HomeMy WebLinkAboutSEPA EPIC-145-80 - TECTON COMPANY - OFFICE BUILDINGTECTON OFFICE COMPLEX
EPIC - 145 -80
CITY OF/TUKWILA
OFFICE OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
TREESEEM/FINAL
DECLARATIOid OF INON— SIGNIFICANCE
Description of proposal
Proponent
Office Complex
The Tecton Company; Harley Jensen, A.I.A., Agent
Location of Proposal Christensen Road @ Easterly terminus of Baker Blvd.
Lead Agency
City of Tukwila
File No.
EPIC - 145 -80
This proposal has been determined to OnmeJnot have) a significant adverse im-
pact upon the environment. An EIS (41,5/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 23 September 1980
Mark Caughey
Acting Planning Director
COMMENTS:
Signature
February 6, 1981
State of
`VaS1111lgtol l
❑eparti llent
of Ecology'
The Techton Company
16040 Christensen Road
Tukwila, Washington 98188
Gentlemen:
Enclosed are the original and one copy of Flood Control Zone Permit
No. 1- 4477 -2 for the purpose of constructing an office building and
parking lot.
Please sign both copies on the reverse side as permittee, retain the
original, and return the copy to this department. The permit does not
become effective until said copy is received.
The enclosed permit should not be considered a permit under the Shore -
line Management Act of 1971.
Sincerely,
Janet Jorg
Resource Management
JJ:jw
Enclosures
cc: King County Hydraulics
City of Tukwila
Northwest Regional Office, 4350 150th Avenue N.E., Redmond. Washingotn 98052
Telephone: (206) 895 -1900
Stateof
WIshington
Depart logy
FLOOD CONTROL ZONE PERMIT
PERMIT NO. 1- 4477 -2
Permission is granted under provisions of Chapter 86.16 RCW, this 6th day of February , 19 81
to THE TF.CHTON COMPANY
(Name of applicant)
16040 Christensen Road, Tukwila, Washington 98188
(Address)
to construct and maintain
Office Building and Parking Lot
(Description of works)
for the period 19 to 19 or in perpetuity
in NW1/4NIAN Section 25 , Township 23 N., Range 4 E W.M. and /or
in Section , Township N., Range _ W.M.
on Green River located within the Green
(Name of stream or flood plain affected) (Flood Zone)
Flood Control Zone No
2 Said works, structures, or improvements must be in accordance with the
Application No 1- 4477 -2 and plans attached thereto on file with the Department of Ecology, which are
incorporated by reference as terms of this permit.
The work herein authorized shall commence on or after the 6th day of February 19 81.
and shall be completed on or before the 6th day of
specified by any extensions granted.
February 19 82
or before such dates as may be
This permit is subject to the conditions printed on the reverse hereof and the acceptance by the permittee.
egi hal' ^`M'a i'ager "� •
DEPARTMENT OF ECOLOGY
cc: King County Hydraulics
City of Tukwila
ECY . 050-6
Rev. 11/79
THIS PERMIT IS SUBJECT TO ^ c FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1. This permit is granted under autho' of Chapter 159, Session Laws of 193ahapter 86.16 RCW)
2. No property rights are granted herein, nor does this permit absolve permittee from liability for any damage which may
be suffered to life or to property, public or private, by reason of works, structures and improvements authorized hereund
3. This permit does not obviate the necessity of obtaining other permits required by federal, state, or local law.
4. The permittee shall remove, at his own expense, all falseworks, structures and materials incident to the construction of
the work herein authorized. Works and structures erected under permit covering a specific period of time shall be
removed by the permittee at his own expense upon the expiration of said period or at the expiration of any ex-
tension of time which may be granted.
5. Z.!:ould permittee fail to remove, at the proper time, materials, works and structures referred to under paragraph 4,
the director reserves the right to have it done at the expense of the permittee.
6. Any alteration of plans for works and structures made subsequent to the filing of an application or the issuance of
permit shall be subject to approval by the director.
7. The director shall be notified by the permittee of the completion of works under this permit in order that he may
make final inspection and give final approval.
8. RCW 86.16.100 provides that the exercise by the state regulatory powers shall not imply or create any liability for
any damages against the state, and the action taken by the department herein shall not imply or create any liability
for any damages against the state.
9. When necessary to provide for the proper maintenance or operation of the works, structures, or improvements as
authorized herein, the department may issue supplementary orders providing for such.
10. This permit is subject to further special conditions as follows :
A. The water surface elevation for the Green River, with a controlled
discharge from the Howard Hanson Dam.of 12.,000 cfs as measured at
Auburn (Porter Gauge), is 26.0 feet (Mean Sea Level Datum) at the
subject site. The proposed finished floor elevations are shown to
be at or above elevation 26.5 feet.
B. King County must be notified at least 48 hours prior to doing any
work adjacent to or on the existing river bank.
C. The proposed rock work along the existing river bank must be constructed
to the satisfaction of King County Surface Water Mgmt. Div.
