Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2014-05-12 Item 5B - Discussion - Review of Public Hearing Comments Regarding Southcenter Plan Regulations and GuidelinesCOUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS Lritials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Council review 04/14/14 LM 1/Cr- /L (A 04/28/14 LM (' ❑ Motion Mtg Date 5/12/14 CO C,p� I I Resolution 6/2/14 CO Mtg Date 5/12/14 Mtg Date 6/2/14 ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. 21 STAFF SPONSOR: LYNN MIRANDA ORIGINAL AGENDA DATI: 4/14/14 AGENDA I'I'ENI TrrLI? Southcenter Plan Regulations and Guidelines 4/14/14 & ❑ Motion Mtg Date ❑ Bid Award Mtg Date ❑ Other Mtg Date CATEGORY /1 Discussion I I Resolution ■ Ordinance I 1 Public Hearing Mtg Date 5/12/14 Mtg Date 6/2/14 Mtg Date 6/2/14 Mtg Date 4/14/14 & 4/28/14 SPONSOR ❑ Council n Mayor ❑ HR ❑ Finance ❑ Fire ❑ IT ❑ P &R ❑ Police ❑ PIF // DCD SPONSOR'S The ordinances and resolutions to adopt and implement the City's Southcenter subarea SUMM, \RY plan for the Tukwila Urban Center were discussed at a City Council work session on 4/3/14, and a public hearing was conducted on 4/14/14, with written comments accepted until 4/28/14. The Council is being asked to review the matrix of comments and make a determination on each suggestion. Ordinances and resolutions will be amended based on the discussion. *PLEASE BRING YOUR SOUTHCENTER PLAN AND REGULATIONS BINDER* REVIEWED BY ❑ COW Mtg. ❑ CA &P Cmte ❑ F &S Cmte ❑ Utilities Cmte ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Parks Comm. DATE: 10/25/12 COMMITTEE CHAIR: ❑ Transportation Cmte ■ Planning Comm. RECOMMENDATIONS: SPONSOR /ADMIN. COMn1I'ITI Department of Community Development ;I;. COST IMPACT / FUND SOURCE EXPI:NDI'I'URI: RIQUTRED AMOUNT BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $0 $0 $0 Fund Source: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 4/14/14 Continue the Public Hearing to 4/28/14 for written comments only 4/28/14 Forward to 5/12/14 C.O.W. MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 4/14/14 Informational Memorandum dated 4/9/14 Southcenter Subarea Planning Process Southcenter Plan Background Material Ordinance implementing Zoning Code regulations for the Tukwila Urban Center Ordinance reenacting TMC 18.28 Resolution adopting the Southcenter Design Manual Resolution adopting the Southcenter Subarea Plan 5/12/14 Informational Memorandum dated 5/6/14, with attachments A -D 21 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor I9oa INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM Mayor Haggerton Tukwila City Council FROM: Nora Gierloff, Deputy DCD Director BY: Lynn Miranda, Senior Planner DATE: May 6, 2014 SUBJECT: Public Comments on Southcenter Plan and Regulations ISSUE Should the Planning Commission recommended Southcenter Plan, Chapter 18.28 Tukwila Urban Center (TUC) District and the Southcenter Design Manual with Public, Staff and Council recommended edits be adopted? BACKGROUND The Southcenter Plan documents the existing conditions in the area and sets the vision for change over the next 20 years. The Zoning regulations, when adopted, will replace the existing TMC Chapter 18.28 and be used to evaluate development proposals and improvement plans proposed on properties within the Southcenter area (TUC District). The Southcenter Design Manual will provide additional design detail for projects subject to design review. In 2012 these documents were reviewed by the public and the Planning Commission at an open house, public hearing and series of work sessions. The Commission approved their recommended drafts of the three documents in October 2012. DISCUSSION Council held a public hearing on the documents on April 14, 2014 and received both written and verbal testimony. Staff compiled these comments into a matrix with recommendations and responses. The Council is being asked to review the matrix of comments and decide whether or not to act on each suggestion. Staff will then amend the draft ordinances and resolutions to reflect the Council edits. FINANCIAL IMPACT No direct budget impact. RECOMMENDATION The Council is being asked to forward the revised documents to the June 2, 2014 Regular Meeting for adoption. ATTACHMENTS A. Southcenter Subarea Plan Comment Matrix B. Zoning Code TMC 18.28 Comment Matrix C. Southcenter Design Manual Comment Matrix D. General Topics Comment Matrix 23 Southcenter Subarea Plan Matrix Page numbers are from the documents included in the binders and used for the 4/3/14 Council Work Session. Page # in Plan Comment (language changes in strikout /underline, recommendation in bold) Exhibit #/ Date /Source Staff comment /analysis /options p. 4, 1.2 Community Intent If the Union Pacific Railroad tracks get relocated /removed, there may be a special opportunity to assemble properties in the area north of the Sounder Station and develop at greater intensities with a wider variety of uses than currently proposed in the TOD District. The Subarea Plan should reflect this possibility. Add to #5 as follows: In the area surrounding the Sounder commuter Derek Speck, 4.28.14 Staff Response: Make this change. rail /Amtrak Station, consider a special opportunity area that could develop at even greater intensities with a wider variety of uses, such as regional serving entertainment and retail. p. 4, 1.2 Community Intent Add a new item: 11. Continue to enhance the driveability of and access to D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Make this change. the Commercial Corridor. p. 12, 1.4 (1) District Structure Revise 3) to read: A rapidly growing demand for walkable