Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit 82-14-CA - CITY OF TUKWILA - PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN R-1 ZONING CODE AMENDMENT82-14-ca prd-1 zoning code amendment COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE NO. g AN ORDINANCE ALLOWING PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT (,PRD) IN THE R -1 SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS, AMENDING ORDINANCE NO. 1247 AND TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 18.46. 1)Gl;d /7 P3 T UKWILA sided THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, does ordain as follows: 1. Section 18.46.020 of the Tukwila Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 3. Section 18.46.050 of the Tukwila Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.46.050 Location. The site of the planned residential development shall abut, and the main internal street serving the PRD shall be connected to, at least one major, secondary, or collector arterial as defined in the comprehensive land use policy plan, except in R -1 Single Family Residential districts. 4. Subsection (1) of section •18.46.060 of the Tukwila Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.46.020 Permitted Districts. Planned residential development (PRD) may be permitted in the following districts: 1) R -1 Single-family residential; • 2) R -2 Two - family residential; 3) R -3 Three- and four- family residential; 4) R -4 Low apartments; 5) RMH Multiple- residence high density. 2. Section 18.46.030 of the Tukwila Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.46.030 Permitted Uses. The following uses are allowed in planned residential development: (1) Single family dwellings, pursuant to the height and yard regulations of Chapter 18.50 for the R -1 -7.2 district. (2) In R -2, R -3, R -4, and RMH districts, residential developments of all types regardless of the type of building in . which such residence is located, such as single - family residences, duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, rowhouses, townhouses or apartments; provided, that all residences are intended for permanent occupancy by their owners or tenants. Hotels, motels, and travel trailers and mobile homes and trailer parks are excluded; (3) Accessory uses specifically designed to meet the needs of the residents of the PRD such as garages and recreation facilities of a noncommercial nature; (4) In planned residential developments of ten acres or more, commercial uses may be permitted. Commercial uses shall be limited to those which are of a neighborhood convenience nature such as beauty or barber shops, drugstores, grocery stores and self- service laundries. 18.46.060 Relation of this chapter to other sections and other ordinances. (1) Minimum Lot and Yard Requirements. Except as required in Sections 18.46.030(1) and 18.46.070(2), the minimum Tot size and yard requirement provisions of other sections of this code are waived within the planned residential development. The number of dwelling units per net acre permitted in the underlying zone shall serve as the criteria to determine basic PRD density. 5. Section 18.46.070 of the Tukwila Municipal Code is hereby amended to read as follows: 18.46.070 Density Standards. (1) . The basic density shall be the same as permitted by the underlying zone district. The dwelling units per net acre for the resi- dential zones are as provided in Chapter 18.50. With reference to R -1 single family residential districts. (2) the Planning Commission may recommend., and the city council may authorize, a minimum lot size not less than the yard requirements of the R -1 -7. •istric ollowing tindings t at e amenities or design features listed below are substantially provided: (A) At least fifteen percent of the natural vegetation is retained (in cases where significant stands exist); (B) Advantage is taken of unusual or significant site features such as views, streams, or other natural characteristics; (C) Separation of auto and pedestrian movement, especially in or near areas of recreation; (D) Development aspects of the PRD complement the land use policies of the comprehensive plan; (E) Some extraordinary public benefit is derived in exchange for the reduced minimum lot size in the planned residential development. (3/ With reference to multiple family residential districtsa the planning commission may recommend, and the city council may authorize, a dwelling unit density not more than twenty percent greater than permitted by the underlying zones following findings that the amenities or design features listed below are substantially provided: (A) A variety of housing types are offered; .(B) At least fifteen percent of the natural vegetation is retained (in cases where significant stands exist); (C) Advantage is taken of unusual or significant site features such as'views, streams, or other natural characteristics; (D) Separation of auto and pedestrian movement, especially in or near areas of recreation; (E) Developmental aspects of the PRD complement the land use policies of the comprehensive plan; (F) Some extraordinary public benefit is derived in exchange for the increased density in the planned residential development. 6. A new section, 18.46.115, is hereby added to the Tukwila Municipal Code to read as follows: - 18.46.115. Restrictive. Covenants Subject to Approval by the City Council and City Attorney. The restrictive covenants intended to be used by the applicant in a planned residential development (PRD), which purports to restrict the use of land or the location or character of buildings or other structures thereon, must be approved by the City Council and the City Attorney.before the issuance of any building permit. PASSED by the City Council of the City of Tukwila, this 7 day of °2Q.4, _ , 1983. ATTEST: APPROVED AS TO FORM: Ma ?, . G• ry L. Van Dusen Published Record Chronicle - March 11, 1983_ City Attorney. Daniel D. Woo PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PUBLIC HEARING At 7:00 p.m. on December 6, 1982, the Tukwila City Council will conduct a. public hearing on a proposed amendment to the zoning regulations governing the planned residential development of new housing in Tukwila. A Planned Residential Development or PRD is a permit process that may be followed by property owners who wish to develop new residences on properties which are one acre in size or larger. The PRD makes it possible for larger developments to have all their plans reviewed at one time without having to go through a series of reviews on separate parts of the plans. The proposed zoning changes would permit large single family properties to be built with single family homes on separate lots like traditional subdivisions. However, the lots would not be restricted to a specific lot size such as 7200 square feet but instead would be restricted to the required setbacks of each house from its own lot lines. This proposed amendment would not allow a greater density of houses on th property even though developed under a PRD, but would allow yard gpace normally associated with large lots to be used for common recreation purgposes by the PRD's residents. Since a minimum of twenty percent of the total site area is required for common open space, it would be like a sub - division with its own playfield, ten- nis courts, or other recreational facilities. The pro- posed amendment would not permit housing types other than detached single family houses in any R -1 zoning districts. The proposed changes will permit smaller individual lot sizes for single family homes, if the City Council approves the PRD's use of that yard space for common recreation areas. WOULD 1. Permit large R -1 zoned properties to be built with single family homes on separate lots like traditional subdivisions under PRD provisions; 2. Restrict minimum lot size to the existing requirements of R -1 setbacks for each house from its own lot lines (lot size would increase as building lot coverage increased); 3. Allow yard space normally assosciated with large lots to be used for common re- creation purposes by the PRD's residents; 4. Permit smaller individual lot sizes for single family homes, only if the City Council approves the PRD's use of that yard space for common recreation areas; 5. Be like a subdivision with its own playfield, tennis courts, or other recreational facilities instead of big yards for each home. WOULD NOT 1. Permit housing types other than detached single family housing in any R -1 zoning districts; 2. Restrict minimum lot size to a specific lot size such as 7200 square feet; 3. Allow a greater density of houses on the property developed under a PRD than under a traditional subdivision; 4. Require City Council approval of smaller individual lot sizes for single family homes; 5. Be like a traditional single family - subdivision. September 13, 1982 7:00 P.M. FLAG SALUTE AND CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL OF COUNCIL MEMBERS REPORTS OLD BUSINESS Prop. Ord. estab. & reg. license fees for amusement ctrs. & amusement devices. Draft 6 of Rev. Sign Code w /proposed language regulating sign displays for hotels. 19.32.190 Hotels RECESS 8:24 - 8:35 P.M. • TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL ( City Hall COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETA%.a Cpuncil Chambers MINUTES Council President Bohrer led the audience and City Council in the Pledge of Allegiance and called the Tukwila City Council Committee of the Whole Meeting to order. EDGAR D. BAUCH, Council President L. C. BOHRER, JOE H. DUFFIE, MABEL J. HARRIS, GEORGE D. HILL, DORIS PHELPS, WENDY WHEELER. The 1983 budget process is underway. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE ESTABLISHING AND REGULATING LICENSE FEES FOR AMUSEMENT CENTERS AND AMUSEMENT DEVICES BE ON THE AGENDA OF THE SEPTEMBER 20, 1982 REGULAR COUNCIL,MEETING. MOTION CARRIED, WITH BOHRER AND BAUCH VOTING NO. Brad Collins, Director of Planning, presented the proposed additional language to Tukwila Sign Code which would be Section IX, Hotels, 19.32.190, Signs Mounted on Hotel Building Faces.• David Shenton, attorney for the Christensen Group, said they would like signs on all four sides of the hotel they are contemplatii so it could be identified from all angles. Businesses are dependent on signs. Ken Baines, representing the proposed hotel building group, presented a drawing showing the proposed signs and the proportion of the signs to the buildings. He said they were likely to not build if they cannot get the increased signage. MOVED BY BAUCH, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT SECTION 19.32.190 BECOME PART OF THE SIGN CODE WITH SECOND SENTENCE OF 19.32.190 (A) READING: "THE AREA OF EACH BUILDING FACE MOUNTED SIGN SHALL BE AS PROVIDED IN TABLE 1, SECTION 19.32.140(A), HOWEVER, THE BONUS FOR BUILDING SETBACK DOES NOT APPLY." MOTION CARRIED, WITH HILL AND BOHRER VOTING NO. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING RECESS FOR FIVE MINUTES. MOTION CARRIED, WITH PHELPS VOTING NO. The Committee of the Whole Meeting was called back to order by Council President Bohrer, with Council Members present as previously listed. 19.32.040 Billboards • MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT SECTION 19.32.040 BE RETAINED AS WRITTEN AND CITY COUNCIL PROCEED. * • MOVED BY HARRIS, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, TO AMEND THE MOTION AND ELIMINATE SOUTH 180TH STREET AS AREA WHERE BILLBOARDS MAY BE LOCATED. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY.BAUCH, NO SECOND, TO AMEND THE MOTION AND STATE SECTION 19.32.040, FIRST LINE, READ: "BILLBOARDS SHALL NOT EXCEED 1n0 SQUARE FEET IN AREA." MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF SECOND: MOVED BY HILL, NO SECOND, TO STRIKE SECTION 19.32.040 FROM THE SIGN CODE. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF SECOND. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY BAUCH, TO AMEND THE MOTION AND REMOVE THE M -1 AREA BY BURLINGTON AND AREA SOUTH OF RIVER BEND FROM 19.32.040 BILLBOARDS. MOTION CARRIED, WITH PHELPS VOTING NO. *MOTION CARRIED, AS AMENDED. TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING September 13, 1982 Page 2 OLD BUSINESS - Contd. Draft 6 of Rev. Sign Code wfproposed language regulating sign displays for hotels.- contd. 19.32.180 Freestanding MOVED BY BAUCH, NO SECOND, THAT SECTION 19.32.180 BE STRICKEN FROM signs - Height & Area THE SIGN CODE. MOTION FAILED FOR LACK OF SECOND. allowance. NEW BUSINESS Prop. zone code amendment to allow Planned Residential (PRO) in R -1. Recommendation by ' Tukwila Arts Comm. to purchase certain works of art to start collection. Prop. to draft ord. concerning Hazardous Material Good Samaritan Law. Prop. res. designating Public Works Dir. as repr. & Planning Dir. as alternate to serve on Metropolitan ,' Pollution Abate - met;IL 'dvisory Comm. ment for Green River. Prop. res. accepting donations. Future operation agreement of Foster Golf Links. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY HARRIS, THAT SECTION 19.32.180 BE ACCEPTED AS WRITTEN AND COUNCIL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA. * MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, TO AMEND THE MOTION SO IT INCLUDES THE EDITORIAL CHANGES SUGGESTED BY BRAD COLLINS. MOTION CARRIED. *MOTION CARRIED, AS AMENDED. MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT THE PROPOSED SIGN CODE, AS AMENDED, BE ON THE NEXT AVAILABLE REGULAR MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY BAUCH, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT DISCUSSION OF THE PROPOSED ZONE CODE AMENDMENT TO ALLOW PLANNED RESIDENTIAL IN R -1 BE ON THE AGENDA OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1982 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING. MOTION FAILED. Brad Collins, Director of Planning, presented the staff report. He stated the planned residential development will not allow multi - family housing. MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT THE APPLICATION BE SENT BACK TO STAFF FOR CONSIDERATION OF BUFFERINGS BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE SURROUNDING AREA AND IT BE ON THE AGENDA OF THE SEPTEMBER 27, 1982 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY BAUCH, SECONDED BY PHELPS, THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONCUR WITH THE RECOMMENDATION BY TUKWILA ARTS COMMISSION TO PURCHASE CERTAIN WORKS OF ART AND IT BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OF THE SEPTEMBER 20, 1982 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY BAUCH, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT STAFF DRAFT AN ORDINANCE AND PRESENT IT TO THE CITY COUNCIL. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY PHELPS, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OF THE SEPTEMBER 20, 1982 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. Approve expend ure of MOVED BY HILL, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, THAT A RESOLUTION BE PREPARED $4,000 & authorize AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO SIGN AN AGREEMENT TO PREPARE A SURFACE Mayor to sign agreement WATER MANAGEMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE GREEN RIVER AND DESIGNATE A to prepare Surface REPRESENTATIVE TO COORDINATE WITH KING COUNTY AND IT BE BUDGETED Water Management Agree- IN 1983. MOTION CARRIED. MOVED BY BAUCH, SECONDED BY HILL, THAT THE PROPOSED RESOLUTION BE ON THE CONSENT AGENDA OF THE SEPTEMBER 20, 1982 REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING. MOTION CARRIED. Don Williams, Director of Parks and Recreation, presented the staff report concerning future Foster Golf Links operations. He presented the gross revenues since the City began its operation in Page - - Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 1982 B) Application 82- 14-CA, Bel Crest Realty, Inc. requesting approval of an amendment to Chapter 18.46 of the Tukwila Municipal Code to allow Planned Residential within single family .. residential areas. Chairman Kirsop opened the public hearing at 9:15 p.m. Ms. Berry presented the staff report regarding Planned Residential Development within single family residential areas. COMMENTS --Mr. Earl Westlund, property owner, 12431 Kingsgate Way NE, Kirkland, WA - Proponent for code amendment, combines the amenities of the site and the ability to develop the property; Upland Green in Kirkland is an example of a planned residential unit development which he would like to see occur in Tukwila: Owner occupied, home association responsibility for landscaping and exterior changes to building, ten (10) feet between buildings, clustering development with smaller units: Remaining land would be in greenbelt area. Mr. Collins stated the height and yard regulations for the R -1 -7200 single family district are as follows: The staff recommendation for PRD in the single family zone would not allow housing types other than single family. Mr. Westlund responded he supports the concept of PRD in the single family district with duplex, triplex and four -plex units like that allowed in King County. A LETTER FROM— Dharlene West, property owner, 5212 South 164, Tukwila, WA - Opposing the amendment was noted. Mrs. Avery asked how this concept is different from the traditional single family district. Mr. Collins responded that the houses will look the same but the yards will be smaller. Mr. Sowinski questioned the value of smaller lots. Mr. Collins explained how the remaining yard will be combined for a common larger yard on the site. Setbacks - District Minimum Lot Size (Sq. Ft.) 'Minimum Area Re fired Maxiimrn Building Height (In Feet) Front Yard (In Feet) Side Yard (In Feet) Rear Yard (In.Feet) Per Unit (Sq. Ft.) R -1 7,200 None 30' 30' 10% of lot width; not less than 4'; need not be more than .8•'.. 10' Page - - Planning Commission Minutes August 26, 1982 B) Application 82- 14-CA, Bel Crest Realty, Inc. requesting approval of an amendment to Chapter 18.46 of the Tukwila Municipal Code to allow Planned Residential within single family .. residential areas. Chairman Kirsop opened the public hearing at 9:15 p.m. Ms. Berry presented the staff report regarding Planned Residential Development within single family residential areas. COMMENTS --Mr. Earl Westlund, property owner, 12431 Kingsgate Way NE, Kirkland, WA - Proponent for code amendment, combines the amenities of the site and the ability to develop the property; Upland Green in Kirkland is an example of a planned residential unit development which he would like to see occur in Tukwila: Owner occupied, home association responsibility for landscaping and exterior changes to building, ten (10) feet between buildings, clustering development with smaller units: Remaining land would be in greenbelt area. Mr. Collins stated the height and yard regulations for the R -1 -7200 single family district are as follows: The staff recommendation for PRD in the single family zone would not allow housing types other than single family. Mr. Westlund responded he supports the concept of PRD in the single family district with duplex, triplex and four -plex units like that allowed in King County. A LETTER FROM— Dharlene West, property owner, 5212 South 164, Tukwila, WA - Opposing the amendment was noted. Mrs. Avery asked how this concept is different from the traditional single family district. Mr. Collins responded that the houses will look the same but the yards will be smaller. Mr. Sowinski questioned the value of smaller lots. Mr. Collins explained how the remaining yard will be combined for a common larger yard on the site. page - - Planning Commission August 26, 1982 Mr. Westlund explained that the land owner will still be buying the same amount of property as he would without a PRD, because the excess land not used for his yard area will be accumulated together in which each family will have a percentage. Circulation Map- -The Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan Map on circulation was reviewed by the applicant and Commissioners. Most roads on McMicken Heights are local access, with the exception of Klickitat. Mr. Westlund requested the code, Chapter 18.46.050,be amended so that PRD on single family districts may be located on local access roads. Mr. Collins said it would be acceptable to the Planning Department to exempt single family Planned Residential Developments fram locating on a major, secondary or collector arterial. Mr. Collins urged the Planning Commission take action on this tonight and restated the Planning Staff's endorcement of PRD in single family districts. Mr. Knudson questioned the effect of attached vs. detached dwelling units for PRD's. Mr. Westlund responded the efficiency of shared utility hook -ups and energy savings would be better With attached dwelling units. Mr. Collins explained that a PRD in the single family district allows that builder to build around environmental sensitive areas such as a steep slope or allow the builder to take advantage of unique site occurance such as several lots taking advantage of a view. However if the builder wants to take advantage of the economies of multi - family he may rezone the property. Most of the remaining R -1 properties are environmentally sensitive. Having heard all persons who wished to address the Planning Catmission, .Chairman Kirsop closed the Public Hearing at 10:15 p.m. Mrs. Avery questioned whether this concept would still be R -l. Mr. Collins responded that this would still be single family residential. MOVED BY MRS. AVERY, WITH , MR. SOWINSKI'S SECOND, TO ALLOW PRD IN SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: 1) 18.46.020 - Include "R -1 Single Family Residential." 2) 18.46.030 - Add a new permitted use and revise language to 18.46.030(1) as follows: (11 "Single family dwellings, pursuant to the height and yard regulations of Chapter 18.50 for the R -1 -7.2 district." (2) "In R -2, R -3, R -4, and RMH districts," residential developments of all types... 3) 18.46.060 - . (1) Minimum lot and yard requirements. The minimum lot size and yard requirements...within the Planned Residential Development, "except as required in Section 18.46.030(1)." Page - - Planni ng Commission ' nutes August 26, 1982 4) 18.46.070 - Exclude R -1 Single Family Residential district fran density. bonus. 5) 18.46.050 - Add "except in R -1 Single Family Residential districts" to the end of the sentence. Discussion centered on the density bonus as an incentive or a gift to the builder. MC7TION CARRIED, MR. KNUDSON DISSENTING. CITY OF TUKWILA PLANNING DIVISION PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT AGENDA ITEM Application 82- 14 -CA, Bel Crest Realty, Inc. INTRODUCTION Bel Crest Realty, Inc.. has submitted a request for the City to amend the zoning code in order to allow Planned Residential Development (PRD) in the R -1 single family districts. Pre- sently, a PRD is allowed only in multiple family districts, including R -2, R -3, R -4, and RMH. Bel Crest Realty proposes that it is the intent of TMC Chapter 18.46 - Planned Residen- tial Development to allow flexibility in site and building design in all residential districts including single family and that to not allow PRD in single family districts would be arbitrary. Bel Crest Realty supports their request by noting that King County has recently adopted a similar ordinance which permits planned unit development in low density single family districts. FINDINGS 1) The Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan encourages di- versity of housing development through a planned unit development approach, providing a variety in housing types (Residence Section 2: Objective 1, Policy 1). 