11. This permit is accepted subject to provisions of law and regulations and conditions herein prescribed.
BY
( Permittee)
*ILA Cit r_.. f Tukwila
Z 6200. Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
1908
Frank Todd, Mayor
MEMORANDUM
TO: Tile 80 -4 -SMP
FROM: Mark Caughey
DATE: 14 April 1980
SUBJECT: STATUS OF VAN WOERDEN SITE SUPPLEMENTAL TRAIL EASEMENT
Following approval in July 1978 of a short plat and SMP to divide the Van Woerden
site into four parcels, the applicants agreed to dedicate,a 20' wide shoreline
trail easement landward from the sites' river frontage and a one acre park site
on the north edge. City Ordinance 1066 accepted these dedications.
Subsequently, the 0.C.D. staff requested the applicants to provide a 25' wide
grant of easement adjoining the south edge of the park site in order to route
the Christensen Trail. System along the top edge of the existing flood control
dike. The applicants prepared the easement document, in cooperation with OCD
Staff who contracted with Wilsey & Ham, Inc., to produce a legal description and
plat thereof at city expense. The property owners, Morris Piha Co., requested
that the easement document be recorded by the City prior to 31 December 1979.
However, this was not done.
On 1 January 1980, the Piha Co. entered into an earnest money purchase contract
with Tecton Co. of California for sale of the Van Woerden site. In March 1980,
Tecton Co. filed an application with the City for a shoreline management substan-
tial development permit to construct a 3 -story office building on segregation
Parcel 1 adjoining the dedicated park site. On April 8, 1980, the Planning
Director requested Piha Co., as owner of record, to finalize the grant of easement
before the SMP. was to be mailed to the Department of Ecology. Mr. Stan Piha
indicated that terms of the aforementioned earnest money agreement forbade the
addition of any new encumbrances on the property. Further, he stated that
finalization of the contract of purchase is contingent upon Tecton's securing a
valid SMP from the City.
Accordingly, I have taken the following actions with respect to the easement
matter:
1) Issued shoreline management permit 80 -4 -SMP and transmitted
complete package to Department of Ecology.
2) Imposed condition on shoreline permit to require recordation
of the trail easement prior to issuance of building /grading,
permits for this site.
1
Memo to File 80 -4 -SMP Page 2
STATUS OF VAN WOERDEN SITE SUPPLEMENTAL TRAIL EASEMENT 14 April 1980
In addition,.I have requested and received a non - binding letter of intent from
Tecton Co. assuring the City of their willingness to follow- through granting
the easement after close of the land -sale transaction. I believe that the City
can safely proceed with all scheduled grant and consultation work with the I.A.C.
relative to the Christensen Trail project.
MC /mkb
cc:, Don Williams
Mayor Todd
CITY OF TUKWILA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM
PROJECT NAME: T�GjGiJ •F1Gr; •
PROJECT ADDRESS: C4- 1pq- 1,6.JSO{,) 1ZD <EFZ 13LVp
DATE ACHAMMIMR=Mt=14147 27 K S O CRI=SPOJD Q`( AMI L 1 °r� PL.eASSj
1.. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date) (reviewer)
❑ Building: by:
rr,
. ngineering: /J / / � u by: - �5/: i1. -- e---- --
❑ Fire: by:
❑ Planning: by:
❑ Police: by:
2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS:
i'11) A iG6- <-0 (A (G 5r; j` 18 i r': !' -r& O
0 CITY OF TUKWILA C
ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM
PROJECT NAME: Tr_cr&1J 9 BI�17G
PROJECT ADDRESS: GN'R151141aS RD & ISL.;VP
DATE Z jf AkbA 8O C RrsroND 131 APRs L . I S- PLEASE]
1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date) (reviewer)
;Building: `/?(x -t— : S / Y(1 by:
.� /—✓
0 Engineering: by:
❑ Fire: by:
❑ Planning: by:
❑ Police: by:
2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS:
7(,t/CN"
ic;e1
76—r— -1((-
•
City of Tukwila Frank Todd
Mayor
Fire Department Hubert H. Crawley
Fire Chief
April 71 1980
Mark Caughey, Asst. Planner
Planning Department
City of Tukwila
Dear Mark:
Regarding the Environmental Check Form for the Tecton
Company, we disagree with the statement within the
check list that says there will be no impact upon the
Fire Department to protect this building.
Not only will there be a fire protection problem, but
also with the amount of people in this type of occupancy
it will increase the amount of response of emergency
medical aid in the department. It also might be inter-
esting to note that this building is to be located in
an area that floods at least once a year. Another item
of interest is that once this building is built the
section of Tukwila Parkway and Christensen Road will
have to be re -done due to the flow of traffic.
Yours very truly,
HHC:vma Hubert H. Crawley
cc:TFD file Fire Chief
City of Tukwila
Fire Department, 444 Andover Park East, Tukwila, Washington 98188 (206) 575 -4404
CITY OF TUKWI,LA �.
ENVIRONMEFJTAL QUESTIOdNAIRE REVIEW FORM
PROJECT NAME: $LP6
PROJECT ADDRESS: /4-13215011.0S01..) 1z12 e BD,KE,C &V 7
DATE 5?), U CRESFbuP A?V. L 1'r PLO ]
1.. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW: (date)
❑ Building: by:
❑ Engineering: by:
❑ Fire: , by:
Pa¢KS by:
by:
0
(reviewer)
❑ Police:
2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS:
City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila Washington 98188
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
MEMORANDUM
Mark Caughey ��✓
Don Williams
25 March 1980
REVIEW OF TECTON OFFICE BLDG. PROPOSAL
After a general review of the Tecton Company's Environmental Questionnaire
I would like to make several comments and suggestions.
