Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 80-38-R - WYNN - REZONE80-38-r south 152nd street 80-22-w dr-06-83 epic-213-83 epic-147-80 wynn property ,1908 R.W. Thorpe Associates 815 Seattle. Tower Seattle, WA 98101 Attn: Bob Thorpe Ow of Tukwila Planning Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845 Office of Community Development Subject: Wynn Property Rezone (80 -38 -R) As requested by telephone yesterday, we are pleased to forward a copy of Tukwila Ordinance #1200, as recorded, which affirms approval of the Wynn rezone. You also requested a schedule of the remaining steps to be completed in the approval process before construction permits be issued: h�ny A) Complete SEPA review: After you and your client firm -up details of the site and architectural concept, a threshold determination on the project itself will be made. I anticipate that some special studies in grading, drainage, tree preservation and the like will be needed to obtain a Decla- tation of Non - Significance. B) File for Board -of- Architectural Review: After completion of SEPA review, the B.A.R. will examine specific site, architecture and landscape plans. Content requirements for supporting graphics are specified on the B.A.R. application form. C) Obtain final waiver approval: As I mentioned on the telephone, this last appearance before the Council serves as a "check ", both on the applicant and the staff to insure that all Council concerns expressed during preliminary waiver review are resolved in the final project design. I hope that this information is helpful to you. MC /blk 10 February 1981 Tukwila Planning Dept. Mark Caughey Associate Planner 8102100337 ORDINANCE NO. /ADD, Page 1 3322A /LEH TUKW WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. A: 66 the following findings of fact: DOSE 6GEt:DR I RCZi4' ILEA' 94 VA) %) 4 0 3 �h 4' / /S -18h- /& / rel AN ORDINANCE RECLASSIFYING CERTAIN LANDS FROM R -1 -12 TO R -3 AND R -4 WITHIN THE CITY OF TUKWILA AS DESCRIBED IN PLANNING DEPARTMENT MASTER FILE NO. 80 -38 -R. P WHEREAS, a Declaration Of Nonsignificance was granted by the responsible official on October 7, 1980, under City file EPIC - 147 -80, and; WHEREAS, said Declaration Of Nonsignificance pertains only to the legislative act of rezoning and reserves the City's option to conduct separate environmental review for any project proposed sub- ._ sequent to the grant of the rezone, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting on Octo- ber 23, 1980, after conducting a public hearing, has recommended ap- proval of the rezone request subject to compliance with six stipula- tions, and; wHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered the environmental significance of the proposed rezone action and the recommendation of the Planning Commision. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Tukwila, Wash- ington, does ordain as follows: Section 1. The real property which is the subject of this ordi- nance is described in the attached legal description (Exhibit A) and is shown on the attached site map (Exhibit B). Section 2. After reviewing the documents set forth in Planning Department master file 80- 38 -R, and having heard materials presented by the property owner and its representatives, the City Council per dwelling unit. ORDINANCE NO. /..7c , Page 2 3322A /LEH A. The real property, which is the subject of this rezone re- quest, is described in Exhibit A. It is now zoned R -1 -12. B. The proposed zoning classifications of R -3 and R -4, as shown on Exhibit B, are generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. C. The zoning classifications depicted on Exhibit B are con- sistent with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. D. The proposed rezone action will not be injurious to the peace, safety, health or general welfare of the community nor injur- ious to property value in the immediate vicinity. E. Implementation of improvements identical to, or substanti- ally the same as, those proposed under City of Tukwila Local .Improve- ment District No. 30 will_ provide adequate public access and utili- ties to and from the subject property. Section 3. Based on tnese findings of fact, the Council makes the following conclusions and conditions relating to and restricting the subject real property: A. The property snown on Exhibit A is reclassified to zoning categories R -3 and R -4 as shown on Exhibit B. B. The building /parking /circulation and related development details, as shown on Exhibit C, are conceptual only and are not approved. Any project proposed on this site subsequent to the pas- sage of this ordinance shall require Board of Architectural Review approval of site, architectural and landscaping details prior to issuance of building permits. C. Maximum residential density for overall development of this site shall not exceed eighteen D.U. /gross acre. Maximum residential density for the R -3 portion of the site shall not exceed sixteen D.U. /gross acre. D. Structured enclosed parking shall be provided for any pro- ject developed on this site at a ratio of not.less than one stall Unstructured parking shall be provided at a minimum ratio of one -half stall per dwelling unit. E. The applicant shall equitably participate in proposed City of Tukwila Local Improvement District No. 30 or any subsequent local improvement district which is identical to or substantially the same as L.I.D. No. 30. F. Fencing shall be provided on the north and east property lines of the property which is the subject of this ordinance. The design details of said fencing shall be agreed on in writing by the owner and representatives of the City of Tukwila. Section 4. The zoning map adopted by reference by Ordinance No. 251 is hereby amended to reflect the changes by the rezoning action taken in this ordinance. Section 5. The City Clerk is directed to record a copy of this ordinance and attachments with the King County Department Of Records And Elections. Section 6. The conditions and restrictions contained in this ordinance shall be covenants and restrictions running with the land and shall be binding on the owners, their heirs, successors and assigns. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, Washington, at a regular meeting thereof this /5? = day of AP 'ROVED AS TO FORM: wrence E. Hard, City Attorney Published Record Chronicle - January 23, 1981 ORDINANCE No./2 Page 3 3322A /LEH CITY OF TUKWILA By ATTEST: rank Todd, Mayor Maxi e Anderson, City Clerk 198/. tir c WTh''N REZONE - - -5 ACRES - -LOT 21 BROOKBAVEN GARDEN TRACTS AREA A - -R -4 ZONE That portion of Lot 21 Brookhaven Garden Tracts lying south of a line which bisects said lot diagonally from the N.W. corner-to the S.E. corner together with that remaining portion of the south 100 feet of said Lot 21. . AREA B - -R -3 ZONE That portion of Lot 21 Brookhaven Garden Tracts lying north of aline which bisects said lot diagonally from the N: W. corner to the S.E. corner except that portion which lies in the south 100 feet of said Lot 21. EXHIBIT A • • slT 57�'t �sTjrh ♦L 4'ILLNRLD rARKNY • S R.7+4,1U01:14.0 r I.S . � % V R ._�_ . L b vWtF. rs* Atx& • 0 10 10 10 40 NORTH c . w VORP. t MLIMIHaKwYNN FLAN . i•• ATTROt te0 W Ai1LADM1' ICIM ` SITr STATISTIer -P 90 :NM. 11. 4'ICX. itt° MRlNY *TALI", .:. 69 ;w nt, oter.A ►wtana. 47W, IIT TLsk. CfiLF.$11,- I.L~.ZU/. /VNIr 15 VINE. TWA M L . cam% D ID b b 40 NOIR* -tAt ntoRPT. ; FICCLIMINAR'( 5{TC PLAN fo.. 1rl'N N REZONE II � x 1 - 115 tr 4r • s .. • • • soillemoiwwwsursinsitsmis-sus . •n �51TM 5TA715TICfp 74 MP. •a e11s•TAtO r 4':b VOW, 69 :w ltpO P.lti•U. 4. l.4 - - IS u►:rr, r,* Amt. \.\-;.-- - L'1 Wit rail .0 k �s WM ass • • 0 b b to K.w 1ftcRPe PRtLIMINARw N IeZONE JLI1T c IC • 3z div i 141 A 1908 City of Tukwila Z 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Frank Todd, Mayor MEMORANDUM TO: President and Members of the City Council FROM: Mark Caughey, Acting Planning Director DATE: 7 November 1980 SUBJECT: Wynn Property Rezone (80 -38 -R) Following your decision on 4 August 1980 to grant a preliminary waiver of 1137 to allow Mr. Wynn to develop 4 multiple - family housing project on 5 acres fronting S. 152nd St., a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on 23 October 1980 to discuss rezoning of the site. The Commission recommended that the existing R -1 -12 designation be changed to R -3 on the northerly half of the site, and R -4 on the southerly portion. Note that their recommendation includes six stipulations, as contained in the accom- panying ordinace. Notice that stipulation 3 provides an overall development density level of 18 units /AC. for the entire site; we suggest however, that wording be added to stipulation 3 limiting density on the R -3 portion of the site to no more than 16 D.U. /Acre, consistent with comprehensive plan density limitations for "Medium Density" use areas. 3) Maximum residential density for overall development of this site shall not exceed 18 D.U. /Gross acre. Maximum residential density for the R -3 portion of the site shall not exceed 16 D.U. /AC. City of Tukwila Planning Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845 Office of Community Development Harold Wynn 14607 Pacific Highway So. Seattle, Wa 98168 Subject: Rezone Application 80 -38 -R 31 October 1980 At its 23 October 1980 meeting, the Tukwila Planning Commission approved your application to rezone 5.0 acres on S. 152nd st. from R -1 to R -3 and R -4. The Commission's approval action is in the form of a recommend- ation to the City Council, which will be presented in ordinance form at their meeting of 10 November 1980 at 7:00 p.m. in City Hall. You or your authorized representative should plan to attend the City Council discussion of ypur project. An excerpt from the minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting, describ- ing stipulations of the approval recommendation, is enclosed. MC /blk Encl. cc: R.W. Thorpe Assoc. 815 Seattle Tower Seattle, Wa 98101 Tukwil 41anning Dept. Ma�r k Caughey 9 y Acting Director 1 City of Tukwila Planning Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845 Office of Community Development MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY. PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes of the meeting of 23 October 1980, continuing the regular meeting of 16 October 1980. Chairman Richard Kirsop called the meeting to order at 7:00 P.M. All Com- missioners were present, except Mr. Sowinski who arrived at 8:10 P.M. Staff present were: Al Pieper, Building Official; Fred Satterstrom, Project Planner; Caroline Berry, Assistant Planner and Mark Caughey, Acting Planning Director. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW A) Hayden Island, Inc. For approval of alternate signing at 16600 Southcenter Pkwy. Mr. Pieper read the staff report. The applicants were not represented at the meeting. The essence of the application is to obtain B.A.R. approval of a second building- mounted tenant sign on one of the buildings in the Parkway Square complex, per Ordinance 1175. The applicants would forego one freestanding sign within the complex in exchance for . the second wall -sign. MOVED BY MRS. AVERY TO APPROVE THE SECOND SIGN AT 16600 SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY WITH THE STIPULATION THAT SIZE RESTRICTIONS IN TABLE B -1 OF ORDINANCE 1175 BE FOLLOWED, AND THAT THE RIGHT TO INSTALL A FREESTANDING SIGN IS FORFEITED. MOTIONED SECONDED BY MR. RICHARDS. 8) S & S Sign Company for review of additional signing on a building located at 15439 53rd Ave. So. Mr. Pieper presented the staff report which recommends denial of the appli- cation as contrary to the intent of Ordinance 1175. He then explained further .. the interpretation of the tenant -sign uniformity standard refer- enced in Ordinance 1175. David Shenton, Attorney, spoke in support of the proposal. He noted that the Board of Adjustment recently interpreted this project as a single entity thus giving it two street frontages. Page 2 c MOVED BY MR. ARVIDSON, WITH MRS. AVERY'S SECOND, TO APPROVE THE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL SIGNING AT 15439 53RD AVE. SO. AS PRESENTED. MOTION FAILED; JAMES, ORRICO AND RICHARDS DISSENTING. MOVED BY MR. ORRICO, WITH MR. JAMES' SECOND, TO DENY THE APPLICATION. MOTION CARRIED WITH MRS. AVERY AND MR. ORRICO DISSENTING. OTHER BUSINESS A) Ramada Inn - Informal Design Analysis The Building Official displayed drawings of the proposed hotel to be built on West Valley Highway, requesting critque thereof by the Commission. B) Report of the Building Official on Ordinance 1175. The Commssion discussed Mr. Pieper's written report citing criticisms of Ordinance 1175. It was the Commission's consensus that a recommendation be sent to the City Council to repeal Ordinance 1175. PUBLIC HEARING A) Application 80 -39 -R (Jack A. Benaroya Co.) to obtain partial release from conditions of rezoning embodied in a property use and developeent agreement dated 21 July 1969. Property located on the West side of Southcenter Parkway, North of South 180th St. Mark Caughey read the "Introduction" and "Recommendation" sections of the staff report. The public hearing was opened at 8:11 P.M. Joel Benoliel, general counsel for the Benaroya Company, elaborated on their request to have the present agreement set aside. He explained that Parkway Plaza's lender, who is out -of- state, objects to the potential cloud on the title represented by the agreement. The Benaroya Company believes that all terms of the agreement have been satisfied and that existing city regulations are already more stringent than those found in the document. Thus, the City's interests are protected and the agreement is no longer useful to either party. The Commission then discussed the relationship between the lender's apparent willingness to extend permanent financing to the project, and the on -going nature of the agreement as a deed restriction. The public hearing was closed at 8:19 P.M. MOVED BY MR. ORRICO, WITH MR. RICHARD'S SECOND TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE BENAROYA COMPANY'S PETITION 80 -39 -12 FOR RELEASE FROM CONDITIONS OF USE AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 6557692 DATED 21 JUNE 1969 BE DENIED. MOTION CARRIED 6 -0, MR. SOWINSKI ABSENT. Page 3 The meeting was recessed at 8:33 P.M. to allow for the scheduled public hearing on Draft #4 of the Proposed Zoning Ordinance and accompanying D.E.I.S. (Separate minutes of these proceedings are available) The meeting reconvened at 10:37 P.M. PUBLIC HEARING B) Application 80 -38 -R (Harold Wynn) to rezone 5.0 acres, more or less from R -1 to R -4. Property located on South 152nd Street, East of MacAdam Road. Mark Caughey read the staff report; Robert Thorpe of R.W. Thorpe Associates was present on behalf of Mr. Wynn, the property owner. The public hearing was opened at 10:49 P.M. Mr. Thorpe stated that his client agrees with most of the staff's comments, but requests Planning Commission consideration of alternative approaches in the configuration of R -4/R -3 zoning boundaries and density levels author- ized. He also presented a real estate research report relating to housing demand within the community. Mr. Thorpe described the background research undertaken to arrive at the present site layout, including their intent to retain significant trees and slope areas in an undisturbed condition to the maximum extent possible. The advantages of allowing higher density than is indicated on the application exhibits were explained, including the possibility of structured recreation and lesser disturbance of surface conditions. Ms. Louise Strander, resident in the project vicinity, suggested that the perimeter of the Wynn property be fenced to limit trespass upon surrounding properties. She also stated her wish that multi - family use not be extended northward of the Wynn property. The public hearing was closed at 11:08 P.M. MOVED BY MR. ORRICO, WITH MR. JAMES'SECOND, TO RECOMMEND TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT THE WYNN PROPERTY BE RECLASSIFIED FROM R -1 -12 TO R -3 AND R -4 SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1) PRIOR TO TRANSMITTAL OF THE COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION ON THIS ZONING RECLASSIFICATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL, THE APPLICANT SHALL PREPARE AND SUBMIT FOR STAFF APPROVAL PRECISE LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS FOR THE "R -3" AND "R -4" SUB -AREAS OF THE SITE. SAID DESCRIPTIONS SHALL BE AGREED UPON MUTUALLY BETWEEN STAFF AND THE PROPERTY OWNER PER THE MODIFICATIONS SUGGESTED FOR EXHIBIT "C" IN THE PUBLIC RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS UNDER THIS APPLICATION 80 -38 -R. 2) THE BUILDING /PARKING /CIRCULATION AND RELATED DEVELOPMENT DETAILS APPEARING ON EXHIBIT "C" ARE CONCEPTUAL ONLY AND ARE NOT APPROVED. ANY PROJECT PROPOSED ON THIS. SITE SUBSEQUENT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE SUBJECT REZONE SHALL REQUIRE B.A.R. APPROVAL OF SITE, ARCHITECTURAL AND LANDSCAPING DETAILS PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMITS. Page 4 MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL DENSITY FOR OVERALL DEVELOPMENT OF THIS SITE SHALL NOT EXCEED 18 D.U. /GROSS ACRE. ) STRUCTURED ENCLOSED PARKING SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ANY PROJECT DEVELOPED ON THIS SITE SUBSEQUENT TO CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF THE REZONE RECOMMENDATION AT A RATIO OF NOT LESS THAN ONE (1) STALL PER DWELLING UNIT. .UNSTRUCTURED PARKING SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE MINIMUM RATIO OF ONE -HALF STALL PER UNIT. 5) THE APPLICANT SHALL AGREE TO EQUITABLY PARTICIPATE IN CITY OF TUKWILA L.I.D. #30. 6) FENCING SHALL BE PROVIDED ON THE NORTH AND EAST PROPERTY LINES OF THE WYNN PROPERTY; PRECISE DESIGN DETAILS OF SAID FENCING SHALL BE SUBJECT TO MUTUAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PROPERTY OWNER AND STAFF. MOTION CARRIED 5 -0, MR. RICHARDS ABSENT. The meeting was adjourned at 11:32 P.M. TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION Minutes Transcribed by: Mark Caughey Assistant Planner MC /jas Eileen Avery Secretary AGENDA ITEM • I) INTRODUCTION Exhibit "A" describes the neighborhood setting of the 5.0 ± acre "Wynn" pro- perty. The applicants are proposing to construct a multi - family condominium housing project, to be built within a single phase. Due to its slope and exten- sive vegetation cover, the site was designated as an area of special development consideration on the Compre- hensive Plan, thus neces- sitating waiver approval by the City Council which was granted on 4.August 1980. The applicants are requesting only the change of zone at this time. Specific details of a multi - family project would be presented for B.A.R. consideration at a future time following the rezone action. II) CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Rf1 -1R -R WYNN RF7ANF FINDINGS 1) Harold and Dorothy Wynn have owned the subject property since 1955. 2) The property is currently zoned R -1 -12; proposed rezoning is to the R -4 District, at an approximate density of 15 D.U. /AC. 3) The Comprehensive Plan designated the southerly half of the property as "high- density" residential, and the northerly portion as "medium - density" residential usage. 4) The subject property is within the boundaries of LID #30, which will improve the width and pavement quality of S. 152nd Street upon which the property fronts. Page 2 5) A Declaration of Environmental Non - Significance was granted on 7 October 1980 for the legislative act of rezoning this site to a more - intensive residential use category. However, the City reserves the right to require a more extensive environmental analysis for any project proposed subsequent to the grant of rezone. 6) Exhibit "B" suggests a conceptual layout of structures, drive- ways and parking for a multi- family project consistent with the rezone action. The intent of the layout is to minimize disturbance of vegetation on the south edge of the site adjoining South 152nd Street, and to resist disturbance of the steep, northeasterly corner of the site adjoining an existing city trail. III) CONCLUSIONS 1) The proposed rezone is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan insofar as intensification of residential uses is concerned. However, redesignating the entire site "R -4" fails to recognize the Comprehensive Plan's intent of "stepping- down" building intensity as one moves from the southerly to northerly portions of the site. The reasoning of the Comprehensive Plan is to provide a transition in bulk and built form between the inten- sive multi - family areas south of 152nd, and the single - family area north of the Wynn property. 2) The approval action to intensify zoning of this parcel will, of itself, have negligible environmental consequences. How- ever, a highly - detailed environmental investigation will be essential for any project proposed subsequent to the grant of rezone. B.A.R. review of such project should be mandatory. 3) The proposed density level of 15 D.U. /AC. is consistent with the general character of the surrounding neighborhood. In Staff's view, density should not become in itself the exclusive guiding principal for development of this site. Rather, City Council, the Planning Commission and Staff should strive to maximize development "performance" in terms of shapes, materials, open space, preservation of existing amenities, and so forth. Therefore, the ultimate number of units should become subordi- nate to some degree to the overall visual and functional quality of the project as a human activity space, and some flexibility in the ultimate D.U. yield should be allowed in the rezone approval. IV) RECOMMENDATION Staff suggests that the Planning Commission r commend to the City Council that the Wynn property be reclassified from 1 1 -12 to R -3 and R -4 as depicted on Exhibit "C" subject to conditions as follow: 1) Prior to transmittal of the Commission's recommendation on this zoning reclassification to the City Council, the applicant shall prepare and submit for staff approval precise legal descriptions for the "R -3" and "R -4" sub -areas fo the site. Said descriptions Page 3 c R` Mu tvm.l.'1 shall - =- • 's) kW. . aGocu . 