The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCAP 2014-04-15 Item 2F - Development Agreement - Amendment to 223 Andover Park East with South Center WA LLCCity of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Community Affairs and Parks Committee FROM: Derek Speck, Economic Development Administrator DATE: April 9, 2014 SUBJECT: Washington Place Development Agreement Amendment ISSUE The owners of 223 Andover Park East would like to construct a building with a hotel and apartments or condominiums and have requested an amendment to an existing development agreement in order to vary the City's zoning and sign code requirements. BACKGROUND In March 2013 the City executed a development agreement with South Center WA, LLC so that the owner of 223 Andover Park East (the former Circuit City site) could construct a building up to 180 feet tall and that included apartments or condominiums. Since that time, the developer has continued to refine the project plan. Recently, the developer submitted an application for the City's design review process which is scheduled to be considered by the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) on May 22, 2014. As currently proposed, the project does not meet certain zoning and sign code standards. Therefore, the City Council would need to approve an amendment to the development agreement allowing modifications to those standards to enable the BAR to consider the project. DISCUSSION Due to the unique nature of this project, there are three areas in which the project needs flexibility from our zoning code: number of parking stalls, area of open space, and building height. Additionally, the proposed project needs flexibility regarding the sign code, especially regarding building mounted signs. Parking — As shown in the table below, the proposed project would include 370 residential units, 189 hotel rooms, and 498 parking stalls. The developer hired the Transpo Group to estimate the parking demand and their technical analysis is attached. Transpo estimated a daily peak parking demand of 340 stalls for the residential units and 118 stalls for the hotel for a combined total of 458 stalls resulting in 40 extra stalls. The City's current zoning would require 939 stalls. Staff recognizes that this parking standard was based on a suburban, low -rise, non - transit oriented development style of apartment building and is excessive for a project in the core of the Urban Center. As currently proposed, the Southcenter Plan and related TUC zoning changes would require 594 parking stalls. Under that code, the project would be short 96 stalls. The key question is whether the proposed project includes sufficient parking. It is a challenging question because this type of multi - family development doesn't exist anywhere in South King 45 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 County. Although staff would feel more comfortable if the project included more parking, staff acknowledges that adding a floor to the parking garage would be very expensive. It is commonly accepted that the cost of constructing a parking garage is approximately $30,000 per stall. It is possible that the cost would make the project financially not viable. The following are reasons why the parking may be sufficient: (a) The Transpo Group's estimate may reflect the actual demand. Transpo Group based its estimate of parking demand for the residential units on King County's Right Size Parking Calculator, which is a tool designed for these types of projects. The developer also plans to charge the residential tenants separately for parking stalls which may reduce the number of vehicles tenants use. The hotel guests may not all need parking since the hotel will operate an airport shuttle and some rooms may be contracted for airline employees who would not have cars. (b) Some other successful high -rise apartment buildings have similar or less parking. A chart is attached listing some apartment buildings in Seattle that have even fewer parking spaces than proposed for this project. However, Seattle has significantly more amenities and jobs within walking and transit of those other apartments. (c) The developer has a strong interest to ensure sufficient parking. Without it, they may have a hard time getting financing or a hotel operator. (d) The developer and property manager can implement a valet parking service when demand exceeds supply. The project could fit an additional 103 parking stalls on site if valet service is implemented. (e) The risk to adjacent properties if there is insufficient parking or if the developer doesn't implement a valet parking service would be relatively minimal. This site is not close to a single family residential neighborhood and commercial property owners could have cars towed if necessary. Parking Comparison Developer Proposal City Zoning Code Units Parking Spaces Daily Peak Demand Current Proposed Residential Studio 154 308 154 One bedroom 150 300 150 Two bedroom + den 63 126 95 Three bedroom 3 6 6 Subtotal 370 340 740 405 Hotel 189 118 199 189 Total 559 498 458 939 594 Note: The parking requirement shown in the current City zoning column undercounts 19 parking stalls for employees for the residential portion. That being said, staff still believes that the residential parking requirements proposed for the Southcenter Plan are the minimum necessary for this