HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-6-MISC - SEPA RESPONSES TO KING COUNTY REFERRALS (1982)SEPA RESPONSES
TO KC REFERRALS
1982
EPIC- 6 -VIISC
KC FILES:
PROPOSAL
Seattle Eagles Aerie
275 -81 -R
82 -85 -C
82 -90 -C
•
DIVISION OF BUILDING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT
Department of Planning & Community Development
450 King County Administration Building
Seattle, Washington 98104
344 -7970
D E C E M B E R 21, 1 9 8 2 - P U B L I C H E A R I N G
A G E N D A
9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, Council Chambers
Suite 4o2 - King County Courthouse
FILE NO.:
APPLICANT:
82 - 83 - V
VICTOR A. FLETCHER, ET AL
LOCATION: West side of Lake Francis Road Southeast, south of
Southeast 187th Street (private road).
STR: 33 -23 -6
PROPOSAL IS: A Variance to subdivide and create two lots, each
129' in width, rather than the required 135'.
FILE NO.:
APPLICANT:
82 - 89 - V
ELIZABETH L. KNIGHT
LOCATION: Northeast corner of Northeast 104th Street and
132nd Avenue Northeast
STR: W 34 -26 -5
PROPOSAL IS: A Variance to subdivide and create a lot of 12,065
square feet, rather than the required 15,000 square
foot minimum, and without providing curbs, gutters,
sidewalks and sewer service.
10:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NO.:
APPLICANT:
82 - 82 - V
BARBARA LITTLE
LOCATION: Northeasterly side of Southeast May Valley Road,
at 193rd Avenue Southeast (if extended).
STR: 7 -23 -6
PROPOSAL IS: A Variance to legalize a garage 11 feet from the
front property line, rather than the required 30
feet.
10:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NO.:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
STR:
82 - 90 - C
SEATTLE AERIE NO. 1, F.O.E.
West side of 32nd Avenue South, between approx.
South 136th and South 138th Streets (if both were
extended).
E 16 -23 -4
PROPOSAL IS: A Conditional Use Permit to allow a noncommercial,
recreational facility.
DECEMBER 21, 1982 - PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA - PAGE I I
1:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NO.:
APPLICANT:
82 - 86 - V
WESTERN MANAGEMENT ASSOC.
LOCATION: East side of Pacific Highway South (State Route 99)
370' north of South 308th Street
STR: W 9 -21 -4
PROPOSAL IS: A Variance to allow a double -faced identification
sign, 66 square feet in area, rather than the
allowed 16 square feet; and, to allow the sign to
be placed within the required 20' front yard set-
back.
2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NOS.:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
STR:
82 - 85 - C and 82 - 88 - V
BYMAY, INC. (ENCHANTED VILLAGE)
Easterly side of Milton Road South, immediately
south of the existing Enchanted Village develop-
ment at State Route 5 and South 362nd Street
(extended)
28 -21 -4
PROPOSALS ARE 1) Conditional Use Permit to expand an existing,
commercial, recreational facility.
2) a) Variance to allow parking within the required
front yard setback; b) Variance to construct a ten
foot -high fence along the southern property line,
rather than the allowed six -foot fence; c) Variance
to allow a pennant sign 270 square feet in total,
rather than the allowed two square feet.
11/3/82 jf
*ILA
►ti City of Tukwila
;1908;
0
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor
November 19, 1982
Mr. Gerald W. Marbett, Supervisor
Development Controls
Building and Land Development Division
450 King County Administration Building
500 Fourth Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98104
Dear Mr. Marbett,
I have reviewed Proposal(s) No. 82 -85 -C and 82 -90 -C and would like to make
several comments.
First, I would like to say the community does need the open space and play-
field, but I am not sure it needs . the indoor facility as there seems to be
ample supply of facilities that offer the same type of public access. For
example, the Highline Senior Center (1210 S.W. 136th), Crestview Conference
Center (16200 42nd So.) and the Tukwila Community Center (4104 So. 131st).
There is no proof that such a converted facility is needed. In addition, a
multitude of churches provide again similiar services.
I also am concerned about the mixing of adult acitivites and youth activi-
ties unless very careful consideration is given. Perhaps, if the use is
approved, several conditions should be imposed, especially if liquer is to
be consumed.
I also wonder about Reno Nights, etc., in what is considered a very quiet
neighborhood. However, this should not be a concern'of mine, but of the
neighbors.
On page 4 of 8 under IV 5., what is meant by "others as set forth in 275 -81 R ?"
I have no idea what this means. I am concerned because the D.N.S. states.'...
to allow a non - commercial, recreation facility." If groups are charged
fees and the group is not registered with the state as a non - profit club
then there is the possibility the group will charge fees higher than may be
needed. Exactly how the facility is operated and who is charged what has a
major bearing on the exactness of the application and any approvals that may
be given.
In conclusion, I will not say my office is opposed to the proposal, but I do
believe some conditions should be established and an open ear given to the
Page -2-
Mr. Gerald W. Marbetiliupervisor
Development Controls IMF
Building and Land Development. Division
November 19, 1982
nearby residents.
DW /blk
cc: Tukwila Planning Director
Sincerely, j _
Don Williams, Director
Parks and Recreation Department
DATE:
Ding County Executive
Randy Revelle
Department of Planning and Community Developme
Holly Miller, Director
NOVEMBER 5, 1982
PROPOSED /FINAL DECLARATION OF
SIGNIFICANCE /NON - SIGNIFICANCE
SUBJECT: Proposal(s) No.: 82 -85 -C and 82 -90 -C
NOV 8 1982
C OF TUKvtiLA
r DEPT.
In accordance with WAC 197 -10 -355 this Division as lead agency
transmits to you its declaration of mbymtftrEm x /non- significance
for those proposals filed and to be acted upon by the SimxixxigrxImi
7521X/satpcx / Zoning Adjustor, copies of each are attached and
made a part hereof.
Apart from any request for redetermination of the proposed
declarations attached, any information or recommendations you
may have concerning disposition of these proposals should be
forwarded to this Division within three weeks of the date of
this transmittal. Information provided by you may utilized
to evaluate the merits of the proposals and /or their environmental
impact. If we do not receive your comments, we will assume you
have no interest in the proposals.
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: DECEMBER 21, 1982
COMMENTS DUE:
Yours truly,
GE'ALD W. MARBETT, SUPERVISOR
DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
GWM:jf
DECEMBER 1, 1982
Attachments: Copy dec. sig /non -sig
Environmental Checklist to A/J
Vicinity Map (when part of proposal)
Plat /Plot Plan(s) (when part of proposal)
cc: copy transmittal ltr w /dec. to:
SEPA INFORMATION CENTER
Applicant /Authorized Agent
Building & Land Development Division 450 King County Administration Building 300 Fourth Avenue Seattle. Waahinaton 98104 12061344-7900
King County Fxecudve
• Randy Novelle
Department of Planning and Community Development
Eolly Miller; Director
DATE: NOVEMBER 5, 1982
DECLARATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE
WAC 197 -10 -355
FILE NO. 82 - 90 - C
SEATTLE AERIE NO. 1, F.O.E.
.Description of Proposal: A Conditional Use Permit to allow a noncommercial,
rPrrPati.nnal facility
Proponent: WWT,1 R WTT.CnX
Location of Proposal: .wPct of 19nri Averi,e South, hPtwPPn approximately
South 136th and South 138th Streets (if both were extemded)_
Lead Agency: KING COUNTY BUILDING & LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
Department of Planning & Community Development
This proposal has been determined to not have a significant adverse impact
upon the environment. An EIS is not required under KCC 20.44.060 and WAC
197 -10 -300. This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a
completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency.
The negative threshold determination shall become our final declaration (15)
fifteen days from the date shown hereon unless a specific written request
for a redetermination has been received on or before this date WAC 197 -10 -340
(5), (6) and (7).
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
POSITION /TITLE:
SIGNATURE:
CC: Applicant /Authorized Agent
GERALD W. MARBETT, SUPERVISOR
DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
Building & Land Development Division 430 King County Administration Building app Fourth Avenue Seattle. Washington 98104 1206) 344.7800
•. DEVELOPENT PLAN
1. Seattle Aerie No. 1, Fraternal Order of Eagles (Cwner)
2. Existing Zone: RS 7200
3. Acres: $.7 plus
4. Sewer District: Val Vue
5. Water District #125
6. Fire District x`11
7. School District: South Central #406
$. Legal Description: (See Next Page Attached)
9. Purpose: A sports and community complex: (See attached)
10. Features: The existing former grade school building and
grounds and soccer field, will be used almost
without change.
11. No kennels are involved.
12. Vicinity I.ap: Attached
82 -90 C
RECEIVED
BLDG. & LAND DEVELOP.
OCT 211982
1
7s8I9dp,11A1i2i3,44b 6
EXHIBrr
8107310579
47884 -D
PARCEL A:
The east 39.63 feet of Lot 1 and the south half of Lots 3,
4, 5 and 6, Block 2, Riverton Acre Tracts, according to th8
plat thereof recorded in Volume 11 of Plats, page 100, in
King County, Washington.
PARCEL B:
That portion of the northeast quarter of the southeast
quarter of Section 16, Township 23 North, Range 4 East,
W.M., in King County, Washington, described as follows:
Beginning at the east quarter corner of said section;
thence north 89 °52'59" west along the north line of said
southeast quarter 30.01 feet to the west line of the east 30
feet of said subdivision and the true point of beginning;
thence north 89 °52'59" west 519.63 feet to the southwest
corner of the east 39.63 feet of Lot 1, Block 2, Riverton
Acre Tracts, according to the plat thereof recorded in
Volume 11 of Plats, page 100 in King County, Washington;
thence south 0 °13'20" east 91.91 feet;
thence south 2 °31'50" east 89.97 feet;
thence southerly to a point on the westerly extension of the
north line of Jorgensen's Addition, according to the plat
thereof recorded in Volume 53 of Plats, page 71, in King
County, Washington, which is south 89 °01'46" west 55.07 feet
from the northwest corner of said plat;
thence north 89 °01'46" east 55.07 feet to said northwest
corner;
thence south 0 °58'14" east along the west line of said plat
194.75 feet to the southwest corner thereof;
thence south 2 °51'51" west 69.68 feet;
thence south 1 °40'11" west 104 feet, more or less, to a
point which bears north 89 °42'02" west from a point on the
east line of said Section 16;
thence south 89 °42'02" east 472.20 feet, more or less, to
said east line;
thence north 1 °40'11" east along said line 176.24 feet to
the south .line of the north 487 feet of said subdivision,
being the south line 32nd Avenue South as conveyed under
Recording Number 3410478;
thence west along said south line to the west line of the
east 30 feet of said subdivision;
thence north 1 °40'11" east along said west line 72.13 feet
more or less to the north line of South 137th Street as
• shown on said Jorgensen's Addition;
thence south 89 °01'46" west along said north line 120 feet;
thence north 1 °40'11" east 240.32 feet;
thence north 89 °31'00" east 120 feet to a point which is
south 1 °40'11" west 177.27 feet, more or less, from the true
point of beginning;
thence north 1 °40'11" east 177.27 feet, more or less, to the
true point of beginning.
i'
io.'
isa
ft it L
%r�r
11
E NCL.7jE.7-
Cow bee 1
Ti
f
3y' er.!
�l
CAsCf:
ealm6v7/,q y Sosib2L.-
s, •
le
t
rice
v
pc, riot./
G 0
1'
CIE t y
A
36'
Of
•
v,
1
I/
t PR /A/ Ip
VI- MAL
f.v
k
F
c y � Sr
• fCi feIiEN Sib
�ii�
e
Crm
G/
8�'
LAGLZS' PI ANi'•LJ Pi?CPLR!'Y USL
The Eagles do not plan to have any new construction on the.
site, with the possible exception of a small shed along side
the school building to shelter the lawn mowing equipment.
The Lagles ;would expect that there could be .accommodated. on
the property a maximur.; 'of 500 persons if the fields were ir:
use and several of the rooms in the school and the gym -audi-
torium at the same time. This is not expected to occur since.
many of the uses are mutually exclusive. it is anticipated
that 100 cars can park on the site,. and 350 people at an
evening function four times a month:
The Eagle's use of the site for its own ?members for a: dance or
other gathering,.would be expected a maximum.of twice a rionth.
1. Scheduled Sports -- (Soccer or softball, the.fields overlap.)
Fields: (No games before-12:30 on Sundays). •
Soccer: 6 games on'Saturdays, 4 on Sundays,2 on week nights
• Softball: 8 games on •Saturdays, • 5 on Sunday,. 3 on week nights
Playground: Swings etc. for community use - .non - scheduled
Gym: Basketball, volleyball,.badmir :ton, etc.
Evenings and weekends as scheduled. No later than 11:00'P.1..
Sports clinics: indoors or outdoors -- one day or a•few hours
on a particular sport
Ping Pong, etc. T'ournements, as community desires
Building use .
iJay Care Room
'Eagle concert band room,.
.Senior Citizens room
Crafts, room
Library - reading room
Exercise rooms (4)
Teams dressir:_; room
Drill Teams room (Ec field use (Ladies' Auxilary G :' Ur.. Giris)
Square Dance Classes.
T.V.—Game Room •
l•'iemorabilia room
Scheduling office
Sports Clubs' office. •
Sports Clubs' meeting room.
1II. tither uses
1. l:eetings,for sports clubs & /or teams
2. Dances .
3. Banquets .. .
4. Bingo & /or Reno nights (for various clubs) •
(at this time not intended as monthly. event)
5. Guest speakers
IV. Conditions on use
1. Scheduled - -to avoid conflicts •
2. Banquet permits'(Liquor board)•obtained by using.grodp
3. (:caner will not be charging fees for use
4. • User may impose reasonable charges for materials (for
'craft classes? etc.) & /or for classes 'taught (square
danc :.n g, etc.)
5. ethers as set forth in 275-61 It
278.3o
7L,./0/
re. IS,
1 333
/44 /Ye o r
%S.) IT -15
4C1 , �. • • • - 4 I L .376 66 o
li_ �.,---1. � p I - 220 __
. • m i PS- -r" --- • 71,-----
1 1
76 I 721 _ <7 �
PC; _ I I i'.773.5/ r._
I
�� 3 1 i
7 Irt 1..
I
N 1 ti 1 N I
I :1.4 90
4621.36
:10
5
/79 74
;g
13335
1613
1334:
13505
Q 13':)
/35TH
NECAI vcoo .a
.o rilfn 1 ti sf
0 ° 18tH
It !O4
S /367H
H
0 1 1,
Lac __i; 1 1
' I 1.1
113 FAIT. 1
/24-35 =? I3520 i^- 1 1
t ♦v7
1l � ? l�IS.
16f2� IOC I Di
v. v. APr3.
135) 5
e.
SCHOOL 01 TRICT
:.r 65&
�Q I9. 1S A7 1 16
_ssc scso, :nsl : Ji 37 12-7:5 i :7 •.:27'a ; se s7 yr
C.3. Ac.
-z-
'31
13E3�
::CA
13E . C. ?Jt.v.: •5 .4C0
,47 S8
36
r, 721
! 1.
3ovlt Lot 4
39 Acres
.• /�.�c clwstR.
NOSP.rA( •
'erc
�z i 23,;N3
t ; =:L 4 i 2t.'.D
�n�s ccc� Er UX
I.78. Ac f/ 3J/
.leer
6 29
`t 9 1 =8
• !O 27
J.3=
0 J •2 .}c
el/s6
6th AVE $ 4
4i/d-
eath PL.
gfh
AVE: 3:
33 rd`..AVE
rI
.38th AVE
38th .AVE'
40 th.
E
•
•
101..7u c:.iia i. Sc.w G: "i∎ Tii:T• hoc
catcaote::C-LEM&WJA '( Scuo %�C
• CONC. 1:ALL -
LAtJ`'- O,cAFR c
Is.; 2° 31' 500" `!J
_ _ 8 DiLJV.axAO:
241.QI'')', N i37 20"W
o 7" DCy WCYJD PROFC6 D •O.HEAD RuX,
o HTMAn 11JA. 1 STATION,
o 10, 1AAD.K'
:STt•JG
S T I)K1 BLACKTC . •
'KICKBALL_
. F-ROPC SLL
5TEP
STATIJN
;Ga;c
�_gdJ..I•
+... - -: -. -1
t, I r
;M . • y'1.
r • L..µ_.__ -�__J
YFE I i[:AF: DSc. P.,4
2C
R 1M
NO. RA; rJG.
f= ".E ?TiCN "1 C:
132 0
O-Fri c iL5
rrt
FROPERT' i.ULJE
BATA
:OWNER - SEATTLE EAGLES. AERIE. INC.: I.:
1360I .- 321-3D -A EMUS-- E - SOU ?1
SEATLE :WAS I\ICjTOM. 9Blc.3:
• DONALD` A`DEVI'-TE PSIDE1.11
P_HOWE : 240
DOYLE. E. "'.WILCO)( ::GHA1RMf N,TRUS TE
PNONE. 244_ :7024: 6;23-8787
Y Iti �n r {..
•
•.E.XI5 ru ! :'r1.J PG A
AC READ •81' .AC -ES .
StWER.DISTRICT. -VAL VLJE 'I
WA rEJ2 DISTRICT NO.•.l'2 I
C7
`FIRE ; r
.DISTRICT —
• ,
( I i '°CHOOL DisTRIC r- 5OT: CENTRAL N0 -9Oo° -! .
l EC1P L'..,DESCRIPTlC61.- SEPERATE..A?T1)-KEEMEMY.
:PROJECT PURPOSE; COMMU1. Cry' SPORTS' 'AND:
.7:RECREX1 101.! . CEN I ', ;OFFICE ,_.
1:1;71C71
NOTE . .
FI1JI °•.N, °GRADES ARE ,APFROXIMATE AA O : -r r,
IVER1nED. :-
' PROPERTY IS •Fr■CED `OAI .P °F'ERT-", LINES
8
•
ViC;1\1°,T.1., P,/1A'P
SEATTLE E."6LE5..1.10 .I
UL k00"1?ITV SPORTS' C1R:
LAN.DSCAP!NG NOTES
TY 'E I - SCREEN `- H ALL C'U ERA LLY CONSIST OFA
MIX OF PRE ^...CMINANTLY EVE2GREEIJ PIANT1N S
INCLUDINC , -rFeES SHRuss AIJD GROUND COVERS
CI -OSEIJ A1'JO • SPACED SO AS Ta GROW 1.OGETi4ER.
WITHIN 3 YEARS THE TREES SHAD_ BE RES- MK TE.J
114.HEI4HT SO AS NOT TO SHADE ADJACENT:CjAROENS
°UCICi ESl7CMS IIJCL UO-. TAXUS (YEW) PRUNUS `
LAUROCERASUS (ENGLISH LAUREL): M+JRTUS (MYRTLE)
OR. PYRACANTHA G.I FENCING. PLANT/N4 • TD
CONIzzjRM TO C1
KING COUIJTY TOO J CODE 21.57.040.
TYPE In" SEE THROUCtH BUFFER SHALL COFISIST .
OFA A•11X OF "EVERCTREEN AND DEC IOUCUS 1-I.AN imr .
IA}CLVDING.TREES, SHRUBS AAJD GRDUNDO VERS
IA CONFORMANCE WI'TFI• K/N4.COUNTY 7C)NIN4 CODE .
21. 57.040':- SHRUBS. SHPT..' IAJCLIIDE UWJ PERUS,
• 3IEURNUM DAVIDII h03-1ODODEIJORCtJ. • GRnuIVL,..
COc /CRj': SHALL OE, HEDERA(IV.Y) OC OIJEA:,Itk
.An'0 JUNIPER LIS. .1-"R ES SHALL INCLUDE'
EwcuERlNq. CF'.EeRY;. WASH !AJ4TO&)..THOW+1j ACED'
PLI+TANCIDES; CA.ORUAsf' MAPCE ).'
2
Q:
z. J
0.
W
2
0
0
Lai
W
W
0,
100
:GRAPHIC SCALE.
•
June
1982
MEWS
OFFICE OF THE ZONING AND 'SU'BDIVISICN :EN?ER 1982I'
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
CI iv OF TUKWtLA
PLANNING DEPT.
ADDENDUM REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL
BASED ON A REMANDED HEARING.
SUBJECT: Building and Land Development File No. 275 -81 -R
Proposed Ordinance No. 81 -789
SEATTLE EAGLES AERIE NO. 1, F.O.E.
RS 7200 to RM 900 -P
8.37 acres lying on the west side of 32nd Avenue
South, 150 feet south of South 135th Street.
