HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L99-0085 - CITY OF TUKWILA - POTENTIAL KING COUNTY AIRPORT AREA ANNEXATIONL99 -0085
N POTENTIAL
ANNEXATION AREA
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN
PAA adjustment w /Seattle
(vicinity of K.C. Airport 16 Ave. So bridge)
Appi %atiot ;compaete ate
taittonth pteter
y a
I. PROJECT /PROPOSAL BACKGROUND
MODIFY NORTH PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA
A. NAME OF PROJECT /PROPOSAL:
B. LOCATION OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT:
STREET ADDRESS: GENERALLY WEST OF KING COUNTY AIRPORT
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Quarter. Section: Township: Range: (This information may be found on your tax statement)
C. CONTACT: (Primary contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent)
REBECCA FOX
NAME
•
ADDRESS:
PHONE: • 206- 431 -3603
SIGNATURE: 7-6-46‘ DATE: Ili 2 y'7
CITY OF TUKWILA
6300 SOUTHCENTER BLVD TUKWILA WA 98188':
1,41!r.+to- wnen+,e
RECEIVED
DEC 2 9 1999
z
z
re L11
00
U)
Li_
w0
co
w
ZI-
z1-
w
U • 0
O N
CI E-
wW
u-O
w..
O~
z
••r,.S••■• •
• 40/4 S; ;
• •
• "
•
.1.•,' r'.. •-:-... '';' ,..
4 r2t1I.,; ;- ...s.+‘..'" tilt,' ..i .,:.0,1:,
...;',. ..)'''.: :i.;:.,•'+' -- ' ,:-.. -,,-..:;;... • • ..1,::: •
....-......,;;•.:
-
, -
F.'. ZONING DESIGNATION:
EXISTING: '
PROPOSED:
• ' " . . . .
• • .
" • N/A:, •••••
; • • -
,"'"? •
G. LAND USE(S):' . • • EXISTING: 'INDUSTRIAL
•
, —
'
-••:-. • • • . . - PROPOSED:
-. . • - • . - (for proposed changes in land use designations or rezones)
_ .
H.' .,DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: (atiach additional sheets if necessary)
• • .. *SEE ATTACHED . . t . .
'
. - . . ,• \
•
•
. , •
• i
' .
. -
, .
. ,
. .
•
I. 'GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING LAND USES: Describe the existing uses located within 1,000
feet in all directions from the property or area for which a change is proposed. s
. ...
SEE ATTACHED
• . . 7
•
•
.
•
. , , . •
,
•
•
IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CHANGE
. • . ,
• .
IMPACT(S) OF PROPOSED CHANGE ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Describe potential adverse impacts of
the proposed change.on surrounding geographic area, such as affects on land use designations and zoning
of surroa riding properties, adjacent natural features or systems, or public utilities or streets. (A summary of
• impacts addressed in SEPA checklist is acceptable.) Attach separate sheet(s) with response.
.„.:,
B. NON-CONFORMING USES CREATED: Describe any existing uses that are likely to become non-conforming
under the proposed land use/zoning designation. •
*SEE ATTACHED
. ,IMPACT OF PROPOSED CHANGE ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES, ZONING REGULATIONS AND CITY'S
, v..,,o0.4sitga•
3
„
< •
•
z
w
6 =
00
(.0
11.1
W
CO1—
u_
u j 0
LL<
CO ▪ cs
11-1
z
1-0
z
UJ uj
O u)
O —
O I—
W
uJco
I 0
b-
.
F-
0
1 .. .. •.... .. .
FU f ONAL PLANS:!/deritify. spe `:'Comprehensive Plan policies and zor. regulations and how /our<
proposal affeccts: them `! dent' an functional plans affected by the proposal (e.g. • Storm and Surface `Waterm. '
Y`Y
Slioreline'Master Priogram `P. arks and Open Space Plan) and what changes would be required inthase lansif. the proposed amendment were approved 'Attach separate sheet(s) with rep "'' *' " " '" " T,.. "' "'`" "'
, ........- , ... , .., ... _ .. s onse. SEE ''AT I
•
D.. IMPACTS) OF PROPOSED CHANGE ON CAPrTAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN: Describe any capital improvements
that would be needed to support the proposed amendment, and what changes would be required in the -
'Ws Capital Improvements Plan. Attach separate sheet(s) with response. ;`SEE ATTACHED • ,.
DERCIENCIES IN baSTING PLAN/CODE RESOLVED BY THE PROPOSAL Explain why the current
Corrmprehensive Plan or Zoning Code is deficient or why it should not continue. Be specific; cite policy
'numbers and code sections that apply. Attach separate sheet(s) with response. *SEE ATTACHED
COMPLIANCE OF•THE•PROPOSAL WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT•ACT:- Describe how the proposed change •
complies with and promotes the goals and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act. Attach
separate sheet(s) with response. *SEE ATTACHED
G. OTHER ISSUES PRESENTED BY THE PROPOSED CHANGE: Describe any other issues that are important to
consider in the proposal, such as other changes in City codes •that would be required, other City - adopted
plans affected, environmental or economic issues. (Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary).
*SEE.ATTACHED
H. ALTERNATIVES TO PROPOSED CHANGE: (A summary of altematives addressed in the project's SEPA
checklist is acceptable.) Attach separate sheet(s) with response. SEE ATTACHED .
III. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN /ZONING CODE AMENDMENT CRITERIA
The burden of_ proof in demonstrating.that•a'change to the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code-is.warranted
Iles solely upon the proponent. The greater the degree of change proposed, the greater will be the burden of
showing that the change is justified. The Planning Commission and the City Council will review your proposal
using the criteria listed . below. It is essential that, you describe in a clear and precise manner why the
amendment request should be approved. Attach additional sheet(s) with your responses to each criterion.
You may submit other documentation in support of your proposal.
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA:
Demonstrate how each of the following circumstances justifies a re- designation of your property
or a change in existing Plan policies:
1. A detailed statement of what is proposed and why;
2. A statement of the anticipated impacts of the change, including the geographic area
affected and the issues presented by the proposed change;
. 3. An explanation of why the current comprehensive plan or development regulations
are deficient or should not continue in effect;
4. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with and promotes the goals
and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act; .
5. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with applicable Countywide
Planning Policies; • . . t
liMitassammatanatuasmeetazso
Rus awY!}E+,fr +x ttst.t%ret •y,?t
• `4:_
MICRO COM
SYSTEMS LTD.
ATTENTION
The next image may be a duplicate of the previous image.
Please disregard previous image.
Please disregard previous 2 images.
Please disregard previous 3 images.
Other:
Z
JU
:0'01
0,
w=
. J H
LLi • °
2
= d.
W
•
F-O
Z F-;
. Di
iD
.W.W
•
Z
H U
tL ~O
V
Z
•
y •:LfJs '1law 1N`tj e ./•}sY.;.:r „k}d' i++ ''. A'. •• rr( L.' S`i%•.,.' p. w:.•.:r•.°""- ::;yi+:— .....,,.., 7%-.•.., g•...p'4,;: -:0, + ,. •' S.1
r,E,t`COMPREHENSIVE PI.A :*6 ice EXISTING:-/-; t .., .; %v e;rr„ .. . <. r{:a
!$ N DESIGNATION.., ., T iti4 •rte
N!t
•r'iY .,.'r , >'
. s •, iI ,.•. . i » •t: ' ,.yiwo...- . r:._ y ..;..... .• o7,Fii y:, . ~ it
w .Y.. :
.fi.; M
#-3 •
PROPOSED:
•. .....:.........
F.:ZONING DESIGNATION:
.. F
EXISTING:
PROPOSED:
•
G. LAND USE(S):'
3/96
EXISTING: INDUSTRIAL
PROPOSED: N/A
(for proposed changes in land use designations or rezones)
H.' DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: (attach additional sheets if necessary) '
*SEE ATTACHED
I. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING LAND USES: Describe the existing uses located within 1,000
feet in all directions from the property or area for which a change is proposed.
SEE ATTACHED..
-IL - IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CHANGE
A. IMPACT(S) OF PROPOSED CHANGE ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Describe potential adverse impacts of
the proposed change.on surnthunding geographic area, such as affects on land use designations and zoning
of surrounding properties, adjacent natural features or systems, or public utilities or streets. (A summary of
impacts addressed in SEPA checklist is acceptable.) Attach separate sheet(s) with response.
B. NON- CONFORMING USES CREATED: Describe any existing uses that are likely to become non- conforming
under the proposed land use/zoning designation.
*SEE ATTACHED •
C. : )MPACT(S) OF PROPOSED CHANGE ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POUCIES, ZONING REGULATIONS AND CITY'S
•
'4,"
z
a•
= z
W
6
0
J H
WO
§Q
=d
Z
I-- O
Z
(• 21
O • -
CI I-
W W.
u' O
Z
W
U
O~
z
RECEIVED
DEC 2 9 1999
z
'
•
U;
oo
to O;.
W o•
2
'� Q
co
:± w'.
0; •
D
•U O>
W W'.
U
• - 0
W ,; z:
- N:
z..:.
............. .
FUNCrioNAt PI S Identify `Comprehensive Plan olicies and zor. regulations and howyoiir
proposal affects. them. ,,Identify any functional plans affected by the proposal (e :g.: Storm. and Surfai e_ :Wate
7P/an Shoreline'MasterProgram,'P.arks and Open Space Plan) and what changes would be required in those
. - plans if. the proposed amendment were approved. 'Attach separate sheets) with response: *SEE : Att iitoD
D.", IMPACTS) OF PROPOSED CHANGE ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN: Describe any capital improvements
that would be needed to support the proposed amendment, and what changes would be required in the -
City's Capital Improvements Plan: Attach separate sheets) with response. -. *'SEE ATTACHED
E "`.DEFICIENCIES IN kiGSTING PLAN/CODE RESOLVED BY THE PROPOSAL Explain why the current
Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code is deficient or why it should not continue. Be specific; cite policy
numbers and code sections that apply. Attach separate sheet(s) with response. *SEE ATTACHED
F. COMPLIANCE OF•THE• PROPOSAL WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENTACT: --Describe how the proposed change
Implies with and promotes the goals and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act. Attach
separate sheet(s) with response. *SEE. ATTACHED
G. OTHER ISSUES PRESENTED BY THE PROPOSED CHANGE: Describe any other issues that are important to
consider in the proposal, such as other changes in City codes .that would be required, other City - adopted
plans affected, environmental or economic issues. (Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary).
*SEE.ATTACHED
H. ALTERNATIVES TO PROPOSED CHANGE: (A summary of alternatives addressed in the project's SEPA
checklist is acceptable.) Attach separate sheet(s)•with response. SEE ATTACHED
1I1. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN /ZONING CODE AMENDMENT CRITERIA
The burden of-proof in demonstrating.that•athange to the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code-is warranted
lies solely upon the proponent. The greater the degree of change proposed, the greater will be the burden of
showing that the change is justified. The Planning Commission and the City Council will review your proposal
using the criteria listed below. It is essential that you describe in a clear and precise manner why the
amendment request should be approved. Attach additional sheet(s) with your responses to each criterion.
You may submit other documentation in support of your proposal.
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA:
Demonstrate how each of the following circumstances justifies a re- designation of your property
or a change in existing Plan policies:
1. A detailed statement of what is proposed and why;
2. A statement of the anticipated impacts of the change, including the geographic area
affected and the issues presented by proposed change; .
3. An explanation of why the current comprehensive plan or development regulations
are deficient or should not continue in effect;
4. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with and promotes the goals
and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act; .
A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with applicable Countywide
Planning Policies;
5.
•
. „mx .„. ,,...T...._..._.._ _
`4 .L...:4
RECEIVED
DEC 2 9 1999
COMMLINfTY
DPVI:LOPMENT
Z
Q
, = -:
W°
W D:
J U:
0 O
U W.
W
J H�
_ LL
W 0'
N
CY
1W
=.
.
ZF
F 0,
Z 1-
U o`
C0 H
WW:
I-
P.
