HomeMy WebLinkAboutPermit L96-0083 - CITY OF TUKWILA - TRANSPORTATION AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENT ELEMENTSL96 -0083
TRANSPORTATION AND NATURAL ENVIRONMENT ELEMENT AMENDMENTS
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
(er4 0/3v)
April 28, 1997
8:55 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
OFFICIAL,
OLD BUSINESS
Award contract for TCC
Phase II construction
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL
Tukwila City Hall
Council Chambers
SPECIAL MEETING
MINUTES
Mayor Rants called the Special Meeting to order at 8:55 p.m.
JOE DUFFIE; JOAN HERNANDEZ; JIM HAGGERTON, Council President;
ALLEN EKBERG; STEVE MULLET; PAM CARTER; PAM LINDER.
JOHN MCFARLAND, City Administrator; BOB NOE, City Attorney; LUCY
LAUTERBACH, Council Analyst; DON WILLIAMS, Parks and Recreation
Director; STEVE LANCASTER, DCD Director; ROSS EARNST, Public
Works Director.
Mayor Rants explained that a motion was made at the April 21st Regular
Meeting and postponed until tonight's Special Meeting to allow adequate time
for Council to be provided additional information to assist in their decision of a
funding source and the total dollars needed to award the base contract and
alternates #1 & #3.
The motion under consideration: MOVED BY HAGGERTON, SECONDED
BY HERNANDEZ, TO AWARD THE CONTRACT FOR THE TUKWILA
COMMUNITY CENTER PHASE II CONSTRUCTION PROJECT TO GOLF
LANDSCAPING, INC., IN THE AMOUNT OF $389,331 WHICH
INCLUDES THE BASE BID, ADDITIVE ALTERNATIVES #1 AND #3,
AND 8.6% SALES TAX.*
Alan Doerschel, Finance Director, clarified that there are $70,000 in
unanticipated 1996 Real Estate Excise Tax revenues, plus an additional
$103,000 in unanticipated 1997 revenues. The 1996 revenues are within the
Estimated Beginning Fund Balance of the 301 Fund. Actual 1997 revenues so
far this year are $146,000 with only $160,000 estimated in the 301.317.340
revenue budget for the full year. If the 1996 additional revenues of $70,000
are combined with the additional anticipated 1997 revenues, there may be as
much as $173,000 to be utilized for TCC Phase II and/or other park and trail
projects.
*MOTION CARRIED (7 -0).
z
ice`
w`
re 2
6 D
-1 C..)
U O
co
Nw
w =:
CO IL-
w 0'
u-¢
ca
w,
z
1— O,
z
U a'
;O �'
0 H
w w`:
H-
- O.
• z:
N'
P. H
O
z
Special Meeting Minutes
April 28, 1997
Page 2
Award contract for TCC
Phase II construction
Consideration of Comprehensive Plan amendments COMPREHENSIVE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT
NEW BUSINESS
Authorization to apply
for CDBG Flood Relief
Funds
Doerschel said it should be pointed out that since there's a shortfall of
approximately $66,000 in the TCC Phase II account, the 301 Fund would be an
appropriate place to utilize funding to make up the shortfall. He cautioned
the Council, however, that out of the total $173,000, it may be necessary to
offset other revenue shortfalls such as sales tax.
MOVED BY HERNANDEZ, SECONDED BY EKBERG, TO MOVE
$66,000 FROM THE 301 FUND TO THE PHASE II COMMUNITY
CENTER ACCOUNT SO THAT ADDITIVE ALTERNATES NUMBER
ONE (SHELTER) AND NUMBER THREE (TWO COURTS) CAN BE
INCLUDED WITH THE AWARD OF THE BASE BID TO GOLF
LANDSCAPING, INC. MOTION CARRIED (7 -0).
II
DCD Director Steve Lancaster reiterated that the Council is charged with
deciding if a proposed amendment is consistent with the current
Comprehensive Plan policies, and whether it should be: 1) dropped from
further consideration; 2) deferred for one or more years; or, 3) forwarded
directly to the Planning Commission for further review. He said the Council is
not limited to the three options. They can take action on one or more tonight.
Others could be processed according to the Council's internal procedures. He
said if any of the amendments are rejected by Council, they could come back
before the Council upon reapplication. That reapplication could occur for
consideration either at the end of this year, a year from now, or any subsequent
year. It would be up to the applicant to decide whether to reapply or not.
It was the consensus of the Council to reject numbers 1, 2, 3, 5 and 6 of the
proposed Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code amendments, and forward number
4 - -- "Allow Senior Citizen Housing 50 & 100 units per acre in various
Comprehensive Plan designation" to the Community Affairs and Parks
Committee for further consideration.
Councilmember Mullet stated that this item had been discussed at the April
22nd Utilities Committee meeting and the Committee recommended a formal
motion authorizing application for grant funding.
MOVED BY MULLET, SECONDED BY DUFFIE, TO AUTHORIZE THE
MAYOR TO APPLY FOR CDBG SUPPLEMENTAL FLOOD RELIEF
FUNDS TO ASSIST IN THE REPAIRS OF THE 1995 -96 STORM -
RELATED DAMAGE TO THE SOUTHCENTER SOUTH GREEN RIVER
LEVEE SYSTEM. MOTION CARRIED (7 -0).
MISMEREgnnemmtl
t,.
• Special Meeting Minutes
April 28, 1997
Page 3
ADJOURN TO
EXECUTIVE SESSION
9:48 P.M.
ADJOURNMENT
10:14 P.M.
MOVED BY DU>,r1E, SECONDED BY HAGGERTON, TO ADJOURN TO
EXECUTIVE SESSION FOR 30 MINUTES TO ADDRESS A PENDING
LITIGATION ISSUE. MOTION CARRIED.
MOVED BY HAGGERTON, SECONDED BY HERNANDEZ, TO
ADJOURN THE MEETING. MOTION CARRIED.
John W. Rants, Mayor
Celia Square, Deputy City Clerk
•
t'
April 28, 1997
7:00 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
OFFICIALS
CITIZEN'S COMMENTS
SPECIAL ISSUES
Sound System orientation
Comprehensive Plan/
Zoning Code Amendments
TUKWILA CITY COUNCIL
Tukwila City Hall
Council Chambers
COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING
MINUTES
Council President Jim Haggerton called the Committee of The Whole Meeting
to order and led the audience in the Pledge of Allegiance.
JOE DUFFIE; JOAN HERNANDEZ; JIM HAGGERTON, Council President;
ALLEN EKBERG; STEVE MULLET; PAM CARTER; PAM LINDER.
JOHN MCFARLAND, City Administrator; BOB NOE, City Attorney; LUCY
LAUTERBACH, Council Analyst; DON WILLIAMS, Parks and Recreation
Director; STEVE LANCASTER, DCD Director; ROSS EARNSPublic
Works Director.
None.
Al Spencer, Internal Operations Manager, gave a brief summary of the
operating instructions on the Council Chambers microphones.
Steve Lancaster explained that the Council held a public meeting on April 7,
1997 and heard presentations from both staff and applicants. Many community
members commented on the proposals at that time. It is now within the
Council's purview on how to proceed from this point regarding further input
on the Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code amendments.
Councilmembers were in agreement that further public comments would be
welcomed as long as the comments were kept to a minimum.
Lancaster clarified that at this point in the process, the Council is charged with
deciding if a proposed amendment is consistent with the current
Comprehensive Plan policies, and whether it should be: 1) dropped from
further consideration; 2) deferred for one or more years; or, 3) forwarded
directly to the Planning Commission for further review.
In response to a question posed by Councilmember Hernandez, Lancaster
stated that the Council is not limited to the three options noted above. They
can take action on one or more tonight. Others could be processed according
to the Council's internal procedures, which would include referral to a
subcommittee of the Council. However, the Planning Commission must
review prior to the Council taking any final action to approve any of the
proposed amendments.
Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes
April 28, 1997
Page 2
Comp Plan Zoning
amendments (Cont'd)
Public comment
Public comments
Public comments
Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code amendment #1: Extend the current
building height exception area to permit potential development of up to 10
stories at 15820 Pacific Highway South
Michael Aippersbach, Post Office Box 95429, Seattle, Wa., 95429, commented
on behalf of Sterling Realty Organization (SRO -Lewis & Clark). He said his
client did not propose the building height exception area amendment without
consideration of the impacts of neighboring properties. Unfortunately, their
knowledge of the changes of the August 15, 1995 Draft Comprehensive Plan
did not surface until just before they were informed of the approaching
submittal deadline for proposed amendments to the adopted Plan. From that
point they simpl'y rushed to complete the submittal. He's requesting to have
the setback distance issue for structures above three stories discussed with the
Planning Commission. Placing the issue on the Planning Commission's
agenda simply allows a reasonable time period for discussions between SRO,
the neighbors and the Planning Commission before action is taken.
Council President Haggerton announced that two additional letters have been
received regarding the six proposed Comp Plan /Zoning Code amendments
since the last Council meeting: one from Secure Capital and the other from
Michael Aippersbach & Associates.
Kathy Solter, Property Manager, Sunnydale Apartments, main objections to
amendment #1 is the blockage of light to the apartments and condominiums..
She urged the Council to adhere to the staff recommendations and reject these
proposals.
Diane Rogel, 3810 South 158th Street (Laural Estates), said the proposals do
not reflect the spirit of the neighborhood.
Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code amendment #2: Change LDR (Low
Density Residential to MDR (Medium Density Residential) to construct a
32 -unit condominium project between Pacific Highway South and 40th
Avenue South at 38th Avenue extended.
Gary Greer, representing Secure Capital, Post Office Box 25127, Seattle, Wa.,
98125, commented that he still believes that a residential townhouse
condominium development is the best development solution for all involved.
Greer submitted modifications to his application that address most of the
concerns raised in the public meeting held on April 7th. He urge the Council
to forward his application with modifications to the Planning Commission.
• a.
Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes
April 28, 1997
Page 3
Comp Plan Zoning
Code amendments (Cont'd) Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code amendment #3: Establish MIC/L
(Manufacturing/Industrial Center - Light) for unzoned property at
No public comments intersection of E. Marginal Way and Interurban Avenue South.
No public•comments
Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code amendment #4: Allow Senior Citizen
Housing 50 & 100 units per acre in various Comprehensive Plan
designations.
Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code amendment #5: Amend certain
No public comments Transportation and Natural Environment policies per Puget Sound
l Regional Council recommendation.
Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code amendment #6: Clarify definition and
No public comments siting process for Essential Public Facilities.
It was the consensus of the Council to forward the proposed Comprehensive
Plan /Zoning Code amendments to the Special Meeting following tonight's
Committee of The Whole meeting.
Disposition of old Council President Haggerton pointed out the numerous meetings /discussions,
community center as chronicled in the agenda packet, that have been held regarding this issue.
.:%y. &Ya iAr av'; 9+.`b�,N;a,•: :b et t:'1.'e+bt9' 4+4AStaii.L M. fkita'a3u`fmifus6�l wr. ,�
City Administrator McFarland explained that the stipulation in the 99 -year .
ground lease with the South Central School District was that when the property
ceased to be part of public use, it would revert back to the District. Therefore,
as long as the City intends to use it for public purposes, it will remain in our
ownership for the duration of the 99 -year ground lease.
A discussion ensued with most of the councilmembers favoring a complete
demolition of the building while others suggested demolishing all except the
enclosed area of the gymnasium. Some Councilmembers thought it might be
feasible to open the four walls of the gym and use it as a covered shelter for
recreational purposes.
Council President Haggerton reminded the Council that this issue will also be
on the agenda for discussion at the joint Council /School Board meeting
scheduled for May 6th.
After a lengthy discussion, it was the consensus of the Council to have staff
provide them with rough parameters of costs associated with various options,
including total demolishing verses saving the gym portion of the old
community center.
z
iI-
Z
J0•
o O;
CO
w;.
J ='
CO u.
wO.
ga -.
u.
= a:
�w
2
z �.
1— o
z F--:
'0 H`
=-
- O_
w
Z`
0
0
z
Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes
April 28, 1997
Page 4
An ord. dissolving the Bd.
of Adjustment
REPORTS
Mayor
McFarland explained that the City has used the Board of Adjustment for many
years to hear certain appeals on land use issues rather than a hearing examiner,
which has been a more popular form of resolution of these disputes and
differences. However, he stated that the Board is currently non - operational due
to lack of a quorum. Only two members remain of the five positions that
constitute the Board. Additionally, the depth of complexity and range of
knowledge necessary to assess and rule on many of the above described
actions, create significant challenges to the Board in their deliberations. The
City's liability insurance carrier has strongly recommended the use of a
professionally trained hearing examiner to decide these matters, rather than a
volunteer citizen's board.
After a brief discussion, it was the consensus of the Council to forward the
ordinance dissolving the Board of Adjustment and creating the Office of
Hearing Examiner to the next Regular Meeting for further consideration.
Council President Haggerton requested that should the Council pass the
ordinance to dissolve the BOA, that a letter of appreciation be sent to the
current and previously retired Board of Adjustment members (and/or the
family of members, if it applies) expressing the City's gratitude for their many
years of dedicated service.
Mayor Rants reported that to date the City has handed out 857 dump passes
and the final count isn't in yet. Pacific Energy Institute handled the
recycling day at Foster for items such as refrigerators, tires and various other
rubbish. He said a total of 95.94 tons of materials were collected on that one
day for recycling.
Rants updated the Council that the Regional Task Force has outlined its
regional needs regarding the Green River basins. Some of the issues being
discussed are flooding, levees maintenance, habitat restoration, atilt habitat
acquisition.
Council Councilmember Duffie reported that Tukwila Elementary School raised 500
fish in their fish hatchery this year.
Duffie complimented the City's Police Department for responding so well in
the case of a recent incident where an attempt was made to abduct a Tukwila
Elementary School student.
Councilmember Hernandez reported she attended the Foster Community Club
meeting on Wednesday, April 23rd. King County Councilmember Dwight
Pelz was scheduled to make an appearance at this meeting but was unable to do
z
�w
6
JU:
U0. •
coal
w i1
N
.w0.
g Q`
w;
z ►- .
z
• w w:.
2 D1
UU
;O -:.
o�:
w ur
II 1--U
V_
— O.
w z,
U U);
z
Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes
April 28, 1997
Page 5
Reports (Cont'd) so. Warren Wing was present, however, and gave a very interesting slide
presentation on the ferry system.
Hernandez attended the Economic Development Advisory Council meeting on
Thursday, April 23th; the DARE graduation program at Foster High School on
Friday, April 25th; and she attended a festival held at Southcenter, sponsored
by the Ethnic Heritage Council on Saturday, April 26th.
