HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 1CITY OF RENTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT
1UT 111001 W k A
Date: January 13, 2011
To: City Clerk's Office
From: Stacy M Tucker
Subject: Land Use File Closeout
Please complete the following information to facilitate project closeout and indexing by the City
Clerk's Office.
Project Name:
2010 Docket, Group #5
LUA (file) Number:
LUA-10-077, ECF
Cross -References:
AKA's:
2010 Docket #5, Docket 5 SERA 2010
Project Manager:
Kris Sorensen
Acceptance Date:
l
November 12, 2010
Applicant:
City of Renton
Owner:
N/A
Contact:
Kris Sorensen
PID Number:
Various
ERC Decision Date:
November 29, 2010
ERC Appeal Date:
December 17, 2010
Administrative Denial:
s
F Appeal Period Ends:
F Public Hearing Date:
Date Appealed to HEX:
By Whom:
HEX Decision:
Date:
Date Appealed to Council:
By Whom:
Council Decision:
Date:
Mylar Recording Number:
A
f
Project Description: Application requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review for the following
Docket items: D-49 Drive-In/Drive-Through
Retail and Services, D-50 Small Scale Research
Facilities, D-51 Religious Institutions in Non -Residential Zones, D-52 Evaluation of Residential
Development Standards, D-53
Fee -in -Lieu Provision for Parks, D-54 Sign Code Amendments, D-55
r Cedar River Pipeline Zoning.
Location:
Various
Comments:
M
co'Jn'� vM
•ii °� ° C i W c '- c 4 0
v ci v `K� E w p yj n o v E fl.cv
poof�'E 03��
vvF7iv°1cc�EvF.YG EvE
y.��c Eo �E vfl
v� ���-a v c c vv
a• E v �QN y
0 0 a o h.E o U E� E aoi v o f
iQ F E 7 foo c� � naZ
o Q cc L ca c o v F N 7
.v,m v0.F• c a, E v v CrJ- b v, Sc.UA3v, c� tc E E¢ U.0 o
c.� O F 'c F
v" 61 bL
-d5 o c
Aj CL
0- U J o.E C GU
0
aav'A� °F°O� a `"A
F m o 4 o C c
aw 0.y C v .� Z [t] .. L
di°�ca+ 9Ac cn r� "O p�u]ia vra•��c
d E 0 =
�'.3 4Q C7 EU CO
Lr]
CE?^FZz•1.`�A�a Ns N 3 E -eFj O
cE.2E E:
w�o-o CL
v oae.�Eo
°c•' a"s r
p
vS.
op. Ga ad•G�pu.E `o: N ��E'a v c
Z GQ G .� A F O y 0 c} C G O L F C,
e. , �a .-1°or-_NsV-12. .W_°¢dzctW=3 E 0030..
,� o w •� �� o v i a •�
_
C14
G s U
a�
CIO �.
3 a gn4 Eb
wz�.��°
z
000
0
>,,to
U
a
Z U
LOO
R��
1-4
IM4
a
'�
o O
,r
b 0 .,-.
V
CIA
y
❑ p d u
rd's+ +
•
P
-4
U
, E J cs
p
Unn p o
+ ,
o ° a?
z
o
;-4C
aQ
moo`
z�Q���'4-4
�• ° nb
06q
z O'o��
�
m o
al�Zq-r.j.--M
I
�
0..ad
Ob in. U m � N o 2F-
3
H�
- City
r
J ikiLI 11 i"""" i IL!d
OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
POSTED TO NOTIFY INTtREVW PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTGN
PROJECT NAME: 2010 Docket-Grwap 05
PROJECT NUMBER: LUR10-077, E6
LWAMON- Chywfde for all items with the exception of D-56, Cedar River Pipeline 2aning,
which is generaly located along South 154th Street between Oakesdale Ave
SW and Hardy Ave SW.
DESCRIPTION:
1. DAS,. Drive-inJO a- Through Antall ant Services - Mquim drbo-in and driueahmo gh. retail and se—,
uses to b , part of primary use's Iwilding similar to a fast-food resourantwith drive-through wmdow.Thi,
would apply curtent regulations in some sono ee all sones, whew stand alone drive-in and driye-through
uses would be pmhibRed.
2- o 0, Small sole Research 7a 54des -Amend TRhe IV Zoning Use Table to add a laml use m the table that
allows for small scale n>search/eduntian/mitigation/demonatratian project, Add a deRnhlan of
"Research scientific (Small 5calel" to Title N.
3. 0-51: Religious Im[lnstinm In NLar-Resldential Zones - Amend the permit rew type owed on square
footage of buildings part of reGgiws bWib tions m create small, medium, nM large d—W—firms, If any
'p—Il . adlaaent or abating a raldential zone an Administratl a or Hearing Examiner conditional use
renew would be required.
d. 0-52: Evaluation of Residential Development Standards - Amend Title rV to add, remove, arM amend
standards and eondmnm assoamed with the Resdeetlal-1 IR -11. ReslaenOa1-4 (RAI, Residential -B IR -BI,
antl Rlfi&.1al-10 (R-10) wnire deshgriatiors. Amend purpose sdm
oeerrt for R-1 sow to include The
dewty borsus cu—ty allowed for assisted Irving.
S. 0.53: Foe 4,,Lieu Prsu s on For Parts -Amend Titin IV to add rsew pmuisipts that would allow developers
the opportunity to conduct the following in C of pm i r,,g canon space in a development: 11 E rad a
Public Trail Bit hw been id—bfwd in thte Renton Trail, and Bicycle Master Past, or the Parks, Rec cation,
open Space, and Natural III—Alan, or an adopted Community Plan; 2) Expand a Public Part R it has
been iderrbfied in the Parka Recreation, Open Span, and Natural Resources Plan, sur an adopted
Community Plan; 3) Pay a fee -In -lieu for the common open space if an off -she Pubiic park is within one
quarter (1141 mile of the sire proposed for de-iopmen4 safe and easy pe faum L n aooast 'u provided to
such WhEhc park, and the public part aan integral part of the design approach of the deaelap—L The
fee would be based upon the monetary value of The required improvemern, for the mmmnn openspar
plus the monetary -I.. of the land ar required to be phased i.= open apace. Thisfee would be
aliorated for park acqulsidnn and development pmjecb, net part
maimeur,ce.
6. 454: Sign Code Amendments -Amend Tithe IV in ordercn rernsnizethe unique chalkngm of lame Capital
lmprovemem: Projects and their -b of NonConfarming Sig— Spific amend— include the
creation Mspeoal ee�ptinns for the miocallon or nonK f—ing signs, due to irhrtcf-way acquistion,
with amortization reguladom along the Rainier Ave corridor.
7. o-56: r ,lar Rr,er Pipeline Zoning - Amend Zoning Map m tune a portion of the pipeline as Residewial-B
(R-9} and Residential -10 (A-10) thatwas immractly identified as part of the Ealing— ann,aador.
THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE IERCI HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED
ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT A1]VER5E IMPACT ON THE ENVIRON MENT.
Appeals of the enrimnmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on December
17, 2010. Appeals must be Filed in writing together with the required fee with: Rearing Examiner, Gty of
Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, Appeals m the Examiner are govented by edy of
Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-1I0,11. Adapin -I inforntatisn regarding the appeal process may be
obtained from the Renton City ❑erlt's Office; 14251430-651¢
IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINA11014 6 APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL RE SET AND ALL PARTIES
NOTIFIED.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CfTy OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY &ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT )425) 436-720U.
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification_ J
CERTIFICATION
hereby certify that copies of the above
were posted in conspicuous places or nearby the d cribed property on
Date: Z )/0 Signed:
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
1 SS
COUNTY OF KING )
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the
uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Dated: A�-
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Notary(Print): E\ a_ C fL: �-.J
My appointment expires: r7 -71t
CITY OF RENTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the 1st day of December, 2010, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing
ERC Determination documents. This information was sent to:
Name
I Agencies I See Attached I
(Signature of Sender):
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) 55
COUNTY OF KINGWwwwr
)
ALM 00
.i
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes
mentioned in the instrument.
