HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 81-05-R - SUNWOOD CONDOMINIUMS - PHASE III REZONE81-05-R
SUNWOOD BOULEVARD
SUNWOOD PHASE III
C ity of Tukwila Fire Chief Crawley
Fire Department
OFFICE FI MEMO
TO: Planning Dept.
FROM: Fire Marshal.
SUBJECT: Sunwood, ase III (proposed)
DATE: April 28, 1983
For this plan to be approved as submitted, the following items
will be required:
1. All buildings shall be fully sprinkler protected.
2. Five fire hydrants shall be installed.
3. All buildings shall be of fire - resistive construction.
4. Maximum grade on any street, road or driveway shall not
exceed 15 %.
5. All corner radii to be 35 feet, minimum.
6. Designated FIRE LANES will be required to maintain
unobstructed 20 foot wide driving lanes throughout.
City of Tukwila , Fire Department, 444 Andover Park East, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 575 -4404
SUNWOOD CONDOMINIUMS PHASE III REZONE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
F. A. LESOURD
WOOLVIN PATTEN
DONALD D. FLEMING
GEORGE M. HARTUNG
MEADE EMORY
LEON C. MISTEREK
DWAYNE E.COPPLE
THOMAS 0. MOLAUGMLIN
JOHN F. COLGROVE
C. DEAN LITTLE
LAWRENCE E. HARD
RODNEY J. WALDBAUM
Mr. Brad Collins
Director, Department of
Planning
City of Tukwila
Tukwila City Hall
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, WA 98188
LEH:sk
cc: Mayor Todd
Mr. Gary Van Dusen
Mr. Karl B. Lewis
(206) 624 -1040
June 4, 1981
LESOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING, HARTUNG & EMORY
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
3900 SEATTLE -FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98184
GI NCDWCiD
JUN 8 1981
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DEPT. ,
Dear Brad:
At the June 2, 1981 City Council meeting, the Council
passed two motions which related to the granting of the
rezone ordinance to the Sunwood Development. Both motions
related to a requirement that the owner- developer provide
at least one additional jacuzzi facility on the subject
site.
Would you please make arrangements to send a copy of the
minutes of the June 2 meeting to Mr. Karl B. Lewis, an
attorney who both resides in the Sunwood Development and
represented a number of the homeowners. His address is
Unit B 33, 15209 Sunwood Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington
'98188.
A notation should be made in some appropriate place to
be sure that when the Planning Commission sits as an
architectural review board for purposes of development
of that property, that this City Council action is specif-
ically addressed at that time.
Very truly yours,
ROBERT L. PALMER
COUNSEL
LeSOURD, PATT , _FLEMING, 1JAKtUNG & EMORY
awre iL3 E'. (lard
BRUCE G. MANSON
RICHARD P. MATTHEWS
D. WILLIAM TOONE
DANIEL. D. WOO
CARL. J. CARLSON
P. WARREN MAROUARDSON
LAWRENCE A. M. ZELENAK
JULIE 0. WADE
MARIANNE SCMWARTZ OIDARA
V.P.C. Form No. 87 Rev. 7-79
Affidavit of Publication
}
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF KING
Michele Roe
JUIN , 19....
SS.
being first duly sworn on
oath, deposes and says that she is the Chi ef Clerk of
THE DAILY RECORD CHRONICLE, a newspaper published six (6) times a
week. That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been
for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to,
printed and published in the English language continually as a newspaper
published four (4) times a week in Kent, King County Washington, and it is
now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the
aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. That the Daily Record
Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior
Court of the County in which it is published, to-wit, King County,
Washington. That the annexed is a Qr.diatinae...1216
1266.9
as it was published in regular issues (and
not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period
of 1 consecutive issues, commencing on the
7 June , 81
day of 19 , and ending the
day of 19 , both dates
inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub-
scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee
charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $ 5 1 • ..3.9 which
has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the
first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent
insertion.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 11
Chief Clerk
day of
Notary Public in and for the Stateof Washington,
residingn County.
— Passed by the Legislature, 1955, known as Senate Bill 281, effective June
9th, 1955.
— Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures,
adopted by the newspapers of the State.
' ''0 0 X+At t P4I1 .°
1 'li ..
-
1 '''I,' - ;-":,"
:::;: . : : ;:.4:; :,sc .i
,,,
‘ypcs!... •••••••,• sr:44 ...41•7,...s. '
• '1, ..ekrs'f?..s , '.',.- ill '.•
. .t•ir.;.,fht, 4 t....... ,A,y•4: • '', • 4
. . ', • -.4 .■07 .. .:Ki.. ,,, g
. 4 , .
;..' :: : , ,
. 1 c . .' .:;t:s4.
:
I
Af
•
,..; .. ,, ,, IIi 1 .... ..rt : 2 ,,,. i r.. .4 l : ,.. ... 4 , , ,ire 1 i., ... , :' ,... .: - 41 7., '. : . v i4 , 1 .: : 1 : :: :'1 :1 1 : ,,, :1- 1„ 44 :::: - : :' : ' , :4 4 . 1 7 ,,,:_ ::‘,. :
-.. ,,..bm.,?:53
4 1
,,i.
- i'.
• "4—* PX .-, A1 tle
A13,,,,,;.„,e,,,•;,p,,,ip,:i.,-,-, .:-1
• *vv. lx-,q , viv. .■!...;..i.#4.
:1,....M"..."4400.Y-e57
OpN,74,
• .t
.e
t,
•
Ott.pal Try oF
g - b1- 11 o .4
JUN f "1 1.981
WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO /c2 /b
uKWIL
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
RECLASSIFYING CERTAIN LANDS FROM R -3 TO R -4, AS
DESCRIBED IN PLANNING DEPARTMENT MASTER FILE NO.
81 -5 -R.
4 4 6 A-0— ,/;
CQUNC;�L I.CTIO�1j
WHEREAS, a Declaration of Non - Significance was granted by the
City's SEPA Responsible Official on February 25, 1981, under City File
EPIC 158 -81, and
WHEREAS, said Declaration of Non - Significance pertains only to
the legislative act of rezoning and reserves the City's option to conduct
separate environmental review for any project proposed subsequent to the
grant of the rezone, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a Public Hearing
on said rezone application on February 26, 1981, and at the applicant's
request reconsidered their recommendation of approval with stipulations
on April 23, 1981, and
WHEREAS, the result of the Planning Commission's deliberations
on April 23, 1981, resulted in their decision to recommend denial of the
rezone action, citing unresolved concerns regarding adequacy of ingress/
egress, intensity of project - generated traffic volumes, adequacy of recre-
ation and open space opportunities, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered the environmental
significance of the proposed rezone action, the recommendation of the
Planning Commission and the subsequent analysis by staff of the Planning
Commission's concerns as presented at the City Council Committee of the
Whole Meeting of May 12, 1981.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The real property which is the subject of this
ordinance is described in the attached legal description (Exhibit A) and
is shown on the attached site map (Exhibit B).
Section 2. After reviewing the documents set forth in Planning
Department Master File 81 -5 -R and having heard materials presented by the
property owner's representative, the City Council makes the following
findings of fact:
A. The real property, which is the subject of this rezone re-
quest, is described in Exhibit A. It is currently zoned R -3.
B. The proposed zoning classification of R -4, as shown on
Exhibit B, is generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
C. The proposed rezone action will not be injurious to the
peace, safety, health or general welfare of the community nor injurious
to property value in the immediate vicinity.
Section 3. Based on these findings of fact, the Council makes
the following conclusions and conditions relating to and restricting the
subject real property:
A. Overall residential density permitted on this site shall
not exceed 20 D.U. /acres.
B. Any project proposed on this site subsequent to City Council
approval of the subject rezone action shall require Board of Architectural
Review of site, architecture and landscaping details prior to issuance of
building permits.
Section 7. The conditions and restrictions contained in this
ordinance shall be covenants and restrictions running with the land and
shall be binding on the owners, their heirs, successors and assigns.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
at a regular meeting thereof this r ,? �- day of 1981.
Section 4. Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions
and conditions, the subject property is reclassified from R -3 to R -4.
Section 5. The zoning map adopted by reference by Ordinance No.
251 is hereby amended to reflect the changes by the rezoning action taken
in this ordinance.
Section 6. The City Clerk is directed to record a copy of this
ordinance and attachments with the King County Department of Records and
Elections.
Appraved as to Form:
ATTEST:
AM.. ILI
Ci y £ttorney, Lawrenc E. Hard
Published Record- Chronicle - June 7, 1981
ity C erk
LEGAL DESCRIP 4
c
_..„�V Vlp1 -
EXHIBIT
Parcel A (Kato Property)
The West 150 feet of the East 450.86 feet of Tract 11, Interurban
Addition to the City of Seattle, according to the plat recorded in
Volume 10 of Plats, page 55, in King County, Washington;
EXCEPT that portion lying Southerly of the following described line:
Commencing at a point on the East line of said Tract 11, 162.79 feet
North of the Southeast corner of said tract;
thence South 89 West 159.21 feet;
thence South 00 East 38.26 feet;
thence South 89 West 141.65 feet to the True Point of Beginning;
thence Northwesterly parallel to the centerline of Southcenter Blvd.
(Renton -Three Tree Point Road) to the West line of the East 450.86
feet of said Tract 11 and the end of said line.
Parcel 8
•This portion of Tract'll, Interurban Addition to Seattle, according
to plat recorded in Vol. 10 of Plats, p. 55, in King County, __
Washington, described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the
eastline of said Tract 11 which is 162.79 feet North of the South-
east corner thereof; thence continuing North 0 8' W. 359.88 feet to
the Northeast corner of said Tract 11; thence South 89° 52' West along
the northerly line thereof 300.86 feet; thence South 0°08' East
398.14 feet; thence North 89 52' East 141.65 feet; thence North
0° 08' West 38.26 feet; thence North 89'52' East 159.21 feet to point
of beginning.
PLANNING DEPT
SITE ACREAGE
TUKWILA ZONING
LAND USES
SUNWOOD PHASE I
SUNWOOD PHASE III
ARCHITECTS -PLANNERS
1
11
1
1 1
11
11
I I
nJ 1
e FN fr
•
0
11
K- 5
/S9 2/
ti ; i
I .1 X19, ;
10 3 tii
_ / I
i0,4 86 1 ." ,, i
•1-
154
i
EXHIBIT A
VICINITY MAP
EHMKE- KATO -KATO REZONE
12 1- - -�
I
,
0
a o
o
' I ' , T n
i I t� 1,\ / �r� V51 :� 1 V 11 ^' I 1 ' 1 j 100 +
r
▪ �, 40
1 3° 0
0 Li
1715 � .
:
6' 1
• co
16
-1.:3.
I5
-PIPE LINE —
TUKWI LA
v
CS C
��� tu °m A F
P
6. Q
S i•
11'
I
1
N
I I
I
r +� i
I f/
M r
115
0
Ui
-
211' 90
6 El
sE r /Ct
7 /027
I !
ti
153 r i O
L
�5 A
� Sc
7r
71,0
tt
'
/SO 2SO
'-'5
tU
W
1 541
ST
! !rJ .1 tt-- I >
1
4
• Js L ! •
17 3 -
c//a /reo
TL :STATE``
R-i-G 475.
PART
IVI "\.i Vr. Vi11
June 2, 1981
Page 2
81D AWARDS
Janitorial
Service
OLD BUSINESS
Ordinance #1215 -
Changing the name
of the custodian
for the Advance
Travel Expense
Account
VV VIW i1.,
Ordinance #1216 -
Reclassifying cer-
tain lands from R -3
to R -4 (Sunwood,
Phase III)
101... 11..1£11NW
*MOTION CARRIED.
*MOTION CARRIED.
*MOTION CARRIED.
,,.......,��...,� ....,....,..�.. _.�.....
Mayor Pro -Tem Van Dusen noted that the current Janitorial Service
has terminated their services with the City. The Public Works
Director has asked Council approval to Call for Bids to ensure
continuity of services.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT COUNCIL APPROVE THE
CALL FOR BIDS FOR JANITORIAL SERVICES IMMEDIATELY.*
Mayor Pro -Tem Van Dusen said there have been reasons, both pro
and con, on why they terminated their services. He asked to
have one of the Committees look into this.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT THIS ITEM BE REVIEWED
BY THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE.*
Councilman Harris asked in what area this company was unsatis-
factory. Ted Uomoto, Public Works Director, said it was many
areas. They have been trying to get the contractor to meet the
requirements listed in the signed contract.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE
BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED.
City Attorney read an ordinance of the City of Tukwila, Washington,
changing the name of the custodian for the Advance Travel Expense
Account, amending Section 2 of Ordinance No. 614, and repealing
Ordinance Nos. 778, 890, 940, 1050 and 1083.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1215 BE
ADOPTED AS READ.*
Mayor Pro -Tem Van Dusen questioned if the name of the Finance
Director, rather than the title is necessary. Attorney Hard
said that the State Auditor Bulletin No. 010 sets forth the
requirement that a person's name is necessary.
However, the people who currently administer the program for
the State Auditor's Office do not take that position. Some
other cities name just the office, and the Auditor's Office has
taken no action against them. It makes sense to name the office
instead of an individual, so you don't have to amend the ordi-
nance every time there is a change. The safe course would be
to adopt the ordinance naming the individual. Councilman Harris
said, while she held the position of City Treasurer, she was told
many times that you abide by the Auditor's Bulletins. Until such
time as the bulletin is repealed, we need to follow it.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE
BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED.
