Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-15-88 - CITY OF TUKWILA - FOSTER ANNEXATION, ZONING AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTFOSTER ANNEXATION- PRE - ANNEXATION COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONING & ANNEXATON OF FOSTER 139T" ST, PACIFIC HWY 50., 144T" ST. & CITY LIMITS EPIC 15 -88 City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 1 FISCAL IMPACT OF COMBINED RIVERTON, FOSTER, AND THORNDYKE AREAS ANNEXATION I. Introduction The City of Tukwila has proposed annexation of Fire District #1; this annexation proposal is presently being considered by the Boundary Review Bnard. In early 1988, the City received annexation petitions from three other areas and has been examining these potential annexations for the past three months. The three areas are called Riverton, Foster, and Thorndyke. In combination, these areas are contiguous with the boundaries of Fire District #18 (a district that is now defunct, having merged with Fire District #11 as of June, 1988), except for the north portion of Riverton between the Duwamish River and South 124 Street (an area which is not part of any fire district). The three annexation areas "fill in" the area between the western boundaries of Tukwila and Fire District #1 to Highway 99 (Pacific Hwy. South). Scope of Study: This study provides a planning analysis of the fiscal impact of annexation of the three areas. The estimated cost impacts on Tukwila are based on a department level review of the area characteristics, and the staffing levels that departments would request for providing services to the area. The City will review these results internally. Final decisions about the staffing requirements for the annexation area will be made when the City adopts an amended budget for the annexation. The Riverton area is the northern portion of the combined area and extends from the Duwamish River to South 138th Street. Foster is the middle portion between South 138th Street and South 144th Street. Thorndyke is the southern portion extending from South 144th Street to South 160th Street. Presently, general government services in the area are provided by several agencies including King County, Fire District #11, the King County Rural Library System, Water District 125, the ValVue Sewer District, Seattle City Light, and Puget Power (Puget Power serves a small portion of the annexation area, east of 51 Avenue South). Solid waste collection and disposal is provided by private companies under franchises with the Washington Utilities and Transportation Commission. Based on current policies and practices, only the municipal services now provided by King County, fire protection services and library services would be governed by Tukwila after annexation. Regional services would continue to be governed by King County. The existing long term franchise agreements between Tukwila and the two electric utilities would extend to the annexation area, based on existing service areas. Solid waste collection and disposal would continue to be provided by private companies. Under RCW 35.13A.070, if a City does not choose to assume sewer or water district responsibilities, it need not. Because sewer and water services in the area, provided by Water District 125 and the ValVue Sewer District, are adequate, they will continue to provide service, and there would not be a City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 2 direct fiscal impact on the City. For these reasons, the operating costs of water, sewer, and other utilities are not examined in this study. Characteristics of Area: The combined annexation area is primarily residential, with commercial development along the Highway 99 strip and along East Marginal Way. The northern end of Riverton (e.g. north of South 124th Street) is commercial/ industrial property. The community facilities in the combined annexation area include an undeveloped county park (Southgate Park), a King County swimming pool (South Central Pool), a library (Foster Library), and a fire station (this was the Fire District #18 station and is now owned by Fire District #11, subsequent to the merger). Table 1 summarizes some basic data on the area, including population estimates, land area and county road miles. It is important to note that the population in the combined annexation area is greater than Tukwila's current population, 6,580 versus 4,760. Population Percent of Tukwila Pop. TABLE 1 GENERAL DATA RIVERTON FOSTER TNORNDYKE TOTAL 1,224 752 4,604 6,580 25.7% 15.8% 96.7% 138.2% Housing Units 597 367 2,074 3,038 Registered Voters 414 355 1,106 1,875 Area (acres) 223 196 469 888 Road Niles II. Revenue Impacts 5.77 3.17 6.34 15.28 The most significant sources of potential revenue to the City from the combined annexation area are property tax and sales tax. Three property taxes that are presently levied in the area would no longer be levied after annexation: the Road District Levy, the Rural Library Levy and the Fire District Levy. The services that are presently supported by these levies (i.e. road maintenance and construction and partial funding for other County services such as police protection, library services and fire protection services) would become the responsibility of the City. After annexation the City would levy its general property tax. The annual impact of these City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 , Page 3 different property tax levies, based on the 1988 assessed valuation and levy rates for the area, are shown on Table 2. TABLE 2 PROPERTY TAXES RIVERTON FOSTER THORNDYKE TOTAL ASSESSED VALUATION: Annexation Area 43,039,680 28,062,113 80,339,726 151,441,519 Fire District 38,222,680 28,062,113 80,339,726 146,624,519 1988 TAX RATES & LEVIES WITH ANNEXATION: Tukwila Tex Rate \1 2.937 2.937 2.937 2.937 Tukwila Levy 126,408 82,418 235,958 444,784 WITHOUT ANNEXATION: FD #18 Tax Rate \2 1.500 1.500 1.500 1.500 FD 018 Levy 57,334 42,093 120,510 219,937 Road District Tax Rate Road District Levy Rural Library Tax Rate Rural Library Levy 1.681 1.681 1.681 1.681 72,350 47,172 135,051 254,573 0.500 0.500 0.500 0.500 21,520 14,031 40,170 75,721 TOTAL LEVY W/0 ANNEXATION 151,204 103,297 295,731 550,231 1. General levy for Tukwila, excludes Golf Course Levy. 2. The 1988 tax rate for FD #18 is $1 per 51,000 in assessed value; however, with merger with FD 011 the rate will be $1.50 per $1,000. During the first two years after annexation, revenue from property taxes are affected by various timing considerations. Property tax levy rates are set in one year and assessed and collected in the next year. This means that, regardless of when an annexation occurs, the property taxes for the current year would already be set and cannot be changed before the following year. Revenue from the City's general tax levy is affected by the timing of the annexation. If the annexation takes place before March 1, the City can levy property tax in the current year for collection in the following year, and there would be no revenue from the City property tax until the following year. If annexation takes place after March 1, the City cannot levy the tax until City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 4 the following year, which means it is not collected until the second year after annexation, and there is no revenue collected during the first two calendar years after annexation. To some extent, this delay in collection of the City's general property taxes is made up by the provision that any Road District taxes that have been levied but not been collected as of the annexation date are distributed to the City upon collection. However, the Road District tax levy is smaller than the City's general tax levy, and would make up only a portion of the City's potential annual property tax revenue. The following examples show the relationship between timing of the annexation and property tax revenue. Example A is for annexation occurring before March 1, Example B is a hypothetical date (June 30) for annexation occurring after March 1. As -these examples show, the timing can affect revenues for up to three years. A 8 Annexation by Annexation by Feb. 28, 1989 June 30, 1989 1989 Property Taxes: Fire District 219,937 219,937 Rural Library 75,721 75,721 Road Tax: County \1 63,643 165,473 Tukwila: Uncollected Road Tax \1 190,930 89,101 General Levy 0 0 Tukwila Total 190,930 89,101 1990 Property Taxes: Fire District 0 219,937 Rural Library 0 75,721 Road Tax: County 0 0 Tukwila: Uncollected Road Tax 0 254,573 General Levy 444,786 0 Tukwila Total 444,784 254,573 1991 Property Taxes: Fire District 0 0 Rural Library 0 0 Road Tax: County 0 0 Tukwila: Uncollected Road Tax 0 0 General Levy 444,784 444,784 Tukwila Total 444,784 444,784 1. Estimates of Road Taxes going to the County and to Tukwila are based on the assumptions that 25 % of the tax would be collected as of February 28 and 65 X as of. June 30. Tukwila receives only the uncollected amount. City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 5 As indicated by this example, delays in annexation can result in less revenue for the City in the first two years. However, since the timing of annexation also affects the City's costs, some of the decrease in revenue would be offset by timing related decreases in costs. For example, under Example B, the City would be responsible for services to the annexation area for only six months in the first year, compared to the 10 -month period under Example A. Also, if the Fire District and Rural Library System continued to collect property taxes, they could continue providing services during the same period for which they collect taxes. This could be done through an interlocal agreement, and the City would not have to bear these additional costs until it was able to collect the