HomeMy WebLinkAboutCAP 2014-11-12 COMPLETE AGENDA PACKETCity of Tukwila
Community Affairs &
Parks Committee
O Joe Duffie, Chair
O Dennis Robertson
O Verna Seal
AGENDA
Distribution:
7. Duffie
D. Robertson
V. Seal
D. Quinn
Mayor Haggerton
D. Cline
C. O'Flaherty
R. Turpin
L. Humphrey
N. Gierloff
N. Robinson
M. Dhaliwal
D. Speck
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 12, 2014 — 5:30 PM
HAZELNUT CONFERENCE ROOM
(formerly known as CR #3) at east entrance of City Hall
Item
Recommended Action
Page
1. PRESENTATION(S)
2. BUSINESS AGENDA
a. An Interlocal Agreement with the City of Seattle for
a. Forward to 11/17 Consent
Pg.1
hearing examiner services.
Agenda.
Nora Gierloff, Deputy Community Development
Director
b. A resolution approving the Teens for Tukwila
b. Forward to 11/24 C.O.W.
Pg.7
charter.
and 12/1 Regular Mtg.
Nate Robinson, Recreation Program Specialist,
Teens
c. An ordinance approving a Development Agreement
c. Forward to 11/24 C.O.W.
Pg.13
for the proposed hotel at 90 Andover Park East.
and 12/1 Regular Mtg.
Minnie Dhaliwal, Planning Supervisor
d. An ordinance establishing an exemption from
d. Forward to 11/24 C.O.W.
Pg.41
real property taxation for development of qualified
multi - family housing in a targeted area in the
and 12/1 Regular Mtg.
Tukwila Urban Center.
Derek Speck, Economic Development Administrator
3. ANNOUNCEMENTS
4. MISCELLANEOUS
Next Scheduled Meeting: Tuesday, November 25, 2014
/• The City of Tukwila strives to accommodate those with disabilities.
Please contact the City Clerk's Office at 206 - 433 -1800 ( TukwilaCityClerk @TukwilaWA.gov) for assistance.
TO:
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
Community Affairs and P ks
FROM: Jack Pace, DCD Director
BY: Nora Gierloff, Deputy D Director
DATE: November 5, 2014
SUBJECT: Hearing Examiner Interlocal Agreement
ISSUE
The current Interlocal Agreement with the City of Seattle for Hearing Examiner services runs
through December 31, 2016. The agreement needs to be modified to reflect an increase in their
hourly rates starting in 2015.
BACKGROUND
Tukwila has contracted with the City of Seattle for Hearing Examiner services since 2005.
DISCUSSION
The City of Seattle has performed these services for Tukwila in an efficient and cost effective
manner for many years. There is no increase in cost for the remainder of 2014 though Seattle
will be raising its hourly rate from $105 to $115 in 2015.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
For land use cases the cost of the Hearing Examiner is passed through to the applicant. Other
Departments budget for these costs.
RECOMMENDATION
The Committee is being asked to forward this agreement to the Consent Agenda at the
November 17, 2014 regular meeting for approval.
ATTACHMENT
A. Draft Interlocal Agreement
1
2
INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY OF TUKWILA AND THE CITY OF SEATTLE FOR
HEARING EXAMINER SERVICES
This INTERLOCAL AGREEMENT ( "Agreement ") is made and entered into pursuant to the Interlocal
Cooperation Act, Chapter 39.34 of the Revised Code of Washington, by and between the City of
Tukwila, a Washington municipal corporation ( "Tukwila "), and the City of Seattle, a Washington
municipal corporation acting through its Office of Hearing Examiner ( "Seattle "), for Tukwila's
utilization of Seattle's hearing examiner services.
WHEREAS, Tukwila is in need of the services of a hearing examiner; and
WHEREAS, Seattle has the experience, personnel, and willingness to provide hearing examiner
services,
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions set forth herein, it is agreed by and
between Tukwila and Seattle as follows:
1. Statement of Purpose. The purpose of this Agreement is for Seattle to provide hearing
examiner services to Tukwila.
2. Scope of Services. Seattle shall provide hearing examiner services and accompanying
support services for Tukwila as required by Tukwila.
3. Compensation. Tukwila shall pay Seattle $105.00 per hour for Seattle's hearing examiner
services through December 31, 2014 and $115.00 per hour for hearing examiner services
rendered during the remaining term of this agreement. Tukwila shall pay Seattle $30.00 per
hour for any support services requested by Tukwila. Seattle shall be reimbursed for any
direct expenses advanced on Tukwila's behalf including mailing and copying charges. If
Seattle is required to provide any copying services in the performance of this Agreement,
Tukwila shall pay Seattle $0.15 per page for the copies.
Drug asset forfeiture hearings shall have a one -hour minimum hearing examiner service
charge unless Tukwila notifies Seattle of the hearing cancellation at least 24 hours prior to
the scheduled hearing time.
Seattle shall not bill for travel time between Seattle and Tukwila. Tukwila will pay a $20.00
flat fee for round trip travel to Tukwila, together with mileage at the current government
reimbursement rate. Each individual providing hearing examiner services under this
Agreement shall separately present to Tukwila a monthly statement detailing the mileage
and number of trips to Tukwila for which the individual is eligible for reimbursement. Each
individual providing hearing examiner services under this Agreement shall be paid directly
and monthly within thirty (30) days after Tukwila receives the individual's detailed request
ATTACHMENT A.
3
for reimbursement. Seattle retains the right to increase its hourly rate in 2015, which will
require amendment of this Agreement.
4. Method of Payment. Seattle shall bill Tukwila on a monthly basis for work performed.
Within thirty 30 days of receiving Seattle's invoice, Tukwila shall issue a check to Seattle for
services rendered.
5. Scheduling Services. Seattle's hearing examiner services shall be scheduled on a case by
case basis. Tukwila shall contact Seattle to schedule appropriate dates and times.
6. Hearing Location. Hearings shall be held at Tukwila City Hall. Seattle shall provide the
necessary recording equipment in order to record the hearings. The hearings may be held
in the day or evening as required by Tukwila.
7. Hearing Decision. Hearings shall be conducted in compliance with the Tukwila Municipal
Code. Upon conclusion of the hearing, Seattle shall issue a written decision. This decision
shall make findings of fact and conclusions of law based on the Tukwila Municipal Code.
The written decision shall be issued within fifteen (15) business days of the hearing unless
unusual circumstances exist.
8. Duration. This Agreement shall take effect upon execution of the Agreement by both
parties, and the appointment of the hearing examiner by the Mayor of Tukwila and the
approval of the Tukwila City Council. This Agreement shall remain in effect through
December 31, 2016 and shall be subject to renewal by mutual agreement.
9. Termination. Either party may terminate this Agreement by giving thirty (30) days written
notice of termination to the other party.
10. Indemnification and Hold Harmless. Seattle shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
Tukwila and its officers, agents, and employees from any and all claims, actions, suits,
liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by reason or arising
out of any negligent action or omission of Seattle, its officers, agents and employees in
relation to the Agreement. Likewise, Tukwila shall defend, indemnify, and hold harmless
Seattle and its officers, agents, and employees from any and all claims, actions, suits,
liability, loss, costs, expenses, and damages of any nature whatsoever, by reason or arising
out of any negligent action or omission of Tukwila, its officers, agents, and employees in
relation to this Agreement.
Except as provided below, in the event the parties are determined jointly liable to any
claimant or litigant, each party shall bear responsibility for its own defense, including the
payment of all attorney fees and costs associated therewith, and shall satisfy any judgment
or settlement to the extent fault is allocated to such party.
Seattle does not assume liability or responsibility for, or in any way release Tukwila from,
any liability or responsibility that arises, in whole or in part, from the existence or effect of
Tukwila's ordinances, code, policies, rules, or regulations. If any cause, claim, or action of
4
any kind is commenced in which the enforceability and /or validity of any Tukwila ordinance,
code, policy, or regulation, including its constitutionality, is at issue, Tukwila shall defend the
same at its sole cost and expense, and if judgment is entered, or damages are awarded
against Seattle, or against Seattle and Tukwila jointly, Tukwila shall promptly satisfy the
same.
11. Applicable Law. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the
laws of the State of Washington. In the event any suit, arbitration, or other proceeding is
instituted to enforce any term of the Agreement, the parties specifically understand and
agree that venue shall be exclusively in King County, Washington.
12. Administrator. No administrator is needed for this Agreement.
13. Records Retention and Transference. Seattle may retain records up to one year from the
date of final disposition after which Seattle shall transfer the records to Tukwila.
14. Notices. All notices required or permitted pursuant to this Agreement shall be addressed as
follows:
City of Seattle
Office of Hearing Examiner
PO Box 94729
Seattle WA 98124
City of Tukwila
Office of the City Clerk
6200 Southcenter Blvd
Tukwila WA 98188
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed.
CITY OF TUKWILA
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Dated:
Approved as to Form
Tukwila City Attorney
CITY OF SEATTLE
OFFICE OF HEARING EXAMINER
Sue A. Tanner, Hearing Examiner
Dated: 9 / l 9 / / `f
5
6
TO:
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
Community Affairs & Parks
FROM: Rick Still, Parks & Recreation Director
BY: Tracy Gallaway, Parks & Recreation Superintenden
Nate Robinson, Teen Programs Specialist
DATE: November 5, 2014
SUBJECT: Teens for Tukwila Charter
ISSUE
Establishing a partnership between the Tukwila City Council and the Teens for Tukwila youth
group.
BACKGROUND
Teens for Tukwila are a group of high school students, primarily from Foster High School, who
want to make a positive impact on the Tukwila community. They are learning to become
leaders and a partnership with City Council is something the group desires.
Teens for Tukwila have established themselves as a group of teens making a positive impact in
the Tukwila community. The group has completed multiple community service projects in
Tukwila and around the region. Local projects include a clean-up at Cascade View Park, yard
work for a Tukwila senior citizen, homework help and participation in the after school program at
Showalter Middle School, and serving Tent City residents when they were in Tukwila. The
group has established relationships with State Representative Steve Bergquist, Representative
Zach Hudgins, and Senator Bob Hasegawa through participation in the annual Youth Action
Day event held at the Capital Campus in Olympia. The group has met with multiple City Council
members and has given two "year in review" presentations at City Council meetings.
DISCUSSION
The teen members created the Charter that sets forth the guidelines of a successful partnership
with Teens for Tukwila could look like for their involvement in providing a teen voice and
perspective on community/teen related topics.
