The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutLUA-04-115I~ .-.;. Page 1 of2 WAC 173-27-130 Filing with department. (1) All applications for a pennit or a pennit revision shall be submitted to the department upon a final decision by local government. Final decision by local government shall mean the order or ruling, whether it be an approval or denial, which is established after all local administrative appeals related to the pennit have concluded or the opportunity to initiate such appeals have lapsed. rm When a substantial development pennit and a conditional use or variance pennit are required for ~opment, the submittal on the pennits shall be made concurrently. (3) A complete submittal shall consist of the following documents and infonnation: (a) A copy of the complete application pursuant to WAC 173-27-180; (b) Findings and conclusions that establish the basis for the decision including but not limited to identification of shoreline environment designation, applicable master program policies and regulations and the consistency of the project with appropriate review criteria for the type ofpermit(s) as established in WAC 173-27-140 through 173-27-170; (c) The final decision of the local government; (d) The pennit data sheet required by WAC 173-27-190; and (e) Where applicable, local government shall also file the applicable documents required by chapter 43.21C RCW, the State Environmental Policy Act, or in lieu thereof, a statement summarizing the actions and dates of such actions taken under chapter 43.21C RCW. (4) When the project has been modified in the course of the local review process, plans or text shall be provided to the department that clearly indicate the final approved plan./ (5) Submittal of substantial development pennits, conditional use pennits, variances, rescissions and revisions is complete when all of the documents required pursuant to subsections (3) and (4) of this section have been received by the department. Hthe' department detennines that the submittal does not contain all of the documents and infonnation required by thi~ sect,ion, the department shall identify the deficiencies and so notify local governmendihd th,e ~pplicant in writing, Th~~;S't~,mittal and pennit are void unless and until the material requested in wr,tingi,~s":~ubm,itted to the d~pahinent _ :<:. ': -~):~. ~',~'!'~;~~. (6) "Date of filing" of a local government final decisio.n involving approval or denial of a substantial development pennit, or involving a denial of a variance or' conditional use pennit, is the date of actual receipt of a complete submittal by the department. (7) "Date! of filing" of a pennit for a conditional use or vii,\P£y"a1>proved by local gove~ent, and such pennits which also involve concurrent submittal. by lo'e:aIJkdVernm'ent of a substantia~l development pennit, is the date of transmittal of the departme~s final d¢d~ion on the variance or conditioQal use pennit to local government and the applicant. --~ ''Ii!'' • , (8) The department shall provide a wri~ten notice to the local government and the applicant of the "date of filing." (9) When a pennit has been appealed pursuant to RCW 90.58.180, upon conclusion of all review proceedings, a copy of the final order shall be provided to the local government and the department. When the project has been modified in the course of the review proceeding, plans or text shall be provided to the local government, consistent with the provisions of WAC 173-27-180, that clearly indicate the final approved plan and the local government shall reissue the pennit accordingly and .I http://www.mrsc.org/nxtigateway.dlllwac/wac%20173%20%20title/wac%20173%20-%2...1112912004 Page 2 of2 submit a copy of the reissued permit and supporting documents consistent with subsection (3) of "1:his section to the department for completion of the file on the permit. The purpose of this provision is to assure that the local and department files on the permit are complete and accurate and not to provide a new opportunity for appeal of the permit. [Statutory Authority: RCW 90.58.140(3) and [90.58].200. 96-20-075 (Order 95-17), § 173-27-130, filed 9/30/96, effective 10/31/96.] http://www.mrsc.org/nxtlgateway.dlllwac/wac%20173%20%20title/wac%20173%20-%2...1112912004 Page I of I WAC 173-27-l60 Review criteria for conditional use permits. The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide a system within the master program which allows flexibility in the application of use regulations in a manner consistent with the policies ofRCW 90.58.020. In authorizing a conditional use, special conditions may be attached to the permit by local government or the department to prevent undesirable effects of the proposed use and/or to assure consistency of the project with the act and the local master program. (1) Uses which are classified or set forth in the applicable master program as conditional uses may be authorized provided that the applicant demonstrates all of the following: (a) That the proposed use is consistent with the policies ofRCW 90.58.020 and the master program; (b) That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines; (c) That the proposed use of the site and design of the project is compatible with other authorized' . uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and shoreline master program; (d) That the proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located; and (e) That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effect. (2) In the granting of all conditional use permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. For example, if conditional use pennits were granted for other developments in the area where similar circumstances exist, the total of the conditional uses shall also remain consistent with the policies ofRCW 90.58.020 and shall not produce substantial adverse effects to the shoreline environment. (3) Other uses which are not classified or set forth in the applicable master program may be authorized as conditional uses provided the applicant can demonstrate consistency with the requirements of this section and the requirements for conditional uses contained in the master program. (4) Uses which are specifically prohibited by the master program may not be authorized pursuant to either subsection (1) or (2) of this section. [Statutory Authority: RCW 90.58.140(3) and [90.58).200. 96-20-075 (Order 95-17), § 173-27-160, filed 9/30/96, effective 10/31/96.] C' \ •. , l,. http://www.mrsc.org/nxtlgateway.dlllwac/wac%20173%20%20title/wac%20173%20-%2...11129/2004 ,''-' it' -. Page 1 of2 RCW 90.58.020 Legislative findings --State policy eo.. undated --Use preference. The legislature finds that the shorelines of the state are among the most valuable and fra.gile of its natural resources and that there is great concern throughout the state relating to their utilization" protection, restoration, and preservation. In addition it finds that ever increasing pressures of additional uses are being placed on the shorelines necessitating increased coordination in the management and development of the shorelines of the state. The legis.lature further finds that much of the shorelines o:f the state and the uplands adjacent thereto are in private ownership; that unrestricted construction on the privately owned or publicly owned shorelines of the sta.te is not in the best public interest; and therefore" coordinated planning is necessary in order to protect the public interest associated with the shorelines of the state while, at the same time, recognizing and protecting private property rights consistent \Vith the public interest. There is, therefor, a clear and urgent demand for a planned, rational, and concerted effort, jointly performed by federal, state, and local governments, to prevent the inherent harm in an uncoordinated and piecemeal develop:nlent ofthe state's shorelines. It is the policy of the state to provi·<!e for the manaGement of the shorelines of the state by planning for and fostering all reasonable and appropriate uses. :This policy is designed to insure the development of these shorelines in a manner which., while allowing for limited reduction of rights 0 :fthe public in the navigable waters, will promote and enhance the public interest. This policy contemplates protecting against adverse effects to the public health, the land and its vegetation and wildlife, aad the waters of the state and their a.~atic life, while protecting generally public rights of navigation and corollary rights incidental there~ The legislature declares that the interest of all of the people shall be paramount in the management of shorelines of statewide significance. The department, in adopting guidelines for shorelines of statewide G significance, and local government, in developing master programs for shorelines of statewide significance, shall give preference to uses in the following order of preference which: 'vC:> ~\\0\;. (1) Recognize and protect the statewide interest over local interest; (2) Preserve the natural character of the shoreline; (3) Result in long term over short term benefit; (4) Protect the resources and eco logy of the shoreline; (5) Increase public access to publicly owned areas of the shorelines; (6) Increase recreational opportu.nities for the public in the shoreline; (7) Provide for any other element as defined in RCW 90.5~.100 deemed appropriate or necessary. In the implementation of this policy the public's opportunity to enjoy the physical and aesthetic qualities of natural shorelines of th·e state shall be preserved to the greatest extent fe asible consistent with the overall best interest of the state and the people generally. To this end uses shall be preferred which are consistent with control of pollution and prevention of damage to the natu:ral environment, or are unique to or dependent upon use of the state's shoreline. Alterations of the natural condition of the shorelines of the state, in those lirn.ited instances when authorized, shall be given priority for single family residences and their appurtenant structures, ports, shoreline recreational uses including but not limited to parks, marinas, piers, and other improvements facilitating public access to shorelines of the state, industrial and commercial developments which are particularly dependent on. their location on or use of the shorelines of the state and other development that will provide an opport~nity for substantial http://www.mrsc.org/nxtlgateway.dlVrcw/rcw%20%2090%20%20title/rcw%20%2090%2...11/2912004 Page 2 of2 numbers of the people to enjoy the shorelines of the state. Alterations of the natural condition ofthe shorelines and shorelands of the state shall be recognized by the department. Shorelines and shore lands of the state shall be appropriately classified and these classifications shall be revised \V'hen circumstances warrant regardless of v.rhether the change in circumstances occurs through man-made causes or natural causes. Any areas resulting from alterations of the natural condition ()fthe shorelines and shore lands of the state no longer meeting the definition of "shorelines of the state·' shall not be subject to the provisions of chapter 90.58 RCW. Permitted uses in the shorelines <> f the state shall be designed and conducted in a manner to minimize, insofar as practical, any resultant damage to the ecology and environment of the shoreline area and any interference with the public's use of the water. [1995 c 347 § 301; 1992 c 105 § 1; 1982 1st ex.s. c l3 § 1; 1971 ex.s. c 286 § 2.] NOTES: Finding --Severability --Part I1eadings and table of contents not law --1995 4:: 347: See notes following RCW 36.70A.470. http://www.mrsc.org!nxtlgateway.dlllrcw/rcw%20%2090%20%20title/rcw%20%2090%2...11129/2004 '-nlL Plcvt.",.Of W'l/' 0~~r e-vtcAoSL-Lve...s; Shoreline Mgmt Subtantial Development Permit Mailings (SM) When a shoreline permit is ready to be sent out; a few things need to be attached. Include a copy of the following: 1. Copy of the shoreline permit 2. Copy of master application ,r ' .~.~.~ .. 3. CopyQf enviroQmental J~.ublicati~n 4. Legal description 5. Site Plan (make sure it shows a mean water high mark). Ask the planner about that. 6. ERC Determination (if there is one) 7. Environmental Checklist 8. Project description 9. Hearing Examiner's decision (if there is one) :md the above package to: a) State Dept. of Ecology NW Regional Office 3190 -16oth Ave SE Bellevue, WA 98008.,.5452 b) Office of Attorney General Ecology Division PO Box 40117 Olympia, WA 98504-0117 Labels for these are located in my blue "State Agency Labels" book located on my desk. Make sure you send a copy of the permit (not the attachments) to the applicant, Larry Meckling, Ron Straka (Utilities) and Bob Mahn (Transportation). Fill out an affidavit of mailing (located in Sandi's top left-hand drawer) listing the applicant and parties of record and give it to a notary. You do not need to list Larry Meckling or Bob Mahn on the affidavit. . ,~,ce it has been notarized, file the original in yellow and copy in white. shorel.doc CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL AND SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT REVIEW Total Processing Time Approximately 16 weeks Determination of Complete Application .& Mailing .& Posting of Notice of Public Application .& * Comment R . t f OptionalDNS P' d ecelp 0 erlO Application Ends Threshold Environmental Decision Published Environmental & Notices Mailed Determination and Posted Local Government Shoreline Decision Decision Sent to Dept. of Ecology DOE Review Period Ends Appeal Period A I Ends ppea Period Staff Report Due Appeal Period** DOE Review/ Appeal to SHB *** Approx. 7-14 Days 14 Days 7 Days before Environmental Determination City staff or other agencies may request additional information during the review and decision making process. It is important that the applicant submit the requested material quickly to avoid delays in the process. Any time spent gathering data and/or additional city review period is not included in the above chart and will increase the time required to process the application. forms/pw/ds/procedure/0034.abc~h 09/2000 7 Days 14 Days** Approx. 7 Days 21 Days * For projects not requiring an environmental impact statement 21 Days ** If the Threshold Environmental Determination contains different mitigation conditions than those included in the optional DNS notice, this time is increased to 29 days to accommodate an additional 15-day period in advance of the appeal period. *** Shoreline Hearing Board CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL AND SHORELINE CONDITIONAL USE OR SHORELINE VARIANCE REVIEW PROCESS Determination of Complete Application & Notice of Application, Optional DNS* and Environmental Decision Published Mailed and Posted Total Processing Time Approximately 16 weeks Public Public Receipt of Hearing Date Comment Mailed and Period Threshold Environmental Determination Application Posted Ends Staff 1 1 1 1 Report Due Approx. 7 Days Before 7 Days 7·14 Days 14 Days Environmental Determination 1 City staff or other agencies may request additional information during the review and decision making process. It is important that the applicant submit the requested material quickly to avoid delays in the process. Any time spent gathering data and/or additional city review period is not included in the above chart and will increase the time required to process the application. forms/pw/ds/procedure/0032.abclbh 09/2000 Hearing Examiner Recommendation Recommendation Appeal Public Period Ends Hearing Sent to Dept. of Appeal Ecology DOE Period Ends Decision Appeal Appeal Period** )., 14 Days** 7·14 Days A 0 10 Working Approx. Days 7 Days DOE Review Period 30 Days '--' period to SHB 21 Days * For projects not requiring an environmental impact statement ** If the Threshold Environmental Determination contains different mitigation conditions than those included in the optional DNS notice, this time is increased to 29 days to accommodate an additional 15·day period in advance of the appeal period. --u c: A CITY .oF RENTON Kathy Keolker-Wheeler,oMayor Planning/BliildinglPublic Works Department GreggZimmerman P.E.,Administrator- January 29, 2004 State Department of Ecology 0 o Northwest Regional Office 3190 t60th Ave. SE Bellevue, WA 98008-5452 SUBJECT: Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit for File No. LUA-03-089;SM, ECF, SSP, SA-H 0 To Whom It May Concern: Enclosed is the Shoreline S!Jbstantial Dev~lopmEmt PermIt for the above referenced project. The permit was -issuedby the City of Henton on January 28,2004. We are filing this action with the Department of Ecology °andthe Attorney General per WAC 173-14-o!:}0.0 Please review this permit and attachments and call me at (425) 430-7382 if you have any questions or need additional information. -0 0 ~~- Susan A Fiala; AICP 0 Senior Planner Attachments: o feu -000,~ 1) Shoreline Permit 01""-~/ lUoG'::;' ~ _ 2) Master Application 3) Environmental Publicaticm 4) Legal Description 5) --Site Plan -OHWM highlight~d ) . 6) ERC Determination 0 _0 _ 7) 0 Efwironmehtal Checklist 0 8) ProjeCt D~scription_ 9) Hearing Examiner's Decision cc: 0 Office of Attorney General City of Renton, Parks City of Renton, Utility Systems Applicant- Parties of Record ~$b~ur~~c----------~~----~-~R-EN--T'-ON 1055 South Grady Way -Renton, Washington 98055 * This paper contains 50% recycled material. 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE CITY OF RENTON SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1971 PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO.: LUA-03-089, BSP, ECF, SM, SA-H DATE RECEIVED: September 22, 2003 DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: October 14, 2003 DATE APPROVED: January 28, 2004 TYPE OF ACTION(S): [ X ] Substantial Development Permit [ ] Conditional Use Permit [ ] Variance Permit Pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCW, the City of Renton has granted a permit for the Oakesdale Commerce Center: This action was taken on the following application: APPLICANT: Oakesdale Commerce Center/Capstone Partners LLC PROJECT: DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION: 1001 4th Ave. Seattle, WA 98165 Oakesdale Commerce Center The applicant is proposing a binding site plan including 13 lots and 13 buildings within a 35.3 acre industrial park for future development of office, commercial, distribution and light warehouse uses. The one and two story structures (up to 32 ft. in height) would total 532,999 sq. ft. of new building area. Storm drainage runoff from the site is tributary to Springbrook Creek. From the parcel east of the creek, storm drainage discharge from the detention and water quality system would drain to Springbrook Creek. The subject shoreline is deSignated as an "urban" environment under the City's Shoreline Master Program. Industrial and commercial developments are permitted within this deSignation provided the development provides reasonable public access to and along the water's edge. The applicant will be constructing the extension of the Springbrook Trail from the north to the south property lines on the east side of Springbrook Creek. The trail will be constructed according to city standards and provide public access along the water's edge. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: SEC-TWNP-R: WITHIN SHORELINES OF: APPLICABLE MASTER PROGRAM: ShorelinDevPermit.doc See Attachment 'A'. 25-23N-4E & 30-23N-5E Springbrook Creek City of Renton Attachment 1 -Shoreline Permit City of Renton P/BIPW Department Shoreline Substantial Development Permit Page 20'2 The following section/page of the Master Program is applicable to the development: Section Description Page 4-3-090.J Urban Environment page 3-25 4-3-090.L SpeCific Use Regulations page 3-27 4-3-090. L.5 Commercial Development page 3-29 4-3-090.L.7 Industrial Development page 3-30 4-3-090.L.17 Trails Page 3-37 This permit is granted pursuant to the Shoreline Management Action of 1971 and pursuant to the following: 1. The issuance of a license under the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 shall not release the applicant from compliance with federal, state, and other permit requirements. 2. This permit may be rescinded pursuant to Section 14(7) of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 in the event the permittee fails to comply with any condition hereof. 3. A construction permit shall not be issued until twenty-one (21) days after approval by the City of Renton Development Services Division or until any review proceedings initiated within this twenty-one (21) day review period have been completed. cc: Attorney General's Office City of Renton, Plan Review (Kayren Kittrick) City of Renton, Surface Water Utility (Ron Straka) City of Renton, Parks (Leslie 8etlach) Applicant ShorelinDevPermit. doc LEGAL DESCRIPTION Parcel 1: Lots 5 and 6 in Block 6 of Burlington Northem Industrial Park Renton II, as per Plat recorded in Volume 111 of Plats, page 42 through 44, Records of King County; TOGETHER WITH the West half of the former 20-foot railroad right-of-way adjoining said lots on . the East, as delineated on the face of said Plat and as abandoned under· Recording No. 8909110687; AND TOGETHER WITH that portion of the 4O-foot strip adjoining on the West which is delineated on the face of said Plat as ·Springbrook Creek Greenbelt and Pedestrian Easemenr, which lies between the Westerly extension of: The North line of said Lot 6 and the South line of said Lot 5; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. Parcel 2: Lots 3 and 4 in Block 7 of Burlington Northern Industrial Park Renton II, as per plat recorded in Volume 111 of Plats, page 42 through 44, Records of King County; TOGETHER WITH the former 20-foot railroad right-of-way lying between and adjoining said lots, as delineated on the face of said Plat and as abandoned under Recording No. 8909110687; EXCEPT that portion of said Lot 4, conveyed to the City of Renton for street purposes by Deeds recorded under King County Recording Nos. 8306090701 and 8308050568; TOGETHER WITH Lot 2 of Glacier Park Short Plat No. SHPL-125-89 as recorded under Recording No. 9103209006, Records of King County, Washington; AND TOGETHER WITH the former 20-foot railroad right-of-way lying between and adjoining said lots, as delineated on the face of said Plat and as abandoned under Recording No. 8909110687; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. Project Name: Seattle TImes Renton Site June 4. 2003 SFljss 11010L.OO1.doc CITY OF RENTON SHO RELINE MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1 S71 PERNIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVElOPMENr PERMIT APPLICATION NO.: DATE RECEIVED: DATE OF PUBLIC NOTICE: DATE APPROVED: TYPE OF ACTJON(S}: LUA-03-089, asp, ECF, SM, SA-H September 22, 2003 Odober 14, 2003 January iI. 2004 [ X ] Substantial Developn1ent Permit [ ] Conditional Use Permit r ] Variance Permit Pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCVV, the City of Renton has granted a perm it for the Oakesdale Commerce Center: . This action was taken on the following application: APPLICANT: PROJECT: DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION: Oakesdale Commerce Center/Capstone Partners LLC 1001 4th Ave. Seattle, WA.. 98165 Oakesdale Commerce Center The applicant is proposing .a binding site plan including 13 lots and 13 buildings withi~ a 35.3 acre industrial park for future development of office, commercial, distribution and light warehouse uses. The one and two story structures (up to 32 ft. in height) would total 532,999 sq. ft. of new building area. Storm drainage runoff from the site is tributary to Springbrook Creek. From th e parcel east of the creek, storm drainage discharge from the detention and water quality system would drain to Springbrook Creek. The subject shoreline is designated as an Durban" environment under the City's Shoreline Master Program. Industrial and commercial developments are permitted within this designation provided the development provides reasonable public access to and along the water's edge. The applicant will be constructing the extension of the Springbrook Trail from the north to the south property Jines, The trail will be constructed according to city standards and provide public access along the water's edge. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See Attachment 'A', SEC-TWNP-R: WITHIN SHORELINES OF; 25-23N-4E & 30-23N-SE Springbrook Creek APPLICABLE MASTER PROGRAM: City of Renton Shorel;nDevPermit. doc '. pg-ge 1 Computer: JACKSON-PHYLLIS Parcel King ,County .Department of Assessments Parcel 334210 -4040 Geo Area : Res Area : 063-003-0 Spec Area: Q-S-T-R: SE-31-24-5 Folio: 22837 Type: R Rasp: R Levy: 2100 Block: A Lot: 82 Property Address: 2807 MOUNTAIN VIEW AV N RENTON 98055 0412]12004 Legal Oesc : HILLMANS LK WN GARDEN OF EDEN # 1 POR BEG AT NXN OF S LN LOT 81 WITH MDR LN TH E ALG S LN & ITS PROD 35 FT TO SWL Y LN N P RIW THNWL Y ALG SWL Y LN 24 FTTH S 51 DEG 21 MIN 04 SEC W 32 FT TO POB & 82 & SH LDSAOJ lESS POR BEG AT NXN OF MDR LN WITH N LN LOT 82 TH S 50 DEG 36 MIN 04 SEC W SO.70 FT TH N 46 DEG 34 MIN 00 SEC W 10.82 FTTO PT WCH BEARS S 62 DEG 15 MIN 42 SEC W FRM POB TH N 62 DEG 15 MIN 42 SEC E TO POB t TaxPayer Accounts . Account Change 334210-4040-031 PRITCHARD MARC & KAAREN 4906 ALPENGlOW PL NW ISSAQUAH .WA 98027 971616 Land HBU If Vacant: Single Family Present Use.: Single F.amily(Res UselZone) Percent Unused : 0 Zoning Date : 10/1812000 Sewer System : Public Comer Lot: No Base Land Val : 290,000 Tax Year: 0 Parking: Land Views Mt Rainier: OlympiCs: Cascades : Territorial: AvC!rage Seattle: Land Waterfront Location : Lake Wash Bank: Low Tide/Shore: Uplands With TidelandslShorelands Restricted : Lot Depth Factor: 0 HBU As Improved: Present Use Traffi~ Volume: 0 Current Zoning : R-8 Water System: Water District Lot 5qFt : 660 . Restrictive SizefShape : Yes Land Val Date: 0311811997 Road Access: Public Street Surface : Paved Sound: Lake Washington: Excellent Lake Sammamish: Lake/River/Creek : Other: . Access Rights: No Proximity Influence: No Poor Quality: Yes Footage: 40 Q.\s"{ \\o4,:S~ u.J r .:L~ 0 1 ~\ '0 ~ ,\1 t\ \~ 'J\l:..~ 1Z~~\.\ ~~ .~~. ,\~oS-(;' I I , ! \ -l SC-~1-'£:. 1'''';. \~' II"" iSIIi\ o S l~ IS' ~\l~\,O~~ -4.!t-J'.? R.o\.t~ S t\c>~L\l-\~ \\'Prt. \1 ... \ Cf'~4)-'\~ C.<Yi .. ~\.'a\ E-S\ t9.\1 Ft~ ~ .. "? ~o ~~ Pc"1 (}'-lJ. l'\e..~ ~ . 1. 8 0 ~-"",ou."-\Pln\ \h\i..v.1 ~e..\~i( -~E.l4.\O~ ~ht ..l.S\\ f'T\O~N"1>J\~ \l\'E. ... :r-t '\)e.\'-l'<...-Rt"-\\b"'-' .\..l'l\" - !C.OI~ 'B\.~~\<..~\ w-if\\- ~e.~ O~\c:{L \)o~~oo~ '$\~~'E:..~ ~lito 't0S~n: S*b~~L\\..\c . ?L~\-\\ \)l~ s lW~R()"~ ~-'Ill\~\h~,lot:> ~~\\ ~ ~~ l\,~ t,)~1. "I.~ '. L?t \<.E;. \t\\ Pts '?r\~~ \,{),,\ f\\: ~t~'O'" c..ou l-\..\"-\; ~,'N.~' f1~'?L\c:..ft~\)·t\~, ~~~C-~~0(.\'\~12.~ b -J..S-o e't Y ZONING + !R + P/BIPW 'D!CBNICAL IlEIlVllCllS ~ 1UOf,IO) / ---'--:-. --',/ // I / - - - -Benton dlV J.Imlt,I / ! r-rl f • i 31 T24N R5E E 112 5431 THE SUN LIFTfM 5pring l7eam l7unks conform to hUt II when lowered _:.. .. ... ;':,:.: :~~":'=.:.::.: .. ",= -:.;~',,: !'t; " _ ....... ,,', 1,:_ ... :_ .'-.......... . 114" aluminu""", construction Carriage assemply easily I'8l"Movea to free up d~ck space Clean Single-arm design Side guide wheels prevent jamming Convenient boarding nandle DJ1000A/D Clamp design adjustaple Punks Easy glide track less sensitive to sticking ~OF\ L\~\ ~ :s~\ -'j~~ N\ ~ ~ "-. l' ~ \\-Z~ ~ ¥ \~ ,;)-'0 Ol '1'1\ ~IA.~ '\ ~\~ '-.\ \ ~'-l'1 ~~\o...\\o~ \~'t\. ,\~05~ \J '?t\(i~ 9-1.1-o~ / ;. '0 j , I I I . ,\' .. ;. ~ . . . '. . -------~-\.,' \. '\ ~ \''' -r:------JI4~ \'~~~~-e,i\~", ~~\ c..L~::'IF\~\u ~ ,,'.t~ ':f~;;; IQ .. JI-l'S--Q<I ~. . ~-E~\~'~,\ Pc~1". "t'\ ~ a..... "Pu~~ O>E:. : p.E-s~~t \l.~~~ -~~Qn:.c::::.-~ .s.\\O~L\~e.. PR.o'l\.~~ S"Ali-e ~1ntt-p\"{:foe-. ~~~c..~-A~ - o"""\ll.l'I\ ~ ~\.S, E.~\ ~'l C.o~ \ ~ '-'1 Rn S". '?~;; P £1:2. "\'1 a~ ~c.e.. s .. (') ..:l..~\\ ~o'-t '\.\\'i\\~ ~\c.'}t ~\. ~So-:S:" MQ,-,~",,, .. J 'HE..~ 0'<-~R._ ~~~Q~ r"UJPt--'SOS"b ~~~,o~ ,N.'Pr-_ . q '00 ':>: '- ~t.. ~~'I.~'et~~~~U€.~t:.. :t oaO-S:-"MO~'A ,i'\~ '-l.'-~ ~~N\.~ \~R. ~U5ca~~ , . , E.~(:>\ \~~ W,l\..Lo'N 1~'t.~ ~\~\ \"\Ol\S£" ~8o\ .> c.l\ \...\:. .1. of -\() I"", ,,1,,1. .0 .s \0 IS ft\c Q.~-'~\ \-J\l\~'t--\ ~V. ~ ~~~~~~.\~~~ '-''3 US-b I _J~~o~:!-:,>-: :,-___ . __ "t.~O"e:. e..f\.~T\\.~" ~o(." ~_~1L_~ Sf, u.. - .¥ ~t)f;. "1' ~ H\~\\ j. .. ~ LaM '3 '-,,\12\(, ''=~AA> 'i- ' .. . , --~ _o',,"_.L , .. -.. . '. . . . .. \ ~ l:: ( .... ~---.----I ~ 11'\ Q -r Fig. 1.1 -Unauthorized fill on N. side of property to be removed Fig. 1.2 -Unauthorized fill on S. side of property to be removed D~\"C. ~~~\5~ 1\-11)'-0:1 b~\~ ~t?>: 7-iA. ~\\ \'>I '-"!> .. :l::U.··,-···.,.t. .. ·· . -.:\:: .: .. :.; ...... t·.·.:·: •.. ::· ~:" ......... ,,:;. . " <., .......... ' . ., .!' ~ IH .... I "'V~1I1.A'1 LA" !.VI 01 ", 0 ........................ --....... HI",,", , .... ,., "'_ WASIoIINCrTCN C.AROEH OF EP'EN Plvl61CN NO. I, A& PEER PLAT • ~CPRC>EP IN YOLU1E II OF ~ PAGE .). NCORO. QII KlW'h,. C~PESCRleED A& FOL.L ...... ~ , . .' BEGN-I~ AT TIoIE INTERSECTICN 011 TJ..IE ~ LINE OP &AID LOT 81 LUn.I Tl-II: t1EANDE~ LINE 011 LAKe UlA5J.{INCiTCN. . 'TI-lENCE EAST, ALONe. T"'I 6OUTI-I LINE AND IT'a ~IIFIL Y PRODUCTICN, A DISTANCE OF 3S FEET TO n.lE 6OJT1-I1E&TE~Y LINE OF T~E 6URLINc.TCN NORTHERN RAILWAY (NORfI..IEfON PACIFIC) • RIGI-IT ·OF·WA Y, lllEHCE NORlH1.E6TERL'I". ALON:i SAID &oUTI-RU!&Te~ Y LINE. A DI!HA:NCE OF '04 FEE'. TJ.lENCE 6!)1'11'~04'W A OI&'TAHCE 011 )2 FEET TO TJ.lE 'NT OF BECi/NNI!'lCi, I TOOE~ER WlTI-I LOT 82 IN 6AI0 BLOCK A AND 6ECCt-lD CLA66 ~REL.4HD6 ~ ca-lVlrrED .i'Y 11-IE &T,I,rl! Cfl1,UA6I-IINGT~ 61TUATE /oj FReNT OF, APJACENT TO OR ABUTTING rl-lEREONI . !)(CePT T\-IAT PORTICN THEREOF De&CRlesED A& 8EOINHlt-al AT TJ.{E NTER.5!CTICN Of: 'TI-IE HEANOER LINE WITI-I ll-II! HOFCTJ.{ LIH!! CP 6AID .or 82. . I'\-IENCE 5S~136'e1",'UI A DISTANCE OF !o0.'fD II!ET. ').jENCE N","'3""eI~'UI A DISTANCE Cf' IIZ)'&l PEET TO A POINT U-IICI-f )EAAS 56~11~'·U"UI FReM n.lE POIHT OP aEGlN-llNO CP THI& !XCEF'TJ.9N- IlruATE IN n.lf; CCUNrr OF KINes. 6TATE as WA6~INGTOH. .OT CO'(E&A;I \REA Cf' SITE \~A Cf' USEABLE LAND .or cOYERAUE orAL COYERAaE r. S/!,I!' ~ COYE~E r. IJJEt 2 • • 93'3. • '61. .... ?ll.o ?o~t:.\? i ... D"E.1 fI.\\.. ~<)\~:>- ...... ?Ro?OS'Y)1 R _ 9C'(. """t~\~\~,, ~~Qt""'-'~""'-"""u..-I PI.P\~\\~6.) "t~,,~) . . : I ,I " L'>q.. ~~~ . .t ~.~ : \ VL"%,' ~~~cf~~, O\~ ~ -"'~.<f'.~.,,,, ~r3i \~d (Ir k' ~~.:~. UPCN FI51-1ER1ES' APPROVAL LINE! \ . .. . ~ OEVElOPMENT'PlANNIN\:o CITY OF RENTON SEP 21 ~ RECEIVED '", .' '. t\~. MI\\t..t.. ''?~\\c:..\',,~~ ..... _ ............. ___ .. !6 01.J~~.2~lU~1.~.~\r-; .. ~. ,~'\~,---__ _ ~'f.\j'o\.\ .'b\\j. 95055"" _ Re."'o"t.U~:V'4:\"OIl\~~~-.li.~\..':-.. :.J.~.£ . . .. .. ... _-)-_ ==--==-_.-. p' '-r::cr : Rt.,..,..Q~~~~.l\~"*£~]..'!!-.p.5)h.\, •. t ___ ._ , .. ~E.~", .. 't.~.: \\~~~"'\ _:' __ . --~~ . .t.::.ll ~t.;'\.OIl.v... t\"'~\''''\ -.f""sil'lL.1. ~_~<!~ll::\~i --'---r('" . ........ -(.0 ~\1 \1,(. ~\ l'C~t>\.Lt> .. !!S ll.'il ' Y~_L. ~t:.'''\\..\ I~c.. \l-l f\L.l.. • ',-i~1'S;g;'! .... 'b ~3;.,~S;~t~·i:a~ ·~""i£·t~·~·3:~~-Q~:" .... . .. '--. -... ~ .. :"':-.. -.. -... -, .-.- .. • _,$.~~l.'~" 1 :ttl. . . .:it. _". _ .... . AM; ~. ~t.«ov.:~\'-\:l-fl.1\~;;i~ ~~ '. '''g -t ... _ .... :.-.-___ • _._ •••• __ ._. _ ...... ___ :_fS!._.:!:. ____ . '. \' . . Marc & Kaaren Pritchard . 2807 Mountain View Drive Renton, WA 98056 (owner / applicant) PARTIES OF RECORD Pritchard Shoreline Restoration LUA04-115, SM, ECF Jeff Sidebotham Seaborn Pile Driving 9311 SE 36th Street#204 Mercer Island, WA 98040 (contact) (Page 1 of 1) Jam Free Printing Use Avery® TEMPLATE 5960™ 334210404607 BISIACK RICHARD 12801 MT VIEW AV N rENTON WA98056 (334210401009 I BURROUGHS JOHN D l 2815 MOUNTAIN VIEW AV N RENTON WA 98056 334210049006 GOBEL PAUL R+JULIA C ~1 ee U< WAOllIPmTOP~ DL ~l Q1 0:1 RENTON WA 98056 1{Xp IJ 2-qAh S'{ > 334210400902 MAXWELL STEVEN A+MARCIE E POBOX 2048 RENTON WA 98056 l . (334210055508 I SANCHEZ ALEX 703 N 29TH ST RENTON WA 98056 \> _.- 1334210402908 : WIELGOS THOMAS A I PO BOX 1829 , NEWPORT WA 99156 / i i I -- 334210405000 BITNEY JON ELL M www.avery.com 1-800-GO-AVERY 2727 MOUNT IAN VIEW AV N RENTON W A 98056 f334210398502 DUBOIS PEGGI L+GALSTER MART 2907 MOUNTAIN VIEW AV N RENTON WA 98056 j \ ! : 334210404508 , KEPPLER WILLIAM F+DEBRA L : 2805 MOUNTIAN VIEW AV N I RENTON WA 98056 -: \, 1 (334210056506 I MC WILLIAMS DONALD E 2820 LK WASHINGTON BL N , RENTON WA 98055 -1 '334210047505 SPENGLER SCOTT R+BAIN MARSHA I I D I 12902 LK WASHINGTON BL N i ! RENTON WA 98056 -~ 1'334210404805 I I WINTER MARLENE R ! 12731 MT VIEW AV N , I RENTON WA 98056 I ' I i \ ( I I ~ AVERV® 5960™' 312405900407 BURLINGTON NORTHRN SANTA FE ATTN: PROP TAX I I PO BOX 96189 , l FORT WORTH TX 76161 (33421 0055607 : : i FRISVOLD LARRY A+CYNDA B I . · 707 NORTH 29TH STREET , I RENTON WA 98056 I : I ! ) \. I (334210395300 1 MARSHALL R C B I I 2909 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR , j RENTON WA 98056 ! / > ') , , 33421 0404003 PRITCHARD MARC 12807 MOUNTAIN VIEW RENTON WA 98056 334210054600 , TRAUTMANN ROBERT F+CAROL YN 809 N 29TH ST : RENTON WA 98056 ! I )----- I I i' L __ ---,----_l ~ j i " I I' ,/- I. 1'1 I I ~I,I i j I l ,~----------------------~/ ~--------------- , lfu0965 @AlI:lAV ~ AH3JW-09-008-~ , WOyAJaAe·MMM --'-----._. --------------------------------------------- .~f(! CITY OF RENTON =! Planning/Building/Public Works 1055 South Grady Way -Renton Washington 98055 ~0 i;{{'. \ ' 1 ,4 ~, ,:-:s g~ Y.I~ 1IIld0 ~ U.Q; ~OO'fa@~ 10 07 8~ DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY Of RENTON 334210049006 GOBEL PAUL R+JULIA C , 2100 LK WASHINGTON BL N Q101 OCT 1 Z 2001t RECEIVED RENTON W A 98056 GOBE~OO 980562015 ~703 2~ ~0/09/0~ FORWARD TIME EXP RTN TO SEND GOBEL 706 N 29TH ST RENTON WA 98056-2501 RETURN TO SENDER H;:::; -C···;:; i:::i~ .. $p,r;::: i -~!iT.:r.3.,:. / . ., . .?i'?:"" I' I I . 'I I J I I II . I '/ I I . il I '/1 . ,I ~. J: tIt If t i itt 1 til i!! J i! i J f : i f l' i f 1 f ! i ! !!1h!.! f .l.~ ,_:' .. . ,:~ . '--; .' NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) DATE: October 6, 2004 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF PROJE~t NAME: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of a residential boatlift, residential jet ski lift and shoreline restoration. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has 2,205 square feet of land outside the ordinary high watermark. The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) and is developed with an existing single-family dwelling and dock. The proposal, under the review and approval by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the US Army Corp of Engineers is to restore the altered shoreline, install a rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings, install a residential boat and jet ski lifts. Shoreline restoration requires the removal of approximately 10 cubic yards of unauthorized fill and restoration of the shoreline habitat. PROJECT LOCATION: 2807 Mountain View Drive I 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 43.21 C.11 0, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M 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 Non-Significance- Mitigated (DNS-M). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: September 21, 2004 October 6, 2004 APPLICANT: Permits/Review Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: ' PUBLlcf~EARING: \ CONSIS-tENCY OVERVIEW: ZonlnglLand Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Marc and Kaaren Pritchard Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit Permits required by State Agencies, Building and Construction Permits. Biological Evaluation, Abbreviated Geotechnical Report Planning/Building/Public Works Department, Development Services Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton; WA 98055 A Public Hearing is tentatively scheduled for December 7,2004, before the Hearing Examiner in the Renton City Council/Chambers. Hearings begin at 9:00 AM on the 7th floor of the Renton City Hall Building located at 1055 South Grady Way. i The subject site is located within the Residentikl Single Family (RSF) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation, and is zoned Residential - 8 Dwelling Units per Acre (R-8). The proposal is consistent with the uses and pOlicies establish by these land use and zoning designations. Compliance with specific development standards will be analyzed during further review of the project. Not Applicable The project will be subject to the City's Environmental SEPA Ordinance , Procedures, Zoning Code, Shoreline Master Program, Critical Areas Regulations, International Building Code, Public Works Standards, and other codes and regulations where applicable. Proposed Mitigation Measures: The following recommended Mitigation Measures will likely be imposed on the proposed project to address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above: The applicant will be required to adhere to the work window as determined by the State Department of Fish and Game and the US Army Corps of Engineers. - • The applicant shall implement and maintain appropriate erosion control measures for the duration of the project. . '. _ _ . '. Comments on the above application ~ust be submitted In writing to Nancy We ii, Associate Planner, Development Services Division, 1055 South -Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on October 20,2004, This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on December"7, 2004, at 9:00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Development Services Division, (425) 430-7282, to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled. If comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments on the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, 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: Nancy Weil, Associate Planner Tel: (425) 430-7270 ~;' . I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFI9ATION I -, If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed projec~, complete this form and return to: City of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. File No./Name: LUA04-115, ECF / Pritchard Shoreline Restoration NAME: ADDRESS: ______________________________________________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: _____________ _ .~:; ;, IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said Grantor has caused this instrument to be executed thisZl day ofO~, 201.9 SCHNEIDER HO~, iN~. !\ (\ \J '.) Notary Seal must be within box Notary Seal must be within box Notary Seal must be within box IlVDIVIDUAL FORM OF ACK1VOWLEDGl'yJEAT STATE OF WASffiNGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that ________ _ _____________ '--____ signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be hislher/their free and voluntary act for the uses and pUTposes mentioned in the instrument Notary_Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) _____________ _ My appointment expires: ____________ _ <' Dated: REPRESElvT ATIVE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDG}'fE"'T STATE OF WASffiNGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that ________ _ __________________ signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she/they waslwere authorized to execute the instrument and acknowledged it as the and _-----'----,_----- of to be the free and voluntary act of such party/parties for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) __________ --'-__ _ My appointment expires: ____________ _ Dated: CORPORATE FORM OF ACKNOWLEDGMEfVT STATE OF WASffiNGTON ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) Onthis 21 dayof October ,2010 ,beforemepersonaJlyappeared ~;9SSSS:~~~~9S~~ Harry J. Schneider to me known to JOHANNA M. COLMAN President -of the corporation that NOTARY PUBLIC ecuted the within instrument, and acknowledge the said instrument to be the free STATE OF WASHINGTON d voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein COMMISSION EXPIRES . and each on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute said AUGUST 15, 2013 tb.J-'l>",.