HomeMy WebLinkAbout11-15-2004 ITEM VIII-B-4CITY OF -
WASHINGTON
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
Agenda Subject
Date:
Application No. PLT04-0003
11/9/2004
Department: Planning
Attachments: Resolution No. 3781,
Budget Impact:
Staff Report, Vicinity Map, D.N.S.,
Application
Administrative Recommendation:
City Council to adopt Resolution No. 3781.
Background Summary:
The Hearing Examiner on September 21, 2004 conducted a public hearing on the request of Dave
Kessler, Latitude Development LLC, for a preliminary plat of four (4) parcels comprising 13.04 -acres into
12 lots to be developed in accordance with the M-1, Light Industrial standards. The property is located on
the west side of the 3800-3900 block of West Valley Highway North, approximately 310 -feet north of the
intersection of West Valley Highway North and 37th Street NW and approximately 730 -feet south of the
intersection of West Valley Highway North and South 287`h Street.
Subsequent to the hearing, the Examiner recommended to the City Council approval of the preliminary
plat.
The City Council may now either affirm the Examiner's decision, remand to the Examiner or schedule a
closed record hearing. The Council can only modify or disaffirm the Examiner's decision after conducting
their own closed record hearing.
HE\PLT04-3 KESSLER-MEREDITH
L1115-1
03.5 PLT04-0003
Reviewed by Council & Committees:
Reviewed by Departments & Divisions:
❑ Arts Commission COUNCIL COMMITTEES:
® Building ® M&O
❑ Airport ❑ Finance
❑ Cemetery ❑ Mayor
® Hearing Examiner ❑ Municipal Serv.
❑ Finance ❑ Parks
❑ Human Services ❑ Planning & CD
® Fire ® Planning
❑ Park Board [--]PublicWorks
❑ Legal ❑ Police
❑ Planning Comm. ❑ Other
® Public Works ❑ Human Resources
Action:
Committee Approval: ❑Yes ❑No
Council Approval: ❑Yes ❑No Call for Public Hearing
Referred to Until _/_/_
Tabled Until
Councilmember: Singer Staff: Krauss
meeting Date: November 15, 2004 Item Number: VIII.B.4
AUBURN * MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED
RESOLUTION NO. 3 7 8 1
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF AUBURN, WASHINGTON, APPROVING
THE PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE FOUR
PARCELS COMPRISING 13.04 ACRES INTO 12
LOTS
WHEREAS, Application No. PLT04-0003, dated January 16, 2004, has
been submitted to the City of Auburn, Washington, by Dave Kessler, requesting
approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide four parcels comprising 13.04 acres
into 12 lots within the City of Auburn; and
WHEREAS, said request above referred to was referred to the Hearing
Examiner for study and public hearing thereon; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to staff review, the Hearing Examiner conducted a
public hearing to consider said petition in the Council Chambers of the Auburn
City Hall on September 21, 2004, of which the Hearing Examiner recommended
approval of the preliminary plat on October 22, 2004; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, on November 15, 2004, considered said
request and affirmed the Hearing Examiner's recommendation for preliminary
plat based upon the following Findings of Fact and Conclusions, to -wit:
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The Applicant requests approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide four
parcels comprising 13.04 acres into 12 lots. The parcels, two of which
contain single-family homes and outbuildings to be removed, are located
310 feet north of the intersection of West Valley Highway North and 37th
Street NW, on the west side of the 3800-3900 block of West Valley
Highway North, at 3815 West Valley Highway North, Auburn,
Resolution No. 3781
November 9, 2004
Page 1
Washington. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 1 and 2; Exhibit 4,
Environmental Checklist Application.
2. The Applicant proposes developing the site ("Meredith Business Park")
as a single phased project that would create 12 legal lots. The
development would contain 200,000 square feet of light industrial park
which would be in 12 buildings. Testimony of Mr. Martin. The
development would include storm drainage, utility and landscape
improvements and approximately 264 parking spaces. The Applicant
expects that 15% of the space would be used as office and 85% would
be used as warehouses. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2 Exhibit 4,
Environmental Checklist Application.
3. The subject parcels and the properties to the north, east and south are in
a "Light Industrial" (M-1) zone and designated as "Light Industrial" in the
Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Land uses include a construction
company to the north, West Valley Highway North and industrial
development to the east, and residences to the south. The properties to
the west are in a King County and zoned R-4 and designated as "Single
Family Residential' and "Light Industrial' in the Auburn Comprehensive
Plan. The properties to the west are vacant. Exhibit 1, Staff Report,
pages 1 and 2; Exhibit 4, Environmental Checklist Application.
4. The project would generate approximately 180 P.M. peak hour trips
daily. Access to the site would be from a driveway off the west side of
West Valley Highway North. The driveway would lead to a private road
that would extend west and provide access to Lots 1-6 (to the north of
the road) and to Lots 7-12 (to the south of the road). In addition to
constructing the access driveway, the Applicant would improve the
existing roadway. There is also public transportation to the site with a
bus stop across West Valley Highway North. Exhibit 4, Environmental
Checklist Application; Exhibit 5, Site Plan.
5. Hawks, songbirds, coyote, and small rodents are found on-site. The site
contains deciduous and evergreen trees, shrubs, grass, pasture, and wet
soil plants. All existing vegetation would be removed prior to
construction and some vegetation would be replaced in accordance with
landscaping requirements. After construction, approximately 70% of'the
site would be covered with impervious surfaces. Exhibit 4,
Environmental Checklist Application.
6. To prepare for the future development of buildings and pavement areas
50,000 cubic yards of import fill material would be used, and 4,000 cubic
Resolution No. 3781
November 9, 2004
Page 2
yards of material would be exported from the site or stockpiled and used
to fill landscape areas. The site, which is mostly flat, includes .09 acres
of low quality wetlands that would be filled. Mitigation would be required
in an adjacent upland area, as required under the U.S. Army Corp of
Engineers Nationwide Permit 18. A type 4 stream is also on-site. Exhibit
4, Environmental Checklist Application.
7. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the City of
Auburn was designated Lead Agency for environmental review of the
proposal. The Responsible Official determined that the proposal would
have no probably significant adverse impact on the environment and a
Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) was issued on
August 17, 2004. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages 1 and 3, Exhibit 7, Final
Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance.
8. Construction impacts would occur but would be controlled. During
construction, there would be normal emissions and exhaust associated
with the project. The site would be watered during construction in order
to minimize dust. All exhaust systems would comply with Washington
State emission standards. Construction noise would only occur during
regular business hours. No surface water would be withdrawn or
diverted and there would be no discharge of waste materials into the
surface water. Exhibit 4, Environmental Checklist Application.
9. Runoff from rainwater would be collected in catch basins and pipes, and
directed to a combined open/wet detention and water quality facility at
the site's southeast corner. Testimony of Mr. Martin.
10. Required utility service is available to the site. The City would provide
police protection, fire protection, water service, sanitary sewer service,
and storm drainage service. Natural gas, electric, telephone and refuse
services are also currently available. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 3
11. The minimum lot size would be 33,205 square feet, and the minimum lot
width would be 140 feet and the minimum lot depth would be 234.9 feet.
While there are no minimum lot width, depth or area requirements in the
M-1 zone, the proposed lots would be large enough to satisfy the
required setbacks and provide reasonable building pads. Exhibit 1, Staff
Report, page 3, Exhibit 3, Preliminary Plat Application.
12. At the open record public hearing, Jim Hudson testified of the long time
drainage problems' that have occurred in the area, including the
problems that have been associated with the subject property. Many of
Resolution No. 3781
November,9, 2004
Page 3
the problems appear to be the result of historic alterations of the stream
flow on site. He submitted that he was concerned with the project's
effect on water drainage. The City responded that such concerns would
be addressed in the forthcoming Storm Drainage Plan. Testimony of Mr.
Hudson; Testimony of Mr. Martin; Testimony of Mr. Kessler
13. A Notice of Application was issued on April 20, 2004. Exhibit 6, Notice of
Application.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Jurisdiction
The Hearing Examiner is granted authority to hold a public hearing and make a
recommendation on a Preliminary Plat pursuant to ACC 17.06.030, 17.06.050
and 18.66.
Criteria for Review
Pursuant to ACC 17.06.070, a preliminary plat application shall only be
approved if findings of fact are drawn to support the following:
A. Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and
general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets,
alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks,
playgrounds and sites for schools and school grounds;
B. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes
of the comprehensive plan;
C. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes
of any other applicable policies or plans which have been adopted
by the city council;
D. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes
of this title, as enumerated in ACC 17.02.030;
E. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the Auburn zoning
ordinance and any other applicable planning or engineering
standards and specifications as adopted by the city, or as
modified and approved as part of a PUD pursuant to Chapter
18.69 ACC;
---------------------------
Resolution No. 3781
November 9, 2004
Page 4
F. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed subdivision
are mitigated such that the preliminary plat will not have an
unacceptable adverse effect upon the quality of the environment;
and
G. Adequate provisions are made so the preliminary plat will prevent
or abate public nuisances.
Conclusions Based on Findings
1. Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and
general welfare and for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys,
other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes, parks,
playgrounds and sites for schools and school grounds. Public
utilities are in-place to serve the project, road improvements would be
made to the affected area, a private road and adequate parking spaces
would be constructed, landscaping would be done on-site following
construction, and surface "water would not be diverted, withdrawn, or
used as a deposit for waste. The project is industrial in nature and
located in an industrial zone, therefore playgrounds and schools are
unaffected. There would be no probably significant adverse
environmental impact as a result of the project. Findings of Fact Nos. 2,
3, 4, 7, 10.
2. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of the
Comprehensive Plan. The site is designated "Light Industrial" in the
Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The intent is to cluster like development
within designated area. Developing the site as a light industrial complex
conforms to the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. Findings of Fact
Nos. 1, 2, and 3.
3. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of any
other applicable policies or plans that have been adopted by the
city council. The proposal conforms, or could conform, to all applicable
policies.
4. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of this
title, as enumerated in ACC 17.02.030. Developing the site as a light
industrial business/warehouse complex in the M-1 zone, and subdividing
4 lots into 12 lots, complies with the purposes of the Land Division
Ordinance.
----------------------------
Resolution No. 3781
November 9, 2004
Page 5
5. The proposed subdivision conforms to the Auburn zoning
ordinance and any other applicable planning or engineering
standards and specifications as adopted by the city, or as modified
and approved as part of a PUD pursuant to Chapter 18.69 ACC. The
project's 12 lots are large enough to satisfy required setbacks under the
M-1 zone and to provide reasonable building pads. ' Other zoning,
planning and engineering standards associated with the M-1 zone would
have to be satisfied prior to the issuance of building permits. The project
complies with the intent of the M-1 zone, as outlined in ACC 18.32.010.
Findings of Fact Nos. 3 and 10.
6. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed subdivision
are mitigated such that the preliminary plat will not have an
unacceptable adverse effect upon the quality of the environment.
As conditioned, the proposal will have no probably significant adverse
environmental impact. Findings of Fact No. 11.
7. Adequate provisions are made so the preliminary plat will prevent
or abate public nuisances. During construction, the site will be
watered to minimize dust. Noise will only occur during regular business
hours and exhaust systems will comply with Washington State emissions
standards. There is no indication that other public nuisances will occur.
Findings of Fact No. 7.
RECOMMENDATION
Upon consideration of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the Hearing
Examiner recommends that the request for a preliminary plat to subdivide four
parcels comprising 13.04 acres into 12 lots be APPROVED, subject to the
following condition:
The Applicant shall comply with the 13 conditions set forth in the MDNS issued
on August 17, 2004.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF AUBURN,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES as follows:
Section 1. The above-cited Hearing Examiner's Conclusions and
Decision are herewith approved and incorporated in this Resolution.
Resolution No. 3781
November 9, 2004
Page 6
Section 2. The preliminary plat to subdivide four parcels comprising
13.04 acres into 12 lots, within the City of Auburn, legally described in Exhibit
"A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, is hereby
approved.
