUADRANT FROM TP LITHOLOGY WATER TABLE Northern 1/4- 1/2 Mile Not Reported Not Reported Eastern 1/4-1/2 Mile Not Reported 242 ft. Southern 1/2-1 Mile Not Reported 2 ft. Western 1 -2 Miles Not Reported 140 ft. STATE DATABASE WELL INFORMATION WELL DISTANCE QUADRANT FROM TP NO WELLS FOUND PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM INFORMATION (EPA-FRDS) Searched by Nearest Well. NOTE: PWS System location is not always the same as well location. PWS Name: LAKE SAMISH MOBILE TERRACE MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 Location Relative to TP: >2 Miles North Well currently has or has had major violation(s): Yes r Sou,ce:P.G.Sclnaten.R.E.Arndt and WJ.Santee,Geology of the Caermnous U.S.at 1:2300.000 Scale-A digital representakm of the 1974 P.B.King and H.M.Berkman Map,USGS Digital Data Senors DOS•11(1994. 7.U.S.EPA Ground Water handbook.Vol I:Grand Waver and Contammaoon.Oho,of Researcn and daralopmem EPN62SI6901016a.Chagar 4.page 78,September 1990. TC207337.1 s Page 3 GEOCHECK VERSION 2.1 • SUMMARY AREA RADON INFORMATION EPA Radon Zone for KING County: 3. Note:Zone 1 indoor average level>4pCi/L :Zone 2 indoor average level>=2pCi/L :Zone 3 indoor average level <2pCi/L. Zlp Code: 98056 Number of sites tested:2 Area Average Activity 0/0<4 pCi/L °/o 4-20 pCi/L 0/0>20 pCi/L Living Area- 1st Floor 0.800 pCi/L 100% 0% 00/0 Living Area-2nd Floor Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Not Reported Basement 0.600 pCi/L 100% 0% 0% TC207337.1 s Page 4 MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY SHOWING ALL SITES Search Target Distance Total Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8- 1/4 1/4-1/2 1/2- 1 > 1 Plotted NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 Delisted NPL TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 RCRIS-TSD 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0 CSCSL 1.000 0 1 1 0 NR 2 CERCLIS 0.500 0 0 1 NR NR 1 CERC-NFRAP TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 CORRACTS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 State Landfill 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0 LUST 0.500 0 1 0 NR NR 1 UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0 RAATS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 RCRIS Sm. Ouan. Gen. 0.250 0 1 NR NR NR 1 RCRIS Lg. Ouan. Gen. 0.250 0 1 NR NR NR 1 HMIRS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 PADS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 ERNS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 FINDS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 TRIS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 • NPL Liens TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 TSCA TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 MLTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 i ROD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 CONSENT 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 Wa Air Emissions (EMI) TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 WA ICR 0.500 0 1 0 NR NR 1 Coal Gas 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 TP=Target Property NR= Not Requested at this Search Distance ' Sites may be listed in more than one database TC207337.1 s Page 7 MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY SHOWING ONLY SITES HIGHER THAN OR THE SAME ELEVATION AS TP Search Target Distance Total Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8 - 1/4 1/4 -1/2 1/2- 1 > 1 Plotted NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 Delisted NPL TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 RCRIS-TSD 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0 CSCSL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 CERCLIS 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0 CERC-NFRAP TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 CORRACTS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 State Landfill 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0 LUST 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0 UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0 - RAATS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 RCRIS Sm. Quan. Gen. 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0 RCRIS Lg. Quan. Gen. 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0 HMIRS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 PADS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 ERNS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 FINDS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 TRIS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 NPL Liens TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 TSCA TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 MLTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 ROD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 CONSENT 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 Wa Air Emissions (EMI) TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 WA ICR 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0 Coal Gas 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 TP=Target Property NR = Not Requested at this Search Distance i Sites may be listed in more than one database i TC207337.1 s Page 8 MAP FINDINGS Map ID - Direction Distance EDR ID Number Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number Coal Gas Site Search: No site was found in a search of Real Property Scan's ENVIROHAZ database. 