Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Permit 84-11-R - WESTERN PACIFIC PROPERTIES - NORTH HILL OFFICE REZONE
84-11-R 5900 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD EPIC 29-085 NORTH HILL OFFICE REZONE NORTH HILL REZONE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE AMENDMENT ;; Dear Don: This letter is formal notification that on December 17, 1984, the City Council approved the rezone of this property to Professional Office (P -0). Separately you will be mailed the actual ordinance after signage. We still require completion of the agreement regarding off -site landscaping of Southcenter Boulevard right -of -way. The City Attorney is working on it, and I will forward the draft agreement when it's available. This does not effect the rezone, but ultimate development of the property relative to the approved variance 84 -10 -V. 8501110391 WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO ./.3.57 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHING- TON, AMENDING THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 18.08.030 OF THE TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE BY RECLASSIFYING CERTAIN PROP- ERTY WITHIN THE CITY KNOWN AS THE NORTH HILL REZONE PROPERTY FROM HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE RESIDENCE (RMH) TO PROFESSIONAL OFFICE (P -0). 7.00 **4:47,n0 55 WHEREAS, the Tukwila Planning Commission conducted public hearing for the purpose of considering a proposal to revise the zoning classification of certain property from high density multiple residence (RMH) to professional office (P -0) known as the North Hill Rezone, City File No. 84 -11 -R, and at the conclusion of said hearing and after deliberations upon the proposed rezone the Planning Commission forwarded its recommendation to the City Council, and WHEREAS, the City Council also conducted a public hearing on the proposed zoning map amendment which was held on November 26, 1984, and at the conclusion of said hearing having determined that the proposed zoning map amendment should be made, 407,9] 1 B WHEREAS, the City's Responsible Official has determined that the proposed zoning map amendment will not result in signi- ficant impacts upon the environment and a final declaration of nonsignificance has been issued, now, therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City's official zoning map adopted pur- suant to Section 18.08.030 of the Municipal Code is hereby amended by revising the zoning classification of certain property within the City described on Exhibit A, attached hereto and incor- porated herein by this reference as if set forth in full, commonly known as the North Hill Property, City File No. 84 -11 -R, from high density multiple residence (RMH) to professional office (P -0). Section 2. The findings and conclusions of the City Council with respect to the zoning map amendment implemented by this ordinance are attached as Exhibit B and are incorporated herein as if set forth in full. Section 3. The City. Planning Director is hereby instructed to revise the City's official zoning map in accordance.. with Section 1 of this ordinance.. Section 4. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. ri WASHINGTON, at a regular meeting thereof this 17th day of e-1 December , 1984. rl r4 APPROVED: O' 1lJ OD ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: CITY/CLERK; MAXINE ANDERSON APPROVED AS TO FORM: BY PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, OFFICE a THE CITY ATTORNEY: FILED KITH THE CITY CLERK: 5/9/84 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: 12/17/84 PUBLISHED: 12/26/84 EFFECTIVE DATE: 12/31 ORDINANCE NO. 1339 2 Y L. VAN DUSEN EXHIBIT A TO ORDINANCE 1339 THAT PORTION OF LOT 11 OF INTERURBAN ADDITION TO SEATTLE, AS PER VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 55, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY, LYING NORTH OF THE NORTHERLY LINE OF PRIMARY STATE HIGHWAY ROUTE 1, AS CONVEYED TO THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, BY DEED RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 5473599; EXCEPT THE EAST 450.86 FEET AND THE NORTH 255.03 FEET THEREOF; SUBJECT TO AND TOGETHER WITH EASEMENTS AS RECORDED IN KING CO. A.F. #6007217 AND #7502130412, RESTRICTIONS AND RESERVATIONS OF RECORD, IF ANY. SITUATED IN THE CITY OF TUKWILA,.COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WA. EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. 1339 Findings & Conclusions of Tukwila City Council Concerning the North Hill Associates Rezone I .. FINDINGS A. Western Pacific Properties is proposing to develop a three story office building consisting of approximately* 14,500 square feet. on the vacant property immediately east of the existing Arco AM -PM Mini Mart at approximately 5900 South - center Blvd. Currently, the property is being utilized for an informal parking lot. In order to accomplish the proposal the applicant is requesting rezoning of the property from the existing zoning of High Density Multiple Residence (RMH) to the Professional Office (P -0) zoning classification. The r4 property which is the subject of the rezone request consists. 0I of approximately .87 acre of a 1.94 acre parcel owned by 0 the applicant. ri r4 B. Board of Architectural Review of the specific design of the r CP building and site plan will occur subsequent to the final action on the rezone. o. C. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map designate the subject property "Commercial" without specific development considera- tions. D. A Final Declaration of Nonsignificance was issued for the proposal. E. The property adjacent to the subject property on the west is zoned Local Retail (C -1) and is designated "Commercial" with- out special development considerations by the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map. The property immediately to the north of the subject property is zoned Multiple Residence High Density (RMH) and is designated by the Comprehensive Land Use Plan map as high density residential without special development considerations. This property is also owned by the appli- cant. The property to the east of the subject property is also designated high density residential without special development considerations. - The present zoning of this prop- • erty is Low Density Apartments (R -4). The subject property is bordered on the south by Southceiiter Boulevard which is adjacent to the 1 -405 freeway. F. An Arco Mini Mart has been constructed on the property adja- cent to the subject property on the west. Other adjacent properties are undeveloped. An office building development is located to the east of the easterly abutting property. G. A hillside and retaining wall are located at the northern end of the subject property. The remainder of the subject property was excavated some time ago and is presently rela- tively flat. II. CONCLUSIONS A. The proposed zoning reclassification is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan, the provisions of Title 18 of the Tukwila Municipal Code and in general will serve the public interest. Specifically, the proposed reclassification is consistent with the following goals and • policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan: 1. General Goals: Goals 1, .5 and 6 (pages 12 and 13). 2. Natural Environment: Goals 1, 2 and 3 (page 15); Objec-. tive 1, Policies 1 and 3 (page 24); Objective 3 (page 25); Policies 1, 2, 3 and 4 (:Ipage 26); Objective 6 (page 28); Policy 1 (page 29); Objective 8 (page 30). 3. Open Space: Goal 1 (page 16); Policy 1 (page 34). 4. Commerce/Industry: Goals 1, 2 and 3 (page 18); Objec- tive 1, Policies 1 and 2 (page 60); Objective 3, Policies 1 and 2 (page 64); Objective 4 (page 65); Policies 1, 2 and 3 (page 65); Objective 6, Policies 1 and 3 (page 67). B. The proposed zoning reclassification has been supported by submittal of rchitectural site plans showing proposed devel- opment and its relationship to surrounding areas. The pro- posed development is consistent and compatible with surround- ing zoning and development, including the multi-family devel- opment to the north, as a result of natural separation pro- vided by the hillside to the north of the property, scale of the proposed development, access points and proposed land- scaping. C. The proposed reclassification is compatible with the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy, plan. - The applicant is there- fore required to demonstrate need for the - request pur- suant to Section 18.84.030(3) of the Tukwila Municipal Code. D. The proposed office development will result in less traffic impact than multi-family development under the existing zoning. -2 41%LA ' 1908 TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 2 Gary L VanDusen, Mayor M EMORANDUM Rick Beeler, Associate Planner Phillip R. Fraser, Senior Engineer December 17, 1984 North Hill Associates Office Building Traffic Analysis Per my review of the subject traffic analysis, I have noted that Mr. Popp recommends two accesses for his proposal as described in Alternate #2 on page 5 of his report. If Alternate #2 is implemented, to effectively limit the easterly access to it's right -in /right -out function - then the "no crossing" stripped /buttoned island in Southcenter Boulevard shall be extended 50 l.f. west of the proposed easterly access to the development. (Access "E." on Reference Map). For any future development or redevelopment along Southcenter Boulevard, from the "S" Line Bridge to the 1-5 on -ramp just west of Macadam Road, Public Works will require that in order to accommodate a future 12' lane widening, access points fronting Southcenter Blvd. shall match the existing grade of Southcenter Blvd. Also, no part of the access or the internal driveways, on site, shall exceed a grade of 15 %. It is recognized that the existing eastern most Arco access will add to the current congestion in Southcenter Blvd. To reduce congestion, recommended is Arco's easterly access be eliminated some time in the future.* Mr. Popp's recommended dual access Alternate #2 is unacceptable as it is in conflict with the City's policy to control the number of accesses onto the public right -of -way. Therefore, staff recommends the westerly access iden- tified in Alternate #2 be modified as follows: The developers develop a joint access that will accommodate full access in /out for the adjoining properties at the west property line of the North Hill Associates . cc: Public Works Director City Engineer File Attachment: (1) * Access "B" on Reference Map 3 - T SOUTHCENTER BLVD MOO , PK NAIL FOUND (a -17 -so agoz w`,vot) LIMITED ACCESS LINE I A r 2 R c ` • ARCO PK NAIL FOUND (a.17-as ~WS S 63'�3'iz'E - Atek SOUTHCENTER BLVD LIMITED ACCESS LINE' (S\-\-R\-\\-\\N 0 ,goampla•••••• • 1.4 • ' agar" • rilyas- Mal IMO •••• mom, N, Imam cm 7 8' b/ ammo ammo S Imago • 4111•11111b NM* Sam .1■11 ONIMMINI 1111•■ eA l am. euzzaZZOMMEZE=210 IIIMM•10 SRA POW*410•01M1°- 115% 1•■•••• awns* - •••••■•• •••■••••■•• in UI 0 • a 0 a ARCO i SOUTHCENTER BLVD PK NAIL FOUND (a -i7 -1 ~foam) • ,r LIMITED ACCESS LINE 1 r oOloo.m.OrMOMO • 10'SIDEVVA1 • LIMITED ACCESS LINE AI SOUTHCENTER BLVD LIMITED ACCESS LINE ARCO 44 SOUTHCENTER BLVD PK NAIL FOUND (42-i7-8 * avoisHoe) LIMITED ACCESS LINE NIP'S 1r \ VIP 'S VIP 'S - L- - - - - - -- r _I_ (T.KATO (YIP'S) PiORTH MILL 80 \, ARCO SITE � - Tjy FV gR 0 M.KATO :fr .., v:!}RS:a .: d'b7; ..�. u� ua .: C7:favu ;Y�4.w... _.::..L'�:iY. �'t:.!;;S! .'x';.:i:�v "'?• O Q Y i --L_ a � > a / 4 14 . ` Jv O 4 : / . 44 /... 1/ 2 •Z" / C +q,Y ..ti S' - •.fie.; xf.�+r -r.,• , wxi' �± u�':+: SY".. 33�` rr''. t'. Y�' i5' o�. �'< ��.:_. m �J�.• �i. x, .i:.,..a".k ^ �i...,t.d!;.. ,.i.:. �x ".; `- ." 1 ISLAND STUDY s 2 1 D a t e 1. Certificate No. Short Plat No. •' _p 4 . � . 33. Nee ,4' '(T. k 1.7, 1. 1 .1 Q t. - sk. 1 8 ..., ,.. ,.. 03 $.50 y DET.4 /L : g % h N h /NS Q ADDED EASEMENT . DET.4 /L f&R Cl.4,P /TY - Land Surveyor's Certificate: This short plat correctly represents a survey made by me or under my direction in conformance with the requirements of appropriate state statute and has been properly staked accordance. with the Tukwila Subdi vi - o Code. V` N - 1' e '17W v� rs:!t •.t O a '. L'37..4e At ® 4s f LI MS R ° 79.Sd L'6 « As57 &' 0 0'45 Ls Al 7150 £• 4 Direction: Scale: Stamp JOBS , C. b e 1.1 („ /53./5 • /90.43 15.f./3 f,I!St/NDACCfSSfSMl R8 MX © L'4 2.1 R•a/zsa L'd5.t4 ® N//'/600`E © N / /'I6'f E LW L+ /C.00 Map on File in Vault /" /DO' Page 4 • • •• r ' rt of City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 cc. Public Works Director City Engineer File Attachment (1) MEMORANDUM TO: Rick Beeler, Associate Planner FROM: Phillip Fraser, Senior Engineer DATE: 12/14/84 SUBJECT: Review of Bill Popp Traffic Analysis - North Hill Re -zone Per my review of the subject traffic analysis I have noted that Mr. Popp recommends two accesses for his proposE_ as described in Alternate #2 on page 5 of his report. If the recommended Alternate #2 is implemented, to effectively limit the easterly access to its right -in /right -out function - then the "no crossing" stripped /buttoned island: in Southcenter Boulevard shall be extended 50 1.f. west of the proposed easterly access to the development. For any development along Southcenter Boulevard, from the "S" Line Bridge to the I -5 on -ramp just west of Macadam Road, Public Works stipulates that in order to accomodate a future 12' lane widening in the future, access points fronting Southcenter Blvd. shall match the existing grade of Southcenter Blvd. 12: feet back of the exci ".sitng sidewalk. Also, for emergency vehicles and Public Works design standards, no part of the access or the internal driveways, on site, shall exceed a grade of 15 %. It is recognized that the existing eastern most Arco access will add to the current congestion in Southcenter Blvd. To reduce congestion, recommended is Arco's westerly access be= elfmfnated someEtimewtn':the future. Bill Popp's recommended Alternate #2 is acceptable; however, Alternate #3 which proposes a single westerly access is more in keeping with the City's policy to limit the number of accesses in the public right -of -way. Attached is a map reflecting existing and proposed accesses, per Alt. #2. SOUTHCENTER BLVD IMITED ACCESS LINE JAMES A. MURPHY• JOHN O. WALLACE DOUGLAS E. ALBRIGHT LEE CORKRUM•• WAYNE D. TANAKA G. GEOFFREY OISDSt LARRY C. MARTIN ROBERT G. ANORE$ MICHAEL 0. WICKSTEAD OF COUNSEL RAYMOND D. OGDEN, JR. RAYMOND 0. OGDEN 61876.1972) RONALD A. MURPHY (1930.1963) Dear Brad: LCM /clh Enclosure : :5....:SY .ii.....fza+J..r.t.; 5.:! n` :' w[ n:.• iJ'::xL•.t } •""' 4`+ • .:..:i9:v 'f:.4PJ.Ei. 1 ' s.i,ar SX. +. r. xhi rev.nw , rmwvea.rsrxnro. a, - r.rasrn ru' i .. +. C a-r.ay a!; r "• . ' 'C' /Jc, i?';u # •+.`PJ'; i Brad Collins City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter. Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 cc: Gary L. Van Dusen LAW OFFICES OF OGDEN, OGDEN & MURPHY 2300 WESTIN BUILDING 2001 SIXTH AVENUE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98121 (206) 622.2991 TELEX: 287941 OGDN UR TELECOPIER: (206) 343.0886 December 7, 1984 Re: North Hill Rezone Ordinance I have enclosed a revised version of the Findings which were submitted to the Council in connection with the above- referenced matter. As you will recall, Councilman Bohrer suggested that the Findings be revised to indicate that only a part of the parcel owned by the applicant is being rezoned. You will note that Finding A has been revised by adding a sentence to this effect. Please make sure that the property sizes I have mentioned are correct. As you will recall, you will need to verify that the legal description is correct and follow up on any other questions that Councilman Bohrer raised: Very truly yours, OGDEN, OGDEN & MURPHY arr . Martin DEC I .n 1984 • CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT. R. MARK ALLEN STEVEN A. RENILER LAURA C. INVEEN CHRISTOPHER A. WASHNGTON• JAMES E. HANEY ROSEMARY P. DORDLEMAY SUE C. FREEBORN DARSARA S. HEAVEY W. SCOTT SNYDER PHILLIP C. RAYMOND ERIC J. THOMAN PAMELA M. ANDREWS •ALSO ADMITTED N CAUPOINNA "ALSO ADMITTED N DMfl11CT OF COUSIEM tALSO ADMRT= N MONTANA • ALSO AOMRTPO N coWINDO. NEW YORK AND NEW MISSY •ALPO ADMIT= N WNICONIEI "ALSO ADMITTED N MIAO{M CE@CEOVC1" EXHIBIT B TO ORDINANCE NO. Findings & Conclusions of Tukwila City Council Concerning the, North Hill Associates Rezone I. FINDINGS A. Western Pacific Properties is proposing to develop a three story office building consisting of approximately 14,500 square feet on the vacant property immediately east of the existing Arco AM -PM Mini Mart at approximately 5900 South - center Blvd. Currently, the property is being utilized for an informal parking lot. In order to accomplish the proposal the applicant is requesting rezoning of the property from the existing zoning of High Density Multiple Residence (RMH) to the Professional Office (P -0) zoning classification. The property which is the subject of the rezone request consists of approximately .87 acre of a 1.94 acre parcel owned by the applicant. B. Board of Architectural Review of the specific design of the building and site plan will occur subsequent to the final action on the rezone. C. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map designate the subject property "Commercial" without specific development considera- tions. D. A Final Declaration of Nonsignificance was issued for the proposal. E. The property adjacent to the subject property on the west is zoned Local Retail (C -1) and is designated "Commercial" with- out special development considerations by the Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map. The property immediately . to the north of the subject property is zoned Multiple Residence High Density (RMH) and is designated by the Comprehensive Land Use Plan map. as high density residential without special development considerations. This property is also owned by the appli- cant. The property to the east of the subject property is also designated high density residential without special development considerations. The present zoning of this prop- erty is Low Density Apartments (R -4). The subject property is bordered on the south by Southcenter Boulevard which is adjacent to the 1 -405 freeway. F. An Arco Mini Mart has been constructed on the property adja- cent to the subject property on the west. Other adjacent properties are undeveloped. An office building development is located to the east of the easterly abutting property. G. A hillside and retaining wall are located at the northern end of the subject property. The remainder of the subject property was excavated some time ago and is presently rela- tively flat. II. CONCLUSIONS A. The proposed zoning reclassification is in conformity with the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan, the provisions of Title 18 of the Tukwila Municipal Code and in general will serve the public interest. Specifically, the proposed reclassification is consistent with the following goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan: 1. General Goals: Goals 1, 5 and 6 (pages 12 and 13). 2. Natural Environment: Goals 2 and 3 (page 15); Objec- tive 1, Policies 1 and 3 (page 24); Objective 3 (page 25); Policies 1, 2, 3 and 4 (page 26); Objective 6 (page 28); Policy 1 (page 29); Objective 8 (page 30). 3. Open Space: Goal 1 (page 16); Policy 1 (page 34). 4. Commerce /Industry: Goals 1, 2 and 3 (page 18); Objec- tive 1, Policies 2. and 2 (page 60); Objective 3, Policies 1 and 2 (page 64); Objective 4 (page 65); Policies 1, 2 and 3 (page 65); Objective 6, Policies 1 and 3 (page 67). B. The proposed zoning reclassification has been supported by submittal of architectural site plans showing proposed devel- opment and its relationship to surrounding areas. The pro- posed development is consistent and compa'aib with surround- ing zoning and development, including the multi - family devel- opment to the north, as a result of natural separation pro - vided by the hillside to the north of the property, scale of . the proposed development, access points and proposed land- scaping. C. The proposed reclassification is compatible with the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. The applicant is there- fore not required to demonstrate need for the request pur- suant to Section 18.84.030(3) of the Tukwila Municipal Code. D. The proposed office development will result in less traffic impact than multi - family development under the existing zoning. OFFICE MEMO CITY of TUKWILA TO: RICK BEELER FROM: PHIL FRASE DATE: 11/21/84 SUBJECT: NORTH HILL ASSOCIATES OFFICE BUILDING DRIVEWAY ANALYSSIS - W. POPP ASSOC. of AUGUST 30, 1984 Per the attached report, questions raised by Public Works: 1. Per Fig. 2 in the report, it is not clear that the Development has access to the proposed westerly property line to the Arco Station property to allow the proposed development. 2. From information provided, it is not clear wether rights of adjacent property to east for joint access, have been preserved. Has contact with adjacent development taken place? 3. The City plans` \to develop an additional traffic lane in the future which means that the proposed east and west accesses per Item 2 on page 5 of the report shall meet existing grade of the street 12' back of existing sidewalk. Allowing no more than a 15% grade access, is this feasible for all properties and existing access agreements in auustinn? 5 accommodate this access configuration. the modified traffic button placement for'the median island to IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Each of the access alternatives operate at satisfactory levels -of- service with the respective improvements described below. 2. The recommended design is the dual driveway access plan with right -in, right -out limitation at the eastern driveway. 3. The next best design is the single access with location of the driveway as far west as possible to permit utilization of the existing two -way left -turn lane and to allow maximum space for merging of driveway left- turning traffic prior to the S -Line intersection. However, if the driveway is located less than 60 feet from the west end of the buttoned island some modification should be made to the island. 4. The least desirable design is the single- access plan with the driveway situated at the eastern edge of the property. For this design, it is recommended that approximately 85 feet of traffic island be converted to a two -way left -turn lane including conversion of 40 feet of solid white lane line with buttons to broken white line. This recommendation accommodates cars turning left with a 25' turning radius plus two car lengths to store and /or merge. Figure 5 displays ‹d■ rn ii 0 1,1 1 1.) SITE PLAN 10 PROJECT DR/ve (I) I. -: • -Sold rt./ C6N TEA Sv 40' REMOVAL 85-90' REMOVAL zoo' ..t cALE: /":= H 0 .1.111/. ••••■■•• MODIFIED TRAFFIC BUTTON PLACEMENT' 51N6LE ACCESS DRIVE AT EAST ED6E OF PROPERTY *ILA . 1909 4 y City of Tukwila s 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Gary L VanDusen, Mayor Publish: November 14, 1984 . .. .. CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL Maxine Anderson City Clerk NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Tukwila City Council will hold a Public Hearing on the 26th day of November, 1984 at 7:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers at Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, to consider the following: Rezone of property at approximately 5900 Southcenter Boulevard. East of and adjacent to the Arco Station. Any and all interested persons are invited to be present to voice approval, disapproval, or opinions on same. CITY OF TUKWILA November 9, 1984 Dear Mr. Beeler: Sincer -ly, WESTE Mr. Rick Beeler, Associate Planner, City of Tukwila, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington, 98188 Donald A. Moody, Inc. DAM:sjr Enc: WESTERN PACIFIC PROPERTIES, INC. Commercial Brokerage Company Re: Rezone of the North Hill Associates Property •.`� r 5 '! 1 3 1984 PLANN1NC DEPT. Further to your telephone request, the following is the amended legal for the property, to conform with that portion of the property that is to be rezoned:- . 7 November 1984 Attn: Rick Beeler Dear Rick, Very truly yours, Principal kab MITHUN • EMRICH GROUP•PS ARCHITECTURE PLANNING AND INTERIOR DESIGN City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: North Hill Associates Office Building Job No. 83028 Enclosed please find the supplemental drawing dated 10/30/84 for North Hill Associates Office Building proposed for 5900 Southcenter Boulevard. This drawing more thoroughly depicts the existing and proposed grades and rockeries. Approximately 620 cubic yards of excavation would be required. To help you visualize, this amount of excavation equates to a 26' cube. About one -half of this excavated earth will be redistributed on the site. The existing rockeries will remain with a new rockery and retaining wall built downhill from the existing rockery to serve as additional stabilization of the hillside. Stormwater from the hillside will be filtered behind the new rockery and held in the center of the parking lots during heavy storms. Stormwater will then be released through a controlled release catchbasin into the 12" city storm pipe located on the north side of Southcenter Blvd. Invert of this pipe at the site manhole is 68.82'. Vincent Ferrese, A.I.A. (-) PAY V.. EXCAVATION ANALYSIS INCLUDING STORM DRAINAGE 2000 112TH AVE NE B. WASH 98004 (206)4543344 VT�Y I'R 'd_tr'v,i: ff 0,±„ ai l ; T'. 1.1 �i 8 198 I • CITY PLANNING DEPT. ! : 12061 454.6692 . �;.. �: TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. INTRODUCTION 1 II. EXISTING CONDITIONS 1 a. Street Characteristics and Traffic Volumes. 1 b. LOS Analysis 2 c. GAP Analysis 2 d. Accidents 3 III. FUTURE CONDITIONS 3 a. Project Traffic Generation 3 b. LOS Analysis for Driveway 4 IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 Technical Appendix + •. At present, Southcenter Boulevard at the site consists of five eleven -foot lanes of traffic, two westbound and three eastbound, divided by an eleven foot wide, two -way turn lane. The turn lane terminates about even with the - - - K [3) UI 0 In 01 it a 'a; I- C • 2 r 0 a. ,...• a. • .y. .1. 7 / // - 1. f; / / i 4 p • . ..• / / 4. 1 / , /i 1 :., . ,, ... i I I ,,-, r • ' p • . rr / F .• .' ,, - ... . .- 1; / ;'J ri. • I I 1 I i 1 /7 "I ,• • • , I I 1 1/ t III • / .., i / ki I i 1 1 // • v II • ' : r -I • ' 1 • 1 h, I . 4 I • .• 1 7 ? / ...T? • • . I ; • / ••' • Ia • r / /..•••• • • / ti• /// • • 4 • • / I I .j / • ' I • / . .g/ / iv• • / ••••••". ..•"•••• • . • • • • • _ - - - • • / . ,.• .,/ / /"..........••••-•••• . •• —..- - . I i / • ° 1 1 i •• • .: .... •••••-•• ••••• ,, ••••••••••••-• ............ .... ...r ••• • , 1 1 .• ., „/ / 1 l ir • ' ...••-'. • ... ......--••■• • - • :,_....... • T.' .50. '•i* ••• ...••••'• .....„,...••••••• Or Or CC Of • • . li; • ; i . 1. : • I; . ... ? . • • . 1. • 1 • • - r : f " • • . . : Ti • 1 : • • • "1 • . . r • ! ' 1 • "--' \ • , : :''.' : ": — : :,;. II : • \ 7 , i i ,rwsrs, : : : • . 1 . li : . 1 \ . i .: .,'.• ,-: „- .... : --: ../..,/,: / :i 1 • ' • • • • • " • •• • " • / • / • • • • . • • • ' - •47-A.•• 1441,4 0 • -7-• `1..•"" • A . • in 4.T 0 ca a 0 tL 5 west end of the proposed project driveway and then begins an island delimited by 8" traffic buttons which tapers down to approximately 5 feet in width at the S -line intersection (see Figure 3). Traffic counts indicate that the largest volume of traffic occurs in the p.m. peak, subsequently traffic flows for level -of- service analysis and gap analysis were measured during this time period. Traffic volumes were obtained from city records while gap measurements were performed by this consultant. (See Figure 4 for a depiction of traffic volumes.) LOS Analysis Level -of- service for the Southcenter Boulevard /S -line intersection were calculated for present conditions. The intersection is a semi - actuated three -phase system with an average cycle time of 1:20. The Webster method of capacity analysis was used to evaluate the system which indicated LOSB, or short traffic delays. GAP Analysis .�'x: ":' +vskY:c9'.;r,S•- a.�.;;..'. axe.;,,, �,- �wuam�vric!'.-. Yn�xr�.•: a�. �:: y.::, µf ,.s,�.�rSZ•£.'f��:a4.''• ^x`.?w ��.�:SLC� ?r 9.�,�.',•S �¢;� `� . c Gaps in the westbound traffic flow of five seconds or more were observed in the p.m. peak period on July 19, 1984. Gaps were observed approximately 350' west of the S -Line intersection with Southcenter Boulevard. The observations denoted an average gap time of 14.8 seconds with an occurrence of 1.5 gaps per minute. These gaps were created by the signal at the S -Line intersection. The gaps indicate ample opportunity for left or right hand turns from the driveway and, accordingly, a high LOS is expected to exist at this location. ,// ".d/ E POPP ASSOCIATES .v. �t.+`N.x:gHCLt :'l} ^.x :;w + icT. �K�. nn.. u. �... w.. w".. �.. � ....�.........^."...... +wnr.l�+ invMerY�. tx!. �: f. t44h1!' 3; PL7P .f'(�:.h1�YLhSlli�irl�i�MARMt'!, .Srt� <4•�w ;' N wrwww ++M • • • • • • $I • ' II 11 ( 1 0 t U l 0 Mime Accidents III. FUTURE CONDITIONS Project Traffic Generation and Future Street Volumes x+:+t`Yl': �RIMs'. Traffic accident records for the period 1979 through 1983 were studied to determine if the proposed site access was in a problem location. The vast majority of accidents occurred at the S -Line intersection and were princi- pally caused by violation of the red signal indication in the eastbound direction. Only three minor lane violation accidents occurred anywhere near the proposed site. Accordingly, accident experience does not indicate any significant operational problems with the two -way turn lane concept in the vicinity of the proposed site access. It should be noted that the accident situation has been showing a positive trend in that 17 accidents occurred in 1979 and that number has been decreasing to 5 and 6 for 1982 and 1983 respectively. A display of the documented accidents occuring at the intersection is located in the technical appendix. The proposed office area of 14,500 square feet was used in conjunction with national trip generation literature rates to obtain a saturated rate of 28 vehicles out and four into the site during the p.m. peak period. It is estimated that 13 and 15 vehicles would turn left and right respectively out from the driveway(s) and two vehicles would enter from each direction. • LOS Analysis for Driveway(s) The City of Tukwila Public Works Department requested an analysis of traffic conditions in the year 1990 using computer model estimates by Entranco Engineers as the future volume data base. For the 1990 traffic condition existing (1984) Southcenter Boulevard p.m. peak hour traffic was increased to the year 1990 by a growth factor derived from comparison of 1984 counts to 1990 forecast volumes on Southcenter Boulevard. This growth factor amounted to a 40 percent increase over 1984 volumes which is substantial considering the recent past rate of growth in traffic volumes on Southcenter Boulevard. See Figure 4 for depiction of future project hourly traffic volumes with the single and dual access. The LOS Analysis for the single driveway access resulted in a satisfactory LOS C/D for 1990 conditions using the TRB Manual 212 method of nonsignalized intersection analysis. This method assumes random arrival of traffic, whereas the actual condition provides regular gaps at frequent intervals. Thus, the 212 method is conservative for this application. In the analysis, it was assumed that the left - turning traffic from the driveway would be able to use a two -way left -turn lane. Therefore, conversion of a portion of the buttoned island into a two -way left -turn lane for a short distance to the east or alternatively a relocation of the project driveway to the west to permit utilization of the existing two -way left -turn lane is required for the single access alternative. With the dual driveway access design, the level -of- service should equal or exceed LOS C /D. No modifications to Southcenter Boulevard are required for this alternative. • cot? lz) /990 PM PEA, XX PROJECT VOLUMES WITH DUAL ACCESS (XX) PROJECT YOLUMES WITH SINGLE' ACCESS Wm E pi A S E O I A c F, . ..a3�D1^ ... �iP. i'7 1W+ ,:4'I.�� .. t, - ,., .. ., �. n a,+ c< � ; i:`%; .� . ivn_.,... ��.:. ti^,,....: z' ab.,. X: N. �c7. '.�w..:,t,:•);,�.._.Tl.�:...}3 �bfYfif_.. d+�n sr...v.,,i ): �TIa . M<t.4S.. 5fi�. :..,J..l v.sc•.... ,+�+n'.; - -+ -36/ J {-- 2 <z) / '"— i6-4 27/ ----:- `� 1330 NOUR L Y TRArT /C VOLUMES F /GORE 4 IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 5 1. Each of the access alternatives operate at satisfactory levels -of- service with the respective improvements described below. 