Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
LUA79-432
CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON r+ fV :: r "; . •,• • • , •I. jam! r{"� ilt� r i �) ENVIROP�I!1Et�TAL CHECKLIST FORM V� ��� ' '`' .Y 0 . . . . .-ci - -FlitE- IL..) . FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ;. ,. • , ._ - -, \\/J�G EpP'- Application No. Environmental Checklist No. PROPOSED, date: FINAL, .date: 0 Declaration of Significance �_. DDecl,aration of :Significance EiDeclaration of Non-Significance ,a Declaration of Non-Significance COMMENTS: Introduction The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and local governmental agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private proposals. The Act also requires that an EIS be prepared for all major actions' 'significantly affecting the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies involved determine whether or not a proposal is such a major action. - ' ' "- -'-'--'-- - -.. _ Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the information presently available to you. Where explanations of your answers are required, or where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision makers , include your explanation in the space provided, or use additional pages if necessary. You should include references to any reports or studies of which you are aware and which are rele- vant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help all agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review with- out unnecessary delay. The following questions apply to your total proposal , not just' to the license for which you 'are currently applying or the proposal for which approval is sought. Your answers . should include the impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed, even though completion may not occur until sometime in, the future. This will allow all of the agencies which will be involved to -complete their environmental review now, with- out duplicating paperwork in the future. • NOTE: This is a standard form being used 'by all state and local agencies in the State -of Washington for various types of proposals: Many of the questions may not apply to your proposal . If a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and continue on to the next question. . • ' ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ' I. BACKGROUND `• •--- 1: -- Name -of-'-Proponent JOHN R. HANSEN .. 2. Address and phone number of Proponent: - __...____...___ . _ __ ._ 3268 Hunts Point Road AGENT: Steve Nielsen 453-1310�1 Bellevue, WA 98004 - - 606 - 110th Ave. N.E. #200 :_ ..__ . Bellevue, WA 98004 - -- - -3-. --=-Date--Checklist submitted Revised 5 February 1980 - ' --A-. Agency requiring Checklist City: of Renton Planning Department 5. Name of 'proposal , if applicable: • Not Applicable ' 6.- - Nature "and brief description of- the proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate . understanding of its scope -and nature): - --.._. SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX "A.'" - - .1. Location of proposal (describe the--physical setting of the proposal , -as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts , including any other information needed to give- an Accurate understanding of the environ- mental setting of the proposal ) : - SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX "A" 8. Estima-ted date .for completion of the proposal : ; There is no estimated date for completion. . • 9. List of all permits,, licenses or government approvals required for the proposal (federal , state and local--including rezones) : • SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX "A" • 10. Do you have any plans for future, additions , expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX "A' _ 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: ` SEE ATTACHED APPENDTX "A1' 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- • posal ; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature. of. such application form: ' SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX "A" • II. ' ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and ."maybe" answers are required) ' ' (1) Earth. Will the proposal result in: • (a) -Unstable .earth conditions or In changes in geologic , X substructures? . . • - YES . M!— NO - (b) • Disruptions, di:spl.acements,• compaction or .over- ' covering of the soil? X _ ' YES MAYBE NO (c) •Change in topography or, •ground_ s_.urface relief features? ' . -- , ., YES MAYBE NO . - (d) The destruction, -co•vering or modification of_•any • unique geologic or physical features? X YES -TOTE NO .- -- (e) Any increase. in...w.i.nd .Or.,.water, erosion of soi_.ls , either on or off the site? X YES MAYBE NO (f) Changes in'deposition or erosion 'of' beach sands , or ,, -. changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which • - - -,--may modify -the- channel, .of _a, river o_r','stream or the ., • ' bed of the -ocean or any bay,' inlet Or—lake- ' " - .. _, - • r__ ... YES MAYBE NO `1 .Explanation,: SEE ATTACHED'APPENDIX'"A" - ..`" '- ` . ' h .L. -3 . (2) . Air. Will the 'proposal result in: . (a) Air emissions .o.r .de.teriorat.ion .of. ambient.-air . . quality? . . . X . . . - > 'TIT- MMAYBE NO X . 01 ',.The—creation 'of ,objectionable odors? . ' = VET- MAYBE N- • ' (.c) Alteration of air-moveme"nt, moi's"ture or -temperature, - or 'any change. in 'climate, either locally or regionally? X . ' .YES MAYBE NO Explanation: ' • SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX '"A" (3) Water. Will the proposal result in: : .. . '(a) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of X -water movement's, in•either marine or fresh waters? YES MAYBE NO (b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or X ' • the rate and amount of surface water runoff? YES MAYBE NO (c) Alterations to the course or 'flow of flood waters? ' X YES MAYBE NO (d) 'Change in the amount of surface water in any water X body? . YES MAYBE NO (e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration . surface water quality, including but not limited to _ temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X EE S MAYBE NN • (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of X ground waters? • YES MAYBE NO (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either • through direct additions or, withdrawals, or through X • interception of an aquifer' by cuts or excavations? . ' - YES MAYBE NO {h) Deterioration in groundwater quality, either through ' direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? X YES MBE NO ' (i )' Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available X - for public water supplies? • YET- MMAYBE NO --- --- -- ____ : -----Explanat-ion: - - -- SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX "A" - (4) Flora. Will the proposal result -in: . • ....., (a) ' Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops , X microflora and aquatic plants)? .. • YES Writ N5- ' . - (b) Reduction 'of the numbers of any unique, rare or , ' - X • -. endangered'species of flora? p_-5 NO (c) Introdyction of new species of flora into an area, or . : .. in a' barrier 'to 'the normal replenishment of existing . . ,X --- species? - _• .... __ ..._,. _ ...... .. Sr WRIT N O (d:) ' Re.ductio"n"'in'a'creage of any- •agricultural -crop?. ... .. .. X S MAYBE NO ; r , .- ..- --- - ,Explanation: :SEE 'ATTACHED APPENDIX "A" , �_ - . -4- , (5) Fauna. Will the proposal .result in: .' • (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of fauna (birds , land animals including • reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms , insects or microfauna)? . . - X - - '- , YES MAYBE NO - (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or X endangered species of fauna? - YES MAYBE NO • ' (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement • X . —of fauna? - YES MAYBE NO (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? • X YES MAYBE NO _ .._Explanation: - _. SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX "A" • (6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? X - YES . MAYBE NO '-. _ . .__ " Explanation; -. . -- ---. ' SFtE OTTACHED APPENDIX "A" (7) Light and Glare: Will the 'proposal produce new light or X glare?• YES MAYBE WT- . _ :____ ___ _: Explanation: . _.-"- -- __"-, SEE. ATTACHED APPENDIX "A" . (8) Land Use. Will . the proposal result in the alteration of the __.. ,present 'or planned land use of an area? X Y S MAYBE- NO . Explanation: - _ ._ ____.... _-. . ._ . . SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX "A" (9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: (a) Increase in the .rate of use of any natural resources? YES MAYBE NO • -1 ..__ '.(.b.) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? YES M YBE NO _-_ . Explanation• . _ .__ .- --. -- - -- - SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX "A" (10) Risk of Ups-et. Does the proposal involve a risk of an ' - explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil , pesticides , chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? X • YES MAYBE NO • . .... . Explanation: . . . - i�- • '(11) Population.' Will the proposal alter the location, distri- - bution, density, or growth rate of the human population - , of an area?- X ES- - • Y MAYBE N3 _. _ . ,_ ' Explanation: . . SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX "A" . i RiceVE)'O.P il' CEP%/F/�3TE %3 /B i ? t 8 Chi. -a; a;tly reF:eserta a survey rada by ne or ";Y°°_{ under ay dlreetton So eonfor?•anee vials the renuirenents • yr of the Survey Recordirq Act at the request of the �'. y5 ,,,, Cht Gage MI:an:t o=_t. iaal and f`ac;fie RAilroarl fncpp * + . ih:.otenba•r 1979. #t �yi, C. Ilrehael Chadwick Certificate No. 9797 5 7N , • , 'sz .a7, 6.,f.y Ave., .k,.rA, ee T..aP f'a etFa.%sa£.�,:r /J.fs:57lIe�oe`'.r.. /�EQ/D//1/V/�'Ci�c$ i� MIo • ,21 a W r..t.r b rev- y o°�L° 5' 9_0� LIiL'D4r.W �-IV I fey r v �4PRG% \•.roJ./v I8 Ilbq t'`' F a • 1• 't P v, h I • 4? 'w' A as�'` =c 1/� 5// j h w a sW1 i,- !F 1 p 1 • n o VI r n.%7�..IV rNtea e y` a5 a� +� t91 4 •tN•:-M1Q-',n Q? `: .e 171 n i Z, 4.� a .1. 4/ r t / 2 cr 8 3'•IS 1'�0 . U Al 'vcX: x . :3L pe b N 1r 6' a c•Iry�-ee1.-�- . 72e•'7 S.E : I14 T...r zI 'r'>.r9 V. .9 01 5 F - o'e-rr 'S. ejL Dorn ' ll PPd<4I 1 $�' '`I t-.. 1;4' 1 B59J ,may • t I 0 1 n $k N,, 4. �d - - zs<t; iie 'y"_oa--.v z6assz_ I`� ° a r� i. — /3 //8 7pJ( t a OSULVEY/N t9E/LSE% See/3 TT_3N-eiE - • 1.t sE/e 51V% S«/3Tz3N,LIE 7HEM/L1V,4U/1EE ,POAD ' - . ' FILE ;t, ,.r S1Vf'OSIV7e See/8TZ3N, .PSE P.POPEETY 18UaPVEY. °'f° ` ' CHADWICK SURVEYING&ENGINEERING fee e o . 4011 STONE WAY NORM ATTtE WASKNOT 03 032-3380 r SF ON 801 .� i. F•:v 5:"�•tom-M-. 4:�' '--° t` ,Jk. A#(, ,. •`S +A :4'++ti... •.n ,1'9" * � Jli: ""'r _�x' ew*;• t,'•L,4 '2'rw 'y a 3_ 'y. '4 '8".,a.•"`` '`'k' .J r. eft s+. ` 9 5 ''', - .. - .a!'."'-R. -E. 1'' . .. n*:.. ,.,. , , ,,tiF .. , ., -. .-a:.v N.,. -,•.,t .,.u. ..,w a ._.."'�,_;.�,+'r.�.. .. c .uws_.:'a ea ',;e-,�._ e. ,•;=,. 'sR. =�+.3 ,:,_' %>' '�}i'?".s^PF 3 'r r.1r • • �: -5- "(12) Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create- a demand for additional housing? X , ' YES MAYBE NO Explanation:._; . SEE ATTACHE)'APPENDIX "A" . (13) ,__Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: . - • . (a) Generation of additional vehicular mgvement?:- X YES MAYBE ' NO `" u (b) _-Effects.on existing parking facilities, or demand ..; ., xfor new park1 ng? __..._ MAYBE YES NO (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? - X . . _ 'YES MAYBE MAYBE. NO (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or . . movement of people' and/or goods? I_ YES . MAYBE NO (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? . • -YES - MAYBE NO (f) : Increase in traffic' hazards-""to motor' vehicles;' - --- - - - bicyc-lists or pedestrians? X - YES NO Explanation: SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX "A" •. . N (14) Public -Services. Will the\proposal have an effect upon, or . result in. a need for new or altered-governmental services in any of the following ,areas : . (a) Fire protection? _ , 'N _ • . YES MAYBE NO (b) Police _-_ YES MAYBE NO =(c) School s?- --."..... _`.r._.. ::...- ..._.__ - ___ .- .,_._.. _ __... . .. . X YES MAYBE NO (d) Parks or other recreational .facilities? ' X .-; .. . :_- YES MAYBE NO • .` '.(i) . Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? -X YES MAYBE NO - (f) Other governmental"services? • • -- - - X '. 'YES • MAYBE NO . • Explanation• . - . - SEE ATTACHED' "A" - : I,(i5)- Energy. - `kli l r the'proposal result yin: . • - „(•a) Use'of substantial amounts :of fuel or energy? - . . . . . 1 YES ATATETE NO .(b-) ' Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require X the- devel.opment':.o.f new;sourc'es of energy? Explanation:. -: 1:2 . (16). Utilities: - Will the proposal• .result in a need for new . • , . systems, or .alterations to th.e. following utilities: • (a) ,..P.ower :,or natural gas? • . . ' X • a`A ui^:�.A ; ,.'.r'%' YES - MAYBE NO (b) 'Communications .systems? . , X rt MAYBE NO - • (c) Water? X r YES MAYBE NO ^ -6- �r'Sewe or septic tanks?, ���� ''��` ' �'� `' �~ �C � ��S-' MAYBE 90— � ]I Sturm wator_drwioage%' YES_ MWYBE WO_ (f} ����d waste and -disposal? d�s�osmY � a� YE]S - MAYBE' NO Explanation: ^ ' SEE ATTACHED APPENDIX. w� Aw � (17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding ]{ mental health)? - YE-�— MAYBE H�— Explanation,: ` ' ' ' (18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of . any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive ' site open to public view? 'YES— MAYBE NO Explanation: ` - ' — - . ' ' (19) Re creation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the _. X quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? - ' TE S�- RAYBE WO- _ Explanation: - - (20) Archwwlpgical/Hintoricm1` Will the proposal result in an alteration of- a significant archeological or historical X �j�m, structure,. object nr. building? ' ^ - � ��S— MAYBE NOExplanation: ' ' Ill`' SIGNATURE I , the undersigned, state that to the bast of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that-the lead agency may withdraw any decla- ration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be. any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure` on my part.. ^ ' — ` --- ' — ---- ~ Prppommmt: (*/y"="/ �^ . . . STEPHEN G. NIDL880 (name printed) ---- � �-- ' Representing the Applicant ^ ' 'City of Renton . Planning Department ` * 5~J6 ' ` '. , ' \ ' ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM APPENDIX "A" RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS I. BACKGROUND 6. Nature and brief description of the proposal. The proposal is for a zoning reclassification from G to MP - Manufacturing Park. Following zoning reclassification and prior to the issuance of develop- ment permits, a detailed plan for the property will be developed and reviewed in public hearings. Development of the site will be a Business and Office Park which in plan, will accomodate some of the existing natural features of the site. The parcel e, is approximately 46 acres in size or about 2,000,000 square feet in land area. �01 Anticipated development would result in approximately 400,000 to 500,000 t 0 eV 0 square feet of building space. Building pads will be interspersed with retained areas of natural vegetation which would preserve the water fowl habitat as well as the "edges" which abound with bird life. In order to retain a quality in development which would be complementary to the natural site conditions, the applicant will be imposing some development restrictions, including the following: `X a. All development shall maintain a 50 foot setback from the top of the bank �` /^- `0 of the Black River channel. 1 \7 ,v YY ,][l`(' b. The minimum tract size for any development shall be two acres • c. Maximum land coverage by building shall be 40%. i �; \ / Y , Maximum site coverage by impervious surfaces shall be 70%. � � 2 �� o vfi, It Each developed site shall retain a minimum of 20% of the natural 47 vegetation in a contiguous pattern. ‘A. D f. All structures are to be architecturally designed to complement the existing environment of the area. Prior to beginning construction ( � 2 all building must be approved by the Architectural Control Committee. `(SIP g. Signing will be limited to non-illuminated low profile identification and directional signs. h. Standards of performance for noise, smoke, odors, vibration, glare, etc. will conform to the City of Renton Zoning Code Section 4-730.040. - 2 - 7. Location of the proposal. The property lies West of a developed industrial park and North of the Earlington Golf Course which will be planned into an industrial/office park. To the North of the site is a Burlington Northern switching yard and to the West and Southwest are properties owned by Burlington Northern and Milwaukee Road which have been retained for ultimate use by King County for flood control and open space preservation. The property is a riparian woodland which once had the Black River running across its Southern boundary. This river is now a backwater channel for Springbrook Creek flowing from the south. (o�` Development of the site would destroy someof the vegetation and displace O some of the wildlife inhabiting the site. Adherence to the general develop- ment provisions stated above would significantly mitigate the environmental - \ � .pstruction by normal mass clearing and grading operations. Other areas of 09" era" .� GI- attention include primarily the impact of the proposal upon regional drainage �� k b �. , plans and upon transportation and circulation. ;� Q l `' 9. List all permits, licenses, etc. i • �� / 1 ' N • - Zoning reclassification from G to MP. ' > - Approval of site development plan by Hearing Examiner. S . � - Building and other development permits. V 10. Other plans. - Only as described above. 11. Yes. Development of the Earlington Golf Course is now pending. Property was just recently rezoned and the-owners are now assisting in the preparation of an EIS on their development plan. 12. No other applications have been filed. II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. Earth (a) No. (b) Yes. Ultimate development of the site will result in a disruption of i i , ‘ '`� approximately 70% of the site. -In some areas fill will be required Awhich would be imported from off-site. 4 i i ,,,,e,„ - 3 - (c) Yes. Even though the topography of the site is essentially level, the filling or grading of roadbeds and building sites will recontour the edges of the retained natural areas. IY/,;:;:k(d) Maybe. All efforts will be made to retain the Black River channel in its present condition. There are no other apparently unique / physical features on the site. " �/ (e) Maybe. It is unlikely that wind erosion would occur during development. Water erosion will be controlled through the now commonplace erosion control measures such as settling ponds, reseeding, use of hay bails etc. (f) No. 2. Air (a) Yes. Construction vehicles and autos of the future employees on the site will emit air pollutants. Whereas the emission are likely to be measurable, this is no reason to believe that the proposal involves any unusual emission risks. (b) Maybe. The use of some construction materials such as tar and asphalt may be objectionable to some people. However, there are no residences in close proximity to the site. (c) No. 3. Water 2 (a) Maybe. There are some small creeks on the property which may be altered or relocated during development. However, Springbrook Creek and the eW Black River Channel will remain unaltered. (b) Yes. As the site is graded and/or filled. The edges of wet areas will be redefined, therefore drainage patterns will likely be altered. Also, ' . the creation of impervious surfaces will increase the velocity of storm Vil q� water runoff from the site which will be controlled through retention 4LI l� ‘ measures. (c) No. The subject property lies near the lowest point of the Green River Lower Valley flood plain. King County Hydraulic Division operates a hug pumping station at that point. In the "Eastside Watershed Project: Comparative Analysis of P-1 Channel Design Alternatives" prepared by Brown and Caldwell, October 2, 1979, four alternative flood control measures are described (Attached as Exhibit B) . Alternative #4 has been accepted by the project'sexecutive committee and is the design which will be implemented. Clearly the design described in - 4 - Alternative #4 lies south of the existing Black River Channel and, / consequently, has no direct bearing on the subject property. 2 / Therefore, with the site in close proximity to the retention ponds �/fetit 00 i• for the Green River flood control the only apparent concerns are � for "on-site" conditions. V (d) No. (!) . No. �(f) Maybe. A disruption and overcovering of the soil will likely alter isome ground water movements. ' (g) No. C. 4,4 Maybe. Storm water run-off from parking areas and roof-tops may contain suspended pollutants. Water retention and settling facilities will mitigate some of the impacts. (i) No. 4. Flora (a) Yes. Appendix C includes the description of the two habitat types which exist at the site. Following development, the Riparian 1 ' Woodland will be altered to accomodate the urban development. With O the conditions imposed by the property owner and required site plan preparation and review, the ultimate goal of achieving a blended ` interface of the two habitat types will occur. The best example of this type of project, which is the closest to the stated objectives of this proposal, is the Bellefield Office Park in Bellevue, Washington. Therefore, Yes, the number of plants species may change but the result of mitigating controls will be an environmentally sensitive proposal. 4) No. The specie types on the site are in themselves not rare or unique. L('c) Yes. Post-development landscaping will likely introduce new specie types to this area. t,(d) No. 5. Fauna (a) Yes. Development of the site will alter and/or destroy some of the existing habitat as described in Section 4 on Flora. The property lies within the alignment of the Pacific Flyway, as does the entire lower Green River Valley. Consequently, the backwater in the abondoned Black - 5 River Channel, as well as other wet pockets on the site, provide (yU ideal habitat for ducks, geese, and other water fowl which frequent p, 14 the site. The channelization and ponding included in the Eastside •`� Watershed Project will develop additional habitat areas for water i4 fowl and other bird life. A retention of natural vegetation and wetland conditions within the a`O �ip project area should continue to provide desirable habitat areas. The function of relationship between urban development and water fowl c�. 4 \iabitats is evident at the Bellefield Office Park in Bellevue. As `� stated, some of the habitat will be destroyed; however, maintenance of edges and some wetlands will continue to provide habitat for the bird life. (b) No. (c) No. (d) Yes. Please see Section (a) above. fiL • 6. Noise Yes. During and after development, vehicles frequenting the site will generate detectable noise levels. However, the current noise levels of ( p� Interstate 405 to the south and the railroad switching yard to the north �1 are in excess of the noise levels likely to be generated on the subject property. 7. Light and Glare • Z. Yes. New street lights and building lighting will be introduced to the • area following development. The intensity of these new sources of light • should not exceed that of the surrounding vicinity. 8. Land Use Yes. The site is currently undeveloped. To the East is an existing industrial park and to the South, an industrial park is being planned on the Earlington Golf Course. The Renton Comprehensive Plan calls for industrial development of the site. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that because of the proximity of compatible development and the current provisions in Renton's Comprehensive Plan, that a Business Park is an acceptable use of the site. However, it is clear that unrestrained development of the site would unnecessarily destroy an attractive habitat (.9 area. Therefore, the developed land use types of the vicinity will be - . 6 - modified and altered in development of the subject property in an acknowledgement of the environmental conditions of the site. The result will be an alteration to the present undeveloped nature of the site but the proposal will show compatibility with the existing environment. 9. Natural Resources (a) No. Overall consumption of natural resources will increase but the rate will be similar to that of surrounding uses. (b) Yes. Fossil fuels will be consumed by construction vehicles, occupants of the site as well as in some construction materials such as tar and asphalt. 10. Risk of Upset No. 11. Population Maybe. Development of the site and the availability of new jobs may cause more people to want to live in the area. Population shifts would be subtle and difficult to detect as a result of this project. It is more likely that people working at the site will commute from other areas. This would occur until the cost of commuting' becote prohibitive. 12. Housing Maybe. New jobs may mean more people. If new employees are moving from outside the area,) it is likely that they will seek housing in the vicinity of the property. However, the demand for housing will only be detectable in the general growth patterns and rates of the vicinity as a whole. 13. Transportation/Circulation (a) Generation of Additional Vehicular Movement? Yes. The proposal is anticipated to generate 1500 to 2000 new jobs. 0 The proposed development would be in the category of "Manufacturing 4`1/1 , . Park" which would consist of a mix of offices, light manufacturing, of and warehousing. 6o �i• - - 7 The Institute of Transportation Engineers has provided trip generation rates for various types of land use and these are presented in the "ITE Trip Generation Manual" published in 1976. Figure 1 shows a summary of the trip generation rates. The category of land-use proposed for the site would be a combination of land-use codes 130; 140, and 150 as shown on Figure 1. The trip generation rates for these categories of land-use are 4.1, 2.2, and 4.3 trips per employee for each respective land-use category. A trip rate of four trips per employee per average weekday is used in the analysis of the subject site which should be the maximum trip rate for the site given the proposed mix of development. The total number of trips estimated to be generated by the site is 8000 trips per average weekday. The approximate hourly distribution of these trips is shown on Figure 2. The curve for Figure 2 was derived by first determining the hourly distribution of trips on SW 7th Street east of Lind Avenue SW where traffic characteristics are considered to be typical of, the traffic characteristics generated by the type of land-use anticipated for the subject site. Figure 3 shows the present traffic flows on SW 7th Street east of Lind Avenue. It is apparent from Figures 2 and 3 that the period of greatest intensity of traffic flow, and therefore greatest concern for traffic impacts, is the period from 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM. The traffic volumes during this period represent approximately 12% of the total daily volume, a factor which is typical for most of the streets in the vicinity of the subject site. ;// The traffic generated by development on the subject site will be distributed onto the surrounding street system on the basis of several :6 variables; the actual origins/destinations of the trips, and the level 9 of service (amount of congestion) on the various streets serving the site. Motorists will generally seek the shortest time path to serve their respective origins and destinations which may result in changing travel patterns as congestion builds on certain routes. This analysis assumes that the trips associated with the subject site will use the existing street pattern, however, it is recognized that several possible projects may occur in the future that could ultimately change traffic patterns. The projects that are currently seen as possible future improvements in the area include the following: L ,. i F1CJUP)E 1 Table 1.'Average Weekday Vehicle Trip Ends Generation Rate Summary. ITE Land Land Use of Vehicle Trip Use Code Building Type Ends Rate 021 Commercial Airport 11.8/Employee 022 General Aviation Airport 6.5/Employee 110 General Light Industrial 3.2/Employee , 130 Industrial Park 4.1/Employee 140 Manufacturing 2.2/Employee 150 Warehousing 4.3/Employee 210 Single Family Detached Unit 10.0/Unit 220 Apartment 6.1/Unit 230 Condominium 5.6/Unit 240 Mobile Home 5.4/Unit 310 Hotel 10.5/Occupied Room 320 Motel 9.6/Occupied Room 330 Resort Hotel 10.2/Occupied Room 411 City Park 60.0/Acre 412 County Park 5.I/Acre 413 State Park 0.6/Acre 420 Marina 3.8/Boat Berth 430 Golf Course 9.1/Acre 501 Military Base 1.8/Employee 520 Elementary School 0.5/Student • 530 High School 1.2/Student 540 Junior/Community College I.6/Student 550 University 2.4/Student 590 Library 41.8/1,000 gross square feet 610 Hospital 12.2/Bed 620 Nursing Home 2.7/Bed 630 Clinic 5.9/Employee 710 General Office Building 11.7/1,000 Gross Square Feet 720 Medical Office 75.0/1,000 Gross Square Feet 820 Shopping Center 116.0 to 26.5/1,000 Gross Square Feet 831 Quality Restaurant 56.3/1,000 Gross Square Feet 832 High Turnover Restaurant 164.4/1,000 Gross Square Feet 833 Drive-in Restaurant 553.0/1,000 Gross Square Feet 844 . Auto Service Station 748.0/Station , 850. Supermarket 125.0/1,000 Gross Square Feet 851 Convenience Market 578.0/1,000 Gross Square Feet SOURCE, : TRAF Pe., aiG,I LE-732.4 Jc, , VOL 46,►•t 0. 10, OCT OR,ER 1.q-7 co ,., ._tit ... .. .. .t -- t• - t', ...._ _ - - , I. • .. • tt .a..�� y + • • ._ I ; , -.., I � .- • 1 .,- ; . ••_. •- • . .1.. ._ . ..•••• ... _ .. .._ 4 • .. ._ . • .. •-__ _ _._• •_.. ._... _. ...• t_ _ ......_- _^Y© -_•-_....._..__._.._. ' " • I P') ' " w.. . . ' i • g • • , , • • • 0. . . . . . . i . , , . . . . , • , . i . . " . . • • • : • • • • • . : . . . . . ; A1~FIG .VOLUME ' . • • ._ :_ . ._:.• : .._._7� .... .. . ._._... ..--! w _ : • ---.._-.... _ _._ I . . 1 . N .. , . . 14 , 1 . 1 . -P a . . .\„... .. ..................______ • • ' . . 1 .1 { 0 • , 3 i m N i t i i to r • _O i w • • • . Q - . i C �;�� • 1 .3L1s J iuns 'u1()%z14 yJ :Sdr L.,h1 IDCI . ClaJ-VW11_SS, . . • ' ' 1 1 , —t- -....- .-..t- . -- + .... . . . .• ..'I _ . .- , . . . { NOi .:tr,K.1 9t '7t.17u1 rQJi E' 30 k1JT : �-'rdH o O c; V 0 8 d TRAPF- ►G VOUJtAE ' l 1 i I 1 ,� lii .... _}— I o \ - 3 _ � , (11 ' G.- i f- --t >� 1 (AL I (i < J7 -- -j- _ _—I _.. �` 1 I ..._----- -_.---- o Ii ............. L __ej__ 17 / - �' E; / I; I i 1 -----d 7.