Council President Haggerton reported he attended a special meeting of ACC
on Wednesday, April 23rd; the Economic Development Advisory Council on
Thursday, April 24th; the DARE graduation program at Foster High School on
Friday, April 25th. He attended the South Central School District Strategic
Planning meeting on Friday and Saturday, April 25th & 26th. He said the five -
year plan will be finalized after the next two planning sessions, which will
culminate in a graduation.
Councilmember Mullet reported that he also attended the Foster Community
Club meeting on Wednesday, April 23rd and concurs with Hernandez that the
slide presentation on the ferry system was very interesting. He said he also
attended various other meetings.
Councilmember Carter on Thursday, April 24th, there was an ad hoc group
meeting to review the RFP's that came in for the non - representatives salary
study. The group selected two from the list. Those two will be brought before
the May 5th Council.
Councilmember Linder reported she attended the Metropolitan King County
Council Commerce Trade and Economic Development Committee meeting on
Thursday, April 24, where the Boeing /King County Airport issues were
discussed.
Carter announced that the Showalter Culture Fair will be held Wednesday,
April 23, 6:30 - 8:00 p.m.. Young Author's Day is Friday, April 25th at all
three elementary schools - -a day -long celebration of writing and creativity. A
SKCATBd meeting is scheduled for June 17, 9:00 - 11:00 a.m. at the WSDOT
building in Kent.
Haggerton announced that he will be attending the AWC Annual Conference
June 18 - 21, and encouraged other councilmembers to contact him if they are
interested in going.
z
i •
re 2
J U;
U O
Nw
w z:
J
U-
w 0'
u- <
21 a`.
w
z�
o:
Z I;
� o
oN
w
I=- U
N—0
O H'
z.
Committee of The Whole Meeting Minutes
April 28, 1997
Page 6
ADJOURN TO THE
SPECIAL MEETING
8:44 P.M.
MOVED BY HAGGERTON, SECONDED BY HERNANDEZ, TO RECESS
FOR FIVE MINUTES THEN RECONVENE TO A SPECIAL MEETING.
MOTION CARRIED.
Jim Haggerton, Council President
Celia Square, Deputy City Clerk
+x1 ^ ^•: ": a.•••� ..nu.ZY.�:adtit'�.Y'.� 3i'v.aClerdnnL::iY.iNS.i:w +liourd.a;nlhu:::i:itA : w. . ,. .yv.:r�.ly •,. ... .. • ••°. •
}
•
City of Tukwila
John W. Rants, Mayor
MEETING DATE:
NOTIFICATION:
REQUESTS:
Department of Community Development Steve Lancaster, Director
STAFF REPORT
TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Prepared March 5, 1997
March 24, 1997
Notice of Public Open House and Public Meeting
Distributed February 21, 1997
Comprehensive Plan /Zoning Code amendments:
I) Extend the current Building Height Exception area to permit potential
development of up to 10 stories at 15820 Pacific Highway South
(Attachment A);
2) Change LDR (Low Density Residential) to MDR (Medium Density
Residential) to construct a 32 -unit condominium project between Pacific
Highway S. and 40th Ave. S. at 38th Ave. extended (Attachment B);
3) Establish MIC /L (Mahufacturing/Industrial Center - Light) for unzoned
property at intersection of E. Marginal Way and Interurban Ave. S
(Attachment C);
4) Allow Senior Citizen Housing 50 & 100 units per acre in various
Comprehensive Plan designations (Attachment D);
5) Amend certain Transportation and Natural Environment policies per Puget
Sound Regional Council recommendation (Attachment E);
6) Clarify definition and siting process for Essential Public Facilities
(Attachment F).
SEPA
DETERMINATION: No SEPA determination is required at this time. SEPA
environmental review will be conducted at a later date for
those amendments which Council forwards to the Planning
Commission.
STAFF:
ATTACHMENTS:
Rebecca Fox
A. L96 -0088 - Building Height Exception
B. L96 -0086 - Comprehensive Plan Amendment LDR to MDR
C L96 -0075 - Establish MIC /L •
D L96 -0082 - Senior Housing
E. L96 -0083 - Transportation/Natural Environment
F. L96 -0085 - Essential Public Facilities
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Suite #100 • Tukwila, Washington 98188 • (206) 431-3670 • Fax (206) 431-3665
Staff Report to the Page E -1
City Council
FILE NUMBER: L96 -0083
APPLICANT: City of Tukwila
REQUEST: Amend Transportation and Natural Environment Policies per
Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC) Consistency Review.
DISCUSSION
The proposed amendments have been introduced as a result of a "Transportation
Consistency Review" by the Puget Sound Regional Council (PSRC). The PSRC is
responsible for ensuring regional coordination of transportation plans and evaluating
project funding proposals for consistency with regional transportation plans. Tukwila's
Transportation policies were approved by the PSRC with the understanding that certain
Comprehensive Plan amendments would be proposed to the City Council. (Exhibit E -1)
The proposed amendments can be grouped into three types:
• Transportation Background Clarification
• Transportation Policy Amendments
• Natural Environment Air Quality Amendments.
The complete text of the proposed amendments is found in the application ( Exhibit E -2).
Significance/Consistency with Comprehensive Plan
The Transportation Element background provisions simply articulate several specific
actions and relationships which were used in developing policies for the Comprehensive
Plan. These relationships were described in the Comprehensive Plan EIS. Using a strong
linkage between land use and transportation system planning is specifically required in
the Growth Management Act. The proposed amendments are either explanations of the
Comprehensive Plan development process, or explicit policy directions which are
supported by combinations of other goals and policies.
Impacts
The proposed amendments have no identified impact. They codify in the Comprehensive
Plan Tukwila's willingness to conform with applicable federal, State and regional
transportation and air quality standards.
Alternatives
The City Council's threshold alternatives include the following:
• reject the proposal;
e.ar.g.t1 r. •C:.�^�^x"i,•Iau:+'isa 1SFiu:hay. y?.3'. 4ic3:s..me,.4.1,, m. v., 9
•••w .•• nt•.,rA. +wrF6:iY�[1':kdeet �u.YdawxY vFw% oeeR�: LY.l wl aV[ 1: k40Yi:44iNuLwrii�.C✓rif+e. wwtx.M e...4N w.esi:•+�w •• wennftd
•
Staff Report to the
City Council
• defer consideration until a later time;
• refer the proposal to the Planning Commission.
Page E -2
If the proposal is referred to the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission may
want to consider the following alternatives.
1) Take no action.
2) Adopt selected amendments
��`.Lr$:l ie'.:<., ......:.1.3.7:2:.`r::.i;�'. �n se{; ��ta�' tf.; ��` jj{ �} ::r5.'t1fiL"AP��HSE4;eis::Y��x �SQSrS ..� °1V:f:i;, se'L`aS�eri:d1::: ,.-. c.:tz •���:.. w...
.2ri:t1zieLf .an: *.a reserik:.r::_ +.�. ruses ri 'MO
CITY 01- TUKWILA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670
EXHIBIT E -1
(P -CPA)
). P4,
Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code
Amendment . Application
.tAe£�.4- >.:. :t£r; ✓., 01:,:4 ",i �.:yi ::: ,.y, -, "- ,,041:v.; 1P".,3d° •e °:�,Y %' ^.'?•5•.•'. .
... fi...,, .,i. "..�w : G; r<n.. s4< . ..),P.., '` ,.r>^.�S•i i'V" :L.. a ., Ft ,l '•. =l ...,>':a >,'' ,:•x � .,V,K =.2' j_f .• h i:'1E... t:..r .
�.2�.� �F.OR:`S:TAF,' FUSE Y.':�::;. �:. ;• ,,F�� �, „ a:))_::�: •,.�:`.�..���. ..'
f`Z'..,.'....,•:,...,w::::::;:,• £. .:?':q.... >r . ............. .... ... . ".' ..., .y'i^"..e•J;a�iis. F..'S..h> >..: wy.; %is x i e ... ... .rY.'1:R:t• °u.♦, .:( >?.7- :...co. {2:ei:+: „,Y., },:...,,.... ... ....
•
•.%i::i^ .f.'•' .•6' :•ho . .. .-t .:£a'.':,.♦ .,,.:q ..F.;j
.i; Vey "a, i:'r{, ! .�•!..�ai ..S:A,• ''KL' of In ''++i.''M�j 'ir '
•::l >< �'+Mvf£y:��y .. IN.e �. . "i:. !A,. s.° °t Y,..��.
,.,.fi" :,t ::..✓:: f,Se> S. . +p4 • -x.eyf.. > ..- Y,.. ..%:
'.:.x:L .avtliik' Ems. i'�2:::���.�.'�%.ir+ ". 1.:. a.:4...Y •:Ze<••c.
P, fanner::,., . ,:. P : •At.1 �re :.�< .>,:. •. r ',i:: :x
..•a, •Y.:: r,•"A.• ..Isi ,f +, ;::'K:.`.t •?�3 �^"
°A.t ^«c . a'I&i{ % Yf' e.. ac? S.r�.w.x:4:.•f<t,+'�5- ..,.;,!!. ~. H.:iLb'i...i.G=
...(:»
:.f�i ::�. ., yf,;:: :.:Y
"�fi�':......'♦ ,y.
.il
t? «�ra�' �R
Eie Numtier. ' '''',..:
':i •
=... .. .. rci::. ((�,.:.. N:i; >:.. ,...
'.r' • "f` ":�':i.,..
{
y, f'i'% : >
�Y= % "y;:.,.�y...a...;y.,.
... .. Y�t,..::i;sng.. ::;:•
'"fk,.. -4.,, 5<y,� •:: •. �%aG :.t' iA'' IiYa .I : •:iS ...;_s:.;GJ
+ ",x. .. s. :7S+," +.ro ♦ S�}'s::55^^' ,...,L. �;c .� „f,r„a"4� +. �...
Y•f .:.)AxT,.> .:.T.•G. Sono ;G <r> :mow: SH!:M . <L:f. i. i!W .: :: i.:i1i 3'+`y°
.d:. ;•:yt's,�bi . '''I i4. <c >" ' 'i,i,�b K•n.$v: ....yw .. •! , dl�.yf:+w<.x, ^k
.`T ^... .LUt :.k ..YS•i`• '..Y+vITy�; <f'[': w.`,iT..
i@Cel t lJR1i}eC... oi...dr, t :, ' -,. .:
N
' ♦. .., ♦ < .•..f ... .. ,,. • w...:� :�:'�:. .. ..k>�>. >�a + '�i:.,s a° Li�i :.Yar..'E'�u.!4v /..iLk:4�Si:... .<. ::.'1!+ZN5�.3
• v�..N
^: ' <.
',.•.. ..0 ect.Fie" :'
:i.�.. .....' 1'
If,� yF:.: .�:k /•...,). >� y
^F` %' „. ': +.%.•.`.....�.,i
<: ,,y..::?�J L• ti "•`''',-gr.:, •'•ii•.r
0 >' M k' .£. i +'6y .: • .
��'�•.,::. .ei li •=!R <:.'>n�1t. -gr.:, :...:�• %��:••.:
3:: :: ..
.. ii� {p �:,.. I. � ��i� � ♦.<....... .:F..
.. >Y e; : r..t b v L ' Y N. w
: i A:fiv, y Rx t
£.t,
.f Y:
� SPA Fife :
Y,`j: iY•t.. .: is ;; ,w �£r
9z!, f!
.v� ., ^ "i, n i> :: ;^ l.
� :Yn fi t` ,rr •.
r 1P Xb i M wf
4 , s� • Jt r,.::,-,4,..,1 ;- SY • %<.:'.•.' f•
{ Applic colete Dte�^ u''' $''' :
. .. .
`,.. -'.'•. • :;t:exQ rr:^ . ..tL`.. h�� ..:St'..a. •.. :', ?. !.?713,,s' • Q iicatio tr x fRn , R,.� . � •,, =r k .
pp n'incomplete °(Date � �� :��'- f��a����'rv�«��: }:
L PROJECT /PROPOSAL BACKGROUND
A. NAME OF PROJECT /PROPOSAL: i 2,AvAlSPO27217 -oAt /V470/ 4 C eT/ vf20A/ Enl7
67, --Cm e-', `r A M 614
B. LOCATION OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT:
CITY
N. A
STREET ADDRESS:
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
Quarter: Section: Township: Range: (This information may be found on your tax statement)
c. CONTACT: (Primary contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent)
NAME:
ADDRESS:
PHONE
SIGNATURE: DATE:
Z
W
ce
6
00
O.
WW:
J H
W
J
u.¢
= a.
F- w
Z�:
I— o:
ZI-
W
U�
0 N.
H
w w'
X—
Z.
Uj
0 W`
i _
O t`
Z
-D. PROPERTY OWNER DECLARATION IVA a Cr C
Pol./CY Aa-feArbm6w,j
The undersigned makes the following statements based upon personal knowledge:
1. I am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application.
2. All statements contained in the application are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge.
3. The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent.
4. I understand that conditions of approval, which the City and applicant have jointly agreed
may not be completed prior to final approval of the construction (e.g., final building permit
approval) will be incorporated into an agreement to be executed and recorded against the
property prior to issuance of any construction permits.
declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington and the United
States of America that the foregoing statement is true and correct.
EXECUTED at (city), (state), on
, 199
(Print Name)
(Address)
(Phone Number)
(Signature)
Use additional sheets as needed for all property owner signatures.
E. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: EXISTING:
. 5:Enr ArrA C 4
PROPOSED'
. ZONING DESIGNATION: EXISTING: I((v '/C
PROPOSED: /VC A/
3/96
G. LAND USE(S): NiA EXISTING:
PROPOSED:
(for proposed changes in land use designations or rezones)
H. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL: (attach additional sheets if necessary) SQL
1}TTA T 4.
I. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING LAND USES: Describe the existing uses located within 1,000
feet in all directions from the property or area for which a change is proposed.
/(A
II. IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CHANGE
A. IMPACTS) OF PROPOSED CHANGE ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Describe potential adverse impacts of
the proposed change on surrounding geographic area, such as affects on land use designations and zoning
of surrounding properties, adjacent natural features or systems, or public utilities or streets. (A summary of
impacts addressed in SEPA checklist is acceptable.) Attach separate sheet(s) with response. ivA
B. NON - CONFORMING USES CREATED: Describe any existing uses that are likely to become non - conforming
under the proposed land use /zoning designation.
U?! A /l\! o ff G
C. IMPACT(S) OF PROPOSED CHANGE ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POUCIES, ZONING REGULATIONS AND CITY'S
., .,..,.mT ,,..w .6«,Tr..,BMWM?,1n
3
Z
HZ
rew
D
J0
0O
W =.
