HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-FD-107 - MCCANN / PROJECT 426 - 66,555 SF WAREHOUSEMcCANN PROJECT 42F
EPIC -FD -107
CITY OF/TUKWILA
McCann Project #426
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SIMINN/F
DECLARATION OF /NON-SIGNIFICANCE
Description of proposal
Multi - Tenant Spec. Warehouse (66,555 Square feet)
Proponent Mesabi Western
Location of Proposal Lots 6 & 9, Upland's Tukwila Industrial Park
Lead Agency City of Tukwila/ Building Division
File No EPIC -FD -107
This proposal has been determined to 01111/not have) a significant adverse im-
pact upon the environment. An EIS (111 /is not) required under RCW 43.21C.030(2)
(c). This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a completed
environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency.
Responsible Official Fred N. Satterstrom
Position /Title
Date
COMMENTS:
Associate Planner
6 June 1979 Signature
CITY OF TUKWILA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT ADDRESS:
DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: 5/30/7Y
He C/4JV)V x-4126
77022
1/,O /4 pc/ 0,,e
1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW:
Building:
❑ Engineering:
❑ Fire:
❑ Planning:
❑.Police:
(date)
(revi ewer)
30/ /p7 by:
by:
by:
2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS:
f,��i— . .0 �r�c�✓c�— ,mot /'�
by:
by:
• CITY OF TUKWILA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM
PROJECT NAME: ' /lc £ /'A) 'r'/O 4
PROJECT ADDRESS: C%la pd -3)/e� t)e.
DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: • 5r/0/7�
7 ?02 z.
1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date) (reviewer)
❑ Biding: by:
I Engineering: �' by: G ¢ /Ir
❑ Fire: by:
❑ Planning: by:
❑.Police: by:
2. ANY PERTI
NT COMMENTS:
CITY OF TUKWILA •
ENVIRONMEiITAL OUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM
PROJECT NAME: th 4467
17022-
PROJECT ADDRESS: Of /aivd �6()e
DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: 5/3o /79'
-
1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date) (reviewer)
O Building: by:
❑ Engineering: by: /
b f '
❑ Planning: by:
❑.Police: by:
2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS:
• CITY OF TUKWILA •
ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM
PROJECT NAME: tte. CAN kJ -PR OT'ECT 41)2(0
PROJECT ADDRESS: Up Ia,j d
DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: S/3 off ?
1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date)
❑ Building: by:
❑ \Engineering: by:
❑ Fire: by:
❑ Planning: by:
EEKPol ice: s — l— y by:
2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS:
(reviewer)
•
QUESTION 13
A survey of similar multi — tenant warehouse complexes in the immediate vicinity discloses:
1. Greatly increased traffic, pedestrian and vehicle.
2. Inadequate parking for employees, visitors and business contacts.
3. Additional traffic flowing into Andover park West at an uncontrolled intersection.
QUESTION 14
1. Additional traffic related responsibilities.
2. Extension of existing patrol boundaries.
3. Increased calls for police services based upon increased population.
EXPLANATION B — Existing high standard of security services, maintained by
tenants, resulted in 703 false alarms during the year 1978. Each false alarm
represent i manhour lost to the patrol function, total lost manhours = 703.
CITY OF TUKWILA
•
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
This questionnaire must be completed and submitted with the application for
permit. This questionnaire must be completed by all persons applying for a
permit from the City of Tukwila, unless it is determined by the Responsible
Official that the permit is exempt or unless the applicant and Responsible
Official previously agree an Environmental Impact Statement needs to be completed. A fee of $50.00 must accompany the filling of the Environments Kin
to cover costs of the threshold determination. 0.C.. F.
CITY OF TUKWILA
I. BACKGROUND
1. Name of Proponent:
Mesabi Western
7919'22_
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 1411 Fourth Avenue Building,
Seattle, Washington 98101 — phone- 682 -7760
3. Date Checklist. Submitted:
May 29, 1979
4. Agency Requiring Checklist:
Building and Planning
5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Upland's Tukwila Industrial Park - Project 426.
6. Nature and Brief Description of the Proposal (including but not limited
to its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give
an. accurate understanding of its scope and nature):
Project 426 is a 66,555 S.F. multi -tenant spec. warehouse on a 145,625 S.F.
site, all located in the western portion of the Upland's Tukwila Industrial Park.
The access is from Uplands Drive at the cul de sac. A secondary access is also
provided by an existing private cul de sac proposed to he named Midlands Drive.