EXHIBIT F
City Attorney Hard read an ordinance of the City of Tukwila,
Washington, reclassifying certain lands from R -3 to R -4, as
described in Planning Department Master File No. 81 -5 -R.
MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1216,
AS AMENDED BY THE CITY ATTORNEY, BE ADOPTED AS READ.*
Attorney Hard noted that he added a new Section 4 to clarify the
action of the ordinance. The property is rezoned from R -3 to
R -4.
A 5: I BUSINESS - Cont.
/Ordinance #1216 -
Reclassifying cer-
tain lands from R -3
to R -4 (Sunwood,
Phase III) (cont.)
iA CITY COUNCIL, REGUII, MEETING
r 3 r, 1981
RECESS:
Mr. Don Dalley, Pacific Townhouse Builders, 1370 Stewart Street,
#100, Seattle, noted that since the meeting of May 12, they have
met with the homeowners that occupy Phase I of the condominium
project. Their concern is adequate recreation facilities. He
requested that a condition be placed in the rezoning ordinance
that they add one jacuzzi, which is equal to size and capacity
of the one installed under Phase I. The location will be either
in Phase III or among the other recreation facilities near the
swimming pool. Councilman Hill asked if it wasn't the developer's
problem rather than the City's. Mr. Dalley said they want it
to be a matter of record. Mr. Hill noted that it would appear in
the minutes.
Mr. Carl Lewis, 15209 Sunwood Blvd., Unit B33, said he repre-
sents the group of homeowners who have expressed their concerns.
After discussion with the developer, they have agreed not to
oppose the rezone on the condition that the developer install
the additional jacuzzi. He said his concern is that this agree-
ment has a binding legal effect. They felt it was best to make
it a condition of the rezone. He asked the City Attorney how
this could become a binding commitment. Attorney Hard said he
would prefer this not be included in the ordinance. This could
open up situations where the City should not get involved. Any
development this size has to have approval of the Board of Archi-
tectural Review. These minutes will reflect to the Board that
there is, at least, one condition for them to consider.
The Council could, by motion, direct staff to inform the Board
of Architectural Review of this condition. The Building Official
should be directed that a Building Permit will not be issued
until this condition is taken care of.
Councilman Bohrer said the Planning Commission raised the fol-
lowing concerns on this project; ingress /access and traffic
generation, adequacy of recreational facilities.and adequacy
of open space provided on Phase III. The Planning Commission
questioned specifically the adequacy of pool space provided in
the project. The City has an Open Space Ordinance, but there
is no analysis as to how the project complies with it. He said
it looks like there is potential further concern as the Planning
Commission expressed.
He further asked if the project now meets the conditions listed
in the rezone ordinance that was repealed in December. The
report does not indicate.
Brad Collins, Planning Director, said he understood that the
previous ordinance was related to a contract zone that covered
more property than this specific rezone covers. Attorney Hard
said it was impossible for the whole property covered under the
previous ordinance to meet the terms of rezone, so it reverted
back to the existing zoning. It is back now, with the request
• to rezone a portion. The original conditions are completely
irrelevant to what is before Council now. Councilman Bohrer
asked what the conditions were and why they are no longer relevant.
Attorney Hard said the property is now zoned R -3, and this is
what Council has to deal with. It may have been zoned something
else, but that is irrelevant. It has been zoned R -3 since January
of 1981. Councilman Bohrer asked again what the conditions were
and said it matters to him if they have been met. Attorney Hard
explained that this property owner has a parcel of property zoned
R -3. He is before Council with the request to change the zone to
R -4. All of the necessary steps have been met to complete the
process. Tonight is the culmination of the process. What hap-
pened earlier has no legal effect.
8:00 P.M.- MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT COUNCIL RECESS FOR
8:10 P.M. "FIVE MINUTES TO'ALLOW TIME TO GET A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL ORDI-
NANCE. MOTION CARRIED.
TUUI A CITY COUNCIL, F.EGL MEETING
June 2, 1981
Page 4
OLD BUSINESS - Cont.
Ordinance #1216 -
Reclassifying cer-
tain lands from R -3
to R -4 (Sunwood
Phase III) (cont.)
4r
• Mayor Pro -Tem . Van Dusen called the meeting back to order
with Council Members present as previously reported.
City Attorney Hard reported that Ordinance 1088 rezoned the
property from R -3 to R -4 with 8 conditions. These conditions
applied to three parcels of property. In 1978, LID 29 was
created and constructed. At that time a portion of this property
was excluded from immediate assessments. After that, it was
concluded that all the property rezoned under Ordinance No. 1088
could no longer meet all of the conditions. The ordinance was
then repealed so the zoning reverted back to R -3. Councilman
Bohrer said his recollection is that the property hadn't met
the conditions, therefore, was not participating in LID #29,
so the ordinance was repealed. He reviewed the conditions re-
quired. Attorney Hard said the conditions have been met by the
properties within the boundaries of the LID. The logical solution
for the City was to turn all of the property back to R -3 and,
as the property is developed, the owners would have to come back
to the City and request appropriate zoning for the use. Council-
man Bohrer asked why there was no analysis of the conditions.
Attorney Hard said because there was no legal requirement. The
conditions are not relevant to this parcel today. The property
is R -3. If Council wants to impose the conditions, they can
make them part of the rezone. Councilman Harris said the project,
at the time of the rezone was a separate project. It had nothing
to do with Sunwood. The conditions were for an entirely different
project. Councilman Johanson noted that the Planning Commission
denied the request, but staff recommended approval. He said he
also wondered about the conditions.
Brad Collins, Planning Director, said he assumed the Planning
Department considered the eight conditions and either they were
not needed or they had been met. Councilman Phelps explained that
Ordinance 1088 has been repealed so the conditions aren't even
there; further, it related to another project all together. Any
conditions that apply to the Sunwood Development would apply to
the rezone before Council now. Councilman Bohrer noted that
there seems to be a lot of questions. He said he did not see
the urgency in insisting that this be passed tonight. It would
be appropriate to send it back to staff for an analysis of the
conditions. Councilman Phelps said all of the conditions and
covenants and agreements that the City has with Sunwood Develop-
ment have already been established. They are developing under
the agreement we currently have. I don't see the point of im-
posing more conditions upon the developer than they already have.
Councilman Harris said when an ordinance is repealed, it is no
longer valid. What ever was in the ordinance no longer applies
to anything. That is what we did to Ordinance 1088. The conditions
no longer apply.
MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY JOHANSON, THAT THE ORDINANCE BE
TABLED TO ALLOW STAFF TO PREPARE A REPORT ON THE RELATIONSHIP OF
THE CURRENT SUNWOOD DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE
ORIGINALLY PROPOSED IN ORDINANCE 1088. MOTION FAILED.
*MOTION CARRIED WITH BOHRER AND JOHANSON VOTING NO.
MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE PLANNING STAFF BE
DIRECTED TO NOTIFY THE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW TO OBSERVE
AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE HOMEOWNERS AND THE DEVELOPERS TO PROVIDE
AN ADDITIONAL JACUZZI RECREATIONAL FACILITY.*
*MOTION CARRIED WITH BOHRER AND JOHANSON VOTING NO.
Councilman Bohrer commented that this is a limited attempt to
include some of the considerations that were in the original eight.
MICA
▪ 1908
•
;s City of Tukwila
• 6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
Frank Todd, Mayor
'PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of the regular meeting of 28 May, 1981.
Chairman Kirsop called the meeting to order at 8:32 p.m. in the Council
Chamber of Tukwila City Hall. Commissioners Orrico, Avery and Sowinski
were present.
Staff present were Brad Collins, Planning Director and Mark Caughey,
Associate Planner.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES: 23 APRIL 1981
MOVED BY MR. ORRICO, WITH MR. SOWINSKI'S SECOND TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF
THE REGULAR MEETING OF 23 APRIL 1981 AS PUBLISHED. MOTION CARRIED.
COUNCIL ACTIONS
Mr. Collins noted that Council is progressing in its review of the Proposed
Zoning Code, with wrap -up anticipated by the end of June.
Regarding the "Sunwood" Phase III rezone proposal, Mr. Collins reported that
Council reviewed the follow -up staff report contained in the Commission's
packet at their Committee -of- the - Whole. The Committee voted to put the
application forward to the regular meeting for a favorable vote. No decision
will be reached before the 9 June 1981 meeting. He noted that certain home-
owners within the project have requested opportunity to comment on the
proposed rezone.
CITIZEN COMMENT
Karl Lewis, representing a group of " Sunwood" homeowners, was recognized by
the chair. He noted that their intent is to decide whether or not to take
a formal position on the rezone matter when it next comes before the City
Council. The minutes of the 23 April 1981 do not, in his estimation, make
totally clear the basis for the Planning Commission's recommendation of
denial for the Phase III rezone request. He asked the Commission to elabo-
rate on the reasons for the denial action.
Mr. Kirsop noted that the chair does not usually vote on applications pend-
ing before the Commission except in case of a tie. He personally did not
find the rezone request unreasonable in light of their previous R -4 zoning
approval now expired.
Page -2-
P1 anni ng Com r . ;:::: on
28 May 1981
Mr. Lewis asked the Commission to indicate specifically if the follow -up
staff report addressed adequately the concerns raised at the public hear-
ing. Mr. Sowinski stated that his perception of the inadequacy of recrea-
tion space and traffic intensity level associated with the rezone pro-
posal has not been alleviated. Mrs. Avery noted that some of the "Open
Space" area is not of sufficient size and slope to permit reasonable use
as a play area. Mr. Sowinski expressed concern about the potential view
blockage eastward from Phase I by Phase III rooflines.
Mr. Caughey explained that the follow -up staff report was prepared as a
means of communicating a set of standards by which the Council might
judge comparatively the issues raised by the Planning Commission.
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
A) Buchanan /Kinnear (Southcenter 6500 Building) - requesting approval
of site and architecture for a two -story office building with
basement -level parking at the northwest quadrant of Southcenter
Boulevard and 65th Ave. So.
Mark Caughey presented the staff report. Brian Brand, project architect,
was present on behalf of the application.
Mr. Brand stated that the building owner does not wish to reduce parking
or floor space to meet the staff's open -space suggestion. Also, they
will reconfigure the narrow driveway between parking areas to accomodate a
loading space. Finally, Mr. Brand stated that his client is willing to
participate in a local improvement district as suggested in the staff
report conditions of approval.
Discussion followed regarding the applicant's proposed outdoor living space
solution -- That is, to control the gradient of the streetside planter
strips on the south and east sides and shade them with street trees.
Decorative benches would be added as well.
A formal landscape proposal will be included with the building permit
plan set. Discussion then followed regarding implementation of the side-
walk requirement for the Southcenter Boulevard frontage. It was the
Commission's consensus that such improvements be made without unneccesary
delay.
MOVED BY MR. ORRICO, WITH MRS. AVERY'S SECOND, TO APPROVE SITE AND ARCHI-
TECTURE FOR THE SOUTHCENTER 6500 BUILDING, ACCORDING TO'EXHIBITS. A -H OF THE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN SET WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1) PROVISION ON -SITE FOR LOADING AND DELIVERY VEHICLE SERVICE SPACE,
IN SUCH A MANNER AS NOT TO OBSTRUCT FREEDOM OF TRAFFIC MOVEMENT
ON STREETS, ALLEYS AND DRIVEWAYS.
SUBMITTAL OF A LANDSCAPE AND AUTOMATIC IRRIGATION SYSTEM PLAN FOR
STAFF APPROVAL PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS.
Page -3-
Planning Commi(
28 May 1981
MOTION CARRIED.
k' .
MOVED BY MRS. AVERY, WITH MR. ORRICO'S SECOND, TO ADJOURN AT 9:16 P.M.
MOTION CARRIED.
Tukwila Planning Commission
Eileen Avery
Secretary
3) EXECUTION OF A DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT TO PARTICIPATE IN A FUTURE LOCAL
IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT FOR ROADWAY AND UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ON THE
SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD FRONTAGE OF THE SITE.
CITY QF TUKWILA
WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. 1/
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
RELATING TO THE INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE AND
REPAIR OF SIDEWALKS AND ADDING TO TUKWILA MUNICIPAL
CODE TITLE 11 AND REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 1025.
WHEREAS, it is hereby deemed necessary in the interest of the
public safety, welfare, and convenience to establish requirements for the
construction of sidewalks for industrial, commercial and residential properties.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Sidewalks for new construction.
A. Whenever a building permit application is made for the
construction of new multi - residential, commercial, or industrial structures
within the City, the person, partnership, or corporation seeking such permit
shall submit a sidewalk construction plan for approval by the Director of the
Department of Public Works. The sidewalk construction plans shall include
all plans and specifications necessary for the construction of sidewalks
adjacent to all edges of the property adjoining any street or other public
right -of -way. A building permit shall not be issued until after a sidewalk
construction plan is approved by the Director of the Department of Public Works.
B. Building permit applications for construction of improvements
on properties zoned for single family residential use shall be excluded from
this requirement except when such sidewalk is built as`a part of an overall
development, plat, or subdivision.
Section 2. Existing streets or arterials.
It is recognized that there exists in the City, arterials and
streets which do not have sidewalks. In furtherance of the intent of this
ordinance and subject to the limitations and exceptions provided in other
sections herein, it shall be a condition of the issuance of a building permit
for the following construction activities that sidewalks conforming to stand-
ards and guidelines prepared by the Department of Public Works shall be installed
along the entire street frontage of the property:
A. Substantial remodeling to buildings or structures adjacent
to a business or arterial street and neither zoned nor actually used as a
single family residence. For purposes of this chapter, "Substantial Re-
modeling" means construction which increases the floor area of an existing
building or structure by at least 20% or any alteration or repairs including
interior, plumbing, electrical and structural made within a 12 month period,
which together exceeds 25% of the value of the previously existing building
or structure.
