HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2014-04-28 Item 4B - Ordinance - Amendment to 223 Andover Park East Development Agreement with South Center WA LLCCOUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS
1 ntials
*Ieetu,g Date
Prepared IQ"
Mayor' review
Council review
04/28/14
DCS
development
development.
agreement with
05/05/14
DCS
04/28/14
Mtg
Motion
Darr
Q Bid Aavard
ll7tg Date
❑ Other
Mtg Dale
CATEGORY ORY Dijcussion
III Resolution
1 / Ordinance
ly Public Hearing
Artg Dale
ITEM INFORMATION
ITEM No.
3B&
4B
STAFF SPONSOR: DEREK SPECK
ORIGINAL AGENDA DATE: 04/28/14
AGENDA ITEM TITLE
Approve an amendment
for the 223 Andover
to the
Park East
development
development.
agreement with
South Center
WA, LLC
04/28/14
Mtg
Motion
Darr
Q Bid Aavard
ll7tg Date
❑ Other
Mtg Dale
CATEGORY ORY Dijcussion
III Resolution
1 / Ordinance
ly Public Hearing
Artg Dale
Alts Date
11,1 tg Date 5/5/14
lilts Date 04/28/14
SPONSOR ❑ Council
❑ DCD ❑ Finance ❑ Fire 1 1 IT
❑ Yid!
/l Ma_yor
• I -fR
❑ P . M Police
SPONSOR'S This item is to amend the development agreement for the property at 223 Andover Park
SUMMARY East, formerly the Circuit City site, to facilitate a new development known as Washington
Place. The Council is being asked to hold a public hearing and to consider and approve the
ordinance and amendment to the development agreement.
REVIEWED BY ❑ COW Mtg.
❑ Utilities Cmte
DA1 h: 04/15/14
//
CA &P Crnte
L) F &S Cmte ❑ Transportation Cmte
❑ Parks Comm. [] Planning Comm.
COMMITTEE CHAIR: DUFFIE
❑ Arts Comm.
RECOMI IENDATIONS:
SPONSOR /ADMIN.
COMMITTIiE
Mayor
Forward to Committee of the Whole
COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE
EXPENDITURE REQUIRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED
$ $
Fund Source:
Comments:
MTG. DATE
RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION
04/28/14
MTG. DATE
ATTACHMENTS
04/28/ 14
Informational Memorandum dated 4/23/14
Proposed Ordinance
Proposed Amendment to the Development Agreement
Technical Memorandum for Parking Analysis by Transpo Group dated 4/2/14
Letter from ACE Parking
Schematic design plans
Minutes from the Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting of 4/15/14
5/5/14
2
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
TO: City Council
FROM: Derek Speck, Economic Development Administrator
DATE: April 23, 2014
SUBJECT: Washington Place Development Agreement Amendment
[New memo composed after Community Affairs and Parks meeting]
ISSUE
The owners of 223 Andover Park East would like to construct a building with a hotel and
apartments or condominiums and have requested an amendment to an existing development
agreement in order to modify the City's zoning and sign code requirements for this project.
BACKGROUND
In March 2013 the City executed a development agreement with South Center WA, LLC so that
the owner of 223 Andover Park East (the former Circuit City site) could construct a building up
to 180 feet tall and that included apartments or condominiums. Since that time, the developer
has continued to refine the project plan. Recently, the developer submitted an application for the
City's design review process which is tentatively scheduled to be considered by the Board of
Architectural Review (BAR) on May 22, 2014. As currently proposed, the project does not meet
certain zoning and sign code standards. Therefore, the City Council would need to approve an
amendment to the development agreement allowing modifications to those standards to enable
the BAR to consider the project.
DISCUSSION
Due to the unique nature of this project, there are three areas in which the project needs
flexibility from our zoning code: number of parking stalls, area of open space, and building
height. Additionally, the proposed project needs flexibility regarding the sign code, especially
regarding building mounted signs.
Parking — As shown in the table below, the proposed project would include 370 residential
units, 189 hotel rooms, and 499 on -site parking stalls, The developer hired the Transpo Group
to estimate the parking demand and their technical analysis is attached. Transpo estimated a
daily peak parking demand of 340 stalls for the residential units and 118 stalls for the hotel for a
combined total of 458 stalls resulting in 40 extra stalls.
The City's current zoning would require 939 stalls. Staff recognizes that this parking standard
was based on a suburban, low -rise, non- transit oriented development style of apartment
building and is excessive for a project in the core of the Urban Center. As currently proposed,
5
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
the Southcenter Plan and related TUC zoning changes would require 594 parking stalls. Under
that code, the project would be short 96 stalls.
The key question is whether the proposed project includes sufficient parking. It is a challenging
question because this type of multi - family development doesn't exist anywhere in South King
County. The main concern is that if the project has insufficient parking that the residents or
hotel guests would park on adjacent lots without permission. Although staff would feel more
comfortable if the project included more parking, staff acknowledges that adding a floor to the
parking garage would be very expensive. It is commonly accepted that the cost of constructing
a parking garage is approximately $30,000 per stall. It is possible that the cost would make the
project financially not viable.
The following are reasons why the parking may be sufficient:
(a) The Transpo Group's estimate may reflect the actual demand, Transpo Group based its
estimate of parking demand for the residential units on King County's Right Size Parking
Calculator, which is a tool designed for these types of projects. The developer also
plans to charge the residential tenants separately for parking stalls which may reduce
the number of vehicles tenants use. The hotel guests may not all need parking since the
hotel will operate an airport shuttle and some rooms may be contracted for airline
employees who would not have cars.
(b) Some other successful high -rise apartment buildings have similar or less parking. Many
apartments and hotels in Seattle have even fewer parking spaces than proposed for this
project. However, Seattle has significantly more amenities and jobs within walking and
transit of those other apartments. Seattle also has some paid street parking and paid
private parking lots which can serve as extra parking.
(c) The developer has a strong interest to ensure sufficient parking. Without it, they may
have a hard time getting financing or a hotel operator.
(d) The developer and property manager can implement a valet parking service when
demand exceeds supply. As currently configured, the project could fit an additional 44
parking stalls on site if valet service is implemented that stacks the cars. Attached is a
letter from ACE Parking describing how this plan could work.
(e) The risk to adjacent properties if there is insufficient parking or if the developer doesn't
implement a valet parking service would be relatively minimal. This site is not close to a
single family residential neighborhood and commercial property owners could have cars
towed if necessary.
Parkin. Com.arison
Developer Proposal
City Requirement
Units
Daily
Peak
Demand
Parking
Stalls
Current
Proposed
Residential
Studio
154
308
154
One bedroom
150
300
150
Two bedroom + den
63
126
95
Three bedroom
3
6
6
Subtotal
370
340
411
740
405
2
6
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 3
Hotel
189
118
88
199
189
Subtotal
559
458
499
939
594
Hotel adjustment
(57)
Stacked valet stalls
44
559 458
543
939; 537
That being said, staff still believes that the residential parking requirements proposed for the
Southcenter Plan are the minimum necessary for this project. Those requirements would be 1
stall per studio, one stall per one bedroom, 1.5 stalls per two - bedroom, and 2 stalls per three -
bedroom unit.
Regarding the hotel parking, the proposed Southcenter Pian would require one stall per hotel
room. Transpo's analysis has merit; however, staff supports a maximum reduction from one
stall per hotel room to 0.7 stalls per hotel room based on Tukwila's general hotel occupancy
level of 70 %.
Using the proposed Southcenter Plan for the residential parking requirement, assuming a 70%
occupancy level for the hotels with one stall per occupied hotel room, and counting 44 stacked
stalls enabled by valet parking, the project would exceed the required on -site parking by six
stalls. It would be necessary for the valet plan to be approved by the City Administration and
Fire Marshall to ensure the stacking would comply with the need for Fire access and be
operationally feasible.