-.<r,,<late seal of said corporation. O:\Fonns\PBPW\BILLSALE2.DOC\bh tary Public in and for the State of Washington Notary (Print) Johanna M. Colman My appointment expires: August 15, 2013 Dated: Page 2 .. .. ~. --------------------......... •• " ":, Mr.'Kenneth Peckham " ' :,'September '1,2006 "Page2 ' ( , 'SitePia,Ii Changes Nee~ed (continued): 'Ple~se update, the 2004 date1:isted on the plans. : ,-' ,. . . , Please change flush side\ValkiS to r:egular raised sidewalks. · ~ 'I, : , "Clcrrif'y the fence locatio'n, witlia-sp~cific line type. Does the fence entirely enclose the complex? Is therea gateproposeq forpedestrian a,ccessto the ret <til center north of the site? ' .):;:;::;:.,;:.,,:};<~.: :';,~~ . . ". ",' ." ~. . ~ .,~r;j--"<~ ~> .,,~. '.> . :;.,: .. ..:,'.':"::: .. . ~".,,:Changes to Landscape Plan., =APl~~e'make the followIng ,changes: , '. Add the scale andnotf:ii'a:rto~~;' ';';"'>~'~".~ .' Make the plant ~ym~pi~"6~ l,~g~iid ~onslstenty,ith¥~h;~~bols used' on the planting plail. ' Siftc~ peIjqi~ter building setbacks'ha~eb~~nieducedfrointhose ,previously appr~\rea;'p3~~~eIll~~;'~qr:~:tl\~}p~rim~iJt;pI~\!ngs proposed ~e able' ",'to provide, effeciiy~s~#eIYng'toli~lp,jtisti~:teduction of tile setbacks. 'Wewere ,unable to identHy~ha~~~ tYP.~';QfPt~ts~:)v~t~lpropoded;~()n!i porii,6ns, of the westerly propertylihe, ~;_ ' ~;",;,,':,;:;:' . "'\'" ' ,;", L~ ",' •• ,Provide at least ,3 dif.Te,;-~~t pl~ti~ecies;l~t~rspersed al~ng' the perImeter 'landscape areas't~befti;I-,prptect against fufure ,sihgle~spe¢les blight . . ,. Please propose lail<J~c~plhg"along the northerlY~9rderdftheap~entsite rather . than on the ~buttin!rI:~1ai{site; .. " ... ' . , " c">" . ' • .' List the number of plant:s,ptbposed . " ... ,1 I '." .' .1:_, "", ." ,<,?,"J\ .• , Change the comnionriaInefrom,$tr;,.t:w9~rry'!'plant" to Strawberry i'tree". • Under the condition colt:llll1l,add the teml "multi stem" in the smilltree category. . .• '. Irrigation plan needed fqralliandscaped areas with building permit sqbmittal~ , " · . .' 'Elevation Details: ' · .; 1 • .' '. Please provid~ a screemng.detailplan (elevations) for therefuse 8l-lecycling areas per RMC requirenietits,(R:MC 4-4-090D).· " . •• ,Please also provide .thep~oposed fence' and gate elevation dr~wii1gs.' Repton code 'does limit residential ien~es to' 4' in heightwithihthe. to"frontYard·area alorig Duvall. ,Will the pedestrIan entrance t~ the retail ,center 'also be.'gated? lfso, please note on.the site pic3.tj.mdprovide an eleV'ation fo~ the gate .. '.. . ,: " , " , .' ,I , ,." 4-9-250E .. ------------~~------------------ and purpose of this Code, and that such mod- ification: a. Substantially impleme-nts the policy direction of the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Ele- ment and the Community Design Ele- ment and the proposed modification is the minimum adjustment necessary to implement these policies and objectives; b. Will meet the objectives and safety, function, appearance, environmental pro- tection and maintainability intended by the Code requirements, based upon sound engineering judgment; c. Will not be injurious to other prop- erty(ies) in the vicinity; d. Conforms to the intent and purpose of the Code; e. Can be shown to be jus-tified and re- quired for the use and situati:.on intended; and f. Will not create adverse ir-npacts to other property(ies) in the vicinity. (Ord. 4517,5-8-1995; Ord. 5100, 11-1-2004) 3. Additional Decision Criteria Only for Center Office Residential 3 (COR 3) Zone: For a modification to special upper story set- back standards in the COR 3 Zone, RMC 4-2-120B, the Department shall rely on the recommendations contained wit"';n the Re- port on Design Criteria for Modifications pre- pared by the Economic DeveloplYlent, Neighborhoods and Strategic Planning Ad- ministrator or designee as the basis for ap- proval or denial of the request. In addition to the criteria in subsection D2 of this-Section, the request for modification in the COR 3 Zone requirements for upper story setbacks shall meet all of the following criteria: a. In comparison to the standard upper story setbacks, the proposed building de- sign will achieve the same or iJetter re- sults in terms of solar access to the public shoreline trails/open space arad publicly accessible plazas; the building will allow access to sunlight along the public traiV open space system and plazas abutting the shoreline during daytime and sea- (Revised ) 2/05) 9 -80 sonal periods projected for peak utiliza- tion by pedestrians. b. The building will create a step in per- ceived height, bulk and scale in compari- son to buildings surrounding the subject building. (Amd. Ord. 4802, 10-25-1999; Ord. 5100,11+2004; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) E. ALTERNATE PROCEDURES: 1. Authority: The provisions of this TItle are not intended to prevent the use of any mate- rial or method of construction or aquifer pro- tection not specifically prescribed by this TItle, provided any alternate has been ap- proved and its use authorized by the Plan- ning/Building/Public Works Administrator. 2. Decision Criteria: The Administrator may approve any such altemate, provided he/she finds that the proposed design and/or methodology is satisfactory and complies with the provisions of this Title and that the material, method or work offered is, for the . purpose intended, at least the equivalent of that prescribed in this TItle in suitability, strength, effectiveness, durability, safety, maintainability and environmental protection. (Amd. Ord. 4851,8-7-2000) 3. SUbstantiation: The Department Admin- istrator shall require that sufficient evidence or proof be submitted to substantiate any claims that may be made regarding its use. (Amd. Ord. 4851,8-7-2000) 4. Record of Decision: The details of any action granting approval of an alternate shall be written and entered in the files of the Code enforcement agency_ (Ord. 4367, 9-14-1992; Ord. 5137, 4-25-2005) F. ABSENCE OF VALID SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION: Where there is an absence of valid scientific infor- mation or incomplete scientific information relat- ing to a critical area leading to uncertainty about the risk to critical area function of permitting an al- teration of or impact to the critical area, the Re- sponsible Official shall: 1. Take a "precautionary or a no-risk ap- proach" that appropriately limits development ----------------------........ 4-4-100C similar nature as determined by the De- velopment Services Division. Such signs may be located in any zone and shall re- quire approval of the Development Ser- vices Division. These signs may be located on or over public rights-of-way with approval of the sign placement by the City of Renton Transportation Sys- tems Division. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000; Ord. 5062, 1-26-2004) p. Real Estate Signs: Open house signs as described in subsection J2B(i) of this Section and freestanding real estate signs as described in subsection J2C of this Section. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000; Ord. 5062, 1-26-2004) q. Safety Information Signs: Signs of public service companies indicating dan- ger and/or service or safety information. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000; Ord. 5062, 1-26-2004) r. Small Parking and Traffic Control Signs: Parking and traffic control signs two (2) square feet or less on private property. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000; Ord. 5062, 1-26-2004) s. Small Wall Signs: One on-premises Sign, not electrical or illuminated, two (2) square feet or less on one face whichjs~ affixed permanently on a plane parallel to the wall on the wall located entirely on pri-. vate property. (Amd. Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000; Ord. 5062, 1-26-2004) t. Weekend and Holiday Display SIg- nage for Vehicle and Vessel Sales in the Auto Mall Overlay Districts: Bal- loons, with no limit on size or number per site, may be displayed on Fridays, Satur- days, and Sundays, federal legal holi- days and December 26 -31. (Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000; Ord. 5062, 1-26-2004) u. Banner Signage for Vehicle and Vessel Sales in the Auto Mall Overlay Districts: Wall-hung and pole~hung ban- ners are permitted as follows: (Revised 4/04) i. Wall-Hung Banner Size and lo- cation Limitations: Wall-hung ban- ners shall not exceed one hundred (100) square feet in size. There are 4 -42 no restrictions on the number per wall or number per site. Wall-hung banners shall not cover up perma- nent signage or address numbers. ii. Pole-Hung Banner Size and location Limitations: POle-hung banners shall not exceed twenty (20) square feet in size. No more than one pole-hung banner shall be located on . anyon-site pole or light standard. There are no restrictions on the num- ber of pole-hung banners per site. (Ord. 4848, 6-26-2000; Ord. 5062, 1-26-2004) C. PROHIBITED SIGNS AND DEVICES: The following signs or devices are specifically prohibited: 1. Signs Which Violate State Regula- tions: All signs not complying with the Wash- ington State Highway Department regulations adjacent to State roads. (Ord. 4629, 8-19-1996) 2. Signs Which Interfere with Traffic Control: Any sign using the words "stop", "look", "danger" or any other word, symbol or character which might confuse traffic or de- tract from any legal traffic control device. No sign shall be erected in such a manner as to confine or obstruct the view or interpretation of any official traffic sign, signal or device. (Ord. 4629, 8-19-19~6; Amd. Ord. 4720, 5-4-1998) 3. Animated, Revolving, Blinking and Flashing Signs: a. Outside City Center: All of the fol- lowing signs located within seventy five feet (75') of the public right-of-way with any of the following features: animated, revolving more than eight (8) revolutions per minute, blinking and flashing. excep- tions are public service signs, such as those which give the time, temperature and/or humidity, and electronic message boards/signs for public facilities and car dealers located within the Auto Mall Area(s). (Ord. 4629, 8-19-1996, Amd. Ord. 4724, 5-11-1998; Ord. 4766, 3-1-1999). 4-11-030 CIRCULATION: Those means of transportation which carry passengers or goods to, from, over, or along a corridor. CITY COUNCIL: The City Council of the City of Renton, Washington. CITY GOVERNMENT OFACES: Offices for City administration and or provision of services to the public. This definition includes but is not limited to City Hall. CIVIL ENGINEER: A professional engineer regis- tered in the. State to practice in the field of civil works.' . - CLEAR VISION AREA: The area bounded by the street property lines of comer lots and a line join- ing points along said street lines twenty feet (20') from their point of intersection. : "U!o I'I<Ift<JY I ~ 11£--: ~ I ~ ¥ • NO STRIJCTtIfE OR PI.AN11NG SHAlL BE ALLOMEO Bi!I ClENt VEOI N1fA BEnOE£lII "'" HElGHTOF lHREE NIt> JlN FEET CLOSED RECORD APPEAL: An administrative appeal on the record to a local government body or officer including the legislative body, following an open record hearing on a project pennit appli- cation when the appeal is on the record with no or limited new evidence or information allowed to be submitted and only appeal argument allOWed. CLOSURE OF UNDERGROUND STORAGE FACIUTIES: See RMC 4-5-120G. CLUSTER, RESIDENTIAL: The placement of more than one building envelope on a single lot or parcel of land for the purpose of constructing sin- gle family residential dwelling units in either at- tached or detached construction arrangement, and where the property ownership outside the (Revised 8/02) 11 -8 building envelopes is commonly held by all single family dwellings on that lot or parcel of land. STREET COLLECTION POINT: In multiple family resi- dences, commercial, industrial and other nonres- idential developments, the exterior location designation for garbage and recyclables collec- tion by the City's contractor or other authorized haulers. COMBINED PUBUC DETENTION: A stonnwa- ter detention system designed to accommodate runoff from both public streets and private prop- erty. COMBINED SEWER: See RMC 4-6-100. COMMERCIAL LAUNDRIES: A facility where clothing or other fabrics are washed, dried, or dry cleaned for other businesses or institutions. This definition does not include laundromats. . COMMERCIAL USE: A type of land use that in- cludes commercial office activities, services and! or retail sales. COMMUNICATION BROADCAST AND RELAY TOWERS: Establishments that provide point-to- point communication services, whether by wire or radio, including radio and television broadcasting stations and the exchange or recording of mes- sages. This definition excludes all terms related to wireless communication facilities. COMPACTION: The densification of an earthen fill by mechanical means. COMPENSATION PROJECT: Actions necessary to replace project-in~uced wetland and wetland i· -\ ". '.' ., , . ~ ~ ~~: : -."r , ~ ,-,.~. ~. -, /luM -!-o ~ ~vrC ifdbw lfU- /-fis-- 71~' G • ~OJECT INFORMATION (CO.aUed) r-------------------~----------~ r--~~--~--~--------------~ __ NUMBER OF EXISTING OWEWNG UNITS (If apprlCable): PROJECt VALU.!! t st Of}O .. O~~ SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAl BUILDINGS (If applicable): ~ A-- SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL BUIlDINGS TO REMAIN (If applicable): ~ R SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAl BUILDINGS (If appfacable): ~ t:\ SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (If apprlCable): .cq <i~;.. NET flOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAl BUILDINGS (If applicable): . NUMBER OF EMPlOYEES TO BE EMPLO NEW PROJECT (If applicable): ~ Pt IS THE SITE LOCATED IN AtfY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTAllY CRITICAL AREA, PlEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (If applicable): [] AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE [] AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA lWO [] flOOD HAZARD AREA [] GEOLOGIC HAZARD ___ sq.ft. ___ sq.ft. [] HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. _tl~HOREUNE STREAMS AND tAKES . b60 sq. ft. [] WETlANDS ___ sq.ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach ~I description on separate sheet with the following infonnation included) SITUATE IN THE 5~ QUARTER OF SECTION ll. TOWNSHIFtl<-\ • RANGES'e. IN THE CITY OF RENTON. KING COUNTY. WASHINGTON. TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES list all land use applications being applied for: ~~~{Na,~ 1: Jtwr{i)c~ &!zslarr6~ OW, ~'f.. c1 ft(}()()3. 2. Owir: t!ALddi~ "ZtJO 4. \)fCO~ ~ 1,1!n '---Ii-~ ~,Jd:) Staff· will calculate applicable fees and postage: $ . AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP /HAf<C ,4 ~ . . I. (Print NameIs) ~t:'fC'I AIl~ declare that I am (please check one) ~the ~ owner of the property . . . a the Involved in this appI"JCation or __ the authorized representative to act tor a corporation (please attach proof d uthorization) and that foregOing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith are in aD respects true and conect to the best of my knowledge and belief • . /1/1 ~ _ A ~~ =~~=~~~1JL.r~~ /" ~ V" ~ L/ J ----uses and purposeS mentioned In the insbu.P}eIll (Signature of 0Wner/Repfesent) (Signature of OwnerIRepresentative) My appointment expires: U .. I/·~ Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERV\Fonns\Planning'mast¢rapp.doc08I29/03 .... '"..... Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and BoatJift File No.: LUA-04-J 15, SM, SMC-H January 10, 2005 Page 2 • The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Nancy Weil, Senior Planner, Development Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The subject site is located on the shores of Lake Washington at 2807 Mountain View Drive. The applicant is currently under action for shoreline alteration and fill without the appropriate permitting. In order to rectify that violation, the applicant is required to restore the shoreline along his property. The proposal for that restoration has been reviewed and approved by the Washington State Department ofFish and Wildlife as well as the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. The applicant recently received a front yard variance in order to construct a new single family home, due to the constraints on the site he was granted a zero setback. A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit is required for a boatJift. it is not an exempted item. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated with two mitigation measures. No appeals were filed. The application for one freestanding boatlift located on the north side ofthe existing dock is compatible with existing uses in that area. The boatlift will be located near shore abutting an existing residential dock and pier. The use meets the conditional use criteria to provide a system within the Master Program, that allows flexibility in the application of use regulations. The single-family residential site has an .ex;sting 492 square foot dock and pier, which is compatible with the adjacent residential properties. The work wi1l primarily be done from Lake Washington by barge, the impact inland should not be substantial. Staff recommends approval of the Conditional Use Permit and the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. The Examiner questioned the height ofthe boatJift when the boat is out of the water and resting in the lift. Ms. Weil stated that because the boatlift does meet the side yard setbacks and it does not protrude beyond or extend any further out into Lake Washington than the existing pier, it does meet the criteria for Development Services Standards. Mark Pritchard, 2807 Mountain View Drive, Renton, W A 98056 stated that he was pleased to be here today to discuss these improvements. The restoration will enhance the habitat in the spawning area of Lake Washington. In regards to the boatlift, on his street there are 18 homes and 24 boatlifts and 4jet ski lifts. The Examiner caned for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 9:27 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having reviewed the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicants, Marc and Kaaren Pritchard, filed a request f~r a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the State Environmental Policy Act (SEP A) documentation and other pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit # 1. • Pritchard Shoreline Rest<>-ration and Boatlift File No.: LUA-04-115, SM, SMC-H January 10,2005 Page 4 16. Lake Washington·s shoreline is classified as a Shoreline of Statewide Significance and therefore any development adjacent to it is subject to the City's Shoreline Master Program. This section of the shoreline is desigDated as an Urban Shoreline. 17. Staff noted that the residential designation of the subject site permits docks associated with single- family uses along -.:his portion of the shoreline. BoatJills are not a listed use nor are they a prohibited use and, therefore> are subject to a shoreline conditionaJ use review. CONCLUSIONS: .. . The criteria for approving a Shoreline Conditional Use permit are twofold. There are City criteria and those City criteria require compliance with additional State criteria. Those criteria are as foHows: Renton: Section 4-9-t 90.1.5: s. Conditional Use: a. Purpose: Upon proper application, a conditional use permit may be granted. The objective oE" a conditional use provision is topr<>yide more control and flexibility for implementiIlg the regulations of the Master Pro:gram. With provisions to control undesirable effects, the scope of uses can be expanded to include many uses. b. Decision Criteria: Uses classified as conditional uses can be permitted only after consideratie>n and by meeting such performance standards that make the use compatible with other permitted uses within that area. A cOIlditional use permit will be granted subject to each of the following conditions: . i. The use must be compatible with other permitted uses within that area. ii. TIle use will not interfere with the public use of public shorelines. iii. Design of the site wiJ) be compatible with the surroundings and the City's Master Program. iv. TJ1e use shan be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City's Master Program. v. The use meets the conditional use criteria in WAC 173-27-160. Washington State: WAC 173-27-160: Review criteria for conditional use permits. The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide a system witb.in the master program which allows flexibility in the application of use regulations in a manner consistent with the policies ofRCW 90.58.020. In authorizing a conditional use, special conditions may be attached to the permit by local government or the department to prevent undesirable effects of the proposed use and/or to assure consistency of the project with the ac't and the local master program. Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift File No.: LUA-04-1 ) 5, SM, SMC-H January] 0, 2005 Page 6 • 4. The lift's profile win be mostly under the water. It wiJ) be setback from property lines more than required by code. It should not create any untoward impacts on adjacent uses or on water-oriented uses. Clearly, it will allow the boat to be higher above the surface than if it were merely floating but this is not totally unusual. 5. The next series of criteria are contained within the Washington Administrative Code. One of the paramount goals is to protect the ecology of the shoreline. While, the applicant improperly placed fill in the lake, 'the current proposal would be to restore the shoreline and therefore, the ecology of that shoreline. 6. The private lot extends out into the lake and the dock and lift serve that lot. The private use is permitted in this area of the shoreline. As noted above, the dock is already in place and the lift wi)) not be extending the intrusion further out into the water. The use should not impair the public use of this section of the lakeshore or the water in its vicinity. 7. The proposed boatlift is relatively low-scale and should not interfere with any uses that niight occur in this area of the lake. The comprehensive plan designates this area as suitable for single-family uses and the normal complement of accessory uses. On a lakeshore property, piers docks and similar uses including a boatlift are considered reasonable accessory uses. 8. The proposed boatliftshould not create any significant adverse affects on the shoreline environment. The improper fin has probably alrel;ldy had an adverse affect but the restoration should ameliorate those impacts over time. 9. The Installation of the boatlift should not further harm the public interest. 10. The analysis of cumulative impact or impacts is hard to judge. At this point, docks already protrude out into the lake from many of the homes. Clearly, there have had to be impacts to water quality and habitat as a result of motor boating and docks shading the lake and some otthe shallow areas. This additional action will probably not have much affect on the overall circumstances. 11. Since boatlifts are neither permitted nor prohibited outright, they do require review under the Conditional Use criteria. The proposal use and restoration are generally consistent with the criteria noted above. RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Conditional Use Permit and the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the single boatlift should be approved (the jet skis lift or Jjfts are no longer under consideration and are not to be approved in this decision). 2. The appellant should comply with the conditions imposed by the ERC. ORDERED THIS lO'hday of January 2005. '. ,. . " .... « ~~~~~ ~-~~-~~~----~--~ -Mt-it.t:-kooil------r---.--.. ---~-_I_/ ------. fWJIO --. ----. --' .. ~ F--. -:---.. _- -----'------------CDR -------, --------------------------- -.------- -------- -------- -------t::::==;er ~~ ------~ '. , . -. -0 ~- ". . Jl-rS-Q<l '. 0 . "'--. --E~\~ .\ol.,\ ~u:;. ~'\ ~ <2- ... ,.. PU~fo>E. -: P.Es\":J~ \\"A~~-~~o\E.<..,.s\\oJt.eL.\~e.. PR.o'-h~~ :S'A~~ S\l)t4\c..~~o"(t ~~~c..~-I\~ _ O~\ll.l'4\ ~ -=2..\. S~ E.~"\ a'l c.o~ \ ~ \. ~ RnS". ·'Pi;;pr.~\'i o't-l. '\\"C:.e.s . - () . . .:t ~ \\ ~o'-\. 'l\ \~\~ "\l\'C.'}{ o~ e...~~o J ,:\JJ 'Pr _ "a QS''b :l.,") . J..6o:S" MO ...... ~,..'~ '--l \E.'-N ~R._ ~~~'ot-:\ .'J;\~ ._. .. . . ~t.. ~~'\~tt~ ~~~~e.~ ::tca0 5:'·-MO'-\)\ ,l"1~ ~\~ ¥:..~N\.~ ~f\'.1~oS" • . r. Proposed Mitigation M,,---;-es: The following recommended Mitigation .res will likely be imposed on the proposed project to address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above: The applicant will be required to adhere to the work window as determined by the State Department of Fish and Game and the US Army Corps of Engineers. • The applicant shall implement and maintain appropriate erosion control measures for the duration of the project. ! Comments on the above application must be submitted In writing to Nancy Well, Associate Planner, Development Services DiviSion, 1055 South Frady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on October 20,2004. This matter Is also tentatively scheduled for a pubrIC hearing on December 7, 2004, at 9:00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh FlQor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Development Services Division, (425) 430-7282, to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled. If comments' Cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments on the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish to be made a party of record and receive additional Information by mail, 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: Nancy Weil, Associate Planner Tel: (425) 430-7270 I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALUNG FOR PROPER ALE IDENTIRCATION I ! • ; . ! . If you would fike to be made a party of record to receive further information on this proposed project, complete this form and retum to: City of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Ale NoJName: LUA04-115, ECF I Pritchard Shoreline Restoration NAME: _______________________________________________________________________________ __ ADDRESS: __________ ~----------------------------------- TELEPHONE NO.: _________________ _ --------------------------......... Pritchard SJloreline Restoration and Boatlift File No.: L UA-04-115, SM, SMC-H January 1 O~ 2005 Page 2 The hearing opened with a presentation of the staff report by Nancy Weil, Senior Planner, Development Services, City of Renton, 1055 S Grady Way, Renton, Washington 98055. The subject site is located on the shores of Lake Washington at 2807 Mountain View Dri ve. The applicant is currently under action for shoreline alteration and fill without the appropriate permitting. Ir~ order to rectify that violation, the applicant is required to restore th e shorel ine along his property. The proposa I for that restoration has been reviewed and approved by the Washington State Department ofFish and Wildlife as well as the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers. The applicant recently received a front yard variance in order to construct a new single family home, due to the constraints on the site he was granted a zero setback. A Shoreline Conditional Use Permit is required for a boatlift, it is not an exempted item. The Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated with t""o mitigation n-::teasures. No appeals were filed. The appl icat ion for one freestanding boatlift located on the north' side of the existing dock is compatible with existing uses in that area. The boatlift will be located near shore abutting an existing residential dock and pier. The use meets the conditional use criteria to provide a system within the Master Program, that allows flexibility in the application of use regulations. The single-family residential site has an existing 492 square foot dock and pier, which i -s compatible with the adjacent residential properties. The work wi II primarily be done from Lake Washington by barge, the impact inland should not be substantial. Staff recomrnends approval of the Conditional Use Perm it and the Shorel ine Substantial Development Permit. The Examiner questioned the height of the boatlift when the boat is out of the water and resting in the lift. Ms. Weil stated that because the boatlift does meet the side yard setbacks and it does not protrude beyond or extend any further out into Lake Washington than the exi sting pier, it does meet the criteria for Development Services Star~dards. Mark Pritcha::rd, 2807 Mountain View Drive, Renton, W A 98056 stated that he was pleased to be here today to discuss these improvements. The restoration will enhance the habitat in the spawning area of Lake Washington_ In regards to -the boatlift, on his street there are 18 homes and 24 boatlifts and 4 jet ski lifts. The Examiner called for further testimony regarding this project. There was no one else wishing to speak, and no further comments from staff. The hearing closed at 9:27 a.m. FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION Having revievved the record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the following: FINDINGS: 1. The applicants, Marc and Kaaren Pritchard, filed a request for a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shore I ine Substantial Development Permit. 2. The yellow file containing the staff report, the Sta-te Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) documentation and o-.:her pertinent materials was entered into the record as Exhibit #]. Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift File No.: LUA-04-115, SM, SMC-H January 10, 2005 Page 4 16. Lake Washington's shoreline is classified as a Shoreline of Statewide Significance and therefore any development adjacent to it is subject to the City's Shoreline Master Program. This section of the shoreline is designated as an Urban Shoreline. 17. Staff noted that the residential designation of the subject site permits docks associated with single- family uses along this portion of the shoreline. Boatlifts are not a listed use nor are they a prohibited use and, therefore, are subject to a shoreline conditional use review. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The criteria for approving a Shoreline Conditional Use permit are twofold. There are City criteria and those City criteria require compliance with additional State criteria. Those criteria are as follows: Renton: Section 4-9-190.1.5: 5. Conditional Use: a. Purpose: Upon proper application, a conditional use permit may be granted. The objective of a conditional use provision is to provide more control and flexibility for implementing the regulations ofthe Master Program. With provisions to control undesirable effects, the scope of uses can be expanded to include many uses. b. Decision Criteria: Uses classified as conditional uses can be permitted only after consideration and by meeting such performance standards that make the use compatible with other permitted uses within that area. A conditional use permit will be granted subject to each of the following conditions: i. The use must be compatible with other permitted uses within that area. ii. The use will not interfere with the public use of public shorelines. iii. Design of the site will be compatible with the surroundings and the City's Master Program. iv. The use shall be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City's Master Program. v. The use meets the conditional us.e criteria in WAC 173-27-160. Washington State: WAC 173-27-160: Review criteria for conditional use permits. The purpose of a conditional use permit is to provide a system within the master program which allows flexibility in the application of use regulations in a manner consistent with the policies ofRCW 90.58.020. In authorizing a conditional lise, special conditions may be attached to the permit by local government or the department to prevent undesirable effects of the proposed use and/or to assure consistency of the project with the act and the local master program. --------------------...... Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift File No.: LUA-04-1I5, SM, SMC-H January 10, 2005 Page 6 4. The lift's profile will be mostly under the water. It will be setback from property lines more than required by code. It should not create any untoward impacts on adjacent uses or on water-oriented uses. Clearly, it will allow the boat to be higher above the surface than if it were merely floating but this is not totally unusual. 5. The next series of criteria are contained within the Washington Administrative Code. One of the paramount goals is to protect the ecology of the shoreline. While, the applicant improperly placed fill in the lake, the current proposal would be to restore the shoreline and therefore, the ecology of that shoreline. 6. The private lot extends out into the lake and the dock and lift serve that lot. The priv(lte use is permitted in this area of the shoreline. As noted above, the dock is already in place and the lift will not be extending the intrusion further out into the water. The use should not impair the public use of this section of the lakeshore or the water in its vicinity. 7. The proposed boatlift is relatively low-scale and should not interfere with any uses that might occur in this area of the lake. The comprehensive plan designates this area as suitable for single-family uses and the normal complement of accessory uses. On a lakeshore property, piers docks and similar uses including a boatlift are considered reasonable accessory uses. 8. The proposed boatlift should not create any significant adverse affects on the shoreline environment. The improper fill has probably already had an adverse affect but the restoration should ameliorate those impacts over time. 9. The installation of the boatlift should not further harm the public interest. 10. The analysis of cumulative impact or impacts is hard to judge. At this point, docks already protrude out into the lake from many of the homes. Clearly, there have had to be impacts to water quality and habitat as a result of moto.r boating and docks shading the lake and some ofthe shallow areas. This additional action will probably not have much affect on the overall circumstances. II. Since boatlifts are neither permitted nor prohibited outright, they do require review under the Conditional Use criteria. The proposal use and restoration are generally consistent with the criteria noted above. RECOMMENDATION: 1. The Conditional Use Permit and the Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the single boatlift should be approved (the jet skis lift or lifts are no longer under consideration and are not to be approved in this decision). 2. The appellant should comply with the conditions imposed by the ERC. ORDERED THIS 10th day of January 2005. HEARING EXAMINER -Ht-it~-Jt-Ool-----~---------j...J--.-.------------... -.~--.-------.-.. _f__.__-.j --------tWJIEl -----_. -~ r---. --- ------_._-CDR --------- ------ -------- ------- -----, --- ----- ® A ZONING +;R + P/BIFW 'l'J!QINJCA3. SIIlVICIIS It ll/04I03 1_ C3 31 'T24N R5E E V2 -, :-A' "-~ -- ® ~ -- , Jl-rs-p<l -. E~\~,\-l.,\ ~u:i' ... ~\~~ Pu ~ f 0 -S E.. -: Po E $\':J tr-e. \l.~ ~~ -~P-..Q\'C.<'" oS 1,\ OYte L \ ~ e.. p~,,\.~€. S"A~\: ~lOl4."~-fo~ ~hCE:lt..c..~-i\~ _ D\,,\ \u l'i\ -: ..::2...\. g~ E., ~ "\ ~'l C.o~ \ ~ \. ~ RQS". 'P~;; P£~\'"l a~ ~c:.1?.s. ... - (') . " ~<O\\ ~0'-t "\\~\~ "\l.\c"}{ 0,<-e .. :~, ~o J r -\JJ Pr. "\ a 0 S"''b >'\i, . - " -~t-~~'\.~tt~ ~~C.'QE.~l :t'OO~--MO'-t'A \i'\~ '-l.\~ ~~N\.~ \.!JA.1150~-r.c , r - N\ t'~~~\~(:;. OE.\IE.~~~ ~E.~O~ st.'? 1 \ 1~~~ \\eC~\\I~\) \' "(J ,A1f[or ~t»¥ E)WNlNG .~ ..... ~.aftCIS ......... -------- .~ ~ ~ C3 ~ I:l ~ ; 31 TUN R5E E 112 .." ¥I1A~~hffod ~ CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 151 day of December, 2004, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner documents. This information vyas sent to: Jeff Reiker Tom Touma Mithra & Usha Sankrithi (Signature of Sender);.~ ~ STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS COUNTY OF KING ) Applicant Contact Owners I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntary act for the uses and purposes mentioned in the instrument. ---"':':')/"-"~ / ;E>~~~~:*dl ()~ -~~.···~C.IOA;·" " Notary Public in and for the State of Washington ~ =".' ~\":r-' 'V ~ '. '1-:. , : ~ ...... } *0 ... (:> I, I ~ :8 NOTARy '$: ~ ~ Notary (Print): Mntli'Lrt {C .. /l-teKCtl1ci(;?r I.' -.__ m • -, --"""-"------';........;:;---:;;.~-'--"-..:....---'--=-:'-'--'-=.=...;------- 'I :.. PUBLIC ~ a~pointment expires: d -11 ~ 0 (p 'I ~" : ", " ~A··~:19-0\) .. "" ~ \<'~ ...... . Christelle Ridge Preliminary Plat LUA04-100, PP, ECF \ ~f~-,.,» ~ ..u. '" -' Kathy Kooiker-Wheeler, Mayor CITY, ( ~'RENT,ON Planninw'BuildinglPublicW~rks DCpartment Gregg Zimmerman P~E., Admi.dstrator, DEcember 1, 2004 J eft Sidebotham. Seaborn Pile Driving 9311 $E36th Street ste:#204 Mercer Island, WA 98040 SUBJECT: Pritchard Shorelirie Restoration & BoatJift ' LUA04-115, SM, SM'C-H, ECF Dear Mr. Sidebotham: This letter is to inform.you' thatthe'appealperiod'hasended for the Environmental Revfew "Committee's, (ERC) Determin~tio;" of~ori~Slgnificance ~. Mitigated for the above-referenced ,project. '" '. '..' ' . -", c'" • • • No appeals were filed on tt)e ERCdetermin~~iq[l. . . . :< :.-'-:: . ~ _ o·::.\.:..!....::.'.·:-:. This decision is finaland:applic~tic>nfdr tt:l~~approp,ri~tely r~quired~~permits may proceed. The "appliCant, mu~tcomplywith,' all" ERCMitig'atlonlv1¢a'sures. f\Hearih,g Examiner PublicH;earing has b~nscheduled for December 7 ,,200.( 'vvf1ei~, Site Plan Conditions may be issued. Plea~e 'see the enclosed Preliminary Hep(jrt toJhe:Hearirit;(Exarnirier. " " , . .. . , ' .he applicant must complywith"call ERC Mitigation Measures" and' Site Plan Gonditionsof" Approval. ' ,',' . " ' If you have any questions, please ~eel~freeto"c6ntactme,at (445) 430-7270. . . ," . '. . .. . For the Erivironmental Review COrTlmittee, G\~w~' ~ " NancyWeil Senior Planner " " 'cc: Marc & Kaaren Pritchard! 'Owner Enclosure --------:-:lO~5=-=5"::;S:-o-uth,;-::G:-ra-'d:-y-=W:::-a-y----:R=:-e-'n-'to-n-" w:~as-:-h-:-in-g'-to-n":"'9-:::8--:-0-55----~~-~· * This p.aper contains 500/0 recycled niaterial. 30% post consumer AHEAD OF T.HE CURVE CITY OF RENTON HEARII\IG EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING Dece'mber 7, 2004 AGENDA eOMNlE.NCIN,GAT.9:00AM, .. __ :.c .•... -COUNCII"cFi~MBERS, 7TH FLOOR; RENTON CITY HALL Tshe;application(s)listed:areinorderofapplication number only and not necessarily the order in which they will be -heCl-rd'.,lternswill:becal!edfoi' heating at the discretion of the Hearing Examiner. PROJECT NAIVIE: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration & Boatlift PROJECT NU 1VIBER: LUA-04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Su bstantial Development Permit for the construction of residentiai boatlift, a rock retaining wall and restoration of the shoreline. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has 2,205 square feet of land outside the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The site is zoned Residential-8 (R-8) and is developed with an existing single-family dwelling and dock/pier. PROJECT NA.ME: Christelle Ridge Preliminary Plat PROJECT NUMBER: LUA-04-100, PP, ECF PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Preliminary Plat and Environmental (SEPA) Review'for the 22-lot subdivision of a 3.54-acre site. The proposed lots range in size form 4,500 to 8,403 square feet with the proposed density of 7.38 units per net acre for the eventual development of single-family residences. The vacant property is designated with the Residential - 8 dwelling units per acre (R-8) zone. Access to the site is proposed by a 42-foot wide public cul-de-sac street to be constructed oH of SE 95th Way. HEX Agenda 12-7-04.doc PUBLIC HEARING City of Renton Department of Planning / Building / Public Works PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST: Public Hearing Date: Project Name: Applicant/Owner Address Contact Address: File Number: Project Description: Project Location: December 7, 2004 Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift Marc and Kaaren Pritchard 2807 Mountain View Drive Renton, WA 98056 Jeff Sidebotham Seaborn Pile Driving 9311 SE 36th Street #204 Mercer Island, WA 98040 LUA-04-115, SM,SMC-H, ECF Projec;t Manager: Nancy Weil The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Cor-.ditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the constru·ction of residential boatlift, a rock retaining wa II and restoration of the shoreline. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mounta in View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has 2,205 square feet of land outside the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) and is de"eloped with an existing single-family dwelling and dock/pier. 2807 Mountain View Drive PUBLIC HEARING City of Renton Department of Planning / Building / Public Works PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER I A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST: Public Hearing Date: Project Name: Applicant/Owner Address Contact Address: File Number: Project Description: Project Location: December 7, 2004 Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift Marc and Kaaren Pritchard 2807 Mountain View Drive Renton, WA 98056 Jeff Sidebotham Seaborn Pile Driving 9311 SE 36th Street #204 Mercer Island, WA 98040 LUA-04-115, SM,SMC-H, ECF Project Manager: NancyWeil The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of residential boatlift, a rock retaining wall and restoration of the shoreline. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has 2,205 square feet of land outside the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) and is developed with an existing single-family dwelling and dock/pier. 2807 Mountain View Drive . ? ~ .. ,J City of Renton PIBIPW Department ~ Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: December 7, 2004 Page 2 of 8 B. EXHIBITS: Exhibit 1: Project file ("yellow file") containing the application, reports, staff comments, and other material pertinent to the review of the project. Exhibit 2: Site Plan (dated revised 11/15/04) Exhibit 3: Neighborhood Detail Map Exhibit 4: Detail Site Plan (dated revised11/15/04) Exhibit 5: EXisting Site Condition (dated 8/24/04) Exhibit 6: Habitat Restoration Elevation (dated 8/24/04) Exhibit 7: Shoreline Habitat Restoration Plan (dated 6/28/04) Exhibit 8: Zoning Map (dated 12/04/03) Exhibit 9: Army Corp Of Engineers Letter (dated 11/23/04) c. GENERAL INFORMA TION: 1. 2. 3. 4. Owner of Record: Zoning Designation: Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation: Existing Site Use: Marc and Kaaren Pritchard 2807 Mountain View Drive Renton, WA 98056 Residential -8 Dwelling Units Per Acre (R-8) Residential Single-Family (RSF) Single-Family Residential 5. Neighborhood Characteristics: 6. 7. 8. hexrpt.doc Access: Site Area: North: Residential -8 (R-8) zoning East: Lake Washington Blvd and Residential -8 (R-8) zoning South: Residential -8 (R-8)) zoning West: Lake Washington Mountain View Drive 13,162 gsf; 2,205 gsf outside of OHWM Project Data: area comments Existing dock/pier Area: New Building Area: Total Building Area: 492 gsf 108 N/A N/A Boatlift: 9 feet x 12 feet N/A City of Renton PIB/PW Department Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: December 7, 2004 Page 3 of 8 D. HISTORICAUBACKGROUND: . Action Annexation Comprehensive Plan Zoning V-A, SME Land Use File No . N/A N/A N/A LUA-04-99 Ordinance No. 2249 4498 4404 N/A Date 06/2011966 02/20/1995 06/07/1993 912112004 E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE RENTON MUNICIPAL CODE: 1. Chapter 2 Land Use Districts Section 4-2-020: Purpose and Intent of Zoning Districts Section 4-2-070: Zoning Use Table Section 4-2-130: Industrial Development Standards 2. Chapter 3 Environmental Regulations and Special Districts Section 4-3-050: Critical Areas Regulations 3. Chapter 4 Property Development Standards Section 4-4-030: Development Guidelines and Regulations Section 4-4-060: Grading, Excavation and Mining Regulations Section 4-4-080: Parking, Loading and Driveway Regulations Section 4-4-130: Tree Cutting and Land Clearing Regulations 4. Chapter 6 Streets and Utility Standards Section 4-6-060: Street Standards 5. Chapter 9 Procedures and Review Criteria 6. Chapter 11 Definitions F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: 1. Land Use Element: Residential Single Family objectives and policies. 2. Environmental Element: Fisheries and Wildlife Resources objectives and policies. G. DEPARTMENT ANAL YSIS: 1. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/BACKGROUND hexrpt.doc The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of residential boat and Jet Ski lifts, a rock retaining wall and restoration of the shoreline. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has 2,205 square feet of land outside the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) and is developed with an existing single-family dwelling and dock/pier. The subject site is designated Residential Single-Family (RSF) on the Comprehensive Plan Area map. The applicant is under action for shoreline alteration and fill without appropriate permitting. To rectify that violation, the applicant is required to restore the shoreline on his property. The proposal, under the review and approval by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the US Army Corp of Engineers is to restore the altered shoreline, install a rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings, install a residential boat and Jet Ski lifts. The shoreline restoration requires the removal of approximately 10 cubic yards of unauthorized fill and restoration of the shoreline habitat. The shoreline restoration plan includes the spread of 5 cubic yards of substrate gravel and planting of native vegetation consisting of Red Osier Dogwood stakes. The 2.5-foot high rock retaining wall to be constructed 3 feet landward of the ordinary high water mark will serve to act City of Renton PIBIPW Department - Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift • P",J;m;n"'Y Report to the Hearing Exam;n" LUA-04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: December 7, 2004 Page 4 of 8 as a ·Iandscape soil retain age barrier and not as a bulkhead. The proposal is to dig a shallow trench at the base rocks and install a silt fence along the shoreline to prevent sediment from entering the lake. The U.S. Corp of Engineers (dated November 23. 2004) has issued authorization for the boatlift as well as future dock and pier repair, not included in this application. The location of the ordinary high water mark, as indicated on the site plan, was established and verified by a representative of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife The project requires Environmental (SEPA) Review, Hearing Examiner Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit. Staff's review of the project's compliance with the Residential - 8 (R-8) development standards, Shoreline Conditional Use criteria and Substantial Development criteria are addressed in this report to the Hearing Examiner. 2. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21 C, 1971 as amended) on November 15, 2004 the Environmental Review Committee (ERC) issued a Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated (DNS-M) for the Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift. As the project warranted a DNS-M, two mitigation measures were required. A 14- day appeal period commenced on November 15, 2004 and ended on November 29, 2004. No appeals of the threshold determination were filed. 3. COMPLIANCE WITH ERC MITIGATION MEASURES A Determination of Non-Significance -Mitigated was issued by the City of Renton's Environmental Review Committee (ERC) on November 15, 2004 requiring no further environmental mitigation. 4. STAFF REVIEW COMMENTS Representatives from various city departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address site plan issues from 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 the report. 5. CONSISTENCY WITH SHORELINE CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA: hexrpt.doc RMC Section 4-9-190.1 lists 5 criteria that the Hearing Examiner is asked to consider such performance standards that make the use compatible with other permitted uses with in that area when making a decision on a Shoreline Conditional Use application. These include the following: (1) The use must be compatible with other permitted uses within that area. The applicant proposes to have installed one freestanding residential boatlift to the north side of an existing 486 square foot dock located on Lake Washington. The use of the site is a single- family residence, which is consistent with the adjoining properties. The waterfront along this portion of Lake Washington is currently developed with residential water-related uses. The site currently does not have any type of water related lifts. The applicant has submitted for the appropriate review and permits from the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers and National Marine Fisheries Services. (2) The use will not interfere with the public use of public shorelines. The proposed residential boatlift will be located near shore abutting an existing residential dock and pier. The 9-foot x 12-foot lift will meet City of Renton development standards and Building Code requirements. The proposed use is for one watercraft to be maintained at this site, which is along private shoreline. The applicant is requesting a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for shoreline restoration to rectify shoreline alteration and filling which was done without appropriate permitting. This r.; City of Renton P/BIPW Department Pritchard Shore'ine Restoration and Boatlift • Prelil17.inary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DA TE: December 7, 2004 Page 5 orB hexrpt.doc proposed plan is to restore and improve the shoreline habitat along the subject site. A stone retaining wall is proposed 3-feet landward of the Ordinary High Water Mark (OHWM) in order to stabilize the shoreline and reduce erosion and sediment. The na tive shoreline vegetation and substrate gravel to be placed along shore is part of the restoration plan. (3) Design of the site will be compatible with the surrOUr1 dings and the City's Master Program. ) The proposed 9-foot x 12-foot freestanding residential boatlift is located approximately 15 feet off shore of the ordinary high water mark. It is approximately 14-feet from the side property line to the north; the City's Shoreline Master Program regulations required a minimum of five feet to an adjacent property line. The structure will not extend out bey<> nd the existing 24-foot pier. Additionally, it is compatible with other properties with such structures in the surrounding area. The applicant has submitted the design of the structure for review I:>y the Army Corp of Engineers. The City's Shoreline Master Program (WAC 173-26-230 b) states the design and construction shall avoid or, if that is not possible, shall minimize and mitigC3te the impacts to ecological functions, and critical areas resources. The proposed residential boatlift is compatible with the objectives and policies of the City's Master Program as an accessory water use to an existing residential use. (4) The use meets the conditional use criteria in WAC 173-27-160, to provide a system within the Master Program, which allows flexibility in the application of use regulations in a manner consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020. 111 authorizing a conditional use, special conditions may be attached to the permit by local government or the department to prevent undesirable effects of the proposed use and/or to assure consistency of the project with the act and the local master program. (A) Uses which are classified or set forth in the application master program as conditional uses may be authorized provided that" the applicant demonstrates al/ the following: 1) That the proposed use is consistent with the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and the master program. Lake Washington is classified as a Shoreline of Statewide Significance. The proposed private residential boatlift demonstlrates compliance and/or non- applicability to the policies of RCW 90.58.020 and the master program. 2) That the proposed use will not interfere with the normal public use of public shorelines. The subject site is single-family residential pri vate property on the shores of Lake Washington. No interference with the public use of public shoreline should occur, as the site is not directly adjacent to any public shoreline. 3) That the proposed use of the site and design of the project is compatible with other authorized uses within the area and with uses planned for the area under the comprehensive plan and shoreline master program. The subject site is designated Residential' Single-Family on the City's Comprehensive Plan and the proposed use qualifies as an accessory use to the waterfront property. The residential boatlift is compatible in design and use to the adjacent lakefront residential properties and the shoreline mater program as discussed previously. 4) That the proposed use will cause no significant adverse effects to the shoreline environment in which it is to be located. This section of Lake Washington is designated as Urban Environment in the Shoreline Master Program regulations and is a developed shoreline of residential uses. If the boatlift is installed and maintained according to all required state and local permits, the use is r:lot expected to cause significant City of Renton PI8/PW Department Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift Preliminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF PUBLIC I-IEARING DA TE: December 7, 2004 Page 6 of 8 adverse effect to the shoreline environment_ The shoreline restoration plan proposed by the applicant is expected to iml>rove the shoreline habitat for this site. 5) That the public interest suffers no substantial detrimental effects. As the site is a private single-family residen~i al use and the intended boatlift is the only watercraft lift proposed on the site at: this time, it is not anticipated any detrimental effects will be created of any significance than what currently exist along the shoreline of Lake Washington in this area. (B) In the granting of all conditional use permits, consideration shall be given to the cumulative impact of additional requests for like actions in the area. This single-family residential site has an existing 492 s quare foot dock and pier, which is compatible with the adjacent residential properties. Thi s site does not currently have any type of watercraft lift as do many of the adjacent prope,rties. A City of Renton Park further to the south of this site does have a boat launch facility. The Army Corp of Engineers is reviewing the boatlift permit for approval. The applica~ t's request for a residential boatlift should not have an adverse cumulative'impact for this area. (C) Other uses which are not classified or set forth in the applicable master program may be authorized as conditional uses provided the applicant can demonstrate consistency with the requirements of this section and the requirements for conditional uses contained in the master program. Residential boatlift is not a use set forth in the Shoreline Master Program thereby requiring a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit. The criteria discussed in this report have demonstrated the applicant's request is consistent with the requirements. (D) Uses which are specifically prohibited by 1he master program may not be authorized pursuant to either subsection (A) or (B) of this section. Residential boatlift is not specifically prohibited by the -City's Shoreline Master Program. G. SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT APPLICATION NO.: DAT E RECEIVED: DAT E OF PUBLIC NOTICE: DATE APPROVED: TYPE OF ACTION(S): CITY OF RENTON SHORELINE MANAGEMENT ACTOF., 971 PERMIT FOR SHORELINE MANAGEMENT SHORELINE SUBSTANTIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT LUA-04-115, SM, SMC-H, EFC October 1 , 2004 October 6, 2004 December 7, 2004 [X] Substantial Development Permit [ X ] Conditional Use Permit [] Variance Permit Pursuant to Chapter 90.58 RCW, staff recommends that a permit be granted_ This action is proposed on the following application: AP\PLlCANT: Marc and Kaaren Pritchard hexlrpt.doc City of Renton PIB/PW Department Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift Prenminary Report to the Hearing Examiner LUA-04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF PUBLIC HEARING DATE: December 7, 2004 PROJECT: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION: The applicant has requested She> reline Substantial Development (SM) and Conditional Use Permit Page 7 of 8 I (SMC-H)) for a shoreline restoration plan on Lake Washington, which includes the spread of 5 cubic yards of substrate gravel and planting of native vegetation consisting of Red Osier Dogwood stakes. A 2.5 foot high rock retaining wall is to be constructed 3-feet landward of the Ordinary High Wate r Mark which will serve as a landscape soil retainage barrier and not as a bulkhead. The proposal is to dig a shallow trench at the base rocks and install a silt fence along the shoreline to prevent sediment from entering the lake. The applicant, under the review and approval of the Army Corp of Engineers and -the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife is required to remove unauthorized fill and restore the shoreline. The removal of approximately 10 cubic yards of unauthorized fill prior to the restoration of the shoreline. A portion of the existing dock would be temporarily removed in order to access the underlying shoreline to carry out the restoration. LEGAL DESCRIPTION: See attached SE-31-23-5 SEC-TWNP-R: WITHIN SHORELINES OF: Lake Washington City of Renton APPLICABLE MASTER PROGRAM: The following section/page of the Master Program is applicable to the developmen t: Section Description Pag~ 4-3-090.J Urban Environment page 3-25 4-3-090.L Specific Use Regulations page 3-27 4-3-090.L 12 Piers and Docks Page 3-32 4-3-090.L.14 Residential Development page 3-36 Staff recommends that development of this project shall be undertaken pursuant to the following terms and condition: 1. The applicant shall comply with all construction conditions by the State agencies and all construction conditions provided in the application and modificati ons submitted to the City. That the permit be granted pursuant to the Shoreline Management Action of 1971 and pursuant to the following: 1. The issuance of a license under the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 shall not release the applicant from compliance with federal, state, and other permit requirements. 2. This permit may be rescinded pursuant to Section 14(7) of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 in the event the permittee fails to comply with any condition hereof. 3. A construction permit shall not be issued until twenty-one (21) days after approval by the City of Renton Development Services Division or until any review proceedings initiated within this twenty-one (21) day review period have been completed. H. RECOMMENDATION: hexrpt.doc Staff recommends approval of the Shoreline Conditional Use and Shoreline Substantial Development Permits for the Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boatlift proposed to be located at 2807 Mountain View Drive, Project File No. LUA-04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF. •. S.E. .~ .... z. so . a -, • ... r. ~ .,0-'; 0 .. ,,0 J-~ r.o-,0\' 13 ,d- 5'0 -. ~R\\e,.,'" ~~\) ~~>~>SQ~S d. '0 01 m OIAY\\'A\~ - CQ 5 .of) I.·~ s-~,.,. .. f· r ~o~4 II 7 " ~I' IJ1 IS 16 ..... 10 " - 95TH ·.S1 so 1-so D~\"C. ~~~\5~ 11-IS-o=:/ b\'\\~ ~~ ;7-IK~\\ "L~ .. :;::U.···-·." ,.!to. ," .. : .... .. : .... :.:., ~: ... '. ',." .-: . ·r IHAI r-VI""II""""" ,.;.,.r LVI 01 H' ICJ"'~ ~ &.on-..... ....,. HIL.I.' '''''''' V L.~ WASI.IIHC.ToN C.ARDEN OF ED'EN DIVISIa-{ NO. ~ AS PeR PLAT ' RECPRDED IN VO!..U1E II Of' l"L.Ai~ f"AGE 6). RECOfODO 011 ~ C~DESCRleED AS FOLL~ " ..... ~ , . . BEGINH~ AT ~E INTERSECTICN Of TI-IE 6C\I1l-I LINE Of" BAlD Lot 81 ,Un-H ~E NEANDER LINE Of' LAKI: WASI,UNciTcN. ' 'THENCE EAST, ALONG THE &ouTH LINE AND 1T'6 ~a:F4.. Y PRODUCTICN. A DIS T ANCE OF liS FEET TO TI-IE 6OUT1-IU!&TEFfL Y LINE OF T~E 6URLINUTCN HORTI-lE~ RAILWAY (NORTHE~ PACIFIC) • RIG~·OF·WAY. f}lEHCE NORn-A1.e6TERL Y. AL~ SAID 6OUT1-AU!8TeR1.. Y LINE. A DI~TANCE OF 1<4 FEe', TI.lENCE S~II1I'1!)4'W A D/&TAHCE Cf')2 FEET TO T~E' 'NT OF BEGINNING. I TOGETHER Wln .. 1 LOT 82 IN SAID BLOCK A AND 6Eca-lD CLA6S ~RELMDS ~ CCt-IVEl'ED.eY THE OTAT!! Cf' IIJA$lINGToH SITUATE H FRCNl" OF. ADJACENT TO OR A6UTTIHG THEREON. . :XCEPT THAT ~ORTloN THEReOf" DE&CRlI:'ED AS eEaINHlHG AT THE NTERSECTICN OF 'TI-IE NEANDER UNE WITH THE NORTH LINE Cf' SAID ~~ . Il-IEHCE 5~1D136'1D.4·u) A DISTANce OF StD,'tD ~ET. "HENCE N"'613~'IDID'W A DISTANCE OF 11D.a2 !=EET TO A POINT fU.4ICI-f )EAR!I e6'11~·.42'U.1 FRC'M THE ~OIHT OP aEG~IN:i CP THI& :XCEPTl9t'l iJl\JATE IN THI: CCUNn" OF KJNes, STATE CP WA~HINGTat .or C9YERAUEr \REA OF SirE lREA OF USEABLE LAND . or cOv1;RAUE orAL COVERAGE r. SUI 'COVE~E" 1J)~2 • • 1U'3 • 161 • • ~~r.. Of" rOTA,L· , fl4,'~ OF uaE;~e .. ... " lito \'O~"-l> : SCALE " I .. 0" PBo?OS!1)1 g~l:~ It""t"'''''~' 'I-\"u...-~~Qe.~l.,~'''''-"t~ .. ~) Pl"'~\\~6.) , .. : ' . ,I L'>q.. ~~ . .,r~ 'VL,,%-. A:lJl'lil .• ~. (f,~ ~ -"'~.<f',~"y" ~Oi \\Y '?~ -If,~. ,t ~. ~~':'. .~ - LAKE WA5~IN6TON A&eu1eo LAKI! !!LI!V • 144>ID' \' OEVElOPMEHT'PlANNIN\:: CITY OF RENTON SEP 21 ~ RECEIVED , , . .. .~ '. ~l:\Q.' MI\\t..l.l'~\\c..\\h~~ . .., D'€.\~\\'" ~<)\'i:...:> -i.80"LN\o(.\,~~'b\.~\r-;..~t.f''-\U--'''' """"'''---'' . . .... l:.\{'o~ ,'b\\),9805S"" J't.~ovt. u",,!~_\"OA.\:z.:~~ li.~\.~,.:.J.~,_~-:-. . ._- -h--"----·--..... PL' '-.;tr -j'~,Q: :t.N\Q~~~~·~~"'i Si~i.~~31.-'\f--~, .. ,. , __ ~t.~\o ... ~· \\"'~\\,,\ _~_..,._--~~ .. LSl ,t.G'\ou.,,,,,, n'f\~\\'" -~~~ _!,,_eC!'aI.'::'.:ti . --.---~.. . .......... -(.,Of..l.~' v..<.-~\ l-e;'\ ... \..Lt> .. , .. 'i\..l.~' ' ~._L. ~E:.'''\~\I~<'' \I.l~Ll. '-ii~i1\.C\!: .. <-'i: ~~9.~Z;~~t~'l:i~ -~\-.~·:"'~'~·~·?;:-o~C . .... , ,-'--. ..... '" '" ,,,. __ .. ;--.' .,s,~~L.'~" 1 -lQ . . ... " ... ~_ .. _ ... . -.. _----':::\"~'----:("'-..... ''''''o'~ . . fG.:1f -l. AI't\'>\~· ~t.o)\.9-\\\\~\.1 "J.~\lI\Y~ ~.f. .. 0-. . "" ""_. __ " _._ ..... __ ._ .... " .... ___ : _________ . \ -",' \.'\'~\ \, J \\.-. "-... R.~ .. "",~ e.,",~\ 4. ~\ C.Lc."Ji:\ T\u ~ '" \. t:.'t-\ .j""; to •... ~. ~ . .r--. . L..?t~~ ~~~~~~\~0~~ /'---.- E"'\~ ,\-J,.~ ~~:i. ~\ c;;., c:L- '?U~~ o~a : P.Es~p:.~ \l.."'A'O~ -~It.O\'E.<:-\ ~'o\o~L\~e... PRo~\'~e. S'A~c ~1'O/t-l\c..~.fQ~ ~~<C±..c..~-A~- a",\u l'I\: ...:1..\. g, E. ~ '\ ~'t c.o~ \ ~ '-~ RQY. "?i;;;\=H:.~\'1 c~~c..e."S. .. \~ . . .:l..~\\ ~oq,,\\91\~ "l.\TC:..~ o~ e .. :~. ~Q J r {J..j f"t .. ~ 6 C):S"'b ~t. ~~'\.'-l'et~ ~~.~'O€.~'E.. =l. 'S o~ ·Mo~ 'A \ i'\Tt\. '-l.\~. ~~~\.~ \!Il?t.14QO~-ca T . . E."1-(:>\ \~S W.\\..Lo~ 1~.:~.~ .. ~~~:tf~~~ ~\~\. -. _~~~_fc.._. _ AR.t)~ ~\~\ \"\ou.5£. l<OO\ .5c.~ \...£. .1."-\ c:) III, I. I""f . CI S \0 IS N\ C L\ ~', ~\ ~\) \~-'f'.\ ~N. ~ ~~~\.~~ \\.~~~ 1~DS-b I .J~~,>.-!c._. _ _' __ _ h~O"""e. e...f\.~:r\l:~~ ~Oc.." ~~~~ ~~\=~~·--·------~-----I ~'f:Up1& ..,. \~ H'\~\\ j. .. ULa\oo\~ ~ C-\·-\tv)s" '!~~i.-~> 'i- '. . -~ __ -j ,J~c't<:J~~~ ~ .~~~.~~~_':'-~t't"'~~~'4l. \"l:'~c> ~\Ll . 1.~~'''''~ ~~~~~L '>\\o~t.\..,~e. \\'A~ \\~\ . .. . .. ; .. '." ' .... _ ........ , ... , ' .. ' .. ' .----i --.... , ............ _-..... -.----, ' .. " ._._---._--+ P p\\U.",,, ~ =>-\. <a 5"" I:.SI. ~q c.\)~ -L ~ \,,\ _:t~ ~ L~~~_.w...t'1...~~~~,~~ A~ "S. ?R.O p~t 'j ()~ )-\\:.'f..~ P.' ~ R'C~ \o\--' \.~ -'-8~·~··~~\J~~·\~\i~·~~'~·:~;·;~~·~~~krr\\7\I,~\1:CQ~.~\\~\,:;~~~~~'====-~-~----.... -: Rt~\ow, \l--.\ttr.q8o~n.. ~£.t-tl~I""Pt-.'18oS-& ,A't,?L\~~~\_~_. t"\~~c.. P\t\\G\\ p..~. , ~ '0 en l'f\ 01.\ ~\l" I't \~ _ \h.~~\ ,,,,,~~_ ·~~·4~'~~.~~~ A ~ -t;:>",",\'C. . 5'~'t-() L.f ~<l..~:q \, , .. . -. ) \ --1 e -.------1(-- ~ III Q r c¥ UI .!J f ~ ., ~ -" --. ;) -cD '8-7-. " ~ ~ q.\s-( \$)~~ u.1 I .1...~ol ~\'O\.\~1~\~\J\~~ Q.\\l~_ fZ~,""\.\ ~~ .~~. ~~oS-(;:, f. I I ! , -J $C-?L.~ 1''':. \ Ci' rll," Itll" o S 1~ IS' ~\lil~o~~ -.l,,",? R.o\.t~ 5t\c>~L\~~ \\~~ i1 l-r\ Ci\\4.}-'\ '. c.~t. . .:J.. \ -'a\ e.~\ t 9. \ , f\~ ~ ~ "? ~o ~~ Pc'l ()~ l'\c..~: . 1. B 0 ~-1\1\ 0'-\ ~ \PlH"\ \l \\'%."'-1 ~e.\'-J't -~~~o~ \J-.h\- .l..8n t-I\OIAt-J""1'1'\",\he.'N ~e.\'J'<...-R~,,"\\b"-l .,-",H\ . 'C.OI~ B\.~~\<..'i:.\ ,,,,ii"t\\ - . ~e.~ O$\C~ ~Q~~O()~ ~\~~"E:.!J ~~o ~Os~Q: S*b~~'-\\..\t . ?L~~\ $l~ s ~ypRC)~ t.c 'O-.! -~l\~\\\~'\O~ ~~\\ ~ 't-.\u.o l\C~ I,)~ 1. "I. ~ '. L?t \<-'E:. 'J\) Pts '?t \ ~ Go\" () "\ f\\: ~'iC:.~'O~ c,ou~\'.\; ~''(\\G..' f\ ~~ L\~ ~ 't'\\~. t\~, ~ ~~'-\>~\\c. \'\ \lJ12-'\) -;:.'. b-J.B-o CDR ~ ZONING '0 ~ 'l'BCBNICAL SIIIlVICBS ----_tan dtV~ 6200 tfO C3 1_ 31 T24N R5E E 1/2 REPLY TO ATTENTION OF Regulatory Branch DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY SEAITLE DISTRICT, CORPS OF ENGINEERS P.O. BOX 3755 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98124-3755 NOV 2 3 tm4 Mr. Marc and Mrs. Kaaren Pritchard 2807 Mountainview Avenue Renton, Washington 98055 Reference: 200400081 Pritchard, Marc and Kaaren Dear Mr. and Mrs. Pritchard: We have reviewed your application for after-the-fact Department of the Anny authorization to repair a pier and.piling, retain a boatlift, and place gravel along the shoreline. The U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers' (CorPs) regulatory program provides f~r the authorization of certain work that isminor in nature, would nofhave significant individual or cumulative impacts on the environment, and should,encounter no appreciable opposition <by a type of perinit known as a "Letter ofPennission" (LOP). We have determined that your proposal to repair or replace up to ten piles, repair decking, caps, stringers, and fascia, and retain a boatlift meet these requirements and is authorized by this LOP. ill addition, the Corps has issued a series of nationwide permits (NWPs) to authorize specific categories of work that have minimal impacts on the aquatic envrronment when conducted in accordance with the pennit conditions (Federal Register, January 15, 2002, Vol. 67;No.1O). Base~ on the information you provided to us, . NWP 18, Minor Fill, authorizes your proposal place up to 10 cubic yards total of rock, cobble, and gravel along the shoreline. The existing and proposed work would occur in Lake Washington,. at Renton, King County,. Washington. The purpose of the proposed project is to provide watercraft storage and safe water access, and to mitigate for aquatic impacts from unauthorized pier and bulkhead construction. < Your authorization to conduct the proposed work under this LOP and NWP 18 is contingent upon you conducting the work as shown in the enclosed drawings dated November 10, 2004, (which are made part of this permit), compliance with the enclosed Letter of Permission General Conditions, with the terms and conditions of the enclosed Nationwide Permit 18, Terms and Conditions, and compliance with the following special conditions: < ' -2- a. For the protection of bald eagles, chinook salmon, and bull trout, you may conduct the authorized in-water work during the period from July 16 through October 31 of any year this perniit is valid. You may not conduct any of the authorized in-water work during the period from November 1 through July 15 of any year this permit is valid. b. You must implement and abide by the Endangered Species Act (ESA) requirements . and/or agreements set forth in the documents entitled, programmatic biological.evaluati6n specific project information forms for the "Installation or Replacement of One (1) Watercraft Lift Per Property," dated June 10, 2004, "Nearshore Fill," dated June 15, 2004, and ''Replacement of up to Eighteen (18) Existing Piling," dated July 12, 2004, prepared by Seaborn Pile Driving Company. Both agencies will be informed of this permit issuance. Failure to comply with the commitments made inthis document constitutes non-compliance with the ESA and your Corps permit. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)lNational Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) is the appropriate authority to determine compliance with ESA. Your ~8~orization to conduct the proposed ramp and float modification under this LOP expires .2 3 2!X1I. Please remember that failure to comply with the terms and conditions of this LOP, including any special conditions, in.valida~es your authorization and could.resultin a violation of Federal law. Any change in the plans for this work will require that you submit revised drawings to this office and receive our written approval of those changes prior'to . conducting the work. The proposed pile stub excavation and clean sand backfill activities verified under this NWP 18 authorization must be completed within two years from the date of this letter. If the authorized work has not been completed by that date, you should contact us to find out what permit requirements are then in effect. Upon completing the authorized work, you must fill out and return the enclosed Certificate o/Compliance:with Department o/the Army Permit form to the address indicated on the form. Your signature on this form is our aSsurance you have conducted the work and any required mitigation in accordance with the terms and conditions of this LOP and NWP, including any special conditions. In order for this NWP 18 authorization to be valid, the State of Washington Department of Ecology (Ecology) must have issued or waived Section 401 Water Quality Certification (WQC) and, for Washington's 15 ~oastal counties, concurred with or waived a Coastal Zone Management (CZM) consistency determination. Based on our review of the proposed work, the Corps has determined that the proposed work will be in compliance with the State's WQC and CZM consistency determination concurrence requirements for this NWP. Therefore, no further coordination with Ecology is required. -3- We have reviewed your project pursuant to the requirements of the ESA. After consulting with the NMFS and USFWS, we have determined that this project will meet the requirements of the ESA provided you comply with special conditions "a" and "b" listed above. We have also reviewed your project pursuant to the requirements of the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, as amended by the 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act, and determined that the proposed action will not adversely affett Essential Fish Habitat for federally managed fisheries in Washington. Under the provisions 'ofthe Corps' Regulatory Program Administrative Appeal Process, you have the right to appeal this LOP permit decision in accordance With the enclosed Notification of Administrative Appeal Options and Process and Request ForAppeal. Ifwe have not received an objection from you within 60 days of the date of this letter, or if you conduct the authorized work, we will presume that you have accepted, and will comply with, all terms and conditions of this LOP. This authorization resolves your violation of Section 10 of the 1899 Rivers and Harbors Act. For future reference, regulations and guidelines implementing our permit program under. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act require that you obtain a permit prior to the discharge of any dredged or fill material into waters of the U.S. including wetlands (definitions enclosed). Under . Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, you are required to obtain ~ permit prior to performing work in a navigable water of the U.S. Please contact this office prior to the commencement of any work in these areas to obtain the appropriate approval.· While this project will not require further authorization from us, please note that it must comply with all State, local, and other Federal requirements that may apply. For example, you should contact the Washington State Department of Natural Resources before starting work for a determination of leasing requirements for work over submerged· landS. For further information, we recommend you contact the Washington Department of Ecology's Permit Assistance Center at (800) 917-:0043 or, on the Internet, at http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/sea/pac/. Please remember that failure to comply with the terms and conditions of this LOP and NWP, including any special conditions, invalidates your authorization and could result in a violation of Federallaw. Any change in the plans for this work will require that you submit revised drawings to this office and receive our written approval ofthose changes prior to conducting the work. Thank you for your cooperation during the permit process. Your efforts help us protect our nation's aquatic resources. Please remember to fill out and return the compliance certification form within 30 days of completing the authorized work. We are interested in your thoughts and opinions concerning your .experience with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District's Regulatory Program. Please complete a Customer Service Survey form. The form is available on our website at: http://per2.nwp.usace.army.mil/survey.html. ·' -4- , A copy of this letter, with enclosures, will be provided to Seaborn Pile Driving Company, Mr. Jeffrey Sidebotham, 9311 Southeast 36th Street, Mercer Island, Washington 98040. If you have any questions about this letter or our regulatory program, please contact Ms. Suzanne Skadowski, by telephone (206) 764-6984, or by email Suzanne.A.Skadowski@usace.anny.mil. BY AUTHORITY OF THE SECRETARY OF THE ARMY: Enclosures cc: USFWS -Lacey, Attn: 'Karen Myers Ms. Wendy Livezey . Mill Creek WDFW Enforcement Officer 16018 Mill Creek Boulevard Mill Creek, Washington 98012 W A Dept ofFish and Wildlife Mr. Stewart Reinbold 3190 -160th Avenue Southeast Bellevue, Washlngton 98008 City of Renton Ms. Laureen Nicolay 1055 South Grady Way' Renton, Washington '98055 / ECOLOGY DNR Compliance File . ~,l/rf~ ~ebra M. Lewis Colonel, Corps of Engineers District Engineer --<;;T- '~1 C) C) .,;::' ~ i.t::I l.L.i ~,j\ -:-l,,J .>- Q:;: 0 Z .. ~ . '\~ -• w • . .. . . '. D "":'"~;'t\()~~ ~~C'-~ ~..: ~",( ;0 ~~ ~\lI\\~~1). 1>' (3"\~S~~) , ~~.~~\"'tc\~ ~~"Q~\o\C.f':. :t ~o'i" t'\Q0.4 ~ ,"~ '-\\~~ ~"'C. ~ \ ., .... ·,Wi\'. ~ 13 0,<0 r 2 004 ooo~l j P~rr.Cl-4~RP} MARe. ~~ .. ~ .. :. . ',',:,,:': King COWIty Del'arnnen, or Assnsmenrs PIlfYt:,,( J)-I1I0. J04" "'lIree' ~: ~ .. Area:O'~ s.~ Iv .. : Q.S.T.~ ; u.n.z ... ;:1/(" : 12UT T~.,. : R R •• p : R I.f'IY : 2tOO 91DCl1 : A LAr: .a "l'OfMI'V.AcId_; 2117 MOUJlT'A1H YII!W A'I ""EHTON ~lfIts Uqa a-; )l11.UIAH8 UC WN GARD.,. 0' ID&H • 1 POR BEG AT MXN OP • Ut LOT If WI11f .oR UUH IULG aUf & ITS ~D 11 Fno .... y LIt N II' IVW'" NW\.y AL~ SWl.Y UUUT'TIt S S'I DIlG 21 MIN 04.c W~Z ""To PO.a" u , 1M LD8 A~ I.UlII"OR IIR MrGH CI' Malt Ut WITH ,. LH l.OT sa ~ S .. DEQ a iii ... 04 sec W .. 711 PT ftC H -44 OEO ,. MI.. 01 SU: W 1G.n flfTO PT weH II"'AS I U DeQ ,. MlN .. 2 lIEC W ". POll TM N. Q ceo 11 1IIIH.a SEC 11'0 Pall TvPa'f!t Accoynt! .b!ll!t )oI8u "Wei",: 3"" •• FaIltRy ~1ItIt UN : S1np Pmllly(RIIoIIh.aoIl~ ~UnU$llllll:1 laM; 0-: 111111120G0 SoMer SY'~ : Publla C:fta: l.DC : 140 &i", ~_ Val: 2S0.000 1aZ'Y~~t: 0 °illfit<g: U..Jld View!! !.oil A~nICf: . Cr,mClic: C __ Cl .. : i"4IritaNI: .!.'4"ntg. Snll/4 • Un? W;lcvrtrom ucalian ; \.10_ 'Null a.n_. t..a .... -:-odBlS,,-; U~" ... Wid! 'n.,.r~lIftISho,. .. RCb ;t..cftC:.d : UI Oallrl FoXIor: IJ S. 31 ~E ,.SU "111II1I/fMd; ~I UM if. IIQIIUII.:O CuItI!m ZIInin; : ... Wallt S,-: WaMf Olstnc:\ (,;)\$qIl; 110 R.u1c:t.. Si=sna.,. : Vat I.an4I1;I 08.: ~1""nT Ro8o Accn.: 1'1I1t11C SPIC s..t1ace : ~ lIound: I.UoW~·: e.rw:.Iellt La*.~SA: l.n.,~lC; Clher: Aaout RIg".: M" i'I1IXI~ InftQIIIC8 : :-Coli "'~or Cul~ : y," FQ~II:40 R.5~ V1CIN·I1Y MAP !NO SCALE LEGAL DESCRIPTLON DA1"'-. ~'0JIS1;:-D; i,-la-cd J,K~~ . J)~"", PtZlTCHA C'.D ., MA~c.. PURPOSE: to provide watercraft , storage, sate access to the water,: and reastabnsh shoreline habitat OAru~: C.O.::. 0.0' ~"T •. 1919 ADJACENT PROPERlY OWNERS: SEE SHEEr fl. 1- . Seabom Pile Orkling Company<!) 1441 N. Nonhlako We'! Sealll., WA 86103 (206) 504503828 • (206).545..:5839 (Fax) s~~ ~Sol tt\O\\'t-\\~\~ ~\~'-,,\ ~Il-~' .. ::: ~bl\~,~\1\.; tlENTC <\ ~ OS'~ VICINI1Y MAP' NO . SCALE RetaIn boa1Ilft,';':--';-. ----- • teplace decking, caps, stringers and 10 pIling, and place 10 cubio yards of clean rock IN: LAKE WASHINGTON AT: ~~~~"'- COUNiY OF: KINe SiAT'E: WASHiNGTON APPL BY: r-\w~ .. C.' ~~'c..\\fti2S> • PACE:'~' OF'6 CATE: "\. -lb-b'l ,- ... ..,. ::: I n: --000( 'Be 1"1-'\ ~'\~ "s. i9l.\\o~ H---,),"'-it~~~;j:;~~~~' ....... 1.....JI,~':5W'--• .,. 'I ;-h :: \ \ =tC ::' \... . , Au... E:j.\~T,~~ ~\\... .... -;. "To. ,"f1~ .~~~"\-e--cc, o ~ ~~,\,,\..~,",\'J!!..O p.~ ~e~~~~f\"~\ • ll."t __ \'''-\,~ ~\L~:' \0 ~'C;. R~\"~\~~P oV-9--c..~~~c:..~,? ( JO,o,~iL\ { 8" ~\'9, ~~"\~"} """''f\'''' ~\~S'E,(:\'~~ b'll."\·"'o~~ V-.~~ .~\.~,<p-:t~~\iatJ:.. ~ ~(.~ ~E.a\o'\ \'0 1>\~~ ~~"'~\~~ ~~""\,,,\\~ i." ::: \~~\ I==================::;:r:: Retain boat lift. ~-----f\ . PURPOSE; to provide watercraft replace decking, capS: slringel'$ t' U ~ ~ oS\c.·, stctage, safe access to the water, and 10 piling, and place 10 cubic and reestablish shoreline habitat yards of clean rock , \:If>t\U~ ~ c.()~ .."l.).&'S" ~")\. \C\\~ I~~ L~\i:.~~~~~\~~$)~ PI '\ ~ ~'i:.~~o-J ~\:) j"~ ~ ?~.i\ '"( O'-N ~ i:.~~ . c....~~$l---'\ ~ v \ ,\ (, , \) .. ).,)'. ~\' h \~l F\~\,L\<".p..~\: f'l'.~-t\~~<-~9-\\<..\\."A..O .l~n N\o-.o.)o\\~\\J\h4C'-N ~~ ~'C.~ \'ol\l ,\"'\-1,. '\~O~b ~5U< ~C).A~fY--'~\'-J ~~~\" t:l1~1\- <\~Oi11 .. ~. ~: .~ ........ f't~ "Ct-\T: ~ ~,,"\\o~u ~\.'" \)~",,\\ ~l'\ c.,.o ' b~ : 1-I~-~' . 6 '3 DF' b ' 20040008'1..; PRncHAf2.C>,.MIl-{tC. ~ \ \\~~ B-v.~'A f:l.\"'"'\ \\C>~'\:... ~ CO·O\. ~OI.I.~\~~ ... J\t.'H \~ , ~~\.:.\\O~ ~'N.'i\ ,,~oc:;t,,· ~'1-l;\. \~C.\ . \).,\. o~~~ ~~~'P'o (" ~ ~ 'i. ,<.. \'1\ ~ 50, ~IA c,,\ IJ.. It. \'":- i:~ia~ '1",~ Vi); u o s·,~ \~; PA~ ~~.s:~ ~ II-Io-a':! Dh'J"(i . Jes '''''1'~S '. t NtfJ ~4~~ "II) -nHS £:1fi)1 Sil'l.'!. B, 3. ~I.\~\'(\ ,Li t,(d~~~~~~~~~~~ \. 'l~.!) ,- ,o~~· /. ~ t """""'E..Po 0 Ei-\~\. \t-\. O(l\)~"'L"-r. ~.,..\j.} ~~ .--:-....w..!...~---l,u...0 =~'f'L~\. ,.; __ . N. . to'/.. \ i '! ( 4 (..4 ~\<... 't \~, '1 -) 'To ~t:.. ~ 'L '1\, t)"..\ \:.D E i-\ ~\ \ \.\ ~ <?.Q(..,( "bl.-\\.. \l \\ ~ "''0. ' \O~~'tt\,,\,..) -------...., 200 Y. 000 %'1 ... 0_ Pt{I"cHA-~[) ~ MARC!.. ~ ~ \\ , .. 'r\~ ~ I~~~~. /~ Roc..~ -ec~ W\ -~'~\~ i. ~ \"h. \ \"\\~ \\-'f.. ~)}J...o,.),\ L~~~ ~ ~s It \~~\O ~ ( 3 c..\A~$. '\ ~~ -\--') ~~ ~e. ~'C:.~CN~~ I I . '''P~~? oc;..~ /, 9..~ .. ~ 5\ ~~ L\'~ \\ ~ 'A o'O..'E:, l\\o,1~ "f'f!..o?o~~O! 'R'C.\"i\O\li.. ~"\.~IA\~q,ft\"Z-.'C;..O . \-\~~'\'~\' . ..~,,\\ a. ~~~\oi2..'t. \"\~'a\\A\ . . .~\', ~~~~ ~ ~!)'c\ \.\.\.~ "\0,,", D~\""W\: c..oi. 0.0" E-->1 \ ~ \e, A'\'; ~~~\Q~ " . _ 0 _ • A~~. "?~~ p.e,f{, .... \ ~w\'--\~~~o \') oJ-~ (:) S" M b'" w"\ '" \~ '-.\ \ 'to""'"' ~Q.. •. , R~ \..\ "0"-> l'~ y\--q 'a 05'" b .J.\ .:i ~ \'l":""o~~\~'~ \,\\~'N ~<?.\\.lr't.--.- C~~" ..... \ '. ~\~U. .. ~ .... ~~? k~~ ""\ .;' "fi\"~~_ \:~\\s".U~t)_ ... _ " ~'8~1 ~'~~\f'.\~ ~\'t.~ . $Q.. ' R ~ ",f,,\t:\ ~ r \~"". <\ & 0 S-b 1".)", .. ",., II .....,_ .... _,. ... ., ~ \ I, -04 ,,=-, ,. s FT ,a\s\ ~()~~ .:1.& 0 1 ~\ Q v. ~\ ~ \~ \I\~~ ~~Q. \~ t:-_ R~~\ol-\ I~Y\' ,\~o5"b ~ I I ! , I I I j ), o s '\ki!.~t)~1:C "4!lJ\ tl R.o,,~ S l\oit't.L\~~ \\~~ \1l'r\ Ci\~4}J\ ~" Co()£. . .:l\.9\ E.<.a.\ t ~ \ \ Pt~ 'S w '? <fe "'~ "'''1 o~ ~a~ ~ .l.BoS-""OU,~,,,\,,,\l\a..t-t \)e..\'-I('t-~E.~i;o~ \j..\~ .l..sn f'S\O\4't-l\"I'U't\ \l\t:.,~ ~e.