general tax levy from area residents (in the second or third year) and phase in its own services. The retail sales and use tax is another source of revenue from the annexation area. The estimate of retail sales tax is shown on Table 3. A list of businesses was gathered from a drive -by survey of the annexation areas. This list was sent to the Department of Revenue, who provided information on the amount of taxable sales for these businesses in 1987. Tukwila's sales tax rate is one percent; fifteen percent of the local sales tax revenue collected within the City is allocated to the County. Table 3 reflects the County's share and the amount of revenue remaining for the City -- approximately $243,000 for the combined area. TABLE 3 SALES TAX RIVERTON FOSTER THORNDTKE TOTAL Taxable Retail Sales 19,995,177 2,134,568 6,541,413 28,671,158 Local Sales Tax Rater 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% Local Sales Tax Revenue 199,952 21,346 65,414 286,712 Less County 15 % (29,993) (3,202) (9,812) (43,007) Tukwila Sales Tax Revenue 169,959 18,144 55,602 243,705 Other significant revenues for the area would be generated by state distributed revenues and locally imposed fees and fines. These are shown on Table 4 which includes footnotes on the method of estimating each revenue. Some of the revenues are restricted to specific uses. The motor vehicle fuel tax must be used for roads purposes, the real estate excise tax must be used for capital projects, and block grant funds must be used for specific grant City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 6 programs. Unrestricted revenues can be used for any purposes designated by the City. As shown on Table 4 the estimated annual amount of revenue that would come to the City from the annexation areas is over 51.1 million in unrestricted sources and about 5142,000 from restricted sources. UNRESTRICTED REVENUE: PROPERTY TAX SALES TAX BUSINESS LICENSES /PERMITS \1 BUILDING PERMITS \2 MOTOR VEHICLE EXCISE TAX \3 LIQUOR EXCISE TAX \3 LIQUOR BOARD PROFITS \3 COURT FINES & FEES, NON-TRAFFIC COURT FINES & FEES, TRAFFIC \5 PLANNING FEES \6 UNRESTRICTED TOTAL RESTRICTED REVENUES: MOTOR VEHICLE FUEL TAX REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX BLOCK GRANT \9 TABLE 4 SUMMARY OF REVENUE IMPACT 1988 * TUKWILA RIVERTON FOSTER THORNDYKE TOTAL ANNEXATION 2,643,640 7,639,674 90,000 90,000 60,000 20,000 30,000 \4 55,000 97,100 102,000 10,827,414 126,408 82,418 235,958 444,784 169,959 18,144 55,602 243,705 2,475 525 1,800 4,800 7,074 4,349 24,577 36,000 15,569 9,565 83,698 108,832 3,721 2,286 20,003 26,010 12,044 7,400 64,747 84,191 3,135 1,925 11,770 16,830 24,955 15,342 93,896 134,192 4,009 2,464 13,927 20,400 369,349 144,418 605,977 1,119,745 \7 64,000 16,448 10,112 61,888 \8 70,000 3,551 2,315 6,628 30,000 7,710 4,740 29,010 88,448 12,494 41,460 RESTRICTED TOTAL 164,000 27,709 17,167 97,526 142,402 GRAND TOTAL 10,991,414 397,058 161,585 703,503 1,262,147 1. Based on estimated number of employees, businesses, and average charges of S75. 2. Assumes overall increase of 40 percent in building permits. 3. Based on estimated per capita amounts for state formulas. 4. Accounts.341310, 356900, 357300 increased based on estimated increase in Part I crimes of 592 (30.6 percent) over current level of 1,936. 5. Accounts 353100, 354000, 353700, 355200 increased based on population. 6. Assumes an increase of 20 percent in zoning fees. 7. Based on increase in population 8. Based on an assumed turnover of 3.3 percent of assessed value 9. Estimate based on increase in population (grant is allocated based on moderate and low income population.) * 1988 budgeted estimates of revenues. III. Cost Impacts for Annual Operations The impact of annexation on Tukwila's costs for annual operations derive primarily from the additional personnel that would be needed to serve the areas. There are some one time costs for additional equipment (e.g. vehicles, desk and chairs). A range of cost estimates were developed based on information supplied by department heads as to personnel and equipment needs. (Personnel costs were estimated using the mid -range monthly salary for the same or similar positions that currently exist in the City; benefits were estimated at 25 percent of salary costs). City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 7 The estimated cost impacts are based on a department level review. The City will review these results internally; final decisions about staffing requirements for the annexation area will be made when the City adopts an amended budget for the annexation. All costs are shown as a range of estimates. A range was used to reflect: 1) the uncertainty about the overlapping impacts on services with and without the annexation of Fire District #1 and 2) variation based on annexation of all or part of the combined annexation area, with annexation of Foster only as the low end of the range and annexation of all three areas as the high end of the range. The range for general costs, such as facility needs, depends on the actual level of personnel additions and decisions about accommodating added staff within existing space. Facility costs also depend on the extent to which existing facilities can be reconfigured to house additional personnel and equipment. General: With the addition of personnel with annexation the City may need to provide additional office space. The high end of the range reflects the cost if all of the additional personnel were hired and all of them required new office. If this were the case, a short term measure would be to lease the additional office space in facilities located near to the current City Hall. There are office parks and similar facilities available in the area. Over the long run, the City will need to examine its long term facility needs. This should be done in the context of considering all likely annexations and other long term growth in City requirements. Estimates of office space needed for additional postions were based on the average amount of space needed for each type of position, ranging from 74 square feet for clerical staff to 150 square feet for mid - management staff. A factor of 20 percent was added to account for common areas, such as hallways and conference rooms that would be needed in addition to individual office space. Based on the range of postions identified for the annexation area, office space needs would range from 581 to 3,215 square feet. If all of this were for additional space that could not be accommodated in existing City facilities, the cost for leasing the space would range from $9,296 to $51,440 per year. There would also be some additional one time costs for furnishing work stations; this cost would range from $4,800 to $21,600. • Facilities for other uses, such as fire protection and public works maintenance, may also need to be considered. There are plans to remodel the fire station in the Foster annexation area. If the area is annexed, the City would become owner of some of the Fire District's assets; it is assumed this would include the fire station. Public Works anticipates that it would need some additional maintenance facilities convenient to the annexation area, for sand piles and certain pieces of equipment. The potential cost of these maintenance facilities have not been included in the cost estimates, because it may be possible to locate them on existing governmental properties in the City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 8 area through an arrangement with the owners. Police Services: The impacts on police service relate to both the size of the geographic area, the density of the population, and the nature of criminal activity in the area. The three annexation areas are mainly residential, with but there are some commercial areas (e.g. along Highway 99) that may attract a different type and frequency of criminal activity. For all three annexation areas, the Police Department has estimated that it would need an additional 14.5 FTEs. This impact assumes the addition of 'a patrol district. It also assumes the annexation of Fire District #1 takes place. A patrol district would be added with the annexation of Fire District #1 and this would allow for certain efficiencies in departmental organization and provision of backup for patrol. If the Fire District #1 annexation does not occur, police staffing for the combined annexation area would likely be higher. The additional personnel estimated by the Police Department for annexation (with Fire District #1) include 5 patrol officers, which is sufficient to have one officer on duty 24 hours a day. A smaller number of patrol officers would be sufficient to man only one or two shifts per day, instead of three. The estimated costs at the low end of the range (i.e. for the Foster area only) is generally based on the relative size and population of the area, and would result in patrol staffing for less than 24 hours a day. However, the existing patrol staffing of the City would be available for back up. Costs for police services include some one time costs for equipment. The total annual cost impact for the Police Department, including both labor costs and a 15 percent factor for other costs (e.g. uniforms, training, equipment), ranges from $120,632 (with 2.5 FTEs) to $606,562 (14.5 FTEs); one time costs range from $11,000 to $77,000. Fire Protection Services: The costs for providing fire protection services to the annexation areas are primarily personnel costs. These costs reflect the fact that Tukwila would obtain a portion of the assets of Fire District *11 upon annexation, and that these assets would include the fire station in the Foster area and some equipment. The amount of assets that the City would receive is based on the proportion of the assessed valuation of