----: / 1 N i I bil IS ciz tL r,\S NO -',':1'70A 7t.d. 1 g,Lol ' - 8 - \`� 0 1) Widening and improvement of SW Grady Way including replacement •,' of the existing two lane bridge. This project is currently d47411 'p 1�� under design review and is scheduled to occur in the next several ` dS 0 years. G / �' • V) Creation of a new major north-south arterial facility linking 7104 SW 43rd Street to Sunset Boulevard via Monster Road. This project, to be named Valley Parkway, will provide substantial improved � access and circulation for the general area bounded on the east jok by Rainier Avenue, on the south by I-405, on the west by Burlington � Northern Railroad lines, and on the north by Sunset Boulevard. `° V3) The connection of Powell Avenue to SW Grady Way including a new si nal at that location. This will provide a second access to r the vicinity of the subject site from Grady Way. This project is � being considered in conjunction with a proposal to develop a tract qit.)kF06 of land south of the subject site. O' The projects cited above will all serve to enhance access to the pF� v subject site. It is anticipated however, that the existing transportation system could adequately handle the additional traffic generated by the site with only some localized additional peak hour congestion. Figure 4 depicts the estimated 24-hour traffic flows for a typical weekday for the street system serving the subject site. The figures shown on Figure 4 include the existing volumes and the existing volumes plus anticipated volumes that would result from full development on the site. The distribution of site-related traffic onto the surrounding roadway network was made with the assumption that the primary attraction for the trips would be to/from interstate 405 and that the best means to accommodate that attraction would be via SW 7th Street, Lind Avenue SW, and SW Grady Way. Figure 5 shows the estimated traffic distribution for the afternoon peak hour on the same basis as described for Figure 4. (b) Effects on Existing Parking Facilities or Demand for New Parking Facilities. Maybe. The type of development anticipated for the subject site would include the provision of adequate on-site parking and would have no impact on existing off-site parking facilities. FIC-rURa 4 . N v'''J)ur'•',.-- A'.i1) FO'= DE JE \ .w\i7..a•1 Dr,! Jr .3 ..-GT sV f E • 11 , , ..., �4 ,-7-4- SU(223 T SITE. ,Lz/° \v(' �, E3‘3 � _ �o -a?'i.�oo 13 83 ] .c 5\V -1 ST c i . ._____--7-7 , -s [i 3.1 3 u 7 4 ��x j C -r-► V\ d ct° aI o i q ifs H g 1 7 ' / r- 1 .. \� 1 Off` 5 i 39 2 `\J (�2� ',ram,, -�""... ci-- F �6� ter,. . _ \ o\9rol "'" I eiQi-0 . AI 4, — i=.:(,: .;,G'/E_; =!,•C(- U El.,'E.G 11 r,'*� g`( `.:`F.T. l:i_/ ::.-... 'M d-I 1- L.).:1_; .1 HT _471A1"�;-::(,_ .J,,.•.._.JtA•B: +-; _ : Fi.. __::t ' _3.ir:1:�c, `�,t-i-e ( VeupprAB-iT, 5 O(I2.r I. t a -1 8 FLU`;,) r ivg,,, C.1 7-r OE t=;-1-1 IZ:�N FIGURE 5 pV E'✓, E V'r" PEAK lour- T►2APPl VOLunn h U -e--1CisTNC;+ N eT'J 0TAi'- ;J I I) F-cOIZ D► '/=' PMCr V OKI 5uP.)SbCT SITS /N. li d° ��b \\ b 5U SECT sr-re 44/ 9(00 Pry R.771 Y.-i-+v,i T12i 1'7: ‘ .:7 by 1C13c.6 S\v -i4+^ 57 . v,( ?A, 6.00* 7 I i���4J g 7 . (N.. ,LD, \2 5\ 31 le+$1 I 2 <> PM P�=,k t4 uLl i 2 Ti Fr 1(,, M0'Je3-P\t:.r r1- (0 l,.t IEYt J Ste`)' ' 1-= ; ii-ri .0-1.', . 1_ c o;,;,') tom;1 ,,/\p r 1 one:, ?t\n PEAK 14-0U R i Rt..F Pc,VOW tv .-t-2-"I o 1-i K ; F-=a Z-u L.,L,JJ c`"",-FireATc-; \,r6 Pw\ -;C. : 1-10J1Z -[ f,Z..rz--tr., ufp'LLlte\r -1- f _1".k I.',L:,,)K -Tzr�FP(c. VO and 62 re c3� 5\-7, 1 L,-Iv\ . - 9 - (c) Impact Upon Existing Transportation Systems. Yes. The proposal would generate additional traffic loads onto the existing street network as described in Item 13 a above. The period of greatest impact would be from 4:00 PM to 5:00 PM. The streets serving the subject area are all fully improved with adequate capacity to handle substantially more traffic than presently exists. SW 7th Street, which would be the street more impacted by development on the site, is a four lane street with a curb to curb width of 44 feet. The street widens as it approaches Rainier Avenue with provisions for left/S.‘) turns at major intersections. Traffic volumes in the range of 14,000 4.111 vehicles per day, as may occur from full development on the site, would not be excessive for that type of facility. Lind Avenue SW is the same type of facility as SW 7th Street and it too, is of adequate design to handle traffic volumes in the range of 14,000 cars per day as may occur with full development on the subject site. SW Grady Way is a five lane facility easily capable of handling the 14,000-15,000 vehicles per day that may occur with full development on the subject site. Other streets in the vicinity would not be significantly affected by development on the subject site. The primary impacts of additional traffic loads within any street network generally occur at intersections. The intersections that would be impacted by development on the subject site would be: 1) The intersection of Lind Avenue SW and SW 7th Street, which is presently controlled by a stop sign on Lind Avenue SW. 2) The intersection of Rainier Avenue South and SW 7th Street which is signal controlled. 3) The intersection of Lind Avenue SW and SW Grady Way which is signal controlled. 4) The intersection of SW Grady Way and Rainier Avenue which is signal controlled. - 10 - The intersection of SW 7th Street and Lind Avenue SW will most likely le, need signalization as a result of increased development in the area. o The future need for a signal at that location has been recognized by 4' the City of Renton and such an installation would be routine with no adverse impact on surrounding signal systems. (�� The signal at the intersection of SW 7th Street and Rainier Avenue South is generally adequate to meet the additional traffic loads generated by development on the proposed site, however, it may be that the inter- section should be considered for minor modification to provide left-turn protection for traffic on SW 7th Street. This revision would be relatively easy to accomplish. The remaining signals in the surrounding network should be more than adequate to accommodate the increased traffic loads resulting from development on the proposed site. Development on other sites within the vicinity of the subject site will contribute to traffic loads on the street system that may exceed the system capacity. It appears, however, that planning for new facilities in the area is now at the stage where it is relatively certain that substantial improvements will occur in the near future to mitigate these problems. • r- Vh Alterations to Present Patterns of Circulation or Movement of People 114 _�Y and/or Goods. e i . ,(P No. It is unlikely that development on the subject site will in itself \� - provide new routes that will alter circulation patterns, i.e, no new hrough routes are anticipated to be provided. t' ' (e) Alterations to Waterborne, Rail or Air Travel. No. It is unlikely that development on the subject site will alter air or waterborne travel. The site may be served by rail spurs that will cause some increase in the amount of rail traffic as well as additional switching operations in the vicinity of the site. (f) Increase in Traffic Hazards to Motor Vehicles, Bicyclists or Pedestrians. Maybe. The increase in traffic resulting from development on the subject site will likely increase the probability of traffic accidents. The accident experience should in all probability, however, be well - 11 - within tolerable limits due to the fact that all streets are fully improved with lighting and pedestrian facilities where appropriate. Existing traffic signals are all modern, high quality equipment specifically designed to provide the highest quality of traffic safety. Pedestrian traffic in the area is relatively minor with no residential areas or schools in the vicinity. Bicyclists are also infrequent in the area. 14. Public Services (a) Fire and police protection. Yes. -1/4- (b) New buildings will require fire and police protection but it is unlikely that new equipment and more manpower will be needed. The resultant increase in tax revenues should carry a more than proportionate burden of increased expenses. ^ ' ,: (c) Schools. No. � �on `t� �Q,ev..� r^"0""`� (d) Parks. Maybe. The Green River Basin Program advocates lineal parks along the drainageways in the valley. The inclusion of the trails in the subject property could complement the proposed park system. (e) Maintenance. Maybe. Maintenance of roads may be required. These costs will be paid through increased property taxes. 15. Energy (a) No. (b) No. 16. Utilities All of the listed utility services are available in the vicinity of the site. Development will require that they be extended onto the property at the expense of the property owner.' .There are no apparent capacity problems associated with the utilities. Note: Please see the discussion on "Water" in Section 3 of the Checklist as it relates to storm drainage. 17. Human Health No. - 12 - 18. Aesthetics No. 19. Recreation No. 20. Archeological/Historical No. f l.. • O APPENDIX "B" East Side Watershed Project SUMMARY Comparative. Analysis of P-1 Channel Design Alternatives • prepared by • Brown and Caldwell October 2, 1979 • • Gis �` "f:f t?k>.ree nRiver Basin Program igy- , Green River Basin Program King County Auburn Kent Renton Tukwila King County Conservation District Basin Executive Committee Chairman: Charles J. Delaurenti-Renton Vice Chairman: John Spellman -King County Members: Gary Grant-King County John Lea-Auburn Isabel Hogan -Kent Edgar D. Bauch -Tukwila . Ralph Backstrom -King County Conservation District The P-1 channel is a major structural component of the East Side Watershed Project, which is proposed to provide drainage and flood protection for a large segment of the Lower Green River Valley. The purpose of this report is to summarize four basic alternatives for the P-1 channel . The alternatives are: Alternative 1 - Original P-1 channel - the original P-1 channel project of wide channels (requiring 250-280 feet, of right-of-way) which includes floodwater storage within the channel , Alternative 2 - Reduced P-1 Channel - a narrower channel following the original P-1 alignment with floodwater storage in a major holding pond next to the pump plant, Alternative 3 - Springbrook Creek Channel - a narrower channel following existing Springbrook Creek alignment with floodwater storage in a major holding pond next to the pump plant, and , Alternative 4. - Hybrid P-1 Channel - a narrower channel using combination of original P-1 alignment and Springbrook Creek with stormwater storage in two holding ponds (one pond next to pump plant and another southeast of Longacres) The study of the P-1 Channel was confined to the area between S.W. 43rd Street (South 180th Street) and the existing pump plant since this would be the area where the first phase of construction would begin. This area is developing rapidly and is crossed by many roads and utilities, both of which pose constraints to project implementation. This report briefly summarizes the preliminary comparative analysis that was conducted during the period between May and October of 1979. Basic engineering and cost features are presented for each alternative with an accompanying map. Also included is a preliminary assessment of the positive and negative features of the alternatives. This summary is based on a preliminary report prepared by Brown and Caldwell . Additional technical information will be presented at the October 2 BEC meeting. ORIGINAL P-1 CHANNEL (ALTERNATIVE 1 ) Physical Features Wide channel approximately 300 feet across. Storage is within channel . Channel follows original alignment. Land Requirements Total right-of-way -- 87 acres. Temporary construction easements -- 128 acres. Engineering 1.3 million cubic yards excavated. Excavated material temporarily stored adjacent to channel . Rock lining of channel required. Access roads required on both sides of channel . Costs Federal : Construction 12.2 million Project administration and contin- gencies (tax, engineering) 5.2 17.4 Local : Land rights ,9.1 Road and utility relocations 3.3 12.4 Total . 29.8 million Operation and Maintenance $200,000 - $300,000 annually • AA-. _47. --4)--c-- / •f,t ,�,r' :.1 • : ) \ `�\ -sue �z- /�' �C? j-� 1 % I I.\ Y: —..-. 0--- T------->f),_N ,",,, ,, ,1_,L_,,.„ ., 1 • II �i-- -r i I - tiu YAW WO 1 ff 10 I --- I• • - I. • � 1 � -- \ C rr • hMtT Sd,IC cmc unrlr -�� - '._ - il / . I .�.�� !, I< • —�' � w r1I9A 1PSii�tlil I 1 / 1 /� \� �, `I NOON.N PACIFIC A Il TT I OIat inn[r WOW I _±_ _ V ,' I 1 f a - . , .. .� "R\rR ti. ti w:.. �� I "� r- neu - I I ® ; i___.... _ . L_ I '' --1---)---• --1 ',\% .. \ ,, _. -•F..-.1_-. .:1 _,-,N.4.: ..z...,, _--.•-..,\_-ir.__ ...i___— :;!..-/ ir • ► —- - `�� 2iII LONG ACES U[I TUC[ ' i _ ', ; � I : N • / I ,,, 1 Ili h ', / : i.-1,,,-:.- , ./ ,,,, . . . ,.. :, II 11 0 . — .„ urin+ten S. —. +ram '\r.J • ��-c,.11 T. ;'11.\,i`. __ I _._ - _ _ .17�� A� ,I \ \" ___ __ •� i\\`.�......4 �v.. - .firer = m-'-` `1 I `` ., {' t A . 1' \ irt l i 0 II \ S 1C� i"' """.`\ � ,, _ E._ i 111 _�.- 1 ' �•��'�•' 4.,..,..iii,iik..,:;.7/._:,4 1iit,,,,/..15‘..ili �Urilli\ MA,4.- . ---: •••• --1...,ft.._, _ I,. -.?-x . 1 ,ti,, mini• ,I ....E r I { lil _ _ x P , frr. `+�. ,r�; of ,p ,� :. - ca m S? li ': ji Il ll a l ✓r �yl. : ! ', Ft•� e�ni�'+/ __. --Ivas -r - - .lkRlls., ... --— S _ —�` r .-- 1 1ii„Iniln rl'iIlll'•, I Tifil 11',.:An:,---- _ li rrn iv E -i 1� . ._ L. i I �,i.�ili,iCq�,:�l't.,,. , it ,j �_Jy'� ,, I I -\- T� 1, 14/ 1{,I ,,46+ __, m • - Luiti illu ,Iiilll,,l lllti 3. 3 V\'1" 1 .\+� e r J V Y a) -g _' m II I 7f �l 3" a` I f a ... I N�1111'l�I I C� t - i; I ;.� \ l , � A :j , N o aL._ ff IIIIIi,IIII jvri l _,=f `. • i' .�0 I-s wl I J f li I I I 1 I, k j 1 ....� -'. _ ND run WY mini 58 /67 ,qr � . _.�w.t r .. , v�4 �I7 c� [-----,--(2-1 ____________ —� -___- �-' h In _ - , r'1\r-. �, ,�1° ,, 11, LTL1 'ill:1 i 119 I c N 3 i�� yy . . I ;\\I'll 'r -.1 L "" -. .- N,._____i cli. -: i -'1; --i • -) .1 rD ! I , .." ..1:f\ ,/,, • It � - - "' I I �� , ,#.,.w . 1� I o T ,, �s•..l: t �`T'"t� . I�f 1 �`� ,T-Itg1 T,,I,r'\'I-A ri L - s y t:;• `` I bps • t, ,tl�. �.Il i ,1. , r• _ ,►l[Cl't: '�rr1 i�rr`rr E�I �y. !'I 1 m i' ,. .; ••.r. 3 A 5' i�',. ',.�r�'��.�,I, , t� a ����'.uL '1" __p \\ —� il�i ���.'.A�:��.JJ ilil:'.w� ;ilk LilJ�' -•. w o titan = ,:I-,r, •, _ : I _. .r• r -, ril �q I ti,�` r,';rr l;(� ,:, �t� 11 N E I: •'',.� y .� Ck +.,. ,1�r c �I.�. ,\ •�l \�Ir L� 1�'�al,i i �� l�r:iNii'A 'll�l I'1 ll�1:"Y rn 1, I :, g •, �.1. , . u[(� Pf'tifitTrttl ��I� °�rrlrr j 4��L j�:' •I' ,, 4 . -� 1,,. ..: , s .. i 1 i•i+• I�T1Ir IF Pt1' r rD W I R, st '� 5 ; F < •T .:cor \ •�o o-ao. ��11+�1:�.L�+».,,-)\.N...4,41.1 i 1a1441�i1111}4- - --1 -- -- — i •,' 4 —. i ��^,;�'rr;rr;� :r,,FC1'.r;. r ,.,.I ,r:�; C+ I y , _ �{��If.,; . I :,� ,�..�.I t:.L;tC.�%it'.EL1.�I11: ' 1 ;;l t L ; I lL• \\ I �C,eIC. - /,f:, I.,..;;f!}�:CC12.i1r!T[#wi lit' ..I' I �r i I� \tirrrrirt:.l 1t10-:?'7 'rtlrrf7:ffFIlminor REDUCED P-1 CHANNEL (ALTERNATIVE 2) Physical Features Narrow channel approximately 140 feet across. Storage is contained in one storage pond. Channel follows original alignment. Land Requirements Total right-of-way -- 115. acres. Temporary construction easements -- 86 acres. Engineering 1 .2 million cubic yards excavated. Excavated material temporarily stored adjacent to channel . Rock lining of channel required. Access roads required on both sides of channel . May provide pump efficiency. Costs Federal : Construction 11 .9 million Project administration and contin- gencies (tax, engineering) 5.0 16.9 Local : Land rights 9.6 Road and utility relocations 2.8 • 12.4 Total 29.3 million Operation, and Maintenance $200,000 - $300,000 annually �\\ p7�/ ...a a • ILA'; = , 1..--- 1 / • `' - / •'� ` o I �� / / \�/ / 1 .0 !I I ! ` / . I• if Y I L�� \ /c„,,,\,_)7 : , I L � � • {l1 I vI T-f'/ � \. !\� 1 \ , \ �.- / S. --- - 11Et UMW SD;i �W 1 _ .- 1 i 41 -PUC[7 SOUND7 I ./�/ 1 4.,i[ - • .A , II �' t:.- _ ='�NIC* MIs------ IY i PA Mar"dill 1 I '� I 8 `,k., a _ �' ,— — T -•�'- NDI NIVN PACIFIC RAILWAY I cC►11D1 AU YLLYI I _ `_ - -` ' I /- i.1'` _ !;\• -�fl. i I I [ xAKar_'__------ _ z� I I rt .11 , 1 s `'1\ .t I1 1.V- \ it! \\.)... t 1 '10;,-;.‘ $ JrTi ) �` GUSUUCk.lRi lR !!; ,/;,, LONG 1 x; i•.. •,) 1 _ ___1______."--,,,,_ .....E.;.;,., /0 —.- ---:-_-_-:"..........1,_‘ - - li_-- --' r--____ ---':.,• ---------- --_____:_,-;.,:. .1,:ki 1.. • • ,. \‘ 1 I !-',':f,••,!•:',1:d I i<6 �� ♦:' a / ! I ,,,.i...,:o,i-• i s'k ill. 7-1 ,,,-4: . __1 I Y 'l - .-.—. XJ )::. ') 4 1 g : r ( ) 1 I Il' .-t� II -A ✓i'.� i Itillii' ;'`� :��d,l.:;f C j 3' r�111i/, .-��:;:;:i' _c m -- - 1 — , # li. I3,,'.. ',, `- *.1,. 'v' /�� ,:p",l.i/,57• 2+;.�ti i('!'J111 I CI 7J a D -- - _ ---- ; ec h,. 5— _ —__-- `� I]• -- I�II,A• '(Y !4°,, T171 '' 'r�- r� !!!!.1,..1ii•.1'•!!!1•1 I I P Ii, . -.f- -J �, I. I� �1��`1 'I�r'f j -T�'�o P--1 I•� [ TI IILLI6P •• •-- L- _-�--- •- IL ,f I ' `'iL.a.--a�3• l 11` I �-0 a ra, . ..______ [ _. . I S �� ��_. L .4� {1� Qyry ,Y1 fit:rT -�• ;--_ • �1C- �f w , °� 11:Il:1:111 r+ _ `mi — � _� "-f� �� P r' . .�j;\ #. \ °�, "' �'� I1 I i'l ='IP' a III , , ,- 1 --�„_ _ 1 ; ; _ - may, = ! ! QegaAAeeeoio r •1 ' `III i��" �ii b 4.11'�I • 1 .. ..._ \ Ci'� [- ar I . I-S fD L I .L �',i -4. i Ii F t i �, NI I1'�. L Yv c�+�ea�'e;..•oQ . '' I`I �� 1 T i ttnitirl ..� Qr�rr I ,rirrrr- # ,1• I n I -- - - --- „tar n\ , it r, ..,., .� ��,\ \7..Ir'I«<G{ h.64GI,yM r'` r+ 0 <,. ..A v „Nr ";•e , ••.; ti. it 1 s.i [.II•I II. , s�1 l r. \,\ DC�[f«�ld °trltr�l i.r`trurr! ` ��:,+I_ I o _ ! ,. \ F= I ,� ` t`Y 1,-I s ��� a'''� p \ —�111.1,,,,,'.11II1�Iuuu •k,.#4iiill 111g411,a '4'. F,t a 1. 5' •4` •Q •r: - ., "= . t r�� fI� 1 Vv1 rr nrm 6t1m s �}}t `' •11'�f•�� __ \ ` \� I SEll'Il„!,lik-:"41gtr11G�g 'Ilr�ll- „GGt'►Ia } I• I .o�• `' SAS \-.1 z, i y �;i PrrtiTr`nl;Ini\� `�rfrltrrl h� I. I.imp, I os • • h' �, . •-= _1 • '•I i 4.l4l11.41a I.I]'TA u10-arr 1 f;1xtra .mi.1CI 11 T fD S 1 0,1 1 - \. _'1,- . II ��_ Jor �` ono - J—Y F •r . a c+ _I_ 'ems '1' =-1- -h� �' • �• \�.. tf.rrj[r)aritiry1J ",.Fri-I ,rra:rrivrJ-4,:rt:;ii co 1 --- E.' - — .CLIJ,IfJ ICItiL,.I 71.4L1I.I..It hlL�1'1C.LL1.�1�1, o I1..:.: •• ' ,,;r \ r"rrr P T rI' h I IIr+ I I 't�'! 1rnrnrn11 .-;"".,'1"-----":" l�r�l; �� I [LCI�CCr�'t�[sl I :l,:'�Gfl}�.il �[ �C#il{1 ICI! 1 [ : •.'.I. I ,,t�1a3), . .% ,/'1.'' ; ��� [;I(••''.trlrrarr:Jgvtiir,ri— <rl'lliTIZIG• -11RI111111 i °' ' I SPRINGBROOK CREEK CHANNEL (ALTERNATIVE 3) Physical Features Narrow channel approximately 140 feet across. Storage is contained in one storage pond. Channel follows Springbrook Creek alignment. Land Requirements Total right-of-way -- 117 acres. Temporary construction easements -- 91 acres. Engineering 1 .3 million cubic yards excavated. Excavated material temporarily stored adjacent to channel . Rock lining of channel required. Access roads required on both sides of channel . May provide pump efficiency. Costs Federal : Construction 12.8 million Project administration and contin- gencies (tax, engineering) 5.4 18.2 Local : Land rights 9.5 Road and utility relocations 3.5 13.0 Total 31.2 million Operation and Maintenance $200,000 - $300,000 annually �irmtrrn rlr�rtl�al pr, l�,a, ��,;° °°�r;urJr;.14.,>..JI t � - a 1 I I.�. ;1 a,1.1.,.. :., as f:-I.rJ. , 1 • I 11-�' '� I ,,i'. i 4- ++ 1.1 • i -1 1 I " 1�� (�aa�1,�L�r1�1.rI•U Uy�y t_— .I.�} ..Lll .1 rf _� , �', - F E ����,.IJ7���1 PI11f!1TA'\t7il,2rr11f917fl1TITllF „.1 ,��� \ ���I aI• `1 i•. ��t. ,0 :.y • Z7 1 Vl tulJJ1+� f r J1 '' r`� 1, IE 11JJJI..J,t, �f f 1111, 1'f n11 e I',; S iJ I' I-:I-44 ;,;1:',-! $i I':.;'y'' I rt7 11111711 J�,,o tr fir 17 —arr1 \ _ � I,.J�. ;: 9 • • �� s w 1 p 1 • s. I,�I f1. ItIUJ'JJJ!E t t;"�711 ai�\ = \!',. I , . `n I` i o T'� 11111E t\ `1 \ a' - T ='. I .1. b�: ,: 55 ° `:1 c 15 11T11T17 RliilIM _ ��I' •4 ,4,t,' _ 1 •• ,� • " c .- p '4,� � 1tUJls4t 1�11 1g91J It111 1I ;\\ i'e " • 21-1 t 4 I,•sl. oq �1a1•I: � <yo - 't '� _ L. t,j Irtti '•11 111111�111J11Yy�..;` iltk• , \,\\` .T II,',,,..4I1..1ia! r- I J •y `'� :— y• (,ti J a I i 1 • Ji;:v I.I:bli l J Li-• ;} l�•'liil�,T' �111 !7 • ,I cl,r • _ ——— — — —— V i t9� I 1 {IIr I l i' I `l c S. j. Ho,/ rf ''' �1� 11 \ // IIII I ter c U O-a .�. ` '`i i RIB �'e• 1 i fill a I'�.t �� _ U .:NIA •�I I T I I I i _ ) '11 •�GT�N °`4 -- _ 1 '_ _f J - -_ -`. I^ -- V c Sa • rl et; „El r cogi 1, ,' 1i�` � es- bs OIIINI ;II II ��- - di c 0 • { 1 'l:ba �a�/'� '' \ 1 1 ▪i t; -r :0 •` II j� I rlt• I1 15,ii!III UllfFI -� M UiN�.t n�( a 1I I,I,I,III; i • •• �. 1 I1, i .�1,11� e�€e I1II`Illtl�$fu'III 'I null! Ihl' oa _ \ j -Y tPo 7' 1_JF.+ rAl.\VIFir,-W , - _ ' �i'16 r` t� '��Illl�i I ..I.,:+.��,..�ja�l, l �— II', ,_, o'N.r, I ._�[it.. i�:L,�a�4,f - �; I �1 _; - ..�i717�N I I .1111 iI Itl��il.•�I IJ �._—__— _ _ __ k--___—I J L_ )' T :�_t f �_i. r F'1 • r rl a .. ..... 2 6 1 1 r°2' a:.. II'1 t:-: . ' 1r ce c �' �l'� . ��13 / 'f;'y�" .,:,, 2 III I�+ IU $ g- - __ - 1 I ¢ n f: t_t ff f 1 •� / _ � ^ `7� L. ,•,ar vv t:.w.__._ • i. 1 `�� II�,; t ` :a::.. ,.,:�: \ \ I i • �� � �' cam. 1'j � - --_- ma's.--`_......"`.` ,:.tea1-70.1 �..;... .r: \. \ - I,:_{ :,\A,..1. :,.:;:;.:::‘: � ..`jg„ eta r.uarvay� full I �> J � i ----1--s-\\--•if I 3 '�' II 1(.., •:.... \\\ .,_, i.. , :,...i., .. .. : ,. . 7 . ,, ,. . , , I .4 it-- -. • '' '' ".1 - 1:-.-- \l''' �. "ill II i ' �:'. .. ��.'��I,f', I .'1 TSD\` I 1 e}e I I =staccl_i a\• } iIi a 1 ;111 2 I I \\� L _ V� � -- ____ Q ' I /."�" \ �'� -�'• jellttIVI I Arm 11 PI]111]ed II.mo.I, �� - \ \. ` a ' . I //� < - i T 1 I 1 TIs�9!!f^I lase ny�lsyymmmyyi:S ?IHi.-�.. .. J d I 1 .,_ I ` �_ la-- I .�.� 1 •1. As+.un o1ei� anoi,iniu. } ? . • 1( ---- - - -- --.- .\ �__ _,1 tit.t i.O'All A1TP/A 1SIA C. I r_ • - l''' i i ��` �� �`�� Ill.__ \\\\L\_.iFrs).ru.i1+ - , i i _ I- . >,:..2 -' .-4 - ' • HYBRID P-1 CHANNEL (ALTERNATIVE 4) Physical Features Narrow channel approximately 140 feet across. Storage is contained in two ponds. Channel follows a combination of Springbrook Creek and original P-1 alignments. Land Requirements Total right-of-way -- 100 acres. Temporary construction easements -- 84 acres. Engineering 1 .3 million cubic yards excavated. Excavated material temporarily stored adjacent to channel . Rock lining of channel required. Access roads required on both sides of channel . May provide pump efficiency. Costs Federal : Construction 12.3 million Project administration and con- _ tingencies (tax, engineering) 5.2 17.5 Local : Land rights 9.6 Road and utility relocations 2.8 12.4 Total 29.9 million Operation and Maintenance $200,000 - $300,000 annually ....... ;W f4, , .`t- f �,ti. -'--_- J. .-_'--- - /' IiI ' LI..' t. -- ----N41.4\-..-'. 6)// ''' - : , 0111, • L/`a \ \. (,.: . _ \ I•, f ill lelIli � - - -1tIS Ichic'Anr4:71:17 II" '1 i ! - 11-. ._ �• i, � I z I ,<r`F .\• s `�\ , I 1— � • , -��[� stu I8 u I / `, A£3 '\ 1 II 4.. _ _ Tfir- o N°n PACIFIC I cinu[r UMW I I L. . __ ' I / /F R8 s ` .. 11 \ • • 1 . ! si, ri I \t1 � 6 517 I_ 3 I \ I! I I \1 I.� t :.: ' ? I I? 'i : r.uc. p LONG ACRES MCC �•/ ;...Fr:All-Al,_ • 1 i 1/4,.‘,...4 '1: " I I•/' . '':',., 1 I • : . I ...... .1e. „, ..„,...,7 .. ,.......,, , _,,-....,, .....,.,,::::„4„, ! ....y/P' v/r,-:. t:---4.-:-5 ..„....,;, ,,t, .,,._ . , „...__,, ,., / /,.... .,.. -___,\, r I Ii 'ef 1j ll 1 I• li‘, '''. _L i 11.- x ; •I -- -- ' �rI 11 I (FA • 7/,, ,*p. — , s_,_ .., ,, , _ ___,_ , • al 1 Ulf= I: � l / J e r I I �-�,! ` tI ) ' I � 3 O —I 1 ,I:I 1 I11 ,-.. ,-.- ._,;. 4\ .7. c,�_,,�:i: ` /y 1, '��...I. 70 6. 7,r,;•-i CL Z •—— -- --_- -- - jy -i11`� -� 1t �'r`� "czi:11.1 �� �i i �r — -0 —� ,, - ! ., i I11!'II IIII• ' •rpl, l: -E-- r:,� r jr `y� ,' I a I �! !i�iT� t _`Ji��� f I ._ <a� arJ IU,j's+1 1•-1 I ----- -- i.1 1' 111111 �.^1 Ii''''.lLI. 1r 1, ; I� l `•`• k// ! rrl c-) I f,IInnI 11''ill'II ",�1. t 111111 I {` �. —a� !1' \ \ I• \Y/fi•• • t i#r. • rD rD W •A -- —�QvIt I 'A 1 I11 111� i1 1 I,1!I 1 V��- 4 �t' •• i. I \ \ L •`. �-i3¢ 7` I =: �D -s O � {III i (� '111 !I I'. 1 I �1!y`�"l�F �3.ia,r ;... O f]aij L._ J I��I1 LVllll--iu-� 1 rii,. . '.'-r07, nr i7(i-1 r^j - - _ — — R /6r �� _ _Ji '.4� tau•.p��1 .t 1:7�''��I� -S I 11) CD ...--�_--" ' II i. h.lG, ( �q �— • r11C� I ' iN' )� 1 ',rill pi, k. I." I '11-1-'•" .. :_- .,\: 'l•n I Epp I` 1,111. ` 6. `I,I�� ii 1t \---- i4p r_ �4 I Ct � /'4; L— I '�!3. .rgp1♦ if s t I��. L 6„;- •,II i., i---- ' \�1 F 111 —1 co 19 ,.pL,E • �'°` I I I �, °1'r{{• I.i ' !Inttirri' ,—\,r,rr-7,!irrfrm ' `4. l \ ,7'--- — — --- , ,; i \ '. .• , 11 f a1. I ��� ',i��' �.A\ `.. p4(�.U..ir..::Ivtil ailiEt111 , ri• - �,c ‘.. 40001 ago s'•� .� [ ICI, ,I,�;.,la�s`t4�� ,,I^ \\�` IL- -" ' � dtll,'\ti!I LIII* f �•�{' I• F"' ,I t ' \ LllLttlllL`rLrll l[tltdl trr`A t ll l �' '1't ~ — 1 tr I frl p, vl 1• trlrrlr T _l� _, o 0 0'�8 ;'. r .1 r" in,,, s _ , , I ;\ .1 �\ 1=.1..l' I 11 I : C 112)k tlii, v"a� I k1lF�f ,..(1.1.111u I. t u'{G�i11 rrs 7 I ep� a ,.v, _ „g ..,,. - -. y`:,� I rtritiifirftr'Ii7i�, ^ i w ...,. I D 6c;00 4 4 �� r t I �IdWII�LkB lllllCll )�.‘tla>i11 l:tl[rIl[�Er�P ir�T .nD ;o ^'..�. i �\ _�i� �"�I. r r� jF•i1. r-s — 4•4 . i. �- 7n _,. _ -1111ITI �:51r•ifIrN .,11Lailt::[6,CCl1. ,titr„�I' 1 11':!". i .l_LL�7 ,. � X I '•! }r.r !r r 1' r I,i go) d 1 1 .�� i CCfC�CC� l I� .C�. CCI�.tCl�trl�:If#1111 II -g-.I I �C}Z��I� 1 _ / �/,1- ,- 1 k� \N _ r,If.\.n-rrrltl:d?diif1--':Yin 11111C!171111.1ri 1TT a, - `G • ', PRELIMINARY ASSESSMENT OF - POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE FEATURES Comments Conclusion Community Development • * Local comprehensive plans have been predicated Alternatives 1, 2, and Compatibility with on Alternative 1. 4 are all generally existing and future compatible with exis- land use. * Alternative 1 offers least potential for ting and future commun- reclaiming land required- for storage. ity development. However, Alternative 4 * Sizeable amounts of land required for storage may recognize needs of excavated materials may temporarily restrict of existing private development on those lands for up to seven development more than years. Alternative 1 requires the most land •1 or 2. for storage. * No private development currently exists that would preclude Alternatives 1, 2 and 4. * Concentrating all storage in ponds in Alter- natives 2 and 3 would reduce developable land north of I-405 and redistribute it to south. * Replatting would be required for Alternative 3. * Alternative 4 is the most compatible with existing private development. _ Transportation/ * Alternative 1 has least conflict with existing Until the alignment Utilities roads. of the Valley Parkway Potential for alteration • north of I-405 is or disruption to roads, * Alternatives 1 and 2 result in least disruption finalized, Alternative railroads, water, sewer to existing utilities. 1 results in the least and gas lines. . disruption to existing * Alignment of Valley Parkway may be more severely and future transporta- impacted by storage ponds (Alternatives 2, 3, 4) tion and utilities. than wide channel (Alternative 1). * Alternatives 2, 3, and 4 require shorter cros- • sings than Alternative 1 for existing and future roads and utilities. * Alternatives 3 and 4 have least conflict with Valley Parkway east of Longacres. * Alternatives 3 an 4 reduce the length of P-9 channel. • Natural Environment * Alternative 1 has greatest adverse impact on .Alternative•4 would Effects on air, water, wetlands and wildlife habitat. have the least impact land, plants and animals, on the natural environ- * Alternatives 1 and 2 may adversely affect ment. Springbrook Creek by dewatering the creek. * Alternatives 2, 3 and 4.may impair fish migra- tion through the ponds. * Ponds part of alternatives 2, 3 and 4 may qualify as wetland mitigation acreage. * Alternatives 2, 3 and 4 pose least potential hazard to the riparian forest area. * Alternative 3 has the most adverse short term impact on Springbrook Creek. • * Alternative 4 has least potential for water quality degradation. --. * Alternative 4 has least impact on wetlands and wildlife habitat. • Public Health/Safety * Alternative 1 with slower channel velocities Alternative 1 presents Potential for health • has fewest safety hazards. the least health and and/or safety hazards. * Alternatives 2, 3 and 4 with ponds have safety hazards. greatest stagnant water and highest potential for insect breeding. - Aesthetics/Recreation * Alternatives 1 and 2 are rectilinear and limit Alternative 4 provides Short and long term the potential for developing pedestrian the most potential for c1 effects to the visual interest and visual variety. enhancing aesthetics character and recreation and recreation oppor- potential of surrounding * Alternatives 2, 3 and 4 provide more opportunity tunities. area. for an open space scheme linking the ponds, riparian forest and Fort Dent Park. * Alternatives 2, 3 and 4 provide more shoreline environment. * Alternatives 3 and 4 would-be-least disrupted by traffic and noise from the Valley Parkway. * Alternative 4 has highest potential for devel- oping pedestrian interest and visual variety. • * Alternative 4 provides two central locations for viewing wildlife. , I // 1#4PP 6e G 1 / ,1Ss HABITAT TYPES • There are nine basic habitat types in the Green River watershed. The farmland of the Lower and Upper Valleys provides wet and dry fields which are utilized, sometimes extensively, by wildlife. Riparian woodland is present in the Upper Valley, and to lesser extent in the Lower Valley. There are also ponds, marshes, and shrub swamps in the Lower Valley and mixed woodland characterizes the areas of increased gradient on the valley sides. The river provides banks of varying character and gravel bars are common in the Upper Valley. Urban areas comprise the last habitat category. All of these habitat types integrate, and there may be distinct types within any -category. , I. RIPARIAN WOODLAND Extensive stands of this habitat are present along the river in the Upper Valley, and in scattered patches near the river and small streams in the Lower Valley. BLACK COTTONWOOD (Populus trichocarpa) dominates the canopy in this habitat, and trees of 60 feet and more are common. Cottonwoods thrive in areas that are occasionally flooded; young trees 1() may also be found in- areas of recent landfill. Numerous other trees may be associated with cotton- woods, depending upon local conditions. In particular, BIGLEAF MAPLE (Acer macrophyllum) , RED ALDER (Alnus rubra) , and several species of WILLOW (Salix spp. ) such as PACIFIC WILLOW (S. lasiandra) are often present; OREGON ASH (Fraxinus latifolia) , . PACIFIC CRABAPPLE (Pyrus fusca) , and a number of . introduced species (e.g. , Prunus spp. ) are sometimes present in lesser -numbers. In general, the willows are shrub-like and tend to stay close to_ water. As one progresses upriver, the nature of riverside and other riparian areas begins to change. Several miles downstream of Flaming Geyser State Park ' coniferous trees, such as WESTERN RED CEDAR (Thuja plicata) and DOUGLAS FIR (Pseudotsuga menziesii) , enter the plant community and cottonwood becomes less conscpicuous. In hillside tributaries of the river, .streambeds are more typically lined with BIGLEAF MAPLE, RED CEDAR, DOUGLAS FIR, and ALDER. Lichens and mosses festoon the larger maples and alders, giving some of these a ghostly, beauty. Riparian habitats sport a diverse assemblage of shrubs which often form a distinct understudy to the cottonwood canopy, and are dense along the margins of the woodland. SNOWBERRY (Symphoricarpus albus) , RED ELDERBERRY (Sambucus racemosa) , SALMONBERRY (Rubus spectabilis) , WILD ROSES (Rosa pisocarpa and R. nutkana) , BLACKBERRY (Rubus 1 laciniatus) , and RED OSIER DOGWOOD (Cornus stolonifera) are common shrubs. To a lesser extent, WILD GOOSEBERRY (Ribes divaricatum) , THIMBLEBERRY i (Rubus parviflorus) , INDIAN PLUM (Osmaronia e cerasiformis) , and other shrubs may be present. /, \ / C-2 - — 1Ns are conspicuous on the densely-wooded slopes. The dominant conifers are similar to those of the Mixed Forest: DOUGLAS FIR, WESTERN RED CEDAR, and l WESTERN HEMLOCK. But in this zone, scattered SITKA SPRUCE (Picea sitchensis) appear, as well as occasional GRAND FIR (Abies grandis) . Deciduous species present include BIGLEAF MAPLE, VINE MAPLE, DOGWOOD, AND ALDER. A myriad of ferns dominate the understory. SWORD FERN is most conspicuous, but DEER FERN, LADY FERN, and MAIDENHAIR FERN (Adiantum pedatum) are also present. RED HUCKLEBERRY (Vaccinium parvi- folium) can often be seen sprouting from old tree stumps, and DEVIL'S CLUB, SALAL (Gaultheria shallon) and OREGON GRAPE join the shrubby understory typical of- Mixed Forest. Many of the wildflowers typical • of Mixed Forest are present here also, in addition to COLTSFOOT (Petasites frigidus) , COW PARSNIP (Heracleum lanatum) , and FALSE SOLOMAN'S SEAL (Smilacina racemosa) in more open areas. In the closed watershed, huge expanses of dense coniferous forest are bi.oken. by clearcut areas in various stages of regeneration from previous logging operations. Elk are most commonly seen in the scattered meadows of old farms which are now abandoned. The forest contiguous to the Gorge and Palmer Reach is usually coniferous but may have many broadleaf trees, depending on local topography. Numerous lakes and swampy areas are found in the still extensive forests of these areas, but the shores of the lakes are rapidly being developed for housing. The coniferous forest of the closed watershed, while not supporting a particularly diverse avian community, does provide excellent habitat for a variety of mammals. By reason of its "undisturbed" - status, this area is excellent for big game animals such as Elk, Mule Deer, Black Bear, and Cougar (rarely seen) . Numerous smaller mammals such as , Deer Mice, Douglas Squirrels, Townsend Chipmunks, and Mountain Beavers are typical of this habitat, and Ruffed Grouse can frequently be heard "drumming" in the deep woods. The closed watershed effectively serves as a wildlife sanctuary, and this status should be maintained in the future. It is possible, however, that this area could be opened to the public in a carefully controlled manner and still remain both a high quality wildlife preserve and a safe municipal watershed. 