Section 3. Standards of Construction.
A. All sidewalks required to be constructed under the provisions
of this section shall be of portland cement concrete and sidewalks shall
otherwise conform to standard specifications and plans for municipal public
works construction, commonly known as APWA Standards. All sidewalks required
to be constructed pursuant to the provisions of this section shall be 6 feet
in width for arterial streets; provided, however, that in C -1 and C -2 zones,
sidewalks shall be 8 feet in width. All other sidewalks shall be a minimum
of 5 feet.
B. No fire hydrants shall be installed within the borders of
any sidewalk. Fire hydrants may be located between the curb and sidewalk.
Section 4. Delays, Waivers or Exceptions.
A delay, waiver, or exception to the requirements of this ordinance
may be granted by the city council upon request by the applicant. Said request
may be granted if the city council determines that such construction is not
feasible because of unique topographical considerations, city public work
development plans or would render a hardship on the applicant.
In the event any person desires to file such a request for delay,
waiver, or exception, such request must be considered by the city council at
least 30 days before the requested building permit is issued.
Section 5. Severability.
If any section, subsection, provision or clause of this ordinance
or its application to any person or circumstance is held invalid by a court
of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this ordinance or the applications
of the provisions to other persons and circumstances shall not be affected.
Section 6. Repealer.
Ordinance #1025 is hereby repealed.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
at a regular meeting thereof this /9 day of,; , 1980.
t y
Ap•roved as to Form
ttorney, awrence • Har
ATTEST:
Published Record Chronicle - May 23, 1980
4 4,4' 4 44 4
Ma
Mark Caughey
Asst. Planning Director
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, WA 98188
RE: REZONE PHASE III "SUNWOOD"
cc: Mayor Todd, City of Tukwila
Matt Sayre, Attorney
George Kresovich, Attorney
Dick Gilroy
Jerry Molitor
Pacific Townhouse Builders
Seattle office: Mariner Building, 1370 Stewart Street, Suite 105, Seattle, WA 98109 (206) 682-7830
Bellevue office: 1115 108th Avenue NE, Bellevue, WA 98001 (206) •155.1726
April 28, 1981
Sincerely,
Dear Mark,
Please consider this letter our request to appeal the Planning
Commission's decision to disapprove of a rezone for the Ehmke /Kato
property which will consist of Phase III of "Sunwood ". We are
asking that we can be put on the May llth City Council hearing
agenda. •
I would Zike to point out that it is our opinion that the
Planning Commission's decision represented an arbitrary and capricious
.action which was discriminatory against P.T.B. It should be`noted
that: 1) the subject site was previously zoned for 18.7 units under
Ordinance 1088 which expired in 1980; 2) the Tukwila comprehensive
plan recommends R -4 zoning for this site; 3) two of the four adj-
oining properties have been rezoned to higher classifications than
we are currently asking for.
The primary reason given by the Planning Commission for denial
was that "they felt Tukwila was overbuilt and additional multi-
family living units were not wanted ". In our opinion, this was
totally unresponsible, unprofessional and discriminatory action.
PACIFIC TOWNHOUSE BUILDERS
Don Dally, Partner
AGENDA ITEM
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DIVISION
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
• Sunwood Phase III Rezone (81 -5 -R)
INTRODUCTION
The following is a summary of actions
taken to date on the request of
Pacific Townhouse Builders to restore
R -4 zoning classification to the
Ehmke and Kato properties immediately
south of Sunwood Phase I:
A) 1 Dec. 80 - City Council adopts
Ordinance 1185 repealing Ordi-.
nance 1088, reverting the zon-
ing classification on the
Eh nke /Kato lands from R-4 to
R -3 due to failure of the
original applicants to satisfy
stipulations enumerated in
Ordinance 1088.
B) 28 Jan. 81 - Pacific Townhouse CPR
Builders, as contract purchasers
of the Ehmke /Kato property,
file application for for rezoning from R -3 to R -4. The boundaries
of this rezone application have been reduced slightly to exclude a
small area of "C -1" contained in the proceeding R -4 rezone action
(see Exhibit "A ").
C) 26 February 81 - Planning Commission holds public hearing on Phase
III rezone request: Approval recommended with stipulation that R -
zoning on Phase III be limited to a density not exceeding 16 D.U. /ac.
D) 9 March 81 - Pacific Townhouse Builders files letter with Planning
Dept. staff requesting reconsideration by the Planning Commission of
their 26 February decision, restricting density to 16 units /acre.
E) 23 April 81 - Planning Commission reconsidered proposed rezone and
stipulations of approval: Changed recommendation to denial of R -
reclassification. •Effectively, this decision reducesumber of
units allowed in Phase III from 78 (as requested) to 62, and reduces
overall build -out of "Sunwood" from 256 units to 240 units.
Fl 28 April 81- Pacific Towtouse Builders files letter of appeal, re-
questing Council review of the Commission's decision.
Page -2-
(81- S -R)
DISCUSSION
The Planning Commission, in deciding to recommend against the proposed
rezone to R -4 for Sunwood Phase 3, found that the following topical areas
of concern had not been resolved adequately:
- Ingress /egress $ traffic generation
- Adequacy of recreational facilities project -wide
- Adequacy of open space provided on Phase III.
In essence, the Commission's position on permitted Phase III density did
not change between the 26 February and 23 April meetings; the property
is already zoned R -3, allowing 16 units /acre maxinaun density under the
Comprehensive Plan. Thus, if the Commission maintained their position
that 16 units /acre is the appropriate maximum density for Phase III,
the rezone to R -4 is not necessary and their denial action is internally
consistent.
In the intervening time since 23 April, however, staff has given some
analysis to the matters of concern raised by the Commission, and wish
to suggest herein some new factors for Council to consider in evaluating
the Planning Commission's recommendation.
A) Ingress /Egress
The Commission questioned the validity of placing an intensive
concentration of dwelling units immediately adjacent to the 62nd
Avenue /Sunwood Boulevard intersection, which is the exclusive
access point for the entire Sunwood Project. They were concerned
that traffic activity on Sunwood Boulevard would increase con-
gestion within the project and would diminish the service level
capacity of 62nd Avenue to Southcenter Blvd.
- Staff notes, however, that early site layout proposals for
"Sunwood" incorporated 2 ingress /egress points, one on the south
at 62nd Avenue and one at the north leading to the hillside
residential district. Very early in the planning process however,
the City directed the applicants to delete the northerly access
concept in order to separate multi- family trip - generation activity
from that of the single - family area. In a very real sense, there-
fore, the disadvantages, if any, of concentrating project access
at the 62nd Avenue intersection is the City's own doing.
- In our discussion with the firm of Jones & Associates which
designed the present configuration of 62nd Avenue as built
under L.I.D. 29, they report that their approach to anticipating
adequate capacity.assumed two direct driveway openings from the
Ehmke -Kato property onto 62nd Avenue, in addition to Sunwood
Boulevard's connection thereto. Since the greater number of
driveway openings onto a street increases congestion potential,
it seems that the applicant's intent to delete any direct
driveway access to 62nd Avenue for Phase III will actually
enhance the design service level of the street, offsetting the
Page -3-
(81-5-R)
additional 96 ADT which would result from allowing 16 additional
units under R -4 zoning in Phase III (16 units x 6 trips /day per
1976 I.T.E. standard for multi - family residential units).
B) Traffic Generation
- The Commission was concerned that the imcremental difference in
trips - per -day generated by the additional 16 units allowed under
R -4 zoning of Phase III would impact significantly the design
service level of 62nd Avenue.
- The final environmental impact statement for the "Parkplace"
rezone (i.e. "Sunwood ") projects a total ADT of 62nd Avenue
of 2070 -2370 based on the following assumptions:
1) Full development of multi - family properties in the vicinity
of "Sunwood" with frontage on 62nd Avenue
2) "Sunwood" Phase I & II build -out at 189 units (186 actual
approved to date) .
3) "Sunwood" Phase III built -out at 108 -132 units /acre.
Of the preceeding assumptions, No. 3 represents the most important to have
changed since publication of the F.E.I.S. Using the aforementioned I.T.E.
standard of 6 trips /unit /day for condominium uses, total trip generation
for Phase III would be predicted as follows:
@ 16 units /acre = 62 units x 6 = 372 A.D.T. (P.C. recomm.)
@ 20 untis.acre = 78 units x 6 = 468 A.D.T. (Applicant's proposal)
Based on the foregoing calculations, therefore, the projected total
A.D.T. for 62nd Avenue would be: '(Anticipating no change in assumptions
1 + 2 of F.E.I.S. notes above)
@ 16 units /acre = 1793 A.D.T. - 1889 A.D.T.
@ 20 units /acre = 1976 A.D.T. - 2072 A.D.T.
Based on the proposed 78 dwelling unit yield of the rezone . application, anti-
cipated "worst- case" traffic impact on 62nd Avenue is roughly equal to the
"best case" option of 2070 A.D.T. predicted by the F.E.I.S. Thus, we con -:
clude that the incremental difference in traffic generation between R -3
and R -4 use of the Phase III site.is - not significant in relation to the
anticipated decrease in street capacity impact levels on 62nd Avenue.
C) Recreation /Open Space Adequacy
- The Planning Commission questioned the adequacy of open space/
recreational area proposed within Phase III, noting that only 0.6
acres thereof is provided. The applicants explained that Phase III
residents would be entitled to use the club - house /pool, tennis
courts and open space areas of Phases I and II (totalling
approximately 3.60 acres). The Commission then reiterated its
•
t
Page -4-
(81- 5 -R)
concern; fearing that the distance from southerly Phase III
units to the pool /rec. area is too great, and the "steep"
topography too inhibiting to facilitate usage by Phase III
residents. They concluded, therefore, that by reducing density
to R -3 levels in Phase III by not allowing the rezone, additional
land space could be freed to satisfy internally same of the demand
within Phase III for :useable open space.
It is difficult to quantify the adequacy of open space necessary
to serve a private development. However, we believe that some
conclusions can be drawn in the present case by examining widely -
applied national park - planning standards:
A) A common rule -of -thumb for siting of "neighborhood" rec-
reation space is 10 acres for each population increment
of 1000 persons population
B) Assuming total build -out of Sunwood at 256 units (R -4
on Phase III included), and assuming a total population
of 665 persons in the complex (F.E.I.S. "worst case"
projection at 2.6 persons /D.U.), approximately 6.5 acres
of open space is required. (For discussion purposes,
public open space within 1/2 mile is not included to offset
some of this demand) If, however, we assume total population
of 1.4 persons /unit, or 358 total occupants (on the basis
of current sales occupancy rates), 3.6 acres of recreation
area is needed.
We suspect that the true need for open space rests somewhere
between the 6.5 and 3.6 acre figures, and is probably closer to the
lower estimate. Thus, Sunwood is providing anywhere from 50a to 75%
or more of its own open'space requirements on an area -only basis
if we apply the same standards within the project that are used to
analyze public park space needs.' Additional credit should probably
be given due to the extensive variety of activities offered within
the project boundary. We note too,that the maximum distance is
slightly less than 1 /8th mile from the Southerly -most Phase III unit
to the pool /tennis complex, more than meeting the access standard
for a "neighborhood" recreation facility.
The Planning Commission questioned specifically the adequacy of.
.pool space provided in the project. Using the National Swimming
Pool Institute's standard of 15 sq. ft. /bather in waters less than
five feet deep, Sunwood's pool can accomodate 46 persons, or between
7% to 120 of the project's anticipated population at a time, de-
pending on which per -unit occupancy rate'is used. We conclude. that
this degree of pool play area is convenient to the demands of the
Sunwood project internally, and far exceeds the amount of per -cap-
lta swimming pool space available in convenient proximity to the
residents of Tukwila generally.
c
CONCLUSION
Page . -5-
01- 5•R)
At the time of the Planning Commission's initial review of the
rezone application, staff recommended R -4 zoning for Phase III
of "Sunwood ". Our findings at that time included:
1) The Comprehensive Land Use Plan map designates the
subject site.as High - Density Residential, defined as
17+ D.U. /Acres in multi - family configuration.
2) The proposed density of 20 units per acre appears to,
be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, although
it represents a higher level of building activity than
that of surrounding multi - family development (Cottage
Creek = 11 D.0 /Ac.) (Sunwood Phase 1 =16 DA, /Ac;).
Due to the project's proximity to the Southcenter Blvd./
I -405 corridor, however, the higher -level density pro-
posal appears justified.
3) Adequate access, utility infrastructure and recreation
space appear to be available to serve the proposed re-
zone area.
The concerns raised by the Planning Commission in their subsequent
recommendation to deny the application have caused us to examine
more carefully the factors which impinge upon this rezone action,
and have led us to conclude on a stronger factual basis that the
R -4, 20 Unit /Ac. proposal is still appropriate. Analyzing the
impacts of the rezone proposal in more concrete terms which the
Planning Commission felt were missing, we feel that the foregoing
discussion has been able to adress satisfactorily the issues raised
at the April meeting such that a positive decision on the rezone
request is justified.
