Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-FD-33 - SALANT / MORA - APARTMENT COMPLEXSALANT/M 0 RA APARTMENT COMPLEX MACADAM RD & S 152 ST EPIGFD -33 TO: FROM: MEMO RANDUM CITY of TUKW1L,A OFFICE of COMMUNITY C_V_IOPmENT 29 September 1977 • Stoknes, Responsible Official • SUBJECT: ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST: SALANT /MORA APARTMENT COMPLEX (Macadam Road & South 152nd Street) The following is a brief chronology of the progress on the above men- tioned project: 1. Application for building permit was made on 16 August 1977. An environmental checklist accompanied the application and it was accepted for filing on the same date. 2. The environmental checklist was reviewed by the Fire Depart- ment (8- 24 -77, 8- 31 -77), Building Division (8- 24 -77), and Engineering Department (8- 23 -77). 3. More information was requested of the applicant by the .Plan- ning Division on 30 August 1977. 4. Applicant responded to Planning Division's request for more information on 14 September 1977. 5. Application for building permit was not considered complete until 15 September 1977 when applicant paid all necessary fees. 6. Upon further investigation, the drawings submitted for the building permit were found to be lacking an architect's stamp. Therefore, application for building permit was not considered complete until 29 September 1977 when the Building Official accepted the drawings without the stamp of an architect after a telephone survey of other jurisdiction's requirements. Based on the threshold determination criteria outlined in WAC 197 -10 -360, I offer the following analysis: FINDINGS: 1. The proposed action will create 81 living units on 1.3 acres of undeveloped land at the intersection of South 152nd Street and Macadam Road. Memorandum Page 2 Kjell Stoknes 29 September 1977 2. Basically, the land is utilized to optimum or maximum capacity; i.e., setbacks are at the minimum required by code, parking space is the minimum required by code, and although not yet a city ordinance, the proposed recreation space would not meet the requirements of the pre- liminary Recreation Space Ordinance. 3. The buildings themselves are proposed to be constructed on the exterior with T -111 siding and an asphalt shingle roof. 4. Building A is approximately 220 feet in length, Building B is 155 feet, and Building C 185 feet. Architecturally, the buildings appear "unbro- ken" along their entire lengths. 5. Traffic will be routed onto South 152nd Street which is presently a narrow, marginal roadway which has not yet been improved by L.I.D. 6. Virtually the entire site will be either cut or filled in order to accommodate the proposed apartment complex. An omnipresent series of rockeries and cut slopes will result. 7. Essentially all vegetation on the site will be removed as a result of the cut and fill activities. CONCLUSIONS: 1. The change in land use from an undeveloped site to an apartment complex represents a radical change in use. 2. In addition, and with respect to #1 above, the proposed change to apartments represents an "intense" use of the land. (You will note that 81 units on 1.8 acres of land is equivalent to 45 units per acre.) 3. WAC 197 -10 -360 speaks of the environmental effects upon the "quality of the environment." Based on the above Findings, I believe the proposed action will have an adverse impact on the quality of the environment in the vicinity of the project. 4. WAC 197 -10 -360 also mentions that the lead agency shall be alert to the possibility that several marginal impacts when taken together may result in a significant adverse environmental impact. This proposal appears to be such a case. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the abovementioned Findings and Conclusions, I would recommend that you require an environmental impact statement on this project. FS /ch COIROMINIUM BUILDERS,IPNC. 19800 Pacific Highway South Seattle, Washington 98188 Telephone: 824 -1120 September 14, 1977 Mr. Fred Satterstrom Planning Supervisor, City of Tukwila 6230 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Wa. 98188 Re: 81 units at Macadam Road and S. 152nd St. Dear Fred, In answer to you letter dated August 30, 1977 and per our meeting in your office yesterday, we are sub- mitting a revised sheet No. 1 drawing and the following information: 1. Grading /fill plan indicating diagonal cross section was submitted to your department on September 7, 1977. 