Open Space — The City's current zoning code requires 200 square feet of recreation space per
residential unit for use of the residents which would total 74,000 square feet, which would be
nearly equivalent to 50% of the lot area. The City's proposed Southcenter Plan zoning would
require 10% of the residential floor area to be "open space" which would equal 20,800 square
feet, which is nearly the equivalent of one entire floor. Plus, the proposed Southcenter Plan
would require 25 square feet per hotel room, which would be 4,725 square feet.
The project as proposed has over 14,000 square feet of common space for the hotel primarily
related to the hotel lobby, bar /cafe, swimming pool, second floor roof deck, and meeting rooms.
If counted as "open space ", the common space easily exceeds the 25 square feet per guest
room requirement.
The project as proposed has over 16,900 square feet of common area space for the residential
portion. Most of the common space is on the nineteenth floor which includes a clubhouse with a
flexible room comprising a kitchen and area for meetings, lounging, dining and playing games.
It also has an exercise room, a hot tub, and an outdoor area with seating /lounging, barbecue
grills, and an outdoor fireplace. The ground level includes a residential lobby, an outdoor pet
area, and a fifteen foot wide tree lined sidewalk with bench seating.
Given the location of this project, there is significant indoor and outdoor space for socializing
and recreation within walking distance such as an exercise club, a bowling alley, the largest
indoor mall in the Pacific Northwest, sidewalks, the Green River bike and pedestrian trail, the
Interurban bike and pedestrian trail, and Bicentennial Park.
3
7
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 4
Staff supports the amount of common space as proposed by the developer and recommends
that the development agreement treat the common space as open space with a minimum
requirement of 25 square feet per hotel room and 45 square feet per residential unit.
Building Height In early 2013 the City approved a development agreement for this project to
entitle the building to be up to 180 feet in height. That was based on a seventeen story building
which did not include a clubhouse on the roof. The project has evolved from that earlier concept
and now includes eighteen stories plus the roof top clubhouse. In addition, the developer is
negotiating an agreement to operate the hotel as a Four Points by Sheraton and Sheraton has
requested some additional height on the second floor (mezzanine level) so the meeting rooms
can have higher ceilings.
Staff supports entitling the building for additional height up to 190 feet. This site is in the core of
Tukwila's Urban Center and is a good location for more urban type of development. Higher
ceilings provide a higher quality experience for the meeting rooms and the roof top club house is
an amenity that improves the entire project. Since the intent of the additional 10 feet is to enable
higher ceilings and the clubhouse, the proposed amendment to the development agreement
would not allow residential units or hotel rooms on the nineteenth floor.
Signage — The developer has proposed signs that exceed the size currently allowed by the
City's sign code on the north and west faces and on the canopy above the main hotel entrance
and apartment entrance on the east side as shown in the attached elevations and renderings.
North Face: The developer originally proposed a wall sign of 840 square feet, which is shown in
the attached elevations. Assuming the project has a public entrance on the north side, the sign
code allows a sign up to 150 square feet.
West Face: The developer originally proposed a wall sign of 840 square feet. Assuming the
project has a public entrance on the west side, the sign code allows a sign up to 150 square
feet.
East Face Canopy: The proposed sign lettering is 3.5 feet in height whereas the sign code
allows lettering up to one foot in height.
Although the developer has not requested signs on the parking garage, the sign code would
allow two signs on the north face of the parking garage and two signs on the west face of the
parking garage. Each of the four signs could be up to 288 square feet. It is unlikely that signs
on the parking garage would be clearly in view from Baker Boulevard or other public street.
The City's sign code was created in the context of our current built environment without
specifically anticipating large and tall buildings like this project. As such, limiting the wall face
signs to 150 square feet is too conservative. Larger signs may improve wayfinding,
marketability of the property, and competiveness of our Urban Center. The City of Seattle does
not allow signs at the top of downtown high rises but the City of Bellevue does. Bellevue limits
its signs on tall buildings to a maximum of 300 square feet. Staff supports allowing larger signs
for this project because the wall faces are considerably taller and larger than contemplated in
the sign code and the larger signs can still be aesthetically pleasing as long as the signs are of
the channel letter design as proposed.
4
8
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 5
When this item was discussed at the Community Affairs and Parks Committee (CAP) on April
15, 2014, staff recommended applying the formula from the MIC /H District which was developed
for large, industrial buildings. Based on that formula, the north face sign could be up to 733
square feet and the west face sign up to 561 square feet.
At least one member of CAP expressed concerns about applying the MIC /H formula to buildings
in a more retail area and setting a precedent for other properties. Based on that discussion,
staff recommends a formula similar to the formula in the Master Sign Program section of the
sign code (TMC 19.32.060) that would allow each of the two signs to be up to 6% of the
exposed building face to a maximum of 500 square feet. Given the size of the walls, the effect
would be to cap the signs at 500 square feet each. Those signs would be about 60% of the size
shown in the attachments. In addition, staff recommends requiring the wall signs to be channel -
type letters (as shown), dis- allowing projecting signs, corner projecting signs, and special
incentive signs for the parking garages.
Staff also recommends approving canopy edge signs up to 3.5 feet tall.
Staff recognizes that the community may have reservations about entitling this project to the
parking, open space, building height, and signage as described.
This is a pioneering project from which we will learn a lot about parking demand in our Urban
Center core. Given the City's vision to have a transit - oriented neighborhood utilizing the
commuter rail station, bus transit center, Interurban and Green River bike trails, and nearby jobs
and amenities, this is a good opportunity to push the envelope to encourage development.
This project is a unique opportunity to encourage transit oriented development with a higher end
multi- family residential component than currently exists in Tukwila. Since this type of product
does not currently exist, it is difficult to prove the market demand in order to get financing. It is a
unique confluence of factors such as the property owner's knowledge and commitment to the
local area, a large enough site to enable some surface parking, the EB -5 financing structure,
and the hotel participation that makes this project a possibility. The project exemplifies many of
the goals reflected in the City's vision for the core of the Urban Center. If the project is
successful, it may inform future adjustments to Tukwila's zoning and sign codes.
Public Notification — Official notice of the public hearing was published in the Seattle Times on
April 14, 2014. The Community Affair's and Parks Committee discussed this item at their
meeting on April 15, 2014. The City also held an open house on April 16, 2014 at Albert Lee
Appliance for the public to meet with the developer and city staff and discuss the project and
proposed amendments to the development agreement. Staff mailed invitations to the nearby
businesses and property owners.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The proposed amendment to the development agreement has no direct budget impact for the
City. The developer has also asked for the City to approve a multi - family property tax exemption
and other financial incentives. Staff is still researching those options and will return to Council
at a future date, possibly in May or June.
9
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 6
RECOMMENDATION
The Council is being asked to hold a public hearing at the Committee of the Whole meeting on
April 28.2O14 and approve anamendment to the devetopment agreement at the May 5.2O14
Regular Meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Proposed ordinance
Pioposed amendment to development agreement
Technical memorandum with parking analysis by Transpo Group dated April 2, 2014
Letter from ACE Farking
Washington Place schematc design plan set
6
1 0
DRAFT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, RELATING TO DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENTS AUTHORIZED PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 18.86
OF THE TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE; APPROVING AND
AUTHORIZING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE 223 ANDOVER
PARK EAST DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH SOUTH
CENTER WA, LLC, A WASHINGTON LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND
ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70B.170, et seq. and Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter
18.86 authorize development agreements between the City and persons having
ownership or control of real property in order to establish development standards to
govern and vest the development use and mitigation of real properties; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila and South Center WA, LLC entered into a
Development Agreement for the 223 Andover Park East Development effective the 19th
day of March, 2013 and approved by Ordinance No. 2399; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila and South Center WA, LLC wish to enter into a First
Amendment to Development Agreement for the 223 Andover Park East Development, a
copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, as required pursuant to TMC Section 18.86.050, a public hearing was
conducted on the 28th day of April 2014 to take public testimony regarding this First
Amendment to the Development Agreement as proposed;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The First Amendment to the 223 Andover Park East Development
Agreement by and between the City of Tukwila and South Center WA, LLC, a copy of
which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, is hereby approved and the Mayor is authorized
and directed to execute said First Amendment to Development Agreement on behalf of
the City of Tukwila.