Fire District *11 that is within the annexed area. However, the value of the Fire District's assets have not been re- evaluated since the merger with Fire District #18. An accurate figure on the Fire District's assets, and the assessed valuation for the annexation area would be needed to be more precise about the potential impacts for Tukwila. A certified valuation of Fire District #11 would be requested upon annexation. At present, the estimates of cost impacts assume that existing City equipment and the facilities in the Thorndyke area would be sufficient, so that the only impact is from additional personnel. The allocation of personnel among the three annexation areas results in problems similar to those for the police department. The smaller numbers of firefighters for an individual area would not allow for 24 hour staffing of a City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 9 position or slot. However, in combination with existing fire department staff, the City would still be able to provide 24 hour response. The range of estimated costs for the Fire Department is $89,490 (2.5 FTEs) for Foster only to $ 278,048 (5 FTEs) for the combined annexation. Municipal Court: The annexation will affect Municipal Court costs because of the additional criminal and traffic cases that must be handled by the City. The Municipal Court has estimated that a half -time Court Clerk will be needed to handle the additional caseload. This cost is only estimated for the total combined annexation area, as it would be difficult to divide a half time position among the three areas. Other Municipal Court costs include judicial time, prosecuting attorney time, public defense payments and payment for the Southeast Community Alcohol Treatment Center. The estimated costs for Municipal Court range from $5,167 for Foster only to $58,072 (with .5 FTEs) for the combined annexation. Planning and Building: The Planning and Building Divisions would be affected by increases in building permit applications and development review tasks generated from the annexation area. The Planning Department has estimated the staffing impact of annexation based on an assumed 20 percent increase in zoning applications and a 40 percent increase (150 over the current level of 372) in building permit applications, with combined annexation. There is potential for additional commercial /industrial development in the Riverton area, and the Thorndyke area has experienced significant development of multi- family units is recent years. The Planning Division would also be affected by additional workloads in the long range and policy planning areas. The estimated annual costs for the Planning Department range from no cost (for Foster only) to $117,465 (4.3 FTEs) with combined annexation. With combined annexation there could be an additional one time cost of $11,000 for purchasing a vehicle for building inspectors Parks and Recreation: The Parks Department estimates that the impact of annexation would be relatively small, since residents in the area already use Tukwila's recreation programs. It is not anticipated that any of the existing parks in the area (e.g. Southgate County Park) would be further developed, although the City may seek ownership of the County park. (Parks maintenance costs are reflected in the cost estimates for Public Works, Division II.) There would be some increase in costs for staffing recreation programs, mailing notices of classes and program, and providing transportation services for senior citizens. The estimated costs for the Parks Department, range from $7,000 (.33 FTE) for Foster only to $21,000 (1 FTE) for the combined annexation. Legislative and Administrative: The City's various legislative and administrative functions would be affected by the overall increase in responsibilities resulting from annexation, with impacts for the City Clerk, Finance Department and Personnel Department. Annexation would also affect the responsibilities of the Mayor and City Council, but this increase cannot be easily translated into dollar amounts; some additional assistant staff may be City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 10 needed for the elected officials. The total cost impact for the Finance Department reflects that assumption that operation of sewer and water utilities would be through contracts with existing providers, and that the Finance Department would not be responsible for any billings to sewer and water customers in the annexation area. The total cost for these general administrative functions ranges from $11,805 (.5 FTE) for Foster only to $85,025 (2.5 FTE) for the combined annexation. Public Works: The Public Works Department would be affected by the addition of roads, surface water management needs, facilities and parks maintenance that would result from annexation. The Department has determined the number of road miles in the area, reviewed the surface water problems, and looked at facilities in the area. The Department has identified staffing requirements for the annexation area based on this review. In addition to staffing requirements, there would be equipment rental costs. The estimate of the equipment costs was made by calculating the percent increase over 1988 staffing for Maintenance Divisions I and II, and increasing equipment rental costs by the same percentage. Public Works costs are divided between the General Fund and the Street Fund. The General Fund portion includes Administration, Engineering Services, Parks Maintenance and Facilities Maintenance. The Street Fund portion includes maintenance of City streets and surface water management. The cost impact ranges from $3,438 for the General Fund and $48,551 (1 FTE) for the Street Fund with annexation of the Foster area, to $127,383 (4 FTEs) for the General Fund and $200,019 (4 FTEs) for the Street Fund with combined annexation. Community Services: Several community service costs are budgeted in the Mayor's Office, including the costs for the City's library contract and health service contract. The City pays the King County Health Department for services provided to City citizens based on a contractual agreement; the estimates for this contract are based on population in the annexation areas. The library contract provides for payment of $19.53 per capita and the estimates are based on this per capita amount. It should be noted that the amount that would be paid to the King County Rural Library System under this contract for the combined annexation area ($128,507) is greater than the amount of revenue the System would lose from its property tax levy for the area ($75,721). In combination with annexation of Fire District #1, the Library System would loose about $144,000 due to the differences between the contract and tax levy amounts. The City contributes to various other programs on a voluntary basis; since these programs provide direct services to individuals, it is assumed that contributions would be increased in proportion to the increase in population related to annexation. The total estimated cost for these' community services ranges from $22,399 for just the Foster area to $195,987 for the combined annexation. City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 11 Summary of Operating Costs: Table 5 summarizes the range of costs for each department and for "general" costs. The low end of the range reflects annexation of Foster only. The high end of the range reflects departmental estimates for annexation of all three areas, and the general costs if new office space was needed for all positions. These estimates may or may not reflect economies of scale that could be achieved with annexation of Fire District #1. Economies of scale could be achieved through more efficient organization of departments, through substitution of equipment for labor costs, pooling of capital resources, reorganization of service areas, and so forth. These potential changes were not addressed in any detail by the departments, so the high estimate may not reflect these types of efficiencies. The table also shows the one time costs for purchases of equipment and work stations. The total annual cost to the General Fund for all three areas ranges from $259,931 to $1,514,982. The annual costs for the Street Fund ranges from $48,551 to $200,019. In addition there are one time costs for equipment and vehicles ranging from $11,000 to $51,500. The range for all costs is $319,482 to $1,850,601. TABLE 5 RANGE OF OPERATING COSTS FOR ANNEXATION AREA Annual Operating Costs: Police Department Fire Department Municipal Court Planning Department Parks Department Administration Coamnity Services Public Works: Gen. Fund General Annual General Fund Total Annual Street Fund Total Equipment Costs Police Department Planning Department Finance Department Work Stations Total Equipment Costs TOTAL ALL COSTS Low High Estimate Estimate 120,632 606,562 89,490 278,048 5,167 58,072 117,465 7,000 21,000 11,805 59,025 22,399 195,987 3,438 127,383 51,440 259,931 1,514,982 48,551 200,019 11,000 77,000 11,000 26,000 21,600 11,000 135,600 319,482 1,850,601 City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 12 C. Capital Improvements Based on a review of King County's capital improvement plans, and discussions with Tukwila's Public Works Department, four capital improvement projects have been identified for the combined annexation area. Since sewer and water services would be provided by existing purveyors, no capital improvements for these services were identified. The annexation area has some surface water problems, and two specific capital projects have been identified by King County to address these problems. With annexation, Tukwila would be responsible for these projects. The costs of the projects have been estimated by the County, but could