The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSEPA EPIC-22-87 - RADOVICH - ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTRADOVICH ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT EXTEND BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTION FT. DENT PARK & INTERURBAN AVE. S. EPIC -22 -87 IDAVIT OF DIST•IBUTION 1, JOANNE JOHNSON hereby declare that: Notice of Public Hearing 0 Notice of Public Meeting O Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Q Board of Appeals Agenda Packet -0 Planning Commission Agenda Packet 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet Determination of Nonsignificance O Mitigated Determination of Non- significance O Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice O Notice of Action [[ Official Notice 0 Notice of Application for [[ Other Shoreline Management Permit O Shoreline Management Permit [ Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on TUESDAY, DECEMBER 22, 1987 (SEE ATTACHED) ALSO COPY SUBMITTED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE THURSDAY, DECEMBER 10, 1987 EDITION OF THE VALLEY DAILY NEWS. Name of Project RADOVICH (ZONE TEXT,AMENDMENT) Signature File Number EPIC -22 -87 87 -5 -CA , 19 . #'RADOV I CH 87 -5 -CA RAY NEILSEN 1602 MONSTER RD, S.W. TUKWILA, WA 98055 J.D. FIORITO E.J. FERULLO 1100 N.W. LEARLY WAY SEATTLE, WA 98055 LAUREN LASKOW MICHAEL SANDORFFY RENTON VILLAGE ASSOCIATES 15 S. GRADY WAY, SUITE 509 RENTON, WA 98055 KING COUNTY NATURAL RESOURCES & PARKS DIV. 2080 - 84TH AVENUE S.E. MERCER ISLAND, WA 98040 JOHN C. RADOVICH 2000 - 124TH AVE N.E. B -103 BELLEVUE, WA 98005 DAVID PARKER THE CASTILLO CO STATE FARM INSURANCE P.O. BOX 21087 PHOENIX AZ 85034 WASH ST. DEPT OF ECOLOGY ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW SECTION MAIL STOP PV -11 OLYMPIA, WA 98504 ATTN: KAREN:BEATTY • IDAVIT OF DIST.BUTION I, JOANNF JOHNSON hereby declare that: E[ Notice of Public Hearing [] Notice of Public Meeting [[ Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet O Board of Appeals Agenda Packet Q Planning Commission Agenda Packet 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet i[ Determination of Nonsignificance ( J Mitigated Determination of Non- significance Q Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice O Notice of,Action [] Official Notice 0 Notice of Application for J Other Shoreline Management Permit [[ Shoreline Management Permit J Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 2, 1987 (SEE ATTACHED) ALSO COPY FOR PUBLICATION IN SUNDAY, DECEMBER 6, 1987 EDITION OF VALLEY DAILY NEWS. Name of Project RADOVICH'(ZONE TEXT AMENDMENT File Number EPIC -22 -87 87 -5 -CA , 19 . ignatur EPIC -22 -87 RADOVICH ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT (Building Height Exception Area) CHECKLIST SUPPLEMENT December 2, 1987 City staff proposes expanding the boundaries of the Building Height Exception area to include the entire area bounded by the easternmost BNSF Burlington Northern right -of -way in Tukwila, I -405, Interurban Avenue and Fort Dent. Park. The original checklist addresses only a five -acre parcel at the entrance of Fort Dent Park. As development occurs in the area, specific proposals shall be carefully reviewed to determine their impacts. Mitigation will be required if determined necessary. Major environmental impacts will be similar to those discussed in the appli- cant's checklist. To the extent that increased building heights result in additional development, environmental impacts such as traffic will be propor- tionately increased. The short -term traffic implications of the rezone are to add traffic to the intersections of Southcenter Boulevard / Interurban.Avenue / Grady Way. The City is planning some short -term improvements to add turn lanes and resignalize. When buildings are constructed, the property owners could be asked to partici- pate in these improvements. The long -term implications are to add traffic opposing that of the on- and off - ramps from I -405 to Interurban Avenue. To mitigate long -term impacts, property owners could be asked to participate in the Southcenter Boulevard project. Tukwila currently does not have a convenient way to require this participation. If the farm adjoining Grady Way is also rezoned, it should be realized that access problems exist for that property. When Southcenter is extended, the property will not have left turn -out toward Renton. Therefore, adding trip ends to their property may not be advisable. Computer- assisted drawings from the east hill perspective show that view block- age is not significantly increased by the construction of the four- or five - story buildings which are most likely to be developed over the area. Views of the Green River would be blocked by the three -story buildings already permitted by the C -2 zoning and M -1 zoning. (25/EPIC- 22 -87) WAC 197 -11 -970 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal EXTEND BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTION AREA TO ALLOW BUILDINGS UP TO 45 FEET IN HEIGHT IN THE AREA EAST OF INTERURBAN AVENUE, SOUTH OF FT. DENT PARK, WEST OF THE EASTERMOST BURLINGTON NORTHERN RIGHT -OF -WAY IN TUKWILA, AND NORTH OF I -405. Proponent JOHN C. RADOVICH AND TUKWILA PLANNING DEAPRTMENT Location of Proposal, including street address, if any (SFF PROPOSAL DESCRIPTION ABOVE) Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC -22 -87 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 This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by . 