A. The building as it is located on the lot is extremely close to the
toe of the slope of the dike. If this area is filled, the building
will be approximately 10 to 20 feet away from the trail in some areas,
assuming we obtain the 20' -25' additional dedication on the north
side of the lot. I feel the developer should consider moving the
building south and west as much as possible. Any loss in open land-
scaped area can be gained with the new open area to the north and
east. I do not feel it is good for the building users or park users
to have the building located too close to the trail /park.
This request will have to be weighed against any parking loss or
redesigning of the parking area. I feel the dedication can be
obtained, which is needed, without affecting the project in a nega-
tive way.
B. As the three parcels are developed I see more and more demand for
park -like areas. Workers will want to take a break or have lunch
in the out -of- doors. (This is not only true for this development,
but is true for all of our non - residential areas.) Is it possible
to require or ask the developer to provide open, usable park -like
settings for their employees? If so, this will help to relieve
the already overcrowed Bicentennial Park in the summer time. In short,
I am asking, can open picnic areas count as part of the developer's
landscaping and if so, can we require this?
C. I assume when and if we receive the dedicated strip that we will
work out who is responsible for landscaping this area and maintaining
it
I would like to be kept informed of the path of this project and in parti-
cular the dedication. Thanks for the opportunity to make a few comments.
DW /mkb
0 CITY OF TUKWILA (-
ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONNAIRE REVIEW FORM
PROJECT NAME: TrcWA91=-
PROJECT ADDRESS: j IS&KE5Z.,
DATE MEEIREERWORgaitat& AI< Cg-riVIJI) 441211" PILEAF-.3
1. DEPARTMENTAL REVIEW:
0 Building: by:
0 Engineering: by:
0 Fire: by:
0 Planning: by:
olice: 4kr_ytv by:
(date)
11.
(reviewer)
2. ANY PERTINENT COMMENTS:
At this time we should request consideration be given the installation of double
'cylinder dead bolt locks on all office spaces. This particular building will be
isolated from nearby buildings and would be an easy target for a group of weekend
office looters.
4!;
CITY OF TUKWILA
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
This questionnaire must be completed and'submitted with the application for
permit. This questionnaire must be completed by all persons applying for a
permit from the City of Tukwila, unless it is determined by the Responsible
Official that 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: The Tecton Company, c/o Harley E. Jensen,
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 251 Lafayette Circle
Lafayette, California 94549 Phone: (415) 284 -4398
3. Date Checklist Submitted: February 6. 1980
4. Agency Requiring Checklist: City f Tuw fl partrn n+
5. Name of Proposal', if applicable: Professional Office Building
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):
See Attachment
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):
See Attachment
8. Estimated Date for Completion of the Proposal:
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 X NO
. (b) King County ijydraulics Permit YES X NO
(c) Building permit YES X NO
(d) Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Permit YES NO x
(e) Sewer hook up permit YES x NO
(f) Sign permit YES X NO
(g) Water hook up permit YES x NO
(h) Storm water system permit YES x NO
(i) Curb cut permit YES X NO
(j) Electrical permit (State of Washington) YES x NO
(k) Plumbing permit (King County) YES NO
(1) Other: Seattle Water - Possible need for Encorachment Permit.
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:
No
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:
None
II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
(Explanations of all "yes" and "maybe" answers are required)
YES MAYBE NO
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
(a) Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic
substructures? x
(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 ?. _X--
-2-
(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:
See Attachment
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:
See Attachment
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?
(g)
YES MAYBE NO
X
x
x
X
x
x
X
X
•
• YES MAYBE NO
(h) Deterioration in ground water quality, either
through direct or through the seepage
of leachate, phosphates, detergents, waterborne
virus or bacteria, or other substances into the
ground waters?
Reduction in the amount of water otherwise avail-
able for public water supplies?
(i)
Explanation:
See Attachment
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:
See Attachment
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?
x
X
x
(d) Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat? X
Explanation:
See Attachment
X
x
x
x
6. Noise. Will the proposal increase existing noise
levels?
Explanation:
See Attachment
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new
light or glare?
Explanation:
See Attachment
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:
YES MAYBE NO
x
X
(a) Increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources? X
(b) Depletion of any nonrenewable natural
resource? —
Explanation:
See Attachment
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:
See Attachment
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 in:
YES MAYBE NO
(a) Generation of additional vehicular movement? x
(b) Effects on existing parking facilities, or
demand for new parking? x
(c) Impact upon existing transportation systems? _
(d) Alterations to present patterns of circulation
or movement of people and /or goods? _
(e) Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? —
(f)
Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles,
bicyclists or pedestrians?
Explanation:
See Attachment
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? x —
(b) Police protection? x —.
(c) Schools?
(d) Parks or other recreational facilities? X
(e) Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads?
x
•
(f) Other governmental services?
Explanation:
• YES MAYBE NO
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:
See Attachment
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:
See Attachment
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in the crea-
tion of any health hazard or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)?
