Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 81-24-R - SCHNEIDER - OFFICE BUILDING REZONE81-24-r southcenter boulevard schneider rezone COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT Schneider Homes, Inc. 6510 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Attn: G.E. Schneider Subject: Rezone Action 81 -24 -R This letter confirms the action of the Tukwila City Council taken at their regular meeting of 16 September 1981 denying the subject application for rezone. A copy of the minutes of the meeting will be sent to you by the City Clerk's office when they become available. MC /blk City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Frank Todd, Mayor Tukwil 17 September 1981 Mark Caughey Associate Planner anning Department AGENDA ITEM DISCUSSION - Procedural Format CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 81 -24 -R Schneider Rezone INTRODUCTION The applicant is requesting rezone approval for 0.62 acres adjoining Southcenter Blvd. to construct an office building. The property is currently zoned R- 1 -7.2; the appli- cants wish to modify that classifi- cation to C -1, consistent with the Comprehensive Plan's designation of the site as "office" useage. Exhibit "B" describes the location and boundary of the rezone site, as well as the conceptual layout of the proposed 12000 sq. ft. office project to be built thereon. RUM •ESS While the Planning Department has recommended approval with certain stipulations, the Planning Commission has recommend denial of this application. inWRINEOf e 11 GPR I J _ _ Iti ' i It j t4-144 A li 1" X19 f } �-�� , ttii i ji ou 1 r.,,/,'.., C-M - Arguments Speaking in support of the rezone the applicant noted that he has applied twice to rezone this site, and been opposed by the neighbors who claim unsubstantiated adverse impacts. He then referred to a site cross - section diagram which depicts the project roofline below the floor level of nearby homes; it is his opinion that the project will not inhibit eastward views. .„;irt On July 23, 1981, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this application. At that time there was some doubt as to whether a quorum of the Commission's membership was present, resulting from the decision of one Commissioner not to participate in discussion or vote upon this application due to conflict of interest. The City Attorney, after reviewing the record, decided that a qualified quorum was not present and that the 23 July 1981 Public Hearing is void. Therefore, a repeat hearing was held on 27 August 1981 with several adjoining property owners in attendance and op- posed to the rezone. 1' t5 Page -2- 81-24-R He expressed his belief that the neighbors are in favor of office -use and commercial zoning in this area, but that they wish to dictate the terms of such development. The neighbors' opposition is based on the Schneider Homes' refusal to negotiate the purchase of their properties and develop the office complex as a whole. This situation is not germain to the land use issues of the proposed rezone and should not be considered in the Commission's decision - making process. He urged the Commission to view the rezone in consideration of the integrity of the Comprehensive Plan, and noted similari- ties between this case and other rezones to office -use adjacent to Southcenter Blvd. He stated their willingness to discuss and resolve design problems identified by the neighbors, and to accept the recommended staff report conditions. The residents adjoining this site, however, opposed the rezone for a variety of reasons. First, the precedent rezone cases, while previously supported by the residents, have proven a hardship on certain individuals. Their support has now diminished. Second, control of roof height will not protect the aesthetics of the resident's views, since they will look down upon the building during winter months when their deciduous vegetation buffer is removed. Third, the neighbors' position on this application is unified. They have been working together to assure orderly development of their area; they would not oppose a single rezone action encompassing all the properties in the area and support development of a comprehensive office project. They do oppose, however, the incremental rezone of adjoining properties which may result in a more haphazard development pattern. RECOMMENDATION As mentioned above, the Planning Commission has recommended denial of this application. While the reasons for their opposition were not shared un- animously by all the Commissioners, three topics of difficulty emerge most clearly: 1) Past problems associated with the existing Schneider Office Building: Principally, traffic congestion and illegal parking have inconvenienced the residential neighbors; the Commission found that this problem - potential is not adequately- addressed in the application material. 2) Neighborhood Opposition: It is fair to conclude from the record that many of the Commissioners were opposed to this rezone because the adjoining land owners viewed this action as one of "spot" zoning. 