HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-35-89 - ASSOCIATE GROCERS - 51,000 SF ADDITIONASSOCIATE GROCERS INC
CNA ARCHITECTURE GROUP
ADDITION TO EXISTING
PARISHABLE FOOD
WAREHOUSE
3301 S. NORFOLK ST.
EPIC -35 -89
WAC 197 -11 -970
DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE
Description of Proposal 51,000 SQ_ FT_ AIITLTTION TO AN_ FXTSI1sIG 231, 18 cQ ET
PARISHABLE FOOD WAREHOUSE. BASICALLY MOVING THE NORTH WA>> fin, AND RFIOrATTNC, All
EXISTING TRUCK DOORS.
Proponent ASSOCIATE GROCERS_INC.
Location of Proposal, including street address, if any 3301 SOUTH NORFOIK, WHTCH RORDERS
THE CITY OF TUKWILA AND THE CITY OF SEATTLE PROPERIIES LINES. NWI. SECTION 3, TWN 23N
RG 4E
Lead Agency: City of Tukwila File No. EPIC- 35 -89
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
This DNS is issued under 197 -11- 340(2). Comments must be submitted by
. The lead agency will not act on this
proposal for 15 days from the date below.
Responsible Official Rick Beeler
Position /Title
Address
Dat
Planning Director
Phone 433 -1846
6200 Southcenter Boulevard, Tu. f 981:,:
Signature A% o��
You may appeal is determination to the Ci y 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
ACTIVIT OG
DATE INIT. COMMENTS
S7A)
i7
TO
tA., _
,67141et,
.62-co 5 0.44 eekAti. igalle4214
7-14/k g.;zi4 1-‘)A- /steoil
1 Ji-Ifi
SUBJECT A1D trZoott/ el're77_,-•■•S
FROM
JEICEY W. WINTER, P.E.
- _ Airport Engineer
I 'KING COUNTY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT
* /OLD IiIERC
24 1990
P. O. BOX 80245
' SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98108
206 / 044v7380
2476.
DATE
We- A/A41C._ 9
l/P1444..td' 4.10414)/Loo H■,0 - 4475 •;" &Y`cre44,-
414. Loalteeg47144.e., • rn■-e, Jetjiti)V14 "4/141 4-1447C 1-tA3
-;4,-foed- 41.44.-kuo .$1,t A-t4;?-04— 47,4
4t/11,eue..40,
SIGNED
FORM 11203 FIAPIDFORMS, INC., BELLMAWR, N.J. 08031
SPEED-MEMO
4,1
� 101
TrantijAir'tation Solutions Inc.
7981168th Avenue Northeast
Redmond, WA 98052
(206) 883 -4134
Telecopy Number 883-7063
January 23, 1990
Mr. Arlan E. Collins
CNA Architecture Group
Suite 600
3050 152nd Avenue NE
Redmond, WA 98052
Subject: Associated Grocers warehouse expansion
Dear Mr. Collins:
Thank you for asking Transportation Solutions, Inc. (TSI) to
review the traffic issues involvedrUith the Associated Grocers
(AG) warehouse expansion in Tukwila Washington. This letter
summarizes our review of the proposed project, identifies any
traffic related impacts precipitated by the construction and use
of the project and, where appropriate, outlines policies and /or
physical improvements to minimize or eliminate these impacts.
PROJECT LOCATION "` ;,^1
The site of the Associated Grocers warehouse is located in
northern Tukwila; the Tukwila /Seattle city limits line runs
r .�
through the middle of the property:i More specifically, the
project site is located on the northeast quadrant of the
intersection of East Marginal Way and the South Boeing Access
Road.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Presently, the perishable foods >< 3arehouse, which is located in
the southern half of the AG pro arty, has a total floor area of
222,800 square feet (sf). The proposed project will expand the
loading dock facilities of this :warehouse by 51,713 sf. This
improvement is being made to increase the efficiency of the
loading /unloading operation at thisjl.ocation by creating product
queuing space. This space will ;be ;used to queue products being
i
loaded onto or unloaded from wat_ing trucks, which then can be
moved into the warehouse at an
cuff -peak time. The project is
scheduled to be built in four phases and to be completed in the
fall of 1992. It is not anticipated that this expansion will
result in additional truck trips`!tland from the AG site.
