Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 88-02-A - SCHNEIDER - ANNEXATIONPermit 88-02-A - SCHNEIDER ANNEXATION 88-2-A schneider homes, inc. 6510 Southcenter Boulevard • Suite #1 • Tukwila, WA 9818Q• (206} -248 -2471 • October 5, 1988 OCT 6 1988 \ City of Tukwila Planning. Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Att: Rebecca Fox Associate Planner Subject: Annexation to Tukwila of property south of 178th St. and East of 1 -5 Dear Ms. Fox: At the present time, I do not wish to be part of the above referenced annnexation to the City of Tukwila. Sig ed, Gerald E. Schneider GES /jc , SCHNEIDER 14 SEP 88 REV. A parcel of land situated in the west 1/2 of Section 35, T23N, R4E, W.M. described as follows: BEGINNING at a POINT being the intersection of the northerly margin of South 178th Street (formerly known as P.J. Musiel Co. Rd.) with the west line of the east 1/2 of the northwest 1/4 of said Section 35; thence proceeding in a westerly direction along said northerly margin to the East Line for Primary State Highway No. 1, as condemned under King County Superior Court Cause No. 596587; thence south along said East Line to its intersection with the southeasterly margin of Orillia Road Extension North; thence northerly along said southeasterly margin, being the present Tukwila City Boundary, to the west line of the east 1/2 of the northwest 1/4 of said Section 35; thence north along said west line to the POINT OF BEGINNING. SCHNEIDER ANNEXATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT ZONING CODE AMENDMENT 4 City of Tukwila S 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Tukwila City Council will conduct a Public Hearing on the 6th day of September, 1988, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, to consider the following: Pre - annexation Zoning and Comprehensive Plan Amendments for approximately 3.2 acres of land, located south of South 178th Street and east of I -5, from single - family residential to professional /office. (Second Public Hearing) CITY OF TUKWILA Maxine Anderson City Clerk Published Valley Daily News - August 19, 1988 Any and all interested persons are invited to be present to voice approval, disapproval, or opinions on same. • •1908 (21/NTC.5 -26) City of Tukwila PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 City of Tukwila PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE Planning Commission Public Hearing Published: Valley Daily News - Sunday May 15, 1988 Distribution: Mayor, City Clerk, Property Owners /Applicants, Adjacent Property Owners, File. Notice is hereby given that the City of Tukwila Planning Commission will conduct a public hearing on Thursday May 26, 1988 at 8:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, to consider the following: 1. Case Number: 88 -2 -CPA, 88 -2 -R Applicant: Gerald E. Schneider Request: Comprehensive Plan Amendment, from low- density residential to office; pre- annexation zoning designation of P -0 (professional office) without multi - family for approximately 24 acres of land. Location: Immediately south and east of 5425 South 178th Street, south of 178th and east of I -5, partially within unincorporated King County and partially within the City of Tukwila. Persons wishing to comment on the above cases may do so by written statement or by appearing at the public hearing. Information on the above cases may be obtained at the Tukwila Planning Department. The City encourages you to notify your neighbors and other persons you believe would be affected by the above items. n w:+µ5 is ";. City of Tukwila PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 APPENDIX 1 CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION JUNE 23, 1988 The meeting was called to order at 8:00 p.m. by Mr. Coplen, Chairman. Members present were Messrs. Coplen, Kirsop, Cagle, Haggerton and Hamilton. Mr. Larson and Mr. Knudson were absent. Representing the staff were Jack Pace, Vernon Umetsu, Rebecca Fox and Joanne Johnson. MINUTES MR. HAGGERTON MOVED THAT THE MAY 26, 1988 MINUTES BE APPROVED AS CORRECTED. MR. CAGLE SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH PASSED UNANIMOU- SLY. 88 -2 -CPA & 88 -2 -R - GERALD E. SCHNEIDER Request for: 1. Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map amendment from Low Density Residential to Office. 2. Pre - annexation zoning designation to P -0 (Professional Office without Residential) 3. Rezone from R -A (Agricultural) to P -0 (Professional Office without Residential) Rebecca Fox, Associate Planner, reviewed the staff report, pointing out the site of the proposal on a vicinity map. Mr. Brad Collins, 365 Erickson Avenue N.E. #326, Bainbridge Island, WA 98110 spoke in behalf of the applicant and other interested property owners. He outlined the proposal on a site plan which was entered into the record as Exhibit "B" and requested approval of the proposal. Ms. Ann Nichols, P.O. Box 88050, Tukwila, represented Mario Segale spoke in opposition to the proposal. She said they are not opposed to the annexation, but the present residential designa- tion is appropriate for this area and therefore, they did not sign the annexation petition. , Planning Commission June 23, 1988 Page 2 Darlene West, 5212 S. 164th spoke in opposition to the request. She concurred with Ann Nichols remarks and added that the topography of the area would lend itself to residential develop- ment. Mr. Richard Goe, 5112 S. 163rd Place, Tukwila, spoke in opposi- tion to the request stating that much time and effort went into the process of developing the Comprehensive Plan and not enough justification has been offered to change the designation of this property. He noted that its location is a natural buffer to noise of the freeway. Discussion ensued on the proposal. MR. CAGLE MOVED AND MR. HAGGERTON SECONDED A MOTION THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SUPPORT THE ANNEXATION BUT OPPOSE THE CHANGE IN ZONING AND COMP PLAN AMENDMENT FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS: 1. THE CITY IS SHORT OF SINGLE - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA; 2. THE LARGE SIZE OF THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL; 3. THERE IS STILL ADEQUATE PROPERTY AVAILABLE WITHIN THE CITY OF TUKWILA THAT IS PROPERLY ZONED TODAY THAT COULD BE USE FOR PROFESSIONAL OFFICE TYPE BUILDING DEVELOPMENT. THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. The Commission concluded that due to the lateness of the hour, the Sidewalk agenda item be moved to a future meeting. 88 -1 -SPE - EMBASSY SUITES - Request for cooperative parking agreement. Jack Pace, Senior Planner, reviewed the staff report for the proposal recommending approval of the request. Mr. Richard Chapen, 2100 Koll Center, Bellevue, WA 98004, the applicant, briefly explained the reasons for the proposal. Mr. Dean Powell, 7425 S. Harl #6, Tempe, AZ reviewed the proposal explaining later details to be included. Discussion ensued on the proposal. MR. HAGGERTON MOVED AND MR. KIRSOP SECONDED A MOTION, BASED ON THE STAFF'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS, IT IS RECOMMENDED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR COOPERATIVE PARKING AGREEMENT BASED ON 236 ROOMS; THE AREA OF THE RESTAURANT, LOUNGE AND KITCHEN NOT TO EXCEED 5141 SQUARE FEET; MEETING ROOM AREA OF 3700 SQUARE FEET; Planning Commission June 23, 1988 Page 3 PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 263 PARKING SPACES; AND A WRITTEN AGREEMENT PROVIDING A STUDY TO BE CONDUCTED ONE YEAR FOLLOWING THE OPENING OF THE HOTEL AND VALLEY PARKING OR ADDITIONS TO THE PARKING STRUCTURE BE PROVIDED SHOULD THE STUDY WARRANT IT. THE MOTION WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Mr. Kirsop was excused at 10:55 p.m. DR -12 -85 - TUKWILA MINI - STORAGE - Request for a revision to June 1985 approved mini - storage proposal, to allow phasing of project and interim design of project. Mr. Carl Tollifson, 720 Industry Drive, represented the applicant stated he concurred with the staff report. MR. HAMILTON MOVED AND MR. CAGLE SECONDED A MOTION THAT BASED ON THE STAFF'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS, TO ACCEPT THE REVISION TO JUNE, 1985 APPROVED MINI - STORAGE PROPOSAL TO ALLOW PHASING OF PROJECT AND INTERIM DESIGN OF PROJECT, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. Substitute Northern Red Oak (minimum 2 1/2" caliper) and grass along Interurban Avenue to complement planned street trees. 2. Move rhododendrons back behind tam junipers and supplement with shrubs to provide a solid landscape border. 3. Specify variety of heathers to be used in containers to provide sufficient height and bulk. MOTION UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. DIRECTOR'S REPORT Jack Pace, Senior Planner reviewed with the Commission scheduling of future work sessions and meetings. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 11:07 pm. Respectfully submitted, Joanne Johnson Secretary HEARING DATE: FILE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: ACREAGE: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING DISTRICT: SEPA DETERMINATION: ATTACHMENTS: City of Tukwila PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 June 23, 1988 88 -2 -CPA, 88 -2 -R Gerald E. Schneider Approximately 35 acres (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) STAFF REPORT to the Planning Commission Prepared June 17, 1988 APPENDIX 2 1. Comprehensive Land Use Plan map amendment for approxi- mately 32.24 acres from Low Density Residential' Office. 2. Pre - annexation zoning designation for approximately 29.03 acres from RS -9600 to P -0 (Professional Office without Residential). 3. Rezone approximately 4.84 acres from R -A (Agricultural to P -0 (Professional Office without Residential). South of South 178th Street and east of 1 -5 Tukwila Comp Plan designation - Low Density Residential (no King County Comprehensive Plan designation) Tukwila Zoning - R -A district (Agricultural) County Zoning - R -S 9600 (Suburban Residential) DNS issued on May 11, 1988. Addendum issued June 9, 1988. Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map Applicant's Written Submittal - Comprehensive Plan Amendment Additional Noise Level Data EPA Noise Chart Vicinity Zoning Applicant's Written Submittal - Rezone VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION BACKGROUND FINDINGS rout enrJrt:� "F�f'e�L; jL:t STAFF REPORT to the 88 -2 -CPA: Gerald E. Schneider Planning Commission Page 2 1. Existing Development: The site is primarily vacant, except for five single - family residences in the northern portion of the subject site. I -5 forms the area's western boundary, acting as a distinct point of separation between land to the west which is Comprehensive Plan designated, zoned and developed as low- intensity residential (single - family), and the subject property. While the subject property has both the Comprehensive Plan desig- nation and zoning for single- family use, it has not been developed for that use and remains largely vacant. The freeway played a role in this pattern, serving as a visual and spatial separation between housing on the west hill and the undeveloped subject property. 2. Surrounding Land Use: Most of the surrounding property is vacant. Agricul- tural land is located to the east and the I -5 right -of -way lies to the west. The King County transfer station is in close proximity to the south. 3. Terrain: The site slopes from west to east, with the steepest slopes in excess of 60% near the center of the eastern edge. 4. Vegetation: The site contains a range of vegetation including deciduous trees, evergreens and shrubs. A pond approximately 40 feet in diameter lies at the bottom of the steep slope area near the eastern boundary of the site. Wet soil plants and water plants grow in and near the pond. 5. Public Facilities: While no utilities are currently on the vacant portion of the site, adequate utility systems exist nearby for residential or office uses. The applicant's request has several parts, including annexing 29.03 acres to Tukwila. This action will be reviewed by the City Council. The applicant has further requested a Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment for the property to be annexed, as well as approximately four acres already in Tukwila. The applicant also seeks pre- annexation zoning for that land to be annexed to Tukwila and a rezone for land already in Tukwila. This area is in the Highline Community Plan and has no King County Comprehensive Plan designation. As shown in Attachment A, Tukwila's Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map designates this area as Low Density Residential with special environ- mental considerations for steep slopes. The City of Tukwila has received some rezone and Comprehensive Plan Map inquir- ies for more intensive uses in the immediate vicinity of the subject property. However, no formal application or proposals have been submitted for review at this time. STAFF REPORT to the Planning Commission An update of the Comprehensive Plan was originally scheduled for this area in 1988. The work plan, however, was changed due to the large number of .annexation requests. The Southwest Tukwila Study was intended to address short- and long- term planning issues including land uses, transportation and open space. The study was to involve the community in discussing these issues. This report is divided into three sections. The first section briefly reviews the annexation request. The second section discusses the request for a Compre- hensive Plan Amendment. The last section reviews the zoning issues including: (1) the proposed zoning upon annexation (pre- annexation zoning), and (2) the rezone of the area already in Tukwila. Both the Comprehensive Plan Amendment and zoning requests will follow a quasi - judicial process. The Planning Commis- sion will make its recommendation to the City Council and the City Council will then hold its two public hearings. ANNEXATION The applicant seeks to annex 29.03 acres to Tukwila. The property lies in Tukwila's Planning Area and has a Low - Density Residential designation. State law requires the City Council to hold two meetings of its own on the annexation request. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 88 -2 -CPA: Gerald E. Schneider Page 3 The decision criteria for Comprehensive Plan Amendments are listed below in bold and are followed by a discussion of the proposal. A Comprehensive Plan Amend- ment is justified if one of the two criteria below is met. The more significant the change, the greater will be the burden of showing that the change is justi- fied and in conformance with the overall Comprehensive Plan. 1. Unforeseen changes in circumstances have occurred in community conditions that justify a Comprehensive Plan redesignation of the subject property or existing plan policies. In the written submittal (Attachment B), the applicant has indicated three "unforeseen" changes - two in transportation policies and one Comprehensive Plan change - which have affected the property and its viability for low - density residential use. Planning staff has summarized them below and provided discussion. First, the applicant states, Tukwila's most recent Transportation Improve- ment Plan identifies a four -lane limited access highway connecting the South 188th freeway interchange with Southcenter Parkway. A likely alignment runs through the southeast portion of the property. Second, 57th Avenue South and South 178th have been upgraded from collector arterials to the equival- ent of secondary arterials in Tukwila's current Circulation Plan. STAFF REPORT to the 88 -2 -CPA: Gerald E. Schneider Planning Commission Additionally, the applicant indicates that the Martin property, at the southwest corner of South 180th and Southcenter Parkway, received a com- prehensive plan change in 1987 from low- density residential to office (86 -19 -CPA: Martin). Finally, the applicant mentions Design Review approval for an office devel- opment north of the subject property on South 178th Street. The nearby Comprehensive Plan Amendment may meet the criteria for "unfore- seen changed circumstances ". The office development north of South 178th Street does not meet that criterion because the development conforms to the "office" designation on the Comprehensive Plan Map. Improvements that are permitted under the Comprehensive Plan do not constitute an "unforeseen" change in circumstances. Page 4 The (four -lane) 188th Connector, discussed by the applicant, was initially incorporated into the Transportation Improvement Plan for construction in 1990. A probable alignment runs through the southeast portion of the sub- ject site of the west property boundary and along the north property line. The project, however, has dropped in priority; currently no funds have been set aside and no firm construction date set. There have been very recent discussions regarding a new access ramp for I -5 at South 178th. If built, this alignment would replace the South 188th connector discussed above. This project, however, is in the very early discussion phase. The City's current functional classification road map has upgraded 57th Avenue South and South 178th Street from the collector arterials shown in the Comprehensive Plan, to the equivalent of a secondary arterial. The Comprehensive Transportation Improvement Plan envisions improving 57th Avenue South to a minimum four -lane secondary arterial in 1990. South 178th Street was upgraded from a collector arterial to the equivalent of a secondary arterial in the Circulation Plan and has been improved to a 4- and 5 -lane roadway along the northern property boundary. The housing mix in the City consists of 65% multi - family and 35% single - family. Within the City's planning area there is limited amounts of vacant land available for new single- family development. As of 1986, there were 136.3 acres of vacant land zoned for single - family use in Tukwila. The applicant's proposal does not directly affect the existing supply of land since only 4.8 acres are in the City. However, the large issue involves this whole hillside which is shown on the Comprehensive Plan as single - family. If the amendment is approved, other requests will follow, further reducing the opportunity for new single - family development in the City. The applicant has stated: . �. .x.�,,,,..- .�..�.,.•n�r.�:ra•n , •ray;. ?a"�;r'. ° c;:C , `.' : �..- STAFF REPORT to the 88 -2 -CPA: Gerald E. Schneider Planning Commission Page 5 2. Factual evidence supports an additional or changed public need for the pro- posed designation. "Much of the office - designated areas of the Comprehensive Plan have now been developed, and there are few vacant P -0 zoned properties. Noise levels on the site threaten public health for residential uses." The applicant has not furnished evidence that much of the area designated "office" in the Comprehensive Plan and zoned P -0 has been developed. Nor is there information backing the assertion that additional "office" designated land is needed due to a diminished supply of "office" designated land. It should be recalled that when the Comprehensive Plan was updated in 1982, the location and amount of land designated for various uses was not based solely on market factors. The original application provides no evidence to support the assertion that "noise levels on the site threaten public health for residential use." The applicant has, however, addressed noise impacts in supplemental environmental information. This shows daytime noise level readings which range from a low of 61.7/56 dBa to a high of 71.7/65 dBa. These levels can be expected to increase as traffic increases on I -5 (Attachment C). As discussed in the EIS prepared for the Valley View Estates project, the Federal Environmental Protection Agency's noise guidelines show that noise levels in excess of 55 dBa can interfere with speech communication. Signi- ficant adverse noise impacts (primarily speech interference and annoyance) occur at noise levels of 65 -75 Ldn) (Attachment 0). Comprehensive Plan Policies which are directly applicable to this request follow. The are further discussed in the applicant's submittal (Attachment B). Residence Objective 1 (p. 45) - Protect all viable residential neighborhoods from intrusions by incompatible land uses. The latest transportation and land use policies for this low density residential area have not protected residential uses from intrusions. Approving the Com- prehensive Plan Amendment would further diminish this area's, and the adjacent area's, opportunity or likelihood of becoming a viable neighborhood. Natural Environment Policy 1 (p. 24) - Maintain the wooded character of the steep slopes and upland plateau, and encourage the use of vegetation in slope stabilization. -AND- Open Space Police #1 (p. 34) - Strive to preserve steep hillsides and wooded areas in a scenic condition. Encourage replanting and revegetation of denuded areas not in the process of development. STAFF REPORT to the Planning Commission <,nrv. <.c:rrv, 88 -2 -CPA: Gerald E. Schneider Page 6 The intent of these policies is to limit the intensity of development on hill- sides. Generally, single- family development is considered a less intensive use than office development. The larger issue raised is to what intensity should the hillside be developed. CONCLUSIONS Over the years there have been many inquiries regarding more intensive develop- ment of the subject properties and surrounding area. Recognizing that each individual decision cumulatively affected the future of the entire area, an update of the Comprehensive Plan was scheduled in 1988 for Southwest Tukwila. The Comprehensive Plan update for this area was intended to involve citizens in a thorough review of the area and its desired future. The work plan, however, was modified to address several annexation requests and this study was deferred. The applicant raises "factual" arguments for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment • based on a lack of Professional Office opportunities and the negative impact of noise on single - family development potential. Although asserted, these are not conclusively shown. However, review of the open space policies does raise questions regarding the desired intensity of development on hillsides. These questions point to the fact that the Comprehensive Plan leaves many questions unanswered. The larger issue remains in determining which uses are desired in the area and to what intensity. Only at this point will a balance be reached between providing a range of housing development opportunities and office -type uses. RECOMMENDATION It must be recognized that each development decision in the area incrementally affects the future development potential for remaining adjacent sites. With or without policy confirmation, land use decisions in one location will de facto affect opportunities nearby. Tukwila's current Comprehensive Plan provides no clear policy guidance on these broad - ranging issues. Therefore, it is appropri- ate for the Planning Commission and City Council to provide direction to the staff regarding their priorities for the use and development of the hillside. Accordingly, Planning staff makes no recommendation. STAFF REPORT to the Planning Commission ZONING 88 -2 -CPA: Gerald E. Schneider Page 7 The applicant desires: 1) a rezone for the property already located in Tukwila, and 2) pre- annexation zoning for the portion of the property to be annexed. The Tukwila portion of the property is zoned R -A (Agricultural) and the King County portion is zoned R -S 9600 (Attachment G). The applicant is requesting that the entire property be zoned P -0 (Professional Office) without residential (Attachments E and F). Although this zoning category normally allows multi- family residential develop- ment, the applicant is seeking voluntarily to restrict the future use of the property to office or other permitted non - residential uses (Attachment F). Due to the impacts of noise in the area, the applicant believes that any residential use, including multi- family normally allowed in the P -0 zones, is inappropriate. In mid -1987, the City approved a rezone from R -A (Agricultural) to P -0 (Pro- fessional Office) without residential at the corner of 180th and Southcenter Parkway. REZONE CRITERIA The City must consider the following criteria (in bold type) in its evaluation of rezone requests. These criteria shall also apply to the request for pre - annexation zoning. 1. The use or change in zoning requested shall be in conformity with the adopted Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan, the provisions of this title, and the public interest. The applicant makes reference to the Comprehensive Plan Amendment applica- tion pages 3 - 7, submitted by him (Attachment B), further stating that the rezone will be in conformity with this criterion to the extent that it com- plies with the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map (Attachment F). Addi- tionally, it is stated that existing land uses and roads, as well as planned transportation improvements, seriously degrade the site for single- family residential use. The broader issue affecting zoning is to determine the long - term desired use for the subject properties, as well as the adjacent lands. 2.. The use or change in zoning requested in the zoning map or this title for the establishment of commercial, industrial, or residential use shall be supported by an architectural site plan showing the proposed development and its relationship to surrounding areas as set forth in the application form. Since the applicant has proposed no specific project, site development plans are not needed at this time. Specific details including the level to which the site can be developed, the mitigating measures to be required, and the specific relationship to surrounding areas will be addressed when an actual project is proposed. Any site plan will need to recognize topographic and STAFF REPORT to the 88 -2 -CPA: Gerald E. Schneider Planning Commission Page 8 access /transportation constraints. Project of 10,000 square feet or greater are automatically required to be reviewed by the Board of Architectural Review. 3. When the request is not in agreement with the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Council's satisfac- tion that there is an additional need for the requested land classification. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application has been submitted, and is dis- cussed earlier in this Staff Report. 4. Significant changes have occurred in the character, conditions or surround- ing neighborhood that justify or otherwise substantiate the proposed rezone. This issue has been addressed in the discussion of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment in this Staff Report. 5. The proposed rezone is in the best interest of public health and safety as compared to any hardship imposed on the individual property owner. Any development on the site raises environmental concerns due to steep slopes, access and transportation planning. At present property owners feel their potential profits are limited due to the restrictions of single - family development. Approval of the rezone and pre- annexation zoning requests would result in substantial gain to the property owners. The City or other public agency would be subject to higher land acquisition costs for the construction of the 188th connector or freeway off -ramp which could cover a portion of the site. 6. The unimproved subject property is unsuitable for the purpose for which it has been zoned considered in the context of the length of time the property has remained unimproved and land development in the surrounding area. In response to this criteria, the applicant has stated: "A portion of the subject property was subdivided for residential development and an access road constructed prior to the construction of I -5, which took part of the subdivided lots. Since and because of the proximity to I -5, there has been no development of residential use on the property for a period of over twenty -five years." Another reason for why this area has not developed for residential uses is the need for City utilities. The City has a policy of not extending City utilities outside of the City limits. Since most of the property is outside of the City, there has been limited development opportunity due to the need for sewer and water services. . r a,. r.. mvxxYtatt'�%YlK4J'f' -+��'u STAFF REPORT to the 88-2-CPA: Gerald E. Schneider Planning Commission Page 9 Zoning issues are specific applications of priorities set by the Comprehensive plan and are dependent on the resolution of these issues. Any recommendation for rezoning and pre- annexation zoning is dependent on the policy conclusions reached in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process, and should be consistent with that decision. Planning staff makes no specific recommendation at this time, pending resolution of Comprehensive Plan policy issues. (22/88- 2- CPA1>4) CONCLUSION RECOMMENDATION � 2 zmmo z 0 z C C D =1 m U) v m z r Plsnnee< Crouu-Rlfi CrIENSivtNLAN AMEND APPLICATION FOt STAR USE 011tr t Ff tip' RIbs+rt • • ::. ...... . Cite i�aess Receipt: Ns. 1. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSAL: Annex those portions of the subject property not in the City of Tukwila and amend the Comp Plan for office use. 2. PROJECT LOCATION: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block, and subdivision; or tax lot number, access street, and nearest intersection) Tax Lots 12, 33, 2J9 and Secluded Terrace Park Lots 1 - 18 Section 35 T23 R4 South of S. 178th St. and East of 1-5 Quarter: NW 842 - 5135 98110 Signature: 4. PROPERTY Name: OWNER Section: 35 Township: 23 Range: 4 (This information may be found on your tax statement.) Gerald E. Schneider 3. APPLICANT :* Name: • Contact Person: 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 Brad Collins Address: 365 Erickson, Suite2l� 248 -2471 _ Bainbridge Is., WA hone: * The applicant is the person whom the staff will contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent, unless otherwise stipulated by applicant. AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP Gerald E. Schneider Address: 6 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: 248 -2471 Date: (1 :2?" I /WE,Csignature(s)] swear that we are e owns s or co rac pure aser s o th• property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers contained in this application are true and correct to the best of my /our knowledge and belief. Oats: : _ 8g Attachment B: Applicant's Written Submittal -- Comprehensive Plan Ammendment 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Existing DESIGNATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION Page 2 Low Density Residential - Tukwila Proposed Office - Tukwila 6. ZONING: Existing RS-9600 (King Co) & R,A Proposed P-0 Tukwila 7. USE: Existing vacant Proposed future office 8. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA: The burden of proof in demonstrating that the change is appropriate lies solely upon the proponent. Generally, the more dramatic the change, the greater will be the burden of showing that the proposed change meets the criteria by the Zoning Ordinance. The proponent must show in a clear and precise manner why the amendment application should be granted. The Planning Commission and City Council will review your proposal using the following criteria. You may attach additional sheets and submit other documentation to support your request. A. Unforeseen changes in circumstances have occurred in community condi- tions that justify a Comprehensive Plan redesignation of the subject property or existing plan policies. (Examples are Functional road classifications or new or changed City policies /plans) RESPONSE: see attached sheet(s) B. Factual evidence supports an additional or changed public need for the proposed designation. RESPONSE: Much of the Office designated areas of the Comprehensive Plan have now been developed and there are few vacant P-0 zoned properties. Noise levels on the site threaten public health for residential uses. 9. To supplement the above criteria discussion, analyze the Tukwila Compre- hensive Plan policies which relate to your proposed Comprehensive Plan amendment. Identify the policies and their page numbers. RESPONSE: see attached sheet(s) (29 /MB.COMP) Attached Sheet Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Page 3 8. A. Unforeseen Changes in Circumstances Several changes in City transportation and land use policies after the 1977 adoption and the 1982 revision of the Comprehensive Plan have occurred which are inconsistent with the current low density residential map designation of the subject property. First, the City's Transportation Improvement Plan now identifies a our lane highway (limited access) connecting S. 188th St. rreeway interchange with Southcenter Parkway (at 57th Ave. S. or S. 176th St.). The most probable alignments of this S. 188th Connector run through the southeast portion of the subject property and would result in freeways on three sides of the site or going right through the site. Second, 57th Ave. S. and S. 176th St. have been upgraded from collector arterials to the equivalent of secondary arterials in the City's Circulation Plan. Initial four lane improvements have already been constructed on each of these roadways, and other improvements to these existing and new arterials are planned or recommended for 1990. Third, the Comprehensive Plan has been amended from low density residential to office for the nearby Martin property, which is also located south of S. 178th St. and west of 57th Ave. S. This Comp Plan Amendment recognized the changes in circumstances for the area and the inconsistency of these changes with residential development. Fourth, just north of the subject property on S. 178th St., the City approved an office development, which commits the use of S. 178th St. east of I -5 to commercial traffic. It is questionable whether a livable and viable single family neighborhood could be created with all of these changes in circumstances. 9. Comp Plan Policy Analysis The Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan map designations should reflect public policies. In this case changes in transportation policies and land use approvals have created an inconsistency between City policies and the current map designation of low density residential. The Comprehensive Plan policies which are most directly related to this application are analyzed in the following discussion: Attached Sheet Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Page 4 Goal 3 (p. 12) Encourage planned expansion of the corporate boundaries of Tukwila while providing adequate service Levels and improvements to all areas within corporate limits. This Comp Plan Amendment is in conjuration with the annexation of the western portion of the subject property into the City. It is one of a few properties east of I -5 that is not already part of Tukwila. Logically and physically the area can be more easily serviced by the City of Tukwila, although existing water service is provided by Water District No. 75. Because the area is isolated between I -5 and Tukwila, most services provided by King County or Special Districts would be very inefficient or at very low levels. Natural Environment Policy 1.1 (p. 24) Maintain the wooded character of the steep slopes and upland plateau, and encourage the use of vegetation in slopte stabilization. The proposed action recognizes in its environmental checklist that vegetation buffers along the freeway(s) and steep slope areas will be retained, particularly for slope stability, noise reduction, and aesthetic purposes. Office development will allow for a much greater clustering of site development than would occur with low density residential development and thereby maintain the wooded character on a greater portion of the site. Natural Environment Policy 2.1 (p. 25) Strive to retain viable areas of wooded hillsides, agricultural lands, wetlands, streams, and the Green River for wildlife habitat. Much of the wooded steep slope areas will be retain, particularly by the greater degree of clustering that is typical of office development versus single family subdivision. Due to the high noise levels and with the addition of • second highway (S. 188th Connector), the viability of the area for wildlife habitat is and would be greatly diminished without any development on the site. Natural Environment Policy 3.1 (p. 26) Discourage development on slopes in excess of 20 percent. The proposed action and its environmental checklist commit steep slope areas to no development. The clustering of site development that is typical of office development will leave more of the site undisturbed than would be typical of single family subdivision. Attached Sheet Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Page 5 Natural Environment Policy 3.2 (2.26) Preserve the views of hillside residents. The proposed action and its environmental checklist commit the retention of a wooded buffer along the freeway. County residents located west of I -5 will continue to overlook the same view toward the Green River Valley and the Cascade Mountains. Future office development will be located below the wooded western boundary due to the topographical sloping to the east and therefore will have little impact on the hillside residents view. Natural Environment Policy 3.3 (2.26) Preserve and promote the quality of landform. The clustering typical of office development and the mitigation of the proposed action to protect steep slope areas from disturbance will implement this policy. Natural Environment Policy 6.1 (2.29) Discourage development in areas where slopes are known to be unstable. In areas where the stability of slopes is questionable, allow development only after a qualified professional can demonstrate that slopes will be stable even ater site modification. The proposed action and its environmental checklist commit to implementation of this policy. Natural Environment Objective 8 (2.30) Recognize the environmental basemap of the Tukwila Planning Area which depicts the distribution and extent of natural amenities based on the previously mentioned objectives and use this map as a general planning guide. The site is designated as having special development considerations due to steep slopes and woodlands. Unstable slopes and surface water areas may also be present but would remain undisturbed by the proposed action. The proposed action and its environmental checklist also recognize and plan accordingly for the sensitive treatment of steep slopes and significant areas of woodlands. Olen S2ace Policy 1.1 (2.34) Strive to preserve steep hillsides and wooded areas in • scenic condition. Encourage replanting and revegetation of denuded areas not in the process of development. The proposed action and its environmental checklist have made these commitments to the extent that undisturbed areas are scenic. The clustering typical of office development and greater landscaping requirements and design review will encourage • more scenic landscape plan for areas that are disturbed than is required of single family subdivision. Attached Sheet Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Page 6 Residence Objective 1 (2.45) Protect all viable residential neighborhoods from intrusions by incompatible land uses. The latest transportation and land use policies for this low density residential area have not protected residential uses from intrusions. In particular the planning, upgrading, and improving of new arterials through the area will have a detrimental impact on the viability of the area for residential use. The approval of commercial traffic on S. 178th St. is in direct conflict with Residence Policy 1.4 (p.46). By these policy changes the City has recognized that the area is not a viable residential neighborhood nor has rt developed as such over the last 25 years. Residence Policy 1.1 (2.45) Use natural features, like topography, to separate incompatible land uses from the residential areas. The established residential area in the vicinity of the subject property lies west of I -5. The proposed action and environmental checklist utilize topography and wooded areas to maintain a visual separation from this residential neighborhood, which is physically separated almost completely by 1 -5. Residsnrs Policy 1.3 (2.46) Prohibit spot zoning in established residential neighborhoods. The area east of I -5 and S. 178th St. has d little residential development over the past 25 years. The most recent land use decision (the Martin office rezone) requested by long time area residents and approved by the City of Tukwila,jrecognized that the area is not an established residential neighborhood. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would correct inconsistencies created by new City policies and City actions that are contrary to low density residential map designation of the area. Residence Policy 1.4 (2.4§) Vehicular traffic to commercial, office or industrial uses should not be through residential areas. The proposed S. 188th Connector, the upgrading and improvements of S. 178th St. and 37th Ave. S. as secondary arterials, and the approval of office development with its only access on S. 178th St. recognize that the area is not an established residential neighborhood. Attached Sheet Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Page 7 Commerce /Industry Policy 1.1 (2.60) Encourage the grouping of uses which will mutually and economically benefit each other or provide necessary services. The subject area is currently being developed for two uses: office and major roadways. The Comprehensive Plan Amendment would encourage the continuation of this development within the City of Tukwila. Future office development on the subject site would be much more compatible with the S. 188th Connector than low density residential use, since a primary service for the office is access to major roadways. There would certainly be compatibility with other office uses in the area and make improvements in services designed for new office uses much more economically efficient. Commerce /Industry Policy 1.2 (2.60) Allow for the location of new commercial and industrial areas and the expansion of existing ones when this expansion is compatible with surrounding land use and not detrimental to the public welfare. The annexation of the subject area and approval of office uses would recognize compatibility with surrounding land uses in particlular transportation and office uses that are approved or planned. The continued designation of the area for low density residential uses with approved traffic and anticipated noise impacts would be contrary to public welfare. Commerce /Industry Policy 4.1 (2.66) Encourage the use of commercial office developments as buffers between residential land uses and other land uses. The site offers a use buffer between the intense roadway and commercial /industrial uses encroaching upon the area and the residential area on the west side of I -S. Commerce /Industry Policy 4.3 (2.66) Encourage the location of commercial offices in areas of high natural amenities. The subject site has views to the east of the Green River Valley and the Cascade Mountains. Office use could take advantage of this natural amenity without as much detriment due to noise levels that exceed public health limits for residential uses (i.e., sleep interference thresholds). The clustering typical of office development will also be able to take better advantage of the natural amenity offered by preserving wooded areas of the site than would typical single family subdivision. Attachment C: Additional Noise Level Data �..,..._.,,..,«.9,,..