W Word ProcessinglOrdinances1223 APE DA -First Amendment 4 -22 -14
DS:bjs
Page 1 of 2
11
Section 2. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the
City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary
corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to
other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering
and section /subsection numbering.
Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause
or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to
be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the
remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be
published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force
five days after passage and publication as provided by law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at
a Regular Meeting thereof this _ day of , 2014.
ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Shelley M. Kerslake, City Attorney
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
Exhibit A: First Amendment to Development Agreement by and between the
City of Tukwila and South Center WA, LLC for the 223 Andover Park East
Development
W: Word Processing \ordinances1223 APE DA -First Amendment 4 -22 -14
DS' bjs
12
Page 2 of 2
FIRST AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND
BETWEEN THE CITY OF TUKWILA
AND SOUTH CENTER WA, LLC FOR THE
223 ANDOVER PARK EAST DEVELOPMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (the "First
Amendment ") is made and entered into this day of May, 2014, by and
between the CITY OF TUKWILA ("City"), a non - charter, optional code
Washington municipal corporation, and SOUTH CENTER WA, LLC, a
Washington limited liability company ( "Developer ").
I. RECITALS
WHEREAS, the City and Developer entered into that certain Development
Agreement relating to the 223 Andover Park East Development, dated March 19,
2013 (the "Development Agreement "); and
WHEREAS, Developer has continued to refine the design of the proposed
development; and
WHEREAS, Developer has requested an amendment to the Development
Agreement in order to proceed with the proposed development; and
WHEREAS, due to the benefits as described in the Development
Agreement the City desires the proposed development to proceed; and
WHEREAS, as required pursuant to TMC 18.86.050 the City conducted a
public hearing on the 28th day of April 2014 to take testimony regarding this First
Amendment to the Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City Council, pursuant to City Ordinance No.
approved this First Amendment to the Development Agreement as proposed and
authorized execution of this First Amendment to the Development Agreement;
and
WHEREAS, the Parties desire to enter into this First Amendment to the
Development Agreement upon the terms and conditions as set forth herein,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth
herein and the long -term benefit to both the City and the Developer, the Parties
hereby agree as follows:
13
11. AGREEMENT
1. Building Height: Section 4.3 of the Development Agreement is hereby
amended so the maximum height for 50 percent of the site shall be 190 feet
The building(s) may have no more than nineteen (19) floors. The nineteenth
floor may be used for common area open space such as a clubhouse, rooftop
deck, other common areas, a green roof and mechanical equipment but may not
be used for residential units or hotel guest rooms. The remaining requirements
of Section 4.3 remain in full force and effect.
2. Open Space: The building(s) shall have common open space of at
least 45 square feet per residential unit and 25 square feet per hotel room_
Common open space may include areas such as apartment lobby, hotel lobby,
restaurant/bar, meeting rooms, business centers, bike storage, pet walk area,
exercise room, hot tub and/or sauna, swimming pool, movie or video watching
room, clubhouse including kitchen, dining and bar areas, and outdoor seating
and barbeque areas. Space for the exclusive use of residents will count toward
the residential open space requirement. Space for the exclusive use of hotel
guests will count toward the hotel open space requirement. Space accessible to
both residents and hotel guests may be counted for either requirement, at the
election of the Developer.
3. Parking: The required minimum amount of on -site parking shall be 0.7
stalls per hotel guest room, one stall per studio unit, one stall per one bedroom
unit, one - and -a -half stalls per two bedroom unit, and two stalls per three
bedroom unit. Parking stalls that are stacked, in which some cars could be
blocked by other cars, may be counted toward the required minimum number of
parking stalls provided that the location of the stalls has been approved by the
City's Fire Marshal and a shuttle and valet parking plan has been approved by
the City administration. The Fire Marshal may approve a drive aisle width
between stacked cars less than required by TMC 18.56.090.
4. Signage: The proposed development may have signage according to
the City's sign code (TMC 19.20) with the following modifications:
a) Canopy -edge signs may be up to 3.5 feet in height and may have
up to two rows of letters.
b) Projecting signs and corner projecting signs per TMC 19.20.050 are
not allowed.
c) Special incentive signs for parking garages are not allowed.
d) Permanent building mounted wall signs: The building may have up
to two flush- mounted wall signs. One sign may be placed on the
northernmost wall and one on the westernmost wall regardless of
14
whether those walls have exterior public entrances. The maximum
allowable message area for the wall signs may be an area up to six
percent of the exposed building face to a maximum of 500 square
feet. The flush - mounted wall signs may not be cabinet or box signs
and must be channel -style letters and may be internally lit and/or
halo -lit.
5. This First Amendment shall be recorded against the Property as a
covenant running with the land.
6. Except as amended herein, the terms and provisions of the
Development Agreement remain in full force and effect.
In Witness Whereof, the parties have caused this First Amendment to be
executed, effective on the day and year set forth on the first page hereof.
CITY OF TUKWILA, a Washington municipal corporation
By:
Jim Haggerton
Its: Mayor
Date:
Attest/Authenticated: Approved as to Form:
Christy O'Fiaherty, MMC, City Clerk City Attorney
SOUTH CENTER WA, LLC, a Washington limited liability company
By:
Omar Lee
Its: Manager
Date:
3
15
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
)ss
COUNTY OF )
On , 20 before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public, personally
appeared JIM HAGGERTON, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) as the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument,
and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity as
MAYOR OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, and that by his signature on the instrument
the entity upon behalf of which he acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Print Name:
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of
Washington, residing at
My commission expires:
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
)ss
COUNTY OF )
On , 20 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public, personally
appeared OMAR LEE, personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within
instrument, and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized
capacity, as MANAGER OF SOUTH CENTER WA, LLC, and that by his signature
on the instrument the entity upon behalf of which he acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal,
Print Name:
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of
Washington, residing at
My commission expires:
4
16
rtranspoGRoup
WHAT TRANSPORTATION CAN BE
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
Date: April 2, 2014
TG: 14027.00
To: Omar Lee — Washington Tower LP
From: Kevin L. Jones, P.E., PTOE —Transpo Group'?, f J
cc: Eric Guion, AIA — Group West Companies PLLLC
Subject: Washington Place Mixed -Use — Parking Analysis
This memorandum presents our estimate of daily peak parking demand for the subject project as well
as compares this estimate to (1) the number of required parking stalls based on the City of Tukwila`s
existing and proposed zoning codes and (2) the proposed parking supply.
Project Description We understand the project site is Located at 223 Andover Park East in Tukwila
near existing shopping, restaurants and entertainment and within walking distance of the existing
Green River Trail. It is also located near the future Tukwila Transit Center and within walking distance
of the future Tukwila Sounder Station. The proposed project would include the demolition of a
40,580- square foot (sf) building formerly occupied by Circuit City and construction of a 19 -story
mixed -use building with 370 apartment units and 189 hotel rooms. The project would include a mix of
apartment unit types rented at local market rates. The number of studios and one- to three - bedroom
apartment units is summarized below along with the average size and anticipated monthly rent for
each unit type:
• 154 studio units averaging 353 sf and rented at approximately $790 /month
• 150 one- bedroom units averaging 578 sf and rented at approximately $1,000/month
• 63 two- bedroom plus den units averaging 996 sf and rented at approx. $1,550/month
• Three three - bedroom units averaging 1,511 sf and rented at approximately $1,900/month
We understand the hotel will be branded as a '4Points by Sheraton. "' It will include a shuttle program,
providing transportation for guests to /from Sea Tae International Airport which is located less than
five miles to the west. Given this proximity and provision for shuttle service, the hotel plans to contract
with the airlines and reserve rooms for pilots, flight crew, etc. An average annual room occupancy
rate of 70 percent is anticipated based on similar hotels.
The project would also provide 208 surface parking stalls and 290 garage parking stalls for a total of
498 stalls. We understand the monthly price for residential parking would be approximately $150 per
stall and this price would be in addition to the monthly rent.