2. We reviewed the location of the access drive- way to the south parking area and relocated it to ingress /egress from 152nd St. 3. The strip of landscape between South 152nd St. and the south parking area will be covered with lawn, the same as all of the interior court areas and between Macadam Rd. and Building B. 4. The entire roof of each building including the recreation building will be covered with asphalt shingles. 5. We disagree with your interpretation of the front and rear yard in this property, but since timing is very important to us we moved buildings A,C, and the recreation building 20 feet from the east property line. If you have any further questions please call me. Thank you, Arr EM:ka Enclosure Enrique •. Mora FIRE DEPARTMENT CITY of TUKWILA 444 ANDOVER PARK EAST TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188 TELEPHONE: (206) 244 -7221 City of Tukwila Planning Dept. Aug. 24, 1977 Re: Environmental Questionnare on Apartments at So. 152 & Macadam Road. It is difficult to intelligently comment on the above referenced project without so much as a plot plan to look at. In view of the problems raised by similar projects, it is anticipated that such items as additional fire hydrants, Fire Dept. access, automatic sprinkler systems and other items of concern to this office have probably not been con- sidered. Please provide this office with a plot plan and any other information available concerning this proposed project. Until then, I will not be able to make concrete statements in favor or against the project. Sincerely: cc: TFD file. Fire Chief. James Hoel, Fire Marshal. CITY OF TU KWILA OFFICE CF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT - rrwroat- !FINAL DECLARATION OF CI' /NON - -S I Gi 1 I F I CA SCE Description of proposal 81 unit apartment complex at Macadam Proponent Salant /Mora Location of Proposal Macadam and South 152nd Street Lead Agency City of Tukwila File No. EPIC -33 -77 This proposal has been determined to ( ielnot have) a significant adverse im- pact upon the environment. An EIS ( /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 Kjell Stoknes Position /Title Date October 12, 1977 Signature Director, Office of Community Developme t COMMENTS: • Declaration is subject to: 1. Adequate screening of parking lot on north property line. 2. Site plan to accomodate future widening of South 152nd Street as shown. 3. Construction of buildings to be done as shown on the building permit applications. MTV ©f TUKW LA OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 30 August 1977 Rubin Salant Eurique•P. Mora 19800 Pacific Highway South Seattle, Washington 98188 RE: Environmental Questionnaire for Macadam Road Apartment Complex Dear Sirs: This division has just completed its initial review of the environmental questionnaire submitted for your proposed apartment complex located at the intersection of Macadam Road and South 152nd Street. In order to adequately evaluate the total impact of the pro- ject, and as authorized under WAC 197 -10 -330 of the SEPA guidelines, this office would like to request some additional information be submitted before a threshold determination is made. This information is detailed as follows: 1. We request that a grading /fill plan be submitted indicating existing contours as well as proposed contours. On this plan, please indicate a cross - section running diagonally from the northeast corner of the property to the southwest corner. 2. A proposed 25 -foot curb -cut is shown on the site plan approximately 55 -feet north of South 152nd Street for ingress /egress to the South apartment structure. Given the traffic volumes on Macadam Road and the prox- imity of the curb -cut to the intersection of South 152nd and Macadam, how safe is this location for ingess /egress? Can this curb -cut be relocated to access onto South 152nd Street instead of Macadam Road? 3. Parking along the property's southern edge is proposed to be setback about 25 -feet from the edge of South 152nd Street right -of -way. Is this 25 -foot wide strip proposed to be landscaped? If not, how will it be treated? 