ISSUES
Based on discussions with City , „ar lakwila staff, it is our
understanding that they have the major concerns with this
project: 1) traffic and '.`.a
pedestrian safety; 2) capacity and level
of service at the intersection of E'i Marginal Way /S. Boeing
Access Road; 3) queuing of trucke a tj1
�ong E. Marginal Way from the
AG site. It is also our understanding that the parking issue . has
been resolved, and that the paring provided meets the code
requirement of 1 parking space lier,1000 sf of floor area.
Traffic and Pedestrian Safety
Accident records for the adjaceln vyk street system were collected
from City of Tukwila files. Base pin this data, there does not
appear to be a safety problem in`th` area. During the time
E
period from January 1986 to January_. 1990, there was a total of
two accidents at the access to tpe AG site, only one of which
involved a truck from the projec ` site.
At the intersection of E. Margina
the same time period, there was
Three of these accidents involveFd
, -„
how many of these three were from
ay /S. Boeing Access Road over
tal of 36 traffic accidents.
trucks, although information on
the AG site is not available.
There were no recorded accident 1olving pedestrians, and due
to the low volumes of? p
pedestrian,ytr , ffic in the area, no problem
is foreseen.
Capacity and Level of Service 5
The City of Tukwila has authori ed TSI to obtain traffic volume r
information for the intersection3Oot9E. Marginal Way /S. Boeing 1
Access Road from Trafficount. Iir. :Bert Hughes, who runs tT
Trafficount, indicated that thidik nAormation will not be
available until Friday, January a6, 1990.
At the time TSI receives the vo u data, we will be agreeable to S
preparing a level of service and �
]ly s for this intersection if.
the City still requires one. Hche4,4r, since this project is not it"'
anticipated to cause an increaserin the number of truck trips 1
generated by the AG site, a level of service analysis does not
appear warranted. !J'
Truck Queuing (j
Based on discussions with AG Satand Security staff, as well
as field observations at the sit, :.ruck queuing does not appear
to be a problem. There is an aJ e` road for trucks entering the
project site which runs paralle`g`to, but separate from, E.
Marginal Way. AG staff estimated that there is queueing space
for up to 20 tractor /trailer rifsi4n this road. The only queuing
that occurs at the present timeis� approximately six trucks,
which usually exists immediatels4p for to opening time of the
warehouse. There is always a pdssibility that a temporary surge
in truck traffic will exceed thedaailable queuing space for the
AG site. However, since the expanded dock facilities will allow
for more efficient loading and dnliiading, a faster turnover in
the number of trucks serviced wirr]1 reduce waiting time and thus
reduce the number of trucks queried ; n the storage area.
TSI
Transportation Solutions Inc
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the above discussions, t`oes not appear that any
physical improvements are requi ed to mitigate impacts
precipitated by the proposed project. TSI recommends that the a
trip generation of the AG site be t4 corded after the completion r
of each phase of the expansion. If the improvement does result b
in additional truck trips in an :; ut of the project site, it is pfAlivirti recommended that these trips be scheduled during non -peak traffic yibs 1.
hours to reduce their impact on �tth "' surrounding street system. C� �h
We trust that this letter addre a the concerns raised by the X1
City of Tukwila. If you or Cit: !staff have any questions or
require additional clarificationUiease contact me or Robert
�4 �;u
Crittenden of our office at you4c8nvenience.
Sincerely,
Transportation Solutions, Inc.
74f6ci 6z.cA
David D. Markley
Principal
6
TS!
Transportation Solutions Inc.
ENVIRON " NTAL REVIEW
ROMMIG FORM
CITY OF TUKWILA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
EPIC:
TO: X Building IX Planning Pub Wks Fire ❑ Police Parks /Rec
PROJECT Atcvine Geee
ADDRESS ,3,30/ 5
DATE TRANSMITTED a ,.?/(2
STAFF COORDINATOR /Veal) l(%L
d
RESPONSE REQUESTED BY Vil,f?
DATE 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 Department through the above staff
coordinator. Comments regarding the project you wish carried to the Planning Commission,
Board of Adjustment and City Council should be submitted in the comment section below.
ITEM
groott
COMMENT
Date: Comments prepared by: ,
09/14/89
ENVIRONM
ROUT
TAL REVIEW
G FORM
CITY OF TUKWILA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
EPIC:
TO J Building Ri Planning
PROJECT iliszvre ' egoe
ADDRESS 33o/ 5. Aeorode,
Pub Wks 2] Fire LI Police
Parks /Rec
7-46
DATE TRANSMITTED /Z
STAFF COORDINATOR 4,e ‘e2jL
RESPONSE REQUESTED BY Vila
DATE 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 Department through the above staff
coordinator. Comments regarding' the project you wish carried to the Planning Commission,
Board of Adjustment and City Council should be submitted in the comment section below:
ITEM
ommEci/e‘e);if
Date: /()-27- �/ Comments prepared by: ,
09/14/89
CITY OF TUKWILA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ENVIRONM JTAL REVIEW
ROUTI G FORM
EPIC:
TO: Building al Planning Pub Wks Fire LJ Police El Parks /Rec'.
