HomeMy WebLinkAboutReg 2010-02-16 Item 7 - Ordinance - Moratorium on Preservation of Industrial Land in Manufacturing Industrial Center ZonesCAS NUMBER: 10-018
AGENDA ITEM TITLE
SPONSOR'S
SUMMARY
Fund Source:
Comments:
MTG. DATE
02/16/10
COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
Initials
Meeting Date Prepared by I or_view 1 "-council review
02/16/10 JP 1 f 1' J }�,C'
1 v
ITEM INFORMATION
ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: FEBRUARY 16, 2010
Moratorium on certain non industrial uses within certain areas of the City.
CATEGORY Discussion Motion n Resolution Ordinance Bid Award
Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date
Mtg Date 02/16/10 Mtg Date
ITEM No.
Public Hearing Other
Mtg Date 4/12/10 Mtg Date
SPONSOR Council Mayor Adm Svcs DCD I I Finance Fire E Legal P &R Police I Pi/
The attached emergency moratorium will prevent certain non industrial uses from being
able to establish within the City's MIC zone. During the moratorium period staff will study
the various issues associated with the City's MIC area. As part of the biennial 2009 -10
budget, the City Council identified a desire to research and analyze development issues
within the City's Manufacturing Industrial Center zones.
REVIEWED BY n COW Mtg. CA &P Cmte n F &S Cmte Transportation Cmte
Utilities Cmte Arts Comm. Parks Comm. Planning Comm.
DATE: None, emergency declaration
RECOMMENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN. Department of Community Development
COMMITTEE Not reviewed by Committee, Emergency Declaration
COST IMPACT /FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION
MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS
02/16/10 1 Informational Memorandum dated 2/10/10 from Jack Pace, DCD Director
Ordinance in Final Form
Map of MIC Area
Report "The Future of Seattle's Industrial Lands"
4 i
48
TO:
City of Tukwila
Mayor Haggerton
City Council
FROM: Jack Pace, Director
DATE: February 10, 2010
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
SUBJECT: Moratorium on certain non industrial uses within the City's Manufacturing
Industrial Center (MIC)
ISSUE
Should the City adopt a moratorium prohibiting the establishment or expansion of certain types
of non industrial uses within the City's two Manufacturing Industrial Center (MIC) zones?
BACKGROUND
As part of the City's 2009/10 biannual budget, the City Council tasked DCD staff with examining
issues associated with the City's Manufacturing Industrial Centers (Tukwila 2009/10 Budget
page 85). King County has five areas designated as Manufacturing Industrial Centers (MIC) by
Countywide Planning Policies. The City of Tukwila contains one of these centers, located in the
north part of the City. The City's MIC area abuts one of the MIC areas located in the City of
Seattle; thus, creating the largest MIC zone in the County.
The purpose of the MIC zoning designation is to preserve and enhance the industrial land
supply for the region. Industrial jobs, such as manufacturing jobs, provide a significant number
of living wage jobs, which in turn support other jobs throughout the region. These MIC areas
are essential to the overall economic health of the City and region. The MIC designation also
makes available a significant number of funding sources for transit and capital improvements.
Essentially, MIC areas, as well as Urban Center areas, are supposed to receive first priority for
funding.
The City's MIC policies must be consistent with the Countywide Planning Policies. Countywide
Planning Policy LU -52 states that by 2010 jurisdictions that contain MIC areas must ensure that
they have plans and policies in place that achieve the following goals:
1. Preserve and encourage the aggregation of vacant or non manufacturing /industrial land
parcels sized for manufacturing /industrial uses;
2. Discourage land uses which are not compatible with manufacturing, industrial, and
advanced technology uses;
3. Accommodate a minimum of 10,000 jobs; and
4. Limit the size of offices and retail unless as an accessory use.
In recent years extreme pressure has been placed on all MIC areas, including Tukwila's.
Because industrial land is typically of lower value than commercial land, there is constant
pressure by non industrial users to locate in these zones. The increased land values can drive
out existing industrial users and prevent new industries from being established.
49
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
DISCUSSION
In 2007, the City of Seattle completed an extensive study of their industrial land supply and
made significant code changes to preserve industrial land. A copy of their final report is
attached. The proposed moratorium would temporarily prevent non industrial uses from
establishing or expanding within the MIC area in order to give staff time to study the issues
associated with the City's MIC area and ensure that we are complying with Countywide
Planning Policies.
Within 60 -days of adoption of the moratorium the City is required to hold a public hearing. At
the public hearing, staff will present the Council with a detailed work plan to brief the Council on
issues associated with the City's MIC zone. The work plan will include some topic areas that
staff would like to explore with the MIC review and will also include provisions to engage
stakeholders.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council is being asked to approve the ordinance as submitted and to schedule a public
hearing for April 12, 2010.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ordinance in Final Form
2. Map of MIC area
3. The Future of Seattle's Industrial Lands, dated July 2007
50 C:1Temp\XPgrpwiseUnfoMemo.doc
C itv of T
Washington
Ordinance No.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, RELATING TO THE PRESERVATION OF INDUSTRIAL
LAND WITHIN THE CITY'S MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIAL CENTER,
ESTABLISHING A SIX -MONTH MORATORIUM ON THE ACCEPTANCE
OF APPLICATIONS FOR AND ISSUANCE OF LAND USE, BUILDING AND
DEVELOPMENT PERMITS, BUSINESS LICENSES AND /OR APPROVALS
FOR ANY CHANGE IN USE FOR CERTAIN NON INDUSTRIAL USES
WITHIN THE MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIAL CENTER ZONE;
PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; DECLARING AN EMERGENCY AND
ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila has the authority to adopt a moratorium pursuant
to RCW 35A.63.220; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila contains one of five manufacturing and industrial
centers (MIC) in the County; and
WHEREAS, these MIC areas are designated via a regional process through the
County -wide Planning Policies; and
WHEREAS, the King County County-wide Planning Policies state that by 2010
jurisdictions that contain MIC areas shall have zoning and detailed plans in place to
achieve the following goals: 1) Preserve and encourage the aggregation of vacant or
non conforming /industrial land parcels sized for manufacturing /industrial uses; 2)
Discourage land uses that are not compatible with manufacturing, industrial and
advanced technology uses; 3) Accommodate a minimum of 10,000 jobs; and 4) Limit the
size of office and retail unless as an accessory use; and
WHEREAS, as part of the 2009 -2010 biennial budget, the Mayor's Office and the