1 . . 1 . . 2) The building /parking /circulation and related development details appearing on Exhibit "C" are conceptual only and are not approved. Any project proposed on this site subsequent to City Council approval of the subject rezone shall require B.A.R. approval of site, architectural and landscaping details prior to issuance of building permits. 3) Maximum residential density for overall development of this site shall not exceed 16.D.U. /gross acre. Structured parking shall be provided for any project developed on this site subsequent to City Council approval of the rezone recommendation at a ratio of not less than one (1) stall per dwelling unit. Unstructured parking shall be provided at the minimum ratio. of one -half stall per unit. 5 g n u 3h.FF ANV ow Ma PWO6• IN L. I. 0• ; 6 MC /jas clay p Qe P120‘0%1D oN N. 6 E• or- W •j CW 5141•4A- 6• 00• MoTUArt sf•FF ANo kPPL•c e,NT• 0 CQic.MA'1. 6oNd) ptx rot. s' pup. W OMJ› s $ fC43- 5 N Arv,Z' NN"q �s City H of Tukwila 4 1 2 6200 Southcenter Boulevard u.1 Tukwila Washington 98188 790$ Dear Mr. Thorpe: Frank Todd, Mayor Mr. R. W. Thorpe R. W. Thorpe & Associates. 815 Seattle Tower 3rd and University Seattle, WA .:.98101 July 11, 1980 Per our meeting on July 10, 1980 in which we discussed an agreement by Mr. Wynn to participate in LID 30, I hope that the several questions you may have had were clarified by the Mayor and staff. To briefly go over our discussion and subsequent input from the Public Works Department and Planning Department, let me make the following comments. Per the consultant's preliminary assessment roll, Mr. Wynn's participation in the LID is 17.29 %. By excluding non - benefiting properties, the consultant informs me that Mr. Wynn's participation is 18.7 %. The consultant informed me that this is based on $259,433.00 which excludes the $13,900 which would have been against the Wynn property if he so elects to include the sanitary sewer in front of his property. The changed percentage indicates a potential $3,677.08 increase to the basic street assessment fron $44,847.24 to $48,524:32. If Mr. Wynn provides an early commitment to the LID by agreement, the City may elect to proceed immediately into the final design phase for the project and allow construction to begin in August 1980. If the LID lacks the 60% protest, the contract documents can be finalized and advertised in a timely fashion and necessary right -of -ways can be obtained before letting the contract. this project can proceed in August 1980 and be completed this year. It is anticipated that under the above circumstances, the consultant's overall project estimate is good, which is the basis for the preliminary assessment roll. As was mentioned in our meeting, the current project represents a scaled -down version of LID 28. The consultant design group has already cut all the "fat" out of the project at this point in time. The Mayor takes personal charge of "change orders" to the project and, through the approval process of change orders, determines the most cost - effective solutions. The Council may be involved also and apprised of any significant project costs. Mr. R. W. Thorpe R. W. Thorpe & Associates page 2 As mentioned in our meeting, the Public Works Department welcomes the opportunity to coordinate the development of the final street plans in conjunction with the site planning for the Wynn property. With regards to right-of-way, the City will acquire.the necessary right- • of-ways for the street and a straight sidewalk along the northerly boundary of S. 152nd Street. However, if the City and Mr. Wynn come to agreement on a meandering sidewalk to preserve trees fronting the property, the property owner will dedicate the necessary easements to construct and/or maintain such a walkway as deemed necessary by the City. Mark Caughey's input resulting from our meeting is as follows: "The comprehensive plan provides for high-density and medium- density residential uses on this site. This site, due to its extensive . vegetation cover and severe scope in several places, is designated 'environmentally-sensitive' on the comprehensive plan environmental base map. The City staff has indicated that multiple-family uses are appropriate for this site; no assurance can be given the applicants at this point, though, as to the ultimate build-out density which will be approved since an environmental investigation has yet to be made. It is anticipated that extensive environmental research will be needed to establish an appropriate density level for the Wynn development, irrespective of the existing residential density levels found on nearby properties." We look forward to Mr. Wynn's review of the agreement sent to him earlier to participate in the LID at this time. Final wording for this agreement and its execution can be worked out with Mr. Larry Hard, City Attorney, by contacting him at 624-1040. If you have any further questions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact myself or the Mayor. el, eti Concurrence: 4 Mayor Frank Todd cc: Larry Hard, City Attorney Ted Uomoto, Public Works Director Mark Caughey, Acting Planning Director Sincerely, Phillip R. Fraser Senior Engineer PRF/jm rw thorpe and associates wynn rezone _TAICKIN& L ST; 1:) UN�iS PARKING >` (FT1M &RAM. Z szer UNfTS 3 STCRel" t1NITZ SECTION THROUGH SITE .:WTHN REZONE. CW. THORPt AND ASlccAtfr-0 TAMA cur_ MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FO1 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 .1) APPLICANT'S NAME Harold Wynn TELEPHONE :(206) 243 -1200 2) APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 14607 Pacific Hwy. S. ZIP: Seattle, 98168 3) PROPERTY OWNER'S NAME Same TELEPHONE : ( ) Consultant Planners: R W Thorpe & Assoc., 815 Seattle 'bower L) 4RORW=AVETV '' 1MESS: ce2rt1 P wool. 624 - 6239: 5) LOCATION OF PROJECT: (geographic or legal descrip.) Lot 21 - Brookvale Garden Tracts; EZ S23 T23 R4E WM; North side of South 152nd St. hPtwPPn Marariam R. South and 57th Ave. South. KROLL PAGE: 334W 6) NAME OF PROJECT(OPTIONAL) Wynn Rezone and Conceptual Site Plan. SECTION II: PROJECT INFORMATION 7) BRIEFLY DESCRIBE THE PROJECT YOU PROPOSE: Rezone of 5 -acre site to R -4; permit up to 98 condominium units and 142 p.s. (1 :1.5 ratio) with recreational bldg and open space areas (net density 20'DU /ac). 8) DO YOU PROPOSE TO DEVELOP THIS PROJECT LN PHASES? DYES ? ONO (Probab 9) PROTECT DATE Site: 330 x 660 = 217,800 SF Depends on No. of a. NET ACRES 4.98 c. PARKING SPACES Proposed - 142 b. GROSS ACRES 4.98 d. FLOORS OF 2 and 3; some struc CONSTRUCTION Darking. some cover LANDSCAPE Balance SQ. FT. (50 & Open Space 26%) + walkways, patio tennis min► X (48,000 - 67,000) e. LOT, .AREA COVERAGE BLDG Vai-tah1e SQ.FT. (22;7,-.307.) PAVING 56,800SQ. FT.= 400 SF p.s 10) DOES THE AVERAGE SLOPE OF THE SITE EXCEED 1O %? YES D :O 11) EXISTING ZONING R - - 12.0 12. EXISTING CCMP.PLA.'V Multi- family, High and 13) IS THIS SITE DESIGNATED FOR SPECIAL CONSIDERATION ® Y NO Dens ities ON ME CITY'S EWIRMBNIAL BASE MaP ?(please see Ll Staff Analysis) 14) IF YOU WISH TO HAVE COPIES OF CITY CORRESPONDENCE, STAFF REPORTS, OR OTHER DOCUMENTS SENT TO ADDRESSES 0111ER THAN APPLICANT OR PROPERTY OWNER, PLEASE INDICATE BELOW. a. ,NAME: R. W. Thorpe & Assoc. ADDRESS: 815 Seattle Tower Third & Un Seattle 98101 b. NAME: ADDRESS: not) anits tured ad. 42 %) ts, etc. 4edium Lversity • OVER ` SECTION III: APPLICANT'S AFFIDAVIT I, 614izet. .-T? --04`11.11.1 , being duly sworn, declare that T am the owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. DATE June 19, 1980 Subscribed and sworn before me this 7 day of J " t- , 19E;4 Public for the / to of Washington in a residing at gnature o Con act • rc er or owner) SECTION TV: SUPPORTING MATERIAL REQUIRFMENTS NOTE: All applications require certain supporting documents and information which are described in the following table: TYPE OF APPLICATION (CHECK BOX(ES)) SUPPORTING INFORMATION REQUIRED ** REZONING 1E, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 1C, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11 VARIANCE 1F, 4, 7, 11 or 17 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MOMENT 110, 3, 4, 5, 7, 11, 12 SHORELINE MQNT. PERMIT 1B, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13 SHORELINE MGM T PERMIT REVISION 4, 10, 16 WAIVER 1A, 3, 4, 11, 12, 13 s SHORT PLAT 4, 5, 9 BINDING SITE IMPROVEMENT PLAN 4, 5, 8 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW 11, 12, 13 LANDSCAPE REVIEW 14 SUBDIVISION 4, 5, 6, 15 SIGN VARIANCE 4, 6, 16, 17 * *See TABLE 1 for detailed description • I q; R.W. (norpe & Asscc L.. Tes Planning • Environmental Analysis • Economics June 23, 1980 City of Tukwila Department of Community Development City Hall Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attri: Mark Caughey, Assistant Planner Re: Rezone Application, Conceptual Site Plan, and Environmental Checklist for Wynn Rezone - Lot 21, Brookvale Garden Tracts Dear Mark: Attached herewith are the various items required for the application for Mr. Wynn's rezone on his five -acre site, located at South 152nd Street and 57th Avenue South. These items include those required in the Master Land Development Application form and those that we feel will supplement the application to explain the details of those items which we have been dis- cussing.in our meetings with the Planning and Public Works staff. Before listing those items, we feel we need a clarification as to the re- quirement for a waiver. A review by yourself, and also by Fred Satterstrom, leaves some question as to whether or not a waiver is necessary. Only a small tip of any of the sensitive lands categories touches the site, and our site analysis (see enclosed) may leave some reason to believe that the only major site constraint is the steepness in the northeast corner which can be handled through site planning conditions and leaving this area in open space. There- fore, in response to Fred's and your recommendation, we are asking for a formal reading of the requirement for a waiver on this property. We would prefer to proceed with the rezone, expanded environmental checklist,., with appropriate areas detailed, and a conceptual site plan, conditioning any action by the Planning Commission and the Council in significant detail prior to site planning efforts. As you are aware, the density contract that will be established on the property will have significant importance as to the site planni effort. Therefore, we are attempting to provide as much information as possible and proceed with a review by the Planning Commission. The items we have provided are as follows: 1. Request for clarification of waiver 2. Rezone application 3. Environmental checklist with the following subpoints covered in detail: a. Topography b. Soils and Geology c. Hydrology d. Vegetation e. Site Inventory f. Traffic g. Utilities Seattle. 