Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReport 1Applicant Greg Smith 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, WA 98027 (425) 369-3237 gcsmith@kcls.org Owner City of Renton 1055 S GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 98057 (425) 430-6500 Party of Record Dennis Ossenkop 3316 NE 12th St Renton, WA 98056-3429 (425) 226-4976 denoss@aol.com Party of Record Judith Tabak 1024 SW 4th PI Renton, WA 98057-2278 (42S) 235-4912 jjtrenton@gmail.com Party of Record Kathie Ossenkop 3316 NE 12th St Renton, WA 98056-3429 (425) 226-4976 Party of Record David Keyes 1013 Kirkland Ave NE, Apt 4 Renton, WA 98056 (425) 7S7-1121 keyes28@msn.com Renton Library of Liberty Park LUA13-000255 PARTIES OF RECORD Architect Ari Ralph King County Library System 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, WA 98027 Party of Record PHYLLIS JEAN GREENE-CROOK JEANNIE BY DESIGN INC 82 MONTEREY PI NE RENTON, WA 98056-4033 Party of Record Paul Ouellette 1918 Rolling Hills Ave SE Renton, WA 98055-3715 (425) 255-1904 pauoue@comcast.net 'E("i::Vt'::.: -'JTY CLERK'S OFFICE Contact Maaike Post 71 Columbia St, 6th Floor Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 254-2036 Party of Record Beth Asher 436 Mill Ave S Renton, WA 98057-6022 (425) 557-7770 betha@mittenthai.com Party of Record Teri Hallauer Seattle Public Utilities PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Party of Record Party of Record Phillipe LeTourneau, PhD Richard Bray Department of Natural Resources and Parks 3713 NE 9th St 201 S Jackson St, #700 Renton, WA 98056-3818 Seattle, WA 98104 (425) 430-1154 rgbray@yahoo.com Party of Record Nicola Robinson 3110 SE 5th St Renton, WA 98058 (425) 255-5160 nicola_rn@msn.com Party of Record Jeanne Ouellette 1918 Rolling Hills Ave SE Renton, WA 98055-3715 (425) 255-1904 Party of Record Judy Milligan 427 Ferndale Ave NE Renton, WA 98056-4001 (425) 235-4805judyrenae@yahoo.com Party of Record LARRY CROOK 82 MONTEREY PI NE RENTON, WA 9805674033 (425) 255-3869 landjcrook@comca5t.net Page 1 of 2 Applicant Greg Smith 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, WA 98027 (425) 369-3237 gcsmith@kcls.org Owner City of Renton 1055 S GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 98057 (425) 430-6500 Party of Record Dennis Ossenkop 3316 NE 12th St Renton, WA 98056-3429 (425) 226-4976 denoss@aol.com `jc Anton .0 Libra at Liberty Park Library Y LUA13-030255 PARTIES OF RECORD Architect Ari Ralph King County Library System 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, WA 98027 Party of Record PHYLLIS JEAN GREENE-CROOK JEANNIE BY DESIGN INC 82 MONTEREY PI NE RENTON, WA 98056-4033 Party of Record Paul Ouellette 1918 Rolling Hills Ave SE Renton, WA 98055-3715 (425) 255-1904 pauoue@comcast.net Contact Maaike Post 71 Columbia St, 6th Floor Seattle, WA 98104 (206) 254-2036 Party of Record Beth Asher 436 Mill Ave 5 Renton, WA 98057-6022 (425) 557-7770 betha@mittenthal.com Party of Record Teri Hallauer Seattle Public Utilities PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Party of Record Party of Record Party of Record Judith Tabak Phillipe LeTourneau, PhD Richard Bray 1024 SW 4th PI Department of Natural Resources and Parks 3713 NE 9th St Renton, WA 98057-2278 2015 Jackson St, #700 Renton, WA 98056-3818 (425) 235-4912 jjtrenton@gmail.com Seattle, WA 98104 (425) 430-1154 rgbray@yahoo.com Party of Record Party of Record Party of Record Kathie Ossenkop Nicola Robinson Judy Milligan 3316 NE 12th 5t 3110 5E 5th St 427 Ferndale Ave NE Renton, WA 98056-3429 Renton, WA 98058 Renton, WA 98056-4001 (425) 226-4976 (425) 255-5160 nicola_rn@msn.com (425) 235-4805 judyrenae@yahoo.com Party of Record David Keyes 1013 Kirkland Ave NE, Apt 4 Renton, WA 98056 (425) 757-1121 keyes28@msn.com Party of Record Jeanne Ouellette 1918 Rolling Hills Ave SE Renton, WA 98055-3715 (425) 255-1904 Party of Record LARRY CROOK 82 MONTEREY PI NE RENTON, WA 98056-4033 (425) 255-3869 landjcrook@comcast.net Page 1 of 1 OMNI% m (D r+ 0 cr r47 W1 r+ a C: Cr CU �u r •C .o sv z - r c N w E 0 0 IV cn Ln 0 c V) m S m z G) Err G) Z tJ� m m b-1 _; 2 0 Beth Asher Dennis Ossenkop LUA13-000255 - Party of Rdcord - LUA13-000255 - Party of Record 436 Mill Ave 5 3316 NE 12th St Renton, WA 98057-6022 Renton, WA 98056-3429 City of Renton Seattle Public Utilities Teri Hallauer LUA13-000255 - Owner LUA13-000255 - Party of Record 1055 S GRADY WAY PO Box 34018 RENTON, WA 98057 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Department of Natural Resources and Parks PhilliTkmLWrdleni&aU PBkOership, LLP Maaike Post LUA13-000255 - Party of Record LUA13-000255 - Contact 201 S Jackson St 71 Columbia 5t ##700 6th Floor Seattle, WA 98104 Seattle, WA 98104 King County Library System Greg Smith LUA13-000255 - Applicant 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, WA 98027 David Keyes LUA13-000255 - Party of Record 1013 Kirkland Ave NE Apt 3 Renton, WA 98056 Nicola Robinson LUA13-000255 - Party of Record 3110 SE 5th St Renton, WA 98058 'Ay-� I �� it 4,c�1 p6sy�anrcy 611A "-- -C- ' a�ke Pte+ Maaike Post The Miller Hull Partnership, FLP Greg Smith 71 Columbia Street, 6th Floor 960 Newport Way NW Seattle, WA 98104 Issaquah, WA 98027 David Keys, Committee Officer Beth Asher, Secretary 1013 Kirkland Av NE, Apt 3 436 Mill Ave S Renton, WA 98056 Renton, WA 98056 Philippe LeTourneau KC Historic Preservation Program Terri Hallauer, SPU Natural Resources and Parks P.O. Box 34018 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 700 Seattle, WA 98124 Seattle, WA 98104 Added: August 6, 2013 Dennis Ossenkop 3316 NE 12th St., Renton, WA 98056 landline: 425-226-4976 email: denoss cDaol,com Nicola Robinson, Treasurer 3110 SE 51h Street Renton, WA 98058 N AAV AWd O 0 OD 0 > X4, < wN C) LU QW LLJ .z Ek 5 7 g, �� z0 z lk LL; 0 cc COU Lu w or u u xz� S3AV III" ---------- I rr < < kP aAv "'VVY 71, G rlAV S113AA C4 SSAV SNV17-11M 0 N 0 JN Fs O 0 OD 0 X4, TV LLJ .z Ek 5 7 g, lk LL; 0 cc xz� S3AV III" ---------- I kP aAv "'VVY G rlAV S113AA C4 SSAV SNV17-11M 0 N 0 JN Fs S 3AV -LL3Nk4n9 i1 Ir O 0 OD 0 w W J � TM E ASH c $'$ as cs� OVg C.% �t 3vb Pd�� 6ey'�v,5rs =^ad I. SUR 43 sang apQ�LL I�•Gma aEz��s �S a. w W m zz 0 o 0 Q Z W 0 0 LU LU NV'id LU t" Rg M3tA3kl 3115 w [SO96 Hhh 'N01k32!' H1flOS 3f1N311'd ]]IN OOtT77� I, �" i, W Q _ MMVd YU838111'd w AN"811 NO1N32i w W J � TM E ASH c $'$ as cs� OVg C.% �t 3vb Pd�� 6ey'�v,5rs =^ad I. SUR 43 sang apQ�LL I�•Gma aEz��s �S a. w W m zz 0 o 0 Q Z W 0 0 LU LU MMAM NVId 3115 Z9096 leM'NOlN;lH I H1rIC9 W)N3AV I 11H 00 NOINM -1 AN"131 Hinos�n!43AV) -,IVY LU Z ---------- z C-1 ouj 93 ig LU Hinos�n!43AV) -,IVY LU Z ---------- C-1 ig LU 7 r. n F IE ,wow Hinos�n!43AV) -,IVY LU Z ---------- I dU + 10-TW-ZI i NO19N11ISv11N'NOlNMI awjSod nls-tl.wl WI.LS,L5 A21VNElll hlN,'lOJ `.]NISI - '.�. (;�, >:,I�rrezn nnr ;Inl'),I "Ills"ul vaco�Um ::A3111 d T- rtU "U F.tll\I, I (1\„ "j"I )1 )\I%tl \1111UU 111(], I�r�F.J _31111311 (1 1" ')41 J110I.-JIrtI: �✓ -;f II f\�f xll]T Ilt n>EU]r S.l 111 (rllr`l', 3ev,n�ml.l vxU -nv_:s hdAADS.)Illda�IDOdDI DUN AFI u]Y.AEI.) ]w)_[I:a1_1=r.uls 7,v1 SNUISIAH'd 0 a inCiy Y �Y 5 R �-' � Ya xe - �•.r�Yg � �$�R�g ���e ei a� 5'f".g��, ie �ao �', Sis y 6y -K Hsi YYi'E % - 75 ZD 3- a z -= C 0 �� I I I axzcx x r y A ��yIX £lOL'0 L'9 +i '.d '. 3 r: M31A3N NVId 3iIS -IIIW C t e- F z G v' 4SUB6 VM'NP1.N3Z4I H-LfIOS 3f1N3A'd QOL r O Xd)(d A H3911 IV l� r a � o5 a U AM'VMG1—I NOIN3a r� C.. �� I I I axzcx x r y A 7 ��yIX rf 3 C t / Big ` i l� r� C.. •'o 7 ��yIX rf ,Y t �s Big ` i l� r� C.. 7 rf ,Y t Big ` i l� 7 ------------ S.- 4f 4f f N4 .1114 % % q;rnoS 24UR4V JJIJ4 r �; � \Y, M31A921 NV -1d 3115 z LSO86 VAA'l HinOS 3nN3AV 111N 00 5 cm -1 La CL ANVUS11 NOIN32{ �5 lei ti IP F!4 I ------------ S.- 4f 4f f N4 .1114 % % q;rnoS 24UR4V JJIJ4 r �; � \Y, a _ ` Col 4 1 1° CHA i -sem `1 ------------ 1 v Do NJID HIP{. iG C; x o '} RENTON LIBRARY C s= AT LIBERTY PARK r. N 100 MILL AVENUE SOUTH RENTON, WA 9$057 F 7 O z 4 SITE PLAN REVIEW y Tis 'W>r r" �it'� i i i i ie s.io.zaia i �,€ _�5 ,��Ya V RENTON LIBRARY j o AT LIBERTY PARK -D (n 100 MILL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON. WA 48057 >> �Y� SITE PLAN REVIEW f Z rn v 5.10.2013 :! E , nils � f Ilk, �y Df E M z 9.�R9Y9��gq i,$m �3 3 9 x = 02 Raa3R AT LIBERTY PARK / z D Ul rn n 4 R`=RgRR.fl�� R Y z n e _ , SITE PLAN REVIEW� _ mD _.. 5.10.2013 ;1 p. wi t' • V - 9c v� ry0 'Y m.S m z x RENTON LIBRARY i n z' Z AT LIBERTY PARK / z D Ul rn n 5. �j z n e _ , SITE PLAN REVIEW� _ mD _.. 5.10.2013 ;1 p. wi - 9c v� ry0 'Y m.S m � 93g pO n 8 RENTON LIBRARY i n z' Z AT LIBERTY PARK / z D Ul rn n 100 MILL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON, WA 98053 z n e _ SITE PLAN REVIEW� _ mD _.. 5.10.2013 ;1 p. wi - 9c RENTON LIBRARY i n z' Z AT LIBERTY PARK / z D Ul rn n 100 MILL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON, WA 98053 z n e _ SITE PLAN REVIEW� _ mD _.. 5.10.2013 ;1 p. wi g $ • [ 2 -. C� fd p €1 5i St � � � 9i { a'J. � k inti a:,Qo g ! q .I RENTON LIBRARY v m X AT LIBERTY PARK 1 -4 m f 100 MILL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON. WA 98057 Q Q z Q m SITE PLAN REVIEW h-� ; 8 5.10.2013 i I _ J r `I ¢m 77 MWR . I I I =g� r O i RENTON LIBRARY r AT LIBERTY PARK Ap e I100 MILL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON, WA 99057 ` t SITE PLAN REVIEW;v �/ 5 ia.za5s 10 V1 m Q -F L' T ------ I I I t€ I I I I I A� i!3 � _ 1 i i �' � SToeAflE ' l u' In,_3, --- -- ry_ =g� RENTON LIBRARY r AT LIBERTY PARK Ap e I100 MILL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON, WA 99057 ` t SITE PLAN REVIEW;v �/ 5 ia.za5s \k m � 0 z , , � RHO §� �E: 2-% - \- �\ 70 \ 23 ){\� ' RENTON LIBRARY rm § c!� $'w a LIBERTY PARK _ . . ,m «rte SOUTHSOUTH:ems ¥_ _e \ EE SITESITEP�NR Ew 5 . no a % m _�'� o x I i RENTON LIBRARY A* I i F N D c !I I AT LIBERTY PARK s F 1d Jb k 100 WLL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON, WA 98057 N z Q P b � � 5.10.2013\"a^/ z3E4FiF m m D 1 O Z m _�'� o x I i RENTON LIBRARY I i i I N D c !I I AT LIBERTY PARK s F 1d Jb k 100 WLL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON, WA 98057 N z Q P u 5.10.2013\"a^/ z3E4FiF m _�'� o RENTON LIBRARY N D c AT LIBERTY PARK F 1d Jb k 100 WLL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON, WA 98057 N z Q P m _�'� o RENTON LIBRARY N D c AT LIBERTY PARK p 100 WLL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON, WA 98057 N z Q SITE PLAN REVIEW 5.10.2013\"a^/ z3E4FiF rn 5 Z O RENTON LIBRARY > 'm � rr. C o m r AT LIBERTY PARK rn 0 m w 100 MILL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON, WA 98057 W z rn 5 Z RENTON LIBRARY > 'm � rr. C o AT LIBERTY PARK 0 m w 100 MILL AVENUE SOUTH I RENTON, WA 98057 W z SITE PLAN REVIEW CA m 510.2013 • • \i\'✓ \ �� vsn u! spew* uUo3•peews 0999£ adn S(I:I 4Z8Z 'aN a`d3 W S /// 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 • $� bG Cision $1A f3 R F C'r!VEn t,!TY CLERK'S OFFICE BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER FOR THE CITY OF RENTON } RE: King County Library System FINAL DECISION Site Plan and SEPA Appeal } } } LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM } Summary The site plan application is approved and the State Environmental Policy Act ("SEPA") appeal is denied. The library is a historical and cultural resource subject to protection under SEPA, but the relocation of its primary entrance is not a probable significant environmental impact that requires an environmental impact statement ("EIS") or SEPA mitigation. The King County Library System ("KCLS" or "applicant") has applied for site plan approval for the remodel of the existing library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The library serves as a unique city landmark in that it has spanned the Cedar River since 1965. The applicant is undertaking the remodel in order to provide for seismic upgrades and other improvements that will bring the building into better compliance with current code requirements. The remodel will be built within the existing footprint and would reduce the size of the library by 2,720 square feet. The remodel would also result in an approximately 50 foot relocation of the primary entrance to the library from the midway point of its southern face as it spans across the river to the southeastern corner of the library. The City of Renton issued a mitigated determination of nonsignificance ("MDNS") for the project. Citizens to the Save the Cedar River Library... Again! ("SEPA appellants") filed a timely appeal of the determination. The SEPA appeal was consolidated with the site plan application. The primary focus of the SEPA appeal is the relocation of the primary entrance. The SEPA SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 is 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 i appellants contend that the library is a historical and cultural resource and that the relocation of the entrance would create a probable significant adverse environmental impact. The appellants contend that this impact needs to be assessed within an EIS or a SEPA mitigation measure should be imposed to mitigate the impact, most likely a condition requiring the entrance to rernain at its current location. The SEPA appellants successfully established that the library overall is a historical and/or' cultural resource subject to review and protection under SEPA. However, the SEPA appellants did not establish that the proposed relocation of the primary entrance will create a probable significant environmental impact. The City's SEPA responsible official has concluded that the relocation does not create probable significant adverse environmental impacts_ legally, substantial weight must be given to this conclusion. That weight is determinative in this case. The arguments for and against a finding of significant impacts are highly compelling and the factors are highly subjective. Under these circumstances, the "substantial weight" legal standard leaves no choice but to sustain the conclusions of the SEPA responsible official. Since the proposed entrance relocation does not constitute a probable significant adverse environmental impact, the relocation does not trigger a requirement for an EIS or any mitigation to keep the entrance at its current location. Testimony Note., This hearing summary is provided as a courtesy to those who would benefit from a general overview of the public testimony of the hearing referenced above. The summary is not required or necessaryfor this final decision. No assurances ore made as to completeness or accuracy. Nothing in this summary should be construed as a finding or legal conclusion mode by the Examiner or an indication of what information is significant to this decision. Site Plan Staff Testimony Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, stated the project is a rehabilitation of the Renton library which includes associated landscaping and structure improvements. The structure is located at 100 Mill Avenue S and spans Cedar River. The site is zoned Urban Center -Downtown; however, Cedar River does not have zoning. The City is using the zoning from the main access area which is adjacent to the structure. The building crosses 3 separate parcels which totals 7.2 acres. The area of impact from the project on the structure is 37,630sgft. The project would reduce the structure from 22,000sgft to 19,680sgft. The overwater reduction would be approximately 7 percent. The upgrades will bring the building up to current code with particular emphasis on seismic hazards. The site is located in a seismic hazard area. The upgrades include a concrete abutment that will be down -grade. To install ' The courts use "cultural" and "historical" resource interchangeably in SEPA decisions and there is no need to distinguish between the two in this decision, especially given that no Washington court or regulation defines the terms. SITE PIAN & SEPA APPEAL 2 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1.0 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 0 0 the abutment, 900 cubic yards of material would be excavated and 260 cubic yards of fill added. The existing building is considered to be a legal non -conforming structure. Alterations are permitted to non -conforming structures as long as they will restore the building to city standards. In its current condition, the building does not meet seismic safety standards. The site is also located in the aquifer protection zone, the flood plain, and the flood way of the Cedar River. The section of the Cedar River along the site is deemed Shoreline High Protection. No work on the project is proposed below the ordinary high water mark or below the base flood elevation. Upland of the river there is below grade work, but not within the river channel. According to Ms. Dolbee, access to the site will remain the same, with 2 locations at Mill Avenue S and through Liberty Park_ Public sidewalks along Mill Avenue will be updated as part of Renton's 2013 Park Improvement Project. Landscaping will primarily remain the same except for in areas where it is disturbed during construction. On June 17, the Environmental Review Committee issued a decision of non -significance mitigated which included three mitigation measures. An appeal was filed. The City received several public comments, comments from the Muckleshoot Indian tribe, and statements from city agencies. The proposal is consistent with relevant comprehensive plan policies. Staff recommendations include an archaeological survey, a detailed refuse and recycling plan, and a final detailed landscape plan. The existing building does not comply with setback standards because it crosses several parcels; however, the proposed rehabilitation of the structure does not increase the non -conformity. All development in the Urban Center Downtown zone is exempt from landscaping street -tree requirements. A landscape plan was submitted with the application which includes eight new trees . One street tree would be replaced during construction. At its highest point, the building would be 18 feet which is compliant with height restrictions. The proposed structure would require an 818sgft refuse and recycling area with screening. The existing parking lot would be retained. All trees on site would be retained except for one cherry tree which would be replaced by a river birch tree. Proposed elevations meet design standards. Staff does not anticipate any adverse impacts on surrounding properties and uses as result of the project. Access and circulation to the site has not been changed. Existing pedestrian facilities are considered to be sufficient and safe. Views of the Cedar River will be maintained. Lighting will be balanced with environmental concerns. Police and fire have identified sufficient resources to provide for the restoration. A drainage plan was submitted with the application that complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual. Staff recommends approval of the site plan with five conditions listed in the staff report. In regard to the glass windows, Ms. Dolbee clarified that design standards can either be met or the intent of the standard met. There is enough glass on several of the walls to meet the intent of the glass window standard. The shoreline permit will be issued after the hearing examiner decision. This will have its own appeal process. Shoreline permits are noted as staff decisions. It is subject to consolidation, but the applicants have to ask for this consolidation. Under questioning by Beth Asher, Ms. Dolbee noted that "visually accessible" means the river is visible. In regard to access to the site, the vehicular access will not change. A traffic study was not submitted that addressed the change in entryway to the physical building. Applicant Testimony SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 3 0 0 1 Greg Smith, King County Library System, stated that the applicants agree with the City's findings 2 outlined in the staff report. King County Library System agrees to follow all mitigation measures set in the SEPA decision. The main structure of the building and part of the roof framing will not be 3 demolished during restoration. 4 Public Testimony 5 Beth Asher stated she has lived in Renton for 37 years. No traffic or pedestrian studies were 6 conducted for the site. The historic patterns of use will be changed with this restoration because the library will be losing one of its entries. People will not utilize parking on the side by the park of the 7 building after the restoration. She is also concerned with the removal of the stop sign at the entrance to the library. The main entrance should be on the bridge. 8 Paul Ouellette testified that he has raised three children in Renton since 1970. His family used the 9 library weekly, especially when the salmon were running. His five grandchildren also utilize the to library often. The river view is a huge draw for children along with the proximity to Liberty Park. As a civil engineer, he has spent many years representing the Postal Service around Washington and 11 Oregon. One of the main issues he handled in this position was dealing with land use agencies and SEPA regulations. 12 Judy Milligan stated that she is concerned with the current pedestrian and traffic pattern. The pattern 13 is a hazard because the intersection at the entrance to the library no longer has a stop sign, only a 14 blinking yellow light. An unidentified speaker noted that the Renton library system was signed over to the King County 15 Library System. Since this time, furniture and artwork have been declared surplus by the applicant 16 and have gone missing. i7 Susie Ure testified that she is a member of the Renton Library Advisory Board but is speaking as a private citizen. She is concerned that people with mobility issues will be kept from visiting the 18 library because of the new entry system. 19 David Beedon stated that exhibit 6 depicts an entryway and the bridge portion of the structure. He wonders if the area between these two sections will be filled in during the project. The documents 20 supplied by the applicant do not make the final plans clear. 21 Staff Rebuttal 22 Kayren Kittrick, Community and Economic Development, stated that the new building will have a 23 smaller footprint than the previous structure, thus it does not require a traffic study. The intersection at the entrance is constantly being re-evaluated by Renton. Recently, it was determined that the 24 intersection was not being used enough to warrant a red-light because there was not enough traffic. The intersection will continue to be evaluated. The new pedestrian access doorway is fifty feet to the 25 south of the previous entrance. Handicap parking standards have been met. Nothing on the site has 26 been degraded. The building is still accessible from both sides. City traffic engineers reviewed the site plan. SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1a ll 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 • Vanessa Dolbee added that the public artwork is regulated by the Municipal Arts Commission. In regard to the shoreline permit, RMC4.9.190b discusses administrative decisions. Applicant Rebuttal Ruth Baleiko, Project Architect, testified that the renovation must bring the structure up to all current codes. Seismic abutments are necessary to meet the code. The pilings in the river will not be touched. The concrete base structure and much of the roof will be retained. The existing structure does not meet Renton's energy code. In regard to the entry, the design team has reviewed various configurations. Having multiple points of entry creates security issues. In regard to the blank walls, the energy code stipulates 50 percent glazing as the maximum. Adding more glass will cause the structure not to meet energy standards. Views to the river were imperative for the public, thus more solid portions of the wall were put towards the parking lot and Liberty Park. Where are some areas of glazing near the comers facing the park. Many of the blank walls are hiding the structural support. In regard to modulation, concrete columns on the outside of the building and curtain walls will provide relief Metal siding will be encased to provide relief within the fenestration. The concrete columns are 24' apart on the parking lot side and 44' apart along the river. in regard to the area between the entryway and bridge, the applicant is proposing to hardscape this section to better engage the entry to the bridge. The site plan depicts this hardscape plan. SEPA Appeal David Keyes stated that the appeal is broken into three parts. First, the master land use application has multiple deficiencies. Second, the environmental review was improperly executed by the City of Renton. The City failed to handle the deficiencies presented by the applicant_ Finally, Renton's notification process failed multiple times throughout the application process. Dennis Ossenkop testified that he has lived in Renton for over forty years. The public comment process was not properly carried out. He worked as the regional environmental specialist for the Federal Aviation Division for 26 years. He handled the preparation and defense of many environmental documents during this period. He has great knowledge of the review process for these documents. According to him, in regard to the library project, some special agencies were given advanced information before receiving the SEPA decision for review. These agencies met with the City and King County Library System representatives before the decision was mailed. "Non -special" agencies did not receive advanced information and only had the 15 -day appeal period. One of the "non -special" agencies was the Washington State Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. Other "non -special" agencies could also have provided comments on the historic nature of the site. Some agencies never received the decision package. Many local citizens did not receive the package materials that the City claimed to have sent. Preferential treatment allowed some agencies to provide more specific comments. The unequal time provided to comment on the library restoration is a breach of the SEPA process. The comment period should be reopen to all agencies for a period of 21 days for the specific purpose of identifying any historic or cultural issues associated with the application. SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 5 1 Under questioning by David Keyes, Vanessa Dolbee stated that the Environmental Review 2 Committee is made up of four members: Greg Zimmerman (Public Works), Terry Higashiyama (Community Services), Mark Peterson (Eire Chicf/Emergency Services), and Chip Vincent 3 (Community and Economic Development). At this project's ERC meeting, all four members were 4 present. She is unaware of these four people's backgrounds in historic preservation, but Terry Higashiyama runs the written museum. 5 David Keyes noted that he is unaware of any of the four members of the ERC have backgrounds in 6 historic preservation. The City should have utilized agencies with more knowledge of historic preservation to combat this missing knowledge. Under the City's environmental review procedures 7 (4-9-070), review of site historical importance is required. Section 13 of 4-9-070 provides three questions regarding cultural and historical impacts. The city answered "no" to the restoration having these types of impacts. 9 Assistant city attorney Gannon Newsom stated that staff believe the checklists were answered 10 correctly based on the knowledge gathered during the application process_ l l David Keyes commented that the City is responsible for providing officials, such as the hearing examiner, with the necessary information to make proper decisions. The city failed to gather 12 sufficient information for this project. The City's Shoreline Management PIan (SMP) provides great detail on what information must be provided for a land use application. SMP subsection D notes 13 development standards along the shoreline, requiring that they meet city standards. The SEPA 14 checklist was insufficient in the answers it provided. The SEPA checklist provides the background information for zoning and shoreline management, thus if the SEPA checklist is inadequate, 15 subsequent decisions will be inaccurate. The SMP also notes that changes cannot affect "ecological functions_" "Ecological functions" can be interpreted to include historical preservation of a site. 16 SMP section 6, "Archaeological, Historical, and Cultural Resources," provides that detailed cultural 17 assessments may be required on sites based on the probability of cultural resources. In addition, it states that coordination between agencies, public, and groups (such as tribes) is encouraged well in 18 advance of the application for development. The applicant and the City failed to do any early coordination with the Departments of Archaeology and Ecology. Section 6 also notes that the 19 detailed cultural assessment should be conducted by an archaeologist in advance of approval. 20 Mr. Keyes met with the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation, specifically Michael 21 Houser, State Architectural Historian, on March 28. According to Mr. Keyes, the Department did not believe the structure being less than fifty years old was an obstacle to its protection. Mr. Houser is 22 responsible for making recommendations to the federal government in regard to historical preservation status. According to Mr. Keyes, exhibit 17d is a letter from Mr_ Houser noting the 23 historical details of the site and the characteristic elements that allow its nomination for historical 24 significance. This letter gives expert opinion and cannot be ignored when reviewing the structure. The Department of Archaeology is referenced in the SMP, but the Department was not contacted until 25 late in the application process. The SMP protects a site even if has not been listed as a historical preservation site. The SMP requires an assessment if it is possible the site could meet this historical 26 status. The subject site will be reviewed for historical status in August, 2013. The site is an identified historical resource and must be protected. The public testified in front of the King County SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 6 2 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 11 Library System ("KCLS") Trustees in an attempt to protect the site, but their concerns were not addressed. The City never recognized the cultural importance of the site even when there was a large turnover at elections. KCLS and the City must realize the significance of the existing structure. KCLS's site plan does not properly illustrate what is being kept and what demolished. The drawings are not properly annotated. Moving the entry is a very significant design change. Nicola Robinson stated that she spoke with the principle architect for the original project, David Arthur Johnston. Mr. Johnston is 93 years old and unable to attend the hearing but provided phone comments during a conversation with Ms. Robinson. Mr. Johnston told Ms. Robinson that the library was one of the most important buildings he ever designed. It was a controversial building from the beginning, and many people fought building it. It was the first design of its type because it spanned the river. When designing the building, they spent a long time planning the entrance so that it was active with the environment. The library was built to compliment the river, and the river provided a unique experience for library guests. Mr. Johnston's comments were submitted as exhibit 29. David Keyes also spoke with Mr. Johnston. According to Mr. Keyes, Mr. Johnston considered the library a celebration of the river. The entry coming in over the water was the most important element of the design_ Previous adversaries to building the library changed their opinions when they saw the unique design. Richard Bray testified that he has lived in Renton for 22 years. He has raised five children in the city, and the library has been an important part of their lives. The entryway is a unique feature because it provides a scenic view for guests. Salmon migrations can be viewed from the bridge. The entryway encourages appreciation for the environment while providing access to a learning facility. During Renton River Day Festivals, the entryway is a main hub of activity. In 2001, Renton celebrated its I 001 anniversary. In a play celebrating this anniversary, the decision to build the library was one of the main scenes. No other library in the region has the same cultural and historical aspects as the Cedar River Library. This decision should not be made solely by KCLS. Renton citizens have the right to demand accountability for the cultural aspects of the library. Judy Milligan commented that she has lived in Renton for 29 years_ Despite living closer to a different library, she always went to Cedar River because her children preferred it for the unique experience. The river entrance is very inviting for children. People of all ages enjoy the entrance and the chance it gives to commune with nature. Time with nature can provide lower blood pressure and better cognitive function. The library entrance is a site of community action. It is a gathering point because of the high pedestrian traffic. The observation deck has space for educational opportunities. KCLS could add a second door to the site. Ms. Milligan read a statement from her daughter, Heather. Heather Milligan spent many days at the library growing up and worked there as a page during high school. She noted that the bridge was never meant to just walk across; instead, the bridge provides an experience for all who visit. Jeannie Greene -Crook stated that she is a longtime resident of Renton. Her family has used the library for three generations. Her family uses the library year-round so they can experience the view of the river in all its states. A door is necessary on the bridge -deck to provide easy accessibility. KCLS should embrace the uniqueness of the library and preserve its current setup. The bridge SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 7 0 0 1 provides easy access to the nearby park for picnics and play. Ideally, the entrance will remain at the 2 center of the observation deck, but she accepts that it may be moved to one side or the other_ People 3 who cannot access the bridge -deck can utilize the new Highlands Library. Beth Asher submitted a poll from The Renton Reporter which showed that 85 percent of respondents 4 felt the Cedar River Library has cultural significance. The library is unique, and the entrance is the 5 most important part of this uniqueness. The library is both a park and a civic campus. KCLS does not own the building, but Renton does. The City must protect the historic and cultural value of the 6 site. The library is part of the heart of Renton and needs to be saved for future generations. 7 David Keyes noted that the entry off the bridge makes the Cedar River Library special. There is one other library over a river in the nation, but it does not have the entry on the bridge. The entry is being 8 changed significantly by KCLS. The planned new entry would change the historic use patterns and 9 alter the community value. Paul Ouellette restated that he was a civil engineer and planned postal service buildings throughout l.� the northwest. For the subject site, the SEPA checklist was inaccurate and incorrect specifically in 11 regard to the historical and cultural impacts. On page 18 of the checklist, in regard to structure, the applicant states that the existing building would remain compatible with Liberty Park; however, no 12 direct access will be provided with the new design. Circulation will be changed because there will not be direct access, but the applicant did not make this clear in the SEPA checklist. There is 1 inconsistency between the many drawings submitted by the applicant. Exhibit 5 and exhibit 6 show 14 two different plans for the area between the entryway and the bridge. Additionally, KCLS has misinterpreted requests by the public in regard to the wedge in the plaza. The public wants the wedge 15 to provide access to the bridge into the vestibule to provide an entrance from the bridge. The interior door should be moved to column B to accomplish this task. KCLS claim the bracings do not allow 16 this, but, based on Mr. Ouellete's review of the plans, it is possible. KCLS has denied all requests for 17 a bridge entrance and has failed to provide reasons for their decisions. KCLS has failed to properly address citizen concerns. The citizens did not want to file an appeal, but KCLS's refusal to consider 18 possible alternatives drove the decision. 19 David Keyes testified that, if the design is revised to have the main public entry be from the deck, the vestibule could have two sets of doors. There is space for a pair of 8'6" doors as long as they are 20 adjacent to column B. This is reasonable, sufficient mitigation. The citizens will accept the changes 21 to the library space, if KCLS will protect the historically and culturally important entryway. The current circulation pattern must be maintained. Mr. Keyes submitted a recording of public comments 22 from a March 19 KCLS Trustees Board Meeting where citizens commented on the new library plans. Citizens express their concern over the removal of the bridge entryway. 23 Applicant Testimony 24 Ruth Baleiko, Project Architect, stated that the building was originally built in 1965 and remolded in 25 1986. The building has already been significantly changed from its original state. The planned 26 improvements would remove an addition that was added in the 1986 remodel on the park side. The glazing and solid panels would be returned, in large part, to their positions held in 1965. In regard to SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 8 3 4 5 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 the entryway, the proposal is the most functional for library use and safety. Having to create new or larger vestibules for a different entryway takes from library space. Entryways require lighting, and lighting over rivers is a difficult process with strict standards. KCLS will be able to provide better lighting with the current plan. The bridge will be one of the first places to gather ice in the winter, thus it is a safety hazard for people traveling to the door. The bridge is staying as is, except for the removal of the entryway. The added wedge will help join the bridge and proposed front entryway. In regard to the citizens' door proposal, doors in a sequence must have specific paths of travel in egress situations. The proposal would not meet all of the clearance standards. It would not meet code minimums, nor have sufficient standards of care necessary in renovation projects. City Testimony Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, noted that the comment letters from the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation were received following the decision on the SEPA review. After reviewing the comments, the City added a condition of approval as part of the site plan process. The public notice procedures have been addressed in the summary of judgment. Appellant Rebuttal David Keyes testified that the structure was superficially renovated in 1986. These changes do not prevent the building from having historical significance. Many other projects that had undergone significant renovation have been marked as historically protected. KCLS has failed to address safety concerns from the site line of the park. In regard to ADA standards, the library does not have to meet the same requirements as a hospital or other facility. The distance from the parking space to entrance does not have to be as close as other types of facilities. In regard to the bridge freezing, the new vestibule will also be over open air (a bank) so there is the same potential for freezing. The travel distance from the park to the entry in the new design is approximately 120ft. The lack of entryway from the bridge creates confusion and insufficiency. The vestibule could be arranged differently to provide for the bridge entry. In regard to the efficiency of library space, KCLS always uses this reason for decisions. The library will have plenty of space (20 percent more area in the support spaces) with the new plan and would not suffer from creating bridge entry. Exhibits Exhibit 1-21 listed on page 2 of the staff report Exhibit 1.7a 6125113 letter to Greg Smith from Gretchen Kaehler Exhibit 17b 6121113 email from Chris Moore to Vanessa Dolbee Exhibit 17c letter from Michael Houser to Nicola Robinson dated June 20, 2013 Exhibit 17d letter from Michael Houser dated July 30, 2013 Exhibit 22 July 5° 2013 filed Appeal SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 0 0 Exhibit 23 letter to Greg Smith from Ruth Baleiko Exhibit 24 Motion from city w/ 4 attachments Exhibit 25 Declaration from Dr. Elizabeth Stuart Exhibit 26 Correspondence between applicant, appellants. City, and Hearing Examiner Exhibit 27 City Powerpoint Exhibit 28 Paul Ouellette Package of Materials Exhibit 29 David Arthur Johnston Phone Comments Exhibit 30 Judy Milligan Written Comments Exhibit 31 Richard Bray Written Comments Exhibit 32 Renton Reporter Survey July 26, 2013 Exhibit 33 City of Renton SMP excerpts Exhibit 34 Excerpts from SEPA checklist and Ossenkop comments Exhibit 35 Environmental checklist Exhibit 36 Renee Fabre Written Comments submitted July 29, 2013 Exhibit 37 Recording of March 19, 2013 KCLS Trustees Meeting Exhibit 38 Statement and Appeal Letter from July 28, Ouellette Exhibit 39 Jeannie Greene -Crook Written Comments Exhibit 40 Kathy Ossenkop Written Comments Exhibit 41 SEPA Appellant Summary Judgment Response Brief Exhibit 42 City Summary Judgment Reply Brief Exhibit 43 SEPA Appellant Sur -response Exhibit 44 City Sur -reply SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL FINDINGS OF FACT 10 4 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 0 Procedural: Applicant. King County Library System (KCLS). 2. Hearin The Examiner held a hearing on the subject application on July 30, 2013 at 1:00 pm in the City of Renton Council Chambers. The record was left open for a response and reply to a motion for summary judgment filed by the City of Renton a week prior to the hearing, with a final reply due August 8, 2013. The record was extended to August 14, 2013 to give the parties an additional opportunity to respond to new information provided in the City's summary judgment2 reply_ Substantive: 3. Project Description. KCLS has applied for site plan approval for the remodel of the existing library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The library serves as a unique city landmark in that it spans the Cedar River. KCLS is undertaking the remodel in order to provide for seismic upgrades and other improvements that will bring the building into better compliance with current code requirements. The remodel will be built within the existing footprint and would reduce the size of the library by 2,720 square feet, reducing it to a footprint that is closer in area to the library when it was originally built in 1965. The remodel would also result in an approximately 503 foot relocation of the primary entrance to the library from the midway point of its southern face as it spans across the river to the Cedar River to the southwestern corner of the library. The City of Renton issued a mitigated determination of nonsignificance for the project. Citizens to the Save the Cedar River Library—Again! ("SEPA appellants") filed a timely appeal of the determination. The SEPA appeal was consolidated with the site plan application. Overall the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. 2 The summary judgment was submitted by the City a week in advance of the hearing. The City's motion was timely filed under City regulations, but the examiner provided the SEPA appellants with an opportunity to respond to the motion after the hearing. The reason was that there was insufficient time for the examiner to provide a reasonable response time to the moderately lengthy motion while also ruling upon it within a week's time. The summary judgment motion essentially put the SEPA appellants in the unfair position of having to defend their entire appeal within a few days' time before the scheduled hearing date. Of course. by allowing for responses to the motion after the hearing., the summary judgment motion was no longer a summary judgment motion but rather just constituted legal briefing for the City and SEPA appellants. For this reason no ruling is being issued on the summary judgment motion. The arguments of that motion have simply been considered in the issuing of the final decision. ' This figure is highly approximate and could range anywhere from 40 to 60 feet, depending upon how the distance is measured. SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL I1 2 31 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 9 0 The subject site is bordered on the north by Liberty Park; the cast by the Cedar River and old City Hall; to the south by the existing parking; and to the west by Mill Ave S and the existing parking lot. 4. Adequacy of Infrastructure/Public Services. The project will be served by adequate infrastructure and public services as follows: A. Water and Sewer Service. Water and sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. Since the proposal will actually reduce the size of the current library and there has historically been adequate sewer and water service to the building, no issues as to adequacy of water and sewer are anticipated. B. Fire and Police. Police and Fire Prevention staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development provided the existing use has not changed and the site of the building is primarily the same. C. Drainage. A drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the site plan application. City staff determined that the report complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. A final Technical Information Report is required with the building permit. D. Transportation. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. The current vehicular access to the site is via Mill Ave. S at two locations. Additionally, the building can also be accessed via Liberty Park. Because the building is currently a public library, there are no anticipated changes in impacts to the existing street system as a result of the facilities upgrades. Traffic is anticipated to remain the same as under existing conditions. Comments were made at hearing that the relocation of the entrance to the library could result in changes to parking lot circulation as well as off-site impacts, most notably creating a potential need for a signal light at an adjacent intersection. City engineering staff testified that these issues had been considered and it was concluded that parking was still adequate. The staff also noted that traffic at the adjacent intersection will be routinely monitored to determine if changes in traffic merit a traffic light. E. Open Space. The applicant has incorporated an entry plaza to the building, located on the south side near the main entrance. This entry plaza serves as a distinctive project focal point. The plaza is proposed to incorporate benches and landscaping to allow for passive activities. In addition, the existing library spans the Cedar River which allows for visual SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 12 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ►J access to the river via the building's windows and the pedestrian bridge which provides access to Liberty Park. Liberty Park provides both active and passive relational opportunities for the users of the library, including a playground, skate park, baseball fields, and access to the Cedar River trail among other amenities. The combination of the upgraded plaza space, pedestrian benches, landscaping, and the associated Liberty Park would provide for the recreational needs of the users. 5. Adverse Impacts. There are no probable significant adverse impacts associated with the project. Few adverse impacts are anticipated since the proposed remodel will be within the existing footprint and result in a reduction in size. impacts are more specifically addressed below: A. Cultural and Historical Resources. The primary focus of the SEPA appeal was the cultural and historical impact of moving the primary access of the library from its central position over the river to the southeastern corner of the building. The location of the library entrance is of environmental significance, but its relocation does not qualify as a probable significant environmental impact under SEPA. Many persons could reasonably conclude that moving the entrance 50 feet has little or no historical or cultural significance. With the limited (but compelling) exception of testimony from the Washington Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation ("DAIIP") and the architect of the building, the historical and cultural significance of the door location is almost entirely a matter of highly subjective personal taste. In the absence of any objective standard or formal historical or cultural designation of the door location, there is limited factual or legal basis to conclude that the relocation has a probable significant adverse impact. When the substantial weight given to the SEPA responsible official is factored into the analysis, there is no choice but to conclude that relocation will not create probable significant adverse environmental impacts. As discussed in the conclusions of law, the door location does not have to be formally designated as a historic or cultural resource in order for the relocation to qualify as a probable significant adverse environmental impact. However, in the absence of that designation there should be some very compelling evidence that would convince most reasonably minded persons that the feature in question is historically or culturally significant. Evidence of this nature could be expert testimony on the fact that the door has historically served as a focal point for views up the river; that the door is a focal point in the City's logo; or that it otherwise features prominently in recurring representations of the City. Instead of providing evidence that the door location is central to the identity of the City or is otherwise culturally or historically significant, the SEPA appellants largely focused upon the fact that many city residents like the location of the door. They enjoy the views along the bridge as they access the library and find the central location optimal for people accessing the library from the western side of the building. This type of testimony is largely overshadowed by the fact that the new location is optimal for the parking lot (from which the majority SITE PLAN &. SEPA APPEAL 13 I patrons presumably arrive) and more readily accessible for persons with disabilities. The 2 overwater experience is reduced somewhat by the relocation, but that view is easily recaptured by anyone who simply takes a stroll across the bridge or takes in the views from inside the 3 building. 4 The most compelling testimony supporting the SEPA appeal is Ex. 17(D), the July 30, 201.3 5 letter from DAHP. Jn that letter DAHP notes that the library is eligible for listing on the National Historic Register or Historic Places, that the building "has significance in terms of its 6 direct connection to the growth and development of the City of Renton in the post WWII era" 7 and that one of its "character defining features" is "the public access to the building on the Cedar River side via a bridge". In short, an expert on historical buildings who has likely S reviewed hundreds or thousands of such buildings has found the entrance location to be a unique and character defining architectural feature. The written statement from the architect of 9 the current building, David Johnston, Ex. 29, somewhat supports the findings of DAHP. In his written statement Mr. Johnston notes that the building as a whole was "important" and 10 from a historic design perspective the building is a `first". However, Mr. Johnston did not 11 expressly single out the location of the entrance as historically or culturally significant, but only that it would be poor design to locate it on the land side of the building. 12 The DAHP and Johnson testimony establish that the location of the entrance has some 13 significance, but the question remains whether the location is significant enough to qualify as 14 a probable significant adverse environmental impact. It is a close question. Ultimately, the answer has to be no because of the deference that must be provided to the determination of the 15 SEPA responsible official. 16 The determinative factor in assessing the DAHP and Johnston testimony is the focus of 17 DAHP and Johnston on the overall integration of the library building into the river as opposed to simply the building itself. DAHP does not advocate the retention of the building, but rather 18 notes in Ex. 17(A), its June 25, 2013.comment letter, that the applicant should "capture the building's contribution to local history into planning of the new building." Similarly, when 19 discussing the importance of the building Mr. Johnston focuses on the functional aspects of the building design and does not state that the building itself should be preserved. Under 20 Johnson and DAHP, the relevant inquiry in assessing significance is how much the relocation 21 of the door detracts from the functionality of its design, specifically whether the relocation will significantly detract from the building's integration into its river setting. This puts us 22 back into the subjective assessment of degree --- the relocation detracts somewhat from the visual experience of the river as one enters the building, but as noted previously this is easily 23 recaptured by simply walking across the bridge or enjoying the views through the windows of 24 the library. Reasonable minds could easily differ on whether the relocation creates a significant reduction in river integration. When faced with such a debatable point, the 25 deference required of the SEPA responsible official prevails. 26 SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 14 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 B. Geologically Hazards_ The building is located in a seismic hazard area. A geotechnical report, Ex. 21, was prepared to evaluate the seismic risks and contains numerous recommendations to ensure building integrity and stability during a ``design level earthquake"_ The recommendations of the geotechnical report are imposed through the MDNS. C. Views. The proposal will reduce view impacts by reducing the size of the existing building. D. Li htin . The conditions of approval require a lighting plan subject to approval of City staff as consistent with all applicable lighting standards and also in consideration of impacts to the environmental resources of the river. E. Natural Features and Landscaping. The existing site is currently vegetated with ornamental landscaping and lawn areas in the vicinity of the existing structure. Scattered around the site are deciduous and coniferous trees/shrubs (see Wildlife and Stream sections for riparian vegetation information). The existing site contains 16 trees of which all will be retained with the exception of one 12 -inch diameter Cherry tree located in the southeast corner of the site. The removed Cherry tree is proposed to be replaced with a 2 - inch caliper River Birch tree. In addition, to the 12 -inch Cherry tree, one street tree along Mill Ave. S is proposed to be removed. This is a result of the sanitary sewer line improvements required for the project. This tree would be replaced in the same location with a 2 -inch caliper Northern Red Oak. A conceptual landscape plan was submitted with the project application. The landscape plan includes a planting plan including 8 new trees. The proposed tree species consist of Vine Maple, Northern Red Oak, River Birch trees. The shrubs proposed largely consist of. Maidenhair Fern, Deer Fern, Sward Fern, False Solomon's Seal, Subalpine spiraea, and white spirea_ The new landscaping is related to restoration of areas that would be disturbed to install the augercast piles and concrete abutments. The new landscaping defines the entrance, would provide shade and generally enhances the appearance of the project. Existing landscaping is proposed to be retained in the parking lot and along the perimeter of the parking lot. In addition, the street trees along Mill Ave. S would remain, with the exception of one tree which would be replaced following utility installation. The land scape land plan submitted by the applicant was conceptual; as such staff recommends as a condition of approval that a final detailed landscape plan shall be submitted for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. The applicant provided a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013. The Stream Study concludes that there would be no direct impacts to the Cedar River, adjacent riparian habitat or State Shoreline area anticipated during or after construction, resulting in no net loss of ecological functions. This conclusion is based on the following reasons: 1) all work would occur within the footprint of the existing development for the library and would stay above the 100 -year SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 1.5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 flood plain and above the OHWM; 2) the footprint of the existing disturbed/developed area within the shoreline zone would not be expanded as a result of the project; 3) all existing shoreline vegetation would remain intact; 4) portions of the existing library structure would be demolished which would result in a net reduction of approximately 1,700 square feet or 7 percent of the library structure's building itself and adjacent pedestrian bridge; 5) Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be implemented during construction to minimize temporary construction impacts to the aquatic environment; and 6) the project would comply with all applicable City ordinances including, but not limited to, stormwater management requirements, and those related to traffic, noise and aesthetics during and after construction. The applicants will also be required to apply for an administrative shoreline substantial development for the permit, which will ensure compliance with the City's shoreline regulations. The existing site topography consists of steep slopes along the north and south edges of the river channel. The grades of the river banks range from elevation 45 at the top of the slope to elevation 26 at the river bottom. Beyond the river banks, the site grades to the north and south of the buildings is relatively flat. The proposed grading is primarily a result of the requirement to install the below -grade concrete abutments, which would require 900 cubic yards of excavation and 360 cubic yards of fill. The concrete abutments avoid impacts to the existing natural features and do not impact existing site topography. All areas disturbed during construction are proposed to be restored with new pathways, landscaping, and/or plaza space. In addition to its location over the Cedar River, the site is located in a seismic hazards area and the Aquifer Protection Zone 1. There is also a 100 year flood plain and a floodway associated with the Cedar River and the banks of the river have been identified sensitive and protected slopes. Based on the project application material, no work is proposed below the ordinary high water mark of the Cedar River and therefore no work would occur in the flood plain or floodway, or on the steep slopes i.e. the river bank. Conclusions of Law 1. Authoriiy. RMC 4-9-200(D)(2)(a) authorizes the hearing examiner to hold public hearings on site plan applications when the environmental review committee determines that the public has raised significant unresolved issues. 2. Zoning/Comprehensive Plan_ Designations. The property is zoned Center Downtown as detailed in POP No. 6 of the staff report. The comprehensive plan map designation is Urban Center Downtown in Design District A. 3. Site Plan Review Criteria. Site plan review standards are governed by RMC 4-9-200(E)(3), which are quoted below and applied through corresponding conclusions of law. SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL a 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 0 4. SEPA Review Criteria. 'There are only two reasons to overturn an MDNS: (1) there are unmitigated probable significant adverse environmental impacts; or (2) the SEPA responsible official has not undertaken an adequate review of environmental factors as required by SEPA regulations. Each grounds for reversal will be separately addressed below. A. Probable Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts. The primary relevant inquiry for purposes of assessing whether County staff correctly issued an MDNS is whether the project as proposed has a probable significant environmental impact. See WAC 197-11-330(1)(b)_ if such impacts are created, conditions will have to be added to the MDNS to reduce impacts so there are no probable significant adverse environmental impacts. In the alternative, an EIS would be required for the project. In assessing the validity of a threshold determination, the determination made by the City's SEPA responsible official shall be entitled to substantial weight. WAC 197-11-6 (3)(a)(viii). B_ Adequate Environmental Review The second reason an MDNS can be overturned is if the SEPA responsible official did not adequately review environmental impacts in reaching his threshold determination. The SEPA responsible official must make a prima facie showing that he has based his determination upon information reasonable sufficient to evaluate the impacts of a proposal. The courts have never actually overturned a decision for inadequate review. These results provide some insight as to how deferential the courts have been in applying the adequacy standard, but do not serve to eliminate the oft -repeated judicial requirement that environmental factors must be adequately considered to support a threshold determination. As recently as 2010, the courts have ruled that an agency's threshold determination is entitled to judicial deference, but the agency must make a showing that "environmental factors were considered in a manner sufficient to make a prima facie showing with the procedural requirements of SEPA." Chuckanul Conservancy v. Washington State Dept. ref Natural Resources, 156 Wn. App. 274, 286- 287, quoting Juanita Bay Valley Community Assn v. City of Kirkland, 9 Wn. App. 59, 73 (1973). In applying this adequacy standard, on several occasions the courts have examined how thoroughly the responsible official reviewed environmental impacts in addition to assessing whether a proposal has probable significant adverse environmental impacts. See, e.g., Boehm v. City of Vancouver, 111 Wn. App. 711 (2002), Moss a City of Bellingham, 109 Wn. App. 6 (2001). In Moss, for example, the court recited the prima facie rule and then applied it as follows: The record indicates that the project received a great deal of review. The environmental checklist was apparently deemed insufficient, and therefore the SEPA official asked for additional information in the form of an EA. The City gathered SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 17 I extensive comments from agencies and the public, held numerous public meetings, and 2 imposed additional mitigation measures on the project before finally approving it. Notably, although appellants complain generally that the impacts were not adequately analyzed, they have failed to cite any facts or evidence in the record demonstrating 4 that the project as mitigated will cause significant environmental impacts warranting 5 an EIS. 6 109 Wn. App. at 23-24. 7 WAC 197-11-335 provides that a threshold determination shall be "be based upon information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the environmental impact of a proposal". The standard of review on 8 adequacy, therefore, is that the SEPA responsible official must make a prima facie showing that the 9 determination is based upon information reasonably sufficient to evaluate the impacts of a proposal. 10 A somewhat confusing facet of the standard requiring adequate review is WAC 197-11-680(3)(a)(ii). 11 "T'his WAC provision prohibits the appeal of intermediate steps of SEPA and only allows administrative appeals of threshold determinations and the adequacy of an EIS. SEPA appellant 12 arguments such as the SEPA checklist is incomplete or inaccurate arguably seeks a ruling on 13 intermediate steps of SEPA review, i.e. the adequacy of the checklist. The judicial standard requiring adequate environmental review was formulated before the adoption of WAC 197-11-680(3)(a)(ii) in 14 1984, but as demonstrated in the Moss case quoted above it was still applied to SEPA threshold 15 appeals well after 1984. The courts have yet to address the arguable conflict between. WAC 197-11- 680(3)(a)(ii) and the judicial adequacy of SEPA review standard. The ultimate resolution may be that 16 WAC 197-11-680(3)(a)(ii) prohibits administrative agencies from assessing adequacy of review but 17 the courts are still free to do so. Unless and until the issue of whether adequacy of review is germane to an administrative appeal is judicially resolved, the prudent approach is to consider the issue as is 18 done currently with cases such as Moss. Doing so will avoid the need for an evidentiary remand 19 should a reviewing court determine that adequacy is something the Examiner should have considered. 20 Practically speaking, a consideration of the adequacy of review rarely results in a reversal of a 21 threshold determination. In order to meet its burden of proof on adequacy, the SEPA appellant must often present the information the SEPA responsible official should have considered at the SEPA 22 appeal hearing. After the information is presented, the SEPA responsible official is often asked 23 whether he or she still believes the project has no probable significant adverse environmental impacts. If the responsible official responds that he or she does not see any reason to change the threshold 24 determination, the issue of adequate review becomes moot. This result is allowed because the courts 25 will consider information or mitigation supporting a determination that wasn't reviewed or imposed until after issuance of the threshold determination. 26 SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 18 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 0 Again, the Moss decision is instructive on the allowance for this type of post hoc rationalization. In Moss, the City of Bellingham added SEPA mitigation Treasures after the SEPA responsible official issued the MDNS. The court sustained the MDNS on the basis of subsequently imposed mitigation I measures as follows: Although the DNS was issued prematurely, it is difficult to see how the appellants were prejudiced. The city council imposed many additional mitigation measures on the project before approving it, thereby making it more environmentally friendly than the version in the DNS. Appellants suggest that the DNS misled the city council into believing that all of the impacts were capable of mitigation, but the record indicates that the project received a considerable degree oj'scrutiny. Furthermore, WAC 197-11-350 requires an EIS where a proposal continues to have a significant adverse environmental impact, even with mitigation measures. While all of the required mitigation measures should have been imposed before the DNS was issued, the appellants still have not shown that the approved project, as it was mitigated, remains above the significance threshold. 109 Wn. App. at 25. 5. Library Qualifies as a Historical and Cultural Resource. The library as a whole has cultural and historical significance that qualities as an element of the environment protected by SEPA. SEPA rules and Washington court opinions provide surprisingly little guidance on what qualifies as a cultural or historical resources. However, formal designation by a legislative or administrative body is not required as argued by the City to qualify a building for cultural or historical significance under SEPA. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 5(A), the integration of the library into the Cedar River is a historically unique and distinctive architectural feature that qualifies the design of the building as a whole as a historical and cultural resource. As discussed in the preceding conclusion of law ("COL"), an EIS is required for a proposal that creates "probable significant environmental impacts". Of central importance to this SEPA appeal is whether the impacts cited by the appellants qualify as "environmental". WAC 197-11-740 defines "environTnenf' as limited to the elements identified in WAC 197-11-444. WAC 197-11-444(2)(vi) identifies "historic and cultural preservation" as an element of the environment. There is no WAC definition or Washington court opinion that defines historic or cultural resources or preservation, nor is there any readily accessible National Environmental Policy Act decision addressing the issue. However, as determined in FOF No. 5(A), the architecturally unique features of the building and its relationship to Renton's development as a community qualifies it as a historic and cultural resource. SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 19 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 0 • In its motion for summary judgment, the City argues that since the building has never been formally designated as a historic or cultural building, it is not historically or culturally significant for purposes of SEPA. The City provides no legal authority for this position. In point of fact, the one Washington court opinion that indirectly addresses the issue supports a contrary position. See Concerned Taxpayers v. WSDOT, 90 Wn. App. 225 (1998). The Concerned Citizens case involved the adequacy of a final environmental impact statement in its assessment of the potential removal of a farm for a highway project. According to the decision, the farm "appeared" eligible for inclusion in the National Register for Historic places but no formal designation by any government agency was identified. Despite this, the farm was found to be historically and culturally significant because it was built in 1925 and was "one of the few, if not the only, complete assemblages of historic -era farm buildings in the project area". The parties to the Concerned Citizens case did not contest the SEPA responsible official determination that the farm had cultural significance, so the issue was not directly addressed by the appellate court. However, it is noteworthy that the issue of cultural significance was completely uncontested simply because the farm was several decades old and unique to the area. As determined in the Finding of Fact ("FOF") No. 5(A), the library is also unique and of historical importance. 6. Relocation of Entrance not "Significant" Under SEPA. Although the building as a whole qualifies as a historical and cultural resource, as determined in FOF No. 5(A) the proposed relocation of the front entrance does not qualify by itself as a "significant" environmental impact. WAC 197-11- 794(1) defines "significant" as "a reasonable likelihood of more than a moderate adverse impact [on] environmental quality." As demonstrated by the City's opinion and the testimony of others at the hearing, there is a difference of opinion on whether the relocation significantly impacts the building as a historical and cultural resource. This difference of opinion is reasonably based, since the most prominent feature of the building by far is its location across the river and not the centrally located entrance. Visual access of the river to library patrons is arguably not significantly affected by the relocation since the river can still be viewed by walking across the pedestrian bridge or through the library windows. Once it is established that the significance of an impact as subjective as the one at hand is reasonably debatable, the issue is out of the examiner's hands and no further environmental review can be required. There are two reasons the historic and cultural impacts cannot be interpreted as significant 4 The fact that a building can qualify as having cultural or historic significance without any formal designation to that effect does not mean that everyone with an old building has to worry about restrictions being imposed through SEPA. As required by RCW 43.21C.060, any mitigation imposed by SEPA has to be based upon adopted SEPA policies and the mitigation must he reasonable and capable of being accomplished. The fact that `unlisted" building may sometimes qualify as a historical or cultural license does not give a municipality unfettered discretion to impose as many restrictions as it desires_ It simply means that the historical/cultural significance of the building must be evaluated as part of the SEPA review process. SITZ; PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 20 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 11 I2 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 in this case. First, an ordinance which requires the doing of an act in terms so vague that men [and women] of common intelligence must necessarily guess at its meaning and differ as to its application, violates the first essential of due process of law. Anderson v. Issaquah, 70 Wn. App. 64 (1993). Requiring further environmental review or mitigation on the characterization of the historical/cultural impacts as significant arguably violates the due process rights of the applicant. Second, and far more conclusive, the determination of the SEPA responsible official must be given substantial weight. The arguments for and against significance in this case are equally compelling and reasonable. The required deference is completely determinative in the resolution of this issue. The City also argues in its summary judgment brief that the impacts are not significant when balanced against other competing environmental interests, citing Overlake Fund v. Shoreline Hearings Board, 90 Wn. App. 746 (1988). The Overlake case was based upon the application of shoreline regulations for a shoreline permit application. It did not deal with an assessment of environmental impacts under SEPA. More importantly, WAC 197-11-330(5) requires that "[a] threshold determination shall not balance whether the beneficial aspects of a proposal outweigh its adverse impacts, but rather, shall consider whether a proposal has any probable significant adverse environmental impacts_.. " Tobe clear, the conclusions of this decision were not based upon any balancing of environmental impacts. The significance of the door relocation was assessed entirely on its own impacts. T Reduction in Building Area Not Significant. The SEPA appeal notes on its grounds for appeal (Ex. 22) that the proposed 7% reduction in building area results in a loss of public shoreline access and recreational use. To the extent the SEPA appellants were arguing this loss is a probable significant adverse environmental impact, there is nothing in the record to support such a determination. The pedestrian bridge does not appear to be reduced to any meaningful degree and visual access for library patrons is fully maintained through the extensive amount of windows included in the proposal. S. Environmental Review Adequate. The level of environmental review conducted by the SEPA responsible official was adequate as required by SEPA. The SEPA appeal (Ex. 22) is primarily focused upon assertions that information contained in the environmental checklist is either incomplete or erroneous. Most of these assertions were based upon the premise that the library is a cultural and historical resource. Ideally, the environmental checklist or other documents used for SEPA review should have recognized the historical and cultural significance of the library. However, the information reviewed by the SEPA responsible official before issuance of the MDNS did include the fundamental reasons why the library qualifies as a historic and/or cultural resources, i.e. its architectural features, its integration into the Cedar River and its date of construction. Further, as discussed in the review of the Moss court decision in COL No. 4, information considered after the issuance of an MDNS can also be considered in assessing adequacy SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 21 0 0 1 of review. In this regard, comments from DAHP and the SEPA appellants were submitted for review 2 prior to the site plan hearing along with the staff report. The SEPA Appellants also provided a 3 significant amount of information on the historical and cultural significance of the proposal during the hearing on their SEPA appeal. In short, a significant amount of information on the cultural and 4 historical significance of the proposal was considered prior to the issuance of any development 5 permits. In this regard, the purpose of SEPA, to provide for informed environmental decision making, has been served. 6 The only remaining legal issue is whether the information provided by DAHP and the SEPA 7 Appellants is legally adequate for purposes of environmental review. That issue is easily resolved by g the Concerned Citizens discussed in. COL No. 5. As noted previously, Concerned Citizens involved the adequacy of an EIS analysis of the potential removal of a historic farmhouse for a highway 9 project. On this issue the court found the level of environmental review adequate in the EIS on 10 impacts to the farm even though it was just a paragraph long. That paragraph simply noted the age of the farm, its distinctive architectural features and that its features were unique to the area. The SEPA 1 appellants have succeeded in presenting more environmental information than that found adequate in 12 the Concerned Citizens case. 13 9. Notice Adequate. The SEPA Appellants' allegations of improper notice are dismissed as 14 abandoned or in the alternative the appellants have failed to establish improper notice by failing to provide any evidence to support their claim. 15 The SEPA appellants assert in their SEPA appeal that improper notice was provided for the "Land 16 Use Master Application" as well as the SEPA threshold determination. The appellants did not 17 identify any code section that the City allegedly failed to follow. The appellants also did not specifically identify who should have received notice, other than to generally note that unspecified 18 persons who have already been identified as parties in interest in a document not in evidence had not 19 been notified and that unspecified persons had provided public comment to the City Council and had not been notified. Beyond these generic comments in the SEPA appeal statement, no further 20 evidence was provided by the SEPA appellants. Given a complete absence of any evidence beyond 21 unsupported allegations, the SEPA appellants notice claims are dismissed as abandoned or in the 22 alternative it is determined that they have failed to provide any evidence to establish that notice was inadequate. 23 Site Plan 24 25 26 s The SEPA appellants also asserted that it did not appear that DAtTP had been timely notified, but abandoned that contention once DAHP clarified that it had received timely notice of the threshold determination. SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 22 I RMC 4-9-200(E)(3): Criteria: The Administrator or designee must find a proposed project to he in 2 compliance with the fallowing: 3 a. Compliance and Consistency: Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and approvals, including: 4 r. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan, its elements, goals, objectives, and 5 policies, especially those of the applicable land use designation; the Community Design 6 Element; and any applicable adopted Neighborhood Plan; 7 ii. Applicable land use regulations, - 8 iii_ Relevant Planned Action Ordinance and Development Agreements; and 9 iv. Design Regulations. Intent and guidelines of the design regulations located in RMC 4- 10 3-100- 11 12. The proposal meets the City's comprehensive plan, zoning ordinance and design guidelines as 12 detailed in pages 6-18 of the staff report, adopted by this reference as if set forth in Rill. The proposal is not subject to a planned action ordinance or development agreement as noted in the staff report_ 13 RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(b): Off -Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and 14 uses, including; 15 L Structures: Restricting overscale structures and overconcentration of development on a 16 particular portion o f the site; 17 ii. Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, 18 walkways and adjacent properties; 19 iii. Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities, rooftop equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views 20 from surrounding properties,- 21 roperties;21 iv. Views. Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual 22 accessibility to attractive natural features; 23 v. Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between development and 24 surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance the appearance of the project; and 25 26 vi. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to avoid excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets. SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 23 4 6 7 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 13. The remodeled building will be located in the same location as the existing structure resulting in no change to the existing concentration of development at any particular location of the site. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4, no significant changes to vehicular or pedestrian circulation are anticipated, so existing road and trail linkages are adequate. As proposed, the roof top equipment would be screened with a metal grating system. Loading areas will remain unchanged by the proposal. The refuse and recycling is proposed to be approximately in the same location as under current conditions; however the new proposal would add screening elements to the design which are not currently provided. The proposed screen would be made of metal grating and 12 -foot wide self- closing doors. The screening is proposed to be 6 feet in height. For views, the proposal will maintain visual access to the Cedar River as detailed in Finding of Fact No. 5. The relocation of the door will reduce visual access to patrons accessing the library, but this is offset by improvements in accessibility and visual access is still readily available through the library windows and for those who traverse the pedestrian bridge. The project site is already fully landscaped and a landscaping plan will be required to assure compliance with all applicable standards as outlined in FOF No. 5(E). New building and entry lighting would be included with the buildings rehabilitation. Lighting at the location needs to be balanced with the environmental considerations associated with the critical habitat provided in the Cedar River and the safety needs of a public library. As a part of the SEPA Environmental Review, a mitigation measure was required that balanced the safety needs of lighting with the potential for impacts on the salmon. Conditions of approval require shielded and cutoff lighting. A final lighting plan shall be submitted by the applicant as a condition of approval prior to building permit issuance. RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(c): On Site Impacts: Mitigation of impacts to the site, including; k Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement, spacing and orientation; U. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian and vehicle needs; iii. Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation and .soils, using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling; and limiting impervious surfaces; and iv. Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide shade and privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to enhance the appearance of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and protection ofplanting areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements. 14. The proposal is largely surrounded by public and uses and its placement, structure and orientation would have no discernible impact on privacy or noise and its scale is compatible with SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 24 I these adjoining public buildings. Further, the proposal involves a remodel substituting a building of 2 smaller scale within an existing footprint, so that the remodel will have no adverse impact on natural characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian 3 and vehicle needs. The proposal does not involve any appreciable increase in impervious surface, 4 includes restoration of all affected vegetation and involves a minimum cutting and filling as necessary to stabilize the structure from earthquake activity. The proposal will not adversely affect 5 natural features as determined in FOF No. 5. 6 RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(d): Access and Circulation: Safe and efficient access and circulation for all 7 users, including: g i_ Location and Consolidation: Providing access points on side streets or frontage streets rather than directly onto arterial streets and consolidation of ingress crud egress points on 9 the .site and, when feasible, with adjacent properties; 10 ii. ,Internal Circulation: Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, 11 including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, 12 drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways; 13 iii Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas; 14 15 iv. Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit, carpools and bicycle facilities and access; and 16 v Pedestrians. Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties. 17 15. As determined in FOF No. 4, the proposal will not appreciably change any vehicular or 1 pedestrian circulation and access to the project. The proposal will also not result in any physical 19 changes to existing access and circulation, which as noted in the staff report is adequate. For these reasons no changes to vehicular or pedestrian access is necessary. 20 21 RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(e): Open Space: Incorporating open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users 22 of the site_ 23 24 16. The criterion is met. As determined in Finding of Fact No. 4(E), the proposal includes open space focal points and includes and adjoins areas used for passive and active recreation. 25 RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(f): Views and Public Access: When possible, providing view corridors to 26 shorelines and Mt. Rainier, and incorporating public access to shorelines. SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 25 1 17. The proposal provides physical and visual access to the Cedar River shoreline. The proposal, 2 as a replacement of a building with larger scale, will not adversely affect any view corridor to Mr. Rainier. 3 RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(g): Natural Systems: Arranging project elements to protect existing natural 4 systems where applicable. 5 18. The proposal will not adversely affect the natural systems of the site, as determined in FOF 6 No. 5. 7 RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(h): Services and Infrastructure: Making available public services and 8 facilities to accommodate the proposed use - 9 19. The project is served by adequate services and facilities as determined in Finding of Fact No. 4. 10 11 RMC 4-9-200(E)(3)(i): Phasing: Including a detailed sequencing plan with development phases and estimated time frames, for phased projects. 12 20. The project is not phased. 13 14 DECISION 15 The SEPA appeal is denied and the SEPA threshold determination made by the City of Renton on 16 Renton Permitting File No_ LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM is sustained. The site plan application 17 for the same file number is approved as proposed in Exhibits 3-13 and described in this decision, subject to the following conditions: 18 1. The applicant shall comply with the three mitigation measures issued as part of the 19 Determination of Non -Significance Mitigated, dated June 17, 2013 (Exhibit 14). 20 2. The applicant shall conduct a professional archaeological survey of the project area prior to any ground disturbing activities. Such survey shall be provided to the Planning Department 21 and any recommendations which are included in the survey results shall be followed by the applicant. 22 3. A final detailed landscape plan shall be submitted for review and approval of the Current Planning Project Manager prior, to building permit issuance. 23 4. A detailed refuse and recycling plan shall be submitted with the building permit application 24 identifying compliance with the minimum standards. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to building permit issuance. 25 5. The applicant shall submit a site lighting plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager that includes shielded and cutoff lighting, prior to building permit 26 issuance. SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 26 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 DATED this 21 st day of August, 2013. r ,r Ph�Olbix"- Is City of Renton Hearing Examiner Appeal Right and Valuation Notices RMC 4-8-110(E)(14) provides that the final decision of the Hearing Examiner is subject to appeal to the Renton City Council. RMC 4-8-110(E)(14) requires appeals of the Hearing Examiner's decision to be filed within fourteen (14) calendar days from the date of the Hearing Examiner's decision. A request for reconsideration to the hearing a examiner may also be filed within this 14 day appeal period as identified in RMC 4-8-110(E)(13). A new fourteen (14) day appeal period shall commence upon the issuance of the reconsideration. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall — 7 I floor, (425) 430-6510. Affected property owners may request a change in valuation for property tax purposes notwithstanding any program of revaluation. SITE PLAN & SEPA APPEAL 27 r 0 0 Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments: For the Library LUA file... Bw Bonnie Walton Wednesday, August 14, 2013 8:10 AM Cynthia Moya Vanessa Dolbee FW: Case No. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Appellant Letter re Ex. A,v2,pdf From: DAVID KEYES [mailto:keyes28Caimsn.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 13, 2013 6:25 PM To: Bonnie Walton; Phil Olbrechts, Garmon Newsom I1 Subject: Case No. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Ms. Walton, Please accept my apologies and forward the attached document (Appellant Letter re Ex. A.v2) to Mr. Olbrechts, Mr. Newsom and others as required in this case. To Mr. Olbrechts and all addressees: Please also accept my apologies for having sent out a previous less -edited version of this letter. (The first version of the letter makes no reference in its filename to ".v2" Version 2 of this Letter, attached here, corrects primarily grammatical errors and deletes redundant phrases and is my intended entry into the Case record. Thank you, Respectfully, David A. Keyes I August 13, 2013 Hearing Examiner Mr. Phil Olbrechts c/o City Clerk City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 SUBJECT: Case No. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Renton Library at Liberty Park LETTER REGARDING EXHIBIT'A' & ASSOCIATED ARGUMENT In APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Mr. OI brechts, Thank you for your email yesterday regarding further argument or evidence in this case. Your point regarding assistance is taken. What follows is limited to the introduction of Exhibit A and the associated argument regarding lack of standing. First, regarding introduction of Exhibit A: We withdraw our ob'ection to the Respondent's introduction of Mr. Hauser's cover email of July 30 as an exhibit_ The error is mine alone in having too quickly scanned the Exhibit document_ In view that the text of Mr. Hauser's cover email did include his discussion of DAHP's receipt of City of Renton's Notice of Draft Determination and invitation to comment, a discussion not contained in either of his attached letters; the email did in fact provide new information appropriate to the Record. I would note that I did not see Mr. Hauser's cover email on the day of our Hearing, only his attached letter of the same date (July 30) and entered that letter as an Exhibit during the Hearing_ Second, regarding the Respondent's contention that our Group lacks standing to raise defects in notice to DAH P: Reference to original language contained in our Appeal Letter filed on July 5, 2013, is useful. Under "Grounds or Basis for this Appeal" our third outline Paragraph lists: 'C. Inconsistencies in the City's Notification Process relative to the Intake of the Land Use Master Application and the beginning of the Public Comment Period." And is followed by subparagraphs 'a' and 'b', with subparagraph 'b' reading: °(C).b. Apparent failure or procedural difficulties resulting in a lack of timely notification to the Washington State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) of this project's LUA and SEPA review.' When we received the July 21 notice of the draft Determination (M -DNS) for this project (a determination reached by the City's Environmental Review Committee on Monday July 17), listing DAHP as one of the parties having received Renton's earlier Notification of Completed Intake (for the LUA application) and invitation to comment, I immediately phoned Michael Hauser of DAHP to confirm firsthand if his Agency had actually LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Appellant Letter Regarding: Introduction of Ex A & Associated Argument Page 1 0 0 received that initial package but not notified the City of the DAHP's interest. He noted that certainly he had not received any direct contact on this project except from our group and communication with Chris Moore, Field Director of the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation. Nor had Mr. Hauser been aware of receipt of such any such package, notice or invitation for comment from the City of Renton or KCLS. After searching that day, Michael confirmed to me in a second phone call that neither he nor Ms. Kaehler had yet found record of Agency receipt of the City's notice. At that time, Michael left on a scheduled 2 -week vacation. Several days passed before we received a copy of the Planning Department's Report to the Hearing Examiner. This document recorded copies of the first direct correspondence from DAHP (Ms. Kaehler's letter dated June 25 and Mr. Griffith's email of June 26 to Ms. Dolbee) for this project. These two pieces certainly support an assumption that correspondence had not occurred earlier; however whether the City had in fact sent the first package to DAHP remained uncertain. Hence, in our Appeal text, paragraph C.b. reads "Apparent failure or procedural difficulties..." (Italics added_) In the end, each piece or incident of communication on which our Appeal language is based relies on my direct personal communication with the correct and presumably informed principal actor at DAHP or is directly supported by written correspondence made part of the Record. I carefully worded the language of our appeal so as to not overstate what we did or did not know. Please note that Ms. Kaehler is the Lead Archaeologist at DAHP and the current point for managing SEPA response, but Mr. Hauser is the Lead Architectural Historian and is referenced in both SEPA and DAHP publications and web citations as the appropriate agency contact for the purpose of Architectural History review. While Exhibit A demonstrates that the City Planning Department did forward the Notification of Completed Intake to DAHP, virtually nothing in any statement or evidence from the City of Renton, KCLS, or their agents has ever indicated any effort made by those Agencies to contact recognized experts outside and above their organizations regarding either Historical or Cultural values and resources present at or near the Cedar River Library site prior to the Environmental Review Committee reaching their dratDetermination on June 17 (published lune 21 ). The evidence we note, together with the absence of contradictory evidence from either the City or KCLS indicates this failure was initiated during production of the SEPA Checklist by KCLS and continued throughout City staff and Environmental Committee Reviews of the Land Use Application. We believe this constitutes a major omission and chain of procedural errors under SEPA rules for this project. In the case of architectural history, both SEPA documents and DAHP documents make clear that the primary source for such consultation is Mr. Hauser of the DAHP. Listing of a property on a historical register is only one of a number of criteria (and only one of three questions in Part 13 of the Checklist) and its absence is clearly not be enough for a SEPA Decision -maker (or Shorelines Reviewer) to rule against the presence of historic or cultural values, particularly where resources such resources may be "undocumented" or their existence "'probable". In fact the Mr. Hauser's determination that the existing Library is "ELIGIBLE" (Hauser 06.20.2013 letter to Ms. Robinson of our Group) is sufficient to establish the building as a "significant", if not currently "documented", historical resource for the purposes of SEPA and related Shorelines Review in this State. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Appellant Letter Regarding: Introduction of Ex A & Associated Argument Page 2 Regarding the our emphasis on the historic and cultural value of the existing building's entry via the bridge, note that Mr. Hauser concurs in his July 30 letter, describing the arrangement of this public access as one of the most important character -defining features of the historical building. You received testimony from a number of Renton residents regarding the cultural significance of this feature during the Hearing; together with statements of impact should it be lost. We argue that their testimony should be given great weight. Requiring a Detailed Cultural Assessment to be reviewed by DAHP and groups such as the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation also appears to be an option for this project under the City's Shorelines Management Plan. Lastly, we believe the additional and significant disparity arising from the City's (admittedly) good -faith attempt to meet with certain outside Review Agencies such as the Corps of Engineers, Department of Ecology and the Muckleshoot Tribe's Fisheries Department, but not others such as DAHP.constitutes a separate procedural error and appearance of unfairness, as outlined in Mr. Ossenkop`s testimony during the Hearing. At the very least, it may have been a contributing element in late response received from DAHP in this case. Respectfully Submitted, August 13, 2013 David A. Keyes Committee Officer for Citizen's to Save the Cedar River Library Again LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Appellant Letter Regarding: Introduction of Ex A & Associated Argument Page 3 Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: More for the library lua.... Bw Bonnie Walton Monday, August 12, 2013 2:13 PM Cynthia Moya FW: LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H RE: LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA --H Cynthia Maya From: Phil Olbrechts <olbrechtslaw@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:09 PM To: 'DAVID KEYES',- Vanessa Dolbee; Garmon Newsom B Cc: Bonnie Walton Subject: RE: LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H I've finally had an opportunity to read over the briefing to be able to respond to the request below. With one exception, the reply brief submitted by the City was limited to replying to the arguments made in the Appellant's response brief and does not present any significant new evidence or arguments that justifies additional briefing. I am able to determine whether any of the City's arguments mischaracterize evidence or arguments without the Appellant's assistance. One point that arguably merits additional input is Ex. A to the reply brief and the associated argument that the Appellants lack standing to raise defects in notice to DAHP. The Appellants may provide a written response to Ex. A and the standing argument by emailing or personal/mailed delivery to the City Clerk (Bonnie Walton — email address above) by 5:00 pm, 8/15/13. The City's reply must be received by 5:00 pm 8/19/13. My goal is to still have the decision completed by 8/22/13, although since I'm speaking at a conference that day the actual completion date may not be until 8/23/13. Other than the written argument on the DAHP notice, the record is closed. From: DAVID KEYES [mailto:keyes28(&msn.com] Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 8:46 AM To: Phil Olbrechts Cc: gnewsom(arentonwa.gov; Bonnie Walton, City Clerk Subject: LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Mr. Olbrechts, Late yesterday we received the Respondent's Reply Brief from the Renton City Attorney in this Case. We find the Respondent's Letter in this matter to be so egregious and inaccurate in: 1. Its misstatement of our arguments, its almost complete omission of elements of environmental law on which we base our arguments; 2. its patently false characterization of actual relevant history (which we argue is important here); 3. Its statement (Point 6, page 6 of Mr. Newsom' letter) that our group "have never proven or attempted to prove that the Mitigate(d) Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS) should be reversed..." (italics added); 4. Its introduction of Mr. Houser's cover email of the 30th as "new" information (both of this email's attachments covering the issues cited by the Respondent are already introduced into the Record as Exhibits...)... That we believe a letter of response by us is necessary and warranted. May we so respond? Or was the Hearing Phase closed upon your receipt of Mr. Newsom's Respondent's Reply yesterday afternoon? Are there considerations or conditions you may wish to place on such a letter? I can have such a letter emailed to The City Clerk, and directly to yourself and Mr. Newsom's office by 2:00 PM this afternoon. Thank you for your consideration in this matter_ Respectfully, David A. Keyes Committee Officer for Citizen's to Save the Cedar River Library Again (425) 757-1121 r� Cynthia Moya From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:41 PM 7o: Cynthia Moya Subject: Library file Attachments: Exhibit A for the Reply Brief; FW: LUA 13-0002SS, ECF, SM, SA -H; RE: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx More.... bw Cynthia Moya From: Sent: To: Subject: Attachments: Good Afternoon Bonnie, Garmon Newsom II Monday, August 12, 2013 2:29 PM Bonnie Walton Exhibit A for the Reply Brief -OTD90B.PDF Please forward this to the Hearing Examiner, and then separately to Mr. Keyes, Ms. Asher, and Ms. Robinson. Thank you. 6. orf e,�� It Senioi _assistant Cite Attorney Cite of Renton 100 S. 2nd Street P.O. Box 626 Renton WA 98006 425-430-6457 (Telephone) GNewsom cr,rentonwa_gov J-1 CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT This message may contain information that is protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product privilege. If this message was sent to you in error, any use, disclosure or distribution of its contents is prohibited. If you receive this message in error, please contact me at the telephone number or e-mail address listed above and delete this message without printing, copying, or forwarding it. Thank you. 1 EXHIBIT "A" .r-� n • Please find attached a follow-up letter regarding the historic significance and timeframe of my initial assessnnent regarding the historical significance of the Renton Library. After much digging around we have determined that in tact we did receive the initial SEPA documents however the paperwork was lost in our shuffle ofmanyundreds provide of SEPA reviews that we receive on a weekly basis. Note that our Local Govemment Archaeologist Gretchen comments to the City of Renton regarding the M -DNS on June 2e (attached). Michael Houser SWe Architectural Hk;torlan Departsrient of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 1063 S. Capital Way, Suite 106 Olympia, WA 98501 (360) 586-3076 michael.houser ahp.wa.cgou n 1 Cynthia Moya From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:37 PM To: 'DAVID KEYES (keyes28@msn.com)'; 'Beth Asher (betha@mittenthal.com)'; 'Nicola_rn@msn.com' Subject: FW: LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Attachments:-OTD90B.PDF Attached please find Exhibit A to the reply brief as referenced below. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton From: Phil Olbrechts Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:09 PM To: 'DAVID KEYES'; Vanessa Dolbee; Garman Newsom II Cc: Bonnie Walton Subject: RE: LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H I've finally had an opportunity to read over the briefing to be able to respond to the request below. With one exception, the reply brief submitted by the City was limited to replying to the arguments made in the Appellant's response brief and does not present any significant new evidence or arguments that justifies additional briefing. I am able to determine whether any of the City's arguments mischaracterize evidence or arguments without the Appellant's assistance. One point that arguably merits additional input is Ex. A to the reply brief and the associated argument that the Appellants lack standing to raise defects in notice to DAHP. The Appellants may provide a written response to Ex. A and the standing argument by emailing or personal/mailed delivery to the City Clerk (Bonnie Walton - email address above) by 5:00 pm, 8/15/13. The City's reply must be received by 5:00 pm 8/19/13. My goal is to still have the decision completed by 8/22/13, although since I'm speaking at a conference that day the actual completion date may not be until 8/23/13. Other than the written argument on the DAHP notice, the record is closed. ....... From: DAVID KEYES [mai Ito: keyes28Cnbmsn.com] Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 8:46 AM To: Phil Olbrechts Cc: gnewsom(&rentonwa.aov; Bonnie Walton, City Clerk Subject: LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Mr. Olbrechts, Late yesterday we received the Respondent's Reply Brief from the Renton City Attorney in this Case. We find the Respondent's Letter in this matter to be so egregious and inaccurate in: 1. Its misstatement of our arguments, its almost complete omission of elements of environmental law on which we base our arguments; 2. its patently false characterization of actual relevant history (which we argue is important here); 3. Its statement (Point 6, page 6 of Mr. Newsom' letter) that our group "have never proven or attempted to prove that the Mitigate(d) Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS) should be reversed..." (italics added); 1 4. Its introduction of Mr. Hou* cover email of the 30th as "new" inf*ation (both of this email's attachments covering the issues cited by the Respondent are already introduced into the Record as Exhibits_._)... That we believe a letter of response by us is necessary and warranted. May we so respond? Or was the Hearing Phase closed upon your receipt of Mr. Newsom's Respondent's Reply yesterday afternoon? Are there considerations or conditions you may wish to place on such a letter? I can have such a letter emailed to The City Clerk, and directly to yourself and Mr. Newsom's office by 2:00 PM this afternoon. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Respectfully, David A. Keyes Committee Officer for Citizen's to Save the Cedar River Library Again (425)757-1121 EXHIBIT "A" • • From: Houser. Micflael (DAHP) mailt :Mi h I Ha ser DAHP A.GOV] Sem Tuesday, 3uly 30, 2013 11:16 AM To: Vanessa Ddbee; [)AVID KEYES (keves28@msn.com_); Nicola Robinson (nicola rn@nn.c rn) Subject: RE: Renton Library Dear Nicola, David & Vanessa: Please find attached a follow-up letter regarding the historic significance and timeframe of my initial assessment regarding the historical significance of the Renton Library. After much digging around we have determined that in fact we did receive the initial SEPA documents however the paperwork was lost in our shuffle of the m=any hundreds of SEPA reviews that we receive on a weekly basis- Note that our Local Government Archaeologist, Gretchen Kaehler, did provide I comments to the City of Renton regarding the M -DNS on .lune 25'h (attached). Michael Houser State Architectural Hls�sn Deparbnent of Archaeology & Historic PresemaUdn 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 Olympia, WA 98501 (360) Wo -3076 . michael houser ahp.wa--q 1 0 0 C nthia Moya From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:34 PM To: 'Phil Olbrechts' Subject: RE: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx Attachments: OTD90B.PDF Attached is Exhibit A to the reply brief. I will send it separately to Mr. Keyes, Ms. Asher & Ms Robinson, as well. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton From: Bonnie Walton [mailto:Bwalton@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:15 PM To: 'Phil Olbrechts' Subject: RE: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx Yes, Garmon just let me know he forwarded the wrong Exhibit. I'll get the correct one to you as soon as I receive it. Bonnie From: Phil Olbrechts fmailto:olbrechtslaw@gmail.coml Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:13 PM To: Bonnie Walton Subject: RE: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx This looks like the Ex. A to the City's motion for summary judgment, submitted a month or two ag. I don't have Ex. A to the reply brief, that was submitted last Thursday. From: Bonnie Walton [ma i Ito: Bwalton@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:09 PM To: 'Phil Olbrechts' Subject: RE: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx Sorry. We didn't realize it was missing. Garmon just supplied it as attached. Bonnie, x6502 ................................... . . From: Phil Olbrechts fmailto:olbrechtslaw@email.coml Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 1:55 PM To: Bonnie Walton Subject: RE: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx Received, but not "Exhibit A" to the reply brief. Also, please advise the City Attorney's Office that I'm not a "pro tem" examiner as captioned in their pleadings. Not a big deal, but could be confusing to people. it appears this might be a hold -over to back when Renton had two examiners (me and Galt) working at the same time. Even though my contract has an expiration date, I'm the main examiner and a "pro tem" would be someone that is substituting for me. From: Bonnie Walton [rnailto:Bwalton@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 8:32 AM To: Phil Olbrechts (olbrechtslaw@grnail.com) Subject: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx Attached is the City Attorney reply as received in this office by email. Please acknowledge receipt, and also let me know if this needs to be copied to any other parties. Thank you. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 EXHIBIT "A" n �1 • E From: Houser,1401ael (DAHP) mail •Michaei.Houser DAMP. A. Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 11:16 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee; DAVID K YES fttgs28@msn.eom?; NicAa Robinson (nimla m2rnsn.com) suile+ct: RE: Renton Library pear Nicola, DaM & Vanessa:. Please find attached a follow-up letter regarding the historic significance and timeframe of my initial assessment regarding the historical significance of the Renton library. After much digging around we have determined that in fact we did receive the initial SEPA documents however the paperwork was lost in our shuNie of the many hundreds of SEPA reviews that we receive on a weekly basis. Note that our Local Government Archaeologist, Gretchen MOW. did provide comments to the City of Renton regarding the M -DNS on June 26' (attached). Michael Houser State Amhftectural Historian DeparbneM of Archaeology & H1SIorbc Preservation 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 Olympia, WA 98M I (360) 556-3076 michael. houser&ahP.wa,gov 1 'Cynthia Moya From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:34 PM To: 'Phil Olbrechts' Subject: RE: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx Attachments:--OTD90B_PDF Attached is Exhibit A to the reply brief. I will send it separately to Mr. Keyes, Ms. Asher & Ms Robinson, as well. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton From: Bonnie Walton [mailto:Bwalton(&Rentonwa.govj Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:15 PM To: 'Phil Olbrechts' Subject: RE: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx Yes, Garmon just let me know he forwarded the wrong Exhibit. I'll get the correct one to you as soon as I receive it. Bonnie From: Phil Olbrechts jmailto:olbrechtslaw(a)gmail.comI Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:13 PM To: Bonnie Walton Subject: RE: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx This looks like the Ex. A to the City's motion for summary judgment, submitted a month or two ag. I don't have Ex. A to the reply brief, that was submitted last Thursday. From: Bonnie Walton [mailto:Bwalton@Rentonwa._ocovv] Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 2:09 PM To. 'Phil Olbrechts' Subject: RE: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx Sorry. We didn't realize it was missing. Garman just supplied it as attached. Bonnie, x6502 From: Phil Olbrechts jmailto:olbrechtslaw(@.gmail.coml Sent: Monday, August 12, 2013 1:55 PM To: Bonnie Walton Subject: RE: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx Received, but not "Exhibit A" to the reply brief. Also, please advise the City Attorney's Office that I'm not a "pro tem" examiner as captioned in their pleadings. Not a big deal, but could be confusing to people. It appears this might be a hold -over to back when Renton had two examiners (me and Galt) working at the same time. Even though my contract has an expiration date, I'm the main examiner and a "pro tem" would be someone that is substituting for me. From: Bonnie Walton [mai Ito: Bwalton@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 8:32 AM To: Phil Olbrechts (olbrechtslaw@gmail.com) Subject: 2013 08 07 Reply Brief - Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library -M DNS Appeal.docx Attached is the City Attorney reply as received in this office by email. Please acknowledge receipt, and also let me know if this needs to be copied to any other parties. Thank you. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 2 EXHIBIT "A" .. r -,N n • A • From: Houser, MWU-,d (DAHp) rmailto-.Mirhael.HoLiserCcDDAHP.LA.Mfl Sem Tuesday, July 30, 2013 11:16 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee; DAVID KEYES (keves28@msr<, ); Nicola Robinson (nicola rnta Mn ---Qom) Subject: RE: Renton Library Dear Nicola, David & Vanessa: Please find attached a follow-up letter regarding the historic significance and timeframe of my initial assessment regarding the historical significance of the Renton Library, After much digging around we have determined that in fact we did receive the initial SEPA documents however the paperwork was lost in our shuffle of the many hundreds of SEPA reviews that we receive on a weekly basis. Note that our t_ocai Government Archaeologist, Gretchen Kaehler, did provide comments to the City of Renton regarding the M -ONS on June 2EP (attached). Michael Houser State Architectural Hisforian Department of Archaeology & Htatortc PrsservaWn 1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 Olympia, WA 9881 (360) 586-3076 michael.houser ah .wa. ov 1 Cynthia Maya From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 8-.48 AM To: Cynthia Moya Subject: FW: LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Attachments: LUA 13-0002SS, ECF, SM, SA -H The attached should be copied for the Library LUA file. Bw Cynthia Moya From: DAVID KEYES <keyes28@msn.com> Sent: Thursday, August 08, 2013 8:46 AM To: Phil Olbrechts Cc: Garmon Newsom H; Bonnie Walton Subject: LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Mr. Olbrechts, Late yesterday we received the Respondent's Reply Brief from the Renton City Attorney in this Case. We find the Respondent's Letter in this matter to be so egregious and inaccurate in: 1. Its misstatement of our arguments, its almost complete omission of elements of environmental law on which we base our arguments; 2. its patently false characterization of actual relevant history (which we argue is important here); 3. Its statement (Point 6, page 6 of Mr. Newsom' letter) that our group "have never proven or attempted to prove that the Mitigate(d) Determination of Non -Significance (MDNS) should be reversed..." (italics added); 4. Its introduction of Mr. Houser's cover email of the 30th as "new" information (both of this email's attachments covering the issues cited by the Respondent are already introduced into the Record as Exhibits...)... That we believe a letter of response by us is necessary and warranted. May we so respond? Or was the Hearing Phase closed upon your receipt of Mr. Newsom's Respondent's Reply yesterday afternoon? Are there considerations or conditions you may wish to place on such a letter? I can have such a letter emailed to The City Clerk, and directly to yourself and Mr. Newsom's office by 2:00 PM this afternoon. Thank you for your consideration in this matter. Respectfully, David A. Keyes Committee Officer for Citizen's to Save the Cedar River Library Again (425) 757-1121 • August 6, 2013 Hearing Examiner Mr. Phil Olbrechts c/o City Clerk City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 AUG 07 2013 RECEIVED CITYCLERK'S OFFICE SUBJECT: Case No. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Renton Library at Liberty Park APPELLANTS' RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT In APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Mr. Hearing Examiner, We (Ms. Beth Asher, Ms. Nicola Robinson and I, all Officers of Citizen's to Save the Cedar River Library Again) received via courier the Respondent's (City of Renton) Motion for Summary Judgment in the above Case on July 23, 2013. The deliveries were made at the very end of that workday, allowing only six days for response prior to the scheduled Hearing Date of July 30. The next day, July 24, you advised the City that their Motion was filed too close to the scheduled Hearing Date to allow a reasonable response in return from our Appellant Group and giving us a choice of maintaining the Hearing of our Appeal on July 30 or continuing it until August 13, 2013. In either option, the Case would be left open until August6/August 8 for our Response to the City's Motion and the City's Rebuttal of our Response. We replied to your offer in an email to you and copied to Mr. Warren and Mr. Newsom on July 25, stating: "At this time, we believe that the most effective and appropriate response we can make regarding the City's Motion is to present to you our planned testimony and arguments as to the facts of this case, as scheduled, at the July 30th Hearing...." However, we reserved the right to provide a written response to the City's Motion on August 61h, if we felt it (wise or...) necessary. In recognition of that statement, you inquired at the end of our July 30 Hearing, whether we were electing to provide a Letter of Response to the City's Motion as well and I replied "Yes". This Letter then, serves as that additional response. Please note we intend our testimony, exhibits and our arguments entered or made at the July 30 Hearing serve as part of a clear Response and Rebuttal to the City's Motion for Summary Judgment as well. This Letter is intended to summarize and supplement elements of our Case made at the Hearing in specific response to the City's Motion. As Appellant, Citizen's to Save the Cedar River Library Again respectfully requests that the Hearing Examiner deny the Respondent's request for an order for summary judgment in this Case, based on the following grounds. LUA 13-000255, ECF, 5M, SA -H Appellant Letter of Response to: Phil ►`��?«� City of Renton Motion for Summary Judgment Page 1 Grounds for Dismissal of Summary Judgment: 1. CR 56 referenced in the Motion's opening Request for Relief and cited again in the Respondent's Section IV Arguments and Authorities is not directly applicable to the Land Use Hearing at hand; 2. Our Appeal does not rely on whether either the KCLS Application for Land Use or the City of Renton's Environmental Review and draft SEPA Determination were inadequate or incorrect in their entirety, as the City's Motion and attached Exhibits seem to suggest; 3. Part III of The City's Motion contains a brief and we believe, distorted Statement of Issues. Only two issues are listed. They do not cover all elements of our original Appeal Letter nor the specifics of our arguments presented in the Hearing. Neither of the issues stated in the City's Motion should be regarded as sufficient grounds for denying either the Hearing or consideration of our Appeal; 4. Part IV, Evidence Relied On of the City's Motion lists in part, the attached Exhibits A through D. None of these contain sufficient fact to refute our arguments, individually or as a whole. 5. Much of Part (V) Argument and Authorities concerns itself with our listing of "a Full Environmental Impact Statement" as one alternative remedy. At the time we filed our Letter of Appeal, we understood that a full EIS must be made a part of an action appealing an M -DNS as a matter of form. Whether or not that understanding was correct, we were also clear in stating that modification of the project's currently proposed design "to directly address and mitigate its likely significant (adverse) impacts...(of the types listed previously)" was also a sought-after remedy. We believe that can be no question of there being Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts associated with this project as proposed. We clearly stated our arguments for that and believe we also demonstrated that neither KCLS or the City of Renton made adequate or appropriate effort in identification or due consideration of the significant cultural and historical resources present at this site. Further, this was done in spite of direct knowledge (by both the City of Renton and KCLS) of this project's intense and sustained Citizen interest; the significant popular dissatisfaction with KCLS' proposed designs and reduction of program area and specific public concern and input over KCLS' failure to respond to Citizen input regarding preservation of the unique and cherished functions present at the existing library entry. 6. We further made clear during the Hearing that the primary Remedy we seek is to achieve Mitigation of the Significant Adverse Impacts (destruction of the significant eligible Historical Resource and its unique and Culturally Significant direct bridge access to the Entry) through recognition, replication, incorporation and architectural celebration of these existing use and circulation patterns into design of the primary public entry for the renovated library. (KCLS preferred approach from the Parking lot is not precluded by this Alternative, it is achievable technically and impact on project cost and schedule is minimized if the design modification occurs at this time. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Appellant Letter of Response to: City of Renton Motion for Summary Judgment Page 2 • • 7. Under the State Environmental Policy Act, a decision to condition a project with such mitigation, or to require additional investigation and consideration via one of the EIS forms or another vehicle, is the province of the "Decision -Makers", in this case the Hearing Examiner. We regard the City's Motion as an attempt to circumvent the appeal process and the Examiner's authority. Discussion While SEPA itself does not compel environmentally wise choices, its ultimate purpose, is to provide decision - makers — in this case the Hearing Examiner - with all relevant information about the potential environmental consequences of their actions and to provide a basis for a reasoned judgment. Citizen Alliance to Protect our Wetlands v. City of Auburn, 126 Wn.2d 356, 362, 894 P.2d 1300. There can be no dispute that SEPA requires review of a project's impacts to historic and cultural resources. WAC 197-11-444(2)(b)(vi)_ Contrary to the argument made by the City's motion, SEPA review of cultural resources is not limited to review of designated landmarks. While Question 13(a) of the checklist asks for information about sites that are designated on historic registers, Question 13(b) is much broader and specifically requires the applicant to provide information, and the City to review information, concerning evidence of "cultural importance known to be on or next to the cite." (Checklist 13(b)). During the hearing we demonstrated to you that the entryway over the water is indeed of cultural importance because of the link or connection it provides the public between the river experience and the unique experience of entering and leaving this library. By placing the entry -way over the river, people are drawn to and are therefore provided with Visual Access to the water. The degree to which this Visual Access can be provided from the relocated entry as proposed in KCLS' design is not remotely comparable_ Nor is the River viewed to the same degree from the interior of the Library on the upstream face, even with the slightly increased glass area. Particularly from a sitting position, the bridge and its railings largely block a library patron's view of the River from the building interior. This is critically important information for the City, the Hearing Examiner and the public to understand. Again, the purpose of SEPA is to collect the relevant information and make sure that the ultimate decision -maker understands the impact of the decision. Byway of example why this information is important in this case, we noted that one of the necessary permits is shoreline substantial development permit. In order for the City to approve a shoreline permit, it must first find that the project is consistent with the Shoreline Master Program It is only logical, therefore, that the SEPA review collect sufficient information to aid the Hearing Examiner and City in reviewing the substantive shoreline permit application. But here, by leaving out all discussion of the cultural and historic entry and the connection it makes between the public and the river, the City and Hearing Examiner are being deprived of valuable information --that we believe is necessary for determining whether the permit is consistent with the Shoreline Master Program. That the importance of cultural significance or critical issues such as public access to Water views are more completely described under the State Shorelines Act or the City's Shoreline Plan is immaterial. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -ii T Appellant Letter of Response to: City of Renton Motion for Summary judgment Page 3 You have noted in previous correspondence, the obligation of the Hearing Examiner to give Substantial weight to testimony and decisions of the Reviewing Agency. In this case however, there has been no evidence that Members of the City's Planning Staff or Environmental Review Committee made any effort to either identify analyze or investigate through available contacts at DAHP the questions of Historical or Cultural Significance in or prior to the Committee's June 17 meeting. Even following their being contacted by Mr. Chris Moore of the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation and receipt of Gretchen Kaehler's letter on June 25th, there is no indication that the City understood the significance of the issue or the inadequacy of their deliberation. Even their submittals of letters later entered as exhibits indicate no new information or understanding. These exhibits simply repeat that there are no Historic listings in place on the site. That clearly is not adequate. Please reference the entire WAC 197-11, and in particular the following passages: • [WAC 197-11-055(2)(c • [WAC 197-11-030(2)(b) and (g)l; • [WAC 197-11-030(2)(f)l; • [WAC 197-11-030(2)(c)1; + Integration of SEPA with existing agency planning and licensing (permitting) procedures, so that the procedures run concurrently rather than consecutively [WAC 197-11-030(2)(e)1; • Integration of SEPA with agency activities at the earliest possible time to ensure that planning and decisions reflect environmental values, to avoid delays later in the process, and seek to resolve potential problems WAC 197-11-055(2)1. • SEPA also gives agencies the authority to condition or deny a proposal based on the agency's adopted SEPA policies and environmental impacts identified in a SEPA document: See RCW 43.21C.060, WAC 197-11-66Q and the Using SEPA in Decision Makin e section in the SEPA Handbook. • ESHB 1724 amendments to a number of laws, including the Growth Management Act [Chapter 36.70A RCW1, Shoreline Management Act RCW 90.58.0201 and SEPA. • The Lead Agency is to ascertain all interdependent pieces of the project been identified [WAC 197-11- 060(3)]? • Lead agencies to solicit comments from agencies with expertise to evaluate the environmental impacts of a proposal [WAC 197-11-3351. Also Included by Reference here is the full SEPA Handbook, available from the State Department of Ecology's website. Please note in particular two additional passages: LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H ^ Appellant Letter of Response to: City of Renton Motion for Summary Judgment Page 4 • Under 2.7.1.1 Tips: The lead agency is responsible for completing the environmental review process for all agencies with jurisdiction (WAC 197-11-600(4)(a)]. Other agencies with jurisdiction are not required to adopt the environmental documents issued by the lead agency for the same proposal; 2.8.3 Public Notice and Circulation of a DNS: Additional public notice efforts are not required, but are encouraged for important or controversial proposals—regardless of environmental significance. In addition to the Letters from DAHP submitted as exhibits, we wish to refer the Hearing Examiner, City and KCLS to The Governor's Executive Order 05-05, available at the DAHP website. In Summary, we_respectFully request that the Hearing Examiner deny the Respondent's request for an order for summary judgment in this Case and consider our Appeal on the Testimony and arguments we provided at the July 30 Hearing and the supporting information herein. Respectfully Submitted, August 6, 2013 avid A. Keyes Committee Officer for Citizen's to Save the Cedar River Library A¢ain LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Appellant Letter of Response to: City of menton Motion for Summary Judgment Page 5 Cynthia Moya From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2013 5:09 PM To: Cynthia Moya Subject: FW: LUA 13-000255 Attachments: Appellant Response. RegforSurnmaryludgement_pdf From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2013 5:05 PM To: Phil 01brechts (olbrechtslaw mail.com) Cc: Garmon Newsom II; Larry Warren; Chip Vincent; 'ggsmith@kcls.org'; 'mpost@MillerHull.corn'; Larry Warren; 'Nicola_rn@msn.com'; 'Beth Asher (betha(&mittenthal.com)'; 'DAVID KEYES (keyes28(&msn.com)'; Vanessa Dolbee Subject: FW: LUA 13-000255 Forwarding this as just received. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 From: DAVID KEYES [mailto:keyes280msn.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2013 5:01 PM To: Bonnie Walton Subject: LUA 13-000255 Bonnie, Our response to City's Motion to Dismiss is attached Thank you, David Keyes 1 August 6, 2013 Hearing Examiner Mr. Phil Olbrechts c/o City Clerk City of Renton 1.055 S_ Grady Way Renton, Washington 48057 SUBJECT: Case No. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Renton Library at Liberty Park APPELLANTS' RESPONSE TO RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT In APPEAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Mr, Hearing Examiner, We (Ms. Beth Asher, Ms. Nicola Robinson and I, all Officers of Citizen's to Save the Cedar River Library Again) received via courier the Respondent's (City of Renton) Motion for Summary Judgment in the above Case on July 23, 2013. The deliveries were made at the very end of that workday, allowing only six days for response prior to the scheduled Hearing Date of July 30. The next day, July 24, you advised the City that their Motion was filed too close to the scheduled Hearing Date to allow a reasonable response in return from our Appellant Group and giving us a choice of maintaining the Hearing of our Appeal on July 30 or continuing it until August 13, 2013. In either option, the Case would be left open until August6/August 8 for our Response to the City's Motion and the City's Rebuttal of our Response. We replied to your offer in an email to you and copied to Mr. Warren and Mr. Newsom on July 25, stating: "At this time, we believe that the most effective and appropriate response we can make regarding the City's Motion is to present to you our planned testimony and arguments as to the facts of this case, as scheduled, at the July 30th Hearing...." However, we reserved the right to provide a written response to the City's Motion on August 6'h, if we felt it (wise or...) necessary. In recognition of that statement, you inquired at the end of our July 30 Hearing, whether we were electing to provide a Letter of Response to the City's Motion as well and I replied "Yes". This Letter then, serves as that additional response. Please note we intend our testimony, exhibits and our arguments entered or made at the July 30 Hearing serve as part of a clear Response and Rebuttal to the City's Motion for Summary Judgment as well. This Letter is intended to summarize and supplement elements of our Case made at the Hearing in specific response to the City's Motion. As Appellant, Citizen's to Save the Cedar River Library Again respectfully requests that the Hearing Examiner deny the Respondent's request for an order for summary judgment in this Case, based an the following grounds. _ ■YININ LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Appellant Letter of Response to: City of Renton Motion for Summary judgment Page I Grounds for Dismissal of SummaEy Judgment: 1. CR 56 referenced in the Motion's opening Request for Relief and cited again in the Respondent's Section IV Arguments and Authorities is not directly applicable to the Land Use Hearing at hand; 2. Our Appeal does not rely on whether either the KCLS Application for Land Use or the City of Renton's Environmental Review and draft SEPA Determination were inadequate or incorrect in their entirety, as the City's Motion and attached Exhibits seem to suggest; 3_ Part III of The City's Motion contains a brief and we believe, distorted Statement of Issues. Only two issues are listed. They do not cover all elements of our original Appeal Letter nor the specifics of our arguments presented in the Hearing_ Neither of the issues stated in the City's Motion should be regarded as sufficient grounds for denying either the Hearing or consideration of our Appeal; 4. Part IV, Evidence Relied On of the City's Motion lists in part, the attached Exhibits A through D. None of these contain sufficient fact to refute our arguments, individually or as a whole. 5. Much of Part (V) Argument and Authorities concerns itself with our listing of "a Full Environmental Impact Statement" as one alternative remedy. At the time we filed our Letter of Appeal, we understood that a full EIS must be made a part of an action appealing an M -DNS. as a matter of form. Whether or not that understanding was correct we were also clear in stating that modification of the project's currently proposed design "to directly address and mitigate its likely significant (adverse) impacts ... (of the types listed previously)" was also a sought-after remedy. We believe that can be no question of there being Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts associated with this project as proposed. We clearly stated our arguments for that and believe we also demonstrated that neither KCLS or the City of Renton made adequate or appropriate effort in identification or due consideration of the significant cultural and historical resources present at this site. Further, this was done in spite of direct knowledge (by both the City of Renton and KCLS) of this project's intense and sustained Citizen interest; the significant popular dissatisfaction with KCLS' proposed designs and reduction of program area and specific public concern and input over KCLS' failure to respond to Citizen input regarding preservation of the unique and cherished functions present at the existing library entry. 6. We further made clear during the Hearing that the primary Remedy we seek is to achieve Mitigation of the Significant Adverse impacts (destruction of the significant eligible Historical Resource and its unique and Culturally Significant direct bridge access to the Entry) through recognition, replication, incorporation and architectural celebration of these existing use and circulation patterns into design of the primary public entry for the renovated library. (KCLS preferred approach from the Parking lot is not precluded by this Alternative, it is achievable technically and impact on project cost and schedule is minimized if the design modification occurs at this time. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Appellant Letter of Response to: City of Renton Motion for Summary Judgment Page 2 7. Under the State Environmental Policy Act, a decision to condition a project with such mitigation, or to require additional investigation and consideration via one of the EIS forms or another vehicle, is the province of the "Decision -Makers", in this case the Hearing Examiner. We regard the City's Motion as an attempt to circumvent the appeal process and the Examiner's authority. Discussion: While SEPA itself does not compel environmentally wise choices, its ultimate purpose, is to provide decision - makers — in this case the Hearing Examiner - with all relevant information about the potential environmental consequences of their actions and to provide a basis for a reasoned judgment. Citizen Alliance to Protect our Wetlands v. City of Auburn, 126 W n.2d 356, 362, 894 P.2d 1300. There can be no dispute that SEPA requires review of a project's impacts to historic and cultural resources. WAC 197-11-444(2)(b)(vi). Contrary to the argument made by the City's motion, SEPA review of cultural resources is not limited to review of designated landmarks. While Question 13(a) of the checklist asks for information about sites that are designated on historic registers, Question 13(b) is much broader and specifically requires the applicant to provide information, and the City to review information, concerning evidence of "cultural importance known to be on or next to the cite." (Checklist 13(b)). During the hearing we demonstrated to you that the entryway over the water is indeed of cultural importance because of the link or connection it provides the public between the river experience and the unique experience of entering and leaving this library. By placing the entry -way over the river, people are drawn to and are therefore provided with Visual Access to the water. The degree to which this Visual Access can be provided from the relocated entry as proposed in KCLS' design is not remotely comparable. Nor is the River viewed to the same degree from the interior of the Library on the upstream face, even with the slightly increased glass area. Particularly from a sitting position, the bridge and its railings largely block a library patron's view of the River from the building interior. This is critically important information for the City, the Hearing Examiner and the public to understand. Again, the purpose of SEPA is to collect the relevant information and make sure that the ultimate decision -maker understands the impact of the decision. By way of example why this information is important in this case, we noted that one of the necessary permits is shoreline substantial development permit. In order for the City to approve a shoreline permit, it must first find that the project is consistent with the Shoreline Master Program It is only logical, therefore, that the SEPA review collect sufficient information to aid the Hearing Examiner and City in reviewing the substantive shoreline permit application. But here, by leaving out all discussion of the cultural and historic entry and the connection it makes between the public and the river, the City and Hearing Examiner are being deprived of valuable information — that we believe is necessary for determining whether the permit is consistent with the Shoreline Master Program. That the importance of cultural significance or critical issues such as public access to Water views are more completely described under the State Shorelines Act or the City's Shoreline Plan is immaterial. rnimnnnuorr� LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Appellant Letter of Response to: City of Renton Motion for Summary Judgment Page 3 You have noted in previous correspondence, the obligation of the Hearing Examiner to give Substantial weight to testimony and decisions of the Reviewing Agency. In this case however, there has been no evidence that Members of the City's Planning Staff or Environmental Review Committee made any effort to either identify analyze or investigate through available contacts at DAHP the questions of Historical or Cultural Significance in or prior to the Committee's June 17 meeting. Even following their being contacted by Mr. Chris Moore of the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation and receipt of Gretchen Kaehler's letter on June 25'h, there is no indication that the City understood the significance of the issue or the inadequacy of their deliberation. Even their submittals of letters later entered as exhibits indicate no new information or understanding. These exhibits simply repeat that there are no Historic listings in place on the site. That clearly is not adequate . Please reference the entire WAC 197-11, and in particular the following passages: • [WAC 197-11-055(2)(c)] • [WAC 197-11-030(2)(b) and + [WAC 197-11-030(2)(f)); • [WAC 197-11-030(2)(c)): • Integration of SEPA with existing agency planning and licensing (permitting) procedures, so that the procedures run concurrently rather than consecutively [WAC 197-11-030(2)(e)]; 40 Integration of SEPA with agency activities at the earliest possible time to ensure that planning and decisions reflect environmental values, to avoid delays later in the process, and seek to resolve potential problems [WAC 197-11-055(2)]. • SEPA also gives agencies the authority to condition or deny a proposal based on the agency's adopted SEPA policies and environmental impacts identified in a SEPA document: See RCW 43.21C.060 WAC 197-11-660, and the Using SEPA in Decision Making section in the SEPA Handbook. • ESHB 1724 amendments to a number of laws, including the Growth Management Act [Chapter 36.70A RCWL Shoreline Management Act [RCW 90.58.0201. and SEPA. • The Lead Agency is to ascertain all interdependent pieces of the project been identified [WAC 197-11- 060(3)]? • Lead agencies to solicit comments from agencies with expertise to evaluate the environmental impacts of a proposal [WAC 197-11-335]. Also Included by Reference here is the full SEPA Handbook, available from the State Department of Ecology's website. Please note in particular two additional passages: LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Appellant Letter of Response to: City of Renton Motion for Summary Judgment Page 4 • �1 Under 2.7.1.1 Tips: The lead agency is responsible for completing the environmental review process for all agencies with jurisdiction [WAC 197-11-600(4)(a)j. Other agencies with jurisdiction are not required to adopt the environmental documents issued by the lead agency for the same proposal; • 2.8.3 Public Notice and Circulation of a DNS: Additional public notice efforts are not required, but are encouraged for important or controversial proposals—regardless of environmental significance. In addition to the Letters from DAHP submitted as exhibits, we wish to refer the Hearing Examiner, City and KCLS to The Governor's Executive Order 05-05, available at the DAHP website. In Summary, we respectfully request that the Hearing Examiner deny the Respondent's request for an order for summary judgment in this Case and consider our Appeal on the Testimony and arguments we provided at the July 30 Hearing and the supporting information herein. Respectfully Submitted, August 6, 2013 Citizen's to Save the Cedar River Library A ain David A. Keyes Committee Officer for Citizen's to Save the Cedar River Library Again LUA 13-000255, LCF, SM, SA -H Appellant Letter of Response to: City of Renton Motion for Summary Judgment Page 5 t 0 0 Cynthia Moya From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2013 3:40 PM 7o: 'ggsmith@kcls.org ; 'mpost@MillerHull.com'; Larry Warren; Nicola_rn@msn.com; Beth Asher (betha@mittenthal_com); DAVID KEYES (keyes28@msn.com); Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Cynthia Moya Subject: Frei• Doc &e F, -SM;, Safi -K1 Attachments: FW: Doc. Re LUA 13-000233, ECF, SM, SA -H Attached is your copy of a Library appeal filing that was received today and has been forwarded to the Bearing Examiner. Bonnie Walton City Clerk, x6502 1 • Cynthia Moya From: DAVID KEYES <keyes28@msn.com> Sent: Tuesday, August 06, 2013 432 AM To: Bonnie Walton Subject: FW: Doc. Re LUA 13-000233, ECF, SM, SA -H Attachments: Johnston.pdf Ms. Walton, Relative to our Appeal in Case LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H: Please forward this email with its attachment and the email chain below to Hearing Examiner Phil Olbrechts, distributing it to the Respondent and Parties of Record as required. Mr. Olbrechts, During the Appeal Hearing on July 30, we introduced the body of the statement attached into the Record as an Exhibit. This copy of the document has now been received back from Mr. David Johnston with his signature, confirming the accuracy of the statement entered. We ask that for the purposes of your consideration in our Appeal and Hearing in the above case, Mr. Johnston's signature on this copy of the Statement, together with this record of email transmissions be considered sufficient evidence that this Statement accurately reflects his thought and intent and has been entered into the Record of this Case in good faith. Respectfully Submitted, David A. Keyes Committee Officer Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library Again (425 ) 757-1121 From: nicola rn@msn.com To: keyes28@msn.com Subject: Fw: Fwd: Document Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 17:05.06 -0700 --Forwarded Message Attachment -- Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 14:04:54 -0700 Subject: Fwd: Document From: daiohns@olympicwi-fi.com To: nicola rn@msn.com Please see the attached document. Forwarded message ---- 0 IN CIVIL ACTION No LUA 1i-000255, ECF, SM, SM -H Date: July 29"' 2013. WRITTEN RECORD OF ` TESTIMONY BY PHONE: Testifier: David Arthur Johnston. Principal Architect. Campanella & Johnston. Current address: 244 Schoolhouse Point Lane, Seyuim, WA 98382. Phone. 1 (360)683-2298 We designed many buildings in Renton. The library was one of the most important buildings I have designed. My partner Terry Murakami worked on the building; I did the negotiations. It was a building that was very controversial frons the beginning_ We were successful and got it through all [of] the challenges. The historic importance of designing such a building, well -- in considering the design we knew it would be a first. I was pretty excited about designing a library that spazis the river. Out of all the buildings we designed, it was the one closest to my heart. It was an accomplishment, [because] it was pretty difficult to do with the people that were fighting it. In the end it was very successful. As a[n] [architectural] group it was a pretty important building. Our office building was on Wells Ave, which fronted on the River Road, and because our office bldg was on the river too, we paid a lot of attention to the library° building. "Ihe sahnon spawned there. We would watch them digging with their tails, and a fisherman caught a steel head right under the library, we watched him land it. It was an active place, it was great. We were concerned about the environment, [and] when you walked into the building what you would see. To have the entrance on land and [to]not [have it] working with the river would seem to be poor [design]. It was important to see the river and experience that at the same time. I built some other libraries and I don't know of any other that was as active with the environment. By placing the entrance on the bridge, [it] allowed people to experience the river. .7 r� The bridge acted as a connection and a point of access to the park and parking lot, and also [allowed access to] the entrance [of] the library. The bridge was a means of access to the park, as well as the library. We saw the river as an asset for the library in terms of people getting out [of the library] into the fresh air and [being able to] see the river. Not like walking [out] into a parking lot but [instead] walking out into nature as it is. We had a great admiration for the library and we followed its activities over the years. Record created by: Nicola Robinson. July 29e1 2013 3110 SE 5" St, Renton. WA 98058 425 255-5160 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY D City of AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT -=; HEARING EXAMINER APPEAL AND PUBLIC HEARING July 30, 2013 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 10:00 AM.- COUNCIL M,COUNCIIL CHAMBERS, 7TH FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL The application(s) listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be heard. Items will be called for hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner. PROJECT NAME: Renton Library at Liberty Park PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The site's zoning is primarily Center Downtown (CD). The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements. HEX Agenda 07-09-13_doc C 1] From: Phil Olbrechts <olbrechtslaw@gmail. com> Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 5:07 PM 7o: 'DAVID KEYES'- 'Beth Asher; 'Nicola Robinson'; Larry Warren; Garmon Newsom II; 'Paul Ouellette'; Vanessa Dolbee; Bonnie Walton Subject: Library Exhibit List -- LUA 13-000255 In order to save some time in compiling exhibits for the above -referenced hearing, below is the list of exhibits as I will present them for admission into the record tomorrow: 1-21 Exhibits listed in the 7/9/13 staff report, p. 2. 22 7/5/13 SEPA Appeal 23 7/11/13 Itr from Ruth Baleiko to Greg Smith 24 City's Motion for Summary Judgment w/ attached Ex. A -D 25 Declaration of Dr. Elizabeth Stewart dated 7/26/13 26 Email correspondence between SEPA Appellants, City and Examiner regarding SEPA appeal Pro Tem Hearing Examiner Phil Olbrechts CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON CITIZENS TO SAVE THE CEDAR RIVER LIBRARY... AGAIN! V. CITY OF RENTON Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Appellant, Respondent. I, Dr. Elizabeth P. Stewart, declare: Civil Action No. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H DECLARATION OF DR. ELIZABETH P. STEWART 1. 1 am the Museum Manager of the Renton History Museum. 2. i have been the Museum Manager since 2006. 3. Prior to the appointment of Museum Manager I was the Research Historian for the Banneker-Douglass Museum from 2000 to 2006. 4. Before that I was the Curatorial Assistant/Researcher for the McKissick Museum from 1990 to 1996. ')ori fC.f n ✓r. Eficuti'e'... P. Ste v" 5. 1 graduated from the University of South Carolina -Columbia with a Bachelor of Arts degree in American History in 1993. 1 earned a Ph.D. in History from American University in 2003. 6. As it relates to the above captioned matter, I have professional and personal knowledge of the buildings and pieces of art owned and maintained by the City of Renton. 7. The Liberty Park or Cedar River Library at 100 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington, and the items within or around it are not currently designated as historic landmarks at the county, state, or federal level. 8. However, the items within or around the library that constitute art are generally the property of the City of Renton under the stewardship of the Renton Municipal Arts Commission and when these items are not on loan to King County Library System they are to be returned to the possession of the City of Renton. EXECUTED at Renton, Washington, this 26th day of July, 2013. 7,0F /1 Dr. Elizabeth P. Stewart Museum Manager Renton History Museum F;:�w'b''2t" P. S -e vu' 2 From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 8:30 AM To: Phil Olbrechts (olbrechtslaw@gmail.com) Cc: DAVID KEYES (keyes28@msn.com); Beth Asher (betha@mittenthal.com); Nicola_rn@msn.com Subject: Renton Library Appeal - Declaration Attachments: 2013 07 26 Declaration of Dr Elizabeth P Stewart - Cedar River Library .... pdf Attached is a filing received today for the Cedar River Library appeal. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 From: Garmon Newsom II Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 8;22 AM To: Bonnie Walton Subject: FW: 2013 07 26 Declaration of Dr. Elizabeth P. Stewart - Cedar River Library Attachments: 2013 07 26 Declaration of Dr Elizabeth P Stewart - Cedar River Library.pdf Good Morning Bonnie, Please forward the attachment but not the e-mail messages to the HEX and Mr. Keyes, Ms. Robinson, and Ms. Asher. Thank you. Senior ;assistant Citi Attorficy City of Renton 100 S. 2nd Street P.O. Box 626 Renton tib'A 98006 425-430-6487 (I-elephonc) GNewsom& rentonwa.j�ov CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT This message may contain information that is protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product privilege. If this message was sent to you in error, any use, disclosure or distribution of its contents is prohibited. If you receive this message in error, please contact me at the telephone number or e-mail address listed above and delete this message without printing, copying, or forwarding it. Thank you. From: Elizabeth Stewart Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 1:47 PM To: Garman Newsom II Subject: RE: 2013 07 26 Declaration of Dr. Elizabeth P. Stewart - Cedar River Library My city title is Museum Manager, but that is meaningless in the museum world, so I have to call myself Director. Here's a better version using only my official city title. �! �Za�o�'✓I kms. S�o'✓Jar�, { �I.p. Museum Director Renton History Museum 235 Mill Ave S Renton, WA 98057 425.255.2330, phone estewa rt@ rentonwa.gov Follow the Renton History Museum on Facebook and Twitter! 1 Renton History Museum on Facebo* Renton History Museum on Twitter 0 From: Garmon Newsom II Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 12:52 PM To: Elizabeth Stewart Subject: RE: 2013 07 26 Declaration of Dr. Elizabeth P. Stewart - Cedar River Library Hi again, Are you the museum manager or director or both? Please check over 1 and 2. Thank you. Senior :assistant City Attorney City of Renton 100 S. 2nd Street P.O. Box 626 Renton WA 98006 425-430-6487 (felephone) G N ewsom&ren tonwa. goy CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT This message may contain information that is protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product privilege. If this message was sent to you in error, any use, disclosure or distribution of its contents is prohibited. if you receive this message in error, please contact me at the telephone number or e-mail address listed above and delete this message without printing, copying, or forwarding it. Thank you. From: Elizabeth Stewart Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 12:41 PM To: Garmon Newsom II Cc: Terry Higashiyama Subject: RE: 2013 07 26 Declaration of Dr. Elizabeth P. Stewart - Cedar River Library Garmon, I have attached my declaration in regard to the upcoming civil action. I slightly changed the wording of item #7 to more clearly reflect my knowledge of the building's lack of historic landmark status. I also slightly reworded item #8 to clarify ownership of the public art currently on loan to KCLS. Please let me know if you have other questions. Do let me know if you need a hand -signed copy -1 can drop one off later this afternoon. Sincerely, Liz Stewart Museum Director 2 Renton History Museum . 235 Mill Ave S Renton, WA 98057 425.255.2330, phone estewa rt@rentonwa.gov Follow the Renton History Museum on Facebook and Twitter! Renton History Museum on Facebook Renton History Museum on Twitter From: Garmon Newsom II Sent: Friday, July 26, 2013 9:40 AM To: Elizabeth Stewart Subject: 2013 07 26 Declaration of Dr. Elizabeth P. Stewart - Cedar River Library Good Morning, Thank you for taking time to speak with me this morning. Please look over this very rough draft of a declaration and make any and all edits and corrections that you believe are needed. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to call or e-mail me. Thank you. Cr. N eV15.� it Senlor Assistant. Cite Attorney City of Renton 100 S. 2nd Street P.O. Box 626 Renton Vi k 98006 425-430-0487 (1'elephone) GN ew s orn(aren tonwa.*ov f1CD. l'_l CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT This message may contain information that is protected by the attorney-client privilege and/or work product privilege. If this message was sent to you in error, any use, disclosure or distribution of its contents is prohibited. If you receive this message in error, please contact me at the telephone number or e-mail address listed above and delete this message without printing, copying, or forwarding it. Thank you. 3 • Cynthia Momma From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 437 PM To: Cynthia Moya Subject: FW: Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library ... Again Appeal Attachments: Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library—Again Appeal Fyi.. bw From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 4:36 PM To: Phil Olbrechts (olbrechtslaw(d)gmail.com) Subject: FW: Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library ... Again Appeal Phil, Regarding the Library appeal, please see the email and documents attached. Please acknowledge receipt of this. Thank you. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 I �J Pro Tern Hearing Examiner Phil 01brechts CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER CITIZENS TO SAVE THE CEDAR RIVER LIBRARY—AGAIN! Appellant, vs. CITY OF RENTON Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Respondent_ RENTON, WASHINGTON Civil Action NO. LLIA 13-0000255, ECF, SM, SA -H DECLARATION OF SERVICE I, !o Ann Olson, declare under the penalty of penury, pursuant to the laws of the State of Washington, as follows, DECLARATION OF SERVICE . 3 1. 1 am a Citi2en of the State of Washington, over the age of eighteen years, not a party to the above -entitled action, competent to be a witness, and I make this declaration based upon my personal knowledge. 2. On July 23, 2013, 1 caused a copy of Respondent City of Renton's Motion for Summary Judgment, along with declarations and attached exhibits, together with a copy of this Declaration of Service, to be served by placing the same into the hands of Mr_ Tye Goetz of Greyhound Legal, for service on the following individuals at the following addresses: David A. Keyes 1013 Kirkland, Ave. NE, Apt 3 Renton, VITA 98056 Beth Asher 436 Mill Avenue S. Renton, WA 98157 Nicola Robinson 3110 5E 51h Street Renton, WA 98058 DATED this 23rd day of July, 2013, at Renton, Washington. DECLARATION OF SERVICE - 2 4 5 6 7 9 �L _3 14 15 15 A i9 20 21- 22 23 24 25 • Pro Tera Hearing Examiner Phil Olbrechts CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON CITIZENS TO SAVE THE CEDAR RIVER LIBRARY_.. AGAIN! V. CITY OF RENTON Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Appellant, Respondent. Civil Action No. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H RESPONDENT`S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR: JULY 30, 2013 Oral Argument Requested I. RELIEF REQUESTED COMES NOW Respondent, City of Renton, requesting an order granting summary judgment pursuant to CR 56 on the grounds that no material issue of fart exists as to the Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance. Respondents Motion for Summary Judgment J Renton City Attorney 1DO S 2"' St 4 , P.O. box 525 -` AM Renton, WA 9$457-0626 ! Phone: 425.43[x,64$7 Fax: 425.255.5474 2 3i 4 i 7 �p 1..1 =2 -a 14 1- 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 11 • The City of Renton ("Renton") respectfully requests that the Hearing Examiner enter an order of summary judgment finding (1) that Appellant, Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library ... Again! ("CSCRL") has not plead or scientifically proven that the proposed remodel to the library causes probable significant, adverse environmental impacts that require an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS), and (2) that Renton provided sufficient notice to CSCRL. I Under CR 56(c), Renton is entitled to judgment as a matter of law as there is no genuine issue I as to any material fact. li. STATEMENT OF FACTS Renton is a municipal corporation duly organized under the laws of the State of Washington and empowered by RCW 35A (entitled optional Municipal Code). CSCRL consists of members of the community that have taken an interest in the redevelopment of the Cedar River Library, also known as the "Main Library" and the "Liberty Park Library', located at 100 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington. CSCRL contends that the Environmental Review Committee wrongly concluder) in its Environmental Review Committee Report ("ERCR"), dated June 17, 2013, that the proposed remodel of the library does not have probable significant adverse impacts. The ERCR, including diagrams and maps, is 26 pages long. The ERCR explains that Renton's main library rests over the Cedar River and opened in 1966. (ERCR, p. 2). "The site is surrounded with civic uses such as the City of Renton Fire Station and old City Hall on the south side of the river and Liberty Park on the north side of the river." (ERCR, p. 2). "The primary purpose of the building upgrades is to bring the existing structure into compliance with current seismic code requirements." (ERCR, p. 4). The Environmental Review Renton City Attorney Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment 2 , - [� 100 5 Z' St P.O. Box 625 Renton, WA 98057-0525 0Phone: 425.430.84$7 Fax: 425.255.5474 2 3 5 h 7 s 1� 12 iZ 14 i4 5 f ;7 19 20 2-1 22 23 24 25 • Committee relied primarily on two studies — the 32 -page Stream Study and Habitat Data Report" (hereinafter "SSHDR"), and the 36 -page Geotechnical Engineering .Study (hereinafter "GES")_ Based on these studies and the project application materials, the Committee recommended that the applicant comply with the SSHDR and GES recommendations, and the applicant "design and place lighting so that it is shielded from impacting the Cedar River and at the same time balances necessary lighting for site safety standards." (ERCR, p. 3). After the ERCR was completed, the Washington State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation ("DAHP") responded to an inquiry by CSCRL and opined in a letter dated June 20, 2013 that the library "is ELIGIBLE for listing on the National Register of Historic Places." (Upper case in original) (Hereinafter "DAHP Letter"). The DAHP Letter, by declaring that Renton does not have any buildings or "resources" listed on the National Register, establishes that the library is not on the National Register, and that it had not been nominated to be on the National Register at the time that the ERCR was completed. (DAHP Letter, p. 1). CSCRL disagrees with the Committee's ERCR and Mitigated Determination of Non - Significance. CSCRL claims that there were deficiencies in the Master Use Application submitted by King County Library System ("KCLS"). (Appeal of Environmental (SEPA) Threshold Determination, dated July 5, 2013, p. 2, hereinafter "Appeal"). CSCRL claims that KCLS's architectural consultant, The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP, provided "grossly inaccurate and incorrect answers" to the historic and cultural preservation questions; that those answers also omitted "salient facts" related to the historic and cultural preservation questions; that the Project Description fails to adequately note that the library footprint will be reduced in size by 7%; and that the drawings fail to "clearly depict" the building demolition. (Appeal p. 2). RespondenCs Motion for Summary Judgment 3 Renton City Attorney � `� UA. ia0 S Z' St �A P.o. Box 626 Renton, WA 98057-0626 Phone: 425.430.6487 Fax: 425.155.5474 .j r 9 O 0 12 -4 J 16 1� 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 • • CSCRL also makes a series of related claims against Renton. CSCRL asserts that Rentoi failed to recognize and challenge CSCRL's perceived inadequacies in KCLS's submissions; failei to "acknowledge or recognize" the "significant cultural and historic values" involved; failed t+ recognize the 7% reduction in size; failed to evaluate the severe impacts (including actue destruction of public resources); failed to appropriately mitigate those cultural and histo impacts; and failed to provide timely notice to members of CSCRL and DAHP. (Appeal p. 2 — 3). ill. STATEMENT OF ISSUES 1_ Whether, as a matter of law, Appellants have scientifically established that the library remodel results in probable significant adverse environmental impacts that require an EiS. 2. Whether notification of the administrative decision met the requirements of RMC 4-8-090(C). IV. EVIDENCE RELIED UPON 1. Environmental Review Committee Report ("FRCR"), lune 17, 2013, (hereinafter "Exhibit A"). 2. Affidavit of Ms. Bonnie Walton in Support of Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment with attached Affidavits of Service by Mailing, a Certification of Posting and requests to be named a party of record (hereinafter "Exhibit B"); 3. Affidavit of Michael J. Nolan in Support of Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment with attached library plans from 1966 and 1986 (hereinafter "Exhibit C"); 4. Affidavit of Ruth Baleiko in Support of Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment (hereinafter "Exhibit D"). and 5. The records and files herein. IV. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES CR 56(b) explains that "(a) party against whom a claire — is asserted ... may move or without supporting affidavits for a summary judgment in his favor as to all or any pa thereof." CR 56(c) states that the judgment requested shall be granted if the pleadii Respondents Motion for Summary Judgment Y Renton City Attorney 100 S 2rd St B P.O. Box 626 # a Renton, WR 48057-0626 Phone: 425.430.6487 Fax: 425.255.5474 2 3 4 12 --3 -�4 E � 16 17 i� _9 20 21 22 23 24 25 "together with the affidavits, if any, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law." In a motion for summary judgment, "[t]he burden is on the moving party to show is no genuine issue of material fact." Ross v- Bennett, 148 Wn. App. 40, 49; 203 P.3d 383 (Div. I 12008), citing Vallandigham v. Clover Park Sch, Dist. No. 400, 154 Wn.2d 16, 26; 109 P.3d (2005)_ "f=actual issues may be decided on summary judgment 'when reasonable minds cou reach but one conclusion from the evidence presented."' Cane v. Harborview Medical Center. 154 Wn. App. 279, 288; 227 :P_3d 297 (Div. I, 2010), quoting Van Dinter v_ City of Kennewick, 12 Wn.2d 38, 47; 846 P.2d 522 (1993). The facts and all reasonable inferences are viewed "'in th light most favorable to the nonmoving parties."' Bank of America, NA, v. Owens, 173 Wn.2d 40 49; 266 P.3d 211 (2011). Despite these inferences, a court "should grant a motion for sure judgment if `there is no genuine issue as to any material fact' and `the moving party is to a judgment as a matter of law.'» Bank of America, NA, at 49, quoting CR 56(c), and Way Sch. Dist. No. 210 v. The State of Washington, 167 Wn.2d 514, 523; 219 P.3d 941 (2009). 1. Appellants have not scientifically established, as a smatter of law, that the library remodel results in probable significant adverse environmental impacts that require an EIS The modern basis for this nation's environmental law is the National Environ Policy Act of 1969, (NEPA), 42 U.S.C.S §§ 4321 et seq. Washington has followed NEPA's lead adopting the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), RCW Chapter 43.210. Washington's legislature in RCW 43.21C.031(1), entitled Significant impacts, explai that "[a]n environmental impact statement ... shall be prepared on proposals for legislation a other major actions having a probable significant, adverse environmental impact." (Ital Respondent`s MDtion for Summary Judgment 5 Renton amity Attorney 10 N 10052 St i t "' a ? P.O. Sox 626 l + ""1 � Renton, WA 98057-0626 Phone: 425.430.6487 Fax: 425.255.5474 2 e 1-9 20 21 22 23 24 25 added). "An environmental impact statement is required to analyze only those probable environmental irmpucts which ore significant." (italics added). RCW 43.21C.031(2). "Where proposal 'change[s] neither the actual current uses to which the land was put nor the impact continued use on the surrounding environment,' that action is not a major action significant affecting the environment and an EIS is not required." Davidson Series & Associates v_ City of Kirkland, 159 Wn. App. 616, 635; 246 P.3d 822 (Div. 1, 2011); citing Chuckanut Conservancy v Dept of Natural Resources, 156 Wn. App. 274, 285; 232 P.3d 1154 (Div. 1, 2010) (alteration i original) (quoting ASARCO, Inc. v. Air Quality Coal., 92 Wn.2d 685, 706; 601 P.2d 501 (1979)). Contrary to RCW 43.210.031 and recent case law, CSCRL alleges that an EIS is required CSCRL bases this allegation on two alleged deficiencies — a failure to consider historic and cultural impacts and the loss of 7% percent of the structure. There are no actual historic or cultural impacts and the library retains approximately 93% of its footprint over the Cedar River. Historic and Cultural Impacts. CSCRL's historic and cultural preservation claims revolve around the Environmenta Checklist, Section 13, entitled Historic and cultural preservation. Section 13 is comprised three questions. Specifically, it asks. 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. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: As to question a., at the time that the project was reviewed, and as far as Renton the library is not listed or proposed to be listed on any preservation register. No other places o Respondent's Motor) for Summary Judgment 6 � Renton City Attomey 140 5 f, St �n # a -x P.O. Bax 626 Renton, WA 98057-0626 Phone: 425.430.6487 Fax: 425.255.5474 2 3 s 6 7 12 13 14 ?5 _6 I 17 9 20 21 22 23 24 2 is • objects on or next to the library are listed or proposed to be listed on any preservation register. CSCRL has not identified any places or objects, listed on, or proposed for preservation on c next to the Cedar River Library. Thus, the Applicant correctly answered question a. "no". As to question b., according to the Washington Information System for Architectural a Archaeological Records Data (WISAARD), https.//fortress.wa.gov/da.hplwisaard , there is landmark or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance on or next I the Cedar River Library; The closest landmark is the Renton Fire station which is across street and a block away. Here too, the Applicant correctly answered the question b. "none". As to question c., with the answers to the preceding questions being "no" and "none, no historic or cultural mitigation measures are required. Additionally, the very question "[p]roposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any" shows that if there were historic o cultural impacts, the response is not to delay the project or to require an EIS, but simply 1 identify mitigation measures. As a result, each of CSCRL's claims that KCLS and Renton alleged failed to fully, completely, or accurately state or consider the historic and cultural significance the Cedar River library should be dismissed_ The Library Retains 93% of its Footprint Over the Cedar River. CSCRt's second basis for claiming that an EIS is required is that there will be "permanent loss to Renton residents of their continued vested Public Access and Recreati Civic use of approximately 1000 s.f. [of] program area above the River." (Appeal p. 2). V CSCRL is correct that (under WAC 197-11.444(2)(c)(v)), movement or circulation of people o goods, is an element of the environment, CSCRL has failed to identify a single probabl significant adverse environmental impact related to the reduction of 7% of more than 25, Respondent's Motion for Summary lodgment % Renton City Attorney Y 100 5 2' St G & �, + # P.D. Box 626 Renton, WA 99057-0626 _fit, Phone: 425.4.30.W7 Fax: 425.255.5474 x s.f. of the library's footprint over the Cedar River. The 7% reduction of the library's Cedar Rivei 2 footprint amounts to a de rrrinimis or insignificant change that is not necessarily adverse in ligh, of safety and environmental considerations or elements. 4 Additionally, as made clear in the Declaration of Mr. Michael J. Nolan, an architect an( a the Renton Facilities Coordinator, and the Declaration of Ruth Baleiko, an architect and Principa at Muller Hull LLP, this library has been altered from its original design and footprint. One o' the two portions of the library being removed from the library was not a part of the origins G library. (Exhibit C, p. 2-3 and Exhibit D, p. 2). Under- the proposed plan, the library will have i r footprint more consistent with the original design than the existing structure. This is require( 2a because of safety concerns, specifically seismic considerations as Renton makes this structure 12 safer for usage now and in the future. (Exhibit D, p. 2). The studies and declarations show tha- 4 Renton has reasonably balanced the needs of the community, safety concerns, an( environmental interests. The decision in The Overlake Fund v. Shorelines Hearings Board, 90 Wn- App- 746; 95' t? P.2d 304 (Div. 1, 1988), is illustrative of how environmental interests must be balanced. Ir Overtake Fund, the Court of Appeals reversed the Shorelines Hearings Board's decisior 19 prohibiting the use of a wetland as a building site and the imposition of additional condition 20 2 1finding that the Board ignored Bellevue's balancing of competing environmental interests 22 Overtake Fund, at p. 751— 752. The court found that it was a "fundamental error" for the Boan 23 to "redesign' the building to do what Bellevue had not done — remove fit/ potential for on; 24 impact on the adjacent wetland." (Italics in original) Overtake Fund, at p. 760. The court agree( z� Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment 8 �,�� Renton 2 Cit Attorney �' � Gam' + g * P.O. Box 626 Renton, WA 88057-0626 Q Phone_ 425.430.6487 Pax-, 425.255.5474 0 with the Board that the building site involved a "de minimis intrusion" into a wetland despite the fact that Bellevue could have minimized the wetland intrusion. Overlake Fuad, at p. 758. 3 Here, CSCRL has not identified any probable significant adverse environmental impact L due to the library's renovation. CSCRL has not demonstrated how reduction of the footprint of the library over the Cedar River should outweigh all of the other considerations. CSCRL has not proven that this should or can be a basis to require an EIS. The SSDHR states that library is a non-conforming structure and "the project does propose to remove unneeded portions of the 9 structure." SSDHR, p. 15. The planned slight reduction in size and over-water footprint makes i0 the nonconforming structure more conforming (ERCR, p. 3 and RMC 4-10-050), reduces the weight that the girders and piers support, and addresses seismic concerns. (Exhibit D, p. 2). 12 An EIS Is Not Required Without Probable Significant Adverse Environmental Impacts. As mentioned above, where a proposed change does not alter the actual current uses 14 5 and does not impact continued use on the surrounding environment, the change is not 16 significant and an EIS is not required. Davidson Series & Associates, at p. 635; Chuckanut 1-7 Conservancy, at p. 285; and ASARCO, .Inc., at p_ 706. In the instant matter, the structure is and would remain a library. The SSHDR states that there will be "[n]o direct impacts to the Cedar 19 River or adjacent riparian habitat are anticipated during or after construction, thus no net less 20 21 of ecological functions is anticipated as a result of project development. All work will be 22 contained within the area of existing development, and the existing disturbed/developed area 23 within the shoreline zone will not be expanded." (SSHDR at ii, see also p. 5, section 5.4, p. 9, 24 section 6.5, and p. 17). The footprint over the Cedar River will be roughly the same after the 2S [ remodel as the library's original footprint. As a result, the remodeling of the existing library is Respondent's Motion for Summary Judgment 9 �1�� 100 ent5 on Cit Attorney # aL + P.O. Box 626 1117 d Renton, WA 98U57 0626 Phone: 425.430.6487 Fax: 425255.54-74 2 3 C: 5 6 "7 8 9 70 -2 13 7 -�S 20 21 22 23 24 25 not a significant adverse change which would require the preparation of an EIS. ASARCO, 706; citing Morino Prop. Co. v. Port of Seattle, 88 Wn.2d 822, 831; 567 P.2d 1125 {1977}_ The General Public Does Not Have a Vested Right in the Library CSCRL's third claim is that the public has a vested right to the library or library footpri (Appeal, at 2). Contrary to CSCRL's claims, there is no such general vested right to the publi There appear to be no Washington state cases that recognize a "general vested right to public_" In Taft v. Washington Mutual Savings Bank, a case that involved a city's power vacate a street, the Washington State Supreme Court stated that only those with some spe damage as distinguished from the general public may recover damages. 127 Wash. 503, 599 221 P. 604 (1923). The Court added that those "whose access is not destroyed or substantial affected, have no vested rights which are substantially affected." Taft, at p_ 509. In another case involving the vacation of a street or road, appellants claimed that th closure of East John Street would "deprive thein of the most direct and convenient access their respective properties", impair access as to expose appellants' properties to an extreme hazard, interfere with people's ability to public worship thereby substantially reducing number of persons attending the church, and that vacation of a street for private use is illega Capitol Hilt Methodist Church (CHMQ v. Seattle, 52 Wn.2d 359, 366-368; 324 P.2d 1113 (1958) The Washington State Supreme Court stated that it will not interfere with a legislative fun and that it "cannot and will not attempt to judge the wisdom of the council's action, since, in case of this nature, (it) cannot substitute [its] judgment for that of the municipal authorities. CHMC, at p. 367. Simply put, "[t]he legislative body is the proper entity to weigh benefit." London v. Seattle, 93 Wn.2d 657, 662; 511 P.2d 781 (1980). Respondent's Motion for summary Judgment 10 Y len 5 2 ton oa Cit Attorney R.0. sax 626 Renton, WA 98057-0626 Y _ Phone: 425.430.6487 Fax: 425.255.5474 1 4 7 b G 1G 12 ,1 _4 11 16 17 r: 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 • • "A vested right is more than a mere expectation." In re Estate of Haviland, 177 Wn.2 68, 79; 301 P.3d 31 (2013), citing In re Pers. Restraint Carrier, 173 Wn.2d 791, 811; 272 P.3d (2012). In Haviland, the Washington State Supreme Court reiterated that "to vest, the 'must have become a title, legal or equitable, to the present or future enjoyment of property, demand, or a legal exemption from a demand by another."' Haviland, at p. 79, citing Carrier, p. 811, quoting Godfrey v, State, 84 Wn.2d 959, 963; 530 P.2d 630 (1975). "'No one has a right in any general rule of law or policy of legislation which gives an entitlement to insist that remain unchanged for one's own benefit.'" Washington State Form Bureau Federation v. Gregoire, 162 Wn.2d 284, 305; 174 P.3d 1142 (2007) quoting Johnson v. Cont'l W., Inc., Wn.2d 555, 563; 663 P.2d 482 (1983). Appellants have not established any vested right, Renton asserts a vested right to remodel its library. Under RCW 35A.11.020, entitled Pourers vested in legislative bodies of noncharter a I charter code cities, "[tjhe legislative body of each code city shall have all powers possible for city or town to have under. the Constitution of this state, and not specifically denied to cod cities by law. By way of illustration and not in limitation, such powers may be exercised i regard to the ... improvement, maintenance, protection, restoration, regulation, use, leasi disposition, vacation, abandonment or beautification of public ways, real property of all kin waterways, structures, or any other improvement or use of real or personal property. Additionally, the state legislature has given cities the ability to use, control or dispose property. See RCW 35A.11.010, entitled Rights, powers, and privileges. In the instant matter, Renton is exercising its granted authority by electing to minimal reduce the library's size. Renton is also exercising its legislatively granted power to irnpri Respondents Motion for summary Judgment l 1 Renton City Attorney G 1005 7— St + � �+ P.Q. Box 626 i Renton, WA 98057-06:26 ' Phone. 425.430.6487 Fax, 425.255.5474 i- 12 13 14 1 16 20 21 22 23 24 25 maintain, use or abandon public ways and real property of all kinds. RCW 35A.11.050, entitle Statement of purpose and policy, provided that "[tjhe general grant of municipal pow( conferred by this chapter and this title on legislative bodies of noncharter code cities an charter code cities is intended to confer the greatest power of local self-government cans with the Constitution of this state and shall be construed liberally in favor of such cities." (Ital added). Finally, Renton has the authority to build, construct or reconstruct or improve a library RCW 35A.27.010, entitled General laws applicable, provides that Renton, a code city, "ma exercise the powers relating to the acquisition, development, improvement and operation of libraries" and may "contract for library service for public libraries with county, intercounty, anc rural library districts, and for regional libraries..." RCW 35.43.040, entitled Authority generally adds that a city council rriay, when there is a public need or interest, have "constructed reconstructed, repaired or renewed" "any local improvement" including but not limited public places and sidewalks. Thus, CSCRL's 7% reduction claire should be dismissed. 2. Notification of the administrative decision met the requirements of RMC 4-8-090(C) CSCRL alleges that Renton failed to notify members of CSCRL who had already been listed as parties, or had offered public testimony concerning the library remodel, and failed to provide DAHP with timely notice. RMC 4-8-090(C), entitled Notice of Administrative Decisions, indicates that Renton shall "notify all parties of record ._. of any administrative decision subject to notice." RMC 4-11-160 Definitions P, defines "Party of Record" as the permit applicant, the appellant, Renton or " [a]ny person or entity who has submitted timely written or verbal Respondents Motion for Summary Judgment Renton City Attorney 100S2n°St P.o, Bex 626 -` Renton, WA 980574626 Phone: 425.430,f,487 Fax: 425.255.5474 4 5 6 s 9 10 w1 12 13 14 15 1? ,� 19 20 21 22 23 2r 25 • testimony." Testimony is defined as "[e]vidence given by a competent witness under oath or affirmation_" (Italics added) Black's Law Dictionary, G``' Edition, 1990, p. 1475. Merely speaking at a city council meeting does not make a person a party of record as the statements are not under oath. Finally, RMC 4-8-090(G), entitled Failure to Receive Notice, provides that the failure to receive mailed notification "shall have no effect upon the proposed action or application." Based on Ms. Walton's Declaration, and its certified attachments, the parties of record were served and therefore CSCRL's notice claims should be dismissed. IV. CONCLUSION Respondent respectfully requests that the Hearing Examiner grant Respondent's. request for an order for summary judgment as Appellants have failed to make a prima facie showing that there is a probable significant adverse environmental impact that requires an EIS. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 23"d day of July, 2013. LAWRENCE J. WARREN Renton City Attorney By: s Garmon Newsom II By: GARMON NEWSOM Il, WSBA No. 31418 Senior Assistant City Attorney 100S.2 nd Street, P.O. Box 626 Renton, WA 98057-0626 Telephone: (425) 430-6457 Facsimile: (425) 430-6498 E-mail:newsorentonwa.gov Respondent's Mogan for Summary Judgment 13 G�IGO Ren on St Attorney + ! P.O. Box 626 Renton, WA 98057-0626 Phone: 425.430.6487 Fax: 425.255.5474 L� EXHIBIT "A" • L 0 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL. REVIEW COMMITTEE REPORT ERC MEEnNG DATE: June 17, 2013 Project Name: Renton Library at Liberty Park Project Dumber. I.UA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Project Manager: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Owner.. - City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Applicant: Greg Smith, King County Library System, 960 Newport Way NW, Issaquah, WA 98027 Contact: Maaike Post, Miller Hull Partnership, 71 Columbia St. - Sixth floor, Seattle, WA 98104 Project Location: 1©El Mill Avenue S Project Summary. The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S_ The 22,400 5F library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall, the area of work would impact 37,630 5F and the remodeled library would be 19,680 Sr following renovations. The site's zoning is primarily Center Downtown (CD). The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope, and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements_ The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one tree is proposed to be retained. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, Regulated Material Survey, Geotechnical Engineering Study, Technical Information Report. The site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zane 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the state and a habitat conservation area. Exist. Bldg. Area SF 22,400 5F -- Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint). 19,680 5F Proposed New Bldg. Area (gross): 19,680 SF Site Area: 37,630 SF Total Building Area GSF. 19,680 SF STAFF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a RECOMMENDATION: Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M). Prpica Locallon Map FRC Report23-000255 docx City of Renton pepurtmrent of Community & Economic Fevefopment Environmental Review Committee Report KENTON LJOR RY AT USERTY PARK LUA234WWSS, ECF, -SM, U -H Report of lune 17, 2013 - Page 2 cf 13 PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION / BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Clearing Examiner Site Plan Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 5E library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River_ Overall, the area of work would impact 37,630 51= and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The subject site is located over the Cedar River; the river itself does not have zoning. However, zoning is applied on both the north and south banks of the river. The north shoreline is zoned Commercial Arterial (CA) and the south shoreline is zoned Center Downtown (CD). The site's main entrance, parking lot, and access is along the south shoreline. Due to the Library's primary access and the majority of the development along the south shoreline, City staff has determined that the CD zone would be applicable to the subject development. Because the subject property is located within the Center Downtown (CD) zoning designation, the proposal would be subject to the Design District 'W standards and guidelines. King County Library System (KCLS) has proposed to remodel or rehabilitate the existing library which was constructed across the Cedar River between 1956 and 1966. The existing library is partially located in Liberty Park but fronts on Mill Ave. S. The site is surrounded with civic uses such as the City of Renton Fire Station and old City Hall on the south side of the river and Liberty Park on the north side of the river_ The applicant has indicated that all work would occur within the area of existing development on the site and public access would be maintained off of Mill Ave. S. The proposed library renovations include the following: • Demolition of existing masonry and glass building envelope. • Retention of existing concrete structure, roof framing, and site work. Installation of new building envelope= aluminum window system with glazed panels and a metal panel wal I assembly. Demolition of portions of existing roof framing and replacement in specific areas at a lower height. • Removal of the existing rooftop mechanical unit near the west end of the building. • New rooftop mechanical unit (similar in scale to existing unit) with screening near the east end of the building where it would be less visible from the parking tot and main entry. 