HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 76-07-CPA - CITY OF TUKWILA - COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT: RESIDENCE ELEMENTmf 76-07-cpa
residence element
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT
COMPREHENISVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
CITY OF TUKWILA
CITY COUNCIL MOTION NO. 76 -3
A MOTION OF THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL RELATED TO
COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING, DECLARING ITS INTENT TO
ADOPT AT SOME FUTURE TIME THE RESIDENCE ELEMENT
AS PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE CITY.
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Tukwila has
directed that the present Comprehensive Plan of the City no longer
reflects the values of the Community and needs updating, and;
WHEREAS, the introduction and general goals for the
updated plan have been adopted by resolution 504, and;
WHEREAS, a motion has been adopted stating the City
Council's intent to adopt the Natural Environment and Open Space
Elements, and;
WHEREAS, the Residence Element is scheduled for action
next in the updating of the Comprehensive Plan, and;
WHEREAS, following a public hearing before the Planning
Commission, as required by law, a favorable recommendation for the
adoption of the Residence Element dated February 26, 1976, as part
of the Comprehensive Plan was made, and;
WHEREAS, the Tukwila City Council has considered the
Residence. Element in a published public hearing, and;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, DO STATE THE FOLLOWING:
WHEREAS, the Environmental Impact of the Residence Element
was reviewed, a negative declaration reached and said review made
available to the Planning Commission and City Council prior to their
decision deliberation.
Section 1. An intent to adopt at some future time the
Residence Element, as revised by the Planning Commission and dated
February 26, 1976, as may be amended by the City Council, as part
of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan.
Section 2. It is the intent of the City Council to adopt
at some future time by ordinance all elements of the Comprehensive
Plan Update and map as may be amended by the City Council at such
time as an intent has been expressed by Council motion to adopt each
of the elements and map.
Section 3. The remaining parts of the plan update are to
follow as closely as reasonably possible to the Comprehensive Plan
flow chart in the introudction as adopted by resolution 504.
Section 4. A copy of this motion shall be kept on file
with the City Clerk.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASH-
INGTON, at a regular meeting this k l,A,4 day of aeA ;f,
1976. J
ATTEST:
Council President
014 r
67 r
of Approval
City Cl, k
Planning Commission Page 5
Minutes of the Meeting 26 February 1976
There being no further audience comments, Chairman Mettler closed the Public
Hearing at 10:05 P.M. No further discussion ensued.
Motion by Mr. Link, seconded by Mr. Bowen and carried unanimously to recommend
the City Council adopt the preliminary Park and Open Space Program as drafted
8 January and amended 23 February 1976.
VI C - PUBLIC HEARING - RESIDENCE ELEMENT
Chairman Mettler opened the Public Hearing at 10:15 P.M. and Mr. Crutchfield
and Chairman Mettler read aloud the entire Element as proposed by the citizen
committee.
No one in audience spoke for or against the proposed Element.
Mr. Bohrer suggested replacing the word "location" with "proximity" in the
second paragraph on page 3 -2.
Mr. Stoknes suggested changing Policy 4 on page 3 -7 to read: Encourage a minimal
care and maintenance level for undeveloped open spaces.
Mr. Stoknes also suggested adding "within appropriate zoning categories" to the
end of Policy 1 on page 3-11.
There being no further audience or Commission comments, Chairman Mettler closed
the Public Hearing at 10:50 P.M.
Motion by Mr. West, seconded by Mr. Link and carried unanimously to recommend
the City Council adopt the Residence Element as revised, as an element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
VIII A - Site Plan - Addition to Kirschner Scientific
Mr. Crutchfield pointed out the location of the existing building, described
the proposed improvements and read Staff Report recommending approval.
Motion by Mr. Link, seconded by Mr. Bowen and carried unanimously to approve the
plans as presented.
Mr. Kirsop suggested the Building Department be directed to check the distance
between the proposed addition and any surrounding buildings to ensure the
maintenance of any open areas required by the Building Code.
IX A - Letter from Board of Adjustment re: Sign Code
Mr. Crutchfield read Staff Report and noted the letter had inadvertently been
omitted from the Staff Report. Proceeded to explain that an interpretation made
by Staff, and which had been sustained by the Board of Adjustment, restricted
wall signs to those building faces whose associated yard abutted a public right -
of -way. This action is being appealed to King County Superior Court by International
Harvester and should be decided sometime in May or June.
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
26 February 1976 8:00 P.M.
AGENDA ITEM VI A : PUBLIC HEARING - REZONE (Anderson)
REQUEST: .REZONE from R -1 to C -2
APPLICANT: Harvey Anderson (TEAM Research)
LOCATION: West side of Southcenter Parkway approximately 1000
feet south of Strander Boulevard.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Industrial
FINDINGS
1. The subject property is approximately one -half acre in size and is
located on the west side of Southcenter Parkway approximately 1000
feet south of Strander Boulevard. (SEE, Exhibit "A ")
2. The property is currently zoned R -1 -7.2 (single - family residential).
3. The property located immediately north of the subject property is
currently zoned C -2 (commercial).
4. The property located immediately south of the subject property.is
currently zoned R -1 -7.2 (single- family residential).
5. The property located across Southcenter Parkway is currently zoned
CM( industrial park).
6. The west property line is also the east right -of -way line of Interstate
5.
7. An electrical substation, approved under a Special Use Permit for Public
Facilities in 1973, is located in the R -1 zone adjacent to the subject
property.
8. The nearest single - family residence is located approximately 300 feet
south of the subject property.
C
Planning Commission Page 2
Staff Report 26 February 1976
9. The subject property gently slopes from elevation 35 near the west
property line to elevation 25 at the east property line, a distance
of approximately 150 feet or a slope of about 6.5 percent.
10. A variety of soil types can generally be found on the site, normally
indicative of poor arability, fair internal drainage, severe erosion
hazard and low bearing capacity. However, the insignificant slope of
the subject property tends to increase the development opportunity to
a level above the more general application to steep slopes. (SEE,
Tukwila Data Inventory, Map 1 -6)
11. The subject property is located on the fringes of a major wooded area
and is generally covered with a dense growth of 5 - 10 year old deci-
duous saplings.
12. Southcenter Parkway is a 72 foot developed right -of -way to which the
subject property has direct access.
13. A 10 -inch water line is located on the east side of Southcenter Parkway.
14. A 12 -inch sanitary sewer line is located at the intersection of South-
center Parkway and Strander Boulevard, a distance of approximately '1400•
feet north of the subject property.
15. A 24 -inch crossover is available near the northeast corner of the
subject property to facilitate storm water runoff.
16. The sanitary sewer line on Strander Boulevard was created by LID #5
and the subject property did not participate in that LID.
17. A recent supplement to the storm water system south of Interstate 405
between the river and Interstate 5 was financed by all commercial and
industrial zoned properties within that area. The subject property
was excluded from the LID #27 due to its residential zoning. (SEE,
Exhibit "B ")
18. The current Comprehensive Land Use Plan map indicates the subject
property as ultimate industrial use.
CONCLUSIONS
1. The requested rezone conforms to the.current Comprehensive Land Use
Plan Map.
2. The subject property is contiguous to the existing C -2 zone on the
north and is contiguous on the south to a residentially zoned parcel
of land being used as a public utility substation.
1
Planning Commission Page 3
Staff Report 26 February 1976
3. The subject property is generally capable of physically supporting a
commercial development.
4. The dense growth of young deciduous trees retards storm water runoff
from the steep slope located above the subject property.
5. Access to the site is adequate to accomodate commercial development.
6. The existing water supply is adequate to accomodate commercial devel-
opment.
7. The existing sanitary sewer line is adequate to accomodate commercial
development but will require construction of nearly 1000 feet of forced
main sewer line to connect to it as well as payment of an equitable .
latecomers charge to LID #5.
8. The existing storm sewer system is adequate to accomodate commercial
development but, insofar as this property was excluded from assessments
under LID #27 because of its residential zone, any rezone to other than
residential use should include payment of an equitable latecomers charge
to LID #27.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the Findings and Conclusions discussed above, staff recommends the
Planning Commission recommend to the City Council the rezone from R -1 to C -2
be granted only upon compliance with the following stipulations:
1. That land area above approximately 35 feet elevation be left in a
natural state.
2. The forced main sewer connection line be installed in accordance with
City of Tukwila standards, at the full expense of the property owner,
and a special connection charge be paid by the property owner in
accordance with Chapter 14.16 (sewer charges) of the Tukwila Municipal
Code.
3. Operation and maintenance of the pump and sewage force main shall be
at the full expense of the owner.
4. At such time as an LID is formed for a gravity flow sewer system serving
the vicinity of this property, as shown in the Tukwila Comprehensive
Sewer Plan, the property will agree to equitably participate in such LID
in accordance with Section 14.16.076 of the Tukwila Municipal Code.
5. A charge in lieu of assessment to be paid to the City at a rate to be
established by the final assessment role for LID #27.
6. All of the above conditions shall be a part of the ordinance granting
the rezone in the form of a Developer's Agreement properly executed and
recorded.
. • •
.••••••
I •*.•'
.0,••■••• ••••••••.••••••■•■•■•••• ••••
lj'As ..410144.°44'
:Mt 41M•
• •••,••• 11•••••••••••••
•••••••••••• \ 4
iL
p fiapatm , t004
•••„
•
01,
••••
G• ••••••••• •
t Pro I If-It: CO. .
• tIteviost.*4.41%,4411414fticroi,:ilogl:
• -vkilgar4k4eaktr.
tf
•
"-v •
cafrost6
I •
i r() •
• 100.0
5■1 36 7. 4 -2;;;Tir.
•■••••■•
• %AA,.
a v
/
tr..;
0 ----
1 56 o.
am.
1 11414b4 i .
41 " 414 . 444 .1.6..14cobsir ose . t
er.v.Y.1".esesr, cc ..(VYI f\r`e
'
s�
.1 `rko.•
.4. 44.4r
•-•••••■
o
V 0 j : i iii 4
...., 6
e 4 0 -..........„ 0
....
La
.c. 0,t
C. im
s
e:.
- Li T I I- I -r•y ev.itr.4 1
1
•••••••
4i 0 ‘..., , . L. 1 . 4 ....., jIPAR124•""ri""")."" le"t""11:7•7041"r" .. /
A. •
trAF.10.C.4.44.7: (TIP) ' ..-.::::- _::::____„„_:;.... ----.•---.......----
•b•••.Z.al••••••••.•■•••••
. . • • • "...''..'"'''.'"""....."'.."..'''"'". . 11•1•••4•10.4...
V•r••••••••••••O•e•
•••••••••••••••••••••••■•••••
• • • • • •
...vwo.vArpuoo;4a0'14f..ANCTU70r."I;l•t•Rrgr•i;
TO: Tukwila Planning Commission
FROM: Mayor Ed Bauch
SUBJECT: Anderson Rezone
MEMORANDUM
CITY' of TU KW 1 LA
cc: Anderson Rezone Application Master File
DATE: Feb. 18, 1976
This memorandum is just a reminder that this property was excluded from the
storm drainage L.I.D. #27 since it was zoned for single- family purposes.
This land does effect storm drainage within the area of L.I.D. #27 and I
strongly urge the Commission that if they recommend approval of the rezone
application, that as a condition of approval they recommend that the property
be charged an equitable amount to. L.I.D. #27.
EXMESIT N
:Re, 3one - Atieferam ,
Ilaitottoi Co ntwis510N
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL FETING
April 5, 1976
Page 2
PUBLIC HEARINGS - Cont.
Rainier Vista - Cont. MOVED BY MS. HARRIS THAT THE REASON FOR DENIAL OF THE
PRELIMINARY PLAT IS THAT IT DOES NOT SERVE THE PUBLIC
USE AND INTEREST IN THAT THE STREETS DO NOT MEET THE
CITY STANDARDS AND THERE ARE NO PROVISIONS FOR ADEQUATE
TURN - AROUND FACILITIES FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES AND
MOVED BY MS. HARRIS TO AMEND THE MOTION THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL DISCUSS EACH REASON SEPARATELY. MOTION FAILED;
FOR LACK OF SECOND. Mayor Bauch recommended the City
Council use the findings of the staff report as a way
of determining reasons for denying the proposed plat.-
.
MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT THE REASON
FOR DENIAL OF THE PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION IS BASED ON
THE.6 ITEMS UNDER RECOMMENDATIONS ON PAGE 3 OF THE
APRIL 5, 1976 ADMINISTRATION REPORT. CARRIED, WITH
MS. PESICKA AND VAN DUSEN VOTING NO.
RECESS
8:15 P.M. - 8:20 P.M.
/Adoption of Commerce/
Industry Element of
the Comprehensive
Plan
.. 1
RESOLUTIONS
Resolution 521 -
In appreciation to
Joanne W. Davis
for services as
City Councilwoman
Resolution 522 -
In appreciation to
Joseph R. Johanson
for services as
City Councilman
Resolution 523 -
In appreciation to
Jon D. Sterling
for services as
City Councilman
MOVED BY VAN DUSEN, SECONDED BY SAUL, TO RECESS FOR
5 MINUTES. CARRIED. Mayor Bauch called the meeting
back to order with all Council Members present as
previously listed.
Mayor Bauch opened the public hearing at 8:21 P.M.
Planning Director Kjell Stoknes explained the citizens'
committee involvement and the actions of the Planning
Commission. No comments were made for or against the
proposed Element. Mayor Bauch closed the public hear-
ing at 8:30 P.M. Councilman Saul thanked the citizens
involved in the committee work. MOVED BY HILL,
SECONDED BY VAN DUSEN, TO REFER THIS ITEM TO TIME APRIL
12, 1976 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING AND TO INVITE
THE COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO ATTEND. CARRIED.
MOVED BY MS. HARRIS, SECONDED BY MS: PESICKA, TO
AMEND THE AGENDA TO CONSIDER ITEMS 10. f., g., h., AND
i. AT THIS TIME. CARRIED, WITH VAN DUSEN VOTING NO.
MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY MS. HARRIS, THAT PROPOSED
RESOLUTION BE READ. CARRIED. Mayor Bauch read propose(
resolution in appreciation to Joanne W. Davis for her
services to the City of Tukwila as a City Councilwoman.
MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY VAN DUSEN, TO SUSPEND
THE RULES FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPT RESOLUTION 521
AS READ. CARRIED. Council President Hill presented
a plaque in appreciation to Mrs. Davis.
MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT PROPOSED
RESOLUTION BE READ. CARRIED. Mayor Bauch read propose(
resolution in appreciation to Joseph R. Johanson for
his services to the City of Tukwila as a City Council-
man. MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY HILL, TO SUSPEND
THE RULES FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPT RESOLUTION 522
AS READ. CARRIED. Council President Hill presented
a plaque.in appreciation to Mr. Johanson.
MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY I-IILL, THAT PROPOSED
RESOLUTION BE READ. CARRIED. Mayor Bauch read propos-
ed resolution in appreciation to Jon D. Sterling for
his services to the City of Tukwila as a City Council-
• man. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY MS. PESICKA, TO SUS-
PEND THE RULES FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPT RESOLUTION
523 AS READ. CARRIED. Council President I1i11 present-
ed a plaque in appreciation to Mr. Sterling.
April 5, 1976
7:00 P.M.
FLAG SALUTE AND
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL OF
COUNCIL MEMBERS
OFFICIALS IN
ATTENDANCE
MINUTE APPROVAL
VOUCHER APPROVAL
BID OPENINGS, CALLS AND AWARDS
PUBLIC •HEARINGS
Preliminary Plat
proposal of Todd's
Rainier Vista
v c"
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
M I N U T E S
Mayor Bauch led the Pledge of Allegiance and called
the Tukwila City Council meeting to order.
Tukwila City Hall
Council Chambers
GARDNER, MS. HARRIS, HILL, MS. PESICKA, SAUL,
TRAYNOR, VAN DUSEN.
Mayor Edgar Bauch, City Clerk Shirlee Kinney, Director
of Public Works Steve Hall, Planning Director Kjell
Stoknes, Deputy City Attorney Larry Hard.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT THE MINUTES OF
THE MARCH 15, 1976 REGULAR MEETING BE APPROVED AS
PUBLISHED. CARRIED.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT THE BILLS BE
ACCEPTED AND WARRANTS BE DRAWN IN THEIR RESPECTIVE
AMOUNTS.* Vouchers 8188, another for WFOA Conference
and Sergeant Maxwell's medical /bills were discussed.
Councilwoman Harris stated shF "would withhold her
approval of Dick Anderson's voucher. *CARRIED, WITH
D'S. PESICKA VOTING NO.
\ Vouchers ,No. 8114 - 8235
\ . Current Fund 8114. - 8195 ," $26,839.68
,Street Fund 8196 - 8203 4,124.58
'Fed. Rev. Shg. 8204 - 8207 17,421.35
Water Fund 8208 - 8220 12,779.05
Sewer Fund 8221 - 8234' 8,003.07
W/S Const. 8235 / 8.25
LID #24 C -32 $6,,133.20
\R-20 6,;133.20
LID #26 C'-•3, 5 $5,517.52
R -3;, 5 /5,517.52
Call for Bids - City Clerk Sh.r1ee\Kinney read call for bids notice
Asphaltic concrete for asphaltic 'concrete street overlay. Public Works
overlay Director Steve Hall explained location on City map.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY SAUL, TO APPROVE CALL FOR
BIDS FOR A S r PHALTIC CONCRETE OVERLAY.. CARRIED.
\
Mayor Bauch requested consideration of bid procedures.
MOVED BY/MS. PESICKA, SECONDED BY HILL, TO REFER
DISCUSSION OF BID PROCEDURES '•,0 APRIL 12, 1976 COMMIT-
TEE OF ;THE WHOLE MEETING. CARRIED.
`\
Mayor Bauch opened the public heariiig at 7:16 P.M.
All comments of the public hearing are on file in the
City Clerk's office in the form of a court reporter's
transcript attached to the original set of Minutes.
Mayor Bauch closed the public hearing at 8:00 P.M.
N
MOVED BY MS. HARRIS THAT THE PLAT BE AMENDED TO PROVID]
A 50 FOOT RIGHT -OF -WAY ON EACH OF THE INTERNAL STREETS
MOTION WITHDRAWN.
