Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Reg 2023-11-06 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKET
ti -+ o THE Tukwila City Council Agenda • REGULAR MEETING .• J,!--1.1 I LA Hq� J a `''s� Allan Ekberg, Mayor Counci/members.• + Kathy Hougardy + De'Sean Quinn David Cline, City Administrator ❖ Kate Kruller ❖ Thomas McLeod Cynthia Delostrinos Johnson, Council President ❖Mohamed Abdi ❖ Tosh Sharp 290a THE MEETING ON -SITE Monday, November WILL BE CONDUCTED PRESENCE WILL PHONE NUMBER For Technical 6, 2023; BOTH ON -SITE AT TUKWILA CITY HALL AND ALSO VIRTUALLY. BE IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS (6200 SOUTHCENTER BOULEVARD). FOR THE PUBLIC TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MEETING IS: 1-253-292-9750, ACCESS CODE: 670077847#. Click here to: Join Microsoft Teams Meeting #2080 Support during the meeting call: 1-206-433-7155. 7:00 PM • Ord #2712 • Res 1. CALL TO ORDER / PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE / ROLL CALL 2. LAND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The City of Tukwila is located on the ancestral lands of the Coast Salish people. We acknowledge their continuing connections to land, waters and culture. We pay our respects to their elders past, present and emerging. 3. PUBLIC COMMENTS— including comment on items both on and not on the meeting agenda Those wishing to provide public comments may verbally address the City Council both on -site at Tukwila City Hall or via phone or Microsoft Teams for up to 5 minutes for items both on and not on the meeting agenda. To provide comment via phone or Microsoft Teams, please email citycouncil@tukwilawa.gov with your name and topic by 5:00 PM on the meeting the date. Please clearly indicate that your message is for public comment during meeting, and you will receive further instructions. 4. CONSENT AGENDA a. Approval of Minutes: 10/16/23 (Regular); 10/23/23 (Special) b. Approval of Vouchers c. Updating term end dates for Boards and Commissions: [Reviewed and forwarded to Consent by the Committee of the Whole on 10/23/23.] (1) An ordinance amending various ordinances as codified in Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Title 2, "Administration and Personnel," to modify term end dates. (2) An ordinance amending Ordinance No. 2534 §4 and §6, as codified at Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Sections 2.36.020 and 2.36.040, to modify term end dates and update meeting regulations in compliance with RCW 35.63.040. Pg.1 Pg.3 Pg.9 (continued...) REGULAR MEETING November 6, 2023 Page 2 5. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2023 Proposed Site -Specific Rezones: a. A Quasi -Judicial hearing to consider a motion to approve or deny an ordinance rezoning a portion of the city -owned George Long property at 14000 Interurban Ave at the request of the City of Tukwila from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Commercial/Light Industrial (CLI), to include the associated Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes. b. A Quasi -Judicial hearing to consider a motion to approve or deny an ordinance moving the Medium Density Residential (MDR)/Low Density Residential (LDR) boundary to follow the proposed boundary line adjustment at 6250 South 153rd Street for the Property East of Terra Apartments, to include the associated Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes, at the request of the applicant, Izabella Henry of Chadwick & Winters Land Surveying. c. A Quasi -Judicial hearing to consider a motion to approve or deny an ordinance rezoning property at 13536 52nd Ave S from Low Density Residential (LDR) to High Density Residential (HDR), to include the associated Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes, at the request of the applicant, Andrew Kovach of Kovach Architect. d. A Quasi -Judicial hearing to consider a motion to approve or deny an ordinance rezoning property at 6250 South 151st Street from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR), to include the associated Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes, at the request of Hans Korve of DMP Incorporated on behalf of the applicant, Schneider Homes. To provide public hearing comments, please email citycouncil@tukwilawa.gov, Pg.13 Pg.45 Pg.79 Pg.133 provide your first and last name, and reference the public hearing topic in the subject line, by 5:00 p.m. on November 6, 2023. Once you have signed up by email, your name will be called upon during the meeting to speak for up to 5 minutes. Call 1-253-292-9750, ACCESS CODE 670077847# or Join Microsoft Teams Meeting at 7:00 p.m. on November 6, 2023 to access the meeting. You may also attend the public hearing in person and provide your comments on -site. (continued...) REGULAR MEETING November 6, 2023 Page 3 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS a. 2023 proposed site -specific rezones: (1) George Long Property: a. A motion to read the ordinance by title only. b. A motion to approve or deny an ordinance rezoning a portion of the city -owned George Long property at 14000 Interurban Ave at the request of the City of Tukwila from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Commercial/Light Industrial (CLI), to include the associated Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes. (2) Property East of Terra Apartments: a. A motion to read the ordinance by title only. b. A motion to approve OR deny an ordinance moving the Medium Density Residential (MDR)/Low Density Residential (LDR) boundary to follow the proposed boundary line adjustment at 6250 South 153rd Street for the property East of Terra Apartments, to include the associated Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes, at the request of the applicant, Izabella Henry of Chadwick & Winters Land Surveying. (3) Kovach: a. A motion to read the ordinance by title only. b. A motion to approve or deny an ordinance rezoning property at 13536 52nd Ave S from Low Density Residential (LDR) to High Density Residential (HDR), to include the associated Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes, at the request of the applicant, Andrew Kovach of Kovach Architects. (4) Schneider Homes: a. A motion to read the ordinance by title only. b. A motion to approve or deny an ordinance rezoning property at 6250 South 151st Street from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR), to include the associated Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map changes, at the request of Hans Korve of DMP Incorporated on behalf of the applicant, Schneider Homes. Pg.13 Pg.45 Pg.79 Pg.133 (continued...) REGULAR MEETING November 6, 2023 Page 4 6. UNFINISHED BUSINESS (cont.) b. Miscellaneous Zoning Code Amendments: (1) An ordinance amending Ordinance Nos. 1758 §1 (part), 1976 §5, 2098 §1, 2199 §4, and 2581 §1 and §11, as codified at various sections of Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Titles 17 and 18; Repealing Ordinance No. 2581 §12 as codified at TMC Section 18.50.220, to update accessory dwelling unit regulations in alignment with State law and encourage housing production. (2) An ordinance amending various ordinances as codified in multiple sections of Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapters 18.80 and 18.84 as detailed herein; Repealing Ordinance Nos. 1770 §53 and 2368 §65, as codified at TMC Section 18.80.015; Establishing TMC Chapter 18.82, "Amendments to Development Regulations"; To clarify the process for updating the Annual Comprehensive Plan Docket and development regulations. (3) An ordinance amending various ordinances as codified in Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Title 18, "Zoning," as delineated herein, to incorporate a variety of housekeeping code amendments and parking regulations related to: Definitions (TMC Chapter 18.06), Nonconforming Lots, Structures and Uses (TMC Chapter 18.70), and Permit Application Types and Procedures (TMC Chapter 18.104); Amending Figure 18-7 and Table 18-6; Establishing TMC Section 18.50.240. c. Authorize the Mayor to accept the King County Parks Open Space River Corridors grant to fund the design of the Chinook Wind Extension, in the amount of $280,000.00 (to include a City match of $70,000 for a total project cost of $350,000). Pg.239 Pg.241 Pg.245 Pg.255 Pg.277 7. NEW BUSINESS Motion to settle the Unico litigation as recommended in the staff memorandum and to direct the City Attorney and staff to take the necessary steps to implement the settlement. Pg.315 8. REPORTS a. Mayor b. City Council c. Staff —City Administrator Report, Monthly Construction & Budget Report Pg.319 (continued...) REGULAR MEETING November 6, 2023 Page 5 9. MISCELLANEOUS 10. EXECUTIVE SESSION 11. ADJOURNMENT This agenda is available at www.tukwilawa.gov, and in alternate formats with advance notice for those with disabilities. RemoteTukwila Council meetings are audio taped (and video taped as of 9/14/20). Available at www.tukwilawa.gov) WELCOME TO THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL MEETING The Tukwila City Council encourages community participation in the local government process and welcomes attendance and public comment at its meetings. MEETING SCHEDULE Regular Meetings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the 1st and 3rd Mondays of each month. The City Council takes formal action in the form of motions, resolutions and ordinances at Regular Meetings. Committee of the Whole Meetings are held at 7:00 p.m. on the 2nd and 4th Mondays of each month. The City Council considers current issues, discusses policy matters in detail, and coordinates the work of the Council at Committee of the Whole meetings. PUBLIC COMMENTS Members of the public are given the opportunity to address the Council for up to 5 minutes on items both on and not on the meeting agenda during Public Comments. The City Council will also accept comments on an agenda item when the item is presented in the agenda, but speakers are limited to commenting once per item each meeting. When recognized by the Presiding Officer, please go to the podium if on -site or turn on your microphone if attending virtually and state your name clearly for the record. The City Council appreciates hearing from you but may not respond or answer questions during the meeting. Members of the City Council or City staff may follow up with you following the meeting. 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. The City Council Rules of Procedure provide the following guidelines for Public Hearings: 1. City staff will provide a report summarizing and providing context to the issue at hand. 2. The proponent shall speak first and is allowed 15 minutes to make a presentation. 3. The opponent is then allowed 15 minutes to make a presentation. 4. Each side is then allowed 5 minutes for rebuttal. 5. After the proponents and opponents have used their speaking time, the Council may ask further clarifying questions of the speakers. 6. Members of the public who wish to address the Council on the hearing topic may speak for 5 minutes each. 7. Speakers are asked to sign in on forms provided by the City Clerk. 8. The Council may ask clarifying questions of speakers and the speakers may respond. 9. Speakers should address their comments to the City Council. 10. If a large number of people wish to speak to the issue, the Council may limit the total amount of comment time dedicated to the Public Hearing. 11. Once the Presiding Officer closes the public hearing, no further comments will be accepted, and the issue is open for Councilmember discussion. 12. Any hearing being held or ordered to be held by the City Council may be continued in the manner as set forth by RCW 42.30.100. For more information about the City Council, including its complete Rules of Procedure, please visit: https://www.tukwilawa.gov/departments/city-council/ COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 10/23/23 CT 11/6/23 CT ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. 4.C. STAFF SPONSOR: DAVID CLINE ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 10/23/23 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Amending the TMC to revise term end dates for Board and Commission positions and to update the meeting regulations of the Planning Commission in compliance with RCW 35.63.040 CATEGORY 11 Discussion 10/23/23 a Motion Date 11/6/23 ❑ Resolution Mk Date ❑ Ordinance Altg Date ❑ Bid Award Altg Date ❑ Public Hearing Altg Date ❑ Other Mk Date Mtg Date Altg SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Admin Svcs ❑ DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ P&R ❑ Police ❑ PIS 0 Mayor SPONSOR'S Amending the TMC to revise term end dates for Board and Commission positions from SUMMARY December 31 to March 31 and to update the meeting regulations of the Planning Commission to hold at least one regular meeting in each month for not less than nine months in each year rather than one regular meeting per quarter in compliance with RCW 35.63.040. REVIEWED BY ❑ Trans&Infrastructure Svcs ❑ Community Svcs/Safety ❑ LTAC ❑ Arts Comm. DATE: 10/9/23 /1 Finance & Governance ❑ Planning & Community Dev. ❑ Planning Comm. CHAIR: KRULLER ❑ Parks Comm. COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONsoR/ADMIN. COMMITTEE Mayor's Office Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $" $- $" Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 10/23/23 Forward to next Regular Meeting Consent Agenda 11/6/23 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 10/23/23 Informational Memorandum dated 10/2/23 Ordinance Amending Term Dates for Boards & Commissions (revised after Committee) Ordinance Amending Term Dates & Meeting Regulations for Planning Commission Minutes from the F&G Committee meeting of 10/9/23 (distributed separately) 11/6/23 Ordinance Amending Term Dates for Boards & Commissions Ordinance Amending Term Dates & Meeting Regulations for Planning Commission 1 2 City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING VARIOUS ORDINANCES AS CODIFIED IN TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC) TITLE 2, "ADMINISTRATION AND PERSONNEL," TO MODIFY TERM END DATES; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the current term of appointment for board and commission members expires on December 31 of the year as set forth in the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC); and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila desires to modify the term end dates from December 31, to March 31, to avoid newly elected officials having to confirm appointment recommendations of board and commission members that were made prior to commencing their term of service; and WHEREAS, this change in term end dates will provide the advantage of moving the appointment process to the beginning of a year, when agendas are traditionally comprised of fewer business items, allowing for more efficient and orderly governmental processes; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. TMC Section 2.29.020 Amended. Ordinance No. 2530 §5, as codified at TMC Section 2.29.020, "Membership," subparagraphs C and D, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.29.020 Membership C. Appointment Process. Community members that meet the requirements stated in TMC Section 2.29.020.A shall submit a completed Boards and Commissions Application to the Mayor's Office. The Mayor's Office will forward the application to the Commission Staff Liaison for review. The Mayor recommends appointments of applicants to the City Council and all appointments are confirmed by the City Council. CC:\Legislative Development\Board & Commission Term End Date 10-26-23 C. Thompson Review by A. Youn Page 1 of 5 3 D. Term of Appointment. The term of appointment for the members of the Equity and Social Justice Commission shall be two years provided, however, that in order for the fewest terms to expire in any one year all current terms of existing appointed Commission members shall expire on March 31 of the year set forth below for each respective position number: Term for Positions 1, 2, 3, 7 and 8 shall expire March 31, 2024 Term for Positions 4, 5, 6 and 9 shall expire March 31, 2025 After the expiration of the current terms for the existing Commission positions listed above, each term thereafter shall be for a period of two years. Section 2. TMC Section 2.30.020 Amended. Ordinance No. 2527 §4, as codified at TMC Section 2.30.020, "Membership," subparagraphs C and D, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.30.020 Membership C. Appointment Process. Community members that meet the requirements stated in TMC Section 2.30.020.A shall submit a completed Boards and Commissions Application to the Mayor's Office. The Mayor's Office will forward the application to the Commission Staff Liaison for review. The Mayor recommends appointment of applicants to the City Council and all appointments are confirmed by the City Council. D. Term of Appointment. The term of appointment for the members of the Tukwila Arts Commission shall be four years provided, however, that in order for the fewest terms to expire in any one year all current terms of existing appointed Commission members shall expire on -March 31 of the year set forth below for each respective position number: Term for Positions 1 and 2 shall expire -March 31, 2027 Term for Positions 3, 4 and 5 shall expire March 31, 2025 Term for Positions 6 and 7 shall expire March 31, 2026 After the expiration of the current terms for the existing Commission members listed above, each term thereafter shall be for a period of four years. Section 3. TMC Section 2.32.020 Amended. Ordinance No. 2533 §4, as codified at TMC Section 2.32.020, "Membership," subparagraphs C and D, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.32.020 Membership C. Appointment Process. Community members that meet the requirements stated in TMC Section 2.32.020.A shall submit a completed Boards and Commissions Application to the Mayor's Office. The Mayor's Office will forward the application to the Commission Staff Liaison to contact the applicant. The Mayor recommends appointment of applicants to the City Council and all appointments are confirmed by the City Council. CC:\Legislative Development\Board & Commission Term End Date 10-26-23 C. Thompson Review by A. Youn Page 2 of 5 4 D. Term of Appointment. The term of appointment for the members of the Tukwila Park Commission shall be three years provided, however, that in order for the fewest terms to expire in any one year all current terms of existing appointed Commission members shall expire on March 31 of the year set forth below for each respective position number: Term for Positions 1 and 6 shall expire March 31, 2026 Term for Positions 2, 4 and 7 shall expire March 31, 2025 Term for Positions 3 and 5 shall expire March 31, 2024 After the expiration of the current terms for the existing Commission members listed above, each term thereafter shall be for a period of three years. Section 4. TMC Section 2.33.020 Amended. Ordinance No. 2532 §4, as codified at TMC Section 2.33.020, "Membership," subparagraphs C and D, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.33.020 Membership C. Appointment Process. Community members that meet the requirements stated in TMC Section 2.33.020.A shall submit a completed Boards and Commissions Application to the Mayor's Office. The Mayor's Office will forward the application to the Board Staff Liaison to contact the applicant. The Mayor recommends appointment of applicants to the City Council and all appointments are confirmed by the City Council. D. Term of Appointment. The term of appointment for the members of the Library Advisory Board shall be two years provided, however, that in order for the fewest terms to expire in any one year all current terms of existing appointed Board members shall expire on March 31 of the year set forth below for each respective position number: Term for Positions 1, 2, 4 and 6 shall expire March 31, 2025 Term for Positions 3, 5 and 7 shall expire March 31, 2024 After the expiration of the current terms for the existing Board members listed above, each term thereafter shall be for a period of two years. Section 5. TMC Section 2.34.020 Amended. Ordinance No. 2531 §4, as codified at TMC Section 2.34.020, "Membership," subparagraphs C and D, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.34.020 Membership C. Appointment Process. Community members that meet the requirements stated in TMC Section 2.34.020.A shall submit a completed Boards and Commissions Application to the Mayor's Office. The Mayor's Office will forward the application to the Board Staff Liaison to contact the applicant. The Mayor recommends appointment of applicants to the City Council and all appointments are confirmed by the City Council. CC:\Legislative Development\Board & Commission Term End Date 10-26-23 C. Thompson Review by A. Youn Page 3 of 5 5 D. Term of Appointment. The term of appointment for the members of the Human Services Advisory Board shall be three years provided, however, that in order for the fewest terms to expire in any one year all current terms of existing appointed Board members shall expire on March 31 of the year set forth below for each respective position number: Term for Positions 5 and 6 shall expire March 31, 2024 Term for Positions 3 and 7 shall expire March 31, 2025 Term for Positions 1, 2 and 4 shall expire March 31, 2026 After the expiration of the current terms for the existing Board members listed above, each term thereafter shall be for a period of three years. Section 6. TMC Section 2.39.020 Amended. Ordinance No. 2529 §4, as codified at TMC Section 2.39.020, "Membership," subparagraphs C and D, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.39.020 Membership C. Appointment Process. Community members that meet the requirements listed in TMC Section 2.39.020.A shall submit a completed Boards and Commissions Application to the Mayor's Office. The Mayor's Office will forward the application to the Board Staff Liaison to contact the applicant. The Mayor recommends appointment of applicants to the City Council and all appointments are confirmed by the City Council. D. Term of Appointment. The term of appointment for the members of COPCAB shall be four years provided, however, that in order for the fewest terms to expire in any one year all current terms of existing appointed members shall expire on March 31 of the year set forth below for each respective position number: Term for Positions 1, 4 and 7 shall expire March 31, 2026 Term for Positions 2, 5 and 8 shall expire March 31, 2027 Term for Positions 3 and 6 shall expire March 31, 2024 After the expiration of the current terms for the existing Board members listed above, each term thereafter shall be for a period of four years. Section 7. TMC Section 2.42.020 Amended. Ordinance No. 2691 §4, as codified at TMC Section 2.42.020, "Membership," subparagraphs C and D, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.42.020 Membership C. Appointment Process. Community members that meet the requirements listed in TMC Section 2.42.020.A shall submit a completed Boards and Commissions Application to the Mayor's Office. The Mayor's Office will forward the application to the Commission Staff Liaison to contact the applicant. The Mayor appoints applicants to the Civil Service Commission. CC:\Legislative Development\Board & Commission Term End Date 10-26-23 C. Thompson Review by A. Youn Page 4 of 5 6 D. Term of Appointment. The term of appointment for the members of the Civil Service Commission shall be six years provided, however, that in order for the fewest terms to expire in any one year all current terms of existing appointed Commission members shall expire on March 31 of the year set forth below for each respective position number: Term for Position 1 shall expire March 31, 2028 Term for Position 2 shall expire March 31, 2024 Term for Position 3 shall expire March 31, 2026 After the expiration of the current terms for the existing Commission members listed above, each term thereafter shall be for a period of six years. Section 8. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser Authorized. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 9. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 10. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2023. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Allan Ekberg, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Office of the City Attorney CC:\Legislative Development\Board & Commission Term End Date 10-26-23 C. Thompson Review by A. Youn Page 5 of 5 7 8 City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 2534 §4 AND §6, AS CODIFIED AT TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC) SECTIONS 2.36.020 AND 2.36.040, TO MODIFY TERM END DATES AND UPDATE MEETING REGULATIONS IN COMPLIANCE WITH RCW 35.63.040; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the current term of appointment for Planning Commission members expires on December 31 of the year as set forth in the Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC); and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila desires to update the Tukwila Municipal Code to modify the term end dates from December 31, to March 31, to avoid newly elected officials having to confirm appointment recommendations of Planning Commission members that were made prior to commencing their term of service; and WHEREAS, in compliance with RCW 35.63.040, the City desires to update the number of Planning Commission meetings held each year; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. TMC Section 2.36.020 Amended. Ordinance No. 2534 §4, as codified at TMC Section 2.36.020, "Membership," subparagraphs C and D, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.36.020 Membership C. Appointment Process. Community members that meet the requirements stated in TMC Section 2.36.020.A shall submit a completed Boards and Commissions Application to the Mayor's Office. The Mayor's Office will forward the application to the Commission Staff Liaison for review. The Mayor recommends appointment of applicants to the City Council and all appointments are confirmed by the City Council. CC:\Legislative Development\Planning Commission Term End Date 10-26-23 C. Thompson Review by A. Youn Page 1 of 3 9 D. Term of Appointment. 1. The term of appointment for the members of the Planning Commission shall be four years provided, however, that in order for the fewest terms to expire in any one year all current terms of existing appointed Commission members shall expire on March 31 of the year set forth below for each respective position number: Term for Positions 1, 2, and 5 shall expire March 31, 2027 Term for Positions 3, 4, 6 and 7 shall expire March 31, 2024 2. After the expiration of the current terms for the existing Commission members listed above, each term thereafter shall be for a period of four years. 3. Members who become non-residents during their term of office shall remain on the Commission no more than 90 days unless granted a special project extension by the Mayor and City Council. If the member who represents the business community is no longer employed within the City, or his or her business relocates out of the City, that member shall remain on the Commission no more than 90 days unless granted a special project extension by the Mayor and City Council. Section 2. TMC Section 2.36.040 Amended. Ordinance No. 2534 §6, as codified at TMC Section 2.36.040, "Meetings," subparagraph A, is hereby amended to read as follows: 2.36.040 Meetings A. Conduct. The Commission shall hold at least one regular meeting in each month for not less than nine months in each year per RCW 35.63.040. Commission meetings shall be conducted in public session and noticed in accordance with the Open Public Meetings Act (OPMA). Section 3. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser Authorized. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 5. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. CC:\Legislative Development\Planning Commission Term End Date 10-26-23 C. Thompson Review by A. Youn Page 2 of 3 10 PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2023. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: City Attorney Allan Ekberg, Mayor Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: CC:\Legislative Development\Planning Commission Term End Date 10-26-23 C. Thompson Review by A. Youn Page 3 of 3 11 12 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 11/6/2023 MB ITEM INFORMATION ITEM NO. 5.A. & 6.A. (1) STAFF SPONSOR: NORA GIERLOFF ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 11/6/2023 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Request for rezone from Low Density Residential to Commercial/Light Industrial at 14000 Interurban Ave S. This is a quasi-judicial matter and any and all discussion related to this issue should occur during the meeting. CATEGORY ❑ Discussion Mtg Date ® Motion Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Resolution Mtg Date ® Ordinance Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ® Public Hearing Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Other Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Mayor ❑ Admin Svcs ® DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ PcSR ❑ Police ❑ PW SPONSOR'S SUMMARY Tukwila has received an application to change the zoning and Comprehensive Plan map for two parcels, current zoning Low Density Residential (LDR) to proposed zoning Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI). REVIEWED BY ❑ Trans&Infrastructure Svcs ❑ Community Svcs/Safety ❑ Finance & Governance ❑ Planning & Community Dev. ❑ LTAC ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. DATE: COMMITTEE CHAIR: 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 11/6/2023 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 11/6/2023 Informational Memorandum dated 10/31/2023 Draft Ordinance Staff Report with attachments 13 14 TO: FROM: BY: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Committee of the Whole Nora Gierloff, Department of Community Development Director Max Baker, Development Supervisor CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: October 31, 2023 SUBJECT: Request for Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Map Change QUASI-JUDICIAL ISSUE Conduct a public hearing for a rezone and Comprehensive Plan map change request from Low Density Residential to Regional Commercial Mixed Use. This is a quasi-judicial matter and any and all discussion related to this issue should occur during the Council meeting. Please do not communicate on this topic outside of the meeting. BACKGROUND Tukwila has received an application for a rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI) on two vacant parcels located at 14000 Interurban Ave S. The rezone to C/LI would bring the subject parcels, owned by the City of Tukwila, into the same C/LI zoning district as neighboring parcels, also owned by the City. DISCUSSION See attached Staff Report along with Attachments A thru E for detailed description of the proposal and findings of fact for the decision. FINANCIAL IMPACT N/A RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation to Commercial/Light Industrial. ATTACHMENTS Staff Report with Attachments A — E. 15 16 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 14000 INTERURBAN AVE S., TUKWILA, FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO COMMERCIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (CLI); PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, in 1995 the City of Tukwila adopted the Zoning Code and Map based on consideration of existing conditions and long-term community goals, and these documents may be reviewed and updated as appropriate; and WHEREAS, as part of the City's 2022-2023 Comprehensive Plan docket of potential amendments, the City received an application for consideration of a change to the Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Maps for a portion of the property located at 14000 Interurban Ave S. (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the zoning of the Property is currently Low Density Residential; and WHEREAS, the Applicant seeks to rezone a portion of the Property to Commercial Light Industrial; and WHEREAS, on October 6, 2023, the City mailed a Notice of Application to the surrounding property owners and tenants, and on October 19, 2023, held the required public meeting regarding the proposed rezone and change to the Zoning Code Map; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila has complied with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act by making a determination on October 13, 2023 that no significant environmental impact would occur as a result of the Zoning Code Map change; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was timely published in "The Seattle Times," posted onsite, and mailed to surrounding properties; and CC:\Legislative Development\Rezone 14000 Interurban Ave S 10-30-23 M. Baker A.Youn Page 1 of 3 17 WHEREAS, on November 6, 2023, the City Council held a public hearing and, after receiving and studying staff analysis and comments from the public, has recommended approval of the rezone application, and has made and entered Findings and Conclusions thereon in support of that recommendation; and WHEREAS, after due consideration, the City Council concurs with the Findings and Conclusions and determines the public interest will be served by approving the rezone application, which is in compliance with the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Map; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings and Conclusions Adopted. The City Council hereby adopts Findings and Conclusions, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein. Section 2. Rezone Approved. The Property is located at 14000 Interurban Ave S., Tukwila, Washington. The site is further identified as King County tax parcels 3365900975 and 3365901016. The site is hereby approved to be rezoned from Low Density Residential to Commercial Light Industrial across the entirety of both parcels, as shown in the attached Exhibit B and incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein. Section 3. Map Amendment Authorized. The Department of Community Development Director, or their designee, is hereby authorized to amend the City's official Zoning Code Map to show the zoning change as authorized in Section 2 of this ordinance. Section 4. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser Authorized. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2023. CC:\Legislative Development\Rezone 14000 Interurban Ave S 10-30-23 M. Baker A.Youn Page 2 of 3 18 ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Allan Ekberg, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Office of the City Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A, Staff Report (Findings and Conclusions) Exhibit B, Revised Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Map CC:\Legislative Development\Rezone 14000 Interurban Ave S 10-30-23 M.Baker A.Youn Page 3 of 3 19 20 HEARING DATE: NOTIFICATION: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Nora Gierloff, AICP, Director STAFF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL November 6, 2023 10/5/2023: Mailed to properties within 500' radius 10/5/2023: Site Posted 10/19/2023: Public Information Meeting Notice of hearing published in the Seattle Times FILE NUMBERS: E23-0009 - SEPA L21-0145 - Rezone APPLICANT: Brandon Miles, Office of the Mayor, City of Tukwila REQUEST: Change Comprehensive Plan and zoning designation from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Commercial/Light Industrial (C/LI) LOCATION: 13536 52nd Avenue S, Tukwila, WA (Tax Parcel 0003000005) CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ZONING DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential (LDR) SEPA DETERMINATION: STAFF: ATTACHMENTS: Determination of Nonsignificance issued October 13, 2023 Maxwell Baker, Development Supervisor A. Site + Current Zoning Map B. Proposed Zoning Map C. Applicant Response to Criteria D. C/LI Zoning Development Standards (TMC 18.30) E. Public Comments 21 L21-0145: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 2 of 10 BACKGROUND/PROPOSAL Summary of Proposed Actions The applicant requests an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map designations from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Commercial Light/Industrial (C/LI) for two small parcels that are part of the larger George Long Shop property, which is owned by the City of Tukwila. This non -project proposal is a quasi-judicial change to the land use designation on the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code maps. The proposed action does not meet the exemptions from review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) listed under WAC 197-11-800. Rezone requests that require a Comprehensive Plan amendment are subject to SEPA review. A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on October 16, 2023. Land Use - Comprehensive Plan and Zoning The George Long property has been in the City of Tukwila for well over 75 years. The small light industrial building on the George Long site was built in 1965 (note this building is not subject to the rezone). Additionally, the parcels that are part of the rezone request included a small fishing cabin. The City purchased the entire George Long property in 1988. The City rented out the fishing cabin until the late 2000s, when it was demolished. When the City adopted its Growth Management Act (GMA) zoning in 1995 it largely followed existing land patterns. The property containing the light industrial building was zoned C/LI, while the part of the property with the fishing cabin was zoned LDR. The subject parcels are also located within the Public Recreation Overlay District (PRO). The Tukwila Municipal Code sets forth development standards for the PRO district, as follows: Development standards for the PRO District shall be as specified by TMC Title 18 for the underlying district. However, when the underlying district is the LDR (Low -Density Residential) District, structures may be granted a height bonus of one additional foot of height for every four feet of excess setback (i.e., setback over and above the LDR minimum standard), up to a maximum height of 50 feet. Ancillary facilities customarily installed in conjunction with a permitted recreational use, including light standards and safety netting, shall not be subject to the height restrictions of the underlying district. Structures for which a height bonus is requested and any ancillary facilities taller than the underlying height restrictions shall be subject to Board of Architectural Review approval under the "Commercial and Light Industrial Design Review Criteria" provisions of TMC Chapter 18.60. If the proposed rezone to C/LI is approved the aforementioned PRO district supplemental development standards will not apply to the subject parcels as they will no longer be zoned LDR. 22 L21-0145: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 3 of 10 GL14U u 411.1 1�39f� 1;[Jw;"` 139 15 1110 rt 1 3'):15' 1411,1 i 5:5 100 11985 1.in- 1 iOR") 11[1 13955 Figure 1: Zoning Map Site and Vicinity Conditions The proposed rezone site is located near Interurban Ave South. The parcels subject to the rezone are part of the underlying George Long parcel. The rezone parcels are completely surrounded by the rest of the Geoge Long parcels, which are zoned C/LI. The rezone parcels are also adjacent to the Duwamish River. The proposed rezone lots are vacant, sloping lot with grass, some trees and shrubs and a concrete retaining wall on the north and east sides of the lot. Land uses in the area are commercial, such as the Grand American Casino and light industrial, such as the new Greenwood Heating building. Figure 1 shows existing zoning with the proposed rezone property highlighted in blue. Public Services and Utilities A review by City of Tukwila Development Review Engineering staff was completed and noted that project design considerations will be evaluated for feasibility at the time of any subsequent development permitting. No relevant comments pertaining to the rezone action itself were received. Environmental Conditions Topography Site topography generally descends to the east towards the river with a total elevation change of approximately 20 feet occurring within the properties. The Tukwila environmentally critical areas map classifies the site as having a Class 3 (High) landslide potential. 23 L21-0145: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 4 of 10 10/25/2023, 5.05:50 PM Parcels landslide Hazard Area 0 City Limae I I Class 2- Moderate Buildings ME Class 3- Hiph Sheet I Further Study Needed Levee -Urban Conservancy - Outside Butler UM urban Conservancy MI Urban Conservancy - Outside Buffer Wetland • Addresses (Tukwila) Shoreline Jurisdiction Environment Designation Category IV MineH3ZardAr0a MN Levee -Urban Conservancy 1:2,257 9.02 0.04 0.07 mi 0 0.03 000 0.11 km Ciy dr... MCoun5.19115 Canty C‘ty of TOY. Figure 1: Environmentally Critical Areas Map Environmentally Critical Areas The site is within the shoreline jurisdiction of the Duwamish River, see Figure 2. The only critical areas on the parcels exist in the form of steep slopes within the riverbank. Development Regulations Comparison, LDR vs. C/LI Height The rezone action would result in a small increase in maximum height allowance of the underlying zoning for the existing parcels; the maximum height of 30 feet in the LDR zoning district would be replaced by a maximum height of "4 stories or 45 feet" for C/LI. Additional height regulations for the Shoreline Jurisdiction — Urban Conservancy may be found in TMC 18.44.050: Development Standards; "Except for bridges, approved above ground utility structures, and water -dependent uses and their structures, to preserve visual access to the shoreline and avoid massing of tall buildings within the shoreline jurisdiction, the maximum height for structures shall be as follows: a. 15 feet where located within the Shoreline Buffer; b. 65 feet between the outside landward edge of the Shoreline Buffer and 200 feet of the OHWM. Unit Density Per TMC 18.10.060, the LDR zoning district requires a minimum lot area of 6,500 SF. Each parcel in the LDR district allows a total of one single-family home, as well as one accessory dwelling unit (ADU). 24 L21-0145: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 5 of 10 If rezoned to C/LI, dwelling units would not be permitted on the subject parcels as dwellings are not a permitted land use within the C/LI district. Scale and Design Bulk and scale impacts of any project developed pursuant to the proposed rezone will be addressed by the City's design review process and environmentally critical areas ordinance. Specific scale and design impacts of proposed development will be determined at the time of project review, pursuant to TMC 18.12.070. Transportation The transportation impacts of individual projects developed subsequent to a rezone to C/LI would be evaluated through construction permitting at the time of project level permit applications. A traffic concurrency review would be required for any new proposed use and findings would result in traffic impact fees under the authority of TMC 9.48.010. The traffic concurrency program is a mechanism to charge and collect fees to ensure that new development bears its proportionate share of the capital costs of transportation facilities necessitated by new development. Public Comment Public notice for this rezone proposal was posted on site and mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the subject property. On October 19th, 2023, staff held a public information meeting for residents to ask questions and provide feedback to the applicant. The only comment received ahead of the hearing was from the Duwamish tribe stating support for the rezone and to clarify that the property would be subject to the regulations set forth for the Urban Conservancy Shoreline Jurisdiction moving forward. Comments received as a result of the public comment period are contained in attachment E. FINDINGS Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment Criteria Four broad -reaching objectives are the basis for the elements, goals and policies for Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan's primary objective is preserving and enhancing Tukwila's neighborhoods. The following will summarize the elements, goals, and policies the applicant has cited to support their rezone request, along with a staff response. The applicant's response to the decision criteria is attached hereto as attachment C. 1. The proposed amendment to the [Comprehensive Plan and] zoning map is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Applicant Response: The City of Tukwila currently owns four parcels and the unimproved right of way at S.140th Street for the George Long shop, located off of Interurban Ave S. The City has owned these parcels for over 35 years, before the City's current zoning code went into effect. All the parcels and ROW that are part of the George Long shop are used for fleet maintenance and outdoor storage. 25 L21-0145: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 6 of 10 The City is currently building out a new facility that will house the Public Works activities that are taking place at George Long. The City Council has authorized the sale of George Long. As part of the research into the property it was determined that a rezone would be needed to address the following: • Two of the parcels are currently zoned low density residential. These lots are not appropriate to be used for residential given their proximity to commercial/light industrial uses and the river. Since they are separate lots there could be an argument that each lot could be eligible for a reasonable use exception. To address this concern Economic Development staff is proposing to consolidate all lots and the ROW into one lot, with one zoning. This would prevent the possibility of the two LDR lots being used for residential purposes in the future. • The rezone would address the current use of the LDR parcels, which is and has been outdoor storage and parking. • The City is hopeful that a majority of the George Long parcel will be sold to King County for a future restoration project. Additionally, the ROW has been be vacated and is envisioned to be included in the deal with King County. Economic Development staff would like to create one parcel to provide to King County as part of the land transaction. However, to do this we believe that the entire area should be C/LI zoning. • The rezone request remedies an odd zoning line boundary. The two parcels that are zoned LDR are largely surrounded by other properties zoned C/LI. The two zoning classifications creates confusion with shoreline development standards. Staff Response: The rezone request is consistent with the following City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Goals and Policies: Goal or Policy # Goal or Policy Staff Notes Policy 2.1.13 Seek funds from non -City sources for use by the City do directly encourage economic development. The rezone request resolves a zoning issue for part of the City's George Long property. Resolves this zoning issues allows the City to easily sale the property and use the proceeds for a variety of uses. Goal 4.4 Water resources that function as a healthy, integrated system; provide a long term public benefit from enhanced environmental quality; and have the potential to reduce public infrastructure costs. The dual zoning on the City's George Long property creates confusion in future development of the site. This confusion could hinder future redevelopment of the site and an associated shoreline enhancement project. Goal 4.5 Vital and self-sustaining fish and wildlife habitat areas that provide where appropriate, opportunities for recreational and educational uses. Goal 4.9 The natural flood attenuation functions of wetlands, floodplains, and floodways are protected and severe flooding is reduced to help prevent damage to life, property, and public safety. As noted, the two lots that are currently zoned LDR could have two homes built on them. The rezone to C/LI eliminates this possibility. Additionally, the City is going to merge the two LDR lots into the C/LI lots to create a large parcel. This Policy 4.9.1 Restrict or prohibit development that could create a danger to health, safety, and property 26 L21-0145: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 7 of 10 due to potential flood hazards, by complying with federal regulations. will ensure compliance with the City's zoning and shoreline regulations. Policy 4.9.2 Minimize the alternation of natural surface features that retain or carry floodwaters (such as wetland, natural flood plains, and streams), and prevent land alterations that increase potential flooding. Goal 5.3 Development along the shoreline that fosters the economic vitality of Tukwila, while preserving the long-term benefits of the river. The current dual zoning for the subject creates regulatory confusion, hindering redevelopment, including the completion of a shoreline restoration on the property. Policy 5.3.2 Design and locate all shoreline development to minimize impacts on the area identified as import for other uses, such as wildlife and aquatic habitat, river vegetation, public access and recreation, and historical resources and flood control. 5.3.5 Recognize and promote the river's contribution to the economic vitality of Tukwila, as a valuable amenity for existing and future businesses which depend on or benefit from the shoreline location. Removing the isolated LDR zoning from the shoreline jurisdiction would provide the City with an opportunity to consolidate the parcels with its adjacent lots, providing an opportunity for restoration projects to be located within the area. 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. Applicant Response: The City currently uses the George Long property, including the LDR portion, in a manner consistent with the C/LI allowable uses. The LDR portion of the property is a legacy from old land use patterns that no longer exist. The LDR parcels are completely surrounded by the parts of the George Long property that are zoned C/LI. One issue that might be raised is the proximity of the rezone to the adjacent Green River. While LDR is a low intensity zone than the C/LI, this rezone would actually reduce the chances of future development of the LDR parcels. Since the LDR lots are legal lots of record they could be sold off in the future and someone argue that they are entitled to a reasonable use exception for the property. Merging all the parcels into one parcel would eliminate this chance. Merging the parcels also ensures that any future project on the George Long property would result in some required shoreline restoration along the river since the work would be on the same site. Also, the residential environment of the City's shoreline regulations has a narrower setback requirement than if it was urban conservancy. Access to and from all properties included in the rezone would remain from Interurban Ave S. Merging all four George Long parcels also precludes the need to do easements between the four parcels as part of any future sale transaction. 27 L21-0145: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 8 of 10 Staff Response: The proposed rezone would cover approximately 35,000 square feet of area. lithe zoning is changed, any land use permitted in C/LI would theoretically be permitted within the new site, subject to all City regulations, including but not limited to the Shoreline Master Program, environmentally critical areas ordinance, and zoning code. However, no significant issues are envisioned from this rezone, as most of the George Long shop property is already zoned C/LI. The rezone would allow for two of the smaller parcels to be merged into the larger C/LI parcels and for lot consolidation to be completed. Having one parcel, with one zoning classification, and one shoreline environment will make future permitting significantly easier on the property. Additionally, Tukwila Municipal Code 18.70.030 requires that substandard lots be brought into conformance ahead of development: A lot, as defined in TMC 18.06.500, which cannot meet the basic development standards (other than lot width) for the applicable zone and other applicable land use and environmental requirements, may be developed only if it is combined with adjacent lot(s) in a manner which allows the combined lots to be developed in a manner which does comply with the basic development standards for the applicable zone and other applicable land use and environmental requirements. In the event lots are combined in order to comply with the requirements of this subsection, a boundary line adjustment shall occur so that the combined lots are henceforth considered a single lot. Rezoning the subject properties to C/LI would ensure that the underlying zoning matches that of surrounding properties and thus require that any future development of the subject properties to first meet the stipulations set forth in TMC 18.70.030. 3. There are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map Applicant Response: The rezone that is requested is to address a minor issue in the zoning of a city owned property. The George Long City Shop contains four parcels and the unimproved right of way of S. 140th Street. The two parcels, including the one with the building, located to the west are zoned C/LI. The two parcels two the east and the unimproved right of way are zoned LDR. The two LDR parcels used to have small residential structures on them. When the City adopted its 1995 comp plan and zoning code it tried not to create non -conforming uses, thus the two parcels with the residential uses were zoned LDR. However, the prevailing land use pattern and the actual use of the property is more consistent with C/LI. The City intends on combining the four parcels and right of way into one larger parcel with one zoning classification. Having split zoning on these parcels creates issues with permitting, allowable uses, and the applicable shoreline designation Staff Response: The original single-family home structures that existed on the Low Density Residential parcels are no longer present, leaving remnant LDR zoning as a result. Rezoning to Commercial Light Industrial will remove this isolated LDR zoning and bring the zoning into agreement with surrounding properties. 28 L21-0145: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 9 of 10 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. Applicant Response: This rezone cleans up a historical spot zone that was created when the City adopted its Growth Management Act zoning code in 1995. At that time the City tried to limit the creation of non -conforming uses by having the zoning be consistent with the uses on the property. In 1995 there used to be two small cabins on the properties at George Long that are zoned LDR, while the surrounding properties were zoned C/LI. Both of the old cabins were demolished several years ago, and the properties are no longer being used for residential purposes. Staff Response: The existing LDR properties are entirely within the Shoreline Jurisdiction and additional critical areas. They are considered nonconforming lots yet could still potentially be developed with a residential use in their current state, allowing additional development to encroach within the shoreline environment. Rezoning the property to C/LI will allow for the consolidation with adjacent lots, allowing a pathway to bring the area into greater conformance with the City's Shoreline Master Program, as well as the opportunity to sell the property for the creation of shoreline habitat. CONCLUSIONS Criteria 1: Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: • The rezone is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan policies: o Policy 2.1.13: Seek funds from non -City sources for use by the City do directly encourage economic development. ■ The rezone request resolves a zoning issue for part of the City's George Long property. Resolving this zoning issues allows the City to easily sale the property and use the proceeds for a variety of uses. o Policy 4.9.1: Restrict or prohibit development that could create a danger to health, safety, and property due to potential flood hazards, by complying with federal regulations. o Policy 3.2.2: Minimize the alternation of natural surface features that retain or carry floodwaters (such as wetland, natural flood plains, and streams), and prevent land alterations that increase potential flooding. ■ The two lots that are currently zoned LDR could have two homes built on them. The rezone to C/LI eliminates this possibility. Additionally, the City is going to merge the two LDR lots into the C/LI lots to create a large parcel. This will ensure compliance with the City's zoning and shoreline regulations. o Policy 5.3.2: Design and locate all shoreline development to minimize impacts on the area identified as import for other uses, such as wildlife and aquatic habitat, river vegetation, public access and recreation, and historical resources and flood control. ■ The current dual zoning for the subject creates regulatory confusion, hindering redevelopment, including the completion of a shoreline restoration on the property. 29 L21-0145: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 10 of 10 Criteria 2: Consistency with Zone: • The City currently uses the George Long property, including the LDR portion, in a manner consistent with the C/LI allowable uses. The LDR portion of the property is a legacy from old land use patterns that no longer exists. The LDR parcels are entirely surrounded by the parts of the George Long property that are zoned C/LI. Criteria 3: Changed conditions: • The original single-family home structures that existed on the Low Density Residential parcels are no longer present, leaving remnant LDR zoning as a result. Rezoning to Commercial Light Industrial will remove this isolated LDR zoning and bring the zoning into agreement with surrounding properties. Criteria 4: Benefit to community: • The proposed rezone would positively affect the community by allowing providing an avenue for consolidation with adjacent lots, creating an opportunity to bring the area into greater conformance with the City's Shoreline Master Program as well as the potential to sell the property for the creation of needed shoreline habitat. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approving the rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Commercial Light Industrial (C/LI). 30 Tukwila iMap 10/26/2023, 12:05 40 PM Parcels Zoning LDR Low Density Residential HDR High Density Residential RCM Regional Commercial Mixed Use CLI Commercial Light Industrial 0 0.01 1 0 0.03 City of Tukwila, King County Pictometry International Corp. King County 1:2,257 0.03 0.05 0.06 mi 0.1 km 31 Tukwila iMap 10/26/2023, 12:40:17 PM - Parcels , -1 Overlay Areas Zoning LDR Low Density Residential HDR High Density Residential RCM Regional Commercial Mixed Use CLI Commercial Light Industrial 0 0.01 0 0.03 City of Tukwila, King County Pictometry International Corp. King County 1:2,257 0.03 0.05 0.06 mi 0.1 km 32 Tukwila iMap 10/26/2023, 12:05 40 PM Parcels Zoning LDR Low Density Residential HDR High Density Residential RCM Regional Commercial Mixed Use CLI Commercial Light Industrial 0 0.01 1 0 0.03 City of Tukwila, King County Pictometry International Corp. King County 1:2,257 0.03 0.05 0.06 mi 0.1 km 33 34 December 31, 2021 George Long Rezone 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 rezone that is request is to address a minor issue in the zoning of a city owned property. The George Long City Shop contains four parcels and the unimproved right of way of S. 140h Street. The two parcels, including the one with the building, located to the west are zoned C/LI. The two parcels two the east and the unimproved right of way are zoned LDR. The two LDR parcels use to have small residential structures on them. When the City adopted its 1995 comp plan and zoning code it tried not to create non -conforming uses, thus the two parcels with the residential uses were zoned LDR. However, the prevailing land use pattern and the actual use of the property is more consistent with C/LI. The City intends on combining the four parcels and right of way into one larger parcel with one zoning classification. Having split zoning on these parcels creates issues with permitting, allowable uses, and the applicable shoreline 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 proposed zoning change creates a more logical zoning boundary between the C/LI and LDR along Interurban Ave South. The change would also result in a different shoreline designation along the river, which would in a greater setback for any development along the shoreline. 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 proposed change will provide clarity on the allowable uses on the George Long property. The two LDR properties are not appropriate for residential uses given their location to the river and proximity to light industrial uses. The rezone would also result in a change in shoreline designation from "residential" to "urban conservancy." This change will result in a greater setback requirement from the river. The lot consolidation will also ensure that any future development on the larger parcels requires some shoreline restoration work. 35 George Long Rezone December, 2021 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA (TMC 18.80.010) 1. A detailed statement of what is proposed and why. The City of Tukwila currently owns four parcels and the unimproved right of way at S.140th Street for the George Long shop, located off of Interurban Ave S. The City has owned these parcels for over 35 years, before the City's current zoning code went into effect. All the parcels and ROW that are part of the George Long shop are used for fleet maintenance and outdoor storage. The City is currently building out a new facility that will house the Public Works activities that are taking place at George Long. The City Council has authorized the sale of George Long. As part of the research into the property it was determined that a rezone would be needed to address the following: • Two of the parcels are currently zoned low density residential. These lots are not appropriate to be used for residential given their proximity to commercial/light industrial uses and the river. Since they are separate lots there could be an argument that each lot could be eligible for a reasonable use expectation. To address this concern Economic Development staff is proposing to consolidate all lots and the ROW into one lot, with one zoning. This would prevent the possibility of the two LDR lots being used for residential purposes in the future. • The rezone would address the current use of the LDR parcels, which is and has been outdoor storage and parking. • The City is hopeful that a majority of the George Long parcel will be sold to King County for a future restoration project. However, as part of any deal the small area that is currently being used for parking by the casino will be bifurcated out and sold to the casino. Additionally, the ROW will be vacated and included in the deal with King County. Economic Development staff would like to create one parcel to provide to King County as part of the land transaction. However, to do this we believe that the entire area should be C/LI zoning. Please note that are waiting for completion of a survey to determine if we need to complete a property transaction with the casino due to a possible encroachment. • The rezone request remedies an odd zoning line boundary. The two parcels that are zoned LDR are largely surrounded by other properties zoned C/LI. 2. A statement of the anticipated impacts of the change, including the geographic area affected and the issues presented by the proposed change. The proposed rezone would only cover just over approximately 35,000 square feet of area. No significant issues are envisioned from this rezone as most of the George Long shop property is already zoned C/LI. The rezone would allow for two of the smaller parcels to be merged into the larger C/LI parcels and for lot consolidation to be completed. Have one parcel, with one zoning classification, and one shoreline environment will drastically make future permitting easier on the property. One issue that might be raised is the proximity of the rezone to the adjacent Green River. While LDR is a low intensity zone than the C/LI, this rezone would actually reduce the chances of future development of the LDR parcels. Since the LDR lots are legal lots of record they could be sold off in the future and 36 someone argue that they are entitled to a reasonable use exception for the property. Merging all the parcels into one parcel would eliminate this chance. Merging the parcels also ensures that any future project on the George Long property would result in some required shoreline restoration along the river since the work would be on the same site. Also, the residential environment of the City's shoreline regulations has a lower setback requirement than if it was urban conservancy. Access to and from all properties included in the rezone would remain from Interurban Ave S. Merging all four George Long parcels also precludes the need to do easements between the four parcels as part of any future sale transaction. 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). This rezone cleans up a historical spot zone that was created when the City adopt its Growth Management Act zoning code in 1995. At that time the City tried to limit the creation of non -conforming uses by having the zoning be consistent with the uses on the property. In 1995 there use to be two small cabins on the properties at George Long that are zoned LDR, while the surrounding properties were zoned C/LI. Both of the old cabins were demolished several years ago, and the properties are no longer being used for residential purposes. The City is working to sell the entire George Long properties to one buyer, most likely King County. As part of the transaction the City would like to create one parcel with one zoning classification. If the City is unable to reach a final agreement with King County the property would likely be sold to a private buyer. Having one parcel, with one zoning classification would make it clear what activities are permitted and which ones are not. For example, the current LDR lots are being used for outdoor storage which may or may not be permitted in the underlying zoning. Additionally, if the City has to sale the entire property to a private entity, we could get someone who does not want to buy the LDR lots since they are near the shoreline. By merging the lots into one parcel the City can ensure that any future buyer of George Long completes shoreline restorations as part of any redevelopment. This may not be possible if the LDR lots remain and are separate parcels. Additionally, the LDR zoning is confusing for the shoreline designation for the entire George Long property. Residentially zoned properties are designated as "residential" environment under the shoreline code. However, the properties that are zoned LDR do not occupy the entire 200-foot shoreline environment. Thus, it is confusing for the remaining parts of the George Long property that are zoned C/LI. Are these properties classified as "urban conservancy?" Could a development on the C/LI portion of the property use the residential designation for the shoreline to have greater impacts on the shoreline environment? Having the entire property under the same zoning solves helps to address these questions. 4. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with and promotes the goals and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act. The proposed rezone will comply with the following requirements of RCW 36.70A.020: (5) Economic development. Encourage economic development throughout the state that is consistent with adopted comprehensive plans, promote economic opportunity for all citizens of this 37 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. The ability to develop the George Long property in the future is hindered by the split zoning on the four parcels. Consolidating the parcels into on lot, with one zoning classification will enable future development on the property in the event that the City is unable to secure a final deal with King County to purchase the property. Additionally, the Great American Casino is currently using a portion of the LDR property for parking. Rezoning the property and allowing the casino' to continue to use this area for parking will allow this business to continue to operate successfully. (7) Permits. Applications for both state and local government permits should be processed in a timely and fair manner to ensure predictability. Having four separate parcels create significant confusion in the permit process. In addition, two zoning classifications on the property also creates confusion as part of any project on the property. The property also contains two shoreline designations since the residential portion of the property is not within the 200 feet of the shoreline. Thus, the George Long property, 200 feet from the ordinary high- water mark, appears to be both in the residential environment of the shoreline zone and urban conservancy. (10) Environment. Protect the environment and enhance the state's high quality of life, including air and water quality, and the availability of water. The rezone may also require a reclassification of the shoreline designation for the property from residential environment to urban conservancy. Urban conservancy requires a greater setback from the river than is required in residential environment. In the unlikely event that the City is unable to reach an agreement with King County on purchasing the property for a restoration site the City will sale the entire George Long site to a private buyer. The rezone will thus provide a greater buffer than is required under the residential zoning and also ensure that any future project on the George Long property completes required shoreline restoration. 5. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with applicable Countywide Planning Policies. Overall this project is consistent with the adopted Countywide Planning Policies. Specifically, the request is consistent with the following Countywide Planning Policies. 