AGENDA ITEM
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DIVISION
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
• Sunwood Phase III Rezone (81 -5 -R)
At the Commission's regular February meeting, this application was approved
subject to a density limitation of 16 units per acre:.. They are requesting
that you reconsider their original request to develop at 20 units /acre.,
A) Existing density levels on surrounding properties: It appears
that staff may have stated erroneously that the Sunwood Phase I
density is sixteen (16)units /acre. The applicants will have
prepared a large scale graphic of the entire project demonstrating
that the density on Phase I is actually higher. Perhaps this
information will prompt you to reevaluate the 20 : :uinit /acre
proposal.
B) Adequacy of Phase III open space: Please see the attached letter
of appeal addressing this point.
At the applicant's request, staff has not forwarded the commission's
recommendation to the City Council, pending re- examination of your
previous decision. Please note also that the public has been re- notified
of the reconsideration request.
1909
4 of Tukwila
NC/blk
xc: Ping. Dir.
c
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
Frank Todd, Mayor
Pacific Townhouse Builders
1115 108th Ave. N.E.
Bellevue, WA 98004
Attn: Dick Gilroy
Subject: Application 81 -5 -R (Sunwood Phase III)
This letter confirms the decision of the Tukwila Planning Commission,
given at its regular meeting of 23 April 1981, to recommend to the City
Council that the subject application be denied. The City Clerk has
tentatively scheduled this item before the Committee -of- the -Whole
meeting of 12 May 1981; however, a final decision on the exact agenda
date has not yet been made by the Council President. I suggest that you
contact Maxine Anderson, City Clerk, at 433 -1830 about a week before May
12th to determine if you will actually be heard on that date. In the
meantime, let me know if I can be of help to you.
An excerpt from the meeting minutes is enclosed.
Tukwila lanning Dept.
Caughey
Associate Planner
28 April 1981
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
Frank Todd, Mayor
PLANNING COMMISSION
Minutes of the regular meeting of 23 April 1981.
The meeting was called to order at 8:06 p.m. by Chairman Richard Kirsop;
all Commissioners except Mr. Arvidson were present.
Staff present were Brad Collins, Planning Director and Mark Caughey,
Associate Planner.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Sowinski noted a typographic error, Page 3 - paragraph 8: Correct
to read "Phase III ", not Phase II.
MOVED BY MR. SOWINSKI, WITH MR ORRICO'S SECOND, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES
OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF 26 FEBRUARY 1981 AS 'CORRECTED; MOTION CARRIED.
CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS
Mark Caughey reported on the first City Council review session conducted
on 14 April 1981 regarding the draft . zoning ordinance. 'The meeting
schedule established by Council which will take them completely through
the document by the end of June was described.
Brad Collins was introduced formally to the Commission, and was wel-
comed by Chairman Kirsop.
OLD BUSINESS
A) Application 81 -5 -R (Sunwood) . Reconsideration: Requesting recon-
sideration of stipulations for approval of Phase III rezone as
recommended by the Planning Commission at the 26 Februrary 1981
regular meeting.
Chairman Kirsop asked for the Commission's feelings about reconsideration
of their previous decision on this application; hearing no objection, he
directed that reconsideration proceed.
Mark Caughey read a memorandum from staff, . and a letter dated 24 March
1981 from Planning Commissioner Orrico.
t
Page -2-
Planning Commission
23 April 1981
Don Dally, representing Pacific Townhouse Builders, was present on be-
half of the application.
Mr. Dally discussed the historic evolution of their master plan for the
Sunwood project. He explained that their original purchase of the Ehmke-
Kato property was based on R -4 zoning allowing 18.7 units /acre. Due to
unforeseen circumstances, the contract rezone expired. Justifications
for the present request are:
1) Sunwood Phase I (R -4 portion) has been developed at 21.3 units/
acre.
2) Other properties to the west, south and north of Phase III have
been zoned or developed at use intensity levels at or greater
than R -4.
) On the basis of comparing properties in similar proximity to the
freeway within other nearby jurisdictions, equal or higher densi-
ties are allowed.
4) Increased density lowers per -unit land cost allowing the builder
to hold -down housing costs.
Mr. Daily then presented a graphic concept illustrating the "grand -
entrance" landscape concept which is a focal -point of the total Sunwood
project. In keeping with that concept, approximately 36% of
Phase III area will be landscaped, proportionately greater than that of
Phase I or II. He noted that residents of Phase III are fully entitled
to use 3.5 acres of passive open space within Sunwood, as well as formal
recreation facilities. P.T.B. based the adequacy of their open space/
recreation needs on an occupancy ratio of 2.6 persons/unit including 100
children. Actual occupancy is less than half that ratio, based on current
sales,leading to a surplus of recreation space even with full occupancy
of Phase III at 20 units /acre.
General discussion followed regarding the points raised in Mr. Daily's
presentation.
Mr. Orrico commented that he finds the quality of existing development in
Sunwood to be high, and that lower density in Phase III may help to insure•
continued high quality levels.
In response to Mrs. Avery's question, Mr. Dally described the proposed
'height and exterior treatment of Phase III construction.
Mr. Orrico asked about the average density of Phase I. Mr. Caughey
cautioned against comparing Phase I and II average densities with Phase
III, since earlier phases contain multiple zoning district classifications.
Page -3-
Planning Commission
23 April 1981
Mr. Sowinski noted that Phase III is situated at the point where all
project - related traffic must pass through, making the density level
permitted at that point a crucial issue. Mr. Orrico agreed, stating his
belief that project density should increase as one moves into the project
rather than concentrating density at the project entry. Mr. Sowinski
expressed further concern that Phase III will act as a "funnel" through
which all project traffic will pass. Mr. Dally pointed out that L.I.D.
29 (62nd Avenue) was designed based on the assumption that Phase III
would build -out at 18.7 units /acre.
MOVED BY MRS. AVERY TO MODIFY THE PLANNING COMMISSION "S RECOMMENDATION
OF 26 FEBRUARY 1981 TO RECOMMEND TO CITY COUNCIL THAT APPLICATION 81 -5 -R
BE APPROVED SUBJECT TO STIPULATIONS AS FOLLOW:
1) OVERALL RESIDENTIAL DENSITY PERMITTED ON THIS SITE SHALL NOT EXCEED
20 D.U. /ACRES.
2) ANY PROJECT PROPOSED ON THIS SITE SUBSEQUENT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL
OF THE SUBJECT REZONE ACTION SHALL REQUIRE BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
OF SITE, ARCHITECTURE AND LANDSCAPING DETAILS PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF
BUILDING PERMITS.
MOTION INVALID FOR LACK OF A SECOND.
Mr. James then summarized the topical areas of concern identified to date:
A) Ingress and egress; B) Adequacy of recreational facilities; C) Open
space D) Traffic generation
Mr Daily noted, in response, that the City's engineering staff has already
accepted the adequacy of the project street network to accomodate full
build -out of 256 units.
MOVED BY MR. SOWINSKI, WITH MR. ORRICO'S SECOND, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY
COUNCIL THAT APPLICATION 81 -5 -R BE DENIED.
MOTION CARRIED 4 -0
BOARD OR ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
A) Wendy's Restaurant (Shimatsu property): Requesting approval of site
and architecture for a franchise restaurant development with drive -up
window located on the west side of Southcenter Parkway, immediately
north of "Zach's" restaurant.
Brad Collins read the staff report. During presentation of the staff's
comments, Mr. Collins explained the action taken by City Council in ap-
proving the Shimatsu rezone. He also clarified certain statements in the
AGENDA ITEM
INTRODUCTION
In December, 1978, the subject
property was rezoned By Tukwila
Ordinance #1088 to R -4 at the re-
quest of Messrs. Ehmke: and Kato.
However, stipulations attached to
Ordinance 1088 were not satisfied;
thus, on.1 December 1980, the City
Council adopted Ordinance #1185
which repealed Ordinance 1088 and
reverted the zone classification
to R -3.
Pacific Townhouse Builders, devel-
opers of the "Sunwood" condominium
project, are seeking restoration of
the R -4 zoning classification for
a portion of original Ehmke -Kato
property. The essential difference
is that the "C -1" portion of the
original rezone application,
paralleling Southcenter Boulevard,
has been excluded in the present
submittal. (See Exhibit "A ")
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DIVISION
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
(81 -5 -R) Sunwood Phase III Rezone
FINDINGS
1) The subject site is currently zoned R-3, allowing a maximum of 4 -plex development.
2) The Comprehensive Land Use Plan map designates the subject site as high- density
residential, defined as 17+ D.'U. /acres in multi - family development.
3) The applicants propose to place 78 units on 3.9 acres for a density level of 20,0
units /acre. Living spaces will be arranged in 6 -piex and 9 -plex formats, (See
Exhibit "C ")
Page -2-
Sunwood Rezone
4) Access to the site is afforded by 62nd Avenue South which has been upgraded to
full city street development standards by L.T.D. 29, The unfinished sidewalk
portion of the Kato property will soon be completed by the City, following record-
ation of a warranty deed accepted by Council on 16 February 1981.
5) The main internal access corridor to the rezone area's interior is "Sunwood
Boulevard" which is already improved.
6) The slope is generally steady from north to south at approximately 12 %,
7) Several significantly -sized conifer specimens are found currently on the site;
the applicants intend apparently to retain some or all of these trees.
8) A Declaration of Environmental Non - Significance was granted on 13 February 1981
for the legislative action of rezone approval only. It is anticipated that a
Declaration of Non - Significance will be issued for the phase III condominium
project as well, following satisfactory review of utility plans by the Public
Works Dept., and B.A.R. approval of specific landscape, building material and site
layout details.
CONCLUSIONS
1) The proposed density of 20 units per acre appears to be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan, although it represents a higher level of building intensity
than that of surrounding multi- family development (Cottage Creek = 11 D.U. /acre;
Sunwood Phases I + II = 16 D.U./AC). Due to the project site's proximity to the
I- 405 /Southcenter Blvd. corridor, however, the higher -level density proposal may
be justified.
2) Adequate access and utility infrastructure appears to be available to serve the
proposed rezone area..
3) The environmental consequences of ungrading the site's zoning classification is
minimal. However, significant questions about the proposed 78unit project remain.
Additional information regarding adequacy of open -space /outdoor recreation oppor-
tunity, building height, scale and • material concept, vegetation retention and grad-
ing will be needed to more accurately assess the environmental integrity of the
project. Final analysis of that information should then be made by the Board of
Architectural Review, following City Council approval of the rezone action.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council that the
Sunwood Phase III rezone, application 81 -5 -R as depicted on Exhibit "A" and as des-
cribed on Exhibit "B ", be reclassified from R -3 to R -4, subject to conditions as follow:
1) Overal residential density permitted on this site shall not exceed 20 D.U. /acres.
2) Any project proposed on this site subsequent to City Council approval of the sub-
ject rezone action shall require Board of Architectural Review of site, architec-
ture and landscaping details prior to issuance of building permits.
SITE PLAN
SUNWOOD SITE PLAN
SUNWOOD STATISTICS
SITE AREA
BUILDING AREA
(% Coverage)
LANDSCAPED AREA
(% Coverage)
OPEN SPACE
(% Coverage)
RECREATION AREA
"Coverage)
WAVED AREA
('k Coyerage)
UNITS
PER
ZONE
DENSITY
(D.U./
Acre)
PARKING
RATIOS
PARKING
SPACES
R -1
R -2
R -3
R -4
TOTAL
R - 1
R -2
R -3
R -4
Overall
PARKING
(% Coverage)
R - 1
R -2
R -3
R -4
Covered
Open
TOTAL
PHASE I
6.23 acres
.98 acres
15.8 %
1.66 acres
26.6 %
1.52 acres
24.4 %
1.80 acres
29.1 %
- 0-
- 0-
20
72
92
46
115
94
67
161
.25 acres
4.1 %
9.62
21.1.
14.77
.59 acres
9.6 %
PHASE II
5.33 acres
.95 acres
17.8 %
1.52 acres
28.5 %
1.50 acres
28.0 %
1.37 acres
25.7 %
-0-
16
16
54
86
6.0
13
?Q.77
16.14
32
34
81
86
61
147
.49 acres
9.13 %
PHASE III
.75 acres
19.5 %
1.40 acres
36.4 %
1.65 acres
42.8 %
- 0-
- 0-
- 0-
78
78
20.26
131
/8
53
131
3.85 acres
.06 acres
1.6 %
.49 acres
12.7 %
SINGLE FAMILY
4.17 acres
.19 acres
4.5 %
3.2 acres
76.7 %
.36 acres
8.6%
.39 acres
9.3 %
4
- 0-
- 0-
-0-
4
.96
.96
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
TOTAL PROJECT
19.58 acres
2.86 acres
14.6%
7.80 acres
40.0%
3.45 acres
17.5%
.25
1.3%
5.21 acres
26.6%
258
181
439
260
.96
V)
6.0 G q
10.9
21.8
13.3
4J
1.57 acres
8 %
Mr. Richard Kirsop, Chairman
Tukwila Planning Commission
Tukwila City Hall
Tukwila, WA 98188
Dear Mr. Chairman:
13765 56th Ave. S., Apt. C -202
Tukwila, WA 98168
March 24, 1981
As I will be in eastern Washington during the regular March meeting of the
Tukwila Planning Commission, I am submitting this and request it be read
into the official record at the meeting. It pertains to agenda item VI. A),
Application 81 -5 -R (Sunwood) - Reconsideration.
I have reviewed the material on this item submitted with the staff report,
including the March 9, 1981 letter from the applicant. I have also visited
the site as requested by the applicant in that letter. Based on these, I
offer the following choices to my fellow commissioners:
1) As my first choice, I suggest the density recommendation by the
Planning Commission remain at 16 units per acre for Phase III. This
would require the Commission recommend denial of the request to re-
zone. Per the comprehensive plan, 16 D.U. /Ac. is the maximum allow-
able density under the existing R -3 zone. I therefore urge the Com-
mission to deny the request.