MOVED BY MS. PESICKA, SECONDED BY TRAYNOR, THAT THE
PRELIMINARY PLAT OF TODD'S RAINIER VISTA BE DENIED.*
City Council discussed provisions of the Comprehensive
Plan regarding zoning in the area of the proposed plat
*ROLL CALL VOTE: 6 AYES - GARDNER, MS. HARRIS, HILL, MS.
PESICKA, SAUL, VAN DUSEN; 1 NO - TRAYNOR. CARRIED.
MOVED BY MS. 1 SECONDED BY MS. PESICKA, THAT THE
COUNCIL FORMULATE ITS SPECIFIC REASONING FOR THE DENIA
OF THE PLAT AND ENUMERATE THOSE REASONS. CARRIED, WIT]
HILL VOTING NO.
,:W CITY COUNCIL MEETING
April S, 1976 {'
Page 3 S
RESOLUTIONS - Cont.
Resolution 524 -
In appreciation to
Frank Todd
for services as
Mayor
PETITIONS, COMMUNICATIONS, APPEALS AND SIMILAR MATTERS
Protest LID #28 -
Esping, Wynn,
Tukwila Associates,
La Vista Estates &
Caditz
Writ of Prohibition -
LID 4128 - Esping vs
City of Tukwila
Writ of Prohibition -
Tukwila Associates
vs City of Tukwila
Formal Motion 76 -3,
Declaring intent to
adopt Residence
Element as part of
the Comprehensive Plan
Letter from Mr.
Doces re: sign
code revision
Letter from
Mayor. Bauch re:
grant procedures
• r,
MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT PROPOSED
RESOLUTION BE READ. CARRIED. Mayor Bauch read propos-
ed resolution in appreciation to Frank Todd for his
services to the City of Tukwila as Mayor. MOVED BY
MS. PESICKA, SECONDED BY HILL, TO SUSPEND THE RULES FOR
SECOND READING AND ADOPT RESOLUTION 524 AS READ.
CARRIED. Council President. Hill presented a plaque
in appreciation to Mr. Todd.
Mayor Bauch noted this item appears on the Agenda for
a matter of record only.
-.
Mayor Bauch noted this item appears on the Agenda
for a matter or record only, and the City Attorney
will proceed with it.
Mayor Bauch noted this item appears on the Agenda for
a matter of record only, and the City Attorney will
proceed with it.
MOVED BY MS. PESICKA, SECONDED BY HILL, TO REFER
TI-IESE ITEMS TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING,
APRIL 12, 1976.* Council President Hill stated no
Council action is required. *SECOND AND MOTION
WITHDRAWN. Deputy City Attorney Hard explained
the position of Mr. Esping and of the Tukwila`
Associates and stated the two lawsuits may be combined.
MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT FORMAL MOTION 25
76 -3 BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. CARRIED. City Clerk
Shirlee Kinney read Formal Motion 76 -3, a motion of the
Tukwila City Council related to comprehensive planning,;
declaring its intent to adopt at same future time the
Residence Element as part of the Comprehensive Plan s'
for the City, by title only. MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECOND -t}
ED BY SAUL, TO ADOPT FORMAL MOTION 76 -3 AS READ.
CARRIED.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT THIS ITEM BE
REFERRED TO TIIE APRIL 12, 1976 COMMITTEE OF THE IVI-IOLE
MEETING. CARRIED.
Council President Hill stated he felt the Council
should refer this letter to the Planning Commission
to review the sign code. Kjell Stoknes, Planning
Director, requested the Council to accept the letter
as information and to ask for a text amendment to
the code. Discussion continued regarding the Board
of Adjustment's decision to allow 90 days for sub- o-
mittal of text amendment proposals. MOVED BY MS.
HARRIS, SECONDED BY MS. PESICKA, TO REVERT TO A
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE TO DISCUSS THIS MATTER. FAILED.
Discussion continued regarding location of curbs and
of the signs in violation. MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED
BY SAUL, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL REFER THIS MATTER TO
THE PLANNING CO?IMISSION TO REVIEW WITH A 60 -DAY TIME '
PERIOD TO RESPOND.* Deputy City Attorney Hard stated
the Council must keep this moving or the abatement of )'
the signs will proceed. Mr. G. John Doces addressed
the Council with the background in the placement of
his signs and the problems created before they had
been installed to direct customers into the proper
entrance. Public Works Director Steve Hall illustrated
the street and parking lot area on the blackboard.
*CARRIED, WITII MS. IIARRIS VOTING NO.
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MELTING
April 5, 1976
Page 4
PETITIONS, COMMUNICATIONS, APPEALS AND SIMILAR MATTERS - Cont.
Letter from
Steve Hall re:
items in Public
Works Committee
Letter from Mayor
Bauch re: additional
office spac
OLD BUSINESS
King County Animal
Control Ordinance
proposal
FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
Proposed ordinance -
Reclassifying certain
property from R -1 to
C -2 (Anderson)
Public Works Director Steve Hall urged the Council to
consider as soon as possible the water study for the
residential area. He stated the funding is budgeted
in the amount of $1,500. MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED
BY SAUL, THAT ADMINISTRATION PRESENT A RESOLUTION TO
THE COUNCIL AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO ENTER INTO AN '
AGREEMENT WITH URS COMPANY FOR THE WATER STUDY..
CARRIED. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY TRAYNOR, TO REFER
ALL OTHER ITEMS IN STEVE HALL'S LETTER TO THE APRIL
12, 1976 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING. CARRIED.
MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY HILL, TO CONCUR WITH
THE RECOMMENDATIONS STATED IN MAYOR BAUCH'S LETTER.*
City Clerk Shirlee Kinney read a letter from Mayor
Bauch addressed to the City Council dated April 1,
1976 regarding acquisition of an additional trailer
on a lease basis for the Mayor/mid future Administra-
tive Assistant, with space f ' the Council and their
secretary and for the City / ttorney and Judge. .
Mr. Frank Todd stated he lved across the street from
City Hall and he objectee to the proposed trailer park'
Discussion continued re:arding use'of the trailer and
its conformity with ti existing code provisions.
*CARRIED.
Dep ty City Att.rney Hard noted at the present time
we a e not in ontract compliance with King County
because- we de not have an adopted ordinance similar
to tha of ing County's and at the present time, no
one is s r- of what the 'animal control law is within
the City MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT
THE PROPS ED ORDINANCE BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. CARRIED:
Deputy Cit \Attorney Hard read by introduction only,
as t propo ed ordinance has no. title. MOVED BY
SAU SECOND EEI1 BY TRAYNOR, TO RECONSIDER THE LAST
AC ON OF THE CITY COUNCIL. CARRIED. MOVED BY •
T YNOR, SECOND'D BY VAN DUSEN, TO DIRECT THE CITY •
TORNEY TO DRAF AN ORDINANCE FOR ANIMAL CONTROL IN
COMPLETE FORM. CARRIED. Discussion continued with
the following audnce comments. Mrs. Rena Holloway
stated there should\be a leash law because after 10:00
P.M. there is no control and the animals run in packs
in the streets at nigh \. Mrs. Anna Bernhard stated
she would like to see animal owners keep them in their
own yards 24 hours a day \ Mr. Elfstrom stated he felt
there was no. need to lice se your dog if you keep it
confined to your own yard. Mr. Fred Shepard stated he
keeps his dog in his yard bu when the dog got out one
time, he was able to get it ba k again because it was
licensed. Mr. Gene Elfstrom st ted when he called
King County Animal Control to report a stray dog, they
asked him to tie the dog up and th,y would be out to
pick it up later. Mrs. Joan Todd s ated they have
fenced their yard not to keep their og in but to keep
all the other dogs out. Mr. Al Pieper stated he wit-
nessed two large dogs stop a couple of� \children on
the sidewalk as they were walking home from school.
If the dogs are out on the streets and sdewalks, whicl
is the public's domain, they dogs should also be con-
sidered public property and dealt with as such.
.MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY MS. PESICKA, THAT THIS
ITEM BE DROPPED FROM TIIE AGENDA UNTIL ALL PAPERWORK
IS COMPLETED.* Mr. Larry Canaan, real estate agent
representing Mr. Anderson, requested the City Council
Page 3
1
DISCUSSION - Contd.
Proposed resolution
- Agreement between
City S RAYS for
community services
Formal Motion
1/76 -3, Declaring
intent to adopt
Residence Element
of the Comprehen-
sive Plan
Proposed animal
control ordinance
RECESS
9:25 P.M. -9:30 P.N.
Optional
Municipal Code
OF THE WHOLE 11EETING
Mayor Bauch said that the contract with PAYS will be submitted to his
office during the week. .MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT THE
PROPOSED RESOLUTION BE ON THE AGENDA FOR THE APRIL 5, 1976 CITY
COUNCIL MEETING. * Mayor Bauch stated that $5,000 will be the retainer
fee. RAYS will work with the courts and they will counsel at the
rate of $20 an hour and the City will be billed by Case Number. He
added that $9,000 was budgeted for this purpose. *CARRIED..
MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY VAN DUSEN, THAT FORMAL MOTION ##76 -3
BE ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL MEETING ON APRIL 5, 1976.
CARRIED.
Mayor Bauch stated that if this ordinance is not passed the County
may cancel the contract. He added that they want the same set of rules;:
in the County as they have in the City so they will not have to worry
about whether or not they are crossing the city boundaries. He said
he had noted they had been busy on Sundays picking.up dogs that were
roaming about the streets. Council President Hill stated that the
agreement was not too bad but he would like to know the interpretation
of the phrase "running at large." Mrs. Terry Griffith, audience, said
if the City adopts the proposed animal control ordinance, livestock
would not be permitted in Tukwila. She felt this would not be desirable;
as most people living here likes the country atmosphere where they can ?:
have a pony, chickens, etc. She said that King County controls not
only dogs and cats but all animals. Mayor Bauch said the proposed
animal control ordinance had been prepared by Attorney Hard and it was
his intent that it be a start to work from and could be changed. The
other alternative to King County control would be to set up the City's
own animal control or let the animals roam at large. Councilman
Van Dusen said that with the increase in crime people are using dogs
as burglar alarms. Nr. Don Hovee, audience, said that the way King
County is enforcing the law is not actually effective. He said they
pick up every dog in the street - they are not getting the dogs
that are the problem. Councilman Van Dusen said if we do not use
King County services the City will be faced with a lot of problems.
Mayor Bauch said he would recommend that the Council not rush into this
ordinance - maybe it would be a good idea to have a public meeting so
input could be obtained. Karlyn Elfstrom, audience, said if the County
gets a complaint they will tell a person to catch the dog and hold it
until they can come and pick up the animal. If it is a barking,
snapping dog one would be reluctant to try and catch it and where
would you hold it until they could get out to pick it up? Councilman
Traynor said that we do not pay for this service to King County
through taxes which we would have to pay whether we used their services
or not. He added that if the City had their own law to enforce it would
cause a lot more work and expense and we would still have to pay the
tax. MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY VAN DUSEN, THAT THE PROPOSED ANIMAL
CONTROL ORDINANCE BE ON THE AGENDA FOR THE NEXT CITY COUNCIL NEETING IN
ORDER TO GET PUBLIC DISCUSSION. * Council President Hill requested
Mayor Bauch have available several copies of the proposed ordinance so
the audience will be able to read it and take part in the discussion.
*CARRIED.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY TRAYNOR, THAT THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MEETING RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. CARRIED. Council President Hill
called the meeting back to order with all Council Members present as
previously listed, with the exception of Councilwoman Harris.
Councilman Traynor stated that four or five years ago the City had a
resolution to adopt the Optional Municipal Code, but it failed in an
election. He stated that he had a pamphlet from the previous resolution
and he briefly outlined the advantages of adopting the Code, stating
that Tukwila is a Third Class City subject to all of the "cans and,
cannots" spelled out for them. If the Optional Municipal Code is
adopted the City would have all of the advantages of a First Class City
and would be able to have a wider range of activity. He stated it
U U:,k.A.L C:U_L'l11'LC C Ut .1 ta; tIltOLT MEET
;March 22, 1976
Page 4
DISCUSSION -- Contd.
Optional
Municipal
Code Contd.
Vouchers #8000
and /8026
Bike. Trail
A.W.C. grants
for in-house
training program.
Proposed Res.:
Thanking Out-
going Mayor &
Counci]. Members
Af•JOUR: Ni.NT
10:25
would make their jobs as Council Members easier. Discussion continued
as to the advantages of having a financial adviser and a clerk -
treasurer or a treasurer - clerk, if it was felt this would be more
advantageous. Mayor Bauch said this Optional Municipal Code could be
adopted by resolution if the Mayor -City Council type of government is
not changed, then if there are no objections within a 90 day period
of tide, an ordinance could be adopted. If there is an objection
by the public during the 90 day period of time there would then be an
election. If the type of City government is changed to a City Manager-
Council_ or Commissioner type of government then it would be put to a
vote of the people before being passed as a resolution. Councilman
Van Dusen suggested that this discussion continue at the first
Committee of the Whole Meeting in April and it would give the Council
Members an opportunity to study the advantages and disadvantages of
the change. Council President Hill stated that he thought a represen-
tative of the Association of Washington Cities would come out and
talk to the Council and audience so everyone would know about it.
Mayor Bauch stated that he had discussed Vouchers #8000 for $158.88
and 448026 for $15.00 with Police Chief Sheets and had convinced him
that the one was for bandages that the police officer had used at
home in dressings. Mayor Bauch continued that the other one was for
a variety of things and he had told the Chief to resubmit it under
prescriptions only as it covered too many things. He stated they
will be resubmitted as prescriptions only and the other will be
submitted to the pension board.
Mayor Bauch stated that he had spent one and one -half hours with the
flood control people that morning in an attempt to get the bike path
on the road. He said he had an appointment with Dave Mooney and went
with him to see others who were concerned. He continued that he did
not like the information that he had got - that the dikes will have
to be raised 4 feet in Tukwila for Hanson Dam - they cannot tell us
how• soon this will be, whether it will be sooner than 10 years or
more than 20 years. He said that he wanted to talk with Mr. Van Worden
and tell him what the City is going to do as it will affect his
property. Mayor Bauch continued that he felt we should get as much of
Christianson Road as possible into trails and show we are going to use
it. Councilman Van Dusen expressed the desire to get a bike trail in
the whole distance. Councilman Traynor agreed that it might be 10 -15
years before the Corp of Engineers takes action so he felt the City
should proceed. Mayor Bauch said that is correct and the County knows
it is in the plans but when is unknown. Council President Hill asked
if the City would have trouble getting grant money. Mayor Bauch said
that might be, but the City has submitted an advance copy of the park
plan to the State in accordance with the date schedule they had set up..
Councilman Saul said that the property along the river is what the
Council wants for the people. The City Council Members looked at the
• design plans and discussion continued with all in favor of prompt
action. Mayor Bauch said he would go to Mr. Van Worden and show him
the design plans so he will know what is planned.
• Mayor Bauch told the Council that all grants for this in -house
training program had been taken, but a call was received that one city
had cancelled and they wanted to know if Tukwila would be interested.
He explained this training would be in -house and for our specific job
descriptions. He said he was interested in staff training and would
like to know if the City Council is interested in this type of thing.
This training could answer any questions that we would want. They will
find a person qualified to do the training here at the'City Hall. All
Council Members expressed interest in the program and Mayor Bauch
said he would tell them the City is interested and reserve the funds.
Councilman Traynor said he was interested in the operations of the
Treasurer's office. He added he would like to know all of the
operations of that office as he had never fully understood it.
Council President Hill asked that Administration prepare resolutions
thanking the outgoing mayor and council members for their service to
the City of Tukwila and it be on the agenda for. the Anri.l 5 meeting
of the City Council.
MOVED BY SAUL,,_ SECONDED, Bl VAN DUSEN, TEAT . THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
.• g.. !
Norma tsooner, Council. be -C�c�y
April 5, 1976
1U!\IY.ILt\ V111 l,VU1Vl.1L
AGENDA
Ord_ #965
Reso. 11521
1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
2. CALL TO ORDER AND ROLL CALL •
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES 3 -15 -76
4. APPROVAL OF VOUCHERS (Including former Vouchers 1x8020 F 8021 - Atty.
118000 $ 8026 - Maxwe
5. BID OPENINGS, CALLS & AWARDS medic
a. Call for Bids: Asphaltic concrete overlay
6 . PUBLIC HEARINGS t7•
* a. Preliminary plat proposal of Todd's Rainier Vista. `;
b. Adoption of Commerce /Industry Element of the Comprehensive Plan
7. •PETITIONS, COMMUNICATIONS,. APPEALS AND SIMILAR MATMRS •
a. Protest LID #28 - Esping, Wynn, Tukwila Associa La .Vista
Estates & Caditz '
• b. Writ of Prohibition - LID #28 - Esping vs City of Tukwila
* c. Writ of Prohibition - LID #28 - Tukwila Associates vs City of
Tukwila
* d. Formal Motion 76 -3 = Declaring intent to adopt Residence Element
• as part of the Comprehensive Plan
e. Doces' letter re: sign code revision
• f. • Mayor's letter re: grant procedures proposal. '
g. Steve Hall's letter•re: items in Public Works Committee
h. Mayor's letter re: additional office space
8. OLD BUSINESS
* a. King County Animal Control Ordinance
9. FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
a. Reclassifying certain property from R -1 to C -2 (Anderson)
b. Amending zoning ordinance, T.M.C. 18.34.170
c. Accepting a donation for the Bicentennial Cookbook
10. RESOLUTIONS •
* a. Authorizing Mayor to execute agreement with LeSourd, Patten,
Fleming & Hartung for legal services (2nd reading)
• b. Authorizing Mayor to execute agreement with RAYS for.•certain
social services (2nd reading) •
c. Segregating special assessment in LID #24, Lindell 4 Assoc. (1st)
d. Authorizing Mayor to acquire Macabee property for park purposes (
e. Amending Reso. 505 to change time, date & place of Finance F
Personnel Committee meetings (1st reading)
f. In appreciation to Joanne Davis as Councilwoman (1st reading)
g. In appreciation to Joseph Johanson as Councilman (1st reading)
h. In appreciation to Jon Sterling as- Councilman (1st reading)
i. In appreciation to Frank Todd as Mayor (1st reading)
11. DEPARTMENT REPORTS
a. Mayor's Report
•
12. MISCELLANEOUS AND FURTHER AUDIENCE COMMENTS
13. ADJOURNMENT
* -- Previously distributed material •
15 Mach 1976
(date)
CITY OF TUKWILA •
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
. Kjell Stoknes
Planning Director
For further information contact Gary Crutchfield at 242 -2177.