2) The Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan promotes pro - tection from intrusions of incompatible land uses and prohibits spot zoning in established residential neigh- borhoods. (Residence, Objective 1, Policy 4). 3) TMC 18.06.620 defines Planned Residential Development (PRD) as follows: A form of residential development characterized by a unified site design for a number of dwelling units, clustering buildings and providing common open space, density bonuses, and a mix of building types. The PRD is an overlay zone which is superimposed over the underlying zone district as an exception to such dis- trict regulations, as processed through procedures specified in Chapter 18.46. Page -2- PLANNING COMMIS )N - STAFF REPORT TMC 18.46.020 permits PRD only in multiple' family districts: A) R -2 Two Family Residential; B) R -3 Three and Four Family Residential; C) R -4 Low Apartments; D) RMH Multiple Residence High Density. 5) TMC 18.46.030 encourages all types of residential buildings, including both single and multiple family in a PRD provided they are intended for permanent occupancy. 6) TMC 18.46.040 requires the minimum site of a PRD be one acre. 7) TMC 18.46.050 requires the PRD be served by, an arterial street. 8) : TMC 18..46...060 waives the minimum lot size and yard require- ments in a PRD. The number of dwelling units per net acre in the underlying zone determines the basic density in a PRD. 9) TMC 18.46.070 (2) allows the Planning Commission to recom- mend and the City Council to authorize a maximum density bonus of twenty (20) percent of the basic density for the provision of certain amenities or design features, including a variety of housing types, retention of natural vegetation and taking advantage of a significant site feature, such as a stream or view. 10) TMC 18.46.080 requires each PRD provide a minimum of twenty (20) percent of the gross site area for common open space. Density Issue 11) TMC 18.46.090 (2) requires the setbacks from the property line of the PRD be compatible with or comparable to those of adjacent properties. CONCLUSIONS Historically, the central issues of.permitting PRD in single family districts are density, design layout and housing types. Other issues, such as traffic and noise, tend to be secondary to these three issues. In a PRD, the dwelling unit density is determined by the under- lying zone district. A maximum density bonus of twenty (20) percent may be granted to an applicant who demonstrates that substantial amenities or design features are included in the project. The following table shows for a one acre parcel the basic dwelling unit density, a twenty (20) percent maximum density bonus and the total possible number of dwelling units for single and two family districts: Page -3- PLANNING COMMISSION = TAFF REPORT Basic Density District (Dwelling Units per acre) Design Layout Issue 20% Bonus Density (Dwelling Units per acre) Maximum Density (Dwelling Units per acre) R -2 10.89 + 2.18 = 13.07 R -1 -7200 6.05 + 1.21 = 7.26 R -1 -9600 4.54 + 0.91 = 5.45 R -1- 12,000 3.63 + 0.73 = 4.36 R -1- 20,000 2.18 + 0.44 = 2.62 Hence, for one acre, the maximum number of dwelling units permitted in a single family district is 7.26, which is 3.63 dwelling units less than the basic density of 10.89 dwelling units for a two family dis- trict. The two family district is by definition the lowest density multiple family district permitted by the zoning code; other multiple family districts allow for more dwelling units per acre. In a PRD, the minimum lot and yard requirements are waived for added flexibility in design layout. For instance, buildings may be cluster- ed together to take advantage of a site feature. Or, buildings may be spread out creating an 'atmosphere of privacy. In a PRD, yard set- backs may vary; however,the Tukwila zoning code requires the property line setbacks be like those of nearby developments, protecting the properties from encroachment of the PRD. Frequently.in a PRD, dwelling units are attached to one another, free- ing yard area for other uses. Dwelling units may be arranged in low, medium, or high density buildings, including single family, duplex, triplex, rowhouse, townhouse and apartment buildings. Housing Type Issue Housing type and the number of units are important factors in defin- ing the neighborhood's character. With all other factors equal, including number of units, it is the housing arrangement and type that creates the image of a neighborhood. For instance, a PRD in a single family district may create the illusion of a multiple family district if the dwelling units are attached to one another even though the density remains that of a single family district. On the other hand, the image of a PRD in a single family district generally remains low density residential if the dwelling units are in detached buildings. ALTERNATIVES Several alternatives are available for the Planning Commission to consider regarding PRD in single family districts. Options include: Page -4- PLANNING COMMISSIT7 STAFF REPORT 1) To allow PRD in single family districts with detached housing units requiring minimum setbacks between units but not minimum lot sizes. 2) To allow PRD in single family districts without a density bonus. 4 To allow PRD in single family districts limited to detached ? and basic dwelling unit density of the underlying zone district. To prohibit PRD in sihcil family districts, as the pre- sent zoning code currently reads. RECOMMENDATION Staff endorses greater flexibility in zoning requirements for resi- dential developments, encouraging imaginative site and building design. Therefore, staff advises that the Planning. Commission re- commend the City Council approve the following amendments to TMC 18.46: 1) 18.46.020 - Include "R -1 Single Family Residential" 2) 18.46.030 - Add a new permitted use and revise language to 18.46.030(1) as follows: • (1) "Single family dwellings, pursuant to the height and yard regulations of Chapter 18.50 for the R -1 -7.2 district." (2) "In R -2, R -3, R -4, and RMH districts," residential developments of all types..... 3) 18.46.060 - (1) Minimum lot and yard requirements. The minimum lot size and yard requirements.. . . within the Planned Residential Development, "except as required in • Section 18.46.030(1)." J • • . _ '•"t ' 11 t.la • . • , • .!, •'. I. • • ; • : I • ), . : ,• li.•: !• L • ' • •. [fiV:141 : , r• t ;i1-.5•.•1•1'1'.1.t.l.',•,';';••••••,5 , •I•t• 1 .•14'.4 ...,t / -ft•••••• 1 •.• -. 0 4-1 a - %01.• ,••,•,••,.' -4 ' •!! ;;1;1`..: „.; 1 • .-:1', •• • • l'• ■ . .. ..' , ;'1:. i,',,•: • • 4. ), .41. I '' 4 - '' i. ... :„ .• • ' •.'i • :' ;t•N 14 - -. ''• •P ' 0 . to ••• • al . •• .• • p w - j . ••I •!:t• • • - . • ,• •. • , :I ::: •.: • -• t 0 .. ., ,, .. 0 .,,..., 1 • .., t.:, 1 03 • :0'. tf ev • irii!1?-1,111, N,„ . 1,1t47, i to';„. , ; 1 1 1;:i i. •,,,i,/, .. , it : Ii i: :: ba .::7 :::;!. '4 ... ' ,„4 .i: „„; 11i..,.; :.:' .:;.:' ,:. :II.'...' :. ; 1 ;. !::; "°(ur ,T: . :1 r:a I .:ri 0!c itt:L i ll! ; ;' • .11/ • t 8 ...ii, •. ‘:: • , . co .. - 1'; .' •t:i • " •.• • ... 1, t 0 i:,...f It : i :nip . I '4 4u ) :111' i (..:.1( 1 4 .' 4,-iPirlan°1'.:'1'.:.'!"11111'11'.!:11.11Iii...1'!(1);)..(1:4.r(tjHnjil::.:.1j1t-ii.'...',!:%;.....'12ilj::.,;:.'14:111::1.:111:1.....4:.1:;:'.1'111-'1.1‘......:'-•.ikr. 4:1E1:4::. 'TC13:. • '..:!:....!...1'11.'''.:.....:1.:.1...:".....•....:..Luri:i ::.';fil(13:-..:-.;;::.-.'.....'..:.':::4r1 ...1.'.1''..:.: '111"r4t) ....1..,....;1...i.: • ' . 'i '....CP44j4)(14 k . .11,0•., p, too ;;:,,, t., • 7 1 13 !:!..),:...... .,_i :; ,. 1 , , ? u ...:. „. •: ._ ,. . . .•11,. 4 ,1)1 93 1 .: ■,!- •,-i .14 t• ' l• '.. • .•••••••• a) ■" • :'.1 . m ul JO 3 U),.$••••41, •6 fl, il: •o• ' • u) ai • • • a) • f • ; .,..•i, 0 • , -, . s•-• r i i • . 14.3 R • • al al . 1 i •• i 'IA ', EP•I i ' l ir i ; ! .1,1 t I. al ' ..1-i 14 ! Q 1 ' 3 ° , ' • •;•-i. • I-4 . , • 1 1,4:E-1-,:••1,10•1!u,1 • ,.4tti,,CI aii.i:.0.,.ify re.i . f.: .. • . -- - • u )..) . - - 4-.) . • .‘• . , •.. . • . . _ . ,. , , • . ;t t Io li 0)1 ''/Ii .1-.1.;Vi$V1044:7.1fill!. ,.,,.1!4•4‘ • A•J '.:!; '".. : .. W . • . •• 4 •-•• • -1 '. • tn • 11‘.(' Q) j . '. :1'. (4) '13 1 • aj '). .+.1...4-laj '':'.. C19 'TI .'5 ' 1'!: * rii ...i, :: ... :....•,' 1 0 : i. :,14 • I3k f...:1 to ' ra••';_ ul'!.A ■!' . ( c t l• . • • • T . 1 .. ul , i F4 ,;,. ,.,..,i k ; : ‘ ,.. 6. .. .1 '-' m .. 1t;_ v i l. n ent...- . • ,c,1 -.!; • . u) 0 ••-1 :.. W : • 0 ••••;.*:' • 0 1i - • ii . 1 - I•Ts4 . /,' : HT :(1 .■i ii. ft . ol t 14 ' I .!.: () • `'.. a). a ) ,o ' " . 0 • •': . ., - .` . t ' : ' P •'• • • i ti.•tr`•!i p:• , :i 4-q 01 a4 :.H lal•••di:••'..,, i0 1 l' .t'i ; ,-. H 121 4-,: : 4-1 , • •:;•,.. H %.... , EU • 42 : . ) 111•1/40 '?i!,$:, IU•. ,0j ,Fl ., • •Lrl:!:•:.•,• *•;;;; '... .% !. : . : P. , ... • , ,. co • • • . ,0-1-1 0 )4 . , , ...,1, 0 u ,. ) 1 .,, H . 0 44 . 4-. .,, '..:,■,' I ,4 • • • ! • ••, '•,, ru, I ..1,,,- Ilk- ;mi.; tvitl ',. }.1.,' p •• I -I :,! 0 ; ,L•• . • - ) 0 • 0 .., .,.. . ... . . , • t '.. !: ,.1-1 •l. • • 5« ll•wi.,•t•-- ', u .4 .i•••• LH al • . .. • ..„. • 44 c •,, t r •-11 )' , u) kittp,ii ;‘,a1.2 ,•ul •.., ,...) An i '■•:?•• l'.;• G - -- ', • -. . 0 -... •.. 1- !....i..fd 2 - -...t l ' P r . . • ...>. : • 1 1 •-•? . 1•11 '1,f t ' 1 I■• 1; 4 ri . l'. i trr•al l• i 01 ,U) •ri :i. •,:' 4- 1 . ..! .; !.. • - • a) • al . 0 :- • r - I . . YI 0' . t. . i .. . • • i_•• •• (41 «0 *•••• al •:, , t 1•. ,... . • .: • , ra .0 IA ' 4-1 al • al -',.• ,•.? u) : ••••. • • - I; • ' a)?.;1:: '-'-? • ' •': )-1" •••:.,0• • G •,....,..:4 ), , •!•+! 41:i.:: ri r r ,: , 4 •••• t. ; ii...,i:.:1,..t,!::::000C111:3.,„!ii,..sv.1)cub0:::..r.•'.1':.1.0.0.0.:14.ii!.:Yrcrili:,:f.i.norm4.74: ' ri ttiri octil 1......,.,74a,,,J1 ' jc) . . ' ... i . i. ..... r:i °0 .... ... i .I .,. '‘ ,: i. : , , ,: „ 4. . : i. , 1" ;,..rcair i cl o ; i i. :1 ,..: ;. 1.::, : . ' ,: i ,.: : .: ; . .... , ', 1 1 " 0430 . i ' . ., , .. ;. '( ' ‘ ..! :. ..... ,1. ! .. .... I 4 - -1 1 1_10wa) • . .....,r) . ,,u 4 : 11j :,:pl • a ail : ,...; i '. .. '1 ) .: . .i ., : . : •= s r..i. 1 :11 ''... ". • i ,.1.0. ai0, .1 ajr::;:ti.i.:2,i:.,:u :: 4 .;;:t.1.11..93....iii1:t:citriti i. ! . ' . :1.-..‘ (11 . 4 : (1) : . . 1":: ° : ...1 .: 7.,...., : ,(P 'l 'c ,' ' :: ' ::,... o '''u-11:: P. :'...:1;:;-. 4-' '1 .C4-.1...' ki:4 pletV,•!•■ b0 :1 if Gil ' ••;.,•i,tl•H ,: .: a•O''•'. •W •.' al 1 - . • 4 0 • •I. -i ' (0 . • ';.H t t -4 ir: tot? • i; o t , 4.) )-I 4..t .... •• al W !• A..1 •• 60 ,s •ri : • ! • .,• .. • , u) , • • •;,. u i,fti 1 4 •• ite • • !!,; kqi t ii, .. t !• Pyt:.},-..?..•••1 ii"I.r..', ...,:,.d ':'-'• .r'ud..,...g',.'....:%,dr 14° ; • 'it t ..,.:c: 01 i. 'j 111i 1.:•,•It • .1 .i.■ ••i.V. pl rat 01"••••.i i•, :•:-i • • • '- t . f . - • • •.'• .4 4-t t: ••••• "" . a) ! It trt 4 -t "7 124 • • i•-: :,• • :' t••. •''''.:•. . . i ..'," : • ',;,.' ' I.,' p-, )4 , ; I • ...,....i. : -..t ot) r * ,,,, 7: • r4 •k. : i '. 1-1 • .G . ', 41) • .. ( •• • ..• ••• 4 1 . l • • • • ' • .• • • • •• . •• •• • • : I i.• 1 • 1 . - •• ,•• • : 1 ' • •• • , • •■•.. i 01 ••, 1*. c; ! 0-14 ,,!,' \ti:V. :w:' 3 .1!, .R14„:li A t . A , ..,:ii I F. c p i ,.:11,„ • . ''. ' i ." 1' 1 .. , :i.3 .! ,..., t ', -i;N., .,:•.