N LL
w O.
2
u_
= w
Z
F— O
Z 1-
w
2 • p,
O =,
0 I-
ww
H• U
IL Z
U N'.
F-
OH
Z
FUNCTIONAL PLANS: Identify' .. ": Comprehensive Plan policies and -_._., 7."'"' regulations and how your
proposal affects them. Identity a, y functional plans affected by the propvsa, (e.g. Storm and Surface Water
Plan, Shoreline Master Program, Parks and Open Space Plan) and what changes would be required in those
plans if the proposed amendment were approved. Attach separate sheet(s) with response. Azaavi
D. IMPACT(S) OF PROPOSED CHANGE ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN: Describe any capital improvements
that would be needed to support the proposed amendment, and what changes would be required in the
City's Capital Improvements Plan. Attach separate sheet(s) with response. /i„dti' - pokA�SGrLrM.
E. DEFICIENCIES IN EXISTING PLAN/CODE RESOLVED BY THE PROPOSAL: Explain why the current
Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code is deficient or why it should not continue. Be specific; cite policy
numbers and code sections that apply. Attach separate sheet(s) with response. .5-6--g- ATTAC q &,
F. COMPLIANCE OF THE PROPOSAL WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT: Describe how the proposed change
complies with and promotes the goals and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act. Attach
separate sheet(s) with response. S-6-4,-- ATTACi , 7. .
G. OTHER ISSUES PRESENTED BY THE PROPOSED CHANGE: Describe any other issues that are important to
consider in the proposal, such as other changes in City codes that would be required, other City - adopted
plans affected, environmental or economic issues. (Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary).
Mo Aft'
H. ALTERNATIVES TO PROPOSED CHANGE: (A summary of alternatives addressed in the project's SEPA
checklist is acceptable.) Attach separate sheet(s) with response. _s--f- A r'Ti4 C f f g .
III. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ZONING CODE AMENDMENT CRITERIA
The burden of proof in demonstrating that a change to the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code is warranted
lies solely upon the proponent. The greater the degree of change proposed, the greater will be the burden of
showing that the change is justified. The Planning Commission and the City Council will review your proposal
using the criteria listed below. It is essential that you describe in a clear and precise manner why the
amendment request should be approved. Attach additional sheet(s) with your responses to each criterion.
You4grlay submit other documentation in support of your proposal.
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA: S A-1-7� C
Demonstrate how each of the following circumstances justifies a re- designation of your property
or a change in existing Plan policies:
1. A detailed statement of what is proposed and why;
2. A statement of the anticipated impacts of the change, including the geographic area
affected and the issues presented by the proposed change;
3. An explanation of why the current comprehensive plan or development regulations
are deficient or should not continue in effect;
4. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with and promotes the goals
and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act;
5. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with applicable Countywide
Planning Policies;
4
6. A statement of N '. 'hanges, if any, would be required in- ft,,-- tional plans (i.e., the
City's water, se.. , ..torm water or shoreline plans) if tt, ,Dosed amendment is
adopted;
7 A statement of what capital improvements, if any, would be needed to support the
proposed change, and how the proposed change will affect the capital facilities plans
of the City; and
8. A statement of what other changes, if any, are required in other City codes, plans or
regulations to implement the proposed change.
B. ZONING AMENDMENT CRITERIA:
Demonstrate how each of the each following circumstances justifies a rezone of your property or
a change in the existing Zoning Code:
1. The use or change in zoning requested shall be in conformity with the adopted
Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan, the provisions of this title, and the public
interest;
2. The use or change in zoning requested in the zoning map or this title for the
establishment of commercial, industrial, or residential use shall be supported by an
architectural site plan showing the proposed development and its relationship to
surrounding areas as set forth in the application form.
z
•
•
- 2;
OOH
;co W,
,w =
J H;
N LL
w o;
= a
• 17 w`
• _w w,
0 1-
• = w+
Oi
Cr •
•
ui zR .
.V
•Z
NA
• CITY tai- 'TUKWILA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670
Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code Amendment
Application Checklist
The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing
by the Department. Please contact the Department if you feel certain items are not applicable to your
project and should be waived. Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete.
The initial application materials allow starting project review and vesting the applicant's rights. However,
they in no way limit the City's ability to require additional information as needed to establish consistency
with development standards.
Department staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206 -431 -3670.
APPLICATION FORMS:
�,/ Application Checklist (1 copy), indicating items submitted with application
Li Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code Amendment Application (12 copies)
❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment Fee ($700)
Zoning Code Amendment Fee ($700)
PLANS [Twelve (12) copies of the following]:
P ❑ Vicinity map showing location of the site.
Cr r`t-
For proposed changes to land use designations or rezones, also include the following:
t4 A ❑ Site plan at a scale of 1"=20' or 1'1=30', with north arrow, graphic scale, and date; and the
license stamp of the architect and landscape architect. The following information must be
contained on the plan:
O Property lines and dimensions, lot size(s) and names of adjacent streets
O Location and gross floor area of existing and proposed structures with setbacks
O Location of driveways, parking, loading, and service areas, with parking calculations
and location and type of dumpster /recycling area screening
O Location and classification of any watercourses or wetlands, limit of 200' Shoreline
Overlay District
O Existing and proposed grades at min. 5' contours, extending at least 5' beyond the
site's boundaries, with a notation of the slope of areas in excess of 20 %. Air
topography data from the Public Works Department may be used if reasonably
accurate
3/96
z
6
_i O
oO'
co 0
co w ,
J ='
0) w
w O'
�a
CO
I
▪ _
M.
z�
F- O
z1
• UJ
O N.
o r-.
tu = U
LL �- _ z
0
z
O Other relevant-" Lures or features, such as rockerir- �'nces
O Location of closaL existing fire hydrant; location /type lines; description of water
and sewer availability
O Location and dimensions of existing and proposed easements and dedications (e.g.
open space, streets, sidewalks or utilities)
O Development area coverage (max. allowable = 50 %) for multi - family proposals.
✓LJ APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO AMENDMENT/REZONE CRITERIA, IMPACTS & z
ALTERNATIVES (See Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code Amendment Application) x Z;
Sear Ar ?AGft. ', re 6u
oqc ❑ OTHER MATERIALS -1 �.
Other documentation in support of the proposal may be included as appropriate, such as studies w o
or recommendations that support the proposed change, color renderings, economic analyses, ' w =,
photos or materials sample board. If other materials are to be considered with the application, N u.
twelve (12) copies of each must be submitted (except materials sample board). Color drawings w 0
or photos may be submitted as 8.5 x 11 -inch color photocopies. 2 •
u_Q
° °
= d,
_'
Z 1-:
f- o':
111 111:
D °;
❑ Two (2) sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (businesses and residents) o -
within 500 feet of the subject roe (Note: Each unit in multi le -famil buildings--e.g. ° ~
1 P P rtY• ( P Y IWw
apartments, condos, trailer parks- -must be included.) See Attachment A.
C3 4' x 4' public notice board will be required on site within 14 days of filing a complete application. Cu N
U
F= x'
017
z
PUBLIC NOTICE:
❑ King County Assessor's map(s) which shows the location of each property within 500 feet of the
subject property (see attached "Address Label Requirements ").
See Attachment B.
a.ti!+vke... ai�ssilowinalkEraccwc4uis' •
ATTACHMENT A
Attached are proposed amendments to the Transportation Element
and Natural Environment Element of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land
Use Plan. All amendments are additional language which are
underlined. No text is proposed to be deleted.
:.','.,`i:e��'wt.:S::7;:L' ti:;:�t� S:::at;:eua�kx:S'Sr..ti.'.M:.. .`.•�."�r.5n.:�ii:!::3�.. -'"•` ^ inn,• �•:.): yiuxi;' s.^. 'duti:awL•s;..i.A.°i';riA�iP:�:t� _ h(.". n�- a.:.:;` i- nxv��:.: mc• ,n+s11_.fs:�.t,rm,::en::x:xrsi: �ea�^�✓au r1.- ■w.:.i•
TRANSPORTATION
PURPOSE
The Transportation Element establishes Tukwila's transportation
goals and policies for the 20 -year planning period. It provides direction for
transportation decisions regarding annual plan updates (including
the six -year Transportation Improvement Plan, the six -year Capital Improvement
Plan, and the annual budget), development review and approval, land use and
zoning decisions, and continuing transportation programs. It establishes a basis
for decision making that is consistent with Washington's Growth Management
Act requirements and assures concurrence with other agencies.
This background section summarizes and supplements the information
presented in the "Transportation Element Background Report" and reflects
further information presented at various public hearings. The subsequent goals
and policies are based on this information and Tukwila's City and regional
responsibility.
Tukwila's future traffic levels were largely projected based on "TMODEL2 ". This
software model incorporated land use Zoning: trip generation estimates from the
"Trip Generation Manual" for various uses (Institute of Traffic Engineers. 1989).
regional traffic levels from the PSRC and King County .and several
interjurisdictional technical working groups. These projections were also •
coordinated with the population and employment levels in the King County
County -wide Planning Policies to ensure adequate infrastructure support. The
model has been selectively updated in special studies. the latest being in 1992.
Growth scenarios are used in this element to project traffic volumes and levels of
service in order to develop the proposed level -of- service (LOS) standards and
determine the improvements needed to maintain capacity. "Level -of- service"
defines an established minimum capacity of public facilities or services; in
transportation, a grading system from A (best) to F (worst) has typically been
used (Figure 38). The City of Tukwila also uses an expanded level of service to
LOS J. for the purpose of quantifying intersection congestion below LOS F,
LEVEL OF SERVICE
z
U O`
0
w z'
J f..,
w0
u-<.
=d
1- u
Z
� 0'.
Z I-
LL/ Lu
C'
= U;
_z
U U;
z
Intersection
Average Delay
Volume/
Capacity Ratio
LOS A
<7.5 seconds
up to 0.6
LOS B
7.5 -15 seconds
0.6 - 0.7
LOS C
15.1 - 25 seconds
0.7 - 0.8
z
U O`
0
w z'
J f..,
w0
u-<.
=d
1- u
Z
� 0'.
Z I-
LL/ Lu
C'
= U;
_z
U U;
z
TRANSPORTATION
PURPOSE
The Transportation Element establishes Tukwila's transportation
goals and policies for the 20 -year planning period. It provides direction for
transportation decisions regarding annual plan updates (including
the six -year Transportation Improvement Plan, the six -year Capital Improvement
Plan, and the annual budget), development review and approval, land use and
zoning decisions, and continuing transportation programs. It establishes a basis
for decision making that is consistent with Washington's Growth Management
Act requirements and assures concurrence with other agencies.
This background section summarizes and supplements the information
presented in the "Transportation Element Background Report" and reflects
further information presented at various public hearings. The subsequent goals
and policies are based on this information and Tukwila's City and regional
responsibility.
Tukwila's future traffic levels were largely projected based on "TMODEL2 ". This
software model incorporated land use Zoning. trip generation estimates from the
"Trip Generation Manual" for various uses (Institute of Traffic Engineers. 1989).
regional traffic levels from the PSRC and King County .and several
interjurisdictional technical working groups. These projections were also
coordinated with the population and employment levels in the King County
County -wide Planning Policies to ensure adequate infrastructure support. The
model has been selectively updated in special studies. the latest being in 1992.
Growth scenarios are used in this element to project traffic volumes and levels of
service in order to develop the proposed level -of- service (LOS) standards and
determine the improvements needed to maintain capacity. "Level -of- service"
defines an established minimum capacity of public facilities or services; in
transportation, a grading system from A (best) to F (worst) has typically been
used (Figure 38). The City of Tukwila also uses an expanded level of service to
LOS J. for the purpose of quantifying intersection congestion below LOS F.
LEVEL OF SERVICE
gy/yte{YY�::y�.SM. i= y�NY MA' fAiJX: M. I�WUM1RG K.N.;e�a+.w.s...wa_.,._.
z
w.
Et
U'
0 0'
ND'
W (0=
J H
u-
w0
ga
CO P
1w
2
Z
I- 0.
Z F-`
0 r-:
w:
z
H V
z.
w
0 ~`
z
Intersection
Average Delay
Volume/
Capacity Ratio
LOS A
<7.5 seconds
up to 0.6
LOS B
7.5 - 15 seconds
0.6 - 0.7
LOS C
15.1 - 25 seconds
0.7 - 0.8
gy/yte{YY�::y�.SM. i= y�NY MA' fAiJX: M. I�WUM1RG K.N.;e�a+.w.s...wa_.,._.
z
w.
Et
U'
0 0'
ND'
W (0=
J H
u-
w0
ga
CO P
1w
2
Z
I- 0.
Z F-`
0 r-:
w:
z
H V
z.
w
0 ~`
z
LOS D
25.1 - 40 seconds
0.8 - 0.9
LOS E
40.1 - 60 seconds
0.9 -1.0
LOS F
>60 seconds
Greater than 1.0
Figure 38 — Level of Service Standards
ISSUES
Tukwila's transportation system includes freeways, arterial streets, access
streets, transit service, sidewalks, trails, and neighborhood footpaths. In
addition, Boeing Field provides air transportation for a combination of primarily
general and business aviation. The Duwamish River provides water access to
Elliott Bay and beyond. Significant commercial freight transportation is provided
by trucking and railroads throughout the City.
Streets and Highways
Tukwila's road system has been developed in coordination with various regional
working groups. City traffic models always incorporating existing and projected
regional traffic volumes. Coordination includes. but are not limited to working
with the South County Area Transportation Board and consistency with the
regionally developed Transportation Improvement Plan.
There are four classes of streets: principal arterials, minor arterials, collector
arterials, and access streets. These four classes of street were developed in
recognition of a transition in street use from strictly access to properties to pure
mobility. The differences result in different street widths, access control, speed
limit, traffic controls, and other similar design and operation features. (Figures
38 and 39)
• FUNCTIONAL STREET SYSTEM STANDARDS
(Standards below are typical; see current City codes for actual standards)
Right of Way
Curb -to -Curb
Typical
Speed Limit
Access Streets
50 to 60 ft.
28 to 36 ft.
25 mph
Connect to
Collector Arterials
60 ft.
36 to 40 ft.
30 mph
Connect to
Minor Arterials
60 - 80 ft.
36 to 48 ft
30 to 35 mph
Figure 39 - Functional Street System Standards
Access streets in residential areas are not projected to experience LOS
problems to the year 2010. However, the occasional problem of "too much traffic
too fast" can occur and measures to address safety and access would be
determined based on studies and measures to reduce the volumes and speed.