project. Those requirements would be 1 46 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 3 stall per studio, one stall per one bedroom, 1.5 stalls per two - bedroom, and 2 stalls per two - bedroom unit. Regarding the hotel parking, the proposed Southcenter Plan would require one stall per hotel room. Transpo's analysis has merit; however, staff supports a maximum reduction from one stall per hotel room to 0.7 stalls per hotel room based on Tukwila's general hotel occupancy level of 70 %. If the developer is able to provide data reflecting a lower parking utilization rate at nearby hotels in Tukwila, staff may support a lower requirement. Using the proposed Southcenter Plan for the residential parking requirement and assuming a 70% occupancy level for the hotels with one stall per occupied hotel room, the required parking would be 537 stalls. In that case, the proposed project is short by 39 stalls. Open Space— The City's current zoning code requires 200 square feet of open space per residential unit for use of the residents which would total 74,000 square feet, which would be nearly equivalent to 50% of the lot area. The City's proposed zoning would require 10% of the residential floor area and 25 square feet per hotel room, which would be 25,525 square feet, larger than one entire floor of the building. The project as proposed has approximately 20,000 square feet of open space. Most of the open space is on the nineteenth floor which includes a clubhouse with a flexible room comprising a kitchen and area for meetings, lounging, dining and playing games. It also has an exercise room, a hot tub, and an outdoor area with seating /lounging, barbecue grills, and an outdoor fireplace. The ground level includes a lobby, cafe, swimming pool and an outdoor pet area. In addition to the 20,000 square feet of open space for the residents and hotel guests, the development would also create a fifteen foot wide tree lined sidewalk with bench seating. Staff supports the amount of open space as proposed by the developer. Given the location of this project, there is significant indoor and outdoor space for socializing and recreation within walking distance such as an exercise club, a bowling alley, the largest indoor mall in the Pacific Northwest, the Green River bike and pedestrian trail, the Interurban bike and pedestrian trail, and Bicentennial Park. Building Height— In early 2013 the City approved a development agreement for this project to entitle the building to be up to 180 feet in height. That was based on a seventeen story building which did not include a clubhouse on the roof. The project has evolved from that earlier concept and now includes eighteen stories plus the roof top clubhouse. In addition, the developer is negotiating an agreement to operate the hotel as a Four Points by Sheraton and Sheraton has requested some additional height on the second floor (mezzanine level) so the meeting rooms can have higher ceilings. Staff supports entitling the building for additional height up to 190 feet. This site is in the core of Tukwila's Urban Center and is a good location for more urban type of development. Higher ceilings provide a higher quality experience for the meeting rooms and the roof top club house is an amenity that improves the entire project. Signage — The developer has proposed signs that exceed the size currently allowed by the City's sign code on the north and west faces and on the canopy above the main hotel entrance on the east side as shown in the attached plans. 47 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 4 North Face: The proposed wall sign is 840 square feet. Assuming the project has a public entrance on the north side, the sign code allows a sign up to 150 square feet. West Face: The proposed sign is 840 square feet. Assuming the project has a public entrance on the west side, the sign code allows a sign up to 150 square feet. East Face Canopy: The proposed sign lettering is 3.5 feet in height whereas the sign code allows lettering up to one foot in height. Although the developer has not requested signs on the parking garage, the sign code would allow two signs on the north face of the parking garage and two signs on the west face of the parking garage. Each of the four signs could be up to 288 square feet. It is unlikely that signs on the parking garage would be clearly in view from Baker Boulevard or other public street. The City's sign code was created in the context of our current built environment without specifically anticipating large, tall buildings like this project. As such, limiting the wall face signs to 150 square feet may be too conservative. Larger signs may improve wayfinding, marketability of the property, and competiveness of our Urban Center. The City of Seattle does not allow signs at the top of downtown high rises but the City of Bellevue does. Bellevue limits its signs to a maximum of 300 square feet. Although the 840 square foot signs proposed for the north and west faces are significantly larger than the 150 square feet allowed by the sign code, they are still only 2% and 2.6% of the building faces, respectively, if the building face is calculated based on the plane perspective as viewed from afar and not strictly the plane of the wall on which the sign is attached. Some wall faces at the mall are allowed to have signs up to 500 square feet, though