urban environments for living, working, playing and shopping; Derek Speck, 4.28.14 Staff Response: Make this change. p. 14, Figure 1.2 Commercial Corridor. Add a new sentence to the end of the description of this district: Results of City research into evolving, successful commercial D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Make this change. corridors elsewhere will be applied to ensure the continuing success of the Southcenter Commercial Corridor. p 23, 1st paragraph Add to the end of the paragraph: Also, if City efforts to relocate or remove Derek Speck, 4.28.14 Staff Response: Make this change. the Union Pacific Railroad tracks are successful the area north of the Sounder Station and east of W. Valley Highway would open up for redevelopment. There could be a possibility of assembling properties in the area and creating a special opportunity district with mixed use development (such as housing, office, and regional serving retail and entertainment) at greater intensities than currently proposed. p. 24 Commercial Corridor. Add a new sentence to the end: The City will D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Make this change. continue to research successful commercial corridors elsewhere and apply the results of this research to ensure the continued success of this highly valued district. p. 33, Second "open" bullet. Add another bullet under Associated measures or actions: Relocation of Derek Speck, 4.28.14 Staff Response: Make this change. Union Pacific Tracks south of 1 -405. P. 38 Recommen ded City Actions See spreadsheet with revised projects /timing Staff, 4.28.14 Staff Response: Make these changes. Z: \DCD n Clerk's \Southcenter Plan Materials \5- 12 -14COW Materials \SCPIan CCReview Comments _5-6.xlsx 05/06/2014 1 Page # in Plan Comment (language changes in strikout /underline, recommendation in bold) Exhibit #/ Date /Source Staff comment /analysis /options p 41, Long Term Actions Add to i) Elements: Should the City be unsuccessful in efforts to relocate Derek Speck, 4.28.14 Staff Response: Make this change. Union Pacific Railroad tracks, the City shall seek a pedestrian underpass beneath the UP tracks. The City will coordinate with the City of Renton... p. 44, Mid term actions Improve stormwater treatment. Move mid -term action (b) to the Short Term action list and add the word 'ensure' so it reads: "The City will work with property owners on the north side of the pond to improve thc functioning ensure the improvements to the functions of the existing stormwater D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Staff coordinated with Ryan Larson, Surface Water Engineer, and suggests the following change. The City will work with all properties discharging surface water to the pond to ensure that existing storm water collection and treatment system (bioswales) thus increasing the retention of phosphorus and other pollutants." treatment systems are properly maintained. Proper maintenance of these facilities will reduce the amount of phosphorus and other pollutants reaching the pond to the maximum extent feasible under current conditions. p. 44 Long term actions Water quality improvements. Move the Long term action item (3) to the Short term action item list. Also, revise the sentence to read as follows: Over thc vcry long tcrm, ilnstall alternative stormwater treatment thc D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Make this change. as ar a on the north redevelop. p. 44, 4) Public Parking Structure Short term actions, a), last bullet. Revise sentence to read: "Preliminary identification of costs and possible funding sources (e.g., public /private partnership or LID). D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Make this change. p. 45, 1.6.2 Street/Circ ulation Network 1) Street and circulation network & facilities, Short Term Actions. Add: d) Relocate Union Pacific (UP) Railroad Tracks The City will pursue the relocation of the UP railroad tracks in a manner that opens up the area north of the Strander Station to 1 -405 and west to W. Valley Highway for redevelopment. This could create a special opportunity area for uses such as regional serving retail and entertainment, in addition to transit - supportive mixed use, including housing. Derek Speck, 4.28.14 Staff Response: Make this change. Z: \DCD n Clerk's \Southcenter Plan Materials \5- 12 -14COW Materials \SCPlan CCReview Comments _5-6.xlsx 05/06/2014 2 TMC 18.28 TUC District Zoning Regulations Issues Matrix Page numbers are from the documents included in the binders and used for the 4/3/14 Council Work Session. Page # in Plan Zoning Code Comment (language changes in strikout /underline, recommendation in bold) Source, Date Staff comment /analysis /options Application of Corridor standards: P. 3 18.28.020.B.4.a Clarify that Corridor standards do not become effective until public right of way and improvements, or private improvements and public access, are implemented. Revise to read as follows: a. Thoroughfare configuration, public frontage conditions, building and parking placement, front yard landscaping, and architectural aspects of that portion of a building's facade within the first 185 feet of a parcel, measured from curb line.