Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit L92-0012 - BOEING - LONGACRES OFFICE PARK TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION
L92-0012 BOEING LONGACRES OFFICE PARK L42 -Obf�. TY/ Pv l'1 , CITY OF TUKWILA � LONGACRES PARK TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION AGREEM NT � This TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION AGREEMENT ( "Agreement "), dated ID c.0,«.1y te) , 19 975 is made by and between the CITY OF TUKWILA ( "Tukwila "), a municipal corporation of the State of Washington and THE BOEING COMPANY ( "Boeing "), a Delaware corporation. RECITALS WHEREAS, the Boeing Company has proposed to develop an office park ("Office Park ") at the site of the former Longacres Race Track; and WHEREAS, several alternatives for the Office Park have been evaluated by the City of Renton as lead agency in accordance with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act ( "SEPA "); and WHEREAS, significant environmental impacts of the Office Park were identified in an environmental impact statement for the Office Park issued by the City of Renton in August of 1994 ( "Office Park EIS "), including impacts to the Tukwila transportation system; and WHEREAS, measures mitigating the adverse environmental impacts caused by Boeing's preferred alternative for the Office Park ( "Alternative 1 ") are set forth in a Mitigation Document issued by the City of Renton in May, 1995 ( "Renton Mitigation Document "); and WHEREAS, the Renton Mitigation Document states that the terms and conditions for the assessment and collection of mitigation fees for traffic impacts to the Tuk transportation system shall be established in a separate agreement between Boeing and Tukwila; and WHEREAS, additional evaluation of adverse impacts to the Tukwila transportation system will be required during the environmental review for each specific development phase of Alternative 1; and WHEREAS, significant adverse impacts to the Tukwila transportation system caused by a specific development phase of Alternative 1 and not previously identified by the Office Park EIS may be mitigated as a condition of approval of that specific development phase; Longacres F'ark Mitigation Ari ment 12/6/95 Page 2 AGREEMENT N.. \V, THEREFORE, in consideration of this and other good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, the parties agree as follows: 1. EIS Analysis Mitigation measures set forth in this Agreement ( "Tukwila Mitigation Fees ") are sufficient to mitigate impacts to the Tukwila transportation system of Alternative 1 as analyzed in the Office Park EIS and summarized in the Renton Mitigation Document. 2. Basis of Mitigation/Mitigation Amount The Tukwila Mitigation Fees have been calculated according to the methodology set forth in the Draft Transportation Element in the City of Tukwila Draft Comprehensive Plan (1993). Using this methodology, the vehicle trips, distribution of trips, and corresponding mitigation payments generated by Alternative 1, were calculated as follows: Intersection Number of Cost per Mitigation Location Veh. Trips Vehicle Trip Cost 1) Southcenter Pkwy/ Strander 156 $ 140 $ 21,840 2) Andover Pk E /Strander 234 $ 135 $ 31,590 3) Andover Pk W /Strander 117 $ 377 $ 44,109 4) S 180 /SR 181 117 $ 475 $ 55,575 5) Andover Pk E/Baker 0 $ 377 $ 0 6) Andover Pk W/Minkler 117 $ 392 . - $ 45,864 7) Southcenter Pkwy /S 168th 117 $ 278 $ 32,526 8) W Valley /Strander 350 $ 283 $ 99,050 9) Interurban Bridge & Interchange 623 $1,122 $ 699,006 TOTAL TRIPS/FEES: 1,831 $1,029,560 3. Payment Because the construction of Alternative 1 is planned over a 10 -15 year period, Tukwila has established two optional methods for payment of the Tukwila Mitigation Fees. Boeing shall exercise, at its sole discretion, one of these options for payment of the Tukwila Mitigation Fees. Option 1 recognizes the benefits to Tukwila of receiving the total Tukwila Mitigation Fee in a single payment. In addition to the time value of money, a single payment would provide Tukwila with a substantial amount of money at once, thereby (a) avoiding the need to accumulate funds in smaller increments over a long period of time before meaningful construction could begin and (b) facilitating the acquisition of matching funds. Payment under Option 1 is nonrefundable and is not subject to future rate increases. Boeing, as part of its decision to exercise Option 1, may choose to negotiate with Tukwila to establish how, where, and when early payment Longacres Park 1'.i l;igation E ement 12/6/95 Page 3 The two options are as follows: — ' .:y,uded. Option 2 provides for incremental payments of the Tukwila iviiugation Fees to mitigate the impacts caused by specific phases of Alternative 1. 3.1 Option 1- December 31, 1995 Payment The total Tukwila Mitigation Fee will be discounted from $1,029,560 to $830,000 if the total fee is paid before December 31, 1995. If Boeing chooses to construct an alternative for the Longacres Park office development other than Alternative 1, fees paid under Option 1 will be credited against any fees assessed to mitigate the transportation impact of that alternative. 3.2 Option 2 - Incremental Payments Tukwila Mitigation Fees will be assessed against each phase of Alternative 1 in accordance with the specific impact resulting from that phase; provided, that the total Tukwila Mitigation Fee shall not exceed $1,029,560, unless, additional fees are imposed pursuant to Section 5 as set forth below. 4. Status of Transportation Projects The parties acknowledge that several projects referenced in Section 2 of this Agreement are currently being designed or constructed and in some cases have already been completed. The current status of such projects shall in no way impact Tukwila's authority to collect mitigation fees under this Agreement. 5. South 158th Street - Limitations, Monitoring, Review The AM and PM peak hour trips for South 158th Street which are attributable to and that may be utilized by the Office Park development shall be limited to 390, which is the "existing condition" for South 158th Street as set forth in the Draft Transportation Element of Tukwila's Draft Comprehensive Plan (1993). Notwithstanding the foregoing, capacity on South 158th Street for AM and PM peak hour trips exceeding 390 that is created as a result of South 158th Street improvements may be utilized by, and only by, the entity financing those improvements. Improvements that may be necessary to increase the number of PM peak hour trips on South 158th Street to accommodate additional traffic generated by Alternative 1 shall be identified through the environmental review process for each phase of development. Tukwila shall periodically monitor AM and PM peak hour traffic volumes on South 158th Street to ensure that limitations are not exceeded by any specifically identifiable entity using the right -of -way. Monitoring will occur at least annually and more frequently if volumes approach the maximum peak hour trips. Monitoring methodology shall be consistent with traffic engineering practices and shall be mutually agreed upon by both parties prior to initiating any monitoring effort. In the event that peak hour limitations are exceeded, Tukwila reserves the right to review the need for additional improvements and to assess additional impact mitigation fees against the entity creating the unmitigated traffic impacts and any such additional impact fees shall be in addition to and not withstanding the total fees provided for in Section 3.2 above. Longa:;re :.:.crk A :itig;&tion ( - cement 12/6/95 Page 4 6. Assignment This Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of both parties hereto. 7. Severability In the event that a court of competent jurisdiction determines that any phrase, section, subsection or clause in this Agreement is invalid, all remaining phrases, sections, subsections, or clauses shall remain in full force and effect. AGREED TO THIS 1 L ) day of Z , 19 C. CITY OF TUKWILA Attest/Authenticated: e E. Cantu, City Clerk THE BOEING COMPANY By AIWZ N.. J. J. Nelson Title: V P -FAMO BCAG STATE OF WASHINGTON County of King ) ss Approved As to Form: Office of the City Attorney 01) On this 'day of ,,, - , 19 � (o , personally appeared before me 4. .. / e • ( , to e known to be the !/p- F/Ml v R(Vt -, of the corporation that executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that '_, was duly elected, qualified and acting as said officer of that corporation, that was authorized to . .. �: • Lunb:icr;.•, - , '...:;�tion ki :ment 1 2/6/95 Page 5 -: ±: -; anent and that the seal . affixed, if any, is the corporate seal of said . IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. State of a.-^ Residing at PUBLIC in and for the My conunission expires 9'9 •c: ttttil Earl Clymer, Mayor RE CT i,Nsf F -.... O )ivtivtL.+'+t t :)FVEL.OPMEN CITY O'' RENTON PlanningBuilding%Yublic Works Department Gregg Zimmerman P.E., Administrator L -obra May 30, 1995 Dear Interested Party: SUBJECT: Mitigation Document for the Boeing Longacres Office Park (LUA 091 -128 ECF) Transmitted herewith is notification of the availability of the Mitigation Document for the Boeing Longacres Office Park development. PROPOSAL: The Boeing Company has submitted conceptual plans for a proposed new office park complex on a 164 acre site located on the former Longacres Park Racetrack property in Renton, Washington. The proposed 2.5 million square foot development would include offices, an employee center, related support and utility facilities, and open space amenities. The office park would be developed over a ten year to fifteen year period in accordance with the corporate needs of The Boeing Company. Approximately 10,0000 employees would work at the Longacres Office park complex at its completion. LOCATION: The northern boundary of the project site is formed generally by The Boeing Company's Customer Services Training Center. The southern boundary lies approximately 1,000 feet south of Southwest 27th Street. Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, if extended, generally forms the site's eastern border. The Burlington Northern Railroad tracks form the western boundary of the project site (and the western limits of the City of Renton). ALTERNATIVES /IMPACTS TO ELEMENTS OF THE ENVIRONMENT: Pursuant to State of Washington Growth Management Act regulations, the City issued a Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) in 1994 and a Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) in 1995 for the Boeing Longacres Office Park. The EIS prepared for this proposed (conceptual) development, under the direction of the City of Renton, by Jones & Stokes, Associates, consultants, included a review of four alternatives: • The Proposed Action (Alternative 1) is described as including approximately 15 office and ancillary services structures, in a dispersed development pattern, as well as parking, approximately 94 acres of landscaping, and a lake (as an water amenity and storm water detention system). • Alternative 2 similarly includes approximately 15 office and ancillary services structures, however, these structures would be designed in a clustered development pattern and some structured parking would be provided as well. Approximately 104 acres of landscaping and the previously described lake system would be provided with this alternative. • Alternative 3 has been defined to include a mix of offices (approximately 75% of development) and light industrial uses (25% of development), parking and landscaping. Under this alternative, the site is assumed to be developed incrementally, so that the design, space allocation and location of improvements would likely also be developed incrementally. • Alternative 4 is a "No Action" alternative, which assumes that the site will remain unoccupied. For each alternative, the contents of the DEIS included discussion of identified potential impacts to the following elements of the environment: earth; air quality; water (surface and groundwater); natural environment (wetlands, terrestrial and aquatic resources); noise; hazardous materials; land and shorelines use; population, housing and socioeconomics; visual resources; historic and cultural resources; transportation; utilities and natural resources; public services. The DEIS generally delineated mitigation measures to address identified significant impacts. The FEIS provided: (1) a summary of the purposes and content of the DEIS; (2) a Summary Table of Significant Impacts, Mitigation Measures and Unavoidable Adverse Impacts identified in the DEIS; (3) a description and discussion of additional factual information to supplement discussion in the DEIS with respect to selected existing conditions, impacts, and potential mitigation measures; and (4) letters of comment on the DEIS (16 letters received from government agencies, community members and other interested parties) and the City's response to those letters. ACTION: Based upon the analysis and findings established in the EIS, and based upon Boeing corporate requirements, Alternative 1 (also identified as the "Proposed Action ") has been selected as the preferred option for development of Longacres Office Park. The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee, under WAC 197 -11- 660, has issued a Mitigation Document to address the environmental impacts anticipated from the potential development of the Boeing Longacres Office Park (Longacres Office Park). 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 ® This paper contains 50% recycled material, 25% post consumer $ An EIS was required for this project under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c) and other documents cited in the ordinance. The impacts described in that EIS and other information on file with the City of Renton are the basis for the mitigating measures established in the Mitigation Document. This Mitigation Document is designated by the City of Renton as the first decision document for Longacres Office Park. Information in the EIS and other documents has been utilized by the City of Renton to develop the Mitigation Document for Longacres Office Park, consistent with the intent of the State Environmental policy Act (SEPA). DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY: The Mitigation Document (and the EIS on which it is based) are available for public review at the Renton Municipal Library (the Main Branch and the Highlands Branch), and in the Renton Municipal Building at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton Washington 98055, both in the Development Services Division (3rd floor) and in the City Clerk's Office (1st floor). The Mitigation Document is available for purchase from the Development Services Division on the third floor of the Renton Municipal Building for a cost of $10.00, plus tax. The Draft EIS is available for purchase for $20.00 per volume (or $30.00 per set), plus tax. The Final EIS is available for purchase for $10.00, plus tax. PUBLIC REVIEW /APPEAL PERIOD: Under SEPA Rules (WAC 197 -11 -680), following the issuance of this Mitigation Document, a a thirty (30) day appeal period will be provided (May 30 - June 29, 1995). During this thirty (30) day period, the adequacy of the EIS and the Mitigation Measures Document may be appealed, pursuant to SEPA Rules (WAC 197 -11 -680, RCW 43.21 C.075) and the City of Renton's Building Regulations Title IV, Chapter 6 (Environmental Review Ordinance) and Title IV Chapter 8 (Hearing Examiner Ordinance). Any interested party may file an appeal as to the adequacy of the Mitigation Document and /or the EIS on which the Mitigation Document is based. Appeals must: (1) state specific objections of fact and /or law; (2) be submitted in writing by 5:00 PM on June 29, 1995; and (c) accompanied by a filing fee of $75.00. Appeals should be addressed to: Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Questions should be addressed to: Lenora Blauman, Project Manager, Renton Municipal Building, Planning /Building /Public Works Department, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. The City of Renton will take no action related to the proposed Boeing Longacres Office Park Development during the appeal period for the Mitigation Document. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS: Following the approval of the Mitigation Document, Boeing may begin to submit applications for specific development actions permitted for Longacres Office Park. These applications will be reviewed under SEPA Rules and under City of Renton policies and regulations applicable to the planned office park development. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: If you would like additional information please contact Lenora Blauman, City of Renton, Planning /Building /Public Works Department at 235 -2550. Sincerely, ner ��ltiiszjcl�c�t Gregg A. Zimmerman, Administrator Planning /Building /Public Works Department CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF ACTION BOEING LONGACRES OFFICE PARK MITIGATION DOCUMENT AND SEPA REVIEW PERIOD NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN UNDER SEPA, RCW 43.210.080 AND THE CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW. ORDINANCE (BUILDING REGULATIONS TITLE IV, CHAPTER 6),THAT THE CITY OF RENTON TOOK THE ACTION DESCRIBED IN SECTION 2 BELOW ON MAY 30, 1995. 1. Any action to set aside, enjoin, review or otherwise challenge such action on the grounds of non- compliance with the provisions of Chapter 43.21C RCW (State Environmental Policy Act) shall be commenced on or before 5:00 PM on June 29, 1995 or be barred. Such action must be pursuant to SEPA Rules (WAC 197 -11 -680, RCW 43.21C.075) and the City'of Renton Building Regulations Title IV, Chapter 6 (Environmental Review Ordinance) and Title IV Chapter 8 (Hearing Examiner Ordinance). Such action shall: (1) state specific objections of fact and/or law; and (2) be accompanied by a filing fee of $75.00. Appeals should be addressed to: Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. 2. DESCRIPTION OF AGENCY ACTION: The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee, under WAC 197 -11 -660, has issued a Mitigation Document to address the environmental impacts anticipated from the potential development by The Boeing Company of Longacres Office Park. 3. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The Boeing Company has submitted conceptual plans for an office park development (" Longacres Office Park") on approximately 164 acres of the former Longacres Park Racetrack. The office park would include offices, an employee center, and related support and utility facilities. The office park would be developed over a ten year to fifteen year period in accordance with the corporate needs of The Boeing Company. 4. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: The northern boundary of the project site is formed generally by The Boeing Company's Customer Services Training Center. The southem boundary lies approximately 1,000 feet south of Southwest 27th Street. Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, if extended, generally forms the site's eastem bonier. The Burlington Northern Railroad tracks form the western boundary of the project site (and the western limits of the City of Renton). 5. TYPE OF ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW: An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was required and prepared for this project under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c) and other documents cited in the ordinance. The impacts described in that EIS and other information on file with the City of Renton are the basis for the mitigating measures established in the Mitigation Document. This Mitigation Document is designated by the City of Renton as the first action for Longacres Office Park. 6. DOCUMENTS MAY BE EXAMINED DURING REGULAR BUSINESS HOURS AT: The Mitigation Document (and the EIS on which it is based) are available for public review at the Renton Municipal Library (the Main Branch and the Highlands Branch), and in the Renton Municipal Building at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton Washington 98055, both in the Development Services Division (3rd floor) and in the City Clerk's Office (1st floor). The Mitigation Document is available for purchase from the Development Services Division on the third floor of the Renton Municipal Building for a cost of 310.00, plus tax. The Draft EIS is available for purchase for $20.00 per volume (or $30.00 per set), plus tax. The Final EIS is available for purchase for $10.00, plus tax., Questions and requests for additional information should be addressed to: Lenora Blauman, Project Manager, Renton Municipal Building, Planning /Building /Public Works Department, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. 7. NAME OF AGENCY GIVING NOTICE: City of Renton, Planning /Building /Public Works Department 8. THIS NOTICE Is FILED BY: Gregg Zimmerman, Administrator, City of Renton Planning /Building /Public Works Department; SEPA Responsible Official. Signature Date 5/2, 3/gS ;� Questions should be addressed to: Lenora Blauman, Project Manager, Renton Municipal Building, Planning /Building /Public Works Department, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. The City of Renton will take no action related to the proposed Boeing Longacres Office Park Development during the appeal period for the Mitigation Document. DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS: Following the approval of the Mitigation Document, Boeing may begin to submit applications for specific development actions permitted for Longacres Office Park. These applications will be reviewed under SEPA Rules and under City of Renton policies and regulations applicable to the planned office park development. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: If you would like additional information please contact Lenora Blauman, City of Renton, Planning /Building /Public Works Department at 235 -2550. Date of Decision: Publication Date: SIGNATURES: del? 3mL 5 5 z 3/IS . Gregg Unmerman, Administrator DATE Department of Planning /Building /Public Works Sam Chastain, Administrator Community Se Departm May 23, 1995 May 30, 1995 Lee Wheeler, Fire Chief DATE Renton Fire Department DA E CITY OF RENTON NOTICE OF ISSUANCE AND AVAILABILITY ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT MITIGATION DOCUMENT Notice is hereby given under SEPA, RCW 43.21C.080 (Notice of Action) and the City of Renton Environmental Review Ordinance (Building Regulations Title IV, Chapter 6), that the City of Renton issued the Mitigation Document for Boeing Longacres Office Park on May 30, 1995. The document is available for public review at the Renton Municipal Library (the Main Branch and the Highlands Branch), and in the Renton Municipal Building at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton Washington 98055, (both in the Development Services Division (3rd floor) and in the City Clerk's Office (1st floor). PROPONENT: The Boeing Company APPLICATION FILE: LUA 91 -128 ECF PROJECT NAME: Boeing Longacres Office Park PROPOSAL: The Boeing .Company has submitted conceptual plans for an office park development ( "Longacres Office Park ") on approximately 164 acres of the former Longacres Park Racetrack. The office park would include offices, an employee center, and related support and utility facilities. The office park would be developed over a ten year to fifteen year period in accordance with the corporate needs of The Boeing Company. LOCATION: The northern boundary of the project site is formed generally by The Boeing Company's Customer Services Training Center. The southern boundary lies approximately 1,000 feet south of Southwest 27th Street. Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, if extended, generally forms the site's eastern border. The Burlington Northern Railroad tracks form the western boundary of the project site (and the westem limits of the City of Renton). LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton, Planning /Building /Public Works Department ACTION: The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee, under WAC 197 -11 -660, has issued a Mitigation Document to address the environmental impacts anticipated from the potential development of the Boeing Longacres Office Park (Longacres Office Park). An EIS was required for this project under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c) and other documents cited in the ordinance. The impacts described in that EIS and other information on file with the City of Renton are the basis for the mitigating measures established in the Mitigation Document. This Mitigation Document is designated by the City of Renton as the first decision document for Longacres Office Park. DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY: The Mitigation Document (and the EIS on which it is based) are available for public review at the Renton Municipal Library (the Main Branch and the Highlands Branch), and in the Renton Municipal Building at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton Washington 98055, both in the Development Services Division (3rd floor) and in the City Clerk's Office (1st floor). The Mitigation Document is available for purchase from the Development Services Division on the third floor of the Renton Municipal Building for a cost of $10.00, plus tax. The Draft EIS is available for purchase for $20.00 per volume (or $30.00 per set), plus tax. The Final EIS is available for purchase for $10.00, plus tax. PUBLIC REVIEW /APPEAL PERIOD: Under SEPA Rules (WAC 197 -11 -680), following the issuance of this Mitigation Document, a a thirty (30) day appeal period will be provided (May 30 - June 29, 1995). During this thirty (30) day period, the adequacy of the EIS and the Mitigation Measures Document may be appealed, pursuant to SEPA Rules (WAC 197 -11 -680, RCW 43.21C.075) and the City of Renton's Building Regulations Title IV, Chapter 6 (Environmental Review Ordinance) and Title IV Chapter 8 (Hearing Examiner Ordinance). Any interested party may file an appeal as to the adequacy of the Mitigation Document and /or the EIS on which the Mitigation Document is based. Appeals must: (1) state specific objections of fact and /or law; (2) be submitted in writing by 5:00 PM on June 29, 1995; and (c) accompanied by a filing fee of $75.00. Appeals should be addressed to: Fred J. Kaufman, Hearing Examiner, City of Renton, Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. Earl Clymer, Mayor March 22, 1993 , • „ Ross Earnst Public Works Director. City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard . Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: Letter of Understanding Modifying the July 7, 1986, Interlocal Regarding Reciprocal Annexations Dear Ross: CITY OF RENTON Planning/Building/Public Works Department Lynn Guttmann, Administrator As discussed in my recent meeting with you, I am transmitting the attached draft Letter of Understanding for your review and comments. The list of projects in this draft document represents projects in the Valley Transportation Plan agreed to by the Boeing Longacres EIS Transportation Committee. As requested, the South 180th Street railroad grade separation will be added to the list of unfunded projects in the Valley Transportation Plan. If you have any questions, please contact Mel Wilson at 277-5542. Sincerely, Lynn uttmann Admi Enclosure: 1 RLMITUKUNMEWwwint 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 Earl Clymer, Mayor October 21, 1992 Dear Interested Party: The enclosed document is a summary of SEPA EIS scoping comments received by the City of Renton for The Boeing Company's proposed Longacres Office Park. As you may remember, SEPA scoping for Longacres Office Park was held from November 15, 1991, until December 6, 1991. As a part of the scoping process, the city held two scoping meetings on November 19 and 21, 1991. This document includes a brief description of the Proposed Action and alternatives, a summary of the public meetings, and a review of and response to written comments received during the scoping process. At the present time, the city and its consultant are preparing the Draft EIS for Longacres Office Park. At this time, the EIS is scheduled for publication during spring 1993. Please contact me if you have any questions. Sincerely, Lenora Blauman Project Manager 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 .................. . CITY OF RENTON Planning /Building /Public Works Department Lynn Guttmann, Administrator City of Tukwila August 17, 1992 Mr. Ross A. Tunnell, Jr. Real Estate Broker 218 Highland Plaza Building 1110 North 175th Street Seattle, Washington 98133 Dear Ross: Sincerely, g esyx Ron Cameron, P.E. City Engineer RMC /kjp CF: The McLeod Group Fred Stewart, Boeing Lenora Blauman, City of Renton Rick Beeler, DCD Director File: Nelsen Place and Mcleod Development RECEIVED AUG 1 81992 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Public Works Ross A. Earnst, P. E., Director RE: Longacres Drainage Thank you for your letters and Lenora Blauman's response from the City of Renton regarding the Nelsen Place drainage to Longacres. This drainage has occurred for many years and is shown in our comprehensive drainage plans. We have continued to explain to Renton officials and Boeing that this drainage has existed, is part of our adopted plans, and needs to be taken into consideration in Boeing's development. The Boeing development team, with Bob Wickleen and Fred Stewart, have assured us that it is being taken into consideration. Recently at a meeting in Renton with Mel Wilson of Renton, City Engineer, Ron Cameron was assured again. Bob and Fred explained that the Boeing drainage system for SW 16th St. has been designed to provide for Tukwila's 48 inch line. The 18 CFS, 24 inch line will be connected to the 48 inch with an overflow gate. The gate will redirect flood water from the 24 inch onto Boeing's property. From the Tukwila side, the capacity of our planned 48 inch line to SW 16th St. and the Pt. and the 18 CFS to Longacres will remain as planned and exists (18 CFS 24 inch). From the Renton side, the 48 inch pipe will not be connected to from Renton or Boeing. The 24 inch line will flow to the 48 except in floods when it will be diverted over to the Longacres drainfield as it has always flowed. Thanks again for your letters and Lenora's, Ross. Your concern and extra effort to make sure we are all working together is sincerely appreciated. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: (206) 433 - 0179 • Fax (206) 4313665 ROSS A. TUNNELL, JR. edate, 218'HIGHLAND PLAZA BLDG. - 1110 NORTH 175th STREET Bus:546 -2458 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98133 Mr. Ross Earnst City of Tukwila 6200 South Center Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Ross: RossATunnellJr:T Re: Drainage through the Longacres Land I am enclosing copies of a letter I have just written to Stuart McLeod who is planning on constructing an Exhibition Hall and Trade Center between the railroad tracks adjacent to Longacres Race Track. and a letter just received from Lenora Blauman of the City of Renton. I feel certain that the City of Tukwila is fully informed about the existing drainage from the Embassy Suites property and including that to the north now owned by Stuart McLeod, but I thought you would like to have a copy of Ms. Blauman's letter for the file. Neither Helen nor I feel that we can come up with any specific data mentioning and /or describing the existing drainage, but since the enclosed letter from the City of Renton states that while the routing of the water will be altered "this action is not expected to adversely affect the current flow of drainage from the Nelsen property." ' If you for the City of Tukwila and McLeod feel secure as to drain- age for the future, then it appears that adequate consideration has already been given to the problem, But Helen and I felt you would like to have a copy of Ms. Blauman's letter. . June 30, 1992 COMMERCIAL. INDUSTRIAL AND INVESTMENT PROPERTIES Res:546 -1675 SCE r'"' V1i : ir; €' Bus: 546 -2458 Mr. Stuart McLeod The McLeod Group 213 Lake St. South Kirkland, WA 98033 Dear Stuart: RossATunnellJr:T ROSS A. TUNNELL, JR. edaz, 91,4. 218 HIGHLAND PLAZA BLDG. - 1110 NORTH 175th STREET SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98133 Sincerely., June 30, 1992 Re: Drainage through the Longacres Land COMMERCIAL. INDUSTRIAL AND INVESTMENT PROPERTIES Res: 546 -1675 Helen has for sometime been concerned about the drainage program as it now exists continuing into the future. She wants Boeing to honor the existing drainage which goes_ the Longacres land and to see that it is not interrupted which would cause a problem to the drainage from the Embassy Suites Hotel and from your proposed Exhibition Hall and Trade Center. I have looked into the lease originally signed by Joe Gottstein and James Nelsen, Helen's father in 1933, and followed up by a copy of the Sales Agreement, but neither is specific about a "drainage easement ". The City of Renton has assured Helen, as shown in the copy of a letter attached from Lenora Blauman, Senior Planner, that there should be no problem. You have already checked on the drainage issue, I think, but I am sending you a copy of this latest• letter from Lenora Blauman, and if you have any concern that has not already been addressed, you may wish to contact her. I am sending a copy of her letter to Ross Earnst of the City of Tukwila also. We haven't come up with any legal document dating back through the years that is specific about the drainage, but Helen knows that her father and Joe Gottstein and also Maurie Alhadeff, who succeeded him as the owner of Longacres Race Track,were both aware of the importance of maintaining the drainage as it existed then and now. This copy of the letter I am enclosing indicates that• apparently Boeing and the City of Renton have agreed to continue the drainage as it now exists. Nal q Earl Clymer, Mayor June 25, 1992 Ross A. Tunnel!, Jr. Real Estate Broker 218 Highland Plaza Bldg. 1110 North 175th Street Seattle, Washington 98133 RE: The Boeing Commercial Airplane - Customer Services Training Center - Test Lake Dear Mr. Tunnell: I am writing in reply to your letter of June 6, 1992, concerning the Lease and Option documents signed by James Nelsen and Joe Gottstein. These documents have been reviewed by City legal /property management officials. Based upon this material, staff have identified a drainage ditch across the property; however, there is no confirmation of a drainage easement either in the lease or in any appurtenant property deed /agreement which has been located during title search. Neither were any other relevant easements or agreements located. Riparian rights were granted during the tenure of the lease, however, those rights do not relate to drainage easements. Also easements were granted for utility lines, but do not include information concerning drainage easements. While our investigation (together with an independent investigation by The Boeing Company) does not reveal any agreement regarding drainage management, Boeing has permitted drainage from the Nelsen property to flow across the Longacres property, Boeing has agreed to continue to allow drainage onto the Longacres property at the same rate as it currently flows onto the property. Routing of the water will be altered, but this action is not expected to adversely affect the current flow of drainage from the Nelsen property. In the event that you are able to locate recorded drainage easements or other recorded agreements, we would be pleased to review them for you. if you have additional questions at this time, piease contact me at 235 -2550. Sincerely, Lenora Blauman Senior Planner cc: Fred Stewart Ron Straka CITY OF RENTON Planning /Building /Public Works Department Lynn Guttmann, Administrator 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 Earl Clymer, Mayor June 11, 1992 Mr. Peter Hudelson The Boeing Company PO Box 3707, M/S 7E -EJ Seattle, WA 98124 SUBJECT: Longacres Park Soil Remediation LUA -92- 030- ECF;SP Dear Mr. Hudelson: The date of Tuesday, June 23, 1992, at 9 :00 a.m., has been set for a Special Permit public hearing to review the above - referenced matter. The hearing, before Mr. Fred Kaufman, Renton Hearing Examiner, will be held in the Council Chambers on the second floor of City Hall, Renton, Washington. The applicant or representative(s) of the applicant is required to be present at the public hearing. A copy of the staff report will be mailed to you one week before the hearing. If you prefer to make other arrangements to receive the staff report, please contact Kathleen Childers, 277 -5582, or Sandi Seeger, 277 -5581. If you have any questions, please call 235 -2550. Sincerely, n4r Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator DKE /kac cc: Attached Party of Record List CITY OF RENTON Planning /Building /Public Works Department 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 Lynn Guttmann, Administrator G]�CS��rn�tri JUN12 X99 CITY OF TUi< /ILA PLANNING DEPT. ■ ...,, . c.. ,7,m- rofapp(catou be called for hearing ME cr ea rd : :- :: cessartly the �raer acing X001.1. PROJECT NAME: Longacres Park Soil Remediation PROJECT NUMBER: LUA- 92- 030 - ECF;SP PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The applicant is seeking permission to excavate and remediate (through a thermal desorption system) approximately 2,000 cubic yards of soil contaminated with petroleum. Remediated soil will be returned to the excavation site and the site will be restored to its original grade. The size of the site is 100' x 100'. - BERPT_Ra JUN 1 7 1992 erry PLANMNU DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING /BUILDING /PUBLIC WORKS PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER PUBLIC HEARING APPLICANT: The Boeing Company (Commercial Airplane) PROJECT NAME: Boeing Customer Service Training Center Site - Soil Remediation APPLICATION NO(S): LUA -92- 030- ECF;SP LOCATION: South of S.W. 16th Street; north of S.W. 19th Street (if extended); west of Oakesdale Avenue (if extended). A. SUMMARY AND PURPOSE OF REQUEST: prelmrpt The applicant is seeking a Special Permit, under the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance, to excavate approximately 2,000 cubic yards of soil containing petroleum (leakage from a petroleum tank which has been removed from the site). The contaminated area is located in a 10,000 square foot (100' x 100') area in the northeast portion of the approximately 51 acre site. This area is currently developed with parking facilities and includes one structure (see attached Exhibits). The purpose of this excavation is to remediate the contaminated soil. The remediation plan is presented here in order to provide background and context. Environmental review of the remediation plan has been previously duly conducted by the City and approval for remediation has been granted, under the Environmental Review Ordinance, pursuant to approval of the Special Permit. Remediated soil would be returned to the excavation site and the site would be restored to its original grade. B. GENERAL INFORMATION: 1. Owner of Record: The Boeing Company 2. Applicant: The Boeing Company 3. Existing Zoning: B -1, Commercial Use 4. Existing Zoning in the Area: Commercial, Manufacturing Park 5. Comprehensive Land Use Plan: Commercial 6. Size of Property: Total CSTC site is approximately 51 acres; soil remediation site is approximately 10,000 square feet. 7. Access: S.W. 16th Street 8. Land Use: Longacres Park Race Track; future site of the Boeing Commercial Airplane CSTC 9. Neighborhood Characteristics: North: Vacant lots, single- family home. East: Office complex, race track facilities; South: Race track facilities; vacant land. West: Race track facilities; vacant land. PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER JUNE 23, 1992 C. HISTORICAL /BACKGROUND: Action Initial Annexation Rezone to B -1 D. PUBLIC SERVICES: File NA NA Ordinance Date 1745 04 -14 -59 1884 05 -02 -61 LUA -92- 030 - ECF;SP PAGE 2 1. Utilities: Water lines, sewer lines and storm water lines are available in the vicinity of the site, but such services are not necessary to support soils excavation activities. Excavation activities should not affect the METRO lines within and in the vicinity of the site. 2. Fire Protection: Provided by the City of Renton as per ordinance requirements. 3. Transit: Not applicable 4. Schools: Not applicable 5. Recreation: Not applicable E. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE: 1. Section 4- 31 -10, Commercial District. 2. Section 4- 31 -27, Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance. F. APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR OTHER OFFICIAL CITY DOCUMENT: 1. Green River Valley Plan, City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Compendium, 1986 (pgs. 31 -50). 2. City of Renton Comprehensive Plan Compendium, 1986 Environmental Elements, (pgs. 8 -11). G. DEPARTMENT ANALYSIS: prrrlmrpt 1. The applicant, the Boeing Commercial Airplane Co., is seeking a Special Permit for grade /fill in order to excavate soil as necessary to voluntarily implement a soils remediation program. The program is proposed to include the excavation and on -site clean -up of approximately 2,000 cubic yards of soil; the soils are located in a 10,000 square foot portion in the northeast section of the approximately 51 acre (pending) CSTC site. The contaminated area formerly housed petroleum tanks; the tanks were previously removed. Environmental review for the remediation process was conducted by the City. The Environmental Review Committee issued a Threshold Determination with mitigation measures pursuant to soils excavation /remediation activities. Public review periods, pursuant to SEPA Rules and the City's Environmental Review Ordinance, were duly provided. (See Section G.2. for additional discussion.) PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER LUA -92- 030- ECF;SP JUNE 23, 1992 PAGE 3 prelmrpt State and local government approvals have been obtained for the remediation activities -- for example, the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency and the Washington State Department of Ecology have recommended remediation and have approved the specific planned remediation activities as well. No additional review is required for the remediation plan. In order to provide background /context for the review of the Special Permit Application, a description of the approved remediation plan is provided herein. Specifically, contamination, at a level exceeding Model Toxics Control Act (MTCA) standards, was discovered on the site, during soils testing activities preparatory to purchase of the site by The Boeing Company. The Department of Ecology has supported Boeing's efforts to voluntarily remediate the site to prevent further contamination to ground water, based upon the proximity of the site to Springbrook Creek and its associated wetlands. - The Boeing Commercial Airplane Company is proposing to excavate and remediate the approximately 2,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil on the subject site. The soil would be transferred into a treatment tank (18 feet in length and 10 feet in height) by a backhoe and treated through thermal desorption (at a temperature of up to approximately 1400 degrees Fahrenheit); chemical emissions from extracted soils are contained and treated in the unit as well so that those emissions which do occur are at levels permitted by PSAPCA and DOE. The unit is heated by the use of propane which is included in the thermal desorption unit; permits for the use of propane have been and /or will be obtained from appropriate governmental agencies prior to issuance of a Special Permit by the City. Emission types and levels are described below. The project area will be cleared and secured, during operations, to prevent trespassing. For example, the existing underlying use, a gravel /paved area, will need to be disturbed to reach the affected soil. Parking which occurs on the site now will not be permitted during clean -up operations. Following remediation, the soil is planned to be returned, and the site is planned to be graded /returned to its present condition. Parking may be permitted again (until the site is redeveloped with the CSTC). In order to reach soil to be excavated, an existing pole barn will need to be removed; this barn is not identified as a historically significant structure by the State Office of Historical and Archaeological Affairs. There is no plan to replace the pole barn; its removal will not affect race track operations. This process is intended to clean the soil and, also, to remove the opportunity for contamination of groundwater by the petroleum. The thermal desorption process is proposed, rather than removal of soil from the site, as this soil is planned to be used to support future development. The proposed incineration system is permitted by PSAPCA generally, and is authorized by the agency for use in this remediation project (i.e., the contractor has proper PSAPCA authorizations). The proposed incineration system is approved by DOE. The activity is outside the purview of King County Health Department, as soil is not to be transported off of the site or treated in the open air. The project is designed, as well, to comply with the following regulations: Releases from Underground Storage Tanks (WAC- 173 -340); Section 4 -10 Mining, Excavating and Grading Ordinance; Hazardous Materials Ordinance; Environmental Review Ordinance 4 -6. The proposed activity is permitted as a short-term, constrained remediation action; it would not be allowed as an on -going use on the site, based upon its industrial character. The thermal desorption system can treat approximately 200 tons of contaminated soil in an eight hour period; if operations are restricted to an 8 - 12 hour period daily, then it is anticipated that remediation would be completed in approximately three weeks. The Boeing Company has asked for permission to operate the unit continuously around the clock; if this schedule is maintained, remediation should be completed in approximately ten days. PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER ' JUNE 23, 1992 prelmrpc LUA- 92.030- ECF;SP PAGE 4 The process will be supervised by certified geotechnicians. At the end of remediation of the initially identified 2000 cubic yards of contaminated material, the subject site will be evaluated by technical staff (under City direction as necessary) to determine if additional contamination exists and, if so, a decision will be made as to the need for continued remediation operations. 2. Pursuant to the City of Renton's Environmental Ordinance and SEPA (RCW 43.21[C], 1971, as amended), the Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non - Significance - Mitigated on April 8, 1992 (amended on or about May 13, 1992), with conditions established to address identified environmental impacts (see Mitigation Measures - attached) from the proposed excavation and remediation activities. All materials required by the Environmental Review Committee in advance of public hearing for this special permit, have been submitted to the satisfaction of the Development Services Section. All agreements have been submitted to the City Attorney for review; it is anticipated that final documents will be in place prior to public hearing. For example, secure screening is to be installed to secure the areas in which contaminated soils are to be excavated and the areas in which remediation activities are located. Boeing has provided an agreement, approved by the City, for location and operation of the thermal desorption unit on an open site, located a minimum of 300 feet from human activity centers and from flammable areas. Plans and agreements have also been provided to ensure that thermal desorption activities are conducted in compliance with OSHA air quality standards and with PSAPCA burning regulations for residential and commercial communities, to limit air emissions and odors in populated areas. Dust emission control systems (e.g. collector bags) approved by PSAPCA have been provided and the applicant has agreed to operate misting equipment continuously (as necessary) to control air emissions. Also, Boeing has agreed to provide visual monitoring to ensure that the quantity and quality of the dust emissions do not exceed PSAPCA standards for contamination by such emissions. All property owners within 300 feet of the site boundaries will be provided written notification of the remediation project (with particular emphasis on information concerning air emissions and odors which may occur), including: a) the schedule of construction operations; and b) the name and telephone number of a designated City representative AND a designated corporate representative to whom affected parties may direct inquiries /complaints concerning the activity schedule. Notices shall be distributed prior to the beginning of the remediation and shall be made available to the Development Services Section; In order to address emergency management, the applicant has provided agreements /plans to ensure: i) that all roadways within the project area (i.e. contamination site, travel route, remediation site) remain available to emergency vehicles for the duration of excavation and remediation activities; ii) that an appropriate emergency management plan (i.e. Boeing Health and Safety Plan) is in place; and iii) that signage /identification of the work area is adequate to facilitate location by emergency service vehicles. 3. Representatives of the various City departments have reviewed the application materials to identify and address impacts anticipated from the proposed actions. Comments have been attached and the content has been integrated into the text of this report. 4. SPECIAL PERMIT: The applicant is seeking a Special Permit pursuant to the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance (4 -10) to allow excavation of approximately 2,000 cubic yards of contaminated soils to facilitate the above - described soil remediation. Under Section 4 -31 -27 of the Zoning Ordinance and the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance 4 -10 -3 (B)(2), a series of basic criteria is established for the Hearing Examiner to determine whether the proposed excavating /remediation operations are compatible with existing /planned future land PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER JUNE 23, 1992 pralmrpt LUA -92- 030 - ECF;SP PAGE 5 uses. (In addition to achieving compatibility with these specific below - listed criteria, the applicant will be required to comply with all applicable general provisions of the underlying Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance and with conditions established by the Environmental Review Committee, as described above). The applicable criteria are: a. Size and Location of the Activity The proposed action to be reviewed at this time involves the excavation of petroleum - impacted soils on the BCA CSTC site. Testing and monitoring conducted previously on the project site has provided sufficient information to generally delineate the size of the project area, the amount and location of affected soils. Specifically, the contaminated soil, which is slated for excavation is located on a 10,000 square foot area on the northeast portion of the CSTC site. Approximately 2,000 cubic yards of soil has been proposed to be removed, treated and returned to the excavated area. Petroleum contamination has been found at depths from surface level to eight feet below the surface of the project site. The affected property is utilized for parking /yard area and overlies a portion of interior, private roadway. The terrain throughout is an essentially flat, upland area. Existing soils are silty sand and gravel. Contaminated soils surround an area in which petroleum tanks were previously located; the tanks were removed in 1990/91. The site is located in the 100 year floodplain (FEMA). Temporary removal of the parking area and permanent removal of the pole barn are required to permit necessary soil excavation. The removal of the pole barn should not hamper race track activities. In order to reduce likelihood of conflict with remaining race track activities, ERC called for the remediation (thermal desorption) unit to be located in an area away from human activity centers and a minimum of 300 feet from areas in which there are flammable products (e.g. vegetation, hay barns, etc.). Structures which do not contain flammable products will remain in the vicinity of the remediation site. Excavation and remediation of the contaminated soil has been proposed (and /or will be recommended by staff) to occur in a manner which generally addresses site characteristics and potential land use impacts (underlying terrain and nearby shoreline areas), as well as life safety impacts to race track personnel and visitors. Staff note that Springbrook Creek abuts the site and its associated wetlands are on the subject property, however, the contaminated area which is proposed for remediation is approximately 300 feet from those environmentally sensitive areas. Thus, no Shoreline Master Permit is necessary. b. Traffic Volumes and Patterns The equipment to be used for excavation of soil will be transported to the site at the beginning of the project and will remain on the site until all contaminated soil has been excavated, cleaned and replaced. Staff note that a portion of the contaminated soil is located under the interior roadway. Roadway area will be affected by excavation, staging and transport of contaminated soils to the remediation unit. Adequate rights -of -way to support emergency vehicles will be required to be maintained at all time. A Work Program has been approved to the satisfaction of the City (Fire Department, Development Services Department). For remediation activities, it is anticipated that there will be approximately 1 - 3 truck trips to the site per day to refill the propane tank, to fuel the thermal desorption unit. Local and PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER JUNE 23, 1992 pnlmrpt LUA -92- 030 - ECF;SP PAGE 6 state standards for transfer of volatile fuels will apply (e.g., truck containment standards, travel routes, travel speeds, etc.); compliance with these standards should address transportation impacts. A small parking area will be removed in order to accommodate the remediation activities. Adequate parking is available elsewhere on the site to meet Code requirements. c. Screening, Landscaping, Fencing and Setbacks The site of the excavation and the proposed location of the thermal desorption unit are generally away from public activity areas (e.g., viewing stands), in a secured section of the site, so that activities will not be readily visible or accessible. Protection of the excavation /remediation area will be accomplished through several systems. These include an on -site security system, information provided to owners /users of the site (via written reports and signage) advising of the need to exercise caution in the excavation /remediation area; and tarps (secured with sandbags) which will remain in place in the excavated areas until the soil is returned to the ground. Based on the above - delineated plans, the limited size /duration of the excavation operation, the extensive set back from neighboring properties, and the scheduling of site preparation at a time when no human activity is slated to occur, specific additional screening is not recommended for the excavation /remediation period. d. Unsightliness, Noise and Dirt The proposed excavation /remediation activities include use of a backhoe to extract soils and transport them to the thermal desorption unit for treatment. These activities may result in an unsightly environment, and are likely to create dust and dirt, and some increased noise level. Staff note that the area in which the thermal desorption unit is located is away from public activity areas (e.g., viewing stands), in a secured section of the site, so that it will not be generally visible or accessible. Additionally, it is anticipated that the excavation /remediation process will be completed within a ten day period based upon 24 hour operation (up to a three week period if 24 hour operations are not possible). The preferred schedule and the alternative schedule both serve to limit the length of time over which the backhoe and the thermal desorption unit are on the site. The applicant intends to return treated soil to the excavated site at the completion of remediation. The area will then be returned to use as a parking /yard area and as a circulation route. Based upon the protected location and the short duration of the project, no substantive aesthetic impacts are anticipated; no mitigation of aesthetic impacts is suggested. Dust and dirt emissions are considered by staff to have been addressed, as necessary, in conditions established by the Environmental Review Committee for management of excavation activities (e.g., monitoring, erosion control systems, drainage control, site clean- up requirements). Neither are substantial noise impacts anticipated. Noise levels from operation of the backhoe and from the thermal desorption unit are 55 - 75 dBA at 500 feet. All on -site activity centers and off -site, vicinity land uses (one residence, office developments) are a PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER LUA -92- 030 - ECF;SP JUNE 23, 1992 PAGE 7 , pralmrpt minimum of 300 feet from the project site; the nearest residence is 500 feet from the project site. The Noise Ordinance establishes standards for acceptable sound levels; the applicant will be required to comply with all standards established in the Noise Ordinance. The applicant has submitted an amended proposal for the scheduling of excavation /remediation activities. Permission is requested to work continuously to complete excavation /remediation during the shortest feasible time period. These revisions are intended to ensure that activities can be underway prior to the wet season, and, also, that excavation /remediation do not conflict with racetrack activities. Staff would support this schedule with the recommendation that surrounding property owners be notified of the hours of construction operation. Also, compliance- with Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance requirements and Noise Ordinance requirements, should serve to mitigate excavation impacts and address life safety issues. e. Surface Water The site is located in the Renton Industrial Drainage Basin (and in the FEMA 100 year floodplain). The area in which contaminated soils have been identified is composed of essentially level terrain. The site has been previously filled; underlying soils have been defined as silty soils in a geotechnical report provided by a registered civil engineering firm. More specifically, hydrogeologic and geologic data gathered by geotechnical engineers, during investigation of soil and ground water quality, beginning in 1991, indicate that the ground water table is shallow (located from four to eight feet below the surface) and that the gradient is relatively flat. Data collected to date indicates that the area of ground water affected by petroleum compounds (i.e. the "plume ") has not increased in size, and that concentration of petroleum constituents in ground water have decreased by as much as 75% due to the effects of natural degradation. Conceptual and specific plans for the excavation /remediation activities, submitted by the applicant, together with mitigation measures established by ERC, and compliance with Municipal Code requirements (e.g. Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance, Surface and Storm Water Management Ordinance) and MTCA regulations should serve to ensure that planned activities do not negatively impact the Drainage Basin. Thus, the excavation /remediation project itself is not expected to impact the surface water. But the benefits of the project should contribute to better surface water quality in the future. NOTE: Ground water has been observed in the area in which contaminated soils are located. The applicant has proposed plans for dewatering /water restoration and for removing such contaminated ground water, as well as removing storm water which collects around the periphery of the excavated material to a pump truck which transports this water to a disposal site (e.g., sanitary sewer lines), as approved by the Development Services Division. Recommendations made for mitigating impacts to the earth (e.g., polyvinylchloride covering, sand berming) should also serve to address impacts to surrounding, uncontaminated ground water. While testing activities have provided good basic data concerning location and level of contamination, it is uncertain that all contaminated soil has been located. It is recommended that the most effective method for making such a determination will be to conduct on site testing of the soil. This testing will be done during /after the soil removal activities so that it is confirmed that all potentially affected soil can be included in remediation activities. PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER JUNE 23, 1992 pnlmrpt LUA- 92- 030 - ECF;SP PAGE 8 There is also some danger of fuel spills as the propane fuel which is used to treat the contaminated soils is transferred from the fueling truck to the thermal desorption unit -- the unit holds approximately 1400 gallons of fuel, which is sufficient to operate the unit for approximately 14 hours. It is estimated that the tank will need to be filled daily for the duration of the remediation activities, assuming continuous operations. Standard transfer systems, which have been approved by PSAPCA and the Washington State Department of Health, should minimize the likelihood of spills. Conducting operations on an impervious surface, as planned, should serve to limit contamination in the event that a spill does occur during fuel transfer. Boeing has provided emergency management procedures (in a Health and Safety Plan) to address fuel spills and related incidents /accidents. All local and state requirements for propane use are to be achieved. The applicant has informed the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE) of the presence of petroleum- contaminated soils on this site as well, and has presented plans for remediation to that agency. The decontamination of soils on this site has been recommended by the DOE. The proposed on -site incineration system is reported by DOE to be acceptable to that agency. f. The Length of Time the Application of an Existing Operation has to Comply with Non - Safety Provisions of this Ordinance. Not applicable. g. Reuse of the Site This application for a Special Permit is intended to allow excavation of contaminated soils for remediation so that the site is restored to a safe condition and the protection of Springbrook Creek is assured. NOTE Under a separate submittal, the applicant is proposing development of a Customer Services Training Center for the Boeing Commercial Airplane Company; remediation would also be desirable prior to undertaking any redevelopment of the site. h. Protection of the Public Trust The proposed excavation (and permitted remediation) of contaminated soil is intended to ensure that the existing environment (underlying terrain and nearby shoreline areas) is protected. The subject proposal, as modified by the mitigating measures established by the Environmental Review Committee (G.2) is anticipated to result in protection of the public trust. Staff note that the proposed remediation process is designed to limit the generation of air emissions to levels below those defined by PSAPCA as constituting a human hazard (see Exhibit); the small volume of soils to be remediated and the natural ventilation should reduce the potential for odors as well. To further limit opportunities for hazardous air emissions, it is recommended that the remediation activities be conducted away from human activity centers and away from flammable products (e.g. vegetation, hay). Staff note that if the excavation /remediation effort is effective, the underlying soils would be restored to a safe condition and reduce risks when development occurs on this site. In the event that soils clean -up is not permitted, then an undefined level of contamination would PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE HEARING EXAMINER LUA -92- 030 - ECF;SP JUNE 23, 1992 PAGE 9 . remain in the underlying soils and pose potential future risks to groundwater and to nearby Springbrook Creek. If the approved thermal desorption remediation system is not effective, then. Boeing and the City staff will work together to select an alternative system to achieve remediation. In sum, the above - described mitigation measures /conditions for excavation /restoration (as well as for remediation) of the site should ensure that the permitted site preparation activities do not harm the persons or property, and, therefore, would not be detrimental to the public interest. H. DEPARTMENTAL RECOMMENDATIONS: pralmrpt Staff recommend that the Hearing Examiner approve the application by The Boeing Commercial Airplane Company (File No.: LUA 92 -30 ECF;SP) for a Special Permit, subject to the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall comply with all conditions required by the Environmental Review Committee in conjunction with the Determination of Non - Significance, Mitigated, issued on or about May 13, 1992 (see Mitigation Measures /Advisory Notes). NOTE 1: The applicant shall be required to comply with all applicable provisions of the City Code for excavation activities. Particular attention is directed to the following regulations: Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance, the Noise Ordinance, and the Surface and Storm Water Management Ordinance. APPLICATION NO(S): LUA -92- 030- ECF;SP PROPONENT: The Boeing Company (Commercial Airplane) PROJECT NAME: Boeing Customer Service Training Center Site - Soil Remediation DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is seeking a special permit, under the Mining, Excavation an Grading Ordinance, to excavate and conduct on -site incineration of approximately 2,000 cubic yards of sc containing petroleum. Remediated soil will be returned to the excavation site and the site will be restored to it original grade. The contaminated area is located in a 10,000 square foot (100' x 100') area on an approximates 51 acre site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: West of Oakesdale Avenue, south of SW 16th Street LEAD AGENCY: City of Renton Department of Planning /Building /Public Works Development Planning Section The City of Renton Environmental Review Committee has determined that it does not have a probable significar adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RC\ 43.21 C.030(2)(c). Conditions were imposed as mitigation measures by the Environmental Review Committe under their authority of Section 4 -6 -6 Renton Municipal Code (see attached sheet). These conditions are necessar to mitigate environmental impacts identified during the environmental review process. This Determination of Non - Significance - Mitigated (DNS -M) is issued under WAC 197 -11- 340(2). Becaus mitigation measures have been imposed, the lead agency will not act on this proposal for fifteen (15) days fro' April 13, 1992. Any interested party may submit written comments which must be submitted by 5:00 p.m., Ap: 28, 1992, in order to be considered. A fourteen (14) day appeal period will commence following the finalization c the DNS -M. Responsible Official: PUBLICATION DATE: April 13, 1992 DATE OF DECISION: April 8, 1992 SIGNATURES: DATE Lynn A. uttmann, Administrator Departm nt ofiPlanning /Building /Public Works 't.e/7 John E. Webtey, -Administrator V ' DATE Community Service Department .• / // ' j Lee,,W eler, Fire Chief DATE Renton Fire Department CITY OF RENTON DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE (MITIGATED) Environmental Review Committee c/o Don Erickson, Secretary Development Planning Section Department of Planning /Building /Public Works 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 mitmeas - 1 DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE REVISED MITIGATION MEASURES PROJECT: Boeing Customer Service Training Center Site - Soil Remediation APPLICANT: The Boeing Company (Commerical Airplane) APPLICATION NUMBER: LUA- 92 -030- ECF;SP DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The applicant is seeking a special permit, under the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance, to excavate and conduct on -site remediation (thermal desorption) of approximately 2,000 cubic yards of soil containing petroleum. Remediated soil will be returned to the excavation site and the site will be restored to its original grade. The contaminated area is located in a 10,000 square foot (100' x 100') area on an approximately 51 acre site. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: West of Oakesdale (if extended), south of SW 16th Street CONDITIONS: The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non - Significance - Mitigated with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate potential impacts to environmental health, provide an agreement to ensure that the thermal adsorption unit is situated and utilized on an open site, located a minimum of 300 feet from human activity centers and from flammable areas; this site is to be approved by the Fire Prevention Bureau and the Development Services Division, prior to the public hearing for the Special Permit. 2. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate potential impacts to environmental health, provide an agreement /plan which ensures that: g), thermal desorption activities are conducted in compliance with OSHA air Quality standards and with PSAPCA burning regulations for residential and commercial communities, to limit air emissions and odors in populated areas. N. i dust emission control s stems e... collector bass a. • roved b PSAPCA shall be utilized at all times during remediation operations; (ii) misting eguipmemt approved by PSAPCA shall be in operation continuouly to control dust emissions; and (iii) visual monitoring of air emissions /odors shall take place continuously during excavation and incineration activities to ensure that the quantity and Quality of the emissions do not exceed PSAPCA standards. In the event visible levels of dust occur, then operations are to cease immediately and the Development Services Section is to be notified: operations may resume when the applicant can demonstrate that PSAPCA standards can acrain be achieved; c) screening is installed to secure the areas in which contaminated soils are present and the areas in which remediation activities are located. di all property owners within 300 feet of the site boundaries be provided written notification of the remediatior project (with particular emphasis on information concerning air emissions and odors which may occur), including: a) the schedule of construction operations; and b) the name and telephone number of a designated City representative AND a designated corporate representative to whom affect parties ma} direct inquiries /complaints concerning the activity schedule. Notices shall be distributed prior to the beginning of the remediation and shall be made available to the Development Services Section; This agreement (and all necessary plans) shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division prior to the issuance of the grade /fill permit and shall be in effect for the duration of the remediation program. 3. The applicant, in order to mitigate potential impacts to earth and water, shall provide a construction management plan including the following elements: a) a containment /erosion control system (e.g., sand berming; poiyviny chloride tarp to protect soil, surface water and ground water; b) a dust containment component; c) a specific plar for securing those portions of the site in which contaminated material is located and in which the remediatior activities are located; and e) street cleaning bond. The construction management plan shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division prior to the issuance of the grade /fill permit and shall be in effec for the duration of the remediation program. 4. The applicant shall, in Qrder to mitigate potential impacts to earth and water. provide to the Development Services Division. all glans and reports submitted to the Washington State Department of Ecology. in order to meet the requirements of the Washington Model Toxics Control Act in conjunction with soils remediation (thermal desorption) activities to be conducted on the subject site. In addition, the applicant shall not undertake any development activities on said site until the Department of Ecology has reported, to the latisfaction of the City's Development Services Division and the Fire Department, that the site has been adequately remediated. 5. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate potential impacts to earth and surface /ground water, provide a specific plan /agreement to ensure that: a) any and all ground /storm water which collects around the periphery of the excavated material shall be removed to a pump truck which transports this water to an approved disposal site; and b) dewatering /water replacement activities are conducted in a manner which protects the integrity of the ground water and underlying terrain. These removal /replacement activities shall be supervised by a certified civil engineer. Plans /agreements shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Development Services Division prior to the issuance of the grade /fill permit. The applicant shall, in order to address public emergency service impacts (e.g. fire), provide agreements /plans to ensure: a) that all thermal adsorption activities occur on an open site which is a minimum of 300 feet from flammable products and human activity centers (pursuant to Condition #1 above); b) that all roadways within the project area (i.e. contamination site, travel route, remediation site) remain available to emergency vehicles for the duration of remediation activities;. c)that an appropriate emergency management plan (i.e. Boeing_ Health and Safety Plan) is in place; and d) that signage /identification of the work area is adequate to facilitate location by emergency service vehicles. These agreements /plans shall be submitted, to the satisfaction of the Fire Department, prior to the public hearing for the Special Permit, and shall be in effect for the duration of the remediation program. These agreements /plans shall be submitted, to the satisfaction of the Fire Department, prior to the public hearing for the Special Permit, and shall be in effect for the duration of the remediation program.p ADVISORY NOTES TO APPLICANT: The following Advisory Notes are informational; they are intended to supplement the environmental mitigation measures. As these Advisory Notes are for information only, they are not subject to appeal under the environmental threshold determination. 1. The applicant will be required to obtain permits from the Renton Fire Department for use of flammable materials, pursuant to the use of propane fuel in the incinerator tank. 2. Any discharges of water containing contaminated materials to the sewer system for any reason must be under permit or approval of METRO's Industrial Waste Division. 3. The applicant will be required to comply with all applicable City regulations, including, but not limited to the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance, the Noise Ordinance, the Uniform Mechanical Code and the Uniform Fire Code. 4. The applicant will be required to be in full compliance with PSAPCA standards and with DOE regulations for the duration of the proposed remediation activities. mitmeas — 2 QIIPN_ II3IES I Ill /CM ND OD0110 CM C016IPUCI01 ACTIN'S OC13715. A nr..•000IRUCIOI11( 111151 BE. IUD 11011 11E cur Ir 74110+ DIPNNitUl OP MC NOES lLAl Pr4url 2 A tray d 4 »la wood pl. wet be ad. job en 1...o vein v 101.10• • paint 3 Itohe1w«t1•bre b S «00 N 10..1973 fad. V ry0 ((00!. 111. n ed P4, p 100, 5.. 1845. 1.4 4 Propel 11. i 4. 9x41 .4 taloa alltan. gvin a low at 61• pas C.1•.• •• war Aral 5. /•• 0 / ..a • leo eltd en ! nil laa+l. el d. F c 0. y o. 610 I» e d. da el 010.1 v hs 4b. e.1.) e4... IN bran •..0 •0. to 6.8148 04..4. gm4s lo o. . .• n. sd 4 1190 p. l .d 4 •11.¢4.8:. • 6x0 ash d gphalU 664 seas. ml 64 y •Iv .a.d Imt.a m401sed .•owe+ ad 84.08 eel o� ed dl v7. 1084 vd 08.17 4 n 100501 CO1100. 101E5 l en61. .ontodrr. Io. p en dd4. .holy fiend d. en eel dead day 400100000 2 N ry.d tea ..d al 0.e. land IaH•, ▪ 4 twr.Nd 0.d w nor 6. po to 996 od1. .4.90 1•1.010 0e 0.411 0.4 I0•4•1.40.1., odd dwe 001 tea d. dad 8005. Irv. Al wo . ad I.bw•a. lard 16 .. 61 4 664. 64. selelalty b0 yM ..d sole d4 qe906.9 rod/or /rod/or • o. .d and posed Ice eons eaon to p1..d 116 •pb s n .waed a 1 ✓d 4 IM e• oil •s �o. meal T°d411 pow. 3 IN rota 6 ..d teen. toner ale. band a d.le ob.. a• Mwnhd Ise to we.w re.....1• to .01 a <pad 1te .mllo• A. c .4...e. ng«a1 ad ,p•IId o wand 1.4040. 66.. I1. so.. c n.. to a . 1 d poop. .4 I. d ata,. Ion U. ^d t h l: duo.., d . p roe y t 0.d ea•.rw e d A. d• 0.d ed 64d e h1y d ( we +. • aid.. 1.7 0.1 tail) pe o do. soy 4 v owed b6R ...toe 01.1.1 I. 4 ped a df •ey 11.1 oil ch. no. ope.. dot o/ f ...11.1 0e p01 «0 p tan. ep.wl ad .as gdly d 4e on damp Irv. 4 74p .4 el dew On en 996 6 6 sera and salean. coal lily It don no cow.. a oypo.4 d Oa. 1 b eag l e t. 1 «1h..1e.0 or pp.. Iowans. 5. O.y d• 0.o yond el 14661 km911196 l ed pope 41a6 1 W seen ends O. 5000 nyo• I ..l. 4ot s• to 4 alt ..ol.d Iv .a. 4a 46 .14.131 hon. dd be towed by e.M. adb5 or pate money 6 Atwlee o.. 4•h Fo 4w ppd d awty eg.W.. an 94 40.• n In. .04 • mepnd la a pryd d 30 .0. +v. d dewbd ono Ml 4 ono 0 per..4 a coward Ton piny or (66 le 4+ 1e• d new 0401.. hole .•«4q dee a A. 0c10014. o4 illy So 4944 d /p4 iet+. Sep al.r ben S. ^'9 rand 44..0. noon d • • •1 ✓« Koef od . II O.00 1 4 .d oareneei C• 7 d Ri I m 0 4. 0h• 4«dod w• .cd by 7. A neporroy 961 C.4b.6 aa w. 2 4' 50 0'. el Noon 4 o. ,on. e. d. 4 t d .d.� Noon 4 . loos d» con.. Doe 0 ohooe n dote pb. q «s o C0611UCI01101E5 1 16 Cw oroor 4d e.o.. 4. e4 ✓• oil boar. .1 199 •0. Jo.la. y sot ad hdr oil • mei . . a 81...4 d.., p 0004 ✓• . I.40 Won. a .bale• 6 e.4 44.%4.90 m1.m .14 pro. by io 0.. n. ..goal. 7. U dooty .h.. booed .6 4. .w+dat ✓• way aids be.soy 0.0 be 418 to C. a 11.0. w..07 Iwo ad odepla. IM Coy dd 4 r• U. la Iota.) d rte .day tad abn • 40. NM ad doily .h gp yea forces dw ray boo yob v teed worm ad opewewn Iy d. .pon pp 90 I y 04 to 100 r I. ot hi 4 v4dy ..d• la 114 vd d .loo l l to •44.444 ✓7.e. red • pmerms 1•Jy, 16 pave.• d nob anal by 6 anon. 3 IM Cavata 4.8 to 0.4.46io fre pawing Inns• .a1 Noy B .del, d•a.. p010 0.. 11.990. and Nnor . wed oil Ih. « e � d ! e l p ol rl pb a dja d by 16 i con v4. Pr �la.m.. of 4 Pra to stand gods and ..veal mown d geed elan ad odovot.. toad Sales 44 4 414.1 a II. lotaa.• oil • .0008..• .sh M dodo 6461 pen 19 6 m.o.! ad woo by to 0∎.90. Co e ldad ova r.r dill* S N• Coam.e dd •54.90 d ntewy en .lo erd ed toad mown a1.4a 7.bd no 4..d to .. I sew 666 b .A f oil o egg. p .. eonr to a haw) 0. to. ad 110.1 .69 6 TI. Cotaln d p rh r..p.cvy 1.840 . l o v I p1 1a..4 4. ewly D in MOW tya•. 00 .4....4 O• Cr.wab. 139 (op•., ro pt .d..9. p0«•3n a 106 pawed ed pant deogt to 4 I.Jdg d&e •.<0.a.. 7 11. Ca 4.d •sawn wooly dw A. V4 dew m 0.,. yin .4.n non. 8608 by the 0.... d d. 8eg..•d o.. ..pewee. *434 .40 ... .4..14 no ...d• 4. 16 dry•eoa0b the Ow. a d•.go..d o..r npnwle.n 0 E.aa..4. apes al at be snow dot I leoeald to 1 ser0d .41 d. Sol (.g... 810....s dot own .d oil g0.das Sadie. p..d lad ln4valy •10401 e.4.a. dry w added 9 IN Coot.. dd ...Mdy ran d sd 0.66 hoe •dot • d. ••011100c• 411 m 011 repel 1 ere 146 br Bons Sol 61 o 6 00dpl. .M 1 4. dw point 4a1o. 0 IM Carona dd ba411 i. e • Sena q .4.. o n g l re d .01 r sea P••te l 0... 6.84.1.1.8 In. d 4 US 4. dot dart 5 pv I ..1 leaned pang Ito 700 w TI. ✓ dd4 raw lad 3/4v .h d. 9000• d+d *ea .0 • •.00 81A00( d 7754.. NbaUle4O.fs L. se 484 wpald o4 . o .14y 4 q 4.. a 81).18 owe rry0.0wI0.4 p0 a ya•..I ad 114010 1 0.111 yi.d to 0 dep4o o1 low 7 In. lobe 1.4. gale 4d 4 pod • .ar.. 0.44 0. 4 bon Its 44 taped to • ..•en. 0.40.4 bossy d 05 pant of the • dn.ry no dononed by 95Th Inl Dagda D 057 P el11 ad 616g .and Neil solo .boo 7 1•n I, 1441 gods 44 4 pod aeon.. 004 895 bete IN ad Ooorett•d ro e new rebese dewy A. 95 peens 641.1 so she 1 b Own .606 o . d.opaied bet rep "-•a•. Pnped Ion TCf SOBSO COMPPW P.O. !OX 3707 SEATTLE MA3H31 4 9624.2707 1 734, R40. ill 21 Prverod br LAWAU 1550QATEA I C, PO !OX 1029 ® ONA WA 90320429 144.84401E VON 771-0907 PROJECT LOCATION 300 600 000 S• 04. S. ..t PNICEL 1 N 4908 lrte. red rap., o. • 0. Coy d P. Co . d rot{ 510. d • 0,1,,,9. b Down. Down. la 114. 6 tad Coo.. la 0 bon. SKb. 74. l..,4., 73 Ns /1 7.9. 4 EO.. 111o..lu 16 4. ed . Sena el d. Ns Vd d i+ SE 1/4 .1 wet 1 1 8 • prone a ,IIa1r 11E1/4 d do SE. V4 d sod Storm 24. and 4y o• Wooer; l � P 1 a 14 16 ddo8.e. 0 C al 1/4 el 44901 SE 1/4 ol LM 1490000517 Sleet. Id•S «I 6806 Ian to .• 1600 be d Hooey A 11.08.. 00-00 lad Cb lb 40 door 409 sod Nosh A. 14171.15711 1467 36 bon d.c. 4.w• red IN it I. 10077E 077.72 10.1 to 6 661, .4..4'490 M d 1405 4..• .ad wd.ny d.rol•.°y be ad 4 •..d. 04.'8 b. d S/' 6d. Sandra. • dal toss 1675757E dy ed» et d . .•0. to 4. o44 ha n• • led.. d 54314 ..l ad • envoi .. 4 264500 to r hyh d 75350 Int One tag.. to 4 poo.bg ten 1073157E 07203 1 ..,. den. 1.00.1ro «edq nos. Bing 4. 0,el a onlo4. 4.11 lo.. . ra8• d 04004 Int ad • cnlid m il. of 025200 head d 9707 len 0.e• 004.1 to d. p.o.do. n be 1064557E 4561..4, d.... aq✓t to 6e peabs tole 8.511. ee d • an to loon 10 4 Io. 0 d 0 m 6000 Int il• tonal e L. e.4. el 03755 a t a4. d 509 16 to ratto .11 tar of 4. p...41mn,.d to 4. Co d Para .dr AE .69103090, oR rrss Con h4.0.•dry 4. ba..l.y d b. .04 500.155694710 Int o6 W913 45700 1 ..0 I0 4..el bed of 0. Mt• It.n sots; 0«h No 1 4.+ ds. lad d l 601 4 Idowg n 500 3 4 04 0 1910 O len 577 004 0606 460 5775437E 7950 i ..a 53557: l e e r Int 537155E 0764 In.. 54000(7: 6071 In.. 5600.1'4 059 Inl 500 1075E 4400 l 545733E 144 76 Ina 531404% 0706 1..0 500 7574 Inc sd 5745177E 6477 Int a4.50.4.4.84.47,1/4 el d. SE Vl wed d...• .4.9 e.0 red 6.01. ti 10 6 B 7 76 454 09963 low l0 4. PO 11 4R100 Coe e. 4130 Awe. d 1.d ..e. a Ian II. Bon d 16..6 la d• d... I.. • she P«vd of 6n9 IM BOdOC.n Ice r.ad.d . Boil 0 or sowns a pogo 7. Ws PKV dq 1e. 7707769007 ry Cony 0 «ad. Covens Borg 1949. A.laan k: B 1141.14. Copan 54417 14.40. P Bo 079 od Eaementd All.. Ebo.4, 1669 98770 P0. 4. 3707. 16 . 7C.E3 IS 17061 770 0001 Seed. R616 0604.7707 140. 17001 393.4703 •wcrI JN0 N91 atso CITY OF RENTON SEPAIT1051 Sr PlU11 MIS n Md. ten 0900. �..••� (4 • td 6sol I Salt....,. Caved 14. M Manton SAT 114.646. hop.. Capon 1 6 1410/92 ton .6 OCAS 1'400' 0.s•.+. ... 460. I n 2 kr 7' by 14 Oa Wert Ohm Ftbric tieuhrid robe or pit. 60' 4414 reit t. $te4lot or Oro thy to crud feta* to oiro 11111 II 9 kobow.ot Ifte asswil r _ h hir 11 _ 44.010 &Oa (OP MN SIT FENCE DETAL to Scot. G. llro Nth or Soo 6.4roiot Cows 11.4, HOU Fishy Force Stabbed Cortnetrat bro. Dew:. Oro Sh Fews Orainclia ,rate Flom hoporty TENTRARY WERCEPTOR BERN DETAL (I) Not to Stele Proizio 3/4' • IS rolod Too/ 144411 lo roar ad co WI Oho of Our Itrel• le* co to _I... • II* go T fry 4' tood prot Alt Wel two pm. It • 25 oit ru. tot.... 4' • II' Merry Sp& STABLQED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE DETAL Not lo Seel. 7 by r by M Go 1Fro Fcbre oroit Pb. Ririe Hawk' eon hoo.d eespzial 900 $ Ptak. Poo. Pah Lip Sor4hr4 Fr HOW Odor Eatomost 1?:!:14*"= p:' 0°Irm' w L. - - - - • - — 1 . -, -,--- Preyed BCENO CttVAIN PA. BOX 3707 SEATTLE WASMOTON 9W24-2207 • p er a It) - r IOWA 90* o. mpootolry 04 looloot b..4 co at "howl ro4ico of • tephrolit ocr fortpholl 1714 L H Peak h Fotavoy Nt Eloorkoo tohooto 8..d..t. Ho. 241. Shrotho 0.111 Coy .9 Byrom Dom Egmont Wok/. loud to /LTA Sooty r oprool lor bcodoern by 1411.14 Goldwith hoothitra. timed 0/9/90 L Prepared by: LANDAU ASSOCIATES. INC. PO BOX 1029 EDMONDS. WA 98020.9129 TELEPHONE 12061 778-0907 Clohtkroto .4 90. 0 AO 60 111111MEN • 160 on. Hero SS HI CITY OF RENTON 01.,510111t OF ?WIC KOFF 11 73(041 II 7289 One, 014 Ennio / Solarrooko Caorti Plot ttotorhote LSI Itomoiroreo herd Lovcros Imo 9/10/92 Promo. NA. PRI mui 40' hoer.. .or mho. anneaw ow, 7 •••• 7 LONGACRES PARK SOIL REMEDIAT date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT /DIVISION: APPROVED 2QPPROVED WITH CONDITIONS de-7/ //" A,e92‘ =?;b. 7- /15" rrr-W_L, ,O2/1 . /1/7-vr/ Md/i 5ecoi 37fr' # 1,14 / Cf ; U/44 C8 Couiee( SIGNA RE OF DI ' ECTOR OR AUTH dr wiht IZED REPRESENTATIVE ECF;SP- 030-92 Page 2 REV. 01 /92 • LONGACRES PARK SOIL REMEDIATION ECF;SP -030.92 February 20, 1992 Pags 2 • REVIEWING DEPARTMENT /DIVISION: Gl.Ir' 7' yr.orolGl. COMMENTS: •nvrvant // !Giant -��� -� vii! �i G zG d74 - S Signature of Dir -ctor •r Authorized Represen tive ( or") f'l�Ol/� ly7GGN�ii - ee// 1 7W ,529/, a/gin GQ GO 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. Rev. 01/92 date .: LONGACRES PARK SOIL REMEDIAf � ' ECF;SP -030.92 Page 2 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT /DIVISION: l ' h 1(1.� \-"‘ A G"4,101(1 APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE DATE: NOT APPROVED devrvsht REV. 01/92 date devrveht REVIEWING DEPARTMENT /DIVISION: .,)'S APPROVED SIGNATURE Pt-AN few APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS RECTOR R AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE DATE: NOT APPROVED Page 2 REV. 01/92 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT /DIVISION: 1 IV if l5 !1 / APPROVED CTOR OR HN THORIZED REPRESENTATIVE ATIVE SIGNATURE 0 dev vsht date Page 2 APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED 1 -144 / t 3 0 te Fx64-rf7 / ± 6 0 FRe rfT / (17fa4, c' t-t r No vr7Z-/�`1 > ( V i 0 DATE: J ^� ; REV. 01/92 LONGACRES PARK SOIL REMEDIA( date. REVIEWING DEPARTMENT /DIVISION: rr,�G �i�•� , iirPS / .S � ��v SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE devtvaht APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED I I A-1 ©, —S; / e id) a.sZ ( y 07 'A/ --C7 - s , ; 2..) k h 5 occ 4 Ai 7 7 / ) / / DATE: ECF;SP -030-92 Page 2 `N REV. 01/92 LONGACRES PARK SOIL REM EDIC date REVIEWING DEPARTMENT /DIVISION: Lt" ).071e___. APPROVED V vr i re 7 U) , SI ATURE OF devrvsht 3 /° /4" /7)7 P/B 4DL/Le-- /47/1k- /^-17(iki /1'62 o_a---4-7e-W ,>-_-/( (4-‹_ /.0-70 ,Pk) APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS UTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE DATE: ECF;SP - 030-92 Page 2 „...>1- NOT APPROVED REV. 01/92 Date: 3/2/92 To: Mary Lynne Myer 7nt From: Ron Pike GF a ••• %)1 0r., 14 t. Tr- ' j These are my comments on the attached green file (Boeing long acres soil clean-up for a lealdng underground storage tank). The revised 1985 Comprehensive Plan designation for the site is Commercial. The site is less than 500 feet from Springbrook Creek and two other identified wetlands and in a floodplain. Do proposed diversion berms, siltation fences, hay bales and other barriers provide adequate protection for these adjacent sensitive areas in the case of intense spring rains occurring during excavation ? The green file contains no environmental report stating the extent of the soil and groundwater contamination. Without such a report it is difficult to determine if the proposed clean-up fully addresses the contamination. LONGACRES PARK SOIL REMEDIA T date . devrvshl i REVIEWING DEPARTMENT /DIVISION: APPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS a/Lif `SIGNAOF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE c�.r;ar- uau-yc NOT APPROVED DATE: � Page 2 ; REV. 01/92 LONGACRES PARK SOIL REMEDIA ' . date • -- REVIEWING DEPARTMENT /DIVISION: PPROVED APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS NOT APPROVED c/e/1 SIGNATURE OF DIRECTOR OR AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE dev ,ht DATE: ECF;SP -030-92 Page 2 REV. 01 /92 rauruary 4u, IZZ4 REVIEWING DEPARTMENT /DIVISION: COMMENTS: ,mu,paeF cam Se.wLc e:<,. 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. . , LcLLvn 6 0Z24gZ_ Signature of Director or Authorized Representative Date envrveht Rev. 01/92 Attendees Discussion Mel Wilson (Chairperson) Bob Mahn Ron Cameron Bill Garing Del Rowan Bob Wicklein Marty Nizlek 1. Status of Boeing Longacres EIS LONGACRES EIS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE MAY 1, 1992 City of Rentol City of Renton City of Tukwila WSDOT Boeing Boeing JHK & Associates 1 JT JUN 17 1992 CITY OE TUKWIL PLANNING DEPT. Del Rowan stated that EIS work has started again. Four land use alternatives (3 action plus no- action) for the Longacres site will be investigated. Representatives of Boeing, the City of Renton and the City's EIS consultant will be meeting weekly (on Thursdays) to identify issues and set up format to resolve them. Currently trying to establish an end date for the EIS process. 2. Status of Valley Transportation Analysis Mel stated that the Renton /WSDOT Interlocal Agreement for the I -405 Ramp metering Study is to be executed by State on May 1st. Enhancements to the City's traffic model included in the Ramp Metering scope of work can begin soon after. The enhancements needed for the Valley transportation analysis will primarily refine the zone structure (TAZ's) in the Tukwila area. Renton staff and TRANSPO will be reviewing the current Transportation Analysis scope of work in light of the work on developing a Valley Transportation Plan that has occurred while the Longacres EIS has been on -hold. . 3. Status of Revisions to Valley TBZ Ordinance Mel has reached agreement with the City Attorney to revise LID No. 1. City staff currently preparing revisions and, when completed, will be forwarded to the City Attorney. Ron Cameron confirmed that Tukwila agrees with Renton's approach to transportation improvements in the Valley. However, they are currently rethinking the priority of Tukwila projects to be included. Ron will provide input on any changes in the next two weeks. . Wetland Banking LONGIIS /RIM- l /ww /lb Mel reported that Renton is acquiring Glacier Park Company property in the Valley for wetland banking. One property abuts the south side of SW 27th Street west of Lind Avenue. Mel is pursuing the acquisition of R/W and access control from this property for the proposed SW 27th HOV improvements. The SW 27th HOV interchange at SR167 also will involve wetlands. Mel will also pursue buying into the wetland bank for this project. Transportation currently has credit for four acres. Bill Garing indicated that WSDOT's SR167 HOV lane project involves wetlands. WSDOT will want to coordinate wetland issues of this project with the City's SW 27th /SR167 HOV interchange project. 5. Level of Service (LOS) Subgroup Committee Mel gave a brief overview of the committee's current direction and concepts. Action for next meeting: • Renton to develop an updated schedule for Valley transportation analysis. • Renton to check on the status of Metro's 108 -inch Trunk Sewer project in the Oakesdale corridor. • Renton to develop an updated schedule for the Oakesdale Avenue street extension project. Next Meeting: No date and time set. Notices will be sent out. lssvm 2 - / ;poT(cs karts 1/2 (?2 c.KK sow -r D (AD jyt 7th DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE- MITIGATED Sit. MITIGATION MEASURES PROJECT: Boeing Commercial Airplane Company Customer Service Training Center PROPONENT: The Boeing Company APPLICATION NUMBER: ECF;SA;SSM;V -006 -92 • 11� . (( . r ( ( f u l� r 1_1.'7Lil.l U! MAR 0 2 1992 CITY CSI t UKWILA PLANNING DEPT. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: The Boeing Company is seeking site plan approval for the development of a training center complex (CSTC) to provide specialized flight simulation instruction for airline transport pilots. LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: Longacres Drive, south of 1-405 and north of SW 19th Street (if extended) CONDITIONS: The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non - Significance - Mitigated with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate impacts in the area, provide a site preparation plan with components which ensure that: a) filling of the site is achieved in a manner which is consistent with recommendations made by registered civil engineers, in a study conducted in January, 1992; b) all filling activities adjacent to wetlands which occur between May 1 and September 30th are inspected each day by a registered civil engineer, and activity reports are to be submitted to the City on a biweekly basis; c) a registered civil engineer is present on the site during all filling activities adjacent to wetlands which occur between October 1 and October 30 and routine activity reports are to be submitted on a weekly basis; and d) hydroseeding of the disturbed areas on the subject property is to be completed immediately following filling, if there is a delay between filling and construction activities. (Note 1.a: Filling is to be achieved according to requirements established in the City's Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance and the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance.) 2. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate impacts in the area, from construction activities, provide a construction management plan including the following components: a) an erosion control element; b) an element for period watering of the site to control dust; c) an element for wheel washing construction vehicles prior to their leaving the site; d) an element for providing temporary site identification to facilitate emergency services during construction activities; and e) a $2,000.00 deposit for street cleaning. The plan must be approved by the Development Services Section prior to issuance of construction /building permits. 3. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate potential impacts in the area, conduct visual testing of soil during excavation to determine whether contaminated soils exist. In the event that contaminated soil is found, all work shall stop immediately in the contaminated area and the applicant shall then seek direction from the Jurisdiction of authority. The applicant shall also notify the City concerning the full extent of contamination and provide plans approved by the jurisdiction of authority for remediation /transport of affected material. 4. The applicant shall, in order to address potential impacts to the area, from proposed disturbances to Wetland Z for the creation of a permanent lake /wetland feature, provide the following: a) an a - . •.L.v .)ZL: r % I. 1 Stelment to irr;piement the improvement plan (i.e. wetland ecosystem plantings and plantings for •01 the 25 foot buffer) as recommended in the report presented by certified wetlands biologists to the • T City in January, 1992; this agreement shall be provided prior to public hearing for the Training Center; and b) a specific plan /schedule for installation of the plantings within the wetland and in the buffer area, to be approved by the Development Services Section, the Development Planning Section and the Storm Water Engineering Section prior to the issuance of the building permits. In the event that the lake is established as a wetland ecosystem within a 24 month period following completion of installation, to the satisfaction of the City, then no additional wetland mitigation shall be required for Wetland Z. If the wetland ecosystem is not established to the satisfaction of the City, then Boeing shall be required to provide a plan for wetland replacement at a ratio of 1.25:1 and /or restoration at a ratio of 2.5:1 (for those portions of the lake which are not functioning at a reasonable level (as a wetlands ecosystem). The plan /installation schedule shall be provided to the satisfaction of the Development Services Section and the Development Planning Section immediately following the end of the 24 month period; installation of wetlands improvements shall be completed according to a schedule approved by the Development Services Section. 5. The applicant shall, in order to protect the wetlands on site, provide an agreement to the satisfaction of the City Attorney allow annual monitoring by the City of each and all of the wetlands areas on the approximately 51 acre site for a period of five years following completion of their installation, to ensure that these areas are being properly protected and maintained. 6. The applicant shall, in order to address potential impacts in the area, develop an upland landscaping maintenance plan for the areas of the site which abut Wetlands X, Y and Z. The plan should ensure that the planted areas can be maintained without damage to the wetland ecosystem. Conceptual plans for the vegetation maintenance systems are to be approved by the Development Services Section prior to issuance of the construction /building permits. 7. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate potential impacts in this area, provide: a) a light /glare analysis to explore effect levels from exterior glazing ("vision" glazing) on vehicles travelling wetbound on 1-405; and b) in the event that glare exposure levels are determined by the City to be potentially hazardous, the applicant may be asked to modify those facades (e.g., alter window angles, utilize solar tinted, low reflective glazing) which are found to create such light /glare impacts. Glazing plans should be provided prior to public hearing. 8. The applicant shall, in order to address potential impacts in this area, provide the following: a) a Transportation Management Plan which complies with City standards, METRO standards, and State standards for trip reduction; the plan should include, but need not be limited to the following components: (1) a transportation coordinator to provide information about the Transportation Management Program and to monitor the success of TMP activities; (ii) an information /education program for the encouragement of ride sharing (private or public transit); (iii) public transit subsidies; (iv) a reserve parking plan (including 51 of the required 881 spaces); (v) preferential parking for HOVs; (vi) guaranteed ride home plan for employees who ride share, as feasible; (vii) flex -time schedules for employees, if feasible; (viii) a "kiss and ride" center; and (ix) bicycle parking racks; mitmeas - 2 TMP improvements shall be approved and implemented at the time of issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for that phase. Following a pilot period of two years for the TMP the applicant may apply to the Zoning Administrator to obtain release of some or all of the parking spaces placed in reserve. The decision of the Zoning Administrator shall be based upon direct observation at the site and upon documentation provided by the applicant verifying that all reasonable effort has been employed to ensure the successful functioning of the TMP during the test period. b) an agreement to reserve a right -of -way (minimum of 80 feet; maximum of 90 feet) along the Oakesdaie Avenue corridor for a future extension of that roadway to City standards; this reservation should remain in effect for a period of six years from the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the Training Center. T (Note 8.a: As required per City Policy, the applicant will be required to take the following actions: (i) make a contribution to the Valley Transportation Benefit Zone in the amount of $276,000.00 ($0.46 x 600,000 square feet) for the training facility, to be paid prior to the issuance of building permits for this phase of development; (ii)) make a contribution to the Valley Transportation Benefit Zone in the amount of $7,084.00 ($0.22 x 32,200) for the utility service structures, to be paid prior to issuance of building permits for this phase of development; (iii) provide a restrictive covenant, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney and the Transportations Systems Division, ensuring fair share participation in LI.D. #1 (Valley Transportation Improvement Plan), prior to issuance of a site preparation /building permit; and (iv) provide a restrictive covenant, to the satisfaction of the City Attorney and the Transportations Systems Division, ensuring fair share participation in LI.D. #2 (Valley Transportation Improvement Plan), prior to issuance of a site preparation /building permit.) Per City policy, the applicant will also be called upon to provide improvements to S. W. 16th Street, based upon an 80 foot right -of -way, including: (i) installation of paving to an area 44 feet in width; (ii) installation of channelization; (iii) installation of bicycle lanes; (iiv) upgrading the intersection of S.W. 16th Street and Longacres Drive; and (v) an agreement to dedicate an area 20 feet in width within the 80 foot S.W. 16th Street right -of -way for future improvement by the City and /or private property owners, if the City determines that such improvements are warranted to mitigate impacts from future developments. 9. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate potential impacts in this area, provide a plan for additional on -site active /passive recreation facilities (e.g., game courts, outdoor seating areas, warm up /cool down areas), to be reserved for employees. Plans should be approved prior to public hearing; facilities should be installed prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. 10. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate potention impacts in this area, consult with the Police Department to develop a security management plan (e.g., security guard, traffic management, voluntary contributions toward purchase of equipment, funding of personnel) for employees and students travelling to and working at the CSTC development. Plans should be approved by the Development Services Section and the Police Department prior to public hearing. 11. The applicant is encouraged, in order to mitigate potential impacts in this area, make a voluntary contribution in the amount of $39,184.00 ($0.62 per square foot) to the (pending) Fire Benefit Zone. This contribution should be provided prior to the issuance of a building permit. (Note 11.a: This contribution will become a requirement in the event that the Fire Benefit Zone is approved by City Council prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the Training Center). NOTE #1: At the time of site plan review, staff may make recommendations for mitigation measures, as necessary, to address criteria established in the Zoning Ordinance (e.g., Site Plan Review Ordinance). NOTE #2 At the time of Shoreline Master Permit review, the applicant will be called up to provide plans for a pedestrian trail adjacent to Springbrook Creek, which ensure that: a) the configuration of the trail provides an attractive, safe access and transition to the abutting upland areas; b) interpretive signs are provided to offer users an understanding of the natural environment; and c) design and location of the trail minimize impacts to the Creek habitat and protect shoreline integrity. These plans shall be approved by the Development Planning Section, Stormwater Utilities, and Parks /Recreation Department, prior to public hearing for site plan review and installed prior to the issuance. of the Certificate of Occupancy. Preservation and maintenance plans will be developed as well, based upon Parks and Recreation Department policies. NOTE #3: At the time of building permit review, staff will require that the applicant make improvements and /or pay fees as mandated by City policy, plan or code. For example, the applicant will need to: a) demonstrate an acceptable plan for installation of water lines in accord with the Comprehensive Water Plan; b) demonstrate an acceptable plan for installation of sewer lines; c) provide an agreement to hold the City harmless for any damage to the subject property in the event of a flood; d) provide special utility connection mitmeas - 4 fees and easements, as /if necessary; e) install curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street lighting; f) provide an inventory of hazardous materials and a a storage /use plan for those products, as well as a plan for notification of the Fire Department in the event of an unauthorized spill of those materials; and g) provide a fire flow analysis and fire flow plan. NOTE #4: METRO is authorized to surcharge the interceptor up to elevation 22.00. Finished floor elevations for the structures are at 18.50. The applicant should work with METRO to develop mutually acceptable plans for facility design. NOTE #5: At the time of construction permit review, the applicant shall be required to provide a specific stormwater management system plan for the site, which addresses on -site features (such as level terrain, the wetlands, and Springbrook Creek) and which is compatible with the intent of the King County Surface Water Control Design Manual. The Tukwila Nelson Place /Longacres Way storm interceptor, if constructed, must be a separate system from the S.W. 16th Street storm system, tinles the connection of the S.W. 16th Street system is approved by the City of Tukwila and the City of Renton. NOTE #6: The applicant may need to work with the State Departments of Ecology and Fisheries and the U.S. Army Corps, to obtain necessary approvals /permits for improvements to Springbrook Creek and for modifications to wetlands. Earl Clymer, Mayor February 28, 1992 Fred Stewart Boeing Commercial Airplane Company P.O. Box 3707, M/S 6Y -50 Seattle, WA 98124 -2207 Dear . -wart: mental R Donald K. Erickson, AICP Secretary to the ERC cc: The Austin Co. ATTN: Steve Porter 800 SW 16th St Renton, WA 98055 Bill Arthur Segale Business Park PO Box 88050 Tukwila, WA 98138 V SUBJECT: Boeing Commercial Airplane Customer Service Training Center (CSTC) ECF;SA;SSM;V -006 -92 CIT',. OF RENTON Planning /Building /Public Works Department Lynn Guttmann, Administrator his letter is written on behalf of the Environmental Review Committee and is to inform you that they have completed their review of the environmental impacts of the above - referenced project. The Committee, on February 26, 1992, decided that your project may be issued a threshold Determination of Non - Significance- Mitigated with the following conditions: See enclosed Mitigation Measures document. Because the Environmental Review Committee imposed specific mitigation measures rather than issue a Determination of Significance, there is a required 15 day comment period during which comments are solicited from various agencies. jurisdictions or individuals (including the applicant) who may have an interest in the Committee's decision. The commen: period will end March 17, 1992. Following the end of the comment period, the City will finalize its Determination unless comments received require a reevaluation. Following the finalization of the Determination, there is a required 14 day appea. period. WAC 197 - 11-660 states that the responsibility for implementation measures may be imposed upon an applicant only to the extent attributable to the identified adverse impacts of the imposed action. Since an environmental impact statement has not been prepared for this project, any mitigation measure established by the ERC not directly attributable to an identifiec adverse impact is deemed to be voluntarily accepted by the applicant. Staff urges you to contact the various City representatives, as appropriate, (e.g., the Public Works Division) as soon as possible, to obtain more information concerning specific mitigation elements recommended for this project, if you have specific questions. This information will assist you in planning for implementation of your project and will enable you tc exercise your appeal rights more fully, if you choose to do so. In addition, by the end of the comment period, we should be able to establish a tentative public hearing date before the Hearing Examiner, should a public hearing be necessary. If you have any questions or desire clarification of the above, please call Lenora Blauman or me at 235 -2550. John E. Keegan Davis Wright Tremaine 2600 Century Square 1501 - 4th Ave Seattle, WA 98101 Kim O'Keefe Andover Co. 415 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Don Miles Colleen Cole - Bowron Miles Consulting 601 Cedar Ave S Bldg #2, Ste #211 Renton, WA 98055 300 - 120th Ave NE Bellevue, WA 98005 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 IMETV U MAR 0 5 1992 CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT. Stuart McLeod McLeod Development 213 Lake St S Kirkland, WA 98033 Earl Clymer, Mayor February 21, 1992 Lori Pitzer The Boein Company PO Bo 707, M/S 6Y -50 Sea , WA 98124 -2207 SUBJECT Boeing Storm Water Management Test Lake ECF;SP- 120 -91 /�L J Dear Nf� tze : am• i CIT'.J OF RENTON Planning /Building /Public Works Department Lynn Guttmann, Administrator I f ` f�C #CL�fIUC�D ttAR o 21992 _ j _ U K ILA CITY OF PLANNING DEPT. This letter is to inform you that the comment period has ended for the Determination of Non - Significance- Mitigated for the above - referenced project. Comments were received. The issues raised by the respondents have been considered by ERC and a revised DNS -M has been issued (see attached). The Committee's determination is final and may be appealed to the City's Hearing Examiner no later than 5:00 p.m. on March 9, 1992. To appeal this Declaration, you must file your appeal document with the hearing examiner within fourteen (14) days of the date the Declaration of Non - Significance is final or the Declaration of Significance has been published in the official city newspaper. See City Code Section 4 -6 -23, RCW 43.21 C.075 and WAC 197 - 11-680 for further details. There shall be only one appeal of a Declaration of Non - Significance or Declaration of Significance, and if an appeal has already been filed, your appeal may be joined with the prior appeal for hearing or may be dismissed if the other appeal has already been heard. Any appeal must state clearly why the determination should be revised and must be accompanied by a non - refundable $75.00 filing fee. If you have questions or desire clarification of the above, please call Lenora Blauman at 235 -2550. e Environment. ' • ommittee, Donald K. Erickson, AICP Secretary cc: Don Miles McLeod Group, Inc. 213 Lake St S, #5 Kirkland, WA 98033 Bill Arthur Segale Business Park PO Box 88050 Tukwila, WA 98138 Stuart McLeod McLeod Development 213 Lake St S Kirkland, WA 98033 Coleen Cole- Bowron 601 Cedar Ave S Renton, WA 98055 Jay Laughlin Seattle Water Dept 710 - 2nd Ave, #1155 Seattle, WA 98104 Kim O'Keefe Andover Co. 415 Baker Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 ...Cron Miles Miles Consulting Bldg #2, #211 300 - 120th Ave NE Bellevue, WA 98055 PROJECT: PROPONENT: APPLICATION NUMBER: DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: LOCATION OF PROPOSAL: South of S.W 16th Street; north of S.W. 19th Street (if extended); wes of Oakesdale Avenue (if extended) The Environmental Review Committee issued a Determination of Non- Significahce - Mitigated with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate impacts to the earth, water, and natural environment, provide: i) an agreement to ensure that the test lake will operate for a maximum period of eighteen (18) months folio ing completion of its installation and that the lake will be remediated (pending City approval) immediately upon the termination of the 18 month test lake activity period; ii) a conceptual plan for dewatering /restoration of the test ake area at the end of the 18 month test period; this restoration plan shall include a component for using excav ted material which will be stored in a protected environment on the site; and iii) an agreement to submit an appli . ion for a specific remediation plan immediately upon making a determination that test lake operations will cease :t a point no later than 18 months following installation); and iv) an agreement to ensure that the operation of the test lake will be coordinated with the operation of any /all other storm drainage systems for the Training Center. Agreements must be approved by the City Attorney prior to public hearing for the development of the test lake, duly recorded prior to the issuance of the first site preparation permit. The conceptual plan shall be provided t Development Services Division a minimum of two weeks in advance of public hearing. Note 1.a.: In the event that an 18 month test period is deemed insufficient to test the adequacy of the s drainage management system, the applicant may apply to the City for an extension of the test lake permit maximum six months duration. CONDITIONS: DETERMINATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE- MITIGATED REVISED MITIGATION MEASURES Boeing Storm Water Management Test,Lake The Boeing Company ECF;SP- 120 -91 The Applicant is seeking a permit to create an approximately .96 acre lake on future Boeing Customer Service Training Center site. This lake is to constructed to test the viability of providing a full -size lake (to serve as a segn of the storm drainage management system, and as a water amenity) at the tim development of the Boeing Commercial Airplane Training Center. Note 1.b.: The applicant will be required to work with staff to develop plans for restoration design (e.g., remo at of introduced water; limits on dewatering) and remediation schedule to minimize impacts to the integrity of exiting wetlands. Note 1.c.: In the event that the test lake is identified as a wetland by the U.S. Army Corps at the time restorati• n is proposed, the applicant will need to obtain all necessary permits from the U.S. Army Corps prior to undert .king filling /restoration activities. In the event that a Corps permit is necessary to restore the site and that no such permit is authorized, the City will work with the applicant to develop an acceptable plan for dewatering the lake and providing actions necessary to improve the test lake area so that wetland ecology is preserved /enhanced. Note 1.d: Filling is to be achieved according to requirements established In the City's Mining, Excavatio and Grading Ordinance. 2. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate impacts to the earth, water and the natural environment, provide specific engineering, testing, monitoring and management plans for the test lake, in accord with the King County S dace Water Control Design Manual, to determine the continuing integrity of the lake and to assess the effectiven:ss of the storm water management system. the be ent of and the orm of a Results testing /monitoring activities are to be reported at monthly intervals to the Development Services Division for review by Planning and Storm Water Engineering staff. Plans for management, testing, monitoring and reporting shall be submitted to the Development Services Division a minimum of two weeks prior to public hearing, and shall be approved by staff prior to that hearing. Approved plans shall be in full force and effect for the duration of test lake installation and operation. Note 2.a: The applicant may complete the initial filling of the test lake using water provided from the City of Seattle. Water for all construction activities and subsequent watering activities in the lake must be accomplished using water from the City of Renton pipeline. 3. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate impacts to the earth, water, and natural environment, provide a plan for preparation /installation of the test lake site, including the following components: i) approved design elements (e.g., sediment trap, water quality swales) for development and Installation of lake facilities; ii) an element for supervision of excavation /construction activities by a certified soils engineer; iii) an element for scheduling clearing, excavation, and grading activities in a manner which complies with City regulations and which does not conflict with race track activities; iv) an element for stabilization of surfaces exposed by excavation activities; v) an element for erosion control systems such as sedimentation facilities and perimeter runoff control devices; vi) an element for cleaning and removal programs for silt /debris on the site; vii) an element for wheel- washing of construction vehicles which will travel upon public roadways before their departure from the site; and viii) a $2,000.00 cash deposit for street cleaning. These plans shall be submitted to the Development Services Division a minimum of two weeks prior to public hearing, and shall be approved by staff prior to that hearing. All elements of the plan are to be in full force and effect during site preparation, and (as appropriate) throughout the operation of the test lake. Note 3.a: Excavation is to be achieved according to requirements established in the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance. Note 3.b: in the event that U.S. Army Corps permits are required for excavation of the test lake, the applicant will need to obtain those permits from the U.S. Army Corps prior to undertaking excavation activities. 4. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate impacts to the earth, water, and natural environment, provide a plan for testing of soils for contamination at the time of soils excavation and prior to stockpiling. In the event that contaminated soil is located, the applicant shall cease work immediately and file a report with the City Development Services Division within twenty-four (24) hours. Contaminated soils will need to be remediated on site or transported in a permitted manner to an approved disposal site. Authorizations from the Department of Ecology and from the City of Renton will be required for excavation, treatment and /or removal of contaminated soil. 5. The applicant shall, in order to mitigate impacts to the earth, water, and natural environment, provide a specific plan for stockpiling clean excavated soils, including the following elements: i) a suitable upland location to be designated for soil stockpile /storage; ii) a plan for stabilization of the exposed surface; iii) a plan for cleaning /removal programs for silt and debris; iv) an installation schedule for stockpiling which addresses potential inclement weather conditions and which does not interfere with race track activities; v) a component which describes planned erosion control systems such as sedimentation facilities, hydroseeding, screening and erimeter runoff control devices; vi) a component for scheduling installation of erosion control systems (including hydroseeding) which addresses potential inclement weather conditions and does not interfere with raceway activities; and vii) a plan for periodic monitoring and maintenance of the stockpile and the related erosion control systems to ensure the continuing integrity of these areas. These plans shall be submitted to the Development Services Division a minimum of two weeks prior to public hearing, and shall be approved by staff prior to that hearing. All erosion control systems related to construction (e.g., sedimentation facilities) shall be installed prior to the advent of stockpiling and shall be maintained in full force and effect for the duration of the existence of the stockpile; hydroseeding shall be installed immediately following the completion of stockpiling. Periodic monitoring and restoration of erosion control systems /hydroseeding shall be in full force and effect for the duration of the existence of the stockpile. 6. The applicant shall, in order to address potential impacts to the natural environment from proposed disturbances to Wetland Z for the creation of a test lake, provide a specific improvement plan (e.g. engineering plans, narrative) to develop and maintain the lake as a wetland ecosystem. The plans shall be submitted to the City a minimum of two weeks prior to public hearing and approved by the Development Services Section, the Development Planning Section and the Storm Water Engineering Section prior to public hearing. If the plans for development and maintenance of the wetland ecosystem are not provided and /or sustained to the satisfaction of the City, then Boeing shall be required to provide a plan for wetland replacement /enhancement for the test lake at a ratio of 1.5:1 and a plan for a 25 foot wide landscaping buffer, to the satisfaction of the mitmeas - 2 mitmeas - 3 ....-- .. Development Services Section and the Development Planning Section. Installation of wetlands improvements, if required, shall be completed according to a schedule (which recognizes vegetation requirements and weather patterns) approved by the Development Services Section. A limited right of entry agreement will be required to allow access to the wetlands areas for City inspection of the test lake; this agreement shall be approved by the City Attorney and duly recorded with King County prior to the issuance of site preparation permits. Monitoring /restoration elements of the plan will be in full force and effect for the duration of the test lake. A landscaping maintenance surety device will be established, to be equivalent to ten percent of the value of the introduced plantings and to be in full force and effect for the duration of the test lake. Funds for this device may be assigned from existing bond accounts between Boeing and the City of Renton. Note 6.a.: The Washington State Department of Ecology has completed a preliminary evaluation of the planned test lake project and will be reviewing the proposed wetland development, in detail, following City action. 7 The applicant shall, in order to mitigate impacts to the earth, water, and natural environment, provide a specific on- site access plan which: i) employs existing access routes to the maximum extent feasible; as available; and ii) develops new access route linkages at locations which minimize Intrusion into the wetlands. The applicant will need to work with staff to ensure that appropriate routes (and paving plans as necessary) are developed; approved plans /schedules for'restoratlon•of any new roadways, following completion'of excavation and stockpiling, will also be required by staff. These plans shall be submitted to the Development Services Division a minimum of two weeks prior to public hearing, and shall be approved by staff 'prior to that hearing. Approved routing plans shall be in full force and effect for the duration of project installation (test lake, stockpile and wetland). 8 The applicant shall, in order to address off-site transportation impacts, provide a routing plan and travel schedule for construction vehicles. Emergency vehicle access routes shall be maintained and protected at all times. This plan shall be approved by the Development Services Division prior to issuance of the first site preparation permit and shall be in full force and effect for the duration of site preparation activities. ADVISORY NOTE #1: The applicant will be required to comply with provisions of each /all applicable local, state and federal guidelines for the creation and maintenance of the test lake, the stockpiled soil and wetland areas. Particular attention Is directed to the Mining, Excavation and Grading Ordinance, the Land Clearing and Tree Cutting Ordinance, and the Surface and Storm Water Management Ordinance. Attendees Mel Wilson (Chairperson) Bob Mahn Lenora Blauman Ron Cameron Bill Garing Bob Wicklein Marty Nizlek Bob Maruska Discussion LONGACRES EIS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE 1. Growth Management Update February 21, 1992 City of Renton City of Renton City of Renton City of Tukwila WSDOT Boeing JHK & Associates HNTB 2. Status of Agreement on Valley Transportation Mitigation !3 LL1B MAR � 0 9 1992 I CITY ctt' t.�i' LA 0 PLANNING DEPT._j Mel gave a brief overview of the committees established to deal with growth management issues. They include: Growth Management Steering Committee (Includes elected officials) Growth Management • Liaison Committee (Includes Public Works Administrators, City Engineers) Growth Management Transportation Group (Includes Transportation Managers & Professionals, Mel is on this committee) Transportation subgroups to address Level of Service, Financing Strategies and Data The Liaison Committee is addressing the issues of Level of Service and Concurrency. The Level of Service Subgroup is currently taking a position that there needs to be different levels of service for single occupancy vehicles, HOVs, Transit, etc. Mel reported that a recent (2/18/92) meeting with Ross Earnst and Ron Cameron of Tukwila has resulted in tentative consensus on a conceptual transportation plan and funding proposal for Valley /Boeing Longacres traffic mitigation. Mel then went over the Phase 1 (minimum needed) transportation improvements and draft funding strategy (refer to the attached conceptual plan and draft funding sheet). Phase 1 includes the SR 167 /SW 27th HOV Interchange and Arterial Improvements, Lind Avenue - SW 16th to East Valley Road in Kent, Oakesdale Avenue SW - SR 900 into Boeing Longacres (to SW 23rd or SW 27th), Strander Boulevard Extension to Boeing Longacres, SW 16th - Lind Avenue to West Valley Highway and Interurban Avenue - Grady Way to Southcenter Boulevard (Bridge widening). Mel explained that Interurban Avenue was included at Tukwila's request as they consider this improvement important to the extension of SW 16th Street. He also explained that funding for Strander Boulevard Extension is shown as 80% grants and 20% from Renton /Tukwila to respond to the current Interlocal Agreement between the two cities. At Tukwila's request, the funding for SW 16th extension is shown as 80% grants. Bill Garing indicated that WSDOT could participate in funding signal modifications that would be needed on West Valley Highway for both the SW 16th and Strander Boulevard Projects. WSDOT funding could amount to $200,000, possible more, for each project. Bob Wicklein asked Mel for his prioritization of Phase 1 projects. Mel responded that the SR 167/ SW 27th HOV Project, Oakesdale Avenue and SW 16th extension were his top three priorities. Ron Cameron stated that Interurban Avenue improvements are necessary if SW 16th is extended to West Valley Highway and, therefore, should also be given a high priority. Ron was asked about status of Interurban /Grady Way Interchange Project. He indicated that Tukwila is now looking at construction in 1994; but, funding problems may push construction further into the future. Responses to questions regarding the SR 167 /SW 27th HOV Project indicated that the HOV interchange would provide connections to and from the north and south and that a reversible HOV operation was not being considered. Mel concluded discussion on the revised Valley Transportation Plan and its funding by indicating that the next steps will be: to continue Renton internal briefings on revising the current mitigation system and Valley LID's and to model the revised Transportation Plan 3. Status of Valley Transportation Studies Mel explained that enhancements to the City's traffic model continue to be needed for the Valley analysis. Since the I -405 Ramp Metering Study overlaps the Valley area and will also benefit from these enhancements, the Ramp Metering Study will make and fund the model enhancements. The City /WSDOT agreement for the Ramp Metering Study is going to Council and approval from the Council is anticipated in 2 or 3 weeks. Information Next Meeting ww /rlm/cb /eismin Ron Cameron is pursuing a regional traffic signal optimization and progression study. Funding of this $150,000 study will be from local agencies (Tukwila, Renton, Kent, King County) and WSDOT to provide matching funds for a Transportation Improvement Account (TIA) Grant. March 20, 1992, at 1:00 p.m., 1st Floor Conference Room, Renton City Hall. i - sr Fri sw sr IdRAFT VALLEY /BOEING LONGACRES PHASE I TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS SW 16th St. - W. Valley Hwy to Tukwila Pkwy 10,000,000 UNFUNDED Oakesdale Ave. SW - SW 23rd to SW 31st 9,000,000 UNFUNDED SW 43rd St /SR167 Loop Ramp 1.050,000 UNFUNDED TOTAL 20,050,000 .8 Project Total Cost Renton City Funds Valley Developer Funds Boeing Mitigation Funds Tukwila Developer Funds Kent WSDOT Possible Grants SW 16th St - Lind Ave SW l to West Valley Highway 20,000,000 3,000,000 1,000,000 16,000,000 Interurban Ave. - Grady Way to Southcenter Blvd 2,500,000 250,000 250,000 2,000,000 Strander Blvd - W. Valley Hwy to Longacres Site • 11,000,000 1,100,000 1,100,000 8,800,000 SR 167/SW 27th St. HOV - Oakesdale to SR167 10,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 3,000,000 4,000,000 Oakesdale Ave. Phase I - Monster Rd to SW 23rd plus R/W to SW 31st 9,000,000 4,000,000 (completed) 2,500,000 2,500,000 (+ R/W dedication) Lind Ave SW - SW 16th to East Valley Road 5,000,000 2,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 1,000,000 Renton sub -total by sources 6,000,000 ($ 4 million completed) 5,500,000 8,850,000 (+ RAN dedication) I TOTAL I 57,500,000 20,350,000 •• 2,350,000 1,000,000 3,000,000 30,800,000 Total Cost Sources of Renton Funds DRAFT VALLEY FUNDING `Serves Boeing and Tukwilla only • •Includes $4 million already completed. Does not include Right -of -Way dedication FUTURE PHASE Project Sources of Non - Renton Funds ., �.,;, , RE: Longacres -- resolution of Strander extension to Oaksdale. The following is an extract from the project history file. I would like to resolve this at our meeting tomorrow. 2/10/92: Received Cameron comments back on Umetsu letter on current status of Longacres SEPA issues dated 2/5/92. Cameron does not dispute proposal to design Strander /27th as a local access street rather than a principal /minor arterial. Paragraph 2 of the Transportation Committee minutes show Cameron's support of the local access option. This was noted, further interpreted in an Umetsu memo (2/5/92) based on a telephone conversation with Blauman, and highlighted for Cameron. If this reflects City policy, I would conclude that all discretionary decisions affecting Tukwila have been resolved. If not, then Cameron, Earnst, Pace and Umetsu should get together to develop a mutually acceptable solution. Next steps to be resolved at a meeting between Pace and Umetsu on 2/11/92. TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: hQi •!4StF'GWN.JL•.`fft'.e¢' ` M'.' kV'. C3[ S�fiwtl•" vn^• xtt'.r ALYwyIAr¢• �rvr. um.—.. wvw�.., w++ twawnwnuwY[ rrw+ .ww.vuui•wzw.MJ�+F3�!Kk!!Y ? YS: City of Tukwila PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -0179 Ross A. Earnst, P.E. Director MEMORANDUM Vernon Umetsu, Associate Planner Ron Cameron, City Engineer February 10, 1992 Longacres Development 1 FEB 101992 Gin' PLANNTAG DEPT. Thank you for the December 1991 meeting minutes. There is no discussion of intersection or boundary analysis that was described in our December 6 letter to Lenora. It is not shown on attachment A. Traffic analysis will be needed on Grady /Southcenter Boulevard as well as Interurban - with and without the Southcenter Blvd. /Interurban interchange project. Drainage and the SW 16th pipe will need resolution. RMC /kjp File: Longacres Development MEMORANDUM To: Longacres File (L92 -0012) From: Vernon Umetsu Department of Community Development Date: 2/5/92 RE: Status of Environmental Review to Date. Background The Longacres site is proposed to be developed in two segments (Attachment A): 1. A 600,000 s.f. training facility on 50 acres, to be constructed immediately. The facility will contain 900 - 1,100 staff, and 650 - 800 students to be bussed in from the Sea -Tac area and 2. A 2.5 million s.f. future office development with 10,000 workers and a helipad on the remaining 155 acres Renton has divided up the environmental review of the Longacres site into two independent projects. A checklist will be used to review the training facility, while a programmatic EIS will be used to review the future office development. This division revises the May 9, 1991 SEPA checklist which described SEPA review as being done through an E.I.S. containing a project level of evaluation for the Training Center and a separate programmatic evaluation of the future office development. Tukwila staff do not object to completing SEPA review of the training center separate from future phases, but feel that the cumulative impacts of both segments should be evaluated in the programmatic EIS. This is opposed by Renton as not being within their legal authority since (a) the parcels are separate legal lots of record and (b) there is no currently proposed joint development of on -site access, infrastructure or facilities; although facilities will be coordinated. Renton's position may also be partially based on "due process" concerns that regulations be blind to ownership over ruling SEPA cumulative impact requirements. Tukwila did not object to Renton division of SEPA review in its EIS scoping comments because both segments were in the EIS at that time. No appeal of the use of a SEPA checklist for the Training Facility has been made since no DNS has been issued. No such appeal is anticipated since there is very little chance of a successful appeal. ..,,.._..,....... „ ,. . . Boeing Training Facility SEPA Checklist The training facility's SEPA checklist is still under review by Renton who has requested additional information. No Tukwila review has as yet been done since a complete checklist has not yet been submitted. Renton has advised the traffic consultants (JHK) to contact Ron Cameron to ensure that Tukwila concerns are addressed. Cameron does not recall having been contacted yet (2/4/92). Renton asserts that if the analysis does not satisfy Tukwila, JHK will do additional work ( Blauman, 2/4/92). Tukwila staff is welcome to review the large box of data which Boeing submitted as a SEPA checklist and Renton will make copies of any data requested. This large Boeing submittal is similar to what they sent to Tukwila as a Developmental Center checklist, only several times larger and with a commensurate amount of superfluous data. Next Step: Staff to wait until a complete checklist is available (Tukwila to call Renton on 2/6/92) and will review at that time. Future Office Development Programmatic EIS Renton understands that traffic is the only unresolved SEPA issue of concern to Tukwila (Blauman, 2/4/92) and that Ron Cameron has been actively participating on the EIS Transportation Committee to represent Tukwila interests. This would mean that all Tukwila EIS scoping comments (Beeler, 12/6/91) have been satisfactorily resolved. Renton's minutes of the EIS Transportation Committee meeting of 12/20/91 indicate that a Strander /27th St. alignment to Oaksdale was proposed by Renton and supported by Cameron (see Attachment ) Next Steps: Review with status of issues with Cameron since all substantive SEPA concerns are public works issues. cc: Beeler/ Pace /Cameron /McFarland /file(L92 -0012) wpdata \lacres \status2.05 ArrAciymewrr1 BoE.IkiG , Lok16-Acp_e. S • A (-TERN ATIVE. TRA•AsioR SOLUT ION Attendees - See attached list Discussion rrActImewr page 1 • LONGACRES EIS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE December 20, 1991 1. Transportation Study Jim MacIsaac asked about Renton's response to the recent request by Jon Ives of Jones & Stokes Associates to compress the schedule of the transportation element of the EIS by separating it from the Valley Transportation Plan update. Since a programmatic EIS is being prepared, a broad brush (or "worst case" scenario) traffic analysis could be used now with detailed traffic impact analyses and mitigation requirements that will result from the Valley Plan update being deferred until the time subsequent SEPA review is needed for Boeing's specific Longacres site projects. Mel Wilson indicated a reluctance to short cut the traffic studies. A programmatic EIS that does not adequately assess transportation needs does not allow Boeing to make "go /no go" decisions beyond the Phase I Training Center. The best course is to proceed with the Valley Transportation update as planned and, where possible, short cut some activities within this work effort. Mel introduced a new approach to Boeing Longacres transportation solutions. This approach was favorably received by Ron Cameron in a 12/16/91 discussion with him and at the 12/19/91 meeting of the Boeing Longacres Oversight Committee. This concept was developed in response to concern about the costs, scheduling, and impacts anticipated with the Oakesdale and other potential Valley transportation projects (SW 16th /SW 156th and Strander Blvd /SW 27th) and to recent traffic studies which show that two - thirds (2/3) of the traffic on Oakesdale Avenue SW would be through traffic (i.e. no origin or destination in the Valley). Thus it would be difficult to assess Boeing and other Valley developers more than one -third (1/3) of the Valley Transportation Plan costs. Assuming a $5 to $10 million maximum contribution by Boeing plus funding from other Valley developers and limited funding available from Renton and Tukwila, transportation solutions that establish a more realistic economic limit for developers and cities is desirable. The transportation solutions (see attached diagram) proposed are: 1. On the north, access to and from the Boeing Longacres site via existing Oakesdale Avenue SW. 2. On the west, extend Strander Boulevard eastward to the Boeing Longacres site. 3. An alternative to Strander Boulevard or an additional connection to the west could be the extension of SW 16th to Tukwila Parkway. 4. Construction of exclusive HOV ramps to and from SR 167 and HOV lanes on SW 27th between SR 167 and the Longacres site. 5. Lind Avenue SW would become the primary north /south arterial route. 6. On the Longacres site, Oakesdale could become part of the internal access provided by Boeing to fit their development. This internal access could be provided to enhance METRO Transit service to and through the site. A phased approach to mitigation /construction to meet funding /economic constraints is possible. 1 M E \i F JAN 21 1992 GI I Y 01- UUUKWILA .J1Y2GYY2Li%;Cr3iiCi.Sa : e'f.'; d.` >:aV$7s'L:•.'�}�fttiltilaC: 2+n9.[IY«y:w:uau avtr...e..��..r wvww.ww....r„waavt.:..nnsr v.wrn� 1.14eatcambv.Mrrwu W Mt 2. Oakesdale Avenue SW schedule: Several activities are occurring in parallel with Oakesdale (i.e. the programmatic EIS, Phase I Training Center, 108" Trunk Sewer, Interjurisdictional decisions, and WSDOT Ramp Metering) which could also impact the Oakesdale schedule. This project may be delayed until the programmatic EIS is completed in order to determine the need for Oakesdale. 3. Concern expressed that METRO is concentrating on the future rail system and losing sight of short range improvements, especially service. There is a need for local jurisdictions to encourage METRO to do more now. Action: 1. It was the consensus of this committee that Mel's new alternative transportation solution concept be evaluated in the Valley Transportation Plan update. 2. Renton to conduct individual discussions necessary to arrive at a decision on delaying Oakesdale. Would like to have a recommendation by the next committee meeting. Next Meeting: February 21, 1992, at 1:00 p.m., 1st floor conference room, Renton City Hall. rlm:LAl2 -20 page 2 . ..vu...wwiw.w.tWxna + hR.L M11+..,va� rlm:LAl2 -20 Attendees LONGACRES EIS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE December 20, 1991 Meeting Mel Wilson (Chairperson) City of Renton Bob Mahn City of Renton Lenora Blauman City of Renton Bruce Wasell Sverdrup Jim MacIsaac Transpo William Garing WSDOT Ron Cameron City of Tukwila Marty Nizlek JHK & Associates Del Rowan Boeing Bob Wicklein Boeing Robert Maruska HNTB Not Present: Carol Thompson METRO Ed White City of Kent Rick Beeler City of Tukwila C BOEItoG . LO/QC7Ace.E.S A LTE.N A'r I V a TRAMS Po 14. SOLUT t. o Attendees - See attached list Discussion LONGACRES EIS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE December 20, 1991 2. On the west, extend Strander Boulevard eastward to the Boeing Longacres site. page 1 1. Transportation Study Jim MacIsaac asked about Renton's response to the recent request by Jon Ives of Jones & Stokes Associates to compress the schedule of the transportation element of the EIS by separating it from the Valley Transportation Plan update. Since a programmatic EIS is being prepared, a broad brush (or "worst case" scenario) traffic analysis could be used now with detailed traffic impact analyses and mitigation requirements that will result from the Valley Plan update being deferred until the time subsequent SEPA review is needed for Boeing's specific Longacres site projects. Mel Wilson indicated a reluctance to short cut the traffic studies. A programmatic EIS that does not adequately assess transportation needs does not allow Boeing to make "go /no go" decisions beyond the Phase I Training Center. The best course is to proceed with the Valley Transportation update as planned and, where possible, short cut some activities within this work effort. Mel introduced a new approach to Boeing Longacres transportation solutions. This approach was favorably received by Ron Cameron in a 12/16/91 discussion with him and at the 12/19/91 meeting of the Boeing Longacres Oversight Committee. This concept was developed in response to concern about the costs, scheduling, and impacts anticipated with the Oakesdale and other potential Valley transportation projects (SW 16th /SW 156th and Strander Blvd /SW 27th) and to recent traffic studies which show that two - thirds (2/3) of the traffic on Oakesdale Avenue SW would be through traffic (i.e. no origin or destination in the Valley). Thus it would be difficult to assess Boeing and other Valley developers more than one -third (1/3) of the Valley Transportation Plan costs. Assuming a $5 to $10 million maximum contribution by Boeing plus funding from other Valley developers and limited funding available from Renton and Tukwila, transportation solutions that establish a more realistic economic limit for developers and cities is desirable. The transportation solutions (see attached diagram) proposed are: 1. On the north, access to and from the Boeing Longacres site via existing Oakesdale Avenue SW. 3. An alternative to Strander Boulevard or an additional connection to the west could be the extension of SW 16th to Tukwila Parkway. 4. Construction of exclusive HOV ramps to and from SR 167 and HOV lanes on SW 27th between SR 167 and the Longacres site. 5. Lind Avenue SW would become the primary north /south arterial route. 6. On the Longacres site, Oakesdale could become part of the internal access provided by Boeing to fit their development. This internal access could be provided to enhance METRO Transit service to and through the site. A phased approach to mitigation /construction to meet funding /economic constraints is possible. � ` i7- • ri :1 OJ.:V' ! ' I 1 JAN 21 1992 t W. (. t v; .. I ,, K\hlti_A PLAN ING DEP f. rlm:LAl2 -20 N (;N ;J.s C.iYl: ascvv,. �u...,............,... w.,-.. u.. �. �.... �.....+..... yrra.. wsw'. x. nu�N.WSwrNay..MUY.t ` n�wY twnrne 'a4.c�sruurtaw+ranlNnwnuw+nes.wv ........- ........... - - ...nww.nw�ecdufY�V• %^'.` 2. Oakesdale Avenue SW schedule: Several activities are occurring in parallel with Oakesdale (i.e. the programmatic EIS, Phase I Training Center, 108" Trunk Sewer, Interjurisdictional decisions, and WSDOT Ramp Metering) which could also impact the Oakesdale schedule. This project may be delayed until the programmatic EIS is completed in order to determine the need for Oakesdale. 3. Concern expressed that METRO is concentrating on the future rail system and losing sight of short range improvements, especially service. There is a need for local jurisdictions to encourage METRO to do more now. Action: 1. It was the consensus of this committee that Mel's new alternative transportation solution concept be evaluated in the Valley Transportation Plan update. 2. Renton to conduct individual discussions necessary to arrive at a decision on delaying Oakesdale. Would like to have a recommendation by the next committee meeting. Next Meeting: February 21, 1992, at 1:00 p.m., 1st floor conference room, Renton City Hall. page 2 rlm:LAl2 -20 LONGACRES EIS TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE December 20, 1991 Meeting Attendees Mel Wilson (Chairperson) City of Renton Bob Mahn City of Renton Lenora Blauman City of Renton Bruce Wasell Sverdrup Jim MacIsaac Transpo William Garing WSDOT Ron Cameron City of Tukwila Marty Nizlek JHK & Associates Del Rowan Boeing Bob Wicklein Boeing Robert Maruska HNTB Not Present: Carol Thompson METRO Ed White City of Kent Rick Beeler City of Tukwila naee 3 • BoEi )G LOk1GAc.QC S ALTERNAi we TRANSPORTATION SOLUT ©l4 December 6, 1991 Dear Lenora: CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD, TUKWILA. WASHINGTON 98188 Lenora Blauman Project Manager Development Planning Section City of Renton Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: Boeing Longacres Office Park - Scoping Notice 1 PIIONE 11 (206) 433.1800 Gary l.. VanDusen, Mayor Thank you for sending us this scoping notice on this project that is very important to the cities of Renton and Tukwila. Our comments are somewhat general, at this time, and will be followed up with a more specific detailed response, if any, during our subsequent meetings on the issues surrounding this application. We look forward to participating with you and the Renton staff in those discussions. I understand that review of Phase I of the project is for specific permits on file with the City of Renton. Subsequent phases are tentative, for which no permits have yet been filed. SEPA specifies that the EIS address the detailed portion of the project together with the long range plans for the total project in one EIS because sufficient information is available about both long and short term aspects of the project. LOCATION /MAP: The map in the Scoping Notice should contain Phase I of the project. It should also reflect extension of SW 27th Street to Strander Boulevard, as agreed to in the prior interlocal agreement between Renton and Tukwila. That extension should be expressed as a "given" part of the project because of that agreement. WATER: Analysis of the storm water drainage system should include Renton's commitment to and plans thereof for construction of the P -1 Drainage Channel which was a condition of much of existing development in the vicinity. In the past agreements were made for construction of the Channel for handling storm drainage from individual sites as well as from Tukwila. The 1988 KCM Nelson Place/Longacres Drainage Study and Plan will need to be implemented - particularly the 24 inch 18 CFS outfall to Longacres that is located about 300 feet north of S 158 St, and the future connection between S 156 St and SW 16 St to the P1 channel. PUBLIC SERVICES/UTILITIES: Fiberoptic cables of Sprint, MCI, and AT &T will need to be provided for in any connections to West Valley Hwy. Also, provision must be made for the Olympic Pipeline (JPL fuel). Seattle has a 60 inch water transmission line crossing the site into Tukwila that will need to be addressed. Metro has a 60 inch north /south interceptor and a 36 inch Tukwila trunk line that runs east /west just south of Strander that will need to be addressed. LAND USE /SHORELINES: Because the existing zoning of the property and vicinity has been known for many years and the proposal conforms to that zoning it seems reasonable that the impacts of that zoning on the Renton CBD were analyzed at the time of that zoning decision. Boeing is proposing only building per that zoning. The interlocal agreement for connecting SW 27th St. to Strander Boulevard in Tukwila Occurred after the most recent zoning of the property and vicinity. The zoning decision did not include, therefore, analysis of impacts upon Tukwila. The Boeing proposal must include review of those impacts. Alternative site plans should be developed to evaluate different concentrations of buildings in different portions of the site. In addition the alternative of taller buildings, and fewer of them, should be discussed. AESTHETICS: Alternative building designs should be presented and reviewed that could fit the goals of Boeing for the property. HOUSING: It is common knowledge that Boeing employees do not relocate closer to their jobs because their jobs frequently change. The established pattern is for the employees to commute from their existing residences to wherever they are assigned to work. This pattern should be assumed in the EIS. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH: Phase I specific impacts should be evaluated in the detail indicated in the Scoping Notice. The subsequent phases should be reviewed in the macro scale, leaving detailed review to the permit review of the individual phases. RECREATION: This analysis should begin with the common knowledge that Boeing employee commute patterns indicate that individual recreation activities /demands occur near 2 C their residences. Per the established, longstanding pattern the employees will commute from their residences and will not change their existing recreation habits/locations because they change their work location. TRAFFIC: This analysis must begin with the "given" of implementation of the Renton - Tukwila interlocal agreement for extension of SW 27th St. to Strander Boulevard. Tukwila has acquired commitments to construct or provide right -of -way to the western border of the Boeing property. In the subject project Boeing must do the same across their property to SW 27th St. Alternative alignments should be discussed, but the connection must be made or the interlocal agreement changed by actions by the Renton and Tukwila City Councils. Boeing has indicated a strong need to link SW 16th St. to the West Valley Freeway. The impacts of that connection need to be addressed and concurrence provided from Tukwila. The site plan shows use of S. 156th St. in Tukwila, which is a narrow two -lane private street. Necessary improvements to that street and impacts upon adjacent existing land uses require analysis, including railroad crossings and the proposed McLeod exhibition facility. The level -of- service (LOS) and safety evaluation analysis to determine impacts and mitigations should be conducted for: Interurban Ave. S. and W Valley between I -5 and S. 180 St. for the signalized intersections. Pedestrian need and safety should be identified. Grady Way and Southcenter Blvd between the Tukwila east city limit and I -5 for the signalized intersections. Nelsen PI and S. 156 St & S. 158 St. If S. 156 St. is being extended to Tukwila Parkway or some form of arterial connection between Tukwila Parkway and /or Andover Park East is an alternative, then, LOS and safety evaluation of the following intersections should be made: 1. Tukwila Parkway /Andover Park E. 2. Tukwila Parkway /Andover Park W 3. Tukwila Parkway/I -405 on ramp 4. Tukwila Parkway/"S" Line Bridge (62 Ave S) 5. Strander /Andover Park E 6. Strander /Andover Park W 7. Strander /Southcenter Parkway 8. Southcenter Parkway/Klickitat 9. Southcenter Parkway/I -5 NB Off (Nordstrom signal) 3 For the Strander extension alternative (in accord with the August 11, 1986 Interlocal agreement signed by Renton Mayor Shinpoch and Tukwila Mayor Van Dusen) the same list of intersections need the LOS and safety analysis with identified mitigations. A summary of the advantages and disadvantages of this alternative from the perspective of Boeing, Renton, and Tukwila will assist the overview of the Strander alternative. A cordon summary of the area's peak volumes, capacity, and remaining capacity after development will be helpful in determining traffic assignments. The area is bounded by SR167, S. 180 St, SR181, and I -405. Particularly identifying freeway ramp "existing" unused capacity, assuming ramp metering and identifying Boeing demand, will quantify the amounts of peak traffic that will be using "local" arterials. Pedestrian traffic to and from the site and any safety deficiencies must be identified. Routes connecting to the Christensen Trail and Interurban (Orillia) Trails would be expected to have significant traffic for lunch hour exercise as well as some bike commuting. Metro transit routes, access and service needs to be identified and needs for that service. Changes to service into Tukwila to provide the new service needs to be identified. Should S. 158 St be an access alternative, then, the resolution of access across the Puget Power right -of -way will be needed. SOCIO- ECONOMIC: It is recognized that this subject is optional for analysis under SEPA. Requiring Boeing to perform that analysis is questionable in view of the proposal's compliance with existing longstanding zoning. Full development of the property and vicinity has been the subject of prior review relative to a development /traffic mitigation payment program. Impacts of full development per existing zoning occurred either at the zoning action or subsequent review of overall improvements needed in the area or surrounding vicinity. Elimination of Longacres Park racing activities represents a revenue loss to Renton. However, that is normally balanced against the revenue gain from sales taxes on construction and increased property tax revenue from the new proposed facilities. This balancing does not need to be reviewed in the EIS. 4 Sincerely L. Rick Beeler cc: John McFarland Ron Cameron Jack Pace City Staff looks forward to continued cooperation with your staff in review of this significant project. BOEING LONGACRES PARK OFFICE COMPLEX ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING REVIEW ;p PUBLIC MEETING THURSDAY - NOVEMBER 21, 1991 7:00 P.11. )40004 COMMUNITY CENTER 4101 SOUTH 131ST STREET a °0 °0 °0° AGENDA Open House Welcome and introductions Oo4op00 Purpose of the Meeting 40aa Project Description 400 000 Overview of Scope for the Environmental Impact Statement MN: > °o°p °0 °. coo*. ).0 00 0494 00404 0 VI. Public Comment 04 00041 04444 ) 0409 )0 ° 0 ° 0 ° o VII. Closing Remarks 04 o a ) °0 °0 °0 °. , °d °d0 ) °a°0°a °0 0000. ) °0°4°00 )4000 4000. )4 °0 )a0a0 )044 40040 )00440 If you have questions on the Scoping Document or the scoping process for the , >004a ,a.4.o.0 )°44040. Environmental Impact Statement, please call Lenora Blauman, Project Manager, O4 pp ). c.. at 235 -2550. ;a 0 ado, ) 0404040 o a o a )004• )0404 $ 04:0 o 0900. For directions to the Tukwila Community Center please telephone 243 -5198. ' )0004 ) 'Oo. ° d ° 0 O.O.Q.ddO APO! 0• ) p 0 0 Q 0 0 0 ) 1 > ° 0 0 40 00001 )4440 0044 a 000' 0000 %,:o 04 0 0000040 0000 0 ' 0 ° 4 ° 0 ° &zit: KO" )4 °4440 > ° 044 4 4 4 . ,04.0.0 0 0 ° 0 ° 0 ,0 0 ) , > °4 ° a °O ° 0 'O ° 4 4 0 °0 2. 4oaoq Nom 4 WA MAR C 6 r . 4O Q 4 4 d4044440404009909900044444 040400 ) T AA A A 4 0 ° A ° 0 ° O ° a ° A.0.0.0.0.OQOA ° A ° 4. 4 0 O.0.0.0.0.0.0404a 4.0.0 O. O. O. 0. 0.0.0A 0.44040.0 0.0A 0.0.0.0.0 0A 0.0.0.0.0.0.0.0 0.0 0.0.0.0404040.0.0.0 0.0.0¢0.0.0 0.O.0.a dd0 0 ° O ° 0 ° 0 ° 0 41 C O Threshold Determination • Checklist Review • Define Impacts • Determination of Significance (DS) • Decision to Prepare EIS SEPA EIS PROCESS • Scoping Notice • Request Agency /Public Input Draft EIS • Alternatives -No Action - Reasonable Alternatives • Existing Environment • Significant Impacts • Mitigation Measures • Publish Draft EIS Final EIS • Respond to Comments • Make Factual Corrections • Supplement Analysis • Modify Alternatives • Publish Final EIS Mitigation Document • Renton Environmental Review Committee • Finalize Mitigation Requirements Glossary of Common SEPA and Environmental Terms Addendum - An environmental document used to provide additional information or analysis that does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. Applicant - Any person or entity, including an agency, applying for a license from an agency. In the case of this project, The Boeing Company is the applicant. Categorical Exemption - A type of action, specified in the SEPA rules, which does not significantly affect the environment. Neither a threshold determination nor any environmental document, including an environmental checklist or environmental impact statement is required for any categorically exempt action. Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) - The written decision by the responsible official of the lead agency that a proposal is not likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact, and therefore an EIS is not required. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) - The term is used when referring to draft, final, or supplemental EISs. Environmental Checklist - A document prepared by the applicant and submitted to the lead agency for review. The checklist is used by the lead agency in making threshold determinations for proposals. Environmental Review - The consideration of environmental factors as required by SEPA. The environmental review process is the procedure used by agencies and others under SEPA for giving appropriate consideration to the environment in agency decisionmaking. Expanded Scoping - Expanded scoping is an optional process that may be used by agencies to go beyond minimum scoping requirements. Lead Agency - The agency with the main responsibility for complying with SEPA's procedural requirements. Mitigation - (1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; (2) Minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation; (3) Rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; (4) Reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; (5) Compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and /or (6) Monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. REN1'ON /BOEING EIS 11/19/91 G -1 . Nonproject (Programmatic) - Actions that are different or broader than the single site specific project, such as plans, policies, and programs. Reasonable Alternative - An action that could feasibly attain or approximate a proposal's objectives, but at a lower environmental cost or decreased level of environmental degradation. Scoping - Determining the range of proposed actions, alternatives, and impacts to be discussed in the EIS. Because an EIS is required to analyze significant environmental impacts only, scoping is intended to identify and narrow the EIS to the significant issues. The lead agency has the option of expanding the scoping process but is not required to do so. Scoping is used to encourage cooperation and early resolution of potential conflicts, to improve decisions, and to reduce paperwork and delay. Threshold Determination - The decision by the responsible official of the lead agency whether or not an EIS is required for a proposal that is not categorically exempt. RENTON /BOEING EIS 11/19/91 G -2 <SEPA Determ nation niflcan ............................ ............................ The City of Renton has issued a determination of environmental significance (DS) for the proposed Boeing Longacres Office Park Complex, under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) (WAC 197- 11 -360). This determination is based upon a finding that the proposed development may cause significant adverse impacts to the environment (RCW 43.21C.020[2]). This notice is a request for comments from government agencies, private businesses, citizens and Native American tribes on the scope of an environmental impact statement. The deadline for submitting written comments on the scope of issues to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement is December 6, 1991 at 5:00 p.m. Comments received in response to this environmental scoping notice will assist the City of Renton and their environmental consulting team in selecting appropriate alternatives /issues for review and to prepare the environmental impact statement for this Office Park Complex. T B LONGACRES OFFICE PARK . NOV 1 8 9 Ci i Y {- F { !.{`< p DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING DOCUMENT 158TH ST 1 1 SIM 1 1 ot ,a EMI SW 27TH STREET w5 PROPOSED BUILDINGS BuUding location and size 4' an subject to change o`E 11/15/91 R esponsible. Parties Lead Agency: The City of Rento Proponent: The Boeing Corn liany L ocation /Map The subject 155.9 acre site is located ge S.W. 19th Street and S.W. 27th Street, we.t Avenue (if extended) and east of the Ren boundary. erally between of Oakesdale on/Tukwila city ::> ` : 1Pr: > ::; a > :: escription:o :...:. oPos....::.;:<;.:,: ,:: -.. - -- .:.... roductiOtt Vett • • The Boeing Company is proposing development of a complex on the Longacres site, including offices, an employment center and related support facilities. The City of Renton has assumed the lead agency role in conducting environmental review, as the project ect will be P j located within its City limits. However, the City believes the environmental review for this regional office park merits broad public involvement. The City is working with the Washington State Department of Transportation, State Department of Ecology, King County, METRO, the City of Tukwila, the City of Kent, Native American tribes, ti community t business associations and commurn groups to identify Y9 P ►fY issues of concern. These issues will include, for example, community plans, infrastructure and public service needs occurring with the development of this major office complex. A "scoping" process for public involvement has been established for the Longacres Office Park project, including public meetings in Renton and other jurisdictions (see Comment /Public Participation below). a o P . ) The SEPA process is being utilized to encourage public review and participation. The Boeing Company has requested that the City prepare a programmatic environmental impact statement (EIS) which evaluates a generic development plan for the entire office park complex (SEPA WAC 197 -11 -060;704). At a future date, specific site plans will be submitted for supplemental (project -level review) environmental review and for site plan review at a future date, when the specific development plan and schedule are more firmly established. This approach will allow public review and comment now for the proposed conceptual development, and, also for plan alternatives. Other benefits include opportunities for the public to review mitigation measures on the cumulative impacts of the entire development and to provide more predictable processing for other local and state permits — such as a shoreline management permit. The presently proposed EIS will provide a framework for studying generic environmental impacts. For future project - specific environmental and site plan review, a supplemental EIS or an addendum may be required, under SEPA Rules, to analyze impacts of changed proposals, if the new impacts are substantially different from those evaluated in this programmatic analysis. If no significant adverse impacts are identified with future specific site plans, then an environmental checklist (standard or expanded) may be employed. 2 The following sections describe The Boe ng Company's general development objectives for the Environmental Policy Act (WAC 197 -11-44 analysis of alternatives (e.g., such as and /or siting options and /or location action option) in the EIS. Prelimin development scenarios have been alternatives will be selected following this The Boeing Company is proposing to lo square foot office park complex on Longacres Park site in the City of Rento Is proposed to include offices, an emp employee services (auditorium, cafete related facilities. On -site amenities including preserved wetlands, a landscaping and recreational areas. Co plans include spaces for employees, visitors; reserved parking areas to sharing; public transit passes; preferred occupancy vehicles. A helipad is propos section of the site. ite. The State ) also calls for esign options ptions and no ry alternative rovided; final coping period. : te a 2.5 million he 155.6 acre The complex oyment center, ia, etc.), and re envisioned, created lake, ceptual parking students and ncourage ride parking for high on the south The project is planned to be developed in several phases over the next decade, based upon corpo :te requirements. Environmental and site pla review will be required for specific projects proposed fo each development phase. A proposal for development of the first phase of the office complex is planned for 1992. When the total development has been completed, approximately 10,000 persons could be employed here. Boeing has planned to design the prop sed project to meet the current development standard for the existing Commercial Use (B -1) zoning designatio for the site. As it is likely that the property will be rezon for Office Park Use (0 -P) under the revised Comprehe sive Land Use Plan (1992), the project will be designed, also, to comply nvirOnmenta[F Revie with Office Park development standards, wt restrictive than Commercial Use standards. • During the environmental review process, conduct a programmatic (non - project) eval Boeing Company's conceptually proposed program and ( 9 alternatives e. g., use op design options and /or siting options ani options and "no action" option). Followir scoping period, the specific alternatives to I the EIS will be defined by the City, in con The Boeing Company. Evaluation in the El: potentially significant environmental impac building and operation eration of an office con o Longacres Park site. At this time the City has identified environmental elements to be evaluated in t 1. Earth: This section will define permeability of underlying soils. T discussion of: effects on the underl! site preparation activities; the capa to support development du operations; and the stability of tt earthquakes and /or other seismic 2. Water: This section will examine is surface and ground water mana water management, preservation and protection of Springbrook CrE will be directed to impacts on the c and flood plain from site pre operation of the complex. 3. Land Use /Shoreline: This sectioi compatibility of the proposec development program with site c There will be a study of the cons proposed and alternative develol with local /state regulations Ordinance, Comprehensive PIE Master Program) affecting the site. There will also be a review of the c proposed /alternative developmen existing and proposed surround both within City limits (e.g. the CE District) and within neighboring (e.g., Tukwila). 4. Aesthetics: This section will evalit which proposed /alternative programs (e.g., structures, landsc with Office Park development standards, which are more restrictive than Commercial Use standards. vironmenta[Review During the environmental review process, the City will conduct a programmatic (non - project) evaluation of The Boeing Company's conceptually proposed development program and alternatives (e.g., use options and /or design options and /or siting options and /or location options and "no action" option). Following the public scoping period, the specific alternatives to be included in the EIS will be defined by the City, in consultation with The Boeing Company. Evaluation in the EIS will focus on potentially significant environmental impacts from both building and operation of an office complex on the Longacres Park site. At this time the City has identified the following environmental elements to be evaluated in the EIS: 1. Earth: This section will define the type and permeability of underlying soils. There will be a discussion of: effects on the underlying soils from site preparation activities; the capacity of the site to support development during normal operations; and the stability of the site during earthquakes and /or other seismic activities. 