6230 Southcenter Boulevard a Tukwila, Washington 98188 a (206) 242 -2177 Rubin Salant Eurique P. Mora Page 2 30 August 1977 4. Proposed construction drawings indicate moray tile on the front or west side of the recreation building roof and asphalt shingles on the rear side. Why? 5. There is a rear yard setback requirement of 20 feet per the Tukwila Municipal Code. Your proposed site plan indicates 10 feet. A threshold determination cannot be made on the above project until we receive this additional information. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me. ectfully, /ehWA red N. Satterstrom Planning Supervisor FNS /ch frt'd //ad 5 Avr 1 s ---ztj 5)1_U LQ to (1A-04(1-s PRELIMINA DRAFT # Le- SUBJ TO REVISION m.)&-ik-- w't-tlt, Zf 70 zm-4- , /1.1 ,v‘ IC 2 2.■.!'"-egl(1/11**74-1" ""'"■11- liPir" ,,41.111vAr k-,i/M "la a., vt4.? 7 eP • 20, r.79 • ./ 42.111 / • ;11I•••- key/aweel 4 0L,-,(0 x2- bi eQ-{+•-so rix( hptro-1,1-11 e4 GD aOQ 20- (Ig- 714_10 46"4524&J eti.:6>1.4 4,lia co 4-L , CiVrt91. ( R€»1 fl/.4 _;/-0 rteido ) „ ,4491 Q'°?°,/ ?--45/5 ;6e 171-ZGe2A '1--7/ ,ki,asixL. 4 . 40 Pr'9/6-4j et,a- • 0 , W I.v � -� - 7fr G� te l ij/e Ge a tr-4 f G ?I ; ' i e r TY1/1-4-diQ # Cda AdL07,66 /(2-L°. U1J14-A7Z41114 A eGe_ir-ae _e; �2 - , d 4 4--1. P. 2-8 ),-a-rywxmLi- /0/_5 6<. r4A-7 - keed.eaz/ 4-6 reu'isPA 40 e-1 1,7- P: 4(9;bm�� t-414.40 c16)t- !".tea -% „e,, rG S 01 fru /44,1/- c�-tl/ �,,, rp fie. 6u-60' iiix-ed 7/ F,e4dIeJ I14 and �,LO-44" s It6biryt ern J_,,,Ids4-4/2e b ,off -- 7n. �d- of(=(-, 47-40 pida,1 /s -A74. /v- P�f/�L S_ Aceefl ) ./11 /--a44 l • Atd. ofie,11 5 ?'d 79--/ /o,- - /0,4)/7 /0"- r(iV ��--1' /�7�'-P�r'� � GQ- vi �� - S b v� cQc.rc� 71A4,4 46,-R d Gee, pC e4),-.a 4-c7 ,//4/49--AeCcr n214441 s 114- /ce--1 p4/4(4'y %/S. d ,44(1,,de Wuz ke-T/41- V 74k 1=0- 44-71- 'e/id c k4-cy YGa,L 6,exe ; e aw,e�� a '7/4d shy S� ea=nsn 4,.iZ, Q )e2-e o4f244.± • 4)/0,- e-vL. � = &-d Lti ede 66e0,7 3(.;&;,/ 45tbe'f4- ceJ.ce. toe. ,6:144eai 1-1-0-21%-v7 at"7C-(-1-Q- 1-,A57)a-v■ ot.‹) o-/ap,) -cep - c�,uy rlaf)Le 6-014 Z44-44 ree44-kui-i t-Y1 011 iicbo vido (44'1')-4 ez.e) R__0. zto 41 . meZtv,i fLiz-v „i4) 0 71 /v/7 /7 7 e,t,-vvv\„a4A--% tied ole-ittj mad 1-er- �.� rzy,,,Q,J4 e:ey , II' 5 V�cS T S (A, s .it aJii o 1,t 1,t4 6� q7? 0 4 ke2-e) e-a-vvue —riift kv& ci/ fi a4d- e_6() 6), 7 OAPICE MEMO CITY of T KWILA fiLZr7 TO: • FROM: (Qy,1 Z % G� - SUBJECT: V' 46/T 73 Ib 2:: /IOC kr/e/99,y co) AerAite0( redzi;e0bei-;-1-- r ise sso.ei o 7 ALA /U GO M40445 - Adel .14te,z, 491/6401:1114;4 - � jf. � ar14 "%14/16 kiler8" taAce- 0;16 411414 1141-0( 11 ir j- ' Med, l-1 I T OF Iuf\rviLI% a ENV I RO;•1TAL.I. QUEST I ON NA I RE R E V I E J R M PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: 1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: ❑ Building: by: ❑ Engineering: by: Fire: ❑ Planning: by: ❑ Police: by: APARTMENT COMPLEX 152nd Avenue and Macadam Road 16 August 1977 (date) (reviewer) 2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS: u t ;J 'W) 1 0-P Hyd r4. f s 61,5 /1 Ai'k&a/ -L pi-ov/i-e d 047111 ) h 9- -Q./.14r- h o!'/4 A 21f , l "rii / q, r4,11; en -eh 4/-0I 1 C-C. cir-i ' e wg a S' f p D 5m 4 33 f,L. isdJ`v5 p'ef %)/ fo' F, 5 oh g7�1i Q� S4)--, 1e vi /w[iNs/S S/i67 // J Q (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL) 3. Agency review of environmental checklist determined that: The project is exempt by definition. The project has no significant environmental impact and application should be processed without further consideration of environmental effects. The project has significant environmental impact and a complete environ- mental impact statement must be prepared prior to further action for permit. More specific information is needed to determine impact. Signature and Title of Responsible Official Date 4. Applicant was notified of decision on: by by Date Staff Person Letter, Phone In accordance with Washington State Environmental Policy Act and City of Tukwila . Ordinance No. 986. l.L 1 I Vr lUWY1LM ENV I RO•NTAL QUEST I O NA I RE REV I E'•ORM • PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: APARTMENT COMPLEX 152nd Avenue and Macadam Road 16 August 1977 1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date) (reviewer) ❑ Building: by: XEngineering: J -05 3 -7 ? by; 1 ❑ Fire: by: ❑ Planning: by: ❑ Police: by: 2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS: aa"t6ial (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL) 3. Agency review of environmental checklist determined that: The project is exempt by definition. The project has no significant environmental impact and application should be processed without further consideration of environmental effects. The project has significant environmental impact and a complete environ- mental impact statement must be prepared prior to further action for permit. More specific information is needed to determine impact. Signature and Title of Responsible Official Date 4. Applicant was notified of decision on: by by Letter, Phone Date Staff Person In accordance with Washington State Environmental Policy Act and City of Tukwila Ordinance No. 986. 1 1 T Ur 1 U C\ YY 1 1-ti ENVIRO ITAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIE *ORM PROJECT NAME: APARTMENT COMPLEX . PROJECT ADDRESS: 152nd Avenue and Macadam Road DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: 16 August 1977 1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date) (reviewer) Building: ' ay— 72 by: G(� ❑ Engineering: by: ❑ Fire: by: ❑ Planning: by: ❑ Police: by: 2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS: ,V 5i6- .v(M-111Cb p i/EfD RtvIEw QF SLot'SS Fill /�l�vl�(iU if-F-1 1-1 \ CUTS F/LL &,P (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL) 3. Agency review of environmental checklist determined that: The project is exempt by definition. The project has no significant environmental impact and application should be processed without further consideration of environmental effects. The project has significant environmental impact and a complete environ- mental impact statement must be prepared prior to further action for permit. More specific information is needed to determine impact. Signature and Title of Responsible Official Date 4. Applicant was notified of decision on: by by Date Staff Person Letter, Phone In accordance with Washington State Environmental Policy Act and City of Tukwila Ordinance No. 986. .RECEIPT •Dote . /. -- ... 19 ri7 6746.':.. Received From AA.... 11 ._.I . A /L- Addr'ess r '1 . .. . ■ I.O At . %4 8,/88 00 o0 . ..i. Dollars$�Q-- For " .L. A I Ali //A iI /. • L. � 43 �L1t.O _L# ACCOUNT' HOW PAID */ .AMT• OF ACCOUNT CASH , 10 \, J ' 1 1 Q a 1... t� �r � �' AMT. PAID CHECK • X BALANCE DUE � " ` MONEY ORDER 1.1°10 0 P/1 k/' gi/ ► vv o Le v �) C 'S . CITY III. 'MLA ii • 6230 Southcenter Blvd. Tukwila, Washington 98067 Phone: (206) 242 -2177 TION OF WORK / NUMBER & STREET ,/1'14 DAm BLOCK • SUBDIVISION ,eu s/4c,HAir /9/v0 Et emvs P. iESS MID° "IfG / ►c #14) CO . PHONE 8,2 �— /62 a, OF BUILDER DD (�o,Jpcw,l /N►um Du /LD Ere 5 . / A/c • STATE LICENSE NO. SALES TAX NO. . IESS MSOO ,� /FAG tfu/ f? $' . PHONE • ?Z� -a2.0 • = • • • APPLICATION FOR BJ'ILDINIG PERMIT I ESTIMATED VALUE OF COMPLETED WORK $ EE PERMIT F $ PLAN CHECK FEE $ ' LATE PERMIT FEE $ TOTAL FEE $ TYPE OF CONST. OCCUPANCY • GROUP • DATE TODAY I ; ? y •+ USE Q�� ZONE /*" • • G MAX. OCC. LOAD ................. _ _.,,.._.._..._. _�. .,., RIPTION OF WORK: 8/ vNnT A-P4I2TIVe7oT By /z -o /Nc5- ,2E-G,2 trio c) • TURE OF BUSINESS: THIS PERMIT DOES NOT AUTHORIZE ANY WORK IN PUBLIC RIGHT -OF -WAY OR ON UTILITY EASEMENTS. SEPARATE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING, HEATING, VENTILATING OR AIR CONDITIONING. 1 HEREBY CERTIFY THAT NO WORK IS TO BE DONE EXCEPT AS DESCRIBED ABOVE AND IN APPROVED PLANS AND' SPECIFICATIONS AND THAT ALL WORK IS TO CONFORM TO TUKWILA CODES AND ORDINANCES. APPLICANT • L%v U o-ec c�rz e -)e) Ci/c e oz i7Ca —f a .CZ/� Al _5.9 73V/_. • CITY OF T UKW I LA 411 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM This questionnaire must be completed and submitted a:ith 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 Environmentallmpact Statement needs to be completed. A fee of $50.00 must accompany the.filling of the Environmental Questionnaire to cover costs of the threshold determination. I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent: Rubin Salant and Enrique P. Mora - 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: Seattle, WA 98188 (206) 19800 Pacific Highway So. 824 11411 -1120 3. Date Checklist Submitted: 4. Agency Requiring Checklist:. City of Tukwila 5.. Name of Proposal, if applicable: 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).: Please see attached sheets. 