HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 81-22-CPA - LYNCH / DREW - XEROX BUILDING EXPANSION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT81-22-CPA
6400 SOUTHCENTER BL
LYNCH XEROX BUILDING EXPANSION
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
P&L COMPANY XEROX BUILDING EXPANSION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
WHEREAS, P & L Company, a Washington General Partnership,
CD filed a petition on June 8, 1981 to have certain real property owned
op
by that partnership reclassified from R -3 to C -1; and
WHEREAS, the comprehensive plan map for the City of Tukwila
indicates that the subject property is to be used for residential
purposes; and
WHEREAS, the current zoning of the subject property is for
multiple residential use; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Tukwila held
a hearing on June 25, 1981 to consider both the zoning reclassification
request and the proposal to change the comprehensive plan map; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed the Planning Department
file on this matter, reviewed the Planning Commission's recommendation
regarding this project and has listened to and reviewed a presentation
by the property owners and their representatives,
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Tukwila,
Washington does ordain as follows:
Section 1. The comprehensive plan map is hereby amended to
show that the property described in Exhibit A attached hereto shall be
included within the professional /office designation.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON
at a regular meeting thereof this is-56 day of
Ap•roved as to Form:
ity Attorney, Larwr E.
Hard
ORDINANCE NO. 4.230
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN MAP
Attest:
WASHINGTON
Published Record Chronicle - September 20, 1981
1981.
►
TOGETHER WITH:
TOGETHER WITH:
REAL PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
•
EXHIBIT A •
Lot 17, Interurban Addition to Seattle, according
to the Plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, Page
55, in Ring County, Washington. Except that
portion lying North of line described as follows:
Beginning at a point on West line 210 feet North
fro;:: Southwest corner, thence North 89° 47' East
630 feet more or less to intersection of West
line of 65th Avenue South and except portion
conveyed to the City of Tukwila by deed recorded
under Auditor's File No. 7108120423.
All of Lessor's right, title and interest in and
to that portion of Macadam Road, as located by
Ring County Survey, No. 639 "a ", lying Westerly
of a line perpendicular to the Northwesterly
margin of said Macadam Road at its intersection
with the Westerly line of that portion of the
William H. Gilliam Donation Claim No. 40, in
Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W.M., as
conveyed to H. Wayne Anderson and Ardeth
Anderson, his wife, by deed recorded under
Auditor's File No. 5845225, and lying North of
the Northerly margin of the Renton -Three Tree
Point Road No. 2649.
Road and utility easement granted by James S.
Huntington and Helen Diane Huntington to Lessor
recorded under Ring County Division of Records
and Elections No.7910240948 , as amended
amendment recorded under No. 7910180588
� J � w L4 � q s y City of Tukwila
J G�
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
w o Tukwila Washington 98188
1909
Frank Todd, Mayor
PLANNING COM'IISSION
Minutes of the regular meeting of 25 June 1981.
The meeting was called to order at 8:04 p.m. by Chairman Richard Kirsop.
Commissioners Arvidson, Avery and Orrico were present.
Staff present: Brad Collins, Planning Director and Mark Caughey, Associate
Planner.
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
MOVED BY MR. ORRICO, WITH MRS. AVERY'S SECOND, TO APPROVE THE MINUTES OF
THE REGULAR MEETING OF 28 MAY 1981 AS PUBLISHED. MOTION CARRIED UNANI-
MOUSLY.
CITY COUNCIL ACTION REPORT
A) Proposed Zoning Code (Draft #4, revised)
Mr. Collins noted that Interurban Avenue and McMicken Heights sub-
area zoning map review have been the predominant subjects recently;
Administrative regulations, height, parking, landscaping will follow.
Staff anticipates completion of the review sessions on or about 20
July. A wrap -up public hearing would likely follow in mid- August.
B) Sunwood Phase III Rezone (81 -5 -R)
The rezone has been passed with the stipulation that an extra jacuzzi
spa unit be included as: :part of the Phase III recreation facility "
package.
PUBLIC HEARING (concurrent)
A) Application 81 -22 -CPA: (P &L Co.) Requesting amendment to the Compre-
hensive Land Use Plan to redesignate 3.1 acres at the northwest quadrant
of Southcenter Blvd. and 65th Ave. So. from high residential to
office use.
B) Application 81 -21 -R: (P &L Co.) Requesting rezoning of 3.1 acres at
the Northwest quadrant of Southcenter Blvd. and 65th Ave. So. from R -3
to C -2.
Page -2-
Planning Commissior(
25 June 1981 l
Mr Caughey presented the staff reports.
Richard McCann, Attorney for the applicants, introduced the members of
the project development team.'
Architect Omer Mithun presented a slide photography program highlighting
design parameters of the site plan and building layout. Generally, the
conclusions and stipulations of the staff report are acceptable with the
exception of the language which appears to require installation of a
masonary sound barrier. They wish to strike -out that specific reference
and allow the B.A.R. to investigate other solutions.
Mr. McCann returned to the podium, and urged that an alternative vehicle
to the deed restriction and covenant running with the land be considered
to allow the land -owner greater flexibility in future decisions affecting
use of the site. He not that there exists a high probability that the
property owner of the Xerox site would be willing to grant an access ease-
ment to the P&L site; however, it is not clear yet what would be the most
advantageous means by which to document that right of access.
Mr. Kirsop declared the public hearing open at 8:22 p.m.
John Richards, representing a group of home - owners in close proximity to
the proposed P&L project, presented a list of concerns which they believe
should be addressed in the Planning Commission's hearing process.
In regard to the medium density housing potential displacement contained
in the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report, Mr. Richards stated his
belief that the existing high percentage of multiple- family housing avail-
able in Tukwila relative to surrounding communities should be taken into
account.
Mr. Richards also noted a possible drafting error in the sectional view of
the building north -to- south; the actual building height will be above the
floor level of the adjoining homesite to the north. He also suggests that
the buiding be moved closer to 65th Ave., consistent with the Housing
Authority 1 uuiding layout, and that direct access to the parking area be .
provided from 65th Ave.
Edward Robinson, nearby resident, emphasized his concern about the potential
noise impacts of the project. He noted that unacceptable noise patterns
are present already on the Xerox site. However, if noise impacts are
controlled, he does not object to the development.
The public hearing was closed at 9 :16 p.m.
Mr. Orrico inquired as to the status of ownership; Mr. McCann explained that
Messrs. Lynch and Patterson are contract purchasers. The staff's proposed
one -year time limit for beginning construction was questioned. Mr. Pithun
asked that an extension clause be added.