2. Water: This section will examine issues including surface and ground water management, storm water management, preservation of wetlands, and protection of Springbrook Creek. Attention will be directed to impacts on the drainage basin and flood plain from site preparation and operation of the complex. 3. Land Use /Shoreline: This section will examine compatibility of the proposed conceptual development program with site characteristics. There will be a study of the consistency of the proposed and alternative development options with local /state regulations (e.g. Zoning Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan, Shoreline Master Program) affecting the site. There will also be a review of the compatibility of proposed /alternative development options with existing and proposed surrounding land uses both within City limits (e.g. the Central Business District) and within neighboring communities (e.g., Tukwila). 4. Aesthetics: This section will evaluate the ways in which proposed /alternative development programs (e.g., structures, landscaping, wetland 3 amenities) could be designed to complement site characteristics. The document will also address compatibility of the proposed /alternative site development programs with private and public land uses on nearby sites and in neighboring communities. 5. Housing: The EiS will address availability of housing in the region to serve Longacres Office Park employees (e.g., impacts on existing housing stock, vacancy and rental rates, opportunities for providing new housing). The review will also examine impacts upon community facilities used by residents (e.g., schools and parks). 6. Environmental Health: This section of the EIS will examine, to the extent feasible: a) impacts from the removal of hazardous substances identified on the site (e.g. asbestos); b) noise impacts from on -site activities to Renton and to neighboring communities; c) noise from vehicle travel to and from the site through Renton and neighboring communities; and d) air quality impacts, such as odors and pollutants, from vehicles travelling to the site, as they affect Renton and neighboring communities. 7. Natural Environment Nectetation /wildlife): The EIS will examine impacts from the proposed /alternative development options to: a) the on -site natural environment (wetland and upland habitats); and b) the surrounding the natural environment (particularly Springbrook Creek and associated wetlands). 8. Recreation: The EIS will examine the feasibility of providing adequate on -site recreational elements to meet employee /visitor needs. There will also be a study of impacts to local and regional public recreation facilities from employees (and their families) moving into homes in the vicinity. 9. Traffic: The document will address impacts from the proposed /alternative development programs within the site and on the adjacent local roadways. There will be an evaluation of impacts to regional (municipal and state) roadways -- i.e., how will vehicles travelling to Boeing site impact traffic patterns /volumes in Renton, Tukwila, Kent, King County, etc. Boundaries of the study area are tentatively planned to be Grady Way to the north, S.W. 43rd Street to the south, the 1-5 corridor to the west and Highway 167 to the east. The EIS will also explore the development of on- site transportation solutions (e.g. Transportation Management Plan) and regional transportation solutions. For example, there will be a study of ways to optimize use of existing /proposed public transit services and the creation of new services (e.g., shuttles, light rail). 10. Public Services /Utilities: The EIS will assess the adequacy of fire and police department resources which are available to serve the proposed /alternative development programs. There will also be a review of the ways in which the proposed /alternative development programs would affect service to the site and to other developments within Renton. The EIS will report on the ways in which utility service to Longacres may affect resources /services to other local properties (e.g., availability of adequate water pressure). Impacts upon public services in surrounding communities (e.g., Tukwila) will also be examined. 11. Historical /Cultural /Archaeological Preservation: The EIS will examine whether the site is significant from a historical, cultural and /or archaeological perspective. If there are findings of significant impact, there will be a discussion as to the ways in which the proposed development program may affect the potential historic, cultural and /or archaeological integrity of the site. The study will also discuss options for ways in which affected portions of the site can be protected. 12. Socio- economic: SEPA supports environmental review of socio - economic impacts which will affect a region. Staff believe that the magnitude of the proposed development program is such that both direct and indirect socio- economic impacts are likely to have a notable effect upon Renton and surrounding communities. On that basis the EIS will include a review of likely socio- economic impacts from: a) the planned and alternative development programs; b) changes to vicinity land uses /development patterns; and c) the elimination of the current racing activities. The EIS will address impacts to existing local and regional public /private services (e.g. libraries, hotels, retail shops, entertainment centers). This review will include an examination as to whether it is appropriate /feasible to provide personal services (e.g. day care) for employees on the campus to supplement community facilities. 4 Finally, the EIS will evaluate impacts to the community occurring as a result of the elimination of racing activities at Longacres Park. Ca nest %Pt blic i ait cipat The City invites municipalities, agencies, citizens and Native American tribes to comment on scoping (environmental elements) to be evaluated in this EIS. The City has scheduled two public meetings to present the proposed development and discuss scoping issues — the first will occur on November 19, at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers, Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South; the second will occur on November 21, at 7:00 p.m. at the Tukwila Community Center, 4101 So. 131st Street, Tukwila. During those public meetings, the public can view drawings of conceptual development options and ask questions of Boeing Company representatives and City staff members. Opportunities to make verbal and written comments on the scoping process will be provided at the meetings. You may also comment in writing on the proposed scoping content (outlined above), additional significant adverse impacts, suggestions for alternatives or mitigation measures; and /or licenses or other approvals that may be required with future potential development. Please submit written comments c/o Donald K. Erickson, AICP, Zoning Administrator, Development Services Division; Attn Lenora Blauman, Project Manager, City of Renton, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055. All comments must be received by 5:00 p.m., December 6, 1991. You will be notified of future comment and /or appeal periods — for the draft EIS, the final EIS, and the environmental mitigation document (issued by the City of Renton). You will also be informed of applications for subsequent environmental /land use /shoreline review process for specific development plans. uestionsJAdditionai In ormatio If you have questions or would like additional information, please contact Lenora Blauman, Project Manager, Development Planning Section, City of Renton, Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055 or telephone 235 -2550. Thank you for your interest. 1) Opening Remarks LONGACRES TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE AGENDA 2) Review Goals and Objectives of Committee Note: Come prepared to discuss your goals and objectives for this committee 3) Attachments November 1, 1991 Transportation Study Review Items Study Area Map Preliminary Assumptions Integrated CPM Transportation inputs needed and when Transportation products and when Scope of Work ,4) Recap of Land Use Brainstorming Meeting 5) Status of Oakesdale Avenue SW Project 6) Open discussion of other issues Mel Wilson Bruce Wasell Jim MacIsaac Mel Wilson Bob Mahn , Longacres EIS Transportation Committee October 18, 1991 Meeting Attendees - See attached list Discussion This committee is a subcommittee of the Boeing /Longacres Oversight Committee. Goals and objectives of this committee: - Consensus Building Product Oriented Emphasis on Multi-Modal Solutions Additional Goals and Objectives Will Surface in Future Meetings This subcommittee's work will continue throughout the development of TRANSPO's transportation studies and conclude after preparation of the Boeing /Longacres Transportation Mitigation Program. The Transportation Mitigation Program will reflect the results and agreements of this committee's efforts. Mel Wilson and Lenora Blauman will keep the City of Renton's Environmental Review Committee informed of this committee's efforts and progress so that there will be no surprises from the ERC . when they are reviewing the Transportation Mitigation Program. Status of TRANSPO's traffic analyses: Background and existing - condition traffic data collection completed - preparing technical reports. Next focus is on projected (2010) traffic data. Interfacing with Renton's traffic modeling consultant (David Kline) and obtaining future trip tables is a first step. Need input on land use assumptions. Renton's schedule for new Comprehensive Plan does not meet the Boeing /Longacres EIS schedule. Therefore, will need to use existing Comprehensive Plan and make the best assumptions for future. A brainstorming session is needed to determine future urban planning assumptions. Boundaries of traffic study area for update of Valley Transportation Plan. Includes I -5 to SR -167 and from Grady Way to the South 192nd /South 196th corridor. Concern expressed that study area does not extend further north. A map of study area will be prepared and distributed to the committee for review. page 1 Schedule of TRANSPO's traffic studies. Completion anticipated by mid - February 1992. TRANSPO assured the committee that it has the resources to meet the current schedule. rlmiingacmin TRANSPO's schedule needs to be integrated with Jones and Stokes's schedule on a CPM format and distributed to the committee for review. Would like to have mitigation required for Phase 1 of Boeing /Longacres development identified early in the process. This could enable the mitigation work to be designed parallel to the EIS process. Also could provide a check on the effectiveness of the consensus building process. How to consider the effect of multi-modal usage and growth management legislation on background traffic reduction. TRANSPO will look into this. Programmatic EIS, rather than planned- project oriented EIS, would provide Boeing with greater flexibility and expedite completion of the EIS since studies could be more generic. Boeing is continuing to explore this option. Assumptions that TRANSPO needs for its work. Need open review by the committee prior to modeling, analysis, reports, and conclusions. Need input from other jurisdictions. Elected officials probably can't respond until February or March of 1992, which does not meet EIS schedule. Check with Kent and King County for update on future traffic needs. Contract for transportation studies to be cost/plus. To provide flexibility in the study work, scopes for individual task orders will be developed and provided to the committee for review. Work Assignments TRANSPO to prepare CPM schedule integrating Jones and Stokes EIS schedule; a map showing boundaries of Valley Transportation Study; and a list of assumptions required for their work. Also, TRANSPO to develop scope of work for first individual task order. Lenora Blauman to set up brainstorming meeting on urban planning and land use assumptions. (Meeting scheduled for October 25th at 1:00 p.m.) Bruce Wasell to assemble information on assumptions from other jurisdictions and agencies. Next Meeting: November 11th at 1:00 p.m. - 5th Floor Conference Room, Renton City Hall. Agenda items to include discussion of TRANSPO's CPM schedule, study boundary map, transportation assumptions and TRANSPO's scope of work. Also, there will be an update on the status of the Oakesdale Avenue SW project. page 2 Mel Wilson (Chairperson) Bruce Wasell Bob Mahn Lenora Blauman Jim Maclsaac Ron Cameron Ed White Marty Nizlek Del Rowan Bob Wicklein Jay Bockisch Rick Beeler Not Present: Carol Thompson William Garing LONGACRES EIS TRANSPORTATION COMMI1 ihE October 18, 1991 Meeting Attendees page 3 City of Renton Sverdrup City of Renton City of Renton Transpo City of Tukwila City of Kent JHK & Associates Boeing Boeing Transpo Tukwila Metro WSDOT . . . . . • . . . . . . . . . . . : ... . . . . . . . _____ .. _ .... ,.... ___ _. __:.:...........*-;....... S 188TH ST 178111 ST BOEING LONGACRES EIS 91306.03 1022191 STRANGER BLVD TUKWILA S 180TH ST FUTURE SW 43120 ST STUDY AREA t RENTON SW41S1ST ,/ -- Existing Roadway Planned Roadway l n North The Transpo Group BOEING LONGACRES PARK OFFICE COMPLEX EIS The TRANSPO Group - Scope of Work Task 1- Subtotal 2 Background Studies 2.1 Background Review 2.2 Description of Alternatives 2.3 Transportation Technical Memo (TM -1) Reviews of: JHK traffic studies; Renton Valley and Grady Way TBZ studies and current policies; Tukwla Transp Plan; Valley TBA plans; Metro Commuter Rail plans; WSDOT freewayMOV plans; Boeing TMP programs and policies. Task Description 1 Scoping 1.1 Contract Development 1.2 Predevelopment Meetings 1.3 Define Public Participation 1.4 EIS Scoping Task 2 - Subtotal 3 Preliminary Draft EIS 3.1. Existing Conditions 3.11 Define transp impact study area; Collect available traffic cants; Collect imited new traffic counts; Calculate existing LOS; Assemble traffic accident data; Describe existing pubic transit service; Describe existing rail operations 3.12 Review existing Longacres traffic and parking operations; estimate existing traffic generation and parting supply & " demand; estimate existing traffic distribution on arterial system Task 3.1- Subtotal 3.2 Future Conditions Without Project 3.21 Prepare 1998 Baseine Trip Table - Remove Longacres Park traffic from 1998 trip table prepared in Task 8.41; add traffic estimates for existing Longacres racetrack; remodal trip table 3.22 Assign 1998 Baseline trip table to 1998'6 -Year TIP' network; adjust network where excessive and evaluate LOS 3.23 Prepare a 1998 '6-Year Baseine TIP reflecting Valey street and arterial improvement needs without development of Longacres Park 3.24 Prepare Technical Memo covering Tasks 3.16 3.2 (TM -2) Task 3.2 - Subtotal Page 1 Prepared By; J. Macisaac, P.E. 9118191 Go . p (e (or& ? '4` c Wavle -4-0 .c_. t M (u c c( vs 4-- Task. t d ev , �. ��� - G oy o4 +tAst5 trtaovk { be t vt e-L u de cl V — 54. 7-as (. ad ek BOEING LONGACRES PARK OFFICE COMPLEX EIS Prepared By: J. MacIsaac, P.E. The .TRANSPO Group - Scope of Work . 9/18/91 Task Description 3.3 Project Traffic Impacts 3.31 Estimate Traffic Generation - Use ITE'Trip Generation' for general office park as base estimate; Prepare estimates of trip reductions to be accomplished thru TMP; Prepare separate estimates for four (4) phases of development 3.32 Estimate Traffic Distribution - Use traffic model to prepare estimates for the 1998 6 -Year TIP networks identified in Tasks 3.23 and 8.43; compare to JHK estimates 3.33 Evaluate Phase 1 Cumulative Traffic Impacts - Add Phase 1 traffic to the 1998 background traffic derived in Task 3.22; evaluate PM peak hour LOS; identify enhancementsto the '6- Year Baseline TIP' prepared in Task 3.23 needed to`r accommodate Phase 1 3.34 Evaluate Phase 2 Cumulative Traffic Impacts - Add Phase 132 traffic to the 1998 background traffic derived in Task 3.22; evaluate LOS; identify enhancements to the '6 -Year Baseline TIP' needed to accommodate Phases 182 3.35 Evaluate Phase 3 Cumulative Traffic Impacts - Add Phase 1,283 traffic to the 1998 background traffic derived in Task 3.22; evaluate LOS; identify enhancements to the '6 -Year Baseline TIP' needed to accommodate Phases 1 -3 3.36 Evaluate Phase 4 Cumulative Traffic Impacts - Add Phases 1-4 traffic to the 1998 background traffic derived in Task 3.22; evaluate LOS; identify enhancements to the '6 -Year Baseline TIP' needed to accommodate Phases 1-4 3.37 Prepare listing of all 1998'6 -Year TIP' improvement needs; Prepare estimates of project traffic (Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3 and Full Development) as proportions of cumulative 1998 traffic estimates (proportional share ratios) 3.38 Estimate Impacts on Rail, Public Transit and Pedestrian Circulation; Estimate Impacts on Traffic and Pedestrian Safety 3.39 Estimate Parking Demand and compare to proposed supply; Evaluate effects of TMP on reduction of • - rki • demand Task 3.3 - Subtotal 3.4 . Prepare Transportation Mitigation Program 3.41 Prepare Traffic Mitigation Plans - Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3 and Full Development; develop prospective funding programs in conformance with the results of Task 8 and using results of Task 3.37 if applicable 3.42 Prepare Suggested Transit Service Plans - Phase 1,Phase 2, Phase 3 and Full Development; Review with Metro to determine portions to be sponsored by project applicant 3.43 Prepare TMP - Based upon input from Boeing and Metro, re recommended TMP Task 3.4 • Subtotal Page 2 Task Description 3.5 Prepare Preliminary Draft EIS 3.51 Prepare Transportation Discipline Report (Appendix) 3.52 Prepare PDEIS Transportation Summary Chapter Task 3.5 Subtotal Task 3 - Subtotal • 4 Preparation of Draft EIS 4.1 Review PDEIS/Meetings 4.2 Revise/Edit Draft EIS 4.3 Print and Publish Draft EIS Task 4 - Subtotal . .5 Prepare Final EIS 5.1 Meetings with City Staff 5.2 Prepare Preliminary Final EIS 5.3 Revise/Edit PFEIS 5.4 Print and Publish Final EIS Task 5 - Subtotal 6 Public Hearing /Adman Review Meetings 7 Interjurisdictional Involvement 7.1 Coord&Meetings with City /Jurisdictions and Agencies 7.2 Workshop/Information Meeting 7.3 Information Exchange Task 7 - Subtotal 8 Update Valley Subarea Plan 8.1 Land Use/Urban Design Assistance Partiiipatewith City-directed team in devebpment of Valley urban design concept; interface with City staff in preparing updated estimates of Valley land use quantities for 2010 buildou and 1998 interim year, including buildout of Longacres Park 8.2 Refine/Update 2010 Traffic Models 8.21 Review Renton Emme/2 traffic models with City consultant develop modelling program for Valley plan update 8.22 Refine Valley, Grady Way and Tukwila zone structure; refine existing 1990, 1998 interim and 2010 land use and traffic generation estimates 8.23 Coordinate with City consultant in updating and recalibrating the 1990 base year and 2010 buildout year traffic models Task 8.2 • Subtotal BOEING LONGACRES PARK OFFICE COMPLEX EIS The TRANSPO Group - Scope of Work Page 3 Prepared By: J. Maclsaac, P.E. 9118/91 d c•k i4-e wt,s 4b b e i,,, -(u.d 4 1 , fil•s+ Task °vial,. BOEING LONGACRES PARK OFFICE COMPLEX EIS The TRANSPO Group - Scope of Work Task Description 8.3 Develop Valley Arterial Plan , .8.31 Assign 2010 traffic forecast to current Valley arterial plan, including 192nd/200th Street cross- valley arterial route; evaluate and identify plan deficiencies -8:32. Develop, test and evaluate three (3) aftemative 2010 Valley 'arterial plans, including at least one WITHOUT SW 27th Street i extended to W.Valley Hwy. 8.33 Review results with City, Boeing and other Valley property owners; develop preferred Valley arterial improvement plan and list of specific street improvement projects Task 8.3 - Subtotal 8.4 Develop 1998 "6 -Year Plan" 8.41 Develop 1998 traffic generation estimates and trip tables, with buildout assumption for Longacres Park 8.42 Assign to enhanced arterial system developed by Boeing (JHK) traffic studies; adjust arterial network to accommodate this interim traffic forecast condition 8.43 Develop 6 -Year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) and list of specific street improvement projects Task 8.4 - Subtotal 8.5 Prepare Cost Estimates for TIPs TO BE PREPARED BY OTHERS 8.6 Prepare Funding Program 8.61 Prepare funding strategies; review with City 8.62 Prepare recommended funding program, including publcJprivate cost shares and procurement/assessment methodologies for public and private funding Task 8.6 • Subtotal 8.7 Reports and Plan Implementation 8.71 Prepare Draft Transportation Plan Report 8.72 Assist City in reviewing plan with other City staff, commissions and Council, Valley property owners and the general public 8.73 Prepare Final Plan Report Task 8.7 • Subtotal 8.8 Develop Implementation Ordinance TO BE PREPARED BY OTHERS Task 8 - Subtotal emolwromml TOTAL LABOR ESTIMATE Page 4 i, Id { k l ,_ Earl Mayor October 30, 1991 Jack Pace City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Parkway Tukwila, Washington Dear Mr. Pace: Sincerely, Lenora Blauman Project Manager cc: SUBJECT: Boeing Longacres Park Office Complex I appreciated the opportunity to meet with you concerning the Boeing Longacres Park development proposal. I've taken some time to consider your suggestion that we meet with Boeing concerning project alternatives prior to the scoping period. I do like the concept of having an "issues" meeting, including representatives from Boeing, Tukwila, METRO and Renton for the purpose of exploring alternative design plans for the site. However, our staff believe that such a meeting would be more effective following the scoping period. This meeting schedule will allow us to integrate input received during that scoping period, thus enhancing our ability to build a sound framework for accomplishing our mutual goals of: 1) early consensus building; 2) reinforcement of a positive, interactive approach to design /site planning for the development; and 3) consideration of realistic, creative development options. In order to provide us with comprehensive information about Tukwila's ideas and concerns related to the Longacres Park Office Complex, I would encourage you to submit written comments to us and to participate in the public meetings which will occur during the scoping period (now tentatively scheduled to begin in November, 1991). I will keep you informed concerning the public scoping meetings and will ensure that you are invited to take part in the planned issues meeting. If you have questions or would like additional information, please telephone me after November 11th. L. Richard Beeler Lynn Guttmann Donald K. Erickson 200 Mill Avenue South - Renton, Washington 98055 CITY RENTON Planning /Building /Public Works Department Lynn Guttmann, Administrator GANONE N OV 011991 CITY OF TuI(VVILA PLANNING DEPT. genmalot A Special Permit Application has been filed and accepted with the Development Services Division of the City of Renton. The following briefly describes the application and the necessary Public Approvals. PROJECT NAME /NUMBER: Boeing Test Lake ECF;SP- 120 -91 DESCRIPTION: Applicant is seeking a permit to excavate 11,000 cy of material to create an approximately .96 acre lake on the future Longacres Office Complex site. This lake will be utilized to test the viability of providing a full -size lake (as a segment of the storm drainage management system, and as a water amenity) at the time of development of the office complex. A separate application is made for the test lake (rather than making the test lake a part of the Office Complex project EIS) because it is preferred that the applicant determine whether the lake would work effectively prior to developing a plan to provide a full -size lake for storm drainage management. In the event that the test lake is unsuccessful, the site is proposed to be restored to its present configuration, and revegetated. GENERAL LOCATION: NW portion of the southern section of the Longacres site PUBLIC APPROVALS: The application can be reviewed in the Development Services Division located on the third floor of Renton City Hall. Comments will be accepted anytime prior to Public Hearings, during Public Hearings, or prior to an administrative site plan approval. For further information on the application, or if you wish to be made a PARTY OF RECORD and receive additional notifications, by mail, of the City's environmental determinations, appeal periods and /or the public hearing date(s) for this project, please contact the Development Services Division at 235 - 2550. Please include the project NUMBER when calling for proper file identification. lam. . .`. W•• I ts SFr. A NOTICE OF PROPOSED SPECIAL PERMIT APpLICATION • L.! \R. ANDOVER !MWHMUL M. PAWN NON u ....._� / 12— L 1 •%\ Environmental Review Special Permit Approval Building Permit m T C C M I C C M T C R i _ r •.... sr Il N =Zoo' DNOTAVAL If you have further questions, please call 235 -2550. CITY OF RENTON Lynn A. Guttmann, Chair Environmental Review Committee Planning /Building /Public Works Department ATTN: Don Erickson, Secretary 200 Mill Ave S Renton, WA 98055 NOTICE OF AVAILABILITY DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT Notice is given under SEPA, RCW 43.216.080, that the Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the proposal described below was issued on October 8, 1991, and is available for public review and comment. Copies are available for review at the Renton Municipal Library and in the Development Services Division, Renton Municipal Building located at 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055. PROPOSAL: The Community Services Department is proposing that the City adopt a new Comprehensive Park and Recreation Master Plan which includes the Trails Master Plan. The Comprehensive Park and Recreation Master Plan outlines a plan for upgrading park and recreation services in the City of Renton. It includes recommendations for new park sites, open space areas, trails, indoor facilities, recreation. programs, and administration actions. Specifically, the plan covers the following: 1. An analysis of existing facilities and operations in the City; 2. An assessment of recreation and facility needs; 3. Development and facility standards; 4. Recommendation for the park system; 5. Summary of the Trails Plan; 6. Recommendation for indoor facilities; 7. Recommendation for administrative and management changes; and 8. Recommendations and strategies for funding improvements. The Trails Master Plan provides guidance for developing a city-wide trails system that will satisfy both recreational and functional non - motorized transportation needs. FILE: ECF -109 -90 PROPONENT: City of Renton, Community Services Department LOCATION: City-wide COST OF DOCUMENT: The Draft Environmental Information Counter, Third Floor, Renton Municipal COMMENT PERIOD: Written comments on the addressed to: tdralliVT OCT 2 3 1991 CITY OF T uKvvILA Impact Statement. Document may be purchased through the SEPA Building. DEIS will be accepted through November 18, 1991, and should be A public hearing to accept written and oral comments on the DEIS will be held in the Renton City Council Chambers on November 7, 1991, at 7:30 p.m., 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington. To: October 8, 1991 6- 4067 -LP -2038 Lori Pitzer Org. 6 -4067, MS 6Y -50 Phone (206) 393 -7098 Boeing Commercial Airplane Group, P.O. Box 3707 ° Seattle, WA 98124 -2207 Lenora Blauman City of Renton Ross Earnst City of Tukwila Bill Caring Washington State DOT Jack Lattemann Metro Dick McCann Perkins Coie John McFarland City of Tukwila Jack Pace City of Tukwila Del Rowan 14 -49 Paul Seely 14 -49 Fred Stewart 6Y -50 Carol Thompson Metro Bob Wicklein 6Y -50 Subject: EIS "OVERSIGHT" Meeting Minutes Attached are the minutes for the EIS Oversight meeting held October 3,1991. Please review, and relay any corrections, additions or deletions to the undersigned. Meeting Date: October 3, 1991 Time: 3:00 PM Place: Renton Community Center Subject: EIS OVERSIGHT (1C 1 1991 tip .... October 4, 1991 6- 4067 -1p -2037 Attendees: Don Erickson City of Renton Lenora Blauman City of Renton Jay Covington City of Renton Ross Earnst City of Tukwila Bill Garing Washington State D.O.T. Lynn Guttman City of Renton Jack Lattemann Metro Dick McCann Perkins Coie John McFarland City of Tukwila Jack Pace City of Tukwila Lori Pitzer Boeing Del Rowan Boeing Paul Seely Boeing F. M. Stewart Boeing Carol Thompson Metro Bob Wicklein Boeing Mel Wilson City of Renton Subject: Boeing /Renton /Tukwila Oversight Meeting October 3, 1991; 3:00 PM The following topics were discussed: 1 - Overview of Development (Renton /Boeing) 2 - Scoping Issues (Renton) 3 - Areas of Concern Page 2 October 4, 1991 6- 4067 -1p -2037 OVERVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT • Lenora Blauman briefly discussed the schedule, key elements of which were: • EIS preparation - approximately 10 to 12 months • Land Use Review - approximately 2 to 3 months She also noted that the scoping process has not started to date. It will start with the submittal to Renton of the Alternate Master Plan. Upon submittal, scoping will start and will include 2 public meetings, one of which will be held in Tukwila. • Fred Stewart presented the Preferred Master Plan and the Alternate Master Plan. Most of the attendees were familiar with the Preferred Master Plan. The Alternate Master Plan included the following: • addition of parking garage south of Employee Center • relocation of Auditorium toward Oakesdale • addition of Auditorium entry court • relocation of 25 -21 building to N -S orientation • emphasis of aesthetics along Oakesdale • emphasis of future HOV tie -ins along west property boundary • addition of transit stops along Oakesdale • Page 3 October 4, 1991 6- 4067 -1p -2037 • Several slides of a model of the preferred plan were shown. These emphasized the central lake system, landscaping, view from I -405 and internal road system. SCOPING ISSUES • Lenora Blauman presented what Renton feels are the key areas of concern for scoping, and therefore the EIS: • traffic /transportation • aesthetics • wetland issues • land -use compatibility on -site • land -use compatibility off -site AREAS OF CONCERN • Don Erickson of Renton had the following comments: • treatment of Oakesdale - Don felt that the Alternate Master Plan did stress a better treatment of Oakesdale by shielding views of parking areas • interrelationship with off -site land uses - He felt this issue needs scrutiny in the EIS Page 4 October 4, 1991 6- 4067 -Ip -2037 • drainage from McLeod Exhibition Facility - Tukwila stressed that they feel this is a non -issue because Renton has agreed to take this water into the P -1 channel. Tukwila currently drains into Longacres and will continue this practice. Bob Wicklein stated that Boeing would like to reroute this water to the drain pipe along 16th Street. Tukwila had no problem with this but stated that the runoff would probably have to be treated prior to entering the drain pipe because it currently is biofiltered on Longacres property via swales. • Tukwila stressed that their main area of concern was transportation around and to the site. Ross Earnst stressed that the extension of 16th Street was probably not going to be enough to service the site. Additionally, it could potentially make the West Valley Highway worse. Tukwila would like TRANSPO to model the project with the addition of 16th Street only, 16th Street and extension of 27th Street, and extension of 27th Street only. • Tukwila noted that on the site plan they have reviewed, 16th Street is shown extended. Boeing stated that on the Preferred and Alternate plans presented, only streets that are current, approved projects are shown (Oakesdale Avenue extension). The transportation studies will drive out which roads are required for the project. Because of this, the extension of 16th Street and 19th Street were removed from the plans. • Renton has retained TRANSPO to do the transportation study for the EIS. TRANSPO is to revisit and update the Valley Transportation Plan with respect to the development and identify the impacts. They are also to identify and evaluate 4 alternative road system designs and multimodal solutions. The alternatives have not been identified at this point. • HNTB is currently designing the Oakesdale extension. This will be worked into the TRANSPO model. Page 5 October 4, 1991 6- 4067 -1p -2037 • The EIS Transportation element is currently scheduled for completion in early 1992 (January). Mel Wilson stated that this is a very aggressive schedule, and a realistic schedule for a study of this magnitude is 6 months. • Bill Garing (WSDOT) was concerned with the "regional" transportation system instead of just this particular project. He would like the transportation study to include Boeing Renton, Boeing Kent, BECO, Paccar, etc. The valley system has been piecemealed together and this is an opportunity to develop a regional plan. Dick McCann stated this project should not be expected to fix the existing regional transportation problems. A project boundary needs to be established and agreed upon to develop the model for the Longacres Park project. • After discussing the various road systems in the area, and potential improvements, it was determined that the subcommittee formed by Boeing previously should continue, under the leadership of Mel Wilson. The committee is to participate in developing the TRANSPO scope of work, determining alternative systems to be investigated, and multimodal options. The subcommittee is to report back to the Oversight group on progress and schedule. • Lynn Guttmann and Ross Earnst both stressed alternative transportation methods. They felt a more regional concept rather than the established "quick fix" was required for this project. Boeing stated that they are not in the transit business and they would have to depend on Metro for bus service. • Growth Management Act: It was stated that the current transportation infrastructure could not support the proposed land -use. Because of the concurrency issue of GMA, this project could be stopped or delayed. Dick McCann asked if Renton felt that Longacres Park could not be developed under GMA. Lynn Guttmann felt that "in good faith" it appears to fit the system. • Tukwila also asked that surrounding growth prompted by the Longacres Park project should be studied. What type of activities, businesses will emerge to support the site. PIIQV = i_N6 ,.,,,. ml 1, G,ry L. l i,nDnsen. Mawr RE: Boeing Longacres Development Environmental Impact Statement Now that Boeing has publicly released its development plans, we can officially discuss our mutual concerns and processing of the required permits and environmental impact statement. I understand that Boeing submitted permit applications to Renton and that your staff is preparing to issue a scoping notice for the impact statement next week. Your staff's suggestion of a scoping hearing being held in Tukwila on June 6, 1991 is a good idea. I have made our.Council chambers available, and you may contact Rick Beeler at 431 -3681 for any special arrangements needed. The State Environmental Policy Act requires that your staff decide who will be the lead agency for the impact statement. Included in the Act is the flexibility for Renton to share lead agency with Tukwila. I would like to request your sincere consideration of sharing the lead on this significant project on our mutual border. My main reason for this request is that the traffic generated by this project will affect Tukwila, and both corporate and private citizens will be extremely interested in this development. It is my hope that this project will provide another opportunity for our cities to work cooperatively together, as we have done so many times before. Si incere , I kele. 400P Ga. VanDusen, Mayor City of Tukwila cc: Rick Beeler • Rick Beeler is my contact person for this project and is available to answer any questions you or your staff may have. Please don't hesitate to call him, or to contact me directly at 433 -1805. A 3&C ass DATE 44-7114; INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT REGARDING WCIP *MIr01Qr THIS AGREEMENT is entered into between the City of Tukwila, hereinafter referred to as "Tukwila ", and the City of Renton, hereinafter referred to as "Renton ". WHEREAS, the Cities of Renton and Tukwila are authorized by Chapter 39.34 RCW to enter into agreements for the purpose of interlocal cooperation, and WHEREAS, the Tukwila City Council has passed Resolution No. 1008 , which indicates Tukwila's willingness to accept annexation to Tukwila of certain property currently located within Renton and more particularly described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth to Tukwila, and calls for certain property currently located within Tukwila and described on Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth to be annexed to Renton, and WHEREAS, the Renton City Council has passed Resolution No. 02,6S/ , which calls for certain property currently located within Renton and more particularly described on Exhibit A to be annexed to Tukwila and indicates Renton's willingness to accept annexation of certain property currently located within Tukwila and more particularly described on Exhibit B to Renton, and WHEREAS, both Resolutions recognize that there are issues of concern to both Renton and Tukwila that must be mutually resolved and Renton and Tukwila desire to enter into an interlocal agreement to resolve these issues, now, therefore FOR AND IN CONSIDERATION OF the mutual benefits and conditions hereinafter contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Scope and Effect of Agreement. It is the intent of the parties to resolve issues of mutual concern with respect to pending reciprocal annexations. This Agreement shall become effective and shall bind the parties upon completion of the latter of the annexation of the property described on Exhibit B to Renton and annexation of the property described on Exhibit A to the City of Tukwila. In the event that, for any reason, one or both of the above referenced annexations are not completed, then this Agreement shall be null and void. 2. Strander Boulevard /S. W. 27th Street Improvements. Local costs of the future crossing of the railroad tracks by Strander Boulevard /S. W. 27th Street should be shared equitably between the two parties. In pursuit of this Agreement, both Cities agree to designate the aforementioned improvement of Strander Boulevard /S. W. 27th Street as a high priority item on each City's Transportation Improvement Plan, and each provide one -half of the local funds needed to match an 80% federal funding for this road improvement project. Because the timing of this street extension is uncertain, Renton and Tukwila agree to monitor development and, as development warrants, to acknowledge that the route is needed and that both jurisdictions will cooperate to insure that an appropriate connection is designed and constructed. Because the crossing will be located entirely within Tukwila upon completion of the annexation, the final decision as to the time for improvement shall be left to the discretion of Tukwila. If federal funding is unavailable, then Renton and Tukwila will negotiate an equitable funding option as necessary, such that each cities' share of the local costs of the improvement shall be 50 %. 3. S. W. 43rd Street /S. 180th Street Improvements. If a proposed grade separated crossing of S. W. 43rd and the railroad tracks is undertaken to improve traffic safety and capacity, the Interlocal Agreement Regarding Reciprocal Annexations Page 2 local costs should be shared equitably between Renton and Tukwila. The two Cities shall support the S. W. 43rd Street /S. 180th Street improvement in the same manner as the Strander Boulevard /S. W. 27th Street railroad crossing. By support, it is meant that both Cities will designate this road improvement as a high priority item on each Cities' Transportation Improvement Plan and each provide one -half of the local funds needed to match an 80% federal funding for this road improvement project. If federal funding is unavailable, then Renton and Tukwila will negotiate an equitable funding option as necessary, such that each cities' share of the local costs of such road improvement shall be 50 %. Because the improvement will be located entirely within Tukwila upon completion of the annexation, the final decision as to the time for the improvement shall be left to the discretion of Tukwila. 4. P -1 Channel. The P -1 Channel is a storm drainage improvement to be located within that property described on Exhibit B which will be annexed to Renton. Renton agrees to assume what would have been Tukwila's share of the cost of construction and maintenance for that portion of the P -1 Channel which will be located in said area. The City of Tukwila shall retain the right to connect to and use the P -1 Channel. 5. Green River Dike Maintenance. Renton's share of the cost of the Green River Dike Maintenance Plan was 22% prior to the reciprocal annexations. Construction and maintenance costs for the Green River Dikes should be revised to reflect the fact that Renton will not have Green River frontage after the reciprocal annexations are completed and that therefore Renton should have no obligation for dike maintenance or rehabilitation. 6. Frank Zepp Bridge. Upon completion of the reciprocal annexations, the Frank Zepp Bridge at S. W. 43rd Street /S. 180th Street will be located entirely within the City of Tukwila. Tukwila agrees to assume all costs of maintenance and future widening for the bridge. Both parties understand that with the annexation of the property described on Exhibit A to Tukwila, the responsibility for maintenance and operation of the traffic signals at the intersection of S. W. 43rd Street and West Valley Road (SR -181), formerly shared by the Cities of Renton and Kent, should be assumed in total by the City of Kent. 7. Utilities. Both parties understand that Renton has existing utilities serving a portion of the area to be annexed to the City of Tukwila bordered by S. W. 43rd Street, West Valley Highway, the existing Renton City limits and the Union Pacific .Railroad right -of -way. Renton shall retain ownership of the said existing utilities and shall be responsible for all costs of operation and maintenance of the same. Tukwila shall be responsible for providing sewer and water service to all other areas annexed to Tukwila as part of the reciprocal annexations. Neither party shall impose a surcharge upon utility users within the newly annexed areas solely because of their annexation. 8. SR -181. The City of Renton should enter into an agreement with the State of Washington regarding the transfer of costs to the State for improvements to SR -181 between S. W. 43rd Street and I -405. The City of Tukwila shall bear no responsibility for such costs by virtue of the execution of this Agreement. 9. Future Annexations. Renton and Tukwila will coordinate review of future annexation petitions received by the parties consistent with the boundary line shown on Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. CITY IF TUKWI . V Interlocal Agreement Regarding Annexations Page 3 10. Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties and no other agreements, oral or otherwise, shall be deemed to exist or to bind the parties hereto. DATED this // .day of , 1986. DU EN. MAYOR M X AN ER ON. C Y CLERK CITY OF RENTON T�t t ? CL rtjS Chi BARBARA Y. SHIINOCH MAYOR MAXINE E. MOTOR, C Y CLERK APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATT NEY CITY ATTORNEY LAWRENCE J. WAR N, CITY ATTORNEY • SECTION - TOWNSHIP -RANGE PARCEL ACREAGE NW 1/4 of Sec. 24, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 27 (portion) 3.62 2� .79 SW 1/4 of Sec. 24, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 63 2.35 32 0.27 28 3.85 7 MDC 4.55 NW 1/4 of Sec. 25, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 38 1.84 0.91 8 MDC (p) 2.9 1.14 9 MDC (p) 3.05 43 2.15 50 0.84 51 0.72 23 2.16 6 6.70 2.16 24 (portion) 44.10 21 MDC 2.45 2.16 22 (portion) 10.47 SW 1/4 of Sec. 25, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 21 1.61 59 0.37 20 2.14 33 3.69 17 5.93 3.01 23 (portion) 10.43 24 (portion) 5.44 44.10 22 3.01 NW 1/4 of Sec. 36, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 97 3.00 57 8.69 62 6.40 61 0.17 11 6.83 43 0.10 37 0.17 38 0.14 39 0.14 53 0.14 14 0.12 13 0.12 29 0.32 10 0.14 9 0.19 59 0.15 8 0.17 1.7 0.12 35 2.84 34 5.54 36 3.09 TOTAL 45 parcels 101.65 EXHIBIT A Lands to be Annexed to Tukwila from Renton The lands proposed to be annexed to the City of Tukwila from the City of Renton are listed below and shown in Figure 1. 'I 111 / 1111174— 's- gb e. F re 1 Renton-Tukwiik, - Boundary Adjustment Map of Affected Areas Lands to Renton TIMM& Clrf LOURS L ONGAC RES SECTION- TOWNSHIP -RANGE PARCEL ACREAGE SW 1/4 of Sec. 25, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 41 19.05 4 23.44 NW 1/4 of Sec. 25, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 42 16.03 SW 1/4 of Sec. 25, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 19 40.21 SE 1/4 of Sec. 14, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 0160 (portion) 11.79 0145 .29 0155 (portion) 1.29 0150 1.49 0320 .28 0330 .02 Lot #2 .12 TOTAL 11 parcels 114.01 EXHIBIT B Lands to be Annexed to Renton from Tukwila The lands proposed to be annexed to the City of Renton from the City of Tukwila are listed below and shown in Figure 1. F;;. ire 1 f Renton-TukwilL_ Adjustment Map of Affected Areas Lands to Renton :: to Renton :at Lands to Tukwila Lands to Tukwila 1000' 1111611F46: EXHIBIT C Areas Subject to Joint Tukwila- Renton Review of all Future Annexation Petitions . 1 1 ., 1' l:Ilt::i `LS.t tilt• - • • Ti " /sJ / / / / / ,11 -1- :_- 1 1 aiggp l *it I CITY OF TUKWILA WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO /167 •' A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING INTENT TO ANNEX CERTAIN AREAS FROM THE CITY OF RENTON, WASHINGTON, REQUESTING THE CITY OF RENTON TO ANNEX CERTAIN AREAS CURRENTLY WITHIN THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, SPECIFYING TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH ANNEXATIONS AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR AND CITY CLERK TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH RENTON ACCORDING TO SUCH TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 1002 OF THE CITY COUNCIL. WHEREAS, the current location of the common corporate boundary between the City of Renton and the City of Tukwila is irregular and does not follow an easily identified natural feature, and WHEREAS, the current boundary is difficult for residents, businesses, and public officials to recognize and use, and WHEREAS, the current irregular boundary limits the ability of vie respective jurisdictions to plan for future land use and logical service areas, and WHEREAS, realigning and simplifying the common boundary would be in the mutual interest of Renton and Tukwila, and WHEREAS, a realigned boundary would provide more logical service areas, including emergency service response areas, and WHEREAS, a realigned boundary would clarify land use planning responsibilities and provide more logical mailing addresses, and WHEREAS, staff members of the respective Cities have explored the potential areas of fiscal and administrative concern in detail, and WHEREAS, the City of Renton, acting as lead agency for purposes of SEPA, a Determination of Non - Significance for a proposed realignment of boundaries between the two Cities to be accomplished by reciprocal annexations pursuant to RCW 35.10.217, now, therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: 2. S. W. 43rd Street /S. 180th Street Improvements. If a proposed grade separated crossing of S. W. 43rd and the railroad tracks is undertaken to improve traffic safety and capacity, the local costs should be shared equitably between Renton and Tukwila. The two Cities shall support the S. W. 43rd Street /S. 180th Street improvement in the same manner as the Strander Boulevard /S. W. 27th Street railroad crossing. By support, it is meant that both Cities will designate this road improvement as a high priority item on each City's Transportation Improvement Plan and each provide one -half of the local funds needed to match an 80% federal funding for this road improvement project. If federal funding is unavailable, then Renton and Tukwila will negotiate an equitable funding option as necessary, such that each cities' share of the local costs of such road improvement shall be 50 %. Because the improvement will be located entirely within Tukwila upon completion of the annexation, the final decision as to the time for the improvement shall be left to the discretion of Tukwila. 3. P -1 Channel. The P-1 Channel is a storm drainage improvement to be located within that property described on Exhibit B which will be annexed to Renton. Renton agrees to assume what would have been Tukwila's share of the cost of construction and maintenance for that portion of the P -1 Channel which will be located in said area. The City of Tukwila shall retain the right to connect to and use the P -1 Channel. 4. Green River Dike Maintenance. Renton's share of the cost of the Green River Dike Maintenance Plan was 22% prior to the reciprocal annexations. Construction and maintenance costs for the Green River Dikes should be revised to reflect the fact that Renton will not have Green River frontage after the reciprocal annexations are completed and that therefore Renton should have no obligation for dike maintenance or rehabilitation. 5. Frank Zepp Bridge. Upon completion of the reciprocal annexations, the Frank Zepp Bridge at S. W. 43rd Street /S. 180th Street will be located entirely within the City of Tukwila. Tukwila agrees to assume all costs of maintenance and future widening for the bridge. Both parties understand that with the annexation of the property described on Exhibit A to Tukwila, the responsibility for maintenance and operation of the traffic signals at the intersection of S. W. 43rd Street and West Valley Road (SR -181), formerly shared by the Cities of Renton and Kent, should be assumed in total by the City of Kent. 6. Utilities. Both parties understand that Renton has existing utilities serving a portion of the area to be annexed to the City of Tukwila bordered by S. W. 43rd Street, West Valley Highway, the existing Renton City limits and the Union Pacific Railroad right -of -way. Renton shall retain ownership of the said existing utilities and shall be responsible for all costs of operation and maintenance of the same. Tukwila shall be responsible for providing sewer and water service to all other areas annexed to Tukwila as part of the reciprocal annexations. [Neither party shall impose a surcharge upon utility users within the newly annexed areas solely because of their annexation. 7. SR -181. The City of Renton should enter into an agreement with the State of Washington regarding the transfer of costs to the State for improvements to SR -181 between S. W. 43rd Street and I -405. The City of Tukwila shall bear no responsibility for such costs by virtue of the execution of this Agreement. 8. Future Annexations. Renton and Tukwila will coordinate review of future annexation petitions received by the parties consistent with the boundary line shown on Exhibit C attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full. SECTION - TOWNSHIP -RANGE PARCEL ACREAGE 3.62 NW 1/4 of Sec. 24, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 27 (portion) 12.79 SW 1/4 of Sec. 24, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 63 2.35 32 0.27 28 3.85 7 MDC 4.55 NW 1/4 of Sec. 25, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 38 1.84 0.91 8 MDC (p) 2.91 1.14 9 MDC (p) 3.05 43 2.15 50 0.84 51 0.72 23 2.16 6 6.70 2.16 24 (portion) 21 MDC 2.45 2.16 22 (portion) 10.47 SW 1/4 of Sec. 25, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 21 1.61 59 0.37 20 2.14 33 3.69 17 5.93 3.01 23 (portion) - 24 (portion) 5.44 4444 10 22 3.01 NW 1/4 of Sec. 36, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 97 3.00 57 8.69 62 6.40 61 0.17 11 6.83 43 0.10 37 0.17 38 0.14 39 0.14 53 0.14 14 0.12 13 0.12 29 0.32 10 0.14 9 0.19 59 0.15 8 0.17 1.7 0.12 35 2.84 34 1 5.54 1 36 3.09 TOTAL 1 45 parcels 101.65 EXHIBIT A Lands to be Annexed to Tukwila from Renton The lands proposed to be annexed to the City of Tukwila from the City of Renton are listed below and shown in Figure 1. re 1 Renton -Tuk4a Boundary Adjustment Map of Affected Areas Lands to Renton Dot Lands to Tukwila Lands to Tukwila Lands to Renton 2000 0042.010.009 JEH /ko 12/01/86 01/06/87 CITY OF TUKWILA WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO. 10 2 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ANNEXING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY TO THE CITY OF TUKWILA FROM THE CITY OF RENTON. WHEREAS, Resolution No. 2651 of the City of Renton requested that the City of Tukwila annex certain real property located in the City of Renton as part of a common effort by Renton and Tukwila to simplify their common boundaries, and WHEREAS, Resolution 1008 of the City of Tukwila declared the City of Tukwila's willingness to accept such annexation upon certain conditions and requested that the City of Renton annex certain property located within the City of Tukwila as a reciprocal measure designed to simplify the common boundary, and WHEREAS, the City of Renton and the City of Tukwila entered into an interlocal agreement providing for shared responsibilities with respect to the areas to be annexed by both cities, and WHEREAS, the King County Boundary Review Board has reviewed the proposed annexations and boundary change and has approved the same, and WHEREAS, pursuant to RCW 35.10.217 and upon proper notice, a public hearing was held on the proposed annexation before the City Council of the City of Tukwila on January 5, 1987, at which all persons who were interested in the annexation were allowed to participate, and WHEREAS, after such public hearing, the City Council of the City of Tukwila has determined to annex the area, now, therefore THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Annexation of Area from Renton. Pursuant to RCW 35.10.217, the real property previously located in the City of Renton and legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full, SECTION - TOWNSHIP -RANGE PARCEL ACREAGE 3.62 NW 1/4 of Sec. 24, Twn. 23. Roe. 4 27 (portion) 12.79 SW 1/4 of Sec. 24, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 63 2.35 32 0.27 28 3.85 7 MDC 4.55 NW 1/4 of Sec. 25, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 38 1.84 0.91 8 MDC (p) '1 1.14 9 MDC (p) -- 3 - .11r - 43 2.15 50 0.84 51 0.72 23 2.16 6 6.70 2.16 24 (portion) 44.10 21 MDC 2.45 2.16 22 (portion) 10.47 SW 1/4 of Sec. 25, Twn. 23, Rge. 4. 21 1.61 59 0.37 20 2.14 33 3.69 17 5.93 3.01 23 (portion) 10.43 24 (portion) 5.44 UM 22 3.01 NW 1/4 of Sec. 36, Twn. 23, Rge. 4 97 3.00 57 8.69 62 6.40 61 0.17 11 6.83 43 0.10 37 0.17 38 0.14 39 0.14 53 0.14 14 0.12 13 0.12 29 0.32 10 0.14 9 0.19 59 0.15 8 0.17 1.7 0.12 35 2.84 34 I 5.54 36 I . 3.09 TOTAL 1_45 parcels I 101.65 EXHIBIT A to be Annexed to Tukwila from Renton The lands proposed to be annexed to the City of Tukwila from the City of Renton are listed below and shown in Figure 1. 