Explanation:
x
x
X
• 1
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in the obstruc-
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:
See Attachment
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:
See Attachment
YES MAYBE NO
X
X
x
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.
li S /gnature and Title ,c
-8-
Date
I. BACKGROUND
6. The proponent, The Tecton Company, proposes to develop a
three story office building of approximately 50, 000 square
feet gross floor space, with the appropriate parking and
Landscaping in accordance with the local planning ordinances,
on this 123, 196 square foot site shown as Parcel 1 of the
Southcenter Investors Short Plat.
7. The proposed site is bordered on the west by Christensen
Road, (improved with storm and drain sewers, water, and other
utilities, as part of the Southcenter Short Plat), on the
south by the City of Seattle's Bow Lake pipeline right -of -way,
and on the east and north by a trailway and parkland dedication
that was included as a requirement of the Southcenter Short
Plat No. 78- 16 -SS.
The city has requested the dedication of an additional 20 -25 foot
strip of land on the north side of the parcel, between the park
site and the proposed development, for use as all weather trailway.
The proponent tentatively agrees to make this dedication in
consideration for some minor variances to the overall 40' shoreline
setback along the north side as needed to meet the parking requirements.
II. .ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
1. Earth
(b) The site currently averages and elevation of 21. For
& potential flood reasons and for storm and sanitary
(c) sewer design purposes, the site will be blanket filled
to an approximate elevation of 26 to 28 with compacted
clean fill brought from offsite,
(e) There will be a temporary increase in the potential for
wind or water erosion during construction. The erosion
potential will be mitigated by proper construction techniques.
2. Air
(a) The major source of air pollution at the site is due to
automotive exhaust emissions. The additional increase
generated by this development would be insignificant when
compared to the total generated within the commercial area.
Solid waste will be removed offsite by a disposal company,
so there will be no incineration onsite.
3. Water
(b) The introduction of impervious surfaces over most of the
site will increase the storm water runoff. This runoff will
be collected in a developer installed storm drainage system,
in accordance with King County Hydraulics requirements, exiting
into the Green River. Storm water runoff from Christensen
Road is collected in an existing storm drain system and
ultimately discharges into the Green River.
(d) The project will cause additional storm water to enter the
Green River.
(e) Storm water runoff discharged into the Green River will pass
through catch basins and a pipe system, in accordance with
King County Hydraulics requirements, to remove most
suspended particles. However, some impurities and some
dissolved oxygen will enter the Green River.
4. Flora
(a) The site is presently an abandoned pasture, covered by a
wide variety of weeds, grasses, shrubs, and trees. Most
of these will be eliminated due to the fill operation.
(c) They will be replaced by appropriate landscaping as part
of the project. Efforts will be made to retain any large
trees onsite if at all feasible.
(d) The project site currently is a small isolated pasture in a
commercial area. The existing use would be changed into
a more intensive urban use in keeping with the Master Program.
While the site has historically been used for agricultural
purposes (grazing), it must be recognized that this agricultural
use is no longer feasible on the site.
5. Fauna
(a) The site presently supports a wide variety of small wildlife
species indeginous to underveloped areas. Many of these
will be displaced by the proposed development and replaced
by wildlife more commonly found around developed areas.
(b) The existing barn and pasture habitats would be replaced by
new buildings, parking lots, and maintained landscaping.
Standard design and construction precautions will be necessary
to avoid significant impact to the aquatic habitat of the Green
River.
6. Noise
(a) There will be an increase in noise levels resulting from
construction and the office use of the site as compared to
those quiet activities that presently occur, on the site.
7. Light and Glare
(a) Localized and relatively low level lighting will be introduced
into the site for safety and security purposes. Landscaping
will be used to minimize the impact of the on -site lighting
and glare.
8. Land Use
(a) The proposed project will change the use of the site from
a low -level agricultural used to the more intense commercial
office use. Office use at this site is consistant with both the
city zoning and comprehensive plan. All lands in the site
vicinity are also in office use.
9. Natural Resources
(a) Common building materials and energy will be consumed during
the course of construction. Long -term energy requirements
would be relatively insignificant, with consumption amounts
being equal to that required for this type development at an
alternate site.
10. Risk of Upset
(a) The risk of explosion or hazardous emmissions will be limited
to those connected with standard construction procedures
and equipment. No unusually hazardous conditions are
expected or forseen.
11.. Transportation /Circulation
(a) The proposal will result in approximately 470 vehicular trips
(in plus out) per day based upon 42, 800 square feet gross
leasable office area, according to the Institute of Traffic
Engineers guidelines for office buildings.
• •
(b) Onsite parking will be provided to meet demand in
accordance with applicable city standards. No off -site
parking will be required by this project.
(c) Use of public transportation and /or carpool programs would
minimize potential traffic impacts.
14. Public Services
(a) New buildings will be of long -life, fire resistant construction
and will be substantially less of a hazard than the structures
presently occupying the site. Development of the site will
also replace much of the existing annual vegetation with
perennial types and thus, remove a possible source of nuisance
fires. The impact of the project on fire protection services
is expected to be slight.
(b) The increase in numbers of people attracted to the developed
site will create a slight increase in demand for police
services. However, the types of activities related to the
development are not conducive to unlawful acts. The increase
in traffic will slightly increase demand upon police traffic
control staff.
(d) Office occupants may increase usage of the adjacent park
area during lunch houz s ii sunny days.
(e) Buildings, grounds and on -site public utilities will be
maintained by the owner. Private utility companies would
maintain their respective facilities. Off -site . water, storm
drainage, and sanitary sewer facilities would be maintained
by the City, as would Christensen Road and Baker Boulevard.