9, DEVELOPED AREAS Numerous types of habitats exist in the valley ') that produce persistent contact between wildlife hand human activities. These include residential and industrial areas, airports, business districts, a racetrack, construction projects, railroads, highways, and many others. In many cases, these areas abut on or intergrade with less disturbed tk areas such as marshes, riparian woodland, or the C-6 -AMM Mika river itself. In most cases, some wildlife use is compatible with such urban environs; for example, numerous birds use the open "meadows" of the Longacres complex. it is. important that future urban developments provide for wildlife needs by supplying food and shelter plantings, and open areas. WILDLIFE The Green River watershed supports a diverse fauna due to the presence of numerous habitat types, some very productive. As noted, marshes are particularly productive habitats, supporting abundant, plant and insect life; consequently, many birds and mammals live and breed in marshes. Various ducks, rails, bitterns, small songbirds, and occasionally Canada Geese nest in the remaining marshes of the Lower Valley. Muskrat and rabbits are often seen in these areas. 1 The shallow ponds, sloughs, and slow-moving streams of the Lower and Upper Valleys provide excellent breeding areas for frogs and salamanders, and Red-legged Frogs, Pacific Treefrogs, and Western Toads are abundant. The reptilian fauna of the watershed is not particularly diverse, but several species of snakes and lizards occur here. Riparian Woodland, particularly extensive in the Upper Valley, is known to produce a relatively high diversity of wildlife as a result of its productivity and vegetative complexity. Songbirds in particular use this habitat extensively during the breeding season. Beaver also utilize this habitat in less-disturbed areas. A variety of mammals utilize the forests, meadows, and waters of the Green River and its tributaries. In addition to the Beaver, Muskrat, and Eastern Cottontail, numerous other medium- and small-sized mammals are widespread. River Otter, Striped Skunk, Coyote, Red Fox, and Long-tailed Weasel are prominent. Big game animals include Mule Deer and Black Bear. In the closed watershed, a herd of about 120 Elk range, and Cougar are occasionally seen. As noted above, the Lower Green River Valley is a significant wintering area and migration corridor for waterfowl in the Puget Sound area. State Game Department winter censuses of the Lower Valley indicate that more than 10, 000 waterfowl presently use the fields, ponds and marshes near Kent, Renton, and Auburn for feeding and resting. Censuses which were made for this report in late winter and early spring indicate an annual minimum of 7, 500 waterfowl and 3,700 shorebirds in the Lower Valley. • C-7 J V • • GENERAL SPECIES LIST UPPER AND LOWER GREEN RIVER VALLEYS Amphibians Pacific Giant Salamander Tailed Frog Northwestern Salamander Western Toad Long-toed Salamander Pacific Treefrog Rough-skinned Newt Red-le gged Frog Western Red-backed Salamander Bullfrog Reptiles Northern Alligator Lizard Rubber Boa Common Garter Snake Western Terrestrial Garter Snake Northwestern Garter Snake Birds ( -seen, +expected but not seen) . Eared Grebe . Ruffed Grouse . Western Grebe . California Quail . Pied-billed Grebe . Ring-necked Pheasant ▪ Great Blue Heron . Virginia Rail + Green Heron + Sora + American Bittern American Coot . Killdeer • . Canada Goose . Common Snipe . Mallard . Spotted Sandpiper . Gadwall . Greater Yellowlegs . Pintail . Lesser Yellowlegs Green-winged Teal + Pectoral Sandpiper . Blue-winged Teal + Baird' s Sandpiper . Cinnamon Teal . Least Sandpiper . European Wigeon . Dunlin . American Wigeon . Long-billed Dowitcher . Shoveler . Western Sandpiper + Wood Duck . Wilson's Phalarope . Redhead . Northern Phalarope . Ring-necked Duck . Glaucous-winged Gull . Canvasback . Thayer's Gull . Greater Scaup + California Gull . Lesser Scaup + Ring-billed Gull . Common Goldeneye . Mew Gull . Bufflehead + Bonaparte' s Gull . Ruddy Duck . Hooded Merganser . Band-tailed Pigeon . Rock Dove ▪ Common Merganser + Screech Owl + Turkey Vulture + Great Horned Owl . Sharp-shinned Hawk + Pygmy Owl . Cooper' s Hawk . Short-eared Owl . Red-tailed Hawk + Saw-whet Owl . Bald Eagle . Marsh Hawk + Common Nighthawk + Merlin (Pigeon Hawk) . Kestrel (Sparrow Hawk) + Vaux's Swift . Rufous Hummingbird , C-9 A 7 / \ + Belted. Kingfisher . Cedar Waxwing . Starling ▪ Common Flicker . Hutton' s Vireo + Pileated Woodpecker + Solitary Vireo , + Red-breasted Sapsucker + Red-eyed Vireo + Hairy Woodpecker - + Warbling Vireo + Downy Woodpecker + Orange-crowned Warbler + Willow Flycatcher . Yellow Warbler + Hammond' s Flycatcher + Yellow-rumped Warbler + Western Flycatcher + Black-throated Gray + Western Wood Pewee Warbler + Olive-sided Flycatcher + Townsend' s Warbler . Violet-green Swallow + MacGillivray's Warbler . Tree Swallow . Yellowthroat . Rough-winged Swallow + Wilson' s Warbler . Barn Swallow . House Sparrow . Cliff Swallow . Western Meadowlark ; . Steller' s Jay . Red-winged Blackbird . Common Crow + Northern Oriole f ▪ Black-capped Chicakadee . Brewer' s Blackbird Y . Chestnut-backed Chickadee . Brown-headed Cowbird . Bushtit + Western Tanager + Red-breasted Nuthatch + Black-headed Grosbeak . Brown Creeper + Evening Grosbeak + Dipper + Purple Finch . Winter Wren . House Finch . Bewick' s Wren . Pine Siskin . Long-billed Marsh Wren . American Goldfinch . Robin . Rufous-sided Towhee i + Varied Thrush . Savannah Sparrow + Hermit Thrush . Dark-eyed Junco + Swainson' s Thrush . White-crowned Sparrow k . Golden-crowned Kinglet . Golden-crowned Sparrow + Ruby-crowned Kinglet . Fox Sparrow . Water Pipit +Lincoln' s Sparrow 1 . Song Sparrow Mammals g o Common Opossum Coyote Trowbridge Shrew Red Fox Vagrant Shrew Bobcat Dusky Shrew Cougar • Pacific Water Shrew Mountain Beaver k. Shrew-mole Townsend Chipmunk t Townsend Mole Douglas Squirrel Pacific Mole Northern Flying Squirrel Little Brown Myotis Beaver Long-eared Myotis Deer Mouse Long-legged Myotis California Red-backed Vole California Myotis Townsend Vole ; Silver-haired Bat Long-tailed Vole Big Brown Bat Oregon Vole Hoary Bat Muskrat Western Big-eared Bat Norway Rat Black Bear Black Rat Raccoon House Mouse Marten Pacific Jumping Mouse Short-tailed Weasel Porcupine Long-tailed Weasel Snowshoe Hare Mink Eastern Cottontail . River Otter Mule Deer Spotted Skunk Elk Striped Skunk \ / C-10 -N t ir ki! . - , 1: .t , 't,,: , , • 4 �1 i"•\ �Ve'p \k- Vtl�., 1+, a A.. . Y,, i g e l To Date Time— WHILE YOU WERE OUT of Phony -tau-I:ONE() PLEA CALL. CALLED TO SEE, YOU WILL. CALL AGAIN • '1 WANTS TO SEE YOU HUSH RETuRNED YOUR CALL [ Message oay.itof S R. W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES 815 Seattle Tower•3rd & University•Seattle, Washington 98101 •(206)624-6239 Suite 503 • 1110 West Sixth Avenue • Anchorage, Alaska 99503 • (907) 276-6846 TO Roger Blaylock D. Se• .e .- 1•, 19a0 City of Renton Planning Department 1 / BJECT City Hall AL e a R IS Renton, WA 98055 Attached are examples of work by Mike Lee who will be working on the Flora and Fauna sections of the Draft EIS for Altera. a.v..2.....t...Sincerely Jon Potter JP:maj „_ Enclosures 70 A nc.Cg Rl E 1` 1U Se 111g%) ,.....-- - �z, Gtt -rx.NtA r S -Cr `hire SOS Ik POZI6 e. General : The site is the north end of a large and nearly continuous wetland fed by Kelsey Creek. South of the site is a Shore Pine-Scrub Birch Peat Bog Community, rather rare in Western Washington, .partly disturbed by the Bellefield Office Park development. Much of the site itself is a former blue- berry farm, though the swamp vegetation has completely reclaimed it. The soils range from heavy clays on the edges to peats and peaty-mucks in the interior. No unusual plant species appear to inhabit the site, although the following uncommon to rare species are found just off the site to the south: Bog kalmia (Kalmia occidentalis) Labrador tea (Ledum groenlandicum) Shore pine (Pinus contorta) Scrub birch (Betula glandulosa hallii) Oregon crab apple (Malus fusca) These species could be expected to move into the site, though the depth and structure of the underlying peat soil may not be precisely suited to these exacting plants. J J Cattail Community: This is the wettest portion of the site, probably holding standing water most of the winter. Soils are entirely a peat-muck, moist to wet at all seasons, too saturated at this stage to support trees or shrubs. Cattail (Typha latifolia) is almost the only plant present, although some grasses, spiraea and lythrum occasionally appear. The cattail community is completely dependent on wet soils throughout the year and any obstruction to the movement of water into the site or any drainage of the naturally high water table would result in the elimination of this community and its replacement by one of following types. Spiraea-Grass Community: Closely allied to the cattail community, this type of vegetation indicates a less consis- tently wet, peaty soil. The dominant species is spiraea (Spiraea douglasii) , though some parts are pure stands of larger grasses. This community, a transitional zone between the cattail community and the next zone, develops as herbaceous debris builds up a mat of organic material that becomes a "topsoil" for larger woody species. As with the previous community, a steady supply of soil moisture is essential for both the existence and the transitional role of this vegeta- tion type. Spiraea-Willow-Dogwood Community: As the natural in- filling of the bog continues and the mat of soil thickens, the first two communities progress to this shrubby one. The prin- cipal species here is still spiraea (Spiraea douglasii) , but there are thickets and hummocks of willows (Salix sitchensis, S. piperi, S. lasiandra) and red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) rising to four to ten meters. Though all of these plants could survive a very gradual lowering of the water table over a period of several years, the community would change rather quickly to a more forested community, losing some or all of its savanna-like qualities. Willow-Poplar Community: The latest stage of the transi- tion to forest is seen in this community, where most of the spiraea has been replaced by larger shrubs and trees. The willows of the previous community, some now grown to 20 meters, are joined by black cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) up to 25 meters tall and in some cases, Oregon ash (Fraxinus latifolia) and Oregon crab apple (Malus fusca) . The soils are still wet in winter, with some standing water at times, but with summer and fall water table well below the surface (one meter or more) . This community, while dependent on a constant source of water, does not require as exact or unchanging a level of soil mositure as do the previous communities. r r Broom-Herbaceous Community: Under this heading come the various mixtures of Scotch broom, grasses and weeds that have covered the edges of the site where there has been recent filling. These fill soils are typically clay, with extreme fluctuations of moisture content, from nearly saturated in winter, to dry and hard for a long period in summer and early fall. Left alone, these jumbled fringe areas will progress to a typical alder-maple-madrona-conifer vegetation community, though very limited in extent and spotty in development. Orchards-Exotic : These areas are the yards and gardens . of abandoned homesites, mostly on the west edge of the site. Fruit trees, roses and ornamental, non-native trees have grown and spread in the company of invading natives such as alder (Alnus rubra) , bitter cherry (Prunus emarginata) and cottonwood. Soils are clay and clay loam, dry to moist in summer, moist to wet in winter. Because of its great diversity, this "community" is very resilient to change, though its wholesale removal would mean re-establishment of a predominantly alder growth. Nature of Wetland Communities It is apparent from the presence of old blueberry bushes on the site that the greater part was still under cultivation within the last ten to twenty years. Therefore, the wetlands, with the possible exception of the southwest corner, are still re-establishing themselves and are changing to a more wooded condition. The older growth on the southwest corner probably indicates the direction this change will take, perhaps with an extension of the Pine-Scrub Birch Community to the south. (The shore pine and scrub birch are rare as natives in the Seattle area, but are abundant just south of this site. ) Undoubtedly, road construction and filling on the edges of the site have slowed the drainage and accelerated the takeover of marsh vegetation. Whatever the exact future vegetation pattern of the site, it will, if undisturbed, clearly remain a wetland community, with some open, hummocky areas and a sizeable woodland peri- phery. As such, it always will be an important wildlife shelter for the widest possible variety of species. The partly open marshlands are particularly attractive to a large number of birds. General : Nearly half the site is a recent fill of mostly heavy clay and is nearly without vegetation. The remainder is still part of the general surrounding wetland and is well covered in wet-soil trees, shrubs and grasses. While the site as a whole can be called "disturbed, " those parts that have not been filled remain viable and valuable wetland communities from the standpoint of both plants and animals. Naturally, the site's value is greatly enhanced by its connection to the rest of the Kelsey .Creek wetland. The following communities may be distinguished on the site: Willow Community: These thickets of willows (Salix sitchensis, S. lasiandra) , black cottonwood (Populus tricho- carpa) and red-osier dogwood (Cornus stolonifera) vary from clumps to extensive groves up to 20 meters tall. This vegeta- tion type, which has been spreading on the site, requires a moist to wet, highly organic soil with a constant supply of moisture. Any interruption of the water supply, or any increase in drainage from the site would eliminate most of these trees, though some of the larger specimens would recover. An increase in surface water would also be destructive, though most of the vegetation would probably adapt. Reedgrass-Spiraea Community: This is largely an herbaceous community on continuously wet soils. After many years, this kind of vegetation builds a matted layer of organic material which eventually supports the tree species of the previous com- munity. The plants of this community require constant moist conditions, as well as surface water in winter. Denied this, the vegetation will move very quickly to a brushy or wooded condition. Principal species are spiraea (Spiraea douglasii) , cattail (Typha latifolia) , red-osier dogwood (Cornus stoloni- f era) , purple loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria) and various large grasses. Fill Soils: These comprise about half the site. Little vegetation exists on these clay and rubble piles and nothing meaningful can be said about its sensitivity since it is little more than a recent crop of herbaceous weeds. Left alone, this fill likely would generate a stand of alder, madrona, cotton- wood and willow with grass and broom in the most difficult spots. or"t'i vt 5 Sri cl?.k`t" ace, vefiitteitt,0vi repo rzt cm- Vitt • DESCRIPTION OF ON SITE PLANT SPECIES The inventory forms which were used. in the field work of inventorying plant species at the Bangor site have been compiled into the following descriptive form. This descriptive material is arranged in plant communities and is numerically tied to the set of maps entitled "FLORA BY PLANT COMMUNITIES" which is included in this report. 1. Forest of mixed conifers, predominately Douglas-fit - (Pseaidotsuga menziesii), Madrona (Arbutus menziesii) and Red Alder ,(Pilaus rubra) , with an understbry of Sword Fern (Polystichum munitum), and in lesser amounts Salal (Gaultheria shallon) , Evergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum) , Pacific Blackberry (Rubus ursinus), Oregon Grape (Mahonia nervosa) and a middle story formed by occasional Coast Rhododendrons (Rhododendron macrophyllum) and Ocean-spray (Holodiscus discolor). Less common trees in the area are Western White Pine (Pinus monticola) , Western Red Cedar (Thuja plicata) and Scouler's Willow (Salix scouleriana). Open margins of the zone support Tobacco Bush (Ceanothus velutinus) , Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) and a:variety of common herbaceous species. 0 2. A relatively clear area surrounding a former homesite. Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparious) covers much of the area, with a variety of grasses, herbaceous perennials, and native and exotic Black- berries (Rubus spp.) . Native trees scattered around and on the site include Madrona (Arbutus menziesii) , Western White Pine (Pinus monticola) and. Red Alder (Alnus rubra) . Additionally, a variety of ornamental plants and fruit trees have persisted, particularly fruit trees (Malus, Pyrus, Prunus spp) , Lilac (Syringla vulgaris) , Hawthorn (Crataegus sp) and a number of commonly planted shrubs and perennials. In a few places will be found Hardhack (Spiraea douglasii) ,. Ocean-spray (Holodiscus discolor) and Sword Fern (Polystichum munitum) . 3. A dense forest of Madrona (Arbutus menziesii) , Douglas fir (Pseudo.tsuga menziesii) with an impenetrable undergrowth of Salal (Gaultheria shallon) , Evergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum) and Coast Rhododendron (Rhododendron macrophyllum) . On the margins of the area are Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) , Piper's Willow (Salix piperi) , Bracken (Pteridium aquilinium) and Pacific Black- berry (Rubus ursinus) . An occasional Western White Pine (Pinus monticola) will be found. 4. A dense forest of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) , Western White Pine (Pinus monticola) , Madrona (Arbutus menziesii) and .I Western Hemlock (Tsuga heterphylla) . In shadier parts, the under- story is mainly Salal (Gaultheria shallon) , Evergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum) , Red Huckleberry (V. parvifolium) , Oregon Grape (Mahonia nervosa) , Coast Rhododendron (Rhododendron macrophyllum) and Pacific Blackberry (Rubus ursinus) . In open spots, caused by clearing or dry soil, growth is mainly shrub, including Hairy Manzaaita (Arctostaphylos columbiana) , Tobaccobush (Ceanothus velutinus), Ocean-spray (Holodiscus discolor) , Bracken (Pteridium aquilinium) , Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) and Willows (Salix scouleriana, S. sitchensis and S. piperi) . Also, the shade-loving understory plants occur in a stunted form in the open, with a variety of herbaceous plants. 5. This open area supports mainly herbaceous species, largely Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) and grasses. Intermixed are Centaury (Centaurium umbellatum) , Parentucellia (Parentucellia viscosa), Lupines (Lupinus rivularis, L. bicolor) , Hypericum (Hypericum perforatum) and Ox-eye Daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum) . 6. A wet soil forest of Red Alder (Alnus rubra) with occasional Willows (Salix lasiandra, S. piperi) and Western Red Cedar (Thuja plicata). The dense understory is dominated by Red Elderberry (Sambuccus callicarpa) , Coast Rhododendron (Rhododendron T7, 42 macrophyllum) and Salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) as well as Deer Fern (Blechnum spicent) . On the wettest soils are found Devil's Club (Oplopanaxhorridus), Hardhack (Spiraea douglasii) and Skunk Cabbage (Lysichitum americanum) . In open wet spots are Yellow Monkey Flower (Mimulus guttatus) , Lady Fern (Athyrium filix-foemina), Twin Berry (Lonicera involucrata) , Cascara (Rhamnus purshiana) , Cattail (Thypha latifolia) and Horsetail (Equisetum sp. ) . 7. A mixed forest of large (100'-15' x 3') Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) with Red Alder (Alnus rubra) and Madrona (Arbutus menziesii) . Less common trees include Western Hemlock (Tsuga heter- phylla) , Western Red Cedar (Thuja plicata) , Pacific Dogwood (Cornus nuttallii) , Sitka Mountain Ash (Sorbus sitchensis) and Western White Pine (Pinus monticola) . The understory is a dense growth of Pacific Blackberry (Rubus ursinus) , Salal (Gaultheria shallon) , Evergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum) , Red Huckleberry (V. parvifolium) , Twin Flower (Linnaea borealis) , Coast Rhododendron (Rhododendron macrophyllum) and Oregon Grape (Mahonia nervosa) . Most of the trees, other than the scattered large specimens are well under 100' tall. Notable and rare here are Twin Berry (Lonicera involucrate) and a species of Disporum. 8. A dry forest of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) , Western White Pine (Pinus monticola) , Madrona (Arbutus menziesii) and Red Alder (Alnus rubra), mixed with a few Western Hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), Western Red Cedar (Thuja plicate) and Cascara (Rhamnus purshiana) where the soil moisture permits. Understory plants are basically evergreen: Rhododendron (Rhododendron macrophyllum) , Salal (Gaultheria shallon) and Evergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinum ovatum). More open areas support Bracken (Pteridium aquilinium) , Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) and a range of sun-loving, drought tolerant perennials. The soil here is very sandy, with a few un-vegetated blow-outs. 9. An opening from a former homesite. The major vegetation is Bracken (Pteridium aquilinium) and grasses. Less common are Oxeye Daisy (Chrysanthemum Ieucanthemum) , Lupine (Lupinus rivularis) , Hypericum (Hypericum perforatum) , Strawberry (Fragaria vesca) , Thistles (Cirsium edule) , Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) , Prunella (Prunella vulgaris, Yarrow (Achillia lanulosa) , Oregon Grape (Mahonia nervosa) , Tall Oregon Grape (M. aquifolium) and a variety of common herbaceous species. Along the margins of the surrounding forest are large Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) , Lodgepole Pine (Pinus contorta) , Western White Pine (P. monticola and Red Alder (Alnus rubra) , with an understory of Ocean-spray (Holodiscua discolor) and Hardhack (Spiraea dougl.asii) with a few specimens of .Coralroot (Coralorhiza sp. ). The Lodgepole Pines were the largest of the very few found on the entire study area. 10. An open area, recently cut, which is in a-shrub stage consisting of sclerophyllous evergreen shrubs and very sparse herbaceous cover. The growth is actually a Mediterranean chapparral, and could conceivably remain indefinately, due to the scorched nature of the soil. Such a vegetation occurs commonly in California, sparingly in this area, and is caused by low summer rainfall, mild temperatures and sharply drained soil. It is. difficult to say whether the coniferous seedlings now appearing will be able to establish a forest cover once again. r _ Principal species here are Hairy Manzanita (Arctostaphylos columbiana) , Kinnikinnik (A. uva-ursi), Media Manzanita (A. maedia, unique to the site), Tobacco Bush (Ceanothus' velutinus), Coast Rhododendron (Rhododendron macrophyllum) , Madrona. (Arbutus menziesii) and Bracken (Pteridium aquilinium). Conifer seedlings found are Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), Western Hemlock (Tsuga hetero- phylla) and Western White Pine (Pinus monticola). In-filling species including Fireweed (Epilobum angustifolium), Foxglove (Digitalis purpurea) , Thistles (Cirsium spp.), Blackberries (Rubus leucodernis, R. ursinus), Ox-eye Daisy (Chrysahthemum leucanthemum) , Starflower .(Trientalis latifolia) , Coast Rhododendron (Rhodo- dendron macrophyllum), Sword Fern (Polystichum munitum) , Sweetroot (Osmorhiza chiloensis) , and Red Flowering Currant (Ribes sanguineum) . 193. A grassy area with spotted native and introduced trees. There are several areas of Red Alder (Alnus rubra) and Quaking Aspen (Populus tremuloides) in pure stands. The Aspens are particularly large (50 to 75 feet) . Other trees there, mostly immature, are Western White Pine (Pinus monticola), Cascara (Rhamnus purshiana), Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) , Madrona (Arbutus menziesii). Very large Willows (Salix scouleriana, S. pipers, S. lasiandra) are found around the site. Also, there are many fruit trees and Lilacs (Syringa) remaining 0 from an old homestead. Shrubs and herbs include Toadflax (Linaria vulgairs) in one large mass near the road, Hardhack (Spiraea_ douglasii), Thistles .(Cirsium spp.), Red Elderberry (Sambuccus callicarpa), Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius), Yarrow (Achillea lanulosa), Queen Anne's Lace (Daucus carrota), Sword Fern (Polystichum munitum), Bracken (Pteridium aquilinium) and Pacific Blackberry (Rubus ursinus). 194. A marsh with extensive open areas around it. The grassy area that comprises the south half of the site is well grown up H-164 in Scotch Broom (Cytisus scoparius) , Hypericum (Hypericum perfor- atum), Ox-Eye Daisy (Chrysanthemum leucanthemum) , Tansy (Tanecetum vulgare) , Queen Anne's Lace (Daucus carrota) , Lupine (Lupinus rivularis) , Yarrow (Archilea lanulosa) , Fireweeds (pilobum spp.), Parantucellia (Parentucellia viscosa), Thistle (Cirsium spp.) , Skunkweed (Navarretia squarrosa) and in thickets of young Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) , Western Hemlock (Tsuga heterophylla), Cascara (Rhamnus purshiana) , Bitter Cherry (Prunus emarginata), Sitka Spruce (Picea sitchensis - probably introduced), Western White Pine (Pinus mOnticola), Bigleaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum), Western Red Cedar '(Thuja plicata), Hazelnut (Corylus conuta), Mountain Ash (Sorbus sp.) , Indian Plum (Osmaronia cerasiformia) and Red Alder (Alnus rubra) . Also, there are escaped Black Locust (Robinia pseudoacacia) and fruit trees. P Around the marsh are extensive thickets of Hardhack (Spirea douglasii), and Quaking Aspen (Populus tremuloides) , Juncus, Cyperus spp. , Scirpus spp. , and, in the water, are Water Lilies (Nuphar polysepalum). 195. A forest of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), Western Hemlock (Tsuga plicata), Cascara (Phamnus purshiana), Pacific Dogwood (Cornus nuttallii), and Bigleaf Maple Acer macro- phyllum). The understory is basically Salal (Gaultheria shallon), Evergreen Huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), Red Huckleberry (V. parvifolium), Twinflower (Linnaea borealis),, Oregon Grape (Mahonia nervosa) , Starflower (Trientalis latifolia), Coast Rhododendron (Rhododendron macrophyllum), Sword Fern (Poly- stichum munitum), Sweet Root (Osmorhiza chiloensis) and Red Flowering Currant (Ribes sanguineum). 196. An open forest of Dougals fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), Madrona (Arbutus menziesii), Bigleaf Maple (Acer macrophyllum) , Grand fir (Abies grandis), Cascara (Rhamnus purshiana), Pacific Dogwood (Cornus nuttallii), and Red Alder (Alnus rubra) with an understory of Hazelnut (Corylus cornuta) , Rose (Rosa), Evergreen , Huckleberry (Vaccinium ovatum), Red Huckleberry (V. parvifolium) , Salal (Gaultheria .shallon), Oregon Grape (Mahonia nervosa) , Ocean-spray (Holodiscus discolor), Coast Rhododendron (Rhododendron macrophyllum), Rattlesnake Plantain (Goodyear oblongifolia), Twinflower (Linnaea borealis), Sword Fern (Polystichum .munitum), Starflower (Trientalis latifolia) and Violet (Viola). 