2. The recommended design is the dual driveway access plan with right -in, right -out limitation at the eastern driveway. 3. The next best design is the single access with location of the driveway as far west as possible to permit utilization of the existing two -way left -turn lane and to allow maximum space for merging of driveway left- turning traffic prior to the S -Line intersection. However, if the driveway is located less than 60 feet from the west end of the buttoned island some modification should be made to the island. 4. The least desirable design is the single- access plan with the driveway situated at the eastern edge of the property. For this design, it is recommended that approximately 85 feet of traffic island be converted to a two -way left -turn lane including conversion of 40 feet of solid white lane line with buttons to broken white line. This recommendation accommodates cars turning left with a 25' turning radius plus two car lengths to store and /or merge. Figure 5 displays the modified traffic button placement for the median island to accommodate this access configuration. rn Cl 10 0 0 SITE P P ROJ EC T DR /VS" hf oti - 7WC6v7 EA C.) ff -040- i■ • , 40 REMOVAL 85-90' REMOVAL 5 /" 5 ' H II MODIFIED TRAFF/C B UTTOA/ PLACEMENT W/Tli 57A/LE ACCESS DRIVE AT MST ED61 Of PRope,e Ty • r OMPLETED BY APPLICAt. E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the contekt of the environmental infor- mation provided and the submitted plans, documents, suppor- tive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objectivets) of the proposal? The ob.iective is to provi rie apprnximatPly 15 ,nn cpinrc3 feet of professional /.office space. 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? Relocation of the proposal to another site. 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: The current site is already designated by the comprehensive pl,pn as commercial. The Site is 7nnPri p,0 The proposed project is compatible with hnth these designations. Development of this project wield enhance the immediate vicinity of Southcenter Anulevsrr1 as the site is currently vacant. -22- Evaluation for Agency Use Only ���c ado -SS . n.......,: ;:�'g�f+'tN..,o..:a5�::�l:C:S,: i :,'.,,. W� ""tf�:* »';.4:4 ".W a w,ro- •.cawcF,.,o-wrcvs ,:n:,vuv�.�•xCrt rr etro �iS r 4 Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Fel Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poll- cies of the Plan? NO. The comprehensive plan currently designates this Property as commercial. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: -23- Evaluation for Agency Use Only ip•sOC Ica.- ►Z -OP N r-6B re 98.00 .no ss 90 r* - 695' 3 -6flN 5'9-1* / ti • N 99'('3 ZIVZ 05 / ML -sz - ee l' I b " PEO <<z A WW 0 0 a s • B9 e > i , O 1 ' . 4- 4, '77 s ; : - Po le 1 ^, _ may 6 1 •f a • S • 0 2 1 • h fFB. _• cS 'iv O / ,e o F - S2� ' 0 c1.1. 0 ' L 0 i I. INTRODUCTION TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE II. EXISTING CONDITIONS 1 a. Street Characteristics and Traffic Volumes 1 b. LOS Analysis 2 c. GAP Analysis 2 d. Accidents 3 III. FUTURE CONDITIONS 3 a. Project Traffic Generation 3 b. LOS Analysis for Driveway 4 IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS Technical Appendix NORTH'HILL ASSOCIATES I. INTRODUCTION This report analyzes the traffic access conditions associated with the proposed development of the North Hill Associates' office building site located on the north side of Southcenter Boulevard in the City of Tukwila. This study. analyzes a single access proposal and a dual access proposal. The single access proposed is located approximately 280' west of the intersection of Southcenter Boulevard and the S -line overcrossing of Interstate 405. With dual access points the previously described- access is utilized as' right -in right -out only with a full movement intersection on the west side of the property using an access to Southcenter Boulevard that is common with the ARCO station access. A vicinity map of the proposed site is illustrated in Fig. 1. A site plan of the proposed project is illustrated. in Fig. 2. The City of Tukwila Public Works Department requested an analysis of traffic operating conditions with the proposed project in place. II. EXISTING CONDITIONS Street Characteristics and Traffic Volumes .» .utrVY ntxrta;.trr..L.:d. At present, Southcenter Boulevard at the site consists of five eleven -foot lanes of traffic, two westbound and three eastbound, divided by an eleven foot wide, two -way turn lane. The turn lane terminates about even with the K tu F.1) 0 LL < a 0 w. a "a; • • • • . • . t • f • „ • •/ •• • ... ... •• 7 ' •.& . ' i t .";"4".'. i +... • • .1. . . „. .. ... 4 . . : • •••••• ••••„. • 1 1.: ••••••,•• • • - / • k•:. • - ; • • . . . 7 •.., ,•• . • • • • • • •• • oN-. • *, • . . • • . ai \V .141 k•• zap ...---• - -...., — ______-- -- -....,. . . • - ... .... j " -- --...... -, .":•-. - .-•-. ,........, 4.... r ..... -----... 4...'\Z.,... \ --- -.. • ------ ....... .., • ..•. •• • •-•... , ......,.... . .., .,.. •-... _ ,, ........ •-•/ vz- ,...,. ----•• ...... ■,, ...f...., ... • .. %. ....... -...%. --.....: %...... ••■ N.". • -- • ... s ''• \ -...., .. x -...%\ N • , • . j . x . ,,, • . • •,.. . '‘ ... - •', - -.- • ' • • : • % • • ''' •• • • , o '" • 1..... ,---1.,7.4.1 . c • • '• :` ' • . I . : . q w••••• f^---•-•----.-_,..„:'•.. .•• s.•-••,,' ..••• .r1 •-.• • • -. . .. . - ....---.2. .. .--. - 1 i ••••••••-••• . . \I ... . • s. • . • v „ . -- ••• .• , ....1 •. „.. ,,,.. . . ... _ . ' s ...”' '••• -• -:.'.- • • ••• • - --.-... . • 1 •. • V , 1 • ..Z.. ... .7...– ••:-••......- ..._ .. -- • • - -- •-•._ ; - .......• • • • so, — " • • o • a • •• •• • • • s . • . — . . -----..... • • . • ;A. f.:•1••••— • S P L/3 A1 w m E PDPP A.SaCICIAT.F.F. • • • • . • • • • • : & • • I • • • • .1" • • • • F/a L/RE LOS Analysis west end of the proposed project driveway and then begins an island delimited by 8" traffic buttons which tapers down to approximately 5 feet in width at the S -line intersection (see Figure 3). Traffic counts indicate that the largest volume of traffic occurs in the p.m. peak, subsequently traffic flows for level -of- service analysis and gap analysis were measured during this time period. Traffic volumes were obtained from city records while gap measurements were performed by this consultant. (See Figure 4 for a depiction of traffic volumes.) Level -of- service for the Southcenter Boulevard /S -line intersection were calculated for present conditions. The intersection is a semi - actuated three -phase system with an average cycle time of 1:20. The Webster method of capacity analysis was used to evaluate the system which indicated LOSB, or short traffic delays. GAP Analysis Gaps in the westbound traffic flow of five seconds or more were observed in the p.m. peak period on July 19, 1984. Gaps were observed approximately 350' west of the S -Line intersection with Southcenter Boulevard. The observations denoted an average gap time of 14.8 seconds with an occurrence of 1.5 gaps per minute. These gaps were created by the signal at the S -Line intersection. The gaps indicate ample opportunity for left or right hand turns from the driveway and, accordingly, a high LOS is expected to exist at this location. tS II CI A 7g tr/31 /0011-ific'5' 4■I .1■1■11 •••••■ •■■ 1 092' • ■•■■ 111■•• 111•1•■• amen - 1.1■• - - _ • • • • e • - • • • • • - — • • %, • • • - - . * - • - • MIIMIII - - • N Lemma - N• .., 103toek/ Nfr7c/ 3..1/9 •MIENI el•M• •••••• • •••••■• • tn UI tn 0 a Accidents III. FUTURE CONDITIONS 3 Project Traffic Generation and Future Street Volumes ....... '.' . • Traffic accident records for the period 1979 through 1983 were studied to determine if the proposed site access was in a problem location. The vast majority of accidents occurred at the S -Line intersection and were princi- pally caused by violation of the red signal indication in the eastbound direction. Only three minor lane violation accidents occurred anywhere near the proposed site. Accordingly, accident experience does not indicate any significant operational problems with the two -way turn lane concept in the vicinity of the proposed site access. It should be noted that the accident situation has been showing a positive trend in that 17 accidents occurred in 1979 and that number has been decreasing to 5 and 6 for 1982 and 1983 respectively. A display of the documented accidents occuring at the intersection is located in the technical appendix. The proposed office area of 14,500 square feet was used in conjunction with national trip generation literature rates to obtain a saturated rate of 28 vehicles out and four into the site during the p.m. peak period. It is estimated that 13 and 15 vehicles would turn left and right respectively out from the driveway(s) and two vehicles would enter from each direction. I LOS Analysis for Driveway(s) The City of Tukwila Public Works Department requested an analysis of traffic conditions in the year 1990 using computer model estimates by Entranco Engineers as the future volume data base. For the 1990 traffic condition existing (1984) Southcenter Boulevard p.m. peak hour traffic was increased to the year 1990 by a growth factor derived from comparison of 1984 counts to 1990 forecast volumes on Southcenter Boulevard. This growth factor amounted to a 40 percent increase over 1984 volumes which is substantial considering the recent past rate of growth in traffic volumes on Southcenter Boulevard. See Figure 4 for depiction of future project hourly traffic volumes with the single and dual access. The LOS Analysis for the single driveway access resulted in a satisfactory LOS C/D for 1990 conditions using the TRB Manual 212 method of nonsignalized intersection analysis. This method assumes random arrival of traffic, whereas the actual condition provides regular gaps at frequent intervals. Thus, the 212 method is conservative for this application. In the analysis, it was assumed that the left- turning traffic from the driveway would be able to use a two -way left -turn lane. Therefore, conversion of a portion of the buttoned island into a two -way left -turn lane. for a short distance to the east or alternatively a relocation of the project driveway to the west to permit utilization of the existing two -way left -turn lane is required for the single access alternative. With the dual driveway access design, the level -of- service should equal or exceed LOS C /D. No modifications to Southcenter Boulevard are required for this alternative. • SOf/T//CE//TER BLVD /989 • P44 PEAk /990 PM PEA4 /96 -- -0-- 9 68 XX PROJECT VOLUMES W /T// DUAL ACCESS (XX) PROJECT VOLUMES 1N /Ty S /NGLE ACCESS ttstlti PL... PP ASEO f r t E E �---- 270 ,r-- /1/ HOURLY TRArF /C VOLUMES F /CURE 4 IV. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Each of the access alternatives operate at satisfactory levels -of- service with the respective improvements described below. 2. The recommended design is the dual driveway access plan with right -in, right -out limitation at the eastern driveway. 3. The next best design is the single access with location of the driveway as far west as possible to permit utilization of the existing two -way left -turn lane and to allow maximum space for merging of driveway left- turning traffic prior to the S -Line intersection. However, if the driveway is located less than 60 feet from the west end of the buttoned island some modification should be made to the island. 4. The least desirable design is the single- access plan with the driveway situated at the eastern edge of the property. For this design, it is recommended that approximately 85 feet of traffic island be converted to a two -way left -turn lane including conversion of 40 feet of solid white lane line with buttons to broken white line. This recommendation accommodates cars turning left with a 25' turning radius plus two car lengths to store and /or merge. Figure 5 displays the modified traffic button placement for the median island to accommodate this access configuration. 5 m Ti ci SITE PZ.4AI U) PROJECT DRIVE ( 0 , -5c)u 7?, Ca'Ai reA -5 cALE /"5O 1 40' REMOVAL 85-90' REMOVAL •-• -10.40- 41-417, 116 N" MODIFIED TRAFFIC BUTTON PLACEMENT SlN6LE ACCESS DRIVE AT AST ED6E or PROPERTY II ••••■• •■•■••■ JAMES A. MURPHY JOHN D. WALLACE DOUGLAS E. ALBRIGHT LEE CORKRUM •• WAYNE D. TANAKA C. GEOFFREY GIBBSt LARRY C. MARTIN ROBERT G. ANDRE$ MICHAEL G. WICKSTEAD OF COUNSEL RAYMOND D. OGDEN. JR. RAYMOND D. OGDEN (1876.1972) RONALD A. MURPHY (1930-1983) Dear Rick: .W,... .0 „am,,•s +,, .u, ... '..l e�,:'t7��.'!�'.' r .Y t•?'- ' ` ...•.• . •� ”" " "'7 • ..,. • .... P • - °' ,_ Yvtakii.� � Pk' ' • 'r �^ .,._.3:i, « i'Y,:. , G , ".ttt^a'ix,�..a..eS;::YFi'.::E Rick Beeler Associate Planner City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 LAW OFFICES OF OGDEN, OGDEN & MURPHY 2300 WESTIN BUILDING 2001 SIXTH AVENUE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98121 (206) 622.2991 June 4, 1984 MARK A. EAMES R. MARK ALLEN STEVEN A. REISLER LAURA C. INVEEN CHRISTOPHER A. WASHINGTON JAMES E. HANEY ROSEMARY P. BORDLEMAY SUE E. FREEBORN 71777 -7.-- BARBARA B. HEAVEY / ( � •` COTT SNYDER �' l. I I � • � I I �.. " I • ALS ADMITTED IN CAUFORNIA .. ••Alb ADMITTED IN DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA _ I t'; 8 l l tALS ADMITTED IN MONTANA 1 I t I ) T) , I I #ALS NEW JERSEY ADMITTED IN COLORADO. NEW YORK J ' AND °A1.11 ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN C i I I ...A Re: Western Pacific Properties Rezone This is to confirm our agreed -upon timetable with respect to completion of the Western Pacific Properties Rezone. My under- standing is that the need for an additional public hearing to pro- vide an adequate basis for the Council's decision, the notice requirements for such a hearing and the City staff's preparation of the access analysis requested by Councilmember Bohrer, will necessitate the Council's consideration of the rezone ordinance taking place no earlier than June 25, 1984. In view of this fact, we have agreed upon the following timetable for completion of the necessary documents and background work by our respective offices: 1. You will be sending a letter to the applicant in the very near future requesting information concerning each of the criteria established by TMC 18.84.030 and Washington Court Decisions (set forth in the document entitled: "Criteria and Guidelines to Be Reviewed in Establishing Zoning or in Cases of Rezoning" which I have given you) and on the question of access. 2. I will provide you with a memorandum outlining suggested criteria to be considered and procedures to be followed in processing rezone applications in the future by June 8, 1984. 3. Using the information obtained from the applicant, you will prepare draft Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for the Tukwila City Council to support the staff's recom- mendation that the rezone be approved. '`u'1ELl t:tJa......�a9lurutae2cc:c nano+ �dci. tu+ a... x,.,... �•._ ti.., �..:.. n.. wv. a. cn., c+ n�. ��............ .»....:::,Jt.'d.7,'.....,...... _......._ uCv7`_;�SS79: * 3' FeIT !m.?Pnvt•:.u+z+x.^Y�•'w+:lp�, romtVar 4. - Rick Beeler Page Two May 31, 1984 JEH /rlr cc: Don Morrison Dennis Hidell These findings and conclusions will address all of the criteria required to be considered and, in addition, will specifically address the issues of access and re- zoning a portion of the site versus rezoning the entire site as requested by the applicant. These draft find- ings and conclusions will be prepared in time for the attorney -staff meetings set for June 19, 1984. Ara di U•Y.7,a`L "C $r i .��"+ %.)yryttf!,C� iI�•,� 4. At the June 19, 1984 attorney -staff meetings, you and I will discuss the draft findings and conclusions and make any necessary revisions. The revised pro - posed findings and conclusions will be submitted as part of the staff report to the City Council included in the council packets for the June 25th meeting, which I under- stand will be put together on June 22nd. 5. At the June 25, 1984 council meeting, staff, with the aid of the City Attorney, will endeavor to assure that testimony is elicited from either the applicant or the applicable staff member regarding each of the necessary criteria for considering the rezone. I look forward to working with the city staff in com- pleting the Western Pacific Properties Rezone request and in streamlining the procedures by which future rezone appli- cations are processed. Very truly yours, OGDEN, OGDEN & MURPHY / James E. Haney �-`� " "�+ -91 N65'15'2714' 104.85' • 0 ,49 (1 f 0 .P 5 0 t PARCEL — Z 0.43 ACRES .iGRESS- EGRESS EASEMENT . .ER AA' tc 7210310148 AND r: 7908220496 B L V D. 4:343' Or ncrAnD O f a N I c ol-1 9 °' sei cr■ ,, A/GRESS- EGRESS EASEMENT ./ PER 4.P * 7311210103 :\ iii0g655- EGRESS EASEMEN7 , ..