0 New mechanical, electrical, and lighting systems within the building. • Addition of insulation, sheathing, and roofing to existing roof assembly. • Relocation of building entry to the west to face the existing parking lot. • Seismic upgrade required by code including below -grade concrete abutments on either side of the building and steel brace frames in both directions. Approximately 900 cubic yards of excavation materials and 360 cubic yards of fill would be required for the installation. New hardscape, utility routing, and vegetation to address new entry location as well as repair associated with concrete abutments_ • Sandblasting of existing structural concrete to remove painted finish. • lie -routing of existing under -slab mounted utility piping to address neve utility penetrations. New exterior enclosure for refuse/recycling area and mechanical equipment. ERC Report13-000255.d❑cx C!t'I of Renton Cepar€mert of Community & Economic Deaefopmenf "ironmenwi Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARY A T LIBERTY PARK LUA13--000255, ECF, SM, 5A -H Report of lune 17, 2013 - - Page 3 of 13 The majority of the renovations includes upgrades to the existing building and structure to bring the building into compliance with today's building cedes and regulations. The applicant has proposed minimal modifications to the existing site, with the exception of required utility upgrades and rehabilitation following necessary structural upgrades. For example, the proposed concrete abutments would require below -grade work along both the north and south edges of the building_ As such, these disturbed areas would be re -landscaped and hard scraped following construction. Offsite [mprouements include the replacement of the sanitary side sewer pipe from the library to the manhole at the intersection of Mill Ave. S and S 2nd St. The public sidewalk along Mill Ave_ S would be updated as a part of a 2014 city of Renton sidewalk improvement project and would not be included in the remodel to the library. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one tree is proposed to be retained. The existing building spans the Cedar River, a shoreline of the State. As such, the project is subject to the Shoreline Master Program regulations. The site is located in the Shoreline High Intensity overlay along Cedar River Reach B. Overall, the existing building is considered to be a non -conforming structure. However, the proposal would be reducing the size of the building bringing is more into conformance then the existing situation. In addition to being located over the Cedar River, the site is located in a seismic hazards area and the Aquifer Protection Zone 1_ There is also a 100 year fled plain and a floodway associated with the Cedar River and the banks of the river have been identified sensitive and protected slopes. Based on the project application material, no work is proposed below the ordinary high water mark of the Cedar River and therefore no work would occur in the flood plain or floodway. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application. a Stream Study and Habitat Rate Report, Regulated Material Survey, Geotechnical Engineering Report, Technical Information Report. 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. A_ Environmental Threshold Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS -M with a 14 -flay Appeal Period. $. Mitigation Measures 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013 and revised May 10, 2013_ 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by GeoEngineers, dated December 20, 2012. 3. The applicant shall design and place lighting so that it is shielded from impacting the Cedar River and at the same time balances necessary lighting for site safety standards. ERC Reportl3-"255.docx City of menton Department of Community & Econornk Deveiopment Environ+mentul Review Committee Report REWON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK f UA33-{)00255, ECf, SM, 514-H Repart or tune 17, 201.3 Page 4 of 13 C. Exhibits Exhibit I Vicinity Map Exhibit 2 Title Sheet Exhibit 3 Architecture Site Plan Exhibit 4 Demolition Plan Exhibit 5 T.E.S.C. Plan Exhibit 6 Civil Site Plan Exhibit 7 Landscape Site Plan Exhibit 8 Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit 9 Tree Inventory Plan Exhibit 10 Building Elevations, Sheets A-201 and A-2012 Exhibit 11 Muckleshoot Tribe Comments 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 anticivated to occur in conjunction with the proposed development. Staff reviewers have identified that the proposal is likely to have the following probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts, The existing site topography consists of steep slopes along the north and south edges of the river channel. The grades of the river banks range from elevation 45 at the top of the slope to elevation 26 at the river bottom. Beyond the river banks the site grades to the north and south of the buildings is relatively flat. Based on the Cites critical areas maps, the river banks are considered to be either a sensitive slope or a protected slope dependent upon the grade at the specific location. In addition, the library is located in a seismic hazard area. The applicant submitted a Geotechnical Engineering Study ("Geo -tech") prepared for the Liberty Park Library by GcoEngineers, dated December 20, 2012. The primary purpose of the building upgrades is to bring the existing structure into compliance with current seismic code requirements - As such, the provided Geo -tech particularly focuses on the necessary structural upgrades needed to bring the existing building into compliance with the seismic standards. Pursuant to the provided study, the existing building is constructed similar to a three -span bridge structure with girders spanning between foundations located on the river banks and two interior piers that are located within the river_ To evaluate the subsurface conditions at the subject site, GeoEngineers completed two borings on October 22, 2012 to depths of 51.50 feet below the existing ground.surface. The soil types encountered consisted of undocumented fill and recent alluvium deposits_ More specifically the fit] consisted of louse to medium dense/very soft to soft silty sand/silt With variable gravel and cobble content, and organics. The fill extended to depths of 15 feet below existing grades. The alluvium deposits consist of medium dense to very dense silty sand with varying amounts of gravel and medium dense to dense gravel with varying amounts of At and sand. Occasional cobbles are anticipated to be present in the alluvium deposits. ERC Repoi t13-000255.doex ............. City of Renton Deportmeo€ of Community & Economic Development fnvironmenro! Review Committee Report RENTON LiSiRARY AT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of lune 17, 2013 Page Sof 13 The Geo -tech also addressed groundwater conditions and found groundwater in both the Borings at approximately 20.50 feet below grades. The report concludes that groundwater levels are expected to fluctuate in response to water levels in the Cedar River and would very as a function of season, precipitation, and other factors. GeoEngineers concluded based on the soil analysis, that the site soils are moderately to highly susceptible to liquefaction under the design earthquake event_ Given the slopes located along the banks of the Cedar River bath settlement and lateral deformation of the foundations elements (towards the Cedar Riven may Occur potentially resulting in excessive foundation deformation. Further -more the potentially liquefiable soils present a risk to the existing building through loss of foundation support, potential foundation settlement, and lateral deformation of sails towards the Cedar River. The Geo tech recommends the use of ground improvements to meet seismic settlement and building performance tolerances_ The preferred ground improvement option is a system comprised of closely spaced augercast piles to mitigate the liquefaction potential at the Cedar River banks on the north and south sides of the building. Approximately 900 cubic yards of soil would be excavated to install the below -grade concrete abutments or augercast piles and 360 cubic yards of fill would be used on site above the abutments. Pursuant to the provided report, the purpose of the ground improvement is to provide a 'block' cif improved soil that would resist seismic lateral earth pressure acting towards the river and to provide unproved bearing of the spread footings currently located on the river banks. GeoEngineers further conclude that the soil exploration indicated that the soils located below the river bottom elevation have a low risk of liquefaction, therefore, no additional improvements of the interior piers is considered to be necessary. The above ground improvement option is expected to mitigate potential liquefaction hazards in the immediate vicinity of the foundation elements located on the river bank and provide anchorage to the building to help resist seismic lateral farces. In addition to the above ground improvement recommendations the provided Geo -tech includes recommendations for augercast piles, earthwork including clearing and site preparation, subgrade preparation, structural fill, materials, reuse of on-site soils, fill placement and compaction criteria, weather considerations, temporary slopes, utility trenches and additional geotechnical services recommendations. Based on the recommendations included in the provided report, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant comply with the recommendations included in the provided Geotechnical Report prepared by GeoEngineers. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by GeoEngineers, dated December 20, 2012_ Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review, RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas Regulations, RMC 4-4-060 Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations. 2. Water a. Wetland, Streams, lakes Impacts, The existing building spans the Cedar River, a shoreline of the State_ As such, the project is subject to the Shoreline Master Program regulations. The site is located in the Shoreline High Intensity overlay along Cedar River Reach 13. The ordinary high water mark (OHWM) for the Cedar River at the project location is general associated with the 34 foot above mean sea level (amsl) contour line and the 100 -year FEMA floodplain is located at elevation 39.62 amsl. The proposed ERC Repartl34W255.do" • • City of Renton Deportment of Community & economic Development environmental Review Committee Report RENTON L1BRARYAT I BEJ?TY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013 — -Page 6 of 13 rehabilitation work would be limited to the library structure above the river only, no work would occur within the regulatory floodplain or below the OHWM. Due to the project's location, over the Cedar River, the applicant submitted a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc_, dated February 2$, 2013. The study was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Renton Municipal Code for both the Shoreline Master Program and the Critical Areas Regulations. The report identifies and describes the river, critical species and habitat on or adjacent to the project site, provides a regulatory review of local, Sate and Federal regulations and proposes mitigation for impacts to critical areas and habitat. Pursuant to the provided Steam Study, the Cedar River is located in the Cedar-Sarmryarnish watershed (WRIA —8) and is approximately 100 feet wide. The water depth at the site was observed to be approximately 18 inches in the summer of 2012 and:3 feet in the fall of 2012. The in -stream substrate consists of clean gravel and cable, however no natural pools, woody debris, or other fish habitat features were observed in the vicinity of the project by Talasaea. The stream study identifies the shoreline riparian habitat in the vicinity of the library building to be very narrow (30-50 feet max), and adjacent to urban impervious surface on the left bank and a baseball field/City park on the right bank. The riparian habitat downstream is dominated by invasive species including reed canarygrass, Japanese knotweed, and Himalayan blackberry. Tree species within the existing riparian habitat include: sycamore, black cottonwood, and horse chestnut. The upstream riparian habitat is similarly dominated by Himalayan blackberry, with slightly improved salmonberry habitat located on the left upstream bank. The Stream Study concludes that there would be no direct impacts to the Cedar River, adjacent riparian habitat or State Shoreline area anticipated during or after construction, resulting in no net loss of ecological functions. This conclusion is based on the following reasons: 1) all work would occur within the footprint of the existing development for the library and would stay above the 100 -year flood plain and above the OHWM; 2) the footprint of the existing disturbed/developed area within the shoreline zone would not be expanded as a result of the project; 3) all existing shoreline vegetation would remain intact; 4) portions of the existing library structure would be demolished which would result in a net reduction of approximately 1,700 square feet or 7 percent of the library structure's building itself and adjacent pedestrian bridge; S) Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be implemented during construction to minimize temporary construction impacts to the aquatic environment; and 6) the project would comply with all applicable City ordinances including, but not limited to, stormwater management requirements, and those related to traffic, noise and aesthetics during and after construction. The Stream Study provides a list of recommend BNIP's which are intended to be employed during construction to ensure adequate protection of water quality and the aquatic and shoreline environment. The BMPs are divided into a set of general goals which have been defined to guide construction activities and ensure adequate protection of the aquatic and shoreline environment. Suggested specific BMPs are listed after each goal in the study, which is not intended to be an exhaustive list but instead a list of BMPs which shall be implemented as needed to meet the identified goals. The study has identified that implementation of BMPs would be the responsibility of the constructor to identify the appropriate BMPs for the different phases and types of work being conducted at the site. The following is a list of goals provided in the Stream Study: Goal 1: Trash, construction/demolition debris, and other contaminants shall be kept out of the river and shoreline environment at all times during construction. ERC Report33-OW255.docx City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Developmenr Environmental Review CommiMe Report RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK C f1A13-0f14255, ECF SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2U13 Page 7 of 13 Goal 2: Dust Control, including minimizing, containment and collection of dust. Goal 3. General worksite management including proper storage of materials and construction debris and worksite cleanup. Goal 4: Work timing and scheduling in order to prevent debris from entering the aquatic environment_ Goal 5_ Stomwater management BMPs shall be implemented in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and a Temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan. In addition to the proposed BMPs, Talasaea has identified that the applicant would contribute $22,700 to a vegetation conservation fund, which is administered by the City of Renton to meet the requirements of the Shoreline Master Program RMC 4-3-095F. This amount has been calculated based on the actual: area of shoreline buffer contained within the project limits, which includes any area landward of the DHWIVI. The total shoreline buffer area contained within the project limits is approximately 18,130 SF. This area was multiplied by a dollar amount of $1 25%SF to calculate an amount for what it would hypothetically cost to restore an area of shoreline buffer equal to the area: within the project limits. Based on the recommendations included in the Stream Study, staff recommends the applicant comply with these recommendations as mitigation for the subject project. On lune 12, 2013, the City received comments from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division (Exhibit 11). These comments include a request for lighting review and specific light bulbs to be used at the new library to reduce the potential impacts of artificial lighting on the fish. In addition, they have requested a wood management plan and a copy of the storrnwater report. Their comments expressed concerns about the gabion baskets located in the Cedar River below the existing building and construction noise impacts. Finally, their comments appeared to be supportive of the fee -in -lieu option for the shoreline master program required mitigation. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013 and revised May 10, 2013 Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Critical Areas Regulations b. Storm Water Impacts: A Technical Information Report (TIR) was submitted with the application, prepared by Miller Hull Partnership, LLP dated May 10, 2E1U The report complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2_ The TIR indicates that the existing site consist of 0.793 acres of impervious area and 0.071 acres pervious area. Following the rehabilitation of the library, the site would consist of 0.788 acre impervious area and 0.0176 acres pervious area. The TIR identified three distinct areas with different drainage patterns. The existing library building roof runoff discharges directly to the Cedar River through piped outfalls_ The parking lot to the south is collected in onsite catch basins and is routed to river outfalls in the near vicinity of the site. Finally, the park property within the site work limits to the north discharges to existing piped outfalls to the River. The proposed drainage system at the site has been identified to remain relatively unchanged, as the project is primarily a building rehabilitation project. Runoff from the site would be conveyed to existing storm systems in the parking lot and the park area to the north. ERC Report13-".255_dacx Oty cf Renton Department of Communk[y & Economic Development Enyirorrmertol Review Cammittee Report RENTONLiBRARYATUBE?rYPARK LtlA13-000255, ECF, SM, 5A --N Report of June 17, 2013 Page a of 13 The roof drainage from the library would continue to utilize existing outfalls to the Cedar River_ Portion of the existing drainage system onsite are proposed to be removed to make room for the new library entrance improvements. A small amount of new catch basins and conveyance piping would be installed in the parking lot to convey runoff to the existing system to the south. Pollution generating surface would be basically unchanged, therefore, no wager quality mitigation is proposed to be installed as a part of the project. The TIR included an upstream and downstream analysis, which concluded that there was no known drainage that enters the site from upstream and that there were no know drainage complaints within % mile of the site. As such no mitigation was proposed for downstream drainage problems. The Library is located aver the floodway of the Cedar River and any work within the floodplain or the floodway would have to comply with City adopted flood hazard :regulations in the Critical Areas Ordinance and FEMA National Flood Insurance Program regulations. This also includes compliance with the National Marine Fisheries Biological Opinion Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives regarding the National Flood Insurance Program compliance with the Endangered Species Act, as they relate to development in the FEMA floodplain. FEMA regulations require that when a structure is located in the 100 -year floodplain;, any substantial improvements (i.e. when cost of improvements exceeds 50% of the appraised value of the structure)', require the structure to be brought up to current floodplain development standards. Any improvements within the floodplain or floodway, such as placement of fill, piers or supports as part of the seismic retrofit work within the floodplain or floodway, will need to comply with FEMA floodplain requirements. Based on the provided TIR, no work is being proposed within the base flood elevation or within the FEMA floodway. Special consideration of design has been made to ensure that no alteration within these zones would occur. in addition, the TIR indicated that a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control {TESL) Plan would be provided including the following: 1. The project would provide sediment protection at the existing catch basins and maintain existing hardscape areas until areas would be re --paved. 2. For the period between November 1 through March 1, disturbed areas greater than 5,000 square feet left undisturbed for more than 12 hours must be covered with mulch, sodding, or plastic covering_ A construction phasing plant would be provided to ensure that erosion control measures are installed prior to clearing and grading_ 3_ There shall be limits to tributary drainage to an area to be cleared and graded. Delineated dimension, stake and flag clearing limits_ 4_ Revegetate areas to be cleared as soon as practicable after grading - Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 3. Vegetation Impacts: The existing site is currently vegetated with ornamental landscaping and lawn areas in the vicinity of the existing structure. Scattered around the site are deciduous and coniferous trees/shrubs (see Wildlife and Stream sections for riparian vegetation information). The existing site contains 16 trees of which all will be retained with the exception of one 12 -inch diameter cherry tree located in the southeast corner of the site. The removed cherry tree is proposed to be replaced with a 2 -inch caliper river birch tree. In addition, to the I2 -inch cherry tree, one street tree along Mill Ave_ S is proposed to be removed. This is a result of the sanitary sewer line ERC Report13-"255_dacar ------------- ------- ---- -- City of Rentva Departmenrof Community & Economic Deuefopment Environnenta, Review Commitree Report RENTON LiRRAR "Y AT £RBERTYPARK £(.JA13-000. 55, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013 - - — page 9 of 13 improvements required for the project. This tree would be replaced in the same location with a 2 - inch caliper Northern Red Oak. In addition to the new trees, the applicant is proposing to revegetatie all disturbed areas on the project site. In the SEPA checklist, the applicant has indicated that the planning palette would include native and non-native adapted/drought tolerant species including such plants as maidenhair fern, kinnickinick, deer fern, mock orange, salrnonberry etc. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required Nexus: N/A 4. Wildlife Impacts: The applicant submitted a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013 with the application_ The Habitat Report included a habitat assessment to determine the extent, functions, values, and existing conditions of the critical habitat on the site. The Habitat Report identified that the Cedar River is known to support Federally -listed (threatened) Chinook salmon and steelhead trout, atong with coho salmon, a Federally -listed Candidate species, and sockeye salmon, a State Candidate species. Bull trout are listed in the Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) database as species of commercial and recreation interest. Pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Salmonscape and StreamNet, the subject portion of the Cedar River is a documented spawning/rearing area for fall Chinook, coho, and sockeye, and is a documented rear area for winter steelhead. Bull trout are confirmed to be located in the area however cutthroat trout are not documented. in the area by Salmonscape or StreamNet. Talasaea conducted a field investigation on July 9 and November 2, 2012. During the field investigation, Talasaea completed a characterization of the habitat within the project site_ Based on this characterization, the area directly beneath the library does not receive direct sunlight and is mostly devoid of vegetation. The left bank between the library and Bronson Way N (downstream) contains reed canarygrass within the streambed and floodplain. Japanese knotweed and Himalayan blackberry dominate the left and right bank slopes. Sycamore trees are located an top of the left bank adjacent to the parking lot. Black cottonwood and horse chestnut trees are growing on the right bank. The upstream riparian habitat is similarly dominated by Himalayan blackberry, with slightly improved salmonberry habitat located on the left upstream bank. The Habitat Report identifies that the area's highly urbanized conditions results in wildlife species typically found in urban and residential areas, such as birds and small and medium-sized mammals_ The Habitat Report concludes that the riparian vegetation in the project area provides only minimal buffer for the fish -hearing Cedar River and is of relatively low value to the watershed as a whole. Moreover, the assessment concludes that the project would not result in direct impacts to the riparian habitat during or after construction, resulting in no net loss cif ecological functions and values. This is a result of a combination of limiting the renovation to the area of existing development and not expanding the existing disturbed/developed area within the shoreline zone. Finally, the study states that a portion of the library structure over the river would be demolished which would result in a net reduction of the library footprint over the river and BMPs would be implemented during construction to minimize temporary construction impacts to the aquatic environment_ ERC Report13-000255.docx city of iienton Repartmentof commuolty& Economic Development €nvironmentai Review Committ e f?eporf RENTON f1BRARYAr UBERTY PARK WAI3-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Report or June 17, 2013 Page 10 of 13 Chapter 7 of the Stream Study and Habitat Data Report is a literature review evaluating the effects of light on salmonid predation to evaluate the possible pre-existing.effect that the library may have on salmonid predation. Roth studies evaluated found that predatian is lowest under dark conditions, and increases as light and visibility increases_ Furthermore Talasaea contacted Naris Berge, the King County expert on fish and the Cedar River watershed. Mr. Serge relayed that shade does not contribute to increased predation, but that excess light does contribute to increased predation. Talasaea concluded that the information indicated that the area under the library may provide a refuge for salmonids because predation would be higher upstream and downstream of the library where the river is always illuminated by sunlight and the lights of surrounding urban area_ Moreover, Talasaea concludes that given the general lack of natural shade along this reach of the Cedar River, the shadow of the library across the river is likely to have beneficial effect, if any at all. Based on the recommendations included in the Habitat Data !teacart, staff recommends the applicant comply with these recommendations as mitigation for the subject project. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc_, dated February 28, 2013 and revised May 10, 2013 Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Critical Areas Regulations 5. Light and Glare impacts: The rehabilitated library structure would be designed with interior and exterior lighting. Based on the provided SEPA checklist, the applicant has indicated that the project would use downlights with excellent shielding and cutoffs_ These types of lights would be incorporated into all spaces interior and exterior_ The check list indicated that the placement of exterior fixtures in the plaza would contain the light to the plaza and would not impact the river or night sky. Light levels would meet but not exceed illuminating Engineering Society recommendations to provide the industry standard amount of light and minimize over lighting the space. Automatic controls would be implemented to turn off non-critical lighting after-hours to further reduce light impacts. The City received comments from the Muckleshoot Tribe on .lune 12, 2013 which included comments regarding lighting impacts on the Cedar River (Exhibit 11.). The applicant has proposed lighting mitigation as identified above, however due to the concerns raised in the Muckleshoot`s comment, staff recommends a mitigation measure that lighting be designed and placed in such a way that is shields spill: over into the river at the same time balancing site safety standards_ Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall design and place lighting so that it is shielded from impacting the Cedar River and at the same time balances necessary lighting for site safety standards. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On-site 6. Parks and Recreation Impacts_ The subject project is located within Liberty Park in downtown Renton. However, the project limits restrict the area of impact to primarily the library building and a small area on both the north and south sides of the building. The north side of the library is located in Liberty Park and construction impacts would extend approximately 30 feet north of the north edge of the existing building. This would result in temporary construction impact to a small plaza area and trail access to the walkway along the river in this location. There are other access locations to the river trail which would not be impacted by the subject project and no impacts are anticipated to any ERC Repovrtl3-oM2s5.d"X City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Devefopmert Environmental Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRAR Y A T LIBERTY PARK x�a l UA13-"255, ECF SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013} Page 11 of 13 recreational uses in the parr_ The construction impacts are temporary in nature and are not anticipated to have an adverse impact an Liberty Park. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 7. Transportation Impacts: The site is surrounded by Mill Ave S, Bronson Way N, and 5 2" d Street. Under current condition, the site is primarily access by vehicles from Mill Ave. S, to the existing surface parking lot. However, there is also a parking lot located in Liberty Park, which is accessed off of Bronson Way N, which may also be utilized by people using the library. The proposed site access and parking facilities are primarily proposed to stay the same. The existing surface parking lot along Mill Ave. S would lose four parking stalls following the project's construction. Trips associated with the project are not anticipated to change, as the existing use is not changing. The public sidewalk along Mill Ave. S would be updated as a part of a 2014 City of Renton sidewalk improvement project and would not be included in the rehabilitation of the library. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 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 Fite and may be attached to this report. The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14 -day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 5, 2013, RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall — 7t' Floor, (425) 430-6510, ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLIC4NT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes erre provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeo! process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.0.2 limits haul hours between 830 am to 3:30 pm Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi -family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight a'clock (8,00) p.m_, Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) ERC Report13-"255.docx City of RLntor, Department of Corrmnuflity & EconomicVevejopment Ervironmdntal Re€riew Cornmittee Report RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, FCF, SPT, SA -N Report of June 17, 2€113 Page 12 of 1.3 a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) clays of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded ar cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adapted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. S. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 6. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6) high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (So'j indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING — Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. Plan Review Sanitary Sewer: 1. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an 8 -inch sewer main in Mill Avenue South with a manhole at the intersection with South 2"a Street. The existing sewer service connection extends southerly to this main. 2_ The project is required to cut and cap the existing side sewer at the property line as part of the demolition permit_ 3. A new side sewer is shown on the preliminary drawings and shall be installed to the updated building as condition of the building permit. Plan Review—Storni Drainage- 1. raina e:1. The FEMA approved 100 -year base flood elevation at the Renton Library overthe Cedar River is elevation .39.62 based upon the NAVD SS Datum per the FEMA approved 2006 Cedar River Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) Case No, 06-10-8596P. 2. The Library is located over the floodway of the Cedar River and any work within the floodplain or the floodway would have to comply with City adopted flood hazard regulations in the Critical Areas Ordinance and FEMA National Flood insurance Program regulations. This also includes Compliance with the National Marine Fisheries Biological ©pinion Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives regarding the national Flood Insurance Program compliance with the Endangered Species Act, as they relate to development in the FEMA floodplain. 3. FEMA regulations require that when a structure is located in the 100 -year floodplain, any substantial improvements (i.e. when cost of improvements exceeds 50% of the appraised valvae of the structure) require the structure to be brought up to current floodplain development standards. Any improvements within the floodplain or floodway, such as placement of fill, piers or supports as part of the seismic retrofit work within the floodplain or floodway, will need to comply with FEMA floodplain requirements. 4.^_ The applicant must show the 100 -year base flood elevation (39.62 NAVD 88 Datum) on the construction ERC Report13-000255. doex City of Rcnton Department of Gammunity & Economic Oevelapment Envtronrnerxtaf Review Committee Report RENTON LfBRARYAT LIBERTY PARK LUA23-000255 ECF, 5M, SA -h' #depart of Jurze 17, 7013 page 33 of 13 pians. S. A drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the site plan application. The report complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. A final TIR is required with the building permit. Plan Review--Transportation/Street: 1, A 12 -foot sidewalk with cut-outs for street trees is not required to be constructed with the project. 2. A traffic study was not required for this project as the use is the same with a smaller building. Plan Review—General Comments. 1. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton ©rafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. Separate permits are required for the water meter installation, side sewer connection, and storm water connection - t=ire: 1. The fire hydrant and fire flow requirements for the proposed library are adequate as they exist. Z. The existing automatic fire sprinkler system will be required to be modified for any tenant improvement work. 3. The existing fire department apparatus access roads are adequate. 4- The existing automatic fire alarm system shall be replaced with an all new system as the existing system cannot meet current fire code requirements. System shall be fulty addressable and full detection is required. S- Exiting shall meet ali current building and fire code requirements, Police: Recommendations: Due to the renovation vs. new construction, this review would he better served by a security survey following the completion of the improvement project. CFS would remain about the same since there will be no additional structural space added - ERC Repart13-000255. docx ncFjce v 5x67 S'. �`•, VICINITY MAP 1"_= X41! '�`2. 7 EXHIBIT 1 L�PTY f GEL1dR &i3E9. L1 F21C T~D, T-., UAS,-.ML :Iyjm i� ria 2CC' 4W . lA3?1 N77d 31is l� i� S6B8 Yh. `N0-LNT.i E iUi'oS=!'.Ffyi7 T am W1 ANVNSI1 NOIN3N �� �� €sa pp ay y� e� g�f �a`�93! Hs IliI � gga is &� .p 2�set! 1218 1 fig., W ii $��� i i LU I t� f zQ Ij _V t `� cn L LLJ . w LLI [l� i ccv Mr. 311 H co w L �� �� €sa pp ay y� e� g�f �a`�93! Hs IliI � gga is &� .p 2�set! 1218 1 fig., W ii $��� i i LU I t� f zQ Ij _V t `� cn L LLJ . w LLI [l� i ccv Mr. 311 H co w Nc L"',ib' wics Aw'—w'i -Fan oct NOINM s I I III tw C3 it IL LU Uri LP (1) .2� CC a 4— Im :171 VON NVn.d 3115 I NUVd,A�-WI-LY M031 A8V'8all NOIN3N O"k It (1) .2� CC a 4— Im :171 CV 'ONO N. - Y O r M-Dtl-�nq Nlel-H A -US i'LPOR -9rNaAid i OR Gel, cr- AM"811 NOIN31i W ii� R 2 CV 'ONO N. - Y O r 0 4M cr- CV 'ONO N. - Y ......... .. ellI., tr M-t4IA NV -id 911S --rm 7G'.I wa: -A,'8VNI911 NOINR�!l i ns i JI Ulf CID MUll ------------------ - It tN IJ T% CID x W IL M31AgH NV-ld gilS C Alhmillv 0 LU NOA3N kNV89I (D -� in 0 14- 0 z c v:e'Nc sc a h res = Hmw-1 r� cap s3 - y MAVd Al]A91i 1V JlMVNSf7 NOIN98 i-/4'�. rf ✓�r� r r a inn yyppyW�,r tiF u: y z zy� r LQ 3 T^^Spi LU LU �r yS� f • 11 -j Lu r j' i-/4'�. rf ✓�r� r r co x ui yyppyW�,r tiF u: y z zy� r co x ui yyppyW�,r tiF P-4 P r r n f co x ui WON S nQ ` IV4. NOLAgN NYICI 9 -us \ —11M YM +L14 -MA ;� ar-�v -Mm x,, "En \ ; Q C4 YHVd JV. || !] )i 2 tu A�IVMI NOIN3N i wt LU S z nQ z I U c - kv ;!� TA CL ROVE" soft,! fowl-, T.C-4 7 _7 i ; /WK& -'ta, fit Nam& Mod SAS C14 AN"81-1 NOINgN I U c - kv ;!� TA CL ROVE" soft,! fowl-, T.C-4 7 _7 i ; /WK& -'ta, Vanessa Dolbee EXHIM From- Karen Waiter {KWaiter@rnuckleshoot,nsn.us> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:16 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee cc: Fisher, Larry D (DFW) Subject: Renton Library at Liberty Park, Lt1A13-000255, ECF, SK SA -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, Mitigated Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag States: Flagged Vanessa, We have reviewed the Notice of Application materials €or the Renton Library redevelopment project referenced above. This project will remodel the existing library located over the Cedar River. When we met with City staff and the consulting team in February 2013; we identified several issues for this project as noted below and offer recommendations where we can based on the information reviewed to date: 1. Artificial lighting- The checklist and the Critical Areas Report (CAR) discuss how the project will seek to recuse artificial lighting impacts in several ways. in addition to the measures proposed, we also recommend that the City use light bulbs which reduce artificial lighting opportunities to the Cedar River or nighttime sky. Previously, we provided information to City public Works staff about potential light bulb options that could he used. We a so request a copy of the detailed site lighting plan for our review which is proposed to be part of the final construction plans. 2. Stormwater- We need additional information about the details as to how stormwater will be managed from redeveloped site, particularly for water quality. We request a copy of the Technical Information Report which likely contains the stormwater management details. 3. Wood management plan- At the February meeting, we indicated that the site should develop a wood management plan to deal with any wood that may approach or be entrained by the existing concrete pi ir;g ir, tre Cedar River_ This issue was not addressed in CAR. Wood management is needed to ensure that wood is not removed from the Cedar River or its banks unless ft is absolutely necessary. Wood is shown being near the site from the photos the City provided in February_ Wood may no longer be on or adjacent to the site =raith winter floods; however, the City should plan on wood transported to and through the site with time and future floods. it is timely to develop a wood management plan now as part of the redeveloped library. Please note that Boeing developed a wood management pian for its Cedar River bridges. We recommend that the City review it for applicability to the library site. Gabion gaskets- We understand :hat there is no bank worst or modifications to the existing gabion baskets used to stabilize the river banks located on the site. Gabion baskets are subject to failure when exposed to strearnbed scour flows, requiring require repair or replacement with some regularity. When they fail, they can adversely affect fish habitat by adding angular rock to the stream channel that can create beneficial habitat spaces far sculpin and other salmon predators. In addition, the broken metal baskets can entrap adult salmon causing injury or mortality. In the course of a tagging study that included sonic tags, MITFD staff, found dozens of live and dead adult salmon an arm's length from the bank inside several failed gabion baskets in the lower Cedar project reach. These fish presumably were seeking hiding cover or slow velocity resting places and were unable to complete their migration and spawning cycle in the Cedar River. The gabiorns also create poor salmon habitat conditions in the lower Cedar River by eliminating the complex natural stream bank habitats characterized by low- velocity areas, vegetation, pools, and undercut banks that are preferred byjtfvenile and adult salmon and reducing bank sources for spawning gravel. When the gabion baskets in the project area need repair, other alternatives that provide bank stability and improve habitat condiions for salrnon shoutd be pursued. 5. Construction Noise- The project should seek to minimize disturbance to spawning sockeye and Chinook in the vicinity from construction activity, particularly any. piling driving activity that may be needed. 6. Shoreline mitigation- We recognize that the project needs to comply with the City's Vegetation Conservation provisions from the Shoreline Master program and there are limited opportunities to meet the 100 -foot vegetated shoreline buffer requirement Per the CAR, the applicant is proposing to pay an in -lieu -fee' to the City's Vegetation Conservation Fund, which needs to be set up. Further, the CAR identifies several potential sites and actions on page 14 where the in -lieu fee could be spent We are keenly interested in seeing the lover Cedar River's riparian areas enhanced and request the opportunity to work closely with City staff for this project, as well as, the overall frarnework approach to implement the in -lieu program. For this project's in -lieu proposal, we would like to work with the City to verify the extent of the impact area, the proposed fee amount; and the mitigation project area. For example, the $1.25 per square foot rate may be too low and only cover the costs of acquiring and planting plants which may not be sufficient to actually plant areas if easements, acquisitions, and permits are needed. Once a rate is accepted by the City it is likely that others will seek to use the same rate, so it is important to ensure that the in -lieu rate is sufficient to cover all of the mitigation project costs. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses and coordination. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Mucktashoot Indian True Fisheries .Division Habitat Program 39095 172nd Ave 5E Auburn, VILA 98092 253-876-3116 2 • EXHIBIT "B" • Pro Tern Hearing Examiner Phil Olbrechts CITY OF RENTON HEADING EXAMWER RENTON, WASHINGTON CITIZENS TO SAVE THE CEDAR RIVER LIBRARY... AGAIN V. CITY OF RENTON Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Appellant, Respondeat. 1, Bonnie Walton, declare: Civil Action No. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H DECLARATION OF MS. BONNIE WALTON 1. I am employed by the City of Denton as the City Clerk, 2. I have been the Renton City Clerk for 11 years. 3. Attached to this Declaration is a true and correct copy of the requests to be named as a party of record for LUA 13-000255. This certified copy was compiled and certified by the Renton City Clerk_ 4, According to these requests, Nis_ Beth Asher requested t7 be ;made ;i pa y of record by e-mail on March 22, 2013, and by providing her address, she completed that request on March 26, 20.13_ Ms. Asher's request does not identify her as a member of Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library ... Again! (CSCRL)- 5. According to those requests, on June 1.0, 2013, Ms_ Asher requested that she and Mr. Keyes be named parties of retard for the Highlands Library, not the Cedar River Library. Mr. David Keyes, indicated an intent to be a party of record on June 10, 2013, for the :Highlands Library (based on the subject line). On June 17, 2013, that request also resulted in hire being added as a party of record for the Cedar River Library. Mr. Keyes' request does not identify hire as a member of CSCRI-. 6. As for Ms. Nicola Robinson whose name appears on the CSCRL appeal, there does not appear to be a request for her to be a party of record on file or in an e-mail. 7. Attached to this Declaration is a true and correct copy of the May 29, 2.013 Certification of Posting of the Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance — Mitigated (DNS-Mj and the May 29, 2013 Affidavit of Service by Mailing that reflects that, among others, CSCRL member Beth Asher, and Gretchen Kaehler of the Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation, were served with the Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of bion -Significance — Mitigated (DMS -M), the Acceptance Letter, the Environmental Checklist, and the Reduced Site Plan 8. Based an the requests of to be roade a party of record, as of May 29, 2013, of the known CSC.RL members, only Ms. Ashur was a party of record, and she was served. 9. Also attached to this Declaration is a true and correct copy of the June 21, 2013 Affidavit.of Service by Mailing that reflects that, among others, CSCRL members David Keyes and Beth Asher, and Gretchen Kaehler of the Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation were served with the ERC Determination_ 10. Based on the requests to be made a party of record, as of June 21, 2013, of the two known CSCRL members, both were served. 11. Attached to this Declaration is a true and 4-orrect copy of the July 2, 2013 Affidavit of Service by Moiling that refiecis that, arriung others, SCRL mernbers David Keyes and Beth Asher, Gretchen Kaehler of the Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation, and Phillip D. LeTourneau of King County -- Historic Preservation were served with the Staff Report to the Nearing Examiner_ 12. Based on the requests to be made a party of record, as of July 2, 2013, of the two known CSCRL members, both were served. Mr. LeTourneau requested to be made a party of record on July 1, 2011 1 declare under penalty of perjury of the lays of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and Correct to the best of my knowledge_ EXECUTED at Renton, Washington, this 20ra day of July, 2013. Nis. Bonnie 1. Walton Renton City Clerk 3 From: 'V-1intssa Ui;lbee" <vr)k[ Ihct C @mist wa.gov Dale; i=ridgy, tiarcit'�J.21�13 �:�=+AAd TO, '-Sraz,y iicke.r" <STucker,u l�.ert�rxt�ra.�av% S(Efrjec#: f i� . ti'3. .13 i would iik to be a Party of Record for b1 e rejovat.r)n cif the Cedar River I.Jb�ary Stacy: Can you please add Beth Aslrer to the Poo, list for the Rerton Library.. LUA13-00025.-)_ Thankyou- yID, x7314 1'Gge i cif CERTIFICATE i. the undersigned City Cleric Of"th Oty of Denton, Washington, certif-,,! that this is � a true,a correct copy of � ; s#rEr>� A4 13 SubscdbW and seaiad this2Q, dayiof:D4., .. 2 t! City Clerk � �. From: Beth Asher [mailto:bethaCarnittenthai.corn] Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 5:01 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Chip Vincent; Neil R. Watts; Stacy.Tucker; Clarice Marbn Subject: RE, 03.22.13 I would dike to be a Party of Record for the renovation of the Cedar River Library Hi viin"essa, tMaihng address is: Beth Asher, 436 fail; Ave. South, Renton, WA 98057 Thanks, cq-'4', iii.^g about pa7r�r:ti*rk — rofee breaks Beth Asher 425-557-7770 ext. 7 FAX: 425-557--7772 betha rnittentfral.com From: Clarice Martin [maifto`C.rnarti Rentonwa.c�ov1 Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2013 3:32 PM To: Beth Asher Cc: Ct+ip Vincent; Neil R. Watts; Vanessa Dolbee; Stacy Tucker Subject: RE: 03.22.13 I would like bD be a Party of Record for the renovation of the Cedar River Library Dear PSAs_ Asher, l have been advised by Planning Division admin support staff that a mailing address must be provided to the project manager for party of record request$ for the subject project. Please submit that information to Vanessa Dolbee at vdoi bee @rentonwa.�ov . Sincerely, ?i l &20 s Oaric I}ft7Ftin C;ryOf C£Uj(irveio;���e��.>.Seri�r[es Di;ris;ol: From: Beth Asher fsiiailtc):beiha c(�i mittenthal.com] Sent: Frday, March 22, 2013 4.39 PM To; iVincent(E)rentona.gov; Neil R. Watts; Clarice Martin Subject: 03.22.13 1 would like to be a Party of Record for the renovation of the Cedar River Library Importance: High Hi Chip, Neil anrf Ciente, would like to he made a Party of Record for any and all phases of the Cedar River Library renovation, including the current phase. Thanks very much, Beth Asher 425-557-7770 ext_ 7 FAX= 425-557-7772 %etha[mitten ha_Lcorn 7;'16''01 3 2 F warn: `Vanessa Ilnlbee" Date: 1Vionday, Jame ;7. --101 , 8:24 A,'t':. VO: "Stacy Tucker" tST°acice.rfa.Itcnrc rt+a.�av Subject: FW: 06,10,13 Becomir a a parr' cit record for the Library 5tac,/, Please add David Keyes to the POR list for the Library 1R-0 00255 David Keyes 1013 Kirkland Ave. NE, Apt. 3 Renton, WA 98056 Front: Rocale i immons Sent: Thursday, June 13, 2013 3:36 PM To: 'DAVID KEYES'; Beth Asher; Chip Vincent Cc, Vanessa Dolbee- Subject: RE: 05.10.13 Becoming a party of record for the Hjghiands Hello Mr. Keyes, 1, tete undersigned City Clerk crhhe City of Renton, Washington, CerfifY that this is a true. and correct oapy of o15 . Subsailbed and seated this day of—I&L—, 20.. City Clerk T hank you. ',Vanessa I did receive gosh voicernail. The appiicaVon you made rcferenre to [LUA13-000255) is actuahy for the Downtown Library not for the Highlands Library. I have courtesy copied the project manager {Vanessa Dolbeej to ensure you are a paM, of record. As for the Highlands Library there stili has not been a formal application made_ Please be sure to continue to check in with i-ne to find Out if an application has bee,) rn?de. if -,ou have any further questions feel free to contact me_ Thank you . locale Timmons Gly of Renton - Current Pia,-Wng Sen;cin 131&nner 1G55 South, Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Tel: 1125) 430-7219 2 : (425) 430-7300 rtirnmons rentanu�ra. au From: DAVID KEYES (mailto:keyes28tamsn.Com7 Sent, Monday, Juste 10, 20313 2:37 PM To. Rocale Timmons; Beth Asher; Chip Vincent Subject: RE: 06.10.13 Becoming a party of record for the Highlands Hi, tis. Timmons' I was unaware that you require a formal application from Citizens asking to become a Party of Record. if that is required, do you have it in PDF forry and can you ernad to me? I'll be happy to return mine to you tomorrow. (Surely, you did not mean that KCES has not submitted their reapplication €or Land Use Review, That was submitted prior to the end of lune and was givers a letter of acceptance for Intake, so presumably it has now 7/16.!2013 bee- distributed to other agencies having jurisdiction as wed. d f there is any confusion or, that issue, please con er- with Chip and ask hip? to Uive me a fb!low-up phone ca,11.) Thank You, ©avid A. Keyes Landline: (425) 757-1121 or Cell: (.425) 765-7951 From: RTii-nmoiis@Rentonwa.gov To: betha mittnthal_corn; CVincen# Rentonvaa, ov CC: keye_s28@ isn.com Subject: RE: 06.16.13 Becoming a party of record for the Highlands Date,, Mon, 10 Jun 2013 21,20:20 0000 Hello Beth, .A formal application has not been received as of yet. So l am unable to add you as a party of record at this time. Please check flack with me periodically. Thank you. Rocale Timmons City of Renton - Current Planning Senior Planner 1055 South G rally `dkk ay Renton, WA 98057 TeL (425) 430-7219 Fax: (425) 430-7300 rrirrm:nons rentonwa.- ov _...... From: Beth Asher lanailto:betha@mitten Lha 1.coml Sent: F-ronday, .dune 10, 2013 2:04 PM To: Rocale Timmons; Chip Vincent Cc: DAVID KEYES (keyes280msn.com) Subject: 06.101 13 Becoming a parry of record for the Highlands David Keyes and l (Beth Asher) would like to become parties of record for the Highlands library ow that the schematic design has been accepted. Please let us know if there is a form to he filled out. David Keyes 1013 Kirkland Ave. NE, Apt. 3 Renton, WA 98056 Seth Asher 436 Mill Ave. S. Renton, VSA 98057 Thanks, 7/16'2013 -jili Humans seem to get a In[ scone — must be the Opposable thurntrs for ;Waking coffee! Beth Asher 425-557-7770 ext. 7 FAX: 425-557-7772 betha_@Dmittenthal.com J3 � Pm -ye 3oz3 71116 /2 0 13 CITY OF RENTO DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPTOENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 29th day of May, 291.3,- f deposited in the mails of the Unwed State, a seaie-d envelope c3raa;11#rg Acceptance Letter, Notice o; Application, Environmental Checklist, Reduced Site Plan documents. his information was sent to: Name Representing Agencies Sey Attached Greg Sm;th - KCLS ppiicant Maaike Post Contaft Seth Asher Party of Record %-} . i � F �-✓ �.F'���• lS_i�'L..{ LAG q i r L!'��`.� �FZ..k,-jF�:.�1:% f `-y��- `y '�.. -" 4".. l � `..:Y__<j� r � w .i 1, the un&Tsigned City Clergy. Qf the thW this is a true and corma copy of A.Widgwo 0,4, SubscfibW Si nature of Sender' ". ' �`���ti��t�t����t��t y 1'rI STAT E OF l'LAShiNGTON 11 ""�`�_'s;�y ! f 0 4` R i r _ COU N 7Y 0}- I(i NG) '" " z I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy 1`0. Tucker X- f signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act {blftt���� �i�rpose.s mentioned in the instrument. Gated: Notary (Print): My appointment expires: Jl LAI Notary public in and for the State of Washington Project Came: Renton Library at Liberty Park Project Number: LUA13-000255, =CF, SM, SA -H tamplale - afda,'it C)f oy railing S AGENCY (DOE) LET ER IMAIL# G ,ERC DETERf' INATIONSI Ue,.t_ of Ecology • VVDFW - tarry Fisher* Mockle5ncotEndian Tribe Fisheries Di,, -,4,," -- _n•rronrnentai Review Section 1715 12th Ave. NW S;3ite 7,277 �.ttm Karen Walz c, or SEPA Reviiwc-- i PO Box 47703 Issaquah, V,A 93027 39015 —172'" Avenue S2 O]Vrnpia, WP 9850;-7703 I Ruburn,'J 980:2 _- .-, - _ _._ VVSDOT Nortr,west Region x Duwamish Tribal Office ' 4uCk'.eshoat C'.i[t rol ;Baso °rrr-s ?r.^..gram Attn: Rzrni i Par.00ki i 4717 W Marginal ;Nay SVIt ! Atrn: R15 AA21;553 Calvert King Area Dev- Serv., MS -244 Seattle, WA 981001514 39015 172'0 Avenue S" Pi) Box 330310 ubt.rr:, it n 981192-9753 Seattle, NA 98133-9714 US Army Cbrp. of Engineers * K-, VVstewa,er Treatment Jivisio l ' Cf ice of rL ;a C ogy rz h s C,'iC F; Cserdat or �1 Seattle DistrictOffire Erwiror reot.al Pla, ning5vp�rti,isor Atm: C,.tch.n Ka__` le' l ttr: SFPA Reviewer Ms. Sh€rlev ,1larroquin � PU boa 483 3 FO Box C-3755 2015- Jackson SF, MS KS(, -NR -050 i Olympia, iFvA SS504-8 63 Seattle, :NA ?812, Seatve, WA 98.104-3855 Boyd powers De?art o`Natural Resojrtes I PC Box 41015 ! � I OI�mpia,' VA 98504-701S I KC Dev. & Env ronmenta'' Serv. Lits° of Newcastle e City o? ren! kLir�: SEPASeciian Attn: 5?Eve Flab€rge A,rn_ M -r. ,ed 3attersl': - 7;aO r aXesca-e Ave. ]W � DiYe_i--r i crp,-m.3nrt jr Renton, WA 930.155-1219 13020 cNewcestle L' zy 240 E ,,.rth, Avenue Scutr. NEWCa3lie, WA 98059 Kent,yW, 9'9032 -sags _ t Aci ,,roTransitI Fuget5ornc'rne€giCityo`Tu?vvila -- i Serior Environmental Planner I l Nluridpa! L;a;son Plar.a,Ier 5te1 Lancaster, Respo:-,siblc: C;iifi;�; I Gary Kriedt JoeJaing.4 6Za 5outhcemer 3!vd- 2'iI Soutn Jackson StreEt KSC-TR-3431 PO Sox 40838, MS: XP,J-011t'J Tukwila WA 9818$ Sea -le, WA 98194-3856 Sellevue, WA 98009-0868 Seattle Public Utilities Rea€ Estate Services i At -,,r-,: SEP,&. Coordinator 700 Fifth ,Aven:;e, Sure4900 PC Box 340.18 Sett*le, WA 981,24-4018 *Nu:u: Ef the Notice of ApplsCatien states Lha: it is an "Op_ic-nai DNS', the marked ager:c;es and cities will need -o be sent a copycf the Envircrime ;ta' ChecKils , Ste Pia-; PVT; an; the Notice of Application,. *Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of:he Environmental Ci;ecklist, Site Plar, PMT, & Notice to the fallowing email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov tem;)ate - of clavii of service by maliin,u "•TYL E '' OE SPVv`R RENTO v YOUTH & FAMILY SERV 'VELEISS L 7%� 5TH' . VE S -i E 49"s0 -RPS 1025 S 3RD ST S127 E B 230 WELLS AV[ 5 L D OX 311-.0isR ry T OF RENTON, �'tv, 98055 S'+A 95124 J, vv P-, 98u5:1 EL7, DIVELE SS CHARLES L PATAS SOUTH SECOND LLC 5R.^ DFORD DEAN KENT 316 SE PIONEER WAY #342 1815 ROLLING HILTS AVE 5' 1000 S 2N!L7 S i :LAK HARBOR, WA 98277' RENTON, VVA 98055 RENTON, WA 96055 BARNFT7- iu'AR3C CEDAR RIVER COURTRIVERVrEW APARTMENTS ATT?J: CHAD NANCY 2011 2.7TH AVE SE #A-200 C/O GRAN INC 9500 ROOSEVELT kNIAY NE 100 PUYALW.P, WA 38374 1018 2ND AVE*' SEATTLE, WA 98115 SFAT�II LE, WA 98119 TF OMASON DEBRA LEAH P=RETTI RAY L REPY �"JrLBI R L 104 MAIN AVE S PO BOX 796 PO BOX 5532 RENTON, IVIVIA 98057 RENTCN, I.UA 98057 KENT, WA. 98064 LYONS JACK A+L.EOTA M VISCHER BALD • Tt4 & DAN' WELSH 7UDITH A 15n2; 135TH AVE SE PFJ BOX 2010 =01 'ARK AVE N P".EN T 0N, VvA 980^8 PORT TCVN5END, %SVA 9'8365 REfITON, Vv'A. 98457 REI'4TCf'd HISTMCF.I_SOCIETY SYTH. BONITA L T3 CAPITAL LLC 235 Mil-{ Av- 5 8550 E SPEEID AY BLVD =202 1222 BRONSON WAY N REI; i:.,`N, V,,)A 98055 TUCSON, AL 8511() kENTOI, WA 98+05: BPJSF 17A.ILir,-RY COT Or 'dJAS;�IIvG MN DOT PROPERTY TAX DEPT -AGB 2 2EE20 68TH AVE S FO L:GX °f 1DF,3 KENT WA 38032 FOPT'w ORTHI, TX 75151 CITY OF RENTON DFPARTMt NT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE. BYfiA3-kILING On the 21s1 day of Jure, 2013, i deposited in the Friails of the United States, a sealed envelope containinK ERC Determination,docurnents. This information was sent to: Arte V I�€417 b - LUAt34)00255, LCF, SM, SA -It f f. Rspresen'tirtg Agencies See Attached iVMaaike Post Contact 1. the undmimed Citv C3etk dthe Greg Smith City of Renton Applicant Owner C4 of Renton, WashingWn, =dify copy lo� #;i oa subnobe David Keyes Party of Record � sea is � c� Teri Ha I{auer Party of Record City z l irk Beth ,fisher Party of Record r tit iGR i{{ (Signature of Sender):.' ! , .{.� _'A 11�r STATE OF WASHINGTON ) s U ��TA"� SS y COUNTY OF Ki NC- j � �.A�',, 4ea�- � I rer ify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker !f=Iti op signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act �4i � O r,d purposes mentioned in the instrument - Da ted: nstrument_Hated: Notary (Print): My appointment expires: Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Fo�ecEame ' Renton Library at Liberty Park Arte V I�€417 b - LUAt34)00255, LCF, SM, SA -It f f. tee spate - affidavit o; s?rukz by nGiiina Dept. of Fcology "* Wr?virorirnental Fsevlew Section )G Bcx si703 0iuripia, WA 985ti-1-71D3 W DOT Northwest Region ` Attn: Ramin Pa Zook! King Area Dev. Sev., MS -24.0 PC Box 334310 Seattle, WA 9$133-9 710 US Army Corp. of Engineers ` Seattie Disttk l Olfice Arm- SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, wA 98124 Boyd Powers' �J Depart. of Natural Resources PO Sox 47015 Olympia, WA 985'34-7015 _ KC Dev. & Envirozimemal Serv. Al ln. SEPA Section 96n Oakesdale Ave -SVA' Rerton, WA 98055-1219 F,Aetre Tra nsit Senior Cnvironmentai Planner Gary Kriedt 201 So€nth Jackson Street KSC-TR�431 Seattle, WA 98104-3856 -- Seattie P!4biic Utifties Real Estate Services Attu: SEPA COordinatcr 70() Fifth Avenue, Suite 49DO PO Box 34018 Sea -le, VdA 93124-4018 AGENCY DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERC DETERMINATIONS) WI)FW - Ldrry Piitier 1775 12th Ave. NW SOL2,201 issaquah, WA 9542' Duwamish Tribal Office 4717 W Marginal Way SW Seattle, WA 98100-1514 KC Wastewate€ Tr=atmE! -t t)ivision Y cnviranmentai Planning Super�i5or rAs, Shirley,,Aarrtiyuin 201 & Jackson ST; MS KS,&Mi-050 Seattle. WA 93104-3855 city of Newcastle Attn_ Steve Roberge Director cf Community Deveioprnciit 13020 tlewcastle LZ'ay Newcastle, WA 98059 Puget Sound Enerky Municipal Liaison #Manager Joe Jainga PO Box 90899, NIS: XRD-r31W !;elievue. 1tiA 98049-0268 M�Chieshoct ln6arr'ribe Fisi,eries Dent- Attr,: Karen Wziter or SEPA Reviewer 39015 --172`d Ave n L e SE Auburn, %NA. 58&92 Muckleshoct Cultural Resources Program Arm, tVls Melissa Calvert 34015 172"4 Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 Office cfArchaeology& H'stodc Preservation* Atte: Gretchen Kaebler PO Box 48343 Olvmpia, WA 48504-8343 ,: ity of Kent ,Attn: fvtr, =red Satterstrorn, ACP Acting Cormnunity Dev. Direc_or 220 Fourth Avenue south City DF Ti, kwiia----- - -- Stevearcaster, Respensibie Officia 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwiia,'VVA 98188 `Nets: If the Notice of AppiicaLion states tha7 it is an 'Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities w;il nr'Cd to be Sent a crs.py Of the Environmental Checklist, 5rte Pian P%IT, and the Notice of Application. "Department of Ecology N emailed a i:opy of the Erwironmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sep2ur1it@Vecy-wa-90v template - of !davit of service by maiiing • EXHIBIT "C" Ll Pro Tern Hearing Examiner Phil Olbrechts CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON CITIZENS TO SAVE THE CEDAR RIVER LIBRARY... AGAIN! V. CITY OF RENTON Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Appellant, Respondent. 1, Michael J. Nolan, declare: Civil Action No. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H DECLARATION OF MR. MICHAEL J. NOLAN 1. 1 am employed by the City of Renton as the Facilities Coordinator. 2_ 1 have been the Facilities Coordinator for 19 years. I received a Bachelor of Architecture from the University of Oregon in 1979 and was licensed by the State of Washington to practice architecture in 1993. • r L 3. In my capacity as the f=acilities Coordinator, I maintain and/or have access to records reflecting the original construction and all remodeling or updating of City of Renton facilities. 4. These records reveal that the structure commonly referred to as the Main Library, Liberty Park library or Cedar River Library, at 100 Mill Avenue South, Renton Washington, was originally constructed in 1966. in 1986 the building underwent a significant remodel which included the following changes: a. The original simple 120 ft by 168 ft rectangle floor plan was expanded to both the north and east. To the north, the existing 11 ft by 80 ft balcony was enclosed- To the east, an 18 ft by 72 ft addition was built. With the construction of the 880 sq ft north addition and the 1,296 sq ft east addition, the original 20,160 sq ft floor plan area was increased by 11%. (See attached Exhibit "A"). b. In addition to the two expansions, the staff work areas were remodeled and the restroGms were remodeled and expanded. c. All the single pane glass in the building was replaced with double pane glass. The entry doors had to be completely replaced to accommodate the new double glazing - d. One of the most distinctive features of the original library design was the treatment of the roof edge or "fascia"- Superimposed on the continuous five • • feet high fascia were eight foot by eight foot panels in "marble trete" spaced at 16 feet on center (see Exhibit "B" North Elevation 1966). When the library was remodeled in 1986, all of the 8x8 panels were removed, In addition, the enclosed balcony was given a gable treatment (see Exhibit "B" North Elevation 1986). This alternate fascia treatment changed the appearance of the library dramatically. e. Before the remodel, the center bay of the north wail was 12' tall, floor to ceiling glass, looking out on the Cedar River. When the balcony was enclosed, the height of the windows on this wall was reduced to just four and a half feet tall, only about a third of the original glazing. 6. 1 feel that items 4a and 4e are particularly significant_ The proposed remodel of the library returns the librar�s enclosed dimensions to almost exactly its original 1966 footprint. The flour to ceiling glass walls of the proposed remodel also harken back to the original 1966 north wall treatment, restoring the full height glazing that was eliminated in the 1986 remodel. 6. Attached to this Declaration is a true and correct copy of the records reflecting the changes in the 100 Mill Avenue South library since its initial construction was completed in 1966. This certified copy was compiled and certified by me/Renton Clerk's Office. /i 3 • • I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. EXECUTED at Renton, Washington, this 22"° clay of July, 2013. rWW,,Michael J. Dolan, AIA Renton Facilities Coordinator 3 W 0. rD m C n rn M N ro � 00 � rn £3 - CL fl 3 Li _ � f � � ,d-•, I . � .�. ,.. 9 — .., � it _� ..;rte, �i RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY. � � � �%� �• f Ei RENOYATIOHS'AN ADWTIONS Y, cw t voo CEDAR F#rvrR A EH'i 0h'-. }i A-^H(H(i TO` I E p _ 91111- -, i -J_..:_: - LO 1 y�k I 1 C � Yj w a v } j z } a G Y IMF g 1 i ! :t3 F— 1- FEm._ 1 �3 1 y�k I 1 C � Yj } j z i@ a 12 ! :t3 F— Y) Cn • 1- �3 34---- ---- j b ; y h 4 b S � i { I 3 a� J s T� Sla. � f =� 1'� •H �3 -fir 1• r• � p`. F#CATS ... ,daWCluknfAhe- .._ .. a'* F44 CC r6b .- sand cmna aSucDjw f ,20� Clink . � 4 f l PA R i y p pp _ nN[NITS LTS aX0 GOmsu PYa NTS BFNTOX itSF-kY SO r,D pt—gM ctYT CCCKIL - PEG 3.a N: F, PRF.S. �R. N.£NRr PEEkNS EN. PA to XR flRmCE r kU:,Ef il£xGnaGPpNEE Lb fl [G•PA.vT a H c.6 N [S�N_Fi[a r'9 uR5_ wkY _r 5. x m'I BEft&. BEG. PS JEP VE; FC I:A N.tG �:E: ? HR p3H P�i�l IGA Huey N. gE u4E - _.3 N`tl A d }S SCEs R;E5 EPR£t xa TVF Fv x5ETT Nar_GVP4ELAVRS NTS r0. S[EN .G 61nNxl ml .. cx vT mPAI.FE m'. IM[c R� rq a_N P. x3 ANI Cl: 1EFH H9 and P15- - I EI II GfAAEF PEPPY - t.i klMEN 0. GICRSCM mECxBMICFL-[LF GTR3clt ExElfl "e Fii XA. aY.GELmcfl:iNl ax. NCHpY E. SLxELLtxlvt PCP. TP9ma5 w- TRIMN PIt Si µRR f.E GLA u 11=L .L EX. L:A xa ulPR a1 R; xEt.m lE k[}`, PH GI" CLERK _ 0.ACTY.EF 6 jf-F' -TT FR£+SJ RF �"-- 1 _ T �l Jim ------------ // cif ` yi",.. �1Se_._-.! _ 'e,. \ \ tr _ ~_ E ,h„�.,�� •. A� i \y is 1 fi , LF 6 l '��I 0 - - it Yl WIM }=ilj fyF } -�� tip;. �4. \ '� - - � s i ' � i 1 }t. � }R�� (•1 r � � � . pan -.-Y _ � �' � 5 1-1 0 yy4 3 •2� _, �3 -� E 1 �E x �- c S j jE lu V C i • � py e—r I b i�j 1 E �• 3 O 1� :..'�'t1S :!FACT L. 6 L •;..?.. I �') N_ �aII+r - .._. .,_ �_-_,_... ..... -_.w... ■ • 4 L �F sa�.`FaTrar . f8 _ _ - - L --h1 74 M �.. E I JY -. 2 AS 9pL DWZS ] AA CIT CY A'4A -LUW {. 5E 11 �:P' - - ' S P RP RH r. _ 7u'r Ia4� ¢.r..F�L 4-r.✓.J F� � - � � � 11 Ilr S. An- W,gf, +'.W..A: �:.SA.411t".NL'mKALL .. 17 �r:'�F .- -: -, a,.-€ ''st✓4a up•s,_ i w;s:il _- ,.�i4:'.;'sf a '•P. i°°• � i -:: ..�` - 4J �' ! - �6 Ulm- r :eb-e�aufly� MVLL'r?M �' L,• �� �} o- ,.� It _ � � �J kr ..,,,b- Y f �Mpe y Y { 1 I I Ij �r� ' � e�L x R ` rf !'1f i�?�. Ja✓b ;�,' rilw"'C-�FJIIIA �I'� i� � si4l.♦ermwu. � �: -... -'��• b G- Nc, JE Si: 'Va4 P•?'>#. ^F�VR.F 'J Zs �ayE�Gp� E�PILS F � (� , t , Z -Ell s CX)D, DATA LEGEND AND 6V)ABCLS 7�7 M—= —_...._ LEGAL DESC IPTION E .lo-' a��apyaf A1�C�11�9CtS L'goEm ` u PHABI G PLAN 4a mw tEYMM 3 A -J i f_ rz Q, r NA 1 � ' t • • - sry fbt 4T P€�RTORiES i zw� r 4 1 6 X-11 i< ! ALL LEOOL TICN A . 8E TES � -„r.�- n AAi r m s `:77 ` Co { �', �� L N 7 l C• ! Lr,i �7`�:n�rwH �.^•vB ��>� wilrTFA T�•...^... �,'i_��t] a.r. .-.a'�.+ _ z � ,�' t_ �. ti� �l"T,.�� ..}��_� r.•, h � �r .w'v+4er +%+�.1' trsa-0. VmA[ t£x.w�.. I � . ..-_ -_-- _— ..—. ® m..�.v, ••.,s .=affirm �n- g��$'.f '.,_ E • . . . . . ............... . .......... Vil 9 � �-- =— \� \����_ I acs yr I e I � � � ! io r x i � r },§MALL �GT{OM AT EagT n061TEGN &. W LL J3-- - —TN 8— - 6 pwl lase no• CAU wW cu.: a woes: 1,Z9VULL1011 AT IL'SCHN RXM 0 • C 12'3 y _ � D KEN ai wesi'�' w rm 7", fL^, (DPP HAND} =--- M� STAR 21 EAT -JO STAFf EI 90ii7H f� j {a RAM A_�EVIKD WS i r' rww .2=.N.� Q EJITRT DI j CnNFEREl1[E SS kORT�H �,^�y� 1-.._- _ i ON DIRECTCA s5 EAST Q DIRECTOR as 3DOTK WESF ® EATAY q EAST 111 xxPNclla< DTAHD H wgRx Ip EAST 7 SECTIQN AT • An MIEN 31 CENTER P.P)l noM f t N£M EI w;IEN 3} NORTH WHEN NZ TYP PARIfTIPN V !Y( *Elm, V WIS, 1CP P.liAND� O WDOEN YE Wvt H Ia,w OR. HFND) .I &H ,mur 22 R£STgDTWLE T 22 TEAITH of 22 EA5T -Eck, ROOM FINISH SCHEDULE w-�- rfb Jf (i,�'fs,crtcttaea,eail- ......,._, _k,. —–"—'.'��`-',���. ".,�,. rp!•ht� f e sw,w T—,. - iau 4i4ss -771 t I F F �_1 ' t z�- 1 FLAN SFCIM AT MM I E ? - - -- �K Ok � E v ro7 nc "Ti .fix 1° p a a FINISH EES: i - I L AUf `T "gin NEN kE,CN T D;Gx- s.wr OCHEvt'PUT DESK s G U-41TT Wsx- SOITiH ' IEifTRr 9ilTE 1K.1 C7i_-r ttRvim ®R CH:CN-OUT IIESK LE ST y � z CUEOK-OUT UE5X- l^1 GNECK -9VF 4ESK-H9RTH SERYifE F1ESK- ElsT Ifl TER;um WEST ku FT7 -- � �CHELK-4Ui DE3K- - ( CH M OPUT ECSK- SERVICE pESK- SOJTH INYEfl10R EAST n...... O �KKO. OnK I t;l FHF9R.y �7{pp VESKI+c- l_v - O seltww WSK - YEsT $MACE mm -WEST EL APLM R PMA—TiT� �MML E�. wi ,CA U'L , .71 VA Top WE JI EL APLM R PMA—TiT� �MML E�. wi ,CA U'L JI WE EL APLM R PMA—TiT� �MML E�. wi ,CA U'L 0 9 ram Iv" -"4. In �i • EXHIBIT "D" • Pro Tern Hearing Examiner Phil Olbrechts CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON CITIZENS TO SAVE THE CEDAR RIVER LIBRARY... AGAIN! V. CITY OF RENTON Renton City Hall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Appellant, Respondent. I Civil Action No. LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H DECLAMATION OF M5. RUTH BALEIKO 1, Ruth Baleiko, declare: 1. I am a Principal (non -equity senior architect) with the architectural firm The Miller Hull Partnership. 2. My firm is a registered limited liability partnership in the State of Washington 3. 1 have been a licensed architect in the state of Washington since 2006. 4. 1 graduated from The University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign in 1996, with a Bachelor of Science in Architectural Studies degree_ I received a Master of Architecture degree from the same institution in 1998. 3. I have worked for Miller Hull since 1999. 6_ As it relates to the above captioned matter, I have professional knowledge of the proposed design and plans for the remodeling of the Liberty Park or Cedar River Library at 100 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington, 7. The proposed design and plans will reduce the footprint of the existing library in two areas: a. The north balcony that is approximately 976 SF, which, as depicted in the (Renton Public Library Additions and Renovations) drawings dated 1986 was enclosed roughly twenty years after the library was originally constructed will be removed; and b. An addition of approximately 1,296 SF, which, as depicted in the same drawings, was added roughly twenty years after the library was originally constructed will also be removed_ S. The two reductions are a result of technical constraints brought about by the structural upgrades required to bring the building up to current seismic code. 9_ The existing library walkway is not being reduced in size. We are adding approximately 433 SF of unenclosed square footage near the proposed main entry. The addition of square footage near the entry is in response to community input about the significance of the bridge, and is an attempt to more visibly join the bridge and entry area. 10. The resulting square footage change per these numbers is a reduction of 1,839 SF_ 11. l declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the State of Washington that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. EXECUTED at Renton, Washington, this 23 n day of July, 2013. Ms. Ruth Baleiko, AIA, Principal The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP 2 v >, ' - v C [_. -O :. v •7 :� r, r. O a v � � r. :s n .� s v O � cL C !t ;n u,�. r. s c ` -, au uy .v c •'1: Y.:/? �'y ".mss :° --Cob f a -O a - •r ^ .+, c%' s 0 n � o C '-' C' - ^ J � = -- _ ry a -.• L u � _ 0. � f � � � G � �,� K � `j/�Yz^ P�-y-���- yu;`rpT.� �'j�,.v�L✓i� _ JC cul-`-_�.'=rt cr.i ZJ rCj C N '� y �, C cccK ?� y j •1 ^— C "? J �' dl O O t rL,) j, .^�-. ,r J y y � 'J '—✓ — � •."�. G � ... 'J r � - w y r Si . — tq . G_ '.. ,�+ v .`.G. D � ',.. "I. �. '� `� �' L Y, �W NO �yi\T'����N11411ir 4r c!. rr bA U 'cl 0 � a^ t w z L, i u4 s~ z`� � � U U � � � O a O �'� a�J �• O 0 A «~ 71 ° v � C) Lij � � Q-� oAR.U ni �W NO �yi\T'����N11411ir �W Cynthia Moya From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 12:09 PM To: Phil Olbrechts (olbrechtslaw@gmail.com) Cc: Cynthia Moya Subject: FW: Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library ... Again Appeal Attachments: Declarations of Service for Nicola Robinson; Beth Asher; and David A. Keyes; .pdf; Certified copy of Renton Library Drawings'65 attached to Declaration of Michael Nolan.pdf; Certified copy of Renton library drawings '86 attached to Declaration of Michael Nolan.pdf Phil, Attached are additional documents received for the Appeal hearing. We will add these to the LUA file also. Please acknowledge receipt. Thank you. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 From: Jo Olson Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 9:05 AM To: Bonnie Walton Cc: Garmon Newsom II Subject: RE: Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library. -Again Appeal Bonnie - here are the certified copies of the plans in 81/2 x 11 size for you to forward to the Hearing Examiner. I am also forwarding to you copies of the Declarations of Service on David Keyes, Beth Asher and Nicola Robinson, all three were served last night with the Summary Judgment documents. Thanks for all your help with this project. Jo From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 4:48 PM To: Jo Olson Subject: RE: Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library ... Again Appeal Jo, For the certified plans, please reduce the size on the copier and then scan to send to me_ I can send that then. Phil should be able then to enlarge them back to full size. Bonnie From: Jo Olson Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2013 4:34 PM To: Bonnie Walton Cc: Garmon Newsom II; Larry Warren Subject: Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library ... Again Appeal 1 Bonnie — attached are the following dooLuments that need to be forwarded to the4kring Examiner today if possible. 1. City's Motion for Summary Judgment; 2. Exhibit A — Environmental Review Committee Report; 3. Exhibit B — Declaration of Ms. Bonnie Walton; 4. Exhibit C — Declaration of Michael Nolan (Bonnie we have the certified plans that should be attached to Michaels's declaration however they were on ledger paper and I could not scan that size, so we can bring them over to you tomorrow if you would like and you can get them to the Hearing Examiner for his review — they are much easier to read as they are much larger than the ones I was able to scan. Let me know what you would like me to do and I will take care of it.) 5. Exhibit D — Declaration of Ms. Ruth Bali and 6. Declaration of Service. The copies of all these documents went out for service on the three individuals this afternoon and hopefully, they we get their copies this evening. Talk to you tomorrow. If you need to talk tome tonight (I am leaving the office now) you can call my cell 206-715-8166. Ja-A ru't. 0LSOTV Administrative Assistant Renton City Attorney 100 S. 2nd Street P.O. Box 626 Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6491 425-255-9789 (fax) jolsonerentpnwa.gov '-�_ _ . Confidentiality Statement. This message may contain information that is protected by the attorney-client priviiege and/or work product pr'wi lege. If this message was sem to you in error, any use, disclosure or distribution of its contents is prahibhed. If you receive this message in error, please wntact meat the telephone number or e-mail address listed above and delete this messase without printing, copying, or forwarding it. Thank you. 0 • CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON Plaintiff Case # CITIZENS TO SAVE THE CEDAR RIVER LIBRARY-AGAINl LUA i3-000255,ECF, SM, SA -H Defendant DECLARATION OF S€WCE CITY OF RENTON The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says: That he/she is now and at all times herein mentioned was a ciften of the United States, over the age of eighteen years, not a party to or interested in the above entitled action and competent to be a witness therein. That on JULY 23RD at 6:48PM, at the address of 3110 SE 5TH ST RENTON, WA 98058, the undersigned duly served the following document(s): Respondent City of Rentonftfws Motion for Summary Judgment: Exhibit A a€" Environmental Review committee Report; Exhibit B &V Declaration of Ms. Bonnie Walton; Exhibit C aE' Declaration of Michael J. Nolan; Exhibit D $B" declaration of Ms. Ruth Bateiko: and Declaration of Service. in the above entitled action upon DAVID A. KEYES, COMMUNICATION OFFICER., by then and there, at the residence and usual place of abode of said person(s), personally delivery i true and correct copy(ies) of the above documents into the hands of and leaving same with NICOL.A ROBINSON TREASURER. Description; CAUCASIAN FEMALE APPROXIMATELY 45-50 YRS OF AGE ABOUT 5'4` TALL 135 LBS WITH BROWN HAIR. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State o shington that tyre forego fig is true cont -et: coct: / Date r- dmf " % s Tye-Bvef- License #: 22725 GreyhoundLegal.corrt 2223 189th St E Tacoma, WA 98445 2532309635 CITY OF RENTON HEADING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON Plaintiff Cas CITIZENS TO SAVE THE CEDAR RIVER LIBRARY ... AGAINI LUA 13-MO255,ECF, 5M, SA -H Defendant DECLARATION OF SERVICE CITY OF RENTON The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says: That he/she is now and at all times herein mentioned was a citizen of the United States, over the age of eighteen years, not a party to or interested in the above entitled action and coff"tent to be a witness therein. That on JULY 23RD at 5:41 PM, at the address of 436 MILL AVE S RENTON, WA 98057, the undersigned duty served the following document(s). Respondent City of RentonAE""s Lotion for Summary Judgment, Exhibit A a€" Environmental Review committee Report; Exhibit B if" Declaration of Ms. Bonnie Walton; Exhibit C AE" Declaration of Michael J. Nolan; Exhibit D if" Declaration of Ms. Ruth Baleiko; and Declaration of Service. in the above entified action upon DAVID A. KEYES. COMMUNICATION OFFICER., by then and therer at the residence and usual place of abode of said person(s), personally delivery 1 true and correct copy(fes) of the above documents into the hands of and leaving same with BETH ASHER SECRETARY. Description. CAUCASIAN FEMALE APPROMMATELY 35 YRS OF AGE 5'9" TALL ABOUT 140 LBS WITH RED FLAIR. I declare under penalty of per)ury under the laws of the State of shington that th fore ng is true and correct: Date* -7 -X License y: 72725 GreyhoundLegal_com 2223189th St E Tacoma, WA 98445 2532349675 CITY OF RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON Plaintiff Case t# CITIZENS TO SANE THE CEDAR RIVER LIBRARY... AGAIN! LUA 13-000255,ECF, SM, SA -H Defendant DECLARATION OF SERVICE CITY OF RENTON The undersigned, being first duly sworn on oath deposes and says: That helshe is now and at all times herein mentioned was a citizen of the United States, over the age of eighteen years, not a party to or interested in the above entitled action and competent to be a witness therein_ That on JULY 23RD at 4:40 PHA, at the address of 1013 KIRKLAND AVE NE APT 3 RENTON, WA 98056 the undersigned duly served the following document(s): Respondent City of Rentonif"As Motion for Summary Judgment; Exhibit A 6E" Environmental Review committee Report; Exhibit SAE' Declaration of Ms. Bonnie Walton; Exhibit C a£" DecEaration of Michael J. Nolan; Exhibit D W Dedaration of Ms. Ruth Baleiko; and Declaration of Servire. in the above entitled action upon DAVID A. KEYES, COMMUNICATION OFFICER., by then and there, at the residence and usual place of abode of said person(s), personally der'suery 1 true and correct copy(iss) of the above documents into the hands of and leaving same with DAVID A. KEYES, COMMUNICATIONS OFFICER. Description: CAUCASIAN MALE LATE SOS 611" TALL ABOUT 210 LBS WITH WHITE HAIR. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State ashfngton the he to oing Is true and correct: Date: X License #: 22725 GreyhoundLegal.com 2223 189th St E Tacoma, WA 98445 2592309675 _ - � �- � � m�•. tea i� (i\ F's 04 p:.k i a va m o t En "a s '� �6 1 6 4 'I- �o � /moi y,{' i �= � �•-.'\.+C�� yr / I t.� z IN o F p I V R �k w Ir} I r l t4 I i � [ �ctiT�'� GL'E3i-ly�L'isGARY et :-FDAri Q,v F -R Ig3ERT PAZs< R6r17ON, WASiW67atiy !I rr m i� n IF, J t I !I i� n IF, p ,> Zh G .,'per 1 •-c n alro o • y- A a ill` � E- )ice 11 To n In o{ r a P +� JOHNSTON - CAMPANELLA & CO. �S.rx3 nR e'rilTPcrs a :onsv Lr rs r !I - _`� 41 1 Fit) EE r SFE . .n t � _ ! 3 Ll2,-RAR1 �� JDHIIA�T6N - ChM PAI Eil4&'CO77- .AT CEDAR:RIVFZ4 LefZ.TY.PkRK �' ARC -HF ECTS .-.d. C'Jntu T ANTS k �i ;REf7TON WASN!KGTON- Ah i i i E 4 1 � F 3 I � n I F- i Iy SS i jE —. �41— r I. p i i I I�y!tvl1141 { 7 11 4-4 �� � � >;r � � `J.� � s�k '�t � a >ID� ° � w.m s n�i - � 1: Al� x I?•i ii. ,� r'C K' � � wl oh�ulo P 9 �'sIII,. a 11, C D Z Ii �.1I;814 �'� s j rR f� fl { f • e � (fj 'I � gFg � � II 1 �] 'f 3 ai -14 'a 7 71 sisE; !_I I € . I n. .'. 1 rI I I i i I 11' IA�^ ,z 1�,y� p rarcv pia ,_ s IIz ` c=oar �!vE7 t.L3ssErzry �r_lau JO,WNSTON - CAMPANELLA 8 CO �A:R Cn'1TELTF Q CCNSIl LTA FITS ��7JTON WAa:t 3'NGrl�p saw aua .we-n.s,c; o'+n. i ! .tea--,f•_� s—� s �--`�.._. •t � 3 Oji -�.\\� ♦ �. ;�3 !� I�i�__ ;rrt -to 3 i ''—^1: e S } ;r i 'IT I ' iF S .J' sr - c: YS I - i r y4PJ -LnG Fa taR .:. JOliNSTON CAMPANELLA & CO J� k �4-L-, 'DEQ}4'p1S��ik56r'�'rY. 6CIL A A C Y l i E C s d lJ N 5 L' L r N -B- T_, '�cATr�FF�I�':Y{'4'-IFZItU:'�"'•bz y. '_ .: � j '�,��_�. j, tr� � -_ _. � _. . '!•' . ,� s .:. _,:�:-.xrr_[a¢.�• rYr� arJ�S.�x_n�T'wi L - ''��:c-r�tax-.- �,.�ds=A�.r,.z�,.:.::. .��� '— I • i - _ i; i it }I V �� • € I 1 rj � � �i ; _{ .. IIs y" a iE{E I� OD I ji 3 � ] '� i. f I 44 i ; -'--�--•}- EP iltl 'r II `k� I II I / " E �� " :'` � _ i � . �fli ` ' a [ i" I ILa 1 4� Vi 13 I 'a£ AliI - I it ,� � � i •`i I � Al p� �, I S - rt E P u=LTC,'i PLa3L Ld.JOHNSTON- CAMPANELLA & CO ' �Tc.,,�rt i € c�,4�9 .I cx?"G�.:.,Y� F�£va� � 4 ".LevA7�.fk•5 . .. s o ...,, c,M, ..,.. ........ i G I � -'- r— I � -q � j n IS .. - ✓ i :I i I _� � I i!I I�.- k � I I t;l I I� O u -may' i '. ZA rj iS I ! [ Cj c i II 41,n 1 Oft L�• r s'�tls j .[ t \iF ;. "'{ =1. I ]E.4' —°�'�. _�.• 3"cF 1'I � ft ��tp'`� �fiE � „ nsE ili. I, � .��r i IT •k., Z'c j F i �[ tl �%-- _ �'-.'k' C 1 - I�I I -T n i s +� ! I' tom— � � � i •. _.�_ � I � ] t ! ! _— I p! 3 I II i Ste, Rl 71 � •e`,--- 1-' 1-! 1 „, r f `'.i o 13:11 f j i?1, p +.i 7 [I # - �• LTJ I:k� S if r F I }S is o' t _•_" Alil_ 4 I Tc 2 A F I WW TO P4 PUB =i2JONN5TON - CAMPANELLA & CQ r. L F,T CEUn4 41Y R E - ;Q rY_?APK \'ice ... AACH�Tt C.is a Co Nspirayrs I' �C"TJN , ASWINGTON ' 4vC ¢5_ �n•: !�pows �. "G c7 A:i_S �� ee ..,, _._ _ .^_, ....- .w ..,..,.. i I • a } irl-jI - ik � Yla T i ' FOR 7�4 –` EEO I I 3 -- s a �,s�� - L•I"' :� �...c � I CSX 3LL l�I� m Li WI KED i G.h. AL BL L3 Bp" -�Y `'— I JOHNSTON - CAMPANELLA & CO. e A: CEPAP ;2tVE4 I ag R-y PARL4 � a-e c.H ltccT ' i: ���_ qtr 7 • t--1 t -d 0 81 f 3 2, 1. E -q c'j Pi� i,,� t7' ;—i: V Ts 9 9. A -i v 5 .ems t--1 t -d 0 81 7 7 RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY PE�;()VATIONS AND ALOMONS 100 CiziSAH RIVER PENION %VlSF1'lG'f()q PE1055 If f 3 2, 1. E -q c'j Pi� i,,� t7' ;—i: V Ts 9 9. A -i v 7 7 RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY PE�;()VATIONS AND ALOMONS 100 CiziSAH RIVER PENION %VlSF1'lG'f()q PE1055 If c'j RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY PE�;()VATIONS AND ALOMONS 100 CiziSAH RIVER PENION %VlSF1'lG'f()q PE1055 If c'j all ��;�;: '��. • M, . �' 3� 4 yak ����' \� q pt i l CEDAR 91VFrzi 41 T� yn $ R f { F x ypy�alSigEi 9 Mi � 1I � I I di2i e RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY ! � � RENO YAl)p178 At7D ADDMONS I I € 100 CEDAR RIVER 4EN70H, %%;SHING70N 98055 I4 Rs 2� R y.O � b i• yr�� !� � S � _` ° `•,i l E! ,r I4 � � +. I{ n T � ,� ICU: �' I �¢ Hca?� ` �— ii JL F ee { - (n -- J i R I � v i 1 l x F A. '.�: i .- -may i � ti : I I I ;�� iySza-�� � �_• 4-r0 RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY RENOVATIONS AN.. An.mTrbNs ' iv0 GECAR RWER' . J - RE NTON, WASNi N.3TON .H8R55 k win l i L_2 a �La �Uo , b 9 i - (n -- J i R I � v i 1 l x F A. '.�: i .- -may i � ti : I I I ;�� iySza-�� � �_• 4-r0 RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY RENOVATIONS AN.. An.mTrbNs ' iv0 GECAR RWER' . J - RE NTON, WASNi N.3TON .H8R55 k win l v7aM1 i § a �Uo , b I ! n L.d _ d e � oiS- � � n fi' t i z�"zin k win l v7aM1 i § a �Uo , 0 Ur.-, p oi qp . . . . . . . . . . . , t L 11, 77 —J—ru i 116AR d ifs 4a up W 1 u �� i '.� � i � '• _ �I I - � �/3 I I �- 'r:l � 21 W. J1 C" Sim IN90 zT 4`3 n P I RIP h 111, .1 zo 14 n Ir jFi -6 -1 R RENT 0N PUBLIC LIBRARY A I -ell 11 RENOVATIONS AND ADDITIONS RENTON,wAsiqi.vwrom mss,. RENTONPUBLEC LIBRARY, ; 55 RENOVATIONS W40 ADDMONS E G1 f 100 CEDAR RIVFR 1 K� ia Ei ct l2 sy s_ J i f �-y � i• ri§y� ! • I 1 E !� I! 1! I I i i I _LX.:. Fi3 , �J 3 I jG, �-- a I Y._ -I • I i7 z pTl 1 LD Ej Ti'� _ `�P� 1 • I i SII` I € I i� �� q_ i L_.1 u � C Imo'• �, i �`1 I C�•I € ji p I • ! I it h g r • II �� :I'� i {�'`" I� i. Fl I f �1 1� (k�� � I � i � �♦ i a r I- I RR i Z 6 y " } RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY jI 3 RENOYA TIANS ANp FD'DfTfoMs - SOD CEDAR Pt Ll -p, E 3 Fi EPJTYPN YVA SIiit�GTON-A8D55 r I ] I _ , w� Ifs I I I I �I 1 l2 sy s_ J i f �-y � i• ri§y� ! • I 1 E !� I! 1! I I i i I _LX.:. Fi3 , �J 3 I jG, �-- a I Y._ -I • I i7 z pTl 1 LD Ej Ti'� _ `�P� 1 • I i SII` I € I i� �� q_ i L_.1 u � C Imo'• �, i �`1 I C�•I € ji p I • ! I it h g r • II �� :I'� i {�'`" I� i. Fl I f �1 1� (k�� � I � i � �♦ i a r I- I RR i Z 6 y " } RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY jI 3 RENOYA TIANS ANp FD'DfTfoMs - SOD CEDAR Pt Ll -p, E 3 Fi EPJTYPN YVA SIiit�GTON-A8D55 r I ] I _ , I sl ; .iIL� Ifs I I I I �I 1 I I { I I 1 1{3 3 Ir£" F •JZ3PG�7[� ZE ..C1 I sl ; .iIL� Ifs I I I I �I 1 I I { I I 1 1{3 3 �I, Ij ��• . t. . _ . . . .. i\ . 7 r�d ). � } ' - 11 F- % a 11 o F- IN }4-4 p - jF 1 o F- IN 116 jF 1 RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY RENOVATION9 AND ADDITIONS IPG CEDAR RtVtR %RENTO". WA.SHJ;GTOH 9906.5 --G ME F- IN 71- --G ME F- 71- .1 ell --G ME r7 k j \N k, --L-4 Z3 1 x rn rK\ lk � Tml_ I ��. � 0L Vk� ff Vie. 41 P -V 6E m z z - -- - - - ------------------ O� 1�j7 4m 112 T, z Z i -71� -clil z < �q N. r 5K c, 4� T; Zc ;': ji.Vv �;K 3z t 7-4L "'IN >111!4 o" P190 "Fft sn i u X0 SVS jE ;FAj I ZIM 11 2 14 c ATA R ly m 13 .4 �- az 4 It RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY RENOVA710N.9 AND ADDITioms CEDAR 41VEh AfiHIN G70N:,s6 f C, cz Oj D fivp 0 Az III OtUrl � Tr= UI TnT ENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY RFNOVATIUHS AN]) kDOITIDN Iffl) CEDAR RlVep 'qENTOm_WA S;Hli44T04 g96.55 I MIMI , rlw-el I I > C) 7,51 t ci v I MIMI , rlw-el I I 2�6 7C� Imo_ I! a p? D S x Nm � r 1� I nij � z4 f x €h o 0 1 Z rh ?! E i O n] • � � 1 Nm � r 1� z4 O n] • 6 v Q Lc -u !l a Pit { € kyr & -29� Hi 12 i LA 41 4r 1 Y}' E i F 4aG 1b, 0 cu 7�jFI 'RENTON PUBLIC L!8 RARY I `}gyms REh10VA73[iNS AND ADD] — iooCEL1'�RRly R �e - } rlE NTpN Ik A51-71NG7Q7. 88.0 5 � i. 3 cn ca an y S p C7. < Ci cr, en n Ic Ri �`F €gib €z�Ci I'c>• �"➢max _ 0 ' �� > zx� E F I >• 2aE IZZ_i Ii31� III>_ ,:, C Pit { € kyr & -29� Hi 12 i LA 41 4r 1 Y}' E i F 4aG 1b, 0 cu 7�jFI 'RENTON PUBLIC L!8 RARY I `}gyms REh10VA73[iNS AND ADD] — iooCEL1'�RRly R �e - } rlE NTpN Ik A51-71NG7Q7. 88.0 5 � i. 3 cn ca an y S p C7. • RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY N RE110 VAT nYs AND-A4VERpVI 1,11 $ .300 CFDgF{i I j 3 I sdR cr. R hfTDN YYA$NdN G�.lOt18R�5b 'E- cs�. �rg 1rN � j�&mti� C+a AO• x W C n !_ Im 3 x `l ti 3 ��y • RENTON PUBLIC LIBRARY N RE110 VAT nYs AND-A4VERpVI 1,11 $ .300 CFDgF{i I j 3 I sdR cr. R hfTDN YYA$NdN G�.lOt18R�5b 'E- cs�. �rg 1rN � j�&mti� C+a AO• 0 ZZ 2,� 1,z 9 m L Iz y Pr "31 IN 71, lz in 1 151, "1 ig r� t iq nl N i A V X" Mil - --------- T N -T 0 N PU B L Ii I 7 � T, 4-. ggo F{ F. I V 1 1 q m t CD Cynthia Mora From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 5:36 PM To: Cynthia Moya Subject: FW: Continuance Decision - Library Appeal Hearing Attachments: RE: Continuance Decision - Library Appeal Hearing Importance: High Another addition to the LUA file... bw S Cynthia Moya MIDI �� From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 5:35 PM To: 'DAVID KEYES (keyes28@msn.com); 'Ruth Baleiko (rbaleiko@millerhull_com)'; 'Gregory Smith (ggsmith@kcls.org)'; Chip Vincent; Larry Warren; 'Maaike Post', 'Adrianne Ralph 'Beth Asher (betha@mittenth aLcom)'; 'Nicola_rn@msn.com'; 'Philippe_LeTourneau@kingcounty.gov'; 'Teri,HaIla uer@seattle.gov' Cc: Peter Renner; Terry Higashiyama; Neil R. Watts; Jennifer T. Henning; Stacy Tucker Subject: RE: Continuance Decision - Library Appeal Hearing Attachments: Re: Sept 30th OR July 30th Library Hearing Importance: High Attached is clarification just received from the Hearing Examiner regarding the continuance decision and hearing date. The hearing is scheduled for 7/30, not 9/30. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 4:13 PM To: DAVID KEYES (keves280msn.com); Ruth Baleiko (rbaleiko(@millerhull.com); Gregory Smith ( smith kcls_org); Chip Vincent; Larry Warren; Maaike Post; Adrianne Ralph; Beth Asher (betha(&mittenthal.com); Nicola rmamsn.com; 'Philippe.LeTourneau@kingcounty.gov'; Teri.Hallauer@seattle.gov' Cc: Peter Renner; Terry Higashiyama; Neil R. Watts; Jennifer T. Henning; Stacy Tucker Subject: Continuance Decision - Library Appeal Hearing Importance: High Hearing Examiner Phil Olbrechts has just issued his decision by email on the request for continuance of the Library Appeal hearing. Copy of this decision, denying the request, is attached. Also attached is copy of comments to the request that were submitted by the City Attorney and by the applicant, KCLS through Miller -Hull. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 1055 5. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6502 1 Cynthia Maya From: Phil Olbrechts <olbrechtslaw@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 1S, 2013 521 PM To: Bonnie Walton Subject: Re: Sept 30th OR July 30th Library hearing The 9/30 date is a typo. Should be July 30. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 15, 2013, at 5:07 PM, Bonnie Walton <Bwalton Rentonwa. ov> wrote: I received two more phone calls asking about the continuance decision issued today and your use of the Sept. 30th date. Can you clarify? Thank you. Bonnie Walton City of Renton Cynthia Mo a From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 4:45 PM To: Phil Olbrechts (olbrechtslaw@gmail.com) Cc: Chip Vincent; Larry Warren; Vanessa Dolbee; DAVID KEYES (keyes28@msn_com); Beth Asher (betha@mittenthal.com); Nicola_rn@msn.com Subject: APPEAL RESPONSE - LIBRARY Attachments: 13_0711 appeal response.pdf Attached is the applicant's response to the SEPA appeal. (Note: This attachment was included in my previous email today regarding the continuance, however, I am sending it here separately to be sure you recognized this as related to the appeal, rather than as part of the continuance matter.) Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6502 .. .__.............. .. ... ... ... ... .... ... From: Ruth Baleiko fmailto:rbaleiko@millerhull.coml Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 5:13 PM To: Peter Renner; Bonnie Walton Cc: Gregory Smith; Maaike Post; Adrianne Ralph Subject: Responses for Library Project Peter and Bonnie, Please find attached our responses to the appeal and letters. Thank you, Ruth Baleiko, AIA, Principal The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP AIA National Firm Award Recipient 71 Columbia Street - 6th Floor Seattle, WA 98104 Direct: 206-254-2013 www. millerhull_com 1 I................................... NA i I t 6Q Ldl 11 1 07/11/2013 Attn: Greg Smith Icing County Library System 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, WA 98027 RE: Response to SEPA determination appeal Dear Greg, We have received the filing letter submitted as an appeal to the City's Determination of Non - Significance -Mitigated (DNS -M) for the Library Renovation project. In response, we have the following comments: — The letter cites "likely environmental impact" as a basis for requesting the submittal of a Full Environmental Impact Statement. As indicated in the submitted documents, the library project has taken several steps to mitigate environmental impact, including the following: o Restoring the library to its original building footprint and envelope location. o Keeping all construction work above or landward of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) and Base Flood Elevation (BFE). This prevents disturbance of shoreline habitat, critical areas, salmon environments, and water flow. o Maintaining the existing parking lot lighting and surfacing (except in locations of required utility trenching or structural work). o Maintaining the existing river banks, shoreline stabilization materials, and vegetation. -- The letter also cites "grossly inaccurate and incorrect answers to Question 13" (HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION) of the SEPA document. We reiterate that no places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site. We also reiterate that no landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance are known to be on or next to the site. Page 1 of 1 The Milledlilull PartnersMp, ur Contact Polson Building T: 246.682-6837 71 Columbia -6' Floor F:206.682-5692 Seattle, WA 99104 y1ZM.mi1lerhu1Lcom = MILLER i HlfLl Please feel free to call with any questions. Sincerely, Ruth Baleiko, AIA Principal, The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP 0 Page 2 of 2 L1 Cynthia Moya rI L From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 4:13 PM To: DAVID KEYES (keyes28@msn.com); Ruth Baleiko (rbaleiko@millerhull.com); Gregory Smith (ggsmith@kcls.org); Chip Vincent; Larry Warren; Maaike Post; Adrianne Ralph; Beth Asher (betha@mittenthal.com); Nicola_rn@msn.com; 'Philippe.LeTourneau@kingcounty.gov'; 'Teri.Hallauer@seattle.gov' Cc: Peter Renner; Terry Higashiyama; Neil R. Watts; Jennifer T_ Henning; Stacy Tucker Subject: Continuance Decision - Library Appeal Hearing Attachments: Library Project; RE: Library Hearing Extension Request; Request for Continuance - Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H; Re: Responses for Library Project; Responses for Library Project Importance: High Hearing Examiner Phil Qlbrechts has just issued his decision by email on the request for continuance of the Library Appeal hearing. Copy of this decision, denying the request, is attached. Also attached is copy of comments to the request that were submitted by the City Attorney and by the applicant, KCLS through Miller -Hull. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6502 0 Cynthia Moya From: Phil olbrechts <olbrechtslaw@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 3.31 PM To: Bonnie Walton Subject: Library Project Thank you for the information. I will issue an email order in order to address the continuance request as expeditiously as possible. The request for continuance from the SEPA appellants is denied for Project No. LUA-13-000255. The permit hearing has already been delayed from July 9 to July 30, 2013 to accommodate the appeal. The appellants have not identified any specific reason why they need a continuance in order to prepare, other than they need to hire an attorney. The SEPA appeal itself does not identify any issue that would take a substantial amount of time to address by the appellants. The appeal appears to be based exclusively on assertions that environmental review is incomplete. If the appellants can provide a concrete example of what will take more than (now) two weeks to prepare, the denial of the reconsideration request will be reconsidered. No reconsideration request will be considered past the end of this week, 7/19/13. The SEPA appellants should also recognize that the hearing examiner is required to provide substantial deference to the findings of the SEPA responsible official, specifically the finding that as mitigated and conditioned the proposal will not create any probable, significant adverse environmental impacts. In order to overcome this deference, it is generally not sufficient to establish that environmental review is based upon incomplete information. The appellants should be able to produce information that establishes that the proposal will result in probable significant adverse environmental impacts. The September 30, 2013 hearing will be bifurcated into a hearing on the permit and a hearing on the SEPA appeal. The hearing on the permit application will be held first and follow the hearing format required by RMC 4-8-100, as pasted below. The SEPA appeal hearing will commence immediately upon the completion of the testimony on the permit application. The order of presentation will be (1) SEPA appellants opening an presentation of evidence; (2) Applicant opening and presentation of evidence; (3) City opening and presentation of evidence; (4) Applicant rebuttal; (5) Appellant rebuttal. RMC 4-5-100 (F)(3)(g) Format of Permit Hearings: i. The public hearing will be informal in nature, but organized, so that testimony and evidence can be presented efficiently. The hearing shall include at least the following elements: (a) An introductory outline of the procedure by the Hearing Examiner. (b) Testimony by the City staff which shall summarize the written staff report and provide any additional exhibits or other information the staff believes should be brought to the Hearing Examiner's attention. The staff presentation shall include a recommendation for approval, approval with conditions, or denial_ (c) Testimony by the applicant and the applicant's witnesses. (d) Testimony from others wishing to be heard. (e) Rebuttal testimorod closing argument from staff. 0 (f) Rebuttal testimony and closing argument from the applicant. (g) Any participant in the hearing may present his or her testimony through witnesses, provided that such witnesses, including expert witnesses, must be personally present to so testify unless permission has been granted in advance by the Hearing Examiner to present such testimony by telephone. From: Bonnie Walton [mailto:Bwalton@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 2:15 PM To: Phil Olbrechts (olbrechtslaw@gmail.com) Subject: FW: Library Project Importance: High The last piece of information you had requested before making a decision on the library continuance to August is below. Please let me know if you need anything further. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 From: Vanessa Dolbee Seat: Monday, July 15, 2013 2:12 PM To: Bonnie Walton Cc: Larry Warren; Jay B Covington; Chip Vincent; Terry Higashiyama; Peter Renner; Preeb Shridhar Subject: RE: Library Project Bonnie, The project was determined to be complete on May 29, 2013 as of today that would be 45 days. On July 30'� it will be 60 days. Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall - 6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 95057 425.430.7314 2 From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Monday, July 15, 2013 10:41 AM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Library Project Vanessa: Where is the Library Land Use application at in the 120 day review process? I asked Neil, but haven't heard back. Thanks. Bonnie, x6502 • Cynthia Moya From: Larry Warren Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 11:01 AM To: Bonnie Walton; Chip Vincent Cc: Jay B Covington; Neil R. Watts Subject: RE: Library Hearing Extension Request C] I object to any continuance. This project is being delayed beyond any expected timelines and in the meantime the price of construction is rising. I note that the appeal was filed at the last minute. My experience has been that if an attorney is hired that there will be another request for a continuance so the attorney can prepare. None of the issues are terribly complicated, could have been anticipated some time ago and would seem to lend themselves to the realization, before now, that appellants wanted or needed an attorney. From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Thursday, .July 11, 2013 5:46 PM To: Larry Warren; Chip Vincent Cc: Jay B Covington; Neil R. Watts Subject: FW: Library Hearing Extension Request Larry and Chip: Please review the attached and let me know if you have any objection to this request for continuance. Also, please let me know where the permit is on the 120 day review process. Once I have heard back from you and the applicant, who I will contact separately, I will pass the comments back to the Hearing Examiner. Bonnie Walton City Clerk X5502 From: Phil Olbrechts [mailto:olbrechtslaw(@q mail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:39 PM To: Bonnie Walton Cc: Neil R. Watts; Jennifer T. Henning; Vanessa Dolbee; Stacy Tucker Subject: Re: Library Hearing Extension Request Does the city or applicant have any objection on the continuance request? Where is the permit on the 120 review? Sent from my iPhone On Jul 11, 2013, at 5:29 PM, Bonnie Walton <Bwalton Rentonwa. ov> wrote: Phil: The attached request was received in my office by fax just before 5 pm this afternoon. Please let me know if you would be available to hold this hearing on August 201h or 27th, instead of July 301h as requested by the appellant. I will need to re -notify the parties if the hearing date is changed. Thank you. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 Cynthia Momma From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 6:14 PM To: ggsmith@kcls.org'; 'mpost@MillerHull.com' Subject: Request for Continuance - Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Attachments: Reschlded Hearing Exten Req.pdf Importance: High Mr. Smith and Ms. Post: I am contacting you, the applicant in the referenced land use matter, to inquire as to whether you have any objections to granting of a continuance of the appeal hearing date, as has been requested by the appellant. Please review the attached request, received in my office by fax late this afternoon, and respond to me in writing at your earliest convenience to confirm whether you do or do not have any objections. Your opinion will be forwarded to the Hearing Examiner who will make a determination regarding the request. Thank you. Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6502 I • July 11, 2013 Hearing Examiner C/o City Clerk City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 • SUBJECT''. RMUFST FOR CALENDAR EXTENSION OF RESCHEDULED APPEAL HEAWNG APPEAL of ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA)'THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA15-C )255, ECF, SM, SA -H Dear Hearing Examiner: On behalf of Citizens to Save the Cedar River Libra!y—Again!, I respectfully request a calendar extension of an additional three (3) to four (4) weeks be allowed prior to Hearing of our Appeal in this case, we ask that this extension be granted beyond the currently scheduled date of Tuesday, July. 3e In order to allow our group reasonable and sufficient time in arranging legal counsel and proper preparation for the body of the Appeal. As requested here, a minimum extension of three to four weeks added to the currently scheduled date of Jury 30th, would reschedule the Appeal Hearing for Tuesday, August 20"`; Tuesday, August 27", or later. (in behalf of: Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library— Againl Sincerely, David A. Keyes Committee Officer 2013 Kirkland Avenue NE, Apt, 3 Renton, WA. 98056 (42,5) 757-1121, email. keyes28@rnsn,com • Q3 cr— A 9 en • 4 C/) El L- CD C� X C3 U— X U— ALJ CO FR: LL - 9 en • Cynthia Moya From: Gregory Smith <ggsmith@kcls.org> Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 5:37 PM To: Bonnie Walton Cc: Ruth Baleiko; Peter Renner, Maaike Post; Adrianne Ralph Subject: Re: Responses for Library Project Correct The architects response is our response. Please excuse typos sent. frons my Verizon Wireless 4G LTL DROID Greg Snaith Bonnie Walton <Bwalton a)Rentonwa.gov> wrote: Thank you, Mr. Smith. So there will be no response about the continuance coming directly from KCLS and what I have now covers it, correct? Bonnie From: Gregory Smith [mailto:ggsmith_@kcls.org] Sent; Friday, July 12, 2013 5:27 PM To: Bonnie Walton Cc: Ruth Baleiko; Peter Renner; Maaike Post; Adrianne Ralph Subject: Re: Responses for Library Project Bonnie, this is the direction KCLS has given the architect to respond_ Please excuse typos sent fi•orn my Verizon Wireless 4G L TE DROID Greg Smith Bonnie Walton <BwaltonCaRenton wa.gov> wrote: Thank you. I will be processing these as soon as I hear back from KCLS, which I understand will likely be on Monday. Have a good weekend. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-5502 From: Ruth Baleiko[mailto:rbaleiko(&millerhull.com] Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 5:13 PM To: Peter Renner; Bonnie Walton Cc: Gregory Smith; Maaike Post; Adrianne Ralph Subject: Responses for Library Project Peter and Bonnie, Please find attached our responses to the appeal and continuance letters. Thank you, Ruth Baleiko, AIA, Principal 10 The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP AIA National Firm Award Pec pient 71 Columbia Street - 6th Floor Seattle, WA 58104 Direct: 206-254-20!3 www.millerhuil.ccm 1-74 Cynthia Moya From: Ruth Baleiko <rbaleiko@millerhull,com> Sent: Friday, July 12, 2013 5:13 PM To: Peter Renner; Bonnie Walton Cc: Gregory Smith; Maaike Post; Adrianne Ralph Subject: Responses for Library Project Attachments: 13_0711 appeal response.pdf, 13_0712 continuance response.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Peter and Bonnie, Please find attached our responses to the appeal and continuance letters_ Thank you, Ruth Baleiko, AIA, Principai The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP AIA Naticnol Firm Av. drd Ruupier;, 71 Columbia Street - 6th Roar, Seattle, WA 9810,' Direct, 206 254-2013 v,ww.mlllerhull,com • 07/11/2013 Attn: Greg Smith King County Library System 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, WA 98027 RE: Response to SEPA determination appeal Dear Greg, • We have received the filing letter submitted as an appeal to the City's Determination of Non - Significance -Mitigated (DNS -M) for the Library Renovation project. In response, we have the following comments: — The letter cites "likely environmental impact" as a basis for requesting the submittal of a Full Environmental Impact Statement. As indicated in the submitted documents, the library project has taken several steps to mitigate environmental impact, including the following: o Restoring the library to its original building footprint and envelope location. o Keeping all construction work above or landward of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) and Base Flood Elevation (BEE). This prevents disturbance of shoreline habitat, critical areas, salmon environments, and water flow. o Maintaining the existing parking lot lighting and surfacing (except in locations of required Utility trenching or structural work). o Maintaining the existing river banks, shoreline stabilization materials, and vegetation. — The letter also cites "grossly inaccurate and incorrect answers to Question 13" (HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION) of the SEPA document. We reiterate that no places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site. We also reiterate that no landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance are known to be on or next to the site. Page 1 of 1 The MIIIer[Hull Partnership, uv Contact Polson Building T: 206.682-6837 71 Columbia - 6' Floor F: 206.682-5692 Beattie, WA 98104 www.m,l!erhuil.com HVLL Please feel free to call with any questions. Sincerely, dw ,r Ruth Baleiko, AIA Principal, The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP Page 2 of 2 07/11/2013 Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 RE: Request for Continuance Dear Bonnie, Thank you for forwarding the request for a schedule extension received by the City on July 11, and inquiring as to whether the team has any objections to granting a continuance of the appeal hearing date, as has been requested by the appellant. Speaking for our client, the King County Library System, we would object to a continuance of the appeal hearing date. The submitted documents being appealed have been available to the public for preparation and study for some time: the documents were first submitted to the City March 1, 2013, and resubmitted on May 10, 2013. We also feel that the basis of the appeal has no merit, and as such would prefer to adhere to the current hearing date of July 30. Every delay to the design and documentation process subjects the project—and the clients—to the risk of increased costs through market escalation, code changes, and design fees. Thank you for your consideration, Sincerely, Ruth Baleiko, AIA Principal, The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP Page 1 of 1 The MIIIerEHull Partnership, LLP Contact Polson Building T: 206.682-6837 71 Columbia - 61h Floor F: 206.682-51542 Seattle, WA 98104 www -mil erhulkom From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2093 6:14 PM To: 'ggsmith@kcls.org', 'mpost@MillerHull.com' Subject: Request for Continuance - Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Attachments: Reschlded Hearing Exten Req.pdf Importance: High Mr. Smith and Ms_ Post: I am contacting you, the applicant in the referenced land use matter, to inquire as to whether you have any objections to granting of a continuance of the appeal hearing date, as has been requested by the appellant. Please review the attached request, received in my office by fax late this afternoon, and respond to me in writing at your earliest convenience to confirm whether you door do not have any objections. Your opinion will be forwarded to the Hearing Examiner who will make a determination regarding the request. Thank you. Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6502 1 From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:46 PM To: Larry Warren; Chip Vincent Cc: Jay B Covington; Neil R. Watts Subject: FW: Library Hearing Extension Request Attachments: Reschlded Hearing Exten Req.pdf Larry and Chip: Please review the attached and let me know if you have any objection to this request for continuance. Also, please let me know where the permit is on the 120 day review process. Once I have heard back from you and the applicant, who I will contact separately, I will pass the comments back to the Hearing Examiner_ Bonnie Walton City Clerk X6502 From: Phil Olbrechts[ma !Ito:olbrechtslaw(&gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:39 PM To: Bonnie Walton Cc: Neil R. Watts; Jennifer T. Henning; Vanessa Dolbee; Stacy Tucker Subject: Re: Library Hearing Extension Request Does the city or applicant have any objection on the continuance request? Where is the permit on the 120 review? Sent from my iPhone On Jul 11, 2013, at 5:29 PM, Bonnie Walton <Bwalton Rentonwa.gov> wrote: Phil: The attached request was received in my office by fax just before 5 pm this afternoon. Please let me know if you would be available to hold this hearing on August 20th or 27th, instead of July 301h as requested by the appellant. I will need to re -notify the parties if the hearing date is changed. Thank you. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-6502 1 From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:41 PM To: 'Phil Olbrechts' Cc: Neil R. Watts; Jennifer T_ Henning; Vanessa Dolbee; Stacy Tucker Subject: RE: Library Hearing Extension Request I will send out those inquiries tomorrow and then get back to you with the responses. Bonnie From: Phil Olbrechts[mailto:olbrechtslaw(aDcimail.com] Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2013 5:39 PM To: Bonnie Walton Cc: Neil R. Watts; Jennifer T. Henning; Vanessa Dolbee; Stacy Tucker Subject: Re: Library Hearing Extension Request Does the city or applicant have any objection on the continuance request? Where is the permit on the 120 review? Sent from my iPhone On Jul 11, 2013, at 5:29 PM, Bonnie Walton <Bwalton(@Rentonwa.gau> wrote: Phil: The attached request was received in my office by fax just before 5 pm this afternoon. Please let me know if you would be available to hold this hearing on August 20th or 27th, instead of July 30"' as requested by the appellant. I will need to re -notify the parties if the hearing date is changed. Thank you. Bonnie Walton City Clerk City of Renton 425-430-5502 <Reschulded Hearing Exten Req.pdf�> I July 11, 2013 Hearing Examiner C/o City Clerk City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 SUBJECT: REQU EST FOR CALEPIR8111 AMMIONOF RESCMQU_LED APPEALHIENING APPEAL of ENVIRONMENTAL JSEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-OW255, ECF, SM, SA -H Dear Hearing Examiner: On behalf of Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library... in! I respectfully request a calendar extension of an additional three (3) to four {4} weeks be allowed prior to Hearing of our Appeal in this case. We ask that this extension be granted beyond the currently scheduled date of Tuesday, July 3e in order to allow our group reasonable and sufficient time in arranging legal counsel and proper preparation for the body of the Appeal. As requested here, a minimum extension of three to four weeks added to the currently scheduled date of July 30th, would reschedule the Appeal Hearing for Tuesday, August 2e; Tuesday, August 27v', or later. on behalf of: Citizens to Save the Cedar River Libminl Sincerely, David A. Keyes Committee Officer 1013 Kirkland Avenue NE, Apt. 3 Renton, WA. 95055 (425) 757-1121, email: keyes28@msn,coM nafi'ennuoIuaJ . g 1Sg pa ti} xe� / d 159 oEb (SZti} • L5�85 uo�6uiyseAA dem AP2�} 4=5 5501 uolleM'I aluuo$ - Tap AID JolfeW Mel SIUa(] Ari V L M L Cis V U) L L - C fn W C cm y y SL QFi LL - Q fQ) V ) 1 4Lfri L Q 1:1 N LM L V CD M LL�'''yyy Cis V L OD E C fn W C cm y y sEC:�IVE[.; °,:tiv CLERK'S C;i �iGr V CD M Co I Cis CL L OD E C m sEC:�IVE[.; °,:tiv CLERK'S C;i �iGr V CD H Co I Cis CL L OD E C m C �y y ra • SL sEC:�IVE[.; °,:tiv CLERK'S C;i �iGr V CD H CL L m sEC:�IVE[.; °,:tiv CLERK'S C;i �iGr n06•ennuoluaa . 9L59-0£ b} Xej / OtS9-O£b (SZb) • M86 u016UIgseM'uo1 . AeMApeaE) y1noS S90 L �'!�� e � � 1 jo'(11D ._... , noel Spua(j Department of Commuand ' OV Economic Development NOTICE OF APPEAL HEARING AND PUBLIC HEARING RENTON HEARING EXAMINER RENTON, WASHINGTON An appeal hearing will be held by the Renton Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of the Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, Washington, on July 30, 2013 at 10:00 am to consider the following petitions: Renton Library at Liberty Park LUA13-000255 Location: 100 Mill Ave S. The remodel of the existing Renton Main Library. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three parcels. The area of work is 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The site is primarily zoned CD. The existing access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one trees is proposed to be retained. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Date Report, Regulated material survey, Geotechnical Engineering Report, Technical Information Report. The site is located in the Aquifer Protection zone 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the State and a habitat conservation area. Legal descriptions of the files noted above are on file in the City Clerk's Office, Seventh Floor, City Hall, Renton. All interested persons are invited to be present at the Public Hearing to express their opinions. Questions should be directed to the Hearing Examiner at 425-430-6515. Publication Date: July 12, 2013 From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 2:35 PM To: Bonnie Walton Cc: Jennifer T. Henning; Stacy Tucker Subject: RE: Public Hearing Cancelation.docx Attachments: Appeal_public hearing notice 13-000255.rtf This sounds great to me. I planned on having Stacy send the publication for the Appeal/Site Plan hearing to the Renton Reporter tomorrow as well; does this work within your procedures too? Attached is a draft of the publication. Thank you for letting me know. Vanessa Do(bee CED, x7314 From: Bonnie Walton Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 1:23 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Jennifer T. Henning Subject: RE: Public Hearing Cancelation.docx Usually I send all POR a copy of the appeal that was filed. So maybe it is best if you just send your notice now and I will send a separate one in a day or two when we've got it ready_ Sound okay? Bonnie From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: Monday, July 08, 2013 1:05 PM To: Bonnie Walton Subject: Public Hearing Cancelation.docx 1 Denis Law City of Mayor. - i, �wrwrei�+ \'1T� City Clerk - Bonnie I. Walton July 9, 2013 Maaike Post The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP 71 Columbia Street, 6th Street Seattle, WA 98104 Re: Appeal of Environmental (SEPA) Threshold Determination for the Renton Library at Liberty Park LUA-13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Dear Ms. Post: Attached is your copy of the Appeal of the Environmental (SEPA) Threshold Determination filed by the Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library ... Again for the Renton Library at Liberty Park. This public hearing has been set by the Hearing Examiner for-luly 30, 2013 at 10:00 a.m. in Council Chambers at Renton City Hall If I can provide further information, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Bonnie I. Walton City Clerk Enc.: Appeal cc: Hearing Examiner Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager Neil Watts, Development Service Director Stacy Tucker, Development Services Greg Smith KCLS/Applicant Parties of Record (5) 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • (425)430-6510/ Fax (425) 430-6516 6 rentonwa.gov Maaike Post The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP 71 Columbia Street, 6th Floor Seattle, WA 98104 David Keys, Committee Officer 1013 Kirkland Av NE, Apt 3 Renton, WA 98056 Philippe LeTourneau KC Historic Preservation Program Natural Resources and Parks 201 South Jackson Street, Suite 700 Seattle, WA 98104 0 Greg Smith 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, WA 98027 Beth Asher, Secretary 436 Mill Ave S Renton, WA 98056 Terri Hallauer, SPU P.O. Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124 • Nicola Robinson, Treasurer 3110 SE 5th Street Renton, WA 98058 Denis Law Mayor City of July 8, 2013 Department. of Community and Economic Development C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Maaike Post The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP 71 Columbia Street; 6th Floor Seattle, WA 98104 SUBJECT: Notice of Public Hearing Cancellation and Rescheduling Renton Library.at Liberty Park, LUA1.3-000255, ECF, SM, SA-.H Dear Ms'. Post: On July 5, . 2013 the City Clerk's Office received an appeal of the SEPA threshold . determination,. issued for the subject project.. Due to the receipt of an appeal, the Public Hearing originally scheduled for July.9, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. has been canceled. A new Public Hearing has been scheduled for July 30, 2013 at 10:00 a.m., Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way;-Renton. Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner cc: City of Renton/ Owner(s) Greg Smith - KCLS /Applicant Beth Asher, Teri Hallaur SPU, Phillip LeTourneau; .PhD — King Co., David Keyes, and Nicola Robinson Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall . 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057. rentonwa,gou Beth Asher LUA13-000255 - Party of Record 436 Mill Ave S Renton, WA 98057-6022 Seattle Public Utilities Teri Hallauer LUA13-000255 - Party of Record PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 0 0 City of Renton LUA13-000255 - Owner 1055 S GRADY WAY RENTON, WA 98057 Department of Natural Resources and Parks Phillipe LeTourneau, PhD LUA13-000255 -Party of Record 201 5 Jackson St #700 Seattle, WA 98104 The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP Maaike Post King County Library System Greg Smith LUA13-000255 - Contact LUA13-000255 - Applicant 71 Columbia St 960 Newport Way NW 6th Floor Issaquah, WA 98027 Seattle, WA 98104 Nicola Robinson LUA13-000255 - Party of Record 3110 5E 5th 5t Renton, WA 98058 David Keyes LUA13-000255 - Party of Record 1013 Kirkland Ave NE Apt 3 Renton, WA 98056 • July 8, 2013 Maaike Post The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP 71 Columbia Street, 6th Floor Seattle, WA 98104 SUBJECT: Notice of Public Hearing Cancelation and Rescheduling Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Dear Ms. Post: On July 5, 2013 the City Clerk's Office received an appeal of the SEPA threshold determination, issued for the subject project. Due to the receipt of an appeal, the Public Hearing originally scheduled for July 9, 2013 at 9:00 a.m. has been canceled. A new Public Hearing has been scheduled for July 30, 2013 at 10:00 a.m., Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. Sincerely, Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner cc: City of Renton/ Owner(s) Greg Smith - KCLS / Applicant Beth Asher, Teri Hallaur — SPU, Phillip LeTourneau, PhD -- King Co., David Keyes, and Nicola Robinson Party(ies) of Record • • From: Jason Seth Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 4:45 PM To: Larry Warren; Neil R. Watts; Jennifer T. Henning; Chip Vincent; Stacy Tucker Cc: Bonnie Walton; Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Appeal of LUA13-000255 Renton Library at Liberty Park Attachments: APPEAL LUA13-000255.pdf An appeal of the Environmental (SEPA) Threshold Determination for LUA13-000255, Renton library at Liberty Park, was filed by Citizens to Save Cedar River Library (David Keys, Beth Asher, Nicola Robinson) at 4:32 p.m_ on 7/5/2013, with the appropriate fee. -Jason Jason Seth Deputy City Clerk jseth@rentonwa.gov 425-430-6504 July 5, 2013 Hearing Examiner C/o City Clerk City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 SUBJECT: APPEAL of ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H CiTY OF RENTON JUL C es 2011 RECEIVED CITY CLERK'S OFFICE f C /Lll rt IJn',l,S/ JCr1fj'r" , I!: 011e e f Dear Hearing Examiner: ft, `'7 � This Filing Letter is written on behalf of Citizens to Save the Cedar River Libra[y... Again! to Appeal the City of Renton's Determination of Non -Significance -Mitigated (DNS -M) for the project referenced above. The project address is 100 Mill Avenue South in downtown Renton. Notice of this Environmental Determination was published in the Renton Reporter, June 21, 2013 edition. As this project as proposed is likely to have significant impact on the Environment, we ask that the City's Determination of Non -Significance -Mitigate (DNS -M) be ordered vacated. Further and as remedy for the issues of likely environmental impact (including Historic and Cultural Preservation, existing Land & Shoreline Use, Public Parks and Recreation, and Aesthetics) on which our Appeal is based, we ask that either: 1. The Proponent of this project be required to submit a Full Environmental Impact Statement for the project addressing fully and accurately the SEPA Elements of Environmental Impact, OR... 2. The project as proposed be modified to directly address and mitigate its likely significant environmental impacts on these same Elements of the Environment. Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library... Again! consists of volunteer Renton residents and citizens concerned specifically with the continued operation, progress and redevelopment of Renton Libraries in light of the policies and directions taken by the Renton City Council, City Administration and the King County Library System (KCLS) under the current Interlocal Agreement(s) (ILA) between these parties. Our group is registered with the Washington State Public Disclosure Commission (PDC) in the form of a Campaign Ballot Committee. Members of our group have testified repeatedly, as representatives of this group or as individuals, before the Renton City Council on aspects of this redevelopment. We have endeavored to communicate our concerns to the KCLS design team over a number of months and as individuals, also addressed the KCLS Board of Trustees. Please note that we were unaware of the exact submission date for the revised Master Land Use Application package on this project, and the cover page of each component within the revised submission was incorrectly stamped upon Intake as "Received, March -12013, City of Renton Planning Department". However, from the City's Report to the Hearing Examiner, we have learned the revised Master Land Use Application was in fact submitted to the City of Renton on May 10, 2013 and determined complete by the City on May 29 of this year. Therefore, where we refer below to elements of the Master Land Use Application, we are referencing the version of the document actually submitted to the City of Renton on May 10, 2013 as the revised Application. Project LUA13 000255: Appeal oRnvironmental Determination July 5, 2013 Grounds or Basis for this Appeal: A. Deficiencies within the Master Use Application submission on which the Determination of Non- Significance-Mitigated is based. a. Grossly inaccurate and incorrect answers submitted by KCLS and their architectural consultant, The Miller Hull Partnership LLP, to Question 13 "Historic and Cultural Preservation" within the Environmental Checklist dated 05.10.2013 and signed by Maaike Post. In this case, the dismissive answers provided by the Proponent have bearing on specific issues of existing Land & Shoreline Use, Aesthetics and Recreation as well as obvious concerns of Historic and Cultural Preservation and Parks or other Recreational Facilities. All of these are specific Elements of the Environment established within the scope of the State Environmental Protection Act (SEPA). Please Reference WAC 197-11-444. Inadequate or incomplete answers provided to other questions within the Environmental Checklist that also omit salient facts having bearing on the answers to Question 13. While these individual answers may result in more subtle impact on Reviewers' perceptions than answers to Question 13 itself, taken together they create a perception of a project having less impact on the present condition of existing historic or cultural values than will actually occur if this project is implemented as currently proposed. Specific omissions exist within the written Project Description relative to KCLS's intended demolition of an area of concrete structural floor (deck and beams) spanning the main channel of the River. (This action is referenced only obliquely in a comment added below question 1.g of the Checklist: "reduction in footprint... spanning the Cedar River by .... 7%") Effectively, this demolition results in permanent loss to Renton residents of their continued vested Public Access and Recreational or Civic use of approximately 1,000 s.f. program area above the River. Again, this loss is a specific impact pertinent to Elements of the Environment noted above. Within the drawings made a part of the revised Master Land Use Application, specific discrepancies exist between drawings produced by separate design disciplines and the drawings fail to clearly depict with either graphics or annotation the actual extent of building demolition for Reviewers or interested parties. Again, this omission significantly lessens a Reviewer's sense of either actual or potential adverse impacts on existing public resources, particularly cultural and historic and public access. B. Deficiencies within the Environmental Review as conducted by the City of Renton, specifically: a. Failure of the Review Committee and the City of Renton to recognize, challenge or question the inadequacies cited above within the LUA but clearly subject to review under SEPA; b. Failure of the Review Committee and the City of Renton to acknowledge or recognize in their Findings of Fact that significant cultural and historical values are present at and in close proximity to this project (the existing Library itself; c. Failure of the Review Committee and the City of Renton to acknowledge or recognize in their Findings of Fact that the reduction of overwater coverage by approximately 7% (Findings of Fact, No. 9) represents a specific, permanent loss of Public Access within the scope of SEPA review; d. Failure of the Review Committee and the City of Renton to evaluate the severe impacts (including actual destruction of public resources) by this project as it is currently proposed on Environmental Elements clearly within the scope of SEPA Review. e. Failure of the Review Committee and the City of Renton to include specific measures within the language of the DNS -M to address and reasonably mitigate the cultural and historic impacts of this project consistent with the public use and value of these existing resources. C. Inconsistencies in the City's Notification Process relative to the intake of the Land Use Master Application and beginning of the Public Comment period. a. Failure to notify members of our group who either: - - Page 2 - - - - - PP Project LUA13 000255: AppealOnvironmental Determination 0 l July 5, 2013 i. Had already been listed as Parties of Interest for this project, or ii. Had commented in the form of public testimony before the Renton City Council on the original Land Use Master Application for this project (dated March 1, 2013). b. Apparent failure or procedural difficulties resulting in a lack of timely notification to the Washington State Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation (DAHP) of this project's LUA and SEPA review. Relief Requested: In light of the deficiencies of the project as currently proposed, the inadequate Master Land Use Application for the project and the City of Renton's failure to address the Adverse Environmental Impacts likely to occur should this project be implemented without modification, we respectfully request vacation of the City's current Determination (DNS -M) and one of the two remedies outlined above be implemented. Signed on behalf of: Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library... Again I David A. Keyes Committee Officer 1013 Kirkland Avenue NE, Apt. 3 Renton, WA. 98056 (425) 757-1121, email: keyes28@msn,com Beth Asher Secretary 436 Mill Avenue S, Renton, Washington 98057 Nicola Robinson Treasurer 3110 SE 5t4 Street Renton, WA 98058 Page 3 • CITY OF RENTON City Clerk Division + + 1455 South Grady Way No Renton, WA 98057 425-430-6510 ❑ Cash ❑ Copy Fee Check No.[Appeal Fee I� Description: to Receipt 2050 Date E J ❑ Notary Service Funds Received From.; f Amount $ / �, U Name Address City/Zip T r r�^ i I�L City S.. ff SignatuT Project Description: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing E Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. { Location: 100 Mill Avenue S Comments: CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM Date: July 2, 2013 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: Renton Library at Liberty Park LUA (file) Number: LUA-13-000255, ECF, SM, SA-H Cross-References: AKA's: Project Manager: Vanessa Dolbee 5 Acceptance Date: May 29, 2013 i Applicant: Greg Smith, KCLS Owner: City of Renton Contact: Maaike Post, The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP PID Number: 7685000010; 1723059011; 1723059043 i ERC Decision Date: June 17, 2013 ERC Appeal Date: July 5, 2013 s Administrative Denial: Appeal Period Ends: Public Hearing Date: July 9, 2013 Date Appealed to HEX: By Whom: HEX Decision: Date: Date Appealed to Council: By Whom: Council Decision: Date: Mylar Recording Number: Project Description: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing E Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. { Location: 100 Mill Avenue S Comments: CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNTY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 2nd day of July, 2013, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Maaike Post Contact Greg Smith Applicant City of Renton Owner Beth Asher Party of Record Teri Hallauer Party of Record Phillip D. LeTourneau Party of Record David Keyes Party of Record (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING iJA 4� I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker yy� signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act N4� ( u purposes 14tt1\\\��� mentioned in the instrument. Dated: .; c ,}-f Notary I Notary (Print): My appointment expires: f} S1 J Renton Liorary at Liberty Park ItEd— "7Uber. LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM c in and for the State of Washington C f i DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY D c;ryaf AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTin '' HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING July 9, 2013 AGENDA COMMENCING AT 9:00 AM, COUNCIL CHAMBERS, 7TH FLOOR, RENTON CITY HALL The application(s) listed are in order of application number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be heard. Items will be called for hearing at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner. PROJECT NAME: Renton Library at Liberty Park PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting a Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The site's zoning is primarily Center Downtown (CD). The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements_ HEX Agenda 07-09-13.doc DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY City of . AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT., REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST HEARING DATE: July 9, 2013 Project Name: Renton Library at Liberty Park Owner: City of Renton; 1055 South Grady Way; Renton, WA 98057 Applicant: King County Library System; Greg Smith; 960 Newport Way NW; Issaquah, WA 98027 Contact: Miller Hull Partnership; Maaike Post; 71 Columbia St - 6th Floor; Seattle, WA 98104 File !Number: LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Project Manager: Vanessa Dolbee; Senior Planner Project Summary: The applicant is requesting a Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The site's zoning is primarily Center Downtown (CD). The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. Only one tree would be removed. In addition, a modification request was received from the design district standards. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, Regulated material survey, Geotechnical Engineering Report, Technical Information Report. The site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the State, and a habitat conservation area. Project Location: 100 Mill Ave. S. (Parcel Vs: 768500-0010,172305-9011 & 172305-9043) Site Area: Limits of work: 37,630 SF Total area of all parcels: 305,958 SF (7.02 ac) Project Location Map HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Com oty & Economic Development Wearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARYATLIBERiYPARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 2 of 22 B. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Staff Report to the Hearing Examiner, dated July 9, 2013 Exhibit 2: Vicinity Map Exhibit 3: Architectural Site Plan Exhibit 4: Demolition Plan Exhibit 5: Civil Site Plan Exhibit 6: Landscape Site Plan Exhibit 7: Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit 8: Tree Inventory Plan Exhibit 9: Building Elevations, Sheet A-201 & A-202 Exhibit 10: Floor Plan Exhibit 11: Exterior Enclosure Elevations Exhibit 12: Illustrative Site Plan Exhibit 13: Graphic Elevations (2 sheets) Exhibit 14: Environmental "SEPA" Determination Exhibit 15: Determination of Non -Significance -Mitigated Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Exhibit 16: Proof of Notice of Application Mailing Exhibit 17: Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Comment Exhibit 18: Muckle -shoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Comment Exhibit 19: Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc, dated February 28, 2013 revised May 10, 2013. Exhibit 20: Technical Information Report, prepared through The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP and prepared by Coughlin Porter Lundeen, dated May 10, 2013. Exhibit 21: Geotechnical Engineering Services, prepared by GeoEngineers, dated December 20, 2012. C. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. owner(s) of Record: 2. Zoning Classification: City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 Center Downtown (CD) 3. Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Urban Center Downtown (UC -D) 4. Existing Site Use: Renton Library 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: a. North: Liberty Park and Commercial (CA zone) b. East: Liberty Park and the Cedar River (CA zone) c. South: Old City Hall and Civic Uses (CD zone) d. West: Commercial & Multi family (CD zone) 6. Site Area: 37,630 SF (0.86 ac) HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Co ity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 3 of 22 D. HISTORICAL/BACKGROUND: Action Land Use File No. Ordinance No. Date Comprehensive Plan N/A 5099 11/01/2004 Zoning N/A 5100 11/01/2004 Incorporation N/A 0 09/06/1901 E. PUBLIC SERVICES: 1. Existing Utilities a. Water: Water service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an existing 8 -inch water main in Mill Ave. S as well as on the northerly side of the triangular property. This site is located in the 196 - water pressure zone. b. Sewer: Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an 8 -inch sewer main in Mill Ave. 5 with a manhole at the intersection with South 2nd Street. The existing sewer service connection extends southerly to this main. c. Surface/Storm Water: There are existing storm water facilities in Bronson Way S, S 2nd Street, and Bronson Way N. All have outfalls to the Cedar River. 2. Streets: There are existing street improvements along the frontages of the site. 3. Fire Protection: City of Renton Fire Department =F.APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE. 1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts a. Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts b. Section 4-2-070: Zoning Use Table c. Section 4-2-12OB: Commercial Development Standards 2. Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations a. Section 4-3-050: Critical Area Regulations b. Section 4-3-090: Shoreline Master Program Regulations c. Section 4-3-100: Urban Design Regulations 3. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards a. Section 4-4-030: Development Guidelines and Regulations b. Section 4-4-070: Landscaping c. Section 4-4-075: Lighting, Exterior On -Site d. Section 4-4-080: Parking, Loading and Driveway Regulations e. Section 4-4-090: Refuse and Recyclables Standards f. Section 4-4-130: Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations 4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards a. Section 4-6-060: Street Standards S. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria a. Section 4-7-200: Site Plan Review b. Section 4-9-190: Shoreline Permits HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Coity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARYAT LIBERTY PAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -II, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 4 of 22 5. Chapter 11 Definitions G. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element 2. Community Design Element H. FINDINGS OF FACT. 1. The applicant, King County Library System (KCLS), is requesting a Site Plan Review for the rehabilitation of the Renton Library at Liberty Park and associated landscaping and infrastructure improvements. 2. The applicant, KCLS, is also requesting a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for approval following the Hearing Examiners Decision, for work within the Shoreline of the Cedar River. 3. The Planning Division of the City of Renton received the above master application for review on March 1, 2013 and the application was determined incomplete on March 26, 2013. New information was submitted on May 10, 2013 and the application was determined complete on May 29, 2013. The project complies with the 120 -day review period. 4. Based on the application submittal, the subject project did not automatically trigger a public hearing. However, due to public interest and comment, staff has scheduled the project for public hearing pursuant to RMC 4-9-200D.2.a. 5. The subject site is bordered: on the north by Liberty Park; the east by the Cedar River and old City Hall; to the south by the existing parking; and to the west by Mill Ave S and the existing parking lot. 6. The subject site is located over the Cedar River; the river itself does not have zoning. However, zoning is applied on both the north and south banks of the river. The north shoreline is zoned Commercial Arterial (CA) and the south shoreline is zoned Center Downtown (CD). The site's main entrance, parking lot, and access is along the south shoreline. Due to the Library's primary access and the majority of the development along the south shoreline, City staff has determined that the CD zone would be applicable to the subject development. Therefore the property is located within the Urban Center Downtown (UC - D) Comprehensive Plan land use designation and Design District'A'. 7. A 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. 8. The area of impact related to the subject project would be 37,630 SF. 9. The rehabilitation of the library would result in a reduction in size to 19,680 SF from 22,400 SF and a reduction of overwater coverage by approximately 7 percent. 10. The proposed site improvements are limited to small areas on both the north and south sides of the building. The site improvements are primarily related to restoration of areas that would be disturbed to install the augercast piles and concrete abutments (Exhibit 5) required bringing the building into compliance with seismic standards. Site restoration would include installation of new sidewalks and plaza areas, benches, ADA parking stalls and refuse, recycling, and mechanical equipment enclosures. 11. Utility improvements include a new water line and sanitary sewer line which are identified to be connected to the existing infrastructure located in Mill Ave. S. Stormwater improvements are proposed in compliance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual (KCSWM) and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. 12. The existing building is considered to be a non -conforming structure pursuant to both Renton Development Standards and the Shoreline Master Program. Pursuant to RMC 4-10-OSOA.3, the cost of HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Cotry & Economic Development 40 Hearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 5 of 22 alteration of a legal nonconforming structure shall not exceed an aggregate cost of fifty percent of the value of the structure, unless the alterations make the structure more conforming, or is used to restore to a safe condition any portion of a structure declared unsafe by a proper authority. The proposed rehabilitation of the existing structure is to bring the building into conformance with existing building codes and seismic safety standards. Under the current condition the building would not meet seismic safety standards. The building is located in a seismic hazard area and therefore is subject to potential liquefaction; see the SEPA Environmental Review report for a more detailed analysis of the Geotechnical issues. The cost of the project exceeds the aggregated cost of fifty percent of the value of the structure; however rehabilitation is permitted due to the safety provisions. 13. The existing building spans the Cedar River, a Shoreline of the State. As such, the project is subject to the Shoreline Master Program regulations. The site is located in the Shoreline High Intensity overlay along Cedar River Reach B. 14. The site is located in a seismic hazards area, Aquifer Protection Zone 1. The 100 year flood plain and a floodway associated with the Cedar River and the banks of the river have been identified sensitive and protected slopes. 15. No work is proposed below the ordinary high water mark of the Cedar River and therefore no work would occur in the flood plain or floodway. 15. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.210, 1971 as amended), on June 17, 2013, the City's Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non - Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M) for the Renton Library in Liberty Park. The DNS -M included three mitigation measures. A 14 -day appeal period commenced on June 21, 2013 and will end on July 5, 2013. As of the date of this report, no appeals have been filed for the threshold determination. 17. Staff received comments from the Department of Archaeology and Historic Preservation regarding the potential for archaeological and historical resources within one mile of the project area. The comment recommends a professional archaeological survey of the project area prior to ground disturbing activities. Furthermore the comment identifies the library building as a good example of mid _20th Century modern architecture and landscape architecture and recommends the applicant and/or interested partners explore ways to capture the building's contribution to local history (Exhibit 17). These comments were received after the comment period for the project which ended June 11, 2013 at 5:00 pm, and therefore were not able to be incorporated into the SEPA determination. However, due to the known presence of cultural resources staff recommends a condition of approval that requires the applicant complete an archaeological survey prior to commencing construction. Comments were also received from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division (Exhibit 18). In response to these comments the applicant would be required to submit a lighting plan for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. 18. No other public or agency comments were received. 19. Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address issues raised by the proposed development. These comments are contained in the official file, and the essence of the comments has been incorporated into the appropriate sections of this report and the Departmental Recommendation at the end of this report. HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Co ity & Economic [Development Nearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARYAT LIBERTY EAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 6 of 22 20. The proposal requires Site Plan Review. The following table contains project elements intended to comply with Site Plan Review decision criteria, as outlined in RMC 4-9-200.E: SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA: a. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPLIANCE AND CONSISTENCY: The site is designated Urban Center Downtown (UC -D) on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map. The purpose of the UC -D is to provide an opportunity for redevelopment as a destination shopping area with neighborhood, citywide, and sub -regional services and mixed-use residential development. Policy LU -201. Uses in the Urban Center - Downtown should include a dynamic mix of uses, ✓ including retail, entertainment, restaurant, office, and residential, that contribute to a vibrant city core. Policy LU -202. Development and redevelopment of Urban Center - Downtown should strive for urban density and intensity of uses. Policy LU -204. Projects in the Urban Center - Downtown should achieve an urban density ✓ and intensity of development that is greater than typical suburban neighborhoods. Characteristics of urban intensity include no or little setbacks, taller structures, mixed -uses, structured parking, urban plazas and amenities within buildings. ✓ Policy LU -20S. Development should not exceed mid -rise heights within the Urban Center - Downtown. Objective LU-QQ: Encourage the evolution of downtown Renton as a regional commercial ✓ district that complements the redevelopment expected to occur in the Urban Center - North. Policy CD -2. During development, effort should be made to preserve watercourses as open channels. Policy CD -3. Site design should maximize public access to and create opportunities for use •� of shoreline areas in locations contiguous to a lake, river, stream, or wetland where such access would not jeopardize habitats and other environmental attributes of the water body. Policy CD -4. Development review of proposed projects should identify opportunities for ✓ increasing public access to Lake Washington, the Cedar River, wetlands, streams, and creeks in the City. Policy CD -31. Neighborhoods, commercial areas, and centers should have human -scale ✓ features, such as pedestrian pathways and public spaces (e.g. parks or plazas) that have discernible edges, entries and borders. Policy CD -36. Developments within Commercial and Centers land use designations should have a combination of internal and external site design features, such as: 1) Public plazas; 2) Prominent architectural features; 3) Public access to natural features or views; 4) Distinctive focal features; 5) Indication of the function as a gateway, if appropriate; 6) Structured parking; and HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Deportment of Coity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRAR Y AT LIBERTY PAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 7 of 22 HEX report 13-000255.doc 7) Other features meeting the spirit and intent of the land use designation. Policy CD -39. Ensure quality development by supporting site plans and plats that ✓ incorporate quality building, development, and landscaping standards that reflect unity of design and create a distinct sense of place. b. ZONING COMPLIANCE AND CONISTENCY: The subject site is classified Center Downtown (CD) on the City of Renton Zoning Map. The purpose of the CD zone is to provide a mixed-use urban commercial center serving a regional market as well as high- density residential development. Uses include a wide variety of retail sales, services, multi -family residential dwellings, and recreation and entertainment uses. RMC 4-2-120B provides development standards for development within the CD zoning classification. The following are applicable the proposal: Lot Dimensions: There is no minimum lot size, width or depth in the CD zone. Lot Coverage: There is no maximum lot coverage for buildings within the CD zone. Setbacks: The CD zoning classification has a minimum front yard and side yard along -a -street setback of 0 -feet and a maximum setback of 15 feet for portions of the structure that are below 25 feet in height. There is no maximum front yard, or side yard along -a -street setback for those portions of the structure that exceed 25 feet in height. There are no other setback requirements within this zone. As mentioned in Finding of Fact 12 above, the existing building is a non -conforming structure. As such, under existing conditions the project does not comply with the setbacks required by the CD zone. The proposed rehabilitation of the building would not increase the non -conformity of the existing building. Landscaping: All development in the CD zone is exempt from all but the maintenance of any existing landscaping and street tree requirements of Section RMC 4-4-070. A conceptual landscape plan was submitted with the project application. The landscape plan includes a planting plan including 8 new trees. The proposed tree species consist of Vine Maple, Northern Red Oak, River Birch trees. The shrubs proposed largely consist of: Maidenhair Fern, Deer Fern, Sward Fern, False Solomon's Seal, Subalpine spiraea, and white spirea. The new landscaping is related to restoration of areas that would be disturbed to install the augercast piles and concrete abutments. The new landscaping defines the entrance, would provide shade and generally enhances the appearance of the project. Existing landscaping is proposed to be retained in the parking lot and along the perimeter of the parking lot. In addition, the street trees along Mill Ave. S would remain, with the exception of one tree which would be replaced following utility installation. The provided site plan was conceptual; as such staff recommends as a condition of approval that a final detailed landscape plan shall be submitted for review and approval prior to building permit issuance. Building Height: Building height is restricted to 95 feet in the CD zoning classification. The height of the proposed structure would be 18 feet at the highest point on the roof, with an average height of 15 feet 5 1/3 inches. The proposal complies with the height requirement of the zone. Screening: All mechanical units would be screened by a metal grating screen proposed along the roof. In addition, some mechanical units would be placed in the refuse and recycling enclosure to reduce the roof top presence of equipment. This enclosure is proposed to be 5 feet tall and be constructed of metal grating. Refuse and Recyclables: Office, educational, and institutional developments require a minimum of 2 square feet per every 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area for recyclable deposit areas and HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Co ity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation R�ENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 8 of 22 minimum of 4 square feet per 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area for refuse deposit area. The proposed facility would require the minimum square footage of 118 square foot deposit area for the 19,680 square foot facility (118.08 SF = 2 x [19,680 /1,000 SF] + 4 x [19,680 /1,000 SF]). The applicant has proposed a 102 square foot deposit area along the south facade of the building located in the existing parking lot. The proposed refuse and recycling space does not meet the minimum size requirements of the code, therefore staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant add the required 16 square feet to the space. A detailed refuse and recycling plan shall be submitted with the building permit application identifying compliance with the minimum standards. The refuse and recycling is proposed to be approximately in the same location as under current conditions; however the new proposal would add screening elements to the design which are not currently provided. The proposed screen would be made of metal grating and 12 -foot wide self- closing doors. The screening is proposed to be 6 feet in height. Parking: Within the Center Downtown Zone, parking loading and driveway regulations are applicable only to the area exceeding the area of the original structure, in terms of calculating the required parking. Based on a proposal to reduce the square footage of the structure, new parking would not be required as a part of the application. The existing parking lot is proposed to be retained, which provides 67 parking stalls of which four are ADA accessible. Signs: The applicant did not submit a signage package for the library and therefore could not be reviewed at this time. The applicant would be required to comply with the signage requirements outlined in RMC 4-4-100 at the time of sign application, if new signage is proposed. Critical Areas: The existing building spans the Cedar River, a Shoreline of the State. As such, the project is subject to the Shoreline Master Program regulations. The site is located in the Shoreline High Intensity overlay along Cedar River Reach B. A Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is required for the subject project and would be issued by the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development following the Hearing Examiners Decision of the site plan. In addition to being located over the Cedar River, the site is located in a seismic hazards area and the Aquifer Protection Zone 1. There is also a 100 year flood plain and a floodway associated with the Cedar River and the banks of the river have been identified sensitive and protected slopes. Based on the project application material, no work is proposed below the ordinary high water mark of the Cedar River and therefore no work would occur in the flood plain or floodway, or on the steep slopes i.e. the river bank. The subject rehabilitation project is designed to upgrade the building to current building and seismic standards. A Geotechnical Report was submitted addressing the geotechnical issues related to the subject project. The library is not anticipated to store or use any substances that would be of concern to the City's aquifer protection zone. If any fill is to be brought to the site, the City would need a fill source statement identifying that the fill is clean. Based on the project's location outside the flood plain and floodway, above the OHWM, and proposed seismic upgrades to the structure, the project would be in compliance with the City's Critical Areas Regulations. c 'ib1�5fl REGU117DN ;CaMPLIANC ANDCON1Sit� _ Tr sre rs iocafed``wrthin Design District W. 6'erisuee thdt buildings are located in relation to struts, 6r d &her buildings so that the Vision of.the City nf.'Rehton can be realized fora, high. -density urban envi.r4nment, so.that businesses: enjoy.visibility from public rights -ref way:. and to encourage Pursuant to RMC 4-3-100A.2 In order guidelines and the intent statenletf br+ a manner that is different from the s HEX report 13-000255.doc ran activity throughout the district: ide flexrbirity, guidelines are stated for edci, elerrient, the =ection for those who seek to meet the'W46, k e e.nt in Pursuant to subsection a., the determine trop as to the' City of Renton Department of Co ity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation RENTONLIBRARYATLIBERTYPAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, 5M Report of July 9, 2013 Page 9 of 22 satisfaction of the requirement through the use of the guidelines and the intent statement is to be made by the Community and Economic Development Administrator. In this case,. the associated request has been elevated'to the Hearing Examiner for a decision. As demonstrated -in the table below it is our recommendation that the..proposal meets the intent of the Design Regulations on the basis of individual merit if ail conditions of approval are met. i. SITE DESIGN AND BUILDING LOCATION: Intent: To ensure that buildings are located in relation to streets and other buildings so that the Vision of the City of Renton can be realized for a high-density urban environment; so that businesses enjoy visibility from public rights-of-way; and to encourage pedestrian activity. 1. Building Location and Orientation: Intent: To ensure visibility of businesses and to establish active, lively uses along sidewalks and pedestrian pathways. To organize buildings for pedestrian use and so that natural light is available to other structures and open space. To ensure an appropriate transition between buildings, parking areas, and other land uses; and increase privacy for residential uses_ Guidelines: Developments shall enhance the mutual relationship of buildings with each other, as well as with the roads, open space, and pedestrian amenities while working to create a pedestrian oriented environment. Lots shall be configured to encourage variety and so that natural light is available to buildings and open space. The privacy of individuals in residential uses shall be provided for. Standard: The availability of natural light (both direct and reflected) and direct sun exposure 'r to nearby buildings and open space (except parking areas) shall be considered when siting structures_ Standard: Buildings shall be oriented to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. Standard: The front entry of a building shall be oriented to the street or a landscaped pedestrian -only courtyard. Standard: Buildings with residential uses located at the street level shall be set back from the N/A sidewalk a minimum of ten feet (10') and feature substantial landscaping between the sidewalk and the building or have the ground floor residential uses raised above street level for residents privacy. 2. Building Entries: intent: To make building entrances convenient to locate and easy to access, and ensure that building entries further the pedestrian nature of the fronting sidewalk and the urban character of the district. Guidelines, Primary entries shall face the street, serve as a focal point, and allow space for social interaction. All entries shall include features that make them easily identifiable while reflecting the architectural character of the building. The primary entry shall be the most visually prominent entry. Pedestrian access to the building from the sidewalk, parking lots, and/or other areas shall be provided and shall enhance the overall quality of the pedestrian experience on the site. Standard. A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing a street '/ shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human -scale elements. Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be made visibly prominent by incorporating architectural features such as a facade overhang, trellis large entry doors, and/or ornamental lighting. Standard Building entries from a street shall be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, or landscaping and include weather protection at least four and one-half feet (4-1/2`) wide (illustration below). Buildings that are taller than thirty feet (30) in height shall also ensure that the weather protection is proportional to the distance above ground level. Standard: Building entries from a parking lot shall be subordinate to those related to the street. HEX report 13-000255.dec City of Renton Deportment of Co ity & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARYAT LIBERTY PAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 10 of 22 HEX report 13-000255.doc Standard: Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows shall be oriented to a street or pedestrian -oriented space; otherwise, screening or decorative features should be incorporated. Standard: Multiple buildings on the some site shall direct views to building entries by NSA providing a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping. Standard. Ground floor residential units that are directly accessible from the street shall N/A include entries from front yards to provide transition space from the street or entries from an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. 3. Transition to Surrounding Development: Intent: To shape redevelopment projects so that the character and value of Renton's long-established, existing neighborhoods are preserved. Guidelines: Careful siting and design treatment shall be used to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height, bulk and scale. Standard: At least one of the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: (a) Building proportions, including step -backs on upper levels; (b) Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller increments; or (c) Roof lines, roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. Additionally, the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may require increased setbacks at the side or rear of a building in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and/or so that sunlight reaches adjacent and/or abutting yards. 4. Service Element Location and Design: Intent. To reduce the potential negative impacts of service elements (i.e., waste receptacles, loading docks) by locating service and loading areas away from high-volume pedestrian areas, and screening them from view in high visibility areas. Guidelines: Service elements shall be concentrated and located so that impacts to pedestrians and other abutting uses are minimized. The impacts of service elements shall be mitigated with landscaping and an enclosure with fencing that is made of quality materials. Standard: Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the pedestrian environment and adjacent uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where they are accessible to service vehicles and convenient for tenant use. Standard: in addition to standard enclosure requirements, garbage, recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed on all sides, including the roof and screened around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors. Staff Comment: The applicant has indicated that adding a roof to the refuse and recycling facility would increase the height of the structure to 9 feet from 6 feet, which would detract aesthetically from the main fa4ade and begin to hinder sightlines. Due to the location of the facility, the provided 6 -foot high screening and metal fence would meet the intent of reducing negative impact related to the service elements. Standard: Service enclosures shall be made of masonry, ornamental metal or wood, or some combination of the three (3). Standard: if the service area is adjacent to a street, pathway, or pedestrian -oriented space, a landscaped planting strip, minimum 3 feet wide, shall be located on 3 sides of such facility. HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Co ity & Economic Development 0Hearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARYAT LIBERTY PAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 11 of 22 ii. PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS. intent: To provide safe, convenient access to the Urban Center and the Center Village; incorporate various modes of transportation, including public mass transit, in order to reduce traffic volumes and other impacts from vehicles; ensure sufficient parking is provided, while encouraging creativity in reducing the impacts of parking areas; allow an active pedestrian environment by maintaining contiguous street frontages, without parking lot siting along sidewalks and building facades; minimize the visual impact of parking lots; and use access streets and parking to maintain an urban edge to the district. Staff Comment: The subject project would not result in any changes to the parking lot, as it is not required due to the site location in the CR zone and pursuant to RMC 4-4-080B.1.a., as such the following parking criteria is not applicable to the subject project. 1. Surface Parking: intent. To maintain active pedestrian environments along streets by placing parking lots primarily in back of buildings. Guidelines: Surface parking shall be located and designed so as to reduce the visual impact of the parking area and associated vehicles. Large areas of surface parking shall also be designed to accommodate future infill development. Standard: Parking shall be located so that no surface parking is located between a building N/A and the front property line, or the building and side property line, on the street side of a corner lot. N/A Standard: Parking shall be located so that it is screened from surrounding streets by buildings, landscaping, and/or gateway features as dictated by location. 2. Structured Parking Garages: Intent: To promote more efficient use of land needed for vehicle parking; encourage the use of structured parking; physically and visually integrate parking garages with other uses; and reduce the overall impact of parking garages. Guidelines: Parking garages shall not dominate the streetscape, they shall be designed to be complementary with adjacent and abutting buildings. They shall be sited to complement, not subordinate, pedestrian entries. Similar farms, materials, and/or details to the primary buildings) should be used to enhance garages. N/A Standard: Parking structures shall provide space for ground floor commercial uses along street frontages at a minimum of seventy five percent (75%) of the building frontage width. Standard: The entire facade must feature a pedestrion-oriented facade. The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development may approve parking structures that do not feature a pedestrian orientation in limited circumstances. if allowed, the N/A structure shall be set back at least six feet (6) from the sidewalk and feature substantial landscaping. This landscaping shall include a combination of evergreen and deciduous trees, shrubs, and ground cover. This setback shall be increased to ten feet (10') when abutting a primary arterial and/or minor arterial. N/A Standard. Public facing facades shall be articulated by arches, lintels, masonry trim, or other architectural elements and/or materials. N/A Standard: The entry to the parking garage shall be located away from the primary street, to either the side or rear of the building. Standard: Parking garages at grade shall include screening or be enclosed from view with N/A treatment such as wolls, decorative grilles, trellis with landscaping, or a combination of treatments. Standard: The Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may allow a reduced setback where the applicant can successfully demonstrate N/A that the landscaped area and/or other design treatment meets the intent of these standards and guidelines. Possible treatments to reduce the setback include landscaping components plus one or more of the following integrated with the architectural design of the building: HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Co rty & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PAR LOA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SNI Report of July 9, 2013 Page 12 of 22 HEX report 13-000255.doc (a) Ornamental grillwork (other than vertical bars); (b) Decorative artwork; (c) Display windows; (d) Brick, tile, or stone; (e) Pre -cast decorative panels; (f) Vine -covered trellis; (g) Raised landscaping beds with decorative materials; or (h)Other treatments that meet the intent of this standard... 3. Vehicular Access: intent: To maintain ❑ contiguous and uninterrupted sidewalk by minimizing, consolidating, and/or eliminating vehicular access off streets. Guidelines: Vehicular access to parking garages and parking lots shall not impede or interrupt pedestrian mobility. The impacts of curb cuts to pedestrian access on sidewalks shall be minimized. ,r Standard. Access to parking lots and garages shall be from alleys, when available. if not available, access shall occur at side streets. Standard: The number of driveways and curb cuts shall be minimized, so that pedestrian circulation along the sidewalk is minimally impeded. W. PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT: Intent. To enhance the urban character of development in the Urban Center and the Center Village by creating pedestrian networks and by providing strong links from streets and drives to building entrances; make the pedestrian environment safer and more convenient, comfortable, and pleasant to walk between businesses, on sidewalks, to and from access points, and through parking lots; and promote the use of multi -modal and public transportation systems in order to reduce other vehicular traffic. 1. Pedestrian Circulation: Intent: To create a network of linkages for pedestrians to improve safety and convenience and enhance the pedestrian environment. Guidelines: The pedestrian environment shall be given priority and importance in the design of projects_ Sidewalks and/or pathways shall be provided and shall provide safe access to buildings from parking areas. Providing pedestrian connections to abutting properties is an important aspect of connectivity and encourages pedestrian activity and shall be considered. Pathways shall be easily identifiable to pedestrians and drivers. Standard: A pedestrian circulation system of pathways that are clearly delineated and connect buildings, open space, and parking areas with the sidewalk system and abutting properties shall be provided. (a) Pathways shall be located so that there are clear sight lines, to increase safety. (b) Pathways shall be an all-weather or permeable walking surface, unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed surface is appropriate for the anticipated number of users and complementary to the design of the development. Standard. Pathways within parking areas shall be provided and differentiated by material or /® texture (i.e., raised walkway, stamped concrete, or pavers) from abutting paving materials. Permeable materials are encouraged. The pathways shall be perpendicular to the applicable building facade and no greater than one hundred fifty feet (150') apart. Standard: Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of buildings shall be of sufficient width to accommodate anticipated numbers of users. Specifically: (a) Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of mixed use and retail buildings 100 or more feet in width (measured along the facade) shall provide sidewalks at least 12 feet in width. The walkway shall include an 8 foot minimum unobstructed walking surface. (b) interior pathways shall be provided and shall vary in width to establish a hierarchy. The widths shall be based on the intended number of users; to be no HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Co ,ty &Economic Development � Hearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 13 of 22 smaller than five feet (5) and no greater than twelve feet (12). (c) For all other interior pathways, the proposed walkway shall be of sufficient width to accommodate the anticipated number of users. NSA Standard: Mid -block connections between buildings shall be provided. iv. RECREATION AREAS AND COMMON OPEN SPACE: Intent: To ensure that areas for both passive and active recreation are available to residents, workers, and visitors and that these areas are of sufficient size for the intended activity and in convenient locations. To create usable and inviting open space that is accessible to the public; and to promote pedestrian activity on streets particularly at street corners. Guidelines: Developments located at street intersections should provide pedestrian -oriented space at the street corner to emphasize pedestrian activity (illustration below). Recreation and common open space areas are integral aspects of quality development that encourage pedestrians and users. These areas shall be provided in an amount that is adequate to be functional and usable; they shall also be landscaped and located so that they are appealing to users and pedestrians NSA Standard: All mixed use residential and attached housing developments of ten (10) or more dwelling units shall provide common opens space and/or recreation areas. NSA Standard: Amount of common space or recreation area to be provided: at minimum fifty (50) square feet per unit. Standard: The location, layout, and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall NSA be subject to approval by the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee. Standard: At least one of the following shall be provided in each open space and/or recreation area (the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee may require more than one of the following elements for developments having more than one hundred (100) units): (a) Courtyards, plazas, or multi-purpose open spaces, (b) Upper level common decks, patios, terraces, or roof gardens/peo-patches. Such spaces above the street level must feature views or amenities that are unique to NSA the site and are provided as an asset to the development; (c) Pedestrian corridors dedicated to passive recreation and separate from the public street system, (d) Recreation facilities including, but not limited to, tennis/sports courts, swimming pools, exercise areas, game rooms, or other similar facilities; or (e) Children's play spaces that are centrally located near a majority of dwelling units and visible from surrounding units. They shall also be located away from hazardous areas such as garbage dumpsters, drainage facilities, and parking areas. Standard: All buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of NSA nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas) shall provide pedestrian - oriented space. Standard: The pedestrian -oriented space for buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,000) square feet of nonresidential uses shall include all of the following: (a) Visual and pedestrian access (including barrier free access) to the abutting structures from the public right-of-way or a nonvehicular courtyard; and N/A (b) Paved walking surfaces of either concrete or approved unit paving; and (c) On-site or building -mounted lighting providing at least four (4) foot-candles (overage) on the ground; and (d) At least three (3) lineal feet of seating area (bench, ledge, etc.) or one individual seat per sixty (50) square feet of plaza area or open space. HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Benton Department of Comity & Economic Development Wearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARYAT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 4, 2013 Page 14 of 22 HEX report 13-000255.doc Standard: The following areas shall not count as pedestrian -oriented space for buildings and developments with over thirty thousand (30,600) square feet of nonresidential uses: (a) The minimum required walkway. However, where walkways are widened or enhanced beyond minimum requirements, the area may count as pedestrian - N/A oriented space if the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee determines such space meets the definition of pedestrian -oriented space. (b) Areas that abut landscaped parking lots, chain link fences, blank walls, and/or dumpsters or service areas. ✓ Standard: Outdoor storage (shopping carts, potting soil bogs, firewood, etc.) is prohibited within pedestrian -oriented space. v. BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN: Intent. To encourage building design that is unique and urban in character, comfortable on a human scale, and uses appropriate building materials that are suitable for the Pacific Northwest: climate. To discourage franchise retail architecture. 1. Building Character and Massing: Intent: To ensure that buildings are not bland and visually appear to be at a human scale; and ensure that all sides of a building, that can be seen by the public, are visually interesting. Guidelines: Building facades shall be modulated and/or articulated to reduce the apparent size of buildings, break up long blank walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood. Articulation, modulation, and their intervals should create a sense of scale important to residential buildings. Standard: All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than forty feet (40'). Staff Comment. The scale of the building is similar to what is currently developed at the site and the existing structural layout minimized the opportunities for modulation of the fagade. However, the proposed rehabilitated building would provide modulation and other architectural design details to meet the intent of the prescriptive standard. The building entry provides modulation on both the south and east facades and the applicant has proposed a combination of glazing and an opaque wail assembly with metal panels to provide details and interest in combination with the awning/overhang. Overall, the project would meet the intent of the standard and therefore staff recommends approval of the proposed modulation and architectural detailing. Standard: Modulations shall be a minimum of two feet (2') deep, sixteen feet (16) in height, 'r and eight feet (8) in width. Staff Comment: See Comment above. Standard: Buildings greater than one hundred sixty feet (160') in length shall provide a variety of modulations and articulations to reduce the apparent bulk and scale of the facade; N/A or provide an additional special feature such as a clock tower, courtyard, fountain, or public gathering area. 2. Ground -Level Details: Intent. To ensure that buildings are visually interesting and reinforce the intended human -scale character of the pedestrian environment; and ensure that all sides of a building within near or distant public view have visual interest. Guidelines: The use of material variations such as colors, brick, shingles, stucco, and horizontal wood siding is encouraged. The primary building entrance should be made visibly prominent by incorporating architectural features such as a facade overhang, trellis, large entry doors, and/or ornamental lighting (illustration below). Detail features should also be used, to include things such as decorative entry paving, street furniture (benches, etc.), and/or public art. HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Coity & Economic Development RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PAR Report of July 9, 2013 Hearing Examiner Recommendation LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Page 15 of 22 HEX report 13-000255.doc Standard: Human -scaled elements such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature shall be provided along the facade's ground floor. Standard: On any facade visible to the public, transparent windows and/or doors are required to comprise at least 50 percent of the portion of the ground floor facade that is between 4 feet and 8 feet above ground (as measured on the true elevation). Staff Comment: All sides of the building would be visible to the public, as the building spans the Cedar River. The portions f the building located over the river were prioritized for windows as windows at these locations would provide the best visual access to the river. As such, the proposed design would meet the intent as landscaping and smaller windows are proposed along both the east and west elevations (facades facing Mill Ave. S and Liberty Park). Standard: Upper portions of building facades shall have clear windows with visibility into NSA and out of the building. However, screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency. The minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be 50 percent. N/A Standard: Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of merchandise, rather than permanent displays. Standard: Where windows or storefronts occur, they must principally contain clear glazing. Standard: Tinted and dark gloss, highly reflective (mirror -type) glass and film are prohibited. Standard: Untreated blank walls visible from public streets, sidewalks, or interior pedestrian pathways are prohibited. A wall (including building facades and retaining wails) is considered a blank wall if.• (a) It is a ground floor wall or portion of a ground floor wall over 6 feet in height, has a horizontal length greater than 15 feet), and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing; or (e) Any portion of a ground floor wall has a surface area of 400 square feet or greater and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing. Staff Comment: The project does have blank walls along the "East Elevation" which is the side along Liberty Park. Pursuant to the applicant these walls are blank in order to keep the glazing percentage realistic to comply with the energy code. From a design standpoint, windows were prioritized to be located over the river with a view to the river. However, this elevation has 15 feet of landscaping proposed in front of the blank walls, which would provide visual interest and would provide human -scale elements, meeting the intent of the standards. Standard. if blank walls are required or unavoidable, blank walls shall be treated with one or more of the following: (a) A planting bed at least five feet in width containing trees, shrubs, evergreen ground cover, or vines adjacent to the blank wall; (b) Trellis or other vine supports with evergreen climbing vines; (c) Architectural detailing such as reveals, contrasting materials, or other special detailing that meets the intent of this standard; (d) Artwork, such as bas-relief sculpture, mural, or similar; or (e) Seating area with special paving and seasonal planting. 3. Building Roof Lines: Intent: To ensure that roof forms provide distinctive profiles and interest consistent with an urban project and contribute to the visual continuity of the district. Guidelines: Building roof lines shall be varied and include architectural elements to add visual interest to the building. N/A Standard: Buildings shall use at least one of the following elements to create varied and HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Coity & Economic Development Nearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 16 of 22 HEX report 13-000255.doc interesting roof profiles: (a) Extended parapets; (b) Feature elements projecting above parapets; (c) Projected cornices; (d) Pitched or sloped roofs (e) Buildings containing predominantly residential uses shall have pitched roofs with a minimum slope of one to four (1:4) and shall have dormers or interesting roof forms that break up the massiveness of an uninterrupted sloping roof. Staff Comment: The proposed project is a rehabilitation of an existing non -conforming structure. Adding any of the above roof lines would increase the degree of non -conformity and would therefore be prohibited. As such, no changes to the roof line are proposed. 