Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-ND-14 - CITY OF TUKWILA - SIDEWALK PLANSIDEWALK PLAN EPIC -ND -14 APPENDIX 2 CITY OF TUKWILA. STATEMENT OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK PLAN ACTION: The adoption of a sidewalk plan APPLICANT: City of Tukwila DECLARATION: Based upon the environmental assessment prepared on this proposed action, Chapter 18.98 of the Tukwila Municipal Code and the Guidelines for the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, I hereby find that the proposed •legislation creating a sidewalk plan will not have a significant effect upon the environment and therefore an environmental impact statement will not be required. SIGNATURE OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ell Stoknes, Planning Director Date: April 8, 1975 CITY OF TUKWILA • ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ON THE PRELIMINARY SIDEWALK PLAN This assessment has been prepared pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 and Chapter 18.98 of the Tukwila Municipal Code April 1, 1975 CONTACT PERSON: Gary Crutchfield, Assistant Plannei 6230 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 242 -2177 TABLE OF CONTENTS PROPOSED ACTION The Action Justification Location Historical Background Public Participation. Relation to Existing Legislation Decisions Remaining EXISTING CONDITIONS ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT Social Esthetic Natural Economic UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED Appendix 1 - Correspondence - Minutes. Appendix 2 - Negative Declaration LIST OF MAPS Map 1 (City Limits Map) Map 2 (Land Use South of I -405) A. PROPOSED ACTION: 1. The Action: The proposed action is the review and adoption of a sidewalk plan for the City of Tukwila, not to include recreational trails. 2. Justification: This plan is justified since it will provide means for safe pedestrian movement for both citizens of Tukwila and visitors. The plan is additionally justified in that it will allow orderly and planned construction of sidewalks, where appro- priate, in such a manner that would allow the city and private property owners alike to budget expenditures. In addition, it would establish policies so that both the property owners and the city would . understand their respective responsibilities. 3. Location: This legislation could affect all areas of the city of Tukwila where sidewalks are not available in areas of public right -of -way. (See map 1 of the city limits.) 4. Historical Background: During 1973 proposals for sidewalks were proposed for the industrial area of the city. In response to this, the Planning Commission received a letter from the Tukwila Indus- trial Council dated September 12, 1973 stating the following: • (a) They opposed the installation of sidewalks in any area until the need is established. (b) That owners of industrial properties affected be included in any decision process determining the need for sidewalks. Presently no legislation exists regulating sidewalks. Consequently, they have been required on a piecemeal basis with building permits and L.I.D.'s. No sidewalk plan exists for any part of Tukwila. 5. Public Participation: The record indicates proposals for installa- tion of sidewalks was under discussion by the Planning Commission MAP 1 COTY OF TOWILA CITY LIMITS TURMILM CITY LIMBS --J april 1975 in 1973. At that time the Andover Industrial Council was involved, however, no action occurred. The present plan proposed was submitted to the Andover Industrial. Council and Architectural Control Commission and they both came out against sidewalks in industrial areas. The document was amended by the Planning Commission on March 12, 1975, and again information was supplied to the Andover Industrial Council for their comments. They were informed of Planning Com- mission meetings also, should they want to attend. Meetings of. the Planning Commission and /or City Council will be published and/ or posted in accordance with present laws. 6. Relationship to Existing Laws, Policies and Plans: At the present time the city has no existing laws, policies or plans relating to sidewalks. The Planning Commission does, however, have architectural review over developments in CM. zones and could require sidewalks where they feel a need exists. Nothing presently exists regarding sidewalks in other areas of the city. ■ 7. Any Decisions Remaining Before Implementation of the Legislation:. The Planning Commission must recommend approval of the plan during :a published public hearing and the city council adopt it during a regular city council meeting prior to adoption. B. EXISTING CONDITIONS: At the present time there are no laws, policies or plans in the City of Tukwila relating to sidewalk construction. This proposed legislation is an attempt to fill this void. C. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION: 1. Social: A sidewalk system would provide a means of safe pedestrian access to areas of the city where they have a need to go. 2. Esthetic: The impact in this category varies. In some places it may disrupt existing landscaping in city right -of -way and in other areas it may take the place of an unmaintained ditch. 3. Natural: Sidewalks will replace a natural condition with concrete creating some additional runoff. In other areas it may also create a necessity for' : enclosed storm water system. 4. Economic: Someone has to pay for sidewalks. This plan provides for the following relating to who pays: (a) Residential areas: (1) Paid by city, or (2) Paid by apartment developer with building permit if not constructed, or (3) Paid by developer in new subdivisions (b) Commercial areas: (1) Cost shared equally by city and property owner on L.I.D. basis, or (2) Paid by developer with a building permit in all commer- cial zones or any retail or office type use no matter what zone if sidewalks are not already constructed. (See Map 2 showing land use south of I -405.) This plan will definitely affect the city budget in that it will commit to new expenditures by the city. However, it will be pro- grammed to be developed in conjunction with other budgeted committments. The cost to the developer. (land owner) should be insignificant since costs of installation of either sidewalks or landscaping tends to fluctuate around .60 cents per square foot in 1975 dollars. The ones that would be most impacted will be those who have al- ready gone to the expense of landscaping areas where sidewalks are planned. iEssentially, this would cause a "sunk cost" of the original landscaping costs where sidewalks are planned. D. ANY UNAVOIDABLE ADVERSE EFFECTS: The main adverse effect of sidewalk installation would be the replacement of natural soils and vegetation with concrete and the associated additional runoff. E. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION: The alternatives to this proposal are unlimited, especially in the cost sharing area, which could probably best be represented by a matrix. In an effort to maintain a higher level of understanding, the following alternatives seem most relevant: OPTIONS OPTIONS OPTIONS 1: No action:. This would perpetuate the status quo with sidewalks in commercial and industrial areas being installed on a hit and miss basis and probably no sidewalk construction occurring in residential areas. 2. Residential Area Alternatives: (a) Construct sidewalks on an L.I.D. basis with the property owner paying all. costs. (b) Construct sidewalks on an L.I.D. basis:with costs shared by property owner and the city. ) The city pay all costs, as proposed.in this plan. (d).'Require sidewalk construction With any building permits. (e) Require sidewalks for building permits only for apartments, as proposed in this plan. (f) Not require sidewalks with a building permit, no matter what- type of structure. 3. Commercial Area Alternatives: (a) Construct sidewalks on an L.I.D. basis with property owner paying all costs. (b) Construct sidewalks on an L.I.D. basis with costs shared by the property owner and city, as proposed in this plan. (c) The city pay all costs. OPTIONS • • '(d) Not require sidewalk construction with any building permits. (e) Require sidewalks with building permits in a commercial zone or in developments of a commercial or office nature. (f) Require sidewalk construction in conjunction with all build - ing permits. APPENDIX 1 CORRESPONDENCE MINUTES • FIRE DEPARTIVIEN Kjell..Stokness Director of Planning City of Tukwila. Dear.Mr. Stokness CITY of TUKWILA 444 ANDOVER PARK EAST TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188 TELEPHONE: (206) 244 -7221 March 3, 1975 I have received your memorandum dated February. 28, 1975 regarding preliminary sidewalk . plans for the City of Tukwila. To recap some of the problems that relate to fire protection and sidewalks, I would say the following:. 1. In several areas fire . department connections to specific buildings_ exist in the public_ utilities corridor in the industrial areas and would cost an extreme amount of money to move or alter these systems.. 2. .Throughout the industrial areas and residential sections of the City, fire hydrants are located inside the public utilities corridor. Again, an extreme amount of money would be required by our . city water department to move these fire hydrants. ,Not only would the City of Tukwila water department :.be involved, but several other water districts would be involved. For the safety of residential sections of the City in'regard to people wanting to get to Southcenter walking, no sidewalk plan would be complete without a. pedestrian bridge spanning 405 somewhere in the vicinity between 62nd and 65th. Avenues. This would terminate somewhere along Tukwila Parkway. A pedestrian bridge is needed at the intersection of Interurban Ave. South and 58th. Avenue. This would allow persons who wish to catch the transit system to the City of Seattle to do so and also school children using that area to cross. Interurban safely.. 