197. Essentially the same as 196, except that the trees are more mature (30 years older). H-166 PLANT COMMUNITIES IN ORDER OF IMPORTANCE A number of rather distinct basic vegetational communities can be seen on the site, based on dominant species in repeated combination over extensive areas. The communities cited here are somewhat • arbitrary, but do account for virtually all of the vegetation on the site. They are listed in order of general biological importance. 1. PSEUDOTSUGA-TSUGA-THUJA-ALNUS-GAULTHERIA-VACCINIUM This is the most common forest type on the site, and its elimination would be rather destructive to the ecology of the site mainly because it is such a large part of the vegetation. It does, besides, support a fairly large variety of plant species. Removal of large amounts of forest cover would have same very serious consequences on the runoff erosion, water quality, wind and microclimate, soil quality, wildlife habitats, and visual quality of the site, unless carried out in gradual steps over a period of time. 2. ALNUS-ACER-POLYSTICHUM This moist forest community supports a wide variety of plant:; species. Occurring with mixed conifers, it is a dominant H-�.b7 type in the north and east parts of the site. It provides shelter for many shade-loving plant species which would be greatly reduced if this formation were widely eliminated. Stream water flow and quality would be adversely affected, since this is a typical growth around stream drainage slopes. 3. THUJA-ALNUS-RUBUS SPECTABILIS-ATHYRIUM Always indicative of moist soil conditions, this community shelters many uncommon plant species and is frequently found on the border between drier forest and bog. Being one, of those species-rich marginal areas, it is rather vital to the natural environment and its removal would be a hardship to wildlife and plantlife of many varieties. 4. LYSICHITUM-ATHYRIUM-OPLOPANAX-RUBUS SPECTABILIS Most areas of continuously wet soil support a community similar to this. This is another vegetatin that is normally - accompanied by a wide variety of plants not found elsewhere. There are many small wet areas on the site, usually spring fed, or associated with streams on flat, poorly drained spots. The removal of these would, of course, drastically affect the many plants and animals, but also would have serious consequences on the storage of natural groundwater and runoff, H-168 5. SPIRAEA DOUGLASII Thissforms large thickets around most bogs and is common on most wet soils. It is often associated with Salix spp. and • Populus tremuloides and though it is not a diverse plant . community in itself, it is a habitat for many water-oriented animals and is a transitional stage to the drier soil plants that will invade the bog gradually. Their removal would entail the serious disruption of the bog environment. 6. PSEUDOTSUGA-PINUS-TSUGA-ALNUS-GAULTHERIA The soils of this zone are reasonably well drained and cause the vegetation to take a sub-humid character, with a combina- tion of moist and dry soil species. The understory is a variable association of evergreen and deciduous species and the typical stand of this community supports a wide range of plant and animal species. This form covers-a substantial part of the site, so while it is difficult to generalize about the effects of its widespread removal, it is clear that the removal of such large tracts of vegetation would • have major effects on large scale factors such as drainage, micro-climate and soil and water quality. H-1�,q 7. ALNUS-PSEUDOTSUGA-ARBUTUS-GAULTHERIA-VACCINIUM-MAHONIA This, too, is a major constituent of the overall vegetation of the site, and is a slightly drier phase of #6. The effects would be nearly the same. 8. PSEUDOTSUGA-PILAUS-ARBUTUS-GAULTHERIA-VACCINIUM-RHODODENDRON This. community is the average type for the southern part of the site and is very extensive there. It probably supports less wildlife than the previous forms, but its amount would mean that the removal of a major percentage of it would have important effects on the natural environment there. In some cases, it is the only suitable habitat for other plants and animals in the area in which it occurs. p 9. PSEUDOTSUGA-ARBUTUS-HOLODISCUS-GAULTHERIA-VACCINIUM The Pseudotsuga-Holodiscus formation is a relatively rare community in Western Washington, indicating very warm, dry situation, generally the driest possible situation in which a Pseudotsuga forest will occur. The wildlife here is less • varied than in the other forest zones and both plant and animal associates are similar to those in other dry forest zones. Other than the loss of an unusual vegetation community, the effects of eliminating this formation would be similar to those for other dry forest zones. On slopes, the erosion hazard would become critical. 10. ALNUS-RUBUS SPECTABILIS This is a common moist soil community grading into numbers 3 and 4 on the wet side and into any of the drier formation on the dry side. It does no_.t support as many plant species as most of the other moist zones, but is at least moderately important to many animals. It normably occurs on flat sites or borders of watercourses so the soil holding potential is variable, 'but it is certain that. these are valuable water- storage areas. • 11. ALNUS-POLYSTICHUM • These are a drier variant of ##10, and are somewhat less important to the biological community. Frequently, the understory is very limited, but becomes greatly enriched as the community intergrates with the.moister zones. It is a fairly important zone for groundwater retention, so • its removal would have pronounced effects on drainage and water distribution. 12. ABIES GRANDIS . Forests in which theGrand fir is a dominant species are fairly moist and tend to support a wide .variety of plant • materials, but they are rather limited in extent on the site. • They have some erosion control importance, since they often occur on slopes and their removal would cause silting of ' some watercourses. There would 'also be the loss of some • moisture and shade loving plants, • 13. PSEUDOTSUGA-ARBUTUS-CORYLUS-RHODODENDRON This is a dry forest similar to #9, often even drier, but • sometimes moister,' with a corresponding variation in under- • growth. A variety of uncommon species grow in this, zone, though there seems to be no'other'special character about • the community. Much of the understory in this formation is • known to regrow as .a shrub community after the clearing of the forest., • 14. PSEUDOTSUGA-RHAMNUS • A peculiar formation, this community is seen frequently in • • (` the north part of the site. It is variable in understory and associates, but •seems, in general, to harbor a wide, 'variety of plants and animals. The main loss from its destruction would be the elimination of a unique floral community, though' Cascara-dominated coniferous woods do occur in small, sporadic patches in Western Washington and Oregon. 15. THUJA-TSUGA The communities dominated by medium to large Hemlock and Red Cedar are fairly few here because the soil is very dry and because logging has caused most of the land to be grown up in sub-climax Douglas fir. A chief result of the removal of large Cedar-Hemlock stands would be the elimination of much of the seedstock of those climax species on the site. Besides that moderately negative effect, there would be moderate wildlife and plantlife disruption, though many of these stands are very dark and of limited flora and fauna. 16. SALTX Those areas clearly dominated by Willows are usually moist to wet and can be good wildlife habitats as well as aquifer areas of some importance. Commonly they are marginal between wetlands and drier forest, or between wetter forests and dry clearings. Many of the species of Willow found here are dry soil species, though the largest Willow thickets are associated with moist soils, meaning that elimination of willows on the site would have notable effects on the water storagesareas, depending on what was involved in the removal. H-173 17. ARCTOSTAPHYLOS-CEANOTHUS These plants represent the sclerophyll or Mediterranean- climate elements in our flora. Such vegetation develops in mild climates where little rainfall occurs in the summer growing season and plants must make leathery, drought resistant foliage. When soil is sharply drained as it is in the south half of the site, a shrubby evergreen growth is all that can be supported. The, cooler. summers and greater humidity of the Northwest make this type of formation uncommon here and its removal would largely be a loss of uncommon natural vegetation. It is likely that these kinds of plants prevent erosion of the often very erosive soil. The wildlife importance of :his type of vegetation is not well known. 18. CYTISUS Those areas dominated by this long-introduced species are usually very dry, poor, open sites either suitable to little else, or in the process of becoming forested. These plants • are important in erosion-control and are often planted on roedcuts for that purpose. In the heavy concentration in which it often occurs, it can provide good wildlife cover, but can also crowd out seedlings of more valuable species. 19. PTERIDIUM AQUILINIUM Bracken Fern, a world-wide species, is found on all sections of the site. In certain places, especially dry, recently burned sites and moist, sandy areas, it is almost the exclu- sive species. This transitional growth is of little importance to the natural community and its elimination would be of little consequence except perhaps to remove protection for tree saplings. 20. GRASSES-HERBS Grass and meadow areas are of limited importance on the site except as open grazing areas for animals or, when thin enough, as natural seedbeds for the forest species. While it is true that some open areas are necessary to the environment P here, removal of those few areas consisting exclusively of grass and herbaceous plants would not seem to be very detri- mental, especially since most or all of the affected species will be found extensively on the roadsides. IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS The sensitive vegetation areas have been defined on the set of maps entitled "Sensitive Vegetation Areas" which is included in this report. It is the recommendation of the Flora Study group that all of the sensitive areas should be avoided if possible in the planning of construction. A good deal of the sensitive areas are associated with wetlands and provide valuable wildlife habitats in addition to providing flora habitat for an exceptionally wide variety of plant species. These wetland areas should be avoided at all cost unless a specifip structure or site development can be shown to be constructed with little or no harm to the existing environment. In reference to the maps entitled "Sensitive Vegetation Areas", the areas which come under this group include'section B, H, I, K, M, N, Q, R, S, T and U. Certain of these areas include one particular plant species which should be saved. Many of these areas are quite small and can be constructed around if sufficient buffer zones are left to protect the plant species from damage. These areas include section D, E, I., 0, P, V and W. H-] 87 Areas A, F and G are areas which are unique to the Bangor Annex site and are important to be saved, however, they are not entirely unique to the Northwest and are the least sensitive of the areas which have been listed. Section C is a visually important, stand of timber which shows a relatively mature plant progression. UNIQUE PLANT SPECIES & COMMUNITIES In this survey, a unique plant species or vegetation community is considered to be a species or formation uncommon to the region or to the site. Some of the plants cited such as Wild Ginger (Asarum caudatum) and Pacific Yew (Taxus brevifolia) are uncommon wherever they occur, while Lodgepole Pine or a dry evergreen shrub growth may be common elsewhere but unique on the site. In all cases, the locations enumerated were felt to contain plant materials unusual enough or sensitive enough to warrant careful consideration in any further planning for the site. There following description of unique plant species or communities f can be related to the earlier set of maps entitled "FLORA BY PLANT COMMUNITIES." S.E. WETLAND - SECTION 6 The wet area at the extreme southeast part of the site contains plants not seen in the rest of the south part. The stream that follows the edge creates wet soil the entire year, permitting plants such as Monkeyflower (Minulus guttatus) , Skunk Cabbage (Lysichitum americanum) , Fairybells, (Disporum sp.) , Deer Fern (Blechnum spicant), Cattails (Typha sp.) , Lady Fern (Athyrium filix-foemina) and similar plants to grow. The density and variety of plant life is characteristic of wet areas, and it is 'dependent on an Uninterrupted supply of moisture. ERYTHRONTUM PATCH - SECTION 27 This alder grove contains in its low, herbaceous groundcover a large patch of orchids or lilies which appear to be the Oregon Trout Lilly (Erythronium oregonum). The plants were not in flower when discovered, These plants are rather uncommon and slow to reproduced. Several hundred were found in this spot. CEANOTHUS - SECTION 43 This site was cleared some time ago and has regrown into a 'forest' of alder (Alnus rubra) saplings and very large Tobacco P-17R • Bush (Ceanothus velutinus) with other evergreen dry soil plants and open spaces between. It is not clear whether this type of dry shrub vegetation was the original type on the site, but there was obviously something similar, at least in patches, because the existing Ceanothus are very large. Such a growth is rather uncommon in Western Washington. ERYTHRONIUM PATCH - SECTION 35 This is another, much smaller patch of what appears to be Erythronium oregonum. WETLAND - NORTHEAST SECTION 87 In this low wet area around a streamcourse grow a wide range of species. Some of the more uncommon species here are Pick-a-back Plant (Tolmeia menziesii) , Deerfern (Blechnum spicant), Devil's Club (Oplopanax horridus), Coolwort (Tiarella trifoliata) , Skunk Cabbage (Lysichitum americanum) , Coralroot (Coralorhiza striate) , Rattlesnake-plantain (Goodyeara oblongifolia) , Water Parsley (Oenanthe sarmentosa), Yellow Monkey Flower (Mimulus guttatus), and Western Yew (Taxus brevifolia). Such a formation depends on undisturbed moisture and stable upstream conditions. u-17a DEVIL'S HOLE The area around the lake supports a wide variety of plant species otherwise uncommon. The immediate edge is clothed with. Cattails (Typha sp. ), Veronica (Veronica sp.), Spiraea (Spiraea douglasii) , Willows (Salix sp. ), and other assorted water-oriented plants. These, of course, are completely dependent on the presence of the water, though they could adjust, by migration, to a gradual rise or fall of the average water level. They are, as is normal in such situations, growing towards the center of the lake as silt and organic matter push the shoreline inward, but this process usually lasts many centuries on a. bog of this size. Farther away from the shore are wet and moist soil forest species, including Devil's Club (Oplopanax horridum), Aspen (Populus tremuloides), Birch (Betula papyrifera) , Currants (Ribes spp.) , Willows (Salix sp. ) , Poplars (Populus tremuloides), Salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis), Rattlesnake Plantain (Goodyeara oblongifolia) , Deer Fern (Blechnum spicant) , Lady Fern (Athyrium filix-foemina) , and similar plants. These are not dependent on the presence of the lake, but do need the soil moisture of that site. H-182 • j WILD GINGER — SOUTHEAST SECTION 177 In this very moist creek zone are many uncommon plants such as Devil's Club (Oplopanaxthorridum), Coolwort (Triarella trifoliata) , Skunk Cabbage, (Lysichitum americanum) , Deerfern (Blechnum spicant) , Bishop's Cap (Mitella sp.), and Wild Ginger (Asarum caudatum) . All require the continuous soil moisture and the shade of the surrounding trees. CREEKBEDS TO CATTAIL LAKE These are not all year-round streams, but the damp, shady valleys through which they run support a very wide range of vegetation. Most of these plants, and hence the variety of vegetation there, require a fairly .constant supply of moisture. Besides, the entire range of moisture loving plants found on the site, there are, in some of the bottoms, some individual trees, particularly Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii), of great size. 5-FOOT DIAMETER DOUGLAS FIR - NORTHEAST SECTION 183 There is an individual specimen of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menzlesii) approximately 5 feet in diameter near the road here. The ravines west from here are said to contain other specimens { as large or larger. CALYPSO ORCHIDS - NORTH SECTION 183 This spot supports a patch of the orchid Calypso bulbosa, a widespread, but uncommon species. These require a moist, shady situation with a highly organic soil. They will not tolerate disturbance. WILKES MARSH - SECTION 194 There are relatively few 'rare'. plants here, but the vegetation around the marsh is obviously an important part of a rather unique natural environment. It is also dependent on the year- s round presence of the lake. Besides the waterlilies (Nuphar polysepalum) and aquatic plants in the water, there are large, encircling patches of Spiraea (Spiraea douglasii) and Quaking Aspen-(Populus tremuloides). Plants, animals, soil and water combine here in a special and very fragile ecosystem. REDWOODS, ETC. - SECTION 130 This is a grassy area used as a park, with native and exotic trees and shrubs around the edge and scattered through it. Among these are two Coast Redwoods (Sequois sempervirens) , a Sitka Spruce (Picea sitchensis) and various deciduous specimens, probably all planted as part of a previous homesite. PONDEROSA PINES. - ALONG WHARF ROAD Two Ponderosa Pines (Pinus ponderosa) are growing here, possibly wild, but most likely planted there long ago. TAXUS - SECTION 126 In this wet area there is at least one Pacific Yew (Taxus brevifolia) with associated wet soil vegetation: Devil's Club (Oplopanax horridum), Pick-a-back Plant (Tolmeia menziesii) , Skunk Cabbage (Lysichitum americanum) , Red Elderberry (Sambuccus callicarpa) , Salmonberry (Rubus spectabilis) , Monkey Flower (Mimulus guttatus) , and .a variety of ferns. All of these species depend on undisturbed soil moisture. N-1R'i • BOG - NORTH SECTION 60 Most of this area is under water in winter, so there are large thickets of Spiraea (Spiraea douglasii) , Wild Crabapple (Malus fusca), and Quaking Aspen (Populus tremuloides) . The Aspen have been found to reach over 50 feet here. The range of plants here is not unusually large, but the Aspens and Crabapples are relatively uncommon species, especially on the site and they depend on continously wet soils. WHITE ALDER - NORTH SECTION 55 The northern part of this section was found to contain large • numbers of White Alder (Alnus rhombifolia) which is uncommon at these elevations and west of the Cascades. Also, found here were Deer Fern (Blechnum spicant), a choice, fairly uncommon species. BOG - SECTION 103 This area is moist most of the year resulting in a large growth of Spiraea (Spiraea douglasii) , Willows (Salix spp.), Aspen (Populus tremuloides) and marsh grasses and sedges. Also found were Lodgepole Pine (Pings contorta) , which is uncommon in the , • • area, and rarely found on the site. As usual with wet areas, the plant growth here is. absolutely dependent on an undisturbed soil moisture. CREEKBED - NORTH SECTION 84 The vegetational characteristics here result from the presence of a creek. Underatory plants are varied and include many uncommon and sensitive species such as Pick-a-back Plant (Toulmeia menziesii), Water Parsley (Oenenthe' sarmentosa) , Coolwort (Tiarella trifoliata) , Veronica (Veronica sp. ) , Blackcurrant (Ribes lacustre), Trillium (Trillium ovatum) . Cooley's Hedgenettle (Stachy cooleye), Licorice (Polypodium glycirhiza) and Deer Fern. (Blechnum spicant), 'Devil's Club (Oplopanex horridum), Skunkcabbage (Lysichitum americanum) and several other herbaceous plants. Interruption of the stream would cause a disappearance of these sensitive species. CREEKBED DEVIL'S HOLE - WEST SECTION 150 This area contains most of the same species found in the other wet areas, •and like them, depends on the constant moisture for the continuance of the vegetation. N-7 8l CREEKBED TO HUNTER'S MARSH - SECTION 158 TO SECTION 162 This watercourse runs more than a mile,, and supports large stands of alder and a fairly continuous growth of moist soil vegetation. These are .dependent on the water supply and on the freedom of the surrounding soil from erosion into the creekbed. Most of the creekbed vegetation is adapted only to shade, which is now provided by the large trees there, including some not. related to moist soil. HUNTER'S MARSH This small pond apparently has a higher water level than it has had in the past, since many of the willows around it have their roots in the water and are dying. This has probably occurred since the road was constructed at its west side. The vegetation seems, however, to be adjusting and maintaining itself as a (. thicket of Willows (Salix spp.), Spiraea (Spiraea douglasii), Cattails (Typha sp.) and associated aquatic plants. There are, in addition, a number of exotics from a former homesite, but they are of relatively minor importance. The vegetation here is essentially another aquatic and moist soil growth, again dependent on a reasonably steady moisture supply. H-1R6 'CHAPARRAL' - SECTION 10 The growths of evergreen shrubs in the south end of the site could be called a sclerophyll formation, or Mediterranean Chaparral of sorts, being composed of Arctostaphylos spp. , Ceanothus velutinus, Madrona (Arbutus menziesii) and other shrubs and small trees adapted to well-drained soils in a mild dry-summer climate. Since the original forest cover of Douglas fir (Pseudotsuga menziesii) was so recently removed, it is difficult to say whether or not this growth will be the dominant vegetation for the area, though the shrubs are much too large to have invaded the site in the last three years, and the conifer seedlings are rather scarce. It was at least the understory to a rather open, dry forest and perhaps formed patches of pure 'chaparral'. as appears elsewhere on the site where road cuts have created openings on sharply drained soil. It is possible that the scorched soil of the site, due to the logging operations, will cause the shrub growth to assume more importance on the site than it has had in-the past. In any case, this type of vegetation is fairly uncommon in Washington. H-].7 7 IF" :- keC DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR :;} SILVERDALE REGIONAL SHOPPING CENTER G.- Ld� KITSAP COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 37, ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SECTION 1 KITSAP COUNTY, WASHINGTON Pi sM Prepared for the Review and Comments of Citizens , Citizen Groups , and Governmental Agencies In Compliance With: The State Environmental Polidy Act of 1971 Chapter 43. 21c Revised Code of Washington p 9 $ SEPA Guidelines , Effective January 16 , 1976 Chapter 197-10 , Washington Administrative Code Kitsap County Ordinance rr DATE OF ISSUE: December 30, 1977 COST PER COPY: $8 . 00 Resp+ sib ficial- �% Director , lep. rtment of 7 � Communiiy D: elopment v :,_ F INTRODUCTION Action Sponsor: fi Winmar Company, Inc. • Suite 800 Bank of California Building Seattle, Washington 98104 Proposed Action: The Action Sponsor is requesting approval of a 50 acre regional shopping center which, in addition to building permits, will require prior approval l' of a change in site zoning, a change in the Kitsap County Comprehensive Plan and a Planned Unit Development. The latter three may be processed simultaneously, with: approval of zoning and Comprehensive Plan changes ' dependent upon the approval of the detailed design contained in the Planned Unit Development.. The proposed regional shopping center is proposed to contain a total of 657,200 square feet of gross building area and a gross leasable area of 570,000 square feet. In addition, parking spaces will be provided on the site for 2850 cars, • Project Location: . - North of the unincorporated town of Silverdale in Kitsap County, - Washington. Bounded generally on the north by Myhre Road, on the east by Kitsap Way, on the west by Clear Creek Road and on the south, by 'a s line running east-west, 1000 feet north of the intersection of Clear Creek Road with Kitsap Way. (See site location map on page 20.) Lead Agency: • Kitsap County Department of Community Development, James Tracy, Director 1. r Contact Person: . Lee A. Lyttle, Planning Division, Kitsap County Department of Community Development, 614 Division, Port. Orchard, Washington 98366 (876-7152). ` -2- Authors of Environmental Impact Statement: I;-; Balzhiser, Longwood, Smith, Paul and Anderson, '-'` `'' Architects and Planners, AIA 800 Securities Building Seattle, Washington 98101 . , R. W. Thorpe & Associates .`;r 815 Seattle Tower Building :=`s- Seattle, Washington 98101 _" x, tv. Principal Contributors; Location of Background Data: :a;:; 34f- Architecture, James R. Paul ' - Site Planning: Balzhizer, Longwood, Smith, Paul & Anderson, AIA _ �' Land Use, Demography, John W. Hunt Tk; < General Research Data: R. W. Thorpe & Associates Utilities: James H. Hess, P.E. `0 Parametrix, Inc. °'_?';41 12505 Bellevue-Redmond Road, Suite 204 :, _____3ellevue, Washington 98005 r:„ ' --- . __`_� Mike was e p(' .4 (may O Fauna and Flora and Dirk Jongejan S .�q , u' ;p Landscape Architecture: Jongejan/Gerrard/Assoces 'Y 23 - 103rdN.E. w� • s' Bellevue, Washington 98004 ,f, r� _ �;-- Transportation: James W. MacIsaac, P.E. - a The Transpo Group1 w ,- 23 - 148th Avenue S.E. %'%' Bellevue, Washington 98007 =a''4! Air Quality: Alsid, Snowden & Associates �.", wa 13240 Northrup Way ;-:fi'°', Bellevue, Washington 98005 0 Soils: James Eaton, P.E. ,,,, Eaton Engineers ;tw P.O. Box 126 ` r, Hobart, Washington • c,^ , Economics and C. T. Beemster :=:":r Marketing: Shorett & Riley Market Research Services 1040 Washington Building Seattle, Washington 98101 , , At ,, , a: a s ,'` :.VEGETATION REPORT - WINMAR SITE / . . Site Inspection - October 12, 1977 "` The site was inspected on foot and the ve9etation was classified by community. All '`:plant species marked ('k) were actually observed on the site while the remainder are II • abundantly native in the vicinity and can be expected on the site in light of the relative densit and yof the vegetation. Similarly, only the animal species marked (-`) Y variety 9 a` *were observed on the site. The remainder were taken from a list compiled for the nearby h.i. :; Trident Support Site. This list was edited to delete all species requiring more un- f' distu�rbed or unique natural habitat than is present in the area of the proposed shopping ° ±center. Most of the birds and a great many of the larger animals are unlikely to be tiYtresident on the site due to the:broken, partly settled pattern of vegetation, but all gl ;are likely to visit the site all or part of the year. No rare or unique plant or animal • species were observed on the site. The site as a whole is of moderate value to wild- 1 - life for food, shelter or nesting, but its islands of trees and brush become increasingly ' 'stepping as migrational stones' as surrounding areas develop . Even patches of ✓ wwmodland and isolated large trees can keep routes open for birds to move between forested ;.back-country. and the Sound. Further, small mammals and reptiles can usuallyfind refuge Wt, P 9 ,.,-„�on such small islands of undisturbed vegetation as the tree stands now present on the qe`; JV'site. However, any considerable development, resulting in drastic reductions in natural 7 'vegetation and an increase in pavement, car traffic and human activity will considerably ',Y jey ' decrease the list of expected animals even if isolated patches of vegetation: are: left. fspecies.marked (o) would be most sensitive to such human use of the site. . p 'lvThe majority of the site is now in livestock farming, but the low level of use has allowed 41:, d 8 variety of vegetation communities to persist. These range from mixed coniferous forest ''to low shrubs and herbs. Poorly drained soils along the drainage swale have encouraged OA q' ;ne aevelopment of some wetland communities while Scotchbroom and Conifers favor the pre ner spots.- - - , ne site may be divided into the following general communities: ,. Mixed Evergreen and Deciduous Forest Vegetation a' ;';:. Moderately dense but small stands and groves of Douglas fir (Psedotsuga menziesii) , ;fir.. Red Alder (Alnus rubra) , Madrona (Arbutus. menziesii) Bigleaf Maple (Acer machrophyllum) ;,. Willows (Salix spp.) and introduced trees. , E-I • VEGETATION REPORT - WINMAR SITE (Continued) Most stands have an understory of Hazel (Corylus cornuta) , Indian-plum (Osmaronia cerasiformis) , Salal (Gaultheria shallon) , Oceanspray (Holodiscus discolor) , Sword Fern (Polystichom munitum) . Except for the scattered additions of introduced species, this zone is a remnant of the original vegetation of the site and is extensively represented in the vicinity. It is by far the most important zone from the standpoint of wildlife habitat, with more than half of all species resident or transitory through the site dependent on the presence of this vegetation type for shelter, cover and/or nesting. Grass and Pasture Communities Several variations may be seen on the site: Grass, grazed - Grasses and broadleaf herbs, most being grazed by livestock. This zone is of some importance for some birds but provides no nesting. Grass, ungrazed - Grasses and herbs in a semi-natural state. These areas are largely progressing to a brush and/or forest condition. These are prime nesting areas for some small mammals and may be important feeding grounds for some birds. Grass/Juncus/Spirea - A wet soil community found mostly near the drainage Swale. Of Similar wildlife value to the ungrazed grass zone, but normally providing fewer food species - Juncus (Juncus effusus) indicates the poorly drained soil . Grass/Scotchbroom m Scotchbroom (Cytisus scoparius) combines with the grasses on well drained soils. The evergreen nature of the broom provides cover to small animals but the community has only moderate wildlife value. Grass and Shrub Communities There are two phases of this zone: Shrub Community - Relatively dense thickets of Spirea (Spirea douglasii ) , Scotchbroom (Cytisus scoparius) , Snowberry (Symphoricarpos albus) , Ocean Spray (Holodiscus discolor) and other species which, due to extremes of soil wetness or dryness, 'will remain as shrub communities semi-permanently. Some grasses are present. Wildlife food and shelter value is moderate to high. E-2 • 14 SY r, ,,;. VEGETATION REPORT - WINMAR SITE (Continued) • ry: `Shrub-sapling Community =: ' Similar to shrub community except for the presence of small trees which will turn this u.'4=7one to woodland over the next few decades. sR ri ` Besides the shrub community, plants there are young Black Cottonwood (Populus trichocarpa) , �t 1ied Alder (Alnus rubra) and several willows (Sal ix spp. ) The wildlife value of this • :c;mm is high to veryhigh, as manyfood and shelter plants are here and there is, nity 9 9 a 4 ` a wide variety of plant species. •, .