HomeMy WebLinkAboutReg 2004-09-07 Item 5A - Public Hearing - Sound Transit's Unclassified Use Permit, Shoreline Variance and Design Review Applications COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
)1
4 lay's
S -4 4 3 0 l Initials ITEM NO.
1 Meeting Date 1 Prepar I Mayo review 1 Counil nview 1
a .'ii 9/7/04 1 SL /d r:r I ,+.,A)Er I x/,' /-e. 1 i k
1 i"soe I 1 1 1 1
I I 1 1 1
ITEM INFORMATION 1
CAS NUMBER: 04-126 I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 9/7/04
AGENDA ITEM TITLE Public Hearing for Sound Transit's Unclassified Use Permit, Shoreline Variance
and Design Review Annlications
CATEGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award X Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date M4 Date Mfg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date
017/04
SPONSOR Council Mayor
Adm Svcs X DCD Finance Fire Legal Pe'rR Police PW/
SPONSOR'S Sound Transit has filed three land use applications for construction of the Tukwila
SUMMARY Freeway Route Project, the Tukwila portion of the Central Link Light Rail. These
applications require City Council action at a public hearing.
REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DATE:
RECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Approval with conditions
COMMITTEE Quasi- judicial action, no committee review
I COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$N /A $N /A $N /A
Fund Source:
Comments: Sound Transit will pay Tukwila's standard permit application and plan review fees.
FMTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION
9/7/04
MTG. DAT ATTACHMENTS
9/7/04 Please bring staff report binders distributed 8/20/04
9/1/04 Memo to Council
Additional public comment and response to be inserted into binders
Depariment of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
MEMORANDUM
To: Mayor Mullet
Tukwila City Council Members
From: Steve Lancaster, DCD Director ~
Date: September 1, 2004
Subject: Sound Transit's Applications for:
L03-057 Unclassified Use Permit
L03-058 Shoreline Variance
L03-060 Design Review
For the Tukwila Portion of the Central Link Light Rail
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Tukwila Freeway Route (TFR) Project will include 4.9 miles of trackway, 87% of
which will be elevated, and 70% of which will be in Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) r-o-w, see attached alignment map. The TFR Project trackway
will generally follow existing streets and freeways, though sections will cross industrial,
commercial, and residential private property. There will be no public access to the
trackway structure or at grade street crossings within the City of Tukwila.
A station is proposed at the southeast comer of the intersection of Southcenter Boulevard
and International Boulevard with a transit center, two park and ride lots, and frontage
improvements in both Tukwila and SeaTac. Five detention ponds, three traction power
substations, s~eet improvements and a bridge over the Duwamish River directly west of the
East Marginal Way South bridge will be built along the trackway.
The original permit submittal for the TFR Project has been modified as Tukwila Staff
reviewed the applications and suggested refinements and mitigation options over the past
11 months. Sound Transit had proposed 'to use five "straddle bents," essentially two
columns with a beam across the top, to support the trackway where it crossed East
Marginal Way S., 52na Avenue S., and Southcenter Boulevard. Tukwila has proposed,
and Sound Transit has accepted, a unified solution that allows for single columns
integrated with sidewalks, curbing, utility underg~ounding, street lighting, and storm
drainage. The City has also recommended and Sound Transit has incorporated
improvements to the station and park and ride design including changes to automobile
circulation, emergency access, pedestrian access, landscaping, lighting and provision of
restrooms.
6300 Southcen(ec Boulevard, Suite #100 · Tukwila, Washington 98188 ° Phone: 206-431-3670 * Fax: 206-431-3665
Memo to the City Council TFR ProJect UUP, Shoreline Variance, Design Review
REQUESTS
I. An Unclassified Use Permit is required to construct the TFR trackway and station in
the City of Tukwila.
2. A Shoreline Variance is required because the light rail traekway over the Green River at
the East Marginal Way crossing will be 49.6 feet over ordinary high water, exceeding the 35
foot height limit.
3. Design Review approval is required for development of the South 154~ Street Station
in the Regional Commercial Zone.
PUBLIC COMMENT
Tukwila Staff has held two informational open houses on these permit applications and
mailed notices to approximately 15,000 residents, property owners and businesses. In
response to the Notice of Application Staff received comments on the TFR proposal from
ten businesses, members of the public, and three agencies with jurisdiction. These
commenters have been added to the list of parties of record and have received notice
mailings as well as responses to their specific questions. After the staff report binders
were distributed an additional comment was submitted, see attached for the comment and
the City's response.