2) As my second choice, should the Commission elect to approve the re-
zone application, in no case should a density level higher than 18
D.U. /Ac. be approved. Further, approval of 18 D.U. /Ac. should be
be conditioned on the applicants completing all roadway and utility
improvements for the single family portion of the development as
previously required by the City Council. Building permits for Phase
III should not be issued until such required improvements are com-
pleted.
I will now attempt to give my rationale for the above positions. With regard
to the density at time of purchase by the applicant, I do not feel we should
be bound or obligated by what was paid. The developer purchased the property
at his own risk. I do not believe he was given any positive assurance by any-
one in authority "the density could be rezoned well above 18.7" as stated in
the March 9, 1981 letter.
With regard to the density of other phases of Sunwood, I feel it would be
esthetically preferable to have a lower density nearer the entrance. Density
could increase as one progresses up Sunwood Boulevard, thus diminishing the
initial' impression of a crowded project environment. Irrespective of the den-
sity of neighboring properties this development should be considered as a
community of its own, as long as the position is not discriminatory.
-2-
With regard to increased cost of housing due to lower density, the developer's
estimated $4,500 additional per unit is a minimal price for greater open space
and buildings of either lower height or more dispersion on the site. For
units proposed to sell in the $70,000 range for two- bedrooms, the increase is
approximately 6 %. I do not feel such an increase, assuming it ultimately is
this much, will eliminate potentially qualified buyers in the anticipated
price range.
With regard to access to the development, it is clear whatever additional
traffic is generated must travel along 62nd Avenue South. As you are aware
this street is steep, has a sharp double curve, and is also the only access
to several other new commercial and residential developments including City
Hall. I feel any additional vehicular load should be kept to a minimum.
With regard to the recreational facilities provided for this development, it
is my opinion they are insufficient for the total number of units. Even
though the applicant states there are only an average of 1.4 people per unit,
this is only for the first 63 units sold, as stated in their letter, which is
a small portion of the 256 total proposed. The swimming pool is very small
to accommodate the demand of such a large complex. It would not be unreason-
able to have additional facilities on the site, leaving the existing ones for
use by the area higher on the hill and for the single family section yet to
be built. As a resident of a multi - family structure, I feel that regardless
of what the applicant states, the existing facilities will be inadequate and
over - crowded during periods of peak use.
I hope these comments will be useful to the Commission and I urge the members
take them into consideration when reviewing the applicant's rezone request.
The thoughts are offered in the interest of improving and preserving the
quality of life in Tukwila without presenting an undue hardship for the
developer. Thank you for taking the time to read this.
cc: Mark Caughey ✓
Respe tfully
itt ,
seph P. Orrico, Member
Tukwila Planning Commission
Pacific Townhouse Builders
Seattle office: Mariner Building, 1370 Stewart Street, Suite 100, Seattle, WA 98109 (206) 682 -7830
Bellevue office: 1115 108th Avenue NE, Bellevue, WA 98004 (206) 455-1726
Mark Caughey
Planning Director
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, WA 98188
RE: REZONE PHASE III "SUNWOOD"
Dear Mark:
March 9, 1981
As we discussed March 3, 1981, Pacific Townhouse Builders economically
cannot live with the density factor of 16 units per acre for Phase III as
recommended by the Planning Commission.
I would like to point out several factors that the Planning Commission
may not have been aware of in making their recommendation:
1. We initially purchased the Ehmke site and optioned the Kato prop-
erty under R -4 zoning (ordinance 1088) which allowed a density of
18.7 units per acre. Needless to say, our purchase price relects
this density. Because of the property's location adjacent to the
freeway corridor, we never thought that the density would be down -
zoned from that figure. As a matter of fact, in discussions with
city staff members, we were under the opinion that the density
could be rezoned well above 18.7.
2. The R -4 portion of "Sunwood" Phase I (Buildings A,B,C,D Ei E) which
immediately borders the subject site to the north was rezoned in
1978 for a density of 21.6 units per acre. (72 units t 3..34acre)
It should be pointed out that this R area is closer to the single
family areas of Tukwila than the subject site. To the northeast
the "San Juan" Apartments have R zoning and are built -out to a
density of 19.28 units per acre. To the east "Cottage Creek" is
zoned R -4 and would have allowed 120 units but only 48 units were
built because 50% of the site had unusable topography.
The south boundary of the property borders on C -1 zoning which will
be developed for commercial use in the near future. To the west of
the site the new VIP hotel is to be built. In most municipalities,
1
" Sunwood"
Page 2
a residential property next to an intensive zoning classification
such as C -1 will have the highest residential classification poss-
ible. Example: King County RM 900 (48 units per acre), Seattle
RM 800 (52 units per acre).
3. As we all know, housing is getting extremely expensive: The public
wants "affordable" housing but because of government regulations,
home prices are estimated to be 20 to 30% higher than they should
be. This is a great example of the Planning Commission restricting
the density (government regulation) thus increasing housing costs
in an area that should have high density.
At 16 units per acre, this site will allow only 62 units vs. the
78 units (20 units per acre) being asked for. This 16 unit red-
uction will add $1800 per unit of ground cost. Add to this; the
financing cost of the construction and hold period, the loss in
maximum efficiency of construction, the additional cost per unit
of roads, utilities, landscaping, and marketing which will be the
same for 78 units as 62 units and the total additional selling
price per unit is approximately $4,500. From sales on Phase I,
we learned that selling prices must be kept as low as possible or
you eliminate a major portion of buyers because they can't qualify
for a loan.
From our discussion, I determined that one of the reasons for the re-
duction in density from 20 to 16 might be the Planning Commissions' concern
for landscaping and recreational area. The main entrance of " Sunwood" will
utilize a heavily landscaped terraced wall. Sunwood Boulevard which divides
the Phase III site has 20' Maples and will add a forested buffer through the
center of the subject site. The area adjacent to building and parking areas
will be heavily landscaped as was done in Phase I. (I might suggest that
members of the Planning Commission take a tour of "Sunwood ").
The purchasers of the individual condominium units for Phase III will
utilize the recreational package which was built as part of Phase I which in-
cludes a swimming pool, tennis court and recreation center with Jacuzzi, kit-
chen, game room and changing rooms. The original recreational package was
designed based on an estimated use of 2.6 people per unit. But in fact, based
on the Vale of the first 63 units the average has been 1.4 people per unit
with only 4 children. As can be seen, the recreational facilities were
over - designed by some 46% which easily will take care of the 16 additional
units. In addition during construction of Phase III we will be incorporating
a jogging trail which will surround the full development.
In conclusion, I have tried to point out that economically we, or the
eventual buyers of the condominium units, can not live with a 16 unit per acre
"Sunwood"
Page 3
cc: Frank Todd.
Dick Gilroy
Jerry Molitor
density. Being that this site is adjacent to the freeway corridor and .
that we are providing Quality landscaping and recreation amenities for
buyers, there is absolutely no reason that the density could not be in
excess of 20 units per acre.
If you need any further information, please do not hesitate to call
me at 682 -7830.
Sincerely,
PACIFIC TOWNHOUSE BUILDERS
n Dally ---
General Partner
ft
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DIVISION
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
(81 -5 -R) Sunwood Phase III Rezone
AGENDA ITEM, •
INTRODUCTION \cebN
At the Planning 0Mmission meeting 1 N.,;
of February 26th, the subject appli- 4 l I
cation was approved with the stipu- k
lation that density for Phase III be
limited to 16 D.U. /acre. The appli-
cants have asked the Commission to
reconsider their original request
for 78 units equalling 20 D.U. /A.C. . Y
At the applicant's request, staff
has not yet transmitted the Commis-
sions February decision to the City
Council.
DISCUSSION
A) Density Levels on Surrounding
Properties: The applicants
have prepared an extensive
statistical survey of the
existing and proposed phases
of the site. (This infor-
mation was supplied in your
packet for the aborted March
regular meeting, along with a'
color diagram of the sunwood
project). Your previous decision to limit R -4 zoning on phase three seems to
have been based : on comparison with existing density levels on Sunwood Phase
I. While the overall density of Phase I is approximately 15 units /acre, the
R -4 portion of Phase I is developed at 21 units /acre. The applicants hope to
demonstrate that. their R -4 20 unit /acre density proposal for the immediately -
adjacent Phase III site is reasonable and consistent with existing zoning
conditions on Phase I.
B) Adequacy of Phase III Open Space: Please see the applicant's letter addressing
this point.
t
Page -2-
Staff Report
81 -5 -R
CONCLUSION
It appears to us that the Commission has two decisions to make on this matter; first,
you must decide whether or not you wish to reconsider your previous decision. If
you choose to let your original action stand, it will be transmitted to Council as
reflected in the minutes of the 26 February 1981 meeting.
Your second decision, if you do choose to reconsider,. will be to determine the ap-
proporiate density level for the site. We would like to point out, however, that
the rezone recommendation as it reads currently is not internally- consistent. A
maxim= dwelling -unit density of 16 units /acre is allowed in R -3 zoning districts
by the Comprehensive Plan. The property is already zoned R -3; thus, if your commis-
sion believes 16 units /acre is the appropriate maximum denisty for Phase III, then
the rezone action to R -4 is not necessary, and you should probably deny the appli-
cation.
We are not suggesting that you deny the application; we are asking only that your
final decision reflect consistency between the site's zoning designation and the
allowable density prescribed in the Comprehensive Plan.
C Z, Lo.4. /se...y
11. Ofs..0 .59% vcr
Sunwood Site Plan
U-11 north
0.0 5050 100
4.
CITY QF
TUK W4 I &
WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. )/Q 71 - 6--
EHMKE- KATO -KATO
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 1088 (RECLASSIFYING CER-
TAIN PROPERTY FROM C -1 AND R -3 TO R -4)
WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 1088, reclassifying certain property
along 62nd Avenue South, was passed by the City Council on the 4th day
of December, 1978, and
ulations, and
required by said ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
WHEREAS, the rezoning to R -4 was subject to certain stip-
WHEREAS, the applicants have failed to meet the conditions
Ordinance No. 1088 reclassifying certain property, as
described in the legal description in Exhibit A, from
C -1 and R -3 to R -4 as contained in the Planning Division
Master File No., 78 -23 -R, subject to certain conditions,
adopted the 4th day of December, 1978, is hereby repealed.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
at a regular meeting thereof this / = day of ,� .�L.� , 1980.
ATTEST:
Ado'ted as to Form
ty Lttorney, awren e . '
Published Record Chronicle - December 5, 1980
/. /,9djP
LEGAL DESCRIPli
Parcel B
This portion of Tract 11, Interurban Addition to Seattle, according
to plat recorded in Vol. 10 of Plats, p. 55, in King County,
Washington, described as follows: BEGINNING at a point on the
eastline of said Tract 11 which is 162.79 feet North of the South-
east corner thereof; thence continuing North 0 8' W. 359.88 feet to
the Northeast corner of said Tract 11; thence South 89° 52' West along
the northerly line thereof 300.86 feet; thence South 0.08' East
398.14 feet; thence North 89 52' East 141.65 feet; thence North
0° 08' West 38.26 feet; thence North 89 ° 52' East 159.21 feet to point
of beginning.
rw■NING DEPT
' EXHIBIT
M.F.
Parcel A (Kato Property)
The West 150 feet of the East 450.86 feet of Tract 11, Interurban
Addition to the City of Seattle, according to the plat recorded in
Volume 10 of Plats, page 55, in King County, Washington;
EXCEPT that portion lying Southerly of the following described line:
Commencing at a point on the East line of said Tract 11, 162.79 feet
North of the Southeast corner of said tract;
thence South 89 °52'00" West 159.21 feet;
thence South 00 °08'00" East 38.26 feet;
thence South 89 °52'00" West 141.65 feet to the True Point of Beginning;
thence Northwesterly parallel to the centerline of Southcenter Blvd.
(Renton -Three Tree Point Road) to the West line of the East 450.86
feet of said Tract 11 and the end of said line.
WASHINGTON
ORDINANCE NO. f o8'er`
CITY OF TUKW
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA RECLASSIFYING CERTAIN
PROPERTY FROM C -1 AND R -3 TO R -4 AS CONTAINED IN TILE PLAN -
NING DIVISION MASTER FILE NO. 78 -23 -R, SUBJECT TO CERTAIN
CONDITIONS.
WHEREAS, An environmental checklist was submitted and reviewed by all
affected parties and agencies;
WHEREAS, Comments received prompted a Proposed Declaration of Signi-
ficance on May 18, 1978;
WHEREAS, The applicant submitted a revised application mitigating the
poi;its of concern;
WHEREAS, A Withdrawal of the Declaration of Significance was made on
June 22, 1978 based upon compliance with mitigating measures in the Planning
Division's EPIC File No. FD -58;
WHEREAS, Mr. Horst Ehmke has agreed to the above mitigating measures
on June 23, 1978;
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission at their 24 August 1978 regular meet-
ing and after holding d public hearing has recommended approval of the rezone
conditioned upon fulfillment of eight (8) stipulations; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered the environmental impact
of the proposed action and the recommendation of the Planning Commission.
NOW, THEREFORE, TILE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASIIINGTON, DO
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. That the property described in the attached legal descrip-
tion (Exhibit "A ") and as shown on the attached site map (Exhibit "B ") is hereby
reclassified to R -4, with conditions as specified in this ordinance.
