HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-ND-29 - LOWER FOSTER ANNEXATIONLOWER FOSTER
ANNEXATION
EPIC -ND -29
CITY OF TUKWILA
CERTIIICATION BY APPLICANT:
June 24, 19/S
Ihereby certify that the information furnished in this environmental checklist
•
sheet is true and accurate to the best. of my knowledge.
Fred N. Satterstrom Associate Planner
Signature and Title
• Project Name: Lower Foster Annexation
Project Address:
BELOW THIS LINE FOR CITY USE ONLY
ACTION.BY OTHER-DEPARTMENTS:
1. Date of Review: Building .by:
Planning by:
Engineering by:
Police by:
Fire by:
environmental checklist determined that:
2. Agency review of
`:The project is exempt by definition.
The project has no significant environmental impact and application
should be processed without further consideration of environmental affects
The project has significant environmental impactoandrah complete
enen irpermi
mental impact statement must be prepared p
More specific information is needed to determine impact.
Date
=Check one
CO or ( -)
CO or ( -)
CO or ( -)
CO • or ( -)
( +) or (-)
gnature and. itle.of Responsible Official
3. Applicant was notified of decision on:
'by
Date
In accordance with Washington State, Environmental Policy.Act and City of Tukwila
Ordinance No. 759.
(- : -) Means recommend a full environmental impact statement be done.
(.-) Means recommend a full environmental impact statement'not•be done.
Staff Person
ate
by .
Letter, phone
CITY OF TUKWILA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE
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 an environmental assessment or full impact statement is required. Other
forms have been developed for single- family home applications and legislation
proposals.
BACKGROUND DATA:
Name of applicant: City of Tukwila
1.
2. Address and phone of Applicant: 14475 - 59th Avenue South
3. Project name: Lower Foster Annexation
4. Project location: Area between Tukwila City Limits and I -5 near Interurban.Ave.
5. Nature and brief description of proposal: Annexation of unincorporated area by
the election method.
6. Estimated completion date: N/A
7. Do you -have any plans for future expansion, if yes please explain: N/A
What other governmental permits are required prior to completion
project?
Rezone, conditional use, substantial
King County HydrolicsPermit
Building permit .
Puget Sound Air Pollution Control. Permit
Sewer hookup permit
Sign permit
Water hook up permit
Storm water system permit
Curb cut permit
Electrical permit (State of Washington)
Plumbing permit (King County)
Other
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
(i)
(j)
(k)
(1)
development,
etc.
of this
- YES
YES
YES .NO X
YES • NO X
YES • NO X
YES -.
YES
YES
YES
NO X
NO X
YES
YES
NO X
NO X .
NO X
NO X
NO X
No. X
• 9. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by
your proposal? If yes, explain: No
10. Agency requiring checklist: City of Tukwila, Department of Community Development
11. Accepted by agency on: July 22, 1976 by:
(to be filled in by city upon receipt of checklist).
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required.)
Earth. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Unstable earth conditions or in
any changes in geologic sub -
structures:
(b) .Disruptions, displacements
or overcovering of the soils:
(c) Change in topography or ground
surface relief features?
(d) The destruction, covering, or
modification of any unique
geologic or physical features?
(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
in 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:
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
in any change in climate, •
either locally or regionally?
Explanation:
•
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
amount of surface water run-
off?
(c) Alterations to the course or
flow of flood waters?
(d) Change in the amount of surface
water in any watercourse?
(e) Discharge into surface waters,
or in any alteration of sur-
face.'water quality, including
temperature or turbidity?
Alteration of the direction or
rate of flow of ground waters?
Change in the quantity of
ground waters, either through
direct additions or withdrawals,
or through interception of an
acquifer by cuts or excavations?
(h) Deterioration in ground water
quality, either through direct
injection, or through the seep -
age of leachate, phosphates,
detergents, waterborne virus
or bacteria, or other substances
.into the ground waters?
(i) Reduction in the amount of water
otherwise available for public
water. supplies?
(f)
(g)
Explanation:
•Yes Maybe No
X
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, micro-flora 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 bar-
rier to the normal replenishment of
existing species?
Explanation:
• Fauna:- Will the proposal result in:
• • Yes Maybe No
X
X-
X
(a) Changes in the diversity of species,
or numbers of any species of fauna
• (birds, land animals including rep-
tiles, fish and shellfish, benthic
organisms, insects, or micro-fauna)? X
(b) Reduction of the numbers of any
unique, rare or endangered species
of fauna? X
(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 wildlife
habitat?
