The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPermit 88-02-R - SCHNEIDER - ANNEXATION REZONE88-02-R SCHNEIDER ANNEXATION REZONE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT SCHNEIDER ANNEXATION REZONE WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. /V77 Page 1 CITY OF TUKWILA 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, 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 the 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 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 CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, this of , , 1988. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: APPRO AS TO FORM: OFFIC CI By FI WITH THE CITY. CLERK: d 88 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL:. 9: 9-86 PUBLISHED: %- .Zg- S8 EFFECTIVE DATE: /0- 7 - Sg ORDINANCE NO.: "i77 1 E 7 ; Y VAN DUSEN /Y- - day 3964C2 14 SEP REV. :land and 's ituated. in ,the. west 1/2 of Section 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 . Mus i e I Co.` Rd.`.) ' w i.th the :'west line of the east . 1/2 of'the northwest /4 Section 35; thence proceeding:-in.a westerly direction along said northerly margi to the;East:,Line for Primary State Highway No. 1, '.as condemned under King County Superior Court Cause No. 596587.; thence south along s.ai.d East'L.ine to its intersection with:the southeasterly margin of OrilIIa Road Extension North; thence northerlyalong: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.Iine to the POINT OF BEGINNING. / •iiRmAN SCHOENbaCHLER 4.? I , JOANNE JOHNSON A Q Notice of Public Hearing [[ Notice of Public Meeting O Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet ❑ Board of Appeals Agenda Packet ❑ Planning Commission Agenda Packet ❑ Short Subdivision Agenda Packet ❑ Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit ❑ Shoreline Management Permit was mailed to each of the following addresses on TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 27, 1988 , I9 (SEE ATTACHED) Name of Project SCHNEIDER ANNEX. File N umber OF GIST °,IBUTION hereby declare that: [] Determination of Nonsignificance ❑ Mitigated Determination of Non - significance ❑ Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Action ❑ Official Notice [I Other SCHNEIDER ANNEXATION INFO. ❑ Other Signa City of Tukwila PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 Levitz Furniture Corporation 212 High Street Pottstown, PA 19464 2. The Tukwila zoning is R- 1 -9.6. September 27, 1988 Subject: ANNEXATION TO TUKWILA OF PROPERTY SOUTH OF 178TH STREET AND EAST OF I -5 As you know, you and several of your fellow property owners seeking annexation to Tukwila have requested a Comprehensive Plan change and pre- annexation zoning from the existing low- density residential to office use. After holding public hearings on August 1 and September 6, 1988, the Tukwila City Council requested an ordinance specifying no change in the Comprehensive Policy Plan and adoption of Tukwila zoning comparable to the existing King County single - family zoning. This supports the recommendation made by the Planning Commission at its June 23, 1988 meeting. As requested, the ordinance was prepared and brought before the City Council on September 19, 1988. At that time, the City Council passed the ordinance establishing pre- annexation zoning of R -1 -9.6 (Single Family Residence -- 9,600 square feet) (see attached ordinance). This means that the City Council agrees to accept the annexation if: 1. The property remains designated "Low Density Residential" on the Comprehensive Policy Plan Map; and Per State statute, the next step required in the annexation process is for property owners representing 75% of the area's assessed valuation to sign a petition requesting annexation to Tukwila. Once the necessary signatures are obtained, the City of Tukwila will prepare a "Notice of Intention" to be forwarded to the King County Boundary Review Board (BRB) for their consideration. BRB review typically takes several months. Once approved, the property will become part of Tukwila. Levitz . Furniture Corporation September 27, 1988 Page 2 Please telephone . Rebecca Fox of the Planning Department at 433 -1845 no later than Monday October 10, 1988, to inform us whether or not you still wish to be part of the annexation. If you wish to proceed with the annexation, we request that you sign the "75 %" petition by October 10, 1988. The petition will be available in Tukwila City Hall during office hours from 8 :30 to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. Your promptness will enable use to proceed with the annexation in the most timely manner possible. RF /sjn attachments Sincerely, Rebecca Fox Associate Planner JOANNE JOHNSON hereby declare that: El Notice of Public Hearing [[ Notice of Public Meeting [] Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet 0 Board of Appeals Agenda Packet [I Planning Commission Agenda Packet Q Short Subdivision Agenda Packet J Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit (SEE ATTACHED) AF.