Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-128-80 - LITHO DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH - OFFICE AND WAREHOUSEOFFICE / WAREHOUSE LITHO DEVELOPMENT RESEARCH 44PLS&S 134 ST EPIG128 -80 February 11, 1980 TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL 7:00 P.M. COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING CALL TO ORDER Q?6ice` City Hall Council Chambers MINUTES Council President Saul called the Tukwila City Council Committee of the Whole Meeting to order. COUNCIL MEMBERS LIONEL C. BOHRER, GEORGE D. HILL, J. REID JOHANSON, DORIS E. PHELPS, PRESENT DANIEL J. SAUL, Council President, GARY L. VAN DUSEN. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MOVED BY HARRIS, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE MINUTES OF THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING HELD JANUARY 28, 1980 BE APPROVED AS PUBLISHED. PUBLIC HEARING Street vacation re- Council President Saul declared the Public Hearing open at 7:03 p.m. quest - stree between Blks 3 & Mr. Larry M. Shaw, audience, stated he was owner of blocks 2 and 3 4 in Plat of northwest of the requested street vacation. Mr. Mellen is owner of Riverton. Request blocks 4 and 5. They are trying to develop the entire area, including by J. Mellen & the street, into a desirable industrial facility. They would like L. M. Shaw. to develop it as a whole. Mr. Robert Iden, attorney representing Mr. John Mellen, was in atten- dance. Councilman Bohrer asked if Mr. Mellen owned lots 6 through 10 on the southeast. Mr. Shaw owned lots 11 through 16 on the northwest. Mr. Iden said that was correct. Councilman Bohrer asked if the street is vacated how would they get access to the property? Mr. Iden said it was anticipated there would be access through 44th Place South and also through the vacated street. Councilman Bohrer said they wanted a public street converted to a private street. Council President Saul called three times for further comments. There being no further comments from the public, he declared the Public Hearing closed at 7:08 p.m. Councilman Van Dusen asked if the property owners would have any difficulty bringing the street up to City standards? Mr. Iden said it would be developed according to the needs of the area and it would be appropriate. Councilman Van Dusen stated he would be in favor of the requested vacation but he would like to see what kind of access is being put in there and what they would deem to be "appropriate" standards. When it is turned over to the City he would like it to meet City standards. Mayor_Todd stated that 43rd Place South has been vacated. Mr. Shaw said 43rd Place South is in the middle of his property. They have planned to develop a warehouse facility. Council President Saul said the owners were planning to put in a road where it would be most desirable for their planned development. Mr. Shaw said this would allow them to develop the entire properties as a whole; it will look better and enhance the City. The present street will be an access and there will be roads into the development. Councilman Bohrer said it was not possible at present to tell what the advantages would be. He said it looks like, from the map, the street was not meant to go right through. It does not make sense to continue the street up to the right -of -way that has been taken. He said he would like to see what the access for the development will be. Mayor Todd said it was his opinion that the expansion of the street would be the best for the. access. The street does not serve any purpose except for these two blocks. It will put a large piece of property on the tax roll. Councilman Van Dusen said he thought there should be safeguards taken and there should be no transfer until the building permit is issued. TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING February 11, 1980 Page. 2 PUBLIC HEARING - Contd. Street vacation request - street between Blks 3 & 4 in Plat of Riverton. Request by J. Mellen & L. M. Shaw - contd. DISCUSSION Dave Clarke, on drainage & flood control improve- ments in the Grn. R. Valley. a?' Councilman Harris asked if there would be a group of warehouses or just a driveway needed? Mr. Shaw replied that there will be more than one warehouse. An actual street will be needed. Both owners are planning to build on their property. Councilman Bohrer said there needs to be a street into the property. The Council should have before them a preconception plat as to where the new street will go in and the proposed constructions. Mr. Shaw and Mr. Iden showed the proposed plans. MOVED BY VAN DUSEN, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE STREET VACATION REQUEST OF THE STREET LYING BETWEEN BLOCKS THREE AND FOUR IN THE PLAT OF RIVERTON REQUESTED BY J. MELLEN AND L. M. SHAW BE PUT IN THE PUBLIC WORKS COMMITTEE. * Councilman Bohrer said it appears they want to do the same thing that has been done in