1 HEATH CUSTOM PRESS RCRIS-SQG 1000405668 SW 4308 JONES AVE NE FINDS WAD061672630 1/8-1/4 RENTON,WA 98056 WA ICR Lower LUST RCRIS: Owner: CLEM HEATH, HOWARD HEATH Record Date: 01/21/88 Classification: Small Quantity Generator Used Oil Recyc: No • Violation Status:No violations found LUST: Facility ID: 200471 Ecology Region: North Western Release Date: 1/17/90 0:00:00 Release ID: 1675 Release Status: REPORTED CLEANED UP Status Date: 5/21/95 0:00:00 Affected Media: SOIL Region: STATE Facility ID: 200471 Ecology Region: North Western Release Date: 1/17/90 0:00:00 Release ID: 1675 Release Status: CLEANUP STARTED Status Date: 1/17/90 0:00:00 Affected Media: SOIL Region: STATE WA ICR: Date Ecology Received Report: 07/19/1990 Contaminants Found at Site: Petroleum products Media Contaminated: Soil Cause of Contamination: Tank Region: North Western Type of Report Ecology Received: Final cleanup report Site Register Issue: 90-08 • 2 QUENDALL TERMINALS RCRIS-LQG 1000310244 West 4503 LK WASHINGTON BLVD CSCSL WAD076645183 1/8-1/4 RENTON,WA 98056 Lower RCRIS: Owner: ALTINO PROPERTIES PUGET TIMBER Record Date: 12/21/83 Classification: Large Quantity Generator Used Oil Recyc: No Violation Status:No violations found • TC207337.1 s Page 9 MAP FINDINGS Map ID _ Direction Distance EDR ID Number Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number QUENDALL TERMINALS (Continued) 1000310244 SHWS: Facility ID: 2045 Facility Status: RA IN PROGRESS Flag: STATE/HSL Rank: 1 Responsible Unit: NORTHWEST Ecology Site Status relative to the MICA cleanup process: Remedial Action in progress Independent Site Status-those sites undergoing an independent cleanup: Not reported WARM Bin Number indicates the outcome of the Washington Ranking Model(WARM): 1 -Greatest assessed risk to human health and to the environment Affected Media: Groundwater Media Status: .0(Confirmed)-The presence of hazardous substances above MTCA cleanup levels has been confirmed by laboratory analysis(or field determination in the case of petroleum contamination) Base/Neutral/Acid Organics: Confirmed above MICA cleanup levels Halogenated Organic Compounds: Not reported EPA Priority Pollutants- Metals and Cyanide: Not reported Metals-Other non-priority pollutant medals: Not reported Polychlorinated biPhenyls(PCBs): Not reported Pesticides: Not reported Petroleum Products: Not reported Phenolic Compounds: Not reported Non-Halogenated Solvents: Confirmed above MTCA cleanup levels Dioxin: Not reported Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons(PAH): Confirmed above MTCA cleanup levels Reactive Wastes: Not reported Corrosive Wastes: Not reported Radioactive Wastes: Not reported Asbestos: Not reported Conventional Contaminants,Organic: Not reported Conventional Contaminants,Inorganic: Not reported • TC207337.1s Page 10 MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction Distance EDR ID Numbe Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Numbe QUENDALL TERMINALS (Continued) 1000310244 Facility ID: 2045 Facility Status: RA IN PROGRESS Flag: STATE/HSL Rank: 1 Responsible Unit: NORTHWEST Ecology Site Status relative to the MTCA cleanup process: Remedial Action in progress Independent Site Status-those sites undergoing an independent cleanup: Not reported WARM Bin Number indicates the outcome of the Washington Ranking Model(WARM): 1 -Greatest assessed risk to human health and to the environment Affected Media: Sediment Media Status: C(Confirmed) -The presence of hazardous substances above MTCA cleanup levels has been confirmed by laboratory analysis(or field determination in the case of petroleum contamination) Base/Neutral/Acid Organics: Not reported Halogenated Organic Compounds: Not reported EPA Priority Pollutants- Metals and Cyanide: Not reported Metals-Other non-priority pollutant medals: Not reported Polychlorinated biPhenyls(PCBs): Not reported Pesticides: Not reported Petroleum Products: Not reported Phenolic Compounds: Not reported Non-Halogenated Solvents: Not reported Dioxin: Not reported Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons(PAH): Confirmed above MTCA cleanup levels Reactive Wastes: Not reported Corrosive Wastes: Not reported Radioactive Wastes: Not reported Asbestos: Not reported Conventional Contaminants,Organic: Not reported Conventional Contaminants,Inorganic: Not reported TC207337.1 s Page 1 MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction Distance EDR ID Number Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number QUENDALL TERMINALS (Continued) 1000310244 Facility ID: 2045 Facility Status: RA IN PROGRESS Flag: STATE/HSL Rank: 1 Responsible Unit: NORTHWEST Ecology Site Status relative to the MTCA cleanup process: Remedial Action in progress Independent Site Status-those sites undergoing an independent cleanup: Not reported WARM Bin Number indicates the outcome of the Washington Ranking Model(WARM): 1 -Greatest assessed risk to human health and to the environment Affected Media: Soil Media Status: C(Confirmed)-The presence of hazardous substances above MTCA cleanup levels has been confirmed by laboratory analysis(or field determination in the case of petroleum contamination) Base/Neutral/Acid Organics: Confirmed above MTCA cleanup levels Halogenated Organic Compounds: Not reported EPA Priority Pollutants- Metals and Cyanide: Suspected to be present Metals-Other non-priority pollutant medals: Suspected to be present Polychlorinated biPhenyls(PCBs): Not reported Pesticides: Not reported Petroleum Products: Not reported Phenolic Compounds: Not reported Non-Halogenated Solvents: Confirmed above MTCA cleanup levels Dioxin: Not reported Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons(PAH): Confirmed above MTCA cleanup levels Reactive Wastes: Not reported Corrosive Wastes: Not reported Radioactive Wastes: Not reported Asbestos: Not reported Conventional Contaminants,Organic: Not reported Conventional Contaminants,Inorganic: Not reported • • TC207337.1s Page 12 MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction Distance EDR ID Number Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number QUENDALL TERMINALS (Continued) 1000310244 Facility ID: 2045 Facility Status: RA IN PROGRESS Flag: STATE/HSL Rank: 1 Responsible Unit: NORTHWEST Ecology Site Status relative to the MTCA cleanup process: Remedial Action in progress Independent Site Status-those sites undergoing an independent cleanup: Not reported WARM Bin Number indicates the outcome of the Washington Ranking Model(WARM): 1 -Greatest assessed risk to human health and to the environment Affected Media: Surface Water Media Status: S(Suspected)-Due to preliminary investigations or the nature of business operations 'or manufacturing processes,certain