The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSEPA EPIC-287-85 - CITY OF TUKWILA - I-405 ANNEXATION1-405 ANNEXATION 1-405 & INTERURBAN AVE. EPIC- 287 -85 DUANE BERENTSON Secretary STATE OF WASHINGTON DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Office of District Administrator • D -1, 6.131 Corson Ave. So., C- 81.110 • Seattle, Washington 98108 Brice Martin Executive Secretary King County Boundary. Review Board Room W -378 King County Courthouse Seattle, Washington 98104 Dear Mr. Martin: September 23, 1985 City..of Tukwila Annexation in the Vicinity of SR --405 and SR -181 ..The Department.of Transportation has.no.objection to the City of ..Tukwila's:proposed annexation as covered in .their Resolution 973, comprising.6.8.acres in.the northwest•quadrant.of SR- 405/181. JAK:nc cc: 4,011eltifi5n M. Umetsu,.Tukwila Sincerely, JOHN A. KLASELL, P.E. District State Aid Engineer • 41E-AO APP lik• , -.5C-14EOUVE. SPEC.IF i ED 12510 'ST, 7.0r) • Te../CitzWAY Pt....PC L.Co. 1.5,13 Ae13.55tr 4104.3541 - ,i,ostertalt,e 1<11-1 Count y,e.51bel 132. 6.510.• 1:•,,ec E...41.4stntenunst 1 ett3V ACCESS wo-rE ci .5 . -J 1-11,A ., those...erre is perm:tied over 4,ne %.k1.11-nttni 22. SA, venire qt.: T LIne 9n:1 t 04 "-- is Pet mit tea under The 11.31-twoni Sinuentres • ..j 0 4•5 restricted e. teacance PScrthi 5 at-7 Greer, Rat. Eirid5ei 51n. CIVI tO5t to *a Vto. to-t+So. TYPE. c.• c-S _1.' ■ e•c• %, I ei Iffiti • I r till ••• U) ...,il;) i " .i d • •„.. • -• 14101 t, 1 • j ° 0 k./ l:-.•?-......,*,-- -. ,._ . Ck ' ""i .1% .--"• ---- '''', AV E„ • ............... 8 1 bo' lic,i ;III 0 ,i! i e 1011 r4 tr101°4 1 i) ..!.tifi f 4c i \ , •4y7 . • 0 . .i.• I A 1 ''',•4..-c,1•."---,- A KJ i , ,... r Li, a., IA. ' 0 • . - , ' ' (1; i Cs1 di • 1. - • ,44,-.S.01 • zz-z1T.C3N.R4 E. W, M. • \ _DA 5.) vai:\ N A‘.2%, i • c • • " AC A:0) . .1 rts.. • f■ 1 4 • nt',1 4. • r 0 to•41.21,:w n v4 4•4e• POsiVr.- 5 ME.: 44"' e <0 • • • • • -4,4; L .• ' 4-v7 ai ' zznizzw._ 1/4c- _ .7 • • •• ••lb • e..`b Atta. <1/4•••• • . N. • ,..i.61`)--""",,,X4‘,,,See •-• IT ' ' • e,:lt.6 r t-t cp^ • 5..72t z81/ V-/ • 1.) 477 r, ti -sy +, zzu co Of di: 4," _.....7"•;-(_-'-81,;„•4441: • . • • ; or . . " • • 0 ;i p:,jg Jr. \-p • -itt. .. .. ...4,(41.,-g t.'",i)". .` . • -, .. -...., 4,,..3 ./ . .:....! ,t \t,.• .: , - •.. ,.., ., .•-_. ,i. of • .. ....... .a , 0 17.:•••••••• 14ri • • For. RIM! Ahead on SRISI.Se...Z. So-•C-to Limits of 'Tukwila to Footcr-17. Intarcboncia., 5hee.4 6 of e1 h s - Appro./a d Watt 1E0168. • ' - en el leo Izew • oi) &) _ .. ,,..it•---=„..„ "4-c- tko-T ., . , • • < • - . • .•,.‘„,c.,_,...........1‘,.... 11,-. ••• • r , &Oa .11, ....,c,z.• .... t-t• ,,, . •,'• 4.••• . ■ ', ..,., ., . . •,• : ca ki) izzl 4..1 ".--.;-7.--- Note: Fo.• pi.,ne:re.n.m. -See Sh.zet 5.0 _.,_#* •-'-' For tecyancl... See. ;r;heet L,,..... -, -,-- -'..-• 4" v- 4, 4,4 4•6 •C ty- 1,410 - - - .4 AC° 401.•:.ttrec a at-ee • • Typ. c Apc+enen -r •I • ...VP! co. OTC <she) 0;• •S•••••••..se, lesz.e.1 few brew% ws.rpen.w anew ••■•elft. Them agreed. us•o•. 1.T ...ay be ▪ tyreosrvote with The ...zit*. ...el for tha pone so'hafe.c.tor., tothe %tote Qt or between Ok....SISCAII.o. Ilveitlywooy . (■-•••(-•••!...-19 X tonS. '. NO. 'Nye approach te. to be ynk.e.ot womb,' ter Jive opsrut•ort, zhchnter•zerse, once • ••t. ectf ts•cl • The oppreax..e11.Nio•trrme.._, ...Coed 70 (eel trio/meth and sew-en be. 4otedonel le:.ed when no th • • • • `I • 01‹.."••• •,.•• _ :eitt • _END 01= PliC.'NI\ STA. - LA- • !3 13 y A').2.2 • _ M 2EN.SQ.s. . \c=-4 All Flans roe su;'•ocn cd.clianga serbrt6 {.CS-113, CtOtern I•e.r..1 should cont.& the -Dental Nan -Lel-- * . ' . ' 4.1s-eo /Amoci•,,,,bak. lin* El-xsertirft6a1.).•40 .4,15R 31133.5.'2 to 1414er 5+13 Cal 5-2.-15 Rev 2.1o,t-t-Rtinnwern. conveyed t t of Tukozas by deedil-t_?.--a. , .. Lti-trer 1-2.1.16 S-20-16 Added toretb.ckl.sse feliel.toC.141 oi lob-wile, /,,TCY L•45 • . ALICuosbe•t UnTE .4•-•-•SECnIent'T nOoROVO.L.. • STA-1- ON 21"1110•3').Z1 121•Cl.C; psiit t9c•5i1i •• • 1• ,44 ..SX• . • \ • - -- • 0,o, •ro ,0 3' 2.6' tiN.S.O 55.86' 1-11.6-t* CURYE. PNTP)_ 15Pukokt.5... P:AcK t csti; E. • 7- s.0 ?.a.G •5•e4}5brf 5 '4775(1 15'03' • V L. -4, , -,--1 . 3'0.0' 114.tr-o' . 53:12 11.1.42:2_7_71." t I• ----"-i C'Ir0 0' 191LO' 92.14 SIT_ 6 T., , _i ..,..., _-_::__I ... , ... fr."Oo' 71S34 Tr:0 104.2?.E..11, 20.00 XP.46....:4'3. 114 2.0 L.4., ,.._gp . .., - .. ...,__._ •-eeoo 40.551 Flo.n6 c>o,- •545.e.e: yt-e4 • • it?.. • a.' Cx.: 1 x44.0 T •t0 +5'3.41 23'n'051. 4:11:S 124.32. 0.14 cc 193.7_S C.G.13 ■f",5 W \ +00. 0 -N4-13AZ• ;21•A- .204 C4.52. Z•• ▪ 01 Aso..'15.0 SS40 acisi3o 31±: 5-oo' zeocc 2.20.62, C.. 00. 9W-ti %05A1 t95.s.c.; • 1 • • I . • • • • - „ 11- 54,-1.-ti .41.-34.• ' 21:ea .58 i , • ---1 s5S.2221 ?.V. -‘• Vt. 2..4. • 5 \ 4150 '312350 so coo 555.o SINzi!? ez2,.2.. 2-1z- --a• Ve-: . ', 2.. 4 _I to--0-....V.?_b,„ 3. 2_2: . 2.4••■ 2.150. SS ,84 171, 47. w.3-3..e• 1.0\ .1-2. \S"3.13E. . 3-5.4 ae; \SL.A4 Res 2911,a-G-,e. Leiter 2.7.o.Ys 13,32.4•16 ii•J bz•,), )..4..q.1.141/4.....s5ts.S9•o010110. 6OT en St • c". Lett Sk 51...ehlo °St:0.51-55.1S Pa, ▪ •Ip,s0,c z•••• 10 1.14E. /pew,. c !FPO. ' A t},10k3•51.1r YT.(POW? • ti : ttV.• :1 -"1:.:, • .; ."‘`''.;1:414 • c ce,s phe.oci sew. ?":5-Trezt;71...",e;.1(..1F. • • ' 4.0. Sn Renton, rion • k roR • _ .................% 1;1-. ‘,. .,....... 3 ..."1...-.......t.......,,._ 7:1:4;7:4' j.;;;;;■;Z:ViVr;.'6.57.4g47.1..7:;411:4,74a1W 'At ,1=- 1;=1 cZ, e227,7,i- „''''''"1".7 lc_ .......... ......... -,.... •................ar• I 76,..,....... i;,,,,i ,......... ,,;';' m..L■ s•-_-.-..,.1.7.