Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-FD-85 - MCCANN / PROJECT 353 - REZONEMcCANN REZONE AT 178' ST EPIC -FD -85 CITY OF TUKWILA OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINAL WITHDRAWAL OF DECLARATIOi1 OF SIGNIFICANCE/ Description of proposal Rezone request from R -1 -12.0 to C -1 ( #353) Proponent Bruce E. McCann Location of Proposal North of So. 178th St., West of Southcenter Pkwy. Lead Agency City of Tukwila File No EPIC -FD -85 This proposal has been determined to (_ /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 Kjell Stoknes Position /Title Director, Office of Community Development Date April 11, 1979 Signature (7;, 1(A COMMENTS: The items requested to reverse the Declaration of Significance have been received. Conditions: 1. Public Works Department reserves all rights in their area of jurisdiction. 2. Fire Department reserves the right to require fire protection systems to mitigate any lack of available emergency access during inclement weather. CITY OF TUKWILA OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT +fterPerSEIVFINAL DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANOE /' i Description of proposal REZONE: R -1 to C -1 Proponent Bruce McCann, P.O. Box 88314, Tukwila, WA 98188 Location of Proposal Lead Agency South 178th Street (McCann Project #353) City of Tukwila File No. M/F 78 -05 -R This proposal has been determined to (have /not +.ea a significant adverse im- pact upon the environment. An EIS (is /iTrtut) 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 k Director, Office of Community Develop nt t 25 April 1978 Signature �r s lbfrvi COMMENTS: SEE, Attached Memorandum dated 24 April 1978. 14A,,,Juk 6/1/7e cityTf-ruooa 353 Administration 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Office of Community eveIopment 433 -1845 12 April 1979 Bruce McCann McCann Development Corp. 950 Andover Pk, E. P.O. Box 88314 Seattle, WA 98188 Dear Mr. McCann: Please find attached the withdrawal of declaration of significance for your two rezone requests on South 178th above Levitz. This will be heard at the May 24, 1979 Planning Commission. meeting. Sincerely, KS /ckh Attachments 11 Stoknes, IDirector ice of Community Development CITY OF TUKWILA OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT UMMMENEVFINAL WITHDRAWAL OF DECLARATION OF SIGNIFICANCE/ Description of proposal Rezone request from R -1 -12.0 to C -1 ( #353) Proponent Bruce E. McCann Location of Proposal North of So. 178th St., West of Southcenter Pkwy. Lead Agency City of Tukwila File No EPIC -FD -85 This proposal has been determined to (ISOWnot 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 Position /Title Date April 11, 1979 Kjell Stoknes Director, Office of Community Development COMMENTS: Signature The items requested to reverse the Declaration of Significance have been •received. Conditions: 1. Public Works Department reserves all rights in their area of jurisdiction. 2. Fire Department reserves the right to require fire protection systems to mitigate any lack of available emergency access during inclement weather. F. A. LeSOURD WOOLVIN PATTEN DONALD D. FLEMING GEORGE M. HARTUNG MEADE EMORY LEON C. MISTEREK DWAYNE E. COPPLE THOMAS 0. McLAUGHLIN PETER LeSOURD JOHN F. COLGROVE C. DEAN LITTLE 1 LESOURD, PATTEN, FLEMING, HARTUNG & EMORY ATTORNEYS AT LAW 3900 SEATTLE -FIRST NATIONAL BANK BUILDING SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98154 (206) 624 -1040 LAWRENCE E. HARD RODNEY J. WALDBAUM BRUCE G. HANSON RICHARD R. MATTHEWS D. WILLIAM TOONE M. COLLEEN WEULE \�t� DANIEL D. WOO CARL J. CARLSON March 30, 1979 "� ���� ROBERT L. PALMER O.C.D. Mr. Kjell Stoknes Office of Community Development City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 COUNSEL CO OF TUK ILA APR 3 1979 Re: McCann Construction Company Rezone Application Dear Kjell: I have reviewed your letter of March 19, 1979 regarding issues presented by the above described rezone application. I will attempt to respond to your specific questions in the order in which they were raised: 1. The City can require the applicant to submit a hold harmless agreement in favor of the City but such an agreement would have little practical value. The City is ultimately charged with providing adequate fire and police protection for its inhabitants and it cannot negotiate a release from this liability, particularly with respect to persons who might be in the building at the time of• an emergency, who are not parties to the specific hold harmless agreement. These third parties might be able to go against the City of Tukwila directly. Another practical problem with such a hold harmless agreement is the fact that in the event the property is sold or in the event that McCann Construction Company goes out of business or is otherwise unavailable, there may be no person against whom the agreement could be enforced in any event. 