PUBLIC HEARING: The public hearing on Item 275 -81 -R was
reopened by the Examiner at 9:10 a.m. on May 20, 1982, in Room
402 of the King County Courthouse, 3rd and James Street,
Seattle, Washington, and closed at 10:20 a.m. Participants at
the public hearing and the exhibits offered and entered are
listed in the attached minutes. A verbatim recording of the
hearing is available in the office of the Zoning and
Subdivision Examiner.
BACKGROUND:
1. The King County Council, acting on the applicant's appeal
of a denial recommendation on April 5, 1982, remanded this
case to the Hearing Examiner with instructions to hold
another public hearing and prepare an addendum report
recommending conditions for approving the application.
2. The application involves the re -use of a vacated
elementary school and playground site by the Seattle
Eagles Aerie #1, F.O.E., which has recently sold and moved
from its downtown Seattle facilities. The school
buildings are intended for office, lodge, recreation and
dining and dancing facilities with a Class "H" liquor
license. The RM 900 -P zone was utilized in the
application because the County code does not permit lodges
and fraternal orders in the less intensive residential
zones —even under a conditional use permit.
3. A notice of remanded hearing was sent to parties of record
in the prior hearings. The notice invited written
- - statements prior to the hearing as_well as hearing
testimony.
The applicant's attorney presented the following suggested
conditions at the remanded hearing:
"1. This zoning is for the use of the Fraternal Order of
Eagles only, and upon sale by the Eagles shall revert
to its prior zoning.
275 -81 -R Page 2
c.2,.'r,ii.No,;functions shall extend past Midnight, subject to
-~re`view for hours extension, bi- annually.
t
. 'No��i 'gamesi shall be scheduled to start on the playing
= fields On Sundays before 12:30 p.m.
~°-- Parking -shall be provided on the site itself, for at
least half as many cars as there are persons attending
the function. Additional areas on the northern
portion' of the property may be blacktopped or
otherwise hard - surfaced, for necessary parking.
5. The land south of line 355, being approximately the
extension of the middle of S. 137th Street, and
designated Area 2 on the attached map, shall•be and
remain as fields for sports, recreation and related
facilities, and for roads. This land and meeting room
shall be available for public use on a scheduled basis.
6. Applicant shall plant and maintain a green barrier of
trees and /or shrubs along 32nd Avenue South, excepting
for driveways, walkways and line -of -sight provisions
for drivers.
7. There shall be no additional buildings constructed on
Area 2 shown on the attached map.
8. No bleachers shall be used or placed on the playing
fields in excess of three (3) rows of seating, nor
higher than five (5) feet.
9. No lighting for sports shall be installed on the
playing fields.
The Builaing and Land Development Division suggested at
the hearing a condition which would place this operation
unaer the provisions of Chapter 21.66 of the County Code.
Chapter 21.66 deals with the revocation, modification, or
expiration of unclassifiea use permits, conditional use
permits and variances where violations of the terms of the
permit are shown, where the public health or safety is
endangerea by the operation, or where the use has been
abandoned or has ceased to operate for a year or more.
The applicants advised that they would support such a
condition.
Testimony by the applicant and by neighbors indicated that
the designated direct access to Military Road is not
desired because of its impact on adjacent homes, it's
proximity to an intersection on an already hazardous
arterial and its impact on the site itself, since it would
require an entry road to pass through a playground and
open space areas to get to the parking area next to the
buildings. This direct arterial access was proposed
through a developed lot that was acquired by the Eagles to
meet County Code requirements for the re -use of school
facilities.
275 -81 -R
Page 3
Comments from neighbors at the remandea hearing were
'generally supportive, of the Eagles. A neighborhood
meeting had been held at the site, and the Eagles
representatives felt that they had achieved a better
unaerstanding with the neighbors. However, a letter from
one of the counter - appellants in the prior hearings who
was not a resident of the area and did not receive notices
of the community meeting, was critical of the past
activities of the Eagles in the Burien area, and indicated
continued opposition to the request. Many of the
participants in the initial hearing did not respond in
writing or attend the,remanaed hearing.
DISCUSSION:
Reclassifying this property to RM 900 -P could in itself have
some adverse impacts to adjacent single - family properties that
go beyond the intended use, since RM 900 is an intensive zone
classification. There are several alternatives available to
the Council to permit the re -use of vacated elementary school
facilities by any fraternal order or lodge without
reclassifying the property. They are:
(1) Amend the County Code to conditionally permit lodges
and fraternal orders (in addition to governmental
social service agencies) in the re -use of vacated
public buildings in single - family resiaential zones
(KCC 21.08.040).
(2) Amend the County Coae to permit lodges and fraternal
orders as an unclassified use (requiring Council
approval) or as.a conditional use (requiring Zoning
Adjustor approval). in single - family residential zones
(KCC 21.44).
Conditions of approval which are operational in nature can be
difficult and expensive to enforce. The conditional use permit
process is better suited to on -going administration than the
P- suffix process - which is intended to function during site
plan review prior to development. The applicants favor the
conditional use permit process, but were forced into a
reclassification hearing by the County Code as presently
written. The Building and Land Development Division was
obligated by the Code to discourage a conditional use permit
application.
275 -81 -R
Page 4
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
It is recommended':that the'Council first consider' one of the
Code amendments suggested in 'the above paragraphs If these
alternatives are not acceptable and the Council wishes to
proceed with the RM 900 -P. reclassification, the following
conditions are recommended:
Note: The rights of the community to have access to portions
of the site and the rights and responsibility of the
applicant to manage and maintain the property are
governed by the contract of purchase entered into by
the applicant ana the South Central School District.
The following conditions are intenaed to be
supplementary and more restrictive than the contract:
A. Site Plan Approval Conditions:
The use ana reaevelopment of the property and its
facilities shall be limited as follows:
(1) Access to vehicular parking shall be limited to the
existing location on 32nd Ave. So. Direct vehicular
access to or from Military Road is not permitted by
this order.
(2) The existing parking area shall be designea ana marked
to fully utilize its potential. The blacktop may be
increased if necessary to provide up to but not more
than 100 spaces.
(3) Parking spaces directly in front of the school on 32nd
Ave. So. shall be eliminated and incorporated into a
landscape plan.
(4) No new buildings shall be permitted unaer this order
other than a small storage shed for outside
maintenance equipment near the present buildings.
(5) No additional paving shall be done except as required
for up to 100 parking spaces and for the construction
of outdoor recreation facilities such as volley ball
or tennis courts in close proximity to the builaings.
The construction of a swimming pool or indoor racquet
ball or tennis facilities shall be considered an
expansion of the permitted use, subject to
modification of this order through the public hearing
process. '
(6) No lighting for playing fields or outdoor recreation
facilities shall be permitted on the site. Lighting
for the building entrances and parking areas shall be
subdued and not directed toward any single family
residence.
(7) Bleachers up to 5 ft. in height may be used for
outdoor sporting events.
(8) The following lanascaping shall be installea in the
fall of 1982:
275 -81 -R Page 5
(a) Between the parking lot and the adjacent homes
Type I (full screen) landscaping;
(b) Adjacent to 32nd Ave. So. (except driveways and
walkways) - Type III (see - through). landscaping.
The requirements for Type I and Type III landscaping
are found in KCC 21.51.030.
(9) The applicant shall post a landscape installation and
2 year maintenance bond with the Building and Land
Development Division as a condition of site plan
approval.
B. Operational Conditions:
(1) The applicants shall exercise reasonable control in
the use and permitted use of the property and
facilities so as to minimize the impact on adjacent
and nearby properties. Evening activities at the site
shall be controlled ana limited so as to clear the
general area of participants and their vehicles by
10:30 p.m. on week nights (Sunday through Thursday)
and 12:30 a.m. on Friday and Saturday nights.
Sporting events in the south area of the site shall
not be scheduled or permitted before 12:30 p.m. on
Sundays.
(2) Use of the facilities for banquets, concerts, parties,
dances and the like shall be restricted to the
following:
(a) Activities sponsored by the Seattle Eagles Aerie
#1;
(b) Activities sponsored by a community non - profit
organization.
(3) Maximum attendance at any specific function or
activity shall be 160 persons.
(4) Off- street parking shall be permitted only in the
designated paved parking area. Events or combined
events that typically involve more than 100 vehicles
in total shall not be scheduled or permitted.
(5) The use of sound amplification devices shall be
,limited to avoid a public disturbance as defined in
KCC 12.92.105. The designation of the subject
property and the surrounding area for the purpose of
enforcement of noise control regulations shall remain
residential.
275 -81 -R Page 6
C. General Conditions:
(1) The continued operation of the grounds and facilities
under this action shall be subject to the
modifications, revocation and expiration conditions
and procedures described in Chapter 21.66 of the King
County Code.
(2) Since the intent of this reclassification is to
provide for a specific community- oriented use on
property that does not meet Comprehensive Plan
criteria for RM 900 zoning, the revocation or
expiration of this use under KCC 21.66 or the sale of
the property by the Eagles Aerie #1 will initiate a
Council reconsideration action under KCC 20.24.220.
ORDERED this 2nd day of June, 1982.
TRANSMITTED this 2nd day
the following parties of
Seattle Eagles Aerie #1
James Smith
J. Fatheringham
H. Weatherstone
Ron /Debbie Frymier
Ron Teker
Kathy Vasilieff
Donald /Nellie Street
Wm /Janet Tolland
Jack /Irene Hood
Barbara Bader
Elmer Hyppa
Mrs. George Gibson
Mary Bosshart
C. J. Driscoll
Richard Carr
Don Devitte
Chuck Rogers
Robert A. Eveleigh
Deputy Zoning and Subdivision
Examiner
of June, 1982, by certified mail, to
record:
Doyle Wilcox, Sr.
Jay Dishnow
David Markley
Bart Lemmon
Steve Ashmore
Ed Bauch
Irene Minns
Sharon Bernhardt
Evelyn Ristow
Salvador /M. B. Benedict
Dean Clingman
Mrs. Hadley
M. Canghey
Gary Knisley
Pauline Conradi
Rep. Diane Keegan
Leroy Brockway
TRANSMITTED this 2nd day of June, 1982, to the following:
King County Building and Land Development Division
King County. Department of Public Works &.Transportation
King County Department of; Health
Washington State Highway Department
275 -81 -R
Page 7
.NOTICE OF RIGHT TO.APPEAL
In order to appeal the recommendation of the Examiner, written
notice of appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the.King
County Council with a fee of $25.00 on or before JUNE 16, 1982.
If a notice of appeal is filed, the original and 6 copies of a
written appeal statement specifying the basis for the appeal
and argument in support of the appeal must be:filed with the
Clerk of the King County Council on or before JUNE 23, 1982.
If a written notice of appeal and filing fee are not .filed
within 14 calendar days of the date of this report, or if a
written appeal statement and argument are not filed within 21
calendar days of the date of this report, the Clerk of the
Council shall place a proposed ordinance which implements the
Examiner's recommended action on the agenda of 'the next
available Council meeting.
Filing requires actual delivery to the Office of the:Clerk of
the Council, Room 403, King County Courthouse, prior to the
close of business (4:30 P.M.) on the date due. Prior mailing
is not sufficient if actual receipt by the Clerk does not occur
within the applicable time period. The Examiner does not have
authority to extend the time period unless the Office of the
Clerk is not open on the specified closing date, in which event
delivery prior to the close of business on the next business
day is sufficient to meet the:filing requirement.
Action of the Council Final. The action of the Council
approving or adopting a recommendation of the Examiner shall be
final and conclusive unless within twenty (20) days from the
date of the action an aggrieved party or person applies for a
writ of certiorari from the.Superior Court in and for the
County of King,. State of Washington, for the purpose. of review.
of the-action taken.
MINUTES OF THE REOPENED PUBLIC HEARING HELD ON.MAY 20,'1982 ON
BALD FILE NO. 275 -81 -R - SEATTLE EAGLES AERIE #1, F.O.E.
Robert,A. Eveleigh was the Hearing Examiner in this matter.
Persons participating in the hearing were Jerry Marbett and
Mark Mitchell representing the Building and Land Development
Division; Jay Dishnow, representing the Eagles; Bart Lemmon,
Jan Tollano, Doyle Wilcox, Richard Carr, Don Devitte, ano Elmer
Hyppa.
The Examiner read the following into the record:
-Letter from Dean Clingman dated May 16, 1982;
- Letter from Jay Dishnow with list of suggested. conditions
RAE:cw
0984A
,,...•4, cc ; 1 3 - --
`ys•I tn,
' • I n �.1't•°
1
1 t I •.,
1 ' I [ - -.- . • - - - •• - - --
1 t 20 ` 11..!%0
.,,. la 1
p h I
ti M
1.11 ei
ill 1 L.
,1I 73' LJ
I,r- 1
111 e• ,
1 yx
«3 :•9 B
1.1Jcc; •t.....•. 1. 1 11 ?;J r.. -r•.-r ■ ; c1 -- - - - - --
1
1 'JO.' .•Q� = ^u Y ILJ
1.5=T34T ly,,.,577. •h• ,.a ; 91s ?s ?TJ rensi
■
—t I 1 Tia• —es� t:o
.13M zi
in 1 1 -- — —L T -L'i -2 ios p s S;.'.' S" l 1 I 1133S
I <' JA 1 R �T_ �TJ76 66 1 :s I fee
�,1 1ee ad'
• 11.0 -- 1 -�
a t. o e J rr 1 ie i j, �1`r
I �- r _, 1 I.v • S/
4.13E2 t 1 11'
of
t ` /3 5 TH
•J•7
sT
11
ea I e to, a ti'',I
74 11
eA
•,
CS
2
11n5Z4,.•
1°
6115
tc 1 ��
24
SCHOOL 01. TRICT
6.58M
Line "355"
Tl -J3
3E m.
l3(
ft Js
rz
'L e-0
137
fl
n-
I n
TA w
:, -i41 JI.
. JO
a
JJ
ti
l (i ,t7 1.7; ^
f
.N` , /38TH
LAC. S 137T
NANCY M
ALEXANDER
b
1.55 AL
0
7,01 60 B.+
+I
Q~ •
•7, A
w
tt..i.:rp lto
(2b AC..
° •�. ,O$PoP•I RIVERTON
, /o — —_ - -� METH CH.
—11 I� 2 334 AC.
� J
PAUL A WESEN ET LA
1 75 Ac 11J11
Ott II 60
,e 's
1..
•
•s t
� 11lJn
rc ie. 3/I AC IZ
Ac
13 `7,34'
tc+1
Y 1) 3! n(.
0 ,•l,i r. L.•[2
L 1- - 1.1,1 7,1 t
.• %� ![ e - :4e. ,3J
'3E I,, JA�.A1.
(__••/ JJ,•ti
SCH 'I151 401
I r aO
1
o �=
w11
et' sos
I I b ,
1 A 1
1
�r1 1 I
1VE4 TON' 11
ET C14. II,
117 9• 1 L O A. 1
�' II IT.
KC FILES:
DESIMONE
216 -83 -R
217 -83 -R
KJi g County Council
AUDREY GRUGER, Dist. No. 1
SCOTT BLAIR, Dist. No. 2
).BILL REAMS, Dist. No. 3
LOIS NORTH, Dist. No. 4
RUBY CHOW, Dist. No. 5
BRUCE LAING, Dist. No. 6
PAUL BARDEN, Dist. No. 7
BOB GREEVE, Dist. No. 8
GARY GRANT, Dist. No. 9
June 22, 1983
MEMORANDUM
KIt County Council
James N. O'Connor, Zoning & Subdivision Examiner
E- 189.King County Courthouse
Seattle, Washington 98104
(206)344.3460
TO: Parties of Record, File No. 216 -83 -R
FROM: Michele McFadden, Deputy Zoning and Subdivision
Examiner
RE: Appeal Filed by METRO
Attached is a copy of an appeal letter submitted by METRO on
June 8, 1983. On reviewing the appeal, I have determined to
treat it as a request for reconsideration. The change
requested by METRO is consistent with the Examiner's intent as
set out in Condition 2 of the initial Examiner's report and the
concerns expressed by neighbors.
Therefore, I have also attached a revised Report and
Recommendation on this case, with Condition 2 modified.
1600A:ple
Attachment
ii
Michele McFadden
DEPUTY ZONING AND SUBDIVISION
EXAMINER
f;. 1."'J�wS.
• ` l ® Municip li t -of Metropolitan an Se a t e C r�
, .. . j.
Exchange Bldg. • 821 Second Ave., Seattle, Washington 98104
June 8., 1983
i
Office- ' Clerk of the Council
° of or ,
King Count =yu
4,7 Room: 0;3, Kipg County Courthouse
':''S`eattle' —Wasshington 98104
RECEIVED
SU13CN'ti'1Si0:J CXA1:4!1i•:k:IR
JUN 8 - 1983
iritM n
i t0t - ilo‘t.1i..idtW•
South Operating Base Annex
Building and Land Development File No. 216 -b3 -R
Proposed Ordinance No. 83 -128
Gentlemen:
r •j
•
Reference is made to the above - referenced application for
rezone of approximately 15.35 acres of land owned by Assunta
Desimone and lying on the south side of SR 599 between Pacific
Highway South (SR 99) and East Marginal Way South. By this
letter the Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle is appealing
the recommendation of the Hearing Examiner. Specifically,
we are appealing condition No. 2, wherein access to the site
shall be from East Marginal Way only, via a private road
shared with the site to the south. Although it was not brought
up at the hearing, the Municipality may at some time in the
future make application to the State of Washington Department
of Transportation for a ramp to enter the site directly from
SR 599 or SR 99. This ramp would reduce impacts of bus traffic
on East Marginal Way. The wording of the condition appears
to prohibit this type of access. We agree that Metro shall
not use 35th Avenue South for access.
We are, therefore, respectfully requesting a modification
to condition No. 2 to allow access to the site from SR 599
or SR 99 if permitted by the Department of Transporation.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Very truly yours,
Susan M. Solberg
Acting Right -of -Way and
Property Supervisor
SMS:jc
June 22, 1983
OFFICE OF THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION EXAMINER
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
REVISED REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL.
SUBJECT: Building and Land Development File No. 216 -83 -R
Proposed Ordinance No. 83 -128
Assunta Desimone
SR (Potential MH) to MH
15.35 acres lying on the south side of SR 599
between Pacific Highway South (SR 99) and East
Marginal Way South.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Division's Preliminary: Approve MH -P, subject to
conditions.
Division's Final: Approve MH -P, subject to
conditions.
Examiner: Approve MH -P, subject to
conditions (modified).
PRELIMINARY REPORT:
The Building and Land Development Division's Preliminary Report
on Item No. 216 -83 -R was received by the Examiner on April 12,
1983.
PUBLIC HEARING:
After reviewing the Building and Land Development Division's
Report, examining available information on file with the
application and visiting the property and surrounding area, the
Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows:
The hearing on Item No. 216 -83 -R was opened by the Examiner at
9:05 AM, April 28, 1983, in Room No. 402 King County
Courthouse, Third Avenue and James Street, Seattle, Washington,
adjourned for administrative purposes at 9:35 AM, and closed on
May 18, 1983. Participants at the public hearing and the
exhibits offered and entered are listed in the attached
minutes. A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in
the office of the Zoning and Subdivision Examiner.
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Having reviewed the
record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the
following:
• •
FINDINGS:
1. General Information:
STR: E 9 -23 -4 and W 10 -23 -4
Location: South side of SR 599 between
Pacific Highway Soutn (SR 99) and
East Marginal Way South.
Existing Zone: SR (Potential MH)
Requested Zone: MH
Size: 15.35 acres
Sewage District: Val Vue
Water District: #125
Fire District: #1
School District: South Central #406
2. The information set out in the Environmental Assessment
portion of the Building and Land Development Division's
report on this case, dated for the April 28, 1983 public
hearing is incorporated herein by reference.
3. The information set out in the Draft and Final
Environmental Impact Statements on METRO's proposed South
Operating Base Annex is incorporated herein by reference.
4. The only issues raised by this case involve air pollution
standards, impact of site - generated traffic on residents in
the area, and inconsistency of the proposal with the City
of Tukwila's plans for the area.
5. With regard to air pollution, the site is in a
nonattainment area for ozone, i.e., the area does not meet
federal standards for ozone. The Puget Sound Air Pollution
Control Agency, which deals with such matters, responded to
the Draft EIS with only minor comments. PSAPCA did not
indicate that the proposal should be denied or conditioned
based on its impacts on the air quality in the, vicinity.