815 Seattle Tower • 3rd 6 University • Seattle. WA 98101 • (206) 624-6239 Anchorage. Suite 503 • 1110 W st Sixth Avenue. • Anchorage AK 99503 • (907) 275.8846 Associates: Len Zickler Deborah Krouse City of Tukwila Attn: Mark Caughey June 23, 1980 Page 2 4. Vicinity map 5.. Three site alternatives, including site inventory and slope analysis 6. Topography and slope analysis 7. The fees required as follows: $200 for rezone and $50 for environ- mental checklist. Total by check from Mr. Harold Wynn: $250. The graphics presented herein are on a size for your review and will be repro - duced either by Xerox or Super K process when you feel they are ready for presentation. We have provided sik copies of the application for your review and distribution to other departments. We would be happy to provide additional copies and to provide reduced copies of the graphics, if you feel they are appro- priate for full application. Please contact us if there is any additional information required for this application at this time. In that we are going to be reviewing the LID 30 in the next 30'days, following the hearing by the City Council on Monday evening, June 23, we would appreciate a written response by both your department and Public Works within that 30 -day period regarding your concerns or additional requirements that rezone and site development might require as related to LID 30. Thank you for your assistance and guidance in this matter to date. We look forward to working closely with the City in developing site plans and conditions that will insure a quality development on this piece of property. RWT /wk enclosures Sincerely, R. W E AND ASSOCIATES Robert W. Thorp-; AICP • 015 Seattle Tower • 3rd S. University • Seattle, WA 98101 • '203) 624.6235 - xn,.,. CITY OF TUKWILA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM This questionnaire must be completed and submitted with the application for permit. This questionnaire must be completed by all persons applying for a permit from the City of Tukwila, unless it is determined by the Responsible Official that the permit is exempt or unless the applicant and Responsible Official previously agree an Environmental Impact Statement needs to be completed. A fee of 550.00 must accompany the filling of the Environmental Questionnaire to cover costs of the threshold determination. 1 BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent: Harold Wynn (R. W. Thorpe & Assoc. - Urban Planners, Agents) 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 14607 Pacific Hwy. S., Seattle 98168; 243 - 1200 (815 Seattle Tower, Seattle 98101; 624 - 6239) 3. Date Checklist Submitted: June 1980 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: City Planning Department 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Wynn Rezone and Conceptual Site Plan 6. Nature and Brief Description of the Proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an accurate understanding of its scope and nature): Rezone - from R -1 -12.0 (Single family) to R -4 (Low density multi- family) - for a 5 ac. (4.98 ac) site at South 152nd between 56th and 57th Avenues South in order to permit development of a proposed 9a+ unit roatiominium romp1Px, .7. Location of Proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal, as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental im- pacts, including any other information needed to dive an accurate under- standing of the environmental setting of the proposal): Lot 21 - Brookvale Garden Tracts; an undeveloped, wooded site lying northerly of 152nd Street between 56th and 57th Ave. South. Tracts to west, south, and north are developed; sites to the east above top of slope are partially de- veloped as single family residential or undeveloped. City trail adjoins on east property line. (See attached site analysis and site plan.) 8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal: Variable - 1981 9. List of all Permits, Licenses or Government Approvals Required for the Proposal (federal, state and local): (a) Rezone, eertdi- t4ena1 -use, sheve44.ae- * i -,- YES X NO (b) King County Hydraulics Permit YES NO X (c) Building permit YES X NO (d) Puget Sounk r Pollution Control Permit � YES NO x (e) Sewer hook up permit YES x NO (f) Sign permit YES ? NO (g) Water hook up permit YES x NO (h) Storm water system permit YES NO x (i) Curb cut permit YES NO x (j) Electrical permit (State of Washington) YES ? NO (k) Plumbing permit (King County) YES ? NO (1) Other: . 10. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or futher activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: No - entire proposal indicated, although project may be phased to respond to market analysis. 11. Do you. know-of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: LID 30; Future use of property at southwest corner of site-for access, land use, and buffering. 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro - posal; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: Waiver, rezone. II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) • YES MAYBE NO 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? (The first is unlikely.) x (b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcover- ing of the soil? x (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief fea- tures? (Limited by site design.) X (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? (Very unlikely - X see soils report Park Place 2 IS and USGS /USDA soils conservation data.) (e) Any increase in wi-R4 or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Explanation: 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: (a) Air emissions or deterioration .of ambient air quality? (b) The creation of objectionable odors? (c). Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? Explanation: (a) Auto emissions from 480 to 784 ADT''s. No detioration in ambient air quality. . Water. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in currents, or the course.or direction of water movements,.in either marine or fresh waters? YES MAYBE NO x (See note) (b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? (c) Alterations to the course orflow of flood waters? (d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? (e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? x (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? x (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? x -3- x __X__ • (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? (i) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise avail- able for public water supplies? Explanation: (b) Yes, surface increased, detention ponds proposed in site plan. (e), (f), (g), (h) Highly improbable. . Flora. Will the proposal result in: (a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers, of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of flora? (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? x Explanation: Approximately 58% to 65% of site will have vegetation removal for buildings and parking. 5. Fauna. Will the proposal result in (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of fauna (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of fauna? (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? Explanation: (d) Loss of vegetation - reduce bird and small rodent habitat. -4- YES MAYBE NO x x 6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? Explanation: Only traffic and human outdoor recreation related noise. 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? Explanation: ' From outside and parking lots; low wash lighting fixture can mitigate glare. 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in the altera- tion of the.present.or planned land use of an area? Explanation: Consistent with comprehensive plan and less dense than 80 -% . of neighborhood. 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? (b) Depletion.of any nonrenewable natural' resource? Explanation: Building and petroleum products. 10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radi- ation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? Explanation: YES MAYBE NO x .x x 11. Population. Explanation: Increase of 72 to 108 people. 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? Explanation: Will provide up to 98 new housing units, proposed to be. owner- occupied. 13. Transportation /Circulation. Will the proposal result in: (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? (b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods? (e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? (f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, . bicyclists or pedestrians? Explanation: See attached traffic and circulation analysis. (a) 480 to 784 ADT's. 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? Fire protection? Police. protection? Schools? Parks or other recreational facilities? Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? YES MAYBE NO x X x i X F (f) Other goverCental services? Explanation: (a) and (b) Normal to new housing units. (e) South 152nd Street (f) Planning, building during construction. 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require.the development of new sources of energy? Explanation:. 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: (a) .Power or natural gas? (b) Communications systems ?. (c) Water? (d). Sewer or septic tanks? (e) Storm water drainage? (f) Solid waste and disposal? Explanation: 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the crea- tion of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? Explanation: YES MAYBE NO x x 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruc- tion of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically of- fensive site open to public view? Explanation: See view analysis, site and inventory data. 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of exist- ing recreational opportunities? Explanation: Additional 72 to 108 people utilizing both on -site recreational faciltiies and City and regional facilities. 20. Archeological /Histroical. Will the proposal result in an alteration of a signifi- cant archeological or his - torical site, structure, object or building? Explanation: CERTIFICATION BY APPLICANT: Signature and Title R. J. Thorpe & Associates Consulting Planners -8- lic/t ° /7/ Date YES MAYBE NO x I, the undersigned, state that the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non - significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. 