HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAP 2011-02-28 Item 2B - Discussion - Southcenter Plan Public Involvement Strategy o s Z City of Tukwila
y Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Ka f o
�s r -9o s� INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: Mayor Haggerton
Community Affairs and Parks Committee
FROM: Jack Pace, Community Development Director
DATE: February 14, 2011
SUBJECT: Briefing on Status of Southcenter Plan Revision Process
ISSUE
On September 27, 2010 the Council Committee of the Whole recommended that staff return to a
future Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting with more information on the draft Plan
for the Southcenter area and alternatives for stakeholder review. This memo provides a briefing
on the background of the plan and presents options for moving forward on completing the plan.
BACKGROUND
The Southcenter area has been designated as an urban center under the Countywide Planning
Policies since the adoption of the revised Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Code in 1995. This
designation provides some benefits such as priority for regional infrastructure and transit
service. It also aligns with the City's plan for accommodating much of its regional share of
employment and housing growth (17,550 employees and 4,850 households by 2031) in mixed
use commercial areas primarily in Southcenter, with the remainder in Tukwila South and along
Tukwila International Boulevard, leading to the creation of vibrant, walkable mixed use districts
linked by transit.'
We hope to see new construction at the core of these areas along the lines of the Tukwila
Village vision, with high quality multi -story buildings close to comfortably wide sidewalks in order
to spur redevelopment and job and housing growth. This strategy will also allow us to protect
the existing character and stability of Tukwila's largely built -out residential areas. For a more
complete discussion of how the Southcenter Plan fits into the broader State, regional and
county policy framework see Attachment A.
FEDERAL GRANT
In 2002 Tukwila received a $1.4 million federal grant to prepare a subarea plan for Southcenter,
one of the region's designated urban centers, including the area designated for transit oriented
development (TOD) around the Sounder commuter rail /Amtrak station. The project's objectives
were as follows:
Prepare a redevelopment strategy for the TUC to create more business activity and
generate additional tax revenue, encourage a broader mix of uses and densities in a
pedestrian- oriented environment to support improved transit (particularly in the northern
part of the TUC), improve internal circulation and create a sense of place.
Identify and coordinate the improvements necessary to initiate and support the plan.
Develop regulations and guidelines implementing the plan.
Complete the evaluation of environmental impacts from the proposed development and
designate the plan as a SEPA "planned action
Approximately 1/3 of the City's forecasted employment growth is planted for the City's Manufachning /Industrial
Center. 9
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
While we are not clearly required to return the money should we fail to complete these actions in
a timely manner it seems likely that it would affect Tukwila's ability to seek future grants and at
some point the unspent funds could be rescinded.
FUTURE REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS
One of the motivations for undertaking this effort to develop more detailed development
standards was to ensure that the Southcenter area remained competitive with other regional
shopping and employment centers. Trends point to the continuing decline of the already
overbuilt retail sector, and consumer preferences for walkable, vibrant, outdoor, entertainment
driven experiences as seen in the outward nature of the Southcenter Mall expansion, Kent
Station, Renton Landing and Burien Town Center.
When the General Services Administration put out a request for proposals for office space in our
area the requirements included amenities such as retail shops, banks, restaurants and multiple
bus lines within a walkable distance of one -half mile from the building. While the Southcenter
area contains these types of amenities, in order to diversify into the office and housing markets
we need to provide safe, comfortable pedestrian and bicycle routes to get to them.
TUKWILA URBAN CENTER (TUC) PLAN PROCESS
The TUC Planning process started with a public visioning exercise and was designed to allow
many opportunities for public involvement. For a chronology of this process to date see
Attachment B. Between May 2002 and May 2004 staff held six public workshops and three joint
City Council /Planning Commission work sessions to develop the vision and priorities for the
plan. During that time, staff and the City's consultant FTB met with the Mall on their design and
renovation project to ensure that the Mall's project was consistent with the direction the vision
was taking. Staff and consultants also flew to Minneapolis to discuss the vision with the Target
Corporation. FTB then took this vision and in 2005 delivered a draft plan composed of three
parts: the vision for the urban center, development standards and design guidelines to
implement the vision, and recommended City investments and actions.