the actual signs may not be that large. Buildings in the MIC /H District may have signs up to 1,500 square feet, depending on the size of the wall. If the MIC /H District code were applied to this project the north face sign could be up to 733 square feet and the west face sign up to 561 square feet. Staff supports allowing larger signs for this project because the wall faces are considerably taller and larger than contemplated in the sign code and the larger signs can still be aesthetically pleasing as long as the signs are of the channel letter design as proposed. Staff recommends approving signs on the north and west faces based on the formula used in the MIC /H District and a canopy sign for the east entrance with channel letters up to 3.5 feet tall. Staff recognizes that the community may have reservations about entitling this project to the parking, open space, building height, and signage as described. This is a pioneering project from which we will learn a lot about parking demand in our Urban Center core. Given the City's vision to have a transit - oriented neighborhood utilizing the commuter rail station, bus transit center, Interurban and Green River bike trails, and nearby jobs and amenities, this is a good opportunity to push the envelope to encourage development. This project is a unique opportunity to encourage transit oriented development with a higher end multi - family residential component than currently exists in Tukwila. Since this type of product does not currently exist, it is difficult to prove the market demand in order to get financing. It is a unique confluence of factors such as the property owner's knowledge and commitment to the local area, a large enough site to enable some surface parking, the EB -5 financing structure, 48 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 5 and the hotel participation that makes this project a possibility. The project exemplifies many of the goals reflected in the City's vision for the core of the Urban Center. If the project is successful, it may inform future adjustments to Tukwila's zoning and sign codes. Process — Typically, a draft amendment to the development agreement would be attached to this report. In order to meet the developer's requested timeframe for moving the project forward, staff is asking for the Community Affairs and Parks Committee (CAP) to consider this item without the draft amendment. If the Committee forwards this item to the full Council, staff will draft an amendment to the existing development agreement. The amendment to the development agreement would need to be approved following a public hearing, which is scheduled for the Council meeting of April 28th. Staff posted official notice for the public hearing on April 14th. If CAP decides to not forward this item to the Council, staff will cancel or reschedule the public hearing. The City is holding an open house for the public to meet with the developer and city staff and discuss the project and proposed amendments to the development agreement. The open house is scheduled for Wednesday, April 16th from 4:00 to 5:30 PM at Albert Lee Appliance. Staff mailed invitations to the nearby businesses and property owners. The developer has also asked for the City to approve a multi - family property tax exemption and other financial incentives. Staff is still researching those options and will return to Council at a future date, possibly in May or June. RECOMMENDATION The Committee is being asked to forward this item for a public hearing at the City Council's Committee of the Whole meeting on April 28, 2014 and approve a development agreement at the May 5, 2014 Regular Meeting. ATTACHMENTS Washington Place schematic design plan set Technical memorandum with parking analysis by Transpo Group dated April 2, 2014 Chart of parking counts dated April 9, 2014 49 fr '.?� g ff.If li r{ Mira /!s l4rNl wsf -r. MarsrsArNac+filir OAPV IMP lip romaa.. aarw rrm Nil s r:, rt _ - g —rr u s�. ,V 1L ( _. Ii .� ti�llll.� ..Irk a liffSMISNIIMIMI AINEMEMIVIN Mai. iMIt IIIIIIIIINI iirM -Ad MGM 111.11**AnvilmvArmama, 'savour f n 4 v ' y / J! '1 rpil! P1 /Iii► IFAVIAV:, illff NI F _.571161'MI Mil V-i 'li/ Ell lbb_, l // / /! 1/ iwojramuslir ISMI WEIN MARCH 26, 2014 51 (uft Pru rrrlr:�.:G fil F L li : ..,...K • tint' 1 --11 . ►` N -0111ir.. "queM. "•41^'- we'-'47%., mow. ,411* Vmmm. „,••` .- -\ \ ti i -sue i _ -_ -+ -1h._ • c.; P61 0 cen 0-F 23 a ND !OVER P RK 1 T •T KWIL W SHIN 1 0 54 '+ \ `t\ ':1 -1 1 1 \tc 71Mir - - Ak M. WEE •WASHINGTON PLACE 23 ANDOVER PARK EAST•TUKWILA WA HINGO • 23 ANDOVER PARK EAST•TUKWILA WA HINGO GROUP WEST COMPA .. MILL ■41, ,r • 223 ANDOVER PARK EAST.TUKWILA, WASHINGON z 0 tx GROUP WEST / / f./1 MA AVM, 17,07lArifillWar AWAITAIVAPMPAIWAIVMMY 111 \1 11 11 11 nt at two likik 410•4 Ini 9 IIII M 111•111ff ir 1 naimusimitims 'n'u'b 1niti it uvormi 4; 111�1��I1�II�IIl1 ►1111IIIl1'�11L1►1�1'lll�ll'�1 VIVIITI=2:\ustcx, ill I •WASHINGTON PLACE immumilgividasAimucwit GROUP WEST COMPA Description 03/20/2014 03/27/2014 J 0 w 0 0 (17 w w 2 0 c (;;;;9( ww 0 00 0 2 caw � zcc w co co W O o co 10 w 0- PROJECT NUMBER 0 C9 1- U w O GC 0 �\ ••■••••••I/ 1 ••■••••••1 ii1 ■ ■ ∎ ■■ ■•■ ■ill IMEMEI■■■■ ■■i m■■ =■■■■■ ■1 „0 -,9Z U .0 -,9L „0 -,VZ U U U 10 STALLS @ 8' -0" EACH U U U U U U U U U 31VO AllafO3S U U 0 0 N N 10 STALI I U U U U U U 11I b�M `V1MNfll 3 NIHVd H AOGNV £ZZ IN O V LLHVdb / -010H N O±O N I H SVM CONSULTANT I1 - • W w 1 tY 0 W I- I— W Q H m z = I— 0 w 0 w mo/ (7) Z .,o - ,9Z .0 - ,9Z j - ,9Z .1 - .9Z 1 •■ 1 •■ 1• 1■ 1• 1•U 111 HOV3 L „0-.8 „0 - .C9 „9 -.09 z w LO oa JJJJ JJJJ 0 -,9Z REGISTRATION ....r ,.... 