The Tukwila Urban Center and principal arterial corridors are being monitored to
assure that the desired average LOS is maintained. This approach is
recommended by the King County Transportation LOS Committee. Tukwila's
modeling work has identified a number of improvements that would maintain an
average LOS E for the Tukwila Urban Center, East Marginal Way, Interurban
Avenue South, West Valley Highway, and Pacific Highway.
~w
6
JU.
00
N 0
WIll
.
w o.
g Q
= a..
w
The City maintains a current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) identifying current z 1._
moo;
system deficiencies and plans for improvements to address those deficiencies. z 1-
That CIP is adopted by reference as part of this Plan. Additional data on traffic 2 La
forecasts and present and future levels of service is included in the N
Transportation Element and the Traffic Efficiencies Study. ;o
uj
The City plans to provide the necessary funding capacity to provide all necessary �;
improvements to service the development anticipated in this Plan. In the event o
of a funding shortfall, the City will re- evaluate planned land uses to assure
continuing concurrency with transportation system improvements, and the
funding alternatives. o
Transit
Six Metro transit routes serve Tukwila, providing service that is predominantly
north- south. Recommended transit improvements center around providing
additional east -west service, a commuter rail connection, regional rapid rail
service, a charter bus or rail alignment in the Interstate 405 corridor, expanded
ridesharing, and expansion of Dial -a -Ride service into the Tukwila area. A
Personal Rapid Transit system of separate, fixed- guideway vehicles carrying up
to three persons has also been considered, and a multimodal center serving
virtually all transportation and transit modes is being contemplated for the
Interstate 405 -West Valley interchange.
An inventory of present transit routes is contained in the Transportation Element
Background Report. Changes to routes are controlled by King County- Metro.
Tukwila recognizes the existing level of service being provided and will work to
in - _ - - r. - . . 1 I•w - -iv- -rvi - I -v r
I - -
- i��••v-
m
r
identified in Goal 13.4 and associated policies.
ecrnixwamixs lunoxt .ftw :rr.^xmrr cramtageauxi -zt w.,wrrksuuxivvr onR-wr h.nramnc. xtitoraauorso rimy rtrst'Y?:Falf=: tiMe trn .-TM,`
80 to 100 ft.
60 to 84 ft.
35 to 50 mph
Principal Arterials
Figure 39 - Functional Street System Standards
Access streets in residential areas are not projected to experience LOS
problems to the year 2010. However, the occasional problem of "too much traffic
too fast" can occur and measures to address safety and access would be
determined based on studies and measures to reduce the volumes and speed.
The Tukwila Urban Center and principal arterial corridors are being monitored to
assure that the desired average LOS is maintained. This approach is
recommended by the King County Transportation LOS Committee. Tukwila's
modeling work has identified a number of improvements that would maintain an
average LOS E for the Tukwila Urban Center, East Marginal Way, Interurban
Avenue South, West Valley Highway, and Pacific Highway.
~w
6
JU.
00
N 0
WIll
.
w o.
g Q
= a..
w
The City maintains a current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) identifying current z 1._
moo;
system deficiencies and plans for improvements to address those deficiencies. z 1-
That CIP is adopted by reference as part of this Plan. Additional data on traffic 2 La
forecasts and present and future levels of service is included in the N
Transportation Element and the Traffic Efficiencies Study. ;o
uj
The City plans to provide the necessary funding capacity to provide all necessary �;
improvements to service the development anticipated in this Plan. In the event o
of a funding shortfall, the City will re- evaluate planned land uses to assure
continuing concurrency with transportation system improvements, and the
funding alternatives. o
Transit
Six Metro transit routes serve Tukwila, providing service that is predominantly
north- south. Recommended transit improvements center around providing
additional east -west service, a commuter rail connection, regional rapid rail
service, a charter bus or rail alignment in the Interstate 405 corridor, expanded
ridesharing, and expansion of Dial -a -Ride service into the Tukwila area. A
Personal Rapid Transit system of separate, fixed- guideway vehicles carrying up
to three persons has also been considered, and a multimodal center serving
virtually all transportation and transit modes is being contemplated for the
Interstate 405 -West Valley interchange.
An inventory of present transit routes is contained in the Transportation Element
Background Report. Changes to routes are controlled by King County- Metro.
Tukwila recognizes the existing level of service being provided and will work to
in - _ - - r. - . . 1 I•w - -iv- -rvi - I -v r
I - -
- i��••v-
m
r
identified in Goal 13.4 and associated policies.
ecrnixwamixs lunoxt .ftw :rr.^xmrr cramtageauxi -zt w.,wrrksuuxivvr onR-wr h.nramnc. xtitoraauorso rimy rtrst'Y?:Falf=: tiMe trn .-TM,`
Nonmotorized Transportation
A nonmotorized transportation plan is included in this element, which has been
coordinated with the King County Non - motorized Plan. It differentiates two
categories of nonmotorized trips: Category 1 trips are "through" trips for bicycle
commuters using trails, bikeways, and bicycle - friendly streets. Category II trips
are "within neighborhood" trips, for example between homes and schools or
between home and playfield, park, or market.
Category 1 improvements include completing the Interurban and King County
Green River trails, which will provide access to the Green /Duwamish high -
employment corridor for bicycle, combined bicycle and bus, and combined bus
and walking trips, as well as for recreation and exercise.
Other Category 1 improvements include incorporating bicycle, pedestrian, and
other nonmotorized transportation elements in other transportation improvement
designs.
Category II improvements include neighborhood footpaths, sidewalks, and the
pedestrian path program of paving shoulders and paths for nonmotorized travel.
Both Category 1 and 11 improvements involve the coordination of Metro, the
Tukwila Parks Department, and other agencies including King County,
neighboring jurisdictions, and the Washington State Department of
Transportation.
Other Transportation Considerations
The Transportation Element envisions that industrial and commercial activity can
be developed that takes advantage of the Duwamish River transportation
capability for goods and people.
GOALS AND POLICIES
Goal 13.1 Overall
Safe and efficient movement of people and goods to, from, within, and through
Tukwila.
Policies
13.1.1 Focus on safety as the first priority of an ongoing and continuous
monitoring program.
z
w
rx
J0.
0 N O;
o;
CO w:
W =!
w'
w 0`
g
w a:
c
= a;
I- w
Z
o:
z�-;.
0 H
ww
z
U N;
0 IH
z
13.1.2 Focus on transportation efficiency as the second priority and the
subject of an ongoing and continuous monitoring program to maintain
adopted LOS standards and provide the highest possible efficiency.
13.1.3 Provide for the on -qoinq development of a multi -modal transportation
system which supports the adopted land use plan.
13.1.4 Coordinate regional translation improvements located within
~w
Tuwkila. with the region's adopted. multi -modal transportation plan(s) _1 o
0
Goal 13.2 Transportation System w ='
J 1
Expansion of the existing public street network into a hierarch of street designs w o
that serve pedestrian and vehicle safety, traffic movement, and adjacent g
J
property. u a
I
Policies I- _
Z F.
13.2.1 Develop a street network plan that augments the existing system of z o,
streets, breaks up super - blocks in non - residential areas, and provides 2 �.
functional separation of traffic through new streets on new alignments, c. N
conversion of private streets into public, and minimization of cul -de- o
sacs. _ w
I-�
13.2.2 Require street improvement projects and development improvements ' o
to be in accordance with the Functional Street System Standards and (Li �'.
o
require an engineering study of specific conditions. I::
o e_-,
z
13.2.3 Require all new streets, street improvements, property developments
and property improvements to provide sidewalks. Property
developments and improvements in commercial areas will provide
direct pedestrian access from sidewalks to buildings. Residential short
plats or smaller single- family projects are exempt from this
requirement.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Sidewalk ordinance
+ Subdivision ordinance
Goal 13.3 Level -of- Service
Residential, commercial, Tukwila Urban Center, arterial, and access street
levels -of- service that provide safe and efficient traffic movement and incorporate
evolving traffic patterns.
Policies
13.3.1 Use the following LOS standards to guide City improvement and
development approval decisions:
— The Tukwila Urban Center area LOS average is not to exceed E.
— The East Marginal industrial and manufacturing corridor LOS
average is not to exceed E.
— The Interurban Avenue corridor LOS average is not to exceed E.
— The Pacific Highway corridor LOS average is not to exceed E.
— The West Valley Highway corridor LOS average is not to exceed
E.
— Southcenter Boulevard between Grady Way and Interstate 5 is not
to exceed average LOS E.
— The Southcenter Parkway corridor south of South 180th Street is
not to exceed average LOS E without agreement with developers,
including contractually scheduled capacity improvements.
— The LOS of minor and collector arterials in predominantly
residential areas is not to exceed average LOS D for each specific
arterial.
— Residential access streets reaching a 1, 000 - vehicle - per -day
volume will be studied to determine appropriate measures to
reduce traffic volumes.
13.3.2 Maintain adopted LOS standards in planning, development, and
improvement decisions.
13.3.3 Provide capacity improvements or trip reduction measures so that the
average LOS is not exceeded.
13.3.4 When reviewing private development proposals, use an expanded
LOS to determine SEPA mitigations that will provide capacity or traffic
generation control.
13.3.5 Include as a priority increased transit use and rideshare measures
such as carpooling as capacity mitigation measures and then consider
signal improvements, other street capacity improvements, and street
widenings as a last resort.
w
re 6
U0.
CO w
w =;
Jam,.
wo
u.Q
= v:
_.
Z►-
I- o.
Z
L1.1 w:
o �.
w w
I- 6
o.
.z
o''
z.
13.3.6 Continue to improve residential streets and coordinate with utility
improvements.
13.3.7 Establish a program to monitor congestion and evaluate the
effectiveness of the LOS standards.
z
•
13.3.8 Continue to encourage the use of rideshare, transit, bicycle, and z
evolving technological transportation improvements. a 65,
JU
13.3.9 Regional or non -local traffic will be discouraged on residential access o
streets. co w;
w =:
J
L,
Goal 13.4 Public Transportation, Transit, Rideshare, and
Personal Rapid Transit g;
J
Efficient transit capacity that will reduce single- occupancy - vehicle trips to, from, _
and through Tukwila and provide public transportation for Tukwila residents who
it. depend on it
P ,- o
zI-
Policies D
V
Ni
13.4.1 Recommend and pursue an east -west route from Renton (and east)
that continues across Southcenter Boulevard and. South 154th Street W
to SeaTac and Burien. LL
13.4.2 Recommend and pursue an additional east -west route through Tukwila w c
to serve the .Valley Medical Center, South 180th Street, and the — •
Tukwila Urban Center transit facility. z
13.4.3 Recommend and pursue an east -west route connecting Skyway (and
east), the Tukwila community center, Gateway, and other employment
areas to the west.
13.4.4 Recommend and pursue a bus route along Interstate 405 connecting a
Tukwila multimodal center, located at Interstate 405 and Interurban,
with Everett (Boeing) and serving the freeway stations, such as the
Bellevue Transit Center.
13.4.5 Recommend and pursue a multimodal center for transit, carpooling,
park 'n' ride, bus, bicycle, commuter rail, and future regional /rapid rail.
13.4.6 Continue to provide Commute Trip Reduction Program service to
Tukwila employers and to provide assistance to Metro, Washington
State Department of Transportation, King County, and adjacent
agencies in increasing people - carrying capacity of vehicles and
reducing trips.
13.4.7 Continue to support, participate in, and encourage the development
and implementation of regional /rapid rail with service to the Tukwila
Urban Center, and other emerging efficient- capacity technologies that
will serve people traveling to, from, and within Tukwila.
13.4.8 Support transportation system management programs and measures
developed by Washington State Department of Transportation,
Metropolitan King County, Tukwila, and others, including the private
sector, to reduce congestion and serve travel needs.
13.4.9 Support forming a partnership with Metropolitan King County,
Southcenter Mall, and surrounding businesses to pursue a transit
center for regional /rapid rail, pedestrians, and buses, located adjacent
to the Mall, with safe and reasonable access, providing transfer
connections, and serving as a destination for shopping.
13.4.10 Research and pursue a shopping circulator shuttle service that would
connect Southcenter Mall and surrounding businesses with frequent
service, to encourage reduction of single- occupant vehicle trips and
bring more customers to all businesses.
13.4.11 Encourage and support public transportation services including
expanded dial -a -ride and fixed -route van service, to areas that do not
produce transit ridership warranting a bus route, transportation system
management (TSM) program, the development of commuter and light
rail particularly with service to the Tukwila Urban Center area, and
continue to provide and support Commute Trip Reduction service.
1'.4.12 Support, encourage, and implement transportation programs and
improvements that promote water quality and regional air quality.
13.4.13 Establish mode -split goals for all significant employment centers which
will vary according to development densities, access to transportation
service and levels of congestion.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
+ Commute Trip Reduction Program
Goal 13.5 Nonmotorized Transportation
Bicycle and walking capacity for regional Category I and local Category 11 trips.
Policies
13.5.1 Implement specific improvements that provide safe bicycle and walking
capacity for regional (Category I) and local (Category II) trips.
z
0
0 .
NO •
W;
W I;
LL
wa
g a.
t- 0.
• z�-'
U�
••o -
o1- •
w w�
H U;.
ui
co;
.o
•z
13.5.2 Adopt Tukwila nonmotorized transportation plans for both categories.
13.5.3 Continue the access street improvement program that provides
sidewalks on access streets.
13.5.4 . Continue the annual pedestrian path improvement program.
13.5.5 Include bicycle improvements in street improvement projects on
designated bicycle- friendly streets.
13.5.6 Continue to pursue grants and require mitigation payment for new
developments affecting pedestrian safety.
13.5.7 Continue to coordinate with adjacent agencies on the development of
regional nonmotorized transportation improvements.
13.5.8 Provide additional foot trails as opportunities and development occur.
13.5.9 Pursue converting railroad and other easements to pedestrian and
bicycle trails.
Require secure bicycle racks in appropriate locations.
13.5.10
Goal 13.6 Freight, Rail, Water, and Air Transportation
Geometric capacity for commercial freight transportation located in and serving
Tukwila.
Policies
13.6.1 Include trucking design parameters in principal and minor arterial
improvements as well as in commercial areas.
13.6.2 Include bus design considerations in street improvements on streets
with existing or potential bus service.
13.6.3 Allow truck traffic on all principal and minor arterials as well as on
commercial area local access streets. Use load limit restrictions on
residential collector arterials and residential local access streets,
following a traffic study and meetings with residents and businesses.
13.6.4 Participate with King County and the Port of Seattle in updating their
airport master plan, to ensure that airport operations and development:
— Enhances Tukwila goals and policies
— Incorporates Tukwila land use plans and regulations
— Minimizes adverse impacts to Tukwila residents.