-e.a.det Soil Vegetation 4,4 ;k =x`�his zone, nearly all in the vicinity of the drainage swale, is a combination of grasses, ,= herbs Juncus (Juncus effusus) , Spirea (Spirea douglasii) and occasionallyPacific P 9 ) (Sal ix lasiandra) . The soils are highly organic and moist to wet all year. -;0',Because of the persistent moisture, certain animals, especially amphibians, are attracted <s N=.:om;to the brushier parts of this zone. It also serves as a breeding ground for many of E,• '',.Athe insects that are important to the diets of some birds. The unique qualities of this r .ommunity are dependent on the continuous flow of water through the swaie. ;▪4.*tultivated �s�: ,r:kx"�Y.�. 'tr ''yq Areas of cultivated trees, shrubs, lawns and gardens. Because of the variety of plant =Y ;,material they provide, especially the large number of fruiting plants, the spots are very l.T1'attractive to wildlife. The presence of humans and domestic animals lessens this attraction ' `somewhat, though the wildlife food value must be considered as high, YEu E-3 �a£ 4 fi PLANT LIST Herbs ;i * Aster spp. Aster * Anaphalis margaritacea Pearly Everlasting . h� * Avena spp. * B romu s spp. Rxr,� * Carex spp. * Chrysanthemum leucanthemum Oxeye Daisy ; axe * Cirsium arvense Canada Thistle . *C. vulgare Thistle 'x . Conium maculata Poison Hemlock `,' Convulvulus arvensis Morning Glory ;yt 1.t� * Digitalis purpurea Foxglove Yx * . Epilobium angustifolium Fireweed ° Horsetail l ry'N? * Equ i setum spp. kr r_; Eragrost i s spp. '1 * Festuca spp. Fescue ty * Gallium aparine Bedstraw , Geranium molle Wild Geranium ar 1- * Geum macrophyllum Oregon Avens * , Gnaphalium sp. * Hieraceum spp. Hawkweed e[[ Common St. John's wor z t • Hypericum perforatum . ;; * Sypocheris radicata Cats Ears , F; * Juncus effusus Rush i:y * Lathyrus latifolius Perennial Sweet Pea ;':. Tiger Lily " Lilium columbianum ,: * Lupinus spp. Lupine 3 • Medicago lupulina Hop Clover * Montia sibirica Miner' s Lettuce Evening r,, • Oenethera hookeri Primrose * Osmorhiza chiloensis Sweet Root Petasites frigidus Co l t's foot ►i • E-4 i E. i • i .;` PLANT LIST (Continued) ` f * Plantago lanceolate Narrowleaf Plantain Licorice Fern `,'. Polypodium vulgate �Y` *s Polystichum munitum Sword Fern .. Silverweed . Potentilla anserina '"'''''` Bracken Fern • `' '��' �� Pteridium aqui 1 inium {w, _: '� Ranunculus repens Creeping Buttercup "i', Sol i da o canadens i s Goldenrod ' yF, " Stachys cooleyal Deadnettle ``"' `,T-°' �k Tanacetum vulgate Tansy `� ; ; * Taraxacum officinale Dandelion >r;,�' - Tiarella menziesii ,4(g a4 Trifolium re p ens White Clover N v T. pretense ., Red Clover v,• ' ;� Urtica lyallii Stinging Nettle ' , r:,r p Verbasum thas us Mullein s`,u Viola spp, Vetch <ws ;+, � Evergreen Violet ,1 Viola sempervirens .• Shrubs d- -{ Cornus stol on i fera Red Osier Dogwood <;; Hazelnut Corylus cornuta ;` :,3,�"- * Cytisus i sus sco ar i us Scotchbroom y p `1' ` 'e Gaultheria shallon Salal ; : . Holodiscus discolor Ocean Spray ;s;, ;r rt - Mahonia nervosa Low Oregon Grape Osmaronia cerasiformis Indian Plum g`.f Little Wild Rose * Rosa gymnocarpa 1;,' * Evergreen Blackberry h.,. Rubus lacinatus natus g '_ Blackcap •, . R. levcodermis % * R. parviflorus Thimbleberry &: TM * R. spectabilis Salmonberry E-5 Y PLANT LIST (Continued) ,•7 t * R. ursinus Blackberry R. discolor Himalayan Blackberry i is * Sambucus racemosa Red Elderberry i * Spiraea douglasii Hardhack, Spiraea • Symphoricarpos albus Snowberry * Vaccinium ovatum Evergreen Huckleberry * V. parvifolium Red Huckleberry Trees s ry * Acer macrophyllum Bigleaf Maple =; * Alnus rubra Red Alder 4 * Arbutus menziesii Madrona -,,,- ! * Cornus nuttallii Pacific Dogwood tY * Malus spp. Apple .."vT * Cratnegus monogyna Hawthorn ;, , Western White Pine R: ' Pinus monticola Al * Populus trichocarpa Black Cottonwood * P. alba White Poplar ;";'k{ * P. nigra ital ica Lombardy Poplar '"`'` * Psedotsuga menziesii . Douglas fir 4 * Rhamnus purshiana Cascara k Salix scouleriana Scouler's Willow14. * S. sitchensis Sitka Willow .y; * S. lasiandra Pacific Willow t...fx * Thuja plicata Western Red Cedar f .Mrs. * Tsuga heterophylla Western Hemlock ' ., ; TSN 0 ‘, ,, ,3/44y ,,,, ,,le, )0 - fit"-} E-6 ,.R . . • . . • . • . . . . sq-0-8 • • • r.l.At 9;vse— • . _ .. . - . . • , • • • . . . , •• 'I , . . . . . , .. . . ,. . , • . • • St , , . • . • .. . • . . . . . . . . 0SM . • • . . ... n . • • i ;1 • 14311L9?3A • . . ISISsisamo• .. . *' . . OMISIIIII -1105-1 ,',,k— , . r-+-- seams, . • ., . . , 44 .• • •• . ;-•\ . • . . • ' -taXii: • . . . . : . • • • -10' I'''. IVI::;414-.1i: 1,1V"•" i . . c.'''' . . 1 ; :•1 •-••• 1. . : •v : . . 4- ' ' •• : ' • i,. ; • ; I:; .1 ,'1 rill +.44-1-44' 1 .1 ' ' ' 11.• i• .. . i • ' •:.' ;I II II ' I '' . . . , .n , ,• ;; ;;, ;I • • . . • •• ,• i I. • I IT ; , . . ...,,„,, --; -- ., I ;. . . . , . ;: . . tt ;11 1 , ; , -- • • . •. I; ; . I •;;;•' I •i 1 "I 1,-;.. ;•-;-,I T1-7.-- •• I , I •l• I I'i • :.`,1.1,1 I • • • • • i • „. 0 I I • 33(11.9tici . 1,-• • • • • •1 : i . ' - Iiii'll •• ': III' 1: 1'• 1.., ----1--i-.-..4.-.‘i I ;et H II' ;1 • . -• , , . s:•..., •.,,....,..•1...... . . . ..,'• \\\ -cVhe • ' '111 1 '' ' • ;; •;!. .; ! 'il ,T:Lr."-i--,_,_;___,_11.. 11 liti . '', .. ,;i1, 1 ill i; .,t 1 t. 1 • . - •-•.'-:: ::„..,, i I • i. .•••-• ' - , ,.. '' \\• 1 1 __._ ,s4,.(::.---•-1-4-'r, I . '' 1 i,, :, . ,, , --,--. ...,..... . . 1 •, , i illii ) 1 II i; 1 I •T—. >\'.. •—•—• 1 1 1 • • •• . .• • •••'• 'I • • •- • .• •. .•\.,•4.• • I 1 I I i.• • ;• • • •'k, •I I / • • /i! I;e •/ • p__.. ::: . •i i i . I • • - ' • 1 i :.‘NN .,z .; , • . i 1 i . . 1 . . . 1 I HI : 1 . 1 I III i • . .l' I 1,i N ' 1, i'•i: ' „„N •:I , , I 1 .. 1 • ! 1 i .1,) i 1 . . •11 I I .\ • . 1 !1; ••-• • , -.. i I i I'I • t I ! I I , I I I 1" - - • MONS .- i , 1 ' , 1 i 1•• 1 il , i li !. ••:, I . 1 I i.i ,• I 1 : ' 'ill• .1-14111.11 11 •'I LLI • I.- • I .' • •'I, II 4,--t 1 U '' ; I, •i I' -.1 L..I . :--14 ili:. :I r.1 1 .1.:, . . •i' 11 I lissalini . ; 4: SgaZi.1- • • ,' r ii • . I • • .., crk . .... .... .• .-. .... • . • . . II I • • . . 1 . . -I . 1 • ..ia-..-....:-4 - . . _ - , 7 "11 I 1 • .7.72917:-.-1:t --.1' 711. . .., " --;•-•;-••••••••,,2,- 4-1- I, ' . el . . • . • . . • .-.4••,, 1,1 4,..• —.4 . ' . t4.:T.7::41.• • : • —.1' ' . . • •••TT T••••••• • ••• • . 71—*0• 1• , 1_1...-.• .....1:it • MN MI . . ' • . . . • . . . I. . • • . • 7.:-:-.:1':•.1.:,:-....,,V-•. . . . . i-,-..,--+.4••,- . 1 44 i • • + 4. .. • " .14 i . • • • . .. . .• • 4-4 .3: • . • s . /001 v=„1 ddlAl NO11\tt]9-3/\ • . . ... • . . . . . • . . • . . , • - . . _.. . . , . .. . . •. . . . . . . • . . , , . . ,.-,....-..,:.:-.-,,,,,.;-„,..,,,,,,•;,-,..0.4.,:,.?iik.,; =',1;',:,:: ;/1-.e.-Diw'..,.1-.•;‘ck..41,:!,.'''s-'::::i-•: =,;,--V--P2-7-..,,f,:.,,:-c:-?;,:0,g,itfa',;-'t;';,,;-- -,t.111;irg.:.:•';-- .Z.*--ili•-klic.f,::i3,,,.. x-....,.,,,'...q.;3::;,:,, A,,.',4,1,T,:$0,;;4,::;:,2,,zte:;,&1:4',;74.-ibli,-.V.-i4... s_,.„,'i-f_i's -",.q.-""4%.;:;-•,-..-,,-;;;,c-,..:U;4-.,i,.;., ,,..,,-;z::;:,.;;;4;,,,;,..;...:-_,;:;.;-;,...,,,,,.,..-.,.;;4,,-.--,.i,,,.;.;_,..;„;;;-;";.;,;--..,,,,,,:,.,.,,,-,„,„c„,f...•,•,_"..-...;.;•.,. ,• ::?;)*Tii••',::•;`‘f;',!;7-6...1,T,,..:•tg,?;T:',:;gCt WI-N'':;-'4.4.4•4-•••'•';.r.:34FAVPMXIi•fg•tqe%$1:!;'''',,,,:':4."•:r.A,;7";:krt•f;:,*--ci-i**-1'-tS4,47`:.1•iffi..21,$•-titi•gn`,•tt,-‘,1:"•;*iiVt4.14.$•*.4:7,;',,:-..,:*,4'f,1,•...'et7.4:74.r.',0;,9•41,41:4;e:i,kii--"ASFKr1.-*=_,.:,•••-,•7,,.`„,t*,.,•-•"-t.',1•,'.'„,?4&*-Ve,,,,,,,,V;4•40i: Olti+V--2-S•US',3".;.:*ig-,,;,Kii.,41::2;;,%,,k*••? ;4,1;a1;;;.„...•;:4'3;•;;‘;,,,,.n,,,,:';.!,;,,N• iii,':•••:. •. 4,r•;•. ,.','...:1,1,•,.:::::::, ,',"=:•-•'•••••:'---'•-•,•'•,f*•--;e•,'-".'-'-',.04••,,;64,(:•2",•' -%-f;.3 .,."-,P---=41.5S.,„,f-itc9,i3i4s;',-; -1.0.5*:,"iii..14"4;',--e...fffw4.45-,;--.. -eA.:10;:.-444-14i-''44,,,, Cii7p7 ',..,-..i.!4;$4;;;e4)5,7,47A,4. 4.'v".4-4 -4,-,nef;--' -'!'-''ZPf..-- P,7,31-9,'''''"'"'-'1J;-3:;P:•';'.---e-',';',,,: .'1,'..-0':'-;''';"--'-`j." .'W-,-,frA'''-','"•"":.%"--',",,-,,'1:';'"'ir!- -!:'47,,S7r, ,..F4*":°-trai-4,i441;!:;:..,, ..,-,,,-',-;. ,'.;ASY:A-1;,7--e.,:,,-.,.„-Y,-. .--.','i'..-:zi'LZ7.1.-A'11-5:'4',4`it'.";'.'1,•.,5-5.4-';',-;;;;-.P.1Z,16-a*.lk..;:;?2S;,,10.,,e,l;',7;:.-;.N.'jf‘f,...-Tli.-agi.K.F .74`'.,1:F,V!.[:.:V.f;1"-?3,:ii•:,:':?ssg .".r-RD---4-. .,:,- ,:'9,-Pil;.:,-:;-,7V.M.M*1-'-0-1,41ilz4'. ,,,-,,,-;4'94.:,',,,..1•40;;A • - .=-"A' '-L- -14,' -'-"4-/tiabi -1 BIRD LIST ANIMAL LIST 14E Brewer's Blackbird Bat Red-Winged Blackbird Mountain Beaver ,_ * . Common Bushtit Townsend Chipmunk * Black-Capped Chickadee Green Frog Chestnut-Backed Chickadee Red-Legged Frog y Brown-Headed Cowbird Pocket Gopher Brown Creeper ° Showshoe Hare * Common Crow ° Northern Alligator Lizard Isil Rock Dove Pacific Mole t House Finch Shrew Mole o Purple Finch Deer Mouse 0 Red-Shafted Flicker Pacific Jumping Mouse `;: = o Traill ' s Flycatcher Rough-Skinned Newt ` Evening Grosbeak ,. ° Opossum , ° Cooper's Hawk 'Cottontail Rabbit M,, Rufous Hummingbird ° Raccoon * Stellar's Jay Long-Toed Salamander * Oregon Junco Northwestern Salamander T`a, o Belted Kingfisher Pacific Giant Salamander c: ' Golden-Crowned Kinglet Van Dyke's Salamander Ruby-Crowned Kinglet Western Red-Backed Salamander -, Red-Breasted Nuthatch Masked Shrew ` hMJ Bullock's Oriole Pacific Water Shrew * Bank-Tailed Pigeon Trowbridge Shrew o California Quail Vagrant Shrew `x) * Robin ° Spotted Skunk ''Yellow-Bellied Sapsucker ° Striped Skunk o Garter Snake Pine Siskin �: Townsend Douglas Squirrel °`' Fox Sparrow Golden-Crowned Sparrow Western Toad ° * House Sparrow Pacific Treefrog r:,, Savannah Sparrow Long-Tailed Vole Song Sparrow Red-Backed Vole 4 Tree Sparrow ° Townsend Vole White-Crowned Sparrow ""` Long-Tailed Weasel ;',0 Starling ° Short-Tailed Weasel l" * Barn Swallow Bushy-Tailed Woodrat Violet-Green Swallow 1 Western Tanager ,M` Varied Thrush • Rufous-Sided Towhee z a; Hutton's Vireo 6 Audubon's Warbler Townsend' s Warbler ril Macgilivray's Warbler Wilson' s Warbler Cedar Waxwing 0 Downy Woodpeckerr4 ° Hairy Woodpecker ecker 0 Pileated Woodpecker Bew i ck's Wren 1.1 Winter Wren N. Cliff Swallow R-R a • • OF i %o ® ° BUILDING & ZONING DEPARTMENT z RONALD G. NELSON - DIRECTOR 9 " MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 • 235-2540 0,9gTF0 SEP1 T' BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH MEMORANDUM MAYOR DATE: OCTOBER 8, 1984 TO: MAXINE MOTOR, CITY CLERK FROM: JEANETTE SAMEK-McKAGUE SUBJECT: TRANSMITTAL OF CLOSED FILE, FILE R-432-79 THE APPLICANT, JOHN R. HANSEN, APPARENTLY DROPPED THE APPLICATION. THE PROPERTY HAS SINCE BEEN REZONED. THEREFORE I AM TRANMITTING THIS FILE TO YOUR OFFICE FOR PLACEMENT WITH THE PERMANENT RECORDS. eceipt # r CITY OF RENTON. PLANN I NG DEPARTMENT (-4-'NAME 7X P1 4 DATE e-' di', PROJECT & LOCATION f...447 r / /JAI( / Application Type Basic Fee Acreage Fee Total ; er Environmental Checklist Environmental Checklist Construction Valuation Fee TOTAL FEES :— Please take thts receipt and your payment to the Finance Department on the first floor. Thank vou. OF R4,, ®o ® THE CITY OF RENTON _- 0® ± MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 Z = P. BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR ® PLANNING DEPARTMENT 235- 2550 o9��F0 SEPS ,ht• October 30, 1980 Delton J. Bonds Alterra Corporation 2120-A S.W. 152nd Street P.O. Box 66101 Seattle, WA 98166 RE: Authorization to proceed with preparation of EIS re: Rezone Application R-432-79 Dear Mr. Bonds: We are in receipt of the required deposit for the preparation of the above DEIS. As of this date, we have not received an amendment to the application to expand the scope of the DEIS to 70+ acres, however, I spoke with Bob Thorp this morning about the revision and provided him with the required application forms. Therefore, this Department hereby authorizes R. W. Thorp Assoc. to proceed with preparation of the DEIS for the 47+ acre site area, and upon receipt of the revised application, we will authorize broadening the scope to include the 70+ acre site area. Authorization provided herein shall be in conformance with our correspondence of October 15, 1980 to yourself and RWT Assoc. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, or • desire further clarification, please feel free to contact this office at your earliest convenience. Very my yours., Gor.on Y. Eric7)s n Pl. ning Dire r 1 - :1(//,5 R.. ` lemens Senior Planner DRC: dc cc: R.W. Thorp Associates John R. Hansen Mayor Shinpoch OF A IP 0 THE CITY OF RENTON U `� ® Z MUNICIPAL BUI LDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 alL 0 . BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 0,o co- 235- 2550 q�FD SEPT' ��P December 2, 1980 MEMORANDUM TO: Police and Fire Departments Building Department Public Works Department Parks and Recreation Department FROM: Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director By: David R. Clemens , Senior Planner RE: REVIEW OF PROPOSED DRAFT EIS - BLACK RIVER INDUSTRIAL PARK Attached you will find a copy of the above referenced EIS for your review. Please prepare any comments that you may have on the document and return them to this Department by Monday, December 14th. As provided by the Environmental Ordinance, all City staff time required to review, or prepare environmental documents shall be charged to the proponant. Therefore, please indicate below, and return with your comments , the following information related to your departments review: DEPARTMENT REVIEWER' S TITLE HOURS REQUIRED HOURLY SALARY 1 ) 2) 3) 4) 5) Thank you for your assistance. Should you require additional copies of the report to accomplish your review in the time period provided, please contact David Clemens as soon as possible. DRC:dc xi or R FNT R. W. THORPE & ASSOCIATES J`w R1 i 815 Seattle Tower•3rd & University•Seattle, Washington 98101 •(206) 624-6239 1 DEC 1 198° Suite 503 • 1110 West Sixth Avenue • Anchorage, Alaska 99503 • (907) 276-6846 ... z TO Renton Planning Department DATE November 26, 1980 Attn: David Clemens SUBJECT Black River Industrial Park Rezone Attached is the latest transportation report from the Transpo Group. This analysis supercedes the letter attached to the Preliminary Draft EIS. In summary, the following observations were made: The eastern portion of the site would be accessed by Powell Avenue through Earlington Park. The western portion of the site would be accessed by Monster Road. Necessary improvements to Monster Road to provide adequate access would be quite extensive and costly. An alternative would be to work in association with the development of Earlington Industrial Park to construct a portion of the proposed Longacres Parkway. A detailed traffic analysis will be provided when specific site plans are dev- eloped. Very truly o , Jon Potter JP/mlv } f-• ny eerier, C;)t1Sui$e,iit5 <: S^ November 24, 1980 J) i Ur • t; Mr. Robert W. Thorpe e� '.�.• ci b., R.W. Thorpe & Associates 815 Seattle Tower D C �93fl 3rd & University Seattle, WA 98101 • \,1-6 SUBJECT: BLACK RIVER INDUSTRIAL PARK \'N1 A/{� Dr7a `��: • Dear Mr. Thorpe: • s,jF Thank you for giving us the opportunity to make a preliminary review of access considerations for the proposed project. The purpose of this letter is to identify anticipated adverse traffic impacts and to suggest several alternatives that might be' investigated after a more detailed traffic analysis is prepared. As we understand, this project will be developed with a combination of rail-served manufacturing and/or warehousing uses. The proposal is - planned to be developed in two phases : the first phase adjacent to the east side of the proposed Earl,ington Industrial Park, and the second phase' west and adjacent' to the proposed P-1 Channel . Access to the first phase is planned to be provided through the Earlington Industrial Park via Powell Avenue' SW and another internal access street. If no road improvement were made, access to phase two development would be provided off Monster Road. As we understand, these two phases of de • - velopment would be connected via an internal road system. Although' specific site plans for the proposal have not been' developed, there are several observations that can be made relating to traffic access. During phase one, the majority of traffic will utilize Powell Avenue SW as a primary access route. The additional traffic generated by this. proposal should be expected to increase volumes at several primary intersections including Grady Way and Powell Avenue SW, Grady Way and, Rainier Avenue South , and 7th Avenue SW and Rainier Avenue. These additional traffic voTumes would add to the congestion experienced at these intersections; however, this congestion would be somewhat less than normally experienced with other types of land uses such as office uses, because the working shifts normally associated with these types of uses start early in the morning and end in the mid-afternoon. Con- sequently, these volumes would not compound problems during the highest peak hour that occurs between 3:45 and 4:45 PM. Access for phase two is planned to extend out to Monster Road. This connection may be less than desirable from two aspects: the first relates to the difficulty of constructing the road across the P-1. Channel at a bend in Monster Road, and the second relates to .the ability . . of Monster Road to carry the anticipated level of truck traffic. While fl,t•t,1%.I1e ryt' 1-Nit!) \'.e•r)lf+. .'ti fll',1. '18007 11.2e y . , d 11-1 Mr. Robert W. Thorpe ll :fa November 24, 1980 77 Page Two j ` F ' 0 construction problems could be overcome, the structures required could be very costly. In addition, Monster Road is a relatively -narrow, two- lane road that has not been designed to serve the anticipated levels of heavy truck traffic. Moreover, the vertical and horizontal alignment of the roadway often restricts sight distance along the road- and at its intersection with Grady Way. To alleviate some of these impacts, one alternative might be to completely. rebuild Monster Road between the 'site and Grady Way. This, however, would not eliminate the construction problemsassociated with connecting the site with Monster Road. Another alternative would be to work in association with the development of Earl.ington Industrial Park to' con- struct a portion of the proposed Longacres Parkway from Grady Way north to its proposed connection with Monster Road. This would provide a more direct access to the major arterial network. Regardless , the alternative selected- to connect the site to and from Monster Road, it is likely. that Monster Road north of the site will have to be upgraded with certain safety improvements and improved traffic control at the intersection of Monster Road and Empire Way would have to be constructed. I trust this letter serves your needs regarding our preliminary observa- tions relative to traffic access to this proposal . If you have any further questions, I invite you to call me so we might refine these alternatives or discuss some alternatives that we may have overlooked. Sincerely, The TRANSPO Group, Inc. David D. Markley Principal F EA ..` O THE CITY OF RENTON U MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 z .3; o - a rn BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR ® PLANNING DEPARTMENT 0 ��P� October 15 , 1980 235— 2550 9�TED SEP'� N R . W. Thorpe & Associates 815 Seattle Tower 3rd & University Seattle, Washington 98101 RE : EIS FOR JOHN R . HANSON REZONE R-432-79 Dear Mr . Thorpe : This office has reviewed and hearby approves R. W . Thorpe Associates as the prime contractor on the subject EIS pursuant to a letter of October 2, 1980 , from R . W. Thorpe Associates to this office, the memorandum of August 26 , 1980, from the Senior Planner to the Planning Director regarding the subject- EIS (copy attached) , and the Memorandum of Understanding dated June 27 , 1980, with Alterra Corporation . Further, Mike Lee & Associates is approved for the wildlife and vegetation sections subject to provision within the EIS of detailed site mapping, prognosis of plant types if disturbed, detailed analysis of soil-water relationships as it relates to plant habitat, . and a quantified analysis of the uniqueness of the individual plant species and the plant community . The analysis shall include a qualitative analysis of the significance of this site, as it relates to other similar sites within the region . Rittenhouse Ziemen is approved for soils sections subject to their analysis of those segments of the soils and ground water aspects, which may adversely or positively affect the wildlife and plant habitat sections of the report . Dave Markley of the TRANSPO Group is approved for traffic and circulation . The subject EIS shall be limited to the 47 acres contained in the original application R-432-79 presented by John R . Hanson . If the applicant/proponent proposes to consider the entire 70 acre ownership within the EIS, an application to that effect shall be submitted to this office and accepted prior to authorization to expand the EIS from 47 to 70 acres. By carbon copy of this letter , we are so informing the applicant/ proponent. Further , by carbon copy of this letter , we are authorizing the creation of an escrow account in the amount of $6 , 500 for a 47 acre area EIS, or a $7 , 500 deposit for the 70 acre EIS . r Lj s r y Letter to R . W. Thorpe & Associates October 15, 1980 Page Two Upon establishment of the escrow account, the City of Renton will authorize in writing for R . W. Thorpe Associates to proceed with the EIS . The City of Renton accepts no responsi- bility prior to establishment of the escrow account. Payments for the Draft EIS shall b,e made upon circulation of the DEIS and accounting for services rendered on the DEIS. R . W. Thorpe Associates shall provide the City of Renton with a pre-draft EIS with copies for the. Planning Department, Building Department, Traffic Engineering, Engineering, 'Fire and Parks Departments. Upon revision of the pre-DEIS pursuant to comments by the City of Renton, R. W. Thorpe shall provide a proof-DEIS for approval to print and circulate. The escrow deposit amount for the Final EIS shall be established within ten (10 ) days of the end of the DEIS thirty-five (35 ) day referral period. R . W. Thorpe will not be authorized by the City of Renton to proceed with completion of the FEIS until the escrow deposit for the FEIS is received . Payment for the FEIS shall be made upon circulation and accounting for services rendered on the FEIS . Very truly yours , of4/ 111 "`_ -�-�`J,tl ' • Gc don Y. c !< n frianning/iiector 9 A� GYE :DRCyb f cc : Mayor Alterra Corporation John R . Hanson I / / OF THE CITY OF RENTON U t® MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RENTON.WASH.98055 istL °. BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR e PLANNING DEPARTMENT 9,0 co- 235- 2550 °ggTFO sEpqGt,10 October 15 , 1980 Delton J. Bonds Alterra Corporation • 2120-A S .W. 152nd .Street P.O . Box 66101 Seattle, Washington 98166 • RE : APPROVAL OF CONSULTANT FOR AN EIS ON THE JOHN R. HANSEN REZONE, R-432-79 Dear Mr . Bonds : Attached you will find a copy of a letter to R . W. Thorpe and Associates approving their form and associates subcontractors for the preparation of the Draft EIS on the 47-acre site encompassed by Rezone R-432-79 . As you note in paragraph two, unless the rezone application is amended to encompass the seventy acre ownership of Mr. Hansen , the EIS shall be limited to consideration of the 47. acres encompassed by application R-432-79 . You will also note that the City of Renton is authorizing the creation of escrow accounting in the amount of $6, 500 for the 47-acre area EIS or a $7,500 deposit for the 70-acre area EIS. Upon establishment of the escrow account and deposit of the appropriate fee, the City of Renton will authorize R . W. Thorpe Associates to proceed. Until receipt of the appropriate deposit , the City of Renton accepts no responsibility for work performed . Whether the rezone application is revised from 47 acres to 70 acres or not, we would like clarification as to whether the files on this matter should be identified as the John • R . Hansen rezone or the Alterra Corporation rezone. An early response would be appreciated. • If you should have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact this department. Very ruly, yours, Co on Y. - , c en, • P anning ' r,/ector • cc: May. Shinpoch - . R . W. Thorpe Associates John- R . Hansen . rujiR.W. Thorpe & Associates 0 Planning • Environmental Analysis • Economics Associates: Len Zickler Deborah Krouse October 6 1980 // n(l�`� ;: ,\ a O David Clemons, Senior Planner '\ , City of Renton '?\CI��� > 200 Mill Avenue Renton, WA 98055 • Re: Alterra EIS Dear Dave: Enclosed is the missing enclosure from our letter of last week. Sorry for the oversight on our part. Please contact me for any clarification. Sincere .b:- t W. Thorpe, AICP RWT/mlv encl: Memorandum of Understanding for Alterra EIS • Seattle: 1315 Seattle Tower• 3rd& University• Seattle, WA 9B1 01 •(206] 624-6239 Anchorage: Suite 503• 1 1 1 0 West Sixth Avenue•Anchorage,AK 99503• (907) 276-6846 • R.W. Thorpe & Associates ruIT�0 Planning • Environmental Analysis • Economics Associates: Len Zickler Deborah Krouse 1f October 2, 1980 ,` 1.11 Mr. Dave Clemens } f Senior Planner City of Renton Planning Department 200 Mill Avenue Renton, WA 98055 Re: Alterra Development Corporation - EIS Preparation - 70 Acre Proposed Manufacturing Park Site Rezone Dear Dave: Enclosed herewith is a copy of the memorandum we sent Del Bonds concerning EIS preparation for their proposed 47 acre site which has been ammended to include additional acreage totalling 70 acres. The EIS would be for the rezone action and conceptual land use plan with supplements to occur based on specific site • plan proposals for portions or all of the subject property. That fee estimated was based upon the fact that we were doing some work for them on a preliminary basis to inventory existing conditions, site planning opportuhities and limi- tations,' while undertaking an analysis of the requirements of the comprehensive plan zoning code, building requirements, etc. of the City of Renton and other related :data. - Furthermore, the fee estimated was also based on the belief that our proposal would be acceptable to the City. In addition to the items proposed in our Memorandum of Understanding with them, we have informed them based upon conversations with yourself and other city staff members, that they would be required to do certain other work efforts that would require information from themselves or support by certain specialized consultants, as follows: 1) Wildlife and Vegetation. We have requested a vege- tation and wildlife study which is complete and will be delivered to us this week by Mike Lee, of Mike Lee and Associates. His subconsultant fee for this work effort as part of the existing conditions inventory, was to be in the range of $700 to $1000. That work effort included an inventory of existing conditions, both in terms of what is there now and what has been there historically, as well - as an assessment of the importance of the rapparian forest to the general area of site influence (i.e similar to that found in the Earlington Park EIS) , the City of Renton, and on a regional basis--say, South King County. We requested that he comment on the importance of the vegetation in terms of aesthetics, water quality, wildlife habitat, and any other benefits that it might provide to the community. We also asked his observations as to the impact of a loss of Seattle: 81 5 Seattle Tower• 3rd& University• Seattle, WA 981 01 •(206) 624-6239 Anchorage: Suite 503• 1 1 1 0 West Sixth Avenue•Anchorage,AK 99503•(907) 276-6546 . Y„�. -2- portions of the site. We will be able to assess the situation when his work efforts to date have been accomplished this week and we will provide you a copy to see if it's consistent with the data that you wish to develop during the EIS process. 2) Traffic and Circulation. We do not have a specific estimate from Dave Markley of the Transpo Group due to the generalized nature of the EIS for a rezone, however, based upon our understanding of other projects they have worked on, an estimate for just general traffic analysis might range somewhere between $1,200 and $1,800 for the First Phase EIS. More specific site develop- ment proposals would require more detail work effort, however, the initial ef- fort would give existing conditions and potential levels of impact, based upon various land use scenarios developed by R. W. Thorpe & Associates. 3) Soils. As you are aware, Rittenhouse Ziemen has performed some soils work to date on the 47 acre parcel. A level of additional data development would be consistent with the direction given by yourself as to the requirements of the city for the rezone action. _ 4) Market and Economics Information will be in part provided by the applicants. Some data generation will be initiated by R. W. Thorpe & As- sociates and will be compared with the market study being developed for the Earlington property. Thus, the attached Memorandum of Understanding covers the entire 70 acre site for our efforts and a separate contract covers Mike Lee's efforts to date. Any traffic work would be in addition to that amount shown. Additional efforts may be necessary for subconsultants to expand on existing condition work done to date. I would suggest that in order to cover other subconsultants, that a $1000 sum be added to cover Transpo's work on the DEIS at this time and for an Escrow account amount to cover the EIS work. I trust this is consistent with our phone conversation and proposals that we have submitted on prior occasions, however, you may wish some.clarification. Please, contact me should that be necessary. Sincerely, Ro ert W. Thor , I R /mlv cc: Del Bonds • B1 5 Seattle Tower• 3rd&University• Seattle, WA 9B 1 01 •(206) 624-6239 R W Tho pe 6 Assoc,ates ICJ :;f6e• i • "-®WVo n Elm r e & SS OCkai wzi es ` �` a ❑ Planning • Environmental Analysis • Economics • ( •g • Associates: June 27, 1980 • Len Zickler Deborah Krouse • MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING • ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT PREPARATION • ALTERRA CORPORATION 47-Acre Manufacturing Park Site , Analyzing a Rezone, Site Plan Alternatives, . \, ( �\\L0 \� Rezone, Site Plan, Subdivision Mr. Delton J. Bonds • 0�� Alterra Corporation . • 2120-A S.W. 152nd Street ��r;� P.. Oa Box. 66101 Seattle, Washington 98166 Dear Mr. Bonds: . I thank you for the opportunity to outline a proposal for your project and to assist you with your zoning and EIS applications. Pursuant to our discussions and meetings, we offer this Memorandum of Understanding which,. if agreed to and signed by your firm and ours, will define our mutual understanding on the scope of the project and fees. We have also noted herein the participation of third parties which are involved in this understanding. • Our understanding is based upon coversations with you.and representatives of the City of Renton. The following assumptions and conditions will guide our work efforts and EIS development. 