0 0 y',I .. mitt ■■ ,E - .9Z ■■I \\■� ‘_ 1 ■ ■■ ■ ■U 1■■■■■■ 1•••••U J 1 I ,,0-,ZL)re HOV3 ..0-,6 N7 S11V1S L ..0-.C9 „9 -,EL ■ ■■ 0 z z s Z ww i I- 1 F5.)) agues u3 1810H A .9Z „E - .EI „Z-,�b „L-,8L Y (F0 00 „0-,86 . ,Ib .0-,8L - „9- 9 „0L -,L 1 ■I w rn > cce Et w w u_ illl �i� �x l ? 1- u) Z .�MIMI 11 mVM I O 911111I/ �aiiiili C11 1 III w 1 0 z te _)luuL.d1u 0a }uewpady 0I 0 0 „E - ,17Z 31Vo AllanO3s • 1 ■ • 111 1 is, 00 w ful 0 uwo ma I* EF 11111d 1 7 . [mffl.I ,∎♦♦♦♦ ,♦ aV 310A03a , _♦_1_ V3 I I∎ U . • rv�♦♦♦��♦ /V3OV ONIOV01 w w < U co ILI Z co Q lwi 2 O r 0 r N 0 0 0) U U U U N I O (0) 0 co 10 k"\ 0 0 w U U (Lc ,5,, U U O ) U U U U U 0 i0 12 S 0 II U 9 N N \ I 0 N L ✓ 0 N N 0 N io 0 N 31OAONOlOW - 0,1310005 z U _ — U 'o C - r- U U U U U U 0 • 0 U U 0 ✓ L M N �►1 L J z L o a I � I I 1 L ✓ I I I I I I I I L r z Y 0 W L J � I I O L L 45 45 45 I 6V0 -X313 i4VO X313 1 NOIIVIS 30eIVH0 1 NOIIVIS 30NVH0 L � 1-00V3 S11V.LS zL rt,,� ,,.8-,5Z L _ Ya31000S Z Y o 00 m '11H ■11 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■I ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■11 ■111 ,o£. �1 ■111 _ _.11111 i•111 , 0 -,b J „£ -,6 L 0-20 L 1 \1 J I HOV3 „0-,6 SllV1S 0 L „0 -,9 L--- -JL - -- „OJ,Q6 - - - -JL 0 „6 -,9Z 9 STALLS @ 8' -6" EACH „0-,99 0 .0 -,b 1 ■111 IA ■1 II II 11 11 11 11 ■1 11 11 II I ■1 111 11 7 T0V3 „ Sl1V1s 7 HO�b31-,8 @7 S11VIS ti X LO —.9 - -_L „0 =,917 —JL JLO =,ZE -- U U c=1 U •••••••••ii • • • • ovicw■ 0 0 fill INN - - • �i- \ \ wm A o„ 0 0) o� Eo 0 0 0 7 STALLS @ 8' -0" EACH 3 STALLS @ 9' -0" EACH 10 STALLS @ 9' -0" EACH 10 STALLS @ 9' -0" EACH 10 STALLS @ 9' -0" EACH 9 STALLS @ 9' -0" EACH m (6 0 0 d ui w ci w z M�� z > C3 1. I- rn CO CO I- W I- Z Q fl i� w o w m 5-N- N ci a �_ w,— w-'= ce I W I- Z IX °_o —F-- conwsQ 0< McncndlL LANDSCAPE AREA PEDESTRIAN PATH ° ° O LOADING AREA ■ SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER Z /J CD N 0 w 0 0 63 64 ISSUE A I Date Description w < H z2 0 m w� ID N N N c) H KEYPLAN PHASE PROJECT NUMBER GWA NO. PROJECT VM V1MN fll 3 )1HVd H1AO®NV EZZ INAINl�bdb / 1AlOH bid N 1 NIH bM O S CONSULTANT REGISTRATION d ()b O CV (2 ) (W (L (o a z ti z > a CO (0 Z CV C/) 1 al o0 0 w , �_ ® CL W v- W 2 U w z �� o -ao c U)) CW n 0 Q a I N CV I 9 CV N 0 C\1 N 0 0 0 1 L — J L J 0 0 Q 0 0 • 0 0 0 0 0- -U 0 0 0 0 9 N I I I I I I I I I I z 0 O 9 CV N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 0 U 0 0 0 0 Z9 N L 0 • 0 U 0 0 0 0 0 RAMP DOWN DASHED LINE OF VALET PARKING L J L J 21V0 x313 w O CO u) NOIIVIS 398VHO NOIIVIS 39LIVHO MAINTENANCE 0 COMMON SPACE 0 1 1 / / i 310AONO1OW /J31000s Z „8- .9ZL —J ..9 -,OZ 310AOaO10h /831000S Z HOV3 n0-.6 N7 S11VIS ZL II9-19 L. .0-.80 1. „0-199 ..6 -,8Z 0 C W D z � < (CI N 0 CO H CD 1-1-I N 0 SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER N N 0 W 1- 0 a 65 ISSUE A I Date I Description W J wI- z2 0m w&) 0 O N N- O CO O d-71- O O N N O � N N CO CO O O w 0 w m Z H U w 0 �> �> 121.2) 11111111 11111111 SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER LEVEL PLAN 0 z 0 0 w O (Y) N O w H 0 a 67 `dM ``d1MN f L REGISTRATION 3 >IHbd IBAOGNV £ZZ i- v, Lu CL 1N8V LLHbdb /1310H 30b-Id NO1DN I HSbM = �> �> 121.2) 11111111 11111111 SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER LEVEL PLAN 0 z 0 0 w O (Y) N O w H 0 a 67 w N N Description 0 4 W J W !— W H FY z 0 m W 0 N 'Co"- O 03/20/2014 03/27/2014 J a w w N a PROJECT NUMBER 0 C9 (05 (0 (09 01— cew 0 a b�M `V1MNfll 3 NHVd H AOGNV £ZZ INaNlHVdb / 1AIOH N O ±O N I H SVM (2) O (3 ) O CONSULTANT REGISTRATION W0713sne 131OH anjm- r 0 0 ado m II )_j of 0 0 0 00 J1 011 �o 1mmal a a a a J 0 w m AWE I� s = P L_� L L _� L RAMP DOWN 1 I J I I L L 1 Mra z w 0 0 w CO L _� L _� L _� DASHED LINE OF VALET PARKING HO -117 „s -.64 .,0-.17Z1. L) .6 - .8Z .0 - .17 W H 0 m N BED + DEN A 2 BED + DEN A 0) z w 0 0 - ) 2 BED + DEN A 2 BED + DEN A 0 w _O w 0 0 1— x cn w SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER f • 1 0 11 O 0 w 1- 0 a 69 IN00H1SDf10 910H w 0 0 2 re S 0 0 0 C 11 o[ 0 0 0 CO CD 1 z cQ = C a Z ti o W c Z > a Co co N ' 1 Z Q co w cj 0 � ® d W M 2 LL W I_ Z 0 Ce o - ao U))CWn 0 Q c a 0 0 2 BED + DEN A c 00 00 0 0 0 0 J0 L L _ J 00 00 L 0 0 0 0 0 10 z w 0 + w c z 0 0 w m 2 BED + DEN A 0 U w 0 0 0 0 0 o[ 0 0 0 00 00 ]o 0 0 10 0 L _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 -1- 0 0 00 00 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 L_ 0 0 0 00 10 0 ED ED 0 0 0 X fri( ..0-17 „£- ..0-.£ ..6 - .9Z 2 BED CORNER STE BED + DEN A SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER z w 0 0 w N ED + DEN A z 0 w CO N 2 BED + DEN A 0 w O 0 w I— U) w z J 0 J w w J !- L ) 0 W 1- 0 a 71 t/M `V1MN fll REGISTRATION w < H z2 3 )1HVd H1AO®NV £ZZ 0 m W 0 Q IBE CL N N N ININl�bdb / 1lOH H bid N 1 NIH bM 0 S IN00H1SDf10 910H w 0 0 2 re S 0 0 0 C 11 o[ 0 0 0 CO CD 1 z cQ = C a Z ti o W c Z > a Co co N ' 1 Z Q co w cj 0 � ® d W M 2 LL W I_ Z 0 Ce o - ao U))CWn 0 Q c a 0 0 2 BED + DEN A c 00 00 0 0 0 0 J0 L L _ J 00 00 L 0 0 0 0 0 10 z w 0 + w c z 0 0 w m 2 BED + DEN A 0 U w 0 0 0 0 0 o[ 0 0 0 00 00 ]o 0 0 10 0 L _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 -1- 0 0 00 00 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 L_ 0 0 0 00 10 0 ED ED 0 0 0 X fri( ..0-17 „£- ..0-.