-, provided, however, that A.Gygi, Target, letter 4.28.14 Staff Recommendation: Revise to read as follows: a. Thoroughfare configuration, public frontage conditions, building and parking placement, front yard landscaping, and architectural aspects of that portion of a building's facade within the first 185 feet of a parcel, measured from curb line, provided, however, that for Future Corridors mapped on Figure 19 these Corridor Standards do not apply until the Corridor is activated by: (i) City acquiring the right of way and installing thoroughfare and public frontage improvements or where Corridors are mapped on Figure 19 in locations that are not lawfully requiring dedication and installation of the same in existing public streets, those Corridor Standards do not apply until connection with a project proposal; or (ii) an applicant or the Corridor is activated by: (i) City acquiring the right of way and owner elects to install the Corridor improvements and provide installing thoroughfare and public frontage improvements or public access in connection with adioininq development. lawfully requiring dedication and installation of the same in connection with a project proposal; or (ii) an applicant or owner elects to install the Corridor improvements and provide public access in connection with adjoining development. P. 3, 18.28.020.B.4 Add: c. For structures proposed on a single lot where more than one A.Gygi, Target, letter 4.28.14 Staff Recommendation: Make the changes underlined below. The intent of having corridor standards is to provide continuity along both sides of a street. Allowing each property owner to select a different corridor type for his frontages would result in sidewalks that jog back and forth and inconsistent landscaping. The corner issue is discussed at p. 35 18.28.160 C which could be modified to address some of Target's concerns: C. Corner Parcels New buildings located at the intersection of two or more corridor applies, only one building side shall be required to constitute the public "front- door." Modification requests to allow back -of -house functionality shall be liberally granted, subject to the back -of -house screening guidance set forth in [new section of design manual]. Where more than two corridor types apply to a property, (i) no structure shall be required to meet more than two distinct corridor standards (ii) the applicant shall be allowed to select the front door corridor type, consistent with subsection 18.28.160.C, and (iii) the applicant may select a second corridor type to apply to multiple building sides and /or be allowed design flexibility through the modifications procedure at TMC 18.28.130.C. Corridors where Building Orientation is required shall have an entrance(s) oriented towards at least one Corridor to be determined by the developer. 18.28.200 C. Add a New Section: 5. On sites where all sides of a building are subject to Corridor standards per 18.28.020 B. 4 a. around level transparency may be waived for the facade facing the least travelled Corridor. service The Design Manual already contains a section on areas. Example of service facade with design elements r.- F .`.� �r � . ev. `,P': T� J 1, , 7 re' —.. -: s p 4. 18.28.030.A.5 Specify that existing structures do not become non - conforming structures under Chapt 18.70 due solely to city's adoption of new corridor standards and design manual. Edit follows: 5. Alterations to nonconforming A.Gygi, Target, letter 4.28.14 Staff Recommendation: No change. This leaves the TUC Zone with no rules for non - conforming structures, creating confusion and unpredictability. as structures uses, landscape lots be areas or parking shall wit subject to the standards in TMC Chapter 18.70, "Non- conforming Lots, Structures and Uses." P. 5 18.28.030.D.1.a Clarify that interior work is exempt from Applicability of Corridor Standards and Design Review. Revise to read as follows: a. Projects meeting the thresholds for design review set forth in 18.28.030.D.1.b. and c. shall be evaluated using applicable regulations in this chapter and the guidelines set forth in the Southcenter Design Manual. Work performed within the interior of A.Gygi, Target, letter 4.28.14 Staff Recommendation: Make this change. The proposed language reflects the City's practice since design review was implemented in Tukwila in 1989. For consistency also add this language to the Workplace section D. 2. a. Buildings containing any dwelling units which meet the following thresholds for design review shall be evaluated using applicable regulations in this chapter and the guidelines set forth in Southcenter Design Manual. Work performed within a structure does not trigger design review or application of District or Corridor Standards. the interior of a structure does not trigger design review or application of District or Corridor Standards. p. 5 18.28.030 D 1 b(3) The proposed triggers for the Corridor specific standards are unclear, arbitrary and should be revised. Target is concerned with thresholds for design review and compliance with corridor standards during remodels. A. Rigel, Target, Hearing 4.14.14 Staff Recommendation: No change. The trigger for design review for exterior changes greater than 10% of assessed valuation and full code compliance triggered by destruction of a building by more than 50% are existing standards in the current code and have been in place since 1989 and 1982 respectively. Z: \DCD n Clerk's \Southcenter Plan Materials \5- 12- 14COW Materials \SCPIanCCReview Comments 5-6.xlsx 1 27 Page # in Plan Zoning Code Comment (language changes in strikout /underline, recommendation in bold) Source, Date Staff comment /analysis /options Design Review Thresholds p. 5 -6, 18.28.030 Raise compliance threshold for exterior remodels and expansions. Edit 18.28.030.0.2, and D.1.b.c and 4 as follows: C.2: Expansions of existing buildings that exceed 20% of the A.Gygi, Target, letter 4.28.14 Staff Recommendation: Make only the one change as the other proposals create regulatory gaps and uncertainty. It