Dated: '�) Cz �_ �.. 1 '3L 14
Av A
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Notary (Print): k- C• "t,
My appointment expires: "` L
Proldo.Naniii'
2010 Docket, Group #5
Pra�ect?.NyM6er'r
LUA10-077, ECF
template - affidavit of service by mailing
AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
Dept. of Ecology *
WDFW - Larry Fisher*
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.
Environmental Review Section
1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201
Attn. Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer
PO Box 47703
Issaquah, WA 98027
39015 — 172nd Avenue SE
Olympia, WA 98504-7703
Auburn, WA 98092
WSDOT Northwest Region *
Duwamish Tribal Office *
Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program
Attn: Ramin Pazooki
4717 W Marginal Way SW
Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert
King Area Dev. Serv., MS -240
Seattle, WA 98106-1514
39015172 nd Avenue SE
PO Box 330310
Auburn, WA 98092-9763
Seattle, WA 98133-9710
US Army Corp. of Engineers *
KC Wastewater Treatment Division *
Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation*
Seattle District Office
Environmental Planning Supervisor
Attn: Gretchen Kaehler
Attn: SEPA Reviewer
Ms. Shirley Marroquin
PO Box 48343
PO Box C-3755
201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050
Olympia, WA 98504-8343
Seattle, WA 98124
Seattle, WA 98104-3855
Boyd Powers *
Depart. of Natural Resources
PO Box 47015
Olympia, WA 98504-7015
KC Dev. & Environmental Serv.
City of Newcastle
City of Kent
Attn: SEPA Section
Attn: Steve Roberge
Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW
Director of Community Development
Acting Community Dev. Director
Renton, WA 98055-1219
13020 Newcastle Way
220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle, WA 98059
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Metro Transit
Puget Sound Energy
City of Tukwila
Senior Environmental Planner
Municipal Liaison Manager
Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
Gary Kriedt
Joe Jainga
6200 Southcenter Blvd.
201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431
PO Sox 90868, MS: XRD-01W
Tukwila, WA 98188
Seattle, WA 98104-3856
Bellevue, WA 98009-0868
Seattle Public Utilities
Real Estate Services
Attn: SEPA Coordinator
700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900
PO Box 34018
Seattle, WA 98124-4018
*Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS', the marked agencies and cities
will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the notice of application.
template - affidavit of service by mailing
City of
000
rf�=
OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION
PROJECT NAME: 2010 Docket - Group #5
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA10-077, ECF
LOCATION: Citywide for all items with the exception of D-56, Cedar River Pipeline Zoning,
which is generally located along South 134th Street between Oakesdale Ave
SW and Hardy Ave SW.
DESCRIPTION:
1. D-49: Drive-In/Drive-Through Retail and Services — Require drive-in and drive-through, retail and service,
uses to be part of primary use's building similar to a fast-food restaurant with drive-through window. This
would apply current regulations in some zones to all zones, where stand alone drive-in and drive-through
uses would be prohibited.
2. D-50: Small Scale Research Facilities— Amend Title IV Zoning Use Table to add a land use to the table that
allows for small scale research/education/mitigation/demonstration projects. Add a definition of
"Research Scientific (Small Scale)" to Title IV.
3. D-51: Religious Institutions in Non -Residential Zones — Amend the permit review type based on square
footage of buildings part of religious institutions to create small, medium, and large classifications. If any
proposal is adjacent or abutting a residential zone an Administrative or Hearing Examiner conditional use
review would be required.
4. D-52: Evaluation of Residential Development Standards — Amend Title IV to add, remove, and amend
standards and conditions associated with the Residential -1 (R-1), Residential -4 (R-4), Residential -8 (R-8),
and Residential -10 (R-10) zoning designations. Amend purpose statement for R-1 zone to include the
density bonus currently allowed for assisted living.
5. D-53: Fee -in -Lieu Provision for Parks — Amend Title IV to add new provisions that would allow developers
the opportunity to conduct the following in lieu of providing common space in a development: 1) Extend a
Public Trail if it has been identified in the Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan, or the Parks, Recreation,
Open Space, and Natural Resources Plan, or an adopted Community Plan; 2) Expand a Public Park if it has
been identified in the Parks Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Plan, or an adopted
Community Plan; 3) Pay a fee -in -lieu for the common open space if an off-site public park is within one
quarter (1/4) mile of the site proposed for development, safe and easy pedestrian access is provided to
such public park, and the public park is an integral part of the design approach of the development. The
fee would be based upon the monetary value of the required improvements for the common open space
plus the monetary value of the land area required to be placed in common open space. This fee would be
allocated for park acquisition and development projects, not park maintenance.
6. D-54: Sign Code Amendments —Amend Title IV in order to recognize the unique challenges of large Capital
Improvement Projects and their creation of Non -Conforming Signs. Specific amendments include the
creation of special exceptions for the relocation of non -conforming signs, due to right-of-way acquisition,
with amortization regulations along the Rainier Ave corridor.
7. D-56: Cedar River Pipeline Zoning — Amend Zoning Map to zone a portion of the pipeline as Residential -8
(R-8) and Residential -10 (R-10) that was incorrectly identified as part of the Earlington annexation.
THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE (ERC) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED
ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on December
17, 2010. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of
Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of
Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be
obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510.
IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE SET AND ALL PARTIES
NOTIFIED.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7200.
DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION
Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification.
Denis Law --- -
Ma or City of
y
December 1, 2010 Department of Community and Economic Development
Alex Pietsch, Administrator
Washington State
Department of Ecology
Environmental Review Section
PO Box 47703
Olympia, WA 98504-7703
Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION
Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following
project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on November 29,
2010:
DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE
PROJECT NAME: 2010 Docket - Group #5
PROJECT NUMBER: LUA10-077, ECF
LOCATION: Citywide for all items with the exception of D-56, Cedar
River Pipeline Zoning, which is generally located along
South 134th Street between Oakesdale Ave SW and
Hardy Ave SW.
DESCRIPTION: 2010 Docket - Group 5, includes the following docket
items: D-49 Drive-In/Drive-Through Retail and Services, D-50 Small Scale
Research Facilities, D-51 Religious Institutions in Non -Residential Zones, D-52
Evaluation of Residential Development Standards, D-53 Fee -in -Lieu Provision
for Parks, D-54 Sign Code Amendments, D-56 Cedar River Pipeline Zoning.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00
p.m. on December 17, 2010. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the
required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,
WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code
Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be
obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510.
Please refer to the enclosed Notice of Environmental Determination for complete
details. If you have questions, please call me at (425) 430-7219.
Benton City Hall 0 1055 South Grady Way 9 Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov
Washington State Department c logy
Page 2 of 2
December 1, 2010.
For the Environmental Review Committee,
Kris Sorensen
Assistant Planner
Enclosure
cc: King County Wastewater Treatment Division Ramin Pazooki, WSDOT, NW Region
Boyd Powers, Department of Natural Resources Larry Fisher, WDFW
Karen Walter, Fisheries, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Duwamish Tribal Office
Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program U5 Army Corp. of Engineers
Gretchen Kaehler, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY City of
d
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT (6 r
ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
APPLICATION NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
PROJECT NAME:
LUA10-077, ECF
City of Renton
2010 Docket - Group #5
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: 2010 Docket - Group 5, includes the following docket items: D-49
Drive-In/Drive-Through Retail and Services, D-50 Small Scale Research Facilities, D-51 Religious
Institutions in Non -Residential Zones, D-52 Evaluation of Residential Development Standards, D-53
Fee -in -Lieu Provision for Parks, D-54 Sign Code Amendments, D-56 Cedar River Pipeline Zoning.
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Citywide for all items with the exception of D-56, Cedar River
Pipeline Zoning, which is generally located along South 134th
Street between Oakesdale Ave SW and Hardy Ave SW.
LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton
Environmental Review Committee
Department of Community & Economic Development
This Determination of Non -Significance is issued under WAC 197-11-340. Because other agencies of
jurisdiction may be involved, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fourteen (14) days.
Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on December
17, 2010. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of
Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton
Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.6. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained
from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510.