£ ..6 - .9Z 2 BED CORNER STE BED + DEN A SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER z w 0 0 w N ED + DEN A z 0 w CO N 2 BED + DEN A 0 w O 0 w I— U) w z J 0 J w w J !- L ) 0 W 1- 0 a 71 IN00H1SDf10 910H w 0 0 2 re S 0 0 0 C 11 o[ 0 0 0 CO CD 1 z cQ = C a Z ti o W c Z > a Co co N ' 1 Z Q co w cj 0 � ® d W M 2 LL W I_ Z 0 Ce o - ao U))CWn 0 Q c a 0 0 2 BED + DEN A c 00 00 0 0 0 0 J0 L L _ J 00 00 L 0 0 0 0 0 10 z w 0 + w c z 0 0 w m 2 BED + DEN A 0 U w 0 0 0 0 0 oL 0 0 0 00 00 ]o 0 0 10 0 L _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 -1- 0 0 00 00 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 L_ 0 0 0 00 10 0 ED ED 0 0 0 X fri( ..0-17 „£-.9 ..0-.£ ..6 - .9Z 2 BED CORNER STE BED + DEN A SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER z w 0 0 w N ED + DEN A z 0 w CO N 2 BED + DEN A 0 w O 0 w I— U) w z J 0 J w w J Li) 0 W 1- 0 a 73 t/M `V1MN fll REGISTRATION w < H z2 3 )1HVd H1AO®NV £ZZ 0 m W 0 Q IBE CL N N N ININl�bdb / 1lOH H bid N 1 NIH bM 0 S IN00H1SDf10 910H w 0 0 2 re S 0 0 0 C 11 o[ 0 0 0 CO CD 1 z cQ = C a Z ti o W c Z > a Co co N ' 1 Z Q co w cj 0 � ® d W M 2 LL W I_ Z 0 Ce o - ao U))CWn 0 Q c a 0 0 2 BED + DEN A c 00 00 0 0 0 0 J0 L L _ J 00 00 L 0 0 0 0 0 10 z w 0 + w c z 0 0 w m 2 BED + DEN A 0 U w 0 0 0 0 0 oL 0 0 0 00 00 ]o 0 0 10 0 L _ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 101 -1- 0 0 00 00 10 0 0 10 0 0 10 0 0 0 0 L_ 0 0 0 00 10 0 ED ED 0 0 0 X fri( ..0-17 „£-.9 ..0-.£ ..6 - .9Z 2 BED CORNER STE BED + DEN A SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER z w 0 0 w N ED + DEN A z 0 w CO N 2 BED + DEN A 0 w O 0 w I— U) w z J 0 J w w J Li) 0 W 1- 0 a 73 VVOO2JJ S2f O 12±OH 12) ci2) j`:) m C/5 o 0 a ui W Z z o Q o Co co o cN C.4 ' f n Z Q °O °� U) :>1 W N fij N a M2 wI-Z r°re �QO i �wx� � 0Q MC/)NaLL SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER Cgt 111111 111111 2 BED + DEN A 62) 11 w O 0 w x vo w z 0_ w w H CV M 0 W 1- 0 a 75 w < z2 0 °� t/M V1MN fll 3 )1HVd H1AO®NV £ZZ REGISTRATION CM W U) � OW BE a N N N ININl�bdb / 1lOH H bid N 1 NIH bM O S VVOO2JJ S2f O 12±OH 12) ci2) j`:) m C/5 o 0 a ui W Z z o Q o Co co o cN C.4 ' f n Z Q °O °� U) :>1 W N fij N a M2 wI-Z r°re �QO i �wx� � 0Q MC/)NaLL SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER Cgt 111111 111111 2 BED + DEN A 62) 11 w O 0 w x vo w z 0_ w w H CV M 0 W 1- 0 a 75 ISSUE A I Date I Description W J wI- z2 0m w� 0 r O N N.- O M O 71- o N O N CO O 71- O N r- N M O W 0 W m Z 1- W U 0 i=r) Hooats3nD -31OH ILC2) 2 N 0 0 : N - z ticfl z Liz > C 4 r a wI- Z ate- W W m O N a � = LL IA 'i Z 0 OCt c`°-,e=cr)cuuai NI- SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER 0 C Jo [ 110 01 0 II Lrwl III 1 ;<l w 0) w Z r 0 0 0 m 0 2 I- U n C MM MM 0 Mw W 110-192 110-192 110-192 110 1-I 7Z 0 N Q 0 0 o w I M c W N N 0 N O N 0 c) N co O 0 o 1— I— U) U) c1� 00 00 r r 0 0 w 00 0 0 o� 1- 1— co u) 0 0 o F- V) (/) 0 w m 0 w m 0 0 o� 1— 1— C/) (/) 1 II k,• 1 0 0 i 0 Mw W 0 w 00 O 0 o� 1— I— v) cf) 0 0 o ( 1 0 11C-161, 116 -182 110-1 Y 110-199 0 w m 0 w m 0 0 O 0 w o � c~n w o) 2 ) Z J 0 J w w J ti O w H 0 a 77 `dM ``d1MN f L 3 )12:1bd H AOONV £ZZ REGISTRATION '^. Li -1 cti 1N8V LLHbdb /11310H 30b-Id NO1DN I HSbM = i=r) Hooats3nD -31OH ILC2) 2 N 0 0 : N - z ticfl z Liz > C 4 r a wI- Z ate- W W m O N a � = LL IA 'i Z 0 OCt c`°-,e=cr)cuuai NI- SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER 0 C Jo [ 110 01 0 II Lrwl III 1 ;<l w 0) w Z r 0 0 0 m 0 2 I- U n C MM MM 0 Mw W 110-192 110-192 110-192 110 1-I 7Z 0 N Q 0 0 o w I M c W N N 0 N O N 0 c) N co O 0 o 1— I— U) U) c1� 00 00 r r 0 0 w 00 0 0 o� 1- 1— co u) 0 0 o F- V) (/) 0 w m 0 w m 0 0 o� 1— 1— C/) (/) 1 II k,• 1 0 0 i 0 Mw W 0 w 00 O 0 o� 1— I— v) cf) 0 0 o ( 1 0 11C-161, 116 -182 110-1 Y 110-199 0 w m 0 w m 0 0 O 0 w o � c~n w o) 2 ) Z J 0 J w w J ti O w H 0 a 77 81 82 w N Description as 0 4 w w Z C w 0 0 N O O H 03/20/2014 03/27/2014 1- J 0 w ()Ian's plan's ais a±s W a 0 a9 PROJECT NUMBER H 0 W 'O GC 0 b�M `V1MNfll 3 >IHVd HIAO®NV £ZZ 1N V IlHVdb / -010H N O±O N I H SVM a99 °Ian's OIan's a'S a'S CONSULTANT CIAO L OE 0 0 0 ED C ®� C ®) • O 0 O 0 11 1 la Iflir • L®_II®H C®) C ®� O 0 O 0 • O oI 0 0 0 0111 0 hi! 1 III O 0 O 0 0 G138 L Nb8H n a99 a99 I- ..0-,9Z ..0-.9Z Co) ®0 0 0 ED ED EDer O _ 0 ■ C ®� (6 REGISTRATION NDO +OD9L O 0 O 0 L - °Ian's °Ian's ]OHV1 a'S als Gal I- „0-.9Z ■ • J C )) 9 ti N 0 0 0 I— I— U) CJ) 9 N 9 C) N 9 N 9 O M N 0 w 0 'pQ 0 mi ■ RUH, °,1 00 00 O O Fic O n 0 (. 1 00 00 0 w m 0 0 0� I- I- 0 0 0 H I- U) U) 0 00 00 0 w m 0 w m 0 0 0 0) 0 00 0 11 i_=:= maa 00 00 0 =MN MOM M �/ I : -:�: E �1 l 0 ED 0 1 SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER w O z o O � 0 coW 0 w m 0 w m 0 w m 0 0 0 � I- 0) 0 0 0 � 1- I- Cn U) 0 O „£-.6 L „6-.9Z 0 w m 0 w m O CH 0 0 0) 0 0 Oz 0 w c~n w „ L -.99 z 0 w w • 0 W 1- 0 a 83 84 ISSUE A I Date Description w< H z2 0m w� 0 N N N I� O o KEYPLAN PHASE PROJECT NUMBER GWA NO. PROJECT t/M V1MN fll 3 )1HVd H1AO®NV £ZZ ININl�bdb / llOH �0b1d NOON I HSVM CONSULTANT REGISTRATION CM d ISSUE A I Date I Description WW El Z Ur 00 W co 0 V r 0 N 0 [(+1 0 7 V .