City Council identified a goal of updating the City's zoning and development
regulations within the City's MIC area; and
WHEREAS, manufacturing jobs typically provide living wage jobs that the City
Council desires to be retained within the City; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila's MIC area borders the City of Seattle's MIC zoned
area and coordination between the City of Seattle, the City of Tukwila and King County
is needed in order to preserve, protect and enhance the region's industrial land supply,
which is essential to the long -term economic vitality of the region; and
WHEREAS, the King County County -wide Planning Policies note, "MIC
Employment Centers are key components of the regional economy. These areas are
characterized by a significant amount of manufacturing, industrial and advanced
technology employment and
WHEREAS, the King County County -wide Planning Policies note that "cities that
contain MIC areas should discourage and prevent incompatible uses within the MIC
areas and
W: \Word Processing \Ordinances\Moratorium Non Industrial MIC Zone.docx
JP:ksn 2/11 /2010
Page 1 of 3
51
52
WHEREAS, the King County County -wide Planning Policies state that all
jurisdictions within the County benefit from and are impacted by the five MIC areas
located within the County; and
WHEREAS, the City's current regulations within the MIC area allow a wide range
of non industrial uses, such as retail, office and recreation; and
WHEREAS, the pressure to convert industrial land to non industrial land increases
the land value in the MIC zones and these rising land values can threaten to push
manufacturing businesses out of the region; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Tukwila desires to research and study
the land supply within the MIC zone in order to determine if the City's development
regulations act to retain existing and attract new manufacturing businesses to the City;
NOW THERFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUICWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Moratorium Imposed. The City hereby imposes a moratorium upon the
acceptance of applications for and issuance of land use, building and development
permits, business licenses and /or approvals for certain non manufacturing uses within
both the MIC /H and MIC /L zones, including, but not limited to:
1. Adult entertainment establishments;
2. Automotive services;
3. Beauty or barber shops;
4. Bicycle repair shops;
5. Stand -alone daycare centers not associated with an existing business within the
MIC /H or MIC /L zones or associated with a new manufacturing use within those
zones;
6. Commercial laundries;
7. Financial services;
8. Hotels;
9. Laundries, including self serve, dry cleaning, tailoring and dyeing;
10. Libraries;
11. Museums;
12. Art galleries;
13. Motels;
14. Offices not associated with a permitted manufacturing use in TMC 18.38.020;
15. Outpatient, inpatient, and emergency medical and dental facilities;
16. Parks, trails, picnic areas and playgrounds (public);
17. Recreation facilities, athletic or health clubs;
18. Rental of vehicles not requiring a commercial driver's license (including
automobiles, sport utility vehicles, mini -vans, recreational vehicles, cargo vans and
certain trucks);
19. Restaurants;
20. Schools and studios for education or self- improvement;
W:1Word Processing Ordinances\Moratorium Non Industrial MIC Zone.docx
JP.ksn 2/11/2010
Page 2 of 3
21. Taverns, nightclubs;
22. Self- storage facilities;
23. Colleges and universities;
24. Fire and police stations;
25. Park and -ride lots;
26. Sports fields;
27. Community centers;
28. Golf courses; and
29. Retail sales not associated with an on -site manufacturing use.
Section 2. Vesting. Section 1 of this ordinance shall not apply to any project which
submitted a completed building permit application prior to the effective date of this
ordinance.
Section 3. Public Hearing. Pursuant to RCW 35A.63.220, a public hearing will be
held on or before April 12, 2010 for the purpose of adopting findings and conclusions in
support of the provisions of this ordinance.
Section 4. Duration. The moratorium imposed hereunder shall be in effect until
August 16, 2010, unless extended by the City Council, pursuant to State law.
Section 5. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause or
phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to
be invalid, unconstitutional or unenforceable for any reason by a court of competent
jurisdiction, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or
constitutionality of the remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any
other person or situation.
Section 6. Declaration of Emergency Effective Date. For the reasons set forth
above, and to promote the objectives stated herein, the City Council finds that a public
emergency exists, necessitating that this ordinance take effect immediately upon its
passage by a majority plus one of the whole membership of the Council in order to
protect the public health, safety, property and general welfare. This ordinance shall take
effect and be in full force immediately upon passage by the City Council. A summary of
this ordinance may be published in lieu of publishing the ordinance in its entirety.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON,
at a Regular Meeting thereof this day of 2010.
ATTEST/ AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, CMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Office of the City Attorney
W: \Word Processing Ordinances\Moratorium Non Industrial MIC Zone.docx
JP:ksn 2/11/2010
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
Page3 of3
53
54
MIC / Manufacturing Industrial Center
Zoning Map
56
t
S
Report
Be attie P
l a n n i n
Juty 20Q7 g Commission
►on
58
Seattle Planning Commission
INTRODUCTION pl
Seattle Planning Commission Role in Seattle's Industrial
Lands Policy
Seattle Planning Commission Involvement in Creating
an Industrial Lands Strategy
City's Effort to Create an Industrial Lands Strategy
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS AND OUTCOME p3
Purpose of Stakeholder Involvement
Explanation of Stakeholder Involvement and
Workshop Series
Seven Key Themes Identified by Stakeholders p6
SEATTLE PLANNING COMMISSION OBSERVATIONS
AND RECOMMENDATIONS p10
Identifying the Fundamental Questions
Seattle Planning Commission Observations p11
Seattle Planning Commission Recommendations p14
CONCLUSION p 17
COVER ART:
Little Ship (T18), 2000
Mary Iverson
Oil on Canvas, 6" x 8" x 1"
Seattle City Light 1% for Art
Portable Works Collection
Paintings shown above are in the
Seattle City Light 1% for Art Portable
Works Collection. Each painting is by
Mary Iverson and is featured later in
this document.
Artist Statement:
My paintings feature a uniquely Seattle icon, the orange
container cranes stationed at Seattle's waterfront. Part figure,
part machine and part archetype, the crane is for me a symbol
of personal strength. At the same time, my paintings of the cranes
generate a universal appeal, as the cranes are such a prominent
feature of our waterfront. These paintings were all executed
on site, or en plein air. To get the feeling for the size, color and
presence of the cranes, it was important for me to be painting on
location, near the cranes, and experiencing all the activities on
the shipping terminals.
