Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-331-86 - HALVORSON ELLING - REZONEELLING HALVORSON REZONE M -1 LIGHT INDUSTRIAL ZONING 4621 S. 134T" PL. EPIC 331 -86 AFFIDAVIT OF DISTRUT{ON I, Kathryn A. Stetson �[ Notice of Public Hearing Q Notice of Public Meeting 0. Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet O Board of'Appeals Agenda Packet [] Planning Commission Agenda Packet [� Short Subdivision Agenda Packet hereby declare that: • Determination of Nonsignificance litigated Determination of Non - significance [[ Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice Notice of Action [] Official Notice [[ Notice of Application for 0 Other Shoreline Management Permit J Shoreline Management Permit [] Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on Washington State Department of Ecology SEPA Division . Environmental Review Section MS PV -11 Olympia, WA 98504 Elling Halvorson 10628 NE 38th P1. Suite 110 Kirkland, WA 98033 Michael Smith 1515 130th Ave. NE Bellevue, WA 98005 Name of Project Elling Halvorson Rezone File Number CN -86 -173 (86- 28- R;EPIC- 331 -86) September 2 , 1986 ❑ ❑ ❑ AFFIDAVIT if% if IV Notice of Public Hearing Notice of Public Meeting Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet Board of'Appeals Agenda Packet Planning Commission Agenda Packet Short Subdivision Agenda Packet Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit [l Shoreline Management Permit OF hereby D I S T'R• U T{ O N declare that: [� Determination of Nonsignificance JMitigated Determination of Non - `significance ❑ Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice [� Notice of Action [� Official Notice [� Other C1 Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on .!„— � 194. ;bra % j4dr7t-1 se4 vt,2v 2 $ /35/2W__ Name of Project File Number WAC 197 -11 -970 (:Mitigated. DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE Description of Proposal M -1 Light Industrial Zoning Amendment Proponent Ellinq Halvorson Location of Proposal, including street address, if any 4621 S. 134th Place Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC- - 331 -86 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. El There is no comment period for this DNS RI This DNS_is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by Thursday, September 11, 1986 . The lead agency will not act on this proposal for 15 days from the date below. This Determination is issued subject to the attached condition: Responsible Official Brad Collins Position /Title Planning Director Phone 433 -1845 Address 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Date g"21 Signature You may appeal this determination to the City Clerk at City Hall -, 6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 no later than 10 days from the above date by written appeal stating the basis of the appeal for specific factual objections. You may be required to bear some of the expenses for an appeal. Copies of the procedures for SEPA appeals are available with the City Clerk and Planning Department. FM.DNS City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 (206) 433 -1800 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor MITIGATED DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIGICANCE EPIC FILE NO: 331 -86 1. Dedication of fifteen (15) feet of additional right -of -way to be consistent with future policy and planned improvements for S. 134th Place. Acquisition of a total of thirty (30) feet in width of additional right -of -way will be made by the City between 133rd Avenue and 48th Avenue $. emi-f(hdae_&14 ( ) U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS ( ) FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ( ) WA.ST. OFFICE OF ARCHAEOLOGY ( ) WA.ST. TRANSPORTATION DEPT. ( ) WA.ST. DEPT. OF FISHERIES ( ) OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR ( ) WA.ST. PLANNING & COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AGENCY LIST: ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW MoNGS Federal Agencies ( )U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY ( )U.S. DEPARTMENT OF H.U.D. (Region X) State Agencies ( ) WA.ST. DEPT. OF SOCIAL & HEALTH SERVICES )WA.ST. DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, SHORELANDS DIVISIO WA.ST. DEPT. OF ECOLOGY, SEPA DIVISION WA.ST. DEPT. OF GAME ( )OFFICE OF ATTORNEY GENERAL County Agencies ( ) K.C. DEPT. OF PLANNING & COMMUNITY DEVEL. ( ) FIRE DISTRICT 18 ( ) BOUNDARY REVIEW BOARD ( ) K.C. HEALTH DEPARTMENT ( ) SOUTH CENTRAL SCHOOL DISTRICT ( ) TUKWILA LIBRARY ( ) RENTON LIBRARY ( ) KENT LIBRARY ( ) PACIFIC NORTHWEST BELL TELEPHONE ( ) SEATTLE CITY LIGHT ( ) WASHINGTON NATURAL GAS ( ) WATER DISTRICT 75 ( ) SEATTLE WATER DEPARTMENT ( ) GROUP W CABLE ( ).KENT PLANNING DEPARTMENT ( ) TUKWILA BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT ( ) TUKWILA MAYOR ( ) TUKWILA CITY DEPARTMENTS: ( ) Public Works ( ) Parks and Recreation ( ) Police ( ) Fire ( ) Finance ( ) Planning /Building ( )FIRE DISTRICT 1 ( )FIRE DISTRICT 24 ( )K.C. BLDG & LAND DEVEL.DIV. -SEPA INFO CNTR Schools /Libraries ( )HIGHLINE SCHOOL DISTRICT ( )KING COUNTY PUBLIC LIBRARY ( )SEATTLE MUNICIPAL REFERENCE LIBRARY Utilities ( ) PUGET SOUND POWER & LIGHT ( )VAL -VUE SEWER DISTRICT ( )WATER DISTRICT 20 ( )WATER DISTRICT 25 ( )WATER DISTRICT 125 ( )UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD City Agencies ( ) RENTON PLANNING DEPARTMENT ( )TUKWILA PLANNING COMMISSION ( )TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS ( ) Edgar Bauch ( ) Marilyn Stoknes ( ) Joe Duffie ( ) Mabel Harris ( ) Charlie Simpson ( ) Doris Phelps ( ) Wendy Morgan Other Local Agencies ( ) PUGET SOUND COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENT (PSCOG) ( )METRO ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING DIVISION ( ) PUGET SOUND AIR POLLUTION CONTROL AGENCY Office /Industrial 10,000 gsf or more ( ) TUKWILA /SEA TAC CHAMBER OF COMMERCE Residential 50 units or more Retail 100,000 gsf or more Media ( ) DAILY JOURNAL OF COMMERCE ( ) RENTON RECORD CHRONICLE ( )HIGHLINE TIMES ( )SEATTLE TIMES August 14, 1986 City of Tukwila Planning Department Attn: Moira Carr Bradshaw, Asst. Planner 6200 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Ms. Bradshaw, [iE - - -- Fro AUG 1 4 1985 j . �a CITY OF TUiKav,' PLANNING DEP T As a means of mitigating potential future transportation impacts, and to cooperate with the city in its comprehensive transportation plan for the area, we hereby agree to dedicate to the city, 15 feet for additional future right of way purposes along the portion of the subject rezone site that is adjacent to So. 134th street. We understand that with such dedication a Declaration of Non - Significance pursuant to SEPA can be issued for the proposal. If you need additional information please contact us. EH /lar Very truly yours, • • TELEPHONE MEMO RE : r � 102—aS PERSON CONTACTED: 1\A\, QIM, PERSON CALLING: .?.4(c,_ DATE: -18� V INFORMATION ITEMS: ,0\ S O aL \INZ S 2 -o - l�J X101 can Ail 4► • scl Es ► r_ .%•• AL. A1 kJ T s .a e d cw f 1 I c_ aLY Imo" SOLNE 1�1 e r II kJ. OM AIM �R . vq. L.l. n l5cuSS DNS pE212.1miky:Tki0, 4r§ 67172-75_ /fee, OFFICE MEMO CITY or TUKWILA TO: ,e66,4 e F ROM : ertioN $eL7W, 1.41 , Derr DATE: 7- 7- t6 SUBJECT: 490744.--0 Pa& uhri6 ite,r4 refuesis pftt #/ ieet)er 30149- .0144 ctaterI;Z, coxic&i:-. 74, 66111Ct-fr-ev:k. "'CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: CN -8L-03 EPIC- 33)8& FILE TO: n BLDG x PING n P.W. n FIRE n POLICE n P & R PROJECT Ellir11. Halvorson kc zon e. LOCATION 4-( Al 5. 1 3 4 PI. FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED - CI - 8 (. 'RESPONSE . REQUESTED BY - to- _���o STAFF COORDINATOR M . Bradshaw 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 Ce / 7/1/4'26 COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 Evaluation for Agency Use Only h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: As stated previously, it is anticipated that the storm drainage system as designed to City Ordinance requirements will control on -site and off -site drainage and thereby help control erosion. Temporary measures during construction will also be utilized as necessary. The landscaping introduced to the site with the completed future development should also reduce and control erosion. 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. No specific development is anticipated at this time. However, it can be assumed that emissions normal to light industrial development and use will occur with future development of the site. These are normally associated s, and the traffic associated with the permanent use. No abnormal emissions are anticipated. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None. The site is surrounded by other industrial freeway for which the imposed zoning is compatible. a1 - . I . - 10 n c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Because of the legislative non - project nature of the proposal this is difficult. However, emissions will be controlled by established City and regional Air control Ordinances. During construction dust can be controlled by proper watering, and equipment emissions through utilization of properly maintained equipment. 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 surface water body is apparent on or near the site. ( 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. 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. No waste materials will be discharged into the ground. 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. Water funoff (including storm water): (1) The exact details o the developed storm drainage system are not lcao ^ . -• -• hat runoff will occur U d 1 i yh t i ndUS Lr I d t l and trs: Suctl -runoff is generated by hiiper "viuus Surfaces such ds buildings and paved areas and is collected inLu d slum drainaye system and transmitted off site in a controlled mariner Lu Lhe existing abutting street storm drainage system, eventually slum drainaye frum the site and general surrounding uses and area flows virartte -established public storm drainage system into the Green River. This is part of the normal storm drainage plan or the area. (2) No abnormal waste materials are anticipated to enter the ground or surface waters. Waste materials will be generated typical of light industrial usage of the site. This is normally associated with waslE materials from associated parking and storage uses. Ypica Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The previously described structure will most likely be demolished at the time of site development. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Single Family Residence \( f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Light Industrial g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an No nvironmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not known at this time. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Approximately 2 people. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Suitable notice to the tenants will be given at the time of actual site development. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: The subject site is adjacent to an existing `, industrial use and is sutticiently distant trom nearby existing single family uses, so that impacts will not be significant. Although there are other light industrial uses further east of the site along South ree , i can •e assume • an.scape •u ering, setbacks, height limits, and other City codes wilT be utilized to suitably buffer single family uses on the east and south of the site. Such elements are normally utilized per City ordinances to reduce such impacts in the short term, while in the long term, it can be assumed that these uses will eventually transition in a similar manner to light industrial uses consistent with the comprehensive land use plan for the area. 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. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 14. Transportation a. Identify public streets and highways serving the PtieL site, and describe proposed accss to the existing street system. Show on site plan if any. The subject site.has approximately 91 feet of frontage along south 134t S-t„ j - -South 134th St.ceet extends general in a north and south direction. Thi 5Oft.�right -of -way provides access from rchange. SR 599 also 133rd also extends to ••. arte'rial facility (continued... b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? Yes, along South 133rd and Interurban Avenue. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? It is not specifically known how many parking spaces will be provided as part of the completed project. However, the size of the site combined with the requirements for setbacks and landscaping indicate a building size range of approximately 10,000 to 15,000 square feet. The parking requirement for such light industrial use is 1 stall per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Therefore, the parking provided on the site will probably range from 10 -15 stalls depending upon the final building size. The site development will not displace existing parking stalls other than that utilized presently for the existing single family rental use. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICAN( ( 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? The rezone itself will not increase these elements but eventual development may nave minor effects as discussed in SeCtion B.1, B.2, B.3, and B. B of the tnvi ronmental l.heckl 1st. Proposed measures,tQ avoid.or.reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life? The proposal will not significantly affect plants. animals, fish or marine life. Please see Sections B.4 and B.5. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life are: Evaluation for Agency Use Only 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The relative size and scope of the eventual site development will not have a significant impact on energy or natural resources. Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resourses are: 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? The proposal is not located on an environmentally - sensitive area. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 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 is compatible with existing land use, zoning, and the comprehensive plan for the surrounding area. Please refer to answers in Section B.8. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts area: Please see answers in SEction B.R. • How does the proposal conform to the Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan? N/A 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Please refer to Sections B.14 , B.15 and B.16. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: Evaluation for Agency Use Only tk .t 7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The proposal will not conflict with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM • CN -81 -173 EPIC- 331 -8(0 FILE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: TO: BLDG n PLNG n P.W. [—] FIRE n POLICE n P & R PROJECT E ( t b y H a l vorsovl PC Zor\ e. LOCATION 4-10,q I 5 • 134 Pl • FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED ( - qI - 8 Lo �IR�E�SrPANS'E REn S'pworlBYk4r` (=" m gif STAFF COORDINATOR Ivy. 6raclshauj 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 �p /‘/r COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM CN -8(-173 EPIC- 331 -8(0 FILE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: TO: n BLDG 0 PLNG 0 P.W. C- .. FIRE n POLICE n P & R PROJECT E I I I n! Halvorson RC: zc r e LOCATION . 4(o II S • 134 P1. FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED - 9 - 8 Co c.RESPUNSE- REQUESTED -6Y _(4 - I CO ' S_(o STAFF COORDINATOR M . 6r0.0(5110W 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 Co.- n„e..o --1 C o-m.ri. LLAZ -,_ DATE 1rj3.f COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 __ -CITY OF TUKWILA . CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: • CN - 173 EPIC- 33)-3(: FILE TO: 0 BLDG Q PLNG n P.W. n FIRE 0 POLICE PROJECT E11111_3 H G\ UOrSOh PC ZOYI e. LOCATION 4140,q1 5 • /34 P1 . FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED - q - 8 (a R1EOPO:N.SdER+E'Q.UE{ S TiE-D6`Y_`_''`'�1'%gf STAFF COORDINATOR M. Bracishaui 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 glyfif COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 CITY OF TUKWILA • CN -8L -173 \Rs CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM EPIC-331-81D FILE a ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: TO: 0 BLDG n PLNG W [i FIRE n POLICE fl] P & R PROJECT E I I i v1_9 Halvorson Pc zcn e. LOCATION 4•l0AI S. /34 P1. FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED " g--8 (o iR;ESPO'NSE.. REQUESTED .._BY_ . __ _ (9 - l g(o' STAFF COORDINATOR M. Bradshaw RESPONSE RECEIVED (v'f2- 6, 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 64I / A3,8 COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 t;ITY OF TUKWILA CENTRAL PERMIT SYSTEM III