•.I•DAV I T OF D I STL; BUT I ON was mailed to each of the following addresses on TUESDAY, AUGUST 23, 1988 Name of Project File Number 88 -2 -A 88 -2 -CPA 88 -2 -R El Determination of Nonsignificance O Mitigated Determination of Non - significance O Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice O Notice of Action O Official Notice O Other O Other , 19 . *'A s City of Tukwila . 19 (80 /NTC.9 -6) • Z 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) Any and all interested persons are invited to be present to voice approval, disapproval, or opinions on same. CITY OF TUKWILA Maxine Anderson City Clerk Published Valley Daily News..- August 19, 1988 AF /"IDAVIT OF DISTF I� JOANNE JOHNSON hereby declare that: Notice of Public Hearing O Notice of Public Meeting O Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet O Board of Appeals Agenda Packet (] Planning Commission Agenda Packet [I Short Subdivision Agenda Packet Q Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit was mailed to each of the following addresses on FRIDAY, JUNE 10, 1988 , 19 (SEE ATTACHED) Name of Project SCHNEIDER ANNEXATION File Number 88-2 -CPA & 88 -2 -R [l Determination of Nonsignificance [T Mitigated Determination of Non - significance Q Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice O Notice of Action O Official Notice Ei Other Q Other v Case Number: Applicant: Request: Location: Case Number: Applicant: Request: Location: (21/NTC.6 -23) City of Tukwila PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 City of Tukwila PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE Notice is hereby given that the City of Tukwila Planning Commission and Board of Architectural Review will conduct a public hearing on June 23, 1988, at 8:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, to consider the following: Planning Commission Public Hearing 88 -2 -CPA, 88 -2 -R: SCHNEIDER ANNEXATION Gerald E. Schneider Comprehensive Plan Amendment for approximately 35 acres from low- density residential to office; pre- annexation zoning designation of P -0 (Professional Office) without multi - family for portions outside Tukwila and rezone from R -A (Agricultural) to P -0 for property in Tukwila. 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. Board of Architectural Review Public Meeting DR- 12 -85: TUKWILA MINI - STORAGE Monte Scruggs and Carl Tollefson Multiple - building mini - storage project of tilt -up concrete Northwest corner of Interurban Avenue and South 143rd Street, Lots 1 -7, Block 18, Hillman's Seattle Garden Tracts. 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. Published: Valley Daily News - Sunday June 12, 1988 Distribution: Mayor, City Clerk, Property Owners /Applicants, Adjacent Property Owners, File. TO: REBECCA FOX FROM: BRAD COLLINS Yaavn..nLa..r_r�n re.e.4a' w.,r ^r�xe v,:v.tvv- DATE: JUNE 6, 1988 SUBJECT: ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES ADDED TO SCHNEIDER ANNEXATION, COMP PLAN AMENDMENT, AND PRE - ANNEXATION ZONING PER CITY REQUEST The following information is provided for the modification of applica- tions to include adjacent properties. If more information is needed, please contact me at 842 -5135. SEPA Environment Checklist All. Description of the Proposal The subject property is 35 moves erv .. f in size. Portions of the subject property are proposed or annexation to the City of Tukwila as well as for Comp Plan Amendment and zoning classification. The proposed use is office, and the applicants are willing to eliminate multiple family residential uses as permitted under P -0 zoning. The subject property is located south of S. 178th St. and east of I -5. The subject property is mostly vacant with 5 single family homes located on lots along S. 178th St., borders on the west by 1 -5, and fronts S. 178th St. on the north. Al2. Location of the Proposal Section 35 Township 23 Range 4 Tax Lots 12, 33, 109 and Secluded Terrace Park Lots 1 -18 and Section 35 Township 23 Range 4 Tax Lots 19, 20, 22, 15, 43, 46, 76, 90, and 114 and unincorporated portions of S. 178th St. and 53rd Ave S. right -of -ways east of I -5. Site maps submitted with annexation, Comp Plan Amendment, and zoning applications. There is no site plan for office development at this time. B8. Land and Shoreline Use a. vacant with 5 single family residences near the northern portion of the subject site; Interstate 5, S. 176th St., and S. 188th Connector R.O.W. border or pass through the site c. 5 single family residences on Tax Lots 19, 20, 43, 76, and 114. d. not at this time j. perhaps 5 single family households and approximately 15 people k. none proposed B9. Housing b. 5 middle income single family residences c. Signature: none proposed; owners are applicants JUN G 1988 1 Date Submitted: 4,- 6- n 4 M6e y:':iW.11:rcNrtrv+.a M.