\\1t..-. $.£.,..\\b~ .'-N\':\ . It III a. ~ a. I?~?os~: ~to, ~ 'B\.9\~\<..~\ WIT\\ - 't~-.;:) O~\!:Q... $"'~~~o1) ~\~~~~ ~~o ~OS~b: S*b~"C.'-\\..\t. crL,",\-\\ \-.1(, ~ -:t.~', L'p.~t:. \I\\?t~ "\).\~\o~ P\ '\ ~, ~'i:~O ~ c..OU'f:o\.\'\; Kl)\~' " ' , ~~~'-\<.ft~\~ "'"(.., ~~~'-~~0C.\'\~1l' t' • r-t, ifla . ~,.. n ". ""::"".:", '~ <t ~ -to C o c ::r- (j () 'J. tJ It t; ~ ~ cJ. .ID-.. CS; ~ ,;r r-I H==~_I '. SEABOR.N PILE DRIVING COMPANY® City Of Renton ESTABLISHED 1947 THE OGDEN BUILDING 931 1 SE 36"' STREET, SUITE 204 MERCER ISLAND, WASHINGTON 98040 . (206) 23&1700 . FACSIMILE: (206) 23&2700 ~\ WEBSITE: WWW.SEABORNPILEDRlVING.COM Planning/BuildinglPublic Works Department 1055 South Grady Way Renton, W A 98055 Attn: Ms. Nancy Weil Dear Ms. Weil, DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON NOV 1 6 2004 RECEIVED November 15,2004 In regard to the Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Project #LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF, please find the following information and revised drawings. Mr. Pritchard wishes to omit the jet-ski lift installation from the application and retain the existing boat lift station only. We have provided this information to The Corps of Engineers (Ms. Suzanne Skadowski 206-764- 6984) as well. (copy enclosed) Very Truly Yours, SEABORN PILE DRIVING COMPANY c ~~,,~ Je ey~bmham ~ ~y .... 1 ( ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION & PUBLIC HEARING ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) r ~ POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS oi=i:~N ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION I ~~'o(;!-PROJECT NAME: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration ,& Boatllft~ PROJECT NUMBER: LUA04-115, SM, SMC·H, ECF -' LOCATION: 2807 Mountain View Drive DESCRIPTION: The applicant Is requesting Envaronmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Pennlt and a Shoreline Substantlal Development Pennlt for the construction of residential boat and Jet Ski lifts, a rock retaining wall and restoration of the shoreline. The site Is located on the shores of La~e Washington, and Is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 ~quare foot site has 2,205 square feet of land outside the ordInary high water mark (OHWM). The site I, zoned Residential - 8 (R-a) and Is developed with an existing alngle-famlly dwelling and dock. THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEVV COMMITTEE (ERG) HAS DETERMINED THAT THE PROPOSED ACTION DOES NOT HAVE A SIGNIFICANT ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE ENVIRONMENT. Appeal_ of the environmental determination mUlt be flied In writing on or before 5:00 PM on November 29, 2004. Appeal. must be flied In writing together with the requlrect $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional Information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the RanlOn City Clerk', OfIIce, (425) 43D-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 DECEMBER 7, 2004 AT 9:00 AM TO CONSIDER THE SHORELINE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. IF THE ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION IS APPEALED, THE APPEAL WILL BE HEARD AS PA. AT OF THIS PUBLIC HEARING. FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, PLEASE CO:NTACT THE ,CITY OF RENTON, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE VVlTHOUT.P.ROPER AUTHORIZATION Please Inc!ude.the proJect NUMBER,_hen cal!Ir.!i:for proper file Identification. f"'N"~~\\'" N rV1~" .. _ . ..J.L __ ~._r·SS·ION··· ()~"" : ~ .. ~~'\ ~";;" ~ '" --• ~. -<)'.~' , ; .:8 ~OTA~).-~". ~ ~ : : tTl. ~ ~ • ....... C/); ! ~ (J):. ,oUBUC : : ~.A. .~~ " -y • .' ~ ~ CERTIFICATION "I.t:-i-..· .. 8-f2 01 .·'~O'; I, f~(;lb ~)"'1~Y1 ,hereb~certifythat? coN.fO)fwi·-;;'~~':. .. -.:- above document were posted by me in ~ conspicuous places on I~fi~~~~~'" the described property on -~L..J~h.I'!....-t=;:z...:+---------f=~-- c--JlJ/lJu ~1.;~~ Signe~: ~~~~_ ATTEST:~b~~e~ ~f!Ti-!: ~e.~tary :Ubli,sp in fer ~ .te of ~ . washingtonreSidingB~~ ,on the c '1...c)-/" dayof=n.~V' cSXJCJf MARILYN KAMCHEFF MY APPOINTMENT EXPIRES 6-29-07 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION & PUBLIC HEARING ISSUANCE OF A DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) POSTED TO NOTIFY INTERESTED PERSONS OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION r I ~ PROJECT NAME: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration & Boatlift ~' PROJECT NUMBER: LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF f- LOCATION: 2807 Mountain View Drive ii' DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of residential boat and J~,t Ski lifts, a rock retaining wall and restoration of the shoreline. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has 2,205 square feet of land :;:"utside the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) and is developed with .iI~ existing single-family dwelling and dock. .,,' 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 PM on November 29, 2004. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110.B. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. 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 DECEMBER 7, 2004 AT 9:00 AM TO CONSIDER THE SHORELINE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. 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, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISION AT (425) 430-7200. DO NOT REMOVE THIS NOTICE WITHOUT PROPER AUTHORIZATION CITY OF RENTON CURRENT PLANNING DIVISION AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAILING On the 10th day of November, 2004, I deposited in the mails of the United States, a sealed envelope containing ERC Determination documents. This information was sent to: iI\t1arc & Kaaren Pritchard Owner/Applicant ·~eff Sidebotham Contact (Signature of Sender): STATE OF WASHINGTON ....... ,""""\" ....... "N KA" .. "I _--~\.' ••••••• '",~ ~tt, -.' '. ~";T-. ' :-~ .,:~~ . ~..t ... ~/, , ~.~. ..(). -.' , : :0 ~OTA.L? ~ .. ~ ~ ::t> y (t'I-' ~ ) SS ~ : -._ (J) : ~ COUNTY OF KING ) ~ ~ \. PUBLIC ./ ~ 1 ~ 7 ~ : ~. '" ~·"~'29-01."" ~o.: I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker "III OJ:"·w·"~\~~ .. --- signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and voluntaty~(t~~ig uses ar. d purposes mentioned in the instrument. Dated: if I '1d?? I/)r Notary (Print): _______ ~'7:i~,+!\.Fl~.!L:::;Y.::,;:N::::Kt:=\1\~.Jir:7.,l-::7lEr-~-F:::_:_::_:_:_:__--______ _ My appointment expires: H'I ,t?I:;Oi@;ldJT EXh~ES 0-29-07 Pritchard Shoreline Restoration & Boatlift LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF ~~ .u. ~', '..u. -Kathy Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor November 10, 2004 Jeff Side both am Seaborn Pile Oriving , , 9311' SE 36th Street #204 " Merc~r Island, WA 98040 . :. '. ' . SUBJECT: Pritchard' Shoreline R~storation& Boatlift LUA04-115,SM, SMC-H, ECF Dear Mr. Sidebotham: CITY.F ,RENTON PJanningIBuildinglPublic Wolks Department Gregg ZimmermanP.E., Administrator .' . . , This letter is wri~en 'onbehalf of the 'Environmental ReviewCommittee(ERC) and is to advise you that , they have completed their review of the sl,Jbject:prbject:Th~ERCissued a threshold DeterminCition of ' Non-Significance-Mitigated' with Mitigation' rv1easurel). Please' riHer, to the enclosed Mitigation Measures document.' " , ,,: ' Appeals, of theer:'lvironment~ldeterin!nation mList be'filed 'jn wr:iting on or before 5:00 PM November, 29~ 2004. Appeals, mU,st b~filed in w.ritingJogetherViitpthe,fE:1quired, $7S.00 application fee with: Hearing Exaniiner, Cityc;>f Rshton, 10q,S 8,ollth':,Gtady Way, R~nton;, WA 980SS.Appealsto the Examiner are governed by C'ity of Renton "Muiiicipal ,Code Section 4-8~:11 o. Additional information regarding the appeal process maybe ~bt~in~~fr~rittQ~;He,n:idn CityCI~ik's;Office, (425) 430~6StO~ ," ' " -. . ',-. ," ',.", ... , -.,..... . ,'." -', .. A Public Hearing will, beheld by the Rentoh'He~fjrig EiCirniner in the CouiiC;il Chambers on the seventh floor of City HaJI,1 OS5 South':Grady Way" Renton, Washington; on Dec:ember 7, 2004 at 9:00 AM to cO!1sider the Shoreline: Conditional U,sePermit: The applicant' or re'presentative(s) of the applicant is required to bepresentat the publichearing~ 'A copy of the staff Jeportwill be mailed to you' one week 'before the hearing. If the Environm~ntal:DeterITIiriatibn is appealed"theappe,al will be heard as part of this public nearing. ", "" " ',',,: ,: '" . ,", ' ",:, """ ' , ,," .",' , , The preceding information WiUassist you'inpl;~nhing'foriniplementationofyour project and enable you to exercise your appeal rights more fully, if you choos~ to do so. If you have any questions or desire' clarification of the' above, please c~llme at (42S) 430~ 7270. . ' , For the Environmental Review Committee, C\,,,"&DJ)· NancyWeil Associate Planner cc: Marc &'Kaaren Pritchard I Owners Enclosure, ------l-OS-S-S-o-uth---,--G-ra-d.,-y-W,-a-y--R-e-n-to-n-, W,-as-hi-n-gt-on-98-0-S-S ------. ~. * This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% postcoosumer AHEAD OF THE CURV'E Agencies See Attached (Signature of Sender)_: -r.:.~IIL--"-'-~-""';:~'--::..o:::::...c=-=--------------;:#'..,~ ... "'7.";-;":I.";=::""'+t' 7~ __ ....... \LYN """ :-~~ ••••••• ~A-" STATE OF WASHINGTON ) f .... ~t-/I\SS/O;:.:"7""" ) SS -'cP 'V''-A-', : ... NO?,..., ~" ~~ ) :: "f.<'> "I:) ~ ". , '-(J) • ,,'7).. -. -n ~ ~ -I: ..() ., ~: "T1 ~ COUNTY OF KING ~ ~ ~ V,& 0:: I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker \ ~ \~\==l (Ie .f f signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be his/her/their free and v~,~~~UG1'~~efises and purposes mentioned in the instrument. lilt ~SHING'\ ....... -- Dated:..--:I.:.:.......z1 1--.-,;1.-::::.-qf-'-'IQ"'--J1~ ~aJ ~ '\\h",,"''''' N~bIiC in and for~shington Notary (Print): ___ ---;.;Fvn;;,;,P.,;,.;;R!:;:.,lyr,~,J=KA~M,:::.:CH~£::...:FF"---------------- My appointment expires: rJlYAPPOINTMENTEXFi~ES 6-29-07 Pritchard Shoreline Restoration & Boatlift LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF template -affidavit of service by mailing Dept. of Ecology * Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region * Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Jamey Taylor * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Servo Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERe DETERMINATIONS) VJDFW -Stewart Reinbold * Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. c/o Department of Ecology * :3190 160th Ave SE Attn. SEPA Reviewer Eellevue, WA 98008 39015 -172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Duwamish Tribal Office * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program 4717 W Marginal Way SW * Seattle, WA 98106-1514 Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation * Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Olympia, W A 98504-8343 City of Newcastle City of Kent \ Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director 13020 SE 72nd Place 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, WA 98032-5895 Puget Sound Energy City or Tukwila Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Joe Jainga 6300 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 Title Examiner 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124-4018 Note: If the Notice of Appli cation states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the r-.otice of application. * Also note, do not mail Jarney Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send her the ERC Determination paperwork. template -affidavit of service by mailing , Mayor November 10, 2004 Washington State Department of Ecology Environmental Review Se<:;tion PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-770~ CITY.F RENTON PlanningIBuildmwPublicWorks Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator Subject:,·, ", '"-~"'Envirdhmental Determiriations '. /' . ".._..", ..... '."h.~;';.:~.~... _:""~' ... _. -;L"~:: ..-(i.. .....-• T~arismitted herewith is a copy of ttie Environmental Determination forthe following project reviewed by the EnvironrnentarReview Committee (ERC) on November 9,2004: . . DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED PROJECT NAME: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and BoaVJet Ski Lifts LUA04-115"SM, SMC"H, ECF PROJ,ECT NUMBER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: .• 286~ Mountain View Drive •. ' . . The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit ,for,the construction of residential boat and Jet Ski lifts" a rock retaining wall and restoration of the shoreline. The site is:located on the'shoresof ,La:k~:Washingtori, and is addressed as2aOTMountain . View Drive. ThEU3,162 square foot site ti~s 2,205 square feet of land .outsidettie-dr:dil"!~ryhighwater mark (OHWM). The site is zoned . Residential-8 (R~8)-~nd is develbpedwith.an existing single-family , dwelling and,doCk; , ' . . . Appeals of· ,the, envir6nmenfQI detertnination niust be filed. in writing on or before 5:00 PM November 29, 2004. Appeals mi:Jst be"filed in writing together with the 'required $75;00 application fee with: Hearing Exal'11iner, City of Rentori,'1955 South GradyWay, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are. governed by City ofHe,nton MuniCipal G.ode Sectiori 4-8-110. Additiona' information regarding the appeal processmay be obtained from :the Renton City Clerk'sOffice; (425) 430~651.0. If you have qu~stioris, please caUmeat (425) 430-7270 . . . For the Erwironmental Review Committee; .G\~~wJl NancyWeil Associate Planner • . . ci:: King County Wastewater Treatment Division WDFW, Stewart Reinbold David F. Dietzman, Department of Natural Resources WSDOT,. Northwest Region Duwamish Tribal Office Rod Malcom, Fishenes; Muckleshoot Indian Tribe (Ordinance) Melissa Calvert, Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program US Army Corp. of Engineers Stephanie Kramer, Office of Archaeology & Historic Preservation Enclosure ~ ----'-----1:-:0=-=~-=-5 -=So-u~th:-G-=-ra-:dy-W:=-. =--ay----=R=-e--:o-to-n--=, W:=-=a:-s-=-hl=--· n-gt-o-n-=9-=-80-=-S=-=S:-. ------R E N TON * This paper contains 50% recycled material, 30% posl consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED MITIGATION MEASURES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF PROJECT NAME: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration & Boatlift APPLICANT: Marc & Kaaren Pritchard LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 2807 Mountain View Drive DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of residential boat and Jet Ski lifts, a rock retaining wall and restoration of the shoreline. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has 2,205 square feet of land outside the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) and is developed with an existing single-family dwelling and dock LEAD AGENCY: MITIGATION MEASURES: The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section 1. Temporary Erosion Control shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the Department of Ecology Standards to the satisfaction of the representative of the Development Services Division for the duration of the project's construction. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations contained within the Biological Evaluation prepared by Shoreline Research dated September 8, 2004 with regards to site preparation, disturbance activities and permissible time periods for construction activities to take place. Construction should be restricted during the migrating juvenile salmonid window between July 16th and December 31 st. CITY <>F RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE-MITIGATED ADVISORY NOTES APPLICATION NO(S): LUA04-11S, SM, SMC-H, ECF P140JECT NAME: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration & Boatlift AIPPLICANT: Marc & Kaaren Pritchard LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: 2807 Mountain View Drive DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applic.ant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of residential boat a..,d Jet Ski lifts, a rock retaining wall and restoration of the shoreline. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has 2,205 square feet oil' land outside the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-B) and is developed 'With an existing single-family dwelling and dock. LEAD AGENCY: The City oil' Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Developm ent Planning Section Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental inforlTJation provided in conjunction with the environmental determination_ Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not su~ject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. 11 _ Applicant shall obtain required permits from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the US Corp of Engineers. 2. The City of Renton owns and operates an 8'" diameter Sanitary sewer Main located in Lake Washington, along the water frontage. In order to avoid darTlaging the existing Sewer Line, and to facilitate installation of a new Cleanout, it is requested that the contractor coordinate the shoreline work with the City of Renton Maintenance personnel (425-430-7279), at least 72 hours prior to beginning construction. S. Should any archaeological deposits or hum an remains be encountered during project work, work shall immediately cease and the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation shall be notified. CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) APPLICATION NO(S): LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF APPLICANT: Marc & Kaaren Pritchard . PROJECT NAME: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration & Boatlift DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of residential boat and Jet Ski lifts, a rock retaining wall and restoration of the shoreline. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has 2,205 square feet of land outside the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) and is developed with an existing single-family dwelling and dock. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: LEAD AGENCY: 2807 Mountain View Drive The City of Renton Department of Planning/Building/Public Works Development Planning Section The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21 C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committee under their authority of Section 4-6-6 Renton Municipal Code. These conditions are necessary to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM November 29, 2004. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. PUBLICATION DATE: DATE OF DECISION: SIGNATURES: Dennis Culp, Administrator Community Services diz:L Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief Renton Fire Department NOVEMBER 15, 2004 NOVEMBER 9, 2004 11/1/ () i DATE' • DATE To: : ..... ' :, .. ~;;::-:: },: "-:" ---: .'.' ,,;~: '-', Gregg Zimmerman, Planning/Building/Public Works Administrator Dennis Culp, Community SeNices Administrator Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief From: Jennifer Henning, Development Planning [;M~eting:"D~te~;!! 'j';r~~§:d?y;Novetnb~r9,,20'04' ;~! , 0lm'irne :!!!:"~~;_ ''t ' "9:pOf,\M '[6batic"i;~> " Sixth Floor C6nferer\'C~Room#620 , ~ . ... ... . ,,_":.i ", .'. '.' . '. .... .: . Agenda listed below. Pritchard Shoreline Restoration (Wei/) LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of residential boat and Jet Ski lifts, a rock retaining wall and restoration of the shoreline. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has 2,205 square feet of land outside the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) and is developed with an existing single-family dwelling and dock. 2005 Update to the City of Renton Water System Plan (Fiala) LUA04-122, ECF The Water Utility Division of the City of Renton is updating the Water System Plan adopted in 1998 and approved in 1999, and complies with WAC 246-290. The plan covers the following: description of the existing drinking water system, land use in the water service and study area, projected water demands, water sources, wellhead protection, water rights, long range water supply plan, water quality plan, policies and criteria, system analysis; planned system improvements, operation and maintenance of the system, financial management, service area and intertie agreements, Cross-Connection Control Plan, Water Conservation Program, Drinking Water Quality Monitoring Plan and standard specifications. Strander BoulevardlSW 27th Street Extension (Jordan) LUA04-123, SM, ECF The City of Renton (lead agent), along with the City of Tukwila, are requesting environmental (SEPA) review and Shoreline Substantial Development Permit approval for the construction of a new segment of Strander BoulevardlSW 27th Street between West Valley Highway (SR 181) and Oakesdale Avenue SW. Tt.e project also includes the widening of SW 27th Street from four lanes to five lanes, including landscaping s~rips and pedestrian/bicycle facilities, between Oakesdale Avenue SW and East Valley Road. cc: K. Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor J. Covington, Chief Administrative Officer A. Pietsch, EDNSP Administrator ® B. Wolters, EDNSP Director ® J. Gray, Fire Prevention N. Watts, P/B/PW Development Services Director ® F. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner S. Engler, Fire Prevention ® J. Medzegian, Council S. Meyer, P/B/PW Transportation Systems Director R. Lind, Economic Development L. Warren, City Attorney ® STAFF REPORT City of Renton Department of Planning / Building / Public Works ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COMMITTEE A. BACKGROUND ERC MEETING DA TE Project Name Applicant File Number Project Manager Project Description Project Location Exist. Structure Area Site Area RECOMMENDATION Project Location Map November 9,2004 Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boat/Jet Ski Lifts Marc and Kaaren Pritchard LUA04-115 ECF, SM, SMC-H NancyWeil The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction o~ residential boat and Jet Ski lifts, a rock retaining wall and restoration of the shoreline_ The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has 2,205 square feet of land outside the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) and is developed with an existing single-family dwelling and dock. (Project Descriptiol7 continued on next page). 2807 Mountain View Drive 400 gsf for residence and 492 gsf dock/pier 13,162 gsf; 2,205 gsf outside of OHWM Proposed New Structure Area 123 gsf Total Building Area gsf N/A Staff Recommend that the Environmental Review Committee issue a Determination or Non-Significance-Mitigated. ERCRPT-example City of Renton PIBIP W Department PRITCHARD SHORELINE RESTORA TIL REPORT AND DECISION OF NOVEMBER 9. 2004 PROJECT DESCRIPTION (CONTINUED) Em mental Review Committee Staff Report LUA04-II5, ECF, SM, SMC-H Page 2 0/4 The proposal, under the review and approval by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the US Army Corp of Engineers is to restore the altered shoreline, install a rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings, install a residential boat and Jet Ski lifts. The shoreline restoration requires the removal of approximately 10 cubic yards of unauthorized fill and restoration of the shoreline habitat. The shoreline restoration plan includes the spread of 5 cubic yards of substrate gravel and planting of native vegetation consisting of Red Osier Dogwood stakes. The 2.5-foot high rock retaining wall to be constructed 3 feet landward of the ordinary high water mark will serve to act as a landscape soil retainage barrier and not as a bulkhead. The proposal is to dig a shallow trench at the base rocks and install a silt fence along the shoreline to prevent sediment from entering the lake. The location of the ordinary high water mark, as indicated on the site plan, was established and verified by a representative of the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife. B. RECOMMENDATION Based on analysis of probable impacts from the proposal, staff recommends that the Responsible Officials make the following Environmental Determination: DETERMINA TION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE Issue DNS with 14 day Appeal Period. C. MITIGA TlON MEASURES x DETERMINA TION OF NON -SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED. Issue DNS-M with 14 day Appeal Period. Issue DNS-M with 15 day Comment Period followed by a 14 day Appeal Period. 1. Temporary Erosion Control shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the Department of Ecology Standards to the satisfaction of the representative of the Development Services Division for the duration of the project's construction. 2. The applicant shall comply with the recommendations contained within the Biological Evaluation prepared by Shoreline Research dated September 8,2004 with regards to site preparation, disturbance activities and permissible time periods for construction activities to take place. Construction should be restricted during the migrating juvenile salmonid window between July 16th and December 31 st• - Advisory Notes to Applicant: The following notes are supplemental information provided in conjunction with the environmental determination. Because these notes are provided as information only, they are not subject to the appeal process for environmental determinations. 1. Applicant shall obtain required permits from the Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the US Corp of Engineers. 2. The City of Renton owns and operates an 8" diameter Sanitary sewer Main located in Lake Washington, along the water frontage. In order to avoid damaging the existing Sewer Line, and to facilitate installation of a new Cleanout, it is requested that the contractor coordinate the shoreline work with the City of Renton Maintenance personnel (425-430- 7279), at least 72 hours prior to beginning construction. 3. Should any archaeological deposits or human remains be encountered during project work, work shall immediately cease and the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation shall be notified. ERCRPT City of Renton PIBIPW Department PRITCHARD SHORELINE RESTORAT/L REPORT AND DECISION OF NOVEMBER 9, 2004 D. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS En' mental Review Committee Staff Report LUA04-115, ECF, SM, SMC-H Page 30/4 In compliance with RCW 43.21 C. 240, the following project environmental review addresses only those project impacts that are not adequately addressed under existing development standards and environmental regulations. 1. Earth: Impacts: The project proposes to remove approximately 10 cubic yards of unauthorized backfill and restore the shoreline habitat with native natural materials and plantings on Lake Washington. Approximately 5 cubic yards of round rock under 3 inches in diameter will be spread along 12 feet of the shoreline for fish habitat. The shoreline will be planted with native vegetation consisting of Red Osier Dogwood stakes. An existing large willow tree on the property is proposed to remain. A 2.5-foot by 20-foot rock retaining wall is proposed along the shoreline, 3 feet landward from the ordinary high water mark (OHWM). The applicant also proposes to install a 12 by 9 foot boatlift and a 5 by 3 foot Jet Ski lift off the existing dock/pier. The estimated duration of construction activities would be two to four days. With the land use application, the applicant submitted a Biological Evaluation prepared by Shoreline Research on September 8, 2004. The report describes the site to be located along an area of shoreline that is heavily developed with waterfront residences with lakeshore bulkheads and piers. The riparian vegetation along the proposed site consists of lawn grass and a large willow tree. The rock retaining wall proposed along the shoreline, 3 feet landward from the OWHM will potential create land disturbance and therefore shall be mitigated to reduce impact to the adjacent water. The proposal is to dig a shallow trench at the base rocks and install a silt fence along the shoreline to prevent sediment from entering the lake. In addition staff recommends the applicant be responsible for installing and maintaining Temporary Erosion Control measures in accordance with the Department of Ecology Standards. Mitigation Measures: Temporary Erosion Control shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the Department of Ecology Standards To the satisfaction of the representative of the Development Services Division for the duration of the project's construction. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 2. Water: Impacts: The project site is located on the eastern shore of Lake Washington, off of Lake Washington Boulevard. The proposed construction activities include the removal of 10 cubic yards of unauthorized fill, restoration of the shoreline and installation of the boat and Jet Ski lifts. As part of the restoration, 5 cubic yards of substrate gravel will be installed and native shoreline vegetation planted. According to the Biological Evaluation, the proposed restoration plan's design will improve existing conditions by increasing the amount of shallow water habitat. The planting of the proposed shoreline vegetation will increase the amount of overhanging cover and hiding areas as well as improve the aquatic and riparian insect habitat near the shoreline. Due to potential impact to water quality, which will impact the habitat, it is recommended the applicant comply with the recommendations of the Biological Evaluation prepared by Shoreline Research. The report recommends, in order to avoid impact to migrating juvenile salmon ids, no construction be allowed between July 16th and December 31 st• Additionally, the optimal period of construction would be when the lake level is low. Mitigation Measures: The applicant shall comply with the recommendations contained within the Biological Evaluation prepared by Shoreline Research dated September 8,2004 to include the site preparation, time periods for construction activities and construction activities. Nexus: SEPA Environmental Regulations 3. Historic Preservation: Impacts: Comments were received from the State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation suggesting that a professional archaeological survey be conducted for the site. However, since the entire area of work was historically underwater until the lake level was lowered in the early 1900s, it would be highly unlikely that archaeological resources would be found in this area. The applicant has been advised in the project Advisory Notes to Applicant that should any archaeological deposits or human remains be encountered during project work, work shall immediately cease and the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation shall be notified. Additionally, the 10 cu yd of fill proposed to be removed as part of the shoreline restoration was previously unauthorized fill and therefore of no historical significance. ERCRPT City of Renton PIBIPW Department PRITCHARD SHORELINE RESTORAn. En' 'mental Review Committee Staff Report REPORT AND DECISION OF NOVEMBER 9. 2004 Mitigation Measures: No mitigation is recommended. Nexus: N/A 4. PlantlAnimalIWildlife Habitat: LUA04-115, ECF, SM, SMC-H Page 4 0/4 Impacts: According to Shoreline Research Biological Evaluation prepared on September 8, 2004, the impacts most likely to affect fish and wildlife due to the proposed project include disturbance, temporary water quality degradation, and/or habitat alterations. The recommended control devices, such as silt curtains would reduce the affected area and the potential spread of suspended sediments. The short time period of construction, proposed 2 to 4 days, limits the period suspended sediments could cause potential impacts and is anticipated will not be significant to any species discussed in the evaluation. As previously discussed under the Earth and Water sections of this report, the applicant shall be responsible for implementing the measures to mitigate impact to plant and animal life. Mitigation Measures: No further mitigation is recommended. Nexus: N/A E. COMMENTS OF REVIEWING DEPARTMENTS The proposal has been circulated to City Departmental/Divisional Reviewers for their review. Where applicable, these comments have been incorporated into the text of this report as Mitigation Measures and/or Notes to Applicant. ~ Copies of all Review Comments are contained in the Official File. __ Copies of all Review Comments are attached to this report. Environmental Determination Appeal Process Appeals of the environmental determination must be filed in writing on or before 5:00 PM November 29, 2004. Appeals must be filed in writing together with the required $75.00 application fee with: Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. Appeals to the Examiner are governed by City of Renton Municipal Code Section 4-8-110. Additional information regarding the appeal process may be obtained from the Renton City Clerk's Office, (425) 430-6510. ERCRPT ~'6 so a ., ~ " , ,.0 <f SO 0 o~.,., t 1~ , • u oUl~ .. I~G.~ 50 S.E. ·93RD ST ., .... :... so a • ~," 0 .. ...., ~ 13 'So 8 9 )o1>t'. lO~ o/It .... -: '1 III 74-.~ - -------.,....->..c:J<" 6 -23-5 ~R\\v~ \:'~\:) ~~>~>S o~S m/lt-~ do. ~ 01 mo~Y\,\OI\~ \hi:..~ ~.~. c .. . . , .., c;; 5 od ,.,!!) S·I'"" 0 f· o~"o r ~o~~ 7 \I ~ V . '"' ,,~ ,0\' ~I..t 14-IS IE. -""'10 . .. N S.c. 94TH rt -r 0 5 $ ",,,, z ~ (-) to) \u 0 t,\oo ~'> ~,rP D 'Po· ... Q-I. tfJ°. I> I~· .3 IAr SO 95TH ·.37 so 1. so .... ..... -"1 r-Vf"'C,IIV'M LA'" LVI QI I .... gL.~ ..... .....".. '-...L.'. t-t1l..L.' I~' o· '-..... ~ WAS\.IINarTON GARDEN OF EDEN DiviSION NO.1. AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN YOLU1E II OF PL,A;~ PAGE 63. RECORDS OF KlW'~ C~~ESCRIBED AS FOLLOJIV . '.i BECsIHHINCs AT THE INTERSECTICN OF TI-lE 6OU11-I LINE OF SAID Lot &1 WITH T~E MEANDE~ LINE OF LAKE WASI·UNa.T~, . 1I-IENCE EAST, ALONG ~ SOUT~ LINE AND IT'S &c:lUTI-IERl'l" PRODUCTION, A DISTANCE OF 3!; I=I:ET TO TI-lE 6OUTI-lUESTER1.:'I" LINE OF TI-lE 6URLINCsT~ HOFU!-IEFON RAILWA'I" (HO~EFiN PACIFIC} . RICsI-IT-OF-WA'I", TI-IENCE NORTI-III.E&TERL'I'. ALONe. 6AID 6OJTHWESTERl.. 'I" LINE. A DISTANCE OF 24 FEE't 11-IENCE S~1121'(l)4'W A DISTANCE OF 32 FEET TO T~E POINT OF BECsINNINCs. I T9GE11-IER WITI .. I LOT 82 IN &AID BLOCK A AND SEcalD CLASS SI-IORELMDS AS COHVE"'rEP .B'I" 11-IE STATE! OF 1!JA6I-1INGTOH SITUATE N FRONT' OF. ADJACENT TO OR ABUTTING TI-lEReONt . :XCEPT 11-IAT PORTION 1l-IEREOF DESCRIBED A& BEGINNING AT 1I-IE NTERSECTION OF 'TI-IE MEANDER LINE WI11-I TI-IE NORTI-! LINE OF SAID .. OT 82, I'I-IENCE 5!;0136'(l).4'W A DISTANCE OF S0.'0 FEET. "I-IENCE N.4&13.4'00'W A DISTANCE OF 10.82 PEET TO A POINT ILI-IICI-I 'EAR5 S&211~''''2'W FROM THE POINT OF eEG~INa OF 11-116 !XCEPTJ~ llTUATE IN 11-IE COUNT"T'" OF KINe.. STATE OF WASI-lINaTON. ,or COVERAGE; lREA OF SirE lREA OF USEABLE LAND . or CovERAGE orAL COVERACsE ,. eEA~t.;E COVERAGE ,. • 13JEt2. • 'iU~ • '6' • • ~.B" OF TOTAL· . 84.9"-OF USE;A6LE ?P-o~~~t?: SCALE: "s. €)" PI3-0?OS%: g~c.'(.. 1t<a.'1~\~\\l."1 """~L.L..~~ot\\.'-'~· .. ,-"(~" 1..1;.) PL"'t.\'\\\o>,,6.~ • I I L~q.. ~~· .. ld'% .. ~~-tf'l:(f. ~/f;f ~\w ~ ~~. ,Q]. .~.,- \:i :-X, . -- LAKE WA5~INGTON DEVELOPMENT·Pt.ANNIN(" CITY OF RENTON A&SU1ED LAKE ELEY • 144>0' SEP 2 I 2001t RECEIVED . . . t\It. MI\~c..~~\\t...\~I'\~~ ..3.8 ()"LN\I:)t.A~~~.~\r~~ .f\~~--." J'a~o\lE. u~,!I:~.I"OA.l~~~ l:i:=;.\\,;=;=:~= .. :=. =;;~::=~= .. _r=_:J..1S'C..~\o ~ I ~~. q 8 0 5~. .. .:_ .. _ ...... ----- ~ D'€.'\ ~\l, ~<)\~5 .. -Ra,."'~i"i"·~v.~~,,\ pb-~'n --~i::.<...: :~~o~~~~'i'\I.\\'Il!~~i.i:.~ .. 1\\..l C- o-----. --_-~ ......... . .~>\O\l..v.. \\l\~\\~, -:.:t"""il'li:(~-=e·~~L6\~i 10 ~~~"\"l t> .. ~ \.I. ... '" 8~~-S'(\ b~' . ~~ .. _~ • __ , .. _.:. . •. ~~~~~~\...~~~L~~ ~~\O~ . .::' ~~~~~.~(..T~.~\ ~~'3"\,..\L ~ .. <.o'i( ~~,"~~ ,~<.;-~~, ;{,," i~o~ ~\'>Ii~: 8-30:0:'1'" . .... . ...... ----... , ---_ .. --'l-"7 !>c. ... • ,,_ '. . 1.-R~ \1 ..... ,· R~->\o~~\:;~ fli\~1\~" ;.;;~ ","'0", "'~:'"L.,,_'e. " .. _. :t.. l~ . : i> -~"'1."'''' ... • '\ \.... . ()o • . _.-..... _-._ ..• " ...... --__ ._L~ ______ . r--" r...?t~~ ~~\~~\~\~0~~ /"--..... "--E"'\~ \~'\ Pt~"!· ~\~~ '?U9.~ O~E.. ~ p.~S~It-e. \l.~~~ -~~O\'E.<..\ S'.\o~L\~e.. P~~\.~E:. S'As;.~ s.1tE4\"'t:-'t-~Q. ~'h\~c..~-PltC\ ~ O\'\'Ul'4\:-J,.\.S' E.~\~'tC.Oc;.:.. \C\\.~ RQ s". "?i~ P £~\'\ C'N. )-\"E:.e. s . \~ . . ~'S\\ ~o'4.,,"\\iIL\~ 'l\c~ C'!2.... e..~~Q J ,.-\..JJ Pt -~ 8 OS"b .... ~~ ~~'\~'et~ ~~(,~e.~~ :tSO.t£MO\.l.'A \!\~ ~\~~ ~~N\.~ "tJPr. ~15o~~ . ;;" Sc.IIo.'-~ 1.-:1.0- (!!,,,, ",.D E1-(:')\ \\"lS\ . ~blL,,"t-.l ,.~~~ P@.Q po S e:p '. ~\~\ \"\Qu.5£. . '. l<OO\ N\Cu.~·\~\ ~\)\"i,":r--\ ~V. ~ R.. ~ ~""\.~ ~ \\.~ ~~ ~BDS-t; ,Sc."ALf.. .1.~-\~ , I , , " , « I , , r . 0 S \0. ,S I ,&.0 ?o~J:.!> ~ __ ~t.~o~~j.\;\\~G.. !C,\..\., b'"t-_~~~~. __ _ '"1 ,-1...\\2\.(. 'I eAAS J>~o ~.~">_;c. _. . __ _ '¥..~.-N\o"e a'f\.">I\~~ ~Qc.." ~~~~ ~\~~-'------------I .:).:'" ~\oi-..,. \ ~ H"~\\ 1-.. ~ Lo~~ '3 c..'1'V)SY ~".J\S-~> -t- ... -, .. \ .-J l:: --.----.(.- ~ 7 ./ lU - ~\S\ \$)~li.. l& 01 t1\ '0 u. \..\1 ~ \~ \J\~~ f(.."<:.~\.\ ~~ .~~. ~~ o5"~ .. I J , . { , SC-?-,L-"t:. 1' .... ;:. \0' (llill iXI!" o S )~ IS' ~\llt~oSE ".ItJ\? R.o\.\~ S *o~~L\~~ \\llr~ \\ 1'r\ Ci\~'-\ ~ " Co,<)£" .. :t \, 'a\" e.<":>\ t Cl, t , f\~ ~ .. ~ «f.o ~~ fie\') o~ ~c.~: . .l.8 o !>-""OU,~\PI\~ \1\\"£-.)..1 ~e..\'Ht-~E.~o~ ~t'A- .l..8n f'l'\OIAN~'V'\~\l\~'N $~\'J'(.._ R£.,,\\b'-l ,'-l\lr\ . @' M C~;' ) ,c. 0 I R 'B'-'ilo.~ \<. 'C:."\ W \\\\ ~c.~ O~\C~ \)o~~\)O~ 'S\~~l::..~ ~~o ~oSE.~: S't\-b~ .. :'E:.L\"-\t:. . ?L~~\ ,)1(\ S ~W~R\)~ 'Cj) ~,~,),,~\\\~,\O~ ~\:l\\ ~ ~\l..o l\~~ ~1:.;t. "I.;.\ '. L '?t ~"'2;. \t\\ ?t s 'rt n .. \ Go "\ D "\ F\\ : ~t~'o\,\ c.,ou N.\'-\; K, ~~ . f\~~ L\'-ft~\~· t\~, ~~~c.. '?~\$. \'\ ~l2-'$ ?~G..~::tt 8 --~---- ----.-._-_ ......... -, s COR '-'''''''~-l ~'-' i -&0---,.., .. ----.~ ! ~TJR' -'---8-'-'bl'-r"-+ ' ,-T-=;" -, Ii' , -,-, i ,-jU, ,o.[».Ih...l.,.. . I Hj ~"llltJP~NJ. J I ----Benton diV J,\JI>N l~OO C3 31 T24N R5E E 1/2 • ESTABLISHED 1947 931 1 SOUTHEAST 3E)nt STREET MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 (206)-23&1700 , FACSIMILE: (206) 2~6-2700;", VVEBSITE: WWW.SEABORNPILEDRIVING.COM u.s. Army Corps of Engineers , Regulatory Branch Post Office Box 3755 Seattle, WA 98124-2255 Attn: Ms. Suzan Skadowski. Reference: Mr. Marc Pritcbard Boat Lift For: Site Address: 2807 M:ountain View Drive Renton, WA 98055 -Tax Account # 334210-4040 SE1I4 Section 31 T 24 R 05 Dear Ms. Skadowski, #200400081 November 3, 2004 Please find the following revised information and drawing regarding the Pritchard application dated 6110/04 Reference # 2004-000SI-ATF. Mr. Pritchard wishes to oDlit the jet-ski lift installation from the application and renin the existing boatIift station only. , If you could please forward this information to those currently reviewing the application at your earliest convenience, it wc:mld be much appreciated. Very Truly Yours, SEABORN PILE DRIV1NG COMPANY By Jeffrey R. Sidebotham 1 City of , .... nton Department of Planning / Building / Pub/II, dorks ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: £co('CJl)'c.. L:ev APPLICATION NO: LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF APPLICANT: Marc Pritchard PROJECT TITLE: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration SITE AREA: 660 sguare feet COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 2004 DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6, 2004 PROJECT MANAGER: Nancy Weil PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson BUILDING AREA (Qross): N/A OCT H 2004 LOCATION: 2807 Mountain View Drive WORK ORDER NO: 77318 ECO~~,1~IC 9,1~.X~52P~1ENT, SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Conditio lal ~~ ... Sult;TE(:'i~;,gNI~!NG Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of a residential boatlift, residential jet ski lift and shoreline restoration. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has only 2,205-square feet·of land outside the high watermark. The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8)' with an existing single-family dwelling and dock. The proposal, under the review and approval by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the State Corp of Engineers is to restore the shoreline, install rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings. The project also includes installing a residential boat and jet ski lifts. The restoration is to restore the shoreline ajoining this site which was altered by the applicant without necessary permitting. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing. Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Pub/ic Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLlCY·RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date CITY OF RENTON ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NEIGHBORHOODS, AND STRATEGIC PLANNING MEMORANDUM DATE: TO: FROM: ST AFF CONTACT: SUBJECT: October 22, 2004 Nan::: ~eil ) Re/~d Don Erickson Pritchard Shoreline Restoration~ LUA 04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF Summary: The applicant is proposing, as part of this application, to construct a residential boat lift, a residential jet ski lift and shoreline restoration on a 13,162 square foot site, of which 2,205 square feet are on land outside of the high watennark. The applicant's drawings also indicate that an existing single-family residence on the site will be reconstructed along the rear property line as part of a future application. The subject site is located in the R...esidential Single Family land use designation and zoned R-S. Relevant land use and shoreline related policies are attached. The Comprehensive Plan Compliance Matrix below shows the rela.tive compliance of this proposal with these City policies. Community Design Element Findings: There are no relevant shoreline related policies that would apply to this application since this project will likely vest before they become effective. Policies related to siting of structures to ensure privacy and quality of life and those pertaining to the retention/replacement of natural features such as unique landscaping have been provided since they presumably would apply when the applicant relocates and reconstructs the existing house. Recommendation: Support this application. cc: Don Erickson H:\EONSP\interdepartmentai\Development Review\Green Fiie\Comments\Pritchard Sl:1oreiine Restoration.doc\cor Relevant Comprehensive Plan Land Use Policies Residential Single Family Designation Policy LU-I54. Interpret development standards to support new plats and infill project designs incorporating street locations, lot configurations, and building envelopes that address privacy and quality of life for existing residents. Policy LU-I56. Interpret development standards to support projects incorporating site features such as distinctive stands of trees and natural slopes that can be retained to enhance neighborhood character and preserve property values where possible. Replanting should occur where trees are not retained due to safety concerns. Retention of unique site features should be balanced with the objective of investing in neighborhoods within the overall context of the Vision Statement of this Comprehensive Plan. Community Design Element Policy CD-I3. Infill development should be reflective of the existing character of established neighborhoods even when designed using different architectural styles, and/or responding to more urban setbacks, height or lot requirements. Infill development should draw on elements of existing development such as placement of structures, vegetation, and location of entries and walkways to reflect the site planning and scale of existing areas. H:\EDNSP\Interdepartmenta\\Development Review\Green File\Comments\Pritchard Shoreline Restoration.doc\cor oo\ .. oo. .. Kathy' Keolker-Wheeler, Mayor . . November 9,2004 . Stephanie Kramer AssistantStateArchaeolbgist ,Office' ofArehaeology and H!storic Preservation 1063 S. Capital Way #106 , Olympia;WA98501 CITY. '. RENTON . PlannjngIBUilmnglPublic WofksT~epartment , Gregg Zinimer .. iuln P.E., Administrator ',' .. . .. . . Subject: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration and Boat/Jet Ski Liftsj City File #LUA04~ 115 State Log102004-05-K1 " ' Dear Ms .. Kramer: . Thank you Jor your 'letter of Aprilt,9th reque~tii1g that a professional arChaeolOgical study be conducted in' , conjunction With theab()ve-refei:eflced project ThiS:particular:project site washistoricallyUriderwater until .•.. the early 1900s.when thelev~1 of LakeWa~hiilgto~:waslqweredbyapproximately nine feet. . Additionally, the proposed 10 cubicyardsof fill]o b~ remoi/e<t&ias,i.inauthorized fill ~ceritlypUt on site. Therefore,we will not be requiring a study to be conducted.In:;thi.sjjarti~t11~~ insta~ce.· ". '. .... . .. , - However, the applicant wiflbenotifi,~'that $houldanyarcha~ologicald~p()sits.or hunianremains be encountered during the project,collstructionwiU immediately cease and he will notify your office. : We would appreciate it if you could provide uS ,withanyil1formational materials your office may have available to guide contractors in this regard. . . '.' '., '" ': " '.' Pleas~ feel free tocorltactme at425430~7270shoul~ you have any questions regarding this letter. Thank . . you fofyourcomments regarding the Pritchard'Restoration project. ,'- Sincerely, Nancy Weil, .' Associate Planner cc: Marc Pritchard, applicant ---'----~l-O--S-:-S -=-so-u-th:-G-:-r-a"':'dy-W.----ay---R--:e-n-to-n-, W.-=-=a,-"-s-,-h-in-gt-o-n-9-S0-S-s---------~ ®. This paper~tains 50% recycled material, 30% post consumer AHEAD OF THE CURVE ., DEVELOPME CITY OF~~~NING STATE OF WAS HINGTON OCT 2 2.200~ Office of Archaeology ancl Historic preservatic»n~R~ -1063 S. Capitol Way, Suite 106 • Olympia, Washington 98501 ('1-~.~ 0 :- (MaUing Address) PO Box 48343 • Olympia, Washington 98504-8343 ~C'" ~ . (360) 586-3065 Fax NUl7Jber (360) 586-3067 ' ---=-----October 20, 2004 Ms. Nancy Weil, Associate Planner City of Renton 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 / , In future correspondence please refer to: Log: 102004-05-KI Property: LUA04-115 Pritchard Shoreline Restoration 2807 lVIountain View Drive Dear Ms. Weil: We have reviewed the materials forwarded to our office for tae proposed project referenced a.bove. The area has high potential for archaeological resources. 'There is an ethnograpnic place name associated with Coleman Point, and another with Gene C~)Ulon Memorial Beach (Waterman 1922: 179). In addition, according to General. Land Office maps, a historic Indian iTrial ran behin-d the project area north-south, a.nd the project area is on the margin of the former Duwamish Embayment. These factors, including the waterfront nature of the parcel, combiae to increase the archaeological probability. ~ e recommend a professional archaeological survey of those areas proposed for any excavation associated with the proposed project be required. We also recommend consultati<)n with the concerned tribes cultural committees and staff regarding cultural resource issues. In addition, if federal funds or permits are involved Section 1 06 of the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, and its implementing regulaticns, 36CFR800, must be follo\Ved. We would appreciate recei-ving any correspondence or comments from concerned tribes or other parties concerning cultural resource issues that you receive as you consult under the requirements of36CFR800.4(a)(4). . These comments are based o:n the information available atthe 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 fonvard to receiving the survey report. cc: Laura Murphy -Richard Brooks Cecile Hansen \ City of Rernan Department of Planning / Building / Public ~'-.S ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ~an COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20 ~ 2004 APPLICATION NO: LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6, 2004 APPLICANT: Marc Pritchard PROJECT MANAGER: Nancy Weil PROJECT TITLE: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson rii:CE/VLD SITE AREA: 660 SQuare feet BUILDING AREA (gross): NlA DC T 0 1 ~f7:'l. LOCATION: 2807 Mountain View Drive WORK ORDER NO: 77318 81 111 r.,.,~ -"'uU/VISt SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Conditional Use Pe~ii and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of a residential boatlift, residential jet ski lift and shoreline restoration. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washingtora addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has only 2,205 square feet of land outside the high watermark. The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) with an existing single-family dwelling and dock. The proposal, under the review and approval by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the State Corp of Engineers is to restore the shoreline, install rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings. The project also includes installing a residential boat and jet ski lifts. The restoration is to restore the shoreline ajoining this site which was alterEd by the applicant without necessary permitting. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable II/Wore Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major I"formation Impacts Impacts 1\1 ecessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation LandlShoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular atten~ion to those areas in which we have expertise and have i"'entified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Date City of Rel .. _tJ Department of Planning / Building / Public WI. -' ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ~112tt COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 2004 APPLICATION NO: LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: O~t:H 0, £~ " APPLICANT: Marc Pritchard PROJECT MANAGE(Fl: Nancy Weil Y PROJECT TITLE: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration PLAN REVIEW: Mik;'ootson ~ SITE AREA: 660 square feet 'o -~ BUILDING AREA (Qross): N/A - LOCATIO"": 2807 Mountain View Drive WORK ORDER NO: 77318 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of' a residential boatlift, residential jet ski lift and shoreline restoration. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has only 2,205 sql.:lare feet of land outside the high watermark. The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) with an existing ·single-family dwelling and dock_ The proposal, under the review and approval by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the State Corp of Engineers is to restore the shoreline, install rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings. The project also includes installing a residential boat and jet ski lifts. The restoration is to restore the shoreline ajoining this site which was altered by the applicant without necessary permitting. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element ~f the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More EnvirontrWent Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Najar Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earlh Housing Air Aesthetics Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transoortation EnvironfTJ'-ental Health Public Services Y Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural ~ esourr;es PreseNation Airport Environment 10.000 Feet 14.000 Feet B. PCJLlCY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have idenUfied areas of probable impact or areas 'Where additional infonnation is needed to properly assess this proposal. cPMiA) Signat:ure of Director or Authorized Representative IO-l3=<)~ Date CITY OF RENTON MEMORANDUM Date: Octobe.-18, 2004 To: Nancy Weil From: Mike Dotson ~ Subject: Pritcha rd Shoreline Restoration -LUA 04-115 ,SM, SMC-H, ECF 2807 Mountain View Avenue N The following Utility and Transportation comments concern the Environmental (SEPA) revie'N for the new single-t=amily residence. EXISTING CONOI.IONS WATER -This project site is located in the 320 Water Pressure Zone. The static water pressure at the street level is approximately 130psi. There is an existing 6" water main located ii'll Lake Washington Boulevard. The site is outside the Aquifer Protection Area. SEWER -There is an existing 8-inch sewer main in the Lake Washington Shoreline. SURFACE WATE R -The site drains to Lake Washington directly. STREETS -This site fronts on Mountain View Ave N. This is a sub-standard street (no curb, gutter or side~alks). CODE REQUIRENENTS and RECOMENDATIONS 1. The City of Renton owns and operates an 8" diameter Sanitary Sewer Main located In Lake Washington, along the water frontage. In order to avoid damaging the existing Sewer Line, and to facilitate installation of a new Cleanout, it is requested that the contracto r coordinate the shoreline work with the City of Renton Maintenance personnel (425-430-7279), at least 72 hours prior to beginning construction. CONDITIONS 1. Temporary Erosion Control shall be installed and maintained in accordance with the Department of Ecology Standards and staff review. 1:IPlan ReviewlPlan Review 20041Prichard greenfolder.doc City of Reh.",n Department of Planning / Building / Public W"n r<S ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW ..sHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Plan ~»\f1.u COMMENTSDUE= OCTOBER 20,2004 APPLICATION NO: LUA04-11 5, SM, SMC-H, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6, 2004 APPLICANT: Marc Pritchard PROJECT MANAGER: Nancy Weil PROJECT TITLE: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson OCl" 07 2004 SITE AREA: 660 sJluare feet BUILDING AREA (Qross): N/A LOCATION: 2807 Mountain View Drive WORK ORDER NO: 77318 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Develop;rnent Permit for the construction of a residential boatlift .. residential jet ski lift and shoreline restoration. The site is located on the shor-es of Lake Washington addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has only 2,205 square feetoHand outside the high watermark. The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) with an existing single-~amily dwelling and dock. The proposal, undEr the review and approval by Washington Departm& nt of Fish and Wildlife and the State Corp of Engineers is to restore the shoreline, install rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings. The project also includEs installing a residential boat and jet ski lifts _ The restoration is to restore the shoreline ajoining this site which was altered by the applicant without necessary permitting. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More" Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water UghtlGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environmer» t 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELA TED COMMENTS C. (;ion with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas e>i probable impact or ron is needed to properly assess this proposal. ~-rt?-/J-&4 Da~e City of Ren.vn Department of Planning I Building I Public WCII,(S ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEEr REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:SlJrface)W:1sieutoJ.u' COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 2004 APPLICATION 1'\10: LUA04-115, SM, SMC-~, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6, 2004 APPLICANT: Marc Pritchard PROJECT MANAGER: NancyWeil iJ L: CCi 'iF,"',: .. PROJECT TITLE: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson (If' I n"7 ~"_ SITE AREA: 660 square feet BUILDING AREA (gross): NJA LOCATION: 2807 Mountain View Drive WORK ORDER NO: 77318 ljUILDING DIVISION SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of a residential boatlift, residential jet ski lift and shoreline restoration. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has o.,ly 2,205 square feet of land outside the high watermark. The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) with an existing single-family dwelli ng and dock. The proposal, under the review and approval by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the State Corp of Engineers is to restore the shoreline, install rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings. The project also includes installin~ a residential boa~ and jet ski lifts. The restoration is to restore the shoreline ajoining this site which was altered by the applicant without necessary permitting. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Informatl~n Impacts Impacts Necessa,.., Earth Housinq Air Aesthetics Water UqhtlGlare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline lJ se Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. We have reviewed this Iication with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable irTFpact or al in~ nnation is needed to properly assess this proposal. Date , City of Ren • .,t1 Department of Planning / Building / Public WI.-.. ,$ ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT:T~Y ~Dr\ COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 2004 \ APPLICATION NO: LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6, 2004 APPLICANT: Marc Pritchard PROJECT MANAGER: Nancy Weil PROJECT TITLE: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 660 square feet BUILDING AREA (gross): N/A LOCATION: 2807 Mountain View Drive WORK ORDER NO: 77318 BlIII nl~',", ~ .. ......... LIt V/:..:l!r'H'1 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Conditional Use Permitand a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of a residential boatlift, residential jet ski lift and shoreline restoration. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has only 2,205 square feet of land outside the high watermark. The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) with an existing single-family dwelling and dock. The proposal, under the review and approval by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the State Corp of Engineers is to restore the shoreline, install rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings. The project also includes installing a residential boat and jet ski lifts. The restoration is to restore the shoreline ajoining this site which was altered by the applicant without necessary permitting. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics 0 Water Light/Glare Plants Recreation Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10.000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENTS lV~ We have reviewed this application with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas where additional information is needed to properly assess this proposal. Date City of Re. ,J Department of Planning I' Building / Public VI .S ENVIRONMENTA.L & DEVELOPMENT A PPLICA TION REVIEW' SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: Par-fc.s COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 2004 APPLICATION NO: LUA04-115, S M, SMC-H, ECF DATE CIRCULATED: OCTOBER 6, 2004 APPLICANT: Marc Pritchard PROJECt MANAGER: Nancy Weil PROJECT TITLE: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 660 square feet BUILDING AREA (Qross): N/A LOCATION: 2807 Mountain View Drive WORK OFlDER NO: 77318 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of a residential boatlift • ..@..SlQ!mJiaUeL~kUi(t_and.shor:E§!Jine_restnr3tion, The site is located on the shores o. Lake Washington addressed as 2807 Mc>untain~ ., , ~ •. ~' J , , 2,205 square feet of land outside the high watermark. The site is···zoned Residentii.-{~ "';-'(f!s' .' Cl', Z . -{ . 2'>;;: J, ~o ; "" and dock. The proposal, under th-e review and approval by Washington Departrl', . 0 < ., " , ' h ,~o:; Engineers is to restore the shoreline. install rock retaining wall and shoreline ('c., ~':", ::.~ f1{'c . ,,,,,_,',. ' residential boat and jet ski lifts. The restoration is to restore the shoreline ajoi ning u,' <1,', •. , 0,.0",::;· ii. ''''!''. s,:;,. "'!~" "",:"': !~,,-. -< necessary permitting. . ," ! 0' 1: " 'Y " .,; '"", .,' ''.d ~-.o'~: ",_~.\ A. ENVlRONMENTALlMPACT ~.,g. Non-Code) COMMENTS EJoment of ... b'~J~J~;~: ':, :'.! ·.;" .. ~:i Environr71ent 'r®'~ ~~~)~'" -it' ~,;._ . .-~> '».~ ~~ Housin I. c' . o;-~ ~ ~. ," ? Aesthetics r:.~ ~r'" <1" 4-\ ~) ~ c· ~1~' ,-, '(}' ~,,;;~:~~ U ht/l""l~ re I .~. '-,,\:( :-~~~ .::!..v-,' ~ ,~' R~.eUat~,.:"'n' ~~~~~~>:i.:: i./~), ;,-. C:'1.;'~ ""~::>;;;,;" r;.,.. ,~ tNfl '--I L' C 2 ¥ ~!'~r~':~ , ./ { Utilities J-;,~'" )~&. ~ ':; ; '~l\J ~.~ ;.: ':~;:'" ~::Cs:~~;s f ""~, ;·tL. "'<> ".'(1, d~(;" '"," Historic/Cultural I~";; C';" , ~':~> -S;,. f', Preservaclion '. ; '0 I.,.. ~ ,'" « • 'f" . ., Airport Er1VironmE "': ',.~' : ~}:':. '.;!~ ,jih.~~;: ,_ (,~;W'" 10,000 Feet If: :.) "~, .' ",_;~; ,.. v, 14,000 Feet l.;i :,}.:~' ",,'." Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Air Water Plants Land/Shoreline Use Animals Environmental Health Energy/ Natural Resources B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS C. CODE-RELATED COMMENrS ;P\.R/U-CVUL Il-O 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 informatio ' ne.eded to properly assess this proposal. City of Ren.vn Department of Planning / Building / Public Wo,,,s ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPARTMENT: ?ro COMMENTS DUE: OCTOBER 20, 2004 APPLICATION NO: LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF APPLICANT: Marc Pritchard PROJECT MANAGER: Nanc PROJECT TITLE: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dotson SITE AREA: 660 s uare feet BUILDING AREA LOCATION: 2807 Mountain View Drive WORK ORDER NO: 77318 SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of a residential boatlift, residential jet ski lift and shoreline restoration. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has only 2,205 square feet of land outside the high watermark. The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) with an existing single-family dwelling and dock. The proposal, under the review and approval by Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife and the State Corp of Engineers is to restore the shoreline, install rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings. The project also includes installing a residential boat and jet ski lifts. The restoration is to restore the shoreline ajoining this site which was altered by the applicant without necessary permitting. A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Element of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary . Earth Housing Air Aesthetics Water UghtlGlare Plants Recreation LandlShoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public Services Energy/ Historic/Cultural Natural Resources PreseNation Airport Environment 10,000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS -riiic CITY of ;K;E;N'Tl>,J. OWN5 AI"6 L),P~7"E"s. AM £3"bIA/'1~ SA'-IITA-R..V-S~ --r;;/.-T IS LocA7ED 4LDNG. the ~ I'F l.AJLE L...t4-SItI~EiTlJ~ Ab-IA-cENT" -,-;, ..,-~ .$vJ3JEi=--T ~r~_ 1";;"1$ ~;>e;z.7Y O""/J~ G~c:.~a..-St-t-A-&--_IJc77Ft-';;e-: CrTYS IJA~..IA1c2. f/IAIN-;-eJV~ ~1oJ~CL (~-4aD-7Z7'9.J 4T ~I 72-j/,;,v/ZlS. Pi2J c e --r;; Be~/"",A.lIAPG, G;.;..s,~7}DA1 --rz; ~ A-~774-rlVc?~ :lSe O,v-S,7t:. *7h£ CTY IJANi"fo /0 ~b 4-Ct.eANcv"l Ffz.o"" /,e-e)C-I.,5.7;.~ .sa~ /VIA",...) Tl:> /'-1""7:-Wa/ 1>9-. F"RleojZ.. "Tl:> C.o~:S·7/G4.h:_771PA/ IJ~ ~ #6)...1 }<e:s;DE=N~ C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENTS lication with particular attention to those areas in which we have expertise and have identified areas of probable impact or areas . formation is needed to property assess this proposal. /O-/I-O</- Date City of Refholn Department of Planning / Building / Public W ..... "$. ENVIRONMENTAL & DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIOI·j'REVIEW SHEET REVIEWING DEPA.HTMENT: Fi re.... APPLICATION NO: LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF APPLICANT: Marc Pritchard PROJECT TITLE: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration SITE AREA: 660 square feet LOCATION: 2807 l\IIountain View Drive COMMEN-rS DUE: OCT( ~ :)~nll.a .l? U \(£r-~"~r;~" DATECIFlCULATED: OCT ~~ 6, 2004 PROJECT MANAGER: Nar leV JtE il (JC r -7 2004 l..J'i.J PLAN REVIEW: Mike Dots n BUILDING AREA (Qross): N~ WORKOADER NO: 77318 _I.," ryrKtNTON FIRE O[PARTMi'tJT SUMMARY OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantjal Development Permit for the construction of a residential boatJift, residential jet ski lift and shoreline restoratioln. The site is located <>n the shores of Lake Washington addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has on lJy 2,205 square feet of land outside the high watermark. The site.-is zoned Residential -8 (R-8) with an existing single-family dwelli~g and dock. The proposal, under the review and approval by Washington E>epartment of Fish and Wildlife and the State Corp 40f Engineers is to restore the shoreline, install rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings. The project also includes installing a residential boat and jet ski lifts. The restoration is to restore the shoreline ajoi ning this site which was altered by the applicant witho-.Jt necessary permitting. A. ENVIRONMEnTAL IMPACT (e.g. Non-Code) COMMENTS Element of the Probable Probable More Elemen~ of the Probable Probable More Environment Minor Major Information Impacts Impacts Necessary EnvironlJ1ent Minor Major Informatio" Impacts Impacts Necessary Earth Housina Air Aesthetics Water UghtlGlare Plants Recreati<m Land/Shoreline Use Utilities Animals Transportation Environmental Health Public S:.ervices Energy! HistoricrCultural Natural Resources Preservation Airport Environment 10.000 Feet 14,000 Feet B. POLICY-RELATED COMMENTS /JA C. CODE-RELA TED COMMENT~ 1 4{)[) tion with particular attention to those areas in which .."e have expertise and ha e ide tified areas of probable imp.act or ion is needed to property assess this proposal. epresentative Date .r. NOTICE OF APPLICATION AND PROPOSED DETERMINATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) DATE: October 6, 2004 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF PROJECT NAME: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPAl Review. a Shorelinoe Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of a residential boaUift. residential jet ski lilt . and sh.orellne restoration. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drtw. The 13,162 square fc>ot site has 2,205 square teet of land outside the ordlnary hfgh watermark. The site Is zoned Residential - 8 (R·a) and Is developed with an existing slngl&family dwelling and dock. The proposa[.. under the review and approval by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the US Army Corp of Englnee~s is to restore the -altered shoreline, Install a rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings. install a residential boat and jet .:ski litts. Shoreline restoratlon requires the rennoval of approximately 10 cubic yards of'unauthorized fill and resloratiocrl of the shoreline habitat. :"1 PROJECT LOCATION: 2807 Mountain View Drive DPTlONAL DETERMINATlClN OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE, MmGATED,(DN5-M): As the Lead Agency _ the C"y 01 Renton has determined that significant environmental impacts are unlikely to ',result from the proposed projEtCL Therefore, as pennltted under the RCW 4-3.21 C.ll 0, the City of Renton Is using the Optional DNS-M process to give noUce that a ONS. M Is likely to be issued. Comment periods for the project and the proposed ONS·M are Integrated Inte. a single comment period. There will be no comment period follOwing the Issuance of the Threshold Determination 0;1' Non-Significance- Mitfgated (ONS-M). A 14-d-=:a.y appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. PERMIT APPUCATION DATE: September 21, 2004 NOnCE OF COMPLETE "'""'PLICATION: October 6, 2004 APPLICANT: PermHslRevlew RequestE!tCI: Mare and Kaaren Prltehard Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Pennlt, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit Other Pennlts which may be required: Permits required by State Agencies, Building and Co.-:.struction Permits. Requested Studies: Loeation where appllcatl<)n may be reviewed: PUBUC HEARING: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: ZonlnglLand Use: Environmental Doc:um~ts that Evaluate the Proposed lProJeet: Development Regulatlc:.ns Used For Project Mltlgeatlon: Biological Evaluation, Abbreviated Geotechnical RepCtrt PlannlnglBulldlngIPubUe Works Department, DevefopmeC""lt Services Division, Sixth Floor Renton CRy Hall, 1055 South Grady ""¥lay, Renton, WA 98055 A Public Hearing is tentatively scheduled for December 7, 20<>4, before the Hearing Examiner in the Renton City Council Chambers. HeCHings begin at 9:00 AM on the 7th floor of the Renton City Hall Building locatEtd at 1055 South Grady Way. The subject site is located within the Residential Single Fami:Jy (RSF) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation. and is zoned RE!sldential-8 Dwelling Units per Acre (R·8). The proposal is consistent with the uses and policies establish by these land use and zoning designations._ Compliance with specific development standards will be analyzed during turth-er review of the project. Not Applicable The project will be subject to the City's Environmental SEPA Ordinance , Procedures, Zoning Code, Shoreline Master Program, Critical Areas Regulations, International Building Code. Public Works Standards, and o'ither codes and regulations where applicable. Proposed MItigation Measu~: The fol!owlng lIr9Commended Mitigation Measures will likely be Imposed on the proposed projE!Ct to address project impacts not coverecl by existing codes and regulations as. cited above: The applicant will be required to adhere to -'the work window as determined by the State Department of Fish and Game and the US Army Corps ot Eng~neers. The applicant shall implement and maintaa:r, appropriate erosion control measures tor the duration of the project. Comments on the above application must be 8ubr:lr11Hed In writing to Nancy Well, Associate Planner, Developme..,t Services Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Rentof'll .... WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on Oetober 20, 2004. This matter is al5:o tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on December 7, 2004, at 9:00 AM, CounCil Chambers, Seventh Floor, Rentc::m City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested In attending the hearing, please contact the Developme-:nt Services Division, (425) 430-7282, to ensure that ·'the hearing has not been rescheduled. II comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above, yOL:a may sun 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 m~de a party of raco. rd and receive additional information by mail, please cc:>ntact the project manager. Anyone who submits written commer:tts will automatically become a party of record and will be. notHled of any decision on this project. CONTACT PERSON: Nancy WolI, Associate Planner Tel: (425) 430-7270 PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBE R WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICAnON If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further infonnation on this proposed project, connplete this form and return to: City of Renton, Deve:Jopment Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055_ File NoJName: LUA04-115, ECF I Pritchard! Shoreline Res10ration NAME: ____________________________________________ __ ADDRESS: __________________________________________ _ TELEPHONE NO.: ________________ _ , ...... , ......... """" .:--...... t-~~~:.~.k.;,'~·.tt / ~C;~ .. &l~QI=/~~\ ~ ... (j NO]: '~ .. (t\ ~ ~: "'l.l'), -~ -n ~ CERTIFICATION , en : ,'7 ..... :13: ~ ~ -I: ..0 ., m: " ~ , ~. Us O'J., ~ :..\ ... .. l.le :" ; -2' \~~9·87! h .... ~ 1 I, .p-:;;r.).-r'"i~;1L ~2>~,Y"\ ,hereby certify that ~ ''lf~es. l.t ~,\o:,_.:- above document were posted by me in conspicuou:s placJ~~it~~~1ab,-"'- the described property OIl -~1/::....=-:........u;~--'-'!:..n~---------'T-~/I/t~Z.If-~ Signe ATTEST:~2Z:" ~m ~~re me, a Notary Pu ·c. in a or the Stat '2.0 Washington residing m~~ • on the c:u:?; ayof ~ 8 v' &f . MARILYN KAMCHEFF MY APflOItm.tENr fXAREs &29a7 .. '. Agencies See Attached Surrounding Property Owners See Attached (Signature of Sende J;.'~;;;;tj~~~a...~~~:k::!a...~~ _______ +-~~~ STATE OF WASHINGTON -._ SS ~ \ "<>USLIC • COUNTY OF KING .".i···.~-<9-07 ..... ~o~j O~"""""~0 __ -- I certify that I know or have satisfactory evidence that Stacy Tucker '""W, AS~~, .... --\.~\.~" .. 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: ru :1 Q?fX)Lf Pritchard Shoreline Restoration LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF template -affidavit of service by mailing ", Dept. of Ecology· Environmental Review Section PO Box 47703 Olympia, WA 98504-7703 WSDOT Northwest Region * Attn: Ramin Pazooki King Area Dev. Serv., MS-240 PO Box 330310 Seattle, WA 98133-9710 US Army Corp. of Engineers * Seattle District Office Attn: SEPA Reviewer PO Box C-3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Jamey Taylor * Depart. of Natural Resources PO Box 47015 Olympia, WA 98504-7015 KC Dev. & Environmental Servo Attn: SEPA Section 900 Oakesdale Ave. SW Renton, WA 98055-1219 Metro Transit Senior Environmental Planner Gary Kriedt AGENCY (DOE) LETTER MAILING (ERe DETERMINATIONS) WDFW -Stewart Reinbold * Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Dept. c/o Department of Ecology * 3190 160th Ave SE Attn. SEPA Reviewer Bellevue, WA 98008 39015 -172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092 Duwamish Tribal Office * Muckleshoot Cultural Resources Program 4717 W Marginal Way SW * Seattle, WA 98106-1514 Attn: Ms Melissa Calvert 39015 172nd Avenue SE Auburn, WA 98092-9763 KC Wastewater Treatment Division * Office of Archaeology & Historic Environmental Planning Supervisor Preservation· Ms. Shirley Marroquin Attn: Stephanie Kramer 201 S. Jackson ST, MS KSC-NR-050 PO Box 48343 Seattle, WA 98104-3855 Olympia, WA 98504-8343 City of Newcastle City of Kent Attn: Mr. Micheal E. Nicholson Attn: Mr. Fred Satterstrom, AICP Director of Community Development Acting Community Dev. Director 13020 SE 72nd Place 220 Fourth Avenue South Newcastle, WA 98059 Kent, W A 98032-5895 Puget Sound Energy City of Tukwila Municipal Liason Manager Steve Lancaster, Responsible Official Joe Jainga 6300 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 Title Examiner 700 Fifth Avenue, Suite 4900 PO Box 34018 Seattle, WA 98124"4018 Note: If the Notice of Application states that it is an "Optional DNS", the marked agencies and cities will need to be sent a copy of the checklist, PMT's, and the notice of application .• Also note, do not mail Jamey Taylor any of the notices she gets hers from the web. Only send her the ERC Determination paperwork. template -affidavit of service by mailing 334210404607 BISIACK RICHARD 2801 MT VIEW AV N RENTON WA 98056 3342104() 1 009 BURROU GHS JOHN D 2815 MOUNTAIN VIEW AV N RENTON WA 98056 334210049006 GOBEL PAUL R+JULIA C 706 NORTH 29TH STREET RENTON WA 98056 334210400902 MAXWELL STEVEN A+MARCIE E POBOX 2048 RENTON WA 98056 334210055508 SANCHEZ ALEX 703N291H ST RENTOI\I WA 98056 334210402908 WIELGO S THOMAS A PO BOX 1829 NEWPORT WA 99156 3~421 0405000 BITNEY JON ELL M 2727 M OUNTIAN VIEW AV N RENTON WA 98056 33421 () 398502 DUBOIS PEGGI L+GALSTER MART 2907 ~OUNTAIN VIEW AV N RENTON WA 98056 33421 0404508 KEPPLER WILLIAM F+DEBRA L 28051\110UNTIAN VIEW AV N RENTON WA 98056 33421 0056506 MC WILLIAMS DONALD E 2820 LK WASHINGTON BL N RENTON WA 98055 334210047505 SPENGLER SCOTT R+BAIN MARSHA o 2902 LK WASHINGTON BL N RENTON WA 98056 33421 ()404805 WINTER MARLENE R 2731 MT VIEW AV N RENT CN WA 98056 *05900407 BURLINGTON NORTHRN SANTA FE A. TIN: PROP TAX PO BOX 96189 FORT WORTH TX 76161 334210055607 FRISVOLD LARRY A+CYNDA B 707 NORTH 29TH STREET RENTON WA 98056 334210395300 MARSHALL R C B 2909 MOUNTAIN VIEW DR RENTON WA 98056 334210404003 PRITCHARD MARC 2807 MOUNTAIN VIEW RENTON WA 98056 :334210054600 "TRAUTMANN ROBERT F+CAROL YII\I ~09 N 29TH ST 'RENTON WA 98056 NOTICE OF APPLICATION I AND PROPOSED DETERMINAljlON OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE -MITIGATED (DNS-M) DATE: October 6, 2004 LAND USE NUMBER: LUA04-115, SM, SMC-H, ECF PROJECT NAME: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is requesting Environmental (SEPA) Review, a Shoreline Conditional Use Permit and a Shoreline Substantial Development Permit for the construction of a residential boatlift, residential jet ski lift and shoreline restoration. The site is located on the shores of Lake Washington, and is addressed as 2807 Mountain View Drive. The 13,162 square foot site has 2,205 square feet of land outside the ordinary high watermark. The site is zoned Residential - 8 (R-8) and is developed with an existing single-family dwelling and dock. The proposal, under the review and approval by Washington State Department of Fish and Wildlife and the US Army Corp of Engineers is to restore the altered shoreline, install a rock retaining wall and shoreline plantings, install a residential boat and jet ski lifts. Shoreline restoration requires the removal of approximately 10 cubic yards of unauthorized fill and restoration of the shoreline habitat. PROJECT LOCATION: 2807 Mountain View Drive 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 43.21 C.11 0, the City of Renton is using the Optional DNS-M 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 Non-Signifi9ance- Mitigated (DNS-M). A 14-day appeal period will follow the issuance of the DNS-M. I PERMIT APPLICATION DATE: September 21, 2004 ! 1 NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION: October 6, 2004 APPLICANT: PermltsJReview Requested: Other Permits which may be required: Requested Studies: Location where application may be reviewed: PUBLIC HEARING: CONSISTENCY OVERVIEW: Zoning/Land Use: Environmental Documents that Evaluate the Proposed Project: Development Regulations Used For Project Mitigation: Marc and Kaaren Pritchard Environmental (SEPA) Review, Shoreline Substantial Development Permit, Shoreline Conditional Use Permit Permits required by State Agencies, Building and Construction Permits. Biological Evaluation, Abbreviated Geotechnical Report PlanninglBulldlng/Public Works Department, Development Services Division, Sixth Floor Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055 A Public Hearing is tentatively scheduled for December 7,2004, before the Hearing Examiner in the Renton City Council Chambers. Hearings begin at 9:00 AM on the 7th floor of the Renton City Hall Building located at 1055 South Grady Way. The subject site is located within the Residential Single Family (RSF) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Designation, and is zoned Residential-8 Dwelling Units per Acre (R-8). The proposal is, consistent with the uses and policies establish by these land use and zoning designations. Compliance with specific development standards will be analyzed during further review of the . t I proJec. t, Not Applicable The project will be subject to the City's Environmental SEPA Ordinance , Procedures, Zoning Code, Shoreline Master Program, Critical Areas Regulations, International Building Code, Public Works Standards, and other codes and regulations where applicable. Proposed Mitigation M~ les: The following recommencfed Mitigation Mt-~ures will likely be imposed on the proposed project to address project impacts not covered by existing codes and regulations as cited above: The applicant will be required to adhere to the work wi~dow as determined by the State Department of Fish and Game and the US Army Corps of Engineers. • The applicant shall implement and maintain appropriate erosion control measures for the duration of the project. I Comments on the above application must be submitted In wrlti:ng to Nancy Weil, Associate Planner, Development ·Servlces Division, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055, by 5:00 PM on October 20,2004. This matter is also tentatively scheduled for a public hearing on December 7, 2004, a;t 9:00 AM, Council Chambers, Seventh Floor, Renton City Hall, 1055 South Grady Way, Renton. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact the Development Services Division, (425) 430-7282, to ensure that the hearing has not been rescheduled. If comments cannot be submitted in writing by the date indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and present your comments on the proposal before the Hearing Examiner. If you have questions about this proposal, or wish .to be made a party of record and receive additional information by mail, please contact the proje-ct 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: Nancy Weil, Associate Planner Tel: (425) 430-7270 I PLEASE INCLUDE THE PROJECT NUMBER WHEN CALLING FOR PROPER FILE IDENTIFICATION I If you would like to be made a party of record to receive further in "formation on this proposed project, complete this form andreturn to: City of Renton, Development Planning, 1055 So. Grady Way, Renton, WA 98055. File No.!Name: LUA04-115, ECF I Pritchard Shoreline Restoration NAME: ______________ !~--------------------------------------- ADDRESS: __________ ~ __________________________________ ___ TELEPHONE NO.: _______________ _ " J~te ,CITY 'FRENTON MIL . .-. " KathyK~lker~Wbeeler. Mayor .. Planning/BuildinwPublicWoCks nq,artment Gregg Zimmerman P~E., Administrator October 6, 2004 Jeff Sidepotham. ' Seaborn PiJe Driving - 9311 $E 36th Street#204 :Mercen Island, WA98040 ." . -," . , . Subject: Pritchard Shoreline Restoration, =&Boatlift . LUA"-04-115, SM~ 'ECF -. . .' . .- Dear Mr. Sidebotham:' .,:','." The Development P-Ianning Section of th~ City ()f' Rehton h~sdeterminedthat the subject application,tscomph~teJ~ccqrdtngto -submiitalrequirements and,the:rEifbre, is' . . accepted for review~ ':'.' .," . It' isterita1ively sched~I~~. for~dn$ideiratiQH:~bV·.:th~~Envir6nmE:mtdt Review Committee on .' .. November 9,2004. ,Pr1or tpthat r~w:ieWj;~Y9u,~illbe, notifiedifany additional in-f6r!Jlqtion: is requ're(ftocontinuep"oc:~s$il1gy6uf~'~ppifc~~i()h:' ,.,,<.', . ". : '., ',"'" . :\. '. ' ... ,,' " .. ~ . .' .~-:. --: :: -;.~ . " In . additiori;this -matter j~.·"tentativ~IY . -scheduled-for " a P~blic, Hearing on ' December 7,2004, at 9:00 AMinthe Council'Chambers;S~verith, Floor, Renton city Hall" l055' South ~rad,y;Way j" Hent6n.T _he a'pplicanto( 'representative( s) of ,the,. applicant are required to be_ present at the ptibii~hearing.A copy 6fthestaff repbrtwill····· . b~ mailedt6 youo~weekbef6re~,theheati~g~_ '. -, . '. .' P"leasecontact me ~t (425) 439,.:7270 ifyou'h$lve 'any questions. Nancy Wei I . Associate Planner - cc: MarC &. Kaa-ten ·Pritchard/Owner --------l:-:-O-:-:SS:-:S~o-, u-t-:-h-::G:-ra-d:-y-=w:7a-y--::-Re-n-to-n~, W.:::a:'-s-=h:-:in:-g-t-on-·'-="9-=-SO=-=S:-='s...,.·-----R E N T ON * This paj,ercontains 50% recyoded material, 30% Post consumer A HEAD OF THE CURVE LAW OFFICES OF BRADLEY JOHNSON PERSONAL INIURY lAW & CRIMINAU DUI DEFENSE PUGET SOUND PlAZA. 1325 FOURTH AVENUE. SUITE 535. SEATTLE. WASHINGTON 98101 TElEPHONE: (206) 223-1601 FACSIMILE: (206) 223-1677 WWW.LAWOFFICESOFBRADlEVIOHNSON.COM September 27,2004 Mr. David Phelan King County Prosecutor -Fraud Division 1002 Bank of California Bldg. 900 Fourth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 RE: Marc Pritchard, No. Y 4SD0267 Dear Mr. Phelan, Per our conversation today, I have drafted a rough timeline of the events follovving the alleged January 17, 2004 hydraulics violation. JANUARY 17: Violation was noted by WashiI)gton Department ofFish and Wildlife ("WDFW") Officer Wendy Livezey. JANUARY 20: Mr. Pritchard met with the City of Renton Code Compliance Officer Bob Arthur and WDFW Officer Livezey at his home. Mr. Prichard indicated that he was unaware that he needed permits to do the work on his shoreline but stated that he was "ready to do anything necessary to amend the violations." (See Officer Livezey's narrative, p.2) JANUARY 21: Mr. Pritchard, Officer Livezey and Area Habitat Biologist Stewart Reinbold meet at Pritchard's residence. Mr. Pritchard was advised the area was a sockeye spawning area and that any work done in that area, including the work necessary to remedy the situa1:ion, would require approval from 1) the City of Renton; 2) the Army Corp of Engineers; 3) No.AA; and 4) WDFW. At this time, Mr. Pritchard was also informed by Mr. Reinbold that, in addition to approval from the aforementioned agencies, he would also need a SEP A checklist form filled out. Fllrthermore, Mr. Pritchard was told that there was a "work window" for shoreline projects and absolutely no work could be done until July 15. Mr. Reinbold agreed to help Mr. Pritchard with this complicated process and Officer Livezey advised that she would allow Mr. Pritchard the time needed to obtain the proper peITDits. During that same week, Mr. Pritchard advised City of Renton Code Compliance Officer Arthur of the discussion and informed that he would be obtaining the proper permits. COpy TRIAL LAWYERS COMMITTED TO AGGRESSIVE REPRESENTATION LATE JANUARY-FEBRUARY: Mr. Pritchard spoke to Mr. Reinbold several times about the SEAP A fonn, how to locate it and navigate it. Mr. Pritchard also reviewed several SEP A fonns online. During this time, Mr. Pritchard also began interviewing Shoreline and Permi tting Companies to decide who to hire for assistance with this project. The finns that he contacted were as follows: 1) Ashley Shoreline Design and Permitting; 2) Sun Stream Boat Lifts; 3) Seaborn Pile Driving. Mr. Pritchard also received new information that the pennit process had chaJ1ged and was informed that 3 pennits were required. Permits were to be issued from each <>f the following agencies prior to any work being done: 1) City of Renton; 2) US Army Corps of Engineers; 3) WDFW. After discovering this infonnation, Mr. Pritchard called Officer Livezey, Steward Reinbold and Bob Arthur to ascertain the best way and the most efficient procedure for obtaining these pennits. Still not certain how best to proceed, Mr. Pritchard re-contacted Ashley Shoreline Design and Permitting and Seaborn Pile Driving. After speaking with these companies, he realized that he was going to need professional assistance to obtain all three ofthese permits, so he hired Seaborn Pile Driving to help him attain the proper pennits and design a shoreline reconstruction project that would meet all permitting requirements. FEBRUARY 18: Officer Livezey forwards charges to King County Prosecuting Attorney, despite representations that she was willing to allow Mr. Pritchard the time needed to obtain the permits. MARCH: While at the Renton City Hall working on the permit process, Mr. Pritchard pulled his address and learned that this matter had been send to the King County Prosecutor for filing of criminal charges. Mr. Pritchard then called Officer Livezey to inquire as to why she had fOlVVarded his infonnation on to the prosecuting attorney when their discussions had indicated that he would be able to have the time needed to remedy the problem. Officer Livezey infonned that once the work was done that the case would probably be dismissed. Mr. Pritchard also explained to Officer Livezey that the process for obtairling all of the permits and getting all the interested agencies to agree on process and shoreline issues is extremely costly and complicated and, by its nature, is not something that can be accomplished in a particularly expeditious fashion. The paperwork for the City of Renton pennit application process alone takes weeks to complete and there is a 12-week intake for the permit process to begin. Before ANY pennits would be issued, Mr. Pritchard needed to satisfy the following requirements: 1. State Environmental Policy Act; 2. Shoreline Substantial Development pennits; 3. Shoreline exemptions; 4. Washington State Department ofFish and Wildlife Hydraulic Project Approval; 5. Biological Evaluation; 6. Building Permit. APRIL: Seaborn Pile Driving is in contact will all three agencies from whom permits are required. The process of coordinating all of these bureaucratic agencies is fully underway. MAY THROUGH PRESENT: I. City of Renton: One week into the 12-week intake process. Application has been submitted and payment in full of$1200 has been made to City of Renton. 2. US Army Corps of Engineers: Ready to release their permit. 3. Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: Pending receipt of proof that both the above mentioned permits have been issued, WDFW will issue permit. This process from the very inception has been exceedingly complicated. Any time approval is required from three separate government agencies, coordination is extremely challenging. In some ways, each is waiting for approval from the other. Prior to even beginning the application process a number of mandatory requirements needed to be satisfied. Certainly, the fact that it appears that everything is in order for the permits to be issued prior to the end of the year from all required agencies is a testament to how much work has already been accomplished in this matter. Mr. Pritchard, in conjunction with Seaborn Pile Driving, has been in contact with all necessary parties in order to properly-reconstruct the shoreline and obtain all necessary permits. Please fmd enclosed communication with the relevant agencies and diagrams made by Seaborn Pile Driving illustrating the repair and reconstruction objectives and evidencing that all efforts have been made to properly remedy this situation. As I am sure you understand, this is not, and could never have been a "quick fix". Mr. Pritchard, with the help and assistance of both Stewart Reinbold and Seaborn Pile Driving, has satisfied all preliminary requirements and is now in the 12-week "intake" process of obtaining the final permit. With all ofthe complications and requirements to be satisfied prior to submitting the permit request, it is unreasonable to think this permit could have been applied for much sooner. Furthermore, when viewing the shoreline in Mr. Pritchard's neighborhood, you can see that his property is the only property that has not been re-constructed. Mr. Pritchard advises that is aware that many ofthe neighbors have added rocks to their shorelines since he has been living in the home without following the permit process. This is not to be construed as a reason not to obtain a permit, rather an explanation as to why Mr. Pritchard was unaware prior to making the alterations to the shoreline that he needed a permit. Absolutely no malice was ever intended in this situation. Mr. Pritchard made a mistake by making improvements to the shoreline without a permit. However, he was immediately willing to do whatever was necessary to remedy the problem as soon as it was called to his attention. Nothing in the police report indicates anything to the contrary. The reality is that "fixing" the • problem takes months due to the pennit process and approval required from all agencies involved. Additionally, there is and was a ''work window" in place that severely limited the amount oftime that any work could be done at all in this matter. Further, Mr. Pritchard has already incurred significant financial penalties. In hiring Seaborn Pile Driving to properly fix this problem, Mr. Pritchard bas incurred fees in excess of $10,000_ In addition, because this was filed as a criminal charge, he has incurred the cost of retaining counsel. It is unfortunate that this matter had to become a criminal case at all. Given Mr. Pritchard's efforts to properly rebuild the shoreline and taking into consideration the serious costs -both financial and otherwise -that have been incurred in this matter, we would ask that the State consider a dismissal with court costs in this matter. I will attach documentation that was referred to in this letter, as well as infonnation that I believe may assist you ~n making this decision. Thank you for your consideration. I look forward to discussing this further with you. . Very Truly Yours, Briteney Mercer Attorney at Law City of Renton LAND USE PERMIT DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON MASTER APPLICATION SEP 2 1 2004 RECEIVED PROPERTY OWNER(S) PROJECT INFORMATION NAME: f\~~ ~~~c,\\:\\~ ,_ , ''eo ' "e.. '>~T"i.( j PROJECT OR DEVELOPMENT NAME: . O~ \ I- t>Q.\t<-\\-¥\Ro .. st\o~'E..W~~ ~'l.J"'i\\,.h~ v. -~~~\O~ t¥' \.\) -' ADDRESS: ...1..8 0l. fl\tJ..\~\~ \) ~\bJJ ~A- CITY: R.~$)0 ~ ZIP:: ,~t\, ~e0~b PROJECT/ADl>RESS(S)JlOCATION AND ZIP CODE: ~8Cil N\~U\i\\~ '\\1:,'-1'-\ $~\.\le. ~~'\)~ \~\\- TELEPHONE NUMBER: ~o6-,q3---~OJl APPLICANT (ifotherthara owner) KING COUNTY: ASSESSOR'S ACCOUNT NUMBER(S): 3"Y1 ~\'D 4,04,0 '. NAME: EXISTING LAND USE(S): ~1 5,~C.'-~ ~\'\~\~G... ¢w:>evt,1=T... " COMPANY (if applicable): PROPOSED LAND USE(S): S~{I./ .. ..-_. .. ADDRESS: EXISTING CONPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION: f2.,~ F CITY: ZIP: PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP DESIGNATION (if applicable): N-4 -TELEPHONE NUMBER EXISTING ZONING: fZ.,-0 CONTACT PERSON PROPOSED ZONING (if applicable): N~~ NAME::5t~ S\ ~ €. ~:)T\-\~VV' SITE AREA (in square feet): 6bo - COMPANY (if applicable): .s~'~bD~~ ~~~-~~,~\~ \\\IIlIHUtil' ,\ ...... _ ,,' •• .J~ .,.' "'..1J ',' ADD~~;·~Qifll···~.:3 b '\V\ ~. ~ ~O"-{ f oItt: :' t. .",,'.'c'I ~ ;,-: i:A : II.. ~', ~.:; CI-rtt~'(?13~ ZIP:1%o~o • ,,"" _ 'P ~ ,.' ~ ,. ti'l ., • ~~~~.~.:~/, . ..~"':.f .~:~ .... '''!i'~ ,.-:\;' TELEpfim!E·~WM@.E~.A~D E-MAIL ADDRESS: . '-:J; II' "\1\\\\' 01.06-~3 E;'-r\OO SQUARE FOOTAGE OF ROADWAYS TO BE DEDICATED FOR SUBDIVISIONS OR PRIVATE STREETS SERVING THREE LOTS OR MORE (if applicable): N4 PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IN)O'jTS PER NET ACRE (if applicable): 'A- NUMBER OF PROPOSED LOTS (if applicable): N A NUMBER OF NEW DWELLING UNITS (if apPlicablej,vA- Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERV\Fonns\PJanning\rnasterapp_doc08I29/03 '. """ PI "J EeT INFORMAT.---I_O_N--,~,--c_on_t_i'-=tt--~e_d-LI) _______ --. PROJECTVALU~ ~ S[ 000 ~ ~ . NUNBER OF EXISTING DWELLING UNITS (rt= applicable): a~~ SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSED '~SIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (If applicable): ~!=1 - SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL IS THE SITE LOCATED IN ANY TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTALLY CRITICAL AREA, PLEASE INCLUDE SQUARE FOOTAGE (if applicable): BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (If applicable): R f R SQUARE FOOTAGE OF PROPOSjD NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (if applicable): ~ R SQUARE FOOTAGE OF EXISTING NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS TO REMAIN (If applicable): L41~.:;. ~:\t\\~ ~ a AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA ONE a AQUIFER PROTECTION AREA TWO a FLOOD HAZARD AREA a GEOLOGIC HAZARD ___ sq.ft. ___ sq. ft. NET FLOOR AREA OF NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS (If a HABITAT CONSERVATION sq. ft. cI~HORELlNE STREAMS AND LAKES b60 sq. ft. app(j~ble): -. ~ -r ~ . NUf\ABER OF EMPLOYEES TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE NEVV PROJECT (if applicable): .~ I Pt a WETLANDS ___ sq.ft. LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY (Attach legal description 0 ... separate sheet with the following information included) SITUATE IN THE $~ QUARTER OF SECTION ~ TOWNSHI~'-\, RANGES'E, IN THE CITY OF RENTON, KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. TYPE OF APPLICATION & FEES List all land use applications being applied for: 1. .J MdlM &bJ1arrn~ OW. (J~t-$ {,(J()Q 3. 2. Ow/y: CIll(idiJf-#ZtJ(> 4. ~ 1,2m ~ Staff will calculate applicable fees aAd postage: $ , AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP - I, (Print Name/s) dtAt<c 4 ~Zrc.,H AIt~ declare that I am (please check one) }5. the ~n:ent owner of the pro~rty . .. Involved In thIS appfication or __ the authonzed representatIVe to act for a corporation (please attach proof of authonzation) and that the foregOing statements and answers herein contained and the inforntation herewith are in all respects true and correct te» the best of my knowledge and belief. ~ I certify that 1 know or have satisfactory evidence that 1YI.A@Cc A Pili TCII:1tgb AM ~ . A signed this instrument and acknowledged it to be hislherltheir tree and' voluntary act lOr the /' ~ ~ C/v uses and purposes mentioned in the instru ent ~------------------------ (Signawre ofOwnerlRepresentative) . (Signature of OwnerlRepresentative) Notary (Print) IQ m,hrIf L..ft?. My apPointment expires: /!)2~I/' ~ Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERV\Fonns\Planning\masterapp.doc08I29/03 l HAl ,....V~II'-"N V'I"" L-VI oi II" t;;JL-~ _ '-"'"" '-~ • ...,11-1-1 I~' 0 L-_"'&;;' WASl .. UNGTON GARDEN OF EDEN' D{vi51ON NO. I. AS PER PLAT . RECORDED IN YOLU1E " Cf Pt..A PAGE 6~. RECORD& OF KlN/" COUNTY. DESCRI6ED AS FOLL~, , ~- BEGINNINU AT Tl-fE INTER5ECTl~ OF TJ-IE &cuT~ LINE OF SAID LOT 81 UJlT~ T}"{E MEANDER LINE OF L.oKE WA5J..11NGTcNi ' T~ENCE EAST, ALONG T~E SOUT .... LINE AND IT'6 60UmERL y FRODUCTICN. A DISTANCE OF 35 FEET TOTJ..IE SOUTI-IJJE5TERL Y LINE OF n .. IE BURLINGTON NORT~ERI"-{ RAILWAY (NORT~E~ PACIFIC) .. Rlu~T -OF-WA I, ~ENCE NORT~&TERL Y. AL~ SAID 6OUT~5TER.L "'( LINE. A DISTANCE OF 24 FEE'! T~ENCE S51121'04"W A DISTANCE OF .32 FEET TO TJ-IE FOINT OF BEGINNING, TOGETl-4ER W(T~ LOT 82 IN SAID BLOCK A AND 5EC~D CLASS SI-lORELANDS AS CONVEYED .SY TJ.4E 6TATE OF WA6~INGTON SITUATE IN FRONT OF. ADJACENT TO O~ AeuTTIHG n-iEREONI eXCEPT Tl-lAT PORTI~ TI-IEREOF DESCRJE3ED AS E3EGINNING AT ~E lNTERSECTIO'l OF ·T .... E MEANDER LINE WITI-I ll£ NOR'rn LINE a= SAID LOT 82. ~ENCE S5~736'''4"u.I A DISTAf-o..ICE OF 5~.1(z) FEET. T"J.4ENCE N.46734'f}(Z;)"W A DIST~lCE OF 10.82 FEET TO A FOINT WICJ.4 BEARS 56211!)'42"W FROM ne FOINT OF eeGIt-NING a= T~I& EXCEFTJc:N.. SlruATE IN T~E COJNTY OF KING. STATE OF WA5~JNGTON. LOT COVERAGE: AREA OF SITE AREA OF USEABLE LAND LOT COVERAGE rOT AL COVERAGE T. .!SEAT?L.:E COVERAGE ,. -13)62. -~C3. -161. -' ~.a~ OF TOTAL. -e4.'3~ OF USE;ABl.E PRo?os~: Roc.'(.. R.~~~\~\~c,'\ " ¥-\~U-. s\\.o~r-L\~E·o",,--c. ~o L~) PlP!~\n,G.'S __ _ SCALE 1':.0" ---=-~ LAKE WA5l-11NGTON ASSlJ1ED LAKE ELEY • 14JZ)0' J~ f;::.. ~OV€. u ~ ~IJ,S" 0 R \ 3-~,? ~\\..~,:_ ~~ .. ..!-__ =~~-~~~~--~~~\\~\ ______ ~~=_.1 \~-.. ~ 14a3.'3r L·.(6~ 0-01-"1'''''3' ~UFO'l F,s~eRIES' AF'FROY AL , '- DEVELOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON SEP 2 1 2004 RECEIVED " Pltge I King: unty Department of Assessme, Parcel 334210-4040 "- Computer: JACKSON-PHYLLIS 0412112004 Parcel Geo Area: Res Area: 063-003-0 "'l Spec Area: Q·S-T-R: SE-31-24-5 FOlio: 22837 Type: R Rasp: R Levy: 2100 Block: A Lot: 82 Property Address: 2807 MOUNTAIN VIEW AV N RENTON 98055 Legal Desc : HILLMANS LK WN GARDEN OF EDEN # 1 POR BEG AT NXN OF S LN LOT 81 WITH MDR LN TH E ALG S LN & ITS PROD 35 FT TO SWL Y LN N P RlW THNWl Y ALG SWL Y LN 24 FTTH S 51 DEG 21 MIN 04 sec W 32 FT TO POS & 82 & SH LDSAOJ LESS POR BEG AT NXN OF MDR LN WITH N LN LOT 82 TH S SO DEG 36 MIN 04 SEC W 50.70 FTTH N 46 DEG 34 MIN 00 SEC W 10.82 FT TO PT WCH BEARS S 62, CEG 15 MIN 42 SEC W FRM POB TH N 62 CEG 15 MIN 42 SEC E TO POB TaxPayer Accounts Account Change 334210-4040-03 I PRITCHARD MARC & KAAREN 4906 ALPENGLOW PL NW ISSAQUAHWA 98027 971616 Land HBU If Vacant : Single Family Present Use: Single F.amily(Res UselZone) Percent Unused : 0 Zoning Date : 10/1812000 Sewer System : Public Comer Lot: No Base Land Val : 290,000 Tax Year: 0 Parking: Land Views Mt Rainier: Olympics : Cascades : Territorial: Average Seattle: Land Waterfront Location : Lake Wash Bank: Low Tide/Shore: Uplands With TidelandslShorelands Restricted : Lot Depth Factor: 0 HBU As Improved: Present Use Traffi~ Volume: 0 Current Zoning : R-8 Water System: Water District Lot SqFt : 660 Restrictive'Size/Shape : Yes Land Val Date: 0311811997 Road Access: Public Street Surface: Paved Sound: Lake Washington: Excellent. Lake Sammamish: Lake/River/Creek : Other: Access Rights: No Proximity Influence: No Poor Quality: Yes' Footage: 40 s Att)O -----' -~, r:. ---- CDR ~_lJ-_J-L __ .~. __ I) . - - - --.~~;j1j -------._. ~-L~~l~_~" if~~~ --L;-J--:~-d~--··--r---_J. ___ .j-; : /":"'r'~~ ~Fi=i=~~~~~~*" -~~~~~-~~ N~=s1nij I srt-:~.- 1 •• JJl I • C3 ~ ZONING ~ =: TBCIINlCAL SDV1CB8 31 T24N R5E E 1/2 -:"6 • II ,.0 d . s" t 0 ..... .,." I • I~ u , oUtS" 1ft I ~"'.!> 50 S.E. '93RD ST so a 6 11"" o,.-.s- ~ 13 50 )o-¢. 10~ "740.~ -!.T~e.e.T 6 23-5 ~R\\v~ ~~\) ~~>~>SQ~S 'f{\(l..~ ;} ~ 01 mo(,\.Y\\~\~ \h~~ ~. ~. . r o .. ~o :., ,,~ ,0\\ ,4- ...-. s.c. ~ \u 0 'Po·" 1'7-' so c ... . Ci 5 ... d , •• I!) s·~,,,,, .. f· r ~o~4 1\ / " ~I' J1 'S 16 _,0 M . 94TH 5 95TH ·.31 so so ~. L-'?t~"i:. ~~\~~\~\~0~~ . /"---.-- E"'I.~ '~'\ ~'\l~. ~\ ~ <2... "?U~~ Q"SE ~ P-£s\"=ltt.e \.\'A~~ -~~o'Ec:..\ s\\o.o~L..\~e... PR.o-...:l\.'i)E:,. S'ASi-e s.\tl(l.1\c...'t:-t-~~ ~~~c..~-A~ - Q\"'l\u'l'4\, ~..:2.,\ -9, E.~\ ~'l c.o'=-\ <\ \.~ ?ttlS-. 'P~;;;?E.1:2\'1 O'N.~c.'2.-s. (') . . .:l.. 'C \\ ~ 0 q '" "\ ~\ ~ 'l. \c'+{ 0'<... ~~~oJ,U-J:Pr-<\8CS'"b • I , 4.:1-.~): ~ ... ", ~ c= oL"'c-y..,..".;J Yo,,,,,,, . -. ~~ ~~'\~~~ ~~.~1lE.~'E. :t~O~MO~'fo\\"'~ ~\~~ ~~~\.~ \Nf\. ~"50~~ r I E:t-l:>\ \l'l~ . W.\lL\l~ \cz..'E:.~ ?@.QPO$~·. ~\~\ \\Qu.s~ ).. <00\ ,Sc.i'LE .1"-\.. c;:; "',I. 3,1,,[ o .s \ 0 IS" N\co..~·'~" ~~ ~ .. ~.;<t'-\ ~\1. ~ ~~~~~y \\.~~~ 9~DS-t; I .&0 ?O5-~!> : _. ~ t.~O"\l.~j.\ ~,~ G.. SC, '-\., b'"t-_~b~~.....,. __ J>~o ~_~">_;c .. _. ___ _ '¥..~~o"e a'f\.~T",~~ ~oc.." ~.~9-~Si\ ~"-___________ I ¥ ~\ot;. "i-\ ~ H\~\l. 1-.. ~ LO~~ "3 '-'112K. ='4-"~> -t- '. . -, \\ .. ~~?o~e: \1l\~~ ~\ ~~S.\t>~r:\\O~ ~R..o,,"~~c..~ ~ R~N'\o~e U~~I.\\~O'I:L.\"l. .. :E.O ~\\"'L '~~$~""\\ ~~~Q.~L ·;~~t.L'~(-~· "'lAQ-~~~\ - P PI.\U.~'\ ~ ~\/. ca5-~;---· ~S~ ~ iqc~~-~--L ~ \-;-'---1 ~=i~ ~ t..~·~~~_w~t'L;i~~:~~~~-·----· -----+ A~~:.~~.q-P~.~t'i---5~~~ 'A~~ . .s_ .. __ .... _______ .. ~\ ~ R.~~~_t?'-~ _____________ ._ .. _ .. -_ .-- \'J -'-8\l N\ou.\J\"Pr\~\h'().l4 ~,~ 'l'b~~fI\~;tI'\"\\7\I,Ea.J.{...~v .. c::::::.Q.~~\\~\~;._.~\~~ __ . _______________ ._._ .... _. Rt"\o~, ~~·qB05b.. ~cl-lT~I""f\. .. ~8os-" := At~~~~rto~~:;~~~.~~~0~A\~l.;~~~.~~~~~~ -t;::>~\~ .. 5'~'-t-() 'i ~~~~~ '=> _ . ..J-~ :::..f ~-II ~i I .., r ~ cr -0 fl\ -(' .,. ,. j ..L t:J (.1\ -1 ~J.L.. ____ -=--_ ::t r I ~\s\ \$)4.5~ l~ 0 1 ~\ '0 u. "-\\ ~,,~ \J\"t..~ R~",-\.\ c.~ .~~. ~~ o5'"~ .. I I ! , I Sc..?-,L.. '£:. 1"::. 1 O' rl"" Irllt\ o S }~ IS" ~ \l ~ \\e ~~ ".l N\ ? R.o\.t i.. S *o~t:.L\ ~ ~ \\ ~ ~ t\ ~1 C ~\:"'-\}J\ '. Co ~ 'i.. ~ .:t \. ~ \' E. s"\ t ~ t , ft~~ .. "?~~~~JIc'l ()~ T'\E-~: .l.ao !>-»-Ol.\~ \PI\~ \l\\"'r.. ...... , ~~\-..J'c -~~~o~ ~t~ J...8l\ f'l'\oI.lN-'t>J'\",,\lvc:'N '$e\~'<..-R~,,\\b~ .'-N\'\ . ,C.OIR 'E>'-'ilI~\<..~\ w i\\1 ~~:i;) 0$\ e:R. 'V'O~~oo t) $\~~"E:.~ ~~o ~o$E.Q: S*b~'CL\\-'\'t:.. ~L~~\ \).l~ s ~~R~~ 'fj) 'O-t -\'ll\~\\\\.\'\O~ ~\;)\\ ~ \l\\~ l\C~ \,)~?i. 1:. ~ -_ L 'r'r ~ '2;. \I\) fit So 'rt \ "-\ G. "\ () "\ t1\ : ~~~'Q~ C.OU"\'-\~ ~''N.~' . f1~?L\c:..~~\~· t\~~ ~?r~<-,"?~\\c.. \~ ~12-? "'-'-~-:::.', b -J.B-o Fig. 1.1 -Unauthorized fill on N. side of property to be removed Fig. 1.2 -:-Unauthorized fill on S. side of property to be removed 1/4" aluminum cc::mstruction Carriage as!Seml7ly easily remov-ed to fTee up docle space THE S~ LIFTfM Spring peam punks conform to hull Clean !Single-arm design Side guide wheels prevent jamming Convenient boarding nanc:::Ue Clamp design adjustable bunks Easy glide track less sensitive to sticking N\ ~ ~ "-. T' ~ \'""Z~ ~ ¥ \~ cr 8 Ol 'fl\~\.q.~ \~\~ \.\ \t.'1~ ~~. "\' ~~\-..\\o~ ,'-t--\i>c--,\~055" I I ;- to . , ' City of Renton Development Services Division 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Re: Conditional Use ~ustification Location: 2807 Mount~in View Drive Renton, WA 98055 Owner: Mr. Marc Pritchard September 14, 2004 i. The use must be c~mpatib1e with other permitted uses within the area. The installation of a freestanding boat lift station and personal water craft lift will be compatilole with other permitted uses within the area for the safe storage and moorage <)f small boats. This installation will meet the setback requirements set by ~he City of Renton and will comply with all conditions and regulations. This installation is also allowed by The Corps of Engineers and National Marine Fisheries Services under Programmatic Reference Numbers 1-3-00I- 1524, 1-3-00-IC-I525 & WSB-00-582. In addition, several of the adjacent properties have simi ~ar existing boat lift and jet.,-ski lift stations. ii. This use will not interfere with the public use of public shorelines. This site is a private residence and the proposed lifts, will be on private property. There wilL be no interference with public use. iii. Design of the site will be compatible with the surroundings and the City's Master' Program. The design of the si-te will comply with all regulations and conditions required by The City of Renton. It will be in scope with the surrounding permitted uses. iv. The use shall be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the City's Master PrograLm. The use will be in ~armony with the City's'Master Prqgram and will not be a grant of special pr3Lvilege. The use wili improve the ability of water related activities as well aLS restore habitat to the immediate shoreline. v. The use meets the conditional use criteria in WAC 173-27-160. This use meets the criteria outlined iIi the WAC 173-27-160 .. ; "".~ \'.,' S~NT BY: K&N MEAT -MONTE VISTA DIST.; 425 204 8122; SEP -1 -04 1 3: 32 ; PAGE: -1 /1 ~~I '-?'-'-: . . ,GEOTECH: , CONSULTANTS. ~NC_ " ~(Opy sse 4. • ..= = ~ . 132S" NE 20th Street, Suite 16 j . BeJievue. WA 98005 : DAILY FIELD REPO RT TRAViEIJPRIiP TIME:. I'IUI; <IH SITE TIMFnFF SITF 425·747-5618 FAX 425-747~8S61 : IIOURS CMARGED WEATHER PERMI1 NUI/I8t!R PAGE. OF .......... ;...><:.....---+-'~~. -~~~~=~I --b~ t:~~'i;~~ .:s--io -;J ~ -~. the ~J8." I;;J .~~ ____ :s ....... t/Je-.e .J.c~ 4.)J.lfJMblL._ . .k~.T.j 5'-"-4-oIIit.~~~~':7=:Z==::~1--.J ~~~~~ .. ~~~<~4~~~:'~1~h~'~------------------------------ ~4 abserv~ ________________ ~ ,..~ -;,., City of Renton Development Services Divisioh 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Re: Project Narrative Location: 2807 Mountain View Drive Renton, WA 98055 Owner: Mr. Marc Pritchard Se ~ sec 31 T 24 R 5E Tax ID: 334210-4040 August 23, 2004 Square footage (lot) 660 sq. ft. Pier: 492 Front Footage: 35' House: 400 Land Use Permits 1. Shoreline Substantial Development 2. SEPA Review 3. Building Permit 4. City of Renton Grading License Zoning R-8 The site is a single family residence (400 sq. ft) with a 492 squCire foot pier ~ocated on the shorell.ne of Lake Washington. The site is a low bank shoreline with good drainage conditions. The proposed work is to remove approximately ten cubic yards of uXlauthorized fi~l and restore the shoreline habitat utilizing native natural mCiterials and plantings~ Approximately five cubic yards of round rock under thr~e inches in diameter will be spread with in, twelve feet of the shoreline for :fish habitat. The shoreline will be planted evenly with native vegetation consisting of Red Osier'Dogwood stakes. The existing large willow tree will remain. Also proposed will be the installation of rock retaining wall along the shoreli3ne landward of the ordinary' high water mark and the installation of a free standing boat lift station andjet~ski.lift.Please refer the enclosed details. , The projected'project cost will be approximately $ 15,000.QO The project will be compieted.within the timing conditions set by The Department ~f Fish & Wildlife and Corps of Engineers, July 16 -December 31. The hours will be between 7am and 4pm Monday through Friday. A best management p~an will be implemented to minimize any impacts to the surrounding areas. Hauling of materials will be completed by a barge mounted crane or by trucking on 1-405, Lake Washington Blvd, and Mountain View Drive. Please' call us at 206-236-1700 if you need i'iny additional informa tion. City of Renton Development Services Divi§ionL 1055 South Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Re: Project Narrative Construction Mitigation Desc~iption T' Location: 2807 Mountain View Drive Renton, WA 98055 Owner: Mr. Marc Pritchard August 23, 2004 The project will be completeci within the timing conditions set by The Departme~t of Fish & Wildlife and Corps of Engineers, July 16 -December 31. The hours wi:l.l be between 7am and 4pm Monda~ through Friday. A best management plan will be implemented to minimize any jimpacts to the surrounding areas. Hauling of materials will be completed by a barge mounted crane from Lake Washington. Sincerely, SEABORN PILE DRIVING COMPANY By Jeffrey R. Sidebotham () DEVEtoPME Crrv 0r: ~t:r~~N/NG . iSEP 2 1 2]0'1 . RECEIVED \ Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Biological Evaluation Prepared for: . Mr. Marc Pritch·ard 2807 Mountain View Av. N. Renton, WA 98055 Prepared by: Shoreline Research P.O. Box 1625 Chelan, WA 98816 ... ( ! TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARy ............................................................................................................ 1 INTRODUCTION .................. ~ ....................................................................................................... 1 I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION ................................................................................... .' ......... .3 A. Project Location ....................................................................................................... 3 B. Project Description ................................................................................................... 3 C. The Action Area ............................................ ; .......................................................... 7 II. SPECIES AND HABITAT INFORMATION .................................................................. 8 A. Species Information ................................................................................................. 8 B. Survey Results ........................................................................................................ 12 C. Existing Environmental Conditions (Environmental Baseline) ......................... , ... 12 III. EFFECTS OF THE ACTION ......................................................................................... 14 A. Effects Analysis ................................................................................................. ; ..... 14 B. Take Analysis ......................................................................................................... 21 C. Conservation Measures .......................................................................................... 22 D. Determination of Effect ......................................................................................... 22 E. Essential Fish Habitat ........................ ; ............................... · .................................... 22 IV. CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................ 26 V. REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 26 List of Tables . Table 1: Draft NMFS Lake Matrix Checklist of Pathways and Indicators for Documenting the Environmental Baseline and Project Effects ..... : .......................................................... 19 Table 2: Species with designated EFH found in waters ofLakeWashington ............................ 25 List of Figures Figure 1: Location Map ........................................................................................................... 2 Figure 2: VICInIty Map ............... , ............................................................................................ 6 Figure 3: Aquatic Habitats ....................................................................................................... 6 Figure 4: Elevation View ......................................................................................................... 7 Figure 5: Typical Cross-sections ............................................................................................. 8 Figure 6: Shoreline Revegetation Plan .................................................................................... 8 Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Biological Evaluation J September 8, 2004 ( i PH<)TOGRAPHS APPENDICES Appendix A: Agency Contacts Appendix B: WDFW Hydraulic Project Approval (pending) Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Biological Evaluation 2 September 8. 2004 {; EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Mr. Pritchard proposes to remove 10 yards of unauthorized fill and replace with substrate gravel and retention· measures on their property located on the south shore of Lake Washington in Renton, WasQington. Proposed construction wo:uld be timed to avoid disturbance to juvenile salmonid'rearing. Minor disturbances to foraging bald eagles could temporarily occur. Shoreline Research recommends ~e following determinations of effect: • Bald eagle noeffec:t • Puget Sound bull trout may affed; . not likely to adversely affect • Puget Sound chinook salmon and its critical habitat may affict, not likely to adversely affect • Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia coho salmon not likely to significantly impact INTRODUCTION The applicant proposes to remove approximately 10 yards of unauthorized backfilI and replace with the appropriate amount of substrate grave] and natural retention barrier along the south shoreline of Lake Washington, as well as to add a free-standing boat lift and a dock-mounted personal watercraft lift and to add a 2Y2' x 20' rock retaining wall 3' landward 0::£ the ordinary high water mark. The proposed work is located at their residence at 2807 Mountain View Av. N. in Renton, King County, Washington (Figure 1). The applicants will apply for permits under the City of Renton's Shoreline Master Program and . will not need a permit for any clearing and grading. They will also need a Hydraulic Project Approval from the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) (Appendix A) and a Section 10/404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps). The applicants have hired Columl>ia Research for assistance with env:ironmental issues. Section 7 of ~he Endangered Species Act (ESA) of 1973 (as amended in 1978,19,9, and 1982) directs federal agencies to ensure that actions they authorize, fund, andlor conduct are not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of any federally proposed or listed species, or result in destruction or adverse modification of critical ha~itat for such species. Section 7(c) <If the ESA requires federal agencies to contact the U.S. Fish and WjJdlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) before the begInning of any construction activity. This is to determine if any species listed as threatened or endangered by the federal government may be in the project area. NMFS has divided anadromous salmonids into Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Biological Evaluc.::ztion .3 September 8, 2004 ( evolutionarily significant units (ESUs), with an ESU (a salmonid population or group of populations) considered a distinct species under the ESA. USFWS and NMFS have dete:::rmined that threatened and endangered species may occur in the project .area, so a biological assessment (BA) or biological evaluation (BE) must be prepared. This BE will provide information to facilitate an evaluation of the potential impact of the proposed project on listed and candidate· species under USFWS and NMFS jurisdiction. Pursuant to the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and fie 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act, NMFS has determined that an Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation is necessary for the proposed project. This BE will' satisfy the inr<>nnation requirements for an EFH assessment when the NMFS concurs with· the recor:mnended detenninations of effect presented in this BE. I. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Project Location The proposed fill removal and shoreline substrate installation will be on private lakefront property at 2807 Mountain View Av. N. in the City of Renton in King County, Washington. The property is situated within SE 'i4 Section 31 , Township 24, Range 5E. B. Project Description The applicants propose to remove the existing unauthorized backfill and install substrate gravel along the shoreline, along with natural retention measures to keep the substrate in place, as well as to add a free-standing boat lift and a dock-mounted personal watercraft lift along the North side of the pier, and to add a 2Y:z' x 20' rock retaining wall 3' landward of the ordinary high water mark as shown on the plan details (this wall will serve to act as a landscape soil retainage barrier and not as a bulkhead. A shallow trench will be dug to retain the base rocks, and a silt f'ence will be installed along the shoreline to prevent sediment from entering the lake). Construction Timing Construction would be scheduled to avoid migrating juvenile salmonids and likely wou..ld not be allowed between July 16th and December 31 st. The desired time for construction would be when the lake level is low. The estimated duration of construction activities would be two to four days. Construction Sequence The work would be completed in three phases: demolition, construction and lift installation. Removal of unauthorized fill (one day) Installation of new substrate gravel and natural retention barriers (one day) Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Biological Evaluation 4 September 8, 2004 ( ( ) () Installation of retainin.g wall (one day) Installation of lifts ('l'2 -one day) To prevent the suspeI1sion of sediments by construction activities, a silt curtain would be placed waterward of all construction activities. The bottom of the cUIttain is fitted with a 2.54- centimeter (I-inch) diameter steel pipe designed to keep the curtain"s end near the lake bottom. The top of the curtain is fitted with floats to keep the curtain suspended. If water depths permit, a silt fence would be in.stalled a couple of feet waterward of the bulkhead as additional suspended sediment protection. A crane with c1ambucket stationed on a barge would excavate the old fill, and to install the new substrate and retaining waJl. All equipment, materials, and construction activities used to complete this -project would be stationed on a barge_ The barge would be located offshore avoiding riparian and shoreline disturbances that could occur with ground-based equipment. c. The Action Area The action area inclades all areas that could be affected by the proposed project and it is not limited to the actual ~roject area. When considering possible disturbance to terrestrial species, limits of the action area are generally considered to extend 0.5 mile from the project area. This distance represents the most commonly recognized limit of concern for terrestrial-species based on the type of constIuction activities proposed for this project. The action area for aquatic species could be described based on two variables: suspended sediments and noise disturbance. It is unknown how much of an increase in suspended sediment would be created by this project. The placement ofa silt curtain and -fence on the waterward side of the project would greatly reduce the transport of sediment inte:> Lake Washington. Lake currents could carry s~me suspended sediment away from the project site, but likely not more than a few hundred yards away. The range of sound rrIagnitude from the faintest to the loudest the-hlIlllan ear can hear is so large that sound pressure is expressed on a logarithmic scale in anits called decibels (dB). Environmental -noise is commonly "A-weighted" to simulate ho~ an average person hears sounds. A-weighted-sound levels are expressed in units of A-weighted decibels (dBA). u.s. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) research found that nOIse associated with normal operation of construction equipment (trackhoe) is typically 75 to 92 dBA at 46 feet (EPA 1971). These measurements are based on sound movement through air. 