1 Economic Development staff intends to complete a BLA and lot consolidation with the casino to incorporate the parking into their lot. The casino lot is already zoned C/LI. 38 EN-12 Work cooperatively with the federal, state, and regional agencies and forums to develop regional levee maintenance standards that ensure public safety and protect habitat. EN-14 Manage natural drainage systems to improve water quality and habitat functions, minimize erosion and sedimentation, protect public health, reduce flood risks, and moderate peak storm water runoff rates. Work cooperatively among local, regional, state, national and tribal jurisdictions to establish, monitor and enforce consistent standards for managing streams and wetlands throughout drainage basins. The City anticipate selling the property to King County to be used as a future restoration or mitigation site. The zoning issues creates issue with the shoreline designation for the property. By providing one zoning for the George Long site, it removes confusion during any future permit review for the restoration site. In addition, DP-3 Efficiently develop and use residential, commercial, and manufacturing land in the Urban Growth Area to create healthy and vibrant urban communities with a full range of urban services, and to protect the long-term viability of the Rural Area and Resource Lands. Promote the efficient use of land within the Urban Growth Area by using methods such as: • Directing concentrations of housing and employment growth to designated centers; • Encouraging compact development with a mix of compatible residential, commercial, and community activities; • Maximizing the use of the existing capacity for housing and employment; and • Coordinating plans for land use, transportation, capital facilities and services. The proposed rezone would allow for the better usage of commercial land and prevent land that is undesirable for residential from being developed. DP-7 Plan for development patterns that promote safe and healthy routes to and from public schools. If the two LDR zoned properties were developed with housing it would create a significant unsafe route for kids going to and from school. 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 in any of the City's functional plans are needed to accommodate this rezone request. The Interurban Ave area is highly developed and the George Long Property contains a light industrial building. 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 needed to support this rezone. This rezone implements the City's long term policy of vacating the George Long property. 8. A statement of what other changes, if any, are required in other City codes, plans or regulations to implement the proposed change. 39 The City's shoreline maps will need to be updated to reflect a change in the shoreline designation due to the rezone. The two parcels along the river are currently classified as residential environment under the shoreline code. However, if approved to C/LI the shoreline designation would now be urban conservancy. 40 Return to Title Page TITLE 18 — ZONING CHAPTER 18.30 COMMERCIAL/LIGHT INDUSTRIAL (C/LI) DISTRICT Sections: 18.30.010 Purpose 18.30.020 Land Uses Allowed 18.30.060 On -Site Hazardous Substances 18.30.070 Design Review 18.30.080 Basic Development Standards 18.30.010 Purpose This district implements the Commercial/Light Industrial Comprehensive Plan designation. It is intended to provide for areas characterized by a mix of commercial, office, or light industrial uses. The standards are intended to promote viable and attractive commercial and industrial areas. (Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995) 18.30.020 Land Uses Allowed Refer to TMC Chapter 18.09, "Land Uses Allowed by District." (Ord. 2500 §15, 2016) 18.30.060 On -Site Hazardous Substances No on -site hazardous substance processing and handling, or hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities shall be permitted, unless clearly incidental and secondary to a permitted use. On -site hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities shall be subject to the State siting criteria (RCW 70.105). (See TMC Chapter 21.08.) (Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995) 18.30.070 Design Review Design review is required for new developments within 300 feet of residential districts, all projects located within the shoreline jurisdiction that involve new building construction or exterior changes if the cost of the exterior changes equals or exceeds 10% of the building's assessed valuation, or for developments larger than 1,500 square feet outside the shoreline jurisdiction. Commercial structures between 1,500 and 10,000 square feet will be reviewed administratively. Design review is also required for certain exterior repairs, reconstructions, alterations or improvements to buildings over 10,000 square feet. (See TMC Chapter 18.60, Board of Architectural Review.) (Ord. 2368 §31, 2012; Ord. 2005 §10, 2002; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995) 18.30.080 Basic Development Standards Development within the Commercial Light Industrial District shall conform to the following listed and referenced standards: C/LI BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Setbacks to yards, minimum: • Front 25 feet • Second front 12.5 feet • Second front, if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR, HDR 15 feet • Sides 10 feet • Sides, if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR, HDR 1st Floor 15 feet 2nd Floor 20 feet 3rd Floor 30 feet • Rear 5 feet • Rear, if any portion of the yard is within 50 feet of LDR, MDR, HDR 1st Floor 15 feet 2nd Floor 20 feet 3rd Floor 30 feet Refer to TMC Chapter 18.52, "Landscape Requirements," Table A, for perimeter and parking lot landscaping requirements. Height, maximum 4 stories or 45 feet Off-street parking: • Warehousing 1 per 2,000 sq. ft. usable floor area min. • Office 3 per 1,000 sq. ft. usable floor area min. • Retail 2.5 per 1,000 sq. ft. usable floor area min. • Manufacturing 1 per 1,000 sq. ft. usable floor area min. • Other Uses See TMC 18.56, off-street Parking & Loading Regulations Performance Standards: Use, activity and operations within a structure or a site shall comply with (1) standards adopted by the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency for odor, dust, smoke and other airborne pollutants, (2) TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise", and, (3) adopted State and Federal standards for water quality and hazardous materials. In addition, all development subject to the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act, RCW 43.21C, shall be evaluated to determine whether adverse environmental impacts have been adequately mitigated. (Ord. 2678 §32, 2022; Ord. 1872 §8, 1999; Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-84 41 42 DUWAMISH TRIBE dxvdw? abs 10/11/2023 City of Tukwila L21-0145 George Long Rezone Dear Max Baker, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the project L21-0145 to rezone the George Long property from LDR (low density residential) to C/LI (city/low industrial) located at 14000 Interurban Ave S. The Comp Plan Amendments from 12/2021 indicate that the rezoning would allow for a change in shoreline designation to urban conservancy which would result in a greater setback for the Duwamish River. We also note from these amendments that King County is planning to purchase the property for (salmon) restoration efforts. The Duwamish Tribe supports the rezoning. Thank you, Nancy A Sackman Duwamish Tribe Cultural Preservation preservationdept@duwamishtribe.org re ingthe No with the help nl nur ancestors, tot the pututc of our children L�lt.r �tis31 �nY �H.a� IstOOI s,i, HISTORIC PR I -NERVATION IlEPARTNIENT CH Duwamish Tribal Services 14705 W. Marginal Way SW, Seattle, WA 98106 1206-431-1582 www.duwamishtribe.org 43 44 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 11/6/2023 67 ITEM INFORMATION ITEM NO. 5.B. & 6.A. (2) STAFF SPONSOR: NORA GIERLOFF ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 11/6/2023 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Request for rezone from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential at 6250 S. 153rd St. This is a quasi-judicial matter and any and all discussion related to this issue should occur during the meeting. CATEGORY ❑ Discussion Mtg Date ® Motion Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Resolution Mtg Date ® Ordinance Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ® Public Hearing Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Other Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Mayor ❑ Admin Svcs ® DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ PcSR ❑ Police ❑ PW SPONSOR'S SUMMARY Tukwila has received an application to change the zoning and Comprehensive Plan map for one parcel, current zoning Low Density Residential (LDR) to proposed zoning Medium Density Residential (MDR). REVIEWED BY ❑ Trans&Infrastructure Svcs ❑ Community Svcs/Safety ❑ Finance & Governance ❑ Planning & Community Dev. ❑ LTAC DATE: ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. COMMITTEE CHAIR: 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 11/6/2023 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 11/6/2023 Informational Memorandum dated 10/31/2023 Draft ordinance Staff Report with attachments 45 46 TO: FROM: BY: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Committee of the Whole Nora Gierloff, Department of Community Development Director Max Baker, Development Supervisor CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: October 31, 2023 SUBJECT: Request for Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Map Change QUASI-JUDICIAL ISSUE Conduct a public hearing for a rezone and Comprehensive Plan map change request from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential. This is a quasi-judicial matter and any and all discussion related to this issue should occur during the Council meeting. Please do not communicate on this topic outside of the meeting. BACKGROUND Tukwila has received an application for a rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) on a parcel located at 6250 S. 153rd St. If the zoning is changed, any MDR use would be permitted, subject to all City regulations. DISCUSSION See attached Staff Report along with Attachments A through E for detailed description of the proposal and findings of fact for the decision. FINANCIAL IMPACT N/A RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation to Medium Density Residential (MDR). ATTACHMENTS Staff Report with Attachments A — E. 47 48 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6250 S. 153RD STREET, TUKWILA, FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR); PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, in 1995 the City of Tukwila adopted the Zoning Code and Map based on consideration of existing conditions and long-term community goals, and these documents may be reviewed and updated as appropriate; and WHEREAS, as part of the City's 2022-2023 Comprehensive Plan docket of potential amendments, the City received an application for consideration of a change to the Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Maps for the property located at 6250 S. 153rd Street (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the zoning of the Property is currently Low Density Residential; and WHEREAS, the Applicant seeks to rezone the entirety of the Property to Medium Density Residential; and WHEREAS, on May 10, 2023, the City mailed a Notice of Application to the surrounding property owners and tenants, and on May 17, 2023, held the required public meeting regarding the proposed rezone and change to the Zoning Code Map; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila has complied with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act by making a determination on September 25, 2023 that no significant environmental impact would occur as a result of the Zoning Code Map change; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was timely published in "The Seattle Times," posted onsite, and mailed to surrounding properties; and CC:\Legislative Development\Rezone 6250 S 153rd 10-30-23 B. Jayger A.Youn Page 1 of 3 49 WHEREAS, on November 6, 2023, the City Council held a public hearing and, after receiving and studying staff analysis and comments from the public, has recommended approval of the rezone application, and has made and entered Findings and Conclusions thereon in support of that recommendation; and WHEREAS, after due consideration, the City Council concurs with the Findings and Conclusions and determines the public interest will be served by approving the rezone application, which is in compliance with the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Map; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings and Conclusions Adopted. The City Council hereby adopts Findings and Conclusions, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein. Section 2. Rezone Approved. The Property is located at 6250 S. 153rd Street, Tukwila, Washington. The site is further identified as King County tax parcel 3597000341. The site is hereby approved to be rezoned from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential across the entire parcel, as shown in the attached Exhibit B and incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein. Section 3. Map Amendment Authorized. The Department of Community Development Director, or their designee, is hereby authorized to amend the City's official Zoning Code Map to show the zoning change as authorized in Section 2 of this ordinance. Section 4. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser Authorized. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and public as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2023. CC:\Legislative Development\Rezone 6250 S 153rd 10-30-23 B. Jayger A.Youn Page 2 of 3 50 ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Allan Ekberg, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Office of the City Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A, Staff Report (Findings and Conclusions) Exhibit B, Revised Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Map CC:\Legislative Development\Rezone 6250 S 153rd 10-30-23 B. Jayger A.Youn Page 3 of 3 51 52 APPLICANT: REQU EST: LOCATION: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Nora Gierloff, AICP, Director STAFF REPORT TO THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: November 6, 2023 NOTIFICATION: 5/10/2023: Mailed to properties within 500' radius 5/10/2023: Site Posted 5/17/2023: Public Information Meeting Notice of hearing published in the Seattle Times FILE NUMBERS: L22-0137 - Rezone E23-0005 - SEPA Izabella Henry Change Comprehensive Plan map and zoning designation from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) 6250 S. 153rd St., Tukwila, WA (APN: 3597000341) CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ZONING DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential (LDR) SEPA DETERMINATION: STAFF: ATTACHMENTS: Determination of Nonsignificance issued September 25, 2023 Breyden Jager, Associate Planner A. Site + Current Zoning Map B. Proposed Zoning Map C. Applicant Response to Criteria D. MDR Zoning Development Standards (TMC 18.12) E. Public Comments Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 53 L22-0137 Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 2 of 10 BACKGROUND/PROPOSAL Summary of Proposed Actions The applicant has submitted a proposal to amend the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Map and the Tukwila Zoning Map to rezone a 0.58-acre parcel located at 6250 S 153rd St. from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR). The applicant has stated that this rezone proposal, in conjunction the with the applicant's proposed Boundary Line Adjustment (L21-0124) would eliminate the nonconforming condition of having apartment parking on an LDR-zoned property, creating a more logical, vertical boundary between the MDR and LDR zones —allowing for preservation of the single-family use with a more recognizable boundary. Upon approval of the rezone from MDR to LDR, the rear property line could be redrawn without creating nonconforming LDR/MDR split -zoning and allowing for the existing Terra Apartments parking lot to be located entirely on adjacent parcels 3597000346 and 3597000350. This non -project proposal is a quasi-judicial change to the land use designation on the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code maps. If the zoning is changed, any MDR use would be permitted, subject to all City regulations. The proposed action does not meet the exemptions from review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) listed under WAC 197-11-800. Rezone requests that require a Comprehensive Plan amendment are subject to SEPA review. A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on September 25, 2023. Land Use - Comprehensive Plan and Zoning The site is classified as Low Density Residential (LDR) in the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and the Tukwila Zoning Ordinance. To the immediate north, east, and south of the subject parcel are properties also zoned LDR. To the west of the property are two parcels zoned Medium Density Residential (MDR) and to the southwest of the property is a parcel zoned High Density Residential (HDR). Allowed uses under the existing LDR zoning are enumerated in TMC Table 18-6, and primarily include detached single-family dwellings, garages, greenhouses, and domestic shelters. Allowed uses under the proposed MDR zoning are largely similar, with the notable addition of detached zero lot line dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, daycare centers, senior housing, and townhomes with up to four attached units. The addition of these use allowances on the subject parcel is not generally expected to have an adverse effect on the environment. Development within the environmentally critical areas and their associated buffers on the subject property is regulated by TMC Chapter 18.45 'Environmentally Critical Areas'. Prior to any development proposal, an applicant would be required to submit a critical areas study to the Department of Community Development for review and approval of proposed mitigation measures. 54 91292023, 11 4,1t AM = P.n.s 0 City Limits Buildings Addresses (Tukwila) Zoning LDR Low Density Residential MDR Medum Density Residential RDR Flgt Density Residential L22-0137 Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 3 of 10 t:564 0112,1 OM Din eE 3y. minau�mos ir..., xu�-RUY xama, N./.4 On 9w fee. , *awned na Gann Fal4 Map we an mem, Figure 1: Zoning Map Site and Vicinity Conditions The subject site is located along South 153rd Street, between 62nd Avenue South and 64th Avenue South. The site contains a single-family home located near the northwest corner of the parcel, accessed by a driveway off of S 153' St. The site includes areas of grass and landscaping, with a paved driveway running along the west side of the lot, to a paved parking lot in the northern portion, behind the house. The property is situated on a moderate slope to the south. The site is bordered to the north by a category IV wetland and includes a Type Ns (intermittent) stream running along the northeast corner of the property. To the east is a single-family home. To the west is the Terra Apartments complex. To the south is the cottage creek apartment complex and single-family homes. Public Services and Utilities A review by City of Tukwila Development Review Engineering staff was completed and noted that project design considerations will be evaluated for feasibility at the time of any subsequent development permitting. No relevant comments pertaining to the rezone action itself were received. 55 L22-0137 Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 4 of 10 Environmental Conditions Topography Site topography generally descends to the north/northwest with a total elevation change of approximately 20 feet occurring within the property. The Tukwila environmentally sensitive areas map classifies the southern portion of the site as having a Class 3 (High) landslide potential. Environmentally Critical Areas The City of Tukwila's iMap data indicates the presence of a category IV wetland bordering the subject property, with an associated buffer extending partially across the northern portion of the property. Additionally, iMap data suggests the presence of a Type Ns (intermittent) stream extending across the northeast corner of the property. Development within the environmentally critical areas and their associated buffers on the subject property is regulated by TMC Chapter 18.45 'Environmentally Critical Areas'. Prior to any development proposal, an applicant would be required to submit a critical areas study to the Department of Community Development for review and approval of proposed mitigation measures. " I. musikvivi 81i 1D/13,2623, 3:45:61 FM Para. _ _ = Csgory u_ZGum�an Wauene tanwesse Hazard Free Class 3•MgM1 AFtermrnee Stream Mader �_�r�everyly , [ I� Wawa ffirler - r.mpory ni_lam&mtr' 1C„W __iCelegory l[I_1:A09u1[e['-..CefegeryN2Don9N[n - Type Ns Stream fln[em 1WMl 1 551 ant 0 ant 11.61 OW. Figure 1: Environmentally Critical Areas Map 56 L22-0137 Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 5 of 10 Development Regulations Comparison, LDR vs. MDR Height The rezone action would not result in an increase in maximum height allowance for the existing parcel. The maximum height of 30 feet in the MDR zoning district is consistent with the existing 30-foot height limit in the LDR zoning district. Unit Density Per TMC 18.10.060, the LDR zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 6,500 SF. Therefore, if subdivided under the existing LDR zoning, a total of 3 new parcels could be created. Each parcel in the LDR district allows a total of one single-family home, as well as one accessory dwelling unit (ADU), equating to 6 total potential dwelling units. If rezoned to MDR, based on the size of the parcel, the site would allow up to 8 primary housing units, recognizing that the final number of units could be fewer to accommodate space needed for roads or other utilities. This number does not account for ADUs, and per TMC 18.50.220(2), ADUs may only be permitted on parcels containing a single-family dwelling, not multi -family uses. Scale and Design It is expected that a modest increase in bulk and scale could result from a multi -family dwelling proposal on the subject parcel under MDR zoning. However, due to the minimal difference in magnitude of these impacts relative to what could occur under existing conditions, the impact is not expected to be significant. Bulk and scale impacts of any project developed pursuant to the proposed rezone will be addressed by the City's design review process and environmentally critical areas ordinance. Specific scale and design impacts of proposed development will be determined at the time of project review, pursuant to TMC 18.12.070. Transportation The proposed rezone will increase development capacity on the subject parcel. Projects developed pursuant to the proposed rezone may generate higher volumes of traffic and have greater transportation impacts than projects proposed under the current zoning. The subject parcel is approximately 0.58 acres, and it is not possible to accurately determine the location and/or intensity of individual projects that may be proposed under MDR zoning. As described previously, the proposed rezone would allow for up to 8 housing units, an increase of 5 housing units from what the existing LDR zoning permits. The subject site lies along S 153rd St, which currently serves vehicular, bike, and pedestrian traffic from both single - and multi -family developments in the immediate Tukwila Hill neighborhood. A sidewalk is provided along the north side of the street for the entire subject parcel's frontage. The nearest transit stop is the RapidRide line along Southcenter Blvd, approximately 0.18 miles down the hill from the property. It is not expected that the number of housing units allowed under MDR zoning would result in a significant impact on traffic and transportation. However, the transportation impacts of individual projects developed subsequent to a rezone to MDR would be evaluated through SEPA and construction permitting at the time of project level permit applications. A traffic concurrency review would be required for any new proposed housing units and findings would result in traffic impact fees under the authority of TMC 9.48.010. The traffic concurrency program is a mechanism to charge and collect fees to ensure that new development bears its proportionate share of the capital costs of transportation facilities necessitated by new development. 57 L22-0137 Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 6 of 10 Public Comment Public notice for this rezone proposal was posted on site and mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the subject property on May 10th, 2023. On May 17th, 2023, staff held a public information meeting for residents to ask questions and provide feedback to the applicant. Comments received as a result of the public comment period are contained in attachment E. The key issues raised include: • Traffic impacts to the neighborhood. It should be noted that this rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal and no approval or denial of any development plan would be granted or denied by the approval of this rezone request. Any impacts to site layout, traffic, etc. would be reviewed as part of any future project review. FINDINGS Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment Criteria Four broad -reaching objectives are the basis for the elements, goals and policies for Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan's primary objective is preserving and enhancing Tukwila's neighborhoods. The following will summarize the elements, goals, and policies the applicant has cited to support their rezone request, along with a staff response. The applicant's response to the decision criteria is attached hereto as Attachment C. 1. The proposed amendment to the [Comprehensive Plan and] zoning map is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Element 3: Housing Goal 3.2.1: Provide zoning that allows a variety of housing throughout the City to allow for diverse, equitable neighborhoods. Goal 3.2.2: Encourage a full range of housing opportunities for all population segments, including very low-income households earning less than 30% AMI, through actions including, but not limited to, revising the Tukwila's zoning map and development codes as appropriate, which would enable a wide variety of housing types to be built. Element 7: Residential Neighborhoods Goal 7.1.1: Maintain a comprehensive land use map that supports the preservation and enhancement of single-family and stable multi -family neighborhoods; eliminates incompatible land uses; and clearly establishes applicable development requirements through recognizable boundaries. • Applicant Statement: The proposed amendment is consistent with and will further the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan —particularly Element 3 (Housing) and Element 7 (Residential Neighborhoods). The City's Housing Element notes that the City will need to accommodate an additional 5,568 households over the next twenty years and emphasizes that this new housing will need to be affordable and diverse. Aging single-family housing, such as the house on the subject parcel, is typically more expensive to 58 L22-0137 Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 7 of 10 maintain. In addition, rezoning the property from LDR to MDR will allow the existing single-family home on the parcel to remain indefinitely, but it will also allow for the conversion of the property to a slightly more dense, affordable housing type. The rezone proposal will eliminate the nonconforming condition of having apartment parking on an LDR-zoned property, creating a more logical, vertical boundary between the MDR and LDR zones —allowing for preservation of the single-family use with a more recognizable boundary. And again, if the market supports a transition to slightly more dense housing in this location, the MDR zoning would support it. • Staff Response: Western Washington is experiencing a housing shortage that will worsen if housing production within Tukwila, and across the region, is not increased. Housing scarcity leads to higher housing costs and limited options for residents. Construction of new housing creates more energy efficient units built to higher standards, provides more options for residents, and also encourages other investment in the community. This rezone proposal would increase the residential density potential of the subject parcel. Under the existing LDR zoning, based on the size of the parcel, the site could accommodate up to 6 housing units, if subdivided. If rezoned to MDR, based on the size of the parcel, the site would allow up to 8 housing units, recognizing that the final number of units could be fewer to accommodate space needed for environmentally critical areas, roads and other utilities. The proposed MDR zoning district would allow for a greater range of housing types to be constructed than currently allowed under LDR zoning. Housing units permitted in the LDR district include single- family homes and accessory dwelling units (ADUs). Housing units permitted in the MDR district include single-family homes, ADUs, detached zero -lot line units, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and townhouses with up to four attached units. Multifamily homes are, on average, more affordable than single family homes, primarily due to the ability to share land costs between units and their smaller unit sizes. As stated previously, this rezone proposal, in conjunction the with the applicant's proposed Boundary Line Adjustment (L21-0124) would rectify an existing nonconforming land use caused by a parking lot for a multi -family complex being partially located on a single-family property in the LDR district. Upon approval of the rezone from MDR to LDR, the rear property line could be redrawn without creating nonconforming LDR/MDR split -zoning, thus allowing for the existing Terra Apartments parking lot to be located entirely on adjacent parcels 3597000346 and 3597000350. 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 18.26.010, the purpose of the MDR zoning district is, "...intended to provide areas for family and group residential uses, and serves as an alternative to lower density family residential housing and more intensively developed group residential housing and related uses. Through the following standards this district provides medium -density housing designed to provide: 1. Individual entries and transition from public and communal areas to private areas; 2. Building projections, level changes and so forth to effectively define areas for a variety of outdoor functions as well as privacy; and 3. Landscaping and open space to serve as extension of living areas." (Attachment d) 59 L22-0137 Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 8 of 10 The proposed MDR zoning is consistent with the neighborhood character and uses in the site's vicinity. MDR zoning would allow development that is moderately more intensive than some neighboring single-family homes, but of similar or lesser intensity than nearby multi -family residential properties. See Attachment C for applicant response to criteria. 3. There are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map • Applicant Statement: Since the previous zoning became effective, the current owner has acquired the subject parcel and the adjacent Terra Apartment complex, whose parking is partially located on the northern part of the subject parcel. The rezone is necessary to make the entire assemblage MDR, creating a more logical boundary with the adjacent LDR zoning and allowing an adjustment of the property lines that will result in the Terra Apartments parking area becoming part of the same lot as the Apartments themselves. Without this rezone, the boundary line adjustment cannot occur (because BLAs cannot adjust lines across parcels with different zoning). • Staff Response: There have been no zoning changes in this area since 1995 when the current zoning was instituted. However, staff also recognize that the subject parcel has been purchased by a new owner since the Terra Apartments complex was originally constructed. The new property owner has a reasonable interest in separating the apartment parking lot from their single-family property, which cannot be accomplished under current zoning conditions, as the City cannot approve Boundary Line Adjustment applications which result in split -zoning. Since 1995, fewer housing units have been constructed in the City of Tukwila than have been set by our housing goals. Under the Washington Growth Management Act (GMA), King County is required to assign housing targets to each jurisdiction in order meet current and projected housing demands. For the period between 2019 to 2044, the housing target for production of new net housing units in Tukwila is 6,500 units. Based on the rate of housing development in Tukwila from 2019 to present, it will be necessary to build approximately 250 net units each year until 2044 to meet this target. However, from 2006 to 2018 Tukwila grew by only 130 housing units. King County recommends the City of Tukwila take reasonable measures to achieve additional housing growth, including taking "action to encourage and/or incentivize residential development". One way to incentivize residential development is to permit rezones on undeveloped properties to higher residential densities. 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. • Applicant Statement: Since the previous zoning became effective, the current owner has acquired the subject parcel and the adjacent Terra Apartment complex, whose parking is partially located on the northern part of the subject parcel. The rezone is necessary to make the entire assemblage MDR, creating a more logical boundary with 60 L22-0137 Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 9 of 10 the adjacent LDR zoning and allowing an adjustment of the property lines that will result in the Terra Apartments parking area becoming part of the same lot as the Apartments themselves. Without this rezone, the boundary line adjustment cannot occur (because BLAs cannot adjust lines across parcels with different zoning). • Staff Response: A rezone from LDR to MDR would increase the potential for small multifamily buildings to be constructed on the property. Increasing housing capacity is in the furtherance of public health, safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare. Residential development is unlikely to adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood, which is largely dominated by other residential uses of similar intensities. Additionally, higher residential densities provide additional support to local businesses, and promote pedestrian scale neighborhoods within walking and biking distance of major transit stops and a large commercial core. CONCLUSIONS Criteria 1: Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: • The rezone is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals: o Goal 3.2.1: Provide zoning that allows a variety of housing throughout the City to allow for diverse, equitable neighborhoods. o Goal 3.2.2: Encourage a full range of housing opportunities for all population segments, including very low-income households earning less than 30% AMI, through actions including, but not limited to, revising the Tukwila's zoning map and development codes as appropriate, which would enable a wide variety of housing types to be built. o Goal 7.1.1: Maintain a comprehensive land use map that supports the preservation and enhancement of single-family and stable multi -family neighborhoods; eliminates incompatible land uses; and clearly establishes applicable development requirements through recognizable boundaries. ■ This rezone proposal would enable a wider variety of housing types to be built in an established neighborhood, increasing housing opportunities. Multifamily homes are, on average, more affordable than single family homes, primarily due to the ability to share land costs between units and their smaller unit sizes. ■ Increased housing options provide an avenue for home ownership to be enjoyed by buyers of a wider age range, on average. Construction of new housing also creates more energy efficient units built to higher standards, provides more options for residents, and also encourages other investment in the community. ■ This rezone proposal, in conjunction the with the applicant's proposed Boundary Line Adjustment (L21-0124) would rectify an existing nonconforming land use caused by a parking lot for a multi -family complex being partially located on a single-family property in the LDR district. Criteria 2: Consistency with Zone: • The proposed MDR zoning is consistent with the neighborhood character and uses in the site's vicinity. MDR zoning would allow development that is moderately more intensive than some neighboring single-family homes, but of similar or lesser intensity than nearby multi -family residential properties. Criteria 3: Changed conditions: • There have been no zoning changes in the vicinity since the LDR zoning was instituted in 1995. 61 L22-0137 Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 10 of 10 • The subject parcel has been purchased by a new owner since the Terra Apartments complex was originally constructed. The new property wishes to separate the apartment parking lot from their property, which cannot be accomplished under current zoning conditions. • Since 2006, Tukwila has, according to King County, produced housing at a rate 94% slower than is necessary to meet our 2035 housing growth target. • Since 2015, the median sale price of a single-family home in Tukwila has increased 97%, from — $303,000 to —$594,000. The median sale price of a unit in a multi -family home in Tukwila has increased 182%, from "111,000 to —$313,000. • Tukwila's housing production has been determined by King County to be the lowest of all jurisdictions within the core metropolitan area, both in total number and in percentage of growth target. Criteria 4: Benefit to community: • The proposed rezone would positively affect the community by providing needed housing capacity on an undeveloped parcel in a location near an existing commercial core and a variety of single- and multi -family structures. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approving the rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR). 62 Current Zoning Map LDR f St HDR 10/27/2023, 1:47:22 PM Parcels Zoning LDR Low Density Residential • S 153rd St LDR S aAV 41179 LDR MDR Medium Density Residential 0 HDR High Density Residential 0 0 Office 0.01 ti 0.01 1:1,128 0.01 0.013 0.03 mi H 0.05 km City of Tukwila, King County Sources: Esri, Airbus DS, USGS, NGA, NASA, CGIAR, N Robinson, NCEAS, NLS, OS, NMA, Geodatastyrelsen, Rijkswaterstaat, GSA, Geoland, FEMA, Intermap and the GIS user community King County Web AppBuilder for ArcGIS 63 64 Current Zoning Map LDR f St HDR 10/27/2023, 1:47:22 PM Parcels Zoning LDR Low Density Residential • S 153rd St LDR S aAV 41179 LDR MDR Medium Density Residential 0 HDR High Density Residential 0 0 Office 0.01 ti 0.01 1:1,128 0.01 0.013 0.03 mi H 0.05 km City of Tukwila, King County Sources: Esri, Airbus DS, USGS, NGA, NASA, CGIAR, N Robinson, NCEAS, NLS, OS, NMA, Geodatastyrelsen, Rijkswaterstaat, GSA, Geoland, FEMA, Intermap and the GIS user community King County Web AppBuilder for ArcGIS 65 66 MCCULLOUGH HILL PLLC TO: Breyden Jager, Associate Planner City of Tukwila FROM: Courtney Flora DATE: September 14, 2023 RE: Terra Apartments, 6250 S 153' Street Revised Comprehensive Plan Amendment/Rezone Narrative (L22-0137) and SEPA (E23-0005) This memorandum provides additional clarification and justification for the applicant's request to rezone the subject parcel (#3597000341) from Low Density Residential ("LDR") to Medium - Density Residential ("MDR"). The application was deemed complete on April 5, 2023, a neighborhood meeting was held on May 17, 2023, and we understand the City Council hearing is scheduled for October 23, 2023. The parcel proposed for rezone is circled below in red. It is currently zoned LDR and developed with one single-family home and a parking lot used by the adjacent Terra Apartments, which are held under common ownership with the subject parcel. The Terra Apartments are zoned MDR. Rezoning the subject parcel to MDR will create a more logical MDR boundary and will advance the City's housing goals, as explained in more detail below. 23 2 24 4 !46 F21 F22 6214 6214 A 6214 B� 6214 D 15 54 E 11 6208 19 24 1 254 E22 15232 6208 1 T fs212 23 15 6208 6208 6212.6212 21 15232 1523213 20 20 6210 6201 •6 D3 14 6206 12 6206 OT 6210 06 26 B12 620E CO 6206 6210 6210 J i 08 621E 309 6216108 6216 107 6216 201 6250 OFF MDR. 6212 • r• .n a . a r'1911 02 C 6402 S 1 53RD—S-T 111 701 Fifth Avenue • Suite 6600 • Seattle, Washington 98104 • 206.812.3388 • Fax 206.812.3389 • www.mhseattle.com 67 September 29, 2023 Page 2 of 3 The proposal complies with the approval criteria in Tukwila Municipal Code ("TMC") 18.84.020. 1. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; The proposed amendment is consistent with and will further the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Plan —particularly Element 3 (Housing) and Element 7 (Residential Neighborhoods). The City's Housing Element notes that the City will need to accommodate an additional 5,568 households over the next twenty years and emphasizes that this new housing will need to be affordable and diverse. Aging single-family housing, such as the house on the subject parcel, is typically more expensive to maintain. In addition, rezoning the property from LDR to MDR will allow the existing single-family home on the parcel to remain indefinitely, but it will also allow for the conversion of the property to a slightly more dense, affordable housing type. This proposal will advance the following Housing Policies in Element 3: • 3.2.1 Provide zoning that allows a variety of housing throughout the City to allow for diverse, equitable neighborhoods. • 3.2.2 Encourage a full range of housing opportunities for all population segments, including very low-income households ... through revising the City zoning map and development codes as appropriate, which would enable a wide variety of housing types to be built. The proposal will advance the following Residential Neighborhood Policy in Element 7: • 7.1.1 Maintain a comprehensive land use map that supports the preservation and enhancement of single-family and stable multi -family neighborhoods; eliminates incompatible land uses; and clearly establishes applicable development requirements through recognizable boundaries. The rezone proposal will eliminate the nonconforming condition of having apartment parking on an LDR-zoned property, creating a more logical, vertical boundary between the MDR and LDR zones —allowing for preservation of the single-family use with a more recognizable boundary. And again, if the market supports a transition to slightly more dense housing in this location, the MDR zoning would support it. 2. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map is consistent with the scope and purpose of TMC Title 18, "Zoning Code," and the description and purpose of the <one classification applied for; The proposal seeks to rezone one parcel from LDR to MDR. According to Chapter 18.10 of the TMC, the purpose of the LDR zone is to provide low -density family residential areas together with a full range of urban infrastructure services in order to maintain stable residential neighborhoods, and to prevent intrusions by incompatible land uses. TMC 18.10.010.A. The LDR zone allows a maximum of 6.7 units/acre. The MDR zone is similarly intended to provide areas for family and group residential uses and serves as an alternative to lower density family residential housing and 68 September 29, 2023 Page 3 of 3 more intensely developed group residential housing and related uses. TMC 18.12.010. It allows a slightly higher density than LDR-14.5 units/acre. The LDR and MDR are compatible zones and abut each other throughout the City. Rezoning this parcel to MDR will provide a more logical boundary between the current MDR and adjacent LDR zoning and is consistent with Title 18. 3. There are changed conditions since the previous honing became ffective to warrant the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map; and Since the previous zoning became effective, the current owner has acquired the subject parcel and the adjacent Terra Apartment complex, whose parking is partially located on the northern part of the subject parcel. The rezone is necessary to make the entire assemblage MDR, creating a more logical boundary with the adjacent LDR zoning and allowing an adjustment of the property lines that will result in the Terra Apartments parking area becoming part of the same lot as the Apartments themselves. Without this rezone, the boundary line adjustment cannot occur (because BLAs cannot adjust lines across parcels with different zoning). 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 neighborhood, nor be injurious to other properties in the vicinity in which the subject properly is located. The proposed rezone will further the public interest by creating a more logical zoning boundary and allowing an existing apartment parking space to become part of the lot of the apartment it serves. The rezone will not impact the physical characteristics of the property or create any impacts beyond the status quo. The existing single-family home is anticipated to remain. There would be a theoretical opportunity to develop the parcel to MDR zoning in the future, but that development/density would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, Title 18, and surrounding property uses. 69 70 Return to Title Page Return to Chapter 18.10 TITLE 18 — ZONING CHAPTER 18.12 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR) DISTRICT Sections: 18.12.010 Purpose 18.12.020 Land Uses Allowed 18.12.030 Recreation Space Requirements 18.12.060 Design Review 18.12.070 Basic Development Standards 18.12.010 Purpose A. This district implements the Medium Density Residential Comprehensive Plan designation, which allows up to 14.5 dwelling units per net acre. It is intended to provide areas for family and group residential uses, and serves as an alternative to lower density family residential housing and more intensively developed group residential housing and related uses. Through the following standards this district provides medium -density housing designed to provide: 1. Individual entries and transition from public and communal areas to private areas; 2. Building projections, level changes and so forth to effectively define areas for a variety of outdoor functions as well as privacy; and 3. Landscaping and open space to serve as extension of living areas. B. Certain MDR properties are identified as Commercial Redevelopment Areas (see Figures 18-10 or 18-9) to encourage aggregation with commercial properties that front on Tukwila International Boulevard. Aggregation and commercial redevelopment of these sites would implement the Pacific Highway Revitalization Plan and provide opportunities to redefine and create more uniform borders between the commercial corridor and adjacent residential neighborhoods. C. Certain MDR properties are located in the Urban Renewal Overlay (see Figure 18-15). Existing zoning and development standards will remain in place, although multi -family buildings would be permitted. The overlay provides additional alternate development standards that may be applied to development within the Urban Renewal Overlay upon request of the property owner and if the development meets certain qualifying criteria. Urban Renewal Overlay district standards would implement the Tukwila International Boulevard Revitalization Plan through more intensive development. (Ord. 2257 §6 (part) 2009; Ord. 1865 §8, 1999; Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-40 71 Return to Title Page Return to Chapter 18.12 TITLE 18 — ZONING 18.12.020 Land Uses Allowed Refer to TMC Chapter 18.09, "Land Uses Allowed by District." (Ord. 2500 §5, 2016) 18.12.030 Recreation Space Requirements In the MDR zoning district, any proposed multiple -family structure, complex or development shall provide, on the premises and for the use of the occupants, a minimum amount of recreation space according to the following provisions: 1. Required Area. a. For each proposed dwelling unit in the multiple - family development and detached zero -lot -line type of development, a minimum of 400 square feet (100 square feet for senior citizen housing) of recreation space shall be provided. Any multiple -family structure, complex or development shall provide a minimum of 1,000 square feet of total recreation space. b. Townhouse units shall provide at least 250 square feet of the 400 square feet of recreation space as private, ground level open space measuring not less than 10 feet in any dimension. c. The front, side and rear yard setback areas required by the applicable zoning district shall not qualify as recreation space. However, these setback areas can qualify as recreation space for townhouses if they are incorporated into private open space with a minimum dimension of 10 feet on all sides. 2. Indoor or Covered Space. a. No more than 50% of the required recreation space may be indoor or covered space in standard multi -family developments. Senior citizen housing must have at least 20% indoor or covered space. b. The Board of Architectural Review may grant a maximum of two square feet of recreation space for each one square foot of extensively improved indoor recreation space provided. Interior facility improvements would include a full range of weight machines, sauna, hot tub, large screen television and the like. 3. Uncovered Space. a. A minimum of 50% of the total required recreation space shall be open or uncovered, up to 100% of the total requirement may be in open or uncovered recreation space in standard multi -family developments. Senior citizen housing allows up to 80% of recreation space to be outdoors and has no minimum outdoor space requirement. b. Recreation space shall not exceed a 4% slope in any direction unless it is determined that the proposed space design clearly facilitates and encourages the anticipated use as endorsed by the Director. c. The Board of Architectural Review may grant a maximum credit of two square feet of recreation space for each one square foot of outdoor pool and surrounding deck area. 4. General Requirements. a. Multiple -family complexes (except senior citizen housing, detached zero -lot -line and townhouses with nine or fewer units), which provide dwelling units with two or more bedrooms, shall provide adequate recreation space for children with at least one space for the 5-to-12-year-old group. Such space shall be at least 25% but not more than 50% of the total recreation space required under TMC Section 18.12.030 (1), and shall be designated, located and maintained in a safe condition. b. Adequate fencing, plant screening or other buffer shall separate the recreation space from parking areas, driveways or public streets. c. The anticipated use of all required recreation areas shall be specified and designed to clearly accommodate that use. (Ord. 2525 §2, 2017) 18.12.060 Design Review Design review is required for all new multi -family structures, mobile or manufactured home parks, developments in a Commercial Redevelopment Area that propose the uses and standards of an adjacent commercial zone, and in the shoreline jurisdiction, if new building construction or exterior changes are involved and the cost of the exterior work equals or exceeds 10% of the building's assessed valuation. Multi -family structures up to 1,500 square feet will be reviewed administratively. (See TMC Chapter 18.60, Board of Architectural Review.) (Ord. 2368 §7, 2012; Ord. 2251 §16, 2009; Ord. 2005 §12002; Ord. 1865 §11, 1999; Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) foduced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-41 Return to Title Page Return to Chapter 18.12 TITLE 18 — ZONING 18.12.070 Basic Development Standards Development within the Medium Density Residential District shall conform to the following listed and referenced standards: MDR BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Lot area, minimum 8,000 sq. ft. (Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats) Lot area per unit (multi -family) 3,000 sq. ft. (For townhouses the density shall be calculated based on one unit per 3000 sq. ft. of parent lot area. The "unit lot" area shall be allowed to include the common access easements). Average lot width (min. 20 ft. street frontage width), minimum 60 feet (Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats) Setbacks, minimum: Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats • Front -1st floor 15 feet • Front - 2nd floor 20 feet • Front - 3rd floor 30 feet (20 feet for townhouses) • Second front - 1st floor 7.5 feet • Second front - 2nd floor 10 feet • Second front - 3rd floor 15 feet (10 feet for townhouses) • Sides - 1st floor 10 feet • Sides - 2nd floor 20 feet (10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Sides - 3rd floor 20 feet (30 feet if adjacent to LDR; 10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Rear -1st floor 10 feet • Rear - 2nd floor 20 feet (10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Rear - 3rd floor 20 feet (30 feet if adjacent to LDR; 10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) Refer to TMC Chapter 18.52, "Landscape Requirements," Table A, for perimeter and parking lot landscaping requirements. Townhouse building separation, minimum • 1 and 2 story buildings 10 feet • 3 story buildings 20 feet Height, maximum 30 feet Development area coverage 50% maximum (75% for townhouses) Recreation space 400 sq. ft. per dwelling unit (1,000 sq. ft. min.) Off-street parking: • Residential See TMC Chapter 18.56, Off-street Parking & Loading Regulations. • Accessory dwelling unit See TMC Section 18.50.220 • Other uses See TMC Chapter 18.56, Off-street Parking & Loading Regulations (Ord. 2678 §24, 2022; Ord. 2581 §3, 2018; Ord. 2199 §12, 2008; Ord. 1976 §23, 2001; Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-42 73 74 Breyden Jager From: Bonnie Wong <auntybon@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2023 1:23 PM To: Breyden Jager Subject: Re: 6250 S 151st Place Thank you for the clarification. A cross walk is needed there for middle schoolers or the bus route pick up in the morning should be the same as the pm drop off. Increase traffic is inevitable! Bjw On Tue, May 16, 2023 at 12:09 PM Breyden Jager <Breyden.Jager@tukwilawa.gov> wrote: Hello Bonnie, I hope I can offer some clarity here. The meeting tomorrow is for a different rezone application, for the Terra Apartments complex at 6214 S 153rd St. This is not the same as the Hopper rezone application to the north of your address on 151' St. The owner of Terra Apartments is interested in rezoning the smaller parcel to the east, which their leasing office currently occupies. Their intent for the rezone is to match the existing MDR zoning of the larger multi -family parcel to the west, so that they can process a lot consolidation to turn the site into one contiguous parcel. At this time, there are no parking implications related to this rezone, as no new development is proposed for the site. The Tukwila Municipal Code requires that the public information meeting be held at least 5 days prior to the close of the public comment period, which ends on 6/1. The date of 5/17 was selected in order to give the community ample time to provide public comments following the information meeting, if they would like to do so. I hope that this information helps answer your questions, but please feel free to reach out should you require any additional information. Thank you, Breyden Jager I Associate Planner Pronouns: He/Him/His 1 75 Department of Community Development 1 City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Breyden.Jager@tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3651 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. From: Bonnie Wong <auntybon@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, May 16, 2023 11:44 AM To: Breyden Jager <Breyden.Jager@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: 6250 S 151st Place Dear Mr Jager, I am posting this email even though attempts to email you are not going through at this time. Today is May 16, I received the notice about Rezoning, in yesterday's yesterday's mail. I hope this was not intentional about the meeting which is to happen tomorrow, May 17! Public opinion and concerns have not changed which includes street traffic,parking and mitigating major traffic at the bottom of the hill. THIS IS A PLANNING ISSUE! PARKING WILL BE ANOTHER ISSUE AS SCHOOL BUSES AND FIRE VEHICLES HAVE TO MAKE A WIDER TURN AT THE TOP OF THE HILL. Many of the parents walking their children to and from school are seen on the sidewalks NOW because there are no parked cars. PARENTS , CHILDREN AND MIDDLE SCHOOLERS HAVE NO CROSSWALKS . WHAT IS THE PLAN BEFORE THE REZONING? IN ADDITION TO MY QUESTIONS, I AM INCLUDING A COPY OF THE EMAIL I RECEIVED REGARDING WHEN THE REZONING MEETING WOULD TAKE PLACE. 0 Breyden Jager Breyden.Jager@tukwilawa.gov to me Hello Bonnie, 2 76 Thanks for providing your comments. I will ensure that they are entered into the public record, and they will be read during the public hearing, likely in early August. Thank you, Breyden Jager I Associate Planner Pronouns: He/Him/His Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 !Tukwila, WA 98188 Breyden.Jager(cr�tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3651 Thank you for your time. Please submit my ongoing concerns about safety issues that have not been addressed. Bonnie J. Wong 206-683-5513 resident since 1989 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. Disclaimer The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorized to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. This email has been scanned for viruses and malware, and may have been automatically archived by Mimecast, a leader in email security and cyber resilience. Mimecast integrates email defenses with brand protection, security awareness training, web security, compliance and other essential capabilities. Mimecast helps protect large and small organizations from malicious activity, human error and technology failure; and to lead the movement toward building a more resilient world. To find out more, visit our website. CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 3 77 78 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 11/6/2023 IG ITEM INFORMATION ITEM NO. 5.C. & 6.A. (3) STAFF SPONSOR: NORA GIERLOFF ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 11/6/2023 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Request for rezone from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential at 13536 52nd Avenue S. This is a quasi-judicial matter and any and all discussion related to this issue should occur during the meeting. CATEGORY ❑ Discussion Mtg Date ® Motion Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Resolution Mtg Date ® Ordinance Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ® Public Hearing Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Other Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Mayor ❑ Admin Svcs ® DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ PcSR ❑ Police ❑ PW SPONSOR'S SUMMARY Tukwila has received an application to change the zoning and Comprehensive Plan map for one parcel, current zoning Low Density Residential (LDR) to proposed zoning High Density Residential (HDR). REVIEWED BY ❑ Trans&Infrastructure Svcs ❑ Community Svcs/Safety ❑ Finance & Governance ❑ Planning & Community Dev. ❑ LTAC ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. DATE: COMMITTEE CHAIR: 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 11/6/2023 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 11/6/2023 Informational Memorandum dated 10/31/2023 Draft Ordinance Staff Report with attachments 79 80 TO: FROM: BY: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Committee of the Whole Nora Gierloff, Department of Community Development Director Isaac Gloor, Associate Planner CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: October 31, 2023 SUBJECT: Request for Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Map Change QUASI-JUDICIAL ISSUE Conduct a public hearing for a rezone and Comprehensive Plan map change request from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential. This is a quasi-judicial matter and any and all discussion related to this issue should occur during the Council meeting. Please do not communicate on this topic outside of the meeting. BACKGROUND Tukwila has received an application for a rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) to High Density Residential (HDR) on a vacant parcel located at 13536 52nd Ave S. The rezone would permit any use permitted in the HDR zoning district, subject to all City regulations. DISCUSSION See attached Staff Report along with Attachments A thru E for detailed description of the proposal and findings of fact for the decision. FINANCIAL IMPACT N/A RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation to High Density Residential (HDR). ATTACHMENTS Staff Report with Attachments A — E. 81 82 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 13536 52ND AVENUE S., TUKWILA, FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR); PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, in 1995 the City of Tukwila adopted the Zoning Code and Map based on consideration of existing conditions and long-term community goals, and these documents may be reviewed and updated as appropriate; and WHEREAS, as part of the City's 2022-2023 Comprehensive Plan docket of potential amendments, the City received an application for consideration of a change to the Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Maps for the property located at 13536 52nd Avenue S. (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the zoning of the Property is currently Low Density Residential; and WHEREAS, the Applicant seeks to rezone the entirety of the Property to High Density Residential; and WHEREAS, on May 9, 2023, the City mailed a Notice of Application to the surrounding property owners and tenants, and on May 23, 2023, held the required public meeting regarding the proposed rezone and change to the Zoning Code Map; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila has complied with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act by making a determination on July 18, 2023, that no significant environmental impact would occur as a result of the Zoning Code Map change; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was timely published in "The Seattle Times," posted onsite, and mailed to surrounding properties; and CC:\Legislative Development\Rezone 13536 52'd Ave S 10-30-23 I. Gloor A.Youn Page 1 of 3 83 WHEREAS, on November 6, 2023, the City Council held a public hearing and, after receiving and studying staff analysis and comments from the public, has recommended approval of the rezone application, and has made and entered Findings and Conclusions thereon in support of that recommendation; and WHEREAS, after due consideration, the City Council concurs with the Findings and Conclusions and determines the public interest will be served by approving the rezone application, which is in compliance with the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Map; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings and Conclusions Adopted. The City Council hereby adopts Findings and Conclusions, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein. Section 2. Rezone Approved. The Property is located at 13536 52nd Avenue S., Tukwila, Washington. The site is further identified as King County tax parcel 0003000005. The site is hereby approved to be rezoned from Low Density Residential to High Density Residential across the entire parcel, as shown in the attached Exhibit B and incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein. Section 3. Map Amendment Authorized. The Department of Community Development Director, or their designee, is hereby authorized to amend the City's official Zoning Map to show the zoning change as authorized in Section 2 of this ordinance. Section 4. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser Authorized. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2023. CC:\Legislative Development\Rezone 13536 52'd Ave S 10-30-23 I. Gloor A.Youn Page 2 of 3 84 ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Allan Ekberg, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Office of the City Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A, Staff Report (Findings and Conclusions) Exhibit B, Revised Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Map CC:\Legislative Development\Rezone 13536 52nd Ave S 10-30-23 I. Gloor A.Youn Page 3 of 3 85 86 APPLICANT: REQU EST: LOCATION: HEARING DATE: NOTIFICATION: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Nora Gierloff, AICP, Director STAFF REPORT TO THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL November 6, 2023 5/9/2023: Mailed to properties within 500' radius 5/9/2023: Site Posted 5/23/2023: Public Information Meeting Notice of hearing published in the Seattle Times FILE NUMBERS: L22-0127 - Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment E23-0003 - SEPA Andrew Kovach, Kovach Architects Change Comprehensive Plan and zoning designation from Low Density Residential (LDR) to High Density Residential (HDR). 13536 52nd Avenue S, Tukwila, WA (Tax Parcel 0003000005) CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ZONING DESIGNATION: Low Density Residential (LDR) SEPA DETERMINATION: STAFF: ATTACHMENTS: Determination of Nonsignificance issued July 18, 2023 Isaac Gloor, Associate Planner A. Site + Current Zoning Map B. Proposed Zoning Map C. Applicant Response to Criteria D. HDR Zoning Development Standards (TMC 18.14) E. Public Comments Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 87 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 2 of 19 BACKGROUND/PROPOSAL Summary of Proposed Actions The applicant requests an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning map designations from Low Density Residential (LDR) to High Density Residential (HDR) on a vacant lot approximately 13,494 square feet in area, located at 13536 52nd Avenue South, Tukwila. (Attachment A) This non -project proposal is a quasi-judicial change to the land use designation on the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code maps. If the zoning is changed, any HDR use would be permitted, subject to all City regulations. In 2016, an application was reviewed and denied by the City Council to rezone this property from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Regional Commercial Mixed Use (RCM). Under the current LDR zoning the lot proposed for rezoning is large enough for possible division into two legal residential lots with a single-family home on each. The proposed action does not meet the exemptions from review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) listed under WAC 197-11-800. Rezone requests that require a Comprehensive Plan amendment are subject to SEPA review. A Determination of Non -Significance was issued on June 15, 2023. Land Use - Comprehensive Plan and Zoning The property became part of Tukwila in 1989 as part of the Foster annexation. At the time of annexation, the property was zoned Professional Office to reflect the prior King County zoning. When the Comprehensive Plan and city-wide zoning were reviewed in 1994, the area was not considered appropriate for continued office designation, primarily due to poor visibility from Interurban Avenue, the narrow 10-to-15-foot residential access streets, and residential sized lots. Medium -Density Residential designation was considered, but Low -Density Residential was ultimately chosen. Vicinity and Site Information The proposed rezone site is located approximately 325 feet from Interurban Avenue. The site is close to bus routes with rapid access to Tukwila International Boulevard Light Rail Station, Downtown Seattle, and Southcenter. Parcels zoned LDR are adjacent to the property to the north, south, and west. RCM zoning is located immediately east and along Interurban Avenue. The DRA Professional Center, a 4-story office building, is located across 53rd Avenue South. Transportation The subject site lies along 52nd and 53rd Avenues South, which currently serve vehicular, bike, and pedestrian traffic from both single- and multi -family developments in the immediate vicinity. The property has no sidewalks along its frontage. The nearest transit is a King County Metro bus stop served by Route 150, approximately 450 feet from the site. 88 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 3 of 19 LIR 9f/121323. Zoning Map A. .3i+'maTT,,� , 125153 251 35 12513 .11219 RCM �> IMO "\ ; \ \ \ CU 9 135Ri1 15596] LAR0313 36-115111 1 • I 5306. \ \ MAR !I 1155 eS •� �/ 135- — ISS35 1M1I - 'LOP 13619 - 1 - 13612 .�` e ' LAR ,.�.• 6�'P LAR fig�. 1155TM i 32 22 PM =Pepe M. Medium Density ReeldeiNal oR p.p.