INTRODUCTION
"Our vision of the future is one in which our city
has thriving neighborhoods where residents
and businesses work with the City to plan and
produce projects that enhance the quality of
life for those who live, work and play in Seattle."
Seattle Planning Commission
About the Commission
The Planning Commission, established by charter in 1946,
is an independent voluntary 16 member advisory body
appointed by the Mayor, City Council, and the Commission
itself.This diverse group is made up of people who bring
a wide array of valuable expertise and perspectives to
important planning decision in the City of Seattle.The role of
the Commission is to advise the Mayor, City Council, and City
departments on broad planning goals, policies, and plans
for the physical development of Seattle. It reviews and use,
transportation and neighborhood planning efforts using the
framework of Seattle's Comprehensive Plan and the long
range vision described in the Plan.
Seattle Planning Commission Role in
Seattle's Industrial Lands Policy
The Seattle Planning Commission is the steward of Seattle's
Comprehensive Plan, Toward a Sustainable Seattle, a 20 -year
policy plan designed to articulate a vision of how Seattle will
grow. In general, the goals define a future outcome that the
City is aiming for, and the policies provide guidance for more
specific decisions that will be made over time.
Preserving designated industrial lands for industrial uses
is an important goal identified in the City of Seattle's
Comprehensive PIan.The Plan recognizes that industrial
zoned land provides a safe haven for industrial businesses
where their operations are less likely to impinge on other,
non compatible uses. In recent years there have been
multiple requests to change Comprehensive Plan policies
and land use zoning designations for industrial properties.
These requests reflect an increasing pressure to convert
industrial lands to other uses. We have a growing concern
about these requests and the desire of individual land
owners to convert their industrial zoned land to non-
industrial uses. We feel strongly that the City must not simply
respond to each request on a case by case basis, but instead
make rational decisions based on an informed and well
thought out strategy.
Seattle Planning Commission Involvement
in Creating an Industrial Lands Strategy
In recognition of the trend toward increased requests to
change the nature of industrial land, in 2004 the Mayor's
Office requested the Commission's assistance in helping
the City determine an overall approach for industrial lands.
Also in 2004, we reviewed the Ten -Year Comprehensive Plan
Update. During that process we called on the City to develop
an industrial lands strategy that would consider the City's
overall objectives for maintaining and attracting industrial
jobs and its role and opportunities within the regional
context rather than on a case by case basis. We believe
that an industrial lands strategy can provide overarching
guidance to the City when responding to specific requests
for zoning or land use changes in industrial areas.
Based on the Commission's recommendation, City Council
asked the Department of Planning and Development (DPD)
in 2005 to complete a study that would help the Council
make decisions about the proposed Comprehensive Plan
amendments.The Department of Planning and Development
(DPD) along with the Office of Economic Development and
the Planning Commission completed the study in August
2005. In addition, we did independent research looking at
how five other cities approached similar efforts to create an
industrial lands strategy. We released the Comparison of
Industrial Land Strategies report in November of 2005. We
believed that the study and our report provided a strong
compelling rationale to call for the City of Seattle to create
a thoughtful 'strategy' regarding how best the City will
structure land use to meet the needs of or make changes in
the future to industrial and manufacturing land uses.
The Planning Commission and the Department of Planning and Development
co- sponsored a four -part workshop series in the Spring of2007.
59
60
INTRODUCTION (continued)
In late 2005 the Seattle City Council responded to the
Commission's call for action by allocating funds for DPD,
with assistance from the Commission, to create an Industrial
Lands Strategy. Since that time we have been working very
closely with DPD to assist them in their effort to create a
strategy. The Commission has been particularly involved in
the stakeholder involvement process.
City's Effort to Create an Industrial Lands
Strategy
In 2006 the City Council adopted a supplemental budget,
funding DPD to prepare an Industrial Lands Strategy to
ensure adequate land to accommodate the expected
future amount of industrial uses, and to provide criteria for
evaluating future requests to reclassify industrial lands.
DPD began conducting research to identify the key issues
facing industrial businesses in the city, to see how other
cities have addressed similar issues, and to work with the
community to develop approaches that can help Seattle
meet its objectives for industrial land. DPD will have
recommendations completed in time to inform City Council
decisions on the 2007 Comprehensive Plan amendments,
which include requests for changes to industrial land.
The Commission and DPD conducted an extensive process to engage
stakeholders in a discussion about the future of Seattle's industrial lands.
In 2006 DPD began extensive background analysis, research,
survey work and public involvement to help better inform
Seattle's Industrial Lands Strategy. They produced and
released four reports earlier this year including:
Seattle's Industrial Lands Backaround
Report features information including the
existing framework of industrial policies in Seattle,
statistics about land use and facilities in industrial
zoned areas, detailed profiles of seven industrial
neighborhoods, a summary of survey findings
highlighting the perspectives of industrial business
owners, and historical and projected employment
information.
Industrial Lands Survey: Survey of Business
Owners provides the results of a survey of 100
industrial businesses about their operations and the
opportunities they have and the challenges they
face in Seattle.
Industrial Lands Survey: investigation of
Comparable Cities provides information on
how eight North American cities are currently
handling the unique industrial issues in each of
those cities.
Industrial Lands Survey: Perspectives on
the Benefits and Chrallenaes of Business
Opportunities in Seattle's Industrial Lands
provides more detailed information than what was
gathered in the larger Survey of Business Owners.
This focused study was designed to gather more
specific information from a targeted group of
industrial business owners.
In addition to cosponsoring our stakeholder workshop series
DPD also held special focus groups and met with several
constituency groups in order to ensure that they were
hearing a broad and diverse set of perspectives.