other parts of the City and it has caused the City trouble. Property is developed and then it may be sold or leased and then someone wants to use larger vehicles on the site or the warehouses are converted to offices and that is another problem. Sometimes the uses change and that is his concern. *MOTION CARRIED. Phil Fraser, Acting Public Works Director, introduced Dave Clarke from King County Planning. Mr. Clarke said the drainage and flood control project has been planned for several years. It was developed early in 1960 and has gone through about 20 years of debate while the Green River Valley has developed. It is to develop flood control for the cities of Kent, Renton, and Auburn and King County that it has been developed. In 1978 the Valley cities and County realized there was need to get together and take action and coordinate efforts. The program created the Green River Basin Committee. Through the program they have achieved a staff group that can make decisions as they come up. A study was commenced to look at four design options. It was funded by the County. The design options were: Alternative 1 - original P -1 channel - The original P -1 channel project of wide channels (requiring 250 - 280 feet of right -of -way) which includes floodwater storage within the channel. Alternative 2 - reduced P -1 channel - A narrower channel following the original P -1 alignment with floodwater storage in a major holding pond next to the pump plant. Alternative 3 - Springbrook Creek Channel - A narrower channel followinc existing Springbrook Creek alignment with floodwater storage in a major holding pond next to the pump plant. Alternative 4 - Hybrid P -1 channel - A narrower channel using combina- tion of original P -1 alignment and Springbrook Creek with stormwater storage in two holding ponds (one pond next to pump plant and another southeast of Longacres). Alternate 4 was selected as the one best suited to the needs. This alternate appears to have a number of advantages. It is compatible with existing and future land use; requires shorter crossings for existing and future roads and utilities; would have the least impact on the natural environment; provides the most potential for enhancing aesthetics and recreation opportunties. Alternative 4 would cost 17.4 million (Federal) and 29.8 million (local) with a total of 29.8 million. The operation and maintenance would be $200,000 to $300,000 annually. The SCS is the sponsor. They have $460,000 that can be expended on preliminary design and engineering. They want a resolution from the TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING April 21, 1980 Page 5 RESOLUTIONS - Cont. Resolution #728 - Endorsing the King Subregional Plan adopted by the King Subregional Council of the P.S.C.O.G.(cont.) RECESS: 8:20 P.M.- 8:25 P.M. Resolution #729 - Intent to vacate a portion of 44th P1. So. after certain actions are complied with Resolution #730 - Authorizing the Mayor to enter into a consultant service contract for Christensen Green- belt Project Phase II ..1-)407 MOVED BY VAN DUSEN, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT RESOLUTION NO. 728 BE ADOPTED AS READ.* Councilman Bohrer commented on the staff report that was prepared to justify the designation of Tukwila as a Secondary Metropolitan Activity Center. The analysis indicates that, of the nine criteria, we presently satisfy four.of them. According to staff, we expect to satisfy two more of the nine in the near future. The other three we will comply with sometime in the future. It would appear that the City's case for the designation is well justified. Councilman Bohrer noted Section 5 of the model resolution and wondered why it was omitted from the new resolution. Councilman Bohrer requested a five minute recess to compare the two resolutions. Mayor Todd called the regular meeting back to order with Council members present as previously reported. MOVED BY BOHRER, SECONDED BY VAN DUSEN, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION BE AMENDED TO ADD SECTION 5 OF THE MODEL RESOLUTION AS SECTION 6 OF THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION. MOTION CARRIED. *MOTION CARRIED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION AS AMENDED. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED. City Attorney Hard read a resolution of the City of Tukwila, Washington, stating their intent to vacate a poriton of 44th Place South at such time as certain actions are complied with. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT RESOLUTION NO. 729 BE ADOPTED AS READ.