�w:.wn.-YU +4 144. .1V'J!i'Mvl , 4 4/-,7FCYS ?'T4?,Y4f.!41* •76,4404iN7.0;41 ,41 m.1424,rrear•..v,:r. 4.4 }21VVZZ111 BLCFn'x' R+C.'k'w 4 Schneider Applications Revisions June 6, 1988 Page 2 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application 2. Project Location: Tax Lots 19, 20, 22, $5, 43, 46, 76, 90, 114, 12, 33, 109 and Secluded Terrace Park Lots 1 -18 Section 35 Township 23 Range 4 south of S. 178th St. and east of 1 -5. 3. Applicant: Name: Gerald E. Schneider, et al 4. Property Owner: Name: Gerald E. Schneider, et al Zoning Application 2. Project Location: 3. Applicant: Name: Gerald E. Schneider, et al Tax Lots 20, 22, 15, 43, 46, 76, 114, 12, 33, 109 and Secluded Terrace Park Lots 1 -18 Section 35 Township 23 Range 4 south of S. 178th St. and east of I -5. 4. Property Owner: Name: Gerald E. Schneider, et al 6. WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY? GlIrq '� 3S 14. Unsuitable for zoning: v � RESPONSE: A portion of the subject property was subdivided for residential development and an access road constructed prior to the construction of 1 -5, which took part of the subdivided lots. Since and because of the proximity to 1 -5, there has been no development of residential use on this subdivided property for a period of over twenty -five years. AF( IDAVIT OF DIST 'BUTION s� -' "lam . hereby declare that: Q Notice of Public Hearing O Notice of Public Meeting Q Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Q Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Q Planning Commission Agenda Packet Q Short Subdivision Agenda Packet Q Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit El Shoreline Management Permit was mailed to each of the following addresses on Ir7.e 21 . , , � 13 , 19 S i Name of Project S 4tui & File Number ES 4 F iS ',�{� Q Determination of Nonsignificance O Mitigated Determination of Non - significance Q Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice Q Notice of Action O Official Notice El Other Q Other Signature (21/NTC.5 -26) L City of Tukwila PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 City of Tukwila PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE 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: Planning Commission Public Hearing 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. Published: Valley Daily News - Sunday May 15, 1988 Distribution: Mayor, City Clerk, Property Owners /Applicants, Adjacent Property Owners, File. I, 5 14_72 D O Notice of Public Hearing C1 Notice of Public Meeting nuw+.r..eew�sbrn+ +nlmaS. Mt•..:Y:' 4. O Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet 0 Board of Appeals Agenda Packet El Planning Commission Agenda Packet EJ Short Subdivision Agenda Packet WATER DISTRICT 75 P.O. BOX 68100 SEATTLE, WA 98168 JIM TRACY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR KING CO PARKS, PLANNING AND RESOURCES 1108 SMITH TOWER 506 SECOND AVENUE SEATTLE, WA 98104 Name of Project GERALD SCHNEIDER File Number EPIC - 12 - RR was mailed to each of the following addresses on WASHINGTON STATE DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SECTION MAIL STOP PV -11 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 ATTN: KAREN BEATTY PERMIT COORDINATOR AF(IDAVIT OF OISTF BUTION hereby declare that: '> :•Kt S: Fi ':'rtrS:'.M.1n > 'Mt uw:•rtN +�MYt:n•rNwwrn.e i g(Determination of Nonsignificance [l Mitigated Determination of Non - significance O Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice O Notice of Action Q Official Notice EI Notice of Application for Other Shoreline Management Permit Q Shoreline Management Permit Other k l..{4.04 di ) Sign re , 19Es1. • WAC 197 -11 -970 Proponent GERALD SCHNEIDER Responsible Official Rick Beeler FM.DNS dint DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal Comprehensive Plan Amendment, zoning and annexation of all or portions of approximately 24 acres. Location of Proposal, including street address, if any Generally located South of So. 178th Street and East of I -5, in Section 35, Township 23, Range 4. Tax Lots 12, 33, 109 and Secluded Terrace Park lots 1 -18. Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC - 12 - 88 The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. 