RECOMMENDATION
It is the recommendation of the Parks & Recreation Department that the Council consider this
item at the November 24, 2014 Committee of the Whole Meeting and subsequent December 1,
2014 Regular Meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Draft Resolution
Teens for Tukwila Charter
7
8
RAFT
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, AFFIRMING ITS
COMMITMENT TO YOUTH ENGAGEMENT AND
APPROVING THE TEENS FOR TUKWILA CHARTER.
WHEREAS, young people are valued members of the community and have much
to offer as valuable participants in the work of local government; and
WHEREAS, youth engagement is supported by the City of Tukwila's Strategic Plan,
Goal 2, "A Solid Foundation for all Tukwila Residents;" and
WHEREAS, City leaders desire to foster meaningful opportunities for youth to make
a difference in those areas that are important to them; and
WHEREAS, Tukwila's youth are uniquely positioned to offer valuable insight into
the creation of youth - friendly City processes and culture; and
WHEREAS, Teens for Tukwila is an established and effective youth leadership
development group that provides its members with opportunities for learning, advocacy
and public service; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires to establish a partnership with Teens for
Tukwila that is founded upon mutual respect and a shared commitment to community
service;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS:
The City Council is dedicated to fostering civic engagement and youth leadership in
Tukwila and approves the Teens for Tukwila Charter as a framework for effective
collaboration.
W: \Word Processing \Resolutions \Teens for Tukwila Charter 11 -4 -14
LH:bjs
Page 1 of 2
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at
a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2014.
ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk De'Sean Quinn, Council President
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Rachel Turpin, City Attorney
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Resolution Number:
Attachment: Teens for Tukwila — City Council Charter, October 2014
W:\Word Processing \Resolutions \Teens for Tukwila Charter 11 -4 -14
LH:bjs
10
Page 2of2
TDU IK A
Teens for Tukwila
City Council Charter
October 2014
Teens for Tukwila is a group of Tukwila residents and high school students established through the
Tukwila Parks and Recreation Department,
Teens fbrTukv/i|o`s mission is to strengthen our community.
Teens for Tukwila shall:
l. Meet annually with Washington State elected officials at Youth Action Day.
2. Annually give a Year in Review presentation to the City of Tukwila City Council.
3. Participate in cornrnunity, private, and global projects und partnerships.
4. Perforrn functions as may be required from partnerships. Lc. World Vision—Youth Em-
pov/enneniPoogrnon,1nnuQincScho|oo,nndfutun:purtncrx.
5. Be open to Tukwila teens (High School age) who have a passion for their community.
6. Consist of equally ranked members.
7. Deterrnine the content, tirne, and place of its rneetings.
8. Report to the City Council bi-rnonthly (during the school year) on its activities and recom-
mendations via email and/or in person.
9. Review and change this charter when needed.
10. Bring the concerns ofthe comrnunity to the City Council's attention
11. Teens for Tukwila would like the City Council to create trainings and/or workshops for the
group to attcnd in order to gain knowledge ofthe role of City Council.
12. Have a trial period, during the 2014-2015 school year, before a decision is made to partner
with the City Council long term.
13. Remain known as Teens for Tukwila and represent itself, and make decisions regarding the
group.
14. Work hand-in-hand with the City Council in service to the cornmunity.
Tukwila Community Cen pr 12424 - 42nd Ave. . Tukwila, WA 206'768-2T[[ wvmw.tukvvi|axxa.Rov
12
TO:
City of Tukwila
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM
Mayor Haggerton
Community Affairs and Parks Committee
FROM: Jack Pace, Director Department of Community Development
BY: Minnie Dhaliwal, Planning Supervisor
DATE: November 4, 2014
SUBJECT: Development Agreement for the proposed hotel at 90 Andover Park East.
ISSUE
Should the City Council approve the proposed Development Agreement for the proposed hotel
development at 90 Andover Park East that would allow the shared use of parking in the right-of-
way of Christensen Road in exchange for the construction of a public pocket park?
BACKGROUND
Tukwila TSD LLC is proposing to develop a new five story hotel at 90 Andover Park East with
approximately 90 guest rooms. One parking space per room is required for lodging uses in the
Tukwila Urban Center Transit Oriented Development District. The developer has submitted a
site plan showing that the required number of parking stalls cannot be accommodated on the
project site. Therefore the developer is proposing shared use of parking and drive aisle area in
the right-of-way of Christensen Road in exchange for developing a public pocket park in the cul-
de sac area of Christensen Road.
TMC 18.86 allows the City to use development agreements to provide flexibility to achieve
public benefits, respond to changing community needs, or encourage modifications which
provide the functional equivalent or adequately achieve the purposes of otherwise applicable
City standards.
DISCUSSION
The proposal includes:
• Shared use of parking and drive aisle area in the right-of-way of Christensen Road to
meet the parking requirements for the proposed hotel at 90 Andover Park East. The
developer shall add 18 new parking spaces within the undeveloped right-of-way area
adjacent to the hotel site and reconfigure the existing spaces to increase the number of
parking spaces in the right-of-way. A total of 45 parking spaces would be available within
the right-of-way; out of which 41 will be shared between the hotel use and members of
the public with four spaces exclusively reserved for non-hotel users including those who
want to access the Green River Trail.
• In exchange for the shared parking the developer shall:
a) Develop and maintain a public pocket park within the existing cul-de-sac area.
b) Maintain the park and the parking area for the term of the agreement.
c) Provide public access through the subject property to compensate for the cul-de-sac
closure.
d) Construct a pedestrian connection between the intersection of Andover Park East
and Tukwila Parkway to the pocket park and the Green River Trail.
13
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
• Initial term of 50 years with an option to extend for 30 additional years.
• The agreement shall terminate if any of the following terms are not met:
a) The applicant fails to submit a complete building permit application for the
construction of the hotel within one year; or if the construction is not completed within
three years; or if the developer does not comply with maintenance obligations for the
park and the parking areas;
b) If the property is redeveloped or a change of use occurs;
c) If WSDOT widens 1-405 or should any other project or condition arise that requires
reconfiguration of Tukwila Parkway, the Project parking area, and/or the Pocket
Park;
d) If the developer abandons the project;
e) The developer shall renegotiate a new agreement or provide documentation showing
how the number of parking spaces required by code will be provided if the hotel use
is to continue after the expiration of the agreement.
This proposal furthers the following goals and policies of the City's Comprehensive Plan and the
Southcenter Subarea Plan:
• The Southcenter Subarea Plan envisions that parking will be accommodated by a
combination of off- and on-street parking spaces/lots and shared parking facilities within
the Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Neighborhood.
• The Southcenter Element of Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan includes policy 12.2.1 to
"Recognize, protect and enhance the open space network by augmenting existing parks,
enhancing access to passive and active recreation areas such as Tukwila Pond, Mink ler
Pond and the Green River...."
The implementation strategies for policy 10.2.1 of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan
includes, "Look for opportunities for pocket park development" and "Seek opportunities
for public/private partnerships".
• Uses that provide public access and public recreation are prioritized in the Urban
Conservancy Environment in the Shoreline Element of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan.
The pocket park and shared parking are considered mutually beneficial to the City and the
developer for the following reasons:
• There are currently only 27 parking spaces in the right of-way area and the proposal will
provide 45 parking spaces.
• Hotel parking spaces are expected to be used primarily in the evening and night time
hours and parking for the trail access is expected to be used during day light hours.
• The pocket park will complement the Green River Trail.
• The proposal facilitates higher intensity development that is envisioned by the
Comprehensive Plan for this area.
• The cost of construction and maintenance of the pocket park and the parking spaces will
be paid for by the developer in exchange for the shared use of the parking.
• Members of the public and emergency vehicles will have access through the hotel
parking lot.
14
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 3
FINANCIAL IMPACT
There is no financial impact to the City as all costs associated with the development and
maintenance of the pocket park and additional parking shall be borne by the developer. The
developer's cost estimate for the development of the pocket park and additional parking area
(Exhibit C) is $186,037. Also, the annual maintenance costs are anticipated to be $6000 per
year and subject to inflation over the term of the agreement. The land value of the right-of-area
with the shared parking is $427,575 ($25 per square foot for 17,103 square feet total area).
RECOMMENDATION
The Council is being asked to approve the development agreement and hold a public hearing
on this item at the November 24, 2014, Committee of the Whole meeting and subsequent
December 1, 2014, Regular Meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Vicinity Map
Draft Ordinance
Exhibit A- Development Agreement
Exhibit 1- Legal Description
Exhibit 2-Conceptual Site Plan
Exhibit 3-Conceptual Site Plan of the Pocket Park; list of park amenities with construction cost
estimates; and land value estimates.
15
16
a
Q
2
1-
17
18
DR FT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING
THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH TUKWILA TSD,
LLC, FOR THE SHARED USE OF PARKING IN THE PUBLIC
RIGHT -OF -WAY OF CHRISTENSEN ROAD AND THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A PUBLIC POCKET PARK AT THE
NORTH END OF CHRISTENSEN ROAD, AS IT RELATES TO
THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OF A HOTEL LOCATED AT
90 ANDOVER PARK EAST; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, RCW 36.70B.170, et seq. and Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter
18.86 authorize development agreements between the City and persons having
ownership or control of real property in order to establish development standards to
govern and vest the development, use and mitigation of real properties; and
WHEREAS, Tukwila TSD, LLC, desires to build a new five -story hotel at 90
Andover Park East with over 90 guest rooms; and
WHEREAS, Tukwila TSD, LLC, proposes non - exclusive use of parking and drive
aisle area in the right -of -way of Christensen Road to meet the parking requirements for
the proposed hotel at 90 Andover Park East; and
WHEREAS, Tukwila TSD, LLC, also proposes to develop and maintain a pocket
park within the cul -de -sac area of Christensen Road; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila and Tukwila TSD, LLC, wish to enter into a
Development Agreement for the shared use of parking in the public right -of -way of
Christensen Road and the development of a public pocket park at the north end of
Christensen Road, as it relates to the planned development of a hotel located at 90
Andover Park East, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A; and
WHEREAS, as required pursuant to Tukwila Municipal Code Section 18.86.050, a
public hearing was conducted on the 24th day of November 2014 to take public
testimony regarding this Development Agreement, as proposed; and
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Public pocket park at 90 APE DA 11 -3 -14
MD:bjs
Page 1 of 2
19
WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the terms of this Development Agreement
are necessary to achieve public benefits, to respond to changing community needs and
to encourage modifications that adequately achieve the purposes of otherwise
applicable City standards;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Development Agreement. The Development Agreement by and
between the City of Tukwila and Tukwila TSD, LLC, for the use of shared parking in the
public right -of -way of Christensen Road and the development of a public pocket park at
the north end of Christensen Road, as it relates to the planned development of a hotel
located at 90 Andover Park East, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, is
hereby approved, and the Mayor is authorized and directed to execute said
Development Agreement on behalf of the City of Tukwila.
