Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-FD-91 - CRESTVIEW AD HOC ANNEXATION COMMITTEE - CRESTVIEW ANNEXATIONCRESTVIEW ANNEXATION EPIC -FD -91 CITY OF TUKWILA OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /FINAL DECLARATION OF 111111111111MIVNON - SIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal Crestview Annexation Proponent Crestview Ad Hoc Annexation Committee, Duane Knittel, Chairman Location of Proposal General neighborhood around 42nd Ave. So. $ So. 160th St. Lead Agency • City of Tukwila File No. EPIC -FD -91 This proposal has been determined to (1 /not have) a significant adverse im- pact upon the environment. An EIS (r /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 COMMENTS: 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: Crestview Ad Hoc Annexation Comanittee 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 16036 - 40th Place South Seattle, Washington 98188 3. Date Checklist Submitted: April 4, 1979 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: City of Tukwila 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: Crestview Annexation Request 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): Petition to annex the Crestview neighborhood to Tukwila by the petition method. 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): Primarily a residential neighborhood with some commercial zoning. Area is the Crestview neighborhood constituting slightly more than one half square mile. (See attached map.) 8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal: November 1979 (Election) 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 YES NO x (e) Sewer hook up,permit YES NO X (f) Sign permit YES NO X (g) Water hook up permit YES NO X (h) Storm water system permit YES NO X (i) Curb cut permit YES NO X (j) Electrical permit (State of Washington) YES NO X (k) Plumbing permit (King County) YES NO X (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: 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: NA 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 (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? YES MAYBE NO (b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? X (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? X (d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? 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? 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? (i) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise avail- able for public water supplies? Explanation: YES MAYBE NO 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? X (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? X Explanation: • YES MAYBE NO 6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? Explanation: 7. 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: Tukwila will probably implement its Comprehensive Plan in developing proposed zoning regulations. These may vary from King County's present zoning. A separate environmental review will be done at such time as zoning is reviewed. 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. 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) 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? 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: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? (e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? YES MAYBE NO X (f) Other governmental services? • YES MAYBE NO 1 Explanation: (a) The City would propose a contract to Fire District! 18 and 23 to continue providing fire services. .If the Fire Dis- tricts choose not to contract, the City would need to develop a plan to provide fire protection. (b) Police protection would change from King County to Tukwila. (over) 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? Explanation: X 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? X (d) Sewer or septic tanks? X (e) Storm water drainage? (f) Solid waste and disposal? Explanation: Where storm drainage problems exist, short term corrective measures may be taken. Later, storm sewers may be under - grounded with street improvement projects. X 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the crea- tion of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? Explanation: X 14. 1 (d) Tukwila may be requested by King County to assume maintenance of any park properites. (e) Tukwila would take over road maintenance. (f) The area would stay within Water District 75 and the Val Vue Sewer District. .4 • • 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. Signature and Title Duane Knittel, Chairman -8-