2. The City can require the applicant to demonstrate that Fire District No. 23 will provide fire protection services to the property. I have not fully explored this question but I believe fire protection districts have the authority by statute to enter into contracts with private property owners for the provision of fire protection services. What I am not sure of is whether a fire protection district can enter into such a contract with a property owner which owns property within an incorporated Mr. Kjell Stoknes March 30, 1979 Page Two city which already has an existing fire department. 3. You, as the responsible official, can require sprinklering of all buildings as a mitigating factor to provide for adequate fire protection to the subject property. 4. You, as the responsible official, may require minimum sight distances for any curb -cuts. 5. You, as the responsible official, probably cannot limit the use of the subject property in order to minimize the amount of traffic flow. If the proposed use of the property is permitted under the zoning classification sought by the applicant, you would have a very difficult time imposing further limitations on the specific type of use of the property. As a practical matter, once the building is constructed you would have little control over its actual use and the resultant traffic flow in any event. With respect to your comments regarding the manner in which restrictions might be placed on use of the property, I would prefer that the specific official or agency charged with a given responsibility impose their particular restrictions. In other words, it would appear that the Department of Public.Works would be the correct agency to insist on certain minimum sight distances for curb -cuts. The fire department should be the agency which insists on adequate sprinklering of the buildings and other fire - related matters. It would be hoped that both the planning commission and the city council will then include the specific recommendations by the various departments of the City in ultimately granting the rezone application, if that is their final conclusion. I hope this letter has answered your--questions. If you need to discuss this in greater detail, please don't hesitate to call. LEH :th cc: Mayor Bauch Very truly yours, LeSOURD, PATTE FLEMING, H IRTUNG & IE ORY awre e E. Hard City of Tukwila Planning Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845 Office of Community Development Igo Mr. Larry Hard LeSourd, Patten, Fleming, Hartung & Emory 3900 Seattle First Ntl. Bank Bldg. Seattle, WA 98154 RE: Proposed Negative Declaration, Rem Application for McCann Dear Larry: Larry, I've been reviewing a negative declaration for two properties to be rezoned from single - family to commercial for an area southwest of Levitz and along. South 178th Street. As you may remember, South 178th Street is very steep and winding. I've attached with this letter a memorandum from Terry Monaghan which indicates some concerns regarding emergency access during inclement weather as well as protential problems with site distance or access roads to either property. I've also discussed this matter with Chief Crawley of the Fire Department and he has indicated that mitigating measures on his part, due to the fact that there may be no access available during inclement weather, may be the require -. ment of sprinklering of buildings and other related items. The primary purpose being to minimize life safety hazards. I guess my real questions to you are as follows: 1. Can the City require the applicant to submit hold harmless agreement to the City and recognize their peril in building on sites to which the City cannot guarantee emergency access for fire or police vehicles within a reasonable response time? 2. Can the City require the applicant to demonstrate that Fire District 23, which serves the area immediately to the west, will agree to provide fire protection services to the properties ?. If so, who should pay any costs requested by this fire district to provide these services? 3. Can I, as a responsible official, require sprinklering of all buildings as a mitigating factor due to the inability of the properties to guarantee emergency access for fire vehicles all year- round? 