CN -84 -173 EPIC - 331 -8Lc FILE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ROUTING FORM: TO: ED BLDG 0 PLNG [1 P.W. n FIRE � Y :, , OLiCE • P & R PROJECT E I I i by Halvorson • Rczorre LOCATION 410 . I S • 134 PI FILE NO. DATE TRANSMITTED GI" CI - 8 to TRESPONSE'`REOU STED'BY "` w'.'T7o 'tc'c'4 STAFF COORDINATOR M . BrGIGIskaW RESPONSE RECEIVED (o--/�-g(p 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 SITE IS AS DESCRIBED HEREIN.k1PACT UPON POLICE SERVICES OF REZONE...MINIMAL TO NONE. 6/10/86 pll DATE COMMENTS PREPARED BY C.P.S. Form 11 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST A. BACKGROUND Con, No. CA) (0 -/73 Epic File No. EPIC-33 /-8L Fee $100.00 Receipt No. A6$4 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Ellinq Halvorson Rezone 2. Name of applicant: Elling Halvorson 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: 10628 NE 38th P1., Suite 110, Kirkland, WA 98033, 827 -4221, CONTACT: Michael Smith or Alice Crawford 4. Date checklist prepared: May 1, 1986 5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila 6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable): The proposal is for rezone only. Immediate development of the site is not anticipated. However, suitable reclassification of the site to M -1 is a necessary first step in its planning and ultimate development. 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain. No further additions or expansions to this property are anticipated. 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal. Other industrial developments on nearby property, including The Fostoria Industrial Park, may have submitted environmental information, Some of which could relate to the subject site. 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. Fostoria Industrial Park, Phase II, has or is in the proresc of receiving certain development approvals. -2- JUN 5 1986 CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DEPT. 4 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal. - - Rezone to M -1 - - Specific Site Development Plan Approval - - Building Permit - - Water, Sewer, Storm, Other underground utilities review and approval - - Demolition permit for existing structure on site. 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 sub iect-_p • •• . - . .erlattifiratjDn of the site's Toning from S.F.Res.to M -1 Light In.ustry Compatible with the zoning of adjacent. property to the west which is owned by the applicant. The subject site is approximately 24,880 square feet(.57 ± acres) in size, with a width of 91± feet and a depth of approximately 272 feet. The City's Comprehensive Plan designation for the site and surrounding area is Light Industrial. 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 subject site is located at 4621 S. 134th St. within an area that is in transition from vacant land and single family land use to industrial uses. The site is directly adjacent to an existing industrial use to the west. The area surrounding the site is strategically located in a growing. industry – commerce area with excellent access via the West Marginal Way interchange with the —SRS Freeway. The site lies within several hundred teet of the SR599 Freeway right oway, providing access and an environment conducive to a light industrial useage of the property. SR599 and interurban Ave. transportation corridor.has interties,(Contc 13. Does the proposal lie within an area designated on the City's Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map as environmentally sensitive? The proposal is not within a designated environmentally sensitive area. The site and surrounding area is designed for Light Industrial Land Use. the physical character of the site appears to be compatible with sucfi -'use. TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLI.. B. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS 1. Earth Evaluation for Agency Use Only a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly; steep slopes, mountainous, other The site is relatively level, rising gently east to west at a slope of approximately 5 %. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? Approximately 5% 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. The soils of the subject site are within the Alderwood series which are primarily gravelly, sandy loams and are moderately well- drained with weakly consolidated to strongly consolidated substratum at a depth of 24 -40 inches. The soils of the subject site have been disturbed in the past by logging and residential activity. This soil type is quite common in the region and is(cont'd) d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. There are no surface indications or history of unstable soils on the site. Some piling tor tounda insThave been utilize�a with other industrial developments in the vicinity. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quanti- ties of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. The proposal is for rezone only. It is assumed that when the site is actually developed, certain excavation and grading normal to industrial building development owilt•- occuna:rc_`. No abnormal quantities are anticipated at this time. g . Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. Erosion can occur almost anywhere dPvPlopnint occurs_ The subject site does not present any abnormal situation regarding erosion. It is anticipated that when the site develops, '.Mitigation measures consistent with established City ordinances will be utilized for temporary erncion control during construction. Such measures may include sedimentation control ponds, (continued...) • About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Because this proposal is for rezone only, specific site development plans are not known at this time. Therefore, it is ditTicult to estimate site coverage of impervious surfaces. However, such coverage will be typical of light industrial developments and within City zoning code standards for maximum site coverage. Landscaping will be installed per City Code as part of future site development. • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: As stated previously, it is anticipated that the storm drainage system as designed to City Ordinance requirements . will control on -site and off -site drainage and thereby help control erosion. Temporary measures during construction will also be utilized as necessary. The landscaping introduced to the site with the completed future development should also reduce and control erosion. 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. No specific development is anticipated at this time. However, it can be assumed that emissions normal to light industrial development and use will occur with future development of the site. These are normally associated • • •� • ions, and the traffic associated with the permanent use. No abnormal emissions are anticipated. b. Are there any off -site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. None. The site is surrounded by other industrial uses and the freeway for which the proposed zoning is compatible. e emi s Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: Because of the legislative non - project nature of the proposal this is difficult. _However, emissions will be controlled by established City and regional Air control Ordinances. During construction dust can be controlled by proper watering, and equipment emissions through utilization of properly maintained equipment. 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 surface water body is apparent on or near the site. • • 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. 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. 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quan- tities, if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note location on the site plan. No. Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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, except normal storm drainage discharge from the developed site. • 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. 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. No waste materials will be discharged into the ground. • 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 decribe. Water•funoff including storm. water): (1 The exact details of the developed storm drainage system are not knu 1 -o hat runoff will occur Lyplua Lo d 1 ryhL irrduSLridi land use. Such- runoff is generated by impervious Sur'fctes Su(.' dSbuildinys and paved areas and is collected iELU a SLUM drainaye - . • -• . site in a controlled manner- Lu Ltie exisLiny cLuLLiny street Sturm drainage system, eventually Sturm drainage . - - . • •- - . urruunding uses and area flows ,ri-a- the established public storm drarnaye system into the Green River. This i s part of Lhe rlor itm l storm dra i riaye plan fur the area.. (2) No abnormal waste materials are anticipated to enter the ground or surface waters. Waste materials will be generated typical of light industrial usage of the site. This is normally associated with waste materials from associated parking and storage uses. • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No abnormal waste materials are anticipated to enter the ground or surface waters. Waste materials will be generated typical of light Industrial uses. This is normally associated with waste materials from assuciated parkiny and storage uses. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, and runoff water impacts, if any: Surface, ground, and water runoff impacts are not anticipated to be significant with tuture light industrial usage of the site. However, such impacff can Te controlled by suitable oil /water separation devices in the storm drainage system,— pervious landscape areas that catch an e p 1 er was es, an o er acceptable measures consistent with City ordinances. 4. Plants a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: x deciduous'free: Balder, maple, aspen, other evergreen tree: cedar, pine, other X shrubs X 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 wi -11 be removed or altered? The site primarily consists of various grasses and shrubs, being cleared of most trees many years ago for residential purposes. No site clearing will be performed at the time of this rezone proposal. However, it can be assumed that in the future after site planning review and buildinj permit approval, most or all of the existing site vegetation will be cleared. No trees exist of a significant nature to preserve as part of the site c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on development. or near the site. No threatened or endangered species of plants . are known to exist on or near the site. • • 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: Specific site landscaping for future development is not known at this time of site rezone. However, .landscaping typical to light industrial park type development and consistent with City ordinances will be installed at the time of development. 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, other: mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other: small rodents fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other: None. b. List any..threatened or .endangered species known to be on or near the site. No threatened or endangered species are apparent on or near the site. c. Is the site part of a migration route? • If so, explain. No. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: The ultimate establishment of landscaping introduced to the site as part of the future light industrial deve o mp ent may provide habitat for some small birds and mammals. • • 6. Energy and. Natural Resources Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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. Most likely electric or natural gas energy will be utilized for the future site. 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: The rezone itself will not affect energy utilization. Conservation features most likely to be part of the future site development include building construction to present energy code standards. Other more indirect methods include the inherent benefits of the site location in d the major transportation cies for both employees 7: Envi` d6AtilF ltfilyture business operation. 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. N/A 2) Proposed measures to reduce or control environ- mental health hazards, if any: N/A 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)? Jhe ambient noise level of the site is relatively high, given the close proximity of the site to the freeway corridor 'and surrounding industrial use... Although such noise levels are less acceptable to residential usage, they are compatible with the proposed M -1 light industrial zoned future uses. 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. Although rezone of the site does not grant approval for immediate site development, potential future site development will create some noise within the noise levels of city and regional regulations. These are most commonly associated with construction equipment and activity during the site development, and increased automobile and truck traffic once the development is completed and occupied. (continued...) 3) Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: Noises from site construction can be controlled by establishment of acceptable times for such construction , as well as through utilization of properly- maintained and muffled equipment. Although it is not anticipated that operation of a lift industrial use on the site will exceed the ambient noise level in the area, noise can be controlled by utilization of baffles, mufflers, insulation or other acceptable sound attenuation(continued...) 8. Land and Shoreline Use a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The site is presently used as a rental single family dwelling with surrounding undeveloped open space. the immediately adjacent property to the north is an existing industrial use. The general area further north and west to South 133rd Street and the freeway interchange is also presently developed or being developed as a substantial light industrial area. The area accross South 134th Street from the site and adjacent to the the existing(continued..) . b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site.One small single family structure, approximately 50 -60 years old exists on the site and is presently used as a rental unit. • Evaluation for Agency Use Only d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? The previously described structure will most likely be demolished at the time of site development. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Single Family Residence f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Light Industrial g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? Not known at this time. j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? Approximately 2 people. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: Suitable notice to the tenants will be given at the time of actual site development. 1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is com- patible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if .any: The subject site is adjacent to an existing industrial use and is sutticiently distant trom nearby existing single family uses, so that impacts wilT not be significant. Although there are other light industrial uses turther east of the site along South ree , i can 'e assume an•scape •u ering, setbacks, height limits, and other City codes wilT be utilized to suitably buffer single family uses on the east and south of the site. Such elements are normally utilized per City ordinances to reduce such impacts in the short term, while in the long term, it can be assumed that these uses will eventually transition in a similar manner to light industrial uses consistent with the comprehensive land use plan for the area. 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? Eventual site development will increase glare primarily in the daytime hours with the addition of more retlective surtaces of the building and parking areas. Some additional light in the night will occur from the building parking areas... b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard or interfere with views? No. c. What existing off -site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None.Jle proposal is compatible with other light industrial sources of light and glare in the vicinity. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: Although it is not specifically known and impacts are not anticipated at this time to be significantjlight and glare can generally be reduced by.such measures as building orientation design, exterior materials, lighting, parking and access orientation and landscaping. 12. Recreation a. What designed and informal recreational oppor- tunities are in the immediate vicinity? A variety of open space and recreational opportunities are located in the general vicinity of the site. These are primarily located along the Green River corridor or westward and south- ward in the.more residential areas of the City. 