4. Also regarding pedestrian safety, it should be con - sidered that a walkway or series of steps is needed to allow the residents living in McMicken Heights areas to come from the intersection of 160th. Street and 53rd. Avenue South down to Klickitat Blvd. TRI -LAND CORPORATION SUITE 1120, 1411 4th AVENUE SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98101 MUTUAL 2 -7760 March 12, 1975 Mr. Kjell Stoknes Director, Planning Department City of Tukwila 6230 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98067 Dear Mr. Stoknes: Re: Tukwila Sidewalk Plan Tri -Land Corporation is the owner of warehouses in the Andover /South- center Industrial Parks. When this area was originally planned and designed it was determined to be generally wholesale and warehouse oriented with no retail trade. Traffic was determined to be vehicular consisting of employee transportation and truck service. The area was designed to allow no on- street parking of vehicles and the utilization of landscaping rather than sidewalks. ' • While we can agree that there is some possible need for sidewalks in those areas of Tukwila which are involved in retailing trade or residential living we feel it would be a mistake for the placement of sidewalks in those areas engaged in wholesale' warehousing and distribution. Constructing sidewalks in areas already landscaped and planted would prove to be expensive and difficult. More importantly it would destroy the concept of the Industrial Park complex. Further, the addition of side- walks in these distribution areas would encourage night useage which would create increased problems for police security. Sidewalks would also stimulate illegal on- street parking. Foot traffic must necessarily be kept to a minimum in an industrial ware- housing situation. Until there is justification of a need for sidewalks in the industrial area, we feel that this part of the city should not be included in the Sidewalk Plan. JWT /gn Sincerely, . TRI -LAND CORPORATION W. Teplicky, President Kjell Stokness Director of Planning. Page 2 - MIPIch 3, 1975 In regard to problems.of.fire_department connections. and fire. . hydrants,. ipesidesinvolving_large amounts of_money to.move, tbe. City has.had_a law suit.in the past where a fire hydrant located on the sidewalk, namely, the fire hydrant directly South of. J.C. Penney Company at Southcenter Mall. . - - I would like to have you consider the steps and also bridges for . residents wishing to travel to industrial areas. on foot. in this • sidewalk plan. •You may wish to review the topography. of land- scaping:now being done at most:of.the new buildingslin the Indust- • rial.area. Large mounds of dirt are now being used in the barrier between.street and parking areas of newer' buildings. In regard. to your preliminary. plan, no sidewalks at all are . indicated in*the McMicken Heights area. I think this'area should be taken into consideration with any plan that would be passed or adopted. • . . _ Also, according to your Submitted preliminary plan, no sidewalks are indicated into Southcenter South. This should also be taken . into consideration. .. Other areas where no sidewalks are indicated is in the vicinity of 143rd. Street, 143rd. Place and 144th Street. This are rep- resents not only resid ential but an ever growing employee growth • area. With the gas problems now arising, every consideration should be given to areas involving people getting to work. Reviewing your sidewalk to the entrance of South King County Park, it should be inter-connecting either at the foot of 65th. Avenue or both 65th. and Interurban Avenue. Pedestrians are now using this stretch of road and an extremely hazardous situation exists. Also, sidewalks should be considered on the West side of West Valley Highway due to the growth of industrial development in that area, Longacres traffic, and also the speedway effect of most of the traffic. I hope these views are of use to you in your study. If you have any further questions, please feel free to forward them. HHC:vma cc: TFD file Yours very truly / C4 H. H. H. Crawley , Fire Chief CABOT, CABOT a FORBES 331 ANDOVER PARK EAST, TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188 208 246-3439 SAN FRANCISCO 415 981-5180 March 12, 1975 Mr. Kjell Stokeness Planning Director 6230 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 Dear Mr. Stokeness: I think it was a very thoughtful gesture on your part to invite members of the Tukwila business community to the meeting last week for discussion of the proposed industrial /commercial sidewalk system. It is my very strong feeling that for the area south of Inter- state 405, consideration of sidewalks involves consideration of four important factors: 1) landscaping, 2) safety, 3) street parking, and 4) crime. With 20 