PUBLICATION DATE:
DATE OF DECISION:
SIGNATURES:
December 3, 2010
November 29, 2010
G
Gregg Zi man, Administrator Da e
Public W rks Department
Terry Higashiyama, Administrator Date
Community Services Department
1
Mark Peters n, Administrator Date
Fire & Em ency Services
ti L
Alex Pietsch, Acl inistrator ate
Department of Community &
Economic Development
DEPARTMENT OF COMIVITY City of
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE
MEETING AGENDA
TO: Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator
Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator
Mark Peterson, Fire & Emergency Services Administrator
Alex Pietsch, CED Administrator
FROM: Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager
MEETING DATE: Monday, November 29, 2010
TIME: 3:00 p.m.
LOCATION: Sixth Floor Conference Room #620
THE FOLLOWING IS A CONSENT AGENDA
2010 Docket, Group #5 (Sorensen)
LUA10-077, ECF
Location: Citywide for all items with the exception of D-56, Cedar River Pipeline Zoning, which is
generally located along South 134th Street between Oakesdale Ave SW and Hardy Ave SW. Description:
2010 Docket - Group 5, includes the following docket items: D-49 Drive-In/Drive-Through Retail and
Services, D-50 Small Scale Research Facilities, D-51 Religious Institutions in Non -Residential Zones, D-52
Evaluation of Residential Development Standards, D-53 Fee -in -Lieu Provision for Parks, D-54 Sign Code
Amendments, D-56 Cedar River Pipeline Zoning.
cc: D. Law, Mayor
J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer
S. Dale Estey, CED Director 10
W. Flora, Deputy Chief/Fire Marshal
Richard Perteet, Deputy PW Administrator - Transportation
C. Vincent, CED Planning Director
N. Watts, Development Services Director
L. Warren, City Attorney 0
F. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner
D. Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal
J. Medzegian, Council
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNIS -"-:" ,City .::.. ....,,.. � r o
AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT r
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT
ERC MEETING DATE:
November 29, 2010
Project Name:
2010 Docket - Group 5
Owner:
N/A
Applicant:
City of Renton
Contact:
Chip Vincent, Planning Division Director, City of Renton
File Number:
LUA10-077
Project Manager:
Kris Sorensen, Assistant Planner
Project Summary:
2010 Docket - Group 5, includes the following docket items: D-49 Drive-
In/Drive-Through Retail and Services, D-50 Small Scale Research Facilities, D-51
Religious Institutions in Non -Residential Zones, D-52 Evaluation of Residential
Development Standards, D-53 Fee -in -Lieu Provision for Parks, D-54 Sign Code
Amendments, D-56 Cedar River Pipeline Zoning.
Project Location:
Citywide for all items with the exception of D-56, Cedar River Pipeline Zoning,
which is generally located along South 134th Street between Oakesdale Ave SIN
and Hardy Ave SW.
Exist. Bldg. Area SF:
N/A Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint):. N/A
Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): N/A
Site Area:
N/A Total Building Area GSF: N/A
STAFF
Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a
RECOMMENDATION:
Determination of Non -Significance (DNS).
ERC Report LUA 10-077. doc
City of Renton Department of Community nomic Development Env 7ental Review Committee Report
2010 DOCKET - GROUP 5 IUA10-077
Report of November 29, 2010 Page 2 of 3
PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION / BACKGROUND
1. D-49: Drive-In/Drive-Through Retail and Services — Require drive-in and drive-through, retail
and service, uses to be part of primary use's building similar to a fast-food restaurant with
drive-through window. This would apply current regulations in some zones to all zones, where
stand alone drive-in and drive-through uses would be prohibited.
2. D-50: Small Scale Research Facilities — Amend Title IV Zoning Use Table to add a land use to the
table that allows for small scale research/education/mitigation/demonstration projects. Add a
definition of "Research Scientific (Small Scale)" to Title IV.
3. D-51: Religious Institutions in Non -Residential Zones — Amend the permit review type based
on square footage of buildings part of religious institutions to create small, medium, and large
classifications. If any proposal is adjacent or abutting a residential zone an Administrative or
Hearing Examiner conditional use review would be required.
4. D-52: Evaluation of Residential Development Standards — Amend Title IV to add, remove, and
amend standards and conditions associated with the Residential -1 (R-1), Residential -4 (R-4),
Residential -8 (R-8), and Residential -10 (R-10) zoning designations. Amend purpose statement
for R-1 zone to include the density bonus currently allowed for assisted living.
5. D-53: Fee -in -Lieu Provision for Parks — Amend Title IV to add new provisions that would allow
developers the opportunity to conduct the following in lieu of providing common space in a
development: 1) Extend a Public Trail if it has been identified in the Renton Trails and Bicycle
Master Plan, or the Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Plan, or an adopted
Community Plan; 2) Expand a Public Park if it has been identified in the Parks Recreation, Open
Space, and Natural Resources Plan, or an adopted Community Plan; 3) Pay a fee -in -lieu for the
common open space if an off-site public park is within one quarter (1/4) mile of the site
proposed for development, safe and easy pedestrian access is provided to such public park, and
the public park is an integral part of the design approach of the development. The fee would be
based upon the monetary value of the required improvements for the common open space
plus the monetary value of the land area required.to be placed in common open space. This fee
would be allocated for park acquisition and development projects, not park maintenance.
6. D-54: Sign Code Amendments.-- Amend Title IV in order to recognize the unique challenges of
large Capital Improvement Projects and their creation of Non -Conforming Signs. Specific
amendments include the creation of special exceptions for the relocation of non -conforming
signs, due to right-of-way acquisition, with amortization regulations along the Rainier Ave
corridor.
7. D-56: Cedar River Pipeline Zoning — Amend Zoning Map to zone a portion of the pipeline as
Residential -8 (R-8) and Residential -10 (R-10) that was incorrectly identified as part of the
Earlington annexation.
PART TWO: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
In compliance with RCW 43.210.240, the following environmental (SEPA) review addresses only those
project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and
environmental regulations.
ERC Report LUA10-077.doc
City of Renton Department of Community & l anomic Development Envir mental Review Committee Report
2010 DOCKET - GROUP 5 LUA10-077
Report of November 29, 2010 Page 3 of 3
A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation
Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible
Officials:
Issue a DNS with a 14 -day Appeal Period.
B. Mitigation Measures
1. None required for this non -project action.
C. Exhibits
No exhibits for this non -project action.
D. Environmental Impacts
The Proposal was circulated and reviewed by various City Departments and Divisions to determine
whether the applicant has adequately identified and addressed environmental impacts anticipated to
occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal
has no probable impacts.
E. Comments of Reviewing Departments
The proposal has been circulated to City Department and Division Reviewers. Where applicable, their
comments have been incorporated into the text of this report and/or "Advisory Notes to Applicant."
✓ Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official t=ile and may be attached to this
report.
Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be
filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM, December 17, 2010.
Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.8 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner. Appeals must be filed
in writing at the City Clerk's office along with the required fee. Additional information regarding the
appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall - 7th Floor, 1055 S. Grady
Way, Renton WA 98057.
FRC Report LUA10-077.doc
City of R Department of Community & Economic De invent
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:y ��.�' �'
COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 29, 2010
APPLICATION NO: LUA10-077, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2010
APPLICANT: City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Kris Sorensen
PROJECTTITLE: 2010 Docket, Group #5
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA: N/A
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A
LOCATION: Citywide
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY Of PROPOSAL: See attached project narrative for a summary of the proposal.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
Water
Plants
Land/Shoreline Use
Animols
Environmental Health
Energy/
Natural Resources
E. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Housing
Aesthetics
tight/Glare
Recreation
Utilities
Trans ortotion
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we hove expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
or areas where additional inform"%'i'[0 is.needed to properly assess this proposal.
Signature of Dire or or Authorized Representative Date
City of R4 1 Department of Community & Economic DE pment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:{/
COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 29, 2010
APPLICATION NO: LUA10-077, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2010
APPLICANT: City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Kris Sorensen
PROJECT TITLE: 2010 Docket, Group #5
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA: N/A
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A
LOCATION: Citywide
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: See attached project narrative for a summary of the proposal.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
water
Plants
Lond/Shoreline Use
Animals
Environmental Health
Energy/
Natural Resources
Element of the probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Housing
Aesthetics
Light/Glare
Recreation
Utilities
Transportation
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
, *Y, �,� C al Z -, � - /Z -L-) " �, W, - � ,� e, - ?�-).