PERMIT REVIEW PROCESS
The Tukwila City Council nmst make decisions on the land use applications after holding
a public heating,
Like any other applicant, prior to starting work Sound Transit must also apply for and
receive demolition, building, utility, public works infrastructure and fire permits, The
Council's decisions on the land use permits will be implemented and many specific
details of development and construction will be finalized through these permits, During
construction Sound Transit's contractor must comply with applicable building and
construction regulations, permit conditions as well as specific restrictions written into
Sound Transit's contract documents,
UNCLASSIFIED USE PERMIT
Unclassified uses are unusual, large-scale or unique projects such as mass transit
facilities, power plants, landfills, certain utilities and manufacturing facilities, Staff
recommends approval of the permit with the following conditions:
1, Within four months of groundbreaking at-the South 154t~ Street Station site,
Sound Transit shall construct either a temporary or permanent noise wall along
the eastern edge of the lot to protect the adjacent residences during the several
· years of construction activity,
Page 2
Memo to the City Council TFR Project UUP, Shoreline Variance, Design Review
2. If Sound Transit chooses to use the north parking lot as a temporary construction
staging area, Sound Transit shall construct a temporary noise wall along the
northern and eastern edges of the lot as approved by the City. A permanent noise
wall is not required on this site because only passenger cars, not Metro busses will
use this lot once the system ~s operating.
3. The Tukwila Police Department reviewed the resign of the station site and north
parking lot to reduce the opportuniftes for criminal activity. Low lighting levels
and highly contrasting areas of brightness and darkness make surveillance of
parking areas by passers by, lot users, and cameras difficult. Tukwila found that
light'mg levels were lower and ratios of average to minimum light levels were
higher than recommended in the Illuminating Engineering Society of North
America (IESNA) Guideline for Security Lighting for People, Prop,e~rt~ and
Public Spaces. Prior to issuance of the building permit for the South 154 Street
Station or north parking lot, Sound Transit shall demonstrate that the lighting plan
will meet IESNA guidelines as approved by the City.
4. Sound Transit has proposed to retain areas of existing landscaping to provide
screening of detention ponds and buffering of residences. In the event that these
existing trees and plants do not survive the construction of the TFR project, Sound
Transit shall replace them accordin~to the Tree Ordinance prior to issuance of an
occupancy permit for the South 154 Street Station.
Due to the unusual nature of Unclassified Uses Council has flexibility to modify Zoning
Code standards for setbacks, height and landscaping. Staff recommends approval of the
following specific code modifications:
1. The TFR Project shall not be subject to Zoning Code setbacks or height
limitations. These regulations were drafted to regulate typical commercial and
resident'iai developmen~ and were not intended to apply to transportation
improvements such as light rail or freeways.
2. Parcels adjacent to the trackway that cannot comply with Zoning Code landscape
standards due to the TFR Project vegetation clear zone requirements shall not be
considered non-conforming to landscape standards. The public interest is served
by ensuring the safe operation of the TFR and neighboring properties should not
be penalized for meeting these restrictions.
3. Perimeter landscape requirements at the station and north parking lot sites may be
modified in order to maximize the efficiency of the sites, thereby reducing the
potential for adverse parking impacts, as .long as the total required square footage
of landscaping is provided.
SHORELINE VARL~NCE
Tiffs project requires a Shoreline Variance because the height above average grade of the
TFR bridge over the ordinary high water mark of the Duwamish River is greater than the
allowed 35 feet. Staff recommends approval of the Variance to allow an increase in
height from 35 feet to 50 feet. This height allows /or minimum clearances for auto
Page 3
Memo to the City Council TFR Project UL1P, Shoreline Variance, Design Review
access underneath the trackway to properties west of the trackway as well as continued
use of the river trail.
DESIGN REVIEW
The station building and associated parking lots are subject to Design Review approval
due to their location in the Regional Commercial zone and size. Design review is
intended to ensure that sites and buildings are designed to fit into their surroundings,
contribute to the vitality of the City and function safely. Staffrecommends approval of
the Station building, landscape design, site layout, and furnishings as proposed by Sound
Transit. The South 154th Street Station signage is not covered by this permit and will
require separate applications and approvals. Three minor modifications are anticipated to
the Station site:
A slight realignment of the driveway intersection to allow it to be better synchronized
with the light at International Boulevard;
Addition of a City Light substation at the northeast comer, and
Changes to the lighting plan to meet IESNA standards.
These and other minor changes should be subject to administrative approval by the
appropriate Tukwila department director.