* =Ron Re9492IComm,r21211922e92192 110121115p9 CL1 Commercial 1.10911921021991 reeremm lryL.alei Dore Y e 222205 LOR Lew omaNae+am[191 o 0,0t /11,12D 0.01 0.09911 d 1.01 m 0.13 0.052m 2.99-95 w' _r.aFiw.mM, '_cv. w,n.waB,n..,. Figure 1: Existing Zoning Map Environmental Conditions The proposed rezone site is a vacant, sloping lot with grass, some trees and shrubs and a concrete retaining wall on the north and east sides of the lot. There are several non -conforming residential uses in the vicinity, including a six -unit apartment building and a small tri-plex north across 52nd Avenue South. The site is in the vicinity of the reported Tukwila Coal Mine, according to the City of Tukwila's Abandoned Underground Coal Mine Hazard Assessment Area Report. Per the City of Tukwila Geologic Hazard maps, the property includes slopes between 15 and 40 %. Most of the property is shown as having landslide potential per the City of Tukwila's geologic hazard maps. The eastern portion of the site is mapped showing Class 3 areas (high landslide potential), with portions of the western side shown as Class 2 (moderate landslide potential). See Figure 2. No sensitive habitats are known to exist on site. It is expected that there would be no major issues with developing this site that would arise from critical areas; that said, the responsibility is on the landowner to verify site conditions. 89 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 4 of 19 Critical Areas Map 13505 13616 UN/T 2 13616 UNI1 1 13622 UNIT 1 13622 UNII2 / ' 13612 1350 13634 i�s1a1 - 8/7/2023, 2:20,23 PM 'Parcels • Addresses (Tuk (Tukwila) ^ Lay LirniMdme Hazard Area Buildings FEMA Flood7lain 100yr area 202 Landslide Hazard Area Class 2 • Moderate /316 5314 532n� 137 0 5 2 13710 1371137100 5 13705 A100 13712 ilk 13745 B307 19445 8412 13745 8100 13745 0201 1,2,257 o 001 0.03 0.05mi 0 0.02 0.04 0.01 km C55wruw,n.�w1 0cs&°r4T,M ros,usas Iron weenminumerioreureis P.�GomrnunrtyAbp5c«.,do.rm,., urReno. napcom, WAS. Pan,MS, 0perewre.eu, hticnnoti.E., HERE. Uam.m saanaph. rxurern.ulwe Inc ET IMP., uses. aureall a Land Inertopement, EPA. nPs. US COW. Bureau. USI. Figure 2: Environmentally Critical Areas Map Public Services and Utilities A review by City of Tukwila Development Review Engineering staff was completed and noted that project design considerations will be evaluated for feasibility at the time of Design Review, Project SEPA, and development permitting. No relevant comments pertaining to the rezone action itself were received. Development Regulations Comparison: LDR vs. HDR Height: A structure built within the LDR zoning district may reach a maximum height of 30 feet. If the parcel were to be rezoned to HDR, a potential future structure could reach the height of 45 feet, an increase of 15 feet from current standards. Unit Density: Per TMC 18.10.060, the LDR zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 6,500 SF. Therefore, under the existing LDR zoning, the property could be divided into 2 parcels. Each parcel in the LDR district allows a total of one single-family home, as well as one accessory dwelling unit (ADU), equating to 4 total potential dwelling units. If the parcel was rezoned to HDR, which requires 2000 sf of lot space per residential unit, the lot size would permit 6 dwelling units, an increase of 2 units from the current standards. However, the final number of units could be fewer to accommodate space needed for roads or other utilities; the maximum number of units is dependent on all development standards being met. Scale and Design: The LDR zoning district does not restrict the bulk or scale of a single-family home beyond height restrictions. The HDR zoning district permits taller buildings, up to 45 feet, but requires that they, along with the remainder of all 90 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 5 of 19 development on the site, occupy only 50% of the parcel. This is a reduction in development coverage from the LDR zoning district, which allows development on 75% of the parcel. Additionally, development of a single- family home is not subject to design review, while a multi -family building would be required to comply with the City's design review requirements. Bulk and scale impacts of any project developed pursuant to the proposed rezone would be addressed by the City's development standards, design review requirements, and tree protection, planting, and landscaping codes. Specific scale and design impacts of proposed development will be determined at the time of a future project review, should a proposal be submitted to the City. Transportation: The proposed rezone will increase the development capacity on the subject parcel from 4 residential dwelling units to 6 residential dwelling units. Projects developed pursuant to the proposed rezone may generate a proportionate volume of traffic, which may be higher than projects developed pursuant to the current zoning. It is not expected that the number of housing units permitted under the HDR zoning district would result in a significant impact on traffic and transportation. However, the transportation impacts of individual projects developed subsequent to a rezone to HDR would be evaluated through construction permitting at the time of project level permit applications. A traffic concurrency review would be required for any new proposed housing units and findings would result in traffic impact fees under the authority of TMC 9.48.010. The traffic concurrency program is a mechanism to charge and collect fees to ensure that new development bears its proportionate share of the capital costs of transportation facilities. Public Comment On May 23, 2023, staff held a public information meeting for residents and property owners within 500 feet of the site. Staff received written comments from three nearby residents. (Attachment E) The key issues raised include: • potential view impacts from a structure achieving the maximum height permitted in the HDR zoning district. • lack of privacy if the site is developed to the maximum permitted density. • noise impacts from additional residents. • traffic impacts to the neighborhood. • the potential displacement of trees, birds, squirrels, and other wildlife living on the site. • property tax impacts on neighboring properties from a future development. Additionally, comments were made regarding a proposed structure that the owner of the property submitted in the documentation as part of this rezone request. These comments related, in part, to the proposed impervious surface coverage, the amount of parking proposed to be provided, the landscaping plan, and the adverse impact on low-income residents in the neighborhood due to perceived property tax increases from nearby new development. While these comments are included in the attachments for this application, it should be noted that this rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal and no approval or denial of any development plan would be granted or denied by the approval of this rezone request. Development specific items would be addressed if/when a project proposal is submitted to the city. 91 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 6 of 19 FINDINGS Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment Criteria Four broad -reaching objectives are the basis for the elements, goals and policies for Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan's primary objective is preserving and enhancing Tukwila's neighborhoods. The following will summarize the elements, goals, and policies the applicant has cited to support their rezone request, along with a staff response. 1. The proposed amendment to the zoning map is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan Applicant cites the following Comprehensive Plan elements: Element 1: Community Image and Identity Goal 1.1: A community of inviting neighborhoods and vibrant business districts. Policy 1.1.2: Strengthen the image and character of Tukwila's distinct areas and neighborhoods. o Applicant Statement: ■ Direct existing sidewalk access to the adjacent public transit facilities encourages non - motorized modes of transportation in alignment with the "Walk and Roll" objectives. The Project site is situated across the street from apartment dwellings, strategic park -and - ride facility, a professional office building, and adjacent to single family residential neighborhoods. The prominent intersection of diverse uses and occupancies benefits from the convenient location of additional residential housing. The local residential identity is enhanced by a small multifamily project that serves as a transition between the adjacent mixed use office/residential building and the neighborhood. o Staff Response: ■ The neighborhood, in particular parcels immediately across 52'd Ave S and 53rd Ave S, is home to structures with diverse uses and scale including a 4-story commercial structure and a small multifamily building. A use consistent with the development standards of the proposed HDR zoning district would not appear out of character with these uses. If it were to be developed to the greatest density permitted in the HDR, it has the potential to achieve 6 residential units, roughly similar to the existing apartment complex across 52" Ave S. Element 2: Economic Development Page 2-3: Encourage growth into certain areas through the use of zoning and developmental regulations. o Applicant Statement: ■ Changing the present zoning of the subject property to compliment the adjacent RCM zoning will bring additional economic opportunity to a long standing vacant lot with the introduction of additional neighborhood accessible residential housing that will bring new tax base opportunities to the neighborhood. The connection to and use of city utilities will add city revenue and the provision of available parking will enhance the functionality and viability of adjacent DRA Office Building who's (sic) occupancy of professional services are available to the surrounding community. 92 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 7 of 19 o Staff Response: ■ The applicant cites no goal or policy. Policy 2.1.18 directly relates to the City promoting development, however, it is meant to refer to the Southcenter area. Element 3: Housing Goal 3.1: The City of Tukwila provides the City's fair share of regional housing. Policy 3.1.1: Provide sufficient zoned housing potential to accommodate future single- and multi- family households to meet the regional growth target of 4,800 new housing units by 2031. Policy 3.1.2: Work with residents and property owners to consider housing options that meet current and future needs. o Applicant Statement: ■ The proposal is consistent with planning goals by providing a transitionary project of higher residential density and housing option type in an area compatible and complimentary to adjacent multifamily residences and commercial office development. o Staff Response: ■ This rezone would increase the residential development potential of this parcel, from the current potential maximum of two single family units, to a potential maximum of 6 units in a multifamily structure. This parcel lies between commercial properties zoned Regional Commercial Mixed Use (RCM), developed with commercial uses, and the LDR zoning district, developed with single-family homes. The City utilizes higher density residential zoning districts as transitional areas between single-family neighborhoods and commercial districts in other areas of Tukwila Hill. For example, an HDR zoned parcel near the intersection of 58th Ave S and S 142nd street lies between the LDR and the RCM districts, and is developed with a 3 story, 13-unit building. Similar scenarios occur along Interurban Ave S, extending to its intersection with Southcenter Boulevard. This rezone would be similar in nature to those existing transitional housing zones, which provide a tapering in use intensity from Interurban westward. .-` eciOaLon overlay,. e \e� lion, `+ y��e� Figure 3: Existing HDR Zoned Parcel on Tukwila Hill (1408158th Ave 5) 93 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 8 of 19 Figure 4: Existing HDR Zoned Parcels on Tukwila Hill (East of 62nd Ave 5) Goal 3.2: The City of Tukwila has safe, healthy and affordable homes for all residents in Tukwila. Policy 3.2.1: Provide zoning that allows a variety of housing throughout the City to allow for diverse, equitable neighborhoods. o Applicant Statement: ■ The proposal is consistent with planning goals by providing housing type options in an area compatible and complimentary to adjacent multifamily and single family residences. o Staff Response: ■ A zoning of HDR would increase the development capacity of the parcel and allow for additional mixing of housing types in this neighborhood which traditionally has featured both single-family homes and small multifamily residences. Multifamily homes are, on average, more affordable than single family homes, primarily due to the ability to share land costs between units and their smaller unit sizes. ■ Additionally, Tukwila's single family home stock is less diverse than its multi -family home stock. Approximately 57% of Tukwila's single-family homes are occupied by households that identify as white, exceeding the percentage of Tukwila's overall white population (33%). While approximately 19% of Tukwila identifies as Black or African American, households with that racial identity occupy only 8% of Tukwila's single-family homes. These statistics highlight historic inequities as well as current economic factors that put single family homes, on average the most expensive form of housing, out of reach for many of Tukwila's residents. Policy 3.2.2: Encourage a full range of housing opportunities for all population segments, including very low-income households earning less than 30% AMI, through actions including, but not limited to, revising the Tukwila's zoning map and development codes as appropriate, which would enable a wide variety of housing types to be built. 94 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 9 of 19 Policy 3.2.3: Provide sufficient appropriate zoning for housing of all types, including government - assisted housing, housing for low-income families, manufactured housing, multi- family housing, and group homes and foster care facilities, subject to conditions that appropriately integrate them into existing neighborhoods. o Applicant Statement: ■ The proposal is consistent with Policies 3.3.2 and 2.2.3 by providing smaller housing units in an area predominated by larger single family residences. Proximity to a major transit facility, live work options, and integrated secure parking and tenant storage add to the affordability and diversity of the housing proposal. o Staff Response: ■ As stated previously, homes in multifamily structures are on average more affordable than homes in single family buildings, primarily due to sharing land costs between all residential units on a parcel and smaller unit sizes. Homes in multifamily structures typically also have lower energy costs and require less infrastructure per housing unit. Element 4: Natural Environment Goal 4.8: Surface water generated by urban development does not exceed pre -development discharge rates. Policy 4.8.2: Require that all proposed development applications identify hydrologic features, both on and off -site, that could be impacted by the project. Evaluate and prevent project impacts on on -site and off -site watercourses, wetlands, drainage features and springs to avoid adverse impacts to existing sensitive area hydrology. o Applicant Statement: ■ The proposal is consistent with Policies 4.8.2 by providing project storm drainage analysis and developing a storm drainage management plan constant with the policies of the City of Tukwila and State Codes. o Staff Response: ■ Any future development proposed will be required to comply with all aspects of the Tukwila Municipal Code, including those regarding critical areas. This is true whether this rezone application is approved or denied. Goal 4.12: Trees are recognized by Tukwila citizens, businesses, City staff and decision -makers for their benefits to the environment, urban infrastructure and their aesthetic value. Policy 4.12.1: Develop a formal urban forest management plan to promote and guide preservation, restoration and maintenance of a sustainable urban forest, using the goals and policies of this chapter as a basis for guidance. o Applicant Statement: ■ The proposal is consistent with Policies 4.12.1 by providing street trees on two street frontages along common property boundary lines and within the open space servicing the residential component of the project. 95 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 10 of 19 o Staff Response: ■ Any future development proposed will be required to comply with all aspects of the Tukwila Municipal Code, including those regarding tree retention, planting, and landscaping. This is true whether this rezone application is approved or denied. Element 6: Parks, Recreation, and Open Space Goal 6.1: Safe, Convenient and Connected System — Parks, recreation opportunities and open spaces that are close to home and/or work and that are interconnected by safe streets, off-street trails and public transportation. Policy 6.1.3: Link parks to neighborhood gathering spots and other destinations in the community and region such as schools, neighboring jurisdictions, regional parks and natural areas, and major employment centers. Policy 6.1.12: Maximize potential and capacity of existing parks and recreation resources to offset existing and future demand. Implementation Strategy: Consider the street sidewalk system as a link in the connecting network, when necessary. o Applicant Statement: ■ The proposal is consistent with Policies 6.1.3 and 6.1.12 by new sidewalks per City of Tukwila development standards that will help link the neighborhood to nearby parks and recreation facilities within walking and bicycling distances benefiting both future tenants and existing neighborhood residents. o Staff Response: ■ A multifamily development would be allowed under the proposed zoning of HDR. If one were to be developed, TMC would require sidewalks to be installed on the property's frontages. Those sidewalks would provide greater circulation of pedestrians in the neighborhood. Alternatively, should the site remain within the Low -Density Residential zoning district, it could be split via the short plat process into two lots, each with single-family homes and Accessory Dwelling Units. The TMC does not require either single-family homes or two lot land divisions to install street improvements- in this scenario, no sidewalks would be required. Goal 6.2: A Network of Green Spaces — Recreational amenities, historical sites, rivers, wetlands, creeks, and other natural resources that are connected to each other and neighboring networks of lands. This network defines Tukwila as a Northwest city, and includes visually significant bands of vegetation that contrast with the built environment. Policy 6.2.1: 6.2.1 Recognize that the City's open space network will be made up of public and private lands that provide or have the potential to provide the following functions: o Passive recreational resources; o Non -motorized transportation links between network lands; o Flood control functions and stormwater detention; o Water quality enhancement, such as biofiltration; 96 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 11 of 19 o Preservation of and public access to community landmarks that help make up the City's identity, including the river and historic sites; o Urban forest preservation and enhancement, and vegetated corridors; o Wildlife habitat and opportunities for salmon habitat enhancement; and/or o Other public benefit. o Applicant Statement: ■ The proposal is consistent with Policies 6.2.1 by providing 3,200 sf of landscaped passive open space creating wildlife habitat and opportunities for rest and relaxation in a natural environment. o Staff Response: ■ This rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal. No review has been made of any specific development, and the amount of required landscaping and open space will be determined upon submittal of a development project that complies with the requirements of the zoning district of the property. Any future development proposed will be required to comply with all aspects of the Tukwila Municipal Code, including those regarding open space and landscaping. This is true whether this rezone application is approved or denied. Element 7: Residential Neighborhoods (Tukwila Hill) Goal 7.3: Neighborhood Quality: Stable residential neighborhoods that support opportunities for improved educational attainment, employment, engagement, economic security, and personal safety. Policy 7.3.2: Improve the public infrastructure in all neighborhoods to an equivalent level of quality, with an emphasis on sidewalks. o Applicant Statement: ■ The project is consistent with Policy 7.3.2 by providing new sidewalk, curb, and gutter along two street frontage ROW's currently either unimproved or marginally improved. o Staff Response: ■ This rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal. No review has been made of any specific development, and the required sidewalks, curbs, and gutters along the frontages of this property will be determined upon submittal of a development project that complies with the requirements of the zoning district of the property. However, properties developed with multi -family structures are often subject to additional infrastructure improvements than those developed with single-family structures, such as requirements to install frontage improvements including curb, gutter, and sidewalks. Goal 7.4: Neighborhood Sustainability: Continuing enhancement and revitalization of residential neighborhoods to encourage long-term residency and environmental sustainability. Policy 7.4.2: Decrease greenhouse gas emissions through land use strategies that promote a mix of housing, employment and services at densities sufficient to promote walking, bicycling, transit and other alternatives to auto travel. 97 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 12 of 19 o Applicant Statement: ■ The proposal is consistent with Policy 7.4.2 by providing a smaller apartment housing option in contrast to the neighborhoods predominately single family residential nature at a density sufficient to promote walking, bicycling, transit and other alternatives to auto travel. New sidewalks and landscape planters will be provided as a (sic) part of the development plans. o Staff Response: ■ Rezoning this property to the HDR zoning district would permit housing at a higher density than is currently allowed, within short walking distance of major transit stops and on a designated bicycle route. The site is within 450 feet of a transit stop served by King County Metro Route 150, which provides 15-minute frequencies throughout the day, 7 days a week, to destinations north as far as downtown Seattle via 1-5, and destinations south as far as Kent Station via the Tukwila Urban Center and Southcenter Mall. The site is also less than 500 feet from the Duwamish River Trail, a critical route providing pedestrian and bicycle access throughout Tukwila and into neighboring communities. Goal 7.5: Neighborhood Development: Tukwila's residential neighborhoods have a high -quality, pedestrian character with a variety of housing options for residents in all stages of life. Policy 7.5.1: Encourage resident identification with the neighborhood through physical improvements and programs including neighborhood gathering spots, landmark designation and improvement, and streetscape improvements. Policy 7.5.2: Ensure that residential development, when applicable, reflects high design quality in harmony with identified, valued features of the natural environment and historic development. Policy 7.5.3: Support single-family residential in -fill housing that is in harmony with the existing neighborhood as a means of achieving adequate, affordable and/or diverse housing. Policy 7.5.4: Encourage single-family residence design to foster a sense of safety and security. Policy 7.5.5: Develop neighborhood -specific single-family regulations that encourage compatibility with the existing scale of residential structures in the neighborhood; provide an appropriate relationship of lot area, building scale and building siting; and maintain a sense of community (e.g., mature trees, pedestrian scale, sensitive transition between public and private spaces). o Applicant Statement: ■ The proposal is consistent with Policy 7.5.1-7.5.5 and Implementation Strategies by providing location sensitive design features that include high quality materials, appropriate modulation to the residential neighborhood, pedestrian scale use of materials and architectural detailing, employing measures to minimize building height, canopy to shade and conceal open parking stalls, below grade parking, parking exceeding twice code requirement, below grade tenant storage to increase efficiency of residential units, abundant landscape screening, canopy, visual interest, and color and limiting exposure to adjacent residential properties to two stories with well defined transitions between public and private space. Extra parking helps relieve current neighborhood over -demand for parking and helps encourage less residential on -street parking uses. 98 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 13 of 19 o Staff Response: ■ This rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal. No review has been made of any specific development, and the required design standards, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, and other frontage improvements for this property, will be determined upon submittal of a development project that complies with the requirements of the zoning district of the property. However, properties developed with multi -family structures are often subject to additional infrastructure improvements and design standards than those developed with single-family structures, such as requirements to install frontage improvements including curb, gutter, and sidewalks. Policy 7.5.10 Ensure that all multi -family residential developments contribute to a strong sense of community through: • site planning focused on neighborhood design integration; • building design architecturally linked with the surrounding neighborhood and style; • streetscapes that encourage pedestrian use and safe transition to private spaces, with trees reducing the effects of large paved areas; • recreational spaces and facilities on site; • creative project design that provides a diversity of housing types within adopted design criteria, standards and guidelines; and • operational and management policies that ensure safe, stable living environments. o Applicant Statement: ■ The project is consistent with Policy 7.5.10 by providing unique but neighborhood sensitive architectural design and style, pedestrian friendly courts, sidewalks, seating areas, abundant canopy trees surrounding parking and sidewalks, residential open space areas in addition to viewing decks, and residential units that offer a compact and convenient alternative to nearby single family residences. o Staff Response: ■ This rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal. No review has been made of any specific development, and the required design standards will be determined upon submittal of a development project that complies with the requirements of the zoning district of the property. However, properties developed with multi -family structures are subject to additional design standards than those developed with single-family structures. GOAL 7.6: Neighborhood -Supportive Commercial Areas : Neighborhood -supportive commercial areas, including Residential Commercial Centers, that bring small commercial concentrations into and adjacent to existing residential neighborhoods to improve existing residential areas while providing products and services to nearby residents. Policy 7.6.1: Link commercial areas located within approximately one -quarter -mile of residential areas with high -quality pedestrian and bicycle access facilities. Policy 7.6.3: Employ appropriate design elements to blend in with the character of the residential neighborhood. Policy 7.6.4: Encourage new construction rather than converting existing residential structures to commercial uses. 99 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 14 of 19 Policy 7.6.6: Create a logical and harmonious division between commercial or industrial uses and residential uses by using changes in topography and through appropriate development standards, including street design. Policy 7.6.7: Ensure appropriate structural transitions between commercial and residential zones. o Applicant Statement: ■ The project is consistent with Policy 7.6.1-7.6.7 by providing a small scale high quality apartment project with approachable street frontage with sensitive design transitions to office and residential occupancies through architectural detail and material choices, both being sympathetic to the scale and complexity of surrounding residential homes, apartment buildings, and commercial development. Ample landscaping is proposed to help soften and buffer the transition to adjacent single family residence. The natural slope of the property maintains two story exposure to adjacent single family residential lots with daylight basement exposure to commercial property, apartments, and street frontages. o Staff Response: ■ This rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal. No review has been made of any specific development, and the required frontage improvements and landscaping will be determined upon submittal of a development project that complies with the requirements of the zoning district of the property. However, properties developed with multi -family structures are subject to additional frontage improvement requirements and landscaping standards as set forth in Tukwila Municipal Code Chapter 18.52: Landscape Requirements; single-family developments are not held to the requirements of 18.52. Chapter 18.52 works to establish requirements for landscaping to accomplish the following: o Implement the Urban Forestry Comprehensive Plan goals and policies by increasing tree canopy throughout the City to improve air quality; promote the health of residents, visitors and employees; and reduce heat islands and stormwater flows. o Support the low impact development goals of the Comprehensive Plan and the City's National Pollution Discharge Elimination System permit. o Promote safety. o Provide screening between incompatible land uses. o Mitigate the adverse effects of development on the environment. o Improve the visual environment for both residents and nonresidents. o Regulate the protection of existing landscaping. o Establish requirements for the Tong -term maintenance of required landscaping. o Establish procedures for modifying landscaping requirements and penalties for violations of the landscaping code. Element 13: Transportation Goal 13.1: General Transportation Policies Policy 13.1.2: Focus on transportation efficiency by maximizing the movement of people with streets that are designed to be safe for all transportation modes, accommodating existing land uses while designing for the future. 100 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 15 of 19 o Applicant Statement: ■ Development of the subject property with the provision more than double code required parking and implementing shared parking strategies will help reduce local neighborhood on -street parking promoting pedestrian and transportation safety consistent with the goals of this policy. Alternative transportation options such as walking, bicycling, transit, and live/work opportunities are available to project users by way of convenient proximity to city bicycle and walking trails, park -and -ride, and transit lines. On -site and nearby employment opportunities will help reduce traffic load to local streets lessening the need for congesting on -street parking and promoting transportation efficiency and safety. o Staff Response: ■ This goal and policy does not apply to private development utilizing right of way. Additionally, this rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal. In association with the permitting process of new multi -family development, the City levies traffic concurrency fees proportional to the impact that the proposal will have on the transportation system to fund infrastructure improvements. Policy 13.1.11: Encourages supporting electric vehicle charging stations and other alternative fuel sources, as available. Use of the subject property that includes parking can include an electric vehicle charging station consistent with this policy. o Applicant Statement: ■ The project development plan includes electric vehicle charging stations at a 1:3 ratio of stations to residential units. o Staff Response: ■ This rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal. Goal 13.2: Street Network Policies Policy 13.2.10: Evaluate street improvement projects for the inclusion of features that support the Complete Streets policy and the Walk and Roll Plan in order to encourage walking, bicycling and transit use. o Applicant Statement: ■ The proposal is consistent with strategy goals by providing street improvements at a strategic intersection that will include new sidewalks, curbs, planting strips, and proper street drainage that will provide needed linkages for City Bicycle Friendly Routes, and the Walk and Roll Non -motorized Transportation Plan Routes. Project residential occupants as well as surrounding neighborhood and transit center users will benefit from improved and safer access to these City provided programs and use will be encouraged. 101 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 16 of 19 o Staff Response: ■ These goals and policies do not apply to private development utilizing right of way. Additionally, this rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal. Policy 13.2.11: Design intersections and sidewalks to promote pedestrian safety and foster walking as a viable mode of transportation. Policy 13.2.12: Include roadside plantings whenever feasible for street and road improvement projects on slopes to help mitigate the land used for roadway and sidewalk improvements. o Applicant Statement: ■ Development of the subject property will include street ROW sidewalks and plantings consistent with policy 13.2.10, 13.2.11, and 13.2.12. The currently unimproved southwest corner of 52nd Ave. S and 53rd Ave. S intersection will have improved accessibility and safety providing better linkage to City walking and bicycling trail systems. o Staff Response: ■ These goals and policies do not apply to private development utilizing right of way. Additionally, this rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal. Policy 13.4.8: Encourage and support public transportation services. The project is consistent with this policy by helping to extend safe access routes to nearby park and ride and public transportation. Goal 13.6: Non -Motorized Transportation Policies Policy 13.6.1: Consider and provide for all users of the roadway, including pedestrians and bicyclists, as appropriate, when new streets and street improvements are made. Policy 13.6.3: Include pedestrian and bicycle improvements in street improvement projects, as appropriate. The prioritized list of missing sidewalk linkages and the Bicycle Friendly Routes map adopted with the Walk and Roll Non -motorized Transportation Plan is the priority network to connect schools, employment centers, parks, shopping and other local and regional destinations. Policy 13.6.6: Construct neighborhood links by providing additional sidewalks and trails as opportunities and development occur. o Applicant Statement: ■ Rezoning and development of the subject property to include street frontage improvements will provide additional linkage consistent with goals of policies 13.6.1, 13.6.3 and 13.6.6. Planned pedestrian and bicycle friendly routes pass alongside the subject property. o Staff Response: ■ This rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal. 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. • Staff Analysis: TMC 18.14.010, regarding the purpose of the High Density Residential (HDR) district, states 102 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 17 of 19 "...intended to provide a high -density, multiple family district which is also compatible with commercial and office areas." (Attachment D) The proposed HDR zoning would allow development that is more intensive than some neighboring single-family homes, but of similar or lesser intensity than nearby commercial and multi -family residential properties. See Attachment C for applicant response to criteria. 3. There are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map • Staff Analysis: There have been no zoning changes in this area since 1995 when the current zoning was instituted. Only one new building —the DRA Professional Center-- has been constructed nearby, in the RCM zone, in 2011. There has been no change to the existing LDR zone since the previous zoning became effective. Since 1995, fewer housing units have been constructed in the City of Tukwila than have been set by our housing goals. King County sets Countywide Planning Policies and growth targets, and reports that "Since 2006, Tukwila has grown at 6% of the pace needed to achieve its 2035 housing growth target of 5,626 units. During this period, the total number of housing units in Tukwila grew by roughly 2%. At this current rate, Tukwila is under the production pace needed to meet its 2035 growth target and needs to grow at an annual rate of 3.2% to reach its remaining target by 2035." King County recommends the City of Tukwila take reasonable measures to achieve additional housing growth, including taking "action to encourage and/or incentivize residential development". One way to incentivize residential development is to permit rezones on undeveloped properties to higher residential densities. 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. • Staff Analysis: A rezone from Low -Density Residential to High -Density Residential would increase the potential for a small multifamily building to be constructed on the property. Increasing housing capacity is in the furtherance of public health, safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare. Residential development is unlikely to adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood, which is dominated by other residential uses of similar intensities. Additionally, higher residential densities provide additional support to local businesses, such as the commercial building located across the street from this property, and increases those living within close walking distance of transit. 103 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 18 of 19 CONCLUSIONS Criteria 1: Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: • The rezone is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan policies: o Policy 3.1.1: Provide sufficient zoned housing potential to accommodate future single- and multi -family households to meet the regional growth target of 4,800 new housing units by 2031. ■ This rezone proposal would increase zoned housing potential. o Policy 3.2.1: Provide zoning that allows a variety of housing throughout the City to allow for diverse, equitable neighborhoods. ■ This rezone proposal would permit additional variety of housing in a neighborhood that historically has been home to both multifamily and single-family housing. o Policy 3.2.2: Encourage a full range of housing opportunities for all population segments, including very low-income households earning less than 30% AMI, through actions including, but not limited to, revising the Tukwila's zoning map and development codes as appropriate, which would enable a wide variety of housing types to be built. ■ This rezone proposal would enable a wider variety of housing types to be built in an established neighborhood, increasing housing opportunities. o Policy 3.2.3: Provide sufficient appropriate zoning for housing of all types, including government - assisted housing, housing for low-income families, manufactured housing, multi- family housing, and group homes and foster care facilities, subject to conditions that appropriately integrate them into existing neighborhoods. ■ This rezone proposal would help provide appropriate zoning for multifamily housing in a neighborhood that historically has been home to both multifamily and single-family housing, in a transitional parcel between commercial and single-family uses. Criteria 2: Consistency with Zone: • The High -Density Residential zoning district would allow a small multi -family structure on the site, in scale with existing nearby multi -family structures and of lesser intensity than the neighboring commercial structure. Criteria 3: Changed conditions: • A 4-story commercial structure was constructed across the street from this parcel, in 2011, in the Regional Commercial Mixed Use zoning district. • There have been no zoning changes in the vicinity since the LDR and RCM zoning was instituted in 1995. • Since 2006, Tukwila has, according to King County, produced housing at a rate 94% slower than is necessary to meet our 2035 housing growth target. • Since 2015, the median sale price of a single-family home in Tukwila has increased 97%, from — $303,000 to —$594,000. The median sale price of a unit in a multi -family home in Tukwila has increased 182%, from "111,000 to —$313,000. 104 L22-0127: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 19 of 19 • Tukwila's housing production has been determined by King County to be the lowest of all jurisdictions within the core metropolitan area, both in total number and in percentage of growth target. Criteria 4: Benefit to community: • The proposed rezone would positively affect the community by providing needed housing capacity on an undeveloped parcel in a transit rich location near existing businesses and other multi -family structures. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approving the rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) to High Density Residential (HDR) with no conditions. 105 106 Current Zoning Map 1s3501 �XCP.Otior) Ar Go 10/26/2023, 11:35:02 AM Parcels City Limits Buildings Addresses (Tukwila) Zoning LDR Low Density Residential RCM Regional Commercial Mixed Use Overlay Area 1:1,128 0 0.01 0.01 I i 0.02 mi 0 0.01 0.02 0.04 km City of Tukwila, King County, King County, Sources: Esri, HERE, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community Web AppBuilder for ArcWeb AppBuilder for Arlin 7 Tukwila Technology Services i City of Tukwila, King County 1 King County i Esri Community Maps Contributors, City of Renton, King County, WA State Parks GIS, © OpenStreetMap, Microsoft, E r, 108 Proposed Zoning Map 10/2612023, 11:35:02 AM Parcels City Limits Buildings • Addresses (Tukwila) Zoning L LDR Low Density Residential R M Regional Commercial Mixed Use a AeA Overlay Area HDR High Density Residential 1:1,1 6 0 001 001 0A2 mi U 0.01 0.02 0.04 kni CiY of Tukaaa, FCi, County, King Count, Sources: Esri, (HERE, Garvin, FAO, NOVA, USGS, h: Opal -Gimp -Amp oonIrGutors, and Ina GIS uso• C mmunity Wet. ppE Li Icier tptArW15 "Lawn Trr.Fnringy Scrnrrs I Cty of TtJ iL , YCng Counnj I King County I Exn Canvniru y Maps Cantrihulnrx, City o' Renton. King Cgprty, Wk Stara Parks GIS, 0 CmonStrnr.IMap. M¢rosoll, Exri, 109 110 E. DECISION CRITERIA (TMC 18..84.020) The burden of proof that a change to the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Maps are 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. This is a type 5 decision. It is a quasi-judicial decision made by the City Council who will decide your request using the criteria listed below. It is essential that you describe in a clear and precise manner why the change should be approved. You may submit other documentation in support of your proposal. • Provide a written response that demonstrates how each of the following circumstances justifies a map change for your property: 1. The proposed amendment to the [Comprehensive Plan and ] Zoning map is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 2. The proposed amendment to the [Comprehensive Plan and ] Zoning map is consistent with the scope and purpose of the TMC Title 18, Zoning Code, and the description and purpose of the zone classification applied for; 3. There are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the [Comprehensive Plan and ] Zoning Map; and 4. The proposed amendment to the [Comprehensive Plan and] Zoning map will be in the interest of and 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. Response Submittal: (1) The proposed project and amendment to the zoning map is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan by the following examples: Element 1 COMMUNITY IMAGE AND IDENTITY GOAL 1.1 A community of inviting neighborhoods and vibrant business districts. POLICIES Page 1 of 12 111 1.1.2 Strengthen the image and character of Tukwila's distinct areas and neighborhoods. Implementation Strategies: • Continue to implement the "Walk and Roll" Plan. • Support residential neighborhood identity where appropriate. Proposal consistency with the City's Comprehensive Plan: Direct existing sidewalk access to the adjacent public transit facilities encourages non motorized modes of transportation in alignment with the "Walk and Roll" objectives. The Project site is situated across the street from apartment dwellings, strategic park - and -ride facility, a professional office building, and adjacent to single family residential neighborhoods. The prominent intersection of diverse uses and occupancies benefits from the convenient location of additional residential housing. The local residential identity is enhanced by a small multifamily project that serves as a transition between the adjacent mixed use office / residential building and the neighborhood. Element 2 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT - Encourages growth into certain areas through the use of zoning and developmental regulations. The following are potential tools available to the City to enhance economic development in the City: v Industrial revenue bonds for certain areas Multi -family property tax exemption Changing the present zoning of the subject property to compliment the adjacent RCM zoning will bring additional economic opportunity to a long standing vacant lot with the introduction of additional neighborhood accessible residential housing that will bring new tax base opportunities to the neighborhood. The connection to and use of city utilities will add city revenue and the provision of available parking will enhance the functionality and viability of adjacent DRA Office Building who's occupancy of professional services are available to the surrounding community. Element 3 HOUSING GOAL 3.1 The City of Tukwila provides the City's fair share of regional housing. POLICIES 3.1.1 Provide sufficient zoned housing potential to accommodate future single- and multi -family households to meet the regional growth target of 4,800 new housing units by 2031. Page 2 of 12 112 3.1.2 Work with residents and property owners to consider housing options that meet current and future needs. The proposal is consistent with planning goals by providing a transitionary project of higher residential density and housing option type in an area compatible and complimentary to adjacent multifamily residences and commercial office development. GOAL 3.2 The City of Tukwila has safe, healthy and affordable homes for all residents in Tukwila. POLICIES 3.2.1 Provide zoning that allows a variety of housing throughout the City to allow for diverse, equitable neighborhoods. The proposal is consistent with planning goals by providing housing type options in an area compatible and complimentary to adjacent multifamily and single family residences. 3.2.2 Encourage a full range of housing opportunities for all population segments, including very low-income households earning less than 30% AMI, through actions including, but not limited to, revising the Tukwila's zoning map and development codes as appropriate, which would enable a wide variety of housing types to be built. 3.2.3 Provide sufficient appropriate zoning for housing of all types, including government- assisted housing, housing for low-income families, manufactured housing, multi- family housing, and group homes and foster care facilities, subject to conditions that appropriately integrate them into existing neighborhoods. The proposal is consistent with Policies 3.3.2 and 2.2.3 by providing smaller housing units in an area predominated by larger single family residences. Proximity to a major transit facility, live work options, and integrated secure parking and tenant storage add to the affordability and diversity of the housing proposal. Implementation Strategies: • Promote mixed -use developments with ground -level commercial space and residences, at and above the street level in specified areas. • Explore and develop incentive zoning, a housing trust fund, density bonuses, parking exemptions, deferred or reduced payment of impact fees, multi -family tax exemptions, and/or other tools to develop or maintain affordable housing that meets the needs of the community, specifically units sized and priced for low- and very -low- income residents. Element 4 NATURAL ENVIRONMENT Page 3 of 12 113 POLICIES GOAL 4.8 4.8.2 Require that all proposed development applications identify hydrologic features, both on and off -site, that could be impacted by the project. Evaluate and prevent project impacts on on -site and off -site watercourses, wetlands, drainage features and springs to avoid adverse impacts to existing sensitive area hydrology. The proposal is consistent with Policies 4.8.2 by providing project storm drainage analysis and developing a storm drainage management plan constant with the policies of the City of Tukwila and State Codes. GOAL 4.12 Trees are recognized by Tukwila citizens, businesses, City staff and decision -makers for their benefits to the environment, urban infrastructure and their aesthetic value. Urban Forestry POLICIES 4.12.1 Develop a formal urban forest management plan to promote and guide preservation, restoration and maintenance of a sustainable urban forest, using the goals and policies of this chapter as a basis for guidance. The proposal is consistent with Policies 4.12.1 by providing street trees on two street frontages along common property boundary lines and within the open space servicing the residential component of the project. Element 6 PARKS, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE GOAL 6.1 Safe, Convenient and Connected System - Parks, recreation opportunities and open spaces that are close to home and/or work and that are interconnected by safe streets, off-street trails and public transportation. POLICIES 6.1.3 Link parks to neighborhood gathering spots and other destinations in the community and region such as schools, neighboring jurisdictions, regional parks and natural areas, and major employment centers. 6.1.12 Maximize potential and capacity of existing parks and recreation resources to offset existing and future demand. Implementation Strategies: Consider the street sidewalk system as a link in the connecting network, when necessary. The proposal is consistent with Policies 6.1.3 and 6.1.12 by new sidewalks per City of Tukwila development standards that will help link the neighborhood to nearby parks and recreation facilities within walking and bicycling distances benefiting both future tenants and existing neighborhood residents. Page 4 of 12 114 GOAL 6.2 A Network of Green Spaces - Recreational amenities, historical sites, rivers, wetlands, creeks, and other natural resources that are connected to each other and neighboring networks of lands. This network defines Tukwila as a Northwest city, and includes visually significant bands of vegetation that contrast with the built environment. POLICIES 6.2.1 Recognize that the City's open space network will be made up of public and private lands that provide or have the potential to provide the following functions: Passive recreational resources; The proposal is consistent with Policies 6.2.1 by providing 3,200 sf of landscaped passive open space creating wildlife habitat and opportunities for rest and relaxation in a natural environment. Element 7 RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS (Tukwila Hill) NEIGHBORHOOD ACCESS Ideally, the built, natural and social environments in neighborhoods combine to provide opportunities for residents to interact, experience nature, enjoy leisure and physical activities, and to easily access food and other retail opportunities. However, many of Tukwila's neighborhoods lack sidewalks, paths and other amenities such as retail and services within walking distance. This limits residents' ability to enjoy their community and to get around without a motor vehicle. Tukwila's current regulations only require the construction of sidewalks for short plats/ single-family development projects of five or more contiguous lots. Sometimes, this has the inadvertent effect of discouraging maximum lot creation due to the increased cost of infrastructure (i.e., developers may create four lots when they have enough land for five). POLICIES 7.3.2 Improve the public infrastructure in all neighborhoods to an equivalent level of quality, with an emphasis on sidewalks. Implementation Strategies • Require sidewalks adjacent to all new development or participation in a no -protest LID with all new residential development in specified areas, in support of implementation of the Walk and Roll Plan • When possible, create flexible development standards to provide creative solutions to infill challenges for short plats or smaller developments, when development meets or exceeds the goals established by the Code and neighborhood groups and the Page 5 of 12 115 neighborhood outreach process but may not exactly conform to the written standards. The project is consistent with Policy 7.3.2 by providing new sidewalk, curb, and gutter along two street frontage ROW's currently either unimproved or marginally improved. GOAL 7.4 Neighborhood Sustainability: Continuing enhancement and revitalization of residential neighborhoods to encourage long-term residency and environmental sustainability. POLICIES 7.4.2 Decrease greenhouse gas emissions through land use strategies that promote a mix of housing, employment and services at densities sufficient to promote walking, bicycling, transit and other alternatives to auto travel. Implementation Strategies • Development of a variety of new housing, including single-family homes. • Require sidewalk and landscape planter for both sides of residential streets and on two-lane street improvements, where appropriate. • Require sidewalk and landscape planters in front of all multi -family developments, where appropriate. The proposal is consistent with Policy 7.4.2 by providing a smaller apartment housing option in contrast to the neighborhoods predominately single family residential nature at a density sufficient to promote walking, bicycling, transit and other alternatives to auto travel. New sidewalks and landscape planters will be provided as as part of the development plans. GOAL 7.5 Neighborhood Development: Tukwila's residential neighborhoods have a high -quality, pedestrian character with a variety of housing options for residents in all stages of life. GENERAL POLICIES 7.5.1 Encourage resident identification with the neighborhood through physical improvements and programs including neighborhood gathering spots, landmark designation and improvement, and streetscape improvements. 7.5.2 Ensure that residential development, when applicable, reflects high design quality in harmony with identified, valued features of the natural environment and historic development. 7.5.3 Support single-family residential in -fill housing that is in harmony with the existing neighborhood as a means of achieving adequate, affordable and/or diverse housing. 7.5.4 Encourage single-family residence design to foster a sense of safety and security. 7.5.5 Develop neighborhood -specific single-family regulations that encourage compatibility with the existing scale of residential structures in the neighborhood; provide an appropriate relationship of lot area, building scale and building siting; and maintain a sense of community (e.g., mature trees, pedestrian scale, sensitive transition between public and private spaces). Page 6 of 12 116 Implementation Strategies • Encourage off-street parking and garage and carport standards that reduce auto dominance, such as requirements for less visually prominent garages and/or front yard setbacks for garages. The proposal is consistent with Policy 7.5.1-7.5.5 and Implement Strategies by providing location sensitive design features that include high quality materials, appropriate modulation to the residential neighborhood, pedestrian scale use of materials and architectural detailing, employing measures to minimize building height, canopy to shade and conceal open parking stalls, below grade parking, parking exceeding twice code requirement, below grade tenant storage to increase efficiency of residential units, abundant landscape screening, canopy, visual interest, and color and limiting exposure to adjacent residential properties to two stories with well defined transitions between public and private space. Extra parking helps relieve current neighborhood over -demand for parking and helps encourage less residential on -street parking uses. MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT POLICIES 7.5.10 Ensure that all multi -family residential developments contribute to a strong sense of community through: • site planning focused on neighborhood design integration; • building design architecturally linked with the surrounding neighborhood and style; • streetscapes that encourage pedestrian use and safe transition to private spaces, with trees reducing the effects of large paved areas; • recreational spaces and facilities on site; • creative project design that provides a diversity of housing types within adopted design criteria, standards and guidelines; and • operational and management policies that ensure safe, stable living environments. The project is consistent with Policy 7.5.10 by providing unique but neighborhood sensitive architectural design and style, pedestrian friendly courts, sidewalks, seating areas, abundant canopy trees surrounding parking and sidewalks, residential open space areas in addition to viewing decks, and residential units that offer a compact and convenient alternative to nearby single family residences. GOAL 7.6 Neighborhood -Supportive Commercial Areas : Neighborhood -supportive commercial areas, including Residential Commercial Centers, that bring small commercial concentrations into and adjacent to existing residential neighborhoods to improve existing residential areas while providing products and services to nearby residents. Page 7 of 12 117 POLICIES 7.6.1 Link commercial areas located within approximately one -quarter -mile of residential areas with high -quality pedestrian and bicycle access facilities. 7.6.3 Employ appropriate design elements to blend in with the character of the residential neighborhood. 7.6.4 Encourage new construction rather than converting existing residential structures to commercial uses. 7.6.6 Create a logical and harmonious division between commercial or industrial uses and residential uses by using changes in topography and through appropriate development standards, including street design. 7.6.7 Ensure appropriate structural transitions between commercial and residential zones. Implementation Strategies • On -street parking along the street front, behind or beside buildings. • Continue to apply multi -family and commercial design guidelines, with an emphasis on buffering residential uses from commercial and industrial uses. The project is consistent with Policy 7.6.1-7.6.7 by providing a small scale high quality apartment project with approachable street frontage with sensitive design transitions to office and residential occupancies through architectural detail and material choices, both being sympathetic to the scale and complexity of surrounding residential homes, apartment buildings, and commercial development. Ample landscaping is proposed to help soften and buffer the transition to adjacent single family residence. The natural slope of the property maintains two story exposure to adjacent single family residential lots with daylight basement exposure to commercial property, apartments, and street frontages. GOAL 13.1 GENERAL TRANSPORTATION POLICIES 13.1.2 Focus on transportation efficiency by maximizing the movement of people with streets that are designed to be safe for all transportation modes, accommodating existing land uses while designing for the future. Development of the subject property with the provision more than double code required parking and implementing shared parking strategies will help reduce local neighborhood on -street parking promoting pedestrian and transportation safety consistent with the goals of this policy. Alternative transportation options such as walking, bicycling, transit, and live/work opportunities are available to project users by way of convenient proximity to city bicycle and walking trails, park -and -ride, and transit lines. On -site and nearby employment opportunities will help reduce traffic load to local streets lessening the need for congesting on -street parking and promoting transportation efficiency and safety. Page 8 of 12 118 13.1.11 Encourages supporting electric vehicle charging stations and other alternative fuel sources, as available. Use of the subject property that includes parking can include an electric vehicle charging station consistent with this policy. The project development plan includes electric vehicle charging stations at a 1:3 ratio of stations to residential units. Implementation Strategies • Implement Safe Routes to School. The proposal is consistent with strategy goals by 1. Helping to reduce on -street parking by providing additional off-street parking. 2. Providing safe pedestrian travel with new sidewalks and street improvements as part of the development improvements of the now vacant parcel. 13.2 STREET NETWORK POLICIES 13.2.10 Evaluate street improvement projects for the inclusion of features that support the Complete Streets policy and the Walk and Roll Plan in order to encourage walking, bicycling and transit use. The proposal is consistent with strategy goals by providing street improvements at a strategic intersection that will include new sidewalks, curbs, planting strips, and proper street drainage that will provide needed linkages for City Bicycle Friendly Routes, and the Walk and Roll Non -motorized Transportation Plan Routes. Project residential occupants as well as surrounding neighborhood and transit center users will benefit from improved and safer access to these City provided programs and use will be encouraged. 13.2.11 Design intersections and sidewalks to promote pedestrian safety and foster walking as a viable mode of transportation. 13.2.12 Include roadside plantings whenever feasible for street and road improvement projects on slopes to help mitigate the land used for roadway and sidewalk improvements. Development of the subject property will include street ROW sidewalks and plantings consistent with policy 13.2.10, 13.2.11, and 13.2.12. The currently unimproved southwest corner of 52nd Ave. S and 53rd Ave. S intersection will have improved accessibility and safety providing better linkage to City walking and bicycling trail systems. Page 9 of 12 119 13.4.8 Encourage and support public transportation services. The project is consistent with this policy by helping to extend safe access routes to nearby park and ride and public transportation. GOAL 13.6 NON -MOTORIZED TRANSPORTATION POLICIES 13.6.1 Consider and provide for all users of the roadway, including pedestrians and bicyclists, as appropriate, when new streets and street improvements are made. 13.6.3 Include pedestrian and bicycle improvements in street improvement projects, as appropriate. The prioritized list of missing sidewalk linkages and the Bicycle Friendly Routes map adopted with the Walk and Roll Non -motorized Transportation Plan is the priority network to connect schools, employment centers, parks, shopping and other local and regional destinations. 13.6.6 Construct neighborhood links by providing additional sidewalks and trails as opportunities and development occur. Rezoning and development of the subject property to include street frontage improvements will provide additional linkage consistent with goals of policies 13.6.1, 13.6.3 and 13.6.6. Planned pedestrian and bicycle friendly routes pass alongside the subject property. (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; HDR Zone Table 18-6: Land Uses Allowed by District Permitted Uses (1758 §1 (part), 1995)-The following uses are permitted outright within a High density residential zoning designation, subject to compliance with all other applicable requirements of the Tukwila Municipal Code: Dwelling -Multi-family Permitted Use in HDR Zone. The proposed project is consistent with the City's development regulations set forth in the City Municipal Code and specifically Title 18 - Zoning Code HDR classification in consideration of: a. The type of land use of the proposed project and rezone; The proposed Residential occupancies are permitted outright per code under the sites proposed rezoning change to HDR. b. The level of development, such as units per acres or other measures of density or use; Page 10 of 12 120 The small scale 7 unit proposal will have minimal impact to personnel or public service requirements by the rezone to HDR and the eventual construction of the proposed project. The project size is limited to 7 dwelling units per the total parcel square footage. c. Availability of infrastructure, including public facilities and services needed to serve the development; Adequate infrastructure and public services are available to the site in a similar fashion to the adjacent existing DRA Professional Office Building. Net increase in public service requirements by the proposed rezone and building development will be typical of a building of the proposed size and occupancy and within the service capacity of present utility systems. d. The character of development, including compliance with Title 18 and all other provisions of this City Municipal Code. The proposed rezone and proposed improvements are intended to compliment the existing RCM zoned DRA Professional Center while meeting all requirements of Title 18 relative to a multi -family building and provides a smooth transition and integration into the existing adjacent LDR zoned neighborhood. (3) That there are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the zoning map; Since the current zoning became effective, the DRA Professional Center adjacent to the subject property has been fully developed but parking is an issue as a result of area wide parking difficulties, acerbated by the often overflowing nearby park -and -ride facility. The requested rezone to HDR and subsequent additionally available shared parking would lessen the current parking issue and compliment the recently completed residential build -out of the DRA building, (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. The proposed amendment to the zoning map allowing the development of the proposed multifamily building will: 1. Improve pedestrian and traffic safety by reducing present neighborhood on -street parking issues by providing below building parking and open parking and though shared parking and surplus parking. 2. Improve safety of pedestrian and bicycle connections to local transit centers, parks, businesses, schools, neighborhoods, and for existing and future City trail programs and routes by providing new sidewalks and street frontage improvements. Page 11 of 12 121 3. Help transition between RCM and LDR zones by maintaining sensitivity to neighborhood scale, use of high quality pedestrian scale building materials and architectural details, provide building massing sympathetic to both residential and commercial features of surrounding structures. The rezone to compliment the adjacent RCM zone is a natural extension of existing developments with no adverse impact to the surrounding neighborhood. 