Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2008-02-11 Item 4C - Ordinance - Zoning and Sudivision Codes for Zero-Lot Line Townhouse Development -T� COUNCIL A GENDA SYNOPSIS ti ITE1�z iZ O; Initiat P1 X1 10 !Meeting Date Prepared by I Mayor's review I Council review I f� 0� 02/11/08 1 JP I X13 1 02/19/08 1 JP I 1 1 ITEM INFORMATION CAS NUMBER: 08-017 IORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: FEBRUARY 11, 2008 AGENDA ITEM TITLE Townhouse Zoning and Subdivision Code Amendments. C:\TIEGORY Discussion Motion 1 1 Resolution Ordinance Bid Award Public Hearing Other ll Date 2 /11 /08 lltg Date !lltg Date Mtg Date 2/19/08 lltg Date Mtg Date 02/11/08 Mfg Date SPONSOR Council n Mayor Adret Svcs DCD n Finance 1 1 Fire Iiedal P&R 1 1 Police n PIV SPONSOR'S The proposal is to amend the zoning and subdivision codes to allow for development of SLIMM: \RY zero -lot line townhomes in MDR and HDR zones. Rt vIE \vED BY COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte 1 1 F &S Cmte n Transportation Cmte Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm. DAI'E: 1 -28 -08 (CAP), 6- 28 -07, 11 -08- 07,12 -13 -07 (PC) RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. Hold the public hearing on the proposed draft ordinance. COMMITTEE Unanimous Approval; Forward to Committee of the Whole COST IMPACT FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT B UDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED Fund Source: N/A Comments: MTG. DATE I RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 02/11/08 I MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 02 -11 -08 Information memo dated 02 -01 -08 with attachments, to include draft Ordinance Minutes from Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting of 01- 28 -08. I I INFORMATION MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Haggerton Committee of the Whole FROM: Jack Pace, DCD Director DATE: February 1, 2008 SUBJECT: Townhouse Zoning and Subdivision Code Amendments ISSUE Should the Zoning and Subdivision Codes be changed to allow for development of zero -lot line /fee simple townhomes on individual lots (lot lines would run through the buildings)? Due to MDR and HDR development standards such as minimum lot sizes and side yard setback requirements only condominiums or apartments can be built in our multi family zones, though they could be built in townhouse form. BACKGROUND DCD has periodically been approached by developers interested in building zero -lot line or fee simple townhomes. Developers think that there is a stronger market for this type of housing on individually owned lots rather than as condominiums and the insurance requirements for condominiums make many small projects unfeasible. Providing for an additional type of housing ownership (townhouses on individual zero -lot line lots) would expand the housing options of Tukwila's residents and provide multi family property owners an alternative to apartment development. In addition to the technical changes needed to create individual townhouse lots changes to Tukwila's bulk and coverage limitations may encourage the market to provide townhouses. Because townhouses are typically significantly larger than stacked apartments and condominiums under the current code requirements fewer townhouse units than apartments could be built on a given site, making them a less attractive development option. The Planning Commission held a hearing on June 28 and recommended a few changes to the staff's proposal. The second hearing was held on November 8, 2007, to finalize the Townhouse Design Guidelines. On December 13, 2007, the Planning Commission forwarded the proposed changes to City Council. Staff presented the Planning Commission's recommendation to the Community Affairs and Parks (CAP) Committee on January 28, 2008. Following items were discussed at the meeting or have come up since the meeting: Councilmember Hernandez asked staff to clarify if the proposed projects will have to meet all design guidelines or were some guidelines optional. The Zoning Code MD Page 1 02 -01 -2008 Q: \Townhomes \COW- 02 -11 -08 Townhouse.DOC includes design criteria for multi family projects and any proposed project has to meet all of the listed criteria. The multifamily design manual and the townhouse design manual provide examples and guidance as to how to meet the intent of the criteria. The multifamily design review criteria are not proposed to be changed as part of this code amendment. See the draft ordinance (attachment A) for the design review criteria. Councilmember Griffin asked staff to include a map of the areas of the city where townhouses are likely to be developed. See attachment F. It was also decided to include in the Council packet a copy of comments submitted by Mike Overbeck, a potential developer. See attachment G. Since the committee meeting staff had a couple of preapplication meetings with developers and as a result of those discussions, staff has added some clarifying language to the MDR and HDR development standards. This relates to minimum lot area per unit standard. For townhouses to be considered compatible to condominiums, the density shall be calculated based on one unit per 3000 sq. ft. (in MDR) and 2000 sq. ft. (in HDR) of the "parent lot area However the "unit lot" shall be allowed to include the common access easements. ANALYSIS Due to Tukwila's prevailing pattern of narrow, deep lots in most infill situations townhouses would be perpendicular to the street, rather than the traditional row house with stoops along the street and alley access behind. Below is an example of a typical market driven design for ten units on an 80'x240' infill lot showing the dashed individual parcel lines through the buildings. a 1 1 1 I 1 1 t_ t t I 1 1 1 �.s i i r F 1 1 F 1 1 t t t „41: 1 j s s I' f —i— t i See Attachment D for examples of townhouses in Tukwila and Renton. See Attachment E for a comparison of Tukwila's current multi family standards to townhouse standards in other cities. The shaded cells on the chart are areas where staff is suggesting changes. Staff circulated the discussion of proposed changes to a few developers who have expressed an interest in townhouse development in Tukwila. Their feedback has been used to shape the Planning Commission recommended changes which are grouped by subject area and discussed below. These include both the minimum changes necessary to allow MID Page 2 02 -01 -08 Q: \Towthomes \COW- 02 -11 -08 Townhouse.DOC platting of townhouse lots as well as additional changes that would bring Tukwila's standards closer to prevailing market driven development patterns. Subdivision Code The recommended approach to the subdivision process is to follow Seattle's example in treating townhouse and cottage housing projects similarly to a binding site plan. This would apply lot size, lot width, setback and landscape standards to the original "parent" parcel rather than the "unit" lots that contain the individual townhomes. This would result in the same treatment adjacent to the neighboring properties while allowing a different ownership pattern. Other than that change both the short plat and subdivision platting process could follow the standard procedure with preliminary approval, infrastructure construction, final approval and then building permit. We would allow the building foundations to be constructed prior to fmal approval along with the rest of the site improvements so that the lot lines could be drawn accurately through the existing common walls. If the buildings are constructed after the plat sometimes field conditions require boundary line adjustments to meet the as built conditions. MDR/HDR Zoning Standards In addition to the technical changes needed to allow platting of townhouse sized lots the Planning Commission recommends the following modifications to the bulk and coverage requirements to allow for a more market driven development pattern and density closer to what is achievable for stacked apartments or condominiums. Setbacks Setback requirements should be applied to the parent lot rather than the unit lots since their purpose is to protect neighboring properties. The front and second front setbacks would not increase for the third or fourth floors unless the adjacent property was zoned LDR. The side and rear setbacks would not increase for the second and third floor but would increase only for fourth floor or if adjacent to LDR. This would still provide a buffer to the adjacent property while allowing for consistent floor plans for the townhouses. A new building separation standard would be adopted for townhouse buildings of 10' for 2 story buildings and 20' for 3 and 4 story buildings. Modulation Because townhouse units are generally narrow the existing modulation requirements would pose a significant constraint on the design. In exchange for shorter allowable building lengths (80' in MDR and 125' in HDR) the 4 foot modulation requirements would not be increased for three and four story townhouse buildings. MD Page 3 02 -01 -08 Q: \Townhomes \COW- 02 -11 -08 Townhouse.DOC Development Coverage It is not possible to achieve zoned density with a typical townhouse product under the 50% development coverage limitation. Townhouses are typically twice as large as an average apartment usually with 2 to 3 bedrooms and a garage. The recommended 75% development coverage would be similar to the impervious surface limitations common in other jurisdictions. Recreation Space Setback areas that are part of a private yard for an individual unit would be allowed to count toward the 400 sq. ft. per unit recreation space requirement as long as it measured at least 10' on all sides. Since the small private yards are generally fenced the height of opaque fences along street frontages should be limited to 4 feet, with lattice or other open material allowed up to 6 feet. s ,s Pri vate yard that includes side yard setback area The current requirement for at least 25% of the recreation space to be devoted to shared children's play areas would start with developments of ten or more lots. This would ensure that the play area is large enough to be usable and that there is a critical mass of owners to share the burden of maintenance and liability insurance. Detached zero -lot line units The townhouse definition covers attached units, but there has been interest to develop detached compact single family units in MDR zone. Staff is recommending adding a definition of detached zero lot line dwelling units and permitting these type of developments in MDR zone subject to design review approval and meeting the recreation space requirements of a townhouse. The zero lot line type of development pattern allows houses to be constructed immediately adjacent to one side lot line (no side yard setback), coupled with an easement on the adjacent lot for maintenance purposes. This helps preserve privacy and usable yard space, especially in small lot areas. Design Review The existing Multi- Family Design Guidelines booklet has a number of sections that may not be applicable to townhouses, such as the common space guidelines, parking lot standards and building separation requirements. In addition it does not provide MD Page 4 02 -01 -08 Q: \Townhomes \COW- 02 -11 -08 To«nhouse.DOC illustrations that reflect townhouse density or building types. See Attachment B for the proposed townhouse guidelines with illustrations. RECOMMENDATION After the public hearing on February 11, 2008, schedule the Planning Commission's recommended code changes for deliberation and adoption on March 3, 2008. Attachment A and B include the Planning Commission's recommendations and staff's clarifying language to minimum lot area per unit. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Ordinance in strikeout/underline fon11at B. Draft Townhouse Design Guidelines C. Planning Commission meeting minutes from June 28 Nov 8 and Dec 13 meetings. D. Townhouse Examples E. Comparison of Tukwila's current MDR and HDR standards to townhouse standards in other cities F. Map of Potential Townhouse sites. G. Comments submitted by Mike Overbeck, potential developer at the CAP meeting. MD Page 5 02 -01 -08 Q \Townhomes \COW- 02 -11 -08 Townhouse.DOC DRAFT AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AMENDING THE ZONING AND SUBDIVISION CODE TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF ZERO -LOT LIE/FEE SIMPLE TOWNHOUSES ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the zoning and subdivision codes of the City of Tukwila do not specifically list zero -lot line townhouses as a permitted use and the development standards in the multifamily zones are not conducive for townhouse type of development; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to allow attached and detached zero -lot line townhouses as another type of ownership housing in the multifamily zones; and WHEREAS, the City Council wishes to expand the choices for development in the multifamily zones from condominiums and apartments to attached and detached zero -lot line townhouses; WHEREAS, on June 28 November 8th, and December 13th, 2007, the Tukwila Planning Commission, following adequate public notice, held a public hearing to receive testimony concerning amending the zoning code and subdivision code to allow townhouses and on December 13, 2007, adopted a motion recommending the proposed changes; WHEREAS, on February 11, 2007, the Tukwila City Council, following adequate public notice, held a public hearing to receive a testimony concerning the recommendations of the Planning Commission; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, DO ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Ordinance 1833 §1(part) as codified in TMC 17.12.010 is amended as follows: 17.12.010 Scope Any land being divided into nine or fewer parcels, lots, unit lots, tracts or sites for the purpose of sale, lease, or gift, any one of which is less than 20 acres in size, shall meet the requirements of this chapter. Section 2. New section is hereby added to TMC Chapter 17.12 as follows: 17.12.070 Unit lot short plats A. Sites developed or proposed to be developed with townhouses, cottage housing, compact single family. 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. B. Subsequent platting actions. additions or modifications to the structure(s) may not create or increase anv nonconfoiniity of the parent lot. ATTACHMENT A 1 C. Access easements and ioint use and maintenance agreements shall be executed for use of common garage or parking areas, common open space (such as common play areas), and other similar features, as recorded with the King County Department of Records and Elections. D. Within the parent lot, required parking for a dwelling unit may be provided on a different unit lot than the lot with the dwelling unit, as long as the right to use that parking is formalized by an easement on the plat. as recorded with the King County Department of Records and Elections. E. The fact that the unit lot is not a separate buildable lot, and that additional development of the individual unit lots may be limited as a result of the application of development standards to the parent lot shall be noted on the plat, as recorded with the Director of the King County Department of Records and Elections. F. Construction of townhouse dwelling foundations may commence prior to final short plat approval. provided: 1. The proposed short plat has received preliminary approval, and the necessary financial sureties have been filed to assure construction of required public improvements: 2. Partial or complete construction of structures shall not relieve the subdivider from. nor impair City enforcement of conditions of subdivision approval: 3. Construction shall not proceed beyond foundations. and units shall not be rented or sold, nor occupancy permits issued until final short plat approval is granted. Section 3. Ordinance 1833 §1(part) as codified in TMC 17.14.010 is amended as follows: 17.14.010 Scope Any land being divided into 10 or more parcels, lots, unit lots. tracts or sites, for the purpose of sale or gift, any one of which is less than 20 acres in size, or any land which has been divided under the short subdivision procedures within five years and is not eligible for further short platting pursuant to Section 17.12.010 shall conform to the procedures and requirements of this chapter. Section 4. New section is hereby added to TMC Chapter 17.14 as follows: 17.14.060 Unit lot subdivisions A. Sites developed or proposed to be developed with townhouses, cottage housing. compact single family. 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 toenail 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. B. Subsequent platting actions. additions or modifications to the structure(s) may not create or increase any nonconformity of the parent lot. C. Access easements and ioint use and maintenance agreements shall be executed for use of common garage or narking areas, common open space (such as common play areas), and other similar features. as recorded with the King County Department of Records and Elections. D. Within the parent lot. required parking for a dwelling unit may be provided on a different unit lot than the lot with the dwelling unit. as long as the right to use that parking is formalized by an easement on the plat. as recorded with the King County Department of Records and Elections. E. The fact that the unit lot is not a separate buildable lot. and that additional development of the individual unit lots may be limited as a result of the application of development standards to the parent lot shall be noted on the plat, as recorded with the Director of the King County Department of Records and Elections. F. Construction of townhouse dwelling foundations may commence prior to final plat approval, provided: 1. The proposed plat has received preliminary approval. and the necessary financial sureties have been filed to assure construction of required public improvements: 2. Partial or complete construction of structures shall not relieve the subdivider from. nor impair City enforcement of conditions of subdivision approval: 2 3. Construction shall not proceed beyond foundations, and units shall not be rented or sold, nor occupancy permits issued until fmal plat approval is Granted. Section 5. New definitions are hereby added to TMC Chapter 18.06 Definitions as follows: 18.06.8XX Detached Zero Lot Line units A development pattern of detached dwelling units constructed immediately adjacent to one side lot line (i.e. no side yard setback), coupled with an easement on the adiacent lot in order to maintain separation between structures. The easement will provide access rights for maintenance purposes: help preserve privacy and usable vard space. 18.06.537 Lot. Parent "Lot, parent" means the initial lot from which unit lots are subdivided for the exclusive use of townhouses.. cottage housing. compact single family, zero -lot line units, or any combination of the above types of residential development. 18.06.542 Lot, Unit "Lot, unit" means one (1) of the individual lots created from the subdivision of a parent lot for the exclusive use of townhouses, cottage housing. compact single family. zero -lot line units. or any combination of the above types of residential development. 18.06.8XX Townhouse "Townhouse" means a faun of ground- related housing in which individual dwelling units are attached along at least one (11 common wall to at least one (1) other dwelling unit. Each dwelling unit occupies space from the ground to the roof and has direct access to Private open space. No portion of a unit may occupy space above or below another unit. except that townhouse units may be constructed over a common shared parking garage, provided the garage is underground. Section 6. Ordinance 1834 §2(part) as codified in TMC 18.06.768 is amended as follows: 18.06.768 Short Subdivision "Short subdivision" means the division of land into nine or less lots, unit lots, tracts, parcels, sites or divisions. 18.06.813 Subdivision "Subdivision" means the division or redivision of land into ten or more lots, unit lots. tracts, parcels, sites or divisions. Section 7. Ordinance 1976 §20, 1865 §9, and 1758 §1(part) as codified in TMC 18.12, is amended as follows: 18.12.020 Permitted Uses A. The following uses are permitted outright within the Medium Density District, subject to compliance with all other applicable requirements of the Tukwila Municipal Code: 1. Dwelling One detached single family dwelling per lot. 2. Dwelling Multi- family duplex, triplex, Of fourplex units or townhouse un to four attached units. 3. Detached zero lot line units. 3./1. Animal veterinary, including associated temporary indoor boarding; access to an arterial required. 4-5. Day care centers. 5.6. Public parks, trails, picnic areas and playgrounds, but not including amusement parks, golf courses, or commercial recreation. 6 7. Shelters. 3 B. In Commercial Redevelopment Areas 1, 2, and 4 (see Figures 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. Section 8. Ordinance 1976 §23, and 1758 §1(part) as codified in TMC 18.12.070, is amended as follows; 18.12.070 Basic Development Standards Development within the Medium Density Residential District shall confoimi 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 60 feet (App lied to parent lot for frontage width), minimum townhouse plats) 1 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 1 10 feet 1 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) 1 Townhouse building separation, minimum 1 1 1 and 2 storm buildings 1 10 feet 1 1 3 storm buildings 20 feet 1 1 Height, maximum 1 30 feet 1 Landscape requi ements (minimum): Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats See Landscape, Recreation, Recycling/Solid Waste Space requirements chapter for further requirements Front(s) 1 15 feet 1 1 Sides 1 10 feet 1 Rear 1 10 feet 1 Development area coverage 1 50% maximum (75% for townhouses) 1 Recreation space 400 sq. ft. per dwelling unit (1,000 sq. ft. min.) 4 Off- street arkin p g Residential Parkin See TMC Chapter 18.56, Off-street p g Loading Regulations. Accessory dwelling unit I See Accessory Use section of this chapter Other uses See TNIC Chapter 18.56, Off street Parking Loading Regulations Section 9. Ordinance 1976 §24, 1865 §13, 1830 §2, and 1758 §1(part) as codified in TMC 18.14.070 is amended as follows: 18.14.020 Permitted Uses A. The following uses are permitted outright within the High Density Residential District, subject to compliance with all other applicable requirements of the Tukwila Municipal Code. 1. Animal veterinary, including associated temporary indoor boarding; access to an arterial required. 2. Convalescent and nursing homes for not more than 12 patients. 3. Day care centers. 4. 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. 5. Dwelling One detached single family dwelling per lot 6. Dwelling multi family. 7. Dwelling townhouse un to four attached units. 78. Libraries, museums or art galleries (public). 4.9 Parks, trails, picnic areas and playgrounds (public) but not including amusement parks, golf courses, or commercial recreation. 9.10 Shelters. B. In Commercial Redevelopment Area 3 (see Figures 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 the BAR chapter of this code, TMC 18.60.060. Section 10. Ordinance 1976 §27, 1830 §3, and 1758 §1(part) as codified in TMC 18.14.070 is amended as follows: 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 2,000 sq. ft. (For townhouses the density senior citizen housing) shall be calculated based on one unit tier 2000 so. 