contaminants are suspected to be present at the site Base/Neutral/Acid Organics: Suspected to be present Halogenated Organic Compounds: Not reported EPA Priority Pollutants-Metals and Cyanide: Suspected to be present Metals-Other non-priority pollutant medals: Suspected to be present Polychlorinated biPhenyls(PCBs): Suspected to be present Pesticides: Not reported Petroleum Products: Not reported Phenolic Compounds: Not reported Non-Halogenated Solvents: Suspected to be present Dioxin: Not reported Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons(PAH): Suspected to be present Reactive Wastes: Not reported Corrosive Wastes: Not reported Radioactive Wastes: Not reported Asbestos: Not reported Conventional Contaminants,Organic: Not reported Conventional Contaminants, Inorganic: Suspected to be present 3 J H BAXTER&CO RENTON CERCLIS 1000104025 North 5015 LK WASHINGTON BLVD N RCRIS-SQG WAD009265521 1/4-1/2 RENTON,WA 98056 FINDS Lower CSCSL • CERCLIS Classification Data: Site Incident Category: Not reported Federal Facility: NO Ownership Status: OTHER NPL Status: NOT ON NPL EPA Notes: Not reported CERCLIS Assessment History: Assessment: DISCOVERY Completed: 07/01/79 Assessment: PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT Completed: 05/06/85 Assessment: SCREENING SITE INSPECTION Completed: 10/10/86 CERCLIS Site Status: This site is currently under investigation by the government to assess the extent of further action CERCLIS Alias Name(s): J H BAXTER&CO • TC207337.1 s Page 13 MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction Distance EDR ID Number Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number J H BAXTER&CO RENTON (Continued) 1000104025 RCRIS: Owner: J H BAXTER&CO (415)349-0201 Record Date: 12/21/83 Classification: Not reported Used Oil Recyc: No Violation Status:No violations found SHWS: • Facility ID: 2068 Facility Status: RA IN PROGRESS Flag: 'STATE/HSL Rank: 1 Responsible Unit: NORTHWEST Ecology Site Status relative to the MTCA cleanup process: Remedial Action in progress Independent Site Status-those sites undergoing an independent cleanup: Not reported WARM Bin Number indicates the outcome of the Washington Ranking Model(WARM): 1 -Greatest assessed risk to human health and to the environment Affected Media: Groundwater Media Status: C(Confirmed)-The presence of hazardous substances above MTCA cleanup levels has been confirmed by laboratory analysis(or field determination in the case of petroleum contamination) Base/Neutral/Acid Organics: Confirmed above MTCA cleanup levels Halogenated Organic Compounds: Not reported EPA Priority Pollutants• Metals and Cyanide: Not reported Metals-Other non-priority pollutant medals: Not reported Polychlorinated biPhenyls(PCBs): Not reported Pesticides: Not reported Petroleum Products: Suspected to be present Phenolic Compounds: Confirmed above MTCA cleanup levels Non-Halogenated Solvents: Not reported Dioxin: Not reported Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons(PAH): Confirmed above MTCA cleanup levels Reactive Wastes: Not reported Corrosive Wastes: Not reported Radioactive Wastes: Not reported Asbestos: Not reported • Conventional Contaminants,Organic: Not reported Conventional Contaminants, Inorganic: Not reported • TC207337.1 s Page 14 MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction Distance EDR ID Number Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number J H BAXTER&CO RENTON (Continued) 1000104025 Facility ID: 2068 Facility Status: RA IN PROGRESS Flag: STATE/HSL Rank: 1 Responsible Unit: NORTHWEST Ecology Site Status relative to the MTCA cleanup process: Remedial Action in progress Independent Site Status-those sites undergoing an independent cleanup: Not reported WARM Bin Number indicates the outcome of the Washington Ranking Model(WARM): 1 •Greatest assessed risk to human health and to the environment Affected Media: Sediment Media Status: C(Confirmed)-The presence of hazardous substances above MTCA cleanup levels has 'been confirmed by laboratory analysis(or field determination in the case of petroleum contamination) Base/Neutral/Acid Organics: Not reported Halogenated Organic Compounds: Not reported EPA Priority Pollutants- Metals and Cyanide: Not reported Metals-Other non-priority pollutant medals: Not reported Polychlorinated biPhenyls(PCBs): Not reported Pesticides: Not reported Petroleum Products: Not reported Phenolic Compounds: Confirmed above MTCA cleanup levels Non-Halogenated Solvents: Not reported Dioxin: Not reported Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons(PAH): Not reported Reactive Wastes: Not reported Corrosive Wastes: Not reported Radioactive Wastes: Not reported Asbestos: Not reported Conventional Contaminants,Organic: Not reported Conventional Contaminants,Inorganic: Not reported • TC207337.1s Page It' MAP FINDINGS Map ID Direction Distance EDR ID Numbe Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Numbe7- J H BAXTER &CO RENTON (Continued) 1000104025 Facility ID: 2068 Facility Status: RA IN PROGRESS Flag: STATE/HSL Rank: 1 Responsible Unit: NORTHWEST Ecology Site Status relative to the MTCA cleanup process: Remedial Action in progress Independent Site Status-those sites undergoing an independent cleanup: Not reported WARM Bin Number indicates the outcome of the Washington Ranking Model(WARM): 1 -Greatest assessed risk to human health and to the environment Affected Media: Soil Media Status: C(Confirmed)-The presence of hazardous substances above MICA cleanup levels has been confirmed by laboratory analysis(or field determination in the case of petroleum contamination) Base/Neutral/Acid Organics: Confirmed above MICA cleanup levels Halogenated Organic Compounds: Not reported EPA Priority Pollutants-Metals and Cyanide: Not reported Metals-Other non-priority pollutant medals: Not reported Polychlorinated biPhenyls(PCBs): Not reported Pesticides: Not reported Petroleum Products: Suspected to be present Phenolic Compounds: Confirmed above MTCA cleanup levels Non-Halogenated Solvents: Not reported Dioxin: Confirmed above MICA cleanup