'Decibel conversion from air to water is approximately 26 dBA higher (Walter 1999). Underwater noise associated with normal operation of construction equipment would be in the 101 to 118 dBA range. Point-source noise dissipates at approxir:nately 6 dBA per distance doubled (e.g., 45,90, 180 feet) through water. Pritchard Shoreline Restorcztion . Biological Evaluation 5 September. 8, 2004 ( c.) " According to Feist (1991), salmonids do not detect sound below about 97 dBA. The estimated distance salmonids "W"ould perceive noise from construction activities would be approximately 650 feet from the project site. . . II. SPECIES A:N"D HABITAT INFORMATION A. Species Info rmation USFWS issued an endangered species listing for this project on March 15, 2000. The letter indi~ated that the foLlowing species might occur in the action .area: Name Bald eagle Bull trout Sc.ientific Name Haliaeetus leucocephalus Salvelinus confluentus . Population Segment Coastal/Puget: Sound Federal Stabs Threatened Threatened NMFS indicates the following spe~ies may occur in the action area (Appendix B). Name Scientific Name Evolutionary Significant Units Chinook salmon Oncorhynchus tshawytscha Puget Sound Coho salmon Oncorhynchus kisutch . Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia :y ederal Status lhreatened 'Candidate On February 16,2000, NMFS designated critical habitat for 'the Puget Sound chinook salmon as protected under the ESA (Federal Register 2000). Critical Babitat for the Puget Sound chinook includes all marine, estuarine, and fresh water that is accessible to chinooksalmon, including the action area. The action area does not contain any other federally designated critical habitat. Only federally listed and candidate species are analyzed in this report. Bald Eagle Bald eagles are attracted to the Puget Sound region and 1:0 Lake Washington during winter because of their abundant fish resources and high density of wintering waterfowl. . The mild winter climate also allows them to spend less energy maintaining body temperature and performing routine activities. These factors and the availability of perch and roost sites make Lake Washington a :favorable wintering area. Some eagles reside year-round along the shores of Lake Washington because of plentiful food. According to WDFW's Priority Habitat and Species database, no bald eagle nest is within 0.5 mile of the project site. During the field visit, no bald eagles or nests were observed. Theaction area is potentially in the foraging range of eagles that use tbis nest site. Other local eagles may also use the area for foraging. Bald eagle populati.ons began to decline in the late 1800s (Federal Register 1999)_ In 1978, lJ under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, the federal government listed the bald eagle as an Pritchard Shoreline Rest~.ration Biological Evaluation 6 Seprember 8, 2004 ( ) ) • en.dangered species in the lower 48 states, except Michigan, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Washington, and Oregon, where it was designated as threatened (Federal Register 1999). Listing this species pr<)inpted the development of a Bald Eagle Recovery Plan. Goals for the Pacific Recovery Region (Idaho, Nevada, California, Oregon, Washington, Montana, and Wyoming) were esublished in 1986 and included a minimum of 800 nesting pairs_ Goals also included an average reproductive rate of one fledged young per occupied breeding area and an average su.ccess rate for occupied breeding areas of not less than 65%. In 199~, 1,480 nesting pairs with_ an. average success rate of 75% were estimated within the Pacific Recovery Region. The re>covery plan documented three existing eagle breeding territories in ~e Lake WashingtonlLake Sammamish area in 1986, and no target recovery territories. Curreritly, there are 13 breeding bald eagle territories in the Lake WashingtonlLake Sammamish area (Negri 2000). C ~astallPuget Sound Bull Trout B~l trout (Salve linus conjluentus) is a member of the salmonidae family in-the genusSalvelinus, w'-hich is commonly known as char. It is native to Washington wa.1ersalong with its closest relative, the Dolly Varden (Salvelinus rnalrna). Bull trout and Dolly Varden were considered to be the same species until 1978, when Cavender (1978) recognized theIll as separate species. Bull tr<>ut have historically been found throughout the Pacific Northwest from Northern California to the Upper Yukon and Mackenzie River drainages in Canada. The range of bull trout may overlap tnat of Dolly Varden west of the Cascade Mountains. R ull trout inhabit the _ Cedar River and possibly other drainages of the Lake Washington basin vv-here high water quality and prey such as juvenile salmon exist. USFWS (1998) reported that tvvo unidentified adult native char were observed in the headwaters of Issaquah Creek in October 1 993. Issaquah Creek is a tributary of the Satnmamish River, which enters the north end of Lake .Washington. Kraemer (1999) indicated that, occasionally, bull trout may enter Lake Washington from Puget Sound in search of food, but probably would not stay long. USFWS (1998) indicates that unidentified adult native char have been observed passing throagh the viewing chamber at the Hiram Chittenden Locks and, in 1992, an angler captured an unidentified native char from the sbore of Lake Washington. Bull_ trout have specific spawning habitat requirements; they spawn only in a small portion of the a~ailable stream habitat. Spawning areas are usually less than 2% gradient (Fraley and Shepard 1 989), and water depths rarige from 4 to 23 inches (Fraley et al. 198 1.). In the Lake Washington system, bull trout spawn in tributaries of Lake Chester Morse. This population is adfluvial and rears in Lake Chester Morse. No known bull trout spawning occurs in the action area. After hatching, juvenile bull trout rear in stream sections containin.g low-velocity water, large substrate, and submerged woody debris (Shepard et al. 1984). Rearing juveniles disperse from h.atch sites and use most of the suitable and accessible stream areas -within a drainage (Leider et al. 1986). Water temperature, water quality, and cover (substrate and large woody debris) determine the distribution and abundance of juveniles (Fraley and Shepard 1989). Juveniles are seldom found in streams with temperatures above 15°C. Excess sediment reduces usable rearing' habitat and macro invertebrate production (Fraley and Shepard 1989). Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Biological Evaluation 7 September 8. 2004 ( ( J C) Adfluvial and anadromDus bull trout may use the action area as a migration corridor. Bull trout migrating to spawning grounds could be found in the Lake Washington watershed from August to October (Brown 1994). Bull trout usually spawn more than once in their lives. Out-migrating fish may be found in the action area between September and November. Occasionally, bull trout remain in spawning streams over winter and migrate out in the spring (Browrn 1994). Fish over- wintering in spawning s-:treams could be in the action area from March to early June. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon Chinook salmon are widely distributed throughout Puget Sound and its fresh~ater drainages. In the Lake Washington. watershed, fall-run chinook salmon migrate through Lake Washington to reach spawning grounds in the Ce~ar ~d Sammamish River systems .and in other Lake Washington tributaries .. WDFW hatchery staff allows returning progeny of th.e Issaquah Hatchery to migrate beyond the hatchery weir if egg-take goals are achieved. Adults ~egin migration into freshwater in June, and it peaks in August. Spawning is from mid-Augu.st to mid-December (Myers et al. 1998). Occasional beach spawning within Lake Washington has been observed (Roberson 1967; Fresh, pers. comm., 28 March 2000). After spawning, fern.ales guard redds for up to three weeks before dying; males attempt to fertilize other redds before dying (Federal Register 1998). Chinoo 1<: salmon eggs hatch after 90 to 150 days, depending on water temperature (Wydoski and Whitney 1979)~ The ocean-type chino-<lk in the Lake Washington basin typicallybegrn their downstream migration as suh:-yearlings (Myerset al. 1998). Most chinook emigrate as fry after emerging from the gravel (Myers et aL 1998), reaching Lake Washington in early January to March (Fresh, pers. comm., 2 August 1999). A second wave of juvenile fingerlings enters Lake Washington in May and June (Fresh, pers. comm., 2 August 1999). Chinook fry are an average of 40 mm (1.6 in.) long when they enter Lake Washington; chinook fmgerlings are an average of 100 mm (4 in.) lOIig when they enter Lake Washington (Fresh, pers. comm., 2 August 1999). In addition to the contribution of natural spawners, WDFW's· Issaquah Creek hatchery has an annual production goal of releasing 2 million age 0+ chinook each May into Issaquah Creek, many of which enter Lake Washington via ~e Sammamish River. The University of Washington hatchery has an annual production goal, which is consistently met, of releasing 180,000 chiaook smolts each May (Tetrick, pers. comm., 10 July 2000)~ The majority of chinook smolts leave LBke Washington in May and June (Fresh, pers. comm., 9 September 1999). Sampling at the rnouili of the Cedar River has found that small numbers of juvenile chinook continue entering Lake Washington as late as July 29 (Fresh, pers. comm_, 9 September 1999). Out-migrating chinook smolts have been observed at the Chittenden Locks in late August (Fresh, pers. comm., 7 June 2000). Yearling and older cbinook (monthly mean fork lengths ranging from 256-323 mm) were captured in littoral gill. nets (2-8 m deep) in all regions dfLake Washington from January through October in 1984-1985 (Kahler 2000). The appearance of small numbers of age 1+ and age. 2+ chinook juveniles in Lake Washington provides additional evidence that extended freshwater Pritchard Shoreline Restorat~on Biological Evaluation 8 September 8, 2004 u rearing occurs in the Lake Washington system (Fresh, pers. comm., 9 September 1999). Data from the Lake Washington Ecological Studies indicate that resident chinook up to adult size are in the lake at all times of the year; it is not clear whether these fish go to sea eventually or continue rearing in the lake until spawning (Warner, pers. comm., 7 July 2000). In Lake Washington, juvenile chinook are distributed along shorelines (Fresh, pers.comm., 18 November 1999). Sampling of both the limnetic and littoral zones of Lake Washington has shown that from early February through late May, young-of-the-year chinook occupy the littoral zone exclusively (Warner and Fresh 1999). They feed primarily on aquatic insects (chironomid pupae) (Fresh, pers. comm., 18 November 2000) and terrestrial insects (Wydoski and Whitney 1979; Tabor and Chan 1996). Chinook j uveniles,' predominantly large individuals, begin appearing in limnetic sampling gear.in late May and June in Lake Washington (Fresh, pers. comm., 9 September 1999). Increasing use of the limnetic zone may be a response to increasing temperatures in the littoral zone, or may merely represent the capture of out-migrating smolts (Fresh, pers. comm., 9 September 1999). The distribution and residence time of juvenile chinook in Lake Washington may be influenced by temperature. Bjornn and Reiser (1991) reported the preferred temperature for chinook as 12 to 14°C, and temperatures from 23 to 25°C could be lethal and were actively avoided. Offshore temperatures at a depth of 1 meter in Lake Washington typically exceed 15°C from mid-May through mid-October, and exceed 20°C from mid-July into September, with maxima generally near 25~C in early August (King County 2000). Despite high temperatures, chinook can be found in the littoral zone during summer. Chinook smolts (and adults) are often found near the surface in water above 18°C (Warner, pers. comm., 7 July 2000). On February 16,2000, NMFS designated critical habitat of the Puget Sound chinook salmon as protected under theESA (Federal Register 2000). Designated critical habitat includes all marine, estuarine, and fresh waters accessible to chinook salmon, including the action area. Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia Coho Salmon The Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia coho ESU is extremely large.' It includes all naturally spawned populations of coho salmon from drainages of Puget Sound, Hood Canal, eastern Olympic Peninsula, and the Strait of Georgia. In the Lake Washington system, coho salmon stocks have been divided into the Lake Washington/Sammamish Tributary stock and the Cedar River stock (WDFW 1993). Adult coho salmon migrate through Lake Washington and Lake Sammamish to reach spawning grounds in the Cedar and Sammamish River systems and in small tributaries to the lakes. Adults begin migrating into freshwater in August. They spawn from late October through December in most systems, and through mid-March in the Cedar River (WDFW 1993). Coho salmon eggs hatch after 45 to 60 days, depending on water temperature (Wydoski and Whitney 1979). After emerging from spawning gravels, juvenile coho will overwinter in freshwater environments. Some fish may spend two to four years in freshwater before migrating to the sea Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Biological Evaluation 9 September 8, 2004 ( () () • (S andercock 1998). While rearing in freshwater, the majori1:y. of juvenile coho are found in streams (Sandercock 1998). Dc.wnstream migration to marine waters begins in April, continues through June, and peaks in May-(Weitkamp et aI., 1995). Juvenile coho salmon are more likely to use the shallow waters of the action area during spring migration. The distribution of juvenile coho salmon in Lakes Washingt<ln and Sammamish is poorly understood. There is evidence that' juvenile coho are migrating aad feeding along the Lake Washington shoreline (Kahler et al. 2000). B_ Survey Results On June 20, 2004, our biologi.st visited the project site an.<f surrounding area to assess the potential presence of threatened and endangered species and ha.bitat quantity and quality. Results \Vill be presented in detail in the following sections. In addition to the site visit, presence potential was determined through contact with WDFW biolog:ists familiar with the area; species lists received from the NMFS and USFWS; and a data search for threatened and endangered species and priority habitats listed in the WDFW Priority Habitat and Species database. c. Existing Environmental Conditions (Environmental Baseline) There have been significant large-scale human alterations of Lake Washington. Historically, the vvaters of Lake Washington drained· out of the south end of tbe lake through the Black River to the Duwamish River. In 1916~ completion of the Ship CanaI and the Hiram Chittenden Locks created a new outlet for the lake. The initial opening of the Locks lowered the water level of Lake Washington by as much as 8 feet. This lowered the lake level below the elevation of the Black River, leaving its chann~l dry The Black River no }.<:mger provided drainage for Lake VVashington. The lowering of Lake Washington exposed 1,334 acres of previously shallow water h.abitat and reduced the lake's s~ace by 7% (Chrzastowski 1981). Lake Washington's shoreline VV'as reduced by 10.5 miles and Illany shoreline wetlands were Iost. Terrestrial Habitat Renton is heavily developed with residential homes and corrunercial businesses. The shoreline <> f' Renton is heavily developed with a large percentage of tie shoreline made up of waterfront residences with lakeshore bulkheads and piers. The riparian vegetation along tbe proposed project site consists primarily of lawn grass along of shoreline. A large willow tree overhangs the water and covers a large area of the shoreline and pier. Land use near the project area consists of residential waterfront and upland homes. There are bulkheads and piers adjacent to the proposed project, on bo-th sides. Disturbance close to the project consists of moderate-to-heavy private, recreational, an.d commercial vessel traffic in Lake 'Washington. Onshore disturbances would include residential vehicular traffic, yard equipment (lawn mowers and leaf blowers), and other activities related to .residential dwellings. Pritchard Shoreline Resioration Biological Evaluation 10 September 8, 2004 ( ( .~. Water Resources Lake Washington is prime rearing habitat for juvenile salmon spawned in the Cedar and Sammamish rivers and other tributaries. It provides many recreationa.l opportunities and supports multiple resident fisheries. The hydrology, water quality, and habitat in and around the lake have been and continue to be severely affected by intensive development in the basin (King County 1999). In recent years, natural runs of Lake Washington chinook s.almon have declined precipitously. The reasons for these declines are not fully understood. The water quality of the lake depends largely upon the high <Juality of water from the Cedar River aad upon the control of pollutants that enter from direct drainages and the Sammamish River. At this time, no unified fisheries or water quality management plan exists for Lake Washington. A number of jurisdictions surrounding the l:Uce bave implemented or are developing pr<>grams to reduce the quantity of pollutants in stormwater runoff that enters the lake. Overall, the water quality of Lake Washington is extraordinary for a large lake surrounded by urban development (King County 1999). Key factors for the lake's excellent water quality include the following: • The .cleanliness of the Cedar R.i. ver, which provides half of its inflow, • A rapid flushing rate with average water residence of only 2.3·years, and • The lake's depth, which allo~s waters in the lake to mix from top to bottom annually. This oxygenates the lowest waters,. which prevents the chemical release o£ phosphorus from the lake floor. There are, however, water quality concerns in the lake, including the follovving: • A long-term trend of increasing alkalinity, the causes and effects of which are unclear, • Spring algal blooms in 1995 and 1996 that were the worst in more than a decade, and • High fecal coliform counts in some localized areas. The size, water quality, and low elevation of the lake are critical for pro-viding excellent habitat for fish. Improving lake survival. rates will ensure that investments to prctect and restore habitat in the lake's tributaries provide the greatest return. The following are some of the lDain issues that have been the focus of Lake Washington studies (King County 1999), including a discussion of the progress made so far, "the work remaining, and the implications for future action. • Seasonal Food Shortages. I ~ appears that key areas in the lake may experience shortages of salmonid prey feed during February and March. • Increased Predation. In recent years, some species of salmon predators, such as sculpins (Cottus sp.), pikeminnow (Ptychocheilus oregonensis), largemcuthbass (Micropterus Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Biological Evaluation 11 September 8, 2004 ( ) () salmoides), and smallmouth bass (Micropterus dolomieui) appear to have increased in numbers or changed their behavioral patterns. ,- The nearshore aquatic habitat at the project site was surveyed on June 20, 2004. Existing aquatic habitat consists of gravel/cobble substrate along the shoreline that extends into -the lake approximately 30 feet. The gravel/cobble substrate transitions into a sandy/silt consistency beyond 30 feet. Water depth at the bulkhead is 6~ to 7 feet deep during ordinary high water, when juvenile salm~n would be most abundant in the action area. The lake bottom grade is gradual; water is 7 feet deep 40 feet offshore. Aquatic vegetation, Eurasian milfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum), began to appear-in patches at 25 feet off shore, becoming dense 45 feet out. Fish were not observed along the shoreline or wider or arourid the existing dock that extends out from the proposed project site, III. EFFECTS OF THE ACTION Impacts that are -most likely to affect fish and wildlife from a project of this nature include disturbance, -temporary water quality degradation, and/or habitat alterations. Impacts from the proposed project could temporarily affect anadromous fish migration and/or rearing and wildlife foraging habitat. The following is an analysis of the direct, indirect, interrelated, interdependent, and cumulative effects of the project. Disturbance As discussed above -in the Action Area section, noise disturbance in the aquatic environment created by construction activities could affect salmonids up to 650 feet from the project site. If unmitigated, this noise level increase could cause juvenile salmonids using the shallow water habitat to move away from the project site during construction activities. This movement could result in unnecessary energy expenditures and may expose juvenile sBlmonids to increased predation. Construction activities would not occur from at least March -15 through July 31 to - reduce potential iinpacts on fish using habitats near the proposed project site. The short duration (one week) of the project would limit the potential underwater disturbance. Limiting construction activities to daylight hours would also allow juvenile -salmonids to travel undisturbed past the project site at night. Noise levels in the terrestrial environment would increase above ambient levels. EPA research found that noise associated with normal operation of construction equipment is typicruly 75 to 92 dBA at 46 feet (EPA 1971). Point-source noise dissipates at approximately 6 to 7.5 dBA per distance doubled (e.g., 45, 90, 180 feet) over hard ground and soft (vegetated) ground, respectively (U.S. Department of Transportation 1982). Structures such as buildings and large trees would dissipate noise even further. At a distance of 1,000 feet, point-source noise equivalent to loud construction equipment would dissipate to between 50 and 67 dBA in a worst- case scenario (hard ground and no structures). As a reference, noise between 50 and 67 dBA is equivalent to a quiet office or a normal conversation at 3 feet (Tipler 1976). Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Biological Evaluation 12 September 8, 2004 (J The topography, vegetation, and homes in the area would act as noise blocks and minimize potential disturbances created by construction noise. Restricting construction to late summer, after June 30, would also reduce disturbances during critical nesting periods for bald eagles. Rodrick and Milner (1991) indicate that most bald eagles are ready to leave nests by mid-July. Although eagle families may remain near the nest site though mid-August, the chance of adults abandoniag juveniles because of disturbance is very low later in the breeding season. Water Q .. ality Water quality may be affected in two ways by project activities: production of suspended sediment and potential spills of hazardous materials. Increased sedimentation in water can cauSe the suffocation of juvenile salmonids and their prey (aquatic invertebrate) by plugging gills and temporaril..y depleting the area of dissolved oxygen. . Sedimentation can also cause juvenile salmonids to avoid the area. Hazardous material spills could locaily affect aquatic life in the lake. Excavation operations during the removal and reconstruction phase of the project would increase the amount of suspended sediment that may enter the water. It is difficult to determine how much of an' increase there would be due to these particular activities, but the impacts are not anticipated to be· significant to any listed species. Control devices, such as silt curtains and fencing, "",ould be used to reduce the affected area and the potential spread of suspended sediments. The short duration of construction activities wbuld limit the time period suspended sediments could cause potential impacts. Any increase in the amount of suspended sediments as a result o::f construction activities is expected to be short term and would not result in chronic sediment delivery to the lake. All in-water work would be completed during a construction wiridow approved by agencies ~th jurisdiction to avoid·· work when juvenile salmonids are expected ~o be in the action area. Limiting operations to daylight hours may also limit impacts on fish, alJowing any migrating fish to move undisturbed through the project area at night. Any time machinery operates near water there is a risk that petroleum products will leak or spill into the V\7ater. Hazardous material. containment systems and traine,,9 personnel would be required to be onsite during any phase of construction where hazardous materials may come in contact. with Lake Washington. The risk to fish would depend on the type of spill, time of year, amount of spill, and success of containment. Habitat AlterationlIn-water Work No bald eagle nesting, perching, or roosting habitat would be lost or altered as a result of the proposed project. Bald eagle foraging habitat would be temporarily altered by construction. Removing the existing fill and preparing the site for the replacement substrate gravel would temporarily alter the shoreline at the project site. Conservation measures will be applied to avoid the "take~~ of a listed species. Once the substrate gravel installation is completed, juvenile salmon habitat w<)uld improve over the existing conditions. The restoration plan's design would increase the amount of shallow water habitat that currently exists. Planting shoreline vegetation would Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Biological Evaluation J3 September 8, 2004 ( } () increase the amount of overhanging cover and hiding areas and improve the aquatic and riparian insect habitat near the shoreline. Placing gravel 0.25 to 2 inches in diameter in front of the bulkhead toe would provide protection and increase the amount of desirable suI> strate in the project area. No spawning habitat for the CoastallPuget Sound bull trout, Puget Sound chinook, or the Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia coho would be altered or disturbed as a result of the proposec:l project. A preliminary matrix of fish habitat pathways and indicators has been developed by NMFS for use in the Lake Washington system. Several habitat elements at the project site could currently be considered at risk because existing docks . and bulkheads in the lake, where intact, and development have reduced the natural function of a pristine lakeshore. See the Draft NMFS Matrix Checklist section below for more information. Indirect, Interrelated, and Interdependent Effects Noise produced during construction activities may disturb waterfowl (potential prey of the bald eagle) close to the project. Disturbing waterfowl could indirectly affect the feeding behavior of local bald eagles to a small degree. This impact would be limited to the short duration of the project. It is expected that waterfowl currently using the action area wouldretumL shortly after the project is completed. In some cases, docks and bulkheads can be detrimental to salmonid habitat by removing shoreline vegetation arid reducing the amount of shallow water habitat. Shoreline vegetation provides cover for juvenile salmonids to hide from avian predators. Shoreline vegetation also provides shade to reduce the wanning effects of the sun and it provides food as insects fall from overhanging vegetation. Removal of shoreline vegetation is usually required when installing shoreline bulkheads or inshore dock areas. Because this project replaces unauthorized fill with more natural substrate gravel along a relatively unvegetated shoreline, no net loss of shoreline or riparian vegetation would result from the proposed project. Juvenile salmonids use shallow water habitat for rearing, hiding, and foraging. When shorelines are armored with bulkheads, it creates; a barrier between shoreline features and potential shallow water habitat. Barriers block the transport of new materials that would replace lost shallow water substrate washed away by wave action and water currents. The wave action and water current could erode the nearshore substrate, indirectly creating deeper water arid the potential for fish predators to move into the nearshore areas. Cumulative Effects There is concern that the proliferation of docks and bulkheads could contribute to tIle degradation of nearshore aquatic habitat. The effects include encroachment on shallow nearshore habitats Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Biological Evaluation 14 September 8, 2004 1 , and erosion of the nearshore area caused by the reflection of ",ave energy off the hard surface of docks and blLlkheads that are located below the lake's ordinary high water mark. This project . is located in a highly urbanized shoreline area. The shoreline is approaching full development-capacity. Current Corps permit applications for bulkheads and new or replacement piers exceed 74. More than 31 involve bulkheads (NMFS 2000). Most cumulative effects of shoreline structures on listed species have already occurr,ed due to urbanization. Any new construction involving the shoreline of Lake Washington wi]l include habitat enhancement and restoration elements to move the habitat for juvenile salIIllonids toward properly functioning conditions. Draft NMFS Matrix Checklist ~ Potential risks to threatened, endangered, proposed, and candidate fish species can also be evaluated using guidance recently provided by NMFS (NMFS 2000). That guidance includes a. draft matrix<lf pathways and indicators to be used in BAs and BEs. The Lake Washington basin receives water from several large watersheds, including the Sammamisa River, the Cedar River, and many smallersysteIlls. The proposed project would not influence these watersheds. Table 1 illustrates the baseline conditions and the project's effects on the conditions. () "Properly Functioning" Indicators The water ~emperature regime and dissolved oxygen ind.icators in the main body of Lake WashingtOR-should be considered properly functioning because they are not subject to human influence to a significant degree. "At Risk" Indicators Several indicators should be considered at risk. These mainly relate to extensive human-caused alterations in the flow patterns and hydrology and are because of the urban development that surrounds most of the lake~ For example, the pH indicator c.ould be considered to be functioning at risk because of the long-term trend in increasing alka3inity. Similarly, algal blooms have resulted fr~ m nutrient loading from several sources. ShoreIine upwelling is likely at risk in the lake because the invasion of Eurasian milfoil has trapped sediments in areas that may once have been porous gravels that facilitated upwelling. This i31vasion may also affect substrate composition, and nearshore substrate may be hardening nom the reflection of wave energy against hard bulkheads. Shallow shoreline gradient is at risk: on much of the shoreline because of the vertical nature of bulkheads. Pritchard Shoreline Restoration Biological Evc:iluation 15 September 8, 2004 c ,- ,_ .... ' -,' Table 1: Draft NMFS Matrix Checklist of Pathways and'Indicators for Documenting the Environmental Baseline and Project Effects DiagnosticslPathways Indicators Water Quality Temperature Dissolved Oxygen (DO) pH Chemical Contamination Nutrientsrrotal Phosphorous (TP) Habitat Elements Exotic Species (in-water plants and animals) Shoreline upwelling - Structural complexity (includes woody debris, submergent and emergent vegetation) Substrate Composition Shoreline Conditions Shoreline vegetation and riparian structure Shoreline uadient BauereResidential Bulkhead Replacement Construction Biological Assessment -Draft Population and Environmental Baseline Effects of the Action(s) Functioning Functioning Functioning at Degrad Unacceptable Restore Maintain Appropriately at Risk Risk e X X X X X X X X X X X X I X X I X X X X X X 16 September 8, 2004 • ( ) CJ "Functioning at Unacceptable Risk" Indicators As discussed above, Lake Washington and the upland areas have been disturbed by the introduction of exotic species such as bass and Eurasian milfoil and by residential and commercial development. Most of the predevelopment riparian vegetation, large -woody debris recruitment, and structural complexity ha~e been removed. B. Take Analysis Section 9 of the ESA prohibits the "take" of any listed species without a special permit. Take means to harm, harass, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, trap, capture, or collect or atteJDlpt to engage in such conduct. Harm is further defined to include significant habitat modification or degradation that results in death or injury to listed species by significantly impairing behavioral patterns such as breeding, feeding, or sheltering. Harass is defined as actions that create the likelihood of injury to listed species to such an extent as to significantly d.isrupt normal behavioral patterns that include, but are not limited to, breeding, feeding, or sheltering. The key concept in a take analysis is the word "significant." NMFS states that insignifican1l: effects relate to the size of the impacts and, based. on best judgement, a person would n<>t be able to meaningfully measure, detect, or evaluate them. The potential for an incidental take associ~ted with this project is extremely small for bald eagles. No nesting, roosting, or forag:ing habitat would be altered as a result of the project. Foraging habitat may be temporarily d:isturbed during construction activities. Because of the short and temporary nature of the projec:t: and the availability of other foraging opp;.crtunities, it is not likely there would be a measurable negative impact that would result in a take of bald eagles. The removal of the unauthorized fill and subsequent replacement with natural substrate gravel would temporarily disturb approximately 35 feet of shoreline habitat. This habita..;: is dominated by lawn grass and very little to no overhanging vegetation exists. Hiding cover for juvenile salmonids is sparse. Adult chinook are Dot expected to be in the action area'duril1l.g construction activities, and the construction windovv substantially limits the likelihood that jUl.venile salmon would be in the action area. It is not expected that construction activities YVould cause a measurable negative impact on salmon:ids in the action area. In the long term, c:Yeating a more natural shoreline with coves and shallow water pockets and riparian vegetat:ion along the shoreline will improve rearing, hiding, and·foraging habitat for salmonids. The potential for an incidental take ass<)ciated with this project is extremely smal.l for the Puget Sound chinook salmon and its critical habitat. Some of the habitat indicators nlay improve if permit and conservation measures are implemented during and after reconstruction of the existing bulkhead. Chinook salmon use the shallow shoreline areas for juvenile migration and rearing. The timing of the project would not overlap with the expected migra1l:ion periods of juvenile Puget Sound chinook s8Imon. It is not likely that this project w<>uld have any measurable negative impact that would result in a take of Puget Sound chinook salmon. Bauer Bulkhead Replacement Biological Evaluation J 91812004 (J C) Environmental conditions of the action area are not favorable -to bull trout. It is not likely that bull trout use the action area for rearing, overwintering, or spawning. Bull trout may use the action area as a travel corridor. Timing of the project would not overlap the expected migration periods of adult or juvenile bull trout. It is not likely that this project would cause any measurable negative impact that would result in a take of bull tr<)ut. C. . Conservation Measures All construction would occur between August 1 and Decem1::>er 31, or another work window approved by agencies, to avoid d~sturbance to juvenile salmon EDigration; Sedimentation control measures and Best Management Practices that are likely to be conditions of any construction permit would be used. Silt curtains and silt fences would be used to control the amount of suspended sediments that may be produced by construction activities. A hazardous spill management plan would be present onsite. The plan would include contacting the Washington Department of Ecology, an Emergency Response Cleanup Team (Foss Environmental), and WDFW if a spill occurs. Spill cleanup and containment materials would also be onsite. Included in the cleanup packets would' be containment booms, materials designed to absorb petroleum produces, and plastic bags to be used for material transport. No native shoreline vegetation would be lost as a result of this project. No upland trees would be removed that may serve as potential paid eagle nesting, roosting, or perching sites or as physical barriers. D. Determination of Effect The "Finding of Effect" is the conclusion reached regarding he project's likelihood of affecting a threatened, endangered, proposed, and candidate species, a species of concern, or designated critical habitat. The actual finding of effect can only be made by the federal agency imtiating the action. The conclusions presented in this report are recommendations that must have the . . concurrence ofNMFS and USFWS. The following are the options for determination of effect on listed species: Beneficial Effect; No Effect; May Affect, Not Likely to Adversely Affect; and May Affect,Likely to Adversely Affect. The following are the options for determination of effect on candidate species: Not Likely to Significantly Impact, Likely to Significantly Impact, and No lnlpact. For critical habitat, the determinations are: will (or will not) adversely modify or destroy critical habitat. The determination of potential effects of this project on listed wildlife and fish and their habitat included the consideration of the following items: '. Bauer Bulkhead Replacement Biological Evaluation 2 91812004 I J ( ) l) • The level of use of the project area by listed species, • The effect of the project on listed species' primary food and foraging areas, and • The degree of predicted impacts of project activity after all appropriate provisions, standards, guidelines, mitigation, and compensation were applied. Bald Eagle Level of use by bald eagles. One bald eagle nest is located within 2 miles of the project site. The site is within the flight and foraging range of eagles that use this nest site and of other local eagles; Several trees near the project site may be large-enough to support roosting eagles. Eagles may occasionally fly over the project site. Effect on prey species. Waterfowl, upon which eagles-prey, and-waterfowl habitat would not be adversely affected to a significant degree. The project would not affect spawning salmon. Degree of predicted effects. If anticipated permit conditions are implemented, the project would not have a significant adverse effect on bald eagles. The project and its construction probably would not disturb eagles or cause themto avoid the project site. Detennination of effect. May affect, not likely to adversely affect. CoastaVPuget Sound Bull Trout Level of use by bull trout. Bull trout have not been documented near the project area. While they are present in low numbers in the Lake Washington watershed, it would be rare for a bull trout to migrate close to the project site. Bull trout do not use the project or action area for spawning or rearing. If foraging or migrating bull trout are in the action area, they would use.the deeper, colder portions of the lake and not the warmer shorelines. . Effect on prey species. The proposed project is not expected to have significant, long-term, adverse effects on prey species Guvenile salmonids) of bull trout. Degree of predicted effects. If anticipated permit conditions are implemented, the project