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): Please see attached sheets. E. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal: 6 months from starting date 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 x_ (e) Sewer hook up permit YES x NO (f) Sign permit YES NO x (g) Water hook up permit YES *_x 0 (h) Storm water system permit YES NO x (i) Curb cut permit YES)V NO x (j) Electrical permit (State of Washington) YES x NO (k) Plumbing permit (King County) YES x NO (1) Other: 10. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or futher activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: 11. NO Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: (Li D zg) 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: None II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS - (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) PLEASE SEE ATTACHED SHEETS FOR EXPLANATIONS OF ALL • "YES" AND "MAYBE" ANSWERS. 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes substructures? (b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction ing of the soil? (c) Change in topography or ground surface tures? (d) • • in geologic or overcover- relief fea- The destruction, covering.or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? YES MAYBE NO x x • • Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands,, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of vriver 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 niovernents, 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? • Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of around waters? Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through ir►terception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? -3- YES MAYBE NO X x x x x x x X • • (h) Deterioration in groundwater 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) Reductions 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.existinq fish or wildlife habitat? Explanation: YES MAYBE NO x x x x x x • YES MAYBE NO 6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? x Explanation: � 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new x light or glare? Explanation: 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 U,nset. 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? F.xpl anati on: x x x x 11. Population. Explanation: • • Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or'create a demand for additional housing? Explanation: 13. Transportation /Circulation. Will the proposal result (a) (b) Generation of additional vehicular movement? Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? (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: in: 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? (b) Police protection? Schools? Parks or other recreational facilities? Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? YES MAYBE NO x x x X X . • • (f) Other governmental services? Explanation: YES MAYBE NO x 15. Energy. Will the proposal result.in: (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? x Explanation: 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: (a) Power or natural gas? x (b) Communications systems ?• x (c) Water? }{ (d) Sewer or septic tanks? x (e) Storm water drainage? x (f) Solid waste and disposal? x Explanation: 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the.crea- tion of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental'health)? Explanation: x • YES MAYBE NO 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 in the creation of in 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: 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. >ignature and Title j:%,<-76T7 Date x x x 4I LUVIRh7NMLNTAL CIiECKLIST FORM City of Tukwila I. BACKGROUND 6. An eighty -one (81) unit multiple family dwelling consisting of three (3) wood frame buildings, each being three (3) levels , andpwith natural wood exteriors. I3uilding 'A' to have ten units per floor (4 one - bedroom and 6 two - bedroom units) for a total of 30 units; Building 'B' to have eight units per floor. (all one - bedroom units) for a total of 24 units; Building 'C' to have nine units per floor (4 one - bedroom units and 5 two - bedroom'units ) for a total.of 27 units. The proposed develop- ment also includes a split level. recreational building and a swimming pool. Parking spaces will be provided for 122 vehicles. 