•• 1..,, ., .I. I..: .' .,'• .; : • . ', • : :• , • . :TO :,'. t 1 - , i. ...i..! • ..... r ':il • • . • 5 e • i, • ,' • •• :. • • •:: . .,rtiri; .11 ..fl• ..... : : : ■ : ! : !•..•,;k 1 1 .1. ... 1 C-‘ 1 , ;;: i i ..:::.; .: 1 . 1: „ :t)) ;'; !.. ;" !:'.: ;; : :... 1 * 1 :: .'i : ;. .• 4,1..t.:iii)icfit x. 11...,1 ):1)::..""::"kla'..1`. ; "'"?',.t 14 • t• % .1 .•"' i l ''"'" 'I .; 1 `.t . : .•,- , • . August 18, Richard Ki Tukwila P1 6200 South Tukwila, W Dear Mr. K May .I spea allow.: Plan residentia The Planni applicant on this su year discu Tukwila's single fam change tha dwellings. of time sa The Planni perfecting every arg recommenda argued and present Zo great deal Since this certainly to allow t neighborho I know I s others whe family zon that the r It I, I II 1982 sop, Chairman nning Commission enter Boulevard shington 98188 rsop.; in regard to the Bel Crest Realty request to ed_Re;sidentiaLzoning : ..Single Family - . . areas? C 2 /.a71EnE '14'ESE 5272 ZouLfi 764 JukwiLa, CM'a5.4in9Eon 9SJSS g Commission, the City Council and, indeed, the ust be very much aware of the citizens feelings ject.. We have only just concluded a seven sion on the matter. The vast majority of itizens are against any further change in ly zoning. We particularly don't want any would allow anything except single family We have spent several years and a great deal ing so. g Commission has spent many hours and years the present zoning. You have heard virtually ent for and against the various zonings. Your ions went tp the City Council and were again discussed. When the City Council adopted the ing Code and Zoning Map, it was only after a of serious thought • a people. process took over seven years, we, as citizens on't.expect to see the zoning changed so soon e deterioration of Tukwila's single family ds. eak not just for myself, but for a great many I say it is sincerely hoped that our single ngs are allowed to remain as they are and quest by Bel Crest is denied. Sincerely, 46°1 0 - 4 Y - c Dharlene West [MOE [AUG 19 198� J C. OF TUKWILA _AWNING DEPT. ....... . ... ........... ........ ............................... . • . ........... .......... ............. .. .......................... . .......................... .. .......................... Sections: Chapter 18.46 PRD -- PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT 18.46.010 Purpose. 18.46.020 Permitted districts. 18.46.030 Permitted uses. 18.46.040 Site acreage minimum. 18.46.050 Location. 18.46.060, Relationship of this chapter to other . sections and other ordinances. 18.46.070 Density standards. 18.46.080 Open Space. 18.46.090 Relationship to adjacent areas. 18.46.100 Pre - application procedures. 18.46.110 Application procedures for PRD approval. 18.46.120 Application procedure for building permit. 18.46.130 Minor and major adjustments. 18.46.140 Expiration of time limits. 18.46.010 Purpose. It is the purpose of this chapter is to encourage imaginative site and building design and to create open space in residential developments by permitting greater flexibility in zoning requirements than is.permitted by other section of this title. Furthermore, it is the purpose of this chapter to: • (1) Promote the retention of significant features of the natural environment, including topography, vegetation, waterways, and views; (2) Encourage a variety or mixture of housing types; (3) Encourage maximum efficiency in the layout of streets, utility networks, and other public improvements; (4) Create and /or preserve usable open space for the enjoyment of the occupants and the general public. 18.46.020 Permitted districts. Planned Residential Development ( "PRD ") may be permitted in the following districts: (1) R -2 Two Family Residential; (2) R -3 Three and Four Family Residential; (3) R -4 Low Apartments; (4) RMH Multiple Residence High Density. 18.46.036 Permitted uses. The following uses are allowed in Planned Residential_ Development: (1) Residential developments of all types regardless of the type of building in which such residence is located, such as single family residences, duplexes, tri- plexes, four- plexes, rowhouses, townhouses-or apartments; provided that all residence are intended for permanent occupancy by their owners APRIL 20, 1982 Page 52 TUKWILA ZONING ORDINANCE (6243A/277A/LEH) or tenants. Hotels, motels, and travel trailers and mobile homes and trailer parks are excluded; (2) Accessory uses specifically designed to meet the needs of the residents of the PRD such as garages and recreation facilities of a non - commercial nature; (3) In Planned Residential Developments of ten (10) acres or more, commercial uses may be permitted. Commercial uses shall be limited to those which are of a neighborhood convenience nature such as beauty or barber shops, drug stores, . grocery stores and self-service laundries. 18.46.040 Site acreage minimum. The minimum site for a Planned Residential Development shall be one (1) acre. 18.46.050 Location. The site of the Planned Residential Development shall abut, and the main internal street serving the PRD shall be connected to, at least one major, secondary, or collector alterial as defined in the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan. 18.46.060 Relationship of this chapter to other sections and other ordinances. (1) Minimum lot and yard requirements. The minimum lot size and yard requirement provisions of other sections of this code are waived within the Planned Residential Development. The number of dwelling units per net acre permitted in the underlying zone shall serve as the criteria to determine basic PRD density. (2) Off- street parking. Off- street parking shall be provided in a PRD in the same ratio for types of buildings and uses as required in Chapter 18.56. (3) Platting requirements. The standards of the Subdivision Code for residential subdivisions shall apply to Planned Residential Developments if such standards are not in conflict with the provisions of this chapter. Upon final approval of the PRD, filing of the PRD shall be in accordance with procedures of the Subdivision Code if any lots are to be transferred. 18.46.070 Density standards. (1) The basic density shall .be the same as permitted by the underlying zone district. The dwelling units per net acre for the residential zones are as provided in Chapter 18.50. (2) The planning Commission may recommend and the City Council may authorize a dwelling unit density not more than twenty (20) percent greater than permitted by the'underlying zone following findings that the amenities or design features listed below are substantially provided: (a) A variety of housing types are offered; (b) At least 15% of the natural vegetation is retained (in cases where significant stands exist); APRIL 20, 1982 Page 53 TUKWILA ZONING ORDINANCE (6243A/277A/LEH) (c) Advantage is taken of unusual or significant site features such as views, streams, or other natural characteristics; (d) Separation of auto and pedestrian movement, especially in or near areas of recreation; (e) Developmental aspects of the PRD complement the land use policies of the Comprehensive Plan; (f) Some extraordinary public benefit is derived in exchange for the increased density in the Planned Residential Development. 18.46.080 Open space. Each Planned Residential Development shall provide not less than twenty (20) percent of the gross site area for common open space which shall be: (1) Concentrated in large usable areas and designed to provide either passive or active recreation; and (2) If under one ownership, owned and maintained by the ownership; or (3) Held in common ownership by all of the owners of the development by means of a Home Owners or similar Association. Such association shall be responsible for maintenance of the common open space; (4) Dedicated for public use, if acceptable to the City of Tukwila or other appropriate public agency. 18.46..090 Relationship to adjacent areas. (1) The design and layout of a Planned Residential C Development shall take into account the relationship of the site to the surrounding areas. The perimeter of the PRD shall be so designed as to minimize any undesirable impact of the PRD on adjacent properties. (2) Setbacks from the property line of the PRD shall be comparable to, or compatible with, those of the existing development of adjacent properties or, if adjacent properties are undeveloped, the type of development which may be permitted. 18.46.100 Pre - application procedure. A pre - application conference between representatives of the City and the potential applicant for a PRD is required prior to the acceptance of an application for PRD approval. This conference shall be set by the Planning Department at the written request of the potential applicant. All affected City Departments shall be notified and invited to participate. The purpose of the pre - application conference is to acquaint the applicant with the provisions of this section as well as other ordinances and regulations which would affect the property under consideration. 18.46.110 Application procedure for PRD approval. The following 'procedure is required for approval of the Planned Residential Development: APRIL 20, 1982 Page 54 TUKWILA ZONING ORDINANCE (6243A/277A/LEH) (1) All applications shall include the following documents: (a) Vicinity map showing the location of the site and its relationship to surrounding areas, including the land use and zoning of both the site and the surrounding areas; (b) A map of the site drawn to a scale of not less than one (1) inch representing one hundred (100) feet showing the following: (i) The existing site conditions including contours at five (5) foot intervals, watercourses, flbodplains, unique natural features, and forest cover; (ii) The location and floor area size of all existing and proposed buildings, structures, and other improvements including maximum heights, types of dwelling' units, density per type, and, nonresidential structures, including commercial facilities, if any. Such drawings should be sufficient to convey the basic exterior architectural intent of the proposed improvements; (iii) The location and size in acres or square feet of all areas to be conveyed, dedicated, Cr reserved as common open spaces, public parks, recreational areas, and similar public or semi - public uses; (iv) The existing and proposed circulations system of arterial, collector, and local streets including off - street parking areas, service areas, loading areas, and major points of access to public rights -of -way. Notations of proposed ownership -- private or public -- should be included where appropriate; (v) The existing and proposed pedestrian circulation system; (vi) The existing and proposed utility systems including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, and water, electric, gas and telephone; (vii) A landscape plan in general schematic form indicating treatment of open space and yards; (viii) The proposed treatment of the perimeter of the PRD, including materials and techniques used such as screens, fences, and walls; (ix) The proposed method of street lighting and signing; (x) The noise, energy efficiency, and general ' insulation characteristics of, the proposed development; (c) In addition to the graphic illustrations listed above; the applicant shall submit a written statement providing the following information: (i) Justification . for the density bonus, if requested by the applicant; (ii) Program for development including staging or timing of development; (iii) Proposed ownership pattern upon completion of the project; APRIL 20, 1982 Page 55 TUKWILA ZONING ORDINANCE (6243A/277A/LEH) (iv) Basic content of any restructive covenants; (v) Provisions to assure permanence and maintenance of common open space through a Home Owners Association, or similar association, condominium development or other means acceptable to the City; (d) An application for rezone may be submitted with the PRD application if rezoning is necessary for proposed density. Fees for rezone request shall be in addition to those APRIL 20, 1982 of the PRD application; (e) An application for preliminary plat may be submitted with the PRD application, if necessary. Fees for the subdivision shall be in addition to those of the PRD application; (2) Filing of application. Application for approval of the PRD shall be made on forms prescribed by the Planning Department and which shall be accompanied by a filing fee as required in Chapter 18.88; (3) Planning Commission public hearing. The Planning Commission shall hold at least one (1) public hearing on the proposed PRD, and shall give notice thereof pursuant to Chapter 18.92 of this title. The public hearing shall not be held before completion of all necessary and approriate review by City departments. This review shall be completed within a reasonable period of time; Page 89 (4) Planning Commission recommendation. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission shall make a report of its findings and recommendations with respect to the proposed PRD, and shall forward the report to the City Council. Such report shall include but need not be limited to the following items: (a) Suitability of the site area for the proposed development; (b) Requirements of the Subdivision Code for the proposed development; (c) Reasons for density bonuses as listed in Section 18.46.080; (d) Adverse environmental impacts have been mitigated; (e) Compliance of the proposed PRD to the provisions of this chapter; (f) Time limitations, if any, for the entire development and specified stages; (g) Development in accordance with the Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan and other relevant plans; (h) Public purposes have been served by the proposed development; (5) City Council•publi'c hearing. After receipt of the Planning Commission report, the City Council shall hold a public hearing on the proposed PRD as recommended by the Planning Commission. The City Council shall give approval, approval with modifications, or disapproval to the proposed PRD. APRIL 20, 1982 Page 90 18.46.120 Application procedures for Building Permit. The following procedures are required for approval of construction for the proposed Planned Residential Development: (1) Time limitation. A complete application for the initial Building Permit shall be filed by the applicant within twelve (12) months of the date on which the City Council approved the PRD. An extension of time for submitting an application may be requested in writing by the applicant, and an extension not exceeding six (6) months may be granted by the City Council. If application for the initial Building Permit is not made within twelve (12) months or within the time for which an extension has been granted, the plan shall be considered abandoned, and the development of the property shall be subject to the requirements and limitations of the underlying zone and the Subdivision Code; (2) Application. Application for Building Permit shall be made on forms' prescribed by the Planning Department and shall be accompanied by a fee as prescribed by the Building Code; (3) Documentation required. All schematic plans either presented or required in the approved PRD plans shall be included in the Building Permit application presented in finalized, detailed form suitable for recording and engineering. These plans shall include but are not limited to landscape, utility, open space, circulation, and site or subdivision plans. Final plats and public dedication documents must be approved by the City Council before the issuance of any building permits; (4) Sureties required for staging. If the PRD is to be developed in stages, sureties shall be required for the complete PRD. The various stages or parts of the PRD shall provide the same proportion of open space and the same overall dwelling unit density as provided in the final plan; (5) Planning Department action. The Planning 'Department shall determine whether the project plans submitted with the Building Permit are in compliance with and carry out the objectives of the approved PRD. Following approval of the Planning Department, the City Clerk shall file a copy of the approved PRD plan with the official records of the City and the originals shall be recorded with the King County Department of Records and Elections. After all approvals, the offical zoning map shall be amended to reflect the PRD by adding the suffix "PRD" to the designation of the underlying zone. 18.46.13D Minor and major adjustments. If minor adjustments or changes are proposed following the approval of the PRD, by the City Council as provided in Section 18.46.120, such adjustments shall be approved by the Planning Department prior to the issuance of a Building Permit. Minor adjustments are those which may affect the precise dimensions or siting of structures, but which do not affect the basic character or APRIL 20, 1982 Page 57 TUKWILA ZONING ORDINANCE (6243A/277A/LEH) ( arrangement of structures approved in the final plan, or the density of the development or open space provided. Major adjustments are those which, as determined by the Planning Department, substantially change the basic design, density, open space, or other substantive requirement or provision. If the applicant wishes to make one or more major changes, a revised plan must be approved pursuant to Section 18.46.120. 18.46.140 Expiration of time limits. Construction of improvements in the PRD shall begin within twelve (12) months from the date of the filing of the final PRD plan by the City Clerk as provided in Section 18.46.130. An extension of time for beginning construction may be requested in writing by the applicant, and such extension not exceeding six (6) months may be granted by the Planning Commission upon showing of good cause. If construction does not occur within eighteen (18) months from the date of filing of PRD plans by the City Clerk, the PRD zoning suffix shall be dropped from the official zoning map and the zoning shall revert to the underlying'designation. APRIL 20, 1982 Page 58 TUKWILA ZONING ORDINANCE (6243A/277A/LEH) BEL CRFST a x L` Y B R S 12431 KINGSGATE WAY N.E., KIRKLAND, WA 98033 823 -4663 evelopment (P R D.):;regulation Chapter.; 18.46:020 "(PERMITTED' DISTRICTS • ^ Y�',A , 4�� r - +.Pr7r y. .�. .�. • ;�j - .- r'•" ;a�,., fic� �l �_ _ riC -'�' '�' ..,_ _.... .. r .n. he. change S; am; asking, :for.:.:your assistancein'is } allowing the :iq�;�n�'`'•r• ' mss' " 'i ?: �:;• _ My argi m - ents' for `allowing_ the "R -1 °district' is' in theychapters o `e P R:D : , regulations: _ Chapter 18.46':010 :;purpose and paragraphs' thru 4: • Chap ter:- 18.46.030 •Permitted uses paragraph 1 - states':' ' Residenti al : developments of all t 'regardless of the type of building in;;which: such .residence is•:.:located,,'..such.''as single family .residences'•'' By not allowing the R- 1 to be in ded in the .R.D arbitrary the the'chapter. Also Chapter 18.46.060 .3 Platting requirements:': a•ay ':j::)'.'�: :y `��ji�a'j..•:,> _ ZF� - ;4L, /,'': , ath.appe'alifig.to-yotrfor'a•change in the Planned'Reeidentiar* in" t1ie. R =''1 �'zonirig 'distr3 ets`:' "The standards of the subdivision code for residential subdivisions:: shall apply to 'planned residential developments if such standards are not in conflict with the provision of this chapter'," , ;ti Again the basic residential single family of the R -1 district are mentioned throughout the P King County has recently adopted a similar ordinance which does include all R.S., zones from R -S 15.000 to R -S 900. I respectfully submit.. and .request for favorable responce, as I believe - it must have been an oversight or an error not to :.include the R -1 districts in the P.R.D., regulations:' Respectfully,'' Earl A. Westlund President MULTIPLE LISTINGS I RESIDENTIAL • COMMERCIAL is INDUSTRIAL • ACREAGE «'OTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING (; OF THE TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL Public Hearing: a proposed amendment to the Tukwila Zoning Code that would allow the city council to approve planned residential development of detached single family houses in single family (R -1) residential zones. Date: January 17, 1983, Nbnday Time: 7:00 p.m. Place: Tukwila City Hall, Council Chambers 6200 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA At 7:00 p.m. on January 17, 1983, the Tukwila City Council will conduct a public hearing on a proposed amendment to the zoning regulations governing the planned residential development of new housing in Tukwila. A Planned Resi- dential Development or PRD is a permit process that may be followed by property owners who wish to develop new residences on properties which are one acre in size or larger. The PRD makes it possible for larger developments to have all their plans reviewed at one time without having to go through a series of reviews on separate parts of the plans. The proposed zoning changes would permit large single family properties to be built with single family homes on separate lots like traditional subdivisions. However, the lots would not be restricted to a specific lot size such ,as 7200 square feet but instead would be restricted to the required setbacks of each house from its own lot lines. This proposed amendment would not allow a greater density of houses on the property even though developed under a PRD but would allow yard space normally associated with large lots to be used for common recreation purposes by the PRD's residents. Since a minimum of twenty percent of the total site area is required for common open space, it would be like a subdivision with its own playfield, tennis courts, or other recreational facilities. The proposed amendment would not permit housing types other than detached single family houses in R -1 zoning districts. The proposed changes will permit smaller individual lot sizes for single family homes, if the Council approves the PRD's use of that yard space for common recreation areas. WOULD 1. Permit large R -1 zoned properties to be built with single family homes on separate lots like traditional subdivisions under PRD provisions; 2. Restrict minimum lot size to the existing requirements of R -1 setbacks for each house from its own lot lines (lot size would increase as building lot coverage increased); 3. Allow yard space normally associated with large lots to be used for common recreation purposes by the PRD's residents; 4. Permit smaller individual lot sizes for single family homes, only if the City Council approves the PRD's use of that yard space for common recreation areas; 5. Be like a subdivision with its own play - field, tennis courts, or other recrea- tional facilities instead of big yards for each home. WOULD NOT 1. Allow a greater density of houses on the property developed under a PRD than under a traditional subdivision; - 2. Obligate City Council approval of smaller individual lot sizes for single family homes; 3. Be exactly like a traditional single family subdivision. Site Plan 'I Sketches represent an artist's conception ()Myr', architectural plans. Washer, dryer. refrigerator not included in sales price. In our constant endear or to improve this development. re.er e the right to modify flimir plan, features, price. materials and design. , • ter 