Parking Demand Peak parking demand was estimated differently for the residential and hotel
components of the project. For the residential component, we used the King County Multi- Family
Residential Parking Calculator (www.rightsizeparkine.orq) to calculate the estimated number of
parking stalls that would be used per apartment unit. The calculator is a map -based statistical model
that estimates parking use for a particular parcel based on local data collected at over 200 existing
multi - family developments in 2012. The calculator was created by King County Metro using grant
monies awarded from the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Value Pricing Program and takes
into consideration surrounding factors such as existing population, employment, and transit service
concentrations.
In using the calculator, we first selected the parcel representing the project site. Next, we entered the
number, size and anticipated monthly rent for each apartment unit type along with the monthly price
per stall for residents of the building. Although it would be reasonable to increase the existing transit
7Fenspo Group 11730 11 Bth Avenue N.E., Suite 600 Kirkland, WA 98034 425 -821 -3665 Fax: 425 -825 -8434
17
service concentration recognizing the nearby investments in the Tukwila Transit Center and Tukwila
Sounder Station, we did not to ensure a reasonably conservative estimate of future residential
parking demand.
As shown in the attached, the tool estimates that the residential component of the proposed
development would generate, on average, a daily peak parking demand of approximately
0.92 vehicles per apartment unit. This translates to approximately 340 vehicles with a total of
370 apartment units. The tool reports this estimate as strong (accurate) for the parcel in which the
project site is located.
The average parking rate published in Parking Generation (Institute of Transportation Engineers
[ITE], 4th Edition, 2010) for "Hotel" was used to estimate peak parking demand for the hotel
component. The average weekday peak period parking demand is 0.89 vehicles per occupied room
(see attached) and based on an anticipated average annual roam occupancy of 70 percent, it Is
estimated that the hotel would generate a daily peak parking demand of approximately 118 vehicles
(189 x 0.70 x 0.89 = 118). This is considered a conservative estimate because it does not account for
the planned shuttle program nor the strategy to reserve rooms for those in the airline industry, two
elements not incorporated in the average ITE parking rate that would likely result in less parking
demand than would be generated otherwise.
Combining our parking demand estimate for the hotel with our estimate for the residential component,
we anticipate the proposed mixed -use development would generate a peak parking demand of
approximately 458 vehicles (340 + 118 = 458).
Parking Analysis The City's existing zoning code requires two parking stalls for each apartment
unit with up to three bedrooms and one stall for each hotel room plus one stall for employees for each
20 rooms, rounded to the next highest figure. As such, the City would require 740 stalls
(370 x 2 = 740) for residential parking and 199 stalls ((189 x 1) + (189 ! 20) = 199) for hotel parking, a
total of 939 stalls. This total supply is approximately 481 more stalls (939 - 458 = 481) than the
estimated total daily peak parking demand described above.
We understand the City has proposed changes to the existing zoning code as it relates to the Tukwila
Urban Center District in which the project site is located. These changes would require fewer parking
stalls than with the existing zoning code. For example, Table 4 of the Planning Commission's
Recommend Draft Chapter 18.28 (October 2012) recommends one parking stall for each studio or
one- bedroorn unit, 1.5 stalls for each two - bedroom unit, two stalls for each unit with more than two
bedrooms, and one stall for each hotel room. if approved, the City would require 404 stalls ((304 x 1)
+ (63 x 1.5) + (3 x 2) = 404) for residential parking and 189 stalls (189 x 1 = 189) for hotel parking,
a total of 593 stalls. This total supply is approximately 135 more stalls (593 - 458 = 135) than the total
daily peak parking demand.
With the project proposing a total of 498 parking stalls, we estimate that this supply is approximately
40 more stalls (498 - 458 = 40) than the estimated total daily peak parking demand. Based on the
average parking rate in Parking Generation for "Hotel," it is worth noting that the proposed supply
would accommodate the peak parking demand even if the hotel was 90 percent occupied and without
the strategies to reduce hotel parking demand described earlier.
The proposed code would require approximately 64 more residential parking stales than the estimated residential
peak parking demand. Assuming these additional stalls would require more structure parking, these stalls would be responsible
for approximately 10,800 kg in annual greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide equivalent) tram construction and
maintenance and approximately 268,600 kg in greenhouse gas emissions (carbon dioxide) from vehicle use of residents, as
calculated by the King County Multi- Family Residential Parking Calculator,
2 Based on projections, it is unlikely that mom occupancy woutd exceed 90 percent with arty regularity but if this was to
occur, the owner is committed to provide valet parking service to off -set the incremental increase in parking demand.
:ftranspo'3l;c.l
18
Conclusions Conservatively, we estimate the proposed project would generate a daily peak parking
demand of approximately 456 vehicles, less than the proposed parking supply and significantly less
than what the City's existing and proposed zoning codes would otherwise require. Peak parking
demand would likely be even less as we did not adjust our estimate to reflect the future transit
concentration of the area nor the hotel's planned services geared toward guests (air travelers, pilots,
flight crew, etc.) affiliated with the nearby airport.
KLJ/
Attachments: Screen Shots from King County Mulfl- Family Residential Parking Calculator
Excerpt from Parking Generation for "Hotel"
l'irtra nspo.
19
Screen Shots from King County Multi-Family Residential Parking Calculator
Li LAIR Cauca), Multi-Fmk x
(- n wwwiriglusizeparkingiorg
• Right
Size King County Muiti-Famity Residential Parking Calculator
Parking
frte r a focaCion
V
fl
sIdI1qiThiL Ratio (Number of StAls)
1I > 1.5
1Parcel Selected ■
r.r.rg er 3411 ch.., 0
(1.92
ralrer
022310000
223 ArctiOtFIC FAN E ((ultra
0
Boiatini & Parking
Spraficatiots
146,474
0.52
• Lticztian
ch-shutel OAS
Pirdns woo a
1 he WeSell Iti5 1.101nei I ehree ern I511:1,114 ee+R.Ug AIROR Warn TJi,tdwwl1
Phr Ming 10 pigging snAcarallpnn Those rave 5 mra Ton argairlivaluel
which II nnonsi Lisp !ARRA Are m11E71;104 set r How the hIPZAIhr gu51311cs
ii LinOunditcl RIG aslord.AVe I1S,11; anogans
MAUER AVIRAGZ
OP RIOTS REIF (1) ARM (SD FT1
MosT.S 1041 $79_9]
i GEPSILsoms 1503 G^1,0-0-01 ' 5713.
2 BECROOSIS G3, 22,550 0961
). PEGIRTORs 3, S1.9001 1511
TOTAL 370 S1,014 ':'3 .:4
' !UMBER Af FORDA51, E RNI1S, kIONTHLY PRICE PER STALL: I SY
5150
klaw on unbundled (priced) parkin uerice par kingfunit ratios?
Talk parkin Darna ralus o Mow ark esimiatel using prase; UhOLuigNEU
price rases tri parcel recabari TAM adiel1rnen1.5 reNulling Rom
1,n5priagna
4.0k.f.4,41
MRS
11.41,11.1114
Lta ker Riv,1
gnker P.r,d
ke Blvd
isikar
siratder
111
rararakr
Screen Shots from King County Multi-Family Residential Parking Calculator
[ King Cnunty KluKti.Kminly.
LI vww.rightsizeparking.org
• Right
Size King County Multi-Family Residential Parking Calculator
Parking
i Parcel. elected
PC) An&tnt
o2231uoco
:,..7?.010(41 HAM; F 93 MR
0 5.11.[TRKI & Patal
'igetifitalkon5
Poptila I cirr
cnnuniraion
..!• 4::
?It EI:d
Jan: (.4
Lanstotracn
Transit Service:
Lel» Ityh
ono, i • !NM.
0.92
,5tervg,th • Ettn•C!•41
. 01 • RUYAN-
q.F1. r.strisae 111,e.AaL6
l4&01 0.52
Lin
Clara CtQnSSICi
51,082
Poonientri enncemagon slnIr to
Eastgate, Foctorla or Faunti !toy
66,252
Job cnnatnnalian nIrm1ar to
Downtown BelieVue or Fremont
1,276
Tr EOM st rviLe V.1-11e•Entrakf p
Crossroads or edrien City Center
< )
'14
L4kc;
sinmder Blvd
IMININO; [1.1.