would not have a significant adverse effect on bUll trout. Deterr:nination of effect. May affect, not likely to adversely affect. Puget Sound Chinook Salmon and Designated Critical Habitat Level of use by chinook salmon. Adult salmon do not use the immediate vicinity of the project site. Migrating juvenile salmon may use the existing nearshore habitat at the site during spring. Shoreline habitat is generally very important for juvenile salmon for feeding and cover during migration. Construction would not occur when juvenile salmon are expected to be present. Bauer Bulkhead Replacement Biological Evaluation 3 91812004 ,. ( Effect on prey species. Project construction would be completed before or after juvenile salmon are expected to be present. In the long term, the abundance of prey species currently available at the project site may increase as a resu.lt of the shoreline vegetation proposed as part of the project. Degree of predicted effects. Construe-lion activities related to bulkhead reconstruction are not expected to have significant, long-tenn.., adverse effects on chinook. Once the restoration project is completed, it may contribute to indirect and cumulative effects of shoreline deveIopm...ent, but to a small degree. Nearshore turbidity would decrease once the shoreline erosion-control measures are in place. In the long term, -improvements in-shallow water habitat and an increase of shoreline vegetation may impr'<)ve foraging and hiding habitat for salmonid..s. These improvements could potentially move habitat indicators to a better functioning state. Determination of effect. May affect~ not likely to adversely affect, and will not adversely modify or destroy critical habitat. Puget Sound/Strait of Georgia C ~ho Salmon Level of use by coho salmon. Adult salmon do not use the project vicinity. Migra.""1ing juvenile salmon may use the existing ne:arshore habitat at the site during spring. Shoreline habitat is generally very important for juvenile salmon for feeding and cover during migration. Construction would not occur when juvenile salmon are expected to be present. Effect on prey species. Project construction would be completed before juvenile salmon are expected to be present. In the long term, the abundance of prey species currently available at the project site may increase as a result of the shoreline vegetation proposed as part o£the project. Degree of predicted effects. Construction activities related to the shoreline erosion-control measures and shallow water improvements are not expected to have significant, long-term, adverse effects on coho. Nearshore turbidity would decrease once the shoreline erosion-control measures are in place. In th.e long term, improvements in' shallow water habitat and an increase of shoreline vegetation ~ay improve foraging and hiding habitat for salinonids. These improvements could potentially move habitat indicators to a better functioning, state. Determination of effect: Not likely to have a significant impact. . E. EssentialFisb Ha.bitat NMFS has determined t:hatan Essential Fish Habitat (EFH) consultation is necessary for the proposed project to satisfy the requirements in the Magnuson-Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act and the 1996 Sustainable Fisheries Act. -An EFH assessment is an analysis of the effects of a proposed action o~ essential fish habitat. Mandatory contents are: a description of the proposed aCtion; an analysis of the effects of that ( ) action on EFH; the federal agency's views on those effects; and "}>roposed mitigation, if D Bauer Bulkhead Replacerne "Zt Biological Evaluation 4 91812004 ( ) -( ) () An EFH assessment is an. analysis of the effects of a proposed action on essential fish habitat. Mandatory contents are: a description of the proposed action; an analysis of the effects of that action on EFH; the federal agency's views. on those effects; and proposed mitigation, if applicable. Additional in:formation that should be discussed (if appropriate) includes: the results of onsite inspections; the-views of recognized experts on affected habitat or ·fish s::pecies; a review of pertinent literature; and an alternatives analysis (50 CFR 600.920 [gD. Essential fish habitat is <lefined as those waters and substrate necessary to fis.1l for spawning, breeding, feeding, or growth to maturity. For the purpose of interpreting the definition of essential fish habitat, "waters" include aquatic areas and their associated physical, chemical, and biological properties that are used by fish and may include aquatic areas historic.ally used by fish where appropriate. "Substrate" includes sediment, hard bottom, structures under lying the waters, and associated biological communities. "Necessary" means the habitat required to support a sustainable fishery and· the managed species' contribution to a healthy ecosystem_~ and "spawning, breeding, feeding, or gro'-Vth to maturity" covers a species' full life cycle. EFH is described by Fishery Management Councils in amendments to Fishery Management Plans, and is approved by the Secretary of Commerce acting through the ~MFS (50 CFR 600.10). Species with E-:FH within the action area of this project are presented iI1l Table 2. Table 2. Species with designated EFH found in waters of Lake Washington. SPECIES EFH Coho Salmon . All accessible freshwater Chinook salmon All accessible freshwater The assessment of potential impacts from elements of the proposed project to these species' EFH is based on information in this report. Analysis of Effects on EFH ·The specific elements <>f'the project that could affect salmon EFH are identified below: Habitat alteration in thee form of temporary water quality impacts during consUuction would not occur during a time when juvenile salmonids are expected. in the action area. Habitat alteration resulting from the project includes a new overwater. structure. Impacts resulting from these changes to EFH have been described and analyzed above. Conservation measures to mitigate significant negative alterations to EFH have also been presented above. Salmon EFH Determi.nation of Effect Based on the conservation measures incorporated into the design of the project and other considerations outlined above, elements of the proposed projectrelatedto EFH will not adversely affect EFH for chinook or coho salmon~ Bauer Bulkhead Replacemenl Biological Evaluation 5 91812004 ( ) c) l) • The information presented in this report will satisfy the informatioa requirements for an EFH assessment when the NMFS concurs wi. th the determinations recommended in this BE. v. CONCLUSION The applicants plan to modify and enhance their existing shoreline. ThLis project, if constructed as planned ~ith the prescribed conservation measures, would pose a very low risk of significant adverse effects to listed species and other fish and wildlife. There should be net progress toward properly nmctioning fish habitat. Bauer B-ul/chead Replacement Biologic.ol Evaluation 6 91812004 ( ( ) IV. REFERENCES References Cited Bjornn, T. C. and D. W. Reiser. 1991. Habitat requirements of salmon ids in streams. American Fisheries Society Special Publication 19: 83-138. Brown, L. G 1994. On the zoogeography and life history of Washington s native charr -Dolly Varden, Salve linus malma (Walbaum) and bull trout, Salvelinus confluentus (Suckleyr Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife, Olympia. Fisheries Management Division report 94-04.47 p. Cavender, T. M. 1978. "Tax:onomyand distribution ofbllll trout, Salvelinusconfluentus (Suckley) from the American Northwest." California Fish and Game. v. 64, No.3, pp. 139-174. Chrzastowski, M. 1981. Historical changes to Lake Washington and route of the Lake Washington Ship Canal, King County, Washington. Dept. of the Interior, U;S. Geological Survey Water Resources Investigations WRI 81-1182. 9p. EPA. See U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Federal Register 1998. 50 CFR Parts 222, 226, and 227. Endangered and threatened species: Proposed endangered status for two chinook salmon ESUs. Proposed RedefInition, Threatened Status, and Revision of Critical Habitat for One Chinook Salmon ESU; Proposed Designation of Chinook Salmon Critical Habitat in California, Oregon, Washington, and Idaho. Vol. 63, No. 45. 11482-11520. Federal Register. 1999. Endangered and threatened wildlife and plants: Proposed rule to remove the bald eagle in the lower 48 states from the list of endangered and threatened wildlife. 50 CFR Part 17, Vol. 64, No. 128~ 36454-36463. Federal Register. 2000. Endangered and threatened species: Proposed endangered status for two chinook salmon ESUs presents the final rule for designating critical habitat for 19 species of NW salmonids listed under ESA. 50 CFR Part 226. Vol. 65, No. 32, pp. 7764- 7787. Feist, B.E. 1991. Potential impacts of pile driving on juvenile pink (Oncorhynchus gorbuscha) and chum (0. keta) salmon behavior and distribution. Thesis, University of Washington, Seattle, Wash. Fraley, J., D. Read, and P. Graham. 1981. Flathead River Basinfishery study. Montana Department ofFish, Wildlife, and Parks, Kalispell, Mont. Bauer Bulkhead Replacement Biological Evaluation 7 91812004 . ( • Fraley, J. J. and B. B. Shepard. 1989. "Life history, ecology, and popula.tion status of bull trout (Salvelinus confluentus) in the Flathead Lake and River system.-" Montana." Northwest Science 63: 133-143. Fresh, Kurt. August 2, 1999, September 9, 1999, November 18, 1999, Narch 28,2000, and June 7,2000. Fisheries Biologist, Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife. Personal communication. in Kahler, Tom. July 13,2000. A summary of Edfects ofbulkheads, piers, and other artificial structures and shorezone development on ESA-listed salinonids in lakes. Prepared for the City of Bellevue by The Watershed COlupany and Washington Cooperative Fish-andWildHfeResearch Unit, University'ofWashington. Kahler, Tom, M. Grassley, and D. Beauchamp. July 13, 2000. A summary of efficts of bulkheads, piers, and other artificial structures and shorezone development on ESA-listed salmon ids in lakes. Prepared for the City of Bellevue by The Watershed Company and Washington Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, University of Washington. King County. 1999. Lake Washington Studies. URL: http://splash.me-t:rokc.gov/wlrIBASINS/ lkwastud.htm (visited September 1999). King County, 2000. Lake Washington St-udies. URL: http://dnr.metrokc.gov/wlr/waterres/lakes/wash.htrn (visited September 2000) (! Kraemer, Curt. August to October 1999. Area Habitat Biologist, Washington Department of Fish -' and Wildlife, Mill Creek office. Personal communication. CJ Leider, S. A.,M. W. Chilcote, and J. 1. LcJch. 1986. "Movement and survival of pres molt steelhead in a tributary and the ll1ainstem of a Washington river." !'forth American Journal of Fisheries Management 6:526-531. Myers, J. M., R. G. Kope, G. J. Bryant, D. Teel, B. J. Lierheimer, T. C. Wainwright, W. S. Grand, F. W. Waknitz, K. Neely, S. T. Lindley, and R. S. Waples. 199 8. Status review o/chinook salmon from Washington, Idaho, Oregon, and California. U.S. Dept. of Commerce., NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-NVVFSC-35, 443 p. National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). July 24, 2000. Guidance for ESA Section 7 consultation effect determinations for new and replacement piers and bulkheads in Lake Washington. Negri, Steve. January 2000. Biologist, Washington Department of Fi:sh and Wildlife, Mill Creek office. Personal communication_ Roberson, K. 1967. "An occurrence of chinook salmon beach spawning in Lake Washington." Trans. Am. Fish. Soc. 96: 423-424. Bauer Bulkhead Replacement Biological Evaluation 8 9181200¢ ( ( (.) Rodrick, E. and R. Milner. 1991. Management recommendations/or Washington s priority habitats and species. Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife. Olympia, Wash. Sandercock, F. K. 1998. "Life history <Jfcoho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch)." Pages 397 to 445 in Groot and Margolis eds. Pacific Salmon Life Histories. University of British Columbia Press. Vancouver, B.C. Shepard, B., S. A. Leathe, T. M. Weaver, and M. D. Enk. 1984. Monitoring levels of fone sediment within tributaries to Flathead Lake, and impacts 0/ .fine sediment on bull trout recruitment, Unpublished·paper presented at-the WHd Trout-III Symposium. Yellowstone National Park, Wyoming. On file at: Montana Department ofFish, Wildlife aad Parks, Kalispell, Mont. Tabor, R. A. and J. Chan. May 1996. Predation on sockeye salmon fry by piscivorouS' fishes in the lower Cedar River and southern Lake Washington. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Western Washington Fishery Resource Office, Olympia,Wash. . Tetrick, Mark. University of Washing1:on hatchery manager. Personal communication"" phone conversation with Tom Kahler (The Watershed Company), 10 July 2000. Tipler, P. A. 1976. Physics. Warth Publishers, New York, N.Y. U.S. Department of Transportation. 1982. Procedures/or abatement o/highway trafic noise and construction nOise. Federal Hi.ghway Administration, Aid Highway Program Nanual, Volume 7, Chapter 7, Section 3. Washington D.C. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). December 31, 1971. Noisefrom construction equipment and operations, building equipment, and home appliances. NTID 300.1. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USF-WS)~ February 12, 1998. Candidate and listed priority assignment/orm. Coastal/Puget Sound Population Segment, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Lacey, Wash. Walter, Katie. August 13, 1999. Eco1<Jgist; Shannonand Wilson, Inc~ Personal cOlIll11unication. Warner, E. and K. Fresh. March 25, -'999. Technical review draft: Lake Washington chinook salmon recovery plan. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe, Auburn, Wash. Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife, Fish Management, Olympia, Wash. 141 p. Warner, E. July 7, 2000. Muckleshoot Indian Tribe Fisheries Division. Personal conununication. in Kahler, Tom. July 13,2000. A summary o/effects o/bulkheads, piers, ana other artificial structures and shorezone development on ESA-listed salmonids in rakes. Prepared for the City of Bellevue by The Watershed Company and Washingtcon Cooperative Fish atid Wildlife Research Unit, University of Washington .. Bauer Bulkhead Replacement Biological Evaluation 9 91812004 ~- ( (_ .J () Washington Department ofFish and Wildlife (WDFW). 1993.1992 Washington State salmon and steelhead stock inventory. OlymIJia, Washington. Prepared in cooperation with Western Washington Treaty Tribes. Weitkamp, L. A., T. C. Wainwright, G. 1. Bryant, G. B. Milner, D. J. Teel, R. G. Kope, and R. S. Waples. 1995. Status review of coho salmon from Washington, Oregon, and California. NOAA Tech, Memo. NMFS-NWFSC-24. 258 p. Wydoski, R. S. and R. R. Whitney. 1979_ Inland fishes of Washington. Univ. of Washington Press, -Seattle, Wash.' 220 p. Additional References Goetz, F. 1989. Biology of the bull trout Salvelinus confluentus: A literature review. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Willarilette National Forest, Eugene, Ore. Haas, G. R. and J. D. McPhail. 1991. "Sys-tematics and distribution of Dolly Varden (Salve linus malma) and bull trout (SaLvelinus confluentus) in North America." Canadian Journal of Fisheries andAqZJatic Sciences. 48: 2191-2211. McPhail, J. D. and C. Murray 1979. rhe early life history' and ecology of Dolly Varden (Salvelinus malma) in the Upper Arrow Lakes. Report to the British Columbia Hydro and Power Authority and Kooenay Department of Fish and Wildlife. University of British Columbia, Department of Zoology and Institute of Animal Resources, Vancouver, B. C. N atiorial Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS). 1996. Making Endangered Species Act determinations of effect for individual or grouped actions at the watershed scale. National Marine Fisheries Service, 'Environmental and Technical Services Division, Habitat Conservation Branch. Seattle, Wash. Pederson, M. 2000. Biologist, Shapiro & A..ssoc. Bauer Bulkhead Project. PIatt, K. 1985. Pend Oreille trout and cJ-zar life history study. Idaho Department of Fish and Game, Boise, Idaho. Reiser, J. R. and T. C.Bjornn. 1979. Hahitat requirements ofanadromous salmonids. General Technical Report. PNW-GTR-96. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station. Portland, Oregon. Scott, W. B. and E. J. Crossman. 1973. Freshwater fishes of Canada. Fisheries Research Board of Canada, Ottawa. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). November 1, 1999. Region 1 listed species by lead region and status as of October 3I, 1999. Division of Endangered Species. Bauer Bulkhead Replacement Biological Evaluation 10 91812004 ( ) Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW). 1997. 1997 Washington salmonid stock inventory (SaSI~: bull trout/Dolly Varderz. Olympia, Washington. 437 pp. Williams, R. W., R. M. Laramie, and 1.1. Ames. November 1975. A catalog of Washington streams and salmon utilization. Volume 1. Washington Department <> f Fisheries. Olympia, Wash. Bauer Bulkhead Replacement Biological Evaluation 11 9/8/200~ () Photographs ( ) u .' ) Fig. 1.1 -Unauthorized fill on N. side of property to be removed () Fig. 1.2 -Unauthorized fill on S. side of property to be removed ·. WAC 197-11-960 Environm:ental checklist. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKUST Purpose of checklist: JEVELOPME CITY nF~~~XNlNG iSEP 2 12CJ4 RECEIVED The State Environn:::l.ental Policy Act (SEPA), chapter 43.21C RCW, requires all governmental agencies to consider the environmental impacts of a :proposal before making decisions. An environmental impact statement (EIS) must be prepared for all proposals with probable si~cant adverse impacts on the quaIity of the environment. The purpose of this checklist is to pro~de information to help you and be agency identify impacts from your proposal (and to reduce or avoid impacts from the proposal, if it C83l 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 yo or proposal are significant, requiring preparation of an EIS. Answe1r the questions briefly, with the m<>st 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 a~le 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 mow" or "does not apply." Complete answers to the questions now-may avoid unnecessary delays later. - Some questions as::k about governmental regulations, such as zoning, shoreline, and landmark designations. Answer ;hese questions if you can. If you, have problems, the governmental agemcies 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 diflf"erent parcels of land. Attach any additional information that will help descnbe your proposal or its environmental effects. The agency to """'hich . you submit this checklist ma...J' ask you to explain your answers or provide additional information reasonably related to determining it there may be significant adverse impact. Use of checklistfor nonproject proposals: Complete this checklist for nonproject proposals, even though questions may be answ~ed "does not apply." IN ADD::rrION, complete the SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (part D). For nonproject actions, 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 I. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 2. Name of applicant: Marc and Kaaren Pritchard 3. Address and phone numlber of applicant and contact person: 2807 Mountain View Ave North Renton, WA 98056 Marc Pritchard [206]79~051 4. Date checklist prepared.: 5/14/2004 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton &ft6 };I~at &:itnetit efFisftefies 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if appJicab1.e): *Pending penniting, the dock work, shoreline work an.d home construction would begin in August 2004 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or fuJrther activity related to or connected with this proposal? -If yes, expIain. *Possibly in the future we would considering lengthening our dock 8. List any environmental information you knowabollI.t that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. R e\() L~<\ \(.II\L-, e:'l~UA. ~t\O u W \ \l ~e. ~ Q.e.. p y\ \p.~ I),~ ~~LL \\~ ~\~ c..~~~~2>\. 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. ~~i.-~~Ov.>~ 10. List any government approvals or permits that rill be needed for your proposal, ifknown. C\\'l .S\ ~e.~ \b":> ~ ~ ~ ~ Q~"l.\}~\04~ ~'&\. m.'f C.bQ.p::> «1>, ti.~\, U .... .,,~ ~ '\\ 1l£.M\,T ~~p". G>~Sc\,>\\~ \N.\.\"'~L\~e. l~~A 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not: need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to inc1u<ie additional specific information on project descnption.) 'R.~"M)~t:. v.,\l "1.\.'"\~O'fV\2.~ ~~\~ <\ ~tL:l\O~~ \\\"\7-~ \-\O£.E.L\-~E ~ "'\~~~\\oQ.,s, \-\ 1's Q \" -f.Ir ~ -. . CON..$\~iA.a i\-\t()c..~ ~<E..-:r\l\\"'" \~~ ~1'tL.J... 3:3' h.o",~ ~'i :.}..-S--~\~ ~ ~Lo ~(rT\\c $t\OQ...c1-'~~ --L~~I>\J-..\~lt)() \;)~ ~ ~~~ • .:I~>;-llt-U-H ~~ ~\~~~\\J" Bo~\ J...\.~ ~~\\O~ ,,~~ ~ ~~-S\(..\. L.\~. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient iI:3formation for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, ifknown. 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, vicitiity map, and topograpmc map, ifreasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist ~~ ~~~\\.~-~a,~l t\t)\A.~\~\U,\\i:.'-L'-\ t)iU.\.\~ R.~~~~~(~'Ir. '\eo~f1 S\r. ~~ ~"t.<-3 \ \' ~'-l R SE. 2 TO BE COMPLE7ED BY APPUCANT B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS I. Earth EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. GenernI description of the sire (cneJe one ~lling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, ""'"'..... . * gentle slop leading to the lake b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? TO BE COMPLETED BY APPliCANT EVALUATION FOR o AGENCY USE ONLY c. What general types of soils are found on the site Cfor example, ClaY,~, peat, muck)? If you... know the classification of agricultural soils, specifY them and note any prime fannland d. Are there surface indications or history of unstab"l.e soils in the innnediate vicinity? If so, descnoe. ~e~~ '<-~ew~ e. Descnbe 1:he pmpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. A rrR.bo'1 ,W\.,.,aL .... -s: <,\A~\c.. ,-\I\~.:i ib ~ c~u\-.:> ,twlL\\ ~O\A."'(\ t~ {2..~s '-~~i> '''\\"\.l d:'-i ~ ~\!\-M.~\ q --.M. \..~\.. a£. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally descnbe. ~\O g. About what percent of the site will be covered \Vitb impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? D ro h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: \\ ~,\..., <-\4U-~~'\J W\\\ ~s;. -s:.~-;\~\J\~~ 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities ifknown. c.~~~\~V\ \,,~ ~v.,\,\>~~\ e~\~~ \i~\)':' ~Q... ~ ~A.'i.5 3 b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally descnbe. ~~ c. Pr<>posed measures to reduce or control emissions or o>t:her impacts to air, if any: S\~~~MJO ~~CO\ r.\Pr\.)tI\~ ~E.~\ ~~$..,~~ 4 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPUCANT 3. Water a. Surface: -EV ALUA nON FOR AGENCY USE ONLY 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 IUUlles. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. J.... \\\(.;~ ~M \\ \ ~" "t-J ~ L()\V~ -, \..J \'0 \' \+ ~ ~ ~ \ (-\ c..~ $ 'i'cL.- 2) Will the project require any \Vork over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. -\ "'lC.bt'~\)~~ ~\~ \ ~a \~ l\\~~ ~\~'\\~\'D~ 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed Un or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site tI:lat would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. ~tr~'t i -W\ O'\E.Li \Q c.(A,~\<, '4 ~(U)S <.l~ IA\l ~\\\<)~\"t.e.,j) ~,,\\ 't-.\\.\\ ~ li:. R..~~"'l~"" ~~\} -r.:l{)~~oj.\l'V\I\I;t<.l:'t £" c.:;u.b\.(.. '\ R~~ 4'>~ t\~~1'Yt u..Q.'e\"~\.. ~\l\?>i::. f'i..f\<..€.o "Lo~ ""~ t-ltA~ 5o"O~~ ~o...~. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? G~ve general description, purpose, and approximate quantities ifknown. ~ 5) Does the proposal lie within. a 100-year floodplain? If so, note locati<>n on the site plan. ~O 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? Ifso, desCrIbe the type of waste and,' anticipated volwne of discharge. ~O b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be with<1rawn, or will water be discharged to gr<>-und water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities ifk:nown. ~O 2) Descnbe waste material that will be discharged into the ground frOrD 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 systerns,the number of houses to be seYVed (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. 5 .' TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT c. Water runoff (including stormwater): EV ALUA nON FOR AGENCY USE ONLY: 1) Descnbe the source of nmoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if ~;~~w:~:. wa~\fl:~S ~~ ~ ~~~~~~:~~:~ ~:~descnbe. 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally descnbe. ~() d. Proposed measures to :reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: ~o\)~ 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on th~ ?" ---deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, othc,~\tW \~ --",--evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other --':'f~ shrubs grass ---pasture ---crop or grain ---wet soil plants = cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk: cabbage, other ---water plants: vvater lily, ~9 other ---other types of -vegetation b. What kind and amoUDt of vegetation will be removed or altered? l\ $~,\L.~ ~\l~ ~<"S\~f!-~\O"~L..AY 1:."'c..l..Vt\\~" ~i.-"""~'n",\'S ~t\\ ~~ ""I.~S"(~\\~.o _ . c. List threatened or endangered specie~ known to be on or near the site. ~\l~'C.. "'~()vJ ~ . d. Proposed landscapio.g, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the si:.1e, if any: F\ tL .. \)t \.~~ ~l .... v ,",\\'\ Tb~ \·~~O-..o 5. Animals a. Circle any birds anel. animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: --......_. other: ~e.~~"-'\\~ U-.~e.. ~""~ eer be elk, beaver, other: fish: ass almo trou herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threa.tened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. <"~\\JDO'L~"'\'MIO~ -~\\ ~\A.\ 6 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPUCANT c. Is the site part of a migratio:m route? If so, explain. ~-.l\~~ ~~~ ~ <:..%~~ Q.wl(,... . 6. Energy and natural resources EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY a. What kinds of energy (ele~c, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used te> meet the completed project's energy needs? Descnbe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. ~yPt. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally descnbe. ~O 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: ~~~t 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? Ifso, descnbe. ~~~~ ~~OW~ 1) Descnbe special emergency services that might be required. ~O~~ 2) Proposed measmes t~ reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: ~()~t-. b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for eJUUIJPle: traffic, equipment, operation, ot:I:ler)? ~O\:)~ 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. c.G)~~~~~~ e.~"'\f~~~\ ~O\S\t ~ (be, ~ b~'1 ~ 7 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPUCANT 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: ~'l c..olV\. tL'1' \l~ \l\l\X\w\ l\M\ "'~ ~~~~I.O ~) ... 8. Land and shoreline use a. What is the current use of the site: and adjacent properties? S\ ~,\E.. 'SS1'tw\~~ ~~ '\)e.Nv~.s b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, descnbe. ~O c. Descnbe any structures on the site. ~\ \l ,$L ~ t.-w\'\\'''1 9.a\D"~t,\l. ,\-l ,,"\\\ ~ ~ "".,\' a. ~\ ~\l:... • d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? ~O e. What is the current zoning c1assificati<ln of the site? 1f!.. -8 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area.? If so, specify. '\ ~~ ~ L~~ ~'tt5\~\'~~~'\~U ~\\.~J,...\~~S i. Approximately how many people wo-:uld reside or work in the completed project? ~~~~ j. Approximately how many people wc.u1d the completed project displace? ~$\J~ k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: ~\) \.'l e 8 EVALUATION FOR.. AGENCY USE ONLY TO BE COMPLETED BY APPUCANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY L Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compa.tJble with existing and projected Land uses and plans, if any: ~'\ Go~ ?l",\\~ ~n-~ ~\C..~""l~\\o ~~ 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be proVided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. ~O\:)~ b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether bigh, middle, or low-income housing. ~~\.')~ c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing mq,acts, if any: ~()\J~ / 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure( s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building materia1(s) proposed? C>"~ ..lc ~\-\. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? ~O\l~ c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic i:nJpacts, if any: ~o~ti.. 11. Light and glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produ.ce? What time of day would it IDainly occur? ~O~'C.. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a. safety hazard or interfere with views? 1\.\0 c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? ~O~~ d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: ~O~'e 9 TO :BE COMPlETED BY APPUCANT 12_ Recreation a. ~t designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the innnediate vicinity? \J'..\~,"eAL ~~\...~\Q.'O ~Vr",,~\e.s b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, descnbe. ~O EV ALUA nON FOR AGENCY USE ONLY c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project orapplicant,ifany: ?ttoS~\ ~\,,\ (.'~rL~ ~.U\\~ lJ\\ c...o~ ~,"\\,o\J-s. 'l\ \ti:., ""\ ~ \\A ~ So • , 13 _ IDstoric 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 ~~? If so, generally descnbe. b. Generally descnbe 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: ~~\.J~ 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system Show on site plans, ifany. r(\ t1 (,\. ~.)"\ ~ -\ \J \l \ ~ "'"' ~ ~ \ "'E. ~ ~~\ '-\ ~E. t> e" '4 e ~\\-'t ' b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? ~ -Le.~"T~ ~ \.J (> ~ 'E:-~\ Le.. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? ~/fT. 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). ~Q 10 TO BE COMPLETED BY APPUCANT EVALUATION FOR AGENCY USE ONLY e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally descnbe. ~~ f. How many vehicular trips ]per day would be generated by the completed project? Ifknown, indicate when peak volumes would occur. ~/~. g. Proposed measures to red-uce or control transportation impacts, if any: ,,\,,~~ 15. Public services a. Would the project result ir1 an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, ge:nerally descnbe. ~() b. Pr~~osed measures to red-;uce or control direct impacts on pul:> lic services, if any. ~~~~ . 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: system, other. b. Descnbe the utilities that :are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the ge:neral construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. ~\:)~'2.. ~e.Q~O:>eo C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the ~st of my kno~ledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. '\ S~brre' ..... ~uz..' .. ;;;~~ .............. c~.~~.~j ... -............................... . Dm SUhmi.v .......... _ pJ...::. ... !1.: .. !r..:1................. ...................................... .................. . 11 .ELOPMENT SERVICES DIV.SION WAIVER OF SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS This requirement may De waived by: 1. Property Services Section PROJECT NAME: pn/(J!rt:uz:L 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section 4. Development Plannilf1g Section DATB '1/r 'f/or Q:\WEB\PW\DEVSERv\Forms\Planning'waiver.xls DEVELOPMENT PLANNING ' CITY OF RENTON SEP 2 1 2004 RECEIVED ~ DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DIVISloA WAIVEK OF SUBMITTAL REQUI"ItEMENTS FOR LAND USE APPLICATIONS Inventory of Existing Sites 2 AND 3 Lease A.greement, 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 Section PROJECT NAME: --,-A.....:...(I-=-tkPJ....:..' ;::;......:.o~.......=..""--____ _ 2. Public Works Plan Review Section 3. Building Section 4. Development Planning Section DATE: q/t'f/o'l' Q:\WEB\Pw\DEVSERv\Forrns\Planning\waiver.xls Printed: 09-21-2004 Payment Made: ttJ:TY OF RENTON . 1055 S. Grady Way Renton, WA 98055 Land Use Actions RECEIPT Permit#: LUAO~-115 09/21/2004 11 :09 AM [Jl EVElOPMENT PLANNING CITY OF RENTON Receipt Number: SEP 2 1 2004 RECEIVED R0405117 Total Payment: 1,200.0~ Payee: MARC PRITCHARD Current Payment Made to the Following Items: Trans Account Code Description 5010 000.345.81.00.0007 Environmental Review 5019 000.345.81.00.0016 Shoreline Subst Dev Payments made for this receipt Arnoun t 200.0 0 1,000.0 0 Trans Method Descr.:i..ption Amount Payment Check Account Balances Trans Account Code 3021 303.000.00.345.85 5006 000.345.81.00.0002 5007 000.345.81.00.0003 5008 000.345.81.00.0004 5009 000.345.81.00.0006 5010 000.345.81.00.0007 5011 000.345.81.00.0008 5012 000.345.81.00.0009 5013 000.345.81.00.0010 5014 000.345.81.00.0011 5015 000.345.81.00.0012 5016 000.345.81.00.0013 5017 000.345.81.00.0014 5018 000.345.81.00.0015 5019 000.345.81.00.0016 5020 000.345.81.00.0017 5021 000.345.81.00.0018 5022 000.345.81.00.0019 5024 000.345.81.00.0024 5036 000.345.81.00.0005 5909 000.341.60.00.0024 5941 000.341.50.00.0000 5954 604.237.00.00.0000 5955 000.05.519.90.42.1 5998 000.231.70.00.0000 Description Park Mitigation Fee Annexation Fees Appeals/Waivers Binding Site/Short Plat Conditional Use Fees Environmental Review Prelim/Tentative Plat Final Plat PUD Grading & Filling Fees Lot Line Adjustment Mobile Home Parks Rezone Routine Vegetation Mgmt Shoreline Subst Dev Site Plan Approval Temp Use or Fence Revie~ Variance Fees Condi tional Approval Fe e Comprehensive Plan Amencj Booklets/EIS/Copies Maps (Taxable) Special Deposits Postage Tax Remaining Balance Due: $0.00 1,200.00 Balance Due .0C) .OC) .OC) .OC) .OC) .OC) .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 CDR s ~J';~~ii;ij}~~!~~~~,'/~.,~·~Cf=;ttLcorrT~B6iIIilIN BLOCK A Of: C.D. ~HLLHANtS LAKE .. ,"":' ",,~'""T~'G:ARDEH ex: EDEN Dlvl&IOf'.I NO. I, AS FER FLAT . REC9RDED IN YOLLl1E II a= FLATS, FAGE 63, RECORD6 OF KING COJNTY, DE&CRI6ED AS FOLLCWSI • BEGINN~ AT TIiE INTER5ECTl~ OF T~E 5C\JTi-I LINE OF SAID LOT 81 UJlT~ T)...{E MEANDER LINE OF LAKE WA5~INaaT~, T)"'{ENCE EAST, ALONG TJ-fE SOUTl-t LINE AND IT'6 SC\JTl-IERl Y FRODUCrrCN, A DISTANCE OF 35 F=EET TO T~E &<:?UTJ..I1JE5TERL Y LINE OF T~E 6URLINGT~ NORTHEFCN RAIL.WAY (NORTI-IEFa'-I PACIFIC) . Rlu~T .. OF-WAY, Tl-IENCE NORT~&TERL 'Y. ALONG SAID SCUTI4UJE5TEFC!!.. I LINE. A DISTANCE OF 24 FEEt Tl-IENCE 551l2J·~4·W A DISTANCE a= .32 FEET TO T)"'{E FOINT OF BECsJNNING, TCX:;ET~ER WIT~ LOT 82 IN SAID BLOCK A AND 5ECc:t-lD ClASS 5J.40RELA.ND5 A5 CONVETED ,BY T~E eTAT£: OF WA6&-1INGTC*-l SITUATE IN FRCNr OF, ADJACENT TO OR ASUTTIHcS TJ-JEREClN, . EXCEPT TI-lAT FORTICN THEREOF DESCRJ6ED AS 6EGINNING AT TJ.4E NTER5ECTICN OF 'T~E MEANDER LINE WITH 1l-tE NOF<T~ LINE a= 5AID LOT 82. Tl-iENCE 5:;'(2)13& '"..4·W A DI5T ANCE 0= s~.,r:z, FEET. rJ-IENCE N.46134t",~·UJ A 01&T ANCE G:lf= 1(2:)..82 I=EET TO A POINT U.II-UC~ 3EAR5 562115'42"U1 FRa1 TI-lE FOINT C'F SEGlf'.I-.llNr:::; a= T .... ,6 =XCEFTk:::(~. stTUA TE IN Tl--iE CCAlNTl OF KING. 5T ATE OF WA5J...1JNGTON . • QT CO'(ER8QE: AREA Cf= SITE AREA 0= USEABLE LAND .OT COVERAUE ·OT AL COYER.A6E 7;. 15E:ABLE COVERAGE ,. • I':;J~2. II S.3'a. • 161. ", • ;..s~ OF TOTAL· " • 64.9'" OF USE;A6LE SCALE: I' = _ (2)" • LAKE WA5~INGTON AS5U1ED LAKE ELEV • 141D"'· . . PRo ?oS1?J.): Rt?c.~ Roc;:.\~\~ \~(\ ~~W-l ~~o~r:..L\~E· . _h(;J..e;, L~) ? L?\ t.\\ "'t-\,6. ~ __ -. f::;X.c So n N <.0 \~OOD ~ \1' L • .J.6lXDf 6-01-"'1'A)' ~UPCN FtS~ERfE5' AFPROYAL WATEr< LtNE (20€JA) .' -'---' I. I I ~,' \I I ! 1 ~ I 1 ., I f I • f t , • , . I " :; ~ , ,r j d . ,) I ~-, ... ,.,.".:. o, ___ --~~--f-~~~--, ,~.\ 1 I' SC-~l.-e.. 1*'~:. \ oP (I t £: :.u::=::::,::O::Ll'.::l:j o S l,~-IS" .--" f l ~ 0 1 tt\ '0 u. \,.\\ ~ \~ \J\~"l-.\ ~D Q \ \l ~_ R.<e:. "'-\.\ t> ~ • 'N. ~ . ~ ~ 0 5"Cv \ #. - ! i / I , . ... te,,, , l ~~~~\<-~T 'IV \\~ ~~'tf OS\ c~ ~oG.~oo\) "S\~~'E:..~ 5'fio~~ L\~c t>~\t\\l ' \N,i'\'t\ ~L'n ~\ \~~S ~~~ O.s'l~t<-\;>o~~O~\? _ 5"'\ ~ l(.~) ~ '?f-'tt c....~'Q. -'\' ~ ?~~\ :r""t S\?r(~~~~E.~ 9_o"tJ.> .:.. r~ ~eO\)~ ::'/4, olf-T\-\-e., t.~L .. :E .. ~,l1\ "" ~?~o~ \ fl\~ ? l.. <n ~') ~~~'~' 'I'V.JtM~."..,~~ ..... __ n'''''''''''''''l';,!J.i.II!IImM'.!WIIlill'''\.'::'''-'~.¥w.-.;.,a')''l)..t.it''''''~~===========;n============::::"::""':"'=' ,.t'::' ::" ==-' =' ':::" ======== . 'r:u..,:W.\'I'I,r:.la'1!,... ...... ...;;;-"'Il.~~'lt,I~~~a ... u.~ ...... ~' ... ~a.l1:. •. )j.c.;'iI.U.:'J4'J.H..~iUlo'.:~.,...~Wl nl ~ . Ci\\~~ '. C.l01, .. :U.'a\" f;..~\ t'1. t,\ . , ! I • n~~· ~~O~~~\i! ()~ ~E-~: . 1. C\ 0 ~-N\. ov, \.\. "\ f\\~ \l \\"£v..1 ~e..\ 'J\"t -~t:.~"",o~ \J-..\. 'A-- cr~o 'r0S~a: Stto~.:E:.).. .. \\-.\t:. ~Li"t'H.\ \)lC\ S ~"\>Ra'l £j) ~ -'1,h\'~\h~~\o,J ~\:>\\ <t ~\l.o l.\'-~ Ctil· -:L ~ .. L ~ ~~ \J\) Pts 'rt\~~ \'0,,\ F\\ : ~~)o\.'o~ .' c.ou~\'.\: ~,~~. ,-'. f\ \>v l.\c.. ~ ~\ l t\1-, ~"~~c.. ,?~\\c.. \"\ ~~~ J.. E) \ \ f'I\ou. N~"'l" \1 \ t:>.l"'~ t>e. \\j~ -Rc ,,\\ b~ .,-tJ \i-. .. n • , _____ .---____ --..J..!...\)~~!..l.\~\7;..::...:..' .. _b.;;,....-_d......;;:o;,....-.;..q.1.J.-___ ...;.....:.?..:.~~~~~_:a .. ".c,,':'..;;'''~~'U~~~i'JIiI"~''O - SEP :' 1 200~ ~--------.----------- ~\~\ \~C>u:3>~ :1.<00\ I ~""C<.A.~·\,,\ ~ \)\~.;<\'-\ \i~. ~ • I J "' f I E.~(:>\ \ t-t~ W\~L,,~ \q.~~ ~"'O'1i-e~l~_. _~j-'.~L_ . S' 1'\~ R~'E:..E -~~.~~~~~~~~~ R., ~ ~ "\. ~.;;:> \\.~ ~ • 9 ~ DS-t; \).:' I , , .... ,,-.. --_ .. _- ji I I I . I' 1;( .j,: l' t, .J~~.~~; __ . r _ -~_- ~~..N\~".li:d \:.~~1\~~ ~oc..~ ~"~:Q..~!i1 --' .' . -~ ,_ ,_ ~I'i, # _..},",-,,~\\ 1.. •.. ~ 1-014~ : \ "!\~:Br'<"> 't.... ". _ . I' '. / -./ { '\'0 --_~ -,-t":'.\\- :rt::\"'>~ -\-,~'"\ \:)~\e..~ f)~~ 'P~~t?~ F-tl .; ..:::r~\ \ J_\~\ ". ~~\f:-~~~~ ~~~.}-').'1;; ~~G.. \\ . . . ~_ ~ '\ ~l:. ~~ ~~~~c..'C:.., " "-.. ~'att r'\o-u.:-\\?t\.~ "\l.\~'N UR ~~lo1-\ c~Pt'· ~B o"S"'"b ~. L-?r~"i:. ~~\ ~;:..\~ \~ 0~;J. ., ..... "--E-f.\~ '~'\ 9[Q'!. ~\ t;.. <l..... "?U'F. ~ Q~ a ~ p..~ S~lt.e. \l.."'~~ -~P-Q"'("e.<..\ oS '.\c~t..\~1!. P£<o'l\'~~ S'A~'e. s.\t)~l\"~~oe. ~'h\~c..~~~ ; Q~\U~-:-=t.\.g, E:!a.\~'tc.o~ \<\\.~ . RtlS". "?~~PE.'C(.\'\ c~ )-\.a~'S. • (') 0 · ~ <S \ \ ~ 0 q "" \ t?\\ '-\ "l \c'f.\ c'<... e..~~o J ,:\JJ Pc .. 9. 8 CS-b /' " I /~h~~-_ ./ / ."" :. ... ;l.\\~~ ~t_~.., \ .• '::'" ~c.~ .. Ii ;1 Iii" , .. -. , -", Ii ... ., j .i -:..., I :t. ~"T,," r • '. Fr~~ ~~'\'-l~~ ~~.c.~E.:\'~~ ~~o MO'-''A'Ps~ 'l..\~~ ~~ \.~ \~?f. '1 '5o')-rc r i • ----------..;,;.;'.~----------------.!..!...------------.-.. ',--,..... -..,.,. --~ · }/\~\~ ~v\~R b~ )./4 ¢ 01...0.00 . .. • • • • . tp~c>~o~~ 50\~~\~~\C To ~c ~L'A~"'t:.-~\~r_ . \A~ ~'"" \" \~ O~\-z..V:.-.o . ~\LL. . . E-1..lS\\t$\ l.~::,\\o~~ $\:..~~ I b ' '-0 \..\ ~ '/.. ~ \ ' ~, • • . . E:. .". I =>\ \ N. '\ ~o(..~ Sf\\40 . ,.. . . . , ,...... .. .' ~ . \ " . • , . . ::0::;,:-;;,:::: ::::'::~ ==:: ::: -::: =:::::::*:: : :::.::: : =::=:~:::: :::::-::::;;::::;:::::==:;;:=::.-= ................ F=~-r"'¥=" =.t:;_.~n.="$ ;;;-= ... ='=:;:==:====::==:=.= .. =~~~= ... ;:;;-:;:-;::" =-.::: ... ::::::::::::=:::====_::;: ........ = ... =_ ~_ =..:~ \-UR~()5£: 't ~~ 'C... .. \1>t~l\~ \\ Sl\"'iLt.L\)-\\{.. Hl\~i\ .. \\ \)~\U""l ~oY-!l\Jl<;' \i~\ \~\'1 , . ft~~. f~o~~<t"Lo~\'-\tC.,~). ' \ \ . .). S 0 5" M 0 -..l. , .. {\ ~ \\\ \1\ ~'I'-\ • J..~ l. 8 l\ "" &I.u .. {\' \\ t~ \l \ \::. '1'4 pe.o ?Os. ~-b '. ~t:.f\ ~ S ~~n.,~ \\ ~~ Y\ \'\.,.\ . ?t??~Q)~~'Q ~'l-'\f\\1\>\-\\~~\00 ~\$t\ \~\L~ ~\.~E. J:t-\ ~ lV\v..~-,;. ~\'\~\\-\'\lc:\\b,~ AT~ Q.c.\-\\ti)~ C,OL). 0\\..\ : K\ .... \ '\ ' iI ~ ~ ~ L\ ~ ~ \-\ \ : {'{\ f\ ~ c.. · "? ~ V\ c:.. \\ 'n 1l-\) t'\r .. ru-~ 1