0 There is no comment period for this DNS This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by May 25 MR . The lead agency will not act on this proposal f or 15 days from the date below. Position /Title Planning Director Phone 433 -1846 Address 6200 Southcenter Boulevard T Ale 98 ;8 Date L /7 e Signature ' You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 days from the above date by written appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Planning Department. PUBLISHED IN THE SUNDAY, MAY 15, 1988 EDITION OF THE VALLEY DAILY NEWS. OWNER'S SIGNATURE TO: The City Council Tukwila City Hall 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (Husband or l,e / 5. (ANNEX.M1) (4C.2) ft • NOTICE OF INTENT TO ANNEX (Direct Petition Method) 4 -� ( "10S Petition ") 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 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 tiled with other pages containing additional signatures which cumulatively may be considered as a single Notice of Intention. • Doris L. GeWnnotti & arol J. Lawrence 352304 -9022 52 Puget Drive Steilacoom WA 98388 PRINTED NAME ADDRESS AND • DATE TAX LOT NUMBER SIGNED erg ate`. t'Sc inei7Cr3 3 = . & � r � 6510 So.Cntr.Blvd( 352304 - 9109 -09 & Lf ^� Tukwila WA 98188 352304 - 9033 -00 & " " ( Lots 1 - 18 Secluded Terrace Park lliam M. Starr 352304 -9076 & 17815 54th Ave. S. 352304 -9114 Tukwila, WA 98188 David Parrott 352304 -9043 5425 S. 178th St. Tukwila, WA 98188 /7/5 • (Revised 1/86) A • 1909 MINUTES Cit of Tukwila 1 . PLANNING DEPARTMENT • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 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. APPENDIX 1 Representing the staff were Jack Pace, Vernon Umetsu, Rebecca Fox and Joanne Johnson. 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. Joanne Johnson Secretary 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, HEARING DATE: FILE NUMBER: APPLICANT: REQUEST: LOCATION: ACREAGE:. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: ZONING DISTRICT: SEPA DETERMINATION: ATTACHMENTS: 4,61, bint CIt -of Tukwila PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 STAFF REPORT to the Planning Commission Prepared June 17, 1988 June 23, 1988 88 -2 -CPA, 88 -2 -R Gerald E. Schneider 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 I -5 Approximately 35 acres 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. (A) Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map (B) Applicant's Written Submittal - Comprehensive Plan Amendment (C) Additional Noise Level Data (D) EPA Noise Chart (E) Vicinity Zoning (F) Applicant's Written Submittal - Rezone STAFF REPORT to the( 88',.. „PA: Gerald E. Schneider Planning Commission Page 2 VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION FINDINGS 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. BACKGROUND 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 ANNEXATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 88 -L, .PA: Gerald E. Schneider Page 3 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. 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. 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 8), 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 Planning Commission 88-i PA: Gerald E. Schneider Page 4 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. 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. STAFF REPORT to the k.... Planning Commission 88 -2 ..PA: Gerald E. Schneider Page 5 2. Factual evidence supports an additional or changed public need for the pro- posed designation. The applicant has stated: "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 and 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 D). 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 L Planning Commission CONCLUSIONS 88-21 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. 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 REZONE CRITERIA ZONING 88-2 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. 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- , .;PA: 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 - 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. STAFF REPORT to the Planning Commission (22/88- 2- CPA1 >4). CONCLUSION RECOMMENDATION wvwurc..neewau+. 88 -- -SPA: Gerald E. Schneider 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. ACHMENT A: COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP . A COMMERCIAL LEGEND • LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (=COMMERCIAL =LIGHT INDUSTRY IIIIHEAVY INDUSTRY SC(114eiciefr 8..? - C 88--1-12 COMPREHE PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION FOR SINE. USE ONLY 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, 33,19 and Secluded Terrace Park Lots 1 -18 Section 35 T23 R4 South of S. 178th St. and East of 1 -5 Quarter: NW Section: 35 Township: 23 Range: 4 (This information may be found on your tax statement.) Gerald E. Schneider 3. APPLICANT :* Name: 4 ' Contact Person: 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 Brad Collins Address: 365 Erickson, Suite213 248 -2471 Bainbridge Is., WA Ph one: 842 -5135 98110 Signature: 4. PROPERTY Name: OWNER * 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: 6510 Southcentor Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98138 Date: (1— ;2 Phone: 248 -2471 I /WE,Csignature(s)7 ,/.i //1/ of th• swear that I we are the owne s or co ract purchaser(s) o 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. Date: Attachment B: Applicant's Written Submittal -- Comprehensive Plan Ammendment 5. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Existing DESIGNATION Proposed Office - Tukwila , RS (King 11ik►+il ) 6. ZONING: Existing B Co) ) & R.J. 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. RESPONSE: see attached sheets) (29 /MB.COMP) COMPREHENSIV `LAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION Page 2 Low Density Residential - Tukwila 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. 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 1962 revision of the Comprehensive Plan nave 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 four lane highway (limited access) connecting S. 168th St. sreeway interchange with Southcenter Parkway ( at 57th Ave. S. or S. 176th St. ) . The most probable alignments of this S. 168th 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. 178th 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. 176th 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 (2. 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 ie in conjuntion 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 (2. 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 (2. 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 a 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 (2. 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 6 (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 elope■ 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. Open Space Policy 1.1 (2.34) 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. 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 a 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 it 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 I -5. Residence Policy 1.3 (2.46) Prohibit spot zoning in established residential neighborhoods. 4/)744.4 s,c.■ 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) equested by long time area residents and approved by the City of Tukwila, recognized 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 (2.46) 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 57th 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 use 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. TO: REBECCA FOX FROM: BRAD COLLINS ,c.-- 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 Attachrr it C: Additional Noise Leve.' 'ata 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 & Kjeer 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 2m 71.7/65 64.2/57 71.5/65 70.5/63 4:30 -5:00 pm 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 1 - 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'e). " 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 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 J. C Responsible tiff The noise measurements consisted of full 24 -hour noise monitoring at three locations and 19 hour noise monitoring at the fourth loca tion, where adverse ~weather curtailed the measurement. A Digital Acoustic DA607P noise moni- toring system was used for the measurements. ResuTii the measurements in hourly L hourly Ld are shown in Appendix 8, 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 vie ws across the site toward I -S. The following is a summary of the measur ed day -night sound levels, Ld and nighttime maximum sound levels, Lmax: Table 3 Existing Noise Levels Location 1 2 3 4 Ldn Below 55 dBA Description SE part of site NE part of site Residence W of site Residence SW of site 81 Existing exterior noise levels, dBA Ldn N ight Lmax 72 77 65(68*) 77 65 72 63 72 * Location 2 had partial topographic shielding of highway no ise, 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 EP A in Guidelines for noise levels affecting residential areas. Those Guidelines a re as follows: Table 4 EPA Noise Guidelines Levels are generally acceptable: no noise impact is generally associated with these levels Adverse noise impacts exist: lowest noise level possible should be strived for. Significant adverse noise impacts exist: allowable only in unusual cases where lower levels are clearly demonstrated not to be possible. Levels have unacceptable public health and welfare impacts As a compariL of Tables 3 and 4 indicates, two of the four sites where 