5ellbw uotticaJes et ( VW letter rt,fc oat. r•Aa 1.1 : st I r • e 4 =1;44 • U land reen COMPANY » Page A2 , Tuesday, March 8, 1983 Record Chronicle : 111111111111111111.011111=.1111111111111111( Judges .. • Planned development ordinance approved ,...:::., . By DEEANN GLAMSER Staff Reporter Knew ordinance to allow planned • - residential development . (PRD) in',:: single - family neighborhoods - was narrowly passed byt Tukwila City; Council on a 4 -3 vote Monday night. - A PRD allows single - family houses • to be built closer together on dif- ficult lots, such as those partly on steep slopes, as long as the overall housing density is equivalent to standard single - family zoning. • Criteria for PRDs include giving the city an "extraordinary benefit." Councilman George Hill again op- posed the ordinance, saying• that instead of the ordinance being - for: the city's benefit, developers would use it to their advantage. "I don't feel we're still protecting our citizens. We're selling them down the river," he said. . But councilwoman Doris Phelps. - ' • reiterated that each PRD will have to .. • ,be "scrutinized" by the •Planning : Commission and City Council before being approved. . , Other council members support- ing the ordinance were Lionel 'Bud" ' bohrer, Mabel Harris and Wendy Morgan. Joining with Hill in opposi= ' tion were Joe Duffie and Ed Bauch. Most of the discussion Monday on the long- debated issue wasn't on the ordinance itself, but on whether ' .council members living close to •potential PDR properties could be '•;isqualified from voting because of c: state's' appearness of fairness . ;octrine. Bauch asked city attorney Dan 'S, lea for his opinion, indirectly refer- : to 11 acres near his McMicken - T-7eights home where Bellcrest•De- vt:iop;nen: would like to use a.PDR. , The area was downzoned by the -csuacil from multi - family to single- . ' family re iidential, and the city still is • - involved in litigation with the de velopero. Bauch earlier had been challenged by developers, who didn't • think he should vote on the downzon- ' :ng part of the city's new zoning . ordinance. Woo said he wasn't aware of any ' attorney general opinion on the most recent legislation, limiting how the fairness doctrine can be applied, but said he didn't think a council memo- er could be excluded from voting just on the basis of proximity. > h1 :4' • ,'j !!"; 11'=. (Continued from page Al) but the Auburn lines were marked with the orange balls. Request made - The manager at Crest Airpark- said Sunday that she unsuccessful- - ly had asked Bonneville to put safety visibility markers on the power lines. She didn't recall any other plane accidents involving the tranemiec :n.. 1:...... _ - - -• •• •• • Power line markers .. . towers, with transmission lines ex- tending over a 60- to 70- foot -wide area. On the higher towers, the lines are in a pyramid formation of three para: : ,I1 lines, McCreary said. The lines run in horizontal single strands through the other towers, and pilots first cross a higher row of trees in the hilly terrain before ,getting to the power lines. • .. �• *.. 1!.d. .i.�Gt +in,!' •Gn`.a a' io •f SF1! +i::i rT.t)a ... • ... ., c r;;; . ; �..:.,, : :.•.:, _ r ,:Y�,d;' "... -:_ • •- Staff photo by MIKE A airplane approaches Crest A,irpark, Over high - voltage lines in foreground standards section, se "amateur built" planes are ed an average four to fig during construction, and inspection is required fox worthiness certificate. A pilot's license is required t planes. Neither an airwo certificate nor pilot's 11 required fnr tiltratioh' OLYMPIA (AP) •=- A' bill that . would allow waivers of some sew= age treatment requirements could result in dangerous wastes being dumped into Puget Sound, environ- mentalists have told Washington lawmakers. However, representatives of cities said if the bill doesn't pass, taxpayers will face some very high bills to upgrade sewage treatment plants. Judy Turpin, lobbyist for the — Washington Environmental Coun- :il, told a legislative committee Monday that the bill would allow the state Department of Ecology to forego its own requirements in favor of less stringent rules of the federal Environmental Protection Agency. "To say that the current ad- ministration of the EPA has not won the confidence of the environmen- tal community is a gross under- . statement," she said. Tom Wimmer, a founder of the Environmental Council and memb -' er of a Citizens Coalition for Clean Water, said more than a score of cities are "already using Puget - Sound as a septic tank." - : • - • • The bill, requested by the - De- partment of Ecology; would allow it • Bill may allow dangerous wastes to be dumped in Sound, say foes Murder'charged in death of robbery victim;. 78 The death of an elderly Riverton -area man from a heart attack after he was robbed of his wallet Thursday, resulted Tuesday in the filing of a first: degree murder charge against a Graham, Wash., man. Douglas Brian Wheeler, 21, is scheduled.to be. arraigned on the charge in King County Superior Court today. He is being held in King County Jail in lieu of bail set at $100,000. ' Andrew Pilon, 78, of 12420 First Ave. S., died of cardiac arrest after Wheeler allegedly put a finger in the victim's back, told him he had a gun and then proceeded to take the victim's wallet by force, according to an affidavit filed with the charge by - Deputy County Prosecutor Robert C. Ryan. The incident occurred while Pilon was walking • to'Waive requirements for a state permit to dump sewage into the Sound or other salt water if it thinks a federal permit is adequate. State law now requires sewage to 'receive "secondary or the best practical treatment" before being : discharged into public waters. King Couhty Metro has applied for a waiver, asking to be allowed to continue "primary" treatment at a sewage outfall proposed for south- ern King County. The bill would allow the depart- ment to grant that waiver if Metro, can satisfy EPA requirements. John Spencer, deputy director of the Department of Ecology, said the bill "will allow the department to exercise its discretion and to concur with the EPA to authorize less than secondary treatment to be discharged into deep marine wa- ters." The department, he said, "could require .more stringent require- ments than the EPA." Wimmer said environmentalists "are extremely distressed that the department has caved in" to the EPA. "We're creating the same condi- tions , that are destroying the Mediterranean Sea," Wimmer said. Tukw owar 0-A- g3 approvai or `.dense , Zoning THAT YOU CAN WATCH AT HOME ON YOUR OWN TELEVISION! ' WE HAVE OVER 600 , MOVIES THAT YOU CAN BUY OR RENT! . Medical Cooperative ALTERNATIVES Ub.C,•.l Y..a un CALIF. BROCC LBS. e REG. 59' LB PEARS REG. 59' U YELLOW ONIO CARROTS 2LBB A A proposed Tukwila zoning ordinance has raised fears among some citizens that it could create suburbah slums in the city. However, others believe the ordinance will mean more attractive neighborhoods for the city. Tukwila City Council is considering an ordi- nance which would allow planned residential developments. Approval of the new zone would mean a developer could build houses on smaller lots than now allowed, . while leaving more community open space to make up for the smaller lots. • A dozen Tukwila residents squared off against a developer who supports the ordinance during a public hearing Monday night. Tukwila's plan- ning staff also supports the ordinance. Councilman George Hill has been an outspo- ken critic of planned residential development. "I can't see crowding a bunch of houses together for the sake of someone making an extra buck," he said at last month's hearing. "I don't like it." Other forms of The Tukwila City Council reviewed Monday a . possible change in its mayor /council form of government — a question that seems to pop up in Tukwila from time to time. The council voted unanimously to review five options, including its current form of govern- ment, on a time schedule prepared by Bohrer. Bohrer was appointed by the council last year to come up with a schedule. The options include: 1) retention of , the current form of government, which features a part -time mayor with an administrative assis- tant; 2) mayor - council form of government with increased salary for the mayor and no adminis- trative assistant; 3) mayor- council form of government with a reduction in the mayor's salary and provision for a full time'city adminis- trator who reports to the mayor; 4) council - manager form of government; and 5) other alternatives as suggested by the council. Through February The time schedule calls for discussion on the review plan at a council workshop meeting next week. Presentations on various forms of govern- eadiaa. _III 41111, 1/1111 . .. i r i `tea Ee4C1311 hula_ Gl 01 ua--e . P j . . 644 li - 6 A - - 1 l t , i f e3 ry i ordinance rya create ms some fear zoning y Earl Westlund, the developer supporting the keep wondering why the city's planning depart - zoning change and a Tukwila property owner, ment is backing this. It's a hard §ale." has contended planned residential development . Cheryl Wheeler said she fears many homes provides an attractive "village" look to neigh -. would be rented in • a planned resdential de- berhoods. velopment, and that those renters would have no Westlund said the zoning change would pro- :motivation for maintaining the coupon open vide a practical alternative for the handicapped, space. . " ' . ' ■ elderly and others who are unable to care for The county would tax the communityproperty large yards. in a planned residential development the same Brad Collins, city planning director, said he as it would , homes, which would encourage and his staff support planned residential de- residents to sell their percentage of community velopment' because it would take pressure off property, said • Al Pieper, a Tukwila building efforts to change Tukwila's single - family zoning official.. "This will happen just like God made to multi - family zoning. little green apples," he said. . . • t Connie Meyer, who called the plan "hooey," Tukwila's ordinance now requires that single- said "things are fine the way they are." She sided family home lots be at least 7,200 square feet. with residents who feared planned residential Under planned residential development, a ee- development would create undesirable neigh- ••veloper could build on lots smaller than that, bit borhoods. , . leave more open space available elsewhere in "I've sat in the audience several times while the development for passive use or as a site for. this has been discussed," said Joan Davis. "I • recreational facilities. - ,f o .r. Tukwila • g ment will be made 'to the council through the er. said he appreciated serving in the position month of February. The first public hearing will during 1982, since the year involved many be March 7. . significant council decisions. • If a council majority wants to change the city's Bohrer said one of the highlights of his term form of government to council- manager, the was serving as mayor of the city for five days council will pass a resolution atithorizing an ' last July. Bohrer became acting mayor upon the election March 21, and hold the election May 17. resignation of former Mayor Frank Todd and Even though the city's form of government . prior to Mayor. Gary Van Dusen's swearing -in. could change, Van Dusen will remain mayor • . ' Foster pro shop until the general election in November, when his . In another unanimous vote, the council passed • office is up for election. .. • , a resolution to let Van Dusen sign a contract for In other