4. Building Materials: intent: To ensure high standards of quality and effective maintenance over time; encourage the use of materials that reduce the visual bulk of large buildings, and encourage the use of materials that add visual interest to the neighborhood. Guidelines: Building materials are an important and integral part of the architectural design of a building that is attractive and of high quality. Material variation shall be used to create visual appeal and eliminate monotony of facades. This shall occur on all facades in a consistent manner. High quality materials shall be used. If materials like concrete or block wolfs are used they shall be enhanced to create variation and enhance their visual appeal. Standard. All sides of buildings visible from a street, pathway, parking area, or open space shall be finished on all sides with the same building materials, detailing, and color scheme, or if different, with materials of the same quality. Standard: All buildings shall use material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns or textural changes. Standard. Materials shall be durable, high quality, and consistent with more traditional urban development, such as brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre finished metal, stone, steel, glass and cast -in-place concrete. N/A Standard: If concrete is used, walls shall be enhanced by techniques such as texturing, reveals, and/or coloring with a concrete coating or admixture. Standard: if concrete block walls are used, they shall be enhanced with integral color, N/A textured blocks and colored mortar, decorative bond pattern and/or shall incorporate other masonry materials. Standard: All buildings shall use material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns, or textural changes. v�„SfIaNAGE _ ` Intent: To provide a means of identifying and advertising businesses, provide directional assistance; encourage signs that are both clear and of appropriate scale for the project; encourage quality signage that contributes to the character of the Urban Center and the Center Village; and create color and interest. Guidelines: Front -fit, ground -mounted monument signs are the preferred type of freestanding sign. Blade type signs, proportional to the building facade on which they are mounted, are encouraged on pedestrian -oriented streets. Alteration of trademarks notwithstanding, corporate signage should not be garish in color nor overly lit, although creative design, strong accent colors, and interesting surface materials and fighting techniques are encouraged. Standard: Entry signs shall be limited to the name of the larger development. Unknown Staff Comment: Signage has not yet been designed for the proposed project. The applicant at this would be required to submit a comprehensive signage package which complies with the time standards of Design District 'A'. The signage package shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Manager prior to sign permit approval, if proposed to change. HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Ca ity & Economic Development eHeoring Examiner Recommendation, RENTON LIBRARYAT LIBERTY PAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 17 of 22 HEX report 13-000255.doc Standard: Corporate logos and signs shall be sized appropriately for their location. Unknown Staff Comment: Signage has not yet been designed for the proposed project. The applicant at this would be required to submit a comprehensive signage package which complies with the time standards of Design District 'A'. The signage package shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Manager prior to sign permit approval, if proposed to change. N/A Standard: In mixed use and multi -use buildings, signage shall be coordinated with the overall building design. Standard: Freestanding ground -related monument signs, with the exception of primary entry Unknown signs, shall be limited to five feet (5) above finished grade, including support structure_ at this Staff Comment: Signage has not yet been designed for the proposed project. The applicant time would be required to submit a comprehensive signage package which complies with the standards of Design District 'A'- The signage package shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Manager prior to sign permit approval, if proposed to change. Standard: Freestanding signs shall include decorative landscaping (ground cover and/or shrubs) to provide seasonal interest in the area surrounding the sign. Alternately, signage Unknown may incorporate stone, brick, or other decorative materials as approved by the Director. at this Staff Comment: Signage has not yet been designed for the proposed project. The applicant time would be required to submit a comprehensive signage package which complies with the standards of Design District 'A'. The signage package shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Manager prior to sign permit approval, if proposed to change. Standard: All of the following are prohibited: a. Pole signs; b. Roof signs; and c. Back -lit signs with letters or graphics on a plastic sheet (can signs or illuminated Unknown cabinet signs). Exceptions: Back -lit logo signs less than ten (10) square feet are at this permitted as area signs with only the individual letters back -lit (see illustration, time subsection G8 of this Section). Staff Comment: Signage has not yet been designed for the proposed project. The applicant would be required to submit a comprehensive signage package which complies with the standards of Design District W. The signage package shall be submitted to and approved by the Current Planning Manager prior to sign permit approval, if proposed to change. G. LIGHTING: intent. To ensure safety and security; provide adequate lighting levels in pedestrian areas such as plazas, pedestrian walkways, parking areas, building entries, and other public places; and increase the visual attractiveness of the area at all tunes of the day and night. Guidelines: Lighting that improves pedestrian safety and also that creates visual interest in the building and site during the evening hours shall be provided. Standard: Pedestrian -scale lighting shall be provided at primary and secondary building entrances. Examples include sconces on building facades, awnings with down -lighting and Unknown decorative street lighting_ at this Staff Comment: A lighting plan was not provided with the application therefore staff could time not verify compliance with the lighting standards. As such, staff recommends as a condition of approval that the applicant submit a site lighting plan for review and approval by the current planning project manager prior to building permit issuance. This comment would apply to all of the following standards under subsection G. Lighting. Unknown at this Standard: Corporate logos and signs shall be sized appropriately for their location. time Unknown Standard. Accent lighting shall also be provided on building facades (such as sconces) and/or HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Com ity & Economic Development Wearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARYATLIBERTY PAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 18 of 22 at this to illuminate other key elements of the site such as gateways, specimen trees, other time significant landscaping, water features, and/or artwork. Standard: Downlighting shall be used in all cases to assure safe pedestrian and vehicular Unknown movement, unless alternative pedestrian scale lighting has been approved administratively at this or is specifically listed as exempt from provisions located in RMC 4-4-075, Lighting, Exterior time On -Site (i.e., signage, governmental flags, temporary holiday or decorative lighting, right -of - way -lighting, etc.). d. PLANNED ACTION ORDINANCE AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT COMPLIANCE AND CONISTENCY: The proposal is not subject to a Planned Action or Development Agreement. e. OFF SITE IMPACTS: Structures: Restricting overscole structures and overconcentration of development on a particular portion of the site. The rehabilitated building would be located in the same location as the existing structure resulting in no change to the existing concentration of development at any particular location of the site. The updated building would remain compatible with the existing civic center located at Liberty Park. Circulation: Providing desirable transitions and linkages between uses, streets, walkways and adjacent properties. The proposed project would not impact any of the existing streets, with the exception of minor utility installation. The applicant would be required to restore any temporary construction impacts to the existing street and/or sidewalks. The walkways located along the north and south side of the building would be restored following construction and would provide linkages between the building, public street, Liberty Park, and the Cedar River Trail. Loading and Storage Areas: Locating, designing and screening storage areas, utilities, rooftop equipment, loading areas, and refuse and recyclables to minimize views from surrounding properties. The existing parking areas are not proposed to change, however under existing conditions these areas are currently landscaped with mature vegetation. The applicant has indicated roof top equipment would be screened with a metal grating system (Exhibit 9). Also see Refuse and Recyclables discussion under Findings Sections 20.b. Views: Recognizing the public benefit and desirability of maintaining visual accessibility to attractive natural features. The existing building is located over the Cedar River, which provides a significant public benefit by providing visual accessibility to this natural feature. The two facades that span the river are designed with translucent glazing, which allows for visual access inside and outside the building. In addition, the existing pedestrian crossing is proposed to remain, which also adds visual accessibility to the Cedar River. Landscaping: Using landscaping to provide transitions between development and surrounding properties to reduce noise and glare, maintain privacy, and generally enhance the appearance of the project. See Landscaping discussion under Findings Section 20.b. Lighting: Designing and/or placing exterior lighting and glazing in order to ovoid excessive brightness or glare to adjacent properties and streets. New building and entry lighting would be included with the buildings rehabilitation. Lighting at the location needs to be balanced with the environmental considerations associated with the critical habitat provided in the Cedar River and the safety needs of a public library. As a part of the SEPA HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Deportment of Cam rty & Economic Development *Hearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARYAT LIBERTY PAROO LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -N, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 19 of 22 Environmental Review, a mitigation measure was required that balanced the safety needs of lighting with the potential for impacts on the salmon. This mitigation measure requires shielding and cutoff of the lighting. A final lighting plan shall be submitted by the applicant as a condition of approval prior to building permit issuance. f. ON-SITE IMPACTS: Structure Placement: Provisions for privacy and noise reduction by building placement, spacing and orientation. The applicant has not proposed to change the placement of the existing building. Structure Scale: Consideration of the scale of proposed structures in relation to natural characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian and vehicle needs. There are no changes proposed to the overall scale of the structure and/or its relation to natural characteristics, views and vistas, site amenities, sunlight, prevailing winds, and pedestrian and vehicle needs. Natural Features: Protection of the natural landscape by retaining existing vegetation and soils, using topography to reduce undue cutting and filling, and limiting impervious surfaces. The existing site is currently vegetated with ornamental landscaping and lawn areas in the vicinity of the existing structure. Scattered around the site are deciduous and coniferous trees/shrubs (see Wildlife and Stream sections for riparian vegetation information). The existing site contains 16 trees of which all will be retained with the exception of one 12 -inch diameter Cherry tree located in the southeast corner of the site. The removed Cherry tree is proposed to be replaced with a 2 -inch caliper River Birch tree. In addition, to the 12 -inch Cherry tree, one street tree along Mill Ave. 5 is proposed to be removed. This is a result of the sanitary sewer line improvements required for the project. This tree would be replaced in the same location with a 2 -inch caliper Northern Red Oak. The applicant provided a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013. The Stream Study concludes that there would be no direct impacts to the Cedar River, adjacent riparian habitat or State Shoreline area anticipated during or after construction, resulting in no net loss of ecological functions. This conclusion is based on the following reasons: 1) all work would occur within the footprint of the existing development for the library and would stay above the 100 -year flood plain and above the OHWM; 2) the footprint of the existing disturbed/developed area within the shoreline zone would not be expanded as a result of the project; 3) all existing shoreline vegetation would remain intact; 4) portions of the existing library structure would be demolished which would result in a net reduction of approximately 1,700 square feet or 7 percent of the library structure's building itself and adjacent pedestrian bridge; 5) Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be implemented during construction to minimize temporary construction impacts to the aquatic environment; and 6) the project would comply with all applicable City ordinances including, but not limited to, stormwater management requirements, and those related to traffic, noise and aesthetics during and after construction. The existing site topography consists of steep slopes along the north and south edges of the river channel. The grades of the river banks range from elevation 45 at the top of the slope to elevation 26 at the river bottom. Beyond the river banks, the site grades to the north and south of the buildings is relatively flat. The proposed grading is primarily a result of the requirement to install the below - grade concrete abutments, which would require 900 cubic yards of excavation and 360 cubic yards of fill. The concrete abutments avoid impacts to the existing natural features and do not impact existing site topography. All areas disturbed during construction are proposed to be restored with new pathways, landscaping, and/or plaza space. HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Com Oity & Economic Development Bearing Examiner Recommendation REN TON LIBRARYATLIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 20 of 22 Landscaping: Use of landscaping to soften the appearance of parking areas, to provide shade and privacy where needed, to define and enhance open spaces, and generally to enhance the appearance of the project. Landscaping also includes the design and protection of planting areas so that they are less susceptible to damage from vehicles or pedestrian movements. See discussion under Findings Section 20.b, Landscaping g. ACCESS: Location and Consolidation: Providing access points on side streets or frontage streets rather than directly onto arterial streets and consolidation of ingress and egress points on the site and, when feasible, with adjacent properties. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. The current vehicular access to the site is via Mill Ave. S at two locations. Additionally, the building could be accessed via Liberty Park_ Internal Circulation: Promoting safety and efficiency of the internal circulation system, including the location, design and dimensions of vehicular and pedestrian access points, drives, parking, turnarounds, walkways, bikeways, and emergency access ways. See Location and Consolidation discussion above. The pedestrian bridge would remain as it exists todayto provide access from the parking lot to Liberty Park and from Liberty Park to the new library's main entrance. Sidewalks are currently developed along Mill Ave. S. This public sidewalk is proposed to be updated as a part of a 2014 City of Renton sidewalk improvement project and would not be included in the scope of the project. The project would restore any disturbed pedestrian walkways as a result of the construction and installation of the concrete abutments. Loading and Delivery: Separating loading and delivery areas from parking and pedestrian areas. No changes are proposed. Transit and Bicycles: Providing transit carpools and bicycle facilities and access. There is an existing Metro transit stop along Mill Ave. S. which is served by the following Metro bus routes: 105, 143, 167, 342, 908, 909, 907, 240, 110. Bicycle parking facilities are provided in the form of bike racks near the main entrance of the building. Pedestrians: Providing safe and attractive pedestrian connections between parking areas, buildings, public sidewalks and adjacent properties. The existing pedestrian facilities are primarily identified to remain. The small portion that would be disturbed during construction would be restored. Under existing conditions pedestrian walkways connect the library to Mill Ave. S, Liberty Park, and the Cedar River Trail. The rehabilitated building would maintain all the existing connections. h. OPEN SPACE: Incorporating open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site. The applicant has incorporated an entry plaza to the building, located on the south side near the main entrance. This entry plaza serves as a distinctive project focal point. The plaza is proposed to incorporate benches and landscaping to allow for passive activities. In addition, the existing library is located across the Cedar River which allows for visual access to this distinct feature via both the windows incorporated in the buildings architectural design, but also via the pedestrian bridge which provides access to Liberty Park. Liberty Park provides both active and passive relational opportunities for the users of the library, including a playground, skate park, baseball fields, and access to the Cedar River trail among other amenities. The combination of the upgraded plaza space, pedestrian benches, landscaping, HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Comleity & Economic Development *Hearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 21 of 22 and the associated Liberty Park would provide for the reaction needs of the users. i. VIEWS AND PUBLIC ACCESS. When possible, providing view corridors to shorelines and Mt. Rainier, and incorporating public accessto shorelines. The proposed structure would not block view corridors to shorelines or Mt_ Rainier. See discussion under Findings Section 20.e, Views. j. NATURAL SYSTEMS. Arranging project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable. The Cedar River is located on site. The entire project would include the rehabilitation of an existing structure which does not propose to change the existing natural systems on site. The Cedar River would remain under the building and no new structural elements are proposed in the river. k. SERVICES AND INFRASTRUCTURE: Making available public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use. Police and Fire: Police and Fire Prevention staff indicate that sufficient resources exist to furnish services to the proposed development; provided the existing use has not changed and the site of the building is primarily the same. Water and Sewer: The site is served by the City of Renton for all utilities. There is an existing 8 -inch water main in Mill Ave. S as well as on the northerly side of the triangular property. This site is located in the 196 -water pressure zone. There is an 8 -inch sewer main in Mill Ave. S with a manhole at the intersection with S 2nd Street. The existing sewer service connection extends southerly to this main. The fire hydrant and fire flow requirements for the proposed library are adequate as they exist. A new sanitary sewer and water connection to the main located in Mill Ave. S are proposed as a part of the project. Drainage: A drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the site plan application. The report complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. A final Technical Information Report is required with the building permit. There are existing storm water facilities in Bronson Way 5, S 2nd Street, and Bronson Way N. All have outfalls to the Cedar River. The existing library building and parking lot also have outfalls directly to Cedar River in conformance with city standards and regulations. Transportation: The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. The current vehicular access to the site is via Mill Ave. S at two locations. Additionaly, the building could be accessed via Liberty Park. Because the building is currently a public library, there are no anticipated changes in impacts to the existing street system as a result of the facilities upgrades. Traffic is anticipated to remsin the same as under existing conditions. Schools: N/A I. PHASING: The applicant is not requesting any additional phasing. 1. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The proposal complies with the Site Plan Review Criteria if all conditions of approval are met. 2. The proposal is compliant and consistent with City of Renton plans, policies, regulations and approvals. Staff does not anticipate any adverse impacts on surrounding properties and uses as long as the conditions of approval are complied with. HEX report 13-000255.doc City of Renton Department of Co rty & Economic Development Hearing Examiner Recommendation RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PAR LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM Report of July 9, 2013 Page 22 of 22 4. The proposed library use is anticipated to be compatible with existing and future surrounding uses as permitted in the CD zoning classification. S. The scale, height and bulk of the proposed buildings are appropriate for the site. b. Access and circulation has not been changed as a part of the subject proposal. The existing access has operated efficiently and safely at the subject site. 7. Proposed open spaces serve as distinctive project focal points and provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the users of the proposed facility. 8. There are adequate public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use. 9. The proposed location is suited for the proposed use. 10. Parking for the proposed use has not proposed to be changed from the existing condition. 11. The proposed site plan ensures safe movement for vehicles and pedestrians. 12. New landscaping has been provided in all areas not occupied by buildings or paving and proposed to be disturbed for the subject project. 13. The project complies with the critical areas regulations. 1. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends approval of the Site Plan for the Renton Library at Liberty Park, File No. LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H, SM as depicted in Exhibits 3 through 13, subject to the following conditions.- 1. onditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with the 3 mitigation measures issued as part of the Determination of Non - Significance Mitigated, dated June 17, 2013 (Exhibit 14). 2. The applicant shall conduct a professional archaeological survey of the project area prior to any ground disturbing activities. Such survey shall be provided to the Planning Department and any recommendations which are included in the survey results shall be followed by the applicant. 3. A final detailed landscape plan shall be submitted for review and approval of the Current Planning Project Manager prior, to building permit issuance. 4. A detailed refuse and recycling plan shall be submitted with the building permit application identifying compliance with the minimum standards. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to building permit issuance. 5. The applicant shall submit a site lighting plan for review and approval by the Current Planning Project Manager, prior to building permit issuance. HEX report 13-000255.doc �_.. N 3AV NiiVd 7 5� ti N, v s AAV lMiN rs N Q d n � s N S 3AV NIVW i C S 3AV STGM a - S 3AV &MMIM C N ~ N R ❑ n n Zm N S AAV li3NbnU O 4 m 0 0 0 0 N 11 VI H co H .T. x W Q w z' Q Y� � C) Liox UC 2 }�- mL c3 L) UH /1 Ww Uy � [Y q,3 U �_.. N 3AV NiiVd 7 5� ti N, v s AAV lMiN rs N Q d n � s N S 3AV NIVW i C S 3AV STGM a - S 3AV &MMIM C N ~ N R ❑ n n Zm N S AAV li3NbnU O 4 m 0 0 0 0 N 11 VI H co H .T. x W MNU 'esu AA31A3M N1»d 31lS E 066HM'NOlN3a Hinc)F:3f1N3AVIII ADOi �o s a NHVd k-LH38[-1 IV =: AN"811 NO1N3M aF Z} F— LU v t- u 3ei fY 0 ^n�iE Q r, aF Z} F— LU v t- u 3ei fY 0 ^n�iE Q d "I.S3f1N3Atl7lIW � o r N W f WI �g ILLI d "I.S3f1N3Atl7lIW � o r N W f WI I VMS, lit MaMaN NVId WS 1.9 2 CD 06VM'NO1N2b I [iinos:3nN3AV_1_11Vq OCL NNW A1182sn IV ANVU911 NOINRI Off 1110110 1 1P WON 010 WIP X, X, Nit €igR as` =�W q i_ 1g v\ UNW3 �I I I i I Q �a = u{ ;g= LLJ C) ; a .# do�yr M3MU NVId WS pc a F J €f ,Fa ! °u '�` � y�'3 MSVM'NMN3b Fi nceanNwmioncu Isom iiadd ,ua391� J V ' `' Lu AHVNSII No1N3Nf =1 l H a€ a .5 M r M3[A3a NVId 31.15 VM'N4iN3ti I Hinos:mN�Av i -.m ou a �a ¢ d O a A183aII J.d s � o . � a t J r ANVE911 NOIN3N G W n q � a Cr dd r tz G W n q H x W � a Cr r tz G /+ a I H x W i!= 01 ELO OVC flied El o M81R32i N1fld 31ES 096'VM'NOIN�aiHinos3nN3AV-ninc)o� F5 � N�ltld J1.123381� ltl JlMVNall NOIN3N N H Z a (DQ ao [M F1 �o a s aUZ � - _ I £ fn L) J L)aa €fig o¢ J ufi J a (DQ ao [M F1 �o a s aUZ � - _ I £ fn L) J L)aa €fig o¢ J G L 1 ro K�= A y _ —`---- {:R ys� ELOL'ELS c z0 a Q ? i dog M31A Td NV-1d311So LL] z O 9 4' GD86 VM 'NO LNaa I Ha.nos 3nN3AV 1IIW ONL!] Q § _ F-wa Aaaasi"I NOINaN E =� z 0 z w la LU w0 w� r R-, H ym x W oJD Z r R-, H ym x W AARIA31A NVId AIIS NHVCI kLM391-1 IV AbI"91-1 NOIN3N M �g 4 UJ 3: o U) Z 5! V14 UJ LLI W 0 rn 5L 0 W 0 rn 5L K I OC 0 V; M:3lA3?1 NV-ld RLIS 95 VM'NGiN;'H I Hinas 3nN:iAV -111h 00 AMVd AIN381'1 IV AUV-81311 NO1N3N ,h Z C%4 CQ C) C%4 LLJ -E) LLI 42 .2 CQ -E) - -:IF. I -- 7, 7 7 �j jj7�ilp I' z II '_,4 -,- Ll -.7 ' i U d C�N'OVG 1111M.4i 1 0 AA31ARM N*%9d 311S jT:I 096VAA'NGINBiJlHlrOS3nN3AV-IIIV400l NWd jUld3811 IV AaVNE311 NOJLN3M j x (91 if 0 0 b CD LL. SU (91 if 0 0 b M3L&A8 Nv 1d 3115 5096 tlN, 'NO1N3h i HIMS Dn.N hl' IAIFV 004 YSVd AiN9811 IV Xd"81 1 NOIN3M O '=g F -1O E� . ❑ ill Illlli!!I . I I I Ilq[I I IIIII Ffl IIIIII[rl II II IIIfI I IIHII .r.nnnuuInnuluIuu u.:wnxuumIII nHit numnumufunnlnn 11lllHIII I I IIIINII IHIIII I I IIINiII I I IIIIrLII IlnlFl I I IYYIII I I.111{RII IIIiFFI IH` ................I n l r. ...III I I F.................. I I l..l..................... [FI I I l...nlrl 1111tH I.....In........[ttlllllll I Ill w a N x° 4L _ a z .,fig L, >u i` a '=g F -1O E� . ❑ ill Illlli!!I . I I I Ilq[I I IIIII Ffl IIIIII[rl II II IIIfI I IIHII .r.nnnuuInnuluIuu u.:wnxuumIII nHit numnumufunnlnn 11lllHIII I I IIIINII IHIIII I I IIINiII I I IIIIrLII IlnlFl I I IYYIII I I.111{RII IIIiFFI IH` ................I n l r. ...III I I F.................. I I l..l..................... [FI I I l...nlrl 1111tH I.....In........[ttlllllll I Ill w o i` a 5 J 6 � e Eg f�7 1 z t a LU W w 4 HI 1 0: [LM O15 ` eskg k M31A3M MVld 3115 66 VM'NOJN:]H l Ftmos 3nN3AV-1l RN OOI 3s MW )1!13911 1V Abb Gll NOIN3a �� " , axe �� r � ��r ' 0 ♦ r".•„� a, _s k- a � i �ry SIP F Fy �� r� �\ �� .- ,,�+-sem � � x 4 � i � �. w Ff �� ,>o ?1x � � t •, �'' �� z '. S _`'k wt q'''. -"7v v fn ^{ •`f t.. +r� 7 'F ` �� t }� .Ysak. � •E- .fit Y�.y''}�"��� _ �,� �P+n�,+X, •b )� � $ ca x W Z 0o i = IL ~ p} Q �� " , axe �� r � ��r ' 0 ♦ r".•„� a, _s k- a � i �ry SIP F Fy �� r� �\ �� .- ,,�+-sem � � x 4 � i � �. w Ff �� ,>o ?1x � � t •, �'' �� z '. S _`'k wt q'''. -"7v v fn ^{ •`f t.. +r� 7 'F ` �� t }� .Ysak. � •E- .fit Y�.y''}�"��� _ �,� �P+n�,+X, •b )� � $ ca x W MOW FSR t7 t... tS3r7 .;� t Pk. 44, l A ik J F AMC DEPARTMENT OF COMMUN19 AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT City of ,;, ENVIRONMENTAL. (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS -M) PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H EXHIBIT 14 APPLICANT: Greg Smith, King County Library System PROJECT NAME: Renton Library at Liberty Park PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 140 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall, the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The site's zoning is primarily Center Downtown (CD). The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of -existing building envelope, and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one tree is proposed to be retained. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, Regulated Material Survey, Geotechnical Engineering Study, Technical Information Report. The site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the state and a habitat conservation area. PROJECT LOCATION: 100 Mill Avenue S LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4- 9-070D Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. 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 July 5, 2013. 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 RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: June 21, 2013 DATE OF DECISION: June 17, 2013 SIGNATURES: Gregg Zi �rftfanAdminjstrafonr Mar Peterson, Administrator Public WorD artment Date Fire & Emergency Services Date w. Terry Higashiyama, Administrator C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administra Community Services Department Date Department of Community & Economic Date Development DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNSM) MITIGATION MEASURES AND ADVISORY NOTES PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H APPLICANT: Greg Smith, King County Library System PROJECT NAME: Renton Library at Liberty Park PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall, the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The site's zoning is primarily Center Downtown (CD). The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope, and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one tree is proposed to be retained. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, Regulated Material Survey, Geotechnical Engineering Study, Technical Information Report. The site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the state and a habitat conservation area. PROJECT LOCATION: 100 Mill Avenue S LEAD AGENCY: The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013 and revised May 10, 2013. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by GeoEngineers, dated December 20, 2012. 3. The applicant shall design and place lighting so that it is shielded from impacting the Cedar River and at the same time balances necessary lighting for site safety standards. LA H m t—� X W :7 ADIVISORY NOTES: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. Commercial, multi -family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. S. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 6. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING --- Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. Plan Review —Sanitary Sewer: 1. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an 8 -inch sewer main in Mill Avenue South with a manhole at the intersection with South 2nd Street. The existing sewer service connection extends southerly to this main. 2. The project is required to cut and cap the existing side sewer at the property line as part of the demolition permit. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 2 of 4 0 0 3. A new side sewer is shown on the preliminary drawings and shall be installed to the updated building as condition of the building permit. Plan Review —Storm Drainage: 1. The FEMA approved 100 -year base flood elevation at the Renton Library over the Cedar River is elevation 39.62 based upon the NAVD 88 Datum per the FEMA approved 2006 Cedar River Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) Case No. 06-10-13596P. 2. The Library is located over the floodway of the Cedar River and any work within the floodplain or the floodway would have to comply with City adopted flood hazard regulations in the Critical Areas Ordinance and FEMA National Flood Insurance Program regulations. This also includes compliance with the National Marine Fisheries Biological Opinion Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives regarding the National Flood Insurance Program compliance with the Endangered Species Act, as they relate to development in the FEMA floodplain. 3. FEMA regulations require that when a structure is located in the 100 -year floodplain, any substantial improvements (i.e. when cost of improvements exceeds 50% of the appraised value of the structure) require the structure to be brought up to current floodplain development standards. Any improvements within the floodplain or floodway, such as placement of fill, piers or supports as part of the seismic retrofit work within the floodplain or floodway, will need to comply with FEMA floodplain requirements. 4. The applicant must show the 100 -year base flood elevation (39.62 NAVD 88 Datum) on the construction plans. S. A drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the site plan application. The report complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. A final TIR is required with the building permit. Plan Review — Transportation/Street: 1. A 12 -foot sidewalk with cut-outs for street trees is not required to be constructed with the project. 2. A traffic study was not required for this project as the use is the same with a smaller building. Plan Review — General Comments: 1. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. Separate permits are required for the water meter installation, side sewer connection, and storm water connection. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 3 of 4 Fire: 1. The fire hydrant and fire flow requirements for the proposed library are adequate as they exist. 2. The existing automatic fire sprinkler system will be required to be modified for any tenant improvement work. 3. The existing fire department apparatus access roads are adequate. 4. The existing automatic fire alarm system shall be replaced with an all new system as the existing system cannot meet current fire code requirements. System shall be fully addressable and full detection is required. S. Exiting shall meet all current building and fire code requirements. Police: Recommendations: Due to the renovation vs. new construction, this review would be better served by a security survey following the completion of the improvement project. CFS would remain about the same since there will be no additional structural space added. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 4 of 4 CITY;OE RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY &`ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF.SERVICE BY MAILING On the 21st day of June, 2013, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing ERC Determination documents. This information was sent to: amefin' Yw-. a .f•^"=, ,--ti ��. .. ..l.,sS-.. ....a ...._-'�... .s-. Q:......'Y.. _..11= .. .. oa i`f %JG Agencies See Attached Maaike Post Contact Greg Smith Applicant City of Renton Owner David Keyes Party of Record Teri Hallauer Party of Record Beth Asher Party of Record A`�����s����lllitf 11' (Signature of Sender): �c.� GF; 4 STATE OF WASHINGTON } ^o TA S f SS r 5 a c �� COUNTY OF KING ) 'NA�% phiO]131sG �Y It, I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tuckerr�"f0+j� �As*�d signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act INAZ1 `end purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: Notary (Print): My appointment expires: Notar� Public in and for the State of Washington A,, -21, Q-iJk3 W� a"Ll am Renton Library at Liberty Park LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H template - affidavit of service by mailing r'1 H H m X W 0 0 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 39D15 —172nd Avenue 5E 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 39015 172nd 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* 5eattie-District-DfFice —EnvironmentaFRam ng -Supervisor- -- ttn-CTretchen-Ka - Attn: SEPA Reviewer Ms, Shirley Marroquin PO Box 48343 PO Box C-3755 2015. 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 Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov template - affidavit of service by mailing 0 Vanessa Doibee 0 From: Griffith, Greg (DAHP) <Greg.Griffith @DAHP.WA.GOV> Seat: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 4:26 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc; Kaehler, Gretchen (DAHP); }Cramer, Stephenie (DAHP) Subject: Library Comment Letter Attachments: 1053_001.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Thank you Vanessa for taking the time to talk about the attached letter in pdf format. I appreciate your consideration of our comments, which we understand come to you after the SEPA comment time period has ended. Let Gretchen or myself know if you have any follow-up questions. Thanks Greg Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Washington State Dept. of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 360-586-3073 greg.griffith(a)dahn.wa.gov R My regularly scheduled office hours are Monday thea Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm The Washington State Historic Preservation Plan is ,being updated. Contact me to get involved! m H x W " [5p?ARTMENTOF AR&ZEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION June 25, 2013 Greg Smith King County Library System 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, WA 98027 Vanessa Dolbee, Planner City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 052013 -03 -Ki Property: Renton Library - LUA 13-000255, ECP, SM, SA -H Re: Archaeology - Survey Requested Dear Mr. Smith and Ms. Dolbee; 0 Allyson Brooks Ph.D., Director Slate Histadc Preservation Officer City of Renton Planning Division JUN 2 F 2013 HTECEMED We have received the City of Renton's DNS -M materials for the proposed project referenced above. Question #13 of the SEPA checklist was missing information relevant to your review of the project. There are 10 receded archaeological and historical resources within one mile of the project area, and several within less than % mile. Seven of these are archaeological sites and/or cemeteries. The Cedar River area has extremely high potential for archaeological resources. In the past,. you may remember other projects in Renton that encountered archaeological resources during construction and experienced delays, including the High School and Henry Moses Aquatic Center. In order to avoid such complications during this project, a- professional archaeological survey of the project area should be conducted prior to ground disturbing activities. This will identify and archaeological resources present and allow you to make plans to appropriately avoid, protect or conduct mitigation if impacts are necessary. We also recommend consultation with the concerned Tribes' cultural committees and staff regarding cultural resource issues. In addition to the comments above regarding archaeological resources, we note that the existing library building has drawn DAHP's interest from a historic architectural standpoint in being a good example of mid -20d' Century modern architecture and landscape architecture. In the post - World War Il era, the Library's modernist style and bold plan spanning the Cedar River clearly evoked the image of Renton as a growing, progressive city. As a result of the building being a good local example of this style and time -period, DAHP also recommends the Library Board, the City, and other interested partners explore ways to capture the building's contribution to local history into planning for the new building. This could happen through interpretive displays, landscaping, art, and perhaps recycling building elements in the Library's plans. STA State of Washington Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 - (360) 586-3065 t s www.dahp.wa.gov 61 roti . 0 f� In closing, just a reminder that if any federal funds or permits are involved, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, (as amended), and its implementing regulations, 36CFR800, must be followed. This is a separate process from SEPA and requires formai government -to - government consultation with the affected Tribes and this agency. These comments are based on the information available at the time of this review and on behalf of the State Historic Preservation Officer. Should additional information become available, our assessment may be revised. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project and we look forward to receiving the survey report. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (360) 586-3088 or Gretchen, Kaehleradahp.wa.aov. Sincerely, Gretchen Kaehler Local Governments Archaeologist (360)586-3088 Gretchen.kaehlerCcDdahp.wa_9oov cc: Laura Murphy Steve Mullen -Moses Dennis Lewarch Cecile Hansen Charlie Sundberg Phil Letourneau ,y}, szArr. State of Washington • Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 www.dahp.wo.gov J 0 Vanessa aolbee From: Chris Moore <cmoore@preservewa.org> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 9,40 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Renton Library Attachments: 062013-03-KI_062013.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Vanessa, Would you please forward the message below, with the attachment, to Chip Vincent. The only email I could find for him was an online form that does not allow attachments. He should have received the text below, but I'd like him to see the attached letter as well. And one other question for you — with the in -water work proposed for the library, has the Army Corps of Engineers been contacted to determine if a permit is needed from them? Thanks Vanessa — I'm sure we'll touch base when I'm back in the office on July 1. Best, Chris Hi Chip, Sorry to be emailing on a Friday night, but I am out of town next week and wanted to be sure you received this message. When we spoke on Wednesday I mentioned that my interest in the Renton Library project was based on inquiries we received regarding the historic nature of the building. Under question 13 on the SEPA checklist, the question dealing with historic and cultural resources, the form indicated that none were present on the site. Yet yesterday I was copied on a letter from the state historic preservation office to the Friends of Cedar River Library that the library, along with the surrounding park and civic campus, is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (as I am unable to attach the letter to this form email, I will send it to Vanessa). Given this, it would be our hope that efforts were made to rehabilitate the existing library in a manner that is historically appropriate and would retain the structure's National Register -eligibility. Short of this, we would at least expect the MDNS for the project to be revised to include mitigation measures for loss of the historic structure. Such measures should include, but are not limited to, documentation of the library and National Register -eligible site, retention of certain features of the library, including character -defining features present in the interior, and a survey of other post-war resources in Renton to better understanding the legacy of the city's built environment. As mentioned, I will be returning to my office July 1. I'd be happy to discuss these ideas further at that time. Best, 0 Chris Moore Field Director WA Trust for Historic Preservation CHRIS MOORE I FIELD DIRECTOR WASHINGTON TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION STIMSON-GREEN MANSION 1204 MINOR AVENUE SEATTLE, WA 98101 206.624.9449 (0) 206.930,5067 (C) 206,624,2410 (F) cmoore@preservewa.org www.preservewa.org 0 l__J A"MENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION Nicola Robinson, Treasurer Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library PO Box 1483 Renton, WA 98057-1483 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 062013 -03 -KI Property: Renton Library & City Hall - DOE Re: Determined Eligible Dear Ms. Robinson: 0 City Of Renton ILWV[Q;I Allyson Brooks Ph.D., Director State Historic Preservation Officer June 20, 2013 Thank you for contacting our office. This is a follow up to your request to evaluate the eligibility of the downtown library building in Renton for potential listing on the National Register of Historic Places. After touring the site and conducting some additional research on my end regarding the construction of the library, I have determined that the building is ELIGIBLE for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. While the structure is not quite 50 years old, I believe that the building has exceptional significance in terms of its direct connection to the growth and development of the city of Renton in the post WWII era, as well as being a representative example of the noted architectural local architectural firm of Johnson -Campanella, who greatly shaped the built environment in Renton during the mid to late 20th century. Note that the library is eligible as part of a larger complex (a small historic district) which includes the said building, the City Hall and the surrounding landscape elements designed by noted landscape architect Glen Hunt. I look forward to working with you on your effort to develop a National Register nomination for these properties. if listed, these would be the first National Register listed resources in Renton; an exciting prospect. National Register listing is strictly honorary with the goal of raising the public profile, celebrating the history, and formally documenting the building(s). Also note that for publically owned properties, owner consent is not required for listing. These comments are based on the information available at the time of this review and on behalf of the State Historic Preservation Officer. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Michael Houser State Architectural Historian (360) 586-3076 michael.houser0dahp.wa:gov CC: Chris Moore, WA Trust For Historic Preservation 5TA7. �A State of Washington • Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation o P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 - (360) 586-3065 x www.dahp.wa,gov �7, 12 0 • Vanessa Dolbee EXHIBIT 18 From: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us} Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:16 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Fisher, Larry D (DFW) Subject: Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Nan -Significance, Mitigated Follow Up Flag: Fallow up Flag Status: Completed Vanessa, We have reviewed the Notice of Application materials for the Renton Library redevelopment project referenced above. This project will remodel the existing library located over the Cedar River. When we met with City staff and the consulting team in February 2013, we identified several issues for this project as noted below and offer recommendations where we can based on the information reviewed to date: Artificial lighting- The checklist and the Critical Areas Report (CAR) discuss how the project will seek to reduce artificial lighting impacts in several ways. In addition to the measures proposed, we also recommend that the City use light bulbs which reduce artificial lighting opportunities to the Cedar River or nighttime sky. Previously, we provided information to City public Works staff about potential light bulb options that could be used. We also request a copy of the detailed site lighting plan for our review which is proposed to be part of the final construction plans. 2. Stormwater- We need additional information about the details as to how stormwater will be managed from redeveloped site, particularly for water quality. We request a copy of the Technical Information Report which likely contains the stormwater management details. 3. Wood management plan- At the February meeting, we indicated that the site should develop a wood management plan to deal with any wood that may approach or be entrained by the existing concrete piling in the Cedar River. This issue was not addressed in CAR. Wood management is needed to ensure that wood is not removed from the Cedar River or its banks unless it is absolutely necessary. Wood is shown being near the site from the photos the City provided in February. Wood may no longer be on or adjacent to the site with winter . floods; however, the City should plan on wood transported to and through the site with time and future floods. It is timely to develop a wood management plan now as part of the redeveloped library. Please note that Boeing developed a wood management plan for its Cedar River bridges. We recommend that the City review it for applicability to the library site. 4. Gabion baskets- We understand that there is no bank work or modifications to the existing gabion baskets used to stabilize the river banks located on the site. Gabion baskets are subject to failure when exposed to streambed scour flows, requiring require repair or replacement with some regularity. When they fail, they can adversely affect fish habitat by adding angular rock to the stream channel that can create beneficial habitat spaces for sculpin and other salmon predators. In addition, the broken metal baskets can entrap adult salmon causing injury or mortality. In the course of a tagging study that included sonic tags, MITFD staff found dozens of live and dead adult salmon an arm's length from the bank inside several failed gabion baskets in the lower Cedar project reach. These fish presumably were seeking hiding cover or slow velocity resting places and were unable to complete their migration and spawning cycle in the Cedar River. The gabions also create poor salmon habitat conditions in the lower Cedar River by eliminating the complex natural stream bank habitats characterized by low- velocity areas, vegetation, pools, and undercut banks that are preferred by juvenile and adult salmon and reducing bank sources for spawning gravel. When the gabion baskets in the project area need repair, other alternatives that provide bank stability and improve habitat conditions for salmon should be pursued. 5. Construction Noise- The project should seek to minimize disturbance to spawning sockeye and Chinook in the vicinity from construction activity, particularly any piling driving activity that may be needed. 6. Shoreline mitigation- We recognize that the project needs to comply with the City's Vegetation Conservation provisions from the Shoreline Master Program and there are limited opportunities to meet the 100 -foot vegetated shoreline buffer requirement*r the CAR, the applicant is proposing to pan "in -lieu -fee" to the City's Vegetation Conservation Fund, which needs to be set up. Further, the CAR identifies several potential sites and actions on page 14 where the in -lieu fee could be spent_ We are keenly interested in seeing the lower Cedar River's riparian areas enhanced and request the opportunity to work closely with City staff for this project, as well as, the overall framework approach to implement the in -lieu program_ For this project's in -lieu proposal, we would like to work with the City to verify the extent of the impact area; the proposed fee amount; and the mitigation project area. For example, the $1.25 per square foot rate may be too low and only cover the costs of acquiring and planting plants which may not be sufficient to actually plant areas if easements, acquisitions, and permits are needed. Once a rate is accepted by the City it is likely that others will seek to use the same rate, so it is important to ensure that the in -lieu rate is sufficient to cover all of the mitigation project costs. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses and coordination. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 i • STREAM STUDY AND HABITAT DATA REPORT RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK RENTON, WASHINGTON ityal Planning Division REVISED Date- Q/10 13 - V Prepared For. KING COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM Issaquah, Washington Prepared By: TALASAEA CONSULTANTS, INC. Woodinville, Washington 28 February 2013 Revised 10 May 2013 b tan ON >oo x W ity of Planning Division REIVISED Date �'/C7/, �IONAi. E� ENGINEERING REPORT Technical Information Report Renton Library at Liberty Park PREPARED FOR: City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 (425) 430 -WO elty of �Pi�nning Di, OR CEVED PREPARED THROUGH: The MiIIer Hull Partnership, LLP 71 Columbia Street, Sixth Floor Seattle, WA 98104 Phone: (206) 682.6837 Contact: Ruth Baleiko PREPARED BY: COUGHLiNPORTEP,LUKDEEN 413 Pine Street Suite 300 Seattle, Washington 98101 P: 206/343-0460 Contact: Bart Balko, P.E. N H m H X W N ry++ ,, t Va 'I", co �lu z a m s y(]yoY r=+.L f1l� -TL ` � W o0\`��,,� ��- ,� �� �.� ova •� `��',� oir jzf 'J y rl y ^, N' n fi .� G a y t E� OL Cp C QY Z � } �' L. -• F L U — ',J O :J P77 "� Vii j = ..J- F S U ✓: -y LL t~C -3 :l a 7 Fp C sm- tb :4 I N ry++ ,, t Va 'I", co �lu z a m s y(]yoY r=+.L f1l� ¢ ` � W o0\`��,,� ��- ,� �� �.� ova •� `��',� ,o w z tb x d Lno p.�b� N U y c Fl. au � CA) 't 0 OQ 'aj� 3`° o ti v ofn x It �H N ry++ ,, t Va 'I", co �lu z a m s y(]yoY r=+.L f1l� ¢ ` � W o0\`��,,� ��- a 0 0 Vanessa Dolbee From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: Tuesday, July 02, 2013 9:56 AM To: 'Karen Walter' Cc: Terry Higashiyama; Peter Renner; Chip Vincent Subject: RE: Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, Mitigated Attachments: 13-0628 Memo - Muckleshoot.pdf Karen, To respond to your additional follow-up comments: 1. Will the City be responding to our comments? We specifically directed comments 4 and 6 to the City and not necessarily the applicant. Comments from Original Muckleshoot Comment Letter: Comment 4: Gabion baskets- We understand that there is no bank work or modifications to the existing gabion baskets used to stabilize the river banks located on the site. Gabion baskets are subject to failure when exposed to streambed scour flows, requiring require repair or replacement with some regularity. When they fail, they can adversely affect fish habitat by adding angular rock to the stream channel that can create beneficial habitat spaces for sculpin and other salmon predators. In addition, the broken metal baskets can entrap adult salmon causing injury or mortality. In the course of a tagging study that included sonic tags, MITFD staff found dozens of live and dead adult salmon an arm's length from the bank inside several failed gabion baskets in the lower Cedar project reach. These fish presumably were seeking hiding cover or slow velocity resting places and were unable to complete their migration and spawning cycle in the Cedar River. The gabions also create poor salmon habitat conditions in the lower Cedar River by eliminating the complex natural stream bank habitats characterized by low-velocity areas, vegetation, pools, and undercut banks that are preferred by juvenile and adult salmon and reducing bank sources for spawning gravel. When the gabion baskets in the project area need repair, other alternatives that provide bank stability and improve habitat conditions for salmon should be pursued. Response: As you mentioned above, the gabion baskets are outside the scope of the subject project since no work is proposed below the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM). Including the gabion repair in the scope of the subject project would add additional permitting requirements that are not required today. However, at which time the City pursues repair of the gabion baskets and/or a habitat restoration plan alternative proposals would be analyzed dependent upon funding sources and stipulation of any grant funding received. Any repair of the gabions would require federal and state permitting beyond focal permitting which would provide for additional Muckleshoot Comments and review. Comment 6% Shoreline mitigation- We recognize that the project needs to comply with the City's Vegetation Conservation provisions from the Shoreline Master Program and there are limited opportunities to meet the 100 -foot vegetated shoreline buffer requirement. Per the CAR, the applicant is proposing to pay an "in -lieu -fee" to the City's Vegetation Conservation Fund, which needs to be set up. Further, the CAR identifies several potential sites and actions on page 14 where the in -lieu fee could be spent. We are keenly interested in seeing the lower Cedar River's riparian areas enhanced and request the opportunity to work closely with City staff for this project, as well as, the overall framework approach to implement the in -lieu program. For this project's in -lieu proposal, we would like to work with the City to verify the extent of the impact area; the proposed fee amount; and the mitigation project area. For example, the $1.25 per square foot rate may be too low and only cover the costs of acquiring and planting plants which may not be sufficient to actually plant areas if easements, acquisitions, and permits are needed. Once a rate is accepted by the City it is likely that others will seek to use the same rate, so it is important to ensure that the in -lieu rate is sufficient to cover all of the mitigation project costs. Response: City staff concurs with the analysis provided by Miller Hull. 2. Can we get a copy of the detailed site lighting plan? We requested in the last sentence to Item 1 and I did not see it attached to your email. Response: At this time we do not have a site lighting plan. However, we can send you a copy when the City receives a lighting plan, typically submitted at Building Permit stage. 3. As we noted in our previous email earlier this week, the wood management plan you sent that Boeing created is the one we were referencing in our June 12 comments. We would appreciate an opportunity to review the wood management plan that either the City or applicant will draft in response to our comment 3 before it is finalized. Any idea when that may be? Response: Thank you for confirming that the Boing Plan we sent was the correct wood management plan. The City is intending to use this plan as a template for a wood management strategy. However, we feel this should be a City wide plan for more than just the Library building, as such we plan on preparing in conjunction with other departments within the City. We would have no problem with your review and comment on the plan prior to finalization and adoption by City Council. Due to the intend interdepartmental coordination and the requirement for City Council adoption a schedule is difficult to provide at this time. 4. The applicant's response regarding construction noise impacts to spawning sockeye and Chinook is a bit vague. Will they be required to conduct this activity at specific dates or times? Response: See attached memorandum from Miller Hull. -----Original Message ----- From: Karen Walter [mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 12:50 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: RE: Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, 5A -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, Mitigated Vanessa, From a quick review of the email below and associated attachments, we have a couple of follow-up comments: 1. Will the City be responding to our comments? We specifically directed comments 4 and 6 to the City and not necessarily the applicant. 2. Can we get a copy of the detailed site lighting plan? We requested in the last sentence to Item 1 and I did not see it attached to your email. 3. As we noted in our previous email earlier this week, the wood management plan you sent that Boeing created is the one we were referencing in our June 12 comments. We would appreciate an opportunity to review the wood management plan that either the City or applicant will draft in response to our comment 3 before it is finalized. Any idea when that may be? 4. The applicant's response regarding construction noise impacts to spawning sockeye and Chinook is a bit vague. Will they be required to conduct this activity at specific dates or times? Thank you! Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader 0 Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 From: Vanessa Dolbee [VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 3:38 PM To: Karen Walter Cc: Terry Higashiyama; Peter Renner; Chip Vincent Subject: RE: Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, Mitigated Karen, Thank you for submitting your comments on the Library at Liberty Park. Please find attached a memorandum from Muller Hull addressing your comments. Additionally, find attached the stormwater report and an additional study completed by Watershed Science & Engineering (referenced in the memorandum). The City received a copy of the wood management plan from the Boeing Company, attached. Could you please verify if this report is the report you are referring to in your comments. Before, we look at creating a wood management plan we would like to make sure we are utilizing a document that the Tribe feels is high quality. Finally, to address your lighting concerns the following mitigation measure was added to the SEPA determination: The applicant shall design and place lighting so that it is shielded from impacting the Cedar River and at the same time balances necessary lighting for site safety standards. if you have any questions about the attachments or the SEPA determination please feel free to give me a call. Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall - 6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Karen Walter[mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:16 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Fisher, Larry D (DFW) Subject: Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, Mitigated Vanessa, We have reviewed the Notice of Application materials for the Renton Library redevelopment project referenced above. This project will remodel the existing library located over the Cedar River. When we met with City staff and the consulting team in February 2013, we identified several issues for this project as noted below and offer recommendations where we can based on the information reviewed to date: 1. Artificial lighting- The checklist and the Critical Areas Report (CAR) discuss how the project will seek to reduce artificial lighting impacts in several ways. In addition to the measures proposed, we also recommend that the City use light bulbs which reduce artificial lighting opportunities to the Cedar River or nighttime sky. Previously, we provided information to City public Works staff about potential light bulb options that could be used. We also request a copy of the detailed site lighting plan for our review which is proposed to be part of the final construction plans. 2. Stormwater- We need additional information about the details as to how stormwater will be managed from redeveloped site, particularly for water quality. We request a copy of the Technical Information Report which likely contains the stormwater management details. 3. Wood management plan- At the February meeting, we indicated that the site should develop a wood management plan to deal with any wood that may approach or be entrained by the existing concrete piling in the Cedar River. This issue was not addressed in CAR. Wood management is needed to ensure that wood is not removed from the Cedar River or its banks unless it is absolutely necessary. Wood is shown being near the site from the photos the City provided in February. Wood may no longer be on or adjacent to the site with winter floods; however, the City should plan on wood transported to and through the site with time and future floods. It is timely to develop a wood management plan now as part of the redeveloped library. Please note that Boeing developed a wood management plan for its Cedar River bridges. We recommend that the City review it for applicability to the library site. 4. Gabion baskets- We understand that there is no bank work or modifications to the existing gabion baskets used to stabilize the river banks located on the site. Gabion baskets are subject to failure when exposed to streambed scour flows, requiring require repair or replacement with some regularity. When they fail, they can adversely affect fish habitat by adding angular rock to the stream channel that can create beneficial habitat spaces for sculpin and other salmon predators. In addition, the broken metal baskets can entrap adult salmon causing injury or mortality. In the course of a tagging study that included sonic tags, MITFD staff found dozens of live and dead adult salmon an arm's length from the bank inside several failed gabion baskets in the lower Cedar project reach. These fish presumably were seeking hiding cover or slow velocity resting places and were unable to complete their migration and spawning cycle in the Cedar River. The gabions also create poor salmon habitat conditions in the lower Cedar River by eliminating the complex natural stream bank habitats characterized by low-velocity areas, vegetation, pools, and undercut banks that are preferred by juvenile and adult salmon and reducing bank sources for spawning gravel. When the gabion baskets in the project area need repair, other alternatives that provide bank stability and improve habitat conditions for salmon should be pursued. S. Construction Noise- The project should seek to minimize disturbance to spawning sockeye and Chinook in the vicinity from construction activity, particularly any piling driving activity that may be needed. 6. Shoreline mitigation- We recognize that the project needs to comply with the City's Vegetation Conservation provisions from the Shoreline Master Program and there are limited opportunities to meet the 100 -foot vegetated 4 0 0 shoreline buffer requirement. Per the CAR, the applicant is proposing to pay an "in -lieu -fee" to the City's Vegetation Conservation Fund, which needs to be set up. Further, the CAR identifies several potential sites and actions on page 14 where the in -lieu fee could be spent. We are keenly interested in seeing the lower Cedar River's riparian areas enhanced and request the opportunity to work closely with City staff for this project, as well as, the overall framework approach to implement the in -lieu program. For this project's in -lieu proposal, we would like to work with the City to verify the extent of the impact area; the proposed fee amount; and the mitigation project area. For example, the $1.25 per square foot rate may be too low and only cover the costs of acquiring and planting plants which may not be sufficient to actually plant areas if easements, acquisitions, and permits are needed. Once a rate is accepted by the City it is likely that others will seek to use the same rate, so it is important to ensure that the in -lieu rate is sufficient to cover all of the mitigation project costs. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses and coordination. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave 5E Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 0 0 Memorandum To: Vanessa Dolbee Date: June 28, 2013 Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton From: Maaike Post, Project Manager ....... .....:.. .... ... .... ........... _..... Project: Renton Library at LibertyPark Project No: 1107.1 Subject: Follow-up regarding Construction Noise Impacts Vanessa, In response to the Muckleshoot Tribe's follow-up question, we have garnered some additional information from the design team. Question: "4. The applicant's response regarding construction noise impacts to spawning sockeye and Chinook is a bit vague. Will they be required to conduct this activity at specific dates or times?" Design Team Responses: - The hours of construction activity are anticipated to be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. on weekdays. This complies with City of Renton ordinances. - It is anticipated that the placing of the auger cast piles will take approximately four to six weeks. The design team's geotech and civil engineers highly recommend that excavation, piling, and foundation work take place in the dry season when it is less challenging to protect the area against erosion. Per the City of Renton permitting calendar, the dry season starts May 151.Once a General Contractor is awarded the project, they will be required to submit a project schedule reflecting actual timing and duration of work. - Because there are several permit hurdles this project has to clear of undetermined length, it is too early to determine a more specific construction schedule at this time. The contractor will be required to comply with all city and state requirements to protect the Cedar River and its inhabitants - Regards, Maaike Post Project Manager The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP CC_ Greg Smith Adrianne Ralph Ruth Raleiko P:1Renton Library at Liberty ParklDocuments104_AgenciesL002 Land Use Applications113-0619 response to Muckleshoot comments113-0628 Memo - M uc kl e s h o o t.d ocx 1107 The Miller Hull Partnenhlp, LLP Contact Polson Building 1206.6824837 71 Columbia Street -6'Floor F: 266.682-5692 Seattle, WA 98164 www.miHerhul€.rom i i _ Vanessa Dolbee �_x� r:1-C'W LS5 From: Chris Moore <cmoore@preservewa.org> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 9:40 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Renton Library Attachments: 062013-03-KI_062013.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Vanessa, Would you please forward the message below, with the attachment, to Chip Vincent. The only email I could find for him was an online form that does not allow attachments. He should have received the text below, but I'd like him to see the attached letter as well. And one other question foryou —with the in -water work proposed for the library, has the Army Corps of Engineers been contacted to determine if a permit is needed from them? Thanks Vanessa — I'm sure we'll touch base when I'm back in the office on July 1. Best, Chris Hi Chip, Sorry to be emailing on a Friday night, but I am out of town next week and wanted to be sure you received this message. When we spoke on Wednesday I mentioned that my interest in the Renton Library project was based on inquiries we received regarding the historic nature of the building. Under question 13 on the SEPA checklist, the question dealing with historic and cultural resources, the form indicated that none were present on the site. Yet yesterday I was copied on a letter from the state historic preservation office to the Friends of Cedar River Library that the library, along with the surrounding park and civic campus, is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (as I am unable to attach the letter to this form email, I will send it to Vanessa). Given this, it would be our hope that efforts were made to rehabilitate the existing library in a manner that is historically appropriate and would retain the structure's National Register -eligibility. Short of this, we would at least expect the MDNS for the project to be revised to include mitigation measures for loss of the historic structure. Such measures should include, but are not limited to, documentation of the library and National Register -eligible site, retention of certain features of the library, including character -defining features present in the interior, and a survey of other post-war resources in Renton to better understanding the legacy of the city's built environment. As mentioned, I will be returning to my office July 1. I'd be happy to discuss these ideas further at that time. Best, Chris Moore Field Director WA Trust for Historic Preservation CHRIS MOORE I FIELD] DIRECTOR WASHINGTON TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION STIMSON-GREEN MANSION 1204 MINOR AVENUE SEATTLE, WA 98171 206,624,9449 (Q) 206.930.5067 (C) 206,624,241.0 (F) cmoore@preservewa.org www.preservewa.org 0 DEPARTMENT OF ARCHAEOLOGY g HISTORIC PRESERVATION 0 A"on Brooks Ph.D., Director State Historic Preservation Officer Nicola Robinson, Treasurer June 20, 2013 Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library PO Box 1483 Renton, WA 98057-1483 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 062013 -03 -KI Property: Renton Library & City Hall - DOE Re: Determined Eligible Dear Ms. Robinson: Thank you for contacting our office. This is a follow up to your request to evaluate the eligibility of the downtown library building in Renton for potential listing on the National Register of Historic Places, After touring the site and conducting some additional research on my end regarding the construction of the library, I have determined that the building is ELIGIBLE for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. While the structure is not quite 50 years old, I believe that the building has exceptional significance in terms of its direct connection to the growth and development of the city of Renton in the post WWII era, as well as being a representative example of the noted architectural local architectural firm of Johnson -Campanella, who greatly shaped the built environment in Renton during the mid to late 20th century. Note that the library is eligible as part of a larger complex (a small historic district) which includes the said building, the City Hall and the surrounding landscape elements designed by noted landscape architect Glen Hunt. I look forward to working with you on your effort to develop a National Register nomination for these properties. If listed, these would be the first National Register listed resources in Renton; an exciting prospect. National Register listing is strictly honorary with the goal of raising the public profile, celebrating the history, and formally documenting the building(s). Also note that for publically owned properties, owner consent is not required for listing. These comments are based on the information available at the time of this review and on behalf of the State Historic Preservation Officer. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Michael Houser State Architectural Historian (360) 586-3076 michael.houser@dahp.wa.ciov CC: Chris Moore, WA Trust For Historic Preservation State of Washington • Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia. Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 wwwAchp.wa_gov Vanessa Dolbee From: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 12;50 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: RE: Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, Mitigated Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Vanessa, From a quick review of the email below and associated attachments, we have a couple of follow-up comments: 1. Will the City be responding to our comments? We specifically directed comments 4 and 6 to the City and not necessarily the applicant. 2. Can we get a copy of the detailed site lighting plan? We requested in the last sentence to Item 1 and I did not see it attached to your email. 3. As we noted in our previous email earlier this week, the wood management plan you sent that Boeing created is the one we were referencing in our June 12 comments. We would appreciate an opportunity to review the wood management plan that either the City or applicant will draft in response to our comment 3 before it is finalized. Any idea when that may be? 4. The applicant's response regarding construction noise impacts to spawning sockeye and Chinook is a bit vague. Will they be required to conduct this activity at specific dates or times? Thankyoul Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 From: Vanessa Dolbee [VDolbee@Rentonwa.gov] Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 3:38 PM To: Karen Walter Cc: Terry Higashiyama; Peter Renner; Chip Vincent Subject: RE: Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, Mitigated Karen, Thank you for submitting your comments on the Library at Liberty Park. Please find attached a memorandum from Muller Hull addressing your comments. Additionally, find attached the stormwater report and an additional study completed by Watershed Science & Engineering (referenced in the memorandum). The City received a copy of the wood management plan from the Boeing Company, attached. Could you please verify if this report is the report you are referring to in your comments. Before, we look at creating a wood management plan we would like to make sure we areozing a document that the Tribe feels is hfil. quality. Finally, to address your lighting concerns the following mitigation measure was added to the SEPA determination: The applicant shall design and place lighting so that it is shielded from impacting the Cedar River and at the same time balances necessary lighting for site safety standards. If you have any questions about the attachments or the SEPA determination please feel free to give me a call, Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall - 6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Karen Walter[mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:16 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Fisher, Larry D (DFW) Subject: Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, Mitigated Vanessa, We have reviewed the Notice of Application materials for the Renton Library redevelopment project referenced above. This project will remodel the existing library located over the Cedar River. When we met with City staff and the consulting team in February 2013, we identified several issues for this project as noted below and offer recommendations where we can based on the information reviewed to date: 1. Artificial lighting- The checklist and the Critical Areas Report (CAR) discuss how the project will seek to reduce artificial lighting impacts in several ways. In addition to the measures proposed, we also recommend that the City use light bulbs which reduce artificial lighting opportunities to the Cedar River or nighttime sky. Previously, we provided information to City public Works staff about potential light bulb options that could be used. We also request a copy of the detailed site lighting plan for our review which is proposed to be part of the final construction plans. 2. Stormwater- We need additional information about the details as to how stormwater will be managed from redeveloped site, particularly for water quality. We request a copy of the Technical Information Report which likely contains the stormwater management details. 3. Wood management plan- At the February meeting, we indicated that the site should develop a wood management plan to deal with any wood that may approach or be entrained by the existing concrete piling in the Cedar River. This issue was not addressed in CAR. Wood management is needed to ensure that wood is not removed from the Cedar River or its banks unless it is absold*necessary. Wood is shown being near t0site from the photos the City provided in February. Wood may no longer be on or adjacent to the site with winter floods; however, the City should plan on wood transported to and through the site with time and future floods. It is timely to develop a wood management plan now as part of the redeveloped library. Please note that Boeing developed a wood management plan for its Cedar River bridges. We recommend that the City review it for applicability to the library site. 4. Gabion baskets- We understand that there is no bank work or modifications to the existing gabion baskets used to stabilize the river banks located on the site. Gabion baskets are subject to failure when exposed to streambed scour flows, requiring require repair or replacement with some regularity. When they fail, they can adversely affect fish habitat by adding angular rock to the stream channel that can create beneficial habitat spaces for sculpin and other salmon predators. In addition, the broken metal baskets can entrap adult salmon causing injury or mortality. In the course of a tagging study that included sonic tags, MITFD staff found dozens of live and dead adult salmon an arm's length from the bank inside several failed gabion baskets in the lower Cedar project reach. These fish presumably were seeking hiding cover or slow velocity resting places and were unable to complete their migration and spawning cycle in the Cedar River. The gabions also create poor salmon habitat conditions in the lower Cedar River by eliminating the complex natural stream bank habitats characterized by low-velocity areas, vegetation, pools, and undercut banks that are preferred by juvenile and adult salmon and reducing bank sources for spawning gravel. When the gabion baskets in the project area need repair, other alternatives that provide bank stability and improve habitat conditions for salmon should be pursued. 5. Construction Noise- The project should seek to minimize disturbance to spawning sockeye and Chinook in the vicinity from construction activity, particularly any piling driving activity that may be needed. 6. Shoreline mitigation- We recognize that the project needs to comply with the City's Vegetation Conservation provisions from the Shoreline Master Program and there are limited opportunities to meet the 100 -foot vegetated shoreline buffer requirement. Per the CAR, the applicant is proposing to pay an "in -lieu -fee" to the City's Vegetation Conservation Fund, which needs to be set up. Further, the CAR identifies several potential sites and actions on page 14 where the in -lieu fee could be spent. We are keenly interested in seeing the lower Cedar River's riparian areas enhanced and request the opportunity to work closely with City staff for this project, as well as, the overall framework approach to implement the in -lieu program. For this project's in -lieu proposal, we would like to work with the City to verify the extent of the impact area; the proposed fee amount; and the mitigation project area. For example, the $1.25 per square foot rate may be too low and only cover the costs of acquiring and planting plants which may not be sufficient to actually plant areas if easements, acquisitions, and permits are needed. Once a rate is accepted by the City it is likely that others will seek to use the same rate, so it is important to ensure that the in -lieu rate is sufficient to cover all of the mitigation project costs. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses and coordination. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, (Caren Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE 3 Auburn, WA 9$492 253-876-3116 Vanessa Dolbee r � From: Griffith, Greg (DAHP) <Greg.Griffith@DAHP.WA.GOV> Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 4:26 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Kaehler, Gretchen (DAHP); Kramer, Stephenie (DAHP) Subject: Library Comment Letter Attachments: 1053_001.pdf Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Thank you Vanessa for taking the time to talk about the attached letter in pdf format. I appreciate your consideration of our comments, which we understand come to you after the SEPA comment time period has ended. Let Gretchen or myself know if you have any follow-up questions. Thanks Greg Griffith Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer Washington State Dept. of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 360-586-3073 re riffith dah .wa. ov My regularly scheduled office hours are Monday thru Friday, 8:00 am to 5:00 pm The Washington State Historic Preservation Plan is being updated. Contact me to get involved! 71 TDEPARTME NTOF 116iARCHAEOLOGY & HISTORIC PRESERVATION June 25, 2013 Greg Smith King County Library System 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, WA 98027 Vanessa Dolbee, Planner City of Renton 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 062013 -03 -KI Property: Renton Library - LUA 13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Re: Archaeology - Survey Requested Dear Mr. Smith and Ms. Dolbee: 't J Allyson Brooks Ph.D., Director Vots HMorlc Preservation Officer tit We have received the City of Renton's DNS -M materials for the proposed project referenced above. Question #13 of the SEPA checklist was missing information relevant to your review of the project. There are 10 recoded archaeological and historical resources within one mile of the project area, and several within less than 1/2 mile. Seven of these are archaeological sites and/or cemeteries. The Cedar River area has extremely high potential for archaeological resources. In the past, you may remember other projects in Renton that encountered archaeological resources during construction and experienced delays, including the High School and Henry Moses Aquatic Center. In order to avoid such complications during this project, a professional archaeological survey of the project area should be conducted prior to ground disturbing activities. This will identify and archaeological resources present and allow you to make plans to appropriately avoid, protect or conduct mitigation if impacts are necessary. We also recommend consultation with the concerned Tribes' cultural committees and staff regarding cultural resource issues. In addition to the comments above regarding archaeological resources, we note that the existing library building has drawn DAHP's interest from a historic architectural standpoint in being a good example of mid -20' Century modern architecture and landscape architecture. In the post - World War it era, the Library's modernist style and bold plan spanning the Cedar River clearly evoked the image of Renton as a growing, progressive city. As a result of the building being a good local example of this style and time -period, DAHP also recommends the Library Board, the City, and other interested partners explore ways to capture the building's contribution to local history into planning for the new building. This could happen through interpretive displays, landscaping, art, and perhaps recycling building elements in the Library's plans. State of Washington • Department of Archaeology S Historic Preservation P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 www.dohp.wo.gov In closing, just a reminder that if any federal funds or permits are involved, Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act, (as amended), and its implementing regulations, 36CFR800, must be followed. This is a separate process from SEPA and requires formai government -to - government consultation with the affected Tribes and this agency. These comments are based on the information available at the time of this review and on behalf of the State Historic Preservation Officer. Should additional information become available, our assessment may be revised. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project and we look forward to receiving the survey report. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (360) 586-3088 or Gretchen. Kaehler@dahp.wa.gov, Sincerely, Gretchen Kaehler Local Governments Archaeologist (360) 586-3088 Gretchen.kaehler(cDdahp.wa.aov cc: Laura Murphy Steve Mullen -Moses Dennis Lewarch Cecile Hansen Charlie Sundberg Phil Letourneau State of Washington • Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation P.Q_ Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 www.dahp.wa.gov DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY i 0k 1J, AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: June 25, 2013 TO: LUA13-000255, File FROM: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner and Stacy Tucker, Planning Secretary -JM, f SUBJECT: Renton Library at Liberty Park "revised" stamps Fix an error in date stamp: The "revised" stamps are the correct submittal stamp date. The March 1, 2013 stamp was in error. The documents that have a revised stamp and the March 1, 2013 date crossed out were submitted as noted on the "revised" stamp. hAcedlplanningkurrent planninglprojectsU 3-000255.vanessatdate stamp memo.docx or 0 Vanessa Dolbee /S -CtCfZS5 From: Chris Moore <cmoore@preservewa.org> Sent: Friday, June 21, 2013 9:40 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Subject: Renton Library Attachments: 062013-03-KI_062013.pdf Fallow Up Flag: Fallow up Flag Status: Flagged Hi Vanessa, Would you please forward the message below, with the attachment, to Chip Vincent. The only email I could find for him was an online form that does not allow attachments. He should have received the text below, but I'd like him to see the attached letter as well. And one other question for you — with the in -water work proposed for the library, has the Army Corps of Engineers been contacted to determine if a permit is needed from them? Thanks Vanessa -- I'm sure we'll touch base when I'm back in the office on July 1. Best, Chris Hi Chip, Sorry to be emailing on a Friday night, but I am out of town next week and wanted to be sure you received this message. When we spoke on Wednesday I mentioned that my interest in the Renton Library project was based on inquiries we received regarding the historic nature of the building. Under question 13 on the SEPA checklist, the question dealing with historic and cultural resources, the form indicated that none were present on the site. Yet yesterday I was copied on a letter from the state historic preservation office to the Friends of Cedar River Library that the library, along with the surrounding park and civic campus, is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (as I am unable to attach the letter to this form email, 1 will send it to Vanessa). Given this, it would be our hope that efforts were made to rehabilitate the existing library in a manner that is historically appropriate and would retain the structure's National Register -eligibility. Short of this, we would at least expect the MDNS for the project to be revised to include mitigation measures for loss of the historic structure. Such measures should include, but are not limited to, documentation of the library and National Register -eligible site, retention of certain features of the library, including character -defining features present in the interior, and a survey of other post-war resources in Renton to better understanding the legacy of the city's built environment. As mentioned, I will be returning to my office July 1. I'd be happy to discuss these ideas further at that time. Best, Chris Moore Field Director WA Trust for Historic Preservation CHRIS MOORE ( FIELD DIRECTOR WASHINGTON TRUST FOR HISTORIC PRESERVATION STIMSON-GREEN MANSION 1204 MINOR AVENUE SEATTLE, WA 98101 206.624.9449 (0) 206.930.5057 (C) 206.624.2410 (F) cmoore@preservewa.org www,preservewa.org 0 0 '00ARTMENT O 11114ARCHAEOLOGY & 11 HISTORIC PRESERVATION City of Renton Nicola Robinson, Treasurer Plannlnq Division Citizens to Save the Cedar River Library PO Box 1483 Renton, WA 98057-1483 JIUN 2 t 0'6 In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 062013 -03 -KI ID E. C Property: Renton Library & City Hall - DOE Re: Determined Eligible Dear Ms. Robinson: Allyson Brooks Ph.D., Director State Historic Preservation Officer June 20, 2013 Thank you for contacting our office. This is a follow up to your request to evaluate the eligibility of the downtown library building in Renton for potential listing on the National Register of Historic Places. After touring the site and conducting some additional research on my end regarding the construction of the library, I have determined that the building is ELIGIBLE for listing on the National Register of Historic Places. While the structure is not quite 50 years old, I believe that the building has exceptional significance in terms of its direct connection to the growth and development of the city of Renton in the post WWII era, as well as being a representative example of the noted architectural local architectural firm of Johnson -Campanella, who greatly shaped the built environment in Renton during the mid to late 20`" century. Note that the library is eligible as part of a larger complex (a small historic district) which includes the said building, the City Hall and the surrounding landscape elements designed by noted landscape architect Glen Hunt. I look forward to working with you on your effort to develop a National Register nomination for these properties. If listed, these would be the first National Register listed resources in Renton; an exciting prospect. National Register listing is strictly honorary with the goal of raising the public profile, celebrating the history, and formally documenting the building(s). Also note that for publically owned properties, owner consent is not required for listing. These comments are based on the information available at the time of this review and on behalf of the State Historic Preservation Officer. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Michael Houser State Architectural Historian (360) 586-3076 m1chael.houser(ZDdahp.wa.Aov CC: Chris Moore, WA Trust For Historic Preservation �y 5TAP, State of Washington • Department of Archaeology & Historic Preservation 4 s P.O. Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 • (360) 586-3065 www.dahp.wa.gov n � 'It' Vanessa Dolbee From: Vanessa Dolbee Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 3:39 PM To: 'Karen Walter' Cc. Terry Higashiyama; Peter Renner; Chip Vincent Subject: RE: Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, Mitigated Attachments: 13-0619 Memo - Muckleshoot.pdf; Technical Information Report - RLL SPR_2013-05-10.pdf; Renton Library Site Inspection Report WSE Jan 2013.pdf; JARPA LWD PLAN Cedar River Flood Pian Revision 2013.docx Karen, Thank you for submitting your comments on the Library at Liberty Park. Please find attached a memorandum from Muller Hull addressing your comments. Additionally, find attached the stormwater report and an additional study completed by Watershed Science & Engineering (referenced in the memorandum). The City received a copy of the wood management pian from the Boeing Company, attached. Could you please verify if this report is the report you are referring to in your comments. Before, we loop at creating a wood management plan we would like to make sure we are utilizing a document that the Tribe feels is high quality. Finally, to address your lighting concerns the following mitigation measure was added to the SEPA determination: The applicant shall design and place lighting so that it is shielded from impacting the Cedar Diver and at the some time balances necessary lighting for site safety standards. If you have any questions about the attachments or the SEPA determination please feel free to give me a call. Vanessa ,OoC&ee Senior Planner Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton Renton City Hall - 6th Floor 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7314 From: Karen Walter[mailto:KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us] Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:16 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Fisher, Larry D (DFW) Subject: Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, Mitigated Vanessa, We have reviewed the Notice of Application materials for the Renton Library redevelopment project referenced above. This project will remodel the existing library located over the Cedar River. When we met with City staff and the team in February 2013 we identified several issues for this project as noted below and offer recommendations 0 0 consulting t ry p J where we can based on the information reviewed to date: Artificial lighting- The checklist and the Critical Areas Report (CAR) discuss how the project will seek to reduce artificial lighting impacts in several ways. In addition to the measures proposed, we also recommend that the City use light bulbs which reduce artificial lighting opportunities to the Cedar River or nighttime sky. Previously, we provided information to City public Works staff about potential light bulb options that could be used. We also request a copy of the detailed site lighting plan for our review which is proposed to be part of the final construction plans. 2. Stormwater- We need additional information about the details as to how stormwater will be managed from redeveloped site, particularly for water quality. We request a copy of the Technical Information Report which likely contains the stormwater management details. 3. Wood management plan- At the February meeting, we indicated that the site should develop a wood management plan to deal with any wood that may approach or be entrained by the existing concrete piling in the Cedar River. This issue was not addressed in CAR. Wood management is needed to ensure that wood is not removed from the Cedar River or its banks unless it is absolutely necessary. Wood is shown being near the site from the photos the City provided in February. Wood may no longer be on or adjacent to the site with winter floods; however, the City should plan on wood transported to and through the site with time and future floods. It is timely to develop a wood management plan now as part of the redeveloped library. Please note that Boeing developed a wood management plan for its Cedar River bridges. We recommend that the City review it for applicability to the library site. 4. Gabion baskets- We understand that there is no bank work or modifications to the existing gabion baskets used to stabilize the river banks located on the site. Gabion baskets are subject to failure when exposed to streambed scour flows, requiring require repair or replacement with some regularity. When they fail, they can adversely affect fish habitat by adding angular rock to the stream channel that can create beneficial habitat spaces for sculpin and other salmon predators. In addition, the broken metal baskets can entrap adult salmon causing injury or mortality. In the course of a tagging study that included sonic tags, MITFD staff found dozens of live and dead adult salmon an arm's length from the bank inside several failed gabion baskets in the lower Cedar project reach. These fish presumably were seeking hiding cover or slow velocity resting places and were unable to complete their migration and spawning cycle in the Cedar River. The gabions also create poor salmon habitat conditions in the lower Cedar River by eliminating the complex natural stream bank habitats characterized by low- velocity areas, vegetation, pools, and undercut banks that are preferred by juvenile and adult salmon and reducing bank sources for spawning gravel. When the gabion baskets in the project area need repair, other alternatives that provide bank stability and improve habitat conditions for salmon should be pursued. 