Section 3. The Mayor is authorized to implement such administrative
procedures as may be necessary to carry out the directives of this legislation.
Section 4. This Resolution shall take effect and be in full force upon
passage and signatures hereon.
DATED and SIGNED this day of , 2004.
CITY OF AUBURN
PETER B. LEWIS
MAYOR
ATTEST:
Danielle E. Daskam,
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City Attorney
----------------------- ---
Resolution No. 3781
November 9, 2004
Page 7
EXHIBIT "A"
Legal Description
----------------------------
Resolution No. 3781
November 9, 2004
Page 8
PARCEL NUMBER 02/-1049075
THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1 IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 21
NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT
LOT 1, WHICH IS 451.12 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER
THEREOF; THENCE WEST PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAND
GOVERNMENT LOT 1, A DISTANCE OF 1,087.17 FEET TO THE WEST
LINE OF A TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO YESLER ESTATE INC., BY
DEED RECORDED IN VOLUME 683 OF DEEDS ON PAGE 176; UNDER
AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 6_3133543, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE 197.00 FEET; THENCE EAST
PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1, A
DISTANCE OF 1,087.17 FEET TO THE EAST LINE THEREOF; THENCE
NORTH ALONG SIA.D EAST LINE 197.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING; EXCEPT THE EAST 30 FEET THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE
KING COUNTY FOR ROAD BY DEED RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S ,
FILE NO. 694365, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY;
AND EXCEPT THE WEST 30.00 FEET;
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
PARCEL NUMBER 0221049085
THE NORTH HALF OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY:
THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1 IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 21
NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY
WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT
LOT 1, WHICH IS 648.12 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER
THEREOF; THENCE WEST PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
GOVERNMENT LOT 1, A DISTANCE OF 1108.80 FEET TO THE WEST
LINE OF A TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO YESLER ESTATE, INC., BY
DEED RECORDED IN VOLUME 683 OF DEEDS, PAGE 176 UNDER
RECORDING NO. 633543, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE
SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE 197.00 FEET; THENCE EAST
PARALLEL WITH THE SAID NORTH LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT. 1, A
DISTANCE OF 1108.80 FEET, MORE ORtESS TO THE EAST LINE
THEREOF; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE 197.00 FEET,
MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THE EAST
30.00 FEET THEREOF CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY FOR ROAD; AND
EXCEPT ANY PORTION WHICH MAY LIE WEST OF A LINE WHICH IS
1524.6 FEET EAST OF THE NORTH -SOUTH CENTER LINE OF SAID
SECTION 2;
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
PARCEL NUMBER 0221049073
That portion of Government Lot 1 of Section 2, Township 21 North, Range 4
East, W.M., described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeast comer of said Section and running thence West, along
the Section line 1141.80 feet to the Northeast corner of a tract deeded to Martha
K. Larimer and recorded May 18, 1891, in Volume 128 of Deeds, page 408,
records of King County; thence South along the East line of the Larimer Tract
351.12 feet; thence East 1141.80 feet, more or less, to the East line of said
Section; thence North along said East line to point of beginning; EXCEPT the
_ North 210 feet; AND EXCEPT County and State Roads;
Situate in the County of King, State of Washington
SUBJECT TO: Easement to the City of Seattle for electric transmission and
distribution line granted by instrument recorded under Auditor's File No.
2589401; Right to install and maintain pipe line on property herein described as
recorded. under Auditor's File No. 5767755.
PARCEL NUMBER 0221049074
THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1 IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 21
NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY,
WASHINGTON; DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS;
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT
A DISTANCE OF 451.12 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST- CORNER
THEREOF;
THENCE WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
GOVERNMENT LOT A DISTANCE OF 1,108.8 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO A
LINE WHICH LIES 1,524.6 FEET EAST OF AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTH
AND SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SECTION 2, AS. ESTABLISHED BY
DECREE ENTERED IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NUMBER
509514; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID LINE A DISTANCE OF 100 FEET,
MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THE EAST 30
FEET THEREOF CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY. FOR ROAD BY DEED Ii
RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 694365
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
CITY OF
� ': U''
'x Peter B. Lewis, Mayor
RN
WASHINGTON 25 West Main Street * Auburn WA 98001-4998 * www.ci.auburn.wa.us * 253-931-3000
October 25, 2004
_ MEREDITH CORNER LLC
25802 WEST VALLEY HWY
KENT WA 98032
DAVE KESSLER
LATITUDE DEVELOPMENT LLC
PO BOX 817
AUBURN WA 98071-0817
RE: APPLICATION NO. PLT04-0003
Dear Applicants:
Attached is the Hearing Examiner's official recommendation regarding your request that was
considered by the Hearing Examiner on September 21, 2004. The City Council will consider your
request on November 15, 2004 in the City Council Chambers at 7:30 p.m. You or a representative are
requested to be at that meeting to answer any questions the City Councilmembers might have
regarding your proposal.
Following the conclusion of the City Council meeting, you must return the public notice sign to the City
of Auburn Planning and Community Development Department. If the board is not returned or is not
legible or is damaged, then City Code requires that the applicant shall pay a replacement fee. The
replacement fee must be paid prior to the issuance of any permit, license or any other approval
required by the City of Auburn that is related to subject property.
If you have any questions regarding the attached, please give us a call.
Sincerely,
Paul Krauss, AICP
Director
Attachment
cc: Building Department
Public Works Department
David J. Litowitz, Lancaster Associates LLC, PO Box 26116, Federal Way, WA 98093-3116
Julie Meredith, Steve Sward, Jim Hudson, Mr. Litowitz, Mara Heiman, and Darlene Locken
AUBURN* MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED
BEFORE THE HEARING EXAMINER
OF THE CITY OF AUBURN
In the Matter of the Application of ) NO. PLT04-0003.
Dave Kessler
For Approval of a Preliminary Plat.
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS
AND RECOMMENDATION
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the request for a preliminary plat to subdivide four parcels comprising
13.04 acres into 12 lots should be APPROVED, subject to conditions.
SUMMARY OF RECORD
Re uest
Dave Kessler (Applicant) requests approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide four parcels
comprising 13.04 acres into 12 lots. The parcels, two of which contain single-family homes and
outbuildings, are located 310 feet north of the intersection of West Valley Highway North and
37th Street NW, on the west side of the 3800-3900 block of West Valley Highway North,
Auburn, Washington.'
Heanna
An open record public hearing on the matter was held before the Hearing Examiner of the City
of Auburn on September 21, 2004.
Testimony
The following individuals submitted testimony under oath at the hearing:
I .
Dave Kessler, Applicant
2.
Dan Balmelli
3.
Darrell Donavan
4.
Tim Carlyle
5.
Jim Hudson
1 The parcels' legal description is "Lot I in Section 2, Township 21 North, Range 4 East, W.M., in King County,
Washington." The tax parcel numbers are 0221049073, 0221049074, 0221049075, and 0221049085.
Before the Hearing Examiner of the Citi? of Auburn
Meredith Business Park, ND. PLT04-0003
Pcrge 1 of 6
6. Aaron Litiwitz
7. Maura Heiman
8. Sean Martin
Exhibits
At the hearing, the following exhibits were admitted as part of the official record of this
proceeding:
I . Staff Report dated September 7, 2004
2. Vicinity Map
3. Preliminary Plat Application received January 16, 2004
4. Environmental Checklist Application received January 13, 2004
5. Site Plan
6. Notice of Application
7. Final Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance dated August 17, 2004
Based on the testimony and exhibits submitted at the hearing, the Hearing Examiner enters the
following Findings of Fact and Conclusions:
FINDINGS OF FACT
The Applicant requests approval of a preliminary plat to subdivide four parcels comprising
13.04 acres into 12 lots. The parcels, two of which contain single-family homes and
outbuildings to be removed, are located 310 feet north of the intersection of West Valley
Highway North and 37`h Street NW, on the west side of the 3800-3900 block of West Valley
Highway North, at 3815 West Valley Highway North, Auburn, Washington. Exhibit 1, Staff
Report, pages I and 2: Exhibit 4, Environmental Checklist Application.
2. The Applicant proposes developing the site ("Meredith Business Park") as a single phased
project that would create 12 legal lots. The development would contain 200,000 square feet
of light industrial park which would be in 12 buildings. Testimonv of Mr. Martin. The
development would include storm drainage, utility and landscape improvements and
approximately 264 parking spaces. The Applicant expects that 15% of the space would be
used as office and 85% would be used as warehouses. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, page 2;
Exhibit 4, Environmental Checklist Application.
3. The subject parcels and the properties to the north, east and south are in a "Light Industrial"
(M-1) zone and designated as "Light Industrial" in the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. Land
uses include a construction company to the north, West Valley Highway North and industrial
development to the east, and residences to the south. The properties to the west are in a King
County and zoned R-4 and designated as "Single Family Residential" and "Light Industrial"
in the Auburn Comprehensive, Plan. The properties to the west are vacant. Exhibit 1, Staff
Report, pages 1 and 2: Exhibit 4, Environmental Checklist Application.
Before the Hearing Examiner of the Cite• of Auburn
Meredith Business Park, NO. PLT04-0003
Page 2 of 6
4. The project would generate approximately 180 P.M. peak hour trips daily. Access to the site
would be from a driveway off the west side of West Valley Highway North. The driveway
would lead to a private road that would extend west and provide access to Lots 1-6 (to the
north of the road) and to Lots 7-12 (to the south of the road). In addition to constructing the
access driveway, the Applicant would improve the existing roadway. There is also public
transportation to the site with a bus stop across West Valley Highway North. Exhibit 4,
Environmental Checklist Application: Exhibit 5, Site Plan.
5. Hawks, songbirds, coyote, and small rodents are found on-site. The site contains deciduous
and evergreen trees, shrubs, grass, pasture, and wet soil plants. All existing vegetation would
- be removed prior to construction and some vegetation would be replaced in accordance with
landscaping requirements. After construction, approximately 70% of the site would be
covered with impervious surfaces. Exhibit 4, Environmental Checklist Application.
6. To prepare for the future development of buildings and pavement areas 50,000 cubic yards of
import fill material would be used, and 4,000 cubic yards of material would be exported from
the site or stockpiled and used to fill landscape areas. The site, which is mostly flat, includes
.09 acres of low quality wetlands that would be filled. Mitigation would be required in an
adjacent upland area, as required under the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers Nationwide Permit
18. A type 4 stream is also on-site. Exhibit 4, Environmental Checklist Application.
7. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA), the City of Auburn was designated
Lead Agency for environmental review of the proposal. The Responsible Official
determined that the proposal would have no probably significant adverse impact on the
environment and a Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance (MDNS) was issued on
August 17, 2004. Exhibit 1, Staff Report, pages I and 3; Exhibit 7, Final Mitigated
Determination of Nonsignificance.
8. Construction impacts would occur but would be controlled. During construction, there
would be normal emissions and exhaust associated with the project. The site would be
watered during construction in order to minimize dust. All exhaust systems would comply
with Washington State emission standards. Construction noise would only occur during
regular business hours. No surface water would be withdrawn or diverted and there would be
no discharge of waste materials into the surface water. Exhibit 4, Environmental Checklist
Application.
9. Runoff from rainwater would be collected in catch basins and pipes, and directed to a
combined open/wet detention and water quality facility at the site's southeast corner.
Testimony of Mr. Martin.
10. Required utility service is available to the site. The City would provide police protection,
fire protection, water service, sanitary sewer service, and storm drainage service. Natural
gas, electric, telephone and refuse services are also currently available. Exhibit 1, Staff
Report, page 3
Before the Hearing Examiner of the CitY of Auburn
Meredith Business Park, NO. PLT04-0003
Page 3 of 6
11. The minimum lot size would be 33,205 square feet, and the minimum lot width would be 140
feet and the minimum lot depth would be 234.9 feet. While there are no minimum lot width,
depth or area requirements in the M-1 zone, the proposed lots would be large enough to
satisfy the required setbacks and provide reasonable building pads. Exhibit 1, Staff Report,
page 3; Exhibit 3, Preliminary Plat Application.