PROJECT Aced /Ae Giteeie.5
7
ADDRESS :530/ 5 _ /keT //L,
DATE TRANSMITTED a
STAFF COORDINATOR vActa) IO /e
RESPONSE REQUESTED BY 1/4/69
DATE 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 Department through the above staff
coordinator. Comments regarding' the project you wish carried to the Planning Commission,
Board of Adjustment and City Council should be submitted in the comment section below.:
ITEM �/a 3 /go
P 445k (3 = G • Rica No N c /Nvia07-3
7i =f C 0,04-6 4:11 i3`7 714 !.) 2EDEV1 i) PM0vj •
ca~( 1/41c-{) t S fllQu (Rao v/4 • ptilm^g7TTM 4 n a s : A7 ?7 nog_ C rrk-I
FS /c,NS INTE1113fj 'N -L. ft 0421NA -L 54414- %ZEL-OGr4TE
Tit (1L F SGT Wimp.) PiLo Parl (N SLcc,H .4 MA- NNER, 'T 4 T
Owe- 0 ..4- ALm E. /V-40.)///, w,4Y occur S (744 11.)
(n . v ?Au PE41TV J AL L AT o t,t ry iYPiiv S ".
s YwJ I PRAu�7» t ►'� (AI cud 1v,14. FaN C 2 .-u £A77Iv , Tet'u(S at10
v N -S l7g 4( Pn-oPtL7 1 4ua1T - $ fZv /sin ✓1-G eC( S
PFlA ' clz c it e--e7v j 1/1/arfl TT 511 -&2c, Tie.
-g Y u N (r ph) Gtr . ,60 PoK1 c,(srnto LEr e))v o F -rya Crr y
Tc� � �k1�4�L ia- i; /rn/1A l � 1 17448%)(14-11
O(7 Jyl `9PrfA�
FoA. 4, w tht, iZ PFArsomOgg Rz r lgN - Ta 7z -d cetn
('2L(-Erme- - . i� -rog. A- s I " 1(NJ /JI Psi Cr Des(4j
G6 't 1Zuc 1 1 LYN frOAl N c ( _ CE E
DEC 2 8 1989
I y c.( (GATIL)1.., PUB c w'�ft
/s T fLLto vN ��
• l I'rtll�kt -1) r3 c L"(T7t.�
COMMENT
_e_4,11Ayitfi
Date: J ZCQ %D
Comments prepared by:
Ode
wA
09/14/89
Conte No.
Epic File No. 35--SPY
Fee $100.00 Receipt No. 9.38!`'
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: ... , j, 4, gxodce,es -72-74Vc:
2. Name of appl1cant:_e%/A
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: X30/ S, i!/e1e.Fj/A
- /22e T e fret' J PF s
4. Date checklist prepared: /47//09
5. Agency requesting Checklist: City of Tukwila
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity
related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will
be prepared, directly related to this proposal.
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.
•
411 2ee / f4 43
DEC 201989
1
ASSOCIATED GROCERS
Environmental Checklist
October 19, 1989
A. BACKGROUND
1. Name of proposed project, if applicable:
Associated Grocers, Inc.
Perishable Warehouse Addition
2. Name of applicant:
CNA Architecture Group for Associated Grocers
3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person:
Mr. Jeffrey E. Jeffers
CNA Architecture Group
3050 - 152nd Avenue N. E.
Suite 600
Redmond, WA 908052
(206) 882 -6060
4. Date checklist prepared:
October 19, 1989
5. Agency requesting checklist:
City of Tukwila
6. Proposed timing or schedule (including phasing, if applicable):
January 1990 to June 1992.
7: Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or
connected with this proposal? If yes, explain.
Campus masterplan - provides for expansion of dry grocery surplus building to expand to the
west.
8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared, or will be
prepared, directly related to this proposal.
Does not apply.
• •
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, if known.
FAA to be notified of construction plans.
11. Give brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the site 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.
(Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project
description.)
Provide 51,000 sq. ft. addition to an existing 231,418 sq. ft. parishable food warehouse.