,11:or Nod
Pa rkingflinit Ratio (Humber BE Stalls)
sias samipm,&,,,._::_=0;1111111111111
Stionder D1,1 Eticandor IVA
:31•1
fifli't.7 ;es.
Screen Shots from King County Multi - Family Residential Parking Calculator
Pr IGng County Muhl- Fareey x
C i f,i www.rightsizeparking.org
Right
Size King County Multi- Family Residential Parking Cakulatar
Parking yA {A :.,
E
r5i{:c torn
1 PareetSetected
1-r; ! A.ddR CI;
82239940/1
7:1 F 0#1100.
r37/NI Mtn 0
0.92
'Yrrgtn F 7stirntred
.eke - F416nr'(�
rso I C�1� -., :�. UiE an.n
145,954
0, {kJ ^dng&P41%sr9
So7411,. 4Y t
Llx>Wn
n32raitenths
Parkes irnpacl5
fsln eed
I1IEaHOn Compared Te
rF+,M MMelte icier a{'$;
Esde.ated Parking Use Redo; 032 '1,091,'
Total $tails: 342 404
Surface Parking
Total Capoal Costs (Land 6
CdnstrucllaN•
IJ4nhr1•v Costs par Realeenlial Lind
(Inclueing O6U ),
Ann031 GHG Emissions rrom
Construcllan an4 Ltauatenance FF:g
CG2e1.
Structure POrkin1
Tolar Capdal Costs (Land &
Construction}_
I.{oottoy Caws par Ra9idoneal UM!
Tncledng GEFJ}
Annual GI 1G Emis s tons Frown
Cons treason one L4aintenanca (k0
EslimaloU Annual %IJT or Building
Rasrtlenls
GHG Emissions from Vehicle Use of
Residents il:g CO2)
52819,930 53,323.633
070 593
24202 211587
55.010,580 57,114.357
5157
59,110
3 502.621
7..89.275
0168
64.809
4 502,022
1.870.880
/
< 3
:thinner Blvd
Sake! 8.4x1
El
8 ker Blvd
Parking/Unit Ratda (Nurnger of Stalls)
‹,f, Etas I - .,.7777∎'° Y1.5SfuPs
f]oker f1,4r
reiker Rl.ci
LI metier nlvd SiranderBlvdd
5trander Blvd
Land Use: 310
Hotel
Average Peak Period Parking Demand vs. Occupied Rooms
On a :: Weekday
Location: Suburban
Statistic
Peak Period
Number of Stud Sites
Avera.e Size of Stud Sites
Avera.e Peak Period Parkin. Dernand
Standard Deviation
Coefficient of Variation
95% Confide nce Interval
Range
85th Percentile
33rd Percentile
PeakPeinod Deinajd
12:00 -1:0[l p.m.: 7 :00 -10:03 p.m.;
11 :00 +.m, -5 :00 a.m.
20
315 accu p ied rooms
0.89 vehicles .eroccu.ied room
0.31
35%
0.75 -1.02 vehicles per occupied room
0.51`1.94 vehicles per occupied room
1.08 vehicles ' er occu ied room
0.72 vehicles • er occu • ied room
Weekday Suburban Peak Period
Parking Demand
900 ... —
P =110x -59
800 - -z -- -�
700 7
600
500 !
400
300
200
100
0
0 200 400
600
x = Occupied Rooms
800
• Actual Data Points
Institute of Transportation Engineers
24
Fitted Curare
701
- - - - Average Rate
Pa,'w Gweratran, 4th Editcn
„PIA
Painwall
EYEriY THANK YOU EARNED.
Scott A. Jones
Chairman
Keith Jones
Managing Principal
John Baumgardner
Vice Chairman & CEO
Steve Burton
President
Founding Member of the
National Parking Association
our mission
By valuing our employees, listening to our clients, and operating under the ideals of moral integrity, quality, and
accountability, we will lead the parking industry in service and financial results for our clients_
April 14t'', 2014
To Whom It May Concern,
The purpose of this letter is to inform the City of Tukwila about the additional parking space that
can be created by implementing valet parking at the proposed new hotel. After reviewing the
design of the property and working with hotel management, we have come up with a scenario
where valet would be provided and accommodate additional vehicles while also leaving dedicated
parking for the apartment complex, allowing residents to self park at all times. Under this scenario
we are assuming that valet services would be provided 24/7.
We propose leaving some of the surface parking and levels 2, 3, and 4 of the garage open to the
residents of the apartment complex. Valet and hotel parking would be dedicated to the 1g floor of
the garage, as well as a small portion of the surface area parking. Under this scenario, we would be
able to completely stack the 1st floor maximizing the amount of vehicles that could be parked.
Access would be restricted to only valet team members. Under this scenario we believe we could at
the very least fit an additional 44 full -sized vehicles in the valet area.
When we stack vehicles there are several processes we use. One is installing small heavy -duty
secure key boxes that would store the keys of vehicles that are blocking other vehicles in. When a
valet retrieves a vehicle, they would access the key box to retrieve the keys of the blocking vehicle.
Another method is to keep all keys in a central location. Under this method, we tag the tickets of
the vehicles that are blocked in with the ticket number of the vehicle blocking it. If a vehicle is
requested that is blocked in, the valet knows to also grab the keys to the vehicle that is blocking it
in.
We would like to keep the valet area restricted to valet use only. This means that valet would only
use the valet designated areas of the garage. At no time would a valet stack or double park a vehicle
in the apartment parking section of the garage.
Ace Parking Management has extensive experience in the valet parking industry. In the greater
Seattle area alone we run multiple luxury hotels, as well as, several large corporate valet assist
programs. This gives us the expertise necessary to maximize space in the garage. With over 300
professionally trained employees in the area, It also allows us to staff a location in a moment's
notice, if needed.
For further questions or concerns, please feel free to contact me directly. I can be reached by email
at nick hutsen@acegarking.com or through my direct office line at 206 -903 -1219.
Sincerely,
Nick Hutsen
Regional Director
ace parking management, inc. 645 Ash Street San Diego, CA 92101 tel 619.233.6624 fax 619,233.0741 www.aceparking.com
25
LEVEL 1- 27 dthtionaI vehicles
DASHED LINE Or VALET PAFIKING
RAMP DOWN
Surface Level- 17
additional spaces
| lT(
"
=
" /"
"/"
CASHEL
CCESS
saAtin-
2
27
Parking Analysis
Assume Valet Parking
Hotel
Site Valet 44
Site Surface Parking S7
Garage - Lower Level 71
Total Hotel Parking 132 (Total required is 0.7 per guestroc
Apartments
Site Surface Parking 164
Garage - Lower Level 18
Garage - 1st floor 85
Garage - 2nd floor 85
Garage - 3rd floor 59
Total Apartment Parking 411
Total Apartment Parking Required per South Center Plan 405
Total Parking Provided with Valet 543
Total Parking Recommended by City Staff 537
Note: Project includes 6 more stalls than recommended by City Staff
28
WASHINGTON PLACE
HOTEL / APARTMENTS
SCHEMATIC DESIGN
April 23, 2014
1HIEiUP W E T COMPANKS ruc
*WASHINGTON PLACE •
223 ANDOVER PARK EAST•TI: EMMA, WASII1NGON
GRGUP WEST COMPANIESPUC
•WASHINGTON PLACE •
223 ANDOVER PARK IAWI' TIiKWII,A, WASFIING(1N
GROUP WEST CCMPANIES►fic
• WASHINGTON PLACE
223 ANDOVER PARK EAST WAS IIINuoN
AO' ..ie
„ler. minideriir •
7iFiTiiiiTTATI—Til no mmummr ismoso•
JIM
•
uuui
7,5 Eng
„: .....-,
gm asoommipoimm movr.,mm met
im
11 11111 111 FOUR PONTS Illi.
i L .