7. Subject property lies on the northeast corner of the intersection of Macadam Road South and South 152nd. The western boundary • extends.northerly from So. 152nd along Macadam Road So approxi- mately 353 feet; the southern boundary extends easterly from Macadam Road So. along So. 152nd approximately 230 feet. The property ranges from less than '% slope to approximately 22% slop` in its steeper portion. The site is partially developed with two single- family dwellings on a portion of the property. The remainder of the site is undeveloped and is mostly grass - covered with a few deciduous trees. I I . tNVI RONI.1LNTAL IMPACTS ('4 5e4444 4114-4'44-1; /d"✓ J 1. Earth 1 Yt1'PICqwt- � LAA a. No. The site will only be graded as shwon by the finish 'contour lines on the site plan. The site selection is suitable for the structures and development planned. b. Approximately 69% of the site will be graded to accommodate roads, utilities, and buildings. Total material moved is estimated at 10.,455-cubic yards and total fill estimated at 10,455 cubic yards, balancing one another. The cut will not exceed 9 feet on any part of the site (see attached site plan). c. Yes. The site contains gentle slopes for approximately •-�� 210 feet from the center of the property to'the northeast • corner of the property. d. No. e. No. f. No. Environmental Check1411 Form - City of Tukwila . Page 2 II. 1ZVIRONEENTAL IMPACTS, contd. 1. Air /`►mkg1,1016, a. Approximately 122 cars will be associated with this develop- ment and will contribute to CO, UOx and SO2 emissions found in the ambient air. Unit heating will be electric base hoard heat. Temporary deteriorations will occur during construction due to dust and auto.emissions. b. Maybe. During construction, objectionable odors may be encountered with machinery and street paving. c. No. 3. Water a. No. b. Yes. Grading and impervious surface applications will change the absorption rates on approximately 69% of the site. Storm water run -off will be controlled by an on- site storm system. c. No. d. No. e. No. f. Yes. Water created by impervious surface applications will flow into an on -site storm system, directing the flow into the open ditch drainage system provided by the City along Macadam Road South. g• No. h. No. i. No. 4. Flora /Ve9/( /b /e a. Approximately 1.42 acres of the underbrush of the site will be removed including small bushes, blackberries, ferns, grass and a few deciduous trees. b. No. c. Yes. With landscaping, there will be introduction of ornamental plants compatible to the region (such as firs, ferns, junipers and rhododendrons.) d. No. The site has never been used for agricultural purposes. Environmental Checklis I'or_m - City of Tukwila Page 3 II. ENVIRONI•ILNTAL IMPACTS, contd. 5. i'auna %V �plike -V a. 1Io. L. lo. c. Yes. Domestic pets can be expected with this development. d. No G. Noise • itile4 IOW a.. Yes. Existing noise levels are due to the vehicular traffic on South 152nd Street and Macadam Road So. (bor- dering the site on the South and [lest sides, respectively). During the course of construction, noise levels intermit- tently high; after completion, ambient noise levels will increase due to an increase in daily residential traffic estimated at approximately 294 average daily vehicle trips. AP 7. Light COMI41 e a. Yes. Street lighting, vehicle headlights and exterior- interior home lighting will result from this development. 8. Land Use (Ad' As - / /Z D; %is a. No. The land is LOned ltrilI. Cam• Ce/Xaa f a� si/G stiy/ Xtr 9. Natural Res urces l tkott '4`1V114L a. Y. Home construction will use materials and energy of the South Seattle area. Multiple family dwellings use less materials than single family housing due to common walls and roof, etc,'which constitutes considerable savings in the use of natural resources, b. No. 10. Risk f pset Risk l: j,lole a. Not 11. Population, � f /ql,u.) a. Yes. Approximately 81 families or 155 persons will in- habit this development. 12. lousi egel de a. Yes. pproximately 81 apartment homes will be added to the property. Two existing single- family dwellings will be relocated. Environmental CheckliIlp s Form - City of Tukwila Page 4 II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, contd. 