HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-FD-78 - C & H PARTNERSHIP - BEL CREST HEIGHTS PRELIMINARY PLATBBL CREST HEIGHTS
EPIGFD -78
CITY OF TUKWILA
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
QED /FINAL
DECLARATION OF. 44 N T r T C kiteE /NON - SIGNIFICANCE
Description of proposal PRELIMINARY PLAT: BEL CREST HEIGHTS
Proponent C & H Partnership
Location of Proposal 54th Avenue S. between Slade Way and S.
ti SLieeL
Lead Agency City of Tukwila File No EPIC -PD -79
This proposal has been determined to (.i rep /not have) a significant adverse im-
pact upon the environment. An EIS (TS- /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
Position /Title
Kjell Stoknes
Office of Community Development, Director
Date 25 January 1979 Signature
COMMENTS:
Soils report submitted pursuant to request, (SEE, letter dated
15 January 1979 from Earth Consultants Inc.).
k%; 1 City of Tukwila
J��� Z 6200 Southcenter Boulevard
��T ' o Tukwila Washington 98188
tLi
Edgar D. Bauch, Mayor
MEMORANDUM
To: FILE #79 -22 -SUB and EPIC -FD -78
FROM: Mark Caughey, Assistant Planner
DATE: 30 August 1979
SUBJECT: SYNOPSIS OF MEETING, BEL CREST HEIGHTS PLAT
This morning at city hall, representatives of the Bel Crest development
met with staff members of the 0.C.D. and Public Works Department regarding
constraints upon final approval of the plat as imposed by the Planning
Commission at its 26 July 1979 meeting, and as enumerated in the 0.C.D.
Director's confirming letter of 1 August 1979.
The entire substance of the meeting centered upon roadway improvement
obligations for the project's 54th Street frontage. All present seemed
to agree that a sidewalk on the west side of 54th Street is desireable
for the safety of schoolchildren in the area. Some disagreement exists,
however, with the extent to which the developers are responsible for
improving 54th Street. All present agreed that the ideal roadway improve-
ment would include a full -width street section with curb, gutter and
sidewalk on the west edge extending from Slade Way to 166th Street.
However, the developers contend that they should be responsible to
improve a half- street only for the immediate frontage of their project.
To accomplish the intended purpose of this meeting -- facilitating sub-
mittal of the final plat to City Council -- the developer agreed to pre-
pare graphic material depicting a long term solution for deficiencies of
54th Avenue, but to accompany that material with a position paper stating
which improvements they feel obligated to implement. Their presentation
will be matched by a position paper prepared by the D.P.W. analyzing what
they believe should be provided by the developer and what concomittant
improvements should be funded by the City. These two positions will be
transmitted to Council along with the final plat to serve as a basis for
negotiation and resolution.
A corollary aspect of the development to be resolved at the final plat
approval stage is the desirability of constructing the internal cul -de -sac
street prior to build -out of individual lots.
MC /ckh
PLANNING DIVISION - OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
TRANSMITTAL
Date: Jul Q/ 19-79
To: 0
Building Division
Fire Department
0 Public Works Department
0 Other
ATT:
rJ EECElJ l/ LTV/
O.C.D.
CITY OF TUKWILA
JUL 10 1979
Project: ii& . C.N uf
/
R r.. / l
5eC PtedEL
Applicant : 5- e pa , / r
The above mentioned applicant has submitted the following plans or materials for
the above referenced project:
O Environmental Checklist lig Preliminary Plat
O Environmental Impact Statement 0 Final Plat
O Site /Development Plans n Rezone Request
O Shoreline Permit Application 0 Variance Request
O Conditional Use Permit Application 0 Other:
The attached materials are sent to you for your review and comment. The planning
Division needs your comments to satisfy necessary review procedures and to com-
plete the project file.
Please use the space provided below for your comments or, if needed,, attach a •
separate sheet.
Requested response date: 7 / I 0 /
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
Review Department comments:
/fry, $ »- e o /57 .
By:
Date:
-' _ 79-
Ear
Consu
Inc
H and L Associates
12431Kingsgate Way N. E.
Kirkland, Washington 98033
Geotechnical Engineering and Geology
12893 N.E. 15th Place, Bellevue, Washington 98005 / Phone: (206) 455 -2018
Attention: Mr. Mel Hogsett
Subject:
Gentlemen:
January 15, 1979 E -836
Visual Site Inspection
Bel Crest Heights
54th Avenue South
Tukwila, Washington
REcaWED
O.C.D.