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS AND OUTCOMES
Purpose of Stakeholder Involvement
The Planning Commission sought to engage the
public and industrial lands stakeholders as an
important component of the Industrial Lands
Strategy. This engagement was meant to achieve
the following:
Engage the public and stakeholders in a
discussion about the future of Seattle's
industrial lands
Obtain input about the state of industrial lands
and current trends affecting those lands from
stakeholders closely involved with these areas
Ensure adequate public review of the Industrial
Lands Strategy process
Educate the public about strategies for approaching
industrial lands taken by other major cities and the
results of the Department of Planning and Development's
(DPD's) research element of the Industrial Lands Strategy
Document public and stakeholder concerns and
suggestions for the future of Seattle's industrial lands
Explanation of Stakeholder Involvement
The Planning Commission and DPD co- hosted a four
part workshop series seeking input from the public and
stakeholders about the Industrial Lands Strategy. These
events included:
Event One Lessons from Other Cities
To open the workshop series the Planning Commission
organized a panel discussion was held with leading industrial
lands experts from Chicago, Portland, and Vancouver, BC on
March 29, 2007.The panelists discussed the challenges and
issues facing these cities with regard to industrial land and
how they have attempted to resolve those issues through
land use and zoning strategies.
City staff take Event One panelists on a tour of Seattle's industrial areas,
including Fisherman's Terminal.
Panelists included:
Nora L. Curry, City of Chicago, Director of Industrial
Initiatives and Policy, Department of Planning and
Development;
Christina DeMarco, Greater Vancouver Regional District,
Regional Development Division Manager, Policy and
Planning Department, and;
Steve Kountz, City of Portland, Senior Economic Planner,
Bureau of Planning.
Stakeholders were able to ask the panelists questions and
make comments about their experiences and how strategies
used in other cities might be applied in Seattle.
Event Two Conversations about Industrial Lands:
Challenges and Opportunities
The second workshop was held on April 10, 2007. At this
event we held a roundtable discussion with industrial lands
stakeholders about the current challenges and opportunities
related to preserving industrial land for industrial uses.The
event was facilitated by Commissioner Linda Amato, and
covered the topics of transportation and freight mobility and
land constraints and conversions.
At Event Two, Commissioner Linda Amato leads a round table discussion
with stakeholders focused on transportation, freight mobility and land
constraints.
3
61
62
4
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS AND OUTCOMES
Below: Commissioner Chris Fiori leads stakeholders in a roundtable
discussion about the future of Seattle's industry at Event Three.
Right and at bottom of page: additional photos from Event Three.
Event Three Conversations about Industrial Lands:
The Future of Industry in Seattle
On April 24, 2007 we held another roundtable discussion
with stakeholders about the future of Seattle's industry.
Issues including changes in the global marketplace, how to
allow for flexibility and new opportunities, and emerging
industries were explored.The event was facilitated by
Commissioner Chris Fiori and topics included regional
perspectives, the future of the port, new and emerging
industrial business. In addition, we asked several individuals
to make opening remarks relevant to the topics to be
discussed in this workshop. The participants heard opening
remarks from Eric Schinfeld, Economic Policy Analyst, Puget
Sound Regional Council; Phil Lutes, Deputy Managing
Director at the Port of Seattle Seaport Division; and Philipp
Schmidt- Pathmann, President, Waste Recovery Seattle
International.
Event Four Alternatives for Moving Forward
The fourth and final workshop, held on May 31, 2007, was a
forum at which we presented preliminary key themes from
the stakeholder involvement process and DPD shared their
preliminary thinking about the Industrial Lands Strategy.
The key themes provide a documentation of the outreach
process and an objective overview of what we heard
from stakeholders. The event included an opportunity
for participants to provide input on the Commission's
observations and DPD's thoughts on the study. The
event was facilitated by Commission Chair Jerry Finrow,
who presented Commission observations and facilitated
participant discussion to make sure the Commission 'got it
right; In addition, DPD staff presented early thoughts on the
Industrial Lands Strategy. The event included an opportunity
for participants to provide input on the Commission's
observations and DPD's thoughts on the study.
Seattle Zoning Map
Areas zoned industrial make up
5,142 acres of land or 12% of
the total land area.
Industrial Areas of Seattle
Manufacturing Industrial Center
Zoning
Downtown
012:DHI;DoC2,00C1iCMC. DAR; DRC
LOM. IDR. Peak PSM
Commercial
ME CI. C2
Neighborhood Commercial
sm. WAR: Nc3. NC2. NCI. NCR
High-Density Muld.Farrdly
BM
01. MR, MR=
LOW-Rise MUlti-Family
EN 13; 1.1iRC,12. Li. UM; LC,. L3RC.Lea3C
single Family
SF SOW; SF 7200, SF S6
am RSI-
IndUstrIal
IB
EMI 131
gsig 102
MaJor Institution
T. 0
fq.ulto a
Ln.1:1.7
tAlq.qhinxt
63
64
6
Seven Key Themes Identified by Stakeholders
Little Ship #2, 2000
Mary Iverson
Oil on Canvas, 7" x 5" x 1"
Seattle City Light 1% for Art
Portable Works Collection
There was broad consensus by stakeholders that defining what is meant by
`industrial business' is often a difficult endeavor. Stakeholders suggested that the
current definition needs to be clearer, and a nuanced approach should be taken
when developing this definition.
Businesses change rapidly over time, as new
industries develop and older industries recede.
Many of Seattle's regulations regarding industrial
lands were created during a different era, and certain
types of new businesses exist today that, while
not currently allowed in industrial zones, could
potentially utilize industrially zoned lands.
Many modern'industrial'businesses are no longer the
polluting, noisy type of business many people believe
they are.
When considering what areas should be considered
'industrial; a nuanced approach should be used, as
there are certain areas where primarily non industrial
businesses are located in industrial zones.
Other cities have struggled to provide enough flexibility
in their zoning regulations to allow for innovation in
industry and attract new businesses, while maintaining
strict enough regulations to keep undesired uses out of
industrial zones.
Participants in the outreach process noted that there is a lack of certainty and
clarity concerning what criteria the City of Seattle uses to rezone industrial land to
non industrial uses. They suggested that the City should consider ways to create
more certainty and provide more predictability for industrial businesses that want to
make long term investments, and there should be a clear public policy rationale for
whatever criteria are developed.
There appears to be a disconnect between the Industrial zoning currently provides a place for 24 -hour,
Comprehensive Plan's policies regarding industrial noisy operations that are critical to the city's economy.
lands, which advocate for preservation of industrial Criteria that would accommodate more flexible uses
lands, and the City's actual practices regarding issuing would need to explain why these other uses could not
permits for non industrial uses in industrial zones. be accommodated in other areas of the city and the
Clear criteria for rezones need to be developed. effect of new uses on existing businesses.