Section 2. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the
City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary
corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to
other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering
and section /subsection numbering.
Section 3. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause
or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to
be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the
remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
Section 4. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be
published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force
five days after passage and publication as provided by law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at
a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2014.
ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Rachel Turpin, City Attorney
Exhibit A — Development Agreement
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Public pocket park at 90 APE DA 11 -3 -14
MD:bjs
20
Page 2of2
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF TUKWILA
AND TUKWILA TSD LLC, FOR THE SHARED USE OF PARKING IN THE RIGHT OF
WAY OF CHRISTENSEN ROAD AND THE
DEVELOPMENT OF A PUBLIC POCKET PARK AT THE NORTH END OF
CHRISTENSEN ROAD, AS IT RELATES TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OF A
HOTEL LOCATED AT 90 ANDOVER PARK EAST
I. PREAMBLE
THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of
, 2014, by and between the City of Tukwila, a noncharter, optional code
Washington municipal corporation, hereinafter the "City," and Tukwila TSD LLC, a (corporation,
limited partnership, partnership, etc.) organized under the laws of the State of Washington,
hereinafter the "Developer."
II. RECITALS
WHEREAS, the Developer desires to develop a new five-story hotel at 90 Andover Park East
with over 90 guest rooms; and
WHEREAS, one parking space per guest room is required for lodging uses in the Tukwila
Urban Center Transit Oriented Development District; and
WHEREAS, the Developer has submitted a site plan showing the required number of parking
stalls for the hotel cannot be accommodated as surface parking on the project site; and
WHEREAS, the Developer proposes non-exclusive use of parking and drive aisle area in the
right-of-way of Christensen Rd. to meet the parking requirements for the proposed hotel at 90
Andover Park East; and
WHEREAS, the City of Tukwila is the owner of the Christensen Rd. right-of-way, which
includes undeveloped area adjacent to the project's eastern property line, paved street, parking, and
cul-de-sac areas; and
WHEREAS, the parking area in the right-of-way of Christensen Rd. is currently used by
members of the public for access to the Green River Trail, shoreline, and parks areas; and
WHEREAS, hotel parking spaces are expected to be used primarily in the evening and
nighttime hours; parking spaces for trail, shoreline, and parks access are expected to be used during
daylight hours; and
WHEREAS, the Developer proposes to develop and maintain a public pocket park within the
cul-de-sac area as outlined in Exhibit B in exchange for use of the other right-of-way areas on the
east side of the project site for parking; and
21
WHEREAS, the Developer proposes to add parking spaces within the undeveloped right -of-
way area adjacent to the hotel site and to reconfigure existing spaces to increase the number of
parking spaces that would be shared for hotel use and the public for access to the Green River Trail;
and
WHEREAS, all parking spaces within the right -of -way area will be shared and at least four
spaces will be designated for non -hotel users to ensure access to the Green River Trail for members
of the public; and
WHEREAS, the Developer proposes to maintain the parking area within the right -of -way as
outlined in Exhibit B for the length of this agreement; and
WHEREAS, the vision for parking areas within the Transit Oriented Development (TOD)
Neighborhood in the Southcenter Subarea Plan is that "parking will be accommodated by a
combination of off- and on- street parking spaces /lots" and shared parking facilities. "Such facilities
can be shared between public and private uses" (p. 19); and
WHEREAS, the Southcenter Element of Tukwila's Comprehensive Plan includes policy
12.2.1 to "Recognize, protect and enhance the open space network by augmenting existing parks,
enhancing access to passive and active recreation areas such as Tukwila Pond, Minkler Pond and the
Green River.... "; and
WHEREAS, the Developer proposes to construct a pedestrian connection between the
intersection of Andover Park East and Tukwila Parkway to the pocket park and Green River Trail;
and
WHEREAS, implementation strategies for policy 10.2.1 of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan
include "Look for opportunities for pocket park development" and "Seek opportunities for
public /private partnerships; and
WHEREAS, a through -way from Andover Park East to Christensen Rd will be constructed as
part of the project to replace the emergency vehicle maneuvering function of the cul -de -sac; and
WHEREAS, the pocket park will be a City of Tukwila park that will provide mutual benefits
to hotel guests and the public; and
WHEREAS, uses that provide public access and public recreation are prioritized in the Urban
Conservancy Environment in the Shoreline Element of the Tukwila Comprehensive Plan and the
proposed development furthers this goal; and
WHEREAS, the Washington State Legislature has authorized the execution of a development
agreement between a local government and a person having ownership or control of real property
within its jurisdiction (RCW 36.70B.170(1)); and
2
22
WHEREAS, a development agreement must set forth the development standards and other
provisions that shall apply to, govern and vest the development, use and mitigation of the
development of the real property for the duration specified in the agreement (RCW 36.70B.170(1));
and
WHEREAS, for the purposes of this development agreement, "development standards"
includes, but is not limited to, all of the standards listed in RCW 36.70B.170(3); and
WHEREAS, a development agreement must be consistent with the applicable development
regulations adopted by a local government planning under chapter 36.70A RCW (RCW
36.70B.170(1)); and
WHEREAS, TMC Section 18.86.030 explicitly allows for flexibility in development
standards applicable to a property developed under a development agreement "to achieve public
benefits, respond to changing community needs, or encourage modifications which provide the
functional equivalent or adequately achieve the purposes of otherwise applicable City standards "; and
WHEREAS, this Development Agreement by and between the City of Tukwila and the
Developer (hereinafter the "Development Agreement "), relates to the development known as the 90
Andover Park East Hotel and Pocket Park, which is located at: 90 Andover Park East (hereinafter the
"Subject Property "); and
WHEREAS, a development agreement must be approved by ordinance or resolution after a
public hearing (RCW 36.70B.200); and
WHEREAS, a public hearing for this Development Agreement was held on , and
the City council approved this Development Agreement by Ordinance on ; and
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises set forth herein, the parties
hereto agree as follows:
III. AGREEMENT
Section 1. The Project. The Project is the development and use of the Subject Property,
consisting of 0.39 acres (approximately17,000 square feet) in the City of Tukwila located at 90
Andover Park East and a portion of Christensen Road right -of -way for a ninety -two (92) room five
(5) story hotel, a Pocket Park, and forty -five (45) shared parking spaces on Christensen Road right -
of -way, as shown on Exhibit B.
Section 2. The Subject Property. The Subject Property and right -of -way are legally
described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
3
23
Section 3. Definitions. As used in this Development Agreement, the following terms,
phrases and words shall have the meanings and be interpreted as set forth in this Section.
a) "Adopting Ordinance" means the Ordinance which approves this Development
Agreement, as required by RCW 36.70B.200.
b) "Council" means the duly elected legislative body governing the City of Tukwila.
c) "Design Guidelines" means the Tukwila Design Manual, as adopted by the City.
d) "Director" means the City's Community Development Director.
e) "Effective Date" means the effective date of the Adopting Ordinance.
f) "Existing Land Use Regulations" means the ordinances adopted by the City Council of
Tukwila in effect on the Effective Date, including the adopting ordinances that govern the permitted
uses of land, the density and intensity of use, and the design, improvement, construction standards
and specifications applicable to the development of the Subject Property, including, but not limited to
the Comprehensive Plan, the City's Official Zoning Map and development standards, the Design
Manual, the Public Works Standards, SEPA, Concurrency Ordinance, and all other ordinances,
codes, rules and regulations of the City establishing subdivision standards, park regulations, building
standards. "Existing Land Use Regulation" does not include non -land use regulations, which
includes taxes and impact fees.
g) "Landowner" is the party who has acquired any portion of the Subject Property from the
Developer who, unless otherwise released as provided in this Agreement, shall be subject to the
applicable provisions of this Agreement. The "Developer" is identified in Section 5 of this
Agreement.
h) "Project" means the anticipated development of the Subject Property, as specified in
Section 1 and as provided for in all associated permits /approvals, and all incorporated exhibits.
i) "Vesting date" means the date a valid and fully complete building permit application for
the hotel is submitted to the City of Tukwila.
Section 4. Exhibits. Exhibits to this Agreement are as follows:
a) Exhibit 1 - legal description of the Subject Property and the right -of -way.
b) Exhibit 2 - Conceptual Site Plan
c) Exhibit 3 - Conceptual Site Plan of the Pocket Park including a list of park amenities;
construction and maintenance cost estimates for the Pocket Park and parking area; and
land value estimate for the parking and drive -aisle area of Christensen Road right -of -way.
4
24
Section 5. Parties to Development Agreement. The parties to this Agreement are:
a) The "City" is the City of Tukwila, 6200 Southcenter Blvd., Tukwila, WA 98188.
b) The "Developer" or Owner is a private enterprise which owns the Subject Property in fee,
and whose principal office is located at 21109 66th Avenue South, Kent, WA 98032.
c) The "Landowner." From time to time, as provided in this Agreement, the Developer may
sell or otherwise lawfully dispose of a portion of the Subject Property to a Landowner who, unless
otherwise released, shall be subject to the applicable provisions of this Agreement related to such
portion of the Subject Property.
Section 6. Project is a Private Undertaking. It is agreed among the parties that the Project
is a private development and that the City has no interest therein except as explicitly outlined in this
Agreement and as authorized in the exercise of its governmental functions.
Section 7. Effective Date and Term. This Agreement shall commence upon the effective
date of the Adopting Ordinance approving this Agreement, and shall continue in force for a period of
50 years, with the option to extend the Agreement an additional 30 years, unless extended or
terminated as provided herein. Following the expiration of the term or extension thereof, or if sooner
terminated, this Agreement shall have no force and effect, subject however, to post - termination
obligations of the Developer or Landowner.
Section 8. Terms.
A. Design
• The Project at 90 Andover Park East shall be allowed non - exclusive use rights for the parking
spaces and drive aisle area of Christensen Rd (as depicted in Exhibit B) to meet minimum
parking requirements for the development. This Agreement shall not preclude the City from
entering into additional agreements regarding use of this area by other private parties. The
Project will be subject to the development regulations in effect at the time of complete permit
application submittals.