3) Reduction of Available Single - Family Lands: Because this rezone deletes about 1/2 acre of existing single - family use area in the community, certain members of the Commission opposed the Schneider application. It was their belief that the City does not have an adequate inventory of single - family property available. Therefore, any existing R -1 zoned land, however marginally- suited for such use, should be preserved. Page -3- 81-24-R Regarding this point, the Commission passed a formal motion to the Council recommending a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from office use to single - family designation: "MOVED BY MR. JAMES, SECONDED BY MR. SOWINSKI, THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE AREA ON THE NORTH SIDE OF SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD BE- TWEEN INTERURBAN AVENUE AND 65TH AVENUE SOUTH BE CHANGED FROM "OFFICE USE" TO "SINGLE- FAMILY" USE. THIS IS IN ORDER TO BE CON- SISTENT WITH CURRENT USES AND THE PROPOSED ZONING CODE. THIS RECOMMENDATION IS BASED ON THE DESIRES OF A MAJORITY OF THE LAND OWNERS AFFECTED, AS PRESENTED AT THE PUBLIC HEARINGS REGARDING AP- PLICATION 81 -24 -R BEFORE THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON 23 JULY 1981 AND 27 AUGUST 1981. The staff has recommended approval of the rezone, finding that it is con- sistent with, and implements the Comprehensive Plan. Specific stipulations of approval to control potential design problems inpacting the adjoining residences were suggested as follows: 1. Prior to transmittal of this application of the City Council for formal adoption, applicant shall furnish to staff an accurate metes -and- bounds description of the rezone area. 2. Development of the property under the C -1 classification shall be limited to a single office building which may contain related non - retail commercial service uses customarily incident to office use. 3. Definitive development plans for the project conceptually- depicted on Exhibit B of this application shall be reviewed and approved by the Board of Architectural Review prior to issuance of building permits. Owners of property within 300' of the subject site shall be notified of the B.A.R. Review date. The purpose of said review shall be to ensure development design complementary to surrounding land uses, and shall adhere to the following standards: A. No portion of the office building roof shall extend above the lowest first floor finished elevation level of the adjoining homesites to the north. B. HVAC mechanical equipment shall not be placed on the building roof. C. A comprehensive planting plan shall be prepared with plant materials configured in a manner which provides visual buffering of the project form Southcenter Boulevard and from the residential properties to the north without obstructing eastward view corridors. 4. Access to the proposed office project shall be approved by the Depart- ment of Public Works. The Public Works Department, in its review, shall insure that project - related traffic does not impede access to the residential properties to the north. IL 1�_ZQ F"I F� AGE r R.- I -11. S. t 5 3 S T /1 , , JWz__, SC-AL ; I'_ 111 l // 1 // / / // 111111 / 111 /1/i11rIN1r11 / / /lr 4-, 11 1rr1r 1r 1 1111r1 11 1 1 1j11 1 11 PLANNING DEPT EXHIBIT ' MF 81- ZN -. • E X H I B I T LEGAL DESCRIPTION THAT PORTION OF N.H. GILLIAMS DONATION CLAIM NO. 409 IN SECTION 239 TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 49 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY,' WASHINGTON. DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TRACT 28 OF THE INTERURBAN ADDITION TO SEATTLE. ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 559 IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE SOUTH 89'47 EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 289 22 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24'25.00" EAST 65 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 68' WEST 156 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 37' WEST 120 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO THE EAST MARGIN OF 65TH AVENUE SOUTH; THENCE SOUTHEAST ALONG SAID EAST MARGIN 70 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH MARGIN OF STATE HIGHWAY ROAD NO. 11; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID NORTH MARGIN 270 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO A POINT FROM WHICH THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING BEARS NORTH 24'25' WEST; THENCE NORTH 24'25'00" WEST 113 FEET. MORE OR LESS TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. 1 T H SITE PLAN AREA CALCULATION TUKW /LA OFFICE BUILDING DESCRIPnON AGENDA ITEM CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Application 81 -24 -R Schneider Homes Rezone INTRODUCTION Exhibit A depicts the neighborhood set- ting and geographic limits of the pro- posed rezone. It is the intnet of the applicant to build a two sotry office on the subject property. The pre- sent R -1 -7.2 zoning prohibits office use, therefore, a rezone to C -1 is necessary to permit office use. February 1979 the applicant made the same request for a rezone on this site from R- 1-7.2 to C -1, at which time the Planning Commission held a public hearing and denied the rezone on the basis of its potential adverse effects to the sur- rounding single family properties. FINDINGS 1) The subject site is currently zoned R -1 -7.2 by Tukwila Ordinance #506, February 1968. 