* Councilman Bohrer noted that Section 3 of the Developer's Agreement says if the street is not constructed to minimum City standards, the City may refuse to accept any dedication. He said that a 40 foot wide right -of -way already does not meet City standards. Councilman Van Dusen explained that the only reason this statement is in there is to say we will not accept this street if it is not built to City standards. They are going to have to maintain it. Councilman Bohrer noted that City standards call for a local street to have a 60 foot right -of -way with a 48 foot pavement. He asked what the benefit to the City is if it is vacated. Mayor Todd noted that the right -of -way is about 300 feet long and runs into the freeway. Councilman Van Dusen said it will never be a viable City. street. Councilman Bohrer said we need emergency access to the businesses on the street and a 30 foot wide street with parking on either side will not provide this access. We have no guarantee they will not park on the street. Attorney Hard said that City standards not only includes the width but also the type of construction materials. Councilman Phelps noted that installation of utilities are subject to other permits. *MOTION CARRIED WITH BOHRER VOTING NO. Mayor Todd read the title to the proposed resolution as follows: A resolution of the City of Tukwila, Washington, authorizing the mayor to enter into a consultant services contract for assistance in the design, bidding and construction inspection of the Christensen Greenbelt Project - Phase II. MOVED BY VAN DUSEN, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT RESOLUTION NO. 730 BE ADOPTED AS READ. MOTION CARRIED. TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL, REGULAR MEETING June 16, 1980 Page 5 ORDINANCES Ordinance #1168 - Vacating that portion of 44th P1. So. located between So. 134th & Primary State Highway No. 1 RESOLUTIONS Resolution #740 - Adopting a revised and extended Comp- rehensive Trans- portation Program Resolution #741 - Adopting a Trans- portation Study (Entranco) ,?i3 MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED. Deputy City Attorney Carlson read an ordinance of the City of Tukwila vacating that portion of 44th Place South generally located between South 134th Street and Primary State Highway #1. MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT ORDINANCE NO. 1168 BE ADOPTED AS READ.* Councilman Van Dusen asked if all the necessary documents had been received and was told they had. Councilman Hill commented that there is a big "FOR SALE" sign on the property. He wondered if they are going to develop it or sell it. *MOTION CARRIED WITH BOHRER VOTING NO. MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED. Deputy City Attorney Carlson read a resolution adopting a revised and extended comprehensive transportation program in accordance with RCW 35.77 and RCW 36.81. MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT RESOLUTION NO. 740 BE ADOPTED AS READ.* Councilman Bohrer said he has a problem with several of the descriptions of the projects that are incomplete. He cited both Items #1 and #2. Further, numbers 32 through 35 read a plan to widen the streets in the industrial area. That proposal will destroy much of the character the City has tried to accomplish through landscaping. The street widening will come out of this area. He said he noted that the 1980 portion calls for a large amount of money. There is about two million dollars for the residential area. The bulk of this would come from City financing and I don't believe the City has that much to put into it. There is a question whether the prioritization in the request for funding is realistic. He said he has no problem with the projects that were selected number one in each category. He said it is in- appropriate to call certain projects "Chartwell Impact Projects." The list is incomplete and the projects have far more general applicability to the Industrial /Commercial area than just Chartwell. Councilman Hill said the Public Works Committee worked on this a number of different times. There aren't many projects in the residential area. The main reason is that all of this will have to be funded by the City. There are no funding sources available at this time. We were trying to stretch the money as far as it would go and still do the most for the City. *MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION BE READ BY TITLE ONLY. MOTION CARRIED. Deputy City Attorney Carlson read a resolution of the City of Tukwila, Wash., adopting a Transportation Study. MOVED BY SAUL, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT RESOLUTION NO. 741 BE ADOPTED AS READ.* :. CITY OF TUKWILA OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT FINAL DECLARATION OF NON - SIGNIFICANCE Description of proposal Office/Warehouse Proponent Litho Development Research (LDR) Location of Proposal 44th P1. S/ S. 134th St. Lead Agency City of Tukwila File No EPIC - 128 -80 This proposal has been determined to ( /not have) a significant adverse im- pact upon the environment. An EIS (Sir- ,:`z) *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. w 15 ND'f Responsible Official Mark Caughey Position /Title Acting Director Date May 1, 1980 Signature COMMENTS: 1) This negative threshold may be withdrawn if the terms and conditions in City Council Resolution 729 are not met. 2) Board of Architectural Review approval of site,architectural,and Landscape plans for this site shall be required prior to issuance of building permits. The intent of such review shall be to insure that the joint development concept with the Normed property to the north is maintained in the architectural, site, intensity, and visual quality of this project. 