= , - 1 - — -
223
IJ f:Ii i,..
11117 `141
5 114
1
GROUP WEST COMPANIESetc.
'WASHINGTON PLACE •
223 DO% Elt PARK HAST•11 KAS.11,A, WAtilli111:0 \
GROUP WEST COMPANIESpuc
.WASHINGTON PLACE
254 ANDO% LAsT.TIKWILA, WASH1NGON
~. . ~ •
'
�C4-
------ --~--------�7T�---------'-- ---- ---------------'--`''--------r-
1� || | � i | | | | > i | | | || f� [ �`� | � | | �) |i [| | �| C
��|"\"1�|"|"|"|^J|='"|�|" � " .'.� ~|~|^ ^|�|�|~|"i�`|"�"|�1"|"|"|"|�|"is "�^|� `|" "|"|�/ �//.|'/'i"||``
..~~ ~~ _ ^ — ~~ / ~~
.
,~~�~~ ~.� � �
� ~ ' ,~' ,^~ ..~ ~ ~~ 14,1° ~. ~ ~�
~�—__'�--_' ~
. ` `—_,-
'~
.`;;,
T ] '
~~� -_
'
���
\,
���=°
,,
4.."••
'
°
°
| .
~^ .
^
C.
T� | — .| [ � .[^ ` .
t`']1`l [1T ^
,o
U
^�
SITE PLAN
md3
,40,�_
4,"
man ruin
" " " " M
°
row
°
( |
V\||| | |[| 1
|
. .
~
~'
SmENDIAR AIRTNE
1.1 11 EASTASAT
-
■ir!
• 1
"6 . sA°=
101191.11.1NION
~•
LLI 1—
cr
eL
uj
° ���� _RAa
R. :�°�'
NE. CORD< TL
IOC TAAA
=~ ~ N. ~ EASEMENT
`----
^az
I ��=
�---
'~
. /"="APE =^
MAE $="~
r.'LOA==
CAMP We.
, MC_ pa
MAI AMANITA/MI
MR 11.1
Emme DM MAN
AA NON NAHA
...•111./.011.120.1.1.111.1.
veer rms. +ram
7117-7/
77:Sf•
777? 22,8•
c c
I a
c
FIRST LEVEL PLAN
VIST
c c
DASNEV LINE OF VALET FARMING
C c
C C
cic
I
C.
71714.17C74,1
lki471410 - 4
.7
TV
tE
FRE
CUP/ •
I! 7 7.7 7.777777,
77,77.7 Mvoomm..
MIMISMIM
COMP WEST
ARCHIMC77 C. 17.
11.1 MEOW NYC It
MAMA n
mow .177777.77.
PAt 001 6217410 7
I MM71711.7.47..7717
A2.02
Axo
SECOND LEVEL PLAN
xx. xxx xx,
A2.03
opj, E1/EL.P
Ewa wlM
.. MI
1111a WLL L1Y. 01114
14X irlip 114.0
11•11. 714 4.17 WHIR
A2,04
1111111,1
11111111
�-- -- -- -- -- --
(22:__ -- -- -_ -- -- --
a e
ti' � � Q
T �
[ T
| / | |
. l
.-� �' ' .-� l
| | | , |
| 1
| | | /
| / |
| � |
.
-�----|----t---
•
. .
�
"
""=. ^ ."ED. P° . BEE .BEN ,=".=°^ 2 02=°
(14
-_�
letdal
_
0��62112.P.S.
milarr2212 11
MI 114
1•221114 0211110
IMURRINOMMMI
2 BED + DEN A, 2 BED + DEN A
2BED+DENA
477'
STUDIO
EXTENDED
2 BEI) + DEN A
5T1-1 LEVEL PLAN
2 BED + DN A
T
7 I
2 BED • DEN A
i117-.- I ,r4
ITC
, I_
p1717
I I •-•-_ Ffko -,
Ip
L.>
•
Pill 4) -.1:12
•
•, - ; - -7 " 77:41-
:40
2 BED DEN A 2 BED + DEN A 2BED+DENA 2 BED COI4NER STE
ea 1 ie
- — -
-
NO.
a 111■Ip•ma
lanalar am., Ms: a
aatratala.
gleatma
A2.06
78 Cr
2 BED +DEN A
2 S' -o-
2 EiED + DNA
27••::1- 2Y-Cr
STUDIO 2 RED +DEN A. 2 BED +OENA 2 &ED1- DEN A
EXTENDED TJ Ti TM TG
, 6 -11TH LEVEL PLAN
ry -1' G
2BED +OENA Z9ED+ DEN A 2HED CORNER ST
TC !TB TA
HOTELGUESTRGOM
Te
T5
T10
OWN. INWEI.VAIIN
au fa
1
w I-
caz
r_p
zo
0a
zw
x
rarlat !AC
MI MAW. AXE 11
ppMale
A2.07
28'-91
STD
STUDIO
23 "A
23'.0
27,1X
1 BED
STD STD
1 BED STUDIO STUDIO
1 BED
23'-0• 2r-D•
1 BED STUDIO (SIM)
TC.t TB
1 58'- -
4.3" 2r-Cr
TA
4'-31
r. r.
1„iIIIi
I1l li
1111111
0
0
4!T 1
Irj
•7 l FF j:w 1F1 I1fN
hf ILA
W 0
STUDIO STD
EXTENDED STUDIO 1 BED
ry TJ
®,TH LEVEL PLAN
1 BED STD STD
STUDIO STUDIO
TM TG
t BED
IF
1 BED
TE
STD STD
STUDIO STUDIO 1 BED
113
TC
1 BED CORNER
TBSTUDIOTk(
TA
79 .
TI0
HOMO KUM
WM,1 pr
NM 114
1C1r+14 wn NfN
1 t *MAW
TM, N 1
A2.08
tai
4._3.
:TAI
STUDIO STD
EXTENDED STUD1D
im
1 BED
,13TH LEVEL PLAN
STD STD
1 BED STUDIO STUDIO • 1 BEA
TO TH TG
STD STD
1 BED STUDIO STUDIO 1 BED
TE T6
TG
1 BED CORNER
TaSTUDIOTA , TA
CS Z
Z
4
Z
0 I-
= J
< 0
aria se.
▪ CKniat.+MC.•!
MI AMMO AM Ii
1.▪ 711,..411r1
now won..
A2.09
28'LS' 234' 23'-0'
STD
STUDIO 1 BED 1 BED
27"-O•
STUDIO 1
STD STD S
1 BED
21'40'
1 BED
27-0'
" STD
STUDIO PIM)
fe
LI
1
0
EE
0
0
P P
09(0
I
J
T2
0
10
0T4
0 -
0
0
ro
r,
I STUDIO STD I
ErrENDED sumo 1 1 BED
(y-1)
1 aEra
STD STD
sTuoro STUDIO
TH TO
04:1F1-1 LEVEL PLAN
I BED
TP
t. 11 " 111:
Tr—
STD STD
1 BED I STUDIO STUDIO.),
I TE I TD 1
1 BED
1 BED
COMER
I TR!
T10
pm. Oman. '1,
PaTRAT KAM Naaa
aaartal
Katt.
B 741111411•1
K att/ATM.
A2.10
23'4'
2 BED + DEN A
23'4'
2T4
k
.�
o.
21 "6+
2W-Cr
— TT1
Y
{
• T4
-1—LA
28ED+
A
26E0 +DENA 2 BED +D
ts T6
c
uE 1 m
G
- STJDID
(T4
BED + DEN A
TJ
2 BED 1ENA
TN
®12:141,1E-M. PLAN
A
_r -Pi] i j 1.' : — . _.-1L .
L it..
2 BED + DEN A
TO
28E{3 +01NA
'TF (TO
2 BED + DEN A
1�
2 BED + DEN CORNER STE
R3 +AI
(T
Td'
Tg,
4.10. Matal.arelper
!Masi Ni■
W F
<
CO
0
7r 2
WIMP .T
mcTS. 94.94
MI mcx
1"i
Tn; r.NIP
LelAra
raw .11110MAIMEN
n.w rwau...1,
A211
TB
TA
18 TH LEVEL PLAN
555 [rip. 1
NM*.