• The site plan attached as Exhibit B is included with this Agreement for reference only, and
has not yet been approved as of the date of execution of this Agreement. The site plan shall
be subject to modifications during review of the required land use permits.
• As a result of the cul -de -sac closure for use as the pocket park, public access through 90
Andover Park East is hereby allowed and provided for.
• The Developer shall construct a pedestrian connection between the intersection of Andover
Park East and Tukwila Parkway to the proposed pocket park and the Green River Trail.
5
25
• All shared parking stalls will be constructed and maintained to Public Works Infrastructure
Design and Construction Standards.
• The detailed park design meeting the requirements for approval shall be approved by the
Director of the City of Tukwila Parks and Recreation Department as part of the building
permit approval process. The Conceptual Plan (Exhibit C) shall be revised to address the
following items:
a) Specific locations of the trash receptacles and the three outdoor exercise pieces shall be
noted.
b) A short pathway connecting the trails /walkways shall be included.
c) Specifications and details of the monument wall and the outdoor exercise equipment shall
be preapproved by the Parks Department.
B. Construction
• The cost of permits and plans required for construction of the park and parking area shall be
borne by the Developer and submitted as part of the permits for the hotel. The pocket park
must receive final approval by all required City departments prior to issuance of the
Certificate of Occupancy for the hotel.
• The Developer is responsible to provide any electrical service that may be necessary for the
pocket park.
C. Maintenance
• The pocket park and the parking area shall be subject to inspections every five years.
• Developer is solely responsible for the cost and maintenance of the pocket park and the
parking spaces. New striping of the parking spaces shall be completed every three years.
• A detailed maintenance plan for the pocket park must be submitted and preapproved by the
Parks and Recreation Department before acceptance.
D. Operations
• A total of 92 parking spaces are required for the 92 -room hotel as proposed. The site plan in
Exhibit B includes 98 parking spaces. All parking spaces within the right -of -way of
Christensen Road shall be for the joint use of the hotel users and members of the public and at
least four spaces shall be designated for non -hotel users to ensure access to the Green River
Trail for members of the public.
6
26
Section 9. Vested Rights. During the term of this Agreement, unless sooner terminated in
accordance with the terms hereof, in developing the Subject Property consistent with the Project
described herein, Developer is assured, and the City agrees, that the development rights, obligations,
terms and conditions specified in this Agreement, are fully vested in the Developer and may not be
changed or modified by the City, except as may be expressly permitted by, and in accordance with,
the terms and conditions of this Agreement, including the Exhibits hereto, or as expressly consented
thereto by the Developer.
Section 10. Minor Modifications. Minor modifications from the approved permits or the
exhibits attached hereto may be approved in accordance with the provisions of the City's code, and
shall not require an amendment to this Agreement.
Section 11. Further Discretionary Actions. Developer acknowledges that the Existing
Land Use Regulations contemplate the exercise of further discretionary powers by the City. These
powers include, but are not limited to, review of additional permit applications under SEPA. Nothing
in this Agreement shall be construed to limit the authority or the obligation of the City to hold legally
required public hearings, or to limit the discretion of the City and any of its officers or officials in
complying with or applying Existing Land Use Regulations.
Section 12. Existing Land Use Fees and Impact Fees.
A. Land use fees adopted by the City by ordinance as of the Effective Date of this Agreement
may be increased by the City from time to time, and are applicable to permits and approvals for the
Subject Property, as long as such fees apply to similar applications and projects in the City.
B. All impact fees shall be paid as set forth in the approved permit or approval, or as
addressed in Chapters 16.26 and 9.48 of the Tukwila Municipal Code.
IV. GENERAL PROVISIONS
Section 1. Assignment of Interests, Rights, and Obligations. This Agreement shall be
binding and inure to the benefit of the Parties. No Party may assign its rights under this Agreement
without the written consent of the other Party, which consent shall not unreasonably be withheld.
This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors, and
assigns of the Developer and the City.
Section 2. Incorporation of Recitals. The Recitals contained in this Agreement, and the
Preamble paragraph preceding the Recitals, are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if fully set
forth herein.
Section 3. Severability. The provisions of this Agreement are separate and severable. The
invalidity of any clause, sentence, paragraph, subdivision, section, or portion or the invalidity of the
application thereof to any person or circumstance, shall not affect the validity of the remainder of this
Agreement, or the validity of its application to other persons or circumstances.
7
27
Section 4. Termination. This Agreement shall expire and/or terminate as provided below:
A. This Agreement shall expire and be of no further force and effect if the Developer fails to
submit a complete building permit application for the construction of the hotel within one year, or if
the Project construction is not completed within three years, of the effective date of this Agreement;
or if at any time after Project construction is completed, Developer fails to maintain the Pocket Park
and the parking areas according to the terms of this Agreement. Nothing in this Agreement shall
extend the expiration date of any permit or approval issued by the City for any development.
B. This Agreement shall expire and be of no further force and effect if the Developer does
not construct the Project as contemplated by the permits and approvals identified in this Agreement,
or submits applications for development of the Subject Property that are inconsistent with such
permits and approvals.
C. This Agreement shall terminate at such time as a change of use occurs at 90 Andover Park
East, or at such time as 90 Andover Park East is redeveloped.
D. This Agreement shall terminate in the event the Washington State Department of
Transportation (WSDOT) widens Interstate 405 in vicinity of the Subject Property, or should any
other project or condition arise that requires reconfiguration of Tukwila Parkway, the Project parking
area, and/or the Pocket Park.
E. This Agreement shall terminate upon the abandonment of the Project by the Developer.
The Developer shall be deemed to have abandoned the Project if /when written notice is provided to
the City that the Developer's interest in the Project has been terminated. Said notice shall be given to
the City no more than thirty (30) days after the Developer's interest in the Project is terminated.
F. This Agreement may terminate pursuant to Section IV.3, Severability, or Section IV.10,
Default, or as otherwise outlined in this Agreement.
G. If the use will continue upon expiration of the term of this Agreement, the Developer shall
either negotiate a new agreement with the City or provide documentation showing how the number of
parking spaces required by the codes at the time of expiration will be provided.
8
28
Section 5. Effect upon Termination on Developer Obligations. Termination of this
Agreement as to the Developer of the Subject Property or any portion thereof shall not affect any of
the Developer's obligations to comply with the City Comprehensive Plan and the terms and
conditions or any applicable zoning code(s) or subdivision map or other land use entitlements
approved with respect to the Subject Property, any other conditions of any other development
specified in the Agreement to continue after the termination of this Agreement or obligations to pay
assessments, liens, fees or taxes.
Section 6. Effects upon Termination on City. Upon any termination of this Agreement as
to the Developer of the Subject Property, or any portion thereof, the entitlements, conditions of
development, limitations on fees and all other terms and conditions of this Agreement shall no longer
be vested hereby with respect to the property affected by such termination (provided that vesting of
such entitlements, conditions or fees may then be established for such property pursuant to then
existing planning and zoning laws).
Section 7. Specific Performance. The parties specifically agree that damages are not an
adequate remedy for breach of this Agreement, and that the parties are entitled to compel specific
performance of all material terms of this Agreement by any party in default hereof.
Section 8. Governing Law and Venue. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in
accordance with the laws of the State of Washington. Venue for any action shall lie in King County
Superior Court or the U.S. District Court for Western Washington.
Section 9. Attorneys' Fees. In the event of any litigation or dispute resolution process
between the Parties regarding an alleged breach of this Agreement, neither Party shall be entitled to
any award of attorneys' fees.
Section 10. Notice of Default/Opportunity to Cure/Dispute Resolution.
A. In the event a Party, acting in good faith, believes the other Party has violated the terms of this
Agreement, the aggrieved Party shall give the alleged offending Party written notice of the alleged
violation by sending a detailed written statement of the alleged breach. The alleged offending Party
shall have thirty (30) days from receipt of written notice in which to cure the alleged breach unless
the Parties agree, in writing, to additional time. This notice requirement is intended to facilitate a
resolution by the Parties of any dispute prior to the initiation of litigation. Upon providing notice of
an alleged breach, the Parties agree to meet and agree upon a process for attempting to resolve any
dispute arising out of this Agreement. A lawsuit to enforce the terms of this Agreement shall not be
filed until the latter of (a) the end of the cure period or (b) the conclusion of any dispute resolution
process.
B. After notice and expiration of the thirty (30) day period or other time period as agreed to by the
Parties, if such default has not been cured or is not being diligently cured in the manner set forth in
the notice, the other party or Landowner to this Agreement may, at its option, institute legal
proceedings pursuant to this Agreement. In addition, the City may decide to file an action to enforce
the City's Codes, and to obtain penalties and costs as provided in the Tukwila Municipal Code for
violations of this Development Agreement and the Code.
9
29
Section 11. No Third -Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement is for the benefit of the Parties
hereto only and is not intended to benefit any other person or entity, and no person or entity not a
signatory to this Agreement shall have any third -party beneficiary or other rights whatsoever under
this Agreement. No other person or entity not a Party to this Agreement may enforce the terms and
provisions of this Agreement.
Section 12. Integration. This Agreement and its exhibits represent the entire agreement of
the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof. There are not other agreements, oral or written,
except as expressly set forth herein.
Section 13. Authority. The Parties each represent and warrant that they have full power and
actual authority to enter into this Agreement and to carry out all actions required of them by this
Agreement. All persons are executing this Agreement in their representative capacities and represent
and warrant that they have full power and authority to bind their respective organizations.
Section 14. Covenants Running with the Land. The conditions and covenants set forth in
this Agreement and incorporated herein by the Exhibits shall run with the land and the benefits and
burdens shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties. The Developer, Landowner and every
purchaser, assignee or transferee of an interest in the Subject Property, or any portion thereof, shall be
obligated and bound by the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and shall be the beneficiary
thereof and a party thereto, but only with respect to the Subject Property, or such portion thereof,
sold, assigned or transferred to it. Any such purchaser, assignee or transferee shall observe and fully
perform all of the duties and obligations of a Developer contained in this Agreement, as such duties
and obligations pertain to the portion of the Subject Property sold, assigned or transferred to it.