12. At the open record public hearing, Jim Hudson testified of the long time drainage problems
that have occurred in the area, including the problems that have been associated with the
subject property. Many of the problems appear to be the result of historic alterations of the
stream flow on site. He submitted that he was concerned with the project's effect on water
drainage. The City responded that such concerns would be addressed in the forthcoming
Storm Drainage Plan. Testimony of Mr. Hudson; Testimont, of Mr. Martin Testimony of
Mr. Kessler
13. A Notice of Application was issued on April 20, 2004. Exhibit 6, Notice of Application.
CONCLUSIONS
Jurisdiction
The Hearing Examiner is granted authority to hold a public hearing and make a recommendation
on a Preliminary Plat pursuant to ACC 17.06.030, 17.06.050 and 18.66.
Criteria for Review
Pursuant to ACC 17.06.070, a preliminary plat application shall only be approved if findings of
fact are drawn to support the following:
A. Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare and
for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies,
sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds and sites for schools and school grounds;
B. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of the
comprehensive plan;
C. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of any other
applicable policies or plans which have been adopted by the city council;
D. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of this title, as
enumerated in ACC 17.02.030;
E. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the Auburn zoning ordinance and any
other applicable planning or engineering standards and specifications as adopted by
the city, or as modified and approved as part of a PUD pursuant to Chapter 18.69
ACC;
Before the Hearing Examiner of the Citi• of Auburn
Meredith Business Park, NO. PLT04-0003
Page 4 of 6
F. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed subdivision are mitigated such
that the preliminary plat will not have an unacceptable adverse effect upon the quality
of the environment; and
G. Adequate provisions are made so the preliminary plat will prevent or abate public
nuisances.
Conclusions Based on Findings
1. Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare and
for open spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies,
sanitary wastes, parks, playgrounds and sites for schools and school grounds. Public
utilities are in-place to serve the project, road improvements would be made to the affected
area, a private road and adequate parking spaces would be constructed, landscaping would
be done on-site following construction, and surface water would not be diverted,
withdrawn, or used as a deposit for waste. The project is industrial in nature and located in
an industrial zone, therefore playgrounds and schools are unaffected. There would be no
probably significant adverse environmental impact as a result of the project. Findings of
Fact Nos. 2, 3, 4, 7, 10.
.2. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of the Comprehensive
Plan. The site is designated "Light Industrial" in the Auburn Comprehensive Plan. The
intent is to cluster like development within designated area. Developing the site as a light
industrial complex conforms to the purposes of the Comprehensive Plan. Findings of Fact
Nos. 1, 2, and 3.
3. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of any other applicable
policies or plans that have been adopted by the city council. The proposal conforms, or
could conform, to all applicable policies.
4. The proposed subdivision conforms to the general purposes of this title, as
enumerated in ACC 17.02.030. Developing the site as a light industrial
business/warehouse complex in the M-1 zone, and subdividing 4 lots into 12 lots, complies
with the purposes of the Land Division Ordinance.
5. The proposed subdivision conforms to the Auburn zoning ordinance and any other
applicable planning or engineering standards and specifications as adopted by the
city, or as modified and approved as part of a PUD pursuant to Chapter 18.69 ACC.
The project's 12 lots are large enough to satisfy required setbacks under the M-1 zone and
to provide reasonable building pads. Other zoning, planning and engineering standards
associated with the M- I zone would have to be satisfied prior to the issuance of building
permits. The project complies with the intent of the M-1 zone, as outlined in ACC
18.32.010. Findings of Fact Nos. 3 and 10.
Before the Hearing Examiner of the CitY ol'Auburn
Meredith Business Park, NO. PLT04-0003
Page 5 of 6
6. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed subdivision are mitigated such
that the preliminary plat will not have an unacceptable adverse effect upon the
quality of the environment. As conditioned, the proposal will have no probably
significant adverse environmental impact. Findings of 'Fact No. 11.
7. Adequate provisions are made so the preliminary plat will prevent or abate public
nuisances. During construction, the site will be watered to minimize dust. Noise will
only occur during regular business hours and exhaust systems will comply with
Washington State emissions standards. There is no indication that other public nuisances
will occur. Findings of Fact No. 7.
RECOMMENDATION
Upon consideration of the Findings of Fact and Conclusions, the Hearing Examiner recommends
that the request for a preliminary plat to subdivide four parcels comprising 13.04 acres into 12
lots be APPROVED, subject to the following condition:
The Applicant shall comply with the 13 conditions set forth in the MDNS issued on
August 17, 2004.
Recommended this � �L day of October 2004.
Driscoll
ng Examiner of the City of Auburn
Before the Hearing Evaminer of the City of Auburn
Meredith Business Park, NO. PLT04-0003
Page 6 of 6
REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
Any party of record who feels the decision of the Examiner is based on error of procedure, fact or
judgment, or the discovery of new evidence may file a written request for reconsideration with the
Hearing Examiner no later than November 1, 2004. Reconsideration requests should be addressed to:
Hearing Examiner, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA. 98001-4998.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION
This decision of the Hearing Examiner is a recommendation to the City Council and will be considered
by the Council at their November 15, 2004, meeting. At the November 15, 2004, meeting the Council
may either affirm the Examiner's recommendation, remand the decision back to the Examiner, or
schedule a closed record public hearing.
CITY OF
AGENDA BILL APPROVAL FORM
WASHINGTON
Agenda Subject
Date:
Public Hearing Application No. PLT04-0003
9-7-04
Department: Planning
Attachments: Exhibits as noted.
Budget Impact:
Administrative Recommendation:
Hearing Examiner to recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat based upon the
.Findings of Fact and conclusions as outlined.
Background Summary:
REPORT OF FACTS:
OWNER/APPLICANT:
Dave Kessler, Latitude Development LLC
REQUEST:
The preliminary plat of four (4) parcels comprising 13.04 -acres into 12 lots
to be developed in accordance with the M-1, Light Industrial standards.
LOCATION:
The west side of the 3800-3900 block of West Valley Highway North,
approximately 310 -feet north of the intersection of West Valley Highway
h
North and 37 Street NW and approximately 730 -feet south of the
intersection of West Valley Highway North and South 287th Street.
EXISTING ZONING:
M-1, Light Industrial.
EXISTING LAND USE
The project site is developed with single-family homes on two of the four
subject parcels and several outbuildings.
COMPREHENSIVE
The site has a "Light Industrial" Comprehensive Plan Map designation.
PLAN DESIGNATION:
SEPA STATUS:
The City issued a Final Determination of Non -Significance on August 17,
2004.
Reviewed y Council
& Committees:
Reviewed by DepartmEnts
& Divisions:
Arts Commission
COUNCIL COMMITTEES:
Building
M&O
Airport
Finance
Cemetery
Mayor
Hearing Examiner
Municipal Serv.
Finance
Parks
Human Services
Planning & CD
Fire
Planning
Police
Park Board
Public Works
Legal
Planning Comm.
Other
Public Works
Human Resources
Action:
Committee Approval:
YesNo
Council Approval:
BYes ONo Call for Public Hearing
Referred to
Until
Tabled
UntiF— T %
Councilmember: Singer
Staff: Krauss
Meeting Date: September 17, 2004 item Number:
EXHIBIT 1
AUBURN *MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED
Agenda Subiect Date:
Public Hearing Application No. PLT04-0003 9-7-04
The Comprehensive Plan designation, zoning designation and land uses of the surrounding
properties are:
gpR
4y •
`
' c FSS ^.
Site
Light Industrial
M-1, Light Industrial
Under developed
North
Light Industrial
M-1, Light Industrial
Construction
contractor
East
Light Industrial
M-1, Light Industrial
West Valley Highway
N
Industrial
development
South
Light Industrial
M-1, Light Industrial
Residential
West
Single Family
R-4 (King County Zoning)
vacant
Residential & Light
Industrial
List of Exhibits
Exhibit 1 Staff Report dated September 7, 2004
Exhibit 2 Vicinity Map
Exhibit 3 Preliminary Plat Application
Exhibit 4, Environmental Checklist Application
Exhibit 5 Site Plan
Exhibit 6 Notice of Application
Exhibit 7 Final Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance, dated August 17, 2004
Exhibit 8 "Traffic Impact Analysis" dated 04-26-01, with revisions through March 8, 2004,
Transportation Consulting Northwest.
Exhibit 9 "Wetland Study" dated May 25, 1999, B & A Associates.
Exhibit 10 - "Wetland Buffer and Functional Value Assessment", dated September 29, 2003 with
revised exhibits through March 17, 2004, Talasae Consultants, Inc.
Exhibit 11 "TESC Calculations" dated December 3, 2003, Rupert Engineering Inc.
Exhibit 12- Downstream Analysis and Site Drainage Analysis" dated July 4, 2003, Rupert
Engineering. Inc.
Exhibit 13 - "Geotechnical Engineering Study" dated May 7, 2001, Earth Consultants, Inc.
Exhibit 14 "Phase I Environmental Site Assessment' dated December 19, 1999, Earth Consultants,
Inc.
Exhibit 15- Comment letter "Heiman"
Exhibit 16- City response to "Heiman" comment letter
Exhibit 17 Notice of Public Hearing
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. The applicant has requested approval of a 12 -lot preliminary plat on approximately 13.04 -acres. The
applicant has identified that the plat would occur in a single phase.
2. The subject plat consists of four existing parcels, each fronting on West Valley Highway North.
Access to the platted lots would be via a private street that will be constructed to serve the project.
3. The proposal is within the M-1 Light Industrial zone and does not require the payment of school
impact fees or park dedication.
Page 2 of 4
Agenda Subject Date:
Public Hearing Application No. PLT04-0003 9-7-04
4. The City of Auburn will provide police protection, fire protection, water, sanitary sewer and storm
drainage services.
5. All lots created through the plat process must meet the development standards associated`with the
applicable M-1 zoning district. There is no minimum lot -width, depth or area is defined by the Code
and the lots are large enough to support the required setbacks and provide reasonable building pads
with commensurate parking.
6. The City's Final MDNS, issued on August 17, 2004, contained 13 conditions of development.
7. The contents o the case files, PLT04-0003 and the environmental file SEPO 1-0027, for this project
are hereby incorporated by reference and made part of the record of this hearing.
CONCLUSIONS
Staff has concluded that the preliminary plat may be approved in that it is consistent with the following
criteria necessary to approve a preliminary plat as outlined in Section 17.06.070 of the Land Division
Ordinance.
1. Adequate provisions are made for the public health, safety and general welfare and for open
spaces, drainage ways, streets, alleys, other public ways, water supplies, sanitary wastes,
parks, playgrounds and sites for schools and school grounds.
Adequate provisions have been or can be provided to serve the plat. Public utilities will serve the
proposed plat. The location of the plat is such that adequate service can be provided via a private
street. The plat is industrial in nature and as such playgrounds and schools are unaffected.
2. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of the Comprehensive
Plan.
The proposed plat is consistent with the general purposes of the Comprehensive Plan.
3. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of any other applicable
policies or plans that have been adopted by the City Council.
The proposed plat is consistent with adopted policies and plans.
4. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the general purposes of the Land Division
Ordinance as enumerated in ACC Section 17.02.030.
The plat is consistent with the purpose of the Land Division Ordinance.
5. Conformance of the proposed subdivision to the Auburn Zoning Ordinance and any other
applicable planning or engineering standards and specifications as adopted by the City.
The plat has been or is capable of being designed in accordance with all applicable planning and
engineering requirements including the City's Design and Construction Standards manual and all
development standards of the Auburn Zoning Ordinance.
6. The potential environmental impacts of the proposed subdivision are mitigated such that the
preliminary plat will not have an unacceptable adverse effect upon the quality of the
environment.