1955751555
RIMY
uJ
ra. 2
z
0<
ta-
z
<0
X
CoMallexf
MI5 5551 5 5 5 5.15515
A2 12
ME I
UN
2T-0'
23'-0'
23'-0'
27
MECHANICAL
UNIT I
L
PRIVATE
0000
F: )
1 Jl wr�l
APARTMENT
, ,
I_ I_
v ' um .-td rji
If1rt C
II o'
�l ' •
THI
PROOF LEVELP_LAN
HOT TUn
'
46 -11'
s�l
i T2Y
Y1a
PPM
coessuar
GROW NEU
frRvI riots.
RUE 1.
MA
F. gum.. Aa w412+.
A2.13
1,9405 San Axe ael nee A 418041
//3327014
- - -- -
14649.081
116 1565
Fh
Tower
1 ER W178n
1375 57
11381x44
165730
1 B
MG
41
1619 •
114.1 1739'
Bp
toner
-
213e Om
9ben
.144046
A(917 s!)
BnRen
112$7"
P 1 }
7Res
Oen4
I
3BAr
Gn
3BA.
ben GrB
.�..1
-
6ulld{1F)C
ARa
119691
1 994
Residential
FFr 1145 S.Yau(Arta
661 Una
Std.
who
Audio
F9I. {377
Comm
Sandia
F
51.566
VAdm (veld
3
4ofUnd
1s1 11400 14411
fir' 7261 5F
--
1
-
12.6111
39197
57
2nd
2nd nom Inee
11.783 SF
7 250,
1
5
17.897
21,47C1
74
341 no
17,4)5 SF
11 Vnle9
{
1
1
9
9,319
di Un3
71,637
55
4O9699i k9s4
61,66
12,0018 SF
11 Un8,
1
_1
9
-
9,319
21 Units
71,637
SF
SIn9ao'lagel
20,82
12,518 5F
11 Unln
1
1
9
9,5.35
21 Vng5
72,074
Sf
risk Cour teen
79,98
12,519 #
11 Units
1
1
9
9,535
71 wits
77,674
5F
7(4 ilp.s,.,I
89,14
13.519 5F
19.11449
1
B
1
1
9.525
71 Q.,,
7(014
58
9,087*, 9441
99. •
17,119 SF
19 Units
1
9
1
1
_
9,515
71 Ueu0
77.074
5F
MP 0wr FSae1
1007. -.
12,539 SF
19 Units
1
_ _
$
1
3
9,535
21 WM.
33.974
5F
10th Odor 4!
115.87
17.579 54
19 UPA1
1
8
1
1
9 535
21 Vets
72,014
SF
1 On Odor level
175.78
13,559 5F
19 lean
1
1
_ 8
_
1
1
9,535
27 Units
72.074
5P
1719 MOM 40041
1ii,9i_
73.157 SF
11 Vnlrr
15
1
1
15
1
1
1
-
77,175
55
13th Soot Semi
164.10
22,115 SF
35 Un9 ,
15
1
1
19
1
1
1
_
-
72,175
5F
14th Soot level
153 -36
77.125 5F
_ 31 Units
15
l
1
1S
1
1
1
-
22,175
SF
1516 46m 87611
147.42
27,175 Si
35 11601
15
_ 1
1
71'.
1
1
1
•
.
27.175
SP
1101000, nueF
771.58
72,115 5F
35 Unto
15
1
1
11
1
1
1
-
37,175
if
1719 Mw 9,1
180.74
31,975 SF
35 Un(9
78
1
1
15
1
1
1
21,575
56
11591 !kw 14941
18990
31,975 9
14 Units
1
1
1
1
7
1
21,875
_
54
19011kar 97r01100168910 1
199.06
5.1$0 SF
5,565
54
Out pool
708.12
1
271,993 SF
370 Units
130
17
4
1
130
6
7
1 6
9
1
41
6
7
2' 1
191674
115 18n9s 491,349
59
1171
side Un•1,
154
Turd 1 Nekton, UniI,
1,0
76441 SA Un45
G3 'S19113 x
3
ReWpslal Pantg0494499nern
441(49 PrManl Requirement
117114.91110
0101e
9o141nl Area
706004ldoR 5197em
418490724!!
154
1/471 IMO 154
1.454441llnS
537 5101
teem L000
17169
sower 1090
61
158 UM.
1511
14477 UNR 150
SST level
77780
151 Par1'e 1xvel
85
2 OR • pen
63
3
1. 55477120 T 45
2/APT 4105 6
-
741010541
27780
2nd Stikine Lem"
Ire Parking Lein
85
346
39014191
17366
55
155141s Parting
298
Valet
44
Tidal
179
403
5019
132 Sulks
537
• 70741 Gera 19295
71711(Pani,B Shawn
542
Mara !MAN
MILIC
III i-
c) 2
W
11
0 < "q
CI-
LTI F.1
Y J
< 0
61.456.4
WIMP weir
..m_r•ncte. um,* e.
• Ffaleel e
Tun 1.4 NW
94.• rC wn ••2440
IMP 6401x4.4
A2.14
liOef GREfIRY BE FA. SOFFR
WRINgE SIZE LW 9
BRIMMED BRONZE YF+M)ON FFPN&
Sulfa Er -BE WE AE b4 FvuF(y
CONCRETE coat
REO BRICK VENEER BABE
OVICRE FE BASE
14801
uirr . ra
S»OSTEME. METAL Fw is
am* No NaNM1 Pine FRAME
31 gl CD
—i
ID ® m
�r 1 ED
05 01 W
m m ;l
m m m
m
Ell m m
Ell Ell m
m m ID _1
m m m
Im m m
m .m
Ca VER PENNY MpENI PRCNV
Madam
- t i e •NN.
—
— +
TOTAL AREA OF NORTH WAIL 439ao5F
— -sire
FP.51. — N..a .,
N�N.
neR er1.
ftvi eta.
WIT NORTH ft PAN,.
A3,03
1414:1404 NET!, PAMELE■
Mn 41.4114441 WINDOW mu.-
CRUSHED BRONZE WINDOM
%MU SERE METAL PANELS
tovegme..P4aMirAGAOF
DONCRETE C
ft." • 7'Lr
4.40 G.E114, METAL SCFFIT
....0....t
71_1_11_11_11 li II 11 II LH 11 ULU -
I!, 1 IN 1 .._ _a .1
at • i -1-m-i — •
........ 11.4•4441411.11M.
[1 III-
,.. rm..
1 ,r_ _ _t_1_,,i _ ,...— N m
ET Fri I — ,---N 1 .
,, — ,—. —
11 En ill .
-71.._
rfrv'' ' :in al En f
Mu 1711 M ,
., — Min 14111*
' 111
M ■M■
lik, ._...: :111 01 71 fi
m 01 17-11 Ell Cri r
„ALI 11
En M illt-70 Ell DI 1.'
En
ED al 71 CO Ell 1,
.-. _ _,...
m al ai 1 EU DI LI, 4,
_ .._
-117717171- al 01 li al ow
73 wi u 4 4 4 14 P1 En A iii 4 4 as
11
I 11 11 11 11 111 ionnounanurinnu
— 44 4
—
14-4
0.1-111,10e4. 144C4
sown..
4.14•01ort
0444* 44,7
Arturrturs.
ilf104104 4414 44
14.7.4. ono
ncoa 0447.4
0044444
•44.1.1..1.404441
43.11{4 f EVATON
A3.02
.■
Iwo
MEMOIMI
_. ...
mom,
•.u■.ou
INMENNI
MEMENEE
i
lIUP
Amnd
kff
f..a
ET
h{F,K.