Explanation:
Noise. Will the proposal increase exist-'
ing noise levels?
Explanation:
X
•
Light and Glare. .Will the proposal produce
new light or glare?
Explanation::'
Land Use. Will. the proposal result in the
alteration of the present or planned land
use of an area?
Yes • Maybe
Explanation:
Area will :beplanned by City of Tukwila instead of King County.
Natural Resources. Will the proposal re-
sult in:
(a) Increase in the rate of use of any
natural resource?
(b) Depletion of any nonrenewable nat-
ural resource?
Explanation:..
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
radiation) in the event of an accident or .
upset conditions?
Explanation:
Population. Will the proposal alter the
location, distribution, density, or growth
rate of the human population of an area? .
Explanation:
Population may vary somewhat in density depending on .
planned land use adopted for area upon annexation.
X
•
Housing. Will the proposal affect existing
housing availability, or create a demand for
additional housing?
Explanation:
Transportation /Circulation. Will the pro -
posal 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 or air
traffic?
Explanation:
Yes Maybe
Local Services. Will the proposal have an
.effect upon, or result in a need for new
services in any of the following areas:
(a) Fire protection?
(b) Police protection?
(c) Schools?
(d) Parks?
(e) Maintenance of public facilities,
including roads?
(f) Other'governmental services?
Explanation:
Existing city resources (fire and police) are expected to be adequate to
cover annexation area. Some roads may be improved.
X
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:
Utilities. Will ' the proposal result in a need
for new - systems, or alterations to the follow-
ing 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:
• Yes Maybe No
X
Human Health. Will the proposal result in the
creation of any health hazard or. potential .
health hazard (excluding mental health) ?.
Explanation:
Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the
obstruction of any scenic vista or view open
to the public, or will the proposal result
in the creation of an aesthetically offensive
site open to public view?
Explanation:
•
Yes Maybe No
Recreation. Will the proposal result in an
impact upon the quality or quantity of ex- X
isting recreational opportunities?
Explanation:
Archeological /Historical. Will the proposal
result in an alteration of a significant
archeological or historical site?
Explanation:
Revenue. Will the proposal cause a signifi-
cant increase in city revenues?
Explanation:
A significant gain in property tax 'revenues to the
City of Tukwila is. expected.
Employment. Will the proposal create.a
significant amount of new jobs?
Explanation:
CITY OF TU14.IILA
REPORT ON TWO POTENTIAL ANNEXATION AREAS:
1. Peninsula (Pamela Drive) Area
2. Lower Foster Area
PREPARED BY:
TUKWILA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
FEBRUARY 2, 1976
PART 1
PART 11
PART 111
PART 1V
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION
PENINSULA POTENTIAL ANNEXATION
LOWER FOSTER POTENTIAL ANNEXATION
APPENDIX
PART .I
INTRODUCTION
The Tukwila City Council requested the Planning Staff to provide information
on two areas which could be used to determine the desireability of annexation
and the best mathod to use if an annexation attempt is to be made. These two
areas are shown on the following map.
In this report, the area shaded as number one will be called the "Peninsula
area and the area shaded as number two will be called the "Lower Foster
area." This report covers each separately since they cannot be annexed under
one action due to their physical separation.
POTENTIAL ANNEXATION METHODS:
There are several options that can be used in an annexation attempt. All of
them need the support of the people in the area proposed to be annexed.
The annexation alternatives are as follows:
1. By. Resolution for Election:
Option 1. Resolution initiated by the City Council determining it
would be in the best interest and general welfare of the City to
annex the area and calling for an election. See RCW 35.13.015 for
procedural requirements, 1973 supplement.
Option 2. Petition for election to annex initiated by 200 of the
qualified voters residing in the area who voted in the last election.
The City Council by resolution must approve or reject the petition
within 60 days and then initiate an election. RCW 35.13.020, 1973
supplement.
•
2 By petition of property owners. By this method the following must
occur:
a. Not less than ten percent of the residents in the area to be
annexed or the owners of not less than 10% of the area must
notify the City Council of their intent to annex in writing.
RCW 35.13.125 (1972)
b. The City Council must than seta meeting date within 60 days
with petitioners to determine if the City will accept the
annexation, and other questions of assuming indebtedness and
adoption of a Comprehensive Plan, if prepared. RCW 35.13.125 (1973).
c. The petition for annexation is drawn by the City and must be
signed by not less than 75% in value, according to assessed
valuation, of the area to be annexed. RCW 35.13.130 (1973).