1 Natural Systems Review SUPPORTING ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS FOR THE WYNN REZONE Topography The five -acre site slopes from the northeast to the southwest corner, or from the adjacent single family areas to the existing multi - family area, from an elevation of approximately 260 feet to approximately 120 feet. This provides for an 18% overall'slope, with 30% slope in the first 200 feet of run from'the northeast to the southwest corner. The last 550 feet of run averages 14 %, with much of the area being around 10% slope with some intermediate steeper areas. This compares with City data in the Data Inven- tory, Tukwila Planning Area of 5% to 15 %, and the northeast corner being 15% to 25 %. Utilizing topography available to the City, and comparing it by walking the site using slope and elevation calculators, it appears that the topography is a little more steep in the . northeast corner than shown on the City's topography and more gentle in slope on the remaining three - quarters of the site. That is, about 80% of the site ranges from 5% to 15% slope;•..about 5% ranges from 0% to 5% slope; 10% ranges from 15% to 25%; and less. than 5% of the site is over 25% slope, all located in the northeast corner. This slope would lend itself to the proposed site plan alternatives which provide for a combination of structured and covered satellite parking, and the terracing of the units in the hill to capture views and sun angles to the south and southwest. Mitigation of potential impacts. The preservation of the northeast corner of the site, a buffer strip along the 57th Avenue trail and along the east property line would preserve important steep areas and associated vegetation, while buffering to adjacent land uses. Geology and Soils A review and extrapolation'- of three area studies on adjacent sites, USGS information, U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service data, and the City's Data Inventory shows general consistency with the exception of USDA which shows the site as urban soils. This is, however, incorrect, in that urban soils are generally those which have been mixed through the urbanization process. Adjacent studies done for apartment and condominium projects on the hillside indicate a consistency with the data in the City report. The City report indicates that the site is largely Vashon till with a small amount of bed- rock. Extensive site visits and shallow probes did not indicate the presence of surface bedrock; however, excavations of similar elevations on other sites have shown the existence of bedrock. The site has shallow glacial till weathered on the upper two or three feet and graded downward into glacial sand and gravel form foundation. This is consistent with both reports on adjacent sites and the City's information. The soils are well drained due to the slope of over 5% in most areas, except in two areas which are impounded by road and parking lot construction on adjacent lands. Both bedrock and till, however, provide excellent foundation strength, and the till appears to be stable with no evidence of sliding on the site. Activities during • 815 Seattle Tower • 3rd S University • Seattle, WA 9E1101 • (206) 624.8239 1 construction woul:equire construction technique o minimize erosion due to the slope, settling ponds during construction, and detention facilities following construction for stormwater. Hydrology A detailed site analysis shows no springs, even after heavy rainfall. However, along the southern property line, there is some minor seepage from other sites and runoff coming into the site and being impounded by 152nd and pro- perty development to the west. There is a small, wet area on the southerly property line near the center of the property that has developed over the years, due to a road being cut through the center section of the property from south to north. In that eventual development of the site might consume anywhere from 45% to 60% in improvements and impervious surfaces for drive- ways, parking, etc., the additional amount of runoff would require some miti- gation. The site planning efforts to date envision one or two detention facilities that will release additional stormwater runoff at a controlled rate into stormwater improvements which are proposed as a part of the 152nd' LID. No streams water running through the site will be affected by development. Vegetation The entire site is wooded with the center portion being less densely wooded and partially open with salal, Oregon Grape ferns, and vines occurring in the understory of Cedars, Firs, and Maple; in two areas smaller Willow and Alter trees also exist. There are some major Maples and other large trees within six to ten feet of 152nd along the entire property line. These trees have been generally inventoried during site visits and would provide an important buffer to the site if they could be retained, both during the site development and during the development of improvements along 152nd Street as a part of the LID 30. It is, therefore, important to limit the new construction along the north side of 152nd to six feet north of the existing pavement area, except those areas where two driveways will access the site and also provide turnouts for stacking of cars in emergency situations. Much of the vegetation of significance occurs in areas designated for green- belts along the north and east property lines and in the steep slope area in the northeast corner. As a mitigating measure, trees 6" or larger could be inventoried at the time a detailed topography map is developed in order to provide data for a site plan that would be based upon a given density from the rezone application approval with conditions. Miscellaneous Climate, Sun Angle, View Corridors. Site exposure is to the south and west and provides views in those directions across Southcenter to the Green River Valley and Mt. Rainier. Sun angles would provide for opportunities for use of solar heating, both passive and active, and the siting of buildings to capture sun and view angles. In terms of view, it is important to retain some vegetation along the south property line in order to soften and screen extensive parking areas that exist along the entire south and west perimeters of the property. • Si 5 Seattle Tower • 3rd & University • Seattle. WA 98101 • (2061624-6239 HAROLD WYNN REZONE 4.98 Acre Site South 152nd Street and 57th Avenue South SUGGESTED CONDITIONS FOR REVIEW OF REZONE APPLICATION Lot 21 - Brookvale Garden Tracts 1. That densitites be limited to those shown in the Conceptual Site Plans and analyzed in the Environmental Checklist with the total number of units not to exceed 98. 2. That the site plan for the five -acre parcel maintain over 40% of the area in open space, landscaping and natural areas. 3. That buffer zones of natural vegetation of a minimum of 40 feet be preserved on the north and east boundaries (along trail) of the property; in addition, the steep (over 25 %) area of the northeast corner be preserved. 4. That the applicant participate" in improved area access to serve the site as provided for in LID 30, with the provision that the design of LID limit the impact on the subject site to no more than six additional feet on the south side of South 152nd Street. 5. That circulation for emergency vehicles be provided through two access points to the site; the driveways being also capable of turnouts for vehicle stacking to allow passage of emergency vehicles. 6. That groupings of major trees, drainage swales and other natural features be inventoried further and the details provided for revisions in the site plans where feasible. 7. That the rezone be based on a condition that the Planing Commission review specific site, elevation, floor, and .landscape plans prior to site development and issuance of building permits. 8. That appropriate mitigating measures of the expanded Environmental Checklist and any required reports (i.e., soils, traffic, topography, etc.) be accepted as conditions of zoning approval. 9. That South 152nd Street be signed by the City for No Parking. 10. That all conditions set forth and agreements between the City of Tukwila and the applicants be attached to the fee title and be binding on all heirs, successors, or assigns. • 615 Seattle Tower • 3rd & University • Seattle. WA 58101 • (206) 624.6239 MASTER LAND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FORM EXISTING ZONING R -1 -12.0 PROPOSED REZONE SITE IS WTll-!IN TUIGIILA CITY LIMITS ZONE NW: RMH NORTH NE: R -1 -12.0 SOUTH RMH EAST R -4 & RMH WEST RM SUPPLEMENTARY QUESTIONAIRE Schedule REZONE APPLICATION REQUESTED ZONING 11M USE EXISTING ZONING CLASSIFICATION AND USE OF SURROUNDING PARCELS: E Stardust(41 DU /Ac) & Southcenter (26 DU /Ac) Apts. .Partially undeveloped; 2 SF houses. La Vista Apts - dense apartment complexes {BEM •njj /Ar) Gradin South Apartments Sg&M evelo meat - units ( DU /Ac) Soutcente view condos. USES PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED ON PROPOSED REZONE SITE Multi- family housing (condominiums) @ 18 -20 DU /Ac, or 90 -98 DU for 4.98 -Acre site; with recreational building and facilities; with 1.S cars /DU. ACCESS TO THE PROPOSED REZONE SITE IS FRCM A DEDICATED, IMPROVED PUBLIC RIGHT -OF- WAY El YES ONO. (If "NO ", please describe how the site is accessed Note: LID 30 Pending; access is from South 152nd Street. PROVISIONS TO BE MADE FOR ADEQUATE SEWER AND WATER SERVICES Sewer and water available to site at southwest corner in 152nd Street right -of -way. R.W. {norpe & Associalaes I/ Planning • Environmental Analysis • Economics June 2, 1980 Mr. Ted Uomoto Public Works Director City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: LID 30 - South 152nd and 57th Avenue South Dear Mr. Uomoto: ReCerti DUEettC 1 GTr OF TUKV1;1; :N 2 1980 Per our meeting last Tuesday evening, I have drafted the following observations concerning the LID 30 and the discussion that took place with three of the affected property owners. As you are aware from that meeting, we are in the process of developing a rezone application, a site plan, and environmental reviews for Mr. Wynn's five -acre parcel, north of South 152nd, designated as Lot 21, Brookvale Garden Tracts. As we indicated, we would like to work closely with the City -- both the Planning Department on the rezone and the Public Works Department on the LID to insure that the design and development of the property is closely interfaced with any improvements that might occur on 152nd. We will be filing the rezone upon completion of discussions about the site plan with the Planning. Department. I feel the meeting was a fairly productive one and there was some concensus about the scale of the LID and the improvements that should occur. I think the question has been narrowed from one of "Should an LID occur ?" to "What type of improvements should occur ?" I feel that the scale of the project will continue to be an issue, as well as who participates. The concensus can be broken down into two areas, first 152nd, regarding design. As we understood it, the standards for 152nd would be as follows: 1. 28 -foot improved surface 2. 2 -foot curbs 3. 