B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
r
7f7�If
we hove reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.
zu,,C4 G f _l %TbC
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date
r�ChV Of
NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF
NON -SIGNIFICANCE {DNS)
GATE: N ... n her 11. 20in
PROIECET NUMBER/PROACF NAME: LUAI13-077, ECF/105D Cockel-G—P IIS
PROfFCT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: 7010 Ducker - Group S. Location is Gtywide br all items with the
evicepdon nF D-56. Cedar Abler Pipeline Zoning, which Is generally boated alone south Lia* Street between Oak.sdale
Ave SW and Nerdy Ave SW. General Descriptions for each It m amending Title IV Development Regulations and item 0-
56Ledar River Plpeilne Zonlrsg:
1. D-09:9me-In/Drive-Throveh Rela'I and st-- RegWn drlve-in Pod drier-thmugh, retail arta servke
set to be part of p lool,..W. bulking similar to a fast-food resirdurant With dri—throsgh window. This
ouk meoly current regulanom, in some zones to ail tones. where stand alone dr In aM drMe-through
uses would be prohibited.
2. D -5O: Small Scale Research 111011ee - Amend Title fV Zoning Use Table I add a land We to the table that
alkws krsmall scale rosuah7edsknalkNmltyIkMdemonstmtion prokCts. Add a def Alan of "Research
Schim lRc (Small Scalel" 1. Title N.
3. 151: fleileious I,stltu0am In Nan -Re .Antal lanes -Amend the permit fevkw type based on squere
Fool of puddings part of rengiovs InstiWilons to emelt small, medium, and large classif t'mm- If any
ori msal 1. adjacent Or abvttlrtg a residil lrai z0n an Adminislnave ar hall Examiner condltlp,al Use
review would be required.
e. {}52: Evacuation of Aesidtnda1 Development Standards - Amend Title IV to add, remove, and amend
starsdard.and rnnditl,ns associated With the Resldill Ill Readch llal-0 IR41, IR-81,and
RrsAendaVID (R-10] zoning di signallans. Amend purpose statement for 9-1 zone to Include the density
I currently allowed for assisted III -
5. D-53: Fee -In -Lois Provision for Parks -Amend Till. N to add new provbism that would alto- developers
Me oppodunhy to condocl the rollowing in geu of providing common space in a development 1) Extend a
P,blc Trail 4 it has been Identified in the Renton Trails and Ble,yele Master Plan, or the Park; Recreation,
Open Spece, and Natural Resourt•a Plan, or an adopted C --runt y clan; 11 E•pand a Public Park it It has
been Identified., the Parks Recreation, Open Sp.... and Natural Resources Plan, or an adopted Community
Plan; 31 Pay a fee -in -II_ for the common open specs if an off-site public park is within one quarter (1141
mile of the site ompmedfor development, care and easy pedestrlan ac— Is prmided to such public park,
and the public perk is an integral part of the design approach 9f the din elopmal The fee would be based
upon the monetary value of the required improvements for the common open space plus the monetary
value 0 the land area regulred to be placed in common open space. This Fee would be elf—led for park
acgvlsidon and development imitodd, not park maintenance.
6. p-Sa; SIP, [ode Amrntlmencs -Amend Title N In order to recognize the unique challenges of large capital
Imprprrmeni Projects and their creation of Non-Canferming 5109, Sp,d1f, amendments include the
talion of specrio emielLiens far thr, relocation of non -conforming shim, due to tight -.F -way acquisition,
with amortization reguWlons along the Rahler Ave corridor.
1. 035 Cedar RMer Pkellne Z.nmE- Amendzoning Mep to r Ove appdkn of Me pipeline as ResIdrnttal-8JR.
B) and Residentia4lO IRl that was Inc.mectiy id -bits d as pert of the Eadinglon anneaailido
OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICAXR IDNSI: As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has delermined
that slgnNfcanl enrhonmenlal impacts are u,Ilk,Jy to result from the pmposed projecnder
t. Therefore, as permitted u
Lhe RLW 91.i1C.11n, the City of Rennin is using the Opti l DNS process to gNe nodes that a DN5 is likely to be,
wed. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS art Integrated Into a Single comment period. Then
.ri be no comment perlad fpp,wing the Issuance of the ThreshoH Determination of 111on-51gnlf race (DNS). A 14 -day
appeal period will follow the Issuance of the DN5,
If you Would lase to be made a party of of to reeelve further infarmalon on this proposed protect, complete this
Form and retum tat Cry of Re it CEO -Planning Dfvishon, L055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA gill
Nem,/FII, Nn 5C100ockei-Group e5/LOA10-077. ECF
NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE NID,
PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: inter R, 2CIO
NOTICE OF LOMPLM APPLICATION! November 12, 2D10
APPUCANTIPROIECT CONTACT PERSON: Chip Vincent. City of Renton
Pennlrsir lew Requested: EnHronmemmi JSEPAj ii -row
Loo llon when spphicatl.. may
be reviewed: Oevarlment of Community A FmnomicDevelopment [CED) -Planning
OlvWim, Sloth Floor Renee, City Hail, 1055 Sa uth Grady Way, Renton,
WA 99(157
Fn.lronmenol Dowment. that
Evaluate the Proposed Prnjecc: Envrr,nmental lSEPA] Checklht dated November B. 20LD
Development RAS, anent
used For Project Mlllgatlon: These non-prajecl actions will be Subject In the City's SEPA Ordinance
and 101-I.pment Regulations and other applicadk reties and
reguratlons as appmonste.
Proposed MItlitall.n Measures: The analy5150f the p ...... I does not revel any adveRe environmental
"Pa"t' regolring Hill above and beyond sitting code
Ill however, mitlgatinn may be necessary and maybe Imposed
at If,e time or a site-spedRc developlim l proposal on the subjtct lite.
Cammens on the abwa aprilicaNgn muse be wbmlthol In wrlLing Io gds Sonnsen. Atisfi t Piano-, CEO -- Planning
Dilalan, 1455 S.Wh Grady way, Rennin, WA 2905T, by 5:00 PM on November 25, 2010. If you have questions shoat
chis proposal, or wish to be made a party of retprd and receive edtlltl... I natinotion by mail, contact the Project
Manager. Aurone who submits written comments will dutomaUolly became a pant of record and mar be notlRed of
any decblon on IN, project.
CONTACT PERSON: Kris Sorensen, Assistant Planner; Tel: (425) 43¢6533;
PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROTECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION
r entt�n
AEtJTGN, JdIPAD GF Ty{E �U0.Vfl•
CERTIFICATION
I, L�V `� SD V?M hereby certify that copies of the above document
were posted in 3 conspicuous places or nearby the described property on
/ I Q -
Date: 1 ! 7i Signed:
STATE OF WASHINGTON }
SS
COUNTY OF KING
certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that _ E l- ; � 5't. r U: -
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the
uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
Notary Public in a(nd for the State of Washington
Notary (Print):
P°�}w - My appointment expires: ft.
J�� ;tall llsyit\5C°"'�,a� •�
CITY OF RENTON
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION
AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING
On the 12th day of November, 2010, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing
NOA, Environmental Checklist, & PMT documents. This information was sent to:
Name Representing
Agencies See Attached
(Signature of Sender):��
STATE OF WASHINGTON�
) ?� s
ISS
COUNTY OF !GING
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Kris Sorensen
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes
mentioned in the instrument.
Dated:
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington
Notary (Print):
My appointment expires: pp
.,P� igNaMM2 '+
2010 Docket, Group #5
x .t M
LUA10-077, ECF
template - affidavit of service by mailing
AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING
(ERC DETERMINATIONS)
Dept. of Ecology *
WDFW - Larry Fisher*
Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept.
Environmental Review Section
1775 12th Ave. NW Suite 201
Attn: Karen Walter or SEPA Reviewer
PO Box 47703
Issaquah, WA 98027
3901.5-172 nd Avenue SE
Olympia, WA 98504-7703
Auburn, WA 98092
WSDOT Northwest Region *
Duwamish Tribal Office *
Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program
Attn: Ramin Pazooki
4717 W Marginal Way SW
Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert
King Area Dev. Serv., MS -240
Seattle, WA 98106-1514
39015172 nd Avenue SE
PO Box 330310
Auburn, WA 98092-9763
Seattle, WA 98133-9710
US Army Corp. of Engineers *
KC Wastewater Treatment Division *
Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation*
Seattle District Office
Environmental Planning Supervisor
Attn: Gretchen Kaehler
Attn: SEPA Reviewer
Ms. Shirley Marroquin
PO Box 48343
PO Box C-3755
201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050
Olympia, WA 98504-8343
Seattle, WA 98124
Seattle, WA 98104-3855
Boyd Powers *
Depart. of Natural Resources
PO Box 47015
Olympia, WA 98504-7015
KC Dev. & Environmental Serv.