Page 4
Attachment E.3 5
8/23/04 Greg & Vanessa Zaputil with attached
a. 8/23/04 Letter from Greg & Var/essa Zaputil
b. 3/15/04 Letter from Sound Transit (see E. 27)
c. 3/1/04 Letter from Greg & Vanessa Zaputil (see E. 26)
d. 1/22/03 Internal Sound Transit Memorandum
e. Pages 3, 9, 10, 11 and 18 from Addendum to FSEIS (see B. 2)
f. Portion of Draft Tukwila SAO Map
RECEIVED
Greg & Vanessa Zaputil
15171 52nd Ave, S # 5 A~J~ ~ 4 200~
Tukwila, WA 98188
COMMUNITY
" DEV~kOPMENT
August 23rd, 2004
City of Tukwila
Planning/Community Services Division
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, WA 98188-2544
Attention: Jack Pace
Dear Mr. Pace,
Please find enclosed a copy of our letter we submitted to Ms Joni Earl.
Sincerely,
Greg & Vanessa Zaputii ~
Greg & Vanessa Zaputil
15171 52~ Ave. S. #$
Tukwila, WA 98188
August 23, 2004
Sound Transit
Link Light Rail
Union Station
401 S. Jackson St.
Seattle, WA 98104-2826
Attention: Joni Earl
Dear Ms. Earl,
We believe it is critical that we write to you for your assistance in an extremely
pressing matter. We are resident owners of 5 townhouses located on 52~ Ave. S..
It was unfortunate you were unable to attend the 52~a Ave. S. meeting on Feb.
2004. This meeting involved 52B~ Ave. S. property owners (residential and
commercial), Sound Transit employees and representatives from the city of
Tukwila.
We have been patiently waiting for Sound Transit to address specific concerns from
the neighbourhood identified at this very important summit. This has failed to
happen. Mr. Fazel did issue a letter dated March 15', 2004, however the majority
of our issues were not even mentioned! The letter simply reiterated benefits cited by
Rod Kempkes at the time the decision to change the alignment was made in
February 2003. As we clearly illustrated to Sound Transit employees at the
February 20* , 2004 meeting, and have been continually and consistently since May
of 2003 when the public was first made aware of this' change, the reasoning to
change was not researched thoroughly by Sound Transit and is fraught with errors
and bias. Please find enclosed copies of Mr. Fazel's letter and our response with
appropriate attachments. As you research this matter with your departments you
will find that our concerns arc not unfounded~ they are valid, and we have been
working with Sound Transit for a considerable time.
Page 1 of 3 '
We have only just received the final SEIS for this portion of the route and find it
concerning that the original report and this new one contradict each other so
greatly. For example the old report (on which the decision to change was based)
states :"Visual: no adverse change" The latest version (after the fact) states
"localized visual impacts" and "more visually prominent" As you see in the reports,
our situation, in particular the 7 residential homes on 52"~ Ave. S., were overlooked
when the change was made and when these facts were pointed out to Sound Transit
employees, a report was generated that minimized our concerns.
We on 52~ Ave. S. are not willing to suffer as a direct result of Sound Transit
refusing to correct a wrong decision.
We maintain our position of attempting to assist Sound Transit in correcting this
decision. As you see from the attachments provided, in May of 2003, we even
proposed an alternative route that would realize the majority of the benefits, and
maintain the integrity of our unique avenue. This idea needs to be revisited. In fact,
with a slight modification we believe the Bricklayer's Union's building currently
under construction may even be able to be salvaged by aligning the track, as before
along 1-5, behind Johnson Braun, then running it in between their building and the
Bricklayer's, traversing 52~ Ave. S., once again on more of an angle, thus
eliminating the need for bent columns or the newly proposed traffic circle eoinmn
in the middle of the street. The new track system Sound Transit has been tooting
would allow this. Also, most importantly, the residential impacts would once again
be kept to a minimum: the philosophy behind the 1-5 corridor route.
If commercial property needs to be sacrificed to decrease the unnecessary and
uneconomic residential impacts, then so be it. We feel we can in good conscience
take this position, as the commercial property in question: the Bricklayer's Union
was bought by them when the preliminary route ran right through the middle of the
undeveloped lot. Sound Transit partially based their decision to realign, on the
Bricklayer Union's desire to develop their newly acquired lot, without giving the
existing neighbourhood the same consideration. In fact, no mention was made to
our area's property owners until after the change was made. (See attached e-mails).
Moreover, the city of Tukwila has identified the areas in the vicinity of posts D-OS
and D-06 as wetlands. (See attached city of Tukwila document wetland 66 and 69).
We see no evidence in any of the environmental statements that addresses or
acknowledges these impacts. Could this be yet another oversight by Sound Transit?
Since May, 2003 we have contended that Sound Transit cannot finalize such drastic
changes, with so many unanswered questions and unresolved problems. We have
pleaded with the employees not to knowingly and unreasonably forge ahead.
Page 2 ~f 3
Sound Transit has done everything in their power to justify a bad decision. We are
confident that you will take the time and careful consideration with our exceptional
situation. This is an example of the need for common sense. Sometimes what
appears feasible on paper is not practical in application.