9/16/86:JRB SUGGESTED LEGAL DESCRIPTION (From City of Renton to City of Tukwila - North Part) the City of Renton as of the east margin of located in the SWf of the City of Renton as of the east margin of located in the NW& of County, Washington vises ATrAca+•wr F All that portion of the City of Renton as annexed by City Ordinance too. 1764 lying westerly of the east margin of BAR Company (N.P. Ry) raain track right of way all being located in the Si of the IOW} of Section 24, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M. Together with all that portion of Ordinance No. 1764 lying westerly main track right of way all being 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M. Together with all that portion of Ordinance No. 1764 lying westerly main track right of way all being 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M. King annexed by City BURR Company (N. P. Ry) Section 24, Township annexed by City BURR Company (N.P. Ry) Section 2S, Township RECEIVED +CQMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Lead Agency: QTY OF REN ON Planning /Building /Public Works Department Renton, , Washington Prepared by JONES & STOKFS A INC. B Washington October 21 ;1992 THE BOEING COMPANY LONGACRES OFFICE PARK ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SLOPING SUMMARY Lead Agency: CITY OF REN10N Planning /Building /Public Works Department Renton, Washington Prepared by: JONES & STOKES ASSOCIATES, INC. Bellevue, Washington October 21, 1992 This document should be cited as: Jones & Stokes Associates, Inc. 1992. The Boeing Company Longacres Office Park. Environmental impact statement scoping _ summary. October 21. (JSA 91 -129.) Bellevue, WA. Prepared for City of Renton Planning /Building /Public Works Department. Renton, WA. • Table of Contents APPENDIX A APPENDIX B - APPENDIX C - APPENDIX D 1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 2.0 PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT 2 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF SCOPING PROCESS 2 4.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 3 4.1 Alternative 1 - Proposed Action, Office Park (Dispersed Pattern) 3 4.2 Alternative 2 - Office Park (Clustered Pattern) 3 4.3 Alternative 3 - Manufacturing /Office Development (Incremental Pattern) 4 4.4 Alternative 4 - No Action 4 5.0 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW 6 6.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC MEETINGS 6 7.0 RESPONSE TO WRII"1'EN SCOPING COMMENTS 7 7.1 Earth 7 7.2 Air Quality 7 7.3 Water 8 7.4 Terrestrial and Aquatic Resources 9 7.5 Environmental Health 10 7.6 Land Use and Housing 11 7.7 Visual Resources 12 7.8 Historic and Cultural Resources 12 7.9 Vehicular Traffic 13 7.10 Movement /Circulation 15 7.11 Utilities 16 7.12 Police and Fire Protection 17 7.13 Parks and Recreation 17 7.14 Socioeconomics 18 - DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE SCOPING MEETING INFORMATION SCOPING MEETING TRANSCRIPTS - SCOPING LETTERS RENTON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 1 Page List of Figures Figure 1 Alternative 1 - Proposed Action, Office Park (Dispersed Pattern) follows 3 RENTON /BOEING EIS 1O /21/92c Parcels Available for Development under Alternative 3 5 Page 1.0 INTRODUCTION This Scoping Summary presents issues identified during scoping for the Longacres Office Park development ( "Longacres Office Park ") proposed by The Boeing Company to be located in Renton, Washington. The City of Renton initiated the scoping process for environmental review of the proposed Longacres Office Park development on November 15, 1991, with the issuance of a Determination of Significance (DS) and a request for comments on an initial Scoping Document for an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for this project (Appendix A). Scoping issues were finalized following consideration of comments. This Scoping Summary has been prepared as a final product of the scoping process to document the public review process. The scoping issues which have been identified will be addressed in the programmatic project EIS prepared for Longacres Office Park. Because The Boeing Company has not proposed specific development plans for Longacres Office Park, Renton has decided to conduct environmental review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) for the development as a concept in the programmatic project EIS. A programmatic project EIS identifies and addresses impacts for a planned future major project action that is still in a conceptual and /or programmatic state and where the design of individual development components, such as buildings, transportation improvements, and open space /recreation components, could change over the proposed buildout period for the project. This type of EIS would apply to projects where it has been recognized that subsequent environmental review is appropriate and will be undertaken in the future as more specific information on the Proposed Action becomes available. Such an EIS could also be called a "conceptual project EIS ". The EIS is intended to identify areas of environmental concerns and constraints; determine baseline, issue - related, environmental conditions; identify the environmental impact of an office development at the project site; develop mitigation strategies; and serve as a basis for subsequent environmental review for project- specific proposals to be submitted within the framework of the Proposed Action, should the City of Renton approve the Proposed Action. The City of Renton will conduct project- specific environmental review later, when The Boeing Company submits such specific proposals. This approach will allow public and agency review and comment during the early stages of each proposed development. Because the EIS is limited in scope, environmental analysis of several elements of Longacres Office Park cannot be fully developed. For example, mitigation plans cannot be specified until specific construction plans are prepared for individual buildings. Rather than proposing mitigation measures, the EIS will provide a generalized framework through which specific measures can be developed later for specific proposals. RENI'ON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 1 This Scoping Summary includes an explanation of purpose, a description of the procedures that were followed during scoping, a description of the Proposed Action and alternatives, a summary of public meetings held for this project, and a review of and response to comments received during the scoping process. Comments received are addressed by topic and are arranged in the order they normally occur in an EIS prepared pursuant to SEPA. Scoping meeting information, as well as copies of comment letters and meeting transcripts, are included in Appendices B, C, and D. 2.0 PURPOSE OF DOCUMENT The purpose of the Scoping Summary is to allow the City of Renton to provide a general response to agency, tribal, and citizen comments regarding the DS for the Longacres Office Park proposal. The DS specified preliminary elements of the environment to be addressed in the EIS and invited comment on those elements and additional issues. Issues raised during the scoping meetings and in comment letters are included in this document. While not required by SEPA, the City of Renton has prepared this Scoping Summary to facilitate public review of the scoping process and to guide preparation of the EIS. Recipients of this Scoping Summary include persons on the City of Renton's mailing list for the proposal. The list includes tribes, affected agencies, persons who have attended public meetings, and others who have expressed interest in receiving project information. These interested parties will be sent notice of the availability of the Draft and Final EISs. 3.0 DESCRIPTION OF SCOPING PROCESS On November 15, 1991, the City of Renton issued a DS and Request for Comments on the EIS Scoping Document (Appendix A). The purpose of this notice was to announce Renton's finding that the Proposed Action may cause significant adverse impacts on the environment and that an EIS must be prepared, to list Renton's preliminary determination of environmental elements to be evaluated in the EIS, and to invite comment on environmental issues to be evaluated in the EIS. Notice was sent to the Washington Department of Ecology (WDOE), other agencies with jurisdiction, municipalities, Native American tribes, environmental interest groups, private businesses, and citizens on the City of Renton's mailing list. The DS was also published for two consecutive weeks in The Valley Daily News and The Seattle Daily Journal of Commerce. The City of Renton used the expanded scoping process allowed by WAC 197 -11 -410 and held two public meetings. During these meetings, City of Renton staff and The Boeing Company representatives presented information and answered questions regarding the proposal, and the public was invited to provide scoping comments (Appendix B). The written comment period spanned 21 days, from November 15 to December 6, 1991. RENI'ON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 2 4.0 DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES 4.1 Alternative 1 - Proposed Action, Office Park (Dispersed Pattern) The Proposed Action is an office park plan. Under this proposal, the general development pattern would be a suburban, campus -like design, with individual buildings dispersed throughout the site (Figure 1). A significant amount of open space would be retained and incorporated into the plan. Ponds and other landscape amenities may be constructed as part of the open space and stormwater management facilities. The preliminary plans include the construction of approximately 2.5 million square feet of office space over 15 years. It is anticipated that approximately 12 to 15 separate office buildings would be constructed over this period and, upon completion, approximately 10,000 employees would occupy the site. The office park may include an employee center and a conference center. Private vehicles are assumed to be a major mode of transportation to and from the site; however, the use of public transit in addition to use of private automobiles will be encouraged. Surface parking lots would be provided adjacent to the office buildings but are sized to induce greater high occupancy vehicle (HOV) participation. The office park plan would be consistent with Renton's current commercial land use designations for the site. 4.2 Alternative 2 - Office Park (Clustered Pattern) Alternative 2 is an office park plan with a nodal development pattern. This alternative would be identical to the Proposed Action (Alternative 1) in the total amount of square footage, phasing period for construction, and total number of employees at completion. The total number of buildings would be 12 to 15, a plan similar to the Proposed Action. As with Alternative 1, this alternative would be consistent with Renton's current commercial land use designations. In contrast to the dispersed pattern of the Proposed Action, the plan for Alternative 2 would group buildings into nodes or clusters. A large amount of the site would remain open space with the potential for ponds and other landscape amenities incorporated into the site similar to the Proposed Action. The site design criteria would include evaluation of the most effective ways to create functional building groupings. Such groupings could potentially be located in strategic relationship to primary transportation corridors such as Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, the connection to the West Valley Highway (SR 181) and Burlington Northern Railroad, and an east -west connector road through the site (if included in final design plans). The design of Alternative 2 would facilitate the use of HOVs and provide potential for High Capacity Transit (HCT) or more traditional modes of public transit in addition to use of private automobiles. RENTON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 3 I . V ',. • ''. I --'' -:f.. -.. :. .1 , 40k \ 1,-'''''' • ''.-- I - - , - -;;,..--c . ,,.1 1...:_, i ‘ ,..•. .1 I \ . 1 ! 1 , r i,til I • [.•.* !? 41174.,m.i - 1 1 wr447„ 1.1: I • . • V ir .1.d , fl'.1';. 1 I I g . - , .-- 17;til i l i !.. . . . 1 .. t l' I58TII ST I t - 1,.;,-A . .• • i L • it oi I.. t .-,.. , .,-.• - -,-- ..-- . I T • 0:it I I .... LLA Mnr.1J I I... .. P7. I I 1 1 l . 40 02 . 1 IL • 1 1, 4 1c;',4410431 1:3t`-'•,•fh: • Tito Boeing Conipany Skidmore, Owings Lk Merrill Sao Franck:a dfl!I !I SW 27TH STREET I I PROPERTY IN ; PROJECT I hi: PROPOSED BUILDINGS Building location and size are subject to change ;I 1, I• SW 10TH STREET SITE PLAN 2(in 400 .4,40A:tuber 24. 0192 LONCACEPS PARK DEVELOPMENT PLAN Figure 1. Alternative 1 - Proposed Action, Office Park (Dispersed Pattern) 43 Alternative 3 - Manufacturing/Office Development (Incremental Pattern) Under Alternative 3, the site would be developed as 8 to 10 individual parcels, approximately 20 acres each (Figure 2), with each parcel improved separately for office or manufacturing uses consistent with the zoning and comprehensive plans in effect at the time of development. If this alternative is selected, the five parcels shown in Figure 2 would probably be reconfigured to achieve the 20 -acre parcel size. This alternative would be comparable to Alternatives 1 and 2 in the construction of approximately 2.5 million square feet of building space over 15 years for an employment population of approximately 10,000 people. Up to 30% of the total building area is assumed to be designated for manufacturing uses. The site would not be developed under an office park plan. Open space and landscaping would be provided on a parcel -by- parcel basis. Few large contiguous areas of open space and landscaping would be planned. Transportation and parking requirements would be determined for individual development proposals. This alternative, as presently proposed, would be consistent with the commercial zoning on the site. This alternative would also be consistent with the Office Park (O -P) zoning of adjacent development located from Southwest 16th Street to Southwest 23rd Street and Manufacturing Park (M -P) zoning south of Southwest 23rd Street. These zoning districts provide for professional, administrative, and business offices. Certain manufacturing activities and support services are also permitted, as well as warehouse storage and distribution services. Typical uses in the Office Park (O -P) zone are administrative and professional offices, medical and dental offices /clinics, financial offices, and research and development facilities. The Manufacturing Park (M -P) zone provides for a wide variety of industrial, transportation, service, and office activities that meet high operational, development, and environmental standards. Principle uses in this zone are manufacturing, processing, assembly, and product servicing; transportation, communication, and utility services; and business, professional, and research and development activities. With this alternative it is assumed that each parcel would be developed to maximum site intensity consistent with zoning regulations and any existing environmental constraints. Possible uses by The Boeing Company include a high -tech computing research facility and a training center. Other uses could include light manufacturing activities such as a wire shop. 4.4 Alternative 4 - No Action Under the No Action Alternative, development of the property would not occur. It is assumed that the racetrack, which ceased to operate at the close of the 1992 season, would be abandoned, and over time, the grandstands, barns, and other buildings would deteriorate. Ornamental trees and shrubs would grow unchecked and become more natural RENTON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 4 .: PARCEL:: A'• ' • • ':.': • • 72 . 930 •AC. • • •.• :1 • 6.868 • AC:. * . • . • • • • .: ......•.F'ARGL : •F . • • ; ••••••••••• 11%531•AC:,,; • •. • .:.: ERG( k: ., ..•. : • . .':: ' • 44. '. •••••••••••••■•••••••••••••••••••• ••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• 1 \/ rr d g (----1 . 0w i s • • • {,0 • • I -405 Springbrook Creek 0 • • SW 27th Street Figure 2. Parcels Available for Development under Alternative 3 RENI'ON /BOEING EIS 10/21 /92e 5 in appearance. The interior of the track would gradually revert to vegetation characteristic of unmanaged areas near Springbrook Creek. With the change in vegetation, the wetland areas would be expected to increase in complexity and would provide habitat for increased numbers and varieties of birds and wildlife. The parking areas on the southern portion of the property would change from short grasses to dense grass, shrubs, and weeds characteristic of this region. Trees may invade the area as well. The track would eventually be overgrown with weeds, grasses, and other vegetation. As development of adjacent properties continued, the project site would become a remnant of wildlife habitat. The vacant buildings would be subject to vandalism and fire, potentially becoming health and public safety hazards. If the City of Renton determined that the buildings constituted a public nuisance, the buildings would likely be demolished. 5.0 ADDITIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW This programmatic project EIS would be supplemented by additional environmental review to be conducted for specific developments proposed, except the No Action Alternative. This environmental review would be conducted by the City of Renton for each development phase of the project. Certain application approvals from Renton may be required during particular phases of development, including, but not limited to: • site plan approvals, • clearing and grading permits, • demolition permits, • building permits, • conditional use permits, and • shoreline substantial development permits (WDOE). 6.0 SUMMARY OF PUBLIC MEETINGS The City of Renton held two public meetings: one on November 19, 1991, in the Renton City Council Chambers at Renton City Hall and the other on November 21, 1991, at the Tukwila Community Center. Ms. Lenora Blauman, Renton Planning Department, presented background information regarding the process leading to the EIS. Mr. Fred Stewart, The Boeing Company, described the conceptual plan of the Proposed Action, and Mr. Jonathan Ives, Jones & Stokes Associates (the consulting firm preparing the EIS), described the SEPA review process. Attendees were invited to ask questions and present comments. Questions and comments at both meetings involved traffic issues, the SEPA process, and the relationship between the Proposed Action and another development proposal by RENTON /BOEING EIS 10/2I/92e 6 The Boeing Company for an adjacent parcel within the former Longacres Park racetrack ( "Longacres Park "). Transcripts of both meetings are presented in Appendix C and include responses to questions and comments. The following sections summarize issues identified through written comments. Comments are paraphrased and summarized to aid in review. Copies of all comment letters are presented in Appendix D. EIS Scope Comments Received Response EIS Scope 7.0 RESPONSE TO WRITTEN SCOPING COMMENTS 7.1 Earth The DS /Scoping Notice noted that the EIS would contain evaluations of site capacity, site stability and seismic tolerances, and impacts on soils from site preparation activities. The analyses will focus on soil type and permeability. No comments were received specifically regarding earth resources. However, stream and wetland sedimentation were raised as issues (Muckleshoot Indian Tribe and WDOE). The issues of stream and wetland sedimentation will be addressed in the terrestrial and aquatic resources chapter of the EIS to the extent that those issues are relevant to this programmatic project proposal and alternative actions. 7.2 Air Quality The EIS will evaluate existing air quality and anticipated impacts in the study area, such as odors and pollutants, resulting from increased traffic volumes. RENTON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 7 EIS Scope Comments Received Comments related to air quality focused on the effects of increased traffic- generated emissions (Gerald C. Bohnen). Response The EIS will address this issue to the extent that the programmatic project proposal and alternative actions contribute to air emissions. 7.3 Water The DS /Scoping Notice identified surface water and groundwater resources, wetlands, and protection of Springbrook Creek as issues to be evaluated in the EIS. The EIS will evaluate impacts on the drainage basin and floodplain from site preparation and operation. Comments Received Water issues identified through public comment included surface water runoff and water quality. It was noted that the EIS should mention plans to develop the P -1 Drainage Channel and potential problems associated with surface water runoff (City of Tukwila, Group Health Cooperative, Valley Office & Industrial Park, Inc.). Response The EIS will address the surface water runoff and water quality issues to the extent that those issues are relevant to the programmatic project proposal and alternative actions. The issue of impacts associated with surface water runoff will be evaluated at a conceptual level in this programmatic project EIS and at the project level during project - specific environmental reviews. More specifically, the EIS will examine the project impacts on regional drainage plans, studies, and facilities including the City of Renton's East Side Green River Watershed Plan, City of Tukwila's Nelson Place /Longacres Way Drainage Plan, and King County's operation and maintenance of the Black River Pump Station in the P -1 Channel / Springbrook Creek drainage system. B NtTON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 8 Separate from this EIS, the City of Renton is preparing a watershed management plan for the area east of the Green River. A number of flood control alternatives, including construction of the P -1 Drainage Channel, are being evaluated. A draft watershed plan, to be completed during 1992, will identify those alternatives and the City of Renton's Proposed Action. EIS Scope 7.4 Terrestrial and Aquatic Resources The DS /Scoping Notice identified that the natural environment section of the EIS would examine impacts on Springbrook Creek, onsite and surrounding wetlands, and upland habitat. As indicated in the DS /Scoping Notice, the EIS will identify existing onsite and adjacent wildlife habitat and species and will address impacts on those resources. Emphasis will be placed on the undeveloped areas on the site and adjacent to the site, including wetlands and Springbrook Creek. The number of species, population sizes, periods of use, and type of activity will be identified in the EIS at a level sufficient to determine impacts on these resources. Comments Received One commenter provided background information on wildlife resources of the site. . It was noted that areas east and south of the project site provide good wildlife habitat for waterfowl, amphibians, reptiles, small mammals, bald eagles (Haliaeetus leucocephalus), great blue herons (Ardea herodias), northern harriers (Circus cyaneus), and red - tailed hawks (Buteo jamaicensis), and that the site is used by Canada geese (Branta canadensis) and wigeons (Anas americana) (Washington Department of Wildlife). Comments were received on fish- related issues focused on fish resources and habitats within Springbrook Creek and potential impacts on water quality and flow levels. Comments included the potential impacts on fish and fish habitat due to increased sediments and priority pollutants in Springbrook Creek, increased peak stormflow and decreased summer low flows resulting from impervious surface area, and downstream and upstream impacts. These issues focused primarily on the coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch) fishery and impact methodology and mitigation measures (Muckleshoot Indian Tribe). Comments regarding wetlands generally focused on value as fish habitat; wetland protection and mitigation, including the retention wetlands; wetland protection when possible; and wetland replacement when impacts are unavoidable (WDOE, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe). RENION /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 9 Response The impact analysis will focus on the potential changes in onsite wildlife habitat and any contribution to the cumulative effects upon habitat in the valley. The EIS will identify the existing fishery resources of Springbrook Creek. The suggested mitigation measures will be considered when developing the EIS. Recommendations regarding wetlands will be addressed in the EIS. The functional values of wetlands on the site will include a discussion of water quality and other fisheries - related functions. Project - specific impacts and mitigation would be identified during environmental review of subsequent project -level development. EIS Scope Comments Received Response RENTON /BOEING EIS 10/2l/92e 7.5 Environmental Health The EIS will address impacts involving removing hazardous substances identified on the site, such as asbestos. It will also address noise from onsite activities and vehicles traveling to and from the site. Comments regarding environmental health involved noise and hazardous materials. Comments were made that the EIS should evaluate noise and hazardous material impacts in detail for the first phase of the proposed project and leave further analysis to subsequent environmental review. It was also indicated that the EIS should address existing and ongoing use of hazardous materials onsite (City of Tukwila, Group Health Cooperative). The evaluations of environmental health issues for the entire project to be addressed in the EIS will be consistent with the level of detail available and necessary for a programmatic project EIS. No distinction regarding level of analysis will be made by phase at this time. More specific evaluations of environmental health issues will be considered in the SEPA review of the specific phases of the project when they are proposed. 10 EIS Scope The land use section will examine the compatibility of the proposed project with site characteristics. There will be a study of the consistency of the Proposed Action and alternatives with local /state regulations. There will also be a review of the compatibility of the proposal and alternatives with existing and proposed surrounding land uses. Comments Received 7.6 Land Use and Housing Comments suggested that the EIS should evaluate alternative site plans that concentrate buildings on different portions of the site (City of Tukwila). Comments regarding land use plans and zoning included one letter which indicated that the EIS should discuss the proposal's relationship to Vision 2020 developed by the Puget Sound Regional Council and to the Washington Growth Management Act (GMA). A second letter indicated that the EIS should evaluate the proposed land use change and its compatibility with existing land use plans. A third letter mentioned that the EIS should address land use implications of the proposed alignment of Oakesdale Avenue Southwest (City of Tukwila, Washington State Department of Transportation [WSDOT], East Lake Washington Audubon Society, Valley Office & Industrial Park, Inc.). Another letter indicated that the EIS should assume The Boeing Company employees would continue to commute from their existing residences and would not relocate because of job assignments at Longacres Office Park (City of Tukwila). Response The EIS will evaluate four alternatives (see Section 4.0 of this document for descriptions). The Proposed Action (Alternative 1) incorporates a dispersed office park concept, Alternative 2 incorporates a clustered office park concept, Alternative 3 is a manufacturing /office development concept (incremental development), and Alternative 4 is No Action. The EIS will address the progress Renton is making toward implementation of the GMA and the relationship of the Proposed Action to that progress. The City of Renton is developing critical area regulations and a land use element for a new comprehensive plan; these will also be addressed. Vision 2020 will be addressed in the Transportation Chapter of the EIS. The EIS will also evaluate the proposed development's compatibility with the City of Renton's existing and proposed land use plans and zoning. R[NT'ON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 11 The issue of the proposed Oakesdale Avenue Southwest alignment will be addressed in the Transportation Chapter of the EIS. This EIS will include a general analysis of any housing impacts of the Proposed Action. The assumption is that existing employees of The Boeing Company will be reassigned to Longacres Office Park from either office space based elsewhere in the region or from other facilities owned by The Boeing Company. EIS Scope 7.7 Visual Resources The EIS will evaluate the ways the Proposed Action and alternatives could be designed to compliment the site characteristics. The EIS will also address compatibility of the Proposed Action and alternatives with land uses on nearby sites and neighboring communities. • Comments Received Comments received during scoping identified building design and visual impacts as issues that should be addressed in the EIS. There was a request that alternative building designs be presented and reviewed as part of the EIS and that the view of Mt. Rainier and open spaces should be considered relative to visual resources (City of Tukwila, David Israel). Response Specific building designs will not be examined in this programmatic project EIS. During supplemental environmental review for the project, specific building designs will be evaluated for aesthetic impacts. The EIS will examine general visual impacts of construction of the office complex on the site. EIS Scope RFNItON /BOEING EIS 10/21/93e 7.8 Historic and Cultural Resources The DS /Scoping Document noted that historic, cultural, and archaeologic issues will be evaluated in the EIS. 12 Comments Received Comments regarding historic and cultural issues focused on the historic significance of the buildings at Longacres Park and the cultural significance in terms of potential Native American archeological sites (David Israel, Muckleshoot Indian Tribe). Response As identified in the DS /Scoping Document, the EIS will examine the historical, cultural, and archeological significance of Longacres Park. The EIS will examine impacts on these resources and identify necessary measures to minimize such impacts within the framework of the Proposed Action. EIS Scope Comments Received RENTON /BOEING Els 10/21/92e 7.9 Vehicular Traffic The EIS will address impacts from the Proposed Action and alternatives within the site and on adjacent local and state roadways. One comment letter indicated that the study area should be enlarged to include SR 515, SR 99, SR 518, SR 516, and the interchanges at I- 405 /SR 169, I- 405 /SR 900, and I -5 /SR 599 (WSDOT). Other comments were that the City of Renton should consider transportation demand management (TDM) programs, while the WSDOT letter pointed out that Renton will be required to comply with the TDM legislation enacted by the Legislature. A letter also indicated that the EIS should examine increasing the mode split for transit to reduce single - occupant vehicle trips (WSDOT, Davis Wright Tremaine). One letter indicated that the scope of the EIS traffic study should be expanded to include a number of intersections in the City of Tukwila and that the extension of Southwest 27th Street to Strander Boulevard should be considered part of the existing conditions (Davis Wright Tremaine, City of Tukwila). A cordon summary and identification of existing freeway ramp capacity in relation to current use were requested (City of Tukwila). A cordon summary is a compilation of the study area's peak volumes, capacity, and remaining capacity after development. 13 Response With regard to the comment concerning enlargement of the study area, it is the intent of the City of Renton to include those roadways in the study area that are likely to receive measurably significant impacts from the project. SEPA rules state that the impact analysis should be focused (WAC 197 -11- 402[1 -3]) and that direct /indirect impacts and cumulative impacts be addressed. This EIS will address those impacts. The scope of the traffic analysis will include a majority of the roads mentioned by the commenters. The EIS will include a discussion of TDM programs, and the EIS traffic study will comply with the TDM legislation. The trip generation assumptions will consider trip reduction associated with TDM programs. The EIS will examine the relationship between the project and the recent TDM legislation and enhanced transit use. With regard to the letter concerning the analysis of intersections in the City of Tukwila, the City of Renton has indicated that it could expand the study area to include SR 900 on the north, but only from 68th Avenue South to SR 167. During this study, the City of Renton will work with the City of Tukwila regarding the transportation analysis. Regarding the comment concerning the extension of Southwest 27th Street to Strander Boulevard, the City of Renton has indicated that this extension and the extension of Southwest 16th Street to the West Valley Highway, or to Tukwila Parkway, are two of the proposed transportation facilities to be investigated in the traffic /transportation studies for the EIS and Valley Transportation Plan update. The City of Renton will be working with the City of Tukwila to determine whether one or both of these proposals are needed to serve the project site. The results of this effort may require changing the previous Renton /Tukwila interlocal agreement for the extension of Southwest 27th Street to Strander Boulevard. With regard to the comment concerning the need for a cordon summary, the City of Renton will discuss with the City of Tukwila the need for this work effort and the cost and requirement for change in the valley study scope and budget. Much of the information requested in the cordon summary will be presented in either the technical appendix to the EIS or the updated Valley Transportation Plan. The scopes of the transportation /traffic studies for the EIS and Valley Transportation Plan update anticipate a Transportation Adequacy Measures (TAM) analysis, estimation of impacts, and identification of specific street improvements at intersections. The City of Renton will be working with the City of Tukwila to determine which intersections in the traffic study area warrant such investigation. For a programmatic project EIS, the location and alignment of proposed transportation facilities serving Longacres Office Park will be conceptual. Therefore, extensive analysis of specific project - related impacts will not be appropriate at this time. RENTON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 14 The EIS transportation study and Valley Transportation Plan update, however, will include an estimation of impacts on pedestrian circulation, vehicular and pedestrian safety, and Metro transit circulation. The evaluation of alternative transportation proposals can also address, in general terms, the impacts on private property, site constraints, and crossings of railroad and public utility rights -of -way. EIS Scope Comments Received Response REN ON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 7.10 Movement /Circulation The EIS will examine the road network to the site and define the impacts of the project on traffic /travel patterns to and from the site. A comment was received that western access to the project site from South 158th Street is problematic and other routes, such as South 156th and Southwest 16th Streets and the extension of Strander Boulevard, should be explored. It also indicated that the EIS should evaluate impacts on private property owners from potential road crossings (Davis Wright Tremaine). One letter indicated that the current City of Renton planning and capital improvement programs show an alignment for Oakesdale Avenue Southwest that passes through the Van Woerden parcel abutting the east border of the project site (Valley Office & Industrial Park, Inc.). With regard to the comment concerning site access from the west, the City of Renton also is interested in examining various access routes. The EIS will consider using South 156th and Southwest 16th Streets for access to the site. With regard to comments concerning the impacts on private property owners from potential road crossings, SEPA rules dictate that study parameters for a nonproject (programmatic) EIS be conceptual. Since this EIS is evaluating a conceptual site plan, the location and alignment of transportation facilities serving the site will be described in general terms. Analyzing impacts on private property owners would not be possible in a programmatic project EIS. The EIS can consider, in general terms, the crossing of railroad rights -of -way, site constraints, and private property needs. With regard to the comment concerning the alignment for Oakesdale Avenue Southwest, the City of Renton has indicated that this alignment was previously identified. 15 However, since 1988, the City of Renton has reconsidered this alignment due to new regulations pertaining to wetlands. The City of Renton and Valley Office & Industrial Park, Inc., on May 18, 1988, signed an agreement to rescind the 1986 agreement referred to in the letter. The City of Renton relinquished all rights to the portions of the Van Woerden property reserved for Oakesdale Avenue Southwest and the P -1 Channel by conveying quit claim deeds to Valley Office & Industrial Park, Inc., in May 1988. EIS Scope Comments Received Response RENTON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 7.11 Utilities Utility issues identified during scoping included impacts on existing water, telephone, electricity, and waste /recycling services. One letter indicated that the EIS should address impacts on fiberoptic cables and the Olympic Pipeline at the West Valley Highway, while two other commenters indicated the EIS should address the Metro north -south interceptors and the Tukwila interceptor. In addition, it was requested that the EIS address the 60 -inch- diameter City of Seattle water transmission pipeline that crosses the site. Two letters indicted that the EIS should address improvements /changes and additions to the electrical distribution, transmission, and substation system in the project vicinity and that the EIS should address waste production and waste reduction /recycling during construction and operation of the development (City of Tukwila, Metro, Puget Power, Group Health Cooperative, WDOE). Impacts on the telephone system and pipeline alignments will be discussed generally in the EIS. The EIS will include a general analysis of the project's impacts on the two Metro interceptors and on the 60 -inch- diameter City of Seattle water transmission pipeline that crosses the site. At the present time, one of the Metro interceptors (South Interceptor) is undergoing the SEPA process. The EIS will include analysis of how utility service to Longacres Office Park may affect resources and services to other properties and to the City of Tukwila. 16 With regard to the comment concerning waste production and waste reduction /recycling during construction and operation, the initial DS had not included these as issues to be addressed in the EIS; however, these are now included and will be evaluated. Use of recycled materials during construction of the development would be decided by the contractor and The Boeing Company when the buildings are designed. This issue is not within the scope of this programmatic project EIS. EIS Scope The EIS will assess the adequacy of police and fire department resources available to serve the project site. Comments Received Several letters indicated that the EIS should address provisions for fire, police, and emergency medical services to the site and surrounding area. Additionally, it was requested that the issue of the impact of the revised Oakesdale Avenue Southwest alignment be addressed either in this EIS or during SEPA review for the Oakesdale Avenue Southwest project (Valley Office & Industrial Park, Inc., Group Health Cooperative). Response The EIS will examine the adequacy of police and fire department resources which would serve the development and other developments in the City of Renton. The EIS will also examine how the development would affect water service to the office park complex and other properties. The issue of access from the revised Oakesdale Avenue Southwest alignment will be addressed during SEPA review for that project. EIS Scope The EIS will examine general impacts of the proposed project on parks and recreation. RENTON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e 7.12 Police and Fire Protection 7.13 Parks and Recreation 17 Comments Received One commenter indicated that the EIS should assume that recreation demands would occur near employees' residences, rather than near their work places. A second commenter indicated that the EIS should address park and recreation mitigation for The Boeing Company projects throughout the City of Renton (City of Tukwila, Cyrus McNeely). Response The issue of impact on parks and recreation will be addressed to the extent that it is relevant to this programmatic project proposal and alternative actions. With regard to the request to consider the impact of all Boeing Company projects within the City of Renton, as required under SEPA rules, this EIS must address only the proposed project, not any other unrelated projects that The Boeing Company has in Renton. EIS Scope Comments Received 7.14 Socioeconomics The EIS will include a socioeconomics section which will evaluate costs and revenues associated with the project. One comment letter indicated that the EIS did not need to address the City of Renton's loss of revenue from the Longacres Park racetrack (City of Tukwila). A second letter expressed concern about loss of revenues from Longacres Park and the effect on the state's thoroughbred horse racing, breeding, and training industry (City of Tukwila, David Israel). Response The issue of economic impacts will be addressed to the extent that they are relevant to this programmatic project proposal and alternative actions. Revenues associated with the operation of the Longacres Park racetrack will be identified, as will projected revenues from the proposed office park. RENDON /BOEING EIS IU /21/o2e 18 appendix a determination of significance The City of Renton has issued a determination of environmental significance (DS) for the proposed Boeing Longacres Office ' Park Complex, under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) (WAC 197-11-360). This determination is based upon a finding that the proposed development may cause significant adverse impacts to the environment (RCW 43.21C.020[2]). This notice is a request for comments from government agencies, private businesses, citizens and Native American tribes on the scope of an environmental impact statement. The deadline for submitting written comments on the scope of issues to be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement is December 6, 1991 at 5:00 p.m. Comments received in response to this environmental scoping notice will assist the City of Renton and their environmental consulting team in selecting appropriate alternatives /issues for review and to prepare the environmental impact statement for this Office Park Complex. BOELNG LONGACRES OFFICE PARK DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE AND REQUEST FOR COMMENTS ON ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING DOCUMENT 11/15/91 uction:Overview The Boeing Company is proposing development of a complex on the Longacres site, including offices, an employment center and related support facilities. The City of Renton has assumed the lead agency role in conducting environmental review, as the project will be located within its City limits. However, the City believes the environmental review for this regional office park merits broad public involvement The City is working with the Washington State Department of Transportation, State Department of Ecology, King County, METRO, the City of Tukwila, the City of Kent, Native American tribes, business associations and community groups to identify issues of concern. These issues will include, for example, community plans, infrastructure and public service needs occurring with the • development of this major office complex. A %coping" process for public involvement has been established for the Longacres Office Park project, including public meetings in Renton and other jurisdictions (see Comment /Public Participation below). The SEPA process is being utilized to encourage public review and participation. The Boeing Company has requested that the City prepare a programmatic environmental impact statement (EIS) which evaluates a generic development plan for the entire office park complex (SEPA WAC 197 -11 -060;704). At a future date, specific site plans will be submitted for supplemental (project -level review) environmental review and for site plan review at a future date, when the specific development plan and schedule are more firmly established. This approach will allow public review and comment now for the proposed conceptual development, and, also for plan alternatives. Other benefits include opportunities for the public to review mitigation measures on the cumulative impacts of the entire development and to provide more predictable processing for other local and state permits — such as a shoreline management permit. The presently proposed EIS will provide a framework for studying generic environmental impacts. For future project-specific environmental and site plan review, a supplemental EIS or an addendum may be required, under SEPA Rules, to analyze impacts of changed proposals, if the new Impacts are substantially different from those evaluated in this programmatic analysis. If no significant adverse impacts are identified with future specific site plans, then an environmental checklist (standard or expanded) may be employed. 2 The following sections describe The Boeing Company's general development objectives for the site. The State Environmental Policy Act (WAC 197 -11 -442) also calls for analysis of alternatives (e.g., such as design options and /or siting options and /or location options and no action option) in the EIS. Preliminary alternative development scenarios have been provided; final alternatives will be selected following this scoping period. Responsible Parties Lead Agency: Proponent: The City of Renton The Boeing Company The subject 155.9 acre site is located generally between S.W. 19th Street and S.W. 27th Street, west of Oakesdale Avenue (if extended) and east of the Renton/Tukwila city boundary. escription of Propose The Boeing Company is proposing to locate a 2.5 million square foot office park complex on the 155.6 acre Longacres Park site in the City of Renton. The complex Is proposed to include offices, an employment center, employee services (auditorium, cafeteria, etc.), and related facilities. On -site amenities are envisioned, including preserved wetlands, a created lake, landscaping and recreational areas. Conceptual parking plans include spaces for employees, students and visitors; reserved parking areas to encourage ride sharing; public transit passes; preferred parking for high occupancy vehicles. A helipad is proposed on the south section of the site. The project is planned to be developed in several phases over the next decade, based upon corporate requirements. Environmental and site plan review will be required for specific projects proposed for each development phase. A proposal for development of the first phase of the office complex is planned for 1992. When the total development has been completed, approximately 10,000 persons could be employed here. Boeing has planned to design the proposed project to meet the current development standards for the existing Commercial Use (B -1) zoning designation for the site. As it is likely that the property will be rezoned for Office Park Use (O -P) under the revised Comprehensive Land Use Plan (1992), the project will be designed, also, to comply •th Office Park development standards, which are more restrictive than Commercial Use standards. :nvir'onmental Review During the environmental review process, the City will conduct a programmatic (non - project) evaluation of The Boeing Company's conceptually proposed development program and alternatives (e.g., use options and /or design options and /or siting options and /or location options and "no action" option). Following the public scoping period, the specific alternatives to be included in the EiS will be defined by the City, in consultation with The Boeing Company. Evaluation in the EIS will focus on potentially significant environmental impacts from both building and operation of an office complex on the Longacres Park site. At this time the City has identified the following environmental elements to be evaluated in the EiS: 1. Earth: This section will define the type and permeability of underlying soils. There will be a discussion of: effects on the underlying soils from site preparation activities; the capacity of the site to support development during normal operations; and the stability of the site during earthquakes and /or other seismic activities. 2. Water. This section will examine issues including surface and ground water management, storm water management, preservation of wetlands, and protection of Springbrook Creek. Attention will be directed to impacts on the drainage basin and flood plain from site preparation and operation of the complex. 3. Land Use /Shoreline: This section will examine compatibility of the proposed conceptual development program with site characteristics. There will be a study of the consistency of the proposed and alternative development options with local /state regulations (e.g. Zoning Ordinance, Comprehensive Plan, Shoreline Master Program) affecting the site. There will also be a review of the compatibility of proposed /alternative development options with existing and proposed surrounding land uses both within City limits (e.g. the Central Business District) and within neighboring communities (e.g., Tukwila). 4. Aesthetics: This section will evaluate the ways in which proposed /altemative development programs (e.g., structures, landscaping, wetland 3 amenities) could be designed to complement site characteristics. The document will also address compatibility of the proposed /alternative site development programs with private and public land uses on nearby sites and in neighboring communities. 5. Housing: The EIS will address availability of housing in the region to serve Longacres Office Park employees (e.g., impacts on existing housing stock, vacancy and rental rates, opportunities for providing new housing). The review will also examine impacts upon community facilities used by residents (e.g., schools and parks). 6. Environmental Health: This section of the EIS will examine, to the extent feasible: a) impacts from the removal of hazardous substances identified on the site (e.g. asbestos); b) noise impacts from on -site activities to Renton and to neighboring communities; c) noise from vehicle travel to and from the site through Renton and neighboring communities; and d) air quality impacts, such as odors and pollutants, from vehicles travelling to the site, as they affect Renton and neighboring communities. 7. Natural Environment (Veoetation /wildlife): The EiS will examine impacts from the proposed /alternative development options to: a) the on -site natural environment (wetland and upland habitats); and b) the surrounding the natural environment (particularly Springbrook Creek and associated wetlands). 8. Recreation: The EIS will examine the feasibility of providing adequate on -site recreational elements to meet employee /visitor needs. There will also be a study of impacts to local and regional public recreation facilities from employees (and their families) moving into homes in the vicinity. 9. Traffic: The document will address impacts from the proposed /alternative development programs within the site and on the adjacent local roadways. There will be an evaluation of impacts to regional (municipal and state) roadways — i.e., how will vehicles travelling to Boeing site impact traffic patterns /volumes in Renton, Tukwila, Kent, King County, etc. Boundaries of the study area are tentatively planned to be Grady Way to the north, S.W. 43rd Street to the south, the 1 -5 corridor to the west and Highway 167 to the east. The EIS will also explore the development of on- site transportation solutions (e.g. Transportation Management Plan) and regional transportation solutions. For example, there will be a study of ways to optimize use of existing /proposed public transit services and the creation of new services (e.g., shuttles, light rail). 10. Public Services /Utilities: The EIS will assess the adequacy of fire and police department resources which are available to serve the proposed /alternative development programs. There will also be a review of the ways in which the proposed /alternative development programs would affect service to the site and to other developments within Renton. The EIS will report on the ways in which utility service to Longacres may affect resources /services to other local properties (e.g., availability of adequate water pressure). Impacts upon public services in surrounding communities (e.g., Tukwila) will also be examined. 11. Historical /Cultural /Archaeological Preservation: The EIS will examine whether the site is significant from a historical, cultural and /or archaeological perspective. If there are findings of significant impact, there will be a discussion as to the ways in which the proposed development program may affect the potential historic, cultural and /or archaeological integrity of the site. The study will also discuss options for ways in which affected portions of the site can be protected. 12. Socio- economic: SEPA supports environmental review of socio - economic impacts which will affect a region. Staff believe that the magnitude of the proposed development program is such that both direct and indirect socio- economic impacts are likely to have a notable effect upon Renton and surrounding communities. On that basis the EIS will include a review of likely socio- economic impacts from: a) the planned and alternative development programs; b) changes to vicinity land uses /development patterns; and c) the elimination of the current racing activities. The EIS will address impacts to existing local and regional public /private services (e.g. libraries, hotels, retail shops, entertainment centers). This review will include an examination as to whether it is appropriate /feasible to provide personal services (e.g. day care) for employees on the campus to supplement community facilities. 