4. Street frontage and development of the existing vacant lot will add value to neighboring properties by upgrading the area. The opportunity of providing denser smaller scale housing will add interest and diversity helping to promote interaction and encourage community building. Page 12 of 12 122 Return to Title Page Return to Chapter 18.12 TITLE 18 — ZONING 18.12.070 Basic Development Standards Development within the Medium Density Residential District shall conform to the following listed and referenced standards: MDR BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Lot area, minimum 8,000 sq. ft. (Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats) Lot area per unit (multi -family) 3,000 sq. ft. (For townhouses the density shall be calculated based on one unit per 3000 sq. ft. of parent lot area. The "unit lot" area shall be allowed to include the common access easements). Average lot width (min. 20 ft. street frontage width), minimum 60 feet (Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats) Setbacks, minimum: Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats • Front - 1st floor 15 feet • Front - 2nd floor 20 feet • Front - 3rd floor 30 feet (20 feet for townhouses) • Second front - 1st floor 7.5 feet • Second front - 2nd floor 10 feet • Second front - 3rd floor 15 feet (10 feet for townhouses) • Sides - 1st floor 10 feet • Sides - 2nd floor 20 feet (10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Sides - 3rd floor 20 feet (30 feet if adjacent to LDR; 10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Rear - 1st floor 10 feet • Rear - 2nd floor 20 feet (10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Rear - 3rd floor 20 feet (30 feet if adjacent to LDR; 10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) Refer to TMC Chapter 18.52, "Landscape Requirements," Table A, for perimeter and parking lot landscaping requirements. Townhouse building separation, minimum • 1 and 2 story buildings 10 feet • 3 story buildings 20 feet Height, maximum 30 feet Development area coverage 50% maximum (75% for townhouses) Recreation space 400 sq. ft. per dwelling unit (1,000 sq. ft. min.) Off-street parking: • Residential See TMC Chapter 18.56, Off-street Parking & Loading Regulations. • Accessory dwelling unit See TMC Section 18.50.220 • Other uses See TMC Chapter 18.56, Off-street Parking & Loading Regulations (Ord. 2678 §24, 2022; Ord. 2581 §3, 2018; Ord. 2199 §12, 2008; Ord. 1976 §23, 2001; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995) CHAPTER 18.14 HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (HDR) DISTRICT Sections: 18.14.010 Purpose 18.14.020 Land Uses Allowed 18.14.030 Recreation Space Requirements 18.14.060 Design Review 18.14.070 Basic Development Standards 18.14.010 Purpose A. This district implements the High -Density Residential Comprehensive Plan designation, which allows up to 22.0 dwelling units per net acre. Senior citizen housing is allowed up to 60 dwelling units per acre, subject to additional restrictions. It is intended to provide a high -density, multiple -family district which is also compatible with commercial and office areas. Certain HDR properties are identified as Commercial Redevelopment Areas (see Figures 18-9 or 18-10) to encourage aggregation and redevelopment of properties that front on Tukwila International Boulevard. Aggregation and commercial redevelopment of these sites would implement the Pacific Highway Revitalization Plan and provide opportunities to redefine and create more uniform borders between the commercial corridor and adjacent residential neighborhoods. B. Certain HDR properties are located in the Urban Renewal Overlay (see Figure 18-15). Existing zoning and development standards will remain in place. The overlay provides additional alternate development standards that may be applied to development within the Urban Renewal Overlay upon request of the property owner, and if the development meets certain qualifying criteria. Urban Renewal Overlay district standards would implement the Tukwila International Boulevard Revitalization Plan through more intensive development. (Ord. 2257 §7 (part), 2009; Ord. 1865 §12, 1999; Ord. 1830 §1, 1998; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995) 18.14.020 Land Uses Allowed Refer to TMC Chapter 18.09, "Land Uses Allowed by District." (Ord. 2500 §6, 2016) 18.14.030 Recreation Space Requirements In the HDR zoning district, any proposed multiple -family structure, complex or development shall provide, on the premises and for the use of the occupants, a minimum amount of recreation space according to the provisions of TMC Section 18.14.030, subparagraphs 1 through 4. In the TSO zone with underlying LDR zoning on land that adjoins the City of SeaTac, recreation space shall meet the provisions of TMC Section 18.14.030, subparagraphs 2 through 4, in addition to the minimum required area as specified in TMC Section 18.41.090.A.1. Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-42 123 Return to Title Page Return to Chapter 18.14 TITLE 18 — ZONING 1. Required Area. a. For each proposed dwelling unit in the multiple - family development and detached zero -lot -line type of development, a minimum of 400 square feet (100 square feet for senior citizen housing) of recreation space shall be provided. Any multiple -family structure, complex or development shall provide a minimum of 1,000 square feet of total recreation space. b. Townhouse units shall provide at least 250 square feet of the 400 square feet of recreation space as private, ground level open space measuring not less than 10 feet in any dimension. c. The front, side and rear yard setback areas required by the applicable zoning district shall not qualify as recreation space. However, these setback areas can qualify as recreation space for townhouses if they are incorporated into private open space with a minimum dimension of 10 feet on all sides. 2. Indoor or Covered Space. a. No more than 50% of the required recreation space may be indoor or covered space in standard multi -family developments. Senior citizen housing must have at least 20% indoor or covered space. b. The Board of Architectural Review may grant a maximum of two square feet of recreation space for each one square foot of extensively improved indoor recreation space provided. Interior facility improvements would include a full range of weight machines, sauna, hot tub, large screen television and the like. 3. Uncovered Space. a. A minimum of 50% of the total required recreation space shall be open or uncovered; up to 100% of the total requirement may be in open or uncovered recreation space in standard multi -family developments. Senior citizen housing allows up to 80% of recreation space to be outdoors and has no minimum outdoor space requirement. b. Recreation space shall not exceed a 4% slope in any direction unless it is determined that the proposed space design clearly facilitates and encourages the anticipated use as endorsed by the Director. c. The Board of Architectural Review may grant a maximum credit of two square feet of recreation space for each one square foot of outdoor pool and surrounding deck area. 4. General Requirements. a. Multiple -family complexes (except senior citizen housing, detached zero -lot -line and townhouses with nine or fewer units), which provide dwelling units with two or more bedrooms, shall provide adequate recreation space for children with at least one space for the 5- to 12-year-old group. Such space shall be at least 25% but not more than 50% of the total recreation space required under TMC Section 18.14.030 (1), and shall be designated, located and maintained in a safe condition. b. Adequate fencing, plant screening or other buffer shall separate the recreation space from parking areas, driveways or public streets. c. The anticipated use of all required recreation areas shall be specified and designed to clearly accommodate that use. (Ord. 2580 §2, 2018; Ord. 2525 §3, 2017) 18.14.060 Design Review Design review is required for all multi -family structures, mobile or manufactured home parks, developments in a Commercial Redevelopment Area that propose the uses and standards of an adjacent commercial zone, and in the shoreline jurisdiction, if new building construction or exterior changes are involved and the cost of the exterior work equals or exceeds 10% of the building's assessed valuation. Multi -family structures up to 1,500 square feet will be reviewed administratively. (See TMC Chapter 18.60, Board of Architectural Review.) (Ord. 2368 §9, 2012; Ord. 2005, §2, 2002; Ord. 1865 §15, 1999; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995) 18.14.070 Basic Development Standards Development within the High -Density Residential District shall conform to the following listed and referenced standards: HDR BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Lot area, minimum 9,600 sq. ft. (Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats) Lot area per unit (multi -family, except senior citizen housing) 2,000 sq. ft. (For townhouses the density shall be calculated based on one unit per 2000 sq. ft. of parent lot area. The "unit lot" area shall be allowed to include the common access easements.) Average lot width (min. 20 ft. street frontage width), minimum 60 feet (Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats) Setbacks, minimum: Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats • Front - 1st floor 15 feet • Front - 2nd floor 20 feet • Front - 3rd floor 30 feet (20 feet for townhouses) • Front— 4th floor 45 feet (20 feet for townhouses) • Second front - 1st floor 7.5 feet • Second front - 2nd floor 10 feet • Second front - 3rd floor 15 feet (10 feet for townhouses) • Second front— 4th floor 22.5 feet (10 feet for townhouses) • Sides - 1st floor 10 feet • Sides - 2nd floor 20 feet (10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Sides - 3rd floor 20 feet (30 feet if adjacent to LDR) (10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Sides — 4th floor 30 feet (20 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) flygaluced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-43 Return to Title Page Return to Chapter 18.14 TITLE 18 — ZONING • Rear - 1st floor 10 feet • Rear - 2nd floor 20 feet (10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Rear - 3rd floor 20 feet (30 feet if adjacent to LDR; 10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Rear— 4th floor 30 feet (20 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) Refer to TMC Chapter 18.52, "Landscape Requirements," Table A, for perimeter and parking lot landscaping requirements. Townhouse building separation, minimum • 1 and 2 story buildings 10 feet • 3 and 4 story buildings 20 feet Height, maximum 45 feet Development area coverage 50% maximum (except senior citizen housing), (75% for townhouses) Recreation space 400 sq. ft. per dwelling unit (1,000 sq. ft. min.) Recreation space, senior citizen housing 100 sq. ft. per dwelling unit Off-street parking: • Residential (except senior citizen housing) See TMC Chapter 18.56, Off-street Parking & Loading Regulations. • Accessory dwelling unit See TMC Section 18.50.220 • Other uses, including senior citizen housing See TMC Chapter 18.56, Off-street Parking & Loading Regulations Performance Standards: Use, activity and operations within a structure or a site shall comply with (1) standards adopted by the Puget Sound Air Pollution Control Agency for odor, dust, smoke and other airborne pollutants, (2) TMC Chapter 8.22, "Noise", and, (3) adopted State and Federal standards for water quality and hazardous materials. In addition, all development subject to the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act, RCW 43.21C, shall be evaluated to determine whether adverse environmental impacts have been adequately mitigated. (Ord. 2678 §25, 2022; Ord. 2581 §4, 2018; Ord. 2199 §14, 2008, Ord. 1976 §27, 2001; Ord. 1830 §3, 1998; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995) CHAPTER 18.16 MIXED USE OFFICE (MUO) DISTRICT Sections: 18.16.010 Purpose 18.16.020 Land Uses Allowed 18.16.060 On -Site Hazardous Substances 18.16.070 Design Review 18.16.080 Basic Development Standards 18.16.010 Purpose This district implements the Mixed -Use Office Comprehensive Plan designation which allows up to 14.5 dwelling units per net acre. Senior citizen housing is allowed up to 60 dwelling units per acre, subject to additional restrictions. It is intended to create and maintain areas characterized by professional and commercial office structures, mixed with certain complementary retail and residential uses. (Ord. 1830 §4, 1998; Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) 18.16.020 Land Uses Allowed Refer to TMC Chapter 18.09, "Land Uses Allowed by District." (Ord. 2500 §7, 2016) 18.16.060 On -Site Hazardous Substances No on -site hazardous substance processing and handling, or hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities shall be permitted, unless clearly incidental and secondary to a permitted use. On -site hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities shall be subject to the State siting criteria (RCW 70.105). (See TMC Chapter 21.08.) (Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995) 18.16.070 Design Review Design review is required for all projects located within the shoreline jurisdiction that involve new building construction or exterior changes if the cost of the exterior changes equals or exceeds 10% of the building's assessed valuation, for commercial structures 1,500 square feet or larger outside the shoreline jurisdiction, for all structures containing multi -family dwellings and all structures in the Tukwila International Boulevard corridor. Commercial structures between 1,500 and 5,000 square feet, multi -family structures up to 1,500 square feet, and all buildings up to 1,500 square feet in the Tukwila International Boulevard corridor will be reviewed administratively. Design review is also required for certain exterior repairs, reconstructions, alterations or improvements to buildings over 10,000 square feet. (See TMC Chapter 18.60, Board of Architectural Review.) (Ord. 2368 §11, 2012; Ord. 2005 §3, 2002; Ord. 1758 §1 (part), 1995) Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-44 125 126 Attachment E: Public Comments Comment 1: Emily Sarah Gendler Zisette From: Emily Sarah Gendler Zisette <ezisette@yahoo.com; Sent: Friday, May 19, 2023 2:06 PM To: Isaac Gloor Cc: CityCouncil Subject: Please Read (this one) L22-0127 / E23-0003 Hello. I am including City Council in this message because the issues pertaining to this re -zone application have broader implications for the entire city. I live at 13600 53rd Ave S. across the street from the proposed re -zone L22-0127 / E23-0003. I have several important concerns about how the proposal will impact this community and wildlife. Reading the SEPA I see several errors mostly regarding vegetation and habitat value. Several mature exceptional trees are on the property and right next to it (Big Leaf Maple. Western Red Cedar. and another large conifer believed to be on the neighbor's property but could harmed from construction without drip line protection.) These are not noted on the SEPA or marked on the proposed site plans. These must be preserved and protected during construction. This should require a site visit with an independent ISA certified arborist for tree assessment and protection plan. The applicant did not mark any presence of animals, which is false. I regularly see eagles, hawks, ravens, flickers and many different species of songbirds on the property. There is very lush. dense vegetation which makes it impossible to note all species without trespassing on the property. The lot is currently providing much wildlife value. and would increase without construction as more native tree species have been naturalizing and increasing in size the past several years. The proposed construction plan will prevent that. There will be substantial impact to existing wildlife if existing trees are not protected. if shrubs and brush are cleared during nesting and fledging. and if the proposed plan for 90% impermeable surface is not amended for more vegetation. including large trees. The proposed plan does not provide habitat for wildlife. or enough landscape for the health of the community. The proposed 90% impermeable surface is incredibly concerning. even more -so without a green infrastructure stormwater plan (which does not exist for this plan). Impermeable surfaces contribute to the urban heat island effect, contributing to hotter and more dangerous neighborhoods. Trees have been proven many times over to be vital for the mental and physical health of a community and public safety. The size and species of trees matters. the positive impact of larger trees. especially conifers. cannot be compared to smaller trees in terms of impact on pollution. urban heating and wildlife. We need large trees in our urban environment. The site plan has only a 10' buffer for street trees. which are by definition not very big. (plus some negligible 'open space') ....this is not enough space to adequately provide wildlife habitat and space for a landscape that can provide benefit to the people in this community. Especially considering the current lot is almost fully covered with vegetation. I speak as someone who lives here. and a professional gardener. Tukwila has some of the worst air quality in the county. We need way more than 10% impermeable surface vegetation for our health. PARKING: The plan notes 7 proposed units. with 2 parking spaces required per unit. meaning 14 parking spaces. 127 The proposed 25 parking stalls in unnecessary. excessive. and will negatively impact the community with increased pollution. traffic. noise. impermeable surface... if the plans included just the 14 parking spaces as needed per code. more space could be designated for larger trees and more vegetation that would have a positive impact on community health and wildlife and result in actually aligning with the city comprehensive plan. If the parking stalls on the south side of the proposed above -ground lot were instead turned into landscape, this would provide the buffer needed to the adjacent homes as well. A 10' buffer with sparse trees is not enough buffer for the neighbors when the parking stalls aren't even needed. There is major transit, a park and ride. and an additional parking lot just a block away. There is no need for all this parking. There is no current 'over demand' for parking in the neighborhood. as the proposal notes. I have never seen the parking lot for the DRA building full. and I pass by all the time (in car and on foot with my dogs). I have never witnessed congested street parking on 52nd or nearby. There is a large parking lot below the DRA building which is also empty, across from the park and ride. There is a major transit bus stop a block away. I was present at the past meetings years ago for a re -zone application -- the applicant made the same argument then that they needed to rezone the lot to provide more parking for their existing building. The overwhelming response from the community then was against the argument for more parking even if people did not disagree with a change in zoning. The application is misleading with statements such as "abundant landscape screening" etc. This is clearly not true if they are also stating 90% impermeable surface with only 10' buffers. especially without noting proposed tree species or landscape plans. It is disheartening the proposal doesn't indicate it will be for low-income housing. I will write more on this later. We need more low-income housing. The impact of this proposal on existing low-income residents should be analyzed and considered. I know of people who can't continue to afford the increase in property tax that is coming with so much 'development'. We cannot let developers continue to push low income residents out. I have not witnessed any investment in. or care for this community by the property owner. I've never seen them. never heard of how they contribute to the community...they don't even pick up the trash that accumulates along the lot. I regularly pick up the trash myself. as do several other residents. While their motivation for this rezone is for their financial profit. I hope you listen to and factor in the contributions of the people who care about the people and wildlife in this community. future and present. Emily 128 Comment 2: Emily Sarah Gendler Zisette From: Emily Sarah Gendler Zisette <ezisette@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, May 22, 2023 9:06 AM To: Isaac Gloor Cc: CityCouncil Subject: Re: Please Read (this one) L22-0127 / E23-0003 Good Morning. Please read the email I sent on 5/19. Some of what it covers are: the errors in the SEPA application. lacking tree protection plan. inadequate landscaping. and the very negative impact the excessive parking lot will have on the people and wildlife in this community. Only 14 parking spaces are required per code for the 7 units. the proposal includes 25. with 16 being above ground with negligible landscape barrier. There is ample parking in the area and major transit. both a block away. The applicant notes 90% of the lot will be impermeable surface. Please see my email sent 5/19. I am not against housing and believe the rezone would be more beneficial if it was to be low-income housing. The excessive parking is a problem. One thing left out of my original message is the additional pollution and negative impact the parking lot will have on this community because of increased use of leaf blowers. Before you laugh at me. I'm not exaggerating this issue. There is plenty of data and well -researched information out there. Here is one article in case you are unaware: https://www.cleana ircollective.net/post/why-are-gas-powered-leaf-blowers-so-bad The increase in car emissions from the parking lot is already bad, but such a large parking lot will add so much more emissions and noise from the blowers. which can be even more toxic than cars. We already deal with more of this than most residential neighborhoods in Tukwila because of the existing commercial and apartment building the applicant also owns. There is excessive use of blowers...this weekend they were there blowing dust (they were blowing forever. so I went and checked at it was literally dust). Even electric blowers. though better than gas. present problems. https://www.audubon.org/magazine/spring-2021/why- cities-are-taking-action-limit-loud-and Leaving leaf litter is actually incredibly important to support native habitat and the health of the plants that drop the leaves. My email on 5/19 notes the importance of trees (please read my email)....the understory. what is planted underneath the trees, is also extremely important, and how the landscape is maintained. I'm trying to make it to the meeting this week. I'm not sure I can make it. please read my comments. Thanks. Emily 129 Comment 3: Nathan Dolejsi From: Nathan Dolejsi <nathandolejsi yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, May 29, 2023 8:43 PM To: Isaac Gloor Subject: Land use application questions Follow Up Flag: Follow up Flag Status: Flagged Hello. This is in reference to: 13536 52 Ave. S tukwila WA 98168 L22-0127 - Rezone own the property directly across the street at 13533 52nd Ave. S and I received the notice for a zoning change of the above referenced property. I had planned to attend the meeting on May 23rd but was unable to. I have looked at the plans on line and can't tell for how many total units the application is for. Please advise if possible. Also, if this application and development go through I am wondering if my property (currently 6 units) would be eligible for increased density/units. Also, I didn't see it on your site but if there is a best way for me to stay apprised of the above application, other than what I see on your site, I would appreciate knowing. Thanks for you help. Nathan Dolejsi 130 Comment 4: Barbara Combs From: Barbara Combs <barb@gravityshack.com> Sent Thursday, May 25, 2023 12:07 PM To: Isaac Gloor Subject: Notes from community meeting on Rezone to HDR on 52nd Ave S Hi Isaac, Thank you for hosting the community meeting on Tuesday afternoon. I'm anxious about this situation of course since I live next door and our property abuts this lot so it's important to me to be as informed as possible about the process and what is on the line. You really had a calm, intelligent manner at the meeting and I appreciated it a lot. Below are some recap notes of my concerns about the rezone application. Please reach out if you have any questions or would like any more info as the council considers this rezone decision. • The building itself: The height is really my major worry in terms of build. If the full 45' height allowed is used, I will lose my view and just see the back of the building. Losing a view and privacy is a big deal to me. I'm aware the projected plan is not at all being considered right now and it's just a rezone decision but of course I'm looking at worst case scenario to see what the impact could be. More units = less privacy, more noise, and more traffic which is more impactful on the neighborhood. Note: when the street improvement project on my street (53'd Ave s) happened, they first made the street a one-way which I loved because the traffic was so much lower and of course I hadn't lost my front property yet so the cars were further from my house and front door. Also my neighbors to the south, Adjua and Waymon have a little girl named Gwen with Downs Syndrome. She has gotten away from her mom and grandma a couple of times and run laughing and screaming into the road. She doesn't get that it's dangerous. The city then made the street wider so it could be two-way and told us it's an arterial so has to be that way. The traffic is constant and even though the city added speed humps, people literally fly over them. What I'm saying is, we're already nervous about the fast cars so close to our houses and with a special needs kid it's even scarier. Adding more residents could definitely impact that even more. • Existing trees and wildlife: I know I keep saying this but I realized you mentioned the council has not reviewed any of the proposed plans but as we said in the meeting, the application filled out by the architect states there are no trees on the property and no birds or wildlife. There is a really big maple on the property just for one. And there are S0 MANY birds in the big trees. Every day I see tons of crows and little birds like hummingbirds and maybe swallows? I don't see eagles every day but I do see them. Also there are rabbits living on that property and squirrels. I'm not sure what else but there is definitely some life there. I like to request a survey of the property so the council can be informed of what actually is under the hammer so to speak. • Financial impact: I would like to know what the property tax impact would be for us residents near this property with HDR vs LDR. Just the street improvements in front of my house (in which 4' of my property is now gone since the road used part of the easement) caused my property taxes to go up sharply. I'm on a fixed income and rising property taxes are already a concern...having this project makes me nervous they will go way higher if the HDR is approved. This may not be something easily discovered but it's a real worry. • Community involvement: There was no signage posted on the lot in question to alert residents about this meeting and the rezoning request. Unless there is one behind all the growth and brush there? There used to be a sign but I believe it was the one from several years ago about the last development request. I feel people could've missed the postcard in their mail (until we got the bank of multi -mailboxes, my 'highly secure' mailbox was broken into so many times I had to 131 get a PO Box) and so might not even know about this recent request. I talked to people around my house but there may be many other residents who don't even know this decision is on the horizon. Another mailing? Some other outreach? Thanks again, Barbara Combs 206-818-3661 13535 53rd Ave S Tukwila 98168 132 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 11/6/2023 67 ITEM INFORMATION ITEM NO. 5.D. & 6.A. (4) STAFF SPONSOR: NORA GIERLOFF ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 11/6/2023 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Request for rezone from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential at 6250 S. 151st St. This is a quasi-judicial matter and any and all discussion related to this issue should occur during the meeting. CATEGORY ❑ Discussion Mtg Date ® Motion Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Resolution Mtg Date ® Ordinance Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ® Public Hearing Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Other Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Mayor ❑ Admin Svcs ® DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ PcSR ❑ Police ❑ PW SPONSOR'S SUMMARY Tukwila has received an application to change the zoning and Comprehensive Plan map for one parcel, current zoning Low Density Residential (LDR) to proposed zoning Medium Density Residential (MDR). REVIEWED BY ❑ Trans&Infrastructure Svcs ❑ Community Svcs/Safety ❑ Finance & Governance ❑ Planning & Community Dev. ❑ LTAC DATE: ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. COMMITTEE CHAIR: 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 11/6/2023 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 11/6/2023 Informational Memorandum dated 10/31/2023 Draft Ordinance Staff Report with attachments 133 134 TO: FROM: BY: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Committee of the Whole Nora Gierloff, Department of Community Development Director Max Baker, Development Supervisor CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: October 31, 2023 SUBJECT: Request for Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Map Change QUASI-JUDICIAL ISSUE Conduct a public hearing for a rezone and Comprehensive Plan map change request from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential. This is a quasi-judicial matter and any and all discussion related to this issue should occur during the Council meeting. Please do not communicate on this topic outside of the meeting. BACKGROUND Tukwila has received an application for a rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) on a parcel located at 6250 S. 151st St. If the zoning is changed, any MDR use would be permitted, subject to all City regulations. DISCUSSION See attached Staff Report along with Attachments A through E for detailed description of the proposal and findings of fact for the decision. FINANCIAL IMPACT N/A RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approval of the rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) zoning and Comprehensive Plan designation to Medium Density Residential (MDR). ATTACHMENTS Staff Report with Attachments A — E. 135 136 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, REZONING CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT 6250 S. 151ST STREET, TUKWILA, FROM LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (LDR) TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR); PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, in 1995 the City of Tukwila adopted the Zoning Code and Map based on consideration of existing conditions and long-term community goals, and these documents may be reviewed and updated as appropriate; and WHEREAS, as part of the City's 2022-2023 Comprehensive Plan docket of potential amendments, the City received an application for consideration of a change to the Comprehensive Land Use and Zoning Maps for the property located at 6250 S. 151 st Street (the "Property"); and WHEREAS, the zoning of the Property is currently Low Density Residential; and WHEREAS, the Applicant seeks to rezone the entirety of the Property to Medium Density Residential; and WHEREAS, on January 31, 2023, the City mailed a Notice of Application to the surrounding property owners and tenants, and on February 15, 2023, held the required public meeting regarding the proposed rezone and change to the Zoning Code Map; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila has complied with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act by making a determination on June 15, 2023 that no significant environmental impact would occur as a result of the Zoning Code Map change; and WHEREAS, notice of the public hearing was timely published in "The Seattle Times," posted onsite, and mailed to surrounding properties; and CC:\Legislative Development\Rezone 6250 S 151 sc Schneider Homes 10-30-23 B. Jayger A.Youn Page 1 of 3 137 WHEREAS, on November 6, 2023, the City Council held a public hearing and, after receiving and studying staff analysis and comments from the public, has recommended approval of the rezone application, and has made and entered Findings and Conclusions thereon in support of that recommendation; and WHEREAS, after due consideration, the City Council concurs with the Findings and Conclusions and determines the public interest will be served by approving the rezone application, which is in compliance with the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan's Land Use Map; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings and Conclusions Adopted. The City Council hereby adopts Findings and Conclusions, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein. Section 2. Rezone Approved. The Property is located at 6250 S. 151 st Street, Tukwila, Washington. The site is further identified as King County tax parcel 3597000400. The site is hereby approved to be rezoned from Low Density Residential to Medium Density Residential across the entire parcel, as shown in the attached Exhibit B and incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein. Section 3. Map Amendment Authorized. The Department of Community Development Director, or their designee, is hereby authorized to amend the City's official Zoning Code Map to show the zoning change as authorized in Section 2 of this ordinance. Section 4. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser Authorized. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 6. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2023. CC:\Legislative Development\Rezone 6250 S 151 sc Schneider Homes 10-30-23 B. Jayger A.Youn Page 2 of 3 138 ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Allan Ekberg, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Office of the City Attorney Attachments: Exhibit A, Staff Report (Findings and Conclusions) Exhibit B, Revised Zoning/Comprehensive Plan Map CC:\Legislative Development\Rezone 6250 S 1515` Schneider Homes 10-30-23 B. Jayger A.Youn Page 3 of 3 139 140 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Department of Community Development - Nora Gierloff, AICP, Director STAFF REPORT TO THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL HEARING DATE: November 6, 2023 NOTIFICATION: 1/31/23: Mailed to properties within 500' radius 1/31/23: Site Posted 2/15/23: Public Information Meeting Notice of hearing published in the Seattle Times FILE NUMBERS: L19-0123 - Rezone E19-0013 - SEPA APPLICANT: Hans Korve, Daley-Morrow-Poblete, Inc. REQUEST: Change Comprehensive Plan map and zoning designation from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR) LOCATION: 6250 S. 151' St., Tukwila, WA (APN: 359700-0400) CURRENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ZONING DESIGNATION Low Density Residential (LDR) SEPA DETERMINATION: STAFF: ATTACHMENTS: Determination of Nonsignificance issued June 15, 2023 Breyden Jager, Associate Planner A. Site + Current Zoning Map B. Proposed Zoning Map C. Applicant Response to Criteria D. MDR Zoning Development Standards (TMC 18.12) E. Public Comments Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 141 L19-0123: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 2 of 12 BACKGROUND/PROPOSAL Summary of Proposed Actions The applicant has submitted a proposal to amend the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan Map and the Tukwila Zoning Map to rezone a 4.4-acre parcel located at 6250 S. 151st St. from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR). This non -project proposal is a quasi-judicial change to the land use designation on the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code maps. If the zoning is changed, any MDR use would be permitted, subject to all City regulations. The proposed action does not meet the exemptions from review under the State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) listed under WAC 197-11-800. Rezone requests that require a Comprehensive Plan amendment are subject to SEPA review. A Determination of Nonsignificance was issued on June 15, 2023. Land Use - Comprehensive Plan and Zoning The site is classified as Low Density Residential (LDR) in the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and the Tukwila Zoning Ordinance. To the immediate north, west, and south of the subject parcel are properties also zoned LDR. To the east of the parcel is an area of vegetation and significant slope zoned High Density Residential (HDR), the eastern developed portion of which is accessed off of Interurban Avenue S. Further to the southeast of the property is an area zoned Medium Density Residential (MDR) and there is also a small pocket of MDR located behind LDR zoned lots to the southwest. See Figure 1 below for zoning map. Allowed uses under the existing LDR zoning are enumerated in TMC Table 18-6, and primarily include detached single-family dwellings, garages, greenhouses, and domestic shelters. Allowed uses under the proposed MDR zoning are largely similar, with the notable addition of detached zero lot line dwellings, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, daycare centers, senior housing, and townhomes with up to four attached units. Site and Vicinity Conditions The subject site is located at the northeast corner of South 151st Street and 62nd Avenue South. The site contains a single-family home located near the center of the parcel, accessed by a gravel driveway off of 5. 149th PI. The site includes areas of open gravel and disturbed land with abandoned cars and various debris and junk piles. The site is bordered to the north by residential development, to the east by forested land and a steep, natural slope, and to the south and west by South 151st Street and 62nd Avenue South, respectively. Public Services and Utilities A review by City of Tukwila Development Review Engineering staff was completed and noted that project design considerations will be evaluated for feasibility at the time of Design Review, Project SEPA, and development permitting. No relevant comments pertaining to the rezone action itself were received. 142 L19-0123: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 3 of 12 R ,.r tins 15214 3 152164 NOR 14961 15226 1 .15230 3 15234 1 ' 15232 4 152362 15222 1522a 152383 .1524014 121 10/18)2023, 3:14:31 PM Parcels 4095 47 14895 48 a481540 1489549 5151 t5r s +slats 214D 6214A LDR 15131 6216 MDR 1046216 204 6216 201 ' 6216309 MDR Medium Density Residential =City Limits HOR High Density Residential Buildings =RCM Regional Gamma/mint Mixed Use ' Addresses (Tukwila) DO,teday Area Zoning LDR Low Density Residential 148d1' RC4 1489304 !irk!: 14893 16 — ;i'9,T;a;2,d5 414 jy} 15130 151'� Ao8 A15 M R 151 0 A11 15130 02 15156 1011 15156 1917 15138111 15138 108 15140 216 151.0 219 1:2.257 0 0.01 0.03 0.06 mi 0 0.03 0_06 0.11 km 040 of rvtwva 464 cowry Sources Earl PA8ua O5. 00G4, NGA. NASA MAR. N Rae4¢en. 44600, LS, imams 0 ' iasty,elaen, RYkewaiastaat 400. p ana ere 016 uaa mmmavry King county wee Appeuaeer for Ar0Gis Figure 2: Zoning Map Environmental Conditions Site topography generally descends to the north/northeast with a total elevation change of about 20 feet occurring within the property. To the east of the site is a large, natural downward slope to the northeast, having more than 40% slope in areas. The Tukwila environmentally critical areas map classifies this area, and an area on the southern parcel boundary, as having a Class 3 (High) landslide potential. The City's critical area data also suggests the presence of a potential uncategorized wetland in the southwest corner of the site. However, the applicant submitted a wetland study in April, 2020, prepared by Sewall Wetland Consulting, which found that no wetlands, streams, or critical area buffers were present on the subject site. 143 L19-0123: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 4 of 12 The tree -forested areas of the site to the west are a mix of fir and big leaf maple and some cedar with an understory of Himalayan blackberry, snowberry, vine maple, hazelnut, sword fern, bracken fern and Oregon grape and scattered holly. The remainder of the site is a mix of native Douglas fir forest and disturbed shrub covered areas. 1011812023, 3:54:49 PM FFE�Tm Ferry unto MIE19ma-H4111 ____Frrul_ 01 ODE 0.03 • Fwe....y Needed 19galylll mml0ms yyy, 3+wnb[ bwawm+ E,....A Pag.eo�L _ Iy 0 O.33 0.00 M sea Rrt : Green ante.,- Outs. Duos — ttle�yV_1001IAwEer wrw.Ema Aih. DSGB. NGM1 ANX CGNR,H PoWvnr. *M Ram. icoyr ww NE tl0i� ___a9,V_150RBrRe Geomre Ceeemmtveleur, d,uwxrx.u. neA L��es•�yI11501Bu1r - _ EIM ewnw end th Glsure. mnmuNty e.adur _ GIWYIV 100RdM.+ IW"Pb =A.Nm.rm. L—J'..Iepvy ll_EOOABuffi - Iq.11aLSGNYA, 1:2,257 O.00 m1 1 0.E4 kin Web 44,4 9. MCGIS Figure 1: Environmentally Critical Areas Map Development Regulations Comparison, LDR vs. MDR Height The rezone action would not result in an increase in maximum height allowance for the existing parcel. The maximum height of 30 feet in the MDR zoning district is consistent with the existing 30-foot height limit in the LDR zoning district. Unit Density Per TMC 18.10.060, the LDR zoning district requires a minimum lot size of 6,500 SF. Therefore, if subdivided under the existing LDR zoning, a total of 29 new parcels could be created. Each parcel in the LDR district allows a 144 L19-0123: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 5 of 12 total of one single-family home, as well as one accessory dwelling unit (ADU), equating to 58 total potential dwelling units. If rezoned to MDR, based on the size of the parcel, the site would allow up to 64 primary housing units, recognizing that the final number of units could be fewer to accommodate space needed for roads or other utilities. This number does not account for ADUs, and per TMC 18.50.220(2), ADUs may only be permitted on parcels containing a single-family dwelling, not multi -family uses. Scale and Design It is expected that a modest increase in bulk and scale could result from a multi -family dwelling proposal on the subject parcel under MDR zoning. However, due to the minimal difference in magnitude of these impacts relative to what could occur under existing conditions, the impact is not expected to be significant. Bulk and scale impacts of any project developed pursuant to the proposed rezone will be addressed by the City's design review process. Specific scale and design impacts of proposed development will be determined at the time of project review, pursuant to TMC 18.12.070. Transportation The proposed rezone will increase development capacity on the subject parcel. Projects developed pursuant to the proposed rezone may generate higher volumes of traffic and have greater transportation impacts than projects proposed under the current zoning. The subject parcel is approximately 4.45 acres, and it is not possible to accurately determine the location and/or intensity of individual projects that may be proposed under MDR zoning. The subject site lies along 62nd Ave S and S 1515t St, which currently serve vehicular, bike, and pedestrian traffic from both single- and multi -family developments in the immediate Tukwila Hill neighborhood. Sidewalks are provided along both streets for the entire project location frontage. The nearest transit stop is the RapidRide line along Southcenter Blvd, approximately 0.5 miles down the hill from the project site. It is not expected that the number of housing units allowed under MDR zoning would result in a significant impact on traffic and transportation. However, the transportation impacts of individual projects developed subsequent to a rezone to MDR would be evaluated through construction permitting at the time of project level permit applications. A traffic concurrency review would be required for any new proposed housing units and findings would result in traffic impact fees under the authority of TMC 9.48.010. The traffic concurrency program is a mechanism to charge and collect fees to ensure that new development bears its proportionate share of the capital costs of transportation facilities necessitated by new development. Public Comment Public notice for this rezone proposal was posted on site and mailed to property owners within 500 feet of the subject property on January 315T, 2023. On February 15th, 2023, staff held a public information meeting for residents to ask questions and provide feedback to the applicant. Comments received as a result of the public comment period are contained in attachment E. The key issues raised include, but are not limited to: • Noise impacts from additional residents. • Traffic impacts to the neighborhood. • The potential displacement of trees, vegetation, wildlife living on the site. • Property tax impacts on neighboring properties from a future development. 145 L19-0123: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 6 of 12 • Water, sewer, stormwater infiltration, and other utility impacts. • On -site and off -site parking impacts. • Lack of recreation space. • Increase of recreation space. • Multi -family homes encourage affordability and diversity. • Neighborhood character and design. • Safety considerations related to privacy fences. • Geotechnical engineering considerations. • MDR zoning could threaten the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood. • Potential impacts to property values. • Student capacity impacts to the nearby elementary school. • Potential litter and trash impacts. • City should explore zoning code amendments and alternatives to site -specific rezones. • Opposition to increased unit density. • Support for townhomes in this area. • Miscellaneous environmental impacts (other). • Concerns regarding affordability of dwelling units. • Potential to increase emergency vehicle response times. • COVID-19 impacts to the public process. • Air quality impacts from vehicles and fireplaces/wood stoves. • Pet waste concerns. • Overuse of Tukwila Park. • Potential increase in crime. • Support for additional affordable housing throughout the greater Seattle area. • Fire safety and mitigation measures. • Need for increased public transportation service in the area. • MDR zoning is inconsistent with surrounding LDR-zoned properties. • Concerns regarding adequacy of applicant's responses to rezone approval criteria. It should be noted that this rezone request is not tied to any specific project proposal and no approval or denial of any development plan would be granted or denied by the approval of this rezone request. Development - specific items, including project design, would be addressed at the time of a formal project proposal. FINDINGS Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Map Amendment Criteria Four broad -reaching objectives are the basis for the elements, goals and policies for Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan's primary objective is preserving and enhancing Tukwila's neighborhoods. The following will summarize the elements, goals, and policies the applicant has cited to support their rezone request, along with a staff response. The applicant's response to the decision criteria is attached hereto as Attachment C. 1. The proposed amendment to the [Comprehensive Plan and] zoning map is consistent with the goals, objectives and policies of the Comprehensive Plan. Applicant cites the following Comprehensive Plan elements: 146 L19-0123: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 7 of 12 Element 3: Housing Goal 3.1.2: Work with residents and property owners to consider housing options that meet current and future needs. ■ Applicant Statement: Comprehensive Plan Policy .3.1.2- directs that the City work with property owners to consider housing options that meet current and future needs. The Applicant proposal will help to meet the needs of moderate -income families and increase housing choice close to transit and employment opportunities. ■ Staff Response: Western Washington is experiencing a housing shortage that will worsen if housing production within Tukwila, and across the region, is not increased. Housing scarcity leads to higher housing costs and limited options for residents. Construction of new housing creates more energy efficient units built to higher standards, provides more options for residents, and also encourages other investment in the community. This rezone proposal would increase the residential density potential of the subject parcel. Under the existing LDR zoning, based on the size of the parcel, the site could accommodate up to 58 housing units, if subdivided. If rezoned to MDR, based on the size of the parcel, the site would allow up to 64 housing units, recognizing that the final number of units could be fewer to accommodate space needed for roads or other utilities. The City utilizes medium and high density residential zoning districts as transitional areas between single-family neighborhoods and commercial districts, both near the subject site and in other areas of Tukwila Hill. For example, an HDR zoned parcel near the intersection of 58th Ave S and S 142nd street lies between the LDR and the RCM districts, and is developed with a 3 story, 13-unit building. The subject site for this rezone request is currently situated adjacent to HDR-zoned parcels which also act as transitional areas along Interurban Ave S, extending to its intersection with Southcenter Boulevard. This rezone would be similar in nature to those existing transitional housing zones, which provide a tapering in use intensity from Interurban westward. See Figures 3 and 4 on the following page of this report. 147 L19-0123: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 8 of 12 Figure 3: Existing HDR Zoned Parcel on Tukwila Hill (14081 58th Ave 5) Figure 4: Existing HDR Zoned Parcels on Tukwila Hill (East of 62nd Ave S) 148 L19-0123: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 9 of 12 Goal 3.2.1: Provide zoning that allows a variety of housing throughout the City to allow for diverse, equitable neighborhoods. Goal 3.2.2: Encourage a full range of housing opportunities for all population segments, including very low-income households earning less than 30% AMI, through actions including, but not limited to, revising the Tukwila's zoning map and development codes as appropriate, which would enable a wide variety of housing types to be built. • Applicant Statement: Comprehensive Plan Policy .3.2.1 and 3.2.2 —Also support a variety of housing opportunities through revisions to the zoning map and development regulations to promote more attainable housing. • Staff Response: As stated previously, a zoning designation of MDR would increase the development capacity of the subject parcel and allow for additional housing types in the Tukwila Hill neighborhood, which has traditionally featured both single-family homes and small multifamily residences. Multifamily homes are, on average, more affordable than single family homes, primarily due to the ability to share land costs between units and their smaller unit sizes. Additionally, Tukwila's single family home stock is less diverse than its multi -family home stock. Approximately 57% of Tukwila's single-family homes are occupied by households that identify as white, exceeding the percentage of Tukwila's overall white population (33%). Conversely, approximately 19% of Tukwila identifies as Black or African American, while households with that racial identity occupy only 8% of Tukwila's single- family homes. These statistics highlight racially disparate impacts that put single family homes, on average the most expensive form of housing, out of reach for many of Tukwila's residents. Goal 3.6.1: Encourage long-term residency by improving neighborhood quality, health and safety. Goal 3.6.2: Encourage long-term residency by providing a range of home ownership options for persons in all stages of life. • Applicant Statement: Comprehensive Plan Policies 3.6.1 and 3.6.2 — encourage longer term residency through a range of home ownership options that maintain and strengthen neighborhood quality. The applicant alteration proposal will increase housing choice and affordability while maintaining the opportunity for home ownership. Home ownership creates a sense of investment in the community and supports long-term residency. • Staff Response: The proposed MDR zoning district would allow for a greater range of housing types to be constructed than currently allowed under LDR zoning. Housing units permitted in the LDR district include single-family homes and accessory dwelling units (ADUs). Housing units permitted in the MDR district include single-family homes, ADUs, detached zero -lot line units, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, and townhouses with up to four attached units. As previously discussed, multifamily homes are, on average, more affordable than single family homes, primarily due to the ability to share land costs between units and their smaller unit sizes. These less costly housing options provide an avenue for home ownership to be enjoyed by buyers of a wider age range, on average. Construction of new 149 L19-0123: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 10 of 12 housing also creates more energy efficient units built to higher standards, provides more options for residents, and also encourages other investment in the community. Element 7: Residential Neighborhoods Goal 7.4.2: Decrease greenhouse gas emissions through land use strategies that promote a mix of housing, employment and services at densities sufficient to promote walking, bicycling, transit and other alternatives to auto travel. ■ Applicant Statement: Comprehensive Plan Polices 7.4.2- seeks to community enhancement through long-term residency and environmental sustainability. This is to be achieved through a mix of housing at sufficient density to promote walking and bicycling and the use of transit. Increased pedestrian activity and transit use decrease carbon emissions. The applicant's proposal will create a higher density residential option that supports long-term residency while maintaining compatibility with the existing single-family homes in the area. The project site is within walking distance of Tukwila Park and Tukwila Elementary. It is also within Biking distance of Fort Dent Park and the Southcenter commercial & transit center. ■ Staff Response: Rezoning this property to the MDR zoning district would permit housing at a higher density and wider range of forms than is currently allowed, within short walking distance of major transit stops and biking distance to several public amenities. 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 18.26.010, the purpose of the MDR zoning district is, "...intended to provide areas for family and group residential uses, and serves as an alternative to lower density family residential housing and more intensively developed group residential housing and related uses. Through the following standards this district provides medium -density housing designed to provide: 1. Individual entries and transition from public and communal areas to private areas; 2. Building projections, level changes and so forth to effectively define areas for a variety of outdoor functions as well as privacy; and 3. Landscaping and open space to serve as extension of living areas." (Attachment d) The proposed MDR zoning is consistent with the neighborhood character and uses in the site's vicinity. MDR zoning would allow development that is moderately more intensive than some neighboring single- family homes, but of similar or lesser intensity than nearby multi -family residential properties. See Attachment C for applicant response to criteria. 3. There are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map There have been no zoning changes in this area since 1995 when the current zoning was instituted. Since 1995, fewer housing units have been constructed in the City of Tukwila than have been set by our housing goals. Under the Washington Growth Management Act (GMA), King County is required to assign housing targets to each jurisdiction in order meet current and projected housing demands. For the 150 L19-0123: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 11 of 12 period between 2019 to 2044, the housing target for production of new net housing units in Tukwila is 6,500 units. Based on the rate of housing development in Tukwila from 2019 to present, it will be necessary to build approximately 250 net units each year until 2044 to meet this target. However, from 2006 to 2018 Tukwila grew by only 130 housing units. The 2021 King County Urban Growth Capacity Report states that "Since 2006, Tukwila has grown at 6% of the pace needed to achieve its 2035 housing growth target of 5,626 units. During this period, the total number of housing units in Tukwila grew by roughly 2%. At this current rate, Tukwila is under the production pace needed to meet its 2035 growth target, and needs to grow at an annual rate of 3.2% to reach its remaining target by 2035." King County recommends the City of Tukwila take reasonable measures to achieve additional housing growth, including taking "action to encourage and/or incentivize residential development". One way to incentivize residential development is to permit rezones on undeveloped properties to higher residential densities. 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. A rezone from LDR to MDR would increase the potential for small multifamily buildings to be constructed on the property. Increasing housing capacity is in the furtherance of public health, safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare. Residential development is unlikely to adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood, which is largely dominated by other residential uses of similar intensities. Additionally, higher residential densities provide additional support to local businesses, and promote pedestrian scale neighborhoods within walking and biking distance of major transit stops and a large commercial core. CONCLUSIONS Criteria 1: Consistency with Comprehensive Plan: • The rezone is consistent with the following Comprehensive Plan goals: o Goal 3.1.2: Work with residents and property owners to consider housing options that meet current and future needs. ■ Tukwila is experiencing a housing shortage that will worsen if housing production is not increased. Housing scarcity leads to higher housing costs and limited options for residents. This rezone proposal would increase the residential density potential of the subject parcel. o Goal 3.2.1: Provide zoning that allows a variety of housing throughout the City to allow for diverse, equitable neighborhoods. o Goal 3.2.2: Encourage a full range of housing opportunities for all population segments, including very low-income households earning less than 30% AMI, through actions including, but not limited to, revising the Tukwila's zoning map and development codes as appropriate, which would enable a wide variety of housing types to be built. ■ This rezone proposal would enable a wider variety of housing types to be built in an established neighborhood, increasing housing opportunities. Multifamily homes are, on 151 L19-0123: Rezone and Comprehensive Plan Amendment Staff Report Page 12 of 12 average, more affordable than single family homes, primarily due to the ability to share land costs between units and their smaller unit sizes. o Goal 3.6.1: Encourage long-term residency by improving neighborhood quality, health and safety. o Goal 3.6.2: Encourage long-term residency by providing a range of home ownership options for persons in all stages of life. ■ Increased housing options provide an avenue for home ownership to be enjoyed by buyers of a wider age range, on average. Construction of new housing also creates more energy efficient units built to higher standards, provides more options for residents, and also encourages other investment in the community. o Goal 7.4.2: Decrease greenhouse gas emissions through land use strategies that promote a mix of housing, employment and services at densities sufficient to promote walking, bicycling, transit and other alternatives to auto travel. ■ Rezoning this property to MDR would permit housing at a higher density and wider range of forms than is currently allowed, within short walking distance of major transit stops and biking distance to several public amenities. Criteria 2: Consistency with Zone: • The proposed MDR zoning is consistent with the neighborhood character and uses in the site's vicinity. MDR zoning would allow development that is moderately more intensive than some neighboring single-family homes, but of similar or lesser intensity than nearby multi -family residential properties. Criteria 3: Changed conditions: • There have been no zoning changes in the vicinity since the LDR zoning was instituted in 1995. • Since 2006, Tukwila has, according to King County, produced housing at a rate 94% slower than is necessary to meet our 2035 housing growth target. • Since 2015, the median sale price of a single-family home in Tukwila has increased 97%, from $303,000 to —$594,000. The median sale price of a unit in a multi -family home in Tukwila has increased 182%, from —111,000 to —$313,000. • Tukwila's housing production has been determined by King County to be the lowest of all jurisdictions within the core metropolitan area, both in total number and in percentage of growth target. Criteria 4: Benefit to community: • The proposed rezone would positively affect the community by providing needed housing capacity on an undeveloped parcel in a location near an existing commercial core and a variety of single- and multi -family structures. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends approving the rezone from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR). 152 Current Zoning Map 10/25/2023, 5:16:54 PM I— 1 Parcels Zoning LDR Low Density Residential MDR Medium Density Residential Air HDR High Density Residential RCM Regional Commercial Mixed Use Overlay Area 0 0.01 0 0.03 1:2,257 0.03 0.06 0.06 mi 0.11 km City of Tukwila, King County Sources: Esri, Airbus DS, USGS, NGA, NASA, CGIAR, N Robinson, NCEAS, NLS, OS, NMA, Geodatastyrelsen, Rijkswaterstaat, GSA, Geoland, FEMA, Intermap and the GIS user community King County Web AppBuilder for ArcGIS 153 154 Proposed Zoning Map 10/25/2023, 5:16:54 PM I— 1 Parcels Zoning LDR Low Density Residential MDR Medium Density Residential HDR High Density Residential RCM Regional Commercial Mixed Use Overlay Area 0 0.01 0 0.03 1:2,257 0.03 0.06 0.06 mi 0.11 km City of Tukwila, King County Sources: Esri, Airbus DS, USGS, NGA, NASA, CGIAR, N Robinson, NCEAS, NLS, OS, NMA, Geodatastyrelsen, Rijkswaterstaat, GSA, Geoland, FEMA, Intermap and the GIS user community King County Web AppBuilder for ArcGIS 155 156 ♦♦♦ DALEY-MORROW-POBLETE,INC. ENGINEERING -SURVEYING -LAND PLANNING 726 Auburn Way North Auburn, WA 98002 TEL: (253) 333-2200 FAX: (253) 333-2206 EMAIL: dmp@dmp-inc.us August 14, 2022 City of Tukwila. Nancy Eklund 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 RE: Hopper Townhomes—Comprehensive Plan Alteration Request LDR to MDR 6250 S 151 ST ST, Tukwila. — Parcel No. 359700-0400 Dear Ms. Eklund: A. Project Background The project site is located in the Tukwila Hills Neighborhood, North of Tukwila Park and east of Tukwila Elementary. The property is currently undeveloped with the exception of a small home, to be removed. Within the limits of the Tree retention ordinance, a numbers of existing trees will be removed to support development of the site. The amount of impact would be similar under either the current LDR or the proposed MDR designation. The number of Peak Hour Trips will likely increase in accordance with the final number of permitted residence. With the payment of impact fees, these impacts are considered mitigated. The proposed alteration is expected to have a positive impact on the neighborhood by increasing the amount of attainable housing in close proximity to employment and recreation opportunities and increasing access to Transit for more residence. B. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA (TMC 18.84.020) Demonstrate how each of the following circumstances justifies a re -designation of your property or a change in existing Plan policies: 157 1. The proposed amendment to the [Comprehensive Plan and ] Zoning map is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan? The Applicant proposes to re -designate a 4.5 acres parcel from LDR to MDR. The current LDR designation limits the style of housing to the most land intensive and costly form of development (Single -Family). This limits the number of new potential home owners and reduces support for Transit. Increased use of Public Transit reduces carbon output per unit. The proposed MDR designation will allow for the creation of zero -lot -line, fee simple townhomes that will increase the opportunity for home ownership at a more modest price point without diminishing the quality of the neighborhood. This will increase the choices of housing styles in close proximity to one of the region's largest employment / transit centers. The proposed alteration will also not result in the loss of an extensive amount of existing housing stock to achieve its goal. The subject property contains only one existing house which is schedule for demolition to address a continuing transient situation. Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan is a flexible framework that adapts to changing conditions over time. One of the Comprehensive plans basic objectives is to support "A thriving Southcenter/Urban Center for shopping, working, living and playing". Another purpose of the comprehensive plan is to reduce barriers that prevent low- and moderate -income households from living near their work or transit, and to support housing that is affordably priced for all households. Tukwila is striving to be a community of choice because increasing home ownership, in turn, supports long term residency and neighborhood stability. According to the Comprehensive plan and the 2010 US Census, home ownership in Tukwila is just above 40%. The applicant's proposal will increase housing choice, decrease housing cost and maintain an ownership option for Tukwila residents. For these reasons, the Applicants proposal supports the intent of the Comprehensive Plan as well as these specific policies: ➢ Comprehensive Plan Policy .3.1.2- directs that the City work with property owners to consider housing options that meet current and future needs. The Applicant proposal will help to meet the needs of moderate income families and increase housing choice close to transit and employment opportunities. ➢ Comprehensive Plan Policy .3.2.1 and 3.2.2 — Also support a variety of housing opportunities through revisions to the zoning map and development regulations to promote more attainable housing. ➢ Comprehensive Plan Policies 3.6.1 and 3.6.2 - encourage long-term residency through a range of home ownership options that maintain and strengthen neighborhood quality. The applicant alteration proposal will increase housing choice and affordability while maintaining the opportunity for home ownership. Home ownership creates a sense of investment in the community and supports long-term residency. 158 Page 12 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Request 18.84 Hopper Townhomes ➢ Comprehensive Plan Policies 7.4.2 — seeks to community enhancement through long-term residency and environmental sustainability. This is to be achieved through a mix of housing at sufficient density to promote walking and bicycling and the use of transit. Increased pedestrian activity and transit use decrease carbon emissions. The applicant's proposal will create a higher density residential option that supports long-term residency while maintaining compatibility with the existing single-family homes in the area. The project site is within walking distance of Tukwila Park and Tukwila Elementary. It is also within Biking distance of Fort Dent Park and the Southcenter commercial & transit center. 2. The proposed amendment to the [Comprehensive Plan and ] Zoning map is consistent with the scope and purpose of the TMC Title 18, Zoning Code, and the description and purpose of the zone classification applied for? There is a need for more attainable home ownership options. More often, higher density development supports a more transient population. The Proposed alteration from LDR to MDR will allow development of a fee - simple townhome neighborhood that will open up home ownership to a broader population base while supporting long-term residency. The applicants proposal is a market based approach to achieving the Comprehensive Planning Policies described above. Other option for increasing housing attainability involves private/public partnerships and grant funding of low cost housing. These programs are complicated, expensive and require long term management. The applicant's proposal is an organic approach and requires only minimal city oversight during the review processes. Smaller, zero -lot -line, fee simple townhomes are, by their nature, a more attainable housing option. 3. There are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the [Comprehensive Plan and ] Zoning Map? As indicated above. The applicant's proposal will increase housing attainability options, strengthen long-term residency and place workforce housing in close proximity to employment and recreation opportunities. With proper design review, the proposed structures can complement the existing neighborhood. Please refer to the specific Comprehensive Plan Policies discussed in Section#1 above. 4. The proposed amendment to the [Comprehensive Plan and] Zoning map will be in the interest of and 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. Page 13 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Request 18.84 Hopper Townhomes 159 The Applicant proposes to re -designate a 4.5 acres parcel from LDR to MDR. The current LDR designation limits the style of housing to the most land intensive and costly form of development (Single-family). This limits the number of new potential home owners. The proposed MDR designation will allow for the creation of zero -lot -line, fee simple townhomes that will provide the opportunity for home ownership at a more modest price point. This will increase the choices of housing styles in close proximity to one of the region's largest employment centers. The proposed alteration will also not result in the loss of an extensive amount of existing housing stock to achieve its goal. The proposed use is also a middle ground between the areas higher density apartment complexes and the intermixed single-family homes. If you have any questions, please contact me at (253) 333-2200 Sincerely, Hans Korve DMP. Inc. 160 Page 14 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Request 18.84 Hopper Townhomes Return to Title Page Return to Chapter 18.10 TITLE 18 — ZONING CHAPTER 18.12 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL (MDR) DISTRICT Sections: 18.12.010 Purpose 18.12.020 Land Uses Allowed 18.12.030 Recreation Space Requirements 18.12.060 Design Review 18.12.070 Basic Development Standards 18.12.010 Purpose A. This district implements the Medium Density Residential Comprehensive Plan designation, which allows up to 14.5 dwelling units per net acre. It is intended to provide areas for family and group residential uses, and serves as an alternative to lower density family residential housing and more intensively developed group residential housing and related uses. Through the following standards this district provides medium -density housing designed to provide: 1. Individual entries and transition from public and communal areas to private areas; 2. Building projections, level changes and so forth to effectively define areas for a variety of outdoor functions as well as privacy; and 3. Landscaping and open space to serve as extension of living areas. B. Certain MDR properties are identified as Commercial Redevelopment Areas (see Figures 18-10 or 18-9) to encourage aggregation with commercial properties that front on Tukwila International Boulevard. Aggregation and commercial redevelopment of these sites would implement the Pacific Highway Revitalization Plan and provide opportunities to redefine and create more uniform borders between the commercial corridor and adjacent residential neighborhoods. C. Certain MDR properties are located in the Urban Renewal Overlay (see Figure 18-15). Existing zoning and development standards will remain in place, although multi -family buildings would be permitted. The overlay provides additional alternate development standards that may be applied to development within the Urban Renewal Overlay upon request of the property owner and if the development meets certain qualifying criteria. Urban Renewal Overlay district standards would implement the Tukwila International Boulevard Revitalization Plan through more intensive development. (Ord. 2257 §6 (part) 2009; Ord. 1865 §8, 1999; Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-40 161 Return to Title Page Return to Chapter 18.12 TITLE 18 — ZONING 18.12.020 Land Uses Allowed Refer to TMC Chapter 18.09, "Land Uses Allowed by District." (Ord. 2500 §5, 2016) 18.12.030 Recreation Space Requirements In the MDR zoning district, any proposed multiple -family structure, complex or development shall provide, on the premises and for the use of the occupants, a minimum amount of recreation space according to the following provisions: 1. Required Area. a. For each proposed dwelling unit in the multiple - family development and detached zero -lot -line type of development, a minimum of 400 square feet (100 square feet for senior citizen housing) of recreation space shall be provided. Any multiple -family structure, complex or development shall provide a minimum of 1,000 square feet of total recreation space. b. Townhouse units shall provide at least 250 square feet of the 400 square feet of recreation space as private, ground level open space measuring not less than 10 feet in any dimension. c. The front, side and rear yard setback areas required by the applicable zoning district shall not qualify as recreation space. However, these setback areas can qualify as recreation space for townhouses if they are incorporated into private open space with a minimum dimension of 10 feet on all sides. 