•
d. City Council passes a resolution accepting the annexation
petition and states an "intent to annex" the area. RCW
35.13.125 (1973).
e. Petition and intent to annex resolution passed to, King County
Boundary Review Board for approval. RCW 35.13.171 (1973).
f. After approval by above, City passes Ordinance annexing area.
Annexation becomes effective on the date fixed on the annexing
ordinance. RCW 35.13.160 (1973).
For full requirements and procedures for annexation reference should be made to
State Laws, RCW Chapter 35.13.
SUMMARY:
Based upon comments from department heads of the city, the two areas are
considered natural service area extensions for the City without a need for
additional manpower or equipment. See the letters in the back of this
document for comments from the various departments.
The major fiscal impact will be based upon a City Council decision whether or
not to add the area to the present city undergrounding program. Staff recommends
this program be extended.
i
cgTy OF TllWiLA
PART II
PENINSULA POTENTIAL ANNEXATION
(PAMELA DRIVE AREA)
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
A. Natural Characteristics:
This section is intended to provide some background information on the
Natural Characteristics and related opportunities and limitations of the
land due to these characteristics.
1. Geology:
The Geology of this peninsula area is alluvium, it consists
primarily of silt, clay and some peat all of "which was laid down by
rivers after the retreat of the glacier. This area has poor founda-
tion stability and sizemic stability.
2. . Slope:
This area is flat, that is, between 0 -5% slope.
3. Water Features:
The primary water feature is the Duwamish River which separates the
peninsula from the rest of Tukwila.
4. Soils:
The soils are alluvial in nature which are deep sedimentary soils of
silt, clay and some peat. Characteristics of these soils include low
bearing capacity, slight erosion problems, porr internal drainage, good
arability and high water table. The high water table and low bearing
capacity require much site preparation prior to development. The high
fertility of the soil is well suited to agriculture.
5. Vegetation:
There are some significant stands of trees generally following the
banks of the Duwamish River. Otherwise, no significant vegetative
characteristics exist.
6. Wildlife:
The wildlife is generally that which is characteristic to the
Tukwila area and valley environment.
B Population /Social Characteristics:
1. Population:
According to 1970 Census figures, the population of the area is 119.
2. Social Characteristics:
There is no reliable information available regarding this subject.
It can only be assumed it has age, income, educational and other
social characteristics similar to the City of Tukwila residents.
C. Housing Characteristics and Land Use:
1. Housing Characteristics:
1970 Census figures show approximately 20% of the houses built in
Tukwila to have been constructed prior to 1950. It is felt that
almost all of these structures in this area were built prior to 1950.
There are approximately 38 housing units in this area, most of which
are owner occupied. The average assessed valuation for 1975 of
buildings in this area is approximately $7,300. Total 1975 assessed
valuation of the entire area is approximately $589,000. (King
County Assessor's Office Records)
2. Land Use:
All of the land in the area being proposed for annexation is presently
used for single - family dwelling purposes. The sole exception to this
is a small pet bedding manufacturer which is in a small area intruding
into this peninsula which is within the City limits of Tukwila and not
included in this subject area.
D. Zoning and Comprehensive Planning:
1. The present zoning under King County for this area is suburban residen-
tial. This calls for minimum lots per dwelling unit of 5 acres unless
an approved subdivision has been established in the area. Average lot
size per dwelling is approximately 12,500 square feet.
2. Comprehensive Plan:
King County Comprehensive Plan for this area is the same as their
zoning category.
E. Streets /Bridges /Railroads:
1. Streets:
Access to this area is over a bridge from Interurban Avenue on the
west and South 130th Place on the North. Some of the roads in the area
are in need of operating. There are approximately .8 of 1 mile of road
in this area.
2. Bridges:
There is one bridge providing access to the area accross the Duwamish
River from Interurban Avenue. This is an old bridge and narrow width
with an established load limit placed on it. The bridge from Interurban
to this area is substandard but sound.
3. Railroads:
A major railroad right -of -way exists adjacent of this area on the east
making access in that direction impossible.
F. Utilities:
There presently are no sanitary sewers being provided to this area. The
adequacy of water and storm sewer is uncertain at this time, however, any
public improvements regarding utilities for this area would be supported
by the local occupants through a Local Improvement District. Utility
installation should cause no additional expense to the City of Tukwila.
PROPOSED ACTIONS SHOULD AREA ANNEX
A. Zoning:
Zoning under King County presently limits lot area to a dwelling per 5 acres.