— 0 3 0 N N O ti N N M c) 0 0 ec:1- N Tx; ) W N W XX PROJECT NUMBER V W bM 'd1MNfll )*dVd HaAOONV £ZZ IN3V111HVdt/ / 1IIOH 3OV1d NOIMNIHSVM CONSULTANT REGISTRATION eig) H ) ; ) H 9 , N wz 4 Sae w m l- 0 2 vi o 0 a W z Z > ° ?i7 &- Q 7, N CO N OU CO I— Cr5 W~ Z < co w W a cat N a F- Wrw =—� ce CC el = 2 LL W N W U O Q o H Q O X 0 Q `r') C Co C LSS. 0=`' w <0 0 0 „6-1.173 Z „0-,5Z „0-,9Z „01--,I7Z w Cn c0 W U it X _W o) 0) 0) 0) ()Lao 0 ot0 0 n 0) SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER h U L 0000000 0 r. T 9 ti N 9 E0 9 N E0 -.69 I I 011111 -0E10 00000 11 0 0 0 1 0 0 00 00000 00 ', 0-,1 116-19Z 0 -,� „0-,99 m cNi cC z J 0 uJ uJ J LL 0 0 0 89 Washington Place Residence & Hotel 3/31/2014 Hotel GBA 20,397 SF 22,470 SF 21,637 SF V) LL ■ M Lo ,ti N 22,074 SF 22,074 SF 22,074 SF 22,074 SF 22,074 SF 22,074 SF 22,074 SF 22,175 SF 22,175 SF 22,175 SF 22,175 SF 22,175 SF 21,975 SF 21,975 SF ln Ln LO 1n 1ri 189 Units 401,049 SF C Q 00 21 Units 21 Units 21 Units c D ti N 21 Units 21 Units 21 Units 21 Units 21 Units Residential Tower 00 �_ (0 v 5 Q m 12,604 IN CO 00 O ti 01 r1 N Ol 01 r1 N Q1 u M Ln Q1 ul M 1n Q1 Ln M 1n Q1 9,535 Ln M Ln Q1 v1 M Ln Q1 1n M Ln Ol v N l0 00 O e-I M 3 BR + Den Crnr (1550 sf) N 63 13 BR Units l 3 BR + Den (1492 sf) N + + U u) , Ln CO CC M N n eN-1 N N Total 2 BR Units 2 BR+Den B (1267 sf) l0 VD 2 BR+Den A (912 sf) 1n 00 01 01 01 .-1 ei V 2 BR Crnr + Den (958 sf) ti ti ti ti ti IA 2 BR Corner (1165 sf) e-i <, c-1 r 1 <-i c-I <-4 <, r, 01 O Ln . Total Parking Shown c1 l0 In W Ln CO O1 Ln W O N 00 Ol a 1 BR + Den (739 sf) ci c-1 ci ci ci ci lD Total 1 Bedroom Unitsl Lower Level 1st Parking Level 2nd Parking Level 3rd Parking Level Surface Parking Total Parking Shown CC Ur N CO .-1 X N c-1 .-1 1 BR Large (657 sf) c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 N 1 BR Urban (575 sf) <-I s-1 <-I <-I <, `-■ 00 Building Area Cr) l0 M N N 27280 27280 0) l0 M n e-1 00 N 0j CO 1 BR (565 sf) CO CO 00 00 00 Ln .ti 111 �-1 V1 .-1 Ln `-1 Ln .-1 Ln - O m e1 Lower Leve 1ST Level 2ND Level 3RD Level Total Gara Studio Wide (434 sf) - ,I ,1' Ln eti Garage Corner Studio (400 sf) N H N r N r 00 Total Studio Units TOTAL REQ'D 594 N i, m N X 14 W c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 c-1 .-1 .-1 .-1 .-1 .-1 .-1 c-1 c-1 N Hotel Parking Requirement 189 Stalls { n Q1 00 0 4- -0 N 0 00 Ln 1j1 M CO 00 00 00 CO In - 1f1 c-I U1 c-I V1 c-I Ln c-I Ln c-I M # of Unit 7 Units 0 c-1 eti = c-I N 0 .--1 c-1 = c-I `-1 0 01 c-1 0 01 c-1 0 O1 c-1 = 01 .-I 0 01 N 35 Units 35 Units 35 Units 35 Units 35 Units 35 Units 14 Units 370 Units 1 /Hotel Unit Stalls Building Area 7,793 SF 11,583 SF 12,418 SF 12,418 SF 12,539 SF 12,539 SF 12,539 SF 12,539 SF 12,539 SF 12,539 SF 12,539 SF 22,175 SF 22,175 SF 22,175 SF 22,175 SF 22,175 SF 21,975 SF 21,975 SF 5,180 SF LL Ln O rl Dl N Residential Parking Development Cr Ln ci Z D cL d < e-1 O Ln ,H Z D c Cl_ < --I Ln 01 H H Cl_ Q Ln e-1 2 /APT UNIT 6 405 Fir Elev O Ln 0l N O Ln .--I cY 52.50 i0 LO .-i LO 70.82 CO 01 04 0 c-1 04 CO O M M 01 LO N O c-1 N to LD c-1 e-1 125.78 134.94 0 , cr 7 c-1 153.26 162.42 CO Ln .-i 1- eti 180.74 0 o1 O1 00 eti l0 O O1 al c-1 208.22 C Ln ri O Ln - M l0 M 0 N m Residential 1st floor level 2nd floor level 3rd floor Level 4th floor level 5th floor level 6th floor level 7th floor level 8th floor level 9th floor level 10th floor level 11th floor level 12th floor level 13th floor level 14th floor level 15th floor level 16th floor level 17th floor level 18th floor level 19th floor level (Club &Roof) Club Roof Studio Unit 11 BR Unit 12 BR + Den 3BR 'Total 91 • 1 GWA NO. Project Number 0 W 0 d VM'V1w�nl 3 )IdVd b3AOaNV £ZZ 1NaW1l1Vdb /131.0H BOVld NO±ONIHSVM t J r ttl GROUP WEST LIGHT CHERRY METAL SOFFIT 1 1 1 1 1 1' 1 II II -II ■ U r i W•.■ -■-■a- I mil II � r 1® u ■ •. - ■� ------ a■ r - W I - UIlU ! • m .00111 i if IT I1 1f 1�1 SANDSTONE METAL PANELS SATIN ALUMINUM WINDOW FRAME BRUSHED BRONZE WINDOW FRAME SURREY BEIGE METAL PANELS COPPER PENNY ACCENT FACADE CONCRETE CAP RED BRICK VENEER BASE Q M W 0) z N co 4 or ai;gcD z < N W W LLIzz 0 °032 SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER SOUTH ELEVATION O M :317/2014 10:13:52 AM O a vu- L$OI8$ osvemol M-L081uGlapelad4A 93 94 Project Status PROJECT NUMBER GWA NO. Project Number VAA ) Vd J1noGNa EZZ 1N3W1HVdV 1131OH 3OV1d NO ±ONIHSVM CONSULTANT ;1; REGISTRATION ; II I VI EL 111 VI El vi Li z N w W W aI- D _ o < re O I Of IZD 0 7 Z 0 N. SUITE 314 SHEET TITLE AND NUMBER NORTH ELEVATION NJ, make 0WMO1uo1ou14geM-I0-6vEN ePa A 95 O 0. .0 yr m 0 0 0 Project Status METAL SCREEN PANEL METAL SCREEN PANEL SIGNAGE SIZE 35'W X 24 "H PROJECT NUMBER {TWA NO. Project Number TE. 1 1 u W VM IV1IMN nl )1 JVd J1AOGMd CZZ 1N3 J ±HVdV 1-310H DOV-Id NO ±ONI HSVM ct J H CONSULTANT II AI mINEIAral :16 11 _I -IiI _IEEE_IEIr iliM OM OM �I -IEI_ Fir `I IEIO �I MEMO UM 01 OM 1 MI ■I I-I118 =BIM MIN t • 11 I■I r^IOIEU_ , _I�Ir�O - ∎∎1En_ 1 1■111•11 11 sm" II I MA I I mil IP I I 1 11 I IMP= LIGHT CHERRY METAL SOFFIT 2w D 2 LL Z J Z 0 I— Z_ BLUE GRAY GLASS w N W 0 m ❑ L- W = 0 co 0 D Z m SURREY BEIGE METAL PANELS CONCRETE CAP IEIi IEI^ 1r k in1 111 I RED BRICK VENEER BASE 4I • MEM CONCRETE BASE 1 cb SIGNAGE SIZE 18'W X 3'H T.; w H N m a "' z N co co z W , Cii N COCA ILL (~} Q Q SOU CD W 2Nr°,L CL I— Ww--•- D_ �F'z oca S ao t! < ` tee,, co Q U SHEET TIME AND NUMBER W Z H W ww Q C) 317/2014 12:39:01 PM W -wJ115 OEUamoiuolDulyse,M- 1.O-61.