-Pc•-..:-;:.c;:--c7...._ F ......„-, • .72;1 _ S .L1 • _ • • - • • -t'S -"1••e .;if • . `•,'• "L 13y Corntrnet.lon.Res..446. 1192 Feb. 11. This .5i-te.e.t. Sapers.,•5 sto•IIS.10 to ,to. 1Z000 of .311SCST 1; Of a 5h.s•kb S12•105, Jet. SSH No. 2-h1 • g•-• • • tooppirc..t....d1".Sp.H.s. N. 1°9.. '.195; c.,;. n t o P !lain ; no Ne:eass.. SR 405 llaM7STATE-.1-4TGHWALY-191X-3-- -% • GREEN. RIVER INTERCHANGE' • MO COUNTY - • • .2 , . • -• 1 t * • St\ 11.1....t• I of 3 •t:Antet'S Feb. ob 9 1'.•To: . % • . Far oi ,ctud • • • SHE . OF • . . . ;?,-, Z7,1 .• •tijckcs 1-1.• • ' • !!! • .. •••. t4 o I . vs S.:en-ton ;Jose* 10 51•SSTI, A • to•‘-,_ • • . • .• • RIGHT OF WAY o.95.00 Si-o. 120.00 • • ". V/ASHINGION STATE' HIC.HWAY COW-V:510y . • • t...• • DV-CRtMINIt cr m.....!1•10a1 • • :" 4 041,•••14 WAS...N.40N • • - • • • • ''• L.. 1 'tflt..7.00 • • 4 • • TELEPHONE MEMO RE: 02.& PERSON CONTACTED: au -e_e, F12E PERSON CALLING: (��„, DATE: f �� s- INFORMATION ITEMS: • City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 433 -1800 Gary L VanDusen, Mayor September 6, 1985 Brice Martin, Executive Secretary King County Boundary Review Board Room W -378 King County Courthouse Seattle, WA 98104 Dear Mr. Martin: The City of Tukwila herewith transmits a notice of intention to annex a portion of unincorporated King County pursuant to RCW 36.93.295 -299. The attached notice has been organized based on the Notice of Intention format supplied by your office and should be reviewed in that light. Please do not hesitate to contact me at 433 -1858 if I can be of any help. Sincerely, Vernon M. Umetsu Associate Planner VU /ks (MARTIN) ( #1) NOTICE OF INTENTION S September 6, 1985 Page 2 NOTICE OF INTENTION As required by RCW 36.93, a Notice of Intention is hereby given to the King County Review Board by the City of Tukwila. 1. The City of Tukwila desires to have rational corporate boundaries and thus desires to annex a 6.8 acre island of unincorporated King County generally located in the east - central portion of the city (see Item Nos. 5 -7). This administrative island of unincorporated King County is entirely surrounded by the corporate boundaries of the City of Tukwila and is entirely owned by the State of Washington. The Washington State Department of Transportation, which administers the subject land, has no objection to the proposed annexation. The City of Tukwila hereby notifies the King County Boundary Review Board of its intention to annex the area of land described in Item Nos. 5 -7, pursuant to RCW 35A.14.295 -299, which provides for the annexation of an unincorporated island of territory within a code city. The City of Tukwila requests that the Chairman of the King County Boundary Review Board provide a written statement declaring that the board will not review this annexation pursuant to RCW 36.93.110. 2. The Tukwila City Council has adopted a resolution which states its intention to annex the subject area (see Attachment A). 3. A determination of non - significance (DNS) was issued by the City of Tukwila on August 12, 1985, and is included as Attachement B. No com- ments have been received by the end of the comment period. The DNS is now final. 4. The City of Tukwila is seeking annexation of the subject area pursuant to RCW 35A.14.295 -299. Under these sections cities may annex unincor- porated territory containing less than 100 acres and having at least 80 percent of its boundaries contiguous with the annexing city (RCW 35A.14.295). The proposed annexation area contains 6.8 acres and has 100 percent of its boundaries contiguous with the City of Tukwila. Pursuant to RCW 35A.14.295, the City- of Tukwila has initiated the annexation proceedings with the attached resoultion. This Notice of Intention is submitted pursuant to RCW 35A.14.220 and 36.93.090. The City of Tukwila is requesting that the Chairman of the Boundary Review Board provide a written statement that the Board's review is not necessary to protect the interests of the various parties and it thus waives jurisdiction pursuant to RCW 36.93.110. RCW 36.93.110 allows the Board to waive its normal review process in those cases where the proposed annexation area is less than ten acres and less than $800,000 in assessed valuation. The proposed annexation area encompasses 6.8 NOTICE OF INTENTION September 6, 1985 Page 3 • • acres, has zero taxable-assessed value because it is wholely owned by the State of Washington, and the State Department of Transportation, which administers the subject area, has no objection to the proposed annexation. 5. The legal description of the proposed annexation area is shown in Attachement C. 6. The proposed annexation area is located on a vicinity map and a King County Assessor's map in Figures 1 and 2 respectively. There are not services required for the are since it is entirely part of the Green River Interchange right -of -way. Therefore no map of required services has been included. 7. An 8i x 14 inch vicinity map showing all significant natural and admi- nistrative features is shown as Figure 3. 8. A map of the existing corporate limits of the City of Tukwila is shown in Figure 3. 9. A. There are no persons living on the subject 6.8 acre area, nor is there any taxable assessed value in the area as it is wholely owned by the State of Washington. B. The subject area is currently used as part of the necessary right - of -way for the I- 405 /SR -181 (Interurban) interchange. No change in this right -of -way function is anticipated. However, the City of Tukwila envisions placing the footings of two road bridges within the annexation area. C. 1. The area is encompassed by the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan which was adopted in 1982. 