6. During METRO's site selection process, residents on 35th
Avenue S. south of S 124th Street expressed objections to
the alternate site, designated as IA, as being too close to
their homes. Alternate IA is immediately to the south of
the subject property, and is the subject of the rezone
action in file 217 -83 -R. They also were concerned that
busses would use 35th Avenue S for access to the subject
site, thus generating traffic in front of their homes.
The neighbor's concerns apparently have been alleviated by
METRO's selection of the subject property (alternate IB)
over alternate IA, as no one appeared at the hearing to
object. Also, METRO and the present owners of both sites
IA and IB have agreed to develop a joint access road
directly to E Marginal Way, thus eliminating the need to
use 35th Avenue S.
7. The City of Tukwila considers the site to be within its
planning area, although it does not have jurisdiction over
the site. The City expressed concerns that the proposed
use of the site does not fit within its definition of Light
Manufacturing, as the City's plan designates the property.
The City also expressed concerns with regard to required
setbacks and landscaping. The City's requirements are more
stringent, while the County permits full site utilization.
8. The City of Tukwila likens the proposed use of the site to
truck terminals, which require a conditional use permit in
all of the City's manufacturing zones. This rezone process
allows an opportunity, similar to that provided by a
conditional use permit process, for conditions of approval
to be considered. However, the City did not suggest any
conditions to attach to the proposal through this rezone
process other than that the City's setback and landscaping
standards be applied.
9. METRO did agree at public hearing to meet the City of
Tukwila's standards for setbacks and landscaping when
developing the site.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. If approved subject to the conditions recommended below,
the proposed reclassification will comply with the goals
and objectives of the King County Comprehensive Plan, other
official policies and objectives for the growth of King
County, and will not be unreasonably incompatible with or
detrimental to affected properties and the general public.
The reclassification as recommended below is required for
the public necessity, convenience and general welfare.
2. The proposed reclassification will comply with the goals
and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Code,
and other official land use controls and policies of King
County. The subject property is potentially zoned for the
reclassification requested and conditions have been met
which indicate that the change is appropriate. The
reclassification will not be unreasonably incompatible with
nor detrimental to surrounding properties and /or the
general public.
3. The Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements on this
proposal adequately address the environmental impacts of
the proposals and support a recommendation to approve the
rezone.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve MH -P in lieu of MH, subject to the following conditions:
1. METRO shall meet the City of Tukwila's standards for
landscaping and setbacks when those standards are more
stringent than King County's standards.
2. Access to the site shall be from E Marginal Way/ via a
private road shared with the site to the south. METRO
shall not use 35th Avenue S for access. Direct access from
SR599 or SR99 is permitted.
3. Site plan review and approval by Building and Land
Development Division shall be accomplished through the
grading permit process.
ORDERED this 22nd day of June, 1983.
Michele McFadden
DEPUTY ZONING AND,SUBDIVISION
EXAMINER
i
TRANSMITTED this 22nd day of June, 1983, by certified mail, to
the following parties of record:
Assunta Desimone
Mary V. Dierickx
David Sweeney
Susan Kilian, METRO
Michael Glanz
Chris Palzer
Susan M. Solberg, METRO
•
TRANSMITTED this 22nd day of June, 1983 to the following:
Raymond Drebin, METRO
James Stephenson, METRO
Mark Kaughey, City of Tukwila
King County Building and Land Development Division
King County Department of Public Works
King County Health Department
Washington State Highway Department
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
In order to appeal the recommendation of the Examiner, written
notice of appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the King
County Council with a fee of $25.00 on or before JULY 6, 1983.
If a notice of appeal is filed, the original and 6 copies of a
written appeal statement specifying the basis for the appeal
and argument in support of the appeal must be filed with the
Clerk of the King County Council on or before JULY 13, 1983.
If a written notice of appeal and filing fee are not filed
within 14 calendar days of the date of this report, or if a
written appeal statement and argument are not filed within 21
calendar days of the date of this report, the Clerk of the
Council shall place a proposed ordinance which implements the
Examiner's recommended action on the agenda of the next
available Council meeting.
Filing requires actual delivery to the Office of the Clerk of
the Council, Room 403, King County Courthouse, prior to the
close of business (4:30 P.M.) on the date due. Prior mailing
is not sufficient if actual receipt by the Clerk does not occur
within the applicable time period. The Examiner does not have
authority to extend the time period unless the Office of the
Clerk is not open on the specified closing date, in which event
delivery prior to the close of business on the next business
day is sufficient to meet the filing requirement.
Action of the Council Final. The action of the Council
approving or adopting a recommendation of the Examiner shall be
final and conclusive unless within twenty (20) days from the
date of the action an aggrieved party or person applies for a
writ of certiorari from the Superior Court in and for the
County of King, State of Washington, for the purpose of review
of the action taken.
MINUTES OF THE APRIL 28, 1983 PUBLIC HEARING ON BALD FILE NO.
216 -83 -R - ASSUNTA DESIMONE
Michele McFadden was the Hearing Examiner for this matter.
Participating in the hearing were George McCallum, representing
Building and Land Development Division, James Stephenson and
Susan Killan, representing METRO, and Mark Kaughey,
representing City of Tukwila.
Correction to BALD report
Page 1, C.1. Change September 15, 1982 to. September 15, 1981
Additional Correspondence
D1 Letter from King County Traffic & Planning, Paul C. Hooper
dated 3 -29 -83
D4 Letter from King County Planning dated 4 -7 -83
The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record:
Exhibit No. 1
Exhibit No. 2
Exhibit No. 3
Exhibit No. 4
Exhibit No. 5
Exhibit No. 6
Exhibit No. 7
Exhibit No. 8
Exhibit No. 9
Exhibit NO. 10
Staff report dated 4 -7 -83
Application received :] 14 -83
Draft EIS dated 9 -15 -81
Final EIS dated 1 -21 -82
Affidavit of posting dated 3 -22 -83
Affidavit of publishing dated 4 -5 -83
Assessor's map NW & SW 10 -23 -4, NE 9 -23 -4
Kroll maps 314E and 315W
The Tukwila Zoning Code
Letter from METRO dated 5 -11 -83
The final recommendation of the Building and Land Development
Division was the same as their preliminary.
1601A:ple
111CR7
0
11Y2G 1983 May 25, 1983
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DEPT.
OFFICE OF THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION EXAMINER
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL.
SUBJECT: Building and Land Development File No. 216 -83 -R
Proposed Ordinance No. 83 -128
Assunta Desimone
SR (Potential MH) to MH
15.35 acres lying on the south side of SR 599
between Pacific Highway South (SR 99) and East
Marginal Way South.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Division's Preliminary: Approve MH -P, subject to
conditions.
Division's Final: Approve MH -P, subject to
conditions.
Examiner: Approve MH -P, subject to
conditions (modified).
PRELIMINARY REPORT:
The Building and Land Development Division's Preliminary Report
on Item No. 216 -83 -R was received by the Examiner on April 12,
1983.
PUBLIC HEARING:
After reviewing the Building and Land Development Division's
Report, examining available information on file with the
application and visiting the property and surrounding area, the
Examiner conducted a public hearing on the subject as follows:
The hearing on Item No. 216 -83 -R was opened by the Examiner at
9:05 AM, April 28, 1983, in Room No. 402 King County
Courthouse, Third Avenue and James Street, Seattle, Washington,
adjourned for administrative purposes at 9:35 AM, and closed on
May 18, 1983. Participants at the public hearing and the
exhibits offered and entered are listed in the attached
minutes. A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in
the office of the Zoning and Subdivision Examiner.
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Having reviewed the
record in this matter, the Examiner now makes and enters the
following:
FINDINGS: , :, "
1. General Information: "'
STR: E 9 -23 -4 and W 10 -23 -4
Location: South side of SR 599 between
Pacific Highway South (SR 99) and
East Marginal Way South.
Existing Zone: SR (Potential MH)
Requested Zone: MH
Size: 15.35 acres
Sewage District: Val Vue
Water District: #125
Fire District: #1
School District: South Central #406
•
216 -83 -R Page 2
2. The information set out in the Environmental Assessment
portion of the Building and Land Development Division's
report on this case, dated for the April 28, 1983 public
hearing is incorporated herein by reference.
3. The information set out in the Draft and Final
Environmental Impact Statements on METRO's proposed South
Operating Base Annex is incorporated herein by reference.
4. The only issues raised by this case involve air pollution
standards, impact of site - generated traffic on residents in
the area, and inconsistency of the proposal with the City
of Tukwila's plans for the area.
5. With regard to air pollution, the site is in a
nonattainment area for ozone, i.e., the area does not meet
federal standards for ozone. The Puget Sound Air Pollution
Control Agency, which deals with such matters, responded to
the Draft EIS with only minor comments. PSAPCA did not
- indicate that the- - proposal- should be denied -or-comd-it'ioned-
based on its impacts on the air quality in the vicinity.
6. During METRO's site selection process, residents on 35th
Avenue S. south of S 124th Street expressed objections to
the alternate site, designated as IA, as being too close to
their homes. Alternate IA is immediately to the south of
the subject property, and is the subject of the rezone
action in file 217 -83 -R. They also were concerned that
busses would use 35th Avenue S for access to the subject
site, thus generating traffic in front of their homes.
The neighbor's concerns apparently have been alleviated by
METRO's selection of the subject property (alternate IB)
over alternate IA, as no one appeared at the hearing to
object. Also, METRO and the present owners of both sites
IA and IB have agreed to develop a joint access road
directly to E Marginal Way, thus eliminating the need to
use 35th Avenue S.
7. The City of Tukwila considers the site to be within its
planning area, although it does not have jurisdiction over
the site. The City expressed concerns that the proposed
use of the site does not fit within its definition of Light
Manufacturing, as the City's plan designates the property.
The City also expressed concerns with regard to required
setbacks and landscaping. The City's requirements are more
stringent, while the County permits full site utilization.
8. The City of Tukwila likens the proposed use of the site to
truck terminals, which require a conditional use permit in
all of the City's manufacturing zones. This rezone process
allows an opportunity, similar to that provided by a
conditional use permit process, for conditions of approval
to be considered. However, the City did not suggest any
conditions to attach to the proposal through this rezone
process other than that the City's setback and landscaping
standards be applied.
216 -83 -R Page 3
9. METRO did agree at public hearing to meet the City of
Tukwila's standards for setbacks and landscaping when
developing the site.
CONCLUSIONS:
1. If approved subject to the conditions recommended below,
the proposed reclassification will comply with the goals
and objectives of the King County Comprehensive Plan, other
official • policies and objectives for the growth of King
County, and will not be unreasonably incompatible with or
detrimental to affected properties and the general public.
The reclassification as recommended below is required for
the public necessity, convenience and general welfare.
2. The proposed reclassification will comply with the goals
and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, the Zoning Code,
and other official land use controls and policies of King
County. The subject property is potentially zoned for the
reclassification requested and conditions have been met
which indicate that the change is appropriate. The
reclassification will not be unreasonably incompatible with
nor detrimental to surrounding properties and /or the
general public.
3. The Draft and Final Environmental Impact Statements on this
proposal adequately address the environmental impacts of
the proposals and support a recommendation to approve the
rezone.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approve MH -P in lieu of MH, subject to the 'following conditions:
1. METRO shall meet the City of Tukwila's standards for
landscaping and setbacks when those standards are more
stringent than King County's standards.
2. Access to the site shall be from E Marginal Way only, via a
private road shared with the site to the south. METRO
shall not use 35th Avenue S for access.
3. Site plan review and approval by Building and Land
Development Division shall be accomplished through the
grading permit process.
ORDERED this 25th day of May, 1983.
'Michele i4cFadde'n
DEPUTY ZONING AND SUBDIVISION
EXAMINER
TRANSMITTED this 25th day of May, 1983, by certified mail, to
the following parties of record:
Assunta Desimone
Mary V. Dierickx
David Sweeney
Michael Glanz
Chris Palzer
• •
216 -83 -R Page 4
TRANSMITTED this 25th day of May, 1983 to the following:
Raymond Drebin, METRO
James Stephenson, METRO
Susan Killan, METRO
Mark Kaughey, City of Tukwila
King County Building and Land Development Division
King County Department of Public Works
King County Health Department
Washington State Highway Department
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
In order to appeal the recommendation of the Examiner, written
notice of appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the King
County Council with a fee of $25.00 on or before JUNE 8, 1983.
If a notice of appeal is filed, the original and 6 copies of a
written appeal statement specifying the basis for the appeal
and argument in support of the appeal must be filed with the
Clerk of the King County Council on or before JUNE 15, 1983.
If a written notice of appeal and filing fee are not filed
within 14 calendar days of the date of this report, or if a
written appeal statement and argument are not filed within 21
calendar days of the date of this report, the Clerk of the
Council shall place a proposed ordinance which implements the
Examiner's recommended action on the agenda of the next
available Council meeting.
Filing requires actual delivery to the Office of the Clerk of
the Council, Room 403, King County Courthouse, prior to the
close of business (4:30 P.M.) on the date due. Prior mailing
is not sufficient if actual receipt by the Clerk does not occur
within the applicable time period.- The Examiner does not have
authority to extend the time period unless the Office of the
Clerk is not open on the specified closing date, in which event
delivery prior to the close of business on the next business
day is sufficient to meet the filing requirement.
Action of the Council Final. The action of the Council
approving or adopting a recommendation of the Examiner shall be
final and conclusive unless within twenty (20) days from the
date of the action an aggrieved party or person applies for a
writ of certiorari from the Superior Court in and for the
County of King, State of Washington, for the purpose of review
of the action taken.
MINUTES OF THE APRIL 28, 1983 PUBLIC HEARING ON BALD FILE NO.
216 -83 -R - ASSUNTA DESIMONE
Michele McFadden was the Hearing Examiner for this matter.
Participating in the hearing were George McCallum, representing
Building and Land Development Division, James Stephenson and
Susan Killan, representing METRO, and Mark Kaughey,
representing City of Tukwila.
Correction to BALD report
Page 1, C.1. Change September 15, 1982 to September 15, 1981
Additional Correspondence
D1 Letter from King County Traffic & Planning, Paul C. Hooper
dated 3 -29 -83
D4 Letter from King County Planning dated 4 -7 -83
216 -83 -R Page 5
The following exhibits were offered and entered into the record:
Exhibit No. 1
Exhibit No. 2
Exhibit No. 3
Exhibit No. 4
Exhibit No. 5
Exhibit No. 6
Exhibit No. 7
Exhibit No. 8
Exhibit No. 9
Exhibit No. 10
Staff report dated 4 -7 -83
Application received 1 -14 -83
Draft EIS dated 9 -15 -81
Final EIS dated 1 -21 -82
Affidavit of posting dated 3 -22 -83
Affidavit of publishing dated 4 -5 -83
Assessor's map NW & SW 10 -23 -4, NE 9 -23 -4
Kroll maps 314E and 315W
The Tukwila zoning Code
Letter from METRO dated 5 -11 -83
The final recommendation of the Building and Land Development
Division was the same as their preliminary.
1549A:ple
• •
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BUILDING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
AND
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION EXAMINER
APRIL 28, 1983 - PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICANT: Assunta Desimone FILE: 217 -83 -R
• Proposed Ordinance No. 83 -129
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION:
This is a request to change the zone classification on the subject
property from SR (Potential MH) and MH to MH (Heavy Manufacturing).
The applicant has not indicated a proposed use for the subject pro-
perty.
B. GENERAL INFORMATION:
Owner:
Agent:
Location:
Assunta Desimone
9365 Seventh Avenue South
Seattle, Washington 98108
Phone: 762 -1981
David B. Sweeney
c/o Roberts & Shefelman
4100 Sea -First Fifth Avenue Plaza
Seattle, Washington 98104
Phone: 622 -1818
West side of East Marginal Way South, 600 feet
south of SR 599 and extending in part, south
to south 124th Street.
Existing Zone: SR (Potential MH) and MH
Requested Zone: MH
STR: W 10 -23 -4
Size: 22.5 acres
Water District: #125
Sewer District: Val Vue
Fire District: #1
School District: South Central #406
C. HISTORY /BACKGROUND:
1. Pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act of 1971 (SEPA)
K.C.C. 20.44.060 and W.A.C. 197 -10 -300, and upon review of the
applicant's environmental checklist, the Manager of the Building and
Land Development Division prepared a proposed declaration of non -
significance on March 11, 1983, stating that the proposed development
would not constitute a major action significantly affecting the
quality of the environment. Therefore, an environmental impact state-
ment was not required prior to the preparation of this staff report.
2. That portion of the subject property zoned SR (Potential MH)
was done at the time of the Highline Area Zoning Study and adopted by
Resolution No. 34529 on December 11, 1967. That portion of the pro-
perty zoned MH was done under rezone File 417 -70 -P and adopted by
Ordinance No. 814 on May 13, 1971.
3. Prior to that time the subject property was zoned LF
(Airports) and A -1 (Agriculture Single - Family District).
D. AGENCIES CONTACTED:
1. King County Division of Traffic: No response.
2. King County Surface Water Management Division: No response.
3. King County Division of parks: No comment.
4. King County Division of Planning: No response.
-1-
• •
FILE 217 -83 -R
5. King County Department of Health & Social Services: No response.
6. Water District No. 125: No response.
7. Val Vue Sewer District: No response.
8. Fire District No. 1: No response.
9. South Central School District No. 406: No response.
10. City of Seattle: No response.
11. City of Tukwila: See Attached Letter.
12. Greater Burien Chamber of Commerce: No response.
13. Duwamish Peninsula Community Commission: No response.
14. Rainier Audubon Society: No response.
15. Washington State Department of Fisheries: No response.
16. Washington State Department of Game: No response.
17. Washington State Department of Ecology: No response.
18. Washington State Department of Transportation: No response.
19. Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission:
"The staff of the Washington State Parks and Recreation
Commission has reviewed the above -noted document and finds
that it will have no effect on properties under the manage-
ment or control of the Washington State Parks and Recreation
Commission."
20. METRO:
"Metro staff has reviewed this proposal and anticipates no
adverse impacts to its wastewater treatment facilities or the
public transportation system."
E. PURPOSE OF THE REQUESTED ZONE AND PERMITTED USES:
1. 21.36.010 Purpose of the MH Classification:
"The purpose of this classification is to provide for the
location of and grouping of industrial enterprises and acti-
vities involving manufacturing, assembling, fabrication and
processing, bulk handling of products, large amounts of
storage and warehousing, and heavy trucking. A further pur-
pose is to apply zoning protection to industries properly
located by prohibiting the intrusion of residential and
institutional uses, and all business enterprises except those
which serve as accessory uses to the permitted types of
industrial enterprises."
2. 21.36.020 Permitted Uses: Any uses permitted in ML, as well
as, aircraft factories, boiler works, flour mills, rock crusher, saw
mill, welding shops and sheet meetal shops.
F. PHYSICAL LAND CHARACTERISTICS:
1. Topography: The existing ground surface grade is reasonably
continuous, sloping only slightly down toward the north.
2. Soils: The subject property is classified as Wo, Woodinville
silt loam. Permeability is moderately slow. There is a seasonal high
water table at or near the surface. In drained areas, the effective
rooting depth is 60 inches or more. In undrained areas, rooting depth
is restricted. The available water capacity is high. Runoff is slow,
and the hazard of erosion is slight. Stream overflow is a severe
hazard unless flood protection is provided.
3. Water: At the time of the staff field investigation there
existed areas of standing water. Water enters the site from the pro-
perties to the south and west on its way to the Duwamish River located
1,600 -1,800 feet north of the subject property (see Page 49 -51 of the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement in File No. 216- 83 -R).
4. The subject property is in native grasses, brush and small
deciduous trees except for a small area in the south east corner of
the site that is under cultivation.
-2-
FILE 217 -83 -R
5. Wildlife: There are a number of small native birds, reptiles
and mammals using the site at various times although a majority of
the wetlands is nonresident.
6. The subject property is undeveloped except for a small storage
building located on the southeast portion of the site.
G. ACCESS:
Access to the subject subject property is from East Marginal Way
South which is designated as a collector arterial or from South 124th
Street a local access street. South 124th Street is at present a one -
lane gravel road that provides access also to a single - family resi-
dence located on the hillside southwest of the subject property.
H. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS:
1. Zoning: The properties to the east are zoned MH -P, MH and MP.
The property to the north is zoned SR (Potential MH) and is owned by
the applicant and has been requested for rezone for METRO under File
216 -83 -R. The properties to the south are zoned SR (Potential MH).
The properties to the west are zoned SR (Potential MH), CG and RS 7200
(Potential MH).
2. Land Use: The property to the north and west is undeveloped.
The properties to the south are under cultivation or are developed
with single - family residences. The properties to the east are deve-
loped with industrial uses.