2) The Comprehensive Land Use Map designates this parcel and adjacent properties as office use. 3) The Planning Commission, in its Draft #4 proposed zoning ordinance, recommends continuation of R -1 -7.2 uses on this site. 4) The site is currently vacant. A single family residence formerly occu- pied the site until approximately 7 years ago. The Schneider Office Building is located to the west and three houses abut the property on the north and east sides. 5) Size of subject property is approximately 27,150 square feet or .62 acres. The size of the proposed office structure is 12,000 square feet. 6) According to the submitted site plan,the average slope of the property is 8 - 10 percent. The slope has a general southeastern exposure and rises from 80 feet elevation along Southcenter Boulevard to 125 feet in the northwest corner. There is a 20 foot high bank along Southcenter Boulevard. 7) Several large ornamental trees are found on the site, probably associated with the single family residence which used to occupy the site. Page -2- Planning Commissio( 81 -24 -R 8) Southcenter Boulevard, located along the south property line, is currently a two -lane roadway with a curbed asphalt bicycle /pedestrian path adjacent the north line of the right -of -way. Improvement of Southcenter Boulevard between 62nd Ave. and Interurban Avenue has been programmed for 1982. 9) Sanitary and storm sewers are available to this parcel as is water service and all are deemed adequate to support commercial development. 10) Certain policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan relate to office developments near residential district: 1. Encourage the use of commercial office developments as buffers between residential land uses and other land uses. 2. Commercial office developments should consider the adjacent use district in the design process. 3. Encourage the location of commercial offices in areas of high natural amenities. 11) Three rezones have been approved in the vicinity since October 1977. These rezones were the Huntington rezone (Ord. #1055), the Schneider rezone (Ord. #1041) and the Lynch rezone (Ord. #1099). These rezones were from R -4 to C -1 zoning, with essentially the same three following conditions: A. Development of the property under C -1 classification shall be limited to a single office building which may contain related commercial services customerily incidental to office use. B. Development plans, including but not limited to site, elevation, landscape and building materials shall be subject to review and approval of Board of Architectural approval as established in Chapter 18.32 of the Tukwila Municipal Code. The express purpose of such review is to ensure the development design conplements the residential neighborhood. C. All buildings shall be set back a minimum of 25 feet from the right- of -way of Southcenter Boulevard. CONCLUSIONS 1. The proposed office use of the site appears to be consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map and text, although the Planning Commission has recommended a continuation of R -1 -7.200 classification in Draft #4 Proposed Zoning Ordinance. 2. There appears to be a trend toward office development along Southcenter Boulevard. In the last five years seven office buildings have been con- structed. 1 Page -3- Planning Commissioi 81 -24 -R 3. The tone of development in this vicinity as established by the City in Ordinances #1041, #1055 and #1099 should also be applied to this parcel. 4. Proposed plan appears to effectively remove all or most of large exist- ing trees found on the site. RE CO14IENDAT ION Staff suggests that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council approval of Application 81 -24 -R, according to Exhibits A and B thereof, modifying zoning classification of the site from R -1 -7.2 to C -1, subject to the following stipulations: 1. Prior to transmittal of this application to the City Council, appli- cant shall furnish to staff an accurate metes - and - bounds description of the rezone area. 2. Development of the property under the C -1 classification shall be limited to a single office building which may contain related non - retail commercial service uses customarily incident to office use. 3. Definitive development plans for the project conceptually- depicted on Exhibit B of this application shall be reviewed and approved by the Board of Architectural Review prior to issuance of building permits. Owners of property within 300' of the subject site shall be notified of the B.A.R. Review date. The purpose of said review shall be to ensure development design complementary to surrounding land uses, and shall adhere to the following standards: A. No portion of the office building roof shall extend above the lowest first floor finished elevation level of the adjoining homesites to the north. B. HVAC mechanical equipment shall not be placed on the building roof, C. A comprehensive planting plan shall be prepared with plant materials configured in a manner which provides visual buffer- ing of the project from Southcenter Boulevard and from the residential properties to the north without obstructing east - ward view corridors.. 