4. Can I as the responsible official require that site distance for any curb -cut into these - properties to be in the order of .389 feet? 3So 5. Can I as the responsible official require that only office -uses be allowed to minimize the amount of traffic flow in and out of these properties? Larry Hard Page 2 LeSourd, Patten, Fleming, Hartung & Emory 19 March 1979 Larry, I think some of the above questions should rightfully be answered by the Public Works Department and by the Planning Commission during the rezone hearings. I would hate to place conditions on a proposed development as a part of the envir- onmental review when the conditions may prove to be to harsh and not allow the Planning Commission and Public Works Department enough flexibility to work the problems. The other side of the coin may be that the City may not be adequately protected unless these decisions are placed in as conditions now. Do you see the double responsibility involved here? That is, the same types of responsibilities are placed on myself as the responsible official under the_ environmental review as are placed on the Public Works Director and Planning Commission and City_ Council in their review and the conditions they place on rezones. Your insite would be appreciated. Very truly yours,_ • 1 Stoknes, Director Office of Community Development KS /ckh cc: Mayor Bauch ;1908; • City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila Washington 98188 Edgar Q. Bauch, Mayor MEMORANDUM TO: Kjell Stoknes, OCD Director FROM: Terry Monaghan, Director of Public Works DATE: March 16, 1979 SUBJECT: McCann Rezone, No. 353 I have reviewed the access study and the traffic study for the two parcels of property, north of South 178th Street and west of Southcenter Parkway, which have been requested for rezone by the McCann Construction Company. My specific remarks are directed to the access study as prepared by Walsey and Ham. In this study they specifically lay out the fact that during certain periods of snow and ice all access to 173th and the adjacent property in question is barred and that all vehicles would need to access from the west via Military Road. In my opinion this represents a serious consideration. Specifically, in terms of response time for Tukwila emergency fire /police vehicles - a coincident emergency - at the time the lower end of the hill were impassable due to snow and ice would mean the vehicles would have to approach the property from a longer route through the McMicken heights area. This access report proposes that the lower parcel be served by an emergency access road at its west end. However, the topography within this parcel indicates that an emergency access road would have a gradient of about 15 degrees; and again in the same ice and snow emergency even access from Military Road might not allow immediate access to any structures because of the internal topography and road gradient. My final comment is that, as - dreported in the studies, sight distance both vertical and horizontal' feed "to be in the order of 350 feet and a location of any access roads to either parcel would have to meet this criteria. My final comment is that the traffic flows projected are based on a certain type of development and a certain type of leasing client and this may not occur. I cite the example of the Koll Business Park which was developed as an industrial complex and turned into an office complex, and the Benaroya Office Building which turned into their employment office, both having higher traffic volumes than originally anticipated. TRM:nb christopher brown p� 9688 rainier avenue a &cattle washin • ton tel:7234567 �• 118 McCann Project TRAFFIC STUDY November 1978 WILS EY&I!AM INC Earl P. Wilsey (1892 -1957) 631 STRANDER BOULEVARD • SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98188 • Telephone (206) 575 -1420 RECEIVED DEC 12 1978 McCann Const. Go., Inc. McCANN PROJECT PROPOSED OFFICE PARK ACCESS STUDY Access to the proposed building sites appears practical from South 178th • Street only.Traveling west from Southcenter Parkway the existing 2 -lane road rises at a gradient of approximately 17 percent for about 700 feet. Near the top of this grade is a sharp curve to the right (R= 125' +) follow- ing which the gradient drops to about 9.6 percent as it enters a reverse curve to the left (R= 250' +). The roadway then continues up at about 9.6 percent west over Interstate 5 to Military Road. During severe weather conditions the steeper section of South 178th Street is occasionally closed off by the City of Tukwila •rohibit'n• ac -ss from So. I -• er Parkway. luring t ese perio•s, access for a vehjcles, includ- fire and •o ust come from the west via Military aPN Reliable ull time •riveway access o e si e en mus necessari y •e west of the steeper gradient on the flatter 9.6 percent slope portion. Driveway access to the site should provide for sufficient entry space, at . roadway level, that cars_- entering the South 178th Street from the site will have sufficient si .e listance in both directions to see approaching vehicles before entering the street. It is recommended that a minimum site dist nce of 350 feet be provided (stopping site distance at 40 MPH). 