The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSEPA EPIC-126-80 - LOCKE JEM - 2 LOT SHORT PLATJEM LOCKS 2 -LOT SHORT PLAT EPIG126 -80 CITY OF/TUKWILA OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT /FINAL DECLARATION OF /i'd0N —S I Gi4I F I CA JCE Description of proposal Two -Lot Short Plat Jem Locke Proponent Location of Proposal Lot 20, Block 15, Seattle Gardent Tract So -1 -ss Lead Agency City of Tukwila File No. ERIC ^ = 1.2.6 =80 This proposal has been determined to (veregnot have) a significant adverse im- pact upon the environment. An EIS (+r 'is not) required under RCW 43.21C.030(2) (c). This decision was made after review by the lead agency of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. Responsible Official Position /Title Date 8 January 1980 Kjell Stoknes OCD Director COMMENTS: CONDITIONS: Signature 1) Maximum driveway slope on segreation parcel 2 shall not exceed 15 %. 2) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit -a soils report and detail drawings of the foundation design, including bulkheads and retaining walls as certified by a registered professional engineer, to the satisfaction of the Public. Works Director. Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a vege- tation removal /retention diagram for approval by the Office of Community Development. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST (EPIC- 126 -80) THRESHOLD DETERMINATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The subject checklist accompanies application 80 -1 -SS to divide an existing parcel which fronts on 59th Avenue South on the west, and Interurban Avenue on the east, into two lots. The east -most segregation. parcel (Lot 1) contains an existing gasoline service station and is zoned C -2. The west -most segre- gation parcel (Lot 2) is. zoned R1 -7.2 and is currently vacant. Competion of the environmental checklist is mandated in this case by the com- prehensive plan environmental base map which designates this property as sensitive to special development considerations. Factors identified as requir- ing specific attention are slope stability and vegetation cover. As the intent of the subject short plat is to create a building site on proposed Lot 2, the following analysis will concentrate on the development implications of potential construction on that portion of the subject site. ANALYSIS A) Slope Stability B As indicated by the applicant's response to Section II.1 of the checklist, the proposed building site on. Lot 2 is sloped in excess of 30 %. A narrow, relatively - flat "shelf" extends eastward from the 59th Avenue property line, and then drops -off quickly. Most of this shelf area would probably be consumed by front yard setback requirements, forcing most of the building to be placed on the steeper slopes of the lot. The soils analysis map contained in the Tukwila data inventory describes the general classification for this site as till soil over bedrock. This soil type has high bearing capacity but moderate erosion potential when batter exceeds 15 %. After field reconnaissance of the site with Phil Fraser, Acting Public Works Director, it seems reasonable to assume that the scale of construction which will fit on this site is sufficiently minimal to allow for.application of relatively routine engineering solutions to control erosion and to secure a sturdy foundation system. Policy 1 of Objective 3 under the "natural environment" section of the com- prehensive plan discourages development on slopes exceeding a 20 %.gradient. The policy text suggest minimizing such development because of vehicle access difficulties. In the present case, however, it appears possible to confine the driveway to the relatively -flat shelf adjoining 59th Avenue South. Vegetation Cover Policy 3 of Objective 1 of the "natural environment" section of the com- prehensive plan discourages unnecessary disturbance of vegetation beyond that needed to accomplish actual development of a property. Lot 2 of the proposed short plat contains numerous deciduous trees which will have to be "thinned" to accommodate construction. To insure that as few trees as possible are removed, thus preserving the "appearance of the valley wall woodlands, a diagram locating all trees within 10' df.the=proposed'bu tiding "foo.tprint "should be provided by the builder at the construction permit stage. The aforementioned diagram should identify the trunk caliper of the tree, its specie, condition of health, and an indication of whether it is to be retained or removed. Retention priority should be given to healthy large - trunk diameter individual specimens, and smaller -trunk specimens occurring in groves or clusters. Down -slope removal of any vegetation should be keyed to conditions for mitigation of run -off and slope stabilization in the development soils report. RECOMMENDATION Approval by the responsible official of a final declaration of non - significance for the subject, short plot proposal.subject to conditions as follows: 1) Maximum driveway slope on segregation parcel 2 shall not exceed 15 %. 2) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a soils report and detail drawings of the foundation design, including bulkheads and retaining walls as certified by a registered professional engineer, to the satisfaction of the Public Works Director. 3) Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall submit a vegetation removal /retention diagram for approval by the Office of Community Development. ;1908 City of Tukwila PlanningDivision 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845 Office of Community. Development. 15 January 1980 Leonard I. Schroeter 2201 SW 152nd St. Seahurst, WA. Re: JEM Locke Short Plat (File EPIC - 126 -80; 80 -1 -SS) The environmental checklist filed by your office in support of the subject short plat application was reviewed by the responsible official on 8 January 1980. The threshold determination has resulted in a conditional - declaration of non - significance for the project. We are sending the enclosed documents in compliance with the State Environmental Policy Act, SEC WAC- 197 -10 -350. Short plat application 80 -1 -SS is discussed in the attached memorandum, and will be heard by the short subdivision committee on 7 February 1980 at 2:OOpm in Tukwila City Hall Conference Room #3. While attendance of the meeting by the applicant is optional, we recommend strongly that a representative be present, as the committee may not act on the staff recommendation without your concurrence. Please feel welcome to contact me should you have any questions about the short plat process.., MC /mkb cc: JEM Locke. 