Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
SEPA EPIC-204-83 - CITY OF TUKWILA - 1984-1989 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
SIX YEAR CAPITAL IVIPROVEVIENT PROGRAM 1984 -1989 CIP EPIC- 204 -83 ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CITY OF TUKWILA 1984 - 1989 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (EPIC - 204 -83) PROPOSAL CITY OF TUKWILA 1987 - 1992 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ACTION SPONSOR City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1848 PROPOSED ACTION Adoption of a Six -year Capital Improvements Program to guide public investment in the City of Tukwila. PROJECT LOCATION Tukwila is located in west central King County in the lower Green /Duwamish River Valley. The Tukwila city limits extend generally from South 188th Street on the south of the Duwamish River on the north, and from 51st Avenue South on the west to the BNSF Burlington Northern railroad tracks on the east, - encompassing approximately 3.8 square miles. LEAD AGENCY City of Tukwila Planning Department. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL Rick Beeler Planning Director 433 -1846 CITY OF TUKWILA FEIS ADDENDUM 1987 - 1992 CIP Page 2 PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTORS /LOCATION OF BACKGROUND DATA Planning Department Staff City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1845 The City of Tukwila is currently reviewing a CIP for the 1987 -1992 planning period. A DEIS and FEIS were issued on November 3, 1983 and January 6, 1984 on the adoption of a Six -year Capital Improvement Program for the City for the 1984 -1989 planning period. This addendum includes information on seventeen additional projects which would not significantly change the impact or alternatives of the existing environ- mental documents. Generally the projects include eight storm drainage projects, two residential street projects, two commercial streets projects, two parks and recreation projects, one police project and two sewer projects. ADDITIONAL PROJECTS Drainage 1. Nelsen Place Storm Drainage Improvements (PW 86 - DR 03) Provide storm drain improvements (system requires pump plant) for 152 acres representing the Helen Nelsen Industrial Development Area. Project Cost: $2,513,000 Operating Revenues: $1,360,000 LID: $1,153,000 2. Green River Dike Improvement (PW 86 - DR 21) Construct dike improvements consisting of raising dike to gain free board, strengthen dike, place park protection. Project Cost: $1,769,000 Operating Revenues: $569,000 Public Works Trust Fund Loan: $1,200,000 3. New 48" Outfall and Storm Drains in 58th Avenue South from Interurban to River (PW 86 - DR 05) Replace 24" outfall with 48" pipe /flap gate and approximately 275 feet of 48" pipe. Project Cost: $60,000 Operating Revenues: $60,000 4. New Storm Drains in South 143rd Street from Maule Avenue South to river (PW 86 - DR 22) Provide approximately 500 linear feet of 24" storm main from low of South 143rd Street to Green River. Project Cost: $45,000 Operating Revenues: $45,000 CITY OF TUKWILA FEIS ADDENDUM 1987 - 1992 CIP Page 3 5. Fostoria 66" Storm Drainage Interceptor (PW 86 - DR 10) South 133rd Street from Interurban to South 132nd Street - Provide 1) 120 linear feet of 66" interceptor main; 2) 590 feet of 4'x8' box pipe (City); 3) 900 linear feet of 42" interceptor pipeline (county expense) Project Cost: $610,000 Operating Revenues: $610,000 6. Andover Park West Storm Drain Rehabilitation (PW 86 - DR 17) Replace 500 linear feet of existing sunken 48" storm drain in Andover Park West from Gilliam Creek to Baker Boulevard. Project Cost: $296,000 Operating Revenues: $296,000 7. New Storm Line - Strander Boulevard (PW 86 - DR 01) Provide 1,100 linear feet of new 36" storm drain to replace existing 12" on Strander Boulevard from Green River to Andover Park East. Project Cost: $200,000 Operating Revenues: $200,000 8. Gilliam Creek 250 CFS Storm Drain Pump Station (PW 86 - DR 19) 250 CFS storm drain pump station in Gilliam Creek to prevent flooding in Tukwila CBD to 100 years river storm, 25 -year local storm. Project Cost: $2,430,000 Operating Revenues: $1,162,000 State /County: $1,268,000 Residential Street 9. South 160th Street (PW 86 - RS 02) Street improvement including grading, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, utility undergrounding, street lighting, and drainage from 42nd Avenue South to 51st Avenue South. Project Cost: $894,000 Operating Revenues: $894,000 10. 51st Avenue South (PW 86 - RS 01) Street improvements including grading, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, utility undergrounding, street lighting and drainage from South 160th Street to South 166th Street. Project Cost $570,000 Operating Revenues: $570,000 Commercial Streets 11. Klickitat Drive Left Turn Lane (PW 86 - RW 02) Widen Klickitat Drive at I -5 entrance ramp to channelize left turns onto I -5. Project Cost: $100,000 Operating Revenues: $100,000 CITY OF TUKWILA FEIS ADDENDUM 1987 - 1992 CIP Page 4 12. Strander Boulevard Extension (PW 86 - RW 03) Open new five -lane street to extend Strander Boulevard from SR181 to Oaksdale. Project Cost: $7,000,000 Operating Revenues: $700,000 Renton: $700,000 FAUS: $5,600,000 Parks and Recreation 13. Christensen Greenbelt Park - IV (PR 87 - PK 01) Construct an 8' to 10' asphalt trail to link the City's river trail between Tukwila Parkway and Interurban Avenue under I -405 along the west side of the Green River. Project Cost: $240,000 Operating Revenues: $140,000 W.S.D.O.T.: $100,000 14. Foot Trail (PR 87 - 02) Two foot trails to be built on existing City right -of -way for public use on Slade Way to Klickitat Drive and 55th Avenue between South 139th and South 140th. Project Cost: $25,000 Operating Revenues: $25,000 Other 15. Mobile Operations Center (PO 86 - 1) Purchase used motorhome or step van and retrofit /equip as a mobile operations center. Project Cost: $35,000 Operating Revenues: $35,000 Sewer 16. CBD Trunk Sewer Replacements (PW 86 - SW 03) Replace sections of 1,000 linear feet of existing 8" sag line. New tee is required to reduce grease buildup from shopping mall. Project Cost: $129,000 . Operating Revenues: $129,000 17. Additional (Basin #13) South City Limits Sewer Extension at 57th Avenue South (Southcenter Parkway), South 180th Street to South City Limits (PW 86 - SW 04) Provide additional sewer extensions to new upgraded Phase II sewerage system tributary to upgraded Pump Station #2 including 2,000 linear feet 8" gravity sewer line and 3,000 linear feet of 14" force main. Project Cost: $497,000 Private Developers: $497,000 A F F NA V I T [J Notice of Public Hearing O Notice of Public Meeting [j. Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet [� Board of'Appeals Agenda Packet J Planning Commission Agenda Packet Q Short Subdivision Agenda Packet Q Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit OF D I ST•R I�UT30N hereby declare that: (l Determination of Nonsignificance [I Mitigated Determination of Non- significance [[ Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice [] Notice of Action Official Notice [] Other O Shoreline Management Permit Q Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on Name of Project aelke4a0, '1" F-/ Crs ICH -igg9 C/P int File Number igg7- f q2 Gffl cam,- _ n ..r, -- , 19 Fc. CrLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW M•NGS ( ) U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION Federal Agencies ( )U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( )U.S. DEPARTMENT OF H.U.D. (Region X) State Agencies ( ) WA.ST. OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY (X) WA.ST. TRANSPORTATION DEPT. ( ) WA.ST. DEPT. OF FISHERIES ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( ) WA.ST. PLANNING & COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AGENCY ( ) WA.ST. DEPT. OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES )WA.ST. DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, SHORELANDS DIVISIO A.ST. DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION ) WA.ST. DEPT. OF GAME ( )OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL County Agencies ( ) K.C. DEPT. OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVEL. ( ) FIRE DISTRICT 18 ( ) BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( ) K.C. HEALTH DEPARTMENT ( ) SOUTH CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY ( ) RENTON LIBRARY ( ) KENT LIBRARY ( ) PACIFIC NORTHWEST BELL TELEPHONE ( ) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS ( ) WATER DISTRICT 75 ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) GROUP W CABLE ( ) KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT ( ) TUKWILA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ( ) TUKWILA MAYOR ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( ) Public Works ( ) Parks and Recreation ( ) Police ( ) Fire ( ) Finance ( ) Planning /Building ( )FIRE DISTRICT 1 ( )FIRE DISTRICT 24 ( )K.C. BLDG & LAND DEVEL.DIV. -SEPA INFO CNTR Schools /Libraries ( )HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( )KING COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY ( )SEATTLE MUNICIPAL REFERENCE LIBRARY Utilities ( )PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT ( )VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( )WATER DISTRICT 20 ( )WATER DISTRICT 25 ( )WATER DISTRICT 125 ( )UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD City Agencies (4)RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT ( )TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION ( )TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ( ) Edgar Bauch ( ) Marilyn Stoknes ( ) Joe Duffie ( ) Mabel Harris ( ) Charlie Simpson ( ) Doris Phelps ( ). Wendy Morgan Other Local Agencies PUGET SOUND COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT (PSCOG) ( )METRO ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DIVISION PUGET SOUND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Office /Industrial 10,000 gsf or more ) TUKWILA /SEA TAC CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Residential 50 units or more Retail 100,000 gsf or more Media ( ) DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE 1...) RENTON RECORD CHRONICLE ( )HIGHLINE TIMES ( )SEATTLE TIMES WAC 197 -11 -970 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal City of Tukwila 1987 to 1992 Capital Improvement Program Proponent City of Tukwila Location of Proposal, including street address, if any (Non - project proposal) Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Q There is no comment period for this DNS El This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by December 5, 1986 . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Responsible Official Rick Beeler Position /Title Address Date 0004, 19, ( c Planning Director Phone 433 -1846 6200 Southcenter Boulevard .� /'S9: ../TukofS i na tu r e i, You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall,_ 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 days from the above date by written appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Planning Department. FM.DNS • • ADDENDUM TO FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CITY OF TUKWILA 1984 - 1989 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (EPIC - 204 -83) PROPOSAL CITY OF TUKWILA 1987 - 1992 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ACTION SPONSOR City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1848 PROPOSED ACTION Adoption of a Six -year Capital Improvements Program to guide public investment in the City of Tukwila. PROJECT LOCATION Tukwila is located in west central King County in the lower Green /Duwamish River Valley. The Tukwila city limits extend generally from South 188th Street on the south of the Duwamish River on the north, and from 51st Avenue South on the west to the Burlington Northern railroad tracks on the east, encompassing approximately 3.8 square miles. LEAD AGENCY City of Tukwila Planning Department. RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL Rick Beeler Planning Director 433 -1846 CITY OF TUKWILA FEIS ADDENDUM 1987 - 1992 CIP Page 2 PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTORS /LOCATION OF BACKGROUND DATA Planning Department Staff City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1845 The City of Tukwila is currently reviewing a CIP for the 1987 -1992 planning period. A DEIS and FEIS were issued on November 3, 1983 and January 6, 1984 on the adoption of a Six -year Capital Improvement Program for the City for the 1984 -1989 planning period. This addendum includes information on seventeen additional projects which would not significantly change the impact or alternatives of the existing environ- mental documents. Generally the projects include eight storm drainage projects, two residential street projects, two commercial streets projects, two parks and recreation projects, one police project and two sewer projects. ADDITIONAL PROJECTS Drainage 1. Nelsen Place Storm Drainage Improvements (PW 86 - DR 03) Provide storm drain improvements (system requires pump plant) for 152 acres representing the Helen Nelsen Industrial Development Area. Project Cost: $2,513,000 Operating Revenues: $1,360,000 LID: $1,153,000 2. Green River Dike Improvement (PW 86 - DR 21) Construct dike improvements consisting of raising dike to gain free board, strengthen dike, place park protection. Project Cost: $1,769,000 Operating Revenues: $569,000 Public Works Trust Fund Loan: $1,200,000 3. New 48" Outfall and Storm Drains in 58th Avenue South from Interurban to River (PW 86 - DR 05) Replace 24" outfall with 48" pipe /flap gate and approximately 275 feet of 48" pipe. Project Cost: $60,000 Operating Revenues: $60,000 4. New Storm Drains in South 143rd Street from Maule Avenue South to river (PW 86 - DR 22) Provide approximately 500 linear feet of 24" storm main, from low of South 143rd Street to Green River. Project Cost: $45,000 Operating Revenues: $45,000 • • CITY OF TUKWILA FEIS ADDENDUM 1987 - 1992 CIP Page 3 5. Fostoria 66" Storm Drainage Interceptor (PW 86 - DR 10) South 133rd Street from Interurban to South 132nd Street - Provide 1) 120 linear feet of 66" interceptor main; 2) 590 feet of 4'x8' box pipe (City); 3) 900 linear feet of 42" interceptor pipeline (county expense) Project Cost: $610,000 Operating Revenues: $610,000 6. Andover Park West Storm Drain Rehabilitation (PW 86 - DR 17) Replace 500 linear feet of existing sunken 48" storm drain in Andover Park West from Gilliam Creek to Baker Boulevard. Project Cost: $296,000 Operating Revenues: $296,000 7. New Storm Line - Strander Boulevard (PW 86 - DR 01) Provide 1,100 linear feet of new 36" storm drain to replace existing 12" on Strander Boulevard from Green River to Andover Park East. Project Cost: $200,000 Operating Revenues: $200,000 8. Gilliam Creek 250 CFS Storm Drain Pump Station (PW 86 - DR 19) 250 CFS storm drain pump station in Gilliam Creek to prevent flooding in Tukwila CBD to 100 years river storm, 25 -year local storm. Project Cost: $2,430,000 Operating Revenues: $1,162,000 State /County: $1,268,000 Residential Street 9. South 160th Street (PW 86 - RS 02) Street improvement including grading, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, utility undergrounding, street lighting, and drainage from 42nd Avenue South to 51st Avenue South. Project Cost: $894,000 Operating Revenues: $894,000 10. 51st Avenue South (PW 86 - RS 01) Street improvements including grading, paving, curb and gutter, sidewalk, utility undergrounding, street lighting and drainage from South 160th Street to South 166th Street. Project Cost $570,000 Operating Revenues: $570,000 Commercial Streets 11. Klickitat Drive Left Turn Lane (PW 86 - RW 02) Widen Klickitat Drive at I -5 entrance ramp to channelize left turns onto I -5. Project Cost: $100,000 Operating Revenues: $100,000 CITY OF TUKWILA FEIS ADDENDUM 1987 - 1992 CIP Page 4 12. Strander Boulevard Extension (PW 86 - RW 03) Open new five -lane street to extend Strander Boulevard from SR181 to Oaksdale. This project will be jointly developed with the City of Renton. Project Cost: $7,000,000 Operating Revenues: $700,000 Renton: $700,000 FAUS: $5,600,000 Parks and Recreation 13. Christensen Greenbelt Park - IV (PR 87 - PK 01) Construct an 8' to 10' asphalt trail to link the City's river trail between Tukwila Parkway and Interurban Avenue under I -405 along the west side of the Green River. Project Cost: $240,000 Operating Revenues: $140,000 W.S.D.O.T.: $100,000 14. Foot Trail (PR 87 - 02) Two foot trails to be built on existing City right -of -way for public use on Slade Way to Klickitat Drive and 55th Avenue between South 139th and South 140th. Project Cost: $25,000 Operating Revenues: $25,000 Other 15. Mobile Operations Center (PO 86 - 1) Purchase used motorhome or step van and retrofit /equip as a mobile operations center. Project Cost: $35,000 Operating Revenues: $35,000 Sewer 16. CBD Trunk Sewer Replacements (PW 86 - SW 03) Replace sections of 1,000 linear feet of existing 8" sag line. New tee is required to reduce grease buildup from shopping mall. Project Cost: $129,000 Operating Revenues: $129,000 17. Additional (Basin #13) South City Limits Sewer Extension at 57th Avenue South (Southcenter Parkway), South 180th Street to South City Limits (PW 86 - SW 04) Provide additional sewer extensions to new upgraded Phase II sewerage system tributary to upgraded Pump Station #2 including 2,000 linear feet 8" gravity sewer line and 3,000 linear feet of 14" force main. Project Cost: $497,000 Private Developers: $497,000 WAC 197 -11 -970 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal City of Tukwila 1986 to 1991 Capital Improvement Program Proponent City of Tukwila Location of Proposal, including street address,-if any nonproject proposal Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC- - 204 -83 The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. LJ There is no comment period for this DNS 0 This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Responsible Official Brad Collins Position /Title Planning Director Phone 433 -1845 Address 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Date August 28, 1985 Signature You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 days from the above date by written appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Planning Department. FM.DNS • *ILA 4 City of Tukwila •1908 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 433-1800 _ Gary L VanDusen, Mayor ADDENDUM TO .FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CITY OF TUKWILA 1984 - 1989 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM (EPIC - 204 -83) PROPOSAL CITY OF TUKWILA 1986 - 1991 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ACTION SPONSOR City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 (206) 433 -1848 PROPOSED ACTION Adoption of a Six -year Capital Improvements Program to guide public investment in the City of Tukwila. PROJECT LOCATION Tukwila is located in west central King County in the lower Green - Duwamish River Valley. The Tukwila City limits extend generally from South 188th Street on the south of the Duwamish River on the north, and from 51st Avenue South on the west to the Burlington Northern railroad tracks on the east, encompassing approximately 3.8 square miles. LEAD AGENCY City of Tukwila Planning Department Page 2 RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL Brad Collins Planning Director 433 -1845 • • PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTORS /LOCATION OF BACKGROUND DATA Planning Department Staff City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1845 The City of Tukwila is currently reviewing a CIP for the 1986 -1991 planning period. A DEIS and final environmental impact statement were issued on November 3, 1983 and January 6, 1984 on the adoption of a Six -year Capital Improvement Program for the City for the 1984 -1989 planning period. This addendum includes information on ten additional projects which would not significantly change the impacts or alternatives of the existing environmental document. Generally the projects include: two residential streets, signalization at one commercial intersection, a 1400 lineal foot water line, a playfield and four bicycle trails, feasibility study and possible construction of a new community center, roadway entrance improvements and construction of sidewalks to the central business district. ADDITIONAL PROJECTS: 1. City Entrances (PL85 -1) - Study, design and construction of improvements to areas of roadway entrances into the City. May include landscaping, banners, repair work, painting, signs, etc., to beautify entrances and enhance the City's identity. Project Cost: $165,000 Current Revenue Fund 2. Upper Foster Playfield (PR84 -PK06) - Develop three (3) acres of school leased land into a youth athletic field for soccer, Little League Baseball and neighborhood use. Total Projected Cost: $75,500 Community Block Grant Funds $39,000 Current Revenue Fund $34,500 3. Tukwila Community Center Study (PR85 -BGO1) - Study the need, use, location and feasibility of developing a new community center facility within Tukwila. Project Cost: $25,000 Community Block Grant Funds $18,000 Current Revenue Fund $ 7,000 L- • Page 3 ADDITIONAL PROJECTS (Continued): 4. New Community Center (PR85 -BG02) - Should a 1986 study determine that the existing Southgate School Center is inadequate and recommend that a new facility be built, construction would be scheduled for 1987. Project Cost: $1,460,000 Funding Options: Councilmatic Bonds, Voter Bonds, or Current Revenues. 5. City Bicycle Trails (PR84 - PK07) - Four trails along Southcenter Boulevard, Interurban Avenue, South 188th Street and Macadam Road are identified in and will be constructed as part of each street project. Bike trails will be eight (8) feet of blacktop path or will be part of sidewalk or shoulder of road. Project Cost: $60,000 Current Revenue Fund 6. North City Transmission (PN84 - WT18) - 1400 lineal feet of eighteen (18) inch water line. Replacement required across railroad property - South 112th and 40th. Project Cost: $160,000 Water Construction Fund 7. South 58th Street (PW85 -RSO1) - Construct new, two -lane residential street on existing right -of -way for one -half of the length and on new right -of -way for one -half of the length. From 51st Avenue South to 46th Avenue South the construction will include sidewalks, street lights, curb and gutters, and parking. Project Cost: $705,000 City Street Fund 8. 57th Avenue South (PW85 -RS02) - South 149th Street to reservoir site. Reconstruct street to reservoir. Project Cost: $77,000 City Street Fund 9. Intersection of SR181 and Todd Boulevard (PW85 -RW03) - Install signal with mastarms, including left turn northbound to Todd Boulevard. Project Cost $301,000 City Street Fund. 10. CBD Sidewalks (PW85 -RW05) - Construct approximately thirteen (13) section of six (6) foot wide sidewalks and selected pedestrian crossings. (Assumes donation of right -of -way by property owners.) Project Cost: $1,271,000 Councilmanic Bond. WAC 197 -11 -970 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal City of Tukwila 1986 to 1991 Capital Improvement Program Proponent 'City of Tukwila,, Location_of Proposal, including street address, if any nonproject proposal Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC- - 204 -83 The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. Ei There is no comment period for this DNS 0 This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Responsible Official Brad Collins Position /Title • Planning Director Phone 433 -1845 Address 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Date August 28, 1985 Signature V''l-4-10i 63--12 Yoir,may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 days from the above date by written appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk-and Planning Department. FM.DNS City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 433 -1800 Gary L VanDusen, Mayor ADDENDUM TO :FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT CITY OF TUKWILA 1984 - -1989 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT.PROGRAM (EPIC - 204 -83) PROPOSAL CITY OF TUKWILA 1986 - 1991 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM ACTION SPONSOR City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 (206) 433 -1848 PROPOSED ACTION Adoption of a Six -year Capital Improvements Program to guide public investment in the City of Tukwila. PROJECT LOCATION Tukwila is located in west central King County in the lower Green - Duwamish River Valley. The Tukwila City limits extend generally from South 188th Street on the south of the Duwamish River on the north, and from 51st Avenue South on the west to the Burlington Northern railroad tracks on the east, encompassing approximately 3.8 square miles. LEAD AGENCY City of Tukwila Planning Department Page 2 RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL Brad Collins Planning Director 433 -1845 PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTORS /LOCATION OF BACKGROUND DATA Planning Department Staff City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1845 The City of Tukwila is currently reviewing a CIP for the 1986 -1991 planning period. A DEIS and final environmental impact statement were issued on November 3, 1983 and January 6, 1984 on the adoption of a Six -year Capital Improvement Program for the City for the 1984 -1989 planning period. This addendum includes information on ten. additional projects which would not significantly change the impacts or alternatives of the existing environmental document. Generally the projects include: two residential streets, signalization at one commercial intersection, a 1400 lineal foot water line, a playfield and four bicycle trails, feasibility study and possible construction of,a new community center, roadway entrance improvements and construction of sidewalks in the central business district. ADDITIONAL PROJECTS: 1. City Entrances (PL85 -1) - Study, design and construction of improvements to areas of roadway entrances into the City. May include landscaping, banners, repair work, painting, signs, etc., to beautify entrances and enhance the City's identity. Project Cost: $165,000 Current Revenue Fund 2. Upper Foster Playfield (PR84 -PK06) - Develop three (3) acres of school leased land into a youth athletic field for soccer, Little League Baseball and neighborhood use. Total Projected Cost: $75,500 Community Block Grant Funds $39,000 Current Revenue Fund $34,500 3. Tukwila Community Center Study.(PR85 -BGO1) - Study the need, use, location and feasibility of developing a new community center facility within Tukwila. Project Cost: i. $25,000 Community Block Grant Funds $18,000 Current Revenue Fund $ 7,000 • • Page 3 ADDITIONAL PROJECTS (Continued): 4. New Community Center (PR85 -BG02) - Should a 1986 study determine that the existing Southgate School Center is inadequate and recommend that a new facility be built, construction would be scheduled for 1987. Project Cost: $1,460,000 Funding Options: Councilmatic Bonds, Voter Bonds, or Current Revenues. 5. City Bicycle Trails (PR84 - PK07) - Four trails along Southcenter Boulevard, Interurban Avenue, South 188th Street and Macadam Road are identified in and will be constructed as part of each street project. Bike trails will be eight (8) feet of blacktop path or will be part of sidewalk or shoulder of road. Project Cost: $60,000 Current Revenue Fund 6. North City Transmission (PN84 - WT18) - 1400 lineal feet of eighteen (18) inch water line. Replacement required across railroad property - South 112th and 40th. Project Cost: $160,000 Water Construction Fund 7. South 58th Street (PW85 -RSO1) - Construct new, two -lane residential street on existing right -of -way for one -half of the length and on new right -of -way for one -half of the length. From 51st Avenue South to 46th Avenue South the construction will include sidewalks, street lights, curb and gutters, and parking. Project Cost: $705,000 City Street Fund 8. 57th Avenue South (PW85 -RS02) - South 149th Street to reservoir site. Reconstruct street to reservoir. Project Cost: $77,000 City Street Fund 9. Intersection of SR181 and Todd Boulevard (PW85 -RW03) - Install signal with mastarms, including left turn northbound to Todd Boulevard. Project Cost $301,000 City Street Fund. 10. CBD Sidewalks (PW85 -RW05) - Construct approximately thirteen (13) section of six (6) foot wide sidewalks and selected pedestrian crossings. (Assumes donation of right -of -way by property owners.) Project Cost: $1,271,000 Councilmanic Bond. C� &A tf 1s"�. LOCHNER �`�` H.W. LOCHNER, INC., (206) 454 -3160 CONSULTING ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS 301 -716th AVENUE. S.E.. SUITE 390. BELLEVUE. WASHINGTON 98004 JOHN A. HECKARD, P. E. ASSOCIATE • IURS AN INTERNATIONAL PROFESSIONAL SERVICES ORGANIZATION January 31, 1984 Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Becky Dear Becky: URS ENGINEERS SEATTLE FOURTH AND VINE BUILDING AR AG E 2615 FOURTH AVENUE SAN FRANCISCO SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98121 DENVER TEL: (200 623 -6000 DALLAS KANSAS CITY NEW ORLEANS NEW YORK WASHINGTON, D.C. ,... �. ,I. 1 i '!f f I :J81 , CIT'(C ru,c ,,i,..4 Enclosed is my check for $.2.00 for a copy of the Final EIS for the City of Tukwila capital improvements program for 1984 to 1989. Please send this document to my attention at URS. Thank you. Sincerely, Gard' W. Harshman Senior Environmental Planner GH /dl Enclosure January 19, 1984 n fr o fir ri nr r� r� Consulting Engineers CIVIL TRANSPORTATION STRUCTURAL City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Dear Sirs: 11U Ly, U L1 1.':.:01 UJ JAPJ 2 0 1984 .a CITY Cu: I ;c:,t, ..ILA PLANNI W's r :PT. . 633 Yesler Way Settle, Washington 98104 Tel: (206) 622 -7318 Please send us a copy of the final environmental impact statement for the City of Tukwila capital improvements program for 1984 to 1989.. Enclosed is a check for'$2.00 to cover costs. _ Thank you, CTS Consulting Engineers Paul Prochaska, P.E. 17025 West Valley Highway P.O. Box 88786 Tukwila Branch Seattle, Washington 98188 (206) 251.5800 'YOUR' CATERPILLAR DEALER ID, N C MACHINERY CO. January 16, 1984 Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Sirs: Please forward a copy of the final environmental impact statement for the City of Tukwila capital improvements program for .1984t0.- 1989. Enclosed is our check for $2.00. Please send to the. attention of:. Gene Jaeger Branch Manager N C Machinery Co. P.O. Box 88786 Tukwila. Branch Seattle, WA 98188 Thank you. Sincerely, N C MACHINERY CO. ■C/ CY-11<-) Fran Reck Branch Secretary Enclosure Corporate Headquarters: P.O: Box 3562, Seattle, Wa. 98124 • Branches: Chehalis, Mt. Vernon, Seattle, Seattle (Lift Trucks), Tacoma (Lift Trucks), Anchorage, Anchorage (Lift Trucks), Fairbanks, Juneau, Ketchikan, N C Marine 2500 Westlake N., Seattle, Wa. 98109, NC Engine Power 16711 West Valley Hwy. Seattle, Wa. 98188 Kathleen G. Deakins "^k.EMEG4^0■4 500 SOUTH 336TH STREET / FEDERAL WAY, WA 98003 (206) 241-2040 SEATTLE / (206) 952-6100 TACOMA 4 4 + cst tfi'f.D.'Vtdnike4nA. I. 4._ 4- 4 4 4- .4 4 4 -1 -4 1 4- .4 • • TAMS TIPPETTS - ABBETT - McCARTHY - STRATTON ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS PARTNERS John Lowe, M,P.E. Wilson V. Binger, P. E. Raymond J. Hodge, P. E. Austin E. Brant,Jr.,P. E. John E. Bardes,P. E. Robert F. Heins, P. E. Dana E. Low, P. E. Eugene O'Brien, P. E. Donald R.Peirce,R.A. Patrick J. McAward, Jr., P. E. Philip Perdichizzi, P. E. Lyle H.Hixenbaugh,P E. City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Atten: Becky ASSOCIATE PARTNERS Ernest Jonas, P. E. Mario Asin, P. E. Edward C. Regan, P. E. Albert T. Rosselli, P. E.,AICP PRINCIPAL ASSOCIATES Eric T. Dodge P.E. Anthony R. Doleimascolo, P. E. Leonard Gersten,P.E. Daniel Remeta,R.A. G. Barrie Heinzenknecht,P. P. CONSULTANTS CONTROLLER Frederick J. Clarke, P. E. Francis A. Rohrer Ronald W. Pulling, P. E. Robert 0. Swain NORTHWEST REGIONAL MANAGER Armando Balloffet, P. E. Phl7ipPerdichizzi,P.E. Paul C. Chao, P. E. Plinio P. Patrao, P. E. December 5, 1983 Dear Becky: Enclosed is our check for the additional $4.24 that you requested for our order for the draft environmental impact statement on the City's capitial improvement program. Please send it to: Thank you. Enclosure Dan Powell TAMS Engineers 3320 Rainier Tower Seattle, WA 98101 Sincerely, TIPPETTS - ABBETT- McCARTHY- STRATTON /47cdsq.a, ceo-x,Ite17,7 Deborah V. McConnell I 4 \,A5 3320 RAINIER TOWER • 1301 FIFTH AVENUE, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 • (206) 624 -3532 TAMS, • • TIPPETTS - ABBETT-McCARTHY - STRATTON ENGINEERS AND PLANNERS PARTNERS John Lowe, III,P. E. Wilson V. Binger, P. E. Raymond J. Hodge,P. E. Austin E. Brant, Jr., P. E. John E. Bardes,P. E. Robert F. Heins, P. E. Dana E. Low, P. E. Eugene O'Brien, P. E. Donald R.Peirce,R.A. Patrick J. McAward, Jr., P. E. Philip Perdichizzi, P. E. Lyle H. Hixenbaugh, P. E. City of Tukwila Planning Dept. 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: Brad Collins Dear Mr. Collins: EC 1 1983 ASSOCIATE PARTNERS Ernest Jonas, P. E. Mario Asin, P. E. Edward C. Regan, P. E. Albert T. Rosselli, P. E,AICP PRINCIPAL ASSOCIATES Eric T. Dodge F.E. Anthony R. Dolcimascolo, P. E. Leonard Gersten, P. E. Daniel Remeta, R.A. G. Barrie Hein> nk„echt,P.P. CONSULTANTS CONTROLLER Frederick J. Clarke, P. E. Francis A. Rohrer Ronald W. Pulling, P.E. Robert O. Swain NORTHWEST REGIONAL MANAGER Armando Balloffet, P. E. Philip Perdichizzi, P. E. Paul C. Chao, P. E. Plinio P. Petrao, P.E. C!TY Ci -it3KV /i' pLA� i` Vl�� ovemjber 30, 1983 r..ti '��f' 1 Enclosed is a check for $4 for the draft environmental impact statement on the City's capital improvement program. Please send it to the address below. Thank you. Enclosure Sincerely, a�, .s✓ is.�;%e Daniel J. Powell, P.E. Associate & U-LLe1 I Ala 44i d L>' tc,e.the w2'-I t .& 3320 RAINIER TOWER • 1301 FIFTH AVENUE, SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 • (206) 624-3532 PUBLIC NOTICE. Notice of Availability Notice is hereby given that the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the City of Tukwila 1984 -1989 Capital Improvement Program was issued on January 6, 1984, and is availble for public review. Copies are available for review at Tukwila Public Library, Renton Public Library, and the City Planning Department - Tukwila City Hall. For further information contact the Tukwila Planning Department at 433 -1845. Cost of document: $2.00. Published in the Daily Record Chronicle January 6, 1984. • AFFIDAVIT OF D I ST R I BUT ION I, Becky L. Kent ❑ Notice of Public Hearing Hereby declare that: Notice of Public Meeting ❑Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit li l Notice of Availability was mailed to each of the following addresses on See attached distribution list.. Si•x Year Capital Improve - Name of Project ment Program File Number EPIC- 204 -83 January 9, ,1984. Notica of Availability Distri ion List, January U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Attn: Co. Leon Moraski Seattle District NPSEN -PL -RP PO Box C -3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Washington State Dept. of Game 600 North. Capitol Way Olympia, WA 98504 Daily Journal of Commerce Editor Dennis Stuhaug 83 Columbia Street Seattle, WA 98104 , 1984 -. -. Office of the Governor State of Washington Legislative Building Olympia, WA 98504 Seattle Times Real Estate News' PO Box. 70 Seattle, WA 98111 Washington Sate Dept. of'Ecology Environmental Review Section Mail Stop PV -11 Olympia, WA 98504 Washington State Planning and Community Affairs Agency 400 Capitol Center Building Olympia, WA 98504 Washington. State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 111 West. 21st Street KL -11 Olympia, WA / 98504 W:ash.ington. Natural Gas Co. Attn: William Fry PO Box 1869 Seattle, WA 981111. Pacific NW-Bell Telephone Co'. Attn: Engineer (EIS Review). 300 SW 7th St. Renton, WA 98055 Notice of Availability Distri Puget Sound Power & Light Co. Attn: Environmental Review 10608 NE 4th St. Bellevue, WA 98004 ion List, January 6, 1984 • US Department H.U.D. (Region X) Community Planning and Development Arcade Plaza Building - 2nd & Union.S Seattle, WA 98104 Washington State Dept. of Fisheries 115 General Administration Building Olympia, WA 98504 Greater Tukwila Chamber of Commerce 950 Andover Park East PO Box 58591 Tukwila, WA 98188 US Environmental Protection Agency' • Region X . 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 Federal Highway Administration Region 10 222 S.W. Morrison Portland, Oregon Washington State Transportation Dept. 9611 SE 36th. St. Mercer Island, WA 98040 Attn: G.L. Gilbert Environmental Planning, Division Attn: Rodney G. Proctor; Manager' Metro, MS 63 821 Second Avenue Seattle,'WA 98104 . Puget Sound Air Pollution. Control Agency Attn: Mr. A:.R_ Daumkoehler,, Ai r Pollution Control Officer PO Box 9863 Seattle, WA- 98109' Puget Sound Council of Governments Attn: Ms-. Barbara Hastings 216 First Avenue So. Seattle, WA 98104 Notie-e of Availability Distrilion List, January 6 1984 King County Dept. of Budget & Program Dev., EIS Review Attn: Mr. Bob Edmundson 400 King County Courthouse Seattle, WA 98104 Hi gh:l i ne School District #401 5675 Ambaum Blvd. S.W. Seattle, WA 98166 • Fire District 1 42026 42nd Ave. So. Seattle, WA 98168 Fire District 18 4237 So. 144th. Seattle, WA 98168 Water District 25 11608 40th_ Ave.. So. Seattle, WA 98168. Fire District 24 2929 So. 200th_ St.. Seattle., ' WA 98188, Water. District 125 PO Box 68147. Seattle, WA 98168 King County Publi:c.Li:brary . 200 8th. No. Seattle, WA 98109° Renton' Pub.li:c Library 100 Mill St:. Renton, WA 98055 d lo- g '/6'139 Notice of Availability Di strillpi on List,. January 6, 1984 County Water District No. 75 PO Box 68100 Seattle, WA 98168 South Central School District #406 9690 South. 144th. Seattle, WA 98168 Kent Planning Department Attn: Mr. James Harris, Director City Hall . 220 So. Fourth Kent, WA 98031 Kent City Library 2205 Fourth. Kent, WA 98031 H.i.ghl i.ne Times PO Box 518 Seattle, WA 98166 Renton Record Chronicle . • Attn: Real Estate /Urban Affairs . 801 Houser Way South. Renton, WA 98055 Renton Planning Department Attn: Mr. Dave Clemens, Acting Director 200 Mill Street Renton, WA 98055 S;e.attl e. Water Department 821 2nd Avenue - Seattle, WA 98104 Val -Vue Sewer District . PO Box 68063 - Seattle, WA 98168 Richard Kirsop, Chairman 16816 53rd Ave. So. - Seattle, WA 98188 Notice of Availability Distri ion List, January 6, 1984 Tukwila Public Library 14475 59th So. Tukwila, WA 98188 Nowt ebb' vi.e Seattle Municipal Reference Library 600 4th.. St. Seattle, WA 98104 Washington State Dept. of Social and Health. Services- PO Box 1788 Olympia, WA 98504 Notice of Availability Distriion List, January 6, 1984 Eileen Avery 16014 51st Ave. So. Seattle, WA 98188 Joseph. Orrico 13765 56th. Ave. So. Tukwila, WA 98188 Dave Larson 14244 55th.Ave. So. Tukwila, WA 98188 . Randy.Cople.n 17487 7th. Ave. So. Seattle, WA 98166 • • TU KWILA ' C ITT COUNCIL : . Edgar D. Rauch. .Lionel C. Rohrer Joe H. Duffle. Mabel J. Harris George D. Hill Doris Phelps Wendy Morgan Charlie Simpson: Leo Sowi:nski: 16050 51st Ave. So. Tukwila, WA 98188 Gerald Knudson 6421 So. 143rd P1. Tukwila, WA 98168 TUKWILA MAYOR: Gary : L. VanDusen -CITY : DEPARTMENTS: Public Works Parks and Recreation Police Fire Finance Planning o ,c 6200 Southcenter Boulevard W � 1 Tukwila Washington 98188 1908 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor MEMORANDUM TO: All Interested Persons and Agencies. FROM: Bradley J. Collins., Planning Director DATE: November 3,' 1983 SUBJECT: Review Period for, .the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Ci;ty,iof Tukwi1a,1984 - 1989 Capital Improvements Program 'The purpose of this memorandum is to notify all recipients of the Draft EIS for Tukwila's Six -Year Capital Improvements Program and other interested persons and agencies; of a ;change of review period. The review period for the document is November 3, 1983 through December 8, 1983, rather than the period listed on the EIS cover page. Therefore, all comments on the Draft must be received by the Tukwila Planning Department no later than 5:00 p.m., December 8, 1983. Also Appendices are available for public review at the Tukwila Public Library, Renton Public Library, and the Tukwila Planning Department Environmental Public Information Center. Appendices may also be purchased for $4.00 from the Planning Department. V2 Brad:ley.J. s 11!i niky Planning Director City of Tukwi a Responsible Official • • AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRIBUTION I, Becky L. Kent Hereby declare that: Notice of Public Hearing J Notice of Public Meeting [l Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Substantial Development Permit © Notice of Availability was mailed to each of the following addresses on November 3, See attached distribution list. Name of Project Six Year Capital Improvement Program File Number EPIC- 204 -83 • ,1983_ Notice of Availability Distri -ion List, November U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Attn: Co. Leon Moraski Seattle District NPSEN -PL -RP PO Box C -3755 Seattle, WA 98124 Washington State Dept. of Game 600 North. Capitol Way Olympia, WA 98504 . Daily Journal of Commerce Editor Dennis Stuhaug 83 Columbia Street Seattle, WA 98104 Office of the Governor State of Washington Legislative Building Olympia, WA 98504 Seattle Times. Real Estate News PO Box 70 Seattle, WA 98111 , 1983 Washington State Dept. of Ecology Environmental Review Section Mail Stop PV -11 Olympia, WA 98504 Washington State Planning and Community Affairs Agency 400 Capitol Center Building Olympia, WA 98504 WAs.h.i:ngton State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation 111 West. 21st Street KL -11 Olympia, WA/ 98504 Washington Natural' Gas Attn: William Fry PO Box 1869 Seattle, WA 981111 Pacific NW Bell Telephone Co. Attn: Engineer (EIS Review) 300 SW 7th St. Renton, WA 98055 Notice of Availability Distri ionlist,November 3 1983 King County Dept. of Budget & Program Dev., EIS Review Attn: Mr. Bob Edmundson 400 King County Courthouse Seattle, WA 98104 High:line School District #401 5675 Ambaum Blvd. S.W. Seattle, WA 98166 - -- • Fire District 1 42026 42nd Ave. So. Seattle, WA 98168 Fire . Di :strict 18 4237 So. 144th. Seattle, WA 98168 Water District 25 12844-:44th= P1. So. Seattle, WA 98168 Water. District 125 PO Box 68147, Seattle, WA 98168 Fire District 24 2929 So. 200th_ St. Seattle., WA 98188 • King County Public Library 200 8th. No. Seattle, WA- 98109 . Renton' Publ i:c Library 100 Mill St.. Renton, WA 98055 Notice of Availability Distrillionitst,November 3, 1983 Puget Sound Power & Light Co. Attn: Environmental Review 10608 NE 4th St. Bellevue, WA 98004 US Department H.U.D. (Region X) Community Planning and Development Arcade Plaza Building - 2nd & Union St. Seattle, WA 98104 1 Washington State Dept. of Fisheries 115 General Adadnistration Building Olympia, WA 98504 Greater Tukwila Chamber of. Commerce 950 Andover Park East PO Box 58591 Tukwila, WA 98188 • US Environmental Protection Agency Region X 1200 Sixth Avenue Seattle, WA 98101 Federal Highway Administration Region 10 222 S.W. Morrison Portland, Oregon Environmental Planning Division Attn: Rodney G. Proctor, Manager' Metro, MS 63', 821 Second Avenue Seattle,'WA 98104 • - Puget Sound. Air Pollution Control Agency Attn: Mr. AA. Daumkoehler, Air Pollution Control Officer PO Box 9863 . • Seattle, WA 98109 Puget Sound Council of Governments Attn: Ms. Barbara Hastings' 216- First Avenue Seattle, WA. 98104 , Notice of Availability Distri- ion List, November 3, 1983 King County Water District No. 75 PO Box 68100 Seattle, WA 98168 • Kent Planning Department Attn: Mr. James Harris , Director City Hall • 220 So. Fourth Kent, WA 98031 South Central School District #406 9690 South. 144th. Seattle, WA 98168 Kent City Library 2205 Fourth. Kent, WA 98031 Hi ghl ine Times: PO Box 518 Seattle, WA 98166 Seattle. Water Department 821 2nd Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 Renton Record Chronicle Attn: Real Estate /Urban Affairs. 801 Houser Way South. • Renton, WA 98055 Val -Vue Sewer District PO Box 68063 Seattle, WA. 98168 - Renton Planning Department Attn: Mr. Dave Clements, Acting Director 200 Mill Street Renton, WA 98055 Richard K. .irsop,.Chairman 16816 53rd Ave. So. Seattle, WA 98188 Notice of Availability Distri ion List, November 3, 1983 411 Eileen Avery 16014 51st Ave. So. Seattle, WA 98188 Joseph. Orrico 13765 56th. Ave. So. Tukwila, WA 98188 Charles Arvidson Seattle. First National Bank PO Box 88199 Tukwila, WA 98188 Randy Coplen 17487 7th. Ave. So. Seattle, WA 98166 _^. Leo Sowinskt 16050 51st Ave. So. Tukwila, WA 98188 Gerald Knudson 6421 So. 143rd P1. Tukwila, WA 98168 TUKWILA-CITY'COUNCIL:. Edgar D. Bauchi Lionel C. Rohrer_ Joe H. Duffle Mabel J. Harris George D. Hill Doris Phelps Wendy Morgan. .—TUKWILA:MAYOR: GaryiL. VanDusen • 1CUTI.DEPARTMENTS: Public Works Parks and Recreation Police Fire Finance Planning Notice of Availability Distr.i -ion List, November 3, 1983 Tukwila Public Library 14475 59th So. Tukwila, WA 98188 Seattle Municipal Reference Library 600 4th, St. Seattle, WA 98104 Washington State Dept. of Social. and Health_ ServiIces. PO Box 1788 Olympia, WA 98504 Washington State Transportation Dept. D.L. Hoffman, District Design Engineer. 6431 Corson Avenue South. Seattle, WA 98108 City of Tukwila NOTICE OF SCOPE OF THE PROPOSAL for the Six -Year Capital Improvement Program Environmental Impact Statement In compliance with Substitute Senate Bill (SSB) No. 3006, the City of Tukwila is hereby announcing that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is being prepared for the Six -Year Capital Improvement Program. The Six -Year Capital Improvement Program is a consolidation of major public facility and infrastructure projects to be undertaken citywide by various City departments to expand or improve the present quality of public services to local residents and businesses. The CIP coordinates the indi- vidual efforts of the respective departments and proposes funding strate- gies to implement these projects. City staff has determined that imple- mentation of the CIP may significantly impact, directly and indirectly, local physical and built environmental resources. Subsequent to SSB 3006, Section 1; which seeks to limit the scope of EIS's by focusing on the major issues raised in consultation with agencies and the public, the City is requesting comment on the Scope of the Proposal. The City of Tukwila will be accepting comments regarding the Scope of the Proposal for 21 days from this announcement. All interested per- sons are instructed to request an EIS Scope of the Proposal response form from the Tukwila Planning Department. All responses must be made in writing and received no later than the close of business on August 25;. 1983, by the Tukwila Planning Department. For further information, please write to the Tukwila Planning Depart- ment: 6200 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188, or phone 433 - 1845. WAC 197 -11 -1360 DETERMINATION OF SIGNIFICANCE AND SCOPING NOTICE Description of proposal Six Year Capital Improvement Program Proponent City of Tukwila Location of proposal Tukwila, Washington Lead agency Tukwila Planning Department EIS Required. This proposal has been determined to be likely to have a significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is .required under RCW 43.21C.020(c) and is now being prepared. An environmental checklist or other materials indicating likely impacts can be reviewed at our offices. Scoping. Agencies and members of the public are invited to comment on the scope of the EIS. The method and deadline for giving us your com- ments is: In writing, but August 26, 1983 Responsible official Bradley J. Collins Position /title Planning Director Address and phone 6200 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA 98188 433 -1845 C L Date August 5, 1983 Signature • • Under Substitute Senate Bill (SSB) No. 3006, agencies contemplating the filing of an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) must consult with other agencies and the public to identify significant impacts of the action and to limit the scope of the EIS. "Scope" consists of the range of actiors, alternatives and impacts to be analyzed per WAC 197 -10 -060, 197 -10 -365, and 197 -10 -410. The adoption of the Six -Year Capital Improvement Program by the Tukwila. City Council is a programmatic action that does not directly impact most environmental resources. The action does commit future municipal financial: resources for funding the capital projects comprising the CIP. This com- mitment may affect revenue available for other public services and, depend- ing on the revenue source(s) used and the nature and location of priority projects in the CIP, raise tax equity issues. Indirect impacts of the proposed action are the consequence of construc- tion and operation of CIP projects on physical and built environmental resources in Tukwila. In addition, CIP projects may eliminate existing physical constraints to development on existing vacant parcels, thus permitting subsequent development within the limitations of land use r regulations. The attached Environmental Checklist identifies poten- tially indirect impacts of the action on local environmental resources. After reviewing the attached Scope of the Proposal and Environmental Checklist, please use the following form to identify any additional impacts of the action you are concerned about, or any changes in empha- sis of the proposed EIS. CITY OF TUKWILA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM This questionnaire must be completed and submitted with the application for permit. This questionnaire must be completed by all persons applying for a permit from the City of Tukwila, unless it is determined by the Responsible . Official that the permit is exempt or unless the applicant and Responsible Official previously agree an Environmental Impact Statement needs to be comple. :ed. A fee of $50.00 must accompany the filling of the Environmental Questionnaire to cover costs of the threshold determination. I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent: City of Tukwila 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, TujcWila, WA 98188: (206) 433 -1845 3. Date Checklist Submitted: August 2, 1983 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: Planning Department 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Six -Year Capital Improvement Program 6. Nature and Brief Description of the Proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of its scope and nature): Six -Year CIP establishes funding mechanisms and coordinated imple- mentation of road, sewer, water, parks and other major public faci:lty improvements for the City. 7. Location of Proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal, as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental im- pacts, including any other information needed to give an accurate under- standing of the environmental setting of the proposal): .City of Tukwila occupies approximately 3 sq. miles of the Green River Valley and adjacent hillsides; and is comprised of predominantly commercial/ industrial land uses. 8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal: October 17, 1933 9. List of all Permits, Licenses or Government Approvals Required for the Proposal (federal, state and local): City Council Adoption (a) Rezone, conditional use, shoreline permit, etc. .YES NO X ' (b). King County Hydraulics Permit YES NO_L (c) Building permit YES NO _L • • (d) Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Permit (e) Sewer hook up permit (f) Sign permit (g) Water hook up permit (h) Storm water system permit (i) Curb cut permit (j) Electrical permit (State of Washington) (k) Plumbing permit (King County) (1) Other: YES X, YES YES__ NO YES X. YES X. YES YES X, YES NO X 10. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or futher activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: Yes, financing the construction and operation of new public facilities and infrastructure,...; 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: Yes, Tukwila Comprehensive Water Plan; Zoning,-Water and Sewer Plana; Circulation Plan. 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- posal; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: N/A II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? (b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcover- ing of the soil? (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief fea- tures? (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? -2- YES MAYBE NO X X X • • (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? YES MA "BE NO Explanation: The action of adopting the Capital Improvements Prc'gram does not directly impact Earth resources, Proposed facility improvements addressed in the Program may impact local earth resources when implemented. These impEcts are mostly soil and subsoil excavation, fill and grading for site preparation. 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: (a) , Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air • quality? (b) The creation of objectionable odors? (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? X Explanation: The .action of adopting the Capi tal Improvements Program does not directly impact air resources. Site preparation and construction of facility improvements subsequent to the CIP's adoption could produce localized, short-term impacts. New road improvements could also affect local- ized air quality conditions by altering current patterns 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: of traffic circulation and congestion. (a) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? (b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? (d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? (e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? -3- _Xi _X_ _ x- 1 • • (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? ) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise avail- able for public water supplies? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The action of adopting the Capital Improvement Program does not directly impact water resources. Site preparation ancl con- struction of facility improvements subsequent to the plan's adoption could create short -term soil erosion and water siltation problems. Construction of new roads and buildings may increase impervious sur- face areas and storm run -off potential. Drainage improvements could 4. Flora. Will the proposal result in: (See attached sheet) . (a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of flora? (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Explanation: 5. Fauna. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of fauna (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of fauna? (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? )' v A X X X X Explanation: The proposed action will not directly impact biological resources. Construction of public facilities subsequent to the adoption could impact vegetation and wildlife -4- (See attached sheet) • • YES MAYBE NO 6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? X Explanation: The proposed action will not directly create noise impacts. Construction of public facilities could produce short -term, local- ized noise impacts. Road construction may alter existing localized noise levels within Tukwila by changing traffic circulation patterns. 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? _X. Explanation: New roadway improvements could add traffic generated light and glare impacts to areas surrounding improvements. 8. Lai`id Use. Will the proposal result in the altera- tion of the present or planned land use of an area? • 1 Explanation: The proposed action will not directly- alter-existing -Lind use patterns in Tukwila. Construction of-public facilities -(e.g. parks) could change -land uses on specific parcels. Indirect impacts_of the CIP, particularly water and sewer improvements, could encourage subsequent residential deve:l opment-by reniovi ng existing ,constraints to.:urbanization_and vacant -,properties::;FDeveTopii nt; in turri, will 9 Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: (See attached !sheet) (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? X (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? X Explanation: 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or.radi- ation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? Explanation: X 11. Population.. Explanation: • • Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? Explanation: 13. Transportation /Circulation. Will the proposal result in: (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? (b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods? (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? (f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? YES MAY3E NO X X X Explanation: The proposed action does not directly impact current traffic system conditions in Tukwila. Subsequent road improvements could alter current circulation:patterns.and congestion problems. 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: (a) Fire protection? (b) Police protection? (c) Schools? (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? (e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? X YES MAYBE NO (f) Other governmental services? X _ Explanation: The proposed public facility projects included-:in the CIP could eventually require increased annual operating cost expen- ditures for maintenance and operation. 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 1_ _ Explanation: The proposed action does not directly affect fuel and energy use. Subsequent construction of individual projects may have a cumulative impact on 'energy resources. Project construction will require the operation of machinery, and. new buildings and equipment will also use energy for operations. 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: (a) Power or natural gas? (b) Communications systems? (c) Water? (d) Sewer or septic tanks? (e) Storm water drainage? (f) Solid waste and disposal? Explanation: The proposed CIP establishes priorities and funding for major public facility improvements over the next six years. These improvements, once implemented, will alter the present level ol= public services to Tukwila residents and businesses. 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the crea- tion of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? Explanation: X • • 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruc- tion of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically of- fensive site open to public view? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: The proposed CIP does not directly affect the aesthetic quality ofthe City. Project construction subsequent to the CIP's adoption could affect local aesthetic conditions by clearing vege- tation, altering noise levels, etc. 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of exist- ing recreational opportunities? K Explanation: The proposed CIP proposes funding improvements to the City's park system that will change the quality and quantity of public recreational facilities. 20. Archeological /Historical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a signifi- cant archeological or his- torical site, structure, object or building? Explanation: Archeological /historical impacts could be discovered at facility construction stage. CERTIFICATION BY APPLICANT: X I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non - significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Signature and Title Date • • Item 3(i): alter the course or flow of flood water. Water supply improve- ments could involve direct withdrawals of ground water. Item 5(d): habitat through site clearing. Road construction projects may displace agricultural use of some land. Item 8: have additional impacts on both the natural and built environ- ments of the City. Once these constraints are removed however, subsequent impacts are most influenced by the land use regula- tions of the City's Land Use Plan and Zoning Ordinance. CITY OF I 220 4TH AVE. S. KENT, WASHINGTON 98032 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT eebeC Ct3 Tukwi /a Plannil 4 part ,7- (,200 Soa-thanfer 8/vd 7 kciila , WA 9'glg•g It . Cif9/.County Cit_y_.No. C_ntlntu tin- - -• - 15IAI 1 -z- 5].-X.-YEAR. TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM .. 19 84. ..TO. 19. 89 — OBLIGATION PROGRAM J eypunching Note: Data entered in cols 1 -8 must 3 =6 be on all cards punched from 'this FnrrY1• Lem a. Hearing Date August 1, 1983 Adoption Date August 1. 1983 Resolutian.Nurnber a'f�7T- 1'Fi!T r'n�'r�. "IM TUf1ttcentflc. nC2 Tlnl.1-,evr, (Item No, I PROJECT IDENTIFICATION Major Class of Work Work Code Tota( .Length (Miles). [Nunctionul Clc \ :n , a OBLlGAT1ON :' SCH'EDULE FUNDING SOURCE _T_ZO-TAL FUNDS Tit 1e, Route, Road Log No., Section No., ,� o c (51-Element) -- Y -E__?: R FEDERAL . U.A.B. LOCAL. Location/Termini ,Description of Work, Be inn.in Milepost Grid e1\!o. Beginning 4 g 1st (Annual • _.2nd -- 3rd 4,5 /t 6th . . AMOUNT PROGRAM I ..i =2: -_ -9 35 -3 : 36 : .. 4 ...... 37 40 41 5 44 6.7 45" 4& 8 47 - . :. 9 ..__ 48 ' . ' . 51 :. -1 O... 52___' ' _ 55 . -11: 54 .. S9 60 12 • 63 13 64 '""' ' ' 67 14_ 68 11 15 .. 72 75 16. . 76 79 . IT' 90 95 i 1 N , , C , E , N I T I R I A I L I , A , V , E I , J 1 A 1 M I E 1 S 1 - 1 2 1 2 18 1 T 1 H 1 1 2kAIB,,DIF , 1 1 0 1 4 S U X - 2 1 7 1 9 1 7 , 1 . 1 I ,L.Li I • I t I , i l l . 1 1 1 •21511t71 121810, i 12(71917 Add - two -way left turn lane - drainage, paving, sidewalks, landscaping G M J K - 2 E , A , S , T , , V , A , L , , H , W 1 Y , 1 1 1 9 1 2 , N 1 D , - , 1 1 8 1 0 1 T 4 H , 1 1 2 KAIB I D , F , 0 1 8 , 5 S U X 1 3 , 9 1 6 2 1 5 , 3 1 0 1 1 1 , t, 1 1 I II 2161 313 120,3 1 12191216 Complete 5 lane section - drainage, paving,sidewalks, curbb F. utt r lighting, landscaping, underground utilities, ridge L H J K L 3 1. S 2 1 2 T H S T A T 4 2 N D A V E S 2 r A B D F 0 2 0 S • • 11 11 I Add left -turn lane, correct slumping - grading, draining paving, channelization, curb and gutter. H . _ COUNTY) 4 g , J I T , T , H , 1 R , D , t S 1 t 7 1 S 1 � 1 R M D , 1 - , 1 5 1 , 7 I S 1 6 I T 1 H 1 y ';rAb1R ;DLQ ' 1 0 1 4 1 0 C U 14 1 7 1 5 I I I 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 141715 1,141715 Reconstruction, alignment correction - grading, draining, paving, bikeway. - 1 5 0 F A S 3 2 5 5 1 ., 1 1 u ∎. 1 . I I 3 • s 1 3 0 Extend left turn lane at James, add left turn lane at S. 238th St - grading, draining, paving, channelization 6 S 2 1 2 T H S T AND 8 4TH A ES 2 A B 1 F 0 1 5 S U 8 8 8 8 :: Add right turn lanes - grading, draining, paving, curb E gutter, sidewalk, channelization, signing, G H K R E I T H R D S 2 5 6 T H - 38TH S 1 V A B D H 1 4 1 3 5 5 3 5 5 Reconstruct curve, add left turn lane, bikepath, pedestrian shoulder - grading, draining,paving, channelization, lighting, bikeway ' J.0 8 SIM,ILT,H, 1S,T, IA ,T, ,C 1E 1N 1T 1R1ALLJ 1A ,VIE1 , 1 1 7�/� III 10 41 15 M U 16.13i5 1 1 1 1, 1 - 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1,1 , 1 1 161315 1 1.161315 Right -of -way purchase for future left turn lanes OT 140 -049 .D15TRt BUT 1 ON 1 COPY 015TRICT STATE. A1D SNGINCER 1 COPY C.R.A.B. (COUt,1T1E5 O2.:LY) _,'. • ISIA 1-2' 51-X- YEAR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM 1984_ ...TO ..)9.89 OBLIGATION PROGRAM - Hearing pate August 1, 1983 Adoption Date August 1, 1983 �nrr Alni .e! rinin v.•�Lo ro rl ire nnI i_ .�- 'Citg_No. County N.o. —.r .. .. .�. .„�.� , .....,,. .....,., 0 6 1 5 3 =6 • be an all cards . .....,, punched from • . . KesoluYlanlVUmner flfl7 -8 this -form. • • a a \ ti a' X "P'R :E.CT.- CO5TS.'.11\L THOUSAND5- .OF'DOLLARS Item Mo . I P20JEC7 • IDENTIFICATION 0 (1.x 2 o )3. o Work Code •- rO�tai .length • .(Miles) - INnctional CIS OBLIGATION:_5CHEDULE FUNDING SOURCE _T_O7AL FUNDS Tit le, Route, Road 1:o• No., Section No., Carry over - , _ __Y_E___A R FEDERAL.. Cl.A.B. _ L.00g1;... Location /Termini,Description of Work, Beginning Milepost Bridge No. 1st (a,n�l�al Element) - 2nd 1985 3rd 1986 4.,5 4 6th AMOUNT PROGRAM -_ . 85 =73 _` 36 ". . 4... _ ... 3i. 40 5 41 44 0:7 " S 46 8 4'146 - ._ 3 -.7-1-1 ' ' ' • 5? .. _. 5Z____ . 55 56 . It - ' - . 59 Go 12 - 63 - - -15 64 ""' . ' 67 7 14 .. 48 11 72 15 75 . 16. - 76 18 8D 17 85 9 W1 I, L1 L, II S, IS,T, 1A, T1 1C,E1N,T,R1A1LI 1A1V1E1 1 1 2V AIBIDIF j01115 M U -• i •17i5e 1.1 1 • i, I• t 1 1 1 I I I. 1 1 I. "I 1 1. 1 1 71 5., 1 i 1715, Add turn lane - grading, draining, paving, curb $ gutter, sidewalk, channelization, signing G H K 10 S 2 5 2 N D S T AT ' S R 9 9 - S I G N A L 6 -I 0 1 0 M U 7 0 1 7 0 New signal . . 5 8 F A U S 1 2 11 1 0 4 T H S E - S E 2 6 0 T H T O S E 2 6 AT 2 ":: i . 1 5 9 0 5 9 0 Extend 5 lanes - grading, draining, paving, curb $ gutter, sidewalk, channelization, lighting, signing, street trees .M G H J K ' 12 51E1214,0,T,H1 ,A,T, 111012,N,D, IS1E, ,, 1 1 1 1, 2 / /,A1BIDIF ,04310 S U 1 1 1 14'10,0 , "1 1` 1 1 1 11 1 1 1 1 1 I I 14,0,0 1 14 1010 Add turn lane, improve 102nd - grading, draining, paving, curb & gutter, sidewalk, signing, possible signalization, potential LID G H K I 13 6 4 T H A V E S M I T H T O S 2 2 8 T H 1 A B D F 1 0 0 S U 1 3 1 0 1 3 1 0 New construction 5 lanes - grading, draining, paving curb $ gutter, sidewalk, street lights, signing, street trees, bikeway G H J K M 0 14 7 6 T H A V E S 2 1 2 T H S 2 2 2 N D • 1 A B D F 0 6 5 S U 1 8 1 2 1 8 1 2 New construction - grading, draining, paving, curb & gutter, sidewalk street lights, signing, street trees G H J K M 15 GREEN :: 1 I ■ :: 1 1 1 1 3 3 6 6 3 7 4 11 Widen functionally deficient bridge to 4 lanes, 3 7 4 0 S B R 16 MI 1S 1C 1 IT,R,A,F IF ,I ,C , ,I ,M,P 1R 10 1V 1E IMIE1N IT 1S , 1 6 R,.H 1I ,J IK , 4 I -- 11 1 11 i0 1 ,1,0 I ,1 10 i 13,0 i I t 5 0 1 I 1 VARIOUS 1 1 1 1 1610 1 0 , 1 . 1 ,6 10 140 -049 DISTRIBUTION I COPY DISTRICT STATE AID ENOINCER 1 COPY CR.A.S. (COUNTIES ONLY) FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT I I for the .. City of Tukwila 1984 to 1989 Capita Im rovements Program FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT for the CITY OF TUKWILA 1984 TO 1989 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM Prepared by CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE OF ISSUE: January 6, 1984 COST PER COPY: $2.00 Bradley J. ColfgyiPlanning Director INTRODUCTION ACTION SPONSOR City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1845 PROPOSED ACTION Adoption of a Six -year Capital Improvements Program to guide public investment in the City of Tukwila. PROJECT LOCATION Tukwila is located in west central King County in the lower Green - Duwamish River Valley. The Tukwila City limits extend generally from South 188th Street on the south to the Duwamish River on the north, and from 51st Avenue South on the west to the Burlington Northern railroad tracks on the east, encompassing approximately 3.8 square miles. LEAD AGENCY City of Tukwila Planning Department RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL Brad Collins Planning Director 433 -1845 PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTORS /LOCATION OF BACKGROUND DATA Planning Department Staff City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1845 Environmental Analysis and Document Preparation of the Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statement: John C. Mauk Environmental Planning Consultant P.O. Box 85185 Seattle, Washington 98145 -1185 (206) 527 -8953 Contact Person: John Mauk Graphics: Denise Bieker Graphic Designer 7407 114th S.E. Renton, Washington 98055 (206) 226 -7210 REQUIRED APPROVALS City of Tukwila Council Adoption COST OF COPIES: $2.00 DATE OF ISSUE OF DRAFT EIS: November 3, 1983 DATE OF ISSUE OF FINAL EIS: January 6, 1984 RECIPIENTS OF THE FINAL EIS. Federal Environmental Protection Agency Department of Housing and Urban Development (Region X) Federal Highway Administration U.S. Army Corps of Engineers State Office of the Governor Washington State Department of Ecology Washington State Department of Fisheries Washington State Department of Game Washington State Department of Social and Health Services Washington State Department of Transportation Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation Washington State Planning and Community Affairs Agencies Regional Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle King County Department of Budget and Program Development Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency Puget Sound Council of Governments Local Government /Public Services City of Renton City of Kent South Central School District #406 Highline School District #401 Val -Vue Sewer District Water District 25 • Water District 75 Water District 125 Fire District 1 Fire District 18 Fire District 24 Seattle Water Department City of Tukwila Mayor: City Council: Gary L. Van Dusen Edgar D. Bauch Lionel C. Bohrer Joe H. Duffie Mabel J. Harris George D. Hill Doris Phelps Wendy Morgan Charlie Simpson Planning Commission: Joseph Orrico Gerald Knudson Eileen Avery Randy Coplen Leo Sowinski Richard Kirsop Charles Arvidson Dave Larson City Departments: Utilities Public Works Parks and Recreation Police Fire Finance Planning Pacific Northwest Bell Puget Sound Power and Light Company Washington Natural Gas Libraries King County Public Library Seattle Municipal Reference Library Tukwila Public Library Renton Public Library - Main Branch Kent Public Library Media Daily Journal of Commerce Highline Times Seattle Times Renton Record Chronicle Others Tukwila Chamber of Commerce SUMMARY This document has been prepared as an addendum to the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the City of Tukwila 1984 to 1989 Capital Improvement Program. This document and the Draft EIS constitute the Final Environmental Impact Statement for the above proposal, pursuant to WAC 197 -10- 580(2). Written comments on the Capital Improvement Plan DEIS were received from three state agencies and two regional or local agencies. These comments and the appropriate responses are contained in this Final EIS. In addi- tion, in response to agency requests, tables clarifying CIP project funding have been enclosed. JOHN SPELLMAN Governor STATE OF WASHINGTON OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND HISTORIC PRESERVATION 711 West Twenty -First Avenue, Mr. Bradley J. Collins Planning Director City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Mr. Collins: KL -71 • Olympia, _ 504 . (205) 753 -4077 I jri Slifri'I�;'1i=j71 Nove ber' 1. t+ 1583 . CITY Y Or PLANNING CoF:%T. Log Reference: 461- C- KI -01 Re: City of Tukwila 1984 to 1989 Capital Improvements Program A staff review has been completed of your draft environmental impact statement. The precautions proposed to identify cultural resources and to avoid or mitigate anticipated impacts to identified or uniden- tified cultural resources are adequate. Thank you for this opportunity to comment. dw Sincerely, \-734,1<c‘A4i Robert G. Whitlam, Ph.D. State Archaeologist Response to comments from Robert G. Whitlam, Ph.D., State Archaeologist, Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. 