5. Construction Noise- The project should seek to minimize disturbance to spawning sockeye and Chinook in the vicinity from construction activity, particularly any piling driving activity that may be needed. B. Shoreline mitigation- We recognize that the project needs to comply with the City's Vegetation Conservation provisions from the Shoreline Master Program and there are limited opportunities to meet the 100 -foot vegetated shoreline buffer requirement. Per the CAR, the applicant is proposing to pay an `tin -lieu -fee" to the City's Vegetation Conservation Fund, which needs to be set up. Further, the CAR identifies several potential sites and actions on page 14 where the in -lieu fee could be spent. We are keenly interested in seeing the lower Cedar River's riparian areas enhanced and request the opportunity to work closely with City staff for this project, as well as, the overall framework approach to implement the in -lieu program. For this project's in -lieu proposal, we would like to work with the City to verify the extent of the impact area; the proposed fee amount; and the mitigation project area. For example, the $1.25 per square foot rate may be too low and only cover the costs of acquiring and planting plants which may not be sufficient to actually plant areas if easements, acquisitions, and permits are needed. Once a rate is accepted by the City it is likely that others will seek to use the same rate, so it is important to ensure that the in -lieu rate is sufficient to cover all of the mitigation project costs. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses and coordination, Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 Memorandum To: Vanessa Dolbee Date; June 19, 2013 Department of Community & Economic Development City of Renton From: Maaike Post, Project Manager Project: Renton Library at Liberty ParkProject No: 1107.1 ......... ............ .. ......... _............ . Subject: Comments from the Muckleshoot Tribe on land -use permit application materials Vanessa, Thank you for forwarding the comments from the Muckleshoot Tribe regarding the proposed renovation of the existing Renton Library. We have reviewed their concerns and recommendations with our consultant team and have the following responses: 1. Artificial Lighting - The scope of the Library Renovation project does not include improvements to the City parking lot on the west side of the building or the City park to the east. As such, existing site lighting in those areas is not being altered as a part of this project. - Any exterior lighting that is added as a part of the building renovation will likely be LED and will not be directed upwards into the night sky_ Similarly, any lighting proposed for the pedestrian bridge will be directed downwards onto the plaza area near the main entry, and not into the water. - In terms of interior lighting, our lighting designer will utilize photometric modeling to locate light fixtures back from the glazing to keep light contained within the building. 2. Stormwater A pdf copy of the Technical Information Report, prepared by CPL is attached to this memo, which addresses the questions regarding stormwater management. 3. Wood Management Plan -and - 4. Gabion Baskets - To mitigate possible environmental impacts due to the renovation, the project does not require work below or waterward of the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) or OHWM. There are no changes proposed to the existing concrete columns in the river, or the existing river banks. - The Cedar River and its banks are under the purview of the City of Renton. Any maintenance of the river, its banks, and any associated mitigation measures should be coordinated with the City of Renton. - An analysis performed in January 2013 by Watershed Science & Engineering has found "a number of minor scour and erosion problems, but none that appear to threaten the structural integrity of the library. Itis our opinion that corrective actions should take place as part of routine maintenance performed by the City rather than as part of the library renovation project." Their complete analysis is attached for your reference. S. Construction Noise - Auger cast piles are necessary to bring the existing building into compliance with current seismic code. These piles will be located to the southeast and northwest of the existing building, landward of the river banks. (The use of these piles was the preferred solution as it avoided improvements to the existing columns within the BFE and OHWM, potentially causing more river and habitat disturbance) - Auger cast piles involve less noise and less vibration than traditional piles, as they are installed by drilling a deep cylindrical hole which concrete is then pumped into. This eliminates the hammer impact noise and vibration associated with driving piles. The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP Contact Polson Building T. 206.682-6837 71 Columbia Street - 6°i Floor F: 206.682-5692 Seattle, WA 96104 www.millerhull com Addressee. Subject Page 2 of 2 - The design team will work with environmental consultants, the general contractor, and the City of Renton to find the most appropriate time/duration for this work, in terms of soil stability and environmental impact. b. Shoreline Mitigation The in -lieu -fee amount proposed is not intended to fully finance a complete mitigation project. Just as mitigation bank credits buy into and finance a piece of a much larger mitigation bank, the in -lieu fee amount calculated for the Renton Library project was intended to contribute to a portion of the City's Vegetation Conservation Fund. This fund, in combination with other contributions, would fund one or more large restoration/enhancement projects along the lower Cedar River within the city limits of Renton. The proposed in -lieu -fee amount was calculated based on impact area, not the anticipated cost of any individual restoration/enhancement project. Ideally, the City would focus first on projects located on City -owned property where acquisition costs would not be incurred, such as the Jones Park property. Regards, Maaike Post Project Manager The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP cc: Greg Smith Adrianne Ralph Ruth Baleiko Attachments: Technical Information Report, dated May 10", 2013, prepared by Coughlin Porter Lundeen, submitted to COR on 5/10 Cedar River Scour and Erosion Inspection at Renton Library, dated January 23, 2013, prepared by Watershed Science & Engineering 1lmhfiles2%ProjectslRenton Library at Liberty Park\Documents104-Agenciesl. 002 Land Use Applications113-0619 response to Muckleshoot comments113-0619 Memo - Mvckleshoot.docx1107 �1 u CEDAR RIVER FLOOD RESPONSE PLAN i (revised) February 22 2013 [THIS FLOOD PLAN FOCUSES ON BOEING'S RESPONSE TO THE CEDAR RIVER. IT ALSO CONTAINS A FLOOD EVACUATION PLAN FOR THE RENTON SITE. UNCONTROLLED WHEN PRINTED ] Renton Site Flood Response Plan and Flood Evacuation Plan a Renton Site 0 Flood Response Plan and Flood Evacuation Plan Table of Contents Section 1: Quick Reference Section a) Flood Conditions/Phases b) South Boeing Bridge Gage c) Useful "links" (National Weather Service, etc.) Section 2: Flood Response Plan a4 N c) Cedar River Gage Readings d4 e) North Boeing Bridge Control Plan 0 g) Flood/bridge emergency procedures/call in list. h) South bridge%ontacts and telephone list. 4 P k) -Section 3. Boeing Fire Department Response Section 4: Post Flood information R.M. • w Section 1: Quick Reference Section a M a) Flood Conditions/Phases CEDAR RIVER Flood Conditions/Phases Conditions. Heavy rain, significant snow melt, or Chester Morse Phase 1 Dam conditions. Weather forecast indicates that the Cedar River has the potential to flood. The river level at the south bridge gage has reached 18 feet — 6 inches. Actions: Facilities will begin to monitor the following: River conditions at the south bridge and hydrographs at Renton and Landsberg. Debris flowing downstream. Notify Construction Management to obtain equipmentloperator for debris removal on the north bridge. At least 24 hours prior to raising bridge notify Field Maintenance/Preflight Senior Manager Notify Boeing Security/Fire Protection/Site Services Mgm't Notify City of Renton Airport Manager Conditions: The river level at the south bridge ,➢� 1. � F F`� Actions: At least 4 hours prior to raising the bridge the Facilities flood control manager will notify the following: • Field Maintenance/Preflight Senior Manager. Any plane left on Apron D might be required to remain there a minimum of 2 weeks. • Boeing Security/Fire protection/Site Services Management • City of Renton surface water and utility manager. • Construction Management for contractorlheavy equipment. • City of Renton Airport Manager Conditions: The river level at the south bridge gage has reached 20'- 0" or corresponding rating on the "rating table memo" indicates action is required. Large pieces of debris have been Phase 3 observed floating downstream towards the north bridge. Actions: The Facilities flood control manager will initiate the process of raising the south bridge. Closing the flood gates and supporting the gates with sandbags will occur when the river has reached a gage reading of 21'-6". In addition to b) S making all required notifications to the Renton site. Stage Fire Dept. equipment on West side of South Bridge. REFERENCE THE FLOOD PLAN FOR DETAILS a a Table 1—Flood Phase Information King County Flood I 2 3 4 Warning Phase 0 • Discharge at 1,000 2,800 3,500 4,200 Landsburgt to to to and (cfs) 2,800 3,500 4,200 Above Note: 1. Discharge corresponds to USGS gage 12117500 at Landsburg. Table 2 - Flood Frequency and Rating Table Information Flood Eventt'3 Flow at Landsburg for t = 0 hrs4 (cfs Flow at Renton for t = 4 hrs4 efs Flood Stage at South Boeing Bridge for t = 4 hrs ft NAVD Corresponding King County Flood Warning Phase 1.01 1,020 1,350 21.5 1 1.05 1,230 1,620 21.8 1 1.11 1,390 1,810 22.0 1 1.25 1,640 2,110 22.4 1 2 2,370 3,000 23.2 1 5 3,720 4,600 24.5 3 10 4,880 5,940 25.3 4 20 6,220 7,470 26.2 4 50 8,340 9,860 27.5 4 100 10,300 12,000 28.4 4 200 12,500 14,500 29.5 4 Notes: 1. A 100 -yr flood event represents a 11100 chance or .01 percent probability that this event will occur in any given year. 2. The South Boeing Bridge low chord elevation is 25.3 ft NAVD, which corresponds to a Landsburg flow of about 4,870 cfs and Renton Flow of 5930 cfs. 3. The South Boeing Bridge "Warning" elevation is 24.3 ft NAVD, which corresponds to a Landsburg flow of about 3,580 cfs and Renton Flow of 4,440 cfs. 4. These values were obtained from the City of Renton and represent the same flows used in last year's analysis 5. Flow values are based on results of a Log Pearson Type III analysis (King County, 2000). c) Useful "links" (National Weather Service, etc.) • • -King County Flood Warning Center (206) 296-4535 or 1-800-768-7932 or http://dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/flood/flood.htm --Recorded Flood Information (206) 296-8200 or 1-800-945-9263 Section 2: Flood Response Plan a • First Response All required personnel will respond to assist in any manner required to control the flood. This will be Boeing employees and Construction personnel (Partners). Facilities management will assign duties as needed. Maintaining Maintaining all flood activity will be done by required personnel and the Partners will be instructed to maintain both (south & north) bridge operations, this activity will be determined by Facilities Management. Clean Up Operations All cleaning up efforts will be done by both Boeing employees and the Partners. Facilities Management will assign duties as needed. Right Click to open links below: �^ ''Security and Fire Protection *National Weather Service Advanced Hydrolopic Prediction Service -U.S. Army Corps of Engineers *City__of Renton lnfonnafion *KInQ County Flood Information *Washington State Emergent Management Division Useful Information below: Recorded River gauge readings call: (206) 296- 8200, press 2 for specific river flow data. Updated information can be obtained from the King County Flood Center (206) 296-4535 or 1- 800-768-7932. The "duty officer" number is: (206) 296-3830. The K.C. Flood Center will follow the below listed phases: Phase 1: An alert will go out. Phase 2: Opening the flood warning center 2417. Phase 3: Issue a 2nd warning and begin Patrol of flooding areas. Phase 4: Issue a 3rd public warning. Section 2 continued: cj Cedar River Gage Readings When the Cedar River reaches "imminent' flood levels, the gage reading shall be taken to monitor the water level. The gage readings shall be taken using the scale located on the south west corner of the Apron D bridge. The gage will be used to assist in the determining when certain critical tasks should take place in order to minimize the impact of flooding to the Renton site. The responsibilities to monitor flood gage readings are as follows: 1) Primary: Uniformed Security/Field Patrol: will make "one hour" checks of the flood gage when conditions warrant them. The water level reports will be made to the Security & Fire Protection dispatcher. 2) Secondary: Fire Department personnel on the field will monitor the water level. 3) Site Services: Facilities Manager identified as the "flood plan" owner. This person has the responsibility to monitor gages and initiate the elevation of the south bridge as required. They make immediate notifications to personnel on the south bridge contact list. They also establish a plan that identifies a contractor to be positioned on the north bridge for debris removal. 4) Preflight Senior Manager: management personnel on the flight line will assist in monitoring the water level on the south bridge gage. e) North Boeing Bridge Control Plan The following plan is intended for use during the flood season. At other times the lower water level in the Cedar River typically allows debris to pass under the bridge structure without becoming trapped. Upon the water level reaching the flood stage, Facilities management will activate this plan and closely monitor conditions at the North Bridge. Regardless of the river conditions, Boeing personnel inspect for foreign object debris (FOD) on the bridge deck and in the river, and mitigate the risk posed by the FOD, before transporting an aircraft across the bridge. 1) Facilities/Construction Management will have an established plan to identify and retain a contractor to remove any debris that could cause damage to the north bridge or its support pilings. Large woody debris (LWD) shall not be removed from the river. Personnel and equipment shall be used to dislodge it from the bridge structure, pilings or abutments and redirect it into the river channel so that it can continue to move downstream into Lake Washington. The contractor shall operate the equipment from the shore or bridge deck and will not allow personnel or equipment (except for the working end of the track hoe) to enter the river at any time. 2) The contractor will need to comply with any safety plan requirements deemed necessary by the Boeing Company. Operations on the west side of the Cedar River must be coordinated with the City of Renton Airport Manager. Below is a list containing potential equipment for safe debris removal: Operations person/contact name and telephone numbers. Thumb Track Hoe Operator (Contractor) Front Loader Operator (Contractor) Spotter (also provides other support/wearing PFD) Truckldumpster for debris removal (non LWD) if necessary. All personnel, including the Contractor that is on the bridge, must have Personal Flotation Device (PFD). Note: when phase 2of the flood plan is in effect all "wing walkers" will wear PFD'S while escorting aircraft across the north bridge. The PFD's will be provided by pre-flight. 3) Boeing Fire Dept. will monitor activity on the north bridge as needed. 4) Uniformed Security will staff the north bridge access point to the Renton site 24 hours a day, seven days a week or until support is no longer required. M g) Flood and Bridge Emergency Procedures/Call in List Steps to follow in the event a flood emergency or bridge emergency occurs. (1) Report the emergency to the Security and Fire Protection Dispatcher at (206) 655-8800. (2) Report the emergency to the on duty Facilities Supervisor. (3) Notify Facilities Dispatcher at. (4) Contact the emergency call in people. (5) Notify Facilities supervisors: (6) Notify the Preflight Senior Manager; City of Renton Contacts Renton Airport Manager Renton Airport Manager F.A.A. Tower Surface Water Emergency Management Fish Biologist Ryan Zulauf Jonathan Wilson David Gildea Ron Straka 425 430-7471 425 430-7471 (206) 764 6632 425 430-7205 Deborah Needham 425 430-7027 Kelly Kiyohara 360-902-2797 206 423-3716 206 423-0087 206 714-2594 206-949-8029 0 Dept. of Fish And Wildlife King County Contacts • 600 Capitol Way North Olympia, WA 98509 King County Flood Warning Center 206 296-4535 or 9-800-768-7932 j) Contractor Information/Current Contract Construction Management will provide a list of potential qualified contractors for debris removal at the north bridge. A copy of the "contract service request" will also be provided. Post contractor information below as applicable. a a Section 3: Boeing Fire Department Response These instructions apply to all uniformed firefighters assigned to the Renton facility during flooding conditions along the Cedar River. Purpose: to establish procedures to prevent accidents and provide operational guidelines for the safe rescue of personnel from the Cedar River during the removal of debris during high water conditions. Operating Instruction: 1) Notification will be made to the City of Renton Fire Dept. that the Boeing Fire Department rescue boat is positioned on the south end of Lake Washington. 2) As determined by the Fire Department a rescue line will be stretched across the Cedar River in strategic locations to assist with any potential rescue. 3) Determine if adequate lighting is available on or near the south and north bridges. 4) The Fire Dept. will assign a Safety Officer (Facilities Manager/Fire Dept.) for all bridge operations. This person is responsible for the following: a. Conduct a safety briefing for all personnel working on the bridge. b. Oversee the debris removal operations and stop any actions deemed unsafe. c. Establish a personnel accountability system for all personnel that are working on the bridge. d. Ensure that all personnel operating on the bridge deck have a PERSONAL FLOTATION DEVICE (PFD), hard hat and emergency locator light. 5) If any individual that is working on/near the bridge accidentally falls into the river, all personnel must notify "971 ". a) The individual should attempt to self rescue. b) If self rescue fails, the individual should position themselves in the center of the river, feet facing downstream, floating on their back. c) AT NO TIME WILL UNTRAINED FIRE DEPT. PERSONELL ENTER THE WATER TO PERFORM A RESCUE. 1�1 Section 3: continued Emergency Response: 10 Boeing Fire Department Flood Response Procedures 1) Immediately upon observing or receiving notification that an individual is in the river the Fire Dept. will immediately notify Boeing Fire Dispatch of the situation. Boeing Fire Dispatch will in turn notify Valley Communications for a water rescue emergency response. Firefighters will attempt to follow the individual down stream and advise other responders of their location. Rescue efforts will be coordinated through Incident Command System (ICS) practices. AT NO TIME WILL UNTRAINED FIRE DEPT. PERSONELL ENTER THE WATER TO PERFORM A RESCUE. Section 4:Post Flood Information Monitor water levels and new bulletins until the river level is below flood stage. Depending on the severity of the flood conditions and at the discretion of the flood control manager, the following activities may be initiated. Bridge Inspection Both north and south bridges must be inspected for structural damage before aircraft can be towed across them. Water level must be down to be inspected by a structural engineer. WATERSHED SCIENCE & ENGINEERING 110 Prefontaine Place South, Suite 508 Seattle, WA 98104 206-521-3000 January 23, 2013 Ruth Baleiko, AIA, Principal The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP 71 Columbia Street - 6th Floor Seattle, WA 98104 206-254-2013 Re: Cedar River Scour and Erosion Inspection at Renton Library Watershed Science and E=ngineering (WSE) traveled to the Renton Library on January 15, 2013 to examine the condition of the Cedar River channel beneath the library structure. The purpose of the visit was to determine if there are any scour and erosion issues that should be addressed as part of the library renovation project. WSE's inspection found a number of minor scour and erosion problems, but none that appear to threaten the structural integrity of the library. It is our opinion that corrective actions should take place as part of routine maintenance performed by the City rather than as part of the library renovation project. The following discussion summarizes our observations and recommendations. Figure 1 and site photos are included at the end of this letter to illustrate findings. South Bank The south bank under the library is protected by a series of rock filled gabion baskets (wire cages filled with rock riprap, see Photos 2 and 3). Bank protection consists of two parts -- a low gabion wall at the edge of the river channel and a much taller stepped wall ten feet landward. Between the two walls is a flat bench of rock riprap spalls. The bank above the stepped gabion wall is covered with shotcrete to prevent erosion. The protection along the south bank is generally in good condition, with the following exceptions: 1. A 30 -foot long section of the gabion wall at the edge of the channel has been damaged. The wire baskets have split open and the rock has fallen into the river channel (Figure 1, Photos 3, 4, and 5). 2. Both gabion walls and the bench between them have settled in a number of places, and several small packets of local scour have eroded material at the base of the taller, stepped, wall (Photo 6). Corrective maintenance does not appear to be needed at this time; however, the City should monitor both settlement and erosion during future routine inspections. 3. Minor scour has occurred along the toe of the concrete maintenance ramp at the southwest corner of the library (Figure 1 and Photo 7). Continued erosion would undermine the toe of the ramp, and the concrete may break if driven over by a vehicle or heavy machinery. 4. The library is supported on two rows of six intermediate concrete columns, one row near the south edge of the channel and the other near the north. A significant accumulation of woody debris is present on the upstream column of the south row (Photo 8). It should be removed. The debris is deflecting flow north which has caused a local scour hole to form riverward of the column. This hole is visible in the topographic contours in Figure 1. The riverbed surrounding the column has also experienced minor scour which has partially undermined the 30 -foot long section of the gabion baskets that have failed. This scour likely contributed to the failure of the gabion baskets. North Bank No bank protection structures are present along the north river bank. The bank is comprised of consolidated sand/gravel/cobble till -type material that has experienced minor erosion. The bank has held up well over time, and the top edge remains 10 to18 feet riverward of the library's north abutment wall, so there is currently no threat to the library structure (Photos 9 and 10). Minor scour and erosion problems that were observed include: 1. Local erosion in the sand/gravel/cobble bank material at two stormwater downspout outlets (Figure 1 and Photos 10 and 11). 2. Erosion along the bank beneath an old concrete rubble planter box located at the upstream edge of the library (Figure 1 and Photo 12). Parts of the wall have failed and other parts will topple into the river in the future. We suggest removing the planter box and if necessary replacing it with something that is not so close to the river bank. 3. Wood debris has accumulated at the upstream column of the north pier, and should be removed. The amount of debris is less than is present at the south pier. Pier Foundation Scour In May 2000, the City of Renton Capital Project Coordinator Lesley Wiscomb retained Northwest Hydraulic Consultants Inc. (NHC) to review a scour evaluation report prepared for the Library by Alpha Engineering Group Inc. At the time, Jeff Johnson was a principal with NHC and is the technical expert that completed the review - the results of which were summarized in a May 23, 2000 letter report to the City. WSE does not have a copy of this letter and therefore cannot append it to this document. If a copy is desired, one should be available from the City. NHC's review led to the following conclusions and recommendations which are direct quotes taken from the letter. It is the opinion of WSE that conditions within the river channel under the library have not changed significantly since 2000 and therefore the conclusions remain valid today. 1. It is my [NHC/Jeff Johnson] opinion that the pier footings are not a risk for current channel conditions; therefore, no mitigation measures are recommended for either intermediate pier at this time. 2. The City should monitor river bed levels under the Library using the annual survey data that will be collected to monitor the impacts of the dredging project. 3. Visual inspections of the piers should be made following all major floods. 4. Woody debris that accumulates on the piers should be removed following each flood. If the debris is not removed, much larger accumulations could form during the next flood which could increase the potential for scour and erosion significantly. 5. Protect the right (east) bank under the Library to stop erosion and to protect the abutments. [Note: The City chose not to protect the bank and it has remained relatively stable since 2000, therefore, monitoring rather than countermeasure installation continues to be the appropriate approach at this time.] 0 Thank you for the opportunity to assist the Library Renovation Design team with this very interesting project. If you, the client, or any member of the design team has questions, please do not hesitate to have them contact WSE. Very truly yours, Watershed Science & Engineering, Inc. 4#�� Jeff P. Johnson, P.E. President Enclosures ChrisrFr ei, P.E. Hydraulic Engineer Photo 1. Viewing southeast to the Renton Library over the Cedar River from the Bronson Way Bridge. Photo 2. Viewing southeast along the south bank of the Cedar River under the library. Bank protection consists of a gabion retaining wall at the edge of the channel, a 10 -foot wide rock spall bench, and a tall stepped gabion wall. The exposed slope above the tall gabion wall is covered with shotcrete to prevent erosion. Photo 3. Viewing south standing atop the spall bench on the south bank. A 30 -foot long section of the river edge gabion wall has failed and the rock has been released into the channel. Photo 4. Viewing north showing a close-up of a section of the damaged gabion basket wall. Photo 5. Grid (6 -inch squares) atop a section of damaged gabion basket wall. Photo 6. Minor erosion/undermining at the base of the tall stepped gabion wall. Photo 9. Viewing northwest along the north bank beneath the library. The bank is unprotected, however, the bank consists of a consolidated material that has experienced some erosion, but not enough to threaten the structural integrity of the north abutment. Photo 10. Viewing southwest along the top of the south bank_ The top of the bank is 10 to 18 feet from the library abutment. One of two storm drainpipes is exposed (upper right in photo) and projects approximately three feet out of the bank. Photo 11. Local erosion at the outlet of the storm drain that is located at the northwest corner of the library. Photo 12. Erosion beneath a historical concrete rubble flower box that is located at the northeast corner of the Library. Erosion has caused most of the wall to fail but this does not threaten the library structure. Photo 13. Debris accumulation on the upstream column of the north pier group. • • C� N N C 4 D C 7 L Q`) O O L O W N n U5 o C_ 3 m r O N N pp Eo N IV O OO C NG N O h O 1- C Ol w �Ov0GO In V O O E O cq mac") V u7 i()NNNf*) m r O r 0 0 0 0 V E� O _� ON06) 00 r N {Y O O C 0 p p G C. 0 O U E fl} N N (D 4� co'.0 w u] 1n m N C Z C) cq D no N m OihQNC7aCaDNm 0,- 00 n rn y N Q h 00 IN+A p1=9C L C (d Q O N } te a n n00 O a7 N N N Q G � O E N N N N N Cl N N o E a C X LU N a O l4 O U }'� d N4 Q t of OOOOOr 000oOo00 LU O L A.3 E � C 0 o . m E E1°E o0o0000T Q z E m m is w m 0) G ip O C 0 CD cl - 4 Q 00000000 Z CL x 41 N CID E [p o r O r o G o y rn Uma � Y -,"-D- G+O onpp OOp00 r4 T :3X ., ov000000 o 6) 3 0 r c N N N N N N N N N `- C N y N@ y W v N N N O .N ~ O V 4) Q q) V 0 N N N 4 L p m ane-nnaQa. 8 '62-20� 0 0 0 0 0 y d 0 0 0 UUUUUUUU a E' E8r C U) LC) 0 (O 1� f- 1- O) W 0 0 G O© 0 O O •G ,C N m iii 1pp p� 47 G �4V N M N m O . C CLL [3m�M�[O r.-N`NNNr N u� u� C 7 O d Q 2 a a nF (O 61 v 1+ o 0 0 0 0 o a o o m N q`) _ a V dtit A O p c m m 3_ m2 m sn C o y cu t5 ¢ d O 3 H= N 0 W� N 41 Qt d d'Q' L�Q'W�'� a N E M V E E O C M 0 Q {m6 'j ¢�j Qy L3 p C U G o Co 1�0 L a7 a O b Y Y .(D C O O C C J y J J C GG3 cu L L a N ig O N m O D L L L b E O m E U Q � d❑ 150 2❑ O N G) .0 E Om {{LL f- 0 co U) co m w L ,F s} w fit) 0g 1� G+ phi RM� N 3 O CO O �f) r0 T) in N Q 1 L tea 4 G'E C m In Z 2 N „O q� :G z a y y o o a� o O 12") c n a CL �+ � m E ¢ � E r U o 2) Xv p N p Q C a N N w 7 D y C I cy aai t E m c o c�i" a O L C S T 4l a1 O fD m — W E R ��7 e-a� — N C m u O m_ Q Et w E .T 3 E� m E(DE, C In c9 = N G cc 'JS— o 2 �C,Nn O� U�M��vrnY)62a +!� m .C�myN„U)� CL~ -b— `Q .moi 3 t6 dd�UMN2.0ca f/)N • city of OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION AND PUBLIC HEARING ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS -M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECT NAME: Renton Library at Llberty Park PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-000255, ECF, SA -H LOCATION: 100 Mill Avenue 5 DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall, the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 15,680 SF following renovations. The site's zoning is primarily Center Downtown (CD). The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope, and installation of new envelope and associated site Improvements. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one tree is proposed to be retained. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, Regulated Material Survey, Geotechnical Engineering Study, Technical Information Report. The site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the state and a habitat conservation area. 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 July 5, 2013, 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 RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THE 7TH FLOOR OF CITY HALL, 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON JULY 9, 2013 AT 9:00 AM TO CONSIDER THE SITE PLAN, IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, THE APPEAL WILL BE HEARD AS PART OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING, FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF RENTON, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT (425) 430-7204. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. City of NOTICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION AND PUBLIC HEARING ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED [DNS -M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION PROJECTNAME: Renton Library at liberty Park PROJECT NUMBER: LUA134MO255, ECF, SA -H LOCATION: 200 MIII Avanut S nESCRIPTC`H The applicant h requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Heating Examiner Site Plan Aaelew, and a Shorallne Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the ealating Raman Main Library I= at 1GG MIII Ave. S, The 22.4M SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar RWer and is located across three different parcels Lscluding Liberty Part and the parking lot on the south ride orthe Ceder River. Overall, the area OF work would Impact 37,a3d SF antl the remodeled Ifbrary wwld be 19,690 5F following rerw 1111 The site's lorim, Is Primarily Gntar Dawntawn IC01. The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition or exhting building enaelope, and Installation of new envelope and associated Ote Improvements. The existing vehicular access and parking Is not proposed to be changed. All but one nee is proposed to be retained. The applI.nt submitted the FuIII studies wFth the applketIon: a Strum stutly and Habitat Gets Repoli, Regulated Material Survey, Geotechntcef EnglneerJng Study, Technical Information Report. The she Is Jocated Fn the Aquifer protection Zone 1, Rood hazard area, Shsrellna of the state and a habitat eonse—thin area. THE CTY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE IERCI HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeals of the smVlronmemai determinatlon must be Filed In writing an or before 5:oo p.m. on July 5, 2013, together with the required fee with: Hearing Examiner, Qty of Renton, 2055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 91113S7, Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of RMC 4-8-110 and Infarmatlan regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clark's Office, (425} 43"SSG. A PUBLIC HEARING WELL BEHELDBY THE RENTON HEARING EXAMINER AT HIS REGULAR MEETING IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS ON THE 77H FLOOR OF CITY HALL, 1055 SOUTH GRADY WAY, RENTON, WASHINGTON, ON JULY 9, 2013 AT 9:00 AM TO CONSIDER THE SITE PLAN. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, THE APPEAL WILL, BE HEARD AS PRAT OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CONTACT THE CTTY OF REN TDN, DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY &ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AT 2430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION. CERTIFICATION I, & SOL "U--- , hereby certify that S copies of the above document were posted in conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date:_L,_ XClfI_� Signed: 1!11 Q_ �n STATE OF WASHINGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) certify that I [snow, 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: NNN � lilrlrr,` Notary Public in and for the State of Washington .� rr �r'#`'a `, Notary (Print): s say My appointment expires: -16j3 .. CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 21st day of lune, 2013, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing ERC Determination documents. This information was sent to: xx m..."."� y'� �y `y.��'xGY::f ;:5 :......,e.....i?i}.�':�• E.c " € { 7 ./��✓�y ......_......,..". ." Ear. �'—_........._.. ....".". .....,.. € ......_"�,.._... Agencies See Attached Maaike Post Contact Greg Smith Applicant City of Renton Owner David Keyes Party of Record Teri Hallauer Party of Record Beth Asher Party of Record (signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON 10 +o*AR f SS 5 COUNTY OF KING � i r�lrsy iObl>Rv" I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker 'fff aPWASkk'� ,y, signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act %A"p&rhd purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: .� Nota4 Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): H A c cl, c, My appointment expires: c' Renton• erty Park + + 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 — 172"d Avenue SF 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 39015 172nd 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 2015. 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 Oakesd ale 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 Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application_ **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov template - affidavit of service by mailing Denis Law City of I< �'�tL MayorD_1� - —WLJ June 21, 2013. Department of Community and Economic Development C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Maaike Post The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP 71 Columbia Street, 6t" Floor Seattle, WA 98104 SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Dear Mr. Post: This letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) to advise you that they have completed their review_Ofthe subject project and have issued.a threshold Determination of Non -Significance -Mitigated with Mitigation Measures. Please refer to the enclosed ERC Report, for a list of the Mitigation Measures. Appeals of the environmental determination must :be fled.in writing on or before 5:00 . p.m. on July S, 2013, 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 RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. Also, a public hearing has been scheduled by the Hearing Examiner in the Council Chambers on the seventh floor of City Hall on July 9; 2013 at 9:00 a.m. to consider the Site Plan. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff recommendation will be mailed to you prior to the.hearing. -If the Environmental Determination is appealed, the appeal will be heard as part-ofthis public hearing: If you have any further questions, please call me at (425) 430-7314. For the Environmental Review Committee, o1buz, Vanessa,Dolbee Senior Planner Enclosure cc: City of Renton / Owner(s) Greg Smith - KCL.S / Applicant Beth Asher, Teri Hanauer, David Keyes / Party(ies) of Record Renton City Hall • 1055 South Grady Way Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov . 0 Denis Law City of. Mayor Aft June 21, 2013 Department of Community and Economic Development C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administrator Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Subject: ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPAJ THRESHOLD DETERMINATION QD Transmitted herewith is a copy of the Environmental Determination for the following project reviewed by the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on June 17, 2013: SEPA DETERMINATION: Determination of Non -Significance Mitigated (DNSM) PROJECT NAME: Renton Library at Liberty Park PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 5, 2013, 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 RMC 4-8-110 and information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the 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) 430-7314. For the Environmental Review Committee, L Vanessa Dolbee Senior 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 Renton City Hall 9 1055 South Grady Way 0 Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov 0 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY D Q ctyof AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT]�C�Q DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNSM) MITIGATION MEASURES AND ADVISORY NOTES PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H APPLICANT: Greg Smith, King County Library System PROJECT NAME: Renton Library at Liberty Park PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall, the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The site's zoning is primarily Center Downtown (CD). The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope, and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one tree is proposed to be retained. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, Regulated Material Survey, Geotechnical Engineering Study, Technical Information Report. The site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the state and a habitat conservation area. PROJECT LOCATION: 100 Mill Avenue S LEAD AGENCY: The City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division MITIGATION MEASURES: 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013 and revised May 10, 2013. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by GeoEngineers, dated December 20, 2012. 3. The applicant shall design and place lighting so that it is shielded from impacting the Cedar River and at the same time balances necessary lighting for site safety standards. i ADIVISORY NOTES: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Plate 1. RMC section 4-4-030.C.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. 2. Commercial, multi -family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. 5. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 6. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING — Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (501. Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. Plan Review —Sanitary Sewer: 1. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an 8 -inch sewer main in Mill Avenue South with a manhole at the intersection with South 2"d Street. The existing sewer service connection extends southerly to this main. 2. The project is required to cut and cap the existing side sewer at the property line as part of the demolition permit. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 2 of 4 0 0 3. A new side sewer is shown on the preliminary drawings and shall be installed to the updated building as condition of the building permit. Plan Review—Storm Drainage: 1. The FEMA approved 100 -year base flood elevation at the Renton Library over the Cedar River is elevation 39.62 based upon the NAVD 88 Datum per the FEMA approved 2006 Cedar River Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) Case No. 06-10-B596P. 2. The Library is located over the floodway of the Cedar River and any work within the floodplain or the floodway would have to comply with City adopted flood hazard regulations in the Critical Areas Ordinance and FEMA National Flood Insurance Program regulations. This also includes compliance with the National Marine Fisheries Biological Opinion Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives regarding the National Flood Insurance Program compliance with the Endangered Species Act, as they relate to development in the FEMA floodplain. 3. FEMA regulations require that when a structure is located in the 100 -year floodplain, any substantial improvements (i.e. when cost of improvements exceeds 50% of the appraised value of the structure) require the structure to be brought up to current floodplain development standards. Any improvements within the floodplain or floodway, such as placement of fill, piers or supports as part of the seismic retrofit work within the floodplain or floodway, will need to comply with FEMA floodplain requirements. 4. The applicant must show the 100 -year base flood elevation (39.62 NAVD 88 Datum) on the construction plans. 5. A drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the site plan application. The report complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. A final TIR is required with the building permit. Plan Review —Transportation/Street: 1. A 12 -foot sidewalk with cut-outs for street trees is not required to be constructed with the project. 2. A traffic study was not required for this project as the use is the same with a smaller building. Plan Review — General Comments: 1. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. Separate permits are required for the water meter installation, side sewer connection, and storm water connection. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 3 of 4 0 0 Fire: 1. The fire hydrant and fire flow requirements for the proposed library are adequate as they exist. 2, The existing automatic fire sprinkler system will be required to be modified for any tenant improvement work. 3. The existing fire department apparatus access roads are adequate. 4. The existing automatic fire alarm system shall be replaced with an all new system as the existing system cannot meet current fire code requirements. System shall be fully addressable and full detection is required. 5. Exiting shall meet all current building and fire code requirements. Police: Recommendations: Due to the renovation vs. new construction, this review would be better served by a security survey following the completion of the improvement project. CFS would remain about the same since there will be no additional structural space added. ERC Mitigation Measures and Advisory Notes Page 4 of 4 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENTAL (SEPA) DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE - MITIGATED (DNS -M) PROJECT NUMBER: LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H APPLICANT: Greg Smith, King County Library System PROJECT NAME: Renton Library at Liberty Park PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall, the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The site's zoning is primarily Center Downtown (CO). The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope, and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one tree is proposed to be retained. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, Regulated Material Survey, Geotechnical Engineering Study, Technical Information Report. The site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the state and a habitat conservation area. PROJECT LOCATION: 100 Mill Avenue S LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Environmental Review Committee Department of Community & Economic Development The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4- 9-070D Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. 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 July 5, 2013. Appeals must be filet{ 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 RMC 4-8-110 and more information may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: June 21, 2013 DATE OF DECISION: June 17, 2013 SIGNATURES: 44ee Administrator Gregg Zi m r aErtment Mar Petersa , Administrator Date Public Works D Date Fire & Emergency Services Terry Higashlyama, Administrator C.E. "Chip" Vincent, Administra Community Services Department Date Department of Community & Economic Date Development DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY 7., of _ AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT L� C����r�l ENVIRONMENTAL. REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA TO: Gregg Zimmerman, Public Works Administrator Terry Higashiyama, Community Services Administrator Mark Peterson, Fire & Emergency Services Administrator C.E. "Chip" Vincent, CED Administrator FROM: Jennifer Henning, Current Planning Manager MEETING DATE: Monday, June 17, 2013 TIME: 3:00 p.m. LOCATION: Sixth Floor Conference Room #620 Renton Library at Liberty Park (Vanessa Oolbee) LUAI3-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Location: 100 Mill Avenue S Description: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall, the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The site's zoning is primarily Center Downtown (CD). The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope, and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one tree is proposed to be retained. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, Regulated Material Survey, Geotechnical Engineering Study, Technical Information Report. The site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the state and a habitat conservation area. cc: D. Law, Mayor J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer D. Jacobson, Deputy PW Administrator -Transportation N. Watts, Development Services Director L. Warren, City Attorney I Phil Olbrechts, Hearing Examiner D. Pargas, Assistant Fire Marshal® J. Medzegian, Council DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY cityof AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT — f r r i !�1TIi��I►i►�1.X11►��h:T��ll�►��[�I�]►�il►�il`i���:»1�1;�1 ERC MEETING DATE: June 17, 2013 Project Name: Renton Library at Liberty Park Project Number: LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Project Manager: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner Owner: City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 Applicant: Greg Smith, King County Library System, 960 Newport Way NW, Issaquah, WA 98027 Contact: Maaike Post, Miller Hull Partnership, 71 Columbia St. - Sixth floor, Seattle, WA 98104 Project Location: 100 Mill Avenue S Project Summary: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall, the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The site's zoning is primarily Center Downtown (CD). The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope, and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one tree is proposed to be retained. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, Regulated Material Survey, Geotechnical Engineering Study, Technical Information Report. The site is located in the Aquifer Protection Zone 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the state and a habitat conservation area. Exist. Bldg. Area SF: 22,400 SF Proposed New Bldg. Area (footprint): 19,680 SF Proposed New Bldg. Area (grass): 19,680 SF Site Area: 37,630 SF Total Building Area GSF: 19,680 SF STAFF Staff Recommends that the Environmental Review Committee issue a RECOMMENDATION: Determination of Non -Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M). Project Location Map ERC Report13-000255.docx 0 0 City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013 Page Z of 13 PART ONE: PROJECT DESCRIPTION / BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall, the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. The subject site is located over the Cedar River; the river itself does not have zoning. However, zoning is applied on both the north and south banks of the river. The north shoreline is zoned Commercial Arterial (CA) and the south shoreline is zoned Center Downtown (CD). The site's main entrance, parking lot, and access is along the south shoreline. Due to the Library's primary access and the majority of the development along the south shoreline, City staff has determined that the CD zone would be applicable to the subject development. Because the subject property is located within the Center Downtown (CD) zoning designation, the proposal would be subject to the Design District "A" standards and guidelines. King County Library System (KCLS) has proposed to remodel or rehabilitate the existing library which was constructed across the Cedar River between 1956 and 1966. The existing library is partially located in Liberty Park but fronts on Mill Ave. S. The site is surrounded with civic uses such as the City of Renton Fire Station and old City Hall on the south side of the river and Liberty Park on the north side of the river. The applicant has indicated that all work would occur within the area of existing development on the site and public access would be maintained off of Mill Ave. S. The proposed library renovations include the following: • Demolition of existing masonry and glass building envelope. • Retention of existing concrete structure, roof framing, and site work. • Installation of new building envelope: aluminum window system with glazed panels and a metal panel wall assembly. • Demolition of portions of existing roof framing and replacement in specific areas at a lower height. • Removal of the existing rooftop mechanical unit near the west end of the building. • New rooftop mechanical unit (similar in scale to existing unit) with screening near the east end of the building where it would be less visible from the parking lot and main entry. • New mechanical, electrical, and lighting systems within the building. • Addition of insulation, sheathing, and roofing to existing roof assembly. Relocation of building entry to the west to face the existing parking lot. + Seismic upgrade required by code including below -grade concrete abutments on either side of the building and steel brace frames in both directions. Approximately 900 cubic yards of excavation materials and 360 cubic yards of fill would be required for the installation. • New hardscape, utility routing, and vegetation to address new entry location as well as repair associated with concrete abutments. • Sandblasting of existing structural concrete to remove painted finish. Re-routing of existing under -slab mounted utility piping to address new utility penetrations. + New exterior enclosure for refuse/recycling area and mechanical equipment. ERC Report13-000255.docx City of Renton Department of Community & 0mic Development Wronmental Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013 Page 3 of 13 The majority of the renovations includes upgrades to the existing building and structure to bring the building into compliance with today's building codes and regulations. The applicant has proposed minimal modifications to the existing site, with the exception of required utility Upgrades and rehabilitation following necessary structural upgrades. For example, the proposed concrete abutments would require below -grade work along both the north and south edges of the building. As such, these disturbed areas would be re -landscaped and hard scraped following construction. Offsite improvements include the replacement of the sanitary side sewer pipe from the library to the manhole at the intersection of Mill Ave. S and S 2nd St. The public sidewalk along Mill Ave. S would be updated as a part of a 2014 city of Renton sidewalk improvement project and would not be included in the remodel to the library. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one tree is proposed to be retained. The existing building spans the Cedar River, a shoreline of the State. As such, the project is subject to the Shoreline Master Program regulations. The site is located in the Shoreline High Intensity overlay along Cedar River Reach B. Overall, the existing building is considered to be a non -conforming structure. However, the proposal would be reducing the size of the building bringing is more into conformance then the existing situation. In addition to being located over the Cedar River, the site is located in a seismic hazards area and the Aquifer Protection Zone 1. There is also a 100 year flood plain and a floodway associated with the Cedar River and the banks of the river have been identified sensitive and protected slopes. Based on the project application material, no work is proposed below the ordinary high water mark of the Cedar River and therefore no work would occur in the flood plain or floodway. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Date Report, Regulated Material Survey, Geotechnical Engineering Report, Technical Information Report. 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. A. Environmental Threshold Recommendation Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials: Issue a DNS -M with a 14 -day Appeal Period. B. Mitigation Measures 1. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013 and revised May 10, 2013. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by GeoEngineers, dated December 20, 2012. 3. The applicant shall design and place lighting so that it is shielded from impacting the Cedar River and at the same time balances necessary lighting for site safety standards. ERC Report13-000255.docx 0 9 City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Deveiopment Environmentol Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -N Report of June 17, 2013 Page 4 of 13 C. Exhibits Exhibit 1 Vicinity Map Exhibit 2 Title Sheet Exhibit 3 Architecture Site Plan Exhibit 4 Demolition Plan Exhibit 5 T.E.S.C. Plan Exhibit 6 Civil Site Plan Exhibit 7 Landscape Site Plan Exhibit 8 Conceptual Landscape Plan Exhibit 9 Tree Inventory Plan Exhibit 10 Building Elevations, Sheets A-201 and A-202 Exhibit 11 Muckleshoot Tribe Comments 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 is likely to have the following probable impacts: 1. Earth Impacts: The existing site topography consists of steep slopes along the north and south edges of the river channel. The grades of the river banks range from elevation 45 at the top of the slope to elevation 26 at the river bottom. Beyond the river banks the site grades to the north and south of the buildings is relatively flat. Based on the City's critical areas maps, the river banks are considered to be either a sensitive slope or a protected slope dependent upon the grade at the specific location. In addition, the library is located in a seismic hazard area. The applicant submitted a Geotechnical Engineering Study ("Geo -tech") prepared for the Liberty Park Library by GeoEngineers, dated December 20, 2012. The primary purpose of the building upgrades is to bring the existing structure into compliance with current seismic code requirements. As such, the provided Geo -tech particularly focuses on the necessary structural upgrades needed to bring the existing building into compliance with the seismic standards. Pursuant to the provided study, the existing building is constructed similar to a three -span bridge structure with girders spanning between foundations located on the river banks and two interior piers that are located within the river. To evaluate the subsurface conditions at the subject site, GeoEngineers completed two borings on October 22, 2012 to depths of 51.50 feet below the existing ground surface. The soil types encountered consisted of undocumented fill and recent alluvium deposits. More specifically the fill consisted of loose to medium dense/very soft to soft silty sand/silt with variable gravel and cobble content, and organics. The fill extended to depths of 15 feet below existing grades. The alluvium deposits consist of medium dense to very dense silty sand with varying amounts of gravel and medium dense to dense gravel with varying amounts of silt and sand. Occasional cobbles are anticipated to be present in the alluvium deposits. ERC Reportl3-000255. docx City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013 Page 5 of 13 The Geo -tech also addressed groundwater conditions and found groundwater in both the borings at approximately 20.50 feet below grades. The report concludes that groundwater levels are expected to fluctuate in response to water levels in the Cedar River and would very as a function of season, precipitation, and other factors. GeoEngineers concluded based on the soil analysis, that the site soils are moderately to highly susceptible to liquefaction under the design earthquake event. Given the slopes located along the banks of the Cedar River both settlement and lateral deformation of the foundations elements (towards the Cedar River) may occur potentially resulting in excessive foundation deformation. Furthermore the potentially liquefiable soils present a risk to the existing building through loss of foundation support, potential foundation settlement, and lateral deformation of soils towards the Cedar River. The Geo -tech recommends the use of ground improvements to meet seismic settlement and building performance tolerances. The preferred ground improvement option is a system comprised of closely spaced augercast piles to mitigate the liquefaction potential at the Cedar River banks on the north and south sides of the building. Approximately 900 cubic yards of soil would be excavated to install the below -grade concrete abutments or augercast piles and 360 cubic yards of fill would be used on site above the abutments. Pursuant to the provided report, the purpose of the ground improvement is to provide a `block' of improved soil that would resist seismic lateral earth pressure acting towards the river and to provide improved bearing of the spread footings currently located on the river banks. GeoEngineers further conclude that the soil exploration indicated that the soils located below the river bottom elevation have a low risk of liquefaction, therefore, no additional improvements of the interior piers is considered to be necessary. The above ground improvement option is expected to mitigate potential liquefaction hazards in the immediate vicinity of the foundation elements located on the river bank and provide anchorage to the building to help resist seismic lateral forces. In addition to the above ground improvement recommendations the provided Geo -tech includes recommendations for augercast piles, earthwork including clearing and site preparation, subgrade preparation, structural fill, materials, reuse of on-site soils, fill placement and compaction criteria, weather considerations, temporary slopes, utility trenches and additional geotechnical services recommendations. Based on the recommendations included in the provided report, staff recommends as a mitigation measure that the applicant comply with the recommendations included in the provided Geotechnical Report prepared by GeoEngineers. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by GeoEngineers, dated December 20, 2012. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Review, RMC 4-3-050 Critical Areas Regulations, RMC 4-4-060 Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations. 2. Water a. Wetland, Streams, Lakes Impacts: The existing building spans the Cedar River, a shoreline of the State. As such, the project is subject to the Shoreline Master Program regulations. The site is located in the Shoreline High Intensity overlay along Cedar River Reach B. The ordinary high water mark (OHWM) for the Cedar River at the project location is general associated with the 34 foot above mean sea level (amsl) contour line and the 1.00 -year FEMA floodplain is located at elevation 39.62 amsl. The proposed ERC Report13-000255.docx • i City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARYAT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -N Report of June 17, 2013 Page 6 of 13 rehabilitation work would be limited to the library structure above the river only, no work would occur within the regulatory floodplain or below the OHWM. Due to the project's location, over the Cedar River, the applicant submitted a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013. The study was prepared pursuant to the requirements of the Renton Municipal Code for both the Shoreline Master Program and the Critical Areas Regulations. The report identifies and describes the river, critical species and habitat on or adjacent to the project site, provides a regulatory review of local, Sate and Federal regulations and proposes mitigation for impacts to critical areas and habitat. Pursuant to the provided Steam Study, the Cedar River is located in the Cedar-Sammamish watershed (WRIA — 8) and is approximately 100 feet wide. The water depth at the site was observed to be approximately 18 inches in the summer of 2012 and 3 feet in the fall of 2012. The in -stream substrate consists of clean gravel and coble, however no natural pools, woody debris, or other fish habitat features were observed in the vicinity of the project by Talasaea. The stream study identifies the shoreline riparian habitat in the vicinity of the library building to be very narrow (30-50 feet max), and adjacent to urban impervious surface on the left bank and a baseball field/City park on the right bank. The riparian habitat downstream is dominated by invasive species including reed canarygrass, Japanese knotweed, and Himalayan blackberry. Tree species within the existing riparian habitat include: sycamore, black cottonwood, and horse chestnut. The upstream riparian habitat is similarly dominated by Himalayan blackberry, with slightly improved salmonberry habitat located on the left upstream bank. The Stream Study concludes that there would be no direct impacts to the Cedar River, adjacent riparian habitat or State Shoreline area anticipated during or after construction, resulting in no net loss of ecological functions. This conclusion is based on the following reasons: 1) all work would occur within the footprint of the existing development for the library and would stay above the 100 -year flood plain and above the OHWM; 2) the footprint of the existing disturbed/developed area within the shoreline zone would not be expanded as a result of the project; 3) all existing shoreline vegetation would remain intact; 4) portions of the existing library structure would be demolished which would result in a net reduction of approximately 1,700 square feet or 7 percent of the library structure's building itself and adjacent pedestrian bridge; 5) Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be implemented during construction to minimize temporary construction impacts to the aquatic environment; and 6) the project would comply with all applicable City ordinances including, but not limited to, stormwater management requirements, and those related to traffic, noise and aesthetics during and after construction. The Stream Study provides a list of recommend BMP's which are intended to be employed during construction to ensure adequate protection of water quality and the aquatic and shoreline environment. The BMPs are divided into a set of general goals which have been defined to guide construction activities and ensure adequate protection of the aquatic and shoreline environment. Suggested specific BMPs are listed after each goal in the study, which is not intended to be an exhaustive list but instead a list of BMPs which shall be implemented as needed to meet the identified goals. The study has identified that implementation of BMPs would be the responsibility of the constructor to identify the appropriate BMPs for the different phases and types of work being conducted at the site. The following is a list of goals provided in the Stream Study: Goal 1: Trash, construction/demolition debris, and other contaminants shall be kept out of the river and shoreline environment at all times during construction. FRC Reportl3-000255.docx 0 0 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013 Page 7 of 13 Goal 2: Dust Control, including minimizing, containment and collection of dust. Goal 3: General worksite management including proper storage of materials and construction debris and worksite cleanup. Goal 4: Work timing and scheduling in order to prevent debris from entering the aquatic environment. Goal 5: Stomwater management BMPs shall be implemented in accordance with the 2009 King County Surface Water Design Manual (KCSWDM) and a Temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan. In addition to the proposed BMPs, Talasaea has identified that the applicant would contribute $22,700 to a vegetation conservation fund, which is administered by the City of Renton to meet the requirements of the Shoreline Master Program RMC 4-3-095F. This amount has been calculated based on the actual area of shoreline buffer contained within the project limits, which includes any area landward of the OHWM. The total shoreline buffer area contained within the project limits is approximately 18,130 SF. This area was multiplied by a dollar amount of $1.25/SF to calculate an amount for what it would hypothetically cost to restore an area of shoreline buffer equal to the area within the project limits. Based on the recommendations included in the Stream Study, staff recommends the applicant comply with these recommendations as mitigation for the subject project. On June 12, 2013, the City received comments from the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division (Exhibit 11). These comments include a request for lighting review and specific light bulbs to be used at the new library to reduce the potential impacts of artificial lighting on the fish. In addition, they have requested a wood management plan and a copy of the stormwater report. Their comments expressed concerns about the gabion baskets located in the Cedar River below the existing building and construction noise impacts. Finally, their comments appeared to be supportive of the fee -in -lieu option for the shoreline master program required mitigation. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013 and revised May 10, 2013 Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Critical Areas Regulations b. Storm Water Impacts: A Technical Information Report (TIR) was submitted with the application, prepared by Miller Hull Partnership, LLP dated May 10, 2013. The report complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. The TI R indicates that the existing site consist of 0.793 acres of impervious area and 0.071 acres pervious area. Following the rehabilitation of the library, the site would consist of 0.788 acre impervious area and 0.076 acres pervious area. The TER identified three distinct areas with different drainage patterns. The existing library building roof runoff discharges directly to the Cedar River through piped outfalls. The parking lot to the south is collected in onsite catch basins and is routed to river outfalls in the near vicinity of the site. Finally, the park property within the site work limits to the north discharges to existing piped outfalls to the River. The proposed drainage system at the site has been identified to remain relatively unchanged, as the project is primarily a building rehabilitation project. Runoff from the site would be conveyed to existing storm systems in the parking lot and the park area to the north. ERC Reportl3-000255.docx 0 0 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013 Page 8 of 13 The roof drainage from the library would continue to utilize existing outfalls to the Cedar River. Portion of the existing drainage system onsite are proposed to be removed to make room for the new library entrance improvements. A small amount of new catch basins and conveyance piping would be installed in the parking lot to convey runoff to the existing system to the south. Pollution generating surface would be basically unchanged; therefore, no water quality mitigation is proposed to be installed as a part of the project. The TIR included an upstream and downstream analysis, which concluded that there was no known drainage that enters the site from upstream and that there were no know drainage complaints within % mile of the site. As such no mitigation was proposed for downstream drainage problems. The Library is located over the floodway of the Cedar River and any work within the floodplain or the floodway would have to comply with City adopted flood hazard regulations in the Critical Areas Ordinance and FEMA National Flood insurance Program regulations. This also includes compliance with the National Marine Fisheries Biological Opinion Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives regarding the National Flood Insurance Program compliance with the Endangered Species Act, as they relate to development in the FEMA floodplain. FEMA regulations require that when a structure is located in the 100 -year floodplain, any substantial improvements (i.e. when cost of improvements exceeds 50% of the appraised value of the structure) require the structure to be brought up to current floodplain development standards. Any improvements within the floodplain or floodway, such as placement of fill, piers or supports as part of the seismic retrofit work within the floodplain or floodway, will need to comply with FEMA floodplain requirements. Based on the provided TIR, no work is being proposed within the base flood elevation or within the FEMA floodway. Special consideration of design has been made to ensure that no alteration within these zones would occur. In addition, the TIR indicated that a Temporary Erosion and Sediment Control (TESC) Plan would be provided including the following: 1. The project would provide sediment protection at the existing catch basins and maintain existing hardscape areas until areas would be re -paved. 2. For the period between November 1 through March 1, disturbed areas greater than 5,000 square feet left undisturbed for more than 12 hours must be covered with mulch, sodding, or plastic covering. A construction phasing plan would be provided to ensure that erosion control measures are installed prior to clearing and grading. 3. There shall be limits to tributary drainage to an area to be cleared and graded. Delineated dimension, stake and flag clearing limits. 4. Revegetate areas to be cleared as soon as practicable after grading. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 3. Vegetation Impacts: The existing site is currently vegetated with ornamental landscaping and lawn areas in the vicinity of the existing structure. Scattered around the site are deciduous and coniferous trees/shrubs (see Wildlife and Stream sections for riparian vegetation information). The existing site contains 16 trees of which all will be retained with the exception of one 12 -inch diameter cherry tree located in the southeast corner of the site. The removed cherry tree is proposed to be replaced with a 2 -inch caliper river birch tree. In addition, to the 12 -inch cherry tree, one street tree along Mill Ave. S is proposed to be removed. This is a result of the sanitary sewer line ERC Reportl3-000255.docx 0 0 City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARYAT LIBERTYPARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013 Page 9 of 13 improvements required for the project. This tree would be replaced in the same location with a 2 - inch caliper Northern Red Oak. In addition to the new trees, the applicant is proposing to revegetate all disturbed areas on the project site. In the SEPA checklist, the applicant has indicated that the planning palette would include native and non-native adapted/drought tolerant species including such plants as maidenhair fern, kinnicki nick, deer fern, mock orange, salmonberry etc. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 4. Wildlife Impacts: The applicant submitted a Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013 with the application. The Habitat Report included a habitat assessment to determine the extent, functions, values, and existing conditions of the critical habitat on the site. The Habitat Report identified that the Cedar River is known to support Federally -listed (threatened) Chinook salmon and steelhead trout, along with coho salmon, a Federally -listed Candidate species, and sockeye salmon, a State Candidate species. Bull trout are listed in the Priority Habitat and Species (PHS) database as species of commercial and recreation interest. Pursuant to Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) Salmonscape and StreamNet, the subject portion of the Cedar River is a documented spawning/rearing area for fall Chinook, coho, and sockeye, and is a documented rear area for winter steelhead. Bull trout are confirmed to be located in the area however cutthroat trout are not documented in the area by Salmonscape or StreamNet. Talasaea conducted a field investigation on July 9 and November 2, 2012. During the field investigation, Talasaea completed a characterization of the habitat within the project site. Based on this characterization, the area directly beneath the library does not receive direct sunlight and is mostly devoid of vegetation. The left bank between the library and Bronson Way N (downstream) contains reed canarygrass within the streambed and floodplain. Japanese knotweed and Himalayan blackberry dominate the left and right bank slopes. Sycamore trees are located on top of the left bank adjacent to the parking lot. Black cottonwood and horse chestnut trees are growing on the right bank. The upstream riparian habitat is similarly dominated by Himalayan blackberry, with slightly improved salmonberry habitat located on the left upstream bank. The Habitat Report identifies that the area's highly urbanized conditions results in wildlife species typically found in urban and residential areas, such as birds and small and medium-sized mammals. The Habitat Report concludes that the riparian vegetation in the project area provides only minimal buffer for the fish -bearing Cedar River and is of relatively low value to the watershed as a whole. Moreover, the assessment concludes that the project would not result in direct impacts to the riparian habitat during or after construction, resulting in no net loss of ecological functions and values. This is a result of a combination of limiting the renovation to the area of existing development and not expanding the existing disturbed/developed area within the shoreline zone. Finally, the study states that a portion of the library structure over the river would be demolished which would result in a net reduction of the library footprint over the river and BMPs would be implemented during construction to minimize temporary construction impacts to the aquatic environment. ERC Report13-000255.docx 0 0 City of Renton Deportment of Community & Economic Development Environmentol Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARYAT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013 Page 10 of 13 Chapter 7 of the Stream Study and Habitat Data Report is a literature review evaluating the effects of light on salmonid predation to evaluate the possible pre-existing effect that the library may have on salmonid predation. Both studies evaluated found that predation is lowest under dark conditions, and increases as light and visibility increases. Furthermore Talasaea contacted Hans Berge, the King County expert on fish and the Cedar River watershed. Mr. Berge relayed that shade does not contribute to increased predation, but that excess light does contribute to increased predation. Talasaea concluded that the information indicated that the area under the library may provide a refuge for salmonids because predation would be higher upstream and downstream of the library where the river is always illuminated by sunlight and the lights of surrounding urban area. Moreover, Talasaea concludes that given the general lack of natural shade along this reach of the Cedar River, the shadow of the library across the river is likely to have beneficial effect, if any at all. Based on the recommendations included in the Habitat Data Report, staff recommends the applicant comply with these recommendations as mitigation for the subject project. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Stream Study and Habitat Data Report, prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013 and revised May 10, 2013 Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, Critical Areas Regulations 5. Light and Glare Impacts: The rehabilitated library structure would be designed with interior and exterior lighting. Based on the provided SEPA checklist, the applicant has indicated that the project would use downlights with excellent shielding and cutoffs. These types of lights would be incorporated into all spaces interior and exterior. The check list indicated that the placement of exterior fixtures in the plaza would contain the light to the plaza and would not impact the river or night sky. Light levels would meet but not exceed illuminating Engineering Society recommendations to provide the industry standard amount of light and minimize over lighting the space. Automatic controls would be implemented to turn off non-critical lighting after-hours to further reduce light impacts. The City received comments from the Muckleshoot Tribe on June 12, 2013 which included comments regarding lighting impacts on the Cedar River (Exhibit 11). The applicant has proposed lighting mitigation as identified above, however due to the concerns raised in the Muckleshoot's comment, staff recommends a mitigation measure that lighting be designed and placed in such a way that is shields spill over into the river at the same time balancing site safety standards. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall design and place lighting so that it is shielded from impacting the Cedar River and at the same time balances necessary lighting for site safety standards. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations, RMC 4-4-075 Lighting, Exterior On-site 6. Parks and Recreation Impacts: The subject project is located within Liberty Park in downtown Renton. However, the project limits restrict the area of impact to primarily the library building and a small area on both the north and south sides of the building. The north side of the library is located in Liberty Park and construction impacts would extend approximately 30 feet north of the north edge of the existing building. This would result in temporary construction impact to a small plaza area and trail access to the walkway along the river in this location. There are other access locations to the river trail which would not be impacted by the subject project and no impacts are anticipated to any ERC Re portl3-000255. docx s ! City of Renton Department of Community & Economic Development Environmental Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013 Page 11 of 13 recreational uses in the park. The construction impacts are temporary in nature and are not anticipated to have an adverse impact on Liberty Park. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 7. Transportation Impacts: The site is surrounded by Mill Ave S, Bronson Way N, and S 2nd Street. Under current condition, the site is primarily access by vehicles from Mill Ave. S, to the existing surface parking lot. However, there is also a parking lot located in Liberty Park, which is accessed off of Bronson Way N, which may also be utilized by people using the library. The proposed site access and parking facilities are primarily proposed to stay the same. The existing surface parking lot along Mill Ave. S would lose four parking stalls following the project's construction. Trips associated with the project are not anticipated to change, as the existing use is not changing. The public sidewalk along Mill Ave. S would be updated as a part of a 2014 City of Renton sidewalk improvement project and would not be included in the rehabilitation of the library. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation required. Nexus: N/A 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 File and may be attached to this report. The Environmental Determination decision will become final if the decision is not appealed within the 14 -day appeal period (RCW 43.21.C.075(3); WAC 197-11-680). Environmental Determination Appeal Process: Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing together with the required fee to: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, on or before 5:00 p.m. on July 5, 2013. RMC 4-8-110 governs appeals to the Hearing Examiner and additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the City Clerk's Office, Renton City Hall — 7th Floor, (425) 430-5510. ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the administrative land use action. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for the land use actions. Planning: 1. RMC section 4-4-030.0.2 limits haul hours between 8:30 am to 3:30 pm, Monday through Friday unless otherwise approved by the Development Services Division. Commercial, multi -family, new single family and other nonresidential construction activities shall be restricted to the hours between seven o'clock (7:00) a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m., Monday through Friday. Work on Saturdays shall be restricted to the hours between nine o'clock (9:00) ERC Report13-000255.docx City of Renton Department of Community & omic Development Ovironmentol Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARYAT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013 Page 12 of 13 a.m. and eight o'clock (8:00) p.m. No work shall be permitted on Sundays. 3. Within thirty (30) days of completion of grading work, the applicant shall hydroseed or plant an appropriate ground cover over any portion of the site that is graded or cleared of vegetation and where no further construction work will occur within ninety (90) days. Alternative measures such as mulch, sodding, or plastic covering as specified in the current King County Surface Water Management Design Manual as adopted by the City of Renton may be proposed between the dates of November 1st and March 31st of each year. The Development Services Division's approval of this work is required prior to final inspection and approval of the permit. 4. A National Permit Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit is required when more than one acre is being cleared. 5. The applicant may not fill, excavate, stack or store any equipment, dispose of any materials, supplies or fluids, operate any equipment, install impervious surfaces, or compact the earth in any way within the area defined by the drip line of any tree to be retained. 6. The applicant shall erect and maintain six foot (6') high chain link temporary construction fencing around the drip lines of all retained trees, or along the perimeter of a stand of retained trees. Placards shall be placed on fencing every fifty feet (50') indicating the words, "NO TRESPASSING — Protected Trees" or on each side of the fencing if less than fifty feet (50'). Site access to individually protected trees or groups of trees shall be fenced and signed. Individual trees shall be fenced on four (4) sides. In addition, the applicant shall provide supervision whenever equipment or trucks are moving near trees. Plan_ Review —Sanitary Sewer: 1. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an 8 -inch sewer main in Mill Avenue South with a manhole at the intersection with South 2nd Street. The existing sewer service connection extends southerly to this main. 2. The project is required to cut and cap the existing side sewer at the property line as part of the demolition permit. 3. A new side sewer is shown on the preliminary drawings and shall be installed to the updated building as condition of the building permit. Plan Review — Storm Drainage: 1. The FEMA approved 100 -year base flood elevation at the Renton Library over the Cedar River is elevation 39.62 based upon the NAVD 88 Datum per the FEMA approved 2006 Cedar River Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) Case No. 06-10-13596P. The Library is located over the floodway of the Cedar Rivera nd any work within the floodplain or the floodway would have to comply with City adopted flood hazard regulations in the Critical Areas Ordinance and FEMA National Flood Insurance Program regulations. This also includes compliance with the National Marine Fisheries Biological Opinion Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives regarding the National Flood Insurance Program compliance with the Endangered Species Act, as they relate to development in the FEMA floodplain. FEMA regulations require that when a structure is located in the 100 -year floodplain, any substantial improvements (Le_ when cost of improvements exceeds 50% of the appraised value of the structure) require the structure to be brought up to current floodplain development standards. Any improvements within the floodplain or floodway, such as placement of fill, piers or supports as part of the seismic retrofit work within the floodplain or floodway, will need to comply with FEMA floodplain requirements. 4. The applicant must show the 100 -year base flood elevation (39.62 NAVD 88 Datum) on the construction FRC Report13-000255. docx City of Renton Deportment of Community & Oumic Development vironmentol Review Committee Report RENTON LIBRARYAT LIBERTY PARK LUA13-000155, ECF, SM, SA -H Report of June 17, 2013 Page 13 of 13 plans. 5. A drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the site plan application. The report complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. A final TIR is required with the building permit. Plan Review — Transportation/Street: 1. A 12 -foot sidewalk with cut-outs for street trees is not required to be constructed with the project. 2. A traffic study was not required for this project as the use is the same with a smaller building. Plan Review —General Comments: 1. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. Separate permits are required for the water meter installation, side sewer connection, and storm water connection. Fire: 1. The fire hydrant and fire flow requirements for the proposed library are adequate as they exist. 2_ The existing automatic fire sprinkler system will be required to be modified for any tenant improvement work. 3. The existing fire department apparatus access roads are adequate. 4. The existing automatic fire alarm system shall be replaced with an all new system as the existing system cannot meet current fire code requirements. System shall be fully addressable and full detection is required. 5. Exiting shall meet all current building and fire code requirements. Police: Recommendations: Due to the renovation vs. new construction, this review would be better served by a security survey following the completion of the improvement project. CFS would remain about the same since there will be no additional structural space added. ERC Report13-000255.docx L) • '0 y � Q a m I r H zza' to ma wOu� LtPL) ¢i car I Y a Ea r N � � Q u I � sOAi N 3AV >iHVd s� 5� G�o�� � s 7� 3� } z Z Lu � - G. ��❑ O mLL iK? XLLa a� wom 5 3nv lllNt � rJ, � O Os �'o 5 3AV Nrvw . S 3AV Sll3M - 53AV SWVIIIIM y r M m S 2AV 11-ANLin9 0 O m 0 a a N O 0 0 H x W 1;9# e-oro�'s ' M3EA38 NV -1d 3iJS g r *,VM'NOiN3i! _ w �•.. �? !¢ ,;s }UnOSlInN3AVIIIWOOl s` f § AUVd JU.M381i 1'd y ujJ ANVUS11 NO1N3H ! o$ n z W W 3: N F - to J F Z F J y Z Q U IN UN 9����53 "!RAI gul$ ;m �� x xx ase xna i� k$ A ^ e #1S T i$ii as W Ss- 4F H J! a r $k N $k 8 zk g � 6E g p 'a6 � � M ik � I �us r3It Im4M a :i,43 IAl � � .s i $ Y F w�EM SFIu _s 4 s� Y�� �Y Ba Y� Oft � CL w w J �r Z Z O W� d a 0 CC ZE i 8 `I AA3LA-9N NV-ld 31lS N8Vd kLd28I1.LV AN"811 NOIN3Nwm 14JAos BnNarm -1 IVI I II — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — ry -----— mw zi 0 ro) V, ELOZ"OL M31A3b NV31.15 �, a O 3 of ¢ 5086 tlM'NOiN3� H.LfIOS 3fiN��H ZIIW 00L r qa t =z ANeNSn NOIN3N �s I 111 oin 1 �- I r O H co H 2 W =moor ry� M3V13EGozoVs ;tF=� oo= t o�� 2l NG�d 3115ui Mam 1 U 0 : € J i rY z b 9". VM'NOIN�-H I H�nosar*�AV-nOoo = U std AMVMG1-1 NO1N3'd z� F- -----------------3 ---f l� t 0 D �� ♦ P1 gb \ ` � {�A �•--'`i/f3�" i I -, `� � �.� ,t} IiF, iii ti,�.� _: j �r yly - .��`'� t � §��r � 1 �". ai Ss � �' e ���; qti�♦ I bf-, \ .r r., ,•Y f 1 to � :�x� _. } X _ ipnos anuaYV Alf+! 1__ S ; �" 8 Ti H x W s!- ` fFGZ OL'S 111111x gde 'a M3U13b NV 3LIS AO muj CD e+ G86VWNOlN;L+ HinOS-;nNDAVMIN G0� G/,. I �Q sS i X"d )aA381-1 ld s rs �y �. a AWNS11 NOIN3N =1 I I'', I 3 13 (�t M31AM:1 NV -1d 311S 1 Q Q icy= UJ 0 oes bM 'NaaNaa I Klncs EnN-3na miry oo � NW o � Q LL z MNVd .113811 ld z r J Ali NS1� NOlN3N1 ,ZT `n -.ter -,AZT g19- 0 C -L tti &Uj O - Lo a15 DC7 co d-. N co LLI a. w uj -S "'yAy Try i a�! M31A32i NVId 3115 EL 085 VWND.LNBii HinoF; Bn*N V TIM DOL � I Q Lo LO >lNvd AUM3911 ib o Ig z a ANVUSE1 NOIN3U ! E F CIOZ'OL'S c _ Y M31A32iNV1d3115 w0z D 086 VM'NOIN32i ! Hif1OS 3fiNRAV TIN 004 w y a uj IL a � I AU"811 Na1N3a Q G co x W In 0{{� °y$j g tF o f 4� gg J �� a Eee 1 H it;tl ii sSEESS i< e�'is $S ! �`j yyi i!§ fl k LE F) Ft f Q G co x W MM1 JIA3N Ndld 3iIS L40B6 bM'NolNaa l Purios 3nN3AV -IIIVV 004 E 5i 7i2ib'd il.Lif381� 11i AN"1311 NOIN3N b c o . 0 � � oa N E z 7 1 IT w c o . � r.T -u o Imo, r I - !fir-T�` ❑ I: :. rd�ll`ll=l c i II CII _�J I - z 0 H a w J LU z m 0 C* b 0 H m W Nil! _: e�? Ma eFoz es y - � "siM 33 #aR# a 31A3NNb"1d311S j -,�:�� of -' - Z a CV zc 66 VM N01N28 I Hinos 7inN�AV 1111100 T='== ANVU911 NO1N3M eE LU wt i a 0 0 Vanessa Dolbee EXHIBIT 11 From: Karen Walter < KWalter@m uckl es hoot. nsn.us> Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:16 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Fisher, Larry D (DFW) Subject: Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, Mitigated Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Vanessa, We have reviewed the Notice of Application materials for the Renton Library redevelopment project referenced above. This project will remodel the existing library located over the Cedar River. When we met with City staff and the consulting team in February 2013, we identified several issues for this project as noted below and offer recommendations where we can based on the information reviewed to date: Artificial lighting- The checklist and the Critical Areas Report (CAR) discuss how the project will seek to reduce artificial lighting impacts in several ways. In addition to the measures proposed, we also recommend that the City use light bulbs which reduce artificial lighting opportunities to the Cedar River or nighttime sky. Previously, we provided information to City public Works staff about potential light bulb options that could be used. We also request a copy of the detailed site lighting plan for our review which is proposed to be part of the final construction plans. 2. Stormwater- We need additional information about the details as to how stormwater will be managed from redeveloped site, particularly for water quality. We request a copy of the Technical Information Report which likely contains the stormwater management details. 3. Wood management plan- At the February meeting, we indicated that the site should develop a wood management plan to deal with any wood that may approach or be entrained by the existing concrete piling in the Cedar River. This issue was not addressed in CAR. Wood management is needed to ensure that wood is not removed from the Cedar River or its banks unless it is absolutely necessary. Wood is shown being near the site from the photos the City provided in February. Wood may no longer be on or adjacent to the site with winter floods; however, the City should plan on wood transported to and through the site with time and future floods. It is timely to develop a wood management plan now as part of the redeveloped library. Please note that Boeing developed a wood management plan for its Cedar River bridges. We recommend that the City review it for applicability to the library site. 4. Gabion baskets- We understand that there is no bank work or modifications to the existing gabion baskets used to stabilize the river banks located on the site. Gabion baskets are subject to failure when exposed to streambed scour flows, requiring require repair or replacement with some regularity. When they fail, they can adversely affect fish habitat by adding angular rock to the stream channel that can create beneficial habitat spaces for sculpin and other salmon predators_ In addition, the broken metal baskets can entrap adult salmon causing injury or mortality_ In the course of a tagging study that included sonic tags, MITFD staff found dozens of live and dead adult salmon an arm's length from the bank inside several failed gabion baskets in the lower Cedar project reach. These fish presumably were seeking hiding cover or slow velocity resting places and were unable to complete their migration and spawning cycle in the Cedar River. The gabions also create poor salmon habitat conditions in the lower Cedar River by eliminating the complex natural stream bank habitats characterized by low- velocity areas, vegetation, pools, and undercut banks that are preferred by juvenile and adult salmon and reducing bank sources for spawning gravel. When the gabion baskets in the project area need repair, other alternatives that provide bank stability and improve habitat conditions for salmon should be pursued. 5, Construction Noise- The project should seek to minimize disturbance to spawning sockeye and Chinook in the vicinity from construction activity, particularly any piling driving activity that may be needed. 