The exception is if this area has an approved subdivision in which case the
lots can be the size approved in the subdivision. Based upon the fact that
the existing average lot size in the area is now approximately 12,5000
square feet, it is recommended that this area be zoned the closest city
zoning category of R -1 -12.0.
B. Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan for this area should be for low density residential
until such time as the necessary utilities are installed. At that point
smaller single - family lot sizes could be allowed if applied for.
C. Street Improvements, Undergrounding:
1. If this area is to annex to the City, a program should be established
to provide the necessary street improvements and also to schedule the
area into the existing undergrounding program. It is estimated that
road improvemnts in the first year would cost the city about $3,000,
for 450 feet of road improvements.
D. Utilities:
Any utilities installed into this area should be paid for on a local
improvement district basis. Attempts should also be made by the City of
Tukwila to determine if any matching monies are available from other
sources to participate in the installation of utilities if it is deter-
mined that they are needed.
•
ANNUAL REVENUE ESTIMATES TO THE CITY IF ANNEXED
1. Property Tax:
2.. Sales Tax:
3. Gambling Tax:
4. Per Capita Tax:
5. Business License:
6. Miscellaneous:
a. Fines and Forfitures
b. Building permits
c. Dog and Cat licences
•
$ 589,000 x .003515 = $ 2,070
27.28 x 119
3,250
500
Total Estimated Revenues $ 5,820
FIRST YEAR COST ESTIMATES TO THE CITY IF ANNEXED
1. Street Improvements:
2. Utilities:
3. Undergrounding Program:
4. Census in Conjunction with Annexation:
$ .25 x 119
$ 3,000
unavailable
30
5. Miscellaneous: undeterminable
Total First Year Cost Estimate: $ 3,030
COST /REVENUE ANALYSIS: (Long term projection)
Since this area is a natural area for extension of city services, no added
manpower or equipment should be needed. The major costs will be street
maintenance and improvements and undergrounding, should the city wish to
extend this service.
The cost revenue projections show the area will bear its share of the costs
of city services rendered. However, should the city extend the underground -
ing to provide this service, this would not be true. Staff recommends schedul-
ing the underground program to this area.
P A R T I I I
LOWER FOSTER POTENTIAL ANNEXATION
EXISTING CONDITIONS:
A. Natural Characteristics:
This section is included to give some general physical characteristics
of the land from information contained in the Data Inventory: Tukwila
Planning Area, 1975.
1. Geology:
The area is composed of 3 geologic characteristics. These are
Vashon till, alluvium, and outwash deposits-. Reference should
be made to page 10 of the Data Inventory for the explanation
and characteristics of each of the geologic deposits and map
1-2 in the same document for the general locations of each type
of geologic feature.
2. Slope Stability:
All areas within this annexation appear to have no problems in
this category except a small area along Interurban Avenue South,
south of 52nd Avenue South. In this area, the stability is un-
known and should be investigated prior to any development occur-
ing. Reference Map 1 -3 in the Tukwila Data Inventory Document..
3. Slopes:
The vast majority of the property within the proposed annexation
is less than 15 %. These areas pose no problems from a development
standpoint. A small portion of land in the northerly portion of
the proposed annexation does contain some slopes from 15 to 25%
Reference Map 1 -4 in the Data Inventory Document for the location
of lands within the various slope categories.
4. Soils Groups:
There are 3 soils groups in this area. These are till soils
over bedrock, till soils over hardpan, and alluvial soils. The
vast majority of the soils are the till over bedrock. In the
northern portion of the area, there are till soils over hardpan
and alluvial soils for a narrow strip along Interurban Avenue.
Reference page 22 and Map 1 -6 in the Data Inventory Document for
Soils Characteristics and general locations of these soils.
B. Population and Social Characteristics:
1. Populations:
The 1970 Census shows the lower Foster area by census block
has a total population of approximately 317 persons. The
vast majority of that population appears to live south of
South 39th Street and west of 53rd Avenue South.
2. Social Characteristics:
The 1970 Census figures are unreliable for this area. Due to
this, it can only be assumed that the general population char-
acteristics are similar to that of the Census tract within which
the City of Tukwila is located. That is, a median age of 25.4
years, average education at 122 years, average income $11,500.
Additional information on this subject can be found in the Tuk-
wila Data Inventory, pages 86 -91.