is unclear what if any standards would apply to the design of building expansions less than 20% under this language. Would they be exempt from setbacks and height limitations? Without design review or with the proposed sentence limiting design review to the new portion of the structure there would be no mechanism to ensure that the design was compatible with the rest of the structure such as for the iFly tenant improvement, see picture below. Staff worked through the expansion issue with Westfield and developed the following language found in the Design Manual introduction: Where an addition to or expansion of an existing building triggers design review the new construction shall meet all relevant criteria. In addition limited exterior modifications to the existing structure may be required to aesthetically unify the new and existing portions of the structure and better meet the design criteria. Adding building orientation /placement to the standards that are triggered by 50% destruction is reasonable "compliance with corridor -based architectural standards and building existing building footprint shall meet all requirements for the new portions of the structure,.... D.1.b.3: Excluding expansions, which are governed by (4) below, aAny exterior repair, reconstruction, cosmetic alterations or improvements, when the cost of the work exceeds 10% of the building's current assessed valuation (the cost of reparis to or reconstruction of roofs screened by parapet walls is exempt). Such review shall be for the portion(s) of the structure's exterior where work is performed, provided, however, that compliance with corridor -based architectural standards and building orientation /placement is only required for existing buildings enly if they are destroyed by any means to an extent of more than 50%80% of their replacement cost at the time of destruction, or 50% in the event of destruction caused by voluntary building remodel. Threshold valuations will be determined in the reasonable judgement of the City's Building Official. D.1.b.4: Exterior expansions greater than 20% of the existing building footprint shall meet all requirements for the new portions of the structure. between 1,500 and 25,000 square feet in size (total on premises). orientation /placement is only required... ". Changing the threshold to 80% for non - voluntary destruction would make the TUC standards more lax than other commercial districts. 1 Il +lV'I�Ii! 11 MI �? p. 5 18.28.030 D 1 b(3) 10% is too low of a threshold and too easily achieved even with the exceptions listed for the amount changes that will be required if they pass 10 %. I would consider 25 %. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: Changing the threshold for design review on existing buildings to 25% would make the TUC trigger more lax than other commercial districts. However the design standards in the TUC are higher than other zones so 25% could be appropriate. p. 5 18.28.030 D Increase the percentage of assessed evaluation from 10% to 50 %. I think this is reasonable and fair. For example, FEMA uses a 50% of assessed valuation as a trigger for the implementation of the Flood Plain Regulations. Rather than specifying square footage, revise the section so that if an expansion costs more than 50% of assessed valuation, it will be subject to the requirements of the plan. Throughout the plan make the trigger 50% rather than 10% of assessed valuation when repairing, remodeling or expanding. For example: 2.a.2 on page 6 may discourage remodels of dwelling units if kept at 10 %. And /or: Have parking, landscape and open space requirements apply only to the expansion of the building when adding on. K.Hougardy, letter 4.25.14 Staff Response: See above response. The current design review trigger for expansions is 1,500 sf in the TUC Zone so this is not a change. A trigger of 50% of assessed valuation would make the TUC significantly more lax than other zones and would mean that a warehouse conversion to retail would likely not trigger design review or landscape conformance. Parking and open space requirements are triggered by a change of use. Parking for an expansion is governed by the non - conforming rules at 18.70. District Standards p. 9 18.28.040 The district standards properly support retail investment. A. Rigel, Target, Hearing 4.14.14 No change requested. p. 9 18.28.040 Add discussion of the other sides of Tukwila Pond. Insert intent narrative for the Southern, West and /or East edge, since only speaks to Northern edge now. A. Ekberg, Hearing 4.14.14; letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: Make this change. p. 10, Fig. 16 District Map Expand the below) boundaries Jill of the Commercial r , �"- i ,i DWO �..,,� { w J II �.� Corridor BI ti Ll District (see I4 , .. Dr , �[dl��_ i D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: This would make a number of existing warehouse, manufacturing and distribution businesses non- conforming. The proposal below would lessen that issue.However the revised area would still make the Costco Optical Lab and Electrical Distributing businesses non- conforming. 14, 11 i II.- 'I ::. 4• S 178th ` lore D ■ ■ 1 ME= f , .• �,, 7r ale Par, o ` '.I�f��y •. r! 28 Z: \DCD n Clerk's \Southcenter Plan Materials \5- 12- 14COW Materials \SCPIanCCReview Comments 5-6.xlsx 2 Page # in Plan Zoning Code Comment (language changes in strikout /underline, recommendation in bold) Source, Date Staff comment /analysis /options p. 11 18.28.050 Table 2 Land Uses 1) Amend land use table 2 to allow bars and nightclubs east of the river and south of Strander, add P3 to the TOD column for that use. If feel strongly against this, add Sports Bars to the allowed uses in the TOD District. 