- - 4- • Pc1? 3:t 73020101/5 R659.65' 1.. :15148 41:1•36 SURVEY VA 1. ..- rn, 1 C, 03 04 r . 2 "V \,' / a li ,... \ YIAIt' '''''' f' - . • ,..1';fic.. -,-::: ,':-...:::,A.-......1,74r1:0,'::,:r,•::: „.c• t x0 N 70 211V 45 NOTE: SEE PAGE p o f 11 ‘I 14 S 4 .1 (4) 1 FOUND MEW? (LE4115 SET 60 d SPIKE W/ CAP \ STAMPED " 5 .1 A . L5539• I I SET i " . z" REBAR WITH CAP I STAMPED A. 1.5 /5639 7 FOUND J1.P (LEANS WESTERLY) y 66° 39'27 335.03' NI 00 oF Z FOR hi STEP 930 50 _j FEDERAL ,0.0, CITY OF TUAVILA 4r0109 Central Permit System MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM ACCEPTED FOR PROCESSING. SECTION I: GENERAL DATA SECTION 11 :. PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT STATISTICS: SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN BEFORE ME TH: S __ DAY ^^ OF /4a4 • NOTARY PUBL I C IN AND FOR THE STATE OF WASHINGTON RESIDING AT ,LA PLEASE WRITE LEGIBLY OR TYPE ALL REQUESTED INFORMATION -- INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS WILL NOT BE TYPE OF APPLICATION: I]BS1P ❑ PHLATT D SUBDIVISION ❑SHpERM�T � PRD �PMUD' D INTCRURBAI CONDITIONAL QUNUSSESS. VARIANCE Bella* ZONING CJ AM EN DMENT I) APPLICANT: NAME THE M I T H U N ASSOCIATES TELEPHONE (206') 454-3344 ADDRESS 2000 112TH AVE. N.E. BELLEVUE, WA. Zip 98004 2) PROP. OWNER: NAMEWESTERN PACIFIC PROPERTIES, INC.TELEPHONE (206 ) 241 - 1616 ADDRESS 13975 INTERURBAN AVE. SO. SEATTLE, WA. Z1v98168 3) PROJECT LOCATION: (STREET ADDRESS, GEOGRAPH I C , LOT/ BLOCK) PORTION OF LOT 11 OF INTERURBAN ADDITION TO SEATTLE. SEE ATTACHED, LEGAL DESCRIPTION. • 4) DESCRIBE BRIEFLY THE PROJECT YQU. PROPOSE, A PROFESS IONAL.. BLDG. OF 3 FLOORS W /APPROX. 14,500 SQUARE FEET, PARKING FOR 38 VEHICLES. 5) ANTICIPATED PERIOD OF CONSTRUCTION: FROM 08 /R4 TO 02/R5 6) WILL PROJECT BE DEVELOPED . I N PHASES? n YES EI NO IF YES. DESCRIBE A) ACREAGE OF PROJECT SITE: NET 1.33 ac GROSS 1.75 ac. EASD4E•TS .42 a c. B) FLOORS OF CONSTRUCTION: TOTAL 11 FLOORS 3 INCLUDES: 0 BASEMENT 0 MEZZANIN TOTAL GROSS±1 4, 5 00 s f 4 NCLUDES : 0 EASF34ENT D MEZZAN I N FLOOR AREA C) SITE UTILIZATION: EXISTING PROPOSED NOTES ZONING DESIGNATION RMH P.O. COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION COMMERCIAL NO CHANGE BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA _ N/A ❑ 5400 S F❑ LANDSCAPE AREA N/A ❑ 58898 S F❑ PAVING AREA N/A ❑ 12300 SF❑ TOTAL PARKING STALLS: -STANDARD S I Z E N/A 24 - COMPACT SIZE N/A 1 3 - HANDICAPPED SIZE N/A 1 TOTAL LOADING SPACES N/A 2 AVER. SLOPE OF PARKING AREA N/A 3% AVER. SLOPE OF SITE 1 3 . 5 % 13.5% S) IS THIS SITE DESIGNATED FOR SPECIAL CONSIDERATION ON THE CITY'S ENVIRCNINEINITAL BASE MAP? ❑ YES NO `SECTION III: APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT , V//)fr-N! 41 -t — a,Q,L4l7 ...7 , BEING DULY SWORN, DECLARE THAT 1 AM THE INVOLVED IN THIS APPLICATION AND THAT THE FORE- GOING STATEMENTS AND ANSWERS HEREIN CONTAINED AND THE INFORMATION HEREWITH SUBMITTED ARE IN ALL RESPECTS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWL E BELIEF. DATE 4/3/25¢ X 'GAAY P/J� Fwtacrt,.us Nor A4 A/ A az #441'15svir 0 VILA 19 (A8 Dear Don: q City ciy Tukwila Z 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Mr'. Don Moody Western Pacific Properties 13975 Interurban Ave. S. Tukwila, WA 98168 Gary L VanDusen,'Mayor Re: North Hill Office Rezone-- 84 -11 -R May 31, 1984 . This letter is to summarize the May 29, 1984, action of the City Council regarding this application. The Council will hold a Public Hearing on June 25, 1984, to consider the ordinance rezoning this property. 'Prior to that time, the following information was requested: 1. Traffic analysis of the proposed access onto Southcenter Boulevard, including the easterly adjacent property. 2. Analysis of opening the southwesterly portion of the parking )ot to the westerly adjacent access. 3. Storm drainage analysis. 4. Excavation analysis relative to the existing rockery and hillside. 5. Testimony regarding: A. Does the proposed zoning change conform with the comprehensive plan? . B. The relationship of the proposed zoning change to the existing land uses and zoning of surrounding or nearby property; C. What changes have occurred in the character, conditions or surrounding neighborhood that would justify or otherwise substantiate the rezone; D. The relative gain to the public as compared with the hardship imposed upon the individual owner; E. In the case of unimproved property the suitability of the subject property for the purpose for which it has been zoned and the length of time the property has remained unimproved considered in.the context of land development in the surround- ing area. xar: axsr,+ av rnrs∎ Awa: Num p..V..iaikt5V,WLTSTI4iXda.M.0.1 nY. .1r. Don Moody Page 2 May 31, 1984 pt In addition, the City Attorney will need a revised legal description of the 175 feet of property being rezoned. The timing of receipt of the aforementioned information is June 14, 1984 in order for the rezone to be heard by the Council on June 25, 1984. If you have any questions, call me at 433 -1847. Rick Beeler Associate Planner cc: Planning Director Public Works Director. • City. Clerk • '<ry�rax x Respectfully :.: ROLL CALL May 29, 1984 7:00. P.M. CALL TO ORDER and • PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE OFFICIALS IN ATTENDANCE REPORTS Mayor Dwayne Traynor Civil Service Com. Proclamations: Recreation & Parks Month and ABWA Education Month Grady Way Bridge Bids Amend Agenda, Highline Incorporation Urban Design Study, Phase I PUBLIC HEARING Western Pacific Property Rezone Request TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE 4 r 0S Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers MINUTES Council Prs.Phelpscalled the Committee of the Whole Meeting to order and led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance. LIONEL C. BOHRER, MABEL J. HARRIS, DORIS E. PHELPS, Council President, JOE H. DUFFIE, EDGAR D. BAUCH, WENDY A. MORGAN, CHARLES E. SIMPSON. JIM HANEY, City Attorney; MAXINE ANDERSON, City Clerk; BRAD COLLINS, Planning Director; PATRICK LOWERY, Crime Prevention Officer; DON MORRISON, City Administrator; DON WILLIAMS, Parks and Recreation Director. Mayor Van Dusen administered the oath of office to Dwayne Traynor who will replace Steve Phelps as a member of the Civil Service Commission. Mayor Van Dusen read two proclamations, one declaring June as "Recreation and Parks Month" in the City of Tukwila and the other proclaiming May, 1984, as "ABWA Education Month" in Tukwila. Washington State officials estimated the cost of Grady Way Bridge Construction to be 6.1 million dollars. The low bidder bid 4.8 million dollars. Under this proposal, the City's share will be $500,000. MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY SIMPSON, THAT ITEM 7C, HIGHLINE INCORPORATION, BE ADDED TO THE AGENDA. MOTION CARRIED. Brad Collins, Planning Director, reported that the con- sultants have met with the Planning Commission and the Economic Development Committee of the Chamber of Commerce and discussed Phase I of the Urban Design Study. The consultants are continuing to analyze the information and will have the draft ready for staff the first part of June. It should beon the Council agenda for June 11. Council Member Morgan asked to have a summary of the Urban Design Study process given to the Community Affairs Committee. • Council President Phelps declared the Public Hearing on the Western Pacific Property rezone request open and asked for any comments. Brad Collins reported that the Planning Commission, at their April 26, 1984, meeting recommended approval by the City Council of the subject rezone. Upon advise of the City Attorney, the Planning Commission adopted Findings and Conclusions. The conclusions state: (1) The proposed pro- fessional office zoning classification is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use'Policy Plan; (2) The scale of the pro- posal and location of the property clearly establishes the desireable relationship of the development to the surrounding multiple family zoning; (3) The request is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Don Moody, President of Western Pacific Properties, 514 10th Avenue West, Kirkland, Wash., offered to answer questions for Council. Mr. Moody noted the access to the property is more than 200 feet from the S -Line Bridge (over TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE May 29, 1984 Page 2 HI DC, PUBLIC HEARING - Cont. Western Pacific I -405 to Southcenter). The access was put here in case the Properties Rezone adjacent property needed access and the entrance on the west Request is to the Arco Station. This would spread the traffic entering onto Southcenter Blvd. The building would be 15,000 square feet. Councilman Bohrer asked to have a staff analysis of the access and its relationship to the adjacent piece of property when it comes back to Council. He asked about access to the northern portion of the property. Mr. Moody said that there is an access on the east side, however, it is not ideal and they would have to come before the City before they could develop the property. At this time, there are no plans to develop that property. A pro- fessional office building creates the least impact,isthe most positive image for the City and is realistic from an economic standpoint for the developers. Council President Phelps asked about the drainage. Mr. Moody said they know they have to meet all drainage requirements before they can get a building permit. He said that they have planned for a reasonable amount of on -site parking and did not want to mix the building parking with the Arco Station or Denny's Restaurant. Councilman Duffie expressed concern about the additional traffic this would create. Mr. Moody said there would be 37 cars in total. Usually traffic from a building like this would leave over a period of time. A professional office building would blend better with the traffic in the area than a multi - family development which the property is now zoned for. Council President Phelps said the drainage problem concerns her and also the cut into the north slope. Mr. Moody said the complex is designed to not go into the toe of the slope. Mr. Collins clarified that the Planning Commission recommen- dation is to rezone back to the 175 foot line. Staff, in reviewing the traffic and the access questions, are requiring that an analysis be completed prior to building permit review. A variance has been granted on the front yard landscaping requirement for this property. Council President Phelps said the option of opening up the westerly portion of the parking lot to allow traffic to go east or west should be considered as part of the traffic analysis. There being no further comment, Council President Phelps closed the Public Hearing. MOVED BY BAUCH, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT AN ORDINANCE BE PREPARED CONSIDERING THIS REZONE AND THAT IT BE ON AN AGENDA APPROVED BY THE COUNCIL PRESIDENT.* Councilman Bohrer asked to have the report on the access to this property and adjacent ones and a copy of the Planning Commission Meetings provided for Council. *MOTION CARRIED. —J 4 \11LA ; City o Tukwila �s v Z 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Gary L VanDusen, Mayor • Minutes of the May 24, 1984 meeting. : ..i 1 PLANNING COMMISSION b Chairman Knudson opened the meeting at 8:00 p.m. Other Commissioners pre- sent were Mr. Larson, Ms. Avery, Mr. Coplen, Mr. Kirsop and Mr. Sowinski. Commissioner Orrico was absent due to a trip out of the Country. Representing City staff was Rick Beeler, Planning Department. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MR. KIRSOP MOVED TO ADJUST THE AGENDA TO DEFER READING OF THE MINUTES. MR. LARSON SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS Mr. Beeler briefly summarized the City Council's recent actions. PUBLIC HEARINGS Urban Design Study - Phase I, City of Tukwila, requesting approval of the preliminary report and recommendation to the City Council. Mr. Beeler reviewed the status of Phase I of the Urban Design Study and the current schedule of completion. The preliminary report originally sche- duled for tonights review was not available, but will be presented at the Planning Commission's June 14, 1984 public hearing. The report is to be submitted to the City on June 7, 1984 by the consultant, and reviewed by the City Council on June 11, 1984. Between June 11 and 14, 1984, the Chamber of Commerce Economic Development Committee will also review the report. Mr. Beeler reviewed the March 22, 1984 meetings with the Economic Development Committee and Metro Task Force. The City is proceeding on schedule for completion of Phase I despite Metro's preference to delay the transit center decision. The City Council had decided to postpone the decision no later than one year to proceed on schedule. Commissioner Coplen reviewed the Economic Development Committee consensus that was reached. The items of agreement were: 1. The business community needs the Metro Transit Center as soon as possible. Page -2- PLANNING COMMISSION MI May 24, 1984 2. Conflicts regarding the location will occur no matter where the transit center is located. The Economic Development Committee therefore will not take a position on the location except to indi- cate that it should go between I -405 and the Green River. 3. Alot of people are working all over the central business district which is a large employment center in itself. 4. A circulator -type transit system is needed in the CBD. 5. The transit center should serve the whole CBD. There being no further testimony the Chairman closed the public hearing. Application 84- 17 -UUP: Seattle Rendering, requesting approval of an unclassified use permit to construct a small laboratory building adja- cent to the existing office at 5795 S. 130th P1. Chairman Knudson opened the public hearing. Mr. Beeler read the staff report. Charles Frame, representing Seattle Rendering, briefly explained the propo- sal and answered questions. MR. COPLEN MOVED TO APPROVE •THE APPLICATION. MR. KIRSOP SECONDED THE MOTION BASED UPON THE STAFF REPORT FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS. The Chairman closed the public hearing. THE MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Application DR- 07 -84: Inn Ventures, Inc., requesting approval of an 144 unit hotel complex adjacent to the Green River at the northwest corner of Strander Boulevard and West Valley Highway. Mr. Beeler read the staff report. Tom Johnson, Johnson Braund Design Group, representing the application, explained the proposal. He expressed agreement with the staff report and recommended conditions except Condition No. 2. He explained the identity being desired of the Brock Residence Inn, varied orientation and off -set of buildings, the unified statement of the architecture and visually interest of the project. Larry Culver, Inn Ventures, Inc., explained the project in Bellevue and marketing of the Brock Residence Inn in the area. He explained that a restaurant, lounge or convention facility would not be featured in the Page -3- . PLANNING COMMISSION MIII� ES . ''" May 24, 1984 proposal. In addition, he explained that the'corner of the property adja- cent to Strander Blvd. and West Valley Highway will be developed as office and /or retail by a separate developer. Larry Braund, Johnson Braunp Design Group, responded to questions regarding improvements along West Valley Highway. Discussion of TMC 18.60.050(4) regarding building design "monotony of design" occurred, and the consensus of the Commission was that this section was intended to address and preclude large boxy oe square buildings, not the type of scheme proposed by the applicant. MS. AVERY MOVED TO ACCEPT THE PROPOSAL INCLUDING AN ADDITIONAL RECOMMENDA- TION NUMBER 6 FOR SIDEWALKS ON STRANDER BLVD. AND WEST VALLEY HIGHWAY. MR. KIRSOP SECONDED THE MOTION. MR. KIRSOP MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION TO DELETE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION NUMBER 2. MR. LARSON SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. The