C. Housing Characteristics and Land Use:
1. Housing Characteristics:
It is estimated that the majority of the structures in the sub -
ject area were constructed prior to 1950. Based on 1975 King ,
County Department of Assessment Figures, the average value of
improvements on properties is $9,100. The average lot value is
approximately $5,000. The value of the entire area proposed for
annexation according to 1975 King County Assessor's office records
is $1,310,000. Of this, $790,000 is for improvements and $520,000
for the value of the land.
According to 1970 Federal Census figures, there are 89 single
family homes and 19 living units in multiple quarters (two' per
structure or more).
2. Land Use:
The land within this potential annexation area is predominantly
single family with 1 business, a machine shop, located adjacent
to Interstate 5 on South 144th Street and several businesses on
Interurban Avenue South north of 52nd Avenue South. Adjacent to
52nd Avenue South is one 4 -plex and presumably several duplexes
interspersed into the area from converted single family homes. In
addition, adjacent to and north of South 139th Street lies some
school district property, of which approximately 3 acres is leased
by the City for park purposes. A school district maintenance fa-
cility is also located in that area as well as additional property
owned by the district south of South 139th Street. Valuation
figures shown in item 1 above do not include the value shown for
school district properties, but only taxable property.
D. Zoning /Comprehensive Plan:
1. Almost all of the property within this potential annexation is
zoned suburban /residential, which requires minimum lots of 5
acres per dwelling unless within an approved subdivision.
Property adjacent to Interurban Avenue is generally zoned BC
(Commercial) with some RM 2400 zoning buffering the residential
area from the commercial. One area adjacent to Interurban
Avenue, south of South 135th Street is generally zoned suburban/
residential since no access is available. directly onto Interurban'
Avenue due to the steep terrain.
2. Comprehensive Plan:
The Comprehensive Plan for the S -R zoning is under King County
that minimum lot area as allowed within an approved subdivision.
Otherwise minimum lot area per dwelling would be 5 acres. North
of the single family area is proposed medium density apartments
(RM 2400) with a narrow strip of BC (Commercial) zoning along
Interurban Avenue where street level access is available to the
abutting land.
E. Streets:
Other than approximately 540 feet of road, the present roads should
be serviceable for a period of approximately 2 years without any
major maintenance. To upgrade these roads would cost approximately
$4,000. There are approximately 1 3/4 miles of roads within this
proposed annexation and these would be scheduled in with the rest of
the roads within the City for preventative maintenance and improvements
as needed.
F. Utilities:
1. Sewers:
This area is currently served by the City of Tukwila for sanitary
sewage disposal and additions to that department would not be re-
quired since it is being handled with present staff plus the
one man added in the 1976 budget.
2. Water Service:
Water in this area is presently being provided by water districts
38 and 20 which would not require any changes within the City of
Tukwila water department at this time. It should be noted that
at such time as annexations increase to the point where it is
felt necessary for the City of Tukwila to assume responsibility
for either of these water districts, plans would be necessary to
increase the staff to support these services. Any additions of
staff for this purpose would be of no cost to the City since
utility departments are self supporting from the revenues produced
on service charges for providing the water.
3. Undergrounding Utilities:
It would be the recommendation of staff that these areas be
programed into the present City of Tukwila undergrounding pro -
gram to receive the benefits of the present occupance of the City
of Tukwila will be receiving from that program.
PROPOSED ACTIONS SHOULD AREA ANNEX:
A. Zoning:
It would be the staff recommendation that existing King County zoning
classifications be converted to the nearest similar City ,zoning cate-
gory. Staff recommends the following conversions:
a. S -R to R -1 -12.0
b. RM 2400 to R -3
c. B -C to C -2
B. Comprehensive Plan:
The following recommendations are made regarding the proposed comprehen-
sive plan for the area should it annes to the City of Tukwila. Staff
recommends the following:
1. That portion of land north of South 135th Street and approxi-
mately 100 feet southwest of Interurban be designated for commer-
cial purposes.
2. That area north of South 136th Street and generally from 100 feet
to 300 feet southwest of Interurban Avenue be designated as medium
density multiple family. Also, in this classification would be the
100 feet depth from Interurban between South 135th and South 136th.
3. That area south of the above 2 and south of South 136th Street all
be designated as single . family residential.
C. Street Improvements /Under rounding Program Extension:
1. Street Improvements:
This area will need about 540 feet of asphalt overlay at an ap-
proximate cost of $4,000. Other than that, the remaining 1 3/4
miles of road within the proposed annexation can be worked into
the present City of Tukwila Maintenance program without a signi-
ficant impact on the operations of the department. For further
information on this see the letter from Steve Hall to Mr. Kjell
Stoknes in the back of this document.