levels Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons(PAH): Confirmed above MICA cleanup levels Reactive Wastes: Not reported Corrosive Wastes: Not reported Radioactive Wastes: Not reported Asbestos: Not reported Conventional Contaminants,Organic: Not reported Conventional Contaminants, Inorganic: Not reported TC207337.1 s Page 16 MAP FINDINGS Map ID ` Direction Distance EDR ID Number Elevation Site Database(s) EPA ID Number J H BAXTER&CO RENTON (Continued) 1000104025 Facility ID: 2068 Facility Status: RA IN PROGRESS Flag: STATEIHSL Rank: 1 Responsible Unit: NORTHWEST Ecology Site Status relative to the MTCA cleanup process: Remedial Action in progress Independent Site Status-those sites undergoing an independent cleanup: Not reported WARM Bin Number indicates the outcome of the Washington Ranking Model(WARM): 1 -Greatest assessed risk to human health and to the environment Affected Media: Surface Water Media Status: S(Suspected)- Due to preliminary investigations or the nature of business operations 'or manufacturing processes,certain contaminants are suspected to be present at the site • Base/Neutral/Acid Organics: Suspected to be present Halogenated Organic Compounds: Not reported EPA Priority Pollutants- Metals and Cyanide: Not reported Metals-Other non-priority pollutant medals: Not reported Polychlorinated biPhenyls(PCBs): Not reported Pesticides: Not reported Petroleum Products: Not reported Phenolic Compounds: Suspected to be present Non-Halogenated Solvents: Not reported Dioxin: Suspected to be present Polynuclear Aromatic Hydrocarbons(PAH): Suspected to be present Reactive Wastes: Not reported Corrosive Wastes: Not reported Radioactive Wastes: Not reported Asbestos: Not reported Conventional Contaminants,Organic: Not reported Conventional Contaminants, Inorganic: Not reported • • • TC207337.1s Page 17 ORPHAN SUMMARY City EDR ID Site Name Site Address Zip Database(s) Facility ID KENT S102514854 MIDWAY AUTO(EXXON) 2802 KENT-DES MOINES ROAD 98056 WA ICR KING COUNTY S101517552 SUNSET PARK SOUTHWEST OF 18TH AVE.S./S. 136TH S SWF/LF KING COUNTY S101517554 VASHON ISLAND WEST OF 130TH AVE.S.W.ACROSS FROM THI SWF/LF KING COUNTY S101517543 KENT NORTHEAST OF MAPLE ST./TILDEN AVENUE SWF/LF KING COUNTY S101517545 NORTH BEND WEST OF THE MIDDLE FORK ROAD,ABOUT 1 I SWF/LF KING COUNTY S101517540 FALL CITY OLD DUMP RD.AT FIRST ROAD BEND SWF/LF RENTON 1000197735 WDOE NRO MAY VALLEY DRUMS 162ND AVE SE&I IWY 900 98056 RCRIS-SOG,FINDS RENTON S102517867 MT.OLIVET LANDFILL NE 3RD ST. 98056 WA ICR RENTON 9106727 ELECTRONICS FACILITY 616 SW 41ST ST. ELECTRONICS FACILITY 616 SW 41ST ST. ERNS RENTON 9106724 ELECTRONICS FACILITY 616 SW 41ST ST. ELECTRONICS FACILITY 616 SW 4IST ST. ERNS RENTON 8908888 607 SW GIRDY WAY 607 SW GIRDY WAY ERNS RENTON S102514648 KING CO.FIRE STN III 12953 156TII NE - 98056 WA ICR • TC207337.1 s Page 18 GEOCHECK VERSION 2.1 ADDENDUM FEDERAL DATABASE WELL INFORMATION Well Closest to Target Property(Northern Quadrant) BASIC WELL DATA Site ID: 473212122112601 Distance from TP: 1/4• 1/2 Mile Site Type: Single well,other than collector or Ranney type Year Constructed: Not Reported County: Not Reported Altitude: 300.00 ft. State: Not Reported Well Depth: 72.00 ft. Topographic Setting: Not Reported Depth to Water Table: Not Reported Prim. Use of Site: Withdrawal of water Date Measured: Not Reported Prim. Use of Water: Domestic LITHOLOGIC DATA Not Reported WATER LEVEL VARIABILITY Not Reported • TC207337.1 s Page Al GEOCHECK VERSION 2.1 FEDERAL DATABASE WELL INFORMATION Well Closest to Target Property(Eastern Quadrant) BASIC WELL DATA Site ID: 473201122110101 Distance from TP: 1/4- 1/2 Mile Site Type: Single well,other than collector or Ranney type Year Constructed: 1936 County: Not Reported Altitude: 550.00 ft. State: Not Reported Well Depth: 407.00 ft. Topographic Setting: Not Reported Depth to Water Table: 242.00 ft. Prim. Use of Site: Withdrawal of water Date Measured: Not Reported Prim. Use of Water: Domestic LITHOLOGIC DATA Not Reported WATER LEVEL VARIABILITY Not Reported • TC207337.1 s Page A2 GEOCHECK VERSION 2.1 FEDERAL DATABASE WELL INFORMATION Well Closest to Target Property(Southern Quadrant) BASIC WELL DATA Site ID: 473114122113001 Distance from TP: 1/2- 1 Mile Site Type: Single well,other than collector or Ranney type Year Constructed: Not Reported County: Not Reported Altitude: 262.00 ft. State: Not Reported Well Depth: 9.00 ft. Topographic Setting: Not Reported Depth to Water Table: 2.00 ft. Prim. Use of Site: Withdrawal of water Date Measured: Not Reported Prim. Use of Water: Domestic LITHOLOGIC DATA Not Reported WATER LEVEL VARIABILITY Not Reported • • L TC207337.1 s Page A3 GEOCHECK VERSION 2.1 FEDERAL DATABASE WELL INFORMATION Well Closest to Target Property(Western Quadrant) BASIC WELL DATA Site ID: 473158122131801 Distance from TP: 1 -2 Miles Site Type: Single well,other than collector or Ranney type Year Constructed: 1953 County: Not Reported Altitude: 350.00 ft. State: Not Reported Well Depth: 154.00 ft. Topographic Setting: Not Reported Depth to Water Table: 140.00 ft. Prim. Use of Site: Withdrawal of water Date Measured: Not Reported Prim. Use of Water: Public supply LITHOLOGIC DATA Not Reported WATER LEVEL VARIABILITY Not Reported • • TC207337.1 s Page A4 GEOCHECK VERSION 2.1 PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY SYSTEM INFORMATION Searched by Nearest Well. PWS SUMMARY: PWS ID: WA5344540 PWS Status: Active Distance from TP: >2 Miles Date Initiated: Not Reported Date Deactivated: Not Reported Dir relative to TP: North PWS Name: LAKE SAMISH MOBILE TERRACE MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 Addressee/Facility: Not Reported Facility Latitude: 47 34 14 Facility Longitude: 122 13 14 City Served: Not Reported Treatment Class: Treated Population Served: 101 -500 Persons Well currently has or has had major violation(s): Yes VIOLATIONS INFORMATION: Violation ID: 9400405 Source ID: Not Reported PWS Phone: Not Reported Vio.beginning Date: 12/01/93 Via.end Date: 12/31/93 Vio. Period: 1 Month Num of required Samples: Not