Commission clarified the findings and conclusions of the staff report were incorporated into the Planning Commission's actions with the exception of the references to monotony of building design on page 2 and 4 of the staff report. MAIN MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Application DR- 02 -84: Hydrotube at the Pavilion, requesting approval of modifications of the approved design. Mr. Beeler summarized the recent conversation with the developers of the Hydrotube wherein the project was no longer valid due to loss of lease on the property. Staff had been given notice that the project would no longer be carried forward. OTHER BUSINESS North Hill Associates Rezone 84 -11 -R, clarification of motion. Mr. Beeler reviewed the City Council's May 14, 1984 action on the proposal whereby final approval of the rezone was postponed pending the Planning Commission's clarification of findings and conclusions supporting their recommendation of April 26, 1984. COMMISSIONER KIRSOP MOVED TO ADOPT STAFF'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF'S MEMORANDUM OF MAY 15, 1984 IN THE REZONE APPLICATION 84 -11 -R. MR. LARSON SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. APPROVAL'OF MINUTES ' ' MS. AVERY MOVED TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF THE•MARCH 22, 1984 MEETING. MR. KIRSOP SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. MR. LARSON MOVED TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF OF THE APRIL 26, 1984 AND MAY 10, 1984 MEETINGS. MR. COPLEN SECONDED THE MOTION WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. The meeting was adjourned at 9:45 p.m. TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION Rick Beeler Associate Planner C es wq City of Tukwila Z 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 •1909 Gary L VanDusen, Mayor TO: PLANNIJ COMMISSION FROM: R . . - - - , • anning Department DATE: May 15, 1984 SUBJECT: North Hill Associates Rezone 84 -11 -R MEMORANDUM At your meeting of April 26, 1984, you conducted a hearing on this appli- cation and recommended approval by the City Council. This recommendation came before the Council on May 14, 1984 where it was noticed that your action lacked findings and conclusions. Therefore, the item is before you again to clarify your motion. The City Attorney advised that case law establishes findings and conclusions must be a part of your decision. Staff may recommend such, as done in our staff report, and you may adopt them by reference. You may also make your own findings and conclusions. The choise is yours, but must clearly be made a part of the record. Attached for your review is the original staff report. Since some of the information is not necessary for findings and conclusions, we have condensed the report into the following to support your decision pursuant to our recommendation: FINDINGS 1. Western Pacific Properties is proposing to develop a three story office building consisting of approximately 14,500 square feet on the vacant property immediately east of the existing Arco AM -PM Mini Mart at approximately 5900 Southcenter Blvd. Currently, the property is being utilized for an informal parking lot. In order to accomplish the proposal the applicant is requesting rezoning of the property from the existing zoning of High Density Multiple Residence (RMH) to the professional Office (P -0) zoning classification. 2. Board of Architectural Review of the specific design of the building and site plan will occur subsequent to the final action on the rezone. 3. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map indicates the subject property as "Commercial" without special development considerations. ��iz: `ri::c,�� ai: jam, . >.r. k. +v,. ,n�1,�..;: d.;,° v,. x� ................-.._._........_..,...._......,, ...m.�.n.�a.... :.r,....o.,..... Yr.....'., ,,.,.1 70..«... u, m.«.... .nn..nn.�........ ..._............. r.......«.. �mvmsstrr sp alxc' tR# l u. 1 !Sd';lY KiliMIT+SP.L'U'�'7.GT 1 t, Page -2- PLANNING COMMISSION C 84 -11 -4: North Hill Associates May 24, 1984 4. A Final Declaration of Nonsignificance was issued for the proposal. CONCLUSIONS 1. The proposed professional office zoning classification is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. This would be in the public's interest, health, safety and general welfare (TMC 18.84.030(1)). 2. The scale of the proposal and location on the property together with the proposed landscaping clearly establish the desirable relationship of the development to the surrounding multiple family zoning (TMC 18.84.030(2)). 3. The request is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan, therefore the applicant is not required to demonstrate need for the request per TMC 18.84.030(3). You may adopt the above, modify the above, or enter your own findings and conclusions at your May 24, 1984 meeting. Per directions by the new City Attorney, Planning Department is developing a new form for properly recording actions taken by various Commissions and Boards. Attached is a copy of the decision record form for your review and comment. Plese note the required signature of the Chairman. RB /blk 1 1908 • City of Tukwila Z 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Gary L VanDusen, Mayor T U K W I L A P L A N N I N G C O M M I S S I O N Minutes of the April 26, 1984 meeting. Chairman Knudson opened the meeting at 8:05 p.m. Other Commissioners pre- sent were Ms. Avery, Mr. Sowinski, Mr. Orrico and Mr. Larson. Representing staff were Rick Beeler and Brad Collins from the Planning Department. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS Mr. Collins briefly summarized the recent actions of the City Council. PUBLIC HEARING Application 84 -11 -R: Western Pacific Properties, Inc., requesting rezone of 1.75 acres from RMH (High Density Multi Family) to P -0 (Professional Office) . Mr. Beeler summarized the staff report. Chairman Knudson opened the public hearing. Vincent Ferrese, Mithun & Assoc., respresenting the applicant, explained the proposal. He stated a a minor traffic study regarding the turning movements for access to the property will be submitted with the building permit application. There being no further testimony, the public hearing was closed. MR. COPLEN MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION. MS. AVERY SECONDED THE APPLICATION. MR. COPLEN MOVED TO TABLE THE MOTION FOR FIVE MINUTES. MS. AVERY SECONDED THE.MOTION, WHICH WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. MR. ORRICO MOVED FOR A FIVE MINUTE RECESS. MR. LARSON SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH WAS APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE FACTUAL AREA OF' THE REZONE APPLICATION. The meeting was reconviened. MR. COPLEN MOVED TO AMEND THE MOTION THAT THE REZONE BE FOR THE SOUTHWEST CORNER 175 FEET TO THE NORTH, PERPENDICULAR ACROSS TO THE EASTERLY PROPERTY LINE AND BACK TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER ADJACENT TO SOUTHCENTER BLVD. BE Page -2- • ,• PLANNING COMMISSION MIk _S April 26, 1984 REZONED TO THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE CLASSIFICATION. MR. ORRICO SECONDEb THE MOTION, WHICH WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PUBLIC MEETING Application 83 -03 -CUP: Hydrotube at the Pavilion, requesting extention of the conditional use permit. Mr: Beeler read the' staff report. Marshal Stevens, representing the Hydrotube, reviewed the differences in the proposed new design from the orignal design approved by the Planning Commission. John Shirley, architect for the application, explained-the construction and design. Discussion ensued surrounding the appropriateness of the location of the proposal, adequacy of parking, the traffic generation by similar facilities and the prior Planning Commission approval of a cooperative parking •agreement. MR. LARSON MOVED TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF THE HYDROTUBE PROJECT AT THE PAVILION SUBJECT TO THE TWO CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. MS. AVERY SECONDED THE MOTION. It was clarified that the motion intended for extension of the original conditions imposed on the conditional use permit. MOTION PASSED 4 -2. Mr. Stevens estimated construction would begin in approximately two months. Application 83 -16 -CUP: Burlington Northern Railroad, review of changes to the approved.conditional use permit. Mr.,Beeler summarized the staff report. Mort Thomas, representing the application, explained the, changes and plans to complete asphalt paving of the site when soil conditions are satisfac- tory. This was estimated to be July or August. MR. COPLEN MOVED TO APPROVE THE CHANGES PROPOSED SUBJECT TO STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS 1 AND 2. MS. AVERY SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH PASSED UNANIMOUSLY. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW Page -3- PLANNING COMMISSION MII( ES April 26, 1984 Application DR- 04 -84: Al and Bernie Sanft, requesting approval of a concrete and metal warehouse building. Mr. Knudson stepped down from the Chairmanship and the meeting due to potential conflict of interest and appearance of fairness. Ms. Avery assumed the Chairmanship by consensus of the Commissioners present. Mr. Beeler summarized the staff report and recommended an additional con- dition of the building being located along the easterly part of the pro- perty. Chuck Grose, representing the application, explained acceptability of the additional staff recommendation and that exterior lighting will be direc- tion off the building to minimize impact in the adjacent residences. MR. SOWINSKI MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF OF CONDITIONS 1 THROUGH 8. MR. ORRICO SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. Ms. Avery exited the meeting and Mr. Knudson returned to the Chair. Application DR- 06 -84: Gull Industries, requesting approval of expan- sion and remodel of the service station at 13435 Interurban Ave. So. Mr. Beeler summarized the staff report. Roger 011enberg, representing Gull Industries, briefly summarized the pro- posal. Discussion occurred regarding the Interuban Avenue arterial project and the Metro Park and Ride facility surrounding the applicant's property. MR. COPLEN MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF STAFF. MOTION WAS SECONDED BY MR. SOWINSKI, WHICH WAS UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED. Application DR- 05 -84: Western Pacific Properties, requesting approval of two 2- story office buildings at approximately 13989 57th Ave. So. Mr..Beeler summarized the staff report and revised recommended condition No. 2 to read: 2. Modification of the easterly parking and loading area adjacent to Phase I and 57th Ave. S. to include landscaping at least 10 feet wide. Vince Ferrese, representing the application, summarized the proposal and responded to concerns raised by staff in the staff report. He explained the orientation of the warehousing to van operation instead of trucks. It was also stated that phase I can include additional landscaping adjacent to 57th Ave. So. .! i« 4�1i� ,.�cS..ralur�e..m.urv.rv»r. craw. r« ...... ............�._..._.....�...... _.. ............,........:....arart Page -4- PLANNING COMMISSION MIC ES. April 26, 1984 Don Moody, owner-of the property and proposal, addressed the Commissions concerns. MR. ORRICO MOVED TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH THE REVISED STAFF'S RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS. MR. LARSON SECONDED THE MOTION, WHICH WAS CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. OTHER BUSINESS Special meeting of May 10, 1984 The consensus of the Commission was to hold a special meeting on this date for design review of the Hydrotube at the Pavilion. The Commission requested that such requests in the future be submitted in writing. Presentation of Staff Reports The Commission favored summarization of staff reports in the. Planning Commission meetings and hearings. The consensus of the Commission was to continue to read the staff reports unless a motion passes to summarize the reports. The meeting was adjourned at 10:50 p.m. TUKWILA N •O MMISSION 77/ Rlck Beeler Associate Planner RB /blk • AGENDA ITEM CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT IV) A. , 84 -11 -R, Western Pacific Properties INTRODUCTION Western Pacific Properties is proposing to develop a three story office building consisting of approximately 14,500 square feet on the vacant property immediately east of the existing Arco AM -PM Mini Mart at approximately 5900 Southcenter Blvd. Currently the property is being utilized for an informal parking lot. In order to accomplish the proposal the applicant is requesting rezoning of the property from the existing zoning of High Density Multiple Residence (RMH) to the Professional Office (P -0) zoning classification. FINDINGS 1. TMC 18.84.030 contains the criteria for granting reclassifications. The applicant has responded to these criteria in the attached application form (Attachment A). The Planning Commission makes a recommendation to the City Council for final action. and may approve, modify, or deny the request. 2. The portion of the property which will contain the proposed development is the level area adjacent to Southcenter Boulevard. The proposed building will backup to and abut the existing steep hillside (Attachment B - Site Plan). Landscaping is proposed along the westerly portion of the property, where the existing roadway will be removed. Access to the development will be at a new curb cut and along the easterly portion of the property within an access and utility easement also serving the adjacent easterly property. Board of Architectural Review of the specific design of the building and site plan will occur subsequent to the final action on the rezone. 3. The Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map indicates the subject property as "Commercial" without special development considerations. Applicable goals and policies from the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan are Goal 1 and 5, page 12; and Goal 6. page 13. Natural Environment Goal 1, 2 and 3. page 15; Objective 1, Policy 1. and Policy 3, page 24; Objective 3, page 25; Policy 1. 2, 3 and 4. page 26; Objective 6. page 28; Policy 1, page 29; Objective 8. page 30. Open Space. Goal 1, page 16; Policy 1, page 34. Commerce /Industry: Goal 1, 2, and 3, page 18; Objective 1. Policy 1 and Policy 2. page 60; Objective 3. Policy 1 and Policy 2, page 64; Objective 4, Page -2- d t PLANNING COMMISSION 84 -11 -R, Western Pacific Properties April 26, 1984 page 65; Policy 1, 2 and 3, page 65. Objective 6. Policy 1 and Policy 3. page 67. 4. The subject site lies adjacent to the commercial deveopment of the Dennys Restaurant and Arco AM -PM Mini Mart to the west, and the developed pro- fessional office zone to the east. Within close proximity to the west is the interchange and access thereto of I -5 and I -405. A short distance to the east is access from Southcenter Boulevard over I -405 to the Southcenter commercial area and further east to the 1-405 freeway interchange with the West Valley Highway. Beginning where Macadam Road South intersects Southcenter Boulevard at the Dennys Restaurant the topography forms a natural separation of the com- mercially zoned properties and the subject site from the higher elevation northerly abutting properties which are zoned multiple family (See Attachment C - Zoning Map). This area forms a small commercial node of moderate to high activity which is indicated to be preserved or continued to at least the sub- ject property in the Comprehensive Plan. 5. A Final Declaration of Nonsignificance was issued for the proposal. since the development is on the existing flat area and not in the area of the steep hillside. CONCLUSIONS 1. The proposed professional office zoning classification is consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map "Commercial" designation for the area. An office development would accomplish desirable transition from I -405 and the southerly Southcenter business district to the uphill multi - family residences (Policy 1. page 66, Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan - hereinafter entitled "Plan "). This area functions as a self contained commercial node. within which the subject site would be a logical extension (Policy 1 and Policy 3. page 67, Plan). This would be in the public's interest, health. safetey and general welfare (Goal 1, page 12. Plan. and TMC 18.84.030(1)). The existing character of the uphill wooded hillside would be retained (Policy 1 and Policy 3. page 24, Plan). Desirable utilization of the existing topography will be accomplished in the applicant's proposal (Objective 3. page 25. Plan). which avoids development of the steep slope on the northerly slope of the property (Policy 1, 2 and 3, page 26. Plan). Landscaping contained in the proposal is more substantial than what would be normally accomplished in office development, thereby enhancing the visibility of the site and the extent of vegetation thereon (Policy 1. page 34. Plan). 