Laserfiche WebLink
City of Tukwila My WebLink |HelpSearch Tips |About |Sign Out
1. Is the issue adequately addressed in the Comprehensive Plan? <br /> The proposal to redesignate and rezone the property Ll is not currently addressed in the <br /> Comprehensive Plan. The existing Comprehensive Plan designation far the property is MICIH. <br /> The applicant is seeking a Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the land use <br /> designation to Ll concurrent with an application to rezone the property to LL The proposal is <br /> supported by numerous goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as discussed <br /> previously. <br /> 2. If the issue is not addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, is there a public need for the <br /> proposed change? <br /> There is a public creed for the proposed change. As previously discussed, the property exists <br /> as a vacant building adjacent to the Unified Grocers site. The vacancy of the property and <br /> the adjacent land (both owned by the some company) presents an opportunity for <br /> redevelopment of the property consistent with market demand and development trends in <br /> the area. The proponent is proposing a rezone of the site to V. While project-level plans <br /> have not been prepared, it is anticipated that a mix of uses allowed in the Ll zone will be <br /> developed on the property, including office, retail, lodging, entertainment, and light <br /> industrial warehouse and manufacturing uses. This development will meet an identified <br /> market demand for these types of uses in the City. ECONorthwest (2007). In addition, the <br /> redevelopment of the site will meet the need identified in the City Comprehensive Plan for <br /> development of identifiable City boundaries, improvements to the aesthetic qualities of the <br /> site, and improvement to the adjacent major transportation corridor of East Marginal Way. <br /> These factors were discussed in more detail above. <br /> 3. Is the proposed change the best means for meeting the identified public need? <br /> Yes. Redevelopment of the property under the current land use designation and zoning <br /> would not meet the need for office, retail, entertainment, and light industrial uses that has <br /> been identified, since these uses are not allowed in the MICIH zone. ECONorthwest (2007). <br /> Further, due to the nature of heavy industrial uses, the fact that uses in the MICIH zone are <br /> not required to undergo design review, and the reduced code requirements for items such as <br /> landscaping as compared to Ll zone, redevelopment of the property with heavy industrial <br /> uses would not meet the City's goals relating to development of identifiable City boundaries, <br /> aesthetic improvements, and improvements to major transportation corridors. Further, <br /> other zoning designations would not be as appropriate as the LI zone. While the Li zone <br /> accommodates a wide range of uses, it is an industrial zone. Accordingly, Ll provides a <br /> transition between heavy industrial uses and the light industrial and commercial uses <br /> developing to the south. Other available zones (such as commercial zones) would not be well <br /> suited to this location as they do not provide this transition. <br /> 106 <br />