1. Comments acknowledged. No response is necessary. S;:ELL,N1AN Ccwerrior STATE OF 1\ ASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY Mail Stop PV- 77 • Olympia, Washington 98504 • (206) '59 -6000 December 2, 1983 Mr. Brad Collins City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, RA 98188 Dear Mr. Collins: DONALD w. MOOS Director Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft environmental impact statement for -the 1984 to 1989 capital improvement program. From the information supplied in the draft EIS, it appears that no permits or approvals are required from the Department of Ecology for this phase of the proposal. Permits /approvals may be required when specific development activities are proposed. If you have any questions, please call me at (206) 459 -6025. Sincerely, Barbara J. itchie Environmental Review Section BJR:ldp Response to Comments made by Barbara J. Ritchie, of the Washington State Department of Ecology, Environmental Review Section. 1. Comment acknowledged. No response is necessary. IOHN SPELLMAN Governor STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPOR Office of District Administrator • D -7, 6437 Corson Ave. So., C-87410 . 'Searle;_i'Vashingtdr 981 r _• December 5, 1983 r_ _ I 3 pQTY r� tC Via A Bradley Collins, Planning Director Planning Department City of Tukwila 620 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Dear Mr. Collins: SR 181 City of Tukwila Capitol Improvements Program DEIS Review K -514. This Department has reviewed the subject document and has the following comments to offer: 1. Any improvements to WSDOT facilities must be approved by WSDOT. 2. Funding for projects involving state facilities should be further defined. We would appreciate being notified if any of our highways are affected by the projects. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. if you have any questions please contact Dick Johnson at 233 -2422 or Patrick Leavy at 233 -2416. Sincerely, G. L. GILBERT, P.E. District Design Engineer BK /hl DUANE BERENTSON Secretary • Response to comments from G.L. Gilbert, P.E., District Design Engineer, Washington State Department of Transportation. 1. Comments acknowledged. A table enclosed in the Final EIS (see Addendum) discloses the proposed funding for individual projects to the degree this information is available. Please note that several intersection improvements along SR 181 are included. eaprIETAE Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle Exchange Bldg. • 821 Second Ave., Seattle, Washington 98104 December 9, 1983 Mr. Bradley J. Collins, Planning Director City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Draft );nvironmental Impact Statement City Q£ Tukwila 1984 -1989 MFLEMPILD; V E C 1 2 19831 CITY GF TiiiC'r:�iA PLANNING DEPT. Dear Mr. Collins: Metro staff found that performing a thorough review of this DEIS was difficult because it was not accompanied by the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) document. The DEIS did not include a list or description of individual projects proposed to comprise the City of Tukwi -la's CIP and the maps depicted only generalized locations. Due to the lack of specific information our comments will necessarily be very general. Public Transit System We found little discussion about the policy implications of the proposed transportation projects, especially in relation to land use policies in the commercial - industrial district. On page 15, some proposed transit improvements in the district are mentioned but are unspecified as to what they are or who proposed them. Do the increases in street capacity reflect a commitment to accommodating primarily single occupant vehicles? Do the CIP transportation projects provide facilities for transit and . other high occupancy vehicles (HOV's) to bypass congestion? Metro is proposing the construction of a regional transit center in the area at or near Southcenter. Does the CIP include specific projects enabling transit to gain access to the transit . center without delays due to traffic congestion? We have found that commerical areas with low employment densities and large quantities of free or low -cost parking generate little demand for transit service. If local officials desire more efficient and effective transit service in the area as a means of reducing dependency on single- occupancy vehicles and resulting traffic growth, several coordinated steps must be taken. Such an effort could include the following measures: o increasing the densities of permitted development in a limited and easily accessible portion of the commercial area;- 1 1 . December 9, 1983 Page Two o taking steps to limit parking supplies to levels substantially below one space per employee; o providing pedestrian amenitites to allow and encourage pedestrian access throughout the high - density area; and o providing street improvements to allow transit . and other HOV's to bypass traffic congestion. Without such a program, developing significant levels of transit ridership will be difficult and result in use of the transit system largely limited to the transit dependent. Wastewater Facilities We note. the proposal will affect Metro's Renton Treatment Plant service. area. Metro has prepared a facilities plan for the :Renton system with a grant from DOE:and EPA, in. part because the Renton Treatment Plant has reached its "design" capacity and continued development is occurring within,the service. area. A final plan for the Renton service area was adopted by the Metro Council in November of 1981 and contains aorecammended program for upgrading the Renton system so that water quality and. health will continue to be protected. The ,plan calls for these improvements to be on line in.the summer of 1986. Water Quality Based on the information includedin this DEIS, the Water Resources Section staff anticipates no adverse impacts to receiving waters in the area. We do recommend that all mitigating measures for erosion and stormwater control are implemented with facilities inspected and maintained on a regular basis. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Very truly yours, Rodney G. Proctor, Manager Environmental Planning Division RGP:1da Response to comments made by Rodney G. Proctor, Manager, Environmental Planning Division, Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle. 1. A table enclosed in the Final EIS (see Addendum) disclosed the proposed funding for individual projects to the degree this information is available. 2. Comment acknowledged. The proposed transit improvements included in the CIP are the $2.0 million regional transit center to be financed by Metro and transit stations along Andover Park West with funding expected to be raised from property owners through an LID. CIP impro- vements to the roadway system including increased accessibility through new river crossings and I -5 connectors, are intended to benefit all transportation modes. The potential effect of improved circulation and reduced congestion on Metro operations, particularly for timely transit operations at the proposed transit center, were discussed on page 68 of the DEIS. The CIP does not include any projects specifically designed to facilitate the movement of transit or other high occupancy vehicles. Such facilities could be included in the design of some major CIP road system improvements, such as the I -5 connector in south Tukwila, as mitigations to encourage transit use. 3. Comments acknowledged and are herein incorporated into the FEIS. Road system and utility projects in the southerly part of the Andover Industrial Area, such as the I -5 connector, are intended to improve or . increase infrastructure capacities to promote more intensive commercial development (see DEIS page 62). Current zoning height criteria is also consistent with the objective of intensifying land uses in the industrial area. The City anticipates increased demand for intensified development in this area as the supply of vacant developable land con- tinues to decline. Although Tukwila's Zoning Code permits intensified development, it does not currently incorporate a bonus system for increased height or floor area ratio (F.A.R.) as a method of encouraging pedestrian amenities or reduced parking as is found in the codes of Seattle and Bellevue. Instead Tukwila has adopted an ordi- nance mandating sidewalk improvements for all new building construction . and substantial remodeling. Implementing parking supply limits and encouraging pedestrian amenities could be achieved further by amending or revising the Zoning Code. Incorporating facilities for transit in the design of major CIP road system improvements could also enhance the future viability of transit as an alternative to the use of the private automobile. 4. Comments acknowledged and are herein incorporated into the FEIS. 5. Comments acknowledged. No response is necessary. CITY OF KEHIV Mr. Brad Collins Planning Director Tukwila City Hall 6200.Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Brad: December 12, 1983 In response to the DEIS on Tukwila's C.I.P., we offer the following comments: 1. Item: Roadway improvement between I -5 freeway and Frager Road SEE, p. 9 for map showing interconnection). Problem: Link between I -5 and Frager would bring terrific vol -. umes of traffic into north Kent on unimproved Trager Road and to bad intersection at Frager /212th. Also, inconsistent with potential "rural" zoning in this area. 2. .Item: Planned water and sewer improvements south of main built - up.area (along Frager Road). Problem: Sewer extensions into the unincorporated area between Kent'and Tukwila is inconsistent with our own aims in preserving area for ag (or future infill development). Thanks again for the opportunity to comment on your DEIS. If you have any questions, please call Fred. Satterstrom at 872 -3390. cjc Sincerely, es Hansen, AICP Associate Planner • CITY � c;• t ., . :: l i. • PLA10. ,NG DEPT. Response to comments made by Mr. James Hansen, Associate Planner, City of Kent Planning Department. 1. Comment acknowledged. The Draft EIS on page B.1, Appendix B, CIP Projects - Environmental Matrix indicates that the growth- inducing impacts of the I -5 connector are significant and would be subject to further environmental review. 2. Comment acknowledged. The Cities of Tukwila and Kent have overlapping spheres of influence in the Frager Road area south of Tukwila's present City limits. Industrial /commercial development of this area is con- sistent with Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan. Tukwila also acknowledges that further environmental review would be necessary for both annexa- tion (because of the Cities' conflicting development objectives) and subsequent construction of the proposed roadways and utility facili- ties (see Appendix B, page B.3). The City of Tukwila made similar com- ments noting the land use conflicts at the time of adoption of Kent's Agricultural Land Study and expects to work cooperatively with the City of Kent and King County at the time property owners in the Frager Road area initiate any annexation or land use plan changes.. ADDENDUM City of Tukwila 1984 -1989 Capital :Improvement Program Funding. Needs (000's of 1983 dollars) Commercial Residential Park & Equipment & Streets Streets Buildings Golf Links Equip. Rental Total Sewer* Water* 1984 8005 442 105 278.5 288.5 9119 3000 1420 Federal 5669 15 - 46 5760 - State 921 - - 90 - 1021 890 450 Tukwila 927 442 90 103 242.5 1804.5 LID - - - Other 458 85.5 - 543.5 2110 970 1984 -89 34177 2528 702 2059.5 1257.1 40723.6 4644 2267 Federal 13642 13642 N/A N/A State 4805 - 125 4930 N/A N/A Tukwila 3190 1484 702 1444 1257.1 8077.1 N/A N/A LID 7836 - 327 - 8163 N/A N/A Other 3704 117 490.5 4911.5 N/A N/A TOTAL 42182 2970 807 2338 1545.6 49842.6 7644 3687 Federal 19341 . 15 - 46 19402 N/A N/A State 5726 - 215 - 5951 N/A N/A Tukwila 4117 1926 792 1547 1499.6 9881.6 N/A N/A LID 7836 327 - 8163 N/A N/A Other 4162 717 576 5455 N/A N/A *Water and sewer utility costs listed for 1984 are the costs of Phase I projects identified in the Master Plans. These projects may involve multi -year financing. CIP PROJECT COST AND ANTICIPATED SOURCE (000'S) Transportation Total Federal State Tukwila LID Other Grady Way Bridge Replacement 8810 7120 845 845 "T" Line Bridge -Phase II 1500 1245 255 South 188th Connector 6377 5293 1084 56th Avenue South 1540 196 1344 Interurban Avenue South 3597 3237 360 South 168th Street 1182. 1182 Minkler Boulevard -A 1697 1527 170 Minkler Boulevard -B 457 457 Macadam Road 373 333 40 Tukwila Parkway Extension 4500 3735 . 765 Longacres Way 155 155 Transit Center (Metro) 2000 2000 Tukwila Parkway 161 161 SR 181 at Strander Boulevard 14 14 Tukwila Parkway at Andover Park East .104 83 21 South 168th Street 257 257 Interurban Avenue South 312 280 32 57th Avenue South 1384 1384 Baker Boulevard 58 58 New Access "S" Line 149 149 Southcenter Parkway 1618 1618 Andover Park West -A, Transit Stations 104 104 South 180th Street 76 - 76 Andover Park West -B, Transit Stations 266 266 Strander Boulevard at Andover Park West 59 59 S. 180th Street and Andover Park West 53 53 South 143rd Street 231 231 South 140th Street 100 100 South 134th Street 140 140 South 143rd Place 140 140 South 144th Street 100 100 South 154th Street 388 349 39 SR 181 954 954 Strander Boulevard 314 314 Minkler Boulevard 2053 1704 349 58th Avenue South 959 959 Subtotal - Commercial Streets 42182 19341 5726 4117 7836 4203 CIP PROJECT COST AND ANTICIPATED SOURCE (000'S) Transportation Total Federal State Tukwila LID Other South 140th Street 131 131 55th Avenue South .311 311 57th Avenue South 436 436 South 141st Street 105 105 56th Avenue South 191 191 56th Place South 191. 191 South 139th Street 82 82 56th Avenue South 196 196 South 144th Street 87 87 58th Avenue South 327 327 South 160th Street 196 196 54th Avenue South 245 245 53rd Avenue South 227 227 Slade Way 245 245 Subtotal - Residential Streets 2970 1926 327 717 Total- Streets 45152 19341 5726 6043 8163 4920 CIP PROJECT.COST AND ANTICIPATED SOURCE (000'S) Buildings Total Federal State Tukwila LID Other Valley Com Expansion 250 250 Heat Pumps Station 51 35 35 Regional Jail N/A Fire Training Tower 75- 75 City Hall, North Bank Improvement • 15 City Hall, Ventilation Improvement 12 Blacktop Repaving 15 15 Tukwila Community Center - Rehabilitation 150 15 135 City Hall, Office Partitions. 30 City Hall, Acoustical Treatment 25 Additional Office Space 200 Total- Buildings 807 15 510 Parks & Golf Links CIP PROJECT COST AND ANTICIPATED SOURCE (000'S) Total Federal State Tukwila LID Other Christensen Greenbelt Park -III 170 85 85 Christensen Greenbelt Park -IV 90 45 45 Foster Park 32 32 McMicken Park -II 170 85 85 Tukwila Park Tennis Courts 30 30 Tukwila Elementary School Field 13 13 Bicentennial Park Improvement 44 44 Adult Athletic Field 100 100 Foot Trails 13 13 Tukwila Pond 1100 1100 Foster Golf Links, Maintenance Building 245 245 Foster Golf Links, Grass Tees 164.5 164.5 Foster Golf Links, Course Improvement 195.5 195.5 Total -Parks & Golf Links 2367 215 1547 605 Equipment Rental CIP PROJECT COST AND ANTICIPATED SOURCE (000'S) Total Federal State Tukwila LID Other Rodding Machine (1) 9 9 Dump Trucks (4) 61 61 Snow Plows (3) 9 9 Tractor (1) 20 20 Paint Striper (1) 35 35 Vans (6) 60 60 Pick -ups (6) 60 60 Asphalt Roller (1) 10 10 Mower /Loader (3) 36 36 Automobiles (6) 53 53 Sand Spreaders (2) 4 4 Welder (1) 3 3 Trailers (4) 16 16 Compressor (1) 5 5 Backhoes (2) 64 64 Trash Pump (1) 2 2 Sewer Jet Truck (1) ' . 29 29 Street Sweeper (1) 70 70 Tar Kettle (1) 3 3 Fire Emergency Vehicle (1) 10 10 Fire Pick -up (1) 10 10 Police Vehicles (24) 240 240 Park Recreation Vans (2) 46 46 Police Motorcycles (2) 12 12 Other Police Vehicles (8) 80 80 Total Equipment Rentals 1047 1047 • CIP PROJECT COST AND ANTICIPATED SOURCE (000'S) Equipment Total Federal State Tukwila LID Other Finance - Computer Upgrade 100 100 Fire- Replace Truck 165 165 Fire - Defibrilator 9 9 Fire -SMT Program 14.6 14.6 Aid Car Replacement 40 40 Police- Computer Aided Dispatch 72 . 72 Fire -Fire Truck Replacement 165 165 Total Equipment 565.6 565.6 Water .CIP PROJECT COST AND ANTICIPATED SOURCE (000'S) Total Federal State Tukwila LID Other Reservoir Number 1 1762 Transmission Line -West Hill 663 Distribution Line -North Hill 308 North Hill Pump 200 Water Well 1 168 Reservoir No. 2 800 Water Supply Control 166 Interurban Pipeline 100 So. 140th Pipeline 15 West Valley Highway System Improvement 130 Reservoir No. 3 1000 Frager Road Pipeline 305 Distribution Pipeline 0014 (CIP #) 37 Distribution Pipeline 0015 46 Distribution Pipeline 0016 86 Distribution Pipeline 0017 86 Distribution Pipeline 0018 88 Distribution Pipeline 0019 137 Distribution Pipeline 0020 32 Distribution Pipeline 0021 40 Distribution Pipeline 0022 43 Distribution Pipeline 0023 50 Distribution Pipeline 0024 13 Distribution Pipeline 0025 40 Distribution Pipeline 0026 27 Distribution Pipeline 0027 27 Distribution Pipeline 0028 57 Distribution Pipeline 0029 25 Distribution Pipeline 0030 93 Distribution Pipeline 0031 22 Distribution Pipeline 0032 530 Distribution Pipeline 0033 64 Distribution Pipeline 0034 27 Distribution Pipeline 0035 13 Distribution Pipeline 0036 35 Distribution Pipeline 0037 9 Distribution Pipeline 0038 26 Distribution Pipeline 0039 17 Water Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Distribution Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline Pipeline 0040 0041 0042 0043 0044 0045 0046 0047 0048 0049 0050 0051 0052 0053 0054 0055 CIP PROJECT COST AND ANTICIPATED SOURCE (000'S) Total Federal State Tukwila LID Other 16 10 19 6 26 10 12 12 10 10 23 19 11 13 41 119 Total Water 7644 Sewer CIP PROJECT COST AND ANTICIPATED' SOURCE (000'S) Total Federal State Tukwila LID Other Stand -by Power Units 70 Emergency Power Adapters 24 Lift Station 1 Upgrade 22 Lift Station Bypass Connections 24 Lift Station 4 Elimination 100 Lift Station 3 Elimination 115 Infiltration and Inflow Repairs 68 TV Inspection 105 Dialer Alarms 30 Lift Station 2 Reconstruction 848 South Service Area Sewers 1197 Southcenter Parkway Sewers 104 West Valley Highway Sewers 45 BN Industrial Park Sewers 208 Segale Business Park Revision 38 Lift Station 5 Elimination 52 Allentown Connection 25 Lift Station 8 Elimination 170 Beacon Coal Mine Road Sewer 139 Nielson Dairy Connection 73 Lift Station 6 Elimination 147 178th Street Sewer 46 Grease Traps 29 Miscellaneous Corrections 8 Total Sewer 3687 \VILA 1908 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor MEMORANDUM TO: All Interested Persons and Agencies, FROM: Bradley 3. Collins, Planning Director DATE: November 3, 1983 SUBJECT: Review Period for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, Ci.ty:of Tukwila,1984 - 1989 Capital Improvements Program . The purpose of this memorandum is to notify all recipients of the Draft EIS for Tukwila's Six -Year Capital Improvements Program and other interested persons and agencies of a change of review period. The review period for .the document is November 3, 1983 through December 8, 1983, rather than the period.listed on the EIS cover page. Therefore, all comments on the Draft must be received by the Tukwila Planning Department no later than 5:00 p.m., December 8, 1983. Also Appendices are available for public review at the Tukwila Public Library, Renton Public Library, and the Tukwila Planning Department Environmental Public Information Center. Appendices may also be purchased for $4.00 from the Planning Department. Bradley . 3.. l l i n�,7 Planning Director 'City of Tukwi a Responsible Official DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT for the CITY OF TUKWILA 1984 TO 1989 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM Prepared by CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DEPARTMENT For the Review and Comment of Citizens, Citizen Groups, and Governmental Agencies In Compliance With: The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 Chapter 43.21c, Revised Code of Washington Revised SEPA Guidelines, Effective January 21, 1978 Chapter 197 -10, Washington Administrative Code City of Tukwila Ordinance #1211 DATE OF ISSUE: November 1, 1983 DATE COMMENTS DUE: December 6, 1983 COST PER COPY: $6.00 INTRODUCTION ACTION SPONSOR. City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1845 PROPOSED ACTION Adoption of a Six -year Capital Improvements Program to guide public investment.. in the City of Tukwila. PROJECT LOCATION Tukwila is located in west central King County in the lower Green - Duwamish River Valley. The Tukwila City limits extend generally from South 188th. Street on the south of the Duwamish River on the north, and from 51st Avenue South on the west to the Burlington Northern railroad tracks on the east, encompassing approximately 3.8 square miles. LEAD AGENCY City of Tukwila Planning Department RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL Brad Collins Planning Director 433 -1845 PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTORS /LOCATION OF BACKGROUND DATA Planning Department Staff City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1845 Environmental Analysis and Document Preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement: i John C. Mauk ' Environmental Planning Consultant P.O. Box 85185 Seattle, Washington 98145 -1185 (206) 527 -8953 Contact Person: John Mauk Graphics: ' Denise Bieker Graphic Designer 7407 114th South East Renton, Washington 98055 (206) 226 -7210 ii ' RECIPIENTS OF THE DRAFT EIS Federal Environmental Protection Agency Department of Housing and Urban Development (Region X) Federal Highway Administration U.S. Army Corps of Engineers State Office of the Governor W.S. Department of Ecology W.S. Department of Fisheries W.S. Department of Game W.S. Department of Social and Health Services W.S. Department of Transportation W.S. Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation W.S. Planning and Community Affairs Agencies Regional Municipality of Metropoli.tan_Seattle King County Department of Budget and Program Development Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency Puget Sound Council of Governments Local Government /Public Services City of Renton City of Kent South Central School District #406 Highline School District #401 Val -Vue Sewer District Water District 25 Water District 75 Water District 175 Fire District 1 Fire District 18 Fire District 24 Seattle Water Department City of Tukwila Mayor: Gary L. Van Dusen City Council: Edgar D. Bauch Lionel C. Bohrer Joe H. Duffie Mabel J. Harris George D. Hill Doris Phelps.: Wendy Morgan Planning Commission: Joseph Orrico Gerald Knudson Eileen Avery Randy Coplen iii Leo Sowinski Richard Kirsop Charles Arvidson City Departments: Public Works Parks and Recreation Police Fire Finance Planning Utilities Pacific Northwest Bell Puget Sound Power and Light Company Washington Natural Gas Company Libraries King County Public Library Seattle Municipal Reference Library Tukwila Public Library Renton Public Library Main Branch Kent Public Library Media Daily Journal of Commerce Highline Times Seattle Times Renton Record Chronicle Others Tukwila Chamber of Commerce iv CONTENTS Pages INTRODUCTION i DISTRIBUTION LIST iii LIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL PARAMETERS ix Chapter I Summary 1 Chapter II Project Description 5 2.1 General Description of the Proposal 5 2.1.1 Proposal and Sponsor 5 2.1.2 Project Location 5 2.1.3 Background .5 2.2 Principal Characteristics of the Action 8 2.2.1 Capital Improvement Projects 8 2.2.2 Capital Improvement Program Financing 8 2.2.3 CIP Project Locations 13 2.3 Relationship of the CIP to Land Use, Plans, 13 Policies and Regulations 2.3.1 City of Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Plan 13 2.3.2 City of Tukwila Zoning Code 14 2.3.3 Public Facility Master Plans 14 2.3.4 Capital Improvement Programs 16 Chapter III Existing Environment 19 3.1 Municipal Finances 19 3.1.1 Introduction 19 3.1.2 Budget Overview 19. 3.1.3 Capital Project Financing 22 3.2 Community Environment 29 3.2.1 Introduction 29 3.2.2 Land Use 29 3.2.3 Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance 33 3.2.4 Public Services 35 3.3 Public Infrastructure. - 41 3.3.1 Introduction 41 3.3.2 Transportation 41 3.3.3 Utilities 45 3.4 Physical Environment 46 3.4.1 Earth Resources 46 3.4.2 Water Resources 47 3.4.3 Biological Resources 48 3.4.4 Air Quality 48 3.4.5 Noise 49 3.4.6 Aesthetics 49 Chapter IV Impacts 51 4.1 Municipal Finances 51 4.1.1 . Introduction 51 4.1.2 Future Tukwila Budget 51 4.1.3 Alternative CIP Financing Strategies 54 4.1.4 Other Capital Financing Sources 58 4.2 Community Environment 61 4.2.1 .: Introduction 61 4.2.2 Land Use 61 4.2.3 Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance 63 4.2.4 Public Services 65 v Pages 4.3 Public Infrastructure 67 4.3.1 Introduction 67 4.3.2 Transportation 67 4.3.3 Utilities 68 4.4 Physical Environment 69 4.4.1 Introduction 69 4.4.2 Physical Environment 70 4.4.3 Water Resources 70 4.4.4 Biological Resources 71 4.4.5 Air Resources 72 4.4.6 Noise 73 4.4.7 Aesthetics 74 Chapter V Mitigations 75 5.1 Municipal Finances: 75 5.1.1 Capital Improvement Planning 75 5.1.2 CIP Financing Strategies 78 5.2 Community Environment 82 5.2.1 Land Use 82 5.2.2 Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance 82 5.2.3 Public Services 82 5.3 Public Infrastructure 83 5.4 Physical Environment 84 5.5 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 84 5.5.1 Municipal Finances 84 5.5.2 Community Environment 84 5.5.3 Utilities 85 5.5.4 Physical Environment 85 Chapter VI Alternatives 87 6.1 Introduction 87 6.2 No Project Alternative 87 6.2.1 General 87 6.2.2 Municipal Finances and Community 87 Environment 6.2.3 Public Infrastructure 88 6.2.4 Physical Environment 88 6.3 Currently Financed Project Alternative 88 6.3.1 Municipal Finances 89 6.3.2 Community Environment 89 6.3.3 Public Infrastructure 89 6.3.4 Physical Environment 90 6.4 Existing Need Alternative 91 6.4.1 General 91 6.4.2 Municipal Finances /Community Environment 91 6.4.3 Public Infrastructure 91 6.4.4 Physical Environment 92 Cahpter VII Resource. Commitments 93 7.1 Short Term Versus Long Term Impacts 93 7.2 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments 93 of Resources Bibliography 94 Appendices Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2.1 1984 -1989 Capital Improvement Program Funding Needs 2.2 CIP Projects by Location 12 14 A.1 Budget Revenues 1979 -1983 A.1 A.2 Budget Expenditures 1979 -1983 A.2 A.3 Current Fund Revenues 1979 - 1983 A.3 A.4 Actual Current Fund Revenues and Expenditures 1978-1982 A.4 A.5 City Street & Arterial Fund Revenues 1979 -1983 A.5 A.6 Actual Revenues and Expenses 1978 -1982 A.6 A.7 Intergovernmental Grants 1978 -1982 A.7 A.8 General Debt. Capacity -- 1982 (000,000's) A.8 A.9 Tax Revenue Trends (in constant $) A.9 A.10 Type of Local Improvement District A.10 A.11 Population and Housing Trends A.11 A.12 Ranking of Community Problems by Residents and Businesses A.12 1975 A.13 1982 Crime Activity, Tukwila and Selected Places A.13 A.14 School District Enrollments A.14 A.15 Existing City Managed Facilities A.15 A.16 Additional Existing Facilities with the Planning Area A.16 A.17 Projected Local Tax Revenue. Changes 1983 -1989 A.18 A.18 Projected Current Fund Revenues A.19 A.19 Projected Current Fund Expenditures 1983 -1989 A.20 A.20 Projected City Street and Arterial Street Fund Expenditures A.21 Figure 2.1 2.2 2.3 2.4 2.5 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.10 3.11 3.12 3.13 3.14 3.15 4.1 4.2 4.3 LIST OF FIGURES Regional Location Vicinity Location CIP Road Projects by Funding Type Water Improvements CIP Sewer Improvements Pagee 6 7 -g 10 11 Major Revenue Sources for Municipal Finances 1976 to 1983 20 1983 Budget -Major Revenue Sources of Funds 21 Current. Fund Finances 23 City Street Fund - Projected and Actual Expenditures 1978 to 1983 25 Tax Revenue Trends 1975 to 1983 27 Property Tax Revenue Trends 1975 to 1983 28 Active Local Improvement Districts 30 Land Use and Planning Areas 31 Residential Construction Trends 34 Six -Year Undergrounding Program (1976 -1981) and Neighborhood 36 Revitalization Public Facilities 37 Priority Streets - Maintenance 40 Street and Highway System 42 Metro Transit Routes 44 Aesthetic Resources 50 Projected Current Fund Revenues 1984 to 1989 52 Projected Local Tax Revenue Change 1984 to 1989 53 Projected Capacity to Fund Capital Improvements Program 55 List of Environmental Parameters * Existing Parameter Conditions Impacts Mitigations Physical Environment Earth 3.4.1 4.4.2 5.5.4 Air 3.4.4 4.4.5 5.5.4 Water 3.4.2 4.4.3 5.5.4 Flora 3.4.3 4.4.4 5.5.4 Fauna 3.4.3 4.4.4 5.5.4 Noise 3.4.5 4.4.6 5.5.4 Light and Glare n/s n/s n/s Land Use 3.2.2 4.2.2 5.2.1 Natural Resources n/s n/s n/s Risk of Explosion n/s n/s n/s Human Environment Population 3.2.3 4.2.3 5.2.2 Housing 3.2.3 4.2.3 5.2.2 Employment 3.2.2 4.2.2 5.2.1 Transportation /Circulation 3.3.2 4.3.2 5.5.3 Public Services 3.2.4 4.2.4 5.2.3 Energy n/s n/s n/s Utilities 3.3.3 4.3.3 5.5.3 Human Health n/s n/s n/s Aesthetics 3.4.6 4.4.7 5.5.4 Recreation 3.2.4 4.2.4 5.2.3 Archaeological /Historical 3.2.4 4.2.4 5.2.3 Fiscal 3.1 4.1 5.1 N/S -- not significant *Section of the report ix L L m E is U En . CHAPTER I Summary 1.1 The Proposed Action The City of Tukwila is the sponsor of a non - project action to adopt a Six - Year Capital Improvement Program. The preliminary CIP is a "wish list" of 202 projects or equipment acquisitions recommended by City departments to improve the quality of facilities and level -of- services available to Tukwila residents and businesses. The preliminary Capital Improvement Program identifies needed public facilities in seven categories: (1) commercial and residential streets, (2). buildings, (3) parks and recreation, (4) equipment, (5) equipment rental, (6) water utility, and (7) sewer. utility. The total cost of the preliminary program is $67.5 million of which $10.3 million is to come from Tukwila's general government revenues. The sources identified for financing the program are intergovernmental (Federal, State) shared - revenues, local improvement districts, fees and charges, debt service (revenue and general obligation bonds) and general revenues. 1.2 Assessment Findings 1.2.1 Municipal Finances Tukwila's future capacity to finance the CIP is-uncertain. The City's principal local revenue sources (property and sales taxes) will remain susceptable to economic cycles, possibly varying greatly from year to year in rate of growth. Present revenue sources may be sufficient to finance CIP local revenue needs without affecting the quality-of public services during periods of economic propriety, but may not be adequate during recessions. Also State and Federal shared - revenue is required for half of the CIP's funding needs, primarily for commercial street'and arterial projects. The availability of these revenues also tends to vary from year to year. Therefore, the City could be faced with future decisions to either increase existing taxes or implement new ones to finance CIP projects, . to reduce current public services or delay or eliminate facility upgrading or maintenance. Monitoring new public facility needs or maintenance and replacement requirements of current infrastructure through the CIP process could promote more efficient use of public revenues for this purpose. Shared - revenues and debt service financing needs for CIP projects could be coordinated with other governmental entities to provide greater assurances of the type and cost of projects to be implemented. In addition,. the City is empowered to levy other taxes that could be earmarked for capital needs. These taxes could broaden the City's tax base and may be less susceptable to economic cycles, thus providing greater CIP financing stability. 1.2.2 Community Environment Implementing the CIP could expand existing commercial /industrial communities and encourage stable and viable single - family residential communities. CIP projects will permit new commercial and industrial development to occur along the Interurban corridor north of I -405; east of the Green River and south of the present City limits. In addition, redevelopment of existing warehousing and industrial uses in south Tukwila to more intensive non- residential uses could also be encouraged. Residential street improvements and new upgraded parks facilities could promote private rehabilitation of 1 older residential communities. Public services such as parks and recreation will have expanded facilities and equipment replacement for general government services (e.g. police, fire) should help maintain the current ' level -of- services offered to residents and businesses. Upgraded facilities may lessen maintenance needs, although new facilities could offset this. 1.2.3 Public Infrastructure Implementing the CIP should eliminate current system deficiencies of Tukwila's public infrastructure. Road projects could provide direct accessibility between I -5 and south Tukwila, more crossings over the Green River and improved accessibility through superblocks in the Andover Industrial Area. These improvements could reduce excessive travel on local streets and reduced congestion and accident potential on City streets and intersections. Water storage and system pressure deficiencies will also be resolved. Inefficient sewer facilities, particular pump stations which tend to be costly to operate, will be eliminated. 1.2.4 Physical Environment CIP projects could modify current earth biology and water features in the City. These changes could include short -term impacts, such as increased erosion and sedimentation potential, equipment noise and air pollutant emissions, during the construction of proposed facilities. Long -term changes to these natural features from woodland clearing and grading and excavation modifi- cations for roadways, bridges and water reservoirs may also occur. Redistributed traffic could alter current traffic noise conditions, decreasing in places and increasing in others. Improved traffic circulation may also reduce automobile pollutant emissions. Revegetation of facility construction sites that do not result in above- ground structures could reduce vegetation loss. Implementing erosion and sedimentation control programs., such as settling basins and covering exposed surfaces could reduce potential earth and water resource impacts. Temporary noise barriers for stationary construction equipment and limited operating hours could attenuate noise levels on nearby sensitive uses. 1.3 Alternatives 1.3.1 No Project Alternative No capital investment would be undertaken by the City to expand or improve its infrastructure. Therefore, existing deficiencies in the City's system of roads, parks and utilities would remain. In addition, the quality of other City services could decrease as a result of aged or unreliable equipment. The quality of Tukwila's residential and business neighborhoods could also deteriorate. 1.3.2 Currently Financed Projects Alternative In general, commercial street and water system improvements would not be implemented in this alternative. Traffic congestion problems in the industrial area south of I -405 would become worse. The City would continue to rely on the Seattle Water Department for water storage needs, thus incurring increased costs. The system would also continue to have pressure problems, particularly on Tukwila Hill. If LID's are not implemented, urbanization in vacant areas east and south of the City could not occur not would redevelop- ment of south Tukwila. 2 1.3.3 Existing Need Alternative Only improvements designed to'eliminate operational problems of the City's capital facility system would be implemented in this alternative. No road, water or sewer improvements to accommodate new development or redevelopment in the City would occur. The residential street program would be discontinued, possibly encouraging the quality of residential areas to decline. Water and sewer system deficiencies would be resolved, however. In addition, the commercial street system would be upgraded, encouraging more efficient traffic circulation. 3 • CHAPTER II PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1. General Description of the Proposal 2.1.1 Proposal and Sponsor This Draft Environmental Impact Statement addresses a proposed nonproject action by the Tukwila City Council to adopt a six -year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The City of Tukwila is the sponsor of this proposal. 2.1.2 Project Location The area affected by the proposed CIP is the City of Tukwila. Tukwila encompasses an area of approximately 3.8 miles in the lower Green - Duwamish River Valley at the interchange of Interstates 405 and 5 (Figure 2.1). The regional accessibility afforded by this location has contributed to Tukwila's development as a regional commercial center. Interstate 5 generally defines the City's western boundary while SR -181 and the Green River delineate the eastern boundary (Figure 2.2). Contiguous unincorporated communities south, north and west of Tukwila are not directly affected by this proposal, but are within the City's sphere -of- influence (planning area). This area represents the probable location of future City expansion and potential capital expenditure needs outside the existing City limits. 2.1.3 Background In July, 1983, the various departments of municipal government in Tukwila compiled a list of capital expenditure needs for the period of 1984 to 1989. The CIP identifies projects in seven categories: transportation (residential and commercial streets); buildings, parks and recreation, equipment, equipment rental, water utility and sewer utility. Most projects included in the CIP represent department programs continued from previous years. These programs were implemented by the individual departments with limited coordination among them for funding and phasing of improvements. The CIP addressed by-this study is Tukwila's first attempt to compile the capital needs of City departments into one package and to identify total financing needs, capabilities and available resources. In some instances, the capital projects included in this CIP extend beyond what is needed or could be expected to be implemented over the next six years. The CIP review process by City decision- makers is expected to further refine the number and types of projects included in the adopted, final document. Pursuant to the Guidelines implementing the State Environment Policy Act (WAC 197 -10) as revised January 1978 and City of Tukwila Ordinance #1211, the City has determined that the proposed action may significantly affect local environmental quality in Tukwila. This EIS addresses the potential impacts of adopting the CIP. As a programmatic action, however, adopting the CIP does not directly affect the City's physical environment. The action will commit City financial resources to implementing these capital projects which could subsequently impact environmental resources. In addition, committing City revenues to a multi -year program could affect the City's ability to maintain a quality environment through public services expenditures. This EIS, therefore, focuses on the financial options available to the City to implement CIP projects and the subsequent effect of these options and projects on the communities, infrastructures and natural resources of Tukwila. In this manner, the EIS is an extension of the CIP planning process - identifying 5 Figure 2.1 CITY OF TUKWILA I Regional Location 6 ;City- -Limits miPlanning Area 7 Figure 2.2 CITY OF TUKWILA Vicinity Location Highline water district intertie Water district 75 intertie Water district #75 intertie the limitations and problems of the current proposal and through mitigations, discussing policy concepts for future capital facility planning. 2.2 Principal Characteristics of the Action 2.2.1 Capital Improvement Projects The proposed CIP is a compilation of 202 projects. Residential and commercial street improvements and water utility projects comprise the largest share of CIP projects, each with 55. Road projects include residential streets with overlays, sidewalks and utility undergrounding that has been underway since the mid - seventies (Figure 2.3). The commercial and arterial street improvement projects incorporate the City's six -year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) into the CIP. Commercial streets are the single largest improvement cost in the CIP, comprising almost three - fourths (72 %) of total revenue needs. Water and sewer projects are derived from the City's preliminary master plans for these utilities prepared in 1982. Water projects are the second largest expenditure need in the CIP (approximately 12 %) and are intended to resolve major system deficiencies (Figure 2.4). Included in the CIP are reservoirs to provide storage capacity, new transmission lines to intertie the reservoirs with the existing utility infrastructure and upgraded water distribution lines to resolve problems of undersized lines and insufficient pressure. Sewer facilities, the third largest CIP expenditure, are projects intended to eliminate operational deficiencies (e.g. eliminate pump stations, undersized lines) and to accommodate new development (Figure 2.5). The proposed Parks and recreation improvements in the CIP are from the City's Parks Plan. The project priorities were established by the City's advisory committee (see the Tukwila Draft Parks and Recreation Plan, September, 1983). Major aspects of the plan include completion of the Christensen Greenbelt Phases III and IV, development of McMicken Park and improvements to existing parks and'recreation facilities. The remainder of the CIP is comprised of general equipment and building projects primarily involving the replacement of outdated equipment, building maintenance, and new equipment purchases. 2.2.2 Capital Improvement Program Financing The proposed CIP identifies revenue needs to implement capital projects and the anticipated source of these funds. Revenue sources, however, primarily reflect traditional sources. The CIP does not consider the availability or desirability of these revenue, particularly from sources outside of its control (e.g. inter- governmental revenues). Different types of capital facilities in the CIP are dependent on different revenue sources. (Table 2.1). Commercial streets are the largest CIP expend- iture. Most projected funding is expected to come from one of two sources: intergovernmental shared revenue or local improvement districts (LID's) supported by the benefitting property owners. The local government share of commercial street financing is matching funds for shared revenues. Residential street improvements will continue to be supported from municipal general revenues. Building improvements are expected to be funded from either general government revenues or fees and service charges, the latter including facilities at Foster Golf Links. Park facilities have a compar- atively diversified revenue base, including general funds (for both shared revenue matching funds and total project cost), shared revenues and fees and charges from recreation programs. Equipment purchases are expected to be made from general funds although Federal - shared revenue, a major source in the past, may also be used. * Intersection /Bridge o. Roadway Improvements 11111 it Transit Inprovements Funding Source: LID 2 City Intergovernmental !Figure 2.3 CITY OF TUKWILA CIP Road Projects by Funding_Type __.__ -- --� 8" of Less 10" of Less 112" Line 14" or More snnG • i Reservoir * !Constant Pressure Pump 300 GPM Groundwater Well Figure 2.4 CITY OF TUKWILA Water Improvements Pump Station Upgrade ftlINIEIPump Station Eliminated with Gravity Sewer Line ;Figure 2.5 CITY OF TUKWILA ;CIP Sewer Improvement: TABLE 2.1 . City of Tukwila 1984 -1989 Capital Improvement Program Funding needs (000's of 1983 dollars) Commercial Residential Buildings Parks Equipment TOTAL Streets Streets & Equipment Rental Tukwila $ 5,270 $2,236 $512 $ 410 $1,860 $10,288 Shared Revenues 34,839 - 15 362 46 35,262 Federal 26,000 15 - 46 26,061 State /Local 8,839 - 362 9,201 ,, Fees /Charges - 245 403 - 648 N LID'sl 8,770 1,044 - 9,814 Totals $48,879 $3,280 $772 $1,175 $1,906 $56,0122 Notes: 1' LID sum does not include water and sewer LID's; 2. If Water ($7,822.0) and Sewer ($3,687.0) projects are included, the total CIP funding needs is $67,521 million. Sources: City of Tukwila Preliminary 1984 to 1989 Capital Improvement Program, July 1983. Utility improvements (water and sewer) are expected to be financed within the limits of their self-supporting funds. The master plans prepared for both the City's utility systems in 1983, identified funding sources for these improvements. The financing plans usually included revenues, developer fees, and reserved funds. For utility improvements and general facilities, both pay -as- you -go and long -term debt financing strategies are possible. Current and potential revenue sources for CIP - funding needs are assessed in Sections III 3.1 and IV 4.1 of this study. 2.2.3 CIP Project Locations The CIP includes facility improvements in most areas of the City (refer to Figures 2.3 through 2.5 for road, water and sewer infrastructure locations). The type and cost of these facilities does vary among four generalized subareas of Tukwila (Table 2.2). The two major commercial /industrial areas of the City, Andover industrial Park and the Interurban corridor, together account for over 90% of anticipated expenditures. Just over half of all expenditures are projected in Andover Industrial Park. The substantial cost of commercial and arterial street improvements is the greatest influence financed by anticipated revenues from intergovernmental sources and LID's (see Figure 2.3) in Tukwila. Also the very high proportion of water and sewer expenditures in the Andover subareas does not reflect the needed investment in general facilities (e.g. water reservoirs) intended to provide system -wide benefits. General facility improvements total about $10 million, primarily for equipment and improvements for City wide problems such as the lack of water storage facilities. The proposed improvements in residential communities are mostly streets, sidewalks and recreation facilities although several water improvements are planned for the Tukwila Hill community to resolve existing water pressure problems. 2.3 Relationship of the CIP to Land Use Plans, Policies and Regulations 2.3.1 City of Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Tukwila's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan was adopted by City Ordinance No. 1039 on September 19, 1977. A general objective of the plan is to provide the most effective service level needed as efficiently as possible. Policies in four general areas direct public investment in capital facilities: Natural environment, open space, residential and transportation /utilities. Natural Environment /Open Space: City policies promoting capital facility investment to preserve natural environment and open space are interrelated. Generally, these policies promote recreational use of sensitive environmental features both to enhance their protection and to encourage public accessibility, use and enjoyment. The following summarizes specific policies that would be accomplished by CIP improvements: - Obtain trail easements along the Green River and incorporate into a lowland trail and open space system (Christensen Trail Phases III and 1V); - Coordinate trails planning system with other communities (Christensen trail is a component of a larger trail system along the Green River); - Construct trails in existing street right -of -ways (proposed trail improvements in residential communities); - Locate public recreation facilities where they are easily accessible 14 by residential population (McMicken Park improvements; various recreational improvements at facilities in Tukwila Hill); - Provide for active and passive recreation facilities consistent with the needs of the community (all parks and recreational facility im- provements); - Maximize the use of local tax dollars for park and recreation facility improvements by using funds from other sources (project financing strategy promotes using diverse revenues, including general revenues, shared revenues, and fees and charges); - Create an integrated network of open space based on existing and proposed recreational areas, lands least suitable for other development, and the natural amenities of the Tukwila area (McMicken Park, Christensen Trail). Residence: Comprehensive Plan goals encourage capital improvements to "diminish the environmental effects of natural and man -made systems which affect the quality of living" in Tukwila neighborhoods. To achieve this goal, residential policies encourage utility undergrounding, residential neighbor- hood beautification (sidewalks, stormwater ditches and landscaping), and pedestrian right -of -ways and lighted trails interconnecting residential, commercial and recreational areas. These policies are incorporated in the residential street and parks and recreation programs included in the CIP. Transportation /Utilities: Comprehensive Plan Transportation and utility goals and policies directly relate to the City's capital infrastructure. Single purpose road construction and improvement projects are discouraged. Promoting instead coordinated street, sidewalks, undergrounding and other improvements. CIP street improvements generally include necessary ancillary projects such as sidewalks, and utility undergrounding in residential neighborhoods, but does not specifically coordinate streets, water and sewer improvements. Proposed transit improvements in the commercial /industrial areas could accomplish objectives to increase transit use within the City. CIP sidewalk improve- ments could further advance City efforts to establish an 'integrated: system tying residential areas with other activity codes in Tukwila. Utility policies promote the development of efficient and adequate facilities for City residents and businesses. The major utility policy accomplishment of CIP improvements is the development of water storage capability in the City. 2.3.2 City of Tukwila Zoning Code Tukwila's present Zoning Code was adopted on April 20, 1983 by the City Council. No separate zoning classification exists specifically for public facilities (facilities such as underground utilities and roads are not affected by zoning district criteria). Public parks are permitted outright in most land use zones. Therefore, CIP park projects should not be affected by zoning restric- tions. The completion of Christensen Trail Phases III and IV is also compatible with Shoreline Zone Restrictions along the Green River . Other public facilities are generally permitted as conditional use permits are water reservoirs, transit facilities and water wells. Bridges crossing the Green River are permitted by the City's Shoreline Zone, but a Shoreline substantial development permit could :be.required. 2.3.3 Public Facility Master Plans Most public facility improvements are directed by individual master plans. 15 In recent years the City has undertaken new or revised Parks and Recreation Plan (1983); Water Utility Plan (1983); Sewer Utility Plan (1983); and Trans- portation Improvement Program (1979). Proposed CIP projects tend to closely correspond with the recommendations funding methods and priorities established by these plans. These documents also define the proposed relationship between Tukwila's improvements and adjacent water and sewer districts and municipal (Kent, Renton) utility departments. Tukwila's program includes consolidation of utility responsibilities within the City, water system interties for emergency backup services and facility design to accommodate service needs of these districts (portions of adjacent sewer districts discharge into Tukwila's system). Subsequent public infrastructure and community environment assessments incorp- orated the findings of these documents into this report. 2.3.4 Capital Improvement Programs Puget Sound Council of Governments: The Puget Sound Council of Governments PSCOG King Subregional Council has drafted a recommended policy plan for coordinating capital improvement programs of individual government jurisdictions in King County (PSCOG King Subregional Council, May 1983). The study emphasizes inter - jurisdictional cooperation on long -term debt service financing of capital facilities to avoid counter- productive impacts on the revenue available from lending institutions. The plan also recommends strategies for improving the approach of local government to capital needs planning and financing. These recommendations are included in Appendix C. As Tukwila's initial effort at capital needs planning, the proposed CIP incorporates few of PSCOG's recommendations for either CIP planning or interjurisdictional coordination. In Chapter V, Mitigations, however, PSCOG recommendations applicable to the CIP planning and finding needs in Tukwila are assessed. King County Capital Budget and Program: King County's 1983 to 1988 CIP outlines proposed improvements in- unincorporated communities west and north of Tukwila. Although the CIP is currently being revised, many of the projects in communities surrounding Tukwila are expected to be included in subsequent CIP's until their scheduled implementation. The following summarizes County capital projects that could directly or indirectly impact Tukwila communities or facilities: - Foster Park Athletic Field /$50,385 /funded; - Lower Green River Trail (between Auburn and Tukwila) /$49,920 /funded; - Green River Basin Program (resolving flooding problems) /$166,435/ funded; - East Marginal Way (traffic control) /$40,000 /funded; - Interurban Bridge No. 3160/$483,000/1984; - S. 176th Street (Military Road S. to Tukwila City limits) /$138,946/ funded; - S. 154th Street (SR -99 to Tukwila City limits) /$69,000/1987 (design); - S. 154th Street (SR -99 to 8th Avenue S.) /$584,300 /funded; - Foster Bridge No. 3158/$214,851/funded; - Allentown (S. 124th Street to 50th Place S. intersection) /$11250/ funded; - Duwamish Sewer 0.L.I.D. /$942,088 /funded; - South Central #12 (Southgate) /$115,040 /funded (funds to be transferred to Tukwila in 1983); - South Central #16 (Thorndyke) /$115,000 /funded (funds transferred Tukwila in 1982); - Fort Dent /$5,337 /final payment of L.I.D. assessment to Tukwila - Earlington (Duwamish River Trail Corridor) /$59,484 /funded; Several of these projects are joint efforts with the City of Tukwila, particular- ly parks and recreation facilities. In addition, the City and County are. coordinating the replacement of Foster Bridge, which is included in both CIP's and is presently financed. Both programs propose additional .improvements to the Green River trail system, promoting a uniform facility for public use. County road improvements along arterials that traverse Tukwila could affect the need for improvements in the City. Road and bridge improvements on East Marginal Way and road improvements on S. 154th Streets could encourage increased traffic use of these arterials. In Tukwila, these roads become the major arterials through the City: Interurban /SR -181 (north /south) and Southcenter Boulevard (east /west). Although Tukwila's proposed CIP includes improvements on these arterials, uncertain funding (the projects-are- dependent on shared revenues) and phasing could result in uncoordinated roadway improvements. City of Renton CIP 1983 to 1988: The Renton Six -Year CIP outlines proposed improvements to the T s TaTic infrastructure and, facilities through 1988. In general, the Renton's program has little direct relationship to ;Tukwila`.s proposed CIP with the exception of roadway improvements along Grady Way. The Renton Six -Year CIP includes the joint Grady Way bridge project which is funded in both City programs. The Renton program also includes roadway improvements to Grady Way between Lind and Longacres east of the bridge project. These improvements could enhance Grady Way's use as an alternative to I -405 for east /west traffic between Burien, Tukwila and Renton, particularly during rush -hour. Therefore, these improvements, as well as the County's S. 154th Avenue project could aggravate traffic problems'associated with.the. Southcenter Boulevard "bottleneck" in Tukwila. Of the improvements along the So. 154th Avenue /Southcenter Boulevard /Grady Way arterial system, Tukwila's project has the most uncertain funding source. The City of Kent does not presently have an adopted Capital Improvement Program providing a comprehensive outline of future public facilities that may be constructed. Kent's future plans for water and sewer utility improvements and their relationship to Tukwila's system improvements are assessed in the proposed water and sewer plans. L 0) w E 1c Q. 0 L s • 11 0) c W CHAPTER III Existing Environment 3.1 Municipal Finances 3.1.1 Introduction Within its corporate boundaries, the City of Tukwila is principally respon- sible for providing public services and facilities to local residents and businesses. Municipal services are closely related to the physical charac- teristics of the "built" environment, influencing its development in two ways. Local land use regulations and provision of streets and utility infrastructure are fundamental in determining the type, magnitude and direc- tion of new development. Also, the nature of services and facilities in existing communities may be important in maintaining viable, stable neighbor- hoods (ASPO July 1979). In Tukwila, both newly urbanizing areas and long - established neighborhoods are found, creating a potential demand for municipal capital investments from diverse community interests. Tukwila's ability to meet these needs will be determined by future trends in the local and non - local revenue sources supporting municipal finances. 3.1.2 Budget Overview The Tukwila municipal budget has demonstrated considerable variation in recent years. In 1983, the City projected revenue /expenditures of $13.4 million, down from the preceding year's budget (15.5 million) but over 300% more than in 1975. Substantial budget differences in consecutive years are largely attributable to anticipated intergovernment revenue (shared revenue) for capital projects and unspent grants carried over into the next year. Anticipated Federal funds for arterial construction in 1982, and carry -over funds for capital projects in 1978, explain the budget revenue source discrepancies of these years (Figure 3.1). Other major revenue sources have remained relatively constant during this time. Taxes, on the average, have been the largest individual revenue source, ranging from 30% to 40% of all estimated revenue. Revenue sources for individual funds in the City budget also vary from one another. In 1983, the budget had approximately 20 individual funds, most established to finance a particular service or facility (Figure 3.2). These funds can be grouped into five types: - Current Fund: The largest of the budget funds (35 %) used to finance general government services. It contains the greatest number of revenue sources, although tax revenue comprises 70% of the total. City government has considerable discretion in allocating revenue. - Intergovernmental Revenue: Funds largely financed by revenues from State and Federal agencies, although substantial local tax revenue is included for matching funds. These funds are used to finance capital projects and fluctuate greatly from year to year (demonstrated by the proportion of the budget allocated to the City Street and Arterial funds; see also Appended Table A.1). - Debt Service Funds: These funds are used to repay the City's General Obligation (G.0.) bonds which are sold to finance major capital projects. Two types of debt service funds exist, both financed by local revenues. Limited bonds are established at City Council discretion and are financed by general government revenues. This — 801— 20— llfl lIntrafund Transfers Miscellaneous I Reserve Service, Fee Charges Intergovernmental Revenue • - - \Tax' Revenue - - ■11■■•■■ .19831; 1982 1981 1980 L197 9_ I 1978 I 1977 11976 • Sources: City of Tukwila, Annual Budgets 1976 thru 1983. • - - - 20 Figure 3.1 CITY OF TUKWILA Major Revenue Sources for Municipal Finances 1976 to 1983 Percent of Fund - 4r .4-7 0 43) a) a. co 0:1 To' 0 1- - 801— 601— .461- 261- 0, 25- 591 — -151 — 1001— 0 0 CC -0 0 03 • .0 Ca 0 0 Li ! i EJ Miscellaneous 1 or Reserves' E. ;01 -o i e! o• .5- 0I 1-= ID 1'4 11 Contingency* 1111111 ,'Service Charges,.! Fines, Fees Intergovernmental' •,Taxes 'lOccasionally receives tas revenue allocations./ !Source: City of Tukwila, 1983 Final Budget. IRevenue Funds Trends,' All Bonds' 'Utilities Street and !Arterial [Current ; --- • - - Figure 3.2 CITY OF TUKWILA 1983 Budget - Major Revenue Sources of Funds revenue is effectively precluded from other funds (usually Current Fund) until the bonds are retired. Unlimited bonds require voter' approval, but are financed by special (excess) levy property tax revenue and do not affect existing revenues for other funds. - Miscellaneous Funds: Funds either required by State law or estab- lished by the City to finance special programs (e.g. Fireman's Pension Fund). Although these funds occasionally receive general tax revenue or shared revenue, they are largely supported by reserves (revenue carry - overs) and interest income and comprise a minor part of the City's budget. Recent fiscal management trends in Tukwila have demonstrated preferences for using local tax revenue and intergovernmental revenues to finance most capital projects. The following section assesses these revenues in greater detail and capital improvement financing in general. 3.1.3 Capital Project Financing Current Fund: The Current Fund supports the daily operation of municipal services in the City of Tukwila. As the largest fund in the City's Budget, allocated revenues have risen 160% since 1975, from $1.76 million to $4.6 million (Figure 3.3 and Appended Table A.3). In constant dollars (dollars adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index for the Seattle - Everett SMSA), allocated revenues have increased 35% since 1975, represent- ing an increase in real terms. Municipal expenditures for each of the major public services financed by the Fund have generally remained constant relative to each other, thereby increasing at a level commensurate with revenues (Figure 3.3). The exceptions are Public Works and maintenance and miscellaneous expenditures, which have increased from 10% to 23% of total fund expenditures. These services are responsible for the upkeep of City buildings, parks and other non - utility or street capital facilities. Funding Tukwila's Current Fund has demonstrated a susceptability to economic conditions that can affect future capacity. The real growth during the period 1975 to 1983 occurred mostly during two years, 1975 and 1983. The period from 1976 to 1982 was characterized by more moderate growth (8 %), including two years marked by a decline in budgeted real revenue. Actual revenue and expenditure trends are less optimistic (Appended Table A.4). Between 1978 and 1982, revenue in constant dollars declined 8 %, despite a weak recovery (.8 %) from 1981 to 1982. During this same period, expend- itures increased in real terms by 7 %. Although revenues continued to exceed expenses throughout the period (largely because of a substantial revenue surplus produced by rapid economic growth prior to 1978) the annual ratio of revenue to expenses continues: to decline. This tendency could affect the City's ability to finance future capital projects, either directly or indirectly, using Current Fund revenues without impacting other municipal services (see Tax Base discussion below).. Capital project financing has been a minor component of Current Fund expend- itures with the exception of recreational facilities. From 1978 through 1982, Recreation expenditures included a capital projects program that reached approximately 50% of budgeted expenditures at its peak in 1980. This program included trail development along the Green /Duwamish River (Christensen Trail), and community center and library rehabilitation (Southgate C.C., Old City Hall). The program was financed through Federal Community Development Block Grant revenues (Tukwila, Annual Budgets, 1979- 22 5.0, 3.0;— -= N CO Millions of Dollars • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • r__••••. ••••• lower: / • —• Current Fund (Real Dollars) Taxes (Real Dollars) Current Fund (Actual Dollars)' — Taxes (Actual Dollars) I 1 1 1 I __I_ _ I 1 1 1 19751 1980 Year Current Fund Revenue' Actual and Constant (1982) Dollars\ 1985! Source: City of Tukwila, Annual Budgets 1975 thru 1982. !General Governmental _Current Fund_Expenditures__ by Major Type (1982 Dollars) Figure 3.3 CITY OF TUKWILA Current Fund Finances 1982). Current Fund . finances, however, have also been affected by capital expenditures in other funds such as reallocating local tax revenue for grant matching funds. Intergovernmental Revenue Funds: In 1983, projected intergovernmental revenue funds (City, Street, Arterial, Land Acquisition, Building and Devel- opment, etc.) comprised 30% of the total City Budget. These funds have not established stable revenue trend patterns, fluctuating from year to year in anticipation of available intergovernmental shared revenue (Appended Table A..5). The amount of actual revenue and expenditures is usually substantially less than budgeted funds, as demonstrated by the City Street Fund (Figure 3.4 Appended Table A.6). While actual operating expenditures are usually close to projected expenditures (as shown by the Street Maintenance and Mainte- nance Administration Funds) because of the greater proportion of locally - derived revenues, construction funds seldom reach planned levels. There are several reasons for this characteristic: budgeted funds show a project's total remaining costs although it may be a multi -year effort; anticipated revenue - sharing grants are delayed or not - approved; or local: matching funds are not available. For example, in 1980 and 1981, no Federal Revenue sharing funds were obtained for City street expenditures and only 3% of budgeted Federal monies were granted in 1982 (Tukwila Annual Reports 1980 - 1982). Locally - derived tax revenue, including both property taxes and sales taxes, comprised 50% or more of actual City Street fund expenditures in three of five years from 1978 to 1982. Despite the inconsistent availability of intergovernmental revenue, several major capital projects have been financed by these funds since 1978. For the most part, grants have supported road and recreational facility improve- ments (Appended Table A.7). Recreational facility grants, mostly provided through the Federal CDBG program, were the more numerous type of grant. Block Grant revenue for neighborhood maintenance (utility undergrounding and Interurban Avenue Studies) were also common. CDBG monies were usually spent incremental and extend over a period of several years. In addition, special intergovernmental revenue funds, such as one City Hall Construction Fund and Park Trust Fund (King County Forward Thrust Bond grants) have been used for major projects. These funds have expired as their limited financ- ing purpose has been accomplished. Debt Service: Funding major capital projects through general obligation bond sales is a relatively recent occurance in Tukwila. Most excess and regular property tax levies for G.O. purposes have occurred from 1978 or after (see Tax Base discussion below). In 1983, 7% of the regular property tax levy and 14% of all tax revenue were allocated to G.O. bond retirement financing. Tukwila's budget includes four debt service funds, only two of which receive property tax revenue: the City Hall Limited G.O. 1977 and the Golf Course Unlimited G.O. 1978. The latter was used towards the acquisition and improvement of the Foster Golf Links while the City Hall bond provided local matching funds for intergovernmental construction grants. Although Tukwila's use of debt service financing for capital projects has increased in recent years, the City retains most of its debt capacity (as mandated by State Law). This capacity is summarized in Appended Table A.8. Tax Base: Local tax revenue in Tukwila is the most important source of funding for most government operations and facilities. The current Fund co 0 - ;ro c 0 ! 1 . 0 1 — C 1 1 . 7 5 1 — . 5 0 1 — 1 . 