Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 91-02-V - DUWAMISH OFFICE PARK - PHASE II VARIANCE91-02-v south 112th street pacific highway south duwamish office park 91-2-V CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD, TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188 ti FROM: Denni Shefrin, Associate Planner DATE: August 5, 1991 SUBJECT: Project Status 1.Design Review 2.Shoreline Substantial Development Permit 3.Variance cc: Ron Cameron, City Engineer M E M O R A N D U M . PIIONE 11 (206) 433.1800 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor TO: FILE NOs 91 -3 -DR, EPIC- 23 -91, 91- 4 -SMP, 91-02-V: Duwamish Office Park, Phase II No further processing will occur for the following project applications: Should the applicant wish to proceed with this project, new applications and associated fees must be submitted to the Department of Community Development. CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD, TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188 PHONE N (206) 433.1800 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor June 27, 1991 Mr. Eugene Horbach E & H Properties P.O. Box 598 Bellevue, WA 98009 Subject: Duwamish Office Park, Phase II Dear Mr. Horbach: The planning staff in several recent meetings has requested a letter of confirmation from the City of Seattle to be provided by you specifying the terms of the lease agreement pertaining to parking on the north portion of the site within the utility easement. The letter has been requested by staff in order to verify that land would be available to accomodate the amount of on -site parking necessary for this project as proposed. Because the initial submittal deadline of June 14 was not met, staff agreed to extend the deadline to June 19th. It was stipulated that the letter of confirmation must be received by this date in order to meet all tentative dates previously discussed for the SEPA Determination and two public hearings. Because information has not been received, the SEPA determination and all related permits have been placed on inactive hold for a three month period. Should the letter not be provided by October 1, 1991, the applications will become null and void. Feel free to contact me at 431 -3663 if you have any questions on this matter. Sincerely, Denni Shefrin, Associate Planner cc: Roger Blaylock Curtis Beattie Ron Cameron CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188 May 17. 1991 PHONE p (206) 433.1800 Gan L. VanDusen, Mayor Roger Blaylock The Blaylock Company 10717 NE Fourth Street, Suite 9 Bellevue, WA 98004 Subject: Duwamish Office Park II, Meeting Summaries for May 10 and May 15, 1991 Dear Mr. Blaylock: The following items were discussed at meetings held on May 10 and with Curtis Beattie on May 15, 1991. As discussed at the May 10th meeting, a public hearing for the required variances cannot be scheduled until the SEPA determination has been reached. A hearing date has been tentatively scheduled for July 11, 1991; pending how quickly the revised submittal is received and how quickly the Public Works Department is able to review and provide comments. SEPA Several issues must be resolved in order to make the SEPA determination. A list is to be provided which specifies all SEPA issues and mitigation measures as agreed to at the May 10th meeting. Traffic Management Plan (TMP) The TMP should be incorporated into the completed traffic analysis to be submitted by May 20th. (See METRO's recommendations enclosed.) Schedule The sequence of permit review /approvals would occur as 1. Shorelines Notice June 3, 2. SEPA Determination June 6, 3. Variance June 11, 4. Shorelines Permit Decision June 5. BAR /Design Review June 25, Site Plan /Building Design 1. Provide a focal point at the river by maximizing the river 2. Integrate pedestrian linkages pedestrian plaza at the 112th 1991 1991 1991 25, 1991 1991 follows: end of 112th adjacent to the as a pedestrian amenity. from Pacific Highway to a St. terminus. Consider a Page 2 sculpture garden and /or other amenities at this location. Provide a concept plan incorporating design features. 3. The traffic analysis should discuss how 112th St. would function if reduced to a two -way, two lane width. River improvements. 1. The path should be an all- weather surface with a maximum separation of 20 feet between the proposed building. The surface type should be acceptable to the Fire Department. 2. Grasscrete or similar enhanced surfacing should be provided between the river path and the rear parking area for fire access. Building /design. Two additional design alternatives to the original submittal were provided at the May 15 meeting. Cross sections and sketches will be submitted by May 21st. The following are recommendations based upon these alternatives: 1. Orient the proposed building towards the corner of Pacific Highway and 112th St. to provide for better pedestrian access to the transit stop. 2. Enhance the parking area boundary adjacent to the Pacific Highway /112th St. intersection. Incorporate similar design form used for the office building. 3. Enhance the building entrance. Consider moving the front entry structure closer to the circular driveway. 4. Due to the lack of natural light, reduce the outside plaza area on the north elevation. 5. Specify design the design details for the outside plazas. 6. Demonstrate how the building and 112th St. terminus will relate to the river environment. Submit concept drawings for staff's review. 7. Based upon the completed traffic analysis, determine the necessity of aligning the access driveways on the north and south sides of 112th St. Utility Easement. Provide a copy of the lease term agreement for the utility easement for the lot north of the project site. The lease term could affect on -site parking requirements and the total building area permitted for this project. The applicant should coordinate with Ron Cameron (Department of Public Works) to resolve drainage, access and public improvement issues. Page 3 Sincerely, enclosure 1. Completed traffic analysis 2. SEPA impacts, mitigation and conditions list 3. Shoreline stability study 4. Design alternatives for the building 5. Concept plan for plaza areas /112th St. terminus 6. Lease term agreement for the utility easement 7. Cross sections Denni Shefrin Associate Planner cc: Curtis Beattie E. Horbach Thaddas Alston Kent Anderson Ron Cameron Phil Fraser In summary, the following should be submitted no later than May 24th: The next meeting has been scheduled for May 24th at 9:00 a.m. at the Department of Community Development to discuss the items listed above. It is anticipated that all SEPA issues will be resolved by the second week in June. Please feel free to contact me if you have questions related to the contents of this letter. CITY OF TUKWILA 62 )O SOUTNCENTER BOULEVARD, TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188 May 7, 1991 Roger Blaylock The Blaylock Company 10717 Fourth Street, Suite 9 Bellevue, WA 98004 Dear Roger: Subject: Duwamish Office Park II As a follow -up to our May 3rd meeting, the SEPA checklist should be completed by the middle of June with the variance review tentatively scheduled for July 11, 1991. This schedule is the result of submittal delays and a change in scope of the traffic analysis. The hearing for the variance and design review cannot proceed until the SEPA dtermination has been completed. , As discussed on Friday, the information below should be provided in