From 2005 to 2008 public review of the plan was put on hold due to other City priorities such as
the Tukwila South annexation. During that time, staff convened a panel of commercial and
mixed use experts from the Urban Land Institute to review the feasibility of the draft plan and
make recommendations. Staff also worked to test the draft regulations on other proposed
projects sought funding for some of the implementing actions such as the pedestrian bridge
over the Green River and improved transit center, and coordinated with Sound Transit on the
design of the permanent commuter rail station and the Parks Department on the master plan for
Tukwila Pond Park to ensure these projects supported the City's vision for the TUC.
In the fall of 2008 we resumed the public review process with mailings, open houses, multiple
meetings with individual property and business owners, and presentations to interested groups.
From March to May 2009 the Planning Commission held a public hearing and 3 work sessions
on the draft Plan. During this process it became clear that there was not internal consensus
among City Departments on a vision for the urban center that included greater building density,
taller buildings, breaking up the superblocks, on- street parking and improved facilities for
pedestrians and bicyclists. The public comments were generally in favor of the vision but there
was concern about development standards in the TOD area such as the 2 story minimum
height, maximum setbacks, entrances facing the street and thresholds for compliance with the
new standards.
In May, the Planning Commission directed Department of Community Development (DCD) staff
to review the comments received from the public on the draft Southcenter Plan and propose
revisions to address the issues raised. After reviewing the comments staff decided to address
1 0 the internal departmental concerns separately from the external stakeholder comments. All of
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 3
the comments are available on the Tukwila Urban Center Plan section of the City's web site,
both in their original form and summarized in a matrix with staff analysis and recommendations.
Staff responded to public comments concerns regarding the economic feasibility of the vision
and the draft development regulations by contracting with ECONorthwest (ECO), the consultant
that prepared economic and market analyses during the preparation of the draft plan. ECO's
analysis consisted of:
1) Technical research on market and demographic forces that will influence Plan
implementation;
2) Creating four pro formas (economic analyses of development scenarios) for possible
prototype developments in the TUC; and
3) Conducting three focus groups and follow -up interviews with TUC stakeholders and
other office, retail, residential and mixed -use developers. Also attending the focus
groups were George Malina (then Planning Commission Chair), Derek Speck
(Economic Development Administrator), and DCD staff.
ECO's technical memo recommended the following revisions to the development standards and
changes to the implementation strategies:
General comments and recommended strategies:
o Almost all stakeholders agreed the vision is the right long -term goal for development
in TUC.
o The vision is achievable in the mid to long term with significant, targeted public
investment to catalyze and support types of development the City would like to see.
o Code appears to be more complex than it actually is: it is designed to provide
certainty while minimizing discretionary interpretive decisions.
Specific recommendations comments:
o Revise high -rise ordinance to allow mid -rise construction will make the Plan more
economically viable and allow Tukwila to be more competitive with other cities.
o Achieving multiple storied development is limited due to difficulty in meeting parking
requirements
o When reducing parking requirements, need to provide other options to avoid
negative consequences
o Open space requirements are consistent with other jurisdictions.
Staff presented these findings to the Planning Commission (PC) on December 10 2009 and
the Community Affairs and Parks Committee on March 22, 2010.
DISCUSSION
WHERE WE ARE Now
Almost all stakeholders commenting on the draft plan agreed the City's vision is the right long-
term goal for development in the TUC. The conflict, however, was in how and when the vision
should be implemented. Some members of the PC thought that additional public outreach was
needed outside of the formal hearing process.
To ensure that we have up to date input from property and business owners staff proposed
moving forward with establishing a second stakeholders' process to address key issue areas
that were identified by ECONW and /or raised during the public comment period. The process
was designed to allow the consultant /staff team to work out the individual concerns of the
11
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 4
stakeholders, with the anticipated outcome of a set of regulatory refinements to the draft Plan
that work for both the stakeholders and the City.