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 60 feet (App lied to parent lot for frontage width), minimum townhouse plats) I Setbacks, minimum: I Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats I I Front 1st floor 115 feet r 5 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 adiacent to LDR) Sides 3rd floor 20 feet (30 feet if adjacent to LDR) (10 feet for townhouses unless adiacent to LDR) Sides 4th floor 30 feet (20 feet for townhouses unless adjacent to LDR) Rear -1st floor 1 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 adiacent to LDR) Rear 4th floor 30 feet (20 feet for townhouses unless adiacent to LDR) Townhouse buildine separation, minimum 1 1 and 2 storm buildings 1 10 feet 1 3 and 4 storm buildings 1 20 feet Height, maximum 1 45 feet Development area coverage 50% maximum (except senior citizen housing, 75% for townhouses) Landscape requirements (minimum): Applied to parent lot for townhouse plats See Landscape, Recreation, Recycling/Solid Waste Space requirements chapter for further requirements 1 Front(s) 1 15 feet 1 Sides 10 feet 1 Rear 10 feet 1 Recreation space 400 sq. ft. per dwelling unit (1,000 sq. ft. min.) Recreation space, senior citizen housing 1 100 sq. ft. per dwelling unit Off street parking: Residential (except senior citizen housing) See TMC Chapter 18.56, Off street Parking Loading Regulations. 1 Accessory dwelling unit See Accessory Use section of this chapter 1 Other uses, including senior citizen housing See TMC Chapter 18.56, Off street Parking Loading Regulations Section 11. Ordinance 1758 §1(part) as codified in TMC 18.50.070 is amended as follows: 18.50.070 Yard Regulations A. Fences, walls, poles, posts, and other customary yard accessories, ornaments, furniture may be permitted in any yard subject to height limitations and requirements Limiting obstruction 6 of visibility to the detriment of public safety. The height of opaque fences along street frontages is limited to 4 feet, with lallice or other open material allowed up to 6 feet. B. In the case of through lots, unless the prevailing front yard pattern on adjoining lots indicates otherwise, front yards shall be provided on all frontages. C. Where the front yard that would noiutally be required on a lot is not in keeping with the prevailing yard pattern, the DCD may waive the requirement for the normal front yard and substitute therefore a special yard requirement which shall not exceed the average of the yards provided on adjacent lots. D. In the case of corner lots, a front yard of the required depth shall be provided in accordance with the prevailing yard pattern, and a second front yard of half the depth required generally for front yards in the district shall be provided on the other frontage. E. In the case of corner lots with more than two frontages, the DCD shall determine the front yard requirements, subject to the following conditions: 1. At least one front yard shall be provided having the full depth required generally in the district; 2. The second front yard shall be the minimum set forth in the district; 3. In the case of through lots and corner lots, there will be no rear yards but only front and side yards; 4. In the case of through lots, side yards shall extend from the rear lines of front yards required. In the case of corner lots, yards remaining after full and halfdepth front yards have been established shall be considered side yards. (See Figure 18 4.) Section 12. Ordinance 1758 §1(part) as codified in TMC 18.50.083 is amended as follows: 18.50.083 Maximum Building Length In the MDR and HDR zones, the maximum building length shall be as follows: For all buildings except as described below: MDR....50 ft HDR ....50 ft Maximum building length with bonus for modulating off-sets: For structures with a maximum building height of 2 stories or 25 ft., MDR....100 ft whichever is less, and having horizontal modulation or a minimum HDR ....200 vertical change in roof profile of 4 feet at Least every two units or ft 50 feet, whichever is less: For structures with a building height over 2 stories or 25 ft., whichever MDR....100 ft is less, with a horizontal and vertical modulation of 4 ft. or an 8 ft. HDR ....200 modulation in either direction: ft For townhouse structures with horizontal modulation or a minimum vertical change in roof profile of 4 feet at least every two units or MDR....80 ft 50 feet, whichever is less: HDR ....125 ft Modulation shall be required for every 2 units or 50 feet, whichever is less, as measured along the building's length. Grouping of offsets in maximum four unit modules may be permitted only with BAR approval (see Figure 18 -5). Section 13. Ordinance 1930 §28 and 1758 §1(part) as codified in TMC 18.50.085 is amended as follows: 7 18.50.085 Maximum Percent Development Area Coverage In the MDR and HDR zones the maximum percent development area coverage shall be 50 except for senior citizen housing developments in HDR. If the senior citizen housing building is converted to regular apartments the 50% limit must be met. Townhouse developments are allowed up to a maximum of 75% development area coverage. Section 14. Ordinance 1872 §14(part) as codified in TMC 18.52.060 is amended as follows: 18.52.060 Recreation Space Requirements In all MDR and HDR zoning districts, 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 so. ft. of the 400 sci. ft. of recreation space as private, ground level open space measuring not less than 10 feet in anv dimension. c. The front, side and rear yard setback areas required by the applicable zoning district shall not qualify as recreation space unless portions 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 8 required under TMC 18.52.060.1, 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. Section 15. Ordinance 1976 §62 as codified in TMC 18.56.065 is amended as follows: 18.56.065 Residential Parking Requirements A. Two off street parking spaces shall be provided for each dwelling unit which contains up to three bedrooms. One additional off street parking space shall be required for every two bedrooms in excess of three bedrooms in a dwelling unit (i.e., four and five bedroom dwelling units shall have three off street parking spaces, six and seven bedroom homes shall have four spaces, and so on). B. Each unit in a townhouse development shall have an attached garage with parking for at least one vehicle or a parking space in an underground garage. B C. The Director shall have the discretion to waive the requirement to construct a portion of the off street parking requirement if, based on a parking demand study, the property owner establishes that the dwelling will be used primarily to house residents who do not and will not drive due to a factor other than age. Such a study shall assure that ample parking is provided for residents who can drive, guests, caregivers and other persons who work at the residence. If such a waiver is granted, the property owner shall provide a site plan which demonstrates that, in the event of a change of use which eliminates the reason for the waiver, there is ample room on the site to provide the number of off street parking spaces required by this Code. In the event that a change of use or type of occupant is proposed that would alter the potential number of drivers living or working at the dwelling, the application for change of use shall be conditioned on construction of any additional off street parking spaces required to meet the standards of this Code. Section 16. Ordinance 1986 §16, 1865 §51, and 1758 §1(part) as codified in TMC 18.14.070 is amended as follows: 18.60.050 Design Review Criteria A. Generally. The BAR is authorized to request and rely upon any document, guideline, or other consideration it deems relevant or useful to satisfy the purpose and objectives of this chapter, specifically including but not limited to the following criteria. The applicant shall bear the full burden of proof that the proposed development plans satisfy all of the criteria. The BAR may modify a literal interpretation of the design review criteria if, in their judgment such modifications better implement the Comprehensive Plan goals and policies. C. Multi- Family, Hotel and Motel Design Review Criteria. In reviewing any multi family, hotel or motel application the following criteria shall be used by the BAR in its decision making as well as the Multi- Family Design Manual or Townhouse Design Manual. Detached zero lot line type of developments shall be subiect to Townhouse Design Manual. 1. SITE PLANNING. a. Building siting, architecture, and landscaping shall be integrated into and blend hainioniously with the neighborhood building scale, natural environment, and development characteristics as envisioned in the Comprehensive Plan. For instance, a 9 multi family development's design need not be harmoniously integrated with adjacent single family structures if that existing single family use is designated as "Commercial" or "High Density Residential" in the Comprehensive Plan. However, a "Low Density Residential" (detached single family) designation would require such harmonious design integration. b. Natural features which contribute to desirable neighborhood character shall be preserved to the maximum extent possible. Natural features include, but are not limited to, existing significant trees and stands of trees, wetlands, streams, and significant topographic features. c. The site plan shall use landscaping and building shapes to form an aesthetically pleasing and pedestrian scale streetscape. This shall include, but not be limited to facilitating pedestrian travel along the street, using architecture and landscaping to provide a desirable transition from streetscape to the building, and providing an integrated linkage from pedestrian and vehicular facilities to building entries. d. Pedestrian and vehicular entries shall provide a high quality visual focus using building siting, shapes, and landscaping. Such a feature establishes a physical transition between the project and public areas, and establishes the initial sense of high quality development. e. Vehicular circulation design shall minimize driveway intersections with the street. f. Site perimeter design (i.e. landscaping, structures, and horizontal width) shall be coordinated with site development to ensure a hainionious transition between adjacent projects. g. Varying degrees of privacy for the individual residents shall be provided; increasing from the public right -of -way, to common areas, to individual residences. This can be accomplished through the use of symbolic and actual physical barriers to define the degrees of privacy appropriate to specific site area functions. h. Parking and service areas shall be located, designed, and screened to interrupt and reduce the visual impact of large paved areas; i. The height, bulk, footprint, and scale of each building shall be in harmony with its site and adjacent long- term structures. 2. BUILDING DESIGN. a. Architectural style is not restricted, evaluation of a project shall be based on the quality of its design and its ability to harmonize building texture, shape, lines and mass with the surrounding neighborhood. b. Buildings shall be of appropriate height, scale, and design/shape to be in harmony with those existing permanent neighboring developments which are consistent with, or envisioned in, the Comprehensive Plan. This will be especially important for perimeter structures. Adjacent structures that are not in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan should be considered to be transitional. The degree of architectural harmony required should be consistent with the nonconforming structure's anticipated permanence. c. Building components, such as windows, doors, eaves, parapets, stairs and decks shall be integrated into the overall building design. Particular emphasis shall be given to harmonious proportions of these components with those of adjacent developments. Building components and ancillary parts shall be consistent with the anticipated life of the structure. d. The overall color scheme shall work to reduce building prominence and shall blend in with the natural environment. e. Monotony of design in single or multiple building projects shall be avoided. Variety of detail, form, and siting shall be used to provide visual interest. Otherwise monotonous flat walls and uniform vertical planes of individual buildings shall be broken up with building modulation, stairs, decks, railings, and focal entries. Multiple building developments shall use siting and additional architectural variety to avoid inappropriate repetition of building designs and appearance to surrounding properties. 