The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSEPA EPIC-276-85 - 51ST AVENUE ANNEXATION (MCMICKEN)51ST AVE. ANNEXATION (MCMICKEN) 51STAVE. BETWEEN 164T" & 166T" REZONE EPIC 276 -85 City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 433 -1800 August 21, 1985 James Adsley, Chief Angle Lake /McMicken Fire District 2929 South 200th Seattle, WA 98188 Dear Mr. Adsley: We have reviewed your response regarding the proposed annexation of ten residential lots on 51st Avenue South. We understand your concerns but still feel that the Determination of Non - Significance is appropriate on this specific proposal of annexation. Further official action by the City will not take place until the King County Boundary Review Board makes a decision regarding the subject annexation. We appreciate your position and hope the fire protection issue for the Crestview area is resolved in an expeditious and satisfactory manner. Sincerely, Moira Bradshaw Assistant Planner MB:nb cc: Mayor Gary Van Dusen City Attorney James Haney Planning ~Direetor'Brad Cortins` ADMINISTATION Chief James E. Adsley Ass't. Chief Bruce D. Pickens Fire Marshal Jeffrey R. Lowe Battalion Chief Ronald A. Wieland Office Manager Wendy Somdahl ANGLE LAK/McMICKEN FIRE DEARTMENT August 12, 1985 Brad Collins, Planning Director City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 FIRE STATIONS HEADQUARTERS STATION 2929 So. 200th Seattle, WA 98188 Business Phone: 824 -2726 STATION 2 3521 So. 170th Seattle, WA 98188 Hjfll [AuG i3985 CITY CAF TUKWlLA PLANNING DEPT, 11 RE: Response to S.E.P.A. regarding proposed annexation, of ten residential lots between South 164th and 166th Streets on 51st Avenue South. Dear Mr. Collins: The Board of Fire Commissioners of King County Fire Dis- trict #24 has determined that the above mentioned an- nexation proposal has a potential negative financial and planning impact on the Fire District. In addition a change in fire and medical response to that area would create a negative impact on the affected residents. The larger question appears to be related to the City of Tukwila policy regarding fire and medical services to the recent annexation of adjacent areas. While this annexation is relatively small there is a significant cumulative impact of periodic annexations. Since the matter of protection to the areas of Crestview already annexed will need to be resolved in the remain- ing few months of 1985, the Board of Fire Commissioners of Fire District 24 respectfully request that the City of Tukwila take no action on the above proposed annexa- tion until the larger issue is resolved. Fire District "Fire Prevention is More Cost Effective than Fire Suppression" • • 424 will than be able to make an appropriate response to the Determination of Non - Significance. Very truly yours, g -✓ ames E. Adsley, Chief Angle Lake /McMicken Fire Department JEA:wls CC: Gary Van Dusen, Mayor, City of Tukwila Joe Brennan, Chairman, King County Fire District #24 Board of Fire Commissioners Brad Gierke, District Attorney Curtis Nesheim, Chairman, McMicken Heights Fire Services Advisory Committee "Fire Prevention is More Cost Effective than Fire Suppression" WAC 197 -11 -970 DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal Annexation of ten residential lots adjacent to Tukwila's corporate limits and rezone of subject area from King County's RS -7200 zoning classification to Tukwila' R -1 -7.2 Single Family Residential Classification. Proponent Property owners listed on petition and City of Tukwila Location of Proposal, including street address, if any the first 175.24 feet lying west of 51st Ave. S. between S. 164th and S. 166th,St.; 16415, 16427, 16431, 16445 51st Ave. S.; 4917 and 4927 S. 164th St.; and 4848 S. 166th St. Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC- - 276 -85 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 Wednesday, August 14, 1985 . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15.days from the date below. Responsible Official Brad Collins Position /Title Planning Director Phone 433 -1845 Address 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Date 7 - 30 -85 Signature kk. _ ( You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 day's 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 A F F I e V I T OF D I S T'R I BOT -I- O N I, Kathryn A. Stetson hereby declare that: [[ Notice of Public Hearing [=1 Notice of Public Meeting f. Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet [[ Board of'Appeals Agenda Packet [] Planning Commission Agenda Packet [[ Short Subdivision Agenda Packet [r Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit (� Shoreline Management Permit Determination of Nonsignificance Eil Mitigated Determination of Non - significance 0 Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice [[ Notice of Action 0 Official Notice (� Other [� Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on Water District -75 P.O. Box 68100' Seattle, WA 98168 King County Boundary Review Board King County Court house Room W378 Seattle, WA 98104 July 30 , 19 85. Steve Miller, Deputy Director Department of Planning & Community Development 811 Alaska building 618 2nd Avenue Seattle, WA 98104 Val Vue Sewer District P.O. Box 68063 Seattle, WA 98168 Fire District 24 3929 South 200th St. Seattle, WA 98188 Name of Project �f s� S T o Q 4 ZUVe, - 1,-- 19 File Number E P IC - 276 -85 WAC 197 -11 -970 i DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal Rezone _of King County zoning designation of RS -7200 to Tukwila zoning designation of R -1 -7.2 Proponent City of Tukwila Location of Proposal, including street address, if any the first 175.24 feet lying west of 51st Ave. S. between S. 164th St. and S. 166th St. Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC - 276 -85 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. eg There is no comment period for this DNS [l 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 Brad Collins Position /Title Planning Director Phone 433 -1845 Address 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Date (o-- (v — "S Signature �( You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Ha'N,J 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 CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM • CN 51� /,3? EPIC 276?