Pressure on industrial lands, a phenomenon not unique to Seattle, is a major concern
for many industrial business owners. Some participants noted that this pressure is
pushing land costs up, forcing businesses out of Seattle or limiting their opportunities
to expand, and prompting the increasing number of requests for the conversion of
industrial lands to non industrial uses.
Demand for industrial lands in Seattle is strong, with
very low vacancy rates. However, the effect land cost
has on the overall cost of doing business in Seattle
will impact the ability to maintain Seattle's industrial
sectors.
Seattle, along with Chicago, Portland and Vancouver,
B.C., have struggled with maintaining industrial
Other major cities have deemed industrial lands integral to their future success and
have taken significant steps to ensure that success.
In Chicago, Portland and Vancouver, B.C.,
policymakers have concluded that industrial lands are
important public resources that should be preserved.
Other cities' reasons include industrial businesses
providing high paying jobs that do not require a
college education and can often last someone's entire
career, producing additional jobs in related industries,
and helping diversify their city's economy.
Other major cities have instituted zoning areas with
strict regulations designed to protect and foster
their industrial businesses, which emphasize the
need for preservation not just of industrial lands,
but of the businesses in them that could be lost to
even Key Themes identified by fitakehotdrs
e
lands for industrial uses due to widespread speculation
on zoning changes in industrial areas. This has caused
difficulty for industrial businesses trying to locate or
expand in the city.
Many businesses are leaving Seattle for cheaper and
and labor, which is available in surrounding areas in the
region or overseas.
other markets. These zoning areas stabilize land use.
thus giving industrial business owners certainty and
predictability when they're making and use decisions,
thus promoting investment in their properties.
Common elements of these policies include creating
guidelines eliminating or strictly limiting the potential
for land in certain industrial zones to be rezoned and
limiting the type and size of non industrial uses in
industrial areas.
7
65
66
vent Key Themes Idei,t Red by Stakeholders
Different groups of stakeholders have different goals and interests. While many
industrial businesses emphasize preservation or expansion of industrial land for
industrial uses, many industrial land owners believe significant rezoning should
occur. However, land owners exist that also operate businesses on their land
who also advocate for preservation or expansion. There is consensus among all
stakeholders, however, that none of the land currently zoned industrial should be
considered for residential development.
It is important to understand the differences between
industrial tenants, land owners, and land owners who
also operate businesses on their property, and what is
driving each of their interests.
Industrial land owners are concerned that their land
prices as a percentage have gone up less than other
areas of the city.
There is also a concern about the amount of land
recently purchased by public agencies for public uses,
which is creating increased competition for land.
Artists that use land zoned industrial for their
crafts, including wood building, ceramics, and
metalworking, value industrially zoned and and
would like to see more land zoned industrial.
The overall lack of available land may call for the City
being more creative in looking at increasing FAR and
creating more flexibility in the zoning code, which
may help attract other industries. However, many
industrial business tenants believe that allowing
residential uses in to the industrial areas would be
a death sentence to industrial business.This is true
even for new R &D industrial businesses that need the
same kinds of protections industrial zoning provides
to be able to conduct noisy activities at all hours.
To some industrial businesses, the creep of non-
industrial uses into industrial lands is a great concern.
Non industrial businesses often complain about
pollution, noise, light and traffic once they are in
industrial areas, and are capable of litigation over their
complaints.
Overall, zoning changes in industrial areas could create
both opportunity and conflict. Increasing the allowable
uses and density in industrial areas could dramatically
increase the amount of jobs in the area. However, many
of the new businesses who want to move into industrial
zoned areas want corporate campuses, which can
potentially be incompatible with industrial uses.
As the City moves forward with future decisions
regarding large scale requests for rezones of industrial
land to non industrial uses, it should be aware of the
potential there is for setting a precedent with these
decisions. Many stakeholders believe future decisions
made regarding such rezones should be balanced, fair
and equal.
The Port of Seattle container shipping business could
significantly expand, creating economic benefits for
the region if the infrastructure is in place to capitalize
on this opportunity. Rail capacity will require
significant expansion in the coming years if Seattle
expects to take full advantage of trade with Asia.
The introduction of other uses into industrial areas
has created significant traffic congestion. Products in
industrial areas need to be moved by trucks and that
is getting more difficult because of road congestion,
causing delays that are costly to business.
Trucking and freight mobility requires good
sightlines, wider lanes, improvements to the size
E Ke i h
nflfled by
Participants recommended that it is important to consider Seattle and its
infrastructure in a global and regional context.
Industrial businesses vary in how they relate to the
rest of the region and to other locations in the global
market. Many trends affecting industrial businesses
in Seattle are caused by trends in the global market
place, and Seattle must compete with these other
markets to maintain its industrial businesses.
Regionally, some uses may be able to move to the
Green River Valley, but many maritime uses can't just
move to Kent.The Port of Seattle has little ability to
move elsewhere and provides an important resource
to the City's economy.
The city should understand how letting go of industrial
land would, among other things, impact the overall
operations of the Port, the city's revenue and the
continued ability to provide family wage jobs.
S t ake ,E
The stakeholder outreach process identified investment in transportation
infrastructure as one of the best ways to support industrial businesses. Suggested
strategies include improving freight mobility by protecting rail, lessening traffic
congestion, making improvements to the street grid, and reviewing parking policies.
and length of the street grid and a revisiting of roadway
geometrics. In addition some significant challenges exist
when pedestrian and bicycle facilities or street trees
are introduced into these areas, causing conflicts with
freight movement.
More Flexibility is needed for parking regulations in
industrial areas to help serve the broadening needs of
industrial businesses.
Other transportation issues that need to be addressed
include potential dislocation due to changes to the
Viaduct and increased investment in mass transit for the
workforce.
Maintaining and potentially expanding the Port's
resources, as well as maintaining uses adjacent to and
near Port uses that utilize the Port's infrastructure in
some way, are important goals to consider. However, it
should be made clear what the Port's goals are for the
future and how much area needs to be preserved for its
potential expansion.
The City is required to view industrial lands in a regional
context by the Growth Management Act, and should
ensure it is achieving the goals set out by the Act.