Page -3-
Planning CommissiorC
25 June 1981
In response to Mr. Kirsop's question, Mr. Richards presented an alterna-
tive size layout diagram showing the building placed closer to 65th
Ave. and depicting a driveway access corridor from 65th Ave. to the park -
ing area along the north edge of the site. Mr. Mithun explained their
willingness to study further the proposed alternatives.
In closing, Mr. Richards urged the Planning 'Commission not to separate de-
sign considerations from the rezone decision - making process.
Mr. Collins pointed out that the City Council is considering zoning re-
classification for this site in the context of its review of draft ordi-
nance #4. They are fully aware of the application for rezone now pending
before the Commission, and their actions do mot prejudice full considera-
tion of this proposal.
MOVED BY MR. ARVIDSON THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO THE CITY
COUNCIL APPROVAL OF APPLICATION 81- 22- CPA, AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE LAND
USE PLAN FROM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO OFFICE USE DESIGNATION, SUBJECT
TO THE FOLLOWING STIPULATIONS:
1. FIELD CONSTRUCTION OF AN OFFICE DEVELOPMENT SHALL BEGIN WITHIN ONE (1)
YEAR OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING THIS COMPRE-
HENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT OR CONTINUANCE THEREOF.
IF CONSTRUCTION DOES NOT BEGIN WITHIN ONE YEAR AS REQUIRED, THE COMPRE-
HENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT SHALL BECOME VOID, AND THE USE DESIGNATION SHALL
RETURN IMMEDIATELY TO "MEDIUM- DENSITY RESIDENTIAL."
2. ANY OFFICE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT PROPOSED ON THIS SITE SUBSEQUENT TO FINAL
ACTION ON THE COI+'IPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT SHALL REQUIRE BOARD OF ARCHI-
TECTURAL REVIEW APPROVAL PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS. THE
INTENT OF SAID REVIEW SHALL BE TO RESTRICT OFFICE DEVELOPMENT INTENSITY
TO A LEVEL APPROXIMATING FOUR PLAX RESIDENTIAL USAGE, AS ANALYZED IN
TERMS OF NOISE CONTROL, ON -SITE CIRCULATION, AND BUILDING HEIGHT.
MR. ORRICO SECONDED THE MOTION.
After discussion, Mr. Arvidson agreed to re -state stipulation 1 as follows:
1. FIELD CONSTRUCTION OF AN OFFICE DEVELOPMENT SHALL BEGIN WITHIN ONE (1)
YEAR OF THE uuFECTIVE DATE OF THE ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING THIS COMPRE-
HENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT OR CONTINUANCE THEREOF SUBJECT TO A PUBLIC
HEARING. IF CONSTRUCTION DOES NOT BEGIN WITHIN ONE YEAR AS REQUIRED
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT SHALL BECOME VOID, AND THE USE
DESIGNATION SHALL RETURN IMMEDIATELY TO 'MEDIUM- DENSITY RESIDENTIAL."
Staff explained that the rationale of their proposed wording of the stipu-
lation is to provide a public hearing prior to extending construction time
limits so that the public may be kept informed of the reasons bringing -
about delay.
MOVED BY MRS. AVERY, WITH MR. ORRICO'S SECOND TO AMEND THE MAIN MOTION TO
Page -4-
Planning Commission
25 June 1981
REQUIRE NOTIFICATION OF NEARBY PROPERTY OWNERS OF SUBSEQUENT ACTION ON
THIS PROJECT BY THE BOARD OR ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW. MOTION CARRIED.
MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY.
After some discussion, it was the Commission's consensus that more study
of the site design issues affecting the rezone application is in order.
MOVED BY MR. ORRICO, WITH bit. ARVIDSON'S SECOND, TO TABLE APPLICATION
81 -21 -R, WITH INSTRUCTION TO THE APPLICANT TO WORK WITH THE NEIGHBORING
PROPERTY OWNERS TO ATTEMPT RESOLUTION OF THE ISSUES RAISED DURING THIS
MEETING. MOTION CARRIED.
Mr. Arvidson asked for clarification of the staff's suggested use of a
masonary sound barrier. Mr. Mithun suggested their willingness to work
out an individual solution with each abutting property owner.
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
A. Development Plan - BSH Investments, Phase II. Requesting approval of
site and architecture for an office- warehouse complex at the easterly
terminus of Upland Drive.
Mark Cuaghey presented the staff report. Herb Bittman, Project Architect
was present on behalf of the application.
Mr. Bittman presented a revised site layout diagram which attempts to
address the matters raised in the staff report. The revised proposal res-
tricts access across the rail easement to two points, eliminates truck man-
euvering over the tracks and provides access to the future extension of
lankier Boulevard. He emphasized his willingness to work cooperatively with
the City and the Union Pacific Railroad to resolve project concerns.
Frank Haverkamp, representing Union Pacific Railway, agreed with the areas
of concern expressed in the staff report. A copy of the rail easement
document was distributed and discussed.
Mr. Collins described the work done to date on the proposed Local Improve-
ment District which will include improvement of Minkler Blvd. He emphasized
the potential advantages to the property owner, the railroad and the City
by accessing the site from Minkler Blvd. once it is improved.
After discussion, it was the Board's consensus to accept the staff's re-
quest for a continuance of this matter to allow further research on the
access issue.
MOVED BY MRS. AVERY, WITH MR. ORRICO'S SECOND, TO TABLE THE BSH PHASE II
DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPLICATION PENDING RESOLUTION OF ACCESS ISSUES DISCUSSED
IN THE STAFF REPORT. MOTION CARRIED.
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DIVISION
CITY COUNCIL
STAFF. REPORT
AGENDA ITEM . 81-22-CPA P&L Company Comp. Plan Amendment
INTRODUCTION
At its regular meeting of 25 June,
1981, the Planning Commission voted
to recommend to the City Council that
the Comprehensive Land Use Policy
Plan be amended to redesignate 3.1
acres north of and adjacent to the
Xerox building on Southcenter Blvd.
from "medium density residential" and
"low density residential" to "office"
use. The applicants intend to use the
site for a second -phase office develop-
ment complementary to the Xerox Build-
ing.
To accomplish the office development
objective, modification of the site's
current R -3 zoning to C -1 is necessary.] •
A rezone application for this site was
filed simultaneously with the Comprehensive Plan Amendment request, and
a concurrent public hearing thereon was held before the Commission. How-
ever, .numerous zoning - related site design issues raised by the staff
and by the nearby property owners were left unresolved. Thus, the rezone
action will be delayed in arriving at Council until a consensus is reached
on those matters.
• 1 ..: , , G.