5 -foot sidewalk on the south side of 152nd 4. All utilities undergrounded beneath the proposed improvements. This design would result in 37 feet of improved surface and 4 or 5 feet of disturbed area on either side of the improved surface, for a total strip of 45 to 47 feet of improvement and disruption of existing plant-material. The concensus on some parts, particularly Mr. Wynn's, appeared to be that this was a fairly wide taking, considering the existing site constraints on both sides of 152nd. It was suggested that an alternative of 24 feet of improved.surface with the two curbs and 5 -foot side sidewalk be" considered, reducing the width to 33 feet and an overall take to approximately 42 feet. Another concern evidenced was the removal of the hump at an estimated cost of $2,000 to $20,000. Mr. Wynn has not indicated a strong preference on this issue. Seattle: B15 Seattle Tower • 3rd & University • Seattle. WA 99901 • (206) 624 -6239 Anchorage: Suite 503 • 1110 West Sixth Avenue • Anchorage. AK 99503 • (907) 276.6646 Associates: Len Zickler Deborah Krouse Mr. Ted Uomoto June'2, 1980 Page 2 In terms of 57th Avenue South, the following design standards were proposed: a 24 -foot improved surface, one curb on one side only, and a five -foot sidewalk. If the sidewalk is on the west side, a solid 5 -foot fence along the rockery would also be required. In addition, a stormwater velocity dissipator was dis- cussed and possible detention facilties. The concensus was that this should be reduced to 20 feet with one curb and one sidewalk. There was also discussion on whether the sidewalk should be on the east or west side. During a site visit by two members of our staff, we noted that there is no driveway access to 57th for its entire length along the east side of the road and there is a narrow strip above the 6 -foot to 8 -foot high rockery on the west. We conclude that the drainage swale in that area could be replaced with storm drainage improvements and a walkway put over that area on the east side of the road. We feel moving the walkway to the west side of the road would require a fairly heavy fill and compacting in order to support the sidewalk and would require a fence along that side. The danger of the proximity to the high retaining wall and the attractive nuisance of the fence to children appears to more than offset the site visibility crossing factor that Mr. Smith evidenced with a walkway on the east side. It is our professional opinion that a walkway on the east side would significantly reduce the costs, be more practical and easier to develop, and allow for minimum improvements wtihin the existing roadway. We therefore, as professional consultants, would offer those observations that the sidewalk should be on the east side of the street. In observing the requirements for 152nd Street it appears that with the proposed design there would be a minimum of 10 -foot take on the north side which would affect Mr. Wynn's property and the S & M property. Although S &,M has allowed for some additional roadway where their rockery is, we feel that the construction would cut heavily into their existing landscaping and remove several desirable trees on the Wynn property as well. We feel the reduction in the width of the road from 28 to 24 feet and reduction in the take from 10 feet to 6 feet would have much better acceptability to both of those property owners and allow the taking to be done through agreements rather than through condemnation action. Because of the impact on site planning on the Wynn property, access, vegetation, and other factors, we would strongly recommend the slightly reduced design for 152nd Street. We recognize the concern for emergency vehicle access on this road; however, if parking is not allowed on 152nd and the possibility of large driveways serving the Wynn property are considered, these could also serve as pullout areas to improve the emergency vehicle access to all properties in the vicinity. In addition, we would suggest that the sidewalk location be allowed to meander slightly on the south side to avoid major trees and vegetation as discussed. In terms of sanitary sewer location for the Wynn property, we feel that if the property is utilized for multi - family .construction, as will be requested in the reclassification, that the existing sewer stub would serve the property. How- ever, given the alternative that the property would not be granted rezoning, then the sewer would be necessary to the extent of the length of the Wynn property in order to serve a potential plat on the property. • B15 Seattle Tower • 3rd & University • Seattle. WA 96101 • (206) 624.6239 R VW Thorpe Mr. Ted Uomoto June' 2, 1980 Page 3 We trust this will assist discussions with the City staff and is representative of Mr. Wynn's concerns and commitment to proceed with the LID and his site planning and zoning action on Lot 21. Please contact me if you have questions or comments concerning this communication. RWT /wk cc: 'Harold Wynn Gradon Smith Enrique Mora Sincerely, • W. Thorpe, AICP • 818 Seattle Tower • 3rd S. University • Seattle. WA 98101 • (208) 824.8239 PO W ?holm c , .... of Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING 1 ....tT, rila Y 19 el V.P.C. Form No. 67 Rev. 7 -79 } ss. Michele Roe being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that .•ehe• is the ....Chte...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 ..0rai nl a.a...1 T1636 as it was published in regular issues (and not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period consecutive issues, commencing on the .23 day of J anuary ,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 $62'10 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. Chief clerk Subscribed and sworn to before me this 28 day of Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at Kent, King County. — Passed by the Legislature, 1955, known as Senate Bill 281, effective June 9th, 1955. — Western Union Telegraph Co. rules for counting words and figures, adopted by the newspapers of the State. Public Notice CITY OF TUKWILA WASHINGTON ORDINANCE NO. 1200 AN ORDINANCE RE- CLASSIFYING CER- TAIN LANDS FROM R- 1-12 TO. R-3 AND R -4 WITHIN THE CITY OF TUKWILA AS DE- SCRIBED IN PLAN- NING DEPARTMENT MASTER FILE NO. 80- 38-R. WHEREAS, a Declaration Of Nonsignificance was granted by the responsible , official on October 7, 1980, :; . under City file EPIC - 147 -80, , and; WHEREAS, said Declara- tion Of Nonsignificance per- tains only to the legislative act of rezoning and reserves ' the Ciyt's option to conduct separate environmental• re- view for any project pro- posed subsequent to the grant of the rezone, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at a regular meeting on October 23, 1980, after conducting a public hearing, has recom- mended approval of the re- zone request subject of compliance with six stipula- tions, and; WHEREAS, the City Council has duly considered the environmental signifi- cance of the proposed re- zone action and the recom- mendation of the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Tukwila, Washington, does ordain as follows: Section 1. The real pro- perty which is the subject of this ordinance Is described in the attached legal descrip- tion (Exhibit A) and is shown on the attached . site map (Exhibit B). Section 2. After reviewing the documents set forth in Planning Department mas- ter File 80 -38 -R, and havifig heard materials presented by the property owner and its representatives, the City Council makes the following findings of fact: A. The real property, which Is the subject of this rezone request, is described in Exhibit A. It is now zoned R -1 -12. B. The proposed zoning classifications of R -3 and R- 4, as shown on Exhibit B, are generally consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. C. The zoning classifica- tions depicted on Exhibit B are consistent with the goals and policies of . the Com- prehensive Plan. D. The proposed rezone action will not be injurious to the peace, safety, health or general welfare of the com- munity nor injurious to pro- perty value in the immediate vicinity. E«implementatkm of im i proyernents identiosl lto, or {ubstsntislty the;: sWne'•u,," those .proposed'`under City' of Tukwila Local Improve -' ment District No. 30 will provide adequate public ac - cess and utilities to and from the subject property.. Section 3. Based on these findings of fact, the Council makes the following conclu- sions and conditions relating+ to and restricting the subject real property: A. The property shown on Exhibit A is reclassified to ! zoning categories R -3 and . 1 R -4 as shown on Exhibit B. B. The building/parking - /circulation and related de- velopment details, as shown'' on Exhibit C, are conceptual: only, and are not Any project prOpearodenthli site subsequent to,the pas- sage of this ordinance shall require Board ofAichltectur- al Review approval. of site, architectural and landscap- ing details prior to issuance of building permits. C. Maximum residential 'density for overall develop- ment of this site shall not exceed eighteen D.U. /gross acre. Maximum- residential density for the R -3 portion of the site shall not exceed sixteen D.U. /gross a cre. D:' Structured enclosed parking shall be provided for any project developed on this :site'at a ratio of not less than one stall per dwelling unit t Unstructured, parking shall be provided at a minimum ratio of one -hal stall per dwelling unit.. E: The applicant shalt equitably participate in pro- posed City of Tukwila Local Improvement District No. 30' or 'any subsequent local im -. provement district which Is ideptical'to or .substantially, theIsame as L.I.D. No. 30. F1 Fencing shall 'be pro- vided on the north and east property lines of the property which is the subject of this ordinance. The design de- tail4 of said fencing shall be agreed on in writing by the ow er and representatives of the City of Tukwila. gection 4. The zonint map adopted 'by reference by Ordinance No. 251 li hereby amended to reflec the•changes by the rezonlni action taken In this ordi nance. Section 5. The City Cler is directed to record a coy of trtis ordinance and attact meats with the King Count Department Of Records An Elections. Section 8. The condition and restrictions'contalned 1 this ordinance shall be cor ver jants and restrictions rur ing with the land and shall binping on the owners, the heirs, successors an • ED::BY:.THE CIT NO OF THE • MVO ... ALAi w!uhIngton, ati regular_meeting,thsr. is 19th day of Jantifry,%.. CITY OF TUKWILA " By Frank Todd Mayor ATTEST: .' Maxine Anderson City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Lawrence E. Hard City Attroney EXHIBITS A, B, & C AV- AILABLE AT CIYT CLERK'S. OFFICE. Published in the Daily Re- cord Chronicle January'23; d 981. T1636 `; .. :' Affidavit of Publication STATE OF WASHINGTON COUNTY OF KING 1 ss. ii eh�l•o•• • �� emu :.'? 1 riv being first duly sworn on oath, deposes and says that .. is the Cb.i.e {'...Cleric 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 ' NOt .c e..of : leat1.n x'1600 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 day of October ,19 .... 