Section 15. Amendment to Agreement; Effect of Agreement on Future Actions. This
Agreement may be amended by mutual consent of all of the parties, provided that any such
amendment shall follow the process established by law for the adoption of a development agreement
(see, RCW 36.70B.200). However, nothing in this Agreement shall prevent the City Council from
making any amendment to its Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, Official Zoning Map or
development regulations affecting the Subject Property as the City Council may deem necessary to
the extent required by a serious threat to public health and safety. Nothing in this Development
Agreement shall prevent the City Council from making any amendments of any type to the
Comprehensive Plan, Zoning Code, Official Zoning Map or development regulations relating to the
Subject Property.
Section 16. Releases. Developer, and any subsequent Landowner, may free itself from
further obligations relating to the sold, assigned, or transferred property, provided that the buyer,
assignee or transferee expressly assumes the obligations under this Agreement as provided herein.
10
30
Section 17. Notices. Notices, demands, correspondence to the City and Developer shall be
sufficiently given if dispatched by pre -paid first -class mail to the addresses of the parties as
designated in Section 5. Notice to the City shall be to the attention of both the Mayor's Office and
the City Attorney. Notices to subsequent Landowners shall be required to be given by the City only
for those Landowners who have given the City written notice of their address for such notice. The
parties hereto may, from time to time, advise the other of new addresses for such notices, demands or
correspondence.
Section 18. Reimbursement for Agreement Expenses of the City. Developer agrees to
reimburse the City for actual expenses incurred over and above fees paid by Developer as an
applicant incurred by City directly relating to this Agreement, including recording fees, publishing
fees and reasonable staff and consultant costs not otherwise included within application fees. This
Agreement shall not take effect until the fees provided for in this section, as well as any processing
fees owed to the City for the Project, are paid to the City. This Agreement shall be terminated if the
Developer does not pay to the City the fees provided for in this section. Upon payment of all
expenses, the Developer may request written acknowledgement of all fees. Such payment of all fees
shall be paid, at the latest, within thirty (30) days from the City's presentation of a written statement
of charges to the Developer
Section 19. Police Power. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to diminish, restrict
or limit the police powers of the City granted by the Washington State Constitution or by general law.
Section 20. Third Party Legal Challenge. In the event any legal action or special
proceeding is commenced by any person or entity other than a party or a Landowner to challenge this
Agreement or any provision herein, the City and Developer will collaborate to resolve such legal
action. In the event such legal action cannot be resolved, the City may elect to tender the defense of
such lawsuit or individual claims in the lawsuit to Developer and/or Landowner(s). In such event,
Developer and /or such Landowners shall hold the City harmless from and defend the City from all
costs and expenses incurred in the defense of such lawsuit or individual claims in the lawsuit,
including but not limited to, attorneys' fees and expenses of litigation, and damages awarded to the
prevailing party or parties in such litigation. Neither the City nor the Developer and/or Landowner
shall settle any lawsuit without the consent of the other. The City and Developer/Landowner shall act
in good faith and shall not unreasonably withhold consent to settle.
Section 21. No Presumption Against Drafter. This Agreement has been reviewed and
revised by legal counsel for both Parties and no presumption or rule that ambiguity shall be construed
against the party drafting the document shall apply to the interpretation or enforcement of this
Agreement.
Section 22. Headings. The headings in this Agreement are inserted for reference only and
shall not be construed to expand, limit or otherwise modify the terms and conditions of this
Agreement.
Section 23. Recording. Developer shall record an executed copy of this Agreement with the
King County Auditor, pursuant to RCW 36.70B.190, no later than fourteen (14) days after the
Effective Date.
11
31
Section 24. Legal Representation. In entering into this Agreement, Developer represents
that it has been advised to seek legal advice and counsel from its attorney concerning the legal
consequences of this Agreement; that it has carefully read the foregoing Agreement and knows the
contents thereof, and signs the same of its own free act; and that it fully understands and voluntarily
accepts the terms and conditions of this Agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Development Agreement to be
executed as of the dates set forth below:
OWNER/DEVELOPER: CITY OF TUKWILA
By By
Its Managing Member Its Mayor
Tukwila TSD LLC
21109 66th Avenue South
Kent, WA 98032 ATTEST:
By
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By
City Attorney
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss.
COUNTY OF
On this day of , 2014, before me personally
appeared , to me known to be the individual that
executed the within and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged the said instrument to be his/her
free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes therein mentioned, and on oath stated that
he/she is authorized to execute said instrument.
12
32
Print name:
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of
Washington
Residing at
Commission expires:
STATE OF WASHINGTON )
) ss.
COUNTY OF
On this day of , 2014, before me personally
appeared , and said person acknowledged that he/she
signed this instrument, on oath stated that he/she was authorized to execute the instrument, and
acknowledged as the of the City of Tukwila to be the free and voluntary
act of said party for the uses and purposes mentioned in this instrument.
Print name:
NOTARY PUBLIC in and for the State of
Washington
Residing at
Commission expires:
13
33
EXHIBIT J.
EXHIBIT
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY
TRACT 4, ANDOVER. INDUSTRIA'. PARK NO.1, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF
RECORDED IN VOLUME 66 OF mos, PAGER 36, RECORDS OF KING COUNTY,
WASHINGTON;
EXCEPT THE SOUTH 28 FEET THEREOP; AND EXCEPT THAT PORTION THEREOF CONDEMNED IN
KING COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT CAUSE NO. 592245, ACCORDING TO DECREE FILED JANUARY
14,1963.
_ v
Co \
34
0L- E C. CL. VD,
uJ
uJ
0
0
TY LINE
TUKWILA PARKWAY
EXHIBIT 2
TYPICAL PARK
CE 9'X19'
55,170 SQ. 1-1
92 UNITS
53 ONSITE PARKING SPACES
45 OFITE PAR NG
SITE PLAN
" = 50=0"
RE- STRIPE EXISTING FOR INCREASED PARKING SPACES FROM 24 SPACES TO 27
HOLIDAY I N EXPRESS
TULWILA, WA
TUKWILA SD L.L.C.
e e n e,9
ARCHITECT
10/31/14
5715 143rd Place S.E.
Bellevue, WA 98008
425-280-8969
35
EXHIBIT 3
PROPOSED POCKET PARK — CHRISTENSEN ROAD
Development of the park and parking area will include the installation of:
• New graded area for the park
• A circular seating wall
�
Bike rack
• Picnic tables
• Waste receptacle
• Pathways
• Three Iife trail stations (along the adjacent trail)
• Evergreen trees to provide screening between the 65th Avenue S bridge, Tukwila Parkway, and
the park
• Flowering trees
• Restriping 27 parking spaces along the east side of Christensen Road
�
Striping four spaces at the north end of Christensen Road
~
New pavement and striping for the development of 14 new spaces along the west side of
Christensen Road and four spaces at the north end.
• Maintaining the parking area, landscaping, irrigation, and waste disposal for the public pocket
park (Includes restriping spaces every three years).
• Allowing public access to the hotel site as required for park access and egress
p
Planned access for emergency vehicles
• The pocket park will be included within the open space requirements of the City Municipal Code
and Christensen Road and the parking spaces will comply with all relevant codes as well as the
American with Disabilities Act (ADA).
36
..(!!;(7r.:11/4
uJ
0
SEPT. 2, 2014
37
38
Schematic Cost Estimate
ITEM
PROPOSED TUKWILA POCKET PARK & PARKING - COST SUMMARY
Date: September 4, 2014
QTY. COST TOTAL REMARKS
New Concrete Paving Area
New Asphalt Paving Area
Landscape Area
Hardscape Improvements
Demolition ($ /c.y.)
Concrete Walks & Paving ($ /s.f.)
Asphalt Paving ($ /s.f.)
Seatwall ($ /f.s.f)
Picnic Tables (S /ea.)
Bike Rack ($ /f.s.f.)
Trash Receptacles
Life Stations ($ /f.s.f.)
Subtotal
Landscape Improvements
Bed Prep. & Fine Grading
Soil Prep
Evergreen Trees
Deciduous Trees
Lawn, Plantings, and Irrigation
Subtotal
3,400
700
9,875
2,706 $1.95
3,400 $6.50
700 $3.00
165 $200
3 $2,200
1 $650
1 $750
3 $3,500
9,875 $0.10
89 $35.00
7 $250.00
6 $400.00
9,875 $4.00
Contingency 10%
Note: Estimate does not include grading, drainage, or parking
Civil Engineering & New Parking Spaces - Right -of -Way
Landscape & Architectural Fees
Annual Maintenance
Total
$5,277 Sawcut & demo. Existing roadway & curbing
22,100 4" rein. Conc. w /scoring and broom finish
2,100
33,000 18" height, c.i.p.concrete wall & raised planter
6,600 6' length
650
750
10,500
$80,977
$988 All lawn & planting areas
3,111 3" depth - all lawn & planting areas
1,750 6' Min. Ht.
2,400 2" Cal., 12' Min. Ht.
39,500
$47,748
$12,872
$25,000
$13,440
$6,000 (Annual fee subject to inflation over term of agreement)
$186,037
Sources:
Jeffrey B. Glander & Associates (Landscape Architecture & Site Planning)
Civil Engineer
Tri- States Development. LLC.
Dale Sweeney, Architect
39
Land Value estimate for parking and drive aisle area of Christensen Road
Approximate land area including right -of -way (s.f.) 17,103
Developer's contracted land cost per square foot $25.00
Land acquisition cost (If 100% use) $427,575
Proposed pocket park & parking cost estimate $186,037
Pocket park & parking as percentage of total cost 43.5%
* Ongoing maintenance and striping costs after initial year go on indefinitely
40
TO:
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
INFORMATIONAL U��U�^��������U�
nx�n�*.���wmn�mm n*.�n��m�~ n�n�~n�nw�pn��mnm����n�n
Mayor Haggerton
Community Affairs and Parks Committee
FROM: Economic Development Administrator
DATE: November 5, 2014
SUBJECT: Multi-Family Residential Property Tax Incentive
ISSUE
The Council is being asked to designate a portion of Tukwila's Transit Oriented Development
District as a "residential targeted area" and approve a multi-family property tax exemption
program as an incentive to encourage construction of new apartments and condominiums.
BACKGROUND
State law (RCW 84.14\ allows cities to exempt qualified multi-family housing from property taxes
within certain "residential targeted areas" as designated by the cities as an incentive to
encourage residential development and redevelopment of market rate and affordable housing in
urban centers.