Z'
U -;
0
Z
I. PROJECT PROPOSAL /BACKGROUND CONT'D
H. Detailed description of proposal:
Amend the Comprehensive Plan Map to eliminate overlap with Seattle in Potential
Annexation Area near King County Airport, including deleting the potential annexation
area (PAA) west of the Duwamish, and annexation rights to the South Park Industrial
area . This area will be added to Seattle's PAA.
I. General description of surrounding land uses:
Industrial park; office and manufacturing buildings;
II. IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CI -IANGE
A. Adverse impacts of proposed change on surrounding properties:
There are few immediate impacts, and no adverse impacts anticipated. Future
annexations in the area will go to the City of Seattle, rather than the City of Tukwila.
Eventual jurisdiction over the 14th /16th Avenue South Bridge would pass to the City of
Seattle.
B. Non - conforming uses created:
None.
C. Impacts of proposed change on Comprehensive Plan policies, zoning regulations
and City functional plans:
This proposed map change implements existing annexation policies (Chapter 6, Tukwila
Comprehensive Plan). See discussion III. A. 3 below. The zoning code remains
unchanged. Functional plans remain unchanged.
D. Impacts of proposed change on Capital Improvement Plan:
Eventually, Tukwila will relinquish jurisdiction over the 14th /16th Avenue South Bridge
and associated improvements.
E. Deficiencies in existing Plan /Code resolved by the proposal:
The proposed amendment modifies the Potential Annexation Area map as called for in
Chapter 6 (Annexation Policies) and further implements existing annexation- related
policies. See discussion III. A.3 below.
F. Compliance of the proposal with Growth Management Act:
Comp Plan amd - -North PAA
•
RECEIVED
DEC 2 9 1999
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
See III.A.4 below.
G. Other issues presented by the proposed change:
No other issues are known at this time.
H. Alternatives to the proposed change:
The primary alternatives would be either: 1) no action (i.e. retain the existing PAA
boundaries), or ; 2) holding further discussions with Seattle and King County over the
PAA.
III. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN /ZONING CODE AMENDMENT CRITERIA
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT (TMC 18.80.010)
In addition to the requirements for complete application, the applicant needs to provide the
following:
1. A detailed statement of what is proposed and why;
The City Of Tukwila proposes to change the boundaries of its potential the Potential
Annexation Area map to eliminate overlap, increase consistency and simplify current
and future provision of municipal services. This topic has been addressed in an
Interlocal Agreement among King County, City of Tukwila and City of Seattle staff.
Key issues include resolving boundary line differences, ownership of the 16th Avenue
South Bridge and annexation rights to the South Park Industrial area.
The City of Tukwila and the City of Seattle have overlapping Potential Annexation
Zones. The City of Tukwila and Seattle have developed a draft Interlocal Agreement
which adjusts overlapping Potential Annexation Areas by having Tukwila transfer
some of its PAA to Seattle. This amendment would revise the Potential Annexation
Area map to reflect the proposed Interlocal Agreements.
2.A statement of the anticipated impacts of the change, including the
geographic area affected and the issues presented by the proposed
change;
The area in question is indicated on the attached map. In general, few impacts are
expected from the switch in Potential Annexation Areas.
The primary impact of ceding a portion of the Potential Annexation Area to
Seattle is that land will eventually be annexed to Seattle, rather than Tukwila and
that Seattle will eventually assume responsibility for the 14th /16th Avenue bridge,
including future repair and eventual replacement.
Comp Plan amd - -North PAA
z
mow,
re 6
00
0
w=
J H,
w�
2
_,
= W
z�
z o'
1.11 Lu
U
0-
I-.
ww
0
w
=.
0 H..
z
EiIIre
DEC 2 9 1999
DSVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY
}H Z
le 2
6D:
J Ui
W I
.J 1
WO
=.CJ:
Z H..
O.
s0 -s
WW
2
.L1 O
U CO
O
3.An explanation of why the current comprehensive plan or
development regulations are deficient or should not continue in
effect;
The proposed amendment corrects the Annexation and Boundary Adjustment Area map
to clean up border anomalies. At present, Tukwila's Potential Annexation Area overlaps
with Seattle and the City's corporate boundaries with King County are unnecessarily
complicated.
The current Comprehensive Plan policies relating to annexation remain in effect and are
implemented by the proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan Map and map of
the Potential Annexation Areas. These policies are shown in Chapter 6 of the current
Comprehensive Plan.
This map change implements Comprehensive Plan Goal 6.1 which posits "A logical and
serviceable municipal boundary."
The map change further implements Policy 6.1.7 which says " Establish
appropriate interlocal agreements that provide solutions to regional concerns,
including but not limited to water, wastewater, storm and surface water drainage,
transportation, parks and open space, development review and public safety."
It is called for in a draft Interlocal Agreement worked out among the City of
Tukwila, the City of Seattle and King County.
4. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with and
promotes the goals and specific requirements of the Growth
Management Act;
The Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A.110 calls for designating Urban
Growth Areas which have city -level services generally provided by cities, rather
than counties. This requirement lays the groundwork for the Potential
Annexation Area which is more fully discussed in several Countywide Planning
Policies (see below).
5. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with
applicable Countywide Planning Policies;
The proposed amendment complies with Countywide Planning Policies as follows:
RF -4: Each city with a potential annexation area shall enter into an interlocal
agreement with the County for defining service delivery
Comp Plan amd - -North PAA
RECEIVED
DEC 2 9 1999
COMUI'
DEV:{
;•• • ............................................................ t;a1.4
responsibilities. A financing plan for investments in the annexation
areas shall be included in the interlocal agreement for capital facilities
and service delivery. Level -of- service standards and financial capacity
should be considered for each area, together with density issues and
phasing of developments.
LU 29: All jurisdictions shall develop growth phasing plans consistent with
applicable capital facilities plans to maintain an urban area served with
adequate public facilities and services to maintain an urban area to
meet at least the six year intermediate household and employment
target ranges consistent with LU -67 and LU -68. These growth phasing
plans shall be based on locally adopted definitions, service levels, and
financing commitments, consistent with State GMA requirements.
The phasing plans for cities shall not extend beyond their Potential
Annexation Areas. Interlocal agreements shall be developed that
specify the applicable minimum zoning, development standards,
impact mitigation and future annexation for Potential Annexation
Areas.
LU -31:
In collaboration with adjacent counties and cities and King County and in
consultation with residential groups in affected areas, each city shall
designate a Potential Annexation Area. Each potential annexation area
shall be specific to each city. Potential annexation areas shall not
overlap. Within the potential annexation area, the city shall adopt
criteria for annexation, including conformance with Countywide
Planning Policies, and a schedule for providing urban services and
facilities within the Potential Annexation Area. This process shall
ensure that unincorporated urban islands of King County are not
created between cities and strive to eliminate existing islands between
cities.
5.A statement of what changes, if any, would be required in functional
plans (i.e., the City's water, sewer, storm water or shoreline plans)
if the proposed amendment is adopted;
No changes will be required in Tukwila functional plans as the areas affected by
the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment are outside of the City's
boundaries.
6.A statement of what capital improvements, if any, would be needed to
support the proposed change, and how the proposed change will
affect the capital facilities plans of the City;
Comp Plan amd- -North PAA
DES 2 9 °.;
ebt.) 7999
•
No additional capital improvements will be needed. With Tukwila's ceding the
10/16th Avenue Bridge to Seattle, Tukwila gives up responsibilities for bridge
improvements and eventual replacement.
8. A statement of what other changes, if any, are required in
other City codes, plans or regulations to implement the proposed
change.
No additional changes are anticipated.
ZONING AMENDMENT CRITERIA (TMC 18.84.030)
1. The use or change in zoning requested shall be in conformity
with the adopted Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan, the
provisions of this title, and the public interest;
Not applicable.
2. The use or change in zoning requested in the zoning map or this title for
the establishment of commercial, industrial, or residential use shall be
supported by an architectural site plan showing the proposed development
and its relationship to surrounding areas as set forth in the application form.
Not applicable.
Conip Plan amd- -North PAA
Q.
= 1 r
■
JU
• 00;
Nom:
w =.
F-;
LL:
U.1 o'.
2
u- <,
•z�
moo.
Z t-
moo'
j0 Ni:
o t~
wa
ui
W:.
U=
O
•z
DEC 2 91999
COMMUNny
DEVELOPtviENT
t.l
111111 IJ_
.11111111I.T.
q 1111111 uno
al11111111inati
1111111•
_ _ _ mil Boeing
• Field
1111 ■ `
11111111
111111111111
111111111111
_'1111111111
M111111111
111111111111
1111111111 =.
1111111N 11111111
1111111111E :111110
81111111111
,11111111
111111111111 11111111110 t•IR
I\ 111111111 0:■1i11: iuinia
00
00
00
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
000000010
0000000
0000000
00000000000
000000000000
0000000000000
0000000000000
00000000000000
it 0000•••• 000000.
000•••..0000000
00••••00000000
0O •••000000000
• 0000000
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
00000
00000
00000
00000
00000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
00000
00000
000000
000000
000000
000000
0000000
0000000
0000000
0000000
°00
000
000
000
000
000
000
00
000
°00
00
000
000
00
00
000
00
0000.00
0000.00
0000.00
00000.00
0000.00
0000 00
000.00
0
00000
00000
00000000000
00000
00000
i- .0000000000
0000000000000000000
000000000000000000
00000000000000000
0000000000000000
000000000
• 000 000000
000000000000
0000000000000000
0000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000
00.00000000000000000000
000 00000000000000000000
00••0000000000000000000
00••0000000000 000
000..000000000• •000
000••00000000• •000
000••0000000• •0000
000••000000• •0000
000
00
°00000
000
00
000
000
000
00•
00.
00000000000000•
00000000000000
0000000000000
000000000000
00000000000
°0000000000000000000
0000000000
0•.0.0
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
000
00
0000
000
00
00000
000
00
Transfer Northern
Potential Annexation Area (PAA)
M. M. — — Existing City Limits (Unchanged)
000000000
000000000
000000000
000000000
To Seattle
GIS
L99 -0085
aoaMENNI i ■ a 1'. 8°i1.t^7Ri- fi.txav+es.�w. w •.<- r• x xmr�s�
z
~ w
cc
6
0O
09 uU
J =
OD UL
H
C)
uL.Q
09
2d
�w
z
H
I— O
z 1-
w uu
O -u2
� 1-
w W
2
1- HtL
z.
W
=.
O 1-
z
ATTACMENT B
TUKWILA.COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
-
-----------------
----------------
---------------
-----------------
-----------------
-----------------
-----------------
-----------------
Figure 9 - Annexation and Boundary Adjustment Areas
Annexation
z
I- Z.
J U.
00
(0 0.
W =
J I-
LL
W0
L Qi
c
W
Z�
I- 0
Z
w.
2
U0
0�
0 H.
W W.
1- U
0:
iii
U�
0
z
ATTACHMENT B
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Annexation
Figure 9 — Annexation and Boundary Adjustment Areas
' - December 4, 1995
.. ,.. .. U:�.:. i.i ^: +:i•.L'"t <. tiY.b:! uv t,,11,1 .a:i, 11;44.44 -
69
z
_6—
I✓Z
Wes.
00
tu
J
NLL:
W0
co LLQ
za
�-_
Z �.
I- 0
Z
my
UU
:0-'
0
WW
.I-U
.. O:
Z:
LLI
p
IilllGIVES
.1.1_.21=
1.11111111- •_I�.�� m�
/1/111111
•••111111:-.111:. III.,
'' %�luwmIu, ._
i.. huunu
111. vhl hill
n .
.huh
■. /1. nun
1■migl
�sin\ 7.11113
uhrw
►�.��hnn7
1..r17
ma 14r41112
■m:l.. .11-1 hh.::
= 1 =11 t1�1 1 �■ ., rl- =iu•1= IIIlllllllll IIIIIi'111;
=�111t;1111 17∎1 - c.6r111= 111111111111 iN1.1194=
1 . •-• _ : ai C O °i _9111 111.® ■: 5T:111= EE
11111 111111111111 1111. 111111111111 1111111111:.ii 1
1111 11111\/11 1111f, 1. 1/111/11 = 11\115 It /.1,
'' % jIii' .