CON OF TUKWILA
JAN l8 1979
In accordance with your request, an engineering geologist from our office
visited the subject site on January 12, 1979. The purpose of our visit was to
evaluate the soil engineering feasibility of developing the proposed plat includ-
ing consideration of the stability of the site soils.
The site is located on the west side of 54th Avenue South between 166th
Street and Slade Way in Tukwila, Washington.
The approximately 4 acre site is situated on an east facing hill slope and
a 15 lot subdivision is planned on the property. The site gradually steepens
eastward with total relief across the site of about 100 feet.
The site is primarily covered with grass, brush, ferns, and small and
large trees. From our visual observations of the site and knowledge of local
geologic conditions, the near surface site soils appear to be recessional gravels
and sand deposits. The recessional deposits are generally underlain by glacial
till in this area. We observed the recessional deposits to be in a loose to
medium dense condition. Evidence of slope weakness along the east edge of 54th
Avenue South and the adjoining slopes above Interstate Highway 5 was noted. It
is our understanding that localized instability has occurred in the past on the
slopes above Interstate 5 and the slopes have required maintenance.
No signs of mass instability were noted on the site, however, we did
observe some minor surface slopewash in the lower road cut areas. Groundwater
was not noted at the time of our inspection, however, portions of the site soils
were frozen and this could result in changes in the future. Surface runoff is
controlled by a CMP half section along the west side of the roadway.
H and L.Associates
January 15, 1979
Page Two
E -836
The lack of surface seepage generally indicates that groundwater lies at
some depth below the surface. However, considering the geologic history of the
area and the conditions underlying the site, it is imperative that adequate
surface and subsurface drainage be maintained during and after construction to
maintain long term stability of the site.
Storm water runoff should be kept in strict control, not permitting pond -
ing and assuring a positive gradient at all locations on the property. Uncon-
trolled surface runoff should not be permitted on the site or on neighboring
slopes. Lined drainage facilities should be provided to convey the surface
runoff to the appropriate storm drainage sites.
The existing slopes have a natural ground cover and vegetation that protect
the slopes from erosion, hence this cover should be allowed to remain wherever
possible. Exposed slopes should also be planted with an adequate ground cover
to minimize erosion. All downspouts should be connected to yard drainage lines
which are tight -lined away from the building areas. The intent is that yard
drainage from improved building lots over the top of slopes would not be greater
in volume or velocity than exists presently in the natural state unless miti-
gated by storm drainage improvements.
In summary, based on our evaluation, we feel the site is developable from
a soil engineering standpoint. The primary features to be considered in dev-
elopment are control of surface and subsurface water. General procedures for
surface runoff control were discussed herein, however, delineation of approp-
riate subsurface control measures will require drilling of deep borings. These
will establish the.actual depth of water, permit future monitoring and also
establish a geologic profile of the site and the related stability aspects.
We trust this preliminary information is adequate for your requirements.
Should you need additional information or clarification, please call.
Respectfully submitted,
ARTH CONSULTANTS, INC.
Anil Butail, P.
DKW /AB /mh Chief Engineer
cc: City of Tukwila
Attn: Mr. Roger Blaylock
Earth Consultants, Inc.
•
1908
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
Edgar D. Bauch, Mayor
6 December 1978
Mr. Chan Chow
Stepan & Associates, Inc.
32123 First Ave. So.
Federal Way, WA 98002
RE: Bel Crest Heights - Preliminary Plat
Dear Mr. Chow:
The preliminary plat application and environmental checklist for "Bel Crest Heights"
have been tentatively reviewed and found to have two major points of concern.
The first is the possibility of development of adjacent properties. The proposal does
not provide a means of access for the future development of those properties. If it
is your intent to acquire additional property, it appears that your present preliminary
plat application may be premature. The State Environmental Policy Act requires that
the total project be reviewed for environmental impacts.
The second point of concern is a question of soils stability and water runoff. A
preliminary soils report might be advantageous considering the economic costs of
possible mitigating measures. It will be a staff recommendation that preliminary
plat be conditioned to- require engineered control and possible retention of storm
water runoff.
Your application will be processed as submitted. Additional information may be
submitted for consideration before the staff report is written on 13 December 1978.