On -site roads and parking lots would be maintained by the Owner.
15. Energy
(b) Construction equipment will consume electricity and fossil
fuel in normal amounts. Long -term energy requirements for
operation of the development will be insignificant.
16. Utilities
(a) Underground electrical service has been installed within
the Christensen Road right -of -way. Power vaults have
already been installed at the southwest corner of the
Baker Road - Christensen Road intersection. Long range
planning by the Puget. Power Company has taken into
account full development of the site such that power
sources and supplies will be adequate for the foreseeable
future, according to company spokespersons. Both on
and off -site installation and maintenance will be the
responsibility of the electrical utility company.
Washington Natural Gas will install and maintain all lines
on and off -site at their own expense if natural gas service is
required for the development. Spokesperson at the utility
indicate sources and supplies are plentiful for the foreseeable
future.
(b) Pacific Northwest Bell indicates it has the ability to supply
telephone service to the site.
(c) Water service is available in Christensen Road at the front
of the site. Installation of piping into the site as requir`ed—
shall be installed by the developer as per city requirements.
Existing watershead resources and distribution systems are
adequate for long -term growth in this area.
(d) A sanitary sewer line has been installed to the site. Additional .
piping, as required, sha]1 be installed by the developer as per
city requirements.
(e) A storm drainage system will be constructed on -site to remove
storm water runoff generated by the addition of impervious
surfaces. The system will be designed and installed in
accordance with King County Hydraulics requirements,
connecting with the previously installed on -site storm drainage
and outfall structures installed under existing permits.
Proposed business occupying the development would generate
relatively insignificant amounts of solid waste. Southgate
Disposal Company, a private company, indicates its present
facilities are adequate to handle the slight increase in demand.
(f)
18. Aesthetics
(a) The site is an aesthetically pleasing rural scene containing
green pastures, weathered farm buildings, and mature trees.
However, it is viewed by only the infrequent passers -by
on Christensen Road. The tall cottonwood trees can be
viewed from further distances and provide vegetative relief
to the urban character of the area. Close visual survey of
the site is difficult as fences, signs, and locked gates
discourage the casual observer. Foot travel along the dike
adjacent to this site is difficult because of heavy vegetation.
The farm buildings and pasture will be removed. In its place,
an attractive office building with appropriate landscaping
treatment will occur. The mature cottonwood trees along
the east edge of Christensen Road will be relocated along
the top of the dike and will connect the Bicentennial Park
with a new river front park site along the north sit e along
the north side of the site, thus, permitting more public use
of the river than is now possible.
19. Recreation
(a) Presently the site has no recreational value, as signs
forbid unauthorized tresspass. A trailway along the east
side of the park connects the Bicententennial park with the
new park site to the north of this site. The developer is
tentatively agreeable to dedicating an additional 20 -25' strip
of land on the north side, as per the city request, for
additional trailway, thus opening up the park and trailway
system along the Green River for greater use by the community.
20. Archeological /Historical
The Tukwila Historical Society has determined that the site
is of some historical significance, as migrating Indians used the
site to camp along the Green River. The State Office of Historical
Preservation is currently researching their records for
significant findings on the site.
The State Office of Public Archeology has responded with the
attached letter. While there is a probability of significant
remains on the site, they conclude that subsurface
disturbance is unlikely considering the depth of fill.
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON.
SEATTLE, WASHINGTON 98195
May 23,1978
1 n.ctstuts f os EmmiroA 'ntpt Studies
Office of Public Archaeology
Engineering Annex FM -12
Mr. Ronald J. Smulski
Wiisey and Ham, Inc.
631 Strander Boulevard
Seattle, Washington 98188
RE: Preliminary Archaeological Assessment of Tukwila
Development Site.
Dear Mr. Smulski:.
• . In response to your letter request dated May 12, 1978, I have
prepared the following preliminary assessment of the potential for
archaeological resources of the Tukwila development site in. the SW 1/4
of the SW 1/4 of Section 24 and the NW 1/4 of the NW 1/4 of Section 25,
Township 23N, Range 4E, King County, Washington. What I have done is
present for you a set of alternative courses of action that might be taken
in regard to archaeological resources at the site and noted which alternative
is more appropriate In the eyes of this office and the State. Historic
Preservation Office.
It is clear from your vicinity and site maps that the property in
question lies an the in -curve of an ox -bow of the Green River. The geological
substrata is riverine silts and sands and, I presume, marine sediments. .
'underlying that. Located as it is on an ox -bow, the site covers an area
that contains buried channels of the Green River that are progressively
older as one moves west from the modern channel. In addition, we know from
other sites in the area that, until fairly recently, this area of the Green
River floodplain was an estuary with extensive marine resources in the
intertidal zone.
Although no archaeological sites are known to exist in the Tukwila_
development site, one site has been reported to have existed nearby in an
environmental setting which is identical (see enclosed map). Site 45 -KI -6
was a shell midden, probably a seasonal shellfish collecting site, located in
the in -curve of an ox -bow in the NW 1/4 of the SW 1/4 of Section 24. It
consists of a 60 cm thick layer of shell and artifacts buried three meters
below the land surface. Nearby, to the north, were wooden posts which had
formed a V-shaped fish trap in the Green River main channel. This site was
totally destroyed by re- channelization of the Green River preparatory to 405
construction.