1. R. W. Thorpe and Associates will provide a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) and a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) which will meet the standards established by the•Renton Planning Department. 2. R. W. Thorpe and Associates will provide the City of Renton with drafts • of the DEIS and FEIS, pursuant to the City"s directions on content, as close as possible to, the schedule set by the Alterra Corporation and R. W. Thorpe and Associates, subject to scheduling decisions made by the City. 3. Other design and technical consultants will supply R. W. Thorpe and• Associates with any required information or drawings pertaining to the project. This will include, if required by the City at this stage: (1) Soils and hydrology reports (we recommend Eaton Engineers) , (2) topography for the site, (3) traffic analysis (we recommend Dave Markley and Jim MacIsaac of The TRANSPO Group, Inc..) . Your contracts with sub- consultants would be directed to the subconsultant, but supervised by our firm. In addition, information related to supply and demand for / office/warehouse use and potential tenants will be helpful to our writing of the EIS. • Seattle: 615 Seattle Tower• 3rd& University• Seattle. WA 98101 •(206) 624-6239 • Anchorage: Suite 503• 1 1 1 0 West Sixth Avenue• Anchorage,AK 99503• (907) 276-6846 Mr. Delton J. Bonds • June '27, 1980 C ?age 2 • • 4. Alterra Corporation will assist R. W. Thorpe and Associates- in developing a general assessment of the practicability and economic' feasibility of alternative projects on the site such as: (a) phased development, (b) variable site coverages, and (c) variable mixes of office and warehouse. . Economic considerations can be generalized and confidential financial data need not be revealed in the statement.• R. W. Thorpe and Associates • will provide format and general analysis. • 5. R. W. Thorpe and Associates has• conducted previous environmental and • feasibility studies in Renton, Auburn, Kent, and Tukwila, and these • studies will provide significant base data to minimize costs. 6. Compensation of R. W. Thorpe and Associates will be on a time and materials basis, as set forth in the attached Exhibit A. Rates for typist/word processing support will vary between $12 and $20 per hour depending on the amount the word processing system is utilized. Payment to the printer for the DEIS and FEIS 'and to any subconsultants will be made direct from Alterra Corporation, although R. W. Thorpe and Associates will supervise the work and verify completion. 7. The following are estimates of the costs which R. W. Thorpe and Associates will bill the City of Renton's Alterra Escrow Account for this project. They are estimates and should be treated as such, although the figures • quoted for the DEIS will not be exceeded unless a specific authorization is given by Alterra Corporation after justification of unanticipated costs by R. W. Thorpe and Associates. The estimates of the FEIS costs are only estimates, based on a moderate amount of document revision and no separte technical studies being required by the City of Renton. R. W. Thorpe and Associates will be paid,for all expenditures of time and materials on the FEIS, based on a detailed accounting by them to the•City of Renton and to • Alterra Corporation. Major unanticipated items, projected to raise the cost of the FEIS above the estimate, must be authorized in advance by the • City of Renton and Alterra Corporation. • Estimated Costs - DFIS Preparation Professional Services: Project Management and Coordination $ 800 - $1,000 Report Research and Writing 3,500 - 4,500 Graphics and Design Analysis 600 - 700 • Secretarial/Word Processing 400 - 550 Xerox, Reductions, Photo, Data, etc 200 - 250 • Total Planning Portion DEIS: - $5,500 - $7,000 ' The estimate includes time and materials with the high figure a maximum. Billings for amounts in excess of this figure will not be made by R. W. Thorpe and Associates without authorization by the City of Renton and Alterra Corporation in order to respond to unanticipated challenges or requirements. • • • • • • B15 Seattle Tower° 3rd& University• Seattle, WA 98101 •(206) 624-6239 aw Thorpe s Asaonaccs • • Mr. Delton J. Bonds June•'27, 1980 • r 'Page 3 Estimated Costs - FEIS Preparation $1,000 - $1,500 The estimate for the FEIS may be reviewed by the parties at the conclusion of the DEIS comment period, if major unanticipated items are 'required by the City. 8. Printing will be provided by a nearby printer which we utilize on a continuous basis for very competitive costs and turnaround. From our experience, this type of report can run $400 to $700 for printing of both the DEIS and FEIS.. We will do all coordination of the printing as part of our fee. • The total_ fee does have a fairly significant range; however, we would endeavor to minimize costs involved in this project and reduce the estimated time frames • and cost wherever possible. It is our intent to meet the schedules we mutually agree upon at the start of this project. (Note: Time frames contingent upon performance of EIS subconsultants and proponent's professional consultants.) • Delivery of Preliminary Draft to City: Projected Date of DEIS Distribution: Projected Date of FEIS Distribution: If this Memorandum of Understanding appears to be in order and you wish us to proceed with the work, please sign the attached copy and return it to us.. Per our discussions, we would appreciate the following payment schedule: Retainer for initial expense: 1/4 of low estimate $1,375 Distribution of DEIS: Billing for DEIS costs payable in 30 days and prior to distribution of FEIS Final payment. within 30 days of distribution of FEIS. • Thank you in.advance for any consideration given this proposal. • Yours very y, R. . .„TETORP OD . • 'Sober W. Thor•e, A RWT/wk • /.„ • Authorization to Proceed: ' /T e Signature Date g at • 69Egal _ ri • el 5 Seattle Tower•3rd& University• Seattle. WA 99101 •(206) 624-6239 aJ - _s OF 0 THE CITY OF RENTON CJ 0 Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT °13 235- 2550 47- FD SEP1°4‘ August 7 , 1980 RECEIVED MEMORANDUM AUG isso TO : Barbara Shinpoch , Mayor CITY OF RENTON MAYOR'S OFFICE FROM : Gordon Y . Ericksen , Planning Director RE : JOHN R . HANSEN, APPLICATION FOR REZONE FROM G TO M-P , R-342-79 , DATED OCTOBER 15 , 1979 In response to your memorandum, the matter has been progressing ; • and Mr . Hansen , to my knowledge , has been advised on a number of occasions of his obligations and actions necessary to proceed with his request . The chronological breakdown attached indicates various meetings , discussions and correspondence regarding the matter . I have personally met with Mr . Hansen on three occasions , discussing the various concerns and advising him of the necessity to obtain City concurrence in the selection of a consultant and the procedures for under- taking the development of an environmental impact statement . However , I was surprised at our meeting of July 30 , when he indicated that he had not obtained a copy of the Renton Environmental Ordinance , which outlines the procedures regard- ing consultant selection and the preparation of an EIS . I personally had referred to the ordinance at the two previous meetings and advised of the need for his review of the require- ments . At the time of my second meeting with Mr . Hansen, Mr . Thorpe ' s name did come up regarding the Earlington Golf Course develop- ment . At that time Mr . Hansen was talking about project feasibility , and it was suggested to him that he might contact Mr . Thorpe to obtain possible consulting input . In May , Dave Clemens had a discussion with Mr . Thorpe regarding Mr . Hansen ' s application and the possibility of his doing consulting work for Mr . Hansen . At that time it is my understanding that Dave indicated no specific problems with this . However, there was no specific request from Mr . Hansen nor was there any specific approval by the Planning Department . We did receive a letter from Mr . Bond on July 14 requesting approval of Mr . Thorpe . You might have noted that we had also previously supplied a list of consultants to Mr . Hansen in response to his request at the meeting of April 28 . Until the time of receipt of Mr . Bond ' s letter of July 10th , there had been no input received from Mr . Hansen regarding the r Barbara Shinpoch , Mayor August 7, 1980 Page Two question of consultant selection . We , therefore , called the applicant and requested a meeting to discuss this matter with a letter going out on July 17, confirming the phone discus- sion . Said meeting was held on July 30;. . The problem basically at this time is that the consultant selection process has never been followed by Mr . Hansen to date . The applicant ' s consultant selection process apparently has been made ; yet we were made aware of it after the fact . This presently puts the City and the Planning Department in an awkward position in that we have had to date little input selection process by the applicant . As we have indicated to Mr . Hansen , Mr . Bond, and another gentleman on the 30th , the development of the property for Manufacturing Park use would be. consistant with the Comprehen- sive Plan subject to various limitations , recognizing the area in question is classed as unique and the area of the so-called Riparian Forest (note attached pages ) and has been defined as an environmentally sensitive area in the Renton Environmental Ordinance . It is also designated as an area that includes both floodway and floodway fringe area for the hundred year flood and is also involved in the Valley Drainage Project . We have indicated to Mr . Hansen this would have to be addressed , and these concerns have been expressed in various correspondence dating back to November 15 , 1979 . To my knowledge in the discussions which have been held with the applicant , I am not aware of a change of direction or a delay which has occurred as a result of City . action or inaction . As late as the meeting of July 30th, the applicant approached the subject again as to whether. an EIS was really necessary and if they really had to do one . Both myself and Dave Clemens indicated that in our opinion the EIS was necessary , and we indicated our willingness to work with them in the consultant selection process to expedite the matter . I would be happy to discuss the matter with your personally and particularly feel that Dave ' s input in response to some of your questions would be desirable , since Dave had more direct dealings with all the parties than I personally have had . I would be happy to meet with you on the subject matter at your convenience . GYE :wr Attachments HANSEN CHRONOLOGICAL BREAKDOWN October 15 , 1979 Application and Environmental Checklist Submitted November 5 , 1979 Proposed Declaration of Significance (EIS required) , transmitted by letter January 4, 1980 Meeting with Steve Nielson regarding Amended Checklist January 7 , 1980 Letter in Response to Nielsen Meeting February 5 , 1980 Amended and Expanded Checklist Submitted March 13 , 1980 Decision that EIS still required , letter so noting April 28 , 1980 Meeting with Applicant on EIS Process April 30 , 1980 Letter listing EIS Consultant noting process for selection and EIS payment Late May Dave Clemens discussion with R .W . Thorpe regarding Hansen EIS, concurrence subject to subcontractor (no specific approval ) July 10 , 1980 Request to approve R . W. Thorpe (received July 14) July 14, 1980 Called applicant to note that meeting appropriate to discuss July 17 , 1980 Letter confirming phone conversation July 30 , 1980 Met with applicant to again define selection process " rS/ ,N' s .,4 a,a5t'�i S 1^:! " /o•'• �• ,,%Z t rr. t a �,a ,• .,d1.4+ f)+ ' 4. ," '' ' ''4 ` n it t `+�9 5 v ,;:7 S 1 t ''east t 3 +'S ,• - .5S[ t r'1.. `'Q ."t «F r 1 ,T''^!^ Y' »a' s 'y;,. = r c 1 ;�T.i`, f h3 } h, .r^r �' 'x �"t Y 0 :1' ti�i v * •S..F, .`,.'>,t'^ a Y j • • . :'t t.;;4 � - •*1+ t�,�4. �irr - ^ .., dt w, � , � �.. .n`Mt'..„t w k• �`F"� - ,.' • .,.�� . 50. / Cv ,c'r✓ ka% 1 ,^3"" ka. ,ftrvic , Ea J?d tJ*Su I, f' UN - • ZAe4(fts ' C,44 ZAVAL AIS . ' 1,.' '1 :0-14 IMPACTS• •.ui `. n• a 1. ., , 4, ,4 Top widths of the proposed lower'P-1`.channel (ranging from approxi, 2 ,, 1 ,',A ,I. mately 182-to-240 feet in the selected plan) would be reduced by an 3 '' ,,� `. '''w' average of 66 feet.. Permanent rights-of-way for this section:of channel 4,,, ` • A ^ .',: • would be decreased an estimated 33 acres - greatly reducing objectionable 5 `' .. ' ^ f visual impacts of the planned project between S. 180th Street and the. . 6 , , y`• ,,x pumping plant. :. . . 7 I is "4 .7.; 8 t T �t ti A minimum of 29 acres of pristine river bottom habitat would be 9 1 � l . tk permanently destroyed. The site presently contains 1 or 2 large black 10 cottonwood treesper acre, approximately six feet in diameter and 150 11 - 1 ti PP Y , feet or more in height; about 50 black cottonwood trees per acre, 12 ':,'• ' ;' averaging 2-to-3 feet in diameter; and about 100per acre one foot in 13 "r ` ','` ' g g i . �,,,,„ diameter. Together with dense stands of red alder, blackberry, nettles 14 1 , and various other understory grasses, sedges and forbs, the site pro- 15 •,I ; t ,,-i, ' vides the best remaining example of a climax riparian hardwood ecosystem 16 Id in the lower Green River Valley. 17 ' l 18 '- •'r , 1 ih, . . Within corporate limits of the city of Renton, the proposed site is 19 i 1 = ;,i an integral part of a 68 acre area which has been nominated to the U. S. 20 `;, i ,2: -- Fish and Wildlife Service for possible acquisition as a 'unique habitat • 21 - r under their Unique Wildlife Ecosystem Program. The area also is zoned 22 r industrial in accordance with locally adopted comprehensive land use 23 ' 4 .'7 7' plans, and thus very likely to be destroyed at some future time. Conse 24 M,' y quently the local sponsoring organizations would need to acquire the ' 25 I . i remaining 39 acres as suitable mitigation for the impacts of this alter- 26 A !,, 1 • , . -155b- 27 4 °Crow.• �Iae k River Playsk S�u • EAST SIDE PROJECT POTENTIAL FOR RECREATION AND WILDLIFE HABITAT 1 A. GREENBELT OPPORTUNITIES Al i Y. The 160 foot to 250 foot wide right way ht of required for the � ° 1 . storm drainage channel provides an excellent opportunity to develop a "greenbelt. " Conceptually this can be divided into two major functions: passive uses, and active uses. • r 1. PASSIVE USES ' i As the name implies, a "greenbelt" is lush, verdant and a relatively natural. Its value depends upon contrast with ' adjacent developed areas. The proposed channel rights-of-way s are broad enough to create an intense natural visual resource for local office spaces, employee lunch areas, and other human activities. Bridges crossing the channel provide • focused views up and down the stream's tree-lined enclosure. i From the adjacent valley walls and elevated freeways, large native trees screen warehouse roofs and provide a visual key to Springbrook Creek' s stream course. i 1 A second type of passive use is the preservation or re-creation of archetypal Green River landscapes. Prior to settlement of the Green River Valley it was covered with low-lying marsh and deciduous. riparian (river-related) forest of black cotton- wood, alder, willow and oregon ash. Development of the bottomlands for farming almost completelyreplaced this environment with seasonally flooded fields. Well-defined marshes remained in poorly drained areas and in remnant '"i stretches of abandoned river bottom. Storage of storm runoff in a marsh and pond adjacent to the :*'' Black River Pump provides the opportunity to preserve an adjacent stand of primeval riparian forest. HistoricallyIt flooded during the winter months, the forest could once again store winter runoff. The 68-acre area provides the best remaining example of a climax riparian hardwood ecosystem in i the lower Green River Valley. It has 'been nominated for f preservation as a unique wildlife ecosystem by the U .S. Fish & Wildlife Service. The 29 acres of marsh and pond developed for stormwater storage would be bounded on one edge by the riparian forest and buffered on the other sides by 20 to 30 foot high berms formed from the marsh and pond excavati:in. `.4 The aggregated marsh, pond, and forest would provide as much as 100 acres of compact wetland habitat for waterfowl and small mammals . Isolated from urban development by strong 1 enclosing elements, a rich, wild scenic resource would be formed. 1 5 OF 1 A. THE CITY OF RENTON wx z 4~ MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200-MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 0 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 9O co' 235- 2550 �P 4•eo SEP11�O September 25, 1980 Delton J . Bonds Alterra Corporation P . O. Box 66101 - Seattle, Washington 98166 RE : ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR THE JOHN R . HANSEN PROPERTY Dear Mr. Bonds : We are in receipt of your letter of September 16th requesting a determination as to the required amount for deposit to accomplish the above referenced EIS. As, of this date, we have not received a scope of wo-rk proposal from R. W. Thorpe Associates , your proposed consultants. At such time as the scope of work is received which addresses the issues discussed between our office and your consultants on August 29th, we will be able to determine the required deposit amount. As noted in our previous correspondence, the rezone action which you propose incorporates more land area than the original application, and the application must be appropriately amended before any actiop can be taken . Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact this office. Very truly yours, Gor;g1 Y. Eri ks,n Pla Dir or 2 tat d emens Senior Planner cc: John R . Hansen 3268 Hunts Point Road Bellevue, WA 98004 PALTERRA CORPORAL - N REAL ESTATE-INVESTMENTS P.O. BOX 66101 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98166 (206) 246-7861 September 16, 1980 • Mr. David Clemnons 1'("j �� 1�'�(} Senior Planner ram-; 4 r Planning Department �; City of Renton �r // 200 Mill Avenue S. _``\. G f?sY,� Renton, WA 98255 Re: Environmental Impact Statement Preparation for Alterra Corporation's 70-Acre Potential Manufacturing Park Site, Black River Area, Renton, Washington Dear Mr. C1eTt nOns: We have met with Mr. Robert Thorpe of R. W. Thorpe & Associates and he has informed us of the meeting involving you, Gene Williams, Deborah Krouse, and him. We appreciate your meeting with Mr. Thorpe and giving them further di- rection concerning areas to be emphasized in the EIS and supporting sub- consultant work that would be necessary. We have the memo from your office concerning those six major areas that need emphasis and have authorized R. W. Thorpe & Associates to continue their efforts with Mike Lee on vege- tation and wildlife; Rittenhouse and Zeiman for soils, and the Transpo Group for traffic and circulation. We will assist R. W. Thorpe & Associates in providing market data information analyzing vacancy rates and demand for manufacturing parks`and rail served warehouse and office uses. In terms of our providing the City an amount equal to the estimate of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement to be placed in escrow and-paid di- rectly by the City to the EIS consultant, we have utilized their figures for an estimate on a draft impact statement. Initially their estimates were $5,500 to $7,000 for the 47-acre site. The additional 23 acres ac- cording to Mr. Thorpe, can generally be handled within the same cost frame- work and may only move the cost slightly up within that range. We do feel that with existing data information that they have generated and some site • planning data that they may optimistically stay within the low-end range of their estimate. We would therefore, request that your requirement for pla- cing in escrow for the EIS be set at $5,500. In terms of the estimate for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, we are informed this is. very difficult to estimate until after responses are received on the Draft Impact Statement. However, based upon response of sim- ilar projects, this should be somewhere in the vicinity of $2,200. We trust ai•� P►LTERRA CORPORAL REAL ESTATE- INVESTMENTS P.O. BOX 66101 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98166 (206) 246-7861 this estimate can be clarified following receipt o Jicomments for the Draft and that fees for that beyond EIS be placed in escrow prior to issuance of the final rather than at this time. As we understand, this is consistent with the process: utilized on similar projects. We are quite anxious to proceed as rapidly as possible, but we have informed R. W. Thorpe & Associates and their sub-consultants to continue to proceed as expeditiously as possible. We also concurr in the City's recommendation to divide the EIS process between one to cover zoning and conceptual devel- opment alternatives for the site and a subsequent supplemental EIS for spe- cific site plans or portions for the entire property as it is developed by other parties on a joint venture basis. We are, as you are aware, anxious to proceed. Please contact us for any necessary clarification or direction in this matter. We would appreciate hearing from you at your earliest convenience to establish the escrow account and receive your comments on the work done to date by R. W. Thorpe & Associates on site planning and inventorying of existing conditions. Thank you. Yo rs very truly, Delton J. Bonds DJB/mlv cc: R. W. Thorpe & Associates Mayor Shinpoch OF R4,,, o THE CITY OF RENTON `o ''N^' Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH.98055 seLL n BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR ® PLANNING DEPARTMENT 00 235- 2550 01 7' eO SEP-r°s" • MEMORANDUM August 29, 1980 TO: Files FROM: Gene N. Williams. RE: HANSEN REZONE/BLACK RIVER INDUSTRIAL PARK EIS Dave Clemens, Senior Planner, and I met today with Bob Thorpe and Deborah Krause of Thorpe & Associates concerning proposals for the EIS for the Hansen property. They presented for our information a copy of a written report on existing conditions at the site prepared for Alterra, the developer . We then discussed the key environmental issues that would have to be addressed in an EIS for development of the Black River riparian forest . Reference was made to the memorandum from Dave Clemens to Gordon Ericksen of August 26 , 1980 . The proposed sub-consultants were also reviewed. Mr. Thorpe suggested that an appropriate approach to environ- mental review of the proposed rezone and subsequent development of the property would be to prepare an EIS on the rezone and generalized development concepts , and later to prepare a supplemental EIS on the specific site development proposal. We indicated that this approach would be satisfactory to this department and would allow a more logical review of the appropriateness of a rezone and later a specific site plan. We also indicated that a complete analysis of alternatives within the body of the EIS (per the Eradco Draft EIS) would be required. The meeting was terminafedwith the understanding that Thorpe & Associates would present a Scope of Work proposal for preparing the EIS to this department ( including examples of work by the sub-consultants) . GNW: yb' of R4 THE CITY OF RENTON �- © Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 m R BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 09 4a. 235- 2550 A 9�TFD SEPZeg' MEMORANDUM August 26 , 1980 TO : Gordon Y. Ericksen, Planning Director FROM : David R . Clemens, Senior Planner RE : ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES FOR THE HANSEN EIS Pursuant to our discussion of Friday , August 22nd, the following outline of environmental issues apply to the Hansen rezone : 1 . UNIQUE ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, AND SPECIAL SITE CHARACTERISTICS . -Riparian forest , biological , wildlife issues . -Black River channel and Springbrook Creek fisheries and wildlife issues . -Possible archaeolgical sites and associated issues . -Qualitative analysis of the wildlife preservation issues on this site as compared to other available sites in the Green River Valley area . -Unique soil and geologic characteristics of the site , construction feasibility and appropriateness of develop- ment . 2 . VALLEY DRAINAGE PLAN. -Impact of the site on the proposed Valley Drainage project . -Potential future acquisition for park , recreation , or open space purposes . -Acceptability of the use of this site for mitigation of the Valley Drainage Plan . 3 . TRANSPORTATION. -Problems and potential access to the site . -Off-site traffic impacts . -On and off-site traffic mitigation . Memorandum to Gordon Y. Ericksen August 26 , 1980 Pge -2- 4 . DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY/LAND USE ALTERNATIVES . -Analysis of the ultimate site character . -Available land use designs to accommodate existing site characteristics . -Analysis of the land use relationships to adjoining property . -A range of development intensities within the site . 5 . MARKET DEMAND ANALYSIS. -An estimate of market feasibility for the proposed development . -Phasing and timing of the proposed development . 6 . MINIMUM ALTERNTAIVES . -No action , or limited action alternatives . -Sparse minimum deve opment level . -Applicant ' s proposed development level . -Maximum site development potential . DRC ;sh • OF R4,4 �t o THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 ma BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT 04 235- 2550 ° P �TFC SEPSE��� August 26 , 1980 Delton J . Bonds P .O . Box 66101 Seattle, Washington 98166 RE : ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR JOHN R . HANSEN Dear Mr . Bonds :• � As discussed at our meeting of July 30 , 1980, your proposed rezone application has now been amended from approximately 40 acres to approximately 70 acres of ownership. We have not , as of this time , received a revised application for this initial 30* acre area . Enclosed for your use are the required forms to make this application . You will also note that a copy of the environmental checklist has been enclosed which will need to be revised in accordance with the expaned area of the application . If you wish a new environmental determination to be made for the entire 70* acre rezone, we will forward the matter to the Environmental Review Committee for their consideration . However , if you conclude that an EIS will still be required, the Environmental Ordinance allows us to credit any environmental checklist fee to the cost of preparation of the EIS. Should you choose to waive a new environmental determination , please note with your application that you concur in the requirement for an EIS for the total rezone . Also enclosed is a copy of a letter to R .W. Thorpe Associates requesting a meeting to discuss the aspects of this EIS. In discussions with Mr . Thorpe on August 21st , he indicated that a meeting this week may be appropriate and would be contacting us as to a specific date and time. • Letter to Delton J . Bonds August 26 , 1980 Page -2- If you should have any further questions regarding this matter , please do not hesitate to contact this department . Very truly yours , Gordo Y. Ericksen , Plan i'ng Dir c ,/r eei0 Dav ' d R . Clemens , Senior Planner cc : John R . Hansen , P. O. Box 808 , Bellevue, WA 98009 / 4 s - OF R,e A. ® O THE CITY OF RENTON ® 4 "' MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE.SO. RENTON.WASH.98055 T • O . BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH. MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT �.� x W 235- 2550 0,9) SEPt0_0 August 12, 1980 Deborah Krouse R . W. Thorpe Associates 815 Seattle Tower Third and University Seattle, Washington 98101 RE : SUBCONSULTANTS: HANSEN REZONE EIS Dear Ms . Krouse : • I Pursuant to the attached Environmental Consultant Selection Process , we would like to hold a meeting to discuss the above project so that your firm can prepare a proposal for our review . In. the event that you have sufficient information to prepare the proposal , no meeting need be held. As noted in item #4, the subcontractors and prinicipal participating staff should be identified . Pursuant to our phone conversation of Friday, August 8th, we would appreciate additional professional background on Michael Lee , and Rittenhouse-Zeman and Associates. We will need to obtain information on their work as it relates to site of a similar size and nature. The examples of. their work may be in the form of professional reports or samples ` of EIS work . If you desire a meeting on the scope of work, please contact this office at your convenience. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours , Cord n Y. Ericksen . Pla. ping Dire r ? ^ i / c ,/JCL�%J D id R . �Clemens Senior Planner DRC :wr - r - r ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS The following administrative guidelines adopted by the Renton Planning Department are intended to clarify certain aspects of the City 's Environmental Ordinance. 1 . APPLICANT : The applicant submits to the City a list containing at least three consulting firms proposed to prepare the Environmental Impact Statement . 2 . CITY : The City contacts each of the consulting firms on the applicant ' s list to indicate that a meeting will be held to discuss the scope of the Environmental Impact Statement which is proposed. 3 . CITY : The City conducts a meeting with at least three consulting firms to discuss the scope of the Environmental Impact Statement , its locale, specific environmental concerns , and other information that would be pertinent to the consultant so that they may present a scope of work to the City . 