2. Not applicable. 3. The proposal is not inconsistent with the King County Comprehensive Plan. 4. There are no applicable policies, regulations or guidelines which have been adopted subsequent to the King County Comprehensive Plan according to representatives from King County and Metro. 5. The present King County zoning for the area is Suburban Residential and Unclassified (RS 15,000). 6. None according to representatives of King County and Metro. • FIGURE 1 • IIN•G( • (LIT ■u.c.11 f lYT MAP OF PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA Proposed Annexation Area -r Tukwila City Limits 0 2000' y._ r- .. )1� .•3 • , \ FIGURE 2 w s S s f ' v► oaf? •' �% ,•4' /• MAP OF PROPOSED �.s i r ANNEXATION AREA scale 1" =100' I 32Y/ •�' L e. /QT "/ /' If g4;32— der,. S 1 4. • 110 •4• '2 ;I it t w 1 • 0 (329.87 �c Figure 3 VICINITY :1 I- I,.r OWN' 'SAC MAP • a �A1;► BRYN MAWR O��ael�uZ'rJ:� I -- N IADZ1711•CINT le�lI•* Proposed Annexation Area • Di- • �ln�!.L�4. City of Tukwila City of Kent [------j City of Renton 1n NOTICE OF INTENTION • September 6, 1985 Page 4 D. The proposed annexation area is generally a flat basin with ele- vated road grades to the south and northeast. The land slopes steeply at the riverbank to the Green River, which forms the northwest area boundary. The steepest slope is approximately 200 percent at the riverbank. Drainage is from the southeast to northwest, toward the Green River. E. No significant growth has been projected for subject annexation area or immediately adjacent lands. This projection assumes that the subject annexation area and all immediately adjacent lands will remain as State right -of -way. F. Only emergency aid services, such as police, fire and medical assistance, are anticipated for the subject area. Said services will be rendered by the Washington State Patrol, the Tukwila Police Department and /or the Tukwila Fire Department as appropriate. G. No community facilities are anticipated to be located in the sub- ject area. H. 1. The municipal services available to the subject area are police, fire and emergency medical aid. 2. Existing land use and development in the annexation area reflect the requirements of the governmental regulatory structure at the time of permit review. Services to the area are provided as necessary to the subject area. 3. The cost of adequate governmental services constitute an insignificant proportion of the overall budgets of the ser- vice providers. The cost of providing the appropriate city services (see Item No. 9.F) to the annexation area will not result in any change in service costs to the State of Washington which owns all lands and improvements in the annexation area. 4. No. 5. With traffic increases over time, the need for police, fire and emergency medical services may be expected to increase. 6. The costs and adequacy of services to the proposed annexation area are not anticipated to significantly change. 7. No change in the fiscal viability of King County is expected to result from the proposed annexation. NOTICE OF INTENTION • September 6, 1985 Page 5 J. The proposed annexation will provide a more rational regional governmental structure by placing a fragmented island of unincor- porated county land, which is surrounded by the City of Tukwila, under the City's administrative jurisdiction. 10. The City of Tukwila proposes to annex the subject area in order to pre- vent abnormally irregular boundaries, in support of RCW 36.93.180(4). 11. The required $25.00 filing fee is enclosed. (MARTINI) ( #1) • Attachment A CITY OF TUKWILA JEH /clh 08/06/85 WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DECLARING THE INTENT OF THE CITY TO ANNEX AN UNINCORPORATED ISLAND OF TERRITORY LOCATED WHOLLY WITHIN THE CITY IN AN AREA FORMED BY THE INTERSECTIONS OF SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD, INTERURBAN AVENUE AND INTERSTATE 405, DESCRIBING THE BOUNDARIES OF THE AREA TO BE ANNEXED, STATING THE NUMBER OF VOTERS RESIDING THEREIN AS NEARLY AS MAY BE, FIXING THE DATE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING ON SAID ANNEXATION AND DIRECTING THE CITY CLERK TO GIVE NOTICE OF SUCH HEARING. WHEREAS, there is, within the City of Tukwila, unin- corporated territory containing approximately 6.8 acres and having one hundred percent of its boundaries contiguous to those 'of the City, and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that annexa- tion of the territory contained within the boundaries of such unincorporated island would be in the best interest and general welfare of the City, and WHEREAS, the City's SEPA Responsible Official has reviewed the environmental impacts of said annexation and has issued a Determination of Nonsignificance (DNS) for the annexa- tion action, and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to fix the date for a public hearing on the annexation proposal, now, therefore, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Declaration of Intent to Annex - Description of Boundaries. Pursuant to RCw 35A.14.295, the City Council of the City of Tukwila hereby declares its intent to annex that certain territory generally described as the area formed by and lying between the intersections of Southcenter Boulevard, Interurban Avenue and Interstate 405 in the Cit'. of Tukwila and more particularly described on Exhibit A attached • • ..ere_= and incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set for =h. Section 2. Number of Voters. There are no voters