2 5 1 — Al iRi CII5.23 Mil; Net MI CII Icll 1 CI IR ;19831 i 1982 (50 %); R Residential Streets /Underground j CI Commercial /Industrial Streets M Maintenance A General Administration /Debt Service 0981 1 1980 1(62 %), j (38%) 1 1979 1(40%) (50 %) Percent of actual expenditures for local revenue; !Source: City of Tukwila, Final Budgets 1978 thru 1983; Annual Reports 1978 thru 1982. ICl i 11978 (54 %) Figure 3.4 CITY OF TUKWILA City Street Fund - Projected and Actual Expenditures 1978 to 1983 is most dependent on this source, but locally derived tax revenue also tends to be the most stable revenue source for capital project funds. The fiscal structure of the City is such that local tax revenue can be allocated to several different budgetary funds at the discretion of the City government. Tukwila's tax base is less varied than most King County municipalities. Tukwila does not levy either utility taxes (as do most other communities, including neighboring Renton, Kent and Auburn) or a general business and occupation tax. Sales and use and property taxes remain the City's primary local revenue sources. The narrower tax base is balanced by the tax revenue generated by Tukwila's larger commercial /industrial business community. Tukwila's per capita assessed land value ($250,000) is 32 to 6 times greater than other King County cities and per capita sales tax revenue is 6 to 14 times higher. Despite the substantial non - residential tax base, Tukwila's local revenue sources have been affected by the current national recession. When adjusted for inflation, both property tax and sales tax revenue have experienced downward trends (Figure 3.5; Appended Table A -9). Property tax revenue has been less affected by the recession than sales taxes. After a temporary decline (in constant dollar terms) between 1978 and 1980, property tax revenue has steadily increased. The 106% tax lid imposed by State Law is largely responsible for this variance. In restricting the • annual increase of most property tax revenue to 106 %, the law limited this tax revenue to a moderate level of increase during the boom period of the late 1970's. High inflation rates between 1978 and 1980 (10 to 17 %) far surpassed the growth rate of property tax revenue, contributing to a net decline (at 4.4% annually) in real terms (Figure 3.6). As inflation decreased in the 1980's, property tax revenue resumed growth in real terms bolstered by a spurt of new building valuation coming onto the tax rolls. Sales tax revenue had not recovered from the effects of the recession by the end of 1982. After a period of rapid growth in the late 1970's, when the average annual increase was about 10 %, (compared to 2% property tax revenue during this time), sales tax revenue has declined steadily in real terms. From 1978 to 1982, the average annual real value loss was over five percent. By 1982, the real value of sales tax revenue was at its 1975 level. The susceptability of sales tax revenue to economic downturn is the primary cause of the decrease. Between 1979 and 1982, personal income levels spent on taxable goods and services declined from 70% to 58% statewide (City of Seattle, 1982). The sales tax revenue increase anticipated for 1983 is due to the imposition of a .2% City sales tax rate increase as permitted by State Law (cities may now charge up to one percent, instead of one -half percent). Without the increase, no substantial change in sales tax revenue trends would occur. Local tax revenue in the period 1975 to 1982 has also been increasingly used for financing capital project funds outside the Current Fund. Much of this revenue has been reallocated to the G.O. bond and City Street funds. From 1980 on, property tax revenue has been the chief source of local revenue for capital project financing. In addition, the 1983 sales tax increase has been allocated to the City Street and Arterial. funds. The reallocation of tax revenue from the Current Fund to capital project: funds has slowed, but not stopped, the former's growth in real terms (refer to Figure 3.3). 26 N V CO J �Q J To CC 2.01 3.01— 2.5 2.0!— 1.0!- 0.5!— Property Taxes j Regular Levy Only - Constant Dollars ; Total Property Taxes - Actual Dollars :1975f1 1976*!, 1977*!: 1978 *1 1979 1 Year !-19801I 1981 * *I 1982 * Regular property tax revenue $10,000 also put into Fireman's Pension Fund ! ** $19,000 for Fire Equipment Reserve Fund t $41,000 forlContingency Fund: 1 Source: City of Tukwila; Final Budgets 1975 thru 1983; Annual Reports 1978 thru 1982; Building, Valuation and Revenue Data Sheet. 1983 1 11975 Sales and Use Taxes Actual Collections - Constant Dollars 1Piojected and Actual Collections - !Actual Dollars. 11976 ] 1977; 1978 11979 11980 1 1981 1982 1983. Year • !Current Fund I ▪ City Street Fund; o(Arterial Fund 1111111 !Miscellaneous Fund Debt Service ;Excess Regular Figure 3.5 CITY OF TUKWILA Tax Revenue Trends 1975 to 1983 b a 2.0' 1.0: 0.0! MO • 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1974, 1975 1976 11977 1978 11979 /1980 1981 1 1982 1 1983 Inflation Rate • Regular Levy Property Tax Revenue Total Property Tax Revenue —••—• Levy Rate Ift111111111 Assessed Valuation Estimated Property Tax at 106% Source: City of Tukwila; Annual Budgets 1975 to 1983. Notes: a. Assessed valuation in billions of dollars. b. Tax revenue in millions of dollars. c. Levy rate in dollars. c 4.0 -3.0 -12.0 -11.0 1Figure 3.6 CITY OF TUKWILA Property Tax Revenue Trends 11975 to 1983 Other Capital Funding: Various non- budgeting methods are available to the City to finance capital projects. Local Improvement Districts (LID'S) have been a common approach to financing facilities of benefit to a localized area within the City. LID's assess benefitting properties directly to retire bonds sold to pay for facilities and are not a direct municipal liability. At the end of 1982, the City had 11 active LID's financing a total bond issue of $2.3 million (Tukwila 1982 Annual Report). Existing LID's encompass primarily non - residential and multi - family districts, although two LID's are financing sewers for single - family districts (Figure 3.7). A recent change in LID formation has been towards multi - facility financing, where street and utility facilities are financed together (see Appended Table A -10). Revenue bonds can also be sold to finance capital projects in enterprise funds such as Sewer and Water Utilities. Revenue bonds are not a liabil- ity of the City, but are backed by the long -term service fees and charges of the utility. The City had five active revenue bonds at the end of 1982. 3.2 Community Environment 3.2.1 Introduction Municipal expenditures for general government services and capital facil- ities and the methods used to finance them influences the quality of neighborhood environments. Government, land use regulations, investment in physical facilities, such as sidewalks, streets, public buildings and parks, and level of other services including police, fire and recreation affects resident's perception of their neighborhood as a place to live. These attitudes subsequently influence individual efforts to maintain their community as a stable and viable neighborhood. This section assesses recent and current programs and services provided by Tukwila and their effect on its neighborhoods. 3.2.2 Land Use Tukwila's accessibility to the remainder of the Seattle metropolitan area is the predominant influence on the types of land uses found in the City. Tukwila is located around the interchange of two major freeways serving the region, enhancing its attractiveness to regionally- oriented intensive land uses. Beginning in the early :.1960'�s. with completion of the freeway system, distributive wholesale, light manufacturing, retail and more recently, professional offices, have located in the City. At present, wholesale, retail and commercial services occupy one -third of the City's area and 80% of all building space. In addition, another 24% of Tukwila is used by transportation facilities (highways, streets and freeways), and 28% is undeveloped, with half of that vacant buildable parcels. These three major land uses also accounted for 86% of the acreage developed between 1978 and 1982. Wholesale and commercial services were responsible for 87% of all new building space (City of Tukwila, 1978 and 1980 Land Use Surveys). Commercial services, including midrise office buildings, are presently the most rapidly growing use in the City. At the community level, there exists substantial land use variation within the City. The Tukwila Zoning Map (Figure 3.8) provides a generalized concept of existing and potential land use patterns within City subareas (actual land use patterns are more complex because of scattered vacant sites, non - conforming uses and multiple uses permitted in most zones). 29 Figure 3.7 n CITY OF TUKWILA Active Local Improvement Districts COMMUNITY PLANNING AREAS 1 Duwamish 2 Fostoria 3 Interurban 4 Tukwila Hill 5 McMicken 6 Andover 7 Burlington 8 Southcenter 9 Parkway West 10 South Hill Single Family Multiple Family Multiple Family Commercial Industrial/Wholesale Agriculture/ Open Space Office 2-4 du/Acre Higher Density Figure 3.8 CITY OF TUKWILA Land Use and Planning Area The river valley lowland south of I- 405,and east of I -5 (Southcenter, Andover and Burlington planning areas) is the major concentration of non- residential land uses. Warehousing, dependent on nearby railroads and freeway accessibility, is the major land use in the area. Retail commer- cial, including a regional shopping mall, have occupied the most accessible parcels near freeway access ramps and along major arterials. Retail, industrial and warehousing are also found along the Interurban Avenue corridor (Interurban, Duwamish and Fostoria planning areas). Residential uses predominate in upland areas (Tukwila Hill and McMicken) where topography and transportation corridors physically seperate these communit- ies from non - residential uses. Current land use trends in Tukwila subareas are interrelated with commun- ity investment needs. In the Andover Industrial Park area south of I -405, the predominant land use trend has been the conversion of agricultural and vacant buildable land to urban non - residential uses. Therefore, capital investment needs have centered on providing the public infrastructure necessary for this development to occur (water, sewer, streets and storm drainage). As the supply of vacant buildable land decreased and becomes more valuable, however, the trend has been towards higher intensity uses (e.g. commercial services, offices) on remaining vacant parcels. These uses often place greater demand on public facilities that light manufact- uring and warehousing uses because of higher employee to floor area ratios and traffic - generating potential. Therefore, public facilities may need upgrading or expansion to maintain adequate level -of- services at higher demand levels. The community north of I -405 is largely comprised of the original Tukwila townsite when it incorporated in 1908. Up until its expansion into the Green River Valley (beginning in the late 1950's) and the freeway construc- tion and subsequent commercial /industrial development, Tukwila has remained confined to the Interurban corridor, the City's link to Seattle and Tacoma, first by rail and later by State highway. Much of the original community has remained intact, particularly the old single - family community on Tukwila Hill. Regional accessibility afforded by the completion of the freeway system, however, has spurred construction of higher density uses in this community as well as diminish the commercial role of Interurban Avenue businesses. The intensifying land development in Tukwila Hill introduces two capital investment. needs. First, higher density uses require upgrading existing facilities to accommodate higher service demand levels. In this respect, capital investment needs are similar to those arising in the south indust- rial area. Encroaching multi - family residential and non - residential land uses, however, also affect the stability of the older single - family resi- dential community. The City has attempted to provide some regulatory protection for this community through rezoning to better manage intens- ified development (Tukwila, October 1980). Public facility investment has also been used in the McMicken community west of I -5. The diminished commercial role of the Interurban corridor also raises capital investment needs. Sporadic development over the past 15 -20 years has produced a diverse, but scattered land use pattern including commercial strip retail businesses and services, light manufacturing, professional offices, recreation and some single - family structures (Tukwila, October 1980). In response to community concerns, the City has initiated a program to upgrade the corridor. To date, a grant has been used to fund a study outlining a development plan and facility needs for implementation and the City has assumed ownership of the arterial from the State. Major capital improvements proposed by the recent Interurban Geometrics Design Study include an expanded roadway, undergrounding utilities, signalization, landscaping, sidewalk, and bikeway improvements. 3.2.3 Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance. The present residential character of the City of Tukwila was established in the second half of the 1960's. The completion of the regional freeway system through the City encouraged a rapid rise in multi - family housing construction on Tukwila Hill, just as it had done for commercial /industrial development in the surrounding lowlands. By 1970, Tukwila's residential community had been transformed from primarily semi - rural, single - family housing to a predominantly higher density, multi - family residential neigh- borhood (Tukwila, August 1975). In 1980, housing conditions had not substantially changed in character from ten years earlier. Despite an absence of apartment construction from 1970 through 1974, multi - family dwellings continue to be largely responsible for most new housing in the City, having increased their share to almost three - fourths of the housing stock (see Appended Table A.11). Unlike the 1960's, however, new multi- family housing construction in the past decade included several condominium, developments, in addition to rental apartment dwellings. Tukwila's single - family residential community has mostly remained intact despite the recent emphasis on multi - family housing construction. Multi- family housing development has located around the periphery of the Tukwila Hill residential community, retaining the single - family housing core. The City's single - family housing stock tends to be much older than multi- family housing. While 99% of all multi - family housing in the City was built after 1960, 80% of the single - family dwellings were built before this time (Tukwila, June 1982; US Bureau of the Census, 1972). An estimated one -third of the single - family dwellings in Tukwila were built before 1940, most of these being concentrated in the Tukwila Hill community. Single - family housing in the McMicken area is not as old as in Tukwila Hill, but still mostly predates 1960. The age of the City's housing stock is significant because of its impact on the public and private invest- ment needed to deter housing deterioration and to maintain healthy, stable neighborhoods. The City's aging single - family residential communities have been a major focus of public capital investment in recent years. The role of public investment in these neighborhoods is important for its effect on local residents' perception of their community and subsequent decisions to main- tain or upgrade their own property (ASPO, July 1977;Mercer, John; and Philips, Deborah, 1981). In Tukwila, the relationship between private redevelopment and neighborhood environment is demonstrated by residential construction trends for the last 20 years (Figure 3.9). Applications for building permits for additions or modifications to single - family units is one measure of private rehabilitation (it should be noted; however, that many improvements may be made outside of official channels because of concerns of increased property taxes; non - conforming improvements, and so on). These applications dropped dramatically during the "Boeing" boom period of the late '60's when apartment construction peaked. As new multi- 33 =mow Single Family Rehabilitations New Single Family New Multiple Family/ '*Three year moving average' '■ Source: Tukwila Planning Department Files.! Figure 3.9 CITY OF TUKWILA Residential Construction Trends* family construction became non - existant in the early 1970's, when the regional economy faltered with the "Boeing- bust ", private reinvestment in the older single - family structures returned to the level of the early 1960's. This level has been maintained throughout the later 1970's and into the 1980's despite a. partial recovery of multi - family housing con- struction. Aggressive neighborhood capital improvement projects initiated by the City in the early 1970's may explain, in part, the continued level of activity in community rehabilitation. These types of programs had not existed during the 1960's to allay local residents' perceived threat to the neighborhood "quality -of- life" from encroaching higher density residential development. As a means of insuring the stability of its older neighborhoods, the City's capital projects in recent years have been directed towards alleviating community concerns raised by local residents. Single - family housing residents were most concerned with the physical appearance of their commun- ity and encroaching apartments (see Appended Table A.11). These problems were partially resolved through regulatory changes (e.g. a new Zoning Code). Public investment in the older residential neighborhoods concentrated on utility undergrounding, sidewalks and bikeway improvements and street repair - projects have been funded primarily with local tax revenue in the Residential Street Fund (see Section 3.1.3 above). Building improvement permits issued from 1975 to 1978 show a strong correlation between public and private rehabilitation efforts in the Tukwila Hill neigh- borhood (Figure 3.10). Funding of new recreational facilities; including a community center and foot trails development, has also been undertaken to promote greater neighborhood interest and vitality. 3.2.4 Public Services Public Safety: The City of Tukwila maintains its own police and fire departments. Police headquarters are located in City Hall and .total 33 personnel: 26 commissioned officers and seven civilian employees. The City also has two fire stations, one located in the predominantly residential Tukwila Hill community and the other in the Andover commercial /industrial area.(Figure 3.11). There are presently 29 full -time Fire Department personnel, 25 in the fire suppression division. All three facilities housing public safety operations are comparatively new and adequate for present and anticipated needs (Tukwila, October 1980). Public safety personnel and expenditure characteristics between 1975 and 1978 have not changed at a rate comparable to new housing and business growth. With the exception of manpower added to the Police Staff for state - mandated programs (e.g. Gambling division, added in 1977; Crime Prevention division, added in 1979), the number of personnel in 1983 has essentially remained the same as in 1975 (29 and 28, respectively). The staff traffic Division of the Police Department has been increased by one patrolman to handle increased traffic - related calls for assistance. Likewise the number of fire personnel has not significantly changed throughout this period (also 29 and 28 for 1983 and 1975), despite increasingly emergency responce calls. The overall real increase of expenditures for police (21 %) and fire (6 %) services, therefore, has lagged behind that of other City services financed through the Current Fund. City public safety agencies do not have specific information of the pro- '35 Utiltiy Undergrounding • Single Family Demolitions * Single Family Dwelling Rehabilitations • New Single Family Dwellings 1Single family building permits for dwelling modifications , 1976 - 1978 Figure 3.10 CITY OF TUKWILA Six Year Undergrounding Program (1976 - 1981) and Neighborhood Revitalization 1 • City Hall CC Community Center P Police F Fire PK Park (City) •••• Trail PKO Park (Other) * Community Club E Elementary School J Junior /Middle School S Senior High School L Longacres SOUTH CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Tukwila Corporate Limits School district Boundaries HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT j__ N...... RENTON u SCHOOL: DISTRICT di Figure 3.11 CITY OF TUKWILA Public Facilities portion of their services that are attributable to the City's business community. Police crime statistics do reveal certain differences between the type and magnitude of offenses in Tukwila compared to cities with comparable population (Appended Table A.13). Crime activity differences are particularly noted in categories where commercial businesses are most likely affected, (e.g. larceny, robbery, and burglary). Shoplifting alone is responsible for over half of all thefts in Tukwila, compared to 3% statewide (WASPC, 1983). Although Tukwila's police force has not expanded at a rate comparable to housing and businesses in the City, it does not appear to have affected the effectiveness of the force relative to similar- sized cities in King County. The rate of offense clearance (arrest) is similar between these communities if shoplifting responses are excluded (these calls usually occur after a suspect has been apprehended while performing the offense, hence the high rate of clearance).. Schools: The City of Tukwila lies within three public school districts: South Central No. 206, Highline No. 401 and Renton No. 403. The majority of the City's school age population (80 %) attend schools in the South Central District which encompasses the Tukwila Hill community (see Appended Table A.14). Tukwila students comprise approximately one - fourth of the districts 1455 students (1982 -83 school years enrollment), the remainder coming from the communities of Allentown,, Duwami sh , Riverton, and Riverton Heights. The district operates four schools: Foster High School, Showalter Middle School and Tukwila and Thorndyke Elementary Schools. Tukwila Elementary is the only public school- facility within the City limits. Tukwila students attending Highline District's schools live in the McMicken Heights neighborhood south of S. 160th Street and west of 53rd Avenue South. City students have little impact on total enrollments and education service needs of either neighborhood schools or the district as a whole. The Renton School District includes most of the Andover commercial /industrial area south of Strander Boulevard and is more affected by the City's non - residential property tax base than by its school age population (at most, eight students). The South Central and Highline School Districts have experienced declining enrollments throughout the past decade. Between the 1977 -78 and'1982 -83. school years alone, the South Central District's enrollment dropped 20% from 1821 students to 1455 students. The Highline District has declined from a peak student enrollment of 31,000 to 1969 to 16,010 students today, almost a 50% drop. Both districts have responded to decreasing enrollments by closing schools. The South Central District has closed two elementary schools: Southgate (now the Tukwila Community Center) and Cascade View. Since 1979, Highline School District has closed one highschool, one junior high and three elementary schools. Parks and Recreation: Park and recreation facilities in Tukwila are provided through the City's Parks and Recreation Department. The depart- ment manages approximately 106 acres of land for park, recreation facil- ities (golf course, athletic fields, community center, trails) and open space (refer to Appended Table A.15). One regional county park, Fort Dent Park, is within the City limits. The City has given priority to expanding and improving recreational opportunities and facilities in City neighborhoods. Two of the three major social groups in the City (apartment residents, businesses) tended 38 to rank lack of recreational facilities and access to the Green River toward the top of community problems (see. Appended Table A.12). The City has responded by directing intergovernmental revenues such as Federal CDBG funds to recreational facilities (Tukwila, September 1980). Capital expenditures for recreation facilities are distributed over several funds, including the Parks and Recreation Department budget within the Current Fund, the Golf Course Special Revenue Fund, the Land Acquisition, Building and Development Fund and other special funds. Major capital projects during the 1975 to 1983 period include the acquisition and improvement of the Foster Golf Links (through G.O. bonds and service charges); the acquisition and repair of Southgate Elementary School as the new Tukwila Community Center; development of the Christensen Greenbelt Park and Trail along the Green River, repairs and improvements to other parks and play - fields and construction of foot trails in residential neighborhoods. The acquisition and development of these new facilities has had its impact on operating expenses for the Parks Department. The department budget increased 200% (in constant dollars) between 1975 and 1983, as compared to 35% for the overall Current Fund. Personnel costs for recreational services increased 25 %, also in real terms. The City presently offers programs for all age groups, including team sports for youths and adults, sports camps, social dancing, and special crafts and social activities for seniors. Most of these programs are offered at the Tukwila Community Center, and are partially or . fully- supported by user fees. Maintenance: Tukwila finances three major maintenance services other than those provided by the Water and Sewer utilities. The Public Works Department (Current Fund) operates maintenance services for both City parks and public buildings, including City Hall and the community center. Public Works also provides street maintenance services' financed through the, City Street Fund. Street maintenance responsibilities include snow and ice removal, signalization repair, storm drainage, road patching and overlays. The addition of new building and park and recreation facilities has had variable effect on most municipal maintenance expenditures. Park Main- tenance personnel was increased from three to four in 1976 and has remained at that level since (Tukwila, Annual Budgets, 1975 to 1983). The City has increased building maintenance expenditures from $38,000 in 1975 to $144,000 in 1983, representing a doubling of costs in real terms in eight years. The acquisition of the Tukwila Community Center and the construc- tion of a new City Hall are the reasons for the increased operating costs. In the late 1970's, City expenditures for street repair and maintenance reversed a downward trend and increased in real terms. A 1980 Public Works study had determined that roadways in the City, particularly heavily travelled routes around Southcenter and the Andover Industrial area, were deteriorating at an accelerating rate (Tukwila DPW, July 1980). Public Works recommended both short -term and long -term strategies to arrest these conditions and priortized the commercial and residential streets needing immediate attention (Figure 3.2). Estimated costs to bring these streets up to standards (in 1982 dollars) was $.94 million for arterials; $.2 million for commercial /industrial streets and $1.9 million for residential streets. Historical and Cultural Services and Facilities: Tukwila's historical 39 So. 133rd t. (60 u So. 134th St. v 52nd Ave. S. (95) 53rd Ave. S. Interurban Ave..(114) So. 144th St. (66) Interurban Ave. (96) •, 11 57th Ave. S. (66) S.W. Grady Way (97) So. 15441 St. (71) 53rd Ave. S. Nelsen PI. (61) Andover Park East (76) Andover Park West (71) Andover Park East (67) 57th Ave. S. (82) Figure 3.12 CITY OF TUKWILA Priority Streets - Maintenance resources are managed by both public and private groups. The majority of the City's.historical resources are located in the narrow.Duwamish Valley along the Interurban Avenue Cooridor (Appended Figure A.1). River valleys have historically provided natural routes for travel and attractive sites for settlement. Therefore, the valley contains numerous sites of Native America use and early European settlement: Fort Dent, the Interurban rail- road right -of -way, and the first civic facilities for Tukwila adjacent to the former railroad. Sites such as the old Tukwila Grade School (former City Hall, now the library), Tukwila Park, and Fort Dent are in public own- ership, although not necessarily with the City of Tukwila. Other sites have either been destroyed (a covered bridge across the railroad) or remain in private ownership. Cultural services and historical preservation efforts in Tukwila are principally financed using recreational funds (e.g. Tukwila Park, Foster: Golf Links sites). The Tukwila Grade School is presently part of the King County library system, to which the City contributed $53,700 in 1983 (Tukwila 1983 Annual Budget). Social and Health Services: Most public social and health services avail- able to Tukwila residents are operated and financed by other governmental agencies. Social Security, public assistance programs and public health care are provided by Federal, State and County agencies. The City provides limited financial support for some County health programs (e.g. Seattle King County Public Health, Alcoholism), but generally does not engage in providing direct social and health services to its residents. Recreation programs for senior citizens and youth that are funded and operated by the City;do' serve social, as well as recreational, purposes. The City recently examined the feasibility of expanding youth support programs to, deter increasing social and criminal youth related problems (Robbins; January 1983). 3.3 Public Infrastructure 3.3.1 Introduction The major part of public investment in capital projects is for street and utility infrastructures. These facilities are essential for most new devel- opment in Tukwila: either development of vacant land or intensive redevel- opment of existing uses. The absence or capacity limitations of these facil- ities can impose constraints or preclude new or intensified development. Likewise, new development more directly affects the level -of- service oper- ations of these facilities rather than most other public services. 3.3.2 Transportation Street Systems: The street and highway system serving Tukwila has three principal components. Four limited access freeways converge within City limits: I -5, I -405, SR -518, and SR -599. These routes link Tukwila with most communities in the Seattle metropolitan region and all major cities in the Puget Sound lowlands. A surface major and secondary arterial network provides accessibility between Tukwila and nearby communities (Figure 3.13). Only three arterials provide continuous traffic movement through the City; SR -181 (north /south); and Southcenter Boulevard /S.. 154th. Street and S. 180th Street /S.. 178th. Street (east /west). A system of local streets and collector arterials serves the access needs of City business and residen- tial communities. Circulation: Much of the local and regional vehicular traffic in Tukwila 41 * Interchanges low sm. Collector Arterials Secondary Arterials Major Arterials Freeway Right-of-Ways Figure 3.13 CITY OF TUKWILA Street and Highway System is carried by a limited number of arterials. The physical barriers to traffic circulation created by topographic and water features is partly responsible for this condition. The freeway system, however, plays a far greater role in restricting traffic movement within the City. The City is partitioned into sectors by the freeways. Only a few arterials provide access for local traffic either over or under the freeway rights -of -way. Regional traffic entering or leaving Tukwila's street network via the freeway system is also restricted to three or four arterials with free- way interchanges. The four heaviest travelled streets in Tukwila: Southcenter Boulevard, SR -181, Southcenter Parkway and Strander Boulevard are generally routes carrying local traffic through the City as well as regional traffic to and from the freeway system (Tukwila, DPW; October 1979). The absence of freeway interchanges with the local street net- work south of Strander Boulevard leaves much of the commercial /industrial district (and most developable vacant land) without direct freeway access. This encourages excessive use of the surface street network (particularly SR -181) subsequently producing congestion problems at several intersections. Heavy traffic volumes on a limited number of arterials is accompanied by related circulation problems. These are summarized as follows (refer to the 1979 Transportation Improvement Plan for more detail):. a. Antiquated design. Several street segments and intersections are not designed for the volumes they carry. Intersections in many areas are without turning facilities or adequate signalization, promoting long delays and higher accident rates. b. Lack of alternative local transit. Noon -time traffic volumes on many streets south of I -405 exceed either morning or evening peak travel periods, largely due to internal travel by employees. Current facilities for alternative travel modes (e.g. sidewalks, bikeways) or transit services are either absent or inadequate. c. Widely spaced road system. In the Andover industrial area, the "superblock" road system encourages congestion, increases traffic hazards and promotes inefficient travel conditions by limiting the access opportunities to individual businesses. d. Freeway interchanges. Traffic to and from the freeway system to the local street network is inefficient, particularly for Southcenter traffic. Travellers are faced with excessive turning movements and signalization getting to and from Tukwila Parkway and the freeways. Alternative Travel Modes: The Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro) provides public transit services to Tukwila. In all, 15 bus routes pass through Tukwila, with six providing direct service to Southcenter (Figure 3.14). These routes provide commuter and full service between Tukwila and downtown Seattle, Green River Valley communities (south to Auburn); Eastside communities (north to Bothell) and Sea -Tac Airport and Burien. Major transit service to the Andover industrial area is available on a couple of routes via Andover Park West, Southcenter and S, 180th Street. Bikeways and sidewalks in Tukwila are generally inadequate for encouraging 43 159 \157146_ 154 158'148 159.150 149 150 ss 154 158 241 59 240 340 241 340 240 280 145 146 148 149 157 Figure 3.14 CITY OF TUKWILA Metro Transit Routes major use. In the Tukwila Hill residential community, street upgrading and foot trail development has improved the internal systems for bicycles and pedestrian circulation. Linkage to the commercial /industrial area to the south, however, are weak. Arterials and commercial streets in the City lack bikelanes, and much of the industrial district is without sidewalks (Tukwila, DPW, October 1979). Widely spaced streets, lack of traffic signals and safety problems also discourage pedestrian travel in this area and contribute to heavy noon -time automobile travel. Tukwila is presently served by the two major railroads in the Pacific Northwest: Burlington Northern and Union Pacific. Approximately nine miles of local railroad lines are located in the industrial area south of I -405. These tracks are spur lines extending from the main railroad rights -of -way along the eastern city limits. 3.3.3 Utilities Water: Most of the City of Tukwila obtains its water from the municipal Public Works Department. City areas north of S. 56th Street are serviced by either Water District 25 or 125, and the area south of S. 180th Street is served by Water District 75. The City and the water districts purchase water' from the City of Seattle and are supplied from its Cedar River source. The Tukwila water system is inter -tied with Water District 75 and the Kent and Renton municipal systems to provide a backup water supply in the event of disrupted service, infrastructure failure or high fire flows. The City's water system is generally sufficient for present needs. Three system deficiencies do exist, however. At present, Tukwila has no water storage facilities. Although the Seattle water supply source provides adequate pressure and storage for City needs, Seattle water has adopted a demand surcharge system to discourage client districts from reliance on its facilities during peak period flows. Therefore, since Tukwila has no equalizing storage capacity to meet peak demand within the City, it incurs greater costs for, water supply. The other two problems, inadequate press - ures;at "higher elevations on Tukwila Hill and restricted water main capacity in several locations, result in deficient fire.flows and water supply to customers. Sewers: The Tukwila Public Works Department also provides sewer facilities for most of the City. An 80 acre area in the McMicken Heights neighborhood has facilities owned and operated by the Val Vue Sewer District. The Val Vue Sewer District system discharges into the City's system, which in turn discharges into METRO interceptors for transport to the Renton treatment plant. The City's sewer system has several problems. Restaurant grease entering the system fouls sewer lines and pump stations, requiring disproportionate efforts on the part of City maintenance crews to resolve (Horton Dennis & Assoc.; April 1982). Sewer line settlement has led to infiltration and inflow of surface and ground water, reducing system capacities. The system as a whole carries flows that are well under design capacity. Other sewer lines are undersized for present or anticipated needs. The City system also has a number of pump stations that are antiquated, require an abnormal amount of maintenance time and are expensive to operate (energy costs). Many of these stations could;be, replaced by gravity flow, sub- stantially reducing maintenance and operational costs (refer to Draft Comprehensive Sewer Plan, April 1982). 45 Storm Drainage: Storm drainage facilities in Tukwila include natural stream courses, channelized ditches, creeks and rivers and drainage pipes. Upland areas are generally served by roadside ditches that collect surface runoff and discharge it into natural streams (Tukwila, Planning Department, August 1975). The construction and maintenance of these roadside facilities is financed by the City Street fund. Natural stream courses are generally found along valley walls too steep for development and provide runoff from upland areas to the lowlands. In the lowlands, high land values have pro- moted the use of pipes and open channels to convey runoff to the Green/ Duwamish River. Runoff is primarily pumped from ponding areas along river dikes into the river channel since gravity flow is obstructed along much of the river. Localized flooding sometimes occurs in the lowland areas during severe storms when pipes, channels, or pumps are insufficient for discharging runoff. Other Utilities: Energy, communications and solid waste services and facilities are provided by agencies or companies other than the City. Electrical power is provided by Seattle City Light (public utility) in the northern part of the City. and Puget Sound Power and Light Company (private utility) in the south (Tukwila, Planning Department, February 1977). Natural gas services are available city wide from the Washington Natural Gas Company. Pacific Northwest Bell provides telephone services and Sea - Tac Disposal handles solid waste. These companies are responsible for providing and maintaining their facilities and are financed through their own revenues. In recent years, the City of Tukwila has financed the undergrounding of overhead utility wires in residential neighborhoods (refer to Section 3.2.2). 3.4 Physical Environment 3.4.1 Earth Resources There are three distinct physiographic features in the City of Tukwila: plateau uplands, valley walls and river floodplain lowlands. Within the present City limits, the most common feature is river floodplain lowlands. Although the broad Green River flood plain south of I -405 differs in appear- ance from the narrow Duwamish River Valley north of the freeway, the two share many common physical characteristics. Geologically, the floodplains are comparatively recent land features created by river deposition (alluvium) of silt and fine sand. Terrain is very flat, having a slight northward gradient. Lowland soils and geology do not provide good building'found- ation stability and tend to present the greatest hazard to buildings and facilities during seismic activity. The soft, wet soil generally require substantial modifications, including draining and filling with sand and gravel before urbanization. Tukwila Hill is the major upland plateau feature within the City's current limits. Upland areas are glacial till deposits from the most recent glacial period in the Puget Sound region. Terrain tends to be undulating, with sloped ranging from flat (0 -5 %) to steep (15 -25 %). Although slopes may impose localized development constraints due to landslide potential, the plateau uplands generally are well- suited for urbanization. The glacial till geology and overlaying soil mantle provide excellent seismic and foundation stability. Valley wall land features in Tukwila are found around the periphery of Tukwila Hill and in the McMicken Heights community. The glacial till 46 deposition that created the upland plateaus also helped form the valley wall feature. The latter, however, have been modified by other geologic processes. In places, stream erosion along hillsides has removed more recent glacial till deposits exposing older glacial and non - glacial geological structures. Localized deposits of glacial outwash materials can also be found. With slopes from steep to very steep (over 25 %), valley wall areas impose develop- ment constraints from potential slope failure. 3.4.2 Water Resources Natural surface water drainage in Tukwila has been modified in past years. All surface drainage in the City iS directed into the Green /Duwamish River. The drainage basin that use to discharge through the river had been sub- stantially reduced, the White River diversion in 1906 and the elimination of Black River flows after 1916. Therefore, the Green /Duwamish river no longer carries the volume of water it use to. In addition, channelization of the rivers and the construction of upstream dams on the Green River have further reduced the overbank flood hazard. potential. Numerous small streams and creeks drain eastward from the Tukwila Hill and McMicken Heights uplands toward the Green / Duwamish River. Many of these surface streams originate at springs along valley walls where groundwater is discharged into the surface streams during the drier months of the year. Manmade ditches along roads in urbanized portions of the uplands also contribute intermittent surface flow during storms. These ditches discharge into the spring -fed stream channels that have carved deep ravines into the valley wall. Upon entering the lowlands, this surface flow is directed into storm drainage pipes for eventual discharge into the rivers. Lowland runoff is carried by ditches and pipes to ponding areas along the river where it is collected and pumped over the dike into the river. Although most march areas in the lowlands have been modified by development, the Tukwila pond site south of Southcenter Mall retains its natural, poorly drained allevial soils. Therefore, the site remains a natural ponding area for lowland runoff. Groundwater resources in Tukwila are an important part of the local hydrol- ogic cycle. The infiltration of precipitation into the groundwater table moderates surface runoff during storm events, reducing flood potential. Groundwater eventually reaches surface streams through springs and helps maintain year round flows in many of the smaller streams. During summer months, groundwater may be the only source of water available for surface streams. The spring -fed stream system along the McMicken Heights uplands is the principal example of this cycle in Tukwila. A recent groundwater analysis for the City of Tukwila identified two important aquifers for potential development as municipal water supplies (Shannon & Wilson, December 1981). One aquifer underlies the McMicken Heights uplands and drains eastward and northward toward the Green River. Therefore, this aquifer probably contributes much of the spring discharge for surface streams in this area. The second aquifer consists of water- bearing sand in the alluvial deposits of the Green River. The direction of groundwater flow in this aquifer follows- the north to northwest direction of surface flow and probably discharges into the Green River. Preliminary water quality information for both aquifers is generally good to excellent, although iron and manganese concentrates may be a problem. 47 High groundwater tables are a common natural occurence in the City of Tukwila. In the Green River flood plain', poor soil drainage may produce marshy areas. or near - surface water table levels that may produce unstable foundation or seismic conditions. Likewise, in upland areas, thin permeable soil mantles overlying comparatively impervious glacial till also contributes to seasonal high water tables. Both situations frequently require special engineering considerations (e.g. fill) prior to development. 3.4.3 Biological Resources Human use has altered much of the natural vegetation and wildlife habitat found in the City. Logging, farming and most recently, urbanization have long eliminated virgin timberlands. Most remaining natural woodlands are second and third growth woodlands confined to sites not readily used for human activities: ravines, steep- sloped valley walls and water courses. Water tolerant species such as cottonwood are common in riparian habitats along rivers and streams, while species more typical of climax forests in the Puget Sound region..such as Western Red Cedar, White and Douglas Fir and Western Hemlock, are common in the upland areas (Tukwila, 1975). Several deciduous species, such as Alder and Maple, are also common. Wood- land understories also include a variety of plant types with water tolerant species found in riparian habitats and shade - resistant types dominant in the upland woodlands. Ornamental vegetation is generally typical of landscaped lots and yards throughout the City. Wildlife habitats in the City support a variety of birds, fish and mammals. Riparian habitats support the most diverse array of wildlife (refer to the DEIS for the Tukwila Hotel proposal, Tukwila, June 1982, for an inventory of Green River wildlife). Four general habitats for birds and terrestrian wildlife have been identified: wetlands and water courses; open grass and shrublands; forested lands and urban environments (Tukwila, 1975). Most mammal wildlife are lesser mammals such as rodents that are more tolerant of human activity. The Green River is also the primary habitat for aquatic life in Tukwila supporting a number of species including salmon and trout. The Green River habitat does not include major spawning areas for the distance within Tukwila, but is a major corridor for anadromous species travelling to and from upstream spawning areas (Tukwila, 1975). The City's tributary streams and other natural water bodies are generally devoid of fish. 3.4.4 Air Quality Climate conditions in Tukwila are characteristic of the marine west coast climate typical for the Pacific Northwest. The .marine influence and pre- vailing wind patterns from the north and northwest in the summer, and the south and southwest in the winter, act to moderate annual temperature extremes. The area also receives an annual average of 35 inches of pre- cipitation, most falling during the late fall and winter months. Periods of air stagnation and temperature inversions that produce "worst- case" air quality conditions occur most frequently during the winter months. The City of Tukwila is within the boundaries of a general nonattainment area for carbon monoxide and photochemical oxidants. The principal source of these pollutants is the automobile. Although air quality conditions within the City are largely a consequence of regional, rather than local sources, there are major transportation generators of air pollution in the area. The freeways, 48 particularly I -405 and I -5, Southcenter Mall, Longacres Race Track, SR -181 and other heavily travelled local arterials all contribute to local air quality degradation. Despite the proximity of these sources, pollutant concentrations in Tukwila attributable to vehicular travel (e.g. carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides) have infrequently reached or exceeded government standards. (Tukwila, October 1980; June 1982; April 1983; USDOT FHA, February 1983). Nevertheless, general pollutants, such as suspended particulate concentrations, have steadily increased in recent years with urbanization in the Green River Valley. Stationary sources of ;pollutants are not a major source of air pollution in Tukwila. Of ten identified stationary pollutant sources in the vacinity, nine are located in Renton and one in Kent ( WSDOT FHA, February 1983). The major stationary source pollutant, sulfer dioxide, occasionally reaches concentrations exceeding current .standards but is largely attributable to emissions from the ASARCO smelter in Tacoma (Tukwila, October 1980). 3.4.5 Noise The freeways and major arterials traversing Tukwila are the principle noise sources in the City. In general the heavier the traffic volume on the roadway. the greater the noise levels on adjacent properties. Noise levels decrease with distance from the roadway, although factors such as toptgraphy, structures and vegetation could have some attenuating effect. The high proportion of truck traffic associated with Tukwila's warehousing industries may also generate disproportionate noise levels on streets and arterials south of I -405. Areas along railroad tracks may also experience intermittant noise impacts from rail use. Other sources exist that contribute to overall ambient noise levels in Tukwila. Occasional aircraft overflights from nearby airports could impact widespread areas of the City. Building construction activities also generate noise impacts on adjacent properties. Activities characteristic of urban communities: emergency vehicle operations, children at play, and so on, also affect local noise levels. 3.4.6 Aesthetics The aesthetic quality of a community is often a composite of individual, physical and built environmental parameters. Topography, water features, vegetation, land use, and public facilities can all influence how an indi- vidual perceives the aesthetic quality of his community. Tukwila's physical setting provides a variety of resources that enhance the area's aesthetic quality; The upland Tukwila Hill and McMicken Heights areas adjacent to lowlying river floodplains creates a number of opportunities for unobstructed vistas, particularly to the southeast towards Mt. Rainier (Figure 3.15). Upland ridge and valley topography also encourages vistas across more localized areas. Water features, including the Green /Duwamish River along Tukwila's eastern boundary, small streams and creeks from upland areas, and natural and man -made ponds are also resources that contribute to the aesth- etic enjoyment of both residents and employees. The woodlands along valley walls and stream ravines are also highly visible, adding to the quality of views and providing short hiking opportunities for persons seeking the solitude of a woodland environment. 49 * Knoll • Nom Ridge Generalized Woodlands 40 4.1 Views Ponds Waterways r Figure 3.15 CITY OF TUKWILA 'Aesthetic Resources > (0 L IP o. Q. ID E s - 0 . CHAPTER IV Impacts 4.1 Municipal Finances 4.1.1 Introduction Implementation of Tukwila's Six -Year Capital Improvement Program may require short -term and /or long -term commitments of local municipal revenues. The proposed action, therefore, directly affects the City's financial resources and subsequently, its ability to maintain or expand existing public services, facilities and programs. The degree of impacts CIP financing may have on other programs and services could vary since a number of factors influence municipal revenues and how they are spent. The following assess- ment examines CIP expenditures in the context ofa range of future municipal budget scenerios because of these indefinite variables. Also, given the potential resources available to finance future City budgets; alternative funding strategies for capital expenditures are addressed in the assessment. 4.1.2 Future Tukwila Budgets Throughout the six -year CIP period, the economic health of the Seattle Metropolitan region should continue to influence Tukwila's municipal. finances. High and low projections for the City's Current Fund were made based on past relationships of its principal revenue sources. (sales and property taxes) to general economic conditions. The assumptions used in the high and low tax revenue projections are listed in appended Table A.17. In addition, high and low projections of other Current Fund revenues (mostly fees and user charges) were also made using 1975 to 1983 trends (see appended Table A.18). The high and low Current Fund revenue projections, given the criteria upon which they are based, should be viewed as budgetary extremes. The projected rates of revenue growth do resemble conditions that occurred in Tukwila within the recent past, however (Figure 4.1 and 4.2). It is unlikely that either a sustained period of rapid revenue growth or decline in Tukwila will occur over the next few years. Therefore, additional revenue growth projec- tions were made: a. A rate based on the average of the high /low estimates of major Current Fund revenues. This rate of growth is similar to overall fund growth from 1975 to 1983; b. A moderate growth rate based on prevailing budget trends from 1977 to 1980 (between one and two percent annually, or 10% over six years); c. A moderate rate of declining revenue based on the low rate for sales taxes (this inverse relationship has characterized tax revenue growth in Tukwila since 1978). The overall rate of change in this scenerio resembles what has occured from 1980 to 1982. The range of future municipal finance: conditions presented by these scenerios provides the framework for the subsequent impact assessment. Determining the effect of CIP local revenue needs on general government services in Tukwila requires projecting future expenditures. High, moderate and low expenditure projections for service finances by the Current Fund were made (-appended Table A.17). Also, revenue expenditure estimates were 51 8.Oi 7.0- 6.01— 5.01 2.0- 1 .1979 1 I 1 1 ! I I I I I ,____.._- 1975 __ ! 1980 !1985 I Year . 52 i 1990 Figure 4.1 !CITY OF TUKWILA Projected Current Fund Revenues 1984 to 1989 .01— 1.01 I i T 1 I I __�_ I 1 1 i _1970.1 . 1975 ; 1980_ 1 Year Annual Rate of Change Sales Tax Revenue: Regular wy -Property Tax 53 ;1985 1990 Figure 4.2 CITY OF TUKWILA Projected Local Tax Revenue ;,Change 1984 to 1989 made for the City Street and Arterial Street funds where the remaining local tax revenue is allocated (Appended Table A.20). The impact assessment focuses on the local revenues in these funds, assuming that the intergovern- mental revenues needed for the CIP projects would be available. This ap- proach establishes worst -case conditions for future local revenue demand. Three alternative CIP funding strategies are reviewed: Current taxes; no rate increase; current taxes with a rate increase; and implementing new taxes. In addition, the impacts of other local revenue sources used for CIP financing (e.g., LID's; user fees) are assessed. 4.1.3 Alternative CIP Financing Strategies Current Taxes, No Rate Increase: Existing municipal revenue sources would be used to satisfy all local revenue needs for CIP projects in this alter- native. No taxes would be increased, including voter- approved general obligation bond excise property tax levies. A total of $10.3 million in local revenues would be needed over the six -year CIP time frame, principally for roads, equipment and park improvements. The Current Fund and Arterial Street Fund of the City's budget would be most affected by this alternative. It is expected that, given particular funding options, future City revenues may prove sufficient for financing both the CIP and general government services with further tax increases. This financing, however, will probably require both long -term debt service funding as well as short -term pay- as -you- go expenditures for capital projects. Figure 4.3 demonstrates the relation- ship between projected revenues and expenditures in the various scenerios and the amount of revenue needed for CIP financing. Only in the most optimistic estimates (where revenue is growing at a fast rate and the level of public services expenditures is held down) does the revenue generated reach a level sufficient to pay outright for capital projects. Likewise, the most pessimistic projection (declining real revenue, high public service expend- iture growth) is the only condition generating insufficient revenue for any kind of CIP financing and then not until the later years of the program. Although the future state of Tukwila's finances appears adequate to fund the CIP through 1989 without tax increases or public service reductions, some problems may arise. For the debt service share of local revenues needs, Councilmanic bonds would have to be issued by the City to avoid increasing property taxes. Tukwila's present capacity for these bonds is $5.3 million. This capacity should increase over the next six years as property values increase and bond payments are made, but it is not likely to reach a level sufficient to pay most, or all, of the CIP's local revenue costs. The projected scenerios for future City finances suggest that Councilmanic bond revenues could be needed for about half of the CIP's local revenue costs under the no tax increase alternative. This amount of CIP financing through the debt service could exhaust the City's Councilmanic bonding capacity. Exhausting available bonding capacity effectively reduces Tukwila's options in financing future capital needs beyond the Scope of the CIP. Using projected tax rates, in 1989 between: 17 and 21% of the City's tax revenue or supporting general operating expenses in the Current and City Street funds could be obligated to long -term debt repayment. The present level is approximately 2.5 %. Tukwila's future operational expenses, therefore, could become more susceptable to economic cycles and their effect on its supporting tax revenue foundation. Having a substantial proportion of its general tax revenues tied -up in debt service 54 8.01 N co" 7_0 0 0 2 C N cc =1 6.0;- cj 5.01 4 01 5.0: 16.0 !Annual Expenditures in Millions of Dollars* *Excluding capital projects ** *Debt service financing assumes issuance of 12.5% 20 year bonds, requiring approximately $138,000/ year for each million dollars sold • Note: Expenditures encompass all Current Fund services and operational services in the City Street Fund. Revenues comprise all revenues in the Current Fund and local tax revenue; other local income and cash forwarded in City Street and Arterial Street Funds. 55 1 7.0 Figure 4.3 CITY OF TUKWILA Projected Capacity to Fund Capital Improvements Program reduces the City's flexibility in responding to the expenditure needs depend- ent on this source. The City's flexibility was demonstrated in the City's use of a healthier property tax base to support funds previously financed by sales tax revenue when the latter decreased after 1978, at least until the 1983 tax increase (Refer to Figure 3.5). Current Taxes; with Rate Increase: In this alternative, tax rate increases for either or both of Tukwila's primary revenue sources would be implemented to finance the CIP. This alternative, therefore, does not diversify the City's current tax base, but instead increases the projected revenues it generates through tax rate increases. Existing problems associated with this narrow tax base, such as the susceptibility to economic cycles and lack of alternative revenues to support expenditures, would persist. Three types of tax increases could occur: An excess property tax levy voted by the general public; A one time increase of the regular property tax levy, up to the statutory limit of $3.60/$1,000 (requires voter approval); An increase of the local sales tax levy from .7% to one percent as permitted by law. Although any combination of these tax increase options could be used to fund the CIP, the following assesses the individual capacities of these potential revenues. The property tax excise levy assumes the City's voters will approve a-$8.5 million general obligation bond issue to finance the CIP. Since voter - approved G.O. bonds are limited to capital purposes only, specifically excluding equipment purchasing, approximately $2.0 million in CIP local revenues are excluded. Unlike Councilmanic bonds, debt limitations for voter - approved G.O. bonds are sufficient for CIP needs (about 40% of the total). Using 1983 assessed valuation, the annual debt service would produce a $1.27/ $1,000 A.U. levy increase if all bonds were released at the same time (worst - case conditions; refer to Figure 4.3 for bond assumptions). This increase represents a 12 to 16% rise above the current minimum ($7.98/$1,000 A.V.) and maximum ($10.22/$1,000 A.V.) tax levels in the City (King County Assessor's Office, 1983). To the average homeowner in Tukwila, this increase translates into an additional $90.00 per year (initially) in property taxes (assuming $70,000 medium home value). The tax rate would decline year to year as property value increases and new development broaden the City's assessed valuation base. State law permits a municipality a one -time lifting of the 106% tax ceiling on regular levy property taxes, up to a maximum of $3.60/$1,000 A.V. Although the rate could be increased to any amount between its present level and $3.60, this assessment assumes a voter approved maximum tax increase. In Tukwila, the regular levy rate would. increase $1.7252/$1,000 A.V.; up from its 1983 rate of $1.8747/$1,000 A.V. This increase would raise the total levy rate for City residents and businesses between 17 and 22 %, representing an initial $120 per year tax increase to the average Tukwila homeowner. From the approved $3.60/$1,000 A.V. level, the 106% limitation law would again reduce the levy rate annually as property value increases and new development occurs. The amount of revenue produced yearly by this tax increase (approximately $1.6 million) would satisfy 90% of the CIP's local revenue needs over the six year period. Therefore, with support from existing City revenues, pay -as- you -go financing for capital projects is possible with this option. 56 The sales and use tax levy in Tukwila would be increased to its statutory limit of one percent in this option. This increase could produce 40% more sales tax revenue to the City treasury over the six year time frame of the CIP. Should sales tax revenue grow at a moderate or rapid pace during this period, the additional income should be adequate to finance CIP local revenue needs on pay -as- you -go basis. The sensitivity of sales taxes to economic cycles, however, may affect its capacity to provide 100% support for local revenue needs. Implement New Taxes: This alternative seeks to achieve increased general operating revenues through a diversified tax base. The City of Tukwila has not used three major revenue sources authorized by the State for municipali- ties: utility taxes, business and occupation taxes and a one - quarter percent real estate transfer tax. The following are estimated annual revenues that would be generated by these taxes in 1983 (Tukwila, Finance Department, 1983): - Utility taxes: $88,000 for each one percent levied, at the statutory limit of six percent, approximately $530,000 could be generated. - Business and Occupation taxes (B & 0): Revenue potential of $2.5 million at the statutory limit of .002 and estimated taxable revenues for retail, wholesale, industrial and commercial services of $1,265 billion. - 25% Real Estate Transfer Tax: This tax was authorized by the State when it prohibited development fees for capital projects. All revenues must be used for capital expenditures. .The tax would generate $62,500 revenue for each $25 million of real estate transfers in the City Under this alternative, it is assumed that one of these tax options would be implemented to partly fund CIP local revenue needs between 1984 and 1989. Utility taxes would be levied on total billing income of public and private utilities serving Tukwila (excluding water and sewer utilities). Although the City has no utility billing records to determine the growth potential of this revenue source, it can be inferred from the experience of other communi- ties. Utility taxes are a sound revenue source because rates are adjusted as inflation and energy costs increase the utilities' operating expenses. Be- tween 1975 and 1980, Bellevue's utility tax revenue increased 17% annually in real terms (Bellevue, June, 1982). Prorating this increase over the CIP time frame, estimates of total utility revenue during this period range from $2.05 million to $4.10 million depending on whether a three or six percent rate is used (three percent is comparable to the rates levied by neighboring Green River Valley municipalities). This revenue is 20 to 40% of the projected local revenue needs for CIP financing. With moderate growth of current tax revenues over the next six years, a utility tax may achieve pay -as- you -go financing for CIP local expenditures. General B & 0 taxes are a levy on the gross business receipts of trade, services and manufacturing businesses. In 1982, the State legislature established maximum levy rates (.002) and a special initiative procedure for the ordinance imposing the tax, subjecting it to voter approval or rejection (RCW 35.21.705; 35.21.710). The B & 0 tax, like the sales and use tax, is an economically elastic revenue source, or fluctuates with general business cycles. For example, in Bellevue the annual real growth of B & 0 taxes varied from 14% (1974 -79) to 3.5% (1979 -81). Nevertheless, the revenue potential is substantial, ranging from $16.8 million to $22.3 million for the 1984 -89 period, at the assumed .002 levy. Even with a B & 0 levy comparable to Bellevue ( .,0005)the potential revenue could range from $4.2 million to $5.6 million. Therefore, at the lower level the B & 0 tax could raise the equivalent of 40 to 55% of the local funding needs of the CIP. This may be adequate, with the moderate growth of existing tax resources, to finance CIP local revenue needs on a pay -as- you -go basis. The real estate excise tax was established by the same 1982 bill that limited B & 0 and utility tax rates and increased the sales tax ceiling (SB 4972). The excise tax was authorized for municipal use to replace developer fees which are now prohibited (see RCW 82.02.020). All revenues raised by this levy must be reserved for capital improvements. The predominance of commercial /industrial property in Tukwila may limit the revenue potential of this tax option, however. These properties tend to change ownership less frequently than residential properties, which represent less than 20% of total City property value. Alternative tax sources do not differ substantially from the other CIP financing strategies in their capacity to fund local revenue needs. Although the amount of revenue produced by any of these sources could vary from estimates (as a consequence of indeterminate factors such as future economic conditions and tax rate variations), it is unlikely that any single new tax source would be capable of funding all CIP local revenue needs. Including revenue from existing sources, however, complete financing may be able to be achieved with either utility or B & 0 taxes. The principal difference between the financial impacts of this alternative and the other two altern- atives is a more diversified tax base to support both capital expenditures and general operating costs. 4.1.4 Other Capital Financing Sources Intergovernment Revenues: Intergovernmental revenue is the largest source of financing anticipated for the CIP. To be implemented, the CIP requires approximately $35.3 million (excluding utilities) in Federal, State and County shared revenues between 1984 and 1989, comprising 63% of total expend- itures. Federal government provides the majority of intergovernmental .revenue, about 75% of the total. All but one percent of intergovernmental grants would fund arterial and commercial street improvements. Fourteen projects require $35 million in grants, a far larger amount than the City has received in recent years. Two of these projects have been funded, totalling $8.4 million. The City's capacity to obtain additional shared revenues will depend on the funding priorities established by the Puget Sound Council of Governments (PSCOG), the agency responsible for distributing Federal and State funds for road projects. Recent trends suggest that the City's substantial reliance on shared - revenues for non - residential street improvements could lead to delays in implementing projects, if not outright grant denials. The remaining one percent of projected intergovernmental shared - revenues is mostly allocated for the improvement of City -owned park properties. These revenues are provided by the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC). There are four CIP projects dependent on IAC revenues, one presently with funding. As with non - residential road projects, the City's ability to implement these projects will be determined by the discretionary decisions of the agency allocating these funds. State shared - revenues through the Department of Social and Health. Services are also proposed for funding, in part, the general water and sewer 'facilities included in the CIP (see Utilities discussion below). The allocation processes used by most government agencies for distributing shared - revenues introduces a level of uncertainty in the City's ability to obtain the necessary funding. Lack of intergovernmental funding may preclude implementing these projects during the CIP's six -year time frame. Failure to implement these projects could impact other City finances. Matching funds from local revenue sources would not be needed for non - funded grants. Half of the CIP's local revenue needs described previously are matching funds for shared revenues on commercial street projects. On the two project's funded at present, just over one million dollars in local revenue is needed as matching funds. Therefore, the failure to obtain other road grants could reduce CIP local revenue needs from $10.3 million to about $6 million over the six year period. Local Improvement Districts: Local improvement district financing is an important part of implementing the CIP. For residential and non - residential roads, $9.8 million is expected to be provided by LID's for a total of 25 projects. Financing requirements for water distribution and sewer trunk lines could increase LID revenue needs an additional $4.4 million over the six year period. These needs could produce an unprecedented level of LID funding in Tukwila, particularly compared to the present $2.3 million in outstanding LID obligations. The rate and total number of LID's that may be established during this period could be influenced by general economic conditions, however. Property owners and developers are unlikely to commit to financing improvements if delays in site development occur due to a weak economy. Tukwila's general finances should not be directly impacted by the increased amount of LID financing that may occur over the next six years. LID levies and liabilities are carried by the benefitting properties within the district. The potential impact of the substantial CIP - related obligations and liabilities on Tukwila's local improvement guarantee fund, however, could subsequently affect other City funds. State law defines the requirements for and obligations of a guarantee fund (RCW Chapter 35.45; 35.45.070, 35.45.080). Briefly, delinquent LID bond obligations are paid by the City from this fund until the cost is recoveredfrom either the property owner or through foreclosure. The time involved in pursuing legal action or otherwise recovering costs for delinquent obligations can take the City several years. During this period, the City must maintain the fund from general operating revenues. At present, the City is potentially faced with payments of $43,000 (through 1984) from their $126,000 guarantee fund (Tukwila, Finance Department, 1983). The potential increase in the outside LID principal produced by implementing the CIP could indirectly impact general City finances through deliquent bond payments. In Tukwila, the problem is compounded by property ownership patterns. The large-size parcels in the Andover industrial area, where LID establishment is most common, produces districts with as few as three par- ticipants. Therefore, if a property owner defaults, which may occur for any of several reasons (e.g. dispute over improvements, economic hardship brought on by recession and so on), the cost to the City guarantee fund can be high because it may be a large proportion of the obligation. This cost would subsequently be supported by general operating revenues until it can be obtained from the delinquent party. Also, outstanding LID obligations, the rate of delinquent payments and the annual cost to the City's guarantee fund can affect the City's bond rating, and subsequently, its costs to borrow money for other capital projects or expenditures. 