feet of landscaping in front of most buildings in the Andover Industrial Park, a 5 foot wide sidewalk eliminates 25% of the landscaped area. As you know, Cabot, Cabot &Forbes has gone to extensive extra effort and expense to install nice green landscaping and trees in front of all of our buildings. Over the 25 years since starting the industrial park concept in America, CC &F has learned that industrial areas are best designed for industrial users, including off - street parking and little provision for pedestrians walking through the industrial areas. We find that people working and doing business in industrial buildings normally drive their own automobiles to work. People waling through the park are liable to be injured by active trucking service to and from the buildings. Street parking impedes truck flow and is hazardous to . both trucks and automobiles. All of our industrial parks involve important consideration of factors necessary to minimize the instances of criminal activity, eliminating sidewalks eliminates the number of people wandering through the industrial area. When the city police encounter someone walking near buildings at night, and there are no side- walks, they normally stop these people to inquire about their. activities. None of this discussion has involved economics, disruption of on- going businesses, or the actual number of pedestrians who would actually use sidewalks if they were available. CC &F is not A SUBSIDIARY OF CABOT, CABOT & FORBES CO., 28 STATE STREET. BOSTON. MA. 02109 OFFICES IN: BUFFALO. PHILADELPHIA. LANHAM. MD.. RICHMOND. WINTERGREEN. VA. BATON ROUGE. PHOENIX. TUCSON. SEATTLE, LOS ANGELES. SANTA ANA. SAN DIEGO AND SAN FRANCISCO • CABOT, CABOT a FORBES Mr. Kjell Stokeness March 12, " 1975 Page Two prepared to pay for sidewalks which we feel are undesirable and we do not feel are needed. We do not wish to have further construction activity around our completed buildings which might disturb our tenants. Lastly, we feel that the City of Tukwila should not incorporate a city sidewalk system for the area south of Interstate 405 into the City Master Plan at this time. If some future very thorough study should establish some unknown need for the sidewalks not presently existing, then I think the sidewalk issue should be reopened at that time. Thank you very much for your thoughtful consideration in soliciting 'comments . from the business community who is directly.. affected by the impact which would result from sidewalk construction in the industrial and commercial areas. Sincerely, J. Thomas Bernard General Manager psr encl. BRUCE E. McCANN March 19, 1975 Mr. Kyell Stoknes City of Tukwila Planning Director 6230 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98067 Dear Mr. Stoknes: 8013 Perimeter Road South Seattle, Washington 98108 As owner of the property at 1141 to 1191 Andover Park West, 950 Andover Park East, 6500 Todd Boulevard and Southcenter South Industrial Park, I wish to go on record with the City as being opposed to the mandatory installation of sidewalks in the areas of the City that are primarily for warehousing and industrial use. BEM /mm Sincerely yours, allpak container, inc, 480 Andover Park East Seattle, Wash. 98188 248 -1400 March 24, 1975 Mr.,Kjell Stoknes City of Tukwila Planning Director 6230 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington. 98067 Dear Mr. Stoknes, Alipak Container, Inc., requests that it go on record as being very sternly opposed to any such sidewalk plan as it relates to the commercial district and to the Andover Industrial Park area. The reasons for our opposition are as so stated in the meeting held on Friday, March 7, 1975. Sincerely, ALLPAK CONTAINER, INC. JFH /sp . Holton sident cwiA VA op, 2'�i975 CITY OF a UKWI A X111915 (�. disc bution facilities are. not presently installed underground; provided, however, the excepted facilities will be installed underground pursuant-to the under -. ground installation of said main distribution facilities as designated by the Capital Improvement Program for Residential Underground Utilities." Sidewalk Plan ' Kjell Stoknes, Planning. Director, informed the Commission that a preliminary draft of the sidewalk plan will be .available for dissemination at the agenda meeting which staff requests be conducted on Wednesday, 12•March 1975. Commission agreed to meet at 7:30 P.M. Wednesday, 12 March Interpretation of Use - SEATTLE BARREL Staff explained that it was under the impression the proponent was N.W. Cooperage and recently_was informed' .of the fact that SEATTLE BARREL was the'proponent and because of the reference to N.W. Cooperage a misinter -:- pretation of the use described was possible. Thus, Mr. Sanft of SEATTLE BARREL requested he be allowed to present a description of the proposed use. Mr. Marvin Bateman, attorney for the Sanft brothers (owners of SEATTLE BARREL),. presented a written descrip- tion of -the proposed use and proceeded to deliver a lengthy oral explanation of said_use concluding with the request . the barrel recycling use be related to Section 18.40.010 paragraphs (33) & (39) as a similar use and in accordance with the fencing requirements. Mr. Al Sanft stated the facility will appear quite similar to the GACO Western operation existing at the southern end of the city. • Staff indicated . agreement with the requested relation--.