7:00 P.M.
(time)
Notice is hereby given that the Tukwila CITY COUNCIL
will conduct a PUBLIC HEARING on the above date at City Hall, 14475 - 59th
Avenue South, to consider ado of th RESIDENCE EL EMENT' of.he
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN for the Tukwila Planning Area.
All interested persons are encouraged to appear and be heard.
Published in the Renton Record- Chronicle on 29 February & 7 March 1976.
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIO i:TING
March 1, 1976
Page 2
VOUCHER APPROVAL - Cont.
LID 1125 C -37, 38, 39
R -26
LID 1126 C -4
R -4
Request for
rezone (R -1 to
C -2) for property
located in area of
Strander Blvd. F,
Southcenter
Parkway
(Anderson)
OLD BUSINESS
Schedule meeting
to review A $ E
architects'
proposals
McAbee property
appraisal
NEW BUSINESS
Bicentennial
Park projects
$1,482.72
1,482.72 .
$7.34.00
734.00
PUBLIC HEARINGS
Adoption of Mayor Bauch declared the public hearing open at 7:20 P.I
Residence Element
of the Comprehensive
Plan Planning Director Kjell Stoknes reviewed the process of
meeting with the citizens committee and the Planning
Commission. Gary Crutchfield, Planning Department,
stated that Mrs. Bernhard and Mrs. Van Dusen, present ii
the audience, were among the members of the citizens
committee which was chaired by a member of the Planning
Commission. Mayor Bauch called for comments from the
audience.
Councilman Van Dusen asked if the information covered ii
the committee was going to be made available to the Cit:
Council and the public. Mayor Bauch stated the informal
tion gathered to use with the maps will be available whf
the maps portion of the update is presented. Kjell
. Stoknes stated much of the information covered by the
committees is available in the Data Inventory and in
Planning Department files.
No comments for or against the subject were made.
Mayor Bauch declared the public hearing closed at 7:26 1
Mayor Bauch declared the public hearing open at 7:27 P.I
Kjell Stoknes, Planning Director, reviewed the history
of the rezone request and stated the Planning Commissioi
has concurred with the staff report and added condition
number 6. The developers agreement should contain all
these conditions. Mayor Bauch called for audience com-
ments. Councilman Traynor requested that the property
location be pointed out on the map. Kjell Stoknes loca
the site.
Mr. Chris Crumbaugh, Segale Business Park, requested th'
terms and conditions be read. Deputy Clerk Doris Phelp:
read the information from the staff report..
No comments for or against the subject were made.
Mayor Bauch declared the public hearing closed at 7:32
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY MS. PESICKA, TO SCHEDULE
MARCH 29, 1976 AS A COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING TO
CONSIDER A t=, E PROPOSALS AT 7:00 P.M. CARRIED.
Mayor Bauch stated he requested this item on the Agenda
Council President Hill pointed the area out on the map
and read the cover letter from Ballaine & Halliday, the
firm subinitting the appraisal for all parcels in the
amount of $106,150. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY VAN DUS.
TO ADD THIS ITEM TO THE MARCH 29 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
MEETING AGENDA. CARRIED.
Mayor Bauch read from the February, 1976 Bicentennial
Proclamations newsletter, a copy of which is on file in
the Clerk's office. The requests for City participatio
in the park projects were discussed (grass, fencing and
°'CI; arch 15, 1976
7 :00 P.M.
FLAG SALUTE AND
:ALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL OF
COUNCIL MEMBERS
OFFICIALS IN
ATTENDANCE
MINUTE APPROVAL
VOUCHER APPROVAL
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL "`N
REGULAR MEETING
Tukwila City Hall
Council Chambers
M I N U T E S
Mayor Bauch led the Pledge of Allegiance and called the
Tukwila City Council meeting to order.
GARDNER, MS. HARRIS, HILL, MS. PESICKA, SAUL, TRAYNOR,
VAN DUSEN.
Deputy Clerk Doris Phelps, Planning Director Kjell
Stoknes, City Attorney Donald Fleming.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY MS. PESICKA, THAT THE MARCH 1,
1976 REGULAR MEETING MINUTES BE APPROVED AS PUBLISHED.*
Mayor Bauch noted a clarification of the Minutes which
was read by the Deputy Clerk. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY
MS. PESICKA, TO AMEND THE MOTION THAT THE CLARIFICATION
BE ADDED TO THE MINUTES.** Councilwoman Harris stated
the comments in question made by Councilwoman Pesicka
cannot be changed so the clarification should be included
in tonight's meeting's Minutes. * *SECOND AND MOTION
WITHDRAWN. Councilman Van Dusen questioned a vote
as noted on Page 8 regarding Alternate #1. Mayor Bauch
stated this would indicate that the "Motion had failed
unanimously since no "yes" votes were recorded and no
roll call was taken. *CARRIED. /TIie March 1, 1976 Minutes
Page 11, paragraph 3, should be clarified to include that
Public Works Director Steve H had not made the state-
ment to Councilwoman Pesica' that he disagreed with the
zoning. /
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDE,D`BY SAUL, THAT THE MARCH 1, 1976
SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES BE APPROVED AS PUBLISHED. CARRIED.
•
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY SAUL, THAT THE BILLS BE
ACCEPTED AND WARRANTS BE DRAWN IN THEIR RESPECTIVE AMOUNT
/
Councilman ' Trainor questioned Vouchers #8026 and #8000
in payment for medical supplies to Officer Maxwell. He
stated these' expenses should be covered by the LEFF Act.
Mayor Bauch stated any items not covered by the LEFF pay -
ments are be paid by the City. Mayor Bauch further
explained the bills MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY SAUL,
TO DELETE VOUCHERS #8000 AND #8026 UNTIL POLICE CHIEF
JOHN/SHEETS CAN CLARIFY THAT THESE ITEMS ARE COVERED BY
LW. CARRIED. Council President Hill questioned
Vouchers #8020 and #8021 payable for services of the
resent City Attorney for 1975 and 1974. He stated he
would like the opportunity,, for the Council to be brought
up to date on the events during the next Committee of
the Whole meeting. He stated he did not feel it was fair
to ask the newly elected Council Members to vote on these
without having some explanation. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED
BY VAN DUSEN, TO WITHHOLD VOUCHERS #8020 AND #8021 TO
DISCUSS AT THE NEXT COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE A'IEETING. **
Councilwoman Harris stated since our City Attorney is
present right now, we can discuss it tonight. Council •
President Hill stated there are two public hearings on
the Agenda tonight along with our other business, and he
preferred to discuss this next week. Councilwoman Pesicka
stated she had not reviewed those particular Vouchers.
Councilman Van Dusen stated he had several questions
about the bills and he felt it would take some time to
review those costs, amounting to about $12,000. Council-
man Traynor stated he was satisfied with the firm's serv-
ices, but he stated the new Council Members should he
appaised of the Council's actions of the past two years.
**CARRIED, WITH GARDNER AND MS. HARRIS VOTING NO.
*MOTION AS AMENDED, CARRIED.
Vouchers
Current Fund #7982 - tt8079
Street Fund #8050 - #8087
Fed. Rev. Shg. #8088
Water Fund #8089 - 08099
Sewer Fui d #8100 - t#3112
W/S Const. #8113
#7982 - #8113
$27,930.55
306.02.
392.66
1.7,189.06
20,065.00
8.25
Tot-1
:. iLA CITY COUNCIL M[r NG
;'..rL.h 1, 1976
'age
NEW BUSINESS - Cont.
li .i.: c. n t_ n n i.. t
projects - Cont.
Formal Motion
76 -3, Declaring
intent to adopt
Residence Element
as part of the
Comprehensive Plan
Formal Motion
76 -4, Designating
alternate member
to the Metro
Sewer Advisory
Committee
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE
Ord. 964,
Adopting Park &
Open Space Plan &
Capital Improve-
ment Program as
part of the Comp-
rehensive Plan E
repealing Ord. 546
/ CJ✓%
benches). Councilman Van Dusen stated there should be
some form of recognition for all those who have donated
time and materials to these Bi.ceritennial projects and
for work on the cabin.
Mr. Frank Todcl stated he had donated the cedar shakes
for the cabin and he would like to have some kind of
receipt for income tax purposes -- others might need
one too.
Councilman Saul stated he' needed authorization from the
City Council before the grass and grading work can be
done. It is our intent to get as much volunteer labor
as we can. MOVED BY TRAYNOR, SECONDED BY HILL, TO
AUTHORIZE MONEY OUT OF THE BICENTENNIAL COMMITTEE FUNDS
FOR GRASS AND RELATED MATERIALS IN THE PARK. CARRIED.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY VAN DUSEN, TO AUTHORIZE
COUNCILMAN SAUL TO EXPEND UP TO $500 FOR. FENCING FOR THE
BICENTENNIAL PARK. CARRIED.
Mayor Bauch stated this item was prepared as information-
only as part of the public hearing documents. MOVED BY
HILL, SECONDED BY MS. PESICKA, TO PLACE THIS ITEM ON THE
MARCH 22, 1976 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE AGENDA FOR DISCUSS-
ION AND PUBLIC INPUT. CARRIED.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY TRAYNOR, THAT FORMAL MOTION
76 -4 BE READ IN ITS ENTIRETY. CARRIED. Deputy Clerk
Doris Phelps read the Motion. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED
BY TRAYNOR, THAT FORMAL MOTION 76 -4 BE ADOPTED AS READ.
CARRIED.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY MS. PESICKA, THAT PROPOSED
ORDINANCE BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. CARRIED. City Attorney
Fleming read proposed ordinance of the City of Tukwila
relating to Comprehensive Planning, Adopting a Park and
Open Space Program (including a Capital Improvement Pro-
gram) for the City, declaring said Program to be an ele-
ment of the Comprehensive Plan and repealing the former
Comprehensive Park and Recreation Plan, prepared by the
firm of Olsen, Richert $ Bignold, as passed by City of
Tukwila Ordinance Number 546, by title only.
MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY VAN DUSEN, THAT ORDINANCE 964
BE ADOPTED AS READ.*
Councilwoman Harris stated the City Council had determines
when the present Park Plan was in need of updating, it
• would be a process of amending the Plan not repealing it,
although the Council's specific authorization to the
Planning Department may not have been clear on that. She
stated she did not want to repeal the present Plan because
there are some things that we can still use even though
much has been carried over to the new Plan. Councilman
Traynor asked Councilwoman Harris to be more specific as
to which parts of the present Plan should not be repealed
Councilwoman Harris stated she would like to have the pre-
sent Plan amended rather than repealed. it met at that
time all of the requirements for the Forward Thrust funds
for parks and she would like to see Olsen, Richert u BBig-
nold's basic plan expanded by this new Plan as an amend-
. ment. Councilman Van Dusen disagreed, stating the new
Plan takes out the civic center, the city hall., the main—
tenance facilities, etc. which no longer apply. This new
Plan was compiled with a large degree of citizen input as
well , which he felt was important.
TUKW ILA CITY COUNCIL( ET (NC
March 1, 1976
Page 4
SECOND READING OF ORDINANCE - Cont.
Ord. 964
.Cont.
FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE
Proposed ordinance,
Reclassifying
property located
on West side of
Southcenter Park-
way approximately
1,000 ft. South of
Strander Blvd. from
R -1 to C -2 (Anderson)
RESOLUTIONS
Reso. 519,
Authorizing Mayor
to execute agree-
ment for banking
services with
Peoples National
Bank of
Washington
Mr. Claris Cr.umbaugh, Segal° Business Park, stated he
hoped the bike trail along Southcenter Parkway would not
be util ized until some :improvements are made clue to the.
heavy commercial traffic in the area. The Council re-
ferred to Page 51 of the Plan to review this project.
Councilwoman Pesicka stated that by adopting this Plan, •
we are not automatically making. all. these projects effec
tine although hopefully, all the projects can be accom-
plished. Kjell Stoknes stated the project appears here
an intention to develop a right -of -way for bikers.
Discussion continued.
Mayor Bauch questioned the procedure to amend or repeal
the present Plan. Attorney Fleming stated an amendment
would be appropriate if you are saving/some of the ele-
ments of the original Plan. With t1yfs new Plan, we are
making some additions and some chana s. Repealing the
present Plan is a complete action nd it may not be the
intent to do that. Kjell Stoknes stated the intent as
the Planning Department understood it was to replace they,
original Plan. We threw out the' public facilities eleme
from the original Plan. We feel it is important that th
Capital Improvement Program be: /adopted. Whether the pre.,
sent Plan is amended or repealed makes no difference fro-,
a planning aspect.
Councilwoman Pesicka stated if the funding proposals are
due April 1 for the Christianson Rd. project, then it is'
necessary to pass this Plan. Councilman Traynorstated
felt the important elements of the old Plan are incorpor
ated into the new Plan., *CARRIED, WITH MS. HARRIS VOTING
\NO .
Mayor \ Bauch stated / this ordinance was prepared as part
of the\.i.nformatio i for the public hearing and was not
intended \as part f the Agenda. MOVED BY TRAYNOR,
SECONDED By SAU , TO PLACE THIS ITEM ON THE NEXT REGULAR
COUNCIL ME};TING/ S AGENDA. CARRIED.
ti
MOVED Y HILL, SECONDED.. BY SAUL, THAT PROPOSED RESOLUTIOI
BE RE1 BY TITLE ONLY.. 'CARRIED. Attorney Fleming read
proposed resolution Mayor to negotiate an
agreement with Peoples National Bank of Washington to
px'6vide banking services, by.title only. MOVED BY HILL,
ECONDI;D BY SAUL, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 519 AS READ.
CARRIED.
Proposed resolution, MOVED BY PESICKA, SECONDED BY 'RITOR, THAT THIS BE
.Approving Todd's READ BY TITLE ONLY.*
Rainier Vista
being Planning Councilman Traynor: Maybe this isn't the right time to
Dept. File !IMF- bring this up, maybe it should be brought up at the time
76 -'2 -Sub. , sub- when whether we adopt it or not. I guess what I'm more
ject to conditions concerned. about is the procedure on this thing is that
of the preliminary I for one feel that this plat should be returned to the
plat applicant and have it brought up, in regards to the road
brought up to C:i.ty standards which is 50 foot. And the
reason I an saying 50 foot over the 35, I took a good
look at the street I live on which is 50 foot now, not
CITY OF TUKWILA
CITY OF TUKWILA - APPLICANT
Kee 1 Stoknes, Planning Director
CITY OF TUKWILA
DECLARATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE
ON THE
RESIDENTIAL ELEMENT
OF THE
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Pursuant to Chapter 18.98 of the Tukwila Municipal Code dealing with environ-
mental requirements and the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971.
Proposed legislation to adopt the Residential Element of the Tukwila Compre-
hensive Plan.
INTRODUCTION:
The following is a statement of declaration by the undersigned as the Responsi-
ble Official pursuant to Chapter 18.98 of the Tukwila Municipal Code and the
Washington State Environmental Policy Act of 1971.
An Environmental Assessment has been completed on the proposed legislation to
adopt the Residential Element of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan.
DECLARATION:
Based upon the environmental assessment submitted, the City of Tukwila Municipal
Code Chapter 18.98 dealing with environmental policy, and the guidelines issued
by the Washington State Department of Ecology for the implementation of the
State Environmental Policy Act, I find that this proposed action will not have
a significant effect upon the environment and therefore an environmental impact
statement is not required.
Date of negative declaration: February 26, 1976
CITY OF TUKWILA
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
ON THE
RESIDENCE ELEMENT
OF THE PROPOSED
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
This assessment has been prepared pursuant to the State Envir-
onmental Policy Act of 1971 (SEPA) and Chapter 18.98 of the
Tukwila Municipal Code.
February 11, 1976
CONTACT PERSON:
Fred N. Satterstrom, Associate.Planner
6230 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98188
242 -2177
A. PROPOSED ACTION:
1. The Action:
The proposed action is the review and adoption of the Residence Element,
the third of five elements of the evolving Tukwila Comprehensive Plan.
Proposed, mapped residential land use, which is a part of the Residence
Element, will be considered separately from the objectives and policies
at a later date. Residential land use will be considered as one land
use designation among several others to be included on the final Compre-
hensive Land Use Map.
2. Justification:
Through its budget allocations for calendar years 1974 and 1975, the
Tukwila City Council has directed the updating of its Comprehensive Plan.
Moreover, on November 17, 1975, the City Council adopted Resolution #504
which established the planning process and the time schedule of the Plan's
five (5) elements and Map.
The Residence Element of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan is authorized in
and has been prepared in accordance with Washington State law, RCW 35.63.
3. Location:
Adoption of the Residence Element will effectuate a plan for residential
land use and development for that area lying within Tukwila city limits.
Indirectly, this legislation could influence land use decision - making in
what is commonly known as the unincorporated Planning Area of Tukwila.
4. Historical Background:
John Graham & Co. completed the first Comprehensive Plan for Tukwila in
1961, shortly before the City underwent the tremendous development which
has characterized the area over the past 15 years. Since this original
plan was adopted, it has been revised only once, in 1967 when changes
were made to the Land Use Map. No revisions have ever been made to the
original text of the Plan.
5. Public Participation:
The Residence Element had its roots in a general planning issue- oriented
questionnaire distributed by the City's planning Staff during June 1975.
This questionnaire was mailed or hand - delivered to every single- family
or apartment unit within city limits. Of the 1300 questionnaires distributed,
about 10% or 138 questionnaires were returned.
c
Responses to this questionnaire helped the Planning Staff to prepare
preliminary general and element goals for the Comprehensive Plan. These
goals were adopted by the City Council on November 17, 1975 by Resolution
#504. The Element Goals for the Residence Element formed the framework
within which the Staff drafted a proposed element to be reviewed by a
citizens' committee.