I. PUBLIC SERVICES:
1. Water and Sewer: The subject property is shown within a Local
Service Area in the King County Sewerage General Plan (adopted by
Ordinance No. 4035), and as a result, it is in an area where sewer
service is permitted. The subject property is located in an area
that is served by Val Vue Sewer District which has a comprehensive
plan approved by King County. Val Vue Sewer District states that
sewers will have to be extended 450 feet to reach the site.
Annexation or Boundary Review Board approval will also be necessary to
provide service.
Water is provided to the subject property by Water District No. 125
which has a comprehensive plan approved by King County. The Water
District states that there is an existing 10 inch line 20 feet from
the subject property that can provide 5,000 gallons per minute for up
to 2 hours or more.
2. Fire Protection: Any development of the site will require
that King County Ordinance No. 3087 (as amended by Ordinance No.
5828), fire hydrants and water pressure standards, be met.
3. Transit: Metro Transit Route No. 123 provides service to the
area on East Marginal Way South adjacent to the subject property.
4. Schools: The subject property is located in South Central
School District No. 406. Development of the site as proposed will
have no impact on the school district.
5. Capital Improvements: There are no capital improvements in
the area that will affect the subject property.
J. APPLICABLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES:
1. Policy C -2:
"Industrial areas shall be encouraged to develop primarily on
large level sites..."
• •
FILE 217 -83 -R
COMMENT: The subject property lies within an expanding
industrially developed area that consists of approximately 70 acres of
MH and potential MH zoning. The topography of this area is basically
flat. The applicant has stated that approximately 203,000 cubic yards
of material will be needed to fill the site for development together
with 237,000 cubic yards of removal of unstable soils.
2. Policy C -3:
"In order that residential areas may be free from industrial
traffic, industrial areas shall be located with access pro-
vided only to major transportation routes which include major
arterial truck routes, expressways, freeways, major railroad
lines, and navigable bodies of water."
COMMENT: Access to the subject property will be from East
Marginal Way South which is designated as a collector arterial. SR
599 is located 600 feet north of the site and SR 99 300 feet to west.
Both are classified as major arterials. All of the adjacent properties
are zoned or potentially zoned for industrial use.
3. Policy C -4:
"Industrial areas should be located where they can be ade-
quately served by necessary major utility lines, such as
electric power stations and transmission lines, trunk sewer
lines, trunk water lines, and trunk gas lines."
COMMENT: See Subsection I -1 of this report for a description of
water and sewer services available to the site.
4. The Highline Communities Plan (Page 213) designates the sub -
ject property Industry. The MH zone classification is considered
equivalent to this land use designation. In addition, the Highline
Plan (Page 21), as well as the Sensitive Area Map Folio (King County
Ordinance No. 4365, July 12, 1979), specifies this area as a Class III
Seismic hazard area. The following Highline Plan Principles - Page
20, would apply:
"Severe Landslide and Seismic Hazards:
"Severe landslide and seismic hazard areas are areas of Class
III Landslide and Class III Seismic Hazards (see map, Page
21). As part of the development approval process, all of the
following must be provided to King County:
"1. site and soils analysis establishing the slope, soils
and geologic character of the site;
"2. a tree removal plan;
11 3
an erosion abatement plan;
"4. a grading plan;
"5. a buidling site plan an a
ditions to be imposed.
"The following may be required
County, based on evaluation of
list of construction ccon-
at the discretion of King
(1 -5) above:
"6. a reduction in the density permitted by zoning."
COMMENT: Compliance with the provisions of the above principles
could be handled through the "P" Suffix Site Plan Approval process
(KCC 21.46.150 - 21.46.200). As a provision of a building or grading
permit under the Uniform Building Code (Section No. 2905) or Ordinance
No. 4365, a soils report may be required.
-4-
FILE 217 -83 -R
5. Highline Communities Plan Policy, Page 32:
"H -15: Encourage full utilization of land currently availa-
ble for manufacturing and industry."
COMMENT: The subject property has been potentially zoned for
industrial uses since 1967.
K. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
Three rezones have been approved by the King County'Council to MH
zoning south and west of the subject property (417 -70 -P, 418 -78 -R and
239- 80 -R).
L. IMPACTS ON NATURAL AND SOCIAL SYSTEMS:
1. Air and Noise: Approval of the subject request will increase
air and noise pollution levels in the vicinity of the subject roperty,
primarily from the movement of automobiles and trucks on and off the
site. However, the increase in these levels should be above those
normally associated with industrial uses.
2. Water: Any development of the site will require that King
County Ordinance No. 2281 (on -site storm water retention) be met.
3. Vegetation and Soils: If the request were to be approved the
applicant has stated that 203,000 cubic yards of material will have to
be removed an the site filled with 237,000 cubic yards of material.
All of the existing vegetation will be removed.
4. Wildlife: The development of the site will eliminate all of
the existing wildlife on site.
5. Land Use: Reclassification of the subject property to allow
industrial uses may encourage other properties in the vicinity to
develop similar.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
B. CONCLUSIONS:
1. Environmental Significance: Pursuant to the State
Environmental Policy Act of 1971 and the SEPA Guidelines as revised
January 21, 1978, the Manager of the Building and Land Development
Division adopted the proposed declaration of nonsignificance as a
final declaration after being circulated for 15 days and reviewed by
all agencies of jurisdiction. Based upon the responses of the agen-
cies of jurisdiction and all other reviewing agencies, a site inspec-
tion of the project, information submitted by the applicant, and an
evaluation of the affected natural, physical and social systems as
outlined in this report, the Manager of the Building and Land
Development Division reconfirms this final determination and does not
require an environmental impact statement.
2. The subject request complies with Policy C -2 and the Highline
Plan policies concerning the location of MH zoning.
3. The subject request does not fully comply with Policy C -3 as
the site does not have access provided to a major transportation
route, but does have a- major arterial 600 feet north and 300 feet west
of the site. The properties located to the south and east are all
zoned or potentially zoned for industrial uses.
4. Sewer and water are available to the site as outlined in
Section I -1 of this report, therefore, the subject request complies .
with Policy C -4.
5. The Highline Communities Plan designates the subject property
as a Class III Seismic Hazard Area, and calls for the analysis of the
-5-
• •
FILE 217 -83 -R
geologic character of the site in order to provide for any mitigating
measures necessary to assure the minimal amount of risk to future
development. With regard to the intent of the principles cited in
Subsection J -4 of this report, concerning the preparation of a geolo-
gic and soils analysis of the subject property, compliance with these
principles should be assured through the grading permit process as
the first step in preparing the subject property for the proposed
development.
6. The subject request meets Highline Communities Plan Policy
H -15 which encourages full utilization of land available for
industrial uses.
B. RECOMMENDATION:
APPROVE MH -P subject to the following post- ordinance condition:
The applicant will apply for a grading permit for the proposed
fill. The grading permit will indicate the locations where any
removed materials are to be dumped or stored. Only sites with valid
grading permits or properties that permit storage will be allowed to
accept removed materials.
fix.
NOTE: No site plan approval would be required under this "P" suf-
TRANSMITTED to parties listed hereafter:
Assunta Desimone
9365 Seventh Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
David B. Sweeney
c/o Roberts & Shefelman, 4100 Sea -First Fifth Avenue Plaza,
Seattle, Washington 98104
GWM:GMcC:ss
4/05/83
Attachments
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
March 28, 1983
King County
Department of Planning and Community Development
Building and Land Development Division
450 King County Administration Building
500 Fourth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98104
ATTN: GERALD W. MARBETT
Subject: Applications 216 -83 -R and 217 -83 -R (Desimone), DNS and Zoning
Reclassification -
We have reviewed the transmittal from your office regarding these proposals.
and wish to note for the record reservations about the proposed rezones and
suggest further environmental analysis is needed for each.
I) Proposed Rezone to M -H (Heavy Manufacturing)
A) The proposed rezones are inconsistent with the City of Tukwila's
Comprehensive Plan. As you are aware, the City's Comprehensive
Land Use Policy Plan encompasses territory within our defined planning
area, even though such territory extends beyond the existing corporate
limits. The rationale for .advance planning of these properties
assumes their future incorporation into Tukwila. The Comprehensive
Plan designates the subject rezone sites as "light manufacturing"
use areas as may be seen on the attached copy of the Comprehensive
Land Use Map, a significant land area surrounding the subject parcels
are designated "light industry." The introduction of more intensive
zoning as proposed in those applications may disrupt the orderly
pattern of future development anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan,
imposing service cost and other regulatory impacts on the City of
Tukwila.
B) Allentown Annexation: At this time, the City is preparing to
reactivate the process for annexation of the Allentown area which is in
close proximity to the proposed rezone sites. That portion of
Allentown immediately north of the Duwamish River has already been
proposed by City Ordinance for M -1 (light industry) zoning. This
zoning classification would become effective upon annexation of Allen-
town to the City. Again, the introduction of heavy manufacturing
zoning as proposed by Ms. Desimone will likely impact the City's
efforts to plan for orderly and compatible juxtaposition of industrial
uses at our northerly boundary.
Page -2-
King County
Department of Planning and Community Development
Building and Land Development Division
ATTN: GERALD W. MARBETT
March 28, 1983
II) Environmental Process
In our judgement, the proposed Declarations of Non - Significance for
items 216 -83 -R and 217 -83 -R should not be finalized pending further
study of the complex issues evoked by the proposal. It is not clear
whether the proposed declaration pertains only to the legislative action
of reclassifying the zoning of these lands, or if the declaration
actually includes the proposed use of these sites as an expanded
transit - basing complex. However, since the proposed use and the proposed
reclassifications appear to be interrelated, it seems appropriate to
delay a decision on the zoning issues pending more detailed environmental
review. The SEPA guidelines remind us that proposals designed to
improve the environment may in themselves entail adverse impacts
(WAC 197 -10- 360(3)). While the expansion of transit facilities may have
a positive impact regionally, the cumulative, local implications of
transit base expansion in the location may adversely affect Tukwila in
terms of noise, air quality, congestion of local streets and surface
drainage management.
On the basis of our prior remarks, we request that the proposed Declarations
of Non - Significance be reconsidered, and that additional research be
performed with special emphasis on the identification and mitigation of
localized impacts before a final threshold determination is made. Using
the additional information- gathering mechanisms provided in WAC 197 -10 -330,
the applicants are requested to prepare an expanded checklist according to
a priority listing of topics developed jointly by the County and the City of
Tukwila as a consulted agency with expertise.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on these matters; we shall look for-
ward to working with you on these matters.
TUKWILA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Brad Collins
Director
BC /MC /blk
• •
FILE
APPLICANT: ASSUNTA DESIMONE -
REQUEST: S -R (Potential M -H) and M -H to M -H
STR: W 10 -23 -4
v / / //)
Yi ///
Proposed
Reclassification
• � M- P
RS-7,200 ARM �(
1 900 /1
206.77 1
S- R
I /-- .\
I ( \ M-H �
i
\4;
'M -2,400
00 •
C -G
RM-
2,400
S. R. No. 599
RS -7,200
S. R. No. 599
S-R
217 -83 -R
APPENDIX B
5
S-R
400'
116th. ST.
S -R
AO
(59/N\
S- R
01
II7th ST
9Y10
(M -H)
I M-H1
W
4
0
4
N
/ /. / / /. / / /
• 17.70
M -P
220.74
UNCLASSIFIED
USE PERMIT
'26_76
RS-7,200
M-H
S - R
C•
1A
W
S -R
(15,000)
5
M -H
S-R
S 425tt, 57
S -R
(15,000)
:24 *0
ST
M-H
S-R
t M•L
(15,000)
S -R
(15,000)
(M L
RD-3,600
126th.
ST
1'
69.460
RM-1,800
z
S -R
(15,000)
N
RN'. -900-P
S -R
(15,000)
S -R
(15,000)
(15,000)
(15,0001
1 RM -900
/ •
R••T.tt00
1
)
RM 0-
9O,
O O
¶p uJ Ci
N,n Q NIA
2
cr0
O
I 0
S -R
(15,000)
• •
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
BUILDING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
AND
PRELIMINARY REPORT TO THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION EXAMINER
APRIL 28, 1983 - PUBLIC HEARING
APPLICANT: Assunta Desimone FILE: 216 -83 -R
Proposed Ordinance No. 83 -128
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
A. SUMMARY OF PROPOSED ACTION:
This is a request to change the zone classification on the subject
property from SR (Potential MH) to MH (Heavy Manufacturing) to allow the dev
lopment of the south operating base annex for Metro.
B. GENERAL INFORMATION:
Owner:
Agent:
Assunta Desimone
9365 Seventh Avenue South
Seattle, Washington 98108
Phone: 762 -1981
METRO
c/o Raymond Drebin
821 Second Avenue
Seattle, Washington 98104
Phone: 447 -6642
Location: South side of SR 599 between Pacific Highway
South (SR 99) and East Marginal Way South.
Existing Zone: SR (Potential MH)
Requested Zone: MH
STR: E 9 -23 -4 and W 10 -23 -4
Size: 15.35 acres
Water District: #125
Sewer District: Val Vue
Fire District: #1
School District: South Central #406
C. HISTORY /BACKGROUND:
1. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (METRO) has taken lead
agency jurisdiction over the project pursuant to the Washington State
Enviromental Policy Act (WAC 197 -10 -105). METRO prepared an
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on the proposal and circulated
the draft EIS for comment and review on September 15, 1982, and sent
it to agencies of jurisdiction prior to publishing the final EIS, January 21
1982.
2. The subject property was zoned SR (Potential MH) at the time
of the Highline Area Zoning Study and adopted by Resolution No. 34529
on December 11, 1967.
3. Prior to that time the subject property was zoned LF
(Airports) and A -1 (Agriculture Single- Family District).
D. AGENCIES CONTACTED:
1. King County Division of Traffic: No response.
2. King County Surface Water Management Division: No response.
3. King County Division of parks: No comment.
4. King County Division of Planning: No response.
5. King County Department of Health & Social Services: No response.
6. Water District No. 125: No response.
7. Val Vue Sewer District: No response.
8. Fire District No. 1: No response.
9. South Central School District No. 406: No response.
• •
FILE 216 -83 -R
10. City of Seattle: See Final EIS, Pages 23 -25.
11. City of Tukwila: See Final EIS, Pages 19 & 20 and attached letter.
12. Greater Burien Chamber of Commerce: No response.
13. Duwamish Peninsula Community Commission: No response.
14. Rainier Audubon Society: No response.
15. Washington State Department of Fisheries: No response.
16. Washington State Department of Game: No response.
17. Washington State Department of Ecology: See Final EIS, Page 12.
18. Washington State Department of Transportation: See Final EIS, Page 7.
19. Washington State Parks and Recreation Commission:
"The staff of the Washington State Parks and Recreation
Commission has reviewed the above -noted document and finds
that it will have no effect on properties under the manage-
ment or control of the Washington State Parks and Recreation
Commission."
20. King County Dept. of Budget and Program Development: See. Final
EIS, Pages 28 and 29.
21. Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation: See Final EIS,
Page 9.
22. Washington State Energy Office: See Final EIS, Page 11.
23. U. S. Environmental Protection Agency: See Final EIS, Page 15.
24. Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency: See Final EIS, Page
17.
25. METRO:
"Metro staff has reviewed this proposal and anticipates no
adverse impacts to its wastewater treatment facilities or the
public transportation system."
E. PURPOSE OF THE REQUESTED ZONE AND PERMITTED USES:
1. 21.36.010 Purpose of the MH Classification:
"The purpose of this classification is to provide for the
location of and grouping of industrial enterprises and acti-
vities involving manufacturing, assembling, fabrication and
processing, bulk handling of products, large amounts of
storage and warehousing, and heavy trucking. A further pur-
pose is to apply zoning protection to industries properly
located by prohibiting the intrusion of residential and
institutional uses, and all business enterprises except those
which serve as accessory uses to the permitted types of
industrial enterprises."
2. 21.36.020 Permitted Uses: Any uses permitted in the ML zone,
as well as, aircraft factories, boiler works, flour mills, rock
crusher, saw mill, welding shops and sheet metal shops.
F. PHYSICAL LAND CHARACTERISTICS:
1. Topography: The- existing ground surface grade is reasonably
continuous, sloping only slightly down toward the north (see Page 31
of the Draft EIS statement).
2. Soils: The subject property is classified as Wo, Woodinville
silt loam. Permeability is moderately slow. There is a seasonal high
water table at or near the surface. In drained areas, the effective
rooting depth is 60 inches or more. In undrained areas, rooting depth
is restricted. The available water capacity is high. Runoff is slow,
and the hazard of erosion is slight. Stream overflow is a severe
hazard unless flood protection is provided (see Page 81 of the Draft
Environmental Impact Statement).
3. Water: At the time of the staff field investigation there
existed areas of standing water. Water enters the site from the pro-
perties to the south and west on its way to the Duwamish River located
-2-
FILE 216 -83 -R
1,100 -1,200 feet north of the subject property (see Page 49 -51 of the
Draft Environmental Impact Statement).
4. Vegetation: The subject property is in native grasses and
small deciduous trees and brush (see Page 52 Draft Environmental
Impact Statement).
5. Wildlife: There are a number of small native birds, reptiles
and mammals using the site at various times although a majority of
the wetlands is nonresident.
6. Land Use: The subject property is totally undeveloped.
G. ACCESS:
Access to the subject subject property is from East Marginal Way
South which is designated as a collector arterial adjacent to the sub-
ject property. The interchange for primary State Highway No. 1 lies
just to the north of the site.
H. NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTERISTICS:
1. Zoning: The properties to the south are zoned SR (Potential
MH) and RS 7200 (Potential MH). That portion of the property to the
south zoned SR (Potential MH) has been requested to be rezoned to MH
(File 217- 83 -R). The properties to the east are zoned MP and SR
(Potential MH). The property abuts SR No. 599 on the north and SR No.
99 on the west.
2. Land Use: The property to the south is undeveloped except for
one old building located adjacent to South 124th Street which is used
for storage of boxes. The property to the east is developed with
METRO's South Operating Base and Rainier Bank's Computer Center. The
property abuts SR 599 on.the north and SR 99 on the west.
I. PUBLIC SERVICES:.
1. Water and Sewer: The subject property is shown within a Local
Service Area in the King County Sewerage General Plan (adopted by
Ordinance No. 4035), and as a result, it is in an area where sewer
service is permitted. The subject property is located in an area
that is served by Val Vue Sewer District which has a comprehensive
plan approved by King County. Val Vue Sewer District indicated in the
sewer availability letter that sewers will have to be extended 800
feet to reach the site. Annexation or Boundary Review Board approval
will also be necessary to provide service.
Water is provided to the subject property by Water District No. 125
which has a comprehensive plan approved by King County. The Water
District indicated in the water availability letter that there is an
existing 10 inch line 20 feet from the subject property that can pro-
vide 5,000 gallons per minute for up to 2 hours or more.
2. Fire Protection: Any development of the site will require
that King County Ordinance No. 3087 (as amended by Ordinance No.
5828), fire hydrants and water pressure standards, be met (see page
106, Draft Environmental Impact Statement).
3. Transit: Metro Transit Route No. 123 provides service to the
area on East Marginal Way South adjacent to the subject property.
4. Schools: The subject property is located in South Central
School District No. 406. Development of the site as proposed will
have no impact on the school district.
5. Capital Improvements: There are no capital improvements in
the area that will affect the subject property.
• •
FILE 216 -83 -R
J. APPLICABLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PRINCIPLES AND POLICIES:
1. Policy C -2:
"Industrial areas shall be encouraged to develop primarily on
large level sites..."
COMMENT: The subject property lies within an expanding
industrially developed area that consists of approximately 70 acres of
MH and potential MH zoning. The topography of this area is basically
flat. The applicant has stated that approximately 272,500 cubic yards
of material will be needed to fill the site for development together
with 200,000 cubic yards of removal of unstable soils (see EIS Draft,
Page 31).
2. Policy C -3:
"In order that residential areas may be free from industrial
traffic, industrial areas shall be located with access pro-
vided only to major transportation routes which include major
arterial truck routes, expressways, freeways, major railroad
lines, and navigable bodies of water."
COMMENT: Access to the subject property will be from East
Marginal Way South which is designated as a collector arterial. SR
599 and SR 99 abut the property on the north and west and are both
classified as major arterials. All of the adjacent properties are
zoned or potentially zoned for industrial use.
3. Policy C -4:
"Industrial areas should be located where they can be ade-
quately served by necessary major utility lines, such as .
electric power stations and transmission lines, trunk sewer
lines, trunk water lines, and trunk gas lines."