3. LANDSCAPE AND SITE TREATMENT. a. Existing natural topographic patterns and significant vegetation shall be reflected in project design when they contribute to the natural beauty of the area or are important to defining neighborhood identity or a sense of place. 10 b. Landscape treatment shall enhance existing natural and architectural features, help separate public from private spaces, strengthen vistas and important views, provide shade to moderate the affects of large paved areas, and break up visual mass. c. Walkways, parking spaces, terraces, and other paved areas shall promote safety and provide an inviting and stable appearance. Direct pedestrian linkages to the public street, to on -site recreation areas, and to adjacent public recreation areas shall be provided. d. Appropriate landscape transition to adjoining properties shall be provided. 4. MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES. a. Miscellaneous structures shall be designed as an integral part of the architectural concept and landscape. Materials shall be compatible with buildings, scale shall be appropriate, colors shall be in harmony with buildings and surroundings, and structure proportions shall be to scale. b. The use of walls, fencing, planting, berms, or combinations of these shall accomplish screening of service yards, and other places that tend to be unsightly. Screening shall be effective in winter and summer. c. Mechanical equipment or other utility hardware on roof, ground or buildings shall be screened from view. Screening shall be designed as an integral part of the architecture (i.e., raised parapets and fully enclosed under roof) and landscaping. d. Exterior lighting standards and fixtures shall be of a design and size consistent with safety, building architecture and adjacent area. Lighting shall be shielded, and restrained in design with no off -site glare spill over. Excessive brightness and brilliant colors shall not be used unless clearly demonstrated to be integral to building architecture. Section 11. 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 12. 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 and effect five (5) days after passage and publication as provided by law. PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at a Regular Meeting there of this day of 2008. Jim Haggerton, Mayor ATTEST/AUTHENTICATED: Jane E. Cantu, CMC, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By Office of the City Attorney 11 FILED WITH THE CITY CLERK: PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL: PUBLISHED: EFFECTIVE DATE: ORDINANCE NO.: 12 TOWNHOUSE DESIGN GUIDELINES I. SITE PLANNING Streetscape The transition from public to private spaces A. The transition from a pedestrian oriented streetscape to multi -story buildings should emphasize pedestrian scale architectural elements such as porches, plantings of varying heights, and use pedestrian oriented entries, courts, and lighting. It is possible to make the transition to the site, building and individual unit in many different physical ways. For example, a sidewalk could lead through a gate to a private yard and then to a porch before reaching the front door of the townhouse. The most successful solution will consist of a combination of the above suggested symbolic definers or other comparable mechanisms. —1krms landscaping and architecture form a gateway. 1� 1 N ,P I --7 -7-‘ I \t t .0 Nit t� 1 3 1 ag f t 1 1 J z t °U: 's----,- r t >44 /1 t k- Special' pangs and may sign_ Fig. 1: Project entry provides an immediate sense of high quality design. B. Provide a clearly defined building or courtyard entry from the primary street. 1. Use distinctive architectural elements and materials to indicate the entry such as a change in paving material, low wall, steps, trellis, or arbor. Attachment B nsition space 2. Define the tra from the sidewalk to the entry with a terrace, plaza, or landscaped area. 3. Consider turning the end unit (or pair of units) to face the public street, see Figure 20. Natural Environment Retain natural site amenities C. Incorporate existing healthy and attractive vegetation into project design by locating buildings to maximize significant tree retention on slopes, retain tree stands, and minimize disturbance of sensitive areas. Retaining large stature trees and tree stands on site very significantly improves the integration of new developments into Tukwila's mature neighborhoods. e e ]L FF X21 'F1 -$y,' 1= x t s ee Fig. 2: Site buildings and roads to retain mature trees. D. Landform grading should be used when feasible to reflect the natural topography and retain mature trees. Q \Townhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 2 Nov I 2007 609 Building 4yu Building Slope STREET 2 Landiorm Site Planning 3 Building Building Building I Building C:17 1 Slope STREET 1 Conventional Site Planning Fig. 3: Comparison of conventional and landform site grading. E. Site coverage on slopes should be minimized I lized to reduce visual impact. Site coverage limitations are not as significant on flat sites where lower buildings may be preferable to maximize architectural harmony with nearby structures and the streetscape. F. Site design should be integrated with the neighborhood. Project design integration should include coordination of circulation, landscaping, recreation spaces, and building location with the surrounding area. A visual distinction using landform, landscaping, or materials may separate a project from the general neighborhood. However, high "fortress" walls should be avoided and buildings should not turn their backs to the street. Circulation Pedestrian G. A comprehensive system of pedestrian sidewalks should link all building/unit entries, parking lots, recreation areas and the project entries with the area -wide sidewalk system. H. Sidewalks should be a minimum of six feet wide between public roadway and the junction where pedestrian traffic begins to disperse. This would allow one pedestrian to pass another and remain on the sidewalk. A minimum four foot wide sidewalk may then be acceptable. Q \Townhomes'MFamilyDesGuide.doc 3 Nov 1, 2007 I. Sidewalk crossings of on -site roadways should be distinguished by a different material and slightly raised to prevent runoff from flowing across them. Building truly area r (I) flt� TI f__\ 4 ii} I .I t- .s ,1 i t ilCit3iVi _LC I i 1 I i L ._ l j -Contrasting Material marks pecksaian crossings Fig. 4: Key sidewalk intersections and segments are marked with contrasting pavers. J. Buildings should be separated at least 8 feet from driveways and parking spaces where facing windowed walls (but not the entry) of ground units and have a minimum 13 foot separation when facing the entry of ground units. K. Separate buildings from common walkways by at least 8 feet in the structure's front and rear, and a minimum 4 feet on its side. L. Separation guidelines do not apply to incidental structures such as trellises, 18 inch roof eaves, chimneys, covered walks, and pedestrian oriented amenities. Circulation Vehicular M. Design the on -site vehicle circulation system as follows: A maximum of two vehicle access points, depending on parcel characteristics and difficulty of access, to reduce traffic impacts and the site area devoted to roads instead of architecture and landscape /recreation space, Create very low volume cul -de -sacs to allow multiple use as street oriented social/recreation areas, and Stress shared driveways between adjacent developments. Q \Townhomes'MFamilyDesGuide.doc 4 Nov 1, 2007 Parking N. Locate parking to minimize conflicts between autos and pedestrians. Driveways should avoid crossing pedestrian walkways and paths from residence to children's play area. In large parking lots, provide pedestrian walkways to allowing people to move safely. Additional space should be provided where cars overhang curbs. 0. Separate driveway parking areas with landscape islands to create an individual unit entry and reduce the appearance of large areas of paving. 49 I "t_ 4 1E .N p .11 :.":41 --Z.Tki---- rr 1 t 4 ar t- Z.._:--: Sri of 3 °i 7 i sis r. .deb 44* ,e ms. Fig. 5: Separation of driveways with landscape islands. P. Provide the majority of the required parking spaces in attached garages (tandem parking allowed), underground parking, and underbuilding parking when grades permit at least partial screening. Q. Minimize the prominence of surface parking by using architecture and landscaping to break up or screen parking areas, moving parking to the side or rear, and breaking up large parking areas into smaller ones. Q \Townhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 5 Nov 1, 2007 g 7 =Ir i ,ii._„ „,,t,„ 4 v _irr;._. I, `s <`,.Sfy� r ,J £s t 1 -fir f r -+l i 1 k r f �z Fig. 6: Parking located so that it is screened by buildings. R. Supplemental parking areas should be located within 200 feet of the farthest dwelling unit served for the convenience of residents. S. The optimum design for a parking area is not necessarily the one which parks the maximum number of vehicles, but the one that also provides ample stall and aisle widths, pedestrian walks, adequate turning radii, reasonable grades, efficient movement of traffic, pleasant appearance, and convenient location. T. Four to six space parking lots are pedestrian and human in character, while over twelve cars become car dominated. The critical number seems to be ten. This marks the breaking point between a human lot and a sea of cars. Small lots can be accomplished by breaking large parking areas into sections that serve no more than 10 to 12 cars. Landscape islands and areas should be located to protect cars as well as to break up seas of asphalt. Solar Orientation U. To maximize the warming effect of solar radiation in winter months and maximize shade in the summer months: 1. Utilize deciduous trees for summer shade and winter sun 2. Orient active living spaces to the south. 