9
67
68
Identifying the Fundamental Questions
After reviewing the key themes that came out of the stakeholder involvement process, the
Commission has developed what we believe are the fundamental questions facing Seattle
regarding industrial lands. These fundamental questions are intended to help define where
the debate is and where the city should focus its efforts in creating a strategy.
110 Is all industrially -zoned land in Seattle sacred? If not,
how do we avoid a haphazard piecemeal approach
to changes?
41" How can the City best balance sustainability and
promotion of industrial businesses with flexibility
and opportunities for other uses? What is the
appropriate definition of an industrial use in the
21st Century?
What is the appropriate public policy rational for
maintaining industrial land? What would be an
appropriate public policy rational for rezoning
industrial land?
What are the advantages for the City in maintaining
land that is zoned for industrial uses? What are the
industries that need specially zoned land that is
separated from commercial, retail and especially
residential? What are those industries value to the
city?
10
SEATTLE PLANNING COMMISSION
OBSERVATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Crane Study #3 (Sun), 2000
Mary Iverson
Oil on Canvas, 6" x 8" x 1"
Seattle City Light 1% for Art
Portable Works Collection
How can the City best provide certainty and clarity
concerning the future of industrial lands for current
business and land owners? Are there useful zoning
and land use changes that could create more clarity
and certainty and help protect the benefits of
industrial zoning?
What are the goals and expectations we have for
our industrial lands? What are the benefits we want
to preserve (health and safety, family wage jobs,
city revenue, economic diversity)?
What strategies for approaching industrial lands in
other cities have worked best and what are the best
strategies for Seattle? What steps can Seattle take to
improve infrastructure in industrial areas?
What are Seattle's competitive advantages in
the regional marketplace? What are Seattle's
competitive advantages in the global marketplace?
How can these advantages best be maintained
and strengthened? What are the critical assets for
industrial business and how do we sustain and
maintain them?
Providing clarity and certainty about Seattle's industrial lands is essential to
stabilizing speculation and land costs.
The Industrial Lands Strategy should result in
providing certainty with regards to the city's policy
on industrial lands. Other cities have found that
speculation and land costs have stabilized once
clear policies are provided. Some of these cities
are moving towards preservation, others towards
housing, but none are going at it haphazardly, as
Seattle is.
A clear definition of industrial is needed. There are
questions that remain about the ability to include
research and development in industrial areas or
whether if there's no production should these uses
be allowed outright in industrial areas. It will be
important to understand the potential conflicts
between 'new' industry and traditional heavy
industry.
There appears to be little controversy about
maintaining the strong industrial nature in the
majority of areas zoned industrial. A vast majority of
Industry in Seattle is thriving and vibrant.
The extremely low vacancy rates in industrial areas
indicated that industry in Seattle is thriving and
vibrant. When considering action regarding industrial
land, it will be important to consider 'protecting'
or'growing' Seattle's industrial lands, rather than
speaking in terms such as'preserving' industrial land.
The term 'preservation' conjures up a vision of saving
a dying aspect of the city, which is not accurate.
Seattle is a competitor for industrial business in the
regional and global market, and has the opportunity
the current land owners do not believe that residential is
appropriate in industrial areas nor that current industrial
areas should be rezoned to another zoning category that
allows residential.
The geographical areas that elicit the most controversy
amongst stakeholders are the areas immediately south
of downtown, north of Spokane Street and the areas
outside the Manufacturing /Industrial Center (MIC).
These are the places where the majority of speculation
is happening and also where the majority of requests for
changes have occurred.
Current Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and height restrictions
should be reexamined. Adjustment of these restrictions
could promote more investment and growth in
industrial areas. Care should be taken, however, to
examine potential unintended consequences from such
adjustments.
to enhance its competitive advantages. Increasing trade
with other regions could present an opportunity for
increased growth in Seattle's industrial sector, including
expansion of existing businesses and attraction of new
businesses.
Seattle's unique position in regard to transportation
options is largely responsible for the vibrancy of its
industrial sector.The intersection of access to water,
rail, 1 -90 and 1 is an invaluable asset for industrial
businesses, and is what keeps many of them in Seattle
11
69
70
12
i J
a
cas vraeBBons
There is a strong public interest in maintaining,
jobs in Seattle.
Basic industries constitute about 25 percent of the
total employment in the city.
Industrial jobs provide high paying, family -wages
jobs that are especially valuable to those without a
college education. These jobs increase the diversity of
the city.
Industrial land is a limited resource and commodity.
Studies appear to indicate that there is not excess
capacity in the region to meet future land use
demand for industrial businesses.
Once land is converted from industrial uses, it rarely
returns to industrial uses. Profitability drives this
as commercial and residential uses generate more
revenue for land owners than industrial uses.
A variety of factors are putting increasing pressure on
The presence of non industrial uses in industrial
areas raises the economic value of that land and the
expected value of adjacent industrial land, leading
to either prohibitively high rents for industrial
businesses or the desire by the owner to sell and cash
out. Increasing land speculation has a similar effect.
Both trends are having a negative impact on local
industrial businesses.
Factors contributing to the increasing conversion
pressure include proximity to downtown, low
vacancy rates in non industrial zones, current land
use code which permits large scale non industrial
uses, the ability of newer businesses to invest
more heavily in their property and operations,
and increased acquisition of industrial land by
governmental entities, often for conversion to non-
industrial uses.
Industrial businesses have unique and special
Non industrial neighbors are impacted by the
noise, dust, odor and trucks associated with nearby
industrial uses which can lead to restrictions on
industrial operations. This indicates that use and
zoning in areas surrounding industrial lands can be
important factors.
Converting industrial areas to commercial
or residential uses would require substantial
investments in infrastructure. Industrial areas are
characterized by poor roads and drainage, lack of
sidewalks and inadequate access for commuter traffic
and even growing, industrial sector
Seattle has extremely valuable resources in terms of port
and transportation infrastructure that cannot be found
elsewhere.
Seattle is at the center of a land- constrained region
where industrially zoned land is in particularly short
supply when viewed in relation to other uses. Residential
and commercial office uses, for example, both have
identified capacity for 20 years or more of growth at
targeted densities across the county, according to
buildable lands studies and countywide planning
policies.
industrial lands
The growing number of Comprehensive Plan
amendments related to the rezoning of industrial land
to non industrial uses, along with other factors, indicates
the pressure on industrial lands will continue if no
changes are made.