2) Amend land use table 2 to allow bulk retail east of the river and south of Strander, add P3 to the TOD column for that use. 3) Amend note 1 to the land use table 2 to change the minimum interior height for ground level retail from 18 feet floor to floor to 12 feet. 4) Amend land use table 2 to allow Special Event Facilities be allowed and considered as a restaurant use in the TOD District east of the river. J. Durkan, Desimone, Hearing 4.14.14; letter dated 4.18.14 Staff Recommendation: Make this change. The code anticipates larger, more auto oriented uses in this location closer to the railroad tracks so bars and nightclubs could also be appropriate. Staff Recommendation: No change. There is ample opportunity for bulk retail uses in 3 of the 5 districts where it is permitted. Staff Recommendation: No change. This requirement is informed by Seattle's experiences with high vacancy in poorly designed retail spaces. If the floor to floor height is 12 feet after subtracting the floor structure and a dropped ceiling the tenant space may only be 9 feet in height which is low for retail. Staff Recommendation: No change. This is a request tied to a specific business that will be established prior to adoption of the new code. This is best addressed through a code interpretation rather than a code change. Animal Kennels and Shelters, including doggy daycare. Considering residential area, having access to doggy daycare in the area would be a nice amenity. Having kennels and shelters that are enclosed (not outside) seems appropriate. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: The concern with this issue is noise impacts in the vicinity of residential uses. This use is permitted with a Conditional Use Permit in the Commercial Corridor and Workplace districts. Bars & Nightclubs. Having Bars and Nightclubs on the West side of the river in the TOD would enhance the vision of an entertainment district, especially along Baker Blvd which extends into that section of the TOD area. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: The concern with this issue is noise impacts in the vicinity of residential uses. This use is permitted in the Regional Center, Commercial Corridor and Pond districts. Bulk Retail. Considering the potential for multifamily in the TOD district, having access to bulk retail stores for mattresses, lighting, and other household goods would be beneficial. It would be good to be able to allow such stores but avoid ones that do not support direclty households. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: The concern with this issue is that bulk retail uses tend to have large, warehouse like buildings with lots of truck deliveries, blank walls and low customer densities. This dos not fit the vision for the TOD district. This use is permitted in the Regional Center, Commercial Corridor and Workplace districts so residents would not have to go far to shop at these types of stores. Automotive Service and Repair. Do not allow in the Commercial Corridor District D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Removing this would not cause any existing businesses to become non - confoming unless the Commercial Corridor was extended along 180th as proposed by Councilmember Robertson above. In that case Les Schwab and Jiffy Lube would be affected. Personal Services (e.g. beauty & barber shops, nail salons, spa, travel agencies). Do not allow in the Commercial Corridor District D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: This would cause 2 nonconformities at Southcenter Square. Recreation facilities (commercial indoor). Do not allow in the Commercial Corridor District. D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Removing this would not cause any nonconformities and would retain the district's focus on larger scale retail. Recreation facilities (commercial outdoor). Do not allow in the Commercial Corridor District. D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Removing this would not cause any nonconformities and would retain the district's focus on larger scale retail. Repair shops (small scale goods: bicycle, appliance, shoe, computer). Do not allow in the Commercial Corridor District. D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Removing this would not cause any nonconformities and would retain the district's focus on larger scale retail. p. 12, Table 2 Vehicle rental and sales (not requiring a commercial driver's license). Do not allow in the Commercial Corridor District. D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Removing this would not cause any nonconformities and would retain the district's focus on larger scale retail. Medical and Dental Laboratories. Do not allow in the Regional Center, TOD, Pond, and Commercial Corridor Districts. D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: There may be some labs in the medical dental building on Strander and there is a dental laboratory on West Valley at Longacres that could be affected, both in TOD. Daycare centers. Do not allow in the Commercial Corridor District. D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Removing this would not cause any nonconformities and would retain the district's focus on larger scale retail. p 13, Table 2 Internet Data Centers, et al. Consider conditional use or other mechanism to allow such exchanges due to routing of fiber cable in that area. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: Utilities are permitted or conditional uses in all zones. Internet data centers like the facility on the S side of 180th outside the TUC tend to have large, warehouse like buildings, blank walls and low employee densities. This only fits the vision for the Workplace district. Commercial parking, day use only. Do not allow in the Commercial Corridor District. D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: The idea of this use is to provide overflow parking so that businesses could "right size" their parking without causing hide and ride problems for their neighbors during periods of high use. Park and ride lots. Do not allow in the Commercial Corridor District. D.Robertson, letter 4.28.14 Staff Response: Removing this would not cause any nonconformities and would retain the district's focus on larger scale retail. P. 14 Table 3 District Standards Maximum Height - TOD. Would like to see 45 ft change to reflect the area can sustain higher heights, such as "45 ft w/p 115" - meaning 45ft with potential to 115 or what ever the appropriate height. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: What about changing the row heading to say "Maximum Height without incentives ": Table 3 District standards Regional District Standards Center TOD Pond District Corridor Comm. 18.28.070 Structure Height ' Minimum Height 25 ft fronting Baker BI. Maximum Height without Incentives 85 ft 115 ft, or 214 ft who 300 ft of Frontal Improvement Height Incentive Tukwila Pkwy & Southcenter Pkwy 25 ft fronting Baker 41. 45 ft 70 ft, 115' 3 combined with MF, LEED or Affordable Housing Incentive n/a 45 ft 70 ft, no increase w /in 150 ft of Pond edge n/a 45 £t n/a 115 t, or 214 ft who 300 ft of Multi - Family Height Incentive Tukwila Pkwy & nit 115' 3 combined with Frontal Imp., LEED or Affordable 70 ft, no increase w /in Z: \DCD n Clerk's \Southcenter Plan Materials \5- 12- 14COW Materials \SCPlanCCReviewComments 5-6.xlsx 3 29 Page # in Plan Zoning Code Comment (language changes in strikout /underline, recommendation in bold) Source, Date Staff comment /analysis /options Corridor Standards p. 18 18.28.120 The corridor specific standards should be revised to provide flexibility for properties with multiple corridor designation. Target's store is bordered by 4 different corridors and complying with multiple standards could be burdensome to a future remodel. A. Rigel, Target, Hearing 4.14.14 Staff Recommendation: No change. Compliance with the future corridor standards will only be required for redevelopment that occurs after the corridors are built as streets. Under the current configuration of the Target site only the Strander corridor standards would apply as the building is more than 185' from 61st Place S. The current code provides flexibility at 18.28.130 C. Modifications, 18.28.150 B. Exceptions, and 18.28.160 C. Corner Parcels. p. 21, Fig. 19 Corridor Type map Label the Walkable Corridor along the east edge of Target's property as Future Walkable Corridor. A.Gygi, Target, letter 4.28.14 Staff Recommendation: Make this change. This corridor segment has not been developed with the frontal improvements or easements for public use. Control impacts of multiple corridors to building function and design construction costs: 1. Eliminate the designation of Future Neighborhood Corridor running along the west side of the Target property. 2. Target proposes new design guidelines for back of house: For back -of -house facades, prescribe aesthetic guidelines in the Design Manual for the use of landscaping, screening, and other non - structural measures that allow unencumbered building function while improving aesthetics for passers -by and adjacent development. A.Gygi, Target, letter 4.28.14 Staff Recommendation: No change. 1) In the long term access to the west side of Tukwila Pond is an important part of the vision. See above discussion about waiving transparency requirements on one side of buildings that face multiple corridors. 2) The Design Manual already contains a section on service areas. We could add loading docks to the section on automotive service bays, see suggestion in the Design Manual matrix. P. 44. 18.28.210 Front Yard Encroachments Covered walkways.Include the ability to use covered walkways in front yards since it rains a large portion of the year. This could substitute for canopies and awnings and can be detached from building facade. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Recommendation: Make this change. Add walkways to the language at 18.28.210 Front Yard Encroachments Building overhangs such trellises, canopies and awnings and freestanding covered walkways may extend horizontally into the public frontage... Landscaping, Open Space & Parking Standards p. 51, 18.28.240.B.6.b Interior Parking lot landscaping. There is no option in this section for the Director of Comm. Development to override or provide flexibility to the requirements. There may be unique circumstances we aren't aware of that may be of benefit to have the DCD weigh in and decide. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: There is language about "flexibility is allowed for the layout of parking lots and landscaped areas ". In the case of an existing site that is or would become non - conforming 18.70.090 provides flexibility through design review. p 56. Table 4 Open Space Residential open space in the TOD Neighborhood and Pond area should be waivable due to the local public space amenities available in said area, such as trains, walk ways, parks, etc. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: The intent of residential open space is to provide the types of on -site amenities such as balconies, decks or workout facilities characteristic of high quality housing. Residential open space in the TOD Neighborhood and Pond area may not have to be developed on the individual building site if an agreement can be reached between builder and City and funding from the builder set aside and 'banked' for future use by the City within the neighborhood for communal open space projects. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: See above. It is my understanding that these open space requirements may be in conflict with RCW 82.02.020. Some entities have challenged open space requirements and won based on this RCW. Have our legal council review. K.Hougardy letter 4.25.14 Staff Response: The commercial and residential open space requirements have been part of the Southcenter Plan since the first draft. The City Attorney has been involved in reviewing the entire set of documents as they have evolved. Tukwila has required multi - family recreation space since 1977. Locally Seattle, Shoreline and Renton require on -site open /recreation space. The amount of open space required for new construction may not allow the project to pencil out. K.Hougardy letter 4.25.14 Staff Response: The proposed standard for multi - family is much lower than in other zones in the City. In the past businesses in Tukwila have voluntarily provided amenities that would qualify as pedestrian space. No businesses have raised this as a concern. , New construction will already be paying park impact fees. It makes sense for the city to use those impact fees to create planned spaces in the area rather than a bunch of smaller spaces that may be less cohesive. Prospective builders may question why they have to pay park impact fees and create park -like open spaces, and it seems like a reasonable question. K.Hougardy letter 4.25.14 Staff Response: The intent for pedestrian space is to create gracious entries, plazas and courtyards for outdoor dining, employees to eat lunch or customers to sit and take a break. Although there is overlap parks are usually larger scale and intended to also host active recreation, concerts or civic activities. The amount of open space required for retail & office seems prohibitive. The amount of open space required for retail and office should be reduced to 10 or so square feet, or based on some different calculations. K.Hougardy letter 4.25.14 Staff Response: The Council should discuss ideas for changes in this area. 25 to 50 square feet of open space per hotel /motel room seems like it often would be difficult to pencil out as well. Hotels may have 100 or more rooms. Are lobbies, pools, weight rooms, etc. included in this space? K.Hougardy letter 4.25.14 Staff Response: Pedestrian space for commercial uses must be outdoors except for children's play areas. P.57 18.28.250.E.2.e. The italicized portion of the following regulation is too restrictive: Pedestrian spaces shall be located to take advantage of sunlight to the greatest extent possible. South - facing plazas are generally preferred, unless particular lot configurations prevent such orientation. In no cases are pedestrian spaces to be only north- facing." Locating a pedestrian space on the north side may be the only option in some cases. K.Hougardy PC Worksession 4.3.14; letter 4.25.14; and A.Ekberg letter 4.2..14 Staff Recommendation: Delete the provision as follows: f ►e- to be north facing. casts arc pcdcctrian cpaccs permittcd only The remaining text adequately conveys the intention. P.60 18.28.250.F.3.d Providing at least 3 of the amenities in a common open space is too much. What other option can we give? K.Hougardy PC Worksession 4.3.14; letter 4.25.14 Staff Recommendation: Revise as follows: "The common open spaces for a site shall provide at least t r -eeone of the following amenities for every 200 square feet of common space, up to a maximum requirement of 3 amenities, to accommodate a variety of ages and activities." 30 Z. \DCD n Clerk's \Southcenter Plan Materials \5- 12- 14COW Materials \SCPIanCCReview Comments 5-6.xlsx 4 Page # in Plan Zoning Code Comment (language changes in strikout /underline, recommendation in bold) Source, Date Staff comment /analysis /options P.60 18.28.250.F.3.f Courtyards - does this item have some provisions for flexibility if the site can't accommodate these exact standards? K.Hougardy letter 4.25.14 Staff Response: 18.28.250 D 4 d. allows the property owner to apply for modification through the special permission process. P. 63 18.28.260 B 5 b Reduce the parking requirement for 2 bedroom apartments from 1.5 to 1 on properties within 1/4 mile of the transit or Sounder stations without a Type 2 Special Permission application. J. Durkan, Desimone, Hearing 4.14.14; letter dated 4.18.14 Staff Recommendation: No change. The parking reduction language as written provides a greater degree of flexibility than the proposal. The Type 2 application process is administrative and can run concurrently with a project's other permits so does not add additional review time. P. 63 18.28.260 B 5 b The 600 foot radius from transit stations for eligibility for commercial properties to request a parking reduction is too small, should be increased. A. Ekberg, Hearing 4.14.14 Staff Response: The images below approximate the properties included in a 600 and 1000 foot distance from our transit stations. This is not exact because the code specifies walking distance not radius so some highlighted properties on the edges may not qualify. 