Section 2. The rezoning to R -4 is subject to the following stipulations:
a. Dedication of 5' of property along 62nd Avenue South to the City
of Tukwila and participation in an L.I.D. for the improvement of
said street, utilities, sidewalk, lighting and all related im-
provements.
b. This ordinance shall not become effective until such time as a
joint egress easement is executed and recorded with the property
to the north. Said easement to be over approximately the north
25 feet and the east 250 feet of parcel 2 as described and shown
in Exhibits "A" and "B" of this ordinance.
c. Submission of a detailed site plan, landscape plan, and recrea-
tion space plan to the Planning Commission prior to issuance of
building permit. Said recreation space plan shall provide
ble and accessible open space to all occupants of the development.
d. Access to 62nd Avenue South shall be reviewed and approved by the
Public Works Department.
e. The Declaration, By -Laws and Covenents of the Condominium Owners
Association shall provide that no 'recreational vehicles' shall
be allowed to park on the site.
'Recreation vehicles', for purposes of this ordinance shall speci-
fically include all travel trailers, campers, and boats and, in
addition, any motorized vehicle which cannot park within the con-
fines of a normal automobile parking space (Approximately 8' 6" x
20' x 8' high).
Review and approval of the above by -laws by the city and recording
by the owner shall occur prior to issuance of any occupancy per-
mits for the project.
f. All proposed buildings shall be limited to three floors of habi-
table space and exterior treatment of said structures and carports
to be approved by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of
building permit.
g. Treatment of any proposed rockeries or retaining walls shall be
approved by the Planning Commission prior to issuance of build-
ing permit.
h. Not less than two parking spaces per unit be required.
Section 3. A maximum of 102 units with not more than 6 units per struc-
ture shall be allowed, consistent with Exhibits "C ",
27, 1978, attached to this ordinance.
Section 4. The zoning map adopted by reference by. Ordinance No. 251 is
hereby amended to reflect the changes by the rezoning action taken in this ordi-
nance.
Section 5. The City Clerk is directed to record a copy of this ordi-
nance and attachments with the King County Department of Records and Elections:
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
regular meeting thereof this c4 day of — , 1978.
-2-
nD►I
Ed ?ar Bauch, Mayor
and "E ", dated November
TUKWILA ZONING SITE ACREAGE
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF KING
Washington. That the annexed is a
Affidavit of Publication
ss.
ki.CYO. ?•o1 a ••diW8 being first duly sworn on
oath, deposes and says that ;,r.e.. is the -Clerk; of
THE DAILY RECORD CHRONICLE, a newspaper published six (6) times a
week. That said newspaper is a legal newspaper and it is now and has been
for more than six months prior to the date of publication referred to,
printed and published in the English language continually as a newspaper
published four (4) times a week in Kent, King County, Washington, and it is
now and during all of said time was printed in an office maintained at the
aforesaid place of publication of said newspaper. That the Daily Record
Chronicle has been approved as a legal newspaper by order of the Superior
Court of the County in which it is published, to -wit, King County,
tit;e •of
T.1638
as it was published in regular issues (and
not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period
of 1 consecutive issues, commencing on the
12 .. day of _'r bruary ,19 . , and ending the
day of ,19 both dates
inclusive, and that such newspaper was regularly distributed to its sub-
scribers during all of said period. That the full amount of the fee
charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of 5..16 2('.hich
has been paid in full at the rate of per folio of one hundred words for the
first insertion and per folio of one hundred words for each subsequent
insertion.
Chief Clerk
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 19 day of
e t -ruary , 19....81
V.P.C. Form No. 67 Rev. 7.79
,i7
Notary Public in and for the ''e of Washington,
residing at -gont, King County.
— Passed by the Legislature, 1955, known as Senate Bill 281, effective June
9th, 1955.
— Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures,
adopted by the newspapers of the State.
3
i
U
O
U
0
CO Z O
v,
0 O
30
co 0
co co
n
coc
m
E
f /A,Jn)• ' r�,
Mr. Dave Halinen
Triad Associates
11415 N.E. 128th Street
Kirkland, WA 98033
Dear Mr. Halinen:
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Public Works Department 433 -1850
February 11, 1981
Re: Sunwood Phase II & III
Public Works staff have completed their review of the site plans
(Job #78 -006) Phase II Sheets #1 & #2 and Phase II Sheets #1 & #2, and
have the following comments:
These plans should be resubmitted by the developer after he has
reviewed the City's comments and complied with our requirements.
Streets - Phase III only
The street through the public right -of -way of 62nd Avenue S. is required
to be a local street. Per Section 17.24.040 of the Subdivision Code, the
minimum right -of -way requirement for a local street is 50 1.f. and pavement
width requirement is 30 1.f.
This street, from the easterly property line of the private property
for Phase III, is defined as a "Private Access Road" to the R =30' turn around
and is approximately 250 1.f. long. Section 17.24.040 of the Subdivision Code,
requirements for the Private Access Road are the following:
A. Private Access Roads shall serve no more than four lots.
B. Private Access Roads shall be no more than 200 1.f. in length.
Because of the acute horizontal and vertical alignment of this roadway as
designed, the following general conclusions have been drawn:
A. The Private Access Road is not wide enough for required'turning
movements for use as a two -way street.
B. The roadway cannot allow parking on either side at its present width
and configuration.
C. A vehicular speed limit, which takes into account minimum safe stopping
distance, will be necessary.
Street and sidewalks in public right -of -way shall be provided per Tukwila
Standard Plan and Sidewalk Ordinance No. 1158.
a •
Mr. Dave Halinen
Triad Associates
February 11, 1981
page 2
Sewer
The firelane portion of the roadway shall be designated with balustrades
which block access beyond the Private Access Roadway. The firelane shall be
clearly marked as "EMERGENCY ONE WAY FIRE LANE ". The fire lane shall be
approved by the Fire Marshal prior to final plan approval by Public Works.
Curb /gutters shall be provided in all roadway sections per standard plans
of the City of Tukwila.
A Developer's Agreement for the maintenance and repair by the landowner
of the roadway, shall be provided prior to issuance of the Street Use - Street/
Fire Lane Permits.
All PVC pipe shall be Schedule 35 minimum and be provided with 3 -foot of
cover.
All sanitary sewers (mains /laterials /services) shall be at a minimum 2%
grade. Pipe designs at less than this percentage shall be accompanied by a
hydraulic design indicating the need for the flatter :line...
All sewers shall be bedded in Class "B" bedding or better.
Sewer lines provided at over 20% grade shall have blocking at every other
pipe joint and /or to a maximum spacing of 20 1.f. at the joints.
No mains under structures or through undeveloped or non - asphalted surfaces
shall be acceptable as public utility turnover.
Water
Additional valving shall be included in the water mains as shown on the
attached plans. Prior to final review by Public Works, the Insurance Under-
writers and Tukwila Fire Department shall.review the plans and stamp all drawings.
Six sets of utility drawings shall be submitted for final review.
Blocking shall be provided at all hydrants.
NOTE #15 - A shutoff valve to each hydrant shall be provided 3' -
10' from the hydrant stem.
NOTE #12 - The Tukwila Fire Department shall be invited to the
preconstruction meeting.
All watermains shall be DIP Class #52 and be provided with 30 -36" cover.
On the lateral pipeline at the south end, relocate water meters from the
south to the end of this waterline. Easements for water meters shall be
Mr. Dave Halinen
Traid Associates
February 11, 1981
page 3
provided to the City in order that the City can install /remove /relocate /monitor
and repair the meters.
Drainage
NOTE #4 - Revise note from Class "C" to Class
PRF /jm
Revise from 90% compaction factor to 95% compaction factor minimum.
All pipe shall be minimum 12" and provided at minimum 0.5% grade.
Sincerely,
Phillip R. Fraser
Senior Engineer
Attachment
cc: Ted Uomoto, Public Works Director
Ted Freemire, Superintendent
Ray Doll, Sewer Foreman
Dave Grage, Water Foreman
Wes Jorgenson, Junior Engineer
Mark Caughey, Acting Planning Director
ISITE ACRE/Net
I E-.7-1 I7Z ,79.3._ia_ - ea. pr. 'cik -------- : . ::: ----
. 473,97AcFkes ,
- 1
1 1
I I
! R- - 9.8
I
I
ro.........•m
1. •
I \ • - 5. 151 ST ST.
sammoml■ alosommlimmid
1 R - 2 - 8 . 4 %
R - 4 I . *
I--, /
I toomommells4r
.75.----152NO.:::_61.— --- r! •
r . S
astmoom
I s s •
I . . - . R -1- I a. 0
• • • a
I - • R- 3 in I
I • I
I • I
m.o. IMINFUNIIMMIN u
1 611MIIII■MMIIII
I 1 I
I
I
II R - 3 r
1 ■ plsoposaP__:____ __: - i R - 4
I
• r IKEZP___Sls 5=1.AK._ -4,
I.
I
R M
I ■%
11 % C- 2 %■%
i
• •C
%•■ %
-w ‘74%, •
\\
C-1
kw %
-
- 0 100 250 500
DAMN% Maga% mad uudOC]rzingol
MN MI MI= NM MI
NUN MI NB MIMI NM MI NI,
JA/I1
_(_ApsiAcaNT TO _eigoppap._ gazoNa)
R M H I
• 1
ARCHITECTS - PLANNERS
MATT SAYRE
ATTORNEY AND COUNSELOR AT LAW
Mr. Mark Caughy
Planning Director
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, WA 98188
MS: sjn
Enclosure
CC: Michio Kato
Don Daily
LAW OFFICES OF
MATT SAYRE
474I% RAINIER AVENUE SOUTH
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98118
TELEPHONE (206) 723-7860
February 3, 1981
Matt Sayr
Dear Mr. Caughy::
Don Dally of Pacific Townhouse Builders has asked
that I write you concerning his pending agreement with
the Kato's to purchase the multiple zone portion of the
Kato property in Tukwila.
I enclose for your review a copy of the Earnest
Money Receipt and Agreement which bears out the sale
that is planned. As you can see, the sale is subject to
Mr. Dally and his partners obtaining a re- zoning of the
subject property. The Kato's have retained the C -1
zone property to the south and fronting on Southcenter
Boulevard. If there is any further information I can
provide you, please advise.
TELEPHONE
(206) 723 -7860
Sincerel .,yours,
SAFECO
Seattle, Wa January 2,
RECEIVED FROM PACIFIC TOWNHOUSE BUILDERS • -PARK PLACE, a WasFiington Partnership
Hcrenialter called " Puicheu.r"
Five Thousand and No /100
5
due upon removal c
paid or melivered to agent as earnest money
Tukwila County of King Washington; Commonly known as
Legal description attac eel hereto as Exhibit A.
(The parties hereto hereby authorize agent to insert over their signatures the correct legal description of the above designated property it unavailable at time of signing, or to correct the legal description entered
it erroneous or incomplete.)
in the form of check for $ - -- Cash for $ - - -- Note lot S 5 z 000 .00
in part payment of the purchase price of the following described real estate in the City of
E- L-_ ) ✓ / F ✓rte 7f v .2 — /be
4t—
. 7/ I f Arc cJ /71-09-t - a— . 6 7 4` 2.4 A, .4 c Atli!'"
TOTAL PURCHASE PRICE IS One Hundred Sixty Seven Thousand Dollars and No /100
Ig 167, 000.00 1 payable as follows: the sum of Thirty -Two Thousand and No /100 Dollars ($32,000.00) dose
and the balance to be provided for under a real estate contract providing for quarterly ,piyipeti
t
(in advance) of interest only for two (2) years from closing date, and contract to bear interest
upon the balance at twelve percent (12 %) per annum; contract to be paid in full no later than two
(2) years from date of closing herein, or upon issuance of a building permit for this real proper
whichever event occures sooner.
The closing of this transaction is conditional upon Purchaser obtaining rezone approval from
the City of Tukwila for a minimum of twenty -five (25) units (1.8 units per acre rate) on the subje
site.
This transaction will close fifteen (15) days after the adoption of a rezone ordinance' for t
subject site. Purchasers agree to apply for rezone one (1) week from Seller's acceptance of this
Agreement.
The closing of this transaction is conditioned on Purchaser's acceptance of a preliminary ti
report. Purchaser agrees to approve or disapprove said title report one (1) week from delivery t
I. Title of seller is to be free of encumbrances, or defects, except: rights, reservations, restrictions of record Purchaser.
acceptable to Purchaser.
NOTE: Purchaser to assume and pay LID assessments, City of Tukwila.
Rights reserved in federal patents or state deeds, building or use restrictions general to the district, and building or zoning regulations or provisions shall not be deemed encumbrances or detects.
Encumbrances to be discharged by seller may be paid out of purchase money at date of closing.
2. Seller agrees io furnish and deliver to office of closing agent as soon as procurable a standard lorm purchaser's policy of title insurance or report preliminary thereto issued by SAFE CO Title Insurance Com
pany, a California corporation, and seller authorizes agent to apply at once for such title insurance. The title policy to be issued shall contain no exceptions other than those provided for in said standari
form plus encumbrances or defects noted in Paragraph 1 above. Delivery of such policy or title report to closing agent named herein shall constitute delivery to purchaser. If title is not so insurable as abov
provided and eanoot be made so insurable by termination date set forth in Paragraph B hereof, earnest money shall be refunded and all rights of purchase terminated: Provided that purchaser may waiv
defects and elect to purchase. II title it no insurable and purchaser tails or refuses to complete purchase, the earnest money shall be forfeited as liquidated damages unless seller elects to enforce this egret
nwnt. The agent shall not be responsible for delivery of title..