59 User Fees: User fees are a relatively small proportion of the total financing needs for the CIP. The $650,000 of parks and building improvements financed by fees is just over one percent of total CIP expenditures. These expend- itures support one -third of the costs for new facilities in these categories. All CIP fee supported projects are at Foster Golf Links and would be financed from the golf course special fund. The average annual capital costs of CIP improvementsis less than the estimated 1983 expenditures for facilities in the Golf Course fund (approximately $100,000 and $125,000, respectively). There- fore, the CIP should not produce increased user costs beyond those needed for normal operating expenditures. Utilities: Financing water and sewer utility expenditures for CIP projects should involve several potential revenue sources. As self- supported funds, new capital facilities may be financed through utility charges, intergovern- mental revenue, long -term revenue bonds, special charges, LID's and the developer (refer to the Proposed Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plans for a detailed description of expenditures). Water improvements are more difficult to finance than sewer facilities. Service charges in Tukwila have been insufficient to support the establishment of a capital projects fund. Therefore, the utility has no reserve fund for capital projects. The preliminary 1982 Water Plan recommended a financing strategy based on several resources. Phase I general facilities (system wide improvements) could be financed by a combination of Washington State DSHS Referendum 38 grant revenues (up to a maximum of 30% of the total $3.0 million cost) and revenue bonds. The annual cost to retire the revenue bonds would be financed through increased monthly charges and a general facility charge for new development. The recommended monthly charges could produce a 3 to 20% increase in cost to residents, a 36 to 65% increase to smaller business establishments and a 50 to 94% increase for larger establish- ments. The General Facilities charge would be levied on new development to cover its fair share of the existing water system as well as-the new system -wide improvements. This charge was expected to finance 50% of the revenue bond cost for Phase I improvements. The passage of SB 4972, how- ever, prohibited special levies on new development for capital facilities unless it could be shown that the facility'is needed as a direct consequence of that development (see also RCW 82 -02 -020). This limitation may preclude the use of the general facilities charge. If so, alternative revenue sources, such as greater monthly services charges be needed. Local facility improvementscould be financed either through LID's or developer financing. Neither method directly affects other City expenditures. A greater emphasis on developer financing, however, could lessen the potential for the adverse L.I. guarantee fund impacts previously discussed. Sewer capital improvement expenditures should also be financed through several potential revenue sources. Unlike the water utility, however, past sewer service charges have been sufficient to build a large reserve of revenue available for financing capital projects. Therefore, a combination of cash reserves, State shared revenue (up to one -third of the total) and general facilities charges are projected for financing CIP projects. Generally, this funding approach should be sufficient to assure implementation of the CIP sewer improvements.. State revenues may be subJect to variations resulting from discretionary allocation decisions, however. If the general facilities charge cannot be implemented (see water discussion above), the City may have to maintain rather than reduce the existing monthly service charge as proposed in the Plan. Likewise, the existing special charges to be replaced by the general facilities charge may also have to be retained. Local facilities should be financed using the same sources as local water • facilities, and have similar impacts. 4.2 Community Environment 4.2.1 Introduction Implementing the Capital Improvement Program could have both direct and indirect impacts on Tukwila's residential and non - residential communities. Direct impacts of the action are the effects of the alternative financing strategies on the City's residents and businesses. Indirect impacts on City communities could result from the construction of the improvements to be fin- anced by the CIP. Di sect and i ndi rest impactsof the action are subsequently identified..for•each community environment parameter. 4.2.2 Land Use Direct Impacts: The alternative financing strategies assessed in Section 4.1 could influence land use trends in Tukwila. Differential tax rates and costs among Tukwila and other cities and communities could be a factor in individual siting or relocation decisions by businesses. The degree to which increased tax costs offset other factors in Tukwila influencing business location decisions (e.g..land /building costs and availability; accessibility to markets; invested capital) should determine the proposed action's land use impact. The alternative tax increase strategies for financing the CIP should produce varying levels of land use impact. Neither the utility tax nor the real estate transfer tax should have much effect on future land use trends in the City. These taxes are fairly commonplace among municipalities in metro- politan Seattle. Therefore, implementing these taxes in Tukwila should not produce disadvantageous business cost increases relative to other communities. Property tax increases, either through an excess levy or by lifting the ceiling on the regular levy, may have some effect on business growth in the City. Property tax increases of the magnitude described in Section 4.1 could make industrial /commercial sites in City areas encompassed by the South Central School District (generally north of I -405), where property taxes are highest, less attractive to business. Existing low tax rates in the commercial/ industrial area south of I -405 would probably remain comparable to tax rates in other communities even with an increase. Tax rates, however, would cease to be as attractive to new businesses, possible slowing the rate of vacant land development within the City. Residential communities are more likely to be affected by the property tax increases (see Section 4.2.3). Increasing the sales and use tax or implementing the business and occupation tax should have the most profound effect on land use in Tukwila. Increasing the sales tax to the one percent limit places Tukwila retail businesses at a disadvantage with respect to other regional commercial centers. Although sales of soft goods (e.g. apparel, linens, etc.) could be impacted, stores dealing in larger, more costly merchandise such as furnishings and appliances, would potentially be most affected. These stores comprise a significant proportion of commercial businesses in the City. Increased sales tax could contribute to a reduction of these businesses by encouraging existing establishments to relocate outside Tukwila and discourage new businesses. Future land development in Tukwila could increasingly become concentrated in regional commercial services should a general B & 0 tax be implemented to finance the CIP. This tax may effectively discourage new light manufacturing, warehousing and wholesale distribution uses from locating in the City and some existing establishments may relocate. Increased business costs may offset the site advantages of Tukwila, making nearby communities with good accessibility and available land (particularly Kent and Auburn) more attractive. Regional commercial services, however, should continue to locate in Tukwila because of its advantageous regional accessibility and competi -. tiveness with other major commercial centers (both Bellevue and Seattle presently have B & 0 taxes). Since new development in Tukwila is currently becoming dominated by commercial services, implementing the B & 0 tax would manifest this trend (see also Indirect Land Use impacts). Local improvement district financing of improvements could accelerate land use change in areas of the City. These impacts should occur in areas where intensified development is anticipated and the improvements are being installed to facilitate this development. Vacant or open use lands east of the Green River, south of S.. 180th Street, and between Southcenter Parkway and Andover Park West are likely to experience intensified development as a consequence of increased site costs produced by LID assessments. Two potential problems may arise with LID's. In mixed use areas such as the Interurban corridor, existing residential and commercial uses could be assessed for improvements intended to accomodate intensified development. Present users satisfied with the status quo may be faced with involuntary relocation as a consequence of increased site costs. Also, uncoordinated LID formation in the.commercial /industrial areas may encourage premature abandonment of agricultural land. The costs of LID assessments could force agricultural uses to relocate long before the demand for improved land can absorb the site. Indirect Impacts: The construction of capital facilities subsequent to the adoption and implementation of the CIP could impact future land use patterns in Tukwila. Many of these facilities, particularly roads and sewers, could eliminate present constraints on land development and redevelopment in several areas of the City. CIP projects could have two general impacts: to promote commercial services as the dominant type of new land development, and to encourage the development of vacant land within the City and around its periphery. Commercial service uses could be encouraged by several road and sewer projects included in the CIP. This impact could be most pronounced in southernmost Tukwila where the South 188th Street connector with 1-5 should provide much improved freeway accessibility. Increased accessibility in this area could increase land costs which could favor commercial service uses over light manufacturing and warehousing. Within metropolitan Seattle, the displacement of warehousing and light manufacturinguses by commercial services has been documented in other industrial districts that are relatively accessible via the freeway system. Proposed sewer improvements along Andover Park West and West Valley Highway are also intended to remove . constraints that otherwise could preclude the eventual displacement of light manufact- uring and warehousing uses by commercial services' in south Tukwila Road and sewer projects in. the CIP could enable vacant parcels around the City periphery to be developed. The sewer improvements in south Tukwila that may promote commercial service uses are also intended to facilitate develop- ment of vacant land south of: the current City limits. Sewer and road improvements in. the CIP could also encourage development in several other areas: - The industrial /commercial areas along Interurban Avenue between I -405 and the golf course; - The industrial areas within City limits east of the Green River; - Remaining vacant parcels in the central Andover Industrial Park; - Remaining commercial areas along Southcenter Parkway. Once capital facilities are built, eliminating public facility constraints on development, the impacts of subsequent use of a site should largely be determined by local government regulations (e.g. Zoning Code, Comprehensive Plan, Subdivision Ordinance). These impacts have been assessed in previous documents (Tukwila, October 1980; Tukwila, February 1977). 4.2.3 Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance Direct Impacts: Financing the Capital Improvements Program directly impacts local tax equity in Tukwila. Tax equity is the balance between who pays for, and who uses, public facilities such as those included in the CIP. The alternative methods available .to the City to finance the CIP impose different degrees of cost on the principal-groups comprising local residential and business communities. Likewise, the facilities included in the CIP may have differential benefits for these groups. At present, Tukwila's property and sales and use taxes are the predominant source of local revenue. Property taxes are levied indiscriminantly on all non - exempt property in the City, based on the assessed value of individual parcels. These taxes are commonly referenced as a form of "horizontal equity " -- placing equal tax burdens on persons enjoying equal levels of government services and owning equal amounts of property (Fisher 1978). Therefore, property taxes are best suited for financing improvements of general benefit to the community. Property tax support for the local revenue share of equipment needed by Police, Fire and General Government in Tukwila, as well as most recreational facilities, should have beneficial equity impacts. Implementing property tax increases, either by lifting the regular levy ceiling or through excess levies, for the purpose of funding all local revenue needs could place a disproportionate share of the costs for some improvements on groups that do not realize actual benefits. Reliance on property taxes for CIP funding could promote adverse effects on the ability of some property owners to pay for imprnvements. Property valuation is not necessarily indicative of an owner's ability to pay property tax levies. In recent years, rapid property value appreciation has compounded the problem. Many residents, including those living in the same house for many years and the elderly, may not be able to afford to purchase . it at 1st current value. Property taxes tend to have a disproportionate impact on these households' income. Low income, elderly home owners are provided some relief from excess property tax levies by State law. This exemption does not help "borderline" households, such as residents with incomes too high_to qualify for assistance but too..low,to absorb large property tax increases. Increased property taxes may also have a detrimental effect on the rate of private home rehabilitation in Tukwila. Property assessment practices and increased property taxes have been found to discourage private reinvestment in housing maintenance (Prentice, October 1976 and January 1977; Smith, January 1978; Mikesell, April 1979; Bails, April 1981). Fear of increased property values and taxes has been cited as a disincentive to use voluntary public assistance programs for housing improvements (Mercer& Philips, 1981). Therefore, the property tax alternative could partially, offset City efforts to encourage the maintenance of existing single - family residential neighbor- hoods. Tukwila could also lose its present tax rate advantage as an incentive for contiguous residential communities to annex to the City. The alternative of increasing the sales and use tax to. finance the CIP could place a greater share of local revenue needs on non - residents. Retail activities in Tukwila generate considerable demands for facilities, parti- cularly commercial streets and arterials and water and sewer utilities. Employees and customers of these businesses are primarily non - residents and therefore do not pay other local taxes for City facilities used in commuting to and from these ablishments (although the businesses generate property tax revenues). The increased sales tax alternative would finance all CIP local revenue needs, thereby subsidizing facilities used exclusively by City residents. Not all businesses in the City contribute to sales tax revenue. Light manufacturing, warehousing and many commercial services have little or no retail income as a proportion of their overall business activity. Generally, these businesses do not usually require the supporting capital infrastructure that retail businesses do. Commercial services, however, are a more intensive business activity requiring a higher level -of- service than either warehousing or light manufacturing, as attested by the proposed expenditures for upgraded sewers for South Tukwila (refer to Section 4.2.2). These uses are expected to comprise the largest share of future development in the City. The business and occupation tax would be assessed on gross business income for all City establishments. As a business tax, revenue from this source would be most equitably used for CIP commercial and arterial improvements. Increasing business taxes for capital purposes does not necessarily establish a more equitable distribution of funding obligations between City residents and non - residents. In the B & 0 tax alternative, CIP local revenue . needs could be financed from this source; subsidizing improvements for residential neighborhoods as well as facilities serving the business community. Business taxes also provide no mechanism for adjusting the rate among businesses to reflect actual needs for municipal services. The real estate transfer excise tax would place a higher cost on the existing property owner for capital facility financing. Transfer taxes are not easily passed on to the purchaser because market demand tends to dictate the sales price for property (Smith, January 1978). In Tukwila, however, the tax may disproportionately fall on residential property owners since apartment, commercial and industrial properties do not change ownership as frequently. The utility tax alternative would levy a flat percentage rate on utility residential and business customer charges. Therefore, the amount of tax paid by individual customers is commensurate with the amount of utility services used - larger customers pay larger shares of the tax. Since counties are not empowered to establish utility taxes, potential future annexation of adjacent unincorporated communities could be influenced by this tax differential should this strategy be implemented. 64 Indirect Impacts: Implementation of the CIP could enhance neighborhood mail ntenance �n existing single - family residential communities. The CIP includes several residential street upgrade projects in the Tukwila Hill and McMicken Heights neighborhoods. These improvements may continue to encourage private housing rehabilitation efforts in these communities. Park improvements in these residential communities may also contribute to stable and viable neighborhoods by encouraging housing rehabilitation (Hendon, July, 1977). Several CIP park projects are located at peripheral City sites (e.g. McMicken Park, Foster Memorial Park, Duwamish Park) serving both Tukwila residents and contiguous unincorporated neighborhoods. These proj- ects could encourage neighborhood stability through private housing rehab- ilitation in communities outside Tukwila's jurisdiction that are physically related to the City's residential neighborhoods and where annexation has been pursued. Park improvements are currently the only facilities included in the CIP serving adjacent communities that may annex to the City over the next six years. 4.2.4 Public Services Direct Impacts: All public services, except education, are potentially impacted by financing the Capital Improvement Program. Several factors should determine the extent of these impacts: the rate of growth of local City revenues, the availability of intergovernmental revenue and future public decisions to either increase local taxes or reduce public expenditures during tight budgetary situations. Section 4.1.2 demonstrated that future budgets could provide flexibility in maintaining services and financing the CIP depending on the particular revenue strategies the City implemented. In the future, however, the City may opt to cutback on public service expenditures rather than raise new revenues. Should this occur, reduced service levels could result and be reflected in increased police and fire response times, greater delays in general government functions and less frequent public facility maintenance. Reduced street maintenance could subsequently increase future capital expenditure for necessary facility reconstruction. Indirect Impacts - Public Safety: Implementing the CIP could indirectly impact municipal services in Tukwila. Public safety agencies could receive new equipment and training facilities that should help maintain the quality of current services. Included in the CIP are new patrol vehicles, fire- fighting vehicles, support vehicles and an aid car that would replace aging equipment. The City presently operates with minimal firefighting apparatus, the oldest becoming increasingly unreliable for daily usage. New equipment could eliminate this problem as well as potentially reduce equipment maintenance costs. The CIP also includes several equipment purchases for upgrading the Valley Com. system, a computer aided dispatch system, and lifesaving equipment for the aid car. In general, this equipment could improve the operational efficiency of Tukwila's Police and Fire Departments, enhance public safety by providing more reliable life saving equipment and reduce the annual operating costs for these departments. CIP funded facilities could also impact the demand for public safety services in Tukwila. The proposed street and arterial improvements may reduce or eliminate current road conditions and traffic congestion or circulation problems that contribute to existing automobile accident rates. A reduced automobile accident rate could lessen the present operational costs in responding to accident emergencies.. These operational benefits may be offset by service demands generated at new public facilities and new land develop- ment accommodated by CIP improvements. Developing parks in McMicken Heights and completing Christensen Greenbelt Park may increase human activity at these 65 sites, therby increasing the potential need for police and fire services. The CIP also provides road and sewer facilities that should eliminate present development constraints on many undeveloped or underdeveloped sites. Once . developed, these sites may generate greater needs for public safety services as a consequence of increased human activity. Indirect Impact- Schools: The CIP may not have much impact on educational facilities in Tukwila. The softball field at Tukwila Elementary School should be upgraded for use during evenings by Recreation Department programs. Students would continue to use the field during the day. New development that could occur subsequent to CIP road and sewer improvements, particularly in the industrial /commercial areas of south and east Tukwila, could increase the property tax base of school districts serving the City. These benefits, however, would accrue primarily to the Renton School District, which is little affected by City students. The-South Central School District may receive increased revenue from new industrial and commercial development along Interurban Avenue north of I -405 and would also receive most students from new residential developments. Indirect Impacts - Parks and Recreation: The park and recreation facilities included in the CIP .should satisfy most recreational needs in Tukwila. The CIP includes 15 capital projects fqr recreational facilities, eight involving the rehabilitation of existing facilities and seven providing new facilities. Many of these projects may resolve current problems of inad- equate or insufficient facilities: rebuilt tennis courts at Tukwila Park; new courts at Foster Golf Links; new and - rebuilt athletic fields for softball and soccer; and improved drainage for existing fields at Foster Park. These facilities are presently in great demand, and the improvements should alleviate much of this need. The CIP also include two projects to complete Christensen Greenbelt Park, a trail along the Green River, from Fort Dent to the Tukwila /Kent boundary. This improvement should be a general benefit to City residents and employees as well as persons from outside the City. In addition to general use facilities, the CIP includes projects that should benefit particular neighborhoods. A City -owned site in McMicken Heights would be developed in two phases providing both passive and active recrea- tional areas. This park would be the City's first in this neighborhood, providing McMicken Heights residents in both Tukwila and the adjacent County community with nearby park facilities. A new foot trail would also be built in this community. Duwamish Park, which serves the Allentown/ Duwamish community northeast of Tukwila Hill, should be upgraded with field and playground improvements. Indirect Impacts - Maintenance: The CIP's street and parks project could affect future maintenance service needs. The number of parks and recreation facilities and total street mileage will increase; subsequently increasing the amount of facilities to be maintained by the City. The maintenance requirements of new facilities, however, could' be offset by improvements upgrading street and park facilities. These projects may reduce the frequency of maintenance needed to keep a sufficient level of service. Indirect Impacts - Historical and Cultural Services and Facilities: The CIP contains no proposed improvements involving the preservation or alteration of historically or culturally significant structures. Certain projects, such as improvements at Tukwila Park and road improvements along Macadam Road are located at historical sites (the City's first park and the first paved road in the County), but should not lessen the historical value of 66 these facilities. Site preparation activities for CIP projects, such as trenches for utility infrastructure and road grading could impact currently undocumented historical resource sites, particularly along the river corridor. Indirect Impacts - Social and Health Services: Although the City does not engage in directly providing social services to residents, certain CIP projects may contribute to resolving City social problems. New or upgraded facilities for team sports could provide recreational opportunities for City youths that may help deter youth - related social and criminal problems in the City. 4.3. Public Infrastucture 4.3.1 Introduction The purpose of the Six -Year CIP is to identify and prioritize public infrastructure improvementsin Tukwila and to outline a strategy for financing them.. Adopting the CIP, however, is a programmatic action that does not directly impact the existing infrastructure. The implementation of individual projects subsequent to the CIP's adoption should affect the service capacities and conditions of these facilities. These indirect impacts of the action are addressed herein. 4.3.2 Transportation Street System: The total mileage of the street, system in Tukwila should increase if the'CIP is implemented. New local commercial streets may be built in the. central part of the Andover Industrial Park through the superblock bounded by Strander Blvd., Andover Park West, S.,180th Street and Southcenter Parkway. Two new bridges may be built across the Green River, extending existing commercial roadways to SR 181. A new arterial connecting 57th Avenue South with the Orilla Road South interchange at I -5 may also be built. Most other road improvements are modifications or realignments of existing streets to encourage more efficient traffic circulation. CIP improvements may alter the functional classification of some City roadways. Extending Minkler Boulevard from Southcenter Parkway to SR 181 could upgrade this roadway from a local commercial street to a secondary arterial. Improving 56th Avenue South could upgrade this roadway from a collecter arterial to a secondary arterial, particularly with the con- struction of the I -5 interchange connector. Circulation: CIP street improvements could substantially change present circulation patterns and problems in the City. The 57th Street South connector with I -5 could provide direct freeway access for south Tukwila. This project should redistribute traffic volumes on much of that road. system serving the commercial /industrial district. Traffic could be directed away from the City's heavily used freeway interchanges along I -405 and I -5 at Strander Boulevard and Southcenter Boulevard. In addition, excess surface street use by traffic traveling between south Tukwila and the freeway system should decrease, alleviating traffic congestion on existing arterials and at major intersections. A series of projects along SR -181 could also substantially alter traffic circulation patterns. New bridges across the Green River connecting SR -181 with Tukwila Parkway and Minkler Boulevard would connect the highway with all four east /west secondary arterials in south Tukwila. These improvements 67 should reduce present congestion at the SR- 181 /Strander Boulevard and SR -181/ South 180th Street intersections. Traffic volumes and congestion at other intersections along these two arterials should also improve as east /west traffic circulation is redistributed onto four roadways. Constructing a new Grady Way /SR- 181 /Southcenter Boulevard intersection should also reduce congestion and hazardous traffic conditions on SR -181 by providing direct east /west travel. A third major circulation improvement that could be produced by the CIP is improved accessibility through "superblocks" in south Tukwila. The con- struction of local commercial roads around the Tukwila pond site and the extension of Minkler Boulevard to Southcenter Parkway could enhance circulation by reducing the distance vehicles need to travel in reaching destinations in this area. Increased accessibility through superblocks may also reduce traffic congestion at the intersections of the arterials around these blocks. Other projects, including road widenings, turning lanes at major intersections and traffic control improvements, should lessen congestion and traffic hazard conditions. Alternate Travel Modes: Pedestrian travel could be enhanced in Tukwila's residential and commercial communities if CIP projects are built. Resi- dential street improvements in both the Tukwila Hill and McMicken Heights neighborhoods include sidewalk facilities that could reduce automobile hazards to pedestrians. The two recreational foot trails projected for these neighborhoods should provide improved pedestrian circulated by completing the City's trail system. Sidewalk improvements included in the Macadam Road and Interurban Avenue projects should also benefit Tukwila Hill residents and provide better pedestrian linkages between residential and commercial areas of the City. In addition to these projects, pedestrian movement in the commercial district may . benefit from the new streets that reduce " superblock" barriers, and two new bridges across the Green River. Completion of the northern and southern parts of Christensen Trail could also encourage increased pedestrian and bicycle travel in the commercial districts. CIP facilities could have two general impacts on METRO transit services. Transit stations may be constructed along Andover Park West to encourage greater transit use by workers and customers in the commercial areas. In addition, Metro's proposal to build a regional transit center in Tukwila could benefit from the general road system improvements. Successful "timed - transfer" operations at the center requires that buses consistently maintain their scheduled arrivals and departures. Traffic congestion creates potential bus delays that could disrupt these coordinated schedules, creating rider in- convenience and dissatisfaction with the system. By reducing congestion along busy arterials and major intersections and improving freeway accessibility, the CIP could contribute to the viable operation of this transit center. 4.3.3 Utilities Water: The water system improvements in the CIP should resolve systemwide deficiencies of the City's current facilities. Three water storage facili- ties and ancillary distribution lines could be built, two in McMicken Heights and one on Tukwila Hill, with a total capacity of 10 million gallons (mg). The reservoirs should satisfy the ultimate water storage needs of the City. This capacity could save the City $1.225 million over 20 years in fees it presently pays to Seattle's peak demand charges (Horton Dennis Associates, March, 1982). The storage facilities may also save Tukwila businesses one million dollars in lowered insurance rates over a 20 year period. Additional annual operating savings could be realized if the City proceeds with the CIP's two groundwater wells. These wells may provide sufficient supply to meet the City's additional water needs, thus avoiding potential "new water use charges (Horton Dennis Assoc., March 1982). Other major CIP water system improvements may eliminate problems of insufficient flows, particularly during peak demand periods. A constant pressure pump may be installed to eliminate deficient water pressures during peak demand periods at higher elevations on Tukwila Hill. Inadequate flows due to deficient water main capacities along Interurban Avenue and South 140th Street may be resolved by installing larger sized water mains. Most other CIP water projects are local distribution pipelines, sized from six to 12 inches, intended to eliminate peak flow deficiencies from undersized lines or to provide water supply for new development (refer to proposed Water Master Plan, October 1983). Sewer: CIP sewer projects should also eliminate present system deficiencies in Tukwila. Six of the City's sewer pump stations could be replaced by gravity flow lines. These improvements could provide a considerable annual savings to the Public Works Department in maintenance time and energy costs. Most other sewer improvements are new lines or upgraded trunk lines to eliminate current constraints on future land development (see Land use Impacts). CIP projects also include installation of grease traps and ancillary facilities to reduce current maintenance problems in the.system. Storm Drainage: The CIP does not include any major strom drainage facilities. Storm drainage facilities are included as ancillary improvements in street and arterial projects. These improvements should provide localized benefits in storm drainage management. Other Utilities: Other utility services in Tukwila are the responsibility of agencies and companies other than the City. Therefore, providing new capital facilities for communications, electricity and natural gas should occur independent of the CIP. 4.4 Physical Environment 4.4.1 Introduction The construction of many of the capital projects included within the CIP could impact local physical environment resources. Therefore, by establishing the funding and priorities to implement these projects, the CIP has an indirect impact on Tukwila's physical resources. The degree of impact these projects have on these resources will be determined by the engineering design and construction practices used. Since the CIP projects represent a "wish list" of facilities intended to resolve current and anticipated public infrastruc- ture deficiencies, few have advanced to the preliminary design stage. The conceptual nature of most CIP projects preclude all but a general assessment of potential physical environment impacts. To assist in this endeavor, an environmental impact matrix identifying the degree of potential impact individual projects may have on physical and other resources is provided in Appendix B. The matrix assessment is based on what is currently known about the individual projects - usually no more than its type and location. There- fore, the findings of this preliminary assessment may be subject to refine- ment as individual projects progress through the planning and design stages to the construction stage. The matrix does not include most equipment purchases, since these projects primarily impact the City's financial resources and service operations and have no effect on physical resources. Most smaller water line projects are also not included because they are generally exempted by SEPA (WAC 197 -11 -1000) and are expected to present similar, limited impact potential. These potential impacts will briefly be described under the affected environmental parameter. 4.4.2 Earth Resources The construction of the road, building, sewer and water facilities could result in modifications to local earth resources and accelerated geological processes. The installation of water and sewer lines and the undergrounding of overhead electrical telephone and cable utilities requires excavating and filling trenches. For the most part, these facilities will be constructed along existing public right -of -way (e.g., roads) that have been extensively modified by previous public facility installation. Nevertheless, while under construction the trenches and excavated material may present a potential site of accelerated erosion and source of increased stream siltation during storm events. Likewise, street and highway improvements requiring roadway widening and storm drainage installation could involve similar modifications. Bridge approaches could involve fill, in some instances creating embankments as high as 30 feet, altering local topog- raphy (U.S. DOT, February 1983). Increased erosion potential during facility installation or construction represent short -term impacts. Soil compaction and fill for improvements such as road widenings and bridge approaches would be long -term impacts. Few CIP projects are located in areas where sensitive earth resources may be impacted. The South 188th Street connector between 57th Avenue South and the I -5 /Orilla Road South interchange, however, could involve considerable modifications to the hillside area between the interchange and South 180th Street, depending on the final alignment chosen. The majority of the hillside includes unstable slopes or slopes potentially unstable when modified (Tukwila Data Inventory, 1975). Constructing the connector along the valley wall between the floodplain and upland plateau could require extensive cut - and -fill, possibly involving modifications outside the right -of -way for stabilizing slopes. Excavation and fills could present both short -term and long -term erosion potential. Long -term erosion hazards could be manifested in steep cut slopes that cannot be easily revegetated, exposing hillsides to runoff erosion, freeze /thaw and other geologic mass - wasting processes. The topographical modifications of cut - and -fill road construction would also be long -term impacts. The the degree that slopes are destabilized by road construction, increased long -term landslide hazards could be produced. 4.4.3 Water Resources Short -term impacts on water resources could occur during the construction of CIP funded projects. Excavating utility trenches, roadway grading and storm drainage channel construction could increase soil erosion and subsequent water quality degradation (increased humidity) and water course siltation. Increased siltation, paricularly in the City's drainage system in the Green River floodplain, could contribute to higher manitenance costs to prevent loss of capacity in transporting storm water runoff. CIP project construction may also have long -term impacts on surface water drainage. These potential impacts are varied, including both adverse and beneficial effects as follows: New and widened roads and bridges and new structures such as buildings and reservoirs could increase the total surface area in the City covered with impervious surfaces. Increased impervious surfaces could reduce the amount of infiltration and groundwater recharge from precipi- tation. Reduced infiltration could subsequently encourage greater surface water runoff and storm flow peaks during storm events. For example, the Southcenter Boulevard expansion project could increase impervious surfaces by 3.5 acres, raising runoff volume during a 100 - year storm by 2.5 cubic feet /second (CFS) (U.S. DOT Feburary 1983). For comparison, Green River discharge during a storm of this intesity is an estimated 12,000 cfs. Although the cumulative impact of all CIP projects could be far greater than 2.5 cfs, it is unlikely that increased runoff from these projects would substantially alter present conditions. Localized street flooding problems, however, could be aggravated. Greater roadway surface area in the City could also increase potential sources of pollutants (e.g., oil and grease) that may enter creeks, streams and other water features. - The feeder springs for a surface stream should be protected in a natural state by the development of McMicken Park. - Increasing the capacity of sewer lines to accommodate existing and potential wastewater flows may reduce the rate of sewage overflows presently discharged into the Green River. A lessened potential for overflows could contribute to improved water quality. Groundwater resources may also be affected by CIP projects. Included in water facility improvements are two groundwater wells for supplementing, if not eventually replacing, current public water supplies. These wells would be located in southeast Tukwila and tap groundwater resources in the Green River aquifer. The City's groundwater study cited two advantages in developing this aquifer rather than the Upland aquifer: production wells could be shallower and less expensive to install, and there is presently little development of the Green River aquifer,therefore., little potential for interference of adjacent wells. The adequacy of the aquifer from the stand- point of water quality and water balance (withdraw vs. recharge) is presently unknown, however. If City water needs from the aquifer exceeds its rate of natural recharge, the flow of groundwater into the Green River could be reversed (Shannon & Wilson, December 1981). Although this reversed flow may assure the long -term productivity of the aquifer as a public water source, it could also affect surface flow in the Green River. The magnitude of the impact of potential reverse flow cannot be determined until after an exploratory drilling program assessing the characteristics of the aquifer (proposed as part of the CIP well program). 4.4.4 Biological Resourses Biological resources are most affected by the proposed road improvement projects in the CIP. Road improvements could produce both long -term and short -term impacts. Land preparation activities, such as clearing and grading, may be necessary for roadway projects involving widening, extension or new construction. Cleared land would subsequently be paved or covered with overburden for the improved roadway. For example, the Southcenter Boulevard extension project could result in clearing 4.5 acres of vegetation (U.S. DOT, February 1983). The major vegetation loss may occur along the Green River channel as a consequence of bridge construction. The two other CIP projects . involving bridge construction across the Green River could have similar effects. In addition, the construction of the connector between I -5.and South 57th Street could result in substantial vegetation clearing for the road right -of -way. Vegetation removal in watercourse and hillside areas affect the most productive wildlife habitats (riparian and forest) in the City and could permanently reduce dependent wildlife populations. Roadway improvements may also require short -term vegetation clearing for equipment and materials - transport and storage (U.S. DOT, February 1983). These areas could be revegetated upon completion of the projects but restoration of their natural habitat capacity may occur only after a period of time. Species most adaptable to disturbed habitats, including various birds and rodents, would probably reoccupy the site initially. The impacts of other CIP projects on biological resources will vary by type of facility. Most water and sewer lines and ancillary facilities are located in existing streets and road rights -of -way and should not affect vegetation. A few water lines in the Tukwila Hill residential community are located along unimproved road rights -of -way that could require the permanent removal of vegetation. Also, the construction of three water reservoirs may also cause permanent loss of woodland vegetation and wildlife habitat. Park and recreation improvements, particularly the proposed McMicken Park, may alter the present character of vegetation and habitat. Woodlands could be partially cleared, or thinned, to install recreational improvements and parking facilities. The potential impacts of CIP projects on water reSources could subsequently affect instream wildlife resources. As noted previously, reduced sewage overflow and increased roadway pollution that may result from proposed CIP improvements could change present water quality conditions in the Green River. Likewise, the potential reversal of groundwater flows as a consequence of groundwater withdrawal's *wells could have some effect on flows in the Green River. Changes in the river's quality and quantity could affect aquatic habitat. The regional nature of water and instream resource problems in the Green River, however, suggests that CIP projects may not produce sub- stantial changes from current conditions, but should have a cumulative effect on future conditions. 4.4.5 Air Resources Most air resource impacts of CIP projects are local in nature. All CIP projects involving clearing and grading or cut - and -fill activities could produce localized, short -term particulate pollution. The operation of construction equipment may also produce short -term emissions. CIP air resource impacts, however, are most closely related to proposed road system improvements. CIP improvements could change current traffic circulation patterns and conditions in Tukwila and subsequently local long -term air pollution problems relative to motor vehicles (see Section 4.3.2 for traffic impact assessment). Air quality conditions in the City will continue to be dominated by regional auto travel behavior. Traffic volumes both in Tukwila and metropolitan Seattle should continue to increase through the.CIP's six -year time frame. Therefore, local air quality conditions will continue to be determined by outside variables: the emissions produced.by higher traffic volume, travel behavior, and stricter automobile performance standards. At the local level, road projects substantially altering current traffic volumes on the road system could produce improved air quality conditions on contiguous properties. The freeway -- connector should most influence localized air quality conditions by redistributing traffic volumes from arterials along the I -405 corridor to south Tukwila. Extending Minkler Boulevard from Southcenter Parkway to SR -181 and completing the Tukwila Parkway Green River crossing at SR -181 could also change local air quality conditions by alleviating potential traffic volumes on Strander Boulevard and South 180th Street. Generally, properties adjacent to arterials that may carry fewer vehicles as a consequence of CIP implementation, could experience local air quality improvements. Localized air quality degradation could be expected for properties along new streets and arterials and arterials experiencing higher traffic volumes with CIP improvements. These improvements should have the cumulative effect of reducing excessive travel in the City, and thereby, total emissions. CIP projects that do not affect traffic distribution may also improve local air quality. Road widenings and intersection improvements(e.g., turning lanes, signalization) could reduce traffic congestion and delays, lowering potential automobile emissions from stalled traffic. Transit services may also benefit from new facilities (transfer station, transit stops) and indirectly from improvedcirculation. To the degree these improvements promote greater transit use (as opposed to the private automobile), additional improvements to local air quality conditions may result. There- fore, overall local air quality improvements can be anticipated in Tukwila as a result of the more efficient traffic circulation patterns CIP facilities could produce. 4.4.6 Noise The impacts of CIP projects on noise conditions in Tukwila are similar to air resource impacts. Facility construction could result in short -term noise impacts from equipment operation and building activities. Construction activities in the McMicken Heights and Tukwila Hill residential communities could most affect noise - sensitive activities. Long -term noise impacts of the CIP could occur as a consequence of road system improvements. Roadway noise impacts occur in areas contiguous to the facility and decrease with distance from it. Traffic volumes and the type of vehicle most influence roadway noise, with truck traffic producing a disproportionate amount of noise. Roadway gradient also.affects vehicle noise but generally is not a factor in the relatively flat industrial district in Tukwila where traffic volumes are greatest. Noise impacts, therefore, are attributable to street projects redistributing traffic volumes on the City's road network. Noise level reductions produced by CIP - related traffic redistribution should have little impact on most roadside activities. Roadways along the I -405 corridor should generally have noise levels belowthose occurring without CIP improvements.. The opposite should characterize arterials in south Tukwila. In both areas most roadside land uses are commercial and industrial activities that tend to be less sensitive to roadway noise. Zoning setbacks for structures further attenuate potential impacts on these uses. Noise level impacts could influence pedestrian activity, but changes in excess of 4 to 5 decibles are necessary to be perceived. The I -5 connector with 57th Avenue South may have the most significant noise impacts of CIP projects. The alignment of this roadway traverses an area planned for low density residential uses. The roadway could introduce noise level increases. 4.4.7 Aesthetics CIP projects could have both short -term and long -term impacts on the aesthetic character of Tukwila. Noise and air quality emissions from construction equipment and temporary clearing, grading and excavation for CIP facilities may produce short -term adverse aestheticimpacts. Long -term impacts of the CIP should include both beneficialand adverse effects as follows: - Residential street improvements could upgrade the appearance of residential neighborhoods; - Park facilities such as completing Christensen Trail and McMicken Park could encourage greater use of these areas, providing greater opportunities for public enjoyment of the City's aesthetic resources; - Roadway and bridge construction in presently undeveloped areas (e.g., two Green River crossings and the I -5 connector) may lessen the visual quality of local areas by modifying vegetation and topography with manmade artifacts and by increasing noise and air pollutant emissions; - Water reservoir construction in residential areas could disrupt the views of surrounding properties and introduce shade and shadow impacts. 74 CHAPTER V Mitigations 5.1 Municipal Finances 5.1.1 Capital Improvement Planning The Six Year Capital Improvement Program addressed in this study is the first of an annual series of reports that will guide future capital project development in Tukwila. Subsequent reports will build upon the framework established by this CIP, updating and revising as project implementation and changing fiscal and community needs may dictate. The fiscal impact assessment in this DEIS demonstrates the need for annual monitoring of City finances for the purpose of capital facility funding. The alternative funding sources available to the City and the potential fluctuation of Tukwila's financial resources to general economic conditions make it difficult to predict with certainty future CIP funding capacity. This section assesses mitigations that would improve future capital facility planning in Tukwila. These mitigations include developing capital needs data systems that are not available for the current CIP as well as planning strategies that could avoid some of the financing problems discussed in Section 4.1. The following mitigations are derived largely from the PSCOG King County Subregional Council's recommendations for improved local capital facilities planning (refer to Appendix C). Capital Facilities Inventory. Append an inventory of public facilities to future CIP's for the purpose of providing City decisionmakers with a method of monitoring capital facility main- tenance, replacement and /or expansion in Tukwila (Appendix C, recommendations C6, C9, C13, C14, C15, C16, C21). The inventory could include all public streets and bridges, public buildings, parks and recreation facilities and major water and sewer infrastructure. For each existing or anticipated facility the inventory would maintain the following information: Year built or rebuilt /cost /finance sources; Current facility condition /existing replacement value /anticipated lifespan of facility, with and without maintenance; Current maintenance need /priority /estimated cost and finance source; Capital construction need /priority /estimated cost and finance source. This facility inventory may be maintained by City subarea to differentiate the capital needsfor communities and to distinguish the needs of areas that may annex to the City (see annexation discussion below). Theinitial inventory would establish baseline conditions with subsequent years incorporating annual updates. The inventory could enhance long -range capital facility planning in Tukwila. Capital construction needs are distinguished from capital maintenance and renovation needs to provide a method of monitoring the degree to which facility maintenance expenditures are deferred as a short -term response to tight . budgetary considerations. This practice has become increasingly common in recent years, particularly as State and Federal grants -in -aid, a traditional source of revenue for maintaining or replacing substandard facilities, have diminished (City of Seattle, 1983 -1988 CIP, n.d; PSCOG, King Subregional Council, May 1983). PSCOG identified the two -part program as a method presently used by some King County jurisdictions for planning capital improvements and recommended a separate capital replacement fund for municipal budgets. Tukwila's comparatively new public infrastructure has not encountered major funding conflicts between capital facility construction and renovation needs. The City's rapid tax base growth and available intergovernment grants -in -aid in the early 1970's has permitted the road and water systems in the old residential community on Tukwila Hill to be renovated. In recent years, as the City's fiscal situation has become increasingly constrained, there are definite signs that Tukwila could face similar decisions, most notably: - The Department of Public Works street pavement evaluation study which identified' rapidly growing street repair needs and an expanded maintenance program to retard further deterioration (Tukwila, DPW, July 1980);- - Insufficient monthly water service rates to provide an adequate reserve fund for infrastructure replacement and expansion; - Tukwila has pursued annexation of older contiguous, residential . communi- ties in recent years. Existing public facilities in these communities tend to be substantially older, or lacking completely, than comparable residential areas in the City. Although no major annexation has yet been successful (the most recent, Allentown, was rejected in September 1983), potential future annexations could require a commitment of revenues for facility replacement or rehabilitation in these areas; - The growing unlikelihood of intergovernmental revenues to implement CIP arterial improvements. The two -part CIP may assist City decisionmakers and the general public in identifying potential needs and balancing available revenues between new capital projects and existing facility renovation and maintenance. Also, identifying maintenance costs in the CIP could provide a better understanding of their impact on Tukwila's budget where they are presently distributed among several funds. This mitigation could increase City annual operating expenditures for Public Works and general government services because of expected manhour requirements for added capital maintenance as well as that needed to implement the inventory. Debt Service Assessment Tukwila's future C IPs could include a discussion of the City's debt service capacity and liability (Appendix C, recommendations C14, C23, C39, C40). This discussion should include councilmanic and general obligation • bond indebtedness, revenue bond indebtedness, the amount of outstanding non - municipal obligations in L.T.D. bonds for capital projects in Tukwila and current bond interest rates (the cost of long -term borrowing) for near -term issue. Annual revenue needs for repaying the debt service could also be projected for the period until these bonds are retired. The L.I.D. debt assessment should include annual payment obligations, data on deliquent payments and the revenue require- ments of the City's L.I. bond guarantee fund. Tukwila's debt capacity (as established by State statuatory limits) is presently in good condition. General bonding capacity, however, is determined by indefinite factors as well. The competition among local jurisdictions in selling bonds (what the bond market can absorb) and the willingness of tax payers to support increased taxation or service charges are two factors that could restrict "reasonable" debt limits to levels substantially below those established by the State (PSCOG, King Subregional Council, May 1983). Prevailing lending rates should demonstrate the general demand for funds. For taxpayer impacts, representative case studies using various household (for residents) and business incomes could be incorporated into the CIP. The assessment would study the impacts of the following: - Current regular and excess property tax levies, including overlapping jurisdictions (school districts, King County, Port of Seattle), and the total share devoted for capital purposes and debt service; - Service charges for utilities and the share dedicated to capital projects and debt service; - Representative costs of local improvement districts to participants; - Other costs to residents and businesses for City revenues (e.g. sales taxes, charges, etc.) that may be used for capital purposes; - Estimated costs to City taxpayers of projected capital programs for overlapping jurisdictions during the City's CIP time frame. This baseline data could be used to assess potential effects of alternative funding strategies on City residents and businesses to determine the "total practical spending limits" for capital projects (PSCOG, King Subregional Council, May 1983). Intergovernmental CIP Planning Several capital improvements in Tukwila affect transportation facilities that accommodate regional "through" traffic as well as traffic to and from City destinations. These facilities include the major arterials traversing the City: SR -181 and the S. 154th Street /Southcenter Boulevard /S.E. Grady Way corridor. PSCOG recommendations encourage interjurisdictional cooperation for improvements to regional facilities as.a means of reducing counter - productive competition for capital funding revenues (Appendix C, recommendations C24 through C36). Two basic approaches are described: making regional jurisdictions such as King County the responsible agency for obtaining funding for regional facilities and coordinating the timing of bond proposals. Tukwila has engaged in joint capital improvement projects with adjacent jurisdictions over the past few years. At present, two of Tukwila:'s major arterial projects, the Grady Way and 56th Avenue South bridge replacements are being coordinated with either the City of Renton or King County. Both projects are presently funded largely using State and Federal grants with local matching funds (Renton, August 1982; Tukwila unpublished CIP). The City and King County have also cooperated on park projects of mutual benefit to their respective neighborhoods. Despite coorperative efforts among jurisdictions on certain capital projects, these jurisdictions are pursuing individual improvements on interrelated facilities. Tukwila, King County and Renton are each proposing improvements along S. 154th Street/ Southcenter Blvd. /Grady Way; each with different funding sources (Renton, August 1982; King County, Budget Office, 1982). Likewise, King County and Tukwila are proposing improvements along the East Marginal Way S. /Interurban .- Avenue /West Valley corridor. In both projects, Tukwila is proposing primarily grant revenue for funding, while the other jurisdictions may use more reliable local revenues. The varying funding sources could result in improvements being implemented along certain corridor segments and not others, aggravating traffic problems in unimproved areas. A cooperative effort to upgrade each corridor as a single project could avoid the potential problems arising from piecemeal capital improvements along regional facilities. Annexation Area CIP Tukwila has pursued annexation of contiguous unincorporated communities on several occasions in recent years. Although these efforts have been unsuccessful to date, changing attitudes in these communities could eventually lead to sufficient support for annexation. Most of these communities potentially annexing to Tukwila are mature residential neighborhoods. Therefore, these communities upon entering the City could generate a greater need for govern- ment expenditures than municipal income (several of Tukwila's preliminary fiscal assessments for proposed income support this contention). The age of the communities also introduces the possibility of increased capital facility maintenance and replacement needs as well as new facilities. This need could have an immediate effect on Tukwila's annual capital improvement program. The City could undertake preparatory studies of capital facility needs in potential annexation areas prior to annexation itself. The purpose of these studies would be to eventually provide a data inventory similar to that discussed above. Needs in potential annexation neighborhoods could be evaluated on the basis of facility conditions in comparable Tukwila communities. Specific study efforts could include: - A sphere -of- influence study outlining the general characteristics of these communities and public service and facility needs. This study would not be specific to any particular annexation proposal, but would serve as an element of Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan defining the City's policies toward these areas; - Facility inventories and assessments could be prepared for specific areas as annexation proposals are made. The intent of these studies would be to establish a capital needs program for this community that can be incorporated into the City's overall CIP upon annexation. These planning efforts could have two beneficial impacts. First, the City may have a better understanding of the capital needs and subsequent financing requirements of adjacent communities when they annex to the City. This approach could permit these needs to be incorporated into the overall CIP with minimal discruption of current projects. Secondly, residents in annexation areas may obtain a better understanding of what improvements the City can accomplish in their community, possibly encouraging more support of annexa- tion proposals. This mitigation could increase operational expenditures for Tukwila due to manpower needs to implement the studies. The expense would be borne by existing City communities rather than the annexation area's residents since the work effort would be completed prior to annexation (Joint studies with County staff could minimize this issue, however). 