Reported Number of Samples Taken: Not Reported Analysis Result: Not Reported Maximum Contaminant Level: Not Reported Analysis Method: Not Reported Violation Type: Monitoring, Routine Major(TCR) Contaminant: COLIFORM (TCR) Vio.Awareness Date: 123193 Violation ID: 9400405 Source ID: Not Reported PWS Phone: Not Reported Vio.beginning Date: 12/01/93 Vio.end Date: 12/31/93 Vio.Period: 1 Month Num of required Samples: Not Reported Number of Samples Taken: Not Reported Analysis Result: Not Reported Maximum Contaminant Level: Not Reported Analysis Method: Not Reported Violation Type: Monitoring, Routine Major(TCR) Contaminant: COLIFORM (TCR) Vio.Awareness Date: 123193 ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION: Violation Type: Monitoring, Routine Major(TCR) Compliance Period: 12/01/93- 12/31/93 Contaminant: COLIFORM (TCR) Enforcement Date: Not Reported Enf.Action: Not Reported Violation Type: Monitoring, Routine Major(TCR) Compliance Period: 12/01/95- 12/31/95 Contaminant: COLIFORM (TCR) Enforcement Date: 12/31/95 Enf.Action: State Violation/Reminder Notice • TC207337.1 s Page A5 GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING To maintain currency of the following federal and state databases, EDR contacts the appropriate governmental agency on a monthly or quarterly basis,as required. Elapsed ASTM days: Provides confirmation that this EDR report meets or exceeds the 90-day updating requirement of the ASTM standard. FEDERAL ASTM RECORDS: CERCLIS: Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation, and Liability Information System Source: EPA/NTIS Telephone: 703-413-0223 CERCLIS: CERCLIS contains data on potentially hazardous waste sites that have been reported to the USEPA by states, municipalities, private companies and private persons,pursuant to Section 103 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation,and Liability Act(CERCLA). CERCLIS contains sites which are either proposed to or on the National Priorities List(NPL)and sites which are in the screening and assessment phase for possible inclusion on the NPL Date of Government Version:06/01/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR:09/30/97 Date Made Active at EDR; 10/28/97 Elapsed ASTM days:28 Database Release Frequency: Monthly Date of Last EDR Contact:09/09/97 ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System Source: EPA/NTIS Telephone: 202-260-2342 ERNS: Emergency Response Notification System. ERNS records and stores information on reported releases of oil and hazardous substances. Date of Government Version:06/01/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR:08/29/97 Date Made Active at EDR: 10/09/97 Elapsed ASTM days:41 Database Release Frequency:Quarterly Date of Last EDR Contact:08/26/97 NPL: National Priority List Source: EPA Telephone: 703-603-8852 NPL National Priorities List(Superfund). The NPL is a subset of CERCLIS and identifies over 1,200 sites for priority cleanup under the Superfund Program. NPL sites may encompass relatively large areas. As such,EDR provides polygon coverage • for over 1,000 NPL site boundaries produced by EPA's Environmental Photographic Interpretation Center(EPIC). Date of Government Version:04/01/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR:04/21/97 Date Made Active at EDR:05/29/97 Elapsed ASTM days:38 Database Release Frequency:Semi-Annually Date of Last EDR Contact:07/01/97 RCRIS: Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System Source: EPA/NTIS Telephone: 800-424-9346 RCRIS: Resource Conservation and Recovery Information System. RCRIS includes selective information on sites which generate,transport,store,treat and/or dispose of hazardous waste as defined by the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act(RCRA). Date of Government Version:04/01/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR:04/25/97 Date Made Active at EDR:06/30/97 Elapsed ASTM days:66 Database Release Frequency:Semi-Annually Date of Last EDR Contact:08/04/97 CORRACTS: Corrective Action Report Source: EPA Telephone: 800-424-9346 CORRACTS: CORRACTS identifies hazardous waste handlers with RCRA corrective action activity. Date of Government Version:12/01/96 Date of Data Arrival at EDR: 12/30/96 Date Made Active at EDR:03/03/97 Elapsed ASTM days:63 Database Release Frequency:Semi-Annually Date of Last EDR Contact:07/07/97 TC207337.1 s Page A€ GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING FEDERAL NON-ASTM RECORDS: BRS: Biennial Reporting System Source: EPA/NTIS Telephone: 800-424-9346 BRS: The Biennial Reporting System is a national system administered by the EPA that collects data on the generation and management of hazardous waste. BRS captures detailed data from two groups: Large Quantity Generators(LOG) and Treatment,Storage, and Disposal Facilities. Date of Government Version: 12/31/93 Date of Last EDR Contact:08/04/97 Database Release Frequency: Biennially Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact:09/22/97 CONSENT: Superfund(CERCLA)Consent Decrees Source: EPA Regional Offices Telephone: Varies Major legal settlements that establish responsibility and standards for cleanup at NPL(Superfund)sites. Released periodically by United States District Courts after settlement by parties to litigation matters. Date of Government Version:Varies Date of Last EDR Contact:Varies Database Release Frequency:Varies Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A FINDS: Facility Index System Source: EPA/NTIS Telephone: 703-908-2493 FINDS: Facility Index System. FINDS contains both facility information and"pointers"to other sources that contain more detail. EDR includes the following FINDS databases in this report: PCS(Permit Compliance System),AIRS(Aerometric Information Retrieval System), DOCKET(Enforcement Docket used to manage and track information on civil judicial enforcement cases for all environmental statutes), FURS(Federal Underground Injection Control),C-DOCKET(Criminal Docket System used to track criminal enforcement actions for all environmental statutes), FFIS(Federal Facilities Information