Goal 13.7 Funding Sources and Mitigation Payment System
Funding through grants, mitigations, and general funds for safety and capacity
measures to maintain adopted LOS standards. (See Capital Facilities Element)
Policies
13.7.1 Continue to pursue grants.
13.7.2 Use an environmental mitigation system that identifies:
— Safety and capacity improvements based on 2010 LOS
deficiencies
— Costs of improvements needed to mitigate increased traffic
reflected in the annual Capital Improvement Plan update
— Fair -share costs, determined from the capacity improvement cost
and the 20 -year increase in traffic
— Fair -share costs, with the 20 -year projection being updated
biennially for newly added projects and mitigation fair -share costs
— Mitigation assessments, determined by the number of
development trips and the capacity or safety improvement fair -
share cost
— Mitigation assessments that may be used for identified capacity or
safety improvements
— Additional mitigation when development affects locations operating
in expanded LOS range.
13.7.3 Update the Capital Improvement Plan annually, adding new projects
and deleting completed projects.
z
JU
0
co
' ww;
W
F-
M w
w 0:
fl '
D 0
=',
01-
`W w;
U1
o_.
ui
-
U ;
0 I,
z
THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
PURPOSE Z.
w.
6
U.
UO
J =,
CO
0
2
Washington State's Growth Management Act and the King County Countywide ga
Planning Policies define critical and priority areas as wetlands, fish and wildlife N
habitats, conservation areas, areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers = w
used for potable water, frequently flooded areas, and geologically hazardous z
areas. It requires cities and counties to identify such areas within their z o
jurisdiction and to adopt development regulations protecting them such as are w w
expressed in Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and in the goals of this o.
o
element of the Comprehensive Plan. O -.
This element of the Comprehensive Plan identifies environmentally sensitive
areas within the City and sets forth goals and policies aimed at their
management and protection. It builds upon Tukwila's June 1991 Sensitive Areas
Ordinance, which formalized the City's long- standing concern with environmental
quality.
In addition, the Growth Management Act requires jurisdictions to designate
natural resource lands of "Iong-term commercial significance" and to adopt
"development regulations to assure their conservation" (WAC 365- 195- 400(1)).
Natural resource lands are those lands that have "Iong-term commercial
significance" for agriculture, growing trees commercially ( "forest lands "), and
mineral resource lands. The GMA also states that "generally natural resource
lands should be located beyond the boundaries of urban growth areas" (WAC
365 - 195- 400(2)(b)). Through the comprehensive planning process, Tukwila has
recognized that, as a highly urbanized area, the City's boundaries contain no
significant natural resource lands. Therefore, policies in the Natural Environment
Element are limited to critical areas and paleontological /archaeological areas.
n .1- ,in. - . air . all • fermi
(WAC 173 -420 -080). Tukwila recognizes this responsibility to act within a
regional framework to work toward air quality conformity.
Past development in the City has been relatively intense, and environmental
restoration is a significant aspect of Tukwila's land use policies. There is a clear
recognition that if the City's urban environment is to function for its citizens, its
natural environment needs to be sensibly preserved and enhanced to promote
recreational opportunities, to provide visual relief from the hard, constructed
surfaces of urban life and to control and accommodate rainwater and manmade
byproducts such as effluent.
w—
w z•
•
0
•z
This element of the Comprehensive Plan focuses on balancing land use and
economic development practices with environmental protection. The aim is to
provide sensible management of designated critical areas while maintaining and
enhancing the important functions of these areas.
ISSUES
Geographically, Tukwila is a relatively small area within an extensive valley
centered on the Green /Duwamish River drainage system. While the valley is
virtually flat, the upland plateau has rolling and undulating topography.
Development in the lowlands has required large amounts of fill, owing to the
presence of wetlands and unstable soil conditions.
The uplands, while altered by clearing and residential development, still retain
developable native soils. Owing to their different physical characteristics, the
uplands and lowlands present different opportunities for and limitations on land
use. (Figure 5)
When Tukwila was still a rural area, there were likely many more natural
drainage corridors to carry runoff from showers and seasonal storms. Today, the
few remaining natural stream corridors are no longer continuous open channel
systems and must convey increased flows from surrounding developed areas.
Tukwila experiences flooding and erosion problems, in various degrees of
seriousness, every year. Development within the City and in areas to the west
has led to increased runoff owing to the conversion of pervious soils to
impervious surfaces, further deteriorating wetlands and stream corridors.
Construction of Howard Hanson Dam and river channel modifications reduced
floodplain areas and made more land available for development. Even though
the loss of natural wetlands has caused increased drainage problems in the
valley, the area continues to be developed for commercial and industrial uses.
The upland plateau presents natural hazards associated with steep slopes that
are unstable, and includes active landslides and wetland springs that will likely
remain undeveloped.
There are natural coal areas within the City's upland plateau. Some of these
formations have been mined and are defined as sensitive areas (based on City
of Tukwila Abandoned Underground Coal Mine Hazard Assessment, May 1990).
z
z'
Wi
6 D.
•J U.
• .0 0;
N 0:
w=
J F.
W LL
WO..
.g a.
CO d:
= '
,z
• z
U co
W W'
1-- • U:
z
U co ;.
H
o. H
z
GOALS AND POLICIES
Goal 4.1
Retention and improvement of hillsides, wetlands and watercourses for wildlife
habitat, recreational uses, water quality enhancement, and flood control
functions.
Policies
4.1.1 Regulate land use and development to protect natural topography,
geology, vegetation, and hydrology and prevent significant erosion,
sedimentation, or degradation of hillsides, wetlands, watercourses,
and their associated buffers.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Sensitive areas regulations
+ Land altering regulations
+ Tree regulations
4.1.2 For new development, control peak runoff rates to predevelopment
levels and minimize the effects of the small, frequent storm events.
Maintain water quality to predevelopment levels; and prohibit direct
discharge to downstream drainage systems unless allowed by specific
regulations.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Sensitive area regulations
+ Stormwater regulations
z
•
5.
•
J U'
U o;
W=
•
Ju •
ua
mow;
•z
• Z
2 a • o;
•!O N
:CI Hi
w;
U1
•
UU
• � F
0
:•�'+a:•;•x, •: • "• •, x.a •• "„ •,:'• .•
�' 1�• CfikuSnftccentul.,iYl.u+,...US} ' ^rnL" fTC4 Nii� _ntlw ':aeRL:L:.t
4.1.3 For existing development, discourage direct discharge to downstream
drainage systems.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Clean water educational programs for business community
+ Incentives for maintenance and replacement of existing stormwater
systems
+ Storm water regulations
4.1.4 Evaluate wetland mitigation strategies in order to better preserve
wetland functions, but also to provide development flexibility, as long
as wetland functions are not harmed.
4.1.5 Provide appropriate mitigation timing that ensures no net loss of water
resource area functions.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
+ Mitigation completed or bonded prior to development
4.1.6 In order to preserve the public benefit and values of wetlands and
watercourses, protect existing vegetation and use supplemental native
plantings in wetland and watercourse areas.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Examination of drainage basins to identify detention areas
+ Stormwater regulation
4.1.7 Allow off -site wetland and flood control mitigation where there is an
equivalent benefit to the affected basin, no significant adverse impact
to the adjacent property, and where it may be combined with City -
sponsored programs.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
+ Require early submission of mitigation proposals and approval by
the City Council
'.vX'Y��1"
•z
a
iZ
mow.
5
•
JU
00:
• N Ui
co w
W s!
WO'
•
• - d'
_,•
•
z Off:
. W W,
D
U `
ww
I U:
u.o
z
Cu co!
•o
:z•
4.1.8
Retain, enhance, or replace wetlands and watercourses through
appropriate programs and projects for multiple purposes such as fish
and wildlife habitat, flood control, stormwater detention, water quality
improvement, and recreation.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Regional wetland detention areas for public and private off -site
mitigation
+ Sensitive areas regulations
+ Land altering regulations
Goat 4.2
Protected fish and wildlife habitat.
Policies
4.2.1 Inventory, classify, and designate fish and wildlife priority habitats.
4.2.2 Preserve and restore appropriate vegetation plantings in identified fish
and wildlife habitat areas.
_4.2.3
4.2.4
Enhance fish and wildlife habitat through water quality control
measures, such as runoff control and best management practices to
maintain aquatic systems.
Protect and manage Tukwila's priority habitat areas, and habitat
corridors within and between jurisdictions.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
+ Sensitive areas regulations
z
re
J U;
U Ot
co Ili;
WI ;
w.o:
w a!
cn
w
'z�:
z o'
LU 111:
Do
Nr
f- V.
o�
z
Goal 4.3
Reduced potential impacts and liabilities associated with development in
geologic hazard areas.
Policies
4.3.1 Require a professional review that reflects the potential degree of
impact when development is proposed in a hazardous area.
4.3.2 Require a special site plan review for developments within geologic
hazard areas to allow flexibility in development options.
4.3.3 Minimize potential hazards and public or private costs through site
design and access alternatives. Before approving development in
areas of potential geologic instability, require that conventional
measures to maintain slope stability be proposed or in place, with the
costs bome by the property owners.
4.3.4 Require areas where vegetation remains undisturbed and require
significant replanting upon development.
Goal 4.4
Citizens who understand Tukwila's ecosystems and act responsibly regarding
their functions.
Policy
•
4.4.1 Create an educational program for all segments of the community on
the multiple purposes of the City's sensitive areas and on individual
responsibilities regarding it, and sponsor joint City and citizen cleanup
and rehabilitation programs.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Neighborhood- and City- sponsored clean ups and tree - planting
programs
+ Recycling programs
+ "Adopt -a- Stream" program
+ Backyard Wildlife Sanctuary Program
+ Access features, such as trails and interpretation of sensitive areas
z
;mow`.
re
V
c;
U U .
,co .co — H
wo
ri' •
-± •
• I' •
z�
• 1•••• o;.
Z
• 2
D. C;
• N:
o •••
w—..
uiZ:
•
• .o
z
Goal 4.5
A system of water resources that functions as a healthy, integrated whole, and
provides a long -term public benefit from enhanced environmentally quality.
4.5.1 Manage flood plains, rivers, groundwater, and other water resources
for multiple uses, including flood and erosion hazard reduction, fish
and wildlife habitat, open space, recreation and, where appropriate,
water supply.
z
a
J U�.
Uo
N0:
4.5.2 Evaluate the downstream impacts due to increased runoff volume. Ico li =
Protect downstream properties and modify the impacts through LL
effective measures such as modification of upstream land uses. uj o,
<'
+ Stormwater mapping based on 100 -year future buildout conditions. ? W'
z
Goal 4.6 z �:
Protected paleontological and archeological artifacts and sites. N'
o
0!--
Policy w w
4.6.1 Inventory sites and adopt measures to ensure that paleontological and ," o
archaeological materials and site details are preserved for posterity. w co
0 ~'
z
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Historic sites map
+ Procedures for protection and mitigation
Goal 4.7
Commit to meeting federal and state air quality requirements.
reduction programs.
.. K_.,. w.x_g.. .
te4.s:,Lf�.ds:G:Fh'w5:.. <'� - s'NtCe'GVawsl Jccsro.'.gasc- 2xnun..aisnazraa�Razr. vse,caxcswaktaa.:�au.,.v ' :+�•,�;u'a�reew�+as �;;ciivisd6"vy.n� ' �t nwa�i7:�c;�++i.��rwca;::;;• wi�an'
Support the air pollution abatement and prevention activities of the Puget Sound
Air Pollution Control Agency as it works to satisfy federal and State
clean air acts.
Collaborate with other jurisdictions and agencies in ways to leverage federal and
state programs and funding that proposes clean air protection and
enhancement.
Consider the air quality implications of new growth and development when
designating urban growth areas, considering annexations. making
Comprehensive Plan and zoning changes. and when planning street
and utility line extensions.
gmalpsrcpol
Lt1"r to4:etisL` :i::at�i::iu.:_:t �iwui+2ar °L:d4tiLlA31: - ua.�y:�ita�•, ak : ^..�.::•'i;v, .•..•:,x?
.z
_'1 •
:6.n
• JU'
iOO.
:NUi
•u) W•
w =:
Wa •
•
• J;.
•
zFT-
L.
• :z1 •
O
WW;.
_U;. •
Zt
w
2
a Miu:•Jwica�.�• r�. iifA:. ti+: Vw:,:,n l::( Sl' 1iari iY: adiat31/• wo+. 1Yt+. U: uv4h". 1K9: 4Wlti[ WrvndC Wa1...!< tISYi :t'arilYf'J.:J�1:slt!li3c^a+
ATTACHMENT B
The proposed amendments affect the Transportation and the Natural
Environment elements of the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan.
The amendments affect the textual discussion, goals and policies
of each element, as presented in Attachment A.
The amendments are proposed as a direct result of review by the
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Puget Sound
region'. MPO certification of the City's transportation plan as
being consistent with the State Growth Management Act, federal
mandates, and State and federal air quality standards' is
necessary for receiving many State and federal transportation
funds.
The MPO has determined that the proposed amendments would bring
the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Plan into conformance with
State and federal statutes. These amendments are also consistent
with the King County, Countywide Planning Policies
(Transportation: FW -18, FW -19, T -2, T -10, and T -11. Air Quality:
CA-14.).
No changes to Tukwila functional plans or specific capital
improvements are needed, as they have already incorporated the
spirit and practices embodied in the proposed amendments. No
changes in other City codes plans or regulations are foreseen as
needed to implement the proposed amendments.
file:gma \cpa -app
'Puget Sound Regional Council staff act as the MPO, pursuant
to their MPO designation.
'As especially embodied in the Washington State Clean Air
Conformity Act and the federal Clean Air Act.
Puget Sound Regional Council
PSRC
January 29, 1997
The Honorable John "Wally'.' Rants
Mayor, City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98294
SUBJECT: Certification of the Transportation. Element
Dear Mayor Rants:
RECEIVED
JAN 31 1997
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
EXHIBIT E -2
z
w
0:
001
N °
cnw -.
w=
J I—.
u_;
al
Q:
DE
= d:
I— w
On January 23, 1997, the Regional Council's Executive Board certified that the Transportation. z
Element in Tukwila's 1995 Comprehensive Plan conforms with the requirements in the Growth 1
Management Act and is consistent with the 1995 Metropolitan Transportation Plan. We were o
impressed by the manner in which you addressed the following issues:
2 U+
1~- -.
•
Multimodal approach to developing a balanced transportation system.