residing within the area for which annexation is sought. Section 3. Public Hearing. A public hearing upon the_ proposed annexation of the territory described in Section 1 of this resolution shall be held in the City Council Chambers at Tukwila City Hall on September 23, 1985 , 1985 at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard. All residents or property owners of the area included in the area proposed for annexation by this resolution shall be afforded an opportunity to be heard at such public hearing. Section 4. Notice of Hearing. Pursuant to RCW 35A.14.295, the City Clerk is hereby directed to give notice of the public hearing by publishing this resolution at least once a week for two weeks prior to the date of the hearing, in the offi- cial newspaper of the City and in one or more newspapers of general circulation within the area to be annexed. RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a regular meeting thereof this 3rd day of September , 1985. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: CITY CLERK, MAXINE ANDERSON APPROVED AS TO FORM: OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY i F FILED WITH THE C TY PASSED BY THE CITY FIRST PUBLICATION: SECOND PUBLICATION: RESOLUTION NO: 973 CLERK OUN CITY OF TUKWILA By CPfi4.t/ ! • �LLA) COUNCIrf PRESIDENT, EDGAR D. BAUCH James E. Haney 8/8/85 L: 9/03/85 9/06/85 9/13/85 • WAC 197 -11 -970 Attachment B DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal For the City of Tukwila to annex a 6.8 acre island of unin- corporated King County which is totally surrounded by the city. Proponent City of Tukwila Location of Proposal, including street address, if any N.W. corner of the intersection of Interurban Ave. and I -405 in the S.W. 1 of Section 24, Township 23N, Range 4E. Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC- 287 -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. 0 There is no comment period for this DNS El This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by I?) I'j 5 . The lead agency will not act on this proposal f r 15 ys from the date below. �g Responsible Official Brad Collins Position /Title Planning Director Phone 433 -1845 Address 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Date /ate -`{ �L - I�S.S Signature c You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Fall,' 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 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 433 -1800 Gary L VanDusen, Mayor MEMORANDUM TO: Reviewers of the I -405 Annexation SEPA Checklist FROM: Vernon Umetsu, Associate Planner Ut DATE: August 14, 1985 SUBJECT: Comment Due Date The due date for comments on the subject checklist was erroneously shown as August 13, 1985. The actual due date for comments is August 28, 1985. • Attachment C GREEN RIVER INTERCHANGE ANNEXATION A tract of land lying in the southwest 1/4 of Section 24, T23N, R4E, W.M. including King County Tax Lots 42 and 46 and a portion of the Green (White) River described as follows: Beginning at a stone monument in the centerline of Permanent Highway No. 3D (now known as Interurban Avenue South), said monument being at a point of curve designated 136 + 44.32 in Survey No. 1143G, and being located North 8 °52'10" West 462.32 feet more or less, and North 34 °46'00" West, 166.7 feet from the intersection of the centerline of said Permanent Highway with the south line of said Government Lot 10 (the meridian used being that of said survey) in said Section 24; thence North 60 °40'West, 147.55 feet and South 28 °05'00" West 30 feet more or less to the southerly margin of said Highway and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of the tract herein described; thence continuing South 28 °05'00" West, 350 feet more or less to the west bank of the Green River (old river channel); thence westerly and northerly along said bank to an intersection with City Limits of Tukwila as est- ablished and described in Volume 16 Page 19 of the Journal of Proceedings of County Commissioners dated June 16, 1908 being also the northeasterly extension of the centerline of James Clark Road No. 622; thence northeasterly along said City Limits and said centerline extended to an intersection with the thread of said river; thence northerly along the thread of said river to an intersection with the southwesterly margin of Interurban Avenue (Permanent Highway No. 3D); thence southeasterly along said margin,550 feet more or less to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. Fem • • D 12‘ o/c. a2 87- 8S- 843 /8 s �� 61e24-e..6P-&& y) je& a2=,4, //(,,:; zrc WAC 197 -11 -970 • • DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal For the City of Tukwila to annex a 6.8 acre island of unin- corporated King County which is totally surrounded by the city. Proponent City of Tukwila • Location of Proposal, including street address, if any N.W. corner of the intersection of Interurban Ave. and I -405 in the S.W. $ of Section 24, Township 23N, Range 4E. Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC- 287 -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. Q There is no comment period for this DNS This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by 13� 1195 . The lead agency will not act on this proposal f�r 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 4' "; t1, 1iET Signature `s-o You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City all, 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 w,LA • � *Si City of Tukwila ;1906 • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 433 -1800 Gary L VanDusen, Mayor MEMORANDUM TO: Brad Collins, SEPA Responsible Official FROM: Vernon Umetsu, Associate Planner /d4 DATE: August 12, 1985 SUBJECT: Response to Planning Department Comments on the I -405 Annexation SEPA Checklist. The following are responses to comments submitted by Rick Beeler of the Planning Department: Item 1, Comment Sheet and comment on SEPA Checklist Item No. E.1. The final sentence of SEPA Checklist Item E.1. is.ammended to read as follows: Implementation of the proposed annexation will help in providing a rational governmental structure in the county and expedite the review of development proposals in the area. SEPA Checklist Item No. B.10.a. There are no structures which are an integral part of the proposed annex- ation. See B.1.e. Therefore, no changes are recommended_to the SEPA Checklist. SEPA Checklist Item No. B.14.d. While new roads and streets may be built within the proposed annexation area, the annexation itself would not obligate the city to construct or or improve any roadways either by city ordinance or policy. SEPA Checklist Item No. E.3. No comment. CIIY. OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM • ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM EPIC FILE 07-3`5 TO: [l BLDG fl PLNG P.W. n FIRE POLICE I I P & R PROJECT r- L 0 5 3. ,Lyu r. LOCATION L/ ' � - (,(X�j FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED ?-6 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY STAFF COORDINATOR Vein vi 6(i. ' RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL - KLIST WASS—RtCEIVED 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 THE ONLY FORESEEABLE IMPACT OF THIS ANNEXATION UPON THE OPERATIONS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT WOULD BE TO CLEAR UP JURISDICTIONAL QUESTIONS THAT MIGHT ARISE FROM PROPERTY OWNERSHIP RESTING WITH THE STATE...POLITICAL GOVERNMENT RESTING WITH THE COUNTY...GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION ENTIRELY WITHIN THE CITY OF TUKWILA. THIS ANNEXATION MUST BE VIEWED AS A POSITIVE FOR THE CITY. 8 -7 -85 pj1 DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY 'MG rN h rl.Vi4U perniici. �,S �, ,�y�¢vy C•P.S. Form 11 bt�Quk�F•h� 1 in a!'1 I�KCL�J►fb be I71QdG &*j Mondays a �9 • Thaalf6for yew' hc1P . OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM •N EPIC FILE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUT NG FORM TO: [l BLDG PLNG [j P.W. [ I FIRE POLICE I P & R PROJECT r l-��)5 j y C at7 LOCATION "l�Q� ail. -G� l-t' (,(�ij j �, FILE N0. 4I -%� DATE TRANSMITTED 0 -((� RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 31 /001.4° STAFF COORDINATOR Voir) Vi 61(0')- RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL - KLIST WA.S- EIVED 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 1 i1> >1��'�_.�1�;- � -l1 �.: �'A � ��"�., 14'0, � ..fit � � r�.l �� 1 ��.,C�\� 6 f�� ,� t. tiec)i\) rtivi. ft4i)ckssiL)Li )f- bccau�G �F�hc d d �n at�A1 Ith f� DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY • t h e rN yh motto i 1 S BO`� c� n� C.P.S. Form 11 M0104 '3 ago G • mcrtlo9 • Yhan vs fiTh- hclA ' --CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM ON 5-,23,e, EPIC -`� FILE _3/ -i4 947 RIV' TO: n BLDG ( PLNG 1 (P.W. FIRE ( POLICE( P & R PROJECT r- LL (,) j j) 1,YLf r (1.17 0u, LOCATION_ T" " (.' ;�� q�'� /,�G� .� L/�(!�4'��7C(G � FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED 0 -(� ESPONSE REQUESTED BY STAFF COORDINATOR Vein via 6((> RESPONSE RECEIVED 31 pin I It THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL - KLIST WAS — R/CEIVED 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 3 7 (5 COMMENTS PREPARED BY akCfr-01„ rt•,h!''r044U peripdd eCe6 C.P.S. Form 11 �h& deity-stun n a Al tteeW b4 rnadt by ' ' iy1 and4� •.s Cb1+�n G 1 � �tIr4 • 'A�an YS •Far yaw l'1G1b 1 ' CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM • 410N EPIC FILE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM TO: fl BLDG PLNG ( P.w. [ FIRE 1 POLICE 1 P & R PROJECT r_ UCH (1) _44^ C atoL, LOCATION_ 1 S �� -/�%� �, FILE NO. 5-'-'%31-1-:Y DATE TRANSMITTED 6 RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 31 Prn.lir STAFF COORDINATOR Vein vio C�, RESPONSE RECEIVED dj THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL - KLIST 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 ��g,,,/ ,,,' DATE C- (/;1111 (F"-(-- COMMENTS PREPARED BY Vie rN i tU i I �h � � 5 ntce6V4eq C.P.S. Form ;Iwo d c�'�r n aA1 ht .s bt rnade i�'14nd�1'.s CnC+ t ri1 �tflr4 • •them YS ,err gaue &1P, CI'i Y OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL EVIEW ROUTING FORM BL TO: ( DG I PLNG n P.W. I I FIRE IIIN EPIC FILE 5 3-6 POLICE I P & R PROJECT .t- L/(JJ Llui a a,, LOCATION T Cl•`r °� td (�i 2 ' FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED ?-(Y ESPONSE REQUESTED BY 31 )ii. STAFF COORDINATOR Very► RESPONSE RECEIVED THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL - KLIST WAS,AtCEIVED 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 401Z/ AL DATE s COMMENTS PREPARED BY 'fhb rNyhLlNita) period. tJ ►l1rcV✓Vr C.P.S. Form 11 bccaux �c�d�p atrah ncuA►s t� be �nado a i �nuO' H'1b�d�1 G 1 01 eetfrn • Th4n 15 or Yaw hGIA ,--eTtY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM EPIC FILE TO: n BLDG 1 PLNG 1 1 P.W. ► /f FIRE I 1 POLICE 1 P & R PROJECT r-UC ,'. (L1ki Y ( I76)L, LOCATION(.rG�� ' /,(�/� ! FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED ESPONSE REQUESTED BY STAFF COORDINATOR Vefr VI Qi Ll�(� , RESPONSE RECEIVED �S- p.rr.