2. Undergrounding Program Extension:
At the present time there is an undergrounding program scheduled
for the entire residential area within the City of Tukwila. Staff
recommends that this program be extended to this area. This in-
cludes at a cost to the City.the undergrounding of overhead lines, .
street overlay, and in most cases, sidewalks.
D. Utilities Needed:
Utility Departments are self supporting, and any additional utilities
needed in the area would be paid for by the user and the ongoing
maintenance program also being paid for by the user through service
charges placed on the relevant utility. In general, sewers are being
provided to the area by the City of Tukwila and water is being pro-
vided to the area by water districts 38 and 20.
FIRST YEAR REVENUE ESTIMATE TO CITY IF ANNEXATION OCCURS:
1. Property Tax: $1,310,000 x .003515 = $ 4,600
2. Sales Tax: 250.
3. Gambling Tax:. $8,000 per quarter x 4 = 32,000
4. Per Capita State Distributed Income: 27.28 x 317 = 8,650
5. Business License: 2 x $25 = 50
6. Miscellaneous: 1,500
a. Dog & Cat
b. Fines & Forfeitures
c. Building Permits
d. Other
Total Estimated Revenues $ 47 ;050
FIRST YEAR COST ESTIMATES TO THE CITY IF ANNEXED:
1. Street Improvements: $ 4,000
2. Utilities: ---
3. Undergrounding Program: undeterminable
4. Census of Area: .25¢ per person x 317 = 80
5. Miscellaneous:
Total Estimated Costs First Year $ 4,080
It "is estimated that this area is a natural service area of Tukwila
and present city manpower and equipment is adequate to service it.
COST /REVENUE ANALYSIS:
Since this area represents a logical service area to the city, no additional
manpower and machinery are needed. The main costs will be related to street
maintenance and improvements.
The most costly item will relate to council policy on whether or not to
extend the undergrounding program to this area at city expense. Staff re-
commends this program be extended to this area.
PART 1V
APPEIDIX
PUBLB WORKS DE ARTM
Ahr
6230 Southcenter L oulevard
Tukwila, Washington 6 "= 06'7
telephone C 206 a 242 - 2177
January 14, 1976
z
Mr. Kjell Stoknes
Planning Director
City of Tukwila
OD 6230 Southcenter Blvd.
Tukwila, Washington 98067
Re: Proposed Annexation
E Lower Foster Area
Q Pamela Drive Area
E' Dear Kjell:
Mr. Isler, Mr. Williams and I toured the entire area under consider-
ation for annexation by the City of Tukwila Council. I am attach-
ing a report which briefly indicates the condition, length and
possibility of repairs with a time limit established. Other. than
N approximately .540 feet of road within the lower Foster area and
approximately 450 feet within the Pamela Drive area the present
roads should be serviceable for a period of approximately two years
without major maintenance. To upgrade these roads to a minimum
standard would cost approximately $7,000.00.
The other roads, as indicated in the attached report are in good
serviceable condition and would not need more than the normal
minor patching during the next several years. The roads are all
located in primarily residential areas and are not subject to high
volume or heavy truck load traffic which causes rapid deteriation
CC
of roads.
F-
ID
z
Within the lower Foster annexation area there are approximately one
and three quarters (1 3/4) miles of road and within the proposed
Pamela Drive annexation there are approximately eight tenth (8/10)
of a mile of roadway surface. The lower Foster area is currently
served by the City of Tukwila for sanitary sewage disposal, and
additions to this department would not be required as we are handl-
ing it with our current staff and the addition of one man at the
1976 Budget time. The water service is presently by Water Districts
#38 and #20, and at the present time would not require any changes
within the City of Tukwila Water Department. However, at such time .
as annexations would increase to the point where it was felt neces-
sary for the City of Tukwila to assume responsibility of either of
Win
Mr. Kjell Stoknes Page
these Water Districts, plans would have to be made as to increase
in staff. Again as I stated in past annexation proposals, the
utility departments are self supporting, and would be carried so
through the revenues produced on service charges for providing water
or disposal of sanitary sewage.
The only department to be affected by either annexation would be the
City Street Maintenance Department. It is the opinion of myself and
Mr. Gene Isler, Field Superintendent, that additional staff would not
be needed at this immediate time. However, to more efficiently
serve the larger and more disbursed . area a replacement would have to
be made of the existing one ton dump truck with a two ton dump truck
in order to facilitate a larger carrying capacity to serve these more
outlying areas. This is required strictly from an efficiency stand-
point. However, I must make you aware that it is the plan of this
Department to request a new two ton dump truck in the 1977 Budget to
replace the current one ton truck which has reached its economic life
expectancy. Therefore, from a practical point of view, I can foresee
no additions required to the City Staff because of either of these
annexations.