14211 Interurban Ave. Tukwila, WA. 98168 Enclosure & Attachment CITY OF TUKWILA ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM L4� CITY CF naryllA This questionnaire must be completed and submitted with the application for permit. This questionnaire must be completed by all persons apply1Aj f2r a permit from the City of Tukwila, unless it is determined by the Responsible 1979 Official that the permit is exempt or unless the applicant and Responsible . Official previously agree an Environmental Impact Statement needs to be completed. A fee of $50.00 must accompany the filling of the Environmental Questionnaire to cover costs of the threshold determination. I. BACKGROUND 1. Name of Proponent: 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 14211 Interurban Ave. S. Tukwila 98168 433 -9933 Jem Locke 3. Date Checklist Submitted: 4. Agency Requiring Checklist: 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: none (short plat) 12 -27 -79 City of Tukwila 6. Nature and Brief Description of the Proposal (including but not limited to its size, general design elements, and other factors that will give an-accurate understanding of its scope and nature): Proposal is to subdivide a piece of property so as to have one parcel with an existing service station, and make one parcel available for oenctruction of a home.' • 7. Location of Proposal (describe the physical setting of the proposal, as well as the extent of the land area affected by any environmental im- pacts, including any other information needed to give an accurate under- standing of the environmental setting of the proposal): The lower portion is in the 14400 block of Interurban Ave. S., and the upper portion lies on the east side of 59th Pl. S.' The service station is on the lower portion. 8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal: unknown 9. List of all Permits, Licenses or Government Approvals Required for the Proposal (federal, state and local): (a) Rezone, conditional use, shoreline permit, etc. YES NO x (b) King County Hydraulics Permit YES NO x (c) Building permit YES x NO (d) Puget et SoundSr Pollution Control Permit 1 YES N.0 X (e) Sewer hook up permit YES x NO (f) Sign permit YES NO x (g) Water hook up permit YES x NO (h) Storm water system permit YES NO x (i) Curb cut permit YES NOx (j) Electrical permit (State of Washington) YES NO x (k) Plumbing permit (King County) YES x NO (1) Other: 10. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or futher activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: no 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: A buyer would probably build (single family zoning) 12. Attach any other application form that has been completed regarding the pro- posal; if none has been completed, but is expected to be filed at some future date, describe the nature of such application form: none II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS (Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required) 1-. Earth. Will the proposal result in: (a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substructures? (b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcover- ing of the soil? (c) Change in topography or ground surface relief fea- tures? (d) The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features ?. -2- YES MAYBE NO x x x x (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which _ may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? YES MAYBE NO mo° t ctv Explanation: The upper portion of the property where a house might be located, is on approximately a 30% grade, so there would no doubt be some disturbance during the construction phase. Storm drainage would also have to be carefully monitored.' The house would require the use of retaining walls and /or piling . 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? (b) The creation of objectionable odors? (c) Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? Explanation: 3. Water. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? (b) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? x (c) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? (d) Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? _ (e) Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? _ (f) Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? _ (g) Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? _ -3- x x x x x x x • 410 YES MAYBE NO (h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either through direct injection, or through the seepage of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne virus or bacteria, or other substances into the ground waters? (i) Reduction in the amount of water otherwise avail- able for public water supplies? Explanation: see previous comment under "Earth" 4. Flora. Will the proposal result in: (a) Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of flora (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, micrQflora and aquatic plants)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of flora? (c) Introduction of new species of flora Into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? (d) Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? Explanation: 5. Fauna. Will the proposal result in: (a) Changes in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of fauna (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects or microfauna)? (b) Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of fauna? (c) Introduction of new species of fauna into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of fauna? (d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? Explanation: x • • YES MAYBE NO 6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? X Explanation: 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? Explanation: 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in the altera- tion of the present or planned land use of an area? Explanation: 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: (a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? (b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural resource? Explanation: 10. Risk of- Upset. Does the proposal involve a risk of an . explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radi- ation) in the event of an accident or upset_ conditions? Explanation: x 11. Population. Explanation: • • Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? Explanation: 13. Transportation /Circulation. Will the proposal result (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? (b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? Impact upon existing transportation systems? Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Explanation: The additional traffic generated by one residence will be, using periphery streets. (c) (d) (e) (f) in: YES MAYBE 710 x 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: (a) Fire protection? (b) Police protection? (c) Schools? (d) Parks or other recreational facilities? (e) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? x x x • YES MAYBE NO (f) Other governmental services? x Explanation: No new utility services will have to be brought into the area. The additional cars and service trucks will have an impact on road maintenance required. 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: (a) Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? (b) Demand upon existing sources of energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? Explanation: 16. Utilities. Will the proposal result in a need for new systems, or alterations to the following utilities: x x (a) Power or natural gas? x (b) Communications systems? x (c) Water? x (d) Sewer or septic tanks? x (e) Storm water drainage? x (f) Solid waste and disposal? X Explanation: 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the crea- tion of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? Explanation: 18. Aesthetics. Will the ro osal result in the obstruc- P P tion of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically of- fensive site open to public view? Explanation: 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of exist- ing recreational opportunities? 'Explanation: 20. Archeological /Histroical. Will'the proposal result in an alteration of a signifi- cant archeological or his - torical site,!structure,- object or building? Explanation: CERTIFICATION BY APPLICANT: YES MAYBE t N0 I, the undersigned, state that to the best of my knowledge the above information is true and complete. It is understood that the lead agency may withdraw any declaration of non - significance that it might issue in reliance upon this checklist should there be any willful misrepresentation or willful lack of full disclosure on my part. Signature and Title Date x- x x •T:PLAT N0. TUKWILA, WASHINGTON U a ro 0 U 0 Filed for record at the request of: Name Return to: APPROVAL, Reviewed and approved by the Short Subdivision Committee and hereby certified for filing this day of 19 Chairman, Short Subdivision CommittE Planning, Division Office of, Community Development 6230 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 LEGAL DESCRIPTION Present Parcel- Lot 20, Block 154 Hillman's Seattle Garden Tracts, according to the plat recorded in volume 11 of plats, page 24, in King County, Wash., EXCEPT that portion of said Lot 20 deeded to King County for road by ;deeds recorded under Auditors File No. 995857, 990090 and 988203. Lot 1- The northeasterly 136.19 feet of Lot 20, Block 15, Hillman's Seattle Garden Tracts, according to the plat recorded in volume 11 of plats, page 24, in King County, Wash., EXCEPT that portion taken for SR 181. Lot 2= Lot 20, Block 15, Hillman's Seattle Garden Tracts, according to the plat recorded in volume 11 of plats, page 24, in King County, Wash., ,EXCEPT the northeasterly 136.19 feet thereof. DEPARTMENT OF ASSESSMENTS '- EXAMINED AND A ?PROVED THIS4- -Day of , 19. ASSESSOR DEPUTY ?SSESSOP DECLARATION: Know all men by these preents that we,•the undersi. d, owner(s) in fee simple and contract purchaser(s) of the land herein described do hereby make short subdivision thereof pursuant to RCW 58.17.060 and acknowledge that said short subdivision shall not be further divided in any manner within a period of five years, from _date of record, without the filing of a final plat. The undersigned further declare this short plat to be the graphic representation of sa-id short subdivision and that same is made with the free'donsent and in accordance with the desire of the owner(s). In witness whereof we have set our hands and seals. Name Narne Name STATE OF WASHINGTON, County of />2:- Name On this day personally appeared before me Jem Locke and Lilly Locke, his wife to me known to be the individual described in and who executed the with- in and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that ..,i`- .4.,' signed the same as C�_,- free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and pur- poses therein mentioned. GIVEN under my hand and official seal this ";\ j day seal STATE OF WASHINGTON, County of On. this day personally appeared before me . Donald Quackenbush and Vicky Quackenbush, his wife to me known to be the individual described in and who �ecuted the with- in and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged thatjti, signed the same as �_ free and voluntary act and deed, for the uses and pur- poses therein mentioned. , 19 , . Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at (_ / GIVEN under my hand and official seal this ze day of ,( i , 191 . Notary Pu lic in and f r the State of Washington, residing at � l seal Short Plat Number Page of Land Surveyor's Certificate: This short plat correctly represents a survey made by me or under my direction in conformance with the requirements of appropriate state statute and has been properly staked in accordance with the Tukwila Subdivision Code. Map on File in Vault Direction: Scale: /" =.5® Certificate No. Short Plat No. Stamp