A3.01
La
un
tri
LIV00t10313 3N0
m
rn
a
X 0
g
OianiS G IVONVIS
(3
LIVING /DINING
(15' -9 "x29'-71
CLOSET
CLOSET
MASTER
BEDROOM
(SG'- 8"x11' -10 ")
0 0
0 0
CLOSET
rTh
TUB
BATH
Ks--]
0
DEN
(1o'- 0"x8' -3 ")
KITCHEN
TWO BEDROOM + DEN C
1,235 sf
r -
I I
J
UVING /DINING
(15' -9 "x10' -1O 1
MASTER
BEDROOM
{18 " -fi "x1O -6'1
WALK -IN
CLOSET
KITCHEN
BEDROOM
(10'-0i"xi3' -3i
BATH
CLOSET
DEN
TUB
L eQa
TWO BEDROOM + DEN A
912sf
CLOSET
CLOSET
LIVING /DINING
Dr- m "x2r -o I
TWO BEDROOM CORNER SUITE
1,165 sf
WALK -IN
CLOSET
Turf
BATH
WALK -IN
CLOSET
BEDROOM
(15'.4•40' -9 1
MASTER
BEDROOM
os'- irx13'fi J
LIVING /DINING
45'41(12'1.1
THREE BEDROOM + DEN
1,492 sf
Community Affairs & Parks Committee Minutes April 15, 2014- Page 2
C. Foster Golf Links Marketing Plan Update
Staff provided an update on the status of the Foster Golf Links (FGL) Marketing Plan that was
originally presented at Committee in November 2013. Strategies in the Marketing Plan were .
identified as: 1) Retain and strengthen core customers; 2) Engage lapsed golfers; and 3) Attract
new customers. Items of note that address these strategies were described as follows:
• The Rewards Card program was launched on April 1, and 178 Rewards Cards have already
been sold. Councilmember Seal asked what the expectation for sales is, and staff indicated
that 600 card sales is realistic, but 1200 is possible.
• FGL has created 9 Get Golf Ready (GGR) instructional programs designed to engage new
and lapsed golfers. The first classes begin at the end of April.
• FGL has developed a Junior Golf Academy through the PGA that will begin in June.
• FGL will partner with the Parks youth programs to incorporate golf into their Summer Camps.
Lessons will take place at the Community Center.
• FGL has purchased a Verti -Drain aerator to begin the Fairway Aeration and Topdressing
Program.
INFORMATION ONLY.
D. Ordinance: Renewing Moratorium on Medical Cannabis Collective Gardens
Staff is seeking Council approval of an ordinance that would renew the moratorium on medical
cannabis collective gardens and dispensaries through May 19, 2015, which if approved would be
the fourth renewal. Staffs position is that it needs additional clarity from the Washington State
Legislature before local and use controls can be developed for safe and effective regulation, It
is expected that the State will provide that clarity in a future session, either by merging the
medical cannabis and recreational marijuana regulations into a combined system, or by
establishing a separate regulatory system for medical cannabis. Also of note, on March 31,
2014, the State Court of Appeals ruled that medical marijuana, including participation in
collective gardens, is illegal and thereby affirmed the City of Kent's authority to prohibit collective
gardens. UNANIMOUS APPROVAL. FORWARD TO MAY 12, 2014 COMMITTEE OF THE
WHOLE.
E. Briefing on Recreational Marijuana License Applications to the State
Staff provided information on the status of licensing for recreational marijuana producers,
processors and retailers in the City. As of February 18, the State Liquor Control Board listed 36
producer, processor or retailer applications for locations in Tukwila, representing 22 unique
addresses. As of today's date, this list has been reduced to 26. None of these properties meet
both state and City regulation. The five proposed locations that are allowed per the zoning the
City adopted in September 2013 are within 1 ,000 feet of Briscoe Park, making them disallowed
under State rules. There have been significant delays in the licensing process and the City cannot
yet fully assess potential impacts from recreational marijuana uses. INFORMATION ONLY.
F. Development Agreement Amendment: 223 Andover Park East with South Center WA, LLC
Staff is seeking Council approval of an amendment to an existing development agreement with
South Center WA, LLC for the construction of the Washington Place project at 223 Andover Park
East. The project plan has undergone some changes since the original development agreement
".*--- was approved by Council in March 2013, and the application for design review is scheduled to be
considered by the Board of Architectural Review (BAR) on May 22, 2014. The project as currently
proposed does not meet certain zoning and sign code standards, so City Council approval to
amend the development agreement would need to occur for BAR to consider the project. This
87
Community Affairs & Parks Commitlee Minutes April 15. 2014 - Page 3
project is a unique opportunity to encourage transit - oriented development with a higher -end
multifamily residential component that does not otherwise exist in Tukwila. Council and staff have
previously recognized that this is a pioneering opportunity that may inform future adjustments to
Tukwila's codes.
Committee discussions on the four main areas in which the project proposal does not meet code
are summarized as follows:
Open Space
The project proposal includes approximately 20,000 square feet of open space in the form of
common areas for residents and hotel guests, including a large clubhouse on the top floor. In
addition, the development would include a 15 foot wide tree lined sidewalk with bench seating.
Under current zoning, 74,000 feet would be required, nearly half of the lot area. 25,525 square
feet would be required under the the City's proposed Southcenter Plan. Staff recommends the
developer's proposal for open space due to the location of this project and numerous indoor and
outdoor amenities nearby. The Committee agreed with this modification.
Building Height
The existing development agreement allows the building to be up to 180 feet in height. The
modified proposal now includes eighteen stories and a rooftop clubhouse for the use of residents
as well as some additional meeting room height on the second floor mezzanine. Staff
recommends allowing the additional height request of up to 190 feet because these are project
enhancements. The Committee agreed with this modification.
Signage
The size proposals for signage exceed the current sign code. Signs on the north and west faces
would be 840 square feet, while current code allows 150 square feet. The hotel canopy entrance
sign would have letters 3.5 feet in height, while the current code allows 1 foot in height. The City's
sign code did not anticipate buildings of this size and scale and 150 feet is very limited in the
context of wayfinding and marketability. For comparison, some wall faces at the mall are allowed
signs up to 500 square feet and buildings in the MIC /H District may have signs up to 1,500 square
feet depending on wall size. If the criteria used in MIC /H were applied to this project, the north
face sign could be up to 733 square feet and the west face sign up to 561. Staff recommends
allowing larger signs due to the scale of the project, and suggest applying the MIC /H criteria as
one reasonable strategy to reach compromise. The Committee did not agree to the use of MICIN
criteria for signage due to the incomparable uses in that zone. Councilmembers affirmed the
uniqe needs of this project and would like to accommodate a compromise between code
requirements and the developer's proposal. They requested that staff bring alternatives for
calculating appropriate signage in a mariner scalable to the building, amenable to the developer,
and fair to other business owners in the zone to the Committee of the Whole discussion.
Parking
The proposed project includes 498 parking stalls. The current code requires 939, but the
proposed Southcenter Plan code changes under separate consideration would require 594 stalls
for this project. A technical analysis conducted by the Transpo Group estimated a daily peak
parking demand of 458 stalls (340 for the residential units and 118 for the hotel.) Because there
are no similar developments in South King County, the actual parking need is unknown. Staff
recommends following the proposed Southcenter Plan parking requirement for residential and
assuming a 70% occupancy level for the hotel, resulting in a total of 537, or 39 more than the
proposal includes. Representatives for the owner indicated that the addition of these spaces
would necessitate a different structural design with significant impact to the ability of this project to
move forward.
88
Community Affairs & Parks Committee Minutes April 15. 2014 - Page 4
Since the last discussions between the City and the owners on the matter of parking, Ace Parking
Management, Inc. submitted a letter claiming that 44 additional spaces could be created by
implementing valet parking service for the hotel. Staff intends to review this new information
further before revisiting their recommendation. The Committee did not make a recommendation
on parking but supports the analysis of the valet proposal prior to the Committee of the Whole
discussion.
FORWARD TO APRIL 28 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
AS DESCRIBED ABOVE.
III. MISCELLANEOUS
Meeting adjourned at 7 :26 p.m.
Next meeting: Tuesday, April 29, 2014
Committee Chair Approval
Minutes by LH, Reviewed by DS
89