City of Newcastle
City of Kent
Attn: SEPA Section
Attn: Steve Roberge
Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP
900 Oakesdale Ave. SW
Director of Community Development
Acting Community Dev. Director
Renton, WA 98055-1219
13020 Newcastle Way
220 Fourth Avenue South
Newcastle, WA 98059
Kent, WA 98032-5895
Metro Transit
Puget Sound Energy
City of Tukwila
Senior Environmental Planner
Municipal Liaison Manager
Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official
Gary Kriedt
Joe Jainga
6200 Southcenter Blvd.
201 South Jackson Street KSC-TR-0431
PO Box 90868, MS: XRD-01W
Tukwila, WA 98188
Seattle, WA 98104-3856
Bellevue, WA 98009-0868
Seattle Public Utilities
Real Estate Services
Attn: SEPA Coordinator
700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900
PO Box 34018
Seattle, WA 98124-4018
*Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities
will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the notice of application.
template - affidavit of service by mailing
City of Re Deportment of Community & Economic De )ment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: &YLJrUhCr)
COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 29, 2030
APPLICATION NO: LUA10-077, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2010
APPLICANT: City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Kris Sorensen
PROJECTTITLE: 2010 Docket, Group #5
PROJECT REVIEWER. Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA: N/A
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A'i:J'J 1 2Q,'
LOCATION: Citywide
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A IM
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL_ See attached project narrative for a summary of the proposal.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Mirror Maim information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
Water
Fronts
Land/Shorefine use
Animals
Environmental Health
Energy/
Notuad Resources
B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODERELATED COMMENTS
0NE
F�iflliiWfl�'R
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Housing
Aesthetics
Li htJGiore
Recreation
utilities
Transportation
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Enuironment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
or areas tiOere additional information is rpeeded to properly assess this proposal.
of DirepYor or Authorized Represe
////t
Date
CJ VIOEr
✓!Y
0
-+ City of Re Department of Community & Economic De �ment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:
COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 29, 2010
APPLICATION NO: LUA10-077, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2010
APPLICANT: City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Kris Sorensen
PROJECT TITLE: 2010 Docket, Group #5
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA: N/A
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A
LOCATION: Citywide
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: See attached project narrative for a summary of the proposal.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Faith
Air
Water
Plants
Land/Shoreline Use
Animals
Environmental Health
Energy/
Natural Resources
B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
Element of the
Environment
Probable Probable More
Minor Major information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Housing
Aesthetics
Light/Glare
Recreation
Utilities
Transportation
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10,OW Feet
14, 000 Feet
/V0 Al
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
or areas where additional information is needed to propery assess this proposal.
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative
// L16 L10
Date
City of Re Department of Community & Economic De lment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: G0l"
rApCOMMENTS
DUE: NOVEMBER 29, 2010
APPLICATION NO: LUA10-077, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2010
APPLICANT: City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Kris Sorensen
PROJECT TITLE: 2010 Docket, Group #5
PROJECT REVIEW Kayren Kittrick
Plants
SITE AREA: N/A
EXISTING BLDG AREAsNA
C c
LOCATION: Citywide
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: See attached project narrative for a summary of the proposal.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the
Environment
Probable Probable More
Minor Major Information
Impacts Imparts Necessary
Earth
Air
Water
Plants
tond horeline Use
Animols
Environmental Health
Energy/
Natural Resources
B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major information
Impacts impacts Necessary
Housin
Aesthetics
Li ht/Giare
Recreation
utilities
Transportotion
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
We hove reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
or areas where additi al iTrmation is needed to properly assess this proposal.
Signature of Director or Authorized Representative
Date
a
City of Re Deportment of Community & Economic De Iment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: h , 0,
COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 29, 2010
APPLICATION NO: LUA10-077, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2010
APPLICANT: City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Kris Sorensen
PROJECT TITLE: 2010 Docket, Group #5
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick tl 4 1 1 .,
SITE AREA: N/A
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A
LOCATION: Citywide
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: See attached project narrative for a summary of the proposal.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable
Environment Minor
impacts
Probable More
Major Information
impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
Water
Plants
Land/Shoreline Use
Animals
Environmental Health
Energy/
Natural Resources
B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
K)o,-R-
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major information
impacts impacts Necessary
Housing
Aesthetics
Light/Glare
Recreation
Utilities
Transportation
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10, 000 Feet
14, 0110 Feet
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.
Director or Authorized Representative
j l vS 9-0 10
Da
a.,
FW
City of Rc Deportment of Community & Economic Dc 3ment
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: 9(m
COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 29, 2010
APPLICATION NO: LUA10-077, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2010
APPLICANT: City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Kris Sorensen -
PROJECTTITLE: 2010 Docket, Group #5
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA: N/A
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A NOV 12 MID',
LOCATION: Citywide
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: See attached project narrative for a summary of the proposal.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
Water
Plants
Land/Shoreline Use
Animals
Environmental Health
Energy/
Natural Resources
B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
H Q, -,—
C
, -,—
C CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major Information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Housing
Aesthetics
Ci ht/Glare
Recreation
Utilities
Transportation
Public Services
Historic/cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
We have have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.
of Director or Authorized Representative
14 4%.
City of Re Department of Community & Economic De invent
ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET
REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: F --'w,
COMMENTS DUE: NOVEMBER 29, 2010
APPLICATION NO: LUA10-077, ECF
DATE CIRCULATED: NOVEMBER 12, 2010
APPLICANT: City of Renton
PROJECT MANAGER: Kris Sorensen
PROJECT TITLE: 2010 Docket, Group #5
PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick
SITE AREA: N/A
EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): N/A
LOCATION: Citywide
PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) N/A
SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: See attached project narrative for a summary of the proposal.
A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major information
Impacts Impacts Necessary
Earth
Air
Water
Plants
Land/Shoreline Use
Animals
Environmental Health
Energy/
Natural Resources
B. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS
C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS
Element of the Probable Probable More
Environment Minor Major information
impacts Impacts Necessary
Housin
Aesthetics
Li hVGlare
Recreation
Utilities
Trans ortotion
Public Services
Historic/Cultural
Preservation
Airport Environment
10,000 Feet
14,000 Feet
"ke
u6t
We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact
or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal.
Signature VDirettor or Authorized Representative
Q
Date
City of
� r F I r;
NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF
NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
DATE: November 12, 2410
PROJECET NUMBER/PROJECT NAME: LUA10-077, ECF / 2010 Docket - Group 16
PROJECT LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION: 2010 Docket — Group 5. Location is Citywide for ail items with the
exception of D-56, Cedar River pipeline Zoning, which is generally located along South 134v' Street between Oakesdale
Ave SW and Hardy Ave SW. General Descriptions for each item amending Title IV Development Regulations and item D-
56 Cedar River Pipeline Zoning:
I. D-49: Drive-In/Drive-Through Retail and Services — Require drive-in and drive-through, retail and service,
uses to be part of primary use's building similar to a fast-food restaurant with drive-through window. This
would apply current regulations in some zones to all zones, where stand alone drive-in and drive-through
uses would be prohibited.
2. D-50: Small Scale Research Facilities — Amend Title IV Zoning Use Table to add a land use to the table that
allows for small scale research/education/mitigation/demonstration projects. Add a definition of "Research
Scientific (Small Scale)" to Title IV.
3. D-51: Religious Institutions in Non -Residential Zones — Amend the permit review type based on square
footage of buildings part of religious institutions to create small, medium, and large classifications. If any
proposal is adjacent or abutting a residential zone an Administrative or Hearing Examiner conditional use
review would be required.
4. D-52: Evaluation of Residential Development Standards — Amend Title IV to add, remove, and amend
standards and conditions associated with the Residential -1(R-1), Residential -4 (R-41, Residentiaf-8 (R-8), and
Residentiai-10 (R-10) zoning designations. Amend purpose statement for R-1 zone to include the density
bonus currently allowed for assisted living.