If a p jectnnggta1heohteha.theque|ifiedreaidenUa|unhsvvou|dbggxennctfnonnadvakonern
property taxes for eight years. If the p ject also provides affordable housing, it would be
exempt for twelve years. The exemption applies to the ad valorem property taxes received by all
taxing districts, not just the City. The property tax exemption applies to the qualified housing
units only, not on the value of the land or commercial improvements. Once the exemption
period ends, the structures are placed on the property tax rolis based on their original new
construction valuation.
In addition to being Iocated within a residential targeted area, the p jects must meet other State
eligibflity criteria such as having four or more units, meeting all city building codes, and being
completed within three years of conditionai approval of the exemption. Cities may add
additional criteria such as height, density, public benefit features, income limits for occupants,
limits on rents or sales prices, etc. The exemption may apply to ownership and/or rental units.
Attached is a report by the Washington State Department of Commerce entitled "Multi-Unit
Housing Tax Incentives 2007-2010" which provides a good summary of the State's intent and
history of the program. The report only provides a overview since it reflects only those cities
that voluntarily reported. The Puget Sound Regional Council also published a summary of the
multi-family property tax exemption incentive (attached).
Many cities in the State and King County have adopted ordinances establishing the exemption
incentive in their cities. Attached is a list of many cities who have adopted programs. A subset of
the cities who adopted programs have approved qualified pr jVCis.
Within King County, five cities have pr jects that are currently receiving exemptions under this
program. The cities are: Burien, Kirh|and, Renton, Seattle, and Shoreline. Attached is a table
showing the number of multi-family pr jects in King County currently receiving property tax
exemptions. It is important to note that the table shows number of projects, not dwelling units.
Some of the projects have hundreds of dwelling units and total number of units is in the
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 2
thousands. The tabie does not reflect projects that have been conditionally approved by cities
but are still under construction and so have not started receiving the exemption.
DISCUSSION
The multi-family property tax exemption can be an effective tool for encouraging residential
development in urban centers. Staif recommends the City implement the incentive for the
portion of the Tukwila Urban Center's Transit Oriented Development district (TOD district) that
lies west of the Green River. This targeted area would comprise 42 parcels and three property
tax levy code areas. A table showing the 2014 property tax levies by taxing district is attached.
The purpose of the incentive is to "prime the pump" and get new construction of multi-family
residential started - not to provide an ongoing subsidy. Therefore staif recommends the program
include a "sunset clause" and only accept applications through the end of 2016, which is
basically two years. After one or two projects are completed and reOted, we may learn that the
rents are high enough to justify additional development without needing the incentive.
There are a number of benefits to the City for adopting the program but the main question is
about the City's vision for the urban center and whether the City wants to encourage
construction of new multi-family residential in the TOD district. Here are some reasons why we
should:
1. Residents in the TOD district help create a more "downtown" feel and sense of place
which strengthens Tukwila's identity.
2. Multi-family residential in the TOD district is a housing option that some of our
current residents would like to have.
3. New apartments in the TOD district would be a step toward condominiums which
may Iead to a higher percentage of home ownership in Tukwila,
4. Residents in our TOD district and an improved identity strengthen the economy of
our retail area by providing a sense of pace that attracts additional customers.
5. Housing in the TOD district will help the City achieve its residential growth targets
and goals outlined in the City's Housing and Urban Center Element of the
Comprehensive Plan.
6. Housing in the TOD district will help the City meet its obligations under the State's
Growth Management Act as a designated urban center and continue receiving
additional credit when applying for State and Federal infrastructure grants.
7. Housing in the TOD district will help the City meet its obligation under the King
County Countywide Pianning Policies.
8. Housing in the TOD district will help implement the City's intent as described in the
recently adopted Southcenter Plan which states the community intent to "stimulate
pioneering residentia/ and office development in waiking distance of the Southcenter
transit center..."
If the Council agrees the City should encourage construction of new multi-family residential in
the TOD district, the nex question is then whether the City shoud offer a multi-family property
tax exemption as an incentive, Attached is a chart showing the value of the exemption to the
property owner for pr ject assessed values ranging from $1 million to $100 million.
It is important to note that the exemption does not reduce or take away property taxes currently
received by the City or other taxing districts. However, it does delay when the agencies would
start receiving property tax on the new construction by eight or twelve years. This is significant
for the City because the City needs those property taxes to be able to provide police, fire, and
other services to the residents of the new development. Whether other agencies will provide
CADnouments and Gonings\demx'$oeomop0rdinunoaMFPTEmemo.uuo
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 3
services to the residents of the new development would depend on the agency's services. For
example, it is unlikely many school children will live in the new residential units in the TOD
district but it is likely those residents would use public transit.
Whether the tax exemption value received by the property owner is an opportunity cos to the
City and taxing districts depends on whether the p ject would occur on its own without the
incentive. If the project would happen on its own then the property tax exemption an
opportunity cost to the City ar,d other taxing districts. If the p ject would not happen without
the incentive, then the exemption is not an opportunity cost since there woutd have been no
new construction.
It is difficult to answer that question with certainty but staf believes the exemption is a
necessary incentive for the first one or two p jects to be built. Foliowing are three examples
indicating why the incentive is necessary:
• Over the past decade, Economic Development staff has spoken with multi-family
residential housing developers who expressed reluctance to develop since there are no
existing rents on new apartments or condos near this TOD district, especial)y for an
urban product. Without rent comparables, proposed p jeCts appear risky and are hard
to finance.
w
In 2014 the City hired Heartland, LLC to perform a financial analysis of the Washington
Place development which is proposed in the TOD district, Heartland concluded that
",.even under optimistic circumstances, the project would not meet financial
eXpect8dDDSOf0a[hetb8G8diOV8StU[SO[|eOd8rS."UtGhOU|db8OOted that the
developers for that project are seeking funding through the Federal government's foreign
investor visa program which may reduce their borrowing costs.]
• At the Soundside Alliance meeting on economic development held recently, Legacy
Partners, the new developer for the apartment and senior housing phases of Burien
Town Square mentioned the property tax exemption as a key incentive for that
development.
Washington Place: It is important to note that staff is not recommending this incentive program
strictly for Washington Place. Even if Washington Place were not in the pipeline, Department of
Community Devebpment and Economic Development staff would recommend this incentive.
The recently adopted Southcenter Plan also recommends the City provide incentives to
encourage new multi-family residential deveiopment. Because the Washington Place pr j8Ct
has expressed a strong desire to apply for the incentive, staff has brought it forward at this time.
Regardless of whether Washington Place receives the incentive, other properties that meet the
criteria could apply. Staff is not aware of any other development proposals that would meet the
criteria at this time.
Transient Occupancy: One of the concerns raised in the public discussion on this incentive is
whether owners of the apartments or condominiums could rent out their units for short term
stays. If they did this repeatedly, it clearly would not meet the intent of the incentive. For
example, we have heard of investors in condominiums in Canada who purchased entire floors
of units and then rented them out for short term stays much like a hotel. In order to protect
against this, the proposed ordinance includes criteria that the exemption is only on units used
for "permanent residential occupancy". As that term is defined it would require apartments to be
rented for terms of at least one month or it would allow condominium owners to rent out their
units for no more than 30 days per calendar year.
CiDncumemamw memo.doc
INFORMATIONAL MEMO
Page 4
The state law suggests jurisdictions considering a tax exemption program hold a public hearing
prior to adopting the program. On November 3, 2013 the City Council approved a resolution
setting the public hearing for the Council meeting on November 24, 2014.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
If the Council approves a multi-family property tax exemption program, there would be no
reduction to current property tax revenues. If a project is approved that would have been built
anyway, then the property taxes on the qualified new construction would be an opportunity cost.
If the project would not have been built, then it is not an opportunity cost. Staff believes it is
likely the exemption incentive is necessary for the first one or two multi-family residential
projects in the TOD district to be built in the next few years.
BUDGET IMPACT
This specific item does not have a budget impact.
RECOMMENDATION
The Council is being asked to hold a public hearing at the November 24, 2014 Committee of the
Whole meeting and consider this item at the December 1, 2014 Regular Meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Draft ordinance with Figure A (map of proposed "Residential Targeted Area")
WA State Dept of Commerce report on Multi-unit Housing Tax Incentives
Puget Sound Regional Council article on Multi-family Tax Exemption
List of cities that adopted multi-family property tax exemption incentive programs
Table of multi-family projects in King County receiving property tax exemption
2014 Property Tax Levies by Taxing District
Example of multifamily property tax exemption value
CADocuments and Settings\derek-s\Desktop \Ordinance MFPTE memo.doc
44
RAFT
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON; ESTABLISHING AN
EXEMPTION FROM REAL PROPERTY TAXATION FOR
DEVELOPMENT OF QUALIFIED MULTI - FAMILY
HOUSING; ESTABLISHING NEW REGULATIONS TO BE
CODIFIED IN TUKWILA MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER
3.90 RELATING TO THE DESIGNATION OF A
RESIDENTIAL TARGETED AREA WITHIN THE TUKWILA
URBAN CENTER; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY;
AND ESTABLISHING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
WHEREAS, Chapter 84.14 RCW authorizes cities to provide for exemptions from
ad valorem property taxation on qualified multi - family housing developments located in
designated residential targeted areas in order to encourage more desirable and
convenient residential units in urban centers; and
WHEREAS, the King County Countywide Planning Policies (KCCPP), developed
pursuant to the Washington State Growth Management Act, have established standards
for cities to plan for their share of regional growth and affordable housing; and
WHEREAS, the Tukwila Urban Center is one of the region's designated urban
centers and lies within an urban growth area; and
WHEREAS, the City intends to assist in achieving its residential growth targets and
goals in the City's Housing and Urban Center Element of the City's Comprehensive
Plan by encouraging new multi - family housing in the Tukwila Urban Center; and
WHEREAS, the Tukwila Urban Center currently lacks sufficient available, desirable
and convenient residential housing, including affordable housing, to meet the needs of
the public who would be likely to live in the urban center, if the affordable, desirable,
attractive, and livable places to live were available; and
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Property tax exemption for qualified multi - family housing 11- 4- 14.doc
DS:bjs
Page 1 of 12
45
WHEREAS, the Tukwila Urban Center qualifies as an urban center for purposes of
RCW 84.14.010 and Tukwila has a desire to stimulate new construction of multi - family
housing within that portion of the Tukwila Urban Center's Transit Oriented Development
district that lies west of the Green River; and
WHEREAS, the tax incentive provided by Chapter 84.14 RCW encourages
increased residential opportunities, including affordable housing opportunities, and will
stimulate the construction of new multi - family housing within the residential targeted
area and will benefit and promote public health, safety, and welfare by encouraging
residential development and redevelopment of that area of the City; and
WHEREAS, on November 24, 2014, the Tukwila City Council, after giving public
notice as required by RCW 84.14.040, held a public hearing to consider adoption of the
proposed ordinance;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA,
WASHINGTON, HEREBY ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Designation of Residential Targeted Area. The City Council hereby
designates the boundary of the residential targeted area as that portion of the Tukwila
Urban Center zone's Transit Oriented Development district that lies west of the Green
River as shown in Figure A and attached hereto and as further specified in Tukwila
Municipal Code Section 3.90.030.