6,61L" mac- 6112A most easterly access to or exit from the lower site which fulfills this criteria is located about midway in the upper reverse curve. From this point visibility will be about 350 feet downhill and over 1,200' westerly and will be to or from the flatter street grade of 9.6+ percent (west of the potential street closure area). Egress from the westerly site presents no site distance problems, however, tt 9 y p P e. sufficient level entry space at the roadway level should also be provided I�NI k,51 C�}P' to insure visibility prior to entering South 178th Street from the site. ldi° Vehicles traveling east on South 178th Street from the west will have adequate site distance for left turns into the site at either the upper or lower site. Vehicles traveling west from Southcenter Parkway will have ready right turn access to either site. J �,1�'S,1� Because of the topography on the lower site (P -352) it may be difficult to provide the desired access at the upper or westerly corner of the site as recommended above. It is suggested that suitable driveway access might be ) provided at a point just easterly of the reverse curves if certain mitigating measures are taken. engineering • planning • surveying • environmental analysis • mapping • systems WILSEY&It '. INC. Earl P. Wilsey (1892 -1957) 631 STRANDER BOULEVARD • SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98188 • Telephone (206) 575 -1420 1. Provide an emergency ingress - egress route to the westerly corner of the site to be used when the steeper portion of South 178th Street is closed due to inclement weather. 2. Improve site distance to the west of the easterly driveway. %/�4--""1 Q`co It appears that the most westerly access requirement, for emergency use, along - with the desired access location further east, might be accomplished with a one - way driveway pattern on -site. With this arrangement the easterly driveway location would be for ingress only and the westerly driveway would be for egress only. During emergency periods when the lower ingress only driveway is closed off for short periods of time, the westerly egress only route would be temporari- ly used for two way traffic. engineering • planning • surveying • environmental analysis • mapping • systems I wA F3f0 A. SEGALE April 27, 1978 City of Tukwila Office of Community Development 6230 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Attention: Mr. Gary Crutchfield Dear Mr. Crutchfield: APR 2 81978 co art TUKWILA Would you please notify Mr. George Hull when environmental information and your staff recommendation, with respect to the McCann rezones #352 and #353, are available for public review. I assume this will be sometime prior to the date of the public hearing on the subject property. Very truly yours, '? , 6_, Mario A. Segale MAS:sb 18010 SOUTHCENTER PARKWAY 13 TELEPHONE: (206) 226 -3200 a TukWlla, Wa. 98188 PLANNING PARKS 3 RECREATION BUILDING 24 April 1978 CUTY of TUKW LA OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM TO: Kjell Stoknes, Dfactor OCD FROM: Gary Crutchfiel stant Planner SUBJECT: THRESHOLD DETERM ATIONS: McCann Rezones (Projects #352 and #353) Review of the Environmental Checklists has been completed by all affected depart- ments. The following conclusions are drawn from said reviews: 1. Earth: Our "Data Inventory" indicates both parcels are composed (generally) of lacustine deposits. As such, they have poor Seismic stability and poor foundation stability. Stability of slopes are unknown in modified state. The proposal may result in unstable earth conditions. 2. Utilities: Extension of utilities (sanitary sewer and water) is a necessary part of the proposal. As a result, current land uses may exper- ience increased development pressure. • • 3. Land Use: Proposed sites are currently zoned R -1 (Single - Family) and both are planned for Office use by the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan. Much larger land area directly south is currently zoned R -A (Resi dential- Agricultural) and is planned (by Comp. Plan) for Low -Den- sity Residential (Single- Family). Proposal, due to extension of utilities and substantial change in current use, may result in significant alterations to planned land use of this area.. South 178th Street is only access to subject sites. Very steep and hazardous; closed during inclement weather. Proposal will increase volume of traffic, in both directions. Will also increase traffic hazards. 