1 I' O• 000000.000
0000 000000.000•
,a =m .1. �� 0000 000000 • 000
L 0000
En g% .0 00000.00
0000 0 00000.00
00000.0 00000 00
t.� �tttl,� 00000.0 00000 00•
ilia' 000000•
000000. 00000000 •O.
O • 00 00000000 . OG
1e �• 000.00. •.00
.T.�0 • 0..•- x000000
00000000000.
000000000001
0.0000000000
;0.00000.•.0
•0.0000•••0
hill11111111.
!
11111 =w
! 2 IIII 9111=
:
11 X111 • i.
ITn gu n i; 111111. : :'1:::-
i 'llllllle
��UU�"•- IIIIIIli1!11111�`�"
1 J '� '1111111 clllll_' - ��
:- II 1 -= 't: ! k
- �:�.. 1�ta1: emum X1,3 � ;:•':._
���,, \!911 ?I _ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 1111111
• 114.!'; "11 j :;•;;CII111111I:'_•IIIIII'�
I►�,I�.1�\\111 11
� ►: cI•.._aml�.- •;:fir
• `11 %G-111R ml
ouu
GIS
Tukwila
Boundary Adjustment Key Map
Tukwila PAA
To Seattle PAA
Existing Tukwila City Limits
• Proposed Tukwila City Limits
1E11111111
\IIII�
000000
000000
000000
000000
000000
0
•0
00
00
00
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
00000000#0
0000000
0000000
00000000000•.
000000000000•
0000000000000
0000000000000
00000000000000
0000••••00000
000.00 00000
00- •0.00000
0.0.00000
0 • . "� 0000000
111111111
1111111
MESE
Boeing
♦ Field
s.
0000 000000000000
0000 000000000000
0000 000000000000
0000 000000000000
0000 000000000000
00000 000000000000
00000 000000000000
00000 000000000000
00000 000000000000
00000 000000000000
00000
00000
000000
000000
000000
000000
0000000
0000000
0000000
0000000
00000
00000
000000
000000
000000
000000
0000000
0000000
0000000
0000000
000
00
000
000
000
00
000
000
000
00
00
000
000
00
00
000
000
00
00
00
000
00
0000.00
0000.00
0000.00
00000.00
0000.00
000000.0000 00
0000000000000 000 00
0000000000000000 0
0000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000
00 00000000000000000000
000.0000000000000000000
00.•0000000000000000000
00••0000000000••..•000
000..0000
000••000
000••00
000.•0
000000000 000
000 00000000 000
000 0000000 0000
000 000000 0000
00.0
,':..0000
O
0000
000.00000.
8 ' •000•
.0000
0000
.00000000000.00000.0••00 0
00000.00.000
•- 00000000000
0000000000000000000
.000000000000000000
0.00000000000000000
00. 000000000000000
000 • 000000000^.x,:.•
0000.000•
00000000000
0000000000000000000
000000000000000000
00000000000000000
000000000000000
000000000,,,y
000
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
000 00
00000.000.000••00
00000.000.0000.00•
00000.00••0000.00.
00•. 000
00000000000000••00
00000000000000.00
0000000000000 00
000000000000.000
00000000000••00
..00000000000.00
0000000000.000
000000000.000
0•.000.•00
1111111111111\ Welil1:11 ,1 *
mi ea
9IMIL ter'
9111111
umpir
VI Ng
::
1111111\ 1111I!i
ISM
NMI
000
000
000
000
.0
000
00
000
000
000
00
0
StanfI 1 11 ■ i
1111■
1111
1■1
•f■
Transfer Northern
Potential Annexation Area (PAA)
L99 -0085
- - --
000000000
000000000
000000000
000000000
Existing City Limits (Unchanged)
To Seattle -
•
G15
z
~ w
00
CO LI
�W
wo
g ?
`�a
W
_
ZF..
1- 0
Z I-
W
U0
ON
OF-
LU uu
Li. 16
lLl Z
U En-
p:
0 I-
Z
Minutes, 11/20/00 Page 1 of 6
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL
November 20, 2000 7:00 p.m.
Tukwila City Hall - Council Chambers
REGULAR MEETING
CALL TO ORDER/PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE:
Mayor Steven M. Mullet called the Regular meeting to order at 7:00 p.m. and led the audience in the
Pledge of Allegiance.
OFFICIALS:
City Administrator John McFarland; City Attorney Bob Noe; City Clerk Jane Cantu; Deputy City
Clerk Bob Baker; Council Analyst Lucy Lauterbach; Public Works Director Jim Morrow;
Community Development Director Steve Lancaster; Police Chief Keith Haines; Parks & Recreation
Director Bruce Fletcher; City Engineer Brian Shelton; Senior Engineer Robin Tischmak; and
Associate Planner Rebecca Fox.
ROLL CALL:
Ms. Cantu called the roll of Council. Present were Council President Joe Duffie; and
Councilmembers Joan Hernandez, Pam Carter, Jim Haggerton, Pamela Linder, Dave Fenton and
Richard Simpson.
CITIZEN COMMENT /CORRESPONDENCE:
None received.
CONSENT AGENDA:
a. Approval of Minutes — 11 -06 -00 Regular Meeting
b. Approval of Vouchers - #224705- 224996, in the amount of $1,745,099.01
Duffie moved; Fenton seconded; approval of the consent agenda as presented. The motion
carried 7 -0.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
Comprehensive Plan Amendments
Community Development Director Steve Lancaster introduced Associate Planner Rebecca Fox and
suggested Council receive citizen comment as the cases are reviewed one by one. Mayor Mullet
agreed.
7:07 p.m. Mayor Mullet opened the public hearing.
Ms. Fox introduced seven proposed amendments to Council and relayed some specifics as to how the
http: / /www.ci. tukwila.wa.us /clerk/rm11- 20.htm
• . „ i, ab:. 1,4,2' a;: »:,te.�:hLy.,ir�i:ar.;ASiJCixai .. , .
8/9/01
z
Z:
o:
6
00
co• w:
w=
J F.
U) LL,
W O.
g Q.
F _.
z �.
1— O.
z E--:
U • 0
.O -
CI I
w w`
1-- U
LI 0
ui
Z,
U=
0~
Z
Minutes, 11/20/00 Page 2 of 6
Planning Commission reached decisions in each case.
Case Number L99 -0094 & L99 -0095
Request: Establish C/LI (Commercial /Light Industrial) Comprehensive Plan and Zoning designation
for two adjacent parcels currently designated as LDR (Low Density Residential) z
Applicant: Holaday Parks /Ted Nixon, Campbell/Nixon & Associates
Planning Commission Recommendation: Deny Request ~ w
Matt Peters, 13552 McAdam Road South, Tukwila, noted the reason(s) behind the Planning v 0
Commission's decision to deny the request are unclear. cn W
Lu
Lawrence Campbell, Architect, o /b /o Holaday Parks Property, spoke in favor of establishing cn u
C/LI and zoning designation for two adjacent parcels currently designated as LDR. w 0
June Naelon, o /b /o Holaday Parks Property, noted an approximate time of one year until u
▪ d
1— w
Z �.
I- 0.
zr
Do
0 -.
CI H-
w u
t- p.
u. 0
.z:
w
F• L-
0
z
development of the property begins.
Betty Gully, 13017 McAdam Road South, Tukwila, spoke against commercial development in
residential neighborhoods. She does not want the City to compromise the quality of neighborhood
life by allowing commercial growth.
Case Number L99 -0092 & L99 -0093
Request: Approval for LDR Comprehensive Plan & Zoning Designation for a Non - Designated, Non -
Zoned Area
Applicant: Community Development Department
Planning Commission Recommendation: Designate Intersection of East Marginal Way and
Interurban Avenue South as MIC/L
Ms. Fox pointed out a letter previously submitted by James Terrile, dated November 13, 2000, in
support of the proposal. Others were also submitted and copied for Council and provided this
evening.
Case Number L2000 -0036 & L2000 -037
Request: Allow office uses in the MIC/L district
Applicant: Tukwila City Council
Planning Commission Recommendation: a. Office as Conditional Use in the MIC /L; b. Elements
being finalized 11/9/00
Brian Kennedy, 12802 — 37th Avenue South, Tukwila, asked the following:
1. Will the new zoning create more parking problems? How many cards will the new garage hold? If
it won't hold the new anticipated traffic, where will they park?
2. Will there be safeguards to protect our neighborhood from problems such as the garbage trucks and
mess on 130th and East Marginal?
http://www.ci.tukwila.wa.us/clerk/rrn11-20.htm 8/9/01
Minutes, 11/20/00 Page 3 of 6
3. When the air conditioning and other exterior devices are running they will diminish the quality of
our neighborhood even more. I feel that our houses would be sound proofed and diesel or any other
airborne emissions should be monitored.
4. What was the problem that sent 20 employees to the hospital a few days ago?
5. What the chances of zoning the area between 126th and 130th, East Marginal and Tukwila
International Boulevard Zoned Business ?
Byron Saunders, 4118 South 130th, Tukwila, spoke against blocking residents' views. He
suggested construction of buildings be kept under 20,000 square feet.
Mike Szluk, 3922 South 113th, Tukwila, spoke against the proposal for fear of too much traffic in
his neighborhood. Ms. Szluk had previously noted his objection, in writing, via e-mail, to Rebecca
Fox.
Case Number L99 -0086 & L99 -0087
Request: Amend Code to allow office uses on third story in NCC zone
Applicant: Community Development Department
Planning Commission Recommendation: Allow Office Uses on Third Floor
No questions or comments from Council.
xT�JAS?" S R75M •' ."' %y'n{,^`St'S,xYLti44 '$ U ZVA.:CI(^ :R419.'.X ^:erVI,!• =3.V S{?itY. ' i3' Y, 7,4' L`: tLTf': , Y3::" x' Lr�.•.`, C+ YZS ,.n,`,1•Ct:^.:ta,-,7.S.S.a1,7 1T•J 1,,,:m..`1 .fists ..,
Case Number L99 -0085
Request: Modify part of PAA Boundary currently overlapping with City of Seattle. Amend map
accordingly
Applicant: Community Development Department
Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve boundary change post finalization of Interlocal
l' Agreement
S`'t•ra,!,vrcx ,- s- r�sMS::•x : r:: r..:,: srrc_ r," z�: s:, i;?, s: �cr%: �S; ;r:.c,..,..:,c.;,:�_:r.. <;;., ,r
Case Number L99 -0088
Request: Revise /Simplify boundaries with Seattle and King County in vicinity of King County
Airport; Amend map accordingly
Applicant: Community Development Department
Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve boundary change post Finalization of Interlocal
Agreement
Case Number L2000 -0038
Request: Revise Comp. Plan for new Transportation Background Report Requirements
Applicant: Public Works Department
Planning Commission Recommendation: Approve change as proposed.
�kU
This request is the result of a Washington State requirement. City Engineer Brian Shelton answered
inquires from Council.
http://www.ci.tulcwila.wa.us/clerk/rin11-20.htm
8/9/01
z
�z
rew
aa�
JU
00
w o.
J
E-
�w
w 0.
:i-
t'.
za
w
zF
�O
z t-
LIJ
U• �
O -
0 H
W
- U
.z
w to
O~
z
Minutes, 11/20/00 Page 4 of 6
8:00 p.m. Mayor Mullet closed the public hearing.
COUNCIL DELIBERATIONS:
Post Council discussion, the following was decided with respect to each case:
Case Number L99 -0094 & L99 -0095 Decision Deferred
Case Number L99 -0092 & L99 -0093 Decision Deferred
Case Number L00 -0036 & L00 -0037 Approve Planning Commission Recommendation
8:24 p.m. Haggerton moved; Linder seconded; approval to re -open the public hearing to review
and /or accept proposed exhibit from Mr. Campbell. The motion carried 7 -0.
Duffie moved; Linder seconded; acceptance of exhibit from Mr. Campbell, on behalf of
Holaday Parks. The motion carried 7 -0.
8:24 p.m. Mayor Mullet closed the public hearing.
Case Number L99 -0086 & L00 -0087 Approve Planning Commission Recommendation
�,�,m.,f�,r . ,: vu.!, rc..m.<r.:- .rtn:f�!aecma- '.r.�^ r�,•
tifF� •.'••.:`:.^'.; • \, .^. 1A� ^.:;5":IL1:•':�,'if�Y.V.Tf�:'T
Case Number L99 -0085 Approve, pending receipt of proposed interlocal agreement Case Number L99 -0088
Approve, pending receipt of proposed interlocal agreement
4197 -12M;r i^^ J% li.=: It!; p4PE.'..[¢!!" �C3' �5v&':'`:. :'S^..°L".:1Et:Y.ir:;'GT`3`_`A1 :Y.SY.^�,r `.�fE:LitYl: ^••r ^.!:ice �:. i1P..:: iA':`- �� .:nri+u'.u;1.':'::9�5,.'�.Vl!: :4'.'.'<'uc: a'L:'
Case Number L00 -0038 Approve Planning Commission Recommendation
:'7+CrSt3,:lf13a:, ^'fiX'1,•�3 s...,_.... S:Y'J7:4:e:, z znikii' t,11:..'
Clerical Note: Letters and map with alternatives (from Mr. Campbell) submitted to staff were marked
Exhibits 9, 9a, 9b, 9c, 9d, and 10 and added to staff report for the record.
OLD BUSINESS:
a. Authorize Mayor to Sign an Interlocal Agreement with the City of Kent for the South 180th Grade
Separation
Carter moved; Duffie seconded; approval to authorize Mayor Mullet to sign an Interlocal
Agreement with the City of Kent for the South 180th Grade Separation project.*
City Engineer Brian Shelton commented the Transportation Improvement Board has committed to
nearly $1.1 million dollars in funding for this project. In addition, FASTCAST has committed
another $4.5 million dollars. Both amounts will greatly decrease the shortfall experienced by
Tukwila.
*The motion carried 7 -0.
b. An Ordinance Authorizing the Condemnation of Property for South 180th Grade Separation
Project
http://wvvw.ci.tukwila.wa.us/clerk/rm11-20.htm 8/9/01
Minutes, 11/20/00
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AUTHORIZING AND
PROVIDING FOR THE ACQUISITION OF LAND FOR
THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING THE SOUTH
180TH STREET GRADE SEPARATION; PROVIDING
FOR CONDEMNATION; APPROPRIATION AND
TAKING OF LAND AND PROPERTY RIGHTS
NECESSARY THEREFOR; PROVIDING FOR THE COST
THEREOF; DIRECTING THE INITIATION OF
APPROPRIATE PROCEEDINGS IN THE AMNNER
PROVIDED BY LAW FOR THE CONDEMNATION;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHIN
AN EFFECTIVE DATE
Page 5 of 6
Carter moved; Hernandez seconded; reading of the proposed ordinance by title only. The
motion carried 7 -0.
City Attorney Bob Noe read the title of the proposed ordinance.
Haggerton moved; Duffle seconded; adoption of the proposed ordinance as read. The motion
carried 7 -0. APPROVED ORDINANCE #1940
c. Authorize Mayor to Sign the 2001 Interlocal Agreement with the Airport Communities Coalition
(ACC) for funding in the Amount of $50,000.00
Haggerton moved; Hernandez seconded; authorization for Mayor Mullet to sign the 2001
Interlocal Agreement with the ACC for funding in the amount of $50,000.00. The motion carried
7 -0.
8:37 p.m. Mayor Mullet called recess.
d. Review of Proposed 2001 Budget
8:47 p.m. Mayor Mullet reconvened the meeting.
Discussion of the proposed 2001 budget and proposed 2001 -2006 CIP took place between Council
and key staff including City Clerk Jane Cantu, Parks & Recreation Director Bruce Fletcher and
Police Chief Keith Haines.
Areas covered included Administrative Services Department, Parks and Recreation, Police
Department, Parks Land Acquisition, Finance Department. Proposed changes were suggested to the
document as Council reviewed each page.
NEW BUSINESS:
Purchase of Property Associated with Tukwila Village Project
City Administrator John McFarland introduced and explained the proposed purchase and sale
agreement between the City and McConkey Development Company, Inc. The sale includes the
Newporter, Graves House and Fantasy Site. In a cover memo from Mr. McConkey, notice was made
http://www.ci.tulcwila.wa.us/clerk/rm11-20.htm 8/9/01
z
• = •
w.
6
UO
co CI
to LLJ
J 1
U) u_
w
LL Q.
z ci
w
z�
I—O
z l—
Lu
(:)
0 F-.
w w`.
-o
..z
w
O~.
z
Minutes, 11/20/00 Page 6 of 6
the Newporter was vacated on October 31 with all tenants being successfully relocated. Asbestos
abatement began on November 1. Demolition is scheduled immediately after permits are issued.
Linder moved; Fenton seconded; mayoral authorization to sign the proposed purchase and sale
agreements between the City of Tukwila and McConkey Development Company, Inc., in the
amount of $2,250,000.00, for the purchase of the Newporter, Graves House and Fantasy Site.
The motion carried 7 -0.
z
REPORTS:
6
JU
Stricken with Council consensus. N o.
w z`
MISCELLANEOUS: J '—
w0
meeting held earlier in the evening. � _;
co d
I— w,
z�`.
z o:
0
O • 1-.
W, w'.
• 0.
Z:
w u);
y
01—i
Councilmember Hernandez provided a verbal summary of the Finance and Safety Committee
10 :12 p.m. Fenton moved; Hernandez seconded; to adjourn to executive session. The motion
carried 7 -0.
EXECUTIVE SESSION:
Real Estate Site Selection /Purchase — Pursuant to RCW 42.30.110(1)(b)
10:12 p.m. Executive session began.
10:18 p.m. Executive session ended.
ADJOURNMENT:
10:18 p.m. Fenton moved; Duffle seconded; adjournment of the executive session; reconvene
and adjourn the Regular meeting. The motion carried 7 -0.
Return to Home
http://www.ci.tulcwila.wa.us/clerk/rm11-20.htm 8/9/01
_, ._- ..... -.....r.tworionktoM.,
MEETING DATE:
NOTIFICATION:
FILE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
Attachment 5
STAFF REPORT
TO THE
PLANNING COMMISSION.
Prepared September 16, 2000
September 5, 2000
Notice published in Seattle Times 9/18/00
L99 -0085 North Potential Annexation Area
Tukwila Department of Community Development
To modify part of the Potential Annexation Area boundary
which currently overlaps with the City of Seattle. Change
Comprehensive Plan map accordingly.
LOCATION: Generally west of the King County Airport
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
DESIGNATION: MIC/H-= Manufacturing/Industrial Center —Heavy Industry
ZONE DESIGNATION: MIC/H— Manufacturing/Industrial Center - -Heavy
SEPA DETERIYIINATION:Determination of non - significance issued 9/20/00
STAFF: Rebecca Fox
ATTACHMENTS: A. Application L99 -0085 -
B. Map — Annexation and Boundary Adjustment Areas
C. Vicinity Map
D. SEPA Determination
•L. ..,.a., �..� ....1.:..u.. ..:7Wy. >.+�lua-.Lw:Sia. :.G:.4z liat�:;::1[i4S'+;:ite
!iF !4Nii\t6'± \'M'�iI1T'FGiCIZi rimisVal
z
61,1
J U,
00
Nom.
w=
J H
w
w0
g
¢
52 a.
1– to
z�
F- o.
Z
U�
w,
Z'
u.i
UN
O
z
FINDINGS
VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION
Project Description
The City of Tukwila and the City of Seattle have overlapping Potential Annexation
areas.. The City of Tukwila proposes to change the boundaries of its Potential
Annexation Area (PAA) map to clarify future areas to be annexed, eliminate overlap,
increase consistency and simplify current and future provision of municipal services.
Surrounding Land Uses
Airport; industrial park; office and manufacturing
B ackground
The Tukwila City Council held a public meeting on this proposal on April 3, 2000 and
at its July 24, 2000 meeting referred it on to the Planning Commission for further study
and a recommendation.
The need for adjustments is acknowledged in the Comprehensive Plan and will result
in changed boundaries for Tukwila's northern Potential Annexation Area (PAA)
(Attachment B). This topic has been addressed in ongoing discussions among King
County, City of Tukwila and City of Seattle staff. The City of Tukwila and Seattle
have developed a draft Interlocal Agreement by means of which Tukwila transfers
the overlapping portion of its PAA to Seattle. This amendment would revise
Tukwila's Annexation and Boundary Adjustment Area Map to reflect the proposed
Interlocal Agreement with Seattle and King County.
REVIEW CRITERIA
Planning Commission review is required for Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code
amendments. The Planning Commission may recommend approval, recommend
approval with conditions or recommend denial of the amendment based on a clear
compliance with the criteria which follow. The Planning _Commission's.recommendation
will be forwarded to the City Council for decision.
1. Describe how the issue is addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. If the issue
is not adequately addressed, is there a need for it?
The proposed adjustment to the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) implements the current
Comprehensive Plan policies relating to annexation. Found in Chapter 6, these policies
remain in effect. The proposed amendment corrects the Annexation and Boundary
Adjustment Area map to clean up border anomalies. At present, Tukwila's Potential
Annexation Area overlaps with Seattle.
This map change implements the following Comprehensive Plan goal and policy.
.::•H: %:h4��; y�c,(e?3;,i,.:;:e.yt;`ai. {f aii.3si va+:nt. r�'.•.: ��:: �v,',':%% Y +'�r�wr`s4'r(n`2;41; :e'sisS.i�%
• Goal 6.1 -- "A logical and serviceable municipal boundary."
• Policy 6.1.7 -- " Establish appropriate interlocal agreements that provide
solutions to regional concerns, including but not limited to water, wastewater, zQ
storm and surface water drainage, transportation, parks and open space,
development review and public safely." w
These changes are called for by the draft Interlocal Agreement worked out among 0 --I 0
the City of Tukwila, the City of Seattle and King County. W
J=
H
2. Impacts
The area under discussion is indicated in Attachment C. No land which is currently part <:
of Tukwila is affected. Ceding a portion of Tukwila's PAA to Seattle means that the land z w
now claimed for potential annexation by both Tukwila and Seattle will eventually annex z =
to Seattle, rather than Tukwila. z o
LLJ
3. Is the proposed change the best means for meeting the identified public o.
need? What other options are there for meeting the identified public need? p
Staff believes that changing the boundary of the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) to = v.
eliminate overlapping jurisdiction is the.best means to meet the public need for clear and u_
logical boundaries for Tukwila. The primary alternatives would be either no action (i.e. z.
iui
retain the existing boundaries) or returning to Seattle for further discussion of the
boundary for the northern PAA. 01—
z
4. Will the proposed change result in a net benefit to the community? If not,
what type of benefit can be expected and why?
The change will result in eventual net benefit to the community by clarifying the
jurisdiction to which lands will be annexed in the future.
CONCLUSIONS
The Planning Commission, pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter
2.36.030 hereby makes the following conclusions.
Tukwila and Seattle now claim the same Potential Annexation Area (PAA). The
Comprehensive Plan calls for eliminating overlap in the PAA. Tukwila and Seattle staff
have developed a draft Interlocal Agreement which clarifies PAA boundaries, and
eliminates overlapping PAA claims between the municipalities.
Policy options include:
• Retaining the current overlapping PAA boundaries;
• Approving the proposal
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approving the Comprehensive Plan amendment to revise the Potential
Annexation Area map, with no final action taken until the final details of the Interlocal
Agreement have been worked out.
Rebecca Fox - comp_ame000-- ublic notes _doc
Page 1!
PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice of Public meeting on Comprehensive Plan Amendments
The City of Tukwila is considering changes to its Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code,
including:
1. Eliminate overlap with the City of Seattle's Potential Annexation Area
2. Revise boundary with Seattle in the vicinity of Boeing Field
3. Establish LDR (Low Density Residential)designation for undesignated area at Interurban
Avenue S. and E. Marginal Way
4. Designate two adjacent LDR (Low Density Residential) lots as C/LI (Commercial/Light
Industrial) at 4625 S. 134th Place
5. Allow 3`d floor office use in NCC(Neighborhood Commercial Center) zones
The Tukwila City Council will hold a public meeting to give residents and businesses an
opportunity to express their opinions and give testimony about the proposals:
Public Meeting
Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Monday, April 3, 2000
7:00 p.m.
The City of Tukwila welcomes both written and verbal comments about the proposed
Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code amendments from Tukwila's residential and business
community.
Please contact Rebecca Fox, Associate Planner, of the Tukwila Department of Community
Development at (206)431 -3683 or rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us if you have questions. Written
comments may be submitted via e-mail or addressed to the Tukwila Department of Community
Development, 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188.
. �. ✓�._....a...— u..�Y,l.�:.�::L'✓ ,,, „ . -..�. �. �- v •. Ll�w %- :�.t�'+�slu'''u'if1i.�+11" ni4:�b.G12a.�i2iiwibD:
:+ ^+�•:'�2. l.: ez4. u:rzz;1v,* if.M"s9i L7iRiih :wcE��n*Y'.R"F$1:ti�4.Si8;.
z
_�
:�- 412
�aa
1 U
U0
w i.
cn u.
w0
co
= d.
w
z�
I— 0
Z
g
o
U
O -:
Q 1-
I U
Z
ui
U =;
0I
z
Smooth Feed SheetsTM 72/1 A-
AERONAUTICAL MACHINISTS
9125 15TH PL S
SEATTLE WA 98108
CAUGHELL C THOMAS+ PATRICIA
1313 S 96TH ST
SEATTLE WA 98108
COLEMAN JAMES E + SHARRON L
1237 S DIRECTOR ST
SEATTLE WA 98108
DUWAMISH MARINA & IND PK
2950 NORTHUP WAY #200
BELLEVUE WA 98004
CO PA
BEARDSLEY JAMES E JR
12715 SW 158TH
VASHON WA 9
V Use template for 5160®
.BRENT /KENNEDY /MENDEHALL
1312 S 96TH ST
8070 SEATTLE WA 98108
CITY OF SEATTLE CITY LIGHT
700 5TH AVE STE 2808
SEATTLE WA 98104
DELTA MARINE
1608 S 96TH
SEATTLE WA
COLELLO FAMILY PARTNERSHIP
9627 DES MOINES WAY S
SEATTLE WA 98108
DUWAMISH MANOR INDL PARK
PO BOX 40072
98108 BELLEVUE WA 98015
DUWAMISH YACHT CLUB
1801 S 93RD ST
SEATTLE WA 98108
• HUMAN GEORGE L IHS ACQUISITION NO 178 INC
16603 35TH AVE S 10065 RED RUN BLVD
SEATAC WA 98188 OWINGS MILLS MD 21117
KING COUNTY
500 FOURTH AVE ROOM 500
SEATTLE WA 98104
MTM RESTAURANT WEST INC
6307 CALIFORNIA AVE SW #101
SEATTLE WA 98136
SEA -KING INDL PARK INC
12886 INTERURBAN AVE S
SEATTLE WA 98168
LA PIANTA LP
PO BOX 88028
TUKWILA WA
GG &MCOLLC
12805 SW 77TH PL
TIGARD OR 97223
KC PARKS & RECREATION DEPT
2040 84TH AVE SE
MERCER ISLAND WA
98040
MERLINO GARY CONST CO
9125 10TH AVE S
98138 SEATTLE WA 98108
PRECISION ENGINEERING INC
1251 S DIRECTOR ST
SEATTLE WA 98108
RAIE LEE
9615 W MARGINAL WAY S
SEATTLE WA 98108
"`, AVERY® Address Labels Laser 5160®
z
•
z
ew
00
N 0.
wz
N L:
=a
I- w.
z�.
I-0
w i--:
p.
:S U
LI o'
w z'
U =I
o i-
z
�t
�Pa4A4
tiJvTo a
PIN
PIN
ADDRESS
TAXPAYER
0001600058
9125 15TH PL S
AERONAUTICAL MACHINISTS
0001600042
1425 93RD ST
BEARDSLEY JAMES E JR
5624200099
1312 96TH ST
BRENT /KENNEDY /MENDEHALL
5624200351
1313 96TH ST
CAUGHELL C THOMAS +PATRICIA
5624200930
10000 MARGINAL PL S
CITY OF SEATTLE CITY LIGHT
5624200371
9635 DES MOINES WY S
COLELLO FAMILY PARTNERSHIP
0001600016
1237 DIRECTOR ST S
COLEMAN JAMES E +SHARRON L
5624200005
1608 96TH ST
DELTA MARINE
0001600050
1605 93RD ST S
DUWAMISH MANOR INDL PARK
0001600029
1801 93RD ST
DUWAMISH MARINA & IND PK
0001600061
1801 93RD ST
DUWAMISH YACHT CLUB
5624200360
1303 96TH ST
GG &M CO L L C
5624200091
9438 DES MOINES WY S
HUMAN GEORGE L
5624200415
10010 DES MOINES WY S
IHS ACQUISITION NO 178 INC
5624200100
0
KC PARKS & RECREATION DEPT
5624200771
10100 DES MOINES WY S
KING COUNTY
5624200330
1119 96TH ST
LA PIANTA LP
5624200132
0 96TH ST
MERLINO GARY CONST CO
5624200372
9600 DES MOINES WY S
MTM RESTAURANT WEST INC
0001600055
1231 DIRECTOR ST
PRECISION ENGINEERING INC
5624200411
1541 96TH ST S
RAIE LEE
0001600060
1620 92ND PL
SEA -KING INDL PARK INC
0423045555
0423046666
0523045555
3224045555
38,240455
332 555
3 04 5
3324046666
7619008888
CIO
ADDRESSI
ADDRESS2
9125 15TH PL S
SEATTLE WA 98108
BEARD
12715 SW 158TH
VASHON WA 98070
PARTN
•
1312 S 96TH ST
SEATTLE WA 98108
1313 S 96TH ST
SEATTLE WA 98108
PMNO
700 5TH AVE STE 2808
SEATTLE WA 98104
9627 DES MOINES WAY S
SEATTLE WA 98108
1237 S DIRECTOR ST
SEATTLE WA 98108
1608 S 96TH
SEATTLE WA 98108
PO BOX 40072
BELLEVUE WA 98015
C/O JO
2950 NORTHUP WAY #200
BELLEVUE WA 98004
1801 S 93RD ST
SEATTLE WA 98108
12805 SW 77TH PL
TIGARD OR 97223
16603 35TH AVE S
SEATAC WA 98188
10065 RED RUN BLVD
OWINGS MILLS MD 21117
0/0 WI
2040 84TH AVE SE
MERCER ISLAND WA 98040
500 FOURTH AVE ROOM 500
SEATTLE WA 98104
PO BOX 88028
TUKWILA WA 98138
9125 10TH AVE S
SEATTLE WA 98108
6307 CALIFORNIA AVE SW #101
SEATTLE WA 98136
1251 S DIRECTOR ST
SEATTLE WA 98108
ENER
9615 W MARGINAL WAY S
SEATTLE WA 98108
C/0 Q
12886 INTERURBAN AVE S
SEATTLE WA 98168
z •
• jZ.
UO
N 0
U) =.
J 4
• LL'.
w�
og'
LL ?.
wa
=w
H1.
z
z ~'
w.
2
LI 0'
O
..z.
w
.Z
City of Tukwila
Department of Community Development
MEETING DATE:
NOTIFICATION:
FILE NUMBER:
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
LOCATION:
STAFF REPORT
TO THE
CITY COUNCIL
March 23, 2000
Steven M. Mullet, Mayor
Steve Lancaster, Director
Notice mailed to surrounding properties March 23, 2000.
Notice published in Seattle Times March 23, 2000
L99 -0085 North Potential Annexation Area
Tukwila Department of Community Development
To modify part of the Potential Annexation Area boundary
which currently overlaps with the City of Seattle. Change
. Comprehensive Plan map accordingly.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
DESIGNATION:
ZONE DESIGNATION:
•
ATTACHMENTS:
Generally west of the King County Airport
MIC/H-- Manufacturing/Industrial Center —Heavy Industry
MIC/H Manufacturing/Iudustrial Center - -Heavy
A. Application L99 -0085
.B. Map — Annexation and Boundary Adjustment Areas
C. Draft Interlocal Agreement with Seattle, King County
D. Vicinity Map
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • Phone: 206 -431 =3670 • Fax: 206 - 431 -3665
FINDINGS
VICINITY /SITE INFORMATION
Airport; industrial park; office and manufacturing
DISCUSSION
Background
The City of Tukwila and the City of Seattle have overlapping Potential Annexation
areas. The City of Tukwila proposes to change the boundaries of its Potential -
Annexation Area (PAA) map to clarify future areas to be annexed, eliminate overlap,
increase consistency and simplify current and future provision of municipal services.
This topic has been addressed in ongoing discussions among King County, City of
Tukwila and City of Seattle staff. The City of Tukwila and Seattle have developed a
draft Interlocal Agreement whereby Tukwila transfers the overlapping portion of its
PAA to Seattle. This amendment would revise Tukwila's Annexation and Boundary
Adjustment Area Map to reflect the proposed Interlocal Agreements. (Attachment B)
THRESHOLD REVIEW CRITERIA.
Describe how the issue is addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. If the issue is not
adequately addressed, is there a need for it?
The proposed adjustment to the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) implements the current
Comprehensive Plan policies relating to annexation. Found in Chapter 6, these policies
remain in effect. The proposed amendment corrects the Annexation and Boundary
Adjustment Area map to clean up border anomalies. At present, Tukwila's Potential
Annexation Area overlaps with Seattle.
This map change implements the following Comprehensive Plan goal and policy.
• Goal 6.1 -- "A logical and serviceable municipal boundary."
• Policy 6.1.7 -- " Establish appropriate interlocal agreements that provide
solutions to regional concerns, including but not limited to water, wastewater,
storm and surface water drainage, transportation, parks and open space,
development review and public safety." -
These changes are called for by the draft Interlocal Agreement worked out among
the City of Tukwila, the City of Seattle and King County. (Attachment C)
Impacts
The area under discussion is indicated on Attachment D. No land which is currently
part of Tukwila is affected. Ceding a portion of Tukwila's Potential Annexation
Area to . Seattle means that the land now claimed for potential annexation by both
Tukwila and Seattle will eventually annex to Seattle, rather than Tukwila.
Is the proposed change the best means for meeting the identified public need? What
other options are there for meeting the identified public need?
Staff believes that changing the boundary of the Potential Annexation Area (PAA) to
eliminate overlapping jurisdiction is the best means to meet the public need for clear and
logical boundaries for Tukwila. The primary alternatives would be either no action (i.e..
retain the existing boundaries) or returning to Seattle for further discussion of the
boundary for the Potential Annexation Area.
Will the proposed change result in a net benefit to the community? If not, what type
of benefit can be expected and why?
The change will result in eventual net benefit to the community by clarifying the
jurisdiction to which lands will be annexed in the future.
CONCLUSIONS
Tukwila and Seattle now claim the same Potential Annexation Area. The Comprehensive
Plan calls for eliminating overlap in the PAA. Tukwila and Seattle staff have developed
a draft Interlocal Agreement which clarifies PAA boundaries. Changing the Annexation
and Boundary Adjustment Area map will allow this change to proceed.
Alternatives for-Action
The City Council's threshold alternatives include the following:
• Refer the proposal as is to the Planning Commission for further review;
• Modify the proposal and refer to the Planning Commission for further review
• Defer consideration until a later time;
Reject the proposal.
If the proposal is referred to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission could:
Recommend approval; _
• Modify the proposal;
• Recommend denial.