Page 3 of 4
Agenda Suboect Date:
Public Hearing Application No. PLT04-0003 9-7-04
The proposal was evaluated under SEPA, City file no. SEP01-0027. The City of Auburn issued a
Final Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance on September 17, 2004 for the proposal.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the Facts and Findings and Conclusions of the staff report, staff recommends that the Hearing
Examiner recommend to the City Council approval of the preliminary plat.
HE\APP\STRP04-3
Page 4 of 4
EXHIBIT 2
APPLICATION NO.: PLT04-0003
APPLICANT: Meredith Corner LLC
REQUEST: preliminary plat approval of a business park
LOCATION: 3815 West Valley Highway North
PRELIMINARY PLAT APPLICATION
............................................................................................................................................................
-.t
4.
PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME APPLICATION NUMBER
Sec. Twp. Rng. -/
Zone Existing S� - /
Area Code a I
Scheduled Hearing 1--S " ;- o `L—
�j Date Received I "-. - O 4 _
Staff Project Coordinator: J'V"
..................................................................................................................................................................
Cod %� DO NOT WRITE ABOVE THIS LINE
APPLICANT: COMPLETE THIS FORM WITH ALL ENTRIES BEING TYPED (except
signatures) OR NEATLY PRINTED IN INK. IF ADDED SPACE IS NEEDED,
ATTACH THE ADDITIONAL REQUIRED PAGES TO THIS APPLICATION.
NAME OF SUBDIVISION: Meredith Business Park
Total area of subdivision: Acres: 13.04 Sq. Ft.: 56$242
Total number of lots: 12 new (4 existing) —
Total number of dwelling units: 12
Proposed zoning: M-1 Light Industrial
Existing zoning: M-1 Light Industrial
Proposed land use: Light Industrial - Office/warehouse/Manufacturing
Minimum size of lot as shown on plat: 33,205 sq. ft.
Minimum lot width as shown on plat: 140 feet
Minimum lot depth as shown on plat: 234.9 feet
source of domestic water
Citv of Auburn Water Main in West Valley Hwy I
Proposed sewage disposal system:
Citv of Auburn Sewer Main in West Valley Hwy I
EXHIBIT 3
Preliminary Plat Page 4 of 6
Revised 7111/2003
ALL PROPERTY OWNERS INCLUDED IN THIS APPLICATION MUST BE LISTED BELOW
OPPOSITE A "PARCEL NUMBER" WHICH IS ALSO SHOWN ON THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION AND
INDICATES THE PROPERTY OWNED BY EACH APPLICANT. YOUR SIGNATURE ALSO
INDICATES YOU HAVE READ AND UNDERSTOOD THE CONTENTS OF THIS APPLICATION AND
ITS ATTACHMENTS.
PARCEL
NUMBER
022104-9073
022104-9074
022104-9075A&B
NAME, ADDRESS & PHONE NUMBER
(Please Print)
Meredith Corner, LLC
25802 West Valley Hwy
Kent, WA 98032
Meredith Comer, LLC
25802 West Valley Hwy
Kent, WA 98032
Meredith Corner, LLC
25802 West Valley Hwy
Kent, WA 98032
DESIGNATED CONTACT PERSON:
Name: Dave Kessler/Lattitude Development, LLC
Address: 1801 West Valley Hwy N Suite 101
City: Auburn, WA, 98071-0818
Phone: (425) 466-7119
SIGNATURE
Preliminary Plat Page 5 Of 6
Revised 7/1112003
J
DES Rig-=
PARCEL NUMBER 0221049075
THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1 IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 21
NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT OF THE EAST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT
LOT 1, WHICH IS 451.12 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER
THEREOF; THENCE WEST PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
GOVERNMENT LOT 1, A DISTANCE OF 1,087.17 FEET TO THE WEST
LINE OF A TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO YESLER ESTATE INC., BY
DEED RECORDED IN VOLUME 683 OF DEEDS ON PAGE 176, UNDER
AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 633543, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY;
THENCE SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE 197.00 FEET; THENCE EAST
PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 1, A
DISTANCE OF 1,087.17 FEET TO THE EAST LINE THEREOF; THENCE
NORTH ALONG SIAD EAST LINE 197.00 FEET TO THE POINT OF
BEGINNING; EXCEPT THE EAST 30 FEET THEREOF CONVEYED TO THE
KING COUNTY FOR ROAD BY DEED RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S ,
FILE NO- 694365, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY;
AND EXCEPT THE WEST 30.00 FEET;
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
PARCEL NUMBER 0221049085
THE NORTH HALF OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY:
THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1 IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 21
NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY
WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT
LOT 1, WHICH IS 648.12 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER
THEREOF; THENCE WEST PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
GOVERNMENT LOT -1, A DISTANCE OF 1108.80 FEET TO THE WEST
LINE OF A TRACT OF LAND CONVEYED TO YESLER ESTATE, INC., BY
DEED RECORDED IN VOLUME 683 OF DEEDS, PAGE 176 UNDER
RECORDING NO. 633543, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE
SOUTH ALONG SAID WEST LINE 197.00 FEET; THENCE EAST
PARALLEL WITH THE SAID NORTH LINE OF GOVERNMENT LOT. 1, A
DISTANCE OF 1108.80 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO THE EAST LINE
THEREOF; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE 197.00 FEET,
MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THE EAST
30.00 FEET THEREOF CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY FOR ROAD; AND
EXCEPT ANY PORTION WHICH MAY LIE WEST OF A LINE WHICH IS
1524.6 FEET EAST OF THE NORTH -SOUTH CENTER LINE OF SAID
SECTION 2;
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
PARCEL NUMBER 0221049073
That portion of Government Lot 1 of Section 2, Township 21 North, Range 4
East, W.M., described as follows:
Beginning at the Northeast corner of said Section and running thence West, along
the Section line 1141.80 feet to the Northeast corner of a tract deeded to Martha
K. Larimer and recorded May 18, 1891, in Volume 128 of Deeds, page 408,
records of King County; thence South along the East line of the Larimer Tract
351.12 feet; thence East 1141.80 feet, more or less, to the East line of said
Section; thence North along said East line to point of beginning; EXCEPT the
-North 210 feet; AND EXCEPT County and State Roads;
Situate in the County of King, State of Washington
SUBJECT TO: Easement to the City of Seattle for electric transmission and
distribution line granted by instrument recorded under Auditor's File No.
2589401; Right to install and maintain pipe line on property herein described as
recorded. under Auditor's File No. 5767755.
C� ��r 2 1`t
PARCEL NUMBER 0221049074
THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 1 IN SECTION 2, TOWNSHIP 21
NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY,
WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS;
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT
A DISTANCE OF 451.12 FEET SOUTH OF THE NORTHEAST- CORNER
THEREOF;
0 THENCE WEST, PARALLEL WITH THE NORTH LINE OF SAID
GOVERNMENT LOT A DISTANCE OF 1,108.8 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO A
LINE WHICH LIES 1,524.6 FEET EAST OF AND PARALLEL TO THE NORTH
AND SOUTH CENTERLINE OF SAID SECTION 2, AS -ESTABLISHED BY
DECREE ENTERED IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NUMBER
509514; THENCE NORTH ALONG SAID LINE A DISTANCE OF 100 FEET,
MORE OR LESS, TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING; EXCEPT THE EAST -30
FEET THEREOF CONVEYED TO KING COUNTY. FOR ROAD BY DEED i i
RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NUMBER 694365
SITUATE IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
APPLICATION NO.: Sek> I CUo Z7 APPLICATION FEE: $700.00
DATE FILLED: 01.- 1.3 T.R. RECEIPT:
STAFF PROJECT COORDINATOR:
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
— TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT
A. BACKGROUND:
4.
5.
6.
Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Meredith Business Park
Name of Applicant:
Mike Kohr
Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Applicant: I Agent (if applicable):
Mike Kohr Dave Kessler/Latitude Development, LLC
3815 West Valley Hwy. N 1801 West Valla Hwv. N.
Auburn WA 98001 P.O. Box 818, Auburn, WA 98071-0818
Ph. No. 253-839-2429 Ph. No. 253-939-7777
Date checklist prepared:
11/24/03
Agency requesting checklist:
City of Auburn, Washington
Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
SEPA and Grading Permit approval by April of 2004. Preliminary Plat approval by
June of.2004. Building permit for the first building by June of 2004 and additional
building permits over the course of 2004, 2005 and 2006.
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or
further activity related to or -connected with this proposal? If
yes, explain.
Yes, we will apply for multiple building permits over the next 2 to 3 years.
5
APPL\^ENVCHECK.APPL
(Rev. 7/21/03)
SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
EXHIBIT 4
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
8. List any environmental information you know about that
has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this
proposal.
A. Wetland Study dated May 25, 1999 by B,& A, Inc.
_B. Geotechnical Engineering Study dated May 7, 2001 by Earth Consultants.
C. Trak Impact Analysis dated April 26, 2001 by Transportation Consulting
Northwest.
D. Revised Traffic Impact Analysis dated November 6, 2004 by Transportation
Consulting Northwest.
E. Stipulated Findings of Fact and Conclusions and Settlement dated May 20, 2000
. with regard to alleged land clearing violations.
F. Conceptual Wetland and Buffer enhancement Plan by Talasaea Constants date
January 9, 2004.
9. Do you know whether applications are pendingYor
governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the
property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain.
No.
10. List any government approvals or permits that will be
needed for your proposal, if known.
A. Environmental Determination from City of Auburn
B. Grade and Fill Permit from City of Auburn
C. Building Permit from -City of Auburn
D. Plat Approval from City of Auburn
E. NPDES coverage under the Baseline General Permit from the Department of
Ecology. We are unable to apply for this permit until we have a SEPA
determination.
F. Electrical Permit from State of Washington Department of Labor -and. Industry
G. Mechanical permits from City of Auburn
H. Facility Extension Permit from City of Auburn
I. Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA) from Washington State Department of Fish
and Wildlife(WDFW) may be required. If the state concludes an HPA is
required the team will submit all required documents to WDFW. We are unable
to apply for this permit until we have a SEPA determination.
J. Right of Way use permit from City of Auburn
K. US Army Corp of Engineers Nationwide Permit 18 (received June 17, 2003)
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal,
including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site.
There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to
APPL\^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to
repeat those answers on this page.
The proposed project consists of the development of approximately 200,000 square
feet of light industrial park in 12 buildings along with required storm drainage, utility
and landscape improvements on a 13.04 -acre site. We anticipate the
—,office/warehouse mix,to be about 15% and 85% warehouse. The project also
'pffroposes to subdivide the existing 4 parcels into a total of 12 legal lots. As part of
the project approximately .09 of a acre of low quality wetlands will be filled and
mitigated for in an adjacent upland area under the US Army Corp of Engineers
Nationwide Permit 18.
12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for
a person to understand the precise location of your proposed
project, including a street addressif any, and section, township,
and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of
area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a
legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if
reasonably available. While you should submit any plans
required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps
or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related
to this checklist.
The proposed project consists ofapproximately 13.04 acres located on the West side of
West Valley Hwy just north of 37 Street Northwest. The address is 3815 West Valley
Hwy North and is within the NE % of Section 2, Township 21N, Range 4E. The site
consists of four existing lots.
B. ENVIItONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth:
A. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling,
hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other
The site is generally flat.
B. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent
slope)?
Typically less than 1%.
C. What general types of soils are found on the site (for
example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know ther
7
APPL\^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any
prime farmland.
See Geotechnical Engineering Study prepared by Earth Consultants dated May
7, 2001. The site consists of topsoil of fill overlying loose silly sand and silt
(Norma Sandy Loam).
` —D. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in
the immediate vicinity? If so, describe.
I on
E. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of
any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Approximately 50,000 CY of import fill material will be placed and compacted
on the site to prepare the property for future development of building and
pavement areas. Approximately 4000 CY yards of material (strippings) will .be
exported from the site or stockpiled and used to fill landscape areas. The
source of fill will be local gravel pits.
F. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or
use? If so, generally describe.
Depending on weather conditions, potential impacts to the adjacent wetlands,
downstream drainage system and off-site properties could occur from erosion
if adequate erosion control measures are not implemented.
G. About what percent of the site will be covered with
impervious surfaces after project construction (for examples
asphalt or buildings)?
Approximately 70 percent of the 13.04 -acre site will be covered with
impervious surface area after construction of the project is completed.
H. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other
impacts to the earth.
A Temporary Erosion and Sedimentation Control Plan will be prepared and
approved by the City of Auburn prior to the issuance of any grading or
construction permits to help eliminate erosion and potential impacts to the
adjacent wetlands, drainage swale, downstream drainage system, and adjacent
off-site properties. Additional measures will be implemented during
construction of wetland mitigation work. Coverage under the Department of
Ecology NPDES Baseline General Permit will also be obtained by the
APPL\^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL, CHECKLIST
applicant. Measures used to control erosion and sedimentation will include a
gravel construction entrance, filter fabric fences, collection ditches a temporary
sedimentation pond, protection of existing storm grates, stabilization of
disturbed or uncovered surfaces if left unworked.
2. Air:
A. What types of emissions to the air would result from the
proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood
smoke) during construction and when the project is
competed? If any, generally describe and give approximate
quantities if known.
During construction of the project, normal emissions and exhaust from
construction equipment will occur on the site. Also dust may be generated
during the . construction phase depending on weather conditions. After the
project is completed, normal vehicle emissions will occur and some emissions
from normal operation of the facilities will occur. Potential use of back up
generators or fuel tanks may also :produce some emissions.
B. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odors that
may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe.
No off-site sources of emissions are known that will affect the proposed
project.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other
impacts to air, if any:
The site will be watered as required to keep dust to a minimum during the
construction phase. Also exhaust systems from construction equipment will be
required to meet the Washington State emission standards. If backup
generators or fuel tanks are used on site, these facilities would be designed,
maintained and operated in accordance with City, State and Federal standards.
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, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands): If yes,
describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state
what stream or river it flows into.
9
APPL1^EWCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Yes, A type 4 stream (Tributary 0053 to Mill Creek) flows into the
southwest corner of the site and exits shortly after entering, continuing in
a northerly direction off site to the west. Two wetlands (Wetland K and
R) are in the west and southwest portions of the site. The majority of the
subject site lies at a lower elevation than the stream cor4dor and neither
adds nor contributes to the flow. See Wetland Study dated May 25,
_ 1999 by B & A, Inc. for further information.)
2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent
to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes,
please describe and attach available plans.
Yes, the proposed project will occur within 200 feet of the existing
wetlands and associated stream. In accordance with the US Army Corps
of Engineers Nationwide Permit 18, the project requires that 0.09 acres
of wetlands be filled. The mitigation for this wetland .fill will be
completed in an upland area within the stream buffer as shown on the
wetland mitigation plan contained in the Wetland Study Report dated
May 25, 1999 by B & A, Inc. This work will be completed during the
specified time frames outlined in the US Army Corps of Engineers
Nationwide Permit 18. The City of Auburn municipal code does not
have prescribed stream or wetland buffer widths. However, all project
paving and building areas will maintain a.50 foot average buffer from the
remaining wetland areas and a 150 foot buffer from the stream
centerline. The buffers may be reduced in some areas and increased in
other areas by means of buffer averaging. The US Army Corps of
Engineers required an overflow storm system for the proposed project.
Overflow structures (catch basins with raised protective cages and
piping) are proposed within the wetland buffer at the northwest comer
and south-central areas of the site to protect the development from a 100 -
year flood. During storm events, these overflow structures will act to
retain water within the wetlands at a controlled maximum elevation and
will prolong the duration of soil saturation, providing hydrologic
enhancement . to the existing and created wetlands. Please see _ the
Conceptual Buffer Enhancement Plan prepared by Talasaea Consultants,
LLC for further information.
3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that
would be laced in or removed from surface water or
wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be
affected. -Indicate the source of fill material.
About 200 to 300 CY of fill will be placed in the onsite ditches. The fill
will be from local gravel pits.
10
APPL\^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals -or
diversions? Give general description, purpose, and
approximate quantities if known.
No.
5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If
so, note location on the site plan.
No.
6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste
materials to surface.waters? If so, describe the type of
waste and anticipated volume of discharge.
No.
B. Ground:
1) Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be
discharged to ground water? Give general description,
purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
No.
2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the
ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for
example; domestic sewage; industrial, containing any
toxic 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) is. (are)
expectedto serve.
None.
C. Water Runoff (including storm water):
1) Describe the source of runoff ( including storm water)
and method of collection and disposal, if any (include
quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will
this water flow into other waters? If so, describe.
11
APPL\^ENVC1-IECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
The, source of runoff from the project will be surface runoff from
rainfall. The runoff from roof drains and pavement areas will be
collected in catch basins and pipes and directed to a combined open/wet
detention and water quality facility located at the southeast comer of the
site. The stormwater detention/water quality treatment. -system will be
designed in accordance with City , of Auburn standards and
_ Comprehensive Plan polices to release the developed 2 year flows at one-half of the pre -developed 2 -year storm event and match the pre and
post development flows for the 10, 25, and 100 -year, events. After
treatment in the storm water detention/water quality facility, drainage
flows will be released through the control structure and into a new storm
drain system constructed as part of half street improvements on the west
side of West Valley Hwy N. This new half street improvement storm
drainage system will connect to the existing storm drainage system
located along the north end of the site's east property line and West
Valley Hwy N.
2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters?
If so, generally describe.
Yes. Oil and gas dripping from trucks and cars could enter the storm
water system.
D. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and
runoff water impacts, if any:
A temporary erosion and sedimentation control plan (TESCP) will be
implemented during construction in accordance , with the City of Auburn
standards. A construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) will
also be implemented to reduce and control surface water impacts and protect
the existing wetlands. A permanent open stormwater detention/water quality
treatment facility will be designed and constructed in accordance with the City
of Auburn standards to .control surface water impacts for the developed site.
This detention system will reduce the rate of flow of the surface water runoff.
The stormwater detention/water quality treatment facility will remove
hydrocarbons and sediment from the storm water.
The proposed wet/detention pond will be located at the southeast corner of the
site. Runoff from the pond will be released into the project's W. Valley Hwy
N half -street improvements which will eventually tie in to the existing drainage
system located in "the street right-of-way at the site's northeast end. This
existing right-of-way drainage system is currently accepting the drainage from
the site through the conveyance of the existing onsite ditch systems. Therefore
the point of release of the site drainage will remain unchanged as part of this
development.
12
APPL1^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
Increased peak runoff from new impervious surface due to half -street
improvement on the west side of West Valley Hwy N. will be mitigated by
decreasing the release rate of the onsite wet/detention pond in a manor in
which at no time will the combined post -developed W. Valley Hwy N and
developed site peak runoff rates exceed the combined pre -developed peak rates
of W. Valley Hwy N. and the site combined.
Submitted with this 'SEPA application is .the Meredith Business Park
Downstream Analysis and Site Drainage Analysis. This report was prepared to
address the City's concern that the additional surface runoff volume from this
development would add to the water surface elevation of the down stream
sites. The conclusion of the report is that the proposed stormwater mitigation
measures listed in the referenced report will keep floodway elevations at their
current water levels which are accepted by local jurisdictions. The proposed
development does not impact the downstream drainage. system in any
aggravated manor.
The City also has asked the question regarding impacts to the capacity and
passage of the creek through the site. These questions addressed the concern
when the site's detention pond was located on the sites west end next to the
creek. Since the site's detention pond has been located to the site's east
property line this question is no longer relevant. As part of the Army Corps of
Engineers permit, Jonathan Smith requested that a low maintenance standpipe
be placed on the site to collect water on the western end of the site above
elevation 49 and then convey it to West Valley Hwy. N. Jonathan Smith stated
that, "The small amount of .additional wetland and water storage capacity
potentially created by this design would help mitigate for the loss of wetland
habitat and increased impervious surface generated by the project."
4. Plants:
A. Check types of vegetation found on the site:
X deciduous tree: lde apleL aspen,rui ; other: ottonwo
X evergreen tree: fir, kioig pine, other.
X shrubs: salmon berry,
X grass.
X pasture.
crop or grain.
X wet soilplants: cattail, uttercu bulrush, Iskunk cabba other:
lough sed
water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other.
other types of vegetation.
13
APPL1^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 721/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
B. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed
or altered?
As part of the proposed development, all existing vegetation will be removed
from the proposed development area. This primarily includes Pasture grasses,
although woody vegetation - including shrubs and deciduous trees - will be
removed where they are growing adjacent to the drainage ditches to be filled
(as allowed per conditions of the Corps' Nationwide Permit).
The _proposal will include removal of the following trees:
9 Alder trees with a cumulative diameter of 144 inches.
33 Cottonwood trees with a cumulative diameter of 543 inches.
2 apple trees with a cumulative diameter of 41 inches.
2 Hawthorn tree with a cumulative diameter of 28 inches.
1 Mountain Ash tree with a 17" diameter.
1 Weeping Willow with a diameter of 28 inches.
1 Pear tree with a diameter of 12 inches.
1 Maple tree with a diameter of 18 inches
C. List threatened or endangered plant species known to be on
or near the site..
None known.
D. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, .or other
measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the
site, if any:
On-site landscaping will be implemented as part of the proposed development
to help preserve and enhance the vegetation on site. Landscaping will also be
provided around the perimeters of the open stormwater detention/water quality
treatment facilities. The wetland mitigation plan will also include native
plantings.
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: 6awa heron, eagle, on bird other: o vote and small roden
Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish,
other:
14
APPL\^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
B. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on
or near the site.
No threatened or endangered species are known to occur on or near the site. In
reviewing the US Army Corps of Engineers Nationwide Permit, it is our
understanding that a determination of "will not affect" has been issued in
regard to the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and a determination of "will not
adversely affect" has been issued in regard to Essential Fish Habitat (EFH).
C. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
Yes, According to the City of Auburn, the entire Auburn/Kent Valley is within
the Pacific flyway for migratory birds.
D. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
On-site landscaping will be implemented as part of the ,proposed development
along with landscaping along the perimeter of the open stonnwater
detention/water.quality treatment facilities. In addition, wetland mitigation and
buffer enhancement measures will provide native plant varieties and habitat
features to offer increased forage and cover opportunities for wildlife within
these sensitive areas.
6. . Enerev 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 beating,
manufacturing, etc.
Electric power and natural gas will be used to serve the projects needs for heat,
and lighting. During construction, oil and diesel fuel, electricity, gasoline and
natural gas will be used to operate various construction equipment.
B. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy
by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe.
M
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 project will comply with the Washington State Energy Code and
Ventilation Code.
15
APPL\^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
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.
None.
1) Describe special emergency services that might be
required:
No need for special emergency services is anticipated.
2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental
health hazards, if any:
No specific measures are proposed.
B. Noise:
1) What types of noise exist in the area which may"affect
your project (for example: traffic, equipment,
operation, other)?
None that would affect this project.
2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or
associated with the project on a short-term or a long-
term basis (for example: traffic, construction,
operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would
come from the site.
On a short term basis, noise from construction equipment will occur
during normal working hours. On a long term basis noise from normal
vehicular and truck traffic will occur.
3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impact,
if any:
Proposed on site landscaping will help to reduce and control impacts
from noise created by the traffic.
8. Land and Shoreline Use:
16
APPL\^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doe
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL. CHECKLIST
A. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? .
This site currently has one residence with several sheds and pastures. The site
to the North houses a construction company and -storage yard.: The site to the
south is residential but mostly undeveloped and to the West is undeveloped.
�B. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe:
Yes. Pasture and fruit trees exist,on the site.
C. Describe any structures on the site:
One residence and several sheds.
D. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
Yes, all structures will be removed.
E. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
M-1.
F. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the
site?
Light Industrial.
G. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program
designation of the site?
Not applicable.
H. Has any part of the site been classified as an
"environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify:
Yes, the site contains sensitive area designations for volcanic hazard, erosion
hazard, aquifer recharge, forested hillside and wetland sensitive areas.
I. Approximately how many people would. reside or work in the
completed project?
Approximately 100 workers.
17
APPL\^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
J. Approximately how many people would the completed
project displace? _
One.
K. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement
impacts, if any:
None proposed.
L. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible
with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any:
This project will comply with current City of Auburn land use zoning and the
current comprehensive plan.
9. )JousinE•
A. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any?
Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
None.
B. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated?
Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing.
One middle income residence.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if
any:
None proposed.
10. Aesthetics:
A. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not
including antennas; what is the principal exterior building
material(s) proposed?
Approximately 40 -foot tall concrete walls.
B. What views in the immediate vicinity would he altered or
obstructed?
None.
18
APPL\^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21103)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
C. Proposed measures to reduce ox control aesthetic impacts, if
any:
Perimeter and interior landscaping combined with building colgr combinations
will be used to help reduce the aesthetic impacts from the proposed project.
11. —Licht and Glare:
A. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What
time of day would it mainly occur?
Wall mounted and pole mounted lights will provide security around the
building perimeter at night. Approximately % foot candle at the edge of
paving. '
B. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety
hazard or interfere with views?
No. .
C. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect
your proposal?
None.
D. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare
impacts, if any:
Lighting will be designed to shine on to the site and not on to adjacent streets
or property. Cutoff shields will be used as necessary.
12. Recreation:
A. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are
in the immediate vicinity?
Emerald Downs, Lake Fenwick Park, Riverbend golf complex.
B. ' Would the proposed project displace any existing
recreational uses? If so, describe.
No.
19
APPL\^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on
recreation, including recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if
any:,
None proposed.
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 neat to the site? If so, generally describe:
None known.
B. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic,
archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be
on or next to the site.
None known.
C. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any:
None proposed.
14. Transportation:
A. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and
describe proposed access to the existing street system.
Show on site plans, if any.
The site will be accessed via one driveway off the West side of West Valley
Hwy North. State route 167 can be accessed via West Valley Highway North
and 15`s Street to the South and 5.272nd to the North.
B. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the
approximate distance to the nearest transit stop?
Yes. Across West Valley Hwy N. to the east of the site is a bus stop.
C. How many parking spaces would the completed project
have? How many would the project eliminate?
Approximately 264 stalls. Approx 5 would be eliminated.
20
APDL\^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL, CHECKLIST
D. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or
improvements to existing roads or streets, not including
driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether
public or private):
No new roads will be required. The proposed project will include improving
= the existing roadway within the ROW of West Valley Hwy N. along the
frontage of the project. In addition to the above improvements, transportation
impact fees will be required based on the City of Auburns Ordinance No. 5506.
Please refer to the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Transportation
Consulting Northwest dated November 6, 2003 for further information.
E. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of)
water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe:
No.
F. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the
completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes
would occur.
The project will generate 180 new PM peak hour trips. For additional
information, see traffic study completed by Transportation Consulting
Northwest dated November 6, 2003.
G. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation
. impacts, if any:
The proposed project will include improving the existing roadway within the
ROW of West Valley Hwy N. along the frontage of the project to help reduce
and control transportation impacts from the project. In addition,. required
transportation impact fees will also provide mitigation for transportion
impacts. For additional information see traffic study completed by
Transportation Consulting Northwest dated November 6, 2003.
15. Public Services:
A. Would the project result in an increased need for public
services (for example: fir protection, police protection,
health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe:
Yes fire protection, police protection and medical services will be needed for
the completed project.
21
APPMAENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
B. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on
public services, if any:
Construction of looped fire mains with new fire hydrants, along with half street
improvements to West Valley Hwy N. will help reduce an4 control direct
impacts on public services from the proposed project.
i6. —Utilities:
I�
Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity,
natural eas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer,
septic system, other
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:
Electricity: Puget Sound Energy — Extension from West Valley Hwy N.
Natural Gas: Puget Sound Energy — Extension from West Valley Hwy N.
Sanitary Sewer: City of Auburn - Extension from West Valley Hwy N.
Water: City of Auburn Extension from West Valley Hwy N.
Telephone: Qwest Communications - Extension from West Valley Hwy N.
Refuse Service: Waste Management — Existing Contract with City of Auburn.
C. SIGNATURE•
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge.
I understand that the
decision.
OWNER/AGENT SIG
DATE SUBMITTED:
22
APPL\^ENVCHECK.APPL SEPA Checklist 010804.doc
(Rev. 7/21/03)
CITY OF
N:�
a Peter B. Lewis, Mayor
WASHINGTON 25 West Main street * Aubum WA 98001-4996 * www.cl.aubum.wa.us * 253-931-3000
NOTICE OF APPLICATION
This notice is to inform you that the City of Auburn has received the following application that
may be of interest to you. The application may be reviewed at the City of Auburn Department
of Planning and Community Development, 25 West Main Street, Auburn, WA.
Nature of Projector Request: The request for a 12 -lot preliminary plat and development of
approximately 200,000 square foot of buildings in an industrial business park complex on
approximately 13 -acres of land. The proposal includes site preparation activities, wetland
mitigation, flood storage, construction of an internal access corridor and transportation
improvements along with commensurate installation of landscaping and utilities.
Location: The west side of the 3800-3900 Block of West Valley Highway North,
approximately 310 -feet north of the intersection of West Valley Highway North and 37"' Street
NW and approximately 730 -feet south of the intersection of West Valley Highway North and
South 287 Street.
Date of Notice of Application:
Permit Application Date:
Date of Notice of Completeness:
File No:
Applicant:
April 20, 2004
July 5, 2001, January 13, 2004 & March 22, 2004
April 6, 2004
PLT04-0003
Latitude Development, LLC; Darrell Donovan
In addition to the preliminary plat application, the applicant has also filed an environmental
checklist application (SEPA File No. SEP01-0027). Based on the City's review of this
environmental checklist application, the City expects to issue a Mitigated Determination of Non -
Significance (MDNS) for the proposal in accordance with the optional DNS process identified in
WAC 197-11-355. The review process for approval of the proposal may include requiring
mitigation measures under applicable codes and imposition of mitigation measures regardless
of whether an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is prepared. This may be your only
opportunity to comment on the environmental impacts of the proposal.
Other Permits Required: No other permits are required for the approval of the preliminary plat
application. Additional permits required for the project include a grading permit, building
permits, Hydraulic Project Approval (HPA), utility permits and final plat.
Additional Studies Provided with the Application:
• "Traffic Impact Analysis" dated 04-26-01, with revisions through March 8, 2004,
Transportation Consulting Northwest.
• "Wetland Study" dated May 25, 1999, B & A Associates.
"Wetland Buffer and Functional Value Assessment", dated September 29, 2003 with revised
exhibits through March 17, 2004, Talasaea Consultants, Inc. EXHIBIT 6
AUBURN *MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED
• "TESC Calculations" dated December 3, 2003, Rupert Engineering Inc.
• "Downstream Analysis and Site Drainage Analysis" dated July 4, 2003, Rupert Engineering.
Inc.
• "Geotechnical Engineering Study" dated May 7, 2001, Earth Consultants, Inc.
• "Phase I Environmental Site Assessment" dated December 19, 1999, Earth Consultants,
Inc.
Public Comment Period: You are invited to comment, request a copy of the decision, when
-- available, and be -made aware of any appeal rights.' Comments must be received in writing by
the Auburn Department of Planning and Community Development at 25 West Main, Auburn,
WA 98001-4998 before 5:00 p.m. on May 5, 2004.
Public Hearings: A public hearing is required for the project. A separate notice of public
hearing will be provided in the future.
Statement of Consistency and List of Applicable Development Regulations: This proposal
is subject to and shall be consistent with the Auburn City Code, Auburn Comprehensive Plan.
City of Auburn Design and Construction Standards Manual, Uniform Building and Uniform Fire
Code
Proposed Mitigation Measures: The City of Auburn proposes to issue a Mitigation
Determination of Non -Significance. A summary of the mitigation conditions are: (1) Haul route
approval; (2) Geotechnical report certification; (3) Geotechnical requirements; (4) Approve fill
source; (5) Stormwater easement; (6) NWP 1.8 requirements; (7) Wetland/stream buffers; (8)
Site design plan; (9) Flood storage; (10) Cultural/Historical notification protocol; (11) Street
improvements and dedication; (12) Traffic improvements.
If you have further comments or questions related to this application, you may contact Sean
Martin of the Planning Department at (253) 931-3090. If you call or write, please reference File
No., SEP01-0027 or PLT04-0003
CITY OF .....F:v<.
Peter B. Lewis, _Mayor.
WASHINGTON 25 West Main sheet * Aubum WA 98001-4998 * www.cl.aubum.Wa.us * 253-931-3000
FINAL
MITIGATED_
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
SEP01-0027
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: A 12 -lot preliminary plat and development of approximately
of an internal access corridor and tranpgrtation improvements along with commensurate
installation of landscaping and utilities
PROPONENT: Latitude Development Inc
approximately 730 -feet south of the intersection of West Valley Highway North and South 287"'
Street. The nroiect is located within the southeast quarter of Section 02 Township 21 North
Range 4 East, W. M.
LEAD AGENCY: City of Auburn
The Responsible Official of the City of Auburn hereby makes the following Findings of Fact
based upon impacts identified in the environmental checklist and the "Final Staff Evaluation for
Environmental Checklist No. SEP01-0027", and Conclusions of Law based upon the Auburn
Comprehensive Plan, and other Municipal policies, plans, rules and regulations designated as a
basis for the exercise of substantive authority under the Washington State Environmental Policy
Act Rules pursuant to R.C.W. 43.21C.060. The SEPA Responsible Official has further
determined that, consistent with WAC 197-11-258 and RCW 43.21C.240, many impacts of the
proposal will be mitigated by local development regulations as well as applicable County, State
and Federal regulations and permit requirements.
FINDINGS OF FACT:
The proposed action, referred to as "Meredith Business Park' project consists of a 12 -lot
preliminary plat and development of an approximately 200,000 square foot of buildings in
an industrial business park complex on approximately 13 -acres of land. The proposal
includes site preparation activities, wetland mitigation, construction of an internal access
corridor and transportation improvements along with commensurate installation of
landscaping and utilities.
2. In order to accomplish the project as proposed, approximately 50,000 cubic yards of fill
will be imported for paving and landscape areas and establishment of building pads for
future development.
3. Approximately 4,000 cubic yards of unsuitable soils are proposed to be excavated and
exported from the site. The site will require the excavation, fill, and grading for the
EXHIBIT 7
AUBURN *MORE THAN YOU IMAGINED
Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance SEP01-0027
Page 2
installation of utilities, to achieve slopes for drainage, for installation of building footings
and slabs, for half street construction, and construction of the storm drainage system..
4. The applicant has submitted a geotechnical report "Geotechnical Engineering Study" by
Earth Consultants Inc. May 7, 2001. The report contains numerous recommendations
related to the foundation design, earthwork operations and pavement design.
S. The applicant has also completed an environmental assessment of the site "Phase I
Environmen-tal Site Assessment" dated December 19, 1999, Earth Consultants, Inc. The
report concluded that there was not evidence of "Recognized Environmental Conditions"
on the site that would warrant additional assessment or mitigation.
6. The proposed construction activities will increase the likelihood of erosion and
sedimentation impacts and could result in the degradation of sensitive wetland areas,
area watercourses and the surface water system. It is anticipated that design and
construction consistent with federal, state and local permits and design standards will
avoid or reduce impacts to a level of insignificance.
7. Site preparation and construction activities will generate increased levels of local
suspended particulate emissions.