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 w 6200 Southcenter Boulevar•, TuA, „deed 98 :8 rilitreqr .411107 -0' Date Signature You may appeal this determination to the ity 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 av (v io' IZI1iI'7 mf a�r ofro ,ead, ck ireip tt, EPtc- ZZ'87 Q' /i,ref Lisf- - /eAy - /(//e /rer! - - /602 /lordSri Ad/1 9foi 1' �!v r/ /i 6:T. fir „ //o / /00 //_w• Lea hi I°cr fKi La. --res r L.cj OiJ Mich,iae j ,,d y0 /?Pr!/y„ - L / / /tce Af ✓o c" rre f A- r- Aiv /L. 549 .ion s%r, G✓r9 .� 8 01�� / , - - - - - - - - i i / A 4 t . ,-e - %oe o+� --tS e/, 208 0 -- f< A ves as .! e • Near /(4 ' .98 o 0 _ Cff ✓U�ir C • Rrt de c 4 2.000 — /Zy rse . /v.6- / /c" C w.4 99oor D� d./ PA. i 7-t ase,„.7 Cf/ t"S►�ir, /$,�u�t,v ) zoo 97 PhOea,x t? 9- 3.r - - — ✓ A0 d" ea.. Jocivie: 12La117,1/,/q/. PNs EPIC - 22-Sri (ea4ovl r ti -ee1C) ^ must be s lci iieq -1 od 1 . (I742 07) *,serif- ou - fay- - - Please^ lIve Iv gick f o J,lgv► . Tim Copy Of iS�i')bufe _ v)a ��a�►.f °� c fi��bQhm• l belreve / /if Sliov /d k! o t pQWislid ,b 14 h SP 1 hope ftl,S In[.vhVChieblt ot) have a- 911 re rote, k KICK) �}Y Glf.(/ h. yZ. z - • City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM Planning Department Ros , City Engineer Dec ber 1, 1987 Traffic Implications of the Radovich Rezone The short term traffic implications of the rezone are to add traffic to the intersections of Southcenter Boulevard / Interurban Avenue / Grady Way. The City .is planning some short term improvements to add turn lanes and resignalize. When buildings are constructed the property owners could be asked to participate in these improvements. The long term implications are to add traffic opposong that of the on and off ramps from I -405 to Interurban Avenue. To mitigate long term impacts they could be asked to participate in the Southcenter Boulevard project. We currently do not have a convenient way to require this participation. If the farm adjoining Grady Way is also rezoned, it should be realized that access problems exist for that property. When Southcenter is extended the property will not have left turn -out toward Renton. Therefore, adding trip ends to their property may not be advisable. RE /kjr OFFICE MEMO CITY OF TUKWIL.A F ROM:, DATE: /V/ 47 SUBJECT: CITY OF TUKWILA • • CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM CN EPIC 22 -87 FILE 87-5 -CA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: TO: El BLDG El PLNG n P.W. ri FIRE n POLICE n P & R PROJECT RADOVICH - ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT (EXTENSION TO BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTION AREA) LOCATION AT THE ENTRANCE OF FT. DENT PARK, NORTHEAST OF FILE NO. EPIC -22 -87 DATE TRANSMITTED 10 -6 -87 RESPONSE REQUESTED VBYE S. 10 -12 -87 STAFF COORDINATOR VERNON UMETSU RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT DATE y'? COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 : --- CITY OF TUKWILA • CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: � U e, • CN EPIC - 22 -87 FILE 87-5 -CA TO: n BLDG PLNG [j P.W. (-7 FIRE j POLICE [ ] P & R PROJECT RADOVICH - ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT (EXTENSION TO BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTION AREA) LOCATION AT THE ENTRANCE OF FT. DENT PARK, NORTHEAST OF FILE NO. FPIC -22 -87 INTERURBAN AVENUE S. 10 -12 -87 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY DATE TRANSMITTED 10 -6 -87 STAFF COORDINATOR VERNON UMETSU RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT )/ DATE /0 /j�' 1% COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA • • CN CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM EPIC - 22 -87 FILE 87 -5 -CA ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: TO: [j BLDG [ PLNG [] P.W. FIRE n POLICE ri P & R PROJECT RADOVICH - ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT (EXTENSION TO BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTION AREA) LOCATION AT THE ENTRANCE OF FT. DENT PARK, NORTHEAST OF FILE NO. FPIC -22 -87 INTERURBAN AVENUE S. DATE TRANSMITTED 10 -6 -87 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 10 -12 -87 STAFF COORDINATOR VERNON UMETSU RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT 4 ,64,1a);;?..), air ttx . /iQ`�'1� Lw/GY /!!' /,b^ai./ 6-e Ai j A r t -4° -5)f c /i' c/ fir, ; ii2%Y, �.• - �� %'r 6y eG��' r. �'�,.e !/.,; Fof, -►� 6_„, /2 C. /f� G vt VI" 1 i/ / I� '1 ; ✓ 1� eG t^ 1 AJ i11 I�'i y e , e f f -a,C ✓n (i ✓i / 3" SP '7`4P 411-e hill 46/1 64.41.