COMMENT: See Subsection I -1 of this report for a description of
water and sewer services available to the site..
4. The Highline Communities Plan (Page 213) designates the sub-
ject property Industry. The MH zone classification is considered
equivalent to this land use designation. In addition, the Highline
Plan (Page 21), as well as the Sensitive Area Map Folio (King County
Ordinance No. 4365, July 12, 1979), specifies this area as a Class III
Seismic hazard area. The following Highline Plan Principles - Page
20, would apply:
"Severe Landslide and Seismic Hazards:
"Severe landslide and seismic hazard areas are areas of Class
III Landslide and Class III Seismic Hazards (see map, Page
21). As part of the development approval process, all of the
following must be provided to King County:
"1. site and soils analysis establishing the slope, soils
and geologic character of the site;
"2. a tree removal plan;
"3. an erosion abatement plan;
"4. a grading plan;
"5. a buidling site plan an a list of construction ccon-
ditions to be imposed.
"The following may be required at the discretion of King
County, based on evaluation of (1 -5) above:
-4-
FILE 216 -83 -R
"6. a reduction in the density permitted by zoning."
COMMENT: Compliance with the provisions of the above principles
could be handled through the "P" Suffix Site Plan Approval process
(KCC 21.46.150 - 21.46.200). As a provision of a building or grading
permit under the Uniform Building Code (Section No. 2905) or Ordinance
No. 4365, a soils report may be required.
5. Highline Communities Plan Policy, Page 32:
"H -15: Encourage full utilization of land currently availa-
ble for manufacturing and industry."
COMMENT: The subject property has been potentially zoned for
industrial uses since 1967.
K. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS:
Three rezones have been approved by the King County Council to MH
zoning south of the subject property (417 -70 -P, 418 -78 -R and
239- 80 -R).
L. IMPACTS ON NATURAL AND SOCIAL SYSTEMS:
1. Air and Noise: Approval of the subject request will increase
air and noise pollution levels in the vicinity of the subject.roperty,
primarily from the movement of automobiles and trucks on and off the
site. However, the increase in these levels should be above those
normally associated with industrial uses. See page 55 and Technical
Appendix C, Draft Environmental Impact Statement.
2. Water: Any development of the site will require that King
County Ordinance No. 2281 (on -site storm water retention) be met.
3. Vegetation and Soils: If.ths request were to be approved the
applicant has stated (see Draft EIS page 31 and 52) that 200,000 cubic
yards of material will have to be removed an the site filled with
272,550 cubic yards of material. All of the existing vegetation will
be removed.
4. Wildlife: The development of the site will eliminate all of
the existing wildlife on site (see page 54, Draft EIS).
5. Land Use: .Reclassification of the subject property to allow
industrial uses may encourage other properties in the vicinity to
develop.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
A. CONCLUSIONS:
1. Municipality of Metropolitan Seattle (METRO) as lead agency
jurisdiction pursuant to Washington State Environmental Policy Act
(WAC 197 -10 -550) prepared a Final Environmental Impact Statement and
issued it on January 21, 1982.
2. The subject request complies with Policy C -2 and the Highline
Plan policies concerning the location of MH zoning.
3. The subject request does not fully comply with Policy C -3 as
the site does not have access provided to a major transportation
route, but does abut a major arterial on the north and west. The pro-
perties located to the south and east are all zoned or potentially
zoned for industrial uses.
4. Sewer and water are available to the site as outlined in
Section I -1 of this report, therefore, the subject request complies
with Policy C -4.
-5-
• •
FILE 216 -83 -R
5. The Highline Communities Plan designates the subject property
as a Class III Seismic Hazard Area, and calls for the analysis of the
geologic character of the site in order to provide for any mitigating
measures necessary to assure the minimal amount of risk to future
development. With regard to the intent of the principles cited in
Subsection J -4 of this report, concerning the preparation of a geolo-
gic and soils analysis of the subject property, compliance with these
principles should be assured through the gradding permit process as
the first step in preparing the subject property for the proposed
development.
6. The subject request meets Highline Communities Plan Policy
H -15 which encourages full utilization of land available for
industrial uses.
7. There exists an irreconcilable conflict with the zoning in
this area and that shown on the City of Tukwila's land use plan.
B. RECOMMENDATION:
APPROVE
M subject to the following post- ordinance condition:
The applica
• fill. The grad
removed materia
grading permits
accept removed
C) dNOTE: The a•plicant is not required, in this case, to file a "P"
uff ix site as r- quired under K.C.C. 21.46.150.
TRANSMITTED o parties listed hereafter:
t will apply for a grading permit for the proposed
ng permit will indicate the locations where any
s are to be dumped or stored. Only sites with valid
or properties that permit storage will be allowed to
aterials.
Assunta Des]. one
9365 Seven h Avenue South, Seattle, Washington 98108
METRO
c/o Raymon Drebin, 821 Second Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104
* * * * **
EI s rg fl ago b vor
GWM:GMcC:ss
4/07/83
xjt? tbIWt& 1► - t.J tw r saVsrr mAfol or 60&- Couca v
�vtr1 cOOMti T1 Nwsun.6 co lPtIAtro • kni+,
,) Orr, r01,- c4r7 11) cow). Gm"1 "Xs zowhv4 vnv.
sG3
*ILA
;sti
City of Tukwila
z
•190S
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
Gary L VanDusen, Mayor
March 28, 1983
King County
Department of Planning and Community Development
Building and Land Development Division
450 King County Administration Building
500 Fourth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98104
ATTN: GERALD W. MARBETT
Subject: Applications 216 -83 -R and 217 -83 -R ( Desimone), DNS and Zoning
Reclassification
We have reviewed the transmittal from your office regarding these proposals
and wish to note for the record reservations about the proposed rezones and
suggest further environmental analysis is needed for each.
I) Proposed Rezone to M -H (Heavy Manufacturing)
A) The proposed rezones are inconsistent with the City of Tukwila's
Comprehensive Plan. As you are aware, the City's Comprehensive
Land Use Policy Plan encompasses territory within our defined planning
area, even though such territory extends beyond the existing corporate
limits. The rationale for advance planning of these properties
assumes their future incorporation into Tukwila. The Comprehensive
Plan designates the subject rezone sites as "light manufacturing"
use areas as may be seen on the attached copy of the Comprehensive
Land Use Map, a significant land area surrounding the subject parcels
are designated "light industry." The introduction of more intensive
zoning as proposed in those applications may disrupt the orderly
pattern of future development anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan,
imposing service cost and other regulatory impacts on the City of
Tukwila.
B) Allentown Annexation: At this time, the City is preparing to
reactivate the process for annexation of the Allentown area which is in
close proximity to the proposed rezone sites. That portion of
Allentown immediately north of the Duwamish River has already been
proposed by City Ordinance for M -1 (light industry) zoning. This
zoning classification would become effective upon annexation of Allen-
town to the City. Again, the introduction of heavy manufacturing
zoning as proposed by Ms. Desimone will likely impact the City's
efforts to plan for orderly and compatible juxtaposition of industrial
uses at our northerly boundary.
Page -2-
King County
Department of Planning and Community Development
Building and Land Development Division
ATTN: GERALD W. MARBETT
March 28, 1983
II) Environmental Process
In our judgement, the proposed Declarations of Non - Significance for
items 216 -83 -R and 217 -83 -R should not be finalized pending further
study of the complex issues evoked by the proposal. It is not clear
whether the proposed declaration pertains only to the legislative action
of reclassifying the zoning of these lands, or if the declaration
actually includes the proposed use of these sites as an expanded
transit - basing complex. However, since the proposed use and the proposed
reclassifications appear to be interrelated, it seems appropriate to
delay .a decision on the zoning issues pending more detailed environmental
review. The SEPA guidelines remind us that proposals designed to
improve the environment may in themselves entail adverse impacts
(WAC 197-10-360(3)). While the expansion of transit facilities may have
a positive impact regionally, the cumulative, local implications of
transit base expansion in the location may adversely affect Tukwila in
terms of noise, air quality, congestion of local streets and surface
drainage management.
On the basis of our prior remarks, we request that the proposed Declarations.
of Non- Significance be reconsidered, and that additional research be
performed with special emphasis on the identification and mitigation of
localized impacts before a final threshold determination is made. Using
the additional information- gathering mechanisms provided in WAC 197 -10 -330,
the applicants are requested to prepare an expanded checklist according to
a priority listing of topics developed jointly by the County and the City of
Tukwila as a consulted agency with expertise.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on these matters; we shall look for-
ward to working with you on these matters.
TUKWILA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Brad Collins
Director
BC /MC /blk
•
•
FILE 216 -83 -R
APPENDIX B
APPLICANT: ASSUNTA DESIMONE
REQUEST: S -R (Potential M -H) & RS -7200 (Potential M -H) to M -H
STR: E 9 -23 -4 & W 10 -23 -4
M -H
Proposed
Reclassification
M -H
RIVER
RS-7,200
0' 400_'
l i
S 11210 ST
M-H
S-R
M -H
S -R
m- _
DUW.4M /SH R /VER
S-R
1
9 \ M-H i
2
S-R
320'
-2,400
s.
1
No. 599
S-R
\
/ - -��
M -H
S- R
IFS
u)
S. R. No. 599
M —H
/ /�f0
RS -7,200 '
(z / / / / / / / / / / /
S -R
/
1M -H)
S -R
M -H 1
( M -H1
m
N
C -G
C-G
CU4 C
CC 3 72
0
c+
n
RS-7,200
/ RD-'
3,600)
•
S-R
1
M-H
—�
S -R
(15,000)
V)
a
S -R
M -H
z
; 417.70 :M-H - P r
e 23e•ao
124th.
(M-H M -H
/ N
251' ST
S -R
(15,000)
W
rn
5•R
M•L
S -R
(15,000)
W
ST
S -R
M - P
220.7•
UNCLASSIFIED
USE PERMIT
S -R
M -L
15,000)
City f Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
Gary L VanDusen, Mayor
March 28, 1983
King County
Department of Planning and Community Development
Building and Land Development. Division
450 King County Administration Building
500 Fourth Avenue
Seattle, WA 98104
ATTN: GERALD W. MARBETT
Thou gat 4o
• Subject: Applications 216 -83 -R and 217 -83 -R (Desimone), DNS and Zoning
Reclassification
We have reviewed the transmittal from your office regarding these proposals
and wish to note for the record reservations about the proposed rezones and
suggest further .._.environmental. -analysis: is needed for each.
I) Proposed Rezone to M -H (Heavy Manufacturing)
A) The proposed rezones are inconsistent with the City of Tukwila's
Comprehensive Plan. As you are aware, the City's Comprehensive
Land Use Policy Plan encompasses territory within our defined planning
area, even though such territory extends beyond the existing corporate
limits. The rationale for advance planning of these properties
assumes their future incorporation into Tukwila. The Comprehensive
Plan designates the subject rezone sites as "light manufacturing::
use areas <As may be seen on the attached.copy of the Comprehensive
Land Use Map, a significant land area surrounding the subject parcels
are designated "light industry." The introduction of more intensive
zoning as proposed in those.applications may disrupt the orderly
pattern of.future development anticipated by the Comprehensive Plan,
imposing service cost and other regulatory impacts on the City of
Tukwila.
Allentown Annexation: At this time, the City is preparing to
reactivate the process for annexation of the Allentown area which is in
close proximity to the proposed rezone sites. That portion of
Allentown immediately north of the Duwamish River has already been .
proposed by City Ordinance for M -1 (light industry) zoning. This
zoning classification would become effective upon annexation of Allen-
town to the City. Again, the introduction of heavy manufacturing •
zoning as proposed by Ms. Desimone will likely impact the City's
efforts to plan for orderly and compatible juxtaposition of industrial
uses at our northerly boundary.
Page -2-
.King County
Department. of Plann nd Community Development
Building and Land Development Division
ATTN: GERALD W. MARBETT
March 28, 1983
II) Environmental Process.
In our judgement, the proposed Declarations of Non - Significance for
items 216 -83 -R and 217 -83 -R should not be finalized pending further
study of the complex issues evoked by the proposal. It is not clear
whether the proposed declaration pertains only to the legislative action
of reclassifying the zoning of these lands, or if the declaration
actually includes the proposed use of these sites as an expanded
transit - basing complex:. However, since the proposed use and the proposed
reclassifications appear to be interrelated, it seems appropriate to
delay a decision on the zoning issues pending more detailed environmental
review. The SEPA guidelines remind us that proposals designed to
improve the environment may in themselves entail adverse impacts
(WAC 197 -10- 360(3)). While the expansion of transit facilities may have
a positive impact regionally, the cumulative, local implications of
transit base expansion in the location may adversely affect Tukwila in
terms of noise, air quality, congestion of local streets and surface
drainage management.
On the basis of our prior remarks, we request that the proposed Declarations
of Non- Significance be reconsidered,.and that additional research be
pefformed with special emphasis on the identification and mitigation of
localized impacts before .a final threshold determination is made. Using
the additional information- gathering mechanisms provided. in WAC 197 -10 -330,
the applicants are requested to prepare an expanded checklist according to
a priority listing of topics developed jointly by the County and the City of
Tukwila as a consulted agency with expertise.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on these matters; we shall look for-
ward to working with. you on these matters.
1": KWILA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
Brad Collins
Director
BC /MC /blk
DATE:
King County Executive
Randy Revelle
BOO
OR 1 41983
CITY OF TUKWILA
PLANNING DEPT.
Department of Planning and Community Development 1 y -
Holly Miller, Director
PROPOSED /FINAL DECLARATION OF
SIGNIFICANCE /NON- SIGNIFICANCE
SUBJECT: Proposal(s) No.: 108 -83 -R
217 -83 -R & 219 -83 -R
In accordance with WAC 197 -10 -355 this Division as lead agency transmits
to you its declaration of .I ataaa/non- significance for those propo-
sals filed and to be acted upon by the zoning and Subdivision Examiner/
Zoning Adjustor, copies of each are attached hereto and made a part here-
of.
Apart from any request for redetermiiration of the proposed declarations
attached, any information or recommendations you may have concerning
disposition of these proposals should be forwarded to this Division with-
in three weeks of the date of this transmittal. Information provided by
you may be utilized to evaluate the merits of the proposals and /or their
environmental impact. If we do not receive your comments, we will assume
you have no interest in the proposals.
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
APRIL. 28, 1983'
COMMENTS DUE: APRIL 1, 1983
'ours truly,
Gerai„e
d W. Marbett, Supervisor
Development Controls
At Zach.
copy dec. sig /non -sig.
environmental checklist to A/J
vicinity map (when part of proposal)
plat /plot plan(s) (when part of proposal)
copy transmittal ltr w /dec. to
SEPA INFORMATION CENTER
Applicant /Authorized Agent
c� Lsnd Development Division 450 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue Seattle, Washington 98104 . (2061344-7900.
King County Executive
Randy Revelle
Department of Planning and Community Development
Holly Miller, Director
DATE: MARCH 11, 1983
DECLARATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE
WAC 197 -10 -355
FILE NO. 216 -83 -R
ASSUNTA DESIMONE
Description of proposal: SR SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL (POTENTIAL M -H HEAVY
MANUFACTURING) RS 7200 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (POTENTIAL M -H
HEAVY MANUFACTURING
Proponent: ASSUNTA DESIMONE
Location of Proposal: South side of S.E. 599, between Pacific Highway South
(S.R. 99P and East Marginal Way South.
Lead Agency: KING COUNTY BUILDING & LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
Department of Planning & Community Development
This proposal has been determined to not have a significant adverse impact
upon the environment. An EIS is not required under BCC 20.44.060 and WAC
197 -10 -300. This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a
completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency.
The negative threshold determination shall become our final declaration (15)
fifteen days from the date shown hereon unless a specific written request
for a redetermination has been received on or before this date WAC 197 -10 -340
(5), (6) and.(7).
P.E.SPONSII3LE OFFICIAL:
POSITION /TITLE:
TGNATURE:
Applicant /Authorized Agent
GERALD W. MARBETT, SUPERVISOR
DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
ling & Land Development Division 450 King County Administration Building 500 Fourth Avenue Seattle, Washington 9&104 12061 3447900
APPLICANT:
REQUEST:
STR:
•
�E 216 -83 -R
APPENDIX B
ASSUNTA DESIMONE
S -R (Potential M -H) & RS -7200 (Potential M -H) to M -H
E 9 -23 -4 & W 10 -23 -4
Proposed
Reclassification
9_• --
M -H
0'
400'.
Jn
C -G
S. R.
No. 5991
S. R. No. 599
M -H
/ /90
RS -7,200
/ / / / / / / / / / /
S -R
C -G
M -H
RS-7,200
S-R
Ii,M-H
I
I C -G
S -R
(15,000)
v
a
S
■ M-H�
S-R
5 25 +n
ST
S -R
(15,000)
w
7
z
d ,u7 -70 ; M - H
_ I � ne-eo
124th
M -H
) R1 f
tM' �
S -R
(15,000)
ST
UNCLASSIFIED
USE PERMIT
S -R
M-L
15,000)
76C.76
5 ,25,h ST\
S -R
King County Execvdve
Randy Revelle •
Department of Planning and Community Development
Holly Miller, Director
DATE: MARCH 11, 1983
DECLARATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE
WAC 197 -10 -355
FILE NO. 217 -83 -R
ASSUNTA DESIMONE
Description of proposal: SR SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL (POTENTIAL M -H HEAVY
MANUFACTURING) AND M -H HEAVY MANUFACTURIN TO M -H HEAVY MANUFACTURING
Proponent: ASSUNTA DESIMONE
Location of Proposal: West side of East Marginal Way South, 600' south
of S.R. 599 and extending, in part, south to South 124th Street
Lead Agency: KING COUNTY BUILDING & LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
Department. of Planning & Community Development
This proposal has been determined to not have a significant adverse impact
upon the environment. An EIS is not required under KCC 20.44.060 and WAC
197 -10 -300. This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a
completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency.
The negative threshold determination shall become our final declaration (15)
rittecn days from the date shown hereon unless a specific written request
-:Tor a redetermination has been received on or before this date WAC 197 -10 -340
d5) , (6) and (7).
:S PONSIBLE OFFICIAL:
} 03ITION /TITLE:
S .. ;NATURE:
CC : Applicant/Authorized Agent
GERALD W. MARBETT, SUPERVISOR
DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
,it3' .:e :Yi :. 1'1. -., nin., .., -.... iii ..7s i.... 'ern v;nn rm 17 r t ...,. 01; r:01 o.. +'..... ._
FILE 217 -83-R
APPLICANT: ASSUNTA DESIMONE -
REQUEST: S -R (Potential M -H) and M -H to M -H
STR: W 10 -23 -4
f /JI /�
1 / 11 /
Proposed
Reclassification
S. R.
0. 599
RS-7,200
MP u,
RM \(
CM.--
M-H 9ooil
206 -77
S-R
S. R. No. 599
S -R
APPENDIX B
400'
S-R
5
S-R
116th. ST.
N
. 117th. ST.
(M_H1
S -8
1-2,400
( <'C
C -G
RM-
2,400
M - P
220 -74
UNCLASSIFIED
USE PERMIT
260.76
/ RD -
1 3,600/
�� —•••••
RS-7,200
RD -3,600 \
S-R
I M-H)
C-G
$
\ M-H
S-R
S '2014
ST
M -H
'2514 S7�
5 -R
S -R
(15,000)
M
S -R
(15,0 00)
s.
S -R
(15,000)
126tH.
RM-1,800
S -R
(15,000)
S -R
(15,000)
S -R
(15,000)
S -R
(15,000)
(1'
cc 0
S-R
o N (15,000)
I i/jl I I
2g,�. 2G0Q
N>
n ` ct O O I I 1 O O
O
"B''" NO �O W dO
Q ip �O (^TM
\ 1151 > (n N
R M -1 N Q
1ri
S-R
(15,000)
P. U. D.
J.D. M -L
S -R
ZONING & SUBDIVISION EXAMINER
FOR THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL
APRIL 28, 1983 - PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA FOR
AMENDMENTS TO OFFICIAL CONTROLS
ROOM 402 KING COUNTY COURTHOUSE, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NO. 216 -83 -R ASSUNTA DESIMONE - REZONE
Owner: Assunta Desimone, 9365 7th Avenue South,
Seattle, WA 98108, Phone No. 762 -1981
AGENT: Raymond Drebin, METRO, 821 2nd Avenue,
Seattle, WA 98104, Phone No. 447 -6642
LOCATION:
South side of S.R. 599, between Pacific
Highway South (S.R. 99) & East Marginal
Way South.