We understand that time is of the essence. We welcome your diligent, and well
researched reply.
Please help our neighbourhood.
Sincerely,
Grcg & Vanessa Zaputil
Attachments
CC: Ahmad Fazei
CC: Rod Kempkes
CC: Steve Sheehy
CC: City of Tukwila
CC: RonSims
CC:: Richard Krochalis (FTA)
CC: Dwight Pelz
Page 3 .of 3
arametri
~n Kir~kland. WA 980,..~350
" MEMORANDUM
)ate: January 22, 2003
['o: James Irish
:rom: DaryJ Wendle
Subject: Preliminary Review of proposed alignment modifications for Tukwila Freeway
Route
cc: Margaret Clancy, Linda Ellis
Project Number: 2743164001 811 IS-1
Project Name: Initial Segment Support
7'- .... ':~a"' concept review drawings.
viewed the fOllOWing plum,,,,, ,, a S '
We have re ' - --. ~ *,', cast of E Marginal W y .),
· HMM-RPO1 (AirponWay o..,,.-._ -ear'S 112~h to S 115~h)
· HMM-RP02 (E. MarginaIWayrr°r[' - ih' Ih '
~ . HMM-RP03 (SR 599 to I-5, traversing 47 and 48 Avenue S and S 136 Street) /
· · r initial comparison of the likely environmental
No major concerns have ar!sen bas. e_d,~°~n l~linns of effects in the Tukw,la Freeway Route F,nal
effects of these proposed cnange. S tu u,.~ ·., -~ial area'
SEIS The expected differences Dy envlronmu ·
· Transportation: no adverse change, although displacements could revise parking loss
totals.
· Land use/economic: changes in property needs would adjust totals used, but no
adverse change expected·
· Acquisitions: adiustc totals listed, but no aaverse change expected based on mitigation.
5 new parcels apparently needed, one partial changed to full, and 5 previous
acquisitions may be avoided; review pending ST real estate information.
· Neighborhoods/Populations: changes limited to effects of acquisitions an(] visual
presence ol structure; alignment changes would bisect blocks rather than being "at edge
of neighborh°°ds~'as characterized in ElS; unclear whether parcels avoided would be
isolated, which would create a larger area ct effect.
· Visual: no adverse change.
· Air quality: No adverse change·
· ,Noise and vibration: sensitive receptors are adjacent and distances would be affected;
reviewing with Michael Minor but all previous impacts were mitigated.
· Ecosystems: stream buffer avoided (near Parcel 74); no change in elfects elsewhere.
· Water resources: no adverse change.
· Geology: no change.
2003
Page 2 o! 2
· Hazardous materials: pending review of tinal lists of acquisitions, no adverse change
expected.
· Public Services: No change;
· Utilities: No change.
~' · Historic/Archeological: No change.
· Parklands: No change.
· Construction: potential for shilts in street closures.
· Cumulative: no change.
Wetland Map
2004 Draft Sensitive Areas Map
Attachment E.36
8/30/04 Tukwila response to Greg & Vanessa Zaputil with attached diagram
City of Tukwila. StevenM. Muil t,M yor
Department of Commumty Development Steve Lancaster, Director
August 30, 2004
Greg & Vanassa Zaputil
15171 52 Avenue S. #5
Tukwila, WA 98188
RE: Your Letter of 8/23/04
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Zaputil,
Thank you for forwarding a copy of your letter to Joni Earl to the City. In that letter you
raise the question of whether Sound Transit has identified and mitigated the wetland
impacts of the trackway construction. The answer is that Parametrix, Sound Transit's
consultant, has prepared a Sensitive Areas Study identifying both temporary and
permanent impacts to wetlands and streams. Please see the attached Figure 543 from
that report identifying the wetlands in question and highligLting the buffer restoration that
Sound Transit has committed to perform. The City has had the Parametrix study peer
reviewed and after some corrections found that the final version meets both local and
national regulations.
If you have any additional questions or comments, please call me at (206) 431 ~3670.
Sincerel)~,
Nor~i Gierl0ff
Planning Supervisor
cc. Rod Kempkes, Sound Transit Tukwila Line Segment Manager
Q:~Light Rail\CommentLetters\8-30ZaputiI.DOC
6300 Sout~cen.ter Boulevard, Suite #100 · Tukwila, Washington 98188 · Phone: 206-431-3670 o Fax: 206o431-3665
PROPOSE(3 STORM
WATER POND --
WETLAND 116 . · ·
X~ S 1515T STREET
- I
/
~---
- I
(~T~LINE)
I STR~0~ BENT ,I
--
__ I
a LEGEND
~ [ .' ...... STREAM ~O B~
-
I I I
Figure