The process was to consist of the following phases:
1. Framework initial stakeholder outreach; summarizing key issues
2. Refinements defining stakeholder City priorities, needs and options
3. Consensus testing options internally; presenting system of refinements to
stakeholders; finalizing the refinement system
4. Approval seeking internal and stakeholder endorsements; presenting plan refinement
system to the Planning Commission
Critical to a successful process were the following tasks:
1. Broad outreach to community early on to solicit stakeholder interest
2. Including other City Departments in the process
3. Providing process updates for the Planning Commission at key points
4. Outreach to stakeholders on an individual basis
5. Public Open House on draft Refinements
The consultant fee for the stakeholder process was to be funded by the Federal Transit
Oriented Development Grant. On September 6, 2010 the Community Affairs and Parks
Committee recommended forwarding the contract for approval to the Committee of the Whole.
On September 27' the Committee of the Whole recommended that staff return to a future
Community Affairs and Parks Committee Meeting with more information on the draft TUC Plan
and alternatives for stakeholder review.
RECOMMENDATIONS
STAKEHOLDER PROCESS ALTERNATIVES
1. Meetings with Individual Stakeholders:
The previously proposed process with the Collins Woerman consultants involved individual
meetings with each external stakeholder listed below as well as with city departments to discuss
their comments and seek consensus solutions. After that process we would hold an open
house, Planning Commission (PC) hearing and PC work sessions, another open house, City
Council (CC) hearing and possibly CC work sessions.
The Parties of Record from the PC hearings are:
1. Westfield Southcenter and tenant Sears
2. Target Corporation and their landlord Regency Centers
3. Segale Properties
4. Owner of Southcenter West and Tukwila Business Parks
5. Innkeepers USA Trust Residence Inn
6. Wig Properties Southcenter Square
7. Desimone Trust Barnabys site
8. Chevron
9. Cascade Land Conservancy
10. Tukwila Fire Department
2. Meetings with a Stakeholder Group:
An alternative would be a stakeholder committee similar to that used for the Sign Code update.
The composition of that 8 member group was:
2 City Council members
1 Planning Commission member
3 Residents
1 2 2 Business Representatives
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 5
In order to keep the committee at a workable size (no more than 10 plus staff) we would actually
need to limit the number of stakeholders to fewer than we had planned to engage previously.
We suggest the following composition:
2 City Council members
1 Planning Commission member
1 Resident
4 Business Representatives
Southcenter Property Owner
Southcenter Tenant
Southcenter Property Manager
Westfield Mall Representative
1 Developer with experience in mixed use, town center type projects
1 Design Professional architect/landscape architect
Staff would work with the Council to develop a resolution specifying the review process, identify
the Council members and Planning Commissioner to attend, recruit interested parties and the
Mayor would appoint the members. We would hold a series of work sessions to review the
policy areas and develop recommendations. After that the process would be the same as
above: hold an open house, PC hearing and PC work sessions, another open house, CC
hearing and possibly CC work sessions.
3. Reduce the Scope of the Project
Revise the product to meet the minimum requirements for accommodating growth and meeting
regional policy goals. Make zoning code changes that would allow but not require denser,
mixed use development and housing. Convert the design standards into guidelines. This
approach would allow but not direct change and mean that the Southcenter area would likely
follow rather than lead the market.
The goal would be to efficiently complete the planning effort and so the review process would be
streamlined. No formal stakeholder process would be proposed because the changes from the
existing code would be limited. Staff would present a revised draft at a PC work session, allow
several weeks for comment, hold a PC hearing, CC hearing and possibly CC work sessions.
NEXT STEPS
Staff asks that the Committee select a process alternative and forward the item to the March 14
Committee of the Whole meeting. If the Council chooses alternative 2 staff would bring the
resolution forming the stakeholder committee to the full Council at a subsequent meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
A Tukwila's Planning Policy Framework
B TUC Plan Process
13
14
TUKWI LA'S PLANNING POLICY FRAMEWORK— ATTACHMENT A
Here is a discussion of how Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan vision for the Southcenter area fits into the
broader State, regional and county policy framework.