2. Indoor or Covered Space. a. No more than 50% of the required recreation space may be indoor or covered space in standard multi -family developments. Senior citizen housing must have at least 20% indoor or covered space. b. The Board of Architectural Review may grant a maximum of two square feet of recreation space for each one square foot of extensively improved indoor recreation space provided. Interior facility improvements would include a full range of weight machines, sauna, hot tub, large screen television and the like. 3. Uncovered Space. a. A minimum of 50% of the total required recreation space shall be open or uncovered, up to 100% of the total requirement may be in open or uncovered recreation space in standard multi -family developments. Senior citizen housing allows up to 80% of recreation space to be outdoors and has no minimum outdoor space requirement. b. Recreation space shall not exceed a 4% slope in any direction unless it is determined that the proposed space design clearly facilitates and encourages the anticipated use as endorsed by the Director. c. The Board of Architectural Review may grant a maximum credit of two square feet of recreation space for each one square foot of outdoor pool and surrounding deck area. 4. General Requirements. a. Multiple -family complexes (except senior citizen housing, detached zero -lot -line and townhouses with nine or fewer units), which provide dwelling units with two or more bedrooms, shall provide adequate recreation space for children with at least one space for the 5-to-12-year-old group. Such space shall be at least 25% but not more than 50% of the total recreation space required under TMC Section 18.12.030 (1), and shall be designated, located and maintained in a safe condition. b. Adequate fencing, plant screening or other buffer shall separate the recreation space from parking areas, driveways or public streets. c. The anticipated use of all required recreation areas shall be specified and designed to clearly accommodate that use. (Ord. 2525 §2, 2017) 18.12.060 Design Review Design review is required for all new multi -family structures, mobile or manufactured home parks, developments in a Commercial Redevelopment Area that propose the uses and standards of an adjacent commercial zone, and in the shoreline jurisdiction, if new building construction or exterior changes are involved and the cost of the exterior work equals or exceeds 10% of the building's assessed valuation. Multi -family structures up to 1,500 square feet will be reviewed administratively. (See TMC Chapter 18.60, Board of Architectural Review.) (Ord. 2368 §7, 2012; Ord. 2251 §16, 2009; Ord. 2005 §12002; Ord. 1865 §11, 1999; Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) ft571uced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-41 Return to Title Page Return to Chapter 18.12 TITLE 18 — ZONING 18.12.070 Basic Development Standards Development within the Medium Density Residential District shall conform to the following listed and referenced standards: MDR BASIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS Lot area, minimum 8,000 sq. ft. (Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats) Lot area per unit (multi -family) 3,000 sq. ft. (For townhouses the density shall be calculated based on one unit per 3000 sq. ft. of parent lot area. The "unit lot" area shall be allowed to include the common access easements). Average lot width (min. 20 ft. street frontage width), minimum 60 feet (Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats) Setbacks, minimum: Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats • Front -1st floor 15 feet • Front - 2nd floor 20 feet • Front - 3rd floor 30 feet (20 feet for townhouses) • Second front - 1st floor 7.5 feet • Second front - 2nd floor 10 feet • Second front - 3rd floor 15 feet (10 feet for townhouses) • Sides - 1st floor 10 feet • Sides - 2nd floor 20 feet (10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Sides - 3rd floor 20 feet (30 feet if adjacent to LDR; 10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Rear -1st floor 10 feet • Rear - 2nd floor 20 feet (10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) • Rear - 3rd floor 20 feet (30 feet if adjacent to LDR; 10 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) Refer to TMC Chapter 18.52, "Landscape Requirements," Table A, for perimeter and parking lot landscaping requirements. Townhouse building separation, minimum • 1 and 2 story buildings 10 feet • 3 story buildings 20 feet Height, maximum 30 feet Development area coverage 50% maximum (75% for townhouses) Recreation space 400 sq. ft. per dwelling unit (1,000 sq. ft. min.) Off-street parking: • Residential See TMC Chapter 18.56, Off-street Parking & Loading Regulations. • Accessory dwelling unit See TMC Section 18.50.220 • Other uses See TMC Chapter 18.56, Off-street Parking & Loading Regulations (Ord. 2678 §24, 2022; Ord. 2581 §3, 2018; Ord. 2199 §12, 2008; Ord. 1976 §23, 2001; Ord. 1758 §1(part), 1995) Produced by the City of Tukwila, City Clerk's Office Page 18-42 163 164 Breyden Jager From: Bonnie Wong <auntybon@gmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 1:03 PM To: Breyden Jager Subject: FileL19-0123 Rezone and E19-0013 (SEPA) Attention Mr Jager, As an original owner (1989) in the Mapletree Cul De Sac directly across the proposed Comprehensive Plan Amendment and Rezone from LDR to MDR at 6250S 151st St Parcel #3597000400, I am concerned about the adverse impact to the neighborhood in general. 1. The main arterials from 58th and Interurban through the neighborhood as well as Southcenter Blvd. are heavily utilized by vehicles traveling to and from work places in the community as well as in the greater Seattle -Renton areas. Businesses in the community are expanding and increasing traffic (speeding and parking )issues in the morning and the late afternoons. Avoiding 1405,1-5 and 167 are the issue. IF REZONING FROM LDR TO MDR,AN ADDITIONAL 40-80 (AVERAGE 2 CARS PER HOUSEHOLD IS REALISTIC) VEHICLES WILL BE ADDED TO THE CONGESTION ON THE HILL. There has been no change to the traffic mitigation when this issue was a concern before the pandemic. Additionally, the opening of the new fire department building will be a cause for delay at the peak hours too. And what about snow days? 2. Construction for the MDR will interrupt the flow for school buses in the afternoon and the increased car traffic for families who are driving their students. This is clearly a problem proven by the unfinished buildings next to the fire department building and the interruptions of the remodeling of the apartment buildings too. 3.How will existing neighbors be impacted by the increase water and sewer utility amendments? My water was interrupted when there was a break in the pipes on the hill last summer. I was told that I must be at the end of the pipelines which was the reason I had grey water for two days. 4. All of Tukwila learned about the danger of a large fire and access to emergency help a year and a half ago. This was a tragic mess! What are the safety measures for this project (approx.40 units) which is a bit bigger than Mapletree (14 units). 5. My neighbors and I are not against development and affordable housing. We oppose the Plan Amendments and especially the rezoning from LDR to MDR. Affordable housing is needed. 6. Tax dollars may be an advantage to the city and certainly to the developer, but does Tukwila have the foresight about solutions for increased pollution, safe play spaces for the community (homeless people are living amongst us on the hill),safe mitigation for the traffic on main boulevards, and bus services to encourage public transportation? I appreciate your attention to these matters. Bonnie Wong Tukwila resident 6341 S.151st Place CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. i 165 https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... SEPA,Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Amendment,Hopper Townhomes Project PL19-0099 Bonnie Wong <auntybon@gmail.com> Sun 3/22/2020 12:08 PM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov>; David Tomlinson <davidwtomlinson@gmail.com>; Nhan Nguyen <ctplanner@gmail.com>; Mayor <Mayor@TukwilaWA.gov> Hello Max, Thank you for facilitating the public meeting on March 18,2020. I was virtually present from 4:30-6:15 and listened tomost of the comments. As I relayed to you, I am one of the original residents in the single family Mapletree Development which is directly opposite fromthe HopperTownhomes proposal. There are 14 homes in our cul de sac. I'm in opposition to changing the zoning! The Schneider proposal of the development plan is for about 35 "affordable houses.ln the meeting,the proposal is that these homes will most likely 3-bedrooms,one to two car garages .These homes would be attached to each other in 3 or 4 homes configurations dependent on the storm collection areas and tree lines. What I heard the average price of the homes would be $450,000 each. Even though the set plans are not decided. The zone change again is at a point where there have been discussions with the city planning commission and Tukwila City Council. I did hear that permitting for storm drain regulations is $38,000 and that the regulations for building is 1500 pages. There were a few comments regarding a $1,000,000 investment and profit margins being unreasonable if the zoning was not changed. The few neighbors that have invested in this neighborhood are focused on the impact of the the amount of homes that are primarily safety issues on the neighborhood,namely increase in the volume of traffic and capacity of utility infrastructure. So the obvious differences are dollars invested and cost by the investors and developers and traffic safety (65th Ave and Southcenter Blvd as well as school traffic (car and walking to and from Tukwila Elementary)and the environmental impact of use (water,sewage,gas and electric infrastructure and portables for Tukwila Elementary). The common thread for both sides (investors and neighbors) is agreement about affordable housing. I am in favor of sharing Tukwila with others. I am not in favor of changing the zoning. The five large buildings constructed to expand the Southcenter area(Holiday Inn, Interurban Hotel,Marvel,and the two facilities for elders on Andover East) are not filled because of the costs of each unit). When occupied,traffic will be very serious. The planning commission then has a responsibility to provide the answers and plans for this section of "town". 1. There needs to be a light for safety on 65th and Southcenter BLVD.high peak traffic on Southcenter Blvd absorbs cars from RENTON to avoid using backups on 1-405. 2. During school starts and endings ,traffic on Southcenter Blvd is traveling at 45 mph. Its dangerous to turn left from 65th Ave S . turning right is also as dangerous. 3. Emergency vehicles will also be using this route. 4. Parking on 65th Ave S. (due to condos and apts) also restricts north and south travel.Increasing car traffic from the proposed development (on average based of 35 166 1 of 2 3/23/2020, 10:14 AM https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... homes (50-70 cars) will need mitigation.(stop signs)Could guest parking overflow in the complex be a doable responsibility of the developer. 5. The tree viability assessment should be published. 6. With the pandemic of CoVid-19,Is this a time to propose a development that may begin but not finish if workers,city representatives and buyers being "put on hold "? Again , I do agree with affordable housing ($450,000 is not affordable for families earning less $75,000) and conservative expansion for Tukwila. I propose keeping the zoning as is and developers being patient and accommodating as we realistically head for a recession for sure and a possible depression. (So now ,I am considering the dollars just as the developers should). I would not want Tukwila to be a town with empty ,expensive housing. Thank you for your time, Bonnie Wong almost 30 year resident at 6341 5.151 st Place CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 167 3/23/2020, 10:14 AM March 30, 2020 David & Layla Tomlinson 6360 S 151st PI Tukwila, WA 98188 Tukwila City Council 6200 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Members of the Tukwila City Council, ECE VED Our names are David and Layla Tomlinson and we reside in Tukwila at 6360 S 151st Place. DMP Inc. and Schneider Homes Inc. have recently applied to rezone the property at 6250 S 151st Street (which is across the street behind our house) from low to medium density residential (File #s: L19-0123 & E19-0013, Project File #: PL19-0099). We are adamantly opposed to the rezoning of this property, as well as the development plan put forward by DMP and Schneider Homes. We will delve further into our reasons for opposing this rezone below, but hope you will listen to the objections and concerns of your constituents who would be most directly impacted by this proposed zoning change and vote in accordance with their interests. We want to begin by assuring you that we are keenly aware of our areas need for more housing and making it clear that we are not necessarily opposed to the development of this property in general, we simply believe that current and future residents of our particular area would be best served by the land remaining zoned as low density residential. Our foremost concern is that allowing this development to go forward as proposed would destroy the natural, tree -filled character of the neighborhood that we love. The current zoning of the property would allow for up to 30 single-family units to be built on it. Rezoning it to medium density would allow for up to 65 units to be placed on the property. The site plan submitted by Schneider Homes and DMP only calls for 38 units, but would still require the property to be clear cut. Furthermore, their plan envisions building 120-foot-long, 30-foot- high buildings only 10 feet from the sidewalks along S 151st Street and 62nd Ave S. Leaving little to no room for vegetation between the street and the townhomes, we believe these structures would tower imposingly over these streets and the current homes across from them. We recently took the time to visit another townhome development built by Schneider homes, only to have our fears of what might come to pass be confirmed. While the buildings were not particularly unattractive, they were imposing on an otherwise naked skyline, and it was clear that not a single tree had been spared during construction. We have included a picture below for your reference of what we can expect to see from our back porch if this development is allowed to go forward as proposed. Leaving the property zoned as low density would require additional distancing from the road to any structures to be built and allow for more vegetation to remain or be subsequently planted. We believe this would honor and preserve the current character of the area that we call home. 1 168 A picture of the Copper Ridge townhome development in Kent built by Schneider Homes. It is clear that no trees were spared during construction. This is what we can expect to see along S 151st St and 62nd Ave S if this project is allowed to proceed as proposed. In the spirit of good faith, we plan to reach out to the developer and builder in the weeks ahead and further explore ways that we can come to agreement on a plan to which we and everyone else in the area is amenable. Until such a time as that has taken place, this rezone must not be allowed to go ahead. Another major concern of ours is the effect that adding such a development to our area would have on traffic and parking. Even with things as they currently are, cars often line up waiting to turn on to Southcenter Blvd from 65th Ave S. During drop-off and pick-up times at Tukwila Elementary, some residents of the area already have difficulty getting out of their driveways. The apartment and condo complexes along 65th Ave S were not built with adequate parking provided, resulting in the streets being continuously lined with cars and creating a hazard as people enter and exit these vehicles. All of this is to say that our area already faces significant traffic and parking challenges, and it is remains unclear how much a new development such as this would exacerbate these. It is my understanding that a public works review has been commissioned to evaluate the implications of allowing this proposed rezone to go ahead, but we have not yet been able to attain a copy of this review. Ultimately, we believe that this rezone should not even be considered by the council until the full traffic and parking implications are fully understood. Our final concern revolves around the implications of the current COVID-19 pandemic. This event has thrown a wrench into all of our lives and it remains to be seen what the ultimate societal, economic and housing market implications of this pandemic will be. The restrictions placed on public gatherings has already impacted the due process normally allowed prior to the consideration of a zoning change such as this as the town hall meeting with the builder and developer had to be conducted via phone conference. Even if you are not convinced that this rezoning application should be denied, we urge you to defer it to such a time as the full implications of this pandemic can be better understood and normal due process allowed to take place. Nothing would be worse than allowing the builder and developer to begin this project, clear cut the land, and then discover that they could not continue with it due to the economic environment. 2 169 We want to close by ensuring that you know we are not alone in our opposition to this rezone. We have taken the liberty of collecting the signatures of 36 individuals from 17 residences in the immediate vicinity of this property who stand in opposition to this proposal. We did this in a manner consistent with the social distancing guidelines currently in effect, and it is likely that we could have garnered even more signatures if this had not been the case. We have provided copies of these signatures in a separate document that has also been provided to the council. We believe the role of government is to protect the interests of all the people that it serves, not just those who stand to gain from maximizing their profit margin from a development such as this. Ultimately, we believe we can find a path forward that permits both the development of this property and the retention of the natural neighborhood feel that we so love about our area. However, we do not believe that this path should involve the rezoning of this property. We urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who will be most directly affected by this proposal and vote against it. We can be contacted at 719-761-6516 or davidwtomlinson@amail.com and would be happy to discuss this matter further and/or answer any questions you may have. We sincerely thank you for your valuable time and consideration in this matter! Respectfully, David Tomlinson Layla Tomlinson 170 3 https : //outlook. office3 65. com/mail/search/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5... Re: Public Meeting Minutes, Hopper Townhomes 3/18/2020 Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Mon 3/30/2020 3:47 PM To: David Tomlinson <davidwtomlinson@gmail.com>; Nancy Eklund <Nancy.Eklund@TukwilaWA.gov> Hi David, The Public Works review is not complete, nor is it a formal document for dispersal; each department provides comments that are included in the staff report that goes before Planning Commission and/or City Council. As a Party of Record you will be notified of any staff reports, public hearings, etc. as they are completed and/or scheduled. The next steps for a Comp Plan Amendment/Rezone include finishing departmental reviews, attaining any additional information from the project applicant, and then presenting the findings as a staff report to the City Council. Between the end of the public comment period and the City Council public hearing the City usually budgets at least two months, but this is likely to be pushed back due to the COVID19 response. You and other Parties of Record will receive a Notice of Public Hearing at least 14 days ahead of the hearing with City Council. Just another reminder that Nancy Eklund will be taking over as the project manager for the proposal, she has been cc'ed on this email as well. Best, Maxwell Baker I Senior Planner Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Max.Baker@Tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3683 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. From: David Tomlinson <davidwtomlinson@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, March 27, 2020 2:18 PM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: Re: Public Meeting Minutes, Hopper Townhomes 3/18/2020 Max, I just left you a voicemail and now following up with an e-mail. I had a couple of questions for you regarding the proposed Hopper Townhome Rezone: - On the call last week you mentioned a public works review. Has this been completed and is it available to the public? - What would be the normal process and timeline from here on something like this and how is it currently looking as a result of the COVID impacts? I would prefer to discuss all of this on the phone with you if at all possible, but e-mail also works if 171 3/30/2020, 3:47 PM hops ://outlook.office365.com/mail/search/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5... not. Thanks for your time! Respectfully, David Tomlinson 719-761-6516 On Mon, Mar 23, 2020 at 5:06 PM Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@tukwilawa.gov> wrote: Hello, You are receiving this email because you are a party of record for the Hopper Townhomes Rezone, PL19-0099. Attached to this email is a copy of the minutes for the public meeting held on 3/18/2020. Please let me know if you have any questions. Best, Maxwell Baker I Senior Planner Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Max.Baker@Tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3683 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 172 2 of 2 3/30/2020, 3:47 PM https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... Opposition to Proposed Rezoning of 6250 S 151st Street David Tomlinson <davidwtomlinson@gmail.com> Mon 3/30/2020 1:48 PM To: Verna Seal <Verna.Seal@TukwilaWA.gov>; Kathy Hougardy <Kathy.Hougardy@TukwilaWA.gov>; Thomas McLeod <Thomas.McLeod@TukwilaWA.gov>; Cynthia Delostrinos Johnson <C.DelostrinosJohnson@TukwilaWA.gov>; Zak Idan <Zak.ldan@TukwilaWA.gov>; Kate Kruller <Kate.Kruller@TukwilaWA.gov>; De'Sean Quinn <DeSean.Quinn@TukwilaWA.gov>; Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> B 2 attachments (5 MB) Letter of Oppositon to File L19-0123.pdf; Petition Letters Opposing File No L19-0123.pdf; Esteemed members of the Tukwila City Council & Co, My wife Layla and I are writing you to express our own opposition, as well as that of our neighbors, to the proposed rezoning of the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, (Reference Files L19-0123 & E19-0013, Project File 19-0099). Attached you will find a letter expressing our personal reasons for opposing this action, as well as letters of opposition signed a total of 36 individuals who live in 17 separate residences in the immediate vicinity of this property. We hope you will hear all of our voices and vote against this proposed rezoning. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any further questions you may have (contact info below). We greatly appreciate your time and consideration in this matter, thank you! Sincerely, David & Layla Tomlinson 6360 S 151 st PI Tukwila, WA 98188 Cell: 719-761-6516 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 173 3/30/2020, 1:53 PM https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... Re: Opposition to Proposed Rezoning of 6250 S 151st Street David Tomlinson <davidwtomlinson@gmail.com> Mon 3/30/2020 3:00 PM To: Verna Seal <Verna.Seal@TukwilaWA.gov>; Kathy Hougardy <Kathy.Hougardy@TukwilaWA.gov>; Thomas McLeod <Thomas.McLeod@TukwilaWA.gov>; Cynthia Delostrinos Johnson <C.DelostrinosJohnson@TukwilaWA.gov>; Zak Idan <Zak.ldan@TukwilaWA.gov>; Kate Kruller <Kate.Kruller@TukwilaWA.gov>; De'Sean Quinn <DeSean.Quinn@TukwilaWA.gov>; Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov>; Mayor <Mayor@TukwilaWA.gov> B 1 attachments (743 KB) Opposed rezone Thoelke.pdf; Sir/Ma'am, Our apologies for the multiple e-mails. We received one additional letter of opposition after we sent you our last e-mail, which you will find attached. Thank you again for your time and consideration. Sincerely, David & Layla Tomlinson On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 1:48 PM David Tomlinson <davidwtomlinson@gmail.com> wrote: Esteemed members of the Tukwila City Council & Co, My wife Layla and I are writing you to express our own opposition, as well as that of our neighbors, to the proposed rezoning of the property at 6250 S 151st Street, (Reference Files L19-0123 & E19-0013, Project File 19-0099). Attached you will find a letter expressing our personal reasons for opposing this action, as well as letters of opposition signed a total of 36 individuals who live in 17 separate residences in the immediate vicinity of this property. We hope you will hear all of our voices and vote against this proposed rezoning. Please do not hesitate to contact us with any further questions you may have (contact info below). We greatly appreciate your time and consideration in this matter, thank you! Sincerely, David & Layla Tomlinson 6360 S 151st PI Tukwila, WA 98188 Cell: 719-761-6516 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 174 1 of 1 3/30/2020, 3:08 PM Breyden Jager From: Breyden Jager Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 1:40 PM To: Geoff Hinton Subject: RE: 6250 S 151ST ST Parcel 3597000400 Geoff, Unfortunately, the tool only allows searches by address, parcel number, and permit number, which makes it a bit difficult to run a general search. To find the information you are looking for, my advice would be to submit a public records request. You can find instructions on how to do so on the City Clerk's website at the following link: https://www.tukwilawa.gov/departments/city-clerks-office/public-records-requests/ Thank you, Breyden Jager I Associate Planner Pronouns: He/Him/His Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Breyden.Jager@tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3651 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. From: Geoff Hinton <geoffhin@microsoft.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 11:14 AM To: Breyden Jager <Breyden.Jager@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: RE: 6250 S 151ST ST Parcel 3597000400 Thanks for the details, Breyden! That was very comprehensive. Is there a way I can programmatically query the data in this database? I'm specifically interested in previous examples where zoning was either approved or declined in the last 5-10 years. Thanks, Geoff From: Breyden Jager <Breyden.Jager@TukwilaWA.gov> Sent: Tuesday, February 14, 2023 9:15 AM To: Geoff Hinton <geoffhin@microsoft.com> Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: 6250 S 151ST ST Parcel 3597000400 Good morning, Geoff, In order to access the latest plans and documents, please navigate to the land use permits portal at the following link and use the search function to locate each application number L19-0123 & E19-0013: https://www.tukwilawa.gov/departments/permit-center/land-use-permit-portal/ 1 175 Once you have the permit file pulled up, just click on the attachments tab to view and download all associated files. The ones that are dated 2023, will be the newer, currently relevant documents. Everything older is superseded by the newer files at this point. There are no current decisions to view, as both applications are still in review at this point. Administrative appeals of the City Council's rezone decision are not allowed; however, the decision may be appealed to the King County Superior Court, pursuant to the procedures and time limitations set forth in RCW 36.70C. Administrative appeals of the SEPA decision follow the process outlined in TMC 21.04.280, and must be filed within 14 calendar days of the date of decision. It's important to note that in deciding to approve or deny any rezone application, the City Council utilize the criteria found in TMC 18.84.020 (shown below). This application is for a rezone only, which is a non -project action. No development proposal has been submitted at this time. The criteria simply assess whether the change in zoning, in this case from LDR to MDR, is appropriate for the subject property. The criteria do not assess the feasibility or impacts of a specific project proposal. The project design plans and documents that have been submitted by the applicant should be considered for reference only, and any preliminary project proposal is subject to change following the decision to approve or deny the rezone application. More concisely, the approval criteria simply ask whether any of the allowed uses within the MDR zoning district are appropriate for the property, not necessarily just townhomes. Specific design considerations would be reviewed during the Design Review land use process accompanying any multi -family proposal later on, if the rezone request is approved. Off-street parking for any future proposal will be required to meet the City's minimum parking requirements outlined in TMC Table 18-7. 18.84.020 Criteria Each determination granting a rezone and the accompanying Comprehensive Plan map change shall be supported by written findings and conclusions, showing specifically that all of the following conditions exist: 1. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Comprehensive Plan; 2. The proposed amendment to the Zoning Map is consistent with the scope and purpose of TMC Title 18, "Zoning Code," and the description and purpose of the zone classification applied for; 3. There are changed conditions since the previous zoning became effective to warrant the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map; and 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 neighborhood, nor be injurious to other properties in the vicinity in which the subject property is located. (Ord. 2368 §69, 2012; Ord. 2116 §1 (part), 2006) Thank you, Breyden Jager I Associate Planner Pronouns: He/Him/His Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Breyden.Jager@tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3651 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. 2 176 From: Geoff Hinton <geoffhin@microsoft.com> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2023 1:43 PM To: Breyden Jager <Breyden.Jager@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: 6250 S 151ST ST Parcel 3597000400 Dear Breyden, I hope this email finds you well. I am reaching out to request more information regarding the proposed rezoning and building plans for the lot located across the street from my home. I understand that, according to the mailer, there are details available about the application, plans, and any current decisions, as well as information about any appeal rights regarding Parcel# 3597000400. It has been over a year since the last hearing on this, and I have not yet seen any updates on the status of the plans for the development. I am particularly concerned about the lack of parking that has been planned by Schneider Homes, as I do not want to see the overflow from their parking situation spilling into our cul-de-sac. I understand that commitments have been made by Schneider Homes in the previous hearing for expanding designated parking spaces inside the property, but I would like to understand more. I hope that you can provide me with the information I am seeking so that I may better understand the situation for preparing my comments. Thank you for your time and attention to this matter. I look forward to hearing back from you soon. Best regards, Geoff Hinton 6202 S 151st PI CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 3 177 Breyden Jager From: Hugh Tobin <htobin@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 4:56 PM To: Breyden Jager Subject: Re: L19-0123 Comments Comp Plan/Rezone Proposal L19-0123, 6250 1515` St. am writing to oppose City Council approval of this proposal for reasons stated below. If the Council decides to allow the upzone despite these matters, it should impose enforceable conditions, as discussed in the last section below. These comments are based on the information I have been able to review and obtain between recently learning of the revised materials submitted in 2022 and earlier this year and before the Feb. 21 deadline. The Neighborhood First, let's be clear about the nature of the neighborhood, which has been stable for many years. The applicant continues to assert that the proposed upzone would be consistent with multifamily developments in the "surrounding area," and at the 2/15/23 meeting stated again that the site was "surrounded" by multifamily property. In fact, the site is surrounded by LDR zoning and an unbuildable steep slope, and all developed land adjacent to the site is built to lower than LDR density, with much remaining wooded open space. The site is bounded on 3 sides (2 across streets) by LDR zones with housing at less than LDR density, often much less. What might appear on the zoning map to be high density property across 65th to the East is actually a steep wooded slope below a walking trail, which is zoned HDR but entirely undeveloped except for a 19-unit condo project with an Interurban Ave. address located well to the Northeast of the site as well as far downhill. That condo project sits on a 4- acre lot (thus is less dense than LDR allows), and in any case is not part of the same neighborhood as the subject site. The only multifamily -zoned lot adjacent to the site and at or near the same elevation, at the SE corner on the other side of 65th and Trail No. 3, was the scene of a tragic fire and is now bare land. To the North, three adjacent lots average one house to about 26,000 s.f., and just North of those is a 2-acre lot with only a small 1903 vintage house. Facing the entire South side of the site on 151st is a single-family subdivision developed by the same applicant with lots of at least 12,000 s.f. each. South of that a large wooded wetland area separates the site vicinity from the multifamily development further South abutting 151st . Applicant cites the Sunwood condos as "surrounding" multifamily development, but these sit high on a hill, separated from the SW corner of the site by 4 homes on lots averaging 34,000 s.f. each. Sunwood does not even take access in the direction of the site. In short, the proposal would be a 4.45 acre intrusion of multifamily zoning into an area of very low -density single-family housing. Build -out of the site under MDR, allowing 1 unit per 3000 s.f., would be radically inconsistent with the existing nature of the surrounding residential neighborhood. The Proposal Does Not Satisfy Rezone Criteria A Comp Plan Amendment/Rezone can be approved only if the Council can make specific findings to establish that all four criteria of TMC 18.04.020 are met. They are addressed by number below. It appears that the applicant did not address these criteria in its 2019 application, which used an incorrect form that called for different criteria. Only in August 2022 1 178 did it submit a letter trying to adapt some of its arguments on those criteria to those that apply, or simply repeating them even if not on point. 1. The main rationale for the rezone advanced in the August 2022 letter is that it is consistent with the Comp Plan because it would provide for more affordable home ownership due to a more efficient housing types. But that could apply to any LDR-zoned property. Comp Plan policy 3.2.2 provides: Encourage a full range of housing opportunities for all population segments, including very low-income households earning less than 30% AMI, through actions including, but not limited to, revising the Tukwila's zoning map and development codes as appropriate, which would enable a wide variety of housing types to be built. [emphasis added] Whether an upzone of this site is the appropriate way to provide opportunities depends on consistency with other Comp Plan policies; on whether the Council can find that all of the Code criteria are met; and on whether the alternative of revising the Code is a better way. Indeed, the City is starting to pursue that better way, to allow "middle housing" more broadly. The City published an RFQ in November of last year for a consultant to "analyze and consider the feasibility of adopting policies and code language that would allow a range of higher density housing types in single family zoned areas of the City; conduct extensive public outreach on housing issues to the general public and community based organizations in the City..." with work to be completed by June 30, 2023. That is more consistent with the Comp Plan strategy at p. 3-5, "Following the neighborhood outreach process, consider flexible zoning standards to promote housing options that meet current and future needs." It would also be a more efficient and equitable way to allow for different housing types in LDR zones than to grant upzones on an ad hoc basis. The applicant seeks to emphasize the access to transit as a reason why this site should be changed from from LDR. The same argument might support rezoning all of the LDR land in the area (such as ours, with theoretical capacity for 13 units in MDR), at similar distances from or closer to bus routes. But the idea that many would walk to transit from the site is not realistic. Unit owners would have cars. From the bus stop on the North side of Southcenter Blvd. it is a hike up a steep hill on 65th, which I timed at 9 minutes to the proposed South entrance of the site at my rather brisk pace; to reach the westbound stop one must brave the unsignaled crosswalk and high-speed traffic, which I did not try. Using that stop would significantly increase the time on the 150 bus compared to boarding on the other side of the hill on Interurban. Having commuted to Seattle for many years from a home near the SW corner of the site, I can attest that the way to use transit to Seattle from here is to drive to it: down to Interurban for the 150 bus, or to the Sounder station (one would not walk there). Some commuters from the site would be dropped off by a family member, to avoid parking issues or keep a car in use; that would double the trips. Some would find current conditions on transit unacceptable and drive to work even if transit would get them there. Nor would homeowners at the site walk to work or shopping in Southcenter. They would have cars, and it is much easier to drive and park. There are no neighborhood retail business that one can reasonably walk to. The applicant says Fort Dent and Southcenter are in easy biking distance, but that overlooks the grueling climb home up 65th, to which I can attest, as well as safety issues. Over many years we have never braved the traffic to Southcenter, and though we have biked down to the Green River Trail and Fort Dent, heavier traffic will make it riskier from here to the bottom of 65th, and I think most would choose the ease and safety of driving the bikes down to the trail parking area. The applicant's August 2022 letter tries to support its proposal with policies for the Southcenter/Urban Center as a place for "living" (applicant's emphasis), but the site is not there. It is in the residential area called Tukwila Hill (Comp. Plan, p. 7-5), cut off from the Urban Center by I-405 and Southcenter Boulevard, as well as by the topography that provides its name This is not a case in which rezoning would lead to transit -oriented development in the sense that residents might live without automobiles, nor would it put density in a walkable neighborhood. Comp Plan objectives, goals, policies, and strategies with which the proposal would not be consistent include: The first priority objective (p. 8): 2 179 1. To improve and sustain residential neighborhood quality and livability. GOAL 7.3 Neighborhood Quality: Stable residential neighborhoods ... 7.1.1 Maintain a comprehensive land use map that supports the preservation and enhancement of single-family and stable multi -family neighborhoods; eliminates incompatible land uses; and clearly establishes applicable development requirements through recognizable boundaries. 7.3.4, p. 8: Use new development to foster a sense of community, and replace lost vegetation and open spaces with improvements of at least equal value to the community. I have seen no indication that such replacement would be done or how it could be done if substantially all of the vegetation is cleared. Continued emphasis on existing land use patterns to protect and preserve residential uses. (p. 7-10) 7.5.9 Support zoning densities that encourage redevelopment of existing multi -family properties. (p. 7-13). Allowing MDR density on greenfield sites by rezone to higher density tends to have the opposite effect. The Aug. 14, 2022 letter to Nancy Eklund emphasizes that the LDR designation allows only detached single-family housing, and that a choice of housing styles can allow more affordable home ownership. These are grounds to reform development standards for LDR, but the cure does not require applying all the MDR rules, including density, lot coverage, and permitted uses, to LDR lots generally or to this particular lot. The proposal is not an appropriate way to further housing goals and is predominantly inconsistent the Comp Plan. 2. The August 2022 letter does not explain how the proposal is consistent with the scope and purpose of Title 18. I am not sure what that means, but part of the purpose is stated in TMC 18.10.010 (LDR Zone): It is intended to provide low -density family residential areas together with a full range of urban infrastructure services in order to maintain stable residential neighborhoods, and to prevent intrusions by incompatible land uses. [emphasis added] The rezone would conflict with that purpose. 3. The applicant fails to identify any change in conditions since the existing zoning was adopted, though that is an essential requirement for a rezone under TMC 18.04.020.3. Having lived in this stable neighborhood over 15 years, I do not know what changes could be cited. The August 2022 letter, coming more than 2.5 years after the application, has a response to that item that does not relate to changed conditions. It merely recites supposed benefits and argues consistency with Comp Plan policies, referring back to another item that relates to an independent requirement. Even if somehow the need for affordable housing has increased over some relevant period, which is not claimed or documented (Seattle declared a housing emergency in 1995), that is a general issue that could merit general Code amendments, not the kind of changes affecting a site or its surroundings that would be relevant to a site -specific rezone. 4. A project at MDR density will have more negative affects on the surrounding neighborhood and its residents and properties than a project within maximum LDR density, which is less than half. All the traffic will have to use the single arterial, because there is not a normal street grid. Not only the residents' vehicles, but also deliveries, service trucks, visitors, contractors, etc., will all have to turn onto and off that arterial, and if entrances are congested they may stop in the road to await a turn. We will feel less safe biking from our home. 3 180 There will be more noise from the vehicles (including emergency vehicles or police when needed), equipment, alarms, and human activity generally. Vehicles that do not fit on site will park on the street and sounds from them will not be buffered. There will be more emissions to air, such as from vehicles and from any barbecues or wood -burning fireplaces (the SEPA checklist says the latter, "if permitted," will produce emissions). An LDR-density development would have some impacts of the same nature, but at a smaller scale. Humans who live in townhomes or triplexes are probably no better or worse neighbors on average than others, and equally variable. By arithmetic, more density will mean more who tend to cause negative impacts. I would expect to see more people drive into the dead end of 62nd — a rather secluded spot right by our property — to hang out at night. We already see this occasionally, and find the debris they leave. The increased impacts on some public infrastructure could be disproportionately greater than from an LDR project; i.e. could hit a tipping point. Sanitary sewer capacity is a concern, discussed separately. Traffic may reach the point at which the left turn lane at the bottom of 65th will frequently back up or a signal is required. Reductions in tree canopy are generally recognized as detrimental to a neighborhood, and we expect more loss from an MDR project, with the permitted and intended 75% lot coverage. See discussion below in the "Conditions" section. Trees retained in a steep slope area in the NE corner provide the least benefit in the neighborhood. I believe that the impacts above, together with the expectation that more land in the immediate vicinity may be similarly rezoned and developed, such as the large lots directly North of the site, are likely to be injurious to the values of single-family properties that are not suitable for MDR redevelopment even if rezoned. The impacts during construction would have to be worse for development to MDR density. More clearing, grading, infrastructure work, and unit construction would mean more noise, dust, emissions, heavy truck traffic, road obstructions, etc. If the street would have to be dug up for sewer work that would not be required for a less dense project, that would substantially increase the inconvenience. As with all types of impact, if we do not know, then Council has no basis to conclude there would be no adverse effect. I have made separate comments regarding some impacts under the SEPA matter, E19-0013, which should be considered incorporated here. The issue under 18.04.020.4 is not whether MDR density will make our lives unbearable, compared to the utopia of living by an LDR development. The applicant seeks a special change in rules for its property alone, enhancing its value with potential that we surrounding owners will not have, and appropriately it must show, on top of the other requirements, that the rezone "will not adversely affect the surrounding neighborhood, nor be injurious to other properties in the vicinity in which the subject property is located." The Council could not rationally find that there will be no adverse or injurious effect. Sanitary Sewer and Concurrency Note: These comments are based on what I have been able to find out before the comment deadline. I am concerned that a high density development on the site not overtax the sanitary sewer system below where our 4-lot subdivision discharges to the main, and cause back-ups. At the 2/15/23 meeting the applicant or consultant dismissed the concern saying that it would discharge to an existing City 12-inch concrete sewer pipe under 151 st. But the "Existing Conditions" plan dated January 2023 from the applicant indicates that the only sewer main there is 8-inch (see also 2014 Sanitary Sewer Plan, Drainage Basin no. 4). I am no sewer expert, but I read that plan as showing that the slope of the pipe drops from .45% to .34% as it runs East from the manhole 4 181 slightly West of the middle of the site. I see that the City's Comprehensive Sewer System Plan linked in the online Comp Plan, at 1.3.3 on p. 1-12, includes a City policy that 8" pipe must have a minimum slope of .40% (a spot check of other sources, including one from Ecology, suggests that is a common minimum). If I follow all this correctly, the proposal is to increase potential density on a site that would discharge to sanitary sewer main that does not meet standards. The Comp Plan says: LEVEL -OF -SERVICE STANDARDS 40. Sufficient system capacity for surface water, water, sewer and transportation is required prior to approval of any new development. (Standards for surface water, water and sewer are codified in the City's Municipal Code, and the transportation standards are in the Transportation Element of this Plan.) New development must pass the concurrency tests before development may be permitted. TMC 14.36.020 provides in part: 3. Applications for Type 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 decisions involving projects which will require sanitary sewer service from the City of Tukwila shall be referred by the Department of Community Development to the Department of Public Works, which shall determine whether the City has the necessary sewer system capacity, including such mains, pump stations and other facilities as may be necessary, to provide sanitary sewer service meeting City standards or that such capacity will be available by the time a certificate of occupancy is issued. If adequate service is not available, the Department of Public Works shall determine and shall advise the applicant of the improvements which are necessary to provide service meeting City standards. (Ord. 1769 §2 (part), The proposed rezone is a type 5 decision "involving" such a project. A City pre-app checklist for this site,under PRE20-0005, that I found online from 2020 has a note about the 8" sanitary sewer main, saying the applicant shall conduct a study as to capacity to handle "so many units." An email exchange from 2000 includes a City staffer who would "not feel confident telling you that we have enough sewer capacity for the new townhomes (38 currently?) that they plan to build." From a phone call with Public Works today (2/21), it appears no final determination has been made on that question; no study has been done over the last 3 years; and the City may not intend to require one. I think there should be a clear determination consistent 5 182 with the concurrency provision in the Code prior to a rezone vote, and if the infrastructure is already substandard or is of doubtful adequacy to support a project at MDR density, the City should have a clear plan for any necessary improvements and their funding, before the rezone decision. Conditions The proposal cannot satisfy Code requirements. But if the City Council decides to approve a zoning change, it should use its authority to impose conditions that will limit the impacts and make the development of the site more compatible with the surrounding low density housing than an unconditioned development under MDR. The Council has "the authority to impose conditions and safeguards as it deems necessary to protect or enhance the health, safety and welfare of the surrounding area, and to ensure that the rezone fully meets the findings set forth in TMC 18.84.020." A Comp Plan policy relied on by the applicant, 3.2.3, says: "Provide sufficient appropriate zoning for housing of all types, including government -assisted housing, housing for low-income families, manufactured housing, multi -family housing, and group homes and foster care facilities, subject to conditions that appropriately integrate them into existing neighborhoods. [Emphasis added] The Council has imposed conditions on prior rezones. Conditions should include: Density limit A limit of 30 units would make the density roughly compatible with the theoretical maximum LDR density of 1/6500, though still several times greater than the actual average density of the surrounding property. That should allow the final design to minimize various impacts by allowing more land to be kept in a natural state rather than cleared and regraded. A 30-unit townhome subdivision should easily be able to preserve many of the mature trees on the site, if the conditions on the rezone so require, and with less impervious surface the extent of grading, filling and detention to deal with stormwater would be less. Note that the applicant's August 2022 letter emphasizes several times that the proposal would allow a different housing type that is more affordable and offers more options in housing style for homeowners; the problem is that LDR limits the style of housing to the most expensive. The letter does not even mention the LDR density limit or say that higher density than that is needed. But to preempt any claim that the rezone with conditions makes it less profitable to develop the site that before, the Council could leave open the option to develop under all LDR regulations instead. Impervious Surface Impervious surface should be limited to something determined by staff to be more consistent with the density limit suggested, and with reasonable tree preservation, than the 75% maximum (At one place the revised SEPA checklist says it will be about 65%, for a project at MDR density). Housing type The applicant represents that the project will be townhomes. A condition excluding other uses that the upzone to MDR might permit (which include boarding homes, senior living facilities, and fourplexes) would ensure that outcome, and housing more compatible with the surrounding single-family homes. Stormwater The change from a heavily wooded lot to one with mostly impervious surface will obviously increase annual stormwater flow from the site. The applicant has submitted a plan that shows stormwater generally routed to a new underground tank in the Southeast corner (though it is not clear how it gets there from the South auto entrance) and from there into the City system on 65th Ave. S. A rezone condition should require that 6 183 solution, and that the developer pay for any necessary improvements to the City system. The earlier plan shown by the applicant had a detention pond in the SW corner, which would have to flow through the surface drainage (wetland) South of the 62nd Ave. S dead end, which would worsen flooding over City Trail No. 4 and adjacent private property, which is already a problem. Sanitary Sewer See the comments and citations above on this issue. Whether or not the City determines prior to the rezone decision that an upgrade is needed to support the density, if the main is substandard under policies incorporated in the Comp Plan, then if the applicant would have to upgrade it as a rezone condition, that would help make the rezone be consistent with the Comp Plan and serve the public health, safety, and welfare, and the issue would not have to be debated in later permitting decisions. Tree Preservation Although the SEPA checklist says in one place that 75% of the site will be cleared (pdf p. 16), in another it says flatly "the site will be cleared" and trees retained per "adopted standards" (pdf p. 8). At the public meeting on 2/15/23 I understood the intent was to clear the entire property, with the exception of the small portion in the NE corner with a slope exceeding 40%. The property is now heavily wooded, and includes tall cedars, firs and maples. The arborist's preliminary survey from early 2020 reported 257 trees of which he said 43 were "exceptional trees" under the Code. This figure may well be low, because others may have grown to the 18 inch diameter over 3 years, and the 43 are a subset of 125 trees the report calls "viable," from which it excludes all cottonwoods as well as some firs and maples that may merely be covered by excess ivy. Under Sec. 18.54.060 A, as many Exceptional Trees as possible are to be retained on a site proposed for development; however, based on what we heard from the applicant and staff at the public meeting, it seemed that the proposed upzone would lead to the near total clearing of the site, without even off -site planting or in -lieu payments except for any trees removed from critical areas. Whether or not proper application of the Code at the subdivision or project permit level would have that result, I think the rezone could cause a much greater loss of canopy and habitat than would be likely as a practical matter under LDR. If the rezone is allowed, the Council should condition it on the retention of at least half of the on -site Exceptional Trees, based on an updated survey that identifies them all using the TMC definition. From a sidewalk survey I see that several Exceptional Trees are near the perimeter, particularly along the western boundary where they may be within the landscape buffer, or in some cases the setbacks, shown on the latest site plan (p.3). These trees enhance the neighborhood and can buffer light and noise (both ways), and I suspect there is nothing wrong with most of them that removing English Ivy cannot cure. A landscape buffer will not prevent the buildings near the West perimeter from looming above the streetscape, absent mature trees. The condition should require the preservation of all Exceptional Trees wholly or partly in that buffer or wholly within the 20 foot setback, unless certified as Defective under the TMC by a qualified arborist. If there is no condition on the rezone I fear that DCD will be pressed to allow a cheaper approach than preserving them. There are also a few Exceptional Trees that must be in the City ROW, which I hope would have to be protected as a matter of course, but a rezone condition could remove any doubt. No Wood -burning Fireplaces or Stoves The SEPA checklist discloses the potential for emissions from wood -burning fireplaces "if allowed." They should not be. Their use would worsen the problem of particulate pollution in the area. If City regulations do not already prohibit them in new homes, a condition should do that here to reduce the impacts on the neighborhood and the environment. Respectfully submitted, Hugh Tobin 15165 62nd Ave. S 7 184 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 8 185 https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzUSL... L19-0123, E19-0013: "Hopper Townhomes" Comp Plan Amendment and Rezone Proposal, Environmental Review Hugh Tobin <htobin@comcast.net> Mon 3/30/2020 2:59 PM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Cc: Verna Seal <Verna.Seal@TukwilaWA.gov>; Kathy Hougardy <Kathy.Hougardy@TukwilaWA.gov>; Thomas McLeod <Thomas.McLeod@TukwilaWA.gov>; Cynthia Delostrinos Johnson <C.DelostrinosJohnson@TukwilaWA.gov>; Zak Idan <Zak.ldan@TukwilaWA.gov>; Kate Kruller <Kate.Kruller@TukwilaWA.gov>; De'Sean Quinn <DeSean.Quinn@TukwilaWA.gov> Dear Mr. Baker and Councilmembers: I am a resident (since 2007) and homeowner at 15165 62nd Ave. S., which is part of a 4-home subdivision on about 3 acres to the southwest of the proposal site, between it and the Sunwood Condominiums (this area of LDR zoning is omitted from the application's "General Description of Surrounding Land Uses", which states that Sunwood is to the southwest). I write first to address the range of alternatives that should be considered if the City is to amend the comprehensive plan and zoning regulations, and second to comment on the adequacy of the SEPA checklist for the specific proposal. Scope of alternatives and environmental review If the City is to consider changing the comp plan to allow greater density or more affordable housing, it should evaluate a range of options for the City as a whole, rather than merely respond to the desire of a single property owner for an upzone. Options could include changes in policies that drive development regulations for LDR zones, and/or creation of additional zoning categories, which might include density bonus options based on provision of housing that would be truly affordable to very low-income households. In some jurisdictions single-family zoning is being phased out, as in Oregon. Without changing the basic density limit for LDR, 6500 s.f. per unit, and perhaps without amending the comp plan, the City could change regulations that unduly limit density and affordability of development on larger lots. For example, Chapter 18.10 TMC arbitrarily limits development coverage and footprints on larger LDR lots (such as the Hopper tract) to much lower percentages than on smaller lots, and prohibits duplexes and triplexes, thereby encouraging subdivision into 6500 s.f. lots and more expensive housing. If an owner could achieve the same 1/6500 unit density on a larger LDR development site (whether or not divided for sale or made into a condominium), or could add to a partly developed site, with townhome development, then housing could be more affordable and climate -friendly, with more usable open space, and in many cases more of the site left undisturbed, than in a typical SF subdivision. Under present LDR zoning, even on a lot large enough for several units under that density (such as the one where I live), one may not have a duplex, even in an existing structure that could be converted without exterior changes ("ADU" unit rules, designed to make those acceptable on minimum size lots, have restrictions that would often require dysfunctional modifications, and do not accommodate family -friendly units). So the City should consider revisiting development restrictions more generally, and include 186 1 of 3 3/30/2020, 3:55 PM https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... potential changes to them as reasonable alternatives to any proposed rezone for purposes of environmental analysis. SEPA Checklist for Hopper Lot Proposal My general comment on the SEPA checklist, as it relates to the specific rezone, is that it does not adequately respond to the questions in the form, and therefore does not provide a sufficient basis for a threshold determination — certainly not a DNS. In many cases responses have one or more of these defects: • Incomplete (e.g., checking "yes" but not answering the "if yes" question) • Admitting or revealing that insufficient study has been done to provide the answer • Entirely omitted (e.g., "N/A" for an item that does apply) • Contradicted by other statements in the checklist or by materials with the application • Inaccurate • Consisting of unsupported and implausible statements • Lacking any quantitative information • Based on assumptions or promises as to actual development for which no assurance exists • Inconsistent with information available in public records, including City maps • Merely stating that regulations (of the new zone) will be followed, as if that disclosed the impact of development under them Subjects on which these defects occur include stormwater runoff, sensitive areas, slopes, streets, traffic, public services and facilities, discharges, noise, tree preservation, wildlife, nearby historic buildings, and nearby recreational facilities. I could provide detail, but it is not the job of neighboring residents to prepare responses to the checklist. I notice also that two preliminary reports from consultants submitted with the application, as well as limited online information in eTRAKIT regarding open code violations, indicate that there have been unpermitted grading, filling, and other activities altering the conditions of the site prior to the submission of this application, all of which clearly were known to the present owner prior to a purchase completed on or about 3/13/2020. That raises the question, whether the full extent of those activities and the previously existing site condition need to be established and the evaluation of impacts done using that prior condition as a baseline for a threshold determination. Finally, although the proponent has indicated an intent to develop approximately 38 townhome units on the site and has provided a possible site plan, there is no proposed concomitant agreement that would limit development or provide any mitigation, so what must be evaluated is the potential maximum development of the site under MDR zoning. The new owner may be describing its intent in complete good faith, but the ultimate development could be done by someone else. 187 3/30/2020, 3:55 PM https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... Thank you for your consideration of the above comments. I understand from the virtual meeting held on 3/18 that if the proposal submitted is to be considered, then there will be public hearings and opportunity to comment. I am reserving any comments on the merits for a later stage, when I would expect there to be more information available about the conditions on the site than the 2 preliminary letters from consultants that were filed with the application. Sincerely, Hugh R. Tobin CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 188 3 of 3 3/30/2020, 3:55 PM https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... Re: L19-0123, E19-0013: "Hopper Townhomes" Comp Plan Amendment and Rezone Proposal, Environmental Review Hugh Tobin <htobin@comcast.net> Mon 3/30/2020 3:51 PM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Following up on my checklist comment with one example, re: stormwater: Under C.1 at p. 8 of the pdf, the checklist says the project will not create stormwater from impervious surfaces that will not be infiltrated on site. Given the preceding statement that 75% of the lot will be made impervious, that is implausible and appears inconsistent with a later statement in the checklist, below. At p. 17, item c., the checklist asks about runoff, including where it will flow. The answer is evasive: it will be collected and infiltrated "to the greatest extent possible." That extent may be little or none, yet maximum MDR development will obviously add a lot of impermeable surface. The City's Surface Water Comprehensive Plan (2013), Section 2.3, identified this site as an area "where infiltration is not allowed as a surface water management approach due to steep slopes and/or high groundwater table (Figure 4)." I understand from City staff that this categorical prohibition has been removed, but the fact that the land was so mapped is a strong indication that very little infiltration could occur, so there would be a large increase in stormwater flowing offsite. At p. 30, 16.b, it is disclosed (notwithstanding the response to C.1, above) that development of the site would require stormwater discharge into the existing City system (presumably in 151st St.). Thus, the quantity of flow that could occur, including in extreme conditions, from a maximum development under MDR, with the site "cleared" as the applicant proposes, must be compared to the adequacy of the existing system to accept added flow in order to evaluate the impact of the proposal and whether it would cause a need for off -site stormwater improvements. Quantitative analysis is required to make a determination as to significance. It is likely that much rainfall to the site is presently absorbed by the vegetation (300 trees according to the proponent on the conference call). Some may now drain easterly down toward Interurban; however, the site is mapped mainly or entirely in the the Gilliam Creek drainage basin, which implies a southerly flow. If flow would drain toward 62nd Ave. S., as does at least some from the Mapletree Park development across 151 st from the site, that could exacerbate recent flooding along Tukwila Trail no. 4 (which the applicant evidently assumes residents will use to walk to Southcenter; else it would not be as close as claimed). A City stormwater map shows that the flow must pass through a 12-inch pipe (and associated catch basins) on the Terra Apts. property to reach larger pipe under 153rd Ave . S. and then Cottage Creek, which drains into Gilliam Creek. Within approximately the past year the water has backed up to make the trail, which is used by elementary school children, impassable, for approximately one day after a heavy rain in the Fall and for weeks after the snowfall in the winter of 2019. CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 189 3/30/2020, 3:54 PM Nancy Eklund From: Hugh Tobin <htobin@comcast.net> Sent: Monday, April 20, 2020 4:24 PM To: Nancy Eklund Cc: Maxwell Baker Subject: Re: L19-0123, E19-0013: "Hopper Townhomes" Comp Plan Amendment and Rezone Proposal, Environmental Review Dear Ms. Eklund, I appreciate that you have posted online the recently received limited geotech report and "Tree Protection Plan", and I have downloaded those. I am writing to request any other consultant reports and other communications from the applicant that have been submitted (Max Baker did provide early letters from the wetland consultant and geotech attached to the application), and to renew and update my public records request in the 3/30 email below for copies of comments from residents received to date. I see from the website comments that you agreed to provide those to the applicant. Related to the SEPA analysis, I note from a brief look at the recently filed documents that (1) the geotech report confirms my earlier comment to the effect that infiltration of stormwater is not feasible, and proposes a pond that it appears would have to drain under 151st down the 62nd Ave. ROW into the recently overflowing wetland abutting Trail No. 4, and (2) the "Tree Protection Plan" seems to say that the effect of the rezone would be that the applicant would remove "most, if not all" the many significant trees. The Plan seems to assume that all cottonwood trees are per se "nonviable hazard trees" and holly trees are invasive, so neither need be considered for protection. I would like to know whether the City accepts those assumptions. I am puzzled by the documentation submitted as it relates to environmentally sensitive areas. The new geotech report describes only one area, a steep slope "along the eastern most margin" and then refers to the landslide hazard as "directly east of the site" (see also negative response to item 12 on pdf p. 12 of the SEPA checklist). The City's map at https://www.tukwilawa.gov/city-maps/ shows not only a Class 3 area in the northeasterly part of the site near the City's Trail No. 3, but also numerous other Class 3 areas, including one along most of S. 151st St. extending well into the site. Is that map current, please, or has the City updated that map to remove those classifications, or others in our area? Sincerely, Hugh Tobin 15165 62nd Ave. S. On 3/30/2020 4:46 PM, Maxwell Baker wrote: Hi Hugh, After today I will no longer be assigned to the project, you will want to coordinate with the new project manager, Nancy Eklund, who is cc'ed on this email. Maxwell Baker I Senior Planner Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Max.Baker@Tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3683 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. 