vary depending on cost of acquiring rights of way. The cost for these two projects totals $307,000. The surface water projects are identified in Reconnaissance Report No. 24 (for the Lower Green River Basin) and Report No. 26 (for the Duwamish River Basin). Report No. 24 identifies a project to "install a control structure and excavate two existing stream channels to provide 2.5 acre -feet of storage" at a site located just north of 154th Street and east of 42nd Avenue, in the Thorndyke area. Report No. 26 identifies a project in the Riverton area for construction of a retention /detention facility at the intersection of 133rd Street South and South Marginal Way East. Another impact of annexation is the potential shift in funding for Surface Water projects included in Tukwila's current capital improvement program. County contributions totalling $620,000 for drainage from the Riverton area cover part of the capital improvement costs; after annexation, Tukwila would be the sole source of funds. Two road projects have been identified in the annexation area. Neither of these projects were given a high priority in the King County Transportation Plan, so they are not part of the County's Capital Improvement Plan. The projects are 1) installation of traffic lights at the intersection of 42nd Avenue South and South 144th Street, and, installation of curbs, gutters and sidewalks along the 40th to 42nd Avenue South arterial which extends the length of the combined annexation area. These road projects address problems that are less immediate than the surface water problems, and they could be funded and implemented over a longer time period. However, since there are schools in the vicinity of the 40 -42nd Avenue arterial, the need for sidewalks and improved signals may be significant. Also, the installation of gutters may have some advantages for surface water management. These issues should be examined before the City determines whether these costs are likely to be incurred in the near future or not. City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact. of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 13 Surface Water: Roads: Intersection Improvements (S. 144th 8 42nd Ave. S.) Curbs, Gutters, 8 Sidewalks (40th . 42nd Ave. S.) TOTAL IV. Summary and Discussion TABLE 6 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Riverton Foster Thorndyke Total 222,000 85,000 307,000 38,500 38,500 77,000 935,000 460,977 1,459,813 2,855,790 1,157,000 460,977 1,583,313 3,239,790 The estimated annual revenues for the annexation area ranges from about $161,000 (for Foster only) to $1,262,000 for the combined annexation. Estimated annual operating costs range from $308,000 to $1,715,000, including Street Fund cost. The following table summarizes the cost and revenues estimated for the annexation. TABLE 7 SUMMARY TABLE General Fund Annual Costs Street Fund Annual Costs Equipment Costs TOTAL COSTS TOTAL ANNUAL REVENUES Low High Estimate Estimate 259,931 1,514,982 48,551 200,019 11,000 135,600 319,482 1,850,601 161,585 1,262,147 Potential capital costs range $307,000 for more immediate surface water projects to $3.2 million with less urgent roads projects. Funding contributions from King County for Surface Water Management in Riverton, totalling $620,000, would likely be withdrawn after annexation. The range of estimates for annual costs are based on department level review of the personnel needed to provide services to the annexation area. Should City of Tukwila: Fiscal Impact of Combined Annexation September 22, 1988 Page 14 annexation occur, these costs will be reviewed prior to adoption of an amended City budget. During this review, the City will need to examine its fiscal requirements in order to achieve a balance between costs and revenues for the annexation area. This balance can be achieved by actions to reduce costs or increase revenues. Options for increasing revenues include allocating more of current revenues to support annual costs by using debt financing for capital projects. Tukwila now pays for almost all of its capital projects directly from current revenues. The City's total debt capacity for non -voter approved general purposes is about $6.75 million. The City has about $1 million is reserved debt capacity (for the 1977 Limited G.O. Bonds for City Hall and 1978 Limited G.O. Bonds for the Golf Course), leaving about $5.75 million is unreserved debt capacity. The practicality of using this approach to finance capital projects would require a review-of long term projections of City wide capital improvements, operating expenses and revenues. Another way to increase revenues would be to exercise certain local tax options increase local fees and charge new fees for current services. For example, the City does not impose a utilities tax or a local business and occupation tax. Increases in taxes may not be desirable, but might be preferable if needed to provide adequate services for future City residents. Surface Water management costs may be funded from sources other than current General Fund revenues. The options for funding surface water management are currently being studied by the City. Options for reducing costs include examining ways in which efficiency can be increased through restructuring of department management, substitution of equipment for labor costs, redefinition of service areas (e.g. patrol districts), and re- evaluation of service standards. Using these techniques, there may be areas where the City can trim the costs of providing services to both current and future residents without making unreasonable reductions in the quality of service. A F F I O A V I T O F D I S T R I I, JOANNE JOHNSON hereby declare that: Q Notice of Public Hearing [j Notice of Public Meeting Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet O Board of Appeals Agenda Packet O Planning Commission Agenda Packet O Short Subdivision Agenda Packet TION Q Determination of Nonsignificance 0 Mitigated Determination of Non - significance O Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice O Notice of Action O Official Notice Q Notice of Application for [[ Other Shoreline Management Permit O Shoreline Management Permit (] Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on WEDNESDAY AUGUST 31,'1988 (SEE ATTACHED) Name of Project EPIC -14 -88 EPIC -15 -88 File Number THORNDYKE ANNEXATION FOSTER ANNEXATION DNS DISTRIBUTION EPIC -15 -88 FOSTER ANNEXATION EPIC -74 -88 THORNDYKE ANNEXATII,1. EPIC- 1 -88 RIVERTON ANNEXATION SlATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SHORELANDS DIVISION MAIL STOP PV -11 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 ATTN: KAREN BEATTY SATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW MALL STOP PV -11 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 ATTN: KAREN BEATTY CMG CO PARKS, PLANNING & RES 1108 SMITH TOWER 506 SECOND AVENUE SEATTLE, WA 98104 ATTN: JIM TRACY U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SEATTLE DIST NPSEN -PL -RP P.O. BOC C -3755 SEATTLE, WA 98124 WASHINGTON ST TRANSPORTATION DPT TSM & P /LAND DEVELOPERS 9611 S.E. 36TH STREET MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 FIRE DISTRICT #11 1243 S.W. 112TH SEATTLE, WA 98146 SOUTH CENTRAL SCHOOL DIST #406 9690 SOUTH 144TH SEATTLE, WA 98168 KING COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY 300 - 8TH NORTH SEATTLE, WA 98109 PACIFIC NORTHWEST BELL ATTN: ENGINEER (EIS REVIEW) 300 S.W. SEVENTH STREET RENTON, WA 98055 SEATTLE CITY LIGHT. ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPT 1015 3RD AVENUE ROOM 922 SEATTLE, WA 98104 WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS ATTN: WILLIAM FRY P.O. 1869 SEATTLE, WA 98111 VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT P.O. BOX 68063 SEATTLE, WA 98168 WASHINGTON STATE DEPT - FISHERIES WATER DISTRICT #125 115 GENERAL ADMINISTRATION BLDG P.O. BOX 68147 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 SEATTLE, WA 98168 FIRE DISTRICT #18. 4237 SOUTH 144TH SEATTLE, WA 98168 KING CO. BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD 3600 136TH PLACE S.E. BELLEVUE, WA 98006 ATTN: BRICE MARTIN CITY OF DES MOINES PLANNING DEPT 21630 - 11TH SOUTH DES MOINES, WA 98198 METRO ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DIV. ATTN: MANAGER MS 92 821 SECOND AVENUE SEATTLE, WA 98104 • HIGHLINE TIMES 207 S.W. 150TH P.O. BOX 518 SEATTLE, WA 98166 SEA -TAC TUKWILA CHAMBER OF COM 5200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD SUITE 11 TUKWILA, WA 98188 VALLEY DAILY NEWS P.0 BOX 130 KENT, WA 98135 • • City of Tukwila PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 DATE: August 30, 1988 TO: FOSTER AND THORNDYKE EPIC -14 -88 and EPIC -15- FROM: MOIRA CARR BRADSHAW, PLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBJECT: ADDENDUM TO FOSTER AND THORNDYKE ANNEXATION FILES The proposal for pre- annexation zoning is modified slightly. The areas proposed for change are identified by "Issue Areas" as shown on the attached maps. Within these issue areas, the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and /or King County Highline Community Plan and Zoning conflict. Therefore, modifications are proposed. Impacts for Thorndyke and Foster range from lowering residential densities from high to low or high to medium for approximately 40 acres. There are also several areas of changes from residential to office and /or commercial which encompass approximately 65 acres. As part of the proposal, a Tukwila Zoning Code amendment for the PO zone is proposed. The PO zone is proposed to be placed between the R -3 and R -4 districts. Due to the cascading nature of the zoning code, the intent of the amendment is to exclude high density housing from PO districts. An amendment to the Code will have City -wide impacts. Current Tukwila PO Districts