Some of the more minor costs involved would be the resigning of the
streets to City standards which cannot realistically be estimated in
thisshort period of time. However, this would be distributed over
a period of time and be programmed within the regular budget.
The final item of concern of this Department would be as to the
Council's position in the extension of the current philosophy of under -
grounding of utilities and upgrading of City streets at no cost to the
citizens. The present six year Utility Undergrounding Program will
be completed, if continued on its present schedule, in the year 1982.
If the Council wishes to continue this policy in annexed areas, it
would be the suggestion of this office that immediately upon annexation
of these areas, if this does come to fruition, that this department
be allowed to extend the Utility Undergrounding Comprehensive Plan to
cover those areas within the annexed areas.
The most critical item within the proposed annexation is the old wooden
trestle bridge which crosses the Green River at 56th Ave. South. This
bridge is currently in good structural condition and is capable of with-
standing normal legal loads under the posted conditions of one legal
load at a time. This bridge provides a serviceable access although it
is substandard in roadway width and in verticle clearance. However,
with only two industries utilizing this structure with larger trucks,
the life span of this bridge could be prolonged for a considerable
amount of time.
Mr. Kjell Stoknes Page 3
The Pamela Drive area is currently not served by sanitary sewers,
and the indications of the Health Department is that there are no
serious failures of septic tanks in this area to merit the installation
of same. If the nature of this area stays as residential, the
installation of sanitary sewers would be in the far future unless the
guidelines of the King County Health Department or the State Department
of Ecology change radically.
To briefly summarize what I have stated, the Public Works Department
should not require additional manpower but merely an upgrading of
the one vehicle as stated. Due to the addition of certain equipment
within the Public Works Maintenance Department, manpower has been
placed in the position of being more .efficiently utilized to complete
more work within a shorter period of time, thus giving me the confidence
in the decision I have herein stated.
However, if you wish more detailed information do not hesitate to
ask me for same.
Sincerely yours,
Steven M. Hall, P.E.
Public Works Director
SMH /ma
Enclosure: Condition of Roads
PROPOSED ANNEXATION - Lower Foster Area
CONDITION OF ROADS
53rd Ave. South from So. City Limits to South 144th
Oiled surface, fair condition, will need overlay within 2 years
Length - 900 feet
53rd Ave. South from 144th to 137th
Entire street overlayed under LID #18 - good condition, no work for
approximately 3 to 5 years. Possibility of storm drainage improvements
within 1 to 2 years. Length - 2,150 feet.
53rd Ave. South from 137th to 52nd Ave. South
Overlayed by County summer of 1975 - no work necessary for approximately
5 years. Length - 450 feet, storm drainage is open ditch.
52nd Ave. South from Interurban to 51st Ave. South
Overlayed under LID ,118, sidewalk one side (old sidewalk presently
serviceable).
No work on street for approximately 5 years. Length - 980 feet.
South 138th St. and 51st Ave. South parallel with Interstate #5 to
location approximately 700 feet North of Interurban
Road is oil shot overlay in good condition,width somewhat substandard.
No turn around at end of roadway, would need minor work within 2 years.
Length - 750 feet.
Small winding road between 51st Ave. South and 52nd Ave. South
Alignment and surface substandard. Presently gravel surface with patches
of oil mat, does not meet minimum City standards. Check for ownership
of right -of -way. Street denoted as South 136th Street. Length - 540 feet.
52nd Place South, One way from 52nd Ave. So. to South 137th St.
Overlayed by King County during summer of 1975, no work required for
approximately 5 years. Street noted as 52nd Place South on South 137th
. Street. Length - 230 feet.
South 137th Street from 53rd Ave. South to 52nd Ave. South
Oil mat surface, minor maintenance needed on a continuing basis, possibility
of overlay with 2 years. Length - 310 feet.
51st Ave. South from South 138th. Street to Cul -de -sac immediately North of
South 139th Street
Street was overlayed under LID #18, sidewalk on East side in semi- useable
state. Cul -de -sac not entirely paved, minor work in patching would be
necessary within first year, and overlay possibility within 5 years.
Length - 850 feet.
CONDITION OF ROADS CONTINUED
Page 2
South 139th Street from 52nd Ave. South to 53rd Ave. South
Present surface oil mat in fair condition, lighter maintenance over
the next two years needed with complete overlay within five years.