System),STATE(State Environmental Laws and Statutes), and PADS(PCB Activity Data System). Date of Government Version:04/01/97 Date of Last EDR Contact:09/29/97 Database Release Frequency:Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact:01/05/98 HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Information Reporting System Source: U.S.Department of Transportation Telephone: 202-366-4526 HMIRS: Hazardous Materials Incident Report System. HMIRS contains hazardous material spill incidents reported to DOT. Date of Government Version: 12/31/96 Date of Last EDR Contact:07/28/97 Database Release Frequency:Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/27/97 MLTS: Material Licensing Tracking System Source: Nuclear Regulatory Commission Telephone: 301-415-7169 MLTS is maintained by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and contains a list of approximately 8,100 sites which possess or use radioactive materials and which are subject to NRC licensing requirements. To maintain currency, EDR contacts the Agency on a quarterly basis. Date of Government Version:07/28/97 Date of Last EDR Contact:07/14/97 Database Release Frequency:Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/13/97 NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens Source: EPA Telephone: 205-564-4267 NPL LIENS: Federal Superfund Liens. Under the authority granted the USEPA by the Comprehensive Environmental Response,Compensation and Liability Act(CERCLA)of 1980,the USEPA has the authority to file liens against real property in order to recover remedial action expenditures or when the property owner receives notification of potential liability. USEPA compiles a listing of filed notices of Superfund Liens. Date of Government Version: 10/15/91 Date of Last EDR Contact:08/25/97 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/24/97 TC207337.1 s Page A7 • , GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING • PADS: PCB Activity Database System Source: EPA Telephone: 202-260-3936 PADS: PCB Activity Database. PADS Identifies generators,transporters,commercial storers and/or brokers and disposers of PCB's who are required to notify the EPA of such activities. Date of Government Version:03/27/97 Date of Last EDR Contact:08/19/97 Database Release Frequency: Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 11/17/97 RAATS: RCRA Administrative Action Tracking System Source: EPA Telephone: 202-564-4104 RAATS: RCRA Administration Action Tracking System. RAATS contains records based on enforcement actions issued under RCRA pertaining to major violators and includes administrative and civil actions brought by the EPA. For administration actions after September 30, 1995,data entry in the RAATS database was discontinued. EPA will retain a copy of the database for historical records. It was necessary to terminate RAATS because a decrease in agency resources made it impossible to continue to update the information contained in the database. Date of Government Version:04/17/95 Date of Last EDR Contact:07/01/97 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact:09/15/97 ROD: Records Of Decision Source: NTIS Telephone: 703-416-0223 Record of Decision. ROD documents mandate a permanent remedy at an NPL(Superfund)site containing technical and health information to aid in the cleanup. Date of Government Version:03/31/95 Date of Last EDR Contact:09/03/97 Database Release Frequency:Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 12/01/97 TRIS: Toxic Chemical Release Inventory System Source: EPA/NTIS Telephone: 202-260-1531 TRIS: Toxic Release Inventory System.TRIS identifies facilities which release toxic chemicals to the air,water and land in reportable quantities under SARA Title III Section 313. Date of Government Version: 12/31/92 Date of Last EDR Contact:07/02/97 Database Release Frequency:Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact:09/29/97 TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act Source: EPA/NTIS Telephone: 202-260-1444 TSCA: Toxic Substances Control Act. TSCA identifies manufacturers and importers of chemical substances included on the TSCA Chemical Substance Inventory list. It includes data on the production volume of these substances by plant site. USEPA has no current plan to update and/or re-issue this database. Date of Government Version:01/31/95 Date of Last EDR Contact:06/16/97 Database Release Frequency:Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact:09/15/97 I TC207337.1 s Page A£ GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED I DATA CURRENCY TRACKING STATE OF WASHINGTON ASTM RECORDS: CSCSL: Confirmed&Suspected Contaminated Sites List Source: Department of Ecology Telephone: 360-407-7200 SHWS: State Hazardous Waste Sites. State hazardous waste site records are the states'equivalent to CERCLIS. These sites may or may not already be listed on the federal CERCLIS list. Priority sites planned for cleanup using state funds (state equivalent of Supertund)are identified along with sites where cleanup will be paid for by potentially responsible parties. Available information varies by state. Date of Government Version:06/09/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR:06/10/97 Date Made Active at EDR:07/28/97 Elapsed ASTM days:48 Database Release Frequency:Semi-Annually Date of Last EDR Contact:08/19/97 HSL: Hazardous Sites List Source: Department of Ecology Telephone: 360-407-7200 HSL The Hazardous Sites List is a subset of the CSCSL Report. It includes sites which have been assessed and ranked using the Washington Ranking Method(WARM). Date of Government Version:02/20/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR:03/12/97 Date Made Active at EDR:04/24/97 Elapsed ASTM days:43 Database Release Frequency:Semi-Annually Date of Last EDR Contact:06/16/97 LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tanks Site List Source: Department of Ecology Telephone: 360-407-7200 LUST: Leaking Underground Storage Tank Incident Reports. LUST records contain an inventory of reported leaking underground storage tank