4. Access to the proposed office project shall be approved by the Depart- ment of Public Works. The Public Works Department, in its review, shall insure that project - related traffic does not impede access to the residential properties to the north. Minutes of Planning Commssion Meeting 23 July 1981 Page 3 PUBLIC HEARINGS - Contd. A) Application 81 -21 -R: (P &L Co.) - contd. 6) INGRESS AND EGRESS VIA 65TH AVENUE SOTUH IS NOT APPROVED AS PART OF THIS REZONE, BUT SHALL BE SUBJECT TO SEPARATE CONSIDERATION BY THE BOARD OF ARCHITEC- TURAL REVIEW. MOTION CARRIED. *MAIN MOTION AS AMENDED CARRIED. Mr. Mithun expressed his concern that elimination of the easterly access point may jeopardize the project. Fred Satterstrom noted that the project's Comprehensive Plan approval motion requires notification of property owners when the project comes before BAR. Their concerns will be further addressed at that time. B) Application 81 -24 -R: (Schneider Homes) - Requesting change of zoning classification from R -1 to C -1 for 0.62 acres northwest of the intersection of Southcenter Boulevard and Christensen Road. =v= Mr. Collins presented the Staff Report. Commissioner Arvidson stated that he would abstain from voting on this application due to a possible conflict of interest, resulting in a question as to whether or not quorum was present. Chairman Pro -Tem Orrico, after consulting Roberts' Rules of Order, determined that a quorum of the Commission was present, subject to further review by the City Attorney, if necessary. Richard Wilson, attorney, was present on behalf of the applicant. Mr. Wilson described the project as a two -story office building of 12,000 square feet adjacent to their existing office building. It is the applicant's intent to relocate his residential construction business office to the new building, leaving greater space in the existing building for use by the present tenant. Access to the building is afforded by way of 65th Avenue South using the existing curb -cut. Although this proposal is similar to the one rejected by the Planning Commission two years ago, it is less- intrusive, reducing grading impacts and avoiding the need for a street vacation action. Mr. Wilson then pointed out the advantages to the neighboring property of an office building as an adjacent use. He stated his position that this proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is not a case of spot zoning. Mr. Orrico opened the Public Hearing at 9:30 P.M. Mr. Collins read into the record two letters in opposition to the rezone. The first was dated 29 June 1981 from Lee and Madge Phillips, the second from Al and Erma Hinkey dated 21 July 1981. John Merrick, adjacent property owner, explained the history of past development on this site. A similar rezone request by Mr. Schneider two years ago was opposed by 92 signatories to a petition. In 1967, the residents obtained an injunction against the City from issuing a building permit for a 32 -unit apartment development on this R -1 site. Minutes of Planning Co ssion Meeting 23 July 1981 Page 4 Mr. Orrico closed the Public Hearing at 10:10 P.M. PUBLIC HEARINGS - Contd. 8) Application 81 -24 -R: (Schneider Homes) - contd. The residents disagree that proposed office use of this magnitude will be com- patible with the adjoining single - family neighborhood; it will block some neighbors' views, and will raise property taxes. They believe that the entire area, including the homesites, should be planned and developed as a unified office complex development. M. E. Simons, stated that he supported development of the existing Schneider office building after receiving assurances that his access would not be impeded. In the past, though , his driveway has been blocked by office - related parking, at one time requiring police assistance to clear a path. Additional office development will only accelerate the traffic interference problem in his opinion; therefore, he is opposed to the rezone. Mr. Wilson returned to the podium and disputed the validity of the petition referenced by Mr. Merrick. In his opinion, the petition is not necessarily an accurate indicator of popular feeling. He also disagreed with Mr. Merrick's contention that their property values and taxes will be directly - influenced by this project. Rather, he believes that the residents are attempting to sell their property as a unit to Mr. Schneider so that it can be developed as one project. Mr. James stated his agreement with the residents that the area should be planned and zoned as a whole entity. He felt that perhaps the City had erred in allowing the first office building to be built here. MOVED BY MR. SOWINSKI, WITH MR. JAMES' SECOND, THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT REZONE APPLICATION 81 -24 -R BE DENIED. MOTION CARRIED, WITH MR. ARVIDSON ABSTAINING FROM THE VOTE. Mr. Orrico declared a recess at 10:20 P.M.; the Commission reconvened at 10:30 P.M. C) Application 81 -23 -SUB: Bel Crest Preliminary Plat - requesting approval of a preliminary plat for a single - family subdivision west of 54th Avenue South at South 165th Street. Mr. Satterstrom presented the Staff