5. D-53: Fee -in -Lieu Provision for Parks — Amend Title IV to add new provisions that would allow developers
the opportunity to conduct the following in lieu of providing common space in a development: 1) Extend a
Public Trail if it has been identified in the Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan, or the Parks, Recreation,
Open Space, and Natural Resources Plan, or an adopted Community Plan; 2) Expand a Public Park if it has
been identified in the Parks Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Plan, or an adopted Community
Plan; 3) Pay a fee -in -lieu for the common open space if an off-site public park is within one quarter (1/4)
mile of the site proposed for development, safe and easy pedestrian access is provided to such public park,
and the public park is an integral part of the design approach of the development. The fee would be based
upon the monetary value of the required improvements for the common open space plus the monetary
value of the land area required to be placed in common open space. This fee would be allocated for park
acquisition and development projects, not park maintenance.
6. D-54: Sign Code Amendments —Amend Title IV in order to recognize the unique challenges of large Capital
Improvement Projects and their creation of Non -Conforming Signs. Specific amendments include the
creation of special exceptions for the relocation of non -conforming signs, due to right-of-way acquisition,
with amortization regulations along the Rainier Ave corridor.
7. D-56: Cedar River Pioeline Zoning — Amend Zoning Map to zone a portion of the pipeline as Residential -8 (R-
8) and Residential -10 (R-10) that was incorrectly identified as part of the Earlington annexation.
OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE (DNS): As the Lead Agency, the City of Renton has determined
that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under
the RCW 43.21C.110, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS process to give notice that a DNS is likely to be
issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS are integrated into a single comment period. There
will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of Non -Significance (DNS). A 14 -day
appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS.
If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further -information on this proposed project, complete this
form and return to: City of Renton, CED — Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057.
Name/File No.: 2010 Docket — Group #5 / LUA10-077, ECF
NAME:
MAILING ADDRESS:
TELEPHONE NO.:
PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: November 8, 2010
NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: November 12, 2010
APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Chip Vincent, City of Renton
Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (SEPA) Review
Location where application may
be reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development {CED) — Planning
Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton,
WA 98057
Environmental Documents that
Evaluate the Proposed Project: Environmental (SEPA) Checklist dated November 8, 2010
Development Regulations
Used For Project Mitigation: These non -project actions will be subject to the City's SEPA Ordinance
and Development Regulations and other applicable codes and
regulations as appropriate.
Proposed Mitigation Measures: The analysis of the proposal does not reveal any adverse environmental
impacts requiring mitigation above and beyond existing code
provisions. However, mitigation may be necessary and may be imposed
at the time of a site-specific development proposal on the subject site.
Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Kris Sorensen, Assistant Planner, CED — Planning
Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on November 29, 2010. If you have questions about
this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional notification by mail, contact the Project
Manager. Anyone who submits written comments will automatically become a party of record and will be notified of
any decision on this project.
CONTACT PERSON: Kris Sorensen, Assistant Planner; Tel: (425) 430-6593;
PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION
City of Renton
LAND USE PERMIT 6
MASTER APPLICATION:
PROPERTY OWNER(S)
NAME:
ADDRESS:
CITY: ZIP:
TELEPHONE NUMBER:
APPLICANT (if other than owner)
NAME: Chip Vincent
COMPANY (if applicable): CED Department
ADDRESS: 1 055 S. Grady Way
CITY: Renton ZIP: 98057
TELEPHONE NUMBER 425.430.6588
CONTACT PERSON
NAME: Chip Vincent
COMPANY (if applicable): City of Renton
ADDRESS: 1055 S. Grady Way
CITY: Renton ZIP: 98057
TELEPHONE NUMBER AND E-MAIL ADDRESS:
425.430.6588 (cvincent@rentonwa.gov)
PROJECT INFORMATION
PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: 2010 Docket,
Group 5
PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP
CODE: Citywide, and for D-56 Cedar River Pipeline
Zoning the location is generally along South 134"' St
between Oakesdale Ave SW and Hardy Ave SW.
KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT
NUMBER(S): NIA with the exception of D-56 with two
parcels #142304-9009 and #132304-UNKN.
EXISTING LAND USE(S): NIA with the exception of
D-56 where the land use is City of Seattle pipeline.
PROPOSED LAND USE(S): N/A where the pipeline in
D-56 is not proposed for any change.
EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP
DESIGNATION: N/A, with the exception of D-56 that
has RSF and RMD designations.
PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP
DESIGNATION (if applicable): N/A, with the
exception of D-56 where no new designation is
proposed.
EXISTING ZONING: NIA, with the exception of D-56
where there is no zoning designation for the properties.
PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): N/A, with the
exception of D-56 with proposed zoning of R-8 and R -
IQ.
SITE AREA (in square feet): N/A, with the exception
of D-56 which is approximately 209,088 s.f. of portions
of two parcels.
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ROADWAYS TO BE
DEDICATED FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR PRIVATE
STREETS SERVING THREE LOTS OR MORE (if
applicable): n/a
PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS
PER NET ACRE (if applicable): n/a
PRC CT INFORMATION (contini
NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): n/a
NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): nla
NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if
applicable): n/a
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable): n/a
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): n/a
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS (if applicable): n/a
SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL
BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): n/a
NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS
if applicable): n/a
NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE
NEW PROJECT (if applicable): n/a
PROJECT VALUE: n/a
IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF
ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE
INCLUDE
SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable):
❑ AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE
❑ AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO
❑ GEOLOGIC HAZARD
sq. ft.
❑ FLOOD HAZARD AREA
sq. ft
❑ HABITAT CONSERVATION
sq. ft
❑ SHORELINE STREAMS AND LAKES
ft.
❑ WETLANDS
sq. ft.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
(Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included)
SITUATE IN THE _ QUARTER OF SECTION _, TOWNSHIP 23 , RANGE portions of 4 and 5_, IN
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. Citywide changes, with the exception of D-56 with legal descriptions:
Parcel #142304-9009: A 66 FT STRIP ACROSS THE NE 114 OF NE 114 FOR PIPE LINE
Parcel #132304-UNKN: CEDAR RIVER PIPE LN R/W THRU NW 114 & THRU POR OF NE 114 LY WLY OF
TOBIN DC
TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES
List all land use applications being applied for:
1. Environmental Checklist
Staff will calculate applicable fees and postage: $
3.
9
I AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I
1, (Print Namels) C. E. "Chip" Vincent , declare that I am (please check one) _ the current owner
of the property involved in this application or X the authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of
authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in all respects true and
correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that
signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be hWher/their free and voluntary
act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument.
(Signature of Owner/Representative)
-J�
My appointment expires:
(Signature of Owner/Representative)
PROJECT NARRATIVE
Project Description and Location: 2010 Docket — Group 5. Location is Citywide for all items with
the exception of D-56, Cedar River Pipeline Zoning, which is generally located along South 134th
Street between Oakesdale Ave SW and Hardy Ave SW. General Descriptions for each item
amending Title IV Development Regulations and item D-56 Cedar River Pipeline Zoning:
1. D-49: Drive-In/Drive-Through Retail and Services — Require drive-in and drive-
through, retail and service, uses to be part of primary use's building similar to a fast-
food restaurant with drive-through window. This would apply current regulations in
some zones to all zones, where stand alone drive-in and drive-through uses would
be prohibited.
2. D-50: Small Scale Research Facilities — Amend Title IV Zoning Use Table to add a land
use to the table that allows for small scale
research/education/mitigation/demonstration projects. Add a definition of
"Research Scientific (Small Scale)" to Title IV.
3. D-51: Religious Institutions in Non -Residential Zones — Amend the permit review
type based on square footage of buildings part of religious institutions to create
small, medium, and large classifications. If any proposal is adjacent or abutting a
residential zone an Administrative or Hearing Examiner conditional use review
would be required.
4. D-52: Evaluation of Residential Development Standards — Amend Title IV to add,
remove, and amend standards and conditions associated with the Residential -1 (R-
1), Residential -4 (R-4), Residential -8 (R-8), and Residential -10 (R-10) zoning
designations. Amend purpose statement for R-1 zone to include the density bonus
currently allowed for assisted living.