600 foot Radius from Transit Centers 1000 foot Radius from Transit Centers - inn, im • ? j!s \ ' • it efi zz L Mi.. Ili c _ rj5. _ _ API 111 p 64. Table 5 Parking Residential - 2+ Bedroom unit or studio. Minimum parking need of 1.5 plus .5 space for each additional bedroom over 2 may be adequate based on closeness /proximity to transit hub (busway) or rail, as residential development moves further out from close proximity to those, the parking needs should increase due to lack of convenience. The condos and appartments on Tukwila Hill north of Tukwila Park, even built to 'old' more lenient parking standards had abundant overflow parking onto City streets. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: The lack of on- street parking or pay lots to accommodate overflow is a concern. The intent was to set a minimum parking standard but let businesses and developers use their judgement about whether they thought their particular use would require more spaces. p 62. 18.28.260 General Parking Requirements Provide for shared parking arrangements between businesses to reduce the parking requirement burden on all businesses. A.Ekberg, letter 4.2.14 No change. Provision already in proposed code - see p.63 18.28.260.B.5.d Provide regulations that would encourage shared access points for vehicle traffice between adjacent properties so vehicles would not need to transition to City roadway in order to get to neighboring properties. A.Ekberg, letter 4.2.14 No change. Provision already in proposed code - see p.65 18.28.260.C.1.f Curb cuts and driveways Z: \DCD n Clerk's \Southcenter Plan Materials \5- 12- 14COW Materials \SCPIanCCReview Comments 5-6.xlsx 5 31 Southcenter Design Manual Issues Matrix Page numbers are from the documents included in the binders and used for the 4/3/14 Council Work Session. Design Criteria Comment (language changes in strikout /underline, recommendation in bold) Exhibit #/ Date /Source Staff comment /analysis /options i, Interpretation Public realm. Provide a definition A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: Make the following change. 18.28.120 Corridors A. Purpose: To provide standards specific to a hierarchy of corridors and implement the vision for Southcenter as set forth in the Subarea Plan. B. A Corridor consists of the following elements which together comprise the public realm (see Figure 18. Corridor Definition of Terms): p. 4 Service Areas and Mechanical Equipment Response to Target's suggestion for new design guidelines for back of house facades. A.Gygi, Target, letter 4.28.14 Staff Recommendation: Add loading docks to the service areas and mechanical equipment section of the Design Manual. B. Automotive Loading Docks and Service Bays: Buildings containing loading docks or automotive service bays shall be designed to minimize their visibility from the public realm. p 16, 7. Entrances & doors.0 Secondary entrances. Change "shall" to should under the photo examples A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: Make the change. to provide more flexibility. W W 1 Z: \DCD n Clerk's \Southcenter Plan Materials \5- 12 -14COW Materials \SCPIan CCReview Comments _5-6.xlsx 05/06/2014 t,� General Topics Matrix Topic Comment (language changes in strikout /underline, recommendation in bold) Exhibit #/ Date /Source Staff comment /analysis /options Approve Plan We encourage the City Council to adopt the 2014 TUC Plan (Subarea Plan, Design Manual and TMC 18.28). B. Carson, Westfield, Hearing 4/14/14 No change requested. Approve Plan Sears appreciates the vision articulated in the Plan. Earlier concerns have been heard by staff and addressed, for example the Freeway Frontage Corridor. Customer certainty about adequate parking is important for sales of Sears merchandise. J. Terrel, Sears, Hearing 4.14.14 No change requested. More Thought to Commercial Corridor The businesses along the Commercial Corridor section of the urban center bring in a significant portion of the area's tax revenue and yet are not given much attention in the Plan. This area should receive a similar amount of emphasis. What are other cities doing for their similar areas? D. Robertson, Hearing 4.14.14 Staff Response: One of the original concepts of the Plan was to phase the improvements and changes to the area from north to south. The Southcenter Parkway corridor has received major investments on the north end at the Klickitat /Strander intersections and the extension to the south with a reconfigured 178th Street. Lighting & Sign Overlay District Baker Blvd Corridor. Provide a'Lighting and Sign Overlay District' that eliminates City sign code amendments so that this area can become a true entertainment district with vibrant lights and signs that will be a major attraction in the Pacific NorthWest. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: This is a new concept for the Plan that should be discussed by the Council. Codification format Provide for public consumption a Southcenter Plan and Design Manual that is codified by ordinance. It would be best if the narrative for the zoning ordinance reference the Southcenter Plan and Design Manual regulations rather than codifying them in the ordinance. The 3 ring binder /or manual concept is easier to digest and more relevent to understanding while keeping images and tables intact. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: We have met with the City Clerks office several times to discuss how to best format and present the new Codes. While they will need to be codified for adoption we can also develop a more Internet friendly format with links and photos. Plan funding needs Provide a listing of all public investment needs identified within the document. A.Ekberg, letter 4.22.14 Staff Response: Staff has developed a summary table of proposed City actions.