Washington State Growth Management Act (GMA)
Establishing the land use planning hierarchy in Washington, the Growth Management Act
(RCW 36.70A) mandates local comprehensive planning in heavily populated and high growth
counties and their cities. It established 13 broad goals to guide the policy development of local
comprehensive plans. The VISION 2040 plan adopted by the Puget Sound Regional Council provides the
multicounty policy framework required by GMA to meet these goals at the regional, county, and local
government levels.
Vision 2040 Regional Growth Strategy
The central Puget Sound region is forecast to continue to grow in the coming decades up to 5 million
people will live here by the year 2040. Vision 2040, the adopted Regional Growth Strategy; provides
guidance to cities and counties for accommodating that growth. It is an integrated, long -range vision for
maintaining a healthy region promoting the well -being of people and communities, economic vitality,
and a healthy environment, see Attachment 1. It contains an environmental framework, a numeric
regional growth strategy, six policy sections guided by overarching goals as well as implementation
actions and measures to monitor progress. The strategy is designed to preserve resource lands and protect
rural lands from urban -type development. The strategy promotes infill and redevelopment within urban
areas to create more compact, walkable, and transit friendly communities.
All levels of government in the central Puget Sound's four counties (King, Kitsap, Pierce, and
Snohomish) will use VISION 2040 as a regional framework for making local decisions. The strategy is
organized around categories of "regional geographies." The majority of the region's employment and
housing growth is allocated to Metropolitan Cities and Core Cities, which together contain the more than
two dozen designated regional growth centers. Tukwila is a Core City with a designated urban center.
The multicounty planning policies provide guidance for implementing the Regional Growth Strategy.
Under these policies growth is to occur first and foremost in the designated urban growth area; less
development is to occur in rural areas. Centers are recognized for their benefits in creating compact,
walkable communities that support transit and other services. Housing and jobs should be located in a
manner that provides for easy mobility and accessibility. Investments in transportation and other
infrastructure should be prioritized to centers. Countywide target- setting processes for allocating
population and employment growth are to be consistent with the regional vision.
Countywide Planning Policies
The GMA further requires King County to prepare broad Countywide Planning Policies
(CPPs) that comply with both the growth principles of the GMA and the more directive policies
of the Multi County Planning Policies (Vision 2040). The CPPs provide the vision and policy framework
for the development of each jurisdiction's comprehensive plan, including Tukwila. The CPPs are
maintained by the Growth Management Planning Council and have recently been updated.
C:\ temp \XPGrpWise\ TukwilaPlanningFramework .docAttaChlnent A
15
Urban Center Criteria
The CPPs require that urban centers have:
15,000 employees within a half mile of a transit center
Average 50 employees per gross acre
Average 15 households per gross acre
See Attachment 2 for a comparison of the urban center criteria to Tukwila's urban center
characteristics. Tukwila made a presentation to PSRC in January on the status of our efforts to
achieve the urban center goals.
Local Comprehensive Plans.
Local comprehensive plans direct land use planning regulations and activity in unincorporated
King County and each of the county's 39 jurisdictions. Each local plan establishes the land use
and development regulations within its jurisdiction. Local plans, when next updated, are expected
to align with the planning hierarchy described above. Anticipating completion of the CPPs in
2010, many cities including Tukwila have begun the planning effort to revise their comprehensive
plans.
King County Growth Targets
In 2009 after an extensive process involving staff from the affected cities, including Tukwila, the Growth
Management Planning Council adopted updated employment and housing growth targets for 2031. As a
core city Tukwila, including its annexation areas, has a target of 4,850 net new housing units and 17,550
net new jobs over the next 21 years, see Attachment 3. While no city can guarantee a certain level of
development we must provide for zoned capacity and infrastructure to accommodate that growth.
It is unclear how Tukwila could accommodate our housing growth target by 2031 without encouraging
housing development in the urban center. The Tukwila South Master Plan calls for between 700 and
1,900 units to be developed over up to 30 years. The recent addition of the Urban Renewal Overlay to the
Neighborhood Commercial Center zone will allow for more intensive development along a section of the
Tukwila International Boulevard Corridor and accommodate another portion of the target. Tukwila's
single and multi family zoned land is largely built -out at the current lot sizes and densities and so has
limited ability to absorb additional units. If the vision for the Southcenter area changes to exclude
housing the most straightforward alternative to meeting our targets would be to upzone existing
residential neighborhoods to allow for more intensive development.