3. Design building overhangs to shield the high summer sun and expose the area to the lower winter sun. Q \Townhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 6 Nov I, 2007 Crime Prevention V. Employ the Concept of Defensible Space to reduce opportunities for crime. "Defensible space" is a term used to describe a series of physical design characteristics that maximizes resident control of behavior particularly crime. A residential development designed under defensible space guidelines clearly defines all areas as either public, semi private or private. In so doing, it determines who has the right to be in each space, and allows residents to be confident in responding to any questionable activity or persons within their complex. Residents are thus encouraged to their private realms, establish their zone of influence which inevitably results in a heightened sense of responsibility towards the care and maintenance of these outdoor areas. W. The following series of techniques can be used to create defensible space and consequently reduce crime. They are summarized in: Defining zones of privacy (public, semi- private, private) with real or symbolic barriers. This allows residents to identify "strangers Establishing perceived zones of influence (allowing residents to extend their private realms). Providing surveillance opportunities. Additional design considerations include the following: Orient windows so that areas vulnerable to crime can be easily surveyed by residents. Locate mailboxes, garbage collection enclosures and common play areas in such a way that they are easily observed by others. Mailboxes should not be located in dark alcoves out of sight Establish a system for identifying the location of each residential unit and common facilities at the project entry. Lighting. More light is not necessarily indicative of better and safer lighting. Lighting levels should be carefully selected and oriented so that areas vulnerable to crime are accented. Provide lighting in areas of heavy pedestrian or vehicular traffic and in areas which are dangerous if unlit, such as stairs and ramps, intersections or where abrupt changes in grade occur. Areas that have high crime potential should be well lighted so that people traveling through them at night may feel secure. Locate plant materials such as high shrubs so that surveillance of semi public and semi- private areas is not blocked. This will provide the opportunity for crime. Use visually open fencing materials such as wrought iron bars or wooden pickets to define space between the street and building. X. Sticker shrubs may discourage crime activities. Low shrubs and umbrella trees (where the canopy is maintained above 5 feet from the ground) will allow surveillance opportunities, hence reducing the potential for criminal behavior. Q \Townhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 7 Nov 1, 2007 II. BUILDING DESIGN Neighborhood Compatibility A. Minimize the appearance of building scale differences between proposed townhouses and existing neighborhood residential units that confoini to current zoning. Portions of multi family developments adjoining areas zoned for single family should maintain a scale, facade and orientation similar to single family uses for compatibility with existing structures. A project site plan and cross sections should show the footprint of all adjacent structures within 100 feet of the property line to help evaluate compatibility. -3 r !1 l` 1 t-, 4 r s t °i I i f Fig. 7: Incorporation of elements from neighboring structures into townhouse design. B. Reflect the architectural character of neighboring residences (within 300' on the same street) where it provides a positive example through use of related building features including scale /mass, height, the proportions of entries, windows and other openings (fenestration), color, materials, and shapes. 1. Step the roof on the building perimeter segments to transition between a proposed taller building and an existing residential structure. 2. Replicate or approximate roof forms and pitch found on existing residential structures in the neighborhood. 3. Use window patterns and proportions similar to those on existing residential structures in the neighborhood. 4. Use building facade materials similar to those used on existing residential buildings in the neighborhood. 5. Maintain a consistent relationship to the street (i.e., building setbacks and entryways) as existing buildings. Q:\Townhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 8 Nov 1, 2007 Offsets, changes in materials, and Oill fine detailing are used to provide chitectural interest. Pirchcd roofs, building modulation and intimate cnzies buroduce a p2ngle family scale to Vas dense building 1 -1------------'---1 1' I Pt A Trellised crary provides saucturaI 4 1 J i g LI q 1 transition from pedesirian environm o e-nt t I 0 s a building mo z. and helps separate public 1 i t ,from semi-prme project space_s i VI I I Ill:. Fi ill q .„J t -r--- :',Ej l 9 1 1 1 4,-- :\r t. fi r 'f A V L. !JR i P4 'tiTegt ,;1I. Init. _Nkk cr i's: 'Al i 2- `4•4 1 I ..-!:140 --1-.4g,!1 ilri tb w_, ,;--,A i ---r —1.0. I I 6 -A f ,—____,,i'L_:, '.1 l' ME il ,g a ll_Pitthr 1 7',!_ r -1.- •..,5, -.2 at.. f.--,:‘ 1-777 1 II i 1 I LI 4 \-A l.' li:: el- et P i :::r. ,k F 8: Detailing and modulation are used to reduce the scale of the building. Building Entrances C. Avoid the use of exterior stairways to second stories that are visible from the street. Do this: Q:\Townhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 9 Nov 1, 2007 Driveway entrance to auto court 8ib��]ao� -i. H i --,--,=_--ti --4----i4A;.:4-L-<__w-,-L,._,--.-7,-r- ...sY-7-_, ..7,. V.-;-",:z.T..7...0:=V• t•i: I l�ottbia� 10 Nov 1, 200 3 Y4 4 t-„.f- .:,,-;_:;*-itf ist -__I csi 44 ,,i._ 1}„__ _,,a.,,c, NI, mi: w -M. Fig. 9: Relationship o entry to street level. D. Townhouse units shall have an individual entrance, with entrance vestibules, canopies or porches to give identity to each unit and provide weather protection. The main entrance to units adjacent to a public street shall be accessed from and face the street. Ltikti7,--)1-t_':P*,:-' 4; i;: --'0?3,- a T t r R= 3' ,'tom >r 14 1 1 X111 if Fig. 10 Individual entry porch. Building Elevations E. Attached townhouses shall read as a unified building mass, maintainin a common architectural language across the entire length of units. This mass shall be varied by changes in un it orientation, c /material variations, shifts in roof profile, and variation at corner units. Windows, bays, balconies, and other articulation could also be used to express the individuality of each unit. Q: \Totiynhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 11 Nov 1, 2007 F. Each building shall incorporate treatments that "complete" the end and comer units, including: 1. an extended base or ground floor units 2. a protrusion, porch or bay that wraps the corner, or 3. an embedded comer tower W i g s �E== r,€ k. j JA I .�i'-_ ,7 ^°s.-[ 4 R rll ..f r '1:.. ii 3 wit- A`t.;: r OL 1 Fig. 11: Expressing individual units through modulation and roof forms. G. A 3 -story blank wall, even if at the narrow end of a building, does not reflect acceptable design quality. Use architectural relief and fine detailing to break up monotonous surfaces. H. Avoid applied ornamentation which is not related to building structure or architectural design. This would include arbitrary, inconsistent forms and decoration; uninterrupted floating horizontal elements; and large blank surfaces. Windows I. Provide relief, detail, and visual rhythm on the facade with well- proportioned windows. 1. Use window patterns, proportions, and orientation consistent with neighboring residences. 2. Use multiple -pane windows. 3. Provide windows that are designed to create shadows (either deeply recessed or protruding). 4. Use visually significant window elements (i.e. frame dimensions, lintels, casings, sills, and trim. 5. Locate windows so that the occupants from one residence cannot look directly into an adjacent residence. Q \Townhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 12 Nov 1, 2007 f 3£ :i z i ;Ii s I I I t_ri 3,_ 1 11 ul ii, iii______ T Fig. 12: Window foul' examples. Roofline J. Vary the roofline along the building length to reflect individual units. This can be achieved using: separate roof forms a combination of roof types, such as shed, gabled and hipped roofs) gables and dormers K. Pitched and continuous sloping roof foinis are encouraged. Where flat roofs are used, they should be detailed with parapets or roof overhangs, and detailed with brackets, corbels or other decorative supports. t bbbb s --:-WS.-.! ,...=4 t_1„.„.-K- -5- ._,_v_-,i-ieg-------M -4 -1-1 1 7 -3"1- -t:::= 1- 1 z -s t I r �s s _ems y� N om t 4 t.„, .....,.*;i.m.,:_f___.. 3 q� 3 a F .el t. 3 1 f F Y Fig. 13: Roof foiui variation. Q \Townhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 13 Nov 1, 2007 Building Massing L. More prominent sites and buildings require a higher level of design quality. This would include projects which are located near hill tops or intersections, or which include large visible building masses. M. Use building and roof modulation and articulation to reduce the appearance of large building masses. 1. Modulate the building facade with features such as porches, balconies, building wall relief, and bay windows. 2. Provide roof elements such as gables, eyebrow roof forms or dormers. 3. Incorporate prominent cornice, soffit, or fascia details that emphasize the top of the building. 4. Provide prominent roof overhangs. 5. Articulate the roof with rafter tails and brackets. l 3 4 ,_:-L.L Fig. 14: Differentiation of individual units through color, material and roof forms. Material and Colors N. Construct building exteriors of durable and maintainable materials that are attractive even when viewed up close. Use building materials that have texture, pattern, or lend themselves to a high quality of detailing. Appropriate materials are horizontal lap siding, shingles, brick, stone, stucco, ceramic or terra cotta tile. 0. Use a variety of complementary colors on building exteriors. Reserve brightly saturated colors for accent or trim features. Garage Design P. Design garages and carports so that they do not dominate the dwelling's facade. 1. Locate garages and carports behind residences, stepped back from the building's street facade, or provide a side entry (perpendicular to the street). 2. Design driveways to be as narrow as possible and/or shared where possible to Q :1Townhomes \MFamilyDesGuide.doc 14 Nov 1, 2007 minimize impervious surface and to minimize disruption of the sidewalk and planting strip by curb cuts. 3. Incorporate windows into garage sidewalls whenever they face the street so that they appear to contain habitable space. 4. Incorporate garage door elements which reduce the apparent size of the doors, such as panels and windows. 5. Use materials and colors that match the residence. _Wcfaily: 1: =Y 7 7 i I- z 4 P 0 '+t -%_4,,-_- :n.'__- Si si_=_=.- r i_ ,:s__,..---,-__= 7_•-=-=_.= I ti f__, i 4 :s.._:_ 4 `tom t€ 1. i _f Is Fig. 15: Side entry garage with windows. III. LANDSCAPE /SITE TREATMENT Landscape Design A. Plants can be used to curtail erosion, to soften the built environment, define or emphasize open space, give privacy, block wind and lessen the effects of solar radiation. B. Although the landscape plan should reflect plants at maturity, landscaping should be considered as a design element harmonizing site plans and building design only to the extent of its effect in five years. This could mean using significantly larger initial plant stock for those project designs which rely heavily upon landscaping to provide relief for building and site design or screen the project. C. Select and site landscape materials to produce a hardy and drought- resistant landscape area consistent with project design. Selection should include consideration of soil type and depth, spacing, exposure to sun and wind, slope and contours of the site, building walls and overhangs, and compatibility of new plant material with existing vegetation to be preserved on the site. Q \Townhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 15 Nov 1, 2007 D. Install all plant materials to current nursery industry standards. Landscape plant material should be properly guyed and staked to current industry standards. Planting of trees in compacted soils is prohibited unless minimum 12 inch gravel drain sumps are installed under each tree to a minimum of 36 inch depth, or the subgrade soil beyond the planting pit is rototilled to a 9 inch depth to the drip line or edge of planter, whichever is less. E. Plant shrubs used to define spaces or separate environments as a staggered double row whenever possible. This provides the significant depth especially necessary to separate environments such as parking areas from grassed fields and building entries. F. Limit shrub beds to a maximum of two feet wide per typical row of nursery stock plants, in order to minimize barked area and maximize live ground cover. A typical five foot wide barked planting bed for a single row of shrubs is not acceptable. Protection of Existing Trees G. The survival and general health of a tree depends as much on the condition of its root system as it does on the factors influencing the above ground portion. This vital root system extends out to, and sometimes beyond the tree's drip line (the outermost reach of branches). Any significant disturbance to the root area, such as high surface compaction, root severing, over watering and/or removal of organic material in which the tree has composted over several years, will almost certainly kill the tree. Tree removal and replacement would be required after a few seasons of progressive