incidents.Not all states maintain these records, and the information stored varies by state. Date of Government Version:05/01/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR:05/19/97 Date Made Active at EDR:07/17/97 Elapsed ASTM days:59 Database Release Frequency:Quarterly Date of Last EDR Contact:08/04/97 SWF/LF: Solid Waste Facilities Handbook Source: Department of Ecology Telephone: 360-407-6132 SWF/LF: Solid Waste Facilities/Landfill Sites.SWF/LF type records typically contain an inventory of solid waste disposal facilities or landfills in a particular state. Depending on the state,these may be active or inactive facilities or open dumps that failed to meet RCRA Subtitle D Section 4004 criteria for solid waste landfills or disposal sites. Date of Government Version: 10/01/96 Date of Data Arrival at EDR:08/19/97 Date Made Active at EDR: 10/28/97 Elapsed ASTM days:70 Database Release Frequency:Annually Date of Last EDR Contact:08/18/97 UST: Statewide UST Site/Tank Report Source: Department of Ecology Telephone: 360-407-7170 UST: Registered Underground Storage Tanks. UST's are regulated under Subtitle I of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act(RCRA) and must be registered with the state department responsible for administering the UST program. Available information varies by state program. Date of Government Version:05/01/97 Date of Data Arrival at EDR:05/19/97 Date Made Active at EDR:07/03/97 Elapsed ASTM days:45 Database Release Frequency:Quarterly Date of Last EDR Contact:08/04/97 STATE OF WASHINGTON NON-ASTM RECORDS: TC207337.1 s Page A GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING AIR EMISSIONS: Washington Emissions Data System Source: Department of Ecology Telephone: 360-407-6040 Date of Government Version: 12/31/95 Date of Last EDR Contact:07/30/97 Database Release Frequency:Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/27/97 ICR: Independent Cleanup Reports Source: Department of Ecology Telephone: 360-407-7200 ICR: These are remedial action reports Ecology has received from either the owner or operator of the sites. These actions have been conducted without department oversight or approval and are not under an order or decree. Date of Government Version:03/01/97 Date of Last EDR Contact:06/09/97 Database Release Frequency:Quarterly Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact:09/08/97 • • • TC207337.1s Page Al GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED I DATA CURRENCY TRACKING WASHINGTON COUNTY RECORDS KING COUNTY: Seattle-King County Abandoned Landfill Toxicity/Hazard Assessment project Source: Department of Public Health Telephone: 206-296-4785 This report presents the Seattle-King County Health Departments follow-up investigation of two city owned and four county owned abandoned landfills which was conducted from February to December 1986. Date of Government Version: 12/31/86 Date of Last EDR Contact:08/14/95 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Abandoned Landfill Study in King County Source: Seattle-King County Department of Public Health Telephone: 206-296-4785 The King County Abandoned Landfill Survey was conducted from October through December 1984 by the Health Department's Environmental Health Division at the request of the King County Council. The primary objective of the survey was to determine if any public health problems existed at the predetermined 24 sites. Date of Government Version:04/30/85 Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/21/94 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A Abandoned Landfill Study in the City of Seattle Source: Seattle-King County Department of Public Health Telephone: 206-296-4785 • The Seattle Abandoned Landfill Survey was conducted in June and July of 1984 by the Health Departments Environmental Health Division at the request of the Mayor's Office. The primary objective of the survey was to determine if any public health problems existed at the predetermined 12 sites. Date of Government Version:07/30/84 Date of Last EDR Contact: 10/21/94 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A SNOHOMISH COUNTY: Soilid Waste Sites of Record at Snohomish Health District Source: Snohomish Health District Telephone: 206-339-5250 Date of Government Version:06/19/96 Date of Last EDR Contact:07/23/97 Database Release Frequency:Semi-Annually Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: 10/20/97 TACOMA-PIERCE COUNTY: Closed Landfill Survey Source: Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department Telephone: 206-591-6500 Following numerous requests for information about closed dumpsites and landfills in Pierce County,the Tacoma-Pierce County Health Department decided to conduct a study on the matter. The aim of the study was to evaluate public health risks associated with the closed dumpsites and landfills, and to determine the need,if any,for further investigations of a more detailed nature. The sites represent all of the known dumpsites and landfills closed after 1950. Date of Government Version:04/15/93 Date of Last EDR Contact:01/11/95 Database Release Frequency: No Update Planned Date of Next Scheduled EDR Contact: N/A • TC207337.1 s Page A GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED / DATA CURRENCY TRACKING Historical and Other Database(s) Depending on the geographic area covered by this report,the data provided in these specialty databases may or may not be complete. For example,the existence of wetlands information data in a specific report does not mean that all wetlands in the area covered by the report are included. Moreover,the absence of any reported wetlands information does not necessarily mean that wetlands do not exist in the area covered by the report. Former Manufactured Gas(Coal Gas)Sites: The existence and location of Coal Gas sites is provided exclusively to EDR by Real Property Scan, Inc. CCopyright 1993 Real Property Scan,Inc. For a technical description of the types of hazards which may be found at such sites,contact your EDR customer service representative. Disclaimer Provided by Real Property Scan,Inc. The information contained in this report has predominantly been obtained from publicly available sources produced by entities other than Real Property Scan. While reasonable steps have been taken to insure the accuracy of this report, Real Property Scan does not guarantee the accuracy of this report. Any liability on the part of Real Property Scan is strictly limited to a refund of the amount paid. No claim is made for the actual existence of toxins at any site. This report does not constitute a legal opinion. DELISTED NPL: Delisted NPL Sites Source: EPA Telephone: 703-603-8769 DELISTED NPL: The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan(NCP)establishes the criteria that the EPA uses to delete sites from the NPL. In accordance with 40 CFR 300.425.