business, Mabel - Baris, former ' the operation of the restaurant and pro shop at Tukwila city treasurer and in her second term on Foster Links golf course. Ernest F. Lueckenotte; the Tukwila City Council, was unanimously a class A golf professional, will become the elected council president. • ' operator Feb. 1. The contract runs through 1987. Sole. nominee With a bit of ceremony, five city employees "Thank you for your confidence in me," Ms. Harris, 61, told the couhcil members. "I will do were recognized for their service to the city. my very best to make your choice a good one." Eugene Elfstrom, in parks maintenance, and . Shirley Johnson, a police clerk, received 20 -year employee service pins. Maxine Anderson, city clerk, and Ed Rowland, a mechanic, received 15= year pins. Given a five -year pin was Deanna Skelton, who works in the Finance Department. Ms. Harris, the sole nominee for the council president, was . nominated by Councilwoman Doris Phelps. There was no discussion before the vote: • . • . . • • Outgoing Council President L.C. `Bud" Bohr- o. No. :w. a. ..r A to% 0%hait 1 rift soil FRES • WHOL (CUT -UP FF 58° LB REG. 79' FRESH GROUND E PIERCE PENNYWI; PO HYGRADE 1 LB. C .BRAUNSCH •0LD FAITHFUL, 4 LUNCHED FRESH - RUSHED STEAMER Tukwila its say. someone making an extra buck. ". - is usable. een irst- ible bout were ssed ed as nted road. ntion two Frost or m t the death, what deci- which — and e into t that show a y God, I can't in the agony . The penalty ysteni should wits a crime rvivors of the ould think of stie• e served in the S. • dence in the trial scheduled to get under way Jan. 10. • • Showed badges ' Maida instead referred to the prose( tion's affidavit of probable cause supporting the aggravated murder charge: i'n which Senior Deputy County Prosecutor Dennis • Nollette says the two policemen initially announced themselves as' polies officers " and later, at a point after the shoiiiiig began;' again said they were police officer's. and 'showed their badges. Outside the courtroom of Judge George T. Mattson, who will conduct Hughes' trial, Frost declined to discuss Hursh's statement, but said the officer's comments. about Hughes' request to see the officers: badges were made in the second of two statements Hursh made to authorities in connection with the Hicks slaying. ' Hursh said he could not discuss the.case. , . Hughes, in addition to the chacge:he faces` ' in the policeman's death, is accused of first degree murder of Sea -Tac -area rock musi- cian John T. Early during a robbery at Tukwila zoning goes to citizens By THERESA GIVNAN Staff Reporter • ' , . Whether Tukwila is ready for smaller lots in areas zoned residential will be a decision citizens will help decide. The City Council, at its meeting Monday -night, decided to table a proposed ordi- nance allowing "planned residential de- velopment "until a public hearing is conducted. • of it," he said. . The ordinance would allow developers tem deals with to 'deviate from the standard minimum .. y we have so . 7,200 square foot lot size in area zoned ter them. '.: • . residential,' said. Brad Collins, Tukwila • -alt with 'planning director: A developer, however, vorite pastime must make up whatever land he subtracts said. "I can't in lot size by providing /communi y- ,, , •; .:. , • ; owned , property in; the same neighbor- es • hood. ;chickler from a The community. -owned e, employees of • , • )n Newspapers •• of the man •who ob for the bogus ma th yee, who asked ' . i ?' , r. . , . . while evidence . Thomas.. Parks sect Schickler to he was the man' u est, n ; ,... At his request, funeral servioes'are ,,r scheduled for Thomas Edward Parks, 81, "she said; "butI who died Monday at his home. ' 'as the guy' saw 'Mr. Parks.was a resident of Renton. ed the ad didn't He was born, July 4,- 1901 in North curly.hair ;'she •. Dakota and, worked as a self - employed photo released carpenter most of his life. . :riffs Office. '. He is survived by a half-sister, Altabel- o asked that she le Foster, Van Nuys; Calif. , he saw Schickl- . •• °' r {;; I a familiarity to ung a positive wever, she also man who placed he guy" to her. that HICKS was a yam«.. _.____ _ . line of duty. Earlier this week, Mattson granted a defense motion' to' delete a section of the formal aggravated murder charge that said the defendant should have known Hicks was .a lawman. Frost said the ruling means the prosecution now will have to prove that Hughes knew that Hicks and Hursh were policemen. • Hughes escaped after 'the shootout with police, but was arrested after a two -day manhunt in the woods near Black Diamond. In the affidavit Nollette filed in court with the .Hicks murder charge, the deputy pro- secutor said the two policemen first spotted Hughes at the residence of his girlfriend, when Hughes got into a pickup truck driven by his brother. The girlfriend's son also was a passenger in the vehicle. - " ' Pump house • • Maleng testified that he considered those The policemen followed the truck in their possible mitigating factors, as set forth in . • car and 'when the occupants of the truck the state death penalty law, when he decided noticed' they were being followed, they to file the aggravated murder charge pulled into a driveway to a small pump house against Hughes. /21 q ' (i1- i..3 vu - CtY- - - ,9 2)'1idea— . be a swimming pool, park, natural setting or any other piece of land that would make the development, in the end, pro- vide no less than an aggregate 7,200 square feet to each home in the develop- ment. Councilman George Hill spoke against the ordinance, noting, "It goes against my grain." Hill said he wants to protect the • area zoned residential in the city,. and letting a developer have planned residen- tial development in "just one area is ..',"The combined annual budgets of the "like being just a.little bit pregnant."' : ' •..`. five largest jurisdictions in King County Council president L.C. "Bud" Bohrer . :total $1.6 billion..This is more than the voiced concern that a developer who has individual budget of 14 states," Greive's five acres — with two- and -a -half that' : handouts stated., • • • " aren't, suitable =• isn't going to get away ; Greive told the council he's not .out to developing as many homes on what's take away the power of individual cities, remaining as he would normally have to but rather to sniff out any movement to build on a total of five acres. Bohrer said ' combine such services as those offered he wouldn't like to see the developments by the 23 school districts, 35 fire districts count steep hillsides or other under -value ,'..'and 43 water districts in the county. <:.' h: n(r, 4.1 : . .,y:;;.�. ts. ^:..:o(;... .; r •:i•. % .� :.i r. t ri r r- � Renton Funeral Home was "•in "' Nov . '.12 , 1894 "in Denmark:Shecam charge of private cremation. •;. to Renton in 1908 and had lived here since • were and showed him their oaages. It then appeared to the officers that . ighes had run from the pump house to a- arby barn and Hicks was shot fatally when he moved from where he was standing near the pump house, Nollette said. Meanwhile Wednesday, Mattson ruled that Maleng did not abuse 'his discretionary' powers in deciding to seek the death penalty. Under state law, the murder of a police: officer is one of several aggravating cir- cumstances on which an aggrvated murder charge 'can be based. If a jury convicts Hughes of aggravated - first- degree murder, the same jury will decide — following a so- called "penalty phase" — whether there are any mitigating circumstances that prohibit the state from executing him. :r • • lan as community property. • . The council voted to have the Planning Department revise some language in the ordinance. • Paying a visit to the council meeting to discuss a proposal to consolidate King County and city services was County Councilman Bob Greive. He distributed literature that said there are 171 taxing jurisdictions in the county, exceeded nation -wide only by Cook County, Ill. a ' • • nnie C. Shearer - �-' • - .that • time. She was' a member of the `, Pythain Sisters Past Chiefs. Mrs. Shearer was the widow of the late Private �services are scheduled Fkiday •- ,,'...Mrs. . at the Stokes Mortuary. Chapel in Renton. ; �• Ernest Shearer,. who died in 1968. , .:• . for Annie C. Shearer, a longtime Renton .:;:•tjr: She, is survived by a son, Elmer Shearer •resident,`•who died . Tuesday at. Valley' '':of Renton two grandchildren; and three General Hospital. ; . ,, •i4.: ;.1 great grandchildren. • - She was 97. P.': ," >Interment will be at Mt. Olivet Cemet= , Mrs. Shearer, a resident of Renton, was'':.; e y in Renton. . • • f .�r�•�e,# : P2A . 6p a-R g e..ur P-u ec4 ud e. I tat, AL F,i dI44 , .e4)- 1.4444 11 , 3 itiwt. Xi..t, i 4 a .4i 44,..41 .4.12-o e44:41 pt4-e4.d uu. 4 . --' -L... P 4.0 s . _ ao . `IAL, . - Lt . -�. eedcr G..1..e..t.,t b.e.� ea-t / W.D.e4 Al . ` . 41-eal4.4.6d 4.4.4 ' , �, .._ .. fit .. o5n.. a 6- e.... .a V `1- I•v.t -- _.. ` . 4 t /1- 4-L1 PR6..__ ...... . im. 411.44-tti_ etz4W4.03 • 1 tiA4 - 44 t A .1 I I 1 M J: i 0.4„g4iffilt.411,14.41;, e4.3 `AL. Liapti-e-e14a.. TtLO ' f c. PIQ D .e_el.hALe, 18.46.100 Preapplication procedure. A preapplication conference between representatives of the city and the poten- tial applicant for a PRD is required prior to the acceptance of an application for PRD approval. This conference shall be set by the planning department at the written request of the potential applicant. All affected city departments shall be ,notified and invited to participate. The purpose of the preapplication conference is to acquaint the applicant with the provisions of this section as well as other ordinances and. regulations which would affect the property under con- sideration. (Ord. 1247 §1(part), 1982). • saLiuz) 4 ' 4 % - .-124;. y e - 1 4 4 0 4 .1 PAD . . _ 18.46.110 Application procedure for PRD approval. The following procedure is required for approval of the planned residential development: (1) All applications shall include'the following docu- ments: • (A) Vicinity map showing the location of the site and its relationship to surrounding areas, including the land use and zoning of both the site and•.the surrounding areas; (B) A map of the site drawn to a scale of not less than one inch representing one hundred feet showing the follow- ing: ( i) The existing site conditions including contours at five -foot intervals, watercourses, floodplains, unique natural features, and forest cover, ( ii) The location and floor area size of all existing and proposed buildings, structures, and other improvements including maximum heights, types of dwelling units, density per type, and nonresidential.structures, including com- mercial facilities, if any. Such drawings should be sufficient to convey the basic exterior architectural intent of the pro- posed improvements, . ( iii) The'location and size in acres or square feet of all areas to be conveyed, dedicated, or reserved as common open spaces, public parks, recreational areas, and similar public or semipublic uses, ( iv) The existing and proposed circulations system of arterial, collector, and local streets including off - street parking areas, service areas, loading areas, and major points of access to public rights -of -way. Notations of proposed ownership, private or public, should be included where appropriate, ( v) The existing and proposed pedestrian circu- lation system, ( vi) The existing and proposed utility systems including sanitary sewers, storm sewers, and water, electric, gas and telephone, ( vii) A landscape plan in general schematic form indicating treatment of open space and yards, (viii) The proposed treatment of the perimeter of the PRD, including materials and techniques used such as screens, fences and walls, ( ix) The proposed method of street lighting and ( x) The noise, energy efficiency, and general insulation characteristics of the proposed development; signing, (C) In addition to the graphic illustrations listed above., the applicant shall submit a written statement provid- I . ing the following information: ( i) Justification for the density bonus, re- } quested by the applicant, ( ii) Program for development including staging or j_ timing o f development, , L (iii) Proposed ownership pattern upon completion of the project, i ( iv) Basic content of any restrictive covenants, ( v) Provisions to assure permanence and mainte- nance of common open space through a home owners association, or similar association, condominium development or other means acceptable to the city; (D) An application for rezone may be submitted with the 'PRD application if rezoning is necessary for proposed density. Fees for rezone request shall be in addition to those of the PRD application; (E) An application for preliminary plat may be sub- mitted with the PRD application, if necessary. Fees for the subdivision shall be in addition to those of the PRD applica- tion. ( Filing of Application,, Application for approval of the PRD shall be made on forms prescribed by the planning department and which shall be accompanied'by a filing fee as _`__ rp�,iired _in Chapter 18.88. Lta P� 9m4414. ge-4..: j A4.4 AL azh .