1 190 From: Hugh Tobin <htobin@comcast.net> Sent: Monday, March 30, 2020 4:43 PM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: Re: L19-0123, E19-0013: "Hopper Townhomes" Comp Plan Amendment and Rezone Proposal, Environmental Review Hi Max -- I infer from the message below that Jeff has submitted a comment. Could you please provide me a copy of that, and any others from residents, and any further consultant reports? Hugh On 3/30/2020 3:56 PM, Maxwell Baker wrote: Hi Jeff, Thank you for your comment, it will be considered by City staff and entered into the project file. You are now a Party of Record on the project and will be notified when staff reports are issued as well as of any public hearings before the Planning Commission and/or City Council. Best, Maxwell Baker I Senior Planner Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Max.Baker@Tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3683 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 2 191 https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... Opposition to L19-0123 jeff.thoelke@gmail.com <jeff.thoelke@gmail.com> Mon 3/30/2020 3:32 PM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> March 30, 2020 Mr. Max Baker City of Tukwila Project Planner Regarding File #: L19-0123 Mr. Baker, I am a long time resident of Tukwila, having lived at my current residence for 28 years. My house is located at 14915 62nd Ave S, Tukwila WA 98168, which is across the street from the 4 % acre property formerly owned by Patricia Hopper and is the subject of the rezoning proposal from low -density - residential to medium -density -residential. I knew Pat Hopper and spoke with her often about her plans for her undeveloped property. She purposely held on to it to prevent it from being rezoned and overcrowded. I am adamantly opposed to this rezoning proposal. I understand why more families would want move into this neighborhood, as it is relatively isolated from the hustle and bustle of the many commercial enterprises surrounding it. But a person only has to turn the corner from South 151st Street onto 65th Avenue South to see why medium density housing is undesirable. Tenants of the existing medium density housing crowd 65th Avenue South with parked cars 24 hours a day, every day of the year. Those tenants apparently lack any pride in the community because litter is constantly thrown on the street and sidewalks by the owners of those cars. But, even if 65th Ave S wasn't already an eye -sore, the streets are often not safe for pedestrians to walk. My house butts up against Tukwila Elementary School and I am frequently appalled at the speed and quantity of cars that pass my house each day. I am not exaggerating when I say cars frequently wiz by my house at over 40 miles -per -hour, through the school zone. Many of these cars likely don't belong to residents of this neighborhood, but rather are taking a shortcut from Interurban Avenue to Southcenter. Regardless of the results of this rezoning effort, 62nd Avenue South needs to have permanent stop signs at the corner of South 149th Street. A traffic light needs to be installed at the corner of Southcenter Boulevard and 65th Avenue South. Increased traffic on Southcenter Boulevard frequently makes it difficult to exit from 65th Avenue South. Considering the new fire station being built near that intersection and the crosswalk feeding the bus stops at the intersection, Tukwila ought to be proactive and put a stoplight at the intersection. Additional homes in this neighborhood is going to exacerbate this problem. Thank you for your consideration, Jeff Thoelke 192 1 of 2 3/30/2020, 3:34 PM https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... 206-579-3254 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 193 3/30/2020, 3:34 PM Breyden Jager From: Jesboneb <jesboneb@yahoo.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 21, 2023 4:43 PM To: Breyden Jager Subject: Rezone 6250 S 151st St, Parcel #3597000400 File #s: L19-0123 comment "Of all man's works of art, a cathedral is greatest. A vast and majestic tree is greater than that." — Henry Ward Beecher I have lived for about 25 years in a home on a heavily wooded lot nearly adjacent to the SW corner of the Hopper tract. I place great value on the tree canopy that extends through our neighborhood and the many species of birds that inhabit and frequent it. I know that building any housing on the Hopper tract will involve cutting some trees, and I will not mourn the loss of holly or cottonwoods, but am disturbed that the City Council might approve a change in the Comprehensive Plan and zoning that could lead to that property being virtually clearcut, including towering conifers and maples. I can see that some of them have a lot of English Ivy, but I know from experience in our own back yard (and the City's work in Tukwila Park), that ivy can be cut and uprooted; it is not a reason to cut the tree. The August 2022 letter to Ms. Eklund says that within the "limits of the Tree retention ordinance,a numbers [sic] of existing trees will be removed." I fear that greatly understates the applicant's intent and the impact of a rezone. The site is heavily wooded, with about 55 trees per acre, many of which are "Exceptional Trees." The SEPA checklist says in places that about 75% of the site would be cleared, but at the February 15 public meeting (to which I phoned in) it was clear that the developer intended to clear the entire site except for the extreme slope in the NE corner, and the DCD staffer did not suggest that any ordinance would prevent that; rather I got the impression that even trees in other steep slope areas could be cut with a compensating payment, which would not be required for the rest. The current site plan shows a landscape buffer and setbacks, but does not show where any trees would be preserved, and from the "Existing Conditions" plan recently submitted it appears that many are clustered where buildings are intended according to the site plan, or where a large proposed detention facility would require a treeless cover. In addition, the intent of the applicant to conduct grading to change the natural direction of drainage, expressed at the meeting, may be inconsistent with keeping trees even where they would not conflict with buildings or infrastructure. The applicant asserts that certain impacts, particularly on trees, would be similar to development under LDR zoning. So far as I know, that assertion is not supported by analysis or any expert opinion. It is not consistent with a statement I heard at the meeting. that the same regulations as for LDR would not apply. Even if that is wrong — if the terms of TMC Ch. 18.54 would be applied to the same extent as under LDR -- logically it seems the impact on canopy would be greater under MDR. If the site were subdivided under LDR, even assuming addition of interior streets rather than having homes only on lots abutting the existing 62nd Ave S and S 151st, I believe the lower limits on lot coverage and the lower density would provide more ability to condition the layout so as to fulfill the City policy and requirement to preserve Exceptional Trees when possible, and with less impervious surface the scale of any stormwater detention facility would be reduced. While I support the idea of allowing more affordable and energy efficient housing types, I think any change to rules to allow townhomes should be designed to result in less loss of tree canopy and less impervious surface than single-family development, not to enable or encourage more of these impacts. So I must oppose this rezone proposal, at least without very strict conditions to protect the tree canopy. i 194 Jessica Bonebright 206-679-4976 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 2 195 f , 1 - — ,1;•6". . ..122‘e's 7."-- • 1.- 1171:1/,,:.4r 4, 1 96 1 97 https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... Re: Re -zoning of 6250 S 151st (File# L19-0123 Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Mon 3/30/2020 10:34 AM To: MICHAEL J. MOORE <hummingbirdking@msn.com>; Nancy Eklund <Nancy.Eklund@TukwilaWA.gov> Hi Michael, Thank you for your comment. You are now a Party of Record on the project and will be notified when staff reports are issued as well as of any public hearings before the Planning Commission and/or City Council. To answer some of the questions that I have answers for at this time: • The City Public Works Department is reviewing the proposed layout of the project and is working to ensure that it meets the requirements of the Infrastructure Design Manual, as well as the ability for the project to accommodate any overflow parking onsite vs. on City streets. • The applicant's proposed townhomes will be sold individually, meaning that they will be purchased by individuals and not rented out by one entity. They have been described as being target towards middle -income earners. • The Tukwila School District has been notified of the proposed rezone and the potential increase in students. No comments have been received from them at this time. Additionally, Nancy Eklund, Senior Planner, will be taking over for meas the project manager for the City moving forward, she is cc'ed on this email. Any additional questions should be directed to her. Best, Maxwell Baker I Senior Planner Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Max.Baker@Tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3683 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. From: MICHAEL J. MOORE <hummingbirdking@msn.com> Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2020 12:46 PM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: Fw: Re -zoning of 6250 S 151st (File# L19-0123 Subject: Re -zoning of 6250 S 151st (File# L19-0123 To whom it may Concern I moved into my home over sixteen years ago and one of the reason I moved here is that it is a very quite community of well kept single family homes and I and my neighbors like it that way. I didn't 198 1 of 2 3/30/2020, 10:35 AM https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... move here with the indentation of the city to rezone mine and my neighbors community to high density housing and change our quality of life here on the hill. If you allow the almost 40 homes that you are proposing that could add up to an additional 100 cars into the neighborhood. The traffic volume is already high enough with vehicles using the hill as a shortcut to the mall and this will just add to it . Then there is the parking issue, will parking be pushed out on to S 151st St or on 62nd Ave S which in my opinion would be an eyesore as it is on 65th Ave S. south of 151st. The town homes that you are proposing will they be high end which would hopefully keep it owner occupied as I would not want it to become a bunch of rentals which would probably start to become rundown looking which in turn would hurt the value of mine and my neighbors property. I did not buy my house to live in a crappy looking neighborhood. I like the that there is a pride ownership here. Next there will more an likely be family's with grade school kids which would attend Tukwila Elementary and will they have the capacity to absorb those children at this facility already as it already has close to 540 kids attending there now. So would there be room to add another 50 to 80 children or more into this school? I'm not oppose to development of the property but the area needs to stay zoned low to medium residential because if we let this go through then we have opened up Pandora's Box and more and more high density housing will get approved and there will be more and more traffic which in turn will continue to destroy the peace and tranquility here on the Old Hill. Please listen to your constituents and preserve our way of life here in our neighborhood. PLEASE DO NOT CHANGE THE ZONING, PLEASE DO NOT APPROVE THIS PLAN AND PLEASR DON'T RUIN MY NEIGHBORHOOD Thank you for you time Michael J. Moore Jacqueline L Spicer Malena C-Moore 206-794-2438 5936 S 149th St CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 199 3/30/2020, 10:35 AM https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzUSL... Re: L19-0123 Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Fri 3/27/2020 9:40 AM To: Miles Mitchell <tfc@drmilesdc.com> B 3 attachments (4 MB) L19-0123 Hopper Townhome Comp Plan.pdf; L19-0123 Hopper Townhome Site Plan - No Notes.pdf; E19-0013 Hopper Townhome SEPA.pdf; Hi Miles, Thank you for your email. I've attached copies of the application materials to this email. I have also cc'ed Nancy Eklund, the new project contact for the City moving forward; I will be taking leave starting next week and will no longer be working on the project. Any future questions you may have should be directed to her. Just to clarify, the rezone theoretically could allow for 64 townhome lots on the site based solely on square footage; the minimum square footage for a townhome lot in the proposed MDR zone is 3,000 square feet and the current property is 193,705 sf; divided this equals 64 3,000 sf lots. However, the applicant is not proposing to subdivide the property into that many lots/units, and is instead proposing 38 dwellings (see attached site plan for proposal). It should be noted that the proposed site plan is only a proposal at this point and may change once it is officially submitted to the City, which could occur only after a successfully approved rezone. Thank you again for your email, please keep an eye out for future notices regarding public hearings for the project. Maxwell Baker I Senior Planner Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Max.Baker@Tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3683 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. From: Miles Mitchell <tfc@drmilesdc.com> Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 3:17 PM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: L19-0123 Hi Max, Jennifer and I are against up to 65 units in this area. I think 30 would be max so we are against the zoning change. Thanks, Miles & Jennifer Mitchell CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open 200 1 of 2 3/27/2020, 9:40 AM https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 201 3/27/2020, 9:40 AM Breyden Jager From: Nicholas Anderson <nanderson03@gmail.com> Sent: Saturday, February 4, 2023 4:43 PM To: Breyden Jager Subject: Comments for Parcel# 3597000400 Hi Breyden, I received a postcard soliciting comments on the proposed rezoning of this lot at 6250 S 151 st St. from LDR to MDR. I am a current owner/resident at Sunwood Condominiums nearby, and walk by this property frequently. Rezoning to medium density residential is fine with me; however, I would like to see the mature conifers on the property preserved if possible. These trees provide natural services including habitat, hillside retention, and are aesthetically valuable to an urban neighborhood. Perhaps denser building in the already cleared areas of this lot would allow for some of these mature trees and understory to remain intact. Having a wooded area on the development with links to existing trails would make the developed property more desirable to prospective buyers, and it would allow a denser development to better fit in with the neighborhood. Sunwood condominiums has this sort of aesthetic with MDR nestled into mature conifers. It's great to live here! Those are my 2 cents. Thanks for listening. Nick Anderson Resident/owner, Sunwood Condominiums. CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 1 202 Breyden Jager From: Nick Webb <webbn@acm.org> Sent: Friday, February 3, 2023 1:52 PM To: Breyden Jager Subject: L19-0123 & E19-0013 [Was: PL19-0099 Comment] Hi Breyden, I'm forwarding my prior 2020 comments on this parcel given the upcoming meeting. My stance is the same, I support this more dense development that is badly needed in our area. Schneider Homes also has a stellar reputation for building quality multifamily homes. Thanks, Nick 6247 S 153rd St. Forwarded message From: Nick Webb <webbn@acm.org> Date: Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 8:39 AM Subject: PL19-0099 Comment To: <Max.Baker@tukwilawa.gov> Hi Max, I'd like to convey my support for adding additional housing in Tukwila, including the development at 6250 S 151st St, very near my own condo. The Seattle area continues to need more and more housing, especially lower end housing, and thus I applaud this development. My family, as a specific example, would like to move from a condo into a larger townhome or a single family home, but the selection in our area is quite constricted and prices are high, thus I'm in favor of adding more supply. Sincerely, Nicholas Webb 15165 Sunwood Blvd CC32, Tukwila, WA 98188 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. i 203 Breyden Jager From: Nick Webb <webbn@acm.org> Sent: Monday, October 23, 2023 8:35 PM To: Breyden Jager Subject: L22-0137 / E23-0005 Hi Breyden, As a Tukwila resident, I'd like to voice my approval of increases in densities within the city to provide more housing in general and for L22-0137 specifically. Sincerely, Nick Webb 6247 S 153rd St Tukwila, WA 98188 Nick Webb C: 206.755.2150 webbn@acm.org CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 1 204 https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... PL19-0099 Comment Nick Webb <webbn@acm.org> Mon 3/16/2020 8:40 AM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Hi Max, I'd like to convey my support for adding additional housing in Tukwila, including the development at 6250 S 151 st St, very near my own condo. The Seattle area continues to need more and more housing, especially lower end housing, and thus I applaud this development. My family, as a specific example, would like to move from a condo into a larger townhome or a single family home, but the selection in our area is quite constricted and prices are high, thus I'm in favor of adding more supply. Sincerely, Nicholas Webb 15165 Sunwood Blvd CC32, Tukwila, WA 98188 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 205 3/17/2020, 2:25 PM https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... Re: Hopper Townhomes Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Fri 3/27/2020 9:08 AM To: PATRICIA PERRY <patperry@comcast.net> Cc: Hans Korve <hans@dmp-inc.us>; Nancy Eklund <Nancy.Eklund@TukwilaWA.gov> Jj 3 attachments (4 MB) L19-0123 Hopper Townhome Site Plan - No Notes.pdf; E19-0013 Hopper Townhome SEPA.pdf; L19-0123 Hopper Townhome Comp Plan.pdf; Hi Patricia, Thank you for your email. I've attached copies of the application materials to this email. I've also cc'ed Hans Korve, the project applicant, on this email for you to contact regarding your plot of land adjacent to the project site. Hopefully the two of you can connect regarding the proposal. I have also cc'ed Nancy Eklund, the new project contact for the City moving forward; I will be taking leave starting next week and will no longer be working on the project. Any future questions you may have should be directed to her. Thank you again for your email. Best, Maxwell Baker I Senior Planner Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Max.Baker@Tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3683 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. From: PATRICIA PERRY <patperry@comcast.net> Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2020 4:29 PM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: Hopper Townhomes HI Max, I would like to view the application for the Hopper Townhomes rezone. I actually own the driveway , yes just the driveway, between the property of 6250 S 151st and 14920 65th Ave S. It goes to 6230 144th place south. Im trying to figure out what to do with the driveway.... Perhaps the townhomes could use it or the city or the people that it actually serves? Do you have any thoughts. I think townhomes will be good there, hopefully preserving the wet area in the properties. Again, I would like to see the full application 206 1 of 2 3/27/2020, 9:43 AM https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... Thanks Patricia Perry CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 207 3/27/2020, 9:43 AM Breyden Jager From: Minnie Dhaliwal Sent: Monday, July 13, 2020 5:21 PM To: Laurel Humphrey; Maxwell Baker; Lynn Miranda; Nancy Eklund Cc: Jack Pace Subject: Re: Proposed rezone of property at 6250 S 151st St Hi Laurel, This matter is a quasi-judicial matter so City Council members cannot discuss it outside of the hearing. Public comments should be directed to staff (Nancy Eklund is the planner working on this project). This item was tentatively scheduled for Aug 17th, but it is likely going to get postponed to Sept. Also, I think Councilmember Kruller had made a comment at one City Council meeting that community members had desired an in -person hearing for this project. It is not clear if we could have in -person hearing in Sept. Minnie From: Laurel Humphrey <Laurel.Humphrey@TukwilaWA.gov> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2020 5:05 PM To: Minnie Dhaliwal<Minnie.Dhaliwal@TukwilaWA.gov>; Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov>; Lynn Miranda <Lynn.Miranda@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: FW: Proposed rezone of property at 6250 S 151st St Hi all, can you remind me of the timeline on this project and any further public hearings? Thanks, Laurel From: Peggy McCarthy <MCCARTHYJP@msn.com> Sent: Monday, July 13, 2020 5:02 PM To: CityCouncil <CityCouncil@TukwilaWA.gov>; Allan Ekberg <Allan.Ekberg@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: Proposed rezone of property at 6250 S 151st St I stand in opposition of the proposed rezone of the property at 6250 S 151st St 98168 from low -density residential, LDR, to medium density residential, MDR. The owner of this 4.45 acre property, purchased in March 2020, has asked for a rezone so that up to 65 units of townhomes can be built on the property. Under the existing LDR zoning, approximately 30 single family homes could be built. The increased density created by MDR zoning and up to 65 new townhomes would add to the existing traffic, street parking and safety issues. Currently, even with the existing number of residents, 65th Ave S gets backed up with vehicles trying to turn left onto Southcenter Boulevard, especially at peak travel times. Because of insufficient parking at the multifamily complexes along 65th Ave S, the street is continuously lined with parked cars creating a hazard as people enter and exit those vehicles. The proposed up -zone site is located just a block or two from Tukwila Elementary school. Traffic congestion already occurs when students are being dropped off or picked up from school. The route i 208 along 151st is used by school children to walk to the elementary school as well as by other pedestrians and bicyclists. Adding up to 65 new households to this area would increase traffic congestion and possibly street parking and would reduce safety for school children and other pedestrians. The housing element of the comprehensive plan was thoroughly vetted by the City Council over a two-year period from March 2013 through adoption in the spring of 2015. Community input was gathered through open houses and public comment and each section of the plan was reviewed and discussed. The plan addressed housing density and identified the Tukwila Urban Center, Tukwila International Boulevard and Tukwila South as three areas targeted for multifamily housing and increased density. This density has been and continues to be realized with at least three residential complexes developed in the Southcenter area, Tukwila Village on the boulevard and possibly apartment housing in Tukwila South. Rather than respond to the desire of a single property owner, the in-depth work of the Council on the comprehensive plan should be honored and the current low density residential zoning retained. At the March 2020 public meeting on this subject, the developer said the reason for requesting the zoning change is to increase their return on investment. As stated by one resident, "We believe the role of government is to protect the interest of all the people that it serves, not just those who stand to gain from maximizing their profit margin from a development such as this". Lastly, one of the stated goals of the comprehensive plan is to preserve neighborhoods. Adding this level of density would change the character of the neighborhood - forever. Please reject the request for a zoning change on this property. Thank you, Peggy McCarthy CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 2 209 Nancy Eklund From: Maxwell Baker Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 2:32 PM To: Nancy Eklund Subject: Fw: hopper townhouses E19-0013 FYI, may need a reply. Maxwell Baker I Senior Planner Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Max.Baker@Tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3683 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. From: rcwieser@comcast.net <rcwieser@comcast.net> Sent: Tuesday, May 5, 2020 1:03 PM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Cc: karenlenise@comcast.net <karenlenise@comcast.net>; CityCouncil <CityCouncil@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: hopper townhouses E19-0013 Mr. Baker: Regarding public comments for project #E19-0013, L19-0123, the Hopper Townhouses; though the comment period expired March 30, 2020, may I offer a couple of observations? As a proponent of the "New Urbanism," I welcome Hopper Townhouses to our neighborhood. The density of townhouses rather than the sprawl that has defined Tukwila is refreshing. As townhouses are more affordable it will encourage economic and ethnic diversity. As a neighborhood resident, I believe it important the design and placement of the homes fits the character of the neighborhood as "Foster Hill" has many early 20' Century homes. Will this development enhance the neighborhood by mirroring design of these legacy homes? Will the design be open and inviting? Will it enhance neighbor interaction? Will it encourage walking, bicycling and space for children to play. I commend the developer for including recreation space. The proposed street design currently posted on the MUP sign does not address a question regarding placement of homes. It is unclear if front door access to those homes bordering S 151sY St and 62"d Ave South will be from those streets. Or will the back of the houses be facing 151' and 62'. If the latter, there is strong probability a tall privacy fence will border those streets. Or, the homes will be defined by a garage/driveway sticking out like a pig snout. Privacy fences are a safety concern. Tukwila School is just one block away. Many children walk along those streets. Check out existing homes on 151st St. with tall fences. Imagine the same thing just across the street. Privacy fences on both sides can prove dangerous to a child's safety. Danger from cars, from bullies, and yes, danger from abduction. Privacy fences prevent homeowners from "keeping an eye on the street." i 210 Privacy fences, especially close to sidewalks, detract from the aesthetics of the neighborhood. And impact resale values. Will existing sidewalks that border the street remain? A Mother remarked she will never walk along such streets with Baby in stroller. "Some car can be flying down the street, jump the curb and smack into us." Just a 2' to 3' buffer with low plantings between sidewalk and street can mitigate that. Regarding the storm pond, no doubt a fence will be required. What sort of landscaping is required to soften the barrier and provide wildlife habitat? Thank you for reading this letter and for your service to the City of Tukwila. A copy of this letter is forwarded to City Council and Karen Simmons as she on Planning Commission and is neighbor. Richard McLeland-Wieser 14234 58th Avenue South Tukwila, Washington 98168 206-229-6123 CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 2 211 https://outlook.office365.com/mail/inbox/id/AAQkAGFhNDMxNzU5L... Re: Opposition Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Mon 3/30/2020 9:58 AM To: kkoma yemo <morningscent12@Outlook.com> Hi Saehee, Thank you for your comment. You are now a Party of Record on the project and will be notified when staff reports are issued as well as of any public hearings before the Planning Commission and/or City Council. Please let me know if you have any questions in the meantime. Maxwell Baker I Senior Planner Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Max.Baker@Tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3683 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. From: kkoma yemo <morningscent12@Outlook.com> Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2020 11:06 AM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: Opposition Max Baker My name is Saehee Yim and I'm residing at 6380 S. 151st PI. Tukwila 98188 for 20yrs. This mail for sending my voice to oppose the Re -Zoning of 6250 S 151stStreet, the file number L19-0123 (Comp Plan/Zoning Amend). Here I'm submitting my voice to strongly oppose the plan. Sincerely Saehee Ymi CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 212 1 of 1 3/30/2020, 9:58 AM Breyden Jager From: Talia Long <long.talia@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, February 13, 2023 11:50 AM To: Breyden Jager Subject: Questions/Concerns - L19-0123 Rezone (6250 S 151 st St) - Hopper Townhomes Greetings Mr. Jager: We are the owners and residents of a property in the culdesac across S. 151 st Place from the development proposed by Schneider Homes, Inc. on parcel #3597000400. First, we are pleased that Schneider Homes is the owner and developer of the proposed project. Our culdesac is a vintage 1980s Schneider Homes development. We appreciate the quality and attention to detail that Schneider put into our development, and we hope that Schneider will do the same for the proposed development. However, we have the following concerns: 1. A little less than three years ago we added our signatures to a letter from our culdesac neighbors opposing the rezoning of the subject parcel from low to mid density. We continue to oppose this rezoning. The subject parcel is approximately the same size as the cumulative size of the 14 parcels making up our culdesac, yet the proposal calls for 38 townhomes! Our culdesac and the other properties immediately west and north of parcel #3597000400 are all single-family dwellings. The density proposed for this project significantly changes the nature of our neighborhood. 2. A project of this size will significantly increase the traffic on the adjacent streets. Thirty-eight townhomes will add huge volume of resident, visitor, service, and delivery vehicles entering and exiting neighboring streets and pouring forth on Southcenter Blvd. This was a burden recognized in our comments nearly three years ago and is even more of a concern now that the new, enlarged fire station has opened nearby and there has been other residential development adjacent to the fire station. Where will all these vehicles enter and exit the project? Have there been provisions for adding traffic and pedestrian controls in the immediate neighborhood as well as adding a traffic signal, including a left turn signal, on Southcenter Blvd.? The two -right angle (blind) turns at either end of S.151 st Place in front of our culdesac will only become more dangerous with the addition of so many more vehicles and people. Will parking be prohibited on these streets? If parking is allowed on S. 151 st Place, our visibility will likely be severely limited when exiting the culdesac. 3. The horrible fire that took three lives and destroyed the apartment building adjacent to the proposed project site highlighted the problem of accessing and fighting a fire on the bluff overlooking Interurban Avenue. Has emergency fire, medical, police access to the eastern most portion of the project been sufficiently and safely addressed? 4. We understand that development necessitates removal of some vegetation and tree canopy. However, hopefully huge heritage trees will be saved, and project landscaping will provide for large scale plantings to help mitigate the loss of wildlife habitat and provide screening and additional landscaping will provide maximum erosion control. Sincerely, Talia and B.J. Long, Jr. P.E. Nelson 1 213 6241 S. 151 st PI. CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 2 214 Nancy Eklund From: Maxwell Baker Sent: Monday, March 30, 2020 4:58 PM To: Travis Boyd Cc: Nancy Eklund Subject: Re: Public Comments on L19-0123: Re -Zoning Proposal for 6250 S 151st St Hi Travis, Thank you for your comment, it will be considered by City staff and entered into the project file. You are now a Party of Record on the project and will be notified when staff reports are issued as well as of any public hearings before the Planning Commission and/or City Council. Maxwell Baker I Senior Planner Department of Community Development I City of Tukwila 6300 Southcenter Blvd, Suite 100 I Tukwila, WA 98188 Max.Baker@Tukwilawa.gov 1206.431.3683 Tukwila: The City of opportunity, the community of choice. From: Travis Boyd <travisboyd2018@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, March 30, 2020 4:53 PM To: Maxwell Baker <Max.Baker@TukwilaWA.gov> Subject: Public Comments on L19-0123: Re -Zoning Proposal for 6250 S 151st St Travis Boyd / Deb Sorensen 6221 S 151 st P1 Tukwila, WA 98188 (206) 241-3971 travisboyd2018@gmail.com 30 March 2020 City of Tukwila Dept. of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Blvd., Suite 100 Tukwila, WA 98188 Max Baker City Project Planner RE: File: E19-0013 (SEPA), L19-0123 (Comp Plan, Zoning Amend) Applicant: Hans Korve, DMP, Inc. Property Owner: Patricia Hopper 1 215 Hopper Townhomes Project PL-19-0099 Project Location: 6250 S 151st St Mr. Baker, The recent proposed change in zoning from Low Density Residential to Moderate Density Residential for the property located at 6250 S 151 st St is concerning to us as residents of the cul de sac on S 151st Pl. The proposed change to MDR would include a change from up to 30 single-family homes to up to 65 multi -family townhomes being built. We understand the need for housing in the greater Seattle area and are not opposed to the development of the property into an LDR area. However, we are opposed to the proposed change to MDR for a number of reasons. Traffic is already an issue in the immediate area. Between Tukwila Elementary, Southcenter Boulevard, I-5 and I-405, the Southcenter Mall, City Hall, and soon the new fire station 52 and Tukwila FD headquarters, the area simply cannot handle the major increase in traffic that the change to MDR will create. With the condos and apartments on 65th Ave S already creating traffic and parking problems in the area, it will be a struggle to accommodate the traffic created by the addition of 30 new homes, let alone 65. Combine all this with the busy morning and afternoon work traffic, construction, emergency vehicle use, a school day at the elementary school, and add in the absence of traffic lights and you've pushed an already hectic commute to an unsafe capacity. The fact of the matter is that this area cannot handle the major increase in traffic that the proposed change to MDR will generate. Another concern of ours is the environmental impact this proposed development will have. The trees on the property should be assessed for viability. Any time there is a storm in the area, you are almost guaranteed to have one of those trees fall. The earth movement involved in the construction process will only add to this problem. How about the increase in water usage, sewer, run-off, and waste? What effect will this have on the surrounding area? It is our belief that it will take a great deal of work to accommodate 30 new homes, let alone 65. Recreation space is already at a premium in this area as the lone park, Tukwila Park, currently has a full or near -full parking lot and constant use. How would the city respond to the need for increased recreation space? We have not seen or heard anything regarding an environmental impact report, which is concerning to say the least. Lastly, just some other miscellaneous concerns we have. The plans we've seen have not included overflow parking (something that is already an issue in the area). What will be done to account for the increase in noise in the neighborhood? With the fire station moving down the hill and conceivably responding to more calls with the addition of more homes, how can the city justify the change to MDR and the massive increase in traffic with no new road accommodations? We ask that the Schneider Homes proposal to re -zone the area from Low Density Residential to Moderate Density Residential be denied. We are supportive of building a small number of 2 216 single-family homes on the property but to change the zoning to MDR and build up to 65 townhomes would create a plethora of problems in an area that was not designed for and is not capable of housing that many residents. Sincerely, Travis Boyd Deb Sorensen L CAUTION: This email originated from outside the City of Tukwila network. Please DO NOT open attachments or click links from an unknown or suspicious origin. 3 217 William James/Clotilde Molina 14920 62nd Avenue South Tukwila, WA 98168 (206) 375-1323 "90E2ok?d,nes@come , t?®ne% (206) 383-2536 th© 6 lo1@c+i,mc 3s ' n % March 17, 2020 City of Tubwila Department of Community Development 6300 Southcenter Boulevard., Suite 100 Tubwila, Washington 98188 Max Baber/Department of Community Development (206) 431-3683 or Mcm,ZeL av@ has �r3a9oloc)ou RE: File #: E19-0013 (SEPA), L19-0123 (Comp Plan, Zoning Amend) Applicant: Hans Korve, DMP, Inc. Property Owner: Patricia Hopper Hopper Townhomes Project PL-19-0099 Project Location: 6250 South 151st Street, Rezone from LDR to MDR. Develop a Maximum of 65 Townhomes. Dear Mr. Baber: Recently, we received a notice regarding a proposed change in zoning from Low Density Residential to Moderate Density Residential for the area to the immediate south of our property, on which we have resided for twenty years. This change proposes multi -family dwelling units — specifically 65— townhomes, instead of what is currently in place in our neighborhood — single family homes. We are very concerned about what this change could mean for our neighborhood and we are opposed to this proposal. 1 218 First, is the issue of increased vehicular traffic. 62nd Avenue South currently has as much traffic as it can bear, especially during school days when parents drop-off and pick up their children from school. There are also a multitude of cars using our street to come from our nearby freeways, South Center, Costco, and other shopping and restaurant areas to their homes in our surrounding neighborhoods. In addition, we have a fire station close by that uses this street to respond to calls. Adding 65 more housing units would add considerably more traffic to this immediate neighborhood and would pose a risk to the number of children and parents walking to/from school, residents walking to/from the bus stop on Southcenter Parkway, recreational and dog walkers, as well as, bike riders. This neighborhood was not designed nor can it tolerate this kind of increase in traffic. Second, we have heard nothing about an environmental impact statement. Our initial questions include: 1) how will 65 more housing units impact the amount of water usage — water run-off, sewer, etc.? 2) what will the impact of approximately 250 more people and automobiles have on our air quality? 3) how can our very small, lovely little Tukwila Park tolerate the level of ensuing overuse anticipated? 4) Assuming that at least some/most households will have a pet, how will the increase of pet waste and pet dander impact our land areas as well as our wild life — cats kill an enormous number of birds every single day and careless, inconsiderate dog owners leave piles of dog poop in our yard as well as on our neighbors' yards, let alone the amount of dog and cat urine that will naturally go into ground water. Finally, this neighborhood has been a relatively peaceful, quiet neighborhood with relatively low crime. We are very concerned that with the influx of so many more people, the quality of our neighborhood will be changed forever. We ask that this proposal be denied and that, instead, Schneider Homes build a small number of single-family homes, which is what we understood would originally happen to this property when it was sold. Sincerely, ZUilP,eam PaHxed &atiide 712oeuza cc: Mayor Ekberg, Tukwila City Council 2 219 March 30, 2020 David & Layla Tomlinson 6360 S 151st PI Tukwila, WA 98188 Tukwila City Council 6200 Southcenter Blvd Tukwila, WA 98188 Members of the Tukwila City Council, t 1 L •. Please find attached 17 letters of opposition to the rezone of the property located at 6250 S 161st Street (File #s: L19-0123 & E19-0013). These letters are signed by 36 individuals who currently reside in the immediate vicinity of the property and were collected in accordance with the social distancing guidelines currently in place. We believe we could have collected even more signatures during normal times. We have provided a map on the following page indicating the location of the property in question (yellow), as well as the location of those opposed to the proposed rezone (red markers). We hope you will hear the voices of those who will be most significantly impacted by this proposed measure and vote against it. We thank you for your time and consideration in this matter. Respectfully, David Tomlinson Layla Tomlinson 220 1 9 9 9 9 9 9 999 9 9 Go gfc ' • 9 9 2 221 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): [� �t re 1, o 1 gal-ioAt 06 and I (we) reside at: \ 419r1 (42 2"- kvt,c As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: �� �'W\ Date: t t 4 f) U __ Signed: `G1u ��u Date: 4 / Z / Z.oz Signed:Date: Signed: Date: 222 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): (41)4Wt11/) C4.00 A/10 (414, and I (we) reside at: 1' 4<3.7A) 024,')P M/6- As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health. livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: Signed: Signed: Signed: Date: .1:c3Cti Date: z,vi---142z4.2 Date: Date: 223 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): e SS't C to kn� ; ,e 'Sr) - and I (we) reside at: \Li 9 S) b 2 Ate. S Tv.1t10. . Il ill 1 i v 0 As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: Date: 3/2-0 Signed: -+ Date: I. -ze Signed: _ Date: Signed: Date: $ 224 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): ..o Dit) ktl �) and I (we) reside at: J ci / U -71u0,0 q3 Apo As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: f �(iV Date: , ` 7 z'' Signed: Date: 3 /._, '. Signed: �-�L. Date: -/-)` 7/} C`� v Signed: Date: 225 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 5 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are):���-�1�-� 1 I'14.6✓4-k -�,ac.��-__(;�rEcc-- r and I (we) reside at: /4/9 As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighbcrhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signer .. ' Signer ,., Date: Signed: Signed: Date: Date: Date: --7 Lr 226 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are) )61-4/44- and I (we) reside at: i As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Sign Signed: Signed: Signed: Date: y. Date:. . Date:77, ate: 227 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): (ieo4`I frL ri€. and I (we) reside at: (%2 0 "--S ( c1 1 L. As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: `- Date: 3 . Z) 120/0 i• r Signed: } e) Date: 3Ja,/zOR-C> Signed: Date: Signed: Date: 228 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): ) E,t) (2 E ti S ,ti v i s to»{D and I (we) reside at: :4- ( = >, 1 5 P As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: ,truse/ri Date: -/: a y/- c Signed: Date: 1 %''( 1 `'0 Signed: Date: Signed: Date: 229 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): VAOV' 1 -6 O)4 G � t 1 v and 1 (we) reside at: (i Tuv3 O ,\ 1b' As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. 1 greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: Signed: Signed: Signed: ij l Date: ?J"' ado7 Date: _- 16 ' Z-c>2-c) Date: / 2(v / 20 2.0 Date: 230 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): I1 kir! zf 5 and I (we) reside at: (: C / Sc' / S / J '-9/ As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: - Date: / �✓ ��: Signed:, Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: 231 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): and I (we) reside at: 10 3 c-C) As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: g Date: Signed: V "' Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: 232 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): S �,ah� �h� ✓�..�G'.�G L,�L,u ter and I (we) reside at: G 3 2! S rsL fi L As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: �ofie,--,-- le Fc/e-7 Date: 3 /2 s-/zezc Signed: - l/ /4 ,,.,� (-Ai . WiLuit4 _ Date: /.916-10-0,21-0 Signed: Date: Signed: _ Date: 233 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): 1\ M and I (we) reside at: / t S~( , L. L,' ro- si kAi- As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: )L0(3\.6---i\c:3, Date: 3- — 2_0: C' v Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Signed: Date: 234 and I (we) res e at: 3 / Ir_dd-A,_/5/sr a Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): b Kn g.,Won //K/s (4/t� you T7-/ ) la_�/, IA14 92/ea As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: Date: O3A7/970 3 f9fri&20 Signed: IL � Ul.i / Date: Signed: J 141 /! Date: 3 I '2-1 /9-02 6 Signed: Date: 235 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): and I (we) reside at: S �( As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: Signed: +• Signed: Signed: Date: ,2 7 44, rrG, 7C70 Date: 3/ ? ! 202.e Date: Date: 236 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): t r 1.11) and I (we) reside at: b As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. 1 greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed: ';t�;,1 Al( Signed: Signed: Signed: Date:C' Date: Date: Date: 237 Subject: Opposition to Proposed Re -zoning of 6250 S 151 st Street (File# L19-0123) Esteemed Members of the Tukwila City Council, My name is (our names are): 5zeI1ef-'71 ,4Po and I (we) reside at: As a Tukwila resident who lives near the property at 6250 S 151 st Street, I am strongly opposed to the re -zoning of this land from low to medium density residential. I am firmly of the belief that retaining the current zoning of low density residential would best preserve the health, livability and natural beauty of the neighborhood in which I live. I urge you to listen to the voices of your constituents who would be most directly affected by this proposed measure and vote against it. I greatly appreciate your time and consideration regarding this matter. Signed /Ai / Signed: Date: / Signed: Date: Signed: Date: Date: <3 238 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared lr}, Mayor's review Council review 10/23/23 NT 11/6/23 NT ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. 6.B. STAFF SPONSOR: NEIL TABOR ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 10/23/23 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Zoning Code Amendment Package, Fall 2023 CATEGORY ❑ Discussion Mtg Date ❑ Motion Mtg Date ❑ Resolution Mtg Date ® Ordinance Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ® Public Hearing Mtg Date 10/23/23 ❑ Other Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council ❑ Mayor ❑ /ldmin Svcs ® DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ P&R ❑ Police ❑ PTA SPONSOR'S SUMMARY This proposal includes three draft ordinances to: address updates to state law that the TMC does not currently comply with; improve the comprehensive plan and development regulation update process; and address errors and housekeeping items identified in code. The Planning Commission held a public hearing on 9/14/23, and voted to forward the draft ordinances with a recommendation for approval with no modifications. REVIEWED BY ❑ Trans&Infrastructure Svcs ❑ Community Svcs/Safety ❑ Finance & Governance ❑ LTAC ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. DATE: 10 / 2/ 23 ® Planning & Community Dcv. ® Planning Comm. COMM' 1`1'EE CHAIR: HOUGARDY RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. Department of Community Development COMMITTEE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED $0 AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $0 $0 Fund Source: N/A Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 10/23/23 Forward to next Regular Meeting 11/6/23 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 10/23/23 Info Memo Draft Ordinance (Accessory Dwelling Standards) Draft Ordinance (Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Zoning Text Amendment) Draft Ordinance (Parking Standards & Housekeeping Items) <revised after Committee> 7/17 PCD meeting minutes, Planning Commission 9/14 minutes, 10/2 PCD minutes 11/6/23 Ordinance (Accessory Dwelling Standards) Ordinance (Comprehensive Plan Amendment & Zoning Text Amendment) Ordinance (Parking Standards & Housekeeping Items) <revised after 10/23 C.O.W.> 239 240 City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING ORDINANCE NOS. 1758 §1 (PART), 1976 §5, 2098 §1, 2199 §4, AND 2581 §1 AND §11, AS CODIFIED AT VARIOUS SECTIONS OF TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC) TITLES 17 AND 18; REPEALING ORDINANCE NO. 2581 §12 AS CODIFIED AT TMC SECTION 18.50.220, TO UPDATE ACCESSORY DWELLING UNIT REGULATIONS IN ALIGNMENT WITH STATE LAW AND ENCOURAGE HOUSING PRODUCTION; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila is an incorporated city within a fully planning jurisdiction under the Growth Management Act (GMA), per RCW 36.70A.040; and WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila is subject to the provisions of Engrossed House Bill ("EHB") 1337 as a fully planning jurisdiction; and WHEREAS, Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Title 17, "Subdivisions and Plats," and Title 18, "Zoning," establishes a definition and development regulations related to Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs); and WHEREAS, many of the development regulations existing within the TMC regarding ADUs need to be updated in alignment with EHB 1337; and WHEREAS, the City desires to expand housing development opportunities to support the City's growing need for housing; and WHEREAS, on September 11, 2023, the City submitted the proposed amendmentto the Washington State Department of Commerce for its 60-day review and received documentation of completion of the procedural requirement (Submittal ID 2023-S-6428); and WHEREAS, in taking the actions set forth in this ordinance, the City has complied with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21 C RCW and any action taken by a City to comply with the requirements of EHB 1337 is not subjectto legal challenge under Chapter43.21C RCW; and CC:\Legislative Development\Update ADU regulations 10-26-23 clean N. Tabor A.Youn Page 1 of 4 241 WHEREAS, on September 14, 2023, the Tukwila Planning Commission, following adequate public notice, held a public hearing to receive testimony concerning amending the Tukwila Municipal Code and at that meeting adopted a motion recommending the proposed changes; and WHEREAS, on October 23, 2023, the Tukwila City Council, following adequate public notice, held a public hearing to receive testimony concerning the recommendations of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, based on careful consideration of the facts and law, the City Council finds that the proposed amendments attached and incorporated herein should be approved as presented; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findings of Fact. The Tukwila City Council finds as follows: A. The above recitals, set forth as "WHEREAS" clauses, are hereby adopted as Findings of Fact in support of the adoption of this ordinance. B. The amendments that are established below are consistent with EHB 1337. Section 2. TMC Section 17.14.060 Amended. Ordinance No. 2199 §4, as codified at TMC Section 17.14.060, "Unit lot subdivisions," subparagraph A, is hereby amended to read as follows: 17.14.060 Unit lot subdivisions A. Sites developed or proposed to be developed with townhouses, cottage housing, compact single-family, accessory dwelling units, or zero -lot line units may be subdivided into individual unit lots. The development as a whole shall meet development standards applicable at the time the permit application is vested. Any private, usable open space for each dwelling unit shall be provided on the same lot as the dwelling unit it serves. Section 3. TMC Section 18.06.016 Amended. Ordinance No. 2581 §1, as codified at TMC Section 18.06.016, "Accessory Dwelling Unit," is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.06.016 Accessory Dwelling Unit "Accessory dwelling unit" means a dwelling unit located on the same lot as a single-family housing unit, duplex, triplex, townhome, or other housing unit. Section 4. TMC Section 18.06.248 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 1758 §1 (part), 1976 §5, and 2098 §1, as codified at TMC Section 18.06.248, "Dwelling, Single -Family," are hereby amended to read as follows: CC:\Legislative Development\Update ADU regulations 10-26-23 clean N.Tabor A.Youn 242 Page 2 of 4 18.06.248 Dwelling, Single -Family "Single-family dwelling" means a building, modular home or new manufactured home, designed to contain no more than one dwelling unit plus two accessory dwelling units. Section 5. TMC Section 18.50.220 Amended. Ordinance No. 2581 §11, as codified at TMC Section 18.50.220, "Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Standards," is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.50.220 Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Standards A. For the purposes of this section, terms shall be defined as follows: 1. "Major transit stop" means a stop on a high -capacity transportation system funded or expanded under the provisions of chapter 81.104 RCW, including but not limited to: commuter rail stops, stops on rail or fixed guideway systems, including transitways, stops on bus rapid transit routes, or routes that run on high -occupancy vehicle lanes, stops for a bus or other transit mode providing actual fixed route service at intervals of at least fifteen minutes for at least five hours during the peak hours of operation on weekdays. 2. "Principal Unit" means the single-family housing unit, duplex, triplex, townhome, or other housing unit located on the same lot as an accessory dwelling unit. B. General Standards. 1. Two (2) ADUs may be created per lot. The lot shall contain one (1) principal unit and a maximum of two (2) ADUs. These ADUs may be either attached or detached. 2. Attached ADUs may occupy a maximum of 40% of the square footage of the principal unit (excluding the area of any attached garage) or up to 1,000 square feet, whichever is greater. 3. Detached ADUs may be a maximum of 1,000 square feet. If built over a detached garage, the detached garage would not count toward the area limit for the ADU. 4. Detached ADUs may be up to 25 feet in height. 5. ADUs are subject to the development standards of the zoning district they are located within. Development standards relating to setbacks and development coverage do not apply to conversions of existing non -conforming structures that are proposed for ADU conversion. New ADUs are not subject to rear yard setbacks on parcels where the rear yard abuts an alley. 6. ADUs may not be rented for periods of less than 30 days. C. Parking. 1. See Figure 18-7 for parking requirements. 2. Tandem spaces are permitted. CC:\Legislative Development\Update ADU regulations 10-26-23 clean N.Tabor A.Youn Page 3 of 4 243 Section 6. Repealer. Ordinance No. 2581 §12, as codified at TMC Section 18.50.230, "Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Registration Procedures," is hereby repealed, thereby eliminating TMC Section 18.50.230. Section 7. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser Authorized. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 8. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 9. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2023. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Allan Ekberg, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Office of the City Attorney CC:\Legislative Development\Update ADU regulations 10-26-23 clean N.Tabor A.Youn 244 Page 4 of 4 City of Tukwila Washington Ordinance No. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING VARIOUS ORDINANCES AS CODIFIED IN MULTIPLE SECTIONS OF TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC) CHAPTERS 18.80 AND 18.84 AS DETAILED HEREIN; REPEALING ORDINANCE NOS. 1770 §53 AND 2368 §65, AS CODIFIED AT TMC SECTION 18.80.015; ESTABLISHING TMC CHAPTER 18.82, "AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS"; TO CLARIFY THE PROCESS FOR UPDATING THE ANNUAL COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DOCKET AND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.80, "Amendments to Comprehensive Plan and Development Regulations," requires that all changes to development regulations in the Zoning Code follow the same standards as changes to the Comprehensive Plan; and WHEREAS, RCW 36.70A.130(2)(a) limits amendments to the Comprehensive Plan to once every year but does not have a restriction on how often zoning text amendments can occur; and WHEREAS, the Tukwila Municipal Code currently restricts zoning text amendments and limits flexibility to correction of text errors, consistency with state requirements, and distribution of staff workload throughout the year; and WHEREAS, these restrictions on zoning text amendments are significantly more limiting than in other jurisdictions comparable to Tukwila in population and area (i.e., South King County); and WHEREAS, decoupling the Comprehensive Plan update process from the zoning text amendment process would provide more flexibility for staff and reduce Planning Commission workload; and CC:\Legislative Development\Comp Plan & Development Regulations 10-26-23 clean N.Tabor A.Youn Page 1 of 9 245 WHEREAS, separating the Comprehensive Plan update process from the zoning text amendment process would provide a more flexible and predictable process for private applicants; and WHEREAS, housekeeping changes to TMC Chapter 18.80 would remove outdated references and provide additional clarity on the annual docketing process for Comprehensive Plan amendments; and WHEREAS, a new TMC Chapter 18.82 is proposed that would provide separate procedures for zoning text amendments not related to a Comprehensive Plan amendment; and WHEREAS, housekeeping changes to TMC Chapter 18.84 would clarify that site - specific rezones may only be considered and adopted once a year in conformance with the Growth Management Act limitation on amendments to Comprehensive Plans; and WHEREAS, on September 11, 2023, the City submitted the proposed amendment to the Washington State Department of Commerce for its 60-day review and received documentation of completion of the procedural requirement (Submittal ID 2023-S-6428); and WHEREAS, in taking the actions set forth in this ordinance, the City has complied with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21 C RCW; and WHEREAS, on September 14, 2023, the Tukwila Planning Commission, following adequate public notice, held a public hearing to receive testimony concerning amending the Tukwila Municipal Code and at that meeting adopted a motion recommending the proposed changes; and WHEREAS, on October 23, 2023, the Tukwila City Council, following adequate public notice, held a public hearing to receive testimony concerning the recommendations of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, based on careful consideration of the facts and law, the City Council finds that the proposed amendments attached and incorporated herein should be approved as presented; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Adoption of Findings of Fact. The Tukwila City Council hereby adopts the foregoing recitals and incorporates them herein as support for these amendments. Section 2. TMC Section 18.80.010 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 1758 §1, 1770 §52, and 2368 §64, as codified at TMC Section 18.80.010, "Application," are hereby amended to read as follows: CC:\Legislative Development\Comp Plan & Development Regulations 10-26-23 clean N. Tabor A.Youn Page 2 of 9 246 18.80.010 Application A. Any interested person (including applicants, residents, City staff and officials, and staff of other agencies) may submit an application for a text amendment to the Comprehensive Plan to the Department. Such applications, except site specific rezones along with the underlying Comprehensive Plan map change, are legislative decisions and are not subject to the requirements or procedures set forth in TMC Chapters 18.104 to 18.116. The application shall specify, in a format established by the Department: 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; 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; and 8. A statement of what other changes, if any, are required in other City codes, plans or regulations to implement the proposed change. Section 3. Repealer. Ordinance Nos. 1770 §53 and 2368 §65, as codified at TMC Section 18.80.015, "Documents to be Submitted with Application," are hereby repealed, thereby eliminating TMC Section 18.80.015. Section 4. TMC Section 18.80.020 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 1758 §1, 1770 §54 , and 2071 §1, as codified at TMC Section 18.80.020, "Docket," are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.80.020 Comprehensive Plan Amendment Docket A. Purpose. The purpose of this section is to establish procedures, pursuant to chapter RCW 36.70A, for the review and amendment of the Comprehensive Plan. 1. The Growth Management Act, chapter RCW 36.70A, provides that the Comprehensive Plan amendments be considered no more than once a year with limited exceptions. The Growth Management Act further provides that all proposals shall be CC:\Legislative Development\Comp Plan & Development Regulations 10-26-23 clean N.Tabor A.Youn Page 3 of 9 247 considered by the governing body concurrently so the cumulative effect of the various proposals can be ascertained. 2. The Annual Comprehensive Plan Amendment Review Docket ("Annual Review Docket") will establish the annual list of proposed Comprehensive Plan amendments and related development regulations that the City Council determines should be included for review and consideration for any given year. 3. Placement of an amendment request on the Annual Review Docket does not mean the amendment request will be approved by the City Council. B. If either the Department or the Council determines that a proposed change is an emergency, the Department shall prepare the staff report described below and forward the proposed change to the Council for immediate consideration, subject to the procedural requirements for consideration of amendments. An emergency amendment is a proposed change or revision that necessitates expeditious action to address one or more of the following criteria: 1. Preserve the health, safety or welfare of the public. 2. Support the social, economic or environmental well-being of the City. 3. Address the absence of adequate and available public facilities or services. 4. Respond to decisions by the Central Puget Sound Growth Management Hearings Board, the state or federal courts, or actions of a state agency or the legislature. C. Non -emergency changes shall be compiled and submitted to the Council for review on an annual basis to establish items to be included on the annual docket, and so that cumulative effects of the proposals can be determined. Proposed changes received by the Department after January 1 of any year shall be held over for the following year's review, unless the Department determines the proposed change is an emergency. Section 5. TMC Section 18.80.030 Amended. Ordinance No. 1758 §1, as codified at TMC Section 18.80.030, "Notice and Comment," is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.80.030 Notice and Comment The docket of proposed changes shall be posted on the Department of Community Development's website and made available to any interested person. At least 28 days prior to the Council's annual consideration of the changes proposed on the docket, the City shall publish a notice in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, generally describing the proposed changes including areas affected, soliciting written public input to the Department on the proposed changes, and identifying the date on which the Council will consider the proposed changes. Section 6. TMC Section 18.80.040 Amended. Ordinance No. 1758 §1, as codified at TMC Section 18.80.040, "Staff Report," is hereby amended to read as follows: CC:\Legislative Development\Comp Plan & Development Regulations 10-26-23 clean N. Tabor A.Youn Page 4 of 9 248 18.80.040 Staff Report A. At least 14 days prior to Council consideration of any proposed amendment to the Comprehensive Plan, the Department shall prepare and submit to the Council a staff report that addresses the following: 1. An evaluation of the application material; 2. Impact upon the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and zoning code; 3. Impact upon surrounding properties, if applicable; 4. Alternatives to the proposed amendment; and 5. Appropriate code citations and other relevant documents. B. The Department's report shall transmit a copy of the application for each proposed amendment, any written comments on the proposals received by the Department, and shall contain the Department's recommendation on adoption, rejection, or deferral of each proposed change. Section 7. TMC Section 18.80.050 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 1758 §1, 1770 §55, 1856 §1, and 2368 §66, as codified at TMC Section 18.80.050, "Council Consideration," are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.80.050 Review Procedure for Comprehensive Plan Docket Requests A. The City Council shall consider each request for an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan at a Council meeting, at which any person may submit a written comment on the proposed change or make an oral presentation. Such opportunities for oral presentation shall be subject to reasonable time limitations established by the Council. B. The Council will consider the following in deciding what action to take regarding any proposed amendment: 1. Is the issue already adequately addressed in the Comprehensive Plan? 2. If the issue is not addressed in the Comprehensive Plan, is there a public 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 net benefit to the community? C. Following Council consideration as provided by TMC Sections 18.80.050.A and 18.80.050.B, the City Council shall take action as follows: 1. Add the proposed amendment to the Annual Review Docket and refer it to the Planning Commission for further review and a recommendation to the City Council; CC:\Legislative Development\Comp Plan & Development Regulations 10-26-23 clean N.Tabor A.Youn Page 5 of 9 249 2. Defer further Council consideration for one or more years to allow the City further time to evaluate the application of the existing plan or regulations and consider it as part of a future Annual Review Docket; or 3. Reject the proposed amendment. Section 8. Regulations Established. TMC Chapter 18.82, "Amendments to Development Regulations," is hereby established to read as follows: CHAPTER 18.82 AMENDMENTS TO DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS Sections: 18.82.010 Application 18.82.020 Staff Report 18.82.030 Review Procedures 18.82.040 Council Decision Section 9. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.82.010, "Application," is hereby established to read as follows: 18.82.010 Application Any interested person (including applicants, residents, City staff and officials, and staff of other agencies) may submit an application for a text amendment to the Tukwila Municipal Code development regulations to the Department. Such applications are legislative decisions and are not subject to the requirements or procedures set forth in TMC Chapters 18.104 to 18.116. The application shall specify, in a format established by the Department: 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 regulations are deficient or should not continue in effect; 4. A statement of what changes, if any, would be required in functional plans (i.e., the City's water, sewer, stormwater or shoreline plans) if the proposed amendment is adopted; 5. 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; and 6. A statement of what other changes, if any, are required in other City codes plans or regulations to implement the proposed change. Section 10. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.82.020, "Staff Report," is hereby established to read as follows: CC:\Legislative Development\Comp Plan & Development Regulations 10-26-23 clean N.Tabor A.Youn 250 Page 6 of 9 18.82.020 Staff Report A. Prior to consideration of any proposed amendment, the Department shall prepare and submit to the reviewing body a staff report that addresses the following: 1. An evaluation of the application materials; 2. Impact upon the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code; 3. Impact upon surrounding properties, if applicable; 4. Alternatives to the proposed amendment; and 5. Appropriate code citations and other relevant documents. B. The Department's report shall transmit a copy of the application for each proposed amendment, any written comments on the proposals received by the Department, and shall contain the Department's recommendation on adoption, rejection, or deferral of each proposed change. Section 11. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.82.030, "Review Procedures," is hereby established to read as follows: 18.82.020 Review Procedures The following shall apply to processing a text amendment to development regulations: 1. The City Council shall either forward the amendment to the Planning Commission for a recommendation or reject the amendment. 2. If the Planning Commission is directed to review the amendment, the Planning Commission shall, after considering the amendment at a public hearing, vote and forward a written recommendation to the City Council. 3. The Planning Commission's written recommendation shall be presented to the City Council unchanged and accompanied by an Informational Memorandum that includes any staff proposed changes to the Planning Commission's recommendation. If any of staff's proposed changes are substantively different from the Planning Commission's recommendation, the City Council may remand the changes to the Planning Commission before proceeding further with action on the amendment. 4. At least one public hearing shall be held before the Planning Commission prior to the City Council acting on an amendment. An additional hearing before the City Council may be held at the Council's discretion. 5. At least 14 days prior to the public hearing, the City shall publish a notice in the City's newspaper of record generally describing the proposed changes including areas affected, soliciting written public input to the Department on the proposed changes, and identifying the date on which the proposed changes will be considered. CC:\Legislative Development\Comp Plan & Development Regulations 10-26-23 clean N. Tabor A.Youn Page 7 of 9 251 Section 12. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.82.040, "Council Decision," is hereby established to read as follows: 18.82.040 Council Decision Following receipt of the Planning Commission's recommendation on a proposed amendment the City Council may: 1. Adopt the amendment as proposed; 2. Modify and adopt the proposed amendment; 3. Remand to the Planning Commission for further proceedings; or 4. Deny the proposed amendment. Section 13. TMC Section 18.84.010 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2116 §1 and 2368 §67, as codified at TMC Section 18.84.010, "Application Submittal," are amended to read as follows: 18.84.010 Application Submittal Applications for rezone of property, along with the request for a Comprehensive Plan map change, shall be submitted to the Department. Proposed changes received by the Department after January 1 of any year shall be held over for the following year's review. A site specific rezone and the accompanying Comprehensive Plan map change application shall be a Type 5 decision processed in accordance with the provisions of TMC Section 18.108.050. Section 14. TMC Section 18.84.040 Amended. Ordinance No. 2116 §1, as codified at TMC Section 18.84.040, "Ordinance Required," is amended to read as follows: 18.84.040 Council Decision A. After holding a public hearing and evaluating the application against the criteria at TMC Section 18.84.020, the City Council may: 1. Adopt the rezone and map amendment as proposed; 2. Modify or condition the proposed rezone and map amendment; or 3. Deny the proposed rezone and map amendment. B. Action under TMC Chapter 18.84, which amends the official Zoning Map, shall require the adoption of an ordinance by the City Council pursuant to the Tukwila Municipal Code and State law. Due to the Growth Management Act, RCW 36.70A, which provides that Comprehensive Plan amendments be considered no more frequently than once a year, any rezone ordinance must be adopted by the Council concurrently with action on the Annual Review Docket items. CC:\Legislative Development\Comp Plan & Development Regulations 10-26-23 clean N.Tabor A.Youn 252 Page 8 of 9 Section 15. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser Authorized. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 16. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 17. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2023. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Allan Ekberg, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Office of the City Attorney CC:\Legislative Development\Comp Plan & Development Regulations 10-26-23 clean N.Tabor A.Youn Page9of9 253 254 NOTE: Shaded text reflects changes made after discussion at the 10/23/23 Committee of the Whole meeting (See page 3). AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING VARIOUS ORDINANCES AS CODIFIED IN TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE (TMC) TITLE 18, "ZONING," AS DELINEATED HEREIN, TO INCORPORATE A VARIETY OF HOUSEKEEPING CODE AMENDMENTS AND PARKING REGULATIONS RELATED TO: DEFINITIONS (TMC CHAPTER 18.06), NONCONFORMING LOTS, STRUCTURES AND USES (TMC CHAPTER 18.70), AND PERMIT APPLICATION TYPES AND PROCEDURES (TMC CHAPTER 18.104); AMENDING FIGURE 18-7 AND TABLE 18-6; ESTABLISHING TMC SECTION 18.50.240; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila is an incorporated city within a fully planning jurisdiction under the Growth Management Act (GMA), per RCW 36.70A.040; and WHEREAS, the City reviews development regulations to ensure clarity, fairness, and consistency with State law; and WHEREAS, the City desires to update its regulations pertaining to parking near transit services in alignment with RCW 36.70A.620; and WHEREAS, Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter 18.06, "Definitions," contains regulations for home occupations that are inconsistent with the general structure of other development regulations; and WHEREAS, amending home occupation regulations will prevent impacts to surrounding properties that will be beneficial to home occupation business owners and neighbors of home occupation businesses; and WHEREAS, terminology used in TMC Chapter 18.58, "Wireless Communication Facilities," is inconsistent with terminology used in TMC Chapter 18.104, "Permit Application Types and Procedures," and the City desires to clarify and standardize the language for staff and applicants; and CC:\Legislative Development\Housekeeping edits & parking regulations 10-27-23 N.Tabor A.Youn Page 1 of 10 255 WHEREAS, current development regulations require existing lots of records that do not adhere to the minimum lot area and/or lot width for their underlying zone to receive a variance prior to the development of an undeveloped lot; and WHEREAS, the process to receive a variance can be extensive, requiring significant staff time, increasing project time, and increasing the applicant's overall project cost; and WHEREAS, removing the variance requirement for existing lots of records that do not adhere to the minimum lot area and/or lot width, but comply with all other development standards, would create efficiencies in staff time and would also save applicants time and costs; and WHEREAS, Table 18-6, "Land Uses Allowed by District," references minor outdated information that is no longer applicable and should be updated for clarity; and WHEREAS, the City desires to update parking requirements for accessory dwelling units in alignment with RCW 36.70A.698 and Engrossed House Bill ("EHB") 1337; and WHEREAS, on September 11, 2023, the City submitted the proposed amendment to the Washington State Department of Commerce for its 60-day review and received documentation of completion of the procedural requirement (Submittal ID 2023-S-6428); and WHEREAS, in taking the actions set forth in this ordinance, the City has complied with the requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 43.21 C RCW; and WHEREAS, on September 14, 2023, the Tukwila Planning Commission, following adequate public notice, held a public hearing to receive testimony concerning amending the Tukwila Municipal Code and at that meeting adopted a motion recommending the proposed changes; and WHEREAS, on October 23, 2023, the Tukwila City Council, following adequate public notice, held a public hearing to receive testimony concerning the recommendations of the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, based on careful consideration of the facts and law, the City Council finds that the proposed amendments attached and incorporated herein should be approved as presented; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Adoption of Findings of Fact. The Tukwila City Council hereby adopts the foregoing recitals and incorporates them herein as support for these amendments. Section 2. TMC Figure 18-7 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 1758 §1 (part), 1795 §3 (part), 2251 §67, 2368 §55, and 2442 §3, as codified at TMC Section 18.56.050, "Required Number of Parking Spaces," are hereby amended to update Figure 18-7 as follows: CC:\Legislative Development\Housekeeping edits & parking regulations 10-27-23 N.Tabor A.Youn 256 Page 2 of 10 Figure 18-7 — Required Number of Parking Spaces for Automobiles and Bicycles NOTE: Automobile parking requirements for TUC -RC, TUC-TOD and TUC -Pond Districts are listed in TMC Section 18.28.260. Use Automobile Standard Bicycle Standard Single-family and multi -family dwellings 2 for each dwelling unit that contains up to 3 bedrooms. 1 additional space for every 2 bedrooms in excess of 3 bedrooms in a dwelling unit. Additional parking may be required for home occupations as otherwise proved by this title. For multi -family, 1 space per 10 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. No requirement for single family. Multi -family dwelling within one- quarter mile of a transit stop that receives transit service at least four times per hour for twelve or more hours per day. *See RCW 36.70A.620(3) 0.75 for each studio 1 for each one bedroom unit 2 for each unit two bedrooms or larger For multi -family, 1 space per 10 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Single-family and multi -family dwellings affordable to 0 - 50% area median income (AMI) within one -quarter mile of a transit stop that receives transit service at least two times per hour for twelve or more hours per day. *See RCW 36.70A.620(1) 0.75 for each studio 1 for each one bedroom unit 2 for each unit two bedrooms or larger For multi -family, 1 space per 10 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. No requirement for single family. Accessory dwelling units 1 for each unit N/A Accessory dwelling units within one mile of a No parking required N/A quarter major transit stop *See TMC 18.50.220(A)(1) CC:\Legislative Development\Housekeeping edits & parking regulations 10-27-23 N.Tabor A.Youn Page 3 of 10 257 Use Automobile Standard Bicycle Standard Multi -family and mixed -use residential (in the Urban Renewal Overlay (URO)) One for each dwelling unit that contains up to one bedroom. 0.5 additional spaces for every bedroom in excess of one bedroom in a multi -family dwelling unit. At least 75% of required residential parking is provided in an enclosed structure (garage or podium). The structure must be screened from view from public rights of way. One automobile space at no charge to a car sharing program (if available) for every 50 to 200 residential spaces on site. An additional space shall be provided for developments with over 200 parking spaces. All car share spaces are in addition to required residential parking. If car sharing programs are not available when the building is constructed, an equivalent number of guest parking spaces shall be provided. These shall be converted to dedicated car -sharing spaces when the program becomes available One secure, covered, ground - level bicycle parking space shall be provided for every four residential units in a mixed -use or multi -family development. Senior citizen housing For 15 units or less, 1 space per dwelling unit. For dwellings with more than 15 units, a minimum of 15 spaces are required, plus 1 space per 2 dwelling units. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Senior citizen housing and housing for persons with disabilities within one -quarter mile of a transit stop that receives transit service at least four times per hour for twelve or more hours per day. *See RCW 36.70A.620(2) 1 for 15 beds with a minimum of 2, to accommodate staff and visitors 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Religious facilities, mortuaries and funeral homes 1 for each 4 fixed seats 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Convalescent/nursing/ rest homes 1 for every 4 beds with a minimum of 10 stalls 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Food stores and markets 1 for each 300 square feet of usable floor area 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. High schools 1 for each staff member plus 2 for every 5 students or visitors 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Hospitals 1 for each bed 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. CC:\Legislative Development\Housekeeping edits & parking regulations 10-27-23 N.Tabor A.Youn 258 Page 4 of 10 Use Automobile Standard Bicycle Standard Hotels, motels and extended stay Manufacturing 1 for each room, plus one employee space for each 20 rooms, rounded to the next highest figure 1 for each 1,000 square feet of usable floor area 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Office, commercial and professional buildings, banks, dental and medical clinics 3.0 for each 1,000 square feet of usable floor area 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Places of public assembly, including auditoriums, exhibition halls, community clubs, community centers, and private clubs The Director shall determine the number of required parking spaces, with a minimum of 1 space for every 100 square feet of assembly area. To ensure parking adequacy for each proposal, the Director may consider the following: a. A parking study or documentation paid for by the applicant and administered by the City regarding the actual parking demand for the proposed use, or b. Evidence in available planning and technical studies relating to the proposed use. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Post offices 3 for each 1,000 square feet of usable floor area 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Restaurant 1 for each 100 square feet of usable floor area 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Restaurant, fast food Retail sales, bulk Retail sales, general 1 for each 50 square feet of usable floor area. Fifty percent of any outdoor seating area will be added to the usable floor area for parking requirement calculations. 2.5 for each 1,000 square feet of usable floor area 4 for each 1,000 square feet of usable floor area if located within the TVS zoning district; 2.5 for each 1,000 square feet of usable floor area if located in any other zoning district. NOTE: Reference TMC Section 18.28.260 for TUC Districts. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Schools, elementary & junior high 1.5 for each staff member 1 space per classroom Shopping center (mall), planned, per usable floor area size, as listed below: 500,000 sq. ft. or larger 25,000 — 499,999 sq. ft. Taverns 5 for every 1,000 square feet 4 for every 1,000 square feet 1 for every 4 persons based on occupancy load. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. CC:\Legislative Development\Housekeeping edits & parking regulations 10-27-23 N.Tabor A.Youn Page 5 of 10 259 Use Automobile Standard Bicycle Standard Theaters 1 for every 4 fixed seats. If seats are not fixed, 1 per 3 seats, with concurrence of Fire Chief, consistent with maximum allowed occupancy 1 space per 100 seats, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Warehousing 1 for every 2,000 square feet of usable floor area 1 space per 50 parking stalls, with a minimum of 2 spaces. Section 3. TMC Section 18.06.430 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 1758 §1 (part) and 1974 §11, as codified at TMC Section 18.06.430, "Home Occupation," are hereby amended to read as follows: 18.06.430 Home Occupation "Home occupation" means an occupation or profession which is customarily incident to or carried on in a dwelling place, and not one in which the use of the premises as a dwelling place is largely incidental to the occupation carried on by a resident of the dwelling place. Section 4. Regulations Established. TMC Section 18.50.240, "Home Occupations," is hereby established to read as follows: 18.50.240 Home Occupations A. Home occupations shall meet the following standards: 1. There shall be no change in the outside appearance of the surrounding residential development; 2. No home occupation shall be conducted in any accessory building. This provision shall not apply to adult family homes as defined in RCW 70.128.010 or community facilities as defined in RCW 72.05.020; 3. Traffic generated by a home occupation shall not exceed two (2) visitors at any given time, and no more than eight (8) total two-way visitor and non-resident employee trips per day; 4. The number of vehicles associated with a home -occupation shall not exceed two (2) vehicles and must be parked on -site. Vehicles associated with the business shall not exceed: a. A gross vehicle weight of 10,000 pounds; b. A height of ten (10) feet; or c. A length of 22 feet; 5. An off-street parking space shall be made available for any non-resident employee. All parking spaces shall meet all development standards; CC:\Legislative Development\Housekeeping edits & parking regulations 10-27-23 N.Tabor A.Youn 260 Page 6 of 10 6. The business shall not involve more than one person who is not a resident of the dwelling. This provision shall not apply to adult family homes as defined in RCW 70.128.010 or community facilities as defined in RCW 72.05.020; and 7. Outdoor storage of materials associated with a home occupation is prohibited. Section 5. TMC Section 18.70.030 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2097 §21 and 2153 §1, as codified at TMC Section 18.70.030, "Substandard Lots," are amended to read as follows: 18.70.030 Substandard Lots A. A lot, as defined in TMC 18.06.500, which does not meet the minimum standard for average lot width and/or minimum lot area for the zone in which it is located, may still be developed, without the need for a variance, as a separate lot if the proposed use is one which is permitted in the zone, and the proposed development can comply with the remaining requirements of this title regarding basic development standards for the applicable zone and other applicable land use and environmental requirements. B. Nothing in this subsection shall be deemed to prevent the owner of a sub- standard lot from applying for or receiving approval of variances pursuant to TMC Chapter 18.72. Section 6. TMC Section 18.104.010 Amended. Ordinance Nos. 2119 §1, 2135 §19, 2235 §19, §2251 §75, 2368 §70, 2442 §6, 2627 §32, 2649 §11, and 2678 §22, as codified at TMC Section 18.104.010, "Classification of Project Permit Applications," subparagraphs 1, 2, and 3, are hereby amended to read as follows: 1. TYPE 1 DECISIONS are made by City administrators who have technical expertise, as designated by ordinance. Type 1 decisions may be appealed to the Hearing Examiner who will hold a closed record appeal hearing based on the information presented to the City administrator who made the decision. Public notice is not required for Type 1 decisions or for the appeals of those decisions. TYPE 1 DECISIONS TYPE OF PERMIT DECISION MAKER Administrative Variance for Noise — 30 days or less (TMC Section 8.22.120) Community Development Director Any land use permit or approval issued by the City, unless specifically categorized as a Type 2, 3, 4, or 5 decision by this chapter As specified by ordinance Boundary Line Adjustment, including Lot Consolidation (TMC Chapter 17.08) Community Development Director Minor Modification of a Boundary Line Adjustment or Lot Consolidation Preliminary Approval (TMC Section 17.08.030) Community Development Director Development Permit Building Official Minor modification to design review approval (TMC Section 18.60.030) Community Development Director CC:\Legislative Development\Housekeeping edits & parking regulations 10-27-23 N.Tabor A.Youn Page 7 of 10 261 TYPE OF PERMIT DECISION MAKER Minor Modification to PRD (TMC Section 18.46.130) Community Development Director Tree Permit (TMC Chapter 18.54) Community Development Director Wireless Communication Facility, Eligible Facilities (TMC Chapter 18.58) Community Development Director 2. TYPE 2 DECISIONS are decisions that are initially made by the Director or, in certain cases, other City administrators or committees, but which are subject to an open record appeal to the Hearing Examiner, Board of Architectural Review, or, in the case of shoreline permits, an appeal to the State Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 90.58. TYPE 2 DECISIONS TYPE OF PERMIT INITIAL DECISION MAKER APPEAL BODY (open record appeal) Administrative Design Review (TMC Section 18.60.030) Community Development Director Board of Architectural Review Administrative Planned Residential Development (TMC Section 18.46.110) Short Plat Committee Hearing Examiner Administrative Variance for Noise — 31-60 days (TMC Section 8.22.120) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Binding Site Improvement Plan (TMC Chapter 17.16) Short Plat Committee Hearing Examiner Cargo Container Placement (TMC Section 18.50.060) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Code Interpretation (TMC Section 18.90.010) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Exception from Single -Family Design Standard (TMC Section 18.50.050) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Modification to Development Standards (TMC Section 18.41.100) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Parking standard for use not specified (TMC Section 18.56.100), and modifications to certain parking standards (TMC Sections 18.56.065, .070, .120) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Critical Areas (except Reasonable Use Exception) (TMC Chapter 18.45) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Shoreline Substantial Development Permit (TMC Chapter 18.44) Community Development Director State Shorelines Hearings Board Shoreline Tree Permit Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Short Plat (TMC Chapter 17.12) Short Plat Committee Hearing Examiner CC:\Legislative Development\Housekeeping edits & parking regulations 10-27-23 N.Tabor A.Youn 262 Page 8 of 10 TYPE OF PERMIT INITIAL DECISION MAKER APPEAL BODY (open record appeal) Minor Modification of a Short Plat Preliminary Approval (TMC Section 17.12.020) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Minor Modification of a Subdivision Preliminary Plat (TMC Section 17.14.020) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Subdivision — Final Plat (TMC Section 17.14.030) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Modification to TUC Corridor Standards (TMC Section 18.28.110. C) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Modification to TUC Open Space Standards (TMC Section 18.28.250. D.4. d) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Transit Reduction to Parking Requirements (TMC Section 18.28.260.8.5.b) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner Wireless Communication Facility, Macro Facilities — No New Tower (TMC 18.58.060) Community Development Director Hearing Examiner 3. TYPE 3 DECISIONS are quasi-judicial decisions made by the Hearing Examiner following an open record hearing. Type 3 decisions may be appealed only to Superior Court, except for shoreline variances and shoreline conditional uses that may be appealed to the State Shorelines Hearings Board pursuant to RCW 90.58. TYPE 3 DECISIONS TYPE OF PERMIT INITIAL DECISION MAKER APPEAL BODY (open record appeal) Resolve uncertain zone district boundary Hearing Examiner Superior Court Variance (zoning, shoreline, sidewalk, land alteration, sign) Hearing Examiner Superior Court TSO Special Permission Use (TMC Section 18.41.060) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Conditional Use Permit Hearing Examiner Superior Court Modifications to Certain Parking Standards (TMC Chapter 18.56) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Reasonable Use Exceptions under Critical Areas Ordinance (TMC Section 18.45.180) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Variance for Noise in excess of 60 days (TMC Section 8.22.120) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Variance from Parking Standards over 10% (TMC Section 18.56.140) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Subdivision — Preliminary Plat with no associated Design Review application (TMC Section 17.14.020) Hearing Examiner Superior Court CC:\Legislative Development\Housekeeping edits & parking regulations 10-27-23 N.Tabor A.Youn Page 9 of 10 263 TYPE OF PERMIT INITIAL DECISION MAKER APPEAL BODY (open record appeal) Subdivision Phasing Plan (TMC Section 17.14.040) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Wireless Communication Facility, Macro Facility- New Tower (TMC Chapter 18.58.070) Hearing Examiner Superior Court Shoreline Conditional Use Permit Hearing Examiner State Shorelines Hearings Board Section 7. Table 18-6, "Land Uses Allowed by District," Amended. Ordinance No. 2678 §38, as codified at Table 18-6, "Land Uses Allowed by District," is hereby amended as set forth in the amended Table 18-6 attached as Exhibit A. Section 8. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser Authorized. Upon approval of the City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering and section/subsection numbering. Section 9. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation. Section 10. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force five days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2023. ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk Allan Ekberg, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Filed with the City Clerk: Passed by the City Council: Published: Effective Date: Ordinance Number: Office of the City Attorney Attachment: Exhibit A, Table 18-6: "Land Uses Allowed by District" CC:\Legislative Development\Housekeeping edits & parking regulations 10-27-23 N.Tabor A.Youn 264 Page 10 of 10 Exhibit A — Table 18-6: Land Uses Allowed by District See Table 18-2 for uses allowed in TUC and Figure 18-1 for uses allowed in Shoreline. For properties zoned LDR, MDR and HDR that are designated as Commercial Redevelopment Areas (see figure 18-9 or 18-10), the uses and development standards of the adjacent commercial zone are permitted and shall apply, subject to the specific criteria and procedures defined in TMC 18.60.060 P = Permitted outright; A = Accessory (customarily appurtenant and incidental to a permitted use) ; C = Conditional (subject to TMC 18.64); U = Unclassified (subject to TMC 18.66); S = Special Permission (Administrative approval by the Director) LDR MDR HDR MUO 0 RCC NCC RC RCM C/LI LI HI MIC/L MIC/H TVS TSO PRO Adult day care A A A A A A A P Adult entertainment (subject to location restrictions') P P P P P P P Airports, landing fields and heliports (except emergency sites) U U U U U U U Amusement Parks C C C C C C P Animal rendering U P Animal shelters and kennels, subject to additional State and local regulations (less than 4 cats/dogs = no permit) C C C C C C Animal Veterinary, including associated temporary indoor boarding; access to an arterial required P P P P P P P P P P Bed and breakfast lodging for not more than twelve guests5 C C C Bed and breakfast lodging (no size limit specified) C P Bicycle repair shops P P P P P P P P P P P P P Boarding Homes C C Brew Pubs P P C P P P P P P P P P P Bus stations P P P P P P P P P P Cargo containers (*see also TMC 18.50.060) A&S A&S A&S A&S A&S A&S P P P P P Cement manufacturing U U U U U U Cemeteries and crematories C C C C C C C C C C C C Colleges and universities C C C C C C C C C6 C6 C6 P Commercial laundries P P P P P P P Commercial Parking (Commercial parking is a use of land or structure for the parking of motor vehicles as a commercial enterprise for which hourly, daily, or weekly fees are charged. TMC Section 18.06.613) P7 P7 P7 P7 P7 P8 P8 P8 Adopted 2016 — Ordinance No. 2500 Page 1 P = Permitted outright; A = Accessory (customarily appurtenant and incidental to a permitted use) ; C=Conditional(subjecttoTMC18.64); U=Unclassified(subjecttoTMC 18.66); S = Special Permission (Administrative approval by the Director) LDR MDR HDR MUO 0 RCC NCC RC RCM C/LI LI HI MIC/L MIC/H TVS T50 PRO Contractor storage yards P P P P P P Continuing care retirement facility C C C C C C C P Convalescent & nursing homes & assisted living facility for not more than twelve patients C P P P C P P P P P P Convalescent & nursing homes & assisted living facility for more than twelve patients C C C C C C C P Convention facilities P P P P P P P Correctional institutes U11 U U U Daycare Centers (not home -based) P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Daycare Family Home (Family Child Care Home)12 A A A A A A A A A A A Diversion facilities and diversion interim services facilities south of Strander Blvd U Domestic Shelter P P P P P Dormitory C C C A13 A13 A13 A13 A13 A13 A13 A13 A13 A13 A13 Drive-in theatres C C C C C C Dwelling — Detached single family (Includes site built, modular home or new manufactured home). One detached single family dwelling per existing lot permitted in MUO, 0, RCC, NCC, TVS. P P P P P P P P P Dwelling- Detached Zero -Lot Line Units P Dwelling- Duplex, triplex or fourplex or townhouse up to four attached units P P Dwelling- Townhouses P P Dwelling —Multi-family P P14 P Dwelling — Multi -family units above office and retail uses P P P P C15 22/ ac P Dwelling —Senior citizen housing, including assisted living facility for seniors see purpose section of chapter, uses sections, and development standards P meeting density and all other MDR standards p 60/ac p 60/ac P 60/ ac p 60/ac p 60/ac C15 100/ ac p Dwelling unit — Accessory 16 A A A Electrical Substation — Distribution C C C C C C C C C C C C C C P Electrical Substation —Transmission/Switching U U U U Page 2 P = Permitted outright; A = Accessory (customarily appurtenant and incidental to a permitted use) ; C = Conditional (subject to TMC 18.64); U = Unclassified (subject to TMC 18.66); S = Special Permission (Administrative approval by the Director) LDR MDR HDR MUO 0 RCC NCC RC RCM CA I LI HI MICA MIC/H TVS TSO PRO Electric Vehicle Charging Station — Level 1 and Level 2 A A A P P P P P P P P P P P P P Electric Vehicle Charging Station — Level 3, battery exchange stations, and rapid charging stations. (TMC 18.50.140) A A A A A A PP P P P P P P P P Emergency Housing P37 P37 P37 P37 P37 P37 P37 P37 P37 Emergency Shelter P37 P37 P37 P37 P37 P37 P37 P37 P37 Essential public facilities, except those uses listed separately in any of the other zones U U U U U U U U U Extended -stay hotel P34 P P P P P P Farming and farm -related activities P P Fire & Police Stations C C C C C CCC C C C C C C C P Fraternal organizations P P CPP P P P P P P Garage or carport (private) not exceeding 1,500 sq.ft. on same lot as residence and is subject to the regulations affecting the main building A A Greenhouses (noncommercial) and storage sheds not exceeding 1,000 sq./ft A A A A Greenhouses or nurseries (commercial) P P P P P P P P P Hazardous waste treatment and storage facilities (off -site) subject to compliance with state siting criteria (RCW Chapter 70.105) (See TMC 21.08) C C Heavy equipment repair and salvage P P P P P P Helipads, accessory C Home Occupation (Permitted in dwellings as covered in TMC Section 18.06.430.) A A A A A A A A A A Hospitals C C C C C C C C P Hotels P34 P P P P C C P P Hydroelectric and private utility power generating plants U U U U U U U U Industries involved with etching, film processing, lithography, printing and publishing P P P P P P P P P Internet Data/Telecommunication Centers C P P P P P P P Landfills and excavations which the responsible official, acting pursuant to the State Environmental Policy Act, determines are significant environmental actions U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U Laundries; self -serve, dry cleaning, tailor, dyeing P P P P P P P P P P P P P Libraries, museums, or art galleries (public) C C P P P C P P P P P P P P P P Manuf./Mobile home park 17 C P Page 3 P = Permitted outright; A = Accessory (customarily appurtenant and incidental to a permitted use) ; C=Conditional(subjecttoTMC18.64); U=Unclassified(subjecttoTMC 18.66); S = Special Permission (Administrative approval by the Director) LDR MDR HDR MUO 0 RCC NCC RC RCM C/LI LI HI MIC/L MIC/H TVS TSO PRO Manufacturing and industrial uses that have little potential for creating off -site noise, smoke, dust, vibration or other external environmental impacts or pollution: A) Manufacturing, processing and/or packaging pharmaceuticals and related products, such as cosmetics and drugs P18 P P P P P P P P P B) Manufacturing, processing and/or packaging previously prepared materials including, but not limited to, bags, brooms, brushes, canvas, clay, clothing, fur, furniture, glass, ink, paint, paper, plastics, rubber, tile, and wood P18 P P P P P P P P P C) Manufacturing, processing, assembling, packaging and/or repairing electronic, mechanical or precision instruments such as medical and dental equipment, photographic goods, measurement and control devices, and recording equipment P18 p p P P P P P P P D) Manufacturing, processing, packaging of foods, such as baked goods, beverages, candy, canned or preserved foods, dairy products and byproducts, frozen foods, instant foods, and meats (no slaughtering) i) Fermenting and distilling included P P P P ii) No fermenting and distilling P18 P P P P P Manufacturing and industrial uses that have moderate to substantial potential for creating off -site noise, smoke, dust, vibration or other external environmental impacts: (A) Manufacturing, processing and/or assembling chemicals, light metals, plastics, solvents, soaps, wood, coal, glass, enamels, textiles, fabrics, plaster, agricultural products or animal products (no rendering or slaughtering) C C P C P C (B) Manufacturing, processing and/or assembling of previously manufactured metals, such as iron and steel fabrication; steel production by electric arc melting, argon oxygen refining, and consumable electrode melting; and similar heavy industrial uses C C P C P C (C) Manufacturing, processing and/or assembling of previously prepared metals including, but not limited to, stamping, dyeing, shearing or punching of metal, engraving, galvanizing and hand forging C C C P P P P C D) Manufacturing, processing, assembling and/or packaging of electrical or mechanical equipment, vehicles and machines including, but not limited to, heavy and light machinery, tools, airplanes, boats or other transportation vehicles and equipment P P P P P C E) Heavy metal processes such as smelting, blast furnaces, drop forging or drop hammering C P Page 4 P = Permitted outright; A = Accessory (customarily appurtenant and incidental to a permitted use) ; C = Conditional (subject to TMC 18.64); U = Unclassified (subject to TMC 18.66); S = Special Permission (Administrative approval by the Director) LDR MDR HDR MUO 0 RCC NCC RC RCM C/L LI HI MIC/L MIC/H TVS T50 PRO Manufacturing that includes rock crushing, asphalt or concrete batching or mixing, stone cutting, brick manufacture, marble works, and the assembly of products from the above materials C C P C P C C Manufacturing, refining or storing highly volatile noxious or explosive products (less than tank car lots) such as acids, petroleum products, oil or gas, matches, fertilizer or insecticides; except for accessory storage of such materials U U U U Marijuana producers, processors, or retailers (with state issued license) P P P19 Mass transit facilities U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U U Medical and dental laboratories P P P P P P P P P Minor expansion of an existing warehouse 20 S Mortician and funeral homes P P P P P P C Motels P P P P P C C P P Offices including: medical, dental, government (excluding fire & police stations), professional, administrative, computer software development, business, e.g. travel, real estate & commercial P22 p P22 P23 P P P P P P9 C10 P24 C25 P P Office or sample room for wholesale or retail sales, with less than 50% storage or warehousing P Park & ride lots C C C C C C C C C C C C Parking areas A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A A Parking areas, for municipal uses and police stations C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C P Parks, trails, picnic areas and playgrounds (public), but not including amusement parks, golf courses, or commercial recreation P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Pawnbroker/Payday lender C C P P P P P Permanent Supportive Housing P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 Planned Shopping Center (mall) P P P P P P P26 Radio, television, microwave, or observation stations and towers C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C Railroad freight or classification yards U U U U Railroad tracks (including lead, spur, loading or storage) p p p p p p Page 5 P = Permitted outright; A = Accessory (customarily appurtenant and incidental to a permitted use) ; C = Conditional (subject to TMC 18.64); U = Unclassified (subject to TMC 18.66); S = Special Permission (Administrative approval by the Director) LDR MDR HDR MUO 0 RCC NCC RC RCM C/LI LI HI MIC/L MIC/H TVS TSO PRO Recreation facilities (commercial — indoor) — athletic or health clubs i P P P P P P P P C3 P P P Recreation facilities (commercial — indoor), including bowling alleys, skating rinks, shooting ranges C P P P P P P Recreation facilities (commercial — outdoor), including golf courses, golf driving ranges, fairgrounds, animal race tracks, sports fields C C C C Recreation facilities (public), including, but not limited to sports fields, community centers and golf courses C C C C C C C C C C C C C C P Recreational area and facilities for employees A A A A A A A A A A A A A Religious facilities with an assembly area less than 750 sq.ft. C C C P P P P P P P P P P P Religious facilities with an assembly area greater than 750 sq.ft. and associated community center buildings C C C C C C C C C C C C C C Removal and processing of sand, gravel, rock, peat, black soil and other natural deposits together with associated structures U U U U U U Rental of vehicles not requiring a commercial driver's license P36 P P P P P P P P Rental of commercial trucks and fleet rentals requiring a commercial 1 driver's license P P P P P P P Research and development facilities P P Residences for security or maintenance personnel A A A A A A A A A A A A A Restaurants, drive -through permitted P35 p p p p p p p p Restaurants, drive -through not permitted P P C P Retail, General P P4 P P35 P35 P P P P C3 C3 p p Sales and rental of heavy machinery and equipment subject to landscaping requirements of TMC Chapter 18.52* P P P P P P P Salvage and wrecking operations P P C Salvage and wrecking operations which are entirely enclosed within a building P P P P Sanitariums, or similar institutes C Schools and studios for education or self-improvement P P P P P P P P P P9 C10 P27 P P Schools, preschool, elementary, junior & senior high schools (public), and equivalent private schools C C C C C C C C C c c P (public only) Secure community transition facility 28 U Page 6 P = Permitted outright; A = Accessory (customarily appurtenant and incidental to a permitted use) ; C = Conditional (subject to TMC 18.64); U = Unclassified (subject to TMC 18.66); S = Special Permission (Administrative approval by the Director) LDR MDR HDR MUO 0 RCC NCC RC RCM C/L I LI HI MIC/L MIC/H TVS TSO PRO Self -storage facilities P P P P P P P P P Sewage lift station U U U U U U U P Shelter P P P P P Stable (private) A29 A29 A29 P Storage (outdoor) of materials allowed to be manufactured or handled within facilities conforming to uses under this chapter; and screened pursuant to TMC Chapter 18.52 P P P P P P P P P Storage (outdoor) of materials is permitted up to a height of 20 feet with a front yard setback of 25 feet, and to a height of 50 feet with a front yard setback of 100 feet; security required P P P C C Storm water - neighborhood detention + treatment facilities U U U U U U U P Storm water pump station U U U U U U U Studios — Art, photography, music, voice and dance P P P P P P P P P Taverns, nightclubs P P P P P P30 P30 P P Telephone exchanges P P P P P P P P P P P P Theaters, except those theaters which constitute "adult entertainment establishments" as defined by this Zoning Code p P P P P P P P31 Tow -truck operations, subject to all additional State and local regulations P P P P P P P Transfer stations (refuse and garbage) when operated by a public agency U U U U Transitional Housing P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 P38 Truck terminals P P P P P P Utilities, regional C Vehicle sales lot2 P32 P P P P P P Vehicle service station P33 P33 P P P P P P P P Vehicle storage (no customers onsite, does not include park -and -fly operations) P Warehouse storage and/or wholesale distribution facilities P P P P P P P P Water pump station U U U U U U U P Water utility reservoir and related facilities U U U U U U U Wireless Telecommunications Facilities (*see TMC Ch. 18.58) P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P P Note: The Director of Community Development will make a determination for uses not specifically fisted in the Zoning Code. The Director will consider whether the proposed use is: a. Similar in nature to and compatible with other uses permitted out right within a similar zone; and b. Consistent with the stated purpose of the zone; and c. Consistent with the policies of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan. Page 7 1. Adult entertainment establishments are permitted, subject to the following location restrictions: a. No adult entertainment establishment shall be allowed within the following distances from the following specified uses, areas or zones, whether such uses, areas or zones are located within or outside the City limits: (1) In or within 1,000 feet of any LDR, MDR, HDR, MUO, 0, NCC, RC, RCM or TUC zone districts or any other residentially -zoned property; (2) In or within one-half mile of: (a) Public or private school with curricula equivalent to elementary, junior or senior high schools, or any facility owned or operated by such schools; and (b) Care centers, preschools, nursery schools or other child care facilities; In or within 1,000 feet of: (a) public park, trail or public recreational facility; or (b) church, temple, synagogue or chapel; or (c) public library. b. The distances specified in TMC Section 18.30.020.1.a shall be measured by following a straight line from the nearest point of the property parcel upon which the proposed use is to be located, to the nearest point of the parcel of property or land use district boundary line from which the proposed land use is to be separated. c. No adult entertainment establishment shall be allowed to locate within 1,000 feet of an existing adult entertainment establishment. The distance specified in this section shall be measured by following a straight line between the nearest points of public entry into each establishment. (3) 2. No dismantling of cars or travel trailers or sale of used parts allowed. 3. Retail sales and services are limited to uses of a type and size that clearly intend to serve other permitted uses and/or the employees of those uses. 4. Retail sales as part of a planned mixed -use development where at least 50% of gross leasable floor area development is for office use; no auto -oriented retail sales (e.g. drive-ins, service stations). 5. Bed and breakfast facilities, provided: a. the manager/owner must live on -site, b. the maximum number of residents, either permanent or temporary, at any one time is twelve, c. two on -site parking spaces for the owner and permanent residents and one additional on -site parking space is provided for each bedroom rented to customers, d. the maximum length of continuous stay by a guest is 14 days, e. breakfast must be offered on -site to customers, and f. all necessary permits or approvals are obtained from the Health Department. 6. Colleges and universities with primarily vocational curriculum if associated with an established aviation, manufacturing or industrial use. 7. Commercial parking; provided it is: a. a structured parking facility located within a structure having substantial ground floor retail or commercial activities and designed such that the pedestrian and commercial environments are not negatively impacted by the parking use; or b. a surface parking facility located at least 175 feet from adjacent arterial streets and behind a building that, combined with appropriate Type III landscaping, provides effective visual screening from adjacent streets. 8. Commercial parking subject to TMC Chapter 18.56, Off -Street Parking and Loading Regulations. Page 8 9. Offices including, but not limited to, software development and similar uses, financial services, schools for professional and vocational education if associated with an established aviation, manufacturing or industrial use, less than 20,000 square feet. This category does not include outpatient medical and dental clinics. 10. Offices including, but not limited to, software development and similar uses, financial services, schools for professional and vocational education if associated with an established aviation, manufacturing or industrial use, 20,000 square feet and over. 11. Correctional institution operated by the City of Tukwila. 12. Family child care homes, provided the facility shall be licensed by the Department of Early Learning or its successor agency and shall provide a safe passenger loading zone. 13. Dormitory as an accessory use to other uses that are otherwise permitted or approved conditional uses such as churches, universities, colleges or schools. 14. Dwelling - multi -family units on a lot that does not front on Tukwila International Boulevard South, subject to the HDR requirements of TMC Section 18.50.083, Maximum Building Length, and TMC Section 18.52.060, 2-4, Recreation Space Requirements. 15. Dwelling - Multi -family units (Max. 22.0 units/acre except senior citizen housing which is allowed to 100 units/acre, as a mixed -use development that is non -industrial in nature); must be located on property adjacent to and not greater than 500 feet from the Green River, Tukwila Pond, or Minkler Pond. 16. See TMC Section 18.50.220 for accessory dwelling unit standards. 17. Manufactured/mobile home park, meeting the following requirements: a. the development site shall comprise not less than two contiguous acres; b. overall development density shall not exceed eight dwelling units per acre; c. vehicular access to individual dwelling units shall be from the interior of the park; and d. emergency access shall be subject to the approval of the Tukwila Fire Department. 18. NCC allows businesses that include a retail component in conjunction with their manufacturing operation and meeting other performance standards of Chapter 18.22. These businesses may manufacture, process, assemble and/or package the following: a. foods, including but not limited to baked goods, beverages, candy, canned or preserved foods, dairy products and by products, frozen foods, instant foods and meats (no slaughtering); b. pharmaceuticals and related products such as cosmetics and drugs; c. bags, brooms, brushes, canvas, clay, clothing, fur, furniture, glass, ink, paints, paper, plastics, rubber, tile and wood; d. electronic, mechanical, or precision instruments; e. other manufacturing and assembly of a similar light industrial character; f. industries involved with etching, lithography, printing, and publishing, meeting the City's performance standards and offering their services to the local populace on a walk-in basis; g. businesses that service and repair the above products, that are entirely enclosed within a building, offering their services to the local populace on a walk-in basis and meeting the City's performance standards. 19. Where the underlying zoning is HI or TVS. Page 9 20. Minor expansion of an existing warehouse if the following criteria are met: a. The area of the proposed expansion may not exceed 5% of the floor area of the existing warehouse; b. The proposed expansion will not increase any building dimension that is legally non -conforming; c. Only one minor expansion may be permitted per warehouse in existence as of the date of adoption of the Tukwila South Project Development Agreement; d. The proposed expansion must be constructed within two years of the date of approval; e. The proposed development shall be compatible generally with the surrounding land uses in terms of traffic and pedestrian circulation, building and site design; f. All measures have been taken to minimize the possible adverse impacts the proposed expansion may have on the area in which it is located. 21. Movie theaters with more than three screens if the following criteria are met: a. The applicant must demonstrate through an economic analysis that the theater will not have a significant financial impact on any other theater in Tukwila; b. The proposed development shall be compatible generally with the surrounding land uses in terms of traffic and pedestrian circulation, building and site design; c. The proposed theater must demonstrate substantial conformance with the goals and policies of the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan and the Tukwila South Master Plan; d. All measures have been taken to minimize the possible adverse impacts the proposed theater may have on the area in which it is located. 22. Offices, when such offices occupy no more than the first two stories of the building or basement and floor above. 23. Offices, when such offices occupy no more than the first two stories of the building, or basement and floor above, or three stories, in the Urban Redevelopment Area along Tukwila International Boulevard. 24. Offices; must be associated with another permitted use (e.g., administrative offices for a manufacturing company present within the MIC). 25. Offices not associated with other permitted uses and excluding medical/dental clinics, subject to the following location and size restrictions: a. New Office Developments: (1) New office developments shall not exceed 100,000 square feet of gross floor area per lot that was legally established prior to 09/20/2003. (2) No new offices shall be allowed on lots that abut the Duwamish River and are north of the turning basin. The parcels that are ineligible for stand-alone office uses are shown in Figure 18-12. b. An existing office development established prior to 12/11/1995 (the effective date of the Comprehensive Plan) that exceeds the maximum size limitations may be recognized as a conforming Conditional Use under the provisions of this code. An existing office development established prior to 12/11/1995 (the effective date of the Comprehensive Plan) may convert to a stand-alone office use subject to the provisions of this code. 26. Planned shopping center (mall) up to 500,000 square feet. 27. Schools for professional and vocational education if associated with an established aviation, manufacturing or industrial use. 28. Secure community transition facility, subject to the following location restrictions: a. No secure community transition facility shall be allowed within the specified distances from the following uses, areas or zones, whether such uses, areas or zones are located within or outside the City limits: (1) In or within 1,000 feet of any residential zone. (2) Adjacent to, immediately across a street or parking lot from, or within the line of sight of a "risk potential activity/facility" as defined in RCW 71.09.020 as amended, that include: (a) Public and private schools; (b) School bus stops; Page 10 (c) Licensed day care and licensed preschool facilities; (d) Public parks, publicly dedicated trails, and sports fields; (e) Recreational and community centers; (f) Churches, synagogues, temples and mosques; and (g) Public libraries. (3) One mile from any existing secure community transitional facility or correctional institution. b. No secure community transition facility shall be allowed on any isolated parcel which is otherwise considered eligible by applying the criteria listed under TMC 18.38.050-12.a, but is completely surrounded by parcels ineligible for the location of such facilities. c. The distances specified in TMC 18.38.050-12.a shall be measured as specified under Department of Social and Health Services guidelines established pursuant to RCW 71.09.285, which is by following a straight line from the nearest point of the property parcel upon which the secure community transitional facility is to be located, to the nearest point of the parcel of property or land use district boundary line from which the proposed land use is to be separated. d. The parcels eligible for the location of secure community transition facilities by applying the siting criteria listed above and information available as of August 19, 2002, are shown in Figure 18-11, "Eligible Parcels for Location of Secure Community Transition Facilities." Any changes in the development pattern and the location of risk sites/facilities over time shall be taken into consideration to determine if the proposed site meets the siting criteria at the time of the permit application. 29. Private stable, if located not less than 60 feet from front lot line nor less than 30 feet from a side or rear lot line. It shall provide capacity for not more than one horse, mule or pony for each 20,000 square feet of stable and pasture area, but not more than a total of two of the above mentioned animals shall be allowed on the same lot. 30. No night clubs. 31. Theaters for live performances, not including adult entertainment establishments and movie theaters with three or fewer screens are permitted. Movie theaters with more than three screens will require a Special Permission Permit. 32. Automotive sales must have an enclosed showroom with no outdoor storage of vehicles. Pre-existing legally established uses in the TIB Study Area, as set forth in Figure 18-60, on December 15, 2020, are exempt from the enclosed showroom requirement, provided the use is limited to the existing parcel(s) currently occupied on that date. Pre-existing legally established automotive sales where existing parking lots abut the public frontage must provide effective visual screening of the parking lot from sidewalks (or street if no sidewalk currently exists) using Type II landscaping when any of the following occurs: an expansion or alteration of the structure, a change of ownership, or when the business is vacated or abandoned for more than 24 consecutive months and a new business is proposed. 33. Allowed; however, if in the TIB Study Area, as set forth in Figure 18-60, the following conditions apply: Outdoor storage of vehicles, tires, or other materials used for service is not permitted. Gas stations are permitted if the pumps and parking are located behind the building, the pumps meet the setback requirements, and the pumps comply with building and fire codes. Queuing lanes are not permitted between buildings and back of sidewalk. Wholesale distribution and storage of fuel (e.g. natural gas, propane, gasoline) are not permitted in the TIB Study Area. Pre-existing legally established automotive service uses with outdoor storage or parking abutting the public frontage must provide effective visual screening of the parking and outdoor stored materials from sidewalks (or street if no sidewalk currently exists) using Type II landscaping when any of the following occurs: an expansion or alteration of the structure, a change of ownership, or when the business is vacated or abandoned for more than 24 consecutive months and a new business is proposed. 34. Allow if the following are provided: a full -service restaurant and a Class A liquor license, 24-hour staffed reception, all rooms accessed off interior hallways or lobby, and a minimum 90 rooms. 35. Allowed, however if in the TIB Study area, as set forth in Figure 18-60, the following conditions apply: Drive -through facilities are permitted when located behind a building. Queuing lanes are not permitted between buildings and public frontage sidewalks. Where the use is located on a corner or with access to an alley, drive-throughs must exit to a side street or an alley that connects to a side street, where feasible. 36. Automotive rentals must have an enclosed showroom with no outdoor storage of vehicles. Pre-existing legally established uses in the TIB Study Area, as set forth in Figure 18-60, on December 15, 2020, are exempt from the enclosed showroom requirement, provided the use is limited to the existing parcel(s) currently occupied on that date. Page 11 37. Subject to the criteria and conditions at TMC 18.50.250 and 18.50.270. 38. Subject to the criteria and conditions at TMC 18.50.260 and 18.50.270. Page 12 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayors review Council review 11/06/23 JR ITEM INFORMATION ITEM NO. 6.C. STAFF SPONSOR: CATRIEN DE BOER ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 11/06/23 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Chinook Wind Extension King County Parks Open Space — River Corridors Grant Acceptance CATEGORY ❑ Discussion Mt Date 11 Motion Date 11/06/23 ❑ Resolution Mtg Date ❑ Ordinance Mtg Date ❑ Bid Award AI tg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mtg Date Mt SPONSOR ❑Council Mayor HR DCD Finance Fire TS P&R ❑Police 11PJV ❑Court SPONSOR'S On March 2023, Council approved staff to apply for the King County OSRC grant to fund the SUMMARY design of the Chinook Wind Extension project to restore the natural functions of rivers, create, or restore public access. The City received an award for the fully requested amount of $280,000. Council is being asked to formally accept the King County Parks Open Space - River Corridors grant award in the amount of $280,000 to fund the design of the Chinook Wind Extension. REVIEWED BY r Trans&Infrastructure ❑ CommunitySvs/Safety ❑ Finance Comm. ❑ Planning/Economic Dcv. ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. 10/16/23 COMMITTEE CHAIR: TOSH SHARP ❑ LTAC DATE: RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. COMMITTEE Public Works Department Unanimous Approval; Forward to the Regular Consent Agenda COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $280,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 Fund Source: GRANT AWARD AND CITY MATCH Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 10/23/23 Informational Memorandum dated 10/13/23 CIP Page 87 Grant Application Grant Award List Minutes from Transportation and Infrastructure Committee meeting of 10/16/23 277 278 City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Public Works Department - Hari Ponnekanti, Director/City Engineer INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Transportation and Infrastructure Services Committee FROM: Hari Ponnekanti, Public Works Director BY: Catrien de Boer, Public Works Analyst CC: Mayor Ekberg DATE: October 13, 2023 SUBJECT: Chinook Wind Extension King County Parks Open Space - River Corridors Grant Acceptance Project No. 92341202 ISSUE Accept a King County Parks Open Space - River Corridors (OSRC) grant award for $280,000 to fund the design of the Chinook Wind Extension project. BACKGROUND In March 2023, Council approved staff to apply for this King County OSRC grant to fund the design of the Chinook Wind Extension project. The OSRC program, a 6-year King County Parks Levy program, supports projects that help restore the natural functions of rivers, create, or restore public access and/or increase public awareness of river corridors are valuable resources. DISCUSSION The City received an award for the fully requested amount of $280,000. This habitat restoration and public access project will connect the off -channel habitats and public trails at the Chinook Wind Mitigation Project site (trail scheduled to be constructed in 2024) and the Duwamish Gardens Habitat Restoration site. In total between the three projects, approximately 1,400 lineal feet of shoreline will have been converted to shallow water off -channel rearing and refuge habitat in the transition zone of the Duwamish River, and the public will have access to more than 1/3 of a mile of shoreline trail. Grant funds are expected to support funding for the shoreline design task of the in -progress SOJ and Miller Hayashi contracts for the Public Works Operation's Campus, Phase 2. FINANCIAL IMPACT The grant award requires a 20% local city match of $70,000. The project CIP budget, which comes from the utility fund, is sufficient to cover the cost of the match. Budget ORSC grant City Match Total Project Cost Project Cost Estimate $280,000 $70,000 $350,000 Fund Source Project CIP RECOMMENDATION Council is being asked to formally accept the King County Parks Open Space- River Corridors grant award in the amount of $280,000 to fund the design of the Chinook Wind Extension and forward this item to the November 6th Regular Meeting. Attachments: CIP Page 87 Grant Application Grant Award List 279 280 CITY OF TUKWILA CAPITAL PROJECT SUMMARY 2023 to 2028 PROJECT: Chinook Wind Extension Project No. 92341202 Following the Public Works Facility Preferred Master Plan (2019) and the Duwamish Gardens Opportunities for DESCRIPTION: Expansion Concept Plan (2013), this project will develp connecting shoreline habitat and the 'missing trail link' between Duwamish Gardens and Chinook Wind within recently aquired City property. This is a Tier 1 project in the WRIA 9 Salmon Recovery Plan, fulfilling a core recovery strategy of restoring, JUSTIFICATION: protecting and enhancing estuary habitat in the Duwamish River. The trail connection has been discussed in the community for many years and is anticipated to be part of larger, popular shorline trail. STATUS: City takes ownership of the site in 2023. MAINT. IMPACT: Passive park elements and restoration plantings will require additional maintenance. COMMENT: Grant funding is anticipated to support this project. FINANCIAL Through Estimated (in $000's) 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 BEYOND TOTAL EXPENSES Design 150 150 50 350 Land (R/W) 0 Monitoring 0 Const. Mgmt. 160 160 Construction 0 900 900 TOTAL EXPENSES 0 0 150 150 50 1,060 0 0 0 1,410 FUND SOURCES Awarded Grant 0 Proposed Grant 150 500 650 Mitigation Actual 0 Mitigation Expected 0 Utility Revenue 0 0 150 0 50 560 0 0 0 760 TOTAL SOURCES 0 0 150 150 50 1,060 1 0 0 0 1,410 ' Project Location sI T• I )41 > 16 iitie, AV `\ : ..;17-74 If. -j 1111111116. \\•",, . 'NY ligl 2023 - 2028 Capital Improvement Program b++nm'Mmn+^ 87 281 282 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila Chinook Wind Extension 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Application City of Tukwila 6200 Southcenter Blvd brittany.robinson@tukwilawa.gov Tukwila, WA 98188 0: 206-431-2445 Mike Perfetti Mike.Perfetti@TukwilaWA.gov 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 283 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila Application Form FOR KING COUNTY USE ONLY Cultural Resource Requirement Guidance Every grant agreement requires a Cultural Resource Requirement (CRR) clause. Please copy and paste the CRR clause assigned to this project/program in the textbox below. Some clauses will note the project does not have a requirement. All others will have HPP requirements, some of which are very detailed -- this is the basic for adding an HPP Requirement in the Deliverables section later in this form. Deliverables Guidance The fields in this section are used to populate the deliverables table in the SOW. No matter the project/program, the first and second deliverables must be Progress Reports and Final Report, respectively. Additional deliverables may be necessary. Use the fields below to assign deliverables. Introduction Introduction Thank you for your interest in King County Parks grants program! King County Parks offers multiple grant opportunities with varying award amounts and goals. For more details on each grant program, including eligibility criteria and other requirements, please review the 2023 Parks Levy Grant Guidelines located on the Parks website. A summary table below provides a comparison of the current levy grant programs. rant program Aquatic Facilities Maximum Award $5 Million Program Goals Preserves and increases public access to public pools by funding activities related to the renovation or expansion of existing facilities, or construction of new aquatic facilities. Healthy Communities and Parks (Tier 1)* $15K Supports projects that increase access to recreation and use of parks, open spaces, and recreational facilities in underserved areas and communities. Healthy Communities and Parks (Tier 2) msocom 1 $250K Open Space — River Corridors $1 Million Supports projects that help restore the natural functions of rivers, create or restore public access, and/or increase public awareness of river corridors as valuable natural resources. Parks Capital and Open Space $1 Million Supports a range of projects that expand and improve recreation opportunities for the region's growing population, including the development of active and passive recreation and trail facilities, and the Printed On: 2 October 2023 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Application 2 284 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila 'acquisition of open space for future public parks. *The Healthy Communities and Parks Tier 1 program accepts applications on a rolling deadline, based on available funding. Applications for all other programs open on January 17, 2023, and close on March 15, 2023, at 5 PM PST. Late applications will not be accepted. Tips for a Successful Grant Application • Learn to navigate Foundant. msocom 2 • Start preparing early. • Keep the grant program goals and evaluation criteria in mind while preparing the grant application. • Provide clear and concise narrative responses that answer all parts of the question. • Character limits are provided to guide maximum response length; responses do not need to use the full character counts allowed. • If applying for multiple grants, please complete and submit one application per grant. Grant Application Consulting Grant application consulting is available at no cost for applicants, with priority for small and emerging organizations with fewer than 20 full-time equivalent (FTE) staff and an operating budget of less than $4 million in the prior fiscal year. The main purpose of this consulting support is to eliminate linguistic, cultural, and other barriers that might prevent organizations from seeking government funding. Grant application consultants can: • Assist in determining appropriate fit between your proposal and the RFP • Provide guidance on how best to answer questions • Support application review, including editing and budget review. Follow this link to request free GA consultant services: https://bit.ly/GAconsultantservices Grant Program Selection Grant Program Selection Grant Program Selection* Please select which King County Grant program you are submitting a proposed project to fund (select one). Please Note: If you are applying for the Healthy Communities & Parks program and your requested project funding is below $15,000 select the Tier 1 program. If your funding request is $15,000 or more, select the Tier 2 program. Open Space - River Corridors Levy Grant Program 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 3 285 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila Open Space - River Corridors Program Details Additional details on the Open Space - River Corridors Levy Grant Program can be found within the 2023 Parks Levy Grant Guidelines, located on the Parks website. Organization Type in King County* City or Town Rivers Project Type in King County* Note: The 'Programs' project type is only eligible for outreach and education programs directly related to a capital project. Planning & Design Total Grant Amount Request* Please provide the total grant amount you are requesting funding for this proposed project. Please note: Maximum project award for this program is $1 Million. $280,000.00 Project Overview Project Overview Responses should describe the proposed project's intent, alignment with grant program goals, and outcomes. Please highlight the project goals and which aspects of the project this grant would support. Project Name* Provide concise name that reflects this project. (3-5 words maximum, for example: "Black Diamond Dog Park" or "Renton Salmon Habitat Restoration") Chinook Wind Extension Project Summary* Briefly highlight the primary objective of the proposed project (1-2 sentences) This project will develop connecting shoreline habitat and a missing public trail link between Duwamish Gardens and Chinook Wind within recently acquired City property. Project Details* Describe the proposed project for this specific funding. Explain how the project aligns with the goals of this King County grant program. 