are located along 52nd Avenue S., Southcenter Boulevard, and S. 178th Street. Several parcels already are limited through concomitant agreements. The impacts are generally a decrease in the potential residential densities of high to medium allowed throughout the City. latIb I MK AIIIILAAI Ran TUKWILA PROPOSED ZONING R-4 C-1 11111111 P-0 LJ RMH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL THREE AND FOUR FAMILY DWELLINGS DISTRICT-LOW APARTMENTS COMMUNITY RETAIL BUSINESS REGIONAL RETAIL BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL/OFFICE BUSINESS MULTIPLE-RESIDENCE HIGH DENSITY ATTACHMENT G ;___ - - — Gov't lot 36 Acres ttaftN4 -...cey, 0 0 S. 136T1H11111111111111 - 1 VIII 11111111 11111111 t‘711111 IIIII1 III 1111 111 11111111UL' 11111101 1 101411111 ill 1111 il 1111111111/ 0111110 1111111111;1111111111111111 i I 11111 lOW 16, •• • 137TH ST 71-T- •L Vrre Arg=l1=210 go. • -- -- ------- r 1. LEGEND IM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 0 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL Ell PARKS AND OPEN SPACE PUBLIC FACILITIES 1- E. COMMERCIAL OFFICE Ezi MED DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 4." TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ATTACHMENT F FOSTER ANNEXATION -r • u Or • .1 oi MIPIFJ =lam ' 1•UPPIrriPPOIAll. . ma MIIMEDMINI • • 0 i • eb Mel 01111 1_Q :TOE Ili App ,r�= eel rte' rots roc CIE 12 tl .a" AREA 5 '3V' i i 55 r`t SIC + 4 n I NORTH ENlpq ->r a O. :i' $ 456Th sr s �+ �. AI {. n y t ..024•?2L.o d ATTACHMENT D THORNDYKE ANNEXATION ISSUE AREAS P ; 11, SC' UTHC.ENTEF • • 3-5967/e =ST=t. 1 r • I.Q � -.n . I -- /fl /7J— — a '"'� M riaMf maeriplivimirmon iliEtizaciara IC wl'harifi MAIM =MEI 1. _ R ...Y.LLZ.r. 1 0! II!±ll • ■Y\.■•••L'Y•■ Y.Tm fl• 11 C l w� r.6. nr,.. ...-.....,.,..... 'AMENDED"' ATTACHMENT E {.. rYlaY.•-I�T \�41VC'.M.YI Ea�n��rsu. A ►:1 MLA ■Y ..�� M•11n..nsL Y� ��ly IIMMVP• am/mums- il�■YOUOC.c rw ZT �� as...1. .1.11.E -- .....�_ ■ • .00a nonionsm■rwars00,680.■ THORNDYKE ANNEXATION PROPOSED TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN I EEO uo. COMMERCIAL OFFICE (RESTRICTED -NO CASCADE) PUBLIC FACILITIES PARKS AND OPEN SPACE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LARGER COPIES OF MAP AVAILABLE IN TUKWILA PLANNING OFFICE S. 144th ST. MOM; Nem NM 11•111111111•11 •••••11•• 11111111•1111•111 EXIIMUMN S. 162n-d ST. 1EN MMMMM 11111•1 •■11111111/11•111111 ME 111111111111111111••••1 IIIIII•IZI MI Mil •111111•211•••111 1•111•1111.111•11 MI IIIiiiitellEMMIll MIME' feBiali ... •11111•111111•111111• 1 154 7' ry IIIIIIMi WOMEN a41,411.111.111MENESII . MEM. ..... - .'... MMMMMM ...- • 1.1111.1 MEE= S. 154th ST. 11111110101•1111 I 7..,■■■ • Er- „an= wwwwwir- -am • wry- sT STATE SIGN ROUTE 518 --../,1••• MIEN i - --111111M MN . MINIM I .:: ....•■■ • 1...- . __,...■n1=-- imm, -----r---- ' .-,'' • mama .aaras Emu marams InIM 1111 IM2ma mem memmazaummor ..011•111111111 ismiumummir ammuurr-- S. 158th ST. THORNDYKE ANNEXATION TUKWILA PROPOSED ZONING I:J1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL jJ R-2 TWO-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL R-3 THREE AND FOUR FAMILY DWELLINGS RMH MULTIPLE-RESIDENCE HIGH DENSITY C-1 COMMUNITY RETAIL BUSINESS C-2 REGIONAL RETAIL BUSINESS II P-0 PROFESSIONAL/OFFICE BUSINESS it R NORTH 7 ATTACHMENT F S. 160th ST. City c•. Tukwila PLANNING DEPARTMENT 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1849 July 25, 1988 Mr. Paul Tanaka, Acting Director King County Public Works Department 956 King County Administration Bldg. 500 Fourth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 Subject: ANNEXATION /COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS/ PRE�ANNEXATION ZONING FOR "RIVERTON ", "FOSTER" AND "THORNDYKE" Dear Mr. The responsible official has modified the Determinations of Non - Significance on EPIC Files 1 -88, 14 -88 and 15 -88, Riverton, Foster and Thorndyke, respectively, to include in the proposals an interlocal agreement between King County and Tukwila for the subject annexation areas. In addition, the following comments are in response to your observations and questions. 1. Tukwila is in the selection process for an engineering consultant who will prepare a scope and outline for a Comprehensive Surface Water Plan and a Surface Water Program with funding and implementation mechanisms. 2. The Riverton proposal has approximately 750 feet of Duwamish riverfront contiguous to the Fire District No. 1 proposal. Like the first annexation area, the appropriate and consistent approach for the currently unincorpor- ated portions of the Duwamish riverbank would be to amend and include these issues (stabilization, protection and maintenance) into the Green River Basin Agreement. 3. The two Surface Water Management (SWM) capital improvement projects planned for the areas would be discussed in the interlocal agreement between the County and the City. 4. An inventory of existing SWM facilities would be appreciated. Thank you for your timely comments. MCB /sjn Sincerel , 6 ,/Cis Moira Carr Bradshaw Associate Planner Basin Boundary Subcatchment Boundary 02 Collection Point '—tom Stream 000i Tributary Number 01301 Proposed Project �C�ctle MbCI. so, 11111111.0 E.cr 1i.s. +E; P.11C.-; 17 1987 Ci.TY 0)- i !ILA PLANINNG DiPT • King County Division of Roads and Engineering Department of Public Works 956 King County Administration Bldg. 500 Fourth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 344-7490 July 14, 1988 Mr. Rick Beeler Planning Director City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Pre - Annexation Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Amendment, for "Foster," "Thorndyke," and "Riverton" Dear Mr. Beeler: Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Declarations of Non - Significance issued by the City of Tukwila for the subject proposed annexations. The Roads Division of the Department of Public Works has reviewed the environmental checklists issued for the three areas and has no comment. Information regarding road maintenance activities in these areas was provided to you in a June 30, 1988 letter from Doug Mattoon, Maintenance Engi- neer addressed to Laurie Bender 'of the consultant firm CCA Incorporated. Comments from the Surface Water Management Division are enclosed for your consideration. If you have any questions, please call Sandy Adams, Intergovernmental Relations Coordi- nator at 296 -3724. Sincerely, Paul Tanaka Acting Director PT:sr Enclosure cc: Lou Haff, County Road Engineer ATTN: Bill Hoffman, Manager, Transportation Planning Section Doug Mattoon, Maintenance Engineer John Logan, Traffic Engineer Jim Kramer, Manager, Surface Water Management Division ATTN: Susan Thomas, Intergovernmental Relations Coordinator .10 METRO • 1 Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle Exchange Building • 821 Second Ave. • Seattle, WA 98104 -1598 July 14, 1988 Rick Beeler, Planning Director 6200 Southcenter Blvd. City of Tukwila Tukwila, WA. 98188 Determination of Non - Significance File No.: EPIC -15 -88 City of Tukwila Dear Mr. Beeler: Metro staff has reviewed this proposal and anticipates no significant impacts to its wastewater facilities. Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment. Sincerely, Gregory M.Bush, Manager Environmental Planning Division GMB:plg • King County Surface Water Management Division Department of Public Works 701 Dexter - Horton Building 710 Second Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 (206) 344 -2585 July 12, 1988 TO: Paul Tanaka� - Acting Director, Department of Public Works ATTN: ✓sandy Adams, Program Analyst VIA: Jim Kramer, Manager FM: Susan Thomas, Intergovernmental Relations Coordinate RE: Riverton, Foster, and Thorndyke Annexations Comments ,/ Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Declaration of Nonsignificance '.(DNS) issued by the City of Tukwila on the proposed annexations of the Riverton, Foster, and Thorndyke areas. Based on a limited review of the DNS, King County Division of Surface Water Management has the following obser- vations:.. 1)\(ing County, through its Division of Surface Water Management and related policies, procedures and programs, advocates a watershed context for consideration of storm and surface water quantity and quality control measures. We are not aware of any storm and surface water management program providing comprehensive watershed planning and manage- ment services in Tukwila, at this time. The DNS does not address strategies for resolving present or future drainage problems within a watershed management context. 2) Portions of the Duwamish River appear to be within the proposed Riverton annexation. The DNS is not explicit regarding the extent of the pro- posed annexation along the River, including what portion of the river- bank will be annexed and how the riverbank will be stabilized, protected, and maintained. 3) King County has two capital improvement projects scheduled in the pro- posed annexation areas. The first to be built (scheduled for 1989 construction) is a siltation and detention facility to be located in an area bounded by South 133rd and South 137th Streets just east of Pacific Highway South (99). This project is part of the Soil Conservation Service Westside Watershed Plan for the P -25 Outlet Improvements proposed for the Riverton area. Paul Tanaka July 12, 1988 Page Two The second project in the proposed annexation areas is located in the vicinity of South 152nd Street and 42nd Avenue South in the Thorndyke area. This project, scheduled for 1991, was identified in the Fostoria Drainage Basin Study undertaken by Tukwila and King County completed in 1987. 