CITY OF TUKWILA
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS)
DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL:
1999 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN & ZONING CODE AMENDMENTS
PROPONENT: CITY OF TUKWiLA
LOCATION OF PROPOSAL; INCLUDING STREET ADDRESS, IF ANY:
ADDRESS:
PARCEL NO:
SEC/TWN/RNG: THROUGHOUT CITY
ATTACHMENT D
LEAD AGENCY: CITY OF TLIKWiLA FILE NO: E2000• -019.
The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable
• significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental
impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43. 21c.030(2) (c) .
This decision was made after review of a completed environmental
checklist and other information on tile with the lead agency. This
information is available to the public on request.
.• k: k*: k: l•*• k*•• k: k: k• k:k*.A:**:l•*•.k*•k:k•k•k**•k:L k k kA•. k.A: k**: k' k•. k*• k*: k**•. l•. k•. k. l•* k•. k• k..• k.•. k*. k• k•. kk��.1•..•.l.•�.k.l••k•kk.l••.k
This determination is final and signed this
7_00 O.
'Stew Lancas r, Respons.ible ficial
• City t Tukwila, (206) 431 -3670
6300 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, WA 931i_ ?S
day of
Copies of the procedures For SEPA appeals are available with the
'Department of Community Development.
•
ATTACHMENT C
DRAFT 11/18/99 12/22/99 1/28/00
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT
tnotc: make insert re eventual reversion of bridzc to Seattle)
AMONG KING COUNTY AND THE CITIES OF SEATTLE AND TUKWILA
REGARDING SOUTH PARK AREA BOUNDARIES AND THE 14TH/16TH AVENUE .
SOUTH BRIDGE
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by King County ( "the County ") and the cities of
Seattle ( "Seattle ") and Tukwila ( "Tukwila "). Seattle and Tukwila are referred to
- hereafter collectively as "the Cities;" the County and the Cities are referred to hereafter as
"the Parties. ".
RECITALS
A. The County and the Cities have successfully completed the mediation process
entered into under the Memorandum of Understanding signed in June, 1997, to resolve a
disputed potential annexation area, boundary adjustments and the future improvements to
the 14`/16` Avenue South Bridge.
B. All three jurisdictions have contributed significant time and effort to the
negotiations, and the results reflect a spirit of cooperation, mutual accommodation and
joint contributions to successful resolution of some of our region's most challenging
- problems.
C. This Agreement represents the completion of this process and is intended to
commit each jurisdiction to carry out specific actions and contribute substantial funding
to accomplish together what the jurisdictions could not accomplish individually.
1
•
D. This Agreement will allow.the County and the-Cities to move forward with
potential annexation area plans, to rationalize existing intercity boundaries, and to
improve the 1e/1 6th Avenue South Bridge for neighborhood, commuter and freight
mobility uses.
E. The 14t /1 6t Avenue South Bridge is located on 1e/1 6t Avenue South across the
Duwamish River, placing the north half of the bridge in Tukwila and the south half of
the bridge in unincorporated King County. The County and Tukwila each own the half of
the bridge that is located within its jurisdiction. The bridge as it exists on the date of
execution of this Agreement is referred to hereafter as "the Existing Bridge" and is
defined as the elevated structure together with the supporting piers, towers, and
foundations, including the mechanical and electrical systems plus the pier protection
system. [do we know vet whether the BRAG definition will wort: better here ?Z
F. The County and Tukwila are parties to an interlocal agreement executed in 1989
( "the 1989 Agreement ") whereby they share responsibility for the operation and
maintenance of the Existing Bridge. Improvements to the bridge are necessary because,
although the Existing Bridge is safe for use by legal highway transportation vehicles and
for passage of river borne traffic under the bridge, it is functionally obsolete and it has
mechanical, electrical, and structural systems that are antiquated and are becoming
irreparable,-and if irreparable, could have an effect of impeding river borne traffic. The
improvements required will constitute either full replacement of the bridge or a complete
rehabilitation. The resultant bridge in either.case is referred to hereafter as "the New
Bridge ". The environmental review, design, property acquisition, construction and other
activities and actions necessary to complete the improvements to the bridge shall be
2
.4
74
referred to hereafter as "the Project ".
G. The need for the Project has been identified in the 1999 King County
Transportation Needs Report and the King County Annual Bridge Reports in 1995, 1996,
=1
HZ
1997, and 1998. The Reports list the Project as "high-priority ". re W
H. _ The Tukwila Transportation Improvement Program has identified the need for the i o
wo
Project. -J 1
0
I. The State legislature has found (RCW 36.89.020) that the public roads and streets 2
J
in a county, whether inside or outside the limits of an incorporated city, provide an CO
=
interconnected system for the convenient and efficient movement of people and goods z
I—
within the county and are of general benefit to all of the residents of the county.
J. After the boundary changes and annexations described herein, both the Existing p c,
w
Bridge and the New Bridge will be located entirely within the City of Seattle. Both the o
o,
Existing Bridge and the New Bridge, and the streets connected thereto, are, and will w Z
U N.
H
remain, essential to the continuation of the County road system because the le/16th z
Avenue South Bridge connects SR99 to East Marginal Way for commuter access to the
Boeing Facility, unincorporated King County, and the King County International Airport
while providing for freight mobility.
K. It is in the best interest of the County and the Cities to establish a lead agency to
manage this Project and to provide for the design and construction of the Project, and for
the County and the Cities to provide for joint funding of the Project.
L. The County and the Cities are authorized, pursuant to RCW Chapter 39.34 and
Article 11 of the Washington State Constitution, to enter into an interlocal governmental
cooperative agreement of this nature.
3
-*
.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual.promises contained herein, the
Parties agree as follows:
AGREEMENT
1 CHANGES IN BOUNDARIES
1.1 Adjustments to Existing Boundaries
As soon as practicable after the execution of this Agreement, the Parties will
mutually request any approvals required by State law, and will promptly take
all necessary actions, for boundary adjustments as illustrated in Exhibit A to
make the following changes: {TUKWILA EDIT] and this agreement does not
a44feelnentST •
. 1.1..1 Shifting the portion of the Boeing property north of Buildings 2-40 and 2-41 from
Tukwila to Seattle.
1.1.2 Shifting the private parcels on the east side of East Marginal Way South that are north
of the Museum of Flight from Tukwila to Seattle. Those parcels that are currently
served by the Tukwila water, sewer and surface water utilities will continue to be so
served, and the Cities will amend the relevant utility interlocal agreements to
accomplish that continuation. of service. The northern limit of Tukwila on the east
side of East Marginal Way South will be [TUKWILA EDIT] The northerly line oflpt
15 of the Buckle Donation Claim and followina the Kinc Count Ai .ort boundary
to the existing City limits east and south of the Museum of Flight. if the Museum of
4
1
Flight expands to the north or east, the boundary for the City of Tukwila will be
adjusted to reflect the Museum of Flight expansion. [Jack and Elsie- has this language
been revised since your 12/17 meeting? —
1.1.3 Shifting the private parcels that are east of the west edge of the flight line of the King
County International Airport from Tukwila to Seattle.
1.1.4 Making small corrections to previous boundary misalignments along 515` Avenue
South, the BNSF Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad right -of -way, and Interstate 5.
1.2 Potential Annexation Areas
At their first opportunities following the effective date of this Agreement, the Cities
will amend their comprehensive plans to make the following changes, as illustrated in
Exhibit A:
1.2.1. Tukwila will amend its comprehensive plan to delete the potential annexation area
( "PAA ") west of the Duwamish River.
1.2.2 Seattle will amend its comprehensive plan to add the balance of South Park, that is,
the presently unincorporated area west of the Duwamish, east of the current Seattle
city limits and north of Seattle's existing South Park PAA, to. its existing South Park
PAA.
1.3 Annexation .- .... .......... ......, . ,,r : -.- '
1.3.1 No later than 180 days after completion of the North Highline Governance Study,
Seattle will initiate a public process for the annexation of the expanded South Park
PAA as illustrated in Exhibit A.
1.3.2 The County and Tukwila will actively support petitions to annex those areas
described in Section 1.3.1 to Seattle.
5
■
•
1.3.3 If annexation of substantially the entire area described in Section 1.3.1 fails, Seattle
may proceed with annexation of Seattle City Light property. [IS THERE A
DESCRIPTION OF SUCH PROPERTY ?] [Seattle will insert.]
1.3.4 If a substantial business need should arise for Seattle City Light to develop its
property for utility purposes, Seattle may proceed with annexation of the City Light
property for municipal purposes, at any time after the effective date of this
Agreement. If this should occur, all other elements of this Agreement will remain in
full effect.
1.3.5 Nothing in this agreement shall preclude Seattle and the County from entering into
additional annexation agreements regarding facility ownership and other transitional
issues.
2 BRIDGE RESPONSIBILITIES '
2.1 Maintenance and Operation of the Existing Bridge
• 2.1.1 Until the County assumes full responsibility for the Existing Bridge pursuant to the
provision of this section, the County and Tukwila will continue to jointly fund,
operate and maintain the Existing Bridge, as described in the 1989 Agreement.
2.1.2 After any portion of the calendar year following the effective date of this Agreement
and two full calendar years thereafter have elapsed, and until the Existing Bridge is
decommissioned, the County will become solely responsible for operation and-
maintenance of the Existing Bridge (and Tukwila shall be relieved of any and all such
responsibilities as well as any further financial responsibility for the Project) when
following two conditions have been satisfied:
(a) the boundary adjustments described in Section 1. have been
completed; and
e
(b) Tukwila has made its contribution to funding the Project as
described in Section 2.2,
2.1.3 The effective date of the transfer of responsibility for all of the Existing Bridge to the
County shall be 30 calendar days after the date that the last of the foregoing
conditions have been satisfied. Not later than 10 days after the satisfaction of such
condition, the County Road Engineer shall provide written notice of such occurrence
and the effective date of transfer to the Tukwila City Engineer and the Director of
Seattle Transportation, provided, however, that failure to provide such notice shall not
delay or extend the effective date of transfer unless such extension is requested jointly
and in writing by both of the Cities. The 1989 Agreement shall terminate on the
effective date of the transfer of responsibility. The County's .responsibility for the
the approach structur-es Estill needs weed technical
•
Gystcm, all as sct forth in - Exhibit . The County's responsibility for the
Existing Bridge shall also include the obligation to defend, indemnify and hold the
Cities harmless from any claims or lawsuits alleging negligence or intentional
misconduct in the maintenance or operation of the Existing Bridge, and to promptly
accept tender of any such claim or lawsuit by the Cities.
2.1.4 After the County has become solely responsible for the operation and maintenance of
the Existing Bridge as set forth in section 2.1.3 above, and through the date it is
decommissioned, Seattle shall pay the County a share of the County's annual costs of
7
e
maintenance and operation of the Existing Bridge, as follows:
(a) if the none of the annexations specified in Section 1.3 has
occurred, Seattle will pay $100,000 to the County per year until
such time as Seattle carries out any of the annexations specified in
Section 1.3, or until the Existing Bridge is decommissioned,
whichever occurs first;
(b) if Seattle annexes all or part of its municipal property following
the defeat of a proposed annexation of the South Park PAA (as
reconfigured pursuant to Section 1.2.2.), Seattle's contribution will
increase to $200,000 per year;
(c) if annexation of the South Park PAA (as reconfigured pursuant
to Section 1.2.2).;has occurred prior to the date the County has
become solely responsible for the operation and maintenance of the
Existing Bridge or, if not, then beginning on the date that it does
occur, Seattle will pay the County half the County's costs of
operating and maintaining the Existing Bridge, up to a maximum
of $300,000 per year. Such payment shall be in lieu of, and not in
addition to, the payments specified in subparagraphs a) and b) of
this subsection.
2.1.5 Seattle shall make its payments to the County under this section on a quarterly basis
within thirty (30): calendar days of receiving an- invoice from the County detailing
Seattle's share of quarterly costs..The payment obligations shall be prorated so that
the annual amount due is adjusted in accordance with the • date that the condition
8
1
r..
precedent to each specified payment obligation is fulfilled. The annual payments
(including the $300,000 payment maximum) provided for in this Section are specified
in 1999 dollars, which amounts will be adjusted at the beginning of each calendar
year for the change in the United States Department of Labor Bureau of Labor
Statistics Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers ( "CPI -U") for the
Everett Seattle- Tacoma - Bremerton Statistical Metropolitan Area for the prece
calendar year. In the event the CPI -U (or a successor or substitute index) is no longer
published, a reliable government or other non - partisan index of inflation selected
jointly by the County and Seattle shall be used to calculate the adjusted amounts.
2.1.6 In the event the County abandons thc Project, it may, after 13 years of operating and
maintaining thc Existing Bridge, and prior to decommissioning it, reopen discussion)
with Seattle over a long term solution to theproblcm of operating and maintaining the
2.2 Funding of the Project
2.2.1 The County and the Cities will actively support partial Federal funding of the Project
through the Bridge Replacement Advisory Committee (BRAC) process, as well as
any.feasible additional Federal and State fund sources. The County will be named as
the beneficiary of any grants or other funding so obtained.
2.2.2 On December 31 of the second of two full calendar years after the effective date of
this Agreement (i.e. December 31, 2001 if the Agreement is signed during 1999)
Tukwila will pay the County $4,000,000. If the boundary adjustments specified in
Section 71.1 have been made, this payment shall relieve Tukwila of any
obligations regarding the Existing Bridge and the New Bridge_ and shall conclude 1
of Tukwila's obligations under this Agreement regardless of any future funding
9
needs. Tukwila's obligation and responsibilities for the Existing Bridge
Agreement shall cease except as specified in this Agreement and Tukwila will
longer be a party to this Agreement after making the payment, except, in the event
Tukwila is entitled to a refund of any of the $4,000,000 paid, the Agreement shall
bind the parties to the extent that it will provide for and ensure that such refund is
forthcoming.. The County understands that a portion of this payment represents
future costs of operating and maintaining the Existing Bridge and that if the County
should decommission the Existing Bridge before full funding for the New Bridge is
secured, the County will repay Tukwila that portion of its .contribution. The
repayment amount will decline over time: if decommissioning of the Existing Bridge
prior to full funding of. the New Bridge occurs during the first year after Tukwila
makes its payment, the repayment would be $3,700,000; if such decommissioning
occurs during the second year, $3,400,000.; and so on, the amount declining by
$300,000 per year until it reaches zero, at which point Tukwila will not be due any
refund on 'its contribution, regardless of events. All refunded amounts shall be
without interest or offset. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in the event that t e
Existin • Brid• e is decommissioned or otherwise • ermanentl taken out of servi e
because of earth. uake vandalism shi • collision settlement fire extraordin.
natural events or weather conditions war riots irree arable de • adation or destructs on
of the Existin • Brid • e or other causes be and the reasonable control of the Coun ii
Tukwila shall not be entitled to any refujid of its contribution, unless the New Brid ' e
project is abandoned by the County. If after the loss of the Existing Bridge,
described above the New Brid• e •ro'ect is abandoned by the Coun the '.4 000 000
i
10
z
�z
w
6U
U O
co 0
w=
• w
w o
2
a
• d
=
►- Lux
z�
�- o'
z r--
w
2
0
U co
O N
oI
=U
►' 0'
.z
w
U =.
O ~'
z
contribution from Tukwila shall be returned to Tukwila, subject to the yearly.
•
reduction s.ecified above in Section 2.2.2 and also reduced b one -half of the costs
incurred by the County in decommissioning, demolishing and/or restoring the site of
the Existing Bridge.
2.2.3 At the time full funding of the New Bridge has been secured, and after Seattle has
annexed the portion of the South Park PAA that includes the south half of the
Existing Bridge and the proposed location of the New Bridge (if different from the
location of *the. Existing Bridge), Seattle will pay $8,000,000 to the County for
funding the Project. Seattle shall make such payment in full to the County no later
than 3 months after its receipt of the County's notice of full funding. The Project
will be considered fully funded when all of the following are met:
1. The sum of all revenue sources that have been committed to funding a
portion of the Project equals the estimated cost of the Project.
2. The construction phase of the Project is programmed in the County's
six -year CEP.
3. The County has furnished to Seattle documentation of the revenue
sources and grant commitments, together with the County Road •
Engineer's current estimate, as the County's certification that the Project is
fully. funded.
2.2.4 If Tukwila and Seattle have fulfilled their obligations under this Agreement, the
County, using its funds and State and Federal funds, will pay the balance of the
Project costs, subject to the following provisions
construction. It is estimated that the County's obligation. for the balance of
11
e
Project costs.beyond the amounts contributed by Tukwila and Seattle will be less than..
$12,000,000. If, prior to the execution of a contract for the construction of the Project
the-County determines that the County's obligation will exceed $15,000,000 beyond
the amounts contributed by Tukwila and Seattle, the County may give notice to
Seattle that the selected Project alternative is not feasible. Upon such notice, Seat e
and the Countypartica will, at the County's request, attempt to renegotiate the Proj
to bring it within the funding available under this Agreement, and/or renegotiate the
cost sharing among the two parties. If Seattle and the County reach agreement on a
revised cost sharing, it will be submitted to their legislative authorities as a proposed
amendment to this Agreement. If the Project cannot be brought within available
funding, and if Seattle and the County do not reach agreement on a revised cost
• sharing, or if an amendment providing .for the revised cost sharing is not duly
approved and executed by Seattle and the County by six months after the County's
notice to Seattle that the selected Project alternative is not feasible, the County may
abandon the Project on 30 days written notice to the Cities. In this event, the County
shall remain responsible for the Existing Bridge and Seattle's payment ($8,000,000)
will be refunded to the Seattle, less a pro rata, share of design and permitting costs that
may have been incurred prior to termination. The pro rata share shall be equal to the
ratio of the $8,000,000 payment to the estimated total project cost of the preferred
bridge alternative.
2.2.5 The County will remain responsible for repayment of any portion of the Project costs
that were financed by County bonds.
2.2.6 If State and Federal funding reduce the County's share of Project costs below
12
$8,000,000, all three jurisdictions' contributions will be adjusted downward,.
proportionate to the Project costs each has borne.
2.2.7 The County's contribution to Project costs includes the funding of the environmental
review process, including the preparation and analysis of environmental documents.
Seattle shall not seek reimbursement of staff costs associated with its participation in
the preparation and review of the EIS nor for its participation in defense of any
administrative appeals or lawsuits arising out of or related to the environmental
review process.
2.3 Alternatives and Environmental Mitigation for the New Bridge
2.3.1 The County and Seattle will jointly decide on the selected bridge alternative. Any
elements of the Project that are identified in the Final Environmental Impact
statement— either within the project scope or as measures that mitigate significant
environmental impacts —shall be covered by the financing terms described in Section
2.2 Any additional mitigation measures or other project features that are not included
in the preferred bridge alternative or mitigation measures in the Final Environmental
Impact Statement will be funded by the party requesting the additional mitigation or
project features.
2.4 Project Management, Design, Permitting and Construction
2.4.1To provide coordination and direction for the work to be performed under this
•
made by the Executive Comniittcc. The Executive Committee will provide directi
13
schedule for implementation of this Agreement.
2.1.2The coordination of the environmental review, management, design, permitting
construction of the Project shall be in accordance with the terms set forth in Exhibit ,
which is hereby incorporated into and made a part of this Agreement by this reference.
constriction will be by the County Road Engineer and the Dircctor of the Sezattle
Transportation Department pursuant to the terms set forth in Exhibit , which azo
incorporated herein by this reference. After it has been finally accepted and
transferred to Seattle, the New Bridge will thereupon become a part of the Sc\ct e
street system, and Seattle will have sole ownership and responsibility for the
operation and maintenance of the New Bridge, together with all appurtenanc
.located within the New Bridge right of way, including, but not limited to, draifiage
facilities, pond tracts, environmental mitigation sites, street lights, landscapii,
ESTIMATED TIMELINE FOR IMPLEMENTATION
Recognizing that the parties cannot control every factor influencing the timeline for -
implementation of this Agreement, the parties will strive to meet the following
14
c
timeline for implementation.
Action
Estimated Completion Date
North Highline Governance Study completed
1999
Environmental Impact Statement Consultant Selection
and Scoping Process Begins
1999
Tukwila Amendment of Comprehensive Plan
(De- Designation of PAA)
_
November 30, 1999June 2000
or the first available opportunity
under the GMA, not later than
December 31, 2000.
Seattle Amendment of Comprehensive Nan
(Re- Designation of PAA)
The first available opportunity
under the GMA, not later than
December 31, 2000.
Final Environmental Impact Statement & Preliminary
Engineering for 16th Ave S Bridge Project
April 1, 2002
Tukwila. Payment to King County ($4 M)
December 31, 2001
King County Responsibility for Entire Existing Bridge
Begins .
December 31, 2001
Seattle Annexation of South Park PAA and
Seattle /Tukwila Adoption of Boundary Adjustments
November 30, 2001
Seattle Payments for Bridge Operations &
Maintenance Begin
January 15, 2002
16th Avenue S Bridge funding proposals to
BRAC/Legislature ,
January 15, 2002
Funding Approved for 16th Avenue S Bridge Project
May 1, 2002
County Council Approval- -16th Avenue S Bridge
Project Financing
November 30, 2002
Seattle Payment to King County ($8 M)
January 15, 2003
Final Design/Engineering of 16th Ave S Bridge
Completed •
November 30, 2004
Contract Awarded -16th Avenue S Bridge Project
April 1, 2005
New 16th Avenue S Bridge Open to Traffic
October 1, 2006 •
DURATION/DISPUTE RESOLUTION
The financial obligations required by Scction 2.2 of this Agreement shall only become
4.1 42-This Agreement shall remain in effect until the Project is finally accepted and
turned over to Seattle as described in Section 2.5 Exhibit B, subject to the early
15
C
r
termination provisions below and subject to the provisions of Section 2.1.2 and
2.2.2 above relating to the termination of Tukwila's obligations under this
Agreement. Termination of the Agreement shall have no effect on the boundary
adjustment provided for under Sections 1.1.1 through 1.1.3.
44-4.2 Dispute Resolution
4.1.11.2.1 In the event of a contractual dispute between any of the parties regarding
is
Agreement, the disputing parties shall meet within seven days to attempt to resolve
the matter informally through their designated representatives. If the parties are
unable to resolve the matter informally within 30 days, the matter shall be decided in
discussions between the Mayor(s)/Executive of the disputing parties.
4.1.21.2.2 If the dispute resolution process described in Section 4.2.1 fails, then
e
disputing parties agree to submit the dispute to non - binding mediation.
4.1.34.2.3 " The disputing parties may also use another mutually agreed upon dispute
resolution process.
4.1.11.2.4 Unless otherwise expressly agreed to by the parties in writing, the Cities and t1e
County shall continue to perform all their respective contractual obligations under this
Agreement during the resolution of the dispute.
5 OTHER PROVISIONS
5.1 The Cities hereby grant to the County right of entry into their corporate limits for
the purpose ofiperforming any and all tasks related to the County's obligations
under this Agreement.
. 5.2 Washington State law shall govern the respective liability among the parties to this
16
C •
Agreement for any loss due to property damage•or personal injury arising out of the
activities conducted pursuant to this Agreement.
5.3 Nothing contained herein is intended to, nor shall be construed to, create any rights
in any party not a signatory to this Agreement, or to form the basis for any liability
on the part of the Cities, the County, or their officials, employees, agents or
representatives, to any party not a signatory to this Agreement.
5.4 Waiver of any breach of any provision of this Agreement shall not be deemed to be
a waiver of any prior or subsequent breach and shall not be construed to be a
modification of the terms of this Agreement.
5.5 If any provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid, the remainder. of the
.Agreement shall not be affected thereby if such remainder would then continue to
serve the purposes and objectives of the parties.
5.6 Except for the estimated timeline described in Section 3, time is of the essence of
this Agreement.
5.7 All parties were represented by counsel throughout the drafting and execution of
this Agreement. The provisions of this Agreement shall not be construed for or
against any party.