Mr. Ronald J. Smulski
May 23, 1978
Page Two
The probability is great that similar sites exist beneath the surface
at the proposed development site. Shell midden sites are important for
several reasons, foremost among them being the significance to Native -
American history and their potential for providing valuable data on the
response of marine invertebrates to environmental changes and to long -term
exploitation by humans. If a site or sites similar to 45-KI -6 exist on
the property in question, they are certain to be of significance.
Two alternatives present themselves as regards the protection of the
archaeological resource potential of the Tukwila development site:
(1) In our phone conversation of May 19, you stated that from five to
seven feet of fill would be placed on this site. Such a cap would effectively
protect any archaeological materials that might exist. If your client chose
to excavate beneath the fill level for sewage, footings, etc., it would be
important for an archaeologist to monitor such activities. In this way, we
would know if, in fact, any sites did exist in the area and have knowiedge
of the nature of the resources protected beneath the cap of fill.
(2) The development site, an area of what appears to be between seven
and ten acres, could be systematically tested for archaeological resources
by coring either manually or mechanically. In this way, we would be certain
of the presence or absence of archaeological resources on the site.
1 have discussed these alternatives with Ms. Sheila Stump of the State
Office of Archaeology and Historic Preservation. She and 1 both feel that,
while capping the site would protect any sites that may exist, it effectively
prohibits the discovery of such sites, thereby limiting our potential know-
ledge of Western Washington prehistory. Monitoring of subsurface disturbances
would assure whether or not sites existed In the areas directly affected by
the disturbances, but provides far less reliable information than would
systematic coring..
As far as the cost of the two alternatives, if there is subsurface
disturbance of the area, alternative 1 would require an undetermined number
of man -days, probably from two to six days. A systematic coring operation
is likely to require three to four man-days. If you find that either
alternative suits your needs, this office can readily supply the necessary
services.
It has been good working with you on this matter. Dealing with Wilsey
and Ham is always a pleasure, as you provide adequate data from which we can
make our assessments. If you have any questions about these recommendations,
please call me.
cc: Ms. Jeanne M. Welch, . u.ty
SHPO, Office of Archaeology 6
Historic Preservat ion.
Sin rely,
James C. Chatters
Research Associate
Q
MAY 2 4 1973
wli: $EY & NAM, INC
PARCEL 1 1.E21AL BElCRIPTIO11(
That purl..n d the W. 11. G.11. «n 16.444,,* Lewd Chun No. 40 ad d IM
...Them at quart.. of the °wlb...1 4...*.. of Set Nun 24, Twn.14p 10 North,
Nang. 4 0..1, W.4., and el G.ve.nno nt Ian 1 1.5 1S, Tooneh.p 11 North.
I1•••• 4 Ea.,. W• 4., •11 M K.ng County, Warh0.4lon, ,nor• yar N.ul.rlp
des. .'abed as 1.1*..w•.
COMMENCING at the ..n.1A.ee1 corner el oo.d Section 24; theme 509° 47'5
•loth, the liner on 1u *.,4 Section 14 and t3, a di.l000• d 110.10 fed
to . eth ...fly marg. of ). c. Ch Rood and the
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, theme 4ont.ou.ng S09• 47•E 10.001.'I;
thence 41000 . 4 5 4 . 3 0 1..1; thence NI0• 14'W 47.71 Ir., theme 14710 44'5
20.80 fret more or Ie*. 10 the 1.11 Lank of the G.e.e Raver; thence contInu.nt
easterly and ...soberly dung the haM of the G... Rirr 1• follo..n0 tour...
and 41.1•ncem
0
O
O
I1
511 "34.07 -E 11.001.'1;
58th °)2'20 "6:50.01 /.el:
N77 °S4•tn'•E •I 00 I..el.
Sn7 "21•19•'E 29 „02 lee*:
541 •21•9 "E 10.41 1...;
501•4456-W 50.01 leer
54.007.11-E 61.12
Na' °32'34 "1: 90.09 1ee11
14•••40'27 "E S.. 4. fem.
5th: "S0•11"E S0. N. feel:
541 •40'19 "E 67.27 feel:
524 °1'33" W 54.61feet:
670•22•29"E 50.19 legit:
N0t020.44 "E 100.90 B:
303'•..6• *9*: V..0* 1••••
599 "14'11:' E 57.00 lee,;
529 "47'54•'E 57.00 fed;
519 •1952 "W 04.54 few;
512 •71.74"W 50.•1 feet: I s the north..1y boundary Ism of the 0ow lake plpe-
Ilne .qht. of •..y •• g•nt..• per . orded under King County Audi...
F.1. No. 4106155 thence lead., Mae lett b.44 of ,4. Green Raver and continuing
.long said 44...4..17 boundary of the Par Lake p.peNee right -of -way 401071'77'-•
101.71 4..G .hence t t to the pr. c..d.n4 tour....long th.... of • to
the right hay.n. • r•dlu• d 105.00 bet 0.d • cent.1 angled 24•214.•' r0
dime.. of 106.65 1e.0 net........4 to the pre.eeding 1464•095l"•
59.56 *..t to the r ..14 010.0.0 of 2.m.• Chri Ro.d; thence Moog .04
.. tier ly marg. N0°1 4'00'-W 111.41 leet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
Con .lning 4.412 ....m d land mot. o. I..s.