4) The maintenance of any King County retention, detention, or other \' `' drainage related facilities is not discussed in the DNS. King County could provide Tukwila with an inventory of existing facilities and t., maintenance procedures. Since storm and surface water management issues are not limited by political boundaries, King County and Tukwila should begin discussions regarding cooperative management of surface water and river resources. Because the DNS format does not lend itself to a complete discussion of the impacts on the surface water and river management aspects of Tukwila's annexation, it is SWM's recommendation that consideration be given to .a mitigated DNS which includes interlocal agreements between King County and Tukwila to address shared drainage concerns. Thank you again for this opportunity to comment on the proposed Tukwila \annexations. ST:ds(C -M276) cc: Ken Guy, Assistant Manager, Surface Water Management Division 0,\% Clark, Manager, River and Water Resource Section, Surface Water Management Division ATTN: Andy Levesque, Senior Engineer T Washington State Department of Transportation District 1 15325 S.E. 30th Place Bellevue, Washington 98007 -6568 (206) 562 -4000 City of Tukwila Planning Department 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 ATTN: Rick Beeler Dear Mr. Beeler: July 12, 1988 Duane Berentson Secretary of Transportation SR 99 MP 20:12 - 23.0 Vicinity CS 1701 and 17320 Determination of Nonsignificance for Zoning and Annexation Proposals File Nos. EPIC- 15 -88, EPIC -1 -88, and EPIC 14 -88 This letter is in response to the Determination of Nonsignificance reviews for three annexation proposals that we received from the City of Tukwila on July 8, 1988. The three file numbers mentioned above are for amendment zoning and annexation of "Foster ", "Riverton ", and "Thorndyke ". The proposed annexations should have no immediate adverse impacts upon any state highways in the vicinity. However, upon development of any part of the annexations, especially development adjacent to SR 99, another evaluation will be required to determine what impact traffic generated by the developments will have on the area's transportation network, and what mitigation measures will be needed, if any, to state highways. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Donald Hurter (562 -4274) or Robert Eichelsdoerfer (562 -4297) of my Developer section. RE:dp tl.wk2 cc: State Aid Sincerely, xor,/ JAMES L. LUTZ, P.E. ".47:. District Utilities Engineer WAC 197 -11 -970 MODIFIED * DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal PRE - ANNEXATION TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ZONING AND ANNEXATION OF "FOSTER" : =' . * PROPOSAL IS MODIFIED TO INCLUDE AN INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN KING COUNTY AND TIIKWTIA ON SURFACE WATFR MANAGEMENT THIS DOES NOT EXCLUDE OTHER AREAS OF CONCERN FROM BEING ADDRESSED IN THE INTERLOCAL PROCESS.) Proponent CITY OF TUKWILA Location of Proposal, including street address, if any APPROXIMATELY 139TH STREET PACIFIC HIGHWAY SOUTH (99), 144TH STREET, AND TUKWILA CITY LIMITS. Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC -15 -88 The lead agency for this proposal has determined that it 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 file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. �[ There is no comment period for this DNS gj This DNS is'issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by JULY 15, 1988 . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. Responsible Official Rick Beeler Position /Title Planning Director Phone 433 -1846 Address 6200 Southcenter Boulevar', Tu, r 98188 Date i � /8:O Signature You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 days from the above date by written appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Planning Department. FM.DNS AFFISVIT OF DISTRIBITION I, JOANNE JOHNSON [I Notice of Public Hearing E] Notice of Public Meeting Q Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Q Board of Appeals Agenda Packet E] Planning Commission Agenda Packet J Short Subdivision Agenda Packet O Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit O Shoreline Management Permit hereby declare that: Determination of Nonsignificance 0 Mitigated Determination of Non - significance Q Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice ❑ Notice of Action O Official Notice O Other O Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on FRIDAY, JULY 1, 1988 , 19 (SEE ATTACHED) Name of Project FOSTER, RIVERTON, THORNDYKE ANNEXATIONS Signature File Number c (L - /s - Y epe -(`(- YY ey /c -' -9)/ Rainier Beach 11111 n 1711111111111_ - lim1111 MN.= 1111ti� i01 18!111 R, _tD lithb IIIMr IHruuu ll I 111 Ma1•1 111•lilIP!/ 111121111) III111IJI III 11111 111111 1,11116igli�i it. I. I IM III IIIIIUV111111F 11!11!! ij v dal!■ ,„ u ... �IdIIIIIIIIIII�oG "� I I II lIlll'll� lm !` z I1 38 ANNEXATIONS • FIRE DISTRICT NO. 1 am FILED DECEMBER 1988 SEA -TAC INCORPORATION FILED JANUARY 1988 !i'IIII RIVERTON ANNEXATION FILED FEBRUARY 1988 ;FOSTER ANNEXATION ' FILED MAY 1988 THORNDYKE ANNEXATION FILED JUNE 1988 11 TUKWILA CITY LIMITS ❑ TUKWILA PLANNING AREA harm.";44,tijirolotWrin Pia_eaill -7 1,8W' _r—it,„„dpv \ IrIiI : o 4 � +:6�1 2.■,n�" .11 7- nrTha %II. • viiN r• ar ye MIOMLINE• I i ODLLLO� DNS DISTRIBUTION EPIC -15 -88 FOSTER ANNEXATION .EPIC -14 -88 THORNDYKE ANNEXATIO. EPIC- 1 -88 RIVERTON ANNEXATION STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SHORELANDS DIVISION MAIL STOP PV -11 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 ATTN: KAREN BEATTY SATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW MAIL STOP PV -11 • OLYMPIA, WA 98504 ATTN: KAREN BEATTY FIRE DISTRICT #11 1243 S.W. 112TH SEATTLE, WA 98146 SOUTH CENTRAL SCHOOL DIST #406 q640-960e-SOUTH 144TH SEATTLE, WA 98168 KING CO PARKS, PLANNING & RES 1108 SMITH TOWER 506 SECOND AVENUE SEATTLE, WA 98104 ATTN: JIM TRACY U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS SEATTLE DIST NPSEN -PL -RP P.O. BOC C -3755 SEATTLE, WA 98124 WASHINGTON ST TRANSPORTATION DPT TSM & P /LAND DEVELOPERS 9611 S.E. 36TH STREET MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 KING COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY 300 - 8TH NORTH SEATTLE, WA 98109 PACIFIC NORTHWEST BELL ATTN: ENGINEER (EIS REVIEW) 300 S.W. SEVENTH STREET RENTON, WA 98055 SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ENVIRONMENTAL AFFAIRS DEPT 1015 3RD AVENUE ROOM 922 SEATTLE, WA 98104 WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS ATTN: WILLIAM FRY P.O. 1869 SEATTLE, WA 98111 VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT P.O. BOX 68063 SEATTLE, WA 98168 WASHINGTON STATE DEPT - FISHERIES WATER DISTRICT #125 115 GENERAL ADMINISTRATION BLDG P.O. BOX 68147 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 SEATTLE, WA 98168 FIRE DISTRICT #18 4237 SOUTH 144TH SEATTLE, WA 98168 KING CO. BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD 3600 136TH PLACE S.E. BELLEVUE, WA 98006 ATTN: BRICE MARTIN CITY OF DES MOINES PLANNING DEPT 21630 - 11TH SOUTH DES MOINES, WA 98198 METRO ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DN. ATTN: MANAGER MS 92 821 SECOND AVENUE SEATTLE, WA 98104 HIGHLINE TIMES 207 S.W. 150TH P.O. BOX 518 SEATTLE, WA 98166 SEA -TAC TUKWILA CHAMBER OF COMI 5200 SOUTHCENTER BLVD SUITE 11 TUKWILA, WA 98188 VALLEY DAILY NEWS P.0 BOX 130 KENT, WA 98135 CHECKLIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW MAILINGS (7) U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ( ) Federal Highway Administration FEDERAL AGENCIES ( )U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ( )U.S. Department of H.U.D. (Region X) WASHINGTON STATE AGENCIES Office of Archaeology .� ransportation Department 4 Department of Fisheries ) Office of the Governor ) Planning & Community Affairs Agency ( ) D ept._ of _Soci_al__and Health Services ( - -D"ept.- of -_Eco1 ogy; ._Shovel ands --Di-v -s1 on t(' �D"ept.: of Ecology_, SEPA =D i vi si on_* ( )Department of Game ( )Office of Attorney General * Send checklist with all determinations KING COUNTY AGENCIES ept._ of___Planning & Community_Devel ( ! i re _Di_stri ct_.18_ (L Bounda.ry;ReviewBoard J ( ) Health Department ( South Central School District ( ) Tukwila Library ( ) Renton Library ( ) Kent Library ( v1 Pacific Northwest Bell Telephone ,(S�SeattleCity Light? ( ) Washington, NaturalGas -J ( ) Water District 75 ( ) Seattle Water Department ( ) Group W Cable la67)/P5 ( ) Kent Planning Department ( ).Tukwila Board of Adjustment ( ) Tukwila Mayor Tukwila City Departments: ) - Public Works - Parks and Recreation ) - Police ) - Fire ) - Finance ) - Planning /Building ( )Fire District 1 ( )Fire District 24 ( )Building & Land Development Division - SEPA Information Center SCHOOLS /LIBRARIES ( )Highline School District ( 4--K ng County Public Library ( )Seattle Municipal Reference Library UTILITIES ( t . ght -_Vue- Sewer - Di- st- r- -ic t_D ( )Water District 20 ( )Water District 25 (?= ) "W:ater�D= i_stri-ct i125� ( )Union Pacific Railroad CITY AGENCIES )Renton Planning Department )Tukwila Planning Commission Tukwila City Council Members: )- Edgar Bauch )- Marilyn Stoknes )- Joe Duffie )- Mabel Harris )- Charlie Simpson )- Jim McKenna )- Wendy Morgan OTHER LOCAL AGENCIES Puget Sound Council of Government(PSCOG) Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency Tukwila /Sea -Tac Chamber of Commerce ( ) Daily Journal of Commerce (t) METRO Environmental Planning Division Office /Industrial 10,000 gsf or more Residential 50 units or more Retail 100,000 gsf or more MEDIA ighline Timesi ( )Seattle Times • • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1e Pre- Annexation Comprehensive Plan Amendment, Zoning and annexation of area known as Foster. 