4. Transpor- tation/ Circula- tion :` 5. Public Services: Fire protection is severely hampered due to location and steep- ness of South 178th. Aid cars and police protection are also a problem. RECOMMENDATION: The proposed rezones (and developments) represent significant alterations to present and planned land use of the affected area. Increased traffic volumes may well affect the residential area west of I -5 and traffic hazards will proportionately increase on 178th Street. Extension of utilities to service the subject proposals will add to the likelihood of dramatic changes in surrounding land use. In light of the foregoing, I fully recommend an EIS be required of the two projects (preferably in a single document). GC /ch cc: Assoc Plnr 6230 Southcenter Boulevard a Tukwila, Washington 98188 v (206) 242 -2177 Attachments: Departmental Comments � • ii City of Tukwila ar D. Bauch or Fire Department Hubert H. Crawley Fire Chief April 20, 1978 Gaf"r Crutchfield, Asst. Planner Planning Department C -i.-ty of Tukwila Dear Gary: Ln regard to your memorandum of April 10 relating to the McCann Rezone 178, I will try to clarify the term, "very T:imited access" as you requested: 178th. has been and will continue to be impassable under any- conditions except normal driving weather.. A light frost can close this road as well as snow, ice, or as on some occasions the spilling of diesel fuel. Any structures built on this road will - have -to -have a fire protection system to fill the gap created by the steepness of the road. This would almost guarantee that all buildings would be required to be fully sprinklered and hose manifold stations for fire department. use ..-installed.. in .them. Generally speaking, this would be a requirement regardless of size of structures and types of material used to build them. HHC:vma cc: TFD file Yours very truly ,m Hubert H. Crawley Fire Chief City of Tukwila Fire Department, 444 Andover Park East, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 575 -4404 CITY of TUKW LA OFFICE of COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 10 April 1978 MEMORANDUM TO: Hubert Crawley, .F .4' -, Chief FROM: Gary Crutchfiel d . -scant Planner SUBJECT: Environmental Reviews: McCann Rezones @ 178th I have reviewed the comments returned by your department for the above - referenced Environmental Checklists. Your comments essentially allude to the steepness of South 178th Street in that it provides "...very limited access..." to the sites in question. Also, the Checklists themselves indicate that fire protection will be affected or result in a need for new or altered fire protection services. In addition, the Public Works Department has indicated that existing water service may be inadequate. • Inasmuch as this office is ultimately responsible for administration of. SEPA and we are void of expertise in the fire protection arena, we would greatly appreciate an explanation of the points raised in the previous paragraph. GC /ch 6230 Southcenter Boulevard a Tukwila, Washington 98188 m (206) 242 -2177 • Form APPLICATION FOR CNANCT: OF IAND USE CLASSIFICATION OR MODIFICATION OF LAND USE REGULATIONS IN THE CITY OF TUKWTTA FOR OFF= USE ONLY Appl. No. Planning Cannission Action Receipt No. Filing Date City Council Action Hearing Date Crainance No. & Date APPLICANT TO ANSWER ALL THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS NEATLY AND ACCURATELY: Nax-P. Bruce E. McCann Address 950 Andover Park East (P.O. Box 88314- Tukwila Branch) Seattle, Washington 98188 .Telephone No. 206/575-4330 Property Petitioned for rezoning is located c along the north side of South 178'Street . west of Southcenter Parkway between and Total square footage in property 164,488 square feet LEGAL, DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY See attached. Ekisting Zoning R7-1-12.0 Zoning requested C-1 Ma.t are the uses you propose to develop on this property? development of office naTur of permanent off-street:parking spaces that will be provided on property? Will be in accordance with City requirements. Number required In accordance with-.City NOT= M'APPLICANT: The following:factors are considered in requirements. reclassifying property or modifying regulations, Evidence or additionalinfanmation you desire to suhmit to substantiate . your request may be attached to this sheet. ASeeAppaication.' Procedure sheet Item :No. 2 for specificjaininum requirements.) 