Sincerely,
171E) .7.1.3616--
Roger J. Blaylock
Assistant Planner
RJB /ch
cc: Ping. Sup.
Mel Hogrett
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 Environmental Questionnaire
to cover costs of the threshold determination.
I. BACKGROUND
1. Name of Proponent: C &H Partnership (Mr. Mel Hogsett)
2. Address and. Phone Number of Proponent: c/o Bel Crest Realty, Inc.
12431 Kingsgate Way N.W., Kirkland, Wa. 98033 Telephone: 828 -4561
3. Date Checklist Submitted: November 21, 1978
4. Agency Requiring Checklist: Planning Department
5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: BEL CREST HEIGHTS
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):
See Attachment
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):
See Attachment
8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal:
9. .List of all Permits, Licenses or Government Approvals Required for the
Proposal (federal, state and local):
(a) Rezone, conditional use, shoreline permit, etc.
(b) King County Hydraulics Permit
(c) Building permit
YES NO X
YES__ NO X
YES X NO
• •
(d) Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Permit
(e) Sewer hook up permit
(f) Sign permit
(g) Mater hook up permit
(h) Storm water system permit
(i) 'Curb cut permit
(j) Electrical permit (State of Washington)
(k) Plumbing permit (King County)
(1) Other:
YES__ NO x
YES X NO
YES No _X_
YES X NO
YES X NO
YES X NO
YES NO X
YES X NO
10. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or futher activii:;
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:
No
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) .
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
(6) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic
substructures?
(b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcover-
ing of the soil?
YES MAYBE NO
X
(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
X
•
YES MAYBE NO
(e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils,
either on or off the site? X
(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:
See Attachment
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: See Attachment
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?
X
X
X
X
(c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X
(d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water
body? 0 X _
(e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration
of surface water quality, including but not limited
to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? X _
(f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of
ground waters? X _
(g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations?
-3-
• •
(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: See Attachment
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:
See Attachment
. Fauna. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers
o, 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?
YES MAYBE NO
X
X
(d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat? X
Explanation:
X
X
• •
YES MAYBE tO
6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise
levels? X
Explanation: Noise associated with construction will be high during the daylight
hours. Ambient noise levels will be increased due to daily residential traffic
estimated at approximately 105 average daily trips.
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new
light or glare? X
Explanation: Street lighting, headlight glare and glow
from interior lighting will result from this development. -
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in the altera-
tion of the present or planned land use
of an area?
X
Explanation: At present, the property is undeveloped and uninhabited. The
proposed development is in compliance with the existing zone classification,
R -1 -96.
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources? _L
(b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural
resource? _.X_
Explanation: Home construction will increase use of materials and energy
of the Puget Sound area. Such consumption will occur regardless of the
site chosen.
10. Risk of Upset. Dues 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
Only limited to accidents associated with construction
activities.
• •
11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location,
distribution, density, or growth rate
of the human population of an area?
YES MAYBE m
Explanation: Fifteen (15) families or forty -eight (48) persons will inhabit
this area. Development of this site will lead to potential development of
adjacent undeveloped properties and subsequent population increases at similar
densities.
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing,
or create a demand for additional housing? X
Explanation: Eventually, 15 homes (single - family detached) will be added
to this area.
13. Transportation /Circulation. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? _X_
(b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking?
(c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? X
(d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation
or movement of people and /or goods? X
(e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? X
X
(f)
Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians? X
Explanation:. Traffic generated by the proposed development is estimated
at approximately 105 average daily vehicle trips. The traffic pattern
will be that of a typical residential development with occasional service
vehicles.
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 NA'r:::: NO
X
Explanation: Moderate increased demands will be placed on fire protection,
police protection, park facilities and other government services. Approxi-
mately 15 additional shcool -age children will be added to the School
District's enrollment.
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: Home lighting, heating and cooling will be electrical.
Adequate power capacity is readily available for the proposed use.
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?
(c) Water? X
(d) Sewer or septic tanks? X
(e) Storm water drainage ?. X
(f) Solid waste and disposal? X
Explanation:
See Attachment
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the crea-
tion of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)?
1
Explanation: The project, if approved, will be served with sanitary sewers.
No health problems are expected.
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 an aesthetically of-
fensive site open to public view?