STR: E 9 -23 -4 F, W 10 -23 -4
PROPOSAL IS:
Rezoning of the property described, from S -R
SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL (POTENTIAL M -H HEAVY
MANUFACTURING) & RS -7200 SINGLE FAMILY RESI-
DENTIAL (POTENTIAL M -H HEAVY MANUFACTURING)
TO M -H HEAVY MANUFACTURING.
TO PERMIT: Use of property for expansion of transit main-
tenance and operations base.
10:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NO. 217 -83 -R
OWNER:
AGENT:
LOCATION:
STR:
PROPOSAL IS:
ASSUNTA DESIMONE - REZONE
Assunta Desimone, 9365 7th Avenue South,
Seattle, WA 98108, Phone No. 762 -1981
David B. Sweeney, Roberts & Shefelman, 4100
Seafirst Fifth Avenue, Seattle, WA 98104,
Phone No. 622 -1818
West side of East Marginal Way South, 600'
south of S.R. 599 F extending, in part, south
to South 124th Street.
W 10 -23 -4
Rezoning of the property described, from S -R
SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL (POTENTIAL M -H HEAVY MANU-
FACTURING) AND M -H HEAVY MANUFACTURING TO M -H
TO PERMIT: No specified use for property
1:30 p.m.,'or as soon thereafter as possible,
"TLE NO. 108 -83 -R
OWNER:
.00 TION:
Sift.
:1'-'t ' aA%, IS:
TO
BETTY MACDONALD FARM - REZONE
Judith Manerud Lawerence, Betty Macdonald Farm,
Route 1, Box 401, Vashon Island, WA 98070,
Phone Nos. 621 -8777 or 567 -4227
Bart Klein., Suite 333 Grant Central on the Park,
Seattle, WA 98104, Phone no. 621 -8777
West side of 99th Ave. SW North of S.W. 120th St.
E 7 -23 -3
Rezoning of the property described, from RS -15000
SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL' TO S -C SUBURBAN CLUSTER
Use of property for reforestation; historical
site future cottage industry
KC FILES:
214 -82 -R
Scheer
ZONING & SUBDIVISION EXAMINER
FOR THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL
APRIL 22, 1982 - PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA FOR
AMENDMENTS TO OFFICIAL CONTROLS
9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, Suite 402,
King County Council Chambers
FILE NO.:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:.
STR:
PROPOSAL IS:
TO PERMIT:
214 -82 -R
DAVID M. SCHEER, B.A., D.C.
Northeast corner of S. 176th St. and 34th Ave. S.
W 27 -23 -4
Rezoning of the property described, from
RS 7200 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY to RM 900
MAXIMUM DENSITY MULTIPLE- DWELLING RESTRICTED
SERVICE.
Use of property for Chiropractic Clinic.
10:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NO.:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
STR:
PROPOSAL IS:
215 -82 -R
PETER J. CARKONEN
Westerly side of Military Road S. between S.
292nd and S. 296th Streets (if both extended).
E 4 -21 -4
Rezoning of the property described, from SR
SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL to RMHP RESIDENTIAL MOBILE
HOME PARK.
TO PERMIT: Use of property for Residential Mobile Home Park.
3 -1 -82
jb
40:4( � LA City` of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
▪ Tukwila Washington 98188
•
Frank Todd, Mayor
• 1908
8 March 1982
King County
Building and Land Development
450 Administration Building
Seattle, WA 98104
Attn: G.W. Marbett
Subject: Proposed D.N.S. 214 -82 -R
Our office has reviewed the proposed threshold determination for the
subject rezone and offers the following comments:
1) The proposed reclassification RM -900 is inconsistent with the
Tukwila Comprehensive Plan which designates this portion of
our planning area as a single - family residential use district.
2) The increased traffic generated by the unanticipated commercial •
use of the site, and by other surrounding properties which may
request similar use - intensive zoning if this application is
approved, will impact directly the intersection capacity of S.
180th St. /Southcenter Parkway.
We believe that this application represents a significant change in land
use policy directly affecting the City of Tukwila; please keep us
informed of the project's progress through the permit review process.
Tukwila P nning Department
Mar 1C Caughey
Associate Planner
MC /blk
. xc: Planning Director
KING CCUNTY 'J
State of Wasnsngton
Randy Revelle, King County Executiv
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Gary S. Tunberg, Director
•
DATE: March 3, 1982
'WILDING & LAND DEVELOPMENT
McConnell, Acting Manager.,,-„
450 Administration Building
Seattle. Wasnrngton 98104
(206) 344-7900
PROPOSED /FINAL DECLARATION OF
SIGNIFICANCE /NON- SIGNIFICANCE
Unngl]
MAR 8 1982
CITY 0 K1nrILA
PLANNING DEPT.
SUBJECT: 'Proposal(s) No. 214 -82 -R, 15 -82 -R, 216 -82 -R
In accordance with WAC 197 -10 -355 this Division as lead agency transmits
to you its declaration of /non- significance for those propo-
sals filed and to be acted upon by the Zoning and Subdivision Examiner/
Dem44.9.411W9immiliww, copies of each are attached hereto and made a part
hereof..
Apart from any request for redetermination of the proposed declarations.:..
attached, any information or recommendations you may have concerning
disposition of these proposals should be forwarded to this Division with
in three weeks of the date of this transmittal. Information provided by
you may be utilized to evaluate the merits of the proposals and /or their.`
environmental impact. If we do not receive your comments, we will assume_.:
you have no interest in the proposals.
Yours truly,
GEHALD'W . MARBETT, SUPERVISOR
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
COMMENTS DUE:
DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
attach. copy dec. sig /non -sig.
environmental checklist
vicinity map (when part
plat /plot plan(s) (when
cc:
APRIL 22, 1982
MARCH 24, 1982
to A/J
of proposal)
part of proposal)
copy transmittal ltr w /dec. to:
SEPA INFORMATION CENTER
Applicant/Authorized Agent
KING COUNTY
State of Wasn,ncton
Randy Revelle, King County Executiv
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Gary S. Tusberg, Director
•
DATE: March 3;_..1982
DECLARATION.
BU]LOING & LAND DEVELOPMENT
Ron McConnell, Acting Manager
450 - Administration. Building
Seattle. Washington 93104
(206) 344-7900
OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE
WAC 197 -10 -355
FILE NO. -214 -82 -R
DAVID M. SCHEER, B.A., D.C.
Description of Proposal: RS 7200 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY to RM 900
MAXIMUM DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING RESTRICTED SERVICE. •
Proponent: DAVID M. SCHEER: B.A. ; D.0 :.....
•
Location of-Proposal: Northeast corner of S. 176th. St. and 34th Ave. S.
Lead Agency: KING COUNTY BUILDING & LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
Department of Planning & Community'Development
This proposal has been determined to not have a significant adverse impact
upon the environment. An EIS is not required under KCC 20.44.060 and WAC
197 -10 -300. This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a
completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency.
The negative threshold determination shall become our final declaration (15)
fifteen days from the date shown hereon unless a specific written request
for a redetermination has been received on or before this date WAC 197 -10 -340
(5), (6) and (7).
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: GERALD W. MARBETT, SUPERVISOR
POSITION /TITLE:
SIGNATURE:
CC: Applicant/Authorized-Agent
DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
APPLICANT: ': DAVID M . CHEER, B.A., D . C .
ZONE REQUEST: RS 7200 to RM 900
STR:
(C -G)
S.
S. 168TK PL.
V)
N
W 27 -23 -4
Proposed
Reclassification
RS -7,200
O I .
ti RS -7,200
H I
S 172N'
RS -7,200
B -C -P
RS-7,,200
RS-7,200
RS-7,200
28
—• —•- 176•- • —ST. --
33 34
27
B -C -.P
RM-
900-P
RM-
900
RM -900
RS -7,200
S.
RS -7,200
W
S.
w
RS -7,200
w
Q
I7OTN
RS -7,200
172N0
0'
RS -7,200
ST.
RS-7,200
ST.
RS- 7,200,
• S.
173 RD
ST.
RS -7,200
•
175TH
ST.
' RM-
", 900
RS -7,200
S. 176th. ST.
RM-900
180th. ST.
RM-900'
O
0
N
2
cc
0
0
N
ti
0
NI
W
400'
N
2
1-
0
RS-7,200
•
RS -7,200
RS-7,200
RS -7,200
RS -7,200
RS-7,200
S.
177th.
ST.
RS-7,200
N
RM -1,800
N
W
S. 181st. ST.
:.T
RS-7,200
RS-
182nd.
IN�
cr
RS-7,200
179th. Sr.
RS-7,200
ST.
RS-7,200
KC FILES:
212 -82 -R, Pitardi
213 -82 -R, Durkin
274-.78-R, Fisher
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
4 February 1982
King County
Building and Land Development
450 Administration Building
Seattle, WA 98104
Attn: G.W. Marbett
Subject: Proposed D:.N.S. 212 -82 -R; 213 -82 -R; 274 -78 -R
Regarding the referrenced transmittals, our comments are as follow:
I) Fisher (.274 -78f R)
The proposed project is located on lands outside the limits of
Tukwila's planning area; we anticipate no direct impacts on the
City as a result of the rezone action.
II) Durkin (213 -82 =R)
The proposed project is at the extreme westerly limit of Tukwila's
planning area;ias this proposal is an expansion,of an ongoing use
generally similar to those already existing in the immediate
vicinity, we anticipate little direct impact on the City as a
result of the rezone action.
III) Pitardi. (212182 -R)
The subject site is within our planning area and is immediately
proximate to our present city boundaries. The proposed rezone to
a more intensive multi - family use classification for purposes of
operating a business office seems to us to be unadvisable as 50th
Ave. So. is inadequate in width and surface condition to support
commercial traffic. Further, the proposed commercial use will
represent a significant departure from the predominant single -
family development of the neighborhood, and from the Tukwila
Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan which designates this property
as a single- family use area.
Page -2-
King County
Building and Land Development
4 February 1982
We thank you for the opportunity to comment on these proposals.
Tukwila P nning Department
Ma ✓k Caughey
Associate Planner
MC /blk
xc: Planning Director
KING COUNTY. •
State of Wasnington
•
Randy Revelle, King County Executiv
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Gary S. Tu::berg, Director
DATE: February 3, 1982
BAILING & LAND DEVELOP ∎RENT
R McConnell, Acting Manager
450 Administration Building
Seattle. Washington 98104
(206) 344.7900
PROPOSED /FINAL DECLARATION OF
SIGNIFICANCE /NON - SIGNIFICANCE
4
FEB
FEB 4 198:
1982
CITY OF TUKWiLA
Ft ANNING DEPT.
SUBJECT: Proposal(s) No.: 210 -82R, 211 -82R, 212 -82R, 213 -82R,
274 -78R
In accordance with WAC 197 -10 -355 this Division as lead agency transmits .
to you its declaration of /non- significance for those propo-
sals filed and to be acted upon by the Zoning and Subdivision Examiner/
, copies of each are attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
Apart from any request for redetermination of the proposed declarations
attached, any information or recommendations you may have concerning
disposition of these proposals should be forwarded to this Division with-
in three weeks of the date of this transmittal.. Information provided by
you may be utilized to evaluate the merits of the prcposals and /or their
environmental impact. If we do not receive your comments, we will assume
you have no interest in the. proposals.
Yours truly,
GE1?1LD 'V V. MARBETT, SUPERVISOR
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: March 25, 1982
COMMENTS DUE: February 24, ..1982
DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
attach. copy dec. sig /non -sig.
environmental checklist to A/J
vicinity map (when part of proposal) .
plat /plot plan (s) (when part of proposal)
cc: copy transmittal ltr w /dec. to:
SEPA INFORMATION CENTER
Applicant /Authori.7ed Agent
KING COUNTY
State of Washington
Randy Revelle, King County Executiv
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Gary S. Tusbcrg, Director
•
DATE: February 3, 1982
OLDING & LAN.D DEVELOPMENT
Ron .McConnell -, Acting .Manager
450 Administration 'Building
Seattle. Washington 98104
(206) 344.7900
DECLARATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE
WAC 197 -10 -355
FILE NO, 274 -78R
CHELSEA GENE FISHER
Description of Proposal: RS 7200 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY (Potential
RM 2400 MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING) to RM 2400 MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE-
DWELLING.
Proponent: CHELSEA GENE FISHER
Location of Proposal:
South of S. 152nd Street, 230' west of 30th P1. S.
Lead Agency: KING COUNTY BUILDING & LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
Department of Planning & Community Development
This proposal has been determined to not have a significant adverse impact
upon the environment. An EIS is not required under KCC 20.44.060 and WAC
197 -10 -300. This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a •
completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency.
The negative threshold determination shall become our final declaration (15)
fifteen days from the date shown hereon unless a specific written request
for a redetermination has been received on or before this date WAC 197 -10 -340
(5), (6) and (7).
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: GERALD W. MARBETT, SUPERVISOR
POSITION /TITLE:
SIGNATURE:
CC: Applicant /Authorized Agent
DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
•
APPLICANT: CHELSEA GENE FISHER FILE 274-78R Revised
ZONE CHANGE: RS 7200 (Pot. RM 2400) to RM 2400
STR: E 21-23-4
17777)
77A
Proposed
Reclassification
5.
0
0
r•--
0)
Cr
s.
146TH
ST.
RS-7,200
RS-7,200,
ST.
0' 400' '
1
f
•
RM-900
RS-
' 7,200
s.
B-C
S.
B-C
•
R5200
s.
• •
ZONING & SUBDIVISION EXAMINER
FOR THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL
MARCH 25, 1982 - PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA FOR
AMENDMENTS TO OFFICIAL CONTROLS
9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, Room 215,
King County Administration Building.
FILE NO: 274 -78 -R
APPLICANT: CHELSEA GENE FISHER
LOCATION: South of S. 152nd Street, 230' west of 30th
Pl. S.
STR: E 21 -23 -4
PROPOSAL IS: Rezoning of the property described, from
RS 7200 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY (Potential
RM 2400 MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING)
to RM 2400 MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING
TO PERMIT: Use of property for Apartments
10:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NO: 212 -82 -R
APPLICANT: PITARDI TRUCKING CO., INC.
LOCATION: West side of 50th Ave. S. and 51st P1. S.,
90' south of S. 122nd Street.
STR:. E 10 -23 -4
PROPOSAL IS: Rezoning of the property described, from
SR SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL to RM 900 MAXIMUM
DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING RESTRICTED SERVICE.
TO PERMIT: Use of property for Business Office
1:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NO: 213 -82 -R
APPLICANT: R.L. DURKIN, ET AL.
LOCATION: Between S. 154th Street and S.R. 518, 250'
east of 35th Ave. S.
PROPOSAL IS: Rezoning of the property described, from
RM 1800 -P HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING
with SITE PLAN APPROVAL to BC COMMUNITY
BUSINESS.
TO PERMIT: Use of property for expansion of existing
parking lot and air - travel.
1 -29 -82
jb
KING CCUNTY
State of Washington
•
Randy Revelle, King County Executiv
`DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Gary S. Tu :berg, Director
DATE: February 3, 1982
DING & LAND DEVELOPMENT . " Manager
McConnell, Acting
450 Administration Building -
Seattte. Washington 98104
(206) 344 -7900
PROPOSED /FINAL DECLARATION OF
SIGNIFICANCE /NON - SIGNIFICANCE
SUBJECT: Proposal(s) No.: 210 -82R, 211 -82R, 212 -82R, 213 -82R,
274 -78R
In accordance with WAC 197 -10 -355 this Division as lead agency transmits
to you its declaration of /non - significance for those propo-
sals filed and to be acted upon by the Zoning and Subdivision Examiner/
copies of each are attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
Apart from any request for redetermination of the proposed declarations
attached, any information or recommendations you may have concerning
disposition of these proposals should be forwarded to this Division with-
in three weeks of the date of this transmittal. Information provided by
you may be utilized to evaluate the merits of the prcposals and /or their
environmental impact. If we do not receive your comments, we will assume
you have no interest in the proposals.
Yours truly,
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING: March 25, 1982
COMMENTS DUE: February 24, 1982
GEP:ALD V. MARBETT, SUPERVISOR
DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
attach. copy dec. sig /non -sig.
environmental checklist
vicinity map (when part
plat /plot plan(s) (when
cc:
to A/J
of proposal)
part of proposal)
copy transmittal ltr w /dec. to:
SEPA.INFORMATION CENTER
Applicant /Authorized Agent
.
KING COUNTY
State of Viasnington
Randy Revelle, King County Executiv
DEPART .IE'IT OF PLANNING
ANO COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Gary S. Tusbcrg, Director
•
DATE: February 3, 1982
likl.DING & LAND 'DEVELOPMENT
Ron McConnell;, Acting Manager
450 Administration Building
Seattle. Washington 98104
(206) 344 -7900
DECLARATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE
WAC 197 -10 -355
Description of Proposal:
FILE. NO, 212 -82R
PITARDI TRUCKING CO., INC.
SR SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL to RM 900 MAXIMUM DENSITY
MULTIPLE - DWELLING RESTRICTED SERVICE
Proponent: PITARDI TRUCKING CO., INC. (FRANK G. PITARDI)
Location of Proposal: West side of 50th Ave. S. and 51st P1. S., 90' south
of S. 122nd Street.
Lead Agency: KING COUNTY BUILDING & LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
Department of Planning & Community Development
This proposal has been determined to not have a significant adverse impact
upon the environment. An EIS is not required under KCC 20.44.060 and WAC
197 -10 -300. This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a •
completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency.
The negative threshold determination shall become our final declaration (15)
fifteen days from the date shown hereon unless a specific written request
for a redetermination has been received on or before this date WAC 197 -10 -340
(5), (6) and (7).
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: GERALD W. MARBETT, SUPERVISOR
POSITION /TITLE:
SIGNATURE:
CC: Applicant/Authorized Agent
DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
APPLICANT:
ZONE CHANGE:
STR:
•
P.ITARDI TRUCKING CO..., INC..
SR to RM 900
E 10 -23 -4
Proposed
Reclassification
RS -7,200
•
FILE 212 -82 -R
400'
YP%
S. JUNIPER ST.
I ••- -•• -•• S. 120th. ST. -
S-R
S-R
S -R
S-R
• •
ZONING & SUBDIVTSION EXAMINER
FOR THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL
MARCH 25, 1982 - PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA FOR
AMENDMENTS TO OFFICIAL CONTROLS
9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, Room 215,
King County Administration Building.
FILE NO: 274 -78 -R
APPLICANT: CHELSEA GENE FISHER
LOCATION: South of S. 152nd Street, 230' west of 30th
Pl. S.
STR: E 21 -23 -4
PROPOSAL IS: Rezoning of the property described, from
RS 7200 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY (Potential
RM 2400 MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE- DWELLING)
to RM 2400 MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING
TO PERMIT: Use of property for Apartments
10:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NO: 212 -82 -R
APPLICANT: PITARDI TRUCKING CO., INC.
LOCATION: West side of 50th Ave. S. and 51st P1. S.,
90' south of S. 122nd Street.
STR:. E 10 -23 -4
PROPOSAL IS: Rezoning of the property described, from
SR SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL to RM 900 MAXIMUM
DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING RESTRICTED SERVICE.
TO PERMIT: Use of property for Business Office
1:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NO: 213 -82 -R
APPLICANT: R.L. DURKIN, ET AL.
LOCATION: Between S. 154th Street and S.R. 518, 250'
east of 35th Ave. S.
PROPOSAL IS: Rezoning of the property described, from
RM 1800 -P HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING
with SITE PLAN APPROVAL to BC COMMUNITY
BUSINESS.
TO PERMIT: Use of property for expansion of existing
parking lot and air - travel.
1 -29 -82
jb
KING COUNTY •
State of Wasnington
Randy'Revelle, King County Executiv
GLPARTMENT OF PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Gary S. Tu:Serg, Director
•
DATE: February 3, 1982
SOING & LAND DEVELOPMENT
RdircConnell, Acting Manager
450 Administration Building
Seattle. Washington 98104
(2061 344-7900
PROPOSED /FINAL DECLARATION OF
SIGNIFICANCE /.NON - SIGNIFICANCE
FEB 4 1982
CITY OF TUKWILA
P'_:1. NNING DEPT.
SUBJECT: Proposal(s) No.: 210 -82R, 211 -82R, 212 -82R, 213 -82R,
274 -78R
In accordance with WAC 197-10-355 this Division as lead agency transmits
to you its declaration of /non- significance for those propo-
sals filed and to be acted upon by the Zoning and Subdivision Examiner/
copies of each are attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
Apart from any request for redetermination of the proposed declarations
attached, any information or recommendations you may have concerning
disposition of these proposals should be forwarded to this Division with-
in three weeks of the date of this transmittal. Information provided by
you may be utilized to evaluate the merits of the proposals and /or their
environmental impact. If we do not receive your comments, we will assume
you have no interest in the proposals.