5. D-53: Fee -in -Lieu Provision for Parks — Amend Title IV to add new provisions that
would allow developers the opportunity to conduct the following in lieu of providing
common space in a development: 1) Extend a Public Trail if it has been identified in
the Renton Trails and Bicycle Master Plan, or the Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and
Natural Resources Plan, or an adopted Community Plan; 2) Expand a Public Park if it
has been identified in the Parks Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources
Plan, or an adopted Community Plan; 3) Pay a fee -in -lieu for the common open
space if an off-site public park is within one quarter (1/4) mile of the site proposed
for development, safe and easy pedestrian access is provided to such public park,
and the public park is an integral part of the design approach of the development.
The fee would be based upon the monetary value of the required improvements for
the common open space plus the monetary value of the land area required to be
placed in common open space. This fee would be allocated for park acquisition and
development projects, not park maintenance.
6. D-54: Sign Code Amendments — Amend Title IV in order to recognize the unique
challenges of large Capital Improvement Projects and their creation of Non -
Conforming Signs. Specific amendments include the creation of special exceptions
for the relocation of non -conforming signs, due to right-of-way acquisition, with
amortization regulations along the Rainier Ave corridor.
7. 0-56: Cedar River Pipeline Zoning — Amend Zoning Map to zone a portion of the
pipeline as Residential -8 (R-8) and Residential -10 (R-10) that was incorrectly
identified as part of the Earlington annexation.
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKL1$T-�,,.`-,,,,,1,,,
City of Renton Development Services Division
1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057
Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231
PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST:
L rr
The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to
consider the environmental impacts of a proposal before making decisions. An Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable significant adverse impacts on the
quality of the environment_ The purpose of this checklist is to provide information to help you and the
agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it can be
done) and to help the agency decide whether an EIS is required.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS:
This environmental checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal.
Governmental agencies use this checklist to determine whether the environmental impacts of your
proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answer the questions briefly, with the most
precise information known, or give the best description you can.
You must answer each question accurately and carefully, to the best of your knowledge. In most cases,
you should be able to answer the questions from your own observations or project plans without the need
to hire experts_ If you really do not know the answer, or if a question does not apply to your proposal, write
"do not know" or "does not apply". Complete answers to the questions now may avoid unnecessary
delays later.
Some questions ask about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark
designations. Answer these questions if you can. If you have problems, the governmental agencies can
assist you.
The checklist questions apply to all parts of your proposal, even if you plan to do them over a period of
time or on different parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help describe your proposal
or its environmental effects. The agency to which you submit this checklist may ask you to explain your
answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining if there may be significant
adverse impact.
USE OF CHECKLIST FOR NONPROJECT PROPOSALS:
Complete this checklist for non -project proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not
apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D).
For non -project actions (actions involving decisions on policies, plans and programs), the references in
the checklist to the words "project," "applicant," and "property or site" should be read as "proposal,"
"proposer," and "affected geographic area," respectively.
KICED%PlanningMtle RADocketlDocket Group 51Docket 5 SEPA Checklist.doc 11/04/10
A. BACKGROUND
Name of proposed project, if applicable:
2010 Docket, Group 5
2. Name of applicant:
City of Renton
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Department of Community & Economic Development
Renton City Hall, 6" Floor
1055 South Grady Way
Renton, WA 98057
Contact: Chip Vincent
Phone: 425.430.6588
4. Date checklist prepared:
October 27, 2010
5. Agency requesting checklist:
City of Renton
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
N/A, non -project action
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected
with this proposal? If yes, explain.
N/A, not? -project action
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared,
directly related to this proposal.
N/A, non -project action
9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals
directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
No.
10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known.
City Council must approve the proposals and proposed changes to the Renton Municipal Code for
each of the docket proposals to become effective.
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the
project and site.
This non -project action includes the following docket items. -
1 -
tems.
1. 0-49: Drive-In/Drive-Through Retail and Services — Require drive-in and drive-through, retail
and service, uses to be part of primary use's building similar to a fast-food restaurant with
HACEMPlanninglTitle MDocketOocket Group 50ocket 5 SEPA Checklist.doc 2
drive-through window. This would apply current regulations in some zones to all zones, where
stand alone drive-in and drive-through uses would be prohibited.
2. D-50: Small Scale Research Facilities — Amend Title IV Zoning Use Table to add a land use
to the table that allows for small scale research/education/mitigation/demonstration projects.
Add a definition of "Research Scientific (Small Scale)" to Title IV.
3. D-51: Religious Institutions in Non -Residential Zones — Amend the permit review type based
on square footage of buildings part of religious institutions to create small, medium, and large
classifications. If any proposal is adjacent or abutting a residential zone an Administrative or
Hearing Examiner conditional use review would be required_
4. D-52: Evaluation of Residential Development Standards — Amend Title IV to add, remove, and
amend standards and conditions associated with the Residential -1 (R-1), Residential -4 (R-4),
Residential -8 (R-8), and Residential -10 (R-10) zoning designations. Amend purpose
statement for R-1 zone to include the density bonus currently allowed for assisted living.
5. D-53: Fee -in -Lieu Provision for Parks — Amend Title IV to add new provisions that would allow
developers the opportunity to conduct the following in lieu of providing common space in a
development: 1) Extend a Public Trail if it has been identified in the Renton Trails and Bicycle
Master Plan, or the Parks, Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Plan, or an
adopted Community Plan; 2) Expand a Public Park if it has been identified in the Parks
Recreation, Open Space, and Natural Resources Plan, or an adopted Community Plan; 3)
Pay a fee -in -lieu for the common open space if an off-site public park is within one quarter
(114) mile of the site proposed for development, safe and easy pedestrian access is provided
to such public park, and the public park is an integral part of the design approach of the
development. The fee would be based upon the monetary value of the required improvements
for the common open space plus the monetary value of the land area required to be placed in
common open space. This fee would be allocated for park acquisition and development
projects, not park maintenance.
6. D-54: Sign Code Amendments — Amend Title IV in order to recognize the unique challenges
of large Capital Improvement Projects and their creation of Non -Conforming Signs. Specific
amendments include the creation of special exceptions for the relocation of non -conforming
signs, due to right-of-way acquisition, with amortization regulations along the Rainier Ave
corridor.
7. D-56: Cedar River Pipeline Zoning — Amend Zoning Map to zone a portion of the pipeline as
Residential -8 (R-8) and Residential -10 (R-10) that was incorrectly identified as part of the
Earlington annexation.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise
location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and
range if known_ If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries
of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if
reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not
required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this
checklist.
1- D--49: Drive-In/Drive-Throuqh Retail and Services — Citywide.
2. D-50: Small Scale Research Facilities — Citywide.
3_ D-51: Religious Institutions in Non -Residential Zones — Citywide.
4. D-52: Evaluation of Residential Development Standards — Citywide.
5. D-53: Fee -in -Lieu Provision for Parks — Citywide.
6. D-54: Sign Code Amendments — Citywide.
7. D-56: Cedar River Pipeline Zoning — Earlington Annexation area.
B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
EARTH
a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous,
other
HACEMPlanninglTitle Nr"Oocket%Docket Group 51Docket 5 SEPA Checklist.doc
N/A, non -project action
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?)
N/A, non -project action
C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat,
muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any
prime farmland.
N/A, non -project action
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so,
describe.
N/A, non -project action.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed.
Indicate source of fill.
N/A, non -project action
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe.
N/A, non -project action
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project
construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
N/A, non -project action.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any:
N/A, non project action_ City of Renton's regulations for surface water are in compliance
with NPDES and DQE and any project will be required to comply with City regulations at
the time of development
2. AIR
a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile,
odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If
any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known.
N/A, non -project action
b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? If so,
generally describe.
N/A, non project action
C_ Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any:
N/A, non -project action
3. WATER
a. Surface Water:
HACEMPlanningMtle MDocketlDockel Group 51Docket 5 SEPA Checklist.doc 4
1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-
round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, and wetlands)? If yes, describe
type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into.
N/A, non -project action. This proposal includes many zoning classifications citywide and
there are a variety of surface water bodies within the geographic boundaries of the City.
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described
waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans.
N/A, non -project action
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from
surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected.