5.8 The headings of the various sections and subsections of this Agreement are inserted
for convenience only and shall not be deemed to expand, limit, or otherwise affect
its terms and conditions. -
5.9 This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the parties and any representations
17
y,.
or understandings, whether oral or written, not incorporated herein are excluded.
.
•
interests of public safety.
345.11. Durin • the . eriod of time that the Coun has res• onsibili for the entire
Existing Bridge, the County will have full authority to make any decisions related
to the operation,maintenance and management of the Existing Bridge to the same
extent as if the Existing Bridge were part of the County road system including,
without limitation, the authority to close and/or decommission the Existing Bridge
at any time if, in the Countv's judgment, closing and/or decommissioning the
Existing Bridge is necessitated by earthquake, vandalism, ship collision, settlement,
fire, extraordinary natural events or weather conditions, riots, irreparable
degradation or destruction of the Existing Bridge, imminent safety considerations,
or other causes beyond the reasonable control of the County. In addition, the
County may close and/or decommission the Existing Bridge if in the County's
judgment, it is unreasonably costly to keep the Existing Bridge open, provided that
the County gives the Cities one year's notice of its intent to close and/or
decommission the Existing Bridge for that reason.
5.12 This Agreement may be amended only by an instrument in writing, duly executed
by all parties.
6 TERMINATION.
646.1 If the Project is not completed by thirteen years after the effective date of this
18
Agreement, this Agreement shall terminate and-the County and Seattle agree to
reopen discussions over a long term solution to the problem of operating,
maintaining, rehabilitation or replacement of the Existing Bridge.
3:46.2 In the event that either City is in material breach of any of its obligations under
this Agreement, in addition to any other remedies available to the County, the
County may terminate this Agreement, provided that, prior to terminating this
Agreement, the County shall give written notice of such material breach to both
Cities, specifying the nature of the breach and the manner in which the breach may
be cured satisfactorily, and giving the alleged breaching City thirty days in which to
cure the breach, provided further that if the nature of the-alleged breach is such that
it cannot reasonably be cured within the thirty day period, then commencement of
the cure within the thirty day period and the diligent prosecution to completion of
the cure shall be deemed a cure. •
3 46.3 Upon termination of this Agreement, the jurisdiction within which the Existing
Bridge or part thereof is located shall have responsibility for the operation and
maintenance of that part of the Existing Bridge that is located within that
iurisdiction: No later than 90 days after termination the County shall repay to the
Cities the portion of their contributions, that is, four million dollars from Tukwila
and ei •ht million dollars from Seattle to which the Cities ma be entitled if an as
follows: repayment to Tukwila shall be in accordance with the formula described in
Section 2.2.2, and repayment to Seattle shall be in accordance with the formula
described in Section 2.2.34.
19
1.•
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement effective as of the
date last written below.
KING COUNTY CITY OF SEATTLE
King County Executive
Mayor
z
■
j- w •
a: 2
oo
(0 CI'
W =.
LL.
w 0:
g J.
LL Q •
w
? H.
zo
LU uj.
Date Date
•v 0:
O Ni
;o f-;
w w.
F- P.
CITY OF TUKWILA:` u. 0 •
Lii z co
U
0�'
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Mayor
Date
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
20
z
Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Seattle City Attorney
Tukwila City Attorney
z
a
Wiz:.
u6=
J0:
UO,
W w'
w=
J
CO LL
w o.
2
g J'
LL Q;
Z d
mow,
1-;
1-O'
Z 1-'
U.1
w
'_
1- -
LL �
O: •
LJ
Uc
O ~'
Z
ATTACHMENT D
1211111115.111-
..... ..
MINIM LTM
Minn I
Zifil111111111111, 14711-11111
raummuira vairn i
WM MUM II
IIIIIIIM II
WI 1111111111111 1
III I
1111
III 1
vu MIME iii I
1111:1 '111111111
111:
111111111
111111h.liv
1111111111116.
111111111111 i11 /4
IIIIIIIIIIII
W111111111 111111111M
NUMMI 111111111.
11111111111 1111111111111;
1111111111111 11111111112
L1111111111 111111111011
Z7111111111 11111111111"
HIM
211111111
11111111111;
=MI12
Boeing
Field
000000 0
000000 0
000000 00
000000
000000
00
o
00.
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000
000000000
0000000000
0000000000
0000000000 0
0000000000 000
0000000 0 0
0000000
0000000
00000000000
000000000000
0000000000000
II 0000000000000
00000000000000.
0000
O 000000
000
0000000
00
00000000
000000000
0000000
IIII
0000
0000
0000
0000
0000
00000
00000
00000
00000
00000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
000000000000
00000
00000
000000
000000
000000
000000
0000000
0000000
0000000
0000000
000
00
000
000
000
00
000
000
000
00
00
000
000
00
00
000
000
00
00
00
000
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
00
0
00000
00000
00
0000
00000
00000
00000
000
0000
0000
0 000
00.000
0 00000000000
00000
00000
00000000000
0000000000000000000
000000000000000000
00000000000000000
000000000000000
000000000
000
000000
000000000000
0000000000000000
0000000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000 00
000000000000000000000 00
00 .00000000000000000000.00
000 • 00000000000000000000 00
00 .0000000000000000000.00
00 0000000000 ..... 000.00
000 • 000000000 000 000
0000
0000
0000
000 .0000000.000
000 .00000000
000 00
00 00000000000000
000 00000000000000
000 0000000000000
000 000000000000
00 00000000000
0 00000000000
00 0000000000
000000000
0 000
00
00
00
•00
000
00
00
00
000
00
00
•000
000
00
muumth. quidezu 11,
NUMMI
MUM=
HUM
Transfer Northern
Potential Annexation Area (PAA),
L99-0085
•. •
••■ ow. — 'IE. Existing City Limits (Unchanged)
000000000
000000000
000000000
000000000
To Seattle
GIS
z
Z
t
6
-J
O 0
O0
CJ)W
WI
• 0
7.1
I
T:
z
c)
ZI-
Wj
2 :3
0 --
0 I-
ILI ill
I 0
F- r=
LLI
z. z
(3
•
City of Tukwila
Washington
Resolution No
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AFFIRMING AGREEMENT IN PRINCIPLE
TO REVISE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MAP TO ELIMINATE AN
OVERLAPPING POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREA WITH SEATTLE,
AND TO REVISE CERTAIN BOUNDARIES ONCE AN INTERLOCAL
AGREEMENT IS SIGNED WITH SEATTLE AND KING COUNTY.
WHEREAS, King County and the cities of Tukwila and Seattle have successfully completed
the mediation process entered into under the Memorandum of Understanding signed in June
1997, to resolve a disputed potential 'annexation area, boundary adjustments and the future
improvements to the l4th /16th Avenue South Bridge; and
WHEREAS, all three jurisdictions have contributed significant time and effort to the
negotiations; and
WHEREAS, the results reflect a spirit of cooperation, mutual accommodation and joint
contributions to the successful resolution of some of our region's most challenging problems; and
WHEREAS, Tukwila's 1995 Comprehensive Plan recognizes the intent to revise certain
boundaries and to avoid overlap in potential annexation areas; and
WHEREAS, these revisions would represent a significant step toward full implementation of
the Growth Management Act by creating a more workable set of boundaries, financing needed
infrastructure improvements, and by providing more efficient government for the residents of the
region;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
A. The City of Tukwila agrees in principle to revise its Comprehensive Plan map to
eliminate an overlapping potential annexation area with Seattle and to straighten boundaries as laid
out in the draft Interlocal Agreement with Seattle and King County.
B. The City of Tukwila shall, however, defer adopting Comprehensive Plan revisions (L99-
0085 and L99-0088) until the Interlocal Agreement with Seattle and King County is finalized and
signed.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THIy, CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a
Regular Meeting thereof this . day of , 2001.
ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED:
z,
Jane E. Cantu, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
I Office of e Attorney
Joan Hernandez, Council President
Filed with the CIty Clerk:,— % — [) /
Passed by the City Council: < • 5
Resolution Number / '/.ff )
COMP PLAN MAP REV I -01 4/29/99
rnrt
o: 1R -- -gap u tm.m ['° emen:J
•
ifRegy..`:)t;
GIS
„
Tukwila Boundary Adjustment Map 2
Existing Tukwila City Limits
Proposed Tukwila City Limits
•
GIS
Tukwila
Tukwila Boundary Adjustment Map 3
Existing Tukwila City Limits
• Proposed Tukwila City Limits
North Boundary Adjustment with
Seattle, King County
e. • Existing City Limits
--11111.--- Proposed City Limits
L99 -0088
To Tukwila
To Seattle
Sheet 2 of 2
Z .
.mow
Q�QL
JU
00
coo
W W.
1-
N LL
WO
Q
=• a
1•- _
Z�
1- 0'
Z
w uj
U0
O -.
W • u!
U.
li.i Z
O D.
H •
O
Z
limmnsum
011111111
000000000000
000 000goo • 000
0000
oo 8
o
000 000000
000 00000
000
0000 '000
0000
00
0000
000
111111111111
111111111111
11111111111i
To Tukwila
110111111111L I EE
osmium 11/4 Nami
ft mamma
m„.....,
.00000000000
0.0000000
0.0000000
0000000N
0000000
.00.0000.
•00000000 Boeing
0000000N",
0000000000..
000000000000.,
000000000000
000000000000l■ Field
00000.000000m
00000000000.0.
000000000.0000
0000000000.000
00000.000000001
00000000000000
.00000000.000
00000000000.001
01%1=22=
0
o 0087,671=601
0000000000000
0000000000000
0000000000001
000000000000
00000000000
00000000000
000000000l
00000000 .
• 0000000
00000
•0000h
00000
• 000l
oo
00
000
0000
000000
000000
0000000
0 000000
000000
00000
000
00
odSTOSSolle
000000000
000000000
0000000000
00000000
00000000
oo
0000000000000000 15,
00000000000000000000
000000000000000000006 • 00000000000000000000
00000000000000000000 • 00000000000000000000
0000000000000000000
0000000000000000000000
oo 0000000000000000000000
oo 0000000000000000000000
•oo 0000000000000000000000
000
00000 • litgam000000
00000 .t, 000000
000 000000000000000000000 •
00000000000000000000
00000000000000000000 • 00000000000000000000
0000000000000000000
0000000000000000000
0000000000000000000
000000000000000000
• 0000000 000000000000000000'
0000000 00000000000000000
00000000 000000000000000000
•00000000 .000000000000000000.
00000000 0000000000000000000
00000000 000000000000000000
00000000 000000000000000000
00000000 000000000000000000
•0000000 • 000000000000000000
0000000 00000000000000000
00000000000000000
0000000000000000
0000000000000000
000000000000000
0000000000000000
000000000000000
000000000000000
0000000000000
0000000000000
000000000000
• 000000000000
000000000000
• 00000000000
00000000000
.0000000000
0000000000
000000000
000000000
• 00000000
0000000
00000
00000
00000
0000
•0000
0000
• 000
000
• 00
0000000
000000
0000000
000000
0000000
111111'01•,_
MEW
lump el■
winirat 4.111141:1114.
•
NMI
ml AMOVIIIIIIIIIPUtifilL■. 4411111eAklibli•■
• MI
NM MOM
II MI
MIL "jr 11111111.16111
Northern Boundary Adjustment
INith Seattle, King County
L99-0088
Existing City Limits
—11110Proposed City Limits
0000000000
To Seattle
To Tukwila
11111111111111111111111
Sheet 1 of 2
z
'
z
cc LILI•
•
_1 0
00
OD C3
op uu.
11.1
111 ()
?-7
g 5
u_
:3.
92 CY
uu
nc.
z
E- 0
ZI-
UJ
cl
0
• 0 a
:C3
ww
:3C ().
1-
t.t.,
.7!
Li=
o
Z*CL II o
DEC 2 9 7999
COMMUNITY
ATTACHMENT C
140 ST
S 146 ST
S 148 ST
S 150 ST
L99-0086 Third Floor Office use in NCC Zone on Tukwila International Blvd
L99-0087 Third Floor Office use in NCC Zone on Tukwila international Blvd
MgliamtorepwrAteormitzelsztOMPAM'•
N