ATTACHMENTS
1) Vision 2040 Executive Summary
2) Comparison of the urban center criteria to Tukwila's urban center characteristics
3) King County Growth Targets Table
16
peop ii
a g. osp�isty
V ISION 2040' Ph „et
the Re ional Growth Strategy E
g gY
VISION 2040's Regional Growth Strategy is a preferred pattern for accommodating residential and employment
growth. It is designed to minimize environmental impacts, support economic prosperity, improve mobility, and
make efficient use of existing infrastructure.
The Importance of the Regional Growth Strategy
The central Puget Sound region is forecast to continue to Central Puget Sound y :_s:�
grow in the coming decades up to 5 million people Regional Growth 4
t A!
will live here by the year 2040. The Regional Growth Strategy '_txrt u r,
Strategy provides guidance to cities and counties for x 7
accommodating that growth. The strategy is designed ti
to preserve resource lands and protect rural lands from F ,4E
urban -type development. The strategy promotes infill 'q
and redevelopment within urban areas to create more
compact, walkable, and transit friendly communities. r 'tr- ?s'4
c k o c
What's in VISION 2040? `4.1 r
VISION 2040's Regional Growth Strategy identifies the role -At
that various cities, unincorporated areas, and rural lands i j d
categories play in accommodating the region's residen- F. t' 2 z
tial and employment growth. The strategy is organized ,,:4„
around categories of "regional geographies. "The major- ms s- 5
ity of the region's employment and housing growth y. is allocated to Metropolitan Cities and Core Cities, which S k A !i ar 1 y:"
together contain the more than two dozen designated ]N rt' l
regional growth centers. Larger Cities also play an impor- I1r; r f
tant role over time as places that accommodate growth. r 1g- 2
Small Cities provide jobs and housing that support vital 1`
i ST F
and active communities at a less intensi scale. Growth y `x -c t a y
in the unincorporated urban growth area is prioritized .i /r 4 7
for areas that are identified for annexation into adjacent i, r 1.'f'.- s
cities. Significantly less growth is allocated to the rural 4 v xmn i
areas than has occurred in the past. �1
Multicounty Planning Policies. The multicounty plan- ;i:.,_,.._.
ning policies provide guidance for implementing the Regional Growth Strategy. Growth is to occur first and foremost in
the designated urban growth area; less development is to occur in rural areas. Centers are recognized for their ben-
efits in creating compact, walkable communities that support transit and other services. Housing and jobs should be
located in a manner that provides for easy mobility and accessibility. Investments in transportation and other infrastruc-
ture should be prioritized to centers. Countywide target- setting processes for allocating population and employment
growth are to be consistent with the regional vision.
Actions. Many of the implementation actions in VISION 2040 contribute to achieving the Regional Growth Strategy.
For example, the Regional Council already began working with its member jurisdictions in 2008 to develop a regional
17
methodology to guide countywide processes for establishing local residential and employment growth targets.
The Regional Council will also monitor and evaluate growth to ensure that it continues to meet VISION 2040's goals
and objectives.
The table presents the regional allocation of population and job growth for the period between 2000 and 2040 by
regional geography category, as well as the specific allocation for each of the four counties.