Report and noted that in reference to. Item 3 under "Conclusions," a soils report was submitted with their earlier application in 1979. Mr. Orrico opened the Public Hearing at 10:40 P.M. Earl Westlund, applicant, stated his agreement with the proposed conditions of approval and outlined his intent to satisfy each of them. John Nubey, Civil Engineer, discussed the soils and slope stability of the plat area. Although some evidence of sliding is detected in the vicinity of the development, it is their opinion that stability has now been established. Robert Stanton, consultant to the applicant, stated in regard to Item 5 in the Staff Report that only two places on site exceed 20% slope. Some of the steeper lots have been expanded to 12,000 square feet of area. ZONING PLAT MAP EXHIBIT A SITE PLAN Ci ' of Tukwila 6200 Sauax:enter Boulevard Tiuicwile Washivon 98188 PIASTER LAND DEVEL0 1E T' APPLICATION FORM EXISTING ZONING R -1 -712 PROPOSED REZONE SITE IS WITHIN TUKWILA CITY LIMITS EXISTING ZONING CLASSIFICATION AND USE OF SURROUNDING PARCELS: ZONE NORTH R -1 -7.2 SOUTH C -1 EAST R- 1 -7.2 WEST 1 -405 USES PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED ON PROPOSED REZONE SITE ACCESS TO THE PROPOSED REZONE SITE IS FROM A DEDICATED, IMPROVED PUBLIC RIGHT -OF- WAY Y ES REQUESTED ZONING USE office PROVISIONS TO BE MADE FOR ADEQUATE SEWER AND WATER SERVICES Connect to existing SUPPLE; TARY QUESTIONAIRE ;ledule E REZONE APPLICATION one family dwelling one family dwelling interstate freeway P 0 YES ❑ NO office NO. (If "NO", please describe how the site is accessed from 65th Avenue South, via unused McCaddam Road MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM • FEES: RCPT. M.F. EPIC. NOTE: Please write legibly or type all requested information -- incomplete applications will not be accepted for processing, SECTION I. GENERAL DATA I) APPLICANT'S NAME Gerald E. Schneider TELEPHONE: (206) 248 -2471 Tukwila 2) APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 6510 Southcenter Blvd. ZIP: 98188 Schneider Construction 3) PROPERTY OWNER'S Nr1ME Company, Inc . TELEPHONE: (206) 248 -2471 4) zip: PROPERTY OIVNER'S ADDRESS 6510 Southcenter Blvd. a zip: 98188 5) LOCATION OF PROJECT: (geographic or legal descrip.) Approximately 6540 Southcenter Boulevard 6) NAME OF PROJECT(OPTIONAL) SECTION II: PROJECT INFORMATION 7) BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE PROJECT YOU PROPOSE: Two story office building approximately 12,000 square feet 8) DO YOU PROPOSE TO DEVELOP THIS PROJECT IN PHASES? OYES ONO 9) PROJECT a. NET ACRES c. PARKING SPACES 30 b. GROSS ACRES 164 + � d. FLOORS OF CONSTRUCTION 2 e. LOT AREA COVERAGE BLDG. SQ.FT. LANDSCAPE SQ. FT. PAVING SQ. FT. 10) DOES THE AVERAGE SLOPE OF THE SITE EXCEED 10%? O YES ONO 11) EXISTING ZONING R -1 -712 12. EXISTING CCMP.PLAN zone office 13) IS THIS SITE DESIGuNATED FOR SPECIAL CONSIDERATION OYES © NO ON THE CITY'S ENVIRONMENTAL BASE MAP? 14) IF YOU WISH TO HAVE COPIES OF CITY CORRESPONDENCE, STAFF REPORTS, OR OTHER DOCUMENTS SENT TO ADDRESSES OTHER THAN APPLICANT OR PROPERTY 0MER, PLEASE INDICATE BELOW. a. NAME: 011411, WILS CIJ ADDRESS: b. NAME: ADDRESS: OVER 4 SECTION III: APPLICA\T'S AFFIDAVIT I, Gerald E. Schneider , heing duly sworn, declare that I am the contract purchaser or owner ot e p f r operty 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 and belief. DATE . 2 — c 2 ?7 X Subscribed and sworn before me this - ` day of • otary •lie i or t e tare or 'as ington residing at 0 i nature r• r at rc as=r dr owner) 6510 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 , s ti `'`,f '''.%, (206) 248 -2471 �� •• " ' ' ` p . • • Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING Michele Roe being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that she is th e 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 of ` .. as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period 8 day of July / ,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 'publication is the sum of $ 80 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 JW1Y ,19 81 V.P.C. Form No. 87 Rev. 7 -79 ss. Notice of I4eeittng. T1681 consecutive issues, commencing on the Mad,c Eot_ Chief Clerk 9 day of Notary Public in and for th tate. of Washington, residing at Wing 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. Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING ss. Michela— Roe being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that ....wilds the !r. ...t..a,.23:1� 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 0 �'�-' F' C,f Ilf''etin T1691 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 J$ U. U3.t ,19 ....8 . 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 1., charged for the foregoing publication is the sum of $ ' , 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 worn to before me this 12 day of 1pig 6 t 19 81 V.P.C. Form No 87 Rev. 7 -79 V.I:;.f•;t,' Clark Notary Public in and .r the State of Washington, residing at Kent, King Count. — 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. J r PIONEER NATIONAL. TITLE INSURANCE ATICOR COMPANY Countersigned• Validating Signatory COPYRIGHT, 1966 — AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION TO 1423 PNTI WaK (12.80) 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 subsequent 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 temlinate 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 Attest UL.J 66 ..LOM y 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 FORM B - 1970 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. 