During February 1976, the Residence Committee, an eight- member volunteer
citizens' group, reviewed the proposed Residence element and after five
meetings adopted a set of revised objectives and policies. In addition,
this committee also adopted a proposed residential land use map. All
committee meetings were open to the general public.
Before official adoption, there will be opportunities for additional public
input at a public hearing before the Planning Commission and a public hearing
before the City Council, both dates to be legally published in the Renton
Record - Chronicle.
6. Relationship to Existing Laws, Policies, and Plans:
As mentioned, there presently exists a Comprehensive Plan for the City of
Tukwila as well as a Comprehensive Land Use Map. Both have been found to
be outdated by the City Council. Through Resolution #489, the City Council
has placed a moratorium -like status on the rezoning of properties to "higher"
uses and on actions significantly affecting the environment until a new
Comprehensive Plan is completed. The Residence Element is one of five
elements in this new plan. When all elements of the Comprehensive Plan are
adopted along with the Land Use Map, the old Comprehensive Plan will be repealed.
Since the existing zoning ordinance is based upon the 1961 Comprehensive Plan
and Map, the adoption of a new Plan will necessitate revision or updating of
the zoning ordinance and map. Until a new zoning ordinance and map can be
adopted, if indeed a revision is undertaken, the existing zoning regulations
will remain in effect.
In addition, if the objectives and policies of the Residence Element are
adopted, they could form the framework and direction for other implementing
ordinances such as the subdivision code, building code, and implementing
programs like a housing assistance program.
7. Decisions Remaining Before Implementation of the Legislation;
The Planning Commission must recommend approval of the plan during a
published public hearing and the City Council adopt it during a regular
Council meeting prior to official implementation of the Residence Element.
Also, if the City Council elects to pass the Residence Element via a motion
of intent to adopt procedure, there will be another public hearing held at
a later date to consider passage of the entire Comprehensive Plan ordinance.
DIRECT IMPACTS:
B. EXISTING CONDITIONS:
As mentioned, there presently exists a Comprehensive Plan for the City of
Tukwila and a Comprehensive Land Use Map. The Plan was completed in 1961,
as was the Map, but the latter was the only one updated (in 1967). As such,
the text of the Plan has long been useless as a tool for guiding land use
decisions. Instead, it has been the Land Use Map which has for several
years been regarded and used as the Comprehensive Plan.
The Residence Element is one of five elements being developed which, together,
will comprise the new Comprehensive Plan for Tukwila. Other elements include
Natural Environment, Open Space, Commerce and Industry, and Transportation
and Utilities. The objectives and policies contained within these elements
will serve to aid the Planning Commission and City Council in their land use
related deliberations. A Comprehensive Land Use Map will be developed along
with these elements which will illustrate how the Plan policies apply to the
land. Residential land use will be one designation on this map.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION:
Because the essential use of the Residence Element will be as a policy
guide and its influence in the decision making process is futuristically
indeterminate, it is impossible to adequately assess the physical and
social impacts of the proposed Residence Element. At a later date, when
implementing ordinances are proposed to enact these objectives and policies,
possible physical and social impacts will become clearer. An adequate
assessment of these impacts should be made at that time.
The most direct effect of the proposed Residence Element will be as a
policy guide for decision - making, especially on matters of residential
land use, population growth, and housing. As such, its primary users
will be the decision - makers themselves, i.e., the Planning Commission
and City Council. Opportunities to utilize the Residence objectives and
policies will occur during official consideration of rezones (to or from
residential use), special use permits, residential subdivisions, and will
provide direction to staff in the development and proposal of implementing
legislation.
INDIRECT IMPACTS:
Indirect impacts will occur through the implementing ordinances which attempt
to effectuate the Residence Element goals and policies. Possible implement-
ing legislation will include a revision of the zoning ordinance (to reflect
the aims of the Residence Element policies and the residential land use map),
the subdivision ordinance, and revisions or modifications to the building
code of Tukwila. Another indirect impact of adoption may be the preparation
of other plans and programs based on the Residence Element goals and policies.
One example might be a Housing Assistance Plan to be adopted by the local
government.
D. ANY UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS:
As a policy guide for decision - making on matters of residential land use,
the direct impacts of the proposed Residence Element should be positive ones.
It is also expected that the indirect social, physical, and economic effects
of adoption of the Residence Element will be mostly positive, especially to
the general public. However, it is anticipated that some individuals could
be negatively impacted in various ways through enactment of implementing
legislation. Such adverse impacts may occur through zoning actions or code
enforcement, actions which may be viewed as positive public benefits but
which may necessarily cause problems for some private parties.
E. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION:
The alternatives to adoption of the Residence Element are limitless, but
a few of these alternatives stand out as more reasonable or viable. These
alternatives are the following:
1. Do not adopt the Residence Element. Allow the existing 1961
Comprehensive Plan and revised Land Use Map for Tukwila to stand
as is.
Advantages: Alternative #1 would require no additional city
resources to implement for the Plan already exists and is in
effect.
Disadvantages: The present Comprehensive Plan and Map provide
little if any basis for land use decisions. Because of this,
the Plan and Map render the City of Tukwila vulnerable to lawsuits.
2. Adopt a Residence Element with only objectives and policies, no
map portion.
Advantages: Objectives and policies would allow City to make land
use decision while not making a mapped pre - commitment. In the long
run, this alternative could be the most flexible.
Disadvantages: Through official actions, the local government has
shown that they want a land use map to accompany the objectives and
policies. Having no such map, confusion could occur in the decision -
making process.
3. Adopt only a Residential Land Use Map, no objectives or policies.
Advantages: This alternative represents a quick, expedient, one -
step method for checking a proposal's compatibility with the
Comprehensive Plan.
�.r�.- :�:- -�•� -, . ""> �: � is , . .
C
Disadvantages: This alternative closely approximates the current
condition of Tukwila's existing Comprehensive Plan which has been
determined to be inadequate as a basis for land use decision - making.
Much of this inadequacy stems from the single - purposeness of the
map. The land use map depicts the distribution of land use over
the ground but does not address other salient land use issues which
may impact the residential neighborhood.
4. Adopt the Residence Element with objectives and policies and a
Residential Land Use Map.
Advantages: Alternative #4 would provide both a policy and mapped
basis for land use decision - making. While the map would propose a
spatial distribution of land use over the ground, the policies would
give direction for the future decision of expanding or shrinking
these areas. Also, the policies would provide a framework for land
use issues not related to the map.
Disadvantages: Much of the disadvantage associated with this
alternative lies with the map. Because of the City's reliance
on the present Comprehensive Land Use Map, its natural tendency
may be to rely on the new Land Use Map, de- emphasizing the
importance of the Plan's goals, objectives, and policies.
F . IRREVERSIBLE AND IRRETRIEVABLE COMMITMENTS OF RESOURCES:
In developing and adopting the Residence Element, the major commitment in
terms of resources will be in the form of staff time, salaries and wages,
and printing and publication fees. Once committed, these resources are
irretrievable.
3. RESIDENCE
BRAFT 0
Sti3JECT TO ftli1StOU
■POPULATION GROWTH AND RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE
In 1959, the City of Tukwila was a small residential community whose character
ranged somewhere between rural and suburban. 1571 souls lived in the town,
mostly on the Tukwila Hill. Almost all of the population was housed in the
445 detached, single - family homes which existed at that time. Only about 4%
of the population lived in "multiple- family" structures — sandwiched into
guesthouses, "second" houses, and converted duplexes.
During the years 1962-66, transportation improvements coupled with new employ-
ment opportunities stimulated a ravenous demand for housing.
Between 1966 and 1970, almost 1000 apartment units were built within Tukwila
city limits. Most of these units were built on the southern and eastern -
facing slopes of the Tukwila Hill. Along with these multiple - family structures
came an increase in the city's population. The 1970 federal census counted
3496 people in Tukwila. Of these, about two - thirds or 65% lived in multiple -
family structures.
Meanwhile in the unincorporated area of the Tukwila Planning Area, the popula-
tion also soared -from about 8000 in 1959 to over 18,000 in 1970. In contrast
to the City of Tukwila, however, the structure of the residential community
remained much the same and it is, today, clearly a suburban, single - family
residential community.
■THE IRONY OF PROSPERITY
Generally, the condition of housing in the Planning Area is on a level with
the average for King County. In certain places of the Planning Area, however,
the condition of residential structures and the integrity of some neighborhoods
have been seriously eroded.
Ironically, some of the causes of residential blight can be linked to the
very improvements and developments which have helped to make Tukwila one of
the wealthiest cities per capita in the State of Washington.
The burst of commercial and industrial development and speculative land purchases
have spelled decline in some residential areas, particularly in the lowland.
Incompatible land uses juxtaposed with residences have discouraged the upkeep
of these homes and diminished their longevity. Zoning policies sometimes have
acted in much the same way. Zoning to "higher" uses has caused higher property
taxes to the residents of these areas and has discouraged the maintenance of
existing housing. This is particularly true on the south side of the Tukwila
Hill where a wobbly boundary between multiple and single - family districts has
caused a general decline in single- family homes.
3 -1 January 26, 1976
C
The same highways which provide the City with such extraordinary mobility have
fragmented neighborhoods and impacted adjacent properties with tremendous noise
levels. In addition, shrinking forests, meadows, and other open spaces — side -
effects of urbanization --- have thrown off the mask of rural living. This ingress
of environmental problems and egress of environmental amenities has generally
reduced the "liveability" of the residential environment.
Yet despite these problems, people are still drawn to the Tukwila area. Its
location to employment centers and commercial services, excellent schools,
diversity of housing, and community friendliness still make the Tukwila area
a desirable place to live. The key to the future liveability of the area lies
with the City's ability to minimize the adverse impacts of urbanization while
maximizing the assets for the benefit of those who call Tukwila "home ".
■PLAN THRUST: LIVEABILITY
The Residence Element goes a step further than former planning efforts. While
the 1961 Comprehensive Plan for Tukwila strived to reserve areas for the exten-
sive residential development which was anticipated, the emphasis of the Residence
Element is to improve the liveability of these areas. Underlying the policies of
this element is the philosophy that the City can have residential development and
live in it too.
The Residence Element is divided into two sections: Neighborhood and Housing.
Neighborhood, the first section, concerns that area surrounding each resident's
castle and the policies are more land use oriented, dealing with the arrangement
of land uses within the residential environment. In the second section, Housing,
policies deal more closely with the castles themselves.
"Liveability" of residential areas is the thrust of both sections of the Residence
Element. The first section seeks to create or maintain liveable living areas by
establishing a healthy land use climate and guaranteeing the future integrity of
these areas. Moreover, the second section seeks to establish an adequate, suit -
able and diversified housing supply fit to meet the demands.
3 -2 January 26, 1976 •
SECTION 1: NEIGHBORHOOD OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
OBJECTIVE 1. PROTECT ALL VIABLE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS FROM
INTRUSIONS BY INCOMPATIBLE LAND USES.
When intensive uses intrude into established residential areas,
they tend to undermine the quality of that neighborhood by creating adverse
environmental, visual, aesthetic and property tax impacts on surrounding resi-
dential properties. Of course, some residential areas in Tukwila are in a
transition from residential to industrial use, and the homes which still remain
in these urbanizing areas represent only temporary residential use. But, in
viable, established residential areas, it is the intent of this objective to
keep intensive, disruptive land uses from undermining the quality of life.
Policy 1. Utilize natural features, like topography, to separate
incompatible land uses from the residential areas.
Probably the most important kind of buffer between incom-
patible land uses is not merely space ( "The further I am from that
nuisance, the better! "), but the appearance of visual separation.
For example, topography can make an extremely effective buffer even
though it may not separate incompatible uses by more than 30 -50 feet
in elevation. The illusion that is created is separation, and it
allows one to live with what is below or above, on the other side or
just around the corner. Another example is the Green River. The
wide expanse of river, the drama of constantly moving waters, and
the seasonal ebb and flow of the river level seems to magnify the
importance of the river and diminishes the disaffinity
between shoreline uses. By utilizing natural features to separate
incompatible land uses, the City ensures the integrity of its resi-
dential areas while creating an efficient land use pattern.
Policy 2. Utilize open spaces, like parks and playfields to separate
incompatible land uses from the residential areas.
Land uses which have an open space nature can also func-
tion as buffers between residential areas and incompatible uses.
Parks, playfields, and other public or private recreational areas
are a few examples of recreational open space which serve to har-
monize divergent districts in the land use pattern. Other uses,
however, which are not of a recreational character but have a
permanent open space character can also function to separate resi-
dential areas from incompatible land uses.
3 -3 January 26, 1976
Policy 3. Prohibit spot zoning in established residential
neighborhoods.
Spot zoning may be defined as the creation of a more
intensive zoning district within another zone which permits uses
that are incompatible with the parent zone. An example might be an
industrial or commercial building in the heart of a single - family
residential district. As far as zoning is concerned, there are
basically two ways to erode the quality of a residential area: one
is by permitting incompatible land uses to jump into the neighborhood
through spot zoning, or to allow incompatible uses to eat away at the
edges of the neighborhood by failing to establish zoning buffers. Of
the two, spot zoning is quicker.
Policy 4. Vehicular traffic to commercial and industrial uses
should not be through residential areas.
The pleasantness of a residential neighborhood is in part
protected by the nature of its streets. Generally, if traffic on
residential streets is excessive, the safety of the streets and abut-
ting area is diminished, as is the pleasantness and quiet of the
residential neighborhood.
Policy 5. Encourage the abatement of incompatible land uses in
viable residential areas.
As mentioned, incompatible land uses which have encroached
into viable residential areas have an injurious and degenerative
impact on the neighborhood. Where it is feasible and consistent with
the future plan for community growtfl, it may within the interest of
the community to abate the incompatible use in order to reestablish
the vigor and viability of the neighborhood. This policy is intended
to apply to residential areas which the community intends to maintain
and protect, not to residential areas which are in transition to other
use.
Policy 6. Encourage the abatement of public nuisances which pose
visual, health, safety, or other threats to the neighborhood.
Public nuisances, like unkempt premises for instance, can be
looked upon as a form of incompatible land use for they have adverse
impacts on the quality of living within the residential neighborhood.
This policy encourages the enforcement of city ordinances to "clean up"
certain areas of Tukwila in order to protect the integrity of residen-
tial areas.
3 -4 January 26, 1976
OBJECTIVE 2. MINIMIZE THE INCOMPATIBILITIES BETWEEN DIFFERENT TYPES OF
RESIDENTIAL USES.
Objective 1 addressed the conflicts which arise between resi-
dential areas and other land uses. This objective addresses the incompatibilities
which arise between residential uses themselves. Indeed, single - family and
multiple - family uses are both residential land uses, but they are not synonymous
nor are they absolutely or completely compatible. Differences in the size of
structures, number of occupants, and volume of traffic in single - family versus
multiple - family areas makes it necessary to plan for an orderly distribution of
these uses within the Planning Area. When arranged compatibly, the quality and •
efficiency of each district are mutually enhanced.
Policy I. Provide for medium density "transition areas" between
high and low density residential areas.
Although multiple - family developments are residential in
nature, they represent a more intensive development of the land and
have an environmental impact much like commercial or industrial
structures. As such, dense multiple- family developments juxtaposed
with single - family residences are incompatible. To establish a
transition area or zone where density of residential development
gradually diminishes from high density multiple - family to low
density single - family is the intention of this policy. Within this
transition area might be located duplexes or triplexes, uses which
are more compatible with the nature of single- family areas. In this
manner, the single - family neighborhood is not damaged vis -a -vis such
formidable structures and the longevity of the single- family neighbor-
hood is promoted.
Policy 2. Multiple- family developments should be located functionally
convenient to a primary or secondary arterial street where
traffic generated by these uses does not pass through single-
family residential areas.
Because of the density of population within multiple- family
developments, a greater amount of traffic is generated in these areas
than in single- family residential areas. Generally, the higher the
density of development, the greater the traffic generated. One of the
attractive features of single- family areas is the safety and quiet of
their streets. A surge of traffic on these streets endangers life and
safety and contributes to a less desirable single- family environment.
Moreover, it behooves multiple - family developments to have direct access
onto arterial streets and highways for it enhances their accessibility.
3 -5 January 26, 1976
v�yy +h'f
OBJECTIVE 3.
While the freeways which splice the Tukwila community have
profoundly enhanced the mobility of residents, the noise generated by a great
volume of traffic at high speeds has adversely affected the residential envir-
onment. High noise levels are not conducive to the calm and quiet sought by
single - family residents. Consequently, single - family residential development
within the freeway corridors has been stymied. It is primarily the edges of
neighborhoods which border the freeways that receive the greatest noise impact,
but almost any place in the City echoes with the hum of the freeway.
C.
DIMINISH THE ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF HIGHWAYS AND FREEWAYS
WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECT THE QUALITY OF LIVING IN THE PLANNING
AREA.
Policy 1. Encourage the use of vegetative or fencelike screens
adjacent to freeways and along noisy use districts to
protect residential areas from high noise levels.
Noise barriers along highways have been shown to be an
effective means of suppressing the noise levels which affect adjacent
properties. While vegetation does not greatly suppress noise, it does
act as a visual screen to separate residences from the frenzy of the
freeway. Vegetation is best used in tandem with other noise barriers,
like walls and fences which have excellent noise - reduction qualities,
in order to add aesthetic appeal.
SECTION 2: HOUSING OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
OBJECTIVE 1. ASSURE A DIVERSIFIED SUPPLY OF HOUSING IN THE PLANNING AREA.
There are various reasons that individuals and families reside
in the Planning Area. Many families desire spacious homes and yards to provide
them a suburban atmosphere while hundreds of individuals prefer the non -main-
tenance and mobility afforded by apartments. Some need low -cost housing close
to commercial services and public transportation while others simply desire to
live in close proximity to their place of employment.
The actual provision of housing will continue to be supplied
by the private market. Tukwila however, has the capability to influence that
market through encouragement of alternative housing modes to meet the variety
of housing needs of Planning Area residents.