Yours truly,
GEF?'ALD 'V V. MARBETT, SUPERVISOR
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
March 25, 1982
• COMMENTS DUE: February 24,_1982
DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
attach. copy dec. sig /non -sig.
environmental checklist
vicinity map (when part
plat /plot plan (s) (when
cc:
to A/J
of proposal)
part of proposal) .
copy transmittal ltr w /dec. to:
SEPA INFORMATION CENTER
Applicant /Authorized Agent
. ;KING COUNTY
State ct `Wasn,nrton
Randy Revelle,, King County Executiv
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Gary S. Tusher(;, Director
•
DATE: • February 3, 1982
i-LD)N.G,& I.AN:O ,DEVELOPMENT
Ron McConnell,, Acting Manager
450 Administration Building
Seattle. Washington 98104
(206) 344-7900
DECLARATION OF NON-SIGNIFICANCE
WAC 197 -10 -355
FILE NO, 213 -82R
R.L. DURKIN
Description of Proposal: MT 1800 -P HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING with SITE
PLAN APPROVAL to BC' COMMUNITY BUSINESS.
Proponent: R.L. DURKIN
Location of Proposal:
Avenue S.
Between S. 154th Street and S.R. 518, 250' east of 35th
Lead Agency: KING COUNTY BUILDING & LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
Department of Planning & Community Development
This proposal has been determined to not have a significant adverse impact
upon the environment. An EIS is not required under KCC 20.44.060 and WAC
197 -10 -300. This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a
completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency.
The negative threshold determination shall become our final declaration (15)
fifteen days from the date shown hereon unless a specific written request
for a redetermination has been received on or before this date WAC 197 -10 -340
(5), (6) and (7).
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: GERALD W. MARBETT, SUPERVISOR
POSITION /TITLE:
SIGNATURE:
CC: Applicant /Authorized Agent
•
DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS
APPLICANT: R.L. ET AL.
ZONE CHANGE: RM 1800 P to BC
STR: W 22-23-4
ST.
RS-7,200
Proposed
Reclassification
I— IL
i 0 1 48;
I 0 1
i
i cur) k
B-C
148T"
PLE :213-82-41
0'
400'
RM-I,800
RS-7,200
RM-900
Immomml.
RS-
7,200
(2,4C01
RS-7,200
RS-7,200
It •
Li S.
.9-
'51"3 RS-7,200
:200
17M
S-7,200
21 :izz
RM-
B-C
RM-1,800
12,400)
\
RS-7,200 (i715r ST
152"0
RM-900
RM-I,800
RS-7,200
B-C
RM-900 -
RS-7,200
RS-
AIN 7,200
11100,
RS-7,200
,1;:s
i.soo )
•
S. I 54th ST.
\\ \\
RM-1,800-P
RM-
900
0\
RM-1,800
RS-
7.2W
284•7$ 262-19
254-70
RM— 900 ;
1
C-G
(C-G\
1581•1' ST.
S. R.
No.
5/8
a. I se*. st
vi
0
c -,p
1
C-G-P C-G
1 21
B-C
• 2 "27'"
RS-7200
ft,"0,
43*-?, :(Rm-\ I
• .0,800,
.1
158T"
RM-1,800
RS-1,200
ST
A
■t°9
m-
oo
RS-7,200
16 0
1
L
ZONING & SUBDIVISION 'EXAMINER
FOR THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL
MARCH 25, 1982 - PUBLIC HEARING
AGENDA FOR
AMENDMENTS TO OFFICIAL CONTROLS
9:00 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible, Room 215,
King County Administration Building.
FILE NO: 274 -78 -R
APPLICANT: CHELSEA GENE FISHER
LOCATION: South of S. 152nd Street, 230' west of 30th
P1. S.
STR: E 21 -23 -4
PROPOSAL IS: Rezoning of the property described, from
RS 7200 RESIDENTIAL SINGLE FAMILY (Potential
RM 2400 MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING)
to RM 2400 MEDIUM DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING
TO PERMIT: Use of property for Apartments
10:30 a.m., or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NO: 212 -82 -R
APPLICANT: PITARDI TRUCKING CO., INC.
LOCATION: West side of 50th Ave. S. and 51st Pl. S.,
90' south of S. 122nd Street.
STR:_ E 10 -23 -4
PROPOSAL IS: Rezoning of the property described, from
SR SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL to RM 900 MAXIMUM
DENSITY MULTIPLE - DWELLING RESTRICTED SERVICE.
TO PERMIT: Use of property for Business Office
1:30 p.m.,.or as soon thereafter as possible,
FILE NO: 213 -82 -R
APPLICANT: R.L. DURKIN, ET AL.
LOCATION: Between S. 154th Street and S.R. 518, 250'
east of 35th Ave. S.
PROPOSAL IS: Rezoning of the property described, from
RM 1800 -P HIGH DENSITY MULTIPLE- DWELLING
with SITE PLAN APPROVAL to BC COMMUNITY
BUSINESS.
TO PERMIT: Use of property for expansion of existing
parking lot and air - travel.
1 -29 -82
jb
KC FILES:
282 -23
Tyee Heights
TRACY J. OWEN, Dist. No. 1
SCOTT BLAIR, Dist. No. 2
BILL REAMS, Dist. No. 3
LOIS NORTH, Dist. No. 4
RUBY CHOW. Dist. No. 5
BRUCE LAING, Dist. No. 6
PAUL BARDEN, Dist. No. 7
BOB GREIVE, Dist. No. 8
GARY GRANT, Dist. No. 9
King County Council
JAMES N. O'CONNOR, Zoning E^' Subdivision Examine?
Room E -189, King County Courthouse
Seattle, Washington 98104
344.3460
May 26, 1982
NOTICE OF ACTION BY THE KING COUNTY
COUNCIL ON RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
ZONING AND SUBDIVISION EXAMINER
RE: Building and Land Development File NO. 282 -23
Proposed Ordinance No. 82 -18
On April 26, 1982, the Council placed Proposed Ordinance
No. 82 -18, concurring with the recommendation of the Zoning
and Subdivision Examiner to approve subject to conditions
the Preliminary Plat of TYEE HEIGHTS, on final passage,
and adopted Ordinance No. 5967.
James N. O'Connor
Zoning and Subdivision Examiner
JNO:dlT
cc: Building and Land Development Division
Parties of Record
APRIL 2, 1982
OFFICE OF THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION EXAMINER
KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION TO THE KING COUNTY COUNCIL.
SUBJECT: Building and Land Development File No. 282 -23
Proposed Ordinance No. 82 -18
Proposed Plat of TYEE HEIGHTS ESTATES
3.91 acres lying on the southwest corner of
Military Road South and South 186th Street.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS:
Division's Preliminary: Approve subject to conditions.
Division's Final: Approve subject to conditions
(modified).
Examiner: Approve subject to conditions.
PRELIMINARY REPORT:
The Building and Land Development Preliminary Report on
Item No. 282 -23 was received by the Deputy Examiner on
February 25, 1982.
PUBLIC HEARING:
After reviewing the Building and Land Development Report,
examining available information on file with the
application and visiting the property and surrounding
area, the Deputy Examiner conducted a public hearing on
the subject as follows:
The hearing on Item No. 282 -23 was opened by the Deputy
Examiner at 10:06 a.m., March 4, 1982, in Room No. 215, King
County Administration Building, Fourth Avenue and James Street,
Seattle, Washington, and was continued for administrative
purposes at 10:35 a.m. Participants at the public hearing and
the exhibits offered and entered are listed in the attached
minutes. A verbatim recording of the hearing is available in
the office of the Zoning and Subdivision Examiner.
FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATIONS: Having reviewed the
record in this matter, the Deputy Examiner now makes and enters
the following:
FINDINGS:
1. General Information:
STR:
Location:
Zoning:
Acreage:
Number of Lots:
Proposed Use:
Sewage Disposal:
Water Supply:
Fire District:
School District:
282 -23 Page 2
E 34 -23 -4
Southwest corner of Military
Road South and South 186th
Street
RS 7200
3.91
24
Townhouses
Des Moines Sewer District
Water District #75
#24
Highline #401
2. Approval of this application will constitute a "major
action" under the provisions of R.C.W. 43.21C and
W.A.C. 197 -10. The applicant submitted an environ-
mental checklist with the application. After
reviewing the environmental checklist, the Manager of
the Building and Land Development Division made a
threshold determination that approval of this appli-
cation will not have a significant adverse impact upon
the quality of the environment and that an environ-
mental impact statement is not required. The
Building and Land Development Division transmitted a
proposed declaration of non - significance to other
agencies with jurisdiction on December 30, 1981.
After the elapse of fifteen days following the
transmittal and after reviewing comments submitted by
agencies with jurisdiction and by other parties, the
Manager of the Building and Land Development Division
adopted the proposed declaration as a final
declaration of non - significance. At the public
hearing on this application a representative of the
Building and Land Development Division reported that
having considered the comments and testimony by
agencies with jurisdiction and by other parties,
having visited the subject property, and having
evaluated the natural, physical and social systems
related to this application, the Building and Land
Development Division reaffirms its determination that
approval of this application will not have a
significant adverse impact on the quality of the
environment and an environmental impact statement is
not required.
3. The subject property was recently approved for a
townhouse Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.) under File
No. 208 -81 -P. The purpose of the plat is to allow the
sale of land parcels with each unit.
4. The proposed plat is consistent with the approved PUD
and generated no new issues. Additional street
improvements are required for platting, and the
development may be required to dedicate additional
right -of -way along Military Road. Neighbors at the
PUD hearing advised of traffic back -ups on Military
Road at peak hours which limit access to the subject
property and other properties served by the local
access street (S 186th St.)
• •
282 -23 Page 3
CONCLUSIONS:
1. Based upon the whole record, and according substantial
weight to the determination of environmental signifi-
cance made by the Division of Building and Land
Development, it is concluded that approval of this
subdivision as recommended below would not constitute
a major action significantly, affecting the quality of
the environment. All evidence of.environmental impact
relating to the proposed action and reasonable altern-
atives to th'e proposed action have been included in
the review and consideration of this action.
2. If approved subject to the conditions recommended
below, the proposed subdivision will comply with the
goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan,
Subdivision and Zoning Codes, and other official land
use controls and policies of King County.
3. If approved subject to the conditions recommended
below, this proposed subdivision will make appropriate
provision for the public health, safety and general
welfare and for drainage ways, streets, other public
ways, water supply, and sanitary wastes; and it will
serve the public use and interest.
4. The conditions recommended in the Division of Building
and Land Development's Preliminary Report as amended
below are in the public interest and are reasonable
requirements.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the subject subdivision, submitted
and received December 17, 1981, be granted preliminary
approval subject to the following conditions for final
plat approval.
1. Compliance with all platting regulations of Title 19
of the King County Code.
2. Record the final PUD (File 208 -81 -P) and satisfy all
conditions of the PUD per Ordinance #5438.
3. Tract B shall be improved with twentyfour feet of
paving, curb to curb; Tract C shall be improved with
22 feet of paving, curb to curb.
4. The applicant may be required to dedicate 12 feet of
right -of -way along Military Road to meet secondary
arterial standards. The Department of Transportation
and Public Works will determine if the additional
right -of -way will be useful.
ORDERED this 2nd day of April, 1982.
ROBERT A. EVELEIGH
DEPUTY ZONING AND SUBDIVISION
EXAMINER
282 -23 Page 4
TRANSMITTED this 2nd day of April, 1982, by certified mail to
the following parties of record:
Ann Williams Triad Associates, Inc. Jerry Lavell
Gottfried Snellnon, G.S. Builders & Devel.Inc.
Randall Parsons, Sadler, Barnard & assoc.
Tyee Heights Associates
TRANSMITTED this 2nd day of April, 1982, to the following:
King County Building and Land Development Division
King County Department of Public Works & Transportation
King County Department Health
Washington State Highway Department
Soil Conservation District
Mark Caughey, Associate Planner - City of Tukwila
Mohammad Hajiarab
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
In order to appeal the recommendation of the Examiner, written
notice of appeal must be filed with the Clerk of the King
County Council with a fee of $25.00 on or before APRIL 16,
1982. If a notice of appeal is filed, the original and 6
copies of a written appeal statement specifying the basis for
the appeal and argument in support of the appeal must be filed
with the Clerk of the King County Council on or before APRIL
23, 1982. If'a written notice of appeal and filing fee are not
filed within 14 calendar days of the date of this report, or if
a written appeal statement and argument are not filed within 21
calendar days of the date of this report, the Clerk of the
Council shall place a proposed ordinance which implements the
Examiner's recommended action on the agenda of the next
available Council meeting.
Filing requires actual delivery to the Office of the Clerk of
the Council, Room 403, King County Courthouse, prior to the
close of business (4:30 P.M.) on the date due. Prior mailing
is not sufficient if actual receipt by•the Clerk does not occur
within the applicable time period. The Examiner does not have
authority to extend the time period unless the Office of the
Clerk is not open on the specified closing date, in which event
delivery prior to the close of business on the next business
day is sufficient to meet the filing requirement.
Action of the Council Final. The action of the Council
approving or adopting a recommendation of the Examiner shall be
final and conclusive unless within thirty (30) days from the
date of the action an aggrieved party or person applies for a
writ of certiorari from the Superior Court in and for the
County of King, State of Washington, for the purpose of review
of the action taken.
• •
282 -23 Page 5
MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC HEARING OF MARCH 4, 1982, on BALD File
No. 282 -23 - TYEE HEIGHTS ESTATES.
Robert A. Eveleigh was the Hearing Examiner for this matter.
Participants were Julie Macrae and Larry Faucher representing
the Building and Land Development Division and Tom Bertek
representing the Department of Public Works, John Cannon,
Randall Parsons, and Gottfried Snellnon.
New correspondence entered into the record was a letter from
the City of Tukwila dated January 12, 1982 and signed by Mark
Caughey, Associate Planner.
The following Exhibits were offered and entered into the record:
Exhibit No.
Exhibit No.
Exhibit No.
Exhibit No.
Exhibit No.
Exhibit No.
Exhibit No.
1. Building and Land Development Division
Preliminary Report prepared for this hearing.
2. Application: Received December 17, 1981.
3. Environmental Checklist: Received December
17, 1981.
4. Declaration of Non - Significance: Received
December 30, 1981.
5. Affidavit of Posting: Received January 4,
1982.
6. Preliminary Plat: Received December 17, 1981.
7. Map of subject area from Sadler, Barnard &
Associates.
The final recommendation of the Building and Land Development
Division was the same as their preliminary with an additional
condition for the 12 foot extra right -of -way, as set forth as
Condition No. 4 on page 2 of this report. The public hearing
was continued for administrative purposes to April 1, 1982 to
allow time for corrections to the newspaper notice. Having no
community response to the corrected notice the public hearing
was closed this date.
RAE:DLR
Doc Id No. 0838A
City f Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
Frank Todd, Mayor
Building & Land Development
King County
450 Administration Building
Seattle, WA 98104
12 January 1982
SUBJECT: Proposal 282 -23 (Tyee Heights Estates)
After reviewing your transmittal to us of 5 January 1982 regarding the
proposed Declaration of Environmental Significance for this project,
we offer the following continents:
1) The proposed dwelling unit density exceeds very slightly the
. 5 unit /gr. acre limit prescribed in the Tukwila Comprehensive
Plan for this portion of our planning area. However, little
direct adverse impact on the City of Tukwila is anticipated
as a result of the proposed construction intensity.
21 The accompanying plot plan indicates that a significant percen-
tage of the site's native tree population will be removed by the
project's development. We urge that careful study be made of the
health and appearance of the more significant specimens to
incorporate their rentention into the project design, if possible.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal.
Tukwila y1 ?ning Department'
Mark'Caughey
Associate Planner
MC /blk
• xc: Planning Director
. KING COUNTY •
State of Washington
Raridy" ReveTle, Count' Executive
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Gary'S. Tusberg, Director
DATE: December 30, 1981
BU ING & LAND DEVELOPMENT
Ron McConnell, Acting Manager
450 Administration Building
Seattle, Washington 98104
(206) 344 -7900
PROPOSED /FINAL DECLARATION OF
SIGNIFICANCE /NON- SIGNIFICANCE
SUBJECT: Proposal(s) No.:
282 -23
In accordance with WAC 197 -10 -355 this Division as lead agency transmits
to you its declaration of non - significance for those propo-
sals filed and to be acted upon by the Zoning and subdivision Examiner/
ZIE&CafiCYDEDWOEZYr4 copies of each are attached hereto and made a part
hereof.
Apart from any request for redetermination of the proposed declarations
attached, any information or recommendations you may have concerning
disposition of these proposals should be forwarded to this Division with-
in three weeks of the date of this transmittal. Information provided by
you may be utilized to evaluate the merits of the proposals and /or their
environmental impact. If we do not receive your comments, we will assume
you have no interest in the proposals.
DATE OF PUBLIC HEARING:
COMMENTS DUE:
Yours truly,
ede.,
JULIAN. T. HIRAKI, SUPERVISOR
SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATION
February 18, 1982
January 28, 1982
attach. copy dec. sig /non -sig.
environmental checklist to A/J
vicinity map (when part of proposal)
plat /plot plan(s) (when part of proposal)
cc: copy transmittal ltr w /dec. to:
SEPA INFORMATION CENTER
Applicant /Authorized Agent
KING COUNTY
State of Wasn,ngton
Bandy Reveller County 'Executive
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Gary S.. Tusberg, Director
DATE: DECEMBER 30, 1981
to,
B ING & LAND DEVELOPMENT
Ron McConnell, Acting Manager
450 Administration Building
Seattle. Washington 98104
(206) 344.7900 •
DECLARATION OF NON- SIGNIFICANCE
WAC 197 -10 -355
FILE N0, 282 -23 .
TYEE HEIGHTS ESTATES
Description of Proposal: 24 lots on 3.91 acres
Proponent: G.S. Builders & Developers
southwest corner Military Road South and South 186th
Street
Location of Proposal:
Lead Agency: KING COUNTY BUILDING & LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION
Department of Planning & Community Development
This proposal has been determined to not have a significant adverse impact
upon the environment. An EIS is not required under KCC 20.44.060 and WAC
197 -10 -300. This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a
completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the
lead agency.
The negative threshold determination shall become our final declaration (15)
fifteen days from the date shown hereon unless a specific written request
for a redetermination has been received on or before this date WAC 197 -10 -340
(5), (6) and (7).
RESPONSIBLE OFFICIAL: .JULIAN T. HIRAKI, Supervisor
POSITION /TITLE: SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATION
SIGNATURE: 4Z yt _44-a4
CC: Applicant /Authorized Agent
SUBDIVISION & P.U.D.
A G E N D A
KING COUNTY ZONING & SUBDIVISION EXAMINER
402 KING COUNTY COURT HOUSE
Seattle, WA.
FEBRUARY 18, 1982.
9:00 a.m. OR AS SOON THEREAFTER AS POSSIBLE
FILE NO. 206 -82 -P
TIFFANY TERRACE
Owner /Developer:
Engineer / Surveyor:
STR:
Location:
Zoning:
Acreage:
Number of Units:
Proposed Use:
Sewage Disposal:
Water Supply:
Fire District:
School District:
Mike Price, 4421 -5th Ave. N.E., Puyallup
WA 98371
Nils Ronhovde & Assoc., #16, 5738 N. 26,
Tacoma, WA 98407
33 -21 -4
Wly side Kit Corner Rd S. (SR 161), N. of
S. 376th Street if extended
SR
5.39 acres
32
Multiple Family Dwellings
Lakehaven Sewer District
#124
#39
#210 (Federal Way)
10:00 a.m. OR AS SOON THEREAFTER AS POSSIBLE
FILE NO. 282 -23
TYEE HEIGHTS ESTATES
Owner:
Engineer /Surveyor:
Developer:
Agent:
STR:
Location:
Zoning:
Acreage:
Number of Lots:
Proposed Use:
Sewage Disposal:
Water Supply:
School District:
Fire District:
G.S. Builders & Developers, Inc., P.O.
Box 68652, Seattle, WA 98168
Sadler, Barnard & Assoc., 31218 Pacific
Highway S., Federal Way, WA 98003.