(e), sites may be deleted from the NPL where no further response is appropriate. NFRAP: No Further Remedial Action Planned Source: EPA/NTIS Telephone: 703-413-0223 NFRAP: As of February 1995,CERCLIS sites designated"No Further Remedial Action Planned"(NFRAP)have been removed from CERCLIS. NFRAP sites may be sites where,following an initial investigation,no contamination was found, contamination was removed quickly without the need for the site to be placed on the NPL,or the contamination was not serious enough to require Federal Superfund action or NPL consideration. EPA has removed approximately 25,000 NFRAP sites to lift the unintended barriers to the redevelopment of these properties and has archived them as historical records so EPA does not needlessly repeat the investigations in the future. This policy change is part of the EPA's Brownfields Redevelopment Program to help cities,states,private investors and affected citizens to promote economic redevelopment of unproductive urban sites. FRDS: Federal Reporting Data System Source: EPA/Office of Drinking Water Telephone: 202-260-2805 FRDS provides information regarding public water supplies and their compliance with monitoring requirements, maximum contaminant levels(MCL's), and other requirements of the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1986. Area Radon Information: The National Radon Database has been developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)and is a compilation of the EPA/State Residential Radon Survey and the National Residential Radon Survey. The study covers the years 1986- 1992. Where necessary data has been supplemented by information collected at private sources such as universities and research institutions. Oil/Gas Pipelines/Electrical Transmission Lines: This data was obtained by EDR from the USGS in 1994. It is referred to by USGS as GeoData Digital Line Graphs from 1:100,000-Scale Maps. It was extracted from the transportation category including some oil,but primarily gas pipelines and electrical transmission lines. Sensitive Receptors: There are individuals deemed sensitive receptors due to their fragile immune systems and special sensitivity to environmental discharges. These sensitive receptors typically include the elderly,the sick, and children. While the location of all sensitive receptors cannot be determined,EDR indicates those buildings and facilities-schools,daycares,hospitals,medical centers, and nursing homes-where individuals who are sensitive receptors are likely to be located. TC207337.1 s Pa: A GOVERNMENT RECORDS SEARCHED I DATA CURRENCY TRACKING USGS Water Wells: In November 1971 the United States Geological Survey(USGS)implemented a national water resource information tracking system. This database contains descriptive information on sites where the USGS collects or has collected data on surface water and/or groundwater. The groundwater data includes information on more than 900,000 wells,springs,and other sources of groundwater. Flood Zone Data: This data,available in select counties across the country,was obtained by EDR in 1994 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA). Data depicts 100-year and 500-year flood zones as defined by FEMA. Epicenters: World earthquake epicenters, Richter 5 or greater Source: Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Water Dams: National Inventory of Dams Source: Federal Emergency Management Agency Telephone: 202-646-2801 WATER DAMS: National computer database of more than 74,000 dams maintained by the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Kitsap County Water Wells in Washington Source: Public Utility District No. 1 of Kitsap County Telephone: 206-779-7656 • • t. TC207337.1 s Page 13 ' MAP FINDINGS SUMMARY SHOWING ALL SITES Search Target Distance Total Database Property (Miles) < 1/8 1/8- 1/4 1/4 - 1/2 1/2- 1 > 1 Plotted NPL 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 Delisted NPL TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 4,RCRIS-TSD 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0 A .CSCSL 1.000 0 1 1 0 NR 2 CERCLIS 0.500 0 0 1 NR NR 1 CERC-NFRAP TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 CORRACTS 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 •\. State Landfill 0.500 0 0 0 NR NR 0 LUST 0.500 0 1 0 NR NR 1 n. UST 0.250 0 0 NR NR NR 0 RAATS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 RCRIS Sm. Ouan. Gen. 0.250 0 1 NR NR NR 1 RCRIS Lg. Ouan. Gen. 0.250 0 1 NR NR NR 1 1. HMIRS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 PADS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 ERNS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 FINDS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 A, TRIS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 NPL Liens TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 .1 TSCA TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 MLTS TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 1 ROD 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 CONSENT 1.000 0 0 0 0 NR 0 Wa Air Emissions (EMI) TP NR NR NR NR NR 0 WA ICR 0.500 0 1 0 NR NR 1 ^•Coal Gas 1.000 0 0 • 0 0 NR 0 TP=Target Property NR= Not Requested at this Search Distance i Sites may be listed in more than one database • • TC207337.1 s Page