order to meet tentative meeting dates of July llth for BOA and July 25th for the Board of Architectural Review: 1. documentation of the South 112th Street water easement; 2. parameters for the proposed Transportation Management Plan; 3. revised traffic study; 4. additional archaeological information Information concerning the water easement should include the easement and water line dimensions if available. Our next meeting is scheduled for May 10 at 10:00 a.m. to discuss the above issues and issues related to project design and siting, variances and SEPA review and mitigation measures. Feel free to contact me at 431 -3663 if you have further questions. Thank you. Vcerely J --D n ni She Associate rin Plarkner ccs Kent Anderson Thaddas Alston Curtis Beattie PHONE 4 (206) 433.1800 Gary L, VanDusen, Mayor CITY OF TUKWILA 6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD, TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188 April 12, 1991 Roger Blaylock The Blaylock Company 10717 N.E. 4th St. # 9 Bellevue, Wa. 98004 RE: VARIANCE REQUEST 50 5/0* 001 00/04e-, 007 ,., ysewrs PIIONE # (206) 433.1800 Dear Mr. Blaylock: This letter is a follow -up to our meeting on Thursday, April 11, 1991 concerning the direction by DCD (Department of Community Department). The City decided to schedule a Public Hearing for the variance, even though, King County handles variances administratively unless adverse comments are received. As mentioned throughout the meeting, an expanded environmental checklist is required in the following areas: . 7 P &Gnc0474/n 0. i 0 4Vd /07/A D✓:07/G# C lA " Iiwe s/ l e. *Mtge ,.,,f co►eme s ✓f A eeip1ete traffic analysis of the entire proposal ✓� A visual analysis on the height of the structure A Geo- Technical report for the entire site ►t. Address the river environment (storm water run -off, shorelines, etc) Provide documentation of whether or not this is a historical site (Indians) All information shall be submitted no later than, Wednesday, May 1, 1991, for the June 6, 1991 Board of Adjustment Public Hearing. In the meeting I mentioned that May 10, 1991 would be the deadline. I apologize for my error. If all the information requested is not submitted by the above date, the public hearing will be rescheduled indefinitely until all issues have been addressed. Also, I indicated that the B.A.R. (Board of Architectural Review) could meet on the June 27, 1991, provided the variance is approved. The deadline for submittal for the B.A.R is Thursday, April 25, 1991. Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor Page 2 nk You Darren Wilson Assistant Planner Should you have any questions regarding these matters, please . contact me at 431 -3670. cc: J. Pace, Senior Planner M. Kenyon, City Attorney G. Horbach, E & H Property Owner ,mss PePP7/.19 Pr &Sy HEARING DATE: FILE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: ACREAGE: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING DISTRICT: SEPA DETERMINATION: ATTACHMENTS: STAFF REPORT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Prepared March 26, 1991 April 4, 1991 91 -2 -V E & H Properties D From the provisions of King County Shoreline Master Program Section 25.16.030 (B) general requirement maximum height of 35 feet for any building within 200 feet of the shoreline. The proposed height is 115 feet, 80 feet over the maximum height limit. Pacific Highway South and South 112th Street;. Tukwila, Wa. 520,000 SF Industrial M -2 Heavy Industrial Not Applicable A. Site Plan /Landscape Plan & Elevation B. King County Variance Requirements STAFF REPORT 91 -2 -V PAGE 2 VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION 1. Project Description: To construct an office building within 200 feet of the shoreline. Also, the height restriction in the M -2L is 35 feet. The applicant is proposing a building of 115 feet in height. This exceeds the Zoning requirements by 80 feet. 2. Existing Development: The site is vacant toward the back portion of the property, while a Trucking School dominates the front half directly off Pacific Highway South. City Light has transmission towers and lines running east and west along the northern property line. 3. Surrounding Land Use: Directly to the south there is a 5- story Boeing Customer Service building within 200 feet of the shoreline. Also, there is a parking lot within 50 and 500 feet of the shoreline. To the east there is IITR (International Insisition Transportation Resource) with storage area for the large tractor trailer. 4. Terrain: Flat except for the river at a 4:1 slope and is covered with 5. Vegetation: The type of vegetation shrubs. BACKGROUND FINDINGS bank which slopes down rip rap. on the site is grass and The subject site was annexed into the City of Tukwila as part of the Fire District #1 Annexation on March 1, 1989. The City's Shoreline Master Program does not encompass any shoreline north of the 42nd Avenue Bridge. Washington Administrative Code (WAC 173 -19 -044) states that "Until a new or amended program is adopted by the department, any ruling on an application for permit in the annexed shoreline area shall be based on compliance with the pre- existing master program adopted for the area." Both under King County and the City of Tukwila all the criteria for granting a variance shall be met. Under King County the height restriction for any building within 200 feet of the shoreline is 35 feet, however, under the City of Tukwila, the STAFF REPORT 91-2-11 PAGE 3 25.16.030 RING COUNTY GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 25.08.600 WATER RELATED USES maximum height in a M -2L zone is 45 feet whether or not within 200 feet of the shoreline. There are certain areas in which buildings are outright permitted per 18.50.040 up to 115 feet with B.A.R. (Board of Architectural Review) approval. This site does not fall into this category, again, we are implementing King County regulations for this project. The site improvements described above have been proposed and require a variance process prior to applying for a shoreline permit and Board of Architectural Review. A. Non -water related and residential developments shall not be permitted waterward of the ordinary high water mark. B. Except in those cases when the height requirements of the underlying zones are more restrictive, no structure shall exceed a height of thirty -five feet above average grade level. This requirement may be modified if the view of a substantial number of residences will not be obstructed, if permitted by the applicable provisions of the underlying zoning, and if the proposed development is agricultural, water related or water dependent. In addition to the Variance Criteria applicable under section RCW 90.58.030(2)(b), the following policies and design conditions stated in Section (25.16.030) General Requirements of the King County Shoreline Management Program shall be met. "Water related uses" or "water related development" means a principal use which is not intrinsically dependent on location abutting the ordinary high water mark but which: A. Promotes the public's enjoyment or access to the water B. Gains a cost savings or revenue - differentiating advantage, which is not associated with land rents or cost, from being located within the shorelines of the state that could not be obtained at an upland location; such uses include but are not limited to residential development, boat sales or restaurants. STAFF REPORT 91 -2 -V PAGE 4 The goals of the Shoreline Act are generally to preserve the natural character of the shoreline; result in long term over short term benefit; and to protect the resources and ecology of the shoreline. The Act is intended to plan for the use, protection, restoration, and preservation of shorelines. The purpose of the County's urban environment, as this area is designated, is to ensure optimum utilization of shorelines and to enhance and maintain the shoreline for a multiplicity of urban uses. It is expected that urban shorelines would be redeveloped with higher intensity of use. The following are the specific policies relating to this environment: 1. Emphasis should be given to development within already developed areas. 2. Priority should be given to shoreline dependent and water oriented uses over other uses. Uses which are neither shoreline dependent or water oriented should be discouraged except for residential. 3. Emphasis should be given to developing visual and physical access to the shoreline in the Urban Environment. 4. To enhance the waterfront and ensure maximum public use, industrial and commercial facilities should be designed to permit pedestrian waterfront activities consistent with public safety and security. 5. Multiple use of the shoreline should be encouraged. 6. Redevelopment and renewal of sub - standard area should be encouraged in order to accommodate future users and make maximum use of the shoreline resource. 7. Aesthetic considerations should be actively promoted by means of sign control regulations, architectural design standards, planned unit development standards, landscaping requirements and other such means. 8. Development should not significantly degrade the quality of the environment, including water quality and air quality, nor create conditions which would accentuate erosion, drainage problems or other adverse impacts on adjacent environments. STAFF REPORT 91-2-17 PAGE 5 DECISION CRITERIA Based on the above policies, King County handles this permit process administratively, therefore, no public hearing is required unless two or more persons object to the proposal. The applicable (K.C.) Code criteria are listed in bold followed by pertinent findings of fact. As mentioned above, King County handles variance applications administratively. 21.58.020 REQUIRED SHOWINGS FOR A VARIANCE BEFORE ANY VARIANCE MAY BE GRANTED, IT SHALL BE SHOWN: 1. BECAUSE OF SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES APPLICABLE TO SUBJECT PROPERTY, INCLUDING SIZE, SHAPE, TOPOGRAPHY, LOCATION OR SURROUNDINGS, THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THE ZONING CODE IS FOUND TO DEPRIVE SUBJECT PROPERTY OF RIGHTS AND PRIVILEGES ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THE VICINITY AND UNDER IDENTICAL ZONE CLASSIFICATION; The variance is being requested to allow relief from the height standards imposed by implementation of the King County Master Program design standards: A 35 foot building of a non -water related commercial development shall maintain a shoreline setback of either fifty feet from the ordinary high water mark or twenty feet from the edge of the floodway, which ever is greater per section (K.C. Chapter 25.16.070 (E)). Therefore, a 3 to 4 story building could be located fifty feet back from the shoreline, at 200 feet from the shoreline the building could be increased to 45 feet or 5 stories. This is assuming recessing the first floor of the parking garage half a level. The total building area could be approximately 520,000 square feet based on a parking ratio of 2.5 parking spaces per 1,000 square feet. The design would spread out 200,000 square feet of office space on one floor. The resulting bulk of the building would force people to walk as far as 600 feet to access the shoreline. The design standards for the City of Tukwila encourage and promote greater use of the shorelines than those of King County. One way to accomplish this is to move the people closer to the shoreline. In the past, the City of Tukwila has encouraged STAFF REPORT 91 -2 -V PAGE 6 developments to be located closer to the shoreline for easier, active pedestrian access and recreational use of the area along the river. This could be considered more of an urban design focus encouraging pedestrian activity and daily use, not just weekend recreational use. The pie- shaped lot dramatically creates an aesthetic dilemma. A 500,000 square foot building could be theoretically constructed on the site under the existing codes. The effect would be a building that is squat and basically insensitive to the shoreline. The shoreline itself is an amenity that should be utilized and enhanced. Re- configuring the bulk of the building accomplishes this by not only encouraging more public use of the shoreline, but providing visual access through aesthetic vistas for more of the office workers and increasing the landscaping as a part of the building. The primary intent of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 was to Obtain and Encourage "public use" of the shoreline. An example of this process is the Boeing Employee Credit Union office building development under City of Tukwila standards. This development not only provides public access to the shoreline, but encourages "pedestrian use ". This is a result of the architectural design of the building and the physical proximity to the shoreline. Similarly, Duwamish II can dramatically increase the opportunity for public access. On the other hand, the King County ordinance appears to isolate the shoreline areas from the adjacent uses. This may be an effort to protect those areas instead of fully utilizing the amenities by integrating them into adjacent land use. This reduces the design flexibility to preserve the public's use of the shoreline encouraging access by creating new urban access amenities. In this case there are few amenities. 2. THE GRANTING OF THE VARIANCE WILL NOT BE MATERIALLY DETRIMENTAL TO THE PUBLIC WELFARE OR INJURIOUS TO THE PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENTS IN THE VICINITY AND ZONE IN WHICH SUBJECT PROPERTY IS SITUATED; The project's design will allow a continuation of the public access that has been provided along the Duwamish River shoreline by Phase I. The existing rip- rapped shoreline will be enhanced to create a park -like environment. In addition, the scale of the proposed office building will be more compatible with the large scale offices and enormous manufacturing buildings that are located to the north in the STAFF REPORT 91 -2 -V PAGE 7 Oxbow Manufacturing Park and industrial complexes adjacent to Boeing Field. This project appears to be part of the evolutionary process away from the disjointed pattern of smaller manufacturing buildings. The project's design not only preserves the natural amenities along the shoreline, but creates new vegetational buffers, while encouraging public access to the shoreline. The proposed landscaping and building will create shadows that will help cool water temperatures in the Duwamish River and promote a salmon fisheries resource. King County envisions the creation of a major recreational trail system along the Duwamish River. This proposal would be a critical link in the trail system and in fact, would promote the development of the system at this time. The design of the walkway has been a discussion point between E & H Properties and King County Parks Department. As a part of the network of recreational trails in King County, this proposal will contribute to Tukwila's portion of the system along the Duwamish River. The public interest, as identified by the Shorelines Master Program, can only gain from granting this application. Public access to the river will be acquired. The shoreline will be preserved and landscaping will be enhanced. Planting will provide additional wildlife habitat, again, the primary benefit is gained by locating the building close to the shoreline so it will become attractive not only for the shoreline destination user. In turn, this will enhance the perceived quality of life. CONCLUSIONS Under the normal conditions for a variance, a public hearing is required, however, the variance criteria using King County's standards are handled administratively. In the event, adverse comments are received from at least two persons or agencies during the comment period which are relevant to the required showings of K.C.C. 21.58.020 or stating specific reasons why a public hearing should be held; or The manager or his designee determines a hearing is necessary to address issues of vague, conflicting or inadequate information; or • STAFF REPORT 91 -2 -V PAGE 8 RECOMMENDATIONS The manager or his designee determines that a hearing is necessary to address issues of public significance. 1. The pie- shaped lot dramatically creates an aesthetic dilemma. A 500,000 square foot building could be theoretically constructed on the site under existing codes. 2. The primary intent of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 was OBTAIN and ENCOURAGE "public use" of the shoreline. 3. The project's design not only preserves the natural amenities along the shoreline, but creates new vegetational buffers, while encouraging public access to the shoreline. An opportunity exists to enhance the riverbank and to provide a landscaped transition between the rip rapped riverbank and a pedestrian pathway. 4. The Duwamish River, although heavily altered by man, still provides interest and amazement because of nature coexisting with industrial activity along a heavily developed shoreline. The applicant takes advantage of this environment by locating a pedestrian pathway along the shoreline. The design of the landscaping along the top of the river bank should be more reflective of a riparian environment rather than a park -like area. The Planning Department recommends that a public hearing is necessary using King County standards. Since the proposal is well within 200 feet of the shoreline, a Shoreline Permit, Environmental Checklist, and Board of Architectural Review hearing will be necessary for the completion of this project. ATTACHMENT E SHORELINE VARIANCE CRITERIA STATEMENT This variance request is for relief from the prohibition of parking located between the development and the shore (KCC 25.16.030.E.1). In our proposal we are showing fully developed paved and landscaped parking lot extending to within 30' of the top of the river bank. The remainder of the proposal is well within the standards of the Shoreline Management Master Program (SMP). We therefore respond to the criteria of WAC 173 -14 -150 (2) as follows: (a) Strict application of the performance standards of SMP noted above would adversely limit the potential development of the project in terms of gross square feet of building as limited by required vehicle parking, beyond the limitations imposed by SMP directly and this underlying IG zone. (b) The hardship noted above is specifically related to the property, because of the irregular shape of the parcel and the relatively high percentage of the property falling within the SMP jurisdiction ( -/+ 18 %) and thus being further restricted. Other considerations such as parking ratios and adjacencies, public access to the shoreline and concern for the visual quality of the project preclude locating the buildings closer to shoreline. (c) This proposal is compatible with other uses and activities permitted and existing in the area. Immediately to the East of this project is an existing paved parking facility which extends to within 30' of the top of the riverbank just as this proposal is requesting. The remainder of the development under this proposal is an expansion of an existing development and is compatible both architecturally and in use with the existing facility. In addition to the parking, this proposal includes landscaping and development of a levee road which will enhance the shoreline environment by providing visual enhancement, soil stabilization and access for levee maintenance. 0 88S Il" V i':it;>s PILE COPY ,;_1)6, L. Page Two Shoreline Variance (d) This request will not constitute a grant of special privileges as this condition already exists on the property immediately east of this project and is in keeping with the nature of other developments in this area. In addition, we feel that this approach is the best solution to the efficient utilization of this site and is the minimum necessary to afford relief. (e) The public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect from the granting of this variance. This proposal will in fact benefit the public interest in that the view of the waterway will be less impacted by maintaining the building setback and the public access to the shoreline will be improved. The cumulative impact of additional similar variance requests will be negligible since this proposal represents the last substantial undeveloped parcel in this area. This variance request represents our best judgement for the most beneficial . development of this site. Not only will the applicant benefit, but the public will also benefit. Greater shoreline access, better view enhancement, easier access for levee maintenance, enhanced river frontage, and new landscaping will result from the granting of this variance. 012 88SV APR U'r' 0 zi*Waill~PVT4zt .41 5 •• . 4, :••,, I I If • • i t , il t is - a.. :1 .. 5'1\ , . at• 14. ., ' r . 4 . ' i (. 44'; ;4 ' 4'4 .. ,, .d , ' .(''' ' \ .4..?t •t it .4-,if , - • ' , ; ..,‘ : ‘ 4 , 1 1 '14 . .if . :: -. •'", • • ' ' I. : . 1 • . t ' S' , i'0•4• . • • ' t• , • ,,, , ;' ..: ? • ,. t 4 . ttf. , , • 1,, .i. • ......f x .r.• , 1„el " .. . :, ' 1: • • \ i' l t . 1 , ; . . i'S 4.: . ,,,:: ,' lot . --„,,,, ,,,.,...,-:;:";.-•"",,, ■ ,,_ It '. .4 ' ■ : °..• . 1 .... , ,,1 ! •,,i .. L, ".• 't• • , '''C...:(' .-, , .11 ; • . .', 1:-.11' :,• •i,:,.,.. , •.;,:•••. , 4 .•-• 1 • • . ' t. , ••Ik. . ,11 . e` ( ' i .1 . . ;iNt.'• : • 4" '..,•-:. :'^' •:' . •t, , ,. .,.... PACIFIC HIGHWAY SOUTH _ DUWAMISH RIVER All trees j arld g or to have a maximum Might of 2S' Existing Silver Maple to remain Barrier shrubsJ1 p .)) SOUTH 112th STREET Landscape Schedule 5' a 11 . 8 7 11111111 Nil; -7 uJ 1.1 rj 6 U 0 I I U U LI 0 U pric74 eta CURTIS BEATTIE & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS • '' FIRST FLOOR PLAN DliWAMISit0FtICE PARK II 41.71; •I • " 7 f. 0 1. U I CURTIS BEATTIE & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS TYPICAL FLOOR PLAN I ES OFFICE PARA • . . • • . • • ni • ; • : • . L • :•• 1 CURTIS BEATTIE & ASSOCIATES ARCHITECTS BUILDING ELEVATIONS & SITE SECTION [ RyryitA*,Isii OFFICE PAItic II I SIM STATISTICS • 4 avg.:0 5F. • F4.2(.49 !.•=2‹.54 :c5 575:2-5 ::5560 259933 5. 53555 .Seems :ts.151 SCALI 1 PARCEL A cP5,11/53 SOUTH 112th STREET . _ EEE ZOf1If G CODE UARIRf10E L PLICATIOf- HEIGHT & PARKII 1/91 DEVELOPMENT ZONING CODE VARIANCE APPLICATION • DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY CITY OF TUKWILA. FOR STAFF USE ONLY Planner: File Number: Cross- Reference Files' Receipt Number: 1. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR REQUEST: E & H Properties is requesting two uariances from the prouisions of the King County Shoreline master Plan which is being implemented by the City of Tukwila ouer recently annexed areas along the Duwamish Riuer. The first request is for a height uoriance from the King County Shoreline master Program Section 25.16.030(8) General Requirement which establishes o maximum height of 35 feet for any building within 200 feet of the shoreline. The second uariance to the King County Shoreline master Program Section 25.16.030(E) (1) for parking is to allow surface parking set bock 50 feet from the ordinary high water murk. 11 separate exception to the City of Tukwila's height limit of 45 feet in the m2L Zoning District wiill be reviewed as part of the Board of Architectural Reuiew. Page 1 EM M \ JAN '3 1 19 1 CITY OF TUKvviLA p 1_AMNiNCI DEPT. ZOflIf G CODE URRIRf10E C . PLICATIO11- PARKI(1G & HEIGH1( 1/91 2. PROJECT LOCATION: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate . lot(s), block and subdivision; or tax lot number, access street, and nearest intersection) Quarter: SE Section: 4 Township: 23 Range 4 (This information may be found on your tax statement) 3. APPLICANT: race: E & H Properties Address: P,O. Box 598 Bellevue. WA 98008 Pone: (206) 454 - 5959 Signature: . . - v c/, Date: January 10. 1991 * The appli .' t is the person whoa the staff will contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports be sent, unless otherwise stipulated by applicant. AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP 4. PROPERTY Name: E & H Properties OWNER Address: P.O. Box 598 Bellevue. WA 98008 Phone: (2 . 6) 45 - 5959 I/WE, (signature(s) 1‘ swear that I /we re he owner(s) or contract purchaser(s) of the property in olved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers contained in this application are true and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and belief. Page 2 Date: January 10. 1991 shall ZOf1If1G CODE URRIAf10E 4„ PLICATIOf1- HEIGHT & PRRKI116 ` 1/91 5, WHY IS THIS UARIRf10E BEI(1G REQUESTED? RESPOIISE: The uariance is being requested' o allow relief from the height standards imposed by implementation of the King County master Program design standards: R 35 foot building of a '...non -water related commercial deuelopment shall maintain a shoreline setback of either fifty feet from the ordinary high water mark or twenty feet from the edge of the floodwoy, whicheuer is greater' (KC. Chapter 25.16.070(E)). Thus o 3 to 9 story building could be located fifty feet back from the shoreline, Rt 200 feet back from the shoreline the building could increase to 45 feet or 5 stories This is assuming recessing the first floor of the parking garage half a Ieuel. The total building area could be approximately 520,000 square feet based on parking ratio of 2.5 parking spaces per 1.000 square feet. The design would spread out 200,000 square feet of office space on one floor The resulting bulk of the building would force people to walk as for as 600 feet to access the shoreline. The design standards for the City of Tukwila encourage and promote greater use of the shorelines than King County. One way to accomplish this is to moue the people closer to the shoreline. In the post the City of Tukwila has encouraged deuelopments to be located closer to the shoreline for easier actiue pedestrian access and recreational use of the area along the riuer. This could be considered more of an urban design focus encouraging pedestrian actiuity and daily use not just weekend recreational use. On the other hand, the King County ordinance appears to isolate the shorelines urea from the adjacent uses. This may be an effort to try to protect those areas instead of fully utilizing the amenities by integrating them into ad jocent land use. This reduces the design flexibility to preserue the publics use of the shoreline encouraging access by creating new urban access amenities. In this case there are few amenities. The shoreline has been armored in the past and filled. Only one major tree exists on the site. Page 3 ZOf1If1G CODE URRIRf10E AP PLICRTIOfI- HEIGHT & PRRKI11G Our uariance request is simple. We are proposing budding 'uertical streets' by increasing the height instead of 'horizontal streets We are not increasing the allowable building bulk, instead we are creatiuely redesigning the building to to be stacked closer to the riuer and increase light and air. This design will also prouide easier access to the riuer by the office workers. 25,16,030 B, King County General Requirements 1/91 Except in those cases when the height requirements of the underlying zones are more - restrictiue, no structure shall exceed a height of thirty -fiue feet aboue auerage grade Ieuel, This requirement may be modified if the uiew of a substantial number of residences will not be obstructed, if permitted by the applicable prouisions of the underlying zoning, and if the proposed deuelopment is agricultural, water related or water dependent, In addition to the Uariance Criteria applicable under Section RCW 90.58.030(2)(b), the following three policy and design conditions stated in Section (25,16,030) General Requirements of the King County Shoreline management master Program must be met first: A, If the proposed deuelopment is agricultural, water related or water dependent; KI(1G COUf1T J OEFIf1ITI0ns 25.08,600 Water Related Uses "Water related use" or "water related deuelopment" means a principal use which is not intrinsically dependent on a location abutting the ordinary high water mark but which: A, Promotes the public's en joyment or access to the water; or B. Gains a cost sauings or reuenue- differentiating aduantage, which is not associated with land rents or costs, from being located within the shorelines of the state that could not be obtained at an upland Page L ZOf1If1G CODE UARIA(10E APPLICATIO11- HEIGHT & PRRKIt1G location; such uses include but are not limited to residential deuelopment, boat sales or restaurants. 1/91 The Duwamish II Office Complex should be considered a 'water related use because of both the project's architectural and site design components, which not only 'promotes the public's enjoyment' and 'access to the water. but provides on improued public park -like access to the Duwamish Riuer along the shoreline at no cost to the public for either deuelopment or maintenance. This is accomplished by creating outdoor terraces where the workers can en joy the scenic riuer uiew and by creating more uisual access from the building to the riuer instead of creating o squat lifeless building. B. If permitted by the applicable prouisions of the underlying zoning; The property upon annexation into the City of Tukwila was designated ID -2L DISTRICT --HEM IDDUSTRIRL /SPECIAL LRf1DSCAPIt1G. USE: This use allows any principal use allowed in the 111-1 or M -2, which under Section 18.90.020(13) allows: "Commercial, professional, and business offices and seruices." Therefore an office building is an allowed use in the (11-2L DISTRICT -- HERO I(1DUSTRIRL /SPECIAL LR(1DSCAPIf1G. HEIGHT: Height limitations are created in the Tukwila Zoning Code under Chapter 18.50 HEIGHT, SETBRCK Rf1D AREA REGULRTIOflS.' Specifically Section 18.50.020 (Table 1) sets the maximum building height at H5 feet in the m -2 District. Building Height Exception Area (Map 2) identifies the sub ject site as allowing a height up to and including 115 feet with B.R.R. Page 5 ZOflIf1G P ODE UARIA(10E RPPLICATIOf- HEIGHT & PARKII16 1/91 SUMO" 9: Authorization of building height greater than the .heights contained in Section 18.090.020 (Table 1) up to an including one hundred fifteen feet in the areas of the city designated on Map 2, shall be made by the planning commission acting as the board of architectural reuiew pursuant to the guidelines and procedures specified in Chapter 18,50. (TMC 18,50.090) Building permits for structures exceeding the basic height limits, no building permits for structures which exceed the•basic height limits may be issued until such time as the planning commission has reuiewed and approued an application for height exception. Rll applications for building permits for structures authorized under this section shall conform strictly to the plans approved by the BAR in its grant of exception, (TMC 18.50.060) Therefo e the uariance for height exception is specially allowed subject to the design euiew process of the m -2L District. C. If the uiew of a substantial number of residences will not be obstructed; The sub ject site is located in the center of a planned heauy industrial area that is currently under deuelopment. Some single family residences he just to the west a•ross the Duwamish Ritter. These residences will euentually be redeuel sped into industrial uses. The nearest existing residential area that is planned to remain residential in charater is approximately one -half mile away. This re- idential area. southwest of the site, lies on a plateau more than 115 feet abi ue the ualley floor. Therefore. the building eleuation will not be any obstruc ion of uiews from residences. The pro i osed deuelopment complies with all three of the policy criteria in Section 25.16.030; therefore it is appropriate to apply for the variance. Paae 6 ZO(lIf1G CODE UARIAf10E cr'PLICATI0l- HEIGHT & PARKIflG 1/91 6. DOES JOUR REQUEST MEET THE UARIAf10E CRITERIA ? RESPO(1SE: HES. The Board of Adjustment will base its decision on the specific criteria shown below, Jou are solely responsible for justifying why your property should not haue to satisfy the same deuelopment standards which all other properties /projects must meet, The Board must decide that your uariance request meets all fiue criteria, Be specific; a "yes" or "true" is not a sufficient response. Additional sheets should be attached if needed, The Planning Staff has prouided some examples to help you respond to each criteria. Please feel free to use or ignore these as you see fit, The Board will make a decision based on the bold criteria, not staff examples, * *flOTE The Board of Adjustment would normally base its decision on a specific criteria delineated by the City of Tukwila, Howeuer, in this case since, the City is implementing policies and criteria adopted by King County, the criteria from King County and the State of Washington must be utilized, 6,A (City of Tukwila) The uariance shall not constitute a grant of special priuilege, inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the uicinity and in the zone in which the property on behalf of which the application was filed is located. Example: Explain how your requested uariance would not giue you a special priuilege in your use of the property in relation to the requirements imposed on adjacent and neighboring properties and on properties with the same zone classification. (King county) That the uariance authorized does not constitute a grant of special priuilege not, enjoyed by the other properties in the area, and will be the minimum necessary to afford relief. Page 7 ZOflI(1G CODE UARIAf10E PLICATIOfI- HEIGHT & PARKIf G( : 1/91 RESPOfItE: Strict application of the height standards would: (1) reduce and discourage public access and use of the shoreline by spreading the building out ouer the entire site and creating a uisual barrier; (2) unreasonably limit the floor area on this unusually- shaped lot which is presently constrained by regional power line and water line easements that are located on the northern and southern boundaries of the site; (3) reduce the amount of potential landscaping along the shoreline by forcing the construction of a 35 foot high wall 50 feet back from the shoreline This building design will provide additional horizontal landscaping adjacent to the shoreline in the form of terraces. The aesthetic perception will be enhanced by the uertical dimension. COfICLUSIOfI: Specifically, the pie- shaped lot dramatically creates an aesthetic dilemma. R 500.000 + square foot building could be theoretically constructed on the site under the existing codes. The effect would be a building that is squat, and basically insensitiue to the shoreline. The shoreline itself is an amenity that should be utilized and enhances. Reconfiguring the bulk of the building accomplishes this by not only encouraging more public use of the shoreline. but prouiding uisual access through aesthetic uistas for more of the office workers and increasing the landscaping as a part of the building. The primary intent of the Shoreline Management Act of 1971 was to OBTHIO A(1D Ef1COURAGE "public use of the shoreline. The recently completed Boeing Credit Union office building. deueloped under City of Tukwila standards. not only prouides public access to the shoreline, but encourages 'pedestrian use'. This is a result of the architectural design of the building and the physical proximity to the shoreline. Similarly, Duwamish II can dramatically increase the opportunity for public access. Page 8 zOflIf1G CUUE URRIA[ICE K...'LICRTIOR- HEIGHT & PRRKII16( 1/91 6,B (City of Tukwila) RESPOflSE: The uariance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to the size, shape, topography, location or surrounding of the sub ject property in order to provide it with use rights and priuileges permitted to other properties in the uicinity and in the zone in which the sut ject property is located. Example :. DOes a special property characteristic such as size, shape topography, combined with the zoning code requirement, preuent you from using your property in the manner of adjacent properties or other like -zoned properties? Special circumstances should not be due to: 1) actions by past or present property owners (i.e„ deueloping or subdiuiding property which in an extremely difficult to build parcel) or paying more for property than was justified by its deuelopment potential; or 2) actions which haue already been compensated for (i,e„ the State condemns a portion of land for I -5 construction and compensates the owner for the diminished ualue of the'remaining parcel. (King County) That the hardship described in WRC 173- 19- 150(1)(a) above is the result of the unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and the application of the master Program, and not, for example, from deed restrictions or the applicant's own actions. Hardship is the result of the triangular shape of the lot and the curue of the shoreline. The power line and woter line easements isolate and significantly limit the functional use of this lot. The King County Blaster Program standards. do not encourage reuitalization of the shorelines as do the design standards of the City of Tukwila. The City of Tukwila encourages the creation of a user friendly enuironment for its shorelines that promotes pedestrian access and enjoyment. Page 9 c_ui i.iILIL 11 1N,ii1!:.� 6,C (City of Tukwila) RESPOf1SE: (King County) LiLfliivi i iiL.iu11 u i'iii�iniiiU 1/ .`71 l The granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improuements in the uicinity and in the zone in which the subject property is situated, Example: Would granting your request cause an harm, in jury, or interference with uses of adjacent and neighboring properties? (Consider traffic, uiews, Tight, aesthetic impacts, etc.) That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect. That the design of the project will be compatible with other permitted actiuities in the area and will not cause aduerse effects to adjacent properties or the shoreline enuironment designation, CUMULATIUE CRITERIA In granting of all uariance permits, consideration shall be giuen to the cumulatiue impact of additional requests for like action in the area. The project's design will allow a continuation of the public access that has been prouided along the Duwamish Riuer shoreline by Phase I. The existing rip- rapped shoreline will be enhanced to create a park like enuironment pleasant to the public. In addition. the scale of the proposed office building will be more compatible with the large scale office and enormous manufacturing buildings that ore located to the north in the Oxbow manufacturing Park and industrial complexes adjacent to Boeing Field. This project appears to be part of the euolutionary process away from the dis jointed pattern of smaller manufacturing. Page 10 ZOfI(1G CODE UARIAIICE Irr'LICRTIO11- HEIGHT & PARKIfG 1/91 The project's design not only preserues the natural amenities along the shoreline, but creates new uegetotional buffers. while encouraging public access . to the shoreline. The proposed landscaping and the building will create shadows that will help cool water temperature in the Duwamish Riuer and promote a salmon fisheries resource. King County enuisions the creation of a major recreational trail system along the Duwamish Riuer. This proposal would be o critical link in the trail system and in fact. would promote the deuelopment of the system at this time. The design of the walkway has been a discussion point between E & H Properties and King County Parks Department. As a port of the network of recreational trails in King County, this proposal will contribute to Tukwila's portion of the system along the Duwamish Riuer. The public interest. as identified by, the Shorelines master Program. can only gain from granting this application. Public access to the riuer will be acquired. The shoreline will be preserued and landscaping will be enhanced. Planting will prouide additional wildlife habitat. Again. the primary benefit is gained by locating the building close to the shoreline so it will become attractiue not only for the shoreline destination user, but draw the office user into a daily actiue use relationship with the shoreline. In turn, this will enhance the perceiued quality of life of the general citizen. 6,D (City of Tukwila) The authorization of such uariance will not aduersely affect the implementation of the comprehensiue land use policy plan. Example: After a review of the City's Comprehensiue' Land Use Policy Plan, list any inconsistencies between your uariance and the Plan's goals, ob jectiues or policies. Page 11 ZOfI(1G CODE UARIAf10E PLICATIO11- HEIGHT & PARKIDB(J 1/91 RESPONSE: Most of the shoreline along the Duwamish Riuer in this uicinity has preuiously been deueloped under King County Standards. Redeuelopment of some of the older uses will allow a blending rnd transition from the deuelopment completed in King County with the proposed si andards of Tukwila. not granting the variance would eliminate the possibility of blending the design of site into the generally accepted existing pattern of deuelopment in Tukwila. It would require a continuation of the old style of deuelopment in shoreline areas from King County that is presenlly inconsistent with deuelopment standards of the City of Tukwila's Shoreline Master Plan. 6.E (City of Tukwila) RESPONSE: The granting of such uariance is necessary for the preseruation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant possessed by the owners of other properties in the same zone or vicinity. Example: Without the uariance, no uses for which your property is zoned (i,e., for a single - family residence or commercial site) would be possible. Without the uariance, rights of use of your property would not be the same as for other similarly zoned property, Describe other alternatiues for use of your property. Why were these alternatiues rejected? The project site is not the typical rectangular industrial or office site. Under the present City of Tukwila codes a larger building than is being proposed appears possible to be constructed. Howeuer. this is not a typical industrial site; it is shoreline site. Preuious deuelopment in the area has turned their backs to the shoreline. Actually discouraging access and public use. Here is the opportunity to not only use the shoreline. but enhance the shoreline enuironment. Page 12 2O{lIf1G CODE URR1ARCE ( 'LICRTIOII- HEIGHT & PHRKII IG ( . 1/91 The recently completed Boeing Credit . Union office building, deueloped under City of Tukwila standards, not only prouided public access to the shoreline, but encourages 'public use because of the physical proximity of the building to the shoreline. Should not this site be giuen the same opportunity? The scale of the proposed office building will be more compatible with the large scale office and enormous manufacturing buildings that are located to the norf;i in the Oxbow Manufacturing Park and industrial complexes adjacent to the Boeing Field. Our office project appears to be part of the euolutionary process from a dis jointed pattern of smaller manufacturing operations to the larger modern office /manufacturing parks. PARKI116 UARIAf10E The second uariance to the King County Shoreline master Program Section 25.16.030[ El (1) for parking is to allow surface parking set buck SO feet from the ordinary high water mark. 5, WHd IS THIS URRIRf10E BEIf1G REQUESTED? RESPOf1SE: The uariance is being requested o allow relief from apparent 200 setback standards for the location of parking areas adjacent to shorelines. There is some question as to the need to submit a uariance since the language states: 'Parking areas serving a water related or a nonwater related use must be located beneath or upland of the deuelopment which the parking serues.' The surface parking urea in question is to the north of the office building and is under the City of Seattle Power Lines. It is landward of the building setback at 50 feet from the ordinance high water mark. but to assure that the issue is address we are submitting the uariance for procedure. Page 13 ZOflIf1G CODE UARIA(10E ('LICA T IO11- HEIGHT & PRRKII1G (; 1/91 In any case, the height of the landscaping under the ouerheod powerlines will be significantly limited. 6, DOES YOUR REQUEST fI1EET THE URRIRIICE CRITERIA ? RESP0f1SE: JES. The Board of Adjustment will base its decision on the specific criteria shown below. You are solely responsible for justifying why your property should not have to satisfy the same deuelopment standards which all other prcperties /projects must meet. + The Board must decide that your uariance request meets all fiue criteria. Be specific; a "yes" or "true" is not a sufficient response, Additional sheets should be attached if needed, The Planning Staff has prouided some examples to help you respond to each criteria, Please feel free to use or ignore these as you see fit, The Board will make a decision based on the bold criteria, not staff examples. * *flOTE The Board of Adjustment would normally base its decision on a specific criteria delineated by the City of Tukwila, Howeuer, in this case since, the City is implementing policies and criteria adopted by King County, the criteria from King County and the State of Washington must be utilized. 6,A (City of Tukwila) The variance shall not constitute a grant of special priuilege inconsistent with the limitation upon uses of other properties in the uicinity and in the zone in which the property on behalf of which the application was filed is located, Example: Explain how your requested variance would not giue you a special priuilege in your use of the property in relation to the requirements imposed on adjacent and neighboring properties and on properties with the same zone classification. (King county) Page 19 ZOfI(1G CODE UARIAl10E Ar- r'LICATIOf1- HEIGHT & PRRKIf1G 1/91 . That the variance authorized does not constitute a grant of special privilege not en joyed by the other properties in the area, and will be the minimum necessary to afford relief. RESPOf1SE: The uariance to allow surface parking within 200 feet of the shoreline has preuiously been approued in Duwamish Phase I. Granting this variance would allow a general consistency of landscaping widths along this bunk of the Duwamish Riuer. 6.8 (City of Tukwila) The variance is necessary because of special circumstances relating to the size, shape, topography, location or surrounding of the sub ject property in order to provide it with use rights and privileges permitted to other properties in the uicinity and in the zone . in which the sub ject property is located, Example: Does a special property characteristic such as size, shape topography, combined with the zoning code requirement, preuent you from using your property in the manner of adjacent properties or other like -zoned properties? Special circumstances should not be due to: 1) actions by past or present property owners (i.e., developing or subdividing property which results in an extremely difficult to build parcel) or paying more for property than was justified by its deuelopment potential; or 2) actions which have already been compensated for (i.e„ the State condemns a portion of land for I -5 construction and compensates the owner for the diminished value of the remaining parcel. (King County) That the hardship described in WAC 173- 19- 150(1)(a) above is the result of the unique conditions such as irregular lot shape, size, or natural features and the application of the master Program, and not, for example, from deed restrictions or the applicant's own actions. Page 15 RESPOf1SE: 6,C (City of Tukwila) (King County) CUmULRTIUE CRITERIR Page 16 20flIfIG CODE URRIRf10E cLICRTI011- HEIGHT & PRRKIf16 The property in question is 200 feet wide along the shoreline.. Typical landscaping can not be placed on this 200 foot strip because of possible interference with overhead power lines. The underlying zoning allows the plocement of structures within the 200 ,foot setback; howeuer it appears to prohibit parking. The granting of such variance will not be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to the property or improuements in the uicinity and in the one in which the sub ject property is situated. Example: Would granting your request cause any harm, in jury, or interference with uses of adjacent and neighboring properties? (Consider traffic, uiews, Tight, aesthetic impacts, etc,) That the public interest will suffer no substantial detrimental effect, 1/91 That the design of the project will be compatible with other permitted actiuities in the area and will not cause aduerse effects to adjacent properties or the shoreline enuironment designation, In granting of all uariance permits, consideration shall be. giuen to. the . cumulatiue impact of additional requests for like action in the area. ZOflIf1G CODE UARIAflCE (. ?LICATIOf- HEIGHT & PHRKII1G(.) 1/91 • RESPOf1SE: The granting of the uariance would be consistent. It would not be detrimental because the use of the property for landscaping has been preuiously limited by deed restriction. There are limited riuer crossings of high voltage power lines. In addition. the power line should be considered a regional necessity when uariable use criteria should be applied. 6,0 (City of Tukwila) RESPOf1SE: The authorization of - such uariance will not aduersely affect the implementation of the comprehensiue land use policy plan. Example: After a reuiew of the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan, list any inconsistencies between your uariance and the Plan's goals, ob jectiues or policies. The comprehensiue plan recognizes the use of the property as power transmission corridor, while the zoning code zones the property for industrial use. This would suggest a certain compatibility between commercial /industrial uses and public use. 6.E (City of Tukwila) The granting of such uariance is necessary for the preseruation and en joyment of a .substantial property right of the applicant possessed by the owners of other properties in the some zone or uicinity, . Example: Without the uariance, no uses for which your property is zoned (i,e„ for a single - family residence or commercial site) would be possible, Without the uariance, rights of use of your property would not be the same as for other similarly zoned property. Describe other alternatiues for use of your property. Why were these alternatiues rejected? Page 17 2O Ill iu CODE UARIAnCE C LICATI011- HEIGHT & PARKIFIG RESPOf1SE: 1/91 Other property owners within the uicinity haue utilized the area under high uoltage power transmission lines for commercial or industrial storage. Parking should be consider on appropriate complementary use unless there are slope or wetland problems. VC/A//7Y M111 ■ SCALE: 1 • 50' 1 o CITY ,•: r x..11. N -1 �1 - etc . »` 1..1.1 1 ..11 C / Q , .0 J� S' D 0 t /4. 11(0.601 C1.•••TI 11•.1.. .., ••4 r M or... ........... n. , w r •13 r 10 »c tame: ION.11p1CI0' J'I 1333•+ Y ••■•••••.. •• •• ....•••■• • 0 4..., T FA S A S S S4-, �. ill 4/ 44- • / / / 4 . /l .1 f8 • 00' 11 _ •13:3 OF SEATTLE PIPELINE RIGHT-OF-WAY o a LEGAL DESCRIPTION 1 h.11M or a.31'CMfM to . ItC110• 1. 11+03113•1• I1 34....A • •••• . 13 33. 1• •l• CWRI .*ItT1.0 41 .0114••• HG•1.1.4 .l 0. 1••OICC410• T 1•! ..11 t1 •W6 •l' 33:0.... b • ••E l.! 1M 00..014 CO M CSR .• HAMS ..Rtt <.I WT 0 ••■ •1 C04CYJ (1TT 1+1T f.IC.0P CSUrt 1 •4 •0•. 1•2 •COU M 1C.•'.. 1 T•! CI TT L0TI( .•T 1. 1 .I1[l i•! 10011 .. t3!(• SJT 1•I.•.' T• M '11 r1•. Or ..6131.1.4 .104 • 16•11•.4 1. CCTT'. 1'' • ICIC' ' C 4,1.1•' 13OO • 1.140. 1 )1 O M/. •. 2 • ...•••• ...•••• C. '' T. IT% MKT • .4 L 1.11• .D M CWT. 1.361• O. M CITT > •ll,t T11•.••:ISION tl< •100 ..•• N CD3101m al .1.10 1014 5.07.410. CCU. ' 134 b . ..CS • Il•1•• 1. • 1'. 1*4.7 SAID IU11CIw TO M 4/ Seat M CU... U 1.1/111•C KOIOI..1f.0 SAID 111.4 11 l.! fI M OTT OP ,Ttn .0t CO t• 111), C! 10 b.. 314 • 4.0.0 SAIO •q1• •odt• • ••••••1•• C T.C. P ^ , mart L•I; M TR< POW at Dtal.wib 104(110. IWO r (.1014 rot Mal ROM 0. •.Y. If •T •16[ V 11301/40 1. GCO KC!•OO 1100 SCC00 :.L MJO(A 1111111111. • .301. A PORTION OF S.E. 1%4, S.E 1/4. SECTION 4, T23 N. R 4 E. W.M. PRCPWEA DT JOHN R. EWING ANO ASSOCIATES CIVIL ENG) _ LAND SVRVE10R5 KENT. W /SNINGTON + 13061657 -663 DRAIN 1Y CAL 1041C880 C(1041C880 1Y GTE I IJ06 NVM6FR 9:419