Tyee Heights Associates by G.S. Builders
& Developers, Inc., P.O. Box 68652,
Seattle, WA 98168
Triad Associates, Inc., 11415 N.E. 128th
St., Kirkland, WA 98033
E 34 -23 -4
S.W. corner Military Rd S. & S. 186th St.
RS 7200
3.91
24
Multiple family
Des Moines Sewer District
Water District #75
#401 (Highline )
#24
11:00 a.m., OR AS SOON THEREAFTER AS POSSIBLE
FILE NO. 282 -22
HIDDEN CEDARS
Owner /Developer:
Engineer /Surveyor:
STR:
Location:
Zoning:.
Acreage:
Number of Lots:
Proposed Use:
Typical Lot Size:
Sewage Disposal:
Water Supply:
School District:.
Fire District:
William H. Finkbeiner, 601 Hoge Bldg.,
Seattle, WA 98104
SEA, INC., Engineers /Planners, 33811 -9th
Ave. S., Federal Way, WA 98003
E 9 & 16 -21 -5
Bet. 125th Ave. S.E. (Extended) & S.R. 18,
both sides S.E. 320th Street (Extended)
SR (9600) & SR (15, 000)
19.3+
28
Single Family
Range from 8625 to 24,000 square feet
City of Auburn
City of Auburn
#408 (Auburn )
#44
VIOLA .RIGS' ADD:,
BLOCK 2: —
RS'72 0
584:89'' -OP
TRACT/A'
OPEN'JPAC
• .SAS.
L
E /•"� (/ /
Girt
MEE
0 20t0PER/0NNER:
•
PLANNIMO AREA
.ACREAGE:
AO. or LOTS: 24
mars-am 2ONIN0: •
PROPOSED USE:
Sadler, 'Barnard . i Assoc.
31210 Pacific Nay S.
Peder.L. Nay: HA., 99003:
PHONE: 941 -1599
Triad Associates, Inc.
11415 0E ' 1205 Street
Kirkland 10f 90033
PEONS: 921-84413••
to 6/.
G.S. rBuilders L Deveopers. I.1.
P 0.^4or ¢8562,.
Seattle 0A 981.68
51005180.,
RS 7200
•
Multi- family .. '
Des Moines Sewer O1striO
Water District 475
Highland School. Of •uiet I400 .,
,Fire. District 024
- Pacific AOrtlwent 0811
:PVgeC ^. Sound: Power 4 L1gh
'DATER:
VICINITY:.
ZNORTH
575.20'
SDUTHRIDGE CONDOMINIUM
RKA.1800'
•
LEGAL 00505IPTI09: T7at portion of the southeast guarter f 58Ct0on
34. Township 23 north. Range 4 Get. •.0. in King Connty,
Washington. described as follows: r . . .
beginning •5 the east quarter corner of'. 1d SectionN343 thence - ,
888.23'45'•. along the north lino of .aid to 1t qma t r'a
distance of 350.05 feet: thence 901'36.15•8 x
a diat.s.of 680.00
feet, to the southerly - margin of south 106th Street and the true'
point of beginning, tnce iOi•36.15•E a distance'of�1305.00 feet;.'
he
then. 588.23'45•8 a distance of 575.20 feet, tri thetwesterly
margin of old Military Road: thane 800.22112•14 1on4..331d w t-
• ly margin a di•tnncs of 305.18 feet, to th tSerly:maiglo •.
of south 19615 Street. thence 886.23•45'0 1 q aid +southerly •
margin, a distance of 564.69 feet, to the true point; f begin- "
ping.
Also known as Lot 34 of Highland rive Acre TraCtl, e unrecorded
plat.
NOTE'
1 Boundary d •topographical survey Computed. •
drawn and tified by,
John 0 Cwinge and
Cioll E gi r1 q planning and design
Kent. NA '852-6653
Certified by Coition T P L.S. I I
•
T518 PLAT 123 IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE
PLANNED UNIT D0V•LOPMENT 200 -81 -P.
ORDINANCE 81 -68 VINO COUNTY^ WA.
rc � E!'JF()
&1 =0.1
KC FILES:
Coluccio Rezone with
Kent
*ILA
0
J
1909
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
Gary L VanDusen, Mayor
16 November 1982
City of Kent
Planning Department
220 South. 4th. Avenue
Kent, WA 98031
Attn: James Harris
Subject: Coluccio Rezone and E..I.S.
Thank you for sending. to us a copy-Of your department's comments regarding
the Coluccio proposal. To keep your files up to date, we enclosed a copy
•of our comments in return.
TUKWTLA,PuANNING DEPARTMENT
Ma�{c Caughey
Associate Planner
MC /blk
xc: Ping. Dir.
•
CITY OF I GT
November 15, 1982
'Ms. Holly Miller, Director .
King County Department of Planning
and Community Development
King County Administration Building
Seattle, WA 98104
Dear Ms. Miller:
J101M
NOV 1 G 1982
C . OF TUKWILA
,;NNING DEPT.
D
The comments . from the City of Kent regarding the Vincent Coluccio
Rezone Draft Environmental Impact Statement appear below.
Planning Department
Page 17, Figure 2
Pages 29 - 31
Page 33
Page 67, Figure 10
It is suggested that the parking area storm .
drainage be directed to the detention pond (to
the north) as opposed to the adjacent wetland
and open space area to the south.
Under the discussion of the Valley Floor Plan
policies, there is no mention of objectives and
policies of the Open Space, Natural Resources,
Waterways, or Urban Design Quality elements.
These policies are critical to a complete evalua-
ti.on of the. project's consistency with local
planning policy.
The discussion of. the Kent Agricultural Lands
Study is highly presumptive when it states that:
"Because of the site's unsuitability for agri-
cultural uses; it will probably be deleted from
further study when and if staff begin site - specific
investigations and make recommendations." Perhaps,
the City of Kent is the best judge of what will be
deleted from our recommendations. This should be
rewritten.
For the most accurate representation of the uses
illustrated, it is suggested that contours be
added to the figure.
•
Ms. Holly Miller, Director
Page 2
.Planning Department (continued)
Page 71, Table 2 The population figures for the City of Kent are
incorrect for 1970 and 1980.
Page 83
Pages 88 - 89
Page 91
Page 99
In the discussion of transportation needs, it is
noted that, "It is not expected that .any of these
major street network improvements'would be built
until late in this decade or during the 1990's."
If this is indeed the situation, then'the proposed
additional 7,800 vehicle trips per day would seem .
to create 'a nearly impossible situation especially
at Orillia and 200th. Signalization of that '
intersection would appear. to be a• necessity.
Mitigating measures discussed'in this section are
all specific project type conditions. It would
seem that because this. is essentially a request
for a rezone (and not a specific project) that •
there should be a'review of area -wide implications.
In regards to the 13 transportation mitigating
measures, there seems to be a general question
that should be raised: Is this rezone request
timely when there is such.an abundance of in-
dustrially zoned land in nearby Kent, Tukwila and
Renton? In Kent alone 45 percent of the industrially
zoned.land is vacant at this time and it already has
most of the urban services to support this type of
development.
Under Parks and Recreation Facilities, the first
sentence should be corrected to read: "The one
third acre Anderson "Green Belt" Park located
nearby (one mile southeast of the site)..."
In addition, there should be some discussion of
Russell Road and Frager Road as scenic roads as
well as Kent's River Greenbelt concept.
The extension of the 27 inch sewer line across the
Green River is a major issue with the City of Kent
and requires more in -de th discussion.(-Recently,
the City adopted a recommen ation in the Agricul-
tural Lands Study that will establish an "Agricul-
tural Lands Preservation Element" as part of the
Comprehensive Plan. The areas most directly
•
Ms. Holly Miller, Director
Page 3
Planning Department '(continued)
affected by this action are the lands that
lie south and west of the Green River. At
this time, there is little pressure to develop
those lands at urban densities because they lack .
the necessary urban services. Extension of the
27 inch sewer line will, therefore, have a
tremendous impact on this new city policy.
Accordingly, this proposed action is an adverse
impact not as "may be viewed... by some people"
but by recently adopted City policy.
Page 105. According to WAC 197 -10 -440 (12)(e), the discussion
of alternatives for a rezone type of action need
not be limited to only the subject site. It could
(and should) be expanded to include the alternative
of achieving the same objective (that is, providing
industrial use) on another site, such as a site(s)
in Kent or Tukwila which is already serviced by
adequate utilities. By limiting alternatives
discussion to the one site, there is no way to
discuss the alternative of providing the same
amount of development in an already serviced area.
Page 113, Figure 26 This map appears to not be the product of a systematic
analysis of comprehensive plans of Kent, Tukwila and
King County. Instead, it appears to be pure conjec-
ture and the subsequent discussion of "secondary im-
pacts" based on this map is, therefore, inaccurate
and misleading.
Page 118
Building Department
Page 6
Following the lead of the above comment, the dis-
,cussion under "Impacts" is inaccurate. The state-
ment is. made that development of the site "will be
compatible with other land use in the immediate
vicinity and in the Green River Valley." Actually,
if this was compared to the proposed development
with the planned "residential - agricultural use of
Kent's Comprehensive Plan, it could not be con-
cluded that it would be compatible.
Noise - increase of 5 - 10 dba is not a practical
guess. All development already properly zoned and
ready for construction must be added to this- -peak
traffic could and probably will reach 95 ,dba at
times. Project could generate primarily, heavy
truck traffic on hills where dba's are even higher
due to gearing down.
Ms. Holly Miller,•rector
Page 4
Building Department (continued)
Page 7
Page 8
Page 63
Page 64
General Comment
Noise - it has been proven in all recent studies
seen that landscaping will not buffer noise it-
self. Heavy berming or walling of a solid material
would be more apt to serve as a buffer. Item #2
under mitigating measures is not.a valid mitigation
to noise limitation. Unavoidable adverse impacts
from noise, on and off site, will be of serious
concern to citizens of Kent.
Light and Glare - landscaping could be used to pro-
tect the valley floor from unnecessary light and
glare created by, new development. All public
streets should also be screened.
Natural Resources - the flooded area addressed
has been targeted by the City of Kent to remain
as a wetland. If steps are taken to annex this
property to Kent or Tukwila, steps could be taken
to save the wetland areas.
Noise - mitigating measures - paragraph two would
not reduce noise levels in itself. More attention
should be given to specific methods for reducing
noise. pollution. Paragraph three are high ideals
and if included as requirements of development
could indeed help.
Light and Glare - impacts - last sentence is not
believeable with focus on security. The develop-
ment will be isolated, so will require more in-
terior and perimeter lighting than in areas of
heavier development.
Mitigating Measures - it will probably not be
practical from a security standpoint to retain
natural vegetation unless on -site security is
planned.
If sewer is provided west of the Green River in the north sector of the
Kent city limits, development could be attracted which could put a burden
on the Building Department's current manpower. Current planning for work-
load only includes those areas east of the Green River with utilities.
Ms. Holly Miller, rector
Page 5
Building Department (continued)
currently available End still undeveloped. An increase in manpower
for the Department could be anticipated due to additional acreage
being approved for development.
Fire Department
General Comment
The proposed site is entirely within the county area served by the Angle
Lake Fire Protection District #24.. At this time, the City of Kent Fire
Department responds to this area only on request from District #24. The
additional traffic generated would not have an impact on emergency response
of the Fire Department.
Public Works Department
General Comment
In the EIS, the consultant has made reasonable assumptions, and the transpor-
tation impact depicted appears to be realistic. However, there are several
changes which should be made in the •text, so that the proposal's impacts can
be properly evaluated. The expected impacts on the planned and existing
transportation system lead to a recommendation of denial.
Page .7
Page 78
Noise --mitigation - it has been proven that land-
scaping has almost a zero effect in reducing
noise levels. Earth berms, walls and fences do
• have a positive. affect..
The consultant states that the traffic increases
have been calculated at a flat rate of 2 percent per
year, regardless of type of roadway. In Kent,
traffic volumes have increased at an average rate
of 6 percent per year. On S. 212th Street in
the Kent valley floor, volumes have increased at
an average rate of 4 percent per year over the
past three years. The Urban Arterial Board recom-
mends using a figure of 2 percent per year in the
Seattle - Everett urbanized area, but only if other
figures are not available. Using the 2 percent
figure substantially understates the actual traffic
increases in Kent.
Ms. Holly Miller,Orector
Page 6
Public Works Department (continued)
From our experience, we have found that 4 - 6 per-
cent on arterials, and 6 - 8 percent on minor roads
is the expected annual average rate of increase.
Over a six -year period (1981- 1987), this higher
rate of increase could result in traffic. volumes
12 - 25 percent higher than predicted in the EIS.
Unless other factors limit the rate of increase,
we see no reason to limit the expected traffic
growth to 2 percent per year.
Page 84, Figure 19 This figure needs to be revised in three areas:
1) S. 188th Street west of the I -5 interchange
should show 1,360 vehicles attributable to
the proposal, even though no number is shown
for 1987 total traffic.
2) The increase attributable to the proposal on
the southbound on -ramp to I -5 from S. 188th
Street should indicate 340 vehicles, not 160.
The total volume is correct.
3) The volume shown on S. 200th Street between
Orillia Road and Frager Road (2,490/1,360) only .
applies to that stretch east . of the site.
The volume on S. 200th just east of Orillia
Road should show a 1987 volume of 6,570, with
5,440 attributable to this proposal. This
missing volume shows more clearly the significant
impact expected at the intersection of S. 200th
and Orillia Road.
General Comments
Recommendation of Denial
Our recommendation is that the proposed rezone be denied. The traffic im- )
pacts are substantial. In addition, the interchange with I -5 at S. 188th
Street will be heavily impacted due to the existing zoning in the valley
floor and Tukwila. The City of Tukwila is contemplating the construction 1
of a connection from Southcenter Parkway to this interchange. The City of
Kent plans to connect a new east -west arterial from the East Hill of Kent
to Orillia Road at S. 200th Street.
•
Ms. Holly Miller, Director
Page 7
These two planned improvements are necessary due to traffic expected from
existing zoning., and they will require expansion of the I -5 interchange
by themselves. There does not appear to be a compelling public need for
more zoning of this type, and there appears to be little excess capacity .
available for traffic generated from'new zoning. The zoning proposal should
not be approved at this time.
Mitigating Measures
If other factors are determined sufficient to require approval of this
rezone, mitigating measures should be required to reduce the immediate
impact of generated traffic. All the mitigating measures on pages 88 and
89 should be required as conditions of approval:
1) Construction of a southbound left -turn lane on Orillia Road at S. 200th.
2) Improvement of S. 200th to a three -lane section from Orillia Road to
the east site boundary.
Dedication of property for additional street right of way sufficient
to allow for a•future primary arterial from the valley floor. This
would require 80 feet or 40 feet from. centerline.
Coordination with Metro and the Seattle -King County Commuter Pool to •
encourage employee ridesharing.
Construction of a pedestrian connection from the east site boundary
to Frager Road.
6.) Installation of a new fully - actuated traffic signal at Orillia Road
and S. 200th with coordination capabilities.
Widening of the intersection of Orillia Road and S. 200th to provide
two westbound right -turn lanes and one westbound left -turn lane.
Improvements to the I -5 /S. 188th Street interchange as specifiedon
page 89 and on page 77, footnotes b and c.
To evaluate the future transportation impact, the consultant has assumed that
these . improvements will be in place. Requiring such improvements as a con-
dition of approval will ensure that they will indeedbe in place when they are
needed.
Storm Water .
The subject property is within a drainage basin which discharges to open
channels which are maintained by King County Drainage District #2. The
Ms. Holly Miller, OPector
Page 8
District channels discharge directly into the Green River through an
outlet pipe which is controlled by a flap gate. Since the HUD 100 -year
flood elevation on the subject property (21.5) is substantially below
the Green River water surface elevation when the river is under 100 -year
conditions (flowing at 11,600 cfs - elevation 324.), significant ponding
occurs during sustained period of high river flows. Development of the
property situated above the 100 -year flood plan will increase the amount
of ponding that takes place in the low wetland area due to an increase
in the total amount of runoff. It is imperative that the existing avail-
able storage below the 100 -year flood elevation at least be maintained,
and it appears that this storage should be substantially increased when
development takes place.
If the 7-day holding criteria is valid for basins that discharge directly
into the Green River (i.e., Black River Pump Station, Horseshoe Acres
Pump Station, Auburn Mill Creek, etc.), then shouldn't the same criteria
apply to properties within the subject drainage basin? This would amount
to approximately 20 acre feet of additional storage that would have to be
provided by the developer. The additional storage would be usable only if
provided in the low wetland area.
These concerns should be addressed more closely by King County Surface Water
Management._ The standard 10 -year detention design does not appear to be
adequate.
Sanitary Sewer
In order to service the area west of the Green River, a crossing of the
river would be necessary. The gravity system proposed by Kent's Compre-
hensive Sewer Plan is adequate to service the subject property. Kent's
system is considerably closer than the Tukwila system, and it does not
require any pumping equipment to service the rezone property. A gravity
system is more energy efficient.
Extending sewers to the west side of the Green River will probably encourage
development of vacant and agricultural lands in the area.
The City of Kent will probably require annexation before the subject property
would be serviced with sanitary sewers. .
In summary, the staff believes that the present DEIS is inadequate in light
of several problems noted in the previous discussion. If you have any
questions regarding these comments, please give me a call at 872 -3390.
ch
ncerely,
MES P. HARRIS
anning Director
*ILA A9S City . f Tukwila
6-
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
" o Tukwila Washington 98188
• Gary L VanDusen, Mayor
•19
OS
8.Navember 1982
Holly Miller, Director
Department of Planning and Community Development
W -217 King County Courthouse
Seattle, WA 98104
Subject: Coluccio Rezone DEIS
We thank you for sending to .us a copy of the subject DEIS for review;
our comments are as follow:
General Comment
The proposed project is sited at the urban fringe of both Kent and Tukwila,
yet the E.I.S. does not adequately discuss the growth inducing potential
of the project on these communities. We belive this topic to be a key
issue in the analysis of the proposed rezone, and suggest that the impact
of the proposal on the adopted policies pertinent to direction and timing
of growth within Kent and Tukwila be discussed in the text. We are
particularly concerned about the effects, both primary and secondary, on
growth as influenced by the extension of infrastructural services to this
unincorporated area, since Tukwila has been identified as a potential
purveyor of sewer service to the Coluccio site. Included in that discussion
should be a review of the relationship between the extension of public
services to the area and the potential requirement of annexation to the
provider jurisdiction.
The Community
Pages 70 -71: The text is disturbingly ambiguous in its treatment of the
project's impact on housing demand within Kent, Tukwila and
the surrounding geographic area. First, Table 2 on Page 71
does not even bother to include housing unit statistics for
the City of Kent, as it does for Tukwila. The report does
not attempt at all to forecast regional distribution of housing
demand associated with "2000 additional employees in the
local workforce" who will eventually hold jobs on the site.
This concern is especially important to the City of Tukwila
since the residential vacancy rate, particularly in the
rental segment of the City's housing market is quite low. For
this reason, we feel that the DEIS should analyze housing
demand by unit type and income level vs availability on a
-age -2-
J- Holly Miller, Direct
Department of Planni� and Community De velopment
8: November 1982
•
quantitative basis for the project vicinity, emphasizing
distinct impacts and mitigation for the Kent, Tukwila and
Des Moines communities.
Public Services
Page 90 -92 (Schools): The text discussion which appears under "Existing
conditions" seems more appropriately placed under the
"impact" section in which there is no discussion of schools.
We suggest that the discussion of impacts of the project on
local schools be refined on the basis of the expanded housing/
locational analysis requested under the community heading
above.
Utilities
- Footnote 1, Page 98: The remarks attributed to Planning Department staff
member Mark Caughey have been paraphrased in a way which might
be misleading. The correct information which he conveyed
to CH2MHILL in the referrenced conversation was that Title 14
of the Tukwila Municipal Code definitely requires City Council
approval of sewer service extensions beyond the corporate
limits. However, the code is silent on the matter of annexa-
tion. Therefore, your text should at least change the word
"will" to "may" in line 6 of paragraph 2, Page 98.
We appreciate the opportunity to review this document.
TUKWILA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
ek4,4, 6e019-Lg„7
Brad Collins, AICP
Planning Director
MC /blk
xc: Ping. Dir.
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
L_..= FI C E MEMO
CITY OF T U KW I LA
SUBJECT: CO1 UCCi 0 DEIS
Since this proposal for rezone in King County involves the poten-
tial extension of Tukwila sewer service beyond the city limits, please
have your staff review this document and return comments to me as
soon as possible, but no later than 10 November. Thanks.
1, C
ids»14-<:-.441e (g41'2 """---