YES MAYBE N0_,
X
Explanation: This project will convert a natural site into a suburban residentia
neighborhood with the subsequent aesthetics changes. No existing public views
will be blocked as a result of this development.
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.
November 20, 1978
Signature and Title Date
STEPAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
X
• •
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
ATTACHMENT
I. BACKGROUND
6. The proposed project is a single - family residential subdivision consisting
of 15 home sites on 4 acres of land. All lots are to be served with public
streets, public water and sanitary sewers. Under the existing zone classifi-
cation, R- 1 -9.6, the minimum lot size will be 9,600 square feet. The purpose
of this project is to provide quality residential building sites to meet the
urgent demand in the general area.
7. The project is located on the west side of 54th Avenue South, and between
South 164th Street and South 166th Street in City of Tukwila. The property
is moderately sloping terrain, ranging from 6 - 20%, falling from west toward
east. Currently, the site is uninhabited, but may have undergone some grading
previously during the construction of I -5. Adjacent on the north, west and
south are single - family residences.
II. ENVIRONMENT IMPACTS
1. Earth
One surface soil is found on this site per King County Soil Survey, 1973, which
is classified Arents, Alderwood material, 6 - 20% slopes (AmC). Runoff is slow
to medium, and the hazard of erosion is moderate. This soil has a moderate
limitation for foundations due to seasonal high water table and slope.
Approximately 70% of the site will be graded to accommodate roads, utilities and
home sites. Storm water erosion will increase but will be mitigated by installa
tion of temporary (during construction) and permanent retention facilities, per
City requirements.
2. Air
Approximately 30 cars will be associated with this development and will
contribute to CO, NO, SO4 emissions found in the ambient air. Fireplaces will
be constructed in homes and will contribute smoke and other particulate matter
to the ambient air. During construction, objectionable odors and dust may be
encountered with street grading, paving and /or roof surfacing.
3. Water
Impervious surfaces created (driveways, roofs, etc.) will undoubtedly increase
surface runoff quantities and rates. Suspended soils and hydro- carbons may
potentially contaminate runoff waters. Groundwaters, infiltration and aquifer
recharge will be decreased. Storm water drainage will be designed and construct
in accordance with the City's standards. Sufficient pollution control facilitie
will be constructed to screen contaminants entering the natural drainage system.
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM - ATTACHMENT
Page 2
4. Flora
The tree cover of the site is predominantly deciduous with interspersed
conifers. Approximately 50% of these trees will be cleared in the areas
where roads, utilities and building construction are located. Approximately
75% of the underbrush of the entire site will be removed, including salal,
berries, ferns and other native brush. A landscape plan has not been
accomplished to date; however, many existing trees, in conjunction with the
new planting materials, will be worked into a landscape plan for each lot.
5. Fauna
Eighty percent (80 %) of the existing habitat, including common squirrels,
chipmunks and other small native animals or birds will obviously have to
relocate as the result of this development. Domestic pets can be expected
with this development and can be expected to limit the rebuilding of natural
species.
16. Utilities
All utilities listed above are available to the site. Extension from these
existing utilities systems will be required to provide adequate service. The
existing utilities are adequate in both location and capacity. Storm water
collection and retention systems will be constructed per County's requirements
and approved West Campus Master Drainage Plan.
r—
I
k.
701-1=1::, - 1
0
11
H- kHTt
s57-7/0
.1.1--r*1
■
?
r-ce.r=)
0'!')
OM'
■or t&s660
uurt-
• 1='f<=-r-.
(,7Y T1/flW/44
ht
• VIITT KA'F' 1 ½HI )11
•
• -
3-1
VAY, '7�!, -1771
• ‘1=-s- ri-,-m-f7I1c44 v. W.,. 1978
• TGt4 iA-
• ToT,41--
• 1.,=T fr' •
•
• -r-vy4-11=f--
• MPT1-0='
\JAL_ 'L-
• S\'')' sdkeFf-r P,T.IM • Czc,
;2=4=
1.,71•114.,194W-e,
ezm rrtfl =c•H
;14.1.60r-Z, W1.L FNE- Sc.4.4E•wli.T
icr=9.11.
• LL •
11-1
TH w vt F
ve.sH11-1sToP.
-L-cAivs •
)c 1-cr 17 Alt=',*:-1- Lor-ze
14s4a44-1- 4■ 1, frI-J
, i-11-11144
1--r-
ri
•1•77 Tur-vvit^