Indicate the source of fill material.
N/A, non -project action
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
N/A, non -project action
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan.
N/A, non project action
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so,
describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
N/A, non project action. Additionally, City of Renton Critical Areas regulations require that
any development, fill, or activity or any expansion of an existing activity which is proposed
to occur within regulated critical areas or their buffer must comply City critical areas
regulations.
b. Ground Water:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give
general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
N/A, non -project action
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other
sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following
chemicals...; agricultural; etc.)_ Describe the general size of the system, the number of
such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of
animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve.
NIA, non -project action
C. Water Runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and
disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water
flow into other waters, if so, describe.
N/A, non -project action
2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
HACEMPlanning\Title RADocketQocket Group 5%Docket 5 SEPA Checklist.doc 5
NIA, non -project action. Additionally, City of Renton Critical Areas regulations require that
any development, fill, or activity or any expansion of an existing activity which is proposed
to occur within regulated critical areas or their buffer must comply City critical areas
regulations.
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if
any:
NIA, non -project action
4. PLANTS
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site:
deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
shrubs
grass
pasture
crop or grain
wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoil, other
other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
NIA, non -project action
C. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
NIA, non -project action
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance
vegetation on the site, if any:
NIA, non -project action.
5. ANIMALS
a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known
to be on or near the site:
Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other
Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other
Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
NIA, non -project action
C. Is the site part of a migration route? if so, explain
NIA, non -project action.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
NIA, non project action
6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES
HACEMPlanninglTitle RADocket%Docket Group 50ocket 5 SEPA Checklist.doc 6
a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the
completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating,
manufacturing, etc.
NIA, non -project action
b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so,
generally describe.
NIA, non -project action
C. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal?
List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any:
N/A, non -project action
7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk
of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste that could occur as a result of this
proposal? If so, describe.
NIA, non -project action
1) Describe special emergency services that might be required.
N/A, non -project action
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
N/A, non project action
b. Noise
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic,
equipment, operation, other)?
N/A, non -project action
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a
short-term or a long-term basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)?
Indicate what hours noise would come from the site_
NIA, non -project action
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any:
NIA, non -project action
8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE
a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties?
N/A, non -project action
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
NIA, non -project action
H:ICEDIPlanninglTitie MDocketlDockel Group 50ocket 5 SEPA Checklist.doc 7
c. Describe any structures on the site.
N/A, non -project action
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
N/A, non -project action
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
N/A, non -project action
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
N/A, non -project action
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site?
N/A, non -project action
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so,
specify.
N/A, non -project action.
Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
N/A, non -project action
Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
N/A, non -project action
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
N/A, non -project action
Proposed measures to ensure the proposals are compatible with existing and projected
land uses and plans, if any:
1. D-49: Drive-in/Drive-Through Retail and Services — The proposal will use established
regulations in commercial, industrial, and mixed -used zones to zones that do not
currently have similar standards and is compatible with existing plans.
2. D-59: Small Scale Research Facilities — The proposal will define uses that have been
allowed in the past and allow facilities to be permitted outright.
3. D-51: Religious Institutions in Non -Residential Zones — The application review type
will be dependent on building size and potential impacts to the surrounding area. The
proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans.
4. D-52: Evaluation of Residential Development Standards — The proposal ensures
compatibility with existing and projected land uses and plans by clarifying or re-
establishing standards including height limits, notes and conditions, terms, setbacks.
5. D-53: Fee -in -Lieu Provision for Parks — Proposed measures are compatible with
existing and projected land uses and plans and offers alternatives for providing for
open space requirements.
6. D-54:_ Sign _Code Amendments _= Proposed measures are compatible with existing
and projected land uses and plans.
7. D-56: Cedar River Pipeline Zoning — The proposal is to bring property zoning into a
more compatible land use designation for the existing land uses and plans.
9. HOUSING
HACEMPlanningUitle MDocketlDocket Group 51Docket 5 SEPA Checklist.doc 8
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle,
or low-income housing.
N/A, non -project action.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low-income housing.
N/A, non -project action_
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
N/A, non -project action.
10. AESTHETICS
a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the
principal exterior building materials} proposed.
Item D-52 would re-establish the height requirement for accessory structures in the R-1,
R-4, and r-6 zones to 15 feet.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
N/A, non -project action
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any:
N/A, non -project action.
11. LIGHT AND GLARE
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly
occur?
N/A, non -project action
b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views?
N/A, non -project action
C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal?
N/A, non -project action
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
N/A, non -project action
12. RECREATION
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity?
N/A, non -project action
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
NIA, non -project action
HACEMPIanninM`ritle RADocket%Docket Group 50ocket 5 SEPA Checklist.doc 9
G. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
N/A, non -project action. Future residential development would be required to pay
Renton's Parks Mitigation Fee. Item D-53 would provide alternatives for providing
common open space in a development when required.
13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local
preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe.
N/A, non -project action
b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or
cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
N/A, nor project action. Projects are reviewed on a case-by-case basis and in the
proposal of item D-50 Small Scale Research Facilities, the proper governmental and non-
governmental bodies have been coordinated with for past projects that have located in the
Cedar River and Shoreline areas.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
N/A, non -project action
14. TRANSPORTATION
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the
existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
N/A, non -project action.
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the
nearest transit stop?
N/A, non -project action
C_ How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the
project eliminate?
N/A, non -project action.
d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or
streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or
private?
N/A, non -project action
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation?
If so, generally describe.
N/A, non project action
How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If
known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
N/A, non project action
HACEMPlanninglTitle MDocket0ocket Group 51Docket 5 SEPA Checklist.doc 10
Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any:
N/A, non -project action, future new development would be required to pay Renton's
Transportation Mitigation Fee,
95. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire
protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe.
N/A, non -project action
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any_
NIA, non -project action
16. UTILITIES
Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service,
telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
NIA, non -project action
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and
the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be
needed_
NIA, non -project action
C. SIGNATURE
I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and
complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non -significance
that it might issue in reliance upon this checkliJshouthere be any willful misrepresentation or
willful lack of full disclosure on my p rt.
Proponent:
Name Printed: C.E. "Chip" Vincent for Cily of Renton
Date: 1
HACEMPlanningMtle IVOocketlDocket Group 50ocket 5 SEPA Checklist.doc 11
D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEETS FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS
(These sheets should only be used for actions involving decisions on policies, plans and
programs. You do not need to fill out these sheets for project actions.)
Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the
list of the elements of the environment.
When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities
likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than
if the proposal were not implemented. Respond briefly and in general terms.
How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production,
storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise?
It is unlikely that the proposal would have any affect on the above environmental issues
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
New development would be required to comply with the City's development regulations.
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
The proposed text changes to Title IV has no affect on plants, animals, fish, or marine life as a
direct consequence of this non -project proposal. All development would be required to comply
with all building and development regulations with negative impacts to plants, animals, fish, and
marine life being addressed and mitigated at the time of proposal.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
None at this non -project level. Development must comply with City of Renton regulations and with
Renton's Critical Areas Ordinance. Any measures needed in this regard will be implemented at
the project level review.
How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
The proposed non -project action will not deplete energy or natural resources. Future project level
development may impact energy or natural resources slightly but will not deplete them.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
None are proposed at this non -project action stage.
4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas
designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness,
wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites,
wetlands, flood plains, or prime farmlands?
The proposed changes would likely not use or affect environmentally sensitive areas. At such
time that development is proposed, applicants will be subject to City of Renton critical area
regulations and development standards that are designed to protect environmentally sensitive
areas.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
N/A.
HACEMPlanningMde MDocket\Docket Group 50ocket 5 SEPA Checklist.doc 12
How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it would allow
or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
The proposed changes would likely not affect land and shoreline use.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
None.
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and
utilities?
Additional demands of transportation that may be created by development will be evaluated at the
time of a project proposaL The City is currently served by public transportation.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
None.
Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or
requirements for the protection of the environment.
The proposal will not conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for protection of the
environment.
SIGNATURE
1, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and
complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration 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: L__1'I----4
Name Printed: C -E. "Chip" Vincent for City of Renton
Date:
HACEMPIanning\Tbe MDocketOocket Group 50ocket 6 SEPA Ghecklist.doc 13