4. CONSULTANT : Within ten days the consultant shall submit to the City a scope of work proposed, a list of the subcontractors proposed to accomplish the work, and the principal staff members that will work on the EIS. NO COST FIGURES WILL BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY. 5. CITY : The City may. interview one or more of the consulting teams to discuss any crucial aspects of the proposed scope of work . 6 . CITY : The City will prepare a written response to the applicant indicating at least three firms which will be acceptable to prepare the EIS under the scope of work submitted above . If less than three firms are deemed acceptable by the City, by mutual consent of the City and the applicant, . a list of less than three consultants may be selected. . 7. APPLICANT : Applicant makes a written acceptance of one of the consulting firms and its scope of work for preparation of the EIS . " ' B . CONSULTANT : Consultant submits a final cost estimate for the scope of work specified above. 9. CITY : City prepares memorandum of understanding for signature by the applicant , consultant, and City. EIS PREPARATION, PAYMENT FOR SERVICES , AND REVIEW The following oytline generally describes the EIS preparation and review process and the time limits for submission of payments by the applicant in the preparation of the EIS . 1 . APPLICANT : Applicant deposits the estimated cost of the draft EIS with the City . 2 . CITY : City authorizes the consultant to commence preparation of the EIS. 3 . CONSULTANT : The consultant has 60-90 days to prepare a tentative draft EIS. 4. CITY : The City has 30-45 days to review the tentative draft EIS . 5 . CITY : City prepares its initial billing for its actual cost of review of the tentative draft . 6. APPLICANT : Within 15 days of billing, the applicant shall pay for review of the tentative draft . 7 . CONSULTANT : The consultant will have 30-45 days to prepare a preliminary draft EIS. 8 . CITY : The City will have 14-30 days to review the preliminary draft EIS . 9. CITY : City billing for actual costs of review of the preliminary draft . 10 . APPLICANT : Within 15 days of billing , the applicant shall pay for review of the preliminary draft . 11 . CONSULTANT : Consultant shall provide the City with a proofed draft EIS for final acceptance . 12.. CONSULTANT : Consultant will print the draft EIS. 13 . CITY : The City will circulate the draft EIS for the 35-day review period. 14 . CITY : City will pay the consultant for the draft EIS upon circulation . 15 . CITY/CONSULTANT : At the end of the draft referral period, the City and consultant shall determine the scope and nature of a response to the comments received on the draft . 16 . CONSULTANT : Consultant shall estimate the cost of preparation of the final EIS. 17 . APPLICANT : Applicant shall submit the cost of the final draft within 7 days of the receipt of the estimate. 18 . CITY : The City will deem the acceptability of the final EIS . A proofed draft shall be submitted to the City for review, prior to printing. 19 . CITY : The City will circulate the final EIS . 20 . CITY : The City will make final billing for its cost for review and mailing of the EIS . 21 . APPLICANT : Within 15 days, or prior to any public hearing or other action by the City , the applicant shall submit final payment for City review costs . 22 . CONSULTANT : Consultant will present a final billing to the City for preparation of the final EIS . 23 . CITY : Within 30 days of receipt of the costs of the final EIS, the City shall pay the consultant for the final EIS. Any funds deposited by the applicant which are not utilized in the review process shall be refunded to the applicant . If at any time the special fund for review of the EIS is exhausted, the City shall not continue with preparation or review of the EIS until the fund is replenished. If at any time the applicant chooses to halt preparation of the EIS, the consultant shall be paid an amount equal to the costs of time and materials expended to that time . No final action or approval of the applicant ' s proposed project shall occur until all costs for the preparation and review of the EIS have been deposited with the City. OF RA, o� 0 THE CITY OF RENTON ®v , z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 tali .4 BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR 0 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 9o,9gT�o � M��P� July 17 , 1980 23S- 255® SEP Delton J . Bonds P . 0 . Box 66101 Seattle , Washington 98166 RE : EIS LOCATED NORTH OF EARLINGTON GOLF COURSE FORMERLY OWNED BY MILWAUKEE RAILROAD Dear Mr . Bonds : We have reviewed your letter regarding the subject and the possible authorization of R . . W. Thorpe & Associates to prepare the impact statement . It should be noted , that this department has not specifically agreed to the use of this firm for this work . There are several critical areas which must be considered in any environmental review of the property in question . As a result , specialists in the area of vegetation, wildlife habitat, soils/geologic , and transportation will need to be considered . Until such time as this department has con- sidered the capabilities and qualifications of the subcontractors which will be evaluating these specific areas , we cannot approve or authorize any firm to proceed with the impact statement . As noted in your letter, a number of questions regarding the procedural and monetary aspects of this report are to be resolved . We will need to know what firms or organizations will be responsible for payments related to this work , and any individual or group who should act as the primary contact person should be identified . In order to clarify all of these issues , we would propose to meet with yourself or members of your group during the week of July. 21st . If you would identify times appropriate for this meeting, we will confirm a specific time and location . Should you have any questions , please feel free to contact this office . Very r ly yours , Gor•on Y . Eric o91, Planning Director 664, 1 . id R . Clemens , Senior Planner DRC :wr cc : Environmental Review Committee r July 10, 1980 City of Renton Mr. Gordon Ericksen Planning Dept. 200 Mill Ave. South Renton, WA 98055 Re: Preparation of E.I .S . for site located north of Earlington Golf Course formerly owned by Milwaukee Railroad. Dear Mr. Ericksen, We have authorized the firm of R.W. Thorpe & Associates to under- take and prepare an Environmental Impact Statement, for the above referrenced site. It is my understanding that certain requirements are to be fulfilled between ourselves and the City of Renton, i.e. , a trust account for services, etc. Would you please respond as soon as possible with information con- cerning the above. ank you, Delton J. Bonds P.O. Box 66101 Seattle, WA 98166 246-7861 DJB:j f ,,��'°- o k"'Y r zn 1 JUL 14 198() f . s. OF I ,y o THE CITY OF RENTON`� ® Z MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 0 �. BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR • PLANNING DEPARTMENT co. 235- 2550 o9grFD SEPIE4‘ April 28 , 1980 MEMORANDUM TO: Files FROM: Gene N. Williams, Assistant Planner RE: MEETING NOTES = HANSEN Persons present: Ray Hanson Gordon Ericksen Steve Nielsen Dave Clemens Del Bonds Gene Williams Nielsen - expressed concern that most impacts of Hansen proposal are similar to those of 1st City Equities property to the south (with the exception of impacts to the natural character of the site.) ; so proponents feel they should be treated equally and prepare EIS at the site design level rather than at the rezone stage. Clemens - stated that the City had learned from 1st Cities experi- ence and that we have had difficult time analyzing full range of alternatives at this later stage. We want to have the important issues addressed and questions answered at the earliest stage possible. Ericksen - stated that we feel an EIS is a full public disclosure document and should be completed at earliest decision point. This position is backed 'by the. City Attorney and state law. Further, we anticipate that the Hearing Examiner will not hear a conditional rezone, if it has been determined that an EIS will be required at a later date. Hansen and Nielsen - expressed concern that much investment and "up front" money is risked, if zoning is not virtually guaranteed. Ericksen - reaffirmed our position as stated in most recent letter to applicants. We will be glad to work closely with proponent in developing the EIS to answer the important questions. We will choose a mutually acceptable consultant , who will prepare the EIS for the City. We will be glad to furnish a list of consultants whom we have dealt with in the past . Files April 28, 1980 Page Two Nielsen - questioned how much detail will be required in any examination of alternatives in EIS. Ericksen - stated that we need to see types of uses, a conceptual site plan, amount of coverage; general lot configuration, access pattern, etc. , but specific buildings and actual plat are not necessary for consideration in the EIS. Hansen - requested list of acceptable consultants. GNW: wr OF R4. -v THE CITY OF RENTON 0. MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON,WASH. 98055 uffil BARBARA Y. SHINPOCH, MAYOR la PLANNING DEPARTMENT 9Q 235 - 2550 oTFO SEPTE���P MEMORANDUM March 6 , 1980 TO : Gordon Y. Ericksen , Planning Director FROMp , Roger J . Blaylock , Associate Planner PE : JP.• P4 - The applicant has provided us with additional detailed infor- mation concerning the environmental impacts of the proposed rezone . The rezoning itself would allow a variety of uses ranging from light business types to heavy office facilities . The ultimate use of the property will determine the impacts . Office buildings can be of moderate size and located to lessen the areas of natural vegetation to be removed while large warehouse facilities will demand huge areas . The design impacts are more critical to the ultimate environmental impacts of the site . The rezoning itself could be determined to have a negative impact and the actual physical development required to have an impact statement presented on it . The applicant proposes maintaining 20% of the site in natural areas . The specifics on whether the natural area should be spread throughout the development or whether it should be retained in one block is an important question to be analyzed at the design stage . The intertie with the Earlington Park development to the south is also critical . Earlington Park could be redesigned to create a loop-type system which would then allow a major wetland area to be retained on the western portion of the site . Therefore , it is recommended that the rezone be processed subject to a declaration of non-significance . RJB ;sh tsf, ) ® THE CITY OF RENTON a ac.i MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 9.,55 . CHARLES J. DELAURENTI MAYOR e PLANNING DEPARTMENT o . o9�r Fo ������h 235- 2550 SEP January 7, 1980 Stephen G. Nielsen • S. G. Nielsen Company, Inc. Suite 110 - Raymer Building 606 - 110th Avenue N.E. • Bellevue, Washington 98004 RE: JOHN R. HANSEN REZONE APPLICATION, R-432-79 Dear Mr. Nielsen: Thank you for the opportunity to discuss Mr. Hansen' s project and the concerns expressed in our proposed declaration of sig- nificance dated October 29 , 1979, at our meeting of January 4. Pursuant to our discussion, it is my understanding that you will be responding to the following issues: 1. Impact of the development on the Valley drainage project. 2. Quality and nature of the existing natural environ- ment . • 3. ' Access and traffic flow requirements of the pro- posed development. 4. Discuss site development intensity, limitations (coverage, parking, employment and the like) and architectural approach. As discussed, if the information presented is sufficient , the Planning Director will .consider rescinding the proposed declara- tion of significance for the rezone. If the information is suf- ficiently detailed and conclusive, consideration will be given to a declaration of non-significance for the full development. As I noted, an environmental impact statement will. be required unless the information submitted is persuasive. Stephen G. Nielsen January 7, 1980 Page Two Should you 'have any questions , please feel free to contact me . Very truly yours, Gordo Y. Ericksen Plan ling Dire r (//1 • D(a: //11,g ,eaceig id R. Clemens Senior Planner DRC:wr cc: Planning Staff John Hansen pF R4, h 7. o THE CITY OF RENTON MUNICIPAL BUILDIPdG 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTOW,WASH. 98055 CHARLES J. DELAURENTI MAYOR 0 PLANNING DEPARTMENT 0,0 co 235- 2550 0,9gre0 SEPletst December 12 , 1979 TO : Files FROM: Gene Williams RE : FIELD OBSERVATION - BLACK RIVER RIPARIAN FOREST December 12 , 1979 Jerry Lind and I made a preliminary field check this morning of the property known as the "Black River Riparian Forest" located immediately south of the Milwaukee Road switching yard and north of the Earlington Golf Course. The total woods area is approxi - mately 85 acres and is for the most part a climax riparian wood- land . The dominant tree types are black cottonwood , alder , Oregon ash and willow. A heavy understory of shrubs and vines is also pre- sent . The most impressive vegetation of the woodland, by far, is the black cottonwood . Approximately 40 cottonwoods with trunk diameters of four feet or larger were observed. The largest trees were about six feet in, diameter and more than 18 feet in circum- ference. These larger trees were very impressive , almost awesome. They occurred singly or in clusters of two to three scattered about every 100 feet or so . All of these large trees were in good health , with no obvious signs of damage. Numerous younger cottonwoods - from seedlings to two foot diameter trees - and smaller alders formed a dense woodland canopy around the larger trees . The age and size distribution of the vegetation indicated that the woodland was in a healthy state and showed no signs of . stress . Numerous line-of-sight surveying transects had been cleared through the understory vegetation recently, however. The forest floor was heavy with litter and in many places was quite damp and , although standing water did not occur within the wooded area , the water table was quite near the surface . The woodland floor was relatively flat with a few topographic changes indicating old river meander scars . A couple of areas totalling about an acre were extremely flat supporting small trees ,, with no undergrowth except grasses . These suggested places of former ponding that have retained different soil characteris- tics . Along the south edge of the woodland bordering the Black River channel and the golf course were dense thickets of black- berry vines. Also the southeastern edge of the woodland Files December 12 , 1979 Page Two consisted almost entirely of alder , indicating this area had been cleared some years in the past. The northern one-third of the woodland is separated from the rest of the woodland by an abandoned railroad right-of-way which now contains railway communication lines . Much of the abandoned route is marshy and grassy , although several stretches of open water occur. The largest of these is located near the eastern edge of the woodland and is about one-half acre in size. We observed forty to fifty waterfowl and a great blue heron on this pond . Most of the woodland north of the abandoned rail route is dominated by large cottonwoods and alders - a continuation of the. riparian forest separated only by a 40 foot strip of marsh . However , a large portion of the north woodland , lying about in the center , is actually a willow swamp. Waterfowl were also observed here. The entire north edge of the Black River woodland is being affected by fill activity along the Milwaukee Road rail yard . Noise from this activity - trucks and heavy machinery •- ;was quite high. The attached map shows generalized locations of the largest cotton- wood trees , as well as the relative locations of the other vegetative and habitat elements . Photographic slides were taken of significant parts of the woodland . From our preliminary observations, the value of the Black River wood- land appears significant. A riparian woodland of this size and integrity is unique in Renton . The number of large cottonwoods is also impressive. As natural habitat for wildlife, the open water , marshes and swamps appear to be most valuable , although small mammals and birds surely utilize the wooded areas for cover and shelter. The value of the Black River woodland as natural habitat may depend on its size and integrity. The Earlington Golf Course and Black River to the south are also of wildlife value and do not impact the woodland. However , to the north the rail tracks present occasional impacts from human activity. And the current fill operations extend into the edge of the woodland so that the habitat itself is being directly affected . Besides the value as natural habitat and open space, the woodland did appear to have potential recreational value . Topography is nearly flat and trails for passive recreation could be provided among the large trees . Recreational use of the woodland could relate directly to whatever recreational opportunities are incorpor- ated into the East Side Watershed Project . The impacts on the wood- land of recreational use are unknown , however. GW :wr Attachment . . \ • . , -F-7-7-777 ;; r .---- ,...''' ''. .. ' -,. '• '' * •• Te 1 °IA- : ' '-' ''-' • '4. 'A'''';'..7411. " 'A. *•••••teVii,,40° ..-...;14 ..••.if• '7? ' .• ' .' r. - % ' •- .4' :, .IA • . .. ., -,,,,,,,.K..•••,.,...;•!4!".1tA,:t:',,,r .1 t.., ..A,., ., 01 ., Ar'.'''' ,, 0,. . ' .. :•i 4 fv,••••••- . .;' '‘,.•4•-•ef• ,,•••:!,•.;. ,/ ,..••• , • • ', - ' ;,i',.. ,.. -... .':: .;,„"-,- -n:#414 "7,i 6 r •\ •••` 7 ti. tiira.41",,.r••.1,' .1, • ...•• r f'.4..-11-:.1 . ... ItA7,,-i; • . ..., .. ,,. .,.„..,- !.. 17 ' . . AEISk ''''‘ ‘„.,.' . ' ' , . . 'r . • 71 ...• ,,,,,..A/ • '.0.,,,h,".. ‘,. 0 .• .. •-•.:,.' .....?ri..i...0 444..i, . ,,,,,f • ''. Iv"- ' . • - ''• •• '.'' . '', -. •• \ ::. ,,s.."--"-, --.. 11" , i ' •..... •4 • • A. ..., •,' -, •• ••, ;):.',..,••'''', • ..', . . .•, , ,•,'; . ,11' .6 "' , `.. . .% ....,.. ,,,,.... .... . , 4 • -,.. ••• •• N'e .. A.... i r' •.', , \ '.,'•......t!'''' • t••t, •• 414•',- . /s' . •r '- ' • • -,'. .. . ':'' •• ' - ••r-. •,• '' • •:!..• •- , — . , , ...., .i A . • . ' ;- ' .4; .';'••' 'lit;•, y 1,, isii„,,,f04"-.• .,,,.. ..,. . ., , , • .• , r , . 'S ,le1401.049 r-err\'`,:?.'-',..18-.4, ,,,,,,,...... •• • . .,,. ., , -,.. . ., .. '..•',•:.., ,'4.'.?,. .: v ,,-.•.' . .,:•7) ' •.s.i.,!.-!-''-,,,e':3. )" ,. .':;.:.‘..,1',... .,47*.e'''''' ',. ' • . , .... . .• . . . ;,..,.,,,... '•., .,..•,, .-, . ,•.•;: :, i, • \ •z.. . - ., •. • , • - • ,.. ••••••••.,.,..0.4.1.k4' 'i' .'4.,r„:L. • y ,-. .7. .' , .,;',..,...•.'' •4•"' •.' -''''.. r4.,."'•''' , , . „ , . . , ... • -9 - it, .,., ,$, .. •„ , - .2 ..-4.2; ,,e...r, .' ,.s., 1., ' • • -c-•,, ; - 2 •• .• ••i'''*',•••;' ..,;,;'''',.12',.. r.,.„,14 -;,..,.. ,:i.,,,.• i ,. ..,iri, .,*..`it. ••• 't 21',•'''1 . • "•• • '"''•;2 -i'74'c . "'•'•'' • • • :2, . • - • • •• • • 0 ;4- '.; '; '• '•*'' ' \i:c.,',-...,,,, • . . . . ',',..4;'',"'", ''Clti„ ..,-c6r`.;; ' ' -,' •"'" -•' ' 2' ' '-s.-4.,'';*b• .,414 ::';el',',41,0T.r.,.'7,-*;''T .;7".• ;,',. •• 2,2-'2.:".' 1,21.41>is .A4c,,..:,•• 1,'"'•,;..'••• , .,I,;(;,t,..T. .,. lit ,, ..• .• .. • - ,,,,,,,',.,,,,,,,.. • --, • •-, • •••,'',..,.-.•, ''A- ''.;..' .-4:' : - -..- '• '--, •-- -.75k.,,,,,.. ,!:-..A, ''',1 0,. ,:„ ' ' ' .' t‘..,f, :1,4,s ,,,;, •N6: , , . '...?',. ,:,iir'en*:".':. :: '2,'''' '' '''-',' . '.:''':. r". ''' '' '.', , :4'l'ii :':,:i ' ''' ''''.1t.....* :',1.4' ' , ''. ..':;.L'r,'Ll''. \4. ,,.,, ,.. •.,,.. .V.,,",..,,,,,,, '.- ,,,.;`.-.. ':, ' .,i 1 ':'-A`"'", . , , , ',-;.')!I-,... -,..,-.• .„ 17: '4'..1i4 : l..'. ..re,,.':;•I'V **N. - :— •:.`;9:::::: 41',4`.,','!,1 ..';. -• ',,''t,' L'''.4•4''''''.''' ' ''' : ''"-?,'- :'' `,,fk ••'';'. , - 4' ::'.--', '- 4.‘,-.1•* ,•,-.:i4,...,,- - '.•‘•,,,,-,5 . . :.--...•.!•. .4,s,,,,,,, -.-0,•--,,,•. .4 i r.r‘." ..-g.4ey..,,,:$.„14;14,:c., •,s,-' .N,.., ..; . ...,--i i.;t:."...-1,.., 2,.!,;,,,' ,;:;:;;;;'(,'.'.'..1,:l.:'-.i--...„.. . .,;.:.'_,:,,'i . kl!. .* , •,,•... . :x.or 4.,..,:.,'i‘z1,..i.'-.1‘,"- • . .i.) .',ti.).;4'.. . .',..',tiOti.tr'-'"Y \\ . '' ' .' 'N''''••':'''N'''','••'''r",•'•'''' '''''''•1' '''''';'•4•'' '''t '''' •-• ' ' -*'-' • •',22' '''" : •-•'''''k,2.2.,' s; ''(, V *.''.,' •'; •, ''',f,,•:L';',' ; ,2.,•Atrii.2:&.••:',',• \ \-* • :• •.$'4,'-. $r, •.*,'.•. ,,t , •,•.%,•.•( :ir•••t i',,,:'. ..,. • i• • •?1.f, . _.,--, .1,V' .. 11,. ."4.,:•,r r v. l• ' ilqks •','', ';4'.i.:434;,.. • - , ,i,,,,;r:..,,,,,,F .4 ,,„ .'.• ."'.•• ''',ikte,,,t,'4,'''.",,1 4r‘i,'":1-'..,4,,:,4, .', .,..,,,f.,4,.' ,,'.'to, • ,.4‘.. , -*,,...,.). t. ,,, , . . t ..,4 . ...•.*::=.7 ..- .1•••,,,,t,l'i'•-' . \:c.!,14.,,,:t,?Al.,..;-...,, ;.,:•,,,:t*:‘,,,,,;,,,,..,,...,,,'„:,, ,,,••,,-• • ,' ,‘,, , i. , !'-'''',11 ';.".,,,,, :.'', ''' • , 6 "V6. .''. ' . •'•.•Vit"'' ' 4• - '•''''' . • . ' ".•'k ' ' '4."" ..... ''' ' 4'‘'714.','' ' '54‘,,,14,'1 ,C'''''; • '' il,,i'A‘:10.i'.•r'tf,''f?'4.I.:tA4',"'''''''149''',,.4:1,"i. .,' 1 .'.. .',V'. '' 11! '', '''.:-.4,. ' r, •1...,.... .."... .. , , .4.••,. . .A',••,:p..;,., ,•:•,i•'•.,t,:c,,,',y1r(6:,44,,,,,,,..;.,,,,1:!;'...,.. . .',' .•y! — •,,k -•-'4'*''..), * ...„,Ar" ''',k.': •:.t -,4,..".,*..:' '‘''.r.11;41,t 4. ,,,, .,' ,"4,..:0',., .. '''\ ,.,',•. ',A f.'', `f i', e' '440 ,ali",`:';Li'44V ,3 4,,,ri.'JV•" .'\.; '.1;4 1:'? .i,,t .'''T .. L '.',"40?'W..,. ',.."ICL. ,;,..., '' ,tk '•,' 4. , ,,y;,!' :„.4, • , .,.1,',•i/N1,-•,,..„‘,, ,n.,41,,,•0-,s,-r:y.4„,„vr';' -',2'.,i.-2',s-,,,:,,,, c., ,•,2, . '.2- ,,',, ' • . f'' i'... •"A„,".•:.4.',.ky'''''. tt•t• '. ','`'',., t:'•••',`...,.t..'.••r','• ''',,..-4''''its'i.'-'it'•..`,',4.. -, \ • - .„1,,44F..k.'''''4,:••, ,r0i,';.....'11-:.„4.`'',,•••','"''...1 ,',',Ax,. ', ..*,, .,.•!-- .' ,,./.''') .'-.,.„.,- • ';• ' .-4-,..,..1.1.,,r, . ,. .--,(s,:ii),,,414. 4„*,.,11,...,,,,,p,..f.,.., , .\ , ...,N vt,,,,.%,.,.,„..•,0,04;,.44::,,i.v;.p.,,..:(—:,. 1,,,., 1, ,;: i,. ..... 1. .,. .,,_, ,,,..., ..„ Z.*, ... ,., r.• ivt,t ,, 1, .r,, ' ;ti,j,1061..,',-'..1,i .,•0.„ .- ''t.,, , ,,,,i.4,,,,':i'N-.4..',,,,,,,..47..:11.:t ,c„,V4,• r v;•• 'ki, ',c1',','1,,,,,,,,.4' 11:.:4, ''1,',• •••(if,,,0 '',!,•1,•,•I I.", .•',,,•••••",,.. • '1 ., , i•,'''1 ,i.2:e•-•,,,,,-. , , ... ,2%..i••,.4f.. ,,,,,, „e„.0.• ;,2;"?„2,;,..c../.•2 „,;?•,`,4,,,,,,,,;,„ 2, ,,is,-4:1'. .V.t.',4,,,,,'.•,,,t'ne ,•:,r Pr-- ',,,1,1„ ,1-r•,‘'. .....,\\0'). '!;;4,-;c1,,c4.1 2'.',iir',Alit,WAric,!••-„,ks'`,,i,i,,,4,,,.1''..'''''2,.';'•,,. ,' '2•.t4 Is,' `.` - 4 i,.,01:4,4,-,;,.At-'1, ,.,..4, .,..,,•;..,:•3: 1. 11%th' ''•0,;,•••'•Y '. •!••••ii•' •' .••••• 4%;'i.' ,l''-'''' '*9••!..;. 't,'"•••'' • .•.-4,‘"••••*' • \ ' i'5,•:e''''‘','',';•1,:•I'•"'•Ir.''.,''''' .'• .•''4.'••••••'4'1'1 *'•••,•• i ' ''f', ''• ' • ', '„3 4#,% .,.,',..4,;,'' • ',,,''1.•V•:"•,••,•';4.,.:•Let•,•,.4'','i 1 .` • .0'•i,jk••1,•,140i.•'.i..?" ':,c••••'1, .,•',.: ,‘ •••''' .. •'1/4 \ ' .4f•''Itii.ry•r'i.c : •,, ,.'..-.-,•'•••;,,,,b, ..,-.1'•:(‘, ,ii •A 4 ' t' • - .,,. :?,211.? '-r••••'--4 ."',Itc. -‘..470'iki.'`'•-•• ,''''-' S'''''''ts•'c101i.,'•I i.04,w,...-.1.:tit,...?, .....-0(••• • . '••-. .,•'..,T‘ , • , ".4.1,?,,,g••oit,,,4 ',- 1,,,•;•••'!..4.,,/'','•!••••v...1,;'''''"4'• P'''.4.fr!,'%7 ' 4 ...,.7..., •••••::„ .„,„,, ,. ,,-,,,,,,,, ,, ...ii,,,,, ,.., . ,..,..,,,.....„„,,,.,„,„ , ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,‘,--• ,. .,,, , ., ,„„,. , ,,,,,,,,„..,..,.., . . ,,,.:,,•,,,,„,,..,„,,,.,,•„,,, ,,.„.•,.,..,,,,,.:,„„*„. ..:,,,,, .. ),,„ ., . ? ,,,,i, .,,,,,•,-„,,, ,•,...,,, .,•,, ...,,_,, ,..,,, .,..7„,,..- ''',„ :,i.:,,,:,;(1/4.: A.'' ,:414tifr.A.'. , .,.,:- .i,,, 1,.-:.,:.,,As. \*t 'cileTA0',,-,,,;",,3•"•:'•-•',4i-,"%dc•' .'44'..'?,•. "*----7.,''' • . 4:1. ke ok ...:**. ',:,,,... ,'.--i,%r.'-lel,,4'-'7:-..r":1'•'i4'i,i44.--w, • '"P•'•:,21';- ':-•i",;,'. ts, i'•'is:,..ilt.2;,`,,, 1 .',1,,,,i'• •,, 4-4-,, '.'', ', ,..104'*'''A., ,:''.'A.';',k A. ,.4,Ii.'4:41''f;i....''0,' - ''.,;i'^' •• .': i ''' ''4c!''''''•':• 4.-•''''••*.14,`),.*:' ,,,,'s ' ''•:•''''•'. .1tAPA.4.40';'rttirii".'ik,i';1*.k.„, ,, ..',..:',;,,,'; • •",.;, ''....,..--..,.,V.N.:44 •.4. 4N.1.;.!,',A,i, • \'ft"V:‘,:,#1,4,t.-!,,,,, ,:40'.,,,'1.'"'. ::.'.5.:1,. .t1.74.. , .! ,'4- , , / ,:,i ,' 01.:‘,.ir---,:---s...7..''4..,.!:;.. •;44.!14,:ti',,, tA*-7,i,L ,..I.,.. ...„_,F).: :;.• ')"..?:',.'It-''' '-•• ;.,C-tir . 1,:•ti.).N,,,,,-,,-,• , , , ,,,,r4., „:4,,r4'22'c,;g:',444.1:4i,'•,- . ;,,'':'•4."'\ • '• •''',""s •..:• '.;,",+„ 4•; .',i''-' ;kai,:','44,tx,i2',,,,,,..4r,;(2,:g•-$.'4,2. ' .,,,,';','Ci'/AN'Al ''''is'f ''k••1,)- '• 1.,•,rip'./' t,..„," 2,2;"•,',$;....F, .-. .'" eitt:;,*1 !i4;,:;,:i'. .. ..1;74'..••,•!*„,...4.,:'..'....,•,...4.,,:,..i,3 4 -'''•',/,'.:, •,•1.4._..r4-' tc.,,,, ':"Ait."-,,,;,;.?,-e. 4' .p4.., •.....:...,',.:.",.4:.,s3 ,.4..„..•;,..‘„,..,,kA •,,A.,.,..4.„:.•,,:,,:-,..:.-:.), - A'-"".1,'' .!, .*:45,i, • \ ..` 1.-cv.',,..n,i.,04,,,,s;' ir,:i.t.:040 •.‘ ,\‘.''''''t'•1' . ' .' p % ..:7:, ,''.itt ,n,' 7°. 'N•ile-li•:,.,-4:g,•,:zi:, .....,:,11,,,l',;14,10±,iq 1;t•;.4.1A.4,40,t,','.4;,!, f','•40, V.`tiii,•....,...k-,,• 10. IA,'.. ..*:),.,,.._-," .., .' A:.'''f.R4t. :',.14,i'l,,,,'t.,.,,t.:,,;..-Arl,,,:•:.,,,'..r.\..4:,,;* : , .. 3g-Ng:'7" . 7.:=','•!.41''' ''';'4.'•'9!'!..' `;'-', '',','•-•-',-.'.*t.g.1--ii;:', 04. tit'.;.;' 4,,..il-,t:,!:.-:-'- ..'.e,t,r•-•'''4"k,. 1 ''.'",;.-.1;*.t',:• '-.''‘ -\.' It.,',,VT„. ..11114,.-, .._„_,-'•,'44('',;,^0 l'a:':'• 1 kiii ..f, .,.-!•;,•:•• %1,L14 -..,r•.41.,..-,..it');,:.;:t.-!'•.: i.'.,,.‘,,,t.:;.:4-tr.,A; I'V,4- ' ''.:8,.p..'.'-',.' lm,:y.: L,g...!irt4,3kpi •,,....t..e.54..1.1.;:i.,'s,;.,•\v '••".:14•",(i4 •*''fr'''•:.'.,417,',',V,V,*•• ''-'• :1:.; •! ' • ,#..,,'. :".iik- -,,,,!-1,11.t 1.- ,.....,..:.--....71,' ', ''.;;*:;'•:1,:;i. , ';'.. '' :..i'7• . l''','',..' ',..'4''‘,;. • ..'' I'Ve•f-,. • ,., .v''. '1', '.',' i'''-,•c.".''''.';',.:,:.4411-,..4';',..., :-.--:,,-,.. . ' '1''-''' ..„. .'',•1.:.1,.'V, '.i..1.4 .',.,,`'.:. , .:,, I.A IV• ' 'I'," :t' • -,itt i . '' •re .,',.'..".' r...,) ,...,!„t.7 4.,..;,,..1„,,,.,,.:., ,,,,!.. ..z ••,....,ta 4 4,••:,'i 0 r0'.',,.,.t.' '..!,• '' 1,,w,,•''3„., q,..,'',,J,4.'71 .... 'Aii ,'4: ''j.. • \ k'''1 Ay,' ,I,,,,,: . !..k• VI... i l':37:!„!,,,,,,,-.,,,W):lg.... ',ye -..tr• '2.,2 •,' .•-',..c!, *;•.1,-,,p,,,,,••,:,; ,..1'4,i'. 7.!., ..11ari'ff,irl't-0.-...,•,•;,.• ,,:• 74.'s,,s.;"-tP•, ...,1••''''' •-.4$ 1,-''.,••!,;', .. '. - • •t •'.:t.t\''. ,t. 'ri'l".:C.1.4.C.' -,,,''''''; Tcli4't•-1.",,,,,, tikste ..s... ‘s4 ',.2,';',.21-1'lit% ..• ".,'pk. ,.!;;.',1,11•04t,_,.._, !..;•,,!'"4",.,.•.',:'.•'•'' ,;' ••';•4•-•`;;;•'.1.1,•`1,.•4 r • it..'c' I lit',.It Ait._, ''.I-. •-.*'1, 4,', ••...,,e'c':. :'. 4 '-..•,.':'pt' '4,'''f''.', .0 ' .„4,,,. ..,-Ii.•,•-.ti:t, .---''',AN, ...'',::•i 'llpi-','''•.`,"..'.'-.'! A: ' '`i- --‘•3'14411' . .,,;,,' -.•; .. • k.,!''itp,- 7,4;.',: Ni. ' - 4, -- ' ---- ' - ''-'•4 •• ' ..' •' ..4? - • .."1".' i,. „.',-. ''',..4'"i' ' •.1 F,-....-.: ..:..-,,,;..:1..:.,,r, . •:.: - ,,. ',4,,..q..,... ...,44.y., 't,?.., .. ,,.., .5.- ,,,.....1) ..1.11 .:.....''.4:.:.1.1•41:':,,1:,'0„,'41?:,.:::,..•Pli?..w.'1•11•:',..-',-,•1:-,.4•'‘'.. ,.'.;i:,.., • .1:/.44; i ..,, ,y, •„0. ,, ,,,,p $..•.•,..;•-• . . ,'.'..4,e , .... ••',•is . l• • ' ,•;::,*.-:.,ili. '' .' *Et/4. ,.:-,.A1,:s•'.,'- ••..i..i!', '..', ,'-i.,4?„-,•:,44, !.,,l,z; ,.!: ....0.' . .. '• ,•4F-.' •.0.4:,.,,,!;.•, ),-,,,,„',.tit41.4!- ',V-:••::..,!,,•:,4',-:..Z,‘' :.'' :;,,1: ' ',,,'; ,:-.,....',..0i'4": '".4.':',:V.'"#6 s't :.'',- ...,..1 jt", '44t;,,, ,. 1 .t Vri.',Vot.:1,44..,,i44T:,;,, ,:f1r,f' •..,'' ,'• ': '.0";'' -.4.. ,,,,1,,, n„-1',',!'.'''".:!'.;??,,e1"4..,,,' Ci t..,i',',';,4',>•-•',.s.',:'•-'",'-' . '.:-'',',..'.),,,i?.'8, .4.3,,t, ,-,..' IA. .•••'2Vq.• ',1",.". .2.,', ;'At,i. -',' '0'•.'.i'2,P..,•,'.1''''rt : 4';,..?, '4', 4.-,74.4.;), -.,,-,',„ ‘.4 .;., nil' •-•":' ,,,'''• ; ... 7 - ,,,'i,*.T., auk•,,:14;r.-', ..!;.• ..'. \ ,....,..,..•., ,,,i.„1.,,t •,,,,c,-.4z.z. '', •Pn‘.' ••44i',4,-.i.•in. ' 1• %'AA''',;;,,.,..', ,:,.,,,, '.14..i'„.,,1 , ....'•'";C:,','4:,',`',, ', (.74,,', - ' ' 6'.. . '- ''' *.*,Is!' ',"'''I'i, g w, .;•;0-lot.:.* .,.. : • -- ,.-k!hr...,.••i."'-,-,•: ••'-v.,,-e. '.' '''''' ' 't ... ) ''r t* '4 .01•10.. ."'''‘Nlia,i.'',.it..'' .1,.%'?;11,,' 1,''.' „' . . , ',""S. .41;40.?.'..i,,,.,cy..L' ....",'',: -''' :4,:',.. i„4..". .... ' ),'.'.,;i: %.• ,A.iet„'j' . .,4,t l'`,',tf j):•#''.'2,.,'.',4' '',' 1. ','Y' 4,, er. ' .••.:',•,,,,,,,•,. 1 i.o.,•,•is,••-4j,..,44.,,..',..,'.•.r . ,, 3,44,,...N..•• ,..,,,,,,A .. ....J. , •.,, •, ,,,r, :,..h...:,:, 10-r, , •• e••. ,440ST '''Z' •'' "t i.' ' 4. '4' • '.`,44- 4i)i ,14.‘, ,.•.1,- ,,..! ,...... v.,,,,.;., ' ,.., ti i r i'• ' , 0 i ''••2 , yr,,,,,..A . .,. ,.., ,'.#1 •4 ', ''. , 'C'* '''''0 .,1".4."! ''''''‘•' )11°I 1 '' -4', ,-,1'41,f.' tut tyl '41P4 '-' '''' ,,,„„,.,.,,,...,,,...•44P. .•.•-._ ,,,, . . ••.:=.,4,,,fk.'r.4,,,,,i--, . .„ . ,. .,. .- . ,•.. , p,..4„,,,,,,,,,sw.4&:r.4 ,,.. .1., •ktiN.,---„„.,..A. .,, ,'•„ , . , - .4! :.'• ''... i'r` ,1" ,,, ..'.I, :.-i 0 ii ,,' ,'. "V „ ,,,,, ' ":".'L'01.•''''''''4` • ••• V',I6•"Y•''''•'•'' -• • !•`' '' ., IP'''"1.''-'ilit'•`e'''' t., ,,,,g,‘,,.:• ti...,`i,.,..,,,;; .1,• .y.44,;,,,,lk itts,tiht".,, ,,,,,,,••• 7, 'Altt„sionlettxr;:, .;. .,,r,,,,,.., '1,., .;' lei lt,,,,,:%14,,, ,.,,), -,4s.„' ji, ,.',Y,N.,li.';:,412,1?..! .....1_1 N,•..,t.;/,,,1,,,,),,,,,,",,,,;votiv-,,o,!.•, .,4,,, ,,,,,,,‘ -;,.,:: .t, ••t: 7,44 2, .., .4, 1 ',7.,,,,,'• 2,,0.: •,,,/,,. •..},c.2,:i.‘,00,;;;;..,f;.,-.$,,,,• • • • ,,t.-', •'',. '' . 040 .,J'-1,: 4,7,4*;•'t-.T ..,,,‘.jv•••.•-,-,„„a„„ .' ,,-,4,'- ;; 2...',,•,4 '''''.. •:•.,,'t'h- 1,ty ., ,,,, ,i1,,,,' -.t,-. .;,, ,, i .1., ,p,.• :,4,„;.t.4,1242 ,1,...41s,t,it ,-,;.2,.,•s•,,,c,,,,,,•• ,...,.k, !,!'•;••,•,,, -,'• •-10,, • . .....,..-.i" ' ',P.:.-St•t, •••'"'-, --••:-.7:.-"•••-zt•o•• •'.,,,o't '' ''. •"••7'.'''••• 4.4';-'',•*•''. '•• 4,' .,.'''', , ',,,..;),..'., .. 11 .i'..'''.,,,,,,,"'orq,,i},e1444"1,1".•Y .,..,..'.-A.:: .:..... 1 , ,,,,,,,.-.. ...„ • :..' .,.,..',.....1,,it.,.,47, ms-2. mu -•'01%u-,, 40,4‘.1"• , C.,:,' . :'.77...Pe:-•''-,,, .f.', ,•A'.4‘t, iffii,...,•,‘,,,, , ,, „•„ ,, ,•4'.4';'ei.' ' PI :''', 4c,,,.;‘,.4,.. . tp,ot.;.i.:., ,•,;,,, '4'./..;' ,,::,...A .',17/• ..--. • ilitl,,r1,‘•-:.;1011.'Lt .f,'''.0,...::,i. - 2',,I.,',„,„. * -•,.,y0t.,„,.--;,,:, .-,..4,.. ,,,.,..t:i.....- •,,:, .. •,, ,.:.c.. ,,,'.',,,' .,. .-• Li ',..:,-.).. ,,,,,,„,,,,:,,,,,,r-4o',,:,:'4 t',4,. ,:''''.','ie,( .,''f.'f,t' :‘Ni'..' 'I-1' 'ir,, :'.14,,s1*1140,t.404't.';''. ..i.'":;'.. , ..‘t:V: 4: .....;0..edk.,..'._', ,,..44,v 3 N7'3,,('-',s,,;0 i'll ',': ., . +:*,:*41';''':?,2:.,, 1, 1 il '1'<.,r;.;.:•,';',w•,,•41..,1•;•;-.:,-e,,4 4:;:•'...,.4.4r'...,•':',•n•t•,•,.',• ,•.,,,,,',..., ..ii. , .4.