2e City of Tukwila _o Jack Pace Planning Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 (206) 433 -1849 4e June 23, 1988 5a City of Tukwila EPIC FILE NO: 15 -88 1 6. Comprehensive Plan review and amendment and pre- annexation zoning are scheduled for July through November 1988; Annexation election is scheduled for February 1989° 7. There are no future plans for additions or expansions of the subject proposal and its area; however, future annexations contiguous to the subject area are possible. Text amendments to the zoning code are possible in order to reduce land use conflicts and provide comparable zoninoe 8. If text amendments are proposed additional environmental work will be donee 9. There may be land use applications and permits that are pending on individual parcels with King County that would be affected by this proposal. In addition, F:ing County has scheduled an area -wide Community Plan update that would include area covered by this proposal. 10. The governmental approvals and permits that are needed are included within the annexation process. City Council adoption of pre - annexation Comprehensive Plan amendment, zoning and annexation. A notice of intention will be submitted to the King County Boundary Review Board where review may be invoked. The County Council must pass an ordinance placing the election on the ballot. 11. The proposal is an annexation by election of the below described property. The proposal also includes a review of Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan of the area with amendments, pre - annexation zoning to allow for simultaneous adoption of zoning if area is annexed. 1 • 12. The proposed site is roughly bounded by South 144th Street, SR 99 (Pacific Highway), S. 139th Street, and the Tukwila city limits on the east, and is referred to as "Foster." The size of the area is approximately 196 acres. 13. Some of the areas within the proposed annexation areas do lie within environmentally sensitive area B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. EARTH a. The Riverton, Foster, and Thorndyke annexation areas have a combination of flat, rolling, hilly, and steep slopes. There are no mountains. b. The steepest slope in these sites is 100 percent in some areas. c. The different types of soils are varied and include clay, sand, silt and gravel. d. The general area of the Duwamish River Basin has a history of landslides and areas of instability. e. There is no proposal for any filling or grading to be done. f. There will be no construction clearing during this project. g. Impervious surfaces will not need to be built after this annexation because there is no construction occurring during this project. h. Currently, there is no proposal to reduce or control erosion to the earth. 2. AIR a. The study of emissions is not applicable to this project. b. There is no off -site sources of emissions that will effect this project. c. There are no proposals to reduce or control emissions because it is beyond the scope of this proposal. 3. WATER a. The surface body of water that is located in the proposed annexation area is the Duwamish River Basin and its tributaries. See attached map of basin for stream information. b. No work in the vicinity of the above waters is required in order for this annexation to take place. c. Fill and dredge materials are not needed in the annexations of these areas. d. There is no need for surface water withdrawals or diversions given the nature of these annexations. e. A portion of the proposed annexation area does lie within a 100 year floodplain. f. No waste materials will be dealt with in this project. b. Ground 1. Ground water will not be withdrawn during this project. No waste materials will be dealt with during this project. c. Water Runoff 1. Major runoff occurs from the highways that traverse the areas - SR 518, SR 99 and Interstate I -;. Other runoff occurs from local streets, roofs and paved parking and driveways. The method of collection is varied The majority of the streets are ditched and the culverts are the primary means of collection for eventual discharge to the Green /Duwamish River. tin 4. PLANTS The discharge and seepage of waste materials is not effected by this annexation project. Currently listed surface water improvements will be reviewed for consideration in the City of Tukwila's CIP. Engineering personnel will be allocated time to continue drainage planning and analysis. However shoreline impacts will be regulated through an amended shoreline program to include new portions of the Duwarnish River. a. The types of vegetation found on the site are deciduous and evergreen trees, shrubs, grass, and wet soil plants. b. No vegetation will have to be removed from the site. c. No endangered species are known to be located in the area d. There is no proposed landscaping for the proposal. 5. ANIMALS a. The animals which are located on or near the site are as follows: Birds: Hawk; Heron, and Songbirds Mammals: Raccoons, Foxes, Coyotes, and Musk Rats Fish: Steelhead, Bullheads b.& c. There are no endangered species known to be located on or near the site. The area is part of a migration route but the swamps and wetlands have been filled to discourage the large gathering of waterfowl. d. There are no measures proposed to enhance the wildlife. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. There are no changes to be made in the sites energy requirements. b. This project will not affect the potential use of solar energy in adjacent properties. c. not applicable 7. ELI AL HEALTH a. There are no environmental health hazards as a result of this proposal. b. The City of Tukwila would assume responsibility for all fire and police services. c. There is no need for proposed environmental health precautions due to the fact that there are no hazards involved in this proposal. b. Noise a. Vehicular traffic would be the major noise effecting the site area. b. There would be no construction noise occurring in the area as a result of this project. 4 c. There are no changes proposed to control the noise impact on the area The City of Tukwila will enforce its noise ordinance to control the noise. S. LAND AND SHORELINE a. In the Riverton annexation area there are heavy and light industrial and commercial uses located in the north with residential uses in the southern half of the proposals area In the Foster annexation area there are commercial, residential and public facility land uses. In the area of Thorndyke, commercial, residential and public facility uses predominate. b. The Riverton area has been used agriculturally for farmlands. c. Some of the structures in the annexation areas are comprised of fast food restaurants, motels, commercial businesses, heavy and light industries, and various densities and types of residential dwellings. d. No structures will be demolished in this annexation process. e. The existing King County zoning Riverton -MH Heavy Manufacturing MP Manufacturing Park ML Light Manufacturing CG General Commercial BN Neighborhood Business RM 900 Maximum Density Multiple Dwelling RD 3600 Two Family Dwelling RS 7200 Single Family Dwelling SR Suburban Residential Foster CG General Commercial BC Community Business RM 2400 Medium Density Multiple Dwelling RM 1800 High Density Multiple Dwelling RS 7200 Single Family Swelling SR Suburban Residential Thorndyke CG General Commercial BC Community Business BN Neighborhood Business RM 900 Maximum Density Multiple Dwelling RM 1800 High Density Multiple Dwelling RM 2400 Medium Density Multiple Dwelling RS 7200 Single Family Dwelling • 1 fe The current plan for the areas is as follows: g= Riverton - The King County Comprehensive Plan designates this area as urban with Southgate park designated as park. The Highline Community Plan designates the area with the following uses in a north to south direction : Industry, Light Manufacturing, Single Family, High /Maximum Density Multi - Family, Neighborhood and Community Business, Park and Recreation; Low /Medium Density Multi-Family. The Tukwila Comprehensive Plan currently designates the area as follows: Light Industry, Commercial, Low Density Residential, High Density Residential, and Parks and Open Space. Foster - The King County Comprehensive Plan designates the area as urban. The Highline Community Plan designates the area with Highway oriented Commercial, Low Density Residential, High /Maximum and Low /Medium Density Multiple Family, Community Facilities and Parks and Open Space. The Tukwila Comprehensive Plan designates the area with the following: Low Density Residential, High Density Residential; Commercial, Public Facilities; and Parks and Open Spaces Thorndyke - The King County Comprehensive Plan designates the area as urban. The Highline Community Plan designates the area with the following: Highway Oriented Commercial, High /Maximum Density Residential, Community Facilities, Park and Open Space, Neighborhood and Community Business, Low /Medium Density Residential and Single Family. The Tukwila Comprehensive Plan designates the area with the following: Commercial, High Density Residential, Public Facility, Park and Open Space, and Low Density Residential. There is no shoreline in the Thorndyke or Foster area however a small section of the Duwamish River is located along the north boundary of Riverton. he The following areas have been classified as environmentally sensitive. Riverton - The hill east of E. Marginal Way and north of Se 124th Street and south of the Rainier Bank Processing Center is classified as environmentally sensitive as well as the hillside running generally northwest to southeast from Pacific Highway around S. 133rd Street across 42nd Avenue around Se 135th street to Macadam Road and the hillside running north to south along the west side of Macadam Road from approximately 135th South into the Foster annexation area Foster - The hillsides just northwest of the Foster Park at 52nd and S. 137th and along the west side of Macadam Road for its entire length through the annexation area are designated as environmentally sensitive. 