' \ -- I 1 2—Vf_ta:FA '
1 ti � i ▪ 1 — `„
` i . :2� N 1 ' , � I \ 1 ' 7
N r ;'= i. — \ i, 'Zit µ•� M -I
Z01 � y �
r.o P.-14Z rn�-'— ■ {._ate
\\ 1T1-12. < �.;, ,: \
1 S ` R14.1 i j
♦ ' �a4-eD \`„`
V ca • R.y P-4 . i:7 - ...47
�. ' cc
I,
C
S1Te
i W 1 1 i 1, M•t � .%.
,,
• cN j OPA 1
ri
DISCUSSION
The principal concern with the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment is the
unavoidable reduction of. land area in Tukwila deemed suitable for use as
medium - density, multiple - family residential development. After comparing the
exisiting and remaining housing potential using "R -3" zoning as that which
corresponds most closely with medium-density use districts of the Comprehen-
sive Plan, we concluded that removal of the P&L property from medium- density
multiple - family usage (defined as residential density ranging from 6 -16
units /acre) represents a significant reduction in the amount of land area
available to the City to meet its internal obligations for diverse housing
opportunity. About 50% of existing vacant R -3 lands would be removed from
the current zoning map, and 20% of such land would be taken away under the
Proposed Draft #4 map. Assuming full buildout of the 3.1 acre site at 16
units /acre, an actual loss of 49 units will occur. Further, the P&L site is
Page -2-
81 -22 -CPA
c.
not considered an area of special development consideration, meaning that
full build- outunder "medium density" (16 units /acre) is likely. Almost
half of the vacant R -3 lands under the existing zoning map are in special,
environmentally sensitive areas. Nearly two- thirds of vacant R -3 lands under
"Draft 4" are so designated. These properties are constrained in some
manner by natural factors, and full- intensity development is not as likely.
Thus, the importance of unconstrained land such as the P&L site to absorb
a full measure of medium density residential growth demand is heightened.
Staff noted that both the King Subregional Plan (endorsed by Council in
February, 1980), and the "residence" element of our Comprehensive
Plan, emphasize the need for variety in type and configuration of housing
in the community. While conceding that approval of the proposed amendment
may reduce medium - density potential, both the neighboring owners who
testified at the hearing, and several of the commissioners stated their
belief that Tukwila's total supply of multi - family land (R -3, R -4 and R -M -H
combined) evidences more - than- adequate recognition of the City's obligation
to provide diversified housing opportunity relative to its employment base.
The Commission also noted that the Comprehensive Plan encourages placement
of low- intensity office activity as a buffer between single - family and
commercial boulevard uses.
RECMIENDATION
While the staff would like to have encouraged more depth in discussion of
the housing - related impacts implicit in this application before the Commis-
sion rendered its decision, it is fair to conclude that the Commission's
concerns, if any, were adequately resolved in public hearing testimony.
We recommend, therefore, that the City Attorney be directed to prepare an
appropriate ordinance amending the Comprehensive Plan for the property
illustrated on Exhibit "A" and described on Exhibit "B" (both attached), and
containing the following stipulations:
1. Field construction of an office development shall begin within one (1)
year of the effective date of the ordinance implementing this Compre-
hensive Plan Amendment or continuance thereof following a public
hearing. If construction does not begin within one year as required,
the Comprehensive Plan Amendment shall become void, and the use de-
signation shall return immediately to "medium- density residential."
7 Any office development project proposed on this site subsequent to
final action on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment shall require Board
of Architectural review approval prior to issuance of building
permits. The intent of said review shall be to restrict office deve-
lopment intensity to a level approximating four plea residential
usage, as analyzed in terms of noise control, on -site circulation,
and building height.
3. Property owners within 300' of the subject site shall be notified of
subsequent Board of Architectural Review actions affecting its development.
THE KITH=
ASSOCIATES S3
A?C:HI i ECTS & R.ANNEPS
2 1121H AVENUE' NE
—VUE. WASHINGTON
9E:04 2O 454 3344
OUTHCEfdTERE
TUKWILA
Y HALL
1
1 ;Q
111 I 1:1
I 1 1 ►
D n » B
[2]
VICINITV MAP
. 1' f. ?.aye
Q
TUKWILA PARKWAY
0
- 'LC
�
SUBJECT PROPERTY
1 ANDOVER INDUSTRIAL PA
Lying in the southern part of Lot 17, Interurban
Addition to Seattle, bounded on the North by a
line parallel to the North line of said Lot 17,
recorded in Volume 10, page 55, of plats, records
of said county, more properly described as: The
south 210 feet (measured along the west line
thereof) of Lot 17, records of said county, TOGETHER
WITH right of way of present driveway leading thereto
(19'2 "); The above containing a total of 3.1 acres.,
more of less.
1
EXHIBIT B
L 16 . 6 10.2
_ II 44.5 1 34.6
62% 6.2
77% 15.3
38%
33%
2.5
10.3
15%
23%
40% 3.1
67% 12.2
19%
26%
50%
20%
Current
Zoning
Draft 4
Zoning
A.C.
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DIVISION
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
AGENDA ITEM • 81 -22 -CPA P & L COMPANY
INTRODUCTION
The applicants are requesting an amendment
to the Comprehensive Plan to redesignate
3.1 acres north of and adjacent to the
Xerox Building on Southcenter Blvd. from
"medium density residential" and "low
density residential" to "office" uses.
The applicants intend to use the site for
a second -phase office development comple-
mentary to the Xerox Building. The parking
area for this second -phase project will be
enlarged beyond minimum code requirements
to accommodate overflow demand levels at
the Xerox site.
DISCUSSION
TOTAL ACRES % ACRES %
DEV. TOTAL VACANT TOTAL
ACRES
in
ASDC.
The principle concern of staff relative to
this request for modification of the Compre- ! 1 r�
hensive Plan is the intended reduction of
land area in Tukwila deemed suitable for use as medium - density multiple family
housing. To assess the quantitative impact of converting 3+ acres of potential
"medium density" land to non - residential use, we have developed an inventory of
existing and remaining housing potential using "R -3" zoning as that which cor-
responds most closely with medium density use districts of the Comprehensive Plan.
INVENTORY OF R -3 LANDS IN TUKWILA
ACRES
% VACANT VACANT VACANT
TOTAL VACANT wo.P &L REMAINING REDUCTION
A.S.D.C. = Area of Special Development Consideration
HOUSING POLICY
From the information contained in the table, we find that this Comprehensive Plan
amendment application may present potential conflict with the existing and emerging
statements of policy advocating the availability of multi-family 'housing in the
community. In February, 1980, the Tukwila City Council endorsed, by resolution,
the King Subregional Plan, as the reference document by which local growth manage-
ment decisions will be guided. Under "phased growth objectives," the Subregional
P & L COMPANY
Page 2
Plan states: "...stage growth to contribute to reasonable housing costs and the
availability of housing for all segments of the population. There is a recognized
scarcity of well located sites zoned for multi - family housing development, a situa-
tion which may adversely affect the housing opportunities for young and elderly
households."