1 • THRESHOLD DETERMINATION - EPIC- 128 -80 LDR OFFICE /WAREHOUSE COMPLEX PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject proposal includes a fill permit and 20,000 square feet office/ warehouse building with related parking. The site is located at the S/E quadrant of So. 134th Street and 44th P1. So. The project was proposed to the City as a joint development with the site immediate adjoining the north R/W line of 44th P1. So. ANALYSIS Environmental concerns relative to this pertain primarily to hydraulics (storm retention) and traffic generation. Adequate information on these two subjects was generated by the proponents of the site immediately to the north (City File EPIC - 122 -79). The traffic analysis concluded that adequate traffic volume capacity exists within the present street network to accommodate industrial buildout of adjoining properties. The hydraulic study concluded that on- site.storm water retention may not be needed in this vicinity. The principal concerns remaining for this project are access and architec- tural quality. A) The access question.was resolved on 21 April 1980 by City Council wherein a developer's agreement to improve the abandoned right -of -way of 44th P1. So. was approved. The intent of said agreement is to permit. the proposed "joint development" to create a "private "driveway of sufficient width to serve both sites with an orderly configuration of curb - breakes, and to eliminate conflicting vehicle movements on So. 134th St. B Final action on the resolution depends on the parties thereto fulfilling certain obligations. Also, the proposed LDR site plan will have to be revised to eliminate encroachment of the parking area upon the former R/W corridor. The conceptual architectural theme for this joint development was established by the Normed site plan affirmed under. EPIC - 128 -80. The proposed LDR project departs significantly from that theme in terms of building materials, lack of setback, and overall site usage intensity. Modification of the proposal to conform with screening requirements of zoning should be approved by the Board of Architectural Review. Planning Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845 Office of Community Development 26 June 1980.. Sconzo Associates 919 124th Avenue NE #101 Bellevue, Washington 98005 Attn : Kris Anderson SUBJECT: LDR Office Warehouse Thank you for the opportunity to review your transmittal of 25 June 1980; as requested, I have the following comments: 1) Overall, the preliminary site concept represents a sincere effort to address the matters contained in my letter of 1 May 1980 to L.D.R. 2) As stated in section 4a of the 1 May. letter, I urge you once again to attempt to provide landscaped areas on the north and south edges of the site,. as I am certain that such will be required by the board of Architectural Review. 3) Since all street frontage planting will be placed within the public right -of -way, we will require you to obtain written agreement from the public works department allowing such landscaping improvements . and providing for the maintenance thereof. Please proceed to discuss this revised plan with the design consultant for the Normed Project. As stated in the aforementioned 1 May letter, the staff and B.A.R. will be looking for a coordinated approach to the site layout, architectural scale and selection of materials to be incor- porated into both projects. Our intent is to insure that these two projects will establish a base -line visual character for future deve- lopment in the neighborhood. Please advise me of the outcome of your meeting with the Normed people; I will be pleased to lend assistance to your coordinating efforts as needed. TUKWILA P NING DEPT. Manx Caughey Acting Director MC /jas cc: Normed Co. TRANSMITTAL TO: --r,w6).9 avomitvefel* NAic Gentlemen DATE: JOB: We are sending herewith (0/7-/bcp I} , under separate cover Copies Description 1 ri,ex6eA c-Az tkAx ctAx.4 pokAlc- sakti- ailkeA Vs.; bcr, Submitted Copies to Approved / Approved as noted For approval please return copies For your information For files As requested SCONZO /ASSOCIATES PLANNING & DESIGN, INC. 919 - 124TH AVENUE N.E. #101 BELLEVUE, WA. 98005 BY: PKO),#),L, City of Tukwila Planning Division 6200 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, Washington 98188 433 -1845 Office of Community Development Litho Development and Research 570 S. Michigan Seattle, WA. 98108 Attn: Bob Iden