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 B) 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 d8A 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 d8A 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 (HUD) to determine site acceptability for HUD projects. HUD's criteria are as follows: Table 5 H. U. D. Acceptability Standards 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 dBA beyond the 25 dBA reduction that is typically accomplished with standard construction (i.e., a total noise reduction of 30 dBA). A reduction of an additional 10 dBA (35 dBA total) is required for sites above 70 dBA which do not exceed 75 dBA. 82 4 1 fk I E 24= 46443 FLICENVI- -- II / i --. E SKLE HAW CCICENTIAL E rt21/ WAY REZIEPITI44. , 1 a NO %ILI FE5a441144. RPM IV li 1:: El 14‘4 4441R1 =SIM MI MOW if i t rtaa .0 RxR Aims cow., E . I i. 4FINMOITS it • A li ,.....--, ,,Nu_i_ .„. 3112 :., 41 1 HMENT E ITY ZONING CGTV TRION•VGL& • • • 4.-•••= ON I N (e. 0 0 exam grammar woo AIL Os The Am. ow 4/4.11116 LW% F ZONE APPLICAT! APPLIC ' T'S WRITTEN SUBMITTAL (REZONE APPLICATION) 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 Sokluded Terrace Park Lots 1 -18 South of S. 178th St. and East of I - Quarter: Nw Section: 35 Township:_ 23 Range: 4 (This information may be found on your tax statement.) 3. APPLICANT :* Name: Gerald E. Schneider *Contact Person: Brad Collins 6510 Southcenter Blvd. Address: 365 Erickson, Suite 213 Bainbridge Is., WA 98110 one: 8 -5135 Signature: ,1, fnQ ,(.d�/./,( 4. PROP OW 248 71 * 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 Na..: Gerald E. Schneider Tukwila, WA 98188 ess: -6510 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: 2 - 2471 I /WE,Csignature(s)] /: �W��i7�!A / swear that we are .wn r s or con ra c aser s 0 the 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. Date: g - ae - eiGF 5. WHAT IS; CURRENT ZONING OF THE PROPERTY? 7. WHAT ZONING CLASSIFICATION IS REQUESTED? NA Tukwila REZONE APPLICATION Page 2 R9 -9600 King County & RA Tukwila 6. WHAT I5 T$f OF THE PROPERTY? 23.9471 acres or 1,043,137 sq. ft. 8. WHAT IS THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION? Law 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(s) Comprehensive Plan Amranrimont App1iratiort paps 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: Tb!r is no proposed development to be shorn. A site plan does show the otbristios 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 pro 11. When the request is not in agreement with the Comprehensive Land Use Policy posed 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. Significl 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 o 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 vas subdivided for residential development and an access road constructed prior to the construction of 1.5, p the p (29 /MB.REZONE) k part of the subdivided lots. Since and because of the 5, them has been no development of residential use on for period of over twenty -five years. •4 4.11r. .r Y1.,. 11• 2 RrI■T Corry.. M .... • 1 'J *IL INV - Scot Cow/. Mawr. I Stl Wro COW.. MN. 144• . Se r• vi' 1a... P. I Worm GOB 0 1.4•441. ti • . (.19e•.1 • ZfM' : • i17• to' S7 alt* uws � a.s1•s 1 S al 2.S. es' �� J 0 N1 14,•11' N • S ` • O• -- J . <J• • c1.GINitaCNZ LA' D Sr •Y• .N• . • • T.:: r • , 1 J.: '11 1...1. .. .....� 111 . M..../Laos • S..aw f.'r W6al1. SMa$ C13•r F. IL• ea,. MS 11.641 • �V1 1�A • LemoV11 1 1N . i 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 Tukwila, 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 as 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 -O (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- ACCEPTED BY: The City of Tukwila 4. Police 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. BY: Mayor, Gary L. VanDusen OWNERS -2- Gerald E. Schneider Gail Schneider A»' xKtvIts7 0 U5171FNm Ctl_WtiVVVP JAhei.b.ote.ruma waumroens wscant .mn csmgewa. ..ua.�._._... _ -e* SCHNEIDER 03 JUN 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. 6 6.IS 33,0. 24- N" M Cs 0 0 4— t /�� l'e 53RD AVE S. 591. 2 • 6 6 N ``- ,..i. ti 1 03 . ' v ! • � ` A r 0A / -1 1 `a 414 . / +4 is -. `• J 76587 A C / / I w L. ■ 0� � // D / / ii A, \ , � � � i / at. • .. /64 n _ / 9 4, v to PoR ® m , — 3— 7UKw1..a C "4 j, /5 ORD Z47 sisx. /sso r 503.47 4 \_ / 'I% ti ♦ riy ti 4 .474 / / v // /` ; / / / / �� /4 , %o , V / •/ / 1 / 1326.45 Tf h / eso- 34- 5 9e 1 1 •Vjirc W : i • j z! • •SIN,• •• runt :oT d 2 J ale, IJ 1 Al , rug br.•C.uc.Mw. SA. 2443+00 o4i 15.1 6q WrWr, o¢ 23.9811 A.. t r4..• ..0 .•. uw4 6&G 96211•4 Seer 'V"1.4...P, W1rH CA P * 10444. LTV PI e.o.`) S o f - sai nil • Sal N I "e. 21.00• / 14.53' 0 0 0 0 N S(37'6o'37 z S JV.ESCO El+GINEERING ' L.l• +D Fi.:.