6_ Shoreline mitigation- We recognize that the project needs to comply with the City's Vegetation Conservation provisions from the Shoreline Master Program and there are limited opportunities to meet the 100 -foot vegetated 0 0 shoreline buffer requirement. Per the CAR, the applicant is proposing to pay an "in -lieu -fee" to the City's Vegetation Conservation Fund, which needs to be set up. Further, the CAR identifies several potential sites and actions on page 14 where the in -lieu fee could be spent. We are keenly interested in seeing the lower Cedar River's riparian areas enhanced and request the opportunity to work closely with City staff for this project, as well as, the overall framework approach to implement the in -lieu program, For this project's in -lieu proposal, we would like to work with the City to verify the extent of the impact area; the proposed fee amount; and the mitigation project area. For example, the $1.25 per square foot rate may be too low and only cover the costs of acquiring and planting plants which may not be sufficient to actually plant areas if easements, acquisitions, and permits are needed. Once a rate is accepted by the City it is likely that others will seek to use the same rate, so it is important to ensure that the in -lieu rate is sufficient to cover all of the mitigation project costs_ We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses and coordination. Please let me know if you have any questions_ Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-878-3118 PLAN REVIEW COMMEND (LUA13-000255) cite of i \u PLAN ADDRESS: 100 MILL S AVE APPLICATION DATE: 03/01I2C13 RENTON, WA 98057-2126 DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations The sites zoning is primarily Center Downtown (CD). The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one trees is proposed to be retained. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Date Report, Regulated material survey, Geotechnical Engineering Report, Technical Information Report. The site is located in the Aquifer Protection zone 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the state and a habitat conservation area. Fire Review - Construction Corey Thomas Ph: 425-430-7024 email: cthomas@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Code Related Comments: 1. The fire hydrant and fire Flow requirements for the proposed library are adequate as they exist. 2. The existing automatic fire sprinkler system will be required to be modified for any tenant improvement work. 3. The existing fire department apparatus access roads are adequate. 4, The existing automatic fire alarm system shall be replaced with an all new system as the existing system cannot meet current fire code requirements. System shall be fully addressable and full detection is required. 5. Exiting shall meet all current building and fire code requirements. Reviewer Comments Leslie Betlach Ph: 425-430-6619 email: LBetlach@rentonwa.gov Item Review Name: Community Services Review Comments: Staff is coordinating a new landscape layout plan to interface with future Liberty Park playground improvements. (entered by SMT). Police Review Cyndie Parks Ph: 425-430-7521 email: cparks@rentonwa.gov Recommendations: Due to the renovation vs. new construction, this review would be better served by a security survey following the completion of the improvement project. GFS would remain about the same since there will be no additional structural space added. June 21, 2013 Page 1 of 1 City of An Department of Community & Economic D opment ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: APPLICATION NO: LUA13-000255, ECF, SM APPLICANT: Greg Smith, KCLS PROJECTTITLE: Renton Librarr, SITE AREA: 38980 square feet LOCATION: 100 Mill Avenue S COMMENTS DUE: JUNE 12, 2013 �s DATE CIRCULATED: MAY 29, 2013 z 0 PROJECT MANAGER: Vanessa Dolbee •i c„ rf•. at Liberty Park PROJECT REVIEWER: Kayren Kittrick EXISTING BLDG AREA (gross): 22,400 square fbet7 u: PROPOSED BLDG AREA (gross) 19,680 square feet M SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non -Code) COMMENTS i14,00OFMeetl7l ent of the Probable Probable More onment Minor Major information Impacts Impacts Necessary in etics /Glare ation ies s Transportation c services ric/Cu7tura!rvationrt Environment404 Feet004 Feet Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor information Impacts Necessary Earth Air Water Plants LandlShoreline Use Animals Environmental Health fnergy Naturol Resources 8. POLICY -RELATED COMMENTS ID \,,;Ae,� c � , C. CODE -RELATED COMMENTS a"?'t %'Zo 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 infor on is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date 0 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M a R A N D U M DATE: June 3, 2013 T0: Vanessa Dolbee, Planner 3 FROM: Kayren Kittrick, Development Engineering Supervisor , SUBJECT: Renton Cedar River Library 100 Mil! Avenue S. LUA13-000255 Water 1. Water service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an existing 8 -inch water main in Mill Avenue South as well on the northerly side of the triangular property. This site is located in the 196 -water pressure zone. 2. As part of this project, the existing non -conforming 4 -inch DCVA for the fire sprinkler system located in the existing vault is shown with notes it must be replaced with a new and State approved Detector Double Check Valve Assembly (DDCVA). The contractor needs to verify if the new DDCVA can fit in the existing vault or a larger vault may be needed. 3. New hydrants, if any, shall be installed per Renton's fire department standards to provide the required coverage of the new building. Existing hydrants counted as fire protection shall be retrofitted with Storz fittings if not already in place. Sanitary Sewer 1. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an 8 -inch sewer main in Mill Avenue South with a manhole at the intersection with South 2nd Street. The existing sewer service connection extends southerly to this main. 2. The project is required to cut and cap the existing side sewer at the property line as part of the demolition permit. 3. A new side sewer is shown on the preliminary drawings and shall be installed to the updated building as condition of the building permit. Storm Drainage 1. The FEMA approved 100 -year base flood elevation at the Renton Library over the Cedar River is elevation 39.62 based upon the NAVD 88 Datum per the FEMA approved 2006 Cedar River Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) Case No. 06-10-13596P. 2. The Library is located over the floodway of the Cedar River and any work within the floodplain or the floodway would have to comply with City adopted flood hazard regulations in the Critical Renton Cedar River Library— LuA600255 46 Page 2 of 2 June 3, 2013 Areas Ordinance and FEMA National Flood Insurance Program regulations. This also includes compliance with the National Marine Fisheries Biological Opinion Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives regarding the National Flood Insurance Program compliance with the Endangered Species Act, as they relate to development in the FEMA floodplain. FEMA regulations require that when a structure is located in the 100 -year flood plain, any substantial improvements (i.e. when cost of improvements exceeds 50% of the appraised value of the structure) require the structure to be brought up to current floodplain development standards. Any improvements within the floodplain or floodway, such as placement of fill, piers or supports as part of the seismic retrofit work within the floodplain or floodway, will need to comply with FEMA floodplain requirements. 4. The applicant must show the 100 -year base flood elevation (39.62 NAVD 88 Datum) on the construction plans. 5. A drainage plan and drainage report was submitted with the site plan application. The report complies with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. A final TIR is required with the building permit. Transportation/Street 1. A 12 -foot sidewalk with cut-outs for street trees is not required to be constructed with the project. 2. A traffic study was not required for this project as the use is the Same with a smaller building. General Comments 1. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. Separate permits are required for the water meter installation, side sewer connection, and storm water connection. H:\CED\Planning\Current Planning\PREAPP5\13-000087.Vanessa\Plan Review Comments PRE13-000087.doc Vanessa Dolbee From: Karen Walter <KWalter@muckleshoot.nsn.us? Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:16 PM To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Fisher, Larry D (DFW) Subject: Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000265, ECF, SM, SA -H, Notice of Application and Proposed Determination of Non -Significance, Mitigated Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Vanessa, We have reviewed the Notice of Application materials for the Renton Library redevelopment project referenced above. This project will remodel the existing library located over the Cedar River. When we met with City staff and the consulting team in February 2013, we identified several issues for this project as noted below and offer recommendations where we can based on the information reviewed to date: Artificial lighting- The checklist and the Critical Areas Report (CAR) discuss how the project will seek to reduce artificial lighting impacts in several ways. In addition to the measures proposed, we also recommend that the City use light bulbs which reduce artificial lighting opportunities to the Cedar River or nighttime sky. Previously, we provided information to City public Works staff about potential light bulb options that could be used. We also request a copy of the detailed site lighting plan for our review which is proposed to be part of the final construction plans. 2. Stormwater- We need additional information about the details as to how stormwater will be managed from redeveloped site, particularly for water quality. We request a copy of the Technical Information Report which likely contains the stormwater management details. 3. Wood management plan- At the February meeting, we indicated that the site should develop a wood management plan to deal with any wood that may approach or be entrained by the existing concrete piling in the Cedar River. This issue was not addressed in CAR. Wood management is needed to ensure that wood is not removed from the Cedar River or its banks unless it is absolutely necessary. Wood is shown being near the site from the photos the City provided in February. Wood may no longer be on or adjacent to the site with winter floods; however, the City should plan on wood transported to and through the site with time and future floods. It is timely to develop a wood management plan now as part of the redeveloped library. Please note that Boeing developed a wood management plan for its Cedar River bridges. We recommend that the City review it for applicability to the library site. 4. Gabion baskets- We understand that there is no bank work or modifications to the existing gabion baskets used to stabilize the river banks located on the site. Gabion baskets are subject to failure when exposed to streambed scour flows, requiring require repair or replacement with some regularity. When they fail, they can adversely affect fish habitat by adding angular rock to the stream channel that can create beneficial habitat spaces for sculpin and other salmon predators. In addition, the broken metal baskets can entrap adult salmon causing injury or mortality. In the course of a tagging study that included sonic tags, MITFD staff found dozens of live and dead adult salmon an arm's length from the bank inside several failed gabion baskets in the lower Cedar project reach. These fish presumably were seeking hiding cover or slow velocity resting places and were unable to complete their migration and spawning cycle in the Cedar River. The gabions also create poor salmon habitat conditions in the lower Cedar River by eliminating the complex natural stream bank habitats characterized by low- velocity areas, vegetation, pools, and undercut banks that are preferred by juvenile and adult salmon and reducing bank sources for spawning gravel. When the gabion baskets in the project area need repair, other alternatives that provide bank stability and improve habitat conditions for salmon should be pursued. 5. Construction Noise- The project should seek to minimize disturbance to spawning sockeye and Chinook in the vicinity from construction activity, particularly any piling driving activity that may be needed. 6. Shoreline mitigation- We recognize that the project needs to comply with the City's Vegetation Conservation provisions from the Shoreline Master Program and there are limited opportunities to meet the 100 -foot vegetated shoreline buffer requirement. e'er the CAR, the applicant is proposing to ppan "in -lieu -fee" to the City's Vegetation Conservation Fund, which needs to be set up. Further, the CAR identifies several potential sites and actions on page 14 where the in -lieu fee could be spent. We are keenly interested in seeing the lower Cedar River's riparian areas enhanced and request the opportunity to work closely with City staff for this project, as well as, the overall framework approach to implement the in -lieu program. For this project's in -lieu proposal, we would like to work with the City to verify the extent of the impact area; the proposed fee amount; and the mitigation project area. For example, the $1.25 per square foot rate may be too low and only cover the costs of acquiring and planting plants which may not be sufficient to actually plant areas if easements, acquisitions, and permits are needed. Once a rate is accepted by the City it is likely that others will seek to use the same rate, so it is important to ensure that the in -lieu rate is sufficient to cover all of the mitigation project costs. We appreciate the opportunity to review this proposal and look forward to the City's responses and coordination. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Karen Walter Watersheds and Land Use Team Leader Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division Habitat Program 39015 172nd Ave SE Auburn, WA 98092 253-876-3116 CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 29th day of May, 2013, 1 deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Acceptance Letter, Notice of Application, Environmental Checklist, Reduced Site Plan documents. This information was sent to: Name Representing Agencies See Attached Greg Smith - KCLS Applicant Maaike Post Contact Beth Asher Party of Record (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy M. Tucker 'f, signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act mentioned in the instrument. Dated: 471. 2 'Ii tA Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print): 11 e' - My appointment expires: Project Name: Renton Library at Liberty Park Project Number: LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H template - affidavit of service by mailing rposes 0 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 39015-172 nd Avenue SE Olympia, WA 98504-7703 Auburn, WA 98092 WSDOT Northwest Region * Duwamish Tribal office * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program Attm Ramin Pazooki 4717 W Marginal Way SW Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert King Area Dev. Serv., MS -240 Seattle, WA 98106-1514 39015 172nd 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 Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, and the Notice of Application. **Department of Ecology is emailed a copy of the Environmental Checklist, Site Plan PMT, & Notice to the following email address: sepaunit@ecy.wa.gov template - affidavit of service by mailing L SEATTLE CITY OF SPU-WTR RENTON YOUTH & FAMILY SERV DIVELBISS CHARLES L 700 STH AVE STE 4900 -RPS 1025 S 3RD ST SUITE B 230 WELLS AVE S PO BOX 34018 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98057 SEATTLE, WA 98124 DIVELBISS CHARLES L PATAS SOUTH SECOND LLC BRADFORD DEAN KENT 316 SE PIONEER WAY #342 1815 ROLLING HILLS AVE SE 1000 S 2ND ST OAK HARBOR, WA 98277 RENTON, WA 98055 RENTON, WA 98055 BARNETT MARK RIVERVIEW APARTMENTS ATTN: CHAO NANCY CEDAR RIVER COURT CSO GRAN INC 9500 ROOSEVELT WAY NE #100 201 27TH AVE SE #A-200 1016 2ND AVE W SEATTLE, WA 98115 PUYALLUP, WA 98374 SEATTLE, WA 98119 THOMASON DEBRA LEAH PERETTI RAY L REPP WILBUR L 104 MAIN AVE S PO BOX 796 PO BOX 5532 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON, WA 98057 KENT, WA 98064 LYONS JACK A+LEOTA M VISCHER BALDWIN & DANA WELSH JUDITH A 15002 135TH AVE SE PO BOX 2010 101 PARK AVE N RENTON, WA 98058 PORT TOWNSEND, WA 98368 RENTON, WA 98057 RENTON HISTORICAL SOCIETY SYTH BONITA L T3 CAPITAL LLC 235 MILL AVE S 8550 E SPEEDWAY BLVD #202 1222 BRONSON WAY N RENTON, WA 98055 TUCSON, AZ 85710 RENTON, WA 98057 BNSF RAILWAY CO STATE OF WASHINGTON DOT PROPERTY TAX DEPT-AOB 2 26620 68TH AVE S PO BOX 961089 KENT, WA 98032 FORT WORTH, TX 76161 City Of... NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS -M) A Master Application has been filed and accepted with the Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: LAND USE NUMBER: PROJECT NAME: May 29, 2013 LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Renton Library at Liberty Park PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the remodel of the existing Renton Main Library located at 100 Mill Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located across three different parcels including Liberty Park and the parking lot on the south side of the Cedar River. Overall the area of work would impact 37,630 SF and the remodeled library would be 19,680 SF following renovations, The sites zoning is primarily Center Downtown (Ci The proposed improvements to the building would include seismic upgrades, demolition of existing building envelope and installation of new envelope and associated site improvements. The existing vehicular access and parking is not proposed to be changed. All but one trees is proposed to be retained. The applicant submitted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Date Report, Regulated material survey, Geotechnical Engineering Report, Technical information Report. The site is located in the Aquifer Protection zone 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the state and a habitat conservation area. PROJECT LOCATION: 100 Mill Avenue 5 OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED (DNS -M): 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 Di process to give notice that a DNS - M is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed DNS -M are integrated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threshold Determination of i Significance -Mitigated (DNS M}. A 14 -day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS -M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: March 1, 2013 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 29, 2013 APPLICANT/PROJECT CONTACT PERSON: Maaike Post, The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP; 71 Columbia Street, 0 Floor, Seattle, WA 98104 Permits/Review Requested: Environmental (Si Review, Shoreline Permit Review, and Hearing Examiner Site Plan Review Other Permits which may be required: Building and Construction Permit Requested Studies: Geotechnical Report, Habitat Report, and Stream/Lake Study Location where application may he reviewed: Department of Community & Economic Development (CED) — Planning Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057 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.: Renton Library at Liberty Park/LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: City/State/Zip: TELEPHONE NO.: 0 PUBLIC HEARING: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Proposed Mitigation Measures: 101 Public hearing is tentatively scheduled for July 9, 2013 before the Renton Hearing Examiner in Renton Council Chambers at 9:00 a.m. on the 7th floor of the new Renton City Hall located at 1055 South Grady Way. The subject site is designated Urban Center Downtown (UC -D) on the City of Renton Comprehensive Land Use Map and Center Downtown (CD) on the City's Zoning Map. Environmental (SEPA) Checklist The project will be subject to the City's SEPA ordinance, RMC 4-2-120A, RMC 4- 9-070, RMC 4-3-090, RMC 4-9-190, RMC 4-9-200, RMC 4-3-140 and other applicable codes and regulations as appropriate. The following Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project. These recommended Mitigation Measures address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Stream Study and Habitat Data Report prepared by Talasaea Consultants, Inc., dated February 28, 2013 and revised May 10, 2013.; ■ The applicant shall comply with the recommendations included in the Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by GeoEngineers, dated December 20, 1012. Comments on the above application must be submitted in writing to Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner, CED — Planning Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98057, by 5:00 PM on June 12, 2013. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on July 9, 2013, at 9:00 a.m., Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. if you are interested In attending the hearing, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled at (425) 430-7282. If comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments on the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please 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: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7314; Eml: vdolbee@rentonwa.gov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS -M) A Master APPllcatfon has been fired and actepled wlth the Department of Community A Economic Deve;ddi ICEW_ Planning 13Nlsion of the Qty Of Renton, The III Iawl AS briefly desalbes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. DATE OF NOTICE OF APPLICATION: May 29, 2013 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA13-0D0255, EGF, SM, SA -H PROTECT NAM E: Renton Llbrary at Liberty Park PROJECT DEsCAIPTION: The appii[anL Is requesting SEPA Environmental Review, Hearing Examiner Site Poon Aevkw and a shoreline substantial 0evelppment Permit Tor the remodel 01 the iRenton Mein library looted at 100 1 Ave. S. The 22,400 SF library is currently constructed over the Cedar River and is located k and the parking lot the w,th area of threeifferent imprtf3"' o TSF and Liberty P ermotlekd 1 hrary wpuldnbe ]9.680 SP togtthe Cedar Rhaer. ow ng renovatioruOThe yarais [es caning 'u prlmariFy center Downtown ICDI. The proposed Improvements to the building would indo-de seismic upgrades, demGlRbn of existing building envelope and installation of new envelope end associated she Im ,pisting vehlcufu access and parking Is net proposed to be changed. All but one trees Is props provrmenls. The etl m he retained. The applicant suhmhted the following studies with the application: a Stream Study and Habitat Date Repon, Regulated material survey, Geotechnical Engineering Report, Technical Information Aepmt, The site is IGcacad in the Aqui Protection zone 1, flood hazard area, Shoreline of the state and a habitat conservation area. PROJECT LOCATION: 1DO Mik Avenue S OPTIONAL DETERMINATION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE, MITIGATED IDNSi As the Lead Agency, the ❑Ly of Renton has determined that signIscant environmental impacts are unfikeiy to result from the proposed project. Therefore, as permitted under the RCW 93.21[-110, the Dry of Renton Is psing the Optional UNS-M process to give notice that a DNS. M is likely to be issued. Comment perfods for the project and Lha proppsed Di are I-Iturated into a single comment period. There will be no comment period following the issuance of the Threslwid Determination of Non- 54ALFcanee-mitlit. ed (ONS -M). A 14 -day appeal period wlfl fallow the issuance 111 the DNS -M, PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: March 11 2013 NOTICE Or COMPLETE APPLICATION: May 29, 2013 APPLJCANT/pAOJECT CONTACT PERSON: M—lo,Pose, The Miller Pull Partnershlp, L1P; 71 Columbia Street, Ee Floor; Seattle, WA 96104 Permlts/ReAew Requested: Environmental (SEPA) R.0e,, Shoreline Permit Review, and Heaving Examiner She plan Rini Other Permits which may be required: Banding and Cunstruetion Permft Requested Studies: Geotechnical Report, habitat Aeport, and StreamlLaAe study Location where aP'Trivi may be —T—ii Department of Community & Economic Development ICED} - Planning Division, Sixth Eldon Renton City Haff, 1055 Somh Grady Way, Renton, WA 96057 If you would like to be made a Pliny of record to receive further information an chis proposed project comp{ele chis form and re[urn to: City of Renton, CEO - Planning Division, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98052- Name/Elle No.; Renton Library at Liberty P.,VLUA13.000255, ECF, SM, SA -H NAME: MAILING ADDRESS: TELEPHONE NO.: _ PV812C HEARING: �h lir Is ten;. YYscheduletl fnrlu�g 2D 3b r r hsarin xaminer Irt nto C I ?�. e e [he Ren n the new Renton Clry Hall locate p55n5--o �c y Mon the 7th otos of CON5ISTENCy OVERVIEW; Tanfng/Wnd use: The subject site is desjgnaled Urban Center OewnlownUG on the Citi, f Ren In' Comprehensive Land Use Map and Center DOwnlnwnl(CDI On the Gly, Zonhir Map. Envlrnnment:1 Documents that Evaluate the proposed project: Environmentaf DEPAI Lhrckiist De"'E"Imenl Regula einn3 Used For Project Mlllgation: - 9h0 0. RM wilt be . RM to -9. City, SEPA ordinance, AMC a -2-120A, AMC 4. 9-07q RMC 4.3-090, RMC 4-9-i"' RMC 4.4-201 NMC 43.100 and other applicable codes and reguiauons as appropriate. Proposed Mitigatlon Measures: The toil—mg Mitigation Measures will Irkely be in+ppsed on the ,d project, These sato mme ndal MlUgatioA Measures adtlrese project Imp posed covered 4evis[Ing codes and regalalions as dtedab ove. pacts not ' 11 nppd'by 7 1ho11 comply wTh the —"Aitrchded in the 5lreom Stilly and Hobrrot Qoro N prrpared8y7olnsaeo[prlsuffenu,lnr. dared FrbrWry78, 20.3 nqd re oiled May 10. 71 rpa� Thr app""", shoo comply with the recammepdotlons inrlUded in E chnical npinrerinQ S:udY prepGred by G"OE""nrers, cored December she Geote 20, ]012. Comments an the above appheatlon must be subrglt[ed In wdting to Vanessa DelRee, Senior Planner, CEP_ 11hinlan, 2055 South Grady way, penton, WA 96oS7, by 5:00 PM on lune 12, 2013, Thi, matter h also [antativrly alv1sh n, 05 r pub, Marin Planning g on furl. 9' 2013, at 9:111 a.m [ou„cil Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton G South Grady Way, Renton, 11 you are interes[etl in attending the heaving, please contact the Planning Division to ensure that the hearing has scat been rescheduled at (425) 430-7281, If commenh cannot be submitted In writing by the date Indlcased above, you may stlR appear at the hearing ar,d present your comments on the proposal before the Hearing E'arniner. p you have questions about this proposal. Gr wish to 4e made a party of record and receive additional information by mad, please contact the project manager. Anyone who SUbmlts written comments wiR automatically become a party of record all will be notified of limy decision on this project, CONTACT PERSON: Vanessa Aolbee, Senior Planner; Tel: (425) 430-7314; Ernl; vd o l b e e 0 r e n to n w a. g ov PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING F PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION r y . alt Df REN70N;AJIFASSOFTNECURNE enti 1n - :":111J[+l rIM0 I, -5fi -U-D _- hereby certify that `4 copies of the above document were posted in conspicuous places or nearby the described property on Date: Signed:ri--- STATE OF WASHINGTON j SS COUN"i OF KING ) certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that / � k i S 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:i'11.26i j,3 Yr A _ Notary Public In and for the State of Washington �z r ^ ��'� � may''.., z 15, , y :z : so � y Notary (Print): l' f zti 1111 0 :z Aty9v �= = y appointment expires: ,A Is �11i i 3 Denis o Ma V%' r Law Cl � O` }f :� . r Department of Community and Economic Development May 29, 2013 C.E."Chip"Vincent, Administrator Maaike Post The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP 71 Columbia Street, 6th Floor Seattle, WA 98104 Subject: Notice of Complete Application Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255, ECF, SM, SA -H Dear Mr. Post: The Planning Division of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is complete according to submittal requirements and, therefore, is accepted for review. It is tentatively scheduled for consideration by the Environmental Review Committee, on June 17, 2013. Prior to that review, you will be notified if any additional information is required to continue processing your application. In addition, this matter is tentatively scheduled for a Public Hearing on July 9, 2013 at 9:00 a.m., Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. The applicant or representatives) of the applicant are required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you prior to the scheduled hearing. Please contact me at (425) 430-7314 if you have any questions. Sincerely, fV U'U �- D 0& Vanessa Dolbee Senior Planner M. Greg Smith - KCLS / Applicant Renton City Hall . 1055 South Grady Way . Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Denis Law City Mayor Cf_, AFF - .i March 26, 2013 Maaike Post The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP 71 Columbia St., 6ri' Floor Seattle, WA 98104 Subject: Notice of Incomplete Application Renton Library at Liberty Park, LUA13-000255 Dear Ms. Post: Mayor's Office The city received your application for SEPA Environmental Review, Site Plan Review, and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit on March 5, 2013. Following submittal, the PlanningDivision of the City of Renton has determined that the subject application is incomplete according to the interlocal agreement between the City of Renton and King County Library System, Contract Agreement.11-130, dated July 11, 2011, pursuant to Section 4. Design and Bid, subsection c. Selection of Final Design, the city and KCLS are required to approve a design for the library project. At this time, the city has not approved the design submitted on March 5, 2013. The final design approval will be the result of City Council action. Until the City Council approves the design, the subject application will not be deemed complete and the application will not be processed. In order to continue processing your application, the final design shall be approved by the City Council and KCLS. If the design approved by City Council is not consistent with the design currently submitted to the city; new plan sets, including but not limited to, site plan, elevations, drainage plans, floor plans, etc. reflecting the approved design would be required to be submitted. If you have any questions, please contact Vanessa Dolbee, City of Renton Senior Planner, at 425-430-7314. Sincerely, I _JA Jay Covington Chief Administrative Officer JC. -aa cc: City of Renton / Owner(s) G reg Smith KCLS / App€€ca Int Renton City Hall a 1055 South Grady Way • Renton, Washington 98057 • rentonwa.gov Vanessa Dolbee From: Bob MacOnie Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 4:21 PMg c1, To: Vanessa Dolbee Cc: Peter Renner 7 Subject: Library over the Cedar River Fallow Up Flag: Fallow up AIAR " ipri Flag Status: Flagged 6, Vanessa, cz��� To follow up on our conversation. The Cedar River at the library lies within the "Cedar River Waterway" which is a right of way of the City of Renton. Therefore there are no easements per say within the waterway limits and any third party utilities lying within the waterway are operating under their franchise agreement with the City. Bob Mapping Coordinator CED/Planning - 6th Floor 1055 5 Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.7369 bmaconie@ rentonwa.goy UA 1 ,'-'= UL qty of Renton P1anr+ing Division REVI USE PERMIT oate9 13��E�R APPLICATION PROPERTY OWNER(S) NAME: City of Renton (contact Peter Renner) ADDRESS: 1055 South Grady Way CITY: Renton, WA ZIP: 98057 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425.430.6605 APPLICANT (if other than owner) NAME: Greg Smith COMPANY (if applicable): King County Library System ADDRESS: 960 Newport Way NW CITY: Issaquah, WA ZIP: 98027 TELEPHONE NUMBER: 425.369.3237 CONTACT PERSON NAME: Maaike Post COMPANY (if applicable): Miller Hull Partnership ADDRESS: 71 Columbia St. — sixth floor CITY: Seattle, WA ZIP: 98104-1031 TELEPHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL ADDRESS: 206.6$2.6837 mpost@millerhull.com PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: Renton Library at Liberty Park PROJECT/ADDRESS(S)/LOCATION AND ZIP CODE: 100 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98057 i KING COUNTY ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 768500-0010 Parking Lot 172305-9011 Liberty Park Comm Bldg 172305-9043 Renton Library & Skateboard Park .,I I L C, EXISTING LAND USE(S): Surface Parking, Public Park, Cultural Facility (Library) PROPOSED LAND USE(S): Surface Parking, Public Park, Cultural Facility (Library) EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: UC -D (Urban Center Downtown) PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable): NIA EXISTING ZONING: CD - Center Downtown PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): NIA SITE AREA (in square feet): Total area of three affected parcels: 305,958 SF Area within limit of work: 37,630 SF SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PUBLIC ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED: NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PRIVATE ACCESS EASEMENTS: NIA PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN UNITS PER NET ACRE (if applicable): NIA NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): NIA NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): NIA C'.Userslprenner.Apps)mall,ocnP�.h1 icrosafllSL'indows�7empurary Internet FilesTontent.Ovt1wk%F4TkIB14)Ut04 - mastcrapp.duc PJECT INFORMATION contifted) NUMBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (if applicable): NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): NIA SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): N/A SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (if applicable): 19,680 SF(gross) NET FLOOR AREA ON NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): NIA NUMBER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEW PROJECT (if applicable): 5-7 (approximate) PROJECT VALUE: $6.2 million (approximate) IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): ✓ AQUIFIER PROTECTION AREA ONE in .. mm-_! -. .. ✓ FLOOD HAZARD AREA 9,372 sq. ft. IMWi9gal WATAfiw!rwx,,wrlr • :� ✓ HABITAT CONSERVATION 38,980 sq. ft. ✓ SHORELINE STREAMS & LAKES 38,980 sq. ft. I LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach legal description on separate sheet with the following information included) (SEE ATTACHED) 3. 1-7_ AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP I, (Print Name/s) t"7 cyr ryr r c Ir , declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that I am (please check one) the current owner of the property involved in this application or L --The authorized representative to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authorization) and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contaipq and the information herewith are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. I 51,12,W3 Signature of Owner/Representative Date STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) Signature of Owner/Representative Date certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that signed this instrument and acknowledge it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purpose mentioned in the instrument. Dated �•�~� fits Notary Public in and for th State of Washington 4 �`��h1N141yy�' /// Q�wRY �SZ Notary (Print): f .. { . 6 s " .)O My appointment expires: 4i :) ! '-tc( C,\Users.prenner%..AppDatalLocal,'4licrosotlt'}i l! , rary`lnt � Filee Content 0w]ook',F4TLIRV111P,O4-maSterapp doc -Z- �114ti�.,..���\��� PAJECT INFORMATION (contimed) RENTON LIBRARY at LIBERTY PARK LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF SITE: 768500-0010: SEES A ALDEN 1ST ADD TO RENTON 172305-9011: TRACT IN SE COR OF GL 2 LY E OF SNOQUALMIE CO RD & BET SD RD & C W W # 2 172305-9043: BEG AT INTS OF W LN OF SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 & S LN OF CO RD AT A PT 721.39 FT S OF NW COR OF SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 TH E AT R/A TO SD W LN 653.03 FT TO W LN OF A TRACT OF LAND OWNED BY SEATTLE CAR & FOUNDRY CO TH SWLY ALG SD W LN PARL TO & 100 FT WILY OF WILY LN OF R/W C & P S RY CO,NEW CASTLE BRANCH, A DIST OF 597.33 FT TO N LY LN OF C W W # 2 TH NWLY ALG SD N LN 440.8 FT TO W LN OF SD SE 1/4 OF NW 1/4 TH N 293.10 FT TO BEG ClUsers.prenner�.4ppf)aiaU,ocall.h1 icrosoftiWindowslTemporaryInternet Filesicontent_0udooVF4TURVOL164-m sterapp doc -3 - PRE• PLICATION MEETINGIOR Renton Library at Liberty Park 100 Mill Avenue South PRE 13-000087 S_ CITY OF RENTON Department of Community & Economic Development Planning Division February 7, 2013 Contact Information: Planner: Vanessa Dolbee, 425.430.7314 Public Works Plan Reviewer: Kayren Kittrick, 425.430.7299 Fire Prevention Reviewer: Corey Thomas, 425.430.7024 Building Department Reviewer: Craig Burnell, 425.430.7290 Please retain this packet throughout the course of your project as a reference. Consider giving copies of it to any engineers, architects, and contractors who work on the project. You will need to submit a copy of this packet when you apply for land use and/or environmental permits. Pre-screening: When you have the project application ready for submittal, call and schedule an appointment with the project manager to have it pre-screened before making all of the required copies. The pre -application meeting is informal and non-binding. The comments provided on the proposal are based on the codes and policies in effect at the time of review. The applicant is cautioned that the development regulations are regularly amended and the proposal will be formally reviewed under the regulations in effect at the time of project submittal. The information contained in this summary is subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision -makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Planning Director, Development Services Director, Department of Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator and City Council). Fire & Emergency Servi c C . f, Department r► f tz- M E M D R A N D U M DATE: 1/25/2013 12:00:OOAM TO: Vanessa ©olbee, Senior Planner FROM: Corey Thomas, Plan Review/Inspector SUBJECT: (Renton Library at Liberty Park) PRE13-000087 1. The fire hydrant and fire flow requirements for the proposed library are adequate as they exist . 2. The existing automatic fire sprinkler system will be required to be modified for any tenant improvement work. 3. The existing fire department apparatus access roads are adequate. 4. The existing automatic fire alarm system shall be replaced with an all new system as the existing system cannot meet current fire code requirements. System shall be fully addressable and full detection is required. 5. Exiting shall meet all current building and fire code requirements. Page 1 of 1 )EPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY .ND ECONOMIC DEVELWMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: 2/6/2013 12:00:OOAM TO, Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner FROM: Kayren Kittrick, Dev Eng Supervisor SUBJECT: (Renton Library at Liberty Park) PRE13-000087 NOTE: The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary is preliminary and non -binding and may not subject to modification and/or concurrence by official city -decision -makers. Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. I have completed a preliminary review for the above -referenced proposal. The following comments are based on the pre -application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant. NOTE: The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary is preliminary and non -binding and may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official city decision -makers. Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. I have completed a preliminary review for the above -referenced proposal. The following comments are based on the pre -application submittal made to the City of Renton by the applicant. Water 1. Water service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an existing 8 -inch water main in Mill Avenue South as well on the northerly side of the triangular property. This site is located in the 196 -water pressure zone. 2. As part of this project, the existing non -conforming 4 -inch DCVA for the fire sprinkler system located in the existing vault must be replaced with a new and State approved Detector Double Check Valve Assembly (DDCVA). The contractor needs to verify if the new DDCVA can fit in the existing vault or a larger vault may be needed. 3. New hydrants, if any, shall be installed per Renton `s fire department standards to provide the required coverage of the new building. Existing hydrants counted as fire protection shall be retrofitted with Storz fittings if not already in place. Sanitary Sewer 1. Sewer service is provided by the City of Renton. There is an 8 -inch sewer main in Mill Avenue South with a manhole at the intersection with South 2nd Street. The existing sewer service connection extends southerly to this main. 2. The project is required to cut and cap the existing side sewer at the property line as part of the demolition permit. A new side sewer shall be installed to the updated building as condition of the building permit. 3. Page 1 of 2 Storm Drainage 1. The FEMA approved 100 -year b flood elevation at the Renton Library er the Cedar River is elevation 39.62 based upon the NAVD 88 Datura per the FEMA approved 2006 Cedar River Letter of Map Revision (LOMR) Case No. 06-10-13596P. 2. The Library is located over the floodway of the Cedar River and any work within the floodplain or the floodway would have to comply with City adopted flood hazard regulations in the Critical Areas Ordinance and FEMA National Flood Insurance Program regulations. This also includes compliance with the National Marine Fisheries Biological Opinion Reasonable and Prudent Alternatives regarding the National Flood Insurance Program compliance with the Endangered Species Act, as they relate to development in the FEMA floodplain. 3. FEMA regulations require that when a structure is located in the 100 -year floodplain, any substantial improvements (i.e. when cost of improvements exceeds 50% of the appraised value of the structure) require the structure to be brought up to current floodplain development standards. Any improvements within the floodplain or floodway, such as placement of fill, piers or supports as part of the seismic retrofit work within the floodplain or floodway, will need to comply with FEMA floodplain requirements. 4. The applicant must show the 100 -year base flood elevation (39.62 NAVD 88 Datum) on the construction plans. 5. A drainage plan and drainage report will be required with the site plan application. The report shall comply with the 2009 King County Surface Water Manual and the 2009 City of Renton Amendments to the KCSWM, Chapters 1 and 2. All core and any special requirements shall be contained in the report. Based on the City's flow control map, this site falls within the Peak Rate Flow Control Standard, Existing Site Conditions. Transportation/Street 1. To meet the City's complete street standard for non-residential non -arterial roads in the Central Downtown district, street improvements including a 12 -foot sidewalk with cut-outs for street trees are required to be constructed within the project. A modification or variance will be considered as the site limitations and parking requirements are evaluated. 2. A traffic study will not be required for this project. General Comments 1. All construction utility permits for drainage and street improvements will require separate plan submittals. All utility plans shall conform to the Renton Drafting Standards. Plans shall be prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer. 2. Separate permit and fees will be required for the water meter installation, side sewer connection, and storm water connection_ Page 2 of 2 0 0 DEPARTMENT OE- City or COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT M E M O R A N D U M DATE: February 7, 2013 TO: Pre -Application File No. 13-000087 FROM: Vanessa Dolbee, Senior Planner SUBJECT: Renton Library at Liberty Park General: We have completed a preliminary review of the pre -application for the above - referenced development proposal. The following comments on development and permitting issues are based on the pre -application submittals made to the City of Renton by the applicant and the codes in effect on the date of review. The applicant is cautioned that information contained in this summary may be subject to modification and/or concurrence by official decision -makers (e.g., Hearing Examiner, Community & Economic Development Administrator, Public Works Administrator, Planning Director, Development Services Director, and City Council). Review comments may also need to be revised based on site planning and other design changes required by City staff or made by the applicant. The applicant is encouraged to review all applicable sections of the Renton Municipal Code. The Development Regulations are available for purchase for $50.00 plus tax, from the Finance Division on the first floor of City Hall or online at www_rentonwa.gov Project Proposal. The subject property is located over the Cedar River at 100 Mill Avenue South. The project site is not entirely located on a tax parcel as portions of the building are over the River. The associated tax parcel number 768500-0010 is 41,758 SF plus approxamily 35,000 square feet of additional work, over the river and extending into Liberty Park for an approximate total area of impact of 76,758 SF. The pre -application packet indicates that the proposal is to upgrade the existing structure to seismic standards, which would include demolition of the existing building (walls, roof and floor) and rebuilding the building within the same envelope and installation of new site improvements as a result of the seismically required below -grade concrete abutments. The renovation would reduce the size of the library from 22,000 SF to 16,000 SF. Access to the site would be maintained as it exists today, off of Mill Avenue South. The project is located over the Cedar River, a shoreline of the State, would be located within the 100 year flood plain and/or flood way, aquifer protection zone 1, and contains geological hazards (steep slopes and seismic hazards). Current Use: The property currently contains the Renton Main Library, which is proposed to be remodeled to 16,000 SF from the current 22,000 SF building. Zoning: The subject site is located over the Cedar River; the river itself does not have zoning; however zoning is applied on both the north and south banks of the river. The north shoreline is zoned Commercial Arterial (CA) and the south shoreline is zoned Center Downtown (CD). The h.\ced\planning current planning`preapps\13-000087.vanessa\13-000087 (cd liberty park libary).doc Renton Library at Liberty Par E13-CO0087 Page 2 of 8 February 7, 2013 sites main entrance, parking lot and access is along the south shoreline. Due to,the Library's primary access and the majority of the development along the south shoreline, City staff has determined that the CD zone would be applicable to the subject development. Therefore the following report addresses development standards located in the CD zone. Because the subject property is located within the Center Downtown (CD) zoning designation, the proposal would be subject to the Design District "A" standards and guidelines. Proposals should have unique, identifiable design treatment In terms of landscaping, building design, signage and street furniture. The project is also located in the City Center Sign Regulation Area. Development Standards: The project would be subject to RMC 4-2-120A, "Development Standards for Commercial Zoning Designations" effective at the time of complete application (noted as "CD standards" herein). The library would be considered a "government office and facility" in the City's use table and therefore would be subject to a Hearing Examiner's Conditional Use Permit. However, the library use has been established at the subject site since 1968 (Building permit application was June 1, 1965) and the proposal would not be expanding the use. Based on the established use and proposal to reduce the size a Conditional Use Permit would not be required. Minimum Lot Size Width and Depth — There are no minimum requirements for lot size, width or depth within the CD zone. Lot size, width and depth standards would not be applicable to the proposal unless the applicant is proposing to subdivide the property. Lot Coverage —There is no maximum building requirement in the CD zoning classification. Setbacks — Setbacks are the distance between the building and the property line or any private access easement. Setback requirements in the CD zone are as follows: 0 -foot minimum for the front yard setback and a 15 foot maximum front yard setback for buildings 25 ft. or less in height and none for portions of the building over 25 ft. in height; 0 -foot minimum side yard and rear yard setbacks_ The existing building would be considered a non -conforming structure and therefore would be subject to RMC4-10-050 Nonconforming Structures. Therefore, the cost of the alterations of a legal nonconforming structure shall not exceed an aggregate cost of fifty percent (50%) of the value of the structure, based upon its most recent assessment or appraisal, unless the alterations make the structure more conforming, or is used to restore to a safe condition any portion of a structure declared unsafe by a proper authority. Alterations shall not result in or increase any nonconforming condition. Based on the above, the restoration of the subject building would be to bring the project into compliance with currently adopted seismic standards which would increase the conformity of the structure. The new building would not meet the maximum front yard setback of 15 feet and the building appears to cross existing parcel lines and therefore may not be in conformance with other setback standards. It appears the proposed remodel would not increase the nonconformity of the existing condition and therefore would be acceptable pursuant to RMC 4- 10-050. Gross Floor Area — There is no minimum requirements for gross floor area within the CD zone. Building Height — The maximum building height that would be allowed in the CD zone is 95 feet, however such height would be restricted by the Airport Part 77 Surface Area overlay. h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\13-000087.vanessa\13-000087 (cd liberty park libary).doc Renton Library at Liberty ParlpE13-ff00087 Page 3 of 8 February 7, 2013 The applicant did not provide elevations with the application, however assuming the building would not be any taller than it is today, and the project would comply with the height restrictions of the CD zone. Building elevations and detailed descriptions of elements and building materials are required with your site plan review submittal. Screening — Screening must be provided for all surface -mounted and roof top utility and mechanical equipment. The site plan application will need to include elevations and details for the proposed methods of screening. Refuse and Recycling Areas — Refuse and recycling areas need to meet the requirements of RMC 4-4-090, "Refuse and Recyclables Standards" (enclosed). For office, educational, and institutional developments a minimum of 2 square feet per every 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for recyclable deposit areas and a minimum of 4 square feet per 1,000 square feet of building gross floor area shall be provided for refuse deposit areas with a total minimum area of 100 square feet. Based on the proposal for a total of 16,000 square feet space; a minimum area of 100 square feet of refuse and recycle area would be required. The sizing of the proposed refuse and recycle area could not be verified with the materials submitted. Details of the reface and recycling facility and screening shall be provided at site Plan Review. Landscaping —The requirements of this section shall apply to the entire site and parking areas if the remodel of a structure requires improvements equal to or greater than fifty percent (50°x6) of the assessed property valuation. Except for critical areas, all portions of the development area not covered by structures, required parking, access, circulation or service areas, must be landscaped with native, drought - resistant vegetative cover. The development standards require that all pervious areas within the property boundaries be landscaped. The minimum on --site landscape width required along street frontages is 10 feet, except where reduced through the site plan development review process. Please refer to landscape regulations (RMC 4-4-070) for additional general and specific landscape requirements (enclosed). A conceptual landscape plan and landscape analysis meeting the requirements in RMC 4-8-1200.12, shall be submitted at the time of application for Site Plan Review. Tree Preservation — A tree inventory and a tree retention plan along with a tree retention worksheet shall be provided with the formal land use application. The tree retention plan must show preservation of at least S percent of significant trees. If the trees cannot be retained, they may be replaced with minimum 2 inch caliper trees at a rate of six to one. Fences — If the applicant intends to install any fences as part of this project, the location must be designated on the landscape plan. A fence detail should also be included on the plan as well. Parkin — Within the Center Downtown Zone, parking loading and driveway regulations are applicable only to the area exceeding the area of the original structure, in terms of calculating the required parking. Based on a proposal to reduce the square footage of the structure, staff would not require any new parking as a part -of the application. However, for your information, if changes are proposed to the parking lot the following standards would be applicable: hAced\planninglcurrent planning\preapps\13-000087.vanessa\13-000087 (cd liberty park libary).doc Renton Library at Liberty Par* 13-000087 is Page 4 of 8 February 7, 2013 Parking regulations specify standard stall dimensions. Surface parking stalls must be a minimum of 9 feet x 20 feet, compact dimensions of 8% feet x 16 feet, and parallel stall dimensions of 9 feet x 23 feet; compact surface parking spaces shall not account for more than 30 percent of the spaces in the surface parking lots. ADA accessible stalls must be a minimum of 8 feet in width by 20 feet in length, with an adjacent access aisle of 8 feet in width for van accessible spaces. The appropriate amount of ADA accessible stalls based on the total number of spaces must be provided. Please refer to landscape regulations (RMC 4-4-070 and RMC 4-4-080F.7) for further general and specific landscape requirements (enclosed). Access — Driveway widths are limited by the driveway standards, in RMC 4-40801. If any new access points are proposed as a part of the project they shall comply with these standards. Building Design Standards — Compliance with Urban Design Regulations, District W', is required along the eastern facade. See the attached checklist and Renton Municipal Code section 443- 100. The following bullets are a few of the standards outlined in the regulations. 1. A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing a street, shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human -scale elements. 2. Facades shall be articulated and vehicular entrances to nonresidential or mixed use parking structures shall be articulated by arches, lintels, masonry trim, or other architectural elements and/or materials. 3. Pedestrian pathways within parking lots or parking modules shall be differentiated by material or texture from abutting paving materials. 4. Site furniture shall be provided and shall be made of durable, vandal- and weather - resistant materials that do not retain rainwater and can be reasonably maintained over an extended period of time. 5. Amount of common space or recreation area to be provided is minimum fifty (50) square feet per unit. 6. All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than forty feet (40'). 7. Human -scaled elements such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature shall be provided along the facade's ground floor. 8. Lighting shall also be provided on building facades (Such as sconces) and/or to illuminate other key elements of the site such as specimen trees, other significant landscaping, water features, and/or artwork. Elevations and other details shall be provided with the Site Plan Review application to verify compliance with the above Design District standards. Critical Areas Geological Hazards: Steep slopes and seismic hazards have been identified on or near the subject site. A geotechnical study shall be provided by a qualified professional with the land use application. The study shall demonstrate that the proposal will not increase the threat of the geological hazard to adjacent properties beyond the pre -development conditions, the proposal h:Aceftlanning\current planning1preapps113-000W7.vanessa\13-000087 (cd liberty park libary).doc Renton Library at Liberty Pa E13-000087 Page 5 of 8 February 7, 2013 will not adversely impact other critical areas, and the development can be safely accommodated on the site. to addition, the study shall assess soil conditions and detail construction measures to assure building stability. Portions of the Cedar River bank appear to be identified as "sensitive" and "protected" slopes. Protected slopes are defined as topographical features that slope in excess of 40% and have a vertical rise of 15 feet or more. if any work is planned on a "protected slope" a Variance from the Critical Areas regulations would be required. Aquifer Protection Zone 1: The City of Renton's Critical Areas reaps indicate the subject site is located within the Aquifer Protection Area, Zone 1. The overall purpose of the aquifer protection regulations is to protect aquifers used as potable water supply sources by the City from contamination by hazardous materials. Some uses are restricted that store, handle, treat, use, or produce substances that pose a hazard to groundwater quality. if fill is used, then a fill source statement is needed. Flood lain and Floodwa : If the development is located in the floodplain and/or the floodway, the applicant would be required to address the issues raised in the Final Biological Opinion And Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act Essential Fish Habitat Consultation and propose mitigation for any anticipated impacts as it would relate to the referenced publication, in the SEPA review for the project. The SEPA checklist should be provided to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for their review and comment. In addition, a Floodplain Biological Assessment shall be provided. Shoreline: The project site is within the Shoreline area of Reach B of the Cedar River and would therefore be subject the regulations within the City's Shoreline Master Program. The site is designated as Shoreline High Intensity, pursuant to the Shoreline Environment Overlay. The Cedar River is a Class 1 water of the state and any development within 200 -feet of the ordinary high water mark of the River would be required to comply with the Shoreline Master Program. As proposed many portions of the development would be located within 200 -feet of the shoreline, as such a stream study would he required, in addition to a Habitat Assessment. Additionally, if impacts to the stream are proposed a supplemental stream study would be required. The studies should identify "no net loss of ecological function" as a result of the overall project. The project would be required to comply with the standards of RMC 4-10-095 Shoreline Master Program, Nonconforming Uses, Activities, Structures and Sites. Pursuant to sub -section F. the following would be applicable: Alteration of an Existing Structure (compliance Standard Alteration Expansion or remodel that does not Without change the building footprint or increase No site changes required. Expansion I impervious surface. Minor Expansion of building footprint by up to Install site improvements that protect the ecological Alteration 500 sq. ft. or up to 10% (whichever is functions and processes of the shoreline, consisting of less); or I either: Expansion of impervious surface by up to` o partial compliance with Vegetation Conservation 1,000 sq. ft. or up to 10% (whichever isl provisions of RMC 4-3-090F1, Vegetation Conservation, h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps\13-000087.vanessa\13-000087 (cd liberty park libary).doc Renton Library at Liberty Park 13-000087 Page 6 of 8 February 7, 2013 consisting of revegetation of a native community of at least 50% of the area between an existing building and the water's edge; provided, that the area to be revegetated does not exceed 10 ft., unless a greater area is desired by the applicant, or o An alternate mitigation proposal: prepared by a qualified professional and approved by Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee that would provide at least equal protection of ecological functions and processes as the full required* setback and buffer. • Remove over water structures that do not provide public access, or do not serve a water -dependent use. ,install site improvements that protect the ecological functions and processes of the shoreline, consisting of either: o Partial compliance with Vegetation Conservation provisions of RMC 4-3-09OF1, Vegetation Conservation, consisting of revegetation of a native community of at least 80% of the area between an existing building and the waters edge, or at least 10 ft., or a An alternate mitigation proposal prepared by a qualified professional and approved by the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee that would provide at least equal protection of ecological functions and processes as the full required* setback and buffer. • Remove over water structures that do not provide public access, or do not serve a water -dependent use. • Piers and docks shall be required to replace any solid decking with light penetrating surfacing materials. • Install site improvements that protect the ecological functions and processes of the shoreline, consisting of either: o Full compliance with Vegetation Conservation provisions of RMC 4-3-090FI, Vegetation Conservation, consisting of revegetation of a native community of the full required* buffer, or 100% of the area between an existing building and the waters edge if the full buffer cannot be planted, or at least 10 ft., or o An alternate mitigation proposal prepared by a qualified professional and approved by the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps113-000087.vanessa`13-000087 (cd liberty park libary).doc less); or Remodeling or renovation that equals less than 30% of the replacement value of the existing structures or improvements, excluding plumbing, electrical and mechanical systems and normal repair and maintenance. Moderate Expansion of building footprint by more Alteration than 500 sq. ft. or between 10.1-25% (whichever is less); or Expansion of impervious surface by more than 1,OD0 sq. ft., or between 10.1-25% (whichever is less); or Remodeling or renovation that equals 30.1-50% of the replacement value of the existing structures or improvements, excluding plumbing, electrical and mechanical systems and normal repair and maintenance. Major Alteration Expansion of building footprint by more than 25%; or Expansion of impervious surface by more than 25%; or Remodeling or renovation that equals more than 50% of the replacement value of the existing structures or improvements, excluding plumbing, electrical and mechanical systems and normal repair and maintenance. consisting of revegetation of a native community of at least 50% of the area between an existing building and the water's edge; provided, that the area to be revegetated does not exceed 10 ft., unless a greater area is desired by the applicant, or o An alternate mitigation proposal: prepared by a qualified professional and approved by Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee that would provide at least equal protection of ecological functions and processes as the full required* setback and buffer. • Remove over water structures that do not provide public access, or do not serve a water -dependent use. ,install site improvements that protect the ecological functions and processes of the shoreline, consisting of either: o Partial compliance with Vegetation Conservation provisions of RMC 4-3-09OF1, Vegetation Conservation, consisting of revegetation of a native community of at least 80% of the area between an existing building and the waters edge, or at least 10 ft., or a An alternate mitigation proposal prepared by a qualified professional and approved by the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee that would provide at least equal protection of ecological functions and processes as the full required* setback and buffer. • Remove over water structures that do not provide public access, or do not serve a water -dependent use. • Piers and docks shall be required to replace any solid decking with light penetrating surfacing materials. • Install site improvements that protect the ecological functions and processes of the shoreline, consisting of either: o Full compliance with Vegetation Conservation provisions of RMC 4-3-090FI, Vegetation Conservation, consisting of revegetation of a native community of the full required* buffer, or 100% of the area between an existing building and the waters edge if the full buffer cannot be planted, or at least 10 ft., or o An alternate mitigation proposal prepared by a qualified professional and approved by the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development h:\ced\planning\current planning\preapps113-000087.vanessa`13-000087 (cd liberty park libary).doc Rentan Library at Liberty Par* E13-000087 Page 7 of 8 February 7, 2013 Environmental Review 0 or designee that would provide at least eRual protection of ecological functions and processes as the full required` setback and buffer_ • Remove over water structures that do not provide public] access, or do not serve a water -dependent use. • piers and docks shall be required to replace any solid decking with light penetrating surfacing materials. • Developments with existing shoreline stabilization shall mitigate fur the impacts of shoreline stabilization in one of the following ways: o Shoreline stabilization structures not conforming to, or otherwise permitted by, the provisions of this Code shall be reviewed and upgraded according to the standards of RMC 4-3-090F4aiii, Shoreline Stabilization Alternatives Hierarchy, or o An alternative mitigation proposal prepared by a qualified professional and approved by the Administrator of the Department of Community and Economic Development or designee that would identify near shore mitigation to improve shoreline function or values on-site, or o If the two alternatives above are infeasible, then the project proponent shall contribute to an off-site vegetatlon conservation fund, in accordance with RMC 4- 3-090F1k. The proposed project would be subject to Washington State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) review due to the projects location on lands covered by water. Therefore, an environmental checklist is a submittal requirement. An environmental determination will be made by the Renton Environmental Review Committee. This determination is subject to appeal by either the project proponent, by a citizen of the community, or another entity having standing for an appeal. Permit Requirements The proposal would require Administrative Site Plan review, Environmental (SEPA) Review and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. The purpose of the Site Flan process is the detailed arrangement of project elements so as to be compatible with the physical characteristics of a site and with the surrounding area. An additional purpose of Site Plan is to ensure quality development consistent with City goals and policies. General review criteria includes the following: a. Compliance and Consistency. Conformance with plans, policies, regulations and approvals, including: b, Off -Site Impacts. Mitigation of impacts to surrounding properties and uses. h:\ced`planning\current planning\preapps\l3-OD0087.vanessa\l3-OD0087 (cd liberty park iibary).doc Renton Library at Liberty Pari E13-000087 Page 8 of 8 February 7, 2013 c. On -Site Impacts. Mitigation of impacts to the site d. Access and Circulation. Safe and efficient access and circulation for all users. e. Open Space. Incorporation of public and private open spaces to serve as distinctive project focal points and to provide adequate areas for passive and active recreation by the occupants/users of the site.- f. ite;f. Views and Public Access. Provision of view corridors to shorelines and Mt. Rainier, incorporates public access to shorelines, and arranges project elements to protect existing natural systems where applicable. g. Services and infrastructure. Availability of public services and facilities to accommodate the proposed use; h. Signage. Use of signs primarily for the purpose of identification and management of sign elements — such as the number, size, brightness, lighting intensity, and location — to complement the visual character of the surrounding area, avoid visual clutter and distraction, and appear in proportion to the building and site to which they pertain; and L Phasing. Inclusion of a detailed sequencing plan with development phases and estimated time frames, if applicable. **It should be noted that the project is only required to go through Administrative Site Plan Review process, however pursuant to RMC 4-9-200D.2.a. a Public Hearing may be required if the ERC Committee determines that there are significant unresolved concerns raised by the proposal, based on departmental comments or public input. City staff anticipates that a public hearing will be required far the subject project. The applicant will also be subject to Design Review as part of the Site Plan Review and a Design Checklist shall be completed and submitted as part of the application materials. All applications can be reviewed concurrently in an estimated time frame of 12 weeks once a complete application is accepted. The Site Pian Review application fee is $1,000. The application fee for SEPA Review (Environmental Checklist) is $1,000 and the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit is $2,000. Modification requests are $100 each. There is an additional 3% technology fee charged at the time of land use application. Detailed information regarding the land use application submittal is provided in the attached handouts. In addition to the required land use permits, separate construction, building and sign permits would be required. The review of these permits may occur concurrently with the review of the hand use permits, but cannot be issued prior to the completion of any appeal periods. Impact Fees: In addition to the applicable building and construction fees, impact fees would be required prior to the issuance of building permits. Please refer to the attached handout for applicable impact fees. Expiration_ Upon site plan approval, the site pian approval is valid for two years with a possible two-year extension. h:\ced\planning\current plan ning\preapps113-000087.vanessa\13-000087 (cd liberty park libary).doc Zoning Mates None 1: 3,738 341 0 156 391 Feel NAD IM HARN_StatePiane_Nrash:ngton_ Nortt7 FIps 4$01 Cirr ty Of .�N w Rnance & IT Division Legend Jurisdiction Boundaries RM -r Resden:ia Mon Far :ly I.. I pthvr !:.i RM -T Rvsiavrstiat Multi-Famly r: adbonal l City rA fiemon RrA-U Resigcnt=al IAilts-F=01 Urban Cramer Addresses Cly, Center Vtl1age ED Parcels Co Center boan;nwn Zoning UC441 Urban Center - North I RC P,esowco Coraerva1w UC -N2 t]rban Crmlar - Nora 2 R -I RCsident=al 1 CWIs ■ COR Cxn mal OffcalResidenital R -d Resldent,al 4 Wac 34 C=meraar Ar:er�r� R-8 Res4efmal 8 OWac ? CO Commercla! Otr�co Information Teehn&ogy - GIS This rnnp is a user genum:ud static mlpi t from rt Internet mapping rile acid is for rerererre on:y Data layers that appe3f pr, 0115 map may or may not ue RenlonlulapSuppor4 Rentonwa.gov aICWace, Cu{ref'l, or otltemY Sa re! ab;e 2/412013 THIS MAP IS NOT TO 0E USED FOR NAVIGATION NOWS None " L�J 1: 3,738 311 0 156 311 Feel NAD _1983_HAR N_State Pi3ne_Washington_ North FIP5 4601 79 Cl Of on ', FinanCt & IT Division Legend J.insdiction Boundaries LQly U 7Unton Addresses Parcels Information Tethnology - GIS Tn;s Map �S a L,ser 9cneraed stdli,.. or;tp,t IrOm cn tnlcrngc mapping ;do and RentcnMa Su is T0x rare E kp WY Da,a lavors thal lPpew on Ihis map may or may not ts_ p pporl�itentonwa.gov as late, cwrenl, or olnNw:se rclia�N 2/4/2013 THSS MAP IS NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION PLANNING DIVISION WAIVERISF SUBMITTAL REQUIREOENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS -::;�Ftil!IU€ail:��h';�t�€MIT':S.iJ�METT�►L:=;-_ �-:WAtVf=D;� '.tIRQ Calculations 1 Construction Mitigation Description 2AND4 Density Worksheet 4 bra 'a`���eot�Pa . g.. z..:' 3rainage Report Z fcvat oris 'mac . €tectural Environmental Checklist 4 "sxi5fi xisting Easements (Recorded Copy) 4 77 =1oor Plans 3 AND 4 grading Phan, Conceptual iabitat Data Report 4 awi°i te�erra rrigation Plan 4 iResit` lVSs;sg'Ai1a`'Iniclii-Site .andscape Plan, Conceptual 4 andscap��.P)an ��i�ileJd .egal Description,, 4ap.afistttrtg Stl Corrtdltiotts? faster Application Form 4 leighborhood Detail Map 4 artt4igof:CiVegssridr' '[an Reductions (PMTS) 4 his requirement may be waived by: Property Services Public Works Alan Review Building Planning t]-ICEl7lr]atalEorets-TemplalestSet!•tielq pubo PLANNING DIVISION WAIVEFOF SUBMITTAL REQUIREOENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS 17, B E•rQ. Plat Name Reservation 4 i1 Public Works Approval Lettere Screening Detail 4 Stream or Lake Study, Standard 4 Stream or Lake Mitigation Plan 4 t Title Report or Plat Gertificat8 4 . .. .. ..... ...... ...... Traffic Study 2 Urban Design Regulations Analysis 4 NA Wetlands Mitigation Plan, Final 4 Wetlands Report/Delineation 4 (A^'� al - Applicant Agreement Statement 2 AND 3 Inventory of Existing Sites 2 AND 3 Lease Agreement, Draft 2 AND 3 Map of Existing Site Conditions 2 AND 3 Map of View Area 2 AND 3 PhotosimulationS 2 AND 3 This requirement may be waived by: 1. Property Services 2. Public Works Plan Review 3. Building 4. Planning PROJECT NAME -IA VF A r1l Y--IJf A 1, ..&L DATE: rl:%CED1();itakForms-Templates%Salf4le1p 06M 0 i qtr u J; planning Divisbn REVISEPo Data 0 PROJECT NARRATIVE RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK May 2013 enton nivisio "An kKING COUNTY I LIBRARY Owner: King County Library System Contact: Greg Smith Facilities Management Services 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, 98027 425.369.3237 Architect: The Miller Null Partnership, LLP Contact: M aai ke Post 71 Columbia —Sixth Floor Seattle, WA 98104-1031 206.682.6837 U Project Narrative Renton Library at Liberty Park Project Name: Renton Library at Liberty Park Project location: 100 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98057 Project Size: 19,680 SF (GROSS) Land Use Permits required for proposed project: Site Plan Review Environmental Review Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Zoning designation: CD - Center Downtown Current use of the site: The current use of the site is a public library; this project would maintain the same use. Proposed improvements include seismic upgrades to the existing structure, demolition of existing building envelope and installation of new envelope and building systems, as well as site improvements as a result of seismically required below -grade concrete abutments. Special site features: (i.e. wetlands, water bodies, steep slopes) The Cedar River runs through the project site. The Cedar River is a Class 1 Stream and a Shoreline of the State. All lands within 200' of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the Cedar River are considered State Shorelands and are subject to the regulations of the Shoreline Management Act and the City of Renton Shoreline Master Program. The Cedar River is also designated as Critical Habitat by the City of Renton and contains anadromous salmonids, including species Federally -listed as threatened or endangered. Soil type and drainage conditions: Soil types encountered on the project site consisted of undocumented fill and recent alluvium deposits. Fill soils were encountered in each of the explorations completed and consisted of loose to medium dense/very soft to soft silty sand/silt with variable gravel and cobble content, and organics. The fill extended to depths of 15 feet below existing grades. Recent alluvium deposits were observed below the fill and consisted of medium dense to very dense silty sand with varying amounts of gravel and medium dense to dense gravel with varying amounts of sift and sand. The recent alluvium deposits extended to the depth explored. Portions of these soil types present below the groundwater table are potentially liquefiable during a design level earthquake. The site topography slopes steeply down to the Cedar River on both the north and south sides of the building with grades ranging from approximate Elevation 45 feet at the top of the slopes, to Elevation 26 feet at the river bottom. Site grades to the north and south of the building and outside of the river banks are relatively level. Drainage for the project will mimic existing conditions for both site and roof drainage. Relocated catch basins will be reconnected to the existing system which is routed off site prior to direct discharge into the Cedar River. Roof drains are routed to two outfalls to the river on the north side of the building. 0 0 Project Narrative Renton Library at Libertv Park Proposed use of property: The project proposes renovating the existing library use for continued use as a library. This scope would entail the following: Demolition of existing masonry and glass building envelope. - Retention of existing concrete structure, roof framing, and sitework. Installation of new building envelope: aluminum window system with glazed panels and a metal panel wall assembly. - Demolition of portions of existing roof framing and replacement in specific areas at a lower height. - Removal of the existing rooftop mechanical unit near the west end of the building. - New rooftop mechanical unit (similar in scale to existing unit) with screening near the east end of the building where it will be less visible from the parking lot and main entry. - New mechanical, electrical, and lighting systems within the building. - Addition of insulation, sheathing, and roofing to existing roof assembly. - Relocation of building entry to the west to face the existing parking lot. - Seismic upgrade required by code including below -grade concrete abutments on either side of the building and steel braced frames in both directions. - New hardscape, utility routing, and vegetation to address new entry location as well as repair associated with concrete abutments. Sandblasting of existing structural concrete to remove painted finish. Re-routing of existing under -slab mounted utility piping to address new utility penetrations New exterior enclosure for refuse/recycling area and mechanical equipment. For plats indicate the proposed number, net density and range of sizes (net lot area) of the new lots: Access: (not applicable) To remain the same as existing, using the current parking lot and curb cuts. Proposed off-site improvements: (i.e. installation of sidewalks, fire hydrants, sewer main, etc.) The existing sanitary side sewer pipe will be replaced from the library building to the manhole at the intersection of Mill Ave S and 5 2nd St. The public sidewalk along Mill Ave will be part of a 2014 City of Renton sidewalk improvement project. Our understanding is that the scope includes maintenance of the root structure of the existing street trees, re -paving of the sidewalk, and installation of ADA accessible ramps at crossings. Total estimated construction cost / estimated fair market value of proposed project: To be less than $6.2 million Estimated quantities and type of materials involved if any fill or excavation is proposed: Approximately 900 cubic yards of soil will have to be excavated for the installation of the below -grade concrete abutments. After the concrete is poured, approximately 360 cubic yards will be filled on site above the abutments. Number, type, and size of any trees to be removed: One Cherry Tree, 12" caliper, is proposed for removal. Explanation of any land to be dedicated to the City: (not applicable) 0 Any proposed job shacks, sales trailers, and/or model homes 0 Project Narrative Renton Library at Liberty Park The contractor is not yet selected, but will likely locate a job trailer for employees within the project site. Any proposed modifications being requested (include written justification) A modification to Design District Guideline District A is being requested for this project, specifically the guideline concerning 'Service Element Location and Design'. A written justification is included with this submittal. For projects located within 100 feet of a stream or wetland, please include distance in feet from the wetland or stream to the nearest area of work. The Renton Library spans the Cedar River. Therefore, the renovation work on the library building will effectively have a zero horizontal distance to the Cedar River. Site work for seismic upgrades involving the installation of augercast piles and concrete pilecaps will occur outside of, but within approximately 40 feet of the OHWM on both sides of the Cedar River. For projects located within 200 -feet of Black River, Cedar River, Springbrook Creek, May Creek and Lake Washington please include the following additional information: Distance from closest area of work to the ordinary high water mark : See response to previous question. Description of the nature of the existing shoreline: The shoreline of the Cedar River in the vicinity of the Renton Library is highly constrained and modified by humans. The Cedar River was diverted from its original course, which flowed into the Black River, to Lake Washington. This was accomplished so that the water elevations of Lake Washington and Lake Union would always be higher than the Puget Sound at the Ballard Locks. The river banks are relatively straight and uniform in aspect and width. Gabion walls were installed on the left bank of the Cedar River under the Renton Library and north to Bronson Way. Gabion walls were not installed along the right bank. Vegetation on the left bank north of the library consists predominantly of Himalayan blackberry and Japanese knotweed with reed canarygrass along the water's edge. The vegetation on the right bank north of the library consists of Himalayan blackberry with black cottonwood and horse chestnut trees. The trees have a heavy growth of non-native ivy on them. The vegetation on the shoreline south of the library consists of black cottonwood and Himalayan blackberry. No vegetation currently grows under the library. The approximate location of and number of residential units, existing and potential, that will have an obstructed view in the event the proposed project exceeds a height of 35 -feet above the average grade level: (none) \\mhfiles2\Projects\Renton Library at Liberty Park\Documents\04_Agencies\_002 Land use Applications\13-0510 Land Use Re-Submittal\i3-0510 Land Use RE- su6MITTAL\06- project narrative. docx MODIFICATION REQUEST- DESIGN DISTRICT 'A' GUIDELINE kt of DNislon , \/ 1 F.D rA J"�pate �9 `� �r ` RENTON LIBRARY AT LIBERTY PARK May 2013 Ot tt '}p13 MAR Vys��� FKIJMG 'COUNTY LIBRARY Owner: King County Library System Contact: Greg Smith Facilities Management Services 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, 98027 425.369.3237 Architect: The Miller Hull Partnership, LLP Contact: Maaike Post 71 Columbia —Sixth Floor Seattle, WA 98104-1031 206.682.6837 Modification Request - Design District 'A'Guideline Renton Library at Liberty Park Project Name: Renton Library at Liberty Park Project location: 100 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98057 Project Size: 19,680 SF (GROSS) Design District Guideline: 5. Service Element Location and Design: Intent: To reduce the potential negative impacts of service elements (i.e., waste receptacles, loading docks) by locating service and loading areas away from high-volume pedestrian areas, and screening them from view in high visibility areas. Minimum Standard: In addition to standard enclosure requirements, garbage, recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed on all sides, including the roof and screened around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors (see illustration, RMC 4-3-100E7f). Modification Request: The project proposes an exterior enclosure to contain a refuse/recycling area and an area for exterior mechanical equipment (chiller). The walls and self-closing doors will be constructed from metal grating. The top of walls and doors will be approximately 6'-0" above finished grade per RMC 4-4- 090C.8. A roof for this enclosure is not proposed as part of this project for reasons listed below, necessitating this modification request. - The existing refuse/recycling area consists of a trash dumpster, exposed to view in the main parking lot. The proposed enclosure is a significant improvement on the existing situation. - The mechanical equipment (chiller) cannot be covered by a roof per manufacturers specifications. - Locating the mechanical equipment on site in this enclosure reduces the load of rooftop equipment on the existing roof structure. - In order to provide a roof, the enclosure would have to increase in height to approximately 9'-0" above grade. Unfortunately, because of the layout of the existing site, the only logical location for the enclosure is near the southwest face of the building which is also the fagade with the main entry. An increased height of the enclosure would detract aesthetically from the main fagade of the project and start to hinder sightlines. \\mhWes2\Pro1ects\Renton Library at Liberty Park\Documents\04_Agencies\-002 Land use Appkations\13-0510 Land Use Re-submittal\13-0510 Land Use RE- SUBMITTAL\09- DDA modification request.docx 11 PLANNING DIVISION 0 DESIGN DISTRICT "A" CHECKLIST City of Renton Planning Division 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST: Ensure compliance with design review regulations located in the Renton Muni to: a. Maintain and protect property values; b. Enhance the general appearance of the City; c. Encourage creativity in building and site design; d. Achieve predictability, balanced with flexibility; and e. Consider the individual merits of proposals. INSTRUCTIONS FOR APPLICANTS: I Of �f �:trti.i !�it-i~ C7tr MAR al Code in o44 Planning Division REVISED Date /_/ iS This design district checklist asks you to describe some basic information about your proposal. The City will use this checklist to determine whether the your proposal complies with the Urban Design Regulations in the Renton Municipal Code (RMC 4-3-100). Answer the questions briefly, with the most precise information known, or give the best description you can. There are two categories that have been established: (a) "minimum standards" that must be met, and (b) "guidelines" that, while not mandatory, are considered by the Planning Director in determining if the proposed action meets the intent of the design guidelines. 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. A. SITE DESIGN AND BUILDING LOCATION: Intent: To ensure that buildings are located in relation to streets and other buildings so that the Vision of the City of Renton can be realized for a high-density urban environment; so that businesses enjoy visibility from public rights-of-way; and to encourage pedestrian activity throughout the district. 1. Site Design and Street Pattern: Intent: To ensure that the City of Renton Vision can be realized within the Urban Center Districts; plan districts that are organized for efficiency while maintaining flexibility for future development at high urban densities and intensities of use; create and maintain a safe, convenient network of streets of varying dimensions for vehicle circulation; and provide service to businesses. — 1 — 05/10 l\mhfiles2lPrpjectMRenton Library at Liberty Park%Documents104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re- 5ubmittal113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL109 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc Minimum Standard: Maintain existing grid street pattern. This project maintains the existing street pattern. 2. Building Location and Orientation: Intent: To ensure visibility of businesses; establish active, lively uses along sidewalks and pedestrian pathways; organize buildings in such a way that pedestrian use of the district is facilitated; encourage siting of structures so that natural light and solar access are available to other structures and open space; enhance the visual character and definition of streets within the district; provide an appropriate transition between buildings, parking areas, and other land uses and the street; and increase privacy for residential uses located near the street. Minimum Standard: Orient buildings to the street with clear connections to the sidewalk. In its existing condition, the building entry is oriented towards a pedestrian bridge that crosses the Cedar River from the parking lot on the southwest bank to Liberty Park on the northeast bank. The main entry is currently not visible from the parking lot or Mill Ave S. The project proposes a re -orientation of the entry towards the parking lot and Mill Ave S. The new paving shown in the site design ties into the existing sidewalks along Mill Ave S, the existing trail system along the Cedar River, and the existing pathways of Liberty Park. Minimum Standard: The front entry of a building shall not be oriented to a drive aisle, but instead a public or private street or landscaped pedestrian -only courtyard. The site design provides for a covered recessed main entry and an entry plaza with landscaping as a buffer between the building and parking. 3. Building Entries: Intent: To make building entrances convenient to locate and easy to access, and ensure that building entries further the pedestrian nature of the fronting sidewalk and the urban character of the district. Minimum Standard: A primary entrance of each building shall be located on the facade facing a street, shall be prominent, visible from the street, connected by a walkway to the public sidewalk, and include human -scale elements. The existing entry location is not visible from Mill Ave. S or the parking lot. This project proposes moving the main entry to the south corner of the building so it is visible from Mill Ave S, the parking lot, and from the pedestrian bridge that crosses Cedar River. 