1. What provisions will be made to screen adjacentand surrounding property from any . incarpatible effects Which may. arise as a result of the proposed land use classification? Existing topography acts as a natural barrier. 2_ brat provisions will be made to provide for necessary street widening to City s s? None required. 3_ Tbat: provisions will he rcode for adeglate sewer and water service? Adequate sewer and water service is in existence. 4. A.hy other comments which the petitioner feels are appropriate: RECEIPT Date 11' 1 Received From Address /3 For 9158 7F7 Dollars y ACCOUNT AMT. OF ACCOUNT AMT. PAID BALANCE DUE MONEY OPDEP. 8X808 RodIrm PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: /l/gV 5/, e D c5• C 4st Cute. 07/ / -5 eeA/ DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: 5/ MdA -t2t_ 1,77? • CITY OF TUKWILA • 'DI57121bUTIO /0 ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM 5 EN• 4NV__ e (16ua. C'/ ('`353) 1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date) (reviewer) ❑ Building: by: ❑ Engineering: by: ❑ Fire: by: ❑ Planning: by: ❑ Police: by: 2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS: • CITY OF TUKWILA .p/ 4 (3 78 ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW; FORM PROJECT NAME: /g, & e / CJ/ rid353) PROJECT ADDRESS: /� �e D J. 1 i 4 JL42v 651 /idce ti /'S CIiw DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: 5/ MilA /77? 1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date) (reviewer) ABuilding: - / 0` 7 r by: ❑ Engineering: by: ❑ Fire: by: ❑ Planning: by: ❑ Police: by: 2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT ADDRESS: Alfa ,5 de d/ J. /if 'u 5f /i4se al /-5 7vecu/ . DATE ACCEPTED FOR .FILING: 5/ %�ZVG& 72 3 ,y 1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date) (reviewer) ❑ Building: by: AEngineering: decI '/ /97k by: ,t°.�{.�J• ❑ Fire: by: ❑ Planning: by: ❑ Police: by: 1)1Mizbv 415J -78 CITY OF TUKWILA 'ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORA 6/1/0 - % C �/ rsti353) 2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS: // /D Gat> f D CZ'`9 G!./ Ai //e //vim CQ'.riSU�crS 40W 4/..0 4-d ✓ m . / etp / /G24Uf ' /.fi is ,� 7cP� /474 r i o / c / ri of GU /`/ 4 ,Pe-f C v'a 6007` Qd'a( -cSJ Uj` /G /T /c S i e ,s ,,5/ 7i • 7-X CITY OF TUKWILA Difiroto ? • ENVIRONMENTAL QUEST I O NA I RE REVIEW FORM PROJECT NAME: /C L(,l,ag- )e6zo,c.L . ,- 1 C- / (#354 PROJECT ADDRESS: Na./ 51//e o/ 5 /7 ?' / ‘5,6,vnec7tri At-A411 DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: 5/ %f'�lrtLL /77n 1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: ❑ Building: Engineering: ❑ Fire: ❑ Planning: ❑ Police:. (date) (revi ewer) by: * /1d /97d' by: /e./ by: by: by: 2. ANY PERTINENT COMPENTS:. 7p A o. 7 G/j Th l �ti� �Z!/e - C%€4Slrx,-S _Z- Ca.t/ -' O.0 / 4r, . 7 9/e/7' ,,,./,‘.,7:„., 7/717,-- al :470 va / 72 19;c: l ;, // % 7e,t) es�a f c / le, �fs ,UV/ glc/ce.s / TEL /77c S 7U /moles • .Si 7f1°, 741 Seej , Gv ie /4'e' S /S //r u / .fr,-/ c J //', 6H �CeP .s - 6/r /A., /.,ti6 � 1i„, / 1., „.°a : v - Svo -re.� • e y / e — . ✓; . /7, -4.5 - Cl se r/7� J� d uTi`� G •,U i” /,!r/`-- r .7 /- GC/C✓ 7 sic-4- 4 74. re 0 S e- 0/ • e, t_ -C' i.ft- /06.; 1 %yjpvei-r/�.v o/UYiAi° iS /n,,,,v re-. e.9r/ 1 / /rrr_e fhe re . Gr rG �Pu.:-c e},'_ /,e./_-, 5 / o;-) D GOvIc)/ G ICJ S'e- e Li �O � 777c_.,-) 74 G:7 I. . > J : /% -G"C.• • / /i(i Z/ ✓ G j d� a/7/A0C/ ,'.e-if/ Scrv`. .S4 uT� r f;..) /U e- -C% SO ,/ if -a / ��� iR- •. e7 ' C.s /! a, --) • CITY OF TUKWILA • ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM PROJECT NAME: _ /Ye &AG IE*04t: el 74 el (1353) PROJECT ADDRESS: /WA 57ik (5../f/Le_t_g_15/1i;te /,f5 DATE ACCEPTED FOR FILING: 5/ ,/ Ad 1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: 0 Building: 0 Engineering: X Fire: 0 Planning: 0 Police: (date) by: by: by: by: by: ecru/ (reviewer) 2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS: r , ttultnk. APR 6 1979 r CM Of 'TUKWILA P 96. �± CHZL ICK SURVEYING AND ENGINE•NG 4011 Stone Shay North, Seattle, WA. 632 -3366 98103 October 25, 1976 File 76337 McCann. Development Company Legal Description of Parcel to be Rezoned to C -1 That portion of the northwest.quarter of the northwest quarter of Section 35, Township 23 North, Range 4 East, W. M. in the City of Tukwila,-King County, Washington described as follows: beginning at the northeast corner of said northwest quarter of the northwest quarter; thence S 01°49'41". W along the east line of said northwest quarter of the northwest quarter a distance