deterioration. H. Protect significant trees during construction with a chain -link fence or plastic vinyl construction fence at the drip line. Install the protection fence prior to issuance of grading permit. Removal or destruction of fencing should be cause for a Stop Work Order until reviewed by City staff. I •1' r i *t fi i .r N A DRIP -LINE 1 FENCE LINE Fig. 16: Tree protected with a chain link fence at the drip line during construction. Q \Townhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 16 Nov I, 2007 Design for Screening and Separation I. Full privacy requires an opaque fence or evergreen barrier at least six feet high or above eye level, depending on the angle of view. Noise reduction requires a dense fence (i.e., concrete /masonry) wall or berm in addition to plantings. J. Area separation requires a continuous physical barrier not less than three feet high. A greater degree of separation would require a higher opaque barrier. A separation planting strip could be deciduous or evergreen. K. Provide a privacy fence along side and rear yards if adjoining single family zoning. This should be 6 feet high sight- obscuring wood (or equivalent) fence with exterior materials and colors consistent with building architecture. Outdoor Space Design L. Outdoor space tends to be unusable when it is simply the "leftovers" after buildings are placed on the land. Outdoor spaces should have a definite functional shape, be internally designed to fulfill that function, and be functionally associated with a specific unit or unit group (see "Defensible Space" in Site Plan guidelines). M. Complexes with 10 or more units must provide an on -site recreation space for children with at least one area designed for children aged 5 -12, see TMC 18.52.060. This area should be characterized by interactive group equipment which tests skills. The Parks and Recreation Director should be consulted in the review of acceptable design proposals. N. The child play area should reflect the design elements below: 1. Visually accessible to casual surveillance by passersby and residents. This is a key element in facility safety and generally requires a central location. 2. Provide separation of play areas from general passersby for security. 3. Easy safe access from residence to play area(s) 4. Hard surface areas for wheeled toys and tricycles. 5. Equipment with zones to satisfy the specific sensory and skill needs up to age 12. 6. Use water and sand if limited to two materials. These provide more possibilities for play and fun than all asphalt deserts combined. The ability to move over, under, around or through something.affords a child control. He can change his relationship to it. 7. A child should be able to control his level of involvement with others. Make small sheltered areas for solitary play, larger spaces .for group play. 8. An adjacent sitting area for monitoring the children. Q: \Townhomes MFamilyDesGuide.doc 17 Nov 1, 2007 i ti s 1, C r ffil 1 f s 1 a- i Fig. 17: A recreation space for the 5 -12 year old group which facilitates group interaction and skill testing. 0. Linkages with existing public trail and park facilities should be made where possible, either through immediate construction or agreement to jointly participate in the coordinated provision of such a linkage at a later date. IV. MISCELLANEOUS STRUCTURES /STREET FURNITURE Lighting A. Reflect project architectural design considerations in all exterior lighting (i.e., distribution, intensity, and pattern). B. Maximum parking area light standard height is 20 feet or the height of the building; whichever is less. 4 s A. 74', i IE A Wee* ss k1 "1 74 Fig. 18: Parking lot lighting. C. Maximum walkway and grounds lighting is 15 feet. Light fixture height is limited to enhance a sense of scale and enclosure for common areas at night. Q \Townhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 18 Nov 1, 2007 D. Provide all lighting standards with glare cut -off features to avoid off -site spill -over. E. Place fixtures so that light patterns overlap at a height of 7 feet which is sufficiently high to vertically illuminate a person's body. F. At hazardous locations, such as changes of grade, use lower level supplemental lighting or additional overhead units. Where low -level lighting (below 5 feet) is used, fixtures should be placed in such a way that they do not produce glare. Most eye levels occur between 3 feet 8 inches for wheelchair users and 6 feet for standing adults. G. Where walkway lighting is provided primarily by low fixtures provide sufficient peripheral lighting to illuminate the immediate surroundings. Peripheral lighting contributes to a feeling of security in an individual because he can see into his surroundings to determine whether or not passage through an area is safe. Such an area should be lighted so that the object or person may be seen directly or in silhouette. Fencing, Walls, and Screening H. All fencing, walls, and screening should reflect building architecture and be haunonious with adjacent project designs. This includes consideration of proportion, color, texture, and materials. Design perimeter fencing to be attractive from both sides. Service Areas I. Screen all exterior maintenance equipment, including }{VAC equipment, electrical equipment, storage tanks, satellite dishes, and garbage dumpsters from off -site and on -site common area view in an architecturally integrated manner. 44 g Y e t c ,,,k i g 2 5 t +*1_ 4: ?II/ 4 7 sw S g N F J Fig. 19: Dumpsters are sited and screened to minimize prominence. Q \Townhomes \MFamilyDesGuide.doc 19 Nov I, 2007 J. Several small dumpsters adjacent to buildings such as garages are preferable to a single large free standing site. Dumpsters should have solid architectural wall screening only to the container height to minimize its prominence. i E_ 6 M tyli[tit�u €tl �i� 1 s pin-up t t F 3 l i t a 1, t z a1„ j Sri E t' f z r- Garbage pickup area for new development Fig. 20: Garbage collection area screened from public street. K. Recycling containers and areas should confouu to King County standards or as amended by Tukwila standards. Street Furniture L. Carry out the project's design concept with the choice of street furniture. M. Foster opportunities for social gathering by residents in shared open spaces by the provision of seating and other amenities. Separate vehicular traffic from pedestrian oriented areas with the use of bollards and other barrier features. Q \Townhomes\MFamilyDesGuide.doc 20 Nov 1, 2007 JUNE 24, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING MI_NU'1'ES PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING CASE NUMBER: L07 -024 Code Amendments APPLICANT: City of Tukwila REQUEST: Modifications to zoning and subdivision codes to allow for zero -lot line townhouse development. LOCATION: Multi family zones Nora Gierloff gave the presentation for staff. Currently, in the multi family zones, there are certain standards, such as minimum lot size, lot width and side yard setback requirements. When you combine them you can only build either apai tments or condominiums. You cannot have a townhouse that you own between two party walls all the way to the ground with a lot line between you and your neighbor. Townhouses are a popular housing type and there have been some developers who have talked to the City Council expressing an interest in developing this type of housing. The Council is interested in knowing what it would take to develop townhouses in Tukwila. Staff compared Tukwila standards with standards established in other adjacent cities that are developing townhouses. There are two categories of changes that would need to be considered: 1. There are things that would absolutely need to be changed in order to draw the lot line through the buildings. 2. There are other standards that would bring Tukwila's requirements more into line with what other cities are seeing, which could encourage townhouse development. Staff suggested if the Commission agree that some changes should be made, they may want to look at some of Tukwila's standards to see if it would be a competitive place to develop compared to other Cities. Ms. Gierloff went over the proposed changes that are listed in the June 19, 2007 Planning Commission Staff Report, Attachment H. Staff circulated their proposed changes to a number of developers who have expressed an interest in land in Tukwila. Some of the feedback that she has received from developers was incorporated into the proposed changes where appropriate. There was a lot of discussion on the proposed changes and Ms. Gierloff addressed several questions raised by the Planning Commission. There were no public comments. The Public Hearing was closed. The Planning Commission deliberated. Commissioner Peterson stated that if there is a need for a secondary fire lane access across single family residential, a gate should be erected for passive protection. He pointed out that there is no way to get one after the fact. Attachment C Commissioner Marvin expressed some concerns about the quality of townhouses, indicating he wants them to be nice. He also requested that construction should not impact residents. Chair Malina suggested it would be a great tool for the Council if staff provided some CAD drawings of a parent lot developed with garages in the front and without garages. He also suggested an example of a single unit with and without garage frontage be provided. It was also suggested that a sidewalk recommendation be prepared for the Council.. THE PLANNING COMMISSION MADE A RECOMMENDATION TO MODIFY AND FORWARD TO THE CITY COUNCIL, THE CODE AMENDMENTS ON CASE NUMBER L07 -024 APPROVING STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR OPTIONS: 2. Make only those changes to the Zoning and Subdivision Codes necessary to allow platting of individual townhouse lots and; 3. Make additional changes to the Zoning Code requirements for tiered setbacks, modulation, development coverage and common recreation space; and 4. Modify the Multi- Family Design Guidelines with illustrations and design guidance specific to townhouse development; and THE PLANNING COMMISSION HIGHLY RECOMMENDS THAT OPTION FIVE COMES BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, BUT MAY BE ELIMINATED AND GO TO ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW AT SOME POINT. THERE WAS ALSO SST EXPRESSED IN ADDING A FIRE LANE ACCESS. NOVEMBER 8, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES PLANNING COMIVIISSION PUBLIC HEARING CASE NUMBER: L07 -024 APPLICANT: City of Tukwila REQUEST: Modifications to zoning and subdivision codes to allow for zero -lot line townhouse development LOCATION: Multi- family zones Chair Malina swore in those wishing to provide testimony. Minnie Dhaliwal, Planner gave the presentation for staff. She provided background on the proposed changes and gave an overview of the draft Townhouse Design Guideline Manual, which had not come before the Planning Commission. Staff wanted the Planning Commission to look at and provide input on the final version of the Design Guidelines before going to City Council. Staff also wanted to give developers who had not had the opportunity for comments at a public hearing regarding some of the development standards, a chance to do so. The Townhouse Design Guideline Manual addresses site planning, building design, landscape treatment and miscellaneous issues. As a result of discussion, staff will include language encouraging low grade parking. Mike Overbeck, Developer, explained he is trying to develop property he has on 144 street and is looking at economic factors to develop his parcel. Jim Barker, Architect, is present, to show the Commission some examples of what might happen with the proposed setbacks. Mr. Overbeck asked if a couple of Mr. Barker's examples could be noted in the report. He also asked that the setbacks at the most stringent be 10 feet from the property line and 10 feet going straight up, not having an additional setback for the second