3 -6 January 26, 1976
Policy 1. Encourage housing developments which provide a diversity
of housing types.
So often residential developments contain monotonous rows
of nearly identical dwellings in a typical grid pattern. This can be
avoided by providing variations within residential developments. A
Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) is one conventional mechanism to
attain such diversity. Rather than develop ten acres of medium density
apartments, the same ten acres could provide a small portion of high
density apartments and a larger portion of medium density apartments
interspersed with townhouses or duplexes. Other mechanisms to attain
diversity include varied setbacks and flexible subdivision regulations.
Policy 2. Encourage the development of owner- occupied multiple -
family residential units.
Commonly known as the condominium, this form of housing
provides a more dense living environment but emphasizes many of the
amenities so often lost in most multiple - family developments. Normally
a higher cost form of housing, it enhances the variety of dwellings
yet does not drain municipal services.
Policy 3. Recognize the mobile home which conforms to Uniform
Building Code standards as a suitable housing alternative.
The fast - rising costs of single - family dwelling construction
has made the mobile home a viable alternative form of housing. Changes
in the design and construction of mobile homes have reduced the distinc-
tion between it and the traditional single- family home.
Policy 4. Allow the use of technological advances in building methods
and materials to reduce costs.
The constantly rising cost of construction in the housing
industry is awesome if not overwhelming. A prime example of a fairly
recent advance in construction technology is the advent of the
prefabricated single - family dwelling unit. The same is being accom-
plished, to a lesser degree, with small unit apartment buildings.
Such advances, both in technique and materials, have reduced construc-
tion costs and made suitable housing available to a wider range of
income levels.
3 -7 January 26, 1976
OBJECTIVE 2. MAINTAIN A SUITABLE, LIVEABLE HOUSING SUPPLY IN THE PLANNING
AREA.
The bulk of the single - family homes in the Planning Area are
aging structures yet basically of very sound construction. Normal maintenance
of these dwellings will assure the longevity of their liveability. Still many
others are deteriorating, due simply to neglect by the occupant as an indirect
result of land use conflicts or fear of increased assessments.
Actual deterioration, or even the appearance of such, often-
times has a direct impact on adjacent or nearby homes creating a snowball effect
which eventually leads to residential blight and an unsuitable housing supply.
Close attention to the maintenance of all residential structures is a key element
in any program to maintain a suitable supply of housing. Maintenance, coupled
with new construction, will help retain a suitable and liveable housing supply
throughout the Planning Area.
Policy 1. Promote rehabilitation of aging or deteriorating residential
structures.
Though rehabilitation of structures depends primarily upon
the owner, local programs or incentives can be developed to supplement
existing Federal programs in order to encourage rehabilitation of
structures. Oftentimes a simple exterior painting of one dwelling may
induce a neighbor to do the same, helping to reverse the downhill trend
and encourage reinvestment in the neighborhood.
Policy 2. Enforce building code regulations in all residential areas.
Code enforcement provides the most effective method of
municipal influence on the structural integrity of residential buildings.
A neglected, deteriorated structure can be abated as a public nuisance
and its adverse visual impact can be eliminated through normal code
enforcement.
Policy 3. Encourage the use noise insulation materials in the
construction of residential structures in areas which are
seriously impacted by freeway or aircraft noise.
The primary noise sources within the Planning Area are the
freeway system and the airports. The freeway system, for the most part
unbuffered, causes considerable noise levels along its corridor. The
noise associated with the aircraft using Sea -Tac airport is exceedingly
offensive to nearby residents at all hours of the day and night. The
use of sufficient noise insulation in the construction of residential
housing units in noise - impacted areas will help to reduce the degree of
impact, thus increasing the liveability of housing structures.
3 - January 26, 1976
OBJECTIVE 3. ENCOURAGE PARTICIPATION IN APPROPRIATE FEDERAL PROGRAMS TO
ASSIST FAMILIES OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME LEVELS.
Many programs exist at all levels of government to assist low -
income families. The private housing industry can utilize
these programs where benificial not only to the industry but to families in
need of such housing. Similarly, Tukwila can use beneficial
programs to induce provision of assisted housing, either new construction of
assisted units or an appropriate rent- subsidy program, to accomodate those
families of low and moderate incomes.
Policy I. Assisted housing units should be dispersed throughout
the residential community.
Until recently, assisted housing across the nation was
provided in large groups, sometimes as many as 400 or 500 units in
a single project. Others consisted of 50 or 100 units in separate
projects but located within a half -mile of each other. Not only did
this adversely affect adjacent neighborhoods and property values, but
it had an inherent deterioration effect and lowered the inhabitants'
self- image.
Dispersal of assisted housing units throughout the
community is an effort to avoid the types of mistakes made in the
past. It can help to induce a sense of self- identity, a sense of being
a part of the residential neighborhood or community.
3 -9 January 26, 1976
SECTION: HOUSING OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
OBJECTIVE 1.
Tga W AI2L/
41611 Itt410
ASSURE A DIVERSIFED SUPPLY SING IN THE PLANNING
AREA.
D ia e IQ V1(72119).9'14
Ag
Various are the reasons that ine aaduals and families
reside in the Planning Area. Many families desire spacious homes and yards
to provide them a suburban atmosphere while hundreds of individuals prefer
the non - maintenance and mobility afforded by apartments. Some need low -cost
housing close to commercial services and public transportation and, while
others simply desire to live in close proximity to their place of emplyment,
still others seek to be removed from the urban concentration in which they
work — a characteristic bred by the high degree of mobility currently
enjoyed by our population.
Though actual provision of housing will continue to be largely supplied by
the private market, Tukwila has not only the capability but the responsibility
as well to influence that market through encouragement of a variety of housing
modes throughout the Planning Area to meet the variety of needs common to such
a crossroads community.
Policy 1. Recognize the mobile home (those which meet UBC standards)
as a suitable housing alternative.
Mobile homes have traditionally been looked down upon as
a "suitable" form of housing primarily because of their inherent
mobility. Homeowners also feared reduction in the value of their
homes if a trailer was to locate on the vacant lot next to them.
Over the recent past, however, the mobile home industry has grown
rapidly. This can be attributed to the fast - rising costs of
construction in the housing industry. The newer mobile homes,
vastly improved over their predecessors, still offer a less expensive
form of shelter to those who are suited to a smaller form of housing.
Policy 2. Encourage the development of owner - occupied multiple -
family residential units.
Commonly known as the condominium, this form of housing
provides a more dense living environment but emphasizes many of the
amenities so often lost in the typical renter - occupied apartment
complex. Normally a high cost form of housing, it enhances the
variety of dwellings yet does not drain municipal services.
Policy 3. Encourage housing developments which provide a diversity
of housing types.
So often residential com A :' :'.. F7?.
onous rows of
nearly dwellings :. t
y identical dwellin g in a typ 1 pattern. This can be
avoided by encouraging variations within residential deve metfts.
P.U.D.'s are conventional mechanisms t,,44 ttain city as
well as retain critical amenities t nt h � 'Up ten acres
of medium density apartments, the same acres could provide a
small portion of high density apartments and a larger portion of
medium density apartments interspersed with townhouses or.cee'-
um. In so doing, a diverse and desireable housing supply can
be achieved.
OBJECTIVE 2. MAINTAIN A SUITABLE, LIVEABLE HOUSING SUPPLY IN THE PLANNING
AREA.
The bulk of the homes in the Planning Area are not recently
built. Many are aging structures yet basically of very sound construction.
Normal maintenance of those dwellings will assure the longevity of their
liveability. Still many others are deteriorating, due simply to neglect by
the occupant as an indirect result of land use conflicts or fear of increased
assessments.
Actual deteriorartion, or even the appearance of such,
oftentimes has a direct effect on adjacent or nearby homes creating a snowball
effect which eventually leads to residential blight and an unsuitable housing
supply.
'Close attention to the maintenance of all residential structures
is a key element in any program to maintain a suitable supply of housing. Owners
as well as occupants must be encouraged, either directly or indirectly, to
maintain their dwellings at a complimentary level. That maintenance, coupled
with new construction, will help retain a suitable and liveable housing supply
throughout the Planning Area.
Policy 1. Promote rehabilitation of aging or deteriorating residential
structures.
Though rehabilitation of structures depends primarily upon
the owner or occupant, local programs or incentives can be developed
to supplement existing Federal programs to encourage regabilitation
of structures before they affect others. Oftentimes a simple exterior
painting of one dwelling will induce a neighbor to do the same, thus
reversing the downhill trend and encouraging reinvestment in the
neighborhood's structures.
(exeS,
tial areas. PRE
Policy 2. Utilize strict building code e �11 residen-
:a
Code enforcement provide t most direc_:-ive
method of municipal influence onDBt 1 ,, 1 ; lJ R ential
structures. A continually neglected '� . a ing structure (usually
unoccupied) can be abated as a public nuisance. Other public nuisance
legislation can prevent detrimental effects of non - maintenance.
Policy 3. Encourage the use of noise insulation materials in the
aatthufA residential structures in areas which are impacted
by freeway or aircraft noise.
The primary incompatible land uses within the Planning
Area are the freeway system and Sea -Tac airport. The freeway system,
for the most part unbuffered, causes considerable noise levels along
its corridor. The noise associated with the aircraft using Sea -Tac
airport is exceedingly offensive to nearby residents at all hours of
the day and night. The use of sufficient noise insulation in the
construction of residential housing units in those impacted areas will
help to reduce the degree of impact, thus increasing the 1lveability
of those structures.
OBJECTIVE 3. ENCOURAGE PARTICIPATION IN APPROPRIATE FEDERAL PROGRAMS TO
ASSIST FAMILIES OF LOW AND MODERATE INCOME LEVELS.
Many programs exist at all levels of government to assist low -
income families. FHA and VA loan programs and Title VIII of the Housing and
Community Development Act of 1974 are just a few. Programs are available to the
private marketws well as governmental units.
The private housing industry should be encouraged to utilize
these programs where benificial not only to the industry but to families in
need of such housing. Similarly, Tukwila should encourage the use of beneficial
programs to induce provision of assisted housing, either new construction of
assisted units or an appropriate rent - subsidy program, to accomodate those
families of low and moderate incomes.
Policy 1. Assisted housing units should be disbursed throughout
the residential community.
Until the recent past, assisted housing was provided in
large groups, sometimes as many as 400 or 500 units in a single
project. Others consisted of 50 or 100 units in separate projects
but located within a half -mile of each other. This created a
"group poverty" area, scorned by nearby homeowners, and contributed
to the user's loss of individual identity and the "labiling" of those
low and moderate income families.
Disbursement of assisted hou • •t�the
community is an effort to avoid creatin ;•" :�'�i:' ' It
induces a sense of self- identity, a sen • • eing a part of the
neighborhood or community rather than a part of the poverty slums.
DRAFT ,, # 1g ,yECT TO RECISION
Policy . Encourage the use of techologic building
methods and materials to reduce co sts .
The constantly rising cost of construction in the housing
industry is awesome if not overwhelming. Any reasonable effort to
reduce costs of construction must be made. A prive example of a
fairly recent advance in construction technology is the advent of
the prefabricated single - family dwelling unit. The same is being
accomplished, to a lesser degree, with small apartment buildings.
Such advances, both in technique and materials, have reduced con -
struction costs and made suitable housing available to a wider
range of income levels.
SECTION 1: NEIGHBORHOOD OBJECTIVES AND POLICIE 0,v
OBJECTIVE 1. PROTECT ALL VIABLE RESIDE NEIGHBO
• • v b • AM
INTRUSIONS BY INCOMPATIBLE LANIi
140 o
Intensive forms of land use tend to disrupt the liveability
of the land around them. Industrial uses, for example, may have adverse
environmental, visual, and aesthetic impacts on surrounding properties. Also,
intensive urban uses tend to inflate surrounding land values, causing adverse
property tax situations for nearby residential properties. Hence, intensive
land uses like commercial and industrial uses are traditionally huddled toget-
her in use districts of their own.
v
When intensive uses intrude into established residential areas,
they tend to undermine the quality of that neighborhood. Of course, some resi-
dential areas in Tukwila are in a transition from residential to industrial use,
and the homes which still remain in these urbanizing areas represent only temp-
orary residential use. But, in viable, established residential areas, it is the
intent of this objective to keep intensive, disruptive land uses from undermining
the quality of life.
Policy 1. Prohibit spot zoning in established residential
neighborhoods.
Spot zoning may be defined as the creation of a zoning
district within another zone which permits uses that are incompatible
with the parent zone. An example might be a small tract of heavy
manufacturing zoning (which would allow salvage yards, landfills,
and so on) in the heart of a single - family residential district. As
far as zoning is concerned, there are basically two ways to erode the
quality of a residential area: one is by permitting incompatible
land uses to jump into the neighborhood through spot zoning, or to
allow incompatible uses to eat away at the edges of the neighborhood
by failing to establish zoning buffers. Of the two, spot zoning is
quicker.
Policy 2. Vehicular traffic to commercial and industrial uses
should not be through residential areas.
The pleasantness of a residential neighborhood is in part
protected by the safe movement of a low amount of traffic through it.
In addition, most streets in residential areas are not designed to carry
the amount of traffic which may be generated by commercial or industrial
uses. Generally, if traffic is excessive, the safety of the residential
street is diminished, as is the pleasantness and quiet of the residential
neighborhood.
3 -3
January 26, 1976
Policy 3. Utilize natural features, 1 to separat
incompatible land uses from residential are
0
Probabl the most important * ,gOtrfer between incom-
patible land uses is not merely space ( "The 'further I am from that
nuisance, the better! "), but the appearance of visual separation.
For example, topography can make an extremely effective buffer even
though it may not separate incompatible uses by more than 30 -50 feet
in elevation. The illusion that is created is separation, of being
buffered, and it allows one to live with what is below or above, on
the other side or just around the corner. Another example is the
Green River. The wide expanse of river, the drama of constantly
moving waters, and the seasonal ebb and flow of the river level seems
to magnify the importance of the river rather than the disaffinity
between shoreline uses. By utilizing natural features like topo-
graphy and the Green River to separate incompatible land uses, the
City not only ensures the integrity of its residential areas, but uses
its natural beauty and open spaces to create an efficient land use
pattern.
Policy 4. Utilize open spaces, like parks and playfields to separate
incompatible land uses from the residential areas.
Land uses which have an open space nature can also function
as buffers between residential areas and incompatible uses. Parks,
playfields, and other public or private recreational areas are a few
examples of recreational open space which serve to harmonize divergent
districts in the land use pattern. Other uses, however, which are not
of a recreational character but which serve as open space, like farming
activities for instance, can also function to separate residential areas
from incompatible land uses.
Policy 5. Encourage the abatement of incompatible uses in viable
residential areas.
As mentioned, incompatible land uses which have encroached
into viable residential areas have an injurious and degenerative impact
on the neighborhood. Where it is feasible and consistent with the
future plan for community growth, it may be within the interest of the
community to abate the incompatible use in order to reestablish the
vigor and viability of the neighborhood. Before abatement, it is criti-
cally important that the community recognize the difference between
residential areas which are in transition and those which the community
intends to maintain, otherwise the effort will be confusing and unjust.
3-4 January 26, 1976
OBJECTIVE 2. MINIMIZE THE INCOMPATIBILITIES �E
RENT TYPES
RESIDENTIAL USES.
Objective 1 addressed the confl}r�q�C�ri.se between
residential areas and other land uses. This ob tivS actresses the incompati-
bilities which arise between residential uses themselves. Indeed, single-family
and multiple-family uses are both residential land uses, but they are not
synonymous nor are they absolutely or completely compatible. Differences in
the nature of structures, sites, occupants, and traffic-generation in single-
family versus multiple-family areas makes it necessary to order their distribution
pattern over the face of the Planning Area. When arranged compatibly, the quality
and efficiency of each district aremutually enhanced.
Policy 1. Provide for medium density "transition areas" between
high and low density residential areas.
Although multiple - family developments are residential in
nature, they represent a more intensive development of the land and
have an environmental impact much like commercial or industrial
structures. As such, dense multiple - family developments juxtaposed
with single - family residences are incompatible. To establish a
transition area or zone where density of residential development
gradually diminishes from high density multiple - family to low density
single - family is the intention o phi policy. Within this transition
area might be .located duplexes uses which are more compatible with
the nature of single - family areas. In this manner, the single - family
neighborhood is not vis -a -vis such formidable structures and the
longevity of the single - family neighborhood is promoted.
Policy 2. Vehicular traffic to multiple - family residential areas
should not be through single- family residential areas.
Multiple- family developments should be located functionally
convenient to a primary or secondary arterial street.
Because of the density of population within multiple - family
developments, a greater amount of traffic is generated in these areas
than in single - family residential areas. Generally, the higher the
density of development, the greater the traffic generated. One of the
attractive features of single - family areas is the safety and quiet of
their streets. A surge of traffic on these streets endangers life and
safety and contributes to a less desirable single - family environment.
Moreover, it behooves multiple - family developments to have direct
access onto arterial streets and highways for it enhances their
accessibility and reduces congestion on residential streets.
3 -5
January 26, 1976
c;
Jaii YS AND FREEWAYS
LIVING IN THE PLANNING
OBJECTIVE 3. DIMINISH THE ENVIRONMENTAL
WHICH ADVERSELY AFFECT THE
AREA.
While the freeways which se wila community have
profoundly enhanced the mobility of residents, the noise generated by a great
volume of traffic at high speeds has adversely affected the residential
environment. High noise levels are not conducive to the calm and quiet sought
by single - family residents, and residential development within the freeway
corridors has been stymied. It is primarily the edges of neighborhoods which
border the freeways that receive the greatest noise impact, but almost any
place in the City echoes the hum of the freeway.
Policy 1. Encourage the use of vegetative or fencelike screens
adjacent to freeways and along noisy use districts where
these districts abut residential areas.
Noise barriers along highways have been shown to be an
effective means of suppressing the noise levels which affect adjacent
properties. While vegetation does not greatly suppress noise, it does
act as a visual screen to separate residences from the frenzy of the
freeway. Vegetation is best used in tandem with other noise barriers,
like walls and fences which have excellent noise- reduction qualities,
in order to add aesthetic appeal.