- /' 71-4 P ( a DATE / 6 - -C'"7 COMMENTS PREPARED BYP`��G�7/ �' ' &� 5)3 C.P.S. Form 11 e4-z-v CITY OF TUKWILA • CN CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: EPIC 22 -87 FILE 87 -5 -CA TO: n BLDG El PLNG (] P.W. [i FIRE [j POLICE P & R PROJECT RADOVICH - ZONING CODE TEXT AMENDMENT (EXTENSION TO BUILDING HEIGHT EXCEPTION AREA) LOCATION AT THE ENTRANCE OF FT. DENT PARK, NORTHEAST OF FILE NO. EPIC -22 -87 10 -6 -87 INTERURBAN AVENUE S. 10 -12 -87 DATE TRANSMITTED RESPONSE REQUESTED BY STAFF COORDINATOR VERNON UMETSU RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS RECEIVED REGARDING THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVIEW AND COMMENT BELOW TO ADVISE THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL REGARDING THE THRESHOLD DETERMINATION. THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW FILE IS AVAILABLE IN THE PLANNING DEPART- MENT THROUGH THE ABOVE STAFF COORDINATOR. COMMENTS REGARDING THE PROJECT YOU WISH CARRIED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, AND CITY COUNCIL SHOULD BE MADE ON THE ATTACHED CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ROUTING FORM. ITEM COMMENT srAt f CVv (4\N`movj41 1Z.it S Is twonts: k PPfuP f,(flh1s NIA N N& Tc� Kent f Lit∎ tC iNmpw--c /pbs surt-H-Co\ak_ i,u) i iA P M m C c_zsmrrn ��- D c N1 - I v - kJP1.,f►� DATE 11/ v (') COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 41Iptrol No. Epic File No. .;7,-Z.-877 Fee $100.00 Receipt No. 9/4p 7 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Text Amendment 2. Name of applicant: John C. Radovich 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 2000 124th Avenue. NE. B -103, Bellevue, WA, 98005. Contact: John Radovich or Katie Greif 4. Date checklist prepared: October 5. 1987 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): This is a non - project action and the timing is dependent upon the City of Tukwila hearing schedule. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The applicant wishes to develop the property as an office park. The number of buildings and their height is unknown at this time. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. All required environmental research will be completed in relation to future buildings. . Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the .property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. None at this time. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. Text amendment to City of Tukwila zoning code. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed use and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in thi checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do no need to repeat those answers on this page. Section E requires a complete description of the objectives and alternatives of your proposal and should not be summarized here. See Section E. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applica- tions related to this •checklist. Lots 1 and 2 of Short Plat No. 79 -7 -55 according to the Short Plat Survey recorded under King County recording No. 7908210370; City rf T>>kwila, King County, Washington. The property is locat.d_a.t t entranra to nt.- Park northeast of Interurban. 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? Yes, the Green River borders the property on the northwest north and.norrheast. TO BE COMPLETED BY AP•CANT B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat rolling, hilly, steep .slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Parcel 1; 50% Parcel 2: 08% c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Gray and brownish silt of loose to medium density. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. No. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. Not Applicable. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Not Applicable. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Not Applicable Evaluation for Agency Use Only • h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: Not Applicable. 2. Air a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction and when the project is completed? If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Not Applicable. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Not Applicable. 3. Water a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year - round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river it flows into. The Green River borders the property along the north and empties into Elliott Bay. Evaluation for Agency Use Only • 2) Will the project require any work over, in, or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. Not Applicable. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface water or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. •Indicate the source of fill material. Not Applicable 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. Not Applicable. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge.Not Applicable. Evaluation for Agency Use Only • Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. Ground: 1) Will ground water be-withdrawn, or will water be discharged to ground water? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. Not Applicable. 2) Describe waste materials that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sour- ces, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural; etc.) Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) are expected to serve. Not Applicable. c. Water Runoff (including storm water): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including storm water) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. Not Applicable. • • 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. Not Applicable. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other shrubs grass pasture - _ crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other _ water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other other types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? Not Applicable. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None. Evaluation for Agency Use Only • • d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Not Applicable. 5. Animals a. Circle any birds and animals which have been observed on or near the site or are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, of er• birds: crows, finches, sparrows, robins mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: mammals: none fish: bass, other: herring, shellfish, b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. The Green River may be part of a migration route for salmon and trout. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: Not Applicable. Evaluation for Agency Use Only • 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, color) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. Not Applicable. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. Probably not. The distance between future buildings should be great enough to still allow for solar heating. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 7. Environmental Health a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. Not Applicable. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ- mental health hazards, if any: Not Applicable. Evaluation for Agency Use Only • Evaluation for Agency Use Only b. Noise 1) What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment, operation, other)? Traffic noise exists but should not affect the project. 2) What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short - term or a long -term basis (for example: traf- fic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Not Applicable. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 8. land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? Subject site is currently vacant. Properties to the south and southeast are vacant. The Green River lies to the northeast, north and northwest. A new 2 story office building owned by the applicant lies to thg southwest. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No c. Describe any structures on the site. None Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? C -2 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Commercial g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? Urban h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Yes, the Shoreline Master Program has classified the site as sensitive because the Green River lies to the north. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Approximately 1 person _per 200 square feet of office space will work in a future structure. A realistic building area is approximately 100,000 sq. ft., resulting in 500 people. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Not Applicable. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The property will eventually be de- veloped in accordance with all applicable City. County and State laws; zoning and otherwise. 0 1 Evaluation for Agency Use Only 9. Housing a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing? None b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli- minated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. None c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: Not Applicable. 10. Aesthetics a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? A structure is not proposed for this application. In the future, the applicant hopes to develop a four story office building with height of approxi- mately 52 feet. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? If the property was developed to the maximum allowable height under this text amendment application, views of Fort Dent Park from the south and southeast may be affected but probably no more than the affect under the current zoning code. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: When a structure is developeda,,_an attractive building will be proposed. All applicable zoning laws will be followed including City of Tukwila —Board of Architectural Review. - Evaluation for Agency Use Only 11. Light and Glare a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? Not Applicable. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? Light or glary from a building constructed at the maximum allowable height (115 feet) could possibly impact the freeway (I -405), but this possible adverse impact would be reviewed during the building permit and BAR reviews. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? Lights from Fort Dent Park could affect a completed building but we do not feel this il_an adverse impact. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Not known at this time. 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? Fort Dent Park lies to the immediate north. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: When the subject property is developed, the applicant will construct a trail along the Green River. -14- Evaluation for Agency Use Only 13. Historic and Cultural Preservation a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or pro- posed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site? If so, generally describe. Fort Dent Park, a historical park is located to the north. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. Fort Dent Park. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed. accss to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Interurban Avenue South, Interstate 405 and South - center Boulevard. Ingress and egress will be from an access easement off of Southcenter Boulevard. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Not directly, although there is a bus route along Interurban South. c. Now many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate ?_____ An exact number of parking spaces is not known but the applicant will provide four spaces per 1.000 square feet of office space. • d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). New roads or streets would not be required. Required street improvements are not known at this time. The Inter- urban is fully developed and should not require further improvement. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No Evaluation for Agency Use Only f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. An exact number of trips is not known. According to the International Traffic Engineers Trip Generation Manual, for general office of 100,000 sq. ft. or less, 17.7 average weekday trips are generated per 1,000 sq. ft. of space. For general offices of 100,000- 199,000 sq. ft., 14.3 average weekday trips are generated. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor- tation impacts, if any: Timing adjustments to the traffic signal at Interurban Avenue could help accommodate extra traffic if necessary. 15. Public Services a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. The project could marginally add to the need for police and fire _protection. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None • 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: water refuse service, to ephone,, sanitary sewer; septic system, other. storm sewer b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Not applicable at this time. C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make it decision Signature: t<" -� Date Submitted: October 5, 1987 PLEASE CONTINUE TO THE NEXT PAGE. Evaluation for Agency Use Only TO BE COMPLETED BY A• CANT D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS • Evaluation for Agency Use Only (do not use this sheet for project actions) Because these questions are very general, it may be helpful to read them in conjunction with the list of the elements of the environment. When answering these questions, be aware of the extent the proposal, or the types of activities likely to result from the proposal, would affect the item at a greater intensity or at a faster rate than if the proposal were not imple- mented. Respond briefly and in general terms. 1. How would the proposal be likely to increase discharge to water; emissions to air; production, storage, or release of toxic or hazardous substances; or production of noise? The site is currently undeveloped. Storm water from a developed site would be channelled into the Green River. Other increases are not anticipated. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: Prior implementation of an approved storm drainage system as the site is developed. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life? A finished structure on the subject parcel would result in new landscaping to be maintained by the building owner. Small animals that currently habitat the site would need to relocate or perish. There is no anticipated affect to fish or marine life. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life are: A 100 foot setback from the Green River is planned. This should help to protect the existing nature of the Green River. • 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? A developed structure should not deplete energy or natural resources. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resourses are: When developed, a structure would utilize insulated walls, slabs, windows and conservative H.V.A.C. systems. No natural resources are present at the site. 4. How would the proposal be likely to use or affect environmentally sensitive areas or areas designated (or eligible or under study) for governmental protection; such as parks, wilderness, wild and scenic rivers, threatened or endangered species habitat, historic or cultural sites, wetlands, floodplains, or prime farmlands? This requested text amendment would not affect any of the above. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: Proper setbacks from the Green River will be observed. 5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, inclduing whether it would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans? The proposal will affect land use by allowing a taller building. The applicant would still be required to meet all other zoning regitla- tions for development. All shoreline requirements remain unaffected by this application. Evaluation for Agency Use Only • • Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts area: Implementation of proper shoreline setbacks and minimum use of setback areas. How does the proposal conform to the Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan? As the Shoreline Plan is not being amended under this application, a building taller than 35 feet would not be located within 100 feet of the Green River, therefore, any structure developed under this text amendment would be in complete con- formance with the Shoreline Master Plan. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utrheties? A completed structure would increase existing requirement for public services and utilities as the property is currently undeveloped. Amount of increase is not known but should not be excessive. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: Development of utilities in an organized manner to best serve the City and the property. 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. It does not. Evaluation for Agency Use Only • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 8. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? After reviewing the policies, the applicant does not find conflicts that would oppose this request. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: If conflicts should arise during the review /permit process, the applicant would work with city officials to mitigate any adverse impacts. TO BE COMPLETED BY A• CANT E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental infor- mation provided and the submitted plans, documents, suppor- tive information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? To allow an increase in allowable building height of up to 115 feet which would allow a more efficient use of the land. 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? A text amendment is the only known option. 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: The applicants only option is number one, therefore this is the preferred option. Evaluation for Agency Use Only • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? As the Shoreline Plan is not being amended, the applicant does not believe any conflict exists. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: Not Applicable. -23- 7908210370 FORT DENT /:RN 113170C•Se•L-515.17 34T32'3i•41•117C lt2roe'Srr•aeatr 7:• 'guy - 9O CC Sere r4YW- tlt.cr S StriC46•W- 11S,11)* Rot &undory ur1o•91•w -MU* N30•1Ya•t .tMSit /sad bed in oo.wa.t 1•Iron Pei wu•A lob, NC Land Surveyor's Certificates: 'hi: short plat correctly represents a survey r..;,d, by ::e or under ay direction to cenfer.ar.:: aith the relutromentc of appreorlute state statute. • C.Trtt: i_:s:•: Its): /"ewz. � L 100 0 100 200 Rehm d West 'k. Salton t4 Tisowhp 23 Mirth.. Acme fast .MI flap on File in Vault Direction: Scale: DECRY e t t fCBi A C^ • • t+ ./ fJt...tif rJ NtO.••ct • r.sg: ..�.... o. 2-8 'Ye— -0 —)y-Nev 5,1 . r 4(.1.: ,--, f":--%:. • .: . 0. A . :`• \ ■ ,. ■‘\. \ e 'k :IY'L, %'' ' '''.....' ''.,..., A ), • \ \ ) !' \ _ , .V...-, . - ' - -,', ,•••-•?`---:-`-',-___-. s \ ,-• • , v .:1! ',, ‘, ..,:,:...--;:,,,....-:-=',--.. - ---;•:',"-,,'--7.-7':-1---- iIL '• L ' ''' ,-/ -..` • \ " ' / /,7/ . .\.,,. -.', ; - -_ 3.-., ,---; ---------•, .--7 . ,..-- --,--7, - -.":, • - , -- , ._ • )) - - ,_ :-.1=-7.-‘if.1 il ■ -,...-1„---77-.--.. • :-.;:-- - ,-...- -‘--,';-, -.--? - - .- -- - -.- • 7 - ,-., I N. vv.", , . ../...-7- ,- • . - . '.. •-•••-•:,. r..: r" A •-..,.... ■./,'• ,.' /".e.,... i I , .4'• •_. ck.,. , ,,,, i \\.?-„,-..:, - ',4-',..-',-,,,,, \ '''N' L__i•i -' , ,, '",•!...' " '4'' -'.-7' /, , ■. ,,,, ',N -, ..;.... _ Z,.....,Z..-.s:..•:.-...--------- ;,4, ',A_;.-,--._ -.-,_:--....:_:-,•°•,--::""'-,• • s ... ••-: ..z.,. ,,--....„ • --__ rtr..--,---__ - — ,.._ - • -XvVdt IIIIIlhuIUUII um IIIIIII hi 1=hu11111 un1111111MMIll 111E1 _1 11I!11■aM! 111.11111111. MiRa _ rigamier,, iiillinammioniumill cum {I11®®11PMEN:!��