Population and Employment Growth, 2000 to 2040 �y rY,W 'l
ft 3 "A 'hn �,Y t y Y, svr x •t" 'i' 'k 5 p0 sir I cr '7 alit (a ...'1�riYW $C R
l i 78 t d fi; k. n 3 n r t r fir{
!Olt s..,,+ t rH. a I •It g,s a 4 OFCa k :∎FlidaF I. .7Zs.. ,n .X d J,a: F`os.is l 4. i1 iia.. 6 o p a %'A` A P1, 1 S p
Metropolitan Cities (5) People 96: 540,000 32% 294,000 41% 30,000 20% 127,000 32% 89,000 20% a1
Bellevue, Bremerton, Everett, Seattle, Tacoma Jobs 511,000 -4296 311,000 -45% 14,000 22% 97,000 46% 89,000 3696 1.5
Core Cities and Silverdale (14) People 363,000 230,000 32% 18,000 12% 75,000 1996 40,000 996
Auburn Bothell Burien, Federal Way, Kent, Kirkland Lakewood, Jobs -96 352000. 29% 262,000 38% 15,000. 23% 4D,000 19% 35,000 14%
Lynnwood, Puyallup, Redmond, Rentan,SeaTac Silverdale, Tukwila
Large cides (18) x i.• t Peoplg t 181,0007 1116 U 98f000,-, 14% 16,000. 11% 23,000 44,000r,.)951 if
Arlington, Bainbridge Island, Des Moines;, Edmonds Flfe, Issaquah „Jobs r% 111,000 916 69,000 =10 96' 5,000 8% 6,000 73% 31,000 1396
Kenmore, Maple Valley Marysnlle h1e¢erisland Mill Creek, 1 4, i
Monroe, Mountlake Terrace, Mukilteq sammamlah Shoreline H. 1 f
University Place, Woodinville 1 it
Small Cities(46) t 1 People,% j48900 3 d 12,0 8%1 57000 1$9 40 ,9% a
Algona, Beaux Arts, Bldck Dia mond,A a n ng yla0eBn t r Dutkle, r l� Jo6s 00,004 8% 1 1 25000 496 ;999 712% 37,000 18% .30000,12 %,r F,
G rbonado,C arnation,C lydeHill ,Covlpgtod0artingthniD 9 k' 1 1 ,i( J J
Duvall, Eatonville Edgewood Enumclaw, F cr S l 4lgdrbol i s 1[ r 1 ki
Gold ear, Granite Fa Huyts Point Indeli lake6orest Parke 1x r $i take Stevens, Medma, Milton NeWcastle,Norntndy parfi 1 c i I, 1 1 „i 41
North Bend, Orting, P PortOrchardPoulshd,poyl�ust011 x ,f 4' k 1 1 4. Skykomish, 5611 5n So P k,' Stan r 1 I
St Sulta luinner W1I Wpodw yarrow Pdi0t 3 r 1 1 L'O o jj
u0{nrorpyratgdprea(ais E
lj xe° 4 tfj0 fi A3 s r P k h y es t{+ IO 6' 11 E'43 �00 0 T 3 i ,4590 Q Q 96 3 )f 1 42 1 3 t
i:41 'I r /`.i p.Wt 1 p 3 1 i 4 8 t r 44
t iu11 ro '`I w -LIZ(' ptlil 7 r'b L- b 0,' v' f7 40A0 b�2 rreiv i 9g1-1/4'1!!
R dal Aiea p w 6
N, 1 ,a r' ,ev 'y, V ssa�g t MP 3 5f S s 1 d u 5; r p 4' r OAR 1. II b; 4 L '9 J `S`"�' 'rd i� 6 i n d���Q B %i� h 2 �f °.luS U, n S' 1�
A t b2 ikt,i
lde d&ntl ,fs Percdnt 4 jebPte('i 2 t 1 j0Q T00" 4 72
n, 4 On,2 ii 1L,1N a $SP -i' t 90 �s
3i.fia d11 211'41 �7at„+,,r't7k`ts 1 b y 9. 1 1 rz.:..fik•x, 8 ?Y 7s "6• it s f4i9 UQ0 1b�0 ?f,1 O0 SoG1 .1 6 O ,x 1 +1 i 0 a n t
fiI
What This Means for Other Planning Efforts in the Region
The Regional Growth Strategy provides guidance for counties and cities to use as they develop new local residential
and employment growth targets and update their local comprehensive plans. The 2010 update to countywide plan-
ning policies provides the opportunity to address revisions for the target- setting process in each county. VISION 2040's
implementation actions require counties to work together to use consistent processes for establishing local hous-
ing and employment targets. The Regional Council will collaborate with counties to revise and improve the regional
growth targeting methodology, differentiating expectations among the regional geographies.