3. II financing is required purchaser agrees to make immediate application therefor, sign necessary papers, pay required costs, and exert best ellons to procure such financing.
4. (a) II this agreement is for conveyance of lea title, title shall be conveyed by statutory Warranty deed free of encumbrances or detects except those note
in Paragraph I.
(b) II this agreement in for sale on real estate contract seller and purchaser agree to execute a Real Estate Contract for the balance of the purchase price on Real Estate Contract Form A•1964 currently die
tributed by title insurance companies. The terms of said form are herein incorporated by reference. Said contract shall provide that title he conveyed by Warranty Deed. II said property is subject to a
existing contract or mortgage or deed of trust which seller is to continue to pay, seller agrees to pay said contract or mortgage or deer) nl truss in accordance with its terms, and upon default purchase
shall have right to make any payments necessary to remove the default, and any payments so made shall he applied to the payments next falling due on the contract between seller and purchaser hereir
Ic) II this agreement is for sale and transfer of vendee% interest under existing seal estate contract, the transfer shall he by proper purchaser's assignment of contract and deed sufficient in form to come
after acquired title. date of closing
5. Taxes for the current year, rents, insurance, interest, mortgage reserves, water and other utilities constituting liens shall he prorated as of
6. Purchaser shell be entitled to possession on date of closing
1. Purchaser offers to purchase the property in its present condition, on the terms noted. This oiler is made subject to approval of the seller by midnight of January 8, 1981
In consideration of agent submitting this offer to seller, purchaser agrees with the agent not to withdraw this offer during said period, or until earlier rejection thereat by seller. Purchaser agrees that writte
notice of acceptance given to agent by seller shall be notice to purchaser. If seller does not accept this agreement within the time specified, the agent shall refund the earnest money odement
r u zo n o
Matt Sayre, Attorney at Law 15 property.
B. The sale shall be closed in the office of within days after 0001 IYe1p i14r061gll(11L
*mum Novo pmmofi0� ][onioncootan 0oNatfmoat0(?7gQgotteG co orWQI( OCK7lOt),)( t) ootectgg }d70T(g{Omocc(11Q5emofKgg}0 oodeib iii
x(91 Nnt.117hacpbaCNIONr WCThe purchaser and seller will, on demand, deposit in escrow with the closing agent, all instruments and monies necessary to complete Ih
purchase in accordance with this agreement; the cost of escrow shall be pawl one hall each by seller and purchaser.
9. There are no verbal or other agreements which modify or allect this agreement. Time is of the essence al this agreement. PACIFIC TOWNHOUSE BUILDERS,
PARKE PLACE • J `tee
BY: Donald F. Dally,Partner
Purchaser
Riccl Gilroy, Partne
fe, I "rtel
Gerald Molitor, Partner
Purchasers warrant they are of legal age.
, No real estate agent or commission .
Aunt
Purchaser's Address 1370 Stewart Street, Suite 100
Seattle, WA 98109 Phone 682 -7830
A Form Approved by Seattle Real Estate Board in 1962.
TL-23 R3 11/73
EARNEST MONEY
RECEIPT AND AGREEMENT
(NON-RESIDENTIAL FORM)
A true copy of the foregoing agreement, signed by the seller, it hereby received On this day of
SAFECO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
The undersigned seller on this day of 19 hereby accepts and approves the above agreement and agrees to carry out all of the tern
thereof and further agrees to pay a commission of No commission Dollars IS I to the above agent fi
services. In the went earnest money is forfeited, it shall be apportioned to seller and agent equally; provided the amount to agent does not exceed the agreed commission. I /we further acknowledge receipt of
true copy of this agreement, signed by both parties. '
C/O Matt Sayre, Attorney, 4741h Rainier Ave. So.
Seattle, WA 98118 Address — _ l "" �
Seller twitch
19
Putt/later
Purchaser Iwisel
Attachment to Earnest Money Receipt and Agreement
Kato (Seller) - Pacific Townhouse Builders, Parke Place (Purchaser)
Said Agreement Dated January 2, 1981
The exact lOgal description of the subject site shall be supplied by Safeco Title
Insurance Company prior to closing of this transaction. For purposes of agreement be-
tween Purchaser and Seller, a description of the site is as follows:
The multiple -zoned (R -3) portion of; the west 150 feet of the east
450.86 feet of Tract II, Interurban Addition t� the City of Seattle,
according to plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, page 55, in King County,
Washington, except that portion thereof conveyed to the State of Washing-
ton, for Primary State Highway No. 1 by deed recorded under Auditor's file
No. 5473599; except that portion commercial zoned (C -1). The south boundary
of the subject site shall be identified as follows: from a point which is
the S.W.C. of the "Old Ehmke Site" (Legal Description: That portion of Tract
II, Interurban Addition to Seattle, according to plat recorded in Volume 10
of Plats, page 55, in King County, Washington, described as follows: Begin- •
ring at a point on the east line of said tract II which is 162.79 feet nort�i
of the southeast corner thereof; thence continuing north 0 °08" west 359.88
feet to the northeast corner of said Tract II; thence south 89 °52' west along
the northerly line thereof 300.86 feet; thence south 0 °08' east 338.14 feet
thence north 89 °52' east 141.65 feet; thence north 0 °08' west 38.26 feet;
thence north 89 °52' east 159.21 feet to the point of beginning) , a line shall
be drawn westerly paralleling the center line of South Center Boulevard.until
it intersects with the west boundary of the subject site.
NOTE: See subject site oulined in red below.
Seller to give Purchaser a sewer /water easement along the west boundary of Seller's
C -1 zoned property from the subject site to South Center Boulevard.
NOTE: Outlined in green on map below.
CIO• i -i .._..._..
1
, —
..._DSO ai --
EXHIBIT "A"
10 •
11 Li.
If •
I •
-vVUly - I I .. •
:4 0 5 ......... �```� �.'' ' `` D SO
C
- rr
e
407, 077412:322
1 I , I ,' 1 V , M 1
,p J1
N C)
11
•
te ..
r o r / , • V
'Ns • ••rte
19
.
'a'
1
•
,I
City of 11,dcwila
MOO &dame% Barnyard
111cvnie Weshrgion 98188
MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM
EXISTING ZONING
R-3
REQUESTED ZONING
PROPOSED REZONE SITE IS WITHIN TINKILA CITY LIMITS
SUPPLEMFNTARY QUESTIONAIRE
(. Aedule
E
REZONE APPLICATION
R
OYES ON
EXISTING ZONING CLASSIFICATION AND USE OF SURROUNDING PARCELS•
ZONE USE
Nanm R-4 Low Apt. Multiple Family
swim C Zoned Commercial (Neighborhood Retail)
EAST R-4 Low Apt. Multiple Family
WEST RMH Multifamily'Residential High - Density
USES PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED ON PROPOSED REZONE SITE
Low apartment, Multiple family dwelling
ACCESS TO THE PROPOSED REZONE SITE IS FRCM A DEDICATED, IMPROVED PUBLIC RICITT-OF-
WAY 13 YES ONO. (If "NU", please describe how the site is
accessed 62 nd Ave. South
PROVISIONS TO BE MADE FOR ADEQUATE SEWER AND WATER SERVICES Yes, to
be provided to the site, on 62nd Ave. South in R.O.W to
phase I of this project, (north of this parcel).
Item No. 3, 4
MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM
Parcel 'A'
Michio Kato
9316 39th S.
Seattle, WA 98118
(206) 722 - 3934
ATTACHMENT
Parcel 'B'
Pacific Townhouse Builders
1115 108th Ave. N.E.
Bellevue, WA 98004
(206) 455 -1726
Zc iTurw., FE
4•'
MASTER LAM) DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM
FEES: Z6a
RCPT. (.04t
M.F• gt- .5 -(2-
EPIC.
NOTE: Please write legibly or type all requested information -- incomplete
applications will not be accepted for processing.
/ SECTION I. GENERAL DATA
1) APPLICANT'S NAME Pacific Townhouse B1drsTELEPH0NE :(206) 455 - 1726,.` '
2) APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 1 1 15 108 Ave. N. E .Bel 1 evuelip: 98004
3) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME See Attachment TELEPHONE: ( )
4) PROPERTY OWNER'S ADDRESS ZIP:
5) LOCATION OF PROJECT: (geographic or legal descrip.)
See Attachment.
6) NAME OF PROJECT(OPTIONAL) Sunwood, Phase 1 1 I
SECTION II: PROJECT INFORMATION
7) BRIEFLY DESCRIBE T H E PROJECT YOU PROPOSE: 78 units of m u l t i f a m i l y
housing, 6 nine - plex, and 4 six - pies buildings.
8) DO YOU PROPOSE TO DEVELOP THIS PROJECT IN PHASES? YES ®NO
9) PROJECT DATA
a. NET ACRES 3.85 ± c. PARKING SPACES 131
b. GROSS ACRES 3.89 d. FLOORS OF
(incld. dedication to 62nd Ave. S.)CONSTRUCTION • 3
e. LOT AREA COVERAGE BLDG. 32492 SQ.FT. LANDSCAPE 63,404 SQ. FT.
PAVING 71,810 SQ. FT. (open)
10) DOES THE AVERAGE SLOPE OF THE SITE EXCEED 10 %? D YES 9N0
EXISTING ZONING R 12. EXISTING COMP.PLAN High Dens i ty Res.
11)
13) IS THIS SITE DESIGNATED FOR SPECIAL CONSIDERATION
ON THE CITY'S ENVIROMIENTAL BASE MAP?
DYES
NO
14) IF YOU WISH TO HAVE COPIES OF CITY CORRESPONDENCE, STAFF REPORTS, OR OTHER
DOCUMENTS SENT TO ADDRESSES OTHER THAN APPLICANT OR PROPERTY OWNER, PLEASE
INDICATE BELOW. /
a. NAME: 440, J ( a -! / Q .Cac.., ADDRESS:
b. NAME: NO ADDRESS:
tsa. o .SVn..,00,/ g /vj 4'33
7 ,
•
SECTION II: APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT
I, Don Dally , being duly sworn, declare that I am the
contract purchaser or owner of the property involved in this application and
that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information
herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my
knowledge end belief.
residing at
DATE
Sdbacribed and sworn before me
1 -20 -8
.fon e State of Washington
1?-6- v so- ,(Yee , dray $
ignature o ontract • as •f owner)
SECTION IV: SUPPORTING MATERIAL REQUIREMENTS
NOTE: All applications require certain supporting documents and
information which are described in the following table:
TYPE OF APPLICATION (CHECK BOX(ES))
,REZONING
❑ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
❑ VARIANCE
❑ COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
❑ SHORELINE MGIT. PERMIT
❑ SHORELINE MCAT PERMIT REVISION
❑ WAIVER
❑ SHORT PLAT
❑ BINDING SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN
❑ ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
❑ LANDSCAPE REVIEW
❑ SUBDIVISION
❑ SIGN VARIANCE
SUPPORTING INFORMATION REQUIRED **
2 3, 4,'5, 7, 11
1C, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11
1F, 4, 7, 11 or 17
1D, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11, 12
1B, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13
4, 10, 16
IA, 3, 4, 11, 12, 13
4, 5, 9
4, 5, 8
11, 12, 13
14
4, 5, 6, 15
4, 6, 16, 17
* *See TABLE 1 for detailed description
f
SAFLCO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
To: DICK GILROY
1115 — 108th Northeast
Bellevue, WA. 98004
Attt ntiont
Your No.: PACIFIC TOWNHOUSE BUILDERS /KATO
Our No.: 445505
• ,. I
Uv .ZG€t, IA/1 it
Fourth & Vine Building
P. 0, Box 21987
Seattle,. Washington 98111
TITLE OFFICER:
EDWARD C. O'BRIEN
Telephone: (206) 292- 1321
COMMITTMENT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE A
Your No
Our No.
1 Effective Date. January 13. 1981 at 8 =0U a.m.
2 Policy or Policies to be issued_
X ALTA Owner's Policy
X Standard Extended
Proposed Insured:
PACIFIC TOWNHOUSE BUILDERS
ALTA Loan Policy
Proposed Inured •
WLTA Standard Coverage Policy
Proposed Insured;
A fee: as to Parcel A
An easement as to Parcel B
MICUI4 KATO and ILOSAKO KATO, his wife
PACIFIC TOWNHOUSE
BUILDERS/KATO
445505
Amount: $167,400.00
Premium: $ 528.00
.Tax: $ 28..51
Amount;
Premium; $
Tax: $
Amount $
Premium. $
Tax. $
3 The estate or interest in the land described or referred to In the
Commitment and covered herein is:
I•
4. Title to the fee and easement estate or interest in said laid i.s at
the effective date hereof vested in
5. The land referred to in this Comir4 tment 1s in the State of
Washington. County of Kin, and is described as follows;
SEE EXHIBIT "I" ATTACHED HERETO AND MADE A PART HEREOF.
No. 445505
Parcel A
• Parcel B
EXHIBIT "I"
The West 150 feet of the East 450.86 feet of Tract 11, interurban
Addition to the City of Seattle, according to the plat recorded in
Volume 10 of Plats, page 55, in King County, Washington;
EXCIPT that portion lying Southerly of the following described lime:
Commencing at a point on the East line of said Tract 11, 162.79 feet
North. cf the Southeast corner of said tract;
thence South 89 ° 52'00" West 159.21 feet;
thence South 00 ° 08'00" East 38.26 feet;
thence South 89 ° 52'00" West 141.65 feet to the True Point of Beginning;
thence Northwesterly parallel to the centerline of Southcenter Boulevard
(Renton - Three Tree Point Road) to the West line of the East 450.86 feet
of said Tract 11 and the end of said line.