The focus of the Subregional Plan is to intensify growth pressures within the
county in those areas which are already committed to urbanization, as opposed
to allowing new growth (or sprawl) to occur unchecked at the urban /rural fringe.
Tukwila, because of its burgeoning employment base and access to major trans-
portation corridors, has been designated a "secondary metropolitan" activity
center. This designation is the most intensive in the subregional plan, second
only to the central business district in Seattle. It is the expectation of the
subregional plan philosophy that jurisdictions encompassing intensive centers of
employment opportunity will also assume the responsibility to provide suitable
quantities of land area for housing a reasonable number of those persons at-
tracted by the local job market. Naturally, a portion of that housing demand
will be for multi - family configurations: apartments or condominiums.
The Tukwila Comprehensive Plan predates the King Subregional Plan by several
years. However, many of the policies therein are indeed visionary in that
they already anticipate, on the local level, the crucial questions of housing
advocacy confronting the region as a whole:
- "Residence ": Objective 1 - Assure a diversified supply of housing in the
Planning area.
Policy 1. Encourage housing developments which provide.a diversity of
housing types.
Policy 2. Encourage the development of owner - occupied multiple - family
residential units.
Removal of the P & L property from medium - density multiple- family usage, (de-
fined as residential density ranging from 6 -16 units /acre) represents a signi-
ficant reduction in the amount of land area available to the City to meet its
internal obligations for diverse housing opportunity. About 50% of existing
vacant R -3 lands would be removed from the current zoning map, and 20% of such
land would be taken away under the proposed Draft #4 map. Assuming full build -
out of the 3.1 acre site at 16 units /acre, an actual loss of 49 three or four
plex units will occur. Further, the P & L site is not considered an area of
special development consideration, meaning that full build -out under "medium
density" (16 units /acre) is likely. Almost half of. the vacant R -3 lands under
the existing zoning map are in special, environmentally sensitive areas. Nearly
two - thirds of vacant R -3 lands under "Draft 4" are so designated. These proper-
ties are constrained in some manner by natural factors; full- intensity
development is not as likely. Thus, the importance of unconstrained land such
as the P & L site to absorb a full measure of medium density residential growth
demand is heightened, and emphasizes the significance of its loss.
MITIGATION
The obvious strategy for offsetting this loss of multi - family housing potential
on the P & L site is to "make up" an equivalent or greater number of units else-
where in the community. Two possible alternatives are available to accomplish
the translocation of medium density potential:
P & L COMPANY
Page 3
1. "Cumulative" zoning - Both the existing zoning code, and its potential suc-
cessor, Draft #4 provide for R -3 (medium density) residential uses in "higher"
zoning classifications, either as permitted or conditional uses. It is con-
ceivable that lands elsewhere in the community carrying a higher zoning district
classification could respond to market demand and develop in a four plex con-
figuration. Certain sites in the Interurban Avenue Corridor, for example, have
been shown to possess the app amenities for multi - family usage.
2. McMicken Heights - During its review of Draft Zoning Ordinance #4 and its
accompanying map, the City Council directed the Planning Department to
analyze the suitability of certain vacant R -1 lands in the McMicken Heights
area for higher density development. Preliminary investigation of environ-
mental factors seems to indicate that medium density (R-3) uses may be ap-
propriate on some of the approximately 18 acres involved in the study. Since
the environmental constraints are significant in this area, full build out at
16 d.u. /acre is unlikely. However, even at a relatively low level of usage,
say 11 units /acre, over 200 new four -plex type homes could be developed, more
than offsetting the 50 units lost by this comprehensive plan amendment.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council ap-
proval of application 81 -22 -CPA, amending the Comprehensive Land Use Plan from
medium density residential to office use designation, subject to the following
stipulation:
1. Field construction of an office development shall begin within one (1)
year of the effective date of the ordinance implementing this Comprehnsive
Plan Amendment. If construction does not begin within one year as required,
the Comprehensive Plan Amendment shall become void, and the use designation
shall return immediately to "medium- density residential."
2. Any office development project proposed on this site subsequent to final
action on the Comprehensive Plan Amendment shall require Board of Archi-
tectural review approval prior to issuance of building permits. The in-
tent of said review shall be to restrict office development intensity to a
level approximating four plex residential usage, as analyzed in terms of
noise control, on -site circulation, and building height.
• to Ole
as.011041p -WOO
dprlt•
*ow!'
t.L.C:ar
...---
P 141:7
kilos awc Apr.;
OL; WNW rp•
2563-. k '.-
*
..• pu nem ...or 01
met... --rJwy vls
"Wir
272 111. .44 f*, see Sin *eV ea.
EXHIBIT
• • • • BP O. OM
OPROJECT FOR P&L COMPANY
PLANNING [FT
M.F.
ft B 1
cr
o z
11.
0 .
2
F- 0
0 0
-)1
0
CC
0 .0.
,40 abrie
•■•11111
1
1
tJpootlos • -S
r•otloe A +A
1011oetloo C
PLANNING DEF' i
'
Is
EXHIBIT
M.F.
se
ri PROJECT FOR P&L 'COMPANY
s
•
O z
u.
a .
2
O 0
O e s
CC
CL Or
m
'
4:194
l
2
0
gn 2 l ah i It 3 z g 3 3
f
a
City of Tukwila
6200 South:enter 8atekrard
Tikw�7a Wash*ig n 98188
MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM
SUPPLEMENTAR ESTI011AIRE
•
Schedule
D
COMP. PLAN AMENDMENT APP.
1. What is the general classification of the above described property according
to the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Man Map?
Medium and High Density Residential
2. What general land use classification are you seeking for the above described
property? (Please attach any maps or drawings you feel may help to explain
your proposed amendment.)
Professional and Office
3. Which policies in the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan do you feel serve to justify
your proposed amendment? Analyze these policies as they relate to the subject
property.
See F,xhihit_7_;atta'hed_
4. Do you have any other additional information or reasons for requesting this
Comprehensive Plan amendment?
Additional information will be supplied at the request
of the city and interested persons, and will he pre-
sented at the public hearing.