- Llse(oidl-A 97 r +■r LIVING /DINING (17' -5 "x11' -0 ") BEDROOM (19' -0 "x10' -9 ") 1 (J 0 • /D WALK -IN CLOSET KITCHEN BATH TUB ONE BEDROOM 565 sf 99 100 1, iu LIVING /BEDRM (14' -4 "x13' -0 ") MEI KITCHENETTE W/D STANDARD STUDIO 347 sf 101 102 TWO BEDROOM + DEN C 103 TWO BEDROOM + DEN A 105 06 W I- M 1) CC W z ce Ov V LA e 1 O ,4 cc G W m O H 107 08 THREE BEDROOM + DEN 4- in N Q1 -1 109 110 TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM �fafSpOGROUP WHAT TRANSPORTATION CAN BE Date: April 2, 2014 TG: 14027.00 To: Omar Lee — Washington Tower LP From: Kevin L. Jones, P.E., PTOE — Transpo Group cc: Eric Guion, AIA — Group West Companies PLL`C Subject: Washington Place Mixed -Use — Parking Analysis,.. This memorandum presents our estimate of daily peak parking demand for the subject project as well as compares this estimate to (1) the number of required parking stalls based on the City of Tukwila's existing and proposed zoning codes and (2) the proposed parking supply. Project Description We understand the project site is located at 223 Andover Park East in Tukwila near existing shopping, restaurants and entertainment and within walking distance of the existing Green River Trail. It is also located near the future Tukwila Transit Center and within walking distance of the future Tukwila Sounder Station. The proposed project would include the demolition of a 40,580- square foot (sf) building formerly occupied by Circuit City and construction of a 19 -story mixed -use building with 370 apartment units and 189 hotel rooms. The project would include a mix of apartment unit types rented at local market rates. The number of studios and one- to three - bedroom apartment units is summarized below along with the average size and anticipated monthly rent for each unit type: • 154 studio units averaging 353 sf and rented at approximately $790 /month • 150 one - bedroom units averaging 578 sf and rented at approximately $1,000 /month • 63 two- bedroom plus den units averaging 996 sf and rented at approx. $1,550 /month • Three three - bedroom units averaging 1,511 sf and rented at approximately $1,900 /month We understand the hotel will be branded as a "4Points by Sheraton." It will include a shuttle program, providing transportation for guests to /from Sea -Tac International Airport which is located less than five miles to the west. Given this proximity and provision for shuttle service, the hotel plans to contract with the airlines and reserve rooms for pilots, flight crew, etc. An average annual room occupancy rate of 70 percent is anticipated based on similar hotels. The project would also provide 208 surface parking stalls and 290 garage parking stalls for a total of 498 stalls. We understand the monthly price for residential parking would be approximately $150 per stall and this price would be in addition to the monthly rent. Parking Demand Peak parking demand was estimated differently for the residential and hotel components of the project. For the residential component, we used the King County Multi - Family Residential Parking Calculator (www.riohtsizeparkino.orq) to calculate the estimated number of parking stalls that would be used per apartment unit. The calculator is a map -based statistical model that estimates parking use for a particular parcel based on local data collected at over 200 existing multi- family developments in 2012. The calculator was created by King County Metro using grant monies awarded from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Value Pricing Program and takes into consideration surrounding factors such as existing population, employment, and transit service concentrations. In using the calculator, we first selected the parcel representing the project site. Next, we entered the number, size and anticipated monthly rent for each apartment unit type along with the monthly price per stall for residents of the building. Although it would be reasonable to increase the existing transit lrartopo Group 11730116th Avenue N.E., Suite 600 Kirkland, WA 98034 425 -821 -3665 Fax: 425 -825 -8434 111 service concentration recognizing the nearby investments in the Tukwila Transit Center and Tukwila Sounder Station, we did not to ensure a reasonably conservative estimate of future residential parking demand. As-shown-in the. attached the tool estimates that the residential component of the proposed` development would generate, on average, ,a daily peak parking demand of approximately 0.92 vehicles per; apartment unit. This translates to approximately 340 vehicles with a total of 370 apartment units. The tool reports this estimate as strong (accurate) for the parcel in which the project site is located. The average parking rate published in Parking Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers [ITE], 4th Edition, 2010) for "Hotel" was used to estimate peak parking demand for the hotel component. The average weekday peak period parking demand is 0.89 vehicles per occupied room (see attached) and based on an anticipated average annual room occupancy of 70 percent, it Is estimated that the hotel would generate a daily peak parking demand of approximately 118 vehicles (189 x 0.70 x 0.89 = 118). This is considered a conservative estimate because it does not account for the planned shuttle program nor the strategy to reserve rooms for those in the airline industry, two elements not incorporated in the average ITE parking rate that would likely result in less parking demand than would be generated otherwise. Combining our parking demand estimate for the hotel with our