Basically moving north wall approximately 60 ft. and relocating all existing truck doors.
Campus site is devided between the City of Seattle and City of Tukwila, however, the structure
under consideration lies within the Tukwila City limits.
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 our .
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 applications
related to this checklist.
Associated Grocers, 3301 So. Norfolk, Seattle, Campus site included on portion of SW 1/4, and
NW I /4, Section 3, TWP 23N, RG4E, WM and NEV4 and SE 1/4 TWP 23N, RG 4E, WM.
• •
8. ENVIRONMENTAL ELEMENTS
1. Earth
a. General description of the site (circle one): Flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes,
mountainous, other:
b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)?
1/2 of 1 percent.
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.
Soft to medium stiff clayey silt, medium dense to sense sand and sandstone.
d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity?
If so, describe.
Unknown.
e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading
proposed. Indicate source of fill.
Purpose to build dock height building.
f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally
describe.
No.
g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after
project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)?
Immediate site is imperious surface and will not change with addition.
h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if
any:
Does not apply.
2. Air
a. What type 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.
Truck emissions will remain the same as no change in quantity of truck related
activities.
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.
Duwamish River is located west of roadway "East Marginal Way" running parallel
to projects west boundary.
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.
Does not apply.
• •
4. Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general
description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
Does not apply.
5. Does the proposal lie within a 100 year floodplain? If so, note location on the
site plan.
Does not apply.
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.
b. Ground:
1. Will ground water be withdrawn, or will water be discharge to ground water?
Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities if known.
No.
2. Describe waste material that will be discharge into the ground from septic tanks
or other sources, 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.
Does not apply.
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.
Use of existing catch basins and storm drains, possible regrade only.
2. Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe.
Does not apply.
•
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground, or runoff water impacts,
if any:
None.
4. Plants:
a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: None
Deciduous tree: alder, maple, aspen, other
Evergreen tree: fir, cedar, pine, other
Shrubs
Grass
Pasture
Crop or grain
Wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bullrush, skunk cabbage, other
Water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil, other
Other types of vegetation
b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered?
None.
c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Does not apply.
d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or
enhance vegetation on the site, if any:
Landscaping in front of existing office portion to remain.
5. Animals:
a. Circle any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the site or are
known to be on or near the site: Does not apply
Birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds, other:
Does not apply.
Mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver, other:
Does not apply.
Fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish, other
None.
b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site.
Does not apply.
c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain.
Does not apply.
d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any:
Does not apply.
6. Energy and Natural Resources
a. What kinds of energy electric, natural gas, oil, wood stove, solar will be used to
meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for
heating, manufacturing, etc.
Electric refrigeration pumps, electric interior /exterior lighting.
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.
Does not apply.
2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any:
Does not apply.
b. Noise
1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for
example: traffic, equipment operation, other)?
No affect.
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: traffic, construction,
operation, other)? indicate what hours noise would come from site?
No change to existing conditions.
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?
Industrial.
b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe.
No.
c. Describe any structures on the site.
Campus consists of office facility, dry grocery and perishable food warehouses,
maintenance shops.
d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what?
Yes, truck wash facility and 1 maintenance buildnig.
e. What is the current zoning classification of the site?
M -1 light industry.
• •
f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site?
M -1 light industry.
g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline mater program designation of the site?
N/A
h. Has any part of the site been classified as an "environmentally sensitive" area? If
so, specify.
Not to our knowledge.
i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project?
No additional employees.
j. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace?
None.
k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any:
Does not apply.
1. Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and project
land uses and plans, if any:
None required.
9. Housing
a. Approximately how many units would be provided, if any? Indicate whether high,
middle, or low- income housing?
Does not apply.
b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether
high, middle, or low income housing?
Does not apply.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any:
Does not apply.
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?
36 feet height not to exceed height of existing structure.
b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed?
None
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any?
Exterior facade to match existing - no change in materials.
11. Light and Glare
a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it
mainly occur?
Does not apply.
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..
d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any:
Does not apply.
• •
12. Recreation
a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate
vicinity?
None.
b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe.
No.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation
opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any:
Does not apply.
13. Historic and Cultural Preservation
a. Are there any places or objects listed on, or proposed 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, archeological, scientific,
or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site.
Does not apply.
c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impOacts, if any:
Does not apply.
14. Transportation
a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe the proposed
access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any.
Truck access from and to East Marginal Way South. Automobile access is from
South Norfolk Street and Airport Way South.
b. Is site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance
to the nearest transit stop.
c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would
the project eliminate?