Industrial lands near downtown are reportedly
attractive to new and growing regional employers in
'creative industries' like software and other technology
development. Some of these businesses are attracted to
industrial zoned land because it offers opportunities for
low- scale, single company campus -type development
with large floorplates, while still having proximity to
downtown amenities and a central location.
needs.
that commercial or residential uses would generate.
Manufacturing and industrial and marine related
businesses generally require large tracts of lower cost
land with access to freight transportation, heavy use
utility infrastructure and some separation from non-
industrial uses.
Water- dependant businesses are very important to
Seattle's industrial sector, and require a variety of
infrastructure needs that other businesses do not.
There is a need for investment and preservation in industrial lands- related
infrastructure.
Many industrial businesses require substantial
transportation infrastructure for freight mobility,
including wide turning radii, easy and quick access
to major transportation corridors, and access to
rail and port infrastructure. These businesses also
require investment in public transit options for their
employees. Improvements to this infrastructure could
increase the viability of these businesses. The future
of the Viaduct will have a great effect on freight
mobility, and will need to be considered.
Seattle's Existing
Industrial Uses Map
Industrial Zones Industeal
Existing Land Use
Residential
Office
Retail/Service
MM HemUMotel
Entertainment
taM Mixed Use
Parking
Warehouse
Transit/Uhl/Comm
Insbbtions Public Facilities Schools
Open Space
Water Body
Easement
t{ „a'. Vacant
Unavailable or Unknown
f 5 s
Many of the facilities used by industrial businesses are
aging, and need re- investment.This re- investment may
be difficult for these businesses due to the low- margin
nature of their operations and a lack of capital.
Investment in the remediation of contaminated sites in
industrial lands will be necessary to ensure these sites
and Seattle's industrial lands in general are fully utilized.
13
71
72
eattle Planning Commission Recommendations
Little Ship (T18), 2000
Mary Iverson
Oil on Canvas, 6" x 8" x 1"
Seattle City Light 1 for Art
Portable Works Collection
"Industrial zoned land is a vital civic asset. Because Seattle's industrial businesses
are critical to our city's overall economic health and global competitiveness the City should strengthen
its industrial policies. The retention of industrial land contributes significantly to Seattle's family wage job
base, provides significant tax revenue to the city and is essential in providing stability to our economy.
We are a growing city with lots of competition for scarce land. This competition has created the need
for quick action to protect and provide certainty for industrial land. Seattle's industrial zoned land
provides a sanctuary to industrial business in a tight land market and once converted is not likely to
be replaced. The industrial sector contributes to the City's diverse economy, which protects us from
economic downturns and preserves our quality of life. In the past, the industrial sector has served as
a counterbalance to the cyclical nature of other industries. This sector also provides the mainstay of
middle income jobs to individuals without higher education. These factors should be highly valued when
we consider `highest and best use' of our scarce land." Seattle Planning Commission, July 2, 2007
14
Generally, the policies outlined in Seattle's Comprehensive Plan continue to be relevant
and appropriate framework guidelines for the treatment of Seattle's industrial areas and
illustrate the City's historical support for the unique needs of industrial business. However,
the City should look for additional ways to strengthen and expand Comprehensive Plan
policies to reinforce their commitment to protecting industrial areas in the City.
ring Com f°EiS RecotTomen Eons
The City should align its zoning and land use policy to ensure the integrity of
Seattle's vibrant industrial businesses.
In order to preserve and foster Seattle's industrial
businesses, the city should not reduce the geographic
area of its General Industrial 1 (IG1) and General
Industrial 2 (IG2) zones. It should reexamine the and
use code restrictions in these zones, however, in the
manner documented below. Industrial Commercial
(IC) may need some adjustment, both in terms of
geographic area and land use code restrictions. When
examining IC zones, the City should look again at the
constraints in these zones to ensure the City's policies
regarding retail and office uses are focused on
creating employment centers.The City should ensure
enough flexibility exists to foster employment centers
that can exist and thrive in IC zones.
The allowance of excessive amounts of retail
and commercial uses in industrial zones has
compromised the integrity of Seattle's industrial base.
We recommend that the City significantly restrict
the amount of retail and commercial uses that are
allowed in industrial zoned areas. Small retail uses are
important to the functioning of the industrial areas;
by limiting the size of these uses, we expect that
new retail uses will be those that primarily support
the industrial area.These size limitations may vary
between IG and IC zones, such as creating stricter
size limitations in IG zones than in IC zones, to best
foster the intended uses for each zone. For example,
Portland's "industrial sanctuary" zones limit retail and
office primary uses to up to 3,000 square feet outright
The City should implement a variety of land use
and provide clarity regarding industrial lands.
Seattle should tighten its land use practices by putting
limits on conditional uses and special purpose overlays
that change the nature of industrial areas.
The City should treat and in Seattle's MIC as an area
that requires additional sanctuary from uses that de-
grade and compromise industrial uses. Seattle should
consider applying some of the strategies used by
cities regarding 'industrial sanctuaries'to Seattle's MICs.
and 25,000 square feet or 1:1 Floor Area Ratio with a
conditional use. In order to obtain a conditional use, the
use "needs to bedocated in the industrial area or building
because industrial firms or their employees constitute
the primary market of the proposed use." In Chicago,
general retail sales uses are limited to 3,000 square feet,
and must be accessory sales of goods produced on -site.
Generally, office uses are limited to 9,000 square feet, a
reuse of an existing building, or as an accessory to the
allowed industrial use.
Residential uses should continue to be expressly
prohibited in industrial zones. In Seattle's land use code,
residential uses are currently allowed in Single Family
zones, Multifamily zones, most commercial zones and in
the Seattle Mixed zone. Single Family and Multifamily
zones comprise close to 80 percent of Seattle's total
and acreage. Consistent with the Comprehensive Plan,
residential uses should continue to be encouraged and
focused in a way consistent with Seattle's Urban Village
Strategy, focusing the bulk of residential growth in
Urban Centers that are served by infrastructure.
The City should carefully and clearly define what
constitutes an industrial use in order to provide more
clarity for land owners, potential developers and new
businesses that may want to locate in Seattle.