estimate for the residential component, we anticipate the proposed mixed -use development would generate a peak parking demand of approximately 458 vehicles (340 + 118 = 458). Parking Analysis The City's existing zoning code requires two parking stalls for each apartment unit with up to three bedrooms and one stall for each hotel room plus one stall for employees for each 20 rooms, rounded to the next highest figure. As such, the City would require 740 stalls (370 x 2 = 740) for residential parking and 199 stalls ((189 x 1) + (189 / 20) = 199) for hotel parking, a total of 939 stalls. This total supply is approximately 481 more stalls (939 - 458 = 481) than the estimated total daily peak parking demand described above. We understand the City has proposed changes to the existing zoning code as it relates to the Tukwila Urban Center District in which the project site is located. These changes would require fewer parking stalls than with the existing zoning code. For example, Table 4 of the Planning Commission's Recommend Draft Chapter 18.28 (October 2012) recommends one parking stall for each studio or one - bedroom unit, 1.5 stalls for each two- bedroom unit, two stalls for each unit with more than two bedrooms, and one stall for each hotel room. If approved, the City would require 404 stalls ((304 x 1) + (63 x 1.5) + (3 x 2) = 404) for residential parking and 189 stalls (189 x 1 = 189) for hotel parking, a total of 593 stalls. This total supply is approximately 135 more stalls (593 - 458 = 135) than the total daily peak parking demand. With the project proposing a total of 498 parking stalls, we estimate that this supply is approximately 40 more stalls (498 - 458 = 40) than the estimated total daily peak parking demand. Based on the average parking rate in Parking Generation for "Hotel," it is worth noting that the proposed supply would accommodate the peak parking demand even if the hotel was 90 percent occupied and without the strategies to reduce hotel parking demand described earlier2. The proposed code would require approximately 64 more residential parking stalls than the estimated residential peak parking demand. Assuming these additional stalls would require more structure parking, these stalls would be responsible for approximately 10,800 kg in annual greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide equivalent) from construction and maintenance and approximately 288,600 kg in greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide) from vehicle use of residents, as calculated by the King County Multi - Family Residential Parking Calculator. 2 Based on projections, it is unlikely that room occupancy would exceed 90 percent with any regularity but if this was to occur, the owner is committed to provide valet parking service to off -set the incremental increase in parking demand. ki-transpoGRouP 112 2 Conclusions Conservatively, we estimate the proposed project would generate a daily peak parking demand of approximately 458 vehicles, less than the proposed parking supply and significantly less than what the City's existing and proposed zoning codes would otherwise require. Peak parking demand would likely be even less as we did not adjust our estimate to reflect the future transit concentration of the area nor the hotel's planned services geared toward guests (air travelers, pilots, flight crew, etc.) affiliated with the nearby airport. KLJ/ Attachments: Screen Shots from King County Multi- Family Residential Parking Calculator Excerpt from Parking Generation for "Hotel" rtranspo:aRO..gip 3 113 Screen Shots from King County Multi- Family Residential Parking Calculator O r 3 0 rcv 0 m v TV N 0 • TV 115 Screen Shots from King County Multi - Family Residential Parking Calculator 116 t 'es; entia 'arum a cutata Andner ParkW hark- Screen Shots from King County Multi- Family Residential Parking Calculator 0 - AL-L-:•,-;s1,,..;,, L. 4: Lrt rn 117 Land Use: 310 Hotel Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs. Occupied Rooms On a: Weekday Location: Suburban -Statisitt Peak Pirioi i)einnd Peak Period 12 :00 -1:00 p.m.; 7:00 -10:00 p.m.; 11 :00 p.m. -5:00 a.m. Number of Study Sites 20 Average Size of Study Sites 315 occupied rooms Average Peak Period Parking Demand 0.89 vehicles per occupied room Standard Deviation 0.31 Coefficient of Variation 35% 95% Confidence interval 0.75 -1.02 vehicles per occupied room Range 0.61 -1.94 vehicles per occupied room 85th Percentile 1.08 vehicles per occupied room 33rd Percentile 0.72 vehicles per occupied room P = Parked Vehicles 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 Weekday Suburban Peak Period Parking Demand P= 1.10x -59 R2= 0.74 . .- 0 200 400 600 x = Occupied Rooms 800 • Actual Data Points Institute of Transportation Engineers 118 Fitted Curve 1761 - - - - Average Rate Parking Generation, 4th Edition Comparision of Apartment Parking Ratios Name of Project Location Year Built Units Parking Stalls Ratio 2030 8th Ave. Seattle 2013 430 242 0.56 Alto Seattle 2012 184 125 0.68 Coppins Well Seattle 2012 236 107 0.45 HUE Seattle 2013 100 59 0.59 M Street Seattle 2007 220 110 0.50 Pine & Minor Seattle 2013 120 28 0.23 The Martin Seattle 2013 188 125 0.66 The Post Seattle 2013 208 124 0.60 Via 6 Seattle 2013 654 434 0.66 Viktoria Seattle 2014 249 138 0.55 Bravern Bellevue 2010 446 756 1.70 Excalibur Bellevue 2004 210 224 1.07 119 120