of 757.08 feet to the north margin of South 178th Street (formerly known as P. J.. Musiel County Road); thence °N.65 °22'03" W along said north margin a distance of 145.00 feet..to the true point of beginning; thence continuing N 65 °22'03" W along said north margin a distance of 95.64 feet; thence N-47,°46'03" W along said north margin a distance of 341.00 feet to the east right of way line of Primary State Highway No. 1 (Junction S. S. H. No. 5A to South 178th Street); thence N 09 °32'33" E along said east right of way line a distance of 240.39 feet; thence along a curve to the right, having a•radius of 11,199.16 :feet an arc distance of 209.74 feet through a central angle of 01 °04'23" to the north line of said northwest quarter of the northwest quarter; thence S 87 °45'57" E along said north line a distance of 210.00 feet; thence S 04 °18'18' E a distance of 706.41 feet to the true point of beginning. Containing 164,488 square feet or 3.776 acres. Form C AFFIDAVIT 1, Bruce E. McCann , being duly sworn, declare that 1 am the contract purchaser or owner of the property involved in this application and that the foregoing statements and answers herein contained and the information herewith submitted are in all respects true and correct to.the best of my knowledge and belief, Subscribed and sworn before me thi (Signat ontract 'urch er or owner) P.O. Box 88314 - Tukwila Branch (Nailing ing Address) Seattle Washington 98188 (City) 206/575 -4330 (State). (Telephone) day of March , 197_ 8 No :ry 'lie in and / the State of Washington, residing at Seattle *. • CITY OF TUKWILA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM OtCEIYE MAR 31 1978 This questionnaire must be completed and submitted with the appiicattiionT 1KWILA 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: Bruce E. McCann 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: P.O. Box 88314 — Tukwila Branch Seattle, Washington 98188 206/575 -4330 3. Date Checklist Submitted: - / - 7P 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: City of Tukwila 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Project 353 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): Development of office 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): North of South 178th Street west of Southcenter Parkway. 8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal: 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___ NO X (d) Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Permit (e) Sewer hook up permit (f) Sign permit (g) Water 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: None YES NO X YES NO X YES NO x YES NO X YES NO X YES NO X YES NO X YES NO x 10. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or futher activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: None more than the original planned development. 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:. None submitted. II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? (b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcover- ing of the soil? (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief fea- tures? (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical' features? -2- YES MAYBE NO X x X (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? 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? YES MAYBE NO x x x -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? YES MAYBE NO x (i) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise avail- able for public water supplies? x 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)? x (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of flora? x (c) Introduction of new species of flora into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? X (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? X 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: x x YES MAYBE NO 6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? Explanation: Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? x Explanation: 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in the altera- tion of the present or planned land use of an area? Explanation: The property to be rezoned for office use in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. 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 11. Population. • Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? YES MAYBE NO Explanation: Development may indirectly affect the density of this 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 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? (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? x particular area. Explanation: Office zoning will require additional parking and additional vehicular movement. 