Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
SEPA E98-0011 - NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS - SOUTHCENTER CORPORATE SQUARE MOBILE RADIO MONOPOLE AND EQUIPMENT
NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS SOUTHCENTER CORPORATE SQUARE ENHANCED SPECIALIZED MOBILE RADIO (ESMR) FACILITY - INSTALLATION OF MONOPOLE & EQUIPMENT 375 CORPORATE DRIVE E98-0011 • City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director AUGUST 13, 1998 CITY OF TUKWILA NOTICE OF HEARING PROJECT INFORMATION Nextel Communications, Inc. has filed an application for a Conditional Use Permit, Number L98-0024, to construct an Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio (ESMR) Base Station, comprised of a 100 foot monopole with 12 antennae and an equipment building for associated operating equipment at 375 Corporate Drive. You are invited to comment on the project at the public hearing scheduled for August 27, 1998 at 7:00 p.m. before the Planning Commission. The hearing will take place at City Hall in City Council Chambers, 6200 Southcenter Blvd. To confirm the time and date before the hearing, call the Department of Community Development at 431-3670. For further information on this proposal, contact Michael Jenkins at 431-3685 or visit our offices at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100, Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Permits applied for include: • Conditional Use Permit • SEPA Checklist Other known required permits include: • Development Permit FILES AVAILABLE FOR PUBLIC REVIEW The project files are available at the City of Tukwila. To view the files, you may request them at the permit counter of the Department of Community Development (DCD), located at 6300 Southcenter Boulevard #100. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 AFFIDAVIT I, 6:d-etti /Lqzz,4fuIJf Notice of O Notice of Public Hearing Public Meeting Li Board of Adjustment Agenda Packet LI Board of Appeals Agenda Packet []Planning Commission Agenda Packet Li Short Subdivision Packet Agenda J Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit was mailed to each of the following addresses on eF /Z1(I . OF DISTRIBUTION hereby declare that: ODetermination of Non- significance 0 Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance fl Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice fl Notice of Action fl Official Notice fl Other 4, C. / "�o p662___ 0 Other slot7 CFNeb 5.7D Name 1017 c 4e2) S23 64 /oy' of Project j)ic- /11 Signatur File Number�� - /i • • CITY OF TUKWILA DETERMINATION OF NONSIGNIFICANCE (DNS) DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: INSTALLATION OF A MONOPOLE AND ASSOCIATED TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT PROPONENT: NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS LOCATION OF PROPOSAL. INCLUDING STREET ADDRESS. IF ANY: (mor r�,..ti Pf`.- ADDRESS: 75 ANDOVER PK W PARCEL NO: 262304-9075 SEC/TWN/RNG: LEAD AGENCY: CITY OF TUKWILA FILE NO: E98-0011 The City has determined that the proposal does not have a probable significant adverse impact on the environment. An environmental impact statement (EIS) is not required under RCW 43.21c.030(2)(c). This decision was made after review of a completed environmental checklist and other information on file with the lead agency. This information is available to the public on request. •k* k************•k******•kik**•k********** k**•** k•k-k**********•******************,k* This determination is final and signed this 19911. Steve Lancaster: Responsible Official City of Tukwila. (206) 431-3670 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila. WA 98188 114' day of At/Gy,- Copies of the procedures for SERA appeals are available with the Department of Community Development. • City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director To: Steve Lancaster From: Michael Jenkin Date: August 11, 1998 Re: E98-0011, SEPA review on application by Nextel for a 100 foot monopole in the parking lot of the Southcenter Corporate Square office complex, 375 Corporate Drive. MEMORANDUM Project Description: This SEPA review is for a proposal to locate a 100 foot monopole for an Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio (ESMR) Base Station adjacent to the west property line in the west parking area at Southcenter Corporate Square, 372 Corporate Drive. A site plan is included. The proposed development will include the monopole accompanied by operating equipment located in an existing adjacent structure. Twelve (12) antennae will be affixed to the top of the monopole with up to 4 antennas mounted on each array. Two Global Positioning System (GPS) antennae will be affixed to the monopole. Agencies with jurisdiction: None Summary of Primary Impacts: • Earth The entire site is generally flat with glacial till and topsoil in the area. • Air Negligible vehicle emissions will occur during construction. • Water No dredging or filling from surface water or wetlands. No discharge of waste materials to surface waters will occur. No withdraw or discharge of groundwater will occur. The site is located approximately 175 feet from the closest edge of the wetlands associated with Tukwila Pond. All construction in and around existing drainage field(s) must comply with Tukwila's Storm Water Management Ordinance. 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 E98-0011 SEPA Checklist - Nextel 375 Corporate Drive August 11, 1998 • Plants • • No anticipated impact. Applicants have not proposed landscaping to screen the equipment buildings or monopole. • Animals No animals found in the area. No threatened or endangered species known in area. The site is adjacent to the Tukwila Pond, which provides a habitat for a variety of birds and small mammals. • Energy/Natural Resources Electricity will run electronic equipment and telephone services will be provided. Batteries are primary backup if power failure occurs. All equipment will comply with applicable state energy codes. • Environmental Health No significant health impacts have been identified from proposed technology operating at 806-821 and 851-866 megahertz (MHz). Health impacts of telecommunication facilities are exempt from environmental review. Minor traffic and construction noise will occur during construction period. No other significant noise will be generated by project. Any noise generated during construction or operation of the facility must comply with Tukwila's Noise Ordinance (TMC 8.22). • Land/Shoreline Use Proposed development is located in the Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) zone. Surrounding uses are primarily office, retail and distribution. No demolition of structures is proposed. The proposal must also obtain approval of a Conditional Use Permit (TMC 18.64). At its proposed height of 100 feet, the facility's coverage area will extend outside the City of Tukwila and beyond it's permit authority. Copies of coverage area based upon proposed heights of 50 feet, 75 feet and 100 feet are attached indicating how the telecommunication coverage are expands outside of the City of Tukwila as the monopole increases in height. • Housing No housing is proposed nor will development reduce housing. E98-0011 SEPA Checklist - Nextel 375 Corporate Drive August 11, 1998 • Aesthetics • • The proposed monopole, with attached antennae, will be approximately 100 feet tall. The monopole will accommodate additional antennae that will extend the height of the monopole to 115 feet. The monopole will be the tallest structure within the Urban Center but is exempt from Design Review requirements (TMC 18.60). The monopole will be visible from surrounding hillsides, adjacent offices, hotels, retail and other commercial uses and the Tukwila Pond Park. The operating equipment will be located in an existing structure immediately adjacent to the proposed monopole. • Light and Glare The tower will not produce significant Tight or glare. No off-site light or glare will be produced. • Recreation The monopole is located adjacent to the Tukwila Pond, which has passive recreation features. • Historic/Cultural Preservation No known places or landmarks. • Transportation One vehicle trip per month is anticipated for service and maintenance. • Public Services Proposed development will not impact or require specific public services. • Utilities The facility will be served by electric and telephone services. In support of the City's Comprehensive Plan concerning non city -owned utilities (Policy 12.1.36), the facility should be designed to include the ability of other service providers to locate antennae on the monopole. E98-0011 SEPA Checklist - Nextel 375 Corporate Drive August 11, 1998 • • SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET • What are the objectives of the proposal To provide telecommunication services in the Southcenter area, as a link in the coverage area for Nextel's system in King County • What are the alternative means of accomplishing these objectives The alternative to erecting a monopole to support the ESMR antennae is to "co -locate" the antennae on an existing building, monopole or other structure. • Please compare the alternative means and indicate the preferred course of action The applicant researched numerous locations within their "search ring" but none of the alternatives were acceptable due to technical or market driven problems. A copy of the applicant's statement concerning the alternative site is attached, as well as a copy of the "search ring" for possible locations. • Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan? If so, what policies of the Plan? No • Proposed measures to avoid or reduce the conflicts are None Recommendation: DNS rimmin Isom a»a ,tel ISMINIKONCHTSZEINVO91111 .4;11 BillsV i,IIMMI V 7.MINISMINOIN III� LSIII11®111 ■ �►i1 f�►/�" ,� I / ,\ al • \\\' o_■• 1 ; ■, ATTA:HMENT A: SEARCH RING ark 1111bgairer m y1��a �yJ o4111RMM___ S��J►�1\�/1 II/ '1I/! 4 I11lb 411112 . 'e1MUNRO INNIMEIRVAME ; fl• 1 r SIU II ME LUDASZsumplaresurnm. 1 IN 27'30" "55 AIRPORT Rad Tow BDY� i BDY T 23 N 1_122N Pyrk b00/7.001a1 #bt Parricks-441 R P cEiadio To eri115' P o. •. , , (MOD AHA2IY9 I C9S6 96Z 90Z�YWI 90: LT NOW S6/LZ/LO Pr(' ant Coe Gm tak, Sup Bat, hyd Mea COR Pro I 1o,C 197 To l 23n Gnel The nese —COl Wrn NAT BAT DAT THE COI, am HAS STA; NYE pup' USE .c0 To cc multi; To cc mobil ATTACHMENT B: SITE COVERAGE AT 100' Mobile System, International Inc Tue Jul 14 15:04: 50 1998 Centre Long: 122 15.15.2W Lt: 47 27.09.0N Scale: 1: 30000 Primary Road - - Secondary Road - - Connecting Road - - Road -- Neighbourhood Road S 198TH STREET ATTACHMENT C: SITE COVERAGE AT 7 Mobile SyStegvi 1,11ernational Inc Tue Jul 14 15: 29 1999 SC Corp Sq @ 75' Centre Long: 122 1915.2W Lt: 47 2709.0N Scale: 1• 30000 Pr]mary Rom! - - Secondary Road - - Connecting Road -- Road - - Neighbourhood Road S 196TH STREET '‘-----M ATTACHMENT D: SITE COVERAGE AT 50' Mobile Systemi.ornational Inc Tue Jul 14 15.35: 41 1998 Centre Long: J? 1515.2W Lat: 47 2709 0"N Scale: 1: 30000 Primary Road - - Secondary Road -- Connecting Road - - Road - - Neighbourhood Hood gaml=mr; S 196TH STREET ATTACHMENT E: SOUTHCENTER PLACE COVERAGE AT 75' Mobile Systems foiernational Inc Tue Jul 14 02: 24 1995 Centre Lony: 122 I515.2W Lat: 47 2709.0"H Scale: 1: 30000 Primary Ropid - - Secondary Road -- Connecting Pnad - - Road -- Neighbourhood Road S 196TH STREET ATTACHMENT F: NEIGHBOR CELL COVERAGE AT 100' Mobile Systems Inl rrnat ionnl Inc Wed Jul 15 06:(1.1: 02 1999 Neighbor Cell r.uverage Proposed Cell ;iL In0* Centre Long: 122 1:1'55.8"W Scale: 1: 30000 • Primary Road — Secondary Read — Connecting I-oad — Road — Ne i ghbourhnnd Ulnad Lat: 47 26'42 ©"N ATTACHMENT F NEIGHBOR CELL COVERAGE AT 100' 108TH AVENUE SE Mobile Systems Inl.r:rnational Inc Wed Jul 15 08 +r: 9 1998 Neighbor Cell 1.nverage Proposed 100' Ib•ruht Centre Long: 12? 13'36.7"W tat: 47 25'57.8"N Scale: 1: 50000 Primary Road — Secondary Road — Connecting Road ATTACHMENT G: NEIGHBOR CELL COVERAGE AT 75' SR S 1r Y 1 } 41, ce a� A F� i > rr -r* n W 1174 K..e 0,„, • 108TH AVENUE SE mob1le System. intr•rnat1ona1 1NC Wert Jul 15 Oft IL 50 1A91? Neighbor Cell r.overage Proposed Cell at 75' Centre Longs 1:2 13'38.6"W Lat: 47 26.48.5"N Scale: is 30000 Primary Road — Secondary Road — Connecting Rnad ATTACHMENT G: NEIGHBOR CELL COVERAGE AT 75' PLANET V2.7 Mobile Systems fnlrrnationa] Inc Thu Jul 23 07'41,' 55 1998 Neighbor Cell Coverage Proposed 75' Height Centre Long: 12? 13'45.3"W Lat: 47 25'55.0"N Scale: 1: 50000 - Primary Road — Connecting Road Road — Neighbourhood Road ATTACHMENT H: NEIGHBOR CELL COVERAGE AT 50' 4 Vls '4 l '40 61 • • 1r ■ a imP • - �'' r4 ':r ^ i '., `' yrs x n ' . •i,�xi 47'#n cl,. +. r .r;. ,}T4' \`' FF tit; 1 o•T • .y, f,'S `S �).. 4r ,^,t..•li='{;t =.i :'r• _ r` k a i fir', r; ;jib• Mobile System-. rn' ernat lona l Inc Wed Jul 15 08: t`.: u3 1998 Neighbor Cell c.ovr-rage Proposed Cell 4v.. 50• Centre LOnq: 122 1352.6"W Lat ■ Scale: 1: 30000 -- Primary Ro,41 — Secondary Road — Connecting Pried 108TH AVENUE SE 47 27'07 1"M ATTACHMENT H: NEIGHBOR CELL COVERAGE AT 50' PLANET V2.7 Mobile Systems Internationa] Inc Thu Jul 23 07: 45: 55 1990 Neighbor Cell Coverage. Centre Long: 122 13'45.3"W Lat: 47 25'55.0"N Scale: 1: 50000 — Primary Road — Connecting Road — Road — Neighbourhood Road • • ATTACHMENT H: NEIGHBOR CELL COVERAGE AT 50' 4 W I.. 1.7q1 i 46i5 4j 6111" • F44111r , 604 ;VI ;•'T..z •..!7$. 'IA?'k •,:,..bv -1.-4. vt ,q;-4.t,c, ...r, x eli'l:3 , '- i1\'" lee 1 .411“. •,7,. :fr r.. ..,_;•ri...,. ,,.•4 +.. . !,6`,4••••nr. , 4,-, ,,,,,. ,sy, gkh.erk.7.1 • .g.., r. - zip. 'A. 1,1110u,„17 L •*..r.,..„ ti 4 .,..., ,,4irli,,...;,,t,t, n:. 1 , „.,... ;D.=• ..., . -4 1 ,, -q..... 4 1 11,1:;1-1•1i . '..'''''''It`,P11..kr:fw, ''''''':"1-?%-12;7.i::,€'45A;;:11::.::i..' .,.1.. • ;7-.7 k)., ..c::,;-,-,,.e.:•;•y-r, . -,.....4. c..ri:is 01 ••• ".. 7 q ..4 '1.4 I: t, 0,..-.P' ,,,,1,,,...._nt...., .,,,,,--,9. { .:,."-, ,:),•',,,,,tqL. ,,...:A'd I. "(....,......' -5,2_5,...":1Z4j,.. ;,..s.111,11:',","..1 .. )...;',..r: v!..i it.,':;...7,7V-':: . -1:tvA, ',4:„;;....i: 1,6' ,_,.t.,,... tti,1 . . , .,..16. , , ,,...,,,,,,...,.. . Is, .. ,''.6.- 4 ' e‘.-4,i,...,,i? .1e' ve • ,,i1 , ,-:' • . xst',A. ..1 li '1. .. '':•.;,•- ,i ,.y7R1 kl.k.144;NI 7„,".,:, ' '• A ,..'14,— .4‘, . - ,` , v::, ..4 ; —'-'-',--&.F --.:—Lf...q,%f• . 1= • .r...l3-4.\-..1 . n Mobile Sy5tew. IW,rnflt10001 Wed Jul 15 00: 199/3 Nelghbor Cell (j -rage Proposed Cell Centre Long: IPP I l'52.6"W 1al: 47 27 ' DV 1"M • Scale: 1: 30000 – Primary Pond -- Secondary Road -- Connectng Poad 108TH AVENUE SE JUL 23 '99 04:14PM TUA DCDIPW • TO BE COMPLETED BY APPLICANT E. SUPPLEMENTAL SHEET FOR ALL PROJECT AND NON PROJECT PROPOSALS The objectives and the alternative means of reaching the objectives for a proposal will be helpful in reviewing the aforegoing items of the Environmental Checklist. This information provides a general overall perspective of the proposed action in the context of the environmental infor- mation provided and the submitted plans, documents, suppor- tive .information, studies, etc. 1. What are the objective(s) of the proposal? Tlifl 9blectives are to provide in building portable Covera a in the Southcenter Sho •in: Mall and surrounding business complexes, 1-405 and 1-5. Also, it provides a critical link in the system and "hands off'r to (5) five other sites providing necessary coverage 2. What are the' alternative means of accomplishing these objectives? There are no alternative means of accomplishing the objectives. 3. Please compare the alternative. means and indicate the preferred course of action: There are no alternative means to compare. P.Z/3 Evaluation for Agency Use Only CEIVED C:h'REY OF TUKWILA JUL 2 7 1998 PERMIT CENTER --22- t00/C000 &TOD X3A2IV9 a C926 96Z 90Z XV3 OT:LT NON 96/LZ/L0 JUL 23 '98 04:14PM Tulip DCD'PW • 4. Does the proposal conflict with policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plant If so, what poli- cies of the Plan? The proposal does not conflict with the policies of the mpre ensive se o rohcy kraal. Proposed measures to avoid or. reduce the conflict(s) are: mere are no conflicts. a propos supports several of the Goals and Policies. Additionaly•it it provides for colocation opportunities. -23- P.3/3 Evaluation far Agency Use Only b00/b00l cDI00 A3AHV9 a 0926 96Z 90Z XVI OT: LT NOIR 86/LZ/L0 ■■■■■■■■.■■■■■■■r. ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■r MEN 111 MW% ■■■u uu ■■■u • . nu ... • • ■■n • ■■■■.- ..■■■I oniu■u.. u■i ■■■■i■■■■■■■■■■■■u ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■t u■■■v- -v■uun D. •GARA/ EY CORPORATION PROJECT MANAGERS July 15, 1998 Michael Jenkins Assistant Planner City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 Tukwila, Washington 98188 Re: Nextel Conditional Use Permit Application, 372 Corporate Drive N. (L98 - 0024/E 98-0011) Dear Michael: This is in response to your letter, dated July 6, 1998 requesting additional information concerning the above-mentioned application. Attached is a letter, prepared by Derek Deitz a Radio Frequency Engineer for Nextel Communications, which addresses all of the radio frequency questions you raised. Additionally, the following responds to your question regarding other sites considered. I. What alternative sites were reviewed in preparation for this proposal? . Building roof tops considered and reasons no proposals were made to locate on them are discussed as follows: a. Southcenter Mall; 633 Southcenter Mall Only the flagpoles on top of the building were of sufficient height to meet radio frequency requirements and a stealth approach was considered. However, the Bon Marche, anchor tenant, was not interested in entering into a lease with Nextel. b. RECEIVED c. cm OF TUKWILA jUL. 1 6 1998 PERtdlTCENTER DoubleTree Inn; 16500 Southcenter Parkway Considerable effort was made to locate on the DoubleTree Inn roof. However, the electrical service is at maximum capacity and no space is available to accommodate the necessary equipment (see Deitz letter dated 7/15/98). Southcenter Place; 16400 Southcenter Parkway Negotiations were conducted and a lease agreement unable to be reached due to 1700 Westlake Avenue North • Suite 420 • Seattle, Washington 98109 (206) 216-3355 fax (206) 298-9583 • • Michael Jenkins Page 2 Southcenter Place; 16400 Southcenter Parkway, continued landlord terms and conditions which did not meet Nextel financing requirements (see Deitz letter dated 7/15/98 for RF comment). d. Centerplex; 6100 Southcenter Boulevard This site was considered but did not meet RF engineering requirements (see Deitz letter dated 7/15/98 for RF comment). 2. Raw land sites considered and reasons no proposals were made to locate on them are discussed as follows: a. Southcenter Mall Monument sign; 633 Southcenter Mall A stealth approach was considered with antennas to be located in the signage monument at the Mall. It was concluded technically unworkable and the logistics of extending electrical and telephone service were prohibitive. b. Prime Source Corporation; 355 Treck Drive A raw land site was identified and the landlord who had other plans for the property rejected the lease offer. d. Zee Medical; 378 Upland Drive A raw land site was identified. However, an access easement was required to access the property and the adjacent property owner would not provide the easement. As discussed and formally proposed in the revised drawing submittal and photo simulations dated June 25, 1998 the specific monopole location has been relocated on the site in order to take full advantage of the large tree screen (located on City property) to the northwest and the office building to the east. The proposed monopole will be painted a brown tone with a cluster antenna configuration providing a " softer" visual image than the typical triangular top hat. Please advise me if this provides the necessary information in order for you to proceed with the application. Sincerely, Michael S. Lyons, Project Manager • • NFXFEL Michael Jenkins Assistant Planner City of Tukwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Ste #100 Tukwila, WA 98188 QuasiMoto Site System Design Nextel Communications 1750 - 112th Avenue N.E., Suite C-100 Bellevue, WA 98004 425 452-7400 FAX 425 452-7404 7/15/98 The proposed site was selected to enhance capacity in Nextel's iDEN (integrated Dispatch Enhanced Network) digital radio network in the general area commonly known as South Center, and extending as far east as Hwy 167. Capacity enhancement is achieved through the process of cell -splitting. This process involves providing coverage replacement for surrounding cells, of which are at a much higher elevation with respect to average terrain. These "high" sites include Nextel's Bryn Mawr site located on Skyway Hill and South Seattle site located in McMicken Heights. Coverage replacement for these sites includes three sites in the Kent Valley located at Hwy 167/1-405 interchange (in service), South Center Corp Square (proposed facility), and Hwy 167 and 214th St (not constructed). Attachment I depicts coverage relationships with key neighboring sites. Site Selection (Location & Antenna Height) Site selection is conducted through the establishment of a "search ring" (Attachment A). This ring is created based on key coverage objectives. The key objectives for this ring were 1) 1-5 north to S. 144th St., 2) Hwy 518 west to approximately 44th Av. S., and 3) east from Southcenter to Hwy 167, and 4) in -building coverage at Southcenter and surrounding areas. Furthermore, item 1 required nearly complete line of site coverage. To achieve item 1 the ring was limited to a narrow north/south corridor in-line with the section of 1-5 between 1-405 and S. 144m St. It was limited east and south due to terrain northeast and southwest of the interchange, respectively. Item 3 dictated the initial antenna height of 120'. This height requirement was submitted as part of the search ring requirements. It was initially thought that this height would be required to serve east across the valley to Hwy 167. Subsequent evaluation of empirical data determined that a 100' antenna height would meet requirements. Attached are computer predictions based upon local topography, clutter attributes (moderate vegetation), and antenna height. Predictions were done at heights of 100', 75' and 50' for the proposed facility, Attachments B, C, and D, respectively. Additionally, Attachments F, G, and H depict the relationship between the proposed site at 100', 75', and 50', respectively, and its two key neighboring sites. These are the same sites as described in the system design section above as coverage replacement cells. The Renton site is depicted in red, the proposed site as orange, and the Kent site as blue. The critical portion of coverage is the area between West Valley Hwy and Hwy 167, and north/south of 180th St approximately 30 blocks. A significant effect on coverage can be observed in these plots between the 100' and 75' antenna heights. At 100', service levels will be acceptable in most areas with few weak spots. In building coverage should be good with marginal coverage at selective locations. At 75' coverage gaps become very apparent, with very marginal to unacceptable coverage areas developing between 180th and 212th street exits just west of Hwy 167. Also note that coverage gaps open along the boundary between the Kent site and the proposed facility. V{ED. I fWJF J.UL16.1998 • • Neighboring Site Relationships Overlapping signal between neighboring sites is very important to the design of a cellular network. This is because calls hand-off at the boundary between sites. If signals do not overlap well, dropped calls are the result. The gaps that developed between the proposed site with a 75' height and the Kent site as described above would result in a significant dropped call problem. Overlap to the northwest with our Riverton Heights and Elmo (SPAA) sites are also just as critical. However, the design of either of these sites has little effect on the design of the proposed facility. The hand-off boundaries for these two neighboring sites is completely defined by terrain. Specifically, the hill on 1-5 at 144th Ave and the canyon like bend in Hwy 518 at approximately 46th Ave. Because of the significant terrain contours, the hand-off between sites will happen at these points irregardless of significant changes at either Riverton Heights (Lewis & Clark) or Elmo (SPAA). It is important to note that the 75' height at the proposed facility degrades the overlap point on Hwy 518 with the proposed Riverton Heights site. Refer to Attachments B & C for comparison. Evaluated Properties (Inside Search Ring) Many properties within the search ring were evaluated, but only one existing structure (Double Tree Inn) met the design requirements. However, other structures within the search ring were initially evaluated to determine if they would be acceptable. These included Southcenter Place and Southcenter Mall, all other structures were immediately identified as too low to achieve the desired coverage. Later, both of these structures were determined through evaluation of empirical data (actual measured signals) to be of insufficient height to cover east from the search ring. Southcenter PI, being at approximately 75', also was too low to cover other areas, specifically an area of 51st Av and to a lesser extent Hwy 518 near 46th Av. S. This is primarily a result of terrain shielding due to the site being close to the base of the hill that 51st traverses over (see Attachment E). Evaluated Properties (Outside Search Ring) The narrow constraints of this search ring eliminated possibilities of locating on any structures or existing wireless facilities outside of the ring. However, these facilities were identified and a brief comment is included per your request as to why Nextel could not construct a facility here. Centerplex (near Tukwila City Hall) is an existing ATTWS facility, rejected due to terrain blockage to coverage objective 1 listed above. Air Touch monopole on Andover Park East; rejected as too short, colocation separation issues and terrain blockage. ATTWS +120' monopole behind Embassy Suites, rejected due to terrain blockage. Consultants did identify other willing landlords outside the ring, but all were rejected due to tight constraints placed on site selection. These included transmission lines along W. Valley Hwy and Prime Source Corp near Andover Park East (raw land build). Conclusion Critical design constraints (a result of local topography) resulted in a small search ring and a minimum height of 100'. Movement of the site is limited to the search ring. Without the above constraints, overlapping signal with neighbor sites will be greatly diminished. Additionally, overlap with neighboring sites to the northwest (Riverton Heights, Lewis & Clark Theatre) is impacted. There are also expected building shadowing issues that would result with an antenna lower than the height of the Double Tree Inn structure. Finally, as stated above, the SPAA and Lewis and Clark Theatre sites will not allow the proposed site to be relocated outside the established search ring or reduced in height below the minimum 100' requirement. Nextel Communications ATTACHMENT B: SITE COVERAGE AT 100' Mobile Systems International Inc Tue Jul 14 15: 04: 50 1998 SC Corp Sq @ 100' Centre Long: 122 15'15.2"W Lat: 47 27'09.0"N Scale: 1: 30000 • Primary Road — Secondary Road — Connecting Road — Road — Neighbourhood Road RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA JUL 1 6 1998 PERMIT CEnTg.F ATTACHMENT C: SITE COVERAGE AT 75' Mobile Systems International Inc Tue Jul 14 15: 20: 29 1998 Centre Long: 122 1515.2W Lat: 47 2709.0N Scale: 1: 30000 . Primary Road - - Secondary Road - - Connecting Road -- Road -- Neighbourhood Road RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA JUL 1 6 1988 PERMIT CENTER ATTACHMENT D: SITE COVERAGE AT 50' Mobile Systems International Inc Tue Jul 14 15: 35: 49 1998 SC Corp Sq @ 50' Centre Long: 122 15'15.2"W Lat: 47 27'09.0"N Scale: 1: 30000 Primary Road — Secondary Road — Connecting Road — Road — Neighbourhood Road RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA JUL 1 6 1998 PEjACT CENTER ATTACHMENT E: SOUTHCENTER PLACE COVERAGE AT 75' Mobile Systems International Inc Tue Jul 14 15: 02: 24 1998 SothvAe P\ • C '75' Centre Long: 122 15'15.2"W Lat: 47 27'09.0"N Scale: 1: 30000 •• Primary Road — Secondary Road — Connecting Road — Road — Neighbourhood Road ia EC CITY OFUKKW°VILA J U l_ 1 6 1998 ATTACHMENT F: NEIGHBOR CELL COVERAGE AT 100' Mobile Systems International Inc Wed Jul 15 08: 04: 02 1998 Neighbor Cell Coverage Proposed Cell at 100' Centre Long: 122 1355.8W Lat: 47 2642.8N Scale: 1: 30000 -- Primary Road - - Secondary Road -- Connecting Road -- Road - - Neighbourhood Road RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA JUL 1 6 1998 PERMIT CENTER ATTACHMENT G: NEIGHBOR CELL COVERAGE AT 75' Mobile Systems International Inc Wed Jul 15 08: 11: 50 1998 Neighbor Cell Coverage Proposed Cell at 75' Centre Long: 122 13'38.6"W Lat: 47 26'48.5"N Scale: 1: 30000 -- Primary Road — Secondary Road — Connecting Road RECEIVED eirY OF TUKwQLA J U L 1 6 1998 F'JR?AIT CENTER ATTACHMENT H: NEIGHBOR CELL COVERAGE AT 50' .:. ?''� ,,�s � a. tis d� �. rpt - v4 cZ -taro 'is o Mobile Systems International Inc Wed Jul 15 08: 15: 03 1998 Neighbor Cell Coverage Proposed Cell at 50' Centre Long: 122 13'52.6"W Lat: 47 27'07.1"N Scale: 1: 30000 - - Primary Road — Secondary Road — Connecting Road RECEIVED CITY OF TUIII( A JUL 1 6 1998 .PERMIT,CtE,NjT City of Tukwila • • - John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director July 6, 1998 Michael Lyons D. Garvey and Associates 1700 Westlake Ave N., 4th Floor Seattle, WA 98109 Re: Nextel Conditional Use Permit application, 372 Corporate Drive N. (L98-0024/ E 98-0011) Dear Michael: We have completed our substantive review of your request to establish a 100 foot monopole for an Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio (ESMR) base station at the referenced property. We have a number of concerns related to your proposal that we believe will substantially impact our SEPA determination and recommendation to the Planning Commission. We believe that the monopole will have a significant impact on views in the general area. At 100 feet, it will be the tallest structure in an otherwise predominately low-rise development area between Southcenter Parkway and West Valley Highway. Without significant visual mitigation of the monopole and antennae we believe there will be a detrimental impact on the enjoyment of views in the area, including views of the area from surrounding hillsides. Since no information has been submitted concerning your required coverage area and the minimum height required, we are requesting that you provide the following information: • Why the proposed height is needed • What is the minimum height needed for your coverage needs in this area, given recently approved monopole at Seattle Police Athletic Association • Will future expansion plans to co -locate on a previously approved monopole at Lewis and Clark Theater (L97-0055) reduce the minimum height needed at this location • Will co -location on existing adjacent structures satisfy coverage needs • How far from proposed location can the antennae be moved to maintain coverage needs • What alternative sites were reviewed in preparation for this proposal 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Far (206) 431-3665 July 6, 1998 Michael Lyons Re: Nextel Monopole, 372 Corporate Drive Page Two • Upon receipt of this information, we will retain a third party consultant at the expense of Nextel to review and comment upon the information that you provide. As this is additional information needed to evaluate the impacts of the monopole, antennae and related equipment prior to the issuance of a SEPA determination or the conditional use permit, the 120 day review period required under TMC 18.104.130 is suspended until the required information is submitted and determined to be adequate. Upon receipt of the information and completion of our review, a new hearing date will be scheduled before the Planning Commission. Sincerely, Michael Jenkins Assistant Planner Date: 27-May-98 11:32:02 From: MICHAEL-J (MICHAEL JENI) • To: DON Subject: RE: Cell tower near Tukwila Pond Message-id: B2F96B3501000000 Application-name: MHS > D ate: 26-May-98 17:10:35 >From: DON (DON WILLIAMS) >To: MICHAEL-J >Copies-to: STEVE >Subject: RE: Cell tower near Tukwila Pond >Message-id: 8BF76A3501000000 >Application-name: MHS > »Date: 26-May-98 16:53:09 »From: MICHAEL-J (MICHAEL JENKINS) »To: DON »Subject: CeII tower near Tukwila Pond »Message-id: 75F36A3501000000 »Application-name: MHS » » »when we met on the topic, you had indicated that you were going to send »the SEPA out to Seattle Audobon for comment. Do you know if your »contact has received the packet? >Michael, I talked with the Mayor about the tower because he is very >interested in the pond park. He does not want the tower in the proposed >location and wanted me to past along that response. We did talk about >"hiding" it in the very SE corner of our pond property to hide it in the >trees, and getting paid to have it there, ($ for the park's >construction) so I contacted the project manager and told him my dept. >could not support the location that they identified and asked if he'd be >interested in looking at our corner. He said he'd have to get back to >me. He hasn't yet. I plan no other action until I get an answer. Call >me if you have questions. Don W. Don - I spoke to Jack and what both of us think would work best is that we not go too far with any formal discussions with the applicant about moving onto city property, because we will have a hard time looking them in the face to say that staff will recommend denial to the Planning Commission, but if you move it onto city property we will approve it! After working this issue with Jack and Steve, we want to wait until the Planning Commission actually denies their request based on not being able to adequately screen, that it is located in potential right of way indicated in the Comp Plan, etc. and then work with them to put it on city property. I'II keep you posted. mj 20000 -team -options: R • • 242Send-to: JACK Date: 26 -May -98 17:10:35 From: DON (DON WILLIAMS) To: MICHAEL -J Copies -to: STEVE Subject: RE: Cell tower near Tukwila Pond Message -id: 8 B F76A3501000000 Application -name: MHS 20MCB-options: NNYNA Re -sent -by: MICHAEL -J; on 27 -May -98 08:20:41 >Date: 26 -May -98 16:53:09 >From: MICHAEL -J (MICHAEL JENKINS) >To: DON >Subject: Cell tower near Tukwila Pond >Message -id: 75F36A3501000000 >Application -name: MHS > >when we met on the topic, you had indicated that you were going to send >the SEPA out to Seattle Audobon for comment. Do you know if your >contact has received the packet? Michael, I talked with the Mayor about the tower because he is very interested in the pond park. He does not want the tower in the proposed location and wanted me to past along that response. We did talk about "hiding" it in the very SE corner of our pond property to hide it in the trees, and getting paid to have it there, ($ for the park's construction) so I contacted the project manager and told him my dept. could not support the location that they identified and asked if he'd be interested in looking at our corner. He said he'd have to get back to me. He hasn't yet. I plan no other action until I get an answer. Call me if you have questions. Don W. • • MEMORANDUM To: Steve Lancaster From: Michael Jenkins Date: May 26, 1998 Re: E98-0011, SEPA review on application by Nextel for a 100 foot monopole in the parking lot of the Southcenter Corporate Square office complex, 375 Corporate Drive. Project Description: This SEPA review is for a proposal to locate a 100 foot monopole for an Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio (ESMR) Base Station in the northwest parking area at Southcenter Corporate Square, 372 Corporate Drive. A site plan is included. The proposed development will include the monopole accompanied by operating equipment located in an existing adjacent structure. Twelve (12) antennae will be affixed to the top of the monopole with up to 4 antennas mounted on each array. Two Global Positioning System (GPS) antennae will be affixed to the monopole. Agencies with jurisdiction: None Summary of Primary Impacts: • Earth The entire site is generally flat with glacial till and topsoil in the area. • Air Negligible vehicle emissions will occur during construction. • Water No dredging or filling from surface water or wetlands. No discharge of waste materials to surface waters will occur. No withdraw or discharge of groundwater will occur. The site is located approximately 175 feet from the closest edge of the wetlands associated with Tukwila Pond. All construction in and around existing drainage field(s) must comply with Tukwila's Storm Water Management Ordinance. E98-0011 SEPA Checklist - Nextel 372 Corporate Drive May 26, 1998 • Plants • • No anticipated impact. Applicants have proposed a landscaping screen to be installed around the base of the monopole. • Animals No animals found in the area. No threatened or endangered species known in area. The site is adjacent to the Tukwila Pond, which provides a habitat for a variety of birds and small mammals. • Energy/Natural Resources Electricity will run electronic equipment and telephone services will be provided. Batteries are primary backup if power failure occurs. All equipment will comply with applicable state energy codes. • Environmental Health No significant health impacts have been identified from proposed technology operating at 806-821 and 851-866 megahertz (MHz). Health impacts of telecommunication facilities are exempt from environmental review. Minor traffic and construction noise will occur during construction period. No other significant noise will be generated by project. Any noise generated during construction or operation of the facility must comply with Tukwila's Noise Ordinance (TMC 8.22). • Land/Shoreline Use Proposed development is located in the Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) zone. Surrounding uses are primarily office, retail and distribution. The proposed monopole is within the 115 foot height limit in the TUC zone. No demolition of structures is proposed. The proposal must also obtain approval of a Conditional Use Permit (TMC 18.64). • Housing No housing is proposed nor will development reduce housing. • Aesthetics The proposed monopole, with attached antennae, will be approximately 102 feet tall. The monopole will eventually accommodate additional antennae that will make the total height of the monopole at 115 feet tall. The operating equipment will be located in an existing structure immediately adjacent to the proposed monopole. E98-0011 SEPA Checklist - Nextel 372 Corporate Drive May 26, 1998 • Light and Glare • • The tower will not produce significant light or glare. No off-site light or glare will be produced. • Recreation The monopole is located adjacent to the Tukwila Pond, which has passive recreation features. • Historic/Cultural Preservation No known places or landmarks. • Transportation The location for the monopole is within a potential right-of-way for S. 168th Street that has been identified by the City of Tukwila in their 1998-2003 Capital Improvement Plan (Project 84-RW08), in support of Comprehensive Plan Policy 1.10.10, 10.2.2, 10.3.2 and 13.2.1. One vehicle trip per month is anticipated for service and maintenance. • Public Services Proposed development will not impact or require specific public services. • Utilities The facility will be served by electric and telephone services. In support of the City's Comprehensive Plan concerning non city -owned utilities (Policy 12.1.36), the facility should be designed to include the ability of other service providers to locate antennae on the monopole. Recommendations: MDNS, with two conditions: 1. The applicant shall design the monopole and supporting infrastructure to support at least one separate antennae array, for future collocation by other telephone service providers. 2. The monopole and support facility will have to be moved to an area outside of the potential right-of-way for S. 168th street. • • City of Tukwila Department of Community Development NOTICE OF APPLICATION DATED MAY 10, 1998 John W. Rants, Mayor Steve Lancaster, Director The following applications have been submitted to the Department of Community Development for review and decision. FILE NUMBER: APPLICANT: LOCATION: PROPOSAL: OTHER REQUIRED PERMITS: SEPA checklist (E98-0011) Development Permit L98-0024 (Conditional Use Permit), Nextel 372 Corporate Drive North Installation of up to 12 antennae mounted on to a 115 foot monopole, with accompanying operating equipment located in a building immediately adjacent to the monopole These files are available for review at the Department of Community Development, 6300 Southcenter Blvd., #100, Tukwila, WA. Please call (206) 431-3670 to ensure that the file(s) will be available. OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT You can submit comments on this application. You must submit your comments in writing to the Department of Community Development by 5:00 p.m. on June 1, 1998. This matter is also scheduled for a public hearing on June 25, 1998. If you are interested in attending the hearing, please contact.the Department at (206) 431-3670 to ensure that the hearing is still scheduled for this date. If you cannot submit comments in writing by the cutoff date indicated above, you may still appear at the hearing and give your comments on the proposal before the Planning Commission. If you have questions about this proposal contact Michael Jenkins, the Planner in charge of this file. Anyone who submits written comments will become parties of record and will be notified of any decision on this project. APPEALS You may request a copy of any decision or obtain information on your appeal rights by contacting the Department at 431-3670. A decision from the Planning Commission may be appealed to the City Council. The Department will provide you with information on appeals if you are interested. 6.300 .Sn,,th( Pn%OT Rn!lIPVAT/I Cipro itlnn • T, 1.• TAI nhln,.r ... 1)01 00 - 1,111u ie r 'IL •711 _ r___ inncI .n . -.. , - AFFIDAVIT I, Weindl JU 0 Notice of Public Hearing O Notice of Public Meeting ElBoard of Adjustment Agenda Packet OBoard of Appeals Agenda Packet OPlanning Commission Agenda Packet 0 Short Subdivision Agenda Packet O Notice of Application for Shoreline Management Permit 0 Shoreline Management Permit OF DISTRIBUTION hereby declare that: 0 Determination of Non- significance fl Mitigated Determination of Nonsignificance O Determination of Significance and Scoping Notice O Notice of Action 0 Official Notice Otheit\ 1 cL k plieLIhMA Other was mailed to each of the following addresses on Name of Project Nex+d I File Number LAO -0024 Signature 5-3-9S/ . April 28, 1998 • City of Tukwila John W. Rants, Mayor Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director NOTICE OF COMPLETE APPLICATION Michael Lyons D. Garvey and Associates 1700 Westlake Ave N., Suite 420 Seattle, WA 98109 RE: Application for an Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio (ESMR) Base Station, 372 Corporate Drive North (L98-0024). Dear Mr. Lyons: Your application, on behalf of Nextel, for an Enhanced Specialized Mobile Radio (ESMR) Base Station, 372 Corporate Drive North, has been found to be complete on April 28, 1998 for the purposes of meeting state mandated time requirements. The project has been assigned to Michael Jenkins and is tentatively scheduled for a public hearing before the Planning Commission on June 25, 1998. The next step is for you to install the notice board on the site within 14 days of the date of this letter. You received information on how to install the sign with your application packet. If you need another set of those instructions, you may obtain them at the Department of Community Development (DCD). Also, you must obtain a laminated copy of the Notice of Application to post on the board. This notice is also available at DCD. After installing the sign with the laminated notice, you need to return the signed Affidavit of Posting to the our office. This determination of complete application does not preclude the ability of the City to require that you submit additional plans or information, if in our estimation such information is necessary to ensure the project meets the substantive requirements of the City or to complete the review process. I will be contacting you soon to discuss this project. If you wish to speak to me sooner, feel free to call me at 206-431-3685. Sincerely, «1. Michael Jenkins Assistant Planner cc: Reviewing City Departments 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665 • • MEMORANDUM TO: Jack Pace, File FROM: Michael Jenkins DATE: April 23, 1998 RE: Proposed location of Nextel Monopole The following is a list of locations within a mile of the proposed Nextel Monopole at 372 Corporate Drive, immediately south of the Tukwila Pond, that could potentially accommodate a co -location of Nextel Antennae in lieu of a new monopole: Location: 566B Industry Drive Distance: Approximately 1/2 mile Cellular Carrier: US West Height: 78 feet File: 91 -4 -CUP Location: S. 158/Nelsen Place Distance: Approximately 1 mile Cellular Carrier: Cellular One Height: 100 feet File: 90 -1 -CUP Location: 15901 West Valley Highway Distance: Approximately 1 mile Use: Embassy Suites Hotel Height: Approximately 90 feet • CONVERSATION RECORD J",TE: MON TUE.Li) .TNU FRI SAT SUN TIME:/2.._.' lZ•• �7�' P.M. ` ,rPy: ❑ Visit ❑ Conference in -Telephone- OIncoming e"Outgoing N imo of porson(s) contacted or in contactAth you: U ._laeization (office, dept., bureau, etc.) rte• Cs" -2 ".rf:ation o: Visit/Conference: FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Telephone No.: - 2-1b - 3 3 5 / SUP:1'IIARY: ,sic 1 K ,z,„ co cA,--1- ec-`c_A !{Af•c cc a , >� ' ? eryC� it -e--€114,'° p'4"1•01 , � 7 /-F. e.--- /I f of O` Q.. - -' ( A 7/ / t� GQ !� � i �� c'C�Q� �7 L17 C C �L-- LC.�j (/ ��/ �t f L!/ .ri/1t - L � C /" 2 G !t ,LO e^•l�-t G� „ �� c. e•V:. -C LSC 4:-t LI 6'0.(e e (d{e (-: 9 ��-�!/ 4,4?, vcQ' ignc turei Title: Date: CITY D.-LIKWILA Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Telephone: (206) 431-3670 RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA PERMIT CENTER SEPA APPLICATION CHECKLIST FOR STAFF USE ONL Y Planner: File Number: E ,(2,- (w l Receipt Number: Cross-reference files: p 1 g� Doi b Applicant notified of incomplete application: Applicantnotified of complete application: Notice of application: issued: . A. NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Nextel Communications, Quasimoto/Southcenter Corporate Square (WA0234-3) B. LOCATIONOF.PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT:(address and accessorspeke! number(s)) 372 Corporate' Drive N., Tukwila, Washington 98188 Parcel 1: 2623049075 Quarter: SE Section: 26 Township: 23N Range: 4E (This information may be found on your tax statement) C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Installation of a 115 -ft. communications tower and installation of associated radio equipment inside an existing storage building. D. APPLICANT: NAME: Michael S. Lyons, D. Garvey Corporation for Nextel Communications ADDRESS: 1700 Westlake Avenue N., Suite 420, Seattle, Washington 98109 PHONE: SIGNATURE: 5. L 1ore- 706-716-3353 DATE: • • SEPA CHECKLIST City of Tukwila A. BACKGROUND 1. Name of proposed project, if applicable: Nextel Communications ESMR Facility: Quasimoto/Southcenter Corporate Square (WA0234-3). 2. Name of applicant: Nextel Communications 3. Address and phone number of applicant and contact person: Applicant: Contact Person: Nextel Communications 1750 112th Avenue NE, Suite C-100 Bellevue, WA 98004 (425) 452-7400 Michael Lyons D. Garvey Corporation 1700 Westlake Avenue N., Suite 420 Seattle, WA 98109 (206) 216-3353 4. Date checklist prepared: March 31, 1998 5. Agency requesting checklist: City of Tukwila, Washington Department of Community Development 6. Proposed timing or schedule for completion of the proposal (includes phasing if applicable): Summer 1998 7. Do you have any plans for future additions, expansion, or further activity related to or connected with this proposal? If yes, explain: The facility may be expanded in the future to include up to three (3) omni -directional (whip) antennas. Future expansion may also include the installation of one (1) microwave dish. The location of all future expansion equipment is specified on the attached project plans (Attachment 10). There is no anticipated change to the existing storage building that would house the associated radio equipment. Expansion of the facility is not a certainty, but is dependent upon customer demand and/or technological change. RECEIVED CITY OF TUKWILA 1 PERMIT CENTE{- • • 8. List any environmental information you know about that has been prepared or will be prepared, directly related to this proposal: None. However, an Environmental Checklist was prepared by the City of Tukwila and a DNS issued, May 1,1997 for Tukwila Pond Park Project, adjacent to this site. 9. Do you know whether applications are pending for governmental approvals of other proposals directly affecting the property covered by your proposal? If yes, explain: None known. 10. List any government approvals or permits that will be needed for your proposal, if known. Federal Aviation Administration: Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration Federal Communications Commission: Site Filing and Approval 11. Give a brief, complete description of your proposal, including the proposed uses and the size of the project and site. There are several questions later in this checklist that ask you to describe certain aspects of your proposal. You do not need to repeat those answers on this page. (Lead agencies may modify this form to include additional specific information on project description.) Please see Attachment 6. 12. Location of the proposal. Give sufficient information for a person to understand the precise location of your proposed project, including a street address, if any, and section, township, and range, if known. If a proposal would occur over a range of area, provide the range or boundaries of the site(s). Provide a legal description, site plan, vicinity map, and topographic map, if reasonably available. While you should submit any plans required by the agency, you are not required to duplicate maps or detailed plans submitted with any permit applications related to this checklist. a. Address: 372 Corporate Drive, N., Tukwila, WA 98188 b. Section: 26 Township: 23N Range: 4E c. Tax Parcel Number: 2623049075 d. Legal Description: Please see Attachment 3 B. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 1. EARTH 2 • • a. General description of the site (circle one): flat, rolling, hilly, steep slopes, mountainous, other. b. What is the steepest slope on the site (approximate percent slope)? The site area is generally level. c. What general types of soils are found on the site (for example, clay, sand, gravel, peat, muck)? If you know the classification of agricultural soils, specify them and note any prime farmland. Glacial till. d. Are there surface indications or history of unstable soils in the immediate vicinity? If so, describe. None known. e. Describe the purpose, type, and approximate quantities of any filling or grading proposed. Indicate source of fill. N/A f. Could erosion occur as a result of clearing, construction, or use? If so, generally describe. No. g. About what percent of the site will be covered with impervious surfaces after project construction (for example, asphalt or buildings)? Same as existing. h. Proposed measures to reduce or control erosion, or other impacts to the earth, if any: None. 2. AIR a. What types of emissions to the air would result from the proposal (i.e., dust, automobile, odors, industrial wood smoke) during construction, and when the project is completed. If any, generally describe and give approximate quantities if known. Small quantities of dust and vehicular emissions may be produced during the one-month construction period. b. Are there any off-site sources of emissions or odor that may affect your proposal? If so, generally describe. No. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control emissions or other impacts to air, if any: None. 3. WATER a. Surface: 1) Is there any surface water body on or in the immediate vicinity of the site (including year-round and seasonal streams, saltwater, lakes, ponds, wetlands)? If yes, describe type and provide names. If appropriate, state what stream or river into which it flows. Situated to the north of the proposed site is the Tukwila Pond property, which is approximately 25 acres in total size with an approximate 15 -acre open water pond, Tukwila Pond. However, the proposed project would cause no impact to the pond. 2) Will the project require any work over, in or adjacent to (within 200 feet) the described waters? If yes, please describe and attach available plans. The proposed project would be installed on an existing asphalt area. The proposed project would pose no impact to the Tukwila Pond and the "adjacent" wetlands to the north of the site. 3) Estimate the amount of fill and dredge material that would be placed in or removed from surface waters or wetlands and indicate the area of the site that would be affected. Indicate the source of fill material. N/A 4) Will the proposal require surface water withdrawals or diversions? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities, if known. No. 5) Does the proposal lie within a 100 -year floodplain? If so, note floodplain location on the site plan. No. 6) Does the proposal involve any discharges of waste materials to surface waters? If so, describe the type of waste and anticipated volume of discharge. 4 • • No. b. Ground: 1) Will groundwater be withdrawn, or will water be discharged to groundwater? Give general description, purpose, and approximate quantities of withdrawals or discharges, if known. No. 2) Describe waste material that will be discharged into the ground from septic tanks or other sources, if any (for example: Domestic sewage; industrial, containing the following chemicals...; agricultural, etc.). Describe the general size of the system, the number of such systems, the number of houses to be served (if applicable), or the number of animals or humans the system(s) is/are expected to serve. N/A c. Water Runoff (including stormwater): 1) Describe the source of runoff (including stormwater) and method of collection and disposal, if any (include quantities, if known). Where will this water flow? Will this water flow into other waters? If so, describe. N/A 2) Could waste materials enter ground or surface waters? If so, generally describe. No. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control surface, ground and runoff water impacts, if any: N/A 4. PLANTS a. Check or circle types of vegetation found on the site: X deciduous trees: alder, maple, aspen; other X evergreen trees: fir, cedar, pine; other X shrubs X grass pasture crops or grain • • wet soil plants: cattail, buttercup, bulrush, skunk cabbage; other: water plants: water lily, eelgrass, milfoil; other: other types of vegetation: b. What kind and amount of vegetation will be removed or altered? None c. List threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site. None known. d. Proposed landscaping, use of native plants, or other measures to preserve or enhance vegetation on the site, if any: Proposed 6' high evergreen tree landscaping around the fenced perimeter of the tower base. 5. ANIMALS a. Circle any birds and animals that have been observed on or near the site, or that are known to be on or near the site: birds: hawk, heron, eagle, songbirds; other: geese mammals: deer, bear, elk, beaver; other fish: bass, salmon, trout, herring, shellfish; other Please refer to Tukwila Pond Wildlife Utilization and Habitat Evaluation, Watershed Dynamics, Inc., 1994 for a list of waterfowl, passerine birds and others using the Tukwila Pond. b. List any threatened or endangered species known to be on or near the site: None known. c. Is the site part of a migration route? If so, explain. Not known. d. Proposed measures to preserve or enhance wildlife, if any: None. 6. ENERGY AND NATURAL RESOURCES a. What kinds of energy (electrical, natural gas, wood stove, solar) will be used to meet the completed project's energy needs? Describe whether it will be used for heating, manufacturing, etc. 6 • • Electricity will be used to run electronic switching equipment, lighting and air conditioners. Telephone service will be required for the electronic equipment. b. Would your project affect the potential use of solar energy by adjacent properties? If so, generally describe. No. c. What kinds of energy conservation features are included in the plans of this proposal? List other proposed measures to reduce or control energy impacts, if any: All equipment will conform to applicable energy codes. 7. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH a. Are there any environmental health hazards, including exposure to toxic chemicals, risk of fire and explosion, spill, or hazardous waste, that could occur as a result of this proposal? If so, describe. No. The facility will operate at 806 to 821 and 851 to 866 Megahertz (MHz). Transmissions will be low power (average of 50 watts per channel) with a maximum of twenty channels per antenna. As such, the transmissions will be an average of less than 1% of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard set forth in IEEE/ANSI C95.1-1992, of 567.3 microwatts per square centimeter. 1. Describe special emergency services that might be required. None. The facility would be remotely monitored for fire, smoke, intrusion and AC power failure by Nextel's 24-hour electronic monitoring system. 2. Proposed measures to reduce or control environmental health hazards, if any: None. b. Noise 1. What types of noise exist in the area which may affect your project (for example: traffic, equipment operation, other)? None. 2. What types and levels of noise would be created by or associated with the project on a short term or a long-term 7 basis (for example: traffic, construction, operation, other)? Indicate what hours noise would come from the site. Noise related to construction activities would be generated during normal business hours throughout the one-month construction period. The proposed facility generates no sounds other than low volume, intermittent noise from the air conditioning units in the equipment shelter. These units will comply with State and local noise standards. 3. Proposed measures to reduce or control noise impacts, if any: None. 8. LAND AND SHORELINE USE a. What is the current use of the site and adjacent properties? The current use of the site is an office building. The surrounding land uses are as follows: North: Railroad track, open space. South: Parking lots, office buildings. East: Bon Marche Home Furnishings Clearance Store receiving dock (truck loading/unloading). West: Office buildings, parking lots, and Andover Park West. Wholesalers and computer warehousing across Andover Park West. b. Has the site been used for agriculture? If so, describe. No. c. Describe any structures on the site. Existing structures on site: office building, parking lot, storage building. d. Will any structures be demolished? If so, what? No existing structures will be demolished. e. What is the current zoning classification of the site? Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) District. f. What is the current comprehensive plan designation of the site? Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) District. g. If applicable, what is the current shoreline master program designation of the site? 8 • • N/A h. Has any part of the site been classified an "environmentally sensitive" area? If so, specify. No. i. Approximately how many people would reside or work in the completed project? None. The site will be unmanned. One employee will provide maintenance visits to the site approximately once per month. Approximately how many people would the completed project displace? None. k. Proposed measures to avoid or reduce displacement impacts, if any: None. 1 Proposed measures to ensure the proposal is compatible with existing and projected land uses and plans, if any: Please see Attachments 6 and 7. 9. HOUSING a. Approximately how many units will be provided, if any? Indicate whether be high, middle, or low-income housing. None. b. Approximately how many units, if any, would be eliminated? Indicate whether high, middle, or low-income housing. None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control housing impacts, if any: N/A 10. AESTHETICS a. What is the tallest height of any proposed structure(s), not including antennas; what is the principal exterior building material(s) proposed? The facility will include a 100' monopole with panel antennas for an overall height of 102'. The tallest height of the proposed communications tower installation (with future omni antennas) is 115' 6" including the antennas mounted on top of a 100' monopole. The proposed radio equipment would be placed within an existing storage building and, therefore, would not be visible to the public. b. What views in the immediate vicinity would be altered or obstructed? None. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control aesthetic impacts, if any: The proposed installation has been designed to pose the least amount of visual impact to the area as technically possible. The tower is proposed at the minimum height necessary to meet the radio coverage objectives. Reducing the height of the proposed tower may create the need for additional towers in he immediate area. The proposed radio equipment would be placed within an existing storage building and therefore, would be completely screened from public view. 11. LIGHT AND GLARE a. What type of light or glare will the proposal produce? What time of day would it mainly occur? None. b. Could light or glare from the finished project be a safety hazard, interfere with views? No. c. What existing off-site sources of light or glare may affect your proposal? None. d. Proposed measures to reduce or control light and glare impacts, if any: None. 12. RECREATION a. What designated and informal recreational opportunities are in the immediate vicinity? The newly constructed Tukwila Pond Park is situated Northeast of the site. b. Would the proposed project displace any existing recreational uses? If so, describe. No. 10 • • c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts on recreation, including recreation opportunities to be provided by the project or applicant, if any: None. 13. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION a. Are there any places or objects listed on, proposed for, national, state, or local preservation registers known to be on or next to the site. If so, generally describe: None known. b. Generally describe any landmarks, or evidence of historic, archeological, scientific, or cultural importance known to be on or next to the site. None known. c. Proposed measures to reduce or control impacts, if any: None. 14. TRANSPORTATION a. Identify public streets and highways serving the site, and describe proposed access to the existing street system. Show on site plans, if any. Access to the site would be provided from Andover Park West. Please see project plans (Attachment 10) for further detail. b. Is the site currently served by public transit? If not, what is the approximate distance to the nearest transit stop? N/A c. How many parking spaces would the completed project have? How many would the project eliminate? None is proposed. None would be eliminated. d. Will the proposal require any new roads or streets, or improvements to existing roads or streets, not including driveways? If so, generally describe (indicate whether public or private). No. e. Will the project use (or occur in the immediate vicinity of) water, or air transportation? If so, generally describe. No. 11 f. How many vehicular trips per day would be generated by the completed project? If known, indicate when peak volumes would occur. There will be one visit per month for routine maintenance of the facility. Visits would occur during normal business hours. g. Proposed measures to reduce or control transportation impacts, if any: None. 15. PUBLIC SERVICES a. Would the project result in an increased need for public services (for example: fire protection, police protection, health care, schools, other)? If so, generally describe. No. b. Proposed measures to reduce or control direct impacts on public services, if any. None. 16. UTILITIES a. Circle utilities available at the site: electricity, natural gas, water, refuse service, telephone, sanitary sewer, septic system, other: Electricity and telephone service are available at the site. b. Describe the utilities that are proposed for the project, the utility providing the service, and the general construction activities on the site or in the immediate vicinity which might be needed. Electricity (Puget Sound Energy) and telephone service (US West) are provided at the site. C. SIGNATURE The above answers are true and complete to the best of my knowledge. I understand that the lead agency is relying on them to make its decision. Signature: Michael S. Lyons Date Submitted: 12 ........ 10.1.1. 91.1 FOCA 3. Cr N 613 9 P N 41.11(10N00.91 901 IOP M 110911 A 41 04 . 061.... 01991011 9 401061 0.644 _ y 9a 6 049'11• 414 tir i�1 MI MCC 1,4 ort noY419.0 . CIF Y. .•6m00.69. 10 w'r nM: wpm. 11/311084 AA008 .a .1'X1 TS A0 O MIf T TO MI 4 1.0 nlo. M41wool • PSA. N AUR N49�ORI.3 1.0001 A rat TO 114 00NL A4. 114 'vlm.mi. ROC 130 CI . MC.•amr•1111 1.073.'.1• IC 1E001.10 CT 0:101.39..0 '• >.'4"'.:6e1�.. ,se. .00O]i': woo or llr is liTo 00 11 SLITSa 3..1310000. Ort 00 MTM-i16.•O00 1i0(Of1E •-4CS1115 99099 a1'11.•D9w40r 1493. A 19 09040 0a1IMOK w9..vu 11,44 Pm LEGAL DESCRIPTION MOSSO 01 0.09469S 361 91110 3.0. vm61I31 fi•16..y..114 901 TRJ 904) 443-079 COCCI. 41 01)91 CONSULTANT TENT NEirliNksim MI Ain, Aim SITE NAME QUASIMOTO / SOUTHCENTER CORPORATE SQUARE SITE NUMBED WA0234-3 06 M: Mgt 9rvo./s01m.P m9. A 1. onones. 041. 1cc 9 g.� C. . M Mar. ..06 11 NMI Il 9 1114 O. NM 1'111 41 C010. 6 C.04Cm 0.1 41.91 al ret 9.R •A Ino 11. •6C. N. 49. 40 499 41401 0400.1 T9 CM 1111.1.1 71% of 11444 D.r® 1391 04140. ¢113818 TORT ret fO..110414 s 410334.1•1 . 06 1..7 SAW694 11OIICLIrt TIC bi•0911• P 100000.0..OMR 14 1.0441 T0911 9.11.011 FO 1400 4•44.1 . y fief -ml °Mir auto 031110wn 61.040 119116 rr. 101140: PR9a 1311.8rt. 1031 tab CAC. 1D: 40 91-1113 1 Y0 41 111-191 4. AS 00460 63: 301 Ira 101 PROJECT SUMMARY .at 4-2 04141 40166. OCT. SHEET INDEX TM EOUOYRM' PARTIES 0REBY APPR0.4 ARD ACCEPT <A `rEd"V.r1a k- (1113 Sr Mn 0*. 0 IT1o. 1191. c4 rw4.f 1114. P mn 11 6 `N`i EMU. RUE wa 9rt Z 00 02.11.16 111.1411 tarn re TO. 114. WO 1061/9 isa. RAT Tr 04 10. Ya m .mn 0 •. '•m (:).- .Tort 0. 110 4941410.1 04 0716. Tr CR r6 ® 0w- 0711013 4 10•1C emus 464.r< 1071 Or re Q m.•s. 410 411 mm 4 ae,._. ..11'on .(!)- 4!) 071m 49 row 00 44:.. m.1.1 ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS ........ 10.1.1. 91.1 FOCA 3. Cr N 613 9 P N 41.11(10N00.91 901 IOP M 110911 A 41 04 . 061.... 01991011 9 401061 0.644 _ y 9a 6 049'11• 414 tir i�1 MI MCC 1,4 ort noY419.0 . CIF Y. .•6m00.69. 10 w'r nM: wpm. 11/311084 AA008 .a .1'X1 TS A0 O MIf T TO MI 4 1.0 nlo. M41wool • PSA. N AUR N49�ORI.3 1.0001 A rat TO 114 00NL A4. 114 'vlm.mi. ROC 130 CI . MC.•amr•1111 1.073.'.1• IC 1E001.10 CT 0:101.39..0 '• >.'4"'.:6e1�.. ,se. .00O]i': woo or llr is liTo 00 11 SLITSa 3..1310000. Ort 00 MTM-i16.•O00 1i0(Of1E •-4CS1115 99099 a1'11.•D9w40r 1493. A 19 09040 0a1IMOK w9..vu 11,44 Pm LEGAL DESCRIPTION MOSSO 01 0.09469S 361 91110 3.0. vm61I31 fi•16..y..114 901 TRJ 904) 443-079 COCCI. 41 01)91 CONSULTANT TENT NEirliNksim MI Ain, Aim SITE NAME QUASIMOTO / SOUTHCENTER CORPORATE SQUARE SITE NUMBED WA0234-3 06 M: Mgt 9rvo./s01m.P m9. A 1. onones. 041. 1cc 9 g.� C. . M Mar. ..06 11 NMI Il 9 1114 O. NM 1'111 41 C010. 6 C.04Cm 0.1 41.91 al ret 9.R •A Ino 11. •6C. N. 49. 40 499 41401 0400.1 T9 CM 1111.1.1 71% of 11444 D.r® 1391 04140. ¢113818 TORT ret fO..110414 s 410334.1•1 . 06 1..7 SAW694 11OIICLIrt TIC bi•0911• P 100000.0..OMR 14 1.0441 T0911 9.11.011 FO 1400 4•44.1 . y fief -ml °Mir auto 031110wn 61.040 119116 rr. 101140: PR9a 1311.8rt. 1031 tab CAC. 1D: 40 91-1113 1 Y0 41 111-191 4. AS 00460 63: 301 Ira 101 PROJECT SUMMARY .at 4-2 04141 40166. OCT. SHEET INDEX TM EOUOYRM' PARTIES 0REBY APPR0.4 ARD ACCEPT fFMACT.ST 1. am A 1-A 4 N 1OA.mm..19...141 Y M 109 IWKtM. 4 1. AA 74). 06 06 .Y o[ryl 4 TO A•0001 4.ln(.. _ 1•. 6.43 a• Co N. 5.,'0311*[ =Coat.10146n li 0411.6.>s 419144 nN N lM9 11:61 'N® 116 1190, Mr: N v �1P M N 6611 04C• M O.... (1113 Sr Mn 0*. 0 IT1o. 1191. c4 rw4.f 1114. P mn 11 6 `N`i EMU. RUE wa 9rt tet •rt tort tarn VICINITY MAP .....1.. ........ 10.1.1. 91.1 FOCA 3. Cr N 613 9 P N 41.11(10N00.91 901 IOP M 110911 A 41 04 . 061.... 01991011 9 401061 0.644 _ y 9a 6 049'11• 414 tir i�1 MI MCC 1,4 ort noY419.0 . CIF Y. .•6m00.69. 10 w'r nM: wpm. 11/311084 AA008 .a .1'X1 TS A0 O MIf T TO MI 4 1.0 nlo. M41wool • PSA. N AUR N49�ORI.3 1.0001 A rat TO 114 00NL A4. 114 'vlm.mi. ROC 130 CI . MC.•amr•1111 1.073.'.1• IC 1E001.10 CT 0:101.39..0 '• >.'4"'.:6e1�.. ,se. .00O]i': woo or llr is liTo 00 11 SLITSa 3..1310000. Ort 00 MTM-i16.•O00 1i0(Of1E •-4CS1115 99099 a1'11.•D9w40r 1493. A 19 09040 0a1IMOK w9..vu 11,44 Pm LEGAL DESCRIPTION MOSSO 01 0.09469S 361 91110 3.0. vm61I31 fi•16..y..114 901 TRJ 904) 443-079 COCCI. 41 01)91 CONSULTANT TENT NEirliNksim MI Ain, Aim SITE NAME QUASIMOTO / SOUTHCENTER CORPORATE SQUARE SITE NUMBED WA0234-3 06 M: Mgt 9rvo./s01m.P m9. A 1. onones. 041. 1cc 9 g.� C. . M Mar. ..06 11 NMI Il 9 1114 O. NM 1'111 41 C010. 6 C.04Cm 0.1 41.91 al ret 9.R •A Ino 11. •6C. N. 49. 40 499 41401 0400.1 T9 CM 1111.1.1 71% of 11444 D.r® 1391 04140. ¢113818 TORT ret fO..110414 s 410334.1•1 . 06 1..7 SAW694 11OIICLIrt TIC bi•0911• P 100000.0..OMR 14 1.0441 T0911 9.11.011 FO 1400 4•44.1 . y fief -ml °Mir auto 031110wn 61.040 119116 rr. 101140: PR9a 1311.8rt. 1031 tab CAC. 1D: 40 91-1113 1 Y0 41 111-191 4. AS 00460 63: 301 Ira 101 PROJECT SUMMARY .at 4-2 04141 40166. OCT. SHEET INDEX TM EOUOYRM' PARTIES 0REBY APPR0.4 ARD ACCEPT TIES( 0001MERIS AND AUTHORIZE 111E CONTRACTOR 10 PROCEED WITH TRE CORStRUCtlOrl DESCRIED MERCK All C06TR1CTON DOCUYCATS ARE MEC. TO NEVE. BY 1M LOCM B2ICOC DEPARTMENT AND NO GRIEFS OR MODIFICATIONS TREY MAY MOOSE. UNOIORD/OWNER OATS EMU. RUE APPROVALS NEM' 1750 112th AVENUE N.E. 5017E C-100 BELLEWE. WASNIN670N 98004 425-452-7400 ••t I n unmet mn1R Imo-- e-. 9. - 941 MC T-1 nc int /r.n rn cr rn TITMr,wu%rkr,w.Ar. v.nT -In.wn.n PLANT LIST TREES 5111484 OUANT1(4 BOTANICAL NAME COMMON NAME 042E CONOIRON TP 12 THUJA OCCIDENTALIS GENERAL NOTES AMERICAN ARBORVITAE 'EMERALD GREEN' 6' B&0 I. ALL WORN SHALL 8E PERFORMED BY PERSONS FAMILIAR NTH 1N15 Nw0 OF WORN AND UNDER THE SUPERIISION OF A OLAUVIEO FORM04 2. PUW1 LOCATIONS ON P1µ ARE OKRIJ MAIC AND MA1 8E SUBJECT TO ARRISIMENT w THE FIELD 81 1AN0SCAPE CONTRACTOR 3. PUNT TREES AND SHRUBS OPRCHT AN0 FACE TO ONE TIE BEST 00704 WNCE OR RELATIONSHIP TO AOJACENT STRUCTURES DEMI. 50IL MUM TO BE A WV TOPSOIL Rc.UDONC SANDY SOIL ANO HIpiY ORGANO COMPOST. 5. RANT TREES AID STARE A5 SIOWN IN DETAIL 6. RAKE SOIL. SURFACE SMOOTH MD FREE FRO& ALL ROCKS, SOIL LUMPS. S(IC1(5. ANO OTHER DELETERIOUS LATERALS. 7. AFTER PUNTING. COVER ALL AREAS MITI ma (3) INCHES OF ONE 64RN WACH. 8. QIAA44IEE ALL PLANT IUTERAL FOR A PERIW OF ONE YEAR AFTER ACCEPTANCE 8T OWNER. EA0 •PLANT 50 THAT TOP OF ROOT BALL 15 EVEN NTN 174E FW15860 LAUDE • PAwt ALL CUTS OVER 1' DIA NAROYN00 STAKE 2' X 2' 5117 AT APPROXIMATELY 70° DRIVEN (MIN IB') FIRMLY 4410 SLBORAOE PRIOR BACKF 2O STRAND .LING 2 STRAND TNSTED 12 MACE RUB. VIRE ENCASED 2 1' 6MA. 0 RUBBER HOSE AT 1/2 TREE HEIGHT FORM SAUCER NTH I 1111111,11i MULCH 3' CONRNUOUS RIM 1(&,, 1 11 SPECIFIED PLANRNG W% �I�11_ WATER Ne TAMP TO -••�II II IE REMOVE MR POCKETS .,-111�I1-, 2 X BALL DIA. L TREE PLANTING - ANGLE STAKE 187 (MW ) L TRUNK MT SCALE: NOT TO SCALE 11111111111111111 iiiiiiii 1 NE.1TEL® 1750 112611 AVENUE N.E. SUITE C-100 BELLEVUE. WASHINGTON 98004 425-452-7400 MOO MI wwW MOO MO, SO MARDED WE PIAN sum: ..•a YWaiIYAMIIPIOIa r. MIA WAM3 1 416 mom 372 CORPORATE ORM N. TUKWRAL WA 98188 U.S.A. Isea mu LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND CITYDET,OF-TUKWEIVED° S 1 fm MFR.. 4 A In r7 1 L-1 PEgMIT MOO I nuc wm[u ... mco Id .1 00661 OR v ua[ma.o n.m Dunt r ary.. /06 ago ti tii rw. wMVO= 107060306 4.6606 00 curs n[ .Iwn; an OM o ucom.o nw .n wn 10 at IOU= .7 UI .o r+uc wra 9 7lno.1022 MIDI MC) ILONA T_.nLmro It6116 P6104 I i ), "o�M _;_66_ . ms �If i I i 1 rmnc tum r 4 1 • rJ. ^I g: I. �Y..�.\P I I E sl 11 'I Dant w .orrt. 01.01106 DaSISK 0.60•4 ARIA I I i 11 1 1 I I J I it m[ s,w 6.1.0,66i 00 CI 666 NWT Aul I � NEaTEL' 1750 112th AVENUE N.E. SUITE C -I00 BELLEVUE. WASKNGTON 98004 425-452-7400 it 010194a m ruw • SfxL r. b' -O 2 1 - wA021144 so mom In CO1IgI1ATC OSINC nrlwA. w fe.ee USA 940 M[ OVERALL SITE PLAN 11‘1, mentO A-0 J (> Ctm.r:,c 0313 MP. (.01 ODOM .) 0:343A Oa COMM. a W M. Of NOM TT) 000.0014/401.0033..3100 AV 13063•.os u.r.Mr Ino MOW RI 1130110010 .oM ..o.� m ma TM mCi \ 4,4:4 sl was .�,�'.,., .:s} fail *i', :c��" "ns 3 a " '1 ° TVVV-1 } �� :�..,� X55,5 �:3 %�^�'ci,�pv;. j 14 R.,4 � #"� Gaya }`` 101))101 Carona .mai nc roMx 7710 /ACTON .'," ye- 1•-017 1 I I I ill 0.1 Of .a•70.6 mm 41 1r-� ILM 1 r smart ATM I I 01'4 DOM 1'-f ... I.Cd Ilk I ......... . 101.3 300M11.0A. y • II aID k =0 00.333 POO I--�r.m. ma Me MD GAM e IIS p 1113114 MOM CMM ./...............'..'. IIIw mown M. 9 MOO.Iart% III \ v I I I 1. .in !f�" `. 131 Of D0136301 1 130 DOJO III:• I I..oa ((lN) r ..-r a.-.. Mman ONf.c aw a. KM° woo; sa® 00.3E .n1.�O..n04SU < KM MOT wmo ----------1'< 1.a ..,001 m mMvo INTI a 13003110103 mnc 013134 ora M. MU DOM MIMI TIM OFTROT 330 fp 01 MOWN. ID. MA TIMM fill D3 11 GCMG oMw 0.330r1, 4 / .1 1 011Ae01O SITE .LAM .,". M- .•-c 1 7 1750 112th AVENUE N.E. SUITE C-100 BELLEVUE. WASHINGTON 98004 425-457-7400 1-� 011110101KLIICIIIII COW ID --- i 777 COSP081TC ENTIWIE N. flJI A - 88188 U.S.A. Ma Mg ENLARGED SITE PLAN SITE SECTION LIMO .r A-1 LI N iam�O n r.,..`' --1 . � a.o 44NNJJtt ',:-. - m a /1/1114 ...T.... ..1.A _ . yr t mm ort.. . (A 00 or ...r.`'..r� 1661 11 ota 0,10d pyN. 0091.1 (1w..r.(1.1 1. 0 010 000 01 09 W•• W ua m••• :u1..1Z0 • 1U110 • . 9.9101•1 900•1 Y 191 01 NQ O® 10001 Y 4 a =' • AMMO YOUR RAN f-1 • / QRt MIS 0 llatoes Mt . 900 9000 00 III 901 1:161010 MR 000 SfarOY ASO 010109 0 91 914101ow coeccros 10:6 r 0001 90.101 10 m�w.rn." 0 ala19000.11911 0100 C00191 191 0000 0191.0001 01 909 000 L ,— KIM AIR G1011:6 10.1:9. • 1-0 XV 09 009 0 011 11932 p1 on. 0 199010 Os mn.011000 — u. 1K 0100/100 ® ® .10.110•19x10 100 NM ma OW 1110 - 110090 / 10 .101 Ham Durso rt¢ 009 act Mlle r dim -tan IsrotrIrM1 Ter t. lUiM .... - . r{I i /AR mita A A A n n lam/ , .... 1Y 1I! A TI/ , 1 A5♦ NEM' 1750 11210 AVENUE N.E. SUITE C-100 OELLEWE. WASHINGTON 90004 425-152-7400 NOM 019100 9091 1099 9•110 11/ 100. rn 1000 1004 19 EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS. ANTENNA MOUNT PLAN I 11:: •i:( � �,v ay ', M a. '.Y g�k:;t:. f� 4w i Site Candidate Information Package M,a—r whe /.151 "r ti! CSR THZ:: •A IS LOB RtE issza';xn I" LOcL" irt114 �! D j,S IT'D..? w allow A 1339. 4 e 6154 V• P. R. R. cam 7:7" 7"Y#30b907 N88- os -42w 374.74. CORPORATE DRIVE N. 7907, CO77 ' 388 -.PS --420 3Z7.aS Quasimoto Southcenter Corporate Square WA0234-3 Assessor's Map Paled Number 262104007S I nwnShip ?f. Kanrc 41 Attachment 5 Pg. 1 of 1 SEPA Rules (5) If a DNS or mitigated DNS is issued under subsection (4)(a) of this section, the lead agency shall send a copy of the DNS or mitigated DNS to the department of ecology, agencies with jurisdiction, those who commented, and anyone requesting a copy. A copy of the environmental checklist need not be recirculated. [Statutory Authority: 1995 c 347 (ESHB 1724) and RCW 43.21C.110. 97-21-030 (Order 95-16), § 197-11-355, filed 10/10/97, effective 11/10/97.] WAC 197-11-360 Determination of sig-nificance (DS)/initiation of scoping. (1) If the responsible official determines that a proposal may have a probable significant adverse environmental impact, the responsible official shall prepare and issue a determination of significance (DS) substantially in the form provided in WAC 197-11-980. The DS shall describe the main elements of the proposal, the location of the site, if a site-specific proposal, and the main areas the lead agency has identified for discussion in the EIS. A copy of the environmental checklist may be attached. (2) If an agency adopts another environmental document in support of a threshold determination (Part Six), the notice of adoption (WAC 197-11-965) and the DS shall be combined or attached to each other. (3) The responsible official shall put the DS in the lead agency's file and shall commence scoping (WAC 197-11-408) by circulating copies of the DS to the applicant, agencies with jurisdiction and expertise, if any, affected tribes, and to the public. Notice shalt be given under WAC 197-11-510. The lead agency is not required to scope if the agency is adopting another environmental document for the EIS or is preparing a supplemental EIS. (4) If at any time after the issuance of a DS a proposal is changed so, in the judgment of the lead agency, there are no probable significant adverse environmental impacts, the DS shall be withdrawn and a DNS issued instead. The DNS shall be sent to all who commented on the DS. A proposal shall not be considered changed until all license applications for the proposal are revised to conform to the changes or other binding commitments made by agencies or by applicants. [Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-360, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC 197-11-390 Effect of threshold determination. (1) When the responsible official makes a threshold determination, it is final and binding on all agencies, subject to the provisions of this section and WAC 197-11-340, 197-11- 360, and Part Six. (2) The responsible official's threshold determination: (a) For proposals listed in WAC 197-11-340(2), shall not be final until fourteen days after issuance. (b) Shall not apply if another agency with jurisdiction assumes lead agency status under WAC 197-11-948. (c) Shall not apply when withdrawn by the responsible official under WAC 197-11-340 or 197-11-360. (d) Shall not apply when reversed on appeal. WAC (4/15/98) (3) Regardless of any appeals, a DS or DNS issued by the responsible official may be considered final for purposes of other agencies' planning and decision making unless subsequently changed, reversed, or withdrawn. [Statutory Authority: 1995 c 347 (ESHB 1724) and RCW 43.21C.110. 97-21-030 (Order 95-16), § 197-11-390, filed 10/10/97, effective 11/10/97. Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-390, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] PART FOUR - ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT (EIS) WAC 197-11-400 Purpose of EIS. (1) The primary purpose of an environmental impact statement is to ensure that SEPA's policies are an integral part of the ongoing programs and actions of state and local government. (2) An EIS hall provide impartial discussion of significant environmental impacts and shall inform decision makers and' the public of reasonable alternatives, including mitigation measures, that would avoid or minimize adverse impacts or enhance environmental quality. (3) Environmental impact statements shall be concise, clear, and to the point, and shall be supported by the necessary environmental analysis. The purpose of an EIS is best served by short documents containing summaries of, or reference to, technical data and by avoiding excessively detailed and overly technical information. The volume of an EIS does not bear on its adequacy. Larger documents may even hinder the decision making process. (4) The EIS process enables government agencies and interested citizens to review and comment on proposed government actions, including government approval of private projects and their environmental effects. This process is intended to assist the agencies and applicants to improve their plans and decisions, and to encourage the resolution of potential concerns or problems prior to issuing a final statement An environmental impact statement is more than a disclosure document It shall be used by agency officials in conjunction with other relevant materials and considerations to plan actions and make decisions. [Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-400, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC 197-11-402 General requirements. Agencies shall prepare environmental impact statements as follows: (1) EISs need analyze only the reasonable alternatives and probable adverse environmental impacts that are significant. Beneficial environmental impacts or other impacts may be discussed. (2) The level of detail shall be commensurate with the importance of the impact, with less important material summarized, consolidated, or referenced. (3) Discussion of insignificant impacts is not required; if included, such discussion shall be brief and limited to [Ch. 197-11 WAC—p. 17] SEPA Rules summarizing impacts or noting why more study is not warranted. (4) Description of the existing environment and the nature of environmental impacts shall be limited to the affected environment and shall be no longer than is necessary to understand the environmental consequences of the alternatives, including the proposaL (5) EISs shall be no longer than necessary to comply with SEPA and these rules. Length should relate first to potential environmental problems and then to the size or complexity of the alternatives, including the proposaL (6) The basic features and analysis of the proposal, alternatives, and impacts shall be discussed in the EIS and shall be generally understood without turning to other documents; however, an EIS is not required to include all information conceivably relevant to a proposal, and may be supplemented by appendices, reports, or other documents in the agency's record. (7) Agencies shall reduce paperwork and the accumulation of background data by adopting or incorporating by reference, existing, publicly available environmental documents, wherever possible. (8) Agencies shall prepare EISs concurrently with and coordinated with environmental studies and related surveys that may be required for the proposal under other laws, when feasible. (9) The range of alternative courses of action discussed in EISs shall encompass those to be considered by the decision maker. (10) EISs shall serve as the means of assessing the environmental impact of proposed agency action, rather than justifying decisions already made. [Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-402, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC 197-11-405 EIS types. (1) Draft and final environmental impact statements (EISs) shall be prepared; draft and final supplemental EISs may be prepared (2) A draft EIS (DEIS) allows the lead agency to consult with members of the public, affected tubes, and agencies with jurisdiction and with expertise. The lead agency shall issue a DEIS and consider comments as stated in Part Five. (3) A final EIS (FEIS) shall revise the DEIS as appropriate and respond to comments as required in WAC 197-11-560. An FEIS shall respond to opposing views on significant adverse environmental impacts and reasonable alternatives which the lead agyency determines were not adequately discussed in the DEIS. The lead agency shall issue an FEIS as specified by WAC 197-11-460. (4) A supplemental EIS (SEIS) shall be prepared as an addition to either a draft or final statement if: (a) There_ are substantial changes to a proposal so that the proposal is likely to have significant adverse environmental impacts; or (b) There is significant new information indicating, or on, a proposal's probable significant adverse environmental impacts. [Ch. 197-11 WAC—p. 18] Preparation of a SEIS shall be carried out as stated in WAC 197-11-620. (5) Agencies may use federal EISs, as stated in Part Six. [Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-405, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC 197-11-406 EIS timing. The lead agency shall commence preparation of the environmental impact statement as close as possible to the time the agency is developing or is presented with a proposal, so that preparation can be completed in time for the final statement to be included in appropriate recommendations or reports on the proposal (WAC 197-11- 055). The statement shall be prepared early enough so it can serve practically as an important contribution to the decision making process and will not be used to rationalize or justify decisions already made. EISs may be "phased" in appropriate situations (WAC 197-11-060(5)). [Statutory Authority: RCW 4321C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-406, filed 2/10/84; effective 4/4/84.] WAC 197-11-408 Scoping. (1) The lead agency shall narrow the scope of every EIS to the probable significant adverse impacts and reasonable alternatives, including mitigation measures. For example, if there are only two or three significant impacts or alternatives, the EIS shall be focused on those. (2) To ensure that every EIS is concise and addresses the significant environmental issues, the lead agency shall: (a) Invite agency, affected tribes, and public comment on the DS (WAC 197-11-360). (i) If the agency requires written comments, agencies, affected tribes and the public shall be allowed twenty-one days from the date of issuance of the DS in which to comment, unless expanded scoping is used. (ii) If a GMA county/city issues the scoping notice with the notice of application under RCW 36.70.110, the comment period shall be no less than fourteen days. (iii) The date of issuance for a DS is the date it is sent to the department of ecology and other agencies with jurisdiction, and is publicly available. (b) Identify reasonable alternatives and probable significant adverse environmental impacts. (c) Eliminate from detailed study those impacts that are not significant. (d) Work with other agencies to identify and integrate environmental studies required for other government approvals with the EIS, where feasible. (3) Agencies, affected tribes, and the public should comment promptly and as specifically as permitted by the details available on the proposal. (4) Meetings or scoping documents, including notices that the scope has been revised, may be used but are nor required. The lead agency shall integrate the scoping process with its existing planning and decision-making process in order to avoid duplication and delay. WAC (4/15/98) SEPA Rules (5) The lead agency shall revise the scope of an EIS if substantial changes are made later in the proposal, or if significant new circumstances or information arise that bear on the proposal and its significant impacts. (6) DEISs shall be prepared according to the scope decided upon by the lead agency in its scoping process. (7) EIS preparation may begin during scoping. [Statutory Authority: 1995 c 347 (ESHB 1724) and RCW 43.21C.110. 97-21-030 (Order 95-16), § 197-11-408, filed 10/10/97, effective 11/10/97. Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-408, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC 197-11-410 Expanded scoping. (Optional) (1) At its option, the lead agency may expand the scoping process to include any or all of the following, which may be applied on a proposal -by -proposal basis: (a) Using questionnaires or information packets. (b) Using meetings or workshops, which may be combined with any other early planning meetings of the agency. (c) Using a coordinator or team from inside or outside the agency. (d) Developing cooperative consultation and exchange of information among agencies before the EIS is prepared, rather than awaiting submission of comments on a completed document. (e) Coordinating and integrating other government reviews and approvals with the EIS process through memoranda or other methods. (f) Inviting participation of agencies with jurisdiction or expertise from various levels of government, such as regional or federal agencies. . (g) Using other methods as the lead agency may find helpful. (2) Use of expanded scoping is intended to promote interagency cooperation, public participation, and innovative ways to streamline the SEPA process. Steps shall be taken, as the lead agency determines appropriate, to encourage and assist public participation. There are no specified procedural requirements for the methods, techniques, or documents which may be used in an expanded scoping process, to provide maximum flexibility to meet these purposes. (3) The lead agency shall consult with an applicant prior to deciding the method and schedule for an expanded scoping process. (4) Under expanded scoping, an applicant may request, in which case the lead agency shall set, a date by which the lead agency shall determine the scope of the EIS, including the need for any field investigations (to the extent permitted by the details available on the proposal). The date shall occur thirty days or less after the DS is issued, unless the lead agency and applicant agree upon a later date. [Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-410, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC (4/15/98) WAC 197-11-420 EIS preparation. For draft and final EISs and SEISs: (1) Preparation of the EIS is the responsibility of the lead agency, by or under the direction of its responsible official, as specified by the lead agency's procedures. No matter who participates in the preparation of the EIS, it is the EIS of the lead agency. The responsible official, prior to distributing an EIS, shall be satisfied that it complies with these rules and the procedures of the lead agency. (2) The lead agency may have an EIS prepared by agency staff, an applicant or its agent, or by an outside consultant retained by either an applicant or the lead agency. The lead agency shall assure that the EIS is prepared in a professional manner and with appropriate interdisciplinary methodology. The responsible official shall direct the areas of research and examination to be undertaken as a result of the scoping process, as well as the organization of the resulting document. (3) If a person other than the lead agency is preparing the EIS, the lead agency shall: (a) Coordinate any scoping procedures so that the individual preparing the EIS receives all substantive information submitted by any agency or person; (b) Assist in obtaining any information on file with another agency that is needed by the person preparing the EIS; (c) Allow any party preparing an EIS access to all public records of the lead agency that relate to the subject of the EIS, under chapter. 42.17 RCW (Public disclosure and public records law). (4) Every agency shall specifically provide in its own procedures those situations in which an applicant may be required or authorized to help prepare an EIS. Agency procedures may not require more information of an applicant than allowed by WAC 197-11-100, but may authorize less participation. An applicant may volunteer to provide any information or effort desired, as long as the EIS is supervised and approved by the responsible officiaL These rules do not prevent an agency from charging any fees which the agency is otherwise allowed to charge (WAC 197-11-914). [Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-420, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC 197-11-425 Style and size. (1) Environmental impact statements shall be readable reports, which allow the reader to understand the most significant and vital information concerning the proposed action, alternatives, and impacts, • without turning to other documents, as provided below and in WAC 197-11-402. (2) Environmental impact statements shall be concise and written in plain language. EISs shall not be excessively detailed or overly technical. EISs shall explain plainly the meaning of technical terms not generally understood by the general public. This may be done in a glossary or footnotes or by some other means. EISs may include an index for ease in using the statement. (3) Most of the text of an environmental impact statement shall discuss and compare the environmental impacts and their [Ch. 197-11 WAC—p. 19] SEPA Rules an environmental document (not including the SEPA register) provided to a public interest organization. [Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-504, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC 197-11-508 SEPA register. (1) The department of ecology shall prepare a SEPA register at least weekly, giving notice of all environmental documents required to be sent to the department of ecology under these rules, specifically: (a) DNSs under WAC 197-11-340(2); (b) DSs (scoping notices) under WAC 197-11-408; (c) EISs under WAC 197-11-455, 197-11-460, 197-11- 620, and 197-11-630; (d) Notices of action under RCW 43.21C.080 and 43.21C.087; and (e) Notices in the optional DNS process under WAC 197- 11-355 (2)(d)(i) and (5). (2) All agencies shall submit the environmental documents listed in subsection (1) of this section to the department promptly and in accordance with procedures established by the department (3) Agencies are encouraged to refer to the SEPA register for notice of SEPA documents which may affect them. (4) The department (a) Shall establish the method for distributing the SEPA register, which may include listing on Internet, publishing and mailing to interested persons, or any other method deemed appropriate by the department (b) May establish a reasonable format for the SEPA register; (c) May charge a reasonable fee for the SEPA register as allowed by law, in at least the amount allowed by chapter 42.17 RCW, from agencies, members of the public, and interested organizations. (5) Members of the public, citizen and community groups, and educational institutions are encouraged to refer to the SEPA register for notice of SEPA actions which may affect them. [Statutory Authority: 1995 c 347 (ESHB 1724) and RCW 43.21C.110. 97-21-030 (Order 95-16), § 197-11-508, filed . 10/10/97, effective 11/10/97. Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.110. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-508, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC 197-11-510 Public notice. (1) When these rules require notice to be given under this section, the lead agency must use reasonable methods to inform the public and other agencies that an environmental document is being prepared or is available and that public hearing(s), if any, will be held. The agency may use its existing notice procedures. Examples of reasonable methods to inform the public are: (a) Posting the property, for site-specific proposals; (b) Publishing notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the county, city, or general area where the proposal is located; [Ch. 197-11 WAC—p. 26] (c) Notifying public or private groups with known interest in a certain proposal or in the type of proposal being considered; (d) Notifying the news media; (e) Placing notices in appropriate regional, neighborhood, ethnic, or trade journals; and/or (f) Publishing notice in agency newsletters and/or sending notice to agency mailing lists (either general lists or lists for specific proposals or subject areas). (2) Each agency shall specify its method of public notice in its SEPA procedures, WAC. 197-11-904 and 197-11-906. If an agency does not specify its method of public notice or does not adopt SEPA procedures, the agency shall use methods (a) and (b) in subsection (1). (3) Documents which are required to be sent to the department of ecology under these rules will be published in the SEPA register, which will also constitute a form of public notice. However, publication in the SEPA register shall not, in itself, meet compliance with this section. [Statutory Authority: RCW 43.21C.1l0. 84-05-020 (Order DE 83-39), § 197-11-510, filed 2/10/84, effective 4/4/84.] WAC 197-11-535 Public hearings and meetings. (1) If a public hearing on the proposal is held under some other requirement of law, such hearing shall be open to consideration of the environmental impact of the proposal, together with any environmental document that is available. This does not require extension of the comment periods for environmental documents. - (2) In all other cases a public hearing on the environmental impact of a proposal shall be held whenever one or more of the following situations occur (a) The lead agency determines, in its sole discretion, that a public hearing would assist it in meeting its responsibility to implement the purposes and policies of SEPA and these rules; or (b) When fifty or more persons residing within the jurisdiction of the lead agency, or who would be adversely affected by the environmental impact of the proposal, make written request to the lead agency within thirty days of issuance of the draft EIS; or (c) When two or more agencies with jurisdiction over a proposal make written request to the lead agency within thirty days of the issuance of the draft EIS. (3) Whenever a public hearing is held under subsection (2) of this section, it shall occur no earlier than fifteen days from the date the draft EIS is issued, nor later than fifty days from its issuance. Notice shall be given under WAC 197-11-502(6) and 197-11-510 and may be combined with other agency notice. (4) If a public hearing is required under this chapter, it shall be open to discussion of all environmental documents and any written comments that have been received by the lead agency prior to the hearing. A copy of the environmental document shall be available at the public hearing. (5) Comments at public hearings should be as specific as possible (see WAC 197-11-550). WAC (4/15/98)