3 -6 January 26, 1976.
1 ..
OBJECTIVE 1.
NEIGHBORHOOD OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
PROTECT ALL R NEIGHBORHOODS FROM
INTRUSION ., PATIBLE LAND USES.
Policy 1. P1`ohibit spot zoning in established
residential neighborhoods.
Policy 2. Vehicular traffic to commercial and
industrial uses should not be through
residential areas.
Policy 3. Utilize natural features, like topo-
graphy, to separate incompatible land
uses.
Policy 4. Utilize open spaces, like parks, play -
fields, or forests, to separate incom-
patible land uses.
Policy S. Encourage the abatement of incompatible
uses in viable residential areas.
OBJECTIVE 2. MINIMIZE THE INCOMPATIBILITIES BETWEEN
DIFFERENT TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL USES.
Policy 1. Provide for medium density "transition
areas" between high and low density
residential areas.
Policy 2. Vehicular traffic to multiple - family
residential areas should not be through
single - family residential areas.
Multiple - family developments should
have direct access to a primary or
secondary arterial street.
N a 0
. N b
W C N. N.
rt h N rt
(i Ir N. 0
b m 1 -i
H 111
N b ( rt
N W 0 N.
rt. rt
(D
0 N b (14
I H' 1 ti w
N. (D a 1-1 111 1 ti 0)
CD • 0 Al
0i b 1-4. W
• N rt.
tr N
tD`0
N N O 0
CD 0
(1,0 r.
(nWtc4 0
$ rr (D
4 1 R
r
ti
(D R, 0 N.
rf rh L+.
N. a n
N
f D N
M� I rt (D
▪ ` 1
kc b' h
h r
t (D (D
• (n (D
N 04
l N.
(D
OBJECTIVE 3.
DIMINISH THE NEGATIVE IMPACTS OF NOISE
FROM HIGHWAYS AND NOISE- GENERATING
INDUSTRIES ON THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS.
Policy 1. Encourage the use of vegetative
or fencelike screens adjacent to
freeways and along noisy industrial
areas where they abut residential
areas.
Policy 2. Encourage the use of noise insula-
tion materials in the construction
of residential structures in areas
which are impacted by freeway or
aircraft noise.
I- 1 1
rrt m Eli
Pi 0
do a
a 111 m
rt
w ti
m
m rt h
a
k.
n rr
N.0
0 w
a rt
rr 0
a
• ° m m
N.
HOUSING OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES
OBJECTIVE 1. ASSURE A DIVERSIFIED SUPPLY OF HOUSING IN
THE PLANNING AREA.
Policy 1. Recognize the mobile home (those which
meet UBC) as a suitable housing alter-
native.
Policy 2. Encourage the development of owner -
occupied multiple - family residential
units.
Policy 3. Encourage housing developments which
provide a diversity of housing types
(like P.U.D.'s).
OBJECTIVE 2. MAINTAIN A SUITABLE, LIVEABLE HOUSING
SUPPLY IN THE PLANNING AREA.
Policy 1. Promote rehabilitation of aging or
deteriorating residential structures.
Policy 2. Utilize strict building code enforce-
ment in all residential areas. A o4k evtt,ourale.
A.fl)C4c { avntO.
Policy 3. Encourage the use of technological
advances in building methods and
materials to reduce costs.
OBJECTIVE 3. ASSURE SUITABLE HOUSING FOR LOW - INCOME
FAMILIES.
Policy 1. Encourage participation in appro-
priate federal programs to assist
families of low and moderate income
levels.
Policy 2. Assisted housing units should be
disbursed throughout the residential
community.
rt a, H
ti
m rt n
� wu,0
l C rt v.
N
• N 0
N• 0 rt
r "' .
W . O
b b �
o rt
b o
m N.
rt Di
O En
a •
0
a
rt m to
• a
ti W Cr t
D H. (D
H �G
rt
n o C
m M m
M K
N o 0
M o
rt
ID y
N. rt
m.
o I W.
O • W
N 0
N . 0
0
W N.Ltr
• rt
b 0
o c
• M
W
O ti
o
N
m O
ti
N
ti
X. ADJOURNMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION
AGENDA
26 February 1976 8:00 P.M.
I. CALL TO ORDER
II. INTRODUCTION OF NEW COMMISSIONERS
III. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
IV. CITY COUNCIL ACTIONS
V. OLD BUSINESS
A. Comprehensive Plan Review
B. Elections
VI. NEW BUSINESS
v A. PUBLIC HEARING - REZONE - R -1 to C -2 (Anderson)
B. PUBLIC HEARING, CONTINUED - PARK and OPEN SPACE PROGRAM
C. PUBLIC HEARING - RESIDENCE ELEMENT
VII. SIGNS
VIII. BOARD OF ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW
A. Site Plan - Addition to Kirschner Scientific
IX. OTHER BUSINESS
A. Letter from Board of Adjustment re: Sign Code
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
PLANNING COMMISSION
STAFF REPORT
26 February 1976 8:00 P.M.
AGENDA ITEM VI c : PUBLIC HEARING - RESIDENCE ELEMENT
The RESIDENCE Element was originally drafted by the Planning Department staff
under the general guidelines the General and Element Goals adopted by the
City Council as Resolution #504. The original draft was thoroughly reviewed
by the RESIDENCE Committee,, a volunteer group of citizens. Through the review
process, the original draft was modified to bring the intent of the element
more in line with community thinking. A map of recommended residence areas
and densities has been submitted by the citizen group for consideration by
the Planning Commission in May, 1976, per the Flow Chart.
Those who participated in the RESIDENCE Committee review were: Mrs. Anna
Bernhard, Mrs. Alice Frey, Mr. Clancy Mingo, Mrs. Karen VanDusen, Mrs. Margarette
Chuml ea Mr::..John Richards, Mr: Steven 'Welsh and 'Mrs Elanor McLester: Mr.: Hans
West, Planning Commissioner, chaired the RESIDENCE Committee. ..
CITY OF TUKWILA •
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
26 February 1976 8:00 P.M.
(date)
Notice is hereby given that the Tukwila PLANNING COMMISSION
will conduct a PUBLIC HEARING on the above date at City Hall, 14475 - 59th
Avenue South, to consider ADOPTION of the RESIDENCE ELEMENT of the
h Tukwila Plannin. Area.
Su':
. ,
All interested persons are encouraged to appear and be heard.
(time)
Richard Kirsop, Vice - Chairman
Tukwila Planning Commission
For further information contact Gary Crutchfield at 242 -2177.
Published in the Renton Record- Chronicle o 11 and 18 February 1976.
MINUTES OF
RESIDENCE COMMITTEE
19 February 1976
The fifth meeting of the Residence Committee was commenced at 7:30 P.M. by
Chairman West. Committee members present were: Margarette Chumlea, Karen
VanDusen, Alice Frey, Steven Welsh and John Richards. Gary Crutchfield
represented the Planning Department.
Mr. Crutchfield noted that Anna Bernhard was still ill and could not attend
and Elanor McLester would not be present due to another engagement.
Minutes of the meeting conducted 17 February 1976 were distributed and read.
Motion by John Richards, seconded by Karen VanDusen and carried to approve
the minutes as submitted.
A revised Element, reflecting changes made 17 February 1976, was distributed
and each Objective and Policy was read and discussed.
Policy 4:
Obj. 1
Neighborhood
Policy 2:
Obj. 3
Policy 7:
Obj. 3
Add the word "office" after commercial and include reference to
office uses in the text.
Add but necessary" after unattractive.
Within the text, replace "adolescent" with "young ". Delete
everything after "parking area" and add "and the streets." to
end the text.
Policy 3: Text to read: The continually swelling costs of single - family
Obj. 1 home construction have rendered the mobile or prefabricated home
Housing a more attractive housing alternative for some families. Modern
construction techniques and materials have also reduced the
distinction between single - family and prefabricated homes. However,
the "transient" appearance related to the mobile or prefabricated
home can be mitigated by the use of substantial foundations. That
"transience" can be further reduced if the size and shape of the
mobile or prefabricated home substantially relate to the suburban
homes on adjacent lots. Oftentimes notable differences appear
between conventional and prefabricated homes in the form of carports,
garages and the like. Such uses are traditionally built -ins in
conventional homes but add -ons to prefabricated homes. With only
minor modifications within building codes, prefabricated homes can
be made more permanent and brought into conformance with the character
of surrounding residences.
Residence Committee Page 2
Minutes 19 February 1976
Policy 4:
Obj. 2
Obj. 4:
Delete phrase for the City of Tukwila."
Last sentence of the text revised to read: The relationship
between design and crime has been studied and continues to be
studied. The results of these studies cannot be ignored by
planners nor residents.
This completed all changes to the Element and the Committee agreed the Element
should be forwarded to the Planning Commission as amended at this meeting.
The Residence Map with density designations was displayed as synthesized by
staff from the individual maps completed on 17 February by the Committee. Mr.
Crutchfield explained that staff had identified and outlined those density
areas of unanimous agreement by the Committee and, using man -made and natural
characteristics, expanded or contracted these areas to identify the extent of
each residential density. Noted several areas of disagreement among committee
members and suggested each area be discussed thoroughly to refine the delineations
of density. (Each area is discussed below and corresponds to the numbered map
attached as a part of these minutes.)
AREA #1
No disagreement by the Committee all agreed that the eastern boundary be
generally the street and that physical separation be provided for buffer from
the railroad tracks and related industry.
AREA #2
Although considerable industry is nearby,
quality residential development justified
able discussion ensued regarding density.
compromise among committee members was to
AREA #3
All committee members agreed with maintenance of
AREA #4
All committee members agreed with maintenance of a low density residential area.
AREA #5
Committee members agreed this area should not exceed medium density since high
density would tend to significantly increase traffic through the low density
areas via South 144th and 51st Avenue. (This would be in conflict with explicit
policies.) In addition, the low density of Area #4 would be adversely affected
by high density directly across 51st Avenue.
Committee felt the potential of a high .
a residential designation. Consider -
A P.U.D. was most favorable. Final
designate this area medium density.
a low density residential area.
Residence Committee
Page 3
Minutes 19 February 1976
AREA #6
This area was deemed suitable for high density in light of its close proximity
and direct access to Southcenter Boulevard. Committee felt South 151st Street
should be maximum northerly extension of high density area so as not to intrude
on the low density area.
AREA #7
Direct access to Interurban Avenue is provided for much of this area and a
large complex already exists along the southern boundary of this area. The
same boundary utilizes streets, topography and parks as buffers between it and
the low density area to the south.
AREA #8
This area was clearly identified as the single - family area of the Tukwila hill
and should not shrink to any degree.
AREA #9
Access routes and a degree of physical separation from the low density area
caused this to designated medium density. This also discourages access to
high density areas through the low density areas along South 144th.
AREA #10
This area currently contains several high density units and is the most logical
area for such due to convenience to Southcenter Boulevard and commercial services
and is separated from the low density area #8 by topography and some medium den-
sity area.
AREA #11
This area is designed to utilize topography and streets to provide a buffer
between the low density area and the existing and potential high density area.
AREA #12
This area simply encompasses the existing high density residential developments.
AREA #13
In order to complement the park and the existing residential development within
the confines of this area it was designated medium density.
AREA #14
This entire area was unanimously agreed upon to remain low density in considera-
tion of existing development, street patterns, geology and slope stability.
Residence Committee
Minutes
AREA #15
Considerable discussion ensued regarding view, useability, access and adjacent
land use. Northern portion is excellent residential property. Decision to
encompass entire area including the site presently used as refuse transfer
station (this could be made a conditional or special use). Moreover, the
natural canyon should be used as a natural separation between the refuse sta-
tion and the residential area. Considerable discussion centered on density.
Finally compromised on low density.
AREA #16
This area includes an existing high density residential development as well as
suitable vacant land to the north and south which would not be inhibited by
industrial uses to the north. Moreover, high density residential use will
complement the park across the river.
This completed the map review exercise. Motion by Steven Welsh, seconded by
Alice Frey and carried to adopt the residential designations as clarified at
this meeting. Motion by Steven Welsh, seconded by John Richards and carried
to designate the remainder of the unincorporated Planning Area in accordance
with the current County plans. Margarette Chumlea abstained from voting on
this motion.
Mr. Crutchfield noted this completed the Residence Element and Map. Expressed
his appreciation to the committee members for their fine contributions and
perseverance in completing the Element on schedule. Encouraged all members to
follow the Element through the legal process and attend the Planning Commission
meeting next Thursday evening.
Motion by Margarette Chumlea, seconded by Steven Welsh and carried to adjourn
the meeting. Chairman West adjourned the final meeting of the Residence Element
at 10:30 P.M.
Minutes submitted by:
Gary Crutc ield
Planning partment
Approved by:
Hans West, Chairman
Residence Committee
Page 4
19 February 1976
STATE OF WASHINGTON
COUNTY OF KING
Barbar.e...C.e.mpn.gne being first duly sworn on
oath, deposes and says that she.. is the .. ch•ie f .. o l e .pk of
THE RENTON RECORD - CHRONICLE, a newspaper published four (4)
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 news-
paper 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 Renton
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. r...o•r•••Fubl•ie•••He •
•• Plan• ing••• Coai• e. i• on• ;••••Ree•4denee••Element••••
as it was published in regular issues (and
not in supplement form of said newspaper) once each issue for a period
of two consecutive issues, commencing on the
11 ... day of Feb.. ,19 ..7 f j..., and ending the
�8... day of Feb.. ,19..76., 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 $.7f6Q 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 a,8 day of
= - 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.
V.P.C. Form No. 87
, 19..76
Affidavit : of Publication
ss.
cbiet•..c erk
//%ad
Notary Public in and for the State of Washf{igton,
residing at Kent, King County.
1
NEIGHBORHOOD
Policy 5
Obj. 3
MINUTES OF
RESIDENCE COMMITTEE
17 February 1976
The fourth meeting of the Residence Committee was commenced at 7:30 P.M. by
Chairman Hans West. Committee members present were Elanor McLester, John
Richards, Steven Welsh, Karen VanDusen, and Margarette Chumlea. Fred Satter -
strom represented the Planning Department.
Mr. Satterstrom noted that Gary Crutchfield who regularly sits in for the
Planning Department was ill and could not attend. In addition, committee
members Alice Frey and Anna Bernhard had been called and they were ill. also.
After some discussion, Karen VanDusen moved and John Richards seconded to
approve the minutes of the February 10th meeting. Motion carried.
Mr. Satterstrom drew attention to a couple of items in the February 10th
minutes. According to the minutes, the committee had directed the staff to
draft new policies to reflect committee concerns over off - street parking in
multiple - family developments and prefabricated dwellings. These new policies
had not been drafted due to Mr. Crutchfield's illness. Mr. Satterstrom stated
that he had not felt qualified to suggest new policies since he had not followed
the workings of the Residence Committee very closely. As a result, Mr. Satter -
strom suggested that these areas of concern be addressed right off.
Committee expressed concern over some of the existing multiple -
family development's inability to handle visitor parking. Parking
space for recreational vehicles is also inadequate in some develop-
ments. Elanor McLester noted that the minimum parking standards
cover parking space for tenants only, not visitors or tenant's
recreation vehicles.
It was noted by staff that the way Policy 5 was worded included two
separate thoughts: The first concerned parking and the second
concerned recreational or open space. Committee agreed and it was
suggested to split the two ideas into two separate policies and
split the underlying explanatory text between them since it too
related to separate ideas.
Policy 5 was eventually reworded to read: "In addition to parking
space for tenants, encourage the provision of adequate parking space
for guests and recreational vehicles within multiple - family develop-
ments."
Residence Committee Page 2
Minutes 17 February 1976
Policy 7
Obj. 3
HOUSING
Policy 3
Obj. 1
Policy 1
Obj. 4
A policy 7 was added to reflect the Committee's concern over
recreation and open space opportunities within multiple - family
developments. The second half of the explanatory text under
Policy 5 was included as the explanation for the new policy 7
which was worded: "Encourage the provision of recreational open
space within multiple - family developments."
Considerable discussion revolved around how to address prefabricated
dwellings in a policy statement. Committee members voiced dissatis-
faction over the mobile or prefabricated home's "transience." There
was general agreement by the Committee that these types of homes
should be more permanent, more substantial. Steven Welsh mentioned
that these dwellings should be of substantial size and shape as the
suburban homes on adjacent lots. Elanor McLester stated that pre-
fabricated homes should conform to the character of the surrounding
residential neighborhood. It was generally agreed that this would
be very difficult to implement or to legally carry out. John Richards
also suggested that some of the differences between conventional and
prefabricated homes were related to carports, garages, and the like
which are traditionally built -ins in conventional homes but add -ons
to prefabricated homes. Staff proposed a new policy which would
generally incorporate the feelings of the group but not be discrim-
inatory to prefabricated dwellings. The policy read: "Develop
guidelines within the Building Code which seek to make prefabricated
dwellings more substantial and permanent and recognize these dwellings
as a suitable housing alternative." The Committee agreed this policy
generally reflected their sentiments. There was general agreement
also that the explanatory text should be changed to incorporate Com-
mittee's concerns.
At this point there was a suggestion to vote on the adoption of the objectives and
policies by the Committee. However, it was agreed that this vote should come after
a review of Housing Objective 4 and its policies, drafted by John Richards.
Obj. 4 One change was suggested by the Committee to the wording of the
objective; change "multiple - family" to "residential ".
Policy 1 and its corollary policy were combined into one policy
statement but two different sentences. Within the explanatory
text, the words "contemporary housing" were changed to "multiple -
family".
Residence Committee
Minutes
Policy 3
Obj. 3
**kw
Fred N. Satterstrom
Planning Department
Page 3
17 February 1976
Policy 3 was changed to Policy 4 and a new Policy 3 was created
which read: "Encourage the adequate lighting of residential
streets and parking lots."
There being no further discussion on any of the objectives and policies of the
Residence Element, Steven Welsh made a motion to recommend the Residence element
to the Planning Commission, seconded by John Richards, and carried unanimously.
The Committee noted that they retained the prerogative to return to the policies
at their next meeting to make any changes they felt were necessary.