Section 2. Regulations Established. Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Chapter
3.90, "Multi- Family Residential Property Tax Exemption," is hereby established to read
as follows:
CHAPTER 3.90
MULTI - FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION
Sections:
3.90.010 Purpose
3.90.020 Definitions
3.90.030 Residential Targeted Area — Criteria — Designation —
Recession
3.90.040 Tax Exemption for Multi - Family Housing in Residential
Targeted Areas Authorized
3.90.050 Project Eligibility
3.90.060 Application Procedure — Fee
3.90.070 Application Review — Issuance of Conditional Certificate —
Denial — Appeal
3.90.080 Extension of Conditional Certificate
3.90.090 Final Certificate — Application — Issuance — Denial — Appeal
3.90.100 Annual Certification
3.90.110 Appeals to the Hearing Examiner
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Property tax exemption for qualified multi - family housing 11- 4- 14.doc
DS:bjs
Page 2 of 12
46
Section 3. Tukwila Municipal Code (TMC) Section 3.90.010 is hereby established
to read as follows:
3.90.010 Purpose
The purposes of this chapter are:
1. To encourage increased residential opportunities, including affordable
housing opportunities, and to stimulate the construction of new multi - family housing
within a portion of the Tukwila Urban Center's Transit Oriented Development district.
2. To accomplish the planning goals required under the Washington State
Growth Management Act, Chapter 36.70A RCW and Countywide Planning Policies as
implemented by the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Section 4. TMC Section 3.90.020 is hereby established to read as follows:
3.90.020 Definitions
As used in this chapter, unless the context or subject matter clearly requires otherwise,
the words or phrases defined in this section shall have the indicated meanings:
A. "Administrator" shall mean the Economic Development Administrator of the City
of Tukwila or his /her designee.
B. "Affordable housing" means residential housing that is rented by a person or
household whose monthly housing costs, including utilities other than telephone, do not
exceed 30 percent of the household's monthly income. For the purposes of housing
intended for owner occupancy, "affordable housing" means residential housing that is
within the means of low- or moderate - income households.
C. "High cost area" means a county where the third quarter median house price
for the previous year as reported by the Washington Center for Real Estate Research at
Washington State University is equal to or greater than 130 percent of the statewide
median house price published during the same time period.
D. "Household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons living
together.
E. "Low- income household" means a single person, family, or unrelated persons
living together whose adjusted income is at or below 80 percent of the median family
income, adjusted for family size, for the county where the project is located, as reported
by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development. For cities
located in high -cost areas, "low- income household" means a household that has an
income at or below 100 percent of the median family income adjusted for family size, for
the county where the project is located.
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Property tax exemption for qualified multi - family housing 11- 4- 14.doc
DS:bjs Page 3 of 12
47
F. "Moderate- income household" means a single person, family, or unrelated
persons living together whose adjusted income is more than 80 percent but is at or
below 115 percent of the median family income, adjusted for family size, for the county
where the project is located, as reported by the United States Department of Housing
and Urban Development. For cities located in high -cost areas, "moderate- income
household" means a household that has an income that is more than 100 percent, but
at or below 150 percent, of the median family income adjusted for family size, for the
county where the project is located.
G. "Multi- family housing" means a building having four or more dwelling units not
designed or used as transient accommodations and not including hotels and motels.
Multi- family units may result from new construction or rehabilitation or conversion of
vacant, underutilized, or substandard buildings to multi - family housing.
H. "Owner" means the property owner of record.
I. "Owner occupied" means a residential unit that is rented for fewer than 30 days
per calendar year.
J. "Permanent residential occupancy" means mufti-family housing that is either
owner occupied or rented for periods of at least one month.
K. "Residential targeted area" means the area within the boundary as designated
by TMC Section 3.90.030.
L. "Urban Center" means a compact, identifiable district where urban residents
may obtain a variety of products and services. An urban center must contain:
1. Several existing or previous, or both, business establishments that may
include but are not limited to shops, offices, banks, restaurants, governmental agencies;
2. Adequate public facilities including streets, sidewalks, lighting, transit,
domestic water, and sanitary sewer systems; and
3. A mixture of uses and activities that may include housing, recreation, and
cultural activities in association with either commercial or office or both uses.
Section 5. TMC Section 3.90.030 is hereby established to read as follows:
3.90.030 Residential Targeted Area — Criteria — Designation — Recession
A. The boundary of the residential targeted area is that portion of the Tukwila
Urban Center zone's Transit Oriented Development district that lies west of the Green
River as shown in Figure A.
B. If a part of any legal lot is within the residential targeted area, then the entire lot
shall be deemed to lie within such residential targeted area.
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Property tax exemption for qualified multi - family housing 11- 4- 14.doc
DS:bjs
Page 4 of 12
48
Section 6. TMC Section 3.90.040 is hereby established to read as follows:
3.90.040 Tax Exemption for Multi- Family Housing in Residential Targeted
Areas Authorized
A. Duration of Exemption. The value of improvements qualifying under this
chapter will be exempt from ad valorem property taxation, as follows:
1. For 8 successive years beginning January 1 of the year immediately
following the calendar year of issuance of the certificate of tax exemption; or
2. For 12 successive years beginning January 1 of the year immediately
following the calendar year of issuance of the certificate of tax exemption, if the property
otherwise qualifies for the exemption under Chapter 84.14 RCW and meets the
conditions in this subsection. For the property to qualify for the 12 -year exemption
under this subsection, the applicant must commit to renting or selling at least 20 percent
of the multi - family housing units as affordable housing units to low- and moderate -
income households. In the case of the projects intended exclusively for owner
occupancy, the minimum requirement of this subsection may be satisfied solely through
housing affordable to moderate - income households.
B. Limits of Exemption.
1. The property tax exemption does not apply to the value of land or to the
value of non - housing - related improvements not qualifying under RCW 84.14.
2. This chapter does not apply to increases in assessed valuation made by
the assessor on non - qualifying portions of building and value of land, nor to increases
made by lawful order of the King County Board of Equalization, the Department of
Revenue, or King County, to a class of property throughout the county or specific area
of the county to achieve uniformity of assessment of appraisal required by law.
3. The property tax exemption only applies to the value of improvements used
for permanent residential occupancy.
Section 7. TMC Section 3.90.050 is hereby established to read as follows:
3.90.050 Project Eligibility
A. To be eligible for exemption from property taxation under this chapter, the
residential units must satisfy all of the following criteria:
1. The units must be located in the residential targeted area.
2. The units must be within a residential or mixed -use structure containing at
least four dwelling units.
3. The units must have an average size of at least 500 square feet per unit.
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Property tax exemption for qualified multi - family housing 11- 4- 14.doc
DS:bjs
Page 5 of 12
49
4. A minimum of 15 percent of the units must be at least 900 square feet and
contain at least two bedrooms.
5. The units must be designed and used for permanent residential occupancy.
6. Each unit must have its own private bathroom and private kitchen.
Residential projects that utilize common kitchens and /or common bathrooms are not
eligible.
7. The entire property shall comply with all applicable zoning requirements,
land use regulations, environmental requirements, building codes and fire code
requirements, as outlined in the Tukwila Municipal Code.
8. The units must be constructed and receive a certificate of occupancy after
this ordinance takes effect
9. The units must be completed within 3 years from the date of issuance of
the conditional certificate of acceptance of tax exemption by the City, or within
authorized extension of this time limit.
B. In addition to the requirements listed in TMC Section 3.90.050 (A), residential
units that request the 12 -year property tax exemption, as permitted by TMC Section
3.90.040 (A)(2), must also satisfy the following requirements:
1. The mix and configuration of housing units (e.g., studio, one - bedroom, two -
bedroom, etc.) used to meet the requirement for affordable units under TMC Section
3.90.050 shall be substantially proportional to the mix and configuration of the total
housing units in the project.
2. For owner - occupied projects, the contract with the City required under TMC
Section 3.90.070 shall identify which units meet the affordability criteria.
Section 8. TMC Section 3.90.060 is hereby established to read as follows:
3.90.060 Application Procedure — Fee
A. The owner of property applying for exemption under this chapter shall submit
an application to the Administrator, on a form established by the Administrator. The
owner shall verify the contents of the application by oath or affirmation. The application
shall contain the following information:
1. A brief written description of the project, including phasing if applicable, that
states which units are proposed for the exemption and whether the request is for 8 or 12
years.
2. Preliminary schematic site and floor plans of the multi - family units and the
structure(s) in which they are proposed to be located.
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Property tax exemption for qualified multi - family housing 11- 4- 14.doc
DS:bjs Page 6 of 12
50
3. A table of all units in the project listing unit number, square footage, unit
type (studio, one bedroom, etc.), and indicating those proposed for the exemption.
4. If applicable, information describing how the applicant will comply with the
affordability requirements in TMC Sections 3.90.040 and 3.90.050.
5. A statement from the owner acknowledging the potential tax liability when
the property ceases to be eligible for exemption under this chapter.
6. Any other information deemed necessary or useful by the Administrator
B. At the time of application under this section, the applicant shall pay to the City
an initial application fee of $500 or as otherwise established by ordinance or resolution.
If the application is denied, the City may retain that portion of the application fee
attributable to its own administrative costs and refund the balance to the applicant.
C. The complete application shall be submitted any time before, but no later than,
the date the certificate of occupancy is issued under Title 16 of the Tukwila Municipal
Code.