EXHIBIT 1
MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT
APPLICATION
of
JOSEPH W. LYNCH
Comprehensive Plan Policies Served by Proposed Amendment
I. Commerce /Industry Element
A. Compatibility And Design Policies of Objective 1, The
Encouragement of A Smooth, Steady' And Planned Growth of The
Business Community. Plan policies regarding compatibility are
to encourage the grouping of uses which will mutually and econ-
omically benefit each other (Policy No. 1) and to allow for the
location of new commercial and industrial areas and the expan-
sion of existing ones when the expansion is compatible with the
surrounding land use and is not detrimental to the public wel-
fare (Policy No. 2). The proposed amendment furthers both of
these policies.
Policy 1: Grouping Uses which benefit one another. The
project to be located at this site is a garden office building,
complementing the existing Xerox Building with additional
office space and parking. It is located near the City Hall,
and other office buildings. The project will serve the addi-
tional parking and office space needs generated by existing
municipal and business services.
Policy 2: Expansion compatible with surrounding land use.
To the south, east and west of the site are existing business
uses. The area to the north is presently zoned R.3, and would
remain so under the proposed area rezone. The office building
project is designed to provide an aesthetically pleasing and
visually effective buffer between the residential and commer-
cial uses.
The design policies of Objective 1 include the encourage-
ment of aesthetic building and site design (Policy 3), encour-
agement of live landscaping (Policy 4), promotion of adequate
parking (Policy 7), and the encouragement of a diversity of
business uses (Policy 8). The project meets all of these
goals. It is both aesthetically pleasing and well integrated
into the natural features of the site, utilizing live landscap-
ing, preserving existing trees, and preserving to the greatest
extent possible the natural contours of the site. The land-
scaped parking areas are not only adequate for the new build-
ing, but will also relieve existing parking pressures at the
Xerox Building. Finally, the project will allow an increased
diversity of low- density business uses in the area to enhance
the range of services already available.
B. Compatibility, Design and Growth Policies of Objec-
tive 4, The Encouragement of Office Areas. Policy 1 of this
objective encourages the use of commercial office developments
as a buffer between residential areas and, for example, commer-
cial retail areas. The Plan recognizes that commercial office
developments are more attractive and less dense than many mul-
tiple family structures.
Policies 2 and 3 encourage consideration of the adjacent
use districts in the design process, and the use of commercial
offices in areas of high natural amenities. These policies,
too, are served by the project design.
The building will occupy a relatively small percentage of
the site area, devoting the rest of the area to naturally land-
scaped parking and buffer zones. The project will alleviate
existing parking problems in the area, and serve as a natural,
aesthetically pleasing buffer to the residential uses on the
north from the commercial and light industrial uses located
across the freeway. The site contains many significant trees,
which will be preserved in order to preserve the integrity of
the natural site.
II. Transportation /Utilities Element
A. Transportation Design And Impact Policies of Objec-
tive 1, The Establishment of Safe, Efficient And Well- Designed
Circulation Systems of Transportation. The policies of Objec-
tive 1 include promoting consolidation of access points to
frontage properties along major arterials (Policy 9), and en-
couragement of the use of noise buffers between major roads and
residential areas (Policy 11). The project will meet both
these goals. It will use the existing arterial of 65th Avenue
South for access, and will not require intrusion into the resi-
dential areas to the north. The property will thus share
access points with the existing office uses immediately to the
south.
Moreover, retention of significant foliage and existing
slopes of the site will preserve a natural noise buffer between
the freeway and residential areas to the north.
-2-
061681/2/6804G
III. Natural Environment Element
A. Objective 1, The Recognition of Aesthetic, Environ-
mental and Use Benefits of Vegetation, and The Promotion of Its
Retention and Installation. The policies of this objective
include the encouragement of the use of live vegetation in
development landscape plans (Policy 2), and the discouragement
of disturbing vegetation when not necessary (Policy 3). The
project to be located on this site preserves existing signifi-
cant trees and creates a perimeter buffer of vegetation around
the sites, areas of vegetation in the vicinity of the building,
and landscaped vegetation in the parking area.
B. Objective 3, The Recognition of The Advantages and
Opportunities Afforded by The Site Topography. The policies of
Objective 3 include preservation of the views of hillside resi-
dents (Policy 2), preservation of the quality of the natural
land form (Policy 3), and discouragement of unnecessary filling
and grading (Policy 4). The project to be located on this site
will require a minimum of grading and filling, will preserve
the natural slope character of the site, and will not interfere
with the view of the residents to the north.
IV. Open Space Element
The Policies of The Open Space Element of The Comprehensive
Plan Generally Demonstrate Concern for The Visual and Aesthetic
Benefits of Open Space, as Well as The Dedication of Land "Out-
right to Public Purposes. While the project to be located on
this site is too small to require the dedication of public open
spaces, it does preserve a significant visual open space
through naturally landscaped and sloped parking areas shielded
by existing mature vegetation and tree growth, and by maintain-
ing as closely as possible the original contours of the site.
V. Residence Element
A. The Thrust of The Residence Element of The Plan is To
Enhance The Livability of Residential Areas Through Policies
Pertaining to Neighborhoods And Housing. The project to be
located on this site will enhance the livability of the resi-
dential areas to the north and west by providing an increased
range of services available in the professional and office -use
area, and by providing a visual and auditory buffer zone be-
tween those areas and the freeway and retail districts to the
south.
B. Neighborhood Objective 1, Protection of Viable Resi-
dential Neighborhoods from Intrusions by Incompatible Land
Uses. The plan recognizes that some residential areas are in
transition. These areas are crucial to providing the future
-3- 061681/2/6804G
stability for residential areas. Thus, Objective 1 focuses on
the use of buffer areas to separate incompatible land uses from
residential areas (Policies 1 and 2), and prevention of en-
croachment by incompatible uses into established stable resi-
dential neighborhoods (Policies 3 through 7). This project is
compatible with the residential uses to the north and west,
providing those areas with a broader range of services, and
providing a natural buffer between those areas and more intense
uses to the south. Preservation of existing land contour and
vegetation provides visual open spaces. Access to the project
will not intrude into residential areas, but will be shared
with existing professional office uses.
B. Neighborhood Objective 3, Diminishing The Environ-
mental Effects of Development. The policies of Objective 3
include the encouragement of the use of vegetation as screens
to freeways (Policy 1). The project's retention of natural
vegetation and visual open space meet the goals of this policy
more effectively than either medium or high - density residential
uses.
C. Housing Objective 4, Encouragement of Crime Reducing
Elements in Residential Areas. The policies of the plan in-
clude furthering site designs and uses which will allow visual
surveillance of public spaces (Policy 2) and adequate lighting
of streets and parking lots (Policy 3). The project to be
located on this site will provide a natural border to resi-
dential areas to the north, shielding them visually by means of
vegetation, but also providing well - shielded lighting to pro-
mote physical security in the area.