6 • • Thorndyke - The hillside running north and south along the west side of 51st Avenue S. and the ravine and hillsides running west and east south of 150th and north of S. 154th- Avenues between 51st and 40th are designated as environmentally sensitive. i. No new construction is associated with the project that would cause a change in the number of people who reside of work in the area however, a few comprehensive plan changes are proposed that will change potential residential densities. In the Riverton area a high density multiple family area will be changed to low density and the overall permitted densities in the low density areas will be increased to urban maximum standards. Foster's residential population is estimated to be 755. j. This project will not displace any people. k. Since there is no displacement of individuals, there are no proposed measures to deal with this issue. 1. A pre - annexation zoning ordinance will be used to ensure that the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses. Existing land uses would be protected through the zoning code's non- conforming section. For the most part the proposed zoning will be reflective of the existing uses. Text amendments to the City's zoning code are potential mitigation to impacts associated with the land use /zoning changes. 9. HOUSING a. No new housing will be provided during this project. b. There is no need for any of the housing units to be eliminated due to the nature of this project. c. No housing impacts will be caused by the annexation process under review. 10. AESTHETICS The tallest height of any proposed structure allowed by the Tukwila Zoning Code is 45'. However, height exception areas to this height restriction allow building heights of up to 115' and greater if identified on the Height Exception Map. b. Currently, there are no views which are being altered or obstructed. c. There are no proposed measured to reduce or control aesthetic impacts. 7 11m LIE-' AND GLARE a. Light or glare is not applicable to this proposal. b. Light or glare is not a safety hazard in this proposal. c. There are no off -site sources of light or glare considerations. d. There are no proposed measures to control light and glare. 12. RECREATION a. The recreational opportunities in the annexed areas are Southgate Park, Tukwila Community Center, the Duwamish /Green River riverfront trail, Foster pool and playgrounds and ball fields, the Thorndyke playfield and the Foster ball fields and tennis court. b. There are no construction activities within this annexation process that will displace any recreational areas. c. There is no need for proposed measures to lessen the impact on recreational areas. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. The King County Historic Landmarks Office provided the following list of historic properties: Riverton - Harrison Cabin 13017 40th Avenue S. - 1903 Delta Masonic Temple 13034 41st Avenue S - 1926 Nash House 4106 S. 130th Avenue 1910 -1920 Albert Tutt 13000 E. Marginal Way 1920's Riverton Park United Methodist Church 13001 37th Avenue 1910 Thorndyke -Carey Bungalow 14454 51st Avenue S. - 1917 There are currently no measures to reduce or control impacts to these landmarks. 14. TRANSPORTATION The Metro bus route serves Pacific Highway South between 160th and 112th Streets. Metro also serves some of the area along East Marginal Way South. b. The area is currently served by Metro bus service. c. There would be no parking spaces eliminated from the sites. d. The proposal will not require any new roads. 8 e. Due to the nature of this project' there is not need for water, rail or air transportation. f. The number of vehicular trips is not necessary to this project. g. There are no measures to reduce or control transportation impacts. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. There will be an increased demand on Tukwila municipal and legislative services. The following is a needs projection to provide urban level services to the area b. There are no proposed measures to reduce impacts on Tukwila services. To try and control the impact, a fiscal budgetary study will be completed that refines the revenue projections. Lateral transfers of personnel in health, life safety departments will be made to handle the immediate impact. The budget process will review the needs and adjust personnel levels to accommodate the service demands. 16. UTILITIES a. The utilities available in the area are electricity, natural gas, water' refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, and septic systems. These services are provided by Seattle City Light, WNG, Water District 125, Sea-Tac Disposalv PNBr Val-Vue Sewer District. b. There are no utilities proposed for this project. D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS 1. There are no changes to the existing environment because this is only an annexation. Land uses in Tukwila will be substantially the same as the current King County uses and districts. Because no intensification of use is projected the environmental impacts to water, air, and of toxic and hazardous substances and noise are not expected to increase. 2. The City of Tukwila will enforce its codes in the annexed areas and comply with SEPA to control the environmental impacts. This annexation process does not effect plants, amimaIsv fish, or marine life nor is it expected to deplete energy or natural resources. 4. The City of Tukwila has mapped the environmentally sensitive areas of the annexation areas. The County in contrast with the City has legislation which protects and regulates development adjacent to and of sensitive sites. Tukwila does not Therefore development of or around these areas while covered by SEPA review in Tukwila will be more subjectively treated with perhaps uncertain outcomes. 9 J. • • To avoid or reduce impacts, the environmental review process will be continued and used to protect sensitive sites. No impact is to be expected on the use of the shoreline or the land. Tukwila will designate the one area of shoreline as urban which is compatible with its current designation and with the Tukwila Program„ The effect on land use is expected to be minimal because the objective is to provide compatible zoning. The overall density of single family dwellings is expected to increase because Tukwila does not have the Suburban Residential density of 35,000. Some residential areas will be lowered from their current high and medium densities yet some areas of low will be raised to medium or high. To avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts, a pre - annexation comprehensive plan and zoning analysis is being conducted. If necessary, to mitigate zoning impacts the zoning code will be amended. The Tukwila shoreline program will be amended if the area is annexed. The shoreline is protected in the interim because shoreline development would continue under the county's regulations until it is added to the Tukwila Program. 6.. The annexation will increase the usage of Tukwila police, fire, judicial, administrative, legislative, planning and engineering services. As was mentioned in 15. above, a fiscal budget projection is being done to plan for the increased needs . The increase in police security on Pacific Highway South (old 99) due to the social problems existing there in the form of drugs and prostitution, etc. 7. The annexation and Comp Plan and zoning proposals do not conflict with local, state, or federal laws with regards to the protection of the environment. B. The annexation proposal does not conflict with Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan as it lies within the City's Planning Area The amendments proposed for the Comp Plan primarily reflect existing uses in the areas or are being made to be more comparable with surrounding land uses. E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS 1. The objectives of the proposal are to respond to the requests of residents in Tukwila Planning area In addition, the proposal would expand city boundaries to include adjacent service, impact and planning area and ca- locate with South Central School District and provide urban level services to an urban area 10 • • 2. An alternative means of achieving some of the above objectives would be through the formation of an alternate municipal government as Tukwila is the only city agency whose boundary is contingent to the area or in close proximity. Of the two alternatives, annexation is preferable to incorporation because: a. Policies and economics would support a lid on the number of governmental agencies. b. Tukwila is small in size and population and should be encouraged to assume a stature comparable with other suburban municipal governments. c. Tukwila is logical urban service provider. 4. The Tukwila Comprehensive Plan's General Goal #3 p.12 ... "encourages the planned expansion of the corporate boundaries of Tukwila while providing adequate service levels and improvements to all areas..." Any expansion of the City's area especially into residential areas will create greater demands than revenues generated to serve those areas on a one to one basis. But service levels and improvements can be maintained at adequate levels for the proposed annexation area. In addition, the increase in the residential area of the City would create a more even balance in the land use pattern of the City. (General Goal #6 p.l3) To reduce potential conflicts in equitable allocation of services a plan for the proposal is prepared by the City departments to assist in budgetary, personnel and service decisions. 11 Basin Boundary Subcatchrnent Boundary Collection Point Stream Tributary Number Proposed Project mom sit& • IV' 11"0(041 nbeate