2. The proposed site plan. although conceptual at this point, will be eventually reviewed by the Board of Architectural Review per TMC 18.60. It is evident that the scale of the proposal and location on the property together with the proposed landscaping clearly establish the desirable relationship of the deve- lopment to the surrounding multiple family zoning (TMC 18.84.030(2)). Comments regarding the specific design are within the perview of the Board of Architectural Review, however the Planning Commission and City Council retain Page -3- PLANNING COMMISSION (— 84 -11 -R, Western Pacific Properties April 26. 1984 the discretion to approve or limit the three story and /or 35' building height allowed in the professional office zone (TMC 18.50) through the rezone pro -. cess. Since the northerly portion of the property provides sufficient change of elevation and separation, staff's opinion is that modification of the per- mitted building height is not warranted. 3 Since the request is in staff's opinion compatible with the Plan the applicant is not required to demonstrate need for the request per TMC 18.84.030(3). RECOMMENDATION Based upon the above staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the applica- tion. ATTACHMENTS A - Application. B - Site plan. C - Zoning map. RB /blk I�ENtNY� I T L1RPNT / -� i 1 h J ?;.v. .Y�i; :Y*s•` .:+r': °v:•i •7' a+•:, r�.tf +; nrgW:A: yxF..i•c61cV�` i,:j,.• .•.;rgU:i °r.`;; p�`ka: r' :: ! r . ,.:.;� 2::., •.n• L' < . t .�i 7S, � ,.k ?�: r '"� T..:.ir �: t: w ,r �'ft .. ....,.,u.4tn:::i.. •J.k•xt .k'r<,.,..4K'n FG t .:i: . .. .....,. .. �.. _., . Y„ v rlw+,C. -s �';;�t • .• k t ..« "chi',- in5... '. n. �t".�(i <:i ,..k:,�: t4 �`.i..: t'h::ii.l�5" r�i'::,`.. n� :..r..:1•.ira sr7 ... T MINI - moitzr , T / / / 0 1 ZONING 9AT I I AI° 177,'x0' eex WIN rg.riou•iri z To x o, a7 � o FROM RM H To P s#. r 7' - �. �Y 7 1184 • l'i !f ANN INC DEPT. ..f CITY OF TU( NILA Central Permit System MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM Ct F'l..hN; [ PT. S C H E D U L E u CHANGE OF ZONING EXISTING ZONING RMH REQUESTED ZONING P-0 COMP. PLAN DESIGNATION COMMERCIAL SITE IN CITY LIMITS? YES PROPOSED USE 1 F REZONE APPROVED PROFESSIONAL OFFICE EXISTING USE AND CLASSIFICATION OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: ZONE COMP. PLAN DES1G. NOIftH R-3, R -4 CnMMFBCTAL CONDOMINIUMS souTH STREET R.O.W. N/A EAST R -4 COMMFRCTAT. VACANT WEST C -1., C -2 COMMFRCTAT, USE I -405, SOUTHCENTER BLVD. GAS STATTON, CONVENIENCE^'STORE, RES ESCRIBE THE MANNER IN WHICH YOUR REQUEST FOR CHANGE OF ZONING CLASSIFICATION SATISFIES EACH OF THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA AS SPECIFIED IN TMC 18.84.030 (ATTACH ADDITIONAL SHEETS IF NECES- SARY). 1) THE PROPOSED CHANGE IN ZONING IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE AND LAND USE POLICY PLAN, THE PROVISION OF THE CITY ZONING CODE AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST. RESPONSE: THE SITE IS CURRENTLY DESIGNATED AS COMMERCIAL BY THE TUKWILA 2) 3 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE PROPOSED ZONING CHANGE FROM RMH TO P -0 IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMMERCIAL CLASSIFICATION. THE PROPOSED CHANGE IN ZONING IS APPROPRIATE IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE ZONING AND USE OF SURROUNDING PROPERTIES (IN ADDITION TO THE FOLLOWING NARRATIVE, SITE AND ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS SHOULD BE REFERENCED). Y P RESPONSE: STEP 3 n ' BANKS I SEP' R;OU DING AREAS ZONED R -3 AND R -4. ADJACENT PROPERTIES TO THE WEST ARE ZONED C -1 & C -2 AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE PROPOSED P -0 ZONING. IF THE REQUESTED CHANGE IN ZONING IS NOT IN AGREEMENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE POLICY PLAN, THE FOLLOWING EVIDENCE IS CITED IN SUPPORT OF THE NEED FOR THE REQUESTED RECLASSIFICATION. RESPONSE: N/A +H T' l#jrA.11e a-NT / HINI.1.. -r- 1 /1-.� GJCI.� ; I :100 1-5,2oN E. I , , f . 5149M FeriH r -0 Zc'NfN ^t' i i Cf { 1 U1 { / U PLA �F INCDEPT - - -.? ZONING A .. JAMES A. MURPHY• JOHN D. WALLACE DOUGLAS E. ALBRIGHT LEE CORKRUM•• WAYNE 0. TANAKA G. GEOFFREY GIBBSt LARRY C. MARTIN ROBERT G. ANDRE: MICHAEL G. WICKSTEAD OF COUNSEL RAYMOND O. OGDEN. JR. RAYMOND D. OGDEN (1876.1972) RONALD A. MURPHY ••1930.1983) JEH:jt Enclosures ..r+ ,:axr u: rcrr ..naxa• - LAW OFFICES OF OGDEN, OGDEN & MURPHY 2300 WESTIN BUILDING 2001 SIXTH AVENUE SEATTLE! WASHINGTON 98121 (206) 622.2991 M E M O R A N D U M TO: Mayor, Planning Director and Commission \_Chairman FROM: James Haney, Office of the City Attorney .RE: Johnson v. Vernon, 37 Wn. App. 214 (1984) DATE: May 1, 1984 ..- .»........�n : .: 4*_* Y`. �: n _ai+;�Y:�3!nvx �"{1'?,"di':'x:'. MARK A. EAMES R. MARK ALLEN STEVEN A. REISLER LAURA C. INVEEN CHRISTOPHER A. WASHINGTON JAMES E. HANEY ROSEMARY P. BORDLEMAY SUE E. FREEBORN •.LSO ADMITTED N CALOO.NIA •• ALSO *DIMMED IN DISTINCT Or MAMMA t ALSO ADMITTED M NOWIANA ALSO ADMITTED M COIOSADO, NI W 10.4 AND NEW JEMMY •ALSO ADMITTED IN WISCONSIN Attached is a case report which I have prepared regarding Johnson V. Mount Vernon, a recent case from the Court of Appeals. Also attached is a copy of the court's opinion. If you have any questions regarding the case, please don't hesitate to contact me. Johnson v. Mount Vernon, 37 Wn. App. 214 (1984) CASE REPORT (1) Court of Appeals holds that the application of a planned unit development to a particular tract of land constitutes..rezoning of such land and zoning authority's action on a proposed PUD shall be reviewed according to the same standard as an action on a rezone request, i.e., it will be overturned only if arbitrary or capricious. (2) A zoning authority acts arbi- trarily and capriciously when it acts on a rezone request without entering findings of fact and conclusions of law. I. FACTS Johnson, a land developer, filed an application with the City of Mount Vernon on March 31, 1980 for approval of a preliminary development plan for Timberline Park, a proposed 69 -acre mobile home planned unit development. Johnson's preliminary plat as to Phase I (45 lots) won the unanimous approval of the planning commission. Despite this approval, however, when the planned unit development was referred to the Mount Vernon city council, the council, by a divided vote on September 10, 1980, after much public debate during a public hearing, rejected Johnson's preliminary plat. Although the city council did not enter written findings of fact and con- clusions of law, the record of the public hearing contained comments from opponents to the proposal and from council members from which it could be inferred that the PUD was denied because of the incompatability of the proposal's density with the surrounding area. Johnson petitioned the Superior Court for Skagit County for review of the city council's' decision, asserting generally that the council denied approval of his plat because it was unpopular and that the council's decision was "arbitrary, capricious, and an abusive discretion." ' Johnson v. Mount Vernon, 37 Wn. App. 214 (1984) Page 2. II. ISSUES BEFORE THE COURT III. HOLDING OF THE COURT IV. REASONING OF THE COURT 1. What is the proper standard for judicial review of a city council decision denying a PUD proposal? 2. Is a city council required to enter written findings of fact and conclusions of law when acting on a rezone? The court held that the proper standard of review for denial of. a PUD proposal is the same as that used for denial of a'rezone, i.e., the decision of the city council will be overturned only if it can be characterized as arbitrary or . capricious. The'. court also held that a governmental body's .failure to enter written findings of fact and conclusions•of law in a rezone action constitutes arbitrary or capricious action. The court therefore reversed the holding of the Skagit County Superior Court which upheld the city council's action and remanded the matter to the Mount Vernon council for entry of appropriate findings of fact and conclusions. A. Standard of Review.. The court first determined that the legal nature and effect of the act of imposing a PUD upon a specific parcel of land is the same as rezoning. The court reasoned that a PUD results in such a change in permitted uses for the affected parcel that it must be considered a rezoning of that parcel. Given this determination, the court ruled that the proper standard of review for a denial of a PUD proposal is the same as that which the court has traditionally applied to rezones, that is, that an appellate court will overturn a city coun- cil's decision on a rezone or PUD only if that decision is arbitrary or capricious. B. Failure to Enter Findings and The court held that a governmental body's failure to enter written findings of fact and conclusions of law in a rezone constitutes arbitrary or capricious action. The court relied on the holding of the Washington Supreme Court in Parkridge v. Seattle, 89 Wn.2d 454, 573 P.2d 359 (1978) Johnson v. Mount Vernon, 37 Wn. App. 214 (1984) Page 3 JEH :jt wherein the Supreme Court imposed upon city councils and county commissioners the requirement of written findings of fact and conclusions. The court went on to state two important reasons in this type of case for a city council to enter proper findings and conclusions: 1. Written findings and conclusions provide guidance to the developer so that the developer may satisfy the council's objections or prepare another application; and • 2. The'absence of written findings including a statement of reasons for the council's action makes review by the courts difficult if not impossible. While the Court of Appeals agreed with the Superior Court that the record contained comments indicating that the basis for the denial may have been the density question, the appellate court stated that it could not, from the record; determine absolutely if this was the basis on which the council relied for disapproval. The court thus held the council's action in denying the rezone to be arbitrary and capricious. V. CONCLUSION This case serves to emphasize once again the necessity of a city council making a complete record, including written findings of fact and conclusions of law, when acting on land use matters. The density objection which was voiced in the public hearings before the Mount Vernon city council might have provided a legitimate basis for the council's denial of the planned unit development. Because the council failed to make written findings and conclusions with respect to this objection, however, the city was forced to go to considerable expense in litigating the case only to have the matter dropped back into the city's lap. 214 JOHNSON v. MOUNT VERNON 37 Wn. App. 214 The judgment is affirmed. RINGOLD and SCIIOLFIELD, JJ.; concur. Apr. 1984 • 1No. 10626 -I -I. Division One. April 2, 1984.1 KEITH JOHNSON, Appellant, V. THE CITY OF MOUNT VERNON, Respondent. II I Zoning — Planned Unit Development — Action by Zoning Authority — Review — Nature. The application of a planned unit development to a particular tract of land constitutes rezoning such land, and a zoning authority's action on such a proposal is reviewed in the same manner as action on a rezone request, i.e., it will be overturned only if arbitrary or capricious. 121 Zoning — Rezoning Judicial Review — Findings and Conclusions — Necessity. A zoning authority is arbitrary and capricious in acting on a rezone request without entering findings of fact and conclusions of law. The error of not entering findings and conclusions is not cured by a record before the zoning authority from which various reasons may he found to support the authority's action. Nature of Action: A land developer sought review of a city council's denial of his proposed planned unit develop- ment. Superior Court: The Superior Court for Skagit County, No. 42219, Walter J. Deierlein, Jr., .1., on June 29, 1981, sustained the action of the city council. Court of Appeals: Holding that the council's failure to enter findings and conclusions was arbitrary and capricious, the court reverses the judgment and remands the matter to the city council. T. Reinhard C. Wo1JJ, for appellant. Apr. 1984 JOHNSON v. MOUNT VERNON 37 Wn. App: 214 .Larry E. Moller, City Attorney, for respondent. • 215 SWANSON, J. —Keith Johnson, a Skagit. County land developer, appeals the order of the Superior Court dismiss- ing his petition for a writ of review, thereby affirming the Mount Vernon City Council's denial of Johnson's applica- tion for a preliminary plat of a planned unit development (PUD). • Johnson seeks to develop a 69 -acre tract located within the boundaries of the City of Mount Vernon as a planned unit development. He applied to the City on March 31, 1980 for approval of a preliminary development plan for Timberline Park (Timberline), a proposed 69. -acre mobile home subdivision. Johnson's preliminary plat as to phase I (45 lots) won the unanimous approval of the planning com- mission following public hearings and after initial rejection and submission of a revised plan. But despite the approval of the planning commission, the Mount Vernon City Coun- cil, by a divided vote on September 10, 1980, rejected Johnson's preliminary plat of Timberline. Johnson then petitioned the Superior Court for Skagit County for review of the City Council's decision, asserting generally that the Council denied approval of his plat because it was unpopular and not because of any technical . • deficiency. He claimed in his petition that the denial by the City was "arbitrary, capricious, and an abuse of discretion? Johnson also moved for summary judgment, requesting a remand to the Council for a clarification of the basis for its denial and a statement of the conditions for approval or absolute disapproval. The trial court denied the motion for summary judgment and proceeded to review the Council's actions.• The follow- ing findings of fact entered by the trial court describe the pertinent portions of the Council's proceedings: V. On August 6, 1980, another public hearing was held by the Mount Vernon Planning Commission on the revised development plan referred back to the City Council. 