-4- 061681/2/6804G
!ASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM
NOTE:. Please write legibly or type all requested information -- incomplete
applications will not be accepted for processing.
SECTION I. GENERAL DATA
1) A NT'S MME Joseph W. Lynch, PartneFELEPW E: (206) 455 -2838
2) , PiIGANT' A�6D SSny10800 N. E. 8th St., #604 :Ip 98004
//
Bellevue, WA.
3) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAMF M/M George Drew TELEPHONE: (R17) 275 -5482
4) PROPERTY OWNER'S ADDRESs1023 Greenbrier Dr. :IP: 76013
Arlington, Texas
5) LOCATION OF PROJECT: (geographic or legal descrip.) Contiguous and to
the north of the Xerox Building, 6400 Southcenter Blvd..
6) NAME OF PROJECT(OPTIONAL) P R ! Cnmpany - PhasP IT
SECTION II: PROJECT INFORMATION
7) BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE PROJECT YOU PROPOSE: Two story Garden Office
Project consisting of 30,000 square feet. Land area approx-
ima
8) DO YOU PROPOSE TO DEVELOP THIS PROJECT IN PHASES? AYES IS NO
9) PROJECT
a. NET ACRES 3.1 c. PARKING SPACES 152
b. GROSS ACRES ` - d. FLOORS OF
CONSTRUCTION 2
e. LOT AREA COVERAGE BLDG. ) 5.Q00SQ.FT. LANDSCAPE SQ. FT.
PAVING SQ. FT.
10) DOES THE AVERAGE SLOPE OF THE SITE EXCEED 10fa? EJ YES EINO
11) E(ISTING :ONING R -3 1:. EXISTING CO1P.PLLN R -3
13) IS THIS SITE DESIGNATED FOR SPECIAL CONSIDERATION OYES QNO
ON THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL BASE MAP?
14) IF YOU WISH TO HAVE COPIES OF CITY CORRESPONDENCE, STAFF REPORTS, OR OTHER
DOCUMENTS TS SENT TO ADDRESSES OTHER THAN APPLICANT OR PROPMTY OWNTR, PLEASE
INDICATE BELOW.
a. run: Richard McCann ADDss: 1900 Washington Bldg., Seattl
b. NAME: ADDRESS:
FEES:
RCPT.
M.F.
EPIC.
Affidavit of Publication
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF KING
ss.
Michele Roe being first duly sworn on
oath, deposes and says that she is the Chief 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 Notice of Meettn ;
T3,671
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
11 day of ` a ,19 81 , 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 C
g g publication is the sum of $�'�',U 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 22 day of
,T1,ine 19 81
V.P.C. Form No. 87 Rev. 7-79
Chief Clerk
Notary Public in and for the State of Washington,
residing at g 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.
•YET, Oe
t•
ANCHORAGE OFFICE
420 "L" STREET
ANCHORAOE,ALASKA 99501
TELEPHONE:907- 279 -8581
TELECOPIER: 907 -27B -3108
PERKINS,COIE,STONE, OLSEN & WILLIAMS
Honorable Frank Todd, Mayor
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Mr. Gary Van Dusen, President
Tukwila City Council
6200 South Center Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
1900 WASHINGTON BUILDING
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101
TELEPHONE: 208- 682 -8770
TELECOPIER: 20B- 682 -8784
CABLE "PERKINS SEATTLE"
TELEX:32 -0319
PLEASE REPLY TO SEATTLE OFFICE
June 8, 1981
Re: Tukwila Area Rezone
P &L Company Rezone Application
Dear Messrs. Todd and Van Duesen:
Beginning at a point of a West line 210 feet
North from Southwest corner, thence North
89 °47' East 630 feet more or less to inter-
section of West line of 65th Avenue South and
WASHINGTON, D.C.OFFICE
1920 N STREET N.W.
SUITE 403
WASHINGTON, D.C.20038
TELEPHONE: 202-887 -0030
TELEX: 69.448
P &L Company, a Washington partnership, composed of
Joseph W. Lynch and Robert L. Paterson, have contracted to
purchase, and have filed an application to rezone, the follow-
ing described real property:
Lot 17, Interurban Addition to Seattle, according to
the Plat recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, Page 55, in
King County, Washington. EXCEPT that portion lying
North of line described as follows:
Honorable Frank Todd, Mayor
June 8, 1981
Page 2
EXCEPT portion conveyed to the City of Tuk-
wila by Deed recorded under Auditor's File
No. 7108120423.
This parcel is located Northwest of the Tukwila City Hall
and abuts 65th Avenue South. The development will be phase II
of the original project referred to as the Xerox Building, also
developed by P &L Company. Attached is a vicinity map showing
the location of the property.
The parcel is presently zoned R -3, for three - family dwell-
ings, and is designated for Medium Density Residential in the
Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map. We understand that
the proposed area rezone, Proposed Zoning Ordinance Draft 4,
would classify the property as R -3, for three and four - family
dwellings. The existing Xerox Building is proposed as P -O,
Professional and Office.
P &L Company seeks a rezone and, if necessary, an amendment
to the Comprehensive Plan, to allow office development of the
site. The existing Xerox Building is zoned C -1. Accordingly,
C -1 is requested for Phase II. Under the proposed code, draft
4, it appears that the applicable zone would be P -O, Profes-
sional and Office District for both the existing Xerox Building
and Phase II.
We anticipate that consideration of this rezone will follow
present procedures for hearing and review. In order to avoid
later conflict with the council's area rezone efforts, however,
it is requested that the zoning classification of this parcel
be changed to P -0 District in the present area rezone proceed-
ings to conform to the existing Xerox Building parcel.
If, however, consideration of the P &L rezone cannot be
integrated into the area rezone proceeding, we request that the
zoning classification for this parcel be removed from consider-
ation in that proceeding, to be determined as a separate rezone
application under existing procedures.
Please include this letter in the record of proceedings of
the area rezone.
Honorable Frank Todd, Mayor
June 8, 1981
Page 3
REM /wg
cc: Joseph W. Lynch
Robert L. Paterson
Brad Collins, Planning Director
City of Tukwilla
Maxine Anderson, City Clerk, City
of Tukwila
We will be available at your convenience to . discuss these
alternatives with the council or the planning staff.
Richard E. McCann
Attorney for P &L Company
PIONEER NATIONAL.