and third floor. He pointed out on page 3 of the staff report that the side setbacks, (assuming that the parent lot is viewed as a whole) in townhomes, would mean that the second floor would have to be 20 feet off the property line. Whereas the first floor could be 10 feet off it. He stated that in his seven years of Real Estate background and his searching for examples in King County, he can not fmd a single example of a zero lot line townhome that has a tiered setback for additional stories. Mr. Overbeck said this is really in reference to lots that border MDR and HDR lots. He stated that HDR lots are 2,000 sq. ft. and with the proposed setback that you really can not build a structure that can be sold. Mr. Overbeck stated he is hoping to add to the community and bring in some home ownership and that there will be a little more pride taken in the neighborhood. He said to make this economically viable at all; he has to build three bedroom homes, at a minimum. He asked if something could be adopted so that as developers they could come up with economically viable products. He stated there could be 25 -40% of the lots could be affected by the setbacks. There were samples provided. Jim Barker, Architect, helped Mr. Overbeck design the townhome project in the HDR zone. He said the 20 feet side setbacks really hurt the design. The 20 foot setback does not allow for building 3 bedroom townhomes. Mr. Barker passed around some samples with various setbacks and listed some setbacks in other jurisdictions, asking that the proposed setbacks be reconsidered. Mr. Barker answered questions and provided clarification for the Commission and staff. Gary Singh, Developer, asked why the HDR zone setback has to go higher, stating if that is done you do not have enough room left to build anything. He also stated if the rear setbacks are 10 feet there will be a little more breathing room and it will be more economical. People can spend money and it will help. He also answered questions and provided clarification. REBUTTAL: Minnie Dwaliwal stated that townhomes are a good thing, but she asked, at the same time what we are giving up if you shorten the setback. She said the problem with this property is that it's too narrow and no matter what code you write, there will be some issues with it. With the existing code, landscaping also creates a problem for developers. The suggestion for this particular property is to try and acquire abutting property that may be re- developable. Commissioner Ekberg stated the existing setbacks for apai talents are being applied to townhomes and a different look needs to be taken at it. He recommended taking the existing table and making a new table called "MDR basic development standards for townhomes." Then, apply two principles to that table: 1) townhome development adjacent to an existing multi development (an apailinent) and 2) a townhome development that would be adjacent to single family lots. He would surmise he would like to see setbacks associated to townhomes adjacent to single family lots larger in size than setbacks associated with townhomes next to apai tiuents. An example was provided. Minnie stated that staff will create a table for the Commission to take a fmal look at in December. Chair Malina asked that staff provide the Commission a broader view of townhomes and what other jurisdictions are doing. Case Number L07 -024 continued to December 13 public hearing. DECEMBER 13, 2007 PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES PLANNLNG COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING CASE NUMBER: L07 -024 APPLICANT: City of Tukwila REQUEST: Modifications to zoning and subdivision codes to allow for zero -lot line townhouse development LOCATION: Multi family zones Minnie Dhaliwal, Senior Planner, gave the presentation for staff. She stated that this is the third time the case has been heard by the Commission. This third hearing addresses the comparison setbacks of the neighboring jurisdictions. There was a detailed overview and summary of the proposed changes on the new setbacks. Staff's new recommendations for setbacks are listed in the December 5, 2007 staff report. Since the last meeting, staff has added a definition for detached zero lot line dwelling units. Minnie answered several questions during her overview. Mike Overbeck, Developer, gave testimony on the landscape setbacks and the distance between buildings. He handed out and went over, different lot examples, based on different setbacks, to the Commission. He said his goal is to be able to come up with a zero lot line proposal that allows developers to build as many units as the zoning allows. Mr. Overbeck expressed that he is happy that the new setbacks proposed by staff allow developers to build more units. However, he stated that there are two other problems. 1) Additional landscaping setbacks affects the zoning for narrow lots 2) He also said that 20 foot setbacks between three story buildings create a problem using the maximum space and creating an aesthetic appearance. The Commission was asked to strongly consider a ten foot setback on three story buildings in the MDR between buildings so developers can utilize the maximum space. Commissioner Parrish asked Mr. Overbeck what he would propose as an alternative to the 10 foot landscaping setback. Mr. Overbeck stated that he is proposing zero landscaping setbacks for lots that are adjacent to the HDR and MDR. Jim Barker, for the applicant, went over some documentation he provided on landscape setbacks between buildings of different projects he has worked on. Mr. Barker stated that with staff's proposed landscape setbacks developers aren't able to build as many units because the lots are long and narrow. He indicated that other jurisdictions that he works in have landscape requirements. He said as long as the developer provides the total landscaping that is required, they can move landscaping around. The applicant proposes reducing the separation between buildings to ten feet and recommended a total amount of landscaping vs. landscape setbacks. Mr. Barker asked that the landscape setbacks and the separation between buildings are reconsidered. REBUTTAL: Minnie Dhaliwal, Senior Planner addressed the issue the applicant raised regarding the narrow lots. She said the first thing to figure out is how many long narrow lots the applicant is talking about, which she determined was three. She said when the codes are written they are not written for one specific property, however, staff wants to try and accommodate and make it work for developers. She determined that there would not be a problem reducing to the ten foot setback and going with a ten foot building separation up to three stories. Therefore, she said the Planning Commission might want to reconsider allowing the change. Upon further discussion and noting that properties with 10 feet side setbacks had 20 feet between buildings, Minnie suggested that the original recommendation of 20 feet building separation be maintained. Minnie explained Perimeter Landscaping Averaging, which she stated is in the City's code. The applicant could apply for Perimeter Landscaping Averaging and, if they meet the five criteria, the space would be more useable space, as long as, the screening and buffer requirements are met. The option of not having landscaping is not very attractive and would not provide high quality development. Therefore, staff recommends leaving the ten foot landscaping requirement, which is already in the code and amend the building separation to ten feet for up to three story buildings in the MDR and HDR. The landscaping setbacks for four story buildings would remain at 20 feet. Minnie read the five criteria for Perimeter Landscaping Averaging to provide clarity for the Commission. There was discussion and Minnie answered several questions. There were no further comments. The public hearing was closed. The Planning Commission deliberated. Commissioner Arthur stated that the Commissioners do not come up with guidelines to maximize density for a developer for a specific property and he is reluctant to do so. He said it is difficult to review the amount of documentation provided by the applicant at the meeting and be able to proceed. He inquired whether staff had the opportunity to review all of the documentation, and staff confirmed that they had not. Commissioner Arthur stated he was opposed to suggestions to eliminate landscaping. The Planning Commissioners concurred with Commissioner Arthur and were in consensus with staffs recommendations. COMMISSIONER EKBERG MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE CASE NUMBER L07- 024 BASED ON STAFF'S FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, TO BE FORWARDED TO THF, CITY COUNCIL. COMMESSIONER ARTHUR SECONDED THE MOTION. ALL WERE IN FAVOR. Townhouse Examples Hollycrest Townhomes Tukwila 2,200 to 3,100 sf lots (w /o roads) 1,30 to 1,650 sf houses 2 bedroom 2 bat Approx. $280,000 22 units, 3 have resold dur the last 4 years R i� lit,..:77„,„:„_,:x.,,,,t4,,,T.,...:ti,,,_3=___„.: t= --.---!,:t--,7=-7.;27,44 s r. F 1 a ,_s fi r S .._.„..i.,,..„1„.„.,:" ,,t -r�=s `tt =Its t s L r gr 'fit j F ts. a*'Pe r. tt�yt$� V t .-I .i i i t 6 b s r Attachment D Park Pointe on the Hill Condominiums Tukwila 3,000 sf lots, 1,100 sf houses 2 and 3 bedroom 3 b ath A $200,000 9 units, 3 have resold since 1995 z f 3 f 1 f a 4 r f Nsfir S_ i 'j Cobblestone Townhomes Renton 1 to 2,600 sf lots (w /o roads), 1,40 to 1,800 sf houses 3 bedroom 2 bath Approx. $300,000 s 1 s ir 1 er 3 3 a x :te !_i_,,,,,,- z 3 i r__„_4„,,,:,-- _,_z-ii,, --7:--.:-z---,..-7::_=,;;_--1-1-„, I :3' t-_ =7 4 4-= 1 _„1 -;t--1 1,=i t-c' t-. _r i'sti :L li.ftilln_ 4.11g1,11p14 ',..;.:iNk -7-,Tr' 41,, p :'_-__-f-;-1 '-'4."TfT=7:7....- =4 IF :-%77: ,L.. s, :I P 1-1 -77 17-- 4 1;--i' l' ---_;-s--_,T.--_._ 1 f. .j -jr.,,_.,--.=---i--:,:'--.::.:E-y:H-----:---?,.._, Classic Concepts Townhouses 2,200 to 2,800 SF Lots (including road) 1,400 to 1,650 sf houses 3 bedroom 2 bath Approx. $300,000 140'x400' lot (1.3 acres) ism x z c n i C' Irr Cherrywood Lane Small Lot S Fam 3 to 4,000 sf Lots (public roads) 1,700 sf houses 3 bedroom 2 bath Approx. $400,000 %2 acre communal open space I l=„ .4 k., s 4: t G ,s-i_ sir 7- ,s, 1,0iivc.,.__:-__„_:„...:„.,,,.._,:____1,._::._,_r.,:.;-,, s Yom{ 2 r_ d f Amit 5_ i5.117A i V-siiiI 4- 1 i7; i --iTi l itZt -Irs-i- „4 mt 1., 7 I s t_ v Y f 1 Examples of some detached zero lot line type of developments: r i 1 i 1 i i 1 1 SIVIIII 1 :._.,.../........................1....___• .....1 i paws sutuovu rfto4aiostux.T4ts costrfroc rrkut tun r T 7 -,I i k r 1 111 71 1//1/P_ kil '170/0- I 4 Nik zz- 4:- 1 I; P I 4111111 Ra r r Illlimili (4111 4001; t L 1111111in .4 two i 1,—.,--= ZERO LOT LINE L....7 ZERO LOT LINE The site plan for a small zero lot line development shows how staggered siting, fencing, and detached garages cart help preserve privacy and produce an in. teresting arrangement. Attached zero lot line type of development (These would be considered as townhouses under the proposed code changes) ,441 1 1 111 11 SI/ Jurisdiction Tukwila Seattle Renton SeaTac Olympia Standard MDR I HDR 1 Lowrise 1-41 R -14 1 RM I T 1 R6 -12 1 Density Min 8 Max Min 14 Max Min 12 Max Min 6 Max Units /Acre Max 14.5 Max 22 14 35 24 12 Height 25 10 for 2 Stories or 3 Stories or 30 45 pitched roof 30' 35' 35' 35' Max Attached 1 1 1 3 to 6 1 1 1 4 Max Build. 