�!' THE ATTACHED ENVIRONMENTAL - KLIST WAS--RE�CEIVED 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 R -G -Ps-- ' COMMENTS PREPARED BY ‘a- Vie rNyh Mitt() rotifel. i6 I�C�� v C.P.S. Form 11 rime dc� a1 ht s bit rnadt bij :wry It Old at/ Cbt+t,�1 G 1 01 tti'!/� • �fhan YS �dY ticar hG�O 1 • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: 2. • Name of applicant: City of Tukwila Control No. Epic File No. Fee $100.00 Receipt N I -405 Annexation. 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Vernon Umetsu, 433 -1858 Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 4. Date checklist prepared: August 1, 1985 5. Agency.requesting.Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Pr osed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): Review and waiving of jurisdiction by King County Boundary Review Board: 9/12/85 Adoption of annexing ordinanccP• 10/7/85 Annexing Ordinance effective: 11/21/85 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. The City of Tukwila will be building a bridge over this area in the near future. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. None 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. No • 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your .proposal. Approval, disapproval, modification or waiving jurisdiction over the subject annexa- tion by the King County Boundary Review Board. An ordinance approving the proposed annexation must be enacted by the Tukwila City Counci 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. The City of Tukwila proposes to annex a 6.8 acre island of unincorporated King County which is completely surrounded by the City pursuant to RCW 35A.14.295 -299. 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. The proposed annexation area is generally located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of I -405 and Interurban Avenue South. The site is located in Figures 1 and 2 while a legal description is given in Attachment A. 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? Yes. The Tukwila Comprehensive Plan identifies this area as having "Special Develop- me n Considerations" where additional standards and review are necessary to insure sensitivity to the natural environment. This element of The comprehensive plan has been implemented through the Shoreline section of the Tukwila Loving Code (lMC 18.44). -The proposed annexation will not have any ettects on the natural, en- vironment. -3- FIGURE 1 HANG[ • LAST 1 IUNGL S. LAST MAP OF PROPOSED ANNEXATION AREA Proposed Annexation Area Tukwila City Limits I . 0 2000' I v • MAP OF PROPOSED '4 FIGURE 2 *7°c") f .¢ ANNEXATION AREA scale 1" =100' q s.\ 14/ �y t .3 r I t • us 3-1: Z = =1` 0 <92. 1329.87 1 TO'BE COMPLETED BY APPLIC• 111 Evaluation for Agency Use Only B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth a. General description of the site (circle one) rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, -otti - b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 200 percent at the riverbank. 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. Soils are generally an alluvial silt -loam mixture varying in depth from 3 to 12 feet. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. Some evidence of minor riverbank erosion near waterline of the river. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. None. The proposed action will not 0 e sic. -n •u -1 subsequent construction in the annexation area will be subject environmental impact evaluation at the time of permit application. f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No. See B.1.e. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? N.A. • h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: None 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. None. See B.1.e. 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: None 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. Yes. The center- line of the Green River forms the western boundary of the proposed annexation area. the Green River at This point- varies in width from 15 to 3U feet, has a minimum summer tiow of 300 cts (3uT, 1985), and an average maximum winter tlow 2,8UU cfs. River wager quality is rated as Class A by the State of Washington at this point. 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. No. See B.1.e. 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. None. See 8.1.e. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. No. See B.1.e. Evaluation for Agency Use Only 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. Yes. Part of the northwest portion of the site and a strip approximately 30 feet landward of the ordinary mean highwater mark, lies within the One - Hundred Year Flood Zone (See Figure 3 ). 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. No. See B.1.e. FIGURE 3 • ”h,■.'11■1 Actuss TO THE PROPOSED PARK DEVELOPME ^:T :X RIGHT I i•: /�• .j I: COORDINATE WITH SIGNALS TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH ON INTERURBAN AVENUE FOR THROUGH CONTINUITY AND OPTIONAL TURNING MOVEMENTS. 100 Year Flood Zone 'ERURBAN :'VEMENT5, RLVIS' .ND NN SIG AL REVISE SIGNAL DISPLAY AND SIGNAL SEQUENCE FOR BETTER DRIVER OBSERVANCE Proposed Annexation Area E SIDEWALK DE ONLY 'Tk EXISTING COORDINATE WITH THE TWO SIGNALS TO THE NORTH ON INTERURBAN AVENUE FOR THROUGH CONTINUITY AND OPTIONAL TURNING MOVEMENTS. STOP SIGN CONTROL as TUKWILA TOPICS SOUTHCENTER BLVVD. • • 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. No. 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. None. 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. None. See B.1.e. Evaluation for Agency Use Only • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. N.A. See B.1.e. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: None. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: ,✓deciduous tree: .lder maple aspen, other evergreen tree: fir, ce'ar, pine, other ✓shrubs grass pasture crop or grain wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil,other Wither types of vegetation b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None. c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known at this time. • d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: None. 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, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: fish: bass, �salmon� trout, herring, shellfish, other: b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known at present. Evaluation for Agency Use Only c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.ThP Green River is an important salmon migration route_ The cu •' . . • •- •- •• . he Pacific Coast Flyway (bird . migration route) which extends from Alaska to Central America_ d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. See B.1.e. • 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. None. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. 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. 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. None. See 6.1.e. 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ- mental health hazards, if any: All city, state and federal standards and regulations will enforced. 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) ?jpne__ 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. See 8.1.e. 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The annexation area is largely used for the I- 405 /Interurban Avenue S &th interchange. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. A portion of I -405 is located in the subject area. At this point, I -405 is an elevated, four lane, controlled access freeway. There is also an off -ramp built over the area. 1 • d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No. Evaluation for Agency Use Only e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? King County has'zoned the area Suburban Residgptial and Unclassified (RS15,000 1 f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? The site does not have a specific designation in the King County Comprehensive Plan, but it is subject to the policies of the Green g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master River Planning Area. program designation of the site? The proposed annexation area is designated "Urban" in the King County Shoreline Management Program. h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. Not according to representatives from King County or Metro. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Any specific projects proposed for the annexation area would be required to meet standards in the Tukwila Zoning Code and the SEPA. 1 • 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: None. 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? N.A. No structures proposed. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. See B.1.e. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: None. 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? None. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. See B.1.e. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None. 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? Informal nearby recreational opportunities are represented . adjacent to the Green River. Formal recreational opportunities within one - quarter mile are Tukwila Park, Fort Dent Park, and the Christensen Greenbel Park. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. See B.1.e. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. 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.. No. b. Generally describe any landmarks or evidence of historic, archaeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. 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. Vehicular access to the annexation area is provided by Interurban Avenue South which forms its northwestern boundary. The roadway system in the area is generally shown in Figure 3 . . Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? No. There is a METRO bus stop on Inter- urban Avenue South within one - quarter mile of the annex- ation area. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? None. None. 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). No. See B.1.e. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. None. See B.1.e. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor- tation impacts, if any: None. 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. No. See B.1.e. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. Evaluation for' Agency Use Only i 16. Utilities a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other. N.A. The proposed, non - project action will not have any effects on area utilities. 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. None. 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 its decision. Signature: Date Submitted: /1BS Evaluation for Agency Use Only TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICIP 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? See B.1.e. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are: See Ngne. 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life? See B.1.e. . Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life are: None. Evaluation for Agency Use Only • • 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? See B.1.e. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resourses are: None. 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? See B.1.e. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: None. 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? See B.1.e. Evaluation for Agency Use Only • • Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts area: See B•7_a_2_ How does the proposal conform to the Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan? There is no inconsistency between the subiect annexation proposal and the Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan. 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? See B.l.e. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: None. 7.. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. See B.1.e. Representatives of King County and Metro do not perceive any conflict between the proposed annexation and their resource management plans. 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? No. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: None. \ TO.BE COMPLETED BY APPLIC• • 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? To rectify an administrative anomaly where there is a 6.8 acre island of unincorporated King County contained wholly within the Tukwila city limits. Implementation of the proposed annexation will help in providing a rational governmental structure in the County. 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? To annex the area pursuant to RCW35A.14.120, the direct petition method. However, this method would be artificially cumbersome since the only property owner in the annexation area (the State of Washington) has no objection to the subject annexation proposal and the subject area meets the criteria of a more expeditious process (RCW 35A.14.295). 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: The alternative direct petition method for annexation pursuant to RCW35A.14.120, could take over 300 days while the preferred annexation process . pursuant to RCW35A.14.295 would take approximately 90 days. • 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? No. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: None. - 23- • • • ATTACHMENT A GREEN RIVER INTERCHANGE ANNEXATION A tract of land lying in the southwest 1/4 of Section 24, T23N, R4E, W.M. including King County Tax Lots 42 and 46 and a portion of the Green (White) River described as follows: Beginning at a stone monument in the centerline of Permanent Highway No. 3D (now known as Interurban Avenue South), said monument being at a point of curve designated 136 + 44.32 in Survey No. 1143G, and being located North 8 °52'10" West 462.32 feet more or less, and North 34 °46'00" West, 166.7 feet from the intersection of the centerline of said Permanent Highway with the south line of said Government Lot 10 (the meridian used being that of said survey) in said Section 24; thence North 60 °40'West, 147.55 feet and South 28 °05'00" West 30 feet more or less to the southerly margin of said Highway and the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING of the tract herein described; thence continuing South 28 °05'00" West, 350 feet more or less to the west bank of the Green River (old river channel); thence westerly and northerly along said bank to an intersection with City Limits of Tukwila as est- ablished and described in Volume 16 Page 19 of the Journal of Proceedings of County Commissioners dated June 16, 1908 being also the northeasterly extension of the centerline of James Clark Road No. 622; thence northeasterly along said City Limits and said centerline extended to an intersection with the thread of said river; thence northerly along the thread of said river to an intersection with the southwesterly margin of Interurban Avenue (Permanent Highway No. 3D); thence southeasterly along said margin,550 feet more or less to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. \ -e, .Atifiv-%' \ �� >-' cry \ v' t . y o O/ a •Ik\.. • \I eV: i ra{\,� • c,�r 1 UQ "CI, S\ ,ems P,,, - 1 • vc o t .. f.4. A o f r' �1 -- r.. O u. \ \r,... "r �J V,',4 ' • \ A� 7. off\ c'' \. h: et.' . v aI L, . ‘ Y 4 M -.•.) -e1Lw �4. • n W i G� Yi f `16y ' y • , % • : � ice\ I t . _ �. ..�.... • 4'` Ire .i �! 1-1LiUKt PROVIDL ACCESS TC PROPOSED PARK DEVELUPAIE.,T ••••••••••-; • :A. E 'RIGHT t: , %. • ."•■fir et, .. .., ,..L.....406,1 .. !!.., .— .....eval . COORDINATE WITH SIGNALS TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH ON INTERURBAN AVENUE FOR THROUGH CONTINUITY AND OPTIONAL TURNING MOVEMENTS. . .. ..•.:,., " Id 0.5,,$„,... ,.._ REVISE SIGNAL DISPLAY AND SIGNAL. SECUENM FORBETTER ,.••••,A..- DRIVER OBSERVANCE ERURBAN • • tF- 7,4..„-. vs.r. SIDEWALK ;z1 !j- F. ONLY I , t v • • COORDINATE WITH THE Two SIGNALS TO THE NORTH ON INTERURBAN AVENUE FOR THROUGH CONTINUITY AND OPTIONAL TURNING MOVEMENTS. STOP SIGN CONTROL 11, • •ir, • ii•-:,•••i• T UK MLA TOPICS S OUTHCENI TER LV D. :EE RIGHT FIGURE 3 •„., 6 ••• .•!14. ,1,41V /A:: • COORDINATE WITH SIGNALS TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH ON INTERURBAN 'MP AVENUE FOR THROUGH CONTINUITY AND OPTIONAL TURNING MOVEMENTS. .44: :TERURBAN OVEMENTS. 1 REVISE SIGNAL DISPLAY AND SIGNAL SEQUENCE FOR BETTER DRIVER OBSERVANCE 1111111.11.11111.0Ci r c•;.; vIc'• • • 1E SIDEWALK :DE ONLY 1.• ti<••• IF) COORDINATE WITH THE TWO SIGNALS TO THE NORTH ON IINTERURBAN • AVENUE FOR THROUGH CONTINUITY AND OPTIONAL TURNING IMOVEMENTS.. • -7 • • iAt A•"•0$7 1 STOP SIGN CONTROL II .% . ! 3-'= ' -....• I ,..‘• • -"■............, .44, 1 .--. • .;,‘. ' •!. TLIJK\WILA TOPICS SIOOTII4OEKITiER 15 LOD.