�. ..;, r..strr is +t:Y ?:r. °, = '.iX; •r ;::' ,,... . TO: REBECCA FOX FROM: BRAD COLLINS , �i DATE: APRIL 28, 1988 SUBJECT: SCHNEIDER ANNEXATION SUPPLEMENTAL SEPA INFORMATION & EARLY NOTICE REQUEST Subsequent to the April 7, 1988, Development Review Committee meeting on the Schneider Annexation, this memorandum provides the requested supplemental SEPA information and is the applicant's request for Early Notice of the SEPA threshold determination. NOISE Additional noise information was obtained by field investigation on the site. On April 20, 1988, during the afternoon peak traffic hours from 3:00 pm to 5:30 pm, noise levels were monitored by Brad Collins with the help of Steve Robinson. A City of Tukwila noise meter, Bruel & Kjser Type . 2232 Serial *1006261, was used. The weather conditions were fair skies and mild temperatures (approximately 65 degrees F). The noise level readings were taken at four locations on the site as shown on the attached site map. Two different readings were taken at each of four locations on the site: (1) the highest dB(A) level using the manual reset and (2) an approximate average dB(A) level using the auto reset. Noise Level Reading Loc 1 Loc 2 Loc 3 Loc 4 3:15 -3:45 em 71.7/65 64.2/57 71.5/65 70.5/63 4:30 -5:00 em 70.5/64 61.7/56 70.0/64 69.9/63 These noise level readings are comparable to, though not quite as high as, those found on the Valley View Estates site west of I -5 and north of the subject site. According to the Valley View Estates FEIS (January, 1986, City of Tukwila), the maximum noise levels exceeded 75 dB(A) during many hours of the day and 80 dB(A) during several hours. The conclusion that can be drawn from the Valley View Estates FEIS is "exterior noise levels outside the fenced play area, including the proposed recreation areas, would be in a range EPA characterizes as having significant adverse impacts (i.e., 65- 70• dBA's)." It can also be expected according to the S. 188th Street Connector Study (December, 1984, Centrac) that the S. 188th Street Connector, which could be constructed through the subject property, would further impact the noise levels to be found on the site. January 31, 1985 ATTACHMENT D EPA NOISE GUIDELINES FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR VALLEY VIEW ESTATES PREPARED UNDER THE DIRECTit)N OF CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DEPARTMENT TUKWILA, WASHINGTON Prepared in Compliance with The State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 Chapter 43.21c, Revised Code of Washington, as amended SEPA Guidelines, Effective January 16, 1976 Chapter 197 -10, Washington Administrative Code, as revised City of Tukwila ordinance Number 1211 1984 Bradley O. C 'i Responsible off ■ The noise measurements consisted of full 24 -hour noise monitoring at three locations and 19 hour noise monitoring at the fourth location, where adverse Breather curtailed the measurement. A Digital Acoustic DA607P noise moni- toring hem was used for the measurements. esulti the measurements in hourly L hourly Ldn are shown in Appendix B, Figures 2 and 3. Locations 1 and 2 are on the site. Locations 3 and 4 are off -site, near residence immediately west of the site which have views across the site toward i -ti. The following is a summary of the measured day -night sound levels, Ld and nighttime maximum sound levels, Lmax: Table 3 Existing Noise Levels Location 1 2 3 4 * Location 2 had partial topographic shielding of highway noise, which is esti- mated to have reduced Ld by about 3 dBA compared to noise levels at a future upper story elevation. The day -night sound level (Ld is the reading used in EPA in Guidelines for noise levels affecting residential areas. Those Guidelines are as follows: Table 4 EPA Noise Guidelines Ldn Below 55 d8A Description SE part of site NE part of site Residence W of site Residence SW of site 81 Existing exterior noise levels, dBA Ldn Night Lmax 72 77 657(68 77 65 72 63 72 Levels are generally acceptable: no noise impact is generally associated with these levels 55 to 65 dBA Adverse noise impacts exist: lowest noise level possible should be strived for. 65 to 70 dBA Significant adverse noise impacts exist: allowable only in unusual cases where lower levels are clearly demonstrated not to be possible. Uver 70 dBA Levels have unacceptable public health and welfare impacts Table 5 H. U. D. Acceptability Standards As a comparison of Tables 3 and 4 indicates, at two of the four sites '.v here monitoring occurred, day -night sound levels exceeded EPA's threshold for significant adverse noise impacts. The other two sites were just below this threshold and at the high end of the range where adverse noise impacts can occur. Although EPA's evaluation of noise impacts is based on the day -night sound level and not on maximum noise levels, a review of maximum noise levels at the site over a 24 hour period (see Appendix 8) indicates that maximum levels over 7U dBA are reached regularly. The noise level at the southern site location (Location 1) was found to have maximum levels exceeding 70 dBA during all 24 -hours tested and exceeding 80 dBA during the afternoon hours when people are apt to be outside. At the northern site location (Location 2) the maximum noise level was above 70 dBA during 10 of the 19 hours tested and above 80 dBA during six of these 19 hours. (Measurements were not taken from 1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.) On the other two sites adjacent to the single family area to the west, noise levels measured above 70 dBA during 20 of the 24 hours tested at one site (location 3) and during 12 of the 24 hours tested at the other site (Location 4). Location 3•experiences maximum noise levels above 80 dBA during five hours (including the 5:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. period) while Location 4 experienced maximum levels above 80 dBA during the 6:00 p.m. hour. EPA sources specify that interior noise levels should have an Ld of 45 dBA or less in order to protect health and welfare with an adequate margin of safety. Other studies indicate that to prevent the probability of sleep interference exceeding approximately 50%, interior maximum sound levels, Lmax should be limited to about 50 dBA in bedrooms. A different set of standards is utilized by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUO) to determine site acceptability for HUD projects. HUD's criteria are as follows: Ldn Site Acceptability Standard Not exceeding 65 dBA Acceptable Above 65 dBA but not exceeding 75 dBA Normally Unacceptable Above 75 dBA Unacceptable On sites where Ld is above 65 dBA but does not exceed 70 dBA, HUD requires that the type of construction used reduce interior noise levels by 5 d8A beyond the 25 dBA reduction that is typically accomplished with standard construction (i.e., a total noise reduction of 30 d8A). A reduction of an additional 10 dBA (35 dBA total) is required for sites above 70 dBA which do not exceed 75 dBA. I EJ TORE APO MA AZICIAITIAL LOW APATIAENT3 :M MOM COINTV 01 FiCOU1101111. MO OPES El 0.1 LJ POOMCMOLO SEIM c•a maw. WM. c•• LJ PM ME) MANUS C-14 walitUAL Peal h/r1 LAW MIAMI MEM MOM, •••••••••a*" •••■•- a*. —••■ •a•••■•• •■••• HMENT ITY ZONING ©GTV CXF IFIUMELA O I Nq 0 0 •-•/- 1•*4 WW1 I CIOWCV Tha Om yam. mu 15 ? 4irm ••• • ' REZONE APPLICATION APPLIC S WRITTEN SUBMITTAL (REZONE APPLICATION) M1 iimo 11111cre I r 1. BRIEFLY DESCRIBE YOUR PROPOSAL: Annex those portions of the subject property not in the City of Tukwila and zone the property for office use. 2. PROJECT LOCATION: (Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block, and subdivision; or tax lot number, access street, and nearest intersection) Tax lots 12, 33,109 and Sehluded Terrace Park Lots 1 -18 South of S. 178th St. and East of 1 -5 Quarter: NW (This information may be found on your tax statement.) 3. APPLICANT :* Name: Gerald S. Schneider Section: 35 Township: 23 Range: •Contact Person: 6510 Southcentor Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 Brad Collins Address: 365 Erickson, Suite 213 Bainbridge Is., WA 98110 one: e 48 8 -5135 4. PROP OW 7 1 Signature: AV �'�Y ' , "Ja * The applicant is the person whom the staff will contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent, unless otherwise stipulated by applicant. AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP Name: Gerald E. Schneider ess: -6510 Southconter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: 2.,-2471 Aili I /WE,[signature(s)] O swear that we are .wn r s or con ra c aser s o th, property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers contained in this application are true and correct to the best of my /our 3 - v� _ e5 knowledge and belief. Date: 5. WHAT ISt CURRENT ZONING OF THE PROPERTY? REZONE APPLICATION Page 2 RS -9600 King County & RA Tukwila 6. WHAT IS TNI SIZE OF THE PROPERTY? 23.9471 acres or 1,043,137 ,q, ft. 7. WHAT ZONING CLASSIFICATION IS REQUESTED? P'0 Tukwila 8. WHAT IS THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION? Low Density Residential Tukwila REZONE CRITERIA: The burden of proof in demonstrating that the change is appropriate lies solely upon the proponent. Generally, the more dramatic the change, the greater will be the burden of showing that the proposed change is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan as implemented by the Zoning Ordinance. The proponent must show in a clear and precise manner why the rezoning application should be granted. The Planning Commission and City Council will review your proposal using the following criteria. You may attach additional sheets and submit other documentation to support your rezone application. 9. The use or change in zoning requested shall be in conformity with the adopted comprehensive land use policy plan, the provisions of this title, and the public interest; RESPONSE: see attached sheet(e) Comprehensive Plan Amp n d nwnt Apl,liraH an Pa gas 3 -7 Existing land uses and roads, as well as planned public improvements seriously degrade the viabilitiy of the subject site for single family residential use. The proposed zoning change will be in conformity with this criterion to the extent that it is in conformity with the Comp Plan map, since it complies with the policies 10. The use or change in zoning requested in the zoning map or this title for the establishment of commercial, industrial, or residential use shall be supported by an architectural site plan showing the proposed development and its relationship to surrounding areas as set forth in the application form; RESPONSE: IterS is ne proposed development to be shown. A site plan does show the et.ristios and relationship to surrounding areas. The site can be devel level of P -0 use intensity. The actual level of use which can be develop •.'• .actual mitigating measures to be required, and assurance of project compatibility with surrounding areas will be addressed when an actual project is prc 11. When the request is not in agreement with the Comprehensive Land Use Policy posec Plan, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Council's satisfac- tion that there is an additional need for the requested land classification. To respond to this criteria, obtain a Comprehensive Plan Amendment Applica- tion and submit in conjunction with Rezone Application. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application submitted. ..•�:..... REZONE APPLICATION Page 3 12. Signific>changes have occurred in the character, conditions or surround- ing neighborhood that justify or otherwise substantiate the proposed rezone. RESPONSE: see attached sheet(s) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Page 3 13. The proposed rezone is in the best interest of the public health, safety, and welfare as compared to the hardship, such as diminution of property value, imposed on the individual property owner. RESPONSE: see attached sheet(s) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Pages 3 -7 Zoning approval would not impose a diminution of property value on the owner, and th the threat of public health problems due to residential development in an area that heavily impacted by noise from existing and proposed roadways would be greatly reduc The environmental constraints on the S. 188th Connector may also be reduced by use c this property for a less noise sensitive office development. 14. The unimproved subject property is unsuitable for the purpose for which it has been zoned considered in the context of the length of time the property has remained unimproved and land development in the surrounding area. RESPONSE: A portion of the subject property was subdivided for residential devslop.oat and an access road constructed prior to the construction of I -5, p the p (29 /MB.REZONE) k part of the subdivided lots. Since and because of the 5, there has been no development of residential use on `for. period of over tventp -fine years. 1y i d W , al o r M 2 2 ; v ' J Y1M,••• N1sllbwe W ' N: N • .2. = is' r''- St r V.I IAA. P...., - WO'S C•. `.1a I 1 of U • i 2 ,1 imam. Cow. �. 24411 �r s es- a. U 111 ' 110 4111r s* ./ Sart* WI'S i ti l•so oS S 1f.ee' 0 U $ d • 0 o "a}YE0V. CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENT FOR SCHNEIDER PROPERTY ZONING WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila is a Washington noncharter optional municipal code city and as such has the power to enact laws and enter into agreements to promote the health, safety, and welfare of its citizens and thereby control the use and development of property within its jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, Mr. and Mrs. Gerald Schneider, hereinafter referred to as "the Owners," are the owners of certain real property located in the City of Tukvila, King County, Washington, which is the subject of this Agreement and which is legally described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference ae if set forth in full, and WHEREAS, the Owners have applied for an amendment of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map designation for the property from Low Density Residential to Office and for zoning of the property from R -A (Agricultural) to P -O (Professional and Office), and WHEREAS, the Owners propose that the City Council limit residential development on the property to a density no greater than single family as a condition of the property being zoned to P -O, and WHEREAS, the City Council has authorized similar agreements reflecting such limitation. NOW, THEREFORE, in the event that the property legally described on Exhibit A is approved for annexation and classification to P - (Professional Office) zoning, the Owners hereby covenant and agree as follows: 1. Restrictions on Development. No residential developmenmt shall be permitted on the property described on Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference as if set forth in full at a density which is greater than that permitted under the City's R -1 (Single Family Residence) regulations. The development regulations applicable in the R -2, R -3, R -4, and RMH Districts shall not apply to the property, and no residential development other than single family shall be permitted. 