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 rprovided by the project or applicant, if an•No significant impacts on Y ecrea ion are anticipated by the proposal. the surrounding city and regional Na,k3 and recreation system appears sufflcle t-to handle the minor effects the in -upfu al miyht iiaVE- s - - 1. • . •'-• ay already be involved as cit'rrens Of the area. 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. 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. The subject site "has approximately 91 feet of frontage along south 134th Street. South 134th Street extends generally ft. right -of -way provides access from the rchange. SR 599 also • ^ - 133rd also extends to the d mayor arterial facility (continued...). east side of SR 599 to Interurban Ave., • Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop ?, along South 133rd and Interurban Avenue. c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? It is not specifically known<how many parking spaces will be provided as part of the completed project. However, the size of the site combined with the requirements for setbacks and landscaping indicate a building size range of approximately 10,000 to 15,000 square feet. The parking requirement for such light industrial use is 1 stall per 1,000 square feet of gross floor area. Therefore, the parking provided on the site will probably range from 10 -15 stalls depending upon the final building size. The site development will not displace existing parking stalls other than that utilized presently for the existing single family rental use. • 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 new roads or streets will be necessary for future development of the site - Improvements to South 134th adjacent (.0 the properly will be made if necessary and as required by City code. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, rail, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. °• f. Now many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If - known, indicate when, peak volumes would occur. Ther-ITf- "Trip Generation Manual ", 3rd Edition, provides some guidelines for estimates of traffic generation based on general land use categories. The common measures are trips per some indentifiable unit (i.e; site area, building area,.employee, rooms, etc.) Although a specific development has not been determined, the Manual provides for trip generation factors for light industrial uses on a per acre basis. Code 110 provides a 24 -hour (continued...) g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transpor- tation impacts if any: The above mentioned volumes are not considered significant. T'he site is well - located and connected with the regional transportation-network and a variety of major access alternatives in several directions. (1.e; South 133rd and East Marginal Way to. the West, - • - rth). The streets within Ile area can handle l.iie minor anticipated traffic volumes. Improvements to 15. Publtike syrtIr.i tag e s s driveways and street frontage will help to mitigate any (continued) 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. Yes. Primarily fire and police protection would be necessary once the site is developed to a light industrial use. - 1 1 . b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. The proposed zoning and .ultimate develop- ment will be compatible with other similar developments in the area with similar public service needs. the impacts are not considered significant, particularly when new development will conform to existing building and fire codes. 16. Utilities a. Circle-- u_t-i-l-ities currently available at the___s_i_te_; ire service, elep e — : i ary s -ewe , septic 'system, oThe X11 utilities suitable for urban industrial development are available to or in close proximity—to. the subject site. Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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. Eventual site development will require the following: Water, sewer, and storm drainage utilities from the City of.Tukwila. Power: Puget Sound Power & Light Co. Telephone: Pacific N.W. Bell Refuse Disposal, Nick Raffo Garbage Co. C. Signature The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that t = e.d agency is relying on them to make ij d Signature: Date Sub itted: 4-/y-le‘v Mic ael L. Smit , Planning Consultant Pacific Land Research -- 451 -3337 .TO'BE COMPLETED BY APPLIC• . 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. Evaluation for Agency Use Only 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 rezone itself will not increase these elements but eventual development may nave minor effects as discussed in Section B.1, B.2, B.3, and B.B of the environmental LnecKTlst. - -" Proposed measures.tQ avoid.or.reduce such increases are: 2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine' life? The proposal will not significantly affect plants, animals, fish or marine life. Please see Sections B.4 and B.5. Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, ani- mals, fish, or marine life are: • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only 3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources? The relative size and scope of the eventual site development will not have a significant impact on energy or natural resources. • Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resourses are: 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? The proposal is not located on an environmentally - sensitive area. Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are: 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 is compatible with existing land • use, zoning, and the comprehensive plan tor the surrounding area. Please refer to answers in Section B.8. • • Evaluation for Agency Use Only Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts area: Please see answers in SEction B.A. How does the proposal conform to the Tukwila Shoreline Master Plan? N/A 6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public services and utilities? Please refer to Sections B.14 , B.15 and B.16. Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are: 7.. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. The proposal will not conflict with local, state or federal laws or requirements for the protection of the environment. s 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? The proposal does not conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. it is compatible with the plan for light industrial designation of the site and surrounding area and the policies established in the Commerce /Industry Section of the Plan. The pattern of land.use change to light industrial uses has extended and surrounded the site. 'The zoning of the site provides compatibility with the immediately adjacent industrial development to the north. The screening and buffering requirement of the zoning code provide for the suitable transition(continued) Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: T.0 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 contekt 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? The objectives of the propsal are to attain compatible zoning with adjacent property immediately to the north of the subject site and owned in the past by the applicant. The genera1t rdais experiencing steady growth in light industrial development. The site and general area is designated on the. Comprehensive Plan as Light Industrial. The site was inadvertently excluded from the M -1 zoning pattern for the area, as the last parcel within the City of Tukwila jurisdiction; (City limits are located along the south and west boundary of the site). M -1 zoning of the site is the most logical when considering a potential zoning and site planning relationship with the adjacent industrial development. 2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? Reclassification appears to be the on Ty logical alternative that is compatible with the comprehensive plan and the adjacent surrounding industrial development. 3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action: The preferred course of action is to rezone the property to M -1 compatible with adjacent established City of Tukwila Zoning. 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? Please refer to Sections A.13, B.8 and D.8, as well as other material provided with the rezone application. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are: -23- ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST /HALVORSON REZONE ADDENDUM (CONTINUED FROM-FORM) Background #12., (continued) ...just east of the site. The subject site is generally located within the industrial corridor along Interurban Avenue, the Freeway, and the nearby freeway interchange. Further industrial growth of the immediate area near the site is depicted by the construction of an additional phase to the industrial park to the west, and is recognized as such on the comprehensive Plan. Environmental Elements, (Earth) #1.(c) Continued...used for urban developments. #1.(f) Continued... ...dispersion ditches, filter fences, hay bales, hydroseeding, and other acceptable measures. After the site is developed, the storm drainage system will help control erosion, together with the installation of groundcovers and vegetation to certain portions of the site. b. Noise (2) Continued... ...Such noises will generally occur only during normal business hours. (3) ...devices, if necessary. The addition of landscape areas can help to diffuse and reduce sound generated on the site. Control of operation hours can also be utilized if necessary. 8. Land and Shoreline Use. (a) Continued.. ...SR 599 freeway corridor is mostly vacant, but zoned for light industrial use, although a large older wood frame structure appears to be utilized for storage. The area generally extending eastward and southward of the site is scattered residential with some light industrial interspersed. The general land uses depict this area as generally in transition from older single family residential to a freeway- oriented light industrial area. The subject proposal appears to be consistent with this trend and the comprehensive plan /zoning pattern of the area. 14. Transportation ...(a) Continued... and extends westward to East Marginal Way. This transportation framework provides easy access to the regional transportation network that is critical to a viable light industrial site. (f) Continued... ...rate of 52.4 vehicles per acre. Therefore, the .57 acre site will generate approximately 30 vehicle trips per day. This is further broken down for the 7:00 to 9:00 am peak period and the 4:00 to 6:00 pm period as follows: am peak hr. am pk hr. pm peak hr pm peak hr in out in out rate vol rate vol rate vol rate vol 18.2 11 3.3 2 6.9 4 13.6 8 14. Transportation, (g) Continued. ...potential impacts of site ingress- egress. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR NONPROJECT ACTIONS (8) Continued. ...of the site to single family uses beyond to south and east. Further transition of the area to light industry is anticipated in the future by the City's Comprehensive Plan. Please refer to Sections A.13 and B.8 for further discussion.