-..r. 111,1f-,,,,,,fk.f.7, 4 ,i'.,,',,,Z".1t,',*`•::,',,,. ' 7. ,,,"',,,.."".,,,,r,„ .•,,,': ',ii,H.1.,*:„,:,:i,./8, .::,;., i,','',4• ,L'n"'" , ''Y 7••-ii.^,z'• , li ,.:.1%.,,,,•if.,,,•,',.i.;•;;:4!ierl,,',.i.,0 -;!•••-.11, •,4•.,•'••k.,14"; ', `.4.,r,'; 4 1 ' . ., .., , .;',..41.1,.., ,...,,i,,,,,,,,,:,%;:,...,.., ,...,,....„-,0,4„,,,,,,,:,,, ,,,,,,., ,,,„--„„•,,,,,.,„,, ., ,,,,,,,,,,••.,, ..„,,,,„...,,, ,,,, ,•,,,...:,,,:,,,,,,,,74„,„0,..„1„,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,„.:. ,.,,A„,, -- • -, •,,,,,ligic.--,,,,...iv-,,,,,,-',•,k, 4•",-"•:. *'' i .1.•.-.:,0;;'',...;":24.••"'•....,,.N. ''''',r.••'.:.•4.,.••.,,.;...•j..• ...'..•,!...0.•,' ,-•• :.`-'.'.,•1...•, i i i•f...:,.•>!,•':ji:4'1,•.,,•••r!..,41,,..,.-..t.:A-,tIlf.korlfk•• ',:-• .,-`,•. to‘,. / '• . - ' ,IPt 'v••1,.4•' ''.;iit•tv''•*1. 114;' / '-5 ' r V:•'''•,:' ,''1''''•'•i:i'''.'•'..r'. .., ,,,':.:':.',.','. ,..:,.'-.,, ''Lir';•r"?.-, ..S i'il ; 1.I ',r,,,,y,'A •..,i''","i";•:,,. .. .., ,.•,.„,•:, ..... .04.5,..v., '41, L,. '• '.,L`L''' ...4 .i6,4.---' ,., ......-,44,,...-,.- / , ..-- ,. .-4,-..,Y..' ... ' •.,.•..4,-:'''...4,t4'."4-i'••1 ; -• •'-,:4 -,r, i ,,.,-._,:l.."0. i .:.,..:,,,i.,v. ,.4,,,:e .,,...,,,,„..,),,,41.,..,,,f,,..,t..1:- ,,•.. ., .:_, , , t..,,,,,f„.,,,,,,,,,...• r • • . ' ; .•-1-.:, ‘.. •.,:.'••' , ,•.,','•,k.,,',.t.i ' ,,. ,, -,,„,,r..,,..••,..",.•., ,., .,,.., .,...,...,,,g., •I.J. •;i,„1,t,...,,,,, •...•.•,,,,,,rpi.,. .,,..4. ',. . 1 i . „ : - „„,...i.....: ••,r.,..; ••,,,rqt,v.,..- /...• . , ..... 'L. .„....,,,;•,....,•. .,.„•,,,,„........ -,7t.„.A je.;•.,,' 2',',,,!,;,,',• 1' •...,A•,•,,,• ,;.•i 1. ,' ;''', ,.,:,'4,..,:',-.'t,i,f.It.1:tic.'.4',,,,t4,,,,:,...1,,,,,",i;,, ,'• i : "'. ' ',-' it,"417', '',k; ', Itr", 4'1;iii* 1 , . ,' .',,•..P,,''' ' ''..''i " ''''. ;"' i'''''';'''. ':' '' '''',' '1''''''',': "•':'•,''n.: ::1' ; I ‘2-I '' ''''',;!1'.4.;',.,...illtif'4!,''SiZJ:1,''''4,4`;,:,$'' ',:`,,,"'•;;,,•:' j,,,,'?),,,',7,1 ,.''', i'71 ,,-.1'..t' ' '", '4'),1,7,4 ' ' ' ' - - '''''''':., ,' ," :' '''','.," ':'', '' ':' ' ' ' .t1;:,.. '1,..:,•'.6'•'s t, 441 . :•:•;,'!'.L .'--C:.1.4,$;:-.;,., :',:t.._ '.3,1iw , A• j.";.#' :,'''. ''''',.4 Ahiq'''''',.,<''.• ' ....0‘., ' ' '. ' ,..„,.. ..„,,_..„,,, ,., ,, ,:: ,::,,,„.., ,:, ,,,,,,,,•,..,,,,,..-.....;!0,... ,Aci '.;:.' 'c';',..(;442'(*tio•'144 't s'' 4.t.'1';'.It:. - ••"" '' •,--ii:'."441.,04#17•;.;',“7:i1,,s:,,,,-• ..vit. , -. •, i 4,,, '1,'t''''`V.V.',.V-':%,."• '''. ',.'.'' -,1'4‘1"' '`,',,,,‘'i.,'',,!`'.'n' `_''',..`,,l',,,,,..,,11.41';'../ /''.; i. ',,.''',.... ,';',4. tifs,4y;,"r,,,,c,,44•22.2,4,,,,io,,,,•,,,4! .r.!,',•,,...7!"I., . , ; ,2. 2., ;;4;A:.. s, ,s.,,,f,),;,, p/ ,,,,,!,,,.,: i,'•; :.:..:1 c I?,,". ,i,t.:, ,4,..., ... i,,,, '4,.,,, ,..-4S---••. -.: :,, .ro: ..44. ii,,t4,';',:.'iliAli•••„,'",'.•'., • •• '.. ,'.ilko,, ..,,,!, ', • '' •,-:-.'-.',,,"'. :' .., ' .,fi;?'..' ',.,'.ill. 1 ‘',•,„-,.:,'''f,::1,:li•'4.4k4:1,44V*'-' rp',ti',41.-\',;,v.^ '1%i,r,::)i-4.*'',.' ' ',' '' .1 .,• 4111','‘'4' 'n:.%,,t" ,: .?,', - ',.?w'T'' ' '' ': :' ' ' ., .A: ,:,,,..11*.lt,. 1st, i'r,:,i,,..,',''./ ' , A.,,v,•,4'•%,1,,ityl,. .1.,,,,,,ig ...4- .,-,•..,..,""r...41$, .y, • '' 'tilt,* ,, i''',•-',;',.•• ' 12.•41."'ie• - ri".‘;' . . , ' "..,'..,At.,,;17'," , t,,, .. - '' .,, • ),',...".*-r'..'',' , ..Urir//, -.,• ii•:•.•.,.4..r.,...;.,• .;,' •".•!..trk Tr,A.i.'104,4,,, ,..•,,lr.,• :;.-...!....:... ,.. * • •.• .4,--,•,ii.kii;',,' - 4 • A'' • ' :•,'l'"•••)'2• :•r i . 4.tut4LANA %,.;i1;::%': —`,::-.• ',..;, i ,e,.,,k.„;;.-.,,...::..:' , . . --,..;,,0-,.' :,,,,,fx..... ,,,..' •A-5''•:,,.'4,;;1,.•. ''. .. i ..,-,--,44ir, r. ,.‘,.., ,„.,e.,•*/ . L_.,.........L.: ,-L.,,.. ,7 -.,--,::..,i,:Ae.........4,r,, ,,, At,,t.p,:-.,LL .,--A :,4r, Arp-t.rt,.:41 :.:, L. i .# : ,,-,2-1,-,c,:y2;,..,41;; lk,'•,,,;,',.,9,A,...4..•0'., 'Y, „4,4,p":, .,• . ,• ,.: '',.._!' ,.,,,,,,,I;". .0:t' I .- •'-' K:„•.,c,1 j'%,'". ::-. F. , f'k i'1%.*.y,''-'.' ..''', ,'. +,`"'' ','•.,t,..- , ',11'..'1',;, '..t', . 7 ...,, ,,i.,..... ,. i , ., ,,.'•,.i... .4-,,k, .4yi,4,....< ft;,,„ ,,,,•,''6,1. ..,'"t• , 7.1,t,i;t1!,•l'f'. .y, ,ii,.$,, ,',',‘ itr,.;,y y 1,,..,11.-,,• - . •• „:-7,:-.* L.--.A.i.,s-.1,-,;! ,. $ . . : . ',.,'...1.?,,'' . • . ,. # 4• 'f' '' .. ke.4.ii,',..:/ A"•,f1.. '',.t:',., ••A.. . •:. ,,..- '-'-, ..V,::,:j•.:, ,.' il,..: ''01,,,;,-.,,i;P'' • . 1 :::n=,,,',. ' . .,,,,,-."1,4 . '4.1'' -- -.,...„..f,-;•-,70.,'N'Li.c.i:,',,," .. ,. ,,,1-..---il,.,,v ',_L.) ..,.,.:e;',„;:., d,.„...jt,,,,,,ki,0 . '„',,,,,), -.&41r,.1, ',.7:., , ,zr,:.0,,,,,,•: ,, - b.,i ) " ' 4,-...i.:i.,,,,-4,::. '-'• -s-,r - , ., . ... . ..14 :.'It, ., :' .• ,,,,,,. ...- .:;.,,, .,. .' : ..,:.:, '43-- .1'.41Pt•I'••'• 41t4 ' it, .., 4,• 'S.•,1 , 4- ' ..44.,'>•;',.• •-, • . •-luzi.*., 1 ,,,,t -1,•,••0,W,•• Po. ,t, • 0, •• ,I,It4,,A•.,.. ...•• ,••,N4'.,,ti:', %-.r.,14 ••• :,41 ' '4.1-• ,• - •km.,,,...-, Jo•ii• - . 44^Ii, -; A • - -,u,L-''• •'• ,tf•-, ::24•''''''''-' ''l 7''' j'!!.-t 7' ' 14*'''''''''''?`"'' . -:14e'''':)i''''!'''Plli-• 4:441i, ,A,;e *r.' ';7•''4;.''1,:' ', '' . ..4 4,4 lc . ' ' r'. ''''''.,i44,'•r,,r:41' :z4,' ,'' ''.1.0.,'''7, ".•.f',.":,(010''k''.., ;',.' "''V'#**'' it., Vt'ff'44' 4A4•,tAl-f0,t4' 4 , 4'k'''‘)01,,, AilizT.t... .1.t.,t1/4,Air ow;,,,,,i,:(rt&kv,44:,2„.i.,,,,ip,,,, ,,,, .1, ,,,lilif.,,,,,,., ,, , . i‘t .''- '' 't!' - • 'i• ' '•• '• '.4'' , . ,.'' ,,,‘• ••,,'".r.• .• ' •..•,,O,,.. ... , ,.., " , ,v i.;,, „.„„,,.., .,,,.p. ,. . '-,,: „ ,,,•• ,.._ 0, • . . . ,..,., . . ?„ :_,.. . _,...:, .. .,... „:„... , 1. ''''k!'4'1,/."; t.,,i " i,'=; ' ,•4 wir 114.'411' ‘.',V./ . . .1 t. '.-,'"q r.,. -i'.'.11;. '!,k,..'i.. _:It A' . 1:Ai..'.41, 1ii, ::-1*t,9,f"ei:Ali.:';'!' 1'.'''''''''''' ki":'' .1 .1• 4.,,,,,' , jr • I - ,-.,..'4. . 1,:•-'. ..',4,-lityi. ..,;.-.,.1, ., +i2,,,N.11%•,,,t.-y•,. 1 .;K. -, ' ;,,. 'Pk: t'..,.. ,' r'l• ' ..'„''', • .4 •.•1441 , , . ..A .0. , q,4,-,,•,. 1 4, ..,. A • • 'r'I• " ' '.,,,'4 . • ..,;:d 171E', -.• _2...1 L., ...,?:,.. It ii,r,' • l'-t't'ith,''1;c.:4,1,„'' f •"., .' ''''`„ti -1' ' Z9 ' 41A,I.-7,‘ ' .. 1, l'''''I'St . .A: :,4-,...?..,' ''‘Ii), 'g,Nt.:' •01',44-r-Ilerid:Oi 7'1'a,',,r% ;'• ''' ,e• 42'Zs, ' 44.:t.',',. .:,:, '',.',,'l..,'",4-. • 4,7 '''t".it...4.., '4i'..',IN''1., `;',`3.4'• ,Pz,..,i'.!.•' • • • •d-4* etawki,"Y,:,!,'7., , .....4,,idr .-, ,.;4.'"'$,11' 3,";t.1"'L?,1.:.f 1"L 11 4),,t)\''N., i r. -... ..2;it, t A4;,,i),••,/,'F''-'7--19/s ...R 13) 04,: 1,' ' z1,1e.oh-,,, $41,....„1 ,..,,,,,,,,:,4' 6., -;,,,,,,,, .• . ;:".',';;1,11,-,k1t.:".:),..,• if4S.."',0,A.‘,.••,,,',;',,•;:4••tti,...,,A.7,,,,,''%,,,'A'.,1.,', ' •,"411:4,..;,,• !..,•,,i - . rr. - .-----1 iNi., ' ' . • ' ' : .i. ' ,,),Y.' il, N .....c.. $.#1 . 4t•-,,.••;e4.•.,.4. 0,,,•.7.0. oleigll.„, i...%,-Is.• -° „ic. ........ • ,, .!.., .. ,. ,...• e . 4.,,,,,... , si , 14:.. ' '' :,,'..... '''.: ... •' # 1 ... ..):..P, (..,'-'.1, Ay'.'"'r Ai, .,, 1. ;.4,7',','' .4_. " 4 '7.7k ''' ; r.' ,'4, r• --‘,., . .• •,1,4.4.i . V. ,R,' ?, •471.01,4'.-:••0;..tr. . • .; ' •'-•". • ; •+'"lei t J*.' g'' '. r '. •-3P4'4. ,4''tf•• ..- ' : 'I.''''''''''101 '''", $ fA;"444. - ' •$t X Yr" • 'IV% I ' ..'.,., ' '"‘,..,:'.-:. , %•,-- ".','ri' .4;"4: N J. 41.j ..''''f) , •tl';,it A:.4,1* lAsit'4. . ,. ...,..:.„ ., At, -,. . kit, , • • .-•.': . •,.. ' ....,.:,. •!1 'i ; .ht,,,k'x,;., ,Wte!„,,4,!'. 4. AI -, ' ,-; .„ f,,, rnt.,,L ,11.pik • : .., . I t •, ,' . s• ,:. ' '•,,25,•te:i.•‘$•,*;27:::" . •tP.r'kil'4 ,.1;74,41.-.•,k%'',(, t 2 ' l'.'114:11,-"rf•47'til; ....4 ' ..,!..,,:,..;:!,., :,..,:,.., .t•A„','..v., It ..,.1 -„, ''. : -:... . -,4,,..!::;., c:.. ..:,;,•:. ..„_ ,..,,.Y.i..,4i,• ....U:tqkti'il.' .k''''' •.'• ''.M;4: ,:' ''. . *4'''' %. ' . ' '. ' ..:;1041/4 ' ' .144.:"i4' ' Pi1/4,4::. '::.'t,::,N't 1:;•,i %:4'..t•-•4''‘':.L.'1` 4,:i,...... tA.,,,,,,...47i*/ '•••••k•.1..P.''' 43 51 . '.. •'' '.iti ? ,'.'t 0'.r,•!...,t ;; II'," •. ," ' . ':-'''''',If.' •'''''''' ''' '.:kr 1,'141 , 4., 44ilt , A' •,. it . ',•,:.•i •'.•a'.' ••.•$ A liti .", .'' ,44•41--i„,,,/ Aft6 4.- „.• , :, s.,1 - „.,,:.,-..,,,„; ,:• . , f ,,, ,:1/4., 4 :,.: , ,, .. ,f, , ., .,,,,A .,,,. 0,-;N,‘,,•:.,$.1.!,,r,„,1,,,:. ,.,.••• , 4."4, •, . 4:1, ,„,.., '` :Olf*.i %a .. , 'Itts1r) , • • 0Y• 4 '"i'•f me Q.V. ..".4110. '! ...' 4,11.:. t ,„.,., •,, .., . 4 „,,,,. .. . ., • . 742 ),,,,": tk; ',• •'4,2d,,,,,,.., .,,, ,4., , s :7 • . „•-•--,- TT 4... , 7 i-,• ;:- . .--,:: .- 4 i -,.1. 1. ..t t • . ,...t ' 4••'; • '•*' :',IF* '' 41141.'' - ; ;• s e't. - '. '•., •• sik , ; . Ai„or? •". )411, , . ' • ., . , , • '''':''i' s 4,-;, ......,,, la k - -• X t VP 41, ..1 :. „ . •, . .,,,,k. ,,„ ..... ii ..„ ..,. . i! 1 ..,..,..,„,,, 4.4: .,,. ., ,„_,i,.4., v •. .; ,.14...„, n.,lt ,.li, .1i,,f,;,•, .• „. •.,,.ti 0 IN,Alt . i .N. ftvi '•,...r' ,1‘ .w','*4.• 111,1t,..!.,:il . $4,1tiliXt5t,,..ii,.'"", ;;:',`,:i , AkTitmr1W '...41-;;1'.t '' i.,,,;.-7, ., ,•7. 4.'1? it' i IIP ,At,Iri 73••,..‘i 41 .;: )' 4.,.4t..;r4,j,. J.,..,,,..;;,-,...,,,,,,•,..P ..,A?' tA4,, itAhl.A.'•,..7,41". . t.. •t •••• ' , '4,rtit./,', 4 ,,..-...':•fft•ic;f7).?;:,,,,„-.14; :.,,i-,'‘-' ''.,-i.„, ',, ,a,lik. 1.. ../....),,I. : - .•... ltia '° ,t1hZ 1....i If '1;,w'',.1."..•,,,"1 . ciit. ' ',,,...4,.,„„'.-,.., ,,, ''',, •• ;.., , ',1 ' /k• '. • , .1'•...,. '. it's "''',.'4,-?..1.'1.'11.,•"4 ',,,'.;4.,' At ' ' ".4; : '4'',,'.‘\'',.'.;',7ft'',:''''`..-(•'''' :''''' ' •/t v7S' * 1$ '.''''f; ;' '•''''.. t lattiol.. ji 6,,,: ,,. . ,1`,i,.14„.....ri,z'. V, '','1 I' ,'...t./„‘ 4.%,f4,-‘1 -t-ii..0••„, i --.• 1.7.;•,;, - 47S1 ','• I' '''4'' ' Ii r;.i,,.4.''i..-r'..!,,4 ,,'ji.',,,k .1,,,,'4; , .'t ''?, 'i.., ,. ,4' ',,I0L'‘•,,,i,, i ', ' N,,, , ,:. oftuo .. '.-' Sr-.1i.../14‘44V":‘%,_7%.1.P.'!,, - ,...'1"" 4 • • ;'17.: 1: .7! .f,f '•.4.'.44 tt.,,•....4,-:'lif'"i ?ct`vr-",'...i,i,f , _... 1.i.1, _t7er„, . ,,c., .ak.„,_, -A. .A 50. ! /.._ „Iv- OF R�� / v �� :.. o THE CITY � F g. E TON ,4�,, MUNICIPAL BUILDING 200 MILL AVE. SO. RENTON, WASH. 98055 Z t '"' o o "' CHARLES J. DELAURENTI, MAYOR m PLANNING DEPARTMENT ®9A co- 235- 2550 p P November S, ]979 94 'e SEPS ��ti Mr. John R. Hansen P. 0. Box 808 Bellevue, Washington 98009 RE: PROPOSED DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/REZONE REQUEST File R-432-79 Dear Mr. Hansen: A proposed declaration of significance has been issued by the City of Renton after reviewing the environmental checklist, which was submitted with your rezone application, file number R-432-79. Submission of insufficient data was the primary reason for issuing the proposed declaration of significance. Four principal areas of necessary analysis were listed as points of environ- mental concern, where it appeared insufficient data was available. The reason for issuing a proposed declaration of significance is to give the applicant the opportunity to present supporting data to be considered by the responsible official prior to making the final environmental decision. First, more specific site plans are necessary, showing the building locations and areas of vegetation removal. Access appears to be one of the major devel- opmental problems. An analysis of both the access and traffic situations is critical; however, without a definite site plan the analysis would be impossible. The site apparently has some existing drainage problems. The present extent is unknown, and the impacts of the proposed development are unknown. In addi- tion, the final point of concern is the impact on the wildlife in the area after the removal of an unknown area of vegetation and total habitat modifica- tion. The proposed rezone will not be scheduled for public hearing before the Hearing Examiner until the responsible official has made the final environmental deci- sion. At that point, either an environmental impact statement will be required, or a declaration of non-significance will be issued. Very truly yours, Gordon Y. Ericksen . Planning Director 1°-rACIT- Li 6'CSI Roger J. Blaylock Associate Planner RJB:wr Enclosure PROPOSED/FINAL :CLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCI ON-SIGNIFICANCE R-432-79 i .~` PROPOSED Declaration Application No . � • Environmental Checklist No . ECF-515-79 FINAL Declaration 'Rezone of-a roximatel 40 acres from G to MP for Description of proposal Of-approximately development of an industrial park. Proponent JOHN R. HANSEN, INC. • Location of Proposal Immediately north of Earlington Golf Course/South of Railroad. Lead Agency CITY OF RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT This proposal has been determined to have 0 not ha . e significant adverse impact upon the environment . An EIS is madis not required under RCW 43 . 21C . 030 (2 ) (c) . This de '" sin was e after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency . Reasons for declaration of environmental significance : (1) Access to the property is limited. The preliminary development plans for First City Equities industrial Park to the south does not suggest possible access trom that direction. The only other access is across an unimproved railroad crossing. (Z) Ihe totally natural character of the site implies that any development will substantially impact the existing riparian environment. (3) Ihe subject site is located in the Old Black River Channel . Development of the site could impact regional flood control measures. Those modifications to the regional tlood control program must be thoroughly analyzed. Measures , if any , that could be taken to prevent or mitigate the environmental impacts to such an extent that the lead agency would withdraw its declaration of significance and issue a (proposed/ yea-' ) declaration of non-significance : - (1) Presentation of detailed site plans showing building location and 'ar.eas of vegetation removeal , (2) Access & traffic analysis, (3) Drainage analysis including the impact on the regional flood control • program, and (4) Impact analysis on the removal of the natural vegetation upon wildlife. Responsible Official GORDON Y. ERI_CKSEN • • Title PLANNI DI � fTOR111P Date October 29 , 1979 " r � ���' - © ram,• Si gnatur � R / �# r x!r �� City of Renton i Planning Department V may` a CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST R ' ', 1 197 � CI 12 191, Oc� FOR OFFICE USE ONLY ..... Z r Application No. /� � �' 79 ......... ��- Environmental Checklist No. �L��" %�`� 79 I EqP' PROPOSED, date: FINAL, date: Declaration of Significance Declaration of Significance ® Declaration of Non-Significance fl Declaration of Non-Significance COMMENTS: Introduction The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, Chapter 43.21C, RCW, requires all state and local governmental agencies to consider environmental values both for their own actions and when licensing private proposals . The Act also requires that an EIS be prepared for all major actions significantly affecting the quality of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to help the agencies involved determine whether or not a proposal is such a major action. Please answer the following questions as completely as you can with the information presently available to you. Where explanations of your answers are required, or where you believe an explanation would be helpful to government decision makers , include your explanation in the space provided, or use additional pages if necessary. You should include references to any reports or studies of which you are aware and which are rele- vant to the answers you provide. Complete answers to these questions now will help all agencies involved with your proposal to undertake the required environmental review with- out unnecessary delay. The following questions apply to your total proposal , not just to the, license for which you are currently applying or the proposal for which approval is sought. Your answers should include the impacts which will be caused by your proposal when it is completed, even though completion may not occur until sometime in the future. This will allow all of the agencies which will be involved to complete their environmental review now, with- out duplicating paperwork in the future. NOTE: This is a standard form being used by all state and local agencies in the State of Washington for various types of proposals. Many of the questions may not apply to your proposal . If a question does not apply, just answer it "no" and continue on to the next question. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM I . BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent eforCO#4 Ad ° , *fiefs: •!f 2. Address and phone number of Proponent: 3 z 6 F-- r./v2 rs "97: /2.4. (�D Pa( i® $' Ra&-L,L EVele. !J .4 3. Date Checklist submitted /„ . I 4. Agency requiring Checklist 5. Name of proposal , if applicable: 6. Nature and brief description of the proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of its scope and nature) : •1„:"... e a F;e0 /1-e a. 7.0 ..pia‹ .i/5 r 7/ a ✓e-i Al 5 F42- .d.,uD A4 a.tic CAJ j v s g5 �'A. , gyp Svc -2- 7. Location of proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal , as we' l as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental impacts, including any other information needed to give an accurate understanding of the environ- mental setting of the proposal) : () !U D vE-,c..e0 P .1 I..A ILI j A-P P 2.d X V© .�iC.• D S2Ao_eti -r- !i*E"'s r y za J A 1.-- a")4 s -- )Va 7/1 eDA" C'® �.8s .50 v7-.y ®.� J . ,Q. 8. Estimated date for completion of the proposal : Al D C°. �s c1 G7'iDzd PL 4 'vs 04T .4 'i -i T '/S 7 , UAPT c. 2©Iuicb►-� 9. List of all ermits , licenses o government approvals required for the proposal (federal , state and local--including rezones) : RC'7O!VC : Fier)! ' 6 l D de-,/ 10. Do you have any plans for future additions , expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: • 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: it-,/ 0 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- posal ; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) (1) Earth. Will the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? YES MAYBE NO (b) Disruptions, displacements , compaction or over- covering o.f the soil? x YES MAYBE NO (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief features? yam- MAYBE N0 (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? YES MAYBE NO (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? YES MAYBE (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? • YT MAYBE Explanation: "re,R- 7 AA/f} .5g) .$u2F—I46Ca- 3 1241 A-GG LA) / l,.l., !3 6 C_AID f/2®e_i_e A-$ .Pe2, C !TV f 1--04t5 i® .S €' PA .T off" D VCLOPm ON' T -3- • (2) Air. ' Will the proposal result in: (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? X VET CBE N— (b) The creation of objectionable odors? Y V€Y MAYBE WU— (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? YES MAYBE N Explanation: (3) Water. Will the proposal result in: • (a) Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? YES MAYBE NO (b) Changes in absorption rates , drainage patterns , or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? VET— M YBE WU— (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? YES MA—YBr thIc (d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? VET— MAYBE NO (e) Discharge into surface waters , or in any alteration surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? /( YES MAYBE N— (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of • ground waters? VET MAYBE NO (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters , either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? YES MAYBE NO (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? VET MAYBE 0 • (i ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? YES MAYBE N Explanation: • (4) Flora. Will the proposal result in: (a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species •of flora (including trees, shrubs , grass, crops , microflora and aquatic plants)? VET MAYBE A- (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of flora? , M II v (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or �`� 1ALui in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? _irr tram. 1� 191 (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? - "'- ' VETy)� Explanation: a 1 7—�' a ✓aLa prne—iir ! ,uc.. �N ' DES) •PCIS Z /3 L y s d.IA i ✓c= �Row r / foie. SC.Q c`-e iQ UJec v d 4. 4./3-A) 00 se,4 P i Ale; ..l 1Vb y\ ' �r � kt \ ' • - �/ J ` 4 u. F -4- • (5) Fauna. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of fauna (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms , Y insects or microfauna)? /` YES MATTE N0 (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of fauna? YES MAYBE 0 (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, Or result in a barrier to the migration or movement Y of fauna? lE- MAYBE NO (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? YES NO Explanation: • (6) Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? YES MAYBE NO • Explanation: (7) Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? YES MAYBE 0 Explanation: • (8) Land Use. Will the proposal result in the alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? YES RAB NO Explanation: COAIiS1S 74A) T. IJ111 T? i QveRALL LJSe LA* t'J S (9) Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? YET— MAYBE NO (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? A YES MAYBE NO • Explanation: • • • (10) Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including. but not limited to, oil . pesticides , chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? X YES ..MAYBE NO Explanation: (11) Population. Will the proposal alter the location, distri- bution, density.. or growth rate of the human population of an area? YES— HAM Explanation: AK -5- (12) Housing. Will the -proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? YES MAYBE g— Explanation,: (13) Transportation/Circulation. Will' the proposal result in: (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? YES MAYBE NO (b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand f.o,r new parking? YES MAYBE Oti (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? YET— RATTif (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or ✓ movement of people and/or goods? r YET— MBE TT— (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? YES— MAYBE 0 (f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? YES MAYBE Explanation: (14) Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas : (a) Fire protection? YES MAYBE Ni - (b) . Police protection? X YE—f— MAYBEN _ (c) Schools? YES MAYBE 0 (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? X YES MAYBE NO (e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? YES MAYBE NO (f) Other governmental services? YES MAYBE Explanation: (15) Energy. Will the proposal result in: (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? YU- AMT. NO (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? YE- MAYBE Explanation: - ' (16) Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following uti tle4 -- (a) Power or natural gas? j �l (b) Communications systems? aa1e Y x El MIT NO (c) Water? oC1 19V w nS MAYBE No � NG DSQ IP¢� . 0-9".6 ._y • =6- (d) -Sewer or septic tanks? /+ YES MAYBE NO (e) Storm water drainage? x YES MAYBE N8 (f) Solid waste and disposal? s Y YES MAYBE NO, Explanations (17) Human Health. Will the proposal result in the creation of- _ any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? VT MAC N Explanation: (18) Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an, aesthetically offensive X site open to public view? • YES MAYBE NO, Explanation: (19) Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? YET- MAYBE , NO Explanation: • (20) Archeological/Historical . Will the proposal result in an alteration of a significant archeological or historical , site, structure, object or building? y MAYBE Explanation: III. SIGNATURE I,, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above inforrration is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any decla- ration of non-significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should - there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Proponent: 0-4-" 1.- (signed , oil r. 'st (name printed ' City of Renton Planning Department �. 5-76 J _ ' _ "n ei, _ / - _:N Tlll'. UNITED STATES DISTRICT ChUI,T FOR Tli'': NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS • EASTERN DIVISION IN THE MATTER OF ) • . ) In Proceedings for the ' CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE, ST. PAUL ) Reorganization of a • • AND PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, ) Railroad Debtor. ) No. 77 B 8999 ORDER NO. /` Upon consideration of the "Application of the 'Trustee for Authority . to Sell Certain Property in King County, Washington (John R. Hansen, Incorporated, or Nominee) ," doted September 7, 1979, IT IS ORDERED that: (1) the Trustee is authorized to enter into a real estate contract to sell approximately 42 acres of land at Black River , Junction in Renton, King County, Washi.ngton, . to John R. Hansen, Incorporated of Bellevue, Washington, or his nominee, for a negotiated cash consideration of - - M.,- . per acre or a total of approximately e with the • exact area to be determined by certified survey; . (2) the Trustee is authorized to convey, free from liens and • other claims, including state or local tax liens or claims, • title to the. property when the purchaser has satisfactorily completed its obligations under the contract; (3) the rights, claims, liens and interest of the Trustee, the • holders of any Trustee' s certificates, the Debtor, the trustees under applicable mortgages, state and local tax agencies and any other claimants in, upon or against the property authorized to be sold by this order shall be transferred from such property to the net proceeds from the sale; and • (4) the proceeds from this contract and conveyance, net of interest income and real estate brokerage fees and all • ' other expenses incident or related to the sale, shall, until further. order of the Court, be deposited and retained • in a new or existing trust account bearing the designation "Real. Estate Sales" at the Continental Illinois National Bank and Trust Company of Chicago and shall he invested in short— ' term securities of the United States government in accordance with instructions from the Trustee or a person designated by him. - RE/vT 44..... 6A.A _ (/‘-' OCI 15 191' _,... z .- . O. • • , • • In accordance with Rule 8-509(a) of the Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, this Court finds that the foregoing sale is in the best interest of the Debtor' s estate and ultimate reorganiza A zi (A_ ( V1,4 /ct.C. • 6 - THOMS R. MCMILLEN District Judge TO • • DATED: e 1979 • • • • . • irROB copy-ATTEST,,,,, CLERK g. STUART CUNNING1-1.P,m, (C11 \ BY/. 1-)FrAyry CLERK c'T C,CUBT, \- L1, S., • INOIS DISTRICT CO -IL:L1 DATE.1 • • • R N 7.14:C) tw • 151' oc ... 16, <444 4.? • , ... ,,,,,,.. . . .,, , . .. , ......, . 1 ,t .1; , . f.i , / , , 7 i 1 ,e , ; . 4 (111 ,‘,4( . i, ,',.., :' ,,, - , tip14 fri,/, ,. , ,'. I,'':,.. / 0 .,,, ' w , ar xi / • wr4,,. ...."l 1 .,'.4, , . Il ' ‘ , 4O fh ., . il / f , �• 4 „�F • v 1 1 r r!i ,4141 „ . 1 I?' ii , 4 � - i 1 +` • • . rri -.*1 .!,A . , .1.• a . 7iff, - r;:-vv. - ,r ,,,„1,- I ' 1, 1 • f 01 4,.. 'frc : -ji , , j fN r 4'. �• ' X ll x - '' - 44-1 ,,r7 4' - -- ' . i ' -. ,. 4 . ; , ,t, .- , ;.,,,, -,,. . ....„,,,,,, , r, ., i f.,.7.-ii-f--. 4„ . - I .. T. . .. ,‘.- , 45:-.1.----; ...• , . lit ,IA,-, * ' tr fr- ef--,_ .,0,1,--. , .if,' .,_. ..,,,.Ji:::,!..;i 1 ` ..,Iriittle..., r t''. a , , 0, -MP' ,.. i • je•V . --- ; . '. 4 ,,"; • , ,'' Jr?: ,,'/ Li .. ''''' p 'r, r ;, ', ifir• �;/,' 1 1 • 1 .!S; q . !2 4/i. ° . •4 j s,t sI 1_4 i. 14 t./ . . 1 1t� t • r. - t ` r,, ., `. 4r `ti. ‘ k ,. + 1i g ,., o .I V:c s , r. f G�1''1: �y ' '% •." a 'J ‘ Iire �yi .i 1 ' ,r® I{ '� lei ,,, .1I 4� � :Aug::: 1 t� �. .. y •,,, . T tr 1 II �; r r AFFIDAVIT I, c.� , being duly sworn, declare that I am t` owner of th operty involved in this application and that the foreg ing 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. Subscribed and sworn before me this day of Cam' 4% , 19 l/� , Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at &..i0G ' . 74--&----g------ 4//-6., /-,/ /..„,„&j,..„4„, (1.-L___ g (Name of Notary Public) (J(Sinature of Owner) / ��a2/— aC'Cc d . s Vie , Bc5K s=--c-, g- (Address) (Address) City) (State) C 5 B (Telephone) (FOR OFFICE USE ONLY) CERTIFICATION This is to certify that the foregoing application has been inspected by me and has been found to be thorough and complete in ev ' ular and to conform to the rules and regulations of the Renton . n� p rtment governing the filing of such application . �.� aECF��IE� Q� l Date Received , 19 By: 15 1919 Ren413GP� n g Dept . 2-73 • n-tx-ea Page Policy Number 23464 Ownors Policy Number Loan 5. THE LAND REFEREED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT IS SITUATED IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON, AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS : Government Lot 2 in Section 13, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M. , in King County, Washington; and that portion of Government Lots 7 and 3 and the southeast quarter of the southeast quarter of Section 13, and Government Lot 15 in Section 18 , Township 23 North, Range 5 East, W.M. , lying south of the Columbia and Puget Sound Railroad righ of way (now known as BurlingtoYi Northern Railroad) , EXCEPT the south 650 feet thereof. OWED� pF PO, . ACT 15 1919 N/NG DEP EN Poi 1`4191` z 00� W P �`ANNING CITY OF RENTON RF7ONE APPLICATION ® R�/� o FOR OFFICE USE ONLY 4 A�G����) LAND USE HEARING 1� APPLICATION NO. EXAMINER 'S ACTION O 1.9V ()CI ..APPLICATION FEE $ D(�, (7O APPEAL '/�4/ RECEIPT NO . /// 7�(% CIT A�CQ '0 A • FILING DATE OR A• AND TE,NN/Nr pQP '�`- HEARING DATE 019 I- Z APPLICANT TO COMPLETE ITEMS 1 THROUGH 10 : T ` NN►N G o�QP� 1 . Name .740 A-/ • 44A 5 & /LT Pfione frVfF Addre s .3•ZL Q — aiv S P T /e.1)) 4=L[.ay W 4 . - Po Roy 8'c 78007 3. Property petitioned for rezoning is located on between and 4 . Square footage or acreage of property Afliomor 440 A 5 . Legal description of property (if more space is required, attach a separate sheet) /9-7-7-4-C izieA • rra A /MA, � 2� 6 . Existing Zoning Zoning Requested . P1 NOTE TO APPLICANT : The following factors are considered in reclassifying property. Evidence or additional information to substantiate your request may be attached to this sheet. (See Application Procedure Sheet for specific requirements . ) Submit this form in duplicate. 7. Proposed use of site L'DA.-15/ Si 4-4i T LA) i u co,/ 04C/ci5 /'Ltd} LF s 8. List the measures to be taken to reduce impact on the surrounding area. 9 . How soon after the rezone is granted do you intend to develop the site? /1JO c` tie La P M eou r ?L/9 AJS ,4 T 'Th//S T/ n'1 t, Utu7` Two copies of plot plan and affidavit of ownership are required. Planning Dept. 1-77