•VLY:k• ^,:, t•!: P ! F. P O. B:t 2552 77i.37i5 1)i0•va. P,d 9.41;e • ` "a /CAM S.am.+a WoRAO. SI+4.61' CN .r F..a. ¢aaoaoluea) r.70u/../O/�IZY Su1iV S•1 slir.. Sc.• -Ills 2 — •.114 .. J.1� 1111 oew . d a l -fj 1C CONCOMITANT ZONING AGREEMENT FOR SCHNEIDER PROPERTY!,5RIwG 1988 WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila is a Washington nohchd )Ef l``ghtiic3 a1 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 Tukwila, 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 as 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 -O (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- A • ACCEPTED BY: The City of Tukwila ......._ n+.+. v... w� •un�.:+�N.44",ri:kL' Gt\IIMarvotmatt%c.,..tt tW}o,ear 4. Police 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. BY= Mayor, Gary L. VanDusen OWNERS Gerald E. Schneider -2- Gail Schneider �,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, 33,1 and Secluded Terrace Park Lots 1 -18 South of S. 178th St. and East of I -5 Quarter: • NW 3. APPLICANT•* Name: Gerald E. Schneider *Contact Person: Brad Collins Address: 365 Ericksen, Suite 213 Bainbridge Is., WA 98110 842 -5 Signature: OWNER REZONE APPLICATION Section: 35 Township: 23 Range: 4 (This information may be found on your tax statement.) 4. PROPERTY Name: Gerald E. Schneider 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 •' one: 248 71 W * 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 Address: 6510 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188 Phone: 2 4'- 24 7 1 Date:c 9 — I /WE,[signature(s)] swear that we are :wn "r s or con rac c aser s o the 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. Date: g — 02-e " 8,gy 5. WHAT IS THE CURRENT ZONING OF THE PROPERTY? REZONE APPLICATION Page 2 RS -9600 King County & RA Tukwila 6. WHAT IS THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY? 2 3.9 4 7 1 acres or 1,043,137 sq. 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(s) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Application Pages 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: There is no proposed development to be shown. A site plan does show the site characteristics and relationship to surrounding areas. The site can be developed to some level of P -0 use intensity. The actual level of use which can be developed, the actual mitigating measures to be required, and assurance of project compatibility with surrounding areas will be addressed when an actual project is pro - 11. When the request is not in agreement with the Comprehensive Land Use Policy posed. 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. Significant 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 the the threat of public health problems due to residential development in an area that i heavily impacted by noise from existing and proposed roadways would be greatly reduce The environmental constraints on the S. 188th Connector may also be reduced by use of 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 development and an access road constructed prior to the construction of 1 -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 period of over twenty -five years. (.29 /MB.REZONE) • •.• •• /.• 1 • 1 , 1 1 1 1. • • . , , . : . • . • "1 ., ''. 1 1 '. ! ; ..i - ,,.',•,, i " ' " " . ' • - . ::::'.."'":":•:.; • .' ..' .. • ....•.. - — , .., • .;:.....2.... .'...,..-, ., - ..,, „.: •" .*•-•- - ' ' ' - --- t — .,: .,.• '.- i ': „1.. .„( , ' - ,.. .:C ',. .■ i --.• '. ---. ••• . .• .. — ' ' ' , • • :, f ■ i ;.;• ,. ;;-. ,...-. .., . f....... ••-..., %.,..- :7. ,.. ..: . --- .10 - :: . 00, __•.-. • ••"' - •:::: ci ' 1 , .o3 -*::: 1. 1 f. • '''.. ... !"''''. ' : '- 1. ' ....1.1 '1 -.. ", - ',... 3;;`:•". • 1.. . NW 3 ' 4 ',; • 1/4 ..; • c • .,:. i iia, .. /. • . . • . ''' •-- • •• • . ••••• ,k....„\ ,, ,• ...... '--Itt't . " i ,,,,-• ••Auripii-0,w. (. . . ` . - ,1 ), jrP - • • , ; W : 3 7 . , - '„ 2 , , 3 , , , • , , C ( , if • , ,, )0 * ; 1 . , ", 1 ' . • 1 . •• . i : ' ',. , ...ii :I ..'., , r . : ' .: • ''1 •11 .‘ : ,. f• ;„ • y• ., ,,, ', 1 , , i i ' ... . . r •••• . 1 • . , • • • , . 4 ....„. ) ' • • • •'• ' • ; :1•.' • • .' , ; ''. ' ..; ' 7- • .. • . *Nat 7; ..J 4 . ' ;1 , .. 0' ,1 1 4 # 8 ' "104 4 ' : '. ' . .. ' . . SCALE • /"./oo' •'••\•••,•• ' '1'•'"- 1"1 '' • 1285.53 ; 1 ; . .• • r `. • rr ' • '•: ; i •• . ' 1 _ . . , . ; - - '• "V' !,•• ' -!.•••,, I I • , , , '■ , r '• ' r ' CI 1 •-• ! 4) R . , I ; r;/) • .. • r"? $ •.L.- • • • • ••• •• 0 ,..1 1 .i. ‘•• ex•:•..e,•0 • 31 / P,• /, f (6e,) se, 111,1,1.4 ; 711411,1, 011.0 ' • a (!)'' ' ; , • ' • • • 1. , ;:, ;. '''''''''' Cie ': 7 o , L. .. .. , i .., ,, _... '' THE •UALITY OF 1 ORIGIAAL MI CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT :S DUE R ; 1 0 „is! - \ ,,,,;:y ° IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII_IIIIIIIIIIIIIWPINIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITIWIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 7 3 1 .4 . 