13. Transportation /Circulation 17640 ti,11 star i 6 " a. Yes. Approximately294 average daily vehicle trips. UNITS PERSONS PLP. UNIT DAILY TRIPS 24 1 bedroom 1 2.0 24 1 bedroom 2 3.8 17 2 bedroom 3 5.5 16 2 bedroom 2. 3.8 81 (Trip allowance data per the Puclet Sound -Regional Transportation Study (PSRT'S) ) b. Yes. Parking facilities for the proposed development includes 122 parking spaces. c. Yes. Vehicular access to the subject site is accomplished via two driveways opening onto "Macadam Road South. 7 d. Yes. Entry onto Macadam Road South allows smooth circula- tion of people and c oods from the development to inter- secting arterials. (� t. CA�rle, — poss;w j -4 s1tuf-dts e. :1o. 7 f. This area is not a high-use pedestrian area. 04149 hC. tM Att. Ai.44, A. -4.n4._ 14. Public ` 'erviQep I ed/id/h/e a. No. £lie subject property is serviced by the City of Tukwila fire Department. (Two fire hydrants are located in close proximity of the property, one at the N.W. corner and one near the S.E. corner) . C wu1� utcrca.se. serviu aatwW40 b. No. Adequate. police protection is provided by the C' of Tukwila Police Department. OYlill,Nc+'Y4U . erV!'tc ✓€qu.4V c. No. The proposed development is designed to serve as an adult community. �sy d. Ldo. There are no parks or recreational facilities in the immediate area. However, the development's amenities will provide residents with us1c of a swimming pool and recre- ation building. ( mt.�jvtw/-,Cc .i to e�pi+�u Sii. ) e. No. The two private driveways will be maintained by the property owners. f. No. (P ! C414&PC 84:4, &J 6 Proms) • • Environmental Checklist Form, - City of Tukwila Page 5 II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS, contd. 15. Energy Nek9.1ke a. No. Heat will be provided by electric base board heaters. Attached housing of the type proposed definitely conserves energy as compared to detached single fancily residences. The sharing of double insulated party walls and the close proximity of units causes the efficient use of heat energy. b. Yes. Adequate power capacity is available from Puget Sound Power and Light Company. 16. Utilities, /OQf l b/G a. No. Power is available and will be extended underground to the site. b. Igo. Telephone service will follow the route of the electrical services. c. No. Water services will be extended from the existing City of Tukwila maid line to serve the proposed development. d. No. The City of Tukwila, Department of Public Works has adequate sewer lines to serve the site. e. PIo. Storm water drainage will be provided on site as per design by Joseph J. Millegan and Associates, Consulting Engineers. f. No. Solid waste disposal will be provided by private contractors. 17. human Iiealk -h' ( • /_'6 a. No. The su.ject site is serviced by the City of Tukwila, Department of Public Works. lv. Aesthetics a. No. 19. Recreation , ,,,, ,z / freed 20. Archeological /historical a. N None are currently known for this site. • • Environmental Checklist Form - City of Tukwila Page 6 CERTIFICATION I3Y APPLICANT: 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 will- ful misrepresentatio .f willful lacl: of full disclosure on my part. )F,/ ,, ''‘(---/7 ) Sig T 4 and .' lW a Date REVISIONS BY ',2; Poandatim- Plaa•^'BUildings `A,� 1/8 xala PeOadat3an P1 n-- BOildisg• - "Ir.: l/S•. scale ' •i:. zypxatl �P'1eu Plan -. 1u7 4 A. .'8 i. •.C• 1f 6� seala. . . . "S: y3YeIDinq P, for -LAe first and - 5ecOnd floor, But dingo 'A' 40,C1",.1/4Y1sCle ... -Pouf iramiag'P1an Buildings:•A" s "C• 1/0".sale Pteaing. Plan !or first mid seecnd floors.:and roof.-- Buildlr 1 /4'' scale • • 8. Typical- Bloor Plan- Unite "A ", "B•.'6 •C" 1fM.scaIe '.; Typical.Ploor Plan - Unit•'D "- 10. Elevations- Building P. 11. Elevations Bbildtnq "B• a •C" 12.• Section.- Buildings "A" a "C' 17.'Secttona- Building "B" 14. Site 'Cross Sections 15. Recreation Building- Foundation Plan and Section 16. Recreation Building- 'loos Plan and Elevation G2ADES 4 STO2M l7 z J a F- E) -J a • 0.014 SCH.F ' C- x,S-7 i LEdo6_82 W 24'd+ yOI�C. PiDC- S 'PLOT PLAN u,_1- rt,5 MACADAM eD #5.192�!D - C-L.110.5 RECEIVED CRY cs-nnomui RUG 15 177 i c . U 1 4800 f.A c i f4 c -N.I' .:. JQ� Aces -r� i u \iii \Va S1.fl t 1 .Dab 17- 215-1"7. DS.a of Yip saws