Planning for transportation corridors to create "high amenity, multimodal" connections.
z;
U—°
However, the Transportation Policy Board expressed concern about a number of issues addressed 1 tz-
in Tukwila's Transportation Element where further clarification or detail is strongly needed. z
These issues include:
• Clarification on how the 'city employs land use assumptions to develop its a'ransportation
strategies and provisions.
• Reference to the level -of- service standards established by Metro (and Tukwila) for transit
routes serving the city.
• More detail on the city's reassessment strategy to address potential funding shortfalls for
. transportation improvements.
• Additional air quality policies and provisions designed to reduce criteria pollutants.
We understand that the city is currently developing amendments to its comprehensive plan and
will be addressing these issues in greater detail. Regional Council staff is available to assist you
in addressing clarifications or refinements to your plan.
1011 Western ,Avenue. Suite TO • Seattle. Washington Ci1Q4•IQ35 • •.Z:i? !h:•1090
+5;,?vv.,•: zzzisdava- >Ayf"atag:Lt'aia.1n,m, u,..* �'3r1:4.,DWttif'SYJr.1• .'s:
Puget Sound Regional Council
PSRC
January 29, 1997
The Honorable John "Wally" Rants
Mayor, City of Tukwila
6200 Southcenter Boulevard
Tukwila, Washington 98294
SUBJECT: Certification of the Transportation Element
Dear Mayor Rants:
RECEIVED
JAN 31 1997
COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT
On January 23, 1997, the Regional Council's Executive Board certified that the Transportation
Element in Tukwila's 1995 Comprehensive Plan conforms with the requirements in the Growth
Management Act and is consistent with the 1995 Metropolitan Transportation Plan. We were
impressed by the manner in which you addressed the following issues:
• Multimodal approach to developing a balanced transportation system.
• Planning for transportation corridors to create "high amenity, multimodal" connections.
However, the Transportation Policy Board expressed concern about a number of issues addressed
in Tukwila's Transportation Element where further clarification or detail is strongly needed.
These issues include:
• Clarification on how the city employs land use assumptions to develop its Transportation
strategies and provisions.
• Reference to the level -of- service standards established by Metro (and Tukwila) for transit
routes serving the city.
• More detail on the city's reassessment strategy to address potential funding shortfalls for
transportation improvements.
• Additional air quality policies and provisions designed to reduce criteria pollutants.
We understand that the city is currently developing amendments to its comprehensive plan and
will be addressing these issues in greater detail. Regional Council staff is available to assist you
in addressing clarifications or refinements to your plan.
1011 Western Avenue, Suite 500 • Seattle. Washington 98104.1035 • iZC6) 464.7090 • = ='i 587.4825
z
Z;
U0
coo
W'.
co
wo.•
CO J
CCU;
rr- W
z�;
0>
Z �.
LU
ro..
() N;
O
;o
=U'
()
LL `
— z:
U—
H E;
z
The Honorable John "Wally" Rants
January 29, 1997
Page 2
Subsequent updates and amendments to Tukwila's Transportation Element should allays reflect
the most recently adopted or amended version of the MTP. The Metropol j'tan Try` ortation
Plan (MTP) was amended in 1996 to address planning for a third runway.! at Seal
International Airport.
Thank you for your cooperation in the review process. If you have questions or need additional
information regarding the plan review process, please contact Rocky Piro, Growth Management
Planner, at (206) 464 -6360.
Sincerely,
l2 C- iC�2 -c7 X74'(
Mary McCumber
Executive Director
cc: "Steve Lancaster, Director, Department of Community Development
Vernon Umetsu, Community Development Planner
F-z;
CL
U'
• 0
'(0 0
w =t
I_;
w 0}i
• a
Nom;
xi
'
U+
;O N
'0 H
� O
;0
CITY OF- TUKWILA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670
(P.0 PA)
Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code
Amendment Application
FOR STAFF USE" ONLY
knife_r
Fiie Numbe
eceipt Num
.Application complete (Date..
Project File
SEPA File #:'
Q' :Application incomplete "(Date.:: ` ..
1. PROJECT /PROPOSAL BACKGROUND
A. NAME OF PROJECT /PROPOSAL: //44-A6- Po 1174 710A[ /vr4 70)24 (- V ( /&MIM 2 yr
67.694 e-wr7' AMevAMG- fiC-"S.
B. LOCATION OF PROJECT /DEVELOPMENT:
STREET ADDRESS: C I T / 1) Er
ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER: ACA
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: %•C
Quarter: Section: Township: Range: (This information may be found on your fax statement)
c. CoNTAcT: (Primary contact regarding the application, and to whom all notices and reports shall be sent)
NAME:
ADDRESS:
PHONE:
SIGNATURE: DATE:
z
W
cc
U 0:
0)o
`coW
W =.
V)
W
O.
2
LL
(0 d.
_.
z�
Z OF:
w Lu
U0
O —•
;01--
= W?
1- U
W —O
WZ
N:
O
z
D. PROPERTY OWNER DECLARATION /v'A a cr T'i ) #D C
Po t.1 C AA-t eArb arij
The undersigned makes the following statements based upon personal knowledge:
▪ am the current owner of the property which is the subject of this application.
• All statements contained in the application are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge.
• The application is being submitted with my knowledge and consent.
I understand that conditions of approval, which the City and applicant have jointly agreed
may not be completed prior to final approval of the construction (e.g., final building permit
approval) will be incorporated into an agreement to be executed and recorded against the
property prior to issuance of any construction permits.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Washington and the United
States of America that the foregoing statement is true and correct.
EXECUTED at (city), (state), on
,199
(Print Name)
(Address)
(Phone Number)
(Signature)
Use additional sheets as needed for all property owner signatures.
E. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION: EXISTING:
s ArrACi 4
PROPOSED:
F. ZONING DESIGNATION:
EXISTING: /(CC7i4C C
PROPOSED: f\(° M 6r/
3/96
G. LAND USE(S): EXISTING:
/vA
PROPOSED:
(for proposed changes in land use designations or rezones)
H. DETAILED DESCRIPTION CF PROPOSAL: (attach additional sheets if necessary) _S-6`6-
A-TTACgM .-r- 4 .
1. GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF SURROUNDING LAND USES: Describe the existing uses located within 1,000
feet in all directions from the property or area for which a change is proposed.
9. IMPACTS OF PROPOSED CHANGE
A. IMPACT(S) OF PROPOSED CHANGE ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES: Describe potential adverse impacts of
the proposed change on surrounding geographic area, such as affects on land use designations and zoning
of surrounding properties, adjacent natural features or systems, or public utilities or streets. (A summary of
impacts addressed in SEPA checklist is acceptable.) Attach separate sheet(s) with response. ,4
B. NON - CONFORMING USES CREATED: Describe any existing uses that are likely to become non - conforming
under the proposed land use /zoning designation.
v'1 A /l\t o tq
C. IMPACT(S) OF PROPOSED CHANGE ON COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES, ZONING REGULATIONS AND CITY'S
3
FUNCTIONAL PLANS: Identify spe --7 Comprehensive Plan policies and zor' ---,. regulations and how your
proposal affects them. Identify al ,y functional plans affected by the proposal, (e.g. Storm and Surface Water
Plan, Shoreline Master Program, Parks and Open Space Plan) and what changes would be required in those
plans if the proposed amendment were approved. Attach separate sheet(s) with response. Ivdil�
D. IMPACT(S) OF PROPOSED CHANGE ON CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN: Describe any capital improvements
that would be needed to support the proposed amendment, and what changes would be required in the
City's Capital Improvements Plan. Attach separate sheet(s) with response. / 'dNG- ,4/ P SG1Z •A(
E. DEFICIENCIES IN EXISTING PLAN/CODE RESOLVED BY THE PROPOSAL: Explain why the current
Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code is deficient or why it should not continue. Be specific; cite policy
numbers and code sections that apply. Attach separate sheet(s) with response. S A TTA C4 &_.
F. COMPUANCE OF THE PROPOSAL WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT ACT: Describe how the proposed change
complies with and promotes the goals and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act. Attach
separate sheet(s) with response. Q-� ATTACH , a . •
G. OTHER ISSUES PRESENTED BY THE PROPOSED CHANGE: Describe any other issues that are important to
consider in the proposal, such as other changes in City codes that would be required, other City - adopted
plans affected, environmental or economic issues. (Attach additional sheet(s) if necessary).
kotV(
H. ALTERNATIVES TO PROPOSED CHANGE: (A summary of altematives addressed in the project's SEPA
checklist is acceptable.) Attach separate sheet(s) with response. 5" e-- 4-r7-4 Cf{ g .
III. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN/ZONING CODE AMENDMENT CRITERIA
The burden of proof in demonstrating that a change to the Comprehensive Plan or Zoning Code is warranted
lies solely upon the proponent. The greater the degree of change proposed, the greater will be the burden of
showing that the change is justified. The Planning Commission and the City Council will review your proposal
using the criteria listed below. It is essential that you describe in a clear and precise manner why the
amendment request should be approved. Attach additional sheet(s) with your responses to each criterion.
You may submit other documentation in support of your proposal.
A. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT CRITERIA:.S A 74 C 1"
Demonstrate how each of the following circumstances justifies a re- designation of your property
or a change in existing Plan policies:
1. A detailed statement of what is proposed and why;
2. A statement of the anticipated impacts of the change, including the geographic area
affected and the issues presented by the proposed change;
3. An explanation of why the current comprehensive plan or development regulations
are deficient or should not continue in effect;
4. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with and promotes the goals
and specific requirements of the Growth Management Act;
5. A statement of how the proposed amendment complies with applicable Countywide
Planning Policies;
4
z
~ w
U0
N 0:
w ='
J �.
w 0,
CO
= d.
z�
I- 0.
Z F-
U• �
ON
0 I-
WW
1- • U'
w
Z
• D. •
O ~
z
6. A statement of whe'--•hanges, if any, would be required in fu- tional plans (i.e., the
City's water, sewe,, ,torm water or shoreline plans) if the p, ,iosed amendment is
adopted;
7. A statement of what capital improvements, if any, would be needed to support the
proposed change, and how the proposed change will affect the capital facilities plans
of the City; and
8. A statement of what other changes, if any, are required in other City codes, plans or
regulations to implement the proposed change.
B. ZONING AMENDMENT CRITERIA:
Demonstrate how each of the each following circumstances justifies a rezone of your property or
a change in the existing Zoning Code:
1. The use or change in zoning requested shall be in conformity with the adopted
Comprehensive Land Use Policy Plan, the provisions of this title, and the public
interest;
2. The use or change in zoning requested in the zoning map or this title for the
establishment of commercial, industrial, or residential use shall be supported by an
architectural site plan showing the proposed development and its relationship to
surrounding areas as set forth in the application form.
•
CITY 0!- TUKWILA
Department of Community Development
6300 Southcenter Boulevard, Tukwila, WA 98188
Telephone: (206) 431 -3670
Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code Amendment
Application Checklist
The materials listed below must be submitted with your application unless specifically waived in writing
by the Department. Please contact the Department if you feel certain items are not applicable to your
project and should be waived. Application review will not begin until it is determined to be complete.
The initial application materials allow starting project review and vesting the applicant's rights. However,
they in no way limit the City's ability to require additional information as needed to establish consistency
with development standards.
Department staff are available to answer questions about application materials at 206 - 431 -3670.
APPLICATION FORMS:
,.,/ Application Checklist (1 copy), indicating items submitted with application
L� Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code Amendment Application (12 copies)
114 Pc ❑ Comprehensive Plan Amendment Fee ($700)
DMA ❑
Zoning Code Amendment Fee ($700)
PLANS [Twelve (12) copies of the following]:
N Pc Vicinity map showing location of the site.
CI 1Y- w(DC
For proposed changes to land use designations or rezones, also include the following:
A El Site plan at a scale of 1 " =20' or 1".30', with north arrow, graphic scale, and date; and the
license stamp of the architect and landscape architect. The following information must be
contained on the plan:
O Property lines and dimensions, lot size(s) and names of adjacent streets
O Location and gross floor area of existing and proposed structures with setbacks
O Location of driveways, parking, loading, and service areas, with parking calculations
and location and type of dumpster /recycling area screening
O Location and classification of any watercourses or wetlands, limit of 200' Shoreline
Overlay District
O Existing and proposed grades at min. 5' contours, extending at least 5' beyond the
site's boundaries, with a notation of the slope of areas in excess of 20 %. Air
topography data from the Public Works Department may be used if reasonably
accurate
3/96
O Other relevant str'"" tures or features, such as rockeries,i--- ices
O Location of closebL existing fire hydrant; location /type of 4ality lines; description of water
and sewer availability
O Location and dimensions of existing and proposed easements and dedications (e.g.
open space, streets, sidewalks or utilities)
O Development area coverage (max. allowable = 50 %) for multi - family proposals.
✓U APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO AMENDMENT/REZONE CRITERIA, IMPACTS &
ALTERNATIVES (See Comprehensive Plan/Zoning Code Amendment Application)
SGT' 4T771 G ff.
OTHER MATERIALS
Other documentation in support of the proposal may be included as appropriate, such as studies
or recommendations that support the proposed change, color renderings, economic analyses,
photos or materials sample board. If other materials are to be considered with the application,
twelve (12) copies of each must be submitted (except materials sample board). Color drawings
or photos may be submitted as 8.5 x 11 -inch color photocopies.
(104C f:1
PUBLIC NOTICE:
❑ King County Assessor's map(s) which shows the location of each property within 500 feet of the
subject property (see attached "Address Label Requirements ").
❑ Two (2) sets of mailing labels for all property owners and tenants (businesses and residents)
within 500 feet of the subject property. (Note: Each unit in multiple - family buildings - -e.g.
apartments, condos, trailer parks- -must be included.) See Attachment A.
❑ A 4' x 4' public notice board will be required on site within 14 days of filing a complete application.
See Attachment B.
... w-. �-!' xl' ii! i` l+1`.. at' fu4N5Y.kSClbitiCls52aik " ^ -+..•- - ,�a� -_ s.. �.._ ".��..LK1ffi._'.tlJ'J.Suiii2bafJAi
till: elm: >iotlnuLYl�lw+.ir>...JS ir:u+::v n114l alrL.viw.
3/96
z:
:
U
O
co w
W =!
H.
U) u_
wo
g Ji
LL <
1- w'
z�
1- o'
Z
� o:
io
II'
,off;
Two..
uz, .
i
o�
z
ATTACHMENT A
Attached are proposed amendments to the Transportation Element
and Natural Environment Element of the Tukwila Comprehensive Land
Use Plan. All amendments are additional language which are
underlined. No text is proposed to be deleted.