80 , 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 $.1h...5Pwhich 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. V.P.C. Form No. 97 Rev. 7-79 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 7 day of Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at- ireent, King County. �rrl — 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. ( I1r LS tUtcWIIA NOTICE OF MEETING OF THE TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE IS HEREBY GI- • :; VEN that the Tukwila PLAN - ' NING COMMISSION has ;.:4 . fixed the 16th day of Octob- er, 1980 at 8:00 P.M. in Conference Room 43 of Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington, as the • time and place for: PUBLIC HEARING: Application 80 -30 -R ', A. Moody) to rezone ;4 1.8 Acres, more or less from at rioR-1 139th Street and located terurban Avenue. PUBLIC HEARING: Application 80 -38 -R (Harold Wynn) to rezone 5.0 Acres, more or less from R -1 to R-4. Property located on S. 152nd St. • East of MacAdam Road. PUBLIC HEARING: Application 80-39-R (Jack A. Benaroya Co.) to obtain partial release from condi- tions of rezoning embodied in a property use and de- velopment agreement dated 21 July 1969. Property lo- cated on West side of South - center Parkway, North of S. 180th St. Any and all interested per- sons are invited to atend. PLANNING COMMISSION Eileen Avery Secretary Published in The Daily Record Chroncle October 3, 1980. T1600. , • • '�"'• PROPERTY USE AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ..I J.;,..., .. .. . I ••� . ' rTHIS INSTRUMENT executed this date in favor of the City • • 1 • . 1 \ • Li2 of Tukwila, a municipal corporation (herein callod •City•), by ':�• S anlay N. Kasperson, Truatoo, (herein called 'Owner'). WITUESSETUi • WHEREAS, Owner is the owner of property located within tho\ city limits of•Tukwila, King County, Washington, more.partic- "ulAy doscribod in Exhibit 'A• attached horeto and incorporated.. - ,by this roforencet and • WHEREAS, Owner has filed a petition to rezone the property to H -lt and WHEREAS, tho City Planning Commission has recommended to tho City Council that the proporty be rezoned only upon execution * .of a Property Use and Development Agreement, substantially in tho • • •torsi horoof, heroin called °Agreement* and that bthorwiso, the .•,.,.., „0„ petition should bo doniedt •. • ,; ,NOW, THEREFORE, °? • • . ;1• In • the ' event , tho •City * finds • that :reclassification 'of : ,the proporty to M -1 is within the public health, safety and general welfare, and subsequontly rezones the property to H -1t then the Owner ,:iii consideration thereof and for so long as the proporty remains so ;;,.classlfied, haroby covenants, bargains, and agroes to.the following • covenants and conditions on bohalf of himself, his heirs, successors ▪ and.assignet • :'! 7 f - _•:_`,'• ' (a) ' Setbacks. ' 15 foot on' front apd side yards, and •. •• five foot on roar yards. .r ..• �� .•e. (b) Parking. Paved area, with a minimun of one stall 1 par 1000 cquaro feet of building, or one stall for every two omployeos or visitors, whichever °hall bo greater. • . • . • • . . . • • . • • • additional sheets 1 • „ ••• ___•• ••• .. _•_ • •• • _•_ ••• _ • ■ - .. .•• • . . ••• ..- 41.1., 1. N. 1 •• . ••. .•F • • • (c) Landscaping. As sites aro developed, it Shall be • roquirod that the 15 font adjacent to tho curb ono thcentor • • Parkway be landscaped, and all of tho remaining portion alto not oovored by building or paved parking shill havo a • • . ground covor or landscaping to provent wind and wator erosion of tho earth; tho design of the landscaping and ground cover shall (V conform to similar standards as adopted for Southcenter Indus- , `T trial Park. All area shall bo maintained in a neat and .D or derly manner, to complement the parkliko standards achieved by LB adjacent CH dovolopment. 1 (d) Storago. If storage i n ot confined to the west part of tho situ, and bohi.nd a building, then said storage area shall • have a slotted screening fence or densely planted landscape at loast•10 feet high; any storago not to•excoed an average of 10 foot in height. •• • {o) Architectural Control. The architectural control requirements of CM use area shall apply, along with tho signing -. .. , .•.. covenants applicable in Andover Industrial Park. 2. This agreomont shall be recorded"in the records of .. : . the Y.inq County Auditor and the covenants herein shall be doemod to attach to and run with tho land and shall bo binding upon the Covenantor, his successors and assigns. All building, occupancy and • use permits horoaftor applied for or issuod shall be subject to the tarns, conditions and limitations of this agreement. 3. The City may institute and prosecute any procoodings at law or equity to enforco this agreement and tho City shall • entitled to reasonable attorney's fees for such enforcement pro- readings which may be imposed as a charge against said property. •4. It is further expressly agreed that in the ...vent any covenant, condition or restriction hercinabovo contained or any par- ' • tition thereof is invalid or void, such invalidity or•voidness shall 'in no way effect any other covenants, conditions or restrictions >',• heroin contained. ":‘..'.. • ' - • •r.r •■•• • ._••• •• :.e'•,wa•1MLYTO]4'.r "t 1 • I of this ' / f IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this ngroemcnt if executed this n. day of July, 1969, at Tukwila, Washington. State of tfaahington ) County of King ) On thin Plat Public, duly con.•etaaioned and ,worn, pereonallr appeared Stanley N. Kaapereo Truetee,to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the foregoing inetruaent, and acknowledged to me that he signed and sealed the said inatruaent as his free and voluntary act end deed for the 'uses and purposes therein mentioned. • ....a...,.:. .,. • : ; 7 :. • •� • , s • ¥I11tFSS my hand and official eea1 hereto affixed the day and year 1m this . certificate above written• -- 281909, • I .,. i :i t • t .f • ••. • 1 1. 1 • •• • •..• • ••t , ••I • , • 1.••• 1 • •, . , K ) . • aa• • • • . • • • • „�. •••.1• 1...• • - — • .. • FORM OP•42 *Aft. 004 KING COUNTY TITLE t _f , .sr.. ck COMPANY, AGENT SEATTLE (.60 FORTY -FI`TE HUNDRED HOME OFFICE 705 THIRD AVENUE, SEATTLE 4, WASHINGTON F, , " rI-' z: 1. 13 R PN a f' 44/r,set At I I FI f,a C If TITLE INSURANCE POLICY (OWNER-PURCHASER) IN CONSIDERATION OF THE PREMIUM WHICH HAS BEEN PAID FOR THIS POLICY, THE PUGET SOUND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY s MGR.- A WASHINGTON CORPORATION, HEREINAFTER CALLED THE COMPANY, f S a HAROLD WYNN and DOROTHY I,. WYNN, DOES HEREBY INSURE subject to the annexed conditions, hereby made a part of this policy, hereinafter called the Insured, against loss or damage not exceeding Dollars, which the Insured may sustain by reason of any defect in the title to the property described in Schedule A, hereto annexed, as therein vested, or by reason of liens or incumbrances charging the same, at the date of this policy, saving and excepting, and this policy does not insure against, loss or damage by reason of any estate or interest, defect, lien, incumbrance or objection noted in annexed Schedule B which is a part hereof. Any loss under this policy is to be established in the manner provided in said conditions and shall be paid upon compliance by the Insured with and as prescribed in said conditions, and not otherwise. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Company has executed these presents; but this policy shall not be valid unless countersigned by the duly authorized agent of the Company. PUGET SOUND TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Attest: By: 6 5-"4P-TA c KENNETH C. KLEPSER. PRESIDENT CARL SCHELICH, JR.. viCE PRESIDENT W. A. LANGLOW. VICE PRE3WrNT AND SECRETARY A. READY. TREASURER POLICY No. 1875+8 Countersigned and dated at Seattle, Washington, July 25, 1955 at 8 o' clock A. M. KING g OU TITLE COMPANY, Agent By Ass MAIN 6133 e Officer. 3 33 t:, '� - ..�. . KATHRYN SIMPSON, a SCHEDULE B This policy does not insure against: 1. Questions of boundary or area dependent upon survey for determination, or encroachments by improvements belonging to this or adjoining property. 2. Exceptions and reservations in United States patents; any governmental action based on the claim that any part of the insured premises is within or under navigable waters; regulations and restrictions imposed by building and zoning ordinances or by a planning authority. 3. The existence of roads or ways not established of record, or existence of public roads; water rights, mining rights or matters relating thereto, if any. 4. Rights or claims of persons in possession, or claiming to he in possession, not shown of record; rights claimed under instruments of which no notice is of record and rights or claims based upon facts of which no notice is of record but of which the Insured has notice; material or labor liens of which no notice is of record. 5. General taxes not now payable; matters relating to special assessments and special levies, if any, preceding the same becoming fixed and shown as a lien; unpaid charges for sewer services, for installation of water service and for water, light or power consumed on the premises, owing to and furnished by any City or Sewer District or Water District of the State. 6. A contract for the sale and purchase of the property herein described, dated October 13, 1953, filed April 13, 1954, as File No. 4435238, between William J. Timmons and Ellen C. Timmons, his wife, as vendors, and Richard L. Brennan and Mary Ann Brennan, his wife, as purchasers. Vendors' interest in said contract is now held of record by the vestee herein. 7. A'contract for the sale and purchase of the property herein described, dated June 15, 1955, filed June 17, 1955 as File No. 4585277, between Richard L. Brennan and Mary Ann Brennan, his wife, as vendors, and Harold Wynn and Dorothy L. Wynn, his wife, as purchasers. NOTE: The Company has made no search for and does not insure against assessments,Jevied by the municipality of Tukwila. Lor NO.* • • 5.03 Acollte , • Lcrr Ato,a0 1. • .16.1c5 LOT No. 40 't &op 'Acne o Noo.a5 5.10 ACFOLII •.' ,z, 4 ,q • '464 P .•-• , ,r-csi,nifixet*wv7if '• .0 • .• . • 444.04ii44.41,11.,'..X'O /46e ;0 • • ::Cagtleio.1 t z; ' -7 ' 'DeocrT . : - X • , , • 11.00.0.0011 Lr •, • 1' sko3:itiamtio ;Vvit • Lo-r No. 13 3.03 Roots Lo No. 1 1 6.03 A c• Lot No. 12 5.03: Aorta • in..- 1■1 No. 10 A0Flts LOT No. ec 3.01 Acnce Lo No. 27 5.01 Acncm Loy No.aB .5.01 ACRGIS L o - r No. 04 5.03 Acmcs LOT NO. 33 5.In Acnc s LOT Nu 32 3.2I Acmes Lor No 31 0.03 Acncs 3C1 0 CONOITIOAS OF THIS POLICY 1. The obligations of the Company under this policy shall extend to the Insured above named; to anyone to whom this policy may be assigned in writing endorsed hereon; to the executors, administrators, heirs and devisees of the Insured; and to any assignee of any mortgage which may be insured by this policy. The "Insured," when hereinafter mentioned, refers to each party separately to whom the Company is, at the time referred to, obligated under the terms of this policy. 