2. Future Traffic Analysis. At the time of the filing of an application for development of the property described on Exhibit A, the Owners shall, at the Owner's sole cost and expense, provide a traffic analysis of a scope to be determined by the City in order to determine whether mitigating measures with respect to traffic may be required as part of the development proposal. 3. Binding Effect - Recording. This Agreement shall be recorded with the King County Auditor and shall constitute a covenant and servitude running with the land described on Exhibit A and shall be binding upon the Owners, their successors in interest, and assigns. The Owners shall pay all recording fees necessary to record this Agreement. -1- 4. Polio• Power. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to restrict the authority of the City to exercise its police powers. 5. Enforcement. In addition to any other remedy provided by law, the City may, at its discretion, maintain a lawsuit to compel specific performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement or to otherwise enforce its provisions, through injunctive or other relief, and if the City prevails in such action, it shall be entitled to recover all costs of enforcement, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 6. Severability. In the event any section, paragraph, sentence, term, or clause of this Agreement conflicts with applicable law, or is found by any court having ,jurisdiction to be contrary to law, such conflict shall not affect other sections, paragraphs, sentences, terms, or clauses of this Agreement, which can be given effect without the conflicting provision, and to thisend the terms of this Agreement shall be deemed to be severable, provided, however, that in the event any section, paragraph, sentence, term, . or clause of this Agreement is found to be in conflict with applicable law, the City shall have the right to bring the proposed development back before the City Council for further review and imposition of appropriate conditions to ensure that the purposes for which this Agreement is entered into are, in fact, accomplished and the impacts of the proposed development are mitigated. DATED this day of , 1988. ACCEPTED BY: The City of Tukwila By: Mayor, Gary L. VanDusen OWNERS Gerald E. Schneider Gail Schneider -2- X J Z S /82ND I sr. ■s:r6 $.1 4 90 4i5 fJ 3iS • :ANNEXATION AREA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGE PRE-ANNEXATION ZONING SCHNEIDER ANNEXATION /COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGE /PRE-ANNEXATION ZONING /REZONE 7:t ^ERMAN SCHOEN BACH E. DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY LINE • B 'GAL rH S 14 , c S • TUKWILA BOUNDARY r- i SEE - CRE,ST,:l� TUKWILA BOUNDARY ; 0 5 r 74TH sr - SUBJECT AREA C 1 1 1 1 1 111111 1 111111111 II OFFICE „ OFFICE .0\4. \4. vpkta *%■*\ . 41111, At\\\\ ill s\k\ \ \`'\\‘ ss, 4, 1 • a.•.re. CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION CITY OF TUKWILA WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ENACTED PURSUANT TO RCW 35A.14.330, ADOPTING ZONING REGULATIONS AND ADOPTING A ZONING MAP TO PROVIDE FOR AN AREA OF APPROXIMATELY 29 ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF SOUTH 178TH STREET AND EAST OF I -5 AND PROVIDING THAT SAID AREA SHALL BECOME SUBJECT TO SAID ZONING REGULATIONS UPON ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF TUKWILA. WHEREAS, it is reasonable to expect that the hereinafter described area may at some time in the future be annexed to the City of Tukwila by the direct petition method, and WHEREAS, the property owners in the area have requested an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan designation and pre - annexation zoning, and WHEREAS, the SEPA responsible official has made a determination of nonsignificance, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 23, 1988, and recommended that the. Comprehensive Policy Plan Map remain unchanged as to the subject property and recommended the adoption of a land use plan and zoning regulation in the event of annexation, and WHEREAS, two public hearings upon said proposal were held upon proper notice before the Tukwila City Council on August 1, 1988, and September 6, 1988, and WHEREAS, the City Council determined to adopt the findings and recommendations of the Planning Commission for the reasons given by the Planning Commission, 3964C2 NOW, THEREFORE, THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Area Affected. The area subject to this Ordinance is located south of South 178th Street and east of I -5, is legally described on Exhibit A, and is as shown on Exhibit B. Section 2. Comprehensive Plan Map Not Amended. The City of Tukwila Comprehensive Policy Plan designation for the subject area shall remain unchanged and the Plan Map shall continue to indicate single family residence. Section 3. Zoning Code and Map Adopted Upon Annexation. At such time as the area described in Exhibit A, or any part thereof, shall be annexed to :.._ City of Tukwila, the City Council may provide in the annexation ordinance that so much of said area as is thereby annexed shall be subject to the Zoning Code of the City of Tukwila and shall be zoned R - 1 - 9.6 (Single Family Residence - 9600 square feet) as shown on Exhibit B hereto, said zoning map and zoning Page 1 regulations herein adopted to be an extension to the zoning regulations for the City of Tukwila. Section 4..:' A . certified copy Of this ordinance shall be filed in the Office of the King County Department of Records and Elections. Section 5. This ordinance shall be in force and effect five days after publication of the attached Summary which is hereby approved. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, this day of , 1988. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, MAXINE ANDERSON APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY By FILED. WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO. 3964C2 MAYOR, GARY VAN;DUSEN A parcel of l and s i tuated : i n the west 1/2 ib'ed. as follows 14 SEP'88 REV. Section BEGINNING at a POINT,'b"eing -the. :intersection of the northerly margin of 178th' Street (formerly known as P.J. Mussel -.Co Rd.) with the :i west line of the east 1/2 of the northwest 1/4. o f.:said Section 35; thence proceeding ' . in ,.:a rl y . direction along s a i d northerly. margin ;to the East Line' for Primary State Hi.g.hwa,y No. i,. as condemned under King County Superior Court Cause No:5965871 " thence south along: said: East Line to its intersection with the southeasterly marin of Ori.Ilia Road Extension North; - thence northerly > southeasterly margin, being the ; .present Tukw i - C i t y Boundary, to the west l i n e of the east 1/2 of the northwest 1 /4 of : 'sa i:d Section 35; thence north : said west line to, the POINT OF BEGINNING. ANNEXATION AREA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN •,( k MAN SemAt•ob+i.MLEFI • :2 AL rj� it J• On 1988, the City Council of the City of Tukwila passed Ordinance No. which provides as follows: Retains unchanged the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map and adopts zoning regulations and zoning map for property located south of South 178th Street and east of I -5; provides for said' regulations and map to become effective upon annexation to the City of Tukwila of said area or any part thereof; and establishes an effective date. The full text of this ordinance will be mailed without charge to anyone who submits a written request to the City Clerk of the City of Tukwila for a copy of the text. SUMMARY OF ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY .OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ENACTED PURSUANT. TO' RCW • 35A.14.330, ADOPTING ZONING REGULATIONS AND ADOPTING A ZONING MAP, TO PROVIDE FOR AN AREA OF.•APPROXIMATELY.29' ACRES LOCATED SOUTH OF SOUTH 178TH STREET AND EAST OF I -5 AND PROVIDING THAT SAID AREA SHALL' •BECOME :SUBJECT TO SAID ZONING REGULATIONS UPON ANNEXATION TO THE CITY OF.TUKWILA. APPROVED by the City Council at their meeting of , 1988. MAXINE ANDERSON, CITY CLERK S n r - \ h i• i•� r"‘ C + I Planning Commission June 25, 1987 Page 2 86 -19 -CPA AND 86 - 20 - R: MARTIN Request to redesignate 1.6 acres from Low Density Residential to Office in the Comprehensive Plan and from R -A (Agricultural) to P -0 (Professional /Office) zoning designation. Vernon Umetsu, staff representative, reviewed the staff report which supported an approval recommendation to the City Council. A letter, dated June 22, 1987, from Mr. Roger Blaylock which modified the application, was entered into the record as Exhibit I. The Staff Report was entered into the record as Exhibit II. Roger Blaylock, 10717 N.E. Fourth Suite 9, Bellevue, WA 98004, spoke in behalf of the Martins. He reviewed information which supported the request. After some discussion, the public hearing was closed. MR. HAGGERTON MOVED AND MR. KIRSOP SECONDED A MOTION TO APPROVE 86 -19 -CPA AND 86 -20 -R AS PRESENTED, BASED ON THE FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1. All rezone conditions be included in the property title and recorded with the King. County Assessor at the time of rezone. A seven -foot strip along the 57th Avenue South right -of -way be dedicated to the City at time of rezone. MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. ammo 86- 40 -DR: SOUTHLAND CORPORATION Request to review a revised building design for a 7 -11 convenience store. Vernon Umetsu reviews the staff report recommending approval with conditions. Mr. Greg Aveldson, Southland Corporation, asked to go on record as concurring with the all staff recommendations. Discussion ensued on the. proposal. MR. KIRSOP MOVED AND MR. COPLEN SECONDED A MOTION TO APPROVE THE REVISED SITE DESIGN FOR 86- 40 -DR, BASED ON THE FINDINGS, CONCLU- SIONS, AND CONDITIONS OF THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE EXCEPTION OF A REVISION TO CONDITION FOUR. THE REVISED CONDITIONS READ AS FOLLOWS: HEARING DATE: FILE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: ACREAGE:. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING. DISTRICT: SEPA DETERMINATION: ATTACHMENTS: City .r Tukwila PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 STAFF. REPORT to the Planning Commission Prepared June 19, 1987 June 25, 1987 86 -19 -CPA and 86 -20 -R Mr. and Mrs. Roy Martin To amend the Comprehensive Plan' Land Use Map from Low Density Residential to Office, and to amend site zoning designation from R -A (Agricultural) to P -0 (Professional and. Office). 15665 South 178th Street, Tukwila, WA, 'in. the southwest corner of the South 180th Street /1'57th Avenue South intersection. 1.62 acres. Low Density Residential R -A (see Attachment.B) Determination to be made on June 23, 1987. (A) (B ) (C) (D) (E) (F) Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Zoning Map Site Plan Existing Land Use Topography : Excerpt of Applicant Submittal' STAFF REPORT to the Planning Ommission FINDINGS 86-19 - CPA:..Marti n Page' VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION 1. Project Description: The applicant is requesting: a. An amendment to the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map from a designation of Low Density Residential to Office, and b. A change in the Tukwila Zoning Code Map from a designation of R -A (Agricultural) to P -0 (Professional and Office). 2. Existing Development: The subject property encompasses 1.62 acres and is currently developed with a single - family residence. The site has been gen- erally graded into three terraces with 6 -8 foot berms. Grading was done several years ago as evidenced by 5" diameter alder trees on the lowest terrace (toward 57th Avenue South). Approximately the eastern third of the site is overgrown with blackberry bushes and alder trees. Site development is shown in Attachment C. 3. Surrounding Land Use: The nearby land use pattern is shown in Attachment D. In general, rural and low density uses are to the south and west while retail and commercial uses are located,to the north and east. 4. Terrain: The subject property is located on the western toe of the GrP River Valley wall as shown in Attachment E. The site itself has been cra ed into three general terraces which are separated by five- to seven -foot banks. 5. Vegetation: There are no known rare or endangered species on the site. 6. Access: South 178th Street and 57th Avenue South run along the site's northern and southern boundary respectively. The South 188th Street Con - nector, a four -lane arterial, is early in the planning stage. One of the alternative routes would run along the site's western boundary. The applicant proposes to access the site only from 57th Avenue South. The Public Works Department supports this condition. Site development ootenti3' with a rezone from single- family to office uses would significantly increase potential traffic generation in this intersection area. Potential traffic generation could use up significant roadway capacity Nit_n the location of an access point within 175 feet of the 178th /57th intersec- tion as well as limit the length of a left turn lane. At this time, the Planning Department and the applicant are in the final stages of negotiatioc the access provision necessary to support the Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone. Final provisions will be presented at the Planning Commission public hearing. The subject of this negotiation is dedicating a seven -fno- wide strip of land along 57th Avenue South. The 188th road reservation ar would be treated as right -of -way for land development purposes. The Ci•./ would still have to acquire the property at the time of road constructin. All access commitments would become effective at time of rezone. Addition STAFF REPORT 86_19_ roe. M. -. ;n . to the Planning Commission Page 3 project specific i pact:Aanalysis and mitigation shall be addressed when a building permit application ls • Utilities: The si e is adequately served'with water by King County Water District No. 75; ho ever, the site is not directly served by sewer or storm drainage facilities. A'12 -inch sewer main is located directly across 57th .Avenue from the site. This main may require upgrading pursuant to the Tukwila Comprehensive Sewer Plan to meet cumulative area demands. There is an.18 -inch stor .drainage stub at the northeast corner of the property and a 12 -inch main along the north property line. The ability of these lines to meet expe ted area -wide demands has not been established at this time. Adequacy of all systems will be verified when a specific development application is rev ewed. The ,City's South 57th Avenue road improvement project will exten• utilities to the south, past the property in approxi- mately 1988/89. BACKGROUND .In preparing this staf report, an evaluation of the Comprehensive Plan indi- cated that the proper y was designated Low Density . Residential due to its location on the west va ley wall and steep topography. DECISION CRITERIA This report considers the request in two parts: 1) Comprehensive Plan Mao Amendment, and 2) Zonin• Amendment. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENIMENT CRITERIA This criteria for Compr:hensive'Plan Amendment are listed below in bold and a re followed by a discussi.n of the proposal. A Comprehensive Plan Amendment is justified, if one of t e three criteria below is met.: ' Generally, the more significant the change, the greater will be the burden of showing that the change is justified and in conformance with the overall Comprehensive Plan. • There is an error i the factual basis of the plan. The Planning Depart ent finds no known error in the factual basis of the Comprehensive Plan .s of this date, nor does the applicant allege any error. . There is an unfores en.change in circumstances from the point at which the plan was adopted. Several changes in city transportation policies after the 1977 adoption the Comprehensive P1 •n directly affect the project site:' 1. The (four -lane) 188th Connector was incorporated into the Trans- portation Improvement. Plan for construction in 1990. Preli - ' i to the Planning Lmission STAFF REPORT .engineering was completed in 1985, and 20,000 to 30,000' vehicles are projected to use this arterial. daily. The most probable alignment runs through a small portion of the west property boundary and along the north.proper.ty line. The City's current functional classification road map has upgraded 57th Avenue South'and South 178th Street :from the collector arterials shown in the Comprehensive Plan, to the equivalent of a secondary arterial. The Comprehensive Transportation Improvement Plan envisions improving 57th Avenue South to a minimum four -lane secondary arterial in 1990. 3. South 178th Street has been upgraded from a collector arterial to the equivalent of a secondary 'arterial in the Circulation 'Plan and has been improved to a 4- and 5 -lane roadway along the northern property boundary. The redesignation of 57th Avenue South and South 178th Street from'collector arterials to secondary arterials, along with the 188th Connector, would together constitute a significant change in circumstances. Implementation of the above improvements, could result in bordering the subject property on three sides with four- lane.arterials. 3. There is some unforeseen and demonstrated public need. There is a public need to ensure that Comprehensive Pian map designations reflect public policy. There is a clear inconsistency between the site's map designation, and the Comprehensive Plan policies calling for protection of residential neighborhoods from incompatible land uses (Neighborhood Objective No. 1) and using office areas to separate residential areas fro'n other land uses (Commerce /Industry Policy No. 4.1). The Comprehensive Plan policies which are directly applicable to this situ - ation are shown below along with a discussion of site conditions. Natural Environment Policy 3.1: Discourage development on slopes in excess of 20 percent. The site has been graded into three general terraces (see Terrain). The eastern half of the site may be viewed as having a general slope of 18 to 22 percent. The northern half of the property has an averace slope of 10 percent. Natural Environment Objective 8: Recognize the environmental basemap of the Tukwila Planning Area which depicts the distribution and extent of natura' amenities based on the previously mentioned objectives and use this map as a general planning guide. The site is designated as having Special Development Considerations due to steep slopes and /or water. Slopes are as described above. Ti 9. general hillside area is known to have springs. Neighborhood Policy 1.1: Use natural features, like topography, to separa'- incompatible land uses from the residential areas. 86=19-CPA: Martin Page 4 STAFF REPORT 36 -19 -CPA: Martin to the Planning Commission Page 5 The pr McMick develo separa I n opments as Design Office commer Commerce /In in areas. of. The su 2. This is the family resi for Office, fourth side ZONING AMENDMENT CRITERIA ject site .rests on the bench of an eastward extending toe of n Heights. . A 40 -foot grade change separates the (western) ment area from Southcenter Parkway. A seven -foot terrace es the development area from a residence to the west. Commerce/ In Policy 4.1: Encourage the use of commercial office devel- uffers between residential land uses and other land uses. tion of this transitional area (see Conclusion No. 4.c.) as would buffer upslope single- family residential areas from ial and industrial activities to the east. • ustry Policy 4.3: Encourage the location high natural amenities'.' �- -per -• ..� ., ject site has cross - valley views to the east. COMPREHENSIVE PL N AMENDMENT CONCLUSIONS of commercial offices The applicant as demonstrated sufficient justification for reviewing the appropriateness of the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map at this site. The applicant's ana ysis in Attachment F supports an Office designation for the parcel. The P1.nning Department generally concurs with the analysis and speci- fically concludes that: . 1. Existing la d uses and roads, as well as planned public improvements 'seriously d-grade the viability of the subject site for single- family residential use. n l y is..ceebens i ve .al anned for single- ential uses, -and is surrounded on three 'si.das by areas planned ight Industrial, and Heavy Industrial uses, and bordered on the oy a four -lane arterial. 3. The site shiuld be viewed as a transitional area between commercial /indus- trial activities to the north and east, and residential areas to the west. The City must consider the following criteria (in bold type) in its evaluation of- rezone requests. 1. The use or change in zoning requested shall be in conformity with the adopted Com•rehensive Land Use Policy Plan, the provisions of this title, and the public interest. The propose zoning change will be in conformity with this criteria to tie extent that it is in conformity with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map. 2. The use or hange in zoning requested in the zoning map or this title for the establi hment of commercial, industrial, or residential use shall be STAFF REPORT d , to the Planning toMmission ZONING AMENDMENT CONCLUSIONS ,86 -19. -CPA: Martin Page 6 supported by an architectural site plan showing the proposed development and its relationship to surrounding areas as set forth in the application form. General areas have been .shown as being appropriate for P -0 uses. These development areas conform to building setback requirements and ,generally demonstrate site developability if. sufficient mitigation is provided. The Planning Department concludes that the site can be developed to some level of P-0-use intensity. The actual level of use which can be responsi- bly developed, the actual mitigating measures to be required,'`and assurance of project compatibility with surrounding: areas will be addressed at the building permit phase whenfan actual project is proposed. 3. When the request is not in agreement with the:Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Council's satisfac- tion that there is an additional need for the requested land classification. The applicant has presented a policy evaluation regarding the appropriate- ness of P -0 zoning at the site (Attachment :F),.; The ,Planning. Department concurs that changed 'circumstance's (new and in- creased road development), and an analysis of applicable policies would justify rezoning the property. from R=A to P -O. , 4. The relationship of the proposed zoning change to the ex4sting land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby property: The proposed rezone would.provide a strong rationale for'rezoning the prop- erty to the south from R -A to some higher use classification. This is the subject of a sub -area Comprehensive Plan update to the completed by the Planning, Department An 1987.. No other potential, significant land use compatibility conflicts are anticipated. 5. What changes have occurred in the character, conditions' or surrounding neighborhood that would justify or otherwise substantiate the rezone. The rezone from .R -A to P -0 is justified to the extent that Conclusions 1 through 4 are valid. 6. The relative gain to the public as compared with the hardship imposed upon the individual owner. Approval ofi the rezone would result in substantial gain to the property owner, and the City would become subject to higher land acquisition costs for the 188th Connector which . could over a portion of the site. Based upon the findings above, the staff has concluded the following: 1. The proposed Zoning Amendment from R -A to P -0 will comply with the Compre- hensive Plan as discussed in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment section this report. STAFF REPORT to the Planning Commission 2. The applicant has provided enough information concerning site development to show that the site can be developed to P -0 levels of intensity. 3. The proposed zone change is in response to develooment that has occurred to the south and west of the site. What was once a quiet agricultural and residential area has now become an . area with large numbers of commercial and industrial uses. (22/86- 19- CPA1,2,3) RECOMMENDATION 86 -19 -CPA: Martin Page 7 The Planning Department recommends approval of the Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone. applications as presented, with the following conditions: 1. All rezone conditions icoe included.-in the property'title and recorded with the King County Assessor. at the time'of rezone. 2. A seven -foot strip along the .57th Avenue South right- of- way,be dedicated to the. City at time of rezone. ATTACHMENT A Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map.:, Low Density Residential Office Commercial Light Industrial Heavy Industrial \ 4•••••• •■•■IMIll• •M111■1■111 ,.■■• •••■•■lIl ••■••••• 1=•••■•••• ••■••■•• .11.1•■•••• • • tal FAMLY Ei R 41% FAMLY l FAMILY PESCENTiAL E 2 Do FAMILY RESCENTiAL P-3 THEE AND FCL a14.10 PEXENTIAL R.4 LOW APARTNIENTS t A- -72 - R-1-120 . i9. -1-120 'I t ...0...;.,7— z N . 1. _1,..,-,.:,......, zo v. _ . -e.L_, , .1aD• 1 •R-. -72 i• ' i - 1 Z 1 :74. 4* • 4 1 . P-1-20 / tHr.a...., • 1 1 „..... J ' 4 --'' — :41 4 11Cill 1Z 11 R--Q6 6 I ) R1.541 . ''' PESCENTIAL fi( I i'D21 ' Ill! 41 77 : 1 441 P.ILLTFt.E RESIDENCE 1-0O-1 DENSITY P-0 PROFESSCNAL AND OFFICE C-1 1■Er.i4BC.ReiCCO PETAL C-2 REGIONAL RETAIL c-P PLANNED BUSINESS CENTER C-M INDUSTRIAL PARK M-1 LIGHT INDUSTRY M-2 IEArY NCUSTRY ATTACHMENT B CAT OF irumwo ZONES Potential So. 188th St. Right of Way 1 ,1 N-1 • , , • AMY ( __--- - _______5_ ---- m .— . I ':1 CM 1 1 L. C-P : CM i , .._ ,.._.:L_ . C-1,4 11. C. . III ._ A clvi !i C2 "'s st, sow LA • •••• 1 C C-M C'M SINKAL. 1 C C- .; .11 Psi I _ ; 1 1 C-M ABM la 0-2 • C 1 C-ftl \\) • 1411. v . if r 111 4 —7- - .L....■_= , r is,‘„. 7 , ',...___....„:. • --.1- 7 7 - -- - 1 --- ;L -- - • sr r / ;\ ad. • la ... S i t • ji : l 1 : ' C '. . . M-I ., 8 i; ; A cr Reures .; : ' C'M '''. . ----.// F-1-1" M ,it - M cf.'s/Nevi. / ' I, 7/ g i. ----/. 4 C-M :1 I C f ___=-ClailLS." f S i ■_,. L • ..... - . -- ;;;• • / 0/ • • , , • t ATTACHMENT C SITE PLAN - (Not to Scale) 0 Cs n � h Terrace with S 1 T E lawn :;;; ec e w i t �����-- - -�� st a n d ��• :::::............. par kway r 5 .45° N Sou me 7th Ave, t�►►tt�, Sit � thGe Retail /Office. Wholesale Industrial EXISTING 1 ATTACHMENT D Vacant LAN D Single Fam. Agriculture US E Vacant Over X:e 30% Slope 400 ATTACHMENT E "` TOPOGRAPHY I • ( • I . C • /. _ r •!I • • - wPt.�• 4[C 2• • 0 J • 470: • I. HISTORY • January 12, 1987 ATTACHMENT JUSTIFICATION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN The Martins bought a house in, the: country with . • acreage' in 1.959. Atthat time".the. Green River Valley was all " ' farms. The site. was truly agricultural - residential. Since then I -405 has been completed and tremen"doua" amounts of commercial and industrial development have Occurred in the Green River Valley in'Tukwil;a, Renton,'and Kent. Since 1959, the 'Martins' "acreage has shrunk. Originally the property contained 2.5 acres. The property is now only slightly more than 1.6 acres. Over 36 percent of their land has been taken for public roads and facilities. The "City of'Tukwila has undertaken; a 'major re- evaluation of the traffic situation resulting from the continued expansion of the industrial and commercial activities. o In March, 1982, the City of Tukwila. adopted a new Comprehensive Plan to replace ' their 1961 Comprehensive Plan. The nearby jurisdictions of Kent, Renton, and King County have also re- evaluated the traffic problems associated with the rapid commercial and industrial growth in the Green river Valley and taken action to upgrade the S.W. 180th Street /Petrovisky Road Corridor. In December of 1984, the City of Tukwila received from CENTRAC a Location and Feasibility Study and .Regional Travel'Impact Report for the'South 188th Street Connector. The study recommended the immediate 'construction of'the roadway. II. LAND USE ISSUE INCONSISTENCY The land use designation of Low Density Residential for the subject site is inconsistent with the Goals and Policies of the Comprehensive Plan and general planning practices of 4 • January 12 ; 1987 _ Street and west of Southcenter Boulevard is primarily undeveloped and agricultural in nature. • Implementation of this proposed Comprehensive Plan designation is complicated by the following purpose of the R -1 District- Single Family Residential: 18.12. Purpose.., The purpose of this district is to stabilize and preserve low .den.ity, single - family residential neighborhoods; to prevent intrusions by incompatible saes; to provide a.range of minimum lot sizes. , in. order to respond to the development 'constraints of,.the natural. environment;: and to promote diversity and recognize a variety of residential environments. (Emphasis added) Thus, the Zoning ;Code can not fully implement the intent of the Comprehensive Plan: because. the ezisting adjacent commercial and industrial and potential office land uses would be automatic intrusions into the proposed single family residential area on the subject site.: The Second land though the Martins' use inconsistency arises from the fact that the South 188th Street Connector is not included on the Roadway Circulation Map of the 1982 Comprehensive Plan. Even land .use.applications do not entirely rest upon the issue., of the South 188th. Connector, the impact of construction of a major four -lane arterial street with an estimated 20,000 to 30,000 motor vehicles travelling the street daily is not conducive to the establishment of a stable new single family residential area. Any of the proposed" five designs for the south 188th street Connector 6 January 12, 198 use buffer between ' the commercial and industrial uses on the valley floor and the single family residential 5; the subject site should be considered as a transitional. area betwee n'the intense commercial and industrial •uses to the northeast and east. In addition, the establishment of multiple family residential area could seriously overbalance the ratio. of single family residences to multiple family dwellings in the entire city. Presently, over 65 per cent of the housing stock •is multiple family reaidentiel,.this ratio. cbuld easily'ezceed 80 per cent with the creation of another • sajor multiple family dwelling area. Thii may not be consistent with a primary objective of•the Comprehensive Plan to es'sure that there is a diversified supply of housing the plenning area. (Page 51) A new multiple family zone could be implemented by the Zoning Code. The purpose statement of the RMH DISTRICT- - MULTIPLE- RESIDENCE HIGH DENSITY is "this district is to create a high density, multiple - family district which is compatible with commercial and office areas and which can b used adjacent to such districts to buffer other, less dense multiple - family districts. It is also the purpose of this district to encourage a variety of housing types and residential environments by allowing apartment houses and apartment /office `development. uses west of I in January 12,;.987 trucks take up much of the design capacity of a street system because of their size and slowness. The maneuvering of trucks on public streets to allow access to the loading doors of warehouses and manufacturing plants in light industrial areas has become a major safety problem. A thorough investigation of the issue can not be contemplated without a city -wide transportation study This processes being requested by the applicant. 