216 JOHNSON v. MOUNT VERNON 37 Wn. App. 214 After further public input and Commission discussion, the Planning Commission voted to recommend approval of the project to the City Council, limiting the approval to only 45 loss. VI. On September 10, 1980, a final public hearing was held before the Mount Vernon City Council. There was con- tinual public opposition to the proposal. Councilman Novotny tnoved to deny the proposal citing neighborhood opposition as the reason, but upon further explanation by Novotny, the Councilman indicated that the basis for the motion was the incompatibility of the proposal's density with the surrounding area. Councilman Bordner expressed similar concerns among others. The motion was adopted and the Plaintiffs proposal was denied. VII. On October 6, 1980, the City Council entertained the Plaintiff's request for reconsideration of their September 10, 1980, denial. A third Councilman, Mr. Nelson, reiter- ated the reason for the denial was due to the incompati- bility of the high density proposal with that. of the low density zoning surrounding it. The Council thereafter voted to not reconsider its earlier decision. VIII. Throughout the public hearings and meetings, numer- ous issues were raised and discussed by the public, the consider whether the proposal is harmonious with the surrounding area, whether it is consistent with the Com- prehensive Plan and whether there has been a showing made that granting this "exception" to the zoning ordi- nance is necessary due to a change of circumstances in the area. IV. The Mount Vernon City Council had the right and duty to consider the views of the community in making their decision, whether favorable or unfavorable; and to give substantial weight to those views as expressed in the public hearings. V. The motion to deny the preliminary development plan was sufficient to state the reasons for denial, and the City VI. The Mount Vernon City Council's determination that the Timberline P.U.D. proposal was inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan in terms of location and density was made after much deliberation and consideration of all the facts, and the Court concludes that there does exist room for two opinions on this matter. dismissed Johnson's petition and in effect affirmed the City Council's denial. This appeal followed. On. appeal Johnson raises two issues: (1) whether the Council's action was arbitrary and capricious because the Council failed to either approve the plan or state the con- ditions that precluded approval, (2) whether the density of a -PUD is determined on a per lot basis or a per acre basis. We must initially determine the proper standard of review for a denial of a PUD proposal. To determine that standard, it is necessary to ascertain the nature of the pro- ceeding. The City emphasizes in its brief that Johnson's proposed plat is not a standard preliminary plat proposal but a specialized type authorized by the Mount Vernon Municipal Code and points out that a PUD subdivision other words, the City argues that if Johnson desires to develop lots under 13,500 square feet on his 69 acres that are presently zoned for single family residences with mini- mum 13,500 - square -foot lots, he in essence desires a rezone, even if proceeding under the city code's PUD pro- visions which permit smaller lots. [ 1 ] We agree. A request for a PUD is treated as a request for a rezone. As our Supreme Court stated in Lutz u. Longuiew, 83 Wn.2d 566, 568 -69, 520 P.2d 1374 (1974): What is the legal nature and effect of the act of imposing a PUD upon a specific parcel of land? We hold that it is an act of rezoning which must be done by the city council because the council's zoning power comes 218 JOHNSON v. MOUNT VERNON Apr. 1984 37 Wn. App. 214 Council's action was not motivated solely by the neigh- borhood opposition but included reasons based on sound land use concerns. • here. 220 JOHNSON v. MOUNT VERNON Apr. 1984 37 Wn. App. 214 findings of fact and conclusions or reasons. The court in Parkridge stated at page 464: Henceforth, we also require, founded upon and sup- ported by the record, that findings of fact be made and conclusions or reasons based thereon be given for the action taken by the deciding entity (in this case, the city council). The Parkridge requirement established in January 1978 predated the hearing before the Mount Vernon City Coun -• cil in the instant case which took place on September 10, •.1980 and is therefore binding herein . We hold that in the instant case the City Council's deci- sion was arbitrary or capricious because it entered no writ- ten findings indicating its reasons for denial of Johnson's application. While the Superior Court found adequate rea- sons from a review of the discussion by council members, the trial court in its oral opinion had to rely for its conclu- sion upon an evaluation of the comments made. The court said in its oral opinion: The petitioner maintains this action was faulty in that the action taken by the Council failed to indicate why the petition was being denied. The motion itself fails to set forth reasons. An explanation given following the motion, based on reasons and specific reasons other than those in the mind of the voter. I mean by saying that probably the basis here was density. Some of these people who voted for it may have voted because of traffic problems and other reasons. (italics ours.) A review of the same record considered by the trial court reveals various reasons for the Council's decision. While some of the reasons expressed may justify the denial of Johnson's proposal, we do not know which 'We note that the Skagit County Board of Commissioners in considering a rezone in 1979 (prior to the City Council's action herein) adopted renolutions which detailed the reasons for the denial permitting proper appellate review. See Ruch .,ieb /I)anard. Inc. v. Skagit Cy.. 31 Wn. App. 489.643 P.2d 460 (1982). I • • 221 Apr. 1984 AKADA v. PARK 12 -01 CORPORATION 37 Wn. App. 221 reasons the Council relied upon for disapproval. There are two important reasons in this type of case for entering proper findings and conclusions. First, written findings and conclusions provide guidance to the developer. If the council does not provide reasons for the denial, the developer . is unable to satisfy the council's objections or prepare another application. If, for example, the majority of the Council believe the mobile home subdivision designed pursuant to the PUD ordinance should never be placed on Johnson's tract merely because it involves mobile homes, that reason should be made clear. Second, the absence of written findings including a statement of reasons for the Council's action makes appellate review difficult if not impossible. We therefore vacate the trial court's order and direct that the matter be remanded to the Mount Vernon City Council for the entry of appropriate findings of fact and conclusions stating reasons as mandated in Parkridge. CORBETT', A.C.J., and WILLIAMS, J., concur. (No. 10675 -9 -1. Division One. April 2, 1984.1 YOSItlo AKADA, ET AL, Appellants, v. PARK 12-01 . CORPORATION, ET AL, Respondents. Administrative Law and Procedure — Judicial Review — Certiorari — Timeliness. In the absence of a statute or rule pro- viding another time limit for a party to an administrative proceed- ing which is judicial in nature to seek review by certiorari, the time limit for courts of limited jurisdiction (JCR 73) will apply. The identity of the administrative body is not significant in determining the judicial nature of the proceeding. (2I Administrative Law and Procedure — Judicial Function — (1I • .. .,......_,_.........:....�..... : cz , Transamenec, Title Services DESCRIPTION: VESTED IN: Tax Account No. Year 115720- 0353 -08 1982 (Covers Parcel 1) $1,149.54 115720- 0352 -09 1982 (Covers Parcel 2) 115720- 0351 -00 1982 $ 755.17 (Covers portion of Parcel 3) 115720- 0350 -01 1982 $ 373.01 (Covers remainder of Parcel 3) 359700 - 0202 -09 1982 $1,004.61 (Covers Parcel 4) - continued- Transamerica Title Insurance Comp., Box 1493 10635 Northeast Eighth Street Bellevue, Washington 98009 (206) 628 -4661 THIRD LIMITED LIABILITY REPORT Western Pacific Properties 13975 Interurban Seattle, WA 98168 Attn: Sue Rogers -as hereto attached- Amount Billed $5,502.84 - as hereto attached - Order No. Charge: Tax: Total: Amount Paid $2,751.42 $ 574.77 $ 377.59 $ 186.51 $1,004.61 The levy code for the property herein described is 2380. PLANNING DEPT. 780795 $200.00 $ 13.00 $213.00 This is a report as of October 15, 1982 at 8:00 A.M., covering the property herein described. The information contained herein is restricted to the use of the addressee, and is not to be used as a basis for closing any transaction affecting title to said property. Libility is limited to the charge made for this certificate. /: � • G'(,'! 21. 198 EXCEPTIONS: A. General taxes, as follows, together with interest after delinquency: THIRD LIMITED LIABILITY REPORT VESTED IN: LEL, LTD., a Washington corporation, . as to Parcel 1; ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, a Pennsylvania corporation, as to Parcel 2; THE STATE OF WASHINGTON, as to that portion of Parcel 3 as condemned in King County Court Cause No. 6400726; and VIPS RESTAURANTS, INC., successor by merger to RESTAURANT INDUSTRIES, INC., both corporations, as to the remainder of Parcel 3; and SATOMI KATO, also known as TONY KATO, and DORIS KATO, also known as DORIS M. KATO, husband and wife, as to Parcel 4; Order No.. 780795 THIRD LIMITED LAitiJILITY REPORT "Page 2 B. Notice of additional latecomer charges by Tukwila Local Improvement District No. 29 for sewer or water facilities, the amounts and charges for which have been, or will be, levied against said property, as disclosed by the assessment rolls of said improvement district, wherein the specific amount levied is not disclosed. (Covers Parcel 4) 1. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Disclosed By: Purpose: Area Affected: 2. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Disclosed By: Purpose: Area Affected: Disclosed By: Purpose: Area Affected: Disclosed By: Purpose: Area Affected: Disclosed by: Purpose: Area Affected: Order No. 780795 Instrument recorded under Recording No. 721031 -0148 Easement for ingress, egress and utilities The Southeasterly corner of Parcel 1 Instrument recorded under Recording No. 730201 -0115 Ingress and egress Southwesterly corner of Parcel 2 3. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: 4. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: 5. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: As disclosed by Lease dated August 21, 1972 and recorded November 21, 1973, under Recording No. 731121 -0103 Ingress and egress Over a 14 by 50 foot strip along the Northwesterly line of Parcel 2 Instrument recorded under Recording No. 740304 -0470 Ingress and egress South 60 feet of East 25 feet of Parcel 3 Instrument recorded under Recording No. 750213 -0412 Ingress, egress and utilities West 25 feet of Parcel 4 South of the North 228 feet thereof - continued- 'Page 3 THIRD LIMITED LIABILITY REPORT 6. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Grantee: Purpose: Area Affected: Recording No.: 10. MEMORANDUM OF LEASE: Lessor: Lessee: Dated: Recorded: Recording No.: (Covers Parcel 4) Tony Kato and Doris Kato Vip's Restaurants, Inc. December 1, 1974 February 13, 1975 750213 - -0412 - continued- Order No. 780795 Puget Sound Power & Light Company, a Washington corporation Underground electric system Southwest portion of Parcel 1 and Parcel 3 780718 -0663 7. Declaration of covenants, conditions, restrictions and other terms thereof, as recorded under King County Recording No. 6557638. (Covers Parcels 1, 2 and 3) 8. Declaration of covenants, conditions, restrictions and other terms thereof, as recorded August 22, 1979 under King County Recording No 790822 -0496. (Covers portion of Parcel 1) 9. Terms and conditions of Boundary Line Adjustment No. 80 -4 -BLA recorded under Recording No. 801216 -0685. (Covers Parcel 1) 11. Condemnation by the State of Washington of right of access to State of Washington of right of access to state highway and of light, view and air by decree entered August 6, 1963, in King County Superior Court Cause No. 600726. Said easement rights were amended by instrument recorded March 6, 1969 under Recording No. 6479400 in that the right of access will be restored when the property herein described is reduced to the grade of the existing Primary State Highway No. 1 -RE, pursuant to the recommendations of Dames and Moore, Soil Engineers. (Covers Parcels 1, 2 and 3) 12. Right to make necessary slopes for cuts or fills upon property herein described as condemned in King County Superior Court Cause No. 600726. (Covers Parcels 1, 2 and 3) 13. Concomitant Zoning Agreement between City of Tukwila and George V. Forsyth and Elsie Forsyth, his wife, regarding future land usage dated August 18, 1969 and disclosed by City of Tukwila Ordinance No. 575. (Covers Parcels 1, 2 and 3) Lessor: Lessee: THIRD LIMITED LIABILITY REPORT Page 4 Lessor: Lessee: For a term of: Dated: Recorded: Recording No.: For a term of: From: Dated: Recorded: Recording No.: Order No. 780795 14. CONTRACT OF SALE AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Seller: State of Washington, Department of Highways Purchaser: V.I.P.'s Restaurants, Inc., an Oregon corporation Dated: January 1, 1976 Recorded: March 2, 1976 Recording No.: 760302 -0561 (Covers portion of Parcel 3) 15. LEASE AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Restaurant Industries, Inc. C. Robert Altman 20 years with renewal options from date August 21, 1972 December 28, 1972 721228 -0149 Lessee's interest in said lease is now held of record by Denny's Inc., a California corporation, by successive assignments recorded under Recording Nos. 730706 -0130 and 820928 -0456. (Covers portion of Parcel 1) 16. LEASE AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: C. Robert Altman Vip's Restaurants, Inc., an Oregon corporation 20 years 1st day after the issuance of Certificate of Occupancy August 21, 1972 November 21, 1973 731121 -0103 Lessor's interest in said lease is now held of record by Lel, Ltd., a corporation, by instrument recorded under Recording No. 731121 -0104. (Covers portion of Parcel'1) Lessee's interest in said lease is now held of record by Denny's, Inc., a California corporation, by instrument recorded under Recording No. 820517 -0589. 17. Right of first refusal of the City of Tukwila, as a result of surplussing the portion of property herein described taken for State Highway purposes. Before the Company can insure, it will be necessary to secure a city council resolution, and a quit claim deed from the City of Tukwila. (Covers portion of Parcel 3 vested in the State of Washington) - continued - 4wii.41" 'THIRD LIMITED LI;TLITY REPORT .Page 5 18. JUDGMENT: Against: In Favor of: For: Entered: King County Judgment No.: Superior Court Cause No.: Attorney for Judgment Creditor: NOTE 1: This report is made solely for the purpose of determining the status of property and cannot be used as the basis for any sale, mortgage, litigation, or other action affecting said property. Liability is limited to the sum paid therefor. DW:cz lc Stepan & Associates 930 South 336th St. Federal Way, WA 98003 ATTN: Paul Anderson n � ...ni, :,..�..... .. .. ..,...,,, .....n.i:I:• .+ .. •a "'i a't:K. .:7 - r,•.^, „, r. .,;'i,. i. •01'C!. VIP's Restaurants, Inc., a corporation Commercial Service Company, Inc., a corporation $117.69 September 14, 1982 82 -9- 13441 -0 80- 2- 10204 -4 Thomas G. Rakus By N eGoojer, itle 0 icer (628 -4645) Order No. 780795 TRANSAMERICA TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY -continued- THIRD LIMITED LIABILITY REPORT October 15, 1982 DESCRIPTION: PARCEL 1: That portion of Tract 35 of Brookvale.Garden Tracts, as per plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plats on page 47, records of King County, described as follows: Order No. 780795 Beginning at the intersection of the West line of the East 25 feet of an unplatted strip lying East of said Tract 35 and as described in Deed from Tony S. Kato and Doris M. Kato, his wife, to Restaurant Industries, Inc., and recorded under Recording No. 720803 -0148, records of said County, with the Northerly line of State Highway as condemned in King County Court Cause No. 600726; thence North 65 ° 16'34" West along said Northerly line 163.00 feet to the true point of beginning; thence North 24 ° 43'26" East at right angles to said State Highway Northerly line 160.00 feet; thence North 65 ° 16'34" West parallel to said Northerly line 305.00 feet; thence South 23 ° 54'26" West 102.85 feet to a point; thence South 27 ° 51'56" West to a point on the Northerly line of said State Highway, said line running Southeasterly from a point that is 70 feet Southeasterly, when measured at right angles, from the Mac Road centerline survey and 85 feet Northeasterly, when measured at right angles, from the 1 -RE line of State Highway Route 5 (PSH No. 1) to a point opposite Highway Engineers Station P.C. (1 -RE) 158 + 93.3 on said 1 -RE line and 70 feet Northeasterly therefrom; thence Southeasterly along said line to said point opposite Station P.C. (1 -RE) 158 + 93.3; thence South 65 ° 16'34" East along said State Highway, Northerly line 206.81 feet to the true point of beginning; TOGETHER WITH an easement for ingress, egress and utilities over a strip of land 10 feet in width lying adjacent to AND Westerly of the Westerly boundary and adjacent to AND Northerly of the Northerly boundary of the above described tract; AND TOGETHER WITH an easement for ingress, egress and utilities, described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the West line of the East 25 feet of an unplatted strip lying East of said Tract 35 and as described in Deed from Tony S. Kato and Doris M. Kato, his wife, to Restaurant Industries, Inc., and recorded under Recording