'1;t41 - '�yiy;�a:�i "..:'.s „•��JSc'i...• ",�e:;..1r:S,iaa:.u• w:...3:.v.
c..;,r.2v:c <,:o...a•_.:ss.:s••. � "`'�f,:' "',::A' sx•.. x:: �cw: s�cc: cwa .::+a�k:yru�- .�.uuu.,�v.�rv:
TRANSPORTATION
PURPOSE
The Transportation Element establishes Tukwila's transportation
goals and policies for the 20 -year planning period. It provides direction for
transportation decisions regarding annual plan updates (including
the six -year Transportation Improvement Plan, the six -year Capital Improvement
Plan, and the annual budget), development review and approval, land use and
zoning decisions, and continuing transportation programs. It establishes a basis
for decision making that is consistent with Washington's Growth Management
Act requirements and assures concurrence with other agencies.
This background section summarizes and supplements the information
presented in the "Transportation Element Background Report" and reflects
further information presented at various public hearings, The subsequent goals
and policies are based on this information and Tukwila's City and regional
responsibility.
Tukwila's future traffic levels were largely projected based on "TMODEL2 ". This
software model incorporated land use Zoning. trip generation estimates from the
"Trip Generation Manual" for various uses (Institute of Traffic Engineers. 1989).
regional traffic levels from the PSRC and King County ,and several
interjurisdictional technical working groups. These projections were also
coordinated with the population and employment levels in the King County
County -wide Planning Policies to ensure adequate infrastructure support. The
model has been selectively updated in special studies. the latest being in 1992.
Growth scenarios are used in this element to project traffic volumes and levels of
service in order to develop the proposed level -of- service (LOS) standards and
determine the improvements needed to maintain capacity. "Level -of- service"
defines an established minimum capacity of public facilities or services; in
transportation, a grading system from A (best) to F (worst) has typically been
used (Figure 38). The City of Tukwila also uses an expanded level of service to
LOS J. for the purpose of quantifying intersection congestion below LOS F.
LEVEL OF SERVICE
Intersection
Average Delay
Volume/
Capacity Ratio
LOS A
<7.5 seconds
up to 0.6
LOS B
7.5 - 15 seconds
0.6 - 0.7
LOS C
15.1 - 25 seconds
0.7 - 0.8
LOS D
25.1 - 40 seconds
0.8 - 0.9
LOS E
40.1 - 60 seconds
0.9 -1.0
LOS F
>60 seconds
Greater than 1.0
Figure 38 — Level of Service Standards
ISSUES
Tukwila's transportation system includes freeways, arterial streets, access
streets, transit service, sidewalks, trails, and neighborhood footpaths. In
addition, Boeing Field provides air transportation for a combination of primarily
general and business aviation. The Duwamish River provides water access to
Elliott Bay and beyond. Significant commercial freight transportation is provided
by trucking and railroads throughout the City.
Streets and Highways
Tukwila's road system has been developed in coordination with various regional
working groups. City traffic models always incorporating existing and projected
regional traffic volumes. Coordination includes. but are not limited to working
with the South County Area Transportation Board and consistency with the
regionally developed Transportation Improvement Plan...
There are four classes of streets: principal arterials, minor arterials, collector
arterials, and access streets. These four classes of street were developed in
recognition of a transition in street use from strictly access to properties to pure
mobility. The differences result in different street widths, access control, speed
limit, traffic controls, and other similar design and operation features. (Figures
38 and 39)
FUNCTIONAL STREET SYSTEM STANDARDS
(Standards below are typical; see current City codes for actual standards)
Z
_ 1—
;mow
re
6
J U;
U O:
U C
J I.
• LL ;
w 0.
u
zw
z�
Zo
UJ
U
:0 -.
w
= Vi
0
z
Right of Way
Curb -to -Curb
Typical
Speed Limit
Access Streets
50 to 60 ft.
28 to 36 ft.
25 mph
Connect -te
Collector Arterials
60 ft.
36 to 40 ft.
30 mph
Connect -to
Minor Arterials
60 -80 ft.
36to48ft
30 to 35 mph
Z
_ 1—
;mow
re
6
J U;
U O:
U C
J I.
• LL ;
w 0.
u
zw
z�
Zo
UJ
U
:0 -.
w
= Vi
0
z
Connect to
80 to 100 ft.
60 to 84 ft.
35 to 50 mph
Principal Arterials
Figure 39 - Functional Street System Standards
Access streets in residential areas are not projected to experience LOS
problems to the year 2010. However, the occasional problem of "too much traffic
too fast" can occur and measures to address safety and access would be
determined based on studies and measures to reduce the volumes and speed.
The Tukwila Urban Center and principal arterial corridors are being monitored to
assure that the desired average LOS is maintained. This approach is
recommended by the King County Transportation LOS Committee. Tukwila's
modeling work has identified a number of improvements that would maintain an
average LOS E for the Tukwila Urban Center, East Marginal Way, Interurban
Avenue South, West Valley Highway, and Pacific Highway.
The City maintains a current Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) identifying current
system deficiencies and plans for improvements to address those deficiencies.
That CIP is adopted by reference as part of this Plan. Additional data on traffic
forecasts and present and future levels of service is included in the
Transportation Element and the Traffic Efficiencies Study.
The City plans to provide the necessary funding capacity to provide all necessary
improvements to service the development anticipated in this Plan. In the event
of a funding shortfall, the City will re- evaluate planned land uses to assure
continuing concurrency with transportation system improvements, and the
funding alternatives.
Transit
Six Metro transit routes serve Tukwila, providing service that is predominantly
north- south. Recommended transit improvements'center around providing
additional east -west service, a commuter rail connection, regional rapid rail
service, a charter bus or rail alignment in the Interstate 405 corridor, expanded
ridesharing, and expansion of Dial -a -Ride service into the Tukwila area. A
Personal Rapid Transit system of separate, fixed- guideway vehicles carrying up
to three persons has also been considered, and a multimodal center serving
virtually all transportation and transit modes is being contemplated for the
Interstate 405 -West Valley interchange.
An inventory of present transit routes is contained in the Transportation Element
Background Report. Changes to routes are controlled by King County- Metro.
Tukwila recognizes the existing level of service being provided and will work to
increase the routes and hours it now receives. Service level improvements are
identified in Goal 13.4 and associated policies.
Nonmotorized Transportation
A nonmotorized transportation plan is included in this element, which has been
coordinated with the King County Non - motorized Plan. It differentiates two
categories of nonmotorized trips: Category I trips are "through" trips for bicycle z
commuters using trails, bikeways, and bicycle - friendly streets. Category II trips _ ~`
are "within neighborhood" trips, for example between homes and schools or `• w'
between home and playfield, park, or market. 2
JU
U O'
Category I improvements include completing the Interurban and King County . co o`
Green River trails, which will provide access to the Green /Duwamish high- w i�
employment corridor for bicycle, combined bicycle and bus, and combined bus i u.
and walking trips, as well as for recreation and exercise. w O
Other Category I improvements include incorporating bicycle, pedestrian, and g a..
other nonmotorized transportation elements in other transportation improvement co. d
designs. z =
Category II improvements include neighborhood footpaths, sidewalks, and the z o`.
pedestrian path program of paving shoulders and paths for nonmotorized travel.
D p.
Both Category I and II improvements involve the coordination of Metro, the ;o N`
Tukwila Parks Department, and other agencies including King County, i° 1
neighboring jurisdictions, and the Washington State Department of 0
_
Transportation. u. o
.z
U co
Other Transportation Considerations o
z
The Transportation Element envisions that industrial and commercial activity can
be developed that takes advantage of the Duwamish River transportation
capability for goods and people.
GOALS AND POLICIES
Goal 13.1 Overall
Safe and efficient movement of people and goods to, from, within, and through
Tukwila.
Policies
13.1.1 Focus on safety as the first priority of an ongoing and continuous
monitoring program.
Wcat'a.1
13.1.2 Focus on transportation efficiency as the second priority and the
subject of an ongoing and continuous monitoring program to maintain
adopted LOS standards and provide the highest possible efficiency.
13.1.3 Provide for the on-going development of a multi -modal transportation
system which supports the adopted land use plan.
14
Coordinate re • ional trans. ort
. i•n im•rovem
I
ca
-.
Kt' hi
Tuwkila. with the region's adopted. multi -modal transportation plan(s).
Goal 13.2 Transportation System
Expansion of the existing public street network into a hierarchy of street designs
that serve pedestrian and vehicle safety, traffic movement, and adjacent
property.
Policies
13.2.1 Develop a street network plan that augments the existing system of
streets, breaks up super - blocks in non - residential areas, and provides
functional separation of traffic through new streets on new alignments,
conversion of private streets into public, and minimization of cul -de-
sacs.
13.2.2 Require street improvement projects and development improvements
to be in accordance with the Functional Street System Standards and
require an engineering study of specific conditions.
13.2.3 Require all new streets, street improvements, property developments
and property improvements to provide sidewalks. Property
developments and improvements in commercial areas will provide
direct pedestrian access from sidewalks to buildings. Residential short
plats or smaller single- family projects are exempt from this
requirement.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Sidewalk ordinance
+ Subdivision ordinance
Goal 13.3 Level -of- Service
Residential, commercial, Tukwila Urban Center, arterial, and access street
levels -of- service that provide safe and efficient traffic movement and incorporate
evolving traffic patterns.
Q •
moZ
,
O,
O 0:
0:
W=
J
W O
g J.
LL Q:
a
Z
Z
�.
m
U 0.
'O
O I-
W w`
• U'
lL Z.i.
W
v
0 r:`
z
Policies
13.3.1 Use the following LOS standards to guide City improvement and
development approval decisions:
— The Tukwila Urban Center area LOS average is not to exceed E.
— The East Marginal industrial and manufacturing corridor LOS
average is not to exceed E.
— The Interurban Avenue corridor LOS average is not to exceed E.
— The Pacific Highway corridor LOS average is not to exceed E.
— The West Valley Highway corridor LOS average is not to exceed
E.
— Southcenter Boulevard between Grady Way and Interstate 5 is not
to exceed average LOS E.
— The Southcenter Parkway corridor south of South 180th Street is
not to exceed average LOS E without agreement with developers,
including contractually scheduled capacity improvements.
— The LOS of minor and collector arterials in predominantly
residential areas is not to exceed average LOS D for each specific
arterial.
— Residential access streets reaching a 1,000- vehicle - per -day
volume will be studied to determine appropriate measures to
reduce traffic volumes.
13.3.2 Maintain adopted LOS standards in planning, development, and
improvement decisions.
13.3.3 Provide capacity improvements or trip reduction measures so that the
average LOS is not exceeded.
13.3.4 When reviewing private development proposals, use an expanded
LOS to determine SEPA mitigations that will provide capacity or traffic
generation control.
13.3.5 Include as a priority increased transit use and rideshare measures
such as carpooling as capacity mitigation measures and then consider
signal improvements, other street capacity improvements, and street
widenings as a last resort.
_• , wnm. M. rtrn�Y� *w:�d•.m+nc+w.w.a.•®m....�.�...
z
• W:.
J U'
U 0'
yam:.
W =.
w o:
g Q
=• CY
w
z�:
1- 0
Z I:
ww
moo:
o =:
W W.
z;.
IJJ
0
z
13.3.6 Continue to improve residential streets and coordinate with utility
improvements.
13.3.7 Establish a program to monitor congestion and evaluate the
effectiveness of the LOS standards.
z
13.3.8 Continue to encourage the use of rideshare, transit, bicycle, and z
evolving technological transportation improvements. w
13.3.9 Regional or non -local traffic will be discouraged on residential access o o
streets. w °
w =
Goal 13.4 Public Transportation, Transit, Rideshare, and CO o
u-<.
Efficient transit capacity that will reduce single- occupancy - vehicle trips to, from, a'
and through Tukwila and provide public transportation for Tukwila residents who _
depend on it. z 1._`
o:.
z
ww
moo!
13.4.1 Recommend and pursue an east -west route from Renton (and east) o -
that continues across Southcenter Boulevard and South 154th Street w w`
to SeaTac and Burien.
13.4.2 Recommend and pursue an additional east -west route through Tukwila z
. .
to serve the Valley Medical Center, South 180th Street, and the o
Tukwila Urban Center transit facility. z 1-
Personal Rapid Transit
Policies
13.4.3 Recommend and pursue an east -west route connecting Skyway (and
east), the Tukwila community center, Gateway, and other employment
areas to the west.
13.4.4 Recommend and pursue a bus route along Interstate 405 connecting a
Tukwila multimodal center, located at Interstate 405 and Interurban,
with Everett (Boeing) and serving the freeway stations, such as the
Bellevue Transit Center.
13.4.5 Recommend and pursue a multimodal center for transit, carpooling,
park 'n' ride, bus, bicycle, commuter rail, and future regional /rapid rail.
13.4.6 Continue to provide Commute Trip Reduction Program service to
Tukwila employers and to provide assistance to Metro, Washington
State Department of Transportation, King County, and adjacent
agencies in increasing people- carrying capacity of vehicles and
reducing trips.
13.4.7 Continue to support, participate in, and encourage the development
and implementation of regional /rapid rail with service to the Tukwila
Urban Center, and other emerging efficient - capacity technologies that
will serve people traveling to, from, and within Tukwila.
13.4.8 Support transportation system management programs and measures
developed by Washington State Department of Transportation,
Metropolitan King County, Tukwila, and others, including the private
sector, to reduce congestion and serve travel needs.
13.4.9 Support forming a partnership with Metropolitan King County,
Southcenter Mall, and surrounding businesses to pursue a transit
center for regional /rapid rail, pedestrians, and buses, located adjacent
to the Mall, with safe and reasonable access, providing transfer
connections, and serving as a destination for shopping.
13.4.10
13.4.11
Research and pursue a shopping circulator shuttle service that would
connect Southcenter Mall and surrounding businesses with frequent
service, to encourage reduction of single- occupant vehicle trips and
bring more customers to all businesses.
Encourage and support public transportation services including
expanded dial -a -ride and fixed -route van service, to areas that do not
produce transit ridership warranting a bus route, transportation system
management (TSM) program, the development of commuter and light
rail particularly with service to the Tukwila Urban Center area, and
continue to provide and support Commute Trip Reduction service.
13.4.12 Support, encourage, and implement transportation programs and
improvements that promote water quality and regional air quality.
13.4.13 Establish mode -split goals for all significant employment centers which
will vary according to development densities, access to transportation
service and levels of congestion.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
+ Commute Trip Reduction Program
Goal 13.5 Nonmotorized Transportation
Bicycle and walking capacity for regional Category I and local Category II trips.
Policies
13.5.1 Implement specific improvements that provide safe bicycle and walking
capacity for regional (Category I) and local (Category II) trips.