An easement for ingress and egress and utilities over, under and across
that portion of the West 30 feet of the East 400.86 feet of Tract 11
Interurban Addition, to the City of Seattle, according to the plat
recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, page 55, in King County, Washington,
lying Northerly of Primary State Highway No. 1 and lying 280.00 feet
Southerly of the North line of said Tract 11, as established by
instrument recorded under King County Recording No, 6007217.
No. 445505
CON IThbNT FOR TITLE INSURANCE
SCHEDULE B
I. The tol are the rtquirementa to be complied with;
A. Instruments necessary to create the estate or interest to be
insured must be properly executed, delivered and duly filed
for record.
II. Schedule E of the policy or policies to be issued will contain
exceptions to the following natters unless the same are disposed of
to the satisfaction of the Company,
A. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters.
if any, created, first appearing in the public records or
attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to
the date the proposed Insured acquires of record for value the
estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this
commitment.
B. Any policy issued pursuant hereto will contain under Schedule
13 the standard exceptions as set forth and identified as to
type of policy on the inside of the back cover hereof.
C. SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS;
l.. Terms, covenants and provisions of the easement referred to in
Parcel B of Schedule A and the effect of any failure to comply with such
terms, covenants and provisions.
2. Rights contained in Warranty Deed to the State of Washington, dated
July 31, 1962, recorded August 30, 1962 under King County Recording
Number 5473599. The sane arc as follows:
it is understood and agreed that the State of Washington will
reconstruct the existing road approach on the Northerly [side of Primary
State Highway r :o. IRE at or near Highway's Engineer's Station 164+00.
which approach shall be maintained from the right—of—way line and the
shoulder line of said highway by the grantors, their heirs, successors
and assigns. The grantors herein further grant to the State of
Washington, or its agents, the right to enter upon the grantors
remaining lands where necessary to construct said Approach.
3. regulatory control by the State Supervisor of Flood Control through
the establishment of a flood control zone No. 2 inclusive within the
boundaries thereof these premises and other property as lying within a
flood basin. Control being exercised by issuance of regulatory orders
(Continued)
—la t v s L ee d urng - suss ter ` t' ,e6V19 "'"`
No. 445505 Page 2
4. General taxes
1981, in an amount
Af fects:
Tax Account No.:
5. Assessment of;
Amount:
Ordinance No.:
District:
Payable in:
At:
From
By:
For:
Account No
Affects:
.1W /d g
(Cosa intsed )
and permits affecting.; the planning;;, construction, operation and
maintenance of any structure of improvement, public or private, to be
erected or built, or to be reconstructed or. modified. (RCN 86.16.010 et
seq.)
for the year 1981, not payable until February 15,
not yet available from the Comptroller's of fice.
Said premises and other property
359700- 0208 -y03
(See NOTE below)
1098
29
10 annual installments, plus interest
Percentage Not established yet
December 15, 1980
City or municipality' of. Tukwila
Grading, sewer, curbs, gutters,
sidewalk
5
Lot 11, Interurban Addition to Seattle, the West 150
feet of the East 450.86 feet less State Bighway
street light and
NOTE Pursuant to Ordinance No. 1184, adopted December 1, 1980, the
sum of $17,611.09 shall be paid by the City of Tukwila. The owners of
this parcel will, be assessed late comer chargcer in said amount upon
development of the property,
6. Tien of real estate excise sales tax upon any sale of said
premises, if unpaid.
The sketch is for your aid in ting your land with reference to streets and our' While it is believed to be
correct, the Company assumes ability for,any . lobs occurring by reason of rel .e thereon. 445So
SAFECO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
Lw.
3323-4
S L...f NWT /#E& •
23 -22 -4
1
TO.6 R1 1/74
ISO
-KACT 11) *Pc.k.i 4 7T2 ?C V 12
on
N
S U 62' $1
3so.di
•
i
3 8)
TR.
/D
".3r
Al A! en E
55
75.40
z
N o
k
tann
7A ' g r
gyp/
5j
fr
SAFECO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
CONDOMINIUM PLAT CERTIFICATE
To: NORTHWARD DEVELOPMENT CO.
1115 108th Northeast
Bellevue, WA 98004
Attention: Dick Gilroy
+Le Wear+
Fourth & Vine Building
P.O. Box 21987
Seattle, Washington 98111
Telephone: (206) 292 -1550
No. 442099
Proposed Condominium Plat of: SUNWOOD CONDOMINIUM (PHASE III)
Gentlemen:
This is a certificate as of December 4, 1980, at 8:00 a.m., for a
plat of the following property:
That portion of Tract 11, Interurban Addition to Seattle, according to
the plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, page 55, in King County,
Washington, described as follows:
Beginning at a point on the East line of said Tract 11 which is 162.79
feet North of the Southeast corner thereof;
thence continuing North 0 ° 08'00" West 359.88 feet to the Northeast
corner of said Tract 11;
thence South 89 ° 52'00" West along the Northerly line thereof 300.86
feet;
thence South 0 ° 08'00" East 398.14 feet;
thence North 89 ° 52'00" East 141.65 feet;
thence North 0 °08'00" West 38.26 feet;
thence North 89 ° 52'00" East 159.21 feet to the point of beginning;
EXCEPT the Easterly 5 feet thereof as conveyed to the City of Tukwila by
deed recorded under King County Recording No. 7909040616.
This Company certifies that record title is vested in:
PARKE PLACE NUMBER ONE, INC., a Washington corporation, PARKE PLACE
NUMBER TWO, INC., a Washington corporation, and PARKE PLACE NUMBER
THREE, INC., a Washington corporation, doing business as PACIFIC
TOWNSHOUSE BUILDERS -PARKE PLACE, a joint venture
free from all liens, encumbrances and objections, except as follows:
1. Easement including the terms, covenants, and provisions thereof,
as created by instrument
Recorded: June 15, 1979
Recording No.: 7906150932
Records of: King County, Washington
For: Ingress, egress, drainage and utilities
Affects: Portions of said premises and other property
(Continued)
C
No. 442099 Page 2
2. Easement including the terms, covenants and provisions thereof,
as granted by instrument
Recorded: June 24, 1980
Recording No.: 8006240436
Records of: King County, Washington
In favor of: PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT COMPANY, a Washington
corporation
For: Underground electric transmission and /or
distribution system
Affects: A right -of -way 10 feet in width having 5 feet of
such width on each side of a centerline of grantee's
facilities as constructed or to be constructed,
extended or relocated, lying within portions of said
premises and other property
3. Easement including the terms, covenants and provisions thereof,
as granted by instrument
Recorded: August 25, 1980
Recording No.: 8008250582
Records of: King County, Washington
In favor of: PACIFIC NORTHWEST BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY
For: Underground communication lines and appurtenances
thereto
Affects: A strip of land 10 feet in width having 5 feet of
such width on each side of the underground lines as
placed on portions of said premises and other
property
4. Agreement entered into by and between:
PACIFIC TOWNHOUSE BUILDERS -PARKE PLACE, a joint
venturer; AND
TUKWILA INVESTORS, a partnership
Dated: June 2, 1979
Recorded: June 19, 1979
Recording No.: 7906190909
Records of: King County, Washington
Providing: For construction of certain utilities improvements
on portions of said premises and other property
NOTE: Said agreement recites that it is secured by a promissory note
of even date in the amount of $150,000.00, to be cancelled upon
satisfactory evidence to TUKWILA of completion of the improvements.
(Continued)
No. 4 4209 9
5. Covenants,
Recorded:
Recording No.:
Records of:
Executed by:
Providing:
6. Covenants,
restrictions, a
Recorded:
Recording No.:
Records of:
Executed by:
7. Deed of Trust
interest, advances
Dated:
Recorded:
Recording No.:
Records of:
Grantor:
Trus tee:
Beneficiary:
The beneficial
instrument
Dated:
Recorded:
Recording No.:
Records of:
By:
To:
Page 3
conditions and restrictions contained in instrument
August 23, 1978
7808230748
King County, Washington
CITY OF TUKWILA; RICHARD A. GILROY and DONALD F.
DALLY
Terms and conditions relating to zoning and
development of said condominium premises and other
property; includes Ordinance No. 1071 of the City of
Tukwila
conditions, restrictions and easement in declaration of
copy of which is hereto attached;
November 13, 1980
8011130853
King County, Washington
PACIFIC TOWNHOUSE BUILDERS - -PARKE PLACE
to secure an indebtedness of $190,636.70, and any
, or other obligations secured thereby;
April 27, 1979
May 1, 1979
7905010689
King County, Washington
PACIFIC TOWNHOUSES BUILDERS -PARKE PLACE, a joint
venture composed of PARKE PLACE NUMBER ONE, INC., a
Washington corporation, PARKE PLACE NUMBER TWO,
INC., a Washington corporation, and PARKE PLACE
NUMBER THREE, INC., a Washington corporation
SAFECO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation
HORST EHMKE and CRETE EHMKE, husband and wife
interest under said Deed of Trust was assigned by
September 11, 1980
October 2, 1980
8010020678
King County, Washington
ALEX SHULMAN, as trustee for ALASKA DISTRIBUTORS
COMPANY PROFIT SHARING TRUST
MICHAEL R. MASTRO
(Continued)
No. 442099
8. Deed of Trust
interest, advances
Dated:
Recorded:
Recording No.:
Records of:
Grantor:
Trustee:
Beneficiary:
Page 4
to secure an indebtedness of $100,000.00, and any
, or other obligations secured thereby;
September 5, 1980
September 8, 1980
8009080556
King County, Washington
PARKE PLACE NUMBER ONE, INC., PARKE PLACE NUMBER
TWO, INC., PARKE PLACE NUMBER THREE, INC., all
Washington corporations, doing business as PACIFIC
TOWNHOUSE BUILDERS - PARKE PLACE, a joint venture
PIONEER NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, a
corporation
RONALD M. SUDDERTH and CASTLE DEVELOPMENT, INC.
Affects: Portion of said premises
9. Terms, conditions, provisions and stipulations of a joint venture
agreement of PACIFIC TOWNHOUSE BUILDERS -PARKE PLACE, a joint venture.
Any conveyance or encumbrance of joint venture property should be
executed by each joint venturer, or by the managing venturer, (PARKE
PLACE NUMBER ONE, INC.). Any amendments to the agreement should be
submitted.
According to the Joint Venture Agreement dated April 26, 1979, PARKE
PLACE NUMBER ONE, INC., PARKE PLACE NUMBER TWO, INC., and PARKE PLACE
NUMBER THREE, INC., all Washington corporations, are the joint
venturers.
Evidence of the identity and authority of officers, if any, other than
the following, to execute the forthcoming instrument: RICHARD A. GILROY
for PARKE PLACE NUMBER ONE, INC., (as managing partner for the Joint
Venture), GERALD F. MOLITOR, for PARKE PLACE NUMBER TWO, INC., and
DONALD DALLY for PARKE PLACE NUMBER THREE, INC.
10. Delinquent general taxes for the year 1980.
Amount: $1,054.81, plus interest
Affects: Said premises
Tax Account No.: 359700- 0200 -01
11. Assessment of $54,386.76, under Ordinance 1098, District 29 Plan of
payment and date of delinquency not yet fixed.
By: City or municipality of Tukwila
For: Street, watermain, sewer and sidewalk
Affects: Said premises
(Continued)
No. 442099 Page 5
NOTE: Said premises are expected to be subjected to the provisions
of the Horizontal Property Regimes Act (Condominiums), Chapter 156, Laws
of 1963 (R.C.W. 64.32), under the name of SUNWOOD CONDOMINIUM (Phase
III). Upon recordation of the Survey Map and Set of Plans and the
Declaration, subject to review and approval by SAFECO TITLE INSURANCE
COMPANY, the legal description herein will be modified in accordance
with R.C.W. 64.32.120, and title to said premises will be further
subject to the following matters:
a. Terms, provisions, covenants, conditions, definitions, options,
obligations, easements and restrictions as may be contained in
Condominium Declaration of the hereinafter named Condominium, a
Horizontal Property Regime, and as may be contained in the By -Laws
adopted pursuant to said Declaration;
Condominium: SUNWOOD
Recorded: November 13, 1980
Recording No.: 8011130852
Records of: King County, Washington
Amendment thereto;
Recorded:
Recording No.:
b. Terms, provisions, requirements and limitations contained in the
Horizontal Property Regimes Act (Condominiums), Chapter 156, Laws of
1963 (RCW 64.32) as now amended, or as it may hereafter be amended;
other than those pertaining to the actual valid creation of the
Condominium itself.
c. Any assessment now or hereafter levied under the provisions of the
Condominium Declaration of Condominium hereinafter named (or any
amendment thereto) or under the By -Laws adopted pursuant to said
Declaration.
Condominium: SUNWOOD
SC /jrf
This company further certifies that all taxes and assessments
levied and chargeable have been fully paid except as noted above.
SAFECO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
By
E E . TESCHL
Auth ized Signature
The sketch is for your aid in lo c 3 your land with reference to streets and oth .'rcels. While it is believed to be
correct, the Company assumes no ,,ability for any toss occurring by reason of relia , thereon.
SAFECO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
=Nt +E tz u eb 4 N d d
'fib C; +
N
J
r a a" s r.
ire
Is
o f
o�
• i
5 —fir
• lM •
• it
• me.
) tt+1.
w
w
S, tSI'T ST,
N