Staff then presented the Committee with gridded maps of the Planning Area. All
grid squares which had been checked by at least one committee member as suitable
for residential use had been left open; those which had not were darkened out.
The Committee was asked to now go over all open grid squares and designate them —
using the adopted criteria — for high, medium, or low density residential use.
A synthesis of all responses on this map would be presented by staff to the Committee
at the next meeting. The Committee then spent about an hour going over the maps
and designating squares L, M, or H.
At 10:20 P.M. all members had finished their maps and the meeting was adjourned.
Minutes submitted by:
AGENDA
RESIDENCE COMMITTEE
February 17, 1976
I. Call to Order
II. Minutes from February 10 Meeting
III. Review of Objectives and Policies
IV. Mapping Exercise
V. Adjournment
The third meeting of the Residence Committee was commenced at 7:30 P.M. by
Chairman West. Committee members present were: Elanor McLester, John Richards,
Clancy Mingo, Steven Welsh and Alice Frey. Gary Crutchfield represented the
Planning Department.
Mr. Crutchfield noted that Anna Bernhard, Margarette Chumlea and Karen VanDusen
had notified the Planning Department of their absence.
Mr. Crutchfield collected the viable Residential Area maps from those committee
members present and Anna Bernhard had delivered hers earlier. Noted that Staff
will create a composite of these maps and it will be distributed at the next
meeting.
Mr. Crutchfield distributed minutes of the meeting conducted 5 February 1976.
The minutes were read by all committee members present. Chairman West called
for approval of the minutes. Motion by John Richards, seconded by Steven Welsh
and carried to approve the minutes as prepared.
Mr. Crutchfield distributed the revised Residence Element, dated 9 February 1976,
which reflects all changes made by the Committee as of that date. Suggested the
Committee review thoroughly to be sure the changes are correct.
NEIGHBORH00D
Policy 4:
Obj. 1
Policy 3:
Obj. 2
Policy 2:
Obj. 3
Policy 4:
Obj. 3
C
MINUTES OF
RESIDENCE COMMITTEE
10 February 1976
Committee agreed that adding the word "office" after the word "to"
and change the word "and" to "or" would be sufficient together
with additional text to identify public as well as private offices
which generate traffic from outside the residential neighborhood.
Mr. Crutchfield noted the revision of Karen VanDusen's suggested
policy resulted in ambiguity. Read original policy and Committee
agreed to replace the revision with the original.
Committee agreed to add the words but necessary" after the word
unattractive.
Committee discussed specific problems created by lack of maintenance
of open spaces. John Richards noted potential fire hazards and
Elanor McLester noted the effect of tent caterpillars on trees.
Committee agreed that the text should be expanded to include these
thoughts.
Residence Committee Page 2
Minutes 10 February 1976
Policy 5:
Obj. 3
HOUSING
Policy 3:
Obj. 1
Policy 4:
Obj. 2
it*Afebtm
Gary Crutchfield
Planning Department
Considerable discussion as to intent of this policy. Agreed
that parking space and recreational space should be dealt with
separately. Directed Staff to propose a new policy encouraging
provision of adequate off - street parking space for automobiles
as well as recreational vehicles and that the latter be sufficiently
screened.
Lengthy discussion ensued with respect to the allowance of a
mobile home to locate next door to an existing single- family
home and the subsequent reduction in resale value of the single -
family home. Committee agreed that market forces will help
regulate this; however, the policy could be added to so as to
indicate that prefabricated homes should not detract from the
general character of existing dwellings in the neighborhood.
Discussion regarding possibility of making mobile homes a
conditional use. Mr. Crutchfield explained that conditional
uses usually have some notable incompatibilities which may be
mitigated through location and design review; hence the cond i-
tional use procedure. Mobile homes as a conditional use, however,
would appear to be a purely subjective matter and would, in fact,
be contrary to Objective 1. General agreement by the Committee
to draft new policy recognizing those prefabricated dwellings
which conform to the character of existing dwellings within the
neighborhood and Uniform Building Code standards as a suitable
housing alternative.
Agreed to strike the phrase "for the City of Tukwila" since all
elements of the Comprehensive Plan apply to the city.
John Richards distributed a new Objective 3, proposed by him, which deals with
crime prevention through design techniques. Considerable discussion ensued as
to methods of implementation, actual design techniques and effects on single -
family dwellings. General agreement that these policies should be directed
primarily toward multiple - family developments.
Mr. Crutchfield stated a new draft of the Element will be distributed at the
next meeting which will incorporate the changes indicated at this meeting.
Distributed proposed definitions and criteria to be used in the next step of
the mapping process. The committee offered no changes to those proposed.
Mr. Crutchfield suggested that all committee members familiarize themselves with
both the definitions and criteria by the next meeting to be conducted Tuesday,
17 February 1976.
Motion by Mr. Clancy Mingo, seconded by Steven Welsh and carried to adjourn the
meeting. Chairman West adjourned the meeting at 10:10 P.M.
uutes submitted by:
`
e 61.
10 February 1976
VIII. Adjournment
RES IDENCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA
7:30 P.M.
I. Call to Order
II. Collection of Maps — Viable Residential Areas
III. Distribution and Approval of Minutes -- 5 February 1976
IV. Distribution of Revised Draft of Element -- 9 February 1976
V. Review of Entire Element
VI. Explanation of second step of Mapping Process
VII. Draw criteria and definitions to use in designation of
residential densities -- second step in Mapping Process.
LOW DENSITY:
1. Identification and natural extension of existing single -
family use areas.
2. Little incompatible use.
3. Steep slopes.
RESIDENCE ELEMENT
CRITERIA FOR DESIGNATION OF
RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES
MEDIUM DENSITY:
1. Buffer between identified Low Density use area and identi-
fied High Density use area.
HIGH DENSITY:
1. Identification and natural extension of existing High.
Density use areas.
2. Mild Slope.
3. Functionally convenient to primary or secondary arterial
(must not generate traffic through identified Low Density
use area).
RESIDENCE ELEMENT
DEFINITIONS OF DENSITY DESIGNATIONS
LOW DENSITY:
0-5 dwelling units per gross acre. Generally typical tract
housing (single - family dwellings).
MEDIUM DENSITY:
6-16 dwelling units per gross acre. Generally typifies fourplexes,
tri- plexes and duplexes.
HIGH DENSITY:
Over. 16 dwelling units per gross acre. Generally typifies the exist-
ing apartment complexes found throughout. Tukwila.
MINUTES OF
RESIDENCE COMMITTEE
5 February 1976
The second meeting of the Residence Committee was commenced at 7:30 P.M. by
Chairman West. Committee members present were: Anna Bernhard, Alice Frey,
John Richards, Clancy Mingo and Steven Welsh. Gary Crutchfield represented
the Planning Department.
Minutes of the Committee meeting conducted on 3 February 1976 were distributed
and read by each committee member. Chairman West suggested all minutes be
approved by motion so as to indicate their accuracy. Motion by John Richards,
seconded by Steven Welsh and carried to approve the minutes as prepared.
Mr. Crutchfield noted that Mrs. Chumlea had notified him that she would not be
able to attend this evening due to illness. Anna Bernhard noted Karen VanDusen
would not be able to attend but that she had given Mrs. Bernhard her proposed
policies.
Mr. Crutchfield read the policies proposed by Karen VanDusen for Objective 2,
Section 1, which deals with the visual and physical separation (buffer) between
existing multiple - family residential areas and adjacent single - family residential
neighborhoods.
Committee generally agreed but noted that man -made barriers (such as fences)
would be a futile effort to provide visual separation.
Mr. Crutchfield read a policy proposed by Karen VanDusen which would require
adequate off - street parking and recreational space provisions within multiple -
family developments. Committee agreed with this concept and policy.
Mr. Crutchfield read a policy proposed by Karen VanDusen to be included under
Objective 3 regarding provision of safe pedestrian rights -of -ways between
residential areas and commercial, service and recreational areas. Committee
agreed with this policy.
John Richards distributed copies of a new Objective 3 and several related
policies. Each was read and discussed as noted.
Objective 3: The new objective would diminish the adverse impacts to the
quality of living produced by man -made and natural systems.
This objective would essentially enhance and protect the
liveability within the Planning Area by reducing adverse
effects such as noise, junk yards and land fills as well as
natural systems such as marshes and vegetation.
Policy 1: This policy is proposed to remain as in the draft Element.
■
Residence Committee Page 2
Minutes 5 February 1976
Policy 2:
Policy 3:
Policy 4:
Policy 5:
Policy 6:
C
This new policy would encourage screening of unattractive use
areas to mitigate visual blight.
This new policy would encourage the general beautification of
the residential areas.
This new policy would encourage maintenance of undeveloped
open spaces to mitigate adverse effects of such.
This policy would encourage that land use decisions within
the Planning Area not adversely affect the liveability of
viable residential areas outside the Planning Area.
This policy would encourage coordination with other agencies to
minimize adverse effects to the residential quality within the
Planning Area.
A copy of the proposed Objective 3 and its proposed related policies, as proposed
by John Richards, is attached to these minutes for reference purposes.
The Committee generally agreed with all the proposed policies. Mr. Crutchfield
suggested that proposed policies 5 and 6 be placed under a fourth objective
which would be to minimize adverse effects on the residential quality through
coordination of land use decisions by all appropriate agencies.
With the objectives and policies of Section 1 essentially satisfactory, Mr.
Crutchfield distributed and explained a flow chart regarding the Residence
Element mapping process, noting the first step will be accomplished by the
Committee members, on an individual basis, over the weekend in the form of
identifying the viable residential areas within the Planning Area. Also
distributed gridded maps and written explanation of first mapping step.
Mr. Crutchfield explained that criteria must be developed (drawn from the
objectives and policies) to enable the identification of viable residential
areas in an objective manner, the first mapping step.
Criteria proposed by Staff were distributed and each objective and policy was
read and discussed thoroughly to determine any sound criteria which may be
derived from each. Upon reviewing the Neighborhood section, the following
criteria was agreed upon to be used in the identification of viable residential
areas.
CRITERIA
1. Houses and apartments must be part of a viable neighborhood, not an
island in a sea of incompatibility.
2. Vacant land must be a natural extension to an existing viable resi-
dential area.
Residence Committee Page 3
Minutes 5 February 1976
3. There must be little or tolerable incompatible land use within the
viable residential area.
4. The general condition of housing within the neighborhood must be
average at least.
5. There should be a low level of vacancy within the neighborhoods.
6. Topography should separate the viable residential neighborhood from
incompatible or non - residential use areas. (This may not be a
criteria per se, but should be kept in mind in determining fringes
of the viable residential neighborhood.)
All Committee members indicated their understanding of the mapping step to be
accomplished.
Considerable discussion ensued among Committee members while determining criteria.
In analyzing Policy 4 of Objective 1, it was suggested that the policy include
governmental office uses as they generate as much or more traffic than many
commercial or industrial uses. Noted the fact that the King County Housing
Authority administrative headquarters went through considerable scrutiny before
they were allowed to locate in the periphery of the residential area while the
City Hall is located near the heart of the single - family residential neighbor-
hood. General agreement by Committee members to include such uses in this
policy. John Richards agreed to work on this concept.
The Committee began review of the Housing section which will be reviewed in
much more detail at the next meeting.
Policies 3 and 4 under Objective 1 was discussed with respect to all forms of
prefabricated housing. General agreement that the two policies could be combined
into one policy and eliminate the encouragement of technological advances since
it is not planning related and cannot be influenced through planning measures.
Mr. Crutchfield read a policy proposed by Karen VanDusen which would provide for
creation and enforcement of a Housing Code for Tukwila. A Housing Code would
encourage maintenance of the appearance where the Uniform Building Code fails
to do so. Committee members agreed.
John Richards suggested that a policy be developed to encourage residential
designs include crime - prevention techniques especially in multiple - family
developments. Volunteered to work on this for the next meeting.
Mr. Crutchfield read a policy proposed by Karen VanDusen which would provide
for low- income housing for the elderly. Committee generally agreed.
Residence Committee
Minutes
Discussion on the Housing section in general continued as well as the mapping
process. Gary Crutchfield noted the next meeting will be at 7:30 P.M. Tuesday,
10 February and will be devoted primarily to the Housing section.
Chairman West adjourned the Committee meeting at 10:35 P.M.
Minutes submitted by:
Gatryt ru tc
Planning
ield
partment
Page 4 •
5 February 1976
: -s... .
5 February 1976
I. Distribution of minutes
II. Review and Discussion of Neighborhood Section
III. Development of Mapping Criteria
IV. Explanation of Mapping Criteria
. Adjournment
RESIDENCE COMMITTEE
AGENDA
7:30 P.M.
RESIDENCE ELEMENT
MAPPING OF VIABLE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS
PROPOSED CRITERIA:
1. Viable Neighborhood:
a. Houses are part of viable neighborhood, not an island in a
sea of incompatibility or imminent industrial overrun.
b. Vacant areas: are they natural extensions to existing residential
areas? These areas should be suitable living environments and
natural extensions to existing residential areas.
c. Housing condition. The condition of housing should be at least
average.
d. Occu anc . There should be a high level of occupancy of housing
low level of vacancy).
e. Little or tolerable incompatible land use.
COMMITTEE
STAFF
1st Meeting
Hand out
Planning
Area maps
to committee
members.
Hand out
gridded
Planning
Area map
to Com-
mittee
members.
2nd Meeting
Neighborhood
Policies
of Committee.
4,
Establish
criteria for
designating
residential
areas.
Establish and
Designate
viable Resi-
dential areas.
RESIDENCE MAPPING PROCESS
Staff
Analyze maps:
Omits all
undesignated
grid squares
from map and
re- presents
to committee
3rd Meeting
4th Meeting
Neighborhood
Policies
Establish
criteria for
Low, Medium,
and High
density areas.
Designate
Low, Medium,
and High
density
areas.
9
Results analyzed
by Staff:
Squares designated
L, M and H where
agreement exists.
Isobars of density
drawn by Staff.
Where disagreement
exists on grid,
Staff uses policies
to establish iso-
bars. Proposed
Residence Map drawn.
T wk ?laY►win6 Det artmeat
5th Meeting
Proposed Map
reviewed by
-) committee for
final recom-
mendation of
density areas.
2/5/ .
MINUTES OF
RESIDENCE COMMITTEE
3 February 1976
The initial meeting of the Residence Committee was commenced at 7:30 P.M.
by Chairman Hans West. All committee members introduced themselves.
Committee members present were: Anna Bernhard, Alice Frey, Karen VanDusen,
Mrs. Leland Chumlea, John Richards, Elanor McLester and Steven Welsh. Fred
Satterstrom and Gary Crutchfield represented the Planning Department.
Mr. Satterstrom explained the Comprehensive Plan process to date including the
questionnaires, flow chart, General Goals and the status of the two previous
elements — Natural Environment and Open Space. Generally described the
mapping process as well as the current Comprehensive Land Use Plan Map. Pointed
out the lack of goals and policies and the need for such to facilitate sound
and consistent land use decisions. Further noted that citizen input is instru-
mental in the determination of community goals, objectives and policies.
Mr. Crutchfield gave a slide presentation in concert with reading the intro-
duction to the Residence Element. Following the slide presentation, Mr. Richards
noted the lack of slides depicting the Planning Area as well as the negative
slant to the slides. That is, the slides generally depicted problems rather
than the general residential quality of the Tukwila Planning Area. Mr. Crutch-
field explained the intent of the slide presentation was to emphasize the
information contained in the introduction rather than familiarize the Committee
with the housing within the Planning Area. It is hoped that Committee members
are generally familiar with the residential neighborhoods within the Planning
Area.
Mr. Crutchfield encouraged all committee members to participate in the review
process and to offer any comments in order to achieve a diversity of thought.
This will enhance the outcome of the committee's work and make the Residence
Element more meaningful.
Mr. Crutchfield proceeded to read each Objective and Policy, including the
explanatory text for each, within the Neighborhood section of the Residence
Element draft.
Mrs. McLester noted her concern that Objective 1 should include protection of
single- family residential use from incompatibilities of multiple - family resi-
dential use. Mr. Crutchfield noted that concern is addressed under Objective 2
which will be reviewed after Objective 1.
Objective 1 Mr. Welsh felt the concept of Objective 1 should be more clearly
defined — "incompatible" can include many things.
The committee agreed to change the word "industrial" (in the 2nd
sentence of the explanatory text of Objective 1) to read "non-
residential".
Residence Committee Page 2
Minutes 3 February 1976
Policy 1.
Policy 2.
Policy 3.
Policy 4.
Policy 5.
Policy 6.
Mr. Richards suggested the committee consider the use of man-
made features in addition to the natural features addressed in
Policy 1 under Objective 1. Further suggested the Green River
is a poor example of a natural feature which separates residential
neighborhoods from incompatible land uses since the entire valley
along the river is industrial. Mrs. VanDusen agreed with Mr.
Richards' suggestion regarding inclusion of man -made features or
barriers. Mrs. Chumlea noted that most man -made barriers and
features are offensive to residential land use — such as free-
ways. Mrs. VanDusen agreed some might be difficult and actually
start problems rather than solve them.
Mr. Welsh noted this policy may tempt developers to construct
intense multiple - family complexes and simply dedicate the periphery
of the site (near single - family areas) to the City as a park.
Mrs. Bernhard noted the actual amount and location of open space
or even the development itself could be handed by the Planning
Commission and /or City Council.
Mr. Richards generally discussed the particular example of the
lone industrial building located in the midst of the river penin-
sula on 56th Avenue — as totally single- family residential area.
Mr. Richards noted the streets within a residential neighborhood
serve the residents themselves as they travel to work, play or
shopping. General agreement that arterials and other major
traffic modes are necessary evils but most can be designed to
serve the residential neighborhood without disrupting it.
Mrs. Chumlea noted this policy could be applied to the example
discussed under Policy 3. Felt this policy is necessary to
protect residential areas from encroachment or violation by
incompatible uses. Mr. Richards suggested the explanatory
text identify the interest of the neighborhood rather than the
community. That is, what is in the interest of the community as
a whole is not always in the interest of the neighborhood.
Further suggested the City administration be encouraged through
this policy to recommend abatement be initiated by the City Council
in some instances.