13.5.2 Adopt Tukwila nonmotorized transportation plans for both categories.
13.5.3 Continue the access street improvement program that provides
sidewalks on access streets.
13.5.4 Continue the annual pedestrian path improvement program.
13.5.5 Include bicycle improvements in street improvement projects on
designated bicycle - friendly streets.
13.5.6 Continue to pursue grants and require mitigation payment for new
developments affecting pedestrian safety.
13.5.7 Continue to coordinate with adjacent agencies on the development of
regional nonmotorized transportation improvements.
13.5.8 Provide additional foot trails as opportunities and development occur.
13.5.9 Pursue converting railroad and other easements to pedestrian and
bicycle trails.
13.5.10 Require secure bicycle racks in appropriate locations.
Goal 13.6 Freight, Rail, Water, and Air Transportation
Geometric capacity for commercial freight transportation located in and serving
Tukwila.
Policies
13.6.1 Include trucking design parameters in principal and minor arterial
improvements as well as in commercial areas.
13.6.2 Include bus design considerations in street improvements on streets
with existing or potential bus service.
13.6.3 Allow truck traffic on all principal and minor arterials as well as on
commercial area local access streets. Use load limit restrictions on
residential collector arterials and residential local access streets,
following a traffic study and meetings with residents and businesses.
13.6.4 Participate with King County and the Port of Seattle in updating their
airport master plan, to ensure that airport operations and development:
— Enhances Tukwila goals and policies
— Incorporates Tukwila land use plans and regulations
z
~w.
6
U O
• 0
w w'
w =,
J
CO LI_
'Li 0
g Q
D. a
�_.
F.
I-0:
Z �-
U 0'
O N
0 H
wtu
o.
.. z:
U • co
0
— Minimizes adverse impacts to Tukwila residents.
Goal 13.7 Funding Sources and Mitigation Payment System
Funding through grants, mitigations, and general funds for safety and capacity
measures to maintain adopted LOS standards. (See Capital Facilities Element) z •'
Policies 6 D D.
JU
o o
13.7.1 Continue to pursue grants. ; co ca'
P 9 w w
w =
13.7.2 Use an environmental mitigation system that identifies: LL;
w o.
— Safety and capacity improvements based on 2010 LOS 2
deficiencies LL.
CO
— Costs of improvements needed to mitigate increased traffic I al
reflected in the annual Capital Improvement Plan update ?
zo
- Fair -share costs, determined from the capacity improvement cost uj
and the 20 -year increase in traffic °:
co,
O ° I-
— Fair -share costs, with the 20- Y ear projection being updated
w
wbienniall Y for newly added projects and mitigation fair -share costs ci
w�
— Mitigation assessments, determined by the number of z
development trips and the capacity or safety improvement fair -
share cost o
z
— Mitigation assessments that may be used for identified capacity or
safety improvements
— Additional mitigation when development affects locations operating
in expanded LOS range.
13.7.3 Update the Capital Improvement Plan annually, adding new projects
and deleting completed projects.
THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT
PURPOSE
This element of the Comprehensive Plan identifies environmentally sensitive
areas within the City and sets forth goals and policies aimed at their
management and protection. It builds upon Tukwila's June 1991 Sensitive Areas
Ordinance, which formalized the City's long- standing concern with environmental
quality.
Washington State's Growth Management Act and the King County Countywide
Planning Policies define critical and priority areas as wetlands, fish and wildlife
habitats, conservation areas, areas with a critical recharging effect on aquifers
used for potable water, frequently flooded areas, and geologically hazardous
areas. It requires cities and counties to identify such areas within their
jurisdiction and to adopt development regulations protecting them such as are
expressed in Tukwila's Sensitive Areas Ordinance and in the goals of this
element of the Comprehensive Plan.
In addition, the Growth Management Act requires jurisdictions to designate
natural resource lands of "Iong-term commercial significance" and to adopt
"development regulations to assure their conservation" (WAC 365 - 195 - 400(1)).
Natural resource lands are those lands that have "Iong-term commercial
significance" for agriculture, growing trees commercially ( "forest lands "), and
mineral resource lands. The GMA also states that "generally natural resource
lands should be located beyond the boundaries of urban growth areas" (WAC
365- 195- 400(2)(b)). Through the comprehensive planning process, Tukwila has
recognized that, as a highly urbanized area, the City's boundaries contain no
significant natural resource lands. Therefore, policies in the Natural Environment
Element are limited to critical areas and paleontological /archaeological areas.
A companion State statute is the Washington State Clean Air Conformity Act
which requires linking growth management planning and air quality conformity
(WAC 173 - 420 -080). Tukwila recognizes this responsibility to act within a
regional framework to work toward air quality conformity.
Past development in the City has been relatively intense, and environmental
restoration is a significant aspect of Tukwila's land use policies. There is a clear
recognition that if the City's urban environment is to function for its citizens, its
natural environment needs to be sensibly preserved and enhanced to promote
recreational opportunities, to provide visual relief from the hard, constructed
surfaces of urban life and to control and accommodate rainwater and manmade
byproducts such as effluent.
z
�w
co 0
o0
J=
f-
0.
2
g Q.
—a
=
I w _
Z
Z o;
o W
w w'
U'
— O.
w z.
co
z
This element of the Comprehensive Plan focuses on balancing land use and
economic development practices with environmental protection. The aim is to
provide sensible management of designated critical areas while maintaining and
enhancing the important functions of these areas.
ISSUES
Geographically, Tukwila is a relatively small area within an extensive valley
centered on the Green /Duwamish River drainage system. While the valley is
virtually flat, the upland plateau has rolling and undulating topography.
Development in the lowlands has required large amounts of fill, owing to the
presence of wetlands and unstable soil conditions.
The uplands, while altered by clearing and residential development, still retain
developable native soils. Owing to their different physical characteristics, the
uplands and lowlands present different opportunities for and limitations on land
use. (Figure 5)
When Tukwila was still a rural area, there were likely many more natural
drainage corridors to carry runoff from showers and seasonal storms. Today, the
few remaining natural stream corridors are no longer continuous open channel
systems and must convey increased flows from surrounding developed areas.
Tukwila experiences flooding and erosion problems, in various degrees of
seriousness, every year. Development within the City and in areas to the west
has led to increased runoff owing to the conversion of pervious soils to
impervious surfaces, further deteriorating wetlands and stream corridors.
Construction of Howard Hanson Dam and river channel modifications reduced
floodplain areas and made more land available for development. Even though
the loss of natural wetlands has caused increased drainage problems in the
valley, the area continues to be developed for commercial and industrial uses.
The upland plateau presents natural hazards associated with steep slopes that
are unstable, and includes active landslides and wetland springs that will likely
remain undeveloped.
There are natural coal areas within the City's upland plateau. Some of these
formations have been mined and are defined as sensitive areas (based on City
of Tukwila Abandoned Underground Coal Mine Hazard Assessment, May 1990).
z
�
w
J U.
00
cnw
=
u.
w 0,
u-Q
D. a.,
I- _
z�
I- 0
Z I-
�o
0 H:
ww
1--
LL I-
w z
o 1;
z
GOALS AND POLICIES
Goal 4.1
Retention and improvement of hillsides, wetlands and watercourses for wildlife
habitat, recreational uses, water quality enhancement, and flood control
functions.
Policies
4.1.1 Regulate land use and development to protect natural topography,
geology, vegetation, and hydrology and prevent significant erosion,
sedimentation, or degradation of hillsides, wetlands, watercourses,
and their associated buffers.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Sensitive areas regulations
+ Land altering regulations
+ Tree regulations
4.1.2 For new development, control peak runoff rates to predevelopment
levels and minimize the effects of the small, frequent storm events.
Maintain water quality to predevelopment levels; and prohibit direct
discharge to downstream drainage systems unless allowed by specific
regulations.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Sensitive area regulations
+ Stormwater regulations
• z;
6
JU .
O 0:
w o
W
CO
W 0:
LL
= 0:
�_
Z
'I - 0',
Z
o;
0
w
o..
CU
0.
z
.... di .Y::,.:�,Y:Ss�..� ?::ati�:..�.._ ...�nz�^ si, i ,ya;:=.: = ��, 1 ;:nA= .•Fn��+7t„ca.•4a:ia�:n57�. .�,r,:�c.�N:sysd„+:.,:fu+x
•
4.1.3 For existing development, discourage direct discharge to downstream
drainage systems.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Clean water educational programs for business community
+ Incentives for maintenance and replacement of existing stormwater
systems
+ Storm water regulations
4.1.4 Evaluate wetland mitigation strategies in order to better preserve
wetland functions, but also to provide development flexibility, as long
as wetland functions are not harmed.
4.1.5 Provide appropriate mitigation timing that ensures no net loss of water
resource area functions.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
+ Mitigation completed or bonded prior to development
4.1.6 In order to preserve the public benefit and values of wetlands and
watercourses, protect existing vegetation and use supplemental native
plantings in wetland and watercourse areas.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Examination of drainage basins to identify detention areas
+ Stormwater regulation
4.1.7 Allow off -site wetland and flood control mitigation where there is an
equivalent benefit to the affected basin, no significant adverse impact
to the adjacent property, and where it may be combined with City-
sponsored programs.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
+ Require early submission of mitigation proposals and approval by
the City Council
z
I-
re LLI
2
JO
o O:
w
co w:
w=
LLI
J f":
J
COD
_°:
Fw
z�
moo;
z�-.
w w;,
o u);
I-
= LI
w 1-°
O
iii fit
o h;
4.1.8 Retain, enhance, or replace wetlands and watercourses through
appropriate programs and projects for multiple purposes such as fish
and wildlife habitat, flood control, stormwater detention, water quality
improvement, and recreation.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Regional wetland detention areas for public and private off -site
mitigation
+ Sensitive areas regulations
+ Land altering regulations
Goal 4.2
Protected fish and wildlife habitat.
Policies
4.2.1 Inventory, classify, and designate fish and wildlife priority habitats.
4.2.2 Preserve and restore appropriate vegetation plantings in identified fish
and wildlife habitat areas.
4.2.3 Enhance fish and wildlife habitat through water quality control
measures, such as runoff control and best management practices to
maintain aquatic systems.
4.2.4 Protect and manage Tukwila's priority habitat areas, and habitat
corridors within and between jurisdictions.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
+ Sensitive areas regulations
~'w
JU:
U O.
UU'
U) W
w
CO ILI
'w 0'
u. a.
w
z,
I- o .
z�
w La
U
w ..
'I0
jZ
U to
0 ~;
z
Goal 4.3
Reduced potential impacts and liabilities associated with development in
geologic hazard areas.
Policies
4.3.1 Require a professional review that reflects the potential degree of
impact when development is proposed in a hazardous area.
4.3.2 Require a special site plan review for developments within geologic
hazard areas to allow flexibility in development options.
4.3.3 Minimize potential hazards and public or private costs through site
design and access alternatives. Before approving development in
areas of potential geologic instability, require that conventional
measures to maintain slope stability be proposed or in place, with the
costs bome by the property owners.
4.3.4 Require areas where vegetation remains undisturbed and require
significant replanting upon development.
Goal 4.4
Citizens who understand Tukwila's ecosystems and act responsibly regarding
their functions.
Policy
4.4.1
Create an educational program for all segments of the community on
the multiple purposes of the City's sensitive areas and on individual
responsibilities regarding it, and sponsor joint City and citizen cleanup
and rehabilitation programs.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Neighborhood- and City- sponsored clean ups and tree - planting
programs
+ Recycling programs
+ "Adopt -a- Stream" program
+ Backyard Wildlife Sanctuary Program
+ Access features, such as trails and interpretation of sensitive areas
Goal 4.5
A system of water resources that functions as a healthy, integrated whole, and
provides a long -term public benefit from enhanced environmentally quality.
4.5.1 Manage flood plains, rivers, groundwater, and other water resources
for multiple uses, including flood and erosion hazard reduction, fish
and wildlife habitat, open space, recreation and, where appropriate,
water supply.
4.5.2 Evaluate the downstream impacts due to increased runoff volume.
Protect downstream properties and modify the impacts through
effective measures such as modification of upstream land uses.
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGY
+ Stormwater mapping based on 100 -year future buildout conditions.
Goal 4.6
Protected paleontological and archeological artifacts and sites.
Policy
4.6.1 Inventory sites and adopt measures to ensure that paleontological and
archaeological materials and site details are preserved for posterity.
:.0
IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES
+ Historic sites map
+ Procedures for protection and mitigation
Goal 4.7
Commit to meeting federal and state air quality requirements.
4.7.1 Work with State. regional and local agencies and jurisdictions to develop
transportation control measures and /or similar mobile source emission
reduction programs.
i~
,mow;
6
U0
Np
va w,
w=
w 0'
ga
¢
O
Z
W w 2 Dr
N,
w W .
u. 0
z:
U
;
o
z
Support the air pollution abatement and prevention activities of the Puget Sound
Air Pollution Control Agency as it works to satisfy federal and State
clean air acts.
Collaborate with otherjurisdictions and agencies in ways to leverage federal and
state programs and funding that proposes clean air protection and.
enhancement.
Consider the air quality implications of new growth and development when
designating urban growth areas, considering annexations. making
Comprehensive Plan and zoning changes, and when planning street
and utility line extensions.
gmalpsropol
qj •
ATTACHMENT B
The proposed amendments affect the Transportation and the Natural
Environment elements of the City of Tukwila Comprehensive Plan.
The amendments affect the textual discussion, goals and policies
of each element, as presented in Attachment A.
The amendments are proposed as a direct result of review by the
Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) for the Puget Sound
region'. MPO certification of the City's transportation plan as
being consistent with the State Growth Management Act, federal
mandates, and State and federal air quality standards' is
necessary for receiving many State and federal transportation
funds.
The MPO has determined that the proposed amendments would bring
the Tukwila Comprehensive Land Use Plan into conformance with
State and federal statutes. These amendments are also consistent
with the King County, Countywide Planning Policies
(Transportation: FW -18, FW -19, T -2, T -10, and T -11. Air Quality:
CA -14.) .
No changes to Tukwila functional plans or specific capital
improvements are needed, as they have already incorporated the
spirit and practices embodied in the proposed amendments. No
changes in other City codes plans or regulations are foreseen as
needed to implement the proposed amendments.
file:gma \cpa -app
'Puget Sound Regional Council staff act as the MPO, pursuant
to their MPO designation.
'As especially embodied in the Washington State Clean Air
Conformity Act and the federal Clean Air Act.
H z;
UO
co 0
W ='
-J
u.
WO
2
gJ;
It= = a;
F. _!
z
0
°H.
W
U;
Oi
iz'