Existing plus 51 for this addition.
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.
e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity or) water, rail, or air
transportation? If so, generally describe.
Other facility (dry grocery warehouse) located on campus is served by rail.
f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project?
If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur.
No change to present levels.
g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation 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.
b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any.
None required.
16. Utilities
a. Circle utilities currently available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse
service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other.
b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the
service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate
vicinity which might be needed.
Electricity - Seattle City Light
Drainage - Seattle Sewage District
C. Signature
The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. 1 understand the
lead agency is relying on them to make its decision.
Signature:
Date submitted: .i
• •
This checklist was reviewed by , Environmental Specialist,
Department of Construction and Land Use. Any comments or changes made by the Department are
entered in the body of the checklist and contain the initials of the reviewer.
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 implemented. 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?
No change in occupancy, use is only the expansion of the perishable food warehouse to
provide for additional storage and staging area.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce such increases are:
Does not apply.
2. How would the proposal be likely to affect plants, animals, fish, or marine life?
Does not apply.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve plants, animals, fish, or marine life are:
Does not apply.
3. How would the proposal be likely to deplete energy or natural resources?
Does not apply.
Proposed measures to protect or conserve energy and natural resources are:
Does not apply.
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?
Does not apply.
Proposed measures to protect such resources or to avoid or reduce impacts are:
Does not apply.
5. How would the proposal be likely to affect land and shoreline use, including whether it
would allow or encourage land or shoreline uses incompatible with existing plans?
No.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce shoreline and land use impacts are:
Does not apply.
6. How would the proposal be likely to increase demands on transportation or public
services and utilities?
No.
Proposed measures to reduce or respond to such demand(s) are:
Does not apply.
7. Identify, if possible, whether the proposal may conflict with local, state, or federal laws
or requirements for the protection of the environment. -
N/A
8. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy
Plan? If so, what policies of the Plan?
None to our knowledge.
Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are:
N/A
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 information provided and the submitted plans, documents, supportive
information, studies, etc.
1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal?
The proposed building modifications/additions will permit Associated Grocers to meet
their present and future perishable projects distribution needs.
2. What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives?
None.
• •
3. Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action:
N/A
4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy
Plan? If so, what policies of the Plan?
No.
Proposed measure to avoid or reduce the conflict(s) are:
None
r ri li Al 61 (0
el 1n
tot`, 10 N'.r
0 0 0 Japt9'rn
N.0 ul
7 I u
111 Cif)
.1 ( I
rd
� b 1.i.- 0�.,0:r. — , -YiG IlL aS
0 m m _
1 q -1
0 6_ ---NU1 2a II
C
01 C 4 S U W
100 .. F. .7
77_ Nr IIIU. Yd� ?CI ,
T 1 I ri
CI 0 , 10 .Nr��lul �d(jl Z V
Qua n 1 y,. ( 1< ZA)e 0 dd Z G
• 0101in la T 1-10.1:11 OgJNi° n4 6
.0.Q1'„ U W J I 1 I
z I ty (3 , 4 j I V II rI il
1J.� 0 )0(u iO1� �l Z 7 I IIId0. 4,
O03((�� '.I�a2 lltrL p- io1I)a Ic
u rr s J uu] c 11 10 III C.
-c F- pQ. -NMa p 61'c.,00� u) _NF 1_ .,,01 C
_ 1 t0 U, 01 10 r(I N QI Q, U1 1D tP 1 1 . I Y . K d V 9I II I W Ill d ] IL IL
e e 1 8 F Y
�'_S1ZE'b€ z i.idiiH;I :: it `1 , 22s !, s � 12' 4 P-11--1'
$�
kiiiil a �i it$ t$l.' $ 11111121 ggg 1; slisa , ilg :3188 .1g=t s
tai2i- Ai,:LLigh3o l ox C ioi` ng "P -dg6T, Pg.T Y000000g tzm
�5�� o agmmm�mamm ma �xMSl S�����a M��Mr,�,,nM,,,,.,�n� �...�.. c �Z� �,1
oW �i .gi zF.• ��_ aJ< gvi.LLi z :�9o�5 "voo�'" OLLxia°n
S�ofoer- : >3_oyxzzz a_tv mui$5�3
xxxxxzx :: v 535 sfffffffssEfssfsf �. zizzzz� 00000000
. A
ts
dl
dt
4
dl
4
1
a
•
i --
•
•
■
•
•
•
•