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 ........, 12 . . IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS 44a ;•''' ''''' '',...' II:,t 4 gl ' .„...: Co r • 1. L • 3.3, Ler. 921 r: \ 8 50 50900 9 .„. • t• • • to ; • • • N, • • • • •, Lu ,' • • , v.• .r.,„.. I f: 7•••:Th- ._,-- .. i •.,:; :-.... -q . ,,,,. t Le ..t . .--lirLif!!7'?•. ' at ,,,,,;!°47 ,...., t .• = • ,■,.. • ...,.., '1' (10 l A., . 7•49 y2 , ' ' 1 W to 8? - as- 181 ' 1! , .v hr '• ..si eta. af i -s N W • 1.. • 1, , . C. ‘• ' .•>,.: , 13 o) I :... ' ol' ' ( ••••; 4' i 1)1e114r , , • , , '2 -.21.14 : ! ' N ''''''' ' •,... ':'' „..: .::: . ii7 „...„' ;„.,.' ,,. 7 258 , 4 1 . , ... .'..i. . ''.. . .1=. -.....' '''''. _21. -,4,.. .' i!).- ` ! 4'•.. • •- .•, ,..,_•.;a1,•,.„i• —., • , . ",4 '. ,..,,.,0: .. i ., -. 1 . •:. . . , . - ,,,,. 1 . . ,.. C .' .''::.;1:.\ . - 1 4" ) ."... -: l'''.: .. I \ l i ' 11. : .' ' =• -.- - ,...,:. :3,-, 5 —,,..; ' , ' , . ,.. 1 / 4;. i —,„ .. . , ,L, ,,,..„ . .t.,. ,, ' : , --4: 1- : ' --i ' ;47-t 4 - '!c!. - — - ' ‘ : '.... '' ! - - • ! ,;!..,. ..... ,„ .....,,,,, . r 1.! . ! y .. • • ; : . ' V 1,..'..,- .1. ,...7.: I...1 r ..,:t3 4 • • A '• "' 41:•:•2:■)• '11••4.1 - 4 ''' '''' 1 ' ' '''' .''''''' "'''': .,..... '' ';'13-- ' ' . f"':.• • ....,..............„, . . . . • •.._. , ,...... _,,, ...,.., .. ; • ..,;- . ._.2 .:,.. .. ...... ..3( :,,...‘..,..„ T.77,77.7.7:.:::...7.,_,..__,..,_, • • 0. • rdMT 1.y • • y 1,ffY Un.j Ai • PL/ 1140lf7 0. • • Ar 9• 55' 27' E. 4515. 17 — te a „_ r 25f- - � — �' /76r °f Mal< �� — —J.. — ._s5o` —/ 0000' 5. 60. 24' 3"E — 131 PRA CEI. Ai THAT PORTION OF VACATED BLOCKS 2 AND 3, SECLUDED TERRACE PARK, ACCORDING TO TIE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 55 OF PLATS, PAGE 62,' IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON,. LYING EAST OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY NO. I'M DESCRIBED IN LIS FENDERS RECORDED DECEMBER 6, 1962'AS AUDITOR'S FILE NO. 5516019'ANU CONDEMNED INKING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. 594287. PARCEL 7( THAT P0RT10N OF THE SOUTIWE3T QUARTER OF THE QUARTER OF 35, TOWNSHIP 23 NORT11, RANGE 4 EA5T, W.M. . IN NING•COUNTY, WASIIINGTDN;i LYING EASTERLY OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY N0. 1: EXCEPT THAT PORTION OF 711E SOUTH 660 FEET LYING WEST OF THE EAST .198 OF 710: WEST 792 FEET OF 7111: SOU(INEST QUARTER OF TIIE +NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION ]5; TOGETHER WITH 711E EAST 25 FEET OF TIM SOUTH 495 FEET OF•TIE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SA19 56CTION.35I EXCEPT PORTION LYING WITHIN P.J. MU51EL ROAD, AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION LYING WITHIN OR1LLIA ROAD EXTENTION. PARCEL CI , .i�•. , 711AT PORTION OF THE SUUI71W6ST QUARTER OF THE NORTIIEAST7 N UART E R C ASH DV THE N110 ST LYING QUARTER OF SECTION 35, TOWNSHIP 2] NORTH, IIANCE 4 EAST, KING IyNGT SOUTH AND WEST OF P.J. NU51EL ROAD (SOUTH 178TH STREET), DESCRIBED AS ASH BEGINNING AT TIM 50UTIW65T CORNER bF SAID 50UT1126S7 QUARe R OF 711E NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID.SOCTION; THENCE NORTH 1 FAST ALONG THE WEST . LINE OF SAID WOUTIWEST QUARTER 50147 FEET A POINT ON THE SOUTHERLY MARGIN OP SAID P.J. MUSIEL ROAR• THENCE SOUTH 67 26'J3" EAST ALONG SAID 5067066211 MARGIN 374.01 FEET; THENCE S 55 13'03 "'6A5T 104.12 F6L"T; 6116.2CE SOUTH 23 ° 27'57' WEST 180 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 2 09'03" WEST 137.09 FEET 112.4 POINT IN THE SOUTH L1N6'OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF 7NE 5006116416 QUARTER OF TIIE AMINES? QUARTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE NORTH 87 50'57" ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTIMESX'QUARTL'R 365.16 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. 700ET11ER WITH THAT PORTION OF SOUTII.17820 STREET, MUSIEL ROAD, AS VACATED BY THE CITY OF TUKWILA BY ORDINANCE N0. 556 AMD RECORDED UNDER AUD1T0R'S PILE N0. 6516240. .. EXCEPT THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO TIE:CITY OF TUKWILA BY DEEDRECOROED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE No. 64055081. . 0 •611 — I ICO cNp ...__ 26647. OESCRIPT ON 1 hereby calcify the top0Rraphlc features shown on this mop are boned on actual field measurement° performed by ma In J1521007 of 1980. H.C. Bins. PE I0016936 • A19. 35'27'6 7o7Tt • 2 s a a I 'N \ 1 , •\ ' /'for Of BVJ26 ICI I {I I {I ICI ICI ICI I�I�I�I ICI ICI ICI I {I ICI ICI ICI ICI I� ICI I I I I I � I I I ��'��},'�*� "� 0 sn ""'" 1 2 3 .4 5 6 7 t 8 9 10 11 rss.w. 79 A 1 °5 " .M5 � 1" 5 T �itti,.•y