2. The right to take the land by condemning it, unless a notice of taking appears in the public records on the Policy Date. 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 6, 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 AND 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 arty such law, ordi- nance or governmental regulation. 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. . 4•. t. �1: �1 .:ria::t:t�•}..�..Y.tl:.•Ydtaw r �.. .y.r...s ■.. uNau4a.11avw:.!a(.4∎Ciy ALTA RESIDENTIAL TITLE INSURANCE POLICY - 1979 1. Governmental police power, and the existence or violation of any law or government regulation. This includes building and zoning ordinances and also laws and regulations concerning: IN land use 1 land division improvements on the land • environmental protection This exclusion does not limit the zoning coverage described in Items 12 and 13 of Covered Title Risks. • LOAN POLICY 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 loss 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. 3. Title Risks: ▪ that are created, allowed or agreed to by you ▪ that are known to you, but not to us, on the Policy Date- - unless they appeared in the public records ▪ that result in no loss to you that first affect your title after the Policy Date - -this does not limit the labor and material lien coverage in Item 8 of Covered Title Risks 4. Failure to pay value for your title. 5. Lack of a right: ▪ to any land outside the area specifically described and referred to in Item 3 of Sch A, or,, ▪ in streets, alle aterways that touch your land. This exclusion does not limit the access coverage In Item 5 of Covered Title Risks. 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. „ PIONEER NATIONAITITIE INSURANCE AT1COR COMPANY • PREPARED FOR: A- 278744 U -4 COMMITMENT NO. EFFECTIVE DATE OF COMMITMENT: SCHNEIDER CONSTRUCTION 665 STRANDER BLVD. TUKWILA• WASHINGTON ATTN: BOB KESSEY INQUIRIES SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO: 1. POLICY OR POLICIES TO BE ISSUED: SCHEDULE A YOUR NO.: SCHNEIDER PIONEER NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY 719 SECOND AVENUE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98104 ATTN: RICK SCHELL DIRECT DIALING (2061 223 -7887 AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNERS /PURCHASERS POLICY - FORM B 1970 COVERAGE: STANDARD AMOUNT : $20,000.00 RENEWAL PREMIUM : $31.00 TAX : $1.67 JUNE 24. 1981 AT 8:00 A.M. PROPOSED INSURED: GERALD E. SCHNEIDER AND GAIL M.• HUSBAND AND WIFE 2. THE ESTATE OR INTEREST IN THE LANG DESCRIBED OR REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT AND COVERED HEREIN IS: FEE SIMPLE ESTATE 3. TITLE TO SAID ESTATE OR INTEREST IN SAID LAND IS AT THE EFFECTIVE DATE HEREOF VESTED IN: QUEEN CITY SAVINGS E LOAN ASSOCIATION• A WASHINGTON CORPORATION A- 278744 PAGE 1 A- 278744 4. THE LAND REFERRED TO IN THIS COMMITMENT IS LOCATED IN THE COUNTY OF KING, STATE OF WASHINGTON, AND DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF N.H. GILLIAMS DONATION CLAIM NO. 40, IN SECTION 23, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4, EAST, W.M.• IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON• DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TRACT 28 OF THE INTERURBAN ADDITION TO SEATTLE, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT RECORDED IN VOLUME 10 OF PLATS, PAGE 55, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON; THENCE SOUTH 89'47.00" EAST ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID TRACT 28, 22 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24'25.00" EAST 65 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 68' WEST 156 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 37' WEST 120 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO THE EAST MARGIN OF 65TH AVENUE SOUTH; THENCE SOUTHEAST ALONG SAID EAST MARGIN 70 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO ITS INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTH MARGIN OF STATE HIGHWAY ROAD NO. 11; THENCE EAST ALONG SAID NORTH MARGIN 270 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO A POINT FROM WHICH THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING BEARS NORTH 24'25• WEST; THENCE NORTH 24'25'00" WEST 113 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. PAGE I I A- 278744 SCHEDULE B 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. 