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 4 286 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila This is a proposal is for the design phase of the Chinook Wind Extension project. The project will develop a trail system, informational signage, and viewpoints that will extend the Chinook Wind habitat restoration project being implemented by King County in partnership with the City of Tukwila. The project site is at about river mile 6 of the Duwamish River and lies adjacent to the Recreation & Conservation Office funded Duwamish Gardens habitat restoration and park site. The project goal is to create public access through the Chinook Wind site so that people can enjoy views of the river, the off -channel mitigation site and learn about the history of the area and the extensive salmon recovery efforts being done along the river. This project will connect the Chinook Wind project with the nearby Duwamish Gardens trail system, making a substantial and unique urban water access experience. The property is currently owned by King County and will be transferred to the City of Tukwila following the County's mitigation project and subsequent 10-year maintenance period. Outcomes* Share how this project will meet community needs. What are the intended community benefits and/or project outcomes? 1. Public health - this project will benefit the community by providing a missing link in what will be a 1/3 mile (-1,765 lineal feet) urban waterfront pedestrian trail between trailheads at Tukwila International Boulevard and East Marginal Way South, traversing through the recently completed Chinook Wind Mitigation Project (King County) and Duwamish Gardens (City of Tukwila). This project will include 300 lineal feet of trail located in the middle, in between the existing Duwamish Gardens trail, which includes a spur view trail and a hand -carry boat launch, and the Chinook Winds Public Access trail, scheduled to be completed in 2023. According to the State Department of Health, the Body Mass Index (BMI) of the community within the project site's census tract is 26.14 for ages 20+. This is higher than the state average and is considered 'overweight' by the National Institute of Health. This data speaks to the general health -related characteristics of the community that lives within proximity to this project and speaks to the need for healthy outdoor opportunities. According to the Tukwila Parks, Recreation and Open Space Plan (PROS), Walking/Biking ranked #1 by survey participants as the activity they most wanted to see more of in Tukwila Parks. People in this community have limited connection with nature and access to healthy outdoor spaces. This project will help to provide that need and better serve the community. 2. Species recovery - Chinook salmon, Steelhead, Bull Trout and Southern Resident Killer Whales are endangered or threatened species that stand to benefit from this project. Juvenile Chinook salmon, in particular, will benefit from this project's newly -created off -channel rearing habitat in the Duwamish River transition zone. Research results from the adjacent Duwamish Gardens Habitat Restoration project showed substantial juvenile Chinook use of the off -channel habitat created there. Sampling in February, 2017, the first migration season in which the habitat was opened, showed juvenile Chinook use at 22 cpu/m2 as compared to zero at three control sites in the adjacent mainstem, and compared with zero in the pre -project condition. With this project, we expect to create complimentary off -channel habitat that will be utilized by juvenile Chinook, expanding their critically needed transition zone habitat and contributing to species recovery efforts. Evaluation* Describe how the project's effectiveness and success will be evaluated. The public health goals of the project may be evaluated as part of the City's next PROS Plan update. This project, Duwamish Gardens and the Chinook Wind Public Access projects were not in existence at the time of the last PROS plan, which collected survey data regarding use of various parks located throughout the city. The expected outcome would be to see that residents are utilizing the trail system and gaining the associated health benefits from movement and exposure to nature. Additional feedback may be acquired to understand any barriers that may inhibit people from utilizing and enjoying the trail and its surroundings. Similar to the Duwamish Gardens Habitat Restoration project, the City or King County, will undertake a post - construction fish survey of the project site. King County and the University of Washington have been active in 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 5 287 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila fish surveys in the area. The City would look to collaborate with one or both of those entities to collect data, especially with the proximity of several other restoration projects including the Riverton Creek Flapgate Removal, Chinook Wind, Duwamish Gardens and North Wind's Weir. The City could potentially seek grant opportunities, such as the WRIA 9 Monitoring Fund, to take on the effort independently if needed. Project Viability Project Viability Responses should demonstrate project readiness and highlight any potential issues that may impact project implementation. Project Start Date* Indicate the anticipated start for the proposed project. 01/01/2024 Project Completion Date* Indicate the anticipated completion date for the proposed project. 12/31/2023 Broader Project Scope* Is this proposed project part of a broader project or scope of work? If so, please describe how this proposed project fits into the larger project, or write "Not applicable". This project is an extension of the Chinook Wind project, which is scheduled to be completed in 2023 and Public Works Shops Phase 2 project. Although the Chinook Wind Extension can be completed independently, the goal is to create connect the trail system, and create a unique urban water access experience. Project Contingencies* Is this proposed project contingent on another project, or are there factors that may delay the implementation of this project? If so, please describe any contingencies or factors that could delay implementation of the project or write "not applicable". The Chinook Wind Extension Project is associated with the City of Tukwila' Public Works Shops Phase 2 Project, which will construct new facilities for the City's Public Works Department administration and operations & maintenance personnel. That project is in the planning and cost control phase without a definitive timeline. The parcel and entirety of both project sites will become unrestricted property of the City of Tukwila later this year, when the property lease expires. As part of recent purchase and sale agreement, the property is currently leased to Amalfi Investments and houses the UPS truck yard that has been there for many years. It is anticipated at this time that the Chinook Wind Extension Project will be built in advance of Public Works Shops Phase 2, which is the most sensible sequence from a constructability standpoint. The contractor will be able to access the site easily and utilize portions of the larger site for staging and access without disrupting Shops construction activity or post -occupancy activity. We do not anticipate any delay in implementation of the Chinook Wind Extension Project due to the Shops' project or the terminating lease, but just want to make reviewers aware of the context of the site, its history and future activity. 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 6 288 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila Public Access Public Access* Please describe the current extent of public access to and on the property, and any plans to develop and/or restore the site to enhance public access. There is not currently public access to the site; however, the project goal is to create public access through the Chinook Wind site so that people can enjoy views of the river, the off -channel mitigation site and learn about the history of the area and the extensive salmon recovery efforts being done along the river. This project will connect the Chinook Wind project with the nearby Duwamish Gardens trail system, making a substantial and unique urban water access experience. Capital Project (Preconstruction and Construction) Details Property Owner* Who is the property owner of this property and/or existing facility? The City of Tukwila is the current owner of parcel 1023049059, which encompasses roughly 90% of the project area. Washington State Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) owns parcel 1023049083. Property Owner Permission* What is the ownership status of the property and/or existing facility? (select one) Please note: If long term lease agreement or property owner letter of support are selected, please upload documentation in the next question. Own Property/Facility Property Owner Permission File Upload If "Signed Long-term Lease Agreement" or "Letter of Support from Property Owner" was selected above, please upload documentation. Project Sustainability* Please describe how the agency leading project implementation is planning for and funding the long-term operations and maintenance of the project/facility. The finished project will be owned and maintained by the City of Tukwila as a City park site. Tukwila park employees will partner with local volunteers, as available, to provide routine maintenance of the park portions of the site, including the trail and site furnishings. The Tukwila Parks Department currently works with volunteer groups to maintain several park sites. The Public Works Department will contract maintenance of the restoration site during a 10-year plant establishment period. This separation of duties between departments follows the Duwamish Gardens model. Following plant establishment, routine maintenance should be limited to removal of invasive plants, replacement of damaged or dead vegetation, and plant trimming where necessary. 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 7 289 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila Ongoing stewardship and maintenance of the many completed and planned restoration projects along the Duwamish is a high priority for WRIA 9 salmon habitat recovery, and a strategy for funding long-term stewardship for all projects. Parks' stewardship program trains volunteers to be site stewards who can organize work parties for site maintenance and assign a small group of volunteers to regularly monitor the site. This program may be explored for future maintenance and operations of the site. Project Readiness* Please describe any steps that have been completed to prepare for the project (i.e., feasibility planning, architectural/engineering, cultural resources, permitting, zoning, etc.), as well as any outstanding steps that need to be completed before the project can break ground. This project funding application will support the City's Capital Improvement allocation for this project, which begins in 2023. This project and the funding request builds upon at 2013 masterplan, which laid the foundation for this green and blue corridor, and has been expanded and conceptually defined in the City's Public Works Shops Phase 2 Plan. Additionally, this project is listed as Duw-7a, a Tier 1 project in the WRIA 9 2021 Salmon Habitat Plan update. With this funding, we will follow through on the project development work that has been done to date and on the design and permitting stages of the project. The City will advertise for and hire a professional consulting firm for this work. River System River System* Please identify which river corridor this project is associated with (select all that apply). Duwamish River Corridor Multiple Benefits Multiple Benefits* Please describe how the project integrates multiple benefits (i.e., habitat restoration, public recreation, and/or flood reduction) and balances the impacts of potentially competing priorities. • For recreation focused projects, how does the project mitigate the potential impacts to natural functions of rivers and their riparian areas. • For habitat focused projects, how does the project contribute to improving public access and/or public awareness of the importance of river corridors? The goal of the project is to develop a site for future restoration as an intertidal salmon and aquatic species habitat, as part of a larger strategy to restore tens of acres of shallow water habitat in the Duwamish Transition Zone in order to recover Chinook salmon. While the primary purpose of the project is to provide resting, feeding and cover habitat for juvenile Chinook salmon as they transition from freshwater to saltwater, the addition of this habitat will benefit multiple species. The site is rare in that it is large enough and deep enough to provide more than two acres of off -channel habitat and two or three acres of native tree and shrub plantings. A portion of the site would be used for passive recreational activities including a trail. The site is located in a portion of the Duwamish that is listed as the highest priority area for restoration in the Salmon Habitat Plan for the Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watershed (also known as WRIA 9). 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 8 290 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila This site will provide a passive -use, greenbelt area in a highly industrial location in close proximity to two low-income neighborhoods: Duwamish and Allentown in Tukwila. Residents of the area are multi -ethnic and subject to more health problems and shorter life spans than elsewhere in King County. Replacing a paved area and motel with a green space that has passive recreational opportunities and trees will help alleviate some of these problems. The Duwamish River is a highly altered natural river corridor surrounded by development, including heavy industrial activities. This project, combined with the expanded Duwamish Gardens site, will allow for approximately 1,500 ft. of restored shoreline with passive recreation activities. It would allow the creation of a trail linking East Marginal Way with Tukwila International Blvd. In addition, it is adding to the link of completed or planned habitat projects in the area, creating a corridor of riparian and off channel habitat for juvenile Chinook salmon that include the Codiga Farms, Duwamish Hill Preserve, Duwamish Gardens, North Winds Weir, and the Cecil Moses sites. Studies have shown that this segment of the Duwamish River is vital to the recovery of Chinook salmon. Project Location Project Location The following questions seek more information about the location(s) of your project. Project Address* Provide primary project address (Site Name, Street Address, City, and Zip code). 11244 TUKWILA INTERNATIONAL BLVD, Tukwila WA 98188 Multiple Locations* Does this program have multiple locations? No List Multiple Addresses (Optional) If you selected "Yes" to previous question, please provide the additional addresses associated with this project. Primary King County Council District* Indicate the King County Council district associated with the primary project location. Note: Please refer to this website to identify districts by address and location. District 2 Additional King County Council District Indicate any additional council district(s) associated with the project location(s) (select all that apply). Parcel Number List the parcel number(s) associated with this project* Note: To find detailed parcel information, please refer to King County Parcel Viewer. Example: 5247800795 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 9 291 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila The City of Tukwila is the current owner of parcel 1023049059, which encompasses roughly 90% of the project area. Washington State Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) owns parcel 1023049083, which is the aquatic lands portion of the project area. Note that the City purchased the property from Amalfi Investments, who is shown as the property owner on the King County Department of Assessments webpage. WDNR will be contacted and an aquatic land authorization use permit obtained if needed. Areas Served Areas Served The following questions seek information about the areas served by your project. Cities / Towns* Indicate which cities and towns will be served or have access to this project (select all that apply). Tukwila Unincorporated Areas* Indicate which King County unincorporated/rural areas will be served by this project (select all that apply). Project does not serve King County unincorporated area Project Visuals Project Visuals Please provide maps, photos, plans and/or designs that provide a visual representation of existing site conditions, key features, planned improvements (if any), and how the project fits into the local and regional context. Site Map Upload a map showing the acquisition parcels and/or project site. Use aerial photo base layer and include key features such as site boundaries, public access locations, roads, rivers/streams, etc. (King County iMap is an available free resource) Site Map- Chinook Wind Ext.pdf Regional Map (Optional) If not included as part of the site map, upload a map showing the regional context for the project. Include relevant features such as major roads, urban growth area boundaries, parks, and protected lands. If applicable, include 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 10 292 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila current, past, and future projects if part of a larger coordinated strategy. Regional Map- Chinook Wind Ext..pdf Photos and/or Supporting Visuals - 1 (Optional) Upload 2-3 visuals of the project area, existing site conditions, and/or preliminary site plans (photos, maps, and/or designs). P/ease Note: Only one file can be uploaded per question. Photos and/or Supporting Visuals - 2 (Optional) Upload 2-3 visuals of the project area, existing site conditions, and/or preliminary site plans (photos, maps, and/or designs). P/ease Note: Only one file can be uploaded per question. Photos and/or Supporting Visuals - 3 (Optional) Upload 2-3 visuals of the project area, existing site conditions, and/or preliminary site plans (photos, maps, and/or designs). P/ease Note: Only one file can be uploaded per question. More visuals: /f you have more than three files you wish to submit for supporting materials, please combine materials into one PDF document, then upload. Cultural Resources Review Cultural Resources Review King County has a rich cultural history with some archeological sites dating back over 12,000 years and is committed to the protection of cultural and historic resources. As a result, a formal review by the County's Historic Preservation Program is required for all projects that include ground disturbing activities (i.e., construction, landscaping, sign installation, tree planting, geotechnical studies, etc.) or alterations to historic structures. The following questions provide initial context for that review. Ground Disturbance or Alteration of Historic Resources* Does the project include ground disturbing activities or have potential to alter historic resources, including buildings, structures, sites, districts, and / or objects of historical significance? Yes 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 11 293 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila Cultural Resources Information Extent of Ground Disturbance* In a few sentences, please describe the types of ground disturbing activities and the depth of potential excavation (i.e., planting of trees —18" deep, grading and landscaping of site to a maximum of 2', drilling of test wells to 50' in 3 locations, etc.) Geotechnical investigations may be performed to investigate infiltration for the purposes of rain garden development or other uses that may require such investigations. Cultural Resources Studies or Requirements* What cultural resource review activities are currently planned or have already been completed on this project? Please also briefly describe any known permit requirements and/or state or federal funding programs supporting the implementation of this project. The City will follow protocols outlined in the grant agreement, State Law, and those that would be expected through the Corps Permit and Tribal Consultation Process. The City is very experienced in cultural resource investigation and documentation, having provided investigations, Inadvertent Discovery Plans (IDPs) for the adjacent Duwamish Gardens Habitat Restoration and Chinook Wind Public Access projects. Construction monitoring occurred at the Duwamish Gardens site and will occur at the Chinook Wind Public Access sites. At Duwamish Gardens, 17 investigative trenches were dug, and the archaeological potential area mapped. The design responded to preserve intact artifacts, while meeting project access and restoration goals. For the Chinook Wind Extension project, we will work with the consulting parties to develop archaeological investigation plans, a culturally responsive design, and an appropriate plan for the inadvertent discovery during construction and monitoring, as needed. Project Extent Data (Optional) Upload a spatial data file (zipped shapefile, kml, or gpx, etc.) showing a polygon of the extent of the project area. This data is used for cultural resource review by the Historic Preservation Program and consultation with affected Tribes. (Parks staff can assist with the creation of this data as necessary) Equitable Access & Partnerships (EAP) Equitable Access & Partnerships King County Parks seeks to support community -led and community -informed organizations that are reflective of and embedded in the populations they serve and recognize and address the racial and other disparities that exist in King County. Priority populations focus on underserved communities that experience inequitable access to open space. This may include racial/ethnic communities (Black/African American, Hispanic/Latinx, American Indian/Alaska Native, Asian, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, and/or other People of Color), people with disabilities, refugees and immigrants, low-income individuals, and/or other marginalized communities. Responses should demonstrate how the project addresses disparities through intentional planning, community involvement, and strategic partnerships. 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 12 294 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila EAP - Community Engagement Community Engagement King County Parks seeks to invest in projects that are led by and for underserved communities with the least access to recreational and health equity. Ideally, the need for this project was identified by one or more underserved communities, and those communities play a meaningful and central role in key decisions affecting the proposed project. Community Engagement* Describe how community members are or will be involved in leading, informing, and/or engaging in this project in a meaningful way. During the early stages of the design process, the project team will develop a communication plan that will include public involvement. This is likely to operate independently of the Public Works Shops Phase 2 process and may include one or more of the following venues/mediums to inform and solicit input: public meeting(s), social media posts, web -based posts, printed materials at the Tukwila Community Center and/or other appropriate public locations, and broad outreach to partner organization. EAP - Collaborative Partnerships Collaborative Partnerships King County Parks seeks to support projects that are driven by underserved communities. Collaborative project partnerships can help achieve that goal, particularly involving organizations that reflect the communities they serve (e.g., members share similar backgrounds or identities, have historical ties to the community, etc.). Partners may include tribes, community -based organizations, public agencies, and other organizations contributing resources to this project. Partnerships* If this project involves partnerships with other organizations or agencies, please describe the project partners. If no organizational partners are involved, please describe why the lead organization is best suited to approach this project independently. A. How do the organizational partners (or lead organization, if there are no project partners) reflect the communities served by this project? B. What does each partner bring to this project (funding, in -kind donations, volunteers, etc.)? C. How does collaborating with the identified partners strengthen this project? The City of Tukwila has been an active partner with the many jurisdictions and stakeholders involved in salmon recovery in the Green/Duwamish and Central Puget Sound watershed since 1999. The City's council plays an active role in funding and supporting WRIA 9 salmon recovery actions, and the City has worked closely with the WRIA 9 salmon recovery team to build other projects within city boundaries to enhance salmon habitat. Since this project is in the top tier of the WRIA 9 list of high priority projects, WRIA 9 has indicated its willingness to assist the City with securing funding and ensuring that the project is consistent with regional salmon recovery goals. The City has established working relationships with volunteers, as well as community -based non-profit organizations, in carrying out restoration projects. For example, the City is partnering with Sustainability Ambassadors on the City's Stormwater Outfalls Water Quality Restoration Project to provide students with a 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 13 295 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila meaningful real -world understanding around water quality issues and actions; the City is partnering with DirtCorps on the King County OSRC-funded Nelsen Side Channel project, where DirtCorps, who facilitates a green jobs training program, has been working to restore a portion of the shoreline associate with that project. As such, the City will look for these types of opportunities to help build community support, education, and/or civic engagement. Letter of Support - 1 (Optional) Please upload any letters of support or documentation that demonstrates the project partnerships and/or resources committed to this project. P/ease Note: Only one file is permitted to be uploaded per question. /f you have more than one file, either combine all files into one PDFbefore uploading, or use the next two questions to upload additional letters of support. Letter of Support - 2 (Optional) Please upload any letters of support or documentation that demonstrates the project partnerships and/or resources committed to this project. Letter of Support - 3 (Optional) Please upload any letters of support or documentation that demonstrates the project partnerships and/or resources committed to this project. Budget & Resources Budget & Resources The budget is critical to connecting the proposed project/program and the necessary expenses with estimated dollar amounts. The budget narrative provides opportunity to explain any information that may not be evident in the project budget and specific line -item expenses. Budget Template* Upload a budget that outlines the following: • Total Project Cost: List of project costs to be covered by other resources. • Grant Request: List of project costs to be covered by this grant. [text updated 1/23/23] Applicants are highly encouraged to use the King County Parks budget template. Click here to download a copy. Parks Levy Grants_Budget Exhibit Template_Chinook Wind Extension.xlsx Budget Narrative* Provide any details that support the proposed budget such as: • Clarify budget expenses listed in the project budget template • Explain the total budget of the project/program (beyond the grant request) • Share other funding sources available to cover total project budget • Indicate priority budget items to support project viability, and describe potential impacts of reduced funding The total project budget is $350,000, with the City of Tukwila providing a $70,000 match. The City funding has been allocated through the 2023-2025 Capital Improvements Program. 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 14 296 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila The grant will fund the final design and permitting phases. If the project is not funded or receives reduced funding, the City will continue to seek other grant opportunities from King County and the Recreation & Conservation Office. Reduced funding may delay the project timeline. Supporting Budget Documentation - 1 (Optional) Upload any additional documentation that supports the proposed budget. Please prioritize documentation related to this specific funding request, and supplement with documentation related to the broader project as needed. Examples could include: Bid; Appraisal; Cost Estimates; Fundraising Plan. P/ease Note: Only one file is permitted to be uploaded per question. if you have more than one file, p/ease combine into one PDF or upload in next question below. [Unanswered] Supporting Budget Documentation - 2 (Optional) Upload any additional documentation that supports the proposed budget. Please prioritize documentation related to this specific funding request, and supplement with documentation related to the broader project as needed. Examples could include: Bid; Appraisal; Cost Estimates; Fundraising P/an. P/ease Note: Only one file is permitted to be uploaded per question. If you have more than one file, please combine into one PDF or upload in next question below. [Unanswered] Supporting Budget Documentation - 3 (Optional) Upload any additional documentation that supports the proposed budget. Please prioritize documentation related to this specific funding request, and supplement with documentation related to the broader project as needed. Examples could include: Bid; Appraisal; Cost Estimates; Fundraising P/an. Please Note: Only one file is permitted to be uploaded per question. if you have more than one file, please combine into one PDF or upload in next question below. [Unanswered] Additional Information Additional Supporting Materials - 1 (Optional) Please upload any additional supporting documentation about the project proposal. Please Note: This content may not be scored unless the applicant has requested a reasonable accommodation. 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 15 297 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila Multiple Fi/es: Only one file is permitted to be uploaded per question. if you have more than one file you wish to submit as supporting materials, p/ease combine into one PDF or upload in next two questions below. Chinook Wind Ext. Concept Plans.pdf Additional Supporting Materials - 2 (Optional) Please upload any additional supporting documentation about the project proposal. Please Note: This content may not be scored unless the applicant has requested a reasonable accommodation. 19-0708_Preferred Master Plan.pdf Additional Supporting Materials - 3 (Optional) Please upload any additional supporting documentation about the project proposal. Please Note: This content may not be scored unless the applicant has requested a reasonable accommodation. Multiple Files: Only one file is permitted to be uploaded per question. if you have more than one file you wish to submit as supporting materials, please combine into one PDF. Salmon Habitat Plan 2021 Update - February 2021 - 7_Duwamish Estuary Subwatershed.pdf Media URL Links (Optional) If you wish to submit multimedia links that support the project proposal, please provide URL links to the materials below. End of Application Thank you for completing a King County Parks grant application. If your application is complete and you wish to submit it to King County Parks, click the "Submit Application" button below. To save your work and submit it at a later date, click the "Save Application" button. 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 16 298 Mike Perfetti City of Tukwila File Attachment Summary Applicant File Uploads • Site Map- Chinook Wind Ext.pdf • Regional Map- Chinook Wind Ext..pdf • Parks Levy Grants_Budget Exhibit Template_Chinook Wind Extension.xlsx • Chinook Wind Ext. Concept Plans.pdf • 19-0708_Preferred Master Plan.pdf • Salmon Habitat Plan 2021 Update - February 2021 - 7_Duwamish Estuary Subwatershed.pdf 2023 King County Parks Levy Program Grant Printed On: 2 October 2023 Application 17 299 300 �3315 ,,3325 King County iMap 11231 Project Site Duwa-m-i;si� ,— Gardens Duwamish River `11030 611030 `11222 Iiii I 11536 354Q 11521 IIII\ 3314 illi 463414 I',I * ti --3'S r0 I, ti I'll I, i, I hey . I .-- 11 - _-_ i' }I4r �i 1605 ''S,- illi = `11`b 1 �7� '' i+ ib3415 }'i �� :1 2 i II I4 ?111 iI �I GI 1162111 %i 9 30 `11030 The information iicluded on this rrap has been compiled Icy King County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change without notice. King County makes no representatbns or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or rights to the use of such informatiur. TIis document is not intended br use asa survey product. Kng County shall rot be liable fcr any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages induding, but nd lirrited to, bst revenues or bst profits resulting from the use or misuse d the information curtained on this map. My sale of tlis map or informaticn on this maps prohibited except by written permissiur of King County. Date: 3/15/2023 Notes: NA L41 King Cgp1' ty ti:4‘ 6In Ira lcuil SLAW e 6 4, ,? gU>Lintke — s Loftin) on [kali P.trt. g, 114i 1 ITO King County iMap a c . 4 1 L ' CI:i'dlle N HIII it • 0 rl ill] NE 3th St 4.141 Medina -r4 t H IAVII fr.. E LJ n oz. n st CI v , lt: NE -I tn PASt 14 a Eiii0 tt ...4$ .- N -4 -v 4: iiy . 5 4 E i:_herry N101,1).1 Lake J oor 1 an d .., Bay. t. y, 0 Teri it i.l' E Yesler ilea yi- Washington D.., S Jackson St u. ..,4 ),, , : ' i I* runnel Vel)...riSCOINISille. M erc it..' 0 7 si Seattle ' mont Beaux It 0 41) ma IN C 11 MAI , :,.. a ln f Ekiile,Art s .,loug h Ind TO-1) ' ). riwroli MI .iinit°„i F a 7ii: vU "I' .,(' 7 Ili 1-1111 90 .... ,.. ia. •-i.c eti tiukii ti, i1- Mercer . Nowcri SliNcArci. 4:11, 0 to o9 0.10. ii2,4 1 ,rat ,... Ctimithuo Isl and -.7 Laic ewood ... 1 1101 Anti t I IA I 1tits sve Roxbury 5t iing 1tih 1 kia get ind sw Ile% 51 Shirg-AicookiMmill Bevil St131.11$Mdt gig 3 In us c 8 EN' igi Seattle 1.11 Burien LJk flu.r•ef Minn% vv- corn 41011 $ Nom) an( I, I %I S 0 rca s 5t Orgiharn st 144 14111,1t Sewa rd Park: 1-1441V Iirk Ei7 4r, sceing N di King Cou y Interna I Airport I Iimt Project Site Lake Washington 1.,dom 11divt Saliba 1, 1 Renton Muni 1 itildlis .'-' I entrAi. Allil.',1111 Piiiit St, VV, ery r g..., Airport tri st ',, .:.- I....vng 04-4,..- ____ RIVtlt of N,, Ix e LAritil Ilar oth st 1 Tu I:wil a 'r.ctio,.§- ii, 1.) loin , - 0 - 1-4-It 't ( I ;-_ kV, tit III 11 J w A I s 0 Out 1.A tn nec e- al trt ... It; II, 4, 5 16001 Ai, .., Seatti > Tacan eC M el 7 ti 1 = z Internati v g q.... a ..w Alrpoit .w eu e -2 gii sTace t .&< ... 4. . ....0, Bellevue irt N ew cast le ix X lb g,111 an f Is a a r,irk a A c . Ni (edar t,11.1t, !VW' RentonIIII. NaNa Zone It 144 Mapim \ 4 a t \., . Scos C re, -. k 1441 Hill Park M111.I Trail Ll w I The nforrnation tickided on this mop has been compied bar Kng County staff from a variety of sources and is subject to change wthout notice. King County makes no representatbns or warranties, express or implied, as to accuracy, completeness, tineliness, or rights to the use of such informaticn. Ths document is rot intended br use as a survey product. Kng County shall rot be liable fa any general, special, indirect, incidental, or consequential damages indudng, but nct I inited to, bst revenues or bst profit resuting from the use or misuse ct the information contained on this map. My sale of ths map or infomiaficn on this map is prohitited except by writ302siai of Kirg County. Date: 3/15/2023 Notes: Chinook Wind Extension Project N Regional Map A 1.41 King County Exhibit II Grant Budget Request CAUTION! Download this document to your device, then fill out. Please do not overwrite this tempi download. Project Name: Chinook Wind Extension Project Expenses Total Project Costs Grant Request Stakeholder Outreach & Coordination $15,000 $12,000 Survey & Site Investigations (Cultural, H&H, Geo etc) $57,500 $46,000 Concept and Alternative Design Development $25,000 $20,000 Preliminary Design - 30% Plans and Cost $25,000 $20,000 Design Development - 60% Plans, Specs and Estimate $40,000 $32,000 90% Plans, Specs & Estimate $80,000 $64,000 Permit Application & Agency Coordination $45,000 $36,000 Final Design $45,000 $36,000 Administrative (indirect) costs $17,500 $14,000 Tax Total $350,000 $280,000 W O T1Upland riparian +� High and low 'marsh M.idtl # rid river Cbrnook W'nd. Cfi}rotr Easwi DremicerrgcorKe-iat desgrr sh+vwr«; liiruCcemgrii c-irrcnrrrdi a .rg abibariit:p. MriGhelf r TAMA, 004 rprdyNOkarA 11:1drieVileilY0151Dpworrhh r fneil Jr,i2O litEnTry/ par 4411 arCal pFjy -- R'* - Frilli-T"rmaili'lli'lliii . FriVQ d4G'Jk'te ira bilist rrj to to iavF. ' ' �, "� /fyr P7 rNIN, s "o.f� 5 r — if` �1• 1, rOr' 1:11PaNrb. P t'ri#ial link biIkib trail and Wirth Wind lair ExisI' ng bike trail Duipivarnish River •jr..ryi pang area T4 ChinvariliSli HM1r peowrvv TI:11 tort.g bik trail ej Sca a= = TOG' 0' 100' 200' Am OPPORTUNITIES FOR EXPANDED HABITAT ENHANCEMENT DUWAMISH GARDENS MAY 1 6e 2013 # h 1 La • 1 TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY: PREFERRED MASTER PLAN / / / / / / / / / PROPERTY LINE DECANT 4,400 SF BRINE TANKS / \ \ SPOILS L 8,265 SF CC CO CC = 00 0) a� SPOILS 9,765 SF >2747 fJ77 COVERED STORAGE 11,630 SF CO E (4 FLEET �) 10x3 PA 0 KI CO VE RED FEET FAfKI1�G (45 9x20 PROPOSED WETLAND BY KING COUNTY / UNCOVERED STORAGE -8,454 SF / 700 SF SOUTH 112TH STREET ORGANICS BINS 3,090 SF dll INTERIOR FLEET BU 3,150 SF C VERED FLEE (14)10x30, P RKIN )1 x45 ADMIN + SHOPS — 43,200 SF 22,690 SF FOOTPRINT _ _ ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,• FLEET MAINTENANCE 23,105 SF ADMIN + VISITOR PARKING FLEET MAINTENANCE PARKING DUWAMISH RIVER R 100' - 0" PROGRAM LEGEND ADMIN + SHOPS FLEET MAINTENANCE FLEET MAINTENANCE PARKING INTERIOR FLEET PARKING COVERED FLEET PARKING UNCOVERED FLEET PARKING DECANT + BRINE SPOILS COVERED STORAGE BULK BINS UNCOVERED STORAGE TUKWILA PUBLIC WORKS FACILITY STUDY ALL - HANDS MEETING 07 09 19 SHKSARCHITECTS 308 �aketshed Fit Fo Jt r9 O Green / Duwamish & Central Puget Sound Tier 1 Project: DUW-7a Chinook Wind Extension Park Public Inc. Area Lands - Boundary PROJECT FACTS Subwatershed: Duwamish (DUW) River mile: Duwamish RM 6.8/ right bank Bankside jurisdiction: City of Tukwila Project sponsor: City of Tukwila Budget: $1,418,000 PROJECT TYPE: Acquisition Restoration Planning/ Design KEY HABITAT: Duwamish Duwamish Mudflat Marsh 11) Edge Riparian PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Expand and enhance the land between Chinook Wind Mitigation and Duwamish Gardens to create a unified park and rest. Primary strategy Protect, restore, and enhance channel complexity and edge habitat. Benefits: • Increased habitat connectivity • Recreation opportunities • Sediment quality improvement Contribution to goals metrics: • DUW - Riparian forest • DUW - Shallow water habitat Project Area Map: Ortho2019KCNAT aerial photo KCIT-DCE file: 2010_10202L LPRE GIS file Q:\20009\WRIA9_ProjectMaps.mxd KLINKAT PAGE 106 Green-Duwamish and Central Puget Sound Watershed Salmon Habitat 2021 Update 309 King County Parks 2023 Open Space - River Corridors Grant Awards Council District Grant A City of Kent Boeing Rock Recreation / Habitat Enhancement 5 $200,000 City of Kent will conduct a feasibility study, alternatives analysis, planning, and outreach to restore salmon habitat, reduce flood risk, and enhance recreation at Boeing Rock Park. City of Tukwila Chinook Wind Extension 2 $280,000 The Chinook Wind Extension design project will create plans to connect shoreline habitat and a missing public trail link between Duwamish Gardens and Chinook Wind parks in Tukwila. City of Woodinville Wilmot Gateway Park Boat Launch Ramp 3 $250,000 The City of Woodinville will explore the future construction of passive recreation opportunities, including a nonmotorized boat launch and habitat restoration. EarthCorps Duwamish River Restoration in Tukwila 2 $679,977 EarthCorps will employ a community co -design approach and environmental justice lens to work with local high school students, community members, and other partners to restore important riparian habitat at multiple sites along the Duwamish River in Tukwila. King County Parks and Recreation Auburn Narrows Natural Area Expansion 9 $132,075 This acquisition will preserve and expand the large open space corridor along the Green River by purchasing undeveloped mature forest land adjacent to the Auburn Narrows Natural Area near the City of Auburn. King County Parks and Recreation Kanaskat Natural Area In- Holding Acquisition 9 $410,000 This acquisition will purchase the last 3.5 acres of privately owned land within Kanaskat Natural Area along the Green River, which will allow for public access and extensive restoration at the site. King County Parks and Recreation Middle Fork Snoqualmie River Access Improvements 3 $894,900 The Middle Fork Snoqualmie River Access Improvements project will provide sustainable river access at two parks by constructing a new designated kayaking access in Tanner Landing Park and a new universally accessible trail and toilet building at Granite Creek Flats, while also restoring the riparian buffer at both sites. King County Parks and Recreation South Fork Snoqualmie River Acquisition 3 $1,000,000 The South Fork Snoqualmie River project will acquire a conservation easement on approximately 350 acres of undeveloped forested land along the South Fork Snoqualmie River to protect the land from future development and to allow low -impact public use. 310 King County WLRD Middle Green River Open Space Acquisition 9 $900,000 The Middle Green River Open Space Acquisition project will promote future habitat restoration projects and foster environmental education and recreation opportunities. King County WLRD NE Auburn Creek Restoration 7 $1,000,000 The NE Auburn Creek Restoration project will remove an existing fish passage barrier, rehabilitate degraded floodplain habitat, and revegetate a critical section of riparian buffer to increase the size, accessibility, and quality of crucial rearing habitat for salmon in the Lower Green River. King County WLRD Rutledge Johnson Floodplain Restoration 9 $583,149 The Rutledge Johnson Floodplain Restoration project will reconnect up to 16 acres of Lower Cedar River floodplain, with the goal of restoring riverine processes that benefit salmonids including Chinook, coho, and steelhead, while also providing passive recreation adjacent to the Cedar River Trail. King County WLRD S Fork Skykomish - Miller River Restoration Design 3 $550,000 This habitat restoration design project will support endangered salmonids within the floodplain by removing artificial constraints to restore hydrologic function at the confluence of the South Fork Skykomish and Miller Rivers. King County WLRD Snoqualmie at Fall City Acquisition 3 $ 1,000,000 The Snoqualmie at Fall City project will acquire approximately 130 acres at the confluence of the Snoqualmie and Raging Rivers for future restoration of floodplain function, improved salmon habitat, reduction of flood and erosion risks, and public access. Seattle Parks Foundation West Duwamish Greenbelt Vision/ Concept Plan 8 $770,000 The Seattle Parks Foundation and the Ridge to River Coalition will engage the Duwamish Valley and West Seattle communities to articulate a vision for the West Duwamish Greenbelt as a natural and cultural resource, and to motivate future improvements of the Greenbelt. Snoqualmie Indian Tribe Snoqualmie 3-Forks Riparian Enhancement 3 $63,020 The Snoqualmie Tribe will build on past efforts by the Tribe and partners to improve riparian conditions in the 3-Forks reach of the Snoqualmie River, while preserving public access to a treasured community resource. 311 Stewardship Partners Wallace Acres Riparian Restoration 3 $49,500 Stewardship Partners will provide a voluntary agricultural landowner with technical assistance for implementing riparian habitat restoration and water quality improvement. The project will be promoted through community education and engagement with partners such as Nature Vision, Forterra, and local school groups. Whale Scout Community -Led Sammamish River Restoration I $177,483 Whale Scout will improve water quality for salmon and other wildlife, increase access, and encourage stewardship of public lands and waterways by engaging the community in restoration of the Sammamish River at the former Wayne Golf Course in Bothell. Total I7 projects $8,940, 104 312 City of Tukwila City Council Transportation & Infrastructure Services Committee Meeting Minutes October 16, 2023 5:30 p.m. - Hybrid Meeting; Duwamish Conference Room & MS Teams Councilmembers Present: Tosh Sharp, Chair; Kate Kruller, Mohamed Abdi Staff Present: Hari Ponnekanti, Catrien de Boer, David Baus, Cyndy Knighton, Griffin Lerner, Adam Cox, Sherry Edquid, Laurel Humphrey I. PRESENTATIONS II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Consultant Contract: 2024 Annual Overlay Program Staff is seeking Council approval of a contract with KPG Psomas, Inc. in the amo0unt of $149,383.03 for construction of the 2024 Annual Overlay Program. Committee Recommendation Unanimous approval. Forward to October 23, 2023 Special Consent Agenda. B. Grant Agreement: Landslide Risk Assessment Management Phase I Staff is seeking Council approval of a grant award from FEMA Cooperating Technical Partners in the amount of $150,000 to fund the project Committee Recommendation Unanimous approval. Forward to October23, 2023 Special Consent Agenda. C. Grant Agreement: Chinook Wind Extension Staff is seeking Council approval of a King County Parks Open Space - River Corridors grant *award of $280,000 to fund the design of the Chinook Wind Extension Project. Committee Recommendation Unanimous approval. Forward to November 6, 2023 Regular Meeting. D. Briefing on Concrete Overlay Repairs Grant Applications Staff updated the Committee on the submission of three applications to the WSDOT National Highway System Asset Management Grant Program for major overlay and pavement repair at locations on Boeing Access Road, Interurban Avenue South, and Orillia Road. Committee Recommendation Discussion only. E. Annual Bridge Inspections and Repairs Staff provided an update on the status of the City's bridge program and inventory. Committee Recommendation Discussion only. 313 314 COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Initials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 11/6/23 BJM ITEM INFORMATION ITEM NO. 7 STAFF SPONSOR: B.MILES ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 11/6/23 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Motion to settle the Unico litigation as recommended in the staff memo and to direct the City Attorney and staff to take the necessary steps to implement the settlement. CATEGORY ® Discussion Mtg Date 11/6/23 ® Motion Mtg Date 11/6/23 ❑ Resolution Mtg Date 111 Ordinance bltg Date ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ❑ Public Hearing Mtg Date ❑ Other Mtg Date SPONSOR ❑ Council ® Mayor ❑ Admin Svcs ❑ DCD Finance ❑ Fire ❑ P&R ❑ Police ❑ PW SPONSOR'S SUMMARY The City of Tukwila owns King County parcel 242304-9034 located just north of Tukwila Sounder Station in the Southcenter District. The City purchased the property in 2002. In the mid-1990s the previous owner of the property secured a parking easement on an adjacent parcel in the City of Renton. The parking was related to a convention center that was envisioned on the City owned parcel and other parcels in the area. The convention center project was abandoned. Unico has filed suit seeking to remove the easement. REVIEWED BY D Trans&Infrastructure Svcs ❑ Community Svcs/Safety ❑ Finance & Governance ❑ Planning & Community Dev. ❑ LTAC ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. DATE: N/A COMMITTEE CHAIR: N/A RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR/ADMIN. Mayor's Office COMMITTEE N/A COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED $N/A AMOUNT BUDGETED $N/A APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $N/A Fund Source: N/A Comments: The City will receive $1,500 as part of the settlement agreement. MTG. DATE 11/6/23 RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 11/6/23 Informational Memorandum dated October 30, 2023. 315 316 TO: FROM: CC: DATE: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Tukwila City Council Brandon Miles, Business Relations Manager Mayor Ekberg October 30, 2023 SUBJECT: Settlement Agreement with Unico Properties ISSUE Authorize the Mayor to settle a lawsuit with Unico properties regarding a City easement. BACKGROUND The City of Tukwila owns King County parcel 242304-9034 located just north of Tukwila Sounder Station in the Southcenter District. The City purchased the property in 2002. In the mid-1990s the previous owner of the property secured a parking easement on an adjacent parcel in the City of Renton ("Renton Parcel"). The parking was related to a convention center that was envisioned on the City owned parcel and other parcels in the area. The convention center project was abandoned. Unico Properties has purchased the Renton Parcel and has filed suit against the City seeking to terminate the easement on its property. DISCUSSION City Administration does not believe that the easement on the Renton Property adds any value to the City property. To defend the easement the City would have to expend a significant amount of amount of funds in legal services. Unico has offered a $1,500 financial payment to the City to compensate the City for a portion of its legal fees to settle the suit. This is the same amount that has been offered to other property owners. FINANCIAL IMPACT The City will receive $1,500 in compensation to settle the easement lawsuit. RECOMMENDATION Authorize the Mayor to settle the Unico lawsuit related to the easement on the Renton Property. 317 318 T0: City of Tukwila Allan Ekberg, Mayor Mayor's Office - David Cline, City Administrator The City of opportunity, the community of choice Mayor Ekberg Councilmembers FROM: David Cline, City Administrator DATE: October 31, 2023 SUBJECT: City Administrator's Report The City Administrator Report is meant to provide the Council, staff and community with an update on the activities of the City and on issues that concern Tukwila. Please let me know if you have any questions or need additional information about any of the following items. I. Intergovernmental Update • AWC Mayors Meeting: Mayor Ekberg participated in a South End/South Valley/AWC District 13 Mayors meeting in Auburn on October 10. • WCIA Board Meeting: City Administrator Cline participated in a Washington Cities Insurance Authority (WCIA) Board meeting on October 20. • Cowlitz Tribe Mobile MAT Van Ceremony: On October 24 Mayor Ekberg and Councilmember Kruller participated in a ceremony honoring the Cowlitz Tribe's new Mobile MAT Van that will be operating out of the Cowlitz Tribe Tukwila Clinic. • Starfire Sports 20th Anniversary Event: Mayor Ekberg, Councilmembers Hougardy, Kruller, McLeod and Sharp, City Administrator Cline and Economic Development staff participated in the 20th Anniversary event at Starfire Sports on October 24. • Sound Cities Association Networking Dinner: Mayor Ekberg and Councilmembers Hougardy, Kruller and Sharp attended a Sound Cities Association Networking Dinner on October 25. II. Community Events • Fall Carnival: Parks & Recreation hosted the first Fall Carnival since 2019. The carnival was a huge success with nearly 500 people attending. Carnival activities included carnival games, bounce houses, pumpkin painting, cookie walk, candy crawl, toddler area, and the hugely popular haunted walk. In addition, staff helped families make s'mores, the Tukwila Children's Foundation provided popcorn, and there was even an ice cream truck. A partnership with Metro Parks Tacoma also brought their mobile demonstration kitchen where chefs prepared pumpkin fettucine. Tukwila City Hall • 6200 Southcenter Boulevard • Tukwila, WA 98188 • 206-433-1800 • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 319 City Administrator's Report October 31, 2023 Page 2 • Duwamish Alive: Duwamish Alive was a huge success with over 35 volunteers. Olena Perry, Parks Commissioner Sean Albert, and Friends of Hill led the event. Councilmember Kruller spoke about the last 20 years at the Hill. Crews prepped and seeded 800 square feet with native wildflowers and planted trees and drought -tolerant native shrubs. M. Staff Updates Public Safety • Meeting with Tukwila School District: On October 12 Chief Dreyer met with Dr. Concie Pedroza Interim Superintendent of the Tukwila School District regarding the School Resource Officer program. • Preparedness Kits Distributed at Tukwila Schools: Emergency Management, with the help of Fleet and Facilities, delivered over 150 grant funded preparedness kits to Tukwila schools. Project Updates • 2023 Annual Overlay Program: Estimated Completion: Oct 2023 The Annual Overlay program is a maintenance program focused on keeping the City's streets in good or better condition for both vehicular and pedestrian traffic. Construction started on July 10, 2023. The following streets are in the program and have the following updates: o S. 139th St., 51st Ave. S, 52nd Ave S, S. 137th St. - Asphalt overlay and the new chain link fence transition at 53rd/139th have been completed. Crosswalks are complete but advance warning signs may be a few weeks out. O 32nd Ave. S, 33rd Pl S - Asphalt overlay has been completed. We have noted a small sink hole near the north end of the 32nd scope that will need additional attention. o S 140th St. - Asphalt overlay and replacement of the asphalt speed humps between 33rd Place and 35th Avenue have been completed. O 35th Ave. S - Asphalt overlay has been completed. o S. 142nd St., 37th Ave. S - Water District 125 waterline installation on these streets is complete and final overlay has been placed. Edge restoration and casting adjustments are complete except at S 140th St. o S. 144th St. - All work is complete at this location. O 42nd/119th Pedestrian Crossing - The majority of the work at this crossing has been completed. Final channelization is complete. Installation of the project signs, flashing beacons and handrail remain. RRFB placement expected in January. The low concrete strength of the raised crosswalks has been resolved. • Park Stewardship: o Homeschool Squad Steward Heidi Watters led a small group at Cottonwood Corner, fighting blackberries. o Big Picture hosted its second Service -Learning Day at Crystal Springs Park and got 30 understory plants in the ground. Phone: 206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor@TukwilaWA.gov • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 320 City Administrator's Report October 31, 2023 Page 3 Boards, Commissions and Committees • Arts Commission: The next meeting is scheduled for November 29, 2023. VACANT: Student Representative. • Civil Service Commission: The next meeting is scheduled for November 16, 2023. 1 Resident position term expires December 31, 2023. No vacancies. • COPCAB: The next meeting is scheduled for November 9, 2023. 1 Resident position term expires December 31, 2023. 1 Business Representative position term expires December 31, 2023. VACANT: 1 Business Representative position, 1 School District Representative and Student Representative. • Equity & Social Justice Commission: The next meeting is scheduled for November 2, 2023. 1 City Council position term expires December 31, 2023. 2 Education position terms expire December 31, 2023. 1 Community position term expires December 31, 2023. 1 City Employee position term expires December 31, 2023. VACANT: 1 Education/Community Representative. • Human Services Advisory Board: The next meeting is scheduled for November 16, 2023. 1 Resident position term expires December 31, 2023. 1 Business position term expires December 31, 2023. VACANT: 1 Resident position and 1 Business Community Representative. • Library Advisory Board: The next meeting is scheduled for November 14, 2023. 3 Resident position terms expire December 31, 2023. No vacancies. • Lodging Tax Advisory Committee: The next meeting is scheduled for November 17, 2023. All positions are 1-year terms. VACANT: 1 Business Collecting Tax Representative and 1 Funded by Tax Representative. • Park Commission: The next meeting is scheduled for November 8, 2023. 2 Community position terms expire December 31, 2023. VACANT: 1 Community Member. • Planning Commission: The next meeting is scheduled for November 9, 2023. 1 Business position term expires December 31, 2023. 3 Resident position terms expire December 31, 2023. No vacancies. Phone: 206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor@TukwilaWA.gov • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 321 City Administrator's Report October 31, 2023 Page 4 IV. Responses to Council/Community Inquiries Date of Inquiry Inquiry Response October 16, 2023 During public comment a concern was expressed about fire permit fees for solar installations. Puget Sound Fire representatives met with the commentor on October 23 and will work with the city to evaluate the solar permitting system. October 16, 2023 During public comment a resident shared concerns about activity on neighboring property in Foster Point. Code Enforcement opened a case regarding parking and garbage violations. Both the Police Department and Code Enforcement have been in communication with the residents. Phone: 206-433-1800 • Email: Mayor@TukwilaWA.gov • Website: TukwilaWA.gov 322 City of Tukwila - Public Works Fleet & Facilities TOTAL PROJECT MONTHLY Budget Report (REVISED Budget; D-20 Plan Adopted by Council) Life to Date Costs as of October 30, 2023 (reconciled w/acctg thru March 7, 2023 GL) COUNCIL REPORTING SUMMARY - PUBLIC WORKS Original Budget Budget Transfers Current Budget Committed Budget Life to Date Costs Remain'g Committed Remaining Budget A/E Services (Design & CA) Permits/Fees Construction Construction (Tax) Construction Related Costs PM Services (incl Other Professional Svcs) Contingency (incl Construction & Project) $ 670,768 $ 130,000 $ 6,715,000 $ 662,618 $ 378,186 $ 350,000 $ 843,437 $ 70,625 $ 51,886 $ 1,090,142 $ 124,500 $ 81,261 $ 188,442 $ (606,856) $ 741,393 $ 181,886 $ 7,805,142 $ 787,118 $ 459,447 $ 538,442 $ 236,581 $ 741,393 $ 181,886 $ 7,805,141 $ 755,602 $ 404,413 $ 538,442 $ - $ 734,309 $ 181,886 $ 7,805,141 $ 755,602 $ 393,516 $ 538,430 $ - $ 7,084 $ - $ (0) $ 0 $ 10,897 $ 11 $ - $ - $ (0) $ 0 $ 31,516 $ 55,034 $ 0 $ 236,581 SUBTOTAL -CURRENT MANAGED PROJECT $ 9,750,008 $ 1,000,000 $ 10,750,008 $ 10,426,877 $ 10,408,885 $ 17,992 $ 323,131 Previously Managed Svcs (Land,A/E,Bond,Demo) $ 25,949,992 $ - $ 25,949,992 $ 25,936,198 $ 25,936,198 $ - $ 13,794 TOTAL -COMBINED PROJECT $ 35,700,000 $ 1,000,000 $ 36,700,000 $ 36,363,075 $ 36,345,083 $ 17,992 $ 336,925 324 UPCOMING MEETINGS AND EVENTS NOVEMBER 2023 City Council meetings and Council Committee meetings will be conducted in a hybrid model, with in -person and virtual attendance available. NOV6 MON NOV7 TUE NOV8 WED NOV9 THU NOV10 FRI NOV11 SAT I. ➢ Planning and Community Development Committee 5:30 PM City Hall - Hazelnut Room Hybrid Meeting ➢ Transportation and Infrastructure Services Committee 5:30 PM 6300 Building - 2"d Floor Duwamish Conference Room Hybrid Meeting ➢ City Council Regular Meeting 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers Hybrid Meeting Ballots today dropbox Click 8:30 King 919 SW Click Tukwila and Si Rescheduled } Yoe must be postmarked by or returned to a ballot by8:00 PM today.Join here for information. AM — 8:00 PM County Elections Grady Way, Renton here to know the candidates for Mayor Council positions. to 11/14 GREEN TUKPARWILA RESTORATION AT RIVERTON PARK Forest Steward Debbie to clean up invasive plants. 11:30 AM — 1:30 PM Riverton Park 13263 Macadam Rd S Click here to register. GREEN 4 , TUKRSHIP WILA RSHIP PLANTING AT RIVERTON CREEK AT COTTONWOOD CORNER Join Forest Steward Heidi to add native plants. 11:00VETERANS AM — 2:00 PM Riverton Creek 37" Ave S and S 128' St Click here to register. EV VETERANS DAY EVENT Join us to honor our veterans and their families. Complimentary lunch and entertainment will be provided. 11:OO AM - 2:OO PM Tukwila Community Center 12424 42ntl Ave S ➢Special Planning Commission 6:30 PM Hybrid Meeting ➢ Community Oriented Policing Citizens Advisory Board 6:30 PM Hybrid Meeting -` HAPPY Matt SPIRIT ��, GIVI NG ��aLitt/e, He/paLot Tukwila Parks & Recreation and Rotary Club of SeaTac- Tukwila are collecting donations to help approximately 400 Tukwila children in need. Donate by Dec 1! Click here for information. GREEN TUKWILA P> -- , HEAL OUR HABITAT Join us to remove invasive plants like English ivy and Himalayan blackberry. 10:00 AM - 1:00 PM Tukwila Park 15460 65' Ave S Click here to register. DAY HONORING ALL WHO SERVED City offices closed. CRYSTAL SPRINGS PARK Join us to plant Tukwila's future forest! 10:00 AM - 1:00 PM Crystal Springs Park 15832 51. Ave S Click here to register. Tukwila Village Farmers Market Wednesdays 3-6 p.m. through Nov. 8 Sullivan Center at Tukwila Village Plaza <„o.................a.,...,,,-..k.,-., ➢Park Commission 5:30 PM Hybrid Meeting NOV13 MON NOV14 TUE NOV15 WED NOV16 THU NOV17 FRI NOV18 SAT ➢ Community Services and Safety Committee 5:30 PM CityHall- Hazelnut Room Hybrid Meeting ➢Finance and Governance Committee 5:30 PM 6300 Building - Suite 100 Foster Conference Room Hybrid Meeting ➢ City Council Committee of the Whole Meeting 7:00 PM City Hall Council Chambers Hybrid Meeting Special Meeting to follow Committee of the Whole Meeting. ,got FINANCE CLASS FOR SENIORS Free classes for seniors. Register now due to limited 9 space! 11/14 Choose a Financial Caregiver 12/12 Choose an Executor Tukwila Community Center 12424 42n° Ave S Click here to register. ➢Civil Service Commission 5:00 PM Hybrid Meeting flr T SOUNDTRANSR COMPLETE THE SURVEY TO WIN UP TO $250 Take Sound Transit's 15-minute passenger experience survey and win up to $250! Your Sound Trainpunsit will it to help prioritize efforts to provide a better passenger experience.11:30 Other languages are available. Survey ends on Nov 22. Click here for the survey. . Public Health GREEN j TUKWILA PARTNERIP GREEN TUKWILA DAY Dig in and help plant an understory bush or shrub that will become a safe place for urban wildlife. Many hands make light work. Live music with the BusKings. AM - 1:30 PM Riverton Park 13263 Macadam Rd S Click here to register. Give eioo4 = Save 3 dues TC` DONATE BLOOD AND ENTER TO WIN 2 VIP TICKETS TO SEE MACKLEMOREI It takes 1,000 donors a day to sustain a blood supply for patients in our community. Click here to schedule an appointment. Or call 1.800-398-7888. ALLENTOWN TRUCK RE-ROUTE COMMUNITY MEETING The City is developing an Environmental lmpact Statement (EIS) to evaluate alternatives to reroute existing BNSF truck traffic in Allentown. Join us and provide input. 5:30 PM Tukwila Community Center 12424 42n" Ave S Click here for information. ➢ Special Library Advisory Board 6:30 PM Hybrid Meeting Seattle a King county Open enrollment for health insurance starts Nov 1, and now everyone in WA State can purchase health and dental insurance regardless of immigration status. Click here for information. " ws CITY HALL & 6300 BUILDINGS ARE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC MONDAYS, WEDNESDAYS & THURSDAYS 8:30 AM - 4:00 PM zc NEIGHBORHOOD WATCH GROUP HELP Police Community Engagement Coordinator can help to create a neighborhood watch group in your neighborhood and apartments. Click here to email Brooke Lamothe. FREE CRIME PREVENTION SURVEY FOR BUSINESSES TO ENHANCE SECURITY Police Community Engagement Coordinator will visit your business to conduct a security assessment and recommend making your business more secure. Allow up to 2 weeks for an appointment date confirmation. Click here to make an appointment. FOOD BANK OPENS: TUESDAYS, THURSDAYS AND SATURDAYS 10:00 AM - 2:30 PM 3118 S 140TH ST, TUKWILA Tj 'w''''� VOLUNTEERS - In need of volunteers for food packaging or food distributions. To volunteer, click here to sign up. "`r 1' DONORS - Please donate at tukwilapantry.org/please-donate/. Donations can be dropped off on Tuesday -Saturday from 8 AM -11 AM or by appointment. STILL WATERS SNACK PACK NEEDS YOUR DONATIONS AND VOLUNTEER HELP! `t ,1,. SnackPack distributes food bags on Fridays to Tukwila students in need. Click here for the Snack Pack list. VOLUNTEERS NEEDED ON WEDNESDAYS. Pack snacks every Wednesday at 9:30 AM. `-, To volunteer, email Stillwatersfamilyservices@gmail.com. To deliver food, click here to register with Tukwila School District. Please donate to feed Tukwila kids. Click here to donate to Still Waters, PO Box 88984, Tukwila WA 98138. ❑ =t ❑ 4��� 1 ', _eq., k ,❑ `,1-4 o ~ our online or mail checks RecologyCall RTUKWILA SOLID WASTE SERVICE STARTS ON NOV 1 WITH RECOLOGY r If you have any outstanding questions regarding your solid waste service change, the Recology customer service team will be happy to assist you. customer service at 206-944-3900 or email Tukwila@Recology.com. City of Tukwila provides 50% discount to eligible residents. Click here for information and to apply online. 325 326 I Tentative Agenda Schedule MEETING 1 — REGULAR MEETING 2 — C.O.W. MEETING 3 — REGULAR MEETING 4 — C.O.W. NOVEMBER 6 See below link for the agenda packet to view the agenda items: November 6, 2023 Regular Meeting NOVEMBER 13 PUBLIC HEARING - Tax Levy Legislation: (1) An ordinance levying the general taxes for the City commencing 1/1/2024. (2) An ordinance increasing the regular levy commencing 1/1/2024. - An ordinance amending the 2023-2024 Biennial Budget. SPECIAL ISSUES - Tax Levy Legislation: (1) An ordinance levying the general taxes for the City commencing 1/1/2024. (2) An ordinance increasing the regular levy commencing 1/1/2024. - An ordinance amending the 2023-2024 Biennial Budget. - Contract for Investment Grade Audit for Tukwila Community Center HVAC Replacement project. - Economic Development Strategy. - A resolution fixing the time for a public hearing for vacation of right-of-way within the City of Tukwila dedicated for street purposes (35th Avenue South). - Public Works Operations Campus: Phase 2 Project update. Special Meeting to follow Committee of the Whole meeting. CONSENT AGENDA - A resolution fixing the time for a public hearing for vacation of right-of-way within the City of Tukwila dedicated for street purposes (35th Avenue South). - Authorize the Mayor to accept a NPDES grant from Washington State Department of Ecology in the amount of $130,000.00. - A resolution on 2023 Fleet Surplus. - Authorize the Mayor to sign Supplemental Agreement for the Transportation Element of the Comprehensive Plan, in the amount of $249,705.00. - Authorize the Mayor to sign a contract for a local road safety plan in the amount of $249,705.00. NOVEMBER 20 CONSENT AGENDA - An ordinance designating Puget Sound Fire as the Fire Chief and Fire Marshal for the City of Tukwila. - Authorize the Mayor to sign an amendment to the Interlocal Agreement with Puget Sound Fire. UNFINISHED BUSINESS - Tax Levy Legislation: (1) An ordinance levying the general taxes for the City commencing 1/1/2024. (2) An ordinance increasing the regular levy commencing 1/1/2024. - An ordinance amending the 2023-2024 Biennial Budget. - Contract for Investment Grade Audit for Tukwila Community Center HVAC Replacement project. - Approve 1.25 FTE (full-time employee) for the Tukwila Municipal Court for staffing the Automated Traffic Safety Camera Program, to be included in the mid -biennium budget amendment. NOVEMBER 27 SPECIAL ISSUES - Contract for Tukwila Community Center Business Plan and Recreation Programming. - Community Health and Wellness Center Project update. - Amendment to Business & Occupation Tax Ordinance. - An ordinance involving avoidance of intersections. - Franchise Agreement with Valley View Sewer District. - An ordinance modifying Lodging and Tax Advisory Committee makeup and operation. I MEETING 1 — REGULAR MEETING 2 — C.O.W. MEETING 3 — REGULAR MEETING 4 — C.O.W. DECEMBER 4 CONSENT AGENDA - Contract for Tukwila Community Center Business Plan and Recreation Programming. - Franchise Agreement with Valley View Sewer District. - An ordinance modifying Lodging and Tax Advisory Committee makeup and operation. - Southcenter Boulevard & 65th Avenue South Signal Design Contract Award. PUBLIC HEARINGS - An ordinance for vacation of right-of-way within the City of Tukwila dedicated for street purposes (35th Avenue South). UNFINISHED BUSINESS - An ordinance for vacation of right-of-way within the City of Tukwila dedicated for street purposes (35th Avenue South). - Amendment to Business & Occupation Tax Ordinance. - An ordinance involving avoidance of intersections. - Authorize the Mayor to sign a grant agreement with King County for the Best Starts for Kids Capital grant, in the amount of $500,000.00. DECEMBER 11 SPECIAL ISSUES Resolutions of Service Appreciation for Councilmembers Hougardy and Delostrinos Johnson. Special Meeting to follow Committee of the Whole meeting. CONSENT AGENDA - Resolutions of Service Appreciation for Councilmembers Hougardy and Delostrinos Johnson. - Authorize the Mayor to sign a contract for signal design for Southcenter Boulevard and 65th Avenue South, in the amount of $100,000.00. - Award a bid and authorize the Mayor to sign a contract for the Green River Trail Connector Project in the amount of $1,300,000.00. DECEMBER 18 DECEMBER 25 J;1- ,,, a, 's City offices and Community Center closed.