Mrs. McLester noted the City currently has many ordinances regarding
public nuisances that are simply not enforced. This policy would
encourage the City administration and City Council to enforce such
ordinances in the interest of protecting the residents of the
neighborhood.
Residence Committee Page 3
Minutes 3 February 1976
Objective 2. Mrs. McLester felt the City should designate single - family areas
and multiple - family areas and protect both use areas from
expansion of the other as well as other incompatible uses. Felt
the City should encourage better quality in the design and con-
struction of multiple - family developments. Noted some of the
existing apartment developments didn't look too bad when they
were first built — now they are an eyesore and a detriment to
the rest of the residential neighborhood.
Policy 1. General discussion ensued regarding the concept promoted by this
policy — that of better utilization of lower density multiple -
family development (i.e., duplexes, triplexes and fourplexes) as
a use much more harmonious with single- family than high density
apartments abutting single - family uses.
Policy 2. General agreement by the committee regarding this policy.
The Committee members generally all posed the possible need for
an additional policy dealing with existing or future multiple -
family developments where they abut single - family developments.
Would a transition area (low- density multiple - family) be appro-
priate to separate and buffer the two extremes from the other?
What happens to the existing situations? Policy suggested to
essentially state that where multiple - family districts join
vialbe single - family neighborhods, protect the integrity of the
single family area by not permitting intrusions of multiple -
family into the single - family area. Mrs. VanDusen agreed to work
on a policy regarding this matter.
Objective 3. Committee agreed to strike the term 'single - family' from the
second sentence. Also delete the entire third sentence.
Considerable discussion ensued regarding other adverse effects
of urbanization and the need for a fourth objective to address
beautification of the residential neighborhoods. Mr. Richards
agreed to work on an objective regarding this matter.
Mr. Satterstrom distributed topographical maps of the Planning Area and
suggested each committee member familiarize themselves with this map as one
like it will be used as the base map in the mapping exercise to be commenced
at the next meeting.
•
Residence Committee
Minutes
Mr. Crutchfield informed the committee members of the remaining available
meeting dates — 5, 10, 17 and 19 February — noting the Residence Element
and the map must be completed by the 20th of February. General agreement by
Committee members to meet on the dates mentioned, although some members will
not be able to attend all of them. Mr. Crutchfield requested committee members
to inform the Staff ahead of time if any member cannot attend a meeting.
Chairman West adjourned the Committee meeting at 9:45 P.M.
Minutes submitted by:
Gary Crutchfi d
Planning Dep rtment
Page 4
3 February 1976
RESIDENCE COMMITTEE.
AGENDA
3 February 1976 7:30 P.M.
I. Introduction of Chairman, Committee Members and Staff.
II. How We Got Here?
— The Planning Process
III. Explanation of Data Inventory
IV. Slide Presentation
V. Beginning of Review
VI. Scheduling of next meeting dates
VII. Distribution of Planning Area maps
RESIDENCE COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
Hans B. West, Chairman
Anna M. Bernhard
Mrs. Leland Chumlea
Alice W. Frey
Elanor McLester
Clancy Mingo
John Richards
Karen A. VanDusen
Steven A. Welsh
C
TO: Gary, Kjell
FROM: Fred
SUBJECT: Mapping for Residence Element
MEMORANDUM
CITY of T U KW I LA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
DATE: 28 Jan 1976
Lately, I have been giving a lot of thought as to how the Residence Committee
can accomplish their mapping exercise. The Open Space Committee merely had the
Staff propose a map and then they considered what was presented to them. This
type of an exercise is not a very systematic one, nor is it a very satisfying
one for the Staff or the Committee. The situation we face with doing the
proposed map for the Residential Committee is double - barreled: it must be a
systematic method and it must be a satisfying experience, at least to the
Committee members.
CRITERIA
In order to lend validity and legitimacy to the Residence map, certain
criteria should be met. Some of these criteria are listed as follows:
1. The mapping exercise itself must be systematic, as stated above. It'
must be methodological, not arbitrary, and it must lead opponents to
dispute the mapped pattern not how the pattern was arrived at by the
committee.
2. The mapped pattern must be based upon sound principles or practices,
not arbitrary, subjective, or whimsical prejudice or fancy. (I believe
the policies as they are stated in the Staff's proposal to the committee
represent sound planning principles).
3. The mapping exercise must be one which the Committee believes in and
wants. They must be able to select their own particular way in which
they want to map proposed residential areas.
If the abovementioned criteria are met, I believe the final proposed residential
land use map will be beyond criticism, at least for the manner in which it was
developed.
ALTERNATIVE METHODS IN MAPPING
There are probably a limitless number of ways in which the mapping of the
Residence Committee could be done. However, after sitting on it for a couple
of weeks, I see basically the following three methods:
Memorandum (I. Page 2
Mapping for Residence Element January 28, 1976
1. The Jig -Saw Puzzle approach:
This method of mapping is the loosest. It would entail taking a
blank Planning Area map and passing it out to members of the
committee. Each member would be asked to fill out the areas
suitable for residential use and break these areas down into high,
medium, and low- density sectors. Staff would gather these individual
maps together and analyze them. Staff would find areas of agreement
and areas of conflict. A puzzle would be formed from these maps of
areas of agreement. Areas of conflict would be hashed out by the
committee.
Pros: This method probably represents the highest degree of
satisfaction and participation on the part of committee
members. It would relieve staff from a role of advocacy.
Cons: This method also represents probably the highest degree of
subjectivity and capriciousness, thus reducing its validity
and posing possible legal challenges. Also, the disparity
on disagreements could be too wide to gap and might spell
doomsday for the proposed map.
2. The Existing approach:
As the name implies, this method would basically be built upon the
existing conditions of zoning, comprehensive planning, and land use
in the Tukwila Planning Area. Each committee member would be presented
with these maps and together they could work out what areas were to
continue with planned residential use and which areas within these
districts would be designated for high, medium, or low density
residential.
Pros: Again, this method would take Staff out of an advocacy role.
This method could represent the simplest way to accomplish the
nasty chore of mapping. Staff presently has much of the
required graphics done already.
Cons: Unfortunately, this method basically proposes the status quo
and the map probably would be inconsistent with group's policies.
3. The Overlay approach:
This method is an imitation of what the Natural Environment Committee
did at the end of their element. Simply, upon completion of policy
review and a tentative (or final) adoption of them, overlays would be
prepared by Staff following guidelines of policies. These overlays
would be placed over one another at the Committee meeting to determine
areas suitable for residential use. Once these areas were agreed upon,
areas within these districts would be designated for high, medium, and
low density residential use based upon the adopted policies.
FS /cw
Memorandum
Mapping for Residence Element
Page 3
January 28, 1976
Pros: This method represents the most systemic approach to
mapping proposed residential land use since it is based
entirely on the policies adopted by the Committee. As
such, it takes the subjectivity out of the mapping pro-
cess but still promotes a certain degree of individual
involvement. Takes Staff out of advocacy role.
Cons: This method involves a lot of Staff time preparing
overlay maps for policies of the Committee. It puts
pressure on Staff to prepare maps. If overlays do
not conform to individual committee member's desires,
the mapping exercise could be disastrous.
RECOMMENDATION:
Based on the criteria mentioned earlier, it would seem that the Overlay
approach would be the best way to go. I would recommend this as my choice,
too, but with the forewarning that it involves a lot of Staff's effort in a
short time period. This may not be such a difficult hurdle, though, for we
could all pitch in for a day or two on the overlays.
Nevertheless, I think Staff would ultimately profit by proposing several
mapping methods to the Committee and allowing them to choose the one they
want. We might introduce to them the methodology of the Natural Environment
Committee as one which worked, trying not to bias their thinking but merely .
illustrating one tried and proven method. Whatever method is chosen by the
Committee will undoubtedly prove to be the best.
dJ+F•��T1
g.
• C
17 V oiatm E+-s'p'L a t! CS
OF- MA 3 - M oo YS kVi S
w t 64- ASAP V arZSZA4 Aff -ti} C QAI ,41 '
UVnJto l.v '1 71.A040.3tN` /^b, IMO
WM LLE . trig. awt. O 1-14a ' ceerav MANI. ongvve
gY6rtren eCsgot "l zaorrietvamv 1 01-71.41•t'ti 'eT-0e
$Pt3c.-- t cf G.71f0 ) AAP craarAto VO+L SliStreviS
C
smk 43 .F.AihhAtterriiK l cileAllaaate rOLVS 1 r piowruu.
vac rrol - Ines se leAre. " t8 ss- MA1i4t€ le tA
ca rd w? Yw aN 4) S C OW . 1 1-1 Wa r fE
't2 g..r ti c ro - +0-!141' '1 '`se S a c e slsweeKs eat/ S ovacti t-1
L6td • s r( +� e:v AlepertC. E-(as ibarottisisty AcppeonsP
�� "1l�t► tu,v1- t3K114C -Arr; 14-LcUr /.4 IS U %I t . 1t2e
t-hir Wuw JcA ve- t 114E c.4ui Aso qvt r v1/4)614r
%) ts 1/E►- . is c4t(44Ser D►rt,2 410WitAhrIC pe[3rt aCr
ttriMM fttliN 'A- Aug L wow— c t.evottikv,.i
10
4 0
A s ir
•
C:
cur L4 11.L - S tzuo0 1 421
S'r`i CIF ,a ()KAvv, M ,; ! (moo 014 CA-1J WS
wk a1'r tiro 1 I4 o rrisSa.crSt4ft4WE
o five c.)144%.4. yer Asa elassionr wave.,.
r
rta.r -.to p44 o -r vau -7 r2n4
JM4 -1-3 l.1ylu(o, StmikA tha f! ItAtos
ASe p 6s ' resMolurA.s. or avid% r: -
-
5uves. N I4ri zo v Oriniutvos fag's JJLI u
GJ iaNte- sl ' iZepe-ri Utz te.00 «..NeS` rase. YitOSqJ> E3.
AJO ki11 c}}(c,W '/ 'tob Fume's
()Nig W1.<1.01- ovt AAA ‘14‘ t.39 t-lf* 1 -mese
pis
j ki(t. A- v l v m - .
Vat R ettotk rso its )die v4swo°is •
f Y
'ou f • (ThS 1+1kot9c.
rout ce �.
' L f ? Z. cA )04-616- ' ie 2 ty4o rarto
,d uo Seeresc4410 cc vsrcr- p4.�`t V e.
Vse vt w R.t-cs Cv T axes' as3.311 a4.
Admaa critowi A/411(44w/ tet.1441
( 3 1 (441.1494. -1146 V 4 1 7 1 1 4 6 /CA 4r I LA O F
bw v-n�t -rim y 1 6
iSicts
►ms■ 11.40,e 1"' Wu u 1.3 44 4t . CmCsa
�- xtia 1.01E4 cS to v tie
.44.12 o t-tec-c=s1A-xi-to
Wtig.ta - t iu 9 s 9
�
raM
"itrf'0'..e ISMS. -t
w
1 Ft. ,- ► 16 Aeolla 14 or AlvVersey
AVrtsor 1 (.4 VHS t WI? of vouhs
FES ►'P c t7 ter 21-4 'v
4 '¢"
el-) GO MO 6 E. 1.
chi L c4' o 3 f7.
(It, 4' `Pat qcre u4 se.. tact.$
_ 4
twrrt, v �v i ,r`
l.tr 64040 "to
re‘i tl)s,
ma Anna M. Bernhard
14241 - 59th Avenue South
.Tukwila, WA 98067
Phone: 242 -7996
Alice W. Frey
LV 13911 - 56th Ave. So.
Attu Tukwila, WA 98067
Phone: 242 -9205
Mr. John Richards
✓ 15320 - 64th Ave. So.
1910 QO '
V‘)
Clancy Mingo
13745 - 56th Avenue South Apt. #B -410
Seattle, WA 98168
Phone: 243 -4671 After 5 PM
Karen A. VanDusen
14228 - 59th Avenue South
Tukwila, WA 98168
Phone: (Home) 243 -6743 (Business) 543 -4252
Mrs. Leland Chumlea
16635 - 53rd Avenue South
Seattle, WA 98188
Phone: CH3 -9772
Tukwila, WA 98067
Phone: 622 -1616 8:00 to 4:30
Steven A. Welsh
227 Andover Park East
Seattle, WA 98188
Phone: 243 -4343
RESIDENCE CUiyimITTEE 7
MEMBERSHIP LIST
Elanor McLester
5118 South 164th
Tukwila, WA 98067
Phone: After 4 PM
Hans West, Chairman
5212 South 164th
Seattle, WA 98188
Phone: (Home) 242 -7810 (Business) 935 -0266
mF - goal- C-PA
'RGhIDacCE aernalT
L
nex t,:,„, „nn n +,v,u• °r : ''''” +t .vtu :.; r. 1 �
ANDOVER PARR 'E
r
1
•
r " '
•
•
LONGACRIS
J 1 2
IIII 111111II111111IIIIIII11111111IIIIIIIIIIII111111II I1111111�III I111III1IIII 111111IIIt111tI II EI
! : T:Tulcu •aux nwris:::
ue GE 98 11 V7. cz EE Iz oz GI uI 1.1 91 VI 91 CI El a ()l
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I11111l111111111l111111111l1l1111111l111111111l111111111l111111111l 111111111l1111111111111111111l111111111l111111111l111111111l111111111l111111111l111111111l111111111l111111111l111111111l11
)) os , l ,�ul
P11C
I il tllltl ,L �� 1 t ^
I �RI!(id�i iJ; y;; n::: a:;::. ic: n, CC ; I::: r: 1n::m rr rur7rulmumi:: Ir: r mulmmllllac;tratruiraP;Lmui:.mi �'�'•" fIin; ..•`: ".. tt .. ... .
l�
IPI1'L77:L':7:7u'171;( 1, I[ ITS 1S:[1:ICL'P.;l'I:II';;:RC
717 fIlII4 I
It III I' : ',.mt..t.'• "" " " "•"
+ "tI .
..'! I: I?:I ".:AtI•I '• IIII; lIlIl ��1117 17 II. t1I7llrtiiL'!.^, I. TI:TIIIj j[OU1:uuIIjII1;UIlIIIi' 17i:;:;:i l;t: In ii:nrttm:tnu'rtttl: i:'r t: SR1IL'ntltP. m+f: [:u:lt[nrtt nttri: _•.,y. ., ....
I txamtR[ � t
II is �
I I
j _ f
—.W.V/LLEY. ROAO_ -•' r �
24x
SLA . TAC AI1;90111
I
IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS
CLEAR THAN TIIIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO
TIIE QUALITY OF TIIE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT
iS
G REEN
11
1 1
1
1
1
0 1
cl
1
N1
1
'� "' IIIGNYl AY
--mot ,
rnF 160 -1- cPA
TUKWILA PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1975
1
-
LA I P.NL
3 , •
• v .
t.t.
1;7
• . •
• " • •
•
•,!••,,- t:•-•*.--et , : t, , . • - i •
. .. • \ V . t .....:- -- '''-. • , '
ig•• ' • ' • •••=-, ' - '. '
''.• ''...`, •:' • : ...• •• " ..._•, ,:i ...; : • ill": ,,•,,,:• •■•• ::::,._:. .. .
:',:•7 - •."''% /.: ,/, 1 • *.,.,.., 1 ..
, .. . .
, A L." "...., . .
;":',.... t• • •• • • •
.. .. .,,,,. . ., .. v , . ,'. • , . . • ...1-..,' i,.".
. :,.."•••, • 1% ,
• Le.
• :--"" • ,
1 4 ,
J 1 gir 7 " '.(:- ' - — — ."..kr
. T --- *P';P . ) 4f.:W
' .v4
L
L
L
, .
411
tiOnianti
114111LOMMEI iliakii ME .%
I a DX ME tfau N :k8 BR MN BM
14 bl 'IMEIglithsaV-6,ZratacibffliV
I '"ITARTAIROWNIENTESES
ei EIMIZERININEMPAN
muirossoNtriglograt
MdCat JdJk
11
912111E1 1111111172MAIN
BEENVEITMEIStititEMO
EMEEMEIIIMMEINME-13i
I- 4
annighl NEVE
wagekillaqmainnuncismitint
Emosimmowartm
L
man twaramon
11111111111ESSESI
IRKVI4WAN AIMEE
r
tquwe •zel
g i tw M
NE 1
_
. • v .
... .. _
" .'• ' . • ". "),
• :Ir "; • ".".•••.', V•
• ••'•'"'• • • • ' V
\j
• •••'• • •"11:•••'Z
. •
«1 2
• • .• . • • •;-•-•
• '; - • ' 22
7`•"4% V. it CT
. • _
• - ,
•
- r
• • •‘ .1.!, •
, ■••‘. • • • . - 7 '
• ..
, ••• 4 • N.
"
%■
iq
— - ,
• • • • :• - • -••
•
: . •
...! .-. - _ - ".0 ) ,:,-,.
LI ELT .) :_l 1 - -.- i ;
- : -' -
. . _ _ II• '
-.-, I V
A1 -, "..t
r1. "•,..'" .. .
• :.'...;,
c.li,"' - Is' :,--1..,.,
"
,
-
f1 j , . 14>;:s
-
(
_ qv=
I 1111111i1111111111111111110111411111111i1111(1111i111111111111‘111111911111111iIIIIIIIIIiIIITI1011111111111101111111111111/
ms..5;a5gs=a
nn 1'.. 1 (AI 9.? 61 01 LI 01 1 ()V
•
•
kY
61'
COhIPHENIEHONE
PL415:9
WORZ
MAP
RESIDENTIAL
ELEMENT
' •
O• " VIAF31. RFS112._Lin0L-
k ri
-(.
IF THIS MICROFILMED DOCUMENT IS LESS
CLEAR THAN THIS NOTICE, IT IS DUE TO
THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT
5 AC
461K4'iteS16 O•r e.b1.04fite.
10.ktmloevs lik.+AAtti Defisf/via$1
- 19 Fe IntwArik 113b
AREA
PLANNING
‘•\1! • \\.
TUKWILA
0<xe 1,aarIaLS
• ••■'',..\ -
11(if 10-1- cos,
fieromes ELEVYarf