7. Location of Proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal, as
well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental im-
pacts, including any other information needed to give an accurate under-
standing of the environmental setting of the proposal):
The site is presently undeveloped and supports no vegetation due to the
placement of dirt fill trom adjavent construction developments by the same
owner.
8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal: December, 1979
9. List of all Permits, Licenses or Government Approvals Required for the
Proposal (federal, state and local):
(a) Rezone, conditional use, shoreline permit, etc. YES NO x
. (b) King County Hydraulics Permit YES NO x
(c) Building permit YES x NO,
• •
(d) Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Permit YES NO
(e) Sewer hook up permit YES X NO
(f) Sign permit YES X NO
(g) Water hook up permit YES X NO
(h) Storm water system permit ' YES NO
(i) Curb cut permit t YES X NO
(j) Electrical permit (State of Washington) YES x NO
(k) Plumbing permit (King County) YES X NO
(1) Other: Development plans have been filed with King County
Hydraulics for their records and information.
X
ost
4417,A Duo you�have any plans for future addi ttons:. expansion, or futher activity
related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain:
No
11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by
your proposal? If yes, explain:
No
12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro-
posal; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed'at some future
date, describe the nature of such application form:
City of Tukwila Planning Commission - Site plan approved.
City of Tukwila Building Permit - filed.
City of Tukwila Board of Architectural Review - landscape plan to be filed.
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required)
all
YES MAYBE NO
1-. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic
substructures? x
(b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcover- X
ing of the soil?
(c) Change in topography or ground surface relief fea-
tures? X
(d) The destruction, covering or modification of any
unique geologic or physical features ?. x
-2-
• •
Explanation on Item IT.
lb. Site grading will involve some repositioning of soil on
the site and any unsuitable excavated material will be
hauled away. Any necessary structural fill will be
imported onto the site.
Construction of the building and parking lot will
compact and overcover sfch areas of soil with an
impervious surface.
3h. Construction will result in increased impermeable
surfaces and corresponding insignificant reduction in
ground water.. recharge. Drainage patterns within the
site would not be significantly altered.
•
(e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils,
either on or off the site?
(f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or
changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which
may modify the channel of a river or stream or the
bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake?
Explanation:
2. Air. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air
quality?
(b) The creation of objectionable odors?
(c) Alteration of air movement, moisture
or temperature, or any change in climate, either
locally or regionally?
Explanation:
3. Water. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Changes in currents, or the course or direction
of water movements, in either marine or fresh
waters?
(b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns,
or the rate and amount of surface water runoff?
(c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters?
(d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water
body?
(e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration
of surface water quality, including but not limited
to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
(f)
(9)
Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of
ground waters?
Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
-3-
YES MAYBE NO
x
x
x
x
x
•
(h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either
through direct injection, or through the seepage
of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne
virus or bacteria, or other substances into the
ground waters?
(i) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise avail-
able for public water supplies?
Explanation:
4. Flora. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers
of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs,
grass, crops, microflora and aquatic plants)?
(b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or
endangered species of flora?
(c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area,
or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of
existing species?
(d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop?
Explanation:
5. Fauna. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers
of any species of fauna (birds, land animals
including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms, insects or microfauna)?
(b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or
endangered species of fauna?
(c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an
area, or result in a barrier to the migration
or movement of fauna?
(d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat?
Explanation:
YES MAYBE NO
YES MAYBE NO
6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise
levels? x
Explanation: The project would generate a teniporary.increase
in noise during construction. Following construction, there
would be an insignificant increase in noise due to additional
vehicular traffic.
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new
light or glare?
Explanation: Interior and exterior sources of lighting would
be added to the site. The lighting has been designed to
avoid spilling onto adjacent streets or properties.
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in the altera-
tion of the present or planned land use
of an area?
Explanation:
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources?
(b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural
resource?
Explanation:
10. Risk of Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an
explosion or the release of hazardous
substances (including, but not limited
to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radi-
ation) in the event of an accident or
upset conditions?
Explanation:
x
x
x
• •
YES MAYBE NO
11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location,
distribution, density, or growth rate
of the human population of an area? x
Explanation: Business work hours activity will be given
an insignificant increase due to this warehouse building in an
area that currently supports a large similar distribution
warehouse use.
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing,
or create a demand for additional housing? x
Explanation:
13. Transportation /Circulation. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Generation of additional vehicular movement?
(b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or .
demand for new parking? T
(c) Impact upon existing transportation systems?
(d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation
or movement of people and /or goods?
(e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic?
(f) Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
Explanation: a) There woule be an insignificant increase
in traffic on Uplands Drive and /Andover_ Park West.
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon,
or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services in any of the
following areas:
(a) Fire protection? x _
(b) Police protection? x _
(c) Schools? x
(d) Parks or other recreational facilities? x
(e) Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads? x
•
• •
(f) Other governmental services?
YES MAYBE NO
Explanation: a) The building will he protected by "an automatic
fire prdtection sprinkler system. ;;rl;- -
b) Past experience has indicated"; some tenants.install.and naintain their
own security services to a high standard and demand for Public Police
Services will bot be significant. -
15. Energy. Will the proposal result in:
(a). Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy?
(b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or
require the development of new sources of
energy?
Explanation:
16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for
new systems, or alterations to the
following utilities:
(a) Power or natural gas?
(b) Communications systems?
(c) Water?
(d) Sewer or septic tanks?
(e) Storm water drainage?
(f) Solid waste and disposal?
Explanation:
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the crea-
tion of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)?
Explanation:
nrn Ja "
-7-
x
• •
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruc-
tion of any scenic vista or view open to
the public, or will the proposal result
r_•. r Cbri bna •in_the crreation_,o,f,an aesthetically of-
fensive site open to public view?
Explanation:
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact
upon the quality or quantity of exist-
ing recreational opportunities?
Explanation:
20. Archeological /Histroical. Will the proposal result in
an alteration of a signifi-
cant archeological or his-
torical site, structure,
object or building?
Explanation:
CERTIFICATION BY APPLICANT:
YES MAYBE NO
I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above
information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency
may withdraw any declaration of non - significance that it might issue in
reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation
or willful lack of full disclosure on my part.
1
Agent for proponent May 29, 1979
Signature and Title
McCann. Construction Company Inc.
1950 Andover Park .East
Seattle, Washington 98188
Phone,:" 575' -4330 -8-
Date
x
x
xr_
„” ' •
• . .
• !.- ••••• ,t
• -Id 'zv la
• • ;• • ■ _1
-711-c:1-4
1• 7i''d
• 'rik1-or
-u'41 91I
,2•21, • -Istritc)-ttr
•••.:1,0 41-4.-,1
FT. ---w)Firer-ii-o-a •
v\I n
•
4.
•
171
*17- ••
e •
•
a
-11
11"1111(1 Or1V1011,4
ccr, 1
11 VI
11\ •-• -•\ .4. a, .13 n. •
\
\ •
\ \
• JO.. ,
\ I n,
r-1
•••7• .4r7
own, ••,•
,I..)
}r..”-.-1 • -4L 74
•
r---- *--
111:q I rItril-T- •-rt s'•
"•• `,
■11.14111EL111.1..(1.?-j-
J-::L
i',///' ',/,//:. •_1-=
1
1
1 Cl
1,,,1",n.;.•
•
j
'1
,•'/ • • //,
—
rard...
,I• 7-
I=
_,1•111111111'-t-
I.-4 .• 7)
. 1 • _111111111 rilli
t_ .1._ ,...,;''-r,-,:::::"•:::It _1:_-_, 1111._1. I 1,12",\J-- 11-e," Ix,
• ,-?.''
t t ,- .....-7-:::-: — -- 1".•111 Ll11,1,11. III_L! r; II_
•AiHO ON., -1Hrl i I. 1 t ! i
.--- '
••-•:1 • 1,- ••
• 1 )
••• •
•
• !
•
V IIOIHX3
)
-
• ®
. . ,
•
11.1131/1a1"-•••■ 31....1,....la
7 I . ;•••.r '...:,..7.. -
..•.. . . ''''. l' • ' '''' ^
1
I. 1.0.1.4.6 •
r '
lorma••••• V
.L./ _..T10r-t---.-.
, •
-t/NOY, .J .11).
0
(5)
j)
C -1
• !1,..1 /Tr
■• r...11•••
- •
.o • •
I hi -I •
4t
• 1
T 11I-41f
= 1.04-
• _
I': 1.4_,...:,.....
_
Cf(;) 0-) (v) . . (.•••••) (;l
...... ..
• - • '
-1;'......7■:1'!.-i'll_T_.714•i'1-1-.: ••. (' . ; .- ...,-.. i• ----1- -- : • 2
-1
• III; Lts-
Zilf,i •
- f