--- of use to those spelled out in 18.40.010 (39) as long .- as.any outside storage is adequately screened from sight. Commission discussed at some length the need to widen - and improve the rights- of- way'in this vicinity. Requested a report from the Public Works Director t be reviewed at the agenda meeting of 12 March. Motion by Mr. Zepp, ' seconded by Mr. _Lamb and carried to allow the proposed use to be located in an M -1 - zone providing any outside storage not exceed ten (10) -- feet and all outside storage be sight - obscured with a fence a minimum of eight feet in height. . Frank Todd, Mayor CITY OF TUKW LA 6230 SOUTHCENTER BLVD. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98067 PLANNING DEPARTMENT PLANNING COMMISSION. Minutes of the Work Meeting, 12 March 1975 . • The March work meeting of the Tukwila Planning Commission was commenced at 8:00 PM in the City Council Chambers in City Hall. Members present were: Messrs. West, Link, Mettler, Kirsop, and Sneva. Staff members included Messrs. Crutchfield, Satterstrom, and Stoknes. Ed Bauch was.. present in the audience. SIDEWALK PLAN Kjell Stoknes, planning director, gave a short introduction to the preliminary Sidewalk Plan and reported on the March 7th meeting with the Tukwila Industrial Council. The Council's reception to the Sidewalk Plan was something less than opened - armed,: and at the March llth meeting of the Architectural control Commission it was moved that the Commission go on record as opposed to sidewalks in the industrial area. The Planning Commission proceeded to go through the preliminary Sidewalk Plan policy by policy. A number of revisions were made,-including the omission of. the "regional sidewalk system" from the Plan. As a result of the numerous revisions, staff decided to revise its Implementation chapter to reflect the changes made by the Commission. PLANNING AREA STUDY Fred Satterstrom briefly reviewed the content of the study, stating that the report was a study, not a plan.. It contains no policy statement, but is merely a definition of that area which will be looked at when the comprehensive plan is being completed. The work meeting was adjourned at 10:15 PM. -f ( I�erbert Lamb, Secretary Tukwila Planning Commission Planning Commission Minutes of Meeting E. 27 March 1975 • Page 3 The Commission agreed with this procedure to allow the area to develop only to the extent necessary to establish the L.I.D. but cautioned Staff to main- tain a close watch on that area's development. Sidewalk Plan Mr. Crutchfield noted all the Commissioners ceived the revised draft, dated March 1975, preliminary Sidewalk Plan. had re- of the Mr. Norm Seethoff, Allied Stores and Mr. John.: Flattery, Lincoln Properties both voiced the lack of a needs study as well as the lack of a well - defined and equitable implementation program. .:. Mr. Crutchfield noted these matters would be more appropriately discussed at a work meeting or the Public Hearing. Motion by Mr. Sneva, seconded by Mr. Zepp and car •Tied to conduct a work meeting . regarding the Side - walk Plan at 8:00 p.m: Thursday, 10 April 1975.and schedule the Public Hearing for consideration of the Sidewalk Plan at the regular April meeting. NEW BUSINESS (No new business was submitted for the Commission's 'agenda this month. ) SIGN REVIEWS. A. Rainier Bank Mr. Crutchfield displayed the drawing of the Rainier Bank freestanding sign proposed to replace the exist- ing NB of C bank sign located on Southcenter Parkway. Noted the proposed sign conforms in all respects to the Sign Code. Motion by Mr. Lamb, seconded by Mr. Sneva and carried to approve the sign as presented. B. American Home Furnishings Mr. Crutchfield disbursed letters from American Home Furnishings, both requesting an additional wall sign ACTION: APPQNIX 2 CITY OF TU KID I LA. STATEMENT OF NEGATIVE DECLARATION ON THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK PLAN The adoption of a sidewalk plan APPLICANT: City of Tukwila DECLARATION: Based upon the environmental assessment prepared on this proposed action, Chapter 18.98 of the Tukwila Municipal Code, and the Guidelines for the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971, I hereby find that the proposed legislation creating a sidewalk plan will not have a significant effect upon the environment and therefore an environmental impact statement will not be required. SIGNATURE OF RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: ell Stoknes, Planning Director Date: April 8, 1975