The state required update of local comprehensive plans in 2011 provides the opportunity for local jurisdictions to
incorporate new residential and employment targets into their comprehensive plans. Cities are encouraged to revise
relevant zoning and development regulations to better implement the Regional Growth Strategy. Moreover, cities with
designated regional growth centers are responsible for developing and adopting residential and employment and
targets for their centers. Transit agencies and other service providers also play an important role, and should target
funding and decisionmaking to align with the VISION 2040's Regional Growth Strategy.
l i)r More Information
Additional information on VISION 2040 and the Regional Growth Strategy is available by contacting the Puget Sound
Regional Council's Information Center at 206 464 -7532 or info @psrc.org.
Puget Sound Regional Council
PSRC Apo 2009 1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500 Seattle, Washington 98104 -1035 206 -464 -7090 FAX 206- 587 -4825 psrc.org
18
King County Growth Targets Update
Proposed Table for Inclusion in Countywide Planning Policies
Regional Geography PAA Housing Employment Pte'
City /Subarea Housing Target Employment
Target Target
Target
Net New Units Net New Units Net New Jobs Net New lobs
2006 -2031 2006 -2031 2006 -2031 2006 -2031
Metropolitan Cities
Bellevue 17,000 290 51,500
Seattle 86,000 148,200
Total 103,000 199,700
Core Cities
Auburn 9,620 19,200 150
Bothell 3,000 810 4,800 200
Burien 3,900 4,600
Federal Way 8,100 2,390 12,300 290
Kent 7,800 .•1,560 13,200 290
Kirkland 7,200 1,370 20,200 650
Redmond 10,200 640 23,000
Renton 14,835 3,895 28,700 770
SeaTac 5,800 25,300
Tukwila 4,800 50 15,500 2,050
Total 75,255 166,800
Larger.Cities
Des Moines 3,000 5,000
Issaquah 5,750 290 20,000
Kenmore 3,500 3,000
Maple Valley 1,800 1,060 2,000
Mercer Island 2,000 1,000
Sammamish 4,000 350 1,800
Shoreline 5,000 5,000
Woodinville 3,000 5,000
Total 28,050 42,800
Small Cities
Algona 190 210
Beaux Arts 3 3
Black Diamond 1,900 1,050
Carnation 330 370
Clyde Hill 10
Covington 1,470 1,320
Duvall 1,190 890
Enumclaw 1,425 735
Hunts Point 1
lake Forest Park 475 210
Medina 19
Milton 50 90 160
Newcastle 1,200 735
Normandy Park 120 65
North Bend 665 1,050
Padfih 285 370
Skykomish 10
Snoqualmie 1,615 1,050
Yarrow Point 14
Total 10,922 8,168
Urban Unincorporated
'Potential Annexation Areas 12,795 4,400
Other Urban Unincorp. 2,920 6,200
Total 15,715 10,600
King County UGA Total 232,942. 428,068
The base year for these Targets is 2006. As cities annex territory, PM targets shift Into Targets column.
*Unclaimed or disputed Urban unincorporated areas, e.g., North Hlghllne, Bear Creek UPDs.
Placeholder for footnote conditioning PM target on approval of city-county agreement.
King Co. Growth Targets Committee, Growth Management Planning Council, August 2009
19
TUKWILA COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Tukwila Urban Center
Amended Countywide Planning Policies Recommended Tukwila
Urban Center Criteria Urban Center Characteristics
1 Planned for 20 years Tukwila Urban Center planned for 30+ years
2 Total land area of up to 1.5 square miles Proposed Tukwila Urban Center area
(1,440 acres) approximately 1.35 square miles
3 Requires 15,000 employees within one -half The area is planned to allow this density.
mile (walking distance) of a transit center
4 Average of 50 employees per gross acre The Tukwila Urban Center is planned to allow
this density.
5 Average of 15 households per gross acre Specific Tukwila Urban Center areas are
planned to allow residential uses, particularly
in the area within walking distance of the
Sounder commuter rail /Amtrak station.
6 Emphasis on mass transportation and non- Strong motorized and non- motorized
motorized modes, while lessening connections are planned between the TUC
dependency on single occupancy vehicles the Sounder commuter rail /Amtrak station.