'Professional Office The arguments for a professional office building have been discussed by analyzing the other land use alternatives. Professional offices would provide a reasonable land use transition between the high intensity ,commercial and industrial areas to the east, while it would complement the anticipated professional office uses to the north. Plus the professional office classification would create.a land use buffer if a residential area was still planned for the areas to the south and west of the subject site. Secondary Issue - Domino Effect 10 Normally the review of an apparently localized request to modify any comprehensive plan for .a small parcel of property raises the issue of: if we allow the change, will it create a domino affect where the higher intensity land use keeps expanding. In this case how far south will the request is beyond the scope of the lend use or environmental review { January 12, 198 The arguments` raised' in ' the 'justification for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment point out that the "public interest" is not the'same`as embodied in the Plan in 1982. This is not "a conflict or 'a major mistake made by the professional planners, planning commissioners or by the city • council; it is the normal life cycle of a Comprehensive Plan. Aa the City was undergoing a Metamorphosis, the Plan is static. The Plan needs to be fine 'tuned and adjusted to reflect changes in the environment and new goals and programs of the City. — In Martins" case, the crucial factor is that existing commercial, industrial and office uses are ''intrusions into the proposed single family residential area. This is pointed out in a recent law case', Colella vs. IinR' County, supra. where Mr. Colella's'property adjoined a busy freeway on one side and an airport on another side, while' the property was zoned suburban residential. The :.: Appellate Court, quoting the trial court, reasoned that "In short, the subject property had lost its residential character." Id. at 255 -56. The Martins' property is identical, it has lost its residential character. Traffic and urban development has dramatically modified the area. The proposed construction of the South 188th Street Connector is only the final nail in the coffin for a stable single family residential neighborhood. 12 January 12,LP87 Bellevue is presently building around an established.,.singlefamily residential. 'kitty - corner from Bellevue Square to protect the neighborhood from the intensity of the commercial activity. 14 $500,000 wall at its cost CONCLUSION The Martins have been trapped: by the continuing degradation of the surrounding.single.,family residential neighborhood by . urban growth. In 1959 when they bought the.prop.erty, they were 'out in the country. Farms were all, they could see. Nov in their retirement years they can no longer, deal, with the situation and propose selling the property and leaving,. 'However, they do not want to give their property . to a commercial developer who would present the same arguments to .,the Planning Commission and. City Council with the added statement that "The Martins were forced .off'.the site because of the resulting:from the adjacent commercial. and industrial uses." The. Martins have Aieen in land use process over the. last eight months that requesting a C -2 District for a Regional Retail Business would.only.be an. intrusion of high intensity commercial uses upon their neighbors to the south.. The modified requestto P -0 District Professional Office not only lets the Martins leave the area •with a: little retirement security, but is in the "public interest" and complies with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan and corrects an error on the Comprehensive Plan Map. PP Et 1 i988 KA I HY JON BARGEN L . DAR L 6.,gVI•DI ::UN I T S,C HNE I DER. HOMES 6510 SOUTHCENTER BLVD #1 TUKW I LA, WA r ATTN: Reference: r'^ KATHY VON BARGEN DARYL SAVIDIS JULIE ROTH SUZANNE SIMPSON ANGELA PERRY SCHNEIDER Thank you for this opportunity to serve you. NOTICE ....,.,.......,............. w...... ...,..��.,,.r.s...r,.w.e4+w..nK r.ra.san. taevmr+al.� • CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 1800 SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104 Enclosed are your materials an the above transaction. If you have any questions regarding these materials, please contact us. SENIOR TITLE OFFICER AND UNIT MANAGER TITLE OFFICER ASSISTANT TITLE OFFICER TITLE TECHNICIAN TITLE SECRETARY EFFECTIVE JANUARY 1, 1988, THE SALES TAX RATE IN KING COUNTY HAS INCREASED TO 8.1 PERCENT. ON ALL TRANSACTIONS CLOSING AFTER JANUARY 1, 1988, THE NEW SALES TAX RATE WILL APPLY. Your Guarantee document is enclosed Our No. 132465 Your No. KATHY VON BARGEN DARYL SAVIDIS UNIT 6 628 -5610 • Effective Date: February 01, 1988 UPON at: 8:00 A. M. Insured: HILLIS CLARK MARTIN A Fee Simple CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 701 FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 1800 SEATTLE WASHINGTON 98104 SEE NEXT PAGE LITIGATION GUARANTEE Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER Liability: TO BE AGREED Premium: Tax: The Estate or. Interest in the Land Hereinafter Described or Referred to Covered by this Report is: Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: PAUL JONIENTZ AND A. LORRAINE JONIENTZ, ALSO APPEARING OF RECORD AS LORRAINE JONIENTZ, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AS TO THAT PORTION OF PARCEL C DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: COMMENCING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID PARCEL C; THENCE SOUTH 67 DEGREES 50'57" EAST 286.71 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 23 DEGREES 27'57" EAST 147.13 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 87 DEGREES 50'57" EAST 25 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 2 DEGREES 09'03" WEST 137.09 FEET TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID PARCEL C; THENCE NORTH 87 DEGREES 50'57" WEST ALONG SAID SOUTH LINE TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; AND GERALD E. SCHNEIDER AND GAIL SCHNEIDER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, AS TO PARCELS A, B AND THE REMAINDER OF PARCEL C. The land referred to in this Report is situated in the State of Washington, County of King, and is described as follows: LITIGATION GUARANTEE • (Continued) Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER THIS REPORT IS SUBJECT TO SCHEDULE B, EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE AND CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS WHICH ARE ATTACHED, AND SAID REPORT IS EFFECTIVE ONLY WHEN SAID SCHEDULE B, EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE AND CONDITIONS AND STIPULATIONS ARE ATTACHED. PARCEL A: LITIGATION GUARANTEE (Continued) Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER THAT PORTION OF VACATED BLOCKS 2 AND 3, SECLUDED TERRACE PARK, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF RECORDED IN VOLUME 55 OF PLATS, PAGE 42, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING EAST OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1 AS DESCRIBED IN LIS PENDENS RECORDED DECEMBER 6, 1962 AS RECORDING NUMBER 5516019 AND CONDEMNED IN KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NUMBER 594287. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 35, SOUTH 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING EASTERLY OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. 1; EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH 660 FEET LYING WEST OF THE EAST LINE OF THE WEST 792 FEET OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 35; TOGETHER WITH THE EAST 25 FEET OF THE SOUTH 495 FEET OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 35; EXCEPT PORTION LYING WITHIN F.J. MUSIEL ROAD; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN ORILLIA ROAD EXTENSION. PARCEL C: THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, WILLAMETTE MERIDIAN, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, LYING SOUTH AND WEST OF F. J. MUSIEL ROAD (SOUTH 178TH STREET), DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE NORTH 1 DEGREE 49'41" EAST ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER 503.47 FEET AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY MARGIN OF SAID P.J. MUSIEL ROAD; THENCE SOUTH 65 DEGREES 26'33" EAST ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY MARGIN 374.01 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 55 DEGREES 13'03" EAST 104.12 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 23 DEGREES 27'57" WEST 180 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 2 DEGREES 09'03" WEST 137.09 FEET TO A POINT IN THE SOUTH LINE OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE NORTH 87 DEGREES 50'57" ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTHWEST QUARTER 365.16 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF SOUTH 178TH STREET, MUSIEL ROAD, AS Page 3 VACATED BY THE CITY OF TUKWILA BY ORDINANCE NUMBER 556 AND RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 6516240; EXCEPT THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF TUKWILA BY DEED RECORDED UNDER' RECORDING NUMBER 6405581. LITIGATION GUARANTEE (Continued) Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER LITIGATION GUARANTEE (Continued) INFORMATION FOR THE INSURED Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER 1 PLEASE NOTE that this report is not a.commitment nor an obligation by the Company to issue any policy or policies'of • title insurance insuring the property described in Schedule A. 2. Upon request WITHIN 60 DAYS from the effective date of this Report, the Company will extend the effective date of this Report by endorsement to include the filing of any Complaint and Notice of Lis Pendens. Such an endorsement will show as additional exceptions, and therefore exclude from coverage, those matters attaching subsequent to the effective date of the Report but prior to issuance of the endorsement. 3. The Company may, BUT IS NOT OBLIGATED T0, issue additional endorsements extending the effective date of the Report at the request of the Insured. The fee for such endorsements will be charged according to the Company's filed Rate Schedule for such endorsements. LITIGATION GUARANTEE SCHEDULE B H. GENERAL TAXES, SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS AND SPECIAL LEVIES. Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER The following matters are expressly excepted from the coverage of this report: • A. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records. E. Encroachments, overlaps, boundary line disputes, and any other matters which would be disclosed by an accurate survey and inspection of the premises. C. Easements or claims of easements not shown by the public records. D. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material heretofore or hereafter furnished, imposed by law and not shown by the public records. E. Liens under the Workmen's Compensation Act not shown by the public records. F. Any service, installation, connection, maintenance or construction charges for sewer, water, electricity or garbage removal. G. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water. 1. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PACIFIC TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH CO. PURPOSE: POLES AREA AFFECTED: SAID PREMISES AND OTHER PROPERTY DATED: July 22, 1929 RECORDED: August 19, 1929 RECORDING NUMBER: 2554741 THE DESCRIPTION CONTAINED THEREIN IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO DETERMINE ITS EXACT LOCATION WITHIN THE PROPERTY HEREIN DESCRIBED. Page L LITIGATION GUARANTEE SCHEDULE B (Continued) Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PUGET SOUND POWER &. LIGHT COMPANY PURPOSE: ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION LINE AREA AFFECTED: SOUTHERLY PORTION OF PARCEL B DATED: August 12, 1947 RECORDED: September 30, 1947 RECORDING NUMBER: 3729002 3. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY PURPOSE: ELECTRIC TRANSMISSION LINE AREA AFFECTED: SOUTHERLY PORTION OF PARCEL A DATED: August 13, 1947 RECORDED: September 30, 1947 RECORDING NUMBER: 3729006 4. RELINQUISHMENT OF ACCESS TO STATE HIGHWAY NUMBER 1 AND OF LIGHT, VIEW AND AIR BY DEED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON: RECORDED: January 23, 1963 RECORDING NUMBER: 55349 5. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: PUGET SOUND POWER $ LIGHT COMPANY PURPOSE: ELECTRIC LINE, GUY WIRES AND ANCHOR AREA AFFECTED: WESTERLY PORTION OF LOT 10, BLOCK 2 IN PARCEL A DATED: February 20, 1964 RECORDED: March 12, 1964 RECORDING NUMBER: 5709823 6. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: GRANTEE: KING COUNTY WATER DISTRICT NO. 75 PURPOSE: WATER PIPELINE WITH NECESSARY APPURTENANCES AREA AFFECTED: A STRIP OF LAND 20 FEET IN WIDTH ACROSS A PORTION OF PARCEL A DATED: September 13, 1965 RECORDED: September 17, 1965 RECORDING NUMBER: 5929542 7. AN EASEMENT AFFECTING THE PORTION OF SAID PREMISES AND FOR THE PURPOSES STATED HEREIN, AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES: FOR: PRIVATE RIGHT OF WAY IN FAVOR OF: NOT DISCLOSED DISCLOSED BY INSTRUMENT RECORDED: March 24, 1977 RECORDING NUMBER: 7703240429 AFFECTS: THE WEST 20 FEET OF PARCEL C Page 7 LITIGATION GUARANTEE SCHEDULE B (Continued) Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER r,. CONDEMNATION OF ACCESS TO STATE HIGHWAY NUMBER 1 AND OF LIGHT, VIEW AND AIR BY DECREE TO STATE OF WASHINGTON: ENTERED: NOT DISCLOSED KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT NO.: 594287 GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 12. 74 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0.00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 12.74 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160- 0125 -08 LEVY CODE: 4300 AFFECTS: LOT 10, BLOCK 2 OF PARCEL A 10. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 12.74 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0.00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 12. 74 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160- 0130 -01 LEVY CODE: 4300 AFFECTS: LOT 11, BLOCK 2 OF PARCEL A 11. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 12.74 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0.00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 12. 74 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160 - 0135 -06 LEVY CODE: 4300 AFFECTS: LOT 12, BLOCK 2 OF PARCEL A LITIGATION GUARANTEE SCHEDULE B (Continued) Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER 12. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 6.37 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0.00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 6.37 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160 - 0140 -09 LEVY CODE: 4300 AFFECTS: LOT 13, BLOCK 2 OF PARCEL A 13. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 6.37 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0. 00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 6. 37 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160 - 0145 -04 LEVY CODE: 4300 AFFECTS: LOT 14, BLOCK 2 OF PARCEL A 14. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: AMOUNT BILLED: AMOUNT PAID: AMOUNT DUE: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: 1988 $ 1.27 $ 0.00 $ 1.27 768160- 0150 -06 4300 AFFECTS: LOT 15, BLOCK 2 OF PARCEL A 15. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 1.27 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0.00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 1.27 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160- 0155 -01 LEVY CODE: 4300 Page LITIGATION GUARANTEE SCHEDULE B (Continued) Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER AFFECTS: LOT 16, BLOCK 2 OF PARCEL A 16. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 1.27 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0.00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 1.27 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160 - 0160 -04 LEVY CODE: 4300 AFFECTS: LOT 17, BLOCK 2 OF PARCEL A 17. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 1.27 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0. 00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 1.27 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160- 0165 -09 LEVY CODE: 4300 AFFECTS: LOT 18, BLOCK 2 OF PARCEL A 18. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 38. 22 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0.00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 38. 22 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160 - 0170 -02 LEVY CODE: 4300 AFFECTS: LOT 1, BLOCK 3 OF PARCEL A 19. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 38.22 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0.00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 38.22 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160- 0175 -07 LEVY CODE: 4300 Page 10 LITIGATION GUARANTEE SCHEDULE B (Continued) AFFECTS: LOT 2, BLOCK 3 OF PARCEL A Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER 20. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 38. 22 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0. 00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 38. 22 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160 - 0180 -00 LEVY CODE: 4300 AFFECTS: LOT 3, BLOCK 3 OF PARCEL A 21. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 38.22 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0.00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 38. 22 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160 - 0185 -05 LEVY CODE: 4300 AFFECTS: LOT 4, BLOCK 3 OF PARCEL A GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 38.22 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0.00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 38. 22 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160 - 0190 -08 LEVY CODE: 4300 AFFECTS: LOT 5, BLOCK 3 OF PARCEL A 23. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: 1988 AMOUNT BILLED: $ 38. 22 AMOUNT PAID: $ 0.00 AMOUNT DUE: $ 38.22 TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: 768160- 0195 -03 LEVY CODE: 4300 I NV AFFECTS: 24. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: AMOUNT BILLED: AMOUNT PAID: AMOUNT DUE: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: • AFFECTS: 25. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: AMOUNT BILLED: AMOUNT PAID: AMOUNT DUE: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: AFFECTS: 26. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: AMOUNT BILLED: AMOUNT PAID: AMOUNT DUE: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: AFFECTS: LITIGATION GUARANTEE SCHEDULE B (Continued) Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER LOT 6, BLOCK 3 OF PARCEL A 1988 $ 38.22 $ 0.00 $ 38.22 768160 - 0200 -06 4300 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT LOT 7, BLOCK 3 OF PARCEL A DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT 1988 $ 38. 22 $ 0.00 $ 38.22 768160 - 0205 -01 4300 LOT 8, BLOCK 3 OF PARCEL A DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT 1988 $ 38.22 $ 0.00 $ 38.22 768160 - 0210 -04 4300 LOT 9, BLOCK 3 OF PARCEL A 27. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: AMOUNT BILLED: AMOUNT PAID: AMOUNT DUE: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: 1988 $ 1,685.44 $ 0.00 $ 1,685.44 352304 - 9012 -05 4300 Page 12 AFFECTS: 22. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: AMOUNT BILLED: AMOUNT PAID: AMOUNT DUE: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: AFFECTS: 29. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: AMOUNT BILLED: AMOUNT PAID: AMOUNT DUE: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: AFFECTS: 30. GENERAL TAXES: FIRST HALF NOVEMBER 1: YEAR: AMOUNT BILLED: AMOUNT PAID: AMOUNT DUE: TAX ACCOUNT NUMBER: LEVY CODE: AFFECTS: LITIGATION GUARANTEE SCHEDULE B (Continued) NORTHERLY PORTION OF PARCEL B DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT 1988 $ 1,074.39 $ 0.00 $ 1,074.39 352304 - 9033 -00 2360 SOUTHERLY PORTION OF PARCEL B DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT 1988 $ 616.98 $ 0.00 $ 616.98 352304- 9109 -09 2340 Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER PARCEL C, EXCEPT THAT PORTION VESTED IN "JONIENTZ" DELINQUENT MAY 1, SECOND HALF DELINQUENT 1988 $ 879.37 $ 0.00 $ 879. 37 352304 - 9019 -08 2340 THAT PORTION OF PARCEL C VESTED IN "JONIENTZ" AND OTHER PROPERTY Page 13 NOTE 1:. A SURVEY HAS BEEN RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NUMBER 8007079001. NOTE 2: THE FOLLOWING PARTIES HAVE BEEN SENT A COPY OF THIS REPORT. HILL CLARK MARTIN SCHNEIDER HOMES 6510 SOUTHCENTER BLVD, #1 TUKWILA, WA LITIGATION GUARANTEE SCHEDULE B (Continued) End of Schedule Guarantee No. 132465 Reference No. SCHNEIDER IMPORTANT: This is not a Plat of Survey. It is furnished as a convenience lo locale the land indicated hereon with reference to streets and other land. No liability is assumed by mason of r•Iiance hereon. (iy o i I lk S kiN N wlq SEG 35-073 -y 3ay6r eh. ORDER NO. • II Ch- hlcig Title Insurance Company 1700 Columbia Center 701 Fifth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 620 -5666 • IMPORTANT: This is not • Plat of Survey. it is furnished as a convenience 10 locale the land indicated hereon with reference to streets and other land. No liability is assumed by reason of reliance hereon. Oct • ..,7 �J. rJ r .t. A. Chicago Title Insurance Company - I w V 1 . Mir v. °I® k 110 2sc.1I .1 7 • a • 5,87 -30• " I '7!•v5 ' P N. P ..TO - 7 W. 1700 Columbia Center 701 Fifth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 '628 -5666 '• •I3,120e N • ORDER NO. / 3 o O f '° • 6 19 "`"---> r e'�• yam` i fio.01 r, ` y Y -JJ6w L 7 • k vwc. ORO. sii ea. 01.461 20 l� TO: The City Council Tukwila City Hall 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 The undersigned, who are the owners of not less than ten percent in value, according to the assessed valuation for general taxation of the property for which annexation is sought, hereby advise the City Council of the City of Tukwila that it is the desire of the undersigned residents of the following area to commence annexation proceedings: The property herein referred to is described on Exhibit "A" (legal description) attached hereto and is depicted on Exhibit "B" (map) further attached hereto. The total assessed valuation of the area proposed for annexation is $304,100 it is requested that the City Council of the City of Tukwila set a date not later than sixty days after the filing of this request for a meeting with the undersigned to determine: (1) Whether the City Council will accept the proposed annexation; (2) Whether the City Council will require the simultaneous adoption of proposed zoning regulations for the area proposed for annexation; and (3) Whether the City Council will require the assumption of existing City indeb- tedness by the area to be annexed. If the undersigned have requested the simultaneous adoption of proposed zoning regulations, it is recognized and accepted that the meeting date may be later than sixty days after the filing of this request in order to ensure adequate time for the review of the proposed zoning regulation. This page is one of a group of pages containing identical text material and is intended by the signers of this Notice of Intention to be presented and con- sidered as one Notice of Intention and may be filed with other pages containing additional signatures which cumulatively may be considered as a single Notice of Intention. (NnNEX.MI) (4C.2) NOTICE OF INTENT TO ANNEX (Direct Petition Method) ( "10% Petition ") PRINTED NAME TAX LOT NUMBER SIGN =s"�i�s3».iF!FlSaC -s - i•Y3s -ns3 r- :;. = = . - -- - =•..n - Gerald E. Schneider It II II It II It If II It 352304- 9012 -05 352304- 9109 -09 352304 - 9033 -0.0 11: UR; .PR 1 19881 PLANN.; G DEPT. ADDRESS AND DATE Lots 1 thru 18 Secluded Terrace Park (Revised 1/86) APR 'i 1988 NOTE TO THE APPLICANT: Please complete all appropriate section of(Mtkie��iappllac.a-,i.A tion below. Information contained in this application will be sed 4thA r.eptringq, all of the necessary documentation for this annexation; therefore, p1ease type " " ""` — or clearly print all of the necessary information. If additional space is required tor response to any of these sections, feel free to attach additional sheets to this application. If you have any questions with regard to this application, please feel free to contact the Planning Department at 433 -1849, or you may discuss this matter in person at Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Do you wish to have the area's zoning adopted simultaneously with the annexa- tion? X Yes No If pre- annexation zoning is approved by the City Council, the proposed zoning can be circulated on the 75% Annexation Petition. The Applicant is required to complete an Environmental Checklist for the pro- posed annexation. The Environmental Checklist requires a filing of $100. Please return the completed Checklist with your completed Annexation Application and Notice of Intention. Gerald E. Schneider Bradley J. Collins PROPONENT CONTACT PERSON if other than proponent Name Schneider Homes, Inc. Telephone 248 - 2471 Legal Description See Attached Sheet CITY uF TUKWILA ANNEXATION APPLICATION Collins & Associates Address 6510 Southcenter Blvd 365 Ericksen, Suite 213 City Tukwila, WA 98188 Bainbridge Is., WA 98110 8 4 2 -5135 r - - z --- :: . .." - ,77.7,---f. -- - --- 1 LOCATION South of S. 178th St. and East of I -5 Tax Lots 12, 33, Section 35 T23 FL4 1,043,137 23.9471 Property Address Secluded Terrace Park Lot Area Sq. Ft. Acres Lots 1 -18 Assessed valuation $304,100 Current County zoning RS -9600 Desired Tukwila zoning P.O To develop the Pproperty for office use with municipal services from Tukwila, WA PURPOSE OF ANNEXATIuN - Briefly describe the reasons you desire to annex. (Revised 11/85) I 2 8 L. 0° j a j j r 4 i 1 . r . 11 1 1 t „` • r. 3. <... 1 �• t , r i -`+�� A� { � •^) fk �7 '1 1 �,) .`� (. f •r t I r-. r' ;. • y (� —� : s� ' IK I N GG C OigNN ' A85 Q IT .s T R }, ' ' � I . f� f yF q� e T7 �14 8 Lr ;.`. ,:'�l$!O Q�` ; f '" f • ' ' I t j • } 1: P:, II � fY �Qry ' • i��. ~ � Vj • ' 1 , _ ' .l. 9 0 I } T ( AC . ` �• r. (, yM1 III l • / I � \, ' L P. 9. H nW/ G6RSf /,�R t,.v • pI t r' F»��.A A _ fi r . ^^ �� SCA ' I INCH 100 FEET (. , Il : S.W, 2 6 .. 2 - 4 ..; mo :' "•(...:: : ) - - _ 4., "."',.a'. „n... o- .i.,.., ,. , 712.15 .. N B7-7 J 1 � f. ~ � o + r•rz .FV„ r I �o 1 j`( 1,:, , / ! mt n © /139 , .. .,.ns r pi ti a p ; /na• io -- --- .-- — ,a ! �1 { I 1 o r' y ) aa.• "' "'i? - t Vi I - _ ll •, , r 41, 4:01. 1G. /,. 12 98.84 r.... - rm../ W. .ea '12 8.8 _ 1�J i•'2�n I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I l l l 111111I11111111111111111111111111111 LI! W111 1111111111111111111111 -1ll l ll lifilth 110llll l l l l l l l l 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111181 •.•.�•« 1 2 3 4 . 5 6 7 . \ 8. 9 10 11 •.... 12 II IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS \ • CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO I 0€ ez tie LL oz sz r cz zz ,z J3 THE sUALITY OE THE ORI6IAAI. DO_ ' 0 c u s c z 1 ••o QIII ulwuhihfiII 4105 a mu l lu wn Milli li III j1411!!ll r'.