D. After December 31, 2016, the City will no longer accept applications.
Section 9. TMC Section 3.90.070 is hereby established to read as follows:
3.90.070 Application Review — Issuance of Conditional Certificate — Denial
— Appeal
A. The Administrator shall approve or deny an application under this chapter
within 90 days of receipt of the complete application. The Administrator shall use the
criteria listed in TMC Chapter 3.90 and Chapter 84.14 RCW to review the proposed
application. If the application is approved, the owner shall enter into a contract with the
City regarding the terms and conditions of the project and eligibility for exemption under
this Chapter. The Mayor shall be the authorized signatory to enter into the contract on
behalf of the City. Following execution of the contract, the Administrator shall issue a
conditional certificate of acceptance of tax exemption. The certificate must contain a
statement by the Administrator that the property has complied with the required finding
indicated in RCW 84.14.060The conditional certificate shall expire 3 years from the date
of approval unless an extension is granted as provided in this chapter.
B. If the application is denied, the Administrator shall issue a Notice of Denial
stating in writing the reasons for the denial and send the Notice of Denial to the
applicant's last known address within 10 days of the denial.
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Property tax exemption for qualified multi - family housing 11- 4- 14.doc
DS:bjs
Page 7 of 12
51
C. An applicant may appeal the Administrator's notice of denial of the application
to the City Council by filing a notice of appeal with the City Clerk within 30 days of
receipt of the Administrator's notice of denial and paying a fee of $500 or as otherwise
established by ordinance or resolution. The appellant shall provide a statement
regarding the basis for the appeal. The closed record appeal before the City Council
shall be based upon the record before the Administrator, and the Administrator's
decision shall be upheld unless the applicant can show that there is no substantial
evidence on the record to support the Administrator's decision. The City Council
decision on appeal is final.
Section 10. TMC Section 3.90.080 is hereby established to read as follows:
3.90.080 Extension of Conditional Certificate
The conditional certificate may be extended by the Administrator for a period not to
exceed 24 consecutive months. The applicant shall submit a written request stating the
grounds for the extension, together with a fee as established by ordinance or resolution.
The Administrator may grant an extension if the Administrator determines that:
1. The anticipated failure to complete construction or rehabilitation within the
required time period is due to circumstances beyond the control of the owner;
2. The owner has been acting and could reasonably be expected to continue
to act in good faith and with due diligence; and
3. All the conditions of the original contract between the owner and the City
will be satisfied upon completion of the project.
Section 11. TMC Section 3.90.090 is hereby established to read as follows:
3.90.090 Final Certificate — Application — Issuance — Denial — Appeal
A. After completion of construction as provided in the contract between the owner
and the City, after issuance of a certificate of occupancy and prior to expiration of the
conditional certificate of exemption, the applicant may request a final certificate of tax
exemption. The applicant shall file with the Administrator such information as the
Administrator may deem necessary or useful to evaluate eligibility for the final
certificate, and shall include:
1. A statement of expenditures made with respect to each multi - family
housing unit, including phasing if applicable, and the total expenditures made with
respect to the entire property.
2. A description of the completed work and a statement of qualification for the
exemption.
3. A statement that the work was completed within the required 3 -year period
or any approved extension.
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Property tax exemption for qualified multi - family housing 11- 4- 14.doc
DS:bjs
Page 8 of 12
52
4. If applicable, information on the applicant's compliance with the affordability
requirements in TMC Sections 3.90.040 and 3.90.050.
B. Within 30 days of receipt of all materials required for a final certificate, the
Administrator shall determine whether the completed work is consistent with the
application and contract approved by the Mayor and is qualified for limited exemption
under Chapter 84.14 RCW, and which specific improvements completed meet the
requirements of this chapter and the required findings of RCW 84.14.060.
C. If the Administrator determines that the project has been completed in
accordance with TMC Section 3.90.090 (A), the City shall file a final certificate of tax
exemption with the assessor within 10 days of the expiration of the 30 -day period
provided under TMC Section 3.90.090 (B).
D. The Administrator is authorized to cause to be recorded, or to require the
applicant or owner to record, in the real property records of the King County Department
of Records and Elections, the contract with the City required under TMC Section
3.90.070 and such other document(s) as will identify such terms and conditions of
eligibility for exemption under this chapter as the Administrator deems appropriate for
recording, including requirements under this chapter relating to affordability of units.
E. The Administrator shall notify the applicant in writing that the City will not file a
final certificate if the Administrator determines that the project was not completed within
the required 3 -year period or any approved extension, or was not completed in
accordance with TMC Section 3.90.090 (B); or if the Administrator determines that the
owner's property is not otherwise qualified under this chapter or if the owner and the
Administrator cannot agree on the allocation of the value of the improvements allocated
to the exempt portion of rehabilitation improvements, new construction and multi -use
new construction.
F. The applicant may appeal the City's decision to not file a final certificate of tax
exemption to the City's Hearing Examiner within 30 days of issuance of the
Administrator's notice as outlined in TMC Section 3.90.110.
Section 12. TMC Section 3.90.100 is hereby established to read as follows:
3.90.100 Annual Certification
A. A residential unit or units that receive a tax exemption under this chapter shall
continue to comply with the contract and the requirements of this chapter in order to
retain its property tax exemption.
B. Within 30 days after the first anniversary of the date the City filed the final
certificate of tax exemption and each year for the tax exemption period, the property
owner shall file a certification with the Administrator, verified upon oath or affirmation,
which shall contain such information as the Administrator may deem necessary or
useful, and shall include the following information:
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Property tax exemption for qualified multi - family housing 11- 4- 14.doc
DS:bjs Page 9 of 12
53
1. A statement of occupancy and vacancy of the multi - family units during the
previous year.
2. A certification that the property has not changed use since the date of filing
of the final certificate of tax exemption and continues to be in compliance with the
contract with the City and the requirements of this chapter.
3. A description of any improvements or changes to the property made after
the filing of the final certificate or last declaration, as applicable.
4. If applicable, information demonstrating the owner's compliance with the
affordability requirements of TMC Sections 3.90.040 and 3.90.050, including:
a. The total monthly rent or total sale amount of each unit; and
b. The income of each renter household at the time of initial occupancy
and the income of each initial purchaser of owner - occupied units at the time of purchase
for each of the units receiving a tax exemption.
5. The value of the tax exemption for the project.
6. Any additional information requested by the City in regard to the units
receiving a tax exemption (pursuant to meeting any reporting requirements under
Chapter 84.14 RCW).
C. Failure to submit the annual declaration may result in cancellation of the tax
exemption pursuant to this section.
D. For the duration of the exemption granted under this chapter, the property shall
have no violation of applicable zoning requirements, land use regulations, building
codes, fire codes, and housing codes contained in the Tukwila Municipal Code for which
the designated City department shall have issued a Notice and Order and that is not
resolved within the time period for compliance provided in such Notice and Order.
E. For owner - occupied affordable units, in addition to any other requirements in
this Chapter, the affordable owner - occupied units must continue to meet the income
eligibility requirements of TMC Section 3.90.040. In the event of a sale of an affordable
owner - occupied unit to a household other than an eligible household, or at a price
greater than prescribed in the contract referenced in TMC Section 3.90.070, the
property tax exemption for that affordable owner - occupied unit shall be canceled
pursuant to this section.
F. For property with renter - occupied dwelling units, in addition to any other
requirements in this chapter, the affordable renter - occupied units must continue to meet
the income eligibility requirements of TMC Section 3.90.040. In the event of a rental of
an affordable renter - occupied unit to a household other than an eligible household, or at
a rent greater than prescribed in the contract referenced in TMC Section 3.90.040, the
property tax exemption for the property shall be canceled pursuant to this section.
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Property tax exemption for qualified multi - family housing 11- 4- 14.doc
DS:bjs
Page 10 of 12
54
G. If the owner converts the multi - family housing to another use, the owner shall
notify the Administrator and the County Assessor within 60 days of the change in use.
Upon such change in use, the tax exemption shall be canceled pursuant to this section.
H. The Administrator shall cancel the tax exemption for any property or individual
unit that no longer complies with the terms of the contract or with the requirements of
this chapter. Upon cancellation, additional taxes, interest and penalties shall be
imposed pursuant to state law. Upon determining that a tax exemption shall be
canceled, the Administrator shall notify the property owner by certified mail, return
receipt requested. The property owner may appeal the determination by filing a notice
of appeal within 30 days of the date of notice of cancellation, specifying the factual and
legal basis for the appeal. The appeal shall be heard by the Hearing Examiner pursuant
to TMC Section 3.90.110.
Section 13. TMC Section 3.90.110 is hereby established to read as follows:
3.90.110 Appeals to the Hearing Examiner
A. The City's Hearing Examiner is provided jurisdiction to hear appeals of the
decisions of the Administrator to deny issuance of a final certificate of tax exemption or
cancel tax exempt status. All appeals shall be closed record and based on the
information provided to the Administrator when the administrative decision was made.
B. The Hearing Examiner's procedures, as adopted by City Council resolution,
shall apply to hearings under this chapter to the extent they are consistent with the
requirements of this chapter and Chapter 84.14 RCW. The Hearing Examiner shall give
substantial weight to the Administrator's decision and the burden of proof shall be on
the appellant. The decision of the Hearing Examiner constitutes the final decision of the
City. An aggrieved party may appeal the decision to Superior Court under RCW
34.05.510 through 34.05.598 if the appeal is properly filed within 30 days of the date of
the notification by the City to the appellant of that decision.
Section 14. Corrections by City Clerk or Code Reviser. Upon approval of the
City Attorney, the City Clerk and the code reviser are authorized to make necessary
corrections to this ordinance, including the correction of clerical errors; references to
other local, state or federal laws, codes, rules, or regulations; or ordinance numbering
and section /subsection numbering.
Section 15. Severability. If any section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, clause
or phrase of this ordinance or its application to any person or situation should be held to
be invalid or unconstitutional for any reason by a court of competent jurisdiction, such
invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect the validity or constitutionality of the
remaining portions of this ordinance or its application to any other person or situation.
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Property tax exemption for qualified multi - family housing 11- 4- 14.doc
DS:bjs
Page 11 of 12
55
Section 16. Effective Date. This ordinance or a summary thereof shall be
published in the official newspaper of the City, and shall take effect and be in full force
five days after passage and publication as provided by law.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TUKWILA, WASHINGTON, at
a Regular Meeting thereof this day of , 2014.
ATTEST /AUTHENTICATED:
Christy O'Flaherty, MMC, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Rachel Turpin, City Attorney
Jim Haggerton, Mayor
Filed with the City Clerk:
Passed by the City Council:
Published:
Effective Date:
Ordinance Number:
Attachment: Figure A, "City of Tukwila Multi- Family Property Tax Exemption
Residential Targeted Area"
W: Word Processing \