8. The temporary truck trips generated by the construction operations have the potential to
cause adverse impacts to traffic operations and local streets during peak traffic hours and
thus generate increased levels of local suspended particulate emissions.
9. The site has two sizable wetlands that extend off-site, located in the
western/southwestern limits of the site. The site has provided historic direct and
overflow confluence for King County Tributary 0053, which now flows predominantly
north and is generally located off-site. Tributary 0053 discharges to Mill Creek, which
flows to the Green River.
10. The City and adjoining county parcels experience downstream flooding as a result of
increased flows in tributary 0053.
11. Under the current proposal the applicant seeks to fill approximately .09 -acres
(approximately 3,900 square feet) of drainage swales and wetland area to support site
construction.
12. The applicant has received a Nationwide permit (NWP) 18 from the Army Corps of
Engineers, authorizing the placement of fill subject to seven (7) conditions.
13. The wetlands to. be filled are identified as having low to moderate functional values. To
compensate for wetland impacts, the applicant will provide approximately 8,222 square
foot of wetland area to mitigate for the filling of approximately 3,400 square feet (less
than originally approved under the NWP 18 issued by the Army Corps of Engineers). The
mitigation results in a mitigation ratio identified within the draft Special Area Management
Plan (SAMP).
14. The proposed mitigation ratio is consistent with the draft Special Area Management Plan
(SAMP) for Mill Creek.
Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance SEP01-0027
Page 3
15. The project could potentially result in disruption -to the functions and values of the
existing site wetlands and adjacent stream course by adding pollutants and creating
human intrusions not currently present. The provision of a wetland buffer enhanced with
dense planting of native vegetation of a sufficient width is necessary to reduce and avoid
long-term wetland impacts.
_ 16. The applicaat proposes to remove approximately 50 trees with a cumulative diameter of
approximately 831 -inches. The majority of the trees (66%) and cumulative diameter
(65%) are cottonwood trees located within proximity to the construction limits of the
project area.
17. The City of Auburn and "Michael Kohr" entered into a stipulated finding of fact conclusion
and settlement related to alleged clearing violations. In one of those findings, the parties
agreed that an additional 15% (or a minimum of 25 trees) would be provided beyond
Code requirements. The application of this requirement will be reviewed during the
future plan review associated with construction.
18. The construction of the mitigation and the installation of commensurate plantings and the
observation of Code required landscaping will adequately mitigate for the loss of any
additional trees on-site.
19. In issuing the NWP 18, the Army Corps of Engineers determined that the proposal will not
affect any species listed as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act.
The Army Corps of Engineers also concluded that the proposed action will not adversely
affect Essential Fish Habitat' for federally managed fisheries.
20. The project construction includes approximately 70% of the development site in
impervious surface at completion. The construction of these surfaces will adversely
impact the area's water quality unless mitigation measures are implemented. It is
anticipated that design and construction consistent with the City's Design and
Construction Standards manual will avoid or reduce impacts to a level of insignificance.
21. The creation of expanses of impervious surfaces will increase the quantity of storm water
discharge from the development site. The project's storm drainage facilities must be
properly designed and constructed to accommodate the increased runoff. It is
anticipated that design and construction consistent with the City's Design and
Construction Standards manual will avoid or reduce impacts to a level of insignificance.
22. The proper design, construction and maintenance of the development site's storm
drainage facilities is necessary to ensure protection of water quality.
23. The applicant drainage report "Downstream Analysis and Site Drainage Analysis" dated
July 4, 2003, Rupert Engineering. Inc. concludes that with on-site water quality and
quantity control, the downstream public drainage system will not be impacted by the
proposal. However, the report does note that upsizing of culverts could cause additional
flooding downstream if no action is taken
1 Review occurred in accordance with the Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, as
amended by the Sustainable Fisheries Act of 1996.
Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance SEP01-0027
Page 4
24. The proposed building scale, orientation and development design has the potential to
result in visual impacts.
25. The light industrial development is proposed to consist of speculative building warehouse -
type building. The future development of the site and the uses occupying the site in the
future must be consistent with use provisions and development standards of the M-1,
Light Industrial zoning district.
26. While the sites contain no known historic or cultural resources, the potential for these
resources exists.
27. A traffic study "Traffic Impact Analysis" dated 0426-01, with revisions through March 8,
2004 was prepared by Transportation Consulting Northwest to evaluate existing traffic
conditions and the impacts of the proposed development. Based on the analysis provided
and as reviewed and approved by City staff, it is concluded that the proposed action
would generate 179 vehicle trips in the p.m. peak hour including 38 entering and 141
exiting trips.
28. The proposal requires the payment of the applicable transportation impact fee, in
accordance with Auburn City Code requirements.
29. The applicant proposes to construct a new intersection on West Valley Highway to
provide access to the proposed lots of the preliminary plat via a private street. Mitigation
is required to accommodate for safe turning movements for vehicles utilizing the
proposed private street and driveway.
30. The applicant has requested a deviation with regards to the number of lots being served
from a private street and the maximum length of a dead-end street. If those deviations
are not granted, modifications to the proposal must occur to become consistent with City
Code requirements.
31. The applicant is required to complete half street improvements to West Valley Highway
North in accordance with City Code requirements. 'The full half street includes the
construction and dedication of an additional southbound travel lane and the completion of
curb, gutter, storm drainage, lighting and landscaping to city standards for a principal
arterial.
32. Utilities are generally available in the vicinity of the development site. The proposed
action will result in an increased demand for sewer, stormwater and water services. The
water lines will need to be looped in order to maintain system integrity.
33. The City did receive one detailed letter regarding the project's impact to downstream
properties. As a result of that comment letter, the applicant has prepared and submitted
a "Supplemental Downstream Analysis Report prepared by Rupert Engineering, August 3,
2004" that addresses those concerns from that comment letter related to preconstruction
analysis. The supplemental report contained additional recommendations related to
drainage impacts.
Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance SEPOI-0027
Page 5
34. The "Final Staff Evaluation for Environmental Checklist No. SEP01-0027" is hereby
incorporated by reference as though set forth in full.
CONCLUSIONS OF LAW:
Staff has concluded that a MDNS may be issued. This based upon the environmental checklist
and its attachments, and the "Final Staff Evaluation For Environmental Checklist". The MDNS is
- supported by -Plans and regulations formally adopted by the City for the exercise of substantive
authority under. SEPA. The following are City adopted policies that support the MDNS:
1. The City shall seek to minimize surface water quality and aquatic habitat degradation of
creeks, streams, rivers, ponds, lakes and other water bodies; to preserve and enhance
the suitability of such water bodies for contact recreation and fishing and to preserve and
enhance the aesthetic quality of such waters by requiring the use of current Best
Management Practices for the control of storm water runoff and non -point runoff. [Policy
EN -3, Auburn Comprehensive Plan, (ACP)]
2. The City shall consider the impacts of new development on the quality of land,
known or suspected fish and wildlife habitats and vegetative resources as a part of its
environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures.
Such mitigation may involve the use of native landscape vegetation. (Policy EN -24,
ACP)
3. The City shall seek to ensure that land not be developed or otherwise modified in a
manner which will result in or significantly increase the potential for slope slippage,
landslide, subsidence or substantial soil erosion. The City's development standards shall
dictate the use of Best Management Practices to minimize the potential for these
problems. (Policy EN -69, ACP)
4. The City shall consider the impacts of new development on hazards associated with soils
and subsurface drainage as a part of its environmental review process and require any
appropriate mitigation measures. (Policy EN -71, ACP)
5. The City shall seek to secure and maintain such levels of air quality as will protect human
health, prevent injury to plant and animal life, prevent injury to property, foster the
comfort and convenience of area inhabitants, and facilitate the enjoyment of the natural
attractions of the area. (Policy EN -18, ACP)
6. The City shall consider the impacts of new development on air quality as a part of its
environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. (Policy
EN -22, ACP)
7. The City shall seek to ensure adequate and healthful supplies.of domestic water by
protecting groundwater from degradation, by providing for surface water infiltration, by
minimizing or prohibiting unnecessary withdrawals of groundwater and by preventing
unintended groundwater discharges caused by disturbance of water -bearing geological
formations. (Policy EN -1, ACP)
8. The City will regulate any new storm water discharges to creeks, streams, rivers, ponds,
lakes and other water bodies with the goal of no degradation of the water quality or
Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance SEPO1-0027
Page 6
habitat of the receiving waters, and where feasible seek opportunities to enhance the
water quality and habitat of receiving waters. (Policy EN -4, ACP)
9. Where possible, streams and riverbanks should be kept in a natural condition, and
degraded streambanks should be enhanced or restored. (Policy EN -6, ACP) ,
10. The City's design standards shall ensure that the post development peak stormwater
.� runoff rates -do not exceed the predevelopment rates. (Policy EN -10, ACP)
11. The City will seek to ensure. that the quality of water leaving the City is of equivalent
quality to the water entering. This will be accomplished by emphasizing prevention of
pollution to surface and ground waters through education programs and implementation
and enforcement of Best Management Practices. (Policy EN -11, ACP)
12. The City shall consider the impacts of new development on water quality as part of its
environmental -review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. Impacts
on fish resources shall be a priority concern in such reviews. (Policy EN -13, ACP)
13. The City shall require the use of Best Management Practices to enhance and protect
water quality as dictated by the City's Design and Construction Standards and the
Washington State Department of Ecology's Stormwater Management Manual for the
Puget Sound Basin. In all new development, approved water quality treatment measures
that are applicable and represent the best available science or technology shall be
required prior to discharging storm waters into the City storm drainage system or into
environmentally sensitive areas (e.g. wetlands, rivers, and groundwater). (Policy EN -14,
ACP)
14. The City recognizes that new development can have impacts including, but not limited to,
flooding, erosion and decreased water quality on downstream communities and natural
drainage courses. The City shall continue to actively participate in developing and
implementing regional water quality planning and flood hazard reduction efforts within
the Green River, Mill Creek and White River drainage basins. The findings and
recommendations of these regional efforts, including, but not limited to, the "Draft"
Special Area Management Plan (SAMP) for the Mill Creek Basin, the "Draft" Mill Creek
Flood Control Plan, the Green River Basin Program Interlocal Agreement, and the Mill
Creek Water Quality Management Plan, shall be considered by the City as City programs
and plans are developed and updated. (Policy EN -15, ACP)
15. The City recognizes that stormwater treatment facilities do not function efficiently unless
maintained. The City shall strive to ensure that public and private stormwater collection,
detention and treatment systems are properly maintained and functioning as designed.
(Policy EN -17, ACP)
16. The City shall consider the impacts of new development on the quality of land, known or
suspected fish and wildlife habitats (Map 9.2) and vegetative resources as a part of its
environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures. Such
mitigation may involve the retention of significant habitats and the use of native
landscape vegetation. (Policy EN -22, ACP)
17. The City recognizes the important biological and hydrological roles that wetlands play in
Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance SEPO1-0027
Page 7
providing plant and animal habitat, protecting water quality, reducing the need for man-
made flood and storm drainage systems, maintaining water quality, and in providing
recreational, open space, educational and cultural opportunities. (Policy EN -23, ACP)
18. The City recognizes that wetlands provide varying degrees of biological and hydrological
functions and values to the community depending on the size, complexity and location of
the individual system, and that the overall degree of functions and values should be
considered when reviewing proposals which impact wetlands. In a similar manner, the
levels of.protection afforded to a wetland shall be consistent with its existing function and
values. (Policy EN -24, ACP)
19. The City shall consider the impacts of new development on the quality of wetland
resources as part of its environmental review process and shall require appropriate
mitigation and monitoring measures of important wetland areas. Such mitigation may
involve conservation, -enhancement or restoration or replacement of important wetlands,
and provisions for appropriate buffering. The goal of the mitigation should be no net loss
of wetland functions and values. A permanent deed restriction shall be placed on any
wetlands created or enhanced to ensure that they are preserved in perpetuity. (Policy
EN -25, ACP)
20. Wetlands which are associated with a river or stream, or provide significant plant and
animal habitat opportunities are recognized by the City as the most important wetland
systems, and shall receive the highest degree of protection and mitigation through
conservation, enhancement or relocation measures. Wetlands, which are limited in size,
are isolated from major hydrological systems or provide limited hydrological or plant and
animal habitat opportunities may be considered by the City for development and.
displacement in conjunction with appropriate mitigation. (Policy EN -26, ACP)
21. The City shall encourage the use of native vegetation as an integral part of public and
private development plans. (Policy EN -29, ACP)
22. The City shall seek to retain as open space those areas having a unique combination of
open space values, including: separation or buffering between incompatible land uses;
visual delineation of the City or a distinct area or neighborhood of the City; unusually
productive wildlife habitat; floodwater or storm water storage; storm water purification;
recreational value; historic or cultural value; aesthetic value; and educational value.