-35 FILE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM • r TO: BLDG [l PLNG [ 1 P.W. fl FIRE fl POLICE El P & R PROJECT 5 /5t /lfic/ ' - 9L %�� fief Zatt LOCATION 5M t l /Lod( `�- ¢- /06 4' FILE NO. 35 a 3-le DATE TRANSMITTED o5'c7 15 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY ,>`_ 1S STAFF COORDINATOR ? 'bb 06LigUitg 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 5 3o /Ks COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM • • CN V -/55 EPIC 276-35 • FILE 5:""a3-k. TO: n BLDG n PLNG [] P.W. n FIRE n POLICE n P & R PROJECT 5767:- /(flyer- /b'`L ezUt LOCATION 5/3 6- /?1. ui_e r.) ex( ¢. /CP O '1"' FILE NO. 35- c2 3 -le DATE TRANSMITTED is-ci' "-O c RESPONSE REQUESTED BY �' 'IFS STAFF COORDINATOR /' ' 6 RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST/ WAS 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 No GUrrm mrr- DATE 3 3U `OS COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUT NG FORM i TO: n BLDG PLNG n P. PROJECT 5/5t /(0C/4-4- • CN V/37 EPIC 276215 FILE 35-,23-e W. E] FIRE 17 POLICE P & R 9L /b ee ZG LOCATION 5416- 12 7,{J 66/ DATE TRANSMITTED STAFF COORDINATOR e5 a, octi /00 FILE NO. RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 35-.43 -1€ 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 COMMEN,/ DATE i 'G 7 COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM • CN 8)---/3Y EPIC 2.7&15 FILE '5-- a3-)° TO: Q BLDG n PLNG [ P.W. FIRE (i POLICE [--1 P & R PROJECT 5/5t /(f�f �"`' 9� /lp� fi?f Zai LOCATION 5 4qt bd6aeutJ l (oC!'' ¢. /6, - FILE NO. !g,57-023-/e DATE TRANSMITTED oS4345- RESPONSE REQUESTED BY STAFF COORDINATOR e5a, (RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST WAS 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 COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL, PERMIT SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM TO: n BLDG j] PLNG {j P.W. • CN ei /j? EPIC ol7C -3rj FILE .9 3-A FIRE fl POLICE & R PROJECT 576t /0q‘- ee Zatt LOCATION 54,1& L twa.,14) /(p4' '�' �- /(/0 DATE TRANSMITTED i=c73-85.- STAFF COORDINATOR e/ai on9 gully FILE NO. RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 35-c23-12 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 7- COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM CN 5/1-/ EPIC 27(r FILE a5 a 3 -e ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM TO: 11 BLDG n PLNG n P.W. n FIRE POLICE [7 P & R PROJECT 576t 0 Mg./4'- ek /b(f`I' ofZU LOCATION 5/1t ,(7G,t(j..�.LITJ e_pC! ¥' ¢. /00 t- FILE NO. g-/e. DATE TRANSMITTED i'0.73'85- RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 5: ;56 -85- STAFF COORDINATOR oa, 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 ‘1Q, P .u, 14k,t ehAAA- eq,/ZiOv% 2zt2 -74P iev-eto s IZ) L64.Ld 01 a_� DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 37/57,eg!/ f IN /09,1W4W/0'6I1%l ?OUF/Y) 2. Name of applicant: fl1 / 2 /9A/ LRM 3. Address -and phone number of applicant and contact person: /4,44,27 S/-s V � A • A ®V / U 4. Date checklist prepared: Aj --0V- 5. Agency requesting Checklist: • City -of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): ) 7 kil4077Cf O 777 'NT h= ..57-. 3 -8S' . S1FP91 'CXL /.S7` 1/A/6 /WON 11,EriN6. $7D/l' // jfZe019N) ' '2 7/DIV de 7.4 VA' /,S -63S (77Y CZVNA . ,N), 72/J ' �v A- -Rf v,.u1noAv ip <WEPT NOnCaF AireAir E UItJ MAY 2 2 1985 CITY OF TUikti0aONME PLANNING DEPT. NTAL CHECKLIST Control No. Epic File No. 85 -13s Fee $100.00 Receipt N 80%2 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. NO 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. .4/d/I/F 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain. A/ • 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. 11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not 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. J9NVFx//r2M/ 1 ' PPROx� FiVE V 2OPEP SINGLE ,6 mY PAPoP RTV 7 c /T�/ ��'77} X k /4 ' PRO �/iD '/9 MORE i P A S/ Vg . c0n/YI UN /C, 7? ,ON H// %2/ f D VE, JV/9E/V rnc77,9AI AN SEX' v ES 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. /Ni , r 7r »E /N%ER4 M'7 DA/ Of S/ Sez/Ali7 41.57. 77-/E ).itiesrztw BtIVA/MRY 0ic 77/E C/Ty t / "U' Yt/ // 9 S'O//J►i /, f� Z Y f/-- 4A,/6 sew RiVA/ RY 7 t . r S:� /'Q. �JF' Sa /6b 7W . V7 %r1} iA ' > /74 4 )W ..r te 4" ,fa. ' Awl y / V.�, e1' ti 7VX kV2 Ai"_ so,, /(A6}7W Z- /P®/N 'i — 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally-sensitive? TO BE..COMPLETED BY APPLICANT b. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth 1 a. General description of the site (circle one): rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope) ?' 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. ,5/9A69 d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. NONA" f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. /V® g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? JV e% Evaluation for Agency Use Only • • h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: . AVOA45 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.. N6NA b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or.odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. yd c. , Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: ND7- ,q /J' /J 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. NO 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. /146 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. N 'N, 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. AVJ 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. A/0 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. 