Public agencies should be discouraged from locating
inappropriate uses that disrupt the industrial nature of
these areas.
and zoning strategies to stabilize
Contract rezones should be severely limited and only
allowed in special circumstances when there is a well
documented public policy rationale for doing so. The
city should outline clear and understandable criteria for
meeting a high threshold.
In order to provide certainty and stability to the
industrial areas the City should refrain from entertaining
requests to rezone major portions of industrial land.
The City should increase enforcement of uses to ensure
that only industrial uses are occurring in industrial zones.
15
73
74
Seattle Planning Commission Recommendations
16
Any adjustments to Seattle's industrial lands strategy should be based on well
documented data which accurately measure the success of its industrial land
policies.
The City should conduct ongoing monitoring and
measurement of vacancy and utilization rates on
industrial lands. Periodic reports should be created
and analyzed to confirm issues and opportunities
related to how these lands are utilized, and the
results from such studies shall assist DPD, the Seattle
Planning Commission, and the Executive in analyzing
and acting upon any related Comprehensive Plan
amendments.
The city should continue to track wage and employment
information regarding industrial jobs, to determine
if industrial policies are working to preserve family
wage jobs, including jobs that do not require a college
education.
Seattle's port and transportation infrastructure puts it at a distinct competitive
advantage. These resources should be protected, and infrastructure investment
plans should be developed for Seattle's industrial areas.
Seattle is an important seaport for international trade
and cargo shipping. This sector of Seattle's economy
is vital and should be specifically protected from uses
that will negatively impact the efficient movement
of freight and Seattle's competitiveness in the global
economy.
The City should create an industrial infrastructure
strategy to accompany the Industrial Lands Strategy
that will build on the industrial needs and focus of
the industrial areas.
Investment in transportation infrastructure that supports
industrial business and its workforce is essential. As
jobs and housing growth continues, the transportation
network is becoming more constrained. Freight mobility
and the movement of cargo should be a significant
priority in local and regional transportation investments.
Single occupancy vehicle trips through and to the
industrial areas should be discouraged. Transportation
agencies should work closely with major employers to
take advantage of existing public transit amenities that
serve the worker in these areas to minimize the adverse
impacts of increased traffic in industrial areas.
The City should examine the current capacity for research and development
(R&D) businesses in land currently zoned Commercial, Seattle Mixed, and Industrial
Commercial before rezoning lands to accommodate these uses. Sufficient capacity
may already exist for these businesses, and creating new land for these uses may
not be necessary.
The City should clearly articulate the difference
between R &D that has a valid and compelling need
to be located in an industrial area versus those that
act more as a typical office use. Only R &D that has a
clear and compelling reason to be in industrial areas
should be permitted and should be focused in land
zoned IC.
The City should specifically consider where best to
accommodate the needs of'cleaner and quieter'
industrial businesses such as high tech R &D and
biotech. High tech R &D and other'new'industrial
businesses are currently allowed in land zoned
Commercial, Seattle Mixed, and Industrial Commercial
where infrastructure exists and conflicts with other
industrial users can be minimized.
After examining current capacity, the City could consider
allowing greater flexibility including density, Floor Area
Ratio and heights in a areas currently zoned IC, Seattle
Mixed or Commercial to accommodate the different
needs of the 'cleaner and quieter' industrial businesses
that have a specific need to be in industrial zoning.
We hope that this document will be of assistance as the City
finalizes its Industrial Lands Strategy. The Commission will
continue to be involved in reviewing the final proposal and
will assist Council as they review the proposal. We hope
we can continue to be a resource for policymakers as they
grapple with this complex and important issue.
With this document, the Commission has attempted to
create a framework to guide the manner in which the City
handles future decisions regarding the vital resources that
are Seattle's industrial lands. We hope it will serve as such a
guide for long after its completion.
Our intent is to advocate for an Industrial Lands Strategy that
will provide more clarity and certainty about industrial areas
and the City's continued commitment to industry in Seattle.
The Commission strongly believes that decision making
concerning Seattle industrial zoning should be based on an
informed and well- thought out strategy.
The Commission would like to take this opportunity to thank
the Mayor's office, the Urban Development and Planning
Committee of the Seattle City Council, the Department of
Planning and Development, and the Office of Economic
Development for their hard work and assistance in creating
a Strategy. We would also like to thank industrial businesses
and land owners, stakeholders and members of the public
who attended workshops, provided written comments or
made comments at public meetings. We have sincerely
appreciated the opportunity to assist the City of Seattle
in reviewing its industrial lands policies and making
recommendations for the future of Seattle's industrial lands.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Linda Amato Martin Henry Kaplan
Hilda Blanco Kay Knapton
George Blomberg Amalia Leighton
Mahlon Clements Robin Magonegil
Tom Eanes M. Michelle Mattox
Jerry Finrow Justin McCaffree
Chris Fiori Kevin McDonald
Marshall Foster Kirstin Pennington
Colie Hough -Beck Steve Sheehy
Mark Johnson Carl See
Valerie Aleta Kinast Tony To
Crane Study #4 (Pipes, 2000
Mary Iverson
Oil on Canvas, 7" x 5" x 1"
Seattle City Light 1% for Art
Portable Works Collection
Analysis, Production and Writing: Barbara E. Wilson
Casey Mills
Graphic Design: Liz Martini Maps: Jennifer Pettyjohn
Photos: Liz Martini, Scott Dvorak, Municipal Archives et al.
Special Thanks to:
Ron Borowski, Moon Callison, Nora Curry, Councilmember
Conlin, Deputy Mayor Ceis, Christina DeMarco, Scott Dvorak,
Tom Hauger, Steve Kountz, Phil Lutes, Laura Lutz, John
Rahaim, Mary Jean Ryan, Eric Schinfeld, Susan Shannon,
Councilmember Steinbrueck, Valauri Stotler, Diane Sugimura,
Brian Surratt, Philipp Schmidt Pathmann, Nathan Torgelson,
and all of the stakeholders and members of the public who
generously donated their time and energy to provide us with
your thoughts, perspectives and expertise.
17
75
76
Seattle Planning Commission
700 Fifth Ave, Suite 2000
PO Box 34019
Seattle, WA 98124 -4019
Phone: 206 684 -0433
Planning Commission publications can be found on its website
at: http:// www. seattle.gov /planningcommission/
0
Printed on 100% post consumer fiber