50', 100 w/ 50`,0€ v/- Length Modulation Modulation_ 115' Lot Width 180' Along 60 20' or 25' 14' street 16' Impervious Surface 50% 50% 85% 70% Building Coverage 50% 50% 75% 55% 70% Setbacks: Front Front 20', 10' w/ 5' Min, Av. access 20', 10 -15' (0' side or rear 1st Floor 15 15 Of adjacent w /Alley 10' 5' with design) parking Front 2nd 20 1 20 9 1 1 1 1 1 1 Front 3rd 30 I 0 1 1 1 I 1 L___,457_ Front 4th =1 1 1 1 1 2nd Front 1st House 10' 7.5 7.5 Garage 18' 10' 10' 2nd Front 2nd 10 1 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 2nd Front 3rd 15 1 15- 1 1 1 I 1 2nd Front 4th 1 225 1 1 1 1 1 Side 1st 5', 10' when 5' (0' with 10 10 8' Av, 6' Min next to SF 3' design) 10' Side 2nd 20 20 8' Av, 6' Min Side 3rd 20 (30 next 20 (30 next to LDR) to LDR) 9' Av, 6' Min Side 4th 11' Av, 6' _--__34 Min Rear 1st 25' or 15% 10' (0' with 10 10 lot depth 15' 5' design) 20' Rear 2nd 20 1 20 1 1 1 1 1 Rear 3rd 20 (30 next 20 (30 next to LDR) to LDR) Rear 4th Recreation 400, 25% 400, 25% Space sf per unit shared play shared play Average 200 private, area area 300 private 75 shared Other Alley Access Required Attachment E To: Community Affairs Parks Committee, Tukwila City Council, Tukwila CC: Minnie Dhaliwal, Senior Planner, City of Tukwila From: Mike Overbeck 4620 S 148 Street Tukwila, WA 98168 RE: Code: 07 -024 Modifications To Zoning Zero Lot Line Townhomes (3 Bdrm) In HDR and MDR Zones Goal: To encourage zoning code changes that enable under reasonable circumstances the construction of actual buildable units that match the number of allowable units for which the land was previously zoned. (For example, HDR 1 unit per 2,000 sq ft; MDR 1 unit per 3,000 sq ft) Scope of Lots Affected: There are a total of 203 lots in Tukwila that this zoning modification would affect. Our discussion today is focusing only on the lots less than 80 feet wide (approximately 70 lots or 34.5% of the total lots). Please refer to Chart A. Comments Regarding Land Valuation Criteria For Redevelopable Lots: The current criteria for valuing redevelopable land used by the City of Tukwila Planners do not seem to be in congruence with true market land values. In my opinion, if you take an existing parcel with a Single Family Residence on it and subdivide it using the proposed zoning changes, in most cases, the land would become of greater value than the existing appraised value. Comments Regarding Current Recommendation From DCD Informational Memorandum Dated Jan 23, 2008 And Code Changes Dated Jan 28, 2008: 1) (a) Landscaping setbacks of 10 ft on the side yard's in HDR zoning make it almost impossible to build a livable 3 bedroom unit in Tukwila's narrow lot's. Please refer to the Site Plan example on Page 2 of the Information Memorandum from the DCD. i) In this example, the landscaping setbacks are approximately three to five feet (Tukwila's setbacks are 10 feet) ii) There is ten feet between buildings (Tukwila reauires 20 for a three story dwelling) iii) There is not a designated play area (Tukwila requires one for ten or more units) Attachment G (b) On Page 4 of the DCD Information Memorandum, the proposal calls for a minimum of 400 sq ft of recreation area per unit and it states that 250 sq ft of that has to be private. This requirement is 150 sf larger (or 37% more) than Seattle and SeaTac currently require. Each of these jurisdictions requires just 250 sf of recreation space and only 3 to 5 feet of landscaping. If Tukwila maintains its stricter recreation space requirement of 400 sf to make the units more aesthetically appealing to the inhabitants, it could allow some flexibility in the perimeter landscaping setback requirements. Recommended Solutions: 1) Reduce the landscape setback requirements from 10 ft to 5 ft on the sides and back, leaving the front setback still at 15 feet. These smaller landscape setbacks in conjunction with current recreation space setbacks, building setbacks and modulation requirements should achieve neighborhood aesthetic goals. The aforementioned setbacks are more or equal to adjoining jurisdictions such as Renton, SeaTac, Seattle, Unincorporated King County. 2) Allow a considerable amount of flexibility in perimeter averaging in reference to the landscape setbacks because it becomes challenging on these narrow lots. 3) Keep the recreation requirements at 400square feet to help off set this reduction in Landscaping requirements. Chart A: HDR/MDR Lots Potential Townhouse Sites f Lots Narrow Lots HDR Parcels I 96 32 HDR Vacant/Redevelopable 1 26 2 MDR Parcels 1 71 35 MDR Vacant /Redevelopable 1 10 J 1 TOTAL PARCELS 203 70 34.5% 5% accuracy of counted lots **80 feet wide or less Chart B: Landscape Setback Requirements Seattle Tukwila King County Unincorporated Front 3 1 15 10 Side J 3 I 10 5 Back 1 3 I 10 I 5 Diagram C: Landscape Requirements >`f1' Tukwila's Current Landscape Requirements n. tw Lot Size: 304 x 69 20,976 I i 1 Landscape: FY= 15' i SY =10' :l r RY =10' Front Yard 15 x 49 735 Side, 10 x 304 3096 -A 10 x 304 3096 Rear Yard 10 x 49 490 E Total 7417 (35% of total lot) 'j` Seattle's Current Landscape Reauirements L:t t� Lot Size: 304 x 69 20,976 s t._ I z j Landscape: 3' x perimeter l -1_F 3x746=2238 t Total: 2238 (11% of total lot) i aL f c F King Countv's Current Landscape Requirements* >1- z *Unincorporated 1 1_ n f Lot Size: 304 x 69 20,976 F Landscape: FY 10' f' RY 5' w4 s R z: I Front Yard 10 x 49 490 P Side, 5 x 304 1548 r 5 x 304 1548 r-4 ri Rear Yard 5 x 49 245 i Total 3831 fa' 1 (18% of total lot) Zero Lot Line Townhome Example .A' n..4r 1125--$24 —7 tea I ii 11. Ifi r ,1'11. :tt. I(1 'nt. t. =I "lu,. 'tiv :V., 1I:e i ,fir CI '-.1 i ..:11;1-. i E __.E.T 2 1 .14B T111111 1:7111011 WE i:,ii p 7 —U I- [[Ej a} '1. 1 9E19E- t alit 1 I Mi altil F f (jt y �,pp i■ ps ..•e .I Fitl r..c t5tt 1 l '!ia} h tai 1 `I lg yi G i i I I f ILVIA qg ag i I �I.11AI 1t1 1 (JJ �I 1 �lw�l f ■I a 1I f1 i Vile i t usinI YIIII•Y/YIIII Ills t. ii. III UYMVI kfl u tlil 1 It __mil fl- X TG Drfe 4 off► /47, Jam- -.9 0, f .sy City of Tukwila 'w o Community Affairs and Parks Committee COMMUNITY AFFAIRS AND PARKS COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes Januafy 28, 2008 5:00 p.m.; Conference Room #3 PRESENT Councilmembers: Joan Hernandez, Chair; Verna Griffin and De'Sean Quinn Staff: Bruce Fletcher, Jack Pace, Minnie Dhaliwal, Rhonda Berry, Derek Speck and Kimberly Matej Guests: Chuck Parrish, Mike Overbeck (resident), Julia Talcott (resident), Christi Sheridan Cisler (resident), Doug Cisler (resident), Chris Slatt, Steve Beck, Julie Hoyle -Lowe and Jamie Durkin CALL TO ORDER: Chair Hernandez called the meeting to order at 5:01 p.m. I. PRESENTATIONS No presentations. II. BUSINESS AGENDA A. Modifications to Zoning and Subdivision Codes to Allow for Zero -Lot Line Townhouse Development Staff is requesting a public hearing for modifications to Zoning and Subdivision Codes in order to allow for zero -lot line townhouse development in Tukwila. In summary, City staff is looking at existing land which is zoned multi- family and is seeking to identify opportunities that will provide owner occupied housing rather than apartment complexes. Redevelopable areas as well as current undeveloped areas in the City's multi family zones are mostly comprised of long and narrow lots, which lead to some challenges when building residential units. Townhouse development offers the opportunity to build another owner- occupied product besides condominiums. Suggested modifications to the Zoning and Subdivision Codes will provide guidelines and set the design standards expected for townhouse development in the Tukwila community. The goal is to publish townhouse design guidelines separate from the existing Multi- Family Design Guidelines which the Council adopted in 1992. Staff stated that several neighboring jurisdictions have implemented townhouse development within their communities. Committee Chair Hernandez would like to hear from other cities that have already adopted zero -lot line townhouse development guidelines. Code changes relative to townhouse development have been to the Planning Commission several times. Staff desires to forward the Planning Commission's recommendations to full Council and hold a public hearing on the changes on February 11, 2008. Staff communicated that several pre applications have been submitted in anticipation of this ordinance. Committee Chair Hernandez said that although the proposed Townhouse Design Guidelines are a good start in the right direction, she feels that it is not clear in the proposal which amenities are required and which are optional. She would like staff to use clarifying language as well as provide some examples on guideline interpretation and criteria application. Additionally, Councilmember Griffin stated that she would like to see a map of what areas in the City this would be applicable to included in the packet that will go to full Council. Community Affairs Parks Committee Minutes January 28. 2008 Paae 2 Mike Overbeck, a Tukwila resident and potential developer, distributed an informational memo to attendees. He said that he is looking at townhouse development from a financial standpoint which offers new economic opportunity to potential developers. He has attended several of the Panning Commission meetings where the applicable zoning and subdivision codes have been discussed. He stated that his main focus is that Tukwilas suggested landscape setbacks are more stringent than King County, Seattle and other surrounding cities. He would like staff to re- assess the need for such stringent setbacks. Jack Pace recommended that Mr. Overbeck attend the February 11 public hearing so that his comments can be on record. After the hearing, full Council can direct staff to make specific changes. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO FEBRUARY 11 COW FOR PUBLIC HEARING. B. Amendment #1 to Contract #03 -058 with Starfire Snorts Starfire Sports, who currently has a long -term lease with the City for Fort Dent Park, is requesting an amendment to their existing contract with the City. This amendment will eliminate the softball fields currently located at the Park and add new soccer fields and an accompanying locker room to allow for a practice area that will be subleased to the Major League Soccer (MLS) franchise coming to Seattle. Staff stated that they have been working together with Starfire personnel to create contract language that is fair to both Starfire and the City. In addition to the changes outlined above, a modification has been made to the parking section which Chris Slatt of Starfire believes captures the spirit of what needs to be done; that there is no longer a sole commitment on the side of the City to respond to parking issues. Instead, the City and Starfire agree to work together to identify funding to provide additional parking. Committee Chair Hernandez commented on Section 5.3 and 5.3.2 on page 10 of the current contract, which outlines the City's obligations relating to parking. She recommended that these sections be reviewed to ensure that all clauses regarding parking are consistent with proposed changes. Mr. Slatt discussed at length the conversion that will take place if this amendment is approved. The information he provided included: turf and grass fields, of which the grass field would have very limited public access due to wear and tear; and the creation of mod fields. He stated that the MLS group intends to spend approximately $2 million on the changes. He also commented that the conversion will not increase parking requirements. Mr. Slatt also passed around an additional proposed contract amendment that will be brought to full Council (Section 5.12). This change will allow Tukwila residents to be exempt from parking fees during Starfire special events with proof of residency. Some Committee members commented that it might be beneficial for Starfire to show their presentation at full Council. It was noted, however, that the majority of Council has already seen the presentation. Due to the proposed elimination of the softball fields at Fort Dent, the Committee expressed a desire and need for softball field users to have an opportunity to responded to and comment on this contract amendment at both the February 11 COW and February 18 Regular meeting (or other such regular meeting to which this items may be assigned). UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO FEBRUARY 11 COW. IQ. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 6:39 p.m. Next meeting: Monday, February 11, 2008 5:00 p.m. Conference Room #3 Committee Chair Approval Mi ,utes by KAM.