(Policy PR -7, ACP)
23. The City shall enact ordinances and review development proposals in a manner,
which restricts and controls the discharge of storm water for new development. At a
minimum the peak discharge rate after development shall not exceed the peak
discharge rate before development. (Policy EN -62, ACP)
24. The City shall require that off-site storm drainage improvements needed to serve new
development shall be built prior to or simultaneous with such development, according to
the size and configuration identified by the Comprehensive Drainage Plan as necessary to
serve future planned development. The location and design of these facilities shall give
full consideration to the ease of operation and maintenance of these facilities by the City.
The City should continue to use direct participation, LIDs and payback agreements to
Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance SEPO1-0027
Page 8
assist in the financing of off-site improvements required to serve the development. (Policy
CF -38, ACP)
25. The City shall seek opportunities where feasible to reintroduce treated urban runoff back
into groundwater system as new and redevelopment occurs to minimize urbanization
impacts to the hydrology of the natural river systems. (Policy CF -51, ACP)
_ 26. The City shall evaluate the feasibility and opportunity to improve the water quality of its
existing discaiarges to the river systems to enhance water quality in response to the
Endangered Species Act. (Policy CF -52, ACP)
27. The City shall seek to minimize the impacts to the natural river system's hydrology by
encouraging pre-treatment of surface flows of new development and re -introduction into
the groundwater where feasible. (Policy CF -53, ACP)
28. Storm water runoff from roads is a major cause of water quality degradation. All new
road construction will employ the best management practices available to promote water
ACP)ty compliance consistent with the City storm water quality manual. (Policy TR -62,
29. The City shall encourage the retention of vegetation and encourage landscaping in
order to provide filtering of suspended particulates (Policy EN -20, ACP).
30. The City shall discourage the unnecessary disturbance of natural vegetation in new,
development (Policy EN -34, ACP).
31. The City shall promote high quality development of all light industrial and warehouse
areas. (Policy LU -101, ACP)
32. All industrial development should incorporate aesthetically pleasing building and site
design. The City shall amend its codes and performance standards which govem
industrial development to implement this policy.
a. Procedures shall be established to ensure aesthetically pleasing building and site
design in areas designated for light industrial areas.
b. Appropriate landscaping and site development standards shall regulate site
development in heavy industrial areas.
c. Unsightly views, such as heavy machinery, service entrances, storage areas,
rooftop equipment, loading docks, and parking areas should be screened from
View of adjacent retail, commercial, light industrial and residential areas and
from public streets.
(Policy LU -104, ACP)
33. The City shall encourage development, which maintains and improves the existing
aesthetic character of the community. (Policy UD -1, ACP)
34. Storm drainage facilities shall incorporate high standards of design to enhance the
appearance of the site, preclude the need for security fencing and p n serve as an
tY
9
Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance SEP01-0027
Page 9
amenity. The design of above ground storage and conveyance facilities should
address or incorporate landscaping utilizing native vegetation, minimal side slopes
safety, maintenance needs, and function. The facilities should be located within the
rear or side yards areas and the design should preclude the need for security fencing -
when ever feasible. (Policy UD -6, ACP)
35. The visual impacts of large new developments should be a priority consideration in
W = their review -and approval. (Policy UD -9, ACP)
36. The City shall encourage the protection, preservation, recovery and rehabilitation of
significant archaeological resources and historic sites. (Policy HP -1, ACP)
37. The City shall consider the impacts of new development on historical resources as a part
of its environmental review process and require any appropriate mitigating measures.
(Policy HP -3, ACP)
38. Needed rights-of-way, on-site and off-site road improvements, and utilities should be
assured before development occurs. (Policy LU -105, ACP)
39. The City shall continue to require developers of new developments to construct
transportation systems that serve their developments. The City shall also explore ways
for new developments to encourage vanpooling, carpooling, public transit use, and other
alternatives to SOV travel. (Policy TR -21, ACP)
40. Improvements that serve new developments will be constructed as a part of the
development process. All costs will be borne by the development when the development
is served by the proposed new streets. In some instances, the City may choose to
participate in this construction where improvements serve more than adjacent
developments. The City will encourage the use of LIDs, where appropriate and financially
feasible, and to facilitate their development. The City will consider developing a traffic
impact fee system. (Policy TR -23, ACP)
41. Improvements that upgrade existing streets are considered to benefit the abutting
property, and the abutting property owners should fund such improvements. Some City
participation may be appropriate to encourage the formation of LIDS in particular problem
areas. (Policy TR -24, ACP)
42. Needed rights-of-way, on-site and off-site road improvements, and utilities should be
assured before development occurs. Policy LU -105, ACP)
CONDITIONS:
The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant
adverse impact on the environment, and an environmental impact statement (EIS) is not
required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c), only if the following conditions are met. This decision
was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information of file with
the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request.
Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance SEP01-0027
Page 10
1. Prior to hauling materials to or from the site, the applicant must furnish a route and
hauling schedule to the City Engineer for approval. If, in the opinion of the City Engineer,
such hauling will adversely impact the street network, hauling hours may be limited to
appropriate off-peak hours or an alternate route or schedule.
2. The applicant shall provide documentation that the recommendations of the 'geotechnical
report are fully applicable to the current site proposal or shall produce a subsequent
_ . report related to the current site design.
3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit or the permit that authorizes on-site grading
activities, the recommendations of the geotechnical report "Geotechnical Engineering
Study" by Earth Consultants Inc. May 7, 2001 and/or other subsequent site specific soils
or geotechnical reports shall be incorporated into clearing, grading and other appropriate
construction plans, as determined by the City Engineer.
4. The City Engineer shall approve the source of imported fill material prior to hauling.
S. The proponent shall provide the City with an inspection and maintenance easement for
the on-site storm, drainage facilities on the development site. The easement shall be
prepared and submitted to the City for approval prior to issuance of occupancy permits.
6. The applicant shall provide the City a copy of all documents provided to the Army Corps
of Engineers required to comply with the conditions of the NWP 18 issues on June 17,
2003. The City shall accept that issuance of said permit serves as documentation the
proposal complies with all regulations applicable to said permit, enforced by the issuing
Agency.
7. The applicant shall incorporate the recommendations of the "Supplemental Downstream
Analysis Report prepared by Rupert Engineering, August 3, 2004" into the design and
construction plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, including demonstrating that
the project related off-site improvements will be completed.
8. In addition to the Federal requirements, the applicant shall demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the City of Auburn's Planning Director the following provision have been or
can be implemented. The applicant shall:
a. Provide a 150 -feet buffer to the principal channel of tributary 0053, as generally
shown on the applicant's site plan dated October 28, 2004.
b. Provide a 50 -foot enhanced buffer to the existing limits of the wetlands, as
generally shown on the applicant's site plan dated October 28, 2004. The
applicant will provide a combination of topography and plant material to ensure
that there is adequate separation and protection to the wetland.
c. Provide an appropriate security equivalent to 125 percent of the cost of all buffer
plantings to the Auburn Building Official prior to the issuance of grading permits,
and shall be kept active for the duration of the Federal monitoring period
associated with the mitigation work. At the end of the monitoring program, the
City shall release the security if remedial action is not required.
d. Clearly indicate the wetland area and buffers on all construction plans approved
by the City, indicating the purpose and any limitations on the use of the area.
The boundary of the wetland mitigation area and its buffer shall be staked in 25-
Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance SEP01-0027
Page 11
foot intervals. This staked line shall continuously remain in place and serve as
clearing and construction limits throughout the project for all construction
activities adjacent to the wetlands area, or as required by the City.
e. Provide that interpretative signs for each site shall be installed at approximately
100 -foot intervals and maintained as part of the wetland mitigation construction.
These signs shall indicate the wetland and tributary location, their role in the
ecosystem and restrictions related to the use of the mitigation area. The sign
locations, construction specifications and text shall be specified in civil plan
review process.
f. Provide a conservation easement granted to the City of Auburn for the wetland
buffer, wetland mitigation area and stream buffer setback. The easement shall
state that any uses within the easement area shall be as approved by the
Planning Director. The uses shall be consistent with the purpose of the wetland
buffer/mitigation and be a general benefit to the public. The conservation
easement shall be conveyed on the face of the Final Plat.
9. A site design plan including landscaping, building and site features shall be prepared and
submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director prior to the issuance of any
building permit or facility extension approval. The site design plan, in addition to
demonstrating compliance with applicable City regulations, shall address the following
elements:
a. To ensure that the combination of the landscaping amenities and the project's at
grade storm drainage facilities do not result in adverse functional or visual
impacts, the design of the drainage and landscaping shall be coordinated.
Professionally prepared drainage facility construction and landscaping plans shall
be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Director and Public Works
Director. The storm drainage facilities shall incorporate high standards of design
to enhance the appearance of the site and preclude the need for fencing.
b. Architectural details shall be employed to visually break up expanses of exterior
building walls exceeding 150 feet in length and minimize the appearance of
expanses of hard surfaces visible from the street.
10. The applicant shall provide additional passive flood storage for KC Tributary 0053 to
mitigate unquantifiable losses of natural flood storage, and coordinate said storage with
ion -site landscaping, mitigation, buffer and drainage facilities. The conceptual plan
Wetland Buffer and Functional Value Assessment'; dated September 29, 2003 with
revised exhibits through March 17, 2004, Talasae Consultants, Inc." indicated that
approximately 146,000 cubic feet of flood storage is achievable. In exchange for
providing the additional flood storage, as shown on the exhibits, the City will allow
averaging of the enhanced buffer required under condition 8 to allow a greater flexibility
and creativity in environmental design.
11. If any items of possible cultural or historical significance are encountered during site
activities, work shall be, halted in an area large enough to maintain integrity and the City
and State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation and the Muckleshoot Indian
Tribe, as appropriate, must be immediately consulted.
12. The applicant will be required to construct half street improvements on West Valley
Highway to standards for a principal arterial street including the dedication, by statutory
Mitigated Determination of Non -Significance SEP01-0027
Page 12
warranty deed, of the necessary right-of-way. The dedication will occur on the face of
the Final Plat.
13. To accommodate for safe turning movements for vehicles utilizing the proposed private
street and driveway (which shall be aligned with opposing driveways), the installation of
an additional southbound lane for use as a right turn deceleration lane on West Valley
Highway is required. The applicant is permitted to rely on the additional lane required for
half -street improvements as the deceleration lane. In addition, the southern driveway will
be restricted to left turn only, by design. Prior to the issuance of construction permits,
the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the necessary
geometry of these improvements will be provided.
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
POSITION/TITLE:
ADDRESS:
DATE ISSUED: August 17, 2004
Paul Krauss, AICP
Director of Department of
Planning and Community Development
25 West Main Street
Auburn, WA 98001
(253)
SIGNATURE
Note: this determination does not constitute approval of the proposal The proposal will be
reviewed for and required to meet all appropriate City development requirements.
Any person aggrieved of this final determination may file an appeal with the Auburn City Clerk
within 21 days of the date of issuance of this notice. All appeals of the above determination
must be filed by 5:00 P.M. on September 7. 2004.