---__ --- P& ,...1.8 jisti .A1- L At• a .ce.Vi a-rt4 . ,sahisz7e .. .-14.4 P� . & Pt 4 4.4.�, pine. ,ma c zcoao4 .5 at/AJ ..►e, .4 A_ la A444.446 . . . , CIn�r u o.a1c•�n k 4J 4$1 01 .+. .,u e• �-+� � ,� 7 �" (3) Planning Commission Public Hearing. The planning commission shall hold at least one public hearing on the proposed PRD, and shall give notice thereof pursuant to Chapter 18.92 of this title. The public hearing shall not be held before completion of all necessary and appropriate review by city departments. This review shall be completed within a reasonable period of time. (4) Planning Commission: Recommendation. Following the public hearing, the planning commission shall make a report of its findings and recommendations with respect to the pro- posed PRO, and shall forward the report to the city council. Such report shall include but need not be limited to the following items: (A)• Suitability of the site area for the proposed development; (B Requirements of the subdivision code for the proposed development; (C) Reasons for density bonuses as listed in Section ' 18.46.080; (D) Adverse environmental impacts have been mitigated; (E) Compliance of the proposed PRD to the provisions of this chapter; (F) Time limitations, if any, for the entire develop- ment and specified stages; (G) Development in accordance with the comprehensive land use policy plan and other relevant plans; (H) Public purposes have been served by the proposed development._ Jpe c9 kult., earAA t,p■-n ,,mil 61 4.0 42A- A 444 .4. -, OA o . .c am . .... (5) City Council Public Hearing. After receipt of the planning commission report, the city council shall hold a public hearing on the proposed PRD as recommended by the plan- ning commission. The city council shall give approval, approva with modifications, or disapproval to the proposed PRD. (Ord. 1247 §1(part),, . 1982) . t ' - PCuAL.. Ltra -C u .c -fru- pt-0 14 p , 4 `fr►< 464.441. . dj P- 4.- PJ2Q a n d A l a . el 4i44-14k4 .1%.4.41 r 44-te el L i A t , ea ti4t t o as e tr i t P I ' 14- t' eA,1 .- Alt-e- et fr o-u ct pre. 74. a-9' . : t. - N - it ___W-at a fft4 -1K.. . 441 114LC4 p 6,-1 41Lot ,oubt4,-.- ems; ttli.ew 01,444,.. . qo . /44.4.4.1-4t-e_4_ Of et- 44.14.44:41 ft-4.41(.4 <-4:. . . . _ cati c- (2/4-k. .s .c -Q.t 44- a . ell 6 a ft A .. Pt 0 tot.... `mac._ . 0-44-44-4 4,4A-4-4 Ad 61 1 41 4 -e— 0-4Z 4 -1t-e4 _104tt- . _ j-A-tin .. C-444..5 tid-pL4-0.44.-T-.:- ::. 4 i2.4_44-+ids A . oJfu.., 4 shat IC. . c�: d = -M 4. cfk f -1+D n' 4I‘,. k11._c qty, b . 18.46.120 Application procedures for building permit. _ The following procedures are required for approval of construc- tion for the proposed planned residential development: (1) Time Limitation. A complete application for the initial building permit .shall be filed by the applicant within twelve months of the date on which the city council approved • the PRD. An extension of time for submitting an application may be requested in writing by the applicant, and an extension not exceeding six months may be granted by the city council. If application for the intiial building permit is not made within twleve months or within the time for which an exten- sion has been granted, the plan shall be considered abandoned, and the development of the property shall be subject to the requirements and limitations of the underlying zone and the subdivision code. (2) Application. Application for building permit shall be made on forms prescribed by the planning department and shall be accompanied by a fee as prescribed by the building code. (3) Documentation Required. A13. schematic plans either presented or required in the approved'PRD plans shall be included in the building permit application presented in — finalized, detailed form suitable for recording and engineer- ing. These plans shall include but are not limited to land- . scape, utility, open space, circulation, and site or subdi- vision plans. Final plats- and public dedication documents must be approved by the city council before the issuance of any building permits. (4) Sureties Required for Staging. If the PRD is to be developed in stages, sureties shall be required for the com- plete PRD. The various stagesCr parts of the PRD shall pro- vide the same proportion of open space and the same overall • dwelling unit density as provided in the final plan. (5) Planning Department Action. The planning depart- ment shall determine whether the project plans submitted with the building permit are in compliance with and carry out the objectives of the approved PRD. Following approval of the planning department, the city clerk shall file a copy of the approved plan with the official records of the city and . the originals shall be recorded with the King County depart- ' ment of records and elections. After all approvals, the official zoning map shall be amended to reflect the PRD by adding the suffix "PRD" to the designation of the underlying zone. (Ord. 1247 S1(part), 1982). 18.46.130 Minor and major adjustments. If minor adjust - ments or changes are proposed following the approval of the PRD, by the city council as provided in Section 18.46.120, • such adjustments shall be approved by the planning depart- ment prior to the issuance of a building permit. Minor adjust- ments are those which may affect the precise dimensions or siting of structures, but which do not affect the basic character or arrangement of structures approved in the final plan, or the density of the development or open space provided. Major adjustments are those which, as determined by the plan ning department, substantially change the basic design, density; open space, or other substantive requirement or provision. If the applicant wishes to make one or more major changes, a re- vised plan must be approved pursuant to Section 18.46.120. (Ord. 1247 §1(part), 1982). • 18.46.140 Expiration of time limits. Construction of improvements in the PRD shall begin within twelve months from the date of the filing of the final PRD plan by the city clerk as provided in Section 18.46.130. An extension of time for beginning construction may be requested in writing by the appli- cant, and such :extension not exceeding six months may be granted the planning commission upon showing of good cause. If construction does not occur within eighteen months from the date of filing of PRD plans by the city clerk, the PRD zoning suffix shall be dropped from the official zoning map and the zoning shall revert to the underlying designation. (Ord. 1247 S1(part), 1982). *ALA 1908 ti City of .ukwila ti January 24, 1983 DHARLENE WEST 5212 So. 164th • Tukwila, WA 98188 Dear Ms. West: 6200 Southcenter Boulevard " Tukwila Washington 98188 Gary L. VanDusen, Mayor In response to your questions of January 18,.1983,.I hope the following answers provide you with the information that is helpful. The underlined language in the draft ordinance indicates new language that is proposed .(except for Section headings which are underlined for easy identification purposes). Consequently, the R -2 through RMH dis- tricts are already "permitted districts." The height and yard regulations for all R -I zoning districts 7200 square foot to 20000 square foot minimum lots are identical. Hopefully the impression given to the citizens and the meaning of the height and yard regulations for PRD's was and is that height and yard regulations would be the same for R -1 residences whether a PRD process was followed or not. Regardless of underlying residential zoning districts from R -1 -20 to RMH, commercial uses are not. permitted for any of these zoning districts (except for individual professional offices in RMH only). In PRD's that are 10 . acres or greater commercial uses of a neighborhood convenience nature such as a grocery store, florist, or shoe repair business may be permitted if the City Council agrees that they are needed to serve the development. It is doubtful that any PRD's will be large enough: to. warrant such commercial services in Tukwila at this time. "Basic" density is computed by dividing the total available land area by the minimum square footage per each housing unit. Both Sections 18.46.060(1) and 18.46.070(2) mean that the "basic" PRD density cannot be more than the underlying zoning density. In R -1 districts there is no "bonus" PRD density for extraordinary public benefits. In R -2 to R} districts there may be a "bonus" PRD density increase up to 20% if. the City Council approves extraordinary public benefits. Consequently, in R -1 districts the PRD density cannot be more than the underlying zone, but in R -2 to RMH districts it could be if approved by the City Council. e -2- HARLENE WEST January 24, 1983 Sincerely, Gary Van Dusen Mayor GVD /BC /blk cc: Council President Harris Collins, Planning Director By adding City approval of restrictive covenants to the PRD review process, the other planning, subdivision, and building regulations must still be reviewed and approved before the PRD can be developed. Your impression is correct; each PRD must have City Council approval of size of each lot, placement of houses on the lots, sizes and designs of .the houses, street, lighting, sewers, storm drains, sidewalks, driveways, and expected use of the community grounds. Some of these reviews may be done more exten- sively by City staff, but all are approved by the City Council for each PRD. No changes have been made since the Monday, January 17th meeting, but the Council is considering the public input of that.hearing. If changes are made by the Council at subsequent meetings, you.will be. informed. Thank you for writing down your concerns.. We are able to respond to your written comments more completely and hopefully to your satisfaction. , 1 9 8 3 _._ 2 ! can dam w�- c� . -Q 6 4... __ : _ ✓4. � CITY OF TUKWILA t • 0 14 1A., , 4 +ts, o't ON EKDOLIM 6CU.CVAR► AN U2E :o sreaktr tone. 41 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL El MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL SERVICES RETAIL WHOLESALE D ISTR) BUT1 ON A PROCESS MANUFACTURING PARKS AND PUBLIC SERVICES ro AC. \ UNDEVELOPED 3 wt. F y I • • • I� J ►