Length - 350 feet.
South 142nd Street from 53rd Ave. South west to 52nd Ave. South
Street was overlayed under LID #18, no cul -de -sac at Interstate #5.
No maintenance required within 5 years. Length - 370 feet.
52nd Ave. South running northerly and southerly from South 142nd Street
near Interstate #5
Width is substandard, but overlay satisfactory for service for a
period of approximately five years without any major maintenance.
Length - 620 feet.
This concludes all roads within the Lower Foster proposed annexation.
.PAMELA DRIVE ANNEXATION
56th Ave. Bridge
Bridge is old and of substandard width and capacity, wood trestle
but currently serves the needs of the area. This structure would
have to be replaced within five to ten years in order to meet current
standards. However, the structure itself is sound for serviceability
under current restrictions. Structure is presently one half City and
one hal f County.
56th Ave. South from the center line of Green River easterly to South
130th Place
Street is an old oil mat overlay, would need minor maintenance over
the next two to three years, should be overlayed within five years.
Storm drainage is non - existant. Length - 1,790 feet.
57th Ave. South from South 130th Place to the present City Limits
near Pamela Drive.
Street has non - existant surfacing and would need a complete overlay
and up grade. Length - 450 feet.
South 130th Place from 57th Ave. South to South 129th Street
Street is an extremely low volume intertie between Allentown and the
Pamela Drive area. Surface is oil mat, storm drainage is non - existant,
widening of the street under the Interstate #5 Bridge would be impossible
due to the restrictions of the right -of -way and bridge abutments.
CONDITION OF ROADS CONTINUED Page 3
Minor maintenance would be needed over the normal period of time,
possible overlay within 5 years. Length - 2,080 feet.
This ends the description of all streets within the Pamela Annexation.
• •
FORE DEPARTMENT
CITY of TU KW LA
444 ANDOVER PARK EAST
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON 98188
TELEPHONE: (206) 244 -7221
December 31, 1975
Kjell Stoknes, Director
Planning Department
City of Tukwila
Dear Kjell:
In regard to your memorandum of December 29, 1975 relating to
the Peninsula and lower Foster annexation, I would like to .
make the following comments:
Item #1 - No additional manpower would be needed based
solely upon the requirements for the two
annexations.
Item #2 - No additional equipment would be needed based
.solely upon the requirements for the two
annexations.
Item #3 - I would hope that the street conditions in . the
lower Foster annexation and that the water systems
in both annexations would be given serious review
in your reports. .
Generally, I am in favor of the annexations due to the need
for straightening of boundaries and faster service to the
people involved as provided under first'response agreement
with King County Fire District #1 for the Peninsula'area, and
which is presently being negotiated with King County Fire
District #18 for the lower Foster area.
If you wish any further information, feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
HHC:vma H.H. Crawley
cc: TFD file
• Fire Chief .
•
MEMORANDUM
•
CITY of TUKWILA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
TO: John Sheets
FROM: Kjell Stoknes
SUBJECT:. Proposed Peninsula and Lower Foster annexations,.
FROM: John Sheets
SUBJECT:- Proposed annexation DATE: Jan. 2,1976
DATE: Dec. 29, 197
The City Council has requested that the Planning Department gather some':'
relevant information for them to use in deciding the annexation potential
on the two above referenced areas. In responce to this, I would appreci-
ate it if you could provide me with the following information should the
two referenced areas be brought into the City:
1. Additional man power requirements,and total cost.
2. Additional vehicular needs and costs.
John, I realize that these will strictly be estimates and that's all I'm
really after. Thanks.
KS /cw
Kjelll Stoknes
Inresponse to above; this proposal will not significately impact
our manpower or vehicle needs in the immediate future should the
city accept it. • ,
JAS /jas
OFFICE MEMO
CITY a F TU K IL
January 9, 1976
TO: Kjell Stoknes, Planning Dir.
FROM: Shirlee Kinney, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Proposed peninsula and lower Foster annexation
In reply to your memo of December 29th:
The following areas would be of concern this office but it is my determination
that the cost factors would be insignificant.
a, Census of'area annexed (Could be done in -house or retain a person at 20¢
per name obtained)
b, Licensing of cats and dogs at $1.00 per dog and $.80 per cat.
c, Licensing of businesses at $25.00 per business
d, Registering of voters and election costs (insignificant).
This proposed annexation would not require additional manpower or machinery
for this department.
Shirlee Kinney, City Cler