LESS THE d.dic.t.• of the .rl•rly 20 feet there. to the City of T.1.i1.
for • river tr..l aptem.
ANI] LESS 711E d.d,c•ttoa d the lollowing dear rib.d land to the C.ty of Tukwila
for City park purposes
That portion of the W. H. Gl *Nam Do.... ion ]and Claim No. 40 and the •cuth.e*I
quarter of the •euth.rt quarter of 5.et,on 24, Township 21 North. Range 4 East,
W. M. and of Government Lou 1 an 5. -4444,. 2S. Towrhip 21 North, Range 4 Cad*.
W. M„
•11 in King County Wa•h,ngton, more particularly dons.. bed 0• follows:
•
Commencing at .o
the ,(h...( d 0.
04 5e< on 24, the ou
• Smith 09047'
E.• •1.0g the
lan aid Section 24 nod 25, • distance d 110.30
feet to ttttt now 0,111. easterly margin of 2•m 0 CA . Road: theme
continuing South 09•47. East 10.00 lee*: the... North 00•14• West 6.32 feet;
thence North 10014' W•st 17. 37 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING: thee•
co amain. North 10 °14' W e., 10.14 lee,: thence North 79•24' Ea. 20.60 led
more or 1... 10 the felt bask of the Green Ri ttt the ,a.ing .0.14r1y
•,,d •ounerly Meng the hank of the Green Raver the following cou••• •.d
Scutt. 11°5•.07" Fad *1.00 Ira
South 70 °22'29" Ea.* 30.99
North 06 °52'34•Ea01 50.09 /ea1:
North 77•54.10° East 51.20 1..'.
5.0,1• 4S °O.: 19" Fad 29.00 feel.
Swath 02°50'11" Fad 50.16 feel:
South 4) °21'09° East 10.41 feet:
South 67°07.11" Eat. 69.11 fed:
5outb 00 °12'20" East 30.01 led:
North 02 °20'94" 50.4 100.901.,*:
No.t1,64 °.0•21" Fault 33.461..4:
S.03 87.2159. L..t 23.00 few:
South 590)4'16" East 07.40 fed:
South 41 40.44" East 17.001.4;
nerve le•eta. *aid 111 bank el the Green Rw.. the 10110.102 4our.e
.,d did.n4.• South 40°19'41" We.. 73.00 lee, North 09 4700"
West 110.00 1..4; South 45014.59- Wed 40.21 feel; south 71'04.07'
We., 71.. 22 feet: North 64 °*9'20" W..l 121.30 fed; North •7°37411
Wed 102.40 leer; N..r1A •2°0450- 00.1 70.22 feet: N..•.h•1 °07'11^
West 00.03 ten 10 the TRUE POINT or BEGINNING.
Co.4i.1n0 1.456 d I.ed mars or Ion•.
TOGETHER with that poeti°• d the termer Md of .414 Gee.. Elmer whist.
from 001•.'•1 action el •ereNm would •Nan b to the .bar. M4 pS*tl•• ' •
of ..ad 10.10,0• a1.na CI°I.n.
1•e3.r +te.�
ro.A
• s. oa'aw"
. 444
O•a gel
yt •..,A
L� ►i. -
do'
?O' 40.0.3_4, a0•a''
a •T.h.NCr`
•.- w.a... -a
• J rub., ...-a -
40.74'.4
f
-one '.e t: T,o
1:••14-7-L.:1•-ft
CITY
R
•
VIC IIV 1-r -7-
td 4 440
••■•• N.d
1, • C.
1--- �T6r -.O1110
°X e /
w O•'.o0'.• •01••1.00.•
0.110•
'1.400'
.1 / t
te=e 0) 1 :.11 • ...ae�.. q� e •
10 x:141 -4 fr. T� M 8
c• ass.
w 4.aT0 •roe 0...ap.'y6•S
1 .o• N*n.mr- 0.t
41, 1.1 ..F w•..••l•
Ir o•14•CO▪ 'ol
1
8
•
E
•
1
Haul. 3
IY'CI1
G 19 fa
5.
t
0
I°maL_ 4
t7WV� P"'e-16+--•T
0.
0
a
•
•
1 T@ t►2 6 .5 1`d
M1 O
As O
-7-
P
- r .--/ es
Tu 1L.h -J 1
"T' t . T O Iv C CO 1•.1 1• A. ...a Y •
0 0• 00
e.. C.-e.. •••••••
om • woe s C'.•..,
T- 1y .• •••■••
P1ZOi= ESSIONP�{_ crncE. �UILt��NG
Lam:.°••` 1'�i.��Q'Z �' TL.�
Harley EJensen
4.0.4000 A 11.
251 letose 70. C..
L.*.p01t..CA 64646
*415) 244 4360
•
1
5 G r-y •± r-il .• -r I G -r I t7 1--J I
.4
L B.. tW .n•terIal .41 b. deco aM 11.c1•I till. c.ns•lelng
•0•e.c •• rl■• ••I•l•l•• m•0••1•1. The • .1
the till 1 w111 b• .•riw• canmerel.l p.l. ..d
••••■•eti• proj.cl• w.1h1• the • . the 'm•••
..