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: SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS: 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. GENERAL TAXES, AS FOLLOWS, PLUS INTEREST AFTER DELINQUENCY: FOR YEAR AMOUNT BILLED AMOUNT PAID 1981 5404.54 $.00 1980 S330.12 S.00 BEING COUNTY TREASURER'S PARCEL NO. 000320 - 0014 -07 3. CONTRACT OF SALE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND COVENANTS, AND THE EFFECT OF ANY FAILURE TO COMPLY THEREWITH: SELLER : QUEEN CITY SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION, A WASHINGTON CORPORATION FRANK TODD AND JOAN TODD, JULY 15, 1976 JULY 28, 1976 7607280533 —362764 PURCHASER DATED RECORDED AUDITOR'S FILE NO.: RECEIPT NO. IT E AL ;RANGE, HUSBAND AND WIFE BE DELIVERED SHORTL Y;;x;z;ax THE PURCHASER'S INTEREST INSTRUMENT: DATED RECORDED AUDITOR'S FILE NO.: RECEIPT NO. ASSIGNED TO UNDER PAGE 3 SAID CONTRACT OF SALE ASSIGNED DECEMBER 23, 1977 JANUARY 24, 1978 7801240639 E- 453084 GERALD E. SCHNEIDER AND GAIL M. SCHNEIDER, HIS WIFE 4. AN EASEMENT FOR SIDE SEWER AFFECTING THE PORTION OF SAID PREMISES STATED HEREIN AND CONTAINING A PROVISION FOR BEARING EQUAL COST OF MAINTENANCE, REPAIR OR RECONSTRUCTION OF SAID COMMON SEWER BY THE COMMON USERS. RECORDED : MARCH 2, 1965 AUDITOR'S NO.: 5849828 WIDTH : 6 FEET LOCATION : THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID 6 FOOT EASEMENT SHALL BEGIN AT A POINT ON THE SOUTHERN LOT LINE, 79 FEET EAST OF THE SOUTHWEST CORNER AND RUN DIAGONALLY ACROSS LOT IN A NORTHERLY DIRECTION TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERN LINE OF SAID LOT, WITH THE SAID WESTERLY LINE AT A POINT 128 FEET WEST OF THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID LOT, OF THE FOLLOWING DESCRIBED PROPERTY: T.L. 14, SECTION 23. TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4, EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. H. GILLIAM DONATION CLAIM NO. 40, BEGINNING SOUTHWEST CORNER OF TRACT 28 OF INTERURBAN ADDITION; THENCE SOUTH 89'47'00" EAST 22 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 24'25'00" EAST 65 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE SOUTH 68'00'00" WEST 156 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 37 WEST 120 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO THE EASTERLY MARGIN OF 65TH AVENUE SOUTH; THENCE SOUTHEAST ALONG SAID EASTERLY MARGIN 70 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO THE NORTH MARGIN OF STATE ROAD NO. 11; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG SAID NORTH MARGIN 270 FEET, MORE OR LESS TO A POINT SOUTH 24'25'00" EAST 113 FEET, MORE OR LESS FROM THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 24'25'00" WEST TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. 5. AN EASEMENT AFFECTING THE PORTION OF SAID PREMISES AND FOR THE PURPOSES STATED HEREIN, AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES. FOR : IRON WATER PIPE 1 1/2 INCHES IN DIAMETER RECORDED : APRIL 3. 1909 AUDITOR'S NO.: 605842 AFFECTS : SAID PREMISES AND OTHER LANDS. 6. AN EASEMENT AFFECTING THE PORTION OF SAID PREMISES AND FOR THE PURPOSES STATED HEREIN, AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES. FOR WATER PIPES RECORDED : MAY 13, 1905 AUDITOR'S NO.: 337820 AFFECTS : SAID PREMISES AND OTHER LANDS. 7. WE NOTE A RECORD OF SURVEY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. WE HAVE MADE NO DETERMINATION AS TO ITS EFFECT ON THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPERTY AND NO INSURANCE IS GIVEN ON THE BASIS OF THE LINES OF PROPERTY AS SHOWN THEREBY, BUT NOTHING APPEARS OF RECORD BY WHICH COULD BE CONSIDERED AN ALTERATION OF THE EXISTING RECORD DESCRIPTION, UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED HEREIN. RECORDED : JANUARY 17, 1979 BOOK 16 A- 278744 PAGE 4 PAGE : 84 AUDITORS NO. : 7901179004 8. IN ADDITION TO THE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS SHOWN ABOVE. THE OWNER'S POLICY APPLIED FOR WILL CONTAIN AS EXCEPTIONS IN SCHEDULE 8 THEREOF. THOSE PARTICULAR STANDARD EXCEPTIONS WHICH ARE PRINTED ON THE INSIDE BACK COVER HEREOF AND DESIGNATED PARAGRAPH(S): A THRU J NOTE: THE OWNERS POLICY TO BE ISSUED WILL CONTAIN ENDORSEMENT(S): WA: 10 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. AG /PMM 618 A- 278744 PAGE F. A. LESOURD WOOLVIN PATTEN DONALD D. FLEMING GEORGE M. HARTUNG MEADE EMORY LEON C. MISTEREK DWAYNE E. COPPLE THOMAS 0. McLAUGHLIN JOHN F. COLGROVE C. DEAN LITTLE LAWRENCE E. HARD RODNEY J. WALDBAUM Mr. Mark Caughey Associate Planner City of Tukwila Tukwila City Hall 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Mr. Caughey: LESOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING, HARTUNG St EMORY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3900 SEATTLE -FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98154 (206) 624-1040 September 24, 1981 BRUCE G. HANSON RICHARD P. MATTHEWS D. WILLIAM TOONE DANIEL D. WOO CARL J. CARLSON P. WARREN MAROUARDSON LAWRENCE A. M. ZELENAK JULIE G. WADE MARIANNE SCHWARTZ 0BARA C. A.TEKLINSKI DANIEL W. FERM WILLIAM S. WEINSTEIN ROBERT L. PALMER COUNSEL Quorum Requirements for Meetings of the Planning Commission By letter dated September 3, 1981, you have asked my opinion regarding the existence of a qualified quorum for a particular action taken by the Planning Commission. It is my understanding that the City of Tukwila Planning Commission consists of seven members. At the meeting in question, four members were present. However, when the particular matter was under consideration, one of the Planning Commission members excused himself from the deliberations because of either a conflict of interest or a potential violation of the doctrine