4 Finally, the EIS will evaluate impacts to the community occurring as a result of the elimination of racing activities at Longacres Park. omment /Public Participation The City invites municipalities, agencies, citizens and Native American tribes to comment on scoping (environmental elements) to be evaluated in this EIS. The City has scheduled two public meetings to present the proposed development and discuss scoping issues — the first will occur on November 19, at 7:00 p.m. in City Council Chambers, Renton Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South; the second will occur on November 21, at 7:00 p.m. at the Tukwila Community Center, 4101 So. 131st Street, Tukwila. During those public meetings, the public can view drawings of conceptual development options and ask questions of Boeing Company representatives and City staff members. Opportunities to make verbal and written comments on the scoping process will be provided at the meetings. You may also comment in writing on the proposed scoping' content (outlined above), additional significant adverse impacts, suggestions for alternatives or mitigation measures; and /or licenses or other approvals that may be required with future potential development. Please submit written comments c/o Donald K Erickson, AICP, Zoning Administrator, Development Services Division; Attn Lenora Blauman, Project Manager, City of Renton, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, WA 98055. All comments must be received by 5:00 p.m., December 6, 1991. You will be notified of future comment and /or appeal periods — for the draft EIS, the final EIS, and the environmental mitigation document (issued by the City of Renton). You will also be informed of applications for subsequent environmental /land use /shoreline review process for specific development plans. ue `scions /Additionalanforination If you have questions or would like additional information, please contact Lenora Blauman, Project Manager, Development Planning Section, City of Renton, Municipal Building, 200 Mill Avenue South, Renton, Washington 98055 or telephone 235 -2550. Thank you for your interest. appendix b scoping meeting information '=dt!Vdd dJdd d J d ... dd d 7...QIETERHEI21212.1212.12P.P-PARE12121212121212125:521252.121212121212=252121212121212FefERIERIEP pmpnrannnnmmmwn=pmmnmpmmr.PpprImr.ppopmmmmommnpr.mnprmmr 1112P.2 I7...P.P.:1 . 7 ...P raTaf Q.t2.121 PR! ?PM ! 1 PJCP- 7.1.Q.1212.. 2125212 ERZ dear, al"2.121 -12.12f 7 Pin :HUI .:-.., — L U..f 4.1 —:.J JJ a a a a aeSCIEWOrlab OtifferETC:IdIEFEFEIZI35 ti•Lrdc1212.121 7 :7 - JCQPRIETERIERIESERECP-P-1 1 1QP-17.1212.1 - 2EQ122212522Q121212ERSEIEPRIETERP-P..02.121212fER12121212.1212.12.12.11M2121212.fE/2.1212.12P-PIEFERRIEFUEIERSE.UP-1211 • 7 .:;:mmmmr 747 4 7 Pmr74 - 474=r=mmnPmPmr=mnr; rrr nPerPPPP=PPPMMPPMPMM PP r P Pil:PPMPPPPILIPPPMPPPPMPPM.MW=ppr ...12.1252.11reP.P.125212J21 rr r r r rrr _ _.___.: SEPA EIS PROCESS Draft EIS • Alternatives -No Action - Reasonable Alternatives • Existing Environment • Significant Impacts • Mitigation Measures • Publish Draft EIS Scoping • Scoping Notice • Request Agency /Public Input • Scoping Summary • Respond to Comments • Make Factual Corrections • Supplement Analysis • Modify Alternatives • Publish Final EIS Mitigation Document • Renton Environmental Review Committee • Finalize Mitigation Requirements Glossary of Common SEPA and Environmental Terms Addendum - An environmental document used to provide additional information or analysis that does not substantially change the analysis of significant impacts and alternatives in the existing environmental document. Applicant - Any person or entity, including an agency, applying for a license from an agency. In the case of this project, The Boeing Company is the applicant. Categorical Exemption - A type of action, specified in the SEPA rules, which does not significantly affect the environment. Neither a threshold determination nor any environmental document, including an environmental checklist or EIS, is required for any categorically exempt action. Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) - The written decision by the responsible official of the lead agency that a proposal is not likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact, and therefore an EIS is not required. Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) - The term is used when referring to Draft, Final, or Supplemental EISs. Environmental Checklist - A document prepared by the applicant and submitted to the lead agency for review. The checklist is used by the lead agency in making threshold determinations for proposals. Environmental Review - The consideration of environmental factors as required by SEPA. The environmental review process is the procedure used by agencies and others under SEPA for giving appropriate consideration to the environment in agency decision making. Expanded Scoping - An optional process that may be used by agencies to go beyond minimum scoping requirements. Lead Agency - The agency with the main responsibility for complying with SEPA's procedural requirements. Mitigation - (1) Avoiding the impact altogether by not taking a certain action or parts of an action; (2) minimizing impacts by limiting the degree or magnitude of the action and its implementation; (3) rectifying the impact by repairing, rehabilitating, or restoring the affected environment; (4) reducing or eliminating the impact over time by preservation and maintenance operations during the life of the action; (5) compensating for the impact by replacing, enhancing, or providing substitute resources or environments; and /or (6) monitoring the impact and taking appropriate corrective measures. RENTON /BOEING EIS 10/21/92e Nonproject (Programmatic) - Actions that are different or broader than the single site - specific project, such as plans, policies, and programs. Programmatic Project EIS - An EIS that identifies and addresses impacts for a planned future major project action that is still in a conceptual and /or programmatic state and where the design of individual development components, such as buildings, transportation improvements, and open space /recreation components, could change over the proposed buildout period for the project. This type of EIS would apply to projects where it has been recognized that subsequent environmental review is appropriate and will be undertaken in the future as more specific information on the Proposed Action becomes available. Such an EIS could also be called a "conceptual project EIS ". Reasonable Alternative - An action that could feasibly attain or approximate a proposal's objectives, but at a lower environmental cost or decreased level of environmental degradation. Scoping - Determining the range of proposed actions, alternatives, and impacts to be discussed in the EIS. Because an EIS is required to analyze significant environmental impacts only, scoping is intended to identify and narrow the EIS to the significant issues. The lead agency has the option of expanding the scoping process but is not required to do so. Scoping is used to encourage cooperation and early resolution of potential conflicts, to improve decisions, and to reduce paperwork and delay. Threshold Determination - The decision by the responsible official of the lead agency as to whether an EIS is required for a proposal that is not categorically exempt. RENTON /8O131NO 81S 10/21/92e ranscri APPEARANCES: For Jones & Stokes: JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 C(ECE iVCL.' -- PUBLIC HEARING -- BOEING /LONGACRES OFFICE PARK COMPLEX ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING REVIEW TUESDAY - NOVEMBER 19, 1991 - 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS RENTON CITY HALL For the City of Renton: Lenora Blauman, Project Manager City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 For the Boeing Company: Fred Stewart Lori Pitzer P.O. Box 3707 Mail Stop 6Y -50 Seattle, Washington 98124 Dick McCann, Attorney 1201 3rd Avenue - 40th Floor Seattle, Washington 98101 Jonathon Ives Nadine Zackrisson 2820 Northrup #100 Bellevue, Washington 98033 -- PUBLIC HEARING -- BOEING /LONGACRES OFFICE PARK COMPLEX ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING REVIEW TUESDAY - NOVEMBER 19, 1991 - 7:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS RENTON CITY HALL LENORA BLAUMAN: Since everyone seems to be eager to stay rooted in your seats, I think what I'd like to do then is call this meeting to order this evening and begin to discuss with you the Boeing /Longacres project. My name is Lenora Blauman. I work for the City of Renton's Planning Department and I am the City's Planning Manager for this particular project. There are several other key players involved in the project and this evening I'll be introducing those people to you. I'll be providing you with a project description with help from our representatives from Boeing, and we'll be talking as well about the environmental review process, what will be happening this evening and what will be happening over the course of our environmental review study. I earlier introduced a couple of our representatives from Boeing. I'd like to add a couple of introductions now. Lori Pitzer, who's been working with Fred Stewart on the environmental review process, and Dick McCann, who's an attorney with Boeing working on this project as well. We've been working with Boeing for sometime now, so you're probably aware of what some of the outlines of the project that we're looking at on the Longacres site are about. Boeing is interested in developing an office complex on that site, which includes on employment center, an auditorium, similar buildings, as well as a number of office buildings. This should total to about 2.5 million square feet when the project is done. It's envisioned to be completed over a period of ten years and approximately 10,000 people will work there when the project is at capacity. The project was first submitted to the City on an informal basis in January of this year, and at that time Boeing asked that we consider environmental review and land use review for the entire project; even though the plan was to develop the project over a ten -year period. JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 1 As we've begun to look at the project in some more detail over the course of this year, I think we've all come to an agreement that at this point it would be difficult to make and evaluate specific development plans for buildings which might not be on the site until ten years from today. So, we've gone to an alternative plan, which is that we're at this point interested in doing a programmatic level environmental impact statement. A programmatic environmental impact statement is rather like an umbrella over a project as a whole. It looks at broad impacts with the idea that later on as specific buildings or phases are proposed that there will be more specific environmental review at that time. The State Environmental Policy Act actually encourages us to do that kind of a review; raw generical. When you're looking at a project which will be developed over a long -term period, because everybody recognizes the way the world changes, it's difficult to make the kinds of detailed level assessments today that we would need in a ten -year period. As an illustration, I'd like to say that as a programmatic level EIS; for example, for traffic we would look at the total number of trips we would anticipate when the project is fully built out. What we would not look at now, but what we would look at at a later date when the specific projects come in are such things as how many trips would this phase bring in, where will they be entering and leaving the site, what roadways would those people be most likely to use, and then we can develop the more detailed mitigation measures that go with the broader ones that we develop in conjunction with a programmatic EIS. When the more project level segments come into the City, there are a number of ways that we can look at them under the environmental review umbrella. We might add a section to the present programmatic level EIS and call that a supplement when we're looking at different kinds or different levels of significant environmental impacts. Or we might do an addendum that says that there's not a lot of new information or new significant impacts, but nonetheless something that requires looking at. Or we might do a separate environmental checklist. But the idea I particularly would like to emphasize to you is that each segment, as well as the broad project, will get its own environmental and land use review. At this time we're in the first phase or first step of the environmental review process, which is the scoping phase. It's the time where we work together in the City JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 with Boeing and with,. Jones and Stokes, the consultant hired by the City to do the environmental impact statement for Boeing, to look at what impacts we'd like to study. We want to look at traffic, for example. We want to look at esthetics. We want to look at, excuse me, any environmental health impacts; for example, noise that happens when traffic comes to a site. One of the purposes of this evening's meeting, you're going to hear this at long last, is to give you an opportunity to tell us whether we've missed any areas of environmental significance in our scoping document that you would like us to take a look at, so you'll have an opportunity to talk to us a bit about that tonight. You'll also have an opportunity to help us decide what kinds of broad alternatives we want to look at as we begin to develop this project. Examples of alternatives that we could be looking at would be a more suburban type of campus, which Boeing is interested in putting on this site. We could look at a more urban type of clustered campus. We also, under SEPA, look at something that's No Action; what if the site does not have any new use on it. And, so those are the major things we'll be asking from you this evening. Once the scoping matters are decided, a draft EIS will be prepared by Jones and Stokes, and you'll have an opportunity to comment again. We won't be responding to your comments this evening, except to clarify or answer questions. That would allow you to make comments in a more effective way. We are recording this evening's comments. A sheet has been passed around, so that you can put your name and address and phone number on it so that you can become a party of record and receive at your home any more notices about this project. There is also an opportunity to comment in writing. You can send us a letter, if you like, or there are sheets in the back of the room in which you can simply write your comments this evening and leave them with us as well. That having been said, I'd like to turn the microphone over to Fred Stuart for a couple of moments so that he can describe to you a little bit more about what Boeing is interested in doing on this site. And when that's completed, John Ives from Jones and Stokes will talk a little bit about the environmental review process which is pictured up here this evening. Thank you. JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 FRED STEWART: I'm Fred Stewart. I do represent the Boeing Company. And the picture you see in front of you might just be retrospect of what we plan to do on the site. You may have seen the model that we have constructed on display here in the Municipal area; it was also at Southcenter for a period of time. We showed some grand plan for the ultimate building outside and all the streets and such. But, what we're really addressing tonight is simply the office campus portion of the development. Each of these buildings that's represented in orange would be a three -story 150,000 square foot office structure. The auditorium is located here. The flight center that Lenora referred to is located in the upper right -hand corner here. Some of the major issues that we're faced with on this site, of course, is first of all the traffic issue. I would guess that presently the streets that have been surveyed are very small and certainly inadequate for having 10,000 people on that site. And through Jones and Stokes there is a consultant already addressing that issue in a broad perspective looking at the whole valley plan. The other issues that we're faced with in being able to develop the site is the fact that a substantial portion of it is considered a wetland; depending on which delineation manual you use, whether you use the one that the Corps of Engineers is using or the one that the City uses. But in any case, the City's indication shows that there's presently about 15 acres of wetlands here and there is a pocket of wetlands about 7 or 8 acres down in this corner. And, of course, we have to contend with those things. We want to be able to preserve the wetlands and functional values, yet having the wetland, per se, is something we will need to address from the City's standpoint and from a storm drainage standpoint for that kind of build out on the site. We also have provisions on the site for some utilities and service buildings, municipal building, and a substation that's supposed to be indicated by that little square. And of course their ultimate location is something to be determined. I call your attention to one significant feature; the cost of the site. This blank area is a strip of property owned by the Seattle Water Department. It's the Cedar River Pipeline, and that is a fee ownership by the City of Seattle. If there are questions about this, I'd be glad to answer them. JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 4 CITIZEN: Speaking of those buildings in relation to where they are on the existing site. Like is that the infield where those buildings are? Is that where the grandstand is? FRED STEWART: This is 158th Street, which is the road that comes in from Tukwila. The two railroad tracks are indicated by the dotted line here, and the grandstand area would be in here. Okay? The race track generally sits about like this, not quite near the pipeline, and over here are barns and other sport structures for the horses. Again, the race track itself is the oval that would fit just about like so. Any more questions? Sir? CITIZEN: When you made the press release, you handed out your colored brochure, I can't remember what specific date, but they were available down here at the City. It included and encompassed the greater area. What has happened to that? Is that not developed? FRED STEWART: That included this area up in here. That portion of the project that has been segregated for the Tax Assessor's Office is a separate parcel altogether and a different project is being proposed in there. The project is separate from the office complex here. review? CITIZEN: Does it have a separate environmental FRED STEWART: It will have. It has not been submitted yet. CITIZEN: And, you spoke of issues that are being addressed. You mentioned traffic and wetlands. FRED STEWART: Yes. CITIZEN: Are there any other issues that are being addressed? JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 5 FRED STEWART: In the scoping document the City has issued, I think you'll find that there are a number of other issues, including the esthetics that the site will present, the historical or archeological significance of the site, air quality, hazardous materials, noise, light and glare, the whole litany out of the book. But, they are identified in the scoping document. CITIZEN: Is that other project, is that also an environmental impact statement project? FRED STEWART: It will be, yes. LENORA BLAUMAN: Thank you, Fred. John would you help us get a description of what the environmental review process will look like? JOHN IVES: To answer your question a little bit on the issues that you asked Fred Stewart about. There is a handout behind you which is a scoping document that kind of lists all the particular issues that we've identified. The City's identified eight in their environmental review. You might take a look at that. There's also a second handout which kind of gives you an agenda plus a view of the SEPA process as shown in the foam cord board on the front here, as well as a glossary of common SEPA environmental terms. Now, essentially the scope of the EIS was really based on two things. One is the City's initial process of review of the application by Boeing, and that is what is called the threshold determination in the SEPA process. The second procedure for getting scoping issues identified is essentially tonight's meeting and the whole scoping process that goes on through until the close of scoping. Now, the City identified essentially 12 impact concerns or environmental concerns. Those are listed on Page 3 and 4 of the Determination of Significance. Jones and Stokes will be addressing all of those issues in varying degrees of detail. This particular summary gives you a good idea of what things that we see at this point and time are of concern. And, I might just list a couple of them. There are three sources, particularly the capacity of the site to be developed and the support of the development that is proposed. That will be looked at. JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 The water resources, particularly storm water management and as it would affect any water, receding waters in the area, particularly Springbrook Creek. Land use and shoreline. The consistency and compatibility of a proposed action with surrounding land uses, both in Renton and in Tukwila. Esthetics. This will be a generic analysis of consideration. Sort of what kinds of structures of landscaping can be designed into the site to compliment the site and its particular location. Housing. Impacts, particularly on housing style. What kind of considerations will be for people coming into the area, in terms of housing needs. Traffic. Fred mentioned briefly the traffic analysis that will be going on will be an update of the entire valley transportation plan, which includes the Green River Valley portion influence in the City of Renton. As a part of that, the following project will be broken out or defined in terms of the impacts that will be associated with the traffic volumes generated by the project. Public services and utilities. What is the adequacy of public utilities, services in particular like fire and police, to handle the project. Now, from here we will be going through and preparing a draft EIS. The items of that will be included in the content of the draft EIS as it is shown in the process diagram that's in your packet of information. Once the draft EIS has been completed, there will be a 30 -day review period, a public review period and public hearing, followed by preparation of the final EIS. The final EIS will reflect all of the comments brought forth on the draft. That will be published. The City, in turn, will prepare what they call a mitigation document, which will identify from the EIS's those conditions, those mitigation conditions, that will be required of Boeing for their project. With that I'll turn it back over to Lenora for the rest of the meeting. LENORA BLAUMAN: As promised, this is your opportunity to come up and ask us to include in the Environmental Impact Statement your concerns and ideas. The microphone over there is turned on so that you can make your statements into it. I would ask you to please clearly state your name, address, and phone number, so that in addition, again, duplicating your written sheet there we will have that information for our record and the comments can be properly attributed to you in our taped JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 7 recording and minutes which would be available to you after the meeting if you would like them. Is there anybody who would like to comment? Are you sure? CITIZEN: You say you've received written comments on tonight's meeting. You handed out a -- LENORA BLAUMAN: You can certainly write your comments and hand them into us if you would prefer to do that rather than stating them. CITIZEN: Do they have to be turned in tonight? LENORA BLAUMAN: No, the deadline for submitting comments is December 6th. And you can do that on a private letter or you can do it on this comment sheet, whichever you prefer. Yes? FRED STEWART: Lenora, I think I need to correct something I said a little earlier. that. LENORA BLAUMAN: Please, come ahead and do FRED STEWART: There has been a question from the floor about whether or not there would be an EIS project on the bounds of the site, and when I sat back down I get corrected by the people that keep me ought of trouble all the time. The City has not determined yet what the measure of the review process will be on the balance of the project. But, there has to be a SEPA review of some form or the other. When we submit that project to the City then they will make their determination and we'll know what we have to go through. I just wanted to clarify the point. The EIS is one issue, the SEPA process is a broader scope of the types of reviews to be given to it. CITIZEN: Is it planned to be, that northern section planned to be developed first? FRED STEWART: Yes. JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 CITIZEN: Okay. Thank you. CITIZEN: Another question. On your brochure that you had in the summer, is that lake still gonna be part of the infield there like it shows in the picture? FRED STEWART: That is our proposal on that northern piece. What happens on the balance of it has yet to be determined. Since we have not made that proposal to the City yet, it's not determined where that lake will be. But, it would be our desire that there be a lake up there. CITIZEN: Is there gonna be a conclusion to the traffic impact prior to the development of the northern parcel? Is that traffic gonna be looked at in terms of the entire development? FRED STEWART: We believe it is a separate and distinct issue. But again, that has yet to be determined. LENORA BLAUMAN: That will be looked at in the course of the environmental review by the City and Jones and Stokes in the Environmental Impact Statement. CITIZEN: But, the property to the north is not in an environmental impact statement. LENORA BLAUMAN: That's right. But, when we do environmental review for any project we also look at cumulative impacts. So, it may turn out to be studied in the Environmental Impact Statement or in the environmental review that goes with the parcel to the north. But, it is a key issue and it will be studied in detail and mitigated appropriately. CITIZEN: Is there a time line with respect to when that project is officially submitted. LENORA BLAUMAN: Not at this time. JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 9 LENORA BLAUMAN: Okay. Well, if there are not any other comments this evening, I thank you for coming. Please remember to get your comments into us by December 6th, so that we can take those into account and get back to you when our Draft Environmental Impact Statement is ready. (The hearing concluded at 7:45 p.m.) JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 • APPEARANCES: For the City of Renton: For the Boeing Company: For Jones & Stokes: -- PUBLIC HEARING -- BOEING /LONGACRES OFFICE PARK COMPLEX ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING REVIEW 2 THURSDAY - NOVEMBER 21, 1991 - 7:00 P.M. TUKWILA COMMUNITY CENTER Jonathon Ives 2820 Northrup #100 Bellevue, Washington 98033 Fred Stewart Lori Pitzer P.O. Box 3707 Mail Stop 6Y -50 Seattle, Washington 98124 JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 Lenora Blauman, Project Manager City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Dick McCann, Attorney 1201 3rd Avenue - 40th Floor Seattle, Washington 98101 -- PUBLIC HEARING -- BOEING /LONGACRES OFFICE PARK COMPLEX ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCOPING REVIEW 2 THURSDAY - NOVEMBER 21, 1991 - 7:00 P.M. TUKWILA COMMUNITY CENTER LENORA BLAUMAN: For those of you who may not have met me before, my name is Lenora Blauman. I'm with the City of Renton and I am the Project Manager for the Boeing /Longacres project with the Planning Division. We're here for three reasons tonight. Number one is to introduce to you the key players in this project. The second is to describe the project to you, and I'm going to get some help in doing that from the Boeing staff. And the third is to explain to you what the environmental review process will be for this project and to give you an opportunity to participate in these first phases, and to let you know how the rest of the environmental review process will work as we move along through the various stages of the project. And, I've got some help from Jones and Stokes to do that. To begin, then, with the key players in this program. From the Boeing Company, we have Fred Stewart. He is doing the environmental coordinating. Lori Pitzer, who works with Fred, and Dick McCann, who is the attorney for this project. From Jones and Stokes we have with us this evening John Ives, and John is the Project Manager. He is preparing the Environmental Impact Statement for the City. So, that is, Boeing is the client, but it is the City that is requiring the EIS and the consultant that's preparing it. As most of you know, the Boeing project originally came to us in the informal fashion last January and at that point the thought was to look at the site from a project level review, that is, that we would know where each of the buildings would be located, what the size and configuration would be, what it would do, and when it would be developed. And the development plan was intended to take place over a ten -year period leading to about two and a half million square feet of office space on approximately a 156 -acre site. As we began to look at this over the months and try to plug in how this would look and how it would work, we all realized that it's probably not possible to do the JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 1 best job for Boeing and for the community by working a project level EIS at this point. So, instead we decided to go with a programmatic level EIS. A programmatic level EIS is what I would like to call an umbrella operation. We look at broad level impacts. For example, we would look at traffic for the site when it was all built out with its two and a half million square feet and it's 10,000 employees. We look at the number of trips that would be likely to be generated here in this programmatic level EIS. But, we would wait to look at, for example, where the trips would be generated on the site, and the number of trips that we would develop with respect to the individual phases of the project over several years. And as we began to look at the specific phases, then we would develop a supplemental environmental review process that might actually be a supplemental EIS, which is a document that occurs when we've got a lot of new information that we're looking at; or an addendum to the first environmental impact statement, which is something that tells us that we have a little bit of new information and we need to look at how it plugs into the main document; or we might do an environmental checklist. And when specific projects come in is the time that we would also be doing the site "plan for the review, if you will, macro to micro. And, so, with that what we did was we issued a determination of significance, which said that an environmental impact statement would be done. And we began what the State Environmental Policy Act asked us to do, which is to put together a scope of work, what will be included in the EIS. The State Rules also say that when we're at this beginning level, when we're looking at deciding what kinds of impacts we want to study in the Environmental Impact Statement and how we would like the project to look, that we ask for public input. And there is a variety of ways that we can ask for the public input. We can do it by inviting you to comment, which we have. And, as a matter of fact there is a sheet for each of you to take with you, if you would like, which you can use to provide us with written comments either this evening or mail it in later. You can send in a letter, if you like. and, of course, the major purpose of this evening's program is to give you an opportunity to speak if you would care to do that. You can do all three. When the scoping period is over we will begin, which will, by the way, be on December 6th. We will then begin JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 to prepare the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, and when that draft statement is ready, it will be once again submitted for public review. We will have meetings and again give you an opportunity to comment in writing. I'll have a few concluding remarks for later, but at this particular moment I'd like to turn the floor over to Fred Stewart to describe in a little bit more detail the project that we're going to be looking at in the draft EIS. FRED STEWART: Good evening. The picture we have on display tonight is the site map for the 156, 160 acres, approximately, that Lenora was referring to. To orient you a little bit, 405 is across the top of the page. Southwest 16th Street and Oakesdale come in here. You'll notice, also, that we've dotted in a possible extension of Oakesdale, which the City is presently considering as a street project. 156th Street comes in from the Tukwila side under the railroad tracks, and is the current front door, if you will, to the racetrack. The racetrack itself is situated approximately in this area with the barns and other associated buildings around the eastern side. Each of these orange blocks represent, say, a building that has been proposed. Typically, these are assumed to be three -story office buildings about 150 thousand square feet each. That's 50,000 square feet per floor. The one uniquely shaped building here is originally intended to be an employee center where new hires, retirees, or anyone between those two extremes might go to receive the typical personnel services that employees need. Also in the picture is an auditorium situated here presently. That would be used for the large gatherings of Boeing personnel that occasionally have to happen. Crossing the site through this white streak here is the property which is owned by the Seattle Water Department; that's the Cedar River Pipeline Number 4, and that is a fee simple ownership by the City of Seattle. Other than that, there's not a great deal to say about it. Lenora told you there's about two and a half million square feet that's being proposed. We're suggesting that approximately 10,000 people would occupy that space over time. We're currently looking at something that will probably develop out over the next 10 to 15 years. That depends a great deal on what our internal requirements may generate. JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 3 Beyond that, I think I have nothing else, unless there's a question specifically about this part of it. STEVE PORTER AUSTIN COMPANY 800 SW 16TH STREET RENTON, WA 98055 STEVE PORTER: I am with the Austin Company. Which building is the auditorium? FRED STEWART: This square building that's approximately in the middle of the site. STEVE PORTER: I'm interested on the rationale for the routing of Oakesdale. Going down through -- FRED STEWART: I'm sorry. And the question is? STEVE PORTER: I'm interested in the rationale for that particular location for Oakesdale versus previous routing. FRED STEWART: Well, one of the reasonings behind this being a possible routing is that it avoids a lot of the wetlands that would occur if you went outside our property bounds. This route is relatively free of any significant wetland developed. STEVE PORTER: Environmental concerns? FRED STEWART: It is an environmental concern, yes. And I don't know that that routing is decided. I would emphasize that it is possible, but not necessarily the route. STEVE PORTER: Okay. FRED STEWART: Are there other questions, please? Thank you. LENORA BLAUMAN: Thank you. Steve, I'd like to address your question just for a moment. The routing of Oakesdale Avenue is being considered under separate studies; environmental studies and impact statements by the City, by the Transportation Division. And the documents are under preparation now, JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 and there is 'a committee set up which looks at all of the valley roadways. With that I'd like to turn the meeting over to John Ives of Jones and Stokes to speak a little bit more about the environmental review process. JOHN IVES: Thank you, Lenora. On the table over there is the Determination of Significance and also another handout, which is the agenda, plus the SEPA process diagram, which is in front of me, plus a glossary of common SEPA terms for those of you who aren't familiar with SEPA. Scoping is where we all begin the whole process. The City has done a little bit on the checklist, and review is going to be going to the process here with a scoping summary followed by a Draft Environmental Impact Statement. The draft EIS will include alternatives that.look at No Action, plus what they consider to be reasonable alternative laws that the SEPA spells out. We'll be looking at the existing environmental factors that were listed in the Determination of Significance, these 12 items, plus whatever comes out of this entire scoping process will also be evaluated. Significant impacts will be defined, followed by mitigation measures that will be designed to minimize the impacts, minimize the significance of the impacts. The EIS will be published following internal review. We're anticipating probably a schedule sometime in May, '92. What's driving the schedule, in part, is the transportation studies that are ongoing at the present time. There is a Valley Plan update, which is being initiated by TRANSPO, one of our subcontractors. That is the important determinant basis of determining the impacts for the Boeing component of the valley. Following the publication, there will be a review of the draft EIS. This will include a 30 -day review period, public review period, and a public hearing. Based on the comments that are received during the review period, we'll prepare a final EIS. And that can include such things as the responding to those comments, making any factual changes or corrections from the draft EIS; making a supplemental analysis of any material that is felt to be lacking from the draft EIS, or else material that has new information that has been received since the draft was completed. It may be possible to modify the alternatives to minimize the impacts. JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 5 Following preparation of the final, it will be published and it will go to the Environmental Review Committee at the City of Renton. They will make from that what is called a mitigation document. And this will be the document, which will be essentially the responsibility of the requirements and conditions of approval for the EIS for the Boeing project. The issues that were identified in this document will be modified as necessary based on comments received during the scoping process. There may be other items that are felt by the public to be of importance and those will be also added as elements following the review by the City. With that I'll turn it back to Lenora. LENORA BLAUMAN: Thank you. Before I open it up to your comments, I'd kind of like to reiterate a couple of comments that John has just made. We're looking to you this evening to help us find out if we've addressed all of your concerns in terms of the listing of impact areas, and we've listed all 14 of them, so we haven't probably missed any impact entirely. But, this gives you an opportunity to say to us we'd like you to go farther in a particular area. For example, transportation is a key area of interest to a number of people. And, in fact, the study area that's going to be involved will go all the way from approximately Grady on the north to the Renton /Kent City limit on the south, I -5 on the west, and 167 on the east. And so, we've tried to cover the area which would logically involve all of the Boeing traffic, and look at the impacts not only on the Renton area, but on neighboring communities as well. Another particular area of interest that's been looked at, for example, has been wetlands. This is involving science. We're looking at a number of ways that those impacts to wetlands can be addressed, both within the site and around within the community. So, those are a couple of areas we're looking at. At this time we're also looking at how could this site be designed to meet Boeing's goals, certainly, but goals of others as well. And so, Boeing is primarily interested in putting in a more suburban - looking campus. The City is also interested in evaluating the impacts that would occur from a more urban - looking campus. Under SEPA Law, we are also asked to look at a No Action Alternative. JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 6 So, there are a number of options within those three, again, umbrella laws, if you will, or there are other options which .we could consider at the end of the scoping period based on the information which you provide us. With that I'd like to turn the floor over to you and invite you to comment on things that you would like to see involved in the draft EIS. This is my favorite part. Somebody needs to talk to me. Please. SALLY STEINER 17818 - 109TH STREET RENTON, WA 98055 SALLY STEINER: My main concern is I'd like to know more about the first parcel of land that isn't being explained on the top that you said was a separate deal. And, I'd like to know when that's gonna be brought out, and if we're gonna be contacted, or is . there gonna be talk about that, are they gonna be putting buildings on, or just how far ahead we're given notice. LENORA BLAUMAN: And, that's understandable, because there's been an evolution. The Boeing company is looking at submitting a plan for development of this parcel, which is a separate parcel, sometime after the beginning of the year. And when that happens, always in the City of Renton the environmental review process is a public process. And so people are notified, the site is posted when the project comes in, environmental review is conducted, and a determination is issued, and at that time a decision is made to precisely what type of environmental review is necessary and the range of the product and process. And there is a public notification period and a public comment period, no matter what. SALLY STEINER: That will be sent in after the first of the year? LENORA BLAUMAN: Yes. Are there any other questions or comments? Ideas you'd like to share with us? STEVE PORTER: How does this affect the P -1 channel? Is that even considered in this? LENORA BLAUMAN: Yes. None of us can answer at this particular point how it affects the P -1 channel, because the City's other studies on that are only JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 7 beginning to come in now. And I don't know if you were the one person that attended Ron Straka's meeting'on Tuesday night on the Black River Water Quality Management Plan, but that was one that I understand where there was one person that attended. So, that's a beginning step and there's also the Green River Valley Flood Control Plan, which is tied into the Black River Plan, which will eventually be tied into this one. So, we're all very aware that there needs to be a connection, and that there will be a connection. Exactly how that will work, is we don't have enough information to say that yet, but it is definitely a part of everything that we're working on. In fact, that's one of the reasons that this project has evolved at this particular phase, because everybody's kind of been waiting to see where the P -1 channel falls. LARRY BROWN 261 SW 41ST RENTON, WA 98055 LARRY BROWN: I'm on the Renton Chamber of Commerce Board of Directors, as well as working with the downtown Renton Association. We recently had a meeting with METRO. There is a lot of consideration going on right now to provide a shuttle service throughout the Renton area, and the inclusion of Boeing /Longacres is an important part of that. So, I'm just mentioning this so it's on the record and the transportation study groups could look at that issue in terms of how it would fit with the vehicle movement within it. LENORA BLAUMAN: Thank you. I believe that the scoping document mentions that shuttles are being considered. If it doesn't, that's my oversight and I apologize. Indeed, they are an integral part of the transportation study. FRED STEWART: May I offer a comment, also? METRO has been very supportive to the Boeing Company in its plans and preparations for these submittals and continues to be an active participant in the Transportation Committee that's been formed under the City under TRANSPO to address these issues. And we welcome their contribution and support. JOAN T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 8 LENORA BLAUMAN: Fred raises a good point. We have a transportation committee, Boeing, which I spoke of a little bit earlier, which includes representatives from WASHDOT, from METRO, from Tukwila, from Renton, and also from Kent. And then those are the regular members. And included on that team also are all representatives from each of the consulting firms that's preparing the EIS, that's involved in any portion of the Valley Transportation Plan, including Oakesdale. There are other people who come and go from these meetings as particular issues are considered and we envision that that committee will continue throughout the EIS process. SALLY STEINER: I was just wondering on the train transportation matter. Are you still working on the rail? LENORA BLAUMAN: Yes. Other questions or comments? Going once, going twice. Okay. Well, with that I would remind you again then that the deadline for submitting written comments is December 6th, and we would really urge you to take this opportunity to comment, because it helps us to provide the sort of document that meets the needs of the community at large, as well as the City officials and the Boeing Company. There is coffee and cookies left, so please help yourself before you leave. ( The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m.) JOAN. T. RIKANSRUD 10023 S.E. 204th Kent, WA 98031 (206) 859 -1797 9 Donald K. Erickson City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Erickson: Recycling STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV -11 • Olympia, Washington 98504 -8711 • (206) 4596000: • - . December 4, 1991 3 Re: Boeing Longacres Office Park Complex proposed by The Boeing Company Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the determination of significance and scoping notice for the above referenced project. We reviewed the scoping notice and have the following comments. We recommend that waste production be included in the analysis of impacts caused by this project; and that waste reduction waste /recycling be considered as mitigation for those impacts. Some information which may be appropriate to include or evaluate during preparation of the DEIS follows: 1. The applicant should check with solid waste officials, garbage haulers, and recyclers to locate recycling services that are available locally. The local comprehensive solid waste management plan may identify recycling programs and requirements. 2. The facility(ies) should be designed to accommodate recycling. Opportunities for recycling aluminum, other metals, glass, newspaper, corrugated containers, plastics, office paper and other materials should be as convenient as throwing them out. Space should be provided to accommodate the storage of these materials both inside the building(s) and at a centralized location outside the building(s) 3. The applicant, when considering space in the design of the building(s), may also want to consider processing equipment, such as a baler, to compact recyclables. 4. During the construction phase of the project, we encourage the applicant to use products made from recycled materials wherever possible. Products containing recycled materials include parking lot bumper stops, park and picnic benches, landscape timbers and sign posts made from recycled plastic, rubberized asphalt made with recycled tires, glassphalt made with ground glass, insulation and other building materials. An inquiry to a building material supplier will provide information on what products are available and at what percent the products contain recyclable materials (the higher the better). Donald K. Erickson December 4, 1991 Page 2 . 5. During the landscaping phase of the project, we recommend using recycled materials. Compost from recovered organic waste can be used as a soil amendment in landscaping. Chipped woody debris can be used to mulch ornamental beds, to control erosion on slopes, and as a base for pathways and jogging trails. We also recommend that organic landscaping debris generated on -site be used on -site. 6. During the construction phase of the project, we encourage the applicant to recycle construction debris and to reduce construction waste whenever possible. 7. During daily operations of the facility, we recommend using products and supplies that are recyclable and /or made from recycled materials. The local office supply company may have products and supplies made with recycled materials. Also, non -toxic chemicals for cleaning and maintenance should be considered. 8. The Department of Ecology's Waste Reduction, Recycling and Litter Control Program staff are available to assist in developing or implementing waste reduction and recycling programs. If you any questions, please contact Peter Christiansen in our Northwest Regional Office at 649 -7048. Wetlands We recommend that the following information be considered when evaluating any impacts to wetlands: Wetlands should be preserved with a buffer adequate to protect them from adjacent land use. Any adverse impacts to wetlands on the site should be minimized to the fullest extent possible. Any unavoidable impacts to wetlands should be mitigated by enhancement or creation of additional wetlands. Placement of fill in wetlands may require a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. We advise the applicant to contact the Corps to determine if a permit is needed. Ecology recommends that a buffer of native vegetation be retained to protect the functions and values provided by the wetlands. Wetland buffers act to filter surface runoff, reduce erosion, screen adjacent noise, light and activity, and protect critical habitat for wetland dependent species. Our review of available studies indicates that effective buffer widths range from 50 feet to 300 feet, depending upon the values provided by the wetland, the topography, soils, existing vegetation, and the proposed adjacent land use. In some instances, enhancement of an existing buffer, such as planting of native vegetation, or constructing a fence, can improve the protection of wetland functions. If the project will result in unavoidable wetland impacts, Ecology recommends preparation of a mitigation plan which includes information on: the goals and objectives, construction details (including schedule), the hydrologic regime, Donald K. Erickson December 4, 1991 Page 3 revegetation plans, monitoring plan, contingency plans, buffers, the estimated cost, and bonding. The goal of compensatory mitigation should be to replace the wetland functions and values that will be destroyed. In the case of severely degraded wetlands, however, we recommend that improved quality be an objective. Based upon recent findings, Ecology recommends the following acreage replacement ratios as guidance in determining minimum acreage replacement for unavoidable losses: 3.0 1 for forested wetlands, 2.0 : 1 for'scrub -shrub wetlands, 1.5 : 1 for emergent marsh (NOTE: These ratios are recommended for calculating the area of wetlands to be created. The'area should be doubled for enhancement of an existing wetland.) These ratios should be viewed as general guidelines that may be adjusted either upwards or downwards based upon consideration of two factors: 1) the likelihood of successful replacement of lost wetland functions, and 2) the time lag between the loss of wetland functions and their replacement. Upon completion of wetland construction, a baseline report should be prepared which includes an "as built" survey and photographs of the established wetland. Any deviations from an approved plan should be documented in writing. Stormwater runoff contains many pollutants which have an adverse impact on aquatic systems. Prior to discharge to a wetland or buffer area, all runoff should be adequately treated. We recommend the use of a detention basin and /or grass -lined swales to filter runoff. Two hundred feet of grass -lined swale with less than 5 percent slope has been proven effective in removing particulates and hydrocarbon pollutants when draining a small enough area. This type of biofiltration has been shown to be more effective in improving water quality than most vault oil /water separator systems. In order to minimize and rectify construction impacts on wetlands, we recommend that the following conditions be applied: A. Best Management Practices for sediment and erosion control should be implemented. This should include functional silt fences, immediate revegetation and mulching. B. Native vegetation representative of the site should be replanted immediately following re- contouring of the site. Donald K. Erickson December 4,1991 Page 4 If you have any questions regarding the Recycling comments, please contact Peter Christiansen in our Northwest Regional Office at 649 -7048. If you have any questions regarding the Wetland comments, please contact Ann Remsberg in our Wetlands Section at 493 -9260. PLC 7075 cc: Ann Remsberg, Wetlands Peter Christiansen, NWRO Janet Thompson-Lee, NWRO Sincerely, p a2.144/90,_ Patricia L. Crumley Environmental Review Section � Wir Washington State Department of Transportation District 1 15325 S.E. 30Th Place Bellevue, Washington 98007 -6538 (206) 562 -4000 Mr. Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator Development Services Division City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Mr. Erickson: December 4, 1991 Duane Berentson Secretary of Transportation , Determination of Significance and Scope of EIS for the Boeing Longacres Office Park This letter is in response to the Determination of Signifi- cance (DS) and request for comments on the scope of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) issued by the city for the proposed Boeing Longacres Office Park. The project would construct a 2.5 million square foot office park complex on the 155.6 -acre Longacres Park site in the city of Renton. Included in the complex is an employment center, employee services (auditorium, cafeteria, etc.), office space and related facilities. Reserved parking for HOVs and public transit passes will be utilized to reduce SOV use by the site's proposed 10,000 employees. A helipad will also be constructed in the southerly section of the complex. We note that the city has determined that an EIS is required for this proposed project. Our comments regarding the DS and scope of the EIS are as follows: 1. If the EIS is to be a programmatic (non project) evaluation of potential development at Longacres Park, one or more Supplemental EISs will be needed prior to the start of construction on specific buildings/ facilities. 2. The Land Use /Shoreline section of the EIS should also include a discussion of the proposal's relationship to Vision 2020 and the state's growth management legisla- tion. Mr. Donald K. Erickson, AICP Boeing Longacres Office Park December 4, 1991 Page 2 3. The boundaries for the study area in the Traffic section of the EIS need to be enlarged. Congestion levels on the regional highway network in the area are already high and a development of this size would only exacer- bate the situation further. The addition of thousands of trips during the peak periods would create a congestion ripple effect at interchanges /intersections miles away from the Longacres Park site. We, therefore, recommend that the traffic study area include SR 515, SR 167, SR 181, SR 5, SR 99, SR 405, SR 518 and SR 516. The SR 405 /SR 169, SR 405 /SR 900 and SR 5 /SR 599 interchanges should also be evaluated in the traffic study. 4. Since this proposal will be required to comply with the recently enacted Transportation Demand Management legislation, the EIS should include a discussion of the measures Boeing intends to implement to reach the SOV reduction goals identified in the TDM legislation. 5. Increasing the mode split for transit is one method of reducing SOV trips. To make transit more attractive to Boeing employees, the design of the site should maximize transit compatibility and provide easy access to bus routes. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the DS and scope of the EIS for the proposed Boeing Longacres Office Park. We would appreciate receiving a copy of the draft EIS to review when it is published. If you have any questions concerning these comments, please contact Mr. David Oberg of my staff at 562 -4106. DAO:la 34 /do -boe Sincerely, 4 4( ;2 z - JERRY B. SCHUTZ )' I Assistant Manager for Route. Development Leonora Blauman, .Project Manager Development Planning Section City of Renton Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98066 Re: Boeing Longacres Office Park Dear Ms. Blauman, I would appreciate being kept informed of any public hearings on the proposed Office Park at the Longacres Site and any reviews of the Environmental Impact Statement. I would also like to be informed of any proposed rezones of the property. The E.I.S. should address the proposed change and its compatability with existing land use plans. Sincerely, r� r� Leonard Steiner Conservation Chairman East Lake Washington Audobon Society Leonard Steiner 14615 N.E. 32nd, li D102 Bellevue, WA 98007 December 3, 1991 CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD. TUKWILA. WASHINGTON 98188 December 6, 1991 Lenora Blauman Project Manager Development Planning Section City of Renton Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Re: Boeing Longacres Office Park - Scoping Notice Dear Lenora: 1 PHONE # (2061 433.1800 Cary L. VanDuscn. ,%tnvor PLANNING DIVISION C ,', affON 11 ►= r'. .i991 s d Thank you for sending us this scoping notice on this project that is very important to the cities of Renton and Tukwila. Our comments are somewhat general, at this time, and will be followed up with a more specific detailed response, if any, during our subsequent meetings on the issues surrounding this application. We look forward to participating with you and the Renton staff in those discussions. I understand that review of Phase I of the project is for specific permits on file with the City of Renton. Subsequent phases are tentative, for which no permits have yet been filed. SEPA specifies that the EIS address the detailed portion of the project together with the long range plans for the total project in one EIS because sufficient information is available about both long and short term aspects of the project. LOCATION /MAP: The map in the Scoping Notice should contain Phase I of the project. It should also reflect extension of SW 27th Street to Strander Boulevard, as agreed to in the prior interlocal agreement between Renton and Tukwila. That extension should be expressed as a "given" part of the project because of that agreement. WATER: Analysis of the storm water drainage system should include Renton's commitment to and plans thereof for construction of the P -1 Drainage Channel which was a condition of much of existing development in the vicinity. In the past agreements were made for construction of the Channel for handling storm drainage from individual sites as well as from Tukwila. D The 1988 KCM Nelson Place/Longacres Drainage Study and Plan will need to be implemented - particularly the 24 inch 18 CFS outfall to Longacres that is located about 300 feet north of S 158 St, and the future connection between S 156 St and SW 16 St to the P1 channel. PUBLIC SERVICES/UTILITIES: Fiberoptic cables of Sprint, MCI, and AT &T will need to be provided for in any connections to West Valley Hwy. Also, provision must be made for the Olympic Pipeline (JPL fuel). Seattle has a 60 inch water transmission line crossing the site into Tukwila that will need to be addressed. Metro has a 60 inch north /south interceptor and a 36 inch Tukwila trunk line that runs east /west just south of Strander that will need to be addressed. LAND USE /SHORELINES: Because the existing zoning of the property and vicinity has been known for many years and the proposal conforms to that zoning it seems reasonable that the impacts of that zoning on the Renton CBD were analyzed at the time of that zoning decision. Boeing is proposing only building per that zoning. The interlocal agreement for connecting SW 27th St. to Strander Boulevard in Tukwila Occurred after the most recent zoning of the property and vicinity. The zoning decision did not include, therefore, analysis of impacts upon Tukwila. The Boeing proposal must include review of those impacts. Alternative site plans should be developed to evaluate different concentrations of buildings in different portions of the site. In addition the alternative of taller buildings, and fewer of them, should be discussed. AESTHETICS: Alternative building designs should be presented and reviewed that could fit the goals of Boeing for the property. HOUSING: It is common knowledge that Boeing employees do not relocate closer to their jobs because their jobs frequently change. The established pattern is for the employees to commute from their existing residences to wherever they are assigned to work. This pattern should be assumed in the EIS. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH: Phase I specific impacts should be evaluated in the detail indicated in the Scoping Notice. The subsequent phases should be reviewed in the macro scale, leaving detailed review to the permit review of the individual phases. RECREATION: This analysis should begin with the common knowledge that Boeing employee commute patterns indicate that individual recreation activities /demands occur near 2 their residences. Per the established, longstanding pattern the employees will commute from their residences and will not change their existing recreation habits/locations because they change their work location. TRAFFIC: This analysis must begin with the "given" of implementation of the Renton - Tukwila interlocal agreement for extension of SW 27th St. to Strander Boulevard. Tukwila has acquired commitments to construct or provide right -of -way to the western border of the Boeing property. In the subject project Boeing must do the same across their property to SW 27th St. Alternative alignments should be discussed, but the connection must be made or the interlocal agreement changed by actions by the Renton and Tukwila City Councils. Boeing has indicated a strong need to link SW 16th St. to the West Valley Freeway. The impacts of that connection need to be addressed and concurrence provided from Tukwila. The site plan shows use of S. 156th St. in Tukwila, which is a narrow two -lane private street. Necessary improvements to that street and impacts upon adjacent existing land uses require analysis, including railroad crossings and the proposed McLeod exhibition facility. The level -of- service (LOS) and safety evaluation analysis to determine impacts and mitigations should be conducted for: Interurban Ave. S. and W Valley between I -5 and S. 180 St. for the signalized intersections. Pedestrian need and safety should be identified. Grady Way and Southcenter Blvd between the Tukwila east city limit and I -5 for the signalized intersections. Nelsen PI and S. 156 St & S. 158 St. If S. 156 St. is being extended to Tukwila Parkway or some form of arterial connection between Tukwila Parkway and /or Andover Park East is an alternative, then, LOS and safety evaluation of the following intersections should be made: 1. Tukwila Parkway /Andover Park E 2. Tukwila Parkway /Andover Park W 3. Tukwila Parkway/I -405 on ramp 4. Tukwila Parkway/"S" Line Bridge (62 Ave S) 5. Strander /Andover Park E 6. Strander /Andover Park W 7. Strander /Southcenter Parkway 8. Southcenter Parkway/Klickitat 9. Southcenter Parkway/I -5 NB Off (Nordstrom signal) 3 For the Strander extension alternative (in accord with the August 11, 1986 Interlocal agreement signed by Renton Mayor Shinpoch and Tukwila Mayor Van Dusen) the same list of intersections need the LOS and safety analysis with identified mitigations. A summary of the advantages and disadvantages of this alternative from the perspective of Boeing, Renton, and Tukwila will assist the overview of the Strander alternative. A cordon summary of the area's peak volumes, capacity, and remaining capacity after development will be helpful in determining traffic assignments. The area is bounded by SR167, S. 180 St, SR181, and I -405. Particularly identifying freeway ramp "existing" unused capacity, assuming ramp metering and identifying Boeing demand, will quantify the amounts of peak traffic that will be using "local" arterials. Pedestrian traffic to and from the site and any safety deficiencies must be identified. Routes connecting to the Christensen Trail and Interurban (Orillia) Trails would be expected to have significant traffic for lunch hour exercise as well as some bike commuting. Metro transit routes, access and service needs to be identified and needs for that service. Changes to service into Tukwila to provide the new service needs to be identified. Should S. 158 St be an access alternative, then, the resolution of access across the Puget Power right -of -way will be needed. SOCIO- ECONOMIC: It is recognized that this subject is optional for analysis under SEPA. Requiring Boeing to perform that analysis is questionable in view of the proposal's compliance with existing longstanding zoning. Full development of the property and vicinity has been the subject of prior review relative to a development /traffic mitigation payment program. Impacts of full development per existing zoning occurred either at the zoning action or subsequent review of overall improvements needed in the area or surrounding vicinity. Elimination of Longacres Park racing activities represents a revenue loss to Renton. However, that is normally balanced against the revenue gain from sales taxes on construction and increased property tax revenue from the new proposed facilities. This balancing does not need to be reviewed in the EIS. 4 City Staff looks forward to continued cooperation with your staff in review of this significant project. Sincerely, L. Rick Beeler cc: John McFarland Ron Cameron Jack Pace ; _el .1751 ID: MEC - 12TH FLR TEL NO (206) 69/1-19(30 11 P32 .••• • " tr • Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle Exchange Building • 821 Gecoud Ave. • Seattle, WA 98104 December 6, 1991 City of Renton Environmental Review Committee c/o Don Erickson, Senretary Development Planning Section Department of Planning/Building/Public Works 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice File 110 . : Dear Review Committee: Metro otaff has reviewed the netormination of Significance and Scraping Notice for the proposed action and concuro with the proposed scope of impacts to be addressed in the forthcoming environmental impact statement. Staff recommends that the EIS also include a discuggion of the project's impact on MAtro's Tukwila Interceptor and South Tnterceptor, Section 1. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. SincerelY, Petrina Gee, Environmental Planner Environmental Compliance and Right Way Division pg726 PLF P Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator Development Services Division City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Attn: Lenora Blauman Project Manager RE: Boeing Longacres Office Park Dear Ms. Blauman: December 6, 1991 Puget Power supports the Boeing Company's proposed development of Longacres Office Park. The company desires to work with the City and Boeing to provide information about Puget Power's existing facilities and proposed electrical system improvements that are necessary to support a successful project. The notice of Determination of Significance states that "the city will conduct a programmatic evaluation of the Boeing Company's conceptually proposed development program and alternatives... Evaluation in the EIS will focus on potentially significant environmental impacts from both building and operation of an office complex on the Longacres Park site." One of the elements to be evaluated in the EIS is impacts to Public, Services /Utilities. The notice states that "the EIS will assess the adequacy of fire and police department resources which are available to serve the proposed /alternative development programs. There will also be a review of the ways in which the proposed /alternative development programs would affect service to the site and to other developments within Renton. The EIS will report on the ways in which utility service to Longacres may affect resources /services to other local properties (e.g., availability of adequate water pressure). Impacts upon public services in surrounding communities (e.g., Tukwila) will also be examined." Puget Power, as the electric utility serving the Renton and Tukwila areas of King County, provides an essential public service to residential, commercial, and industrial customers. Improvements /changes and additions to the electrical distribution, transmission, and substation system will be needed to serve the proposed project. The electrical facility improvements, located within the Boeing Longacres site and off -site, that are necessary to serve the development must be assessed and addressed in the EIS. The Energy Starts Here® Puget Sound Power & Light Company P.O. Box 97034 Bellevue, WA 98009 -9734 (206) 454 -6363 The scope of the project, when fully developed and as presently understood, indicates the need for a new substation on -site to serve the development, and the need for another station at the south end of the site (possibly on -site or off -site) to meet Puget Power's obligations to serve the Boeing Company and other customers in the area. Capacity improvements to the distribution and transmission line system will be required and there is the potential for relocation of existing above ground distribution and transmission lines and the potential conversion of lines to underground. The siting, construction, and operation of these electrical system improvements, and others identified during the review of the project, should be addressed in the EIS. Puget Power looks forward to working with the City of Renton in the development of the EIS. Mr. Steve Szablya, Professional Engineer, can be contacted at 255 -2464 to coordinate the review of electrical system improvements required for the project. Puget Power appreciates the opportunity to comment on the scoping of the Boeing Longacres Office Park Environmental Impact Statement. Sincerely yours, L Larry Tornberg Senior Environmental Scientist Group • Health �► Cooperative of Puget Sound Administration and Conference Center 521 Wall Street Seattle, WA 98121 December 6, 1991 City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 ATTN: Lenora Blauman, Project Manager Development Services Division Dear Ms. Blauman: Other concerns include: •Public Services - sufficient capacity (fire, police, medical, etc.) in the event of a major catastrophe should be provided •Public Amenities and Services - 10,000 new employees will tax the areas capacity •Surface Water - given existing surface water issues, where will it go? The area has a difficult history. •Hazardous Substances - both existing and those used as part of Boeing's ongoing business should be disposed of properly Please accept this . letter as written comment to Boeing's proposed office park development at Longacres and the issues Group Health Cooperative, as an adjacent land owner, would like to see addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. Given the magnitude and proximity of the proposed facilities, we will continue to require information pursuant to development timing and mitigation details of the following concerns. We also request opportunity to give regular input to the approval /review process as it proceeds. Our greatest concern is the potential traffic congestion in the immediate area should an additional 10,000 commuters "move in next door". We would hope to see the development of a park and ride and increased access to public transit to encourage alternate modes of transportation among other traffic mitigation measures under consideration. Of particular concern are the Oakesdale and SW 16th corridors and the ability of these streets to handle increased traffic volumes. Another major concern is the power source. Currently only a single feed electrical service from Puget Power supplies this area. The Group Health facility located adjacent to Boeing's proposed development houses our central computer center. Any power disruption caused by construction or development could cause disruption in the flow of vital health care information. City of Renton December 6, 1991 Page 2 We understand that these concerns will be addressed during the EIS process and hope that a thorough examination of each issue will result in a project that will benefit the entire community. Please copy Group Health with relevant meeting minutes and notification of upcoming meetings /hearings with sufficient lead time to ensure our involvement as a concerned neighbor. Sincerely, William Biggs Director, Facilities • • THOMAS A. GOELTZ (206) 628 -7662 VIA FACSIMILE AND MAIL DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE LAW OFFICES 2600 CENTURY SQUARE • 1501 FOURTH AVENUE • SEATTLE, \VASHINGTON 981Ot -1688 (206) 622.3150 December 5, 1991 Ms. Lenora Blauman, Project Manager Development Planning Section City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 Dear Ms. Blauman: GOELT \01243.LTR Seattle FAX: (206) 628 -7040 ' TELEX: 328919 DWT SEA ANCHORAGE, ALASKA ' BELLEVUE, WASHINGTON • BOISE, IDAHO • LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA ' PORTLAND, OREGON • RICHLAND, WASHINGTON • WASHINGTON, D.C. Re: Comments on EIS Scoping Document - Boeing Longacres Office Park This letter comments on the City's scoping document for the Boeing Longacres Office Park. These comments are submitted on behalf of McLeod Development Company, which owns or is the long- term ground lessee of 23 acres of property adjoining Longacres along its western boundary. McLeod has submitted to the City of Tukwila development plans for its site consisting of a 230,000 square foot exhibition facility. We are supportive of Boeing generally as the economic leader for our region. We also are supportive of Boeing's development of an office park at its Longacres site. Consequently, these comments are not in any fashion an effort to delay or add unnecessary cost to the office park EIS or project review by the City of Renton and other jurisdictions. Rather, the purpose of our comments is to ensure the best possible access, circulation and traffic system is developed for the Boeing project, consistent with neighboring properties as well as the plans of the cities of Renton and Tukwila. Since McLeod's exhibition facility will operate almost exclusively on weekends and in the evenings, and hence at dissimilar peak hours with Boeing and other office uses, we believe the opportunity exists for mutually beneficial planning for traffic, access and general circulation. Ms. Lenora Blauman December 5, 1991 Page 2 We have four principal comments for revising the EIS scope, which are principally related to traffic, transportation and circulation. The comments reflect the analysis not only by McLeod Development, but also of other members of McLeod's project team, including David Markley, Transportation Solutions, Inc. (the project traffic consultant), Don Miles, Miles Consulting (the project engineer), and myself: 1. Western Access to Longacres Business Park. The scoping document map shows "158th Street" in Tukwila as the sole access to the Boeing site from the west. Access over 158th Street for business park use will not work for physical as well as legal reasons. As a public street, 158th St. stops inside the City of Tukwila approximately 725 feet west of the western boundary of Boeing's Longacres site (which is also the western boundary of the City of Renton). The existing 725 -foot connection to Longacres is over a private easement with limited use, narrow and varying widths and limited benefited properties. There is no method to provide voluntary dedication by the various parties, including McLeod, who own and have legal rights in the land and the easement. Compounding the legal problems are the physical constraints of the two railroad right -of -ways which cross the easement. The easement now goes under the Union Pacific tracks, with a limited width. Consequently, if access to and from the west side of the Boeing site is anticipated, then alternative access needs to be developed as part of the project description and analyzed in the EIS. The most logical access alternatives are (a) the Tukwila Parkway (156th Street) /16th Avenue connection, and (b) extension of Strander Boulevard. These corridors themselves are not without their own difficulties, but the problems at least are solvable as compared to 158th Street and both are now in City transportation plans. Both of the alternatives need a dedicated right -of -way and both also cross the two active rail lines. However, we believe they make far more sense than 158th and are in fact feasible with cooperation and the correct design. We note the Tukwila Parkway /16th connection has been added to both the City of Tukwila and City of Renton Transportation Improvement Plans. Likewise, extension of Strander Boulevard has long been considered a potential transportation improvement and has long GOELT \01243,LTR Seattle Ms. Lenora Blauman December 5, 1991 Page 3 been a matter reviewed by the Cities of Tukwila and Renton (see e.g. interlocal agreement- 1986). The EIS should evaluate the impact of potential road crossings to private property, including the McLeod property. If western access is required to Boeing, which we assume it is, then McLeod is willing to cooperate on the alignment and location so long as it can be done to accommodate development on the McLeod parcel. The EIS also needs to analyze impacts related to construction of the access connections because of the challenges presented by the railroad rights -of -way and the physical constraints of the sites. 2. Scope of Traffic Analysis. The traffic analysis scope should extend beyond the boundaries outlined in the EIS scope and concentrate along corridors including the following: Corridor GOELT \01243.LTR Seattle West Valley Highway /Interurban Oaksdale Parkway /S 143rd SR 900 SR 167 S 180th Strander Boulevard Grady Way /Southcenter Blvd. From To S 196th S 180th I -5 SR 900 Southcenter Southcenter I -5 I -5 SR 900 SR 167 S 196th P SR 167 P East Terminus SR 167 The EIS analysis of these corridors does not require evaluation of every intersection along each corridor. Rather, it should analyze (a) intersections of the corridors themselves, (b) streets providing direct access to the site, (c) interchanges with limited access facilities, and (d) intersections adjacent to interchanges. 3. Trip Generation /TDM Programs. The trip generation assumptions used in the EIS traffic analysis should not consider potential trip reduction associated with Transportation Demand Management Programs prior to trip distribution and assignment. Such programs can be considered as mitigation if performance and non - attainment penalties are included as part of the mitigation. This is a reasonable approach because much of the proposed Boeing facility is dedicated to training and because of the regular internal job transfers which occur at non - manufacturing facilities. Consequently, these buildings have use Ms. Lenora Blauman December 5, 1991 Page 4 characteristics that are not conducive to establishing patterns of high HOV and transit rider use. 4. Entire 212 Acre Boeing Site /Full Impacts. We are concerned the traffic, drainage and other aspects associated with development of the northern 56 acres under Boeing's ownership may have off -site impacts. Any such off -site impacts need to be analyzed to account for the cumulative impacts of the entire Boeing ownership of 212 acres. The Boeing Longacres project originally was advertised as comprising 212 acres, with 3,000,000 square feet of building to house 11,000 - 12,000 employees. The current EIS scoping document has reduced the proposed analysis to 156 acres of land, 2.5 million square feet to house 10,000 employees. We do not object to phasing of development. Our concern is that there be a full impact analysis, and adequate mitigation solutions, for access, circulation, drainage and other potential off -site impacts. The City of Renton has the obligation to understand the full range of impacts for the entire Boeing development in order to craft areawide mitigation measures. 5. Conclusion. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the EIS scope and hope our comments are used in the constructive fashion in which they are offered. TAG /ss Enclosure cc: Stuart. McLeod David Markley Don Miles GOELT \01243.LTR Seattle Respectfully submitted, Thomas A. Goeltz DAVIS WRIGHT TREMAINE 10 Do n 0. kt k. C K So v } ,-I C7 Zo r 'l v1 of L r 11 •6 S ‘\10 Le- j eittVw1oJ/ ) " Pro J�°C . fYlaAncir at.) : Loh S -P k E/,V 11rooryle,y\ -�' 2 s 1 efrek ✓t`t-- } "Dcw A A s . ._Ls✓o�°� 163/ /to /PE s ea-A-4-4C R) 6L._ &'(a-D- /n 4frne S acs Ake-a% any✓ 61/01 6_,4 i2 lq° *'&fe 1/4 S Z0i; 4 -eie S lr&aS 4 l4 /r1 /9 d1/" -/ 1/ > a/gv-envorl . Now i7c°cN /c/ si) deGa. 4's /4i 4 O/194c1r'f 445 eoH'Ie- 411 /ns11 ,40k -/4i? 7Po�le_ 0-7z . ?` /l N /Uo k-a w e r rPylXe / ke W 4 (k frovti Pine S 44.-e , /47e Loh ure ricA Aishei J /4-4 w >/ 4 o r 6e_ d ano o r //c / e coh1 / X, j T W o a d Z - GL. 7 v v et-- n u m .g e Y' O 7 re a !'o h f C✓Nmfl /j L©r19acveS . // /77ie lave(' ma irk . ez7q o /2 s' aye /> `1 iS' f4 -, / a) ecohow► i, a k7 c/ ;) 6r1 V ro n n'l ai1 ` /1 Gvepi/am C' S o i .c?gee 4 6n4 w 'l/C//%4 . 1 L1 a v e a ,z/eteQ/ Q!oc oM Ws 7 44_7!-- A o /p 70 e } f 4 Pk, /-A e. A i S /or'i ('2 / s/1 /1 /1`I t to O o f Zoo9acfPS �-��� c�lelor�s4-Q -e �� -/-hov LU � cfe /y A'/J. 7 _ mar ki coc v wt y r�rr e v P -4c-o i.-i ytre // 7 4 07 Z /<y (au'? //if 4v /C �r�Seirvoct 6 »op. /'S 7 4c7 ,J '16; S (/ C Si /�("'S' /' / / l / gi:N a v 1 / J Svv!/ � InvEn�o� �t 5/� �e➢` Flea. /V o. 'W rS S ,- / 7 . /t)o . o / 3 a A;c docvm6✓77 Gv4_5 ?rto?cuze0/ C � v /? 7o ' s s o'i Ca-41 req tidy Sc' `ohpacveS' /)a 16 Cori 5/ ctake.Cf Arc /01 / S //6) 4✓ G UL° // OveA aCc c /p fin Gteri,1611 dvvr�I rvaiiy /9? f v st ?-e Oac r 07' Arc at='64 y / am ci His 41-1' 7vvs e,,,-va-ho I e1 D/Yni ,p� •� z90 iii/s7 yolcco 4 /-.4e d +te e c r4o Loo n cu- 6 ar '/d ah c. c Jv( ovr /PmpAy (ohva q.,ito 1 4e_ ,/ 40 a do--4'n (i7 / c%s &ve S cl cl v4 t § 4w ra Z Aiavetr6e /,ve 9oernv %' 4/7 u>�l� 4,4„ / vvckctl'erJ Lohj4creS 5 240 -1 1- A A Gael& ✓ J cucv'� �a t'7 / �S' /i I S' /o' i ( / S' /�h r Cctn C ✓ � . !¢-rl d/ /-/.7" e h� . , S t /u& S / eeyt at_ Ke7h rr // (0fr /Ok-Lt4 ((o1I /it ) c i 4 ?eh 17 is 1107 /p, �.// ,s cA - - /er � .��vy a rl'h : ppo-e - c/ )z-`1t 4- /- c/e°cr a/oc vm°,i7`f . doa / A S tut e. / -Ae � i s �� av�' Lcc� n a ore S . tt/ i )LA v'P ya4 vccinokn o C_s' c/oYUvv O7 (o11 yQev'J roc) /d , 6L d e w . T t? . ` e v c - ,) Lo►1 eoip/ele c' (' L 5. ral &veit a) o v x I o o o l b o 0 ok_ - e C' b) av p lit 1p s7bp0) coo i h hafr.a (e° .2) aire ou&r ? , 20o 6ve'dth . hf, s 3) over 2coop ett.r° S e_ aavo ted 4- ho v se S '1-) d.ve, +o LoiNerto ps ranks se in -f-he bvped�h Jvnd,vs �) ete vat‘p, o a s40 ('o��v �C'(11hiswoV1 4}S oc( S' TIC. (Capp 1990 -�-�� 5 Nte wt cs1 E 4-6 vat)? 1 brod {'1 e_A pS ` O S v s'rat \ f 70 00 -f -v 2o oco a t y\d 'pvodocPs crn vIrlti a I eCoho Air C %Ay a cn IA) iviy-/ontS or o i o oy J aoo / 000 Loh 4cves Acte a /wa ZEeiel ea€ C/I ¢ GYpepsS6ov1 ©`F el )I in y lfoh S 5 1- j vrolA .6vecl a,+i d wi' io07z Lon QCveS � in d�s4-y evil/ s' goitre Me/ y 4 , 1d 4na 4 4on'1 a� es J'? 1/ /inopo/k77 W, y - � �efr� (ail one ?ni c/le k ��e. cr aMcI /laves eX /)cuII o ,7) 7v7eh opt s c e rS eet // i/ 1/o& m a j's he . 41 d 'W /24)4i0--- RS I7 you. (oad a do/1 ) A to /vs Lj ? g- %e1 ,4'e / / your clot ye / -vovn A Camadie P f bukippoo Q�► d f lop o✓c v -pr /141 4v� 414, k' 4e • _7 just eotild a/plleY Wo L. o f &vilt Flo .eie0f . Comf')16%. PD.Fee/4// 6c/i Field No. JW -55 NAME Historic Longacres Common Longacres Historic District LOCATION Number & Street City or Town Renton Incorporated X Unincorporated Congressional District 7 State Legislative District 11 County Council District — 6 CLASSIFICATION . CATEGORY X District Building (s) _ Structure Historic Site Arc. Site _ Object OWNER OF PROPERTY: Washington Jockey Club Number & Street Longacres City or Town Renton State WA Zip 98055 ) LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Sec 24 Twn 23 Rug 4 (TL 16 HEADER HENRY D C 48 BEG 438.9 FT W OF NE COR OF D C T)( S 340 FT TH W 485.1 FT TH 4 10FT N OFSLNOFDCTHWTO ELNNPRY R/W T)(NALG SD R/W TONLNOFDCT)) E E 924 FT LY NLY OF BOW LAKE PIPE LN R/W LESS N 340 FT & BEG AT NXN OF S LN OF DC n GL 10 SEC 25 23 04 TH W TO )i LN OF NP R/W TH N ALG R/W TO S LN OF BOW LAKE PIPE ).N (Legal Description continued below) PRESENT REGISTER STATUS Nat. Register State Register Other DESCRIPTION CONDITION XExcellent _ Fa i r Deteriorated Ruins Unexposed Intersection and S. 158th Street Not for Publication Zip 90055 name Renton Junction OWNERSHIP Public 'X Private Both ACCESSIBLE X Yes Restricted Yes Unrest. No SITUATION Unaltered X Altered X Original Site Moved Date PRESENT & ORIG. PHYSICAL APPEARANCE (see attached continuation sheet) `1 7 KING COUNTY HISTORIC SITES SURVEY Inventory Sheet of the West Valley Highway Community Community Planning District Zoning B -1 Shoreline Environment STATUS X Occupied _Unoccupied Preservation —Work in Progress Threatened by: Demolition _ Neglect File No. 0327 Site No. Renton PRESENT USE Agriculture Museum _Commercial _Park _Educational Private _Entertainment — Residence Government _Religious _Industrial Scientific Military Transportation X Other Racetrack S TO P' TO DEC E LN 0 TH ELY Longacres began in 1933 in a whirlwind or building activity. Architect B. Marcus Priteca hired a crew and in 28 days built a grandstand, clubhouse, racing oval, and 42 barns. The whirlwind slowed down, but never stopped. Alterations and the addition and removal of buildings have been continuous. Priteca's 60' x 300' Grandstand is constructed of poured concrete and structural steel posts. The rear of the building had board and batten siding. As tall as a three - story building, the gambrel roofed structure has two gambrel roofed dormers in the rear (west) and a decorative wooden parapet across the front (east). A two story polygonal tower stands on the southeast corner of the roof. Over the years this spot has been occupied by numerous cupolas and towers built in various styles. There is seating for 6500 patrons in the grandstand. Space beneath the seating area is utilized as a betting area. Clustered at the rear of the Grandstand are several single story, flat roofed buildings constructed of poured concrete. The brick sided buildings house administrative offices. • Priteca built the two story, rectangular (50' x 75') Clubhouse in a colonial revival style, characterized by a gable roof with pedimented gable ends, a closed cornice and a plain frieze. A two story veranda on the east (front) is supported by large, two story columns. In early years the large stone fireplace in this building provided the only heat at Longacres. Early photographs show a flat roofed tower with a lattice railing around the top at the southeast corner of the Clubhouse. A gable roofed cupola was added at this corner by 1940. Three more cupolas have been added since 1940. LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONT. & NELY ALG SD LN TO PT N OF BEG TH S TO BEG TGW GL 14 & POR GL 8 OF SEC LY C OF NP R/W & S OF S 153RD ST ALSO NW k OF SE 14 LY S OF S 153RD ST FORMERLY BOND C 10 PRESENT AND ORIGINAL PHYSICAL APPEARANCE CONT., Page 2 Extensive alterations and additions have nearly hidden the original facade. The veranda columns are now about 15' inside the building. This front addition, and a larger one in the rear, built in 1972, have nearly doubled the size of the building. It now seats 2850 patrons. The alterations and additions to the original Priteca buildings have varied in style, but the designer's philosophy, providing intimate sections in public areas, has always been part of Longacres planning philosophy. There are three additional public structures built in recent years. One is the Pavilion, also designed by Priteca. It was built in two stages in 1966 and 1968. Constructed of poured concrete and structural steel supports, the flat roof building with metal parapet is compatible with the adjacent Grandstand to the south. It seats 1000 people. A refreshment area and lounge beneath the bleacher area of the Pavilion opens into the Grandstand betting area. In 1977 the Gazebo was built north of the Pavilion. An irregularly shaped, ele- vated area, constructed of poured concrete, centers around a circular metal roof about 50' in diameter. Architect Richard McCann's interpretation of Priteca's philosophy of intimate spaces in public areas was well executed in islands of outdoor seating at small tables. South of the Clubhouse is the 1978 addition to Longacres, the Paddock Club, (also designed by McCann). The three story, flat roofed structure is built of poured con- crete and sided with corrugated metal. Open on two sides, the first floor is the paddock where the horses are saddled and the jockeys mount for each race. The layout of the racing oval has remained unchanged. However, a two story, poly- gonal judges' tower, and a manually operated clock announcing the time of the next race have been removed from the infield of the oval. In the non- public area Priteca and his crew built 42 of the present 78 horse barns ;. Most of the barns have bellcast gable roofs which overhang eight feet on each side. A few of the barns have shed roofs, and a few have clapboard siding, but the majority are covered with shiplap siding. Small storage sheds are attached to either side of the buildings. These are contained under extensions of the roof overhangs. The older barns are smaller than the newer ones. The original barns contain seven stalls on each side and the newer ones have 10 to 15 stalls per side. The barns are located east of the racing oval. Numerous service buildings such as the shop, track photgraphers office, garages and storage sheds are at the southwest corner of the racing oval. They are frame structures with shiplap siding and gable roofs. One exception is the Jockey's Room, the first structure south of the Paddock Club. It is a small poured concrete building with a gable roof at the south end and a flat foor at the north end. A small, wood frame second floor has been added above the flat roofed portion. Sections of this building may have been the first additions to Longacres after the initial buildings were completed in 1933. •• SIGNIFICANCE Builder (s) Joe Gottstein and William Edris Architect(:) and /or Engineerts) B. Marcus Priteca, Richard McCann and others Date(s) Built 1913 to present Most Significant Period 1933 to present Organization f in County Historic Sites Survey Address 1955 6th Ave. W. Seattle, WA 98119 Present Level of Significance: National K State Local STATEMENT OF HISTORY & SIGNIFICANCE Longacres is significant as the first race track to open after the Washington Leg- islature rescinded a 1903 law banning horse racing. It is the oldest race track on the Pacific coast in continous operation. Longacres was created by Joe Gottstein and Bill Edris, successful Seattle real estat• men. Gottstein had long been interested in horse racing. His father raced horses at the Meadows, King County's first race track, and Joe had owned his first race horse at the ag. of eight. With plans to develop the first race track in Washington in.thirty years, Gottetein lobbied the Washington State Legislature. In 1933, betting on Thoroughbred horses was legalized. California investors, counted on to finance the race track, failed to produce any money. Not wanting to pass up the opportunity they had been waiting for, Gottstein and Edris managed to finance the track themselves. They bought 106 acres of James Nelson's Dairy Farm. This site was chosen for three reasons: the fine sub - alluvial soil was free from rocks and the track would need little preparation to be safe; its close proximity to the railroad tracks meant sidings could quickly and economically provide railroad freight service to the track; and its location southeast of Seattle between the East and West Valley Highways made it easily accessible from all directions. Longacres was built in a record 28 days by B. Marcus Priteca, a 42 year old Scottish architect and personal friend of Joe Gottstein. Priteca was a famous theater designer and architect. Some buildings he designed in Seattle include the old Palomar and Orpheum Theaters, the old Opera House, and the Coliseum Theater. In 1943 gas rationing resulted in a government edict closing the race track for a year. The army used the track that year; barracks were built and the infield was used as an artillery stockade. After the war, Gottstein and his wife, Luella, converted a barrac' into a summer cottage and moved it east of the track entrance. Morrie Alhadeff, a Seattle radio personality, was hired in 1947 as Gottstein's assis tant.' After Gottstein's death in 1971, Alhadeff succedded him as President of the Wash- ington Jockey Club, the corporation which owns and operates Longacres. Alhadeff, Gott - stein's son -in -law, runs the race track today with the help of his sons, Michael, General Manager, and Kenneth, Director of Facilities. Always a successful venture, Longacres is known for its charitable contributions and spirit. Buildings have been added and altered yearly, but the philosophy and goals of th• administration have remained consistent. BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES "The Early Years," Longacres 1973 Press Guide, p. 4 -8. "Longacres History: Longacres Celebrates 40th Anniversary," Longacres 1973 Press Guide, p. 3. "Longacres Improvements: Intimacy Prevails as Longacres Grows," Longacres 1973 Press Guide, p. 9. Longacres Photo Collection. Longacres Pavilion. Early photos of Longacres, mostly undatu' "Longacres: The Track that.Joe Built'," The 1977 Longacres Yearbook, p. 4. Slauson, Morda. Renton: From Coal to Jets. Renton Historical Society, 1976, p. 103 -105 Interviews: Alhadeff, Morrie. Age 63. Longacres. Renton, WA. 98055. Interviewed April 19, 1978. President of the Washington Jockey Club. (bibliographic references. continued below) FORM PREPARED BY •RINT): Jayne Wissel Signature , t.! , ) /- .2- Date 5 -4 -78 BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES CONY. (Interviews) Redmond, Tom. Long Acres. Renton, WA. 98055. Interviewed April 19, 1978 (with tour) and May 4. 197Fi. nt at 1.nnon'.n» Phone(200 284 -8556 Significance Period _ prehistoric _ 1400 -1499 — 1500 -1699 — 1600 -1699 1700 -1799 1800 -1899 y 1900- Areas of Significance —Check and Justify below _ archeology- prehistoric — community planning _X_ landscape architecture _ archeology - historic —. conservation _ law _ — agriculture ..X_. economics ___. literature architecture _ education _ military — art _ engineering _ music commerce ^ exploration /settlement — philosophy _ _ communications _ Industry — politics /government Invention X religion. science sculpture • social/ humanitarian theater transportation' other (opacity) sport Specific dates 1933 - present guilder /Architect Joseph Gotts Marcus Priteca Statement of Significance (In one paragraph) Longacres, the West Coast's oldest existing thoroughbred race track, was built on the initiative of founder Joe Gottstein from plans designed by renowned theatre architect B. Marcus Priteca. The original clubhouse and grandstand, which still constitute the heart of the facility, plus the racing surface and the first 37 barns, were constructed in a ramarkab: 28 days on a 106 -acre parcel formerly known.as the old. Nelson farm. From the time the facility opened for racing on August 3, 1933,.it was recognized as one of the most beautiful race tracks in America. Contribu to its beauty was the extensive landscaping of the grounds, including the planting of the now - majestic Lombardy poplar, trees that - ring the track. Longacres boasts a rich tradition, having presented the best thoroughbred racing in the Northwest for 57 seasons. The track has been the site of world record performances and has been graced by some of the greatest jockeys, trainers and horses in the history of American racing. "Always an entertainment center for Puget Sound residents, Longacres became an increasingly important. contributor to Washington's economy. As breeding farms and support businesses grew up around the track, Longacres emerged as the . hub .of one of the state's largest industries. Longacres stands as a monument to visionary Seattle native Joe Gottstein; whose Polish -born father had been a director of Washington's first •race track, The Meadows, which was closed by anti - gambling forces in 1903; • 'bocsan ohmmplonins lor;iolo.bior tv cV L V t•n�:,I.ILb. l n 1°i?? H IO1 tiuw e. isles urem reaalizea w? en tiovernor UlarennP D. Mart-1n .1 enari +-ro onul i nG bill into law on March 3, 1933. With the aid of other prominent Seattle businessmen, including Joshua Green, Henry Broderick and Bill Edris, Gottstein put together the financing to build a track and enlisted architect B. Marcus Priteca, whose credits included Seattle's Paramount and Coliseum threatres, to design the clubhouse and grandstand. Over 3,000 laborers were put to work to erect the complex in 2.8 days on land that had been homesteaded by James Nelson in 1886. The track opened its doors to a crowd estimated at 11,000 on August 3, 1933 and has staged a race meeting every year since then with the exception of 1943, when the track was closed due to a World War II blackout and an army 'barracks was constructed in the infield. That barracks, incidentally. *, was converted into a cottage tucked behind the tote board which Gottstein and his wife, Luella, used as their summer home, and which still stands. Gottstein ran the track until his death at the age of 79 in 1971, when son --in -law Morri Alhadeff took over the helm. Before his death, Gottstein saw the first major, eXpansion of Longacres completed in 1966 when the Pavilion area wit its colorful picnic tables and umbrellas opened at the north end of the grandstand. It was Alhadeff, however, who presided over the track's greatest period of expansion. A series of projects designed by architect Continuation Richard McCann, who stove to preserve the intimate atmosphere of Priteca's original design, roughly. doubled the .seating capacity. The clubhouse was expanded by nearly 20,000 square feet in 1972, a roof was erected over the north grandstand in 1973 and the 5,200 square foot Gazebo Terraces was added north of the grandstand in 1974. The two -story Paddock Club was built over the saddling area on the south end of the facility in 1978, and a new North Grandstand was added in 1982, expanding the physical plant to its current dimensions. Through all of the additions, Priteca's origine__ clubhouse and grandstand were left intact. Their public areas, separated into small, intimate sections, set the tone for what followed, and they remain the heart of the complex. Landscape Architecture When Joe Gottstein built Longacres in 1933, he ringed the track with Lombardy poplar saplings that have since grown to nearly 100 feet in height, providing a magnificent background for the racing action. Extensive flower plantings, chiefly geraniums, and shruberies were later added to the west side of the infield. The greatest portion of the infield, however, has been left in lush grass to provide a year- around hone for Canadian geese and widgeon, and a stopover for mirating waterfowl. Sport - Longacres racing has thrilled Puget Sound area fans for 57 years, making it the longest- running professional sport in the Northwest. The track has been the site of some of thoroughbred racing's greatest moments, including world record performances by Turbulator in 1970, Grey Papa in 1972, Best Hitter in 1913 and Chinook Pass in 1982. On May 2.0, 1972, jockey Larry Pierce set a North American riding record by winning with seven of eight mounts on .a single afternoon. Longacres has hosted many of racing's most celebrated personalities, including rider Bill Shoemaker, who made his first appearance at the track When he finished second in the 1949 Longacres Mile and returned 29 years later to win the 1978 Mile aboard Bad 'N Big. Other Hall of Fame riders who have won Longacres' most prestigious race include Ralph Neves, Eddie Arcaro, Willie Hartack, Johnny Longden and Laffit Pincay, Jr. Among the great trainers who have saddled horses at the track is Charlie Whittingham, who began his career at Longacres in the 1930s and returned as one of the sport's most accomplished conditioners in 1987 to win the Longacres Mile with Judge AnRelucci. Economics Longacres has always been the chief expression of Washington's thoroughbr industry, and that industry has grown to become one of the state' s largest. Over 1,000 breeding farms occupying an estimated 25,000 acres now produce more than 2,000 thoroughbred foals per year, with most intend to run at Longacres. The track that averaged less than $100,000 in bettiinE T er day through its inaugural 39 -day meeting grew over the years to top 200,000 per day in 1954, $500,000 per day in 1971 and $1 million per day in 1979. At its 125-day 1990 meeting, Longacres drew 1,068,467 fans who wagered a total of $165,114,844 for a record daily average of $1,320,919. It also paid out $10,806,300 in purses, exclusive of bonuses and it paid roughly that much in wages and in taxes. According: to a stud,. conducted by Kiilingsworth Associates, Inc. in 1985 and updated last year, the state -wide thoroughbred industry helps to sustain from 15,000 to 20,000 jobs and produces an annual economic impact on Washington's econom of over $400,000 000. Longacres is the essential cog in that industry. Nonetheless, on September 2.7, 1990, three days after the close of its most successful season, Longacres was sold to The Boeing Company, which announced plans to raze the historic facility and build an office complex in its place. CURT SMITCH Director December 5, 1991 16018 Mill Creek Blvd., Mill Creek. WA 98012 Tel. (206) 775 -1311 Donald K. Erickson, AICP Zoning Administrator, Development Services Division Attention: Lenora Blauman, Project Manager City of Renton 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, Washington 98055 RE: BOEING LONGACRES OFFICE PARK; SCOPING NOTICE The Department of Wildlife recommends the EIS include a comprehensive study of the wildlife use of the site. The study should identify the number. of species, population sizes, periods of use and type of activity (nesting, breeding, feeding, etc.). The document should discuss the impacts expected and address mitigation measures proposed to avoid, minimize and /or compensate for these impacts. The area to the east and south of the Longacres Race Track site provides some very good wildlife habitat. Although limited in size by past development, the area is used by numerous waterfowl for feeding and resting. Sightings of many other species have been reported for this area including bald eagle, great blue heron, harrier and red - tailed hawk. Amphibians, reptiles and small mammals are likely to be found on or adjacent the site and would be affected by the project. The wetlands on the site and on adjoining properties are an important part of the habitat these wildlife species use and should be addressed in conjunction with the wildlife study. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Sincerely, e52 Tony permann Habitat Biologist TO:ks cc: Habitat, Olympia STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF WILDLIFE Valley Office Sc Industrial Park, Inc. December 4, 1991 Ms. Lenora Blauman, Project Manager Development Planning Section City of Renton Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue, S. Renton, WA 98055 RE: Boeing Longacres Office Park / Scoping of EIS Dear Ms. Blauman: PLANNING DIVISION MY' OF RENTON 1991 - E EaVED I am making this comment on behalf of Valley Office and Industrial Park, Inc. ( "Valley Office "). Valley Office is the owner of a parcel approximately 28 acres in size bordered by the extension of S.W. 19th Street on the north, the extension of Raymond Avenue S.W. on the east, the proposed P -9 channel on the south, and the Boeing Longacres Office Park on the west. In previous correspondence and agreements with the City, this parcel has been referred to as the "Van Woerden parcel." Let me say at the outset that we do not object to the development of the Boeing Longacres Office Park. We are confident that the Boeing Company, in consultation with the City of Renton and other agencies, will carry out its development in a manner beneficial to the City of Renton and to the Puget Sound region. Our concerns are centered on the apparent change in alignment proposed for the extension of Oaksdale Avenue S.W. The scoping notice shows Oaksdale Avenue S.W., after it passes under 1 -405 and reaches S.W. 16th Street, jogging to the west and passing through the proposed Boeing Longacres Office Park. This is a significant change from the alignment shown for Oaksdale Avenue in numerous adopted City plans, policies and regulations. All prior City planning, including direct agreements between the City of Renton and Valley Office, showed the alignment passing through the Van Woerden parcel. See attached map. Valley Office has for years relied upon the proposed alignment of Oaksdale Avenue through its property. Such reliance was well founded due to the fact that Oaksdale Avenue was shown passing through the Van Woerden parcel in the City's Comprehensive Plan, in the Street and Arterial Plan, in the Capital Improvement Program, in plans for the Soils Conservation Service P -1 and P -9 Channels and in all previous plans for Oaksdale Avenue itself. In July, 1986 Valley Office and the City of Renton entered into an "Acquisition and Fill Agreement" for the purpose of allowing Renton to develop the P -1 Channel and Oaksdale Avenue across the Van Woerden parcel to complete the City's roads and streets plan. In return, Valley Office would be allowed to fill the Van Woerden parcel as well as its other properties in the Valley area. In implementation of this Agreement, Valley Office actually deeded certain right -of -way for Oaksdale Avenue to the City of Renton. From 1986 through 1990, Valley Office participated on a City Task Force with other property owners in the Valley, including Longacres, to develop a joint public and private transportation program to fund major improvements for the Valley area. Throughout that effort and in the transportation impact fee program eventually adopted by the City of Renton, it was understood that Oaksdale Avenue S.W. would pass through the Van Woerden parcel. Valley Office (through The Austin Company) has paid impact fees under the Interim Valley Transportation Program adopted in 1986 as well as the permanent program adopted by Ordinance No. 4283 on August 6, 1990. All of these fees were paid in reliance upon Oaksdale Avenue S.W. crossing the Van Woerden parcel. We are concerned that the relocation of Oaksdale Avenue S.W. to the west, as shown in the scoping notice, will deny reasonable access to the Van Woerden parcel. Such a relocation is in contravention of the numerous plans, policies and regulations described above. We request that the City do the following in the forthcoming Boeing Longacres Office Park EIS (or in any other EIS that is prepared for the Oaksdale Avenue project): 1. Provide an explanation, in detail, for the proposed relocation of Oaksdale Avenue S.W., providing reference to all documents and studies used to support such proposal. 2. Discuss the "land use" implications of relocating Oaksdale Avenue S.W., including inconsistencies with existing zoning, transportation and comprehensive land use plans. 3. Discuss the effects of the proposed Oaksdale relocation on "surface and ground water management" including the relationship to the P -1 and P -9 channel projects. 4. Discuss the adverse impacts of the proposed Oaksdale Avenue relocation on the Van Woerden parcel, from a "traffic and access" standpoint. Explain how traffic to and from the Van Woerden parcel would be able to use Oaksdale Avenue S.W. if it is relocated. 5. Discuss the "public service and utility" impacts on the Van Woerden parcel resulting from the proposed relocation, including fire access to the Van Woerden parcel. 6. Under "socio- economic" impacts, discuss the adverse impacts to the Van Woerden parcel of losing access to Oaksdale Avenue S.W. if it is relocated. 7. Consider and compare the following three alternatives in the EIS: City of Renton December 5, 1991 Page 2 (a) The existing Oaksdale Avenue S.W. alignment across the Van Woerden parcel with the proposed P -1 channel (210 ft. in width) between Oaksdale Avenue and the Boeing ownership to the west (see attached map); . (b) An alignment which centers on the boundary between the Van Woerden parcel and the Boeing property; (c) The proposed alignment through the Boeing property, with an extension of S.W. 19th Avenue to Oaksdale Avenue in order to connect the Van Woerden parcel with Oaksdale Avenue. We are interested in meeting soon with the appropriate City officials to further discuss the proposed alignment of Oaksdale Avenue S.W. Please respond to this letter describing the Staff and City Council process for consideration of the Oaksdale Avenue S.W. alignment and identify the appropriate persons and committees who are reviewing this subject. Please add my name to the list of interested persons to be notified in respect to the draft EIS and hearing concerning Boeing Longacres Office Park and Oaksdale Avenue S.W. Also provide notice to our local representative in Renton, Mr. Stephen C. Porter, 800 S.W. 16th St., Renton, Washington 98055 (226- 8800). Thank you for taking our comments in to account. Sincerely yours, James R. Anderson Vice President DUSTRIAL PARK, INC. Note: Please address correspondence to: JRA /jmm Attachment 3650 Mayfield Road Cleveland, Ohio 44121 City of Renton December 5, 1991 Page 3 DOX CULVERTS 10 1- 0 0 0 0 0 = 0 0 0 = 000 LONCACRES i 1 COMPANY ,1 CROUP HEALTH C0- OPERA1NE lu VALLEY OFFICE AND INDUSTRIAL PARK INC. PROPERTY MAP DETA -WEST LOT 1 DETA -WEST LOT 4 14.5 ORES \\ \\\‘ 7 ROSA BARBER RENTON � t n AcR£s' L _L\ tlt ACRES I I I1 I 1 1 • . ' SHERA101 RENTON Will erije_Y p z2.0 S cpcs -- PLANNINC: cVY o: 1-0.:.NTON 0 - 1 (1•1 ..; L!,/ V S //.7 (4Zie5 Ct(-e cS-e ‘ ()eV - G., / ahefi t57.? 4 c.7 ez)-e}t4P, a 4_ vi-t9 c p_A-- 1 _,61JJ-(3-1-1 Pe)' • ft-CP G. Ct L2A- acut 0 /--e0C—c-i- Z-- 0-14 p eit-e4 ee-741-1--; c,L-t7 C, 5 ( ; 71 3 Ct) „2"r4)/A__> s itC49 * ( ;/) c-7 e ) z- 6(.;u) c f.P6,21L I LI af-P 0 7) --R - ) ) 7 ) • AsL9-*-u- AReee9 wet- ;7 4 4 - e-t i 7 C 't- Is e erX--vLOC.---ZO et/Opc,00.4_, -- tt) )14 i'fy % wo. Cfi-f fr tY 6 /A)t l"CieleXa > a (o 1-0 a r e-u-e(9- - v) C cef,)? v.b -/-c) GcLe-,7 colL 7 icAc.4) • — c' LAv-e—c, craw44.62 4_R tia-1/ /cfewc,-ze c:27-m., 6-e0 p,t c<A7/a-e_t ectr-Qp7t ,eot p iDs-ciA — ftt;k4 < 7) ' S't PA< o E. 140. uah ?Ds c)--7 - 1 1 0 • 2)0 fre-Cez-e- BOEING LONGACRES PARK ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT SCORING COMMENTS I have l:.ved in Tukwila 18 years - 5 ye in an Apartment at the Green Apartments on interurban Av.:nue anu - To years ------------------ at the P.'anle Crest Apartments a buve In ruroen : avenue Rec2,15.e of the bad_pollution_prublem c by — Enousino oz .caries . ` 'if : ck and forth to work at Boei nfs plants and because of the b Qaaalari o ___car from other areas of the city Fo 1 n;; 'To to septeiiber my ejes : re irritated aria ,t e __ 2!J, -- _p_allu on.. _ 'his has_ never b o t h e e d me in K C° I have lived. It isn £J17 - Uctooer - v.nen tne : , l ��pr — t ? t my , e es are o£ Ti eu d1 Io - tTie h �' n ra. n c lea ring the car pollution. n w - I 'mo ir' 1 am afTTC - ted - - - - -- --- - -- - --- - -- - - -- -- - - - - -- by_this car tollut on so are many other Tulcv:ile. r, s n- -S - . bringing; in anoEner 170;Jvu viorki3r s 1.31 7 1.li3 "are 4-tzz _ thousand o f c e r II1 male a a 4 " p u ITu -r sPi rr t cr- a ---- -- i ;tp o s s i b le one . - -- ------------ ,��----- --- - -- --------- ---- -- - -- ----------- -- ---- F - o�.:ns =l ;; deal of l.a°a lil _,nu r .L�r.c;� u�•.