TITLE INSURANCE
AMOR COMPANY
Countersigned;
Validating Signatory
COPYRIGHT, 1966 — AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION
Attest:
TO 1423 PNTI WaK (4.79) American Land Title Association Commitment- 1966
Commitment for Title Insurance
PIONEER NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, (a stock company), a California corporation, herein called the Company,
for a valuable consideration, hereby commits to issue its policy or policies of title insurance, as identified in Schedule A,
in favor of the proposed Insured named in Schedule A, as owner or mortgagee of the estate or interest covered hereby in the
land described or referred to in Schedule A, upon payment of the premiums and charges therefor; all subject to the provi-
sions of Schedules A and B and to the Conditions and Stipulations hereof.
This Commitment shall be effective only when the identity of the proposed Insured and the amount of the policy or policies
committed for have been inserted in Schedule A hereof by the Company, either at the time of the issuance of this Commit-
ment or by subseauent endorsement.
This Commitment is preliminary to the issuance of such policy or policies of title insurance and all liability and obliga-
tions hereunder shall cease and terminate one hundred eighty (180) days after the effective date hereof or when the policy
or policies committed for shall issue, whichever first occurs, provided that the failure to issue such policy or policies is
not the fault of the Company.
This Commitment shall not be valid or binding until countersigned below by a validating officer of the Company.
Pioneer National Title Insurance Company
by rJ
PRESIDENT
SECRETARY
1. The term mortgage, when used herein, shall include deed of
trust, trust deed, or other security instrument.
2. If the proposed Insured has or acquires actual knowledge of
any defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other matter af-
fecting the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this
Commitment other than those shown in Schedule B hereof, and
shall fail to disclose such knowledge to the Company in writing,
the Company shall be relieved from liability for any loss or dam-
age resulting from any act of reliance hereon to the extent the
Company is prejudiced by failure to so disclose such knowledge.
If the proposed Insured shall disclose such knowledge to the Com-
pany or if the Company otherwise acquires actual knowledge of
any such defect, lien, encumbrance, adverse claim or other mat-
ter, the Company at its option may amend Schedule B of this
Commitment accordingly, but such amendment shall not relieve
the Company from liability previously incurred pursuant to Par-
agraph 3 of these Conditions and Stipulations.
3. Liability of the Company under this Commitment shall be
OWNER'S POLICY
only to the named proposed Insured and such parties included
under the definition of Insured in the form of policy or policies
committed for and only for actual loss incurred in reliance hereon
in undertaking in good faith (a) to comply with the requirements
hereof, or (b) to eliminate exceptions shown in Schedule B, or
(c) to acquire or create the estate or interest or mortgage thereon
covered by this Commitment. In no event shall such liability ex-
ceed the amount stated in Schedule A for the policy or policies
committed for and such liability is subject to the insuring pro-
visions, the Conditions and Stipulations, and the Exclusions from
Coverage of the form of policy or policies committed for in favor
of the proposed Insured which are hereby incorporated by refer-
ence and are made a part of this Commitment except as expressly
modified herein.
4. Any action or actions or rights of action that the proposed
Insured may have or may bring against the Company arising out
of the status of the title to the estate or interest or the status of
the mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment must be based
on and are subject to the provisions of this Commitment.
Schedule of Exclusions from Coverage
THE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE REFERRED TO IN PARAGRAPH 3
OF THE CONDITIONS OF STIPULATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWS:
1. Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but
not limited to building and zoning ordinances) restricting or reg-
ulating or prohibiting the occupancy, use or enjoyment of the
land, or regulating the character, dimensions or location of any im-
provement now or hereafter erected on the land, or prohibiting u
separation in ownership or a reduction in the dimensions or area
of the land, or the effect of any violation of any such law, ordi-
nance or governmental regulation.
2. Rights of eminent domain or governmental rights of police
power unless notice of the exercise of such rights appears in the
public records at Date of Policy.
3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters
(a) created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant;
(b) not known to the Company and not shown by the public re-
cords but known to the insured claimant either at Date of Policy
or at the date such claimant acquired an estate or interest insured
by this policy and not disclosed in writing by the insured claimant
to the Company prior to the date such insured claimant became an
insured hereunder; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured
claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy; or
(e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained
if the insured claimant had paid value for the estate or interest in-
sured by this policy.
LOAN POLICY
c
Conditions and Stipulations
1. Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but
not limited to building and zoning ordinances) restricting or reg-
ulating or prohibiting the occupancy, use or enjoyment of the
land, or regulating the character, dimensions or location of any im-
provement now or hereafter erected on the land, or prohibiting a
separation in ownership or a reduction in the dimensions or area
of the land, or the effect of any violation of any such law, ordi-
nance or governmental regulation.
2. Rights of eminent domain or governmental rights of police
power unless notice of the excercise of such rights appears in the
public records at Date of Policy.
3. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters
(a) created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant;
(b) not known to the Company and not shown by the public re-
cords but known to the insured claimant either at Date of Policy
or at the date such claimant acquired an estate or interest insured
by this policy or acquired the insured mortgage and not disclosed
in writing by the insured claimant to the Company prior to the
date such insured claimant became an insured hereunder; (c) re-
sulting in no Toss or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching
or created subsequent to Date of Policy (except to the extent in-
surance is afforded herein as to any statutory lien for labor or
material).
4. Unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage because
of failure of the insured at Date of Policy or of any subsequent
owner of the indebtedness to comply with applicable "doing busi-
ness" laws of the state in which the land is situated.
NOTE: THE POLICY COMMITTED FOR MAY BE EXAMINED BY INQUIRY AT THE OFFICE
WHICH ISSUED THE COMMITMENT, AND A SPECIMEN COPY OF THE POLICY FORM
(OR FORMS) REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT WILL BE FURNISHED
PROMPTLY UPON REQUEST.
A. Encroachments or questions of location, boundary and area,
which an accurate survey may disclose.
B. Public or private easements, streets, roads, alleys or highways,
unless disclosed of record by recorded plat or conveyance, or
decree of a court of record.
C. Rights or claims of persons in possesion, or claiming to be in
possesion, not disclosed by the public records.
D. Material or labor liens, or liens under the Workmen's Comp-
ensation Act not disclosed by the public records.
E. Water rights or matters relating thereto.
•
ADDITIONAL EXCEPTIONS WHICH MAY, ACCORDING TO
SCHEDULE B OF THIS COMMITMENT, BE SET FORTH AS
EXCEPTIONS IN SCHEDULE B OF THE POLICY APPLIED FOR:
F. Any service, installation or construction charges for sewer,
water, electricity, or garbage removal.