.oh.. of l• -plot• 1111 revile..1 for parcel 11•1).000L cable yord..
1. He Mortal l• l• be ••te•ted Iran the ail•.
). ill *misting •arlcultur.l •tn.cture• •r• 10 be d.moll•hed
. ••d removed from the •i••.
4. Parcel 1 1. d••l4o•Ld •• Urban shoreline by the short'..
W.te• Program of the City et Tukwila.
4. B.•it..y ••■••• waiter. awl miser ulllille• •re •ink• •tubbed
Ire or •.atlabl. In th. dj.c..l to the p
0.•.l• ultlili.•
•111 be constructed to li• into th••• •al.11ul
.111 iri••. T. on -•its storm dr.1. 4. will It• d.sidd •nd
wstruct.d In .114 dui l.c•I ..quirem•nt, with
the piping bei.0 connected to the •aluing control manhole
••d eu4•4 .tructur• at ti. n.l •.d of the p.rc•l.
•
•. The project •tte i• ...rounded by con. iiii iel and ladu•trW
with the ••p.ion u/ the Blcenl.nni.IP•rk to the •o..t .
Iha •d acme Tukwila Ri..rlrun1 Park to tb• a rth 'eta th•
t..•rco...cting tr•ilw.y •y.tem •loll the river 1
•.K_.
O-. a •T.
+°u"ru�G
ciTY r -•..v_
1.•• is-. . Zer
Or. -O•�a f\Y rte.•'t 4.4T... le.-.Q a lt3i/. 71.•r
4 NI2t 7:r -.1B
t•'
O.
Laves.
>ti
Fj14��pn�1 -d
T/--4 Fa
I in 14
-11nre
...�.. T...'
•••cam..
M
or
- -� - -- ∎ ∎--- ------. --
ap
roJ
l ywf�
r
s 1 T G crs Q G -r 1 O
i- M G T _ 1'�J
t7 V
f-F er:, r .cr E sl CrffIG- t::%ING
►...�,�•61 --d Le�J 0 r ICJ
6 mass -.a
rfl
Harley EJensen
fvVUl.c1 Ar.A.
282 l.l.y.tt. C./0o
L.t.,.tt•. CA WB46
HMI 394 430111
IAA 1.01 70. PROPERTY OWNERS
•
28270490)3 17 8111. Karol(' Y. S Mae, Bruce 0. - P.O. So. 700 - Rercer Island. 09. 98040
2527049006 0 flatter Pere Co. la, Dept. 437 Central Slew. - 810.)rd Ave. - Se 90104
2023049020 Q City of 1utu11• - Tutuila. WA. 9818
2523049028 ® City of 7,9.11. - Tukwila. WA. 818
0223200040 ® 1029- 133832 Jew Assoc. . 209 Coleman 8100. - Seattle. OA. 8101
0223200041 Q Iron. J.Y. M. S 9.s. P.O. 80. 8179 - 7u411. 8r. - Settle. W. 818
0223200042 ® Ohio 1k41441 Products. 01r. Airco Inc. General Accl9. 488
3030 Airco 9r. P. 0. Boa 1314 11701,0.. Mac. 83701
2523049072 (i31 Union ►.c /flc 5.0. - 10 5o. 1171• 5t. - Salt Este City. Utah 84101
0223100040 ® Puget Sound Blood Center - lorry 6 IYdlso. - Seattle. 00. 98104
0223/00101 Q 1,1-land Corp. 1411 4tb Ave. - Sint. 1120 - W. 90101
0223100099 p. 1,7 teed Corp. 1411 4th Are. - S.Its 1120 - 5e , W. 8181
0223100100 Q Premium Distributors Inc. 230 Andover part C. - Seattle. W. 9818
0223200012 C°J Pivot. Distributors. lac. - 230 Andover Part C. - Seattle. 80. 9818
0223200030 () Peterson. A.Y. ► A.D. 290 Andover Part East - Tut. /1a. 00. 9818
2423049030 ® It/non Canty •
242)019020 1:.• Retro Indus . P.0. b. 21S4S - Seattle. IA. 8111
0223003090 , 50004011.9. Pell; 114449. AKMrd J.
0171 011401,. 01.0. 0914 - Beverly 8111.. CA. 90210
0223000050 Cji Sh.o.dlingq. Phil; harsh. 07chard J.
9171 011s1re Blvd. 0514 - Mverly . G. 90210
0227000042 ® 1... 161141n9 Ile.10 o - 405 Stevens - Spot.oe. 104• 98208
02270000E Can.rol Electric Co. • 401 1 4.11a Partway - T ,9.11.. W. 98067
• •--r O .+ r war O
♦ A .6... 88 9 L. •
1.r .Ttiti rr�.
• A O J• C T
Y r T in, 1
1 r-1 r--1 G C7 1 ^ -r c
V l c l r--.J i -r Y
1-� r•
• T 1--1 /L
T IL • T O n►1
C 1•
d . N fe0
tl3
Or'OSED f OrESSION,--L Orrice BUILDING
S --JI -6 H 0
CO P. cy,. . 1eO
Harley EJensen
4,O.t.09 AIA
261 Lateran. C.a.
1..7.4401.. CA 0464
1416) 264 43941