Enhanced transit facilities are anticipated
in proximity to the TUC core. Additional
potential forms of high capacity transit (HCT)
directly serving the TUC include bus rapid
transit (BRT), a local area transit route,
and future phases of light rail. Roadway
improvements, including enhanced
streetscapes, will improve auto, transit and
pedestrian movement and access. An enhanced
street network will improve mobility.
Facilities developed will recognize the actual
and projected need and demand for motor
vehicle, pedestrian, and transit facilities.
7 Promotion of high caliber urban design Design standards and high quality public/
standards and support for capital public private capital improvements are key to
improvements attracting the types of development that will
achieve the vision for the TUC.
8 Receives first priority for development of A Sounder commuter rail /Amtrak station is
high capacity transit center and regionally located in the TUC. Ensuring that additional
funded support infrastructure high- capacity transit facilities serve the TUC
will require active City involvement in regional
planning processes.
9 Receives other funding and streamlined Via a SEPA planned action for the TUC Plan.
permit processing incentives
Figure 22 Countywide policies compared to Tukwila Urban Center
December2008 111
20
Southcenter Subarea Planning Process Attachment B
2002 -2004 Development of the Vision for the Urban Center
Council Briefing
6 Public Workshops See 9/ 18/08 Memo for Summarizes
2 Joint PC/ CC Worksessions
Multiple Team Meetings with Staff Consultants
2004 Endorsement of the Vision by CC and PC
Joint PC/ CC Meeting— Directed Team to prepare regulations that implement the Vision
Adoption of Updated Comprehensive Plan Policies
2005 -2008 Development of the Plan to Implement the Vision
Staff review of Draft Plan by FIB
Urban Land Institute Technical Advisory Panel Worksession on the Implementation Aspects
of the Draft Plan
Meetings with Local and Regional Developers to Review Plan Direction
`Testing" draft regulations on Proposed Developments (Mall expansion, Baker Blvd Retail,
Fidelity Bank of America, other office retail projects)
Grant Funding for Pedestrian Bridge Study
Sounder Station Review
Coordination on Tukwila Pond Park Master Plan
Grant and Developer Funding for Transit Center Design and Construction
2008 Affirmation of the Vision and Introduction to the Plan
Public Open House with FIB 10/23/08
Joint PC/ CC Worksession with FIB 10/ 23/ 08
2008 -2009 Public Outreach for the Plan
Presentation to the SWKC Chamber of Commerce 10/7/08
Presentation to the Parks Commission 11 19/08
Mailings Emailings to 1400 Property Owners, Tenants, Interested Parties
Public Open House 3/4/09
Meetings with Multiple Property Owners
Hatelnut Article
2009 Review of the Plan Specifics by PC
Presentation by FTB 3/ 12/09
Public Hearings 3/26/09, 4/23/09, 5/28/09
3 Worksessions
Meetings with Fire Department 3/25, 5/8, 5/20
Plan remanded to staff for revisions to address the public comments
C:temp\XPOipWisthProcess.doc Attachment B
21
Staff to Review Public Comments and Revise Draft Plan
Meeting and PC work session with EcoNW to discuss additional economic analysis 7/8/09
Meetings with Fire Department and PW
Individual meetings with Property Owners
EcoNW led Focus groups 9/29/09
Local and Regional Developers
Local Property Owners and Managers
Wesffield Mall Representatives
Presented EcoNW TUC Implementation Analysis to PC 12/10/09
2010 Internal Departmental Review Process on Street Cross sections
Meetings with DCD, Public Works Fire 3/5/ 10, 4/20/10, 5/4/ 10, 5/ 18/ 10
Presented EcoNW TUC Implementation Analysis to CAP 3/22/10
Proposed Stakeholder Review Process
to CAP 9/06/ 10
to CC 9/27/ 10
to CAP 2/28/ 11
Future Public Involvement /Stakeholder Process
Review of the Revised Plan by PC
Public Hearings
Public Open House
Work Sessions
Forward PC Recommended Draft Plan to CC
Review of the PC Recommended Plan by CC
Review of Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement for the Plan
Open House
Public Heating
Worksessions
Adoption of Plan, Implementing Ordinances and SEIS by CC
22