4/2 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. ,4 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. mQ 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. /jam` • • 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. ,y d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: NO//E 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: r✓ deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other ✓ evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other i✓ 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? AA 9A65 c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. &OAS/, 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:___EXar/A/a Ml vP5C %NG 9 yg64739 rr0N 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, � 1A/4 OZi9ekABgc,9,S. mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: NONE other: fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: ,/yQN2F 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. NO d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: N07" /PF4I/./M12 Evaluation for Agency Use Only • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 6. Energy and Natural Resources a. What kinds of energy (electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solor) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. ARC !/.F %E! /F RE CORge/VrI Y/9.0/z4440' b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally. describe. A/D 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: NONE jr4W/ /R, 7? 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. /VD 1) Describe special emergency services that might be required. /V/4 /Vf 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ- mental health hazards, if any: Ahlet(RAWAneU2 • • 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) ?_ / /yE 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. NONE 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: NON,:" //AEW 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? R ",S`LDi� ,L, I/2N4 fir' /AI6L1. e L b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. N c. Describe any structures on the site. srn As rem- d. • Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? .WD e. What is the current, zoning classification of the site? %.7o?Da ( //%J dP00 ' f.. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? 67/V aLAr, 4,11,6 V RE'S // /1/7"'/ ,9L g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? ,W)7° /VAZ/6i9,4.y4° h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. ND i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace ?_A/ k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: AA0 A waig, JJ 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: N67— /f4ND /i D • • 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? • TDE.,,5 /y07- PM y b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eli- minated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low - income housing. /lie /E c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: /Mr , ,F'4/a/R I.' 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? ..30° WOOD b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: A/Q7" A RQ /1 /RE/.) • 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? V,D YF b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? n/r)A'( c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? A6JVI. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: )/ 7 e Lf /KED 12. 'Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? GRE:fii// NV 77)1(W/2 /9 PARR ..s /i " b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. AP c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: IV /V • 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. NONE b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. ,/ N c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: N6 RFf LJJ/ EP 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. MEM, m%s AN .37.6229 V27 , -.fin , 4* ASS 7V ,zt.4A ,.5�, X, AND rn j' ? 9 k// 7774/A/ ' M 1,4,E'..0/. 597 A//. . b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? ,y' c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? Dt A.0 -N0 7' /7/9®Y y • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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). ,j//, e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe.___2/3 f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. 5,1/67-- /fPi70/ g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor- tation impacts, if any: NOT irEiDZI /g.e..0 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. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. /Y /VE 16. Utilities • currently available at the site: water, 0fus_e service., septic system, other. 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. NO /V,' C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead relying on them to ma is decision. Signature: Date Submitted: agency is Evaluation for Agency Use Only • • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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? AMP Pe4 PryF77 Th1,e/PER-2A/ 77 ria. C./7V o, 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? /V011,r-5 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: . 07727P214A,132, TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT Evaluation for Agency Use Only D. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS. (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? mom( Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: /1D 7 I E'-Q /) /. h,-B 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life? NO /91,77" Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life are: #D]"'R,pa/R,' • • 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? 4/D !9 -, , er Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy And natural recourses are: N6i R 'Q/J /J FD 4.. Now 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? /Mr RRh,°4 ' Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: A//07. /W// /R' .)7 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? //ONE ' Evaluation for Agency Use Only • Evaluation for Agency Use Only Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts area: /1/47"A abilj ,E,D How does the proposal conform to the Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan? //07' Ar,E, 'T, ,1) 6.. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities ?_421 E Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: N6 r* RLL-Q 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. ,moo • 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? WO Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: /1/D ii` °4,//JR4.27