05/10 —2— 1lmhfiles2\Projects%Renton Library at Liberty Park%Documents104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re- submittaM 3-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL109 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFTA00 LJ 0 Minimum Standard: Multiple buildings on the same site shall provide a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping to provide a directed view to building entries. Does not apply. Minimum Standard: Ground floor units shall be directly accessible from the street or an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. Does not apply. The building does not incorporate any residential uses. Minimum Standard: Secondary access (not fronting on a street) shall have weather protection at least 4-1/2 feet wide over the entrance or other similar indicator of access. The staff entry and a door to the mechanical spaces are on the same elevation as the main entry. Since these are not open to the public, the project proposes a subdued expression for these access points compared to the new relocated main public entry. A canopy is proposed on all sides of the building, approximately 8'-0" deep. Minimum Standard: Pedestrian access shall be provided to the building from property edges, adjacent lots, abutting street intersections, crosswalks, and transit stops. From the proposed main entry, pedestrians can reach the sidewalk along Mill Ave S. two ways. Either follow the new paving in the NW direction along the face of the building to Mill Ave S. Or follow the existing sidewalks in the SW direction, along the edge of the parking lot, and turn West at 2"d Ave S to get to Mill Ave S. The sidewalk on Mill Ave S directly adjacent to the parking lot has a bus stop that serves lines 105, 110, 143, 167, 240, 342, 907, 908, and 909. One block south, a bus stop serves lines 101, 148, and 153. Guideline: Multiple buildings on the same site should provide a continuous network of pedestrian paths and open spaces that incorporate landscaping to provide a directed view to building entries. Does not apply. (same as minimum standard #2 above) Guideline: Ground floor units should be directly accessible from the street or an open space such as a courtyard or garden that is accessible from the street. Does not apply. The building does not incorporate any residential uses. (same as minimum standard #3 above) -a- Ilmhfiles2\Projects%Re"ton Library at Liberty ParklDocumentsl04_Agenciesl 002 Land Use Applications113-0590 Land Use Re- SubmittaR93-0514 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL109 - Design District A Checklist -DRAFT. doe os;,10 0 0 Guideline: Secondary access (not fronting on a street) should have weather protection at least 4-1/2 feet wide over the entrance or other similar indicator of access. See response to minimum standard #4 above. Guideline: Pedestrian access should be provided to the building from property edges, adjacent lots, abutting street intersections, crosswalks, and transit stops. See response to minimum standard #5 above. Guideline: Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows should be oriented to a street or pedestrian -oriented space; otherwise, screening or decorative features such as trellises, artwork, murals, landscaping, or combinations thereof should be incorporated into the street -oriented facade. The proposed location for the main entry is oriented towards Mill Ave S. The covered entry opens out to a paved pedestrian entry plaza. The plaza will be bordered by planting areas with small trees, and it will have two benches. Guideline: For projects that include residential uses, entries should provide transition space between the public street and the private residence such as a porch, landscaped area, terrace, common area, lobby, or similar feature. Does not apply. The building does not incorporate any residential uses. Guideline: Features such as entries, lobbies, and display windows should be oriented to a street; otherwise, screening or art features such as trellises, artwork, murals, landscaping, or combinations thereof should be incorporated into the street -oriented facade. See response to guideline #5 above. Guideline: Entries from the street should be clearly marked with canopies, architectural elements, ornamental lighting, or landscaping. Entries from parking lots should be subordinate to those related to the street for buildings within District `A The orientation of the existing building does not allow for complete compliance with this guideline. There is one main entry for the public. The project proposes relocating it so it will be visible from the parking lot and from Mill Ave S. It will read clearly as the main entry through the overall form, canopy, recessed entry doors, lighting, and signage. —4— os; io llmhfiies2%Projects\Renton Library at Liberty Park\Documents104_Agencies%-002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re- Submittalli 3-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL109 -Design District A Checklist -DRAFT. doc 0 0 4. Transition to Surrounding Development: Intent: To shape redevelopment projects so that the character and value of Renton's long established, existing neighborhoods are preserved. Minimum Standard: Careful siting and design treatment are necessary to achieve a compatible transition where new buildings differ from surrounding development in terms of building height, bulk and scale. At least one of the following design elements shall be considered to promote a transition to surrounding uses: (a) Setbacks at the side or rear of a building may be increased by the Reviewing Official in order to reduce the bulk and scale of larger buildings and so that sunlight reaches adjacent yards; (b) Building proportions, including step -backs on upper levels; (c) Building articulation to divide a larger architectural element into smaller increments; or (d) Roof lines, roof pitches, and roof shapes designed to reduce apparent bulk and transition with existing development. Setbacks: per the City of Renton 2/7/2013 pre -application comments, this is a non- conforming site. This project does not propose to increase the non -conformity. Building proportions: This project is a remodel of an existing building from 1965. The proportions of the existing building would not be significantly changed by this project. Building articulation: Exposed structure at the exterior of the building - necessary for code -required seismic improvements — will provide articulation. The canopy at all sides, and the recessed covered main entry also provide articulation. At the finer scale, the building envelope will be a combination of a glazed curtainwall system and an opaque wall assembly with metal panels. Roof lines: The bulky form of the existing roof overhang and soffit will be significantly thinned in the proposed design. S. Service Element Location and Design: Intent: To reduce the potential negative impacts of service elements (i.e., waste receptacles, loading docks) by locating service and loading areas away from high-volume pedestrian areas, and screening them from view in high visibility areas. Minimum Standard: Service elements shall be located and designed to minimize the impacts on the pedestrian environment and adjacent uses. Service elements shall be concentrated and located where they are accessible to service vehicles and convenient for tenant use (see illustration, RMC 4-3-100E7e). Because the existing building spans the Cedar River, the only location for service elements is along the southwest face of the building, in or near the parking lot. The refuse/recycling area and exterior mechanical equipment are combined in one -s- 051,10 1lmhfiles2lProjects%Renton Library at Liberty ParkkDocumenlsW4_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applicalions113-0510 Land Use Re- 5ubmiltaR13-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTALM - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 0 . enclosure placed within the parking lot near the West corner of the building. The location chosen was least impactful to sightlines to and from the main entry, while providing easy access to the services for building staff, maintenance, and hauling trucks. Minimum Standard: Garbage, recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed, consistent with RMC 4-4-090. Refuse and Recyclables Standards, and RMC 4-4-095. Screening and Storage Height/Location Limitations. An enclosure is provided for refuse/recycling and exterior mechanical equipment, see above. Minimum Standard: In addition to standard enclosure requirements, garbage, recycling collection, and utility areas shall be enclosed on all sides, including the roof and screened around their perimeter by a wall or fence and have self-closing doors (see illustration, RMC 4-3-100E7f). The enclosure mentioned above will have two compartments, one for refuse/recycling and one for mechanical equipment. Each compartment will have walls on all sides and a large self-closing access gate. The project proposes using weatherproof containers for refuse and recycling rather than providing a roof per 4- 4-090.C.10. The mechanical equipment in the exterior enclosure cannot have any obstructions above it per manufacturer's requirements. Refer attached modification request for more information. Minimum Standard: The use of chain link, plastic, or wire fencing is prohibited. The enclosure will be constructed from metal grating. Minimum Standard: if the service area is adjacent to a street, pathway, or pedestrian - oriented space, a landscaped planting strip, minimum 3 feet wide, shall be located on 3 sides of such facility. The enclosure is not adjacent to a path. There is an existing +/-8'-0" wide planting strip between the proposed enclosure and the nearest pedestrian path. Guideline: Service enclosure fences should be made of masonry, ornamental metal or wood, or some combination of the three. The enclosure will be constructed from metal grating. —6- Ilmhfi1es2lProjects\Renton Library at Liberty Park\Documents104—Agencies\ 002 Land Use Applicalions113-0510 Land Use Re- Submittal113-0510 Land Use RE-SUSMITTALM - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 05110 0 0 B. PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS: Intent: To provide safe, convenient access to the Urban Center and the Center Village; incorporate various modes of transportation, including public mass transit, in order to reduce traffic volumes and other impacts from vehicles; ensure sufficient parking is provided, while encouraging creativity in reducing the impacts of parking areas; allow an active pedestrian environment by maintaining contiguous street frontages, without parking lot siting along sidewalks and building facades; minimize the visual impact of parking lots; and use access streets and parking to maintain an urban edge to the district. 1. Location of Parking: Intent: To maintain active pedestrian environments along streets by placing parking lots primarily in back of buildings. Minimum Standard: No surface parking shall be located between a building and the front property line or the building and side property line on the street side of a corner lot. It will not be possible to comply with this guideline. The existing parking lot is already located between the existing building and Mill Ave S. Guideline: In areas of mixed use development, shared parking is recommended. Does not apply. 2. Design of Surface Parking: Intent: To ensure safety of users of parking areas, convenience to businesses, and reduce the impact of parking lots wherever possible. Minimum Standard: Parking lot lighting shall not spill onto adjacent or abutting properties (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.F5b). Minimum Standard: All surface parking lots shall be landscaped to reduce their visual impact (see RMC 4-4-080F7, Landscape Requirements). Guideline: Wherever possible, parking should be configured into small units, connected by landscaped areas to provide on-site buffering from visual impacts. Guideline: Access to parking modules should be provided by public or private local streets with sidewalks on both sides where possible, rather than internal drive aisles. Guideline: Where multiple driveways cannot be avoided, provide landscaping to separate and minimize their impact on the streetscape. This project is exempt from all but the maintenance of any existing landscaping and street tree requirements. RMC 4-4-070-C.1 -7- llmhfi1es2\Prpjects\Renton Library at Liberty Park\Documents104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re- SubmittaK13-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL109 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 0511,10 E No additional parking is required for this project as the renovation will reduce the area of the existing building. Per City of Renton 2/7/2013 Pre -application comments and RMC 4-4-080-B.l.a.ii The project aims to improve safety and security of the parking lot and areas surrounding the library while reducing impact. 3. Structured Parking Garages: Intent: To more efficiently use land needed for vehicle parking; encourage the use of structured parking throughout the Urban Center and the Center Village; physically and visually integrate parking garages with other uses; and reduce the overall impact of parking garages when they are located in proximity to the designated pedestrian environment. Guideline: Parking garage entries should be designed and sited to complement, not subordinate, the pedestrian entry. If possible, locate the parking entry away from the primary street, to either the side or rear of the building. Guideline: Parking garage entries should not dominate the streetscape. Guideline: The design of structured parking at finished grade under a building should minimize the apparent width of garage entries. Guideline: Parking within the building should be enclosed or screened through any combination of wails, decorative grilles, or trellis work with landscaping. Guideline: Parking garages should be designed to be complementary with adjacent buildings. Use similar forms, materials, and/or details to enhance garages. Guideline: Parking service and storage functions should be located away from the street edge and generally not be visible from the street or sidewalks. Does not apply. No parking structures are proposed as part of this project. 4. Vehicular Access: Intent., To maintain a contiguous, uninterrupted sidewalk by minimizing, consolidating and/or eliminating vehicular access off streets within pedestrian environments and/or designated pedestrian -oriented streets. Guideline: Parking lots and garages should be accessed from alleys or side streets. The existing parking lot is accessed from South 2nd Street and has an exit along Mill Ave S. This project does not propose any changes to the layout of the existing parking lot except in the immediate vicinity of the library building. -8- fthfiles2\Projects\Renton Library at Liberty ParkTocuments\04—Agencies\-042 Land Use Applications\1 M5 10 Land Use Re- Submittaf113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL109 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 05110 0 Guideline: Driveways should be located to be visible from the right-of-way, but not impede pedestrian circulation on-site or to adjoining properties. Where possible, minimize the number of driveways and curb cuts. There is one existing curb cut along Mill Ave 5 for the parking lot exit. The project does not propose any changes to the layout of the existing parking lot except in the immediate vicinity of the library building. C. PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT: Intent: To enhance the urban character of development in the Urban Center and the Center Village by creating pedestrian networks and by providing strong links from streets and drives to building entrances; make the pedestrian environment safer and more convenient, comfortable, and pleasant to walk between businesses, on sidewalks, to and from access points, and through parking lots; and promote the use of multi -modal and public transportation systems in order to reduce other vehicular traffic. 1. Pathways through Parking Lots: Intent: To provide safe and attractive pedestrian connections to buildings, parking garages, and parking lots. 2. Pedestrian Circulation: Intent: To create a network of linkages for pedestrians to improve safety and convenience and enhance the pedestrian environment. Minimum Standard: Developments shall include an integrated pedestrian circulation system that connects buildings, open space, and parking areas with the adjacent street sidewalk system and adjacent properties (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.G4b). The project does not propose any changes to the layout of the existing parking lot or to the existing network of sidewalks and pathways except in the immediate vicinity of the library building. The building entry plaza is connected via paved pathways to this existing pedestrian network. Minimum Standard: Sidewalks located between buildings and streets shall be raised above the level of vehicular travel. The level of the existing sidewalk along Mill Ave S is already above the level of the vehicles. Minimum Standard: Pedestrian pathways within parking lots or parking modules shall be differentiated by material or texture from adjacent paving materials (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.G4c). The project does not propose any changes to the layout of the existing parking lot. —9— 05110 1lmhfi1es2lProjects%Renton Library at Liberty ParkMocuments104—Agenciesl_002 Land Use Appiicalions113-0510 Land Use Re- SubmittaR13-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL109 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 0 0 Minimum Standard: Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of buildings shall be of sufficient width to accommodate anticipated numbers of users. Specifically: (a) Sidewalks and pathways along the facades of mixed use and retail buildings 100 or more feet in width (measured along the facade) shall provide sidewalks at least 12 feet in width. The walkway shall include an 8 foot minimum unobstructed walking surface and street trees (see illustration, subsection RMC-4-3-100.G4d). Does not apply. This is not a mixed use or retail building. (b) To increase business visibility and accessibility, breaks in the tree coverage adjacent to major building entries shall be allowed. One tree is planned near the entry plaza. It has been carefully located to avoid the obstruction of sightlines to and from the main entry. (c) For all other interior pathways, the proposed walkway shall be of sufficient width to accommodate the anticipated number of users. A 10 -12 foot pathway, for example, can accommodate groups of persons walking four abreast, or two couples passing one another. An 8 foot pathway will accommodate three individuals walking abreast, whereas a smaller 5 — 6 foot pathway will accommodate two individuals. Proposed paved pathways will be 8'-0" in width. Minimum Standard: Locate pathways with clear sight lines to increase safety. Landscaping shall not obstruct visibility of walkway or sight lines to building entries. Proposed paved pathways near building entry, and the entry itself will be clearly visible from the parking lot. Proposed pathways at the NE face of the building are clearly visible from Liberty Park. Refer Landscape Plan L1.00. Minimum Standard: All pedestrian walkways shall provide an ali-weather walking surface unless the applicant can demonstrate that the proposed surface is appropriate for the anticipated number of users and complementary to the design of the development. Proposed pathway surfaces will be concrete paving. Guideline: Delineation of pathways may be through the use of architectural features, such as trellises, railings, low seat walls, or similar treatment. Typically, proposed pathways are delineated by a curb on one side and planting areas on the other side. Guideline: Mid -block connections are desirable where a strong linkage between uses can be established. _10— 05r 10 1\mhfiles2\ProjectslRenton Library at Liberty ParkTocuments\04—Agencies\-002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re- 5ubmittal\13-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL\09 -Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 0 0 Does not apply. Guideline: Decorative fences, with the exception of chain link fences, may be allowed when appropriate to the situation. There will be a metal railing on the northeast river bank between the library building and the pedestrian bridge. 3. Pedestrian Amenities: Intent: To create attractive spaces that unify the building and street environments and are inviting and comfortable for pedestrians; and provide publicly accessible areas that function for a variety of activities, at all times of the year, and under typical seasonal weather conditions. D. LANDSCAPING/RECREATION AREAS/COMMON OPEN SPACE: Intent: To provide visual relief in areas of expansive paving or structures; define logical areas of pedestrian and vehicular circulation; and add to the aesthetic enjoyment of the area by the community. To have areas suitable for both passive and active recreation by residents, workers, and visitors; provide these areas in sufficient amounts and in safe and convenient locations; and provide the opportunity for community gathering in places centrally located and designed to encourage such activity. 1. Landscaping: Intent: Landscaping is intended to reinforce the architecture or concept of the area; provide visual and climatic relief in areas of expansive paving or structures; channelize and define logical areas of pedestrian and vehicular circulation; and add to the aesthetic enjoyment of the area by the community. Minimum Standard: All pervious areas shall be landscaped (see RMC 4-4-070. Landscaping). This project is exempt from all but the maintenance of any existing landscaping and street tree requirements. RMC 4-4-070-C.1 Minimum Standard: Street trees are required and shall be located between the curb edge and building, as determined by the City of Renton. There are three existing mature street trees along Mill Ave S. The City of Renton has a sidewalk improvement project planned for 2014 that includes the maintenance of these trees. A large section of the street frontage is taken up by a bus stop and curb cuts for vehicles to exit the parking lot. This project does not propose the addition of any street trees. Minimum Standard: On designated pedestrian -oriented streets, street trees shall be installed with tree grates. For all other streets, street tree treatment shall be as determined by the City of Renton (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.H3a). — 11 — 05110 llmhfiles2lProjects%Renton Library at Liberty ParklDocuments104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re- SubmittaR13-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTALM - Design District A Checklist-DRAFT.doc 0 0 See response to previous standard. Minimum Standard: The proposed landscaping shall be consistent with the design intent and program of the building, the site, and use. The proposed landscaping will tie the updated building seamlessly into its surroundings. Plantings will aim to blend the site into its riverbank context with native and native -like plantings, while still setting off the entries with a modest formality different from the riverbank. The new entry location will be highlighted with an entry plaza, ideal for the pick-up and drop-off of patrons. The plaza also provides access to the existing pedestrian bridge which leads across Cedar River to Liberty Park. Minimum Standard: The landscape plan shall demonstrate how the proposed landscaping, through the use of plant material and nonvegetative elements, reinforces the architecture or concept of the development. See response to previous question and Landscape Plan L1.00. Minimum Standard: Surface parking areas shall be screened by landscaping in order to reduce views of parked cars from streets (see RMC 4-4-080F7, Landscape Requirements). Such landscaping shall be at least 10 feet in width as measured from the sidewalk (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.H3b). This project is exempt from all but the maintenance of any existing landscaping and street tree requirements. RMC 4-4-070-C.1 Minimum Standard: Trees at an average minimum rate of one tree per 30 lineal feet of street frontage. Permitted tree species are those that reach a mature height of at least 35 feet. Minimum height or caliper at planting shall be eight feet or two inch caliper (as measured four feet from the top of the root ball) respectively. There are three existing mature street trees along Mill Ave S. The City of Renton has a sidewalk improvement project planned for 2014 that includes the maintenance of these trees. A large section of the street frontage is taken up by a bus stop and curb cuts for vehicles to exit the parking lot. This project does not propose the addition of any street trees. Minimum Standard: Shrubs at the minimum rate of one per 20 square feet of landscaped area. Shrubs shall be at least 12 inches tall at planting and have a mature height between three and four feet. This project is exempt from all but the maintenance of any existing landscaping and street tree requirements. RMC 4-4-070-C.1 —12— 05110 \\mhfiles2\Projecls\Renton Library at Liberty Park\Documents\04 Agencies\ -002 Land Use Applications\13-0510 Land Use Re- 5uhmittal\13-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL109 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 0 0 Minimum Standard: Ground cover shall be planted in sufficient quantities to provide at least 90 percent coverage of the landscaped area within three years of installation. This project is exempt from all but the maintenance of any existing landscaping and street tree requirements. RMC 4-4-070-C.1 Minimum Standard: The applicant shall provide a maintenance assurance device, prior to occupancy, for a period of not less than three years and in sufficient amount to ensure required landscape standards have been met by the third year following installation. This project will meet landscape standards as noted above within three years of construction completion. Minimum Standard: Surface parking with more than 14 stalls shall be landscaped as follows: (a) Required Amount: Total Number of Spaces Minimum Required Landscape Area* 15 to 50 15 square feet/parking space 51 to 99 25 square feet/parking space 100 or more 35 square feet/parking space * Landscape area calculations above and planting requirements below exclude perimeter parking lot landscaping areas. (b) Provide trees, shrubs, and ground cover in the required interior parking lot landscape areas. (c) Plant at least one tree for every six parking spaces. Permitted tree species are those that reach a mature height of at least 35 feet . Minimum height or caliper at planting shall be eight feet or two inch caliper (as measured four feet from the top of the root ball) respectively. (d) Plant shrubs at a rate of five per 100 square feet of landscape area. Shrubs shall be at least 16 inches tall at planting and have a mature height between three and four feet. (e) Up to 50 percent of shrubs may be deciduous. (f) Select and plant ground cover so as to provide 90 percent coverage within three years of planting; provided, that mulch is applied until plant coverage is complete. (g) Do not locate a parking stall more than 50 feet from a landscape area. This project is exempt from all but the maintenance of any existing landscaping and street tree requirements. RMC 4-4-070-C.1 —13- llmhfilesZProjec sNRenton Library at Liberty ParklDocuments104_Agenciest 042 Land Use Applications\ 13-0510 Land Use Re- SubmittaR13-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTA009 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 05110 9 0 Minimum Standard: Regular maintenance shall be provided to ensure that plant materials are kept healthy and that dead or dying plant materials are replaced. Regular maintenance will be provided by the owner/operator, KCLS. Minimum Standard: Underground, automatic irrigation systems are required in all landscape areas. This project is exempt from all but the maintenance of any existing landscaping and street tree requirements. RMC 4-4-070-C.1 Existing irrigation system will be maintained. Guideline: Landscaping should be used to soften and integrate the hulk of buildings. The site design calls for planting areas next to the building on the northeast and southwest faces. Guideline: Landscaping should be provided that appropriately provides either screening of unwanted views or focuses attention to preferred views. Planting areas are held back from the main entry plaza in order to call attention to it and keep the paving free and clear. Guideline: Use of low maintenance, drought -resistant landscape material is encouraged. Proposed plantings will be easy to maintain. Guideline: Choice of materials should reflect the level of maintenance that will be available. Proposed plantings will be easy to maintain. Guideline: Seasonal landscaping and container plantings are encouraged, particularly at building entries and in publicly accessible spaces. planting Guideline: Window boxes, containers �a plantings, weather -resistant ming ate�ials that can beaskets, or rreasonably feature elements should be made of maintained. This project does not include window boxes or any of the other elements mentioned. Guideline: Landscaping should be used to screen parking lots from adjacent or neighboring properties. This project does not propose to change the existing landscaping of the parking lot. Due to the layout of the parcels, the parking lot is not directly visible from adjacent properties. 05/10 —14— \VnhfiIes2\Projects\Renton Land Librar� at Liberty U eRE-SUBM1TfAL1091�Design District A Checklist -DRAFT. DRAFS.dacApPi1�tions113-0510 Land Use Re- 0 0 2. Recreation Areas and Common Open Space: Intent: To ensure that districts have areas suitable for both passive and active recreation by residents, workers, and visitors and that these areas are of sufficient size for the intended activity and in convenient locations; create usable, accessible, and inviting open space that is accessible to the public; and promote pedestrian activity on pedestrian -oriented streets particularly at street corners. Minimum Standard: Mixed use residential and attached housing developments of ten or more dwelling units shall provide a minimum area of common space or recreation area equal to 50 square feet per unit. The common space area shall be aggregated to provide usable areas) for residents. The location, layout, and proposed type of common space or recreation area shall be subject to approval by the Director. The required common open space shall be satisfied with one or more of the elements listed below. The Director may require more than one of the following elements for developments Laving more than 100 units. (a) Courtyards, plazas, or multi-purpose open spaces; (b) Upper level common decks, patios, terraces, or roof gardens. Such spaces above the street level must feature views or amenities that are unique to the site and are provided as an asset to the development; (c) Pedestrian corridors dedicated to passive recreation and separate from the public street system; (d) Recreation facilities including, but not limited to, tennis/sports courts, swimming pools, exercise areas, game rooms, or other similar facilities; or (e) Children's play spaces. Does not apply. The project does not incorporate any residential uses Minimum Standard: In mixed use residential and attached residential projects, required landscaping, driveways, parking, or other vehicular use areas shall not be counted toward the common space requirement or be located in dedicated outdoor recreation or common use areas. Does not apply. The project does not incorporate any residential uses. Minimum Standard: In mixed use residential and attached residential projects required yard setback areas shall not count toward outdoor recreation and common space unless such areas are developed as private or semi -private (from abutting or adjacent properties) courtyards, plazas or passive use areas containing landscaping and fencing sufficient to create a fully usable area accessible to all residents of the development (see illustration, subsection RMC4-3-100.1­13c). Does not apply. The project does not incorporate any residential uses. —15— 05110 fthfiles2lPrajects\Renton Library at Liberty Park%Documents104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use ApplicationsU 3-0510 Land Use Re- Submittal113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL109 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 0 0 Minimum Standard: Private decks, balconies, and private ground floor open space shall not count toward the common space/recreation area requirement. Does not apply. The project does not incorporate any residential uses. Minimum Standard: In mixed use residential and attached residential projects, other required landscaping and sensitive area buffers without common access links, such as pedestrian trails, shall not be included toward the required recreation and common space requirement. Does not apply. The project does not incorporate any residential uses. Minimum Standard: All buildings and developments with over 30,000 square feet of nonresidential uses (excludes parking garage floorplate areas) shall provide pedestrian - oriented space (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.1-13d) according to the following formula: 1% of the lot area + 1% of the building area = Minimum amount of pedestrian -oriented space Does not apply. The project is well under 30,000 SF. The existing building is 22,400 SF (gross), while the proposed building is 19,680 SF (gross). Minimum Standard: To qualify as pedestrian -oriented space, the following must be included: (a) Visual and pedestrian access (including barrier -free access) to the abutting structures from the public right-of-way or a non -vehicular courtyard; (b) Paved walking surfaces of either concrete or approved unit paving; (c) On-site or building -mounted lighting providing at least four foot -candies (average) on the ground; and (d) At least three feet of seating area (bench, ledge, etc.) or one individual seat per 60 square feet of plaza area or open space. A pedestrian -oriented space is not required per previous item, however the project does provide a well -lit, paved, and landscaped entry plaza with seating. The relocation of the main entry to the southwest corner also improves ADA access to the building. The current location of the main entry is on the pedestrian bridge, approximately 140'-0" from the ADA parking stalls. In addition, the pedestrian bridge is slightly sloped and has been known to ice over in the winter, further hindering access. The proposed main entry location is approximately 90'-0" from ADA parking. The paving on grade will not ice over as quickly as the pedestrian bridge, it is level, and at the same elevation as the parking stalls (curbless transition). 16— 05110 1lmhfiles2NProjectslRenton Library at Liberty ParklDocuments104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications\ 13-0510 Land Use Re- Submittal113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL109 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.dx 0 0 Minimum Standard: The following features are encouraged in pedestrian -oriented space (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.H3e) and may be required by the Director: (a) Provide pedestrian -oriented uses on the building facade facing the pedestrian - oriented space. (b) Spaces should be positioned in areas with significant pedestrian traffic to provide interest and security — such as adjacent to a building entry. (c) Provide pedestrian -oriented facades on some or all buildings facing the space. (d) Provide movable public seating. See response to previous item. Minimum Standard: The following are prohibited within pedestrian -oriented space: (a) Adjacent unscreened parking lots; (b) Adjacent chain link fences; (c) Adjacent blank walls; (d) Adjacent dumpsters or service areas; and (e) Outdoor storage (shopping carts, potting soil bags, firewood, etc.) that do not contribute to the pedestrian environment. See response to previous items. Minimum Standard: The minimum required walkway areas shall not count as pedestrian - oriented space. However, where walkways are widened or enhanced beyond minimum requirements, the area may count as pedestrian -oriented space if the Director determines such space meets the definition of pedestrian -oriented space. See response to previous items. Guideline: Common space areas in mixed use residential and attached residential projects should be centrally located so they are near a majority of dwelling units, accessible and usable to residents, and visible from surrounding units. Does not apply. The project does not incorporate any residential uses. Guideline: Common space areas should be located to take advantage of surrounding features such as building entrances, significant landscaping, unique topography or architecture, and solar exposure. A common space area is not required per earlier item. —17- fthfiles2%ProjectslRenton Library at Liberty Park\Documents104—Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re- Submittall13-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTALX09 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 05110 0 E Guideline: In mixed use residential and attached residential projects children's play space should be centrally located, visible from the dwellings, and away from hazardous areas like garbage dumpsters, drainage facilities, streets, and parking areas. Does not apply. The project does not incorporate any residential uses. E. BUILDING ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN: Intent: To encourage building design that is unique and urban in character, comfortable on a human scale, and uses appropriate building materials that are suitable for the Pacific Northwest climate. To discourage franchise retail architecture. 1. Building Character and Massing: Intent: To ensure that buildings are not bland and visually appear to be at a human scale; and ensure that all sides of a building, that can be seen by the public, are visually interesting. Minimum Standard: All building facades shall include modulation or articulation at intervals of no more than forty feet (40'). Exposed structure at the exterior of the building - necessary for code -required seismic improvements - will provide articulation and modulation. The large canopy at all sides, and the recessed covered main entry also provide articulation. At the finer scale, the building envelope will be a combination of a glazed curtainwall system and an opaque wall assembly with metal panels. The footprint of the finished building is dictated by the configuration of the existing structural layout, minimizing the opportunities for modulation of the facade. Guideline: Building facades should be modulated and/or articulated with architectural elements to reduce the apparent size of new buildings, break up long blank walls, add visual interest, and enhance the character of the neighborhood. See response to previous item. Guideline: Articulation, modulation, and their intervals should create a sense of.scale important to residential buildings. Does not apply. The project does not incorporate any residential uses. Guideline: A variety of modulations and articulations should be employed to add visual See response to minimum standard above. _18— 05A O 1lmhfiies2lPrcjectslRenton Library at Liberty Parkloocuments104_Agencies\_002 Land Use ApplicationsN13.0510 Land Use Re- Submittal113-0510 Land Use RE�UBMITTAL109 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 0 0 Guideline: Building modulations should be a minimum of two feet deep, 16 feet in height, and eight feet in width. The proposed recessed entry complies with the suggested height, width, and depth. The proposed exposed structure complies with the suggested height and width. Guideline: Alternative methods to shape a building such as angled or curved facade elements, off -set planes, wing walls, and terracing will be considered; provided, that the intent of this Section is met. Does not apply. This is an existing building. Z. Ground -Level Details: Intent: To ensure that buildings are visually interesting and reinforce the intended human -scale character of the pedestrian environment; and ensure that all sides of a building within near or distant public view have visual interest. Minimum Standard: Untreated blank walls visible from public streets, sidewalks, or interior pedestrian pathways are prohibited. A wall (including building facades and retaining walls) is considered a blank wall if: (a) It is a ground floor wall or portion of a ground floor wall over six feet in height, has a horizontal length greater than 15 feet, and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing; or (b) Any portion of a ground floor wall having a surface area of 400 square feet or greater and does not include a window, door, building modulation or other architectural detailing. The project does contain some blank wall area at the northeast face. This was necessary In order to keep the glazing percentage realistic to comply with the energy code. Glazing at the facades that face the river was given higher priority. Minimum Standard: Where blank walls are required or unavoidable, blank walls shall be treated with one or more of the following (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.15d): (a) A planting bed at least five feet in width containing trees, shrubs, evergreen ground cover, or vines adjacent to the blank wall; (b) Trellis or other vine supports with evergreen climbing vines; (c) Architectural detailing such as reveals, contrasting materials, or other special detailing that meets the intent of this standard; (d) Artwork, such as bas-relief sculpture, mural, or similar; or _19— 05110 fthfiles2lProjectslRenton Library at Liberty ParkTocuments\04_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applicalions113-0510 Land Use Re- Submitta1113-0510 Land Use RE-SUSMITTALM - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT. doc 0 • (e) Seating area with special paving and seasonal planting. A generous planting bed approximately 15'-6" wide is planned along the northeast face. Refer landscape plan L1.00. Minimum Standard: Treatment of blank walls shall be proportional to the wall. See previous response. Minimum Standard: Provide human -scaled elements such as a lighting fixture, trellis, or other landscape feature along the facade's ground floor. The southwest face of the building (towards the parking lot) will have a planting area alongside it. The main entry plaza will have benches, two trees, and more landscaping. The northeast face of the building (towards Libery Park) will have planting areas and trees between the building and the path. Minimum Standard: Facades on designated pedestrian -oriented streets shall have at least 75 percent of the linear frontage of the ground floor facade (as measured on a true elevation facing the designated pedestrian -oriented street) comprised of transparent windows and/or doors. Does not apply. This is an existing building. Minimum Standard: Other facade window requirements include the following: (a) Building facades must have clear windows with visibility into and out of the building. However, screening may be applied to provide shade and energy efficiency. The minimum amount of light transmittance for windows shall be 50percent. (b) Display windows shall be designed for frequent change of merchandise, rather than permanent displays. (c) Where windows or storefronts occur, they must principally contain clear glazing. (d) Tinted and dark glass, highly reflective (mirror -type) glass and film are prohibited. The project proposes a new building envelope consisting of a combination of glazed curtainwall system and an opaque wall assembly with metal panels. The opaque walls will be strategically located such that transparent glazing is primarily located over the river to capitalize on scenic views. The amount of glazing percentage will be dictated by energy code compliance. Guideline., The primary building entrance should be made visibly prominent by incorporating a minimum of one of the following architectural features from each category listed (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.15e): (a) Facade Features: —20— 05/10 1lmhfiles2\Projects\Renton Library at Liberty Park\Documents104—Agenciesl-002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re- Submitta1113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTALN09 - Design District A checklist - DRAFT doc 0 (1) Recess; (2) Overhang; (3) Canopy; (4) Trellis; (5) Portico; (b) Porch; (7) Clerestory. (b) Doorway Features: (1) Transom windows; (2) Glass windows flanking door; (3) Large entry doors; (4) Ornamental lighting; (5) Lighted displays. (c) Detail Features: (1) Decorative entry paving; (2) Ornamental building name and address; (3) Planted containers; (4) Street furniture (benches, etc.). The main entry will be recessed, well illuminated, and there is a canopy. There will be large glazed entry doors, with glass on either side. The entry plaza will include benches. Guideline: Artwork or building ornamentation (such as mosaics, murals, grillwork, sculptures, relief, etc.) should be used to provide ground -level detail. Guideline: Elevated or terraced planting beds between the walkway and long building walls are encouraged. 3. Building Roof Lines: Intent: To ensure that roof forms provide distinctive profiles and interest consistent with an urban project and contribute to the visual continuity of the district. Minimum Standard: Buildings shall use at least one of the following elements to create varied and interesting roof profiles (see illustration, subsection RMC 4-3-100.I5f): (a) Extended parapets; (b) Feature elements projecting above parapets; (c) Projected cornices; (d) Pitched or sloped roofs. —21— 05/l 0 llmhfiles2%ProjectslRenton Library at Liberty Park\Documents104—Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re- Submitta1113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL109 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc The project is the renovation of an existing building that does not currently include the elements listed alcove. Minimum Standard: Locate and screen roof -mounted mechanical equipment so that the equipment is not visible within 150 feet of the structure when viewed from ground level. The proposed rooftop mechanical unit will be screened. Minimum Standard: Screening features shall blend with the architectural character of the building, consistent with RMC 4-4-095E, Roof -Top Equipment. The project will screen the rooftop unit. Screening design and equipment placement will be dictated by the capacity of the existing structure. Minimum Standard: Match color of roof -mounted mechanical equipment to color of exposed portions of the roof to minimize visual impacts when equipment is visible from higher elevations. See response to previous item 4. Building Materials: Intent: To ensure high standards of quality and effective maintenance over time; encourage the use of materials that reduce the visual bulk of largebuildings; and encourage the use of materials that add visual interest to the neighborhood. Minimum Standard: All sides of buildings visible from a street, pathway, parking area, or open space shall be finished on all sides with the same building materials, detailing, and color scheme, or if different, with materials of the same quality. Minimum Standard: Materials, individually or in combination, shall have an attractive texture, pattern, and quality of detailing for all visible facades. Minimum Standard: Materials shall be durable, high quality, and reasonably maintained. Minimum Standard: Buildings shall employ material variations such as colors, brick or metal banding, patterns, or textural changes. Guideline: Building materials should be attractive, durable, and consistent with more traditional urban development. Appropriate examples would include brick, integrally colored concrete masonry, pre -finished metal, stone, steel, glass, and cast -in-place concrete. Guideline: Concrete wails should be enhanced by texturing, reveals, snap -tie patterns, coloring with a concrete coating or admixture, or by incorporating embossed or sculpted surfaces, mosaics, or artwork. —22— 0511 b WnhrdesZProjectslRenton Library at Liberty Park%Docurnentsk04_Agenciesl_ 002 Land Use Applicationsll3-0510 Land Use Re- SubmittaRl3-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL109 - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 0 L� Guideline: Concrete block walls should be enhanced with integral color, textured blocks and colored mortar, decorative bond pattern and/or incorporate other masonry materials. Guideline: Stucco and similar troweled finishes should be used in combination with other more highly textured finishes or accents. They should not be used at the base of buildings between the finished floor elevation and four feet (4') above. Building finishes will employ variation: concrete columns, curtainwall mullion patterns, and steel cross bracing. Material selection has been identified to comply with the existing structural criteria, ease of maintenance over a significant watershed, and enhancement of river views. F. SIGNAGE: Intent: To provide a means of identifying and advertising businesses; provide directional assistance; encourage signs that are both clear and of appropriate scale for the project; encourage quality signage that contributes to the character of the Urban Center and the Center Village; and create color and interest. Does not apply. G. LIGHTING: Intent: To ensure safety and security; provide adequate lighting levels in pedestrian areas such as plazas, pedestrian walkways, parking areas, building entries, and other public places; and increase the visual attractiveness of the area at all times of the day and night. Minimum Standard: Lighting shall conform to on-site exterior lighting regulations located in RMC 4-4-075, Lighting, Exterior On -Site. Minimum Standard: Lighting shall be provided on-site to increase security, but shall not be allowed to directly project off-site. Minimum Standard: Pedestrian -scale lighting shall be provided, for both safety and aesthetics, along all streets, at primary and secondary building entrances, at building facades, and at pedestrian -oriented spaces. On-site lighting will comply with these regulations, as well as best practices for the salmon watershed within the Cedar River. —23- Ilmhfiles2lProjects%Renton Library at Liberty Park\Documents104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications\ 13-0510 Land Use Re- Submittal113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTALM - Design District A Checklist - DRAFT.doc 05110 3 4 .00 0 CITY 4F RENTON , PAS J -. ��," t - RENTaN; \VASk{SNGTW4 OFFICE 4 CITY ALTrORHEY Gerard M. Shellor, [?itpArrorni f .1 1�''��% `4+j = _ . . Ar,hur U Hpugan . � � '�f✓' �, :,ale �1}-lY'.'. .. " snow !� gra �� � 1 , ���,L �� G- `.���r�� ._ , �'� �� r••, . r this d :te "rim t:Y MY clerk conies of ^e,r] ; Of 'I '?dicat- n {'r XI We Vartorlt8 tD mutt' rLtY Of i*E :{Irton- i01: Sly! T1s:f.iGC ' Lt??-Ci.� `- -s�st CE.':tS,:Vax '?l! 1;12 �T`�+�++r':tl�' i'C.i'Prs }Q :):'ak"r �1t KIM the � ,-.� & Gainer= Tt, y Sann5 to COV �� �.J to 1 liberty i ert E._^^ti F� E. 71'G 9• JC' l7Ol' t.r? `l2Cij QD-=Tr C��,' a it y Flu G,.+, thn out legal descr.L:.Way c ntape in Q! ra, ce wM Yom earVest ccnTanic oe iihEtheT Q Abrar si ,::l jti6 ^altneE of _I���idf�g �-aT�C .^c?S:J9C:.i�r�1,1.• I j A340V,j,t 'a'l'` t'Aba W t y clerk As no attar c:f3eQ, rocorday t,,rc� ;4,rc: is of pr is a operty n 1 thoir .. , ,.1, ,Q v ^ pit—rt t i out. any :Ati C+.moi,-7^, "1 .,..for - L '.:.t',. otner wtµ 1054;6. it i rt be Vail fag Mg iF - cl.yr� is Nterrtnv O Othar there is 0..,, '',,=rd -:7 t" 'Ay'.5 R n fi}e Licit trnvll i-hdicatn that the parcal 6i property. haA elan` C+HB� ti - 'ir'� ..`.ail' } t�,n 3r:' ',C T[; Or vtyar `;cver rental 2 arQy for Mm -f'L, m aN Operation, yTUS MY -cit. Of• _t�!`Sj�ETa:ylC=��Si,L'I t8 1C8 I,. plan rating the present plan adort'!d :;y tl!"3 i'77cr dR'1 the My . cunc'_"?. in the utilization of the subject area. r .r:st"in ' .t"c h_"�r "ao,t cu at a:,j azrly `date wa rermin, Xal�s vary truly, Jag: ,'arum_ ,,hellan City ,lttnxnny " G!'r : b, J nelosilra . cc.:.��:r�, ;,Ql C:slaorr? City Clerk TRIS AGRE ZLENT made and entered into this �� day of June, 1917, by and between the CITY OF RENTON, a municipal corporation of the state of Waahington, party of the first part, and JENNIE SARTORI, ERSILIA M. SBARBARO, KATHERINE E. SARTORI and LAURA G. SARTORI, parties of the second part; WITTESSETH: That the part:ies of the second part agree to sell and convey to the party of the first part and the party of the first part agrees to purchase from.the party of the second part, the lands hereinafter described, to be used for a public park only, the parties of the second part reserving all coal under the surface of the lands conveyed vrit�'nthe right to remove the IaMe but without the right to enterponhe surface.kof said lands for such purpose. The parties of the second part acknowledge the receipt from the part, of the first part of the sum of Fifty Dollars as earnest to be applied on part of the purchase price, the whole amount of which purchase price is Nine Thousand Dollars, and the whole amount of said purchase price shall be paid on or before thirty days after the delivery b� the parties of the second part to the party of the first Part of an abstract of title showing good merchantable title, free of all taxes, liens or incumbrances, in the parties of the second part to all said lands. And the parties of the second part further agree to dedicate for the purposes of a public street $ strip of land sixty feet in width along the north side of and immediately adjacent to said tract of land. The parties of the second part agree to deliver to the party of the first part a good and sufficient warranty deed of said lands upon full payment of the purchase price within the time above provided. Time is material and of theessence of this agreement and unless the full payment of the purchase price shall be made by the party of the first part within the time above specified this contract shall be wholly terminated and at an end and all rights of the party of the first part thereunder. The lands hereinabove referred to are situated in King county, State of Was:_ington, and are more particularly described as follows, to-viit: That portion of Sartori's pirst Addition to the city of Renton, bounded on the ?est by the Daat line of the present city perk, on the liorth by the South line of river avenue, as shown on plat of said padaition, on the Last by the 100 foot strip of land rse �Err%re�#r�, lying im__ediately West of the GkAmeV1 and. Puget Sound aHailway Company right of way, and on the South by the right of way of Commercial Water way District No.2 (said parcel of land containing approximately four and one-half acres). Dated this o day of June, 1917. 66666 666 i r r 0 0 910209 4�-.51 ° 6I,� D 3 E D. TTUC GRLUTORS Ignazio Sartori. and Jennie Sartori, his wife for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar (;,1600), cash In hand paid by the City of Renton, Washington a municipal corporation of the third class of the State of Washington receipt of which is hereby aokaowledged subject to the qualifications hereinafter setforth convoys and warrants to the said City of Renton, l7ashington the following &eseribed property to -wit. Beginning at the intersection of the north line of the Cedar ?diver y;aterway and the west marginal line of Lot Pour (4) Section Seventeen (17), Township Twonty-three (23) 2Torth Range Five (5) Fast-, ^hence I`orth one degrees, fifty --two (52) minutes and ten (10) seconds west along said west marginal lire 293,1 feet to the southeasterly marginal line of the Renton Issaquah Road; t"rnence north forty --five (45) degrees, fifty --nine (59) minutes and thirty (30) seconds east east along said southeasterly marginal line 80.91 feet to the true point of beginning; thence. continuing Yorth forty-five degrees, fifty- nine minutes and thirty (30) seconds east along said southeasterly marginal line 137.56 feet thence sor,th one degree, fifty-two (52) minutes and ten (lo) second;, east 146.58 feet; hence south eighty- eight (88) degibeee, seven (07) minutes and fifty (50) seconds wast 102.0 feet; thence north one degree, fifty-two (52) minutes and. ten (If,") aeconds west 54.28 feet to the }point of beginning, aituated in King County, ' 7ashIngt on . Said above described tract of land being Lots four (4), five d (5) and six ( 6) in Block three (3) Df Sartori"s First &ddition to the City of Renton, according to an unrecorded plat thereof prepared by Jdo Hesse Engineering CoTMpa,;,T, e oon;F of which said unrecorded. plat is hereto attached and b;; this reference made a part hereof. This conve rance is made scloly for the parpose of nroviding said City of Renton, Wasringtor. with a surtsblo site for a rniblic library ---------2 building. And it is understood and agreed that in case said amity of Renton, Washington shall not buil3 a Public Libsrary on said above described pro- perty or cause sAd library to be built Within a period of two Mears from date hereof that then and in that event the title to said above described real estate shall revert to and vest in the grantors herein, free from any claim or demand of said 'City of Renton, 7ashine:ton or its assigns, Frovided however, That if at the expiration of said period of two years material for said Public Libra;:y Builaing shall be upon the pre- ¢:isea heretofore described that then and in that event said City of Renton shall have an ad%itional period of one year in which to complete said building. Signed in presEnve of SMITE OF :7r'i:5HLi n''CT : SS l/ COUINTY OF %Iil i," "I4 I5 TO :cTIF Y, "hat an thisaL _ (lay of �r1tix U. n. D. 19 J 7/ be fore me ' �1��:.�._ a idotar;J Public in and for the State of ; asaington, du?y „ammiesioned and sworn personally came Sartori arU jen,nie Sartori, his ,life to me known to be the ind-ivia- uals described in and -rho executed the within instrument, and ac],sno,Jledged to me that they .9i&ned and sealed the score as their free and voluntary act Mid deed for the uses and purposes t:zerein mentioned. l^T]ES:1 my hand snot official seal the dal and year in this cer- tificate first above written. f Notary _ubl in and f r t a State of tvashington, re;,iding at :�� U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY ELEVATION CERTIFICATE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY National Flood Innirance Program IA*rtant: Read the instructions on pages. Al. Building Owner's Name City of Renton OMB No. 1660-0008 Expiration Date: July 31, 2015 SECTION A- PROPERTY INFORMATION I POR -INSURANCE COMPANY USE 1 A2. Building Street Address (including Apt, Unit, Suite, anti/or Bldg. No.) or P.O. Route and Box No. I Company NAIL Nulnbe� I 100 Mill Avenue South f City Renton State WA ZIP Cade 98057 A3. Property Description (Lot and Black Numbers, Tax Parcel Number, Legal Description, etc.) King County TPN -172305-9043 A4_ Building Use (e.g., Residential, Non -Residential, Addition, Accessory, etc.) Public Libraro A5. Latitude/Longitude: Lat. 47°28'54" Long. -122°12'06" Horizontal Datum: ❑ NAD 1927 ® NAD 1983 A6. Attach at least 2 photographs of the building if the Certificate is being used to obtain flood insurance. AT Building Diagram Number Diagram 5 A8. For a building with a crawlspace or enclosure(s): A9. Fora building with an attached gam, . a) Square footage of crawlspace or enclosure(s) sq ft a) Square footage of attached g44 b) Number of permanent flood openings in the crawlspace b) Number of permanent flood openings in the attachect�y ge or enclosure(s) within 1.0 foot above adjacent grade within 1.0 foot above adjacent grade c) Total net area of flood openings in A8.b sq in c) Total net area of flood openings in A9.b sq In d) Engineered flood openings? ❑ Yes ❑ No d) Engineered flood openings? ❑ Yes ❑ No SECTION B - FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP (FIRM) INFORMATION 131. NFIP Community Name & Community Number B2. County Name 133. State City of Renton - 530088 King WA B4. Map/Panel Number B5. Suffix B6. FIRM Index Date B7. FIRM Panel B8- f=lood B9. Base Flood Elevations) (Zone 5303310977 K Preliminary Effective/Revised Date Zone(s) AO, use base flood depth) below according to the building diagram specified in Item A7. In Puerto Rico only, enter meters. 05/16195-4119/05 AE & XX 39.62 B10. Indicate the source of the Base Flood Elevation (BFE) data or base flood depth entered in Item 69. ❑ FIS Profile ® FIRM ❑ Community Determined ® Other/Source. City of Renton Bl l . Indicate elevation datum used for BFE In Item B9: ❑ NGVD 1929 ® NAVD 1988 ❑ Other/Source: B12. is the building located Ina Coastal Barrier Resources System (CBRS) area or Otherwise Protected Area (OPA)? Designation Date: ❑ CBRS ❑ OPA ❑ Yes ® No SECTION C - BUILDING ELEVATION INFORMATION (SURVEY REQUIRED) Cl. Building elevations are based on: ❑ Construction Drawings' ❑ Building Under Construction` ® Finished Construction *A new Elevation Certificate will be required when construction of the building is complete. C2. Elevations - Zones Al -A30, AE, AH, A (with SFE), VE, Vi -V30, V (with BFE), AR, ARIA, ARAE, ARIA -A30, AR/AH, AR/AO. Complete Items C2.a-h below according to the building diagram specified in Item A7. In Puerto Rico only, enter meters. Benchmark Utilized: KC K384 Vertical Datum: NAVD 1988 Indicate elevation datum used for the elevations In items a) through h) below. ❑ NGVD 1929 ® NAVD 1988 ❑ Other/Source: Datum used for building elevations must be the same as that used for the BFE. Check the measurement used_ a) Top of bottom floor (including basement, crawlspace, or enclosure floor) 45.2 IG] feet ❑ meters b) Top of the next higher floor ❑ feet ❑ meters c) Bottom of the lowest horizontal structural member (V Zones only) 42.04 ® feet ❑ meters d) Attached garage (top of slab) ❑ feet ❑ meters e) Lowest elevation of machinery or equipment servicing the building 44&2 121 feet ❑ meters (Describe type of equipment and location in Comments) f) Lowest adjacent (finished) grade next to building (LAG) 22.8 0 feet ❑ m eters g) Highest adjacent (finished) grade next to building (HAG) 45.5 ® feet ❑ meters h) Lowest adjacent grade at lowest elevation of deck or stairs, Including structural support 23.9 ® feet ❑ meters SECTION D - SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, OR ARCHITECT CERTIFICATION This certification is to be signed and sealed by a land surveyor, engineer, or architect authorized by law to certify elevation Information. I certify that the information on this Certificate represents my best efforts to interpret the data available. I understand that any false statement may be punishable by fine or imprisonment under 18 U.S. Coate, Section 1001. ❑ Check here if comments are provided on back of form. Were latitude and longitude in Section A provided by a ❑ Check here if attachments. licensed land surveyor? ® Yes ❑ No Certifier's Name Ron Hilliard, PLS License Number 35971 Title Principal Company Name Pacific Geomatic Services, Inc. Address 6608 216'" St. 5 , Si 4 City Mountlake Terrace State WA ZIP Code 98043 SignatureDate Telephone 425-778-5620 p� � 'Ha���'4•P �'•�'4' v tir�C �. J . J H L jz $• ..,��35971 S�p�,9r 71 5� FEMA Form 086-0-33 (7112) See reverse side for continuation. Replaces all previous editions. IMPORTANT: In these spaces, copy the cormsponding information from Section A. FOR INSURANCE COMPANY USE Building Street Address (including Apt., Unit, Suite, Wor Bldg. No.) or P.O. Route and Box No. Policy Number: 100 Mill Avenue South City Renton State WA ZIP Code 98057 Company NAIC Number: SECTION D - SURVEYOR, ENGINEER, OR ARCHITECT CERTIFICATION (CONTINUED) Copy both sides of this Elevation Certificate for (1) community official, (2) Insurance agent/company, and (3) building owner. Comments Due to the unique nature of this building, as it sits on a bridge deck spanning the Cedar River, elevations f) g) and h) from above are described as follows. f) Is the lowest point in the Cedar River channel at the upstream face of the building. g) Is the grade adjacent to the building at the highest point on the right bank. h) is the grade in the>rbpttW adjacent to the deck columns. Signature Date .. , Z"q _ r 1,2) SEC ION E- BUILDING ELEVATION INFORMATION (SURVEY NOT REQUIRED) FOR ZONE AO AND ZONE A (WITHOUT BFE) For Zones AO and A (without BFE), complete Items E1 -E5. If the Certificate is Intended to support a LOMA or LOMR-F request, complete Sections A, B, and C. For Items E1 -E4, use natural grade, if available. Check the measurement used. In Puerto Rloo only, enter meters. E1. Provide elevation information for the following and check the appropriate boxes to show whether the elevation is above or below the highest adjacent grade (HAG) and the lowest adjacent grade (LAG). a) Top of bottom floor (including basement, crawlspace, or enclosure) is ❑ feet ❑ meters ❑ above or ❑ below the HAG, b) Top of bottom floor (including basement, crawlspace, or enclosure) is ❑ feet ❑ meters ❑ above or ❑ below the LAG. E2. For Building Diagrams 6-9 with permanent flood openings provided in Section A items 8 and/or 9 (see pages 8--9 of Instructions), the next higher floor (elevation C2.b In the diagrams) of the building is ❑ feet ❑ meters ❑ above or ❑ below the HAG. E3. Attached garage (top of slab) is ❑ feet ❑ meters ❑ above or ❑ below the HAG. E4. Top of platform of machinery and/or equipment servicing the building Is ❑ feet ❑ meters ❑ above or ❑ below the HAG. E5. Zone AO only: If no flood depth number Is available, Is the top of the bottom floor elevated In accordance with the community's floodplain management ordinance? ❑ Yes ❑ No ❑ Unknown. The local official must certify this information In Section G. SECTION F -- PROPERTY OWNER (OR OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE) CERTIFICATION The property owner or owner's authorized representative who completes Sections A, B, and E for Zone A (without a FEMA -Issued or community -issued BFE) or Zone AO must sign here. The statements in Sections A, B, and E are correct to the best of my knowledge. Property Owner's or Owner's Authorized Representative's Name Address City State ZIP Code Signature Date Telephone Comments ❑ Check here If attachments. SECTION G -- COMMUNITY INFORMATION (OPTIONAL) The local official who is authorized by law or ordinance to administer the community's floodpialn management ordinance can complete Sections A, B. C (or E), and G of this Elevation Certificate. Complete the applicable item(s) and sign below. Check the measurement used in Items G8 -G10. In Puerto Rico only, enter meters. G1. ❑ The information In Section C was taken from other documentation that has been signed and sealed by a licensed surveyor, engineer, or architect who Is authorized by law to certify elevation information. (Indicate the source and date of the elevation data In the Comments area below.) G2. ❑ A community official completed Section E for a building located In Zone A (without a FEMA -issued or community -issued BFE) or Zone AO. G3. ❑ The following Information (Items G4 -G10) is provided for community floodplain management purposes. G4. Permit Number I G5. Date Permit Issued I G6. Date Certificate Of Compliance/Occupancy Issued G7. This permit has been issued for: ❑ New Construction ❑ Substantial Improvement G8. Elevation of as -built lowest floor (including basement) of the building: ❑ feet ❑ meters Datum G9. BFE or (in Zone AO) depth of flooding at the building site: ❑ feet ❑ meters Datum G10. Community's design flood elevation: ❑ feet ❑ meters Datum Local Official's Name Title Community Name Telephone Signature Date Comments ❑ Check here If attachments. FEMA Form 086-0-33 (7112) Replaces all previous editions. 0 SiteWorkshoP LLC _a iD_a=.: 3 T7:r7r:a, Landscape Analysis, lot coverage, and parking analysis Project Name: Renton Library at Liberty Park Submittal: Site Plan Review Submittal 1 D9 Date. 05.10.2013 Item Area/Quantity Notes Site Square Footage 40,753 SF* *Size of parcel. Building is over Cedar Limit of Work Square 371630 SF River and outside of Footage parcel. Library Building 19,680 SF Footprint: Existing Impervious 34,522 SF Surface Proposed Impervious 34,313 SF Surface Percentage of lot N/A, see explanation in Building is over Cedar covered by buildings notes column River and not within parcel. Number of code required N/A, see explanation in Within the Downtown parking spaces notes column Center Zone, parking loading and driveway regulations are applicable only to the area exceeding the area of the original structure, in terms of calculating the required parking. Based on a proposal to maintain the square footage of the structure, new parking is not required. Number and dimensions of (2) 8' x 18' ADA head -in standard, compact, and stalls ADA accessible spaces (2) 8.5' x 19' ADA provided angled stalls (8) 9' x 18' Compact head -in stalls Planning D 9' x 19' Compact angled stalls REV1 Date z ` Perimeter parking lot 2,153 SF Per 4-4-070 Landscaping landscaping C.1, "CD Zone: All development in the CD zone is exempt from all but the maintenance of any existing landscaping and street tree requirements of this Section_" SiteWorkshop Landscape Architecture 1927 Pos� Alley Seattle Washington 981D1 7:206.285.3026 F:206.285.3629 www.siteworkshop.net ily of 1 4� L'u lision QED �i SiteWorkshopLLC LA.11F)6 .AP - ,,.._ETP=CTURE Interior parking lot 1,189 5F Per 4-4-070 Landscaping landscaping C.1, "CD Zone: All development in the CD zone is exempt from all but the maintenance of any existing landscaping and street tree requirements of this Section." 5iteWorkahcp Landscape Architecture 1927 Post Alley Seattle Washington 98101 7:206.285.3026 7-266-265.3629 www.siteworkshop.net 0 0 PLANNING DIVISION E N V I R 0 N M E N TALZ*fC9U_& AL City of Renton Planning Division Xmental 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, WA 98057 Phone: 425-430-7200 Fax: 425-430-7231 �Bt9( PURPOSE OF CHECKLIST:The State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), Chapter 43.210 RCW, requires all gover 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 nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answered "does not apply." IN ADDITION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). i� 4.1.2013 11mhfl1es21PrajecLslRenton Library at Liberty Park%Documenls104_A9enc1esl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use R"Ubmittall13-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL105 - environmental checklisl.doc For nonproject actions (actions involving decisions on policies, pians 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. A. BACKGROUND Name of proposed project, if applicable: RENTON LIBRARY at LIBERTY PARK 2. Name of applicant: KING COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM in conjunction with CITY OF RENTON DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Greg Smith King County Library System Service Center 960 Newport Way NW Issaquah, WA 98027 425.369.3237 Peter Renner City of Renton Renton City Nall 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 425.430.6605 4. Date checklist prepared: May 10, 2013 5. Agency requesting checklist: Administrative Site Plan Review: COR Planning Division Environmental (SEPA) Review: COR Planning Division Shoreline Substantial Development Permit: COR Planning Division 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): We would like the submittals expedited as promptly as possible. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Not at this time. -2- 4.1.2013 1lmhfiles2NProjects%Renton Library at Liberty Parklbocuments104_Agen6iesl_002 Land Use Appiications113-0510 Land Use Re-Submittal113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL105 - environmental checklist.doc CJ 0 S. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Regulated Materials Survey Report dated 6.25.2012, prepared by URS Stream Study and Habitat Data Report dated 5.10.2013, prepared byTalasaea Consultants, Inc. 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. There are no other pending proposals for this site. 10. List any governmental approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Administrative Site Plan Review, City of Renton Environmental (SEPA) Review, City of Renton Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, City of Renton Demolition Permit, City of Renton Building Permit, City of Renton Hydraulic Project Approval, WA Department of Fish & Wildlife 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. The project, Renton Library at Liberty Park, is a renovation of an existing 22,400 SF library into a 19,680 (gross) SF library. The site address is 100 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98057. The project affects three parcels, the total limit of work is 37,630 SF. Proposed improvements include seismic upgrades to the existing structure, demolition of existing building envelope, installation of new envelope and building systems, as well as site improvements as a result of seismically -required below -grade concrete abutments. This project proposes the demolition of under -performing portions of the existing building. First any asbestos -containing materials identified in the Regulated Materials Survey will be removed by Certified Asbestos Workers. Then the contractor will dismantle, demolish, and remove: interior partitions, ceilings and finishes, mechanical and electrical systems, portions of the existing roof and roof sheathing, portions of the roof structure, the exterior envelope including glazing, frames, masonry, portions of the concrete topping slab, and portions of the concrete structure. On the site, one tree will be removed in order to excavate for the required seismic upgrades to the concrete structure. The existing asphalt parking lot west of the building will remain in place. -3- 4.1.2013 fthfilesZProjecAsWenton Library at Liberty Park\Documents104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re-Submittal113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL105- environmental chacklist.doc This project further proposes a full renovation of the library building. This includes the seismic upgrades to the concrete structure with two below -grade concrete pile caps at the banks of the Cedar River, with auger cast piles as ground improvements. The roof structure will be braced for seismic with steel brace frames in both directions. The building envelope will be replaced with a high -performing curtainwall system with transparent glazing and a metal panel wall assembly. New systems infrastructure will be part of the project including mechanical, lighting, electrical, data, plumbing, fire suppression, and fire alarm. Site improvements include replacement of the existing sanitary side sewer pipe from the building connection to the connection at the City main in Mill Avenue S due to the current poor condition of the pipe. 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 pians submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. Library Address: 100 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98057 Quarter -Section -Township -Range: NW -17-23-5 Parking Lot Parcel: Plat Lot / Unit Number: Address: Liberty Park Comm Bldg Parcel: Address: 768500-0010 1 thru 6 110052 nd St Renton, WA 98055 172305-9011 1119 Bronson Way N Renton, WA 98055 Renton Library & Skateboard Park Parcel: 172305-9043 Address: 200 Mill Ave S Renton, WA 98055 !919 4.1.2013 llmhfilesMrojectslRentan Library at Liberty ParR\Documents104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re-SubmittaR13.0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL105 - enviranmental checklist.doc 0 0 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. General description of the site (circle one); flat, Failing, holly, steep slopes, other: The site is generally flat except where the Cedar River runs through it. The Cedar River flows through a generally steep -sided, artificially - constructed channel in a north -northwesterly direction. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope?) There is 50% slope at the river banks, however no work will occur within this area. 3% slope is the steepest within the construction site area. 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. Soil types encountered on the project site consisted of undocumented fill and recent alluvium deposits. Fill soils were encountered in each of the explorations completed and consisted of loose to medium dense/very soft to soft silty sand/silt with variable gravel and cobble content, and organics. The fill extended to depths of 1S feet below existing grades. Recent alluvium deposits were observed below the fill and consisted of medium dense to very dense silty sand with varying amounts of gravel and medium dense to dense gravel with varying amounts of silt and sand. The recent alluvium deposits extended to the depth explored. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No surface expression of instability was noted. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Approximately 900 cubic yards of soil will have to be excavated for the installation of the below -grade concrete abutments. After the concrete is poured, approximately 360 cubic yards will be filled on site above the abutments. Material will be imported from WSDOT approved pits as needed. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion is not likely. Any exposed soils will be covered with an all- weather construction surface prior to construction. -5- 4.1.2013 Wnhfiles2VProjem%Ftenton Library at Liberty ParklDocumenWs _A9enciesl_002 Land Use Appiicationsl13-0510 Land Use Re-Submittahl3-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTALM - enviranmental checklist.doc 0 i g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? 91% of the site area will be covered by impervious surfaces. (This represents a 1% reduction of impervious surfaces) Note: The site area for this project is the area within the limit of work as shown in the civil site plan (37,630 SF). Note: The project will reduce the footprint of the existing building that spans the Cedar River by approximately 7%. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Existing asphalt will be maintained within the parking lot reducing the amount of exposed soils on site. Exposed existing soils will be covered with an all-weather construction surface, likely crushed rock or rip rap prior to construction, which will protect the soils from rain water and wind. Soil stock piles will be covered with plastic as needed during construction. During dry summer months, a water truck may be utilized 2. AIR to prevent wind-blown dust. 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. Exhaust from diesel- and gasoline -powered equipment is likely during construction. Dust from the use of construction equipment on dry soil is possible. Dust from cutting or removal of concrete is also possible. b. Are there any off-site sources of emission or odor that may affect your proposal? if so, generally describe. There are no known off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect the proposed project. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Exhaust emissions will be limited when practicable by turning off equipment if it will be idling for an extended period of time. Emissions of dust will be prevented by measures such as wetting of soil where heavy equipment will be travelling, and by best management practices during concrete demolition. -6- 4.1.2013 %\mhfiles2lProjectMRenton library at Liberty Parklbocument5104_Agenciesl 002 Land Use Appkicabons113-0510 Land Use Re-Submittal113-0510 Land Use RESUBMITTAL105 - environmental checklist.doc 0 0 3. WATER a. Surface Water: 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, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The Cedar River runs through the project site. The Cedar River is a Class 1 Stream and a Shoreline of the State. All lands within 200' of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the Cedar River are considered State Shorelands and are subject to the regulations of the Shoreline Management Act and the City of Renton Shoreline Master Program. The Cedar River is also designated as Critical Habitat by the City of Renton and contains anadromous salmonids, including species Federally -listed as threatened or endangered. The Cedar River flows into Lake Washington approximately 1.5 river miles downstream of the project site. 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes. The project includes the renovation of an existing building that spans the Cedar River. Work will be performed on the building itself over the river as well as within a work area within the 200 -foot shoreline zone on either side of the river (this work area will extend approximately 50 feet beyond the OHWM on both banks of the river). No work will occur below the OHWM or below the 100 -year Base Flood Elevation (+39.62' NAVD88) 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. No fill or dredge material will be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands. No work will occur below the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the Cedar River. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known. No removal of surface water will result from the proposed project. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year flood plain? If so, note location on the site plan. Portions of the library building are located over the 100 -year floodplain. However, all proposed work will be above the 100 -year Base Flood Elevation, determined to be +39.62' NAVD88 for this site. -7- 4,1.2093 lbnhfi1es2lPrnjectslRenton Library at Liberty ParkOomments104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re-Submittal113.0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL105 - environmental cheddist.doc 0 0 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. No discharge of waste materials will occur during construction or after project completion. 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. Withdrawal of groundwater should not be a necessary part of this project. Seismic stabilization work near the building's outer footings will involve the use of auger cast piles and will likely not require dewatering during construction. No water will be discharged into the ground as a result of the proposed project. 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. None. 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. Storm water runoff from the building's roof after the renovation will be routed through permanent below ground pipes to the existing drainage system which currently discharges into the Cedar River below the building. 2) Could waste material enter ground or surface waters? if so, generally describe. No. Construction storm water will be captured and treated prior to discharge to the existing below grade piped storm drainage system. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Storm water will be captured on site and conveyed to the existing below grade piped storm drainage system. No ground water will be collected or discharged as part of this project. ME 4.1.2013 1lrmhfilas2lProjects\Renton Library at Liberty Park\OocumentM10 Agenciesl_002 Land use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re-Submi"A13-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL105 - environmental checklist.doc 4. PLANTS Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other X shrubs X grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eel grass, milfoll, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? One Cherry Tree, 12" caliper, is proposed for removal. C, List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The planting palette will include native and non-native adapted/drought tolerant species. Plantings will include trees, shrubs, groundcovers and restoration of existing turf areas. S. ANIMALS 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, heFeR, eagle,, songbirds, other Mammals: , , other Fish: ba6s, salmon, trout, Merl ihm, other b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. The reach of the Cedar River that includes the project site has known runs of Puget Sound fall Chinook, Puget Sound winter steelhead, and bull trout. Also present are Puget Sound coho, which are a Federally -listed species of concern. C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain The Cedar River is a migration route for Chinook, coho, sockeye and steelhead, as well as bull trout and coastal resident cutthroat trout. The project site is also within the Pacific flyway for migratory birds. -9- 4.1.2013 WnhfilesMProjectslRenton Library at Liberty Park0ocuments104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re-SubmittaA73-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMI7TAL105 - environmental checklist.doc 6 d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: The project proposes to contribute to a vegetation conservation fund maintained by the City of Renton for the purpose of enhancing the lower reach of the Cedar River. This fund is currently in development. Several potential sites on the Cedar River have been located within the City of Renton that could be enhanced for the benefit of Federally -listed threatened or endangered species of salmonids. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES d stove, solr) l be used a meet the compeleted project's,energy needs nergy (lectricnatural gas, �I Des � be whether it will to What kins ofll be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Natural gas will be used for gas heating. Grid electrical energy will be used for other building needs. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. This project should not affect the potential use of solar power by adjacent properties. 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: Electrical Conservation features: We will use LED, fluorescent, and ceramic metal halide lamps, which are the most energy efficient lighting options available. We are targeting a 10% or better below energy code for lighting. We will have daylight dimming controls in all daylight zones and occupancy sensors in non-active rooms. Mechanical Conservation features: The building will use an efficient natural gas condensing boiler for heating. Ductwork and piping will be .sized to reduce pumping and fan energy. Cooling equipment will be specified with efficiencies exceeding code. Thermal Conservation features: The existing building is poorly insulated and has low -performance glazing systems. The proposed new building envelope will significantly improve thermal performance of the existing building. It will consist of high performance fenestration systems, opaque wall 'systems, and roof assemblies that meet or exceed current Washington State Energy Code requirements. -10- 4.1.2013 1lmhfiles2l13rojects\Renton Library at Liberty Park\Documents104 Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re-Submittal113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL105 - environmental checklist.doc 0 0 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. We do not anticipate exposure to toxic chemicals or other environmental health hazards as a part of this proposal. 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. We do not anticipate any special emergency services being required. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Not Applicable. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Nearby traffic noise does exist at Bronson Way N, however we do not anticipate that it will adversely affect this project. 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. During construction, a temporary increase in noise in the vicinity is anticipated due to construction activities and the use of machines such as earth movers, compactors, trucks, and other typical construction equipment. The hours of construction activity are anticipated to be limited to between 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. and will not exceed the maximum permissible noise levels, as determined by WAC Chapter 173- 60. The library's general hours of operation are anticipated to be as follows: Monday —Thursday 10am -- 9pm Friday loam — 6pm Saturday 10am — 5pm Sunday ipm — Spm Additionally, a range of vehicles will make deliveries to the library. Noise impacts to neighboring uses are not anticipated as a result of the library and associated activities. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Although noise impacts are not anticipated and the project is not required to implement noise mitigation, the proposed library is planned to be constructed with sound insulation or other means to achieve a day/night average interior noise level of 45 Ldn. Siff 4.1.2013 1lmhfiles2lProjectslRenton Library at Liberty Parl<Oocuments104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re-Submittal113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL105- environmental cheddist.doc 0 ! 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The existing building is currently in use as a library. Adjacent to the project site are the following uses: • Northeast: public park • Southeast: Cedar River • Southwest: parking lot & office building • Northwest: Cedar River with Bronson Way bridge b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. M C. Describe any structures on the site. The site consists of three parcels, totaling 305,958 SF. These parcels include several structures that will not be affected by this project. The unaffected structures are Liberty Park Community Building (per King County Assessor), Old City Hall/200 Mill Building (per COR GIS), and several Parks and Recreation structures: skate board park, shelter, Utility building, and Basketball court. The area of the limit of proposed work is 37,630 SF. It includes the existing Renton Library, which spans the Cedar River and is the focus of this proposal. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The project proposes to remodel the existing Renton Library. This will include some demolition work. First any asbestos -containing materials identified in the Regulated Materials Survey will be removed by Certified Asbestos Workers. Then the contractor will dismantle/demolish and remove: interior partitions, ceilings and finishes, mechanical and electrical systems, portions of the existing roof and roof sheathing, portions of the roof structure, the exterior envelope including glazing/frames and masonry, and portions of the concrete topping slab. On the site one tree will be removed in order to excavate for the required seismic upgrades to the concrete structure. The existing asphalt parking lot at the West end of the site will remain in place. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? CD — Center Downtown f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? UC -D (Urban Center Downtown) -12- 4.1.2013 fthfiles2lPro]ectslRenton Library at Liberty ParkT=ments104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re-Submittalll3.0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTA005 - environmental cherklist.doc 0 i g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? The Cedar River is a Class 1 Stream and a Shoreline of the State. All lands within 200' of the ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of the Cedar River are considered State Shorelands and are subject to the regulations of the Shoreline Management Act and the City of Renton Shoreline Master Program. The Cedar River is also designated as Critical Habitat by the City of Renton and contains anadromous salmonids, including species that are Federally -listed as threatened or endangered. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. The library site includes the Cedar River and portions of its associated shorelands and buffer, which are environmentally sensitive areas. No other environmentally sensitive areas, such as wetlands, lakes, or streams, are on the site. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Full time staff at any one time would be between 5-7 employees. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Documents being submitted describe measures being taken to ensure compatibility with land use code. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: None. NICE 4.1.2013 NVnhfiles2lProjectslRenton Library at Liberty Parkloocuments104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applicationslt 3-0510 Land Use Re-Submittalll3-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL105 - environmental checklist -doe 0 0 10. AESTHETICS What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed. The proposed remodel will not increase the height of the existing building, approximately 19'-0" above grade. The required screening at the rooftop mechanical units will add approximately another 10"-0" in one specific location, in the middle of the roof, towards the northeast corner. The existing rooftop mechanical unit is approximately the same size as the proposed and currently not screened. The building envelope will consist mainly of aluminum curtainwall frames with transparent glazing and a metal panel wall assembly. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? Views to the Cedar River from within the building will be enhanced. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Because this is a renovation, the aesthetics of the existing building will largely determine the final design expression. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The lighting for this project will be controlled to reduce or eliminate any potential for glare. bownlights with excellent shielding and cutoff will be incorporated into all spaces; interior and exterior. Placement of exterior fixtures in the plaza will contain the light to the plaza and will not impact the river or night sky. All lighting will be reduced to minimal security lighting during night hours. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light and glare are not anticipated to be a safety hazard or interfere with views. All outdoor luminaires would be well shielded and directed downward so light is contained to the plaza but not beyond the plaza to the river below. All but safety and security lighting will be automatically shut off at a designated time to further reduce nighttime presence. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? No offsite light sources are anticipated to affect this proposal. MICR 4.1.2013 1lmhfiles2%Projects\Renton Library at Liberty Park\Documents104_Agenc1esl_002 Land Use ApplicatJionsll3-4510 Land Use Re-Submi"1113-0514 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL105 - environmental checklist-doc 0 0 d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Light levels will meet but not exceed Illuminating Engineering Society (IES — produces lighting standards for the lighting industry) recommendations to provide the industry standard amount of light and minimize over lighting the space. Any outdoor luminaires would be directed downward to illuminate the intended surface and minimize glare. Automatic controls will be implemented to turn off non-critical lighting after-hours to further reduce light impact. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? Public Park with basketball, tennis, baseball, park shelter, the river b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? if so, describe. M Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Not applicable. 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. 110o b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: Not applicable. _15- 4.1,2013 1lmhfi1es2lPrajed5lRenton Library at Liberty Park0ocuments104_Agenciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re-Submittal113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBMITTAL105 - environmental checklist.doc 0 14. TRANSPORTATION �J Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Mill Avenue South Bronson Way North South 2"d Street The parking lot included in the site is accessed from Mill Avenue South. b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. The sidewalk on Mill Ave S directly adjacent to the parking lot has a bus stop that serves lines 105, 110, 143, 167, 240, 342, 907, 908, and 909. One block south, a bus stop serves lines 101, 148, and 153. C. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The proposed project has (70) stalls. The project would eliminate (4) parking stalls. 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? No new roads or streets are required. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Because this project maintains an existing use, the number of vehicular trips should not deviate from the current amount of trips to the building. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Not applicable. -16- 4.1.2013 Ilmhfl1es2TroiectslRenton Library at Liberty Parklbocuments104_A9enciesl_002 Land Use Applications113-0510 Land Use Re-Submittal113-0510 Land Use RE-SUBM[rrALl05 - environmental checklist.doc n IS. PUBLIC SERVICES 0 a. 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. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. Not applicable. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, __ptie system, other: communications fiber. 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. The City of Renton provides domestic water service and sanitary sewer service for the site. Sanitary side sewer replacement is proposed. The existing domestic water service has been recently replaced and will be maintained. Electric service provided by PSE, and communications & telephone service provided by King County INET are proposed. Minor modifications to the existing private storm conveyance system within the parking lot on site are proposed. C. SIGNATURE 1, the undersigned, declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true, correct, 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 Signature: povt;C�� Name Printed: Maaike Post Date: 05.10.2013 -17- 4.1.2013 llmhfllesWrojectslRenton Library at Liberty Park0ocuments104_Agenaesl_002 Land Use ApplicalionO3-0510 Land Use Re-SubmittaAl3-0510 Land Use RESUHMffTAL105 - environmental checklist.doc RECEIPT EGO0005104 BILLING CONTACT City of Renton 1055 S Grady Way Renton, WA 98057 14AR I 201,E IED REFERENCE NUMBER FEE NAME TRANSACTION PAYMENT AMOUNT PAIL} TYPE METHOD LUA13-000255 PLAN - Environmental Review Fee Payment Check #3020225 $1,000.00 PIAN - Shoreline Substantial Dev Permits Fee Payment Check #3020225 $2,000.00 PLAN - Site Plan Review - Admin Fee Payment Check #3020225 $1,000.00 Technology Fee Fee Payment Check #3020225 $120.00 SUB TOTAL $4,120.00 TOTAL $4,120.00 Printed On: March 01, 2013 Prepared By: Vanessa Dolbee Page 1 of 7