�11L �nu b j1d their 001 heaclquar�er s on in some n � ; of the r prop�:�ty in u '_...a5! ^"..,, =sited area • This .lreo in Turc= is _: r:::• in the st:aTe anu ce instead of increaaTin6 . Name Ger. ld C . Bohnen Address Phone (Day) 243 0213 LEvening) 24o 0210 PLANNING DIVISION CIj . RENON NOV .. ; R It f�. ff.c pr 013.:4 0l J Or 61 t+rr 1rr �r t aril c 3L �^ U -�J s l O! d iC de L r y .15 .L ,_; Q c - 1757cr - t no sa Eat { 1UCKLESNOOT W TRIBE FISHERIES DEPARTMENT 40405 AUBURN - ENUMCLAW ROAD - AUBURN, WASHINGTON 88002 (206) 825 -7030 - FAX # (206] 825 -9027 Ms. Lenora Blauman, Project Manager Development Planning Section City of Renton Municipal Building 200 Mill Avenue South Renton, WA 98055 RE: SCOPINc NOTICE FOR THE BOEING LONGACRES OFFICE PARK Dear Ms. Blauman: 1. Affected Environment 2. Scope of the EIS 5 December, 1991 c PI Jtlj�iiN G DNISI ' C. f:4 , -i We have reviewed the Determination of Significance and request for comments on the scope of the Environmental Impact Statement for the above project. The following comments are forwarded in order to protect the fisheries and fisheries habitat in the Usual and Accustomed (U and A) areas of fishing of the Muckleshoot Indian Tribe. The proposed work would potentially increase the amount of e sediments and priority pollutants discharged to Springbrook Creek (WRIA 09.0005) which provides habitat for coho salmon. The fisheries resources will also be adversely impacted by increased peak storm flows and decreased summer low flows resulting from the increased impervious surface area. The site is near known Native American archeological sites; therefore the potential exists for impacts to undiscovered sites in the vicinity of the proposed development. The Environmental Impact Statement must assess potential impacts to downstream fisheries resources. Increased discharges of priority pollutants and increased runoff from the project site will affect the fisheries in a number of ways as outlined in (C) below. Ensuring that EPA water quality criteria are met instream and that instream flow rates are limited to those which maintain good habitat will require that the project applicants. consider upstream as well as project effects. Project impacts must be assessed utilizing watershed hydrologic and water quality models. The following information should be specifically addressed by an environmental assessment: A. Habitat and Water Quality Assessment (1) Describe quantitatively and qualitatively the fishery resource, current and historical, and the fishery habitat community structure in the reach of Springbrook Creek downstream of the proposed development. (2) Determine the importance, or potential importance, of the impacted region in providing nutrients or food incorporated into the downstream salmonid food chain. Identify the environmental variables (lack of suitable habitat, water quality, fish passage) limiting salmonid production in Springbrook creek. (4) Analyze project stormwater (quality and quantity) impacts to Springbrook Creek. The EIS must examine the effects of priority pollutant discharges (copper, zinc, and lead in particular) upon stream water quality requirements as defined by EPA Water Quality Criteria for Aquatic Life. ( B. Cultural and Archaeological Assessment (1) Identify known and suspected Native American archaeological sites at the project site. C. Potential Adverse Impacts Potential impacts to the salmonid fisheries resource should be identified and alternatives proposed. These impacts include behavioral and physiological changes, decreased growth rates, and increased mortality. Environmental impacts will arise from any of the following conditions, acting singularly or collectively, which should be discussed in the Environmental Impact Statement: (1) Increased rates of runoff which through scouring of channels, siltation, or physical displacement reduce spawning and rearing habitat. (2) Increased rates of runoff which through erosion remove essential streamside vegetation. Modifications to water temperature and seasonal instream flows resulting from changes in seasonal runoff patterns and groundwater recharge. (3) /IUCKLESHODT INDIAN TRIBE FISHERIES DEPARTMENT 40405 AUBURN - ENUMCLAW ROAD - AUBURN, WASHINGTON 96002 (206) 825 -7030 - FAX # (206) 825 -0027 (4) Increased discharges of pollutants, including priority pollutants, exerting sublethal effects on salmonid growth, migration, .and behavior. (5) Increased discharges of pollutants and pesticides which may alter invertebrate community structure both in the riparian buffers, which provide an important food source to rearing salmonids, and in the creek. Exposure and damage to artifacts of historical and cultural importance to the Muckleshoot Tribe. (6) 3. Mitigation Measures Potential adverse impacts should be addressed through development alternatives analyses, site design features, and end of pipe facilities. If local building codes, such as height restrictions, discourage or preclude appropriate environmental site design, Boeing Staff should work with local officials to identify design alternatives which meet environmental and traditional objectives. If necessary, variances to local code requirements should be proposed. Mitigation measures should include, but not be limited to: A. Impervious areas shall be minimized to promote ground water recharge. (1) Parking facilities should be placed beneath the above grade structures. (2) Building floor space should be accommodated by increasing the building height rather than the footprint. B. Stormwater discharge (1) (2) (3) Discharge hydrographs must:be reduced from pre - development conditions. A. comparison of pre- and post - development discharge 'hydrographs should be submitted as part of a master drainage plan. The applicant will demonstrate that stormwater treatment utilizing soil infiltration detention storage is not feasible before considering alternative treatment technologies. Stormwater detention times:should be a minimum of 24 hours for the 2 year, 3 day event. (4) Hydrographs based upon historical storm precipitation data will be included in the drainage submittal. Hydrologic design will be based upon a 7 -day event_ (5) Any water treatment system or component of that system must not be located within 100 feet of Springbrook creek, or its associated wetlands. C. Wetland and stream mitigation (1) Plans for wetland habitat restoration will be based upon a quantitative assessment of lost habitat values in both the fill and mitigation areas. Absent such assessment, wetlands should be mitigated at a creation /fill acreage ratio of 2:1. (2) Mitigation for lost wetlands, or relocation of stream channels, must be completed prior to filling or grading. (3) Plans for stream rehabilitation should be prepared and integrated with the wetlands mitigation plan. Plan integration will allow the 'applicant to realize cost - effective design, flood control and sustainable habitat benefits. Rehabilitation activities could include: (1) Improvement of spawning habitat by introducing spawning gravel or gravel traps; (2) Improvement of rearing habitat by planting overhanging native riparian vegetation, emplacing large organic debris or boulders into the channel, or constructing side channels to provide refuge from extreme stormwater flows. E. cultural and archaeological preservation (1) Construction activities should be immediately halted and the Tribe notified if artifacts which could be of concern to Tribal members are uncovered. (2) A qualified archaeological consultant should be available to provide on -call services to assist in the identification of Native American artifacts. Consideration should be given to whether onsite or offsite mitigation will be more effective in mitigating impacts and restoring lost functions and values. Often, onsite mitigation will not be successful due to upstream impacts, therefore, effort devoted to offsite watershed mitigations may ensure onsite mitigations are more effective, sustainable, and provide for restoration of previously lost fisheries functions and values. L/'ucKLESHDDT INDIAN TRIBE FISHERIES DEPARTMENT 40405 AUBURN - ENUMCLAW ROAD - AUBURN, WASHINGTON 98002 (206) 925 -7030 - FAX # (206) 825 -9027 Implementation of the comments in this letter will ensure that mitigation is more effective and aid in the restoration of Springbrook Creek. Thank you for your attention to these comments. Please direct any questions to me at 825 - 7030. c: DOF /Randy Carman Roder k Habitat Specialist A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project: Longacres Park 4. Date checklist prepared: May 9, 1991 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Renton No. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008 -0352 /SB910770.1501 -4 CITY OF RENTON ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST May 9, 1991 2. Name of applicant: The Boeing Company P.O. Box 3707 M/S 13 -03 Seattle, Washington 98124 -2207 Fred Stewart (206) 655 -2072 (Plant 2) (206) 342 -1130 (Everett) 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: The Boeing Company P.O. Box 3707 M/S 13 -03 Seattle, Washington 98124 -2207 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The site is proposed to be constructed in two phases. The Envi- ronmental Impact Statement will address impacts of Phase 1 at the project level of detail, and of Phase.2 at the programmatic level. See Exhibits A and C for detail. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. Page 1 5/8/91 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. The following reports have been prepared: "An Analysis of the Distribution and Jurisdictional Status of Waters of the United States, Including Wetlands at Longacres Park, Renton, Washington" by L.C. Lee and Associates. (January 3, 1991) "Report Geotechnical Engineering Services, Boeing Longacres Park, Renton, Washington" by Geo Engineers. (January 23, 1991) "Environmental Site Assessment Broadacres Property, Renton, Washington" by Landau Associates, Inc. (August 31, 1990) Other reports may be prepared as required for SEPA purposes. 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. None for the project site; we understand that there is a pending proposal for the property immediately west of the Longacres Park site. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Federal: State of Washington: • Department of Natural Resources: Ground Water Removal Permit • Department of Fisheries: Hydraulics Permit • Department of Ecology - State Water Quality Certification (Only If Corps Permit Required) - Waste Discharge Permit (Only If METRO Effluent Used for Irrigation) - NPDES Permit - Prevention of Significant Deterioration (of Air Quality) (PSD) Approval • Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency • Notice and Approval of Construction of New Air ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008 -0352 /SB910770.150] -4 (POSSIBLE PERMITS) • 404(s) (Corps of Engineers) - Inwater Construction - Wetlands Modification • Letter of Map Revision (FEMA) (100 -year flood plain designation) Page 2 5/8/91 B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008 -0352 /sB910770.1501-4 Contaminant Source(s); Registration of Air Contaminant Source(s) City of Renton: • Demolition Permit • Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (If Required) • Contract Rezone • Site Plan Approval • Clearing and Grading Permits • Utility Permit • Building Permits • Sewer Hookup Permit • Conditional Use Permit (Helipad) 11. Give a 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 as- pects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) The project description is attached as Exhibit A. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range of boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to dupli- cate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. The site is Longacres Park, Longacres Drive, Renton, Washington 98057. The legal description, site plan, vicinity map and topography map are attached as Exhibits B, C, D and E. a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other Flat, with slight slopes. Page 3 5/8191 b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 6 %, except for drainage ditches where bank slopes are greater. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. The site is located in an area of soils classified by the USDA Soil Conservation Survey (1973) as "urban land ". Soils modi- fied by distribution of natural layers with addition of fill material. Soils are believed to be predominantly inter - layered silt, sandy silt, silty sand and sands underlaid or interbedded with marine (Estuarine) organic silt and fluvial sand. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The site will be graded and excavation required for building foundations and utilities. Details will be provided in the EIS. Some fill will be required to replace excavated material and to raise the elevation of buildings, roads and parking lots. Neither the source nor quantities of fill are known at this time but will be described in the Environmental Impact Statement. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Yes. Precipitation and surface water runoff may cause erosion during clearing, grading and construction. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious sur- faces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Approximately 64 %. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Appropriate measures, such as silt fences, hay bale filters and settlement ponds, will be used to control erosion during construction. After construction, exposed soils will be landscaped with stabilizing vegetation. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008 -0352 /SB910770.1501-4 Page 4 5/8/91 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during con- struction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities, if known. During construction, vehicle and construction equipment and dust will be released. However, this will be minimized by ensuring that machines and equipment are well maintained and that the site is wetted to reduce fugitive dust emissions. After completion, vehicle emissions will be released. Natural gas fixed steam boilers may be used for heating. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. Emissions and odor from the proposed Metro sewage treatment plant expansion may affect the proposal. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Mitigation measures will meet or exceed all applicable stan- dards as required by the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency and the Department of Ecology and will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. 3. Water a. Surface (1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year -round and seasonal streams, salt- water, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and pro- vide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. Spring Brook Creek and its associated wetlands are situated on the Northeastern boundary of the site. This stream flows into the Green River via the Black River pump station. The Green River passes about 1.1 mile to the west of the site. L.C. Lee & Associates' Wetlands Study delineates wetlands on the site. Surface waters will be addressed in the Environ- mental Impact Statement. (2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Yes. Details and plans will be provided in the Environ- mental Impact Statement. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008 -0352 /SB910770.1501 -4 Page 5 5/8191 b. Ground: • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008 -0352 /88910770.150] -4 (3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indi- cate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. No wetlands will be filled. No dredged material will be placed in or removed from designated wetlands. 1.94 acres of Waters of United States in the central eastern portion of the site will be filled (now the practice track). The source of fill is unknown, but will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. (4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diver- sions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. Yes. The existing connection point to SpringBrook Creek will be relocated to an appropriate point on site. See Flood Plain and Storm Water Report, April 30, 1991. (5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Yes. See topographical map, Exhibit E. (6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and antici- pated volume of discharge. No. (1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approx- imate quantities, if known. Dewatering during construction will be required for exca- vations below the existing water table. Approximately 15 million gallons per year may be withdrawn from ground water for irrigation of landscaped areas. (2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: domes- tic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals . . .; agricultural; etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. None. Page 6 5/8/91 c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 4. Plants (1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Storm water runoff will result from impervious surfaces constructed on site. It will be collected by a new storm drainage system constructed for the site and will flow into SpringBrook Creek. See Flood Plain and Storm Water Report, April 30, 1991 (2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: The storm water drainage system will be designed to conform to the Storm Water Management Manual for the Puget Sound Region. Appropriate mitigation measures will be taken during construc- tion and upon completion, and will be addressed in the Environ- mental Impact Statement. See Flood Plain and Storm Water Report, April 30, 1991. a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous trees: alder, maple, aspen, poplar, other evergreen trees: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Until the flood plain elevation is confirmed and elements that need to be out of the flood plain are identified (i.e., build- ings, roads, parking), the amount of existing vegetation re- quired to be removed is undetermined. These issues will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008 -0352 /SB910770.150]-4 Page 7 5/8/91 d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: The landscaping plan is not yet determined, but will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, ducks and geese mammals: none fish: salmon in SpringBrook Creek b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. A bald eagle observed on the site on November 27, 1990. This was an isolated observation, and no evidence indicates that this site is regularly frequented by bald eagles. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Yes. The site is within the Pacific Flyway migration route. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: A contiguous park connecting all on -site wetlands is proposed. This park will include large open spaces and wetlands which will accommodate wildlife. 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Electricity and natural gas will be utilized to heat, cool and light the buildings. District heating /cooling, a method of extracting heat /cooling from the METRO Renton Treatment Plant effluent, is being investigated and may be incorporated if found to be feasible. Energy and Natural Resource issues will be addressed in the EIS. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST (03008 -0352 /813910770.150] -4 Page 8 5/8/91 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. The buildings will be designed to meet the energy codes and to minimize heat loss and energy wastage. A computerized energy management system will monitor systems operations to assure optimal performance. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. (1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. (2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: Not applicable. b. Noise (1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Background noise from I -405 and nearby trains. (2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associ- ated 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. Normal construction noise will occur during construction operations (approximately 7:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.), and increases in traffic noise during construction and after project completion will occur. (3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST (03008 -0352 /SB910770.150) -4 Page 9 5/8/91 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Current use is a horse - racing track. Uses of surrounding prop- erties are described in Exhibit F. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. Yes. The site was used for a dairy farm from at least the mid - 1920s until 1933, when the Longacres Race Track was opened. It has been used as a racetrack since. c. Describe any structures on the site. There are a number of structures on the site, including a grandstand, horse barns, mobile home trailers and the adminis- tration building and the thoroughbred breeders office. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? Yes. All of the existing structures on the site will be de- molished and utility services removed. Some utility services that cross the site will be relocated. See Exhibit G. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? The property is presently zoned B -1. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Commercial. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designa- tion of the site? A portion of the site adjoining SpringBrook has been designated as "Urban Environment" by the Shoreline Master Program of the City of Renton. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the com- pleted project? There will be no residential use. Approximately 12,000 people will be employed at Longacres Park when it is completed. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008 -0352 /S13910770.150J -4 Page 10 5/8/91 j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Approximately 80 permanent and 800 seasonal employees will be displaced. Residents of approximately 30 mobile homes will be displaced from the trailer park currently located on the site. k. Proposed measures to avoid or any: Relocation assistance will be trailer park. 9. Housing reduce displacement impacts, if provided to residents of the I. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The proposed use is compatible with the comprehensive plan commercial designation and the existing B -1 zoning classifica- tion; in cooperation with the City's intent, a contract rezone to Office Park will be requested. A conditional use permit will be required for the helipad. Land use issues will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? indicate whether high -, middle- or low- income housing. No living units will be provided. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high -, middle -, or low- income housing. Approximately 30 rental mobile homes will be eliminated. Housing income level is unknown. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Appropriate mitigation measures will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not includ- ing antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The tallest height of proposed structures will be approximately 95 feet. The principal exterior building materials proposed are painted metal and nonreflective glass. Details will be provided in the Environmental Impact Statement. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST Page 11 [03008 -0352 /SB910770.1501 -4 5/8/91 b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: Maintaining a campus -like environment; preservation of open areas and vegetation, where possible; preservation and enhance- ment of existing wetlands; integrated site landscaping; design and construction of structures in scale and bulk compatible with surrounding uses and structures; use of exterior building materials and building treatments compatible with surrounding uses. 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? The extent of light and glare, if any, that the proposal will produce is unknown, but will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. b, Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Unknown; these issues will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. c. What existing off -site sources of Tight or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None presently known; if applicable, appropriate measures will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. 12. Recreation ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008 -0352 /S11910770.1501 -4 a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? None. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. Yes. A horse racing track will be displaced. Page 12 5/8/91 c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: Jogging and walking trails will be provided. 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archae- ological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on the site plans, if any. 16th Street in the City of Tukwila and 19th, 23rd, 24th (Strander), and Oaksdale Streets in the City of Renton will serve the site. See Site Plan, Exhibit C. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes. During racing season, from April through September. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? The project will have approximately 8,370 parking spaces and will eliminate approximately 8,720 existing parking spaces. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improve- ments to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). Yes. Transportation impacts and appropriate mitigation mea- sures, including new roads or streets, if any, or improvements ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008 -0352 /SB910770.1501-4 Page 13 5/8/91 to existing roads or streets, if any, will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. A helipad will be constructed on site. Burlington Northern and Union Pacific Railroad tracks are near the site. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. Unknown. Vehicle trips per day and transportation impacts will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, as necessary, will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. Yes. The project will result in increased needs for Fire and Police protection provided by the City of Renton. Public Services will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any: Sprinkler systems will be installed in each building to reduce fire hazards and there will be a roving Boeing Security Force on site. A perimeter security fence may be provided. Each building will have controlled access. Increased tax revenues from the completed project can provide funding for the ad- ditional needed public services. Appropriate mitigation measures, if needed, will be addressed in the Environmental Impact Statement. 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008- 0352/S8910770.1501 -4 Page 14 5/8/91 C. SIGNATURE Electricity, natural gas, domestic water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer and storm sewer. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Utility Proposed Electricity Natural gas Water Refuse Service Telephone Sanitary Sewer Storm Sewer Construction activities on site or in the immediate vicinity which will be needed for installation of utilities are: 1. An electrical substation may be constructed on the site. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008 -0352 /SB910770.150] -4 2. Electrical transmission and distribution lines may be buried underground. 3. Relocate 36" sewer line. 4. Relocate two 115 kv power lines. 5. Relocate gas pipeline. The above answers are true and • lete the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead a elyin on them to make its decision. Signature: / //F Date Submitted: 4Qy 9,/99I Purveyor Puget Sound Power and Light Washington Natural Gas City of Renton Rainier Disposal US West City of Renton and Metro The Boeing Company Page 15 5/8/91 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008- 0352/SB910770.150] -4' EXHIBIT A [Project Description] Page. 16 5/8/91 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008- 0352/SB910770.1501 -4 EXHIBIT E [Topography Map] Page 20 5/8/91 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008- 0352/SB910770.1501 -4 EXHIBIT B [Legal Description] Page 17 5/8/91 Parcel A:. LONGACRES PARK LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS That portion of Henry A. Meader's donation land claim No. 46 and of the Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 of section 24, Township 23 North, Range 4 East W.M. described as follows: Beginning at the Southeast corner of said section; Thence North 87. 18' 57 " West along the South line thereof a distance of 881.10 feet; Thence North 02' 46' 03 "East 1,327.44 feet to the North line of said Southeast 1/4 of the Southeast 1/4 and the true point of beginning; Thence North 87.26' 45 " West along said North line 504.52 feet to the Northwest corner of said subdivision; Thence South 00 ' 56' 17 " West along the West line thereof 68.96 feet; Thence South 87 • 13 ' 57 " East 63.42 feet; Thence South 02 • 46' 03 " West 340.00 feet; Thence South 87 * 13 ' 57 " East 438.90 feet; Thence North 02' 46' 03 "East 410.80 feet to the true point of ,beginning; Situate in the City of Renton, County of King, State of Washington. Exhibit B DESCRIPTION (continued): PARCEL 8: AND GOVERNMENT LOT 14, SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST W.M.; THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT. 8, SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST N.M., LYING EAST OF THE NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY RIGHT -OP -MAY AND SOUTH OF SOUTH 153RD STREET, PORNERLY JOIOWN AS RENTON JUNCTION PAVED HIGHWAY SURVEY N0. 1599 P.B. N0. 26; AND THAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST N.M., LYING SOUTH OF SOUTH 153RD STREET, FORMERLY KNOWN AS RENTON JUNCTION PAVED HIGHWAY SURVEY N0. 1599 P.H. N0. 26; AND THAT PORTION OF HENRY A. MEADER'S DONATION LAND CLAIM N0. 46, SECTIONS 24 AND 25, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST W.K., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING 438.9 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID DONATION CLAIM; THENCE SOUTH 340 FEET; THENCE WEST 485.1 FEET; THENCE SOUTH TO A POINT 410 FEET NORTH OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID DONATION CLAIM; THENCE WEST TO THE EAST LINE OF TEE NORTHERN PACIPIC RAILWAY RIGHT -OP -NAY; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF SAID RIGHT -OF -WAY TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID DONATION CLAIM; THENCE EAST TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY BY DEED RECORDED JULY 2, 1923, UNDER RECORDING N0. 1755253; AND EXCEPT ANY PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN THE RIGHT -OF -WAY OF SOUTHWEST 16TH STREET (SOUTH 153RD STREET) AS PRESENTLY ESTABLISHED; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF RING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. DESCRIPTION (continued): PARCEL C: THAT PORTION OF HENRY A. MEADER'S DONATION LAND CLAIM N0. 46, SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH. RANGE 4 EAST M.M.. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID DONATION CLAIM AND THE EAST LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT 10 IN THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF SAID SECTION 25; . THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF HENRY A. MEADER'S DONATION LAND CLAIM N0. 46 TO THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY RIGHT -OF -WAY; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID RIGHT -OP -NAY TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE BOW LAKE PIPE LINE AS CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING N0. 418108 ?; THENCE EASTERLY AND NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE OF BOW LAKE PIPE LINE TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH A NORTHERLY EXTENSION IN A STRAIGHT LINE .OF THE EAST LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT 10; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID STRAIGHT LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON. COUNTY OP KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL D: DESCRIPTION (continued): EXCEPT THAT PORTION, IF ANY, LYING EASTERLY OF A LINE DESCRIBED AS: SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING. STATE OF WASHINGTON. THAT PORTION OF HENRY A. MEADER'S DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 46, SECTIONS 24 AND SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST M.K., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID DONATION CLAIM 340.00 FEET SOUTH OF TEE NORTHEAST CORNER THEREOF; THENCE NORTH 87'00'27" VEST, PARALLEL TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID DONATION CLAIM, 924.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 01'02'53" WEST, PARALLEL TO TEE EAST LINE OF SAID DONATION CLAIM, 1,231.69 FEET, KORE OR LESS. TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF THE CITY OF SEATTLE BOW LAKE PIPELINE RIGHT -OF -WAY AS CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 4131067; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 87'11'02" EAST 6.84 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE: THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 122.55 FEET. A DISTANCE OF 42.82 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE NORTH 72'47'23" EAST 725.37 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE ALONG A CURVE TO THE RIGHT. HAVING A RADIUS OF 935.00 FEET, A DISTANCE OF 189.87 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE INTERSECTION OF THE EAST.LINE OF SAID DONATION CLAIN; THENCE NORTH 01'02'53" EAST ALONG SAID EAST LINE 926.34 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; BEGINNING THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST W.M.; THENCE NORTH 87'18'57" WEST ALONG TBE SOUTH LINE THEREOF A DISTANCE OF 881.10 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING OF THE HEREIN DESCRIBED LINE; THENCE NORTH 02 EAST A DISTANCE OF 1,327.44 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT 13 OF SAID SECTION 24 DISTANT THEREON 504.52 FEET EASTERLY OF THE NORTHWEST CORNER THEREOF AND THE TERMINUS OF SAID LINE; PARCEL E: DESCRIPTION (continued): THAT PORTION 0P THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 24. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH..8ANGE 4 EAST M.M.. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE WEST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 MITE THE SOUTH MARGIN OF HEAT IS KNOWN AS NELSON COUNTY ROAD (S.W. 16T0 STREET) IN SECTION 24; TEENCE SOUTH 00'33'45" EAST 1.107.56 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE SOUTH 88'55'20" EAST 920 FEET, MORE OR LESS, ALONG TEE • SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST 1/4 TO TEE CENTER OF WHAT IS KNOWN AS WHITE RIVER DITCH NO. 1; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID DITCH AS FOLLOWS: NORTH 19 WEST 170 FEET; THENCE NORTH 43'20'00" NEST 300 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87'50'00" WEST 182 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47 WEST 252 FEET; THENCE NORTH 30 WEST 416 FEET; THENCE NORTH 12'14'40" WEST 219.05 FEET, MORE OR LESS. TO THE SOUTH MARGIN OF SAID NELSON COUNTY ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 88 WEST 40 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING WITHIN TEE WRITE RIVER DRAINAGE DITCH NO. 1; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF RENTON BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 8911030810; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF RING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL P: DESCRIPTION (continued): THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOTS 10 AND 11, SECTION 28. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTE, RAN0E -4 EAST M.R.. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT TEE INTERSECTION OF TEE SOUTH LINE OF HENRY A. MEADER'S DONATION LAND CLAIM NO 48 AND TEE EAST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 10; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID EAST LINE 255.38 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ON A STRAIGHT LINE TO A POINT ON TIE EAST LINE OF THE NORTEERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY RIGHT -OF -WAY 289.12 FEET SOUTHERLY, AS MEASURED ALONG SAID RIGHT- OF-WAY LINE, FROM THE INTERSECTION OF SAID RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE AND TIN SOUTH LINE OF SAID DONATION LAND CLAIM; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF THE NORTEERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY RIGHT -OF -MAY TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID DONATION LAND CLAIM; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO TEE POINT OF BEGINNING; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF ICING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. DESCRIPTION (continued): PARCEL 0: THOSE PORTIONS OP 00VERNNENT LOTS 10 AND 11, THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, AND ?HE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4, SECTION 25. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST M.M., LYING NORTH OF A LINE PARALLEL AND 545.6 FEET NORTH, MEASURED ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4, AND TEE INTERSECTION OF THE EAST -WEST 1/4 LINE OF SAID SECTION WITE,THE EAST LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND EAST OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED LINE: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST -WEST 1/4 LINE OF SAID SECTION, 60 FEET EAST, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM TEE EAST LINE OF THE BURLINGTON NORTHERN RIGHT-OF-WAY; THENCE NORTHERLY 1,200 FEET PARALLEL TO•SAID EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -MAY LINE TO A POINT; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY TO A POINT ON SAID EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE DISTANT 289.12 FEET SOUTH ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT -OP -WAY LINE FROM THE INTERSECTION OF. HENRY A. MEADER'S DONATION LAND CLAIM N0. 46 AND SAID EASTERLY RIGHT -OP -WAY LINE OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH.LINE OF HENRY A. MEADER'S DONATION LAND CLAIM N0. 46 AND THE EAST LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT 10; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID EAST LINE A DISTANCE OF 255.38 FEET; THENCE WESTERLY ON A STRAIGHT LINE TO A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY RIGHT -OF -WAY 289.12 FEET SOUTHERLY, AS MEASURED' ALONG SAID RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE. PROI[ THE INTERSECTION OF SAID RIGHT -OF -MAY LINE AND THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID DONATION LAND CLAIN; TRENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EAST LINE OF THE, NORTHERN PACIFIC RAILWAY COMPANY RIGHT -OF -WAY TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID DONATION LAND CLAIN; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF RING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. DESCRIPTION (continued): PARCEL H: THAT PORTION OF THE FORMER PUGET SOUND SHORE RAILROAD COMPANY'S SEATTLE LINE IN GOVERNMENT LOT 8, SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST W.M., LYING BETWEEN THE PRESENT RIGHT -OP -MAY OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN INC.'S SEATTLE LINE AND A LINE PARALLEL TO AND DISTANT NORTHERLY 2,160 FEET, MORE OR LESS, FROM THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 24, TO TIM SOUTH ABUTXENT OF ABANDONED BRIDGE ON THE OLD NORTHERN PACIPIC RAILWAY COMPANY'S MIN LINE; ALSO, A STRIP OF LAND ON THE EASTERLY SIDE OF THE FORMER PUGET SOUND SHORE RAILROAD COMPANY'S FORMER SEATTLE LINE RIGHT -OF -WAY IN HENRY A. MEADER'S DONATION LAND CLAIM NO. 46 AND IN GOVERNMENT LOT 8, SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT OF INTERSECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SECTION 24 WITH THE CENTERLINE OF THE MOST WESTERLY MAIN TRACK OF BURLINGTON NORTHERN, INC., AS CONSTRUCTED AND OPERATED, SAID MAIN LINE ALSO BEING THE CENTERLINE OF THE FORMER PUGET SOUND SHORE RAILWAY COMPANY'S ORIGINAL 100 FOOT RIGHT -OF -WAY; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID FORMER RAILWAY COMPANY'S MAIN TRACK CENTERLINE 1,058 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID MAIN TRACT CENTERLINE 50 FEET TO A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF THE FORMER RAILWAY COMPANY'S RIGHT -OP -WAY AND THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTHERLY ALONG SAID EASTERLY RIGHT -OP -WAY LINE 447 FEET; THENCE EASTERLY, AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE 20 PEET; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG A LINE PARALLEL TO AND DISTANT 20 PEET EASTERLY TO SAID EASTERLY RIGHT -OF -WAY LINE, 410 FEET; THENCE ALONG A STRAIGHT LINE 42 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING ; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR HIGHWAY BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 8412140016; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OP RING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. DESCRIPTION (continued): PARCEL I: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST M.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT TIE INTERSECTION OF TBE NORTH MARGIN OF SOUTH 153RD STREET (ALSO KNOWN AS BOND ISSUE ROAD N0. 10, SURVEY N0. 1152), WITH TBE WEST BOUNDARY OF C.D.'HILLMAN'S EARLINGTON GARDENS ADDITION TO TBE CITY OF SEATTLE, DIVISION N0. 1, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 17 OF PLATS, PAGE 74, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH MARGIN 350 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH MARGIN 257 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID SOUTH 153RD STREET TO THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN OF THE RIGHT -OF -WAY OP PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY N0. 1, AS ESTABLISHED BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING N0. 5548715; THENCE NORTSSASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN TO A LINE DRAWN NORTHERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE NORTH MARGIN OF SAID 153RD STREET THROUGH THE TRUE POINT OP BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID LAST DESCRIBED LINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; (ALSO BEING KNOWN AS THAT PORTION OF TRACTS 8, 10, 11 AND 12, SUNSET HOME GARDENS, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF, LYING SOUTHERLY OP PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY N0. 1); SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. PARCEL J: DESCRIPTION (continued): THAT PORTION OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY LYING SOUTHERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF BLACK RIVER JUNCTION ROAD, ALSO KNOWN AS SECONDARY HIGHWAY N0. 1 -L, AS CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING N0. 2919483: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTEEAST 1/4 AND OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTEIBAST 1/4. SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH. RANGE 4 BAST W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT TEE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF BOND ISSUE ROAD N0. 10 "SURVEY N0. 1142` NOW SOUTH 153RD STREET, WITH TEE WEST BOUNDARY OF C.D. HILL MAN'S EARLINGTON GARDENS ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SEATTLE, DIVISION N0. 1, AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 17 OF PLATS, PAGE 74, RECORDS OF RING COUNTY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY MARGIN 607 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE CONTINUING WESTERLY ALONG SAID NORTHERLY MARGIN 120 FEET; THENCE AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID NORTHERLY MARGIN, NORTHERLY 715 FEET, MORE OR LESS. TO THE SOUTHEASTERLY MARGIN OF THE PUGET SOUND ELECTRIC RAILWAY RIGHT -OP -WAY "SEATTLE - RENTON INTERURBAN RIGHT -OF -MAY "; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY MARGIN TO INTERSECT A LINE DRAWN NORTHERLY AND AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE NORTHERLY MARGIN OF SAID BOND ISSUE ROAD NO. 10, THROUGH THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTHERLY, ALONG THE LAST DESCRIBED LINE. 745 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON FOR HIGHWAY PURPOSES BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 5500257; (ALSO BEING KNOWN AS THAT PORTION OF TRACTS 7 AND 8, SUNSET HOME GARDENS, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF, LYING SOUTHERLY OF SECONDARY HIGHWAY NO. 1 -L); SITUATE IN THE CITY'.OF RENTON, COUNTY OF RING. STATE OF WASHINGTON. DESCRIPTION (continued): PARCEL K: ,. THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 AND OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST K.K.. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING ON THE NORTH (MARGIN OF SOUTH 153RD STREET (S.W. 16TH ST). AS CONVEYED TO RING COUNTY BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 1144220, AT A POINT WHICH IS 727 FEET WEST OP.THE WEST LINE OF C.D. HILLMAN'S EARLINGTON GARDENS ADDITION TO THE CITY OF SEATTLE, DIVISION NO. 1. AS PER PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 17 OF PLATS, PAGE 74, RECORDS OF RING COUNTY; THENCE VEST ALONG SAID STREET LINE 62 FEET; THENCE NORTHERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO SAID STREET MARGIN 350 FEET. MORE OR LESS, TO THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF RENTON JUNCTION WAY (SECONDARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1 -L) AS CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 2919489; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID LINE 68 FEET, MORE OR LESS,'TO A POINT ON A LINE DRAWN FROM THE POINT OF BEGINNING, NORTHERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 183RD STREET; THENCE SOUTHERLY 370 FEET, MORE OR LESS. TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING NORTHERLY OF A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND 100 FEET DISTANT SOUTHERLY WHEN MEASURED RADIALLY FROM THE P. A. 1. - 405 CENTERLINE SURVEY OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1, JCT. SSH 82 -M TO JCT. PSH *2 IN RENTON, AS CONDEMNED IN RING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. 594806; (ALSO BEING KNOW AS THAT PORTION OF TRACT 6, SUNSET HOME GARDEN TRACTS, ACCORDING TO THE UNRECORDED PLAT THEREOF, LYING SOUTH OF RENTON JUNCTION WAY); SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF ICING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. DESCRIPTION (continued): PARCEL L: TEAT PORTION OF THE NORTHWEST 1/4 OP THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OP SECTION 24, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST W.M.. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING ON THE NORTH. LINE OP THE SOUTH 153RD STREET AT A POINT WHICH IS 789 FEET WESTERLY FROM THE WEST LINE OP 80TH AVENUE SOUTH; THENCE NORTHERLY, AT RIGHT ANGLES, TO THE SOUTH LINE OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO INTERSECT A LINE PROJECTED NORTHERLY AT RIGHT ANGLES TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 153RD STREET FROM A POINT THEREON 854 FEET WESTERLY FROM THE WEST LINE OF SAID 80TH AVENUE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG SAID PROJECTED LINE TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH 153RD STREET; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID LAST DESCRIBED LINE 65 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF 77TH AVENUE SOUTH, VACATED BY THE CITY OF RENTON ORDINANCE NO. 2192, AS WOULD ATTACH BY OPERATION OF LAW; SITUATE IN THE CITY OF RENTON, COUNTY OF RING, STATE OF WASHINGTON. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008 -0352 /S8910770.150] -4 EXHIBIT C [Site Plan] Page 18 5/8/91 Xvt 1.41:140:14400215:0.%* tr.“1:4 44" 0 ),.. \\— --------- l5BTB ST Phase I Phase II May 9, 1991 rrizoc _. .1 I - 4 itC4. ■•••.1'.• To..4 • .4 taaWageSk4Womi LONGACRES PARK MASILIt PLAN z 0 1-40 TH STREET IBTH 23RD STREET SUBSTATION 11 0 Exhibit C ILLUSTRATIVE 075 .00 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST 103008 -0352 /SB910770.150] -4 EXHIBIT D [Vicinity Map] Page 19 5/8/91 4J PROPERTY EXHIBIT F LIST OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND THEIR USES CURRENT USE ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST [03008- 0352/SB910770.150] -4 Page : 21 5/8/91 2. Helen B. Nelsen ADJACENT PROPERTIES OWNERSHIP USE 1. Alma Taylor, June Nelsen, Jack O. Nelsen; Patricia Lantz and Nancy Taylor, as Co- Trustees of the John Owen Taylor Trust 3. McLeod Group, Inc. a Washington Corporation 4. Burlington Northern Railroad Properties, Inc., a Delaware Corporation Undeveloped 7. Virgil R. Fox and A. Bernard Conley doing Residential business as Longacres Joint Venture (Contract Purchasers) 8. Melvin G. Rongerude Residential Exhibit F Undeveloped Undeveloped Primarily undeveloped 5. Valley Office & Industrial Park, Inc. Undeveloped 6. Group Health cooperative of Puget Sound Office building 9. Puget Sound Power & Light Company Electric transmission tower • • 1 Exhibit F-1 4:7 • • 0:0 • •• • • P • • :0 • • • • • • I, . ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST EXHIBIT G [Utilities Relocations] PAGE 22 5/9/91 LEGEND RELOCATED UTILITIES EASEMENT BOUNDRY = EXISTING UTILITIES - OW 1 RELOCATED TO EXISTING ATED RELOCATED LYMPIC 14" OLYMPIC NE PIPELINE - RELOCATED j 30' ELECTRICAL l EASEMENT CONNECT UTILITIES RELOi 12" 0 PIPEL RELOCATED 30,' PETROLE EASEMENT 30' SEATTLE WATER DISTRICT PIPELINE EASEMENT FOR EXIST. 60" WATERLINE EXIST. 60 "W EXIST. PUGET POWER J EXIST. 14" OLYMPIC PIPELINE EXIST. M.H. EXIST. SEA. CITY LIGHT EXIST. 12" OLYMPIC PIPELINE RELOCATED 10' METRO SEWER EASEMENT - RELOCATED 36 "SS CONNECT TO EXIST. M.H. w MOMS MX • Rya • metingigiT O AUBURN. WA. 98002 0 BELLEVUE, WA. 98007 O EVERETT, WA. 98201 O KENT WA. 98031 ■ O PORTLAND, OR. 97220 !SEAT WA. 98059 SEAATTLE. WA. 98124 MOM We i•42 -001 - n �= BMW 2 :ATTLE WATER DISTRICT NE EASEMENT FOR EXIST 'ATERLINE ■TED YMPIC E rwri. w ' LAz - )1z ~swam 11L" Mu, geraniOrm .c WI .m. ....�� 11 RELOCATED PL GET POWER 2 RELOCATED SEATTLE CITY LIGHT CONNCT RELOCATED UTILITIES TO EXISTING 'tea SW 27th ST. EXIST. M.H. 11 1 J TU RE JBSTATION XIST. 2 "S. S. F 0 0 PROPOSED U11UlY RELOCA11ON IIMISI LONAACRES PARK SITE DEVELOPMENT ORaCOHL w.mi EXIST. 60 "W Mgr RELOCATED 30' ELECTRIC EASEMENT O AUBURN, WA. 98002 0 BELLEVUE, WA. 98007 0 EVERETT, WA. 98201 0 KENT WA. 98031 0 PORTLAND, OR. 97220 S RENTON WA. 98055 SEATTLE, WA. 98124 LEGEND RELOCATED UTILITIES EASEMENT BOUNDRY = = _ - EXISTING UTILITIES EXIST. EXIST. PUGET SEA. CITY POWER LIGHT EXIST. 14" OLYMPIC PIPELINE EXIST. 12" OLYMPIC PIPELINE EXIST. M . H . RELOCATED 10' METRO SEWER EASEMENT - RELOCATED 36 "SS -\ CONNECT TO EXIST. • M.H. NM RELOCATED RELOCATED 12" •LYMPIC 14" OLYMPIC PIPEL NE- PIPELINE RELOCATED 30,' PETROLE M EASEMENT CONNECT RELOCATED UTILITIES TO EXISTING Mr 30' SEATTLE WATER DISTRICT PIPELINE EASEMENT FOR EXIST. 60" WATERLINE EXIST. 60 "W - RELOCATED 30' ELECTRICAL EASEMENT 4- o AUBURN. WA. 98002 o BELLEVUE. WA. 98007 EVERETT, WA. 9 8201 P O K 98031 o PORTLAND. OR. 97220 ■SE WA. 98053 o SEA WA. 98124 1 � roes •� �� war w ra Mow R P LOCATED GET POWER 2 RELOCATED S ATTLE CITY LIGHT CONNECT RELOCATED UTIU IES TO EXISTING SW 27th ST. EXIST. M.H. PROPOSED UTIUTY RELOCATION iti J 0 0 LONOACRES PARK SITE DEVELOPMBIT & c me. TU JB S 1S RE TA ION XIST. 2"S.S. X -00 r� r.+ NORTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION 0 SOUTH ELEVAT ONg EAST ELEVATION TK LSE A.0 LOCAfO66 0E TK [SIERRAS LOWEA5 WE TO BE AS SM000 061 TK EL[VAIO.[S IK E0TEROA LOWERS ARE 60 6l1 '*111.1 IK EXIEMOR ED tr.OSE PP.Aig65 06 OAT SW O[RS 6601 USED BY 1K 43.0616'6 YS1E1d ARC 10 BE 4.41000 066.. WEST WINO Calllson 1 • NORTH C(1(RN FACT A. =CT CI 6110T1[wtt U0 no PENO NORTH ELEVATION WEST ELEVATION 0 EAST ELEVATION NOTES : TK LSE A.0 LOCAfO66 0E TK [SIERRAS LOWEA5 WE TO BE AS SM000 061 TK EL[VAIO.[S IK E0TEROA LOWERS ARE 60 6l1 '*111.1 IK EXIEMOR ED tr.OSE PP.Aig65 06 OAT SW O[RS 6601 USED BY 1K 43.0616'6 YS1E1d ARC 10 BE 4.41000 066.. SEE 0E1. E /S611. A216 0 0 0 0- u WEST WINO Calllson 1 • NORTH C(1(RN FACT A. =CT CI 6110T1[wtt U0 no PENO b �m •J .10a1011 V 1a2 IMENBIE .� _�. __ _.. 4444_ .__ _ ._ _ ._.. _.. _.. _..- ._ - _ :- I '.:!.::_� . -_ 1 I -, w�i .. M 1 i ,iii u I t�i� , S b i �.i� .i t w r , � ii:� i filll t i 1 I �I II • i' 1• i I _: _ fir : _. .. L . _ 1 1_ .' ;; i I I _. m i mi " �� " �� ' III - - � l �}_.�;. '- iii 0 �t�0�0���aa�a�Y i , �i iii its u� ,a_r_911 44 44 1i ui iii u°i'iii�nG �Lr■!l•.y�lTa tTr.T'M1,lTv .. L I — ; - i - ..�..I•il II iT. I 1 � 1: '_.... - . .- ._ 'f- _� r H _ . J u. iiT- - •_ - I - . _.. _�. __ _.. 4444_ .__ _ ._ _ ._.. _.. _.. _..- ._ - _ :- I '.:!.::_� . -_ 1 I -, w�i .. L_ _;_.- .yiL._ 1 i . , -- -' • ; , ,ii • , • .. �.i� .i ;-1 I -_ 1 L i 1.i t iii ii illAlai rm Sidi _ "b ii�miu • i' 1• i I _: _ fir : _. .. L . _ 1 1_ .' ;; _.. ,. _ 1.i r..,. 1 ! _ _P_ i. I J�• _-- fi (( .l. - - r .. '- t'i-:,.i..� -.1 _:c l °. ; ...�. iL. - - � l �}_.�;. '- r a ' 011 OW Roo EAST ELEVATION - MO ' 000 — E I .— .4.-O 4 Y0orq II00 00 r WEST WING } /y� SCALE Ya" • r -0• 4.92 -ct42_ L 5«1 O •0 Vl0 rTh SPNUHL 0006110• 10w. 4N.5 410'1 0010&4 “ASS 1100 SPNR•it 0675 01.E • 001 01015 1110.1 SPNIML P000, 10P. LIP NPa C.475 • 11,YawIL 1Nal: MP Cw0 0..55 • 11'0,11( 001041 000,E 111 J L - -- t(, ■E1 :100(.1-0 11 P.1 • I• G,. � � N I W S SOL M Q YETN. LONr105 21 V:J 1."..J SOUTH ELEVATION - WEST WING Sca/E: y-• r•o• I 0 SCALD Ye • 1•0• - 0 a S[000 (0Oa I a•m �o- 1 W0V IBS? 11.000 oft -- l �WO'D. A TO 0 1 J —. -- TC-1LI Roy •' 511 0001 0004 000 (1.000 M5T ILOOR WEST ELEVATION - WEST WING 2 SCALE YR • V Ts 4.0...710I * *'MCI Ca. 0».a- 00.1 •m MST (1000 NORTH ELEVATION - WEST WING T1N0 (0000 (1 .01.0•f yL00.s QOM •nr•o- 544 PMME1 • LcilErarT•12 ' 50(!5.001 04.. •170••0• , NOTES : PwI ki 1 a Herr n rS lantIM INE LIE 00 (OEa100 10 11( ETTEb0R LO0IYCRS ARC CRiOR LOUVERS 0 M0 10 . 0100 i1 llC ( (4000,00 0(000140 0101E0 MO BC *000100 BY TeL Ar4lS 007041(0 (NOSE P0R1100S Of ITC 0000(05 NOT u500 BY Tr( 00.00G'S NEON STSICNS MC TO BE *4.110100 0T( 000 OCT. 60511T. At0 1.1.411■13 lqax 144.111 1 - 11.L.1 wit " ..- ' .....,., - f4.7;14:1• " "tL=L ,--4 141. _:. ......,,,,-, : .:: `.2-t-76,.. -..--:-____,,,,,,.., ..-- — - - 1- : _ .,..--; - , . ---,- ---- - -- ,-.... - - - i -- F-, F p27 — ..., -,- •••••_..... _ -,..-,.• hr...- - - ,..,.., - — ..... - ._- - . -i-. 1.,,, -- 4 - ,7-.7... - -tr._,.=,-. , -. .---- ---_, , ---, - ....,.... - r.-7,==.); - -: --- - - :}4. = ,-__-,_ ,,-.........:!..--_,.., ,...,,---....... -._,,-,...,....,_, -.....,, .,,,,,,_ .t.- :::17-.! r E Ita - r__ - : -4 .;.i.•..,, 1 my-I.... ,•■••• ... , - ' 1, . - • 1..:;.. ... .....y... .....1.1;, w. - - .-... -,... :1 11,11 ' .... • ,,,,......• ...,....... • ..... ...,......4.. ,....... . tn. ... ..t. . . , i.r - - ...._ 1 .. i- : -......;...,-.- • - ..---=,--- , • 4 ...... I ....... Z,I, r r 02-09 ia_ -` •.1 1 6.111NPI 1. f011 fa WANG Muff SU WIT 11.11•11C)C• 1. F, 1.,51.0 KW.. flfll •./.0 itt N cttr ()COL (1/17e/t) r u l suriliK : 1 II lur IR/ /-..., 3 ' wsr war, ;sr, e.c .