G. Exceptions and reservations in United States Patents.
H. General taxes not now payable; matters relating to special
assessments and special levies, if any, preceding the same
becoming a lien.
I. Right of use, control or regulation by the United States of
America, in the exercise of powers over navigation.
J. Any prohibition or limitation on the use, occupancy or im-
provement of the land resulting from the rights of the pub-
lic or riparian owners to use any waters which may cover
the land.
COMMITMENT NO.
A- 274683 U -4
PREPARED FOR:
FEE SIMPLE ESTATE
A- 274683
JOSEPH LYNCH AND COMPANY
10800 NE 8TH, SUITE 604
3ELLEVUE, WA 98004
ATTN: JOE LYNCH
INQUIRIES SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO:
1. POLICY OR POLICIES TO BE ISSUED:
AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION
OWNERS POLICY - FORM 8 - 1970
COVERAGE: STANDARD
AMOUNT : %300,000.00
PREMIUM : S784.00
TAX : $42.34
SCHEDULE A
EFFECTIVE DATE OF COMMITMENT:
MARCH 26, 1981 AT 8:00 A.M.
YOUR NO.: DREW AND LYNCH
PIONEER NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY
719 SECOND AVENUE
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104
ATTN: RICK SCHELL DIRECT DIALING 1206) 223 -7887
PROPOSED INSURED:
JOSEPH AND NANCY LYNCH, HUSBAND AND WIFE
GEORGE E. DREW AND DOROTHI DREW. HUSBAND AND WIFE
PAGE 1
2. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LAND DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO IN
THIS COMMITMENT AND COVERED HEREIN IS:
3. TITLE TO SAID ESTATE OR INTEREST IN SAID LAND IS AT THE
EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF VESTED IN:
4. THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT IS LOCATED IN THE COUNTY
OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON, AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
LOT 17, INTERURBAN ADDITION TO SEATTLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN
VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 55, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. EXCEPT THAT
PORTION LYING NORTH OF LINE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON WEST LINE 210 FEET NORTH FROM SOUTHWEST
CORNER, THENCE NORTH 89' 47' EAST 630 FEET MORE OR LESS TO
INTERSECTION OF WEST LINE OF 65TH AVENUE SOUTH AND EXCEPT PORTION
CONVEYED TO THE CITY OF TUKWILA BY DEED RECORDED UNDER AUDITOR'S FILE NO.
7108120423.
A- 274683 PAGE
SCHEDULE B
SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS:
1. THE FOLLOWING ARE THE REQUIREMENTS 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 B OF THE POLICY OR POLICIES TO BE ISSUED WILL CONTAIN
EXCEPTIONS TO THE FOLLOWING MATTERS UNLESS THE SAME ARE DISPOSED
OF TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE COMPANY:
1. 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 FOR VALUE OF RECORD THE ESTATE OR
INTEREST OR MORTGAGE THEREON COVERED BY THIS COMMITMENT.
2. LIEN OF REAL ESTATE EXCISE SALES TAX UPON ANY SALE OF SAID
PREMISES, IF UNPAID.
3. GENERAL TAXES, AS FOLLOWS, PLUS INTEREST AFTER DELINQUENCY:
FOR YEAR AMOUNT BILLED AMOUNT PAID
1981 $1,349.10 S.00
BEING COUNTY TREASURER'S PARCEL NO. 359700- 0320 -06
4. AN EASEMENT AFFECTING THE PORTION OF SAID PREMISES AND FOR THE
PURPOSES STATED HEREIN, AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES.
FOR : SEWER
IN FAVOR OF : CITY OF TUKWILA
RECORDED : JANUARY 6, 1964
AUDITOR'S NO.: 5683679
AFFECTS : THE NORTH 10 FEET EXCEPT THE WEST 120 FEET OF THE SOUTH 210
FEET.
5. RIGHT TO MAKE NECESSARY SLOPES FOR CUTS OR FILLS UPON SAID PREMISES
IN CONFORMITY WITH STANDARD PLANS AND SPECIFICATIONS FOR HIGHWAY
PURPOSES, AND TO THE SAME EXTENT AS IF THE RIGHTS GRANTED HAD BEEN
ACQUIRED BY CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS UNDER STATUTE OF THE STATE OF
WASHINGTON, AS GRANTED BY DEED.
AUDITOR'S NO.: 7108120423
GRANTED TO : THE CITY OF TUKWILA
6. THE EASEMENT ON THE APPLICATION CANNOT BE LOCATED AS DESCRIBED. WE
RESERVE OPINION PENDING SUBMISSION OF AN ACCURATE DESCRIPTION.
A- 274683 PAGE 3
NOTE: THE DESCRIPTION SHOWN IN THE CAPTION HAS BEEN AMENDED
TO CONFORM WITH THE RECORD TITLE.
7. IN ADDITION TO THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS SHOWN ABOVE, THE OWNER'S
POLICY APPLIED FOR WILL CONTAIN AS EXCEPTIONS IN SCHEDULE B THEREOF.
THOSE PARTICULAR STANDARD EXCEPTIONS WHICH ARE PRINTED ON THE INSIDE
BACK COVER HEREOF AND DESIGNATED PARAGRAPH(SI:
A THRU H
NOTE: THE OWNERS POLICY TO BE ISSUED WILL CONTAIN ENDORSEMENT(S):
WA: 10
NOTE:
WE WILL INFORM YOU LATER WHETHER THE FOLLOWING INDORSEMENT WILL BE
ATTACHED TO THE OWNER'S /PURCHASER'S POLICY TO BE ISSUED
WA: 9
NOTE: INVESTIGATION SHOULD BE MADE TO DETERMINE IF THERE ARE ANY
SERVICE, INSTALLATION, MAINTENANCE OR CONSTRUCTION CHARGES FOR SEWER,
WATER, GARBAGE OR ELECTRICITY.
NOTE: A CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF ALL CHARGES AND ADVANCES IN
CONNECTION WITH THIS ORDER WILL BE PROVIDED AT CLOSING.
NOTE: IN EVENT THE TRANSACTION FAILS TO CLOSE AND THIS COMMITMENT
IS CANCELLED, A FEE WILL BE CHARGED TO COMPLY WITH THE STATE
INSURANCE CODE AND THE FILED SCHEDULE OF THIS COMPANY.
DK /IE 0274
A- 274683 PAGE 4
The Company has not surveyed the premises described in
The sketch below is furnished without charge solely for the purpose of assisting in locating said premises and the
Company assumes no liability for inaccuracies therein. It does not purport to show ALL highways, roads and ease -
ments adjoining or affecting said premises.
WTI G. 3
Map Dept. Reference
C