of appearance of fairness. One of the three remaining members was the Chairman of the Commission. It is customary for the Chairman not to cast a vote unless there is a tie. In my opinion, there was not a quorum present to consider the particular application in question. While there was a quorum present sufficient to hold the meeting as to all other matters, the removal of one of the Council members from the consideration of the particular application deprived the Planning Commission of its legally required quorum. In McQuillan on Municipal Corporations, Section 13.35(a), the author discusses this issue. In that analysis, he states: "Members having an interest are generally excluded in counting a quorum." The case of Smith v. Centralia, 55 Wash. 573 is cited in support of that proposition. Mr. Mark Caughey September 24, 1981 Page Two I would note that when the Chairman of the Commission is present, he can be counted in order to determine whether a necessary quorum has been constituted. If the Tukwila Planning Commission has elected to have its Chairman vote only in the event .of a tie, that policy should be formally adopted. LEH:sk cc: Mayor Frank Todd Mr. Gary Van Dusen Very truly yours, LeSOU PATTEN, FLEMING, HA ' TUNG & MPRY MC/blk City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Frank Todd, Mayor Lesourd, Patten, Fleming, Hartung & Emory 3900 Seattle - First National Bank Building Seattle, WA 98154 Attn: Larry Hard Subject: City Attorney's Opinion 3 September 1981 As you may recall, we discussed the results of the Planning Commission's meeting of 23 July 1981 regarding the presence of a qualified quorum for the Schneider rezone action. I received from you at that time a verbal opinion that a new public hearing would be needed, since only two commis- sioners of the potential seven - member board participated in the final vote. At their regular August meeting, the Commission requested a formal, written opinion on this matter. Thus, I have enclosed an excerpt of summary min- utes of the July Meeting and request that you provide a discussion of the facts which led to your opinion invalidating the first hearing. Please call me if you have questions; and thanks for your help. If pos- sible I would like to present your findings to the Commission at their regular September meeting. Tukwila P1 nning Department Mark Caughey Associate Planner j 908 MC /blk .. City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Frank Todd, Mayor MEMORANDUM To Planning Commission Members FROM: Mark Caughey, Associate Planner DATE: 20 August 1981 SUBJECT: Application 81 -24 -R; Schneider Rezone On July 23, 1981, the Tukwila Planning Commission held a public hearing on this application. At that time, there was some doubt as to whether a quorum of the Commission's membership was present, resulting from the decision of one Commissioner not to participate in discussion or vote upon this application due to conflict of interest. The Tukwila City At- torney, after reviewing the record, has decided that a qualified quorum was not present and that the 23 July 1981 public hearing is void. Therefore, we have rescheduled the public hearing for the August meeting, and have sent .out notices to that effect to the property owners nearby the rezone site. Please note that there has been no modification of the application or proposed project since the 23 July 1981 meeting, and that all written comments previously received will remain a part of the record. The staff report included in your packet is substantially the same as that presented last month; however, we have revised and expanded some of the recommended stipulations to address more specically the concerns about site design which have come to our attention since the July meeting. ii VI • 11 •.• LEGAL DESCRIPTION GROUP FOUR INC RECORD OF SURVEY SURVEYOR CROSS SECTION SCALE: "•20' SITE PLAN AREA CALCULATION TOTAL LOT AREA +27 S0. FT. BLDG. COVERAGE 6,140 SO. FT. 37 PARKING SPILLS ,3I PER 4000 SO. FT. LEGEND. BOUNDARY o EXISTING REBAR BUILDING - -- EX /STING CONTOURS - PROPOSED CONTOURS DESCRIPTION That per8an of W H.OIMUns donation chin no.40, In sec.25, T.23N. K.4E.,WM., in N.C. Wo, Beginning at IM S.W cor. of tract 28 of t he Interurban Add. to Seattle, °ccordnate the plat recorded In volute 10 of plats, page 55,In K.C.,Wa.; thence S 89° 47'00 ° E along the S Ins of sold Iract 28,22; thence S24 °25'00 ° E 65'10 the true pia of beginning; thence S68 °00'Od'W 156; thence 537 °00' 00 ° W 120', mote or less to the E margin of 65th Aw. S.t thence S.E. along sold E margin 70' more or less tolls Intersection with the N. margin of State Highway Road no.II; thence E along cola N margin 270% more or less to o point from which the true point of beginning bears N 24° 25 thence N 24 °25'00' W 113, more or Nss loth* true point of beginning; MiPORltrlllrrrWNW 911141111 O • +w• w" 1 2 3 4 I' r' r'T Pl I T I TO I i(1 1 11T 1 1I.111 f 1T 1 5 6 7 8' _© wmmmr_ 0£ 62 ee 92 nz vz CZ zz 61 el a 91 gl to 'el al a Off'` cz Iz OZ ..._._ Igld111110114111411141111IIII >!Illl61 1 1 1 41111141IlUlllull0Ullll 1111llllillll 1UUlllll) IU lIlll1I1111111111111IIIIg1u11411 11111611011111 IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT I