Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2011-03-14 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKET .s wQ� Tukwila City Council Agenda o r y COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE -z# Jim Haggerton, Mayor Councilmembers; Joe Duffie Joan Hernandez 2908 Steve Lancaster, City Administrator Dennis Robertson Verna Seal Allan Ekberg, Council President Kathy Hougardy De'Sean Quinn Monday, March 14, 2011, 7:00 PM Tukwila City Hall Council Chambers 1. CALL TO ORDER PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE 2. SPECIAL a. Swearing in of Officer Erik Kunsmann. David Haynes, Police Chief PRESENTATIONS b. Presentation and introduction of Digital Records Center. Christy OFlaherty, City Clerk, 3. CITIZEN COMMENT At this time, you are invited to comment on items not included on this agenda (please limit your comments to five minutes per citizen). To comment on an item listed on this agenda, please save your comments until the issue is presented for discussion. 4. SPECIAL a. Strander Boulevard right -of -way dedication. Pg.1 ISSUES b. Southcenter Plan Public Involvement Strategy. Pg.17 c. Discussion on possible Development Agreement in Riverton area. Pg.35 d. Briefing on Comprehensive Plan Amendments. Pg.43 e. A resolution to request a special election. Pg.187 f. Tukwila Village: Proposed developer selection process. Pg.217 5. REPORTS a. Mayor b. City Council c. Staff d. City Attorney e. Intergovernmental 6. MISCELLANEOUS 7. EXECUTIVE SESSION 8. ADJOURNMENT Tukwila City Hall is wheelchair accessible. Reasonable accommodations are available at public hearings with advance notice to the City Clerk's Office (206- 433 -1800 or tukclerk @ci.tukwila.wa.us). This notice is available at www.ci.tukwila.wa.us, and in alternate formats with advance notice for those with disabilities. Tukwila Council meetings are audio taped. HOW TO TESTIFY If you would like to address the Council, please go to the podium and state your name and address clearly for the record. Please observe the basic rules of courtesy when speaking and limit your comments to five minutes. The Council appreciates hearing from citizens but may not be able to take immediate action on comments received until they are referred to a Committee or discussed under New Business. COUNCIL MEETINGS No Council meetings are scheduled on the 5th Monday of the month unless prior public notification is given. Regular Meetings The Mayor, elected by the people to a four -year term, presides at all Regular Council Meetings held on the 1st and 3rd Mondays of each month at 7:00 p.m. Official Council action in the form of formal motions, adopting of resolutions and passing of ordinances can only be taken at Regular Council meetings. Committee of the Whole Meetings Council members are elected for a four -year term. The Council President is elected by the Council members to preside at all Committee of the Whole meetings for a one -year term. Committee of the Whole meetings are held the 2nd and 4th Mondays at 7:00 p.m. Issues discussed are forwarded to the Regular Council meeting for official action. GENERAL INFORMATION At each Council meeting citizens are given the opportunity to address the Council on items that are not included on the agenda during CITIZENS COMMENTS. Please limit your comments to 5 minutes. Special Meetings may be called at any time with proper public notice. Procedures followed are the same as those used in Regular Council meetings. Executive Sessions may be called to inform the Council of pending legal action, financial, or personnel matters. PUBLIC HEARINGS Public Hearings are required by law before the Council can take action on matters affecting the public interest such as land -use laws, annexations, rezone requests, public safety issues, etc. Section 2.04.150 of the Tukwila Municipal Code states the following guidelines for Public Hearings: 1. The proponent shall speak first and is allowed 15 minutes for a presentation. 2. The opponent is then allowed 15 minutes to make a presentation. 3. Each side is then allowed 5 minutes for rebuttal. 4. Citizens who wish to address the Council may speak for 5 minutes each. No one may speak a second time until everyone wishing to speak has spoken. 5. After each speaker has spoken, the Council may question the speaker. Each speaker can respond to the question, but may not engage in further debate at this time. 6. After the Public Hearing is closed and during the Council meeting, the Council may choose to discuss the issue among themselves, or defer the discussion to a future Council meeting, without further public testimony. Council action may only be taken during Regular or Special Meetings. COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS t c1 ILA i q Initials ITEM No. Meeting Date I Prepared by_ 4.1 Mayor's review I Council review 4 Vitko 1 03/14/11 1 BG I 1 I 03/21/11 I BG I 1 908 I ITEM INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 11-030 I STAFF SPONSOR: BOB GIBERSON I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 3/14/11 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Strander Boulevard Extension Phase II Right -of -Way Dedication to the City of Renton CA I'EGORY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 03/14/11 Mtg Date 03/21/11 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date SPONSOR Council Ma Adm Svcs DCD Finance El Fire Legal P&R Police ®PW SPONSOR'S Strander Blvd Extension Phase II will install a new BNSF bridge over a Strander Blvd SUMMARY undercrossing that will tie into the new Sounder's Tukwila Longacres Station. The Interlocal Agreement with Renton (approved by Council 3/7/11) specifies that Tukwila will dedicate a portion of a city -owned parcel that is located between the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) rights -of -way that is needed to construct the Strander Blvd Phase II project. REVIEWED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte El Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 3/07/11 COMMITTEE CHAIR: JOAN HERNANDEZ RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Public Works COMMITTEE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST /FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $0.00 $0.00 0.00 Fund Source: 104 ARTERIAL STREET FUND (PAGE 29, 2011 CIP) Comments: MTG.DATE I RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 03/14/11 03/21/11 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 03/14/11 Informational Memorandum dated 03/02/11 Aerial GIS Photo Right -of -Way Dedication to the City of Renton Minutes from the Transportation Committee meeting of 03/07/11 I 03/21/11 1 2 oiii 4T j Cit of Tukwila J tr 0 Jim Haggerton, Mayor a 0a INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM 9 TO: Mayor Haggerton Transportation Committee FROM: Bob Giberson, Public Works Directory DATE: March 2, 2011 SUBJECT: Strander Boulevard Extension Phase II Right -of -Way Dedication ISSUE Approve a Right -of -Way Dedication related to the Strander Boulevard Extension Phase II project from a city -owned parcel located between the Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) and Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) rights -of -way. BACKGROUND The Interlocal Agreement with the City of Renton specifies that Tukwila will dedicate the necessary right -of -way for the Strander Boulevard Extension project from a city owned parcel located between the BNSF and UPRR rights -of -way. A plan sheet that shows the planned improvements is attached for reference. DISCUSSION The enclosed Right -of -Way Dedication identifies the property needed to construct the project. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to approve the Right -of -Way Dedication for the Strander Boulevard Extension project and consider this item at the March 14, 2011 Committee of the Whole meeting and subsequent March 21, 2011 Regular Meeting. attachments: Plan Sheets Right -of -Way Dedication W: \PW Eng PROJECTS \A- RW RS Projects598610403 Strander Extension\INFORMATION MEMO ROW Dedication gl.doc 3 4 STRANDER BOULEVARD EXTENSION PHASE II AERIAL MAP 6 Document Title: Right of Way Dedication Grantor(s): The City of Tukwila Grantee: The City of Renton Legal Description: Ptn Govt Lot 11 and Ptn Sec 25 -23 -04 Assessor's Tax Parcel Number: 252304 -9006 RIGHT OF WAY DEDICATION In the Matter of that Road Known as Strander Boulevard, Tukwila, Washington. Know all men by these presents, that the Owner, The City of Tukwila, Washington, a Washington Non Charter Optional Municipal Code City, hereby dedicates the following described real property for the use of the public forever as a public vehicle right -of -way, including the right to use the property herein described for the purpose of constructing public and private utilities including, but not limited to, water, natural gas, sanitary sewage, storm sewage, and telecommunications systems: That property legally described on Exhibit B and depicted on Exhibit C (the "Property incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein. Situated in the County of King, State of Washington. This Right of Way Dedication shall run with the land and shall be binding upon their heirs, assigns, executors, or administrators. Page 2 of 6 City of Tukwila Strander Blvd ROW Dedication 7 Dated: 2011. Owner: CITY OF TUKWILA Jim Haggerton, Mayor Attest/Authenticated: Approved As to Form: City Clerk City Attorney STATE OF WASHINGTON ss. County of King On this day of 2011, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, duly commissioned and sworn, personally appeared Jim Haggerton, known to me to be the Mayor of CITY OF TUKWILA, the municipal corporation that executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged it to be the free and voluntary act of said municipal corporation, for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument, and on oath stated that he was authorized to execute said instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal hereto affixed the day and year above written. Print Name Notary Public in and for the State of Washington, residing at My appointment expires Page 3 of 6 City of Tukwila Strander Blvd ROW Dedication 8 EXHIBIT A Legal Description of Entire Parcel of Owner's Property: PARCEL A: ALL THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 11 AND THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, ALL SITUATED IN SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, BOUNDED AS FOLLOWS: ON THE WEST BY A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 43 FEET EASTERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, TO THE CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE AND ST. PAUL RAILWAY MAIN TRACT CENTERLINE AS LOCATED AND CONSTRUCTED; ON THE EAST BY A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 50 FEET WESTERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, TO BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY'S OLD MAIN LINE TRACT CENTERLINE AS NOW LOCATED AND CONSTRUCTED; ON THE SOUTH BY A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 330 FEET SOUTHERLY, AT RIGHT ANGLES, TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 11; ON THE NORTH BY A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 150 FEET SOUTHERLY, AT RIGHT ANGLES, TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE HENRY MEADER DONATION CLAIM NO. 46. PARCEL B: A NON EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR WATER SUPPLY, SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER, GAS, ELECTRICITY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS, AS DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 9811051959, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL C: A NON EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES, 20 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 9811051961, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL D: A NON EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OF OVERSIZED LOADS 24 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 9811051962, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. (King County Tax Parcel No. 252304 9006) Page 4 of 6 City of Tukwila Strander Blvd ROW Dedication 9 EXHIBIT B Legal Description of Dedicated Right of Way: THE NORTH 240 FEET OF THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 11 AND THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, ALL SITUATED IN SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL A: ALL THAT PORTION OF GOVERNMENT LOT 11 AND THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER, ALL SITUATED IN SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 23 NORTH, RANGE 4 EAST, W.M., IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, BOUNDED AS FOLLOWS: ON THE WEST BY A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 43 FEET EASTERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, TO THE CHICAGO, MILWAUKEE AND ST. PAUL RAILWAY MAIN TRACT CENTERLINE AS LOCATED AND CONSTRUCTED; ON THE EAST BY A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 50 FEET WESTERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, TO BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD COMPANY'S OLD MAIN LINE TRACT CENTERLINE AS NOW LOCATED AND CONSTRUCTED; ON THE SOUTH BY A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 330 FEET SOUTHERLY, AT RIGHT ANGLES, TO THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID GOVERNMENT LOT 11; ON THE NORTH BY A LINE DRAWN PARALLEL WITH AND DISTANT 150 FEET SOUTHERLY, AT RIGHT ANGLES, TO THE SOUTH LINE OF THE HENRY MEADER DONATION CLAIM NO. 46. PARCEL B: A NON EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR WATER SUPPLY, SANITARY SEWER, STORM SEWER, GAS, ELECTRICITY AND TELECOMMUNICATIONS, AS DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 9811051959, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL C: A NON EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN INGRESS, EGRESS AND UTILITIES, 20 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 9811051961, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. PARCEL D: A NON EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS OF OVERSIZED LOADS 24 FEET IN WIDTH, AS DESCRIBED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED UNDER RECORDING NO. 9811051962, IN KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON. Page 5 of 6 City of Tukwila Strander Blvd ROW Dedication 10 EXHIBIT C Delineation of Owner's Property including the Dedicated Right of Way Page 6 of 6 City of Tukwila Strander Blvd ROW Dedication 11 12 NW 1/4, SEC 24, T 23 N, R 4 E, W.M. 0 a� o I A 2523049023 ,.;g, —1— .4'+ -',n GET S OUND ENERGY PU GY j i 252304902 z m I UNION PACIFlC RAILROAD CO a z 1 r J T f 2a6 UNION PAClF1C RR x12089 i I :::.:x ,1 1 31.5 1 6 a ®ee ®e ®meoe e ee 8 866 ee �R 5686.7 i 556 N or 22' 11'WI R e N01'22 a 1 uue ueeee eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eee °eeuu "4 ee�eeeeeeeeee�eeeeeeeeeeee eeeemeuuom ■uee111MIuuuuumuune NoceeeeeeeeeeeNeeeeeeeuoeoustewur gr i'.ii W 11•11•111••••• MU 1111•••• uueuoueeueeeeuu MINN �"���1 W 3-E: \'-I co eeppp 111•11111 MU Oeeele• eeeee eeeeeeee• Nee iiii°eii�eiiiiii••IO NV•••iiiieeiiii °eiiii i n eua uuueeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeueuul W •••111•111•111•111•110 •••11••••• NMI Nee uueeuu■ u •••••111•11111110111••••• IMO MOM MOM eeeeleleee■ Neel e•e•e• eel■ eeeel■OMEIN �I iiIIONIMi° °iiiiiiiiiiiiiiie I i ,Z �I uu eeee e u■ n uu uu ouoeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeeeopO °i ii `i' Z M ii® e N',IJ 2523049006 25 23 ll 1e .,o U C OF TUKIWLA e F. 7350 5 163RD ST uueeueuen O rg Q e u e ueueueueun euuue� J TUK%1LA, WA 98055 i eMp.o:•o•n: ..ai 2523049087 r■oel; CPSTRA (SOUND TRANSIT) eeen-ii--:." .eeueuuue 39 ....I 2523049022 1 DNSF I i E:: `:i`i` I'. g 1 NO2' 06' 20'E I i 9._ NO2 06' 20'E 1'::` 1 555.0' I 240.0• :;.53.9' z- 53.9 I 1 1.223.4' 1 B NSF RR ,I i I t I 1 T� MATCH LINE (SEE SHEET RW 8) 4 PROPOSED: ROW UNE i. PROPERTY UNE 1 -4----1 EASEMENT UNE i`_� 1 ROW ACQUISITION UNE '-1 rI 1 ROW DEDICATION UNE 0 1` `I CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT I,EI I RIGHT -O F WA Y A CQUISITION OWNERSHIP TABLE �'r Q. 1 RIGHT -OF -WAY DEDICATION i' 1.,, S PARCEL TAX I I TOTAL R/W CONSTRUCTION I ACCESS PERM ACCESS R NO PARCEL NAME AREA ACQ FONT EMT EMT DEAD USAGE NOTES I 1— I_„ 5 I 1 1 2523049006 I qTY OF TUKWILA 1 244,037 SF I 0 I 0 SF I 0 SF I 0 SF 1 77,533 SF I POND PUMP STATION CONSTRUCTION, GRADING, ROW I 71 f I rr_1 2 1 2523049087 I CPSTRA (SOUND 1RANSIT) 1 163,461 5F 1 12,586 5F I 26,388 SF 1 124,488 SF I 0 SF I 0 SF I TEMPORARY ACCESS, HAULING OF MATERIALS, STAGING, ROW I 40 0 40 80 KEY PLAN scale feet I I I I 1 =eo fi CITY OF STRANDERBOULEVARDEXTENSION 1 /ze //1 CALL 48 HOURS �j I3 ergerABAM I I 1_ 1 '''''''11. 1 d,?� RENTON PHASE II BEFORE YOU DIG I M N rov lic Works Department RIGHT OF WAY PLANS RW S 33301 981 Avenue Sash, Suite 300 I 1 I I I Approved For Construction I 800 424 -5555 Fie a1 W t T -23 Washington 98003-2600 i NO. I REVISION I BY I DATE I APPR i PLAN SHEET 1 206 931 -2300 Fa:: 206 431 -2250 Robert M. Hanson P.E. Date 5 m 13 11111 14 r.t111.44 1 Y City of Tukwila ste- o Transportation Committee I9 0a TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes March 7, 2011 5:00 p.m. —Conference Room 1 PRESENT Councilmembers: Joan Hernandez, Chair; Joe Duffle and Verna Seal Staff: Bob Giberson, Frank Iriarte, Robin Tischmak, and Gail Labanara CALL TO ORDER: The meeting was called to order at 5:03 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS No presentations. II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Strander Boulevard Extension Phase II: Right of Way Dedication At the 2/22/11 Transportation Committee, Strander Blvd Phase II presented the BNSF Underpass Agreement, the Interlocal Agreement (ILA) with the City of Renton, and the Assignment Agreement between Tukwila, Renton, and BNSF. This agenda item was included in the ILA and is for the Right -of- Way dedication of a portion of the city -owned parcel located between the BNSF and UPRR railroads. This right -of -way is needed for Phase II construction. Robin presented the parcel location with Google Earth. No funds are being exchanged in this ROW dedication. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO MARCH 14 C.O.W. FOR DISUCSSION. B. SCATBd Meeting Agenda: March 9 Meeting The agenda listed is not for the main SCATBd meeting but for the Subarea Technical Advisory Committees (TACs). The TAC agendas normally move forward to the main SCATBd meetings. Tukwila has the Tukwila Urban Center Access (Klickitat) project erroneously listed under Past Due projects (pg 14) and Behind Schedule projects (pg 16). PSRC will correct the tables as the TUC Access Project has been awarded and the road is scheduled to be closed on March 28. Future interest may include the King County Metro Transit Strategic Plan which will show transit cuts. Once Joan sees the Transit presentation, she will determine if King County should present the strategic plan to Tukwila Council. INFORMATION ONLY. III. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 5:20 p.m. Next meeting: Monday, March 21, 2011 5:00 p.m. Conference Room 1 Committee Chair Approval Minutes by GL, Reviewed by BG. 15 16 COUNCIL AGENDA SIWOPSIS �..0111...„A:11, r N Initials ITEMNO. <t o -,t Z Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor review Council review s- 12 09/27/10 LM a 03/14/11 NG I 90 I I I I I II 6E ITEM INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 10-106 / 11-031 STAFF SPONSOR: NORA GIERLOFF 1 ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 9/27/10 AGI ;ND;\ ITEM TITLE Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) Plan Stakeholder Outreach Process C I'I c E O RY N Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 3/14/11 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 1SP c )NSOR Council Mayor E Adm Svcs N DCD n Finance Fire Legal P &R Police PW SPONSOR'S The Department of Community Development (DCD) is seeking Council guidance on the SL I I,\RY outreach process for the TUC Plan. The original proposal was to use a consultant to assist with a stakeholder involvement process to develop refinements for the Plan. The firm of CollinsWoerman was selected to lead the stakeholder outreach support process, to be paid for using Transit Oriented Development (TOD) grant funds. The City Council asked for more options and sent the issue back to the Community Affairs and Parks Committee. Ri I AK'I ;D BY COW Mtg. N CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte n Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. n Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DA 1'E: 9/13/10, 2/28/11 COMMIfIEE CHAIR: VERNA SEAL RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADIvMIN. Department of Community Development COMMITi'EE Unanimous Approval; Forward 2 Options to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPI Ri QUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $71,937 $0 $0 Fund Source: TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT GRANT Comments: Funding only needed if Option 1 is chosen MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 9/27/10 Forwarded back to Committee MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 9/27/10 Informational Memorandum dated 9/7/10 Consultant Agreement Minutes from the Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting of 9/13/10 3/14/11 Informational Memorandum dated 2/14/11 with Attachments Minutes from the Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting of 2/28/11 17 18 .r11 L-A;`k, Jy City of Tukwila r Jim Haggerton, Mayor 90- INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Community Affairs and Parks Committee FROM: Jack Pace, Community Development Director DATE: February 14, 2011 SUBJECT: Briefing on Status of Southcenter Plan Revision Process ISSUE On September 27, 2010 the Council Committee of the Whole recommended that staff return to a future Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting with more information on the draft Plan for the Southcenter area and alternatives for stakeholder review. This memo provides a briefing on the background of the plan and presents options for moving forward on completing the plan. BACKGROUND The Southcenter area has been designated as an urban center under the Countywide Planning Policies since the adoption of the revised Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code in 1995. This designation provides some benefits such as priority for regional infrastructure and transit service. It also aligns with the City's plan for accommodating much of its regional share of employment and housing growth (17,550 employees and 4,850 households by 2031) in mixed use commercial areas primarily in Southcenter, with the remainder in Tukwila South and along Tukwila International Boulevard, leading to the creation of vibrant, walkable mixed use districts linked by transit.' We hope to see new construction at the core of these areas along the lines of the Tukwila Village vision, with high quality multi -story buildings close to comfortably wide sidewalks in order to spur redevelopment and job and housing growth. This strategy will also allow us to protect the existing character and stability of Tukwila's largely built -out residential areas. For a more complete discussion of how the Southcenter Plan fits into the broader State, regional and county policy framework see Attachment A. FEDERAL GRANT In 2002 Tukwila received a $1.4 million federal grant to prepare a subarea plan for Southcenter, one of the region's designated urban centers, including the area designated for transit oriented development (TOD) around the Sounder commuter rail /Amtrak station. The project's objectives were as follows: Prepare a redevelopment strategy for the TUC to create more business activity and generate additional tax revenue, encourage a broader mix of uses and densities in a pedestrian- oriented environment to support improved transit (particularly in the northern part of the TUC), improve internal circulation and create a sense of place. Identify and coordinate the improvements necessary to initiate and support the plan. Develop regulations and guidelines implementing the plan. Complete the evaluation of environmental impacts from the proposed development and designate the plan as a SEPA "planned action Approximately 1/3 of the City's forecasted employment growth is planned for the City's Manufacturing /Industrial Center. 19 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 While we are not clearly required to return the money should we fail to complete these actions in a timely manner it seems likely that it would affect Tukwila's ability to seek future grants and at some point the unspent funds could be rescinded. FUTURE REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS One of the motivations for undertaking this effort to develop more detailed development standards was to ensure that the Southcenter area remained competitive with other regional shopping and employment centers. Trends point to the continuing decline of the already overbuilt retail sector, and consumer preferences for walkable, vibrant, outdoor, entertainment driven experiences as seen in the outward nature of the Southcenter Mall expansion, Kent Station, Renton Landing and Burien Town Center. When the General Services Administration put out a request for proposals for office space in our area the requirements included amenities such as retail shops, banks, restaurants and multiple bus lines within a walkable distance of one -half mile from the building. While the Southcenter area contains these types of amenities, in order to diversify into the office and housing markets we need to provide safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle routes to get to them. TUKWILA URBAN CENTER (TUC) PLAN PROCESS The TUC Planning process started with a public visioning exercise,and was designed to allow many opportunities for public involvement. For a chronology of this process to date see Attachment B. Between May 2002 and May 2004 staff held six public workshops and three joint City Council /Planning Commission work sessions to develop the vision and priorities for the plan. During that time, staff and the City's consultant FTB met with the Mall on their design and renovation project to ensure that the Mall's project was consistent with the direction the vision was taking. Staff and consultants also flew to Minneapolis to discuss the vision with the Target Corporation. FTB then took this vision and in 2005 delivered a draft plan composed of three parts: the vision for the urban center, development standards and design guidelines to implement the vision, and recommended City investments and actions. From 2005 to 2008 public review of the plan was put on hold due to other City priorities such as the Tukwila South annexation. During that time, staff convened a panel of commercial and mixed use experts from the Urban Land Institute to review the feasibility of the draft plan and make recommendations. Staff also worked to test the draft regulations on other proposed projects sought funding for some of the implementing actions such as the pedestrian bridge over the Green River and improved transit center, and coordinated with Sound Transit on the design of the permanent commuter rail station and the Parks Department on the master plan for Tukwila Pond Park to ensure these projects supported the City's vision for the TUC. In the fall of 2008 we resumed the public review process with mailings, open houses, multiple meetings with individual property and business owners, and presentations to interested groups. From March to May 2009 the Planning Commission held a public hearing and 3 work sessions on the draft Plan. During this process it became clear that there was not internal consensus among City Departments on a vision for the urban center that included greater building density, taller buildings, breaking up the superblocks, on- street parking and improved facilities for pedestrians and bicyclists. The public comments were generally in favor of the vision but there was concern about development standards in the TOD area such as the 2 story minimum height, maximum setbacks, entrances facing the street and thresholds for compliance with the new standards. In May, the Planning Commission directed Department of Community Development (DCD) staff to review the comments received from the public on the draft Southcenter Plan and propose revisions to address the issues raised. After reviewing the comments staff decided to address the internal departmental concerns separately from the external stakeholder comments. All of 20 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 the comments are available on the Tukwila Urban Center Plan section of the City's web site, both in their original form and summarized in a matrix with staff analysis and recommendations. Staff responded to public comments concerns regarding the economic feasibility of the vision and the draft development regulations by contracting with ECONorthwest (ECO), the consultant that prepared economic and market analyses during the preparation of the draft plan. ECO's analysis consisted of: 1) Technical research on market and demographic forces that will influence Plan implementation; 2) Creating four pro formas (economic analyses of development scenarios) for possible prototype developments in the TUC; and 3) Conducting three focus groups and follow -up interviews with TUC stakeholders and other office, retail, residential and mixed -use developers. Also attending the focus groups were George Malina (then Planning Commission Chair), Derek Speck (Economic Development Administrator), and DCD staff. ECO's technical memo recommended the following revisions to the development standards and changes to the implementation strategies: General comments and recommended strateaies: o Almost all stakeholders agreed the vision is the right Tong -term goal for development in TUC. o The vision is achievable in the mid to long term with significant, targeted public investment to catalyze and support types of development the City would like to see. o Code appears to be more complex than it actually is: it is designed to provide certainty while minimizing discretionary interpretive decisions. Specific recommendations comments: o Revise high -rise ordinance to allow mid -rise construction will make the Plan more economically viable and allow Tukwila to be more competitive with other cities. o Achieving multiple storied development is limited due to difficulty in meeting parking requirements o When reducing parking requirements, need to provide other options to avoid negative consequences o Open space requirements are consistent with other jurisdictions. Staff presented these findings to the Planning Commission (PC) on December 10 2009 and the Community Affairs and Parks Committee on March 22, 2010. DISCUSSION WHERE WE ARE NOW Almost all stakeholders commenting on the draft plan agreed the City's vision is the right long- term goal for development in the TUC. The conflict, however, was in how and when the vision should be implemented. Some members of the PC thought that additional public outreach was needed outside of the formal hearing process. To ensure that we have up to date input from property and business owners staff proposed moving forward with establishing a second stakeholders' process to address key issue areas that were identified by ECONW and /or raised during the public comment period. The process was designed to allow the consultant /staff team to work out the individual concerns of the 21 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 stakeholders, with the anticipated outcome of a set of regulatory refinements to the draft Plan that work for both the stakeholders and the City. The process was to consist of the following phases: 1. Framework initial stakeholder outreach; summarizing key issues 2. Refinements defining stakeholder City priorities, needs and options 3. Consensus testing options internally; presenting system of refinements to stakeholders; finalizing the refinement system 4. Approval seeking internal and stakeholder endorsements; presenting plan refinement system to the Planning Commission Critical to a successful process were the following tasks: 1. Broad outreach to community early on to solicit stakeholder interest 2. Including other City Departments in the process 3. Providing process updates for the Planning Commission at key points 4. Outreach to stakeholders on an individual basis 5. Public Open House on draft Refinements The consultant fee for the stakeholder process was to be funded by the Federal Transit Oriented Development Grant. On September 6, 2010 the Community Affairs and Parks Committee recommended forwarding the contract for approval to the Committee of the Whole. On September 27' the Committee of the Whole recommended that staff return to a future Community Affairs and Parks Committee Meeting with more information on the draft TUC Plan and alternatives for stakeholder review. RECOMMENDATIONS STAKEHOLDER PROCESS ALTERNATIVES 1. Meetings with Individual Stakeholders: The previously proposed process with the Collins Woerman consultants involved individual meetings with each external stakeholder listed below as well as with city departments to discuss their comments and seek consensus solutions. After that process we would hold an open house, Planning Commission (PC) hearing and PC work sessions, another open house, City Council (CC) hearing and possibly CC work sessions. The Parties of Record from the PC hearings are: 1. Westfield Southcenter and tenant Sears 2. Target Corporation and their landlord Regency Centers 3. Segale Properties 4. Owner of Southcenter West and Tukwila Business Parks 5. Innkeepers USA Trust Residence Inn 6. Wig Properties Southcenter Square 7. Desimone Trust Barnabys site 8. Chevron 9. Cascade Land Conservancy 10. Tukwila Fire Department 2. Meetings with a Stakeholder Group: An alternative would be a stakeholder committee similar to that used for the Sign Code update. The composition of that 8 member group was: 2 City Council members 1 Planning Commission member 3 Residents 2 Business Representatives 22 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 In order to keep the committee at a workable size (no more than 10 plus staff) we would actually need to limit the number of stakeholders to fewer than we had planned to engage previously. We suggest the following composition: 2 City Council members 1 Planning Commission member 1 Resident 4 Business Representatives Southcenter Property Owner Southcenter Tenant Southcenter Property Manager Westfield Mall Representative 1 Developer with experience in mixed use, town center type projects 1 Design Professional architect /landscape architect Staff would work with the Council to develop a resolution specifying the review process, identify the Council members and Planning Commissioner to attend, recruit interested parties and the Mayor would appoint the members. We would hold a series of work sessions to review the policy areas and develop recommendations. After that the process would be the same as above: hold an open house, PC hearing and PC work sessions, another open house, CC hearing and possibly CC work sessions. 3. Reduce the Scope of the Project Revise the product to meet the minimum requirements for accommodating growth and meeting regional policy goals. Make zoning code changes that would allow but not require denser, mixed use development and housing. Convert the design standards into guidelines. This approach would allow but not direct change and mean that the Southcenter area would likely follow rather than lead the market. The goal would be to efficiently complete the planning effort and so the review process would be streamlined. No formal stakeholder process would be proposed because the changes from the existing code would be limited. Staff would present a revised draft at a PC work session, allow several weeks for comment, hold a PC hearing, CC hearing and possibly CC work sessions. NEXT STEPS Staff asks that the Committee select a process alternative and forward the item to the March 14 Committee of the Whole meeting. If the Council chooses alternative 2 staff would bring the resolution forming the stakeholder committee to the full Council at a subsequent meeting. ATTACHMENTS A Tukwila's Planning Policy Framework B TUC Plan Process 23 24 TUKWILA'S PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK— ATTACHMENT A Here is a discussion of how Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan vision for the Southcenter area fits into the broader State, regional and county policy framework. Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) Establishing the land use planning hierarchy in Washington, the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70A) mandates local comprehensive planning in heavily populated and high growth counties and their cities. It established 13 broad goals to guide the policy development of local comprehensive plans. The VISION 2040 plan adopted by the Puget Sound Regional Council provides the multicounty policy framework required by GMA to meet these goals at the regional, county, and local government levels. Vision 2040 Regional Growth Strategy The central Puget Sound region is forecast to continue to grow in the coming decades up to 5 million people will live here by the year 2040. Vision 2040, the adopted Regional Growth Strategy, provides guidance to cities and counties for accommodating that growth. It is an integrated, long -range vision for maintaining a healthy region promoting the well -being of people and communities, economic vitality, and a healthy environment, see Attachment 1. It contains an environmental framework, a numeric regional growth strategy, six policy sections guided by overarching goals as well as implementation actions and measures to monitor progress. The strategy is designed to preserve resource lands and protect rural lands from urban -type development. The strategy promotes infill and redevelopment within urban areas to create more compact, walkable, and transit friendly communities. All levels of government in the central Puget Sound's four counties (King, Kitsap, Pierce, and Snohomish) will use VISION 2040 as a regional framework for making local decisions. The strategy is organized around categories of "regional geographies." The majority of the region's employment and housing growth is allocated to Metropolitan Cities and Core Cities, which together contain the more than two dozen designated regional growth centers. Tukwila is a Core City with a designated urban center. The multicounty planning policies provide guidance for implementing the Regional Growth Strategy. Under these policies growth is to occur first and foremost in the designated urban growth area; less development is to occur in rural areas. Centers are recognized for their benefits in creating compact, walkable communities that support transit and other services. Housing and jobs should be located in a manner that provides for easy mobility and accessibility. Investments in transportation and other infrastructure should be prioritized to centers. Countywide target- setting processes for allocating population and employment growth are to be consistent with the regional vision. Countywide Planning Policies The GMA further requires King County to prepare broad Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs) that comply with both the growth principles of the GMA and the more directive policies of the Multi- County Planning Policies (Vision 2040). The CPPs provide the vision and policy framework for the development of each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan, including Tukwila. The CPPs are maintained by the Growth Management Planning Council and have recently been updated. C:\ temp\ XPGrpWise\ TukwilaPlanningFramework .docAttaChment A 25 Urban Center Criteria The CPPs require that urban centers have: 15,000 employees within a half mile of a transit center Average 50 employees per gross acre Average 15 households per gross acre See Attachment 2 for a comparison of the urban center criteria to Tukwila's urban center characteristics. Tukwila made a presentation to PSRC in January on the status of our efforts to achieve the urban center goals. Local Comprehensive Plans. Local comprehensive plans direct land use planning regulations and activity in unincorporated King County and each of the county's 39 jurisdictions. Each local plan establishes the land use and development regulations within its jurisdiction. Local plans, when next updated, are expected to align with the planning hierarchy described above. Anticipating completion of the CPPs in 2010, many cities including Tukwila have begun the planning effort to revise their comprehensive plans. King County Growth Targets In 2009 after an extensive process involving staff from the affected cities, including Tukwila, the Growth Management Planning Council adopted updated employment and housing growth targets for 2031. As a core city Tukwila, including its annexation areas, has a target of 4,850 net new housing units and 17,550 net new jobs over the next 21 years, see Attachment 3. While no city can guarantee a certain level of development we must provide for zoned capacity and infrastructure to accommodate that growth. It is unclear how Tukwila could accommodate our housing growth target by 2031 without encouraging housing development in the urban center. The Tukwila South Master Plan calls for between 700 and 1,900 units to be developed over up to 30 years. The recent addition of the Urban Renewal Overlay to the Neighborhood Commercial Center zone will allow for more intensive development along a section of the Tukwila International Boulevard Corridor and accommodate another portion of the target. Tukwila's single and multi family zoned land is largely built -out at the current lot sizes and densities and so has limited ability to absorb additional units. If the vision for the Southcenter area changes to exclude housing the most straightforward alternative to meeting our targets would be to upzone existing residential neighborhoods to allow for more intensive development. ATTACHMENTS 1) Vision 2040 Executive Summary 2) Comparison of the urban center criteria to Tukwila's urban center characteristics 3) King County Growth Targets Table 26 t��,�ii�h f' o£t?ety VISION 2040 pla net i„ &the Regional Growth Stra ,_._...i i,..„Itst: VISION 2040's Regional Growth Strategy is a preferred pattern for accommodating residential and employment f growth. It is designed to minimize environmental impacts, support economic prosperity, improve rnobility, and make efficient use of existing infrastructure. T'he lmportance of the Regional Growth Strategy The central Puget Sound region is forecast to continue to Central. Puget Sound grow in the coming decades up to 5 million people Regional Growth X:.;. will live here by the year 2040. The Regional Growth Strategy 3" sc #42 Via; Strategy provides guidance to cities and counties for K At that growth. The strategy is designed 9 9 9Y 9 r accommodating to preserve resource lands and protect rural lands from s x urban -type development. The strategy promotes infill 4 s x and redevelopment within urban areas to create more s; a 7 compact, walkable, and transit friendly communities. Ste' F k r f, Ltirhat's in VISION 2040? 1 an r ,`t VISION 2040's Regional Growth Strategy identifies the role 4 r 1, that various cities, unincorporated areas, and rural lands C 4 t h il rC0Y T z T categories play in accommodating the region's residen- F«s ay r-` tial and employment growth The strategy is organized g, S S' around categories x ories of "regional eo ra hies. "The major- s 9 9 9 9 P 1 F caa;mr t V a �4 ity of the region's employment and housing growth� is allocated to Metropolitan Cities and Core Cities, which ,,,,3'17-$1 T together contain the more than two dozen designated 'i; I regional growth centers. Larger Cities also play an impor .R f� tans role over time as places that accommodate growth. t, s 4 �-4 t-, Small Cities provide jobs and housing that support vital cl_Y J a E m and active communities at a less intensive scale. Growth ic, t l/ 1 17 r in the unincorporated urban growth area is prioritized 1.2. ss d ot,,.. for areas that are identified for annexation into adjacent f cities. Significantly less growth is allocated to the rural :'rM areas than has occurred in the past. :'f Multicounty Planning Policies. The multicounty plan ning policies provide guidance for implementing the Regional Growth Strategy. Growth is to occur first and foremost in the designated urban growth area; less development is to occur in rural areas. Centers are recognized for their ben- efits in creating compact, walkable communities that support transit and other services. Housing and jobs should be located in a manner that provides for easy mobility and accessibility. Investments in transportation and other infrastruc- ture should be prioritized to centers. Countywide target- setting processes for allocating population and employment growth are to be consistent with the regional vision. Actions. Many of the implementation actions in VISION 2040 contribute to achieving the Regional Growth Strategy. For example, the Regional Council already began working with its member jurisdictions in 2008 to develop a regional 27 methodology to guide countywide processes for establishing local residential and employment growth targets. The Regional Council will also monitor and evaluate growth to ensure that it continues to meet VISION 2040's goals and objectives. The table presents the regional allocation of population and job growth for the period between 2000 and 2040 by regional geography category, as well as the specific allocation for each of the four counties. Population and Employment Growth, 2000 to 2040 t l MetropolitanCities(5) People 540,000 -3296 294,000 -41% 30,000 -2096 127,000 -32% 89,000 -20% Bellevue, Bremerton, Everett, Seattle, Tacoma Jobs -966: 511,000 -42% 311,000 -4596 14,000 -2296 97,000 46% 89,000 -36% Core Cities and Silverdale (14) People 363,000 -21% 230,000 -3296 18,000 -12% 75,000 -19% 40,00Q -9% Auburn, Bothell, Burien, Federal Way, Kent, Kirkland, Lakewood, Jobs 352,000 =29% 262,000 -38% 15,000 -2396 40,000 -1996 35000 -14% Lynnwood, Puyallup, Redmond, Renton, SeaTat, Silverdale, Tukwila 98 Arlington, Bainbridge Cities (1 8rid a Island, People -9a .181000 1190 000 -1496: 16 000 11% 23,000 6% A4,000,7 1096 Large g d, Des Moines, Edmonds, Fife, Issaquah;: Jobs 90 111000 996 69 000 -10% 5,600 896 6,000.73% 31 :13 %7 Kenmore, Maple Valley, Marysville, Mercer Island, Mill Creek Monroe, Mountlake Terrace ,Mukilteo Sammamish,Shoreline, University Place, Woodinville SmallCities(46) People -90 148000 9% 39000 5% 12000 8% 57,00(11% 40,000 9% Algona, Beaux Arts Black Diamond,Bonn;eyLake Bner Buckley !obi 9a: ;140004% 2 8000 12%:"",';' 37000 18% y 30000 12% nt Carbonado,Carnation,' Covington Darrmgton DuPo Duvall, Eatonville, Edgewood Enumclaw Ficrest Giig,Narbor, s„ Gold Bar, Granite Falls,,Huhts Paint Index, Lake FOrest Lake Stevens, Medina, Milton Newcastle,_ Normandy Park,. North Be n. d, Orting Pacific, Port Orchard, Poulsbo Roy, Boston, Skykomish, Snohomish, Snoqualmie South Prairie Stanwood r Steilacoom Sultan Sumner Wilkeson Woodway Ya rowPoin ed Area (assumed to be annexed over time) 362 000 21% 43 000:' 6% r 45 000 30% r 87 000 22% 187 000 42% Unincorporat lobs= 113 000 996 LL ;23,000- 3% 19 000 28% 25 Oq0 12% 47 000 999 1 Ru aIArea People -4 118000 1x(11 20000 3% t 28000 19 24fl00 6% 46000 1046 Jobs 31000 3 %1 5000' 1% ,5000 7000 3% 140006% A "�s q'�3 tlmdltli• esy nt t f a a 1 Fs3rb 1 ry E is-: 1 rQ Y:.. 0ii'1 1e r J 8"' a O ti r i What This Means for Other Planning Efforts in the Region The Regional Growth Strategy provides guidance for counties and cities to use as they develop new local residential and employment growth targets and update their local comprehensive plans. The 2010 update to countywide plan- ning policies provides the opportunity to address revisions for the target- setting process in each county. VISION 2040's implementation actions require counties to work together to use consistent processes for establishing local hous- ing and employment targets. The Regional Council will collaborate with counties to revise and improve the regional growth targeting methodology, differentiating expectations among the regional geographies. The state required update of local comprehensive plans in 2011 provides the opportunity for local jurisdictions to incorporate new residential and employment targets into their comprehensive plans. Cities are encouraged to revise relevant zoning and development regulations to better implement the Regional Growth Strategy. Moreover, cities with designated regional growth centers are responsible for developing and adopting residential and employment and targets for their centers. Transit agencies and other service providers also play an important role, and should target funding and decisionmaking to align with the VISION 2040's Regional Growth Strategy. For More 1nforniat.ion Additional information on VISION 2040 and the Regional Growth Strategy is available by contacting the Puget Sound Regional Council's Information Center at 206 464 -7532 or info @psrc.org. Puget Sound Regional Council PSR Apo 2039 1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500 Seattle, Washington 98104 -1035 206 -464 -7090 FAX 206-587-4825 psrc.org 28 King County Growth Targets Update Proposed Table for Inclusion in Countywide Planning Policies Regional Geography PAA Housing Employment PAA City Subarea Housing Target Employment Target Target Target I I Net New Units Net New Units Net New lobs Net New Jobs 1 I I 2006 -2031 2006 -2031 2006 -2031 2006 -2031 I I 1 Metropolitan Cities Bellevue I 17,000 290 51,500 1 Seattle I 86,000 148,200 Total 103,000 199,700 Core Cities Auburn 9,620 19,200 150 1 Bothell 1 3,000 810 4,800 200 Burien I 3,900 4,600 Federal Way I 8,100 2,390 12,300 290 Kent I 7,800 1,560 13,200 290 Kirkland 1 7,200 1,370 20,200 650 I Redmond 1 10,200 640 23,000 Renton 14,835 3,895 28,700 770 1 SeaTac 5,800 25,300 I Tukwila 4,800 50 15,500 2,0501 Total 75,255 166,800 {Larger Cities Des Moines 3,000 5,000 Issaquah 5,750 290 20,000 Kenmore 3,500 3,000 Maple Valley 1,800 1,060 2,000 Mercer Island 2,000 1,000 I Sammamish 4,000 350 1,800 I Shoreline 5,000 5,000 Woodinville 3,000 5,000 Total 28,050 42,800 Small Cities 1 Algona 190 210 1 Beaux Arts 3 3 I I! j Black Diamond 1,900 1,050 I Carnation 330 370 I Clyde Hill 10 Covington 1,470 1,320 Duvall 1,140 840 Enumclaw 1,425 735 Hunts Point 1 Lake Forest Park 475 210 I 1 Medina 19 Milton 50 90 160 Newcastle 1,200 735 Normandy Park 120 65 North Bend 665 1,050 Pacific 285 370 Skykomish 10 Snoqualmie 1,615 1,050 Yarrow Point 14 1 Total 10,922 8,168 Urban Unincorporated I Potential Annexation Areas 12,795 4,400 Other Urban Unlncorp. 2,920 6,200 Total 15,715 10,600 1 King County UGA Total 232,942 428,068 The base year for these Targets is 2006, As cities annex territory, PAA targets shift into Targets column. Unclaimed or disputed Urban unincorporated areas, e.g., North Hlghline, Bear Creek UPDs. Placeholder for footnote conditioning PM target on approval of city-county agreement. King Co. Growth Targets Committee, Growth Management Planning Council, August 2009 29 TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Tukwila Urban Center Amended Countywide Planning Policies Recommended Tukwila Urban Center Criteria Urban Center Characteristics 1 Planned for 20 years Tukwila Urban Center planned for 30+ years 2 Total land area of up to 1.5 square miles Proposed Tukwila Urban Center area (1,440 acres) approximately 1.35 square miles 3 Requires 15,000 employees within one -half The area is planned to allow this density. mile (walking distance) of a transit center 4 Average of 50 employees per gross acre The Tukwila Urban Center is planned to allow this density. 5 Average of 15 households per gross acre Specific Tukwila Urban Center areas are planned to allow residential uses, particularly in the area within walking distance of the Sounder commuter rail /Amtrak station. 6 Emphasis on mass transportation and non- Strong motorized and non motorized motorized modes, while lessening connections are planned between the TUC dependency on single occupancy vehicles the Sounder commuter /Amtrak station. Enhanced transit facilities are anticipated in proximity to the TUC core. Additional potential forms of high capacity transit (HCT) directly serving the TUC include bus rapid transit (BRT), a local area transit route, and future phases of light rail. Roadway improvements, including enhanced streetscapes, will improve auto, transit and pedestrian movement and access. An enhanced street network will improve mobility. Facilities developed will recognize the actual and projected need and demand for motor vehicle, pedestrian, and transit facilities. 7 Promotion of high caliber urban design Design standards and high quality public/ standards and support for capital public private capital improvements are key to improvements attracting the types of development that will achieve the vision for the TUC. 8 Receives first priority for development of A Sounder commuter rail /Amtrak station is high- capacity transit center and regionally located in the TUC. Ensuring that additional funded support infrastructure high capacity transit facilities serve the TUC will require active City involvement in regional planning processes. 9 Receives other funding and streamlined Via a SEPA planned action for the TUC Plan. permit processing incentives Figure 22 Countywide policies compared to Tukwila Urban Center December 2008 111 30 Southcenter Subarea Planning Process Attachment B 2002 -2004 Development of the Vision for the Urban Center Council Briefing 6 Public Workshops See 9/18 08 Memo for Summaries 2 Joint PC/ CC Worksessions Multiple Team Meetings with City Staff Consultants 2004 Endorsement of the Vision by CC and PC Joint PC/ CC Meeting— Directed Team to prepare regulations that implement the Vision Adoption of Updated Comprehensive Plan Policies 2005 -2008 Development of the Plan to Implement the Vision Staff review of Draft Plan by FI 13 Urban Land Institute Technical Advisory Panel Worksession on the Implementation Aspects of the Draft Plan Meetings with Local and Regional Developers to Review Plan Direction 'Testing" draft regulations on Proposed Developments (Mall expansion, Baker Blvd Retail, Fidelity Bank of America, other office retail projects) Grant Funding for Pedestrian Bridge Study Sounder Station Review Coordination on Tukwila Pond Park Master Plan Grant and Developer Funding for Transit Center Design and Construction 2008 Affirmation of the Vision and Introduction to the Plan Public Open House with F1 B 10/23/ 08 Joint PC/ CC Worksession with F "11B 10/23/08 2008 -2009 Public Outreach for the Plan Presentation to the S1-VKC Chamber of Commerce 10/7/08 Presentation to the Parks Commission 11 /19 08 Mailings Emailings to 1400 Property Owners, Tenants, Interested Parties Public Open House 3/4/09 Meetings with Multiple Property Owners HaelnutArticle 2009 Review of the Plan Specifics by PC Presentation by FTB 3/ 12/09 Public Hearings 3/26/09, 4/23/09, 5/28/09 3 Worksessions Meetings with Fire Department 3/25, 5/8, 5/20 Plan remanded to staff for revisions to address the public comments C: \temp \XPGpWise \Process.doc Attachment B 31 Staff to Review Public Comments and Revise Draft Plan Meeting and PC work session with EcoNW to discuss additional economic analysis 718/09 Meetings with Fire Department and PW Individual meetings with Property Owners EcoNW led Focus groups 9/29/09 Local and Regional Developers Local Property Owners and Managers Wesield Mall Representatives Presented EcoNW TUC Implementation Analysis to PC 12/10/09 2010 Internal Departmental Review Process on Street Cross sections Meetings with DCD, Public Works Fire 3/5/10, 4/20/ 10, 5/4/ 10, 5/ 18/ 10 Presented EcoNW TUC Implementation Analysis to CAP 3/22/10 Proposed Stakeholder Review Process to CAP 9/ 06/ 10 to CC 9/27/ 10 to CAP 2/28/ 11 Future Public Involvement /Stakeholder Process Review of the Revised Plan by PC Public Hearings Public Open House Work Sessions Forward PC Recommended Draft Plan to CC Review of the PC Recommended Plan by CC Review of Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Plan Open House Public Hearing Worksessions Adoption of Plan, Implementing Ordinances and SEIS by CC 32 Otrktp y City ®f Tukwila and Parks Committee Comm Affair -190 COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND PARKS COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes February 28, 2011— 5:00 p.m.; Conference Room #3 PRESENT Councilmembers: Verna Seal, Chair; Joe Duffle and De'Sean Quinn Staff: Rick Still, Derek Speck, Jack Pace, Nora Gierloff, Brandon Miles, Lynn Miranda, Steve Lancaster and Kimberly Matej Guests: Vanessa Zaputil (resident), Ellen Gengler (resident), Aaron Hundtofte (Riverton Development), Kent Alexander (Riverton Development), Andy Ciarrocchi (Westfield) CALL TO ORDER: Committee Chair Seal called the meeting to order at 4:59 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS No presentations. II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Development Agreement: 12909 East Marginal Wav South (Riverton Development) Staff is seeking Council direction as to whether not to enter into a development agreement with the property owner, also known as Riverton Development, at 12909 East Marginal Way, regarding the construction of a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified, mixed use building. A development agreement has been suggested as a means to address some code ambiguities and uncertainties, including: G Parking issues Split zoning Setbacks As a result of such an agreement, the City would experience its first LEED certified building and full frontage improvements. The Committee was in agreement that a draft development agreement should be prepared for the Committee /Council review process. Additionally, staff inquired about the Committee's preference for the project approval. Committee members recommended suggestion 2.b. as outlined on page 3 on the agenda packet, summarized below: Council will simultaneously review the development agreement and design review application, allowing the project to have one public hearing. Staff commented that development agreements are usually created and entered into when there is a unique project in which not every issue is addressed in the Code. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THE PROCESS AS OUTLINE IN LETTER B. FORWARD TO MARCH 14 COW FOR DISCUSSION. B. Tukwila Urban Center /Southcenter Plan: Public Involvement Strategy Staff is seeking Committee recommendation and Council approval on how to proceed with expanding public involvement in/on the Tukwila Urban Center Plan/Southcenter. >r At the September 27, 2010, Committee of the Whole meeting the City Council requested staff conduct additional research on opportunities for public outreach and involvement, rather than move forward with a consultant agreement to lead stakeholder outreach. The Council requested staff return to Committee with results on other outreach/public involvement alternatives. 33 Community Affairs Parks Committee Minutes February 28. 2011- Paae 2 After a brief overview of the history of the plan process to date, Committee discussion ensued. Committee members ultimately recommended that public involvement in this project should include both meetings with individual stakeholders and with a stakeholder group (see options 1 and 2 as outlined under the Recommendations in the Committee agenda packet). Committee members did not express interest in reducing the scope of the project as outlined in option 3. Committee members acknowledged that previously, the Council did not desire the approach of meetings with individual stakeholders as described in option 1; however, given the time that has passed and other considerations, the Committee felt it would be worthwhile to revisit the option with the full Council. RECOMMENDATION MADE WITH UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO MARCH 14 COW FOR DISCUSSION. C. Ballot Measure Special Election: Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District Per previous Council direction, staff presented a timeline and draft resolution requesting the King County Director of Elections call a special election on August 16, 2011, and place on the ballot a measure regarding the formation of and funding for a Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District. Council originally considered calling a special election during the month of February 2011; however, a number of factors affected the ability to meet required timelines associated with the February deadline. Staff has prepared timeline requirements and estimated costs associated with placing the measure on the next available ballot which is August 16. Staff reported that the items such as levy rate and governance structure were derived from information provided in a memo from Rick Still, dated February 23, 2011. The memo is included in the Committee agenda packet for review. Vanessa Zapitul, Tukwila resident, spoke on behalf a citizen group that has expressed interest in the continued operation of the pool. Ms. Zapitul suggested the City consider a third party operator for the pool and alternate means of providing necessary staff. She stated that, regrettably, that the citizen group will not be able to support this process and /or a ballot measure if a third party is not considered. Committee members recognize that there are a number of factors involved with this ballot measure and continued operation of the pool facility. In consideration of such details, the Committee thought it may be in the best interest of the City Council to hold a work session to discuss these factors prior to making a decision on how to proceed. RECOMMEDATION TO HOLD A WORK SESSION PRIOR TO THE COUNCIL MAKING A DECISION. FORWARD TO MARCH 14 COW FOR DISCUSSION. D. Parks Recreation Events Calendar As an information only item, Rick Still reviewed a calendar of upcoming Parks Recreation events for the months of March and April with the Committee. INFORMATION ONLY. III. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 6:09 p.m. Next meeting: Monday, March 14, 2011 5:00 p.m. Conference Room #3 Committee Chair Approval Mi VW KAM. Reviewed by NG and SL. 34 COUNCIL AGENDA SY1VOPSIS �IILA iv ITEM No. �J q� Initials Meeti* Date 1 Prepared by 1 Mayor's review 1 Council review t e,E. C 03/14/11 1 BIM 1 1 t+ c 4 r y ITEM 'INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 11-032 STAFF SPONSOR: BRANDON MILES I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 3/14/11 Ac; I :NU,\ ITEM TITLE Discussion on Possible Development Agreement in the Riverton Area (12909 East Marginal Way South). CAT! Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 03/14/11 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date SP( )NSOR 1 1 Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PW Si' ONSOR's A property owner has asked the City to enter into a Development Agreement for the SI f\IMARY construction of a LEED Certified mixed use building at 12909 East Marginal Way South. If the Council wants to consider this, staff will prepare a draft Development Agreement and bring it back to Council in April. The City Council is also being asked to provide input on a process for review of the entire project. No City property or funds are involved. RI WI_,D BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 2/28/11 COMMInEE CHAIR: COUNCILMEMBER SEAL RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMrN. Department of Community Development COMMIYrEE unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole :COST IMPACT FUND. SOURCE EXPI?,NDITURE, REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $N /A $N /A $N /A Fund Source: N/A Connnzents N/A MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 03/14/11 MTG. DATE ATTACH ATTACHMENTS 03/14/11 Informational Memo dated February 22, 2011 Aerial Map Proposed Site Plan Minutes from the Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting of 02/28/11 35 36 *siI ILA �J �ti City of Tukwila F E Jim Haggerton, Mayor MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton Community Affairs and Park Committee FROM: Brandon J. Miles, Senior Planner DATE: February 22, 2011 SUBJECT: Riverton Development 12909 East Marginal Way South ISSUE Does the City Council want to consider entering into a Development Agreement for the construction of a mixed use building at 12909 East Marginal Way South? BACKGROUND The City has been approached by a property owner who is requesting that the City enter into a Development Agreement for the construction of a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified, mixed use building at 12909 East Marginal Way South (see attached map). The property is zoned Neighborhood Commercial Center (NCC) and the applicant is proposing a use which is permitted in the zone. The City has been working with the property owner to identify any Zoning code issues with the proposed development on the property. As currently designed the building has several small code issues specifically, with parking, split zoning on one of the parcels, first floor usage, and setbacks. Parking. The property owner is proposing a three story, mixed use building. The ground floor along East Marginal Way will have commercial tenants, which will include a small restaurant. Residential dwelling units (mixture of one and two bedrooms) will be included on the first, second and third floors. The City's parking regulations would require that a total of 63 stalls be provided for the proposed use. The property owner is proposing to install 37 parking stalls on site and create an additional 11 stalls along East Marginal Way South. Thus, the total number of parking stalls proposed for the development is 48. This creates a deficiency of 15 parking stalls. In order to install the on- street parking stalls the applicant will be required to complete full frontage improvements along their property and the adjacent school district (bus parking) property. Typically, the City would use the parking variance process to address the issue presented by this development. However, it's unclear if the City can process a parking variance for this project. City code prohibits the issuance of a parking variance when the project is within 300 feet of a single family zone. It's unclear if this 300 feet requirement is based on path of travel or simply by distance. Split Zoning. A parcel that is part of this development has split zoning, Low Density Residential and NCC. Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) 18.08.040 provides an avenue for addressing this type of situation. "Where a district boundary line divides a lot which was in single ownership at the time of passage of this Title, the Hearing Examiner may permit, as a special exception, the extension of the regulations for either portion of the lot not to exceed 50 feet beyond the district line into the remaining portion of the lot". 37 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 The property owner petitioned and the Hearing Examiner approved extending the NCC zoning onto the LDR zoned portion. However, that approval has expired. The property owner could request that the Hearing Examiner reapprove the project; however this would add cost and time to the project. First Floor Usaae The NCC zone allows mixed use buildings; however the code is unclear if the first floor can have residential units. TMC 18.22.050 (13) states that multi family units are allowed above office and retail uses. The applicant is proposing to have retail uses fronting along East Marginal Way, but would have first floor residential units facing the interior of the lot. At this location it would not seem feasible to require retail and /or office in the back part of the property. Setbacks In order to create a unique building the property owner has requested some deviations from the required front setbacks along East Marginal Way. The TMC permits 18 inches of roof overhang within required setback areas. The property owner has requested that we permit other architectural elements to encroach the same distance into the setback. The specific items that would encroach would be approved as part of design review, but would likely be balconies, bay windows, and other incidental building features. As part of the Development Agreement the property owner has committed to the following: a. Building the first LEED certified building in the City. LEED certification is a building standard for level of green development. The City has no code requirements to mandate the construction of LEED buildings. b. The applicant would utilize Low Impact Development (LID) standards in the development to deal with stormwater. Again, LID standards are encouraged, but not required in Tukwila. c. Construction of frontage improvements that exceed City standards. Typically, the City can only require construction of frontage improvements along those portions of the right of way that are adjacent to a particular development. In this case, the applicant is proposing to construct frontage improvements off -site. These frontage improvements will include a sidewalk, bike lane, and on- street parking. Once completed these frontage improvements may act as a catalyst for the development of the school property. DISCUSSION Besides the issues with parking, the City staff believes that the development issues listed above are minor. Even parking could be addressed through a Development Agreement. The driving force for the required number of parking stalls are the residential units. City Code requires that two stalls be provided for each dwelling unit. This parking requirement for residential dwellings may be too high. As the City Council is aware, the City adopted code changes modifying the parking requirements for the NCC area around the Tukwila Village site (TMC 18.43). Additionally, City staff has researched other city codes and has found that may codes require Tess parking for residential units than is required in Tukwila. As part of any Development Agreement the City would provide controls to mitigate possible impacts associated with the development. These controls would be reviewed by the City Council before approval of any Development Agreement. This is the same type of process staff would use to process a parking variance, but it's unclear if this development is eligible for a parking variance. It's also unclear why this property is not within the Tukwila International Boulevard (TIB) Corridor. The TIB Corridor ends on the south side of S. 130 Street. The NCC properties located north of S. 130 Street are the only NCC zoned properties that are not located within W:12011 Info Memos \RivertonDA.doc 38 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 the TIB Corridor. The TIB Development standards provide significant flexibility that the applicant could utilize if the property was within the TIB Corridor. The proposed development highlights some issues with the current Zoning Code regulations and these issues should be ultimately addressed with Code amendments which would clarify the City Council intent. Yet, the time it takes to process the code amendments would impact a developer who is ready to build, thus the need for a Development Agreement. Staff has not prepared a draft Development Agreement, but first wanted to get input from the Council. The questions before the City Council are as follows: 1. Does the Council want to consider entering into a Development Agreement? If the answer is yes, staff will work with the property owner to draft a development agreement and will bring it back to Council in April for consideration and a public hearing. 2. If the answer is yes, what type of process does the Council want to provide for the applicant in order to approve the project? a. The Council could only consider a Development Agreement with the items listed above and require that the building design be approved by the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) at a later date. This option would provide the least deviation from the City's existing process; however it would add to the project timeline. This option would require that the applicant have one public hearing with the City Council for the Development Agreement and one with the BAR for the design review application. b. At the same time the Council reviews the Development Agreement, they could also review the Design Review application. This would speed up the applicant's review process and allow the project to only have one public hearing. c. A hybrid approach would be for Council to review the Development Agreement and require that the building design be approved by the Director. This would option would only require one public hearing. RECOMMENDATION The Committee is being asked to forward this item to the March 14, 2011 Committee of the Whole meeting. Staff supports the applicant's request for a Development Agreement. The project will provide the following to the City: a. LEED Certified Building; b. Site Developed with Low Impact Development; and c. Frontage Improvements that exceed our code requirements. All that is being asked of the Council at this time is to provide consensus to consider a development agreement at a later date. No commitments to actually enter into a development agreement need to be decided at this time, as the full Council process will be followed once a development agreement has been crafted. With regards to the various options of how to proceed, staff supports all the options provided. ATTACHMENTS A. Aerial Map B. Proposed Site Plan W12011 Info Memos\RivertonDA.doc 39 PROJECT SITE AERIAL MAP "ii..3 ',q, c 2 VM DI!m>lnl 'S ADM IDtMaIDV\I 3 606Z I. 11 q a c ii. I if asea luawdolanaG uotiA iGn J FI'''.'• 1H tli 7 J ::::i:::: 1: 1] :L i iiH I::: ,•.::•H L:::i :::::i 7 1 '1 77: :i:Iii: :1 I:. t.:1 F;.! -A iit. .4 ':'''•':'''1••" i 1:::1:.: .,.:•;'';_1[7',4' .A•i•: .',4 2 o_ j.,', i: 1: 1:1' 9H' .i: 2 le 1 '1 I H;•:1:I 5 I ::-011:::' l::::: 5 :-',7: i :11.,::i1!111,.i111i1:) g ll ig'::'" I LI .i :•.:.:1::::•1:::ild g 1],i1 I 1 i 1, g .iti:::1' 11 gy! 1 g i_, Hi ...1.i:1 .141 i.. AA. 0_ 0 Air:•_'• Erg.1 1 t i i l' f 1 I 1 g, E t. 1 1::. 1:' H. g z, ti„. IVA gi g g gISLi E 1 1 r 1 [‘l c.) (.D 4 j z g n i 1 E 1 3 1 E, ,11 "it 7•:t:,..::, V 4 14 41 MAI .1._ —1— i o- 5 1 :.i.`a.;,.• ri ‘6.y. ,..i s r ArA Am.. 1, E t E5 1 1; i 1; i r ,I, I Og ;itg t L 2z 1\ ;!iS%';'1>,-",-- A A ,,•••,,%1•:;,':'/',,, V t,-2 2- 2V2 221: i 2 :3! i 5 l l' :.......;;;-'-,%(-7?-:','",-N, ti i ....1 1 9 ;1 ::11 i 4 W ,l .7, =i 1 '1. ;i to ,77 g•,,.•,:,,,, i,, ,E g g il t 1 1 Ilk' 1 19 E, to i io 1 i A: 2,:-.11 :I k ;H f I Et ea, L !::.:g:.L: I .1 I F :II i 1:1.:-Iiiii 1 ...g F.. 1 14 1 g... :t 4 I 2 ii ii _i?, ..4 it ii I 1 IH 4 1 l i!,4 il 4 A 1 1 1 :1 .1. :t.' t. gr. 7... 7,:tr gAisr i d 0 8 .9,,,i1 ....1.4. I I I Z ;:ar,i 4•.° 2 P. 14 F' .12 RIOCZYIN g.J S 41 C ILA =h, sy ti C 01Tukw o_ Community Affairs and Parks Committee 9Qa COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND PARKS COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes February 28, 2011— 5:00 p.m.; Conference Room #3 PRESENT Councilmembers: Verna Seal, Chair; Joe Duffle and De' Sean Quinn Staff: Rick Still, Derek Speck, Jack Pace, Nora Gierloff, Brandon Miles, Lynn Miranda, Steve Lancaster and Kimberly Matej Guests: Vanessa Zaputil (resident), Ellen Gengler (resident), Aaron Hundtofte (Riverton Development), Kent Alexander (Riverton Development), Andy Ciarrocchi (Westfield) CALL TO ORDER: Committee Chair Seal called the meeting to order at 4:59 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS No presentations. H. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Development Aureement: 12909 East Marginal Wav South (Riverton Development) Staff is seeking Council direction as to whether not to enter into a development agreement with the property owner, also known as Riverton Development, at 12909 East Marginal Way, regarding the construction of a Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certified, mixed use building. A development agreement has been suggested as a means to address some code ambiguities and uncertainties, including: :Sy„,-- Parking issues 0 Split zoning Setbacks As a result of such an agreement, the City would experience its first LEED certified building and full frontage improvements. The Committee was in agreement that a draft development agreement should be prepared for the Committee /Council review process. Additionally, staff inquired about the Committee's preference for the project approval. Committee members recommended suggestion 2.b. as outlined on page 3 on the agenda packet, summarized below: Council will simultaneously review the development agreement and design review application, allowing the project to have one public hearing. Staff commented that development agreements are usually created and entered into when there is a unique project in which not every issue is addressed in the Code. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS THE PROCESS AS OUTLINE IN LETTER B. FORWARD TO MARCH 14 COW FOR DISCUSSION. B. Tukwila Urban Center /Southcenter Plan: Public Involvement Strategv Staff is seeking Committee recommendation and Council approval on how to proceed with expanding public involvement in/on the Tukwila Urban Center Plan/Southcenter. At the September 27, 2010, Committee of the Whole meeting the City Council requested staff conduct additional research on opportunities for public outreach and involvement, rather than move forward with a consultant agreement to lead stakeholder outreach. The Council requested staff return to Committee with results on other outreach/public involvement alternatives. 42 r COUNCIL AGENDA. SYNOPSIS (-01LA ►v 4 y Initials ITEM NO. 4M -ft, Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor revieav Council review .�r u" 03/14/11 1 RF 1 61 03/21/11 I RF 01,K---, 4:-.:v 290: ITEM INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 11-033 STAFF SPONSOR: REBECCA FOX I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 3/14/11 AG ISNDA ITEM TITLE Annual Comprehensive Plan amendments C.\ 11?GORY Briefing Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Meeting Other Mtg Date 3/14/11 Mtg Date 3/21/11 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 3/21/11 Mtg Date S! )NSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PW SPONSOR'S Briefing on 3 requests for site specific Comprehensive Plan amendments /rezones in 2011. SUMMARY No action is needed. On 3/21/11, there will be a public meeting to hear comments from citizens and the applicants. After hearing from public and discussion at the 3/21/11 meeting, the City Council shall be asked to take action on each request to either to deny, defer or refer the realest to the Planning Commission for review RISVIE BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: N/A COMMITTEE CHAIR: N/A RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Department of Community Development COMMITTEE COST IMPACT `FUND SOURCE. ExpENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION':, 03/14/11 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 03/14/11 Informational memorandum dated 3/9/11 Attachments A through X *No Community Affairs and Parks minutes. This item is a quasi judicial matter, and at the direction of the City Attorney, came directly to the City Council.) 1 43 44 ILA h y City of Tukwila 0 Jim Haggerton, Mayor 19 INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Committee of the Whole FROM: Jack Pace, Community Development Director DATE: March 9, 2011 SUBJECT: ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS ISSUE The City of Tukwila received three applications for Comprehensive Plan map and zoning map changes on specific sites in the Manufacturing /Industrial Center for review during 2011. On March 14, 2011, the City Council will be briefed on the applications. No action is required at this meeting. On March 21, 2011, the City Council will hold a public meeting to hear from interested citizens and the applicants regarding requests under consideration for Comprehensive Plan amendment and rezone. After the public meeting and discussion, the City Council will decide that evening whether to forward each proposed amendment to the Planning Commission for further consideration and recommendation, to defer review or to deny the request. BACKGROUND The City of Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1995, establishes goals and policies that guide the community as it accommodates growth and change over time. The Comprehensive Plan's policies and land use map articulate the community's long range vision. The zoning code and map implement this vision through specific land use guidance, including what uses can locate and operate in a specific zone. The Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA) gives Tukwila the opportunity to amend the Comprehensive Plan once a year, unless it is an emergency. Proposed amendments may include changes to policies or the future land use map. Since the GMA requires Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan land use map and zoning map to be consistent, any change to the Comprehensive Plan land use map also requires a rezone /change in the zoning map. To be eligible for consideration, applications for proposed amendments must be submitted by December 31. Applications are reviewed during the following year, with the potential for two separate reviews by the City Council, and one by the Planning Commission. There are opportunities for public comment at each stage. The City Council acts as a legislative body when it makes changes to the Comprehensive Plan, including site specific changes to the Comprehensive Plan map. When it considers making site specific changes to the zoning map, the City Council acts as judges in a quasi judicial manner. Different procedures and rules apply to the Comprehensive Plan amendment (i.e. legislative) process and the rezone (i.e. quasi judicial) processes Review Process The procedure for amending the Comprehensive Plan is illustrated by Attachment A. Screening: In the first review, the Council holds a public meeting, reviews feedback, and identifies the amendments that will be analyzed and considered in the cycle. The City Council 45 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 uses adopted criteria in selecting Comp Plan amendments to consider, and possibly forward to the Planning Commission for further review. 1. Is the issue already adequately addressed in the Comprehensive Plan? 2. If the issue is not adequately addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, is there a need for the proposed change? 3. Is the proposed change the best means for meeting the identified public need? 4. Will the proposed change result in a new benefit to the community? After considering the criteria, the Council shall make a motion either to: 1. Refer the proposal to the Planning Commission for review; 2. Modify the proposal and refer it to the Planning Commission; 3. Defer consideration for one year to get additional information; or, 4. Reject the proposal Planning Commission /Analysis: City staff and the Planning Commission then analyze the possible amendments that the Council identified and forwarded in the threshold screening. The Planning Commission holds public meeting, and makes a recommendation. City Council /Final Action: Staff submits an ordinance containing the Planning Commission's recommended amendments for the Council to consider. In the case of a map change, a rezone is also required. In this case, two ordinances are prepared, one to amend the Comprehensive Plan map, and one to change the zoning map. Council reviews the staff work, hears from the public in an open record hearing, and then considers adoption of the proposals. A final, amended ordinance, adopted by the Council before December 31, adds the selected amendments into the Comprehensive Plan. Changes in review process for 2011: This year the City Attorney has recommended changes to Tukwila's review process, in order to distinguish clearly between the quasi judicial, site specific rezones and the legislative Comprehensive Plan amendments. This will ensure the proper review process is followed. These changes are incorporated in the process described above. They include: 1) going straight to the City Council for the public meeting, rather first to a Council Committee; 2) holding a public meeting, rather than a hearing, with the Planning Commission; and 3) holding a single, open- record hearing with the City Council after the Planning Commission's meeting and recommendation. DISCUSSION: Applications- The requests are described briefly below. Each of the requested amendments is located in the Manufacturing Industrial Center, which is currently being reviewed as part of the required regular update of the Comprehensive Plan. (Attachment B) A moratorium in effect on most non- industrial permits will expire on July 1, 2011. Comprehensive Plan amendments and rezones are exempt from the moratorium in the MIC. Application #1 Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad (BNSF)— Redesignate Three Lots from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Manufacturing /Industrial Center —Light (M /IC- L)(North Lot) File #L10-073—Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment File# L 10- 074 Zoning Map Amendment. Rf 2 03/09/20112:40:48 PM W:\201 I Info Memos \CompPlan.doc 46 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 The applicant Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) seeks to redesignate three vacant parcels "North Lot totaling approximately 1.8 acres from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Manufacturing /Industrial Center —Light (MIC /L) Attachment C) Located at the western edge of the existing BNSF multi -modal yard east of 44 Place S., the site is shown in the upper portion of the aerial map. (Attachment D) The nearest intersection is South 122 and 44 Place South. The purpose of the rezone request is to allow expansion of the adjacent intermodal yard, most likely for container storage. (Attachments E, F) Access to the lots would be through the existing gate. The adjacent intermodal yard is designated Manufacturing /Industrial Center -Heavy (MIC /H), with the proposed MIC /L zoning intended to provide a transition to the LDR residential area. In this case, there is little functional distinction between the intermodal yard's MIC -H and the proposed MIC -L zoning since both will be used for the intermodal yard's operations. The properties are located in the Allentown neighborhood, with single family homes immediately to the south, and across 44 Place South to the west. The neighborhood has a combination of newer and older homes. Several non conforming industrial uses, including Western Cascade and Union Tanks Works operate in the immediate area. These are "grandfathered" as non- conforming uses, and are allowed to operate provided they do not expand or increase their non- conformity in any way. Allentown residents are very concerned over the proposals. A number of citizen comments opposed to the rezones have been received, including two petitions with a combined total of 56 signatures. (Attachments G, H) Additional letters and emails expressing negative opinions and /or requesting information are included. (Attachments I P) Review Criteria: Per TMC 18.80.060, the Council considers the following criteria in deciding whether to forward the application to the Planning Commission for review: 1. Is the issue already adequately addressed in the Comprehensive Plan? Aspects of the requested change designation are addressed in several goals and policies as follows: Objective #1: The Comprehensive Plan's highest priority,.as expressed through Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Objective #1 is "To improve and sustain residential neighborhood quality and livability. Goal 7.2 Noise Abatement Residential neighborhoods protected from undue noise impacts, in order to ensure for all residents the continued use, enjoyment and value of their homes, public facilities and recreation, and the outdoors. Goal 7.3 Overall Land Use Pattern land use pattern that encourages a strong sense of community by grouping compatible and mutually supportive uses and separating incompatible uses The MIC is seen as the focus of significant industrial activity that must be balanced with the needs of nearby residential neighborhoods: Rf 3 03/09/20112:40:48 PM W:\2011 Info Memos \CompPlan.doc 47 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 Goal 11.1 (Manufacturing /Industrial Center); Support for existing industrial activities in the Manufacturing /Industrial Center and development of industrial activity in order to maximize the employment and economic benefits to the people of Tukwila and the region, while minimizing impacts on residential neighborhoods Policy 11.1.6 Develop and designate appropriate zoning, buffers, mitigation and access opportunities where manufacturing zoning directly abuts or impacts residential zoning so that MIC uses may operate without significant degradation of the residential environment. 2. If the issue is not adequately addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, is there a need for the proposed change? Residences, in the LDR zone, are immediately adjacent to BNSF's intermodal yard, designated MIC /H. No buffer is present between the two zones. By establishing the current LDR designation for the Allentown community immediately adjacent to the existing MIC /H designation for BNSF's intermodal yard, the City of Tukwila indicated its intention to retain Allentown's residential community, even without a buffer between homes and industry. Boundaries between LDR, the lowest intensity zone, and MIC /H, the highest impact zone, were designated as part of the 1995 Comprehensive Plan development. The fixed boundary between the residential community and the railroad's intermodal yard is intended to limit further impacts on the residential community, and to allow the intermodal yard to continue operating. Rezones and Comprehensive Plan changes are exempt from the current moratorium on development in the MIC area. 3. Is the proposed change the best means for meeting the identified public need? Sustaining and improving the residential neighborhood is identified as the City's key priority. Changing LDR to MIC /L would allow industrial activity, uses and impacts to extend farther into the residential area which is already significantly impacted by noise, light and traffic from BNSF's existing operations. 4. Will the proposed change result in a net benefit to the community? The proposed change from LDR to MIC -L will allow an existing industrial use to expand its operations further into a single family residential area. Although expansion would benefit BNSF, and could result in additional economic activity, it is likely to have a negative impact on the existing Allentown neighborhood. The proposed change to allow expansion of the intermodal yard would prevent future residential use on the sites, and would negatively affect existing residential uses in the vicinity. Rf 4 03/09/20112:40:48 PM W: \201 1 Info Memos \CompPlan.doc 48 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 Conclusions: The Comprehensive Plan's highest priority is to improve and sustain residential neighborhood quality and livability. The Comprehensive Plan designates LDR and MIC -H adjacent to each other without buffer in Allentown. Extending industrial zoning and uses into the residential area will negatively affect the residential quality of life. Expanding the industrial zoning in this location is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the request. Application #2 Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroacl—"South Lot"-- Redesignate Five Lots from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Manufacturing /Industrial Center —Heavy (M /IC -H) File #L10-075—Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment File# L10-076--Zoning Map Amendment. The applicant Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) seeks to amend the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map on approximately 3.2 acres on five parcels, from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Manufacturing /Industrial Center —Heavy (MIC /H). (Attachment P) The properties are located on the western edge of BNSF's existing intermodal yard on 51 Place South, and are indicated in the lower portion of the aerial map. (Attachment C). The nearest intersection is at South 124 Street and 51st. The purpose of the rezone request is to allow expansion of the adjacent intermodal yard operations for either trailer or container storage. (Attachments Q, R) There are no plans to limit or reroute traffic from S. 124 Street. BNSF plans to continue using its existing entrance, immediately to the north of the subject site in the MIC /H zone. The Tots would be accessed from within the intermodal yard, rather than from 51 Place S. The properties are in the Allentown neighborhood, with single family homes immediately to the west across 51s Place South, a dead -end street. Four lots are cleared, and one contains a house, which is currently under contract to BNSF. Mature trees currently screen the yard from the east side of the subject properties. The yard itself is at a higher elevation than the proposed rezone site. As mentioned in the earlier discussion of the North Lot (File L10 -073 and L10 -074), Allentown residents have expressed significant concern over and opposition to the proposals. Comments did not distinguish between the two proposals, and seem to apply to equally to the North and South Lot proposals. (See Attachments G through P) Per TMC 18.80.060, the Council considers the following criteria in deciding whether to forward an application to the Planning Commission for review: Rf 5 03/09/20112:40:48 PM W: \2011 Info Memos \CompPlan.doc 49 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 6 1. Is the issue already adequately addressed in the Comprehensive Plan? Aspects of the requested change designation are addressed in several goals and policies. Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Objective #1 is "To improve and sustain residential neighborhood quality and livability." Goal 7.2 Noise Abatement Residential neighborhoods protected from undue noise impacts, in order to ensure for all residents the continued use, enjoyment and value of their homes, public facilities and recreation, and the outdoors. Goal 7.3 Overall Land Use Pattern —A land use pattern that encourages a strong sense of community by grouping compatible and mutually supportive uses and separating incompatible uses The MIC seen as the focus of significant industrial activity. Goal 11.1 (Manufacturing /Industrial Center); Support for existing industrial activities in the Manufacturing /Industrial Center and development of industrial activity in order to maximize the employment and economic benefits to the people of Tukwila and the region, while minimizing impacts on residential neighborhoods Policy 11.1.6 Develop and designate appropriate zoning, buffers, mitigation and access opportunities where manufacturing zoning directly abuts or impacts residential zoning so that MIC uses may operate without significant degradation of the residential environment. 2. If the issue is not adequately addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, is there a need for the proposed chang? Residences, designated LDR, are immediately adjacent to BNSF's intermodal yard, designated MIC /H. No buffer is present between the two zones. In establishing the current LDR designation of the Allentown community immediately adjacent to the existing MIC /H designation for BNSF's intermodal yard, the City of Tukwila indicated its clear intention to retain Allentown's residential community, even without a buffer between homes and industry. LDR, the lowest intensity zone, and MIC /H, the highest impact zone, were designated as part of the 1995 Comprehensive Plan development process. A distinct boundary exists between residential uses and the railroad's operations, in order to limit further impacts on Allentown's residential community, and to allow the intermodal yard to continue its operation. Rezones and Comprehensive Plan changes are exempt from the current moratorium on development in the MIC area. 3. Is the proposed change the best means for meeting the identified public need? Redesignating from LDR to MIC /L would extend industrial activity, uses and impacts further into the residential area which is already significantly affected by noise, light and traffic from BNSF's intermodal yard operations. This is inconsistent with the public need for high quality neighborhoods. Rf 6 03/09/20112:40:48 PM W:\2011 Info Memos \CompPlan.doc 50 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 7 4. Will the proposed change result in a net benefit to the community? The proposed change from LDR to MIC /L would allow an existing industrial use to expand its operations further into a single family residential area. Although expansion would benefit BNSF and could result in modest economic benefit, it is likely to have a negative impact on the Allentown neighborhood. The proposed change would prevent future residential use on the sites. Expanding the intermodal yard further into the neighborhood would have a negative effect on developing future residential uses. Conclusions: The Comprehensive Plan's highest priority is to improve and sustain residential neighborhood quality and livability. The Comprehensive Plan designates LDR and MIC /H adjacent to each other without buffer in Allentown. Extending industrial zoning and uses into the residential area will negatively affect the residential quality of life. Expanding the industrial zoning in this location is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Recommendation: Staff recommends denial of the request. Application #3 Community Bank at Unified Grocer Site Redesignate one lot from Manufacturing Industrial Center /Heavy (MIC /H) to Light Industrial (LI) File #L11-001—Comprehensive Plan Map Amendment File# L 11- 002 Zoning Map Amendment. Request: The applicant, Mikel Hansen of the Sabey Corporation is requesting a change in Comprehensive Plan and zoning on .64 acres from Manufacturing Industrial Center /Heavy (MIC /H) to Light Industry (LI) at 10200 E. Marginal Way South. (Attachments T U) The property was formerly occupied by Community Bank. Now vacant, it has been acquired by the Sabey Corporation. (Attachments V, W) Backaround: In 2007, the City of Tukwila approved a rezone request from the Sabey Corporation from Manufacturing Industrial Center -Heavy (MIC /H) to Light Industrial (LI) on 32 acres of the 62 acre Unified Grocer (then Associated Grocer) site. (Attachment X) The 62 acre property is split between the City of Tukwila and the City of Tukwila, with the remaining 30 acres located immediately adjacent in the City of Seattle. The applicant's intent was to obtain compatible zoning changes from both Tukwila and Seattle to allow development of a large -scale project in light industrial and commercial uses. In 2009, the City of Seattle approved a rezone of the remaining 30 acres from General Industrial to Industrial Commercial. The applicant had wanted to include the subject property in the original 2007 rezone but did not own the parcel then. The applicant has now acquired the property, and is proceeding with the rezone request in order to prepare for eventual large scale development that includes the subject property. Rf 7 03/09/20112:40:48 PM W:\2011 Info Memos \CompPlan.doc 51 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 8 Review Criteria: Per TMC 18.80.060, the Council considers the following criteria in deciding whether to forward an application to the Planning Commission for review: 1. Is the issue already adequately addressed in the Comprehensive Plan? Comprehensive Plan policies balance support for the Manufacturing Industrial Center and industrial uses with Tukwila's overall goals for continued economic development and well- being. The MIC is seen as the focus of significant industrial activity. Goal 11.1 (Manufacturing /Industrial Center); Support for existing industrial activities in the Manufacturing /Industrial Center and development of industrial activity in order to maximize the employment and economic benefits to the people of Tukwila and the region, while minimizing impacts on residential neighborhoods. The MIC zones are intended primarily for industrial uses or activities that support these uses. Policies protect the and resource, allowing it to be used effectively to generate its potential of high -wage jobs and public revenue: Policy 11.1.5: Allow uses that are commonly associated with manufacturing and industry, including those directly supporting such activity, such as offices and laboratories, while prohibiting unrelated uses. Allowing a broader range of uses, including Tight industrial and commercial, that can be developed under the Light Industrial zoning generally supports a varied and healthy economy for Tukwila: Goal 2.1 Continuing enhancement of the community's economic well -being 2. If the issue is not already adequately addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. is there a need for the proposed change? The site is part of the Manufacturing Industrial Center which is currently being reviewed as part of the required Comprehensive Plan Update. A moratorium on most non industrial uses is in effect until its expiration on July 1, 2011. When the adjacent 32 acre rezone from MIC -H to LI was approved in 2007, the City of Tukwila considered the potential impacts that this action could have on existing and future land use and development in the Manufacturing /Industrial Center (M /IC). By approving the rezone, the City Council indicated that the LI designation was appropriate for the general location. If the City Council decides to forward the request to the Planning Commission for further review, the following may be discussed in more detail including the impacts of: Less land for the heaviest industrial uses in MIC /H; More retail and office due to the wider range of uses allowed in LI; Jobs and tax revenue to increase, as well as improvement the overall appearance of the area; Possible additional traffic impacts; Possible increased pressure on MIC uses that wish to remain or more pressure on industrial lands to convert to commercial uses; Rf 8 03/09/20112:40:48 PM W:\2011 Info Memos \CompPlan.doc 52 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 9 3. Is the proposed change the best means for meeting the identified public need? Redevelopment in the LI zone could provide a range of additional employment opportunities, depending on the mixture of uses that located in the project. The subject property is the last piece of property for a large scale project to include light industrial, office and service uses. By approving the 32 acre rezone from MIC /H to LI in 2007, the City Council indicated that it valued the potential large scale redevelopment with the anticipated jobs and economic activity that would follow. 4. Will the proposed change result in a net benefit to the community? Redesignating and rezoning the remaining United Grocers site presents opportunities for a development project in a large and important location at the northern boundary of Tukwila. New construction will meet current standards, including landscaping and frontage improvements, and will result in a more attractive site than what is currently there. Designating the property as LI shifts its redevelopment options from manufacturing and heavy industry that is permitted in the MIC /H. LI allows supportive commercial and light industrial uses, and would provide a transition to more commercial development that exists or is planned farther to the south. The site previously contained a bank, rather than industrial use. With redevelopment, former office jobs at the site could be replaced new jobs in the office and service sectors as part of an overall project. Light industrial uses would still be allowed. Conclusions: 1.The requested rezone is considered part of a 32 acre rezone from MIC -H to LI that was approved in 2007. 2. Changing from Manufacturing /Industrial Center —Heavy (MIC -H) to Light Industrial (LI) would reduce the amount of land available for the heaviest industrial uses, but would allow a range of non industrial uses to be developed at the site, including light industrial. 3. As LI, the property could be included as part of proposed large scale redevelopment with additional employment and revenue opportunities at a visible location. Recommendation: Staff recommends forwarding the request to the Planning Commission for further consideration. RECOMMENDATION The March 14, 2011 meeting is a briefing only. No action is required. After taking public comments on March 21, 2011 at the Committee of the Whole, the Council is being asked to consider each proposal, and decide by motion from among the following at this meeting: Refer the proposal as is to the Planning Commission for further review; Modify the proposal and refer to the Planning Commission for further review; Defer consideration until a later time to get more information; Reject the proposal. The decision is not whether to adopt the proposal, but rather whether it should be reviewed in greater detail, rejected or deferred. Rf 9 03/09/20112:40:48 PM W:\2011 Info Memos \CompPlan.doc 53 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 10 ATTACHMENTS A. Chart Comprehensive Plan amendment process B. Location of Requested Zoning /Comprehensive Plan changes C. Requested Zoning —BNSF North Lot –LDR to MIC /L D. Aerial Map -BNSF E. Application— Comprehensive Plan amendment request LDR to MIC /L(File #L10 -073 F. Application Rezone request –LDR to MIC /L (File #L10 -074) G. Citizen Petition H. Citizen Petition I. Comment letter —Ghita Breban J. Comment letter —Mr. and Mrs. Bendico K. Comment letter— Laurie Jenkins L. Comment letter— Laurie Jenkins M. Comment letter— Brooke Alford N. Comment letter— Brooke Alford O. Comment letter —Donna Anderson P. Comment letter— Marjorie Bates Q. Requested Zoning —BNSF South Lot –LDR to MIC /H R. Application— Comprehensive Plan —LDR to MIC /L (File #L10 -075) S. Application— Rezone —LDR to MIC /L (File #L10 -076) T. Aerial Map— Community Bank United Grocers U. Requested Zoning— Community Bank United Grocers MIC /H to LI V. Application— Comprehensive Plan —MIC /H to LI (File #L11 -001) W. Application— Rezone —MIC /H to LI (File #L11 -002) X. 2007 Associated Grocers Rezone —MIC /H to LI Rf 10 03/09/20112:40:48 PM W:\2011 Info Memos \CompPlan.doc 54 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDEMENT PROCESS CHART ATTACHMENT B jj i 0 \\:\-''s 7ukwi{,a Y Seattle iv1kC;1�•, Seattle ..11-C.' i o t E 111111 i I V- s �.e k .,.0 e.. ---S...„ t.. 500' S� 1� „r I Manufacturing f i Industrial Center /Heavy (MIC /H} 7) r MICIH t G r to Light Industrial (LI) Illz --;5--- 5 _i, Ital sti 9 7 VI Ica. rill 1 id'i.yP. r: --I/ A j Illy *F .LG -i ‘s 1 a r +l r f`i 3 j t s l ry t¢ N 1,...0=` M i wo l a m n J i h. I r I t IS 121191 PI 1, ll� 1 -0” r Q j f' i ,•"A.,,y ISM r l t ]1, i P.. Low Density Residential (LDR) to 1 r t a Manufacturing Industrial yl tzaw F 1 d II 1 3 i e,k -tT S_ CenterlLight (MICIL) Mi A. F II �Ql j, 1 litn 1 r 1 .0,\ I A I r I L lionwi—W„ t thst i h. 1 Mr L119 O ti. 11. $'i li l N gyp D a. 4 1 181 t( t I :x LI s b LIM 1411C111 MDRo Ih r r �a r ri Toil I W rr-k, A' y ii j a r 1 i.,3. /�f p FS�� -�u I• Wolof �4 i 5, 1 '''s CLl a r il Pat 129 St hi∎ LOR k' y` City of Tukwila Comprehensive o Low Density Residential (LDR) to o. Plan Amendment Vicinity Map Manufacturing Industrial ti Center/Heavy (MIC/H) 56 N. ICI t t- s, cl z; -1, 0 A AC- 1---- r,,,.) ,,,,--7> „/„„,,,,yrk---r---LH''''' c:/\\,"\\:>/:•..,„-ii-.. .1.''''''''''''. ,N n 4 A 14 4 1 tt t-1742-2(51.------ •,--71- C I 1-,1; -----7 P -1 --,-_-_,k-' i .L_J C r,-- e ;4•,.. 0 0 I, L_iik u. 0 1 0)- (Du H--;!1--- -'',c‘' .4 t_Li I _3 -4.-- -----Ac>, 0 7_tr 1 1- 1 1 „____L---_i 1 ____.:1, city of dme nt t r Plan Amen i ___1- CoMP 07 e i0-° As RegOn 11° t 0.0- m 0 1 C----3 T•1: proiect Vile lc L---1 P.,_ rPertV S 404 Sublect o 11,___ CD 11‘ng 1--- ;Elea 1, St f 52 4 ---i ----1---- 58 ATTACHMENT D BNSF REZONE AERIAL PHOTO 60 ATTACHMENT E Ji1l�a y qs CITY OF TUKWILA y COMPREHENSIVE %o,:''; Z Department of Community Development rr,,�� 1 f 1 6) I 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, 6 PLAN i s Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 437 -3665 t1 i eit Z E-mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us `4 t n AMENDMENTS APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P -CPA Planner: R to "c I File Number: (i 0`7 Application Complete (Date: I Project File Number: 17 f, C Application Incomplete (Date: I Other File Numbers: 1. 10 01 4 Re 26,14e. N I NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: BNSF Intermodal Facility Expansion North Lot LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. Vacant lots located east of 44th Place S. and adjacent to the existing BNSF facility at 12200 51st Place S. The nearest intersection is at S. 122nd Street /44th Place S. LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). Parcels 3347400915, 3347400930, and 3347400935. r. DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR The individual who: has decision making authority on behalf of the owner /applicant in meetings with City staff, has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: Sam Phanekham, BNSF Railway Company Address: 2500 Lou Menk Drive, AOB -3 Fort Worth, TX 76131 Phone: (817) 867 -6132 FAX: E -mail: sam.phanekham @bnsf.com Signature: ,,a Date: 12 -21 -2010 61 A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Existing: Low Density Residential (LDR) Proposed: Manufacturing /Industrial Center Light (MIC /L) B. ZONING DESIGNATION: Existing: Low Density Residential (LDR) Proposed: Manufacturing /Industrial Center Light (MIC /L) C. LAND USE(S): Existing: vacant Proposed: cargo container storage associated with BNSF rail yard operations (for proposed changes in land use designations or rezones) D. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING LAND USES: Describe the existing uses located within 1,000 feet in all directions from the property or area for which a change is proposed. To the west and south, land uses are mainly residential. There is a large truck maintenance and repair shop northwest of the site, and an airport car rental service to the west. Further south of the site is the Duwamish River. The BNSF facility and Interstate 5 are located east of the site. The parcels proposed to be rezoned are vacant. 62 1 4,4 __--4:4411-A, y q CITY OF TUKWILA A kti Department of Community Development .O l•11 4 p 10 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 Ifi�. •I rflf Telephone: (206) 431-3670 FAX (206) 431-3665 t i Vale E-mail. tukolan@ci.mkwi /905 AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 12200 51st Place S., Tukwila, WA 98178 for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at W fA (city), (state), on 1 f, _t: 20 10 Print Name e 1 m ,1- ukAN Address (-00 Ritau trit.Nm b .3 Tic 1413) Phone Number 'I1 312. bfo G l Signature On this day personally appeared before me l) to me own to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he /she sign the same J known voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS /1 9 I i- DAY OF i !.Lp1/� f. t 20 ID 404ty c .IOYIA E. SIMMONS 3 A A, olunA_ 6 Notary Public I NOTARY PU IC m a or the Statehf "r s j STATE OF TEXAS 1 cc// h residing at U /)�Tl+ co., 'FOF My Comrn. Exp. 03/11/2012 I K ,ern w,. My Commission expires on 1 0-0 a._-- 63 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT. CRITERIA The burden of proof to demonstrate that a change to the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code is warranted lies solely upon the proponent. The greater the degree of change proposed, the greater will be the burden of showing that the change is justified. The Planning Commission and the City Council will review your proposal using the criteria listed below. It is essential that you describe in a clear and precise manner why the amendment request should be approved. Attach additional sheet(s) with your responses to each criterion. You may submit other documentation in support of your proposal. A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA (TMC 18.80.050) Demonstrate how each of the following circumstances justifies a re- designation of your property or a change in existing Plan policies: 1. Describe how the issue is addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. If the issue is not adequately addressed, is there a need for the proposed change? 2. Why is the proposed change the best means for meeting the identified public need? What other options are there for meeting the identified public need? 3. Why will the proposed change result in a net benefit to the community? If not, what type of benefit can be expected and why? B. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA (TMC 18.80.010) 1. A detailed statement of what is proposed and why; 2. A statement of the anticipated impacts of the change, including the geographic area affected and the issues presented by the proposed change; 3. An explanation of why the current comprehensive plan or development regulations are deficient or should not continue in effect; (be specific; cite policy numbers and code sections that apply!) 4. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with and promotes the goals and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act; 5. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with applicable Countywide Planning Policies; 6. A statement of what changes, if any, would be required in functional plans (i.e., the City's water, sewer, storm water or shoreline plans) if the proposed amendment is adopted; 7. A statement of what capital improvements, if any, would be needed to support the proposed change, and how the proposed change will affect the capital facilities plans of the City; 8. A statement of what other changes, if any, are required in other City codes, plans or regulations to implement the proposed change. 64 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria Responses BNSF Facility Expansion Project i °LL ILA: W Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria (TMC 18.80.050): 1. Describe how the issue is addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. If the issue is not adequately addressed, is there a need for the proposed change? The proposed land use is inconsistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan designation. 2. Why is the proposed change the best means for meeting the identified public need? What other options are there for meeting the identified public need? The BNSF facility is constrained by the Duwamish River to the south and railroad tracks and Interstate 5 to the east. The proposed change is the best option, as there is no other way for the BNSF facility to expand without rezoning the surrounding Low Density Residential (LDR) areas. 3. Why will the proposed change result in a net benefit to the community? If not, what type of benefit can be expected and why? The BNSF facility expansion would allow for the creation of more jobs, benefiting the local economy. Expansion of the BNSF facility would also create additional tax revenue for the City of Tukwila. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria (TMC 18.80.010): 1. A detailed statement of what is proposed and why; BNSF proposes to change the zoning and comprehensive plan designation of the subject parcels from LDR to Manufacturing/Industrial Center Light (MIC /L). This change would allow the BNSF to expand operations and create additional storage area for cargo containers. 2. A statement of the anticipated impacts of the change, including the geographic area affected and the issues presented by the proposed change; The change would affect the surrounding low- density residential neighborhood to the west by expanding existing operations of the BNSF facility. The parcels that would be rezoned to MIC/L would provide a lower intensity buffer between the MIC /H zone and the LDR zone. This, along with landscaping and fencing, would provide an adequate buffer for nearby residences. Page 1 of 4 65 3. An explanation of why the current comprehensive plan or development regulations are deficient or should not continue in effect; (be specific; cite policy numbers and code sections that apply!) The current Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject parcels is LDR. The proposed Comprehensive Plan designation of MIC/L is more appropriate, as this zone is "intended to provide a major employment area containing distributive light manufacturing and industrial uses and other uses that support those industries" (TMC 18.36.010). The following Manufacturing/Industrial Center goals and policies from the Comprehensive Plan are supportive of the proposed project: Policy 2.2.13 Promote economic use of industrial lands outside the MIC by encouraging redevelopment of under utilized sites and by promoting the retention of large parcels or consolidation of smaller parcels of industrial land to facilitate their use in an efficient manner. Goal 11.1— Support for existing industrial activities in the Manufacturing /Industrial Center and development of new industrial activity in order to maximize the employment and economic benefits to the people of Tukwila and the region, while minimizing impacts on residential neighborhoods. 11.1.6 Develop and designate appropriate zoning, buffers, mitigation and access opportunities where manufacturing zoning directly abuts or impacts residential zoning so that MIC uses may operate without significant degradation of the residential environment. 4. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with and promotes the goals and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act; The proposed amendment complies with and promotes the following goals and requirements of the GMA: RCW 36.70A.020 Planning Goals Economic development. Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, promote the retention and expansion of existing businesses and recruitment of new businesses, recognize regional differences impacting economic development opportunities, and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public services, and public facilities. RCW 36.70A.115 Comprehensive plans and development regulations must provide sufficient land capacity for development. Counties and cities that are required or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 shall ensure that, taken collectively, adoption of Page 2 of 4 66 and amendments to their comprehensive plans and/or development regulations provide sufficient capacity of land suitable for development within their jurisdictions to accommodate their allocated housing and employment growth, including the accommodation of, as appropriate, the medical, governmental, educational, institutional, commercial, and industrial facilities related to such growth, as adopted in the applicable countywide planning policies and consistent with the twenty -year population forecast from the office of financial management. 5. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with applicable Countywide Planning Policies; The proposed amendment complies with the following Economic Development and Land Use Pattern Countywide Planning Policies: ED -6 Local jurisdictions' plans shall include policies that actively support the retention and expansion of the economic base of the multi County region. Local jurisdictions and the County shall work cooperatively on a regional basis and invite private sector participation to evaluate the trends, opportunities and weaknesses of the existing economy and to analyze the economic needs of key industries. Local jurisdictions' comprehensive plans shall include policies intended to foster: a. The development and retention of those businesses and industries which export their goods and services outside the region. These businesses and industries are critical to the economic strength and diversification of the economy; and b. A business climate which is supportive of business formation, expansion, and retention and recognizes the importance of small businesses in creating new jobs. ED -8 Where appropriate, jurisdictions' plans shall include policies intended to attract and retain industries, firms and jobs, within their locally determined or zoned manufacturing and industrial areas. ED -15 Local comprehensive plans should include policies which foster a climate supportive of the siting needs of industrial users and that recognize the important role they play in creating high -wage jobs. Local plans are encouraged to include policies designed to ensure that industrial use of industrial -zone land is not unduly encroached upon or limited by non supporting or incompatible uses. Local policies and plans are encouraged to support the continued availability of land for those industrial and supporting or compatible activities dependent on critical infrastructure as identified in local comprehensive plans. Jurisdictions should consider zoning or other means to provide opportunities for those uses in areas where infrastructure facilities can be utilized to exploit the economic benefit of that infrastructure. LU -53 All jurisdictions support the development of a regional industrial siting policy to promote industrial activity. Page 3 of 4 67 LU -54 Jurisdictions shall design access to the regional Manufacturing/Industrial Centers to facilitate the mobility of employees by transit, and the mobility of goods by truck, rail or waterway as appropriate. Regional comprehensive plans shall include strategies to provide capital improvement projects which support access for movement of goods. 6. A statement of what changes, if any, would be required in functional plans (i.e., the City's water, sewer, storm water or shoreline plans) if the proposed amendment is adopted; No changes would be required to any of the City's functional plans. 7. A statement of what capital improvements, if any, would be needed to support the proposed change, and how the proposed change will affect the capital facilities plans of the City; No capital improvements would be needed to support the proposed change. 8. A statement of what other changes, if any, are required in other City codes, plans or regulations to implement the proposed change. The proposal would require a rezone of the subject property from LDR to MIC/L (see attached Zoning Code Amendment form). Page4of4 68 N i O '5 J ,-4 c' n LL a= U Y C LL d co S s 1. y tee 3 J i i a i t •S 5 03 .fir- A I }1 U I I i i 1 11'. I n e, C os 1 W w “.30cr %i z aacoc /i a{ T f ,4 a_ 1. 1 P O v 's`_ i i j j 1', a,,r :V /7.1,r- 7, 7 4 1 i i ..1 I 1 i N. /SY 1: lo 7 11 1 d of y %I i i o C� Z t 4 i V;` V 4- ,e cl 1 7 k z'Z' .1 Ig' 11, 7,„ ,',<A 1, 1 t :i I 1 w I W m 1 4 e. d 3 b a F; Ln; l N *°d II 1 1 w J w 4 6 W Z a. t w a g �i 1 F Y W Q 1 z 6 1, 1 W W <L Q U a 1 j a 1 O O u F 8 Z i 1 K J W qW _I 11 o i 0 j��'j 1 w• r O s ?u 1 cI i i Q of o a i z 69 0 70 I i ATTACHMENT F CITY OF TUKWILA k� +s Department of Community Development s E C E I V E DZONING CODE c •i 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 MENDMENTS i O Telephone: (206) 431-3670 FAX (206) 431- 3j5,f` 1l r.` i 2 s E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us �'d7n�d16e7�e APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P -ZCA Planner: 4` X File Number: L. 16 6' 7 9, Application Complete (Date: II Li. l Project File Number: f7(, L: Application Incomplete (Date: 1 Other File Numbers: lei O 7 NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: BNSF Intermodal Facility Expansion North Lot LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. Vacant lots located east of 44th Place S. and adjacent to the existing BNSF facility at 12200 51st Place S. The nearest intersection is at S. 122nd Street /44th Place S. LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). Parcels 3347400915, 3347400930, and 3347400935. DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR The individual who: has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: Sam Phanekham, BNSF Railway Company Address: 2500 Lou Menk Drive, AOB -3 Fort Worth, TX 76131 Phone: (817) 867 -6132 FAX: E -mail: sam phanekham @bnsf.com Signature: Date: 12 -21 -2010 0/7K 7 1 A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Existing: Low Density Residential (LDR) Proposed: Manufacturing /Industrial Center Light (MIC /L) B. ZONING DESIGNATION: Existing: Low Density Residential (LDR) Proposed: Manufacturing /Industrial Center Light (MIC /L) C. LAND USE(S): Existing: vacant Proposed: cargo container storage associated with BNSF rail yard operations (for proposed changes in land use designations or rezones) 72 W tIA CITY OF TUKWILA Department of Community Development t 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 ril. 4i 0 1 Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 tf) r a E -mail: tukp1an 1c .tukw h 1 1 1 1908 r ordd (.il�f AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contactors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 12200 51st Place S., Tukwila, WA 98178 for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at (4A (city), (state), on I 201® Print Name t`f Address 2 'aO L .Wt lc 0 B mD Phone Number Bt"/ 5S L. 2 3 8 7 teci ;it Signature I U On this day personally appeared before me Hr_ L. to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he /she signe'the same as" his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS tq DAY OF 20 /0 .0.AY k eit JOYIA E. SIMMONS r TARY P B IC dfor the Statiof��' 1 4 Notary Public e STATE OF TEXAS residing at h to LObarti i yG °?4 fAy Lem" xra 03/11/2012 My Commission expires on (3 °I/ 06 f 73 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT CRITERIA The burden of proof to demonstrate that a change to the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code is warranted lies solely upon the proponent. The greater the degree of change proposed, the greater will be the burden of showing that the change is justified. The Planning Commission and the City Council will review your proposal using the criteria listed below. It is essential that you describe in a clear and precise manner why the amendment request should be approved. Attach additional sheet(s) with your responses to each criterion. You may submit other documentation in support of your proposal. A. ZONING AMENDMENT CRITERIA (TMC 18.84.030) Demonstrate how each of the following circumstances justifies a rezone of your property or a change in the existing Zoning Code. Each determination granting a rezone shall be supported by written findings and conclusions showing specifically wherein all of the following conditions exist: (1) That the proposed amendment to the zoning map is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan; (2) That the proposed amendment to the zoning map is consistent with the scope and purpose of this title and the description and purpose of the zone classification applied for; (3) That there are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the zoning map; and (4) That the proposed amendment to the zoning map will be in the interest of furtherance of the public health, safety, comfort, convenience and general welfare, and will not adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood, nor be injurious to other properties in the vicinity in which the subject property is located. 74 Zoning Code Amendment Criteria (TMC 18.84.030) BNSF Facility Expansion Project Null Lat 1. The proposed amendment to the zoning map is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan The proposed Manufacturing/Industrial Center Light (MIC /L) zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as follows: Policy 2.2.13 Promote economic use of industrial lands outside the MIC by encouraging redevelopment of under utilized sites and by promoting the retention of large parcels or consolidation of smaller parcels of industrial land to facilitate their use in an efficient manner. Goal 11.1— Support for existing industrial activities in the Manufacturing /Industrial Center and development of new industrial activity in order to maximize the employment and economic benefits to the people of Tukwila and the region, while minimizing impacts on residential neighborhoods. Policy 11.1.1— Support the efforts of existing industries to expand and new industrial businesses to develop in the Manufacturing/Industrial Center by providing them with economic data, information on available development sites, help in understanding and getting through the permit processes, and other appropriate assistance. 2. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map is consistent with the scope and purpose of this title and the description and purpose of the zone classification applied for. Per TMC 18.36.010, the requested MIC/L zone is "intended to provide a major employment area containing distributive light manufacturing and industrial uses and other uses that support those industries." The proposed rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) to MIC /L will fulfill this purpose by allowing the existing, adjacent BNSF facility to expand onto these parcels for cargo container storage. The MIC/L zone permits uses such as heavy equipment repair and salvage, storage yards, railroad tracks, and outdoor storage of materials. Permitted LDR uses include single family dwellings and their accessory uses. MIC/L zoning would allow a wider range of uses that are compatible with the adjacent BNSF facility, including the proposed use of cargo container storage. The parcels for the proposed rezone would act as a lower intensity buffer, separating the adjacent LDR parcels from the BNSF parcel, which is zoned Manufacturing/Industrial Center Heavy (MIC/H). Page 1 of 2 75 3. There are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map The BNSF facility is constrained by railroad tracks and Interstate 5 to the east and the Duwamish River to the south. BNSF wants to expand operations, however the only available area is to the west, into the LDR zone. 4. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map will be in the interest of furtherance of the public health, safety, comfort, convenience and general welfare, and will not adversely affect the surrounding neighborhoods, nor be injurious to other properties in the vicinity in which the subject property is located The light manufacturing or industrial uses that are permitted in the requested MIC /L zoning would benefit the region and the City of Tukwila by providing additional employment opportunities and tax income. The rezone would provide a buffer between the BNSF use (zoned MIC/H) and the adjacent low- density neighborhood (zoned LDR). Additional screening measures would be implemented around the site, including vegetation and fencing. Use of the parcels as part of the BNSF facility expansion would promote safety and convenience through good design. Setback, height, and landscaping/screening requirements for the MIC/L zone would be followed. In addition, cargo container storage is already permitted in the LDR zone as an accessory use for some facilities (per TMC 18.10.030[7], "institutional uses such as hospitals, food banks, schools, or government facilities may have two cargo containers per lot with approval as a Type 2 decision; criteria listed at TMC 18.50.060 Future development applications for SEPA and Design Review will address specific potential impacts such as traffic, parking, and other impacts on abutting property, and provide the City of Tukwila a clear means to evaluate any future proposed development, accommodate neighborhood conditions, and avoid adverse impacts to the adjacent properties and the community. Page 2 of 2 76 25338531_01.cdr g t„ z g 1 i m 0 0 1 So' ;4•,'Z X •O ini 0 .a I: t Z 0 I i CI 1 4•C: 7 1-13 2 P• 3 r 7.- Z A 7 cr w 0 c_ ■i V -Hz ,7', 7,2 0 0 -n 0 ••,23 0 0 i LI r A I J rn 0 c 2 53 1 7 7 10 A j M rj "1 i z '6 g c 9 Z O' i i L.• 7 1 o iT f. m g I "r■ 1 tr.. -r ck, Li j J- t S 1 1 9. el 1 N i ,fZ7' Fa 1 rn 5 --I I l w:, .t.. L.r.S3Pvi_." 7 z V A .7 0 x L z 2 I iIrr-X4 s 7 1 11 \\--1 t 1, i r Z /c Ay s2.,_ ..2 o_Lavr,._...0-0,_::_,.-----,-----t-4 1 7 7 ";1 t i 'I 1 r• 1. 9 7. N---/ 1 '-3- U v I -0 V 7 1 a .1 I P./ 1 9 w 1 V V r< N„ ',-t i -`3 ....-7....,./ 1 t l ,,,.NA:. i K 7 I .x •••.i. N I 1 <4. 1 Z 6 ,1 i i 1 7 v( 2. .'.'''T 11 1 C7 .1 I C VTVZ ,...5' t3 c•63:p 0 z N., 4,. .c. 55 73 0 -.I -.I 0 -i C', 4 In N. 1 r7 Z •C 7 7 1.0 ocor CD W .._i ,F 7 La CA 0. 1 T i \v" -7 '1Z7 co 1 in 4 J 4 h 1 721,-.4.....,....... yvvo L CO Z c 1---- ..t. P C 0 I 'l K m N•,/ N 78 ;.7, i -0 ,:,:r.-, p• CD cr) N. ,11 1 s B 417.- 1 116- 3. •r. m L c ......6,...7.i.,...-.,,.._feito ct. ..4_,:-. --6' N., Varg.• ti L 4 3 ----4‘.4' z cn 4 6 J 8 a i ET rir, 1 0 .5Ri A T. T. 4) 1- 5 ,..,,A;;f7:,..S. "lr-Ae&b:'-44'.: ..,,,'Z'• P Z4W-igNit ilt112 E --./rw‘F). VrAs Nne ip P'0 /..q,---z■ co Z "1:1 ff•C 7 ."-r ro NI, cn n IN irn P :',4t.P':.•11=-771,PAL C -E .......t,..:., 0 5D. Z fr. g 77 78 tl r 0 ATTACHMENT G MAR, 0 8 20 R/ty1Nt i V To: City of Tukwila, Wa u HPA�NT We, the undersigned, petition the City of Tukwila to prevent changes to the zoning of parcels 334740 -0795 and 334740 -0810 to allow the expansion of light industry or commercial property in our neighborhood. In December of 2010, Frauenheim and Bononcini illegally expanded their operations by storing large industrial steel framing beams on two residentially zoned properties. The undersigned are opposed to any zoning changes that will drastically reduce property values in the neighborhood. Keep Allentown a clean, pedestrian friendly neighborhood. Sincerely, The Undersigned Property Owner Signature Property Owner Name Address or Parcel Number nn \AAL- cw t, 4 �t;t 4 S c2c1 �,k,-��,rvv� tiL1 �L-L" in i nyv �v�� L Li/Atoll, ell' P V Pk-iv ;F' 00-1 I Po Is- p-tvez4 09 1_0 ..f i rirt P tc ;e ,*,(-:-(4 st. 17 d vfm—o :c L 3 G' 74 0 /Yr/G'f 12 00 '44' s 61: P- A 7-, g r t..l ,t. 1 Q. 1 2O V S_ 6 Y a -e 5 L =-t_z, 7 I L—o 1 1 7 Phil ii-C 6.,c A 1L(civ, iii,.(1 1( i 060 0 A -tom S I tik =3 ‘4,1. (1, G/i/lIC g r d'�. ._JCS 1 2 .l) °•4 1C 4 ZE C i 5 -GI to S e 1t...) 1 l e)-(1 N I 0. ci y K:6-t -4- i(nit) e yT 1.2 0 -v S G y/ J j f cc_r ct, "t z C)/ \Its iL G� �L° l �i �1 1 �1 L S' ,7 ,5) IA J /!.4; ;�tu.. s 'l i? ,1 .s7,� Z-,4 i.' iLr .i _.JY�ivi� k) ..s W 5 4 9 A P S 7 I. rile k '0,JAA )}4 /lA a g c. Ls 1-t vi o S! 22 S y Bl 79 To: City of Tukwila, Washington We, the undersigned, petition the City of Tukwila to prevent changes to the zoning of parcels 334740-0795 and 334740-0810 to allow the expansion of light industry or commercial property in our neighborhood. In December of 2010, Frauenheim and Bononcini illegally expanded their operations by storing large industrial steel framing beams on two residentially zoned properties. The undersigned are opposed to any zoning changes that will drastically reduceproperty values in the neighborhood_ Keep Allentown a clean, pedestrian friendly neighborhiREC TE WED Sincerely, MAR 0 8 2011 I The Undersigned DIN CAE 7 Property Owner Signature Property Owner Name Address or Parcel Number 1 7 1 0 M UhA laiti INCn j 7--r) -..f.:,.....„,-- 7V/ -RA A/ Z-05 0 W/ )1 P1 s :1 r-K-, e_ c e I 7 J2 ,T) „/2.-.1i ,f---1 f.,::)`-1A2,- I .L2-- ,,e r-A/LL,x.,/ i Sti-- (L(4-4-1_, r L. c Vf- fincciort (tryc< 1.2_7_1q 4 -6 4 1 z-.. 4:,.,F 4 .J __I 1, 0\ k .,,W. ,,---2 7 6 3 .6g 4- U S S,Tti Ji eri,,,) U 0,(A.AL S7, ,0 l'„ ri Pr C,_ („P- 9,3? :4 (5 711 /:i(ii; 5 /7 7 7,14A- /2 6'/,i 791. 2.V Z i z.- ,e7 4 e; 7 ti 0" C-e l 0 (1 tbi t li'l 7 1 VP). C /2Z 57" c---je..ikpLA( /-i?L6itit ,,ie 1 in(av g Ie.-/--s Wic 2 ,S: /?7(r( k4. I 4 11 A j-7, 1Lt-Vtr. LAKilf I I /va 4 ii 2u4 qtriv\ icleb,,f c. D.zp t cl A -f- AF C -di AiS-c- 80 To: City of Tukwila, Washington We, the undersigned, petition the City of Tukwila to prevent changes to the zoning of parcels 334740 -0795 and 334740 -0810 to allow the expansion of light industry or commercial property in our neighborhood. In December of 2010, Frauenheim and Bononcini illegally expanded their operations by storing large industrial steel framing beams on two residentially zoned properties. The undersigned are opposed to any zoning changes that will drastically reduce property values in the neighborhood. Keep Allentown a clean, pedestrian friendly neighborhoor K E C fl/ Sincerely, MAR 0 8 2011 The Undersigned COMMUN;' y DEVELOPMENT Property Owner Signature Property Owner Name Address or Parcel Number M S 1 i 1 l 4 II t' j II 1--.4. C. mac 7 r c k r i.4 va-^ A Y tom.' L. FAIT) t,,L ine x'- ZA-1 Li-' f. t V!! t7� /-.1: .�,Ne r' k S...;., n ti, o, li i'U it* ?A ,h S' he 4 ei o t i h 1-1 ti-, L j s J L a 1 e 4 A 1 r V 6.tic /r G/ sy7e 4 9 pi: .S' s 81 82 ATTACHMENT H To: City of Tukwila, Washington We, the undersigned, petition the City of Tukwila to prevent changes to zoning in Allentown to allow the expansion of light industry or commercial property in our neighborhood. The undersigned are opposed to any zoning changes that will drastically reduce property values in the neighborhood. Keep Allentown a clean, pedestrian friendly neighborhoods; E Sincerely, 20111 The Undersigned CQ MMUNITY E'JELOPMENT Residents Signature Residents Name Address 4// 44o a S l.�wrr' St. i /V ferf'f 2 !�u1/GL �V r1Kl C1i1 AM U.. 1 6 ic;.: la w A q 8 11 6 K zk �5 Q-c, 2 --,Z5 3 x`54 erc_s c z iL U e'0 ro I 1 Q IA P, (v'', /2„; (r A C 1 VA i \I 1-5 12.-;(1 Zf-ci /+1/(= .r A V V r,li; 10 op- v(c xc 'PL5 /_9,g, P(5 ke ...--Y -ik =mil 7V l JG" G71 r J4 Ll'�.1. /7 7 0 L 1 -77 7 1 7 s i Li?. �1 12 4' 5 y 5 a 1 V I J v) g C 1-1,6- C 1 c (4-jv :r of t;: c 6 t f S r ,i ,.4,7, ,.„.,7 ./..2 -;:?.;_.:,,.„.7. _..,./-6,6,6 i.;/ .0'1 r i v i l r ki 6 0 f 2 v T,t A hi .1_1_2) (a ce /1..‘f ei 2 ,14 l_•tz i/t .)7' it 1 ..t--- c to i Vi 1 G C° (77 i 83 To: City of Tukwila, Washington We, the undersigned, petition the City of Tukwila to prevent changes to zoning in Allentown to allow the expansion of light industry or commercial property in our neighborhood. The undersigned are opposed to any zoning changes that will drastically reduce property values in the neighborhood. Keep Allentown a clean, pedestrian friendly neighborhood. Sincerely, 1V The Undersigned '1 8 2011 COMMUNE! Residents Signatur v W Residents Name Address 9 niL/S'l. i`L/3 71 ✓.4 /14 1Arra (Po i C(j>h /57 G) 5 84 ATTACHMENT I We don't want industrial construction in our area, we want stay residential area only. We don't want big truck driving on the stride to make noise, is dangerous for kits. I hope you don't approved. Thank you. RECEIVED GHITA BREBAN 12709 46 AVE, S. MAR 0 5 22 f TUKWILA, WA 98178 COMMUNT1 DEVELOPN EN I'm residential of Tukwila. 1 85 ATTACHMENT J Page 1 of 1 Rebecca Fox we dont want the BNSF in neighborhoo. From: Isidro Bendico To: Date: 03/08/2011 12:11 PM Subject: we dont want the BNSF in neighborhoo. to:rfox, I'd like to inform you that we are againts with the expansion of the BNSF to our neighborhood.Thanks fr. mr /mrs Bendico. 86 f /C:\ temp\ XPGrpWise\ 4 D 761 D 0 Dtuk mail6300- po1001346335121C9E1 \GW }00001... 03/08/2011 ATTACHMENT K Rebecca Fox Re: Fwd: WE NEED YOUR HELP!!! From: Rebecca Fox To: Rebecca Fox Subject: Re: Fwd: WE NEED YOUR HELP!!! On 2/22/2011 at 8:13 AM, in message 0e3601cbd2ab$78d2e9c0$6a78bd40$ @net "LAURIE JENKINS" <LaurieUis @comcast.net> wrote: We, the citizens of Allentown, are outraged about the industrial contamination in our neighborhood... and BNSF's wanting to rezone residential property so they can further destroy our quiet enjoyment of our humble homes...some are pretty fancy! Spot zoning appears to be in direct contradiction with the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan, as far as protecting residential areas. While we understand BNSF's need for expansion, we cannot have it in our neighborhood... No matter what they are offering. Period! Whatever you can do to help protect our rights... If you went door to door, you would find all are vehemently opposed to the further industrial contamination of our community. The 24/7 noise, banging, huge trucks running, all night ruckus is hard to live with as is. We've collected many signatures, have many statements, and are prepared to take this higher up. We need your help to stop this. Laurie L Jenkins, GRI, CRS, EPro, SRES, CNS Realtor, Notary Public 206 478 -1993 LaurieLlis@comcast.net www.LaurieJenkins.com Coldwell Banker Danforth about:blank 03/08/2011 87 88 ATTACHMENT L Rebecca Fox RE: Hello Ms. Jenkins, From: "LAURIE JENKINS" To: "'Rebecca Fox Date: 02/23/2011 5:56 PM Subject: RE: Hello Ms. Jenkins, Thank you, we have printed out and reviewed the Community Participation manual and the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan from the city website. We hope to protect residential Tukwila from any more Industrial invasion. We understand the need for commerce and business and want to see ft, just no more in this little community by the Tukwila Community Center. It turns out that there are many impassioned citizens in this little area who want to see spot zoning stopped, a quality of life maintained so that people can have the quiet enjoyment of their property they are entitled to. The aircraft above us are plenty to tolerate, and we worry about the contamination there too. Just as an aside, we are seeing how health is amongst the residents, and wondering how much more contamination we can take. We will try to get a feel for what Planning has in mind. Many fear we are just being 'Railroaded'. We will get as organized and prepared as possible, but please know the natives are extremely restless as they feel they are powerless...can't fight city hall. Guess we'll see. Thanks for your input. Laurie L Jenkins, GRI, CRS, EPro, SRES, CNS Realtor, Notary Public 206 4784993 LaurieUis @comcast.net www.LaurieJenkins.com Coldwell Banker Danforth From: Rebecca Fox [mailto:rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us] Sent: Wednesday, February 23, 2011 4:23 PM To: LaurieUis @comcast.net Cc: Kimberly Matej; Minnie Dhaliwal Subject: Hello Ms. Jenkins, Hello Ms. Jenkins, Thank you for your message to Kimberly Matej of the City Council staff regarding your serious concerns about the BNSF rezone request. Kimberly will give your message to all the City Council members. I've also received your message since I am the staff person working on this issue. I'd like to review the process that the City Council will follow when it reviews Comprehensive Plan /rezone requests, including BNSF's. Depending on the City Council's decisions, there will be up to three opportunities for the community to comment on the requests at two public meetings and a hearing. At each point, the public will be notified of the meetings by mail, by posting on the site, and with a notice in the newspaper. Background: file: /C temp\ XPGrPWise \4D654A30tuk- mail6300 -po 1001346335121AD31 \GW 00001... 03/08/2011 89 Page 2 of 2 State law generally allows cities, including Tukwila, to amend the Comprehensive Plan only once per year, unless the request is considered an emergency. All applications for change in zoning /Comprehensive Plan are due on December 31. They are reviewed during the following year. This year the City of Tukwila received three complete applications, including two from BNSF. Review The first opportunity for public comment will be on March 21, 2011, when the City Council will hold a public meeting to hear from interested community members and the applicants about the 2011 requests for Comprehensive Plan amendments /rezones. Afterwards, the City Council will decide whether to: 1) deny the request; 2) defer consideration for a year, or 3) forward the request to the Planning Commission, Tukwila's volunteer land use advisory group. If the City Council denies a request at this point, consideration ends. If the City Council forwards an application to the Planning Commission for consideration, it does not mean that the City Council is in favor of a particular request. Rather, it means that they want the issue to be reviewed further. Staff prepares a report for any application that goes to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission will hold a public meeting on the request, where community members and the applicant can speak. Afterwards, the Planning Commission will make a recommendation back to the City Council. After the Planning Commission meeting, the City Council schedules a public hearing. Again, the public and applicant are invited to speak. After the hearing, the City Council will deliberate and make a final decision on whether to approve the application as is, modify the request and approve it, or deny the request. Decisions may be appealed to Superior Court. I hope this information about the review process is helpful. Thanks again for expressing your opinions about BNSF's rezone request. Please contact me if you have further questions. I will be out of the office until March 7, 2011. If you have questions before then, please contact Minnie Dhaliwal, Planning Supervisor, at 206 431 -3685 or via email at mdhaliwaVaci.tukwila.wa.us Sincerely, Kebecca rox Senior Planner City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Boulevard Tukwila, WA 98188 206 431 -3683 (tel) 206 431 -3665 (fax) rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us 90 file: /C:\ temp\ XPGrpWise\ 4D654A30tuk- mail6300 -po 1001346335121 AD31 \GW 00001... 03/08/2011 (03/08/2011) Rebecca Fox application to rezone LDR to MIC /L in Allentown ATTACHMENT M From: Brooke Alford <bmarie2 @earthlink.net> To: Rebecca Fox <rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 01/29/2011 4:16 PM Subject: application to rezone LDR to MIC /L in Allentown Hi, Rebecca, I am in shock as I just received a postcard in the mail about rezoning for MIC /L in Allentown. I have a picture I have been meaning to send to the Dept where a landowner cleared ALL vegetation for industrial storage on a site adjacent to the a MIC /L just a bit north of the proposed BNSF. These lots are sandwiched in between houses, in an LDR neighborhood. Years ago, when I moved here (Allentown) I was told by Councilman Robertson how the Council, during his previous tenure, had secured LDR for this neighborhood, with some unfortunate grandfathered property. Given how obviously unacceptable this is, and what a deplorable trend it could set, I am assuming this will not pass Council. However, I would like to request a meeting as soon as possible to better understand what appears to be a recommendation coming out of DCD. Please let me know if you are available to meet the week of Feb 1. Perhaps on Feb 1? Thank you, Brooke Alford 4724 S. 122nd St. 91 (03/08/2011) Rebecca Fox BNSF applications tiu�t��r ri PP Page 1 From: Brooke Alford <bmarie2 @earthlink.net> To: Rebecca Fox <rfox @ci.tukwila.wa.us> Date: 03/02/2011 8:52 AM Subject: BNSF applications Attachments: zoning_map_bw edit 2 copy.pdf; Part.002 Hi, Rebecca, I wanted to check in on the app process. Will you be presenting the applications to Council's Comm of the Whole on the 14th? If so, do you make any recommendations at that point? Will the Council be made aware that BNSF has also bought another LDR property in Allentown that it is not Currently requesting a rezone for? And will BNSF be presenting to the Council at the 21st mtg? I'll attach the flyer that is being distributed in the Allentown neighborhood, with a map attached. I thought I'd send it on to the Council as an fyi, as well. Thank you, Brooke 92 Attention :Allentown residents! BNSF Railroad is attempting to re -zone parts of our neighborhood from LDR (low den- sity residential) to MIC -L and MIC -H (manufacturing industrial center Tight and heavy). See map on backside of this page. (1.) South parcel: "Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) has applied to amend the Comprehensive Plan (File #L10- 075) and Zoning (File #L10 -076) on five lots with a total area of approximately 1.8 acres east of 51st Place South and adjacent to the existing BNSF facility at 12200 51st Pls. S. The nearest intersection is at S. 124nd St. and 51st PL. S, Tukwila, WA. The request is to amend zoning /Comprehensive Plan on 5 parcels parcels #0179002110, 0179002155, 0179002160, 0179002195, 0179002230) from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Manufacturing Industrial Center /Heavy (MIC /H) in order to expand the existing rail yard operations." (2.) North parcel: "Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) has applied to amend the Comprehensive Plan (File #L10- 073) and Zoning (File #L10 -074) on three lots with a total area of approximately 1.8 acres east of 44th Place South and adjacent to the existing BNSF facility at 12200 51st Pis. S. The nearest intersection is at S. 122nd St. and 44th PL. S, Tukwila, WA. The request is to amend zoning /Comprehensive Plan on 3 vacant parcels #2247400915, 3347500930 3347400935) from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Manufacturing Industrial Center /Light (MIC /L) in order to expand the existing rail yard opera- tions." (3.) Other lots owned by BNSF with LDR zoning. What this means to our neighborhood: The railroad will be expanding their operations into the Allentown neighborhood, reducing our residential neighborhood's size and increasing their noise and light pollution and their truck traffic into our neighborhood. The applications (Files PL10 -063, #L1073 &74 and PL10 -064, #L107 76) are available for public review at the City of Tukwila Dept. of Community Development (DCD) office, located at 6300 South center Blvd, #100. What YOU can d o Your written comments on the projects are requested! They, must be delivered to DCD at the address' above or postmarked or sent via a mail to rfox @citukwila wa us no later than 5 pm, March 11, 2011: You are invited to comment on t he "re uest a p ubl ►c,meetln 9 scheduled for March 2011 at 7 9 21 pm before the City Council in the CityCouncil Chambers, Tukwila City Hall, 6200 Southcenter Blvd, Tukwila, WA After:hearing comments from the public the Council will decide whether to deny the request, defer it for one year,"or forward hte request to the Planning Commission for additional review: 93 KEY MAP: Residential Lots Purchased by BNSF in the Allentown Neighborhood. —L_ X I %Mk i t u -2_- i r 1 1 —I .r L k In vi -i•:; 1 111 si 171 :.,1 !pi v T 1111111- 61111 1 RCA-. 1 :5 s ir 1 t z lip '01 iir aLc7 S1-115 St 1 4&, ,4, is L -Ifillk" Ix 01 ..k.: „.-01 r--Hsi:,...r---,_____ .,_...i.,,,...,.....:.„.. .i.1 ---,=_I 1 ,.=-,4,. P 1 Ig T S t I llga MINIM 44: wi= N,,,II ,I •mola 1 Em rsr '...:N ij 4 ii .1::!7•" i \\I m Imiir611 --1 rq--1 s.,.„ IC/L. t 1 7 .r--, s n4s if..:,!;:• I C1)1 im 71 =lik 110, a) 00 2 1 mg -Irak r LA m 1- ma VIZ 1111 S 124 Still 1111 ow muma 1.11r& 1, J a e i// 1 T 1 I IH $12,5 t 0\ (5‘ Community Center ''1,: piluillik,„.........., 0 1 AO .tAV i I l a 4 A 4":. 11, •'..3P,,:'::. i'/.:i.;.':".':... mil i S i '''.T. x V '..'.'2.--- 29 St fal CiLl :"X ...nf 94 ATTACHMENT 0 Rebecca Fox FILE #'S PL10 -64, PL10 -75, PL10 -76 From: DONNA M ANDERSON To: Date: 03/02/2011 8:55 AM Subject: FILE #'S PL10 -64, PL10 -75, PL10 -76 Rebecca Fox The above Tots cover the block on one side of 51st Place South. There are 4 homes directly across from these lots on this dead end street, one of them is mine. You are being asked to change the zoning from residential to heavy industrial without knowing what those Tots are going to be used for. The railroad yard sits higher in elevation than the lots, street and our homes. Will fill be brought in to raise it? Will the mature trees between the railroad yard and the Tots be cut down? Will trucks be driving on 51st? What kind of noise and pollution will we have? Will there be activity day and night? Will ta!l beacon lights be installed so they shine into our homes? Is the whole area going to be leveled with concrete? What about water run off? Will fencing and landscaping be done? If the council members are not familiar with this street, now is the time to become acquainted. Thank You Donna Anderson 12533 51st Place South file: /C:\ temp\ XPGrpWise\ 4D6E061Atuk- mail6300 -po 1001346335121BAC 1 \GW 0000... 03/07/2011 95 ATTACHMENT P lo-A4 Marjorie Bates '0 'dr4° i I --A-v. ..-Pii;..ti.A1-1-4-.4-' 'ill OW 6-DirilIi- \l'A 1,,,, 5 t- Kls24,144A if v K Lkt.,-J j 7-k pt,L, ..,,,u_AA 4,a4A„tz,d 8,, ai it-ta/a 1 )4(1 r t C ou-E 1 7 1 14 i 4vii,i rgi ci,, .-i. 4 -4 i 96 ATTACHMENT 0 ------1 mitC/H '_.c 1 1 t.l.';,,,,-,,,_ r L r 7 ,4 4, -3-125113. -St LDR to MC/H f A '4 '4'3 *47:: l e I t_. --a•w TA. m 1 1,_ •.-1 /----03-‘1, '1101** ..P 4 -:,,,.;4 a -.t ib 4,1.,,,• o___!. City of Tukwila Comp Plan Amendment Li0-073 Codiga Rezone L10-074 Project File PL10-064 Farm 1 Al Subject Property •vec „....,...,..„_,y \i ,c. 0 zoning 1,190,,\,_1,5., CD -------„Nt 1".200' 9-/ 98 ATTACHMENT R CITY OF TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE 1 4 Z Department of Community Develo E 3D 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 PLAN ►i► ��`1 to t D f .,a,,,. T elephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -��6�5 ��l�r E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila wa. us AMENDMENTS AME DME1r T S 8 Xi DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P -CPA Planner: File Number: Application Complete (Date: I Project File Number: p i Application Incomplete (Date: I Other File Numbers: (r l0 --pi NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: BNSF Intermodal Facility Expansion South Lot LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. Vacant lots located east of 51st Place S. and adjacent to the existing BNSF facility at 12200 51st Place S. The nearest intersection is at S. 124th Street /51st Place S. LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). Parcels 0179002110, 0179002155, 0179002160, 0179002195, and 0179002230. DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR The individual who: has decision making authority on behalf of the owner /applicant in meetings with City staff, has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: Sam Phanekham, BNSF Railway Company Address: 2500 Lou Menk Drive, AOB -3 Fort Worth, TX 76131 Phone: (817) 867 -6132 FAX: E -mail: sam.phanekham@bnsf.com Signature: Date: 12 -21 -2010 99 A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Existing: Low Density Residential (LDR) Proposed: Manufacturing /Industrial Center Heavy (MIC /H) B. ZONING DESIGNATION: Existing: Low Density Residential (LDR) Proposed: Manufacturing /Industrial Center Heavy (MIC /H) C. LAND USE(S): Existing: vacant Proposed: cargo container storage associated with BNSF rail yard operations (for proposed changes in land use designations or rezones) D. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING LAND USES: Describe the existing uses located within 1,000 feet in all directions from the property or area for which a change is proposed. There is a large truck maintenance and repair shop and an airport car service located northwest of the site. To the west, land uses are mainly residential. Across the Duwamish River to the west and southwest, there are several banks, offices, and an educational center (ITT Tech). South of the site is the Duwamish River and further south is a truck rental facility with associated parking. The BNSF facility and Interstate 5 are located east of the site. The parcels proposed to be rezoned are vacant. 100 J I :fcss CITY OF TUKWILA 1 3 i En k r Department of Community Development O rte .2,, —I q t% n 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 fi 1 4 i Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 ,tot rim r mo o^ t o e1�• E -mail: tukplan��ci.tukwila.�va.us ��a'��'t+tT,/ i C AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 12200 51st Place S., Tukwila, WA 98178 for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at (city), (state), on 1 C 20 0 Print Name p 4 '4 Q Address 0 ticrod Ala-- t ?8 •3 4131 A Phone Number All. 652 J 81 Signature JJ 1 (I On this day personally appeared before me h A L.. to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he /she At the sam as his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS 1 119k DAY OF Il. eirn 12.01 20 (0 iiss .9Q No E. Public SIMMONS rtn nrt B Notary Public /t STATE OF TEXAS N f A P LIC in and f r the State of Was 4 j FOFy MY (otssn�, EXP. 0311 My Commission expires on (3 /1 ®701 101 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA The burden of proof to demonstrate that a change to the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code is warranted lies solely upon the proponent. The greater the degree of change proposed, the greater will be the burden of showing that the change is justified. The Planning Commission and the City Council will review your proposal using the criteria listed below. It is essential that you describe in a clear and precise manner why the amendment request should be approved. Attach additional sheet(s) with your responses to each criterion. You may submit other documentation in support of your proposal. A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA (TMC 18.80.050) Demonstrate how each of the following circumstances justifies a re- designation of your property or a change in existing Plan policies: 1. Describe how the issue is addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. If the issue is not adequately addressed, is there a need for the proposed change? 2. Why is the proposed change the best means for meeting the identified public need? What other options are there for meeting the identified public need? 3. Why will the proposed change result in a net benefit to the community? If not, what type of benefit can be expected and why? B. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA (TMC 18.80.010) 1. A detailed statement of what is proposed and why; 2. A statement of the anticipated impacts of the change, including the geographic area affected and the issues presented by the proposed change; 3. An explanation of why the current comprehensive plan or development regulations are deficient or should not continue in effect; (be specific; cite policy numbers and code sections that apply!) 4. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with and promotes the goals and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act; 5. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with applicable Countywide Planning Policies; 6. A statement of what changes, if any, would be required in functional plans (i.e., the City's water, sewer, storm water or shoreline plans) if the proposed amendment is adopted; 7. A statement of what capital improvements, if any, would be needed to support the proposed change, and how the proposed change will affect the capital facilities plans of the City; 8. A statement of what other changes, if any, are required in other City codes, plans or regulations to implement the proposed change. 102 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria Responses BNSF Facility Expansion Project South Lot Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria (TMC 18.80.050): 1. Describe how the issue is addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. If the issue is not adequately addressed, is there a need for the proposed change? The proposed land use is inconsistent with the existing Comprehensive Plan designation. 2. Why is the proposed change the best means for meeting the identified public need? What other options are there for meeting the identified public need? The BNSF facility is constrained by the Duwamish River to the south and railroad tracks and Interstate 5 to the east. The proposed change is the best option, as there is no other way for the BNSF facility to expand without rezoning the surrounding Low Density Residential (LDR) areas. 3. Why will the proposed change result in a net benefit to the community? If not, what type of benefit can be expected and why? The BNSF facility expansion would allow for the creation of more jobs, benefiting the local economy. Expansion of the BNSF facility would also create additional tax revenue for the City of Tukwila. Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria (TMC 18.80.010): 1. A detailed statement of what is proposed and why; BNSF proposes to change the zoning and comprehensive plan designation of the subject parcels from LDR to Manufacturing/Industrial Center High (MIC /H). This change would allow the BNSF to expand operations and create additional storage area for cargo containers. 2. A statement of the anticipated impacts of the change, including the geographic area affected and the issues presented by the proposed change; The change would affect the surrounding low- density residential neighborhood to the west by expanding existing operations of the BNSF facility. The parcels that would be rezoned to MIC/H would be separated from nearby residences by a road (51st Place South). This, along with landscaping and fencing, would provide a buffer for nearby residences. Page 1 of 4 103 3. An explanation of why the current comprehensive plan or development regulations are deficient or should not continue in effect; (be specific; cite policy numbers and code sections that apply!) The current Comprehensive Plan designation for the subject parcels is LDR. The proposed Comprehensive Plan designation of MIC /H is more appropriate, as this zone is "intended to provide a major employment area containing heavy or bulk manufacturing and industrial uses, distributive and light manufacturing and industrial uses, and other uses that support those industries" (TMC 18.38.010). The following Manufacturing /Industrial Center goals and policies from the Comprehensive Plan are supportive of the proposed project: Policy 2.2.13 Promote economic use of industrial lands outside the MIC by encouraging redevelopment of under utilized sites and by promoting the retention of large parcels or consolidation of smaller parcels of industrial land to facilitate their use in an efficient manner. Goal 11.1— Support for existing industrial activities in the Manufacturing/Industrial Center and development of new industrial activity in order to maximize the employment and economic benefits to the people of Tukwila and the region, while minimizing impacts on residential neighborhoods. 11.1.6 Develop and designate appropriate zoning, buffers, mitigation and access opportunities where manufacturing zoning directly abuts or impacts residential zoning so that MIC uses may operate without significant degradation of the residential environment. 4. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with and promotes the goals and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act; The proposed amendment complies with and promotes the following goals and requirements of the GMA: RCW 36.70A.020 Planning Goals Economic development. Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this state, especially for unemployed and for disadvantaged persons, promote the retention and expansion of existing businesses and recruitment of new businesses, recognize regional differences impacting economic development opportunities, and encourage growth in areas experiencing insufficient economic growth, all within the capacities of the state's natural resources, public services, and public facilities. RCW 36.70A.115 Comprehensive plans and development regulations must provide sufficient land capacity for development. Counties and cities that are required or choose to plan under RCW 36.70A.040 shall ensure that, taken collectively, adoption of and amendments to their comprehensive plans and/or development regulations provide Page 2 of 4 104 sufficient capacity of land suitable for development within their jurisdictions to accommodate their allocated housing and employment growth, including the accommodation of, as appropriate, the medical, governmental, educational, institutional, commercial, and industrial facilities related to such growth, as adopted in the applicable countywide planning policies and consistent with the twenty-year population forecast from the office of financial management. 5. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with applicable Countywide Planning Policies; The proposed amendment complies with the following Economic Development and Land Use Pattern Countywide Planning Policies: ED -6 Local jurisdictions' plans shall include policies that actively support the retention and expansion of the economic base of the multi -County region. Local jurisdictions and the County shall work cooperatively on a regional basis and invite private sector participation to evaluate the trends, opportunities and weaknesses of the existing economy and to analyze the economic needs of key industries. Local jurisdictions' comprehensive plans shall include policies intended to foster: a. The development and retention of those businesses and industries which export their goods and services outside the region. These businesses and industries are critical to the economic strength and diversification of the economy; and b. A business climate which is supportive of business formation, expansion, and retention and recognizes the importance of small businesses in creating new jobs. ED -8 Where appropriate, jurisdictions' plans shall include policies intended to attract and retain industries, firms and jobs, within their locally determined or zoned manufacturing and industrial areas. ED -15 Local comprehensive plans should include policies which foster a climate supportive of the siting needs of industrial users and that recognize the important role they play in creating high -wage jobs. Local plans are encouraged to include policies designed to ensure that industrial use of industrial -zone land is not unduly encroached upon or limited by non supporting or incompatible uses. Local policies and plans are encouraged to support the continued availability of land for those industrial and supporting or compatible activities dependent on critical infrastructure as identified in local comprehensive plans. Jurisdictions should consider zoning or other means to provide opportunities for those uses in areas where infrastructure facilities can be utilized to exploit the economic benefit of that infrastructure. LU -53 All jurisdictions support the development of a regional industrial siting policy to promote industrial activity. Page 3 of 4 105 LU -54 Jurisdictions shall design access to the regional Manufacturing /Industrial Centers to facilitate the mobility of employees by transit, and the mobility of goods by truck, rail or waterway as appropriate. Regional comprehensive plans shall include strategies to provide capital improvement projects which support access for movement of goods. 6. A statement of what changes, if any, would be required in functional plans (i.e., the City's water, sewer, storm water or shoreline plans) if the proposed amendment is adopted; No changes would be required to any of the City's functional plans. 7. A statement of what capital improvements, if any, would be needed to support the proposed change, and how the proposed change will affect the capital facilities plans of the City; No capital improvements would be needed to support the proposed change. 8. A statement of what other changes, if any, are required in other City codes, plans or regulations to implement the proposed change. The proposal would require a rezone of the subject property from LDR to MIC/H (see attached Zoning Code Amendment form). Page 4 of 4 106 Map 108 1 ATTACHMENT S -.1 CITE �oF TUKWILA ZONING CODE f' '•ti Department of Community Development ;At 61 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 1 Q ��1 0,0 --I Te (206) 431 3670 FAX (206) 431 36 g r d ��cs rr�ap AMENDMENTS t� i �6m 3 :��.ao 1;..�' ,(f) isi,:'� E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us /908 DEC 21 2010 APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P-ZCA Planner: Rt? ,4 e" c_. s 7 I File Number: L i t 0 Application Complete (Date: I Project File Number: Z f 0 0 01 Application Incomplete (Date: I Other File Numbers: I NAME OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT: BNSF Intermodal Facility Expansion South Lot LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. Vacant lots located east of 51st Place S. and adjacent to the existing BNSF facility at 12200 51st Place S. The nearest intersection is at S. 124th Street /51st Place S. LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). Parcels 0179002110, 0179002155, 0179002160, 0179002195, and 0179002230. DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR The individual who: has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: Sam Phanekham, BNSF Railway Company Address: 2500 Lou Menk Drive, AOB -3 Fort Worth, TX 76131 Phone: (817) 867-6132 FAX: E -mail: sam.phanekham@bnsf.com Date: 12 -21 -2010 109 RFCEIVED xi� fi• q a c 1 :��01 A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION• Existing: Low Density Residential (LDR) Proposed: Manufacturing /Industrial Center Heavy (MIC /H) B. ZONING DESIGNATION: Existing: Low Density Residential (LDR) Proposed: Manufacturing /Industrial Center Heavy (MIC /H) C. LAND USE(S): Existing: vacant Proposed: cargo container storage associated with BNSF rail yard operations (for proposed changes in land use designations or rezones) 110 4 CITY OF TUKWILA ilk, k I A 2' Department of Community Development r i —I 1.1 e 1 G 63 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 y 1 s 4:C I t /1t 040 1 4 Te (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 s 3 a rte— 4/ V f Z E -mail tukDla n@ci.tukwila.wa.us L I 4 NititY G d J �I 1JPMEi 1908 AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 12200 51st Place S., Tukwila, WA 98178 for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at f II�tWHit (city), Tx, (state), on Ito Cja-c. 20 to I Print Name r rx Address L—� �OtJ VA.244... bs.Av, Phone Number tt7. SZ 1-3R7 Signature On this day personally appeared before me Kg I 1/�X.� to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he /she V d the sa c as his/her voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS f iY DAY OF el; r�x hi,(, 20 I0 1 tPSY ATM JO E. SIMMONS CIA?' iL /�.Ll tiwrn 0-►� 1 Notary Public i NOT Y PU) iIIC in and for the State of Washington. 7 STATE OF TEXAS 3 V j 4 ?E0Flt thy Comm. Exp. 03/11/2012 M y Co m missio> p on 1) 1.2.. 111 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT CRITERIA The burden of proof to demonstrate that a change to the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code is warranted lies solely upon the proponent. The greater the degree of change proposed, the greater will be the burden of showing that the change is justified. The Planning Commission and the City Council will review your proposal using the criteria listed below. It is essential that you describe in a clear and precise manner why the amendment request should be approved. Attach additional sheet(s) with your responses to each criterion. You may submit other documentation in support of your proposal. A. ZONING AMENDMENT CRITERIA (TMC 18.84.030) Demonstrate how each of the following circumstances justifies a rezone of your property or a change in the existing Zoning Code. Each determination granting a rezone shall be supported by written findings and conclusions showing specifically wherein all of the following conditions exist: (1) That the proposed amendment to the zoning map is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan; (2) That the proposed amendment to the zoning map is consistent with the scope and purpose of this title and the description and purpose of the zone classification applied for; (3) That there are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the zoning map; and (4) That the proposed amendment to the zoning map will be in the interest of furtherance of the public health, safety, comfort, convenience and general welfare, and will not adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood, nor be injurious to other properties in the vicinity in which the subject property is located. 112 Zoning Code Amendment Criteria (TMC 18.84.030) BNSF Facility Expansion Project South Lot 1. The proposed amendment to the zoning map is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan The proposed MIC/H zoning is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, as follows: Policy 2.2.13 Promote economic use of industrial lands outside the MIC by encouraging redevelopment of under utilized sites and by promoting the retention of large parcels or consolidation of smaller parcels of industrial land to facilitate their use in an efficient manner. Goal 11.1— Support for existing industrial activities in the Manufacturing/Industrial Center and development of new industrial activity in order to maximize the employment and economic benefits to the people of Tukwila and the region, while minimizing impacts on residential neighborhoods. Policy 11.1.1— Support the efforts of existing industries to expand and new industrial businesses to develop in the Manufacturing/Industrial Center by providing them with economic data, information on available development sites, help in understanding and getting through the permit processes, and other appropriate assistance. 2. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map is consistent with the scope and purpose of this title and the description and purpose of the zone classification applied for. Per TMC 18.38.010, the requested Manufacturing /Industrial Center Heavy MIC/H) zone is "intended to provide a major employment area containing heavy or bulk manufacturing and industrial uses, distributive and light manufacturing and industrial uses, and other uses that support those industries." The proposed rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) to MIC/H will fulfill this purpose by allowing the existing, adjacent BNSF facility to expand onto these parcels. The MIC /H zone permits uses such as heavy equipment repair and salvage, storage yards, offices, railroad tracks, and outdoor storage of materials. Permitted LDR uses include single family dwellings and their accessory uses. MIC /H zoning would allow a wider range of uses that are compatible with the adjacent BNSF facility, including the proposed use of cargo container storage. The parcels for the proposed rezone are separated from the existing LDR neighborhood by a road (51st Place South). Page 1 of 2 113 3. There are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map The BNSF facility is constrained by railroad tracks and Interstate 5 to the east and the Duwamish River to the south. BNSF wants to expand operations; however the only available area is to the west, into the LDR zone. 4. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map will be in the interest of furtherance of the public health, safety, comfort, convenience and general welfare, and will not adversely affect the surrounding neighborhoods, nor be injurious to other properties in the vicinity in which the subject property is located The industrial uses that are permitted in the requested MIC/H zoning would benefit the region and the City of Tukwila by providing additional employment opportunities and tax income. Rather than an isolated pocket of residential uses adjacent to a manufacturing /industrial activity, the rezone would ensure that any new residences would be separated from the BNSF facility by a road and other buffers, such as vegetation and fencing. Use of the parcels as part of the BNSF facility expansion would promote safety and convenience through good design. Setback, height, and landscaping/screening requirements for the MIC /H zone would be followed. In addition, cargo storage is already permitted in the LDR zone as an accessory use for some facilities (per TMC 18.10.030[7], "institutional uses such as hospitals, food banks, schools, or government facilities may have two cargo containers per lot with approval as a Type 2 decision; criteria listed at TMC 18.50.060 Future development applications for SEPA and Design Review will address specific potential impacts such as traffic, parking, and other impacts on abutting property, and provide the City of Tukwila a clear means to evaluate any future proposed development, accommodate neighborhood conditions, and avoid adverse impacts to the adjacent properties and the community. Page 2 of 2 1 14 site plan south Lot Diagram 116 ATTACHMENT T COMMUNITY BANK REZONE 118 ATTACHMENT 140__._ SEAT z:y y 1 a e S W\C) i O i o N i 9 ICi to LI 4 f.,L„ ,c, ii., L. L 1 '(#4t47% -,,2 9 City of Tukwila I Comp Plan Amendment O L11 -001 Rezone L11 -002 Subject Property Q Zoning �Ly X111 Tukwila City Limits 1" =200' G (O 119 120 ATTACHMENT V J t :..l CITY OF TUKWILA `p �2 Department of Community Development COMPREHENSIVE ,i' /y�� 1 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 PLAN ��j�,��_ p Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 IP 1 ibli. 'Z` E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us AMENDMENTS APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P -CPA Planner: Rej e cc_ .G x I File Number: L 11 -0 0 Application Complete (Date: g)Qj11 I Project File Number: (2L 11 0 1 Application Incomplete (Date: I Other File Numbers: C 1 002, NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: COMMUNITY BANK AT UNIFIED GROCER SITE LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. 10200 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH, TUKWILA, WA 98168 LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). 042304 9184 -04 DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR The individual who: has decision making authority on behalf of the owner /applicant in meetings with City staff, has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: Mikel Hansen Address: 12201 Tukwila International Boulevard. Seattle. WA 98168 Phone: 206 277 -5249 FAX: 206 282 -9951 E -mail: miketg/.14.44) h@sabev.co lm Signature: Al?..t Date: //3/// 121 C: \Documents and Settings \AllisonS \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files ContentOutlook \TBXBIIAB \Comprehendive Plan Amendment- Ju12010.doc A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Existing: MIC /H Proposed: CI B. ZONING DESIGNATION: Existing: MIC /H Proposed: CI (Licht Industrial) C. LAND USE(S): Existing: MIC /H Proposed: CI (for proposed changes in land use designations or rezones) D. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING LAND USES: Describe the existing uses located within 1,000 feet in all directions from the property or area for which a change is proposed. Unified Grocer administrative office and warehouse, restaurant, tavern, Boeing, Kina County Airport 122 and Spttinas\ AllisonS\ Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files\ ContentOutlook \TBXBIIAB \Comprehendive Plan Amendment- Ju12010.doc I WatgetiUE4 1 Associated (port of) S. N a rf.. Grocers Property 0003400042 Boundary 0003400046 0003400049 0003400015 10230 E Marginal I iir 0003400041 Property li 00034 1024 ►I1�I1I1r:� o Boundary v¢j6 (0423049101 a 0423049102 Le a 0323049024 t/P vg t�l1 0 Viii 0 0 tD ta 0423049099 0323049062 a. Sea lie tt 0323049048 0323049128 U 1 a A 42304906. 0323049080 cZE,_ D O 0323049045 l �v 0 0 0, 2304907. 4y ?a N z 2304907 r 6 v.. Q 0323049061 i 2304907 o 0323049028 0323049058 5211._ i 0 State in Feet 325 (approximate) S Boeing Rd, 10230 E Marginal Way Seattle, Washington DRAFT Tax Lot Parcel Numbers SAB -029-00 FIGURE 3 February 2007 Ref: Tax Lot Combined.Cdr Dalton, Olmsted Fuglevand, Inc. 123 1/t6T C0611 R •I]� SUBJECT PROPERTY y/0/0.0)0:006.y. CITY OF TUKWILA AREA 27,907 SF I CITY OF SEATTLE 9 A AREA 1,265,135 SF MlK 6L 1 /•SECnp1• 1 e CITY OF' TUKWILA AREA 1,438,912 SF /a. 3301 NORFOLK ST. AND 10230 E MARGINAL WAY SABEY PROPERTY CITY OF TUKWILA AND CITY OF SEATTLE ZONING AREAS SCALE 1" 250' 124 (1) j z z Q_ w &,OD 0 0 �L::: Of r1 0 0 w co LLJ D 0 0 (1) N F- C) 0 ZI uJ w —J :3 r t VOW L J t r z I_,_ w War WOM T 4 nY j 2 57 :i' b J) i 1 B !AN -_r-:•7 r r; IN Mn IF A4 I Nq R 1' 1-C j 1 w 3 w ';1_,w� a (7 x�� rn�rnulo >'4 W E pp 3 c c),-, o o o a N z o°o00 CO Q¢F w o 'n oo k Y 'Z O O¢ W w p Z0� v 2a O U pwoo Q QOo. W Q N W'4 E- awQO U v v w�OxE Q w C Z-Z W 9rvia z v '7" 44 :4:-'1; *,^04' x 1 1 wo 57; Vil '1‘ Z ii G V a 4 A 4 P f �t r c.,) A U t z y 0 N 111 i Z I c 1 ......5 r• f v im-. J -A- V Q i a r >r 4 a ...rs9 t. Q At 3. AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP 127 _d a:` '40 CITY OF TUKWILA ;.O Department of Community Development r (0,- y 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA Vjje'� 00 98188 fA�� •e• Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 3665 E mail: tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us 19(a AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 10200 East Marginal Way, Tukwila, WA 98168 for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at 12201 Tukwila International Boulevard, Seattle, WA, on January 3, 2011. Print Name Mikel Hansen Address 12201 Tukwila International Boulevard. Seattle. WA 98168 Phone Number 206 277 -5249 Signature On this day personally appeared before me Mikel Hansen to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he signed the same as his voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS 3rd DAY OF January, 2011 \11j ON H Sy li r r_ gs %O N F,g r y V pT4 9 NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of Washington tet h 0 residing at V —(----1 4':,� 08`1 'cr.; My Commission expires o ✓1 d �S 1 tl l J -L 1/ l lr1 I WAS C: \Documents and Settings \AllisonS \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files ContentOutlook \TBXBIIAB \Comprehendive Plan Amendment 1 28 Ju12010.doc 4. REDUCED SIZE PLANS 129 0 g ne fis[sLa :amore o 8 C\ 1 One 00112 p a,an3 a V IIMml01 002 0205 c z o s' 1 NOl`JNIHSVM z o e v NOI1V1i0d1100 A39VS ,,531V IOO a+.� Y ..wow SNVA3 OIAVO m r^�m u Q 's 8 G N s J1121�d02id �38dS a i o e o AVM lb'NIJbdW 3 0£Z06 om, NVId 3.LIS 3140Z3?! ONV 1N3WON3WV NVId 3AISN3H38d0100 Z z w v o a i z x cc R R$ ss3]3r 9N13O j 11 4 U m 110 q 1 i w 9, t Z /U 5 G y 0.GN _il i F 0 j /r t� A \It a I U i 4 i f 1 0 3 b 1 W j; j.s' zo c, h i =Y 11\ i B °moo N z '-Q¢a 0 1 V ,c, i W 0 C-- s p\ �b I r r V CC VI ",!`t. a q t t; N D ,k i s,,i, l I i i Z 1 I o rte �I C q 'aL ==l1 130 5. APPLICATION FEE 131 SABEYPROPERTIESLLC 89516 City of Tukwila Finance Dept it±1Vf51C s z it F 4NC'1 f�"T��'� .�:�r�`�.�r� �ESG�iP�i�gN ��tti�t.�.'?��" yr�t��[lVVOI NT�,�"•��D4 ;�€I� I' 4� l C 1 -07 -11 403 -0033 403 -0033 Assoc Gr 7850.00 .00 785 .'00 F z t i. fit ,,ffs�, j 4' r ry 3,Ae:;s �r •K 44,. f- i r Fr y ht 1 "M 1 0, 441.4 6 r i. r y e st"" 1 T� S R e :1,P j W r „�a s r v a 1- r r h rg d yP 1„f*,N "a -,sV yq. x s "o- 3 Y ;s r-e, m 0 „,.i r '.o-'s r r 5 t .ra 5`. q t �rY- tr,. v` a y r t b F ,7r4-.::,',..,.,' F t r r Z leM.. t I r! k, P .4-Td.: "r, f' 3'$4 ;{y--'� r v:�s s i -,t R "4 �2 �w 3g.'s, Y .rt ,c, k ii- ;r�e� t r.. .f'� g1 1 3. �sr, 'i 5 L y N ti s .rt' i s^,y S 4-f `%,�'x k rs 'eF' nS,' 'z aY+>s �k ';"v i .4 FHECK f 0 f 0 ;0 t gy aavfr <8F4if 1198 6 6 T A� F t; s ir igt k irara .[NUM1 5zi' k^f g d. :ar.`' ft w Y r amw r< �rra G y y r f� t'. n' 4• ,V ..i k__. PLEA RET/jI ,K h .W. e >a �4 "44, V 11.0 Q .10 THE FACE OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS A COLORED BACKGROUND ON WHITE PAPER .1X1...0.4Xl<R M Wa1 N{Ia'.'�' 6J AMTNI.00. SABEYPROPERTIES LLC The Commerce BankOf Washington Rem. ittanee is made by Sabey Properties sot Unwn str� t ELI orb behalf ett' sxc iszdac ries 91'0 4 ",z`,: 19S 0�y r 1 Tit B6 41 7' Fir l '.-1:..',--..,‘,!.:.' y ��5j�} f1 f rYt Sd) f� i13 h n ��r�} -4 KQ' e i i j C7� Q 7 Y i3Xt tv, rG1 o.rti No;: r fi' 1. l A (2 a081oq ,�anuAt�r 7 g t 4 6 f' s r �00 c, 8 r 7 .'a x Seven thous i and eght Fl ri dredrflft�y do11aFS a 8311` :„l a s t j 'r j k �3, v 7 T f .M'� U k J *`7` .fit r x h ti 2. j k 5 i 4',- x s r ti s'.z x f ,t yyr i 9 3 'v p F M r. r x i r 7e: "'v t tzPAY t z t of.T+�kwila PInarice Dept ...4 Ikea ti TO THE 3Q0 5outkdrt Bfyd 4! ORDER s w'i #a, WA 9 81 8 8 259: ,i, s i r a t t' ti ..t r f y :•.ti %:."4'4 H s,'. '`'E 1' i# eameop4 1 THE BACK OF THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS AN ARTIFICIAL WATERMARK —HOLD AT AN ANGLE TO VIEW >7�. 0 9.0=0' li'00 L 1.9 34611 1 L2500801,3 00 L L73758" 132 6. ZONING CODE AMENDMENT FEE SUBMITTED CONCURRENTLY WITH THIS APPLICATION 133 7. SEPA CHECKLIST WILL BE SUBMITTED ON REFFERRAL TO PLANNING COMMISSION 134 8. NOTICE BOARD FEE PAID TO FASTSIGNS TUKWILA 135 9. MAILING LABEL FEE INCLUDED WITH APPLICATION FEE 136 10. NOT APPLICABLE 137 11. RESPONSE TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMMENDMENT CRITERIA REPORT BY ECONORTHWEST 138 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA (TMC 18.80.050) Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria (TMC 18.80.0101 The application shall specify, in a format established by the property: 1. A detailed statement of what is proposed and why. Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone. The proposal is to remove an approximately 0.64 acre parcel south of Boeing Field in the City of Tukwila (see aerial photograph submitted concurrently with this application) from the Greater Duwamish Manufacturing Industrial Center (MIC /H) and redesignate the site as Light Industrial (LI). The proposal requires an amendment to the comprehensive plan land use map and a rezone. This 0.64 acre property was recently acquired by Sabey Corporation and was not part of the City of Tukwila 2007 Unified Grocer site rezone. In 2007, the City of Tukwila approved a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Zoning Code Amendment for approximately 32 of the 62 acre Unified Grocer site. The remaining approximately 30 acres is adjacent, and because of City boundaries, is located in the City of Seattle. In 2009, the City of Seattle approved a 30 acre rezone from General Industrial to Industrial Commercial to make it closely compatible to the amended Tukwila zone. We are now asking that the only remaining area within the 62 acre site made up of 0.64 acres be brought to the same zoning classification. The attached maps will clearly show the Tukwila /Seattle boundary as well as this 0.64 acre parcel. Potential Future Development. The proposal will allow for the future development of the entire property with LI uses. The LI zone permits a broader range of uses than currently permitted in the MIC /H zone. These uses include office, retail, lodging, entertainment, and light industrial warehouse and manufacturing uses. While project -level plans have not been prepared, it is anticipated that a mix of these uses will be developed throughout this now 62 acre site. See conceptual site plan submitted concurrently with this application. 2. A statement of the anticipated impacts of the change, including the geographic area affected by and the issues presented by the proposed change. The proposal will result in the following positive impacts to the City: Economic redevelopment. The property currently has a vacant 8,000 sq. ft. office space and was used most recently as a site for Sound Community Bank. An economic study prepared for the proposal (ECONorthwest 2007) shows that there is an existing demand for the range of uses proposed under the LI zoning. Redevelopment of the site with a range of LI uses will provide additional employment opportunities in the City of Tukwila as well as significant tax 139 revenue to the City. Incorporating this one remaining .64 acre parcel will provide consistent zoning and the ability to develop the site as a single parcel. Aesthetics. The property is located at the northern boundary of the City of Tukwila, fronting the major transportation corridor East Marginal Way near the corner of South Norfolk Street. The property is surrounded by the Unified Grocers LI -zoned site immediately to the north, east, and south. See aerial photograph. The property is developed with an older office building and surface parking. See aerial photograph. Development of the property with new buildings to house office, retail, lodging, entertainment, and light industrial (warehouse and manufacturing) uses will greatly enhance the aesthetic qualities as well as the prominence of the property. New buildings developed on the property will be required to meet the requirements of the current code for the LI zone, including landscaping and setback requirements that will enhance the property's aesthetic qualities. In addition, while development under the MIC /H zone is exempt from the design review, future development of the property under the LI zone will be subject to design review. This will ensure the property's function as a significant entry point to the City, as well as general quality of design, will be considered. Transportation. The Cities of Seattle and Tukwila have long had plans to improve the operational and aesthetic characteristics of East Marginal Way. The redevelopment of the property under the LI zone will further these goals by improving the aesthetic quality of development on the property adjacent to these roadways and by providing frontage improvements as required by City code. In addition, the transportation analysis for project level proposals will ensure that access is appropriately located and that all transportation improvements required as a result of the development of the property will be accomplished. In addition, the property is served by Metro transit and light rail. The uses proposed for the property under the LI zone will bring employees and customers to the property who would be likely to utilize Metro transit and the light rail station. In contrast, heavy manufacturing uses under the current zoning are more likely to require automobile and truck use. Industrial Lands. The ECONorthwest report demonstrates that the proposal will not significantly impact future industrial development on parcels near the property in the MIC. The property is physically separated from industrial land to the north (in the City of Seattle) by Boeing and Boeing Field. East Marginal Way and the Duwamish River lie to the west and 1 -5 lies to the east. Properties to the south in Tukwila are predominantly in light industrial and commercial uses. Due to the property's physical isolation (by Boeing -owned land, roadways, and the River) from areas of heavy industrial use, the proposal will not significantly impact future industrial development on parcels near the property in the MICs. 140 Tukwila Urban Center. The ECONorthwest report also shows that the proposal will not adversely affect commercial development in the urban center. As indicated in the report, the scale of development anticipated for the property under the LI zone will serve the local market area, rather than the regional market served by the uses in Tukwila Urban Center. Accordingly, the project will not result in adverse impacts to the urban center. Environmental Impacts. Future development of the site would undergo project- specific review and mitigation to ensure that the proposal does not result in significant adverse environmental impacts. In addition, development made under the LI zone would generally be anticipated to have less impact to the environment than development under the MIC /H zone, since heavy industrial uses typically generate more noise, dust and pollutants than light industrial, office, and retail uses. 3. An explanation of why the current comprehensive plan or development regulations are deficient or should not continue in effect. The current MIC /H designation and zoning for the property should not continue in effect. This designation and zoning was placed on the property under very different circumstances than exist today. Today the site surrounding the property has been rezoned to a light industrial zone through two major parcel rezones in 2007 and 2009. This remaining small parcel was recently acquired and should as a matter of consistent zoning be added to the previous 2007 comprehensive plan amendment. 4. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with and promotes the goals and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act. Urban Growth. The Growth Management Act (GMA) encourages compact urban growth in areas served by urban infrastructure. RCW 36.70A.020(1), (2). The proposal will further these goals by allowing development of the property, which is located in an urban area and well served by existing infrastructure, under the LI zone. The MIC /H use that currently occupies the property will relocate in the relative near future. Development in the vicinity of the property is trending toward light industrial and commercial development. Accordingly, redevelopment of the property under the LI zone is appropriate. Economic development. GMA encourages economic development. RCE 36.70A.020(5). Redevelopment of the site with a range of LI uses will meet an existing demand for these uses in the City. This development will provide additional employment opportunities in the City of Tukwila as well as significant tax revenue to the City. ECONorthwest (2007). The proposal is also consistent with Comprehensive Plan Economic Goal 2.1, which calls for continuing enhancement of the community's economic well being. The proposal meets this goal by meeting an existing demand in the City for the range of uses that can be developed 141 under the LI zoning but which are not available under the existing MIC /H zoning, including office, retail, and entertainment uses. ECONorthwest (2007). City boundaries. The proposal is also consistent with goals and policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan calling for the development of identifiable City boundaries. Goal 1.3 provides, "Identifiable boundaries for Tukwila so that residents, workers, and visitors know they are entering the City." Redevelopment of the property with LI uses will be subject to design review. This process will ensure that the property's function as a significant entry point to the City, as well as general quality design, will be considered. Transportation corridors. In addition, Comprehensive Plan Goal 8.1 encourages "transportation corridors that are functional, attractive, and diverse along their lengths both for the people who live along them, traveling through them, and those travelling to visit these areas." Development under the LI zone will further this goal by improving the aesthetic quality of development on the property adjacent to these roadways and by providing frontage improvements as required by the City code. 5. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with applicable Countywide Planning Policies. The proposal complies with applicable Countywide Planning Policies (CPPs). CPP LU -26 provides that lands within Urban Growth Areas (UGAs) shall be characterized by urban development in the UGA. As previously discussed, the MIC /H use that currently occupies the property will be relocating in the near future. Development in the vicinity of the property is trending towards light industrial and commercial development. Accordingly, redevelopment of the property under the LI zone is appropriate. LU -28 provides that growth should be directed first to centers and urbanized areas with existing infrastructure capacity. The property is an urbanized area with existing infrastructure capacity. In addition, an economic study prepared for the proposal shows that the proposal will not adversely affect the Tukwila Urban Center. ECONorthwest (2007). The CPPs address initial designation of Manufacturing Industrial Centers (MIC) and activities within them (LU 51 -62) but do not address removal of properties from the MIC. With regard to development outside of centers, the CPPs provide: "A variety of land uses and concentrations of growth occur within the Urban Growth Area and outside of Urban Centers and Manufacturing /Industrial Centers. Local land use plans will be responsible for the designation, character, and utilization of Urban Areas outside of Centers." CPPs Section III.FAccordingly, the CPPs do not constrain the City's ability to remove the property from the MIC based on local circumstances. 142 FW -34 provides that "All jurisdictions shall act to increase work training and job opportunities for all residents and communities." The proposal would allow the development of the property under the LI zone, providing job opportunities to Tukwila residents and residents of other jurisdictions in the region. There is an existing demand for the types of uses that could be developed under the LI zone, but which are precluded from the MIC /H zone. Redevelopment of the property under the LI zone would meet this demand. ECONorthwest (2007). ED -3 provides that "(j]urisdictions' comprehensive plans shall include economic development policies. These policies shall address the local economic concerns of each jurisdiction within the context of a regional economic development strategy." The Tukwila Comprehensive Plan includes an Economic Element. As previously discussed, the proposal is consistent with the goals and policies of this Element, particularly with Goal 2.1 (enhancement of community's economic well being) and Policy 2.1.10 (consider land use changes for warehouses if there is a change in sales tax sourcing rules). 6. A statement of what changes, if any would be required in functional plans (i.e. the City's water, sewer, storm water or shoreline plans) if the proposed amendment is adopted. The proposal is not anticipated to affect the City's functional plans. The property is adequately served by existing water, sewer, and stormwater infrastructure. The property is not within the shoreline area. Project specific utility improvements may be required in connection with project -level review. 7. A statement of what capital improvements, if any, would be needed to support the proposed change, and how the proposed change will affect the capital facilities plans of the City. No capital improvements are anticipated in connection with this plan -level action. The proposal is not anticipated to affect the City's capital facilities plans. Project specific utility and transportation improvements may be required in connection with project -level review. 8. A statement of what other changes, if any, are required in other City codes, plans or regulations to implement the proposed change. The proposal requires a rezone of the property to LI. Additional Comprehensive Plan Amendment Criteria (TMC 18.80.050.81 The Council will consider the following in deciding what action to take regarding any proposed amendment: 143 1. Is the issue adequately addressed in the Comprehensive Plan? The proposal to redesignate and rezone the property LI is not currently addressed in the Comprehensive Plan. The existing Comprehensive Plan designation for the property is MIC /H. The applicant is seeking a Comprehensive Plan amendment to change the land use designation to LI concurrent with an application to rezone the property to LI. The proposal is supported by numerous goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan, as discussed previously. 2. If the issue is not addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, is there a public need for the proposed change? There is a public need for the proposed change. As previously discussed, the property exists as a vacant building adjacent to the Unified Grocers site. The vacancy of the property and the adjacent land (both owned by the same company) presents an opportunity for redevelopment of the property consistent with market demand and development trends in the area. The proponent is proposing a rezone of the site to LI. While project -level plans have not been prepared, it is anticipated that a mix of uses allowed in the LI zone will be developed on the property, including office, retail, lodging, entertainment, and light industrial warehouse and manufacturing uses. This development will meet an identified market demand for these types of uses in the City. ECONorthwest (2007). In addition, the redevelopment of the site will meet the need identified in the City Comprehensive Plan for development of identifiable City boundaries, improvements to the aesthetic qualities of the site, and improvement to the adjacent major transportation corridor of East Marginal Way. These factors were discussed in more detail above. 3. Is the proposed change the best means for meeting the identified public need? Yes. Redevelopment of the property under the current land use designation and zoning would not meet the need for office, retail, entertainment, and light industrial uses that has been identified, since these uses are not allowed in the MIC /H zone. ECONorthwest (2007). Further, due to the nature of heavy industrial uses, the fact that uses in the MIC /H zone are not required to undergo design review, and the reduced code requirements for items such as landscaping as compared to LI zone, redevelopment of the property with heavy industrial uses would not meet the City's goals relating to development of identifiable City boundaries, aesthetic improvements, and improvements to major transportation corridors. Further, other zoning designations would not be as appropriate as the LI zone. While the LI zone accommodates a wide range of uses, it is an industrial zone. Accordingly, LI provides a transition between heavy industrial uses and the light industrial and commercial uses developing to the south. Other available zones (such as commercial zones) would not be well suited to this location as they do not provide this transition. 144 4. Will the proposed change result in a net benefit to the community? Yes. As discussed in detail previously, the proposal will provide economic development, assist in creating an identifiable northern City boundary, aesthetic improvements, and transportation corridor improvements. These are all significant benefits to the community. 145 146 5 CONort h S we ECONOMICS FINANCE PLANNING Phone (541) 687 -0051 Suite 400 Other Offices FAX (541) 344 -0562 99 W. 10th Avenue Portland (503) 222 -6060 info@eugene.econw.com Eugene, Oregon 97401 -3001 Seattle (206) 622 -2403 August 9, 2007 TO: Mikel Hansen FROM: Terry Moore, Bob Parker, and Beth Goodman SUBJECT: ANALYSIS OF IMPACTS OF A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND ZONE CHANGE AT THE ASSOCIATED GROCERS SITE SUMMARY Sabey Corporation is submitting an application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and zoning change on the 64 -acre Associated Grocers site. The analysis in this memorandum supports that application by addressing specific questions that the City has raised about the proposed changes. This section (two pages) summarizes our answer to those questions; the memorandum that follows this summary provides supporting data and analysis. CONTEXT The subject property is in Tukwila's Manufacturing Industrial Center (MIC). Its plan designation and zoning is MIC/H (Heavy Industrial). Sabey Corporation is requesting a change to Light Industrial (LI), which would allow for the development of office, commercial, and retail space as well as other light industrial uses. Sabey Corporation is planning to develop the property for office, retail, and light industrial. The City of Tukwila is concerned that the type of development proposed for the subject property could (1) discourage or be incompatible with existing uses in the MIC, (2) increase pressure for conversions from heavy industrial to commercial land, (3) decrease the amount of land available for industrial growth, and (4) compete or take market share for retail and commercial developments in Tukwila's Urban Center. IMPACTS TO INDUSTRIAL LAND 1. Will the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment significantly impact future industrial development on parcels near the subject property in the MIC? No. The majority of land near the subject property is already being used for commercial or light industrial uses. 2. Will the proposed uses on the subject property be compatible with existing and expected industrial uses in the MIC? Yes. Regional trends and local forecasts indicate that manufacturing employment is growing slowly or decreasing. Official regional, long- term employment forecasts suggest the majority of employment that Tukwila can expect 147 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 2 in the future is Professional and Business Services and other types of employment that use office space. Boeing Field and Boeing properties separate the subject property from the heaviest industrial uses in the MIC. 3. Is granting the Comprehensive Plan Amendment likely to increase demand for conversion from industrial to commercial uses on areas adjacent to the subject property? Maybe, especially south of the subject site. That land is currently being used, however, for commercial and light industrial purposes. The pressure for conversion of this land to commercial uses is more likely to be affected by regional land prices for industrial land and employment trends than changes to the subject property. 4. Does the proposed development negatively impact the City's policy to have adequate land for industrial growth? Yes and no. Changing the zoning on the proposed development clearly reduces the amount of land for some industrial uses (the property is roughly 4% of the industrial land in Tukwila), and allows the option to develop more of the land for office and retail uses. But the market trends have been clear for a while: land on and around the subject property is not being used much by heavy industry, and the subject property is now used for light industrial and commercial purposes. There is a reasonable, but not definitive, argument that the change in designation will have little impact on the long -run viability of industrial uses in Tukwila given market forces and the way the MIC/H zone is defined and implemented. IMPACTS TO THE URBAN CENTER 1. How will the uses on the subject site be similar and different from the uses in the Tukwila Urban Center? The uses in the Tukwila Urban Center include a regional mall, high density residential development, and a large mixed -use development. The uses on the subject site will be a smaller -scale mixture of retail, commercial, and light industrial uses. Most of the uses will primarily serve people working on or near the site, visitors wanting to stay near Sea -Tac International Airport, and people living relatively near the subject site. 2. To what extent will the commercial and retail uses in the proposed development compete with commercial and retail uses in the Tukwila Urban Center and other developments within the City? There is no question that the proposed uses will compete with development in other areas of Tukwila: that is the nature of all types of development, and especially retail. The broader question is whether enough demand exists to support all of the existing and proposed developments in Tukwila, including development on the subject property. PSRC forecasts strong employment growth in Tukwila for sectors that use office space. Population growth, coupled with increases in disposable income, will create demand for additional retail space. 3. What is the market area for the proposed development compared to the Tukwila Urban Center? The development concept includes two primary uses: employment (office and some industrial) and retail. The employment uses will draw workers from throughout the region. The retail uses will draw from a smaller market area. Since the mix of retailers is not yet specified, we cannot say definitively exactly what the market area will be. 148 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 3 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND Sabey Corporation contracted with ECONorthwest to analyze the impacts of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and zoning change on the 64 -acre Associated Grocers distribution site, located in north Tukwila and south Seattle. The subject property is located in Tukwila's Manufacturing/Industrial Center (MIC) The Manufacturing/In.dustrial Center (MIC) is an area designated in Tukwila's comprehensive plan as a manufacturing center. It includes land zoned for Manufacturing Industrial Center/Heavy Industrial MIC/H) and Manufacturing Industrial Center/Light Industrial (MIC/L). The subject property is zoned MIC/H. Figure 1 shows that the subject property is located between Airport Way, Norfolk Road, East Marginal Way, the Duwamish River and the Boeing Access Road. The property is separated from other properties in the MIC by these roads, except along the northwestern edge of the property, which is adjacent to a credit union. Figure 1. Subject property and immediate transportation access ww" a 3 h am Lt r Co way I uternat'�u 1 r r '''‘‘-`,7 PT`s dt a J r ''P y z 4 'tor v `om ,Y -i+maw. IA v a e to n F L 99 4 f RL +k i� d* Y k -C ry ry cr n 1 1 Tf f S! m tFi c 599 i' 1 7:7„.4*7.1:4:2:- 1ghr (ta l1P I a r C� Y iq lam.' t' :z Source: Johnson Gardner memorandum "Draft Economic and Market Trends Shaping Industrial Land Need in the Duwamish Corridor," May 10, 2007 Fifty -five acres of the 64 -acre site are occupied by the Associated Grocers headquarters and distribution facility, a light industrial use that has existed in the heavy industry zone for the past 149 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 4 50 years. Associated Grocers is considering changing the location of its facility; it is unclear whether they will continue using the site for more than two to four years. Sabey Corporation is seeking a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and zoning change on the property to bring the zoning in line with historical and likely future uses. The current plan designation is for heavy industrial uses MIC/H on the portion of the site in Tukwila and IG2 on the portion of the site in Seattle). Sabey Corporation is requesting a change in plan designation and zoning to Light Industrial, LI. The purposes and uses permitted in these zones are described in Tukwila's zoning ordinance: Manufacturing/Industrial Center Heavy (MIC/II) District "...is intended to provide a major employment area containing heavy or bulk manufacturing and industrial uses, distributive and light manufacturing and industrial uses, and other uses that support those industries. This district's uses and standards are intended to enhance the redevelopment of the Duwamish Corridor." The district allows a wide range of uses and building types: manufacturing, heavy -metal processing, rock crushing and asphalt or concrete manufacturing, offices associated with permitted uses, warehouse and distribution facilities, storage facilities, hotels and motels, and restaurants. Light Industrial (LI) District "...is intended to provide areas characterized by distributive and light manufacturing uses, with supportive commercial and office uses." The district allows a wide range of uses and building types: manufacturing (similar to manufacturing permitted in MIC/H), many types of office, medical and dental laboratories and offices, retail sales, warehouse and distribution facilities, storage facilities, hotels and motels, and restaurants. Sabey Corporation is considering redeveloping the site for commercial and light- industrial uses. Table 1 shows Sabey Corporation's concept of the possible uses on the site. The majority of the uses would be office and retail, with a small amount of other commercial and light industrial uses. Although the Sabey Corporation does not have definite plans for the components of the development, it hopes to develop a mixed -use center that provides opportunities for working, recreation and socialization, and shopping in the same area. The development is likely to be pedestrian- oriented and incorporate open space. The site is currently served by bus and SoundTransit may develop the proposed light rail and commuter train station at the Boeing Access Road. Plans to develop this station have been deferred by Sound Transit until financing is available for the station. Table 1. Conceptual development types on the Associated Grocers site Est. Size Possible Use (Square feet) Percent Office 700,000 47% Retail 550,000 37% Light Industrial 100,000 7% Hotel 80,000 5% Theatre 60,000 4% Total 1,490,000 100% Source: Sabey Corporation model of possible uses 150 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 5 Previous studies documented regional economic trends in support of the proposed amendments.' A Johnson Gardner study made the following findings about regional economic trends: The subject property has unique qualities that support the change in uses, including the site's size, visibility, multiple modes of access, nearby industries, and the potential for growth in King County. Growth in manufacturing, particularly heavy industrial activity, will be stagnant over the medium- and long -term periods in King County and the Puget Sound region. The combination of increasing costs of industrial land and outflow of traditional heavy industry create disadvantages for future use of the subject property by a new manufacturer or other firm that needs traditional industrial space. Forecasts and plans by the State of Washington, the Puget Sound Regional Council, and the Prosperity Partnership expect heavy industry to continue to be important to the regional economy but expect a long -term decline in heavy manufacturing and are planning to encourage growth in technical and scientific industries. The current zoning of the property (MIC/H) creates barriers to redeveloping the subject property for uses compatible with the expected regional growth in high -tech, scientific, research, and commercial services industries. PURPOSE OF THE MEMORANDUM This memorandum provides supporting documentation to Sabey Corporation's application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and zoning change on the subject property. It addresses specific questions pertaining to the potential impacts of a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and zoning change on the subject site. In short, the purpose of this memorandum is to describe local industrial, commercial, and retail land -use trends that affect future uses of the site, and how (and whether) the Comprehensive Plan Amendment would impact the city's planning efforts. The City of Tukwila is concerned about the impact of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on existing industrial land and existing and planned commercial uses within its city limits. The City is especially interested in the potential impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments on the Tukwila Manufacturing/Industrial Center (MIC) and the Tukwila Urban Center (TUC), as well as strategies to mitigate any potential impacts. Specifically, the City is concerned about: How the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment may impact industrial land near the subject property in the MIC Whether the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment may encourage other property owners to apply for conversion of industrial land to commercial land Compatibility between the proposed uses on the subject property and uses on surrounding industrial lands Johnson Gardner memorandum "Draft Economic and Market Trends Shaping Industrial Land Need in the Duwamish Corridor," May 10, 2007 151 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 6 How the potential commercial development on the subject site will effect other commercial uses in Tukwila ORGANIZATION OF THE MEMORANDUM The remainder of the memorandum is organized as follows: Framework for evaluation summarizes the procedures and criteria for amending Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code that are addressed in this memorandum. Analysis provides answers for each of the questions presented in the Framework section. SCOPE OF THE EVALUATION Sabey Corporation has applied for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the subject property. Tukwila has procedures and criteria for amending its comprehensive plan and Zoning Code, which note that "The burden of proof to demonstrate that a change to the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code is warranted lies solely upon the proponent. An application to amend Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan must address the criteria specified by the City in its "Application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment." This memorandum is not the Sabey Corporation's application, which is being submitted separately and addresses all of the criteria. Rather, this memorandum supports that application by addressing in more detail the following criteria for the Comprehensive Plan Amendment: Explain why the proposed change is the best means for meeting identified public need and describe other options for meeting the public need. Explain why the proposed change will result in a net benefit to the community or the type of benefit that can be expected. Describe the anticipated impacts of the change, including the geographic area affected and the issues presented by the proposed change. Explain why the current comprehensive plan or development regulations are defective or should not continue in effect. Describe how the proposed amendment complies with applicable Countywide Planning Policies. Describe what changes would be required in the Zoning Code. In addition to requesting a change in the Comprehensive Plan, Sabey Corporation will also need to request a change to Tukwila's Zoning Code. An application to amend Tukwila's Zoning Code must address criteria presented in the application for a Zoning Code Amendment. This memorandum addresses the following criteria for the Zoning Code Amendment: Show that the proposed amendment to the zoning map is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan. 2 From the City of Tukwila "Comprehensive Plan Amendments" application. 152 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 7 Show that the proposed amendment to the zoning map is consistent with the scope and purpose of this title and the description and purpose of the zone classification applied for. Demonstrate that there are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the zoning map. Describe how the proposed amendment to the zoning map will be in the interest of furthering public health, safety, comfort, convenience and general welfare, and will not adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood, nor be injurious to other properties in the vicinity in which the subject property is located. In meetings between staff at the Sabey Corporation and the City prior to the submission of the Sabey Corporation's application, City staff identified several concerns regarding the impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This memorandum addresses concerns the City raised about the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment. What are the potential impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on industrial land in the Manufacturing/Industrial Center? This section will address the affect that the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment may have on industrial land in the MIC, including compatibility issues and increases in pressure to convert land from industrial to commercial uses. It will discuss possible strategies for mitigating these impacts. What are the potential impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on uses in Tukwila's Urban Center? This section will address the impact of the proposed amendment and development on existing commercial and retail uses in Tukwila's Urban Center. It will discuss possible strategies for mitigating these impacts. The analysis section of this memorandum addresses these broad questions, and several related ones. ANALYSIS ECO staff worked with City staff to understand the key issues and analysis required to support the Comprehensive Plan Amendment. This section provides analysis of the two broad questions posed above. The analysis is separated into two parts: impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on industrial; and impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on other commercial uses in Tukwila. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ON INDUSTRIAL LAND IN THE MANUFACTURING /INDUSTRIAL CENTER The City of Tukwila is concerned about the potential impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on industrial land in the City's Manufacturing/Industrial Center (MIC). The City's questions are: 1. Will the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment significantly impact future industrial development on parcels near the subject property in the MIC? 153 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 8 2. Will the proposed uses on the subject property be compatible with existing and expected industrial uses in the MIC? 3. Is granting the Comprehensive Plan Amendment likely to increase demand for conversion from industrial to commercial uses on areas adjacent to the subject property? 4. Does the proposed development negatively impact the City's policy to have adequate land for industrial growth? 5. How can the impacts of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment be mitigated? The following analysis addresses these questions. The conclusions at the end of this section provides answers to the questions. Industrial land availability in Tukwila Table 2 shows land uses in Tukwila by plan designation and zoning. The City has designated 1,436 acres —more than one quarter of the City's land —for industrial uses; 1,168 -acres are in the MIC/H zone. An additional 753 acres (14% of the City's land) is in zones that allow a mixture of commercial and industrial uses, and 1,144 -acres (21% of the City's land) are in commercial zones. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would change 64 acres of MIC/H land to LI. The City only has 20 acres currently in the LI zone. Table 2. Land by zoning district, gross acres, Tukwila, 2007 Zone Acres Percent Industrial 1,436 27% Manufacturing Industrial Center /Heavy Industrial (MIC /H) 1,168 22% Heavy Industrial (HI) 144 3% Manufacturing Industrial Center /Light Industrial (MIC /L) 105 2% Light Industrial (LI) 20 0% Mixed Commercial and Industrial 753 14% Commercial Light Industrial (C /LI) 472 9% Tukwila Valley South (TVS) 281 5% Commercial 1,144 21% Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) 853 16% Regional Commercial (RC) 80 1% Regional Commercial Mixed Use (RCM) 77 1% Office (0) 53 1% Neighborhood Commercial Center (NCC) 52 1% Mixed Use Office (MOU) 21 0% Residential Commercial Center (RCC) 8 0% Residential 2,049 38% Low Density Residential (LDR) 1,797 33% High Density Residential (HDR) 161 3% Medium Density Residential (MDR) 91 2% Total 5,383 100% Source: City of Tukwila, 2007 154 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 9 Table 3 shows the distribution of land uses within the Manufacturing/Industrial Center in Tukwila in 2005, the City's key industrial zone. The majority of the land (913 acres) is developed. Other uses include the King County International Airport (175 acres) and vacant land (134 acres). The subject property is 64 acres and represents about 5% of the land within the MIC. Table 3. Land uses in the Manufacturing and Industrial Center, Tukwila, 2005 Acres Percent Developed Land 913 72% Airport 175 14% Vacant Land 134 11% Water 34 3% Right -of -Way 16 1% Total 1,272 100% Source: Tukwila Comprehensive Plan, 2005 and Tukwila City staff, 2007 According to Tukwila City staff, vacant land is defined a s land having an improvement value of less than $5,000. Table 4 shows the distribution of employment for firms located in the Manufacturing/Industrial Center in 2005. About 85% of the more than 18,000 employees in the Center were employed by firms needing industrial land, including processing firms (including manufacturing) and wholesale firms. Table 4. Employment in the Manufacturing and Industrial Center, Tukwila, 2005 Employees Percent Processing 13,845 76% Professional Office 1,887 10% Wholesale 1,644 9% Other 453 2% Retail 362 2% Total 18,191 100% Source: Tukwila Comprehensive Plan, 2005 In 2007, Associated Grocers employed about 750 people at the subject property, approximately 4% of the employment in the Center. About 400 of the jobs (53 of the jobs were in distribution and 350 of the jobs (47 were office related. These categories of employment do not precisely match the categories presented in Table 4. The distribution employees are probably covered under "Wholesale" in Table 4 and the office- related employees are probably accounted for in "Professional Office in Table 4. The data presented in this section suggest that the proposed change in plan designation on the subject property would affect about 6% of the land area and about 4% of the employment in the MIC. The amount of land zoned in the City Light Industrial (LI) would increase from 20 -acres to 84- acres. Granting the Comprehensive Plan Amendment would result in a change in the composition of economic activity on the site, possibly increasing economic activity on the subject property. The 155 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 10 existing use of the subject property is light industrial and commercial in nature, and has no heavy industrial component. Sabey Corporation is proposing to increase the share of office and retail jobs and decrease the share of light industrial employment. Assuming the subject site is developed as proposed by Sabey Corporation in Table 1, the subject property may have 2,500 or more employees, more than three quarters of which would be office jobs Changes in employment and demand for industrial land A key question is how the Comprehensive Plan Amendment will affect employment and demand for industrial land. External but important to this question are regional employment trends that will shape demand for land and built space in the MIC/H zone. The Johnson Gardner memorandum documents the projected change in payroll employment in King County. It states that the Washington Employment Security Department projected that the sectors that will add the most employment in King County over the next ten -years are industries that traditionally use office space. These industries are expected to account for nearly 69% of new job growth in the County. Professional and Business Services are expected to lead job growth and Manufacturing firms are expected to account for only 2% of new jobs. Table 5 shows the Washington Employment Security Department projection of job growth in Manufacturing industries for the 2004 to 2014 period. The industries that are projected to add the most jobs are Aerospace (3,000 new jobs), Nonmetallic Mineral Products (1,300 new jobs), and Food Manufacturing (1,200 new jobs). The industries that are projected to loose the most jobs are Printing and Related Support -700 jobs) and Paper and Paper Products -200 jobs). 3 The estimate of 2,500 employees is based on the amount of space by type that the Sabey Corporation is considering building on the subject property (shown Table 1) and the employment densities presented on page 45 of the Puget Sound Regional Council's document "Industrial Land Supply and Demand in the Central Puget Sound Region." 156 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 11 Table 5. Manufacturing employment forecast, King County, 2004 -2014 Estimated Employment Change 2004 to 2014 Industry 2004 2009 2014 Number Percent AAGR Manufacturing 103,500 115,000 110,400 6,900 7% 0.6% Durable Goods 76,700 87,600 83,200 6,500 8% 0.8% Aerospace 37,300 45,000 40,300 3,000 8% 0.8% Nonmetallic Mineral Products 3,100 4,000 4,400 1,300 42% 3.6% Wood Products 1,300 1,800 1,800 500 38% 3.3% Machinery 5,200 5,700 5,700 500 10% 0.9% Fabricated Metal Products 6,100 6,700 6,500 400 7% 0.6% Electrical Equipment and Appliances 1,700 1,900 2,000 300 18% 1.6% Misc. Manufacturing 5,500 5,500 5,800 300 5% 0.5% Computer and Electronic Products 9,100 9,400 9,300 200 2% 0.2% Furniture Related Prod. 2,600 2,700 2,800 200 8% 0.7% Primary Metals 900 900 800 -100 -11% -1.2% Other Transportation Equipment 3,900 4,000 3,800 -100 -3% -0.3% Non Durable Goods 26,800 27,400 27,200 400 1% 0.1% Food Manufacturing 12,200 13,000 13,400 1,200 10% 0.9% Chemicals 1,800 2,000 2,000 200 11% 1.1% Petroleum Coal Prod. 200 200 200 0 0% 0.0% Plastics Rubber Prod. 3,100 3,100 3,100 0 0% 0.0% Textile Apparel 2,200 2,400 2,100 -100 -5% -0.5% Paper Paper Prod. 2,000 1,800 1,800 -200 -10% -1.0% Printing Related Support 5,300 4,900 4,600 -700 -13% -1.4% Source: Washington Employment Security Department The Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) projects employment for small areas in the Puget Sound Region. Table 6 shows the PSRC's long -term forecast for employment in the Tukwila Forecast Analysis Zones (FAZ) for the 2000 to 2040 period. The PSRC projects that the Tukwila FAZs will add about 27,500 jobs over the 40 -year period. The forecast shows that the majority of new jobs will be in Services, including Finance and Insurance and Real Estate. Employment in Manufacturing is forecast to decline by more than 3,600 jobs. Employment in Wholesale Trade, Transportation Services, Communications, and Utilities (WTCU) is forecast to grow by more than 1,800 jobs. Some or most of the employment growth in WTCU sectors will choose to locate on industrial land. 157 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 12 Table 6. Employment forecast, Tukwila FAZs, 2000 2040 total MFG WTCU Retail FIRES Gov /ED Emp. 2000 11,369 6,302 11,226 13,113 2,278 44,288 2040 7,761 8,147 12,460 41,267 2,199 71,834 Change Number -3,608 1,845 1,234 28,154 -79 27,546 Percent -32% 29% 11% 215% -3% 62% Source: Puget Sound Regional Council Notes: The PSRC uses Census tracts as the geographic basis of the Forecast Analysis Zones (FAZ). The Census tracts do not generally follow political boundaries. As a result, the forecast in Table 6 may include areas outside of Tukwila and /or may exclude areas inside the city limits. Table 6 includes the South Tukwila and North Tukwila/Riverton FAZs MFG is manufacturing WTCU includes wholesale trade, transportation services, communications, and utilities FIRES includes finance and insurance, real estate, and services Gov /ED includes govemment and education The predicted employment shifts are already beginning to take place. According to Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan, Boeing controls 750 acres within the Manufacturing/Industrial Center. With the move of their corporate headquarters out the region, Boeing is in the process of converting its facilities into an aerospace research and development engineering campus, including office, laboratory, and manufacturing space. According to staff with the City of Tukwila, Boeing's current activities within the MIC are predominantly light industrial in nature, including manufacturing airplane components from carbon fiber, assembling plane parts that were manufactured elsewhere, and software development for research and development. Boeing is likely to have low to moderate growth on its land within the MIC. The PSRC employment forecasts suggest that employment in manufacturing in Tukwila will decrease throughout the 2000 -2040 planning horizon. The MIC/H zone primarily targets manufacturing. Declining manufacturing employment strongly suggests declining demand for land and built space. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment recognizes these trends and would provide land for the office and retail sectors where PSRC projects most of the employment growth will occur. Potential impacts of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment on land near the subject property in the MIC The subject property is located on the eastern edge of the MIC. It is bounded by East Marginal Way S and the Duwamish River on the west, Norfolk Road and Boeing Field on the north, Airport Way on the east, and the Boeing Access Road to the south. The property is located near the southern edge of properties zoned MIC/H, and the freeway borders the property to the east. The only parcel that the subject site is directly adjacent to is a credit union, to the north. Other surrounding uses include Boeing facilities, a restaurant, and the Museum of Flight. Existing uses near the subject property are light industrial and commercial in nature, rather than heavy industrial. Thus, several conditions suggest that the change in use at the subject property would not necessarily cause other properties in the MIC area to become less desirable for the kinds of uses allowed in the MIC: The subject property is at the edge of the MIC, not in the center 158 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 13 The subject property is bounded mainly by roads, which reduce direct impacts on surrounding property. Where it touches other parcels, the uses are already commercial (a credit union, a restaurant and the Museum of Flight), not industrial. Independent of the MIC/H designation, the de facto land uses in the MIC/H area would be better characterized as Light Industrial, and would not conflict with LI uses. The majority of the current uses on land within the MIC can be described as light industrial, as defined in the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan. There is comparatively little heavy industrial activity on land in the MIC in Tukwila. The closest large -scale heavy industrial activity is Delta Marine, a ship building firm located along the west side of Duwamish River outside of Tukwila. Boeing controls most of the land in the MIC/H (approximately 750 acres) and, thus, largely has control of its own destiny. Boeing's use of its facilities within the MIC have changed substantially over the past fifteen years. It has already shifted most of its properties to the Light Industrial end of allowable uses in the MIC/H. It may choose to continue that trend, but it is unlikely to be forced in that direction by a rezoning of the subject property to LI. Its current uses are not only compatible with but may be possibly enhanced by the type of development proposed on the subject site. The proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment for the subject property is a symptom of the increasing importance of services that require office space, such as Professional and Technical Services, in the regional and local economy. Granting the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the subject property will not change long -term decline in the demand for heavy industrial uses, employment, and land. Denying the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment, however, could result in the long -term underutilization or even disuse (if Associated Grocers relocates) of the subject property. A key concern of the City is whether this Comprehensive Plan Amendment will lead to other proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendments in the MIC/H resulting in a "domino" effect in the area. Our evaluation is that the Comprehensive Plan Amendment on the subject site will not itself, result in such an effect. First, the site is relatively isolated from other sites in the area. Second, the development concept would support many existing uses in the area. Third, while manufacturing employment is projected to decline, there will still be a projected 7,800 manufacturing jobs in the Tukwila area in 2040. However, if the PSRC's employment forecast for the Tukwila FAZs is correct, the trends towards decreasing manufacturing employment may result in lower demand for industrial land and an increase in the pressure to convert heavy industrial land to light industrial or commercial uses. According to the PRCS's forecast Tukwila will experience changes in the composition of its workforce, most notably a decrease in manufacturing employment. The result of this change may be a decrease in the demand for industrial land, especially heavy industrial land. Change of employment and land uses in the MIC The shift from heavy industrial uses to light industrial and commercial uses in the portion of the MIC near the subject site, including Boeing's land, has already occurred without Comprehensive Plan Amendments. The regional employment trends discussed above and in the Johnson Gardner study describe trends away from heavy industrial employment in the region and in Tukwila. The types of firms that are most likely to be attracted to the region require commercial office or 159 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 14 campus -style development, including high -tech, scientific, research, and other "creative" industries. Aside from the subject property, the non Boeing land that is most likely to be under pressure to convert from heavy industrial to commercial uses are the parcels south of the subject site, east of the Duwamish River between Tukwila International Boulevard, East Marginal Way South, and Interstate 5. The existing uses on these sites are largely commercial in nature, including office buildings and a hotel. It may be that allowing the subject property to convert from a designation of heavy industrial to light industrial will increase pressure on these parcels to convert to commercial uses. On the other hand, some of the existing uses are commercial. Allowing the conversion of the subject property may create an opportunity to develop a commercial and light industrial gateway into Tukwila, encouraging redevelopment of existing commercial and industrial uses. Mitigating the impacts of the Comprehensive Plan Amendment One of the City's concerns is the conversion of industrial land to commercial uses. We have noted that broader forces than local zoning are driving such conversions. The state projects that future employment growth in Manufacturing especially heavy manufacturing —will be stagnant and that the majority of employment growth will be in Services especially Professional and Business Services. The PSRC's forecast of employment in Tukwila shows that these trends are expected to impact Tukwila. Thus, two reinforcing economic factors are reinforcing changes in local land markets: Manufacturing is growing slowly if at all. And the growth that is occurring is looking more and more like the kinds of activities that would be called Light Industrial: flex space in business parks that mix office and manufacturing assembly uses. Professional services are growing rapidly. Those uses need office space. Office space can be stacked, so it can have more employment density. It does not conflict with surrounding amenity (like industrial uses can): it seeks surrounding amenity (especially professional and retail services). It can afford to pay two, three, or four times as much for land as manufacturing and warehousing, which are land intensive. The result is that in metropolitan areas around the country, former industrial land near rejuvenating downtowns is converting to commercial uses. It is not that manufacturing would not like to have that land —it would. Rather, it is that it cannot afford to pay the prices that commercial uses can pay and still be profitable. Manufacturing moves farther out, abetted by cheaper land that is still well served by highways. If future Comprehensive Plan Amendments are a concern to the City, the City can slow the conversion of land in the MIC to light industrial and commercial uses by identifying the key industrial sites and adopting more aggressive policies to preserve these sites. CONCLUSION: IMPACTS TO INDUSTRIAL LAND 1. Will the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment significantly impact future industrial development on parcels near the subject property in the MIC? No. The 160 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 15 majority of land near the subject property is already being used for commercial or light industrial uses. 2. Will the proposed uses on the subject property be compatible with existing and expected industrial uses in the IVIIC? Yes. Regional trends and local forecasts indicate that manufacturing employment is growing slowly or decreasing. Official regional, long- term employment forecasts suggest the majority of employment that Tukwila can expect in the future is Professional and Business Services and other types of employment that use office space. Boeing Field and Boeing properties separate the subject property from the heaviest industrial uses in the MIC. 3. Is granting the Comprehensive Plan Amendment likely to increase demand for conversion from industrial to commercial uses on areas adjacent to the subject property? Maybe, especially south of the subject site. That land is currently being used, however, for commercial and light industrial purposes. The pressure for conversion of this land to commercial uses is more likely to be affected by regional land prices for industrial and employment trends than changes to the subject property. 4. Does the proposed development negatively impact the City's policy to have adequate land for industrial growth? Yes and no. Changing the zoning on the proposed development clearly reduces the amount of land for some industrial uses (the property is roughly 4% of the industrial land in Tukwila), and allows the option to develop more of the land for office and retail uses. But the market trends have been clear for a while: land on and around the subject property is not being used much by heavy industry, and the subject property is now used for light industrial and commercial purposes. There is a reasonable, but not definitive, argument that the change in designation will have little impact on the long -run viability of industrial uses in Tukwila given market forces and the way the MIC/H zone is defined and implemented. POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ON USES IN TUKWILA'S URBAN CENTER The City of Tukwila is concerned about the potential impacts of the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment on existing commercial uses in the City's Urban Center. The City staff asked ECO to address the following questions: 1. How will the uses on the subject site be similar and different from the uses in the Tukwila Urban Center? 2. To what extent will the commercial and retail uses in the proposed development compete with commercial and retail uses in the Tukwila Urban Center and other developments within the City? 3. What is the market area for the proposed development compared to the Tukwila Urban Center. Proposed uses compared to other commercial uses in Tukwila The Comprehensive Plan Amendment proposes a mix of uses for the subject property: 700,000 square feet of office development 161 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 16 550,000 square feet of retail development, plus an 80,000 square foot hotel and a 60,000 square foot theater 100,000 square feet of light industrial development These uses amount to approximately 1.49 million square feet of built space on the site. A key question is: To what extent will the conceptual mix of uses compete with other commercial centers in Tukwila? In other words, the City's concern is whether the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment would draw demand for development in other areas of Tukwila to the subject property. Such an outcome could be inconsistent with several of the City's ongoing planning efforts. Tukwila's Urban Center has more than 850 acres. Some of the development efforts going on in Tukwila's Urban Center include: The Southcenter Mall, which has 1.3 million square feet of occupied retail space and is completing a 400,000 square foot addition, which is 95% leased. In addition, the former Mervyn's site is being redeveloped, adding 50,000 square feet to create a site with 100,000 square feet of retail space. Southcenter Mall is a regional retail center that attracts shoppers from around the region and as far away as Alaska. The South Center Square, which is a new retail development south of the Southcenter Mall with big box development and smaller stores. Its 200,000 square feet of retail space is 90% leased. South Center Square will provide additional regional draw that complements the existing retail development at Southcenter Mall. Residential development in Tukwila Urban Center, which will include high density, multi family residential developments of up to five stories over ground floor retail on the eastern edge of the Urban Center. Three- hundred condominiums are already being developed. The residential development will change the uses in Tukwila's Urban Center from an entirely retail and commercial area to more of a mixed -use area. Table 7 presents an estimate of need for commercial and industrial built space based on the PRCS's forecast for employment in the Tukwila area for 2000 to 2040. Table 7 shows that the Tukwila area will need the most built space (9 million square feet) for Finance and Insurance, Real Estate, and other Services. Employment in these sectors requires office space. Tukwila will have a need for about 2.2 million square feet of additional retail space. As a regional center for retail, Tukwila is likely to have additional demand for retail space because people from the Seattle region (and further) come to Tukwila to shop. Tukwila is likely to have demand for about 1.6 million square feet of built space for the Warehousing, Transportation, Communications, and Utilities sectors. These sectors typically require industrial land. Table 7 shows the demand for built space for Manufacturing decreasing by about 2.1 million square feet and Government and Education decreasing slightly. 4 The estimate is based the employment densities presented on page 45 of the Puget Sound Regional Council's document "Industrial Land Supply and Demand in the Central Puget Sound Region." The estimates for need for built space were developed by multiplying the change in employment by the number of square feet needed per employee by each type of employment. 162 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 17 Table 7. Estimated need for commercial and industrial built space to accommodate new employment, Tukwila area, 2000 to 2040 Type of Needed space employment (square feet) FIRES 9,150,050 Retail 2,149,628 WTCU 1,610,685 Gov /Ed (25,675) Manufacturing (2,117,896) Total 14,441,512 Source: PSRC Employment Forecast, 2000 to 2040; Metro "Puget Sound Regional Council's document "Industrial Land Supply and Demand in the Central Puget Sound Region ECONorthwest Comparison of the market area of the proposed use and other commercial development A "primary market area" is generally considered the area in which most of the demand (typically around 70 for a product will originate. The extent of a market area for retail businesses depends on the products or services they offer and the location of competing businesses. People will not typically drive past one convenience store to get to a similar store in a different area, but they will travel farther for a special service or niche product that cannot be easily obtained elsewhere. Thus, the primary market area for a convenience store is the surrounding neighborhood, while the primary market area for a specialty retailer can extend for miles and could include the entire metropolitan Seattle region. In a downtown area it is common to see retail businesses that sell a wide variety of products and services that have local or regional market areas, depending on the type of product sold and the location and quality of competitive businesses offering the same product. Tukwila already understands the regional nature of its retail market area: Tukwila is a retail destination for much of the Seattle metropolitan area, due to the concentration of retail in Southern Tukwila, especially Westfield's Southcenter Mall, which is the largest indoor mall in Washington State and attracts over 11 million visitors each year. The market area includes not only the residents of Tukwila, therefore, but also residents of the Seattle metropolitan area and beyond. The question for the City of Tukwila is how having a secondary retail location north of the Southcenter area would compete with other developments within the City. This section addresses that question. In Tukwila, the subject property would compete primarily with the Southcenter Mall and South Center Square. Regionally, the site would also compete with other commercial areas in the Seattle area that are either in the planning stages or have already developed. Because Tukwila has much faster north -south traffic flows than east -west traffic flows, the area of competition extends farther to the north and south than it does to the east and west. Areas of potential competition include: 163 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 18 The Landing (2 miles from Tukwila). The Landing is a mixed -use development under development in Renton, south of Lake Washington. When completed in 2008, The Landing will include about 600,000 square feet of retail space and 990 residential units. Kent Station (6 miles from Tukwila). Kent Station, developed in 2005 -2006, includes 470,000 square feet of office, retail, entertainment, and education space and a 30,000 square foot civic plaza. Factoria Mall (8 miles from Tukwila). Factoria Mall, approximately 510,000 square feet of retail space, is planning the Factoria Town Square addition to add 685 housing units and 151,000 square feet of retail space. Downtown Seattle (10 miles from Tukwila). The downtown has extensive office and retail space including City Centre, Pacific Place, and Westlake Center. Bellevue Square (14 miles from Tukwila). The Bellevue Square Mall is upgrading to include 2,500,000 square feet of hotel, office, and retail space; it currently is 1,300,000 square feet. The Bellevue is a 130,000 square foot high -end retail development currently being constructed next door. Bellevue Place (14 miles from Tukwila). Bellevue Place has 500,000 square feet of office, retail, restaurant, and hotel space, and is currently constructing a 351 -room addition to the hotel. Lincoln Square (14 miles from Tukwila). Lincoln Square is a 1.4 million square foot office, retail (310,000 square feet), hotel, and 148 -room residential tower development currently expanding to include a 525,000 square foot office tower to house the corporate headquarters of Eddie Bower. The Bravern (14 miles from Tukwila). The Bravem is a 1,600,000 square foot development in Bellevue that will include retail, office, and condominiums, scheduled to open in 2009. Bellevue Crossroads (15 miles from Tukwila). Bellevue Crossroads is a 550,000 square foot retail development in East Bellevue. It is likely that the subject property will attract a market primarily made up of light industrial and office employees, rather than the larger metropolitan market captured by the Southcenter retail cluster. ECONorthwest's report "Tukwila Urban Center Market Analysis" (2002) forecast demand for built space in Tukwila's Urban Center to 2020. The report focused on demand for built space in Tukwila's Urban Center, not the entire City of Tukwila. The report forecast the following demand for the types of space: Retail. The report forecast demand for between 1.5 million square feet to 3.8 million square feet of additional retail in Tukwila by 2020. The report said that demand for retail space in Tukwila would depend on three future conditions: (1) population in the retail market area, (2) consumer spending trends, and (3) the degree to which the Tukwila Urban Center maintains its market share of regional retail demand. The report said that regional competition could result in a decrease in demand for retail space in the Tukwila Urban Center. 164 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 19 Office. The report forecast demand for about 1 million square feet of office space in Tukwila's Urban Center by 2020. At the time the report was written, the central Puget Sound market area had suffered setbacks in demand for office space Light Industrial and Warehouse. The report forecast need for approximately 600,000 square feet of new light industrial and warehouse space in Tukwila to 2020 `This estimate is dependent on the availability of light industrial land and the extent to which higher- value retail uses compete for available land in the Urban Center. Since the completion of this report in 2002, Tukwila and surrounding cities have experienced retail and commercial development, as well as substantial residential development. Tukwila's Urban Center has continued to be a regional retail draw because (1) the economy has been relatively good, and (2) property owners and developers, such as Westfield, have invested in new development in the Urban Center. Tukwila's Urban Center is still among the strongest regional retail centers but that other retail developments (Renton, Seattle, Bellevue, and elsewhere) keep adding competing retail. Overall, retail development on the subject property and other retail development in progress in Tukwila will almost certainly increase retail sales in Tukwila as a whole. How that increase gets distributed within Tukwila's subareas is complex. In theory, changes in retail activity in Tukwila could be explained through competition and market capacity, which might show economic activity in Tukwila's Urban Center decreasing, or through market synergies and complements, which might show economic activity in Tukwila's Urban Center increasing. Whether retail sales in Tukwila's Urban Center will be the same, greater, or less than they would have been in the absence of Tukwila South or the development of the subject property is a question beyond the scope of this analysis. Notwithstanding these caveats, the type and scope of retail development at the subject property will certainly not be the cause of a collapse at Tukwila Urban Center, but it will probably compete with Tukwila's Urban Center for some business. Role of the proposed development in the community The Associated Grocers site will play a very different role in the community than does the Southcenter/ Tukwila Urban Center area. The Southcenter area has been nationally marketed as a retail destination; it receives over 11 million visitors every year. It is located at a highly trafficked interstate intersection, and is near to the Sea -Tac International Airport. Southcenter is known for its shopping, restaurants, and is beginning to develop nearby high density multi- family residential development as well. The proposed zone change would result in intensification of employment on the subject site and creation of an employment center, and to a lesser extent, a retail center. The majority of the Associated Grocers site is proposed office and light industrial space, and the retail and hotel space will complement that development, but not create a new retail destination for the larger metropolitan market that comes to Southcenter. Because of the scale of the proposed retail uses, 5 Since the completion of this report, demand for office space in the Puget Sound Region has increased. According to C.B. Richard Ellis, the Regional office vacancy rate in second quarter 2007 was 10.5 down from approximately 17% in second quarter 2003. The second quarter 2007 vacancy rate in downtown Seattle was 8.6% and 5.1% in Bellevue's central business district. 165 Sabey Corporation Comprehensive Plan Amendment August 9, 2007 Page 20 the primary market area would be much smaller than those of Southcenter and the Tukwila Urban Center. Given the amount of employment in the area, demand would primarily come from workers in the district. The Associated Grocers site is likely to form a type of transition or buffer zone between the heavy industrial land uses in northern Tukwila and the residential and retail areas in central and southern Tukwila. The light industrial and office uses can buffer the existing residential area from industrial uses, and the commercial and entertainment uses can attract residents on evenings and weekends to an area of the city that is primarily occupied during daytime hours. The commercial and entertainment uses will act as a gateway to the residential part of Tukwila, but the development includes no residential units. CONCLUSION: IMPACTS TO THE URBAN CENTER 1. How will the uses on the subject site be similar and different from the uses in the Tukwila Urban Center? The uses in the Tukwila Urban Center include a regional mall, high density residential development, and a large mixed -use development. The uses on the subject site will be a smaller -scale mixture of retail, commercial, and light industrial uses. Most of the uses will primarily serve people working on or near the site, visitors wanting to stay near Sea -Tac International Airport, and people living relatively near the subject site. 2. To what extent will the commercial and retail uses in the proposed development compete with commercial and retail uses in the Tukwila Urban Center and other developments within the City? There is no question that the proposed uses will compete with development in other areas of Tukwila: that is the nature of all types of development, and especially retail. The broader question is whether enough demand exists to support all of the existing and proposed developments in Tukwila, including development on the subject property. PSRC forecasts strong employment growth in Tukwila for sectors that use office space. Population growth, coupled with increases in disposable income, will create demand for additional retail space. The retail development at the subject property is one quarter of the size of the development proposed in Tukwila South, which means that it will compete less both in scale, type, and proximity with the Tukwila Urban Center. 3. What is the market area for the proposed development compared to the Tukwila Urban Center? The development concept includes two primary uses: employment (office and some industrial) and retail. The employment uses will draw workers from throughout the region. The retail uses will draw from a smaller market area. Since the mix of retailers is not yet specified, we cannot say definitively exactly what the market area will be. 166 ATTACHMENT W �*�t►��qs CITY OF TUKWILA k ti Department of Community Development ZONING CODE s O 2; 1 6300 S outhcenter Boule Tukwila, WA 98188 AMENDMENTS a O A Telephone: 206 431 -3670 FAX 206 431 -3665 t a .z E -mail: tukplan @ci.tukwila.wa.us Nk�.. J 1908 APPLICATION FOR STAFF USE ONLY Permits Plus Type: P -ZCA Planner: ge., P CCo X I File Number: e LH O p Z j Application Complete (Date: I Project File Number: 121_11 -001 Application Incomplete (Date: I Other File Numbers: Li 00 1 r 6 P1' J NAME OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: COMMUNITY BANK AT UNIFIED GROCER SITE LOCATION OF PROJECT/DEVELOPMENT: Give street address or, if vacant, indicate lot(s), block and subdivision, access street, and nearest intersection. 10200 EAST MARGINAL WAY SOUTH, TUKWILA, WA 98168 LIST ALL TAX LOT NUMBERS (this information may be found on your tax statement). 042304 9184 -04 DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR The individual who: has decision making authority on behalf of the applicant in meetings with City staff, has full responsibility for identifying and satisfying all relevant and sometimes overlapping development standards, and is the primary contact with the City, to whom all notices and reports will be sent. Name: Mikel Hansen Address: 12201 Tukwila International Boulevard. Seattle. WA 98168 Phone: 206 277 -5249 FAX: 206 282 -9951 E -mail: mikelh@sabev.com C: \Documents and Settings \AllisonS \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \Content.Outlook \TBXBIIAB \Rezone or Zoning Code Text Amend- Ju17010.doc 167 Signature: Date: 7/3/ C: \Documents and Settings \AllisonS \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \Content.Outlook \TBXBIIAB \Rezone or Zoning Code 1 68 Text Amend- Ju12010.doc A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: Existing: MIC/H Proposed: CI B. ZONING DESIGNATION: Existing: MIC/H Proposed: CI (Light Industrial) C. LAND USE(S): Existing: MIC/H Proposed: CI (for proposed changes in land use designations or rezones) C: \Documents and Settings \AllisonS \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \Content.Outlook \TBXBIIAB \Rezone or Zoning Code Text Amend- Ju12010.doc 169 (pat of) S. 111414 Grocers Property 0003400042 Boundary 0003400046 0003400049 0003400015 10230 E Marginal 0003400041 Property 00034 024 liippip} o Boundary wolf 0423049101 "A"' 'aipipnigi 0423049102 r`~ e 0323049024 N i a S 0423049015 Q 0423049099 032304906 Seattle tt► 0323049048 032304912 U 1 a _10 42904406• 0323049080 RI �i 4 0323049045 III 2304907 7‘ 26 `�'VI) N 2304907r 6� 0323049061 i 2304907 t o 1 0323049028 0323049058 6 a 0 Scale in Feet 325 (approximate) S BOeing Rd. 10230 E Marginal Way Seattle, Washington DRAFT Tax Lot Parcel Numbers S 13 -029-00 FIGURE 3 February 2007 Ref: Tax Lot Combined.cdr Dalton, Olmsted Fuglcvand, Inc. 170 x VMS. MAWS {I]1 SUBJECT PROPERTY CITY OF TUKWILA AREA 27,907 SF 4 CITY OF SEATTLE 9 .c AREA 1,265,135 SF I: M ux[ g V. SECilpx CITY OF TUKWILA AREA 1,438,912 SF 3301 NORFOLK ST. AND 10230 E MARGINAL WAY SABEY PROPERTY CITY OF TUKWILA AND CITY OF SEATTLE ZONING AREAS SCALE 1" 250' 171 SABEY AERIAL PHOTO w w w CID v) LL. LI. VI ,--1 W 0 0 v) 0 ¢"'Ww >ZW 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 �O'x∎ -7>Z Z o o 0 0 WQHtW7�3a�a O Z W v` oo ■�O -a O Z ¢F ¢3 a 0 x W a O .4 W Z H d U uce Z�wv,Hw 0 C 4 zo �zoW�Wza H W OwU c, H a U ¢¢H¢�< U o 0 W, W H Q a a U W.1 I -4 w� U X w H H W Z ZH��ZZc4�wu I p 4 U r' W O H c7) a U a w CI 0 y, H o xH a OU q o v a 9ir, 8 U W IM i r a F j �iy, 4.7 i 1 i a. ¢W i a il f i T 1 4 Lii VD t,, =i I Z O Orr) U i 1 7 O''' o I 4 A:4 ti 44 4, P4 f e' a f 4. qc NI v Z ti 173 3. AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP 174 CITY OF TUKWILA O 25 Department of Community Development 1 ifi r- 6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188 !I 1 01 0 O Telephone: (206) 431 -3670 FAX (206) 431 -3665 E -mail: tukplan@ci.tukwila.wa.us 1 tiWti�wM 1908 AFFIDAVIT OF OWNERSHIP AND HOLD HARMLESS PERMISSION TO ENTER PROPERTY STATE OF WASHINGTON ss COUNTY OF KING The undersigned being duly sworn and upon oath states as follows: 1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application. 2. All statements contained in the applications have been prepared by me or my agents and are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. 3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent. 4. Owner grants the City, its employees, agents, engineers, contractors or other representatives the right to enter upon Owner's real property, located at 10200 East Marginal Way, Tukwila, WA 98168 for the purpose of application review, for the limited time necessary to complete that purpose. 5. Owner agrees to hold the City harmless for any loss or damage to persons or property occurring on the private property during the City's entry upon the property, unless the loss or damage is the result of the sole negligence of the City. 6. Non responsiveness to a City information request for ninety (90) or more days, shall be cause to cancel the application(s) without refund of fees. EXECUTED at 12201 Tukwila International Boulevard, Seattle, WA on January 3, 2011 Print Name: Mikel Hansen Address: 12201 Tukwila International Boulevard. Seattle. WA 98168 Phone Number: 206 277 -5249 Signature On this day personally appeared before me Mikel Hansen to me known to be the individual who executed the foregoing instrument and acknowledged that he signed the same as his voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes mentioned therein. SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO BEFORE ME ON THIS 3rd DAY OF January 2011 N \\\"1 1 I11 l NOTARYI'UBLIC in and for the State of Washington H• Sh' i V---1 gtOk� A residing at C 7 p 'v 1 04 i My Commission expires on 0 ?Si U 0S i h WAS\'''' C: \Documents and Settings \AllisonS \Local Settings \Temporary Internet Files \Content.Outlook \TBXBIIAB \Rezone or Zoning Code Text Amend- Ju12010.doc 1 75 4. REDUCED SIZE PLANS 176 NOlONIHSVM V1IM)Ifll fib 0414 SL> euWd o NOIlV2JOdNOOA38VS ppt elm5'awp�xal�awery MOL9t u 1 gg Al.:13d0ad �,39VS c..1 S3.LVIOOSSVO n 8 SNVA3 CIAVO °Q 6 AV/V1 1VNIJ21VVY 3 0£Z01. z Y m N V NVId 31.1S 3NOZ321 ONV 1N3N1ON3INV NVId 3AISN3H3idW00 C C o e �i q i o l' o F z P i x Z O r g._.. C I t7VOY P53�Y pM3a9 IJ N _____„____:_____I l 1 m I© 1 7-----'- i I a 1 V y t' N QN N. wP I I Q i til t r n,. I 1 I, .1 .-1- i 1 7 I 0 I I lo 1 a z adz f7 Q N I r N¢. a z l i I Z\ III N O O t i g E X, 6 I t ‘A s li i Z 'u m CC i p I I e Q 0 s J E a\\ 4 i gg Z nmm�e4600 6 I l' s 177 5. APPLICATION FEE 178 SABEYPROPERTIESLLC 89516 City of Tukw Finance D; L1,FFE INV .�5301`.j R. 1 :0RIP�IQN .I z, W bad [M1NO7CEAt�IIO RA, Aft D11e I C 1 -07 -11 403 -0033 403 -0033 Assoc Gr 7850.00 .00 7850.00 3 i-S r A t 1 P r F J a0 h t; 3 {tear 4,,,,,, fi. ?i.,y r i T� kt 4 5 1 l F� n '`,�5 .3 .r 7:, n• ig t }�'sF1 :f TA a t fr tix fa ;T>w Ss 4 r A.iY ie L t�"r,�` '2r k u lei e flAie Th€.. 't.'."Ai Xtg rv a r y a r yy a id" 3`e i 4_ y �z. ,.1 ,4 ,r t r,r Y k .d s- 1 j t n&.4. r k4�R y e h =a F i ,S n _L S 1�.�'j+ ��11 "4 �A3+} 3 r ay F YMy Sq T 4 m V JS p� r .K Y s "6 3e [.^4'�a; ap t ai 3 s.^ .x .r p` v n ^�i '3' 7 y 2 i x� �h'k 4 y L"I l h y y r t r i� d et r �et4. k „at 4 f ;}a im� :i t ,'tfi Si r w .r 3 ./e .:m .ae e 40 'f rsly P.!Sw s c r. LZ `£HECt NUMB 11934 b JW y t 1 .2>� you x ;,�1 'Q��:�' 1 0,� 11 �iUMa f x 1 PC�gSEDET �1A4 EP{�f3Rz a f Y F s F' h JY i •4 t e4Ki 1 y ,Fi'3w 3: gl a' SiuZX o L '•�.:,r -s (•M0..1XN0.00•Q•4x00•00.:( �IXh`3..4x0 ixrr•0 ^dHld0..!: THE FACE OF THIS DOCUMENT HAS A COLORED BACKGROUND ON WHITE PAPER Xh "i)f[a ti °t`$°'" f''� �"m m' P P SABEYPROPERTIES LLC The Col'nmerce BanKOf Wa4hington 1Zemittanee as made by Sabey Properties 601 Union S treet o b �i� p t S sui sac ictrres tu n r /�ryY'T` ":131.P4.41 7 e�tt R 7© '4 k 19 ft01 $r a 1 5 Q YPtP /L Fir t a •a. :G. t� a ''r,�,- .:sx.''ya ar,R f I Y s t. y" sf -s fi y �efit A .SI`b8 i eaT F I S- t' 4 t �28� &7a� J 1 4'f �`A� 19345 4 '80 k a,� 3y y a. N ,c1i, `l•�,.1p' i r. �c Y r t ,„xw r� r a 4v "rte* r *Yc'k Yc* 't r fi. s e" t 4 ;Pay t seven thousan e i g ht hu n d re d f i f y d off r d ce t N •�M a 4.- `f, f3 "tea -�{"c .L'i y E w..� t x' d vJ J ry Y j n a �i s sa`�3k y r' A t 1 i f ir i a� F FAY ity of TU WIla Finance De ;yt rd THE c n Q ,.jr L Y OQ �011 bcP�l]te[ BIVU F ORDER Wl� '�1Pdii C J, ti �V1/ 98:88 259.9:: 5� 4 i7 1 a0.00.0a e tott.eQ THE BACK OF THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS AN ARTIFICIAL WATERMARK —HOLD AT AN ANGLE TO VIEW Y 40 *(X 14�! 000 L L 9 3 4 6ii' 1: L 2 50080 L 31: 00 L L 7 3 7 580 1 6. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FEE SUBMITTED CONCURRENTLY WITH THIS APPLICATION 180 7. SEPA CHECKLIST WILL BE SUBMITTED ON REFFERRAL TO PLANNING COMMISSION 181 8. NOT APPLICABLE 182 9. OTHER INFORMATION SEE REPORT BY ECONORTHWEST SUBMITTED WITH APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 183 10. RESPONSE TO 18.84.030 CRITERIA 184 ZONING AMENDMENT CRITERIA (TMC 18.84.030) Zoning Amendment Criteria (TMC 18.84.030) The application shall specify, in a format established by the property: 1. Is the proposed amendment to the zoning map consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the comprehensive plan? The proposal is consistent with goals and policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan calling for the development of identifiable City boundaries. Goal 1.3 provides, "Identifiable boundaries for Tukwila so that residents, workers, and visitors know they are entering the City." Redevelopment of the property with LI uses will be subject to design review. This process will ensure that the property's function as a significant entry point to the City, as well as general quality design, will be considered. 2. Is the proposed amendment to the zoning map consistent with the scope and purpose of the Zoning Amendment Criteria (TMC 18.84.030) and the zone classification applied for? Yes. Please see zoning map changes that were made in 2007 in Tukwila and 2009 in Seattle to this site. This request will make the site a consistent zone. 3. Are there changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the zoning map? Yes the entire 62 acres site has been rezoned. The 32 acres in Tukwila were rezoned in 2007 and the 30 acres in Seattle were rezoned in 2009. 4. Will the proposed amendment to the zoning map be in the interest of furtherance of the public health, safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare of the community and not adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood? Yes. As discussed in detail in the Comprehensive Plan Application, the proposal will provide economic development, assist in creating an identifiable northern City boundary, aesthetic improvements, and transportation corridor improvements. These are all significant benefits to the community. 185 ATTACHMENT X oz Associated (part o1) S. N•ff. Grocers Property 0003400042 Boundary 0003400046 0003400049 10 0003400015 i 1 .230 E Marginal 0003400041 v. Property 00034 1024 Boundary 9 ,0423049101 n1` a Rte.... 0423049102 4.6 a 0323049024 N eft a 042304901504 Q SA 0423049099 0323049062 9 Seatfe N 0323049048 0323049128 u 1 a 042304906),..•ci-ft qt� 0323049080 v D a I 0323049045 t 1\i\‘' a �o�y 0 t:: O� 70 ff Q? N r 1 i 2304907 I 0323049.061 o 0323049028 0323049058 I 0 Scale in Feat 926 (approximate) S Boolng Rd 10230 E Marginal Way Seattle, Washington DRAFT Tax Lot Parcel Numbers SA8- 029-00 FIGURE 3 February 2007 Ref: Tax Lot Combined.cdr Dalton, Olmatca F ig1cvana, inc. 186 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS 41IL'A w ITEM 4 J� h Initials 4 t l N Meeting Date 1 Prepared by I Mayor's review 1 Council review 1 9 1p o 1 03/14/11 1 MH 1 ‘1 ,'-'7"'41(07 a90• I 1 I ITEM INFORMATION ICAS NUMBER: 11-034 I STAFF SPONSOR: KIMBERLY MATE? I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 3/14/11 AGENDA ITEM I M TITLE Special Election timeline Metropolitan Park District C.\'i'I Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 03/14/11 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date IS1) Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire Legal P&R Police PW SPONSOR'S At the July 12, 2010 Committee of the Whole meeting, there was Council consensus to SUMMARY pursue a special election for the formation of a Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District ballot measure. The next available date for requesting a special election for the ballot measure is August 16, 2011. RI ,YII3WED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: 02/28/11 COMMITTEE CHAIR: SEAL RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. City Administration and Parks and Recreation Department CoMMIiTFEE Forward to Committee of the Whole for discussion COST IMPACT /:FUND,SOURCE EYPENDITURI REQUIRED AMOUNT B UDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED Fund Source: Cotnzments MTG. DATE I RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 03/14/11 MTG. DATE I ATTACHMENTS 03/14/11 I Informational Memorandum dated 02/23/11 from Kimberly Matej Informational Memorandum dated 02/23/11 from Rick Still Resolution in draft form I I Informational Memorandum dated 06/21/10, with attachments I I Minutes from the Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting of 2/28/11 187 188 I LA iv City of Tukwila CI o City Council 190. MEMORANDUM TO: Community Affairs Parks Committee FROM: Kimberly Matej, Legislative Analyst CC: Mayor Haggerton; Steve Lancaster, City Administrator; Shelley Kerslake, City Attorney; and Rick Still, Parks Recreation Director DATE: February 23, 2011 SUBJECT: Special Election /Primary Timeline Metropolitan Park District ISSUE Staff is seeking Council direction regarding whether or not to pursue a ballot measure regarding the formation and funding of a Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District for the primary election on August 16, 2011. In the event the Council decides to pursue a ballot measure in the August election, staff has included a draft ballot measure resolution for Council review and approval. This draft resolution requests the King County Elections Director to call a Special Election on August 16, 2011, and include a ballot measure. Specific information included in the draft resolution has been taken directly from a memo from Rick Still, Parks Recreation Director, dated February 23, 2011, to the City Council and Mayor Haggerton. This memo is included in this packet as Attachment A. BACKGROUND At the July 12, 2010, Committee of the Whole, Council consensus existed to pursue a special election in February 2011 for the formation of a Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District ballot measure. The deadline for meeting the requirements to submit a ballot measure for a February election have since passed, and a special election regarding the formation of a Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District was not on the ballot. In consideration of the Council process for review and approval of material relative to placing a measure on the ballot, the next available date for requesting a special election for the above ballot measure is August 16, 2011. DISCUSSION Among the many steps involved in preparing information for a vote on levying a general tax on property, prior to filing a ballot measure, the jurisdiction must pass a resolution and present it to the King County Elections Director. In order to meet the King County elections deadlines, this resolution must be filed with the King County Elections Director by May 24. 2011. The timeline on the next page outlines the additional deadlines associated with ballot measure submission for the August 16 special /primary election. The success of this measure relies significantly on the involvement of a special interest /grass roots committee, as City and /or Council involvement is extremely limited by the Public Disclosure Commission. The Public Disclosure Commission applies the same interpretation to the support /opposition of ballot measures as it does to support /opposition of candidates running for public office. Therefore, there are strict regulations regarding the use of public funds, facilities, agency resources, production and distribution of materials, etc. The City and /or its employees cannot be an active participant in the support/opposition of any ballot measure. The City may only Provide factual information that may assist voters in makina a decision. 189 Special Election Timeline page 2 AUGUST 16, 2011 SPECIAL /PRIMARY ELECTION Estimated Election Costs Election $13,700 $17,125 Voter Pamphlet $500- $1,000 Timeline February 28, 2011 Community Affairs Parks Committee reviews and recommends to full Council a draft resolution that requests the King County Elections Director to call a Special Election on August 16, 2011, and include a ballot measure. March 14, 2011 Committee of the Whole discusses draft resolution as recommended by Community Affairs Parks Committee March 21, 2011 Council determines (approves), at Regular meeting, resolution requesting special election, ballot measure and other items as necessary. May 24, 2011 Ballot Measure /Resolution due to King County Elections requesting special election. June 1, 2011 Pro /Con statements for voter pamphlet due to King County Elections. June 3, 2011 Rebuttal statements for voter pamphlet due to King County Elections. August 16, 2011 Election Day. August 31, 2011 Election is certified by King County. The draft resolution requesting the King County Elections Director to call a Special Election on August 16, 2011, and include a ballot measure for the formation and funding of a of a Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District is included in the packet as Attachment B for Council review. In summary, the draft resolution outlines the following information below, which was taken largely from the memorandum submitted as Attachment A to this packet. History Establishes lack of funding Requests an election Outlines the boundaries of the proposed district Authorizes a general property tax levy Sets the district's governance structure RECOMMENDATION No staff recommendation. Staff will await a formal Council decision prior to proceeding further. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: Memo from Rick Still, Parks Recreation Director, dated February 23, 2011 Attachment B: Draft resolution 190 ATTACHMENT A Memo from Rick Still, Parks Recreation Director, dated February 23, 2011 191 ��1 1LA Asti Ci ty of Tukwila G.) Jim Haggerton, Mayor 190: INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Jim Haggerton, Mayor Community Affairs and Parks Committee FROM: Rick Still, Director of Parks Recreation DATE: February 23, 2011 SUBJECT: Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District Funding Option ISSUE The City Council requested that staff investigate the creation of a Metropolitan Park District to fund the continued operations and improvements of the City of Tukwila Pool. BACKGROUND At the August 9, 2010 Committee of the Whole meeting, the City Council provided consensus direction on seven policy decision points related to the establishment of a Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District. The guidance provided by the City Council was based upon staff presentation of the August 5, 2010 Informational Memorandum that detailed the seven Decision Points to consider when establishing a Metropolitan Pool District. A summary of the City Council's guidance is as follows: 1. GOVERNANCE: The City Council should be established as an ex officio capacity as the board of metropolitan park commissioners. 2. BOUNDARIES: Establish the boundaries to be contiguous with the City of Tukwila boundaries. 3. SUPPORT SERVICES: Determine this once the policy decisions are made regarding the Governance and Boundaries and staff prepares a cost analysis of the various support services methods. 4. OPERATING BUDGET EXPENDITURES AND REVENUE: Use the proposed expenditure and revenue budget outlined in Exhibit 1 until after the Support Services cost analysis is completed and the lease issue is resolved with the Tukwila School District. 5. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM: Use the proposed Capital Improvement budget outlined in Exhibit 2. 6. MILLAGE RATE: Use the proposed Millage Rate of $0.15 per $1,000 assessed value. 7. BALLOT MEASURE TIMELINE: Use the proposed Timeline outlined in Attachment B for the February 8, 2011 election. DISCUSSION OF DECISION POINTS Below please find a brief discussion of the seven Decisions Points: 1. GOVERNANCE: A MPD will be composed of a board of metropolitan park commissioners through one of these methods: a) five park commissioners elected at the time of the ballot measure, b) the City Council to be designated to serve in an ex officio capacity as the board of metropolitan park commissioners, or c) if the district is located within more than 192 INFORMATIONAL MEMO February 23, 2011 Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District Funding Option Page 2 one city or county each governing body may be designated to collectively serve ex officio as the board of metropolitan park commissioners. POLICY DECISION 1: What form of Governance should be established for the MPD? Staff Recommendation: That the City Council should be established as an ex officio capacity as the board of metropolitan park commissioners. 2. BOUNDARIES: The MPD may include territory located within one city or county, or may include portions of one or more cities or counties. POLICY DECISION 2: What Boundaries should be established for the MPD? Staff Recommendation: Establish the boundaries to be contiguous with the City of Tukwila boundaries. 3. SUPPORT SERVICES: Consideration of support services that the MPD will need to include are payroll, finance, legal, and insurance to complete day to day operations. Currently these services are provided by the City. Support service options may include: a. City: a contract with the City to perform support services. b. Contracted Services: the MPD can contract these services with outside agencies. c. MPD Staff: most services can be completed in house' by an executive director /MPD manager d. Combination: a mixture of the above. A cost analysis of each support services method varies greatly depending upon the Governance, Boundaries, level of service and various needs that may arise, especially for legal services. Staff is prepared to investigate and develop a cost analysis once final direction is provided. POLICY DECISION 3: What Support Services method should be established for implementing the MPD? Staff Recommendation: For initiating the MPD, City Support Services should be used to determine the operating budget and millage rate. Once the MPD is established alternate and potential cost saving methods of providing support services could be identified and utilized. 4. OPERATING BUDGET EXPENDITURES AND REVENUE: The 2011 to 2021 budget scenarios are based on the approved 2011 budget. An anticipated growth rate for revenue is 1% for pool participant fees and 2% for tax receipts, while the expenditures are anticipated to increase at about 4% per year. Table 1 is a summary of this budget scenario projected out 20 years. This is a conservative approach that is based on minimum revenue growth and higher expenditure growth. The associated projections allow for a 20 year expenditure and revenue plan that is balanced at the end of the 20 year term. These projections include city -wide overhead and department costs, demolition costs, land lease costs, full time and part-time labor wages and benefits, operating supplies and utilities, and Capital Improvements. Staff is prepared to investigate and develop a cost analysis of alternate pool operator options for the MPD. 2232011 1058 10A 1 93 INFORMATIONAL MEMO February 23, 2011 Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District Funding Option Page 3 TABLE 1 TUKWILA POOL PROJECT REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES, 2012 -2021 I Revenue 1 2012 2031 Average Programs 207,050 250,139 227,952 Rentals Tax Revenue 1 776,240 1 1,130,835 1 943,029 Total 1 983,290 1,380,974 1 1,170,981 Expenditures Overhead 242,837 456,462 353,199 Operations 579,379 1,220,664 1 862,640 Total 1 822,215 1,611,126 1 1,170,884 POLICY DECISION 4: What expenditure and revenue budget should be established for implementing the MPD? Staff Recommendation: Use the proposed expenditure and revenue budget outlined in Exhibit 1. Once the MPD is established, alternate and potential cost saving methods of providing pool operations could be identified and utilized. 5. CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM: The Tukwila Pool is 38 years old and is in need of repairs, renovations and replacement of fixed assets to make the pool operate more efficiently, to keep the pool operating properly and to increase the longevity and integrity of the pool. Table 2 demonstrates a review of the types of improvements that will reduce operational costs and extend the life of the pool. A full list of Capital Improvements can be found on Exhibit 2. TABLE 2 TUKWILA POOL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Capital Projects Cost Timeline a. Energy Efficiency Projects 121,500 2011 -2012 b. Operational Projects I 334,500 I 2012 -2013 c. Longevity and Integrity 317,000 2013 -2018 Projects Total I 773,000 POLICY DECISION 5: What Capital Improvement budget should be established for implementing the MPD? Staff Recommendation: Use the proposed Capital Improvement budget outlined in Exhibit 2. These projects need to be completed if the pool is to be viable for current and future operations. 6. MILLAGE RATE: The millage rate or tax rate would be established by the City Council and subject to voter approval through formation of a Metropolitan Park District. To determine this rate the operating and capital budgets need to be finalized. The millage rate should be set to cover the cost above the program and rental revenue based on the term of the pool lease. A tax rate of $0.15 per $1,000 assessed value would secure the funding that is needed to continue current pool operations. 1 94. 2rtsam 1058:10AM INFORMATIONAL MEMO February 23, 2011 Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District Funding Option Page 4 The impact of the millage rate can be determined by using the assessed value of the home times the millage rate. For the examples below, the average single family home assessed value in the City of Tukwila is $249,475. Table 3 indicates approximately what the annual and monthly cost would be for a single family resident with the average assessed value assuming the boundaries would be contiguous within City boundaries. Likewise, the cost for multi family and condominiums are included. TABLE 3 AVERAGE COST PER TYPE OF HOME Average Multi Familv Average Condominium Average Single Famillt Home Assessed Value Assessed Value Home Assessed Value Per Unit 239,475 1,806,516 177,720 Average Average Average Tax Annual Per month Annual Per month Annual Per month Rate Rate Cost Rate Cost Rate Cost 0.15 35.92 2.99 8.87 0.74 26.66 2.22 POLICY DECISION 6: What Millage Rate should be established for implementing the MPD? Staff Recommendation: Use the proposed Millage Rate of $0.15 per $1,000 assessed value. The tax rate could be reduced at a later time if the cost associated with various decision points above decrease the needed tax revenue. 7. BALLOT MEASURE TIMELINE: The desired February 8, 2011 was not obtained and staff recommends an August 16, 2011. Table 4 is a brief outline of the Ballot Measure Timeline for an August election. TABLE 4 BALLOT MEASURE TIMELINE Date 1 Action 1 02/28/11 Draft resolution to enter City Council process 02/28/11 TSD Pool Land Lease discussions finalized 05/24/11 Ballot Measure /Resolution due to King County requesting special election 08/16/11 Special Election POLICY DECISION 7: What Timeline should be established for implementing the MPD? Staff Recommendation: Use the proposed Timeline outlined in TABLE 4 for the August 16, 2011 election. 2/23/2011 10 58 '.10 AM 19 5 INFORMATIONAL MEMO February 23, 2011 Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District Funding Option Page 5 ALTERNATIVES If the MPD does not pass in August, the options for the future operations of the Tukwila Pool include: a. Transfer operating responsibilities of the pool to a third party as described in the June 22, 2010 Informational Memorandum. b. Contract subsidized services with another pool. For example, an arrangement with the SeaTac YMCA could be made for Tukwila residents to be able to participate in swimming programs at the YMCA at a reduced rate. c. Review options submitted to council on June 22, 2010. RECOMMENDATION Provide policy direction on the seven (7) decision points. ATTACHMENTS Exhibit 1 Revenue and Expenditure 20 -year projections Exhibit 2 CIP Projects 2011 -2031 19 6 223/2011 1058 10 nM Revenue and Expenditures 20 year Projections TUKWILA POOL Exhibit 1 Metropolitan Park District ANNUAL ESTIMATED REV 1% Increase per year in fee revenue and 2% for Property Tax revenue 10 -Year 15-Year 20 -Year 2011 1 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 1 2016 1 2017 1 2018 1 2019 1 2020 1 2021 1 2022 1 2023 1 2024 1 2025 1 2026 1 2027 1 2028 1 2029 1 2030 1 2031 1 PROGRAMS 1 %growthl 114,000 1 115,1401 116,2911 117,454 1 118,6291 119,815 1 121,013 1 122,223 1 123,446 1 124,680 1 125,9271 127,186 1 128,458 1 129,743 1 131,040 132,3501 133,6741 135,011 I 136,361 1 137,724 139,102 2 RENTALS 1 %growthl 91,000 1 91,910 1 92,829 1 93,757 1 94,695 1 95,642 1 96,5981 97,564 1 98,540 1 99,525 1 100,521 I 101,526 1 102,5411 103,566 104,602 1 105,648 106,705 1 107,772 1 108,849 I 109,9381 111,037 3 TAX REVENUE 10.15 at 2% growthI 761,020 I 776,2401 791,765 1 807,600 1 823,752 1 840,227 1 857,032 1 874,172 1 891,656L 909,4891 927,6791 946,232 1 965,157 1 984,460 1 1,004,1491 1,024,232 1,044,717 1 1,065,611 I 5 1,086,923 I 1,108,662 1 1,130,835 4 TOTAL REVENUE 968,031 I 983,290 1,000,885 1,018,812 1,037,076 1,055,684 1,074,643 1,093,960 1,113,641 1,133,694 1,154,126 1,174,9441 1,196,1561 1,217,7691 1,239,791 1,262,2311 1,285,095 I 1,308,3941 1,332,1341 1,356,3241 1,380,974 5 CARRYOVER and RESERVES 161,074 311,289 449,837 575,872 688,507 786,264 868,719 934,850 983,589 1,013,817 1,023,788 1,012,850 961,719 905,054 759,447 716,532 645,669 429,749 298,093 1,941; ANNUAL ESTIMATED EXPI 4% increase per year based on 2010 original budget, less 3% budget directive 10 -Year 15 -Year I 20 -Year OVERHEAD 2011 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 1 2016 1 2017 1 2018 1 2019 I 2020 1 2021 1 2022 1 2023 1 2024 1 2025 1 2026 1 2027 I 2028 1 2029 1 2030 1 2031 6 OVERHEAD 1 34,488 1 142,950 1 148,230 1 153,721 I 159,432 1 165,371 1 172.096 1 178,520 1 185,200 I 192,149 1 199,375 1 207,465 1 215.280 1 223,409 I 231,862 1 240,6541 250,401 I 259,910 I 269,799 1 280,084 1 290,780 7 CIP RESERVE 101a.6wa 6awa- nlw,w1 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1 I I 1 1 I 18,0001 1 60.0001 1 1 115.5001 1 131.500 ss,,000 7 DEMO •x MaMn0 ,.ars 1 300,000 1 34,182 1 34,182 1 34,182 1 34.182 1 34.182 1 34.182 1 34.182 1 34,182 1 34,182 1 34,1821 34.182 I 34,182 1 34,182 1 34,1821 34,1821 34.182 1 34,182 1 34.182 I 34.1821 34,182 683.630 8 BOND PAYMENT (see CIP Page)I 1 65.705 1 65,705 1 65.705 1 65,705 1 65,705 1 65.705 1 65.705 1 65.705 I_ 65,7051 65,705 1 65,705 1 65,705 1 65.705 1 65.705 65.705 1 1 1 1 1 Total Overhead 334,488 I 242,8371 248,1171 253,6081 259,3191 265,2581 271,982278,406 I 285,0871 292,0351 299,261 307,3511 315,1671 341,295 1 331,749 404,540 284,5821 294,0911 419,4801 314,265 456,462 amn0..e me.n OPERATIONS 2011 2012 1 2013 1 2014 1 2015 1 2016 1 2017 1 2018 1 2019 1 2020 1 2021 1 2022 1 2023 1 2024 1 2025 1 2026 1 2027 1 2028 1 2029 1 2030 1 2031 9 SALARIES WAGES 292.892 299.572 1 311.555 1 324.017 I 336.978 1 350.457 1 364,475 1 379,054 I 394.216 1 409,985 1 426,384 1 443.440 1 461.177 I 479,624 1 498.809 I 518.7621 539.512 I 561.093 1 583.536 1 606.878 1 631.153 10 PERSONNEL BENEFITS 106.964 116.270 1 120.921 1 125.758 1 130.788 I 136.019 1 141.460 1 147.119 I 153.003 I 159,124 1 165,488 1 172,108 1 178,992 1 186,152 1 193.598 1 201.3421 209.396 1 217.772 1 226,482 I 235,542 I 244.963 11 SUPPLIES 14.000 15,0001 15,6001 16,2241 16,873 17,548 18.250 18.980 19.739 I 20.529 21.3501 22,204 23.092 1 24.0151 24.9761 25,9751 27,0141 28,095 29.219 I 30,3871 31.6031 12 OTHER SERVICES CHARGES 142,824 148,537 1 154,478 1 160,658 1 167,084 1 173,767 1 180,718 1 187,947 1 195,465 1 203,283 1 211,414 1 219,871 1 228,666 1 237,812 1 247,325 1 257,2181 267,507 1 278,207 1 289,335 1 300,9091 312,945 Total Operations 556,680 579,379 602,554 626,656 651,723 677,791 704,903 733,099 762,423 792,920 824,637 1 857,622 1 891,927 15 927,604 1 5 964,709 1 1,003,2971 5 1,043,429 1 1,085,16615 1,128,573 1 1,173,715 1 5 1,220,664 13 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 891,168 822,215 850,671 880,264 911,041 943,049 976,885 1,011,505 1,047,510 1,084,955 1,123,898 1 1,154,974 1 1,207,094 1 1,268,900 1 1,296,457 I 1,407,837 15 1,328,011 1 1,379,257 1 1,548,053 1 1,487,981 1 1,677,126 SUMMARY 10 -Year 1 15 -Year 1 1 20 -Year 1 4 TOTAL REVENUE 968,031 I 983,290 1,000,888 1,018,812 1,037,076 1,055,684 1,074,643 1,093,960 1,113,641 1,133,694 1,154,126 I 1,174,944 I 1,196,156 I 1,217,769 I 1,239,791 I 1,262,231 1 1,285,095 I 1,308,394 I 1,332,134 I 1,356,324 I 1,380,974 13 TOTAL EXPENDITURES 891,168 822,215 850,671 880,264 911,041 943,049 976,885 1,011,505 5 1,047,510 1,084,955 1,123,898 1,164,974 1,207,094 1,268,900 1,296,457 1,407,837 1,328,011 1,379,257 1,548,053 1,487,981 1,677,126 14 YEAR END BALANCE 76,863 1 161,074 150,215 138,548 126,035 112,635 97,758 82,455 66,131 48,739 30,2281 9,971 1 (10,938)1 (51,130)1 (56,666)1 (145,606)1 (42,915)1 (70,863)1 (215,919)1 (131,657)1 (296,152) W:VdnInhONmNIL1MIP01T.. Peal •MPO nwiwa 1 -13-I I LEASE mN LEASE W2011 WOO AM CIP PROJECTS 2011-2018 METROPOLITAN PARK DISTRICT ATTACHMENT B Draft Resolution 199 200 I A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, ESTABLISHING AUGUST 16, 2011, AS THE DATE FOR AN ELECTION ON THE QUESTION OF THE FORMATION OF A TUKWILA POOL METROPOLITAN PARK DISTRICT WITHIN THE CITY OF TUKWILA TO GENERATE FUNDS FOR ACQUISITION, MAINTENANCE, OPERATION, AND /OR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT /CONSTRUCTION EXPENDITURES FOR A POOL FACILITY WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA. WHEREAS, RCW 35.61.010 provides that a Metropolitan Park District may be created for the management, control, improvement, maintenance, and acquisition of parks, parkways, boulevards, and recreational facilities; and a Metropolitan Park District may include territory located in all of one city, when created; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila currently owns, operates and maintains the City of Tukwila Pool (formerly known as the South Central Pool), hereafter referred to as "Tukwila Pool and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila does not have the resources to continue to manage, maintain, and operate a pool; and WHEREAS, the Tukwila Pool provides a benefit to the citizens of Tukwila, serving our community as a multigenerational facility that provides health and recreation benefits to all ages, strengthens the community, and enhances the quality of life; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila and the Tukwila City Council strongly support the Tukwila Pool and believe it would be in the best interest of the community for its operation to continue; and WHEREAS, after consideration of various alternatives, the Tukwila City Council has recommended formation of the Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District, organized under Chapter 35.61 RCW, to acquire and operate the Tukwila Pool; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: W: \Word Processing \Resolutions \Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District Election.doc KM:bjs 2/23/11 Page 1 of 2 201 Section 1. An election shall be held within the City of Tukwila on Tuesday, August 16, 2011, for the purpose of submitting to the qualified City, for their ratification or rejection, a Resolution No. proposition creating the Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District. Section 2. The boundaries of the proposed Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District are coextensive with Tukwila city limits pursuant to Chapter 35.61 RCW. Section 3. The Director of Records and Elections of King County, Washington is requested to conduct this election on the August 16, 2011 ballot. Section 4. Pursuant to RCW 35.61.050(3), the Tukwila City Council is hereby designated to serve in an ex officio capacity as the board of commissioners for the Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District. Section 5. The City Clerk is directed to certify to the Director of Records and Elections of King County, Washington, by a date no later than May 24, 2011, a copy of this resolution and the proposition to be submitted at that election in the form of a ballot title as follows: PROPOSITION NO. XXXX FORMATION AND FUNDING OF TUKWILA POOL METROPOLITAN PARK DISTRICT Tukwila Resolution No. xxxx proposes creation of the Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District coextensive with the City's boundaries pursuant to 35.61 RCW, including the authority to levy a general tax on property within the District each year not to exceed 15 cents per thousand dollars of assessed valuation, for the purpose of acquiring and operating a pool facility. The Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District is to be governed by the City Council of the City of Tukwila, serving as the board of commissioners in an ex officio capacity. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 2011. ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk Allan Ekberg, Council President APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Resolution Number: Shelley M. Kerslake, City Attorney W: \Word Processing \Resolutions \Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District Election.doc KM:bjs 2/23/11 Page 2 of 2 202 o (-1! 1C City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor 0 f,; INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Tukwila City Council FROM: Jim Haggerton, Mayor Steve Lancaster, City Administrat DATE: June 21, 2010 SUBJECT: Options for Operating Tukwila Pool ISSUE The City of Tukwila owns and operates Tukwila Pool, located on land leased from the Tukwila School District. The City's lease with TSD expires on September 14, 2011. The City must determine whether it is feasible and in the community's best interests (from both a financial and a service standpoint) to extend the lease and continue to operate the pool beyond 2011. Key factors to consider in making this determination are: How important is continued operation of the pool to the community? How much does it cost today, and how much will it cost in the future to provide this service? Options to be considered include: A. Continue operating the pool as in recent years. B. Reduce program offerings and hours of operation to reduce costs. C. Modify fees to increase revenues. D. Some combination of options A, B and C. E. Contract with Third Party Operator F. Close Tukwila Pool at the end of the current lease. BACKGROUND In the early 1970's King County built the "South Central Pool" on property it leased from the South Central School District (since renamed and hereafter referenced as the Tukwila Pool and the Tukwila School District). In 2002, due to King County budget issues, the County indicated its intention to close the pool or, alternatively, turn it over to another entity to operate. The City of Tukwila agreed to assume responsibility for operating the pool, and King County transferred ownership of the pool and assigned its ground lease with TSD to the City in January 2003. At the same time, King County assumed full responsibility for operation, maintenance and ultimate replacement of the South Park Bridge, which responsibilities had previously been shared between the County and the City. The City contributed $3 million as its final obligation toward bridge operation, maintenance and replacement, and ceased paying annual operation and maintenance costs. 203 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 The City of Tukwila has operated the Tukwila Pool since 2003 on property owned by and leased from the Tukwila School District. The history of operating costs, capital costs and pool revenues is provided by Table 1. A cost breakdown and percentage of the operating budget can be found on Attachment A. Additionally, a Capital Improvement Project summary in Attachment B. TABLE 1 TUKWILA POOL COSTS AND REVENUES, 2003 -2009 Year Operating Cost 1 Capital Cost I Total Cost Revenue Net Cost 2003 388,052 1 9,593 397,645 169,949 (227,696) 2004 439,642 1 76,478 1 516,120 178,861 (337,259) 2005 466,912 1 39,572 I 506,484 190,952 (315,532) 2006 512,973 1 8,964 1 521,937 216,357 (305,580) 2007 549,450 I 10,091 1 559,541 192,106 (367,435) 2008 579,596 1 0 1 579,596 195,465 (384,131) 2009 633,964 1 0 I 633,964 192,206 (441,758) Average 510,084 I 20,671 1 530,755 190,842 (339,913) Annual pool operating costs increased by approximately 44% between 2004 and 2009, while operating revenue increased by approximately 7.5 in 2009, the general fund subsidy for operating the Tukwila Pool was $441,758. Programs at the City of Tukwila Pool focus on increasing water safety knowledge and enhancing a person's quality of life by providing opportunities for physical fitness, socialization, and emotional balance. Core programs at the pool include: swim lessons for all ages and skill levels, water aerobics, water walking, dive classes, lifeguard certification courses, lap swim, open swim, and family swim. The facility is also rented to groups for private functions such as pool parties, corporate training sessions, and several other unique pool uses (ex. kayak instruction, airline water rescue simulation). Additionally, high school swim teams and private swim league organizations rent the pool for swim practices. Table 2 indicates the total number of participants per program by year between 2003 and 2009. Table 2 TUKWILA POOL ATTENDANCE, 2003 -2009 Drop In Program Facility Membership Programs: Participation Rentals Passes lap swim, open Youth Swim Lessons private parties, high scanned swipes swim, family swim, school swim teams, water walking, private swim aerobics leagues Non Year Mixed Use Resident Resident Mixed Use Mixed Use Total 2003 18,148 8,409 1 9,108 1 30,313 1 13,930 79,908 2004 18,409 9,454 1 9,938 I 45,427 1 15,275 98,503 2005 19,277 8,917 I 12,547 1 56,886 15,851 113,478 2006 18,771 8,920 I 13,118 1 57,047 15,879 113,735 2007 16,295 8,521 1 12,781 1 42,677 1 14,323 94,597 2008 15,694 11,208 1 12,947 I 42,532 I 14,478 96,859 I 2009 14,493 11,267 I 12,807 I 56,815 1 14,234 1 109,616 W:\Stevel6UDGETTTukwila Pool Options 6 -21 -10 sjl.doc 6/21/2010 12:51:32 PM 204 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 Table 3 reflects resident vs. non resident use for youth swim lesson programs (does not include rental, membership and drop in users as data was not collected). Table 3 TUKWILA POOL SWIM LESSONS, 2003 -2009 Year Resident Visits Non- Resident Visits 1 2003 1 48.58% 51.42% 1 2004 48.75% 51.25% 2005 1 41.54% 58.46% 2006 40.48% 59.52% 2007 40.10% 59.90% 1 2008 46.40% 53.60% 2009 1 46.88% 53.12% Average 1 44.71% 55.32% ANALYSIS OF OPTIONS The following analysis is provided to assist the City in determining an appropriate course of action. There remains considerable uncertainty regarding several important issues bearing on this decision (including future lease rates, future operating costs, and the ability of customers to absorb fee increases). This analysis should be considered an "order of magnitude" assessment at this time. Option A Continue Operating Tukwila Pool as in Recent Years Three factors are important in understanding the financial implications of continuing to operate Tukwila Pool in a manner similar to recent years: 1. Extension of the current lease with Tukwila School District 2. Projected operating expenses 3. Projected capita! expenses 4. Projected revenue Extension of Lease. The City's lease with the Tukwila School District expires on September 14, 2011 (approximately 15 months from now). Preliminary discussions with regard to extension of the lease have been held with Tukwila School District representatives. The District indicates an extended lease must include lease payments reflecting the value of the property. The District contracted for an appraisal in early 2009 which estimated the land plus improvement value at $1,015,000 at that time. This value was discounted due to the remaining (at that time) 30 months on the City's $1 per year lease. Prior to applying this discount, the appraised value was estimated at $1,350,562 ($510,000 land value plus $840,562 improvements value). The City has requested but has not yet received a suggested future lease rate from the District. Proiected Operating Expenses Without changes in operations or fee structure, operating costs can be expected to continue to grow faster than revenues over the mid -to -long term. W:1Steve1BUDGET1Tukwila Pool Options 6 -21 -10 sji.doo 6/21/2010 12:51:32 PM 205 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 One notable change in near -term future operating expenses will be that the Pool Operator was reclassified effective in 2010 to a Project Coordinator which is budgeted out of the Department's Administration budget. Therefore, 0.75 FTE will be transferred to the Administration Budget for a cost savings of approximately $53,000 with salary and benefits annually for the Pool Budget. This transfer was accounted for in the Parks and Recreation Department Service Reduction Proposals presented to the City Council on May 24, 2010. The utility cost can be reduced with capital investments to the pool operating systems. For example, in December 2009, a three -way actuator valve for the pool air heating system was replaced. This $4,000 project has reduced our gas consumption by over $2,000 per month. Other operating cost can be reduced with similar Capital investments (See Table 4 below). The utilities are approximately 18% of the operating budget (see Attachment A for a cost and percentage pie chart of the Tukwila Pool operating budget). Projected Capital Expenses At City Council direction, the Pool has not made major Capital Improvements since the High Performance Coating, often referred as painting, in 2005. There are 13 projects listed in Table 4 that show how the City of Tukwila could invest in the Tukwila Pool to operate more efficiently. The list below indicates by priority what could be done to save annual operational cost by reducing utilities such as gas, electricity, water and sewer. TABLE 4 TUKWILA POOL POTENTIAL ENERGY EFFICIENT PROJECTS Project Minimum Maximum Life Estimated Recovery Grant Cost Cost Expec- Annual Years or fancy Savings Rebate 1 I Sewer Deduct Meter 0 1,000 N/A I 500 J 1 -2 yrs I N/A 2 I Pool Cover /Blanket 18,000 1 70,0DD 12 yrs 12,000 1 1 -2 yrs 1 50 -70% 3 HVAC Natatorium 3,000 1 7,500 10 yrs 235 -470 1 2 -8 yrs I Yes I 4 HVAC Lobby Supply 1,000 1 2,000 10 yrs 235 -470 1 2 -8 yrs I Yes 5 HVAC Lobby Exhaust 1,000 1 2,000 10 yrs 235 -470 2 -8 yrs I Yes 6 Building Heat Pump* 1,000 1 2,000 10 yrs 235 -470 1 2 -8 yrs Yes 7 Pool Heat Pump 1,000 2,000 10 yrs 25 -50 10+ yrs Yes 1 8 HVAC Controls /Dampers 40,000 90,000 40 yrs 8,000 15,000 3 -10 yrs I Maybe 9 Lighting Conversion 8,000 15,000 20 yrs 800 1 10 -20 yrs I Yes 10 Pool Recirculation Pump 3,000 7,500 10 yrs 500 -2,300 1 2 -10 yrs 1 Maybe 11 PVI Boiler Instantaneous 30,000 40,000 12 yrs 750 -5,000 6+ yrs I Maybe I 12 Commissioning 1,000 5,000 N/A N/A N/A 1 50% I 13 Solar Panels 47,000 90,000 12 yrs 12,000 15,000 1 4 -6 yrs I Maybe I Total $154,000 $334,000 1 1 1 VSD or Variable Speed Drive pump motor that doesn't have to run at 100% capacity if it is not needed. Implementing all of these investments could reduce average net annual costs by up to $50,000 over a ten year period. W:1Steve\BUDGET1Tukwila Pool Options 6 -21 -10 sjl.doc 6/21/2010 12:51:32 PM 206 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 There are a couple of projects that are necessary to extend the life and integrity of the Tukwila Pool. The current pool liner was installed in the early 1990's and its expected life is near the end. This project is identified in Project A below in Table 5 and would cost approximately $250,000 to $275,000. The Pool Filters, Project B below, are currently a Vacuum Diatomaceous Earth type of filter system. This is outdated and could be retrofitted to a High Rate Sand Filter type system that is more efficient, using Tess chemically treated and heated -pool water, and would reduce annual maintenance cost. TABLE 5 TUKWILA POOL POTENTIAL CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS Project Minimum Maximum Life Annual Recovery Grant or Cost Cost Expec- Savings Years Rebate tancy A 1 Pool Liner I 250,000* 1 275,000 1 15 yrs 1 Longevity 1 N/A Not likely 1 B Retrofit Filters 1 40,000 I 50,000 1 30 yrs 1 $4,000 1 10 -13 yrs Unknown 1 1 Total 1 $290,000 1 $325,000 1 1 1 Proiected Revenue The 2010 projected revenue for the Tukwila Pool is on target to exceed the current revenue goal of $205,000. The first five months of 2010 shows over a 5% increase in revenue as compared to the same months in 2009. If this growth is consistent throughout 2010, revenues should out perform the budget goal by more than $10,000. Summary Without changes in operations or fee structure, operating costs can be expected to continue to grow faster than revenues over the mid -to -long term. This growth in the cost/revenue gap will be slowed by the previously mentioned Project Coordinator reclassification (approximately $50,000 per year) and could be further slowed by some strategic investments in energy efficiency improvements (up to $50,000 per year with an up -front investment of $150,000 to $300,000). Additionally the City should anticipate investing approximately $300,000 in necessary capital improvements in the next few years. Option B Reduce Program Offerinas and Hours of Operation There are program offerings and hour reductions that could be implemented to reduce the Tukwila Pool operating budget. These are as follows: Cut open swims in the evening open swims cannot be combined with anything other fee generating programs because they use the entire pool. $5,700. o Cut out Friday night lap swim. This allows the pool to close at 1 pm Currently there are no lessons on Friday. $6,000. Close the Pool on Saturdays. $11,000 Reduce 0.75 $45,000 or 1.0 FTE $73,000 Transfer the 0.75 FTE Project Coordinator to the P. R Administration Budget reducing the Pool budget by $53,000 (as previously mentioned, this increased expense to the Administration budget is offset by other program reductions previously recommended to Council). W:1Steve\BUDGET\Tukwila Pool Options 6 -21 -10 sjl.doc 6/21/2010 12:51:32 PM 207 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 6 The proposed service reduction impacts may upset some pool patrons. However, Staff believes that patrons would be more accepting of fee increases than having the pool closed. Attachment D outlines the current and proposed revised pool operating hours as described above. Under this proposal the pool would be available for use 57.5 hours per week, a reduction of approximately 20% compared to the current 72 hours per week. A range for the cost reduction for this proposal is approximately $120,000 to $150,000 annually. Option C Modify Fees to Increase Revenues The pool fees could be modified to increase the revenues generated to pay for the operating cost of the Tukwila Pool. The proposed fees could increase the revenues by approximately $45,000. It may too much of an impact to raise the fees to the proposed amounts at one time. So, a graduated fee increase system would be recommended to reach the fee increase goal. The new revenue is based on the current users' numbers being the same as in 2009. If the higher fees make people not want to use the Tukwila Pool then revenue may not reach this new amount and could possibly be reduced. A price break point has not been established and further studies would need to be performed prior to implementing the proposed fee structure identified in Attachment E. Option D Combination of Options A. B and C This Option represents a "best case scenario," from a financial standpoint, of continuing City operation of the Tukwila Pool. It would have the following characteristics: Implement the most promising energy efficiency projects over a several year period (Cost: $150,000 to $335,000. Annual Savings: $35,000 to $50,000). Implement the Pool Liner and Pool Filters replacement projects (Cost: $290,000 to $325,000). O Reduce program offerings and hours of operation (Annual Savings: $120,000 to $150,000). o Modify fees (Annual Revenue Increase: up to $45,000). This best -case scenario would involve a one -time investment of approximately $440,000 to $660,000. If we borrowed this money, the annual debt service would be approximately $35,000 to $55,000 per year. Net operating costs could be reduced by approximately $155,000 to $200,000 per year, or $105,000 to $165,000 per year after debt service payments. Please note this does not include lease payments to the Tukwila School District at this point. These numbers may represent an optimistic view of continued City operation, and should the City decide to pursue this option, staff proposes to prepare a much more detailed analysis prior to a final decision. Option E Transfer Operating Responsibilities to a Third Party When King County divested itself of its community pools in 2002 -2003 a variety of arrangements were made for their continuing operation. Some, like Tukwila Pool, were transferred to cities; some to school districts. A few were transferred to private non profit organizations. For example, Mercer Island's Mary Wayte Pool is owned and operated by W:ISteve\BUDGET1Tukwila Pool Options 6 -21 -10 sjl.doc 6/21/2010 12:51:32 PM 208 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 7 Northwest Center, a non profit social service organization. The City of Mercer Island contributes $100,000 annually to the operation of Mary Wayte Pool, with the remaining costs borne by Northwest Center. Northwest Center also operated the Redmond Hartman pool (leased from the City of Redmond) until June 18 of this year but reports it has not been able to negotiate a favorable lease to continue this arrangement. The City could investigate the potential for finding a third party operator for Tukwila Pool. Alternatively the City could investigate assisting its residents to access alternative existing facilities and services. For example, the City of SeaTac provides a level of support to its residents allowing for decreased cost for City residents using the new YMCA facility on South 188 Street. Option F Close Tukwila Pool Fall of 2011 Under this option the City would cease operating Tukwila Pool and vacate the premises to the Tukwila School District no later than September 14, 2011. RECOMMENDATION Under the best case scenario for continued City operation of Tukwila Pool, the City will need to continue subsidizing pool operations by at least $250,000 to $300,000 per year or more, depending on negotiation of a new lease with the Tukwila School District and our success in controlling future operating costs. Based upon the City's current financial situation and our forecasts of future general fund expenses and revenue, continued operation of the Tukwila Pool would necessitate significant reductions elsewhere within the City's operating budget, on top of reductions already under consideration. Tukwila Pool has provided outstanding and important services to the residents of Tukwila and surrounding areas for over 35 years, first under King County operation and more recently under City operation. The City can no longe t afford to provide this service as it has since 2003. With regret, we recommend that the City plan for the closure of Tukwila Pool no later than September 2011. In the interim, staff will explore two options for providing some level of related services to Tukwila Residents. 1. Seek out a partner willing and able to operate Tukwila Pool under a new lease with the Tukwila School District. 2. Investigate options for providing Tukwila residents with access to alternative facilities at an affordable cost. ATTACHMENTS A. Tukwila Pool Operations Budget Breakdown. B. Tukwila Pool Completed CIP Projects C. Tukwila Pool Operations Budget Utilities D. Tukwila Pool Reduced Program Offerings and Hours of Operation E. Tukwila Pool Current and Proposed Fee Schedule W: \Steve \BUDGET1Tukwila Pool Options 6 -21 -10 sjidoc 6/21/2010 12:54:21 PM 209 ATTACHMENT A TUKWILA POOL OPERATIONS BUDGET BREAKDOWN CHART ATTACHMBENT B TUKWILA POOL COMPLETED CIP PROJECTS ATTACHMENT C TUKWILA POOL OPERATIONS BUDGET UTILITIES CHART ATTACHMENT D TUKWILA POOL REDUCED PROGRAM OFFERINGS AND HOURS OF OPERATION CHART ATTACHMENT E TUKWILA POOL CURRENT AND PROPOSED FEE SCHEDULE Community Affairs Parks Committee Minutes February 28, 2011— Paae 2 After a brief overview of the history of the plan process to date, Committee discussion ensued. Committee members ultimately recommended that public involvement in this project should include both meetings with individual stakeholders and with a stakeholder group (see options 1 and 2 as outlined under the Recommendations in the Committee agenda packet). Committee members did not express interest in reducing the scope of the project as outlined in option 3. Committee members acknowledged that previously, the Council did not desire the approach of meetings with individual stakeholders as described in option 1; however, given the time that has passed and other considerations, the Committee felt it would be worthwhile to revisit the option with the full Council. RECOMMENDATION MADE WITH UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO MARCH 14 COW FOR DISCUSSION. C. Ballot Measure Special Election: Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District Per previous Council direction, staff presented a timeline and draft resolution requesting the King County Director of Elections call a special election on August 16, 2011, and place on the ballot a measure regarding the formation of and funding for a Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District. l Council originally considered calling a special election during the month of February 2011; however, a number of factors affected the ability to meet required timelines associated with the February deadline. Staff has prepared timeline requirements and estimated costs associated with placing the measure on the next available ballot which is August 16. Staff reported that the items such as levy rate and governance structure were derived from information provided in a memo from Rick Still, dated February 23, 2011. The memo is included in the Committee agenda packet for review. Vanessa Zapitul, Tukwila resident, spoke on behalf a citizen group that has expressed interest in the continued operation of the pool. Ms. Zapitul suggested the City consider a third party operator for the pool and alternate means of providing necessary staff. She stated that, regrettably, that the citizen group will not be able to support this process and /or a ballot measure if a third party is not considered. Committee members recognize that there are a number of factors involved with this ballot measure and continued operation of the pool facility. In consideration of such details, the Committee thought it may be in the best interest of the City Council to hold a work session to discuss these factors prior to making a decision on how to proceed. RECOMMEDATION TO HOLD A WORK SESSION PRIOR TO THE COUNCIL MAKING A DECISION. FORWARD TO MARCH 14 COW FOR DISCUSSION. D. Parks Recreation Events Calendar As an information only item, Rick Still reviewed a calendar of upcoming Parks Recreation events for the months of March and April with the Committee. INFORMATION ONLY. HI. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 6:09 p.m. Next meeting: Monday, March 14, 2011 5:00 p.m. Conference Room #3 Committee Chair Approval M utes KAM. Reviewed by NG and SL. 215 216 COUNCIL A G E ND A S Y'N O P S I S rV ITEM No. J 4 J Initials ,<t e Meeting Date Prepared by 1 Mayors review 1 Cozrncil review ykkoti 4 1 03/14/11 1 DCS 1 03/21/11 DCS -41K4°).1,. ITEM INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 11-035 I STAFF SPONSOR: DEREK SPECK I ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 03/14/11 AGENDA I'T'EM TITLE Tukwila Village: Approval of Developer Selection Process C T1 G URY Discussion Motion Resolution Ordinance ['Bid Award Public Hearing Other Mtg Date 03/14/11 Mtg Date 03/21/11 Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 1 SP( )NS( )R 0 Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD Finance Fire n Legal P&R Police PW SPONSOR'S On 3/7/11 the City Council voted to start a developer selection process. The Council is SUMMARY being asked to consider and approve a recommended developer selection process. Ri .\'I1,w1?D BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DATE: N/A COMMIFIEE CHAIR: N/A RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Approve COMMITTEE CO IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPI NDITURI? REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $0 $0 $0 Fund Source: Con MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 03/14/11 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 03/14/11 Informational Memorandum dated 3/10/11 217 218 J .NILA V 4 t N i z City of Tukwila (e Jim Haggerton, Mayor 9oa ...9 INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor Haggerton FROM: Derek Speck, Economic Development Administrator DATE: March 10, 2011 SUBJECT: Tukwila Village ISSUE Staff seeks City Council approval of a developer selection process for Tukwila Village BACKGROUND On March 7, 2011 the City Council voted in support of starting a developer selection process. State law requires the City Council to approve the developer selection procedure. DISCUSSION There are many approaches the City could take to select a developer. For government redevelopment projects, it is very common for the government agency to select a developer based on one of the following competitive methods: (1) Developer's qualifications (2) Developer's proposal (3) Developer's qualifications and proposal Under the first method the agency would issue a request for qualifications (RFQ), would review the qualifications of all the developers who apply, and would select based on that information. In this method, the RFQ would typically request information on the developer's management team, design team, experience with similar developments, experience getting financing, and experience getting commercial or residential tenants. The City of Tukwila could also request the developer to describe their concept for Tukwila Village and provide justification for why they believe their concept is feasible in the marketplace. All terms of an agreement would be negotiated. Under the second method, the agency would issue a request for proposals (RFP), would review the proposals received, and would select the developer based on the agency's preferred proposal. Typically, proposals include significantly more definition of the developer's concept and would include an estimate of land price. The more detail requested, such as architectural renderings, the more time and expense would be involved for the developer. If the agency requires an actual purchase offer, the developer would have to invest very significant time and expense. 219 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 The third method is much more common than the second method because most developers will not invest the time and expense needed to make a detailed proposal, and certainly not an offer, unless they believe they have a reasonable chance of success. The third method accommodates this by enabling developers to fairly easily submit their qualifications. The agency would then review the qualifications and select the top two or three developers to submit proposals. This two step process is effective but takes significant time. This is the process that the City used in 2008 to select a developer for Tukwila Village. At this stage for Tukwila Village, staff recommends method 1, selecting a developer through a competitive process based on qualifications. This method is the most likely for success because: (1) It is the fastest method and the library has indicated a strong desire to move forward quickly. We are most likely to have the optimal development if a developer can proceed at the same time as the library. (2) In this economy, the types of developments that are feasible in the marketplace are probably fairly limited. If all developers propose very similar concepts, then the most important criteria is the developer's qualifications. As an example, two developers who have expressed strong interest in the Village at this time have both indicated they can incorporate the elements of the Council's adopted vision and believe the most feasible concept for a residential component is senior housing. In the RFQ, staff would include some provisions that make it clear that the City is not bound by the RFQ and could end the process at any time or add additional steps. For example, if we receive applications from many highly qualified developers with very different concepts, it's possible we would add the proposal step into the process. Proposed Selection Process March 21 City Council approves developer selection process. March 23 Draft RFQ is available to the Council. March 30 Request for Qualifications (RFQ) is issued. We would post it to the City's website, publish official notice through the City's standard methods, and market it through email and selected publications. April 29 Developer applications are due. May 2 -13 Developer applications are available at City Hall for public review. Citizens would be encouraged to provide written comments that could be shared with the staff team and City Council or provide oral comments to the Economic Development Administrator. May 2 -17 Staff team review and Mayor's review /approval. In addition to city staff, the team would likely include a representative from the King County Library District. May 24 City Council discussion of staff recommendation June 6 City Council selection of developer W:12011 Info Memos\TukwilaVillage3- 14- 11.doc 220 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 Proposed Selection Principles (as approved by Council 3/7/11) (1) The City still holds the vision for Tukwila Village that was adopted in 2007. (2) The Library is still a key component of the vision and the City is committed to reasonable deal terms to include the Library at the primary corner "Site B (3) Active living, age restricted apartments "senior apartments" for 62 and older) are an appropriate type of residential space and can be a major portion, or even all, of the residential space. (4) Some portion of the apartments (senior or non senior) can be "affordable meaning income restricted to levels of 50 60% and 80% of area median income. (5) If possible, a significant portion of the units should also be "market rate meaning not income restricted. (6) A heathcare provider, including a non profit providing primary and dental care to people regardless of income, can be a positive use for the site. Proposed Selection Principles (excerpted and paraphrased from the 2008 RFQ) (1) The City desires a development that accomplishes the City's vision as adopted by the City Council in 2007: "Tukwila Village will be a welcoming place where all residents can gather and connect with each other. This mixed -use development will draw upon Tukwila's strengths and include a library, a neighborhood police resource center, retail, restaurants, public meeting space, and an outdoor plaza. The Village may also include office, live /work, and residential space. This active, vibrant place will set high standards for quality and foster additional neighborhood revitalization and civic pride. (2) The City prefers to sell all six acres to one developer. However, selling significant portions to separate developers will be considered. (3) This project is located in a designated urban renewal area in which the City has eminent domain authority; however, the City is not seeking to acquire additional property at this time. (4) In addition to the library and neighborhood police resource center, the City is amenable to concepts that include office, live /work, or residential as major components of the development. Apartments will be considered but preference may be given to concepts with ownership housing. (5) The City encourages both market rate and mixed income concepts but is not interested in concepts in which the entire residential component is income restricted, unless it is to offer housing for active seniors or artists. W:12011 Info Memos\TukwilaVillage3- 14- 11.doc 221 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 (6) The City desires to maximize its financial return while achieving the project vision. We are open to creative approaches such as phasing the construction, phasing financial payments, or retaining an equity position. (7) Improvements are scheduled for South 144 Street in the City's capital improvement plan. If technically feasible, the City is willing to coordinate the timing of those improvements to coincide with the development of this project. The City owns Tukwila International Boulevard and is willing to explore on- street parking or other improvements. (8) The City plans to own or lease approximately 2,000 square feet of office space in the development for a neighborhood police resource center. (9) We encourage green and environmentally sustainable building practices. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to forward this item to the March 21, 2011 Regular Meeting to make a formal motion in support of the developer selection procedure and principles outlined in this report. ATTACHMENTS None W:12011 Info Memos\TukwilaVillage3- 14- 11.doc 222 U pcoming Meetings Events MARCH 2011 14th (Monday) 15th (Tuesday) 16th (Wednesday) 17th (Thursday) 18th (Friday) 19th (Saturday) Community Utilities Parks Tukwila Volunteer Work Affairs Cmte, Commission, Historical Society, Party Parks Cmte, 5:00 PM 5:30 PM 7:00 PM 5: 00 PM (CR #1) (Community (Tukwila Heritage (CR #3) Center) Cultural Center 14475 59 Ave S.) 10:00 AM 1:00 PM Library Advisory Duwamish Hill City Council Board, Committee of 7:00 PM Preserve the Whole (Foster Librmy) For information and Mtg., registration visit 7:00 PM www. cascadeland. org (Council (or call 206 -905- Chambers) 6931). Cottage Creek Restoration party 9:00 AM Noon (meet by flagpole at City Hall) RESCHEDULED FROM 2/26/11 21st. (1Vloiday) .:.;22nd (Tuesday),; 23rd (Wedilesda}) '24th (Thursday) 25th; :(Fnday)r 't 26th (Saturday) Transportation Finance COPCAB, Planning Tukwila Int'l. Blvd. Cmte, Safety Cmte, 6:30 PM C :3+4 Action Cmte's 5:00 PM 5:00 PM (CR #5) CANCELLED Trash Pickup Day (CR #1) (CR #3) 9:00 —10:00 AM City Council Regular Mtg., For location contact 7:00 PM Rick at (Council rickaforschler. ore Chambers) "Strike Out Hunger" event at ACME Bowl to benefit Tukwila Food Pantry. 10 AM to 12 NOON (100 Andover Park W) Q) Call Tukwila Rotary at 206 992 -4578 Arts Commission: 1st Tues., 5:30 PM, Tukwila Community Center. Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206- 767 -2342. >Chamber of Commerce's Tukwila Government and Community Affairs Committee: 1st Tues., 12:00 Noon, Chamber Offices. Contact Nancy Hinthorne at 206 -575 -1633. City Council Committee of Whole (C.O.W.) Meeting: 2nd 4th Mon., 7:00 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall. City Council Regular Meeting: 1st 3rd Mon., 7:00 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall. Civil Service Commission: 1st Mon., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room 113. Contact Bev Willison at 206 433 -1844. Community Affairs Parks Committee: 2nd 4th Mon., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #3. 3/14/11 (A) Billboard Lease. (B) North Highline Annexation Briefing, (C) Bid Award for 34 golf carts. (D) Parks and Recreation Annual Report. COPCAB (Community Oriented Policing Citizens Adv. Board): 4th Wed., 6:30 PM, Conf. Rm #5. Phi Huyn /i (206- 433 7175). Equity Diversity Commission: 1st Thurs., 5:15 PM, Conf. Room #3. Contact Joyce Trauhna at 206- 433 -1850. >Finance Safety Committee: 1st 3rd Tues., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #3. >Human Services Advisory Brd: 2nd Fri. of even months, 10:00 AM, Human Services Office. Contact Evie Boykan at 206 -433 -7/80. Library Advisory Board: 3rd Wed., 7:00 PM, Foster Library. Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206- 767 -2342. Lodging Tax Advisory Committee: Every other month (or as scheduled), 12:00 NOON. Contact Katherine Kertzman at 206 -575 -2489. Parks Commission: 3rd Wed., 5:30 PM, Senior Game Room at Community Center. Contact Stephanie Gardner at 206- 767 -2342. Planning Commission /Board of Architectural Review: 4th Thurs., except 2nd Thursday in Nov. Dec., 6:30 PM, Council Chambers at City Hall. Contact Wynetta Bivens at 206- 431 -3670. >Transportation Committee: 1st &3rd Mon., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #1. Tukwila Historical Society: 3rd Thurs., 7:00 PM (meeting location varies). Contact Pat Brodin at 206 -433 -1861. >Tukwila 1nt'I. Blvd. Action Cmte: 2nd Tues., 7:00 PM, Tukwila Community Center. Contact Chief Dave Haynes at 206- 433 -1812. Utilities Committee: 2nd 4th Tues., 5:00 PM, Conf. Room #1. 3/15/11 (A) NPDES Program, 2010 Annual Report and 2011 Surface Water Management Program. 223 Tentative Agenda Sc, e•F le MONTH MEETING 1 MEETING 2 MEETING 3 MEETING 4 REGULAR C.O:W R. EGULA.R C.O.W: March 7 14 21 28 See agenda packet Special Presentations: Special Issues: cover sheet for this Update from the An ordinance to raise week's agenda Suburban Cities the tax rate applied to (March 14, 2011 Association and social card rooms Committee of the Whole recognition of Mayor Meeting) Haggerton State of the County Presentation by King County Councilmember Julia Patterson Southcenter Access Project Unfinished Business: Strander Boulevard right -of- way dedication Comprehensive Plan amendment (in public meeting format) Southcenter Plan Public Involvement Strategy Discussion on possible Development Agreement in Riverton area A resolution to request a special election Tukwila Village: Proposed developer selection process April 4 11 18 25 Special Presentation: Special Presentation: Employee Recognition Mayor's State of the and Awards City Address State of the Municipal Appointments: Court Boards and (Judge Kimberly Commission Walden) 224