No. 720803 -0148, records of said County, with the Northerly line of State Highway as condemned in King County Court Cause No. 600726; thence running North 0 ° 53'34" East 147.58 feet; thence North 65 ° 16'34" West 103.37 feet; thence North 24 ° 43'26" East 20.00 feet; thence South 65 ° 16'34" East to a point on the West line of the Interurban Addition, as per plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plats on page 55, records of said County; THIRD LIMITED LIABILITY REPORT DESCRIPTION (continued - page 2) - continued- Order No. 780795 thence South 0 ° 53'34" West along said Interurban Addition, West line to the aforesaid State Highway Northerly line; thence North 65 ° 16'34" West along said Northerly line 27.33 feet, more or less, to the point of beginning; Situate in the City of Tukwila, County of King, State of Washington. PARCEL 2: That portion of Tract 35 of Brookvale Garden Tracts, as per plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plats on page 47, records of King County, and of the unplatted strip of land adjoining on the East of said Tract 35 in the Southeast 4 of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the East line of said unplatted strip with the North line of State Highway as condemned in King County Court Cause No. 600726; thence Northwesterly along said North line to its intersection with a line which is 25 feet West of as measured at right angles to and parallel with the East line of said unplatted strip and the true point of beginning; thence continuing Northwesterly along the North line of said Highway a distance of 163 feet; thence North at right angles to the North line of the Highway a distance of 135 feet; thence East parallel with the North line of said Highway to a point in said line which is 25 feet West of and parallel with the East line of said unplatted strip; thence South along said line to the true point of beginning; TOGETHER WITH an easement for ingress, egress and utilities over a strip of land 25 feet in width being the 25 foot strip of land lying South of the Easterly projection of the North line of the main tract hereinabove described and lying East of and contiguous to the East line of said main tract, and lying North of the highway; AND TOGETHER WITH an easement for ingress, egress and utilities, described as follows: Beginning at the Southwest corner of above described main tract; thence Northwesterly along the North line of the highway a distance of 20 feet; thence Northeasterly to a point in the West line of said main tract which is 50 feet North of the point of beginning; thence South along said West line to the point of beginning; Situate in the City of Tukwila, County of King, State of Washington. THIRD LIMITED LIABILITY REPORT 'DESCRIPTION (co inued - page 3) PARCEL 3: Tract 35 of Brookvale Garden Tracts, as per plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, on page 47, records of King County; EXCEPT that portion lying Westerly of a line described as follows: Order No. 780795 Beginning at the intersection of the North line of said Tract 35 with a line drawn parallel with and 70 feet Northeasterly, when measured at right angles and /or radially, from Mac Road centerline survey; thence Southeasterly, Southerly and Southwesterly, parallel to said Mac Road centerline survey, to a point 85 feet Northeasterly, when measured at right angles, from the 1 -RE line of State Highway Route 5 (PSH No. 1), and the terminus of said line; ALSO, an unplatted strip of land adjoining said property on the East, lying between the East line of said property and the East line of the Southwest 1/4 of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M.; AND EXCEPT that portion of said Tract 35 of Brookvale Garden Tracts, described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the West line of the East 25 feet of an unplatted strip lying East of said Tract 35 and as described in Deed from Tony S. Kato and Doris M. Kato, his wife, to Restaurant Industries, Inc., and recorded under Recording No. 720803 -0148, records of said County, with the Northerly line of State Highway as condemned in King County Court Cause No. 600726; thence North 65 ° 16'34" West along said Northerly line 163.00 feet to the true point of beginning; thence North 24 ° 43'26" East at right angles to said State Highwa Northerly line 160.00 feet; thence North 65 ° 16'34" West parallel to said Northerly line 305.00 feet; thence South 23 ° 54'26" West 102.85 feet to a point; thence South 27 ° 51'56" West to a point on the Northerly line of said State Highway, said line running Southeasterly from a point that is 70 feet Southeasterly, when measured at right angles, from the Mac Road centerline survey and 85 feet Northeasterly, when measured at right angles, from the 1 -RE line of State Highway Route 5 (PSH No. 1) to a point opposite Highway Engineers Station P.C. (1 -RE) 158 + 93.3 on said 1 -RE line and 70 feet Northeasterly therefrom; thence Southeasterly along said line to said point opposite Station P.C. (1 -RE) 158 + 93.3; thence South 65 ° 16'34" East along said State Highway, Northerly line 206.81 feet to the true point of beginning; AND EXCEPT that portion of Tract 35 of said Brookvale Garden Tracts, and of the unplatted strip of land adjoining on the East of said Tract 35 in the Southeast 4 of Section 23, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., described as follows: Beginning at the intersection of the East line of said unplatted strip with the North line of State Highway as condemned in King County Court Cause No. 600726; thence Northwesterly along said North line to its intersection with a line which is 25 feet West of as measured at right angles to and - continued- THIRD L DESCRIP paralle point o thence Highway thence a dista thence a point with th thence Situate PARCEL ... MITED LIABILITY REPORT Order No. 780795 ION (continued - page 4) with the East line of said unplatted strip and the true beginning; ontinuing Northwesterly along the North line of said a distance of 163 feet; orth at right angles to the North line of the highway ce of 135 feet; ast parallel with the North line of said Highway to in said line which is 25 feet West of and parallel East line of said unplatted strip; outh along said line to the true point of beginning; in the City of Tukwila, County of King, State of Washington. That po tion of Lot 11 of Interurban plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, County, lying North of the Northerly Route 1 as conveyed to the State of under R:cording No. 5473599; EXCEPT she East 450.86 feet thereof; Addition to Seattle, as per . on page 47, records of King line of Primary State Highway Washington, by deed recorded Situate in the City of Tukwila, County of King, State of Washington. = T ' Transameruca Title Insurance Services r Western Pacific Properties 13975 Interurban Seattle, WA 98168 ATTN: Sue Rogers L ❑ Deed dated and recorded ❑ Contract dated and recorded ❑ Mortgage dated and recorded Deed of Trust dated and recorded Doted as of Disclosed by: Purpose: Area Affected: forms No. WAK•73S Rev. 12.73 (Previous form No. 1163) NTD:cz October 25, 1982 Transamerica Title Insurance Company J SUPPLEMENTAL TITLE REPORT The following matters affect the property covered by this order: 1. EASEMENT AND THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS THEREOF: Instrument recorded No. 6007217 Ingress, egress and The East 30 feet of . � .�.. }. +:( "�. YOUR LOAN NO MORTGAGOR PURCHASER OUR ORDER NO 780795 as file No as file No as file No as file No Paragraph (s) No of our preliminary commitment is eliminated. The policy is being issued in accordance with your instructions. Our inspection of the premises on discloses: under Recording utilities Parcel 4 ya Except as to the matters reported hereinabove, the title to the property covered by this order has NOT been reexamined. ❑ There has been no change in the title to the property covered by this order since , EXCEPT the matters noted hereinabove. (dote of lost report) at 8:00 A.M. TRANSAMERICA TITLE INSURANCE CO. B Neil T. DeGoojer y (628 -4645) NOV . 2 1982 walbn floc A gpeties 6007217 GIANTO* 3. SATOYI KATO, who in identical with TONY KATO, and DORIS KATO, his wife, foraadlats•aldantloaet no consideration but to evidence Grantees' interest in the hereinafter described property crw'V eedqufaclals u MICHIO KATO and HISAKO KATO, his wife, tie foilv.frg daecrfbed teal watt, dtuted In tl. County a1 King State of Vraahlnjton lneludiss any Wariest ther.fa which Sraatar :nay hereafter acaulret :•hs wait 150 fort of the east 450.86 :set of tract 11, Interurban Addition to the Cit;, of :enttl', nocordin to plat rsoordsd in voltne 10 of plats, page 55, in ling , .;aunty, •sach=nSton, ezoeyt tb_t portion thereof oonce;ed to the :tote of . :achir.;,ton or :rig,.cry State ::ighw_y No. 1, ty deed recorded under auditor's mile :.o. 5473599. YOG = :_? with an ease =eat for it: :race s.^d 'areas and utilities o'er, under na4.across that portion of the t^aat 30 :sat o: the last 460.06 fest of tract 11, Interurban Addition to the J3ty sonording Zo plat recorded in 'ol'a:s 10 of plats, pats 55, in King %.:cun.ty, ..actington, lying of pri=cey State -ighway ::o. 1 and lying_YBQ,,.QQ :oat southerly of tts north line of said trot 11. Any road construction on said easement be with the written approval of the grantors. Subject to an easement of ingress and egress and utilities•over, under and across the most ■nuiherly thirty feet of the land conveyed hereby, provided that if this 3 oo ease of is not used within two years from date hereof, said easement shall cease and terminate. Dead this 1 .4 Quit Claim Deed ea.. Lee• February, 1968. «.y Paige is oaf of a,t:yg,.. 1e am Seattle. STATE Or WASHLNGTON, Ccaty KING Ce 11 ...�ia : y,i so.�r'_ herte i a w' s yATOYI KAYO, who is identical with Tony Kato d en kao.a m a . b e . ' tan tod:nc j ee►:.o.e m aid ro nent:ad :oa w:_ ..v 1 :'47.:::./ :ea:- .-.e: ud Kinovt +died that they i 3, u —ne at their fr.a nd vn:nt uy a� and d.ed, for do tear sad p'urpo..a tiarela taciJan•d. •GIIZY under e7 Land and o5dal Kai this / j • ARCO Ilwommo SOUTHCENTER BLVD ON.•■• PK NAIL FOUND (a-17-8* EiRoopia mac) 56 D 4A3 # a/ 7 E - ? LIMITED ACCESS LINE PZ 3AV "• . • r :s 1- 71,.11044 > ;> � ,� • aro4orit' +" • . v t, o 8 r • Q. • ct- • 7r • .•7 t, :..... • • ,;. f y. q ' h I•_, L AI S E-or IT • • Q4•rT /M Po -OM Q .1 • d rr o I • h • `•- • Jo 4 1i A f Pr 4, • • rromooto *rm. 1-605:oF oarrt. HOe•H terE E.ArJr oF abITE JTH aaiTE. ••••••••••.-r. ;.."4-112 WOE. 4 Zot-IIMe, L Cer•••erp N ZON4kI Peever.rr - arr. Flopoemo• P.o 4••• I C ge-E Lkyr rufgENT - ■ Plrorryro- PlorLocnoH4L./oFFeE OwEr. pliNit•to.al • 6Ecvf.4 •oTATtomi ItEttro‘ust"tqf LOKX:il IN liallro V•LA.M7 Ealli}CNIEL E. , PrOltro6.0 ve-R4.*4-ZE To 1.41't. THE 16 Fool mom' wzo 1./.440er-dkriNG KEQLFEE.MENT To 041.1c4.1 . Jt411 12z, ex"re Hp - 0 - m uTI-1 fle-orEETT La‘IE • IN c•cnirEw roe. THOO d‘...Lo....441-r-E, 11•E. AITLIC.04-rr WiLL LANDE4 THE C.:TY rgor ,..."EFAGL•0 be, FEET DETWEEHI 'U1-CE4.-1 eo641..avrgio "No "Ha rporwmto PRoPE-IrrY 0Na. .3r101-1 A. A 41 TE • trpU L4 4 • idect-1 I i . 1 ! 1 ' I 7 77.. • * • • 11-41:404•4 Er4EHENT • • •-■ . • . •:•471.1G1t1-11114 , .... • ' , pew fizr.1 PC0- ISO 1 - r - 2 NCI Lt.. LEVF-4.- 47 Pet:it, sfa 19.041040. 44 . . 1 . I te S. ■ • • 4 p.;•; 1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111P1111:111 • . 9 .••• , • •',.0 , •.•":"• 41. • „4 9; all.). • , • 0%,§3 , • •t• 1 ,,..• 11111111111111111A11110.. 141111111111111111111111111111111111111111111.1111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 11111111 4 • u • .4. 0 le THE INCH 1 3 4 - 6 7 8 9 10 11 " 6131 12 IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS.DUE TO 1, 0€ 6Z BC LZ 9Z SZ EZ ZZ LZ THE IUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCIJMENTL 7 L. 9 s 4, C e I ii iii iii titi iiiiIiii iiii ii 1111 irt 11111711111111111116111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 •, -z,.?!.!..0,7,0! ' • 4.•.14 J NOm., DE • N ' t1541,Mr0712NTInta."."b, . -•••• -;- s \s• I / ■ ^ _ • -• • • - ; Arrg..c>4 m<1 — NEW 6,2c co. yt:s. 5 1/2,_ Ly.e.t7 As 1'NT-4 1.-ar FILL- P-e-QUIRetD • ji : • I i iii I III I III P IL I III I III I I I I I I I I I I I I 1 111 1 111 1 111 1 111 1 111 1 111 1 111 1 1 1 1 1 0 16 THS INCH 1 3 4 5 6 7 \ 8_, 9 10 11 "DEIN Gin "" 12 IF THIS MICRO DOCUMENT IS LESS1 OC 6Z 8c LZ 9? GZ 47Z ICI-EAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO IP 0 1 ,11113■Tii ti !IT I OF ..., 1111 ez za . • •. . :, • T1-11 DW&. CAW& PcKTE.1) 4•4* rrit.37 TO crrj 1 1110111/Mut EIS111011 GROINPAPS" ARCH! TE CT URI; PLANNING AND INTERIOR • DESIGN: . , 2000 112T11 AVE NE', BELLEVUE: WASH, 98004 (206)4543344 Jos*" e; 6, • 18'84 10 -"a -84 4 4 4 ∎ rE . :,,!,,A,,4 5 1, '''. :F+'''y4 64.Pt6 } ro Jltl :",t .,:q y 1 �f . . �I 4d AFr, IIIIIIIII11111111111111111111111I111I1111111I11111PTIIIlIIIII111 IIIAT1 11111111111111111 . 1111 . 1 111 ) 1- 11J1ILIIIIIIIII111111111 0 .....I... 1 2 3 4. 5 6 7 1 _.- 8 9 IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO 1 li 111)1lll OE 6z 8e L 9z 9z VE C " EE 2z j THE UALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT 8 8 L 9 t l �1 (1l!! n u) u d I I ull III I i nl I i I II i I IIII IIA IIII IIII I II IIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIII I II IIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIlIIIII I I 1 uulunnnll 1 1111 l I I u � 5•.,, 4r', c. � Is r" '7+[ 7nr,` � - ;;ti .'r+•4'I,,..r 1111111111111111111111111111111111 10 11 12 s 9 E z e .0 111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII111111IIIIIIIIII1111 FXI �-�°'7 H elxrH 120 I/1011 I -a" `/IGIN.) 1' No -5- .-- 4 1 15321 15 32 -- o to �Xf�Tll -Ka Grl�PttDE H 1 g - MT1L1 4 14CCr (ia,V -0-11- 1. 5. s 2oHlhk'a °x fHGEl -rruz t:21-VP. I- a6°.71oN ZoNE M evIT Ft o we or 4 711 - E -2. H TH of 07ITE. 1z_4 coN4 *.AT of '-+ITE K•q ONTH OF'I — $o4 -rrE. . I' 1::) I �e2 IzFG2UI12Ep f (�VIpCb . (ITY T o � F [ I.4 i A riCEEENT• Y,.'4 T � pN ri "P°46t7' ofIG 13L / f ‘'E4vlcE 4I of - IFLIr ((,,t1 -AND) Nillil C V EX1 l� �l �3 +oci� ®MOM® L _ I b m ( ,1 I L• iw • m 'Y. (gill �► 1 i`�1 ICI � 11 y • '1011111MMII Il�rl iirn��l�s Ill�illrl MIZEMEITAMMi ®® ®® ® ®vml ®j ,, 1 i� ® ., il ... ,.,.. mt€I Ii�IIIii�,m_, �tl...Wli : tee • �oNr� �LE��T ICI -I ■ mot. � s.���.• u at ,d v: I 4 .I M, II I��r r�' I�MEM .►M 11 �IIR � 9P I✓Ip� II�I r wr• '. A� t' �. I I I i l I ,. I f � l Y r ql 1 11 Ili , �7 YIPItIl14Ui�rtl I I • �` l'�� 11 �,! \R\ DINWEI / . �... l .v�anll�n .. • '•1 W DoT L E�/ oN i t44 Tyr, 1 \ zrI o► - -I I'✓UILDING FXTEJ Iofz - ice P.� - plz; A �i TEM olz ILlalz �TI.ICr - - "P`I'PE N TEI CaIAZ►1 - �Ca To • P f FLFLTIVE C1L o, Folz- • Loco - i H of EXTEIZIol LI�HTII a �E:E cIT PION, b 4.1 0 sd PI V � N g i� 4i 4 En o Z CO CO CO ON MITHUN • EMRICH GROUP PS ARCHITECTURE PLANNING AND INTERIOR DESIGN 2000 112TH AVE NE BELLEVUE. WASH 98034 (205)454.3344 JOB NO.& z ,o2. DATE: 10 /21/e5 7 /I /5c: 7°,I LAND F r ZANII�IG L oc" T to N 261NI1.-tc. I -NT - izMH IrR ?F 2 L7- P•o W5A7r OFSITE c G •2 NoR'M of eoiTe t� .AP F ctTE LANs L PP- ENT - v NT p ,9EU Gt9'IGE MINI• •T • S VIE 1= � °�TAGFZAN T CONCX> rl rl vp.CAN T To I,.IAIvE THE IE Foal FRONT YAfzD LPNrxJG,�'ING leF -4UI MENT To , U•DW F' To ExlE.ND TO 1-1E 'oL.l'FH I- oPEKTY L . , IN GdMPEh1�f�TjoN Foie THr), fti..•LOI- -LANCE I THE APPLIG✓ I-4ILL N7SG E THE oITY Pleor L -JH1 H "vE G 3o FEET 1N WIDVH C�ETWEEN SoLATHGE-1 - 1 - = AI`IP THE SITE ProPeizrr LINE. :r%4: zen - +12z . _. — *Ito'•o'' —• -- t98 •o" ;es`3 =n aSx -'.F& _ —•, u.�:.2::uS:T -1�iui ' +-ltr +F.v ww, • ,. YJ'[�..•.;;.•.. i ( YfGINI Mai _ . 2 Nu Ll=►. 3 Ems• LC- '�/rL. !APR 5 1984 1Y Ur ]Ura:I.A PLANNING DEPT. I 9 tr. � v, : ll�+' + M. Y. : i .. IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII11111111IlIlIII1111111I1I1Il 1111111∎ IIIIIIIII .IJJ_1111III,I.I.Lllllllllf IIIII1III1II111 ICI. II1Il, Jlll. 11111011111111111111111111110111111111111111111lll 3 _4. .... 5 _6 7 1, 8_ 9 10 11 ••" ' 12 IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS\ CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO' OE 6z se tz 9z Ez yz ez; ' zE tE THE UALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT,, 6 e c 9 s n C z I w p III I II I I I I I II I - I I — II II I IJ I IIII Hum IIII IIII IIIIIIIIII In - 1111 IIIIIIOIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII�III 1IGi ilium II iii I I uluuhulluuluull ,._ 7 , 7T ,- ". 4 JOB NKD 83o2b DATE • 4 •.j' • 81-