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? (c) Schools? (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? (e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? x x x (f) Other governmental services? Explanation: 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: As required for office building development. 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: YES MAYBE NO 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 in the creation of 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. � z4 9SihatNiaghld Title Date X X I j ! 4.. / / / / / •t/* / / / J '' .0 / i 1 } /141) / r s t,/ ...:7 -- ...... Q' / t�y if t +• t4'�+�• /7,.'r ! / 7 ,s, 7 441. ff�.t t,1• tq5• • l�r t, . .1 �iPOPf:�3fD RfZONf BOU4'224' ' 1 / f' 7~ • , J/ j5 �:i tt! J; �1 ?._ -: __ �fi /~ - - � 5tr t 471 '' / / e, ♦ o / Y t t / . .N ./ t'j *4.. dl 4 0 gig JM•mi. /I.4! t• ,f: I/' ..; ,�•..•,,. • 445 L {J set P 3, M dl t •. • _ '/S- 0 ..... •..tit.. �- tt „,..b..... t • M ' •Yt� • Jt' L tt t/ _ �•fr -4' !IA_ 3.441_ ✓•----- ;�31 "'_• + �� tt•• t� 1 till ty 7 yd+' +� sa'7 7/4.4/ •4 01.-1G4 4 4 • • JM Ir 4/.' JV /.4N .0),nwN M Fa7liaq' 4dr4t.5rV .401004004125 4.4•4 .lrrirad t /iRVV1w./ nn AIM SCALE /' • 30' LffSQL DftSC.P /PT /ON Thal pe.41.e of tree n .:,...r .. r1.r of the nertno..r w•rth( of 4•001« 15. twn•1411 28 sort?. :311010• • •. 5. In the Cate of 104411•. 11•• County, 4.4hllnton 28.04 I..8 ut1.11.41 henlnntnn at the nereh.41a corner of ••14 Yrrn...t .5••••• •4 the nortwe.t waster; • thane. a 08•4.41• ..t•..1 N. east line of said nortnw•t warty . l tree ,.rth••.t N.r ? • In • stance •f 111.00 fast to th.• s Yell* of teeth 1711th Ifor..rlY known ea the P. J. w•1•1 Cart), ••••11 Oversee • 45•11.87• r •!.0.7 ••■• n•rth •.r71. • distance of 148.00 feet to the tau• polna of 184, 10141: tnenc. 4.04!0..9 3 a1v:•01• a alone .014 earth mantle • f flea .0 78.04 foot; l'AIVC0 r 0.44.01- 4 •1010 .aid north ..roan • dlaeer. of 141.00 feet he .. l.5 te of ..0 line f 00I.ary t I1141...y 40. 1 1Junetlon S. S. II. Co. 54 t• 104th 170th Sheet); thence . 05.17.21. 0 alone •ell out (tent of way 1..e • •l.t.ece of 140.15 feet; than. •1804 • tar• to the right, haetnq • (ollo. of 11.157.13 foot an re dlotante of 105.14 foot through • central •nel..4 01.04'l1r W the north l.no of "s.td northwest pu•rter el 14,. nort ...a al.rt.r; • thence 3 47.48.57 [ •lane 041d earth ilea . 41.0.,,. .0 110.00 . root; shale. • 34•18•!4- • . al•eane. of to3.0 foot a u.�� . I be;trottm. Containing 134.400 wry41. 4041 n 7.713 .em. rlea.r. l/i''A Jw.11 114 PI4OPERTY FO/PO/P0/9O.SED /PE20/1/E TO /9-4 TOPO6RAOH /C SURVEY 'C•2' • 4tC.eNN DEVELOP, -/ENT CO10,NY . SOUTNCENTER P4,PA'I.4Y PM PE.PT /ES CHADWICK SURVEYING d ENGINEERING •011 117041 .IAY a0. rlI (chant& a40r00*0:1 ea 101 .80.314 .1' Awe. , • • 4 / A , 5 40 • •2 ,• • • a 4471/40 MAGI . • LCAP.J. .1 IP O• ••••■, X17. 4110111W /V Aleitotr A774.1.a.a 1441/ ..irri•erde (.4110gicir,' .49 "LI /'•..10" 70.4rSC/P/P770N , That portion •7 the 77,71h..••t rrrrr of the ne•tntre•• calatur .7 Seetlas 75. tea.a•nip 71 74,77, hanne • caw!. 4. 4. La the Cum of ' Tultell•. slop County, hasesnoten Oe•cr.01•Id 44 181100., hon0.44. the 14117..4 earner of 1•44 a4774wa1 a•••••• .4 tee ...two. wafter; 1'.c 0 01•4•••t• • •Ion• Use oast Ita• of 44171 wor(h.St warbee of tha 4.411.7447 11 rrrrr • 24•47. •7 747.07 0.77 t• aer. earnie of Iwth 4770. tttttt 147.4,4 lawn ss the 1. J. mats) Cl Seal): Um.. • IVJPOI 4 •Iena ••12 earth warp. • dt•t•••• of 141.00 feet to tee true point et ho0,7•43; twow •e41at000 • •.22.011. •41 44w (.14 nett* 00*04 • 4414.ee of 11.04 loot: thane. 2 47,441• 4 •Ionq said north "rote • dt•tasee •7 141.00 feet to the •••t right *1 007 line al Frawry 14.414 1114147•7 14. 1 13unatten 4. 2. h. No. 54 South 1711th 174eet); Owes • 01'03I1 3 along "14 out 7471 •7 107 Itne • lla4ece 61 34.14 feet: .7••31. •Itrg • fl,, • 7, the rich, . haat.; a 741.4 •7 11,101.11 . f•et an arc all•tenc•of 41.14 feet through • tant••1 4..gII •1 ta the ttttt of 47.4 oher174.••t wart., tit 0.. serlawat 44 . *hoop 0 S4SU 2 Allow said nortit 1110 • ttl•teme of 710.00 . feat; thew. 0 04•111.14 • I • 47a10.ee 42 7011.41 feet le the tarty prix Of te41n41na4 • r • , C0t2•17409 *14,404 .9.1411 (.1 or 7.774 001••04 ••••••• Ar6/11.11, jr.;,.. P4191"1427, din 9.0e'X'a40.546:0 Ara:WE 70 ,4-4 701106R. APHIC SURVEY 4C-2' • Aile.INA/ 0.17/11D/WENT CD.44'PANY oof • • SOZ/ZWENTER RIAY1444Y ,DRaohr.f7/ES 1..1 CHADWICK SURVEYING & ENGINEERING 4111 117130C1 VAT 10104114 LLAMA 11447041001 114103 •27,10•