2. The Company will at its own costs defend the Insured in all legal proceedings founded upon a claim of title, incumbrance or defect which existed or is claimed to have existed prior in date to this policy and not set forth or excepted herein; reserving, however, the option at any time of settling the claim or paying this policy in full. In case any such legal proceedings shall be begun and the Insured shall have knowledge thereof, it shall be the duty of the Insured at once to give written notice thereof to the Company at its Home Office; and, if the Insured is a party to such legal proceedings, to secure to the Company, within ten days after service of the first process upon the Insured, the right to defend such proceeding in the name of the Insured so far as necessary to protect the Insured, and to render all reasonable assistance in such defense. If such notice shall not be given, or the right to defend secured, as above provided, then all liability of this Company in regard to the subject matter of such proceedings shall terminate as to such Insured who failed to perform such duty in the manner and within the time required. 3. Loss.shall be payable hereunder upon a final judicial determination by a court of competent jurisdiction, under which the Insured is dispossessed or deprived of the real estate covered hereby or his estate or interest insured is impaired by reason of any adverse interest, lien or incumbrance hereby insured against, provided the conditions of this policy have been in all ways complied with. 4. The total liability under this policy, exclusive of costs, shall in no case exceed the face of the policy, and every payment by the Company shall reduce the policy by the amount paid and shall be endorsed on the policy. When the Company shall have paid a loss under this policy, it shall be subrogated to all rights and remedies which the Insured may have against any person or property in respect of such claim, or would have if this policy had not been issued, and the Insured shall forthwith transfer all such rights to the Company accordingly; but if the payment made by the Company does not cover the loss of the Insured, then the subrogation and transfer to the Company shall be proportionate. Or, the Company may, in case this policy insures the lien of a mortgage, pay the mortgagee the entire mortgage indebtedness, and thereupon the mortgagee shall assign and transfer to the Company the mortgage and the indebtedness thereby secured, with all instruments evidencing or securing the same, or shall convey to the Company any estate vested in the mortgagee by virtue of foreclosure of the mort- gage, and all liability of the Company to such mortgagee shall thereupon terminate. 5. The Company shall not be liable for any loss or damage resulting from the refusal of any party to enter into or carry out any contract respecting the estate or interest insured. .' FORM 109 4585277 RICHARD L. BRENNAN and MARY ANN BRENNAN, his wife hereinafter called the "seller" and HAROLD WYNN and DOROTHY L. WYNN, his wife hereinafter called the "purchaser," WITNESSETH : The seller agrees to sell to the purchaser, and the purchaser agrees to purchase of the seller the following described real estate with the appurtenances, situate in KING County, Washington: Treat 21, Brookvale Garden Tracts, as per plat thereof recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, page 47, records of King County, State of Washington. 4585277 REAL ESTATE 'CONTRACT THIS CONTRACT, made this 15th day of JUNE, 1965 SUBJECT to rights, reservations, easements or restrictions of record, if any. Flee o'f, iricitnibrances, except: ,.SUBJ CT TO contract of sale dated October 13, 1953, filed April 13, 1954 , aa' File No. 4435238, between William J. Timmons and Ellen C. his as vendors and Richard L. Brennan and Mary Ann Brennan, his wife, as -•ptarehasers. VDL347) F E217 between 4_ 4 ti. p /7, J55:8 P The purchaser agrees: (1) to pay before delinquency all payments of whatsoever nature, required to be made upon or by virtue of said mortgage, if any ; also all taxes and assessments which are above assumed by him, if any, and all which may, as between grantor and grantee, hereafter become a lien on the premises; and also all taxes which may hereafter be levied or imposed upon, or by reason of, this contract or the obligation thereby evidenced, or any part thereof ; (2) to keep the buildings now and hereafter placed upon the premises unceasingly insured against loss or damage by fire, to the full insurable value thereof, in the name of the seller as owner, in an insurance company satisfactory to the seller for the benefit of the mortgagee, the seller, and the purchaser, as their interests may appear, until the purchase price is fully paid, and to deliver to seller the insurance policies, renewals, and premium receipts, except such as are required to be delivered to the mortgagee ; (3) to keep the buildings and all other improvements upon the premises in good repair and not to permit waste; and (4) not to use the premises for any illegal purpose. In the event that the purchaser shall fail to pay before delinquency any taxes or assessments or any pay- ments required to be made on account of the mortgage, or to insure the premises as above provided, the seller may pay such taxes and assessments, make such payments, and effect such insurance, and the amounts paid therefor by him shall be deemed a part of the purchase price and become payable forthwith with interest at the rate of 10 per cent per annum until paid, without prejudice to other rights of seller by reason of such failure. 3 7 ) FAGE218 The purchaser agrees to assume all risk of damage to any improvements upon the premises, or of the taking of any part of the property for public use; that no such damage or taking shall constitute a failure of consideration, but in case of such dainage or taking, all moneys received by the seller by reason thereof shall be applied as a payment on account of the purchase price of the property, less any sums of money which the seller may be required to expend in procuring such money, or at the election of the seller, to the rebuilding or restoration of such improvements. The seller agrees, upon receiving full payment of the purchase price and interest in the manner above spe cified, to execute and deliver to purchaser a we�rre►nty deed to the property, excepting such part thereof which may hereafter be condemned, if any, free of incumbrances except those above mentioned, and any that may accrue hereafter through any person other than the seller. The seller has delivered, or within ten days herefrom will procure and deliver, to the purchaser, a title policy in usual form issued by the Puget Sound Title Insurance Company, insuring the purchaser to the full amount of said purchase price against loss or damage occasioned by reason of defect in, or incumbrance against, seller's title to the premises, not assumed by the purchaser, or as to which the conveyance hereunder is not to be subject. The parties agree: (1) to execute all necessary instruments for the extension of payment or renewal of said mortgage during the period prior to the delivery of said deed, or the termination of purchaser's rights by virtue of the provisions hereof ; provided the seller shall not be obligated thereby to assume any personal obli- gation or to execute any mortgage providing for a deficiency judgment against the seller, or securing a principal indebtedness in excess of that now unpaid on the above mentioned mortgage or bearing an interest rate of more than two per cent greater than that of the original mortgage indebtedness; (2) that the purchaser has made full inspection of the real estate and that no promise, agreement or representation respecting the condition of any building or improvement thereon, or relating to the alteration or repair thereof, or the placing of addi- tional improvements thereon, shall be binding unless the promise, agreement or representation be in writ- ing and made a part of this contract ; (3) that the purchaser shall have possession of the real estate on and be entitled to retain possession so long as purchaser is not in default to carrying out the terms hereof ; and (4) that, upon default, forfeiture may be declared by notice sent by registered mail to the address of the purchaser, or his assigns, last known to the seller. Time is of the essence hereof, and in the event the purchaser shall fail to comply with or perform any con- dition or agreement hereof promptly at the time and in the manger herein required, the seller may elect to declare all of the purchaser's rights hereunder terminated, and upon his doing so, all payments made by the purchaser hereunder and all improvements placed upon the premises shall be forfeited to the seller as liqui- dated damages, and the seller shall have the right to re-enter and take possession of the property; and if the seller within six months after such forfeiture shall commence an action to procure an adjudication of- the termination of the purchaser's rights hereunder, the purchaser agrees to pay the expense of searching the title Statutory Warranty Deed ---- STATE OF WASHINGTON, ss. cc.. vtchi tbisday personally appeared before me .1 ' • • to be the individual s described in and who acknowiecf P that t they signed the same as their • -:‘ .:;uses ptirposes therein mentioned. • ...GIVEN under my hand and official seal this M . J. rt. day of 1 (5 THE GRANTOR S RICHARD L. BRENNAN and MARY ANN BRENNAN his wife for and in consideration of TEN DOLLARS AND OTHER VALUABLE C ONS DERAT ONS in hand paid, conveys and warrants to HAROLD INYNN and DOROTHY L. WYNN, his wife the following described real estate, situated in the County of KING Washington: Tract Twenty—One (21), Brookvale Garden Tracts, as per plat thereof recorded in Volume 10 of Plats, page 47, records of King County, State of Washington. SUBJECT TO rights, reservations, easements or restrictions of record, if any. F',;,!E9 orl tt;t:7 A. hk M CO Y 1SURE . R DEPUTY This deed is given as fulfillment of that certain real estate contraci'of even date herewith, and the warranties herein are expressly limited to said date. Li N 1 r 't TATE'S • . — ""tillGI yil\.4 t" • P p. , 1") ., Y ... , vkl.s. Iv' „-.r.-,-.,.. r.::4- .';•'..--:-.3- • :t , JUNE tiONNOGN TIVOIMILAM F1935 Sales Tax Lien paid June 17, 1955, Rec # E-181743 Form 467- 1-REV , State of , 1955 --1 ' 4 ' 6 <- 1 4-6.<2( SEAL ) RICHARD L. BRENNAN and MARY ANN BRENNAN executed the within and foregoing instrument, and free and voluntary act and deed, for the Notary Public sn a r the State of Washington, residing at S map rw thorpe and associates wynn rezone site and slope analysis schemes scheme