5.1.2 CIP Financing Strategies The mitigations assessed in the preceding section are designed to improve the value of the CIP as a planning tool in Tukwila. This section assesses alterna- tive financing strategies for CIP projects that could mitigate some of the potential adverse effects described in Section 4.1 and 4.2 of Chapter IV. The strategies assessed herein include the revenue sources identified in Chapter IV, but recommends specific applications of these sources to minimize inequities. Property Taxes -- Excess Levies Property taxes may be used to finance specific projects in the CIP despite its general inequities. Projects of city -wide benefit and extended life- cycles are suited to long -term debt financing through excess levies. Park and recreation facilities which are available to both City residents and non - residents (including employees and patrons of the Tukwila business comminity) could be financed by this mothod without creating substantial inequities for City taxpayers Although user fees could present a more equitable method of financing recreation facilities (see subsequent discussion) it could be impractical to charge all users for certain facilities (e.g., jogging trail along Green River). In addition, a flat -rate user charge without exemptions provides 78 no adjustment for ability -to -pay, possibly excluding some social groups from using them. The excess levy provides a 100% exemption for low and moderate income elderly households, although non- elderly low and moderate income house- holds are not exempted. Unlike the user charge, the excess levy also provides no direct means of recovering facility.costs from residents of adjacent communities who use them. This issue could be resolved through eventual annexation and City debt assumption by these communities. A second possible use of the excess. levy is an alternative method of financing general facility needs in the water utility. As described in Chapter IV, the proposed levy charge on new development may not be permitted subsequent to Senate Bill 4972. Since increased water rates have been proposed for partly funding needed improvements (for revenue bond redemption), increasing.them further to fund all the cost could create hardships for some users. The . exemptions and cost distribution of an excess levy rather than another water rate increase may merit use of this approach. A final decision should be deferred until the comparative impacts of each approach has been assessed on representative households and businesses, including the exemptions or discounts offered hardship social groups (the PSCOG study noted that the cost to tax payers of either property tax supported G.O. bonds or service charge supported revenue bonds do not differ substantially). Increasing the regular property tax levy as an option to the excess levy is not a feasible mitigation. The cost of either option, excluding exemptions, would be similar. Low and moderate income elderly households, however, are permitted a 15% exemption from the regular levy, and thus could experience greater costs than if excess levy funding was implemented. Also., the regular levy increase is permanent and would not expire as excise levies do once the bonds are redeemed. Utility Tax Should Tukwila elect to raise new revenues to meet future capital needs without affecting general government services, the utility tax could be implemented. The utility tax could diversify the local tax base for capital facility financing, reducing the City's current susceptability to economic cycles. Most other municipalities in King County presently have this tax, therefore the City would not impose excess tax burdens on its residents and businesses (except for unincorporated County communities because counties are not empowered to implement this tax). Earmarking utility tax revenues for the City's residential street and utility undergrounding programs could encourage community support for the levy. This support is important because the tax is subject to potential voter approval by referendum. Allocating utility tax revenues to residential street repairs could also make the City /County utility tax differential accep- table to annexation and residents. Current local tax revenues used for these improvements (sales and regular levy property tax levy) could be reallocated to other projects. This action could offset the potential inequities of using revenues largely generated by non - residential uses for residential capital projects. Although the amount of utility tax paid is commensurate with the cost of the service to the user (larger users pay more tax), exemptions for fixed income households is advisable to avoid potential adverse affects. User Fees and Charges User fees and charges for services are generally considered an equitable method of financing projects since they are paid directly by users. When used to fund non - essential services that benefit a small clientele (i°n.Tukwila operations and capital improvements at Foster Golf Links are financed by this method), service charges prove to be an effective method of municipal financing (Lucy 10/1981). Other proponents view charges as a rationing tool (much as a supply /demand market system) moderating service demand and detering overuse of facilities (Thompson 1976). Cities assert that user fees assume a "threshold ability to pay" for all persons interested in the service and could discourage persons with limited incomes from using facilities they otherwise would. User fees are of limited applicability in Tukwila given current municipal authority. The Parks and Recreation Department uses fees at the golf links and for funding many special programs offered through the Tukwila Community Center. These charges are structured to cover the operating costs of these programs (e.g., instruction, materials). Increasing charges for these programs, or implementing general user charges for parks and other facilities (difficult, but has been done by other jurisdictions) could raise reserves for capital projects and property acquisition. These charges, however, could push recreation costs to a level prohibiting or reducing the ability of some social groups to use public facilities. The persons most affected by user charges could include both elderly and juveniles, the two groups recreation programs are intended to help the most. Therefore, user charges for capital purposes could provide counterproductive to City social objectives. A second limitation of user fees for capital facilities is the difficulty of applying them where needed the most -.the road system: A form of road user fee can presently be found in Washington 'State automobile registration fees and the motor vehicle fuel tax. These charges are closest to a street user fee, obtaining revenue directly from the motorist. Given the large share of capital improvement costs attributable to the road system, user fee options include a local motor fuel tax or increased State fuel taxes and /or vehicle registration fees, allocated through a system similar to the AB shared - revenue program. These financing methods are currently beyond local authority and would require action by the State Legislature. A local motor fuel tax would have to be universal, rather than a local option, to work. Piecemeal implementation of a local gas tax would merely be an incentive to motorists to buy gas elsewhere, particularly within a metropolitan region. Also, if the tax were collected by the State and redistributed to local government, as the State gas tax presently is, the allocation formula could affect funding equity. Motorists using City streets do not necessarily purchase th.ei:r gasoline in the City, paricularly if they are non - residents. Therefore, if revenues were redistributed like sales taxes, the revenue would not necessarily reflect actual use. Likewise, per capita redistribution is based on residential population and may not represent an equitable allocation, particularly in Tukwila with substantial commercial and industrial districts. An allocation based on road mileage and type could be a more equitable funding method. Street Utility With street projects comprising the greatest capital need in most communities, increasing attention has been given to establishing a street utility along the line of other self- supporting utilities. PSCOG recommendations suggest a road utility as a means of assessing project beneficiaries for street capital improvements (Appendix C, recommendation C.7). The street utility would operate as a self-supported agency, obtaining revenue from a city -wide rate based on the trip - generating potential of individual land use types. • The chief advantage of the street utility alternative is its relative equity compared to current local government revenue sources. The rate structure would differentiate land uses according to their traffic- generating potential. This financing approach establishes a closer relationship'between the amount of demand individual developments placed on the road system, and the amount of revenue they contribute to upgrading the system. Capital projects could also be financed through revenue bonds supported by rate income, rather than general obligation bonds paid for through excess property tax revenues. LID financing could still be used for local benefit projects, with levies also structured according to trip generation potential. Although this levy assesses users in the City according to street service needs, some inequities may occur. Monthly service charges would probably be constant for individual land use types, based on trip - generation factors. Therefore, the monthly charge for a single - family residence with one driver could be the same as a household with two or more drivers. (The trip - generation factors for non - residential uses are commonly based on floor area; thereby varying monthly service charges by the site of the establishment). Also, a community with a high proportion of through traffic such as Tukwila experiences on SR -181, would not recover a share of the street maintenance/ replacement needs from these non -City based users. State enabling legislation is also required to empower local governments to establish road. utilities. General /Local Benefit Financing Applying a general /local financing strategy to all facility improvements using current fund revenues could establish a more equitable capital funding plan. Preliminary CIP funding proposals currently recommend localized financing (LID's) for road, sewer, and water improvements benefitting a small area within the City. LID financing could be extended to other CIP projects that disproportionately benefit a localized area but are proposed for general revenue support. State enabling legislation for LID's provides local government with flexibility in determining a levy fomula that best defines "benefit," or the cost carried by individual properties. Increased LID financing could alleviate potential conflicts between capital facility and general services expenditures for limited current fund revenues. This strategy is also a method of encouraging greater participation by the private sector in financing capital projects (see Appendix C, PSCOG recommendations C.11, C.12) . A financing strategy very similar to LID's is the Benefit Area Improvement District (BAID) concept (Bellevue, 4/.1982). The BAID would be delineated around major business centers for the purpose of funding road improvements. BAID levy obligations would be distinguished first between public (outside BAID) and private (within BAID) benefit. Revenue obligations for properties within the BAID could be further refined between those abutting the improve- ment (direct benefactors) and other properties that indirectly benefit from the projects). The BAID strategy could prove useful for funding major arterial projects within the City's commercial /industrial areas particularly if intergovernmental revenues are not available. Increasing LID financing of CIP projects as an alternative to the planned use of general or intergovernmental revenues could aggravate the potential problems with this method as cited previously (Section 4.1). Increased LID /BAID bond issues could increase the amount of annual debt payment that may be defaulted by responsible parties. The City is obligated to cover these costs through its L.I. guarantee fund, thereby potentially affecting revenues for other budget funds. Tukwila could implement the following policies to reduce the potential adverse impacts of LID financing in general, and to enhance its value as mitigation for the problems of other revenue sources: • - Assess current and historical LID financing trends, particularly during periods of slow economic growth, to determine the worse -case ratio of default payments to annual repayment obligation. This sum is the minimum amount of revenue to be maintained in the guarantee fund, subject to the requirements of State law, and - Levy a service charge on LID participants at an equitable rate that assures the maintenance of minimum revenue needs in the guarantee fund without affecting other general revenue sources; or - Establish a maximum limit to outstanding LID bond obligations that the City is able or willing to guarantee with general revenues. Should the amount of LID funding sought by local property owners exceed this maximum, all LID petitions should be evaluated according to standardized criteria and prioritized. Petitions can then be implemented according to their priority ranking until the City's .capacity limit is reached. Subsequent petitions may either be deferred until the City's capacity can support their implementation or property owners may seek other sources to finance their capital facilities. Business and. Occupation Tax The business and occupation tax could be used to finance arterial and commercial street improvements should intergovernmental revenues both be available for CIP projects. Since this tax would be levied on the City's business community, allocating B & 0 revenues for capital projects benefitting these uses is the most equitable use of the funds. Also, the BAID tax is the only local source (beyond strategies such as the BAID or street utility) that could potentially yield the large amounts of revenue needed for arterial projects if intergovern- mental grants prove insufficient. The controversial nature of this tax in the City, however, may limit its use to a last resort measure when other funding options have been exhausted and arterial conditions reach a stage of disrepair or service inadequacy. 5.2 Community Environment 5.2.1 Land Use Vacant areas of Tukwila that could develop subsequent to the construction of CIP facilities are addressed by both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code. Strict enforcement of these policies and regulations could assure that the land development that does occur will conform to the type and intensity of activity anticipated by the City. The vacant, unincorporated areas south of the City could be annexed and rezoned in conformance with the City's Comprehen- sive Plan prior to implementing sewer and road improvements. This strategy could discourage unplanned development or land development contrary to the objectives of the City. 5.2.2 Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance No mitigations are warranted for the housing and neighborhood maintenance impacts of the CIP. 5.2.3 Public Services No mitigations are necessary for public safety impacts of the action. Schools The potential impact of CIP financing requirements on the capacity of local school districts to implement their own capital programs could be mitigated by coordinating capital financing strategies as described in Section 5.1.1. Otherwise, no mitigations are warranted for the CIP's school impacts. Parks and Recreation No mitigation measures are necessary. Maintenance No mitigation measures beyond those described in Section 5.1.1, Capital Improvement Planning, recommending a two -part program to distinguish maintenance /replacement needs from new facilities are proposed. Historical and Cultural Services and Facilities If archaeological resources are uncovered during site preparation for capital facility construction, work should be temporarily stopped and the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historical Preservation contacted. Social and Health Services No mitigation measures are necessary. 5.3 Public Infrastructure Coordinating utility and street improvements could avoid unnecessary • disruption of traffic on City streets. Utility infrastructures are primarily along street rights -of -way. Therefore, building these facilities requires traffic modifications as roadways are torn up. Likewise, street modifications could involve traffic disruptions from construction activities. Consolidating construction of these facilities minimizes the total time traffic movement on these roadways could further reduce potential traffic disruption. Coordinating street and utility improvements may also enable financing to be consolidated into a single LID, encouraging more efficiency in project funding. Subsequent CIP's could identify projects that should be coordinated to maximize financing and operational efficiency. Project coordination in developing or redeveloping areas of Tukwila could minimize indirect impacts of land development on the service capacities of existing facilities. At present, the absence of sewer infrastructures or capacity imposes the greatest constraint to development while undersized roadways imposes the least (essentially all City areas are accessible from an existing public roadway). Implementing water and sewer improvements prior to upgrading the arterials serving these properties could permit land development that- causes more problems for the City's road. networks by increasing traffic volumes. The current CIP financing program for these facilities: intergovernmental grants for arterials and LID's for most water and sewer facilities may encourage uncoordinated development because of the uncertain availability of.grants. To minimize these.prob.l.ems, the City . may.establish CIP priorities assuming certain road improvements be implemented prior or concurrent to growth - inducing utility improvements as follows: - Prior to installing sewer improvements intended to allow development in the unincorporated areas south of Tukwila. or. redevelopment,._i.n_south Tukwila, build the connector. between I -5 and 57th Street South. 83 prior to installing sewer improvements in the Burlington district east of the Green River, implement the intersection and roadway improvements that upgrade traffic conditions along SR -181. 5.4 Physical Environment Presently, CIP projects are little more than concepts - a list of facilities needed to resolve current system problemsor-to accommodate future development. As these projects enter the engineering and design phase, assessments of specific project impacts and mitigations will be possible. The implementation of individual public improvements, except those specificlaly exempted by SEPA, will be subject to subsequent environmental assessment. Appendix B identified projects whose potential impacts could warrant detailed environmental analysis. These assessments will define more specific mitiga- tions for project impacts based on the detailed design information that will be available at the time. Given the type of CIP projects, the following miti- gations could be implemented to minimize potential impacts: Land alteration activities, such as clearing, grading, excavation and filling within the City of Tukwila are regulated by City standards which are intended to minimize environmentaldamage and to insure no unstable situations are created. Strict adherence to erosion control and other land alteration and drainage system regulations could reduce stream siltation potential during project construction. Construction activity along the Green River may require special permits intended to minimize impacts from agencies such as the Washington State Department of Fisheries and Game. Revegetation of land temporarily disturbed for building capital improvements could help restore wildlife habitat. Consideration should be given to vegetation known to have value for wildlife in selecting ornamental vegetation for above - ground improvements (e.g., reservoirs) or along new roadways. Suspended particulates generated during facility construction could be reduced through techniques such as watering areas of exposed earth and minimizing the time earth is exposed. The Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA) requires that reasonable precautions be taken to prevent particulate pollution. Construction noise can be mitigated by measures such as limiting construction activity to daytime hours, using mufflers on construction equipment or by installing temporary noise -- attenuating shields around stationary equipment. Measures that mitigate the loss of vegetation, topography modification and protect water resources may help maintain the aesthetic character of the City. Ornamental vegetation screening of above - ground facilities could also reduce adverse aesthetic impacts. 5.5 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 5.5.1 Municipal Finances Pending future economic change in Tukwila and its effect on municipal revenues and expenditures, either tax increases or reductions in public service levels may be necessary to provide CIP funding. 5.5.2 Community Environment Land use: Implementing new taxes, such as a business and occupation tax, to finance CIP projects could alter Tukwila's competitve standing with other municipalities and communities in attracting additional business and industry. Land uses most affected by these impacts are wholesale /warehousing and light industry, currently a significant part of the City's economy. Some existing industries may choose to relocate to other communities that have not enacted this tax. Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance Implementing property tax increases to finance CIP projects could be counter- productive to City efforts to encourage private housing rehabilitation and prevent neighborhood deterioration. Public Services The operational capacities of existing public services could be affected if reductions in general expenditures are used to finance capital improvements. The need for increased operational expenses (e.g., road maintenance) could also occur as a consequence of CIP projects. 5.5.3 Public Infrastructure No adverse utility impacts are anticipated as a result of the CIP. 5.5.4 Physical Environment Earth Resources The construction of CIP facilities could accelerate geological processes during the short -term. Permanent soil and topographic alterations may also occur as a consequence of facility construction. Water Resources Potential short -term siltation of surface water features in Tukwila could occur during the construction of CIP facilities. Additional impervious surfaces and roadways could produce a slight increase in storm water runoff and water quality degradation due to roadway pollutants. The operation of ground water wells for municipal purposes could affect the quality and direction of flow of ground water resources over the long term. Biological Resources Native vegetation could be lost as a consequence of building CIP projects. Wildlife habitat could be destroyed as a result of cleared native vegetation and aquatic habitat could be degraded from adverse impacts to streams and wetlands. Air Resources Suspended particulate levels could increase locally during construction of projects requiring excavation or grading activities that expose soils. Noise Short -term noise impacts on surrounding properties may occur during the construction of capital facilities. Roadway improvements and new streets that alter traffic circulation patterns could expose adjacent properties to higher noise levels. Aesthetics Vegetation loss, topographic modification and the visual character of above- ground facilities may reduce the aesthetic quality of the City. _____. _______ ____ CHAPTER VI Alternatives 6.1 Introduction The direct impacts of adopting the six -year CIP assessed in Chapter IV were analyzed in the context of alternative approaches to financing the projects. This chapter addresses alternative Capital Improvement Programs and their effect on municipal revenues and the built and physical environments of the City. Three program alternatives are analyzed: The No Project alternative; the currently Financed Projects alternative and the Existing Need alterna- tive. 6.2 No Project Alternative 6.2.1 General The No Action Alternative could result in no capital investment being made by the City for needed improvements and rehabilitation of existing facilities. The opportunity of comprehensively planning for and scheduling needed capital improvements could be lost. If a capital improvement program was not adopted, recommendations of the various functional master plans may not be implemented. The positive environmental effects which could result from adoption of the capital improvement program may be lost under the no- action alternative. Similarly, the identified adverse environmental impacts may not occur. 6.2.2 Municipal Finances and Community Environment Failure to finance capital improvements could result in indirect costs to potential users of these facilities. For example, street congestion produced by traffic volumes exceeding designed capacities increases the social costs of noise and air pollution, increases traffic hazards and safety problems, increases energy costs, decreases business productivity, and reduces the quality of life for all taxpayers and facility users. Both residents and commuting workers may incure these costs since traffic con - gestion is most likely to occur at peak travel hours. Traffic - related costs associated with deficient public facilities are probably recognized by most motorists.. Traffic congestion and hazardous turning movements frequently contribute to automobile accidents. The lack of road improvements such as uncontrolled intersections and lack of turning lanes for high demand turning movements contributes to traffic accidents. Traffic accidents produce costs for property damage and personal injuries that motorists readily recognize. Similar impacts can be anticipated for users of other facilities experiencing overuse. In addition to indirect human costs to the users, failure to replace or upgrade aging facilities could directly impact municipal finances. Annual operating expenditures could increase as more resources are required to maintain deteriorating facilities at an acceptable level of service. These costs may increase to the point that they offset the annual debt service obligation for bonds that could have been issued to replace the same facility. Deteriorating capital facilities may also lead to degradation of City neighborhoods, both residential and commercial. The physical appearance of City facilities could influence individual decisions to move into the community or to rehabilitate property. If permitted to continue over the 87 long -term, the failure to invest in public facility rehabilitation could result in loss of customers to local businesses, increased property vacancies and stagnation or decline of local government revenues. Public safety services could be required to operate with substandard "equipment, in- hibiting their performance and creating potentially hazardous emergency situa- tions. These operational impacts may contribute to_an even less desirable community for residents and businesses. In addition, presently undeveloped or underdeveloped areas east of the Green River, in south Tukwila and along the Interurban corridor could not be developed. 6.2.3 Public Infrastructure The No Project alternative could continue and aggravate the current system deficiencies of Tukwila's water, sewer and street infrastructures. The City's street system south of I -405 would continue to be plagued by congested streets and intersections, excessive use of local streets, limited accessibility due to "superblocks" and traffic hazards. As traffic volumes increase, longer delays and greater hazard potential could be anticipated. The traffic conditions resulting from no capital improvements could preclude Metro from establishing a regional transit center in the City because of unreliable service. Failure to implement water and sewer improvements could maintain system deficiencies that may pose health and safety hazards. The sewer system could continue to function with undersized mains and pumping stations that could increase the frequency and volume of wastewater overflow discharges into the Green River. Continued dependence on pumping stations could result in higher operating costs, especially as anticipated rate increases for power go into effect. Likewise, Tukwila's inability to provide water storage could result in higher annual operating costs due to Seattle City Water surcharges. Undersized lines and inadequate water pressures could remain in the upper elevations of Tukwila Hill. Inadequate pressures could inhibit fire fighting efforts, presenting a potential public safety hazard. 6.2.4 Physical Environment No impacts to earth, water, or biological resources would occur from the construction or use of CIP projects in this No Project alternative because they would not be implemented. Nevertheless, physical environment resources could be adversely affected by this alternative. Increased potential wastewater overflow discharge could have a detrimental effect on Green River water quality and aquatic habitat. Greater automobile congestion and delays may generate increased localized air pollutant emissions, affecting sites nearby roadways. Traffic would continue to be funneled onto certain arterials because of an incomplete road system, particularly for east /west circulation across the Green River. This condition would encourage greater noise and air pollution emissions along the impacted roadways. 6.3 Currently Financed Projects Alternative This alternative assumes that CIP projects that are presently funded or could have little difficulty in obtaining funding will be implemented. The uncertainty about support for funding methods such as LID's promotes a two - scenario assessment of this alternative. The first scenario includes all projects that are presently funded or have consistently been financed in the past from relatively stable sources such as general government revenues. Following is a list of these projects: 88 Arterial /commercial streets 56th Avenue South bridge replacement; Grady Way bridge replacement; I -5 off -ramp to Strander Blvd. improvement; S. 180th Street /Andover Park East intersection improvements; - All residential street projects; - All equipment purchases; - All sewer projects except LID funded (largely because of the reserved revenues available for capital projects); - All Parks projects; The second scenario includes the above projects, but also assumes that LID funded projects will be built. In neither scenario will major arterial improvements dependent on intergovernmental revenues or water facilities not financed by LID's (due to their lack of definite financing) be built. 6.3.1 Municipal Finances Local funding needs could be substantially lowered by restricting the CIP to currently funded projects. Eliminating commercial and arterial projects could reduce local matching revenues to fund projects with intergovernmental grants to approximately one million dollars. Therefore, local revenue needs for CIP projects over the six -year period may become more manageable, given current sdurces. The indirect costs of inadequate transportation facilities (as described in the No Project alternative) could also be a potential problem in this alternative. These impacts would not substantially change in the LID funding scenario. The need for increased LID Guarantee funds and its impact on general government revenues is the only anticipated difference. 6.3.2 Community Environment The currently funded alternative could produce impacts comparable to those generated by the proposed CIP. The capital projects that most influence residential neighborhood conditions: the City's residential street and utility undergrounding programs; parks and recreational opportunities and sufficient public safety services (up-to-date equipment) would be funded in this alternative. The LID - funded project scenario would produce no substantive impact difference in residential communities. The community impacts of the two scenarios could differ in developing commercial /industrial areas of the City. Many of the road, sewer, and water projects funded by LID's are intended to permit development or redevelopment of these areas. Therefore, while these areas could remain underdeveloped or at their current development intensity without LID financing, implementing these LID projects may encourage new or intensified development. Public service impacts of the funded projects alternative generally do not differ from the proposed CIP action. The parks and recreation facility improvements and equipment needs of current government agencies should be funded in this alternative. Maintenance needs may be lower in the CIP scenario not implementing LID projects because additional sewer, water and road facilities could not be added to the City system. These service need benefits may be offset by the savings afforded by the LID funded improvements that may be implemented in the second scenario. 6.3.3 Public Infrastructure Most road systems would remain unchanged if only currently funded projects in the CIP are implemented. Although residential streets would continue to be 89 improved, most City commercial streets and major arterials could retain current defiencies, contributing to congestion, delays and excessive hazards. Major'systems inefficiencies that may remain: - Excessive surface street use as a consequence of limited freeway accessibility in south Tukwila (connector would not be built); - Continued lack of access through superblocks; - Limited access across Green River between SR -181 and the Andover Industrial Park; - Inadequate intersections and streets (e.g. Southcenter Boulevard); Two major improvements would occur, however: the Grady Way bridge replace- ment, providing an improved alternative to I -405 for local traffic between Tukwila and Renton, and the South 56th Street bridge replacement, providing renewe direct accessibility across Green River to Foster Point. Some inter- section improvements would also be implemented, partly alleviating existing and potential problems at these locations. Implementing LID - funded improvements in addition to currently financed projects could better resolve arterial and commercial street defiencies. LID - funded projects could make three contributions to the City's non- residential street network: increased accessibility through "superblocks," improved accessibility across the Green River south of I -405 and upgraded substandard streets and intersections. These improvements may create more "efficient traffic circulation in the industrial area of Tukwila and reduce traffic hazards. Lack of freeway accessibility in south Tukwila, bottleneck conditions on Southcenter Boulevard, the inability to maximize accessibility across the Green River and continued deficiencies on the arterial system around the Tukwila Hill periphery may continue to trouble the City's road system, even with the LID projects. Both scenarios have similar effects on general water and sewer facilities. The available reserve of cash in the Sewer fund for capital projects enhances the probability that these improvements will be built. Because these projects are most likely to be financed by revenue funds, it is assumed they would be implemented in either scenario. Water facility improve- ments are assumed not to be funded in either scenario because of the lack of reserve revenues and uncertainty about the proposed methods of financing revenue bonds. Therefore, the impacts of this scenario on water facilities is no different from the No Project alternative. Sewer utility impacts are essentially the same as the current CIP. Local infrastructure financed by LID's would be implemented for both water and utility facilities if the LID's are established. These improvements would either resolve current local problems of undersized facilities or extend new service to local areas. 6.3.4 Physical Environment The physical environment impacts of this alternative may not be as extensive as the current CIP because fewer projects would be implemented. In the scenario without LID - funded projects, the impacts on natural environmental resources would resemble those of the No Project Alternative. The arterial improvements implemented basically upgrade or replace existing facilities, therefore, disruption of natural systems would be minimal. Sewer projects likewise would be confined primarily to public rights -of -way previously modified, therefore producing only short -term impacts. Water facility improvements would not be implemented and would not affect natural resources. Although most other CIP projects would be implemented in this alternative 90 (e.g. residential streets,parks.and recreation), these , facilities should have limited impacts on physical environmental parameters. LID - funded projects could produce more extensive impacts on Tukwila's physical environment than just currently funded CIP projects. More commercial streets and water and sewer utility infrastructures would be constructed. With the exception of a couple local commercial streets and one bridge crossing over the Green River, LID - funded projects are generally confined to presently improved sites where natural conditions have been modified. Physical environment impacts of LID projects, therefore, may be limited primarily to short -term effects of construction. 6.4 Existing Need Alternative 6.4.1 General The Existing Need CIP Alternative would include all projects necessary to resolve current facility deficiencies. Projects intended to encourage development of vacant land or redevelopment of low intensity activities would not be included. In addition, projects to upgrade facilities not required from an operational standpoint (e.g. residential streets, some parks and local commercial streets given a low - rating by City staff in problem- solving capacity) would not be implemented. 6.4.2 Municipal Finances /Community Environment The Existing Needs Alternative could reduce local funding needs over the six -year CIP period from 20 to 25 %. Much of the savings would come from the elimination of the residential street program and several recreational facility improvements from the CIP. Despite these revenue savings, the City would still need $30 to $35 million from either intergovernmental sources, or an alternative funding source, to implement arterial and commercial street projects, which are primarily intended to resolve current traffic system deficiencies. Should shared - revenues (which both traffic and water improvements rely on) not be available for the needed amounts, tax or service charge increases may be needed to implement the Existing Needs CIP Alternative. The Existing Needs alternative could also have three major impacts on local communities in Tukwila. First, additional land development in south and east Tukwila and the Interurban corridor may not occur because the sewer, water and road improvements necessary to support it may not be built. Second, eliminating the residential street and reducing the parks improvement program may have a negative effect on private housing rehabilitation efforts, and subsequently the maintenance and enhancement of stable residential neighborhoods. Lastly, with the exception of the Phase I McMicken Park project and rehabilitation and expansion of recreation facilities at Tukwila Park, the elementary school and Foster Park; no creation facilities would be implemented. Therefore, future City residents, workers and customers may be denied recreational opportunities. 6.4.3 Public Infrastructure The Existing Needs CIP Alternative would include most arterial and commercial street improvements and most general facilities for the water and sewer utilities. These facilities are required to resolve existing operational deficiencies. Therefore, the operational impacts of the Existing Needs alternative on existing street and utility systems should not differ significantly from the proposed CIP. 6.4.4 Physical Environment The impact of the Existing Needs alternative on local physical environment resources could be similar to those of the proposed action. Road, sewer and water projects in the existing CIP are largely responsible for most signifi- cant environmental impacts. The majority of projects involving facility extensions or expansions would be built, producing similar impacts as described in Chapter IV, section 4.4. The proposed improvements for new development in south and east Tukwila however, would not be built. The overall extent of physical environment impacts that could occur from this alternative should therefore be reduced from current CIP impacts. 92 CHAPTER VII Resource Commitments 7.1 Short Term versus Long Term Impacts The proposed Capital Improvements Program will implement a number of proj- ects affecting the current level -of- service provided by public facilities in the City of Tukwila. The objective of this program is to resolve exist- ing or projected capital improvement needs in accordance with the adopted plans, goals, and policies of the City. The overall use of the study area's environment has been determined by past and present City policies. However, natural resources will be used and affected by the proposed CIP projects. The CIP does not foreclose future options for the City within the framework of an urban environment. Should future development directions lead to a less intensive environment than anticipated, the proposed facilities should maintain an adequate level of service. If future development should become more inten- sive than planned, proposed facilities could be expanded to accommodate de- mand given the availability of funding sources. Age and use customarily require upgrading or replacement of facilities after a period of time, anyway. The CIP could affect potential public revenues available for funding other government services and facilities. The extent of this impact depends on the CIP financing direction the City may undertake. Direct funding of capi- tal projects would require greater amounts of revenue over a short (six -year) period. Indirect funding through the sale of bonds would reduce the annual revenue requirement but would commit funds to repay debt obligations for a longer time period. Tukwila's current total revenue- generating potential, given its present tax authority, would permit CIP financing without reducing current service levels while retaining potential revenue for future expendi- tures for the duration of its funding period. Delaying implementation of the CIP could continue and increase existing safety and health problems associated with an overused public facility system. Foregoing short -term capital expenditures to residential street improvements could contribute to long -term deterioration of residential neighborhoods by discouraging private housing reinvestment and rehabilita- tion. In addition, delaying implementation of the CIP until the growth of Tukwila's tax base has reached a greater level of funding potential may not offset increased public expenditures for maintenance, hidden costs associated with environmental degradation, and a lower quality -of -life as a consequence of deficient facilities. 7.2 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources Implementation of the Capital Improvement Program will commit land, energy, materials, manpower and public revenue resources for the financing, con- struction and operation of additional capital improvements. The use of land resources for public facilities will, for the most part, involve property that has already been committed to this specific use. Facilities permitting new development in south and east Tukwila, however, may require dedication of vacant or rural land for streets and public facility rights -of -way. The use of energy and materials for the facilities represents an irretrievable commitment of these resources, although some facility materials may be re- cyclable once the project's useful "life" has expired. Manpower needs for construction and operation of these facilities effectively precludes using these resources elsewhere for the duration of these activities. CIP funding commits public revenues to financing capital facilities, merely reducing the funds available for other expenditure opportunities. CIP ex- penditures may enhance future land development and business activity growth in some City subareas such as South Tukwila. Therefore, capital facility financing may encourage City tax base growth and public revenues available for other expenditures. Likewise, the CIP may reduce current maintenance and operating costs associated with deficient facilities. Indirect costs attributable to deficient public services, such as property loss due to delayed fire or police response and traffic congestion and accidents may also be reduced through financing and implementing the CIP. 94 Bibliography BIBLIOGRAPHY American Society of Planning Officials. Local Capital Improvements and Development Management Literature Synthesis. July 1977. City of Bellevue, Office of Environmental Coordination. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Capital Improvements Program. June 1982. Horton Dennis & Associates. Sewer Plan. April 1982. Horton Dennis & Associates. Water Plan. March. 1982. King County, Assessor's Office, Accounting Division. 1983 Codes and Levies King County Taxing Districts. 1983. King County, Budget Office. Capital Improvements Program 1983 —1988. 1983. Lucy, William. "Equity and Planning for Local Services." Journal of the American Planning Association. Vol. 47 No. 4. October 1981. Mercer, John and Phillips, Deborah A. "Attitutes of Homeowners and the Decision to Rehabilitate Property." Urban Geography. Vol. 2 No. 3. 1981 Prentice, P.I. "Urban Financing for Jobs, Profits and Prosperity, 2. Self Interest Questions about Tax Reform.: American Journal of Economics and Sociology. Vol. 35 No. 4. October 1976. Puget Sound Council of Governments King Subregional Council. of Capital and Maintenance Needs in King Subregion. May 1 Puget Sound Council of Governments King Subregional Council. Transportation Plan. June 1981. City of Renton.. Capital Improvement Program 1983 - 1988. August 1982. Robbins, Floyd D. Identifying Youth- Related Problems in the City of Tukwila: Data and Recommendations. January 1983. City of Seattle, Office of Management and Budget. 1983 Budget. October 1982. City of Seattle, Office of Management and Budget. 1982 - 1987 Capital Improvement Program. n.d. Smith, Roger S. "Land Prices and Tax Policy: A Study of Fiscal Impacts." American Journal of Economics and Sociology. V. 37. No. 1. January 1978, 51 -67. City of Tukwila Preliminary Comprehensive City of Tukwila Preliminary Comprehensive The Financing 9 83 . • King Subregional Thompson, Wilbur. "The City as a Distorted Price System." Harold Hochman (_Ed.) The Urban Economy. 1976. City of Tukwila. Community Development Plan 1981 - 1983. 1980. 94 City of Tukwila. Final Annual Budget. 1975_ 1983. City of Tukwila. Annual Financial Report. 1978 - 1982. City of Tukwila, Mayor's Office. Community Development Plan 1981 - 1983. September 1980. City of Tukwila, Office of Community Development. City of Tukwila Annexation Policy and Data Book. 1978. City of Tukwila, Parks and Recreation Department. Long Range Park and Open Space Plan. September 1983. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. September 19, 1977. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. Data Inventory: Natural Environment - Land Use - Housing •and Population - 1975. August 1975. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Tukwila Bend. Office Park. April 1983. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Tukwila City Center. December 1979. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for Tukwila Hotel. June 1982. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Zoning Ordinance. October 1980. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. 1982 Land Use Survey. May 5, 1983. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. The Tukwila Zoning Code. April 20, 1982. City of Tukwila, Department of Public Works. .Transportation Improvement Plan. October 1979. U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington State Department of Transportation, City of Tukwila. Environmental Assessment Southcenter Boulevard Improvements, 62nd Avenue South to Grady Way. March 1983. 95 ;\ City of Tukwila 190E 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM All Interested Persons and Agencies, Bradley J. Collins, Planning Director November 3, 1983 Review Period for the Draft Environmental Impact Statement, City:of Tukwila 1984 — 1989 Capital Improvements Program The purpose of this memorandum is to notify all recipients of the Draft EIS for Tukwila's Six -Year Capital Improvements Program and other interested persons and agencies of a change of review period. The review period for the document is November 3, 1983 through December 8, 1983, rather than the period listed on the EIS cover page. Therefore, all comments on the Draft must be received by the Tukwila Planning Department no later than 5:00 p.m., December 8, 1983. Also Appendices are available for public review at the Tukwila Public Library, Renton Public Library, and the Tukwila Planning Department Environmental Public Information Center. Appendices may also be purchased for $4.00 from the Planning Department. Bradl:ey.J.. 11in) Planning Director City of Tukwi a • Responsible Official DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT for the CITY OF TUKWILA 1984 TO 1989 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM Prepared by CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DEPARTMENT For the Review and Comment of Citizens, Citizen Groups, and Governmental Agencies In Compliance With: The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 Chapter 43.21c, Revised Code of Washington Revised SEPA Guidelines, Effective January 21, 1978 Chapter 197 -10, Washington Administrative Code City of Tukwila Ordinance #1211 DATE OF ISSUE: November 1, 1983 DATE COMMENTS DUE: December 6, 1983 COST PER COPY: $6.00 INTRODUCTION ACTION SPONSOR City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1845 PROPOSED ACTION Adoption of a Six -year Capital Improvements Program to guide public investment in the City of Tukwila. PROJECT LOCATION Tukwila is located in west central King County in the lower Green - Duwamish River Valley. The Tukwila City limits extend generally from South 188th. Street on the south of the Duwamish River on the north, and from 51st Avenue South on the west to the Burlington Northern railroad tracks on the east, encompassing approximately 3.8 square miles. LEAD AGENCY City of Tukwila Planning Department RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL Brad Collins Planning Director 433 -1845 PRINCIPAL CONTRIBUTORS /LOCATION OF BACKGROUND DATA Planning Department Staff City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1845 Environmental Analysis and Document Preparation of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement: 1 John C. Mauk Environmental Planning Consultant P.O. Box 85185 Seattle, Washington 98145 -1185 (206) 527 -8953 Contact Person: John Mauk Graphics: Denise Bieker Graphic Designer 7407 114th South East Renton, Washington 98055 (206) 226 -7210 REQUIRED APPROVALS City of Tukwila Planning Commission Recommendation City of Tukwila City Council Adoption COST OF COPIES: $6.00 DATE OF ISSUE OF DRAFT EIS: November 2, 1983 RETURN COMMENTS TO RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL BY: December 6, 1983 ii RECIPIENTS OF THE DRAFT EIS Federal Environmental Protection Agency Department of Housing and Urban Development (Region X) Federal Highway Administration U.S. Army Corps of Engineers State Office of the Governor W.S. Department of Ecology W.S. Department of Fisheries W.S. Department of Game W.S. Department of Social and Health Services W.S. Department of Transportation W.S. Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation W.S. Planning and Community Affairs Agencies Regional Municipality of Metropolitan:Seattle King County Department of Budget and Program Development Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency Puget Sound Council of Governments Local Government /Public Services City of Renton City of Kent South Central School District #406 Highline School District #401 Val -Vue Sewer District Water District 25 Water District 75 Water District 175 Fire District 1 Fire District 18 Fire District 24 Seattle Water Department City of Tukwila Mayor: Gary L. Van.Dusen City Council: Edgar D. Bauch Lionel C. Bohrer Joe H. Duffie Mabel J. Harris George D. Hill Doris Phelps Wendy Morgan Planning Commission: Joseph Orrico Gerald Knudson Eileen Avery Randy Coplen Leo Sowinski Richard Kirsop Charles Arvidson City Departments: Public Works Parks and Recreation Police Fire Finance Planning Utilities Pacific Northwest Bell Puget Sound Power and Light Company Washington Natural Gas Company Libraries King County Public Library Seattle Municipal Reference Library Tukwila Public Library Renton Public Library Main Branch Kent Public Library Media Daily Journal of Commerce Highline Times Seattle Times Renton Record Chronicle Others Tukwila Chamber of Commerce iv CONTENTS Pages INTRODUCTION i DISTRIBUTION LIST iii LIST OF ENVIRONMENTAL PARAMETERS ix Chapter I Summary 1 Chapter II Project Description 5 2.1 General Description of the Proposal 5 2.1.1 Proposal and Sponsor 5 2.1.2 Project Location 5 2.1.3 Background 5 2.2 Principal Characteristics of the Action 8 2.2.1 Capital Improvement Projects 8 2.2.2 Capital Improvement Program Financing 8 2.2.3 CIP Project Locations 13 2.3 Relationship of the CIP to Land Use, Plans, 13 Policies and Regulations 2.3.1 City of Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Plan 13 2.3.2 City of Tukwila Zoning Code 14 2.3.3 Public Facility Master Plans 14 2.3.4 Capital Improvement Programs 16 Chapter III Existing Environment 19 3.1 Municipal Finances 19 3.1.1 Introduction 19 3.1.2 Budget Overview 19 3.1.3 Capital Project Financing 22 3.2 Community Environment 29 3.2.1 Introduction 29 3.2.2 Land Use 29 3.2.3 Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance 33 3.2.4 Public Services 35 3.3 Public Infrastructure.. 41 3.3.1 Introduction 41 3.3.2 Transportation 41 3.3.3 Utilities 45 3.4 Physical Environment 46 3.4.1 Earth Resources 46 3.4.2 Water Resources 47 3.4.3 Biological Resources 48 3.4.4 Air Quality 48 3.4.5 Noise 49 3.4.6 Aesthetics 49 Chapter IV Impacts 51 4.1 Municipal Finances 51 4.1.1 Introduction 51 4.1.2 Future Tukwila Budget 51 4.1.3 Alternative CIP Financing Strategies 54 4.1.4 Other Capital Financing Sources 58 4.2 Community Environment 61 4.2.1 Introduction 61 4.2.2 Land Use 61 4.2.3 Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance 63 4.2.4 Public Services 65 v Pages 4.3 Public Infrastructure 67 4.3.1 Introduction 67 4.3.2 Transportation 67 4.3.3 Utilities 68 4.4 Physical Environment 69 4.4.1 Introduction 69 4.4.2 Physical Environment 70 4.4.3 Water Resources 70 4.4.4 Biological Resources 71 4.4.5 Air Resources 72 4.4.6 Noise 73 4.4.7 Aesthetics 74 Chapter V Mitigations 75 5.1 Municipal Finances: 75 5.1.1 Capital Improvement Planning 75 5.1.2 CIP Financing Strategies 78 5.2 Community Environment 82 5.2.1 Land Use 82 5.2.2 Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance 82 5.2.3 Public Services 82 5.3 Public Infrastructure 83 5.4 Physical Environment 84 5.5 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 84 5.5.1 Municipal Finances 84 5.5.2 Community Environment 84 5.5.3 Utilities 85 5.5.4 Physical Environment 85 Chapter VI Alternatives 87 6.1 Introduction 87 6.2 No Project Alternative 87 6.2.1 General 87 6.2.2 Municipal Finances and Community 87 Environment 6.2.3 Public Infrastructure 88 6.2.4 Physical Environment 88 6.3 Currently Financed Project Alternative 88 6.3.1 Municipal Finances 89 6.3.2 Community Environment 89 6.3.3 Public Infrastructure 89 6.3.4 Physical Environment 90 6.4 Existing Need Alternative 91 6.4.1 General 91 6.4.2 Municipal Finances /Community Environment 91 6.4.3 Public Infrastructure 91 6.4.4 Physical Environment 92 Cahpter VII Resource Commitments 93 7.1 Short Term Versus Long Term Impacts 93 7.2 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments 93 of Resources Bibliography 94 Appendices Appendix A Appendix B Appendix C vi LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2.1 1984 -1989 Capital Improvement Program Funding Needs 2.2 CIP Projects by Location 12 14 A.1 Budget Revenues 1979 -1983 A.1 A.2 Budget Expenditures 1979 -1983 A.2 A.3 Current Fund Revenues 1979 - 1983.,. A.3 A.4 Actual Current Fund Revenues and Expenditures 1978 -1982 A.4 A.5 City Street & Arterial Fund Revenues 1979 -1983 A.5 A.6 Actual Revenues and Expenses 1978 -1982 A.6 A.7 Intergovernmental Grants 1978 -1982 A.7 A.8 General Debt Capacity -- 1982 (000,000's) A.8 A.9 Tax Revenue Trends (in constant $) A.9 A.10 Type of Local Improvement District A.10 A.11 Population and Housing Trends A.11 A.12 Ranking of Community Problems by Residents and Businesses A.12 . 1975 A.13 1982 Crime Activity, Tukwila and Selected Places A.13 A.14 School District Enrollments A.14 X1.15 Existing City Managed Facilities A.15 A.16 Additional Existing Facilities with the Planning Area A.16 A.17 Projected Local Tax Revenue.: Changes 1983 -1989 A.18 A.18 Projected Current Fund Revenues A.19 A.19 Projected Current Fund Expenditures 1983 -1989 A.20 A.20 Projected City Street and Arterial Street Fund Expenditures A.21 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 2.1 Regional Location: 6 2.2 Vicinity Location 7 2.3 CIP Road Projects by Funding Type 9 2.4 Water Improvements 10 2.5 CIP Sewer Improvements 11. 3.1 Major Revenue Sources for Municipal Finances 1976 to 1983 20 3.2 1983 Budget -Major Revenue Sources of Funds 21 3.3 Current Fund Finances 23 3.4 City Street Fund - Projected and Actual Expenditures 1978 to 1983 25 3.5 Tax Revenue Trends 1975 to 1983 27 3.6 Property Tax Revenue Trends 1975 to 1983 28 3.7 Active Local Improvement Districts 30 3.8 Land Use and Planning Areas 31. 3.9 Residential Construction Trends 34 3.10 Six -Year Undergrounding Program (1976 -1981) and Neighborhood 36 Revitalization 3.11 Public Facilities 37 3.12 Priority Streets - Maintenance 40 3.13 Street and Highway System . 42 3.14 Metro Transit Routes 44 3.15 Aesthetic Resources 50 4.1 Projected Current Fund Revenues 1984 to 1989 52 4.2 Projected Local Tax Revenue Change 1984 to 1989 53 4.3 Projected Capacity to Fund Capital. Improvements Program 55 List of Environmental Parameters * Existing Parameter Conditions Impacts Mitigations Physical Environment Earth 3.4.1 4.4.2 5.5.4 Air 3.4.4 4.4.5 5.5.4 Water 3.4.2 4.4.3 5.5.4 Flora 3.4.3 4.4.4 5.5.4 Fauna 3.4.3 4.4.4 5.5.4 Noise 3.4.5 4.4.6 5.5.4 Light and Glare n/s n/s n/s Land Use 3.2.2 4.2.2 5.2.1 Natural Resources n/s n/s n/s Risk of Explosion n/s n/s n/s . Human Environment Population 3.2.3 4.2.3 5.2.2 Housing 3.2.3 4.2.3 5.2.2 Employment 3.2.2 4.2.2 5.2.1 Transportation /Circulation 3.3.2 4.3.2 5.5.3 Public Services 3.2.4 4.2.4 5.2.3 Energy n/s n/s n/s Utilities 3.3.3 4.3.3 5.5.3 Human Health n/s n/s n/s Aesthetics 3.4.6 4.4.7 5.5.4 Recreation 3.2.4 4.2.4 5.2.3 Archaeological /Historical 3.2.4 4.2.4 5.2.3 Fiscal 3.1 4.1 5.1 N/S -- not significant *Section of the, report ix - CHAPTER I Summary 1.1 The Proposed Action The City of Tukwila is the sponsor of a non - project action to adopt a Six - Year Capital Improvement Program. The preliminary CIP is a "wish list" of 202 projects or equipment acquisitions recommended by City departments to improve the quality of facilities and level -of- services available to Tukwila residents and businesses. The preliminary Capital Improvement Program identifies needed public facilities in seven categories: (1) commercial and residential streets, (2). buildings, (3) parks and recreation, (4) equipment, (5) equipment rental, (6) water utility, and (7) sewer utility. The total cost of the preliminary program is $67.5 million of which $10.3 million is to come from Tukwila's general government revenues. The sources identified for financing the program are intergovernmental (Federal, State) shared - revenues, local improvement districts, fees and charges, debt service (revenue and general obligation bonds) and general revenues. 1.2 Assessment Findings 1.2.1 Municipal Finances Tukwila's future capacity to finance the CIP is uncertain. The City's principal local revenue sources (property and sales taxes) will remain susceptable to economic cycles, possibly varying greatly from year to year in rate of growth. Present revenue sources may be sufficient to finance CIP local revenue needs without:-_aff_ecting the quality"of public services during periods of economicpropriety;;but may not be adequate during recessions. Also State and'Federal- shared- revenue is required for half of the CIP's funding needs, primarily for commercial street and arterial projects. The availability of these revenues also tends to vary from year to year. Therefore, the City could be faced with future decisions to either increase existing taxes or implement new ones to finance CIP projects, to reduce current public services or delay or eliminate facility upgrading or maintenance. Monitoring new public facility needs or maintenance and replacement requirements of current infrastructure through the CIP process could promote more efficient use of public revenues for this purpose. Shared - revenues and debt service financing needs for CIP projects could be coordinated with other governmental entities to provide greater assurances of the type and cost of projects to be implemented. In addition, the City is empowered to levy other taxes that could be earmarked for-capital needs. These taxes could broaden the City's tax base and may be less susceptable to economic cycles, thus providing greater CIP financing stability. 1.2.2 Community Environment Implementing the CIP could expand existing commercial /industrial communities and encourage stable and viable single - family residential communities. CIP projects will permit new commercial and industrial development to occur along the Interurban corridor north of I -405; east of the Green River and south of the present City limits. In addition, redevelopment of existing warehousing and industrial uses in south Tukwila to more intensive non- residential uses could also be encouraged. Residential street improvements and new upgraded parks facilities could promote private rehabilitation of 1 older residential communities. Public services such as parks and recreation will have expanded facilities and equipment replacement for general government services (e.g. police, fire) should help maintain the current level -of- services offered to residents and'businesses. Upgraded facilities may lessen maintenance needs, although new facilities could offset this. 1.2.3 Public Infrastructure Implementing the CIP should eliminate current system deficiencies of Tukwila's public infrastructure. Road projects could provide direct accessibility between I -5 and south Tukwila, more crossings over the Green River and improved accessibility through superblocks in the Andover Industrial Area. These improvements could reduce excessive travel on local streets and reduced congestion and accident potential on City streets and intersections. Water storage and system pressure deficiencies will also be resolved. Inefficient sewer facilities, particular pump stations which tend to be costly to operate, will be eliminated. 1.2.4 Physical Environment CIP projects could modify current earth biology and water features in the City. These changes could include short -term impacts, such as increased erosion and sedimentation potential, equipment noise and air pollutant emissions, during the construction of proposed facilities. Long -term changes to these natural features from woodland clearing and grading and excavation modifi- cations for roadways, bridges and water reservoirs may also occur. Redistributed traffic could alter current traffic noise conditions, decreasing in places and increasing in others. Improved traffic circulation may also reduce automobile pollutant emissions. Revegetation of facility construction sites that do not result in above- ground structures could reduce vegetation loss. Implementing erosion and sedimentation control programs, such as settling basins and covering exposed surfaces could reduce potential earth and water resource impacts. Temporary noise barriers for stationary construction equipment and limited operating hours could attenuate noise levels on nearby sensitive uses. 1.3 Alternatives 1.3.1 No Project Alternative No capital investment would be undertaken by the City to expand or improve its infrastructure. Therefore, existing deficiencies in the City's system of roads, parks and utilities would remain. In addition, the quality of other City services could decrease as a result of aged or unreliable equipment. The quality of Tukwila's residential and business neighborhoods could also deteriorate. 1.3.2 Currently Financed Projects Alternative In general, commercial street and water system improvements would not be implemented in this alternative. Traffic congestion problems in the industrial area south of I -405 would become worse. The City would continue to rely on the Seattle Water Department for water storage needs, thus incurring increased costs. The system would also continue to have pressure problems, particularly on Tukwila Hill. If LID's are not implemented, urbanization in vacant areas east and south of the City could not occur not would redevelop- ment of south Tukwila. 2 1.3.3 Existing Need Alternative Only improvements designed to eliminate operational problems of the City's capital facility system would be implemented in this alternative. No road, water or sewer improvements to accommodate new development or redevelopment . in the City would occur. The residential street program would be discontinued, possibly encouraging the quality of residential areas to decline. Water and sewer system deficiencies would be resolved, however. In addition, the commercial street system would be upgraded, encouraging more efficient traffic circulation. 3 c L � W O. 43 0 ■s � ss Uqj 0 4, 0 sit 0) 0 0. . CHAPTER II PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1. General Description of the Proposal 2.1.1 Proposal and Sponsor This Draft Environmental Impact Statement addresses a proposed nonproject action by the Tukwila City Council to adopt 'a six -year Capital Improvement Program (CIP). The City of Tukwila is the sponsor of this proposal. 2.1.2 Project Location The area affected by the proposed CIP is the City of Tukwila. Tukwila encompasses an area of approximately 3.8 miles in the lower Green - Duwamish River Valley at the interchange of Interstates 405 and 5 (Figure 2.1). The regional accessibility afforded by this location has contributed to Tukwila's development as a regional commercial center. Interstate 5 generally defines the City's western boundary while SR -181 and the Green River delineate the eastern boundary (Figure 2.2). Contiguous unincorporated communities south, north and west of Tukwila are not directly affected by this proposal, but are within the City's sphere -of- influence (planning area). This area represents the probable location of future City expansion and potential capital expenditure needs outside the existing City limits. 2.1.3 Background In July, 1983, the various departments of municipal government in Tukwila compiled a list of capital expenditure needs for the period of 1984 to 1989. The CIP identifies projects in seven categories: transportation (residential and commercial streets); buildings, parks and recreation, equipment, equipment rental, water utility and sewer utility. Most projects included in the CIP represent department programs continued from previous years. These programs were implemented by the individual departments with limited coordination among them for funding and phasing of improvements. The CIP addressed by this study is Tukwila's first attempt to compile the capital needs of City departments into one package and to identify total financing needs, capabilities and available resources. In some instances, the capital projects included in this CIP extend beyond what is needed or could be expected to be implemented over the next six years. The CIP review process by City decision- makers is expected to further refine the number and types of projects included in the adopted, final document. Pursuant to the Guidelines implementing the State Environment Policy Act (WAC 197 -10) as revised January 1978 and City of Tukwila Ordinance #1211, the City has determined that the proposed action may significantly affect local environmental quality in Tukwila. This EIS addresses the potential impacts of adopting the CIP. As a programmatic action, however, adopting the CIP does not directly affect the City's physical environment. The action will commit City financial resources to implementing these capital projects which could subsequently impact environmental resources. In addition, committing City revenues to a multi -year program could affect the City's ability to maintain a quality environment through public services expenditures. This EIS, therefore, focuses on the financial options available to the City to implement CIP projects and the subsequent effect of these options and projects on the communities, infrastructures and natural resources of Tukwila. In this manner, the EIS is an extension of the CIP planning process - identifying 5 Figure 2.1 CITY OF TUKWILA Regional Location City Limits: Nel.m miPlanning Area Figure 2.2 CITY OF TUKWILA Vicinity Location the limitations and problems of the current proposal and through mitigations, discussing policy concepts for future capital facility planning. 2.2, Principal Characteristics of the Action 2.2.1 Capital Improvement Projects The proposed CIP is a compilation of 202 projects. Residential and commercial street improvements and water utility projects comprise the largest share of CIP projects, each with 55. Road projects include residential streets with overlays, sidewalks and utility undergrounding that has been underway since the mid - seventies (Figure 2.3). The commercial and arterial street improvement projects incorporate the City's six -year Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) into the CIP. Commercial streets are the single largest improvement cost in the CIP, comprising almost three - fourths (72 %) of total revenue needs. Water and sewer projects are derived from the City's preliminary master plans for these utilities prepared in 1982. Water projects are the second largest expenditure need in the CIP (approximately 12 %) and are intended to resolve major system deficiencies (Figure 2.4). Included in the CIP are reservoirs to provide storage capacity, new transmission lines to intertie the reservoirs . with the existing utility infrastructure and upgraded water distribution lines to resolve problems of undersized lines and insufficient pressure. Sewer facilities, the third largest CIP expenditure, are projects intended to eliminate operational deficiencies (e.g. eliminate pump stations, undersized lines) and to accommodate new development (Figure 2.5). The proposed Parks and recreation improvements in the CIP are from the City's Parks Plan. The project priorities were established by the City's advisory committee (see the Tukwila Draft Parks and Recreation Plan, September, 1983). Major aspects of the plan include completion of the Christensen Greenbelt Phases III and IV, development of McMicken Park and improvements to existing parks and recreation facilities. The remainder of the CIP is comprised of general equipment and building projects primarily involving the replacement of outdated equipment, building maintenance, and new equipment purchases. 2.2.2 Capital Improvement Program Financing The proposed CIP identifies revenue needs to implement capital projects and the anticipated source of these funds. Revenue sources, however, primarily reflect traditional sources. The CI-P does not consider the availability or desirability of these revenue, particularly from sources outside of its control (e.g. inter- governmental revenues). Different types of capital facilities in the CIP are dependent on different revenue sources. (Table 2.1). Commercial streets are the largest CIP expend- iture. Most projected funding is expected to come from one of two sources: intergovernmental shared revenue or local improvement districts (LID's) supported by the benefitting property owners. The local government share of commercial street financing is matching funds for shared revenues. Residential street improvements will continue to be supported from municipal general revenues. Building improvements are expected to be funded from either general government revenues or fees and service charges, the latter including facilities at Foster Golf Links. Park facilities have a compar- atively diversified revenue base, including general funds (for both shared revenue matching funds and total project cost), shared revenues and fees and charges from recreation programs. Equipment purchases are expected to be made from general funds although Federal- shared revenue, a major source in the past, may also be used. * Intersection /Bridge Roadway Improvements 11111 rU Transit Inprovements Funding Source: LID City Intergovernmental O 4 Figure 2.3 CITY OF TUKWILA CIP Road Projects by Funding Type ______ -- - -� 8" of Less 10" of Less 12" Line 14" or More 5MG • 'Reservoir * Constant Pressure Pump 300 GPM I Groundwater Well I Figure 2.4 CITY OF TUKWILA Water Improvements 1 Pump Station Upgrade Pump Station Eliminated with Gravity Sewer Line i j New Sewer;_ c,... +a...s rc+.• :Figure 2.5 CITY OF TUKWILA {CIP Sewer Improvement, N TABLE 2. 1 City of Tukwila 1984 -1989 Capital Improvement Program Funding needs (000's of 1983 dollars) Commercial Residential Buildings Parks Equipment TOTAL Streets Streets & Equipment Rental Tukwila $ 5,270 $2,236 $512 $ 410 $1,860 $10,288 Shared Revenues 34,839 15 362 46 35,262 Federal 26,000 15 - 46 26,061 State /Local 8,839 362 - 9,201 Fees /Charges - - 245 403 - 648 LID'sl 8,770 1,044 - 9,814 Totals $48,879 $3,280 $772 $1,175 $1,906 $56,0122 Notes: 1' LID sum does not include water and sewer LID's; 2. If Water ($7,822.0) and Sewer ($3,687.0) projects are included, the total CIP funding needs is $67,521 million. Sources: City of Tukwila Preliminary 1984 to 1989 Capital Improvement Program, July 1983. Utility improvements (water and sewer) are expected to be financed within the limits of their self-supporting funds. The master/plans prepared for both the City's utility systems in 1983, identified funding sources for these improvements. The financing plans usually included revenues, developer fees, and reserved funds. For utility /improvements and general facilities, both pay -as- you -go and long -term debt financing strategies are possible. Current and potential revenue s /ources for CIP - funding needs are assessed in Sections III 3.1 and IV 4.1 of this study. 2.2.3 CIP Project Locations The CIP includes facility improvements in most areas of the City (refer to Figures 2.3 through.2.5 for road, water and sewer infrastructure locations). The type and cost of these facilities does vary among four generalized subareas of Tukwila (Table 2.2). The two major commercial /industrial areas of the City, Andover industrial Park and the Interurban corridor, ,together account for over 90% of anticipated expenditures. Just over half of all expenditures are projected in Andover Industrial Park. The substantial cost of commercial and arterial street improvements is the greatest influence financed by anticipated revenues from intergovernmental sources and LID's (see Figure 2.3) in Tukwila. Also the very high proportion of water and sewer expenditures in the Andover subareas does not reflect the needed investment in general facilities (e.g. water reservoirs) intended to provide system -wide benefits. General facility improvements total about $10 million, primarily for equipment and improvements for City wide problems such as the lack of water storage facilities. The proposed improvements in residential communities are mostly streets, sidewalks and recreation facilities although several water improvements are planned for the Tukwila Hill community to resolve existing water pressure problems. 2.3 Relationship of the CIP to Land Use Plans, Policies and Regulations 2.3.1 City of Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Tukwila's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan was adopted by City Ordinance No. 1039 on September 19, 1977. A general objective of the plan is to provide the most effective service level needed as efficiently as possible. Policies in four general areas direct public investment in capital facilities: Natural environment, open space, residential and transportation /utilities. Natural Environment /Open Space: City policies promoting capital facility investment to preserve natural environment and open space are interrelated. Generally, these policies promote recreational use of sensitive environmental features both to enhance their protection and to encourage public accessibility, use and enjoyment. The following summarizes specific policies that would be accomplished by CIP improvements: - Obtain trail easements along the Green River and incorporate into a lowland trail and open space system (Christensen Trail Phases III and 1V); - - Coordinate trails planning system with other communities (Christensen trail is a component of a larger trail system along the Green River); - Construct trails in existing street right -of -ways (proposed trail improvements in residential communities); - Locate public recreation facilities where they are easily accessible TABLE .2.2 City of Tukwila CIP Projects by Locationl Tukwila Andover McMicken Projects Interurban Hill Ind'l Park Hill Total No. 10 10 29 6 55 Roads $ $21,494 $2,057 $25,385 $1,223 $50,159 43 4 51 2 100 No 4 3 3 14 Parks2$ $ 411 $ 81.5 $ 259 $ 278.5 $ 1,030 40 8 25 27 100 No. 5 21 21 0 47 Water 3$ $ 339 $ 534 $ 1,914 0 $ 2,787 12 19 69 0 100 4No. 6 0 10 0 16 Sewer $ $ 427 0 $ 2,902 0 $ 3,329 13 0 87 0 100 Total $22,671 $2,672.5 $30,460 ' $1,501.5 $57,305 40 5 53 2 100 Notes: 1' Excludes buildings, equipment and equipment rental projects. 2. Excludes $100,000 in non -sited improvements (one project). 3' Excludes eight general system projects totaling $5.035 million. 4' Excludes eight general system projects totaling $358,000. Sources: City of Tukwila Preliminary 1984 to 1989 Capital Improvement Program, July 1983. 14 by residential population (McMicken Park improvements; various recreational improvements at facilities in Tukwila Hill); - Provide for active and passive recreation facilities consistent with the needs of the community (all parks and recreational facility im- provements); - Maximize the use of local tax dollars for park and recreation facility improvements by using funds from other sources (project financing strategy promotes using diverse revenues, including general revenues, shared revenues, and fees and•charges); - Create an integrated network of open space based on existing and proposed recreational areas, lands least suitable for other development, and the natural amenities of the Tukwila area (McMicken Park, Christensen Trail). Residence: Comprehensive Plan goals'encourage capital improvements to "diminish the environmental effects of natural and man -made systems which affect the quality of living" in Tukwila neighborhoods. To achieve this goal, residential policies encourage utility undergrounding, residential neighbor- hood beautification (sidewalks, stormwater ditches and landscaping), and pedestrian right -of -ways and lighted trails interconnecting residential, commercial and recreational areas. These policies are incorporated in the residential street and parks and recreation programs included in the CIP. Transportation /Utilities: Comprehensive Plan Transportation and utility goals and policies directly relate to the City's capital infrastructure. Single purpose road construction and improvement projects are discouraged. Promoting instead coordinated street, sidewalks, undergrounding and other improvements. CIP street improvements generally include necessary ancillary projects such as sidewalks, and utility undergrounding in residential neighborhoods, but does not specifically coordinate streets, water and sewer improvements. Proposed transit improvements in the commercial /industrial areas could accomplish objectives to increase transit use within the City. CIP sidewalk improve- ments could further advance City efforts to establish an integrated system tying residential areas with other activity codes in Tukwila. Utility policies promote the development of efficient and adequate facilities for City residents and businesses. The'major utility policy accomplishment of CIP improvements is the development of water storage capability in the City. 2.3.2 City of Tukwila Zoning Code Tukwila's present Zoning Code was adopted on April 20, 1983 by the City Council. No separate zoning classification exists specifically for public facilities (facilities such as underground utilities and roads are not affected by zoning district criteria). Public parks are permitted outright in most land use zones. Therefore, CIP park projects should not be affected by zoning restric- tions. The completion of Christensen Trail Phases III and IV is also compatible with Shoreline Zone Restrictions along the Green River . Other public facilities are generally permitted as conditional use permits are water reservoirs, transit facilities and water wells. Bridges crossing the Green River are permitted by the City's Shoreline Zone, but a Shoreline substantial development permit could: be required. 2.3.3 Public Facility Master Plans Most public facility improvements are directed by individual master plans. 15 In recent years the City has undertaken new or revised Parks and Recreation Plan (1983); Water Utility Plan (1983); Sewer Utility Plan (1983); and Trans - portation Improvement Program (1979). Proposed CIP projects tend to closely correspond with the recommendations funding methods and priorities established by these plans. These documents also define the proposed relationship between Tukwila's improvements and adjacent water and sewer districts and municipal (Kent, Renton) utility departments. Tukwila's program includes consolidation of utility responsibilities within the City, water system interties for emergency backup services and facility design to accommodate service needs of these districts (portions of adjacent sewer districts discharge into Tukwila's system). Subsequent public infrastructure and community environment assessments incorp- orated the findings of these documents into this report. 2.3.4 Capital Improvement Programs Puget Sound Council of Governments: The Puget Sound Council of Governments PSCOG King Su rgional Council has drafted a recommended policy plan for coordinating capital improvement programs of individual government jurisdictions in King County (PSCOG King Subregional Council, May 1983). The study emphasizes inter - jurisdictional cooperation on long -term debt service financing of capital facilities to avoid counter- productive impacts on the revenue available from lending institutions. The plan also recommends strategies for improving the approach of local government to capital needs planning and financing. These recommendations are included in Appendix C. As Tukwila's initial effort at capital needs planning, the proposed CIP, incorporates few of PSCOG's recommendations for either CIP planning or interjurisdictional coordination. In Chapter V, Mitigations, however, PSCOG recommendations applicable to the CIP planning and finding needs in Tukwila are assessed. King County Capital Budget and Program: King County's 1983 to 1988 CIP out Tines proposed improvements in reincorporated communities west and north of Tukwila. Although the CIP is currently being revised, many of the projects in communities surrounding Tukwila are expected to be included in subsequent CIP's until their scheduled implementation. The following summarizes County capital projects that could directly or indirectly impact Tukwila communities or facilities: - Foster Park Athletic Field /$50,385 /funded; - Lower Green River Trail (between Auburn and Tukwila) /$49,920 /funded; - Green River Basin Program (resolving flooding problems) /$166,435/ funded; - East Marginal Way (traffic control) /$40,000 /funded; - Interurban Bridge No. 3160/$483,000/1984; - S. 176th Street (Military Road S. to Tukwila City limits) /$138,946/ funded; - S. 154th Street (SR -99 to Tukwila City limits) /$69,000/1987 (design); - S. 154th Street (SR -99 to 8th Avenue S.) /$584,300 /funded; - Foster Bridge No. 3158/$214,851/funded; - Allentown (S. 124th Street to 50th Place S. intersection) /$11250/ funded; - Duwamish Sewer O.L.I.D. /$942,088 /funded; - South Central #12 (Southgate) /$115,040 /funded (funds to be transferred to Tukwila in 1983); - South Central #16 (Thorndyke) /$115,000 /funded (funds transferred Tukwila in 1982); - Fort Dent /$5,337 /final payment of L.I.D. assessment to Tukwila - Earlington (Duwamish River Trail Corridor) /$59,484 /funded; Several of these projects are joint efforts with the City of Tukwila, particular- ly parks and recreation facilities. In addition, the City and County are coordinating the replacement of Foster Bridge, which is included in both CIP's and is presently financed. Both programs propose additional improvements to the Green River trail system, promoting a uniform facility for public use. County road improvements along arterials that traverse Tukwila could affect the need for improvements in the City. Road and bridge improvements on East Marginal Way and road improvements on S. 154th Streets could encourage increased traffic use of these arterials. In Tukwila, these roads become the major arterials through the City: Interurban /SR -181 (north /south) and Southcenter Boulevard (east /west). Although Tukwila's proposed CIP includes improvements on these arterials, uncertain funding (the projects are- dependent on shared revenues) and phasing could result in uncoordinated roadway improvements. City of Renton CIP 1983 to 1988: The Renton Six -Year CIP outlines proposed improvements to the City' puff is infrastructure and facilities through 1988. In general, the Renton's program has little direct relationship to::Tukwila'.s: proposed CIP with the exception of roadway improvements along Grady Way. The Renton Six -Year CIP includes the joint Grady Way bridge project which is funded in both City.programs. The Renton program also includes roadway improvements to Grady Way between Lind and Longacres east of the bridge project. These improvements could enhance Grady Way's use as an alternative to I -405 for east /west traffic between Burien, Tukwila and Renton, particularly during rush -hour. Therefore, these improvements, as well as the County's S. 154th Avenue project could aggravate traffic problems associated with the. Southcenter Boulevard "bottleneck" in Tukwila. Of the improvements along the So. 154th Avenue /Southcenter Boulevard /Grady Way arterial system, Tukwila's project has the most uncertain funding source. The City of Kent does not presently have an adopted Capital Improvement Program providing a comprehensive outline of future public facilities that may be constructed. Kent's future plans for water and sewer utility improvements and their relationship to Tukwila's system improvements are assessed in the proposed water and sewer plans. CHAPTER III Existing Environment 3.1 Municipal Finances 3.1.1 Introduction Within its corporate boundaries, the City of Tukwila is principally respon- sible for providing public services and facilities to local residents and businesses. Municipal services are closely related to the physical charac- teristics of the "built" environment, influencing its development in two ways. Local land use regulations and provision of streets and utility infrastructure are fundamental in determining the type, magnitude and direc- tion of new development. Also, the nature of services and facilities in existing communities may be important in maintaining viable, stable neighbor- hoods (ASPO July 1979). In Tukwila, both newly urbanizing areas and long - established neighborhoods are found, creating a potential demand for municipal capital investments from diverse community interests. Tukwila's ability to meet these needs will be determined by future trends in the local and non - local revenue sources supporting municipal finances. 3.1.2 Budget Overview The Tukwila municipal budget has demonstrated considerable variation in recent years. In 1983, the City projected revenue /expenditures of $13.4 million, down from the preceding year's budget (15.5 million) but over 300% more than in 1975. Substantial budget differences in consecutive years are largely attributable to anticipated intergovernment revenue (shared revenue) for capital projects and unspent grants carried over into the next year. Anticipated Federal funds for arterial construction in 1982, and carry -over funds for capital projects in 1978, explain the budget revenue source discrepancies of these years (Figure 3.1). Other major revenue sources have remained relatively constant during this time. Taxes, on the average, have been the largest individual revenue source, ranging from 30% to 40% of all estimated revenue. Revenue sources for individual funds in the City budget also vary from one another. In 1983, the budget had approximately 20 individual funds, most established to finance a particular service or facility (Figure 3.2). These funds can be grouped into five types: - Current Fund: The largest of the budget funds (35 %) used to finance general government services. It contains the greatest number of revenue sources, although tax revenue comprises 70% of the total. City government has considerable discretion in allocating revenue. - Intergovernmental Revenue: Funds largely financed by revenues from State and Federal agencies, although substantial local tax revenue is included for matching funds. These funds are used to finance capital projects and fluctuate greatly from year to year (demonstrated by the proportion of the budget allocated to the City Street and Arterial funds; see also Appended Table A.1). - Debt Service Funds: These funds are used to repay the City's General Obligation (G.0.) bonds which are sold to finance major capital projects. Two types of debt service funds exist, both financed by local revenues. Limited bonds are established at City Council discretion and are financed by general government revenues. This 1001— Intrafund Transfers Miscellaneous 171 601— 1— CO , 5 401— , eu co ' ct. Reserve 2 Service, Fee Charges Intergovernmental Revenue • Tax*Revenue 1 1983! 1982 :1 1981 L1980 *\ 1 979 1 1978 \ 1977_ 11976 Sources: City of Tukwila, Annual Budgets 1976 thru 1983. 20 Figure 3.1 1CITY OF TUKWILA Major Revenue Sources for Municipal Finances 1976 to 1983 Percent of Fund 0 c 0 s- a 100 — 801— 601— ,461— 201 — 0, 25- 501— 751- 1001 - 1 1 a) a) 1. U) 4 IC. NM= 1 111■111■ ■••=111=10 .11=1•■• 'Miscellaneous 1 Er Reserves! 1111111 Serv—iiecharges,IFines, Fees lOccasionally receives tas revenue allocations.! Di Intergovernmental( IIIITaxes !Source: City of Tukwila, 1983 Final Budget. \Revenue Funds Trends 11983' I_100 o IAII Bonds Util ities ! Street and ;Arterial (Current, Figure 3.2 CITY OF TUKWILA 1983 Budget - Major Revenue Sources of Funds revenue is effectively precluded from other funds (usually Current Fund) until the bonds are retired. Unlimited bonds require voter approval, but are financed by special (excess) levy property tax revenue and do not affect existing revenues for other funds. - Miscellaneous Funds: Funds either required by State law or estab- lished by the City to finance special programs (e.g. Fireman's Pension Fund). Although these funds occasionally receive general tax revenue or shared revenue, they are largely supported by reserves (revenue carry - overs) and interest income and comprise a minor part of the City's budget. Recent fiscal management trends in Tukwila have demonstrated preferences for using local tax revenue and intergovernmental revenues to finance most capital projects. The following section assesses these revenues in greater detail and capital improvement financing in general. 3.1.3 Capital Project Financing Current Fund: The Current Fund supports the daily operation of municipal services in the City of Tukwila. As the largest fund in the City's Budget, allocated revenues have risen 160% since 1975, from $1.76 million to $4.6 million (Figure 3.3 and Appended Table A.3). In constant dollars (dollars adjusted for inflation using the Consumer Price Index for the Seattle - Everett SMSA), allocated revenues have increased 35% since 1975, represent- ing an increase in real terms. Municipal expenditures.for each of the major public services financed by the Fund have generally remained constant relative to each other, thereby increasing at a level commensurate with revenues (Figure 3.3). The exceptions are Public Works and maintenance and miscellaneous expenditures, which have increased from 10% to 23% of total fund expenditures. These services are responsible for the upkeep of City buildings, parks and other non - utility or street capital facilities. Funding Tukwila's Current Fund has demonstrated a susceptability to economic conditions that can affect future capacity. The real growth during the period 1975 to 1983 occurred mostly during two years, 1975 and 1983. The period from 1976 to 1982 was characterized by more moderate growth (8 %), including two years marked by a decline in budgeted real revenue. Actual revenue and expenditure trends are less optimistic (Appended Table A.4). Between 1978 and 1982, revenue in constant dollars declined 8 %, despite a weak recovery (.8 %) from 1981 to 1982. During this same period, expend- itures increased in real terms by 7 %. Although revenues continued to exceed expenses throughout the period (largely because of a substantial revenue surplus produced by rapid economic growth prior to 1978) the annual ratio of revenue to expenses continues to decline. This tendency could affect the City's ability to finance future capital projects, either directly or indirectly, using Current Fund revenues without impacting other municipal services (see Tax Base discussion below). Capital project financing has been a minor component of Current Fund expend- itures with the exception of recreational facilities. From 1978 through 1982, Recreation expenditures included a capital projects program that reached approximately 50% of budgeted expenditures at its peak in 1980. This program included trail development along the Green /Duwamish River (Christensen Trail), and community center and library rehabilitation (Southgate C.C., Old City Hall). The program was financed through Federal Community Development Block Grant revenues (Tukwila, Annual Budgets, 1979- 22 5.0; 4.0:— 3.0 2.01— 1.0! L5.0' 4.0• — j-2.0 — = N O O N C W 2 . • ..... e • • • • / ••� / • • • • % ••••• • /• • • • ' • • ' . r • Current Fund (Real Dollars) Taxes (Real Dollars) Current Fund (Actual Dollars)! ▪ Taxes (Actual Dollars) 1 1 19751 1980 Year Current Fund Revenue' Actual and Constant (1982) Dollars!. 19851 %Source: City of Tukwila, Annual Budgets 1975 thru 1982. N i co I° C46 N 10 1 Total roos/.000.1111.11.11°1111/ Maintenance ...../....., Public Works 1 Fire 1 Police 1General 1Governrnental 0' 11975 1 1 1980 _ , Year . iCurrent Fund Expenditures_ by Major Type (1982 Dollars) � I 1 1985 Figure 3.3 CITY OF TUKWILA Current Fund Finances 1982). Current Fund finances, however, have also been affected by capital expenditures in other funds such as reallocating local tax revenue for grant matching funds. Intergovernmental Revenue Funds: •In 1983, projected intergovernmental revenue funds (City, Street, Arterial, Land Acquisition, Building and Devel- opment, etc.) comprised 30% of the total City Budget. These funds have not established stable revenue trend patterns, fluctuating from year to year in anticipation of available intergovernmental shared revenue (Appended Table A..5). The amount of actual revenue and expenditures is usually substantially less than budgeted funds, as demonstrated by the City Street Fund (Figure 3.4 Appended Table A.6). While actual operating expenditures are usually close to projected expenditures (as shown by the Street Maintenance and Mainte- nance Administration Funds) because of the greater proportion of locally - derived revenues, construction funds seldom reach planned levels. There are several reasons for this characteristic: budgeted funds show a project's total remaining costs although it may be a multi -year effort; anticipated revenue - sharing grants are delayed or not - approved; or local ,matching funds are not available. For example,. in 1980 and 1981, no Federal Revenue sharing funds were obtained for City street expenditures and only 3% of budgeted Federal monies were granted in 1982 (Tukwila Annual Reports 1980 - 1982). Locally - derived tax revenue, including both property taxes and sales taxes, comprised 50% or more of actual City Street fund expenditures in three of five . years from 1978 to 1982. Despite the inconsistent availability of intergovernmental revenue, several major capital projects have been financed by these funds since 1978. For the most part, grants have supported road and recreational facility improve- ments (Appended Table A.7). Recreational facility grants, mostly provided through the Federal CDBG program, were the more numerous type of grant. • Block Grant revenue for neighborhood maintenance (utility undergrounding and Interurban Avenue Studies) were also common. CDBG monies were usually spent incremental and extend over a period of several years. In addition, special intergovernmental revenue funds, such as one City Hall Construction Fund and Park Trust Fund (King County Forward Thrust Bond grants) have been used for major projects. These funds have expired as their limited financ- ing purpose has been accomplished. Debt Service: Funding major capital projects through general obligation bond saris a relatively recent occurance in Tukwila. Most excess and regular property tax levies for G.O. purposes have occurred from 1978 or after (see Tax Base discussion below). In 1983, 7% of the regular property tax levy and 14% of all tax revenue were allocated to G.O. bond retirement financing. Tukwila's budget includes four debt service funds, only two of which receive_ property tax revenue: the City Hall Limited G.O. 1977 and the Golf Course Unlimited G.O. 1978. The latter was used towards the acquisition and improvement.of the Foster Golf Links while the City Hall bond provided local matching funds for intergovernmental construction grants. Although Tukwila's use of debt service financing for capital projects has increased in recent years, the City retains most of its debt capacity (as mandated by State Law). This capacity is summarized in Appended Table A.8. Tax Base: Local tax revenue in Tukwila is the most important source of funding for most government operations and facilities. The current Fund — — — — — — — — N ! 1.01 — .75j- 1 .501 — Ri 1 .251 — CIS M1 AI CI) 5.23 Mil.; M1 ICl/ 1 R C1 IR C11 I CI M ,1983 1982; (50 %)1 Residential Streets /Underground Commercial /Industrial Streets Maintenance A General Administration /Debt Service ;1981 1(62%) 1980 (38 %) 11979 : 19781 (40 %) (54 %)/ (50 %) Percent of actual expenditures for local revenue; /Source: City of Tukwila, Final Budgets 1978 thru 1983; Annual Reports 1978 thru 1982. Figure 3.4 1 CITY OF TUKWILA City Street Fund - Projected and Actual Expenditures 1978 to 1983 is most dependent on this source, but locally derived tax revenue also tends to be the most stable revenue source for capital project funds. The fiscal structure of the City is such that local tax revenue can be allocated to several different budgetary funds at the discretion of the City government. Tukwila's tax base is less varied than most King County municipalities. Tukwila does not levy either utility taxes (as do most other communities, including neighboring Renton, Kent and Auburn) or a general business and occupation tax. Sales and use and property taxes remain the City's primary local revenue sources. The narrower tax base is balanced by the tax revenue generated by Tukwila's larger commercial /industrial business community. Tukwila's per capita assessed land value ($250,000) is 32 to 6 times greater than other King County cities and per capita sales tax revenue is 6 to 14 times higher. Despite the substantial non - residential tax base, Tukwila's local revenue sources have been affected by the current national recession. When adjusted for inflation, both property tax and sales tax revenue have experienced downward trends (Figure 3.5; Appended Table A -9). Property tax revenue has been less affected by the recession than 'sales taxes. After a temporary decline (in constant dollar terms) between 1978 and 1980, property tax revenue has steadily increased. The 106% tax lid imposed by State Law is largely responsible for this variance. In restricting the annual 'increase of most property tax revenue to 106 %, the law limited this tax revenue to a moderate level of increase during the boom period of the late 1970's. High inflation rates between 1978 and 1980 (10 to'17 %) far surpassed the growth rate of property tax, revenue, contributing to a net decline (at 4.4% annually) in real terms (Figure 3.6). As inflation decreased in the 1980's, property tax revenue resumed growth in real terms bolstered by a spurt of new building valuation coming onto the tax rolls. Sales tax revenue had not recovered from the effects of the recession by the end of 1982. After a period of rapid growth in the late 1970's, when the average annual increase was about 10 %, (compared to 2% property tax revenue during this time), sales tax revenue has declined steadily in real terms. From 1978 to 1982, the average annual real value loss was over five percent. By 1982, the real value of sales tax revenue was at its 1975 level. The susceptability of sales tax revenue to economic downturn is the primary cause of the decrease. Between 1979 and 1982, personal income levels spent on taxable goods and services declined from 70% to 58% statewide (City of Seattle, 1982). The sales tax revenue increase anticipated for 1983 is due to the imposition of a .2% City sales tax rate increase as permitted by State Law (cities may now charge up to one percent, instead of one -half percent). Without the increase, no substantial change in sales tax revenue trends would occur. Local tax revenue in the period 1975 to 1982 has also been increasingly used for financing capital project funds outside the Current Fund. Much of this revenue has been reallocated to the G.O. bond and City Street funds. From 1980 on, property tax revenue has been the chief source of local revenue for capital project financing. In addition, the 1983 sales tax increase has been allocated to the City Street and Arterial. funds. The reallocation of tax revenue from the Current Fund to capital project: funds has slowed, but not stopped, the former's growth in real terms (refer to Figure 3.3). 26 Property Taxes I ,Regular Levy Only - Constant Dollars ;Total Property Taxes - Actual Dollars ,19751 i 1976* (; 1977* I. 1978 *1 1 1979 ( i 198011 1981 ** ( ;1982 i 1 198.3 (Year] * Regular property tax revenue $10,000 also put into Fireman's Pension Fund ** $19,000 for Fire Equipment Reserve Fund t $41,000 for I Contingency Fund; Source: City of Tukwila; Final Budgets 1975 thru 1983; Annual Reports 1978 thru 1982; Building, Valuation and Revenue Data Sheet. 3.0; 2.0' Sales and Use Taxes Actual Collections - Constant Dollars ; ( Projected and Actual Collections - (Actual Dollars,, .1Current Fund Ei ;City Street Fund( (Arterial Fund I 1 1978; 11979_ j1980 P Year 1111111 ;Miscellaneous Fund ; Debt Service ;Excess. 'Regular , ( 1983. Figure 3.5 CITY OF TUKWILA Tax Revenue Trends 1975 to 1983 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 _) I. _ 1974: 1975 :1976 :1977' 1978 11979 11980 11981 .1982 1 1983 Inflation Rate — —• Regular Levy Property Tax Revenue Total Property Tax Revenue Levy Rate ;rrruIuruuAssessed Valuation Estimated Property Tax at 106% Source: City of Tukwila; Annual Budgets 1975 to 1983. Notes: a. Assessed valuation in billions of dollars. b. Tax revenue in millions of dollars. c. Levy rate in dollars. c ' Figure 3.6 CITY OF TUKWILA Property Tax Revenue Trends 1975 to 1983 Other Capital Funding: Various non - budgeting methods are available to the City to finance capital projects. Local Improvement Districts (LID'S) have been a common approach to financing facilities of benefit to a localized area within the City. LID's assess benefitting properties directly to retire bonds sold to pay for facilities and are not a direct municipal liability. At the end of 1982, the City had 11 active LID's financing a total bond issue of $2.3 million (Tukwila 1982 Annual Report). Existing LID's encompass primarily non - residential and multi - family districts, although two LID's are financing sewers for single - family districts (Figure 3.7). A recent change in LID formation has been towards multi - facility financing, where street and utility facilities are financed together (see Appended Table A -10). Revenue bonds can also be sold to finance capital projects in enterprise funds such as Sewer and Water Utilities. Revenue bonds are not a liabil- ity of the City, but are backed by the long -term service fees and charges of the utility. The City had five active revenue bonds at the end of 1982. 3.2 Community Environment 3.2.1 Introduction Municipal expenditures for general government services and capital facil- ities and the methods used to finance them influences the quality of neighborhood environments. Government land use regulations, investment in physical facilities, such as sidewalks, streets, public buildings and parks, and level of other services including police, fire and recreation affects resident's perception of their neighborhood as a place to live. These attitudes subsequently influence individual efforts to maintain their community as a stable and viable neighborhood. This section assesses recent and current programs and services provided by Tukwila and their effect on its neighborhoods. 3.2.2 Land Use Tukwila's accessibility to the remainder of the Seattle metropolitan area is the predominant influence on the types of land uses found in the City. Tukwila is located around the interchange of two major freeways serving the region, enhancing its attractiveness to regionally- oriented intensive land uses. Beginning in the early :.196O',s, with completion of the freeway system, distributive wholesale, light manufacturing, retail and more recently, professional offices, have located in the City. At present, wholesale, retail and commercial services occupy one -third of the City's area and 80% of all building space. In addition, another 24% of Tukwila is used by transportation facilities (highways, streets and freeways), and 28% is undeveloped, with half of that vacant buildable parcels. These three major land uses also accounted for 86% of the acreage developed between 1978 and 1982. Wholesale and commercial services were responsible for 87% of all new building space (City of Tukwila, 1978 and 1980 Land Use Surveys). Commercial services, including midrise office buildings, are presently the most rapidly growing use in the City. At the community level, there exists substantial land use variation within the City. The Tukwila Zoning Map (Figure 3.8) provides a generalized concept of existing and potential land use patterns within City subareas (actual land use patterns are more complex because of scattered vacant sites, non - conforming uses and multiple uses permitted in most zones). 29 Figure 3.7 CITY OF TUKWILA Active Local Improvement Districts COMMUNITY PLANNING AREAS _ . 1 Duwamish 2 Fostoria 3 Interurban 4 Tukwila Hill 5 McMicken 6 Andover 7 Burlington 8 Southcenter 9 Parkway West 10 South Hill •••r•o Single Family Multiple Family 2-4 du/Acre Multiple Family Higher Density Commercial Industrial/Wholesale Agriculture/Open Space Office Figure 3.8 CITY OF TUKWILA Land Use and Planning Area The river valley lowland south of I- 405'and east of I -5 (Southcenter, Andover and Burlington planning areas) is the major concentration of non- residential land uses. Warehousing, dependent on nearby railroads and freeway accessibility, is the major land use in the area. Retail commer- cial, including a regional shopping mall, have occupied the most accessible parcels near freeway access ramps and along major arterials. Retail, industrial and warehousing are also found along the Interurban Avenue corridor (Interurban, Duwamish and Fostoria planning areas). Residential uses predominate in upland areas (Tukwila Hill and McMicken) where topography and transportation corridors physically seperate these communit- ies from non - residential uses. Current land use trends in Tukwila subareas are interrelated with commun- ity investment needs. In the Andover Industrial Park area south of I -405, the predominant land use trend has been the conversion of agricultural and vacant buildable land to urban non - residential uses. Therefore, capital investment needs have centered on providing the public infrastructure necessary for this development to occur (water, sewer, streets and storm drainage). As the supply of vacant buildable land decreased and becomes more valuable, however, the trend has been towards higher intensity uses (e.g. commercial services, offices) on remaining vacant parcels. These uses often place greater demand on public facilities than light manufact- uring and.warehousing uses because of higher employee to floor area ratios and traffic - generating potential. Therefore, public facilities may need upgrading or expansion to maintain adequate level -of- services at higher demand levels. The community north of I -405 is largely comprised of the original Tukwila townsite when it incorporated in 1908. Up until its expansion into the Green River Valley (beginning in the late 1950's) and the freeway construc- tion and subsequent commercial /industrial development, Tukwila has remained confined to the Interurban corridor, the City's link to Seattle and Tacoma, first by rail and later by State highway. Much of the original community has remained intact, particularly the old single - family community on Tukwila Hill. Regional accessibility afforded by the completion of the freeway system, however, has spurred construction of higher density uses in this community as well as diminish the commercial role of Interurban Avenue businesses. The intensifying land development in Tukwila Hill introduces two capital investment. needs. First, higher density uses require upgrading existing facilities to accommodate higher service demand levels. In this respect, capital investment needs are similar to those arising in the south indust- rial area. Encroaching multi - family residential and non - residential land uses, however, also affect the stability of the older single - family resi- dential community. The City has attempted to provide some regulatory protection for this community through rezoning to better manage intens- ified development (Tukwila, October 1980). Public facility investment has also been used in the McMicken community west of I -5. The diminished commercial role of the Interurban corridor also raises capital investment needs. Sporadic development over the past 15 -20 years has produced a diverse, but scattered land use pattern including commercial strip retail businesses and services, light manufacturing, professional offices, recreation and some single - family structures (Tukwila, October 1980). In response to community concerns, the City has initiated a program to upgrade the corridor. To date, a grant has been used to fund a study outlining a development plan and facility needs for implementation and the City has assumed ownership of the arterial from the State. Major capital improvements proposed by the recent Interurban Geometrics Design Study include an expanded roadway, undergrounding utilities, signalization, landscaping, sidewalk: and bikeway improvements. 3.2.3 Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance. The present residential character of the City of Tukwila was established in the second half of the 1960's. The completion of the regional freeway system through the City encouraged a rapid rise in multi- family housing construction on Tukwila Hill, just as it had done for commercial /industrial development in the surrounding lowlands. By 1970, Tukwila's residential community had been transformed from primarily semi - rural, single - family housing to a predominantly higher density, multi- family residential neigh- borhood (Tukwila, August 1975). In 1980, housing conditions had not substantially changed in character from ten years earlier. Despite an absence of apartment construction from 1970 through 1974, multi - family dwellings continue to be largely responsible for most new housing in the City, having increased their share to almost three - fourths of the housing stock (see Appended Table A.11). Unlike the 1960's, however, new multi- family housing construction in the past decade included several condominium developments, in addition to rental apartment dwellings. Tukwila's single - family residential community has mostly remained intact despite the recent emphasis on multi - family housing construction. Multi- family housing development has located around the periphery of the Tukwila Hill residential community, retaining the single- family housing core. The City's single - family housing stock tends to be much older than multi- family housing. While 99% of all multi- family housing in the City was built after 1960, 80% of the single - family dwellings were built before this time (Tukwila, June 1982; US Bureau of the Census, 1972). An estimated one -third of the single - family dwellings in Tukwila were built before 1940, most of these being concentrated in the Tukwila Hill community. Single - family housing in the McMicken area is not as old as in Tukwila Hill, but still mostly predates 1960. The age of the City's housing stock is significant because of its impact on the public and private invest- ment needed to deter housing deterioration and to maintain healthy, stable neighborhoods. The City's aging single - family residential communities have been a major focus of public capital investment in recent years. The role of public investment in these neighborhoods is important for its effect on local residents' perception of their community and subsequent decisions to main- tain or upgrade their own property (ASPO, July 1977;Mercer, John; and Philips, Deborah, 1981). In Tukwila, the relationship between private redevelopment and neighborhood environment is demonstrated by residential construction trends for the last 20 years (Figure 3.9). Applications for building permits for additions or modifications to single - family units is one measure of private rehabilitation (ft should be noted; however, that many improvements may be made outside of official channels because of concerns of increased property taxes; non - conforming improvements, and so on). These applications dropped dramatically during the "Boeing" boom period of the late '60's when apartment construction peaked. As new multi- 33 1 1 1 1 1 i90/ ,19651 11970 1 Ma MI mu Single Family Rehabilitations; New Single Family New Multiple Family/ *Three year moving average Source: Tukwila Planning Department Files.! 1975 1 1980 1985! /Figure 3.9 CITY OF TUKWILA Residential Construction Trends* = family construction became non - existant in the early 1970's, when the regional economy faltered with the "Boeing- bust ", private reinvestment in the older single - family structures returned to the level of the early 1960's. This level has been maintained throughout the later 1970's and into the 1980's despite a partial recovery of multi - family housing con- struction. Aggressive neighborhood capital improvement projects initiated by the City in the early 1970's may explain, in part, the continued level of activity in community rehabilitation. These types of programs had not existed during the 1960's to allay local residents' perceived threat to the neighborhood "quality -of- life" from encroaching higher density residential development. As a means of insuring the stability of its older neighborhoods, the City's capital projects in recent years have been directed towards alleviating community concerns raised by local residents. Single - family housing residents were most concerned with the physical appearance of their commun- ity and encroaching apartments (see Appended Table A.11). These problems were partially resolved through regulatory changes (e.g. a new Zoning Code). Public investment in the older residential neighborhoods concentrated on utility undergrounding, sidewalks and bikeway improvements and street repair - projects have been funded primarily with local tax revenue in the Residential Street Fund (see Section 3.1.3 above). Building improvement permits issued from 1975 to 1978 show a strong correlation between public and private rehabilitation efforts in the Tukwila .Hill neigh- borhood (Figure 3.10). Funding of new recreational facilities, including a community center and foot trails development, has also been undertaken to promote greater neighborhood interest and vitality. 3.2.4 Public Services Public Safety: The. City of Tukwila maintains its own police and fire departments. Police headquarters are located in City Hall and total 33 • personnel: 26 commissioned officers and seven civilian employees. The City also has two fire stations, one located in the predominantly residential Tukwila Hill community and the other in the Andover commercial /industrial area (Figure 3.11). There are presently 29 full -time Fire Department personnel, 25 in the fire suppression division. All three facilities housing public safety operations are comparatively new and adequate for present and anticipated needs (Tukwila, October 1980). Public safety personnel and expenditure characteristics between 1975 and 1978 have not changed at a rate comparable to new housing and business growth. With the exception of manpower added to the Police Staff for state - mandated programs (e.g. Gambling division, added in 1977; Crime Prevention division, added in 1979), the number of personnel in 1983 has essentially remained the same as in 1975 (29 and 28, respectively). The staff traffic Division of the Police Department has been increased by one patrolman to handle increased traffic - related calls for assistance. Likewise the number of fire personnel has not significantly changed throughout this period (also 29 and 28 for 1983 and 1975), despite increasingly emergency responce calls. The overall real increase of expenditures for police (21 %) and fire (6%) services, therefore, has lagged behind that of other City services financed through the Current Fund. City public safety agencies do not have specific information of the pro- 35 Utiltiy Undergrounding • Single Family Demolitions * Single Family Dwelling Rehabilitations • New Single Family Dwellings 1Single family building permits for dwelling modifications , 1976 - 1978 Figure 3.10 CITY OF TUKWILA Six Year Undergrounding Program (1976 - 1981) and Neighborhood Revitalization 1 • City Hall CC Community Center P Police F Fire PK Park (City) 0.00 Trail PKO Park (Other) * Community Club E Elementary School J Junior /Middle School S Senior High School L Longacres C� N SOUTH CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT Tukwila Corporate Limits School district Boundaries HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT RENTON SCHOOL; DISTRICT Figure 3.11 CITY OF TUKWILA Public Facilities portion of their services that are attributable to the City's business community. Police crime statistics do reveal certain differences' between the type and magnitude of offenses in Tukwila compared to cities with comparable population (Appended Table A.13). Crime activity differences are particularly noted in categories where commercial businesses are most likely affected, (e.g. larceny, robbery, and burglary). Shoplifting alone is responsible for over half of all thefts in Tukwila, compared to 3% statewide (WASPC, 1983). Although Tukwila's police force has not expanded at a rate comparable to housing and businesses in the City, it does not appear to have affected the effectiveness of the force relative to similar -sized cities in King County. The rate of offense clearance (arrest) is similar between these communities if shoplifting responses are excluded (these calls usually occur after a suspect has been apprehended while performing the offense, hence the high rate of clearance).. Schools: The City of Tukwila lies within three public school districts: Souentral No. 206, Highline No. 401 and Renton No. 403. The majority of the City's school age population (80 %)attend schools in the South Central District which encompasses the Tukwila Hill community (see Appended Table A.14). Tukwila students comprise approximately one - fourth of the districts 1455 students (1982 -83 school years enrollment), the remainder coming from the communities of Allentown., Duwami sh , Riverton, and Riverton Heights.' The district operates four schools: Foster High School, Showalter Middle School and Tukwila and Thorndyke Elementary Schools. Tukwila Elementary is the only public school facility within the City limits. Tukwila students attending Highline District's schools live in the McMicken Heights neighborhood south of S. 160th Street and west of 53rd Avenue South. City students have little impact on total enrollments and education service needs of either neighborhood schools or the district as a whole. The Renton School District includes most of the Andover commercial /industrial area south of Strander Boulevard and is more affected by the City's non - residential property tax base than by its school age population (at most, eight students). The South Central and Highline School Districts have experienced declining enrollments throughout the past decade. Between the 1977 -78 and'1982 -83. school years alone, the South Central District's enrollment dropped 20% from 1821 students to 1455 students. The Highline District has declined from a peak student enrollment of 31,000 to 1969 to 16,010 students today, almost a 50% drop. Both districts have responded to decreasing enrollments by closing schools. The South Central District has closed two elementary schools: Southgate (now the Tukwila Community Center) and Cascade View. Since 1979, Highline School District has closed one highschool, one junior high and three elementary schools. Parks and Recreation: Park and recreation facilities in Tukwila are provided through the City's Parks and Recreation Department. The depart- ment manages approximately 106 acres of land for park, recreation facil- ities (golf course, athletic fields, community center, trails) and open space (refer to Appended Table A.15). One regional county park, Fort Dent Park, is within the City limits. The City has given priority to expanding and improving recreational opportunities and facilities in City neighborhoods. Two of the three major social groups in the City (apartment residents, businesses) tended 38 to rank lack. of recreational facilities and access to the Green River toward the top of community problems (see Appended Table A.12). The City has responded by directing intergovernmental revenues such as Federal CDBG funds to recreational facilities. (Tukwila, September 1980). Capital expenditures for recreation facilities are distributed over several funds, including the Parks and Recreation Department budget within the Current Fund, the Golf Course Special Revenue Fund, the Land Acquisition, Building and Development Fund and other special funds. Major capital projects during the 1975 to 1983 period include the acquisition and improvement of the Foster Golf Links (through G.O. bonds and service charges); the acquisition and repair of Southgate Elementary School as the new Tukwila Community Center; development of the Christensen Greenbelt Park and Trail along the Green River, repairs and improvements to other parks and play - fields and construction of foot trails in residential neighborhoods. The acquisition and development of these new facilities has had its impact on operating expenses for the Parks Department. The department budget increased 200% (in constant dollars) between 1975 and,1983, as compared to 35% for the overall Current Fund. Personnel costs for recreational services increased 25 %, also in real terms. The City presently offers programs for all age groups, including team sports for youths and adults, sports camps, social dancing, and special crafts and social activities for seniors. Most of these programs are offered at the Tukwila Community Center, and are partially or fully- supported by user fees. Maintenance: Tukwila finances three major maintenance services other than those provided by the Water and Sewer utilities. The Public Works Department (Current Fund) operates maintenance services for both City parks and public buildings, including City Hall and the community center. Public Works also provides street maintenance services' financed through the.. City Street Fund. Street :maintenance responsibilities include snow and ice removal, signalization repair, storm drainage, road patching and overlays. The addition of new building and park and recreation facilities has had variable effect on most municipal maintenance expenditures. Park Main- tenance personnel was increased from three to four in 1976 and has remained at that level since (Tukwila, Annual Budgets, 1975 to 1983). The City has increased building maintenance expenditures from $38,000 in 1975 to $144,000 in 1983, representing a doubling of costs in real terms in eight years. The acquisition of the Tukwila Community Center and the construc- tion of a new City Hall are the reasons for the increased operating costs. In the late 1970's, City expenditures for street repair and maintenance reversed a downward trend and increased in real terms. A 1980 Public Works study had determined that roadways in the City, particularly heavily travelled routes around Southcenter and the Andover Industrial area, were deteriorating at an accelerating rate (Tukwila DPW, July 1980). Public Works recommended both short -term and long -term strategies to arrest these conditions and priortized the commercial and residential streets needing immediate attention (Figure 3.2). Estimated costs to bring these streets up to standards (in 1982 dollars) was $.94 million for arterials; $.2 million for commercial /industrial streets and $1.9 million for residential streets. Historical and Cultural Services and Facilities: Tukwila's historical 39 So. 133rd i So. 134th St. (63)/ `4 52nd Ave. S. (95) 53rd Ave. S. °i 57th Ave. S. (66) t. (60 Interurban Ave . (114) So. 144th St. (66) Interurban Ave. (96) 57th Ave. S. (75) S.W. Grady Way (97) So. 154th St. (71) So. 153rd St. (67) 53rd Ave. S. Nelsen PI. (61) Andover Park East (76) Andover Park West (71) Andover Park East (67) 57th Ave. S. (82) Figure 3.12 CITY OF TUKWILA Priority Streets - Maintenance resources are managed by both public and private groups. The majority of the City's historical resources are located in the narrow Duwamish Valley along the Interurban Avenue Cooridor (Appended Figure A.1). River valleys have historically provided natural routes for travel and attractive sites for settlement. Therefore, the valley contains numerous sites of Native America use and early European settlement: Fort Dent, the Interurban rail- road right -of -way, and the first civic facilities for Tukwila adjacent to the former railroad. Sites such as the old Tukwila Grade School (former City Hall, now the library), Tukwila Park, and Fort Dent are in public own- ership, although not necessarily with the City of Tukwila. Other sites have either been destroyed (a covered bridge across the railroad) or remain in private ownership. Cultural services and historical preservation efforts in Tukwila are principally financed using recreational funds (e.g. Tukwila Park, Foster Golf Links sites). The Tukwila Grade School is presently part of the King County library system, to which the City contributed $53,700 in 1983 (Tukwila 1983 Annual Budget). Social and Health Services: Most public social and health services avail- able to Tukwila residents are operated and financed by other governmental agencies. Social Security, public assistance programs and public health care are provided by Federal, State and County agencies. The City provides limited financial support for some County health programs (e.g. Seattle King County Public Health, Alcoholism), but generally does not engage in providing direct social and health services to its residents. Recreation programs for senior citizens and youth that are funded and operated by the City ,do, serve social, as well as recreational, purposes. The City recently examined the feasibility of expanding youth support programs to' deter increasing social and criminal youth related problems (Robbins; January 1983). 3.3 Public Infrastructure 3.3.1 Introduction The major part of public investment in capital projects is for street and utility infrastructures. These facilities are essential for most new devel- opment in Tukwila: either development of vacant land or intensive redevel- opment of existing uses. The absence or capacity limitations of these facil- ities can impose constraints or preclude new or intensified development. Likewise, new development more directly affects the level -of- service oper- ations of these facilities rather than most other public services. 3.3.2 Transportation Street Systems: The street and highway system serving Tukwila has three principal components. Four limited access freeways converge within City limits: I -5, I -405, SR -518, and SR -599. These routes link Tukwila with most communities in the Seattle metropolitan region and all major cities in the Puget Sound lowlands. A surface major and secondary arterial network provides accessibility between Tukwila and nearby communities (Figure 3.13). Only three arterials provide continuous traffic movement through the City: SR -181 (north /south); and Southcenter Boulevard /S. 154th. Street and S. 180th Street /S. 178th. Street (east /west). A system of local streets and collector arterials serves the access needs of City business and residen- tial communities. Circulation: Much of the local and regional vehicular traffic in Tukwila 41 * Interchanges — m. Collector Arterials Secondary Arterials Major Arterials Freeway Right-of-Ways Figure 3.13 • CITY OF TUKWILA Street and Highway System is carried by a limited number of arterials. The physical barriers to traffic circulation created by topographic and water features is partly responsible for this condition. The freeway system, however, plays a far greater role in restricting traffic movement within the City. The City is partitioned into sectors by the freeways. Only a few arterials provide access for local traffic either over or under the freeway rights -of -way. Regional traffic entering or leaving Tukwila's street network via the freeway system is also restricted to three or four arterials with free- way interchanges. The four heaviest travelled streets in Tukwila: Southcenter Boulevard, SR -181, Southcenter Parkway and Strander Boulevard are generally routes carrying local traffic through the City as well as regional traffic to and from the freeway system (Tukwila, DPW; October 1979). The absence of freeway interchanges with the local street net- work south of Strander Boulevard leaves much of the commercial /industrial district (and most developable vacant land) without direct freeway access. This encourages excessive use of the surface street network (particularly SR -181) subsequently producing congestion problems at several intersections. Heavy: traffic volumes on a limited number of arterials is accompanied by related circulation problems. These are summarized as follows (refer to the 1979 Transportation Improvement Plan for more detail): a, Antiquated design. Several street segments and intersections are not designed for the volumes. they carry. Intersections in many areas are without turning facilities or adequate signalization, promoting long delays and higher accident rates. b. Lack of alternative local transit. Noon -time traffic volumes on many streets south of I -405 exceed either morning or evening peak travel periods, largely due to internal travel by employees. Current facilities for alternative travel modes (e.g. sidewalks, bikeways) or transit services are either absent or inadequate. c. Widely spaced road system. In the Andover industrial area, the "superblock" road system encourages congestion, increases traffic hazards and promotes inefficient travel conditions by limiting the access opportunities to individual businesses. d. Freeway interchanges. Traffic to and from the freeway system to the local street network is inefficient, particularly for Southcenter traffic. Travellers are faced with excessive turning movements and signalization getting to and from Tukwila Parkway and the freeways. Alternative Travel Modes: The Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (Metro) provides public transit services to Tukwila. In all, 15 bus routes pass through Tukwila, with six providing direct service to Southcenter (Figure 3.14). These routes provide commuter and full service between Tukwila and downtown Seattle, Green River Valley communities (south to Auburn); Eastside communities (north to Bothell) and Sea -Tac Airport and Burien. Major transit service to the Andover industrial area is available on a couple of routes via Andover Park West, Southcenter and S. 180th Street. Bikeways and sidewalks in Tukwila are generally inadequate for encouraging 43 149 150 154 158 241 59 240 340 241 340 240 280 145 146 148 149 157 Figure 3.14 CITY OF TUKWILA Metro Transit Routes major use. In the Tukwila Hill residential community, street upgrading and foot trail development has improved the internal systems for bicycles and pedestrian circulation. Linkage to the commercial /industrial area to the south, however, are weak. Arterials and commercial streets in the City lack bikelanes. and much of the industrial district is without sidewalks (Tukwila, DPW, October 1979). Widely spaced streets, lack of traffic signals and safety problems also discourage pedestrian travel in this area and contribute to heavy noon -time automobile travel. Tukwila is presently served by the two major railroads in the Pacific Northwest: Burlington Northern and Union Pacific. Approximately nine miles of local railroad lines are located in the industrial area south of I -405. These tracks are spur lines extending from the main railroad rights -of -way along the eastern city limits. 3.3.3 Utilities Water: Most of the City of Tukwila obtains its water from the municipal Public Works Department. City areas north of S. 56th Street are serviced by either Water District 25 or 125, and the area south of S. 180th Street is served by Water District 75. The City and the water districts purchase water from the City of Seattle and are supplied from its Cedar River source. The Tukwila water system is inter -tied with Water District 75 and the Kent and Renton municipal systems to provide a backup water • supply in the event of disrupted service, infrastructure failure or high fire flows. The City's water system is generally sufficient for present needs. Three system deficiencies do exist, however. At present, Tukwila has no water storage facilities. Although the Seattle water supply source provides adequate pressure and storage for City needs, Seattle water has adopted a demand surcharge system to discourage client districts from reliance on its facilities during peak period flows. Therefore, since Tukwila has no equalizing storage capacity to meet peak demand within the City, it incurs greater costs for water supply. The other two problems, inadequate press - ures.at higher eie.vations on Tukwila Hill and restricted water main capacity in several locations, result in deficient fire flows and water supply to customers. Sewers: The Tukwila Public Works Department also provides sewer facilities for most of the City. An 80 acre area in the McMicken Heights neighborhood has facilities owned and operated by the Val Vue Sewer District. The Val Vue Sewer District system discharges into the City's system, which in turn discharges into METRO interceptors for transport to the Renton treatment plant. The City's sewer system has several problems. Restaurant grease entering the system fouls sewer lines and pump stations, requiring disproportionate efforts on the part of City maintenance crews to resolve (Horton Dennis & Assoc.; April 1982). Sewer line settlement has led to infiltration and inflow of surface and ground water, reducing system capacities. The system as a whole carries flows that are well under design capacity. Other sewer lines are undersized for present or anticipated needs. The City system also has a number of pump stations that are antiquated, require an abnormal amount of maintenance time and are expensive to operate (energy costs). Many of these stations could: be replaced by gravity flow, sub- stantially reducing maintenance and operational costs (refer to Draft Comprehensive Sewer Plan, April 1982). 45 Storm Drainage: Storm drainage facilities in Tukwila include natural stream courses, channelized ditches, creeks and rivers and drainage pipes. Upland areas are generally served by roadside ditches that collect surface runoff and discharge it into natural streams (Tukwila, Planning Department, August 1975). The construction and maintenance of these roadside facilities is financed by the City Street fund. Natural stream courses are generally found along valley walls too steep for development and provide runoff from upland areas to the lowlands. In the lowlands, high land values have pro- moted the use of pipes and open channels to convey runoff to the Green/ Duwamish River. Runoff is primarily pumped from ponding areas along river dikes into the river channel since gravity flow is obstructed along much of the river. Localized flooding sometimes occurs in the lowland areas during severe storms when pipes, channels, or pumps are insufficient for discharging runoff. Other Utilities: Energy, communications and solid waste services and facilities are provided by agencies or companies other than the City. Electrical power is provided by Seattle City Light (public utility) in the northern part of the ;City; and Puget Sound Power and Light Company (private utility) in the south (Tukwila, Planning Department, February 1977). Natural gas services are available city wide from the Washington Natural Gas Company. Pacific Northwest Bell provides telephone services and Sea - Tac Disposal handles solid waste. These companies are responsible for providing and maintaining their facilities and are financed through their own revenues. In recent years, the City of Tukwila has financed the undergrounding of overhead utility wires in residential neighborhoods (refer to Section 3.2.2). 3.4 Physical Environment 3.4.1 Earth Resources There are three distinct physiographic features in the City of Tukwila: plateau uplands, valley walls and river floodplain lowlands. Within the present City limits, the most common feature is river floodplain lowlands. Although the broad Green River flood plain south of I -405 differs in appear- ance from the narrow Duwamish River Valley north of the freeway, the two share many common physical characteristics. Geologically, the floodplains are comparatively recent land features created by river deposition (alluvium) of silt and fine sand. Terrain is very flat, having a slight northward gradient. Lowland soils and geology do not provide good building found- ation stability and tend to present the greatest hazard to buildings and facilities during seismic activity. The soft, wet soil generally require substantial modifications, including draining and filling with sand and gravel before urbanization. Tukwila Hill is the major upland plateau feature within the City's current limits. Upland areas are glacial till deposits from the most recent glacial period in the Puget Sound region. Terrain tends to be undulating, with sloped ranging from flat (0 -5 %) to steep (15 -25 %). Although slopes may impose localized development constraints due to landslide potential, the plateau uplands generally are we ll- suited for urbanization. The glacial till geology and overlaying soil mantle provide excellent seismic and foundation stability. Valley wall land features in Tukwila are found around the periphery of Tukwila Hill and in the McMicken Heights community. The glacial till 46 deposition that created the upland plateaus also helped form the valley wall feature. The latter, however, have been modified by other geologic processes. In places, stream erosion along hillsides has removed more recent glacial till deposits exposing older glacial and non - glacial geological structures. Localized deposits of glacial outwash materials can also be found. With slopes from steep to very steep (over 25 %), valley wall areas impose develop- ment constraints from potential slope failure. 3.4.2 Water Resources Natural surface water drainage in Tukwila has been modified in past years. All surface drainage in the City directed into the Green /Duwamish River. The drainage basin that use to discharge through the river had been sub- stantially reduced, the White River diversion in 1906 and the elimination of Black River flows after 1916. Therefore, the Green /Duwamish river no longer carries the volume of water it use to. In addition, channelization of the rivers and the construction of upstream dams on the Green River have further reduced the overbank flood hazard. potential. Numerous small streams and creeks drain eastward from the Tukwila Hill and McMicken Heights uplands toward the Green / Duwamish River. Many of these surface streams originate at springs along valley walls where groundwater is discharged into the surface streams during the drier months of the year. Manmade ditches along roads in urbanized portions of the uplands also contribute intermittent surface flow during storms. These ditches discharge into the spring -fed stream channels that have carved deep ravines into the valley wall. Upon entering the lowlands, this surface flow is directed into storm drainage pipes for eventual discharge into the rivers. Lowland runoff is carried by ditches and pipes to ponding areas along the river where it is collected and pumped over the dike into the river. Although most march areas in the lowlands have been modified by development, the Tukwila pond site south of Southcenter Mall retains its natural, poorly drained allevial soils. Therefore, the site remains a natural ponding area for lowland runoff. Groundwater resources in Tukwila are an important part of the local hydrol- ogic cycle. The infiltration of precipitation into the groundwater table moderates surface runoff during storm events, reducing flood potential. Groundwater eventually reaches surface streams through springs and helps maintain year round flows in many of the smaller streams. During summer months, groundwater may be the only source of water available for surface streams. The spring -fed stream system along the McMi:cken Heights uplands is the principal example of this cycle in Tukwila. A recent groundwater analysis for the City of Tukwila identified two important aquifers for potential development as municipal water supplies (Shannon & Wiison, December 1981). One aquifer underlies the McMicken Heights uplands and drains eastward and northward toward the Green River. Therefore, this aquifer probably contributes much of the .spring discharge for surface streams in this area. The second aquifer consists of water - bearing sand in the alluvial deposits of the Green River. The direction of groundwater flow in this aquifer follows the north to northwest direction of surface flow and probably discharges into the Green River. Preliminary water quality information for both aquifers is generally good to excellent, although iron and manganese concentrates may be a problem. 47 High groundwater tables are a_common natural occurence in the City of Tukwila. In the Green River flood plain', poor soil drainage may produce marshy areas or near - surface water table levels that may produce unstable foundation or seismic conditions. Likewise, in upland areas, thin permeable soil mantles overlying comparatively impervious glacial till also contributes to seasonal high water tables. Both situations frequently require special engineering considerations (e.g. fill) prior to development. 3.4.3 Biological Resources Human use has altered much of the natural vegetation and wildlife habitat found in the City. Logging, farming and most recently, urbanization have long eliminated virgin timberlands. Most remaining natural woodlands are second and third growth woodlands confined to sites not readily used for human activities: ravines, steep - sloped valley walls and water courses. Water tolerant species such as cottonwood are common in riparian habitats along rivers and streams, while species more typical of climax forests in the Puget Sound region..such as Western Red Cedar, White and Douglas Fir and Western Hemlock, are common in the upland areas (Tukwila, 1975). Several deciduous species, such as Alder and Maple, are also common. Wood- land understories also include a variety of plant types with water tolerant species found in riparian habitats and shade - resistant types dominant in the upland woodlands. Ornamental vegetation is generally typical of landscaped lots and yards throughout the City. Wildlife habitats in the City support a variety of birds, fish and mammals. Riparian habitats support the most diverse array of wildlife (refer to the DEIS for the Tukwila Hotel proposal, Tukwila, June 1982, for an inventory of Green River wildlife). Four general habitats for birds and terrestrian wildlife have been identified: wetlands and water courses; open grass and shrublands; forested lands and urban environments (Tukwila, 1975). Most mammal wildlife are lesser mammals such as rodents that are more tolerant of human activity. The Green River is also the primary habitat for aquatic life in Tukwila supporting a number of species including salmon and trout. The Green River habitat does not include major spawning areas for the distance within Tukwila, but is a major corridor for anadromous species travelling to and from upstream spawning areas (Tukwila, 1975). The City's tributary streams and other natural water bodies are generally devoid of fish. 3.4.4 Air Quality Climate conditions in Tukwila are characteristic of the marine west coast climate typical for the Pacific Northwest. The .marine influence and pre- vailing wind patterns from the north and northwest in the summer, and the south and southwest in the winter, act to moderate annual temperature extremes. The area also receives an annual average of 35 inches of pre- . cipitation, most falling during the late fall and winter months. Periods of air stagnation and temperature inversions that produce "worst- case" air quality conditions occur most frequently during the winter months. The City of Tukwila is within the boundaries of a general nonattainment area for carbon monoxide and photochemical oxidants. The principal source of these pollutants is the automobile. Although air quality conditions within the City are largely a consequence of regional, rather than local sources, there are major transportation generators of air pollution in the area. The freeways, 48 particularly I -405 and I -5, Southcenter Mall, Longacres Race Track, SR -181 and other heavily travelled local arterials all contribute to local air quality degradation. Despite the proximity of these sources, pollutant concentrations in Tukwila attributable to vehicular travel (e.g. carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides) have infrequently reached or exceeded government standards. (Tukwila, October 1980; June 1982; April 1983; USDOT FHA, February 1983). Nevertheless, general pollutants, such as suspended particulate concentrations, have steadily increased in recent years with urbanization in the Green River Valley. Stationary sources of pollutants are not a major source of air pollution in Tukwila. Of ten identified stationary pollutant sources in the vacinity, nine are located in Renton and one in Kent (WSDOT FHA, February 1983). The major stationary source pollutant, .sulfer dioxide, occasionally reaches concentrations exceeding current .standards but is largely attributable to emissions from the ASARCO smelter in Tacoma (Tukwila, October 1980). 3.4.5 Noise The freeways and major arterials traversing Tukwila are the principle noise sources in the City. In general the heavier the traffic volume on the roadway_ the greater the noise levels on adjacent properties. Noise levels decrease with distance from the roadway, although factors such as toptgraphy, structures and vegetation could have some-attenuating effect. The high proportion of truck traffic associated with Tukwila's warehousing industries may also generate disproportionate noise levels on streets and arterials south of I -405. Areas along railroad tracks may also experience intermittant noise impacts from rail use. Other sources exist.that contribute to overall ambient noise levels in Tukwila. Occasional aircraft overflights from nearby airports could impact widespread areas of the City. Building construction activities also generate noise impacts on adjacent properties. Activities characteristic of urban communities: emergency vehicle operations, children at play, and so on, also affect local noise levels. 3.4.6 Aesthetics The aesthetic quality of a community is often a composite of individual, physical and built environmental parameters. Topography, water features, vegetation, land use, and public facilities can all influence how an indi- vidual perceives the aesthetic quality of his community. Tukwila's physical setting provides a variety of resources that enhance the area's aesthetic quality: The upland'Tukwila Hill and McMicken Heights areas adjacent to lowlying river floodplains creates a number of opportunities for unobstructed vistas, particularly to the southeast towards Mt. Rainier (Figure 3.15). Upland ridge and valley topography also encourages vistas across more localized areas. Water features, including the Green /Duwamish River along Tukwila's eastern boundary, small streams and creeks from upland areas, and natural and man -made ponds are also resources that contribute to the aesth- etic enjoyment of both residents and employees. The woodlands along valley walls and stream ravines are also highly visible, adding to the quality of views and providing short hiking opportunities for persons seeking the solitude of a woodland environment. 49 * 1 Knoll min! Ridge : Generalized Woodlands 4.1 Views Ponds Waterways N f Figure 3.15 !CITY OF TUKWILA Aesthetic Resources > m L � Q • CHAPTER IV Impacts 4.1 Municipal Finances 4.1.1 Introduction Implementation of Tukwila's Six -Year Capital Improvement Program may require short -term and /or long -term commitments of local municipal revenues. The proposed action, therefore, directly affects the City's financial resources and subsequently, its ability to maintain or expand existing public services, facilities and programs. The degree of impacts CIP financing may have on other programs and services could vary since a number of factors influence municipal revenues and how they are spent. The following'assess- ment examines CIP expenditures in the context of a range of future municipal budget scenerios because of these indefinite variables. Also, given the potential resources available to finance future City budgets; alternative funding strategies for capital expenditures are addressed in the assessment. 4.1.2 Future Tukwila Budgets Throughout the six -year CIP period, the economic health of the Seattle Metropolitan region should continue to influence Tukwila's municipal finances. High and low projections for the City's Current Fund were made based on past relationships of its principal revenue sources (sales and property taxes) to general economic conditions. The assumptions used in the high and low tax revenue projections are listed in appended Table A.17. In addition, high and low projections of other Current Fund revenues (mostly fees and user charges) were also made using 1975 to 1983 trends (see appended Table A.18). The high and low Current Fund revenue projections, given the criteria upon which they are based, should be viewed as budgetary extremes. The projected rates of revenue growth do resemble conditions that occurred in Tukwila within the recent past, however (Figure 4.1 and 4.2). It is unlikely that either a sustained period of rapid revenue growth or decline in Tukwila will occur over the next few years. Therefore, additional revenue growth projec- tions were made: a. A rate based on the average of the high /low estimates of major Current Fund revenues. This rate of growth is similar to overall fund growth from 1975 to 1983; b. A moderate growth rate based on prevailing budget trends from 1977 to 1980 (between one and two percent annually, or 10% over six years) ; c. A moderate rate of declining revenue based on the low rate for sales taxes (this inverse relationship has characterized tax revenue growth in Tukwila since 1978). The overall rate of change in this scenerio resembles what has occured from 1980 to 1982. The range of future municipal finance conditions presented by these scenerios provides the framework for the subsequent impact assessment. Determining the effect of CIP local revenue needs on general government services in Tukwila requires projecting future expenditures. High, moderate and low expenditure projections for service finances by the Current Fund were made (- appended Table A.17). Also, revenue expenditure estimates were 51 8.0i• 7.0— 6.01— 3.01— 1.0: 1 1 I 1 1 I I 1 I 1 1970 1975 i 1900 1985 Year 52 i 1990 Figure 4.1 — CITY OF TUKWILA Projected Current Fund 1 Revenues 1984 to 1989 ,_ 1975_: 1980 Year Sales Tax Revenue, Regular Levy Property Tax 53 1 -.1 1 11985 1990 Figure 4.2 CITY OF TUKWILA Projected Local Tax Revenue ii Change 1984 to 1989 made for the City Street and Arterial Street funds where the remaining local tax revenue is allocated (Appended Table A.20). The impact assessment focuses on the local revenues in these funds, assuming that the intergovern- mental revenues needed for the CIP projects would be available. This ap- proach establishes worst -case conditions for future local revenue demand. Three alternative CIP funding strategies are reviewed: Current taxes; no rate increase; current taxes with a rate increase; and implementing new taxes. In addition, the impacts of other local revenue sources used for CIP financing (e.g., LID's; user fees) are assessed. 4.1.3 Alternative CIP Financing Strategies Current Taxes, No Rate Increase: Existing municipal revenue sources would be used to satisfy all local revenue needs for CIP projects in this alter- native. No taxes would be increased, including voter - approved general obligation bond excise property tax levies. A total of $10.3 million in local revenues would be needed over the six -year CIP time frame, principally for roads, equipment and park improvements. The Current Fund and Arterial Street Fund of the City's budget would be most affected by this alternative. It is expected that, given particular funding options, future City revenues may prove sufficient for financing both the CIP and general government services with further tax increases. This financing, however, will probably require both long -term debt service funding as well as short -term pay- as -you- go expenditures for capital projects. Figure 4.3 demonstrates the relation- ship between projected revenues and expenditures in the various scenerios and the amount of revenue needed for CIP financing. Only in the most optimistic estimates (where revenue is growing at a fast rate and the level of public services expenditures is held down) does the revenue generated reach a level sufficient to pay outright for capital projects. Likewise, the most pessimistic projection (declining real revenue, high public service expend- iture growth) is the only condition generating insufficient revenue for any kind of CIP financing, and then not until the later years of the program. Although the future state of Tukwila's finances appears adequate to fund the CIP through 1989 without tax increases or public service reductions, some problems may arise. For the debt service share of local revenues needs, Councilmanic bonds would have to be issued by the City to avoid increasing property taxes; Tukwila's present capacity for these bonds is $5.3 million. This capacity should increase over the next six years as property values increase and bond payments are made, but it is not likely to reach a level sufficient to pay most, or all, of the CIP's local revenue costs. The projected scenerios for future City finances suggest that Councilmanic bond revenues could be needed for about half of the CIP's local revenue costs under the no tax increase alternative. This amount of CIP financing through the debt service could exhaust the City's Councilmanic bonding capacity. Exhausting available bonding capacity effectively reduces Tukwila's options in financing future capital needs beyond the Scope of the CIP. Using projected tax rates, in 1989 between. 17 and 21% of the City's tax revenue or supporting general operating expenses in the Current and City Street funds could be obligated to long -term debt repayment. The present level is approximately 2.5 %. Tukwila's future operational expenses, therefore, could become more susceptable to economic cycles and their effect on its supporting tax revenue foundation. Having a substantial proportion of its general tax revenues tied -up in debt service 54 Annual Expenditures in Millions of Dollars* *Excluding capital projects *!'Debt service financing assumes issuance of 12.5% 20 year bonds, requiring approximately $138,000/ year for each million dollars sold Note: Expenditures encompass all Current_Fund services and operational services in the City Street Fund. Revenues comprise all revenues in the Current Fund and local tax revenue; other local income and cash forwarded in City Street and Arterial Street Funds. 55 Figure 4.3 CITY OF TUKWILA Projected Capacity to Fund Capital Improvements Program reduces the City's flexibility in responding to the expenditure needs depend- ent on this source. The City's flexibility was demonstrated in the City's use of a healthier property tax base to support funds . previously financed by sales tax revenue when the latter decreased after 1978, at least until the 1983 tax increase (Refer to Figure 3.5). Current Taxes; with Rate Increase: In this.alternative, tax rate increases for either or both of Tukwil primary revenue sources would be implemented to finance the CIP. This alternative, therefore, does not diversify the City's current tax base, but instead increases the projected revenues it generates through tax rate increases. Existing problems associated with this narrow tax base, such as the susceptibility to economic cycles and lack of . alternative revenues to support expenditures, would persist. Three types of tax increases could occur: - An excess property tax levy voted by the general public; - A one time increase of the regular property tax levy, up to the statutory limit of $3.60/$1,000 (requires voter approval); - An increase of the local sales tax levy from .7% to one percent as permitted by law. Although any combination of these tax increase options could be used to fund the CIP, the following assesses the individual capacities of these potential revenues. The property tax excise levy assumes the City's voters will approve a $8.5 million general obligation bond issue to finance the CIP. Since voter - approved G.O. bonds are limited to capital purposes only, specifically excluding equipment purchasing, approximately $2.0 million in CIP local revenues are excluded. Unlike Councilmanic bonds, debt limitations for voter - approved G.O. bonds are sufficient for CIP needs (about 40% of the total). Using 1983 assessed valuation, the annual debt service would produce a $1.27/ $1,000 A.V. levy increase if all bonds were released at the same time (worst case conditions; refer to Figure 4.3 for bond assumptions). This increase represents a 12 to 16% rise above the current minimum ($7.98/$1,000 A.V.) and maximum ($10.22/$1,000 A.V.) tax levels in the City (King County Assessor's Office, 1983). To the average homeowner in Tukwila, this increase translates into an additional $90.00 per year (initially) in property taxes (assuming $70,000 medium home value). The tax rate would decline year to year as property value increases and new development broaden the City's assessed valuation base. State law permits a municipality a one -time lifting of the 106% tax ceiling on regular levy property taxes, up to a maximum of $3.60/$1,000 A.V. Although the rate could be increased to any amount between its present level and $3.60, this assessment assumes a voter approved maximum tax increase. In Tukwila, the regular levy rate would increase $1.7252/$1,000 A.V.; up from its 1983 rate of $1.8747/$1,000 A.V. This increase would raise the total levy rate for City residents and businesses between 17 and 22 %, representing an initial $120 per year tax increase to the average Tukwila homeowner. From the approved $3.60/$1,000 A.V. level, the 106% limitation law would again reduce the levy rate annually as property value increases and new development occurs. The amount of revenue produced yearly by this tax increase (approximately $1.6 million) would satisfy 90% of the CIP's local revenue needs over the six year period. Therefore, with support from existing City revenues, pay -as- you -go financing for capital projects is possible with this option. 56 The sales and use tax levy in Tukwila would be. increased to its statutory limit of one percent in this option. This increase could produce 40% more sales tax revenue to the City treasury over the six year time frame of the CIP. Should sales tax revenue grow at a moderate or rapid pace during this period, the additional income should be adequate to finance CIP local revenue needs on pay -as- you -go basis. The sensitivity of sales taxes to economic cycles, however, may affect its capacity to provide 100% support for local revenue needs. Implement New Taxes: This alternative seeks to achieve increased general operating revenues through a diversified tax base. The City of Tukwila has not used three major revenue sources authorized by the State for municipali- ties: utility taxes, business and occupation taxes and a one - quarter percent real estate transfer tax. The following are estimated annual revenues that would be generated by these taxes in 1983 (Tukwila, Finance Department, 1983): - Utility taxes: $88,000 for each one percent levied, at the statutory limit of six percent, approximately $530,000 could be generated. - Business and Occupation taxes (8 & 0): Revenue potential of $2.5 million at the statutory limit of .002 and estimated taxable revenues 9 or retail, wholesale, industrial and commercial services of $1,265 • b Ilion. - 25% Real Estate Transfer Tax: This tax was authorized by the State when it prohibited development fees for capital projects. All revenues must be used for capital expenditures. The tax would generate $62,500 revenue for each $25 million of real estate transfers in the City. Under this alternative, it is assumed that one of these tax options would be implemented to partly fund CIP local revenue needs between 1984 and 1989. Utility taxes would be levied on total billing income of public and private utilities serving Tukwila (excluding water and sewer utilities). Although the City has no utility billing records to determine the growth potential of this revenue source, it can be inferred from the experience of other communi- ties. Utility taxes are a sound revenue source because rates are adjusted as inflation and energy costs increase the utilities' operating expenses. Be- tween 1975 and 1980, Bellevue's utility tax revenue increased 17% annually in real terms (Bellevue, June, 1982). Prorating this increase over the CIP time frame, estimates of total utility revenue during this period range from $2.05 million to $4.10 million depending on whether a three or six percent rate is used (three percent is comparable to the rates levied by neighboring Green River Valley municipalities). This revenue is 20 to 40% of the projected local revenue needs for CIP financing. With moderate growth of current tax revenues over the next six years, a utility tax may achieve pay -as- you -go financing, for CIP local expenditures. General B & 0 taxes are a levy on the gross business receipts of trade, services and manufacturing businesses. In 1982, the State legislature established maximum levy rates (.002) and a special initiative procedure for the ordinance imposing the tax, subjecting it to voter approval or rejection (RCW 35.21.705; 35.21.710). The 8 & 0 tax., like the sales and use tax, is an economically elastic revenue source, or fluctuates with general business cycles. For example, in Bellevue the annual real growth of B & 0 taxes varied from 14% (1974 -79) to 3.5% (1979 -81). Nevertheless, the revenue potential is substantial, ranging from $16.8 million to $22.3 million for the c7 1984 -89 period, at the assumed .002 levy. Even with a B & 0 levy comparable to Bellevue (.0005)the potential revenue could range from $4.2 million to $5.6 million. Therefore, at the lower level the B & 0 tax could raise the equivalent of 40 to 55% of the local funding needs of the CIP. This may be adequate, with the moderate growth of existing tax resources, to finance CIP local revenue needs on a pay -as- you -go basis. The real estate excise tax was established by the same 1982 bill that limited B & 0 and utility tax rates and increased the sales tax ceiling (SB 4972). The excise tax was authorized for municipal use to replace developer fees which are now prohibited (see RCW 82.02.020). All revenues raised by this levy must be reserved for capital improvements. The predominance of commercial /industrial property in Tukwila may limit the revenue potential of this tax option, however. These properties tend to change ownership less frequently than residential properties, which represent less than 20% of total City property value. Alternative tax sources do not differ substantially from the other CIP financing strategies in their capacity to fund local revenue needs. Although the amount of revenue produced by any of these sources could vary from estimates (as a consequence of indeterminate factors such as future economic conditions and tax rate variations), it is unlikely that any single new tax source would be capable of funding all CIP local revenue needs. Including revenue from existing sources, however, complete financing may be able to be achieved with either utility or B & 0 taxes. The principal difference between the financial impacts of this alternative and the other two altern- atives is a more diversified tax base to support both capital expenditures and general operating costs. 4.1.4 Other Capital Financing Sources Intergovernment Revenues: Intergovernmental revenue is the largest source of financing anticipated for the CIP. To be implemented, the CIP requires approximately $35.3 million (excluding utilities) in Federal, State and County shared revenues between 1984 and 1989, comprising 63% of total expend- itures. Federal government provides the majority of intergovernmental .revenue, about 75% of the total. All but one percent of intergovernmental grants would fund arterial and commercial street improvements. Fourteen projects require $35 million in grants, a far larger amount than the City has received in recent years. Two of these projects have been funded, totalling $8.4 million. The City's capacity to obtain additional shared revenues will depend on the funding priorities established by the Puget Sound Council of Governments (PSCOG), the agency responsible for distributing Federal and State funds for road projects. Recent trends suggest that the City's substantial reliance on shared - revenues for non - residential street improvements could lead to delays in implementing projects, if not outright grant denials. The remaining one percent of projected intergovernmental shared - revenues is mostly allocated for the improvement of City -owned park properties. These revenues are provided by the Interagency Committee for Outdoor Recreation (IAC). There are four CIP projects dependent on IAC revenues, one presently with funding. As with non - residential road projects, the City's ability to implement these projects will be determined by the discretionary decisions of the agency allocating these funds. State shared - revenues through the Department of Social and Health Services are also proposed for funding, in part, the general water and sewer facilities included in the CIP (see Utilities discussion below). The allocation processes used by most government agencies for distributing shared - revenues introduces a level of uncertainty in the City's ability to obtain the necessary funding. Lack of intergovernmental funding may preclude implementing these projects during the CIP's six -year time frame. Failure to implement these projects could impact other City finances. Matching funds from local revenue sources would not be needed for non - funded grants. Half of the CIP's local revenue needs described previously are matching funds for shared revenues on commercial street projects. On the two project's funded at present, just over one million dollars in local revenue is needed as matching funds. Therefore, the failure to obtain other road grants could reduce. CIP local revenue needs from $10.3 million to about $6 million over the six year period. Local Improvement Districts: Local improvement district financing is an important part of implementing the CIP. For residential and non - residential roads, $9.8 million is expected to be provided by LID's for a total of 25 projects. Financing requirements for water distribution and sewer trunk lines could increase LID revenue needs an additional $4.4 million over the six year period. These needs could produce an unprecedented level of LID funding in Tukwila, particularly compared to the present $2.3 million in outstanding LID obligations. The rate and total number of LID's that may be established during this period could be influenced by general economic conditions, however. Property owners and developers are unlikely to commit to financing improvements if delays in site development occur due to a weak economy. Tukwila's general finances should not be directly impacted by the increased amount of LID financing that may occur over the next six years. LID levies and liabilities are carried by the benefitting properties within the district. The potential impact of the substantial CIP - related obligations and liabilities on Tukwila's local improvement guarantee fund, however, could subsequently affect other City funds. State law defines the requirements for and obligations of a guarantee fund (RCW Chapter 35.45; 35.45.070, 35.45.080). Briefly, delinquent LID bond obligations are paid by the City from this fund until the cost is recoveredfrom either the property owner or through foreclosure. The time involved in pursuing legal action or otherwise recovering. 'costs for delinquent obligations can take the City several years. During this period, the City must maintain the fund from general operating revenues. At present, the City is potentially faced with payments of $43,000 (through 1984) from their $126,000 guarantee fund (Tukwila, Finance Department, 1983). The potential increase in the outside LID principal produced by implementing the CIP could indirectly impact general City finances through deliquent bond payments. In Tukwila, the problem is compounded by .property ownership patterns. The large =size parcels in the Andover industrial area, where LID establishment is most common, produces districts with as few as three par- ticipants. Therefore, if a property owner defaults, which may occur for any of several reasons (e.g. dispute over improvements, economic hardship brought on by recession and so on), the cost to the City guarantee fund can be high because it may be a.l.arge proportion of the obligation. This cost would subsequently be supported by general operating revenues until it can be obtained from the delinquent party. Also, outstanding LID obligations, the rate of delinquent payments and the annual cost to the City's guarantee fund can affect the City's bond rating, and subsequently, its costs to borrow money for other capital projects or expenditures. 59 User Fees: User fees are a relatively small proportion of the total financing needs for the CIP. The $650,000 of parks and building improvements financed by fees is just over one percent of total CIP expenditures. These expend- itures support one -third of the costs for new facilities in these categories. All CIP fee supported projects are at Foster Golf Links and would be financed from the golf course special fund. The average annual capital costs of CIP improvementsis less than the estimated 1983 expenditures for facilities in the Golf Course fund (approximately $100,000 and $125,000, respectively). There- fore, the CIP should not produce increased user costs beyond those needed for normal operating expenditures. Utilities: Financing water and sewer utility expenditures for CIP projects should involve several potential revenue sources. As self- supported funds, new capital facilities may be financed through utility charges, intergovern- mental revenue, long -term revenue bonds, special charges, LID's and the developer (refer to the Proposed Comprehensive Water and Sewer Plans for a detailed description of expenditures). Water improvements are more difficult to finance than sewer facilities. Service charges in Tukwila have been insufficient to support the establishment of a capital projects fund. Therefore, the utility has no reserve fund for capital projects. The preliminary 1982 Water Plan recommended a financing strategy based on several resources. Phase I general facilities (system wide improvements) could be financed by a combination of Washington State DSHS Referendum 38 grant revenues (up to a maximum of 30% of the total $3.0 million cost) and revenue bonds. The annual cost to retire the revenue bonds would be financed through increased monthly charges and a general facility charge for new development. The recommended monthly charges could produce a 3 to 20% increase in cost to residents, a 36 to 65% increase to smaller business establishments and a 50 to 94% increase for larger establish- ments. The General Facilities charge would be levied on new development to cover its fair share of the existing water system as well as the new system -wide improvements. This charge was expected to finance 50% of the revenue bond cost for Phase I improvements. The passage of SB 4972, how- ever, prohibited special levies on new development for capital facilities unless it could be shown that the facility is needed as a direct consequence of that development (see also RCW 82 -02 -020). This limitation may preclude the use of the general facilities charge. If so, alternative revenue sources, such as greater monthly services charges may be needed. Local facility improvementscould be financed either through LID's or developer financing. Neither method directly affects other City expenditures. A greater emphasis on developer financing, however, could lessen the potential for the adverse L.I. guarantee fund impacts previously discussed. Sewer capital improvement expenditures should also be financed through several potential revenue sources. Unlike the water utility, however, past sewer service charges have been sufficient to build a large reserve of revenue available for financing capital projects. Therefore, a combination of cash reserves, State shared revenue (up to one -third of the total) and general facilities charges are projected for financing CIP projects. Generally, this funding approach should be sufficient to assure implementation of the CIP sewer improvements. State revenues may be subJect to variations resulting from discretionary allocation decisions, however. If the general facilities charge cannot be implemented (see water discussion above), the City may have to maintain rather than reduce the existing monthly service charge as proposed in the Plan. Likewise, the existing special charges to be replaced by the general facilities charge may also have to be retained. Local facilities should be financed using the same sources as local water facilities, and have similar impacts. 4.2 Community Environment 4.2.1 Introduction Implementing the Capital Improvement Program could have both direct and indirect impacts on Tukwila's residential and non - residential communities. Direct impacts of the action are the effects of the alternative financing strategies on the City's residents and businesses. Indirect impacts on City communities could result from theconstruction of the improvements to be. fin- anced by the CIP. Direct and indirect impacts of the action are subsequently identified., for each community environment parameter. 4.2.2 Land Use_. Direct Impacts: The alternative financing strategies assessed in Section 4.1 could influence land use trends in Tukwila. Differential tax rates and costs among Tukwila and other cities and communities could be a factor in individual siting or relocation decisions by businesses. The degree to which increased tax costs offset other factors in Tukwila influencing business location decisions (e.g..land /building costs and availability; accessibility to markets; invested capital)• should determine the proposed action's land use impact. The alternative tax increase strategies for financing the CIP should produce varying levels of land use impact. Neither the utility tax nor the real estate transfer tax should have much effect on future land use trends in the City. These taxes are fairly commonplace among municipalities in metro- politan Seattle. Therefore, implementing these taxes in Tukwila should not produce disadvantageous business cost increases relative to other communities. Property tax increases, either through an excess levy or by lifting the ceiling on the regular levy, may have some effect on business growth in the City. Property tax increases of the magnitude described in Section 4.1 could make industrial /commercial sites in City areas encompassed by the South Central School District (generally north of I -405), where property taxes are highest, less attractive to business. Existing low tax rates in the commercial/ industrial area south of I -405 would probably remain comparable to tax rates in other communities even with an increase. Tax rates, however, would cease to be as attractive to new businesses, possible slowing the rate of vacant land development within the City. Residential communities are more likely to be affected by the property tax increases (see Section 4.2.3). Increasing the sales and use tax or implementing the business and occupation tax should have the most profound effect on land use in Tukwila. Increasing the sales tax to the one percent limit places Tukwila retail businesses at a disadvantage with respect to other regional commercial centers. Although sales of soft goods (e.g. apparel, linens, etc.) could be impacted, stores dealing in larger, more costly merchandise such as furnishings and appliances, would potentially be most affected. These stores comprise a significant proportion of commercial businesses in the City. Increased sales tax could contribute to a reduction of these businesses by encouraging existing establishments to relocate outside Tukwila and discourage new businesses. Future land development in Tukwila could increasingly become concentrated in regional commercial services should a general B.& 0 tax be implemented to finance the CIP. This tax may effectively discourage new light manufacturing, warehousing and wholesale distribution uses from locating in the City and some existing establishments may relocate. Increased business costs may offset the site advantages of Tukwila, making nearby communities with good accessibility and available land (particularly Kent and Auburn) more attractive. Regional commercial services, however, should continue to locate in Tukwila because of its advantageous regional accessibility and competi- tivenesswith other major commercial centers (both Bellevue and Seattle presently have B & 0 taxes). Since new development in Tukwila is currently becoming dominated by commercial services, implementing the B & 0 tax would manifest this trend (see also Indirect Land Use impacts). Local improvement district financing of improvements could accelerate land use change in areas of the City. These impacts should occur in areas where intensified development is anticipated and the improvements are being installed to facilitate this development. Vacant or open use lands east of the Green River, south of S., 180th Street, and between Southcenter Parkway and Andover Park West are likely to experience intensified development as a consequence of increased site costs produced by LID assessments. Two potential laroblems may arise with LID'S. In mixed use areas such as the Interurban corridor, existing residential and commercial uses could be assessed for improvements intended to accomodate intensified development. Present users satisfied with the status quo may be faced with involuntary relocation asa consequence of increased site. costs. Also, uncoordinated LID formation in the commercial /industrial areas may encourage premature abandonment of agricultural land. The costs of LID assessments could force agricultural uses to relocate long before the demand for improved land can absorb the site. Indirect Impacts: The construction of capital facilities subsequent to the adoption and implementation of the CIP could impact future land use patterns in Tukwila. Many of these facilities, particularly roads and sewers, could eliminate present constraints on land development and redevelopment in several areas of the City. CIP projects could have two general impacts: to promote commercial services as the dominant type of new land development, and to encourage the development of vacant land within the City and around its periphery. Commercial service uses could be encouraged by several road and sewer projects included in the CIP. This impact could be most pronounced in southernmost Tukwila where the South 188th Street connector with 1-5 should provide much improved freeway accessibility. Increased accessibility in this area could increase land costs which could favor commercial service uses over light manufacturing and warehousing. Within metropolitan Seattle, the displacement of warehousing and light manufacturinguses by commercial services has been documented in other industrial districts that are relatively accessible via the freeway system. Proposed sewer improvements along Andover Park West and West Valley Highway are also intended to remove. constraints that otherwise could preclude the eventual displacement of light manufact- uring and warehousing uses by commercial services' in south Tukwila Road and sewer projects in. the CIP could enable vacant parcels around the City periphery to be developed. The sewer improvements in south Tukwila that may promote commercial service uses are also intended to facilitate develop- ment of vacant land south of the current City limits. Sewer and road improvements in the CIP could also encourage development in several other areas: - The industrial /commercial areas along Interurban Avenue between I -405 and the golf course; - The industrial areas within City limits east of the Green River; - Remaining vacant parcels in the central Andover Industrial Park; - Remaining commercial areas along Southcenter Parkway. Once capital facilities are built, eliminating public facility constraints on development, the impacts of subsequent use of a site should largely be determined by local government regulations (e.g. Zoning Code, Comprehensive Plan, Subdivision Ordinance). These impacts have been assessed in previous documents (Tukwila, October 1980; Tukwila, February 1977). 4.2.3 Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance Direct Impacts: Financing the Capital Improvements Program directly impacts local tax equity in Tukwila. Tax equity is the balance between who pays for, and who uses, public facilities such as those included in the CIP. The alternative methods available to the City to finance the CIP impose different degrees of cost on the principal-groups comprising local residential and business communities. Likewise, the facilities included in the CIP may have, differential benefits for these groups. At present, Tukwila's property and sales and use taxes are the predominant source of local revenue. Property taxes are levied indiscriminantly on all non - exempt property in the City, based on the assessed value of individual parcels. These taxes are commonly referenced as a form of "horizontal equity " -- placing equal tax burdens on persons enjoying equal levels of government services and owning equal amounts of property (Fisher 1978). Therefore, property taxes are best suited for financing improvements of general benefit to the community. Property tax support for the local revenue share of equipment needed by Police, Fire and General Government in Tukwila, as well as most recreational facilities, should have beneficial equity impacts. Implementing property tax increases, either by lifting the regular levy ceiling or through excess levies, for the purpose of funding all local revenue needs could place a disproportionate share of the costs for some improvements on groups that do not realize actual benefits. Reliance on property taxes for CIP funding could promote adverse effects on the ability of some property owners to pay for improvements. Property valuation is not necessarily indicative of an owner's ability to pay property tax levies. In recent years, rapid property value appreciation has compounded the problem. Many residents, including those living in the same house for many years and the elderly, may not be able to afford to purchase . it at.lst current value. Property taxes tend to have a disproportionate impact on these households' income. Low income, elderly home owners are provided some relief from excess property tax levies by State law. This exemption does not help "borderline" households, such as residents with incomes too high__to qualify for assistance but too.low,to absorb large property tax increases. Increased property taxes may also have a detrimental effect on the rate of private home rehabilitation in Tukwila. Property assessment practices and 63 increased property taxes have been found to discourage private reinvestment in housing maintenance (Prentice, October 1976 and January 1977; Smith, January 1978; Mikesell, April 1979; Bails, April 1981). Fear of increased property values and taxes has been cited as a disincentive to use voluntary public assistance programs for housing improvements (Mercer 81 Philips, 1981). Therefore, the property tax alternative could partially: offset City efforts to encourage the maintenance of existing single - family residential neighbor- hoods. Tukwila could also lose its present tax rate advantage as an incentive for contiguous residential communities to annex to the City. The alternative of increasing the sales and use tax to. finance the CIP could place a greater share of local revenue needs on non - residents. Retail activities in Tukwila generate considerable demands for facilities, parti- cularly commercial streets and arterials and water and sewer utilities. Employees and customers of these businesses are primarily non - residents and therefore do not pay .other local taxes for City facilities used in commuting to and from these ablishments (although the businesses generate property tax revenues). The increased sales tax alternative would finance all CIP local revenue needs, thereby subsidizing facilities used exclusively by City residents. Not all businesses in the City contribute to sales tax revenue. Light manufacturing, warehousing and many commercial services have little or no retail income as a proportion of their overall business activity. Generally, these businesses do not usually require the supporting capital infrastructure that retail businesses do. Commercial services, however, are a more intensive business activity requiring a higher level -of- service than either warehousing or light manufacturing, as attested by the proposed expenditures for upgraded sewers for South Tukwila (refer to Section 4.2.2). These uses are expected to comprise the largest share of future development in the City. The business and occupation tax would be assessed on gross business income for all City establishments. As a business tax, revenue from this source would be most equitably used for CIP commercial and arterial improvements. Increasing business taxes for capital purposes does not necessarily establish a more equitable distribution of funding obligations between City residents and non - residents. In the B & 0 tax alternative, CIP local revenue . needs could be financed from this source; subsidizing improvements for residential neighborhoods as well as facilities serving the business community. Business taxes also provide no mechanism for adjusting the rate among businesses to reflect actual needs for municipal services. The real estate transfer excise tax would place a higher cost on the existing property owner for capital facility financing. Transfer taxes are not easily passed on to the purchaser because market demand tends to dictate the sales price for property (Smith, January 1978). In Tukwila, however, the tax may disproportionately fall on residential property owners since apartment, commercial and industrial properties do not change ownership as frequently. The utility tax alternative would levy a flat percentage rate on utility residential and business customer charges. Therefore, the amount of tax paid by individual customers is commensurate with the amount of utility services used - larger customers pay larger shares of the tax. Since counties are not empowered to establish utility taxes, potential future annexation of adjacent unincorporated communities could be influenced by this tax differential should this strategy be implemented. Indirect Impacts: Implementation of the CIP could enhance neighborhood maintenance —i a isting single - family residential communities. The CIP includes several residential street upgrade projects in the Tukwila Hill and McMicken Heights neighborhoods. These improvements may continue to encourage private housing rehabilitation efforts in these communities. Park improvements in these residential communities may also contribute to stable and viable neighborhoods by encouraging housing rehabilitation (Hendon, July, 1977). Several CIP park projects are located at peripheral City sites (e.g. McMicken Park, Foster Memorial Park, Duwamish Park) serving both Tukwila residents and contiguous unincorporated neighborhoods. These proj- ects could encourage neighborhood stability through private housing rehab- ilitation in communities outside Tukwila's jurisdiction that are physically related to the City's residential neighborhoods and where annexation has been pursued. Park improvements are currently the only facilities included in the CIP serving adjacent communities that may annex to the City over the next six years. 4.2.4 Public Services Direct Impacts: All public services, except education, are potentially impacted by financing the Capital Improvement Program. Several factors should determine the extent of these impacts: the rate of growth of local City revenues, the availability of intergovernmental revenue and future public decisions to either increase local taxes or reduce public expenditures during tight budgetary situations. Section 4.1.2 demonstrated that future budgets could provide flexibility in maintaining services and financing the CIP depending on the particular revenue strategies the City implemented. In the future, however, the City may opt to cutback on public service expenditures rather than raise new revenues. Should this occur, reduced service levels could result and be reflected in increased police and fire response times, greater delays in general government functions and less frequent public facility maintenance. Reduced street maintenance could subsequently increase future capital expenditure for necessary facility reconstruction. Indirect Impacts - Public Safety: Implementing the CIP could indirectly impact municipal services in Tukwila. Public safety agencies could receive new equipment and training facilities that should help maintain the quality of current services. Included in the CIP are new patrol vehicles, fire- fighting vehicles, support vehicles and an aid car that would replace aging equipment. The City presently operates with minimal firefighting apparatus, the oldest becoming increasingly unreliable for daily usage. New equipment could eliminate this problem as well as potentially reduce equipment maintenance costs. The CIP also includes several equipment purchases for upgrading the Valley Com. system, a computer aided dispatch system, and lifesaving equipment for the aid car. In general, this equipment could improve the operational efficiency of Tukwila's Police and Fire Departments, enhance public safety by providing more reliable life saving equipment and reduce the annual operating costs for these departments. CIP funded facilities could also impact the demand for public safety services in Tukwila. The proposed street and arterial improvements may reduce or eliminate current road conditions and traffic congestion or circulation problems that contribute to existing automobile accident rates. A reduced automobile accident rate could lessen the present operational costs in responding to accident emergencies.. These operational benefits may be offset by service demands generated at new public facilities and new land develop- ment accommodated by CIP improvements. Developing parks in McMicken Heights and completing Christensen Greenbelt Park may increase human activity at these 65 sites, therby increasing the potential need for police and fire services. The CIP also provides road and sewer facilities that should eliminate present development constraints on many undeveloped or underdeveloped sites. Once developed, these sites may generate greater needs for public safety services as a consequence of increased human activity. Indirect Impact - Schools: The .CIP may not have much impact on educational facilities in Tukwila. The softball field at Tukwila Elementary School should be upgraded for use during evenings by Recreation Department programs. Students would continue to use the field during the day. New development that could occur subsequent to CIP road and sewer improvements, particularly in the industrial /commercial areas of south and east Tukwila, could increase the property tax base of school districts serving the City. These benefits, however, would accrue primarily to the Renton School District, which is little affected by City students. The South Central School District may receive increased revenue from new industrial and commercial development along Interurban Avenue north of I -405 and would also receive most students from new residential developments. Indirect Impacts - Parks and Recreation: The park and recreation facilities included in the CIP should satisfy most recreational needs in Tukwila. The CIP includes 15 capital projects fqr recreational facilities, eight involving the rehabilitation of existing facilities and seven providing new facilities. Many of these projects may resolve current problems of inad- equate or insufficient facilities: rebuilt tennis courts at Tukwila Park; new courts at Foster Golf Links; new and - rebuilt athletic fields for softball and soccer; and improved drainage for existing fields at Foster Park. These facilities are presently in great demand, and the improvements should alleviate much of this need. The CIP also include two projects to complete Christensen Greenbelt Park, a trail along the Green River, from Fort Dent to the Tukwila /Kent boundary. This improvement should be a general benefit to City residents and employees as well as persons from outside the City. In addition to general use facilities, the CIP includes projects that should benefit particular neighborhoods. A City -owned site in McMicken Heights would be developed in two phases providing both passive and active recrea- tional areas. This park would be the City's first in this neighborhood, providing McMicken Heights residents in both Tukwila and the adjacent County community with nearby park facilities. A new foot trail would also be built in this community. Duwamish Park, which serves the Allentown/ Duwamish community northeast of Tukwila Hill, should be upgraded with field and playground improvements. Indirect Impacts - Maintenance: The CIP's street and parks project could affect future maintenance service needs. The number of parks and recreation facilities and total street mileage will increase; subsequently increasing the amount of facilities to be maintained by the City. The maintenance requirements of new facilities, however, could' be offset by improvements upgrading street and park facilities. These projects may reduce the frequency of maintenance needed to keep a sufficient level of service. Indirect Impacts - Historical and Cultural Services and Facilities: The CIP contains no proposed improvements involving the preservation or alteration of historically or culturally significant structures. Certain projects, such as improvements at Tukwila Park and road improvements along Macadam Road are located at historical sites (the City's first park and the first paved road in the County), but should not lessen the historical value of 66 these facilities. Site preparation activities for CIP projects, such as trenches for utility infrastructure and road grading could impact currently undocumented historical resource sites, particularly along the river corridor. Indirect Impacts - Social and Health Services: Although the City does not engage in directly providing social services to residents, certain CIP projects may contribute to resolving City social problems. New or upgraded facilities for team sports could provide recreational opportunities for City youths that may help deter youth - related social and criminal problems in the City. 4.3. Public Infrastucture 4.3.1 Introduction The purpose of the Six -Year CIP is to identify and prioritize public infrastructure improvements in Tukwila and to outline a strategy for financing them.. Adopting the CIP, however, is a programmatic action that does not directly impact the existing infrastructure. The implementation of individual projects subsequent to the CIP's adoption should affect the service capacities and conditions of these facilities. These indirect impacts of the action are addressed herein. 4.3.2 Transportation Street System: The total mileage of the street system in Tukwila should increase if the'CIP is .implemented. New local commercial streets may be built in the central part of the Andover Industrial Park through the superblock bounded by Strander Blvd., Andover Park West, S.,180th Street and Southcenter Parkway. Two new bridges may be built across the Green River, extending existing commercial roadways to SR 181. A new arterial connecting 57th Avenue South with the Orilla Road South interchange at I -5 may also be built. Most other road improvements are modifications or realignments of existing streets to encourage more efficient traffic circulation. CIP improvements may alter the functional classification of some City roadways. Extending Minkler Boulevard from Southcenter Parkway to SR 181 could upgrade this roadway from a local commercial street to a secondary arterial. Improving 56th Avenue South could upgrade this roadway from a collecter arterial to a secondary arterial, particularly with the con- struction of the I -5 interchange connector. Circulation: CIP street improvements could substantially change present circulation patterns and problems in the City. The 57th Street South connector with I -5 could provide direct freeway access for south Tukwila. This project should redistribute traffic volumes on much of that road. system serving the commercial /industrial district. Traffic could be directed away from the City's heavily used freeway interchanges along I -405 and I -5 at Strander Boulevard and Southcenter Boulevard. In addition, excess surface street use by traffic traveling between south Tukwila and the freeway system should decrease, alleviating traffic congestion on existing arterials and at major intersections. A series of projects along SR -181 could also substantially alter traffic circulation patterns. New bridges across the Green River connecting SR -181 with Tukwila Parkway and Minkler Boulevard would connect the highway with all four east /west secondary arterials in south Tukwila. These improvements 67 should reduce present congestion at the SR- 181 /Strander Boulevard and SR -181/ South 180th Street intersections. Traffic volumes and congestion at other intersections along these two arterials should also improve as east /west traffic circulation is redistributed onto four roadways. Constructing a new Grady Way /SR- 181 /Southcenter Boulevard intersection should also reduce congestion and hazardous traffic conditions on SR -181 by providing direct east /west travel. A third major circulation improvement that could be produced by the CIP is improved accessibility through "superblocks" in south Tukwila. The con- struction of local commercial roads around the Tukwila pond site and the extension of Minkler Boulevard to Southcenter Parkway could enhance circulation by reducing the distance vehicles need to travel in reaching destinations in this area. Increased accessibility through superblocks may also reduce traffic congestion at the intersections of the arterials around these blocks. Other projects, including road widenings, turning lanes at major intersections and traffic control improvements, should lessen congestion and traffic hazard conditions. Alternate Travel Modes: Pedestrian travel could be enhanced in Tukwila's residential and commercial communities if CIP projects are built. Resi- dential street improvements in both the Tukwila Hill and McMicken Heights neighborhoods include sidewalk facilities that could reduce automobile hazards to pedestrians. The two recreational foot trails projected for. these neighborhoods should provide improved pedestrian circulated by completing the City's trail system. Sidewalk improvements included in the Macadam Road and Interurban Avenue projects should also benefit Tukwila Hill residents and provide better pedestrian linkages between residential and commercial areas of the City. In addition to these projects, pedestrian movement in the commercial district may benefit from the new streets that reduce " superblock" barriers, and two new bridges across the Green River. Completion of the northern and southern parts of Christensen Trail could also encourage increased pedestrian and bicycle travel in the commercial districts. CIP facilities could have two general impacts on METRO transit services. Transit stations may be constructed along Andover Park West to encourage greater transit use by workers and customers in the commercial areas. In addition, Metro's proposal to build a regional transit center in Tukwila could benefit from the general road system improvements. Successful "timed - transfer" operations at the center requires that buses consistently maintain their scheduled arrivals and departures. Traffic congestion creates potential bus delays that could disrupt these coordinated schedules, creating rider in- convenience and dissatisfaction with the system. By reducing congestion along busy arterials and major intersections and improving freeway accessibility, the CIP could contribute to the viable operation of this transit center. 4.3.3 Utilities Water: The water system improvements in the CIP should resolve systemwide deficiencies of the City's current facilities. Three water storage facili- ties and ancillary distribution lines could be built, two in McMicken Heights and one on Tukwila Hill, with a total capacity of 10 million gallons (mg). The reservoirs should satisfy the ultimate water storage needs of the City. This capacity could save the City $1.225 million over 20 years in fees it presently pays to Seattle's peak demand charges (Horton Dennis Associates, March, 1982). The storage facilities may also save Tukwila businesses one million dollars in lowered insurance rates over a 20 year period. Additional f annual operating savings could be realized if the City proceeds with the CIP's two groundwater wells. These wells may provide sufficient supply to meet the City's additional water needs, thus avoiding potential new water use charges (Horton Dennis Assoc., March 1982). Other major CIP water system improvements may eliminate problems of insufficient flows, particularly during peak demand periods. A constant pressure pump may be installed to eliminate deficient water pressures during peak demand periods at higher elevations on Tukwila Hill. Inadequate flows due to deficient water main capacities along Interurban Avenue and South 140th Street may be resolved by installing larger sized water mains. Most other CIP water projects are local distribution pipelines, sized from six to 12 inches, intended to eliminate peak flow deficiencies from undersized lines or to provide water supply for new development (refer to proposed Water Master Plan, October 1983). Sewer: CIP sewer projects should also eliminate present system deficiencies in Tukwila. Six of the City's sewer pump stations could be replaced by gravity flow lines.. These improvements could provide a considerable annual savings to the Public Works Department in maintenance time and energy costs. Most other sewer improvements are new lines or upgraded trunk lines to eliminate current constraints on future land development (see Land use Impact §). CIP projects also include installation of grease traps and ancillary facilities to reduce current maintenance problems in the system. Storm Drainage: The CIP does not include any major strom drainage facilities. Storm drainage facilities are included as ancillary improvements in street and arterial projects. These improvements should provide localized benefits in storm drainage management. Other Utilities: Other utility services in Tukwila are the responsibility of agencies and companies other than the City. Therefore, providing new capital facilities for communications, electricity and natural gas should occur independent of the CIP. 4.4 Physical Environment 4.4.1 Introduction The construction of many of the capital projects included within the CIP could impact local physical environment resources. Therefore, by establishing the funding and priorities to implement these projects, the CIP has an indirect impact on Tukwila's physical resources. The degree of impact these projects have on these resources will be determined by the engineering design and construction practices used. Since the CIP projects represent a "wish list" of facilities intended to resolve current and anticipated public infrastruc- ture deficiencies, few have advanced to the preliminary design stage. The conceptual nature of most CIP projects preclude all but a general assessment of potential physical environment impacts. To assist in this endeavor, an environmental impact matrix identifying the degree of potential impact individual projects may have on physical and other resources is provided in Appendix B. The matrix assessment is based on what is currently known about the individual projects - usually no more than its type and location. There- fore, the findings of this preliminary assessment may be subject to refine- ment as individual projects progress through the planning and design stages to the construction stage. The matrix does not include most equipment purchases, since these projects primarily impact the City's financial resources and service operations and have no effect on physical resources. Most smaller water line projects are also not included because they are generally exempted by SEPA (WAC 197 -11 -1000) and are expected to present similar, limited impact potential. These potential impacts will briefly be described under the affected environmental parameter. 4.4.2 Earth Resources The construction of the road, building, sewer and water facilities could result in modifications to local earth resources and accelerated geological processes. The installation of water and sewer lines and the undergrounding of overhead electrical telephone and cable utilities requires excavating and filling trenches. For the most part, these facilities will be constructed along existing public right -of -way (e.g., roads) that have been extensively modified by previous public facility installation. Nevertheless, while under construction the trenches and excavated material may present a potential site of accelerated erosion and source of increased stream siltation during storm events. Likewise, street and highway improvements requiring roadway widening and storm drainage installation could involve similar modifications. Bridge approaches could involve fill, in some instances creating embankments as high as 30 feet, altering local topog- raphy (U.S. DOT, February 1983). Increased erosion potential during facility installation or construction represent short -term impacts. Soil compaction and fill' for improvements such as road widenings and bridge approaches would be long -term impacts. Few CIP projects are located in areas where sensitive earth resources may be impacted. The South 188th Street connector between 57th Avenue South and the I -5 /Orilla Road South interchange, however, could involve considerable modifications to the hillside area between the interchange and South 180th Street, depending on the final alignment chosen. The majority of the hillside includes unstable slopes or slopes potentially unstable when modified (Tukwila Data Inventory, 1975). Constructing the connector along the valley wall between the floodplain and upland plateau could require extensive cut - and -fill, possibly involving modifications outside the right -of -way for stabilizing slopes. Excavation and fills could present both short -term and long -term erosion potential. Long -term erosion hazards could be manifested in steep cut slopes that cannot be easily revegetated, exposing hillsides to runoff erosion, freeze /thaw and other geologic mass - wasting processes. The topographical modifications of cut - and -fill road construction would also be long -term impacts. The the degree that slopes are destabilized by road construction, increased long -term landslide hazards could be produced. 4.4.3 Water Resources Short -term impacts on water resources could occur during the construction of CIP funded projects. Excavating utility trenches, roadway grading and storm drainage channel construction could increase soil erosion and subsequent water quality degradation (increased humidity) and water course siltation. Increased siltation, paricularly in the City's drainage system in the Green River floodplain, could contribute to higher manitenance costs to prevent loss of capacity in transporting storm water runoff. CIP project construction may also have long -term impacts on surface water drainage. These potential impacts are varied, including both adverse and beneficial effects as follows: New and widened roads and bridges and new structures such as buildings and reservoirs could increase the total surface area in the City covered with impervious surfaces. Increased impervious surfaces could reduce the amount of infiltration and groundwater recharge from precipi- tation. Reduced infiltration could subsequently encourage greater surface water runoff and storm flow peaks during storm events. For example, the Southcenter Boulevard expansion project could increase impervious surfaces by 3.5 acres, raising runoff volume during a 100 - year storm by 2.5 cubic feet /second (CFS) (U.S. DOT Feburary 1983). For comparison, Green River discharge during a storm of this intesity is an estimated 12,000 cfs. Although the cumulative impact of all CIP projects could be far greater than 2.5 cfs, it is unlikely that increased runoff from these projects would substantially alter present conditions. Localized street flooding problems, however, could be aggravated. Greater roadway surface area in the City could also increase potential sources of pollutants (e.g., oil and grease) that may enter creeks, streams and other water features. - The feeder springs for a surface stream should be protected in a natural state by the development of McMicken Park. Increasing the capacity of sewer lines to accommodate existing and potential wastewater flows may reduce the rate of sewage overflows presently discharged into the Green River. A lessened potential for overflows could contribute to improved water quality. Groundwater resources 'may also be affected by CIP projects. Included in water facility improvements are two groundwater wells for supplementing, if not eventually replacing, current public water supplies. These wells would be located in southeast Tukwila and tap groundwater resources in the Green River aquifer. The City's groundwater study cited two advantages in developing this aquifer rather than the Upland aquifer: production wells could be shallower and less expensive to install, and there is presently little development of the Green River aquifer, therefore, little potential for interference of adjacent wells. The adequacy of the aquifer from the stand- point of water quality and water balance (withdraw vs. recharge) is presently unknown, however. If City water needs from the aquifer exceeds its rate of natural recharge, the flow of groundwater into the Green River could be reversed (Shannon & Wilson, December 1981). Although this reversed flow may assure the long -term productivity of the aquifer as a public water source, it could also affect surface flow in the Green River. The magnitude of the impact of potential reverse flow cannot be determined until after an exploratory drilling program assessing the characteristics of the aquifer (proposed as part of the CIP well program). 4.4.4 Biological Resourses Biological resources are most affected by the proposed road improvement projects in the CIP. Road improvements could produce both long -term and short -term impacts. Land preparation activities, such as clearing and grading, may be necessary for roadway projects involving widening, extension or new construction. Cleared land would subsequently be paved or covered with overburden for the improved roadway. For example, the Southcenter Boulevard extension project could result in clearing 4.5 acres of vegetation (U.S. DOT, February 1983). The major vegetation loss may occur along the Green River channel as a consequence of bridge construction. The two other CIP projects . involving bridge construction across the Green River could have similar effects. In addition, the construction of the connector between I -5 and South 57th Street could result in substantial vegetation clearing for the road right -of -way. Vegetation removal in watercourse and hillside areas affect the most productive wildlife habitats (riparian and forest) in the City and could permanently reduce dependent wildlife populations. Roadway improvements may also require short -term vegetation clearing for equipment and materials - transport and storage (U.S. DOT, February 1983). These areas could be revegetated upon completion of the projects but restoration of their natural habitat capacity may occur only after a period of time. Species most adaptable to disturbed habitats, including various birds and rodents, would probably reoccupy the site initially. The impacts of other CIP projects on biological resources will vary by type of facility. Most water and sewer lines and ancillary facilities are located in existing streets and road rights -of -way and should not affect vegetation. A few water lines in the Tukwila Hill residential community are located along unimproved road rights -of -way that could require the permanent removal of vegetation. Also, the construction of three water reservoirs may also cause permanent loss of woodland vegetation and wildlife habitat. Park and recreation improvements, particularly the proposed McMicken Park, may alter the present character of vegetation and habitat. Woodlands could be partially cleared, or thinned, to install recreational improvements and parking facilities. The potential impacts of CIP projects on water resources could subsequently affect instream wildlife resources. As noted previously, reduced sewage overflow and increased roadway pollution that may result from proposed CIP improvements could change present water quality conditions in the Green River. Likewise, the potential reversal of groundwater flows as a consequence of groundwater withdrawals *wells could have some effect on flows in the Green River. Changes in the river's quality and quantity could affect aquatic habitat. The regional nature of water and instream resource problems in the Green River, however, suggests that CIP projects may not produce sub- stantial changes from current conditions, but should have a cumulative effect on future conditions. 4.4.5 Air Resources Most air resource impacts of CIP projects are local in nature. All CIP projects involving clearing and grading or cut - and -fill activities could produce localized, short -term particulate pollution. The operation of construction equipment may also produce short -term emissions. CIP air resource impacts, however, are most closely related to proposed road system improvements. CIP improvements could change current traffic circulation patterns and conditions in Tukwila and subsequently local long -term air pollution problems relative to motor vehicles (see Section 4.3.2 for traffic impact assessment). Air quality conditions in the City will continue to be dominated by regional auto travel behavior. Traffic volumes both in Tukwila and metropolitan Seattle should continue to increase through the CIP's six -year time frame. Therefore, local air quality conditions will continue to be determined by outside variables: the emissions produced.by higher traffic volume, travel behavior, and stricter automobile performance standards. At the local level, road projects substantially altering current traffic volumes on the road system could produce improved air quality conditions on contiguous properties. The freeway-connector should most influence localized air quality conditions by redistributing traffic volumes from arterials along the I -405 corridor to south Tukwila. Extending Minkler Boulevard from Southcenter Parkway to SR -181 and completing the Tukwila Parkway Green River crossing at SR -181 could also change local air quality conditions by alleviating potential traffic volumes on Strander Boulevard and South 180th Street. Generally, properties adjacent to arterials that may carry fewer vehicles as a consequence of CIP implementation, could experience local air quality improvements. Localized air quality degradation could be expected for properties along new streets and arterials and arterials experiencing higher traffic volumes with CIP improvements. These improvements should have the cumulative effect of reducing excessive.travel in the City, and thereby, total emissions. CIP projects that do not affect traffic distribution may also improve local air quality. Road widenings and intersection improvements(e.g., turning lanes, signalization) could reduce traffic congestion and delays, lowering potential automobile emissions from stalled traffic. Transit services may also benefit from new facilities (transfer station, transit stops) and indirectly from improvedcirculation. To the degree these improvements promote greater transit use (as opposed to the private automobile), additional improvements to local air quality conditions may result. There- fore, overall local air quality improvements:,can be anticipated in Tukwila as a result of the more efficient traffic circulation patterns CIP facilities could produce. 4.4.6 Noise The impacts of CIP projects on noise conditions in Tukwila are similar to air resource impacts. Facility construction could result in short -term noise impacts from equipment operation and building activities. Construction activities in the McMicken Heights and Tukwila Hill residential communities could most affect noise- sensitive activities. Long -term noise impacts of the CIP could occur as a consequence of road system improvements. Roadway noise impacts occur in areas contiguous to the facility and decrease with distance from it. Traffic volumes and the type of vehicle most influence roadway noise, with truck traffic producing a disproportionate amount of noise. Roadway gradient also affects vehicle noise but generally is not a factor in the relatively flat industrial district in Tukwila where traffic volumes are greatest. Noise impacts, therefore, are attributable to street projects redistributing traffic volumes on the City's road network. Noise level reductions produced by CIP - related traffic redistribution should have little impact on most roadside activities. Roadways along the I -405 corridor should generally have noise levels below those occurring without CIP improvements.. The opposite should characterize arterials in south Tukwila. In both areas most roadside land uses are commercial and industrial activities that tend to be less sensitive to roadway noise. Zoning setbacks for structures further attenuate potential impacts on these uses. Noise level impacts could influence pedestrian activity, but changes in excess of 4 to 5 decibles are necessary to be perceived. The I -5 connector with 57th Avenue South may have the most significant noise impacts of CIP projects. The alignment of this roadway traverses an area planned for low density residential uses. The roadway could introduce noise level increases. 4.4.7 Aesthetics CIP projects could have both short -term and long -term impacts on the aesthetic character of Tukwila. Noise and air quality emissions from construction equipment and temporary clearing, grading and excavation for CIP facilities may produce short -term adverse aestheticimpacts. Long -term impacts of the CIP should include both beneficialand adverse effects as follows: - Residential street improvements could upgrade the appearance of residential neighborhoods; - Park facilities such as completing Christensen Trail and McMicken Park could encourage greater use of these areas, providing greater opportunities for public enjoyment of the City's aesthetic resources; - Roadway and bridge construction in presently undeveloped areas (e.g., two Green River crossings and the I -5 connector) may lessen the visual quality of local areas by modifying vegetation and topography with manmade artifacts and by increasing noise and air pollutant emissions; - Water reservoir construction in residential areas could disrupt the views of surrounding properties and introduce shade and shadow impacts. 74 CHAPTER V Mitigations 5.1 Municipal Finances 5.1.1 Capital Improvement Planning The Six Year Capital Improvement Program addressed in this study is the first of an annual series of reports that will guide future capital project development in Tukwila. Subsequent reports will build upon the framework established by this CIP, updating and revising as project implementation and changing fiscal and community needs may dictate. The fiscal impact assessment in this DEIS demonstrates the need for annual monitoring of City finances for the purpose of capital facility funding. The alternative funding sources available to the City and the potential fluctuation of Tukwila's financial resources to general economic conditions make it difficult to predict with certainty future CIP funding capacity. This section assesses mitigations that would improve future capital facility planning in Tukwila. These mitigations include developing capital needs data systems that are not available for the current CIP as well as planning strategies that could avoid some of the financing problems discussed in Section 4.1. The following mitigations are derived largely from the PSCOG King County Subregional Council's recommendations for improved local capital facilities planning (refer to Appendix C). Capital Facilities Inventory Append an inventory of public facilities to future CIP's for the purpose of providing City decisionmakers with a method of monitoring capital facility main- tenance, replacement and /or expansion in Tukwila (Appendix C, recommendations C6, C9, C13, C14, C15, C16, C21). The inventory could include all public streets and bridges, public buildings, parks and recreation facilities and major water and sewer infrastructure. For each existing or anticipated facility the inventory would maintain the following information: - Year built or rebuilt /cost /finance sources; - Current facility condition /existing replacement value /anticipated lifespan of facility, with and without maintenance; - Current maintenance need /priority /estimated cost and finance source; - Capital construction need /priority /estimated cost and finance source. This facility inventory may be maintained by City subarea to differentiate the capital needs for communities and to distinguish the needs of areas that may annex to the City (see annexation discussion below). Theinitial inventory would establish baseline conditions with subsequent years incorporating annual updates. The inventory could enhance long -range capital facility planning in Tukwila. Capital construction needs are distinguished from capital maintenance and renovation needs to provide a method of monitoring the degree to which facility maintenance expenditures are deferred as a short -term response to tight budgetary considerations. This practice has become increasingiy_common in recent years, particularly as State and Federal grants- in - aid, a traditional source of revenue for maintaining or replacing substandard facilities, have diminished ,(City of Seattle, 1983 -1988 CIP, n.d; PSCOG, King Subregional Council, May 1983). PSCOG identified the two -part program as a method presently used by some King County jurisdictions for planning capital improvements and recommended a separate capital replacement fund for municipal budgets. Tukwila's comparatively new public infrastructure has not encountered major funding conflicts between capital facility construction and renovation needs. The City's rapid tax base growth and available intergovernment grants -in -aid in the early 1970's has permitted the road and water systems in the old residential community on Tukwila Hill to be renovated. In recent years, as the City's fiscal situation has become increasingly constrained, there are definite signs that Tukwila could face similar decisions, most notably: - The Department of Public Works street pavement evaluation study which identified' rapidly growing street repair needs and an expanded maintenance program to retard further deterioration (Tukwila, DPW, July 1980); • Insufficient monthly water service rates to provide an adequate reserve fund for infrastructure replacement and expansion; - Tukwila has pursued annexation of older contiguous, residential communi- ties in recent years. Existing public facilities in these communities tend to be substantially older, or lacking completely, than comparable residential areas in the City. Although no major annexation has yet been successful (the most recent, Allentown, was rejected in September 1983), potential future annexations could require a commitment of revenues for facility replacement or rehabilitation in these areas; - The growing unlikelihood of intergovernmental revenues to implement CIP arterial improvements. The two -part CIP may assist City decisionmakers and the general public in identifying potential needs and balancing available revenues between new capital projects and 'existing facility renovation and maintenance. Also, identifying maintenance costs in the CIP could provide a better understanding of their impact on Tukwila's budget where they are presently distributed among several funds. This mitigation could increase City annual operating expenditures for Public Works and general government services because of expected manhour requirements for added capital maintenance as well as that needed to implement the inventory. Debt Service Assessment Tukwila's future CIPs could include a discussion of the City's debt service capacity and liability (Appendix C, recommendations C14, C23, C39, C40). This discussion should include councilmanic and general obligation bond indebtedness, revenue bond indebtedness, the amount of outstanding non - municipal obligations in L.T.D. bonds for capital projects in Tukwila and current bond interest rates (the cost of long -term borrowing) for near -term issue. Annual revenue needs for repaying the debt service could also be projected for the period until these bonds are retired. The L.I.D. debt assessment should include annual payment obligations, data on deliquent payments and the revenue require- ments of the City's L.I. bond guarantee fund. Tukwila's debt capacity (as established by State statuatory limits) is presently in good condition. General bonding capacity, however, is determined by indefinite factors as well. The competition among local jurisdictions in selling bonds (what the bond market can absorb) and the willingness of tax payers to support increased taxation or service charges are two factors that could restrict "reasonable" debt limits to levels substantially below those established by the State (PSCOG, King Subregional Council, May 1983). Prevailing lending rates should demonstrate the general demand for funds. For taxpayer impacts, representative case studies using various household (for residents) and business incomes -could be incorporated into the CIP. The assessment would study the impacts of the following: - Current regular and excess property tax levies, including overlapping jurisdictions (school districts, King County, Port of Seattle), and the total share devoted for capital purposes and debt service; - Service charges for utilities and the share dedicated to capital projects and debt service; - Representative costs of local improvement districts to participants; - Other costs to residents and businesses for City revenues (e.g. sales taxes, charges, etc.) that may be used for capital purposes; - Estimated costs to City taxpayers of projected capital programs for overlapping jurisdictions during the City's CIP time frame. This baseline data could be used to assess potential effects of alternative funding strategies on City residents and businesses to determine the "total practical spending limits" for capital projects (PSCOG, King Subregional Council, May 1983). Intergovernmental CIP Planning Several capital improvements in Tukwila affect transportation facilities that accommodate regional "through" traffic as well as traffic to and from City destinations. These facilities include the major arterials traversing the City: SR -181 and the S. 154th Street /Southcenter Boulevard /S.E. Grady Way corridor. PSCOG recommendations encourage interjurisdictional cooperation for improvements to regional facilities as a means of reducing counter - productive competition for.capital funding revenues (Appendix C, recommendations C24 through C36). Two basic approaches are described: making regional jurisdictions such as King County the responsible agency for obtaining funding for regional facilities and coordinating the timing of bond proposals. Tukwila has engaged in joint capital improvement projects with adjacent jurisdictions over the past few years. At present, two of Tukwila:'s major arterial projects, the Grady Way and 56th Avenue South bridge replacements are being coordinated with either the City of Renton or King County. Both projects are presently funded largely using State and Federal grants with local matching funds (Renton, August 1982; Tukwila unpublished CIP). The City and King County have also cooperated on park projects of mutual benefit to their respective neighborhoods. Despite coorperative efforts among jurisdictions on certain capital projects, these jurisdictions are pursuing individual improvements on interrelated facilities. Tukwila, King County and Renton are each proposing improvements along S. 154th Street/ Southcenter Blvd. /Grady Way; each with different funding sources (Renton, August 1982; King County, Budget Office, 1932). Likewise, King County and Tukwila are proposing improvements along the East Marginal Way S. /Interurban .- Avenue../ West Valley corridor. In both projects, Tukwila is proposing primarily grant revenue for funding, while the other jurisdictions may use more reliable local revenues. The varying funding sources could result in improvements being implemented along certain corridor segments and not others, aggravating traffic problems in unimproved areas. A cooperative effort to upgrade each corridor as a single project could avoid the potential problems arising from piecemeal capital improvements along regional facilities. Annexation Area CIP Tukwila has pursued annexation of contiguous unincorporated communities on several occasions in recent years. Although these efforts have been unsuccessful to date, changing attitudes in these communities could eventually lead to sufficient support for annexation. Most of these communities potentially annexing to Tukwila are mature residential neighborhoods. Therefore, these communities upon entering the City could generate a greater need for govern- ment expenditures than municipal income (several of Tukwila's preliminary fiscal assessments for proposed income support this contention). The age of the communities also introduces the possibility of increased capital facility maintenance and replacement needs as well as new facilities. This need could have an immediate effect on Tukwila's annual capital improvement program. The City could undertake preparatory studies of capital facility needs in potential annexation areas prior to annexation itself. The purpose of these studies would be to eventually provide a data inventory similar to that discussed above. Needs in potential annexation neighborhoods could be evaluated on the basis of facility conditions in comparable Tukwila communities. Specific study efforts could include: - A sphere -of- influence study outlining the general characteristics of these communities and public service and facility needs. This study would not be specific to any particular annexation proposal, but would serve as an element of Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan defining the City's policies toward these areas; - Facility inventories and assessments could be prepared for specific areas as annexation proposals are made. The intent of these studies would be to establish a capital needs program for this community that can be incorporated into the City's overall CIP upon annexation. These planning efforts could have two beneficial impacts. First, the City may have a better understanding of the capital needs and subsequent financing requirements of adjacent communities when they annex to the City. This approach could permit these needs to be incorporated into the overall CIP with minimal discruption of current projects. Secondly, residents in annexation areas may obtain a better understanding of what improvements the City can accomplish in their community, possibly encouraging more support of annexa- tion proposals. This mitigation could increase operational expenditures for Tukwila due to manpower needs to implement the studies. The expense would be borne by existing City communities rather than the annexation area's residents since the work effort would be completed prior to annexation (Joint studies with County staff could minimize this issue, however). 5.1.2 CIP Financing Strategies The mitigations assessed in the preceding section are designed to improve the value of the CIP as a planning tool in Tukwila. This section assesses alterna- tive financing strategies for CIP projects that could mitigate some of the potential adverse effects described in Section 4.1 and 4.2 of Chapter IV. The strategies assessed herein include the revenue sources identified in Chapter IV, but recommends specific applications of these sources to minimize inequities. Property Taxes -- Excess Levies Property taxes may be used to finance specific projects in the CIP despite its general inequities. Projects of city -wide benefit and extended life- cycles are suited to long -term debt financing through excess levies. Park and recreation facilities which are available to both City residents and non - residents (including employees and patrons of the Tukwila business comminity) could be financed by this mothod without creating substantial inequities for City taxpayers Although user fees could present a more equitable method of financing recreation facilities (see subsequent discussion) it could be impractical to charge all users for certain facilities (e.g., jogging trail along Green River). In addition, a flat -rate user charge without exemptions provides 78 no adjustment for ability -to -pay, possibly excluding some social groups from using them. The excess levy provides a 100% exemption for low and moderate income elderly households, although non- elderly low and moderate income house- holds are not exempted. Unlike the user charge, the excess levy also provides no direct means of recovering facility costs from residents of adjacent communities who use them. This issue could be resolved through eventual annexation and City debt assumption by these communities. A second possible use of the excess levy is an alternative method of financing general facility needs in the water utility. As described in Chapter IV, the proposed levy charge on new development may not be permitted subsequent to Senate Bill 4972. Since increased water rates have been proposed for partly funding needed improvements (for revenue bond redemption), increasing them further to fund all the cost could create hardships for some users. The exemptions and cost distribution of an excess levy rather than another water rate increase may merit use of this approach. A final decision should be deferred until the comparative impacts of each approach has been assessed on representative households and businesses, including the exemptions or discounts offered hardship social groups (the PSCOG study noted that the cost to tax payers of either property tax supported G.O. bonds or service charge supported revenue bonds do not differ substantially). Increasing the regular property tax levy as an option to the excess levy is not a feasible mitigation. The cost of either option, excluding exemptions, would be similar. Low and moderate income elderly households however, are permitted a 15% exemption from the regular levy, and thus could experience greater costs than if excess levy funding was implemented. Also, the regular levy increase is permanent and would not expire as excise levies do once the bonds are redeemed. Utility Tax Should Tukwila elect to raise new revenues to meet future capital needs without affecting general government services, the utility tax could be implemented. The utility tax could diversify the local tax base for capital facility financing, reducing the City's current susceptability to economic cycles. Most other municipalities in King County presently have this tax, therefore the City would not impose excess tax burdens on its residents and businesses (except for unincorporated County communities because counties are not empowered to implement this tax). Earmarking utility tax revenues for the City's residential street and utility undergrounding programs could encourage community support for the levy. This support is important because the tax is subject to potential voter approval by referendum. Allocating utility tax revenues to residential street repairs could also make the City /County utility tax differential accep- table to annexation and residents. Current local tax revenues used for these improvements (sales and regular levy property tax levy) could be reallocated to other projects. This action could offset the potential inequities of using revenues largely generated by non - residential uses for residential capital projects. Although the amount of utility tax paid is commensurate with the cost of the service to the user (larger users pay more tax), exemptions for fixed income households is advisable to avoid potential adverse affects. User Fees and Charges User fees and charges for services are generally considered an equitable method of financing projects since they are paid directly by users. When used to fund non - essential services. that benefit a small clientele (in Tukwila operations and capital improvements at Foster Golf Links are financed by this method), service charges prove to be an effective method of municipal financing (Lucy 10/1981). Other proponents view charges as a rationing tool (much as a supply /demand market system) moderating service demand and detering overuse of facilities (Thompson 1976). Cities assert that user fees assume a "threshold ability to pay" for all persons interested in the service and could discourage persons with limited incomes from using facilities they otherwise would. User fees are of limited applicability in Tukwila given current municipal authority. The Parks and Recreation Department uses fees at the golf links and for funding many special programs offered through the Tukwila Community Center. These charges are structured to cover the operating costs of these programs (e.g., instruction, materials). Increasing charges for these programs, or implementing general user charges for parks and other facilities (difficult, but has been done by other jurisdictions) could raise reserves for capital projects and property acquisition. These charges, however, could push recreation costs to a level prohibiting or reducing the ability of some social groups to use public facilities. The persons most affected by user charges could include both elderly and juveniles, the two groups recreation programs are intended to help the most. Therefore, user charges for capital purposes could provide counterproductive to City social objectives. A second limitation of user fees for capital facilities is the difficulty of applying them where needed the most -.the road system: A form of road user fee can presently be found in Washington State automobile registration fees and the motor vehicle fuel tax. These charges are closest to a street user fee, obtaining revenue directly from the motorist. Given tfie large share of capital improvement costs attributable to the road system, user fee options include a local motor fuel tax or increased State fuel taxes and /or vehicle registration fees, allocated through a system similar to the AB shared - revenue program. These financing methods are currently beyond local authority and would require action by the State Legislature. A local motor fuel tax would have to be universal, rather than a local option, to work. Piecemeal implementation of a local gas tax would merely be an incentive to motorists to buy gas elsewhere, particularly within a metropolitan region. Also, if the tax were collected by the State and redistributed to local government, as the State gas tax presently is, the allocation formula could affect funding equity. Motorists using City streets do not necessarily purchase their gasoline in the City, paricularly if they are non - residents. Therefore, if revenues were redistributed like sales taxes, the revenue would not necessarily reflect actual use. Likewise, per capita redistribution is based on residential population and may not represent an equitable allocation, particularly in Tukwila with substantial commercial and industrial districts. An allocation based on road mileage and type could be a more equitable funding method. Street Utility With street projects comprising the greatest capital need in most communities, increasing attention has been given to establishing a street utility along the line of other self- supporting utilities. PSCOG recommendations suggest a road utility as a means of assessing project beneficiaries for street capital improvements (Appendix C, recommendation C::7). The street utility would operate as a self-supported agency, obtaining revenue from a city -wide rate based on the trip - generating potential of individual land use types. The chief advantage of the street utility alternative is its relative equity compared to current local government revenue sources. The rate structure would differentiate land uses according to their traffic - generating potential. This financing approach establishes a closer relationship between the amount of demand individual developments placed on the road system, and the amount of revenue they contribute to upgrading the system. Capital projects could also be financed through revenue bonds supported by rate income, rather than general obligation bonds paid for through excess property tax revenues. LID financing could still be used for local benefit projects, with levies also structured according to trip generation potential. Although this levy assesses users in the City according to street service needs, some inequities may occur. Monthly service charges would probably be constant for individual land use types, based on trip - generation factors. Therefore, the monthly charge for a single - family residence with one driver could be the same as a household with two or more drivers. (The trip - generation factors for non - residential uses are commonly based on floor area; thereby varying monthly service charges by the site of the establishment). Also, a community with a high proportion of through traffic such. as Tukwila experiences on SR -181, would not recover a share of the street maintenance/ replacement needs from these non -City based users. State enabling legislation is also required to empower local governments to establish road utilities. General /Local Benefit Financing Applying a general /local financing strategy to all facility improvements using current fund revenues could establish a more equitable capital funding plan. Preliminary CIP funding proposals currently recommend localized financing (LID's) for road, sewer, and water improvements benefitting a small area within the City. LID financing could be extended to other CIP projects that disproportionately benefit a localized area but are proposed for general revenue support. State enabling legislation for LID's provides local government with flexibility in determining a levy fomula that best defines "benefit," or the cost carried by individual properties. Increased LID financing could alleviate potential conflicts between capital facility and general services expenditures for limited current.fund revenues. This strategy is also a method of encouraging greater participation by the private sector in financing capital projects (see Appendix C, PSCOG recommendations C.11, C.12). A financing strategy very similar to LID's is the Benefit Area Improvement District (BAID) concept (Bellevue, 4/1982). The BAID would be delineated around major business centers for the purpose of funding road improvements. BAID levy obligations would be distinguished first between public (outside BAID) and private (within BAID) benefit. Revenue obligations for properties within the BAID could be further refined between those abutting the improve- ment (direct benefactors) and other properties that indirectly benefit from the projects). The BAID strategy could prove useful for funding major arterial projects within the City's commercial /industrial areas particularly if intergovernmental revenues are not available. Increasing LID financing of CIP projects as an alternative to the planned use of general or intergovernmental revenues could aggravate the potential problems with this method as cited previously (Section 4.1). Increased LID /BAID bond issues could increase the amount of annual debt payment that may be defaulted by responsible parties. The City is obligated to cover these costs through its L.I. guarantee fund, thereby potentially affecting revenues for other budget funds. Tukwila could implement the following policies to reduce the potential adverse impacts of LID financing in general, and to enhance its value as mitigation for the problems of other revenue sources: - Assess current and historical LID financing trends, particularly during periods of slow economic growth, to determine the worse -case ratio of default payments to annual repayment obligation. This sum is the minimum amount of revenue to be maintained in the guarantee fund, subject to the requirements of State law, and - Levy a service charge on LID participants at an equitable rate that assures the maintenance of minimum revenue needs in the guarantee fund without affecting other general revenue sources; or - Establish a maximum limit to outstanding LID bond obligations that the City is able or willing to guarantee with general revenues. Should the amount of LID funding sought by local property owners exceed this maximum, all LID petitions should be evaluated according to standardized criteria and prioritized. Petitions can then be implemented according to their priority ranking until the City's capacity limit is reached. Subsequent petitions may either be deferred until the City's capacity can support their implementation or property owners may seek other sources to finance their capital facilities. Business and Occupation Tax O The business and occupation tax could be used to finance arterial and commercial street improvements should intergovernmental revenues both be available for CIP projects. Since this tax would be levied on the City's business community, • allocating B & 0 revenues for capital projects benefitting these uses is the most equitable use of the funds. Also, the BAID tax is the only local source (beyond strategies such as the BAID or street utility) that could potentially yield the large amounts of revenue needed for arterial projects if intergovern- mental grants prove insufficient. The controversial nature of this tax in the City, however, may limit its use to a last resort measure when other funding options have been exhausted and arterial conditions reach a stage of disrepair or service inadequacy. 5.2 Community Environment 5.2.1 Land Use Vacant areas of Tukwila that could develop subsequent to the construction of CIP facilities are addressed by both the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code. Strict enforcement of these policies and regulations could assure that the land development that does occur will conform to the type and intensity of activity anticipated by the City. The vacant, unincorporated areas south of the City could be annexed and rezoned in conformance with the City's Comprehen- sive Plan prior to implementing sewer and road improvements. This strategy could discourage unplanned development or land development contrary to the objectives of the City. 5.2.2 Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance No mitigations are warranted for the housing and neighborhood maintenance impacts of the CIP. 5.2.3 Public Services No mitigations are necessary for public safety impacts of the action. 82 Schools The potential impact of CIP financing requirements on the capacity of local school districts to implement their own capital programs could be mitigated by coordinating capital financing strategies as described in Section 5.1.1. Otherwise, no mitigations are warranted for the CIP's school impacts. Parks and Recreation No mitigation measures are necessary. Maintenance No mitigation measures beyond those described in Section 5.1.1, Capital Improvement Planning, recommending a two -part program to distinguish maintenance /replacement needs from new facilities are proposed. Historical and Cultural Services and Facilities If archaeological resources are uncovered during site preparation for capital facility construction, work should be temporarily stopped and the Washington State Office of Archaeology and Historical Preservation contacted. Social and Health Services No mitigation measures are necessary. 5.3 Public Infrastructure Coordinating utility and street improvements could avoid unnecessary disruption of traffic on City streets. Utility infrastructures are primarily along street rights -of -way. Therefore, building these facilities requires traffic modifications as roadways are torn up. Likewise, street modifications could involve traffic disruptions from construction activities. Consolidating construction of these facilities minimizes the total time traffic movement on these roadways could further reduce potential traffic disruption. Coordinating street and utility improvements may also enable financing to be consolidated into a single LID, encouraging more efficiency in project funding. Subsequent CIP's could identify projects that should be coordinated to maximize financing and operational efficiency. Project coordination in developing or redeveloping areas of Tukwila could minimize indirect impacts of land development on the service capacities of existing facilities. At present, the absence of sewer infrastructures or capacity imposes the greatest constraint to development while undersized roadways imposes the least (essentially all City areas are accessible from an existing public roadway). Implementing water and sewer improvements prior to upgrading the arterials serving these properties could permit land development that- causes more problems for the City's road networks by increasing traffic volumes. The current CIP financing program for these facilities: intergovernmental grants for arterials and LID's for most water and sewer facilities may encourage uncoordinated development because of the uncertain availability of.grants. To mi_nimize.these.problems, the City . may.establish CIP priorities. assuming certain road improvements be implemented prior or concurrent to growth - inducing utility improvements as follows: - Prior to installing sewer improvements intended to allow development in the unincorporated areas south of Tukwila.or. redevel.opment_in south Tukwila, build the connector. between I -5 and 57th Street South. - prior to installing sewer improvements in the Burlington district east of the Green River, implement the intersection and roadway improvements that upgrade traffic conditions along SR -181. 5.4 Physical Environment Presently, CIP projects are little more than concepts - a list of facilities needed to resolve current system problemsor•to accommodate future development. As these projects enter the engineering and design phase, assessments of specific project impacts and mitigations will be possible. The implementation of individual public improvements, except those specificlaly exempted by SEPA, will be subject to subsequent environmental assessment. Appendix B identified projects whose potential impacts could warrant detailed environmental analysis. These assessments will define more specific mitiga- tions for project impacts based on the detailed design information that will be available at the time. Given the type of CIP projects, the following miti- gations could be implemented to minimize potential impacts: Land alteration activities, such as clearing, grading, excavation and filling within the City of Tukwila are regulated by City standards which are intended to minimize environmentaldamage and to insure no unstable situations are created. Strict adherence to erosion control and other land alteration and drainage system regulations could reduce stream sirtation potential during project construction. Construction activity along the Green River may require special permits intended to minimize impacts from agencies such as the Washington State Department of Fisheries and Game. Revegetation of land temporarily disturbed for building capital improvements could help restore wildlife habitat. Consideration should be given to vegetation known to have value for wildlife in selecting ornamental vegetation for above - ground improvements (e.g., reservoirs) or along new roadways. Suspended particulates generated during facility construction could be reduced through techniques such as watering areas of exposed earth and minimizing the time earth is exposed. The Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency (PSAPCA) requires that reasonable precautions be taken to prevent particulate pollution. Construction noise can be mitigated by measures such as limiting construction activity to daytime hours, using mufflers on construction equipment or by installing temporary noise-- attenuating shields around stationary equipment. Measures that mitigate the loss of vegetation, topography modification and protect water resources may help maintain the aesthetic character of the City. Ornamental vegetation screening of above - ground facilities could also reduce adverse aesthetic impacts. 5.5 Unavoidable Adverse Impacts 5.5.1 Municipal Finances Pending future economic change in Tukwila and its effect on municipal revenues and expenditures, either tax increases or reductions in public service levels may be necessary to provide CIP funding. 5.5.2 Community Environment Land use: Implementing new taxes, such as a business and occupation tax, to- finance CIP projects could alter Tukwila's competitve standing with other municipalities and communities in attracting additional business and industry. Land uses most affected by these impacts are wholesale /warehousing and light industry, currently a significant part of the City's economy. Some existing industries may choose to relocate to other communities that have not enacted this tax. Housing and Neighborhood Maintenance Implementing property tax increases to finance CIP projects could be counter- productive to City efforts to encourage private housing rehabilitation and prevent neighborhood deterioration. Public Services The operational capacities of existing public services could be affected if reductions in general expenditures are used to finance capital improvements. The need for increased operational expenses (e.g., road maintenance) could also occur as a consequence of CIP projects. 5.5.3 Public Infrastructure No adverse utility impacts are anticipated as a result of the CIP. 5.5.4 Physical Environment Earth Resources The construction of CIP facilities could accelerate geological processes during the short -term. Permanent soil and topographic alterations may also occur as a consequence of facility construction. Water Resources Potential short - termsiltation of surface water features in Tukwila could occur during the construction of CIP facilities. Additional impervious surfaces and roadways could produce a slight increase in storm water runoff and water quality degradation due to roadway pollutants. The operation of ground water wells for municipal purposes could affect the quality and direction of flow of ground water resources over the long term. Biological Resources Native vegetation could be lost as a consequence of building CIP projects. Wildlife habitat could be destroyed as a result of cleared native vegetation and aquatic habitat could be degraded from adverse impacts to streams and wetlands. Air Resources Suspended particulate levels could increase locally during construction of projects requiring excavation or grading activities that expose soils. Noise Short -term noise impacts on surrounding properties may occur during the construction of capital facilities. Roadway improvements and new streets that alter traffic circulation patterns could expose adjacent properties to higher noise levels. Aesthetics Vegetation loss, topographic modification and the visual character of above- ground facilities may reduce the aesthetic quality of the City. ■. CHAPTER VI Alternatives 6.1 Introduction The direct impacts of adopting the six -year CIP assessed in Chapter IV were analyzed in the context of alternative approaches to financing the projects. This chapter addresses alternative Capital Improvement Programs and their effect on municipal revenues and the built and physical environments of the City. Three program alternatives are analyzed: The No Project alternative; the currently Financed Projects alternative and the Existing Need alterna- tive. 6.2 No Project Alternative 6.2.1 General The No Action Alternative could result in no capital investment being made by the City for needed improvements and rehabilitation of existing facilities. The opportunity of comprehensively planning for and scheduling needed capital improvements could be lost. If a capital improvement program was not adopted, recommendations of the various functional master plans may not be implemented. The positive environmental effects which could result from adoption of the capital improvement program may be lost under the no- action alternative. Similarly, the identified adverse environmental impacts may not occur. 6.2.2 Municipal Finances and Community Environment Failure to finance capital improvements could result in indirect costs to potential users of these facilities. For example, street congestion produced by traffic volumes exceeding designed capacities increases the social costs of noise and air pollution, increases traffic hazards and safety problems, increases energy costs, decreases business productivity, and reduces the quality of life for all taxpayers and facility users. Both residents and commuting workers may incure these costs since traffic con - gestion is most likely to occur at peak travel hours. Traffic - related costs associated with deficient public facilities are probably recognized by most motorists. Traffic congestion and hazardous turning movements frequently contribute to automobile accidents. The lack of road improvements such as uncontrolled intersections and lack of turning lanes for high demand turning movements contributes to traffic accidents. Traffic accidents produce costs for property damage and personal injuries that motorists readily recognize. Similar impacts can be anticipated for users of other facilities experiencing overuse. In addition to indirect human costs to the users, failure to replace or upgrade aging facilities could directly impact municipal finances. Annual operating expenditures could increase as more resources are required to maintain deteriorating facilities at an acceptable level of service. These costs may increase to the point that they offset the annual debt service obligation for bonds that could have been issued to replace the same facility. Deteriorating capital facilities may also lead to degradation of City neighborhoods, both residential and commercial. The physical appearance of City facilities could influence individual decisions to move into the community or to rehabilitate property. If permitted to continue over the 87 long -term, the failure to invest in public facility rehabilitation could result in loss of customers to local businesses, increased property vacancies and stagnation or decline of local government revenues. Public safety services could be required to operate with substandard`equipment, in- hibiting their performance and creating potentially hazardous emergency situa- tions. These operational impacts may contribute to_an even less desirable community for residents and businesses. In addition, presently undeveloped or underdeveloped areas east of the Green River, in south Tukwila and along the Interurban corridor could not be developed. 6.2.3 Public Infrastructure The No Project alternative could continue and aggravate the current system deficiencies of Tukwila's water, sewer and street infrastructures. The City's street system south of I -405 would continue to be plagued by congested streets and intersections, excessive use of local streets, limited accessibility due to "superblocks" and traffic hazards. As traffic volumes increase, longer delays and greater hazard potential could be anticipated. The traffic conditions resulting from no capital improvements could preclude Metro from establishing a regional transit center in the City because of unreliable service. Failure to implement water and sewer improvements could maintain system deficiencies that may pose health and safety hazards. The sewer system could continue to function with undersized mains and pumping stations that could increase the frequency and volume of wastewater overflow discharges into the Green River. Continued dependence on pumping stations could result in higher operating costs, especially as anticipated rate increases for power go into effect. Likewise, Tukwila's inability to provide water storage could result in higher annual operating costs due to Seattle City Water surcharges. Undersized lines and inadequate water pressures could remain in the upper elevations of Tukwila Hill. Inadequate pressures could inhibit fire fighting efforts, presenting a potential public safety hazard. 6.2.4 Physical Environment No impacts to earth, water, or biological resources would occur from the construction or use of CIP projects in this No Project alternative because they would not be implemented. Nevertheless, physical environment resources could be adversely affected by this alternative. Increased potential wastewater overflow discharge could have a detrimental effect on Green River water quality and aquatic habitat. Greater automobile congestion and delays may generate increased localized air pollutant emissions, affecting sites nearby roadways. Traffic would continue to be funneled onto certain arterials because of an incomplete road system, particularly for east /west circulation across the Green River. This condition would encourage greater noise and air pollution emissions along the impacted roadways. 6.3 Currently Financed Projects Alternative This alternative assumes that CIP projects that are presently funded or could have little difficulty in obtaining funding will be implemented. The uncertainty about support for funding methods such as LID's promotes a two - scenario assessment of this alternative. The first scenario includes all projects that are presently funded or have consistently been financed in the past from relatively stable sources such as general government revenues. Following is a list of these projects: 88 Arterial /commercial streets 56th Avenue South bridge replacement; Grady Way bridge replacement; I -5 off -ramp to Strander Blvd. improvement; S. 180th Street /Andover Park East intersection improvements; - All residential street projects; - All equipment purchases; - All sewer projects except LID funded (largely because of the reserved revenues available for capital projects); - All Parks projects; The second scenario includes the above projects, but also assumes that LID funded projects will be built. In neither scenario will major arterial improvements dependent on intergovernmental revenues or water facilities not financed by LID's (due to their lack of definite financing) be built. 6.3.1 Municipal Finances Local funding needs could be substantially lowered by restricting the CIP to . currently funded projects. Eliminating commercial and arterial projects could reduce local matching revenues to fund projects with intergovernmental grants to approximately one million dollars. Therefore, local revenue needs for CIP projects over the six -year period may become more manageable, given current sources. The indirect costs of inadequate transportation facilities (as described in the No Project alternative) could also be a potential problem in this alternative. These impacts would not substantially change in the LID funding scenario. The need for increased LID Guarantee funds and its impact on general government revenues is the only anticipated difference. 6.3.2 Community Environment The currently funded alternative could produce impacts comparable to those generated by the proposed CIP. The capital projects that most influence residential neighborhood conditions: the City's residential street and utility undergrounding programs; parks and recreational opportunities and sufficient public safety services (up-to-date equipment) would be funded in this alternative. The LID - funded project scenario would produce no substantive impact difference in residential communities. The community impacts of the two scenarios could differ in developing commercial /industrial areas of the City. Many of the road, sewer, and water projects funded by LID's are intended to permit development or redevelopment of these areas. Therefore, while these areas could remain underdeveloped or at their current development intensity without LID financing, implementing these LID projects may encourage new or intensified development. Public service impacts of the funded projects alternative` generally do not differ from the proposed CIP action. The parks and recreation facility improvements and equipment needs of current government agencies should be funded in this alternative. Maintenance needs may be lower in the CIP scenario not implementing LID projects because additional sewer, water and road facilities could not be added to the City system. These service need benefits may be offset by the savings afforded by the LID funded improvements that may be implemented in the second scenario. 6.3.3 Public Infrastructure Most road systems would remain unchanged if only currently funded projects . in the CIP are implemented. Although residential streets would continue to be 89 improved; most City commercial streets and major arterials could retain current defiencies, contributing to congestion, delays and excessive hazards. Major systems inefficiencies that may remain: - Excessive surface street use as a consequence of limited freeway accessibility in south Tukwila (connector would not be built); - Continued lack of access through superblocks; Limited access across Green River between SR -181 and the Andover Industrial Park; - Inadequate intersections and streets (e.g. Southcenter Boulevard); Two major improvements would occur, however: the Grady Way bridge replace- ment, providing an improved alternative to I -405 for local traffic between Tukwila and Renton, and the South 56th Street bridge replacement, providing renewe direct accessibility across Green River to Foster Point. Some inter- section improvements would also be implemented, partly alleviating existing and potential problems at these locations. Implementing LID - funded improvements in addition to currently financed projects could better resolve arterial and commercial street defiencies. LID - funded projects could make three contributions to. the City's non- residential street network: increased accessibility through "superblocks," improved accessibility across the Green River south of I -405 and upgraded substandard streets and intersections. These improvements may create more • efficient traffic circulation in the industrial area of Tukwila and reduce traffic hazards. Lack of freeway accessibility in south Tukwila, bottleneck conditions on Southcenter Boulevard, the inability to maximize accessibility across the Green River and continued deficiencies on the arterial system around the Tukwila Hill periphery may continue to trouble the City's road system, even with the LID projects. Both scenarios have similar effects on general water and sever facilities. The available reserve of cash in the Sewer fund for capital projects enhances the probability that these improvements will be built. Because these projects are most likely to be financed by revenue funds, it is assumed they would be implemented in either scenario. Water facility improve- . ments are assumed not to be funded in either scenario because of the lack of reserve revenues and uncertainty about the proposed methods of financing revenue.bonds. Therefore, the impacts of this scenario on water facilities is no different from the No Project alternative. Sewer utility impacts are essentially the same as the current CIP. Local infrastructure financed by LID's would be implemented for both water and utility facilities if the LID's are established. These improvements would either resolve current local problems of undersized facilities or extend new service to local areas. 6.3.4 Physical Environment The physical environment impacts of this alternative may not be as extensive as the current CIP because fewer projects would be implemented. In the scenario without LID - funded projects, the impacts on natural environmental resources would resemble those of the No Project Alternative. The arterial improvements implemented basically upgrade or replace existing facilities, therefore, disruption of natural systems would be minimal. Sewer projects likewise would be confined primarily to public rights -of -way previously modified, therefore producing only short -term impacts. Water facility improvements would not be implemented and would not affect natural resources. Although most other CTP projects would be implemented in this alternative 90 (e.g. residential streets, parks: and recreation), these facilities should have limited impacts on physical environmental parameters. LID - funded projects could produce more extensive impacts on Tukwila's physical environment than just currently funded CIP projects. More commercial streets and water and sewer utility infrastructures would be constructed. With the exception of a couple local commercial streets and one bridge crossing over the Green River, LID - funded projects are generally confined to presently improved sites where natural conditions have been modified. Physical environment impacts of LID projects, therefore, may be limited primarily to short -term effects of construction. 6.4 Existing Need Alternative 6.4.1 General The Existing Need CIP Alternative would include all projects necessary to resolve current facility deficiencies. Projects intended to encourage development of vacant land or redevelopment of low intensity activities would not be included. In addition, projects to upgrade facilities not required from an operational standpoint (e.g. residential streets, some parks and local commercial streets given a low - rating by City staff in problem- solving capacity) would not be implemented. 6.4.2 Municipal Finances /Community Environment The Existing Needs Alternative could reduce local funding needs over the six -year CIP period from 20 to 25 %. Much of the savings would come from the elimination of the residential street program and several recreational facility improvements from the CIP. Despite these revenue savings, the City would still need $30 to $35 million from either intergovernmental sources, or an alternative funding source, to implement arterial and commercial street projects, which are primarily intended to resolve current traffic system deficiencies. Should shared - revenues (which both traffic and water improvements rely on) not be available for the needed amounts, tax or service charge increases may be needed to implement the Existing Needs CIP Alternative. The Existing Needs alternative could also have three major impacts on local communities in Tukwila. First, additional land development in south and east Tukwila and the Interurban corridor may not occur because the sewer, water and road improvements necessary to support it may not be built. Second, eliminating the residential street and reducing the parks improvement program may have a negative effect on private housing rehabilitation efforts, and subsequently the maintenance and enhancement of stable residential neighborhoods. Lastly, with the exception of the Phase I McMicken Park project and rehabilitation and expansion of recreation facilities at Tukwila Park, the elementary school and Foster Park; no creation facilities would be implemented. Therefore, future City residents, workers and customers may be denied recreational opportunities. 6.4.3 Public Infrastructure The Existing Needs CIP Alternative would include most arterial and commercial street improvements and most general facilities for the water and sewer utilities. These facilities are required to resolve existing operational deficiencies. Therefore, the operational impacts of the Existing Needs alternative on existing street and utility systems should not differ significantly from the proposed CIP. 6.4.4 Physical Environment The impact of the Existing Needs alternative on local physical environment resources could be similar to those of the proposed action. Road, sewer and water projects in the existing CIP are largely responsible for most signifi- cant environmental impacts. The majority of projects involving facility extensions or expansions would be built, producing similar impacts as described in Chapter IV, section 4.4. The proposed improvements for new development in south and east Tukwila however, would not be built. The overall extent of physical environment impacts that could occur from this alternative should therefore be reduced from current CIP impacts. 92 N > wo 43 0 EL 03 CD .0 IX V CHAPTER VII Resource Commitments 7.1 Short Term versus Long Term Impacts The proposed Capital Improvements Program will implement a number of proj- ects affecting the current level -of- service provided by public facilities in the City of Tukwila. The objective of this program is to resolve exist- ing or projected capital improvement needs in accordance with the adopted plans, goals, and policies of the City. The overall use of the study area's environment has been determined by past and present City policies. However, natural resources will be used and affected by the proposed CIP projects. The CIP does not foreclose future options for the City within the framework of an urban environment. Should future development directions lead to a less intensive environment than anticipated, the proposed facilities should maintain an adequate level of service. If future development should become more inten- sive than planned, proposed facilities could be expanded to accommodate de- mand given the availability of funding sources. Age and use customarily require upgrading or replacement of facilities after a period of time, anyway. The CIP could affect potential public revenues available for funding other government services and facilities. The extent of this impact depends on the'CIP financing direction the City may undertake. Direct funding of capi- tal projects would require greater amounts of revenue over a short (six -year) period. Indirect funding through the sale of bonds would reduce the annual revenue requirement but would commit funds to repay debt obligations for a longer time period. Tukwila's current total revenue - generating potential, given its present tax authority, would permit CIP financing without reducing current service levels while retaining potential revenue for future expendi- tures for the duration of its funding period. Delaying implementation of the CIP. could continue and increase existing safety and health problems associated with an overused public facility system. Foregoing short -term capital expenditures to residential street improvements could contribute to long -term deterioration of residential neighborhoods by discouraging private housing reinvestment and rehabilita- tion. In addition, delaying implementation of the CIP until the growth of Tukwila's tax base has reached a greater level of funding potential may not offset increased public expenditures for maintenance, hidden costs associated with environmental degradation, and a lower quality -of -life as a consequence of deficient facilities. 7.2 Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitments of Resources Implementation of the Capital Improvement Program will commit land, energy, materials, manpower and public revenue resources for the financing, con- struction and operation of additional capital improvements. The use of land resources for public facilities will, for the most part, involve property that has already been committed to this specific use. Facilities permitting new development in south and east Tukwila, however, may require dedication of vacant or rural land for streets and public facility rights -of -way. The use of energy and materials for the facilities represents an irretrievable commitment of these resources, although some facility materials may be re- cyclable once the project's useful "life" has expired. Manpower needs for construction and operation of these facilities effectively precludes using these resources elsewhere for the duration of these activities. CIP funding commits public revenues to financing capital facilities, merely reducing the funds available for other expenditure opportunities. CIP ex- penditures may enhance future land development and business activity growth in some City subareas such as South Tukwila. Therefore, capital facility financing may encourage City tax base growth and public revenues available for other expenditures. Likewise, the CIP may reduce current maintenance and operating costs associated with deficient facilities. Indirect costs attributable to deficient public services, such as property loss due to delayed fire or police response and traffic congestion and accidents may also be reduced through financing and implementing the CIP. 94 Bibliography BIBLIOGRAPHY American Society of Planning Officials. Local Capital Improvements and Development Management 'Literature Synthesis. July 1977. City of Bellevue, Office of Environmental Coordination. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Capital Improvements Program. June 1982. Horton Dennis &'Associates. Sewer Plan. April 1982. Horton Dennis & Associates.. Water Plan. March.1982. King County, Assessor's Office, Accounting Division. 1983 Codes and Levies King County Taxing Districts. 1983. King County, Budget Office. Capital Improvements Program 1983 —1988. 1983. Lucy, William. "Equity and Planning for Local Services." Journal of the • American Planning Association. Vol. 47 No. 4. October 1981. Mercer, John and Phillips, Deborah A. "Attitutes of Homeowners and the Decision to Rehabilitate Property." Urban Geography. Vol. 2 No. 3. 1981 Prentice, P.I. "Urban Financing for Jobs, Profits and Prosperity, 2. Self Interest Questions about Tax Reform.: American Journal of Economics and Sociology. Vol. 35 No. 4. October 1976. Puget Sound Council of Governments King Subregional Council. of Capital and Maintenance Needs in King Subregion. May 1 Puget Sound Council of Governments King Subregional Council. Transportation Plan. June 1981. City of Renton.. Capital Improvement Program 1983 - 1988. August 1982. Robbins, Floyd D. Identifying Youth- Related Problems in the City of Tukwila: Data and Recommendations. January 1983. City of Seattle, Office of Management and Budget. 1983 Budget. October 1982. City of Seattle, Office of Management and Budget. 1982 - 1987 Capital Improvement Program. n.d. Smith, Roger S. "Land Prices and Tax Policy: A Study of Fiscal Impacts." American Journal of Economics and Sociology. V. 37. No. 1. January 1978, 51 -67. City of Tukwila Preliminary Comprehensive City of Tukwila Preliminary Comprehensive The Financing 9 83 . • King Subregional Thompson, Wilbur. The City as a Distorted Price System." Harold Hochman (Ed.) The Urban Economy. 1976. City of Tukwila. Community Development Plan 1981 - 1983. 1980. 94 City of Tukwila. Final Annual Budget. 1975 = 1983. City of Tukwila. Annual Financial Report. 1978 - 1982. City of Tukwila, Mayor's Office. Community Development Plan 1981 - 1983. September 1980. City of Tukwila, Office of Community Development. City of Tukwila Annexation Policy and Data Book. 1978. City of Tukwila, Parks and Recreation Department. Long Range Park and Open Space Plan. September 1983. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. September 19, 1977. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. Data Inventory: Natural Environment - Land Use - Housing and Population - 1975. August 1975. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Tukwila Bend Office Park. April 1983. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. the Tukwila City Center. December City of Tukwila, Planning Department. Tukwila Hotel. June 1982. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Zoning Ordinance. October 1980. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. 1982 Land Use Survey. May 5, 1983. City of Tukwila, Planning Department. The Tukwila Zoning Code. April 20, 1982. City of Tukwila, Department of Public Works. Transportation Improvement Plan. October 1979. Draft Environmental Impact Statement for 19 79 . Draft Environmental Impact Statement for U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, Washington State Department of Transportation, City of Tukwila. Environmental Assessment Southcenter Boulevard Improvements, 62nd Avenue South to Grady Way. March 1983. 95