Re: LDR OFFICE /WAREHOUSE Enclosed is a copy . of the final Declaration of Non - Significance for this project, issued in accordance with the State Environmental Policy Act. An Environmental Impact. Statement is not required for this proposal. Note the conditions appended to the declaration requiring compliance with City Ordinance 729 and requiring B.A.R. approval of your project. regard to your building permit plan set now before the City for re- view, please note the following: 1) Provisions:of Resolution 729 effecting abandonment of 44th P1. South stipulate that..no encroachment upon the R/W is allowed. Your present plan set shows encroachment by parking facilities 'into the right of- way.area, thus_necessi.tating revision'of the site-plan. Abandonment of 44th:P1. South was predicated on the City's understanding that your project would be planned as a,- func"- tionally -;and -. visually- _related'unit: with .:the Normed.sito - "immediately to the north. Your building's architectural.and site use concept, however,_ diverge significantly the plans filed with us last fall :by Normed. Accordingly, we.are.re- quiring you to present your plans to the City's Board of Architectural Review in hopes that the joint development concept can be maintained. 3) Application forms for the Board of Architectural. Review are enclosed. The next Board Meeting will be on the .evening of May 29, 1980. We must receive your submittal by May 15, 1980 to qualify for placement on that agenda. 4) The site plan submitted for B.A.R. approval should reflect the following modifications to your building permit plan set. a) Addition of a min. 5' side yard landscape setback . on both the north and south site boundaries.:Parking should not encroach into the setback area. Ltr To Litho Dev.''Research LDR OFFICE /WAREHOUSE Page 2 1 May 1980 Provision of a minimum 10' wide landscape setback adjacent to the freeway R /W, and indication of.the types of screening materials to be included therein..::. A. comprehensive site landscape_ proposal.: for.. all set= back areas,-including treatment of the area between the west boundary of the site and the edge of pave- ment on South.134th St. .= d). Removal of all proposed construction within the 44th P1. So. R /Wilimits. . 5) Your architectural elevations submitted for B.A.R. approval should depict an exterior building material concept which is compatible with the adjacent Normed development.. You may wish to consult with the designer for Normed to be :certain that the end result of your two projects is visually harmonious and appears as a single, unified development. If you have any questions on these requirements, please contact me. TUKWILA P NING DEPT. Mark Caughey Acting Director City .=f Tukwila =rru. umucn Hubert H.Crawley -- FUre-Departm e t Fire Chief AL PIEPER ' BUILDING DEPARTMENT • CITY OF TUKWILA RE: L.D.R. PROPOSAL DEAR AL: FIRE PREVENTION.BUREAU MARCH 18, 1980 IN REVIEWING THE ABOVE MENTIONED PROJECT PLANS, PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS: ' 1. PER UFC SECTION 10,104 (B), ALL DOORS IN OR LEADING TO EXITS SHALL BE MAINTAINED OPENABLE FROM THE INSIDE WITHOUT THE USE OF A KEY OR ANY SPECIAL KNOWLEDGE OR EFFORT � � AT ALL TIMES WHEN � THE BUILDING OR AREA SERVED THEREBY IS OCCUPIED"... 2. PER UFC SECTION 10,113, AT EVERY REQUIRED EXIT DOORWAY, AND WHEREVER OTHERWISE REQUIRED TO CLEARLY INDICATE THE DIRECTION OF EGRESS, AN EXIT SIGN WITH LETTERS AT LEAST SIX INCHES HIGH AND READILY DISTINGUISHABLE SHALL BE MAINTAINED. 3° HOSE . STATIONS ARE REQUIRED PER CITY ORDINANCE 0730^ ALL SPRINKLER DRAWINGS SHALL BE PREPARED BY COMPANIES. LICENSED TO PERFORM THIS TYPE OF WORK, DRAWINGS SHALL FIRST BE APPROVED BY THE. WASHINGTON SURVEY & RATING BUREAU, THEN BY THE TUKWILA FIRE DEPARTMENT. NO WORK SHALL COMMENCE WITHOUT APPROVED DRAWINGS, 4° FIRE EXTINGUISHERS SHALL BE PROVIDED PER NFPA 010, AS A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT. 5° FIRE HYDRANTS ARE REQUIRED AS DETAILED IN CITY ORDINANCE #729^ (ONE ADDITIONAL HYDRANT kEQUIRED) City ofTukw�a I Fire Department, 444 Andover Park East, Tukwdla, Washington 98188 (206) 575-4404 City��^ of �� 0.. . .^U ��� U 8 U�����"UU ��.~^� �=" " ~~" " ,, "" �� ^������������������ �o�� °~�"�^&��~~�n �x o n��x n� PAGE 2 Edgar D. Bauch Mayor • Hubert H. Crawley Fire Chief 6, A ROOF ACCESS HATCH AND LADDER SHALL BE PROVIDED FROM INSIDE THE BUILDING~ 7, PROTECTIVE GUARD POST OR CURBS ARE REQUIRED 'ROUND ALL GAS METERS, ELECTRICAL VAULTS, SPRINKLER VALVES AND HYDRANTS. B. FLAMMABLE LIQUID STORAGE ROOMS SHALL CONFORM STRICTLY TO SEC, 15,404 OF THE UNIFORM FIRE CODE.. 9. ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS SUCH AS "RACK SPRINKLERS", INCREASED SMOKE-VENTING, ONE-HOUR WALLS, ADDITIONAL EXTINGUISHERS, ETC. 'MAY BE REQUIRED DEPENDING UPON THE EXACT USAGE AND CONTENTS, THESE FEATURES WERE UNDETERMINABLE FROM THE INFORMATION PROVIDED, PLEASE INCLUDE THESE COMMENTS IN YOUR REVIEW OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED PROJECT, CC:TFD FILE 1 YOURS VERY TRULY, "//420411/AntA FIRE DEPARTMENT CITY OF TUK IL WASHINGTON RESOLUTION NO / -2 9 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, STATING THEIR INTENT TO VACATE A PORTION OF 44TH, PLACE SOUTH AT SUCH TIME AS CERTAIN ACTIONS ARE COMPLIED WITH. COUNCIL ACTIC 'AWING TYPE CNN ITEM WHEREAS, Mr. Jon Millen of Litho Development and Research and Mr. Lawrence M. Shaw of Normed, Inc. have submitted a Petition for Vacation of Streets to the City Clerk, and WHEREAS, on the llth day of February, 1980, the City Council held a public hearing in accordance with RCW 35.79.020. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Tukwila City Council intends to pass an ordinance vacating the.portion.of 44th Place South requested for vacation at such time as the applicant has submitted the following information to the City Clerk's Office: A. The executed Developer's Agreement which is attached as Exhibit A. B. Property Tax Statements on the two adjacent properties from the King County Assessor's Office showing square footage of each parcel and present assessed valuation. C. An affidavit that they are the owners of the abutting property to the piece being vacated. This must be notarized by a Notary Public. D. The value of the property is to be determined by the average value of the two adjacent properties and one half that figure estimated. A cashier's check in this amount is to be submitted to the City Clerk's Office. Section 2. As soon as the City Clerk receives the above items and verifies their adequacy, the ordinance will be referred to the City Council. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a regular meeting thereof this „V°-day of � , 1980. a AO roved as to F ATTEST: C ty 'ttorney, awre c- Hard M or t Cl rk • DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT • The City of Tukwila, a municipal corporation in the State of Washington, hereinafter referred to as "CITY" and Litho Development and Research (a /k /a J & R Investors) and Normed, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "DEVELOPERS" agree as follows: WHEREAS, Developers are the owners of the following described properties: 1. Litho Development & Research -- Lots 6 through 10 inclusive in Block 4 of Fostoria Garden Tracts Subdivision Blocks 1 -5 in King County 2. Normed, Inc. -- _Block 3 in entirety of Fostoria Garden Tracts Subdivision Blocks 1 -5 in King County located in the City of Tukwila, King County, Washington, and WHEREAS, Developers have petitioned the City for the vacation of the following described portion of right -of -way: A forty (40) foot wide street identified as 44th Place South, lying between Blocks 3 and 4 in the plat of Riverton, replat of Lots 1 to 5, Fostoria Garden Tracts, as per plat recorded in Volume 13 of plats on page 40, records of King County, formerly identified as Ruth Street, except any portions thereof taken by primary State Highway No. 1, Foster Inter- change to South 118th Street located in the City of Tukwila, and WHEREAS, the City desires said right -of -way to be constructed and improved in accordance with certain conditions. NOW, THEREFORE, THE PARTIES HERETO COVENANT AND AGREE AS FOLLOWS: 1.. The Developers agree to maintain the full 40' wide vacated right -of -way and to construct improvements within the full width thereof. The Developers agree also to prevent any encroachment upon said right -of -way. 2. Developers agree to construct, at their sole expense, im- provements to said 40' wide right -of -way consisting . of a road, free of any obstructions, on the southerly 30' there- of adjoined by a 5' wide landscaped area on the north edge of said roadway. The said landscaped area shall be adjoined on its north edge by a 5' wide sidewalk. 3. If said improvements, as described in paragraph 2 above, do not meet minimum construction standards for the City of Tukwila, the City may refuse to accept any dedication of said right -of -way. 4. This Developer's agreement shall be recorded and shall be binding upon the heirs, assigns, grantees and successors to this agreement. DATED THIS DAY OF , 1980 LITHO DEVELOPMENT & RESEARCH BY TITLE •1• ATTEST: NORMED, INC. BY TITLE ACCEPTED: Clerk, City of Tukwila Mayor, City of Tukwila APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO ADEQUACY: City Attorney Chairman, Public Works Comm. STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS. COUNTY OF KING ) On this day personally appeared before me to me known to be the , respectively of LITHO DEVELOP- MENT AND RESEARCH, the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute said instrument. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL THIS DAY OF STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) SS. COUNTY OF KING ) Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at , 1980. On this day personally appeared before me to me known to be the , respectively of NORMED, INC., the corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged said instrument to be the free and voluntary act and deed of said corporation, for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that they were authorized to execute said instrument. GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND OFFICIAL THIS DAY OF , 1980. Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at • CITY OF TUKWILA • ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM C ..,..). • CITY or i IJI ;17ILA This questionnaire must be completed and submitted with the application for permit. This questionnaire must be completed by all persons appl,. or a 1950 permit from the City of Tukwila, unless it is determined by the Re :•n ible 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: /7%4 x' ,' -T 4( 2. Address. and Phone Number of Proponent: 5-76 S /GW/ 3 3. Date Checklist Submitted: 4. Agency Requiring Checkli 5. Name of Proposal, if applicable: 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) :. / /9 Of GJ9N 4 /» er,60 l 70 Zc; ?G44; 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): W �/0/1- 1 ,moo /IV 11 8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal: 4164.0-7gi il- /9ora. 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 . (b) King County Hydraulics Permit YES X NO (c) Building permit YES }C NO (d) Puget Soun -Air Pollution Control Permit (e) Sewer hook up permit (f) Sign permit (g) Water hook up permit '(h) Storm water system permit (i) Curb cut permit (j) Electrical permit (State of Washington) (k) Plumbing permit (King County) (1) Other: YES NO YES X NO YES NO YES )‹ NO YES ➢C NO YES NO YES X NO YES XC NO 10. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or futher activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: 11. Do you know of any plans by others which may affect the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: c(1-1,ort ff 12. Attach any other application form that has been compldted 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: 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 K (e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? (f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? Explanation: 2. Air.. Will the proposal result in: (a) Air emissions or deterioration of ambient-air quality? (b) The creation of objeQtionable 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? (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? Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? • (9) -3- 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: 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: YES MAYBE N K 6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise levels? 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: YES MAYBE NO 11. Population. Explanation: • • Will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? Explanation: 13. Transportation /Circulation. Will the proposal result (a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? (b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? (c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? (d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and /or goods? Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? Explanation: (e) (f) in: 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks or other recreational facilities? Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? YES MAYBE NO K (f) Other governmental services? Explanation: 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: (a) Power or natural gas? (b) Communications systems? (c) Water? (d) Sewer or septic tanks? (e) Storm water drainage? (f) Solid waste and disposal? Explanation: 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the crea- tion of any health hazard or potential' health hazard (excluding mental health)? Explanation: YES MAYBE NO x_ • 18. Aesthetics. Will the ro osal result in the obstruc- tion 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: -YES . MAYBE NO CERTIFICATION BY APPLICANT:_ 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 q 5 i 1 al I' . CFR -n� 4e o SF. roae-tOe to. *der•°x3,►= IE Oop - -- - Wass a 15 lobo SF fwL= Ion TovAi, u 3I lk CAL. pbtVe.A ► pZ0v1°s �1 S 1341 ST,. S I TS" p.A. t`l , s ' 7! -4OMAS A. SCONZO /d141 J] 9 i 24th A'14 Fd / iiELLFVUE. WA 98005 206/455 -3203 i. — 44: '.• fr ' I 4' 1*--9 Wt.:4 'Atit.1,ki:TANNArks i 'SOWN Yikikli 4 • imn 'Nth. airL,_ 111.. iok.aNiteUNIIIIAlehl."11114144,141b1Dikr. siSt 1., .41./.....11/1.14. ''111 -• *tom •!-, • • ••• !••■ 4,, • iona••••wir•-'grt4.1.1K%akt...-N116.1%..1,41•6 • •■• T • ithirtAl Mai OrMillattetM 1 ,:vvrerit061111:, i ii) 44,6enorty, itc•fl4t* fatk all~41441111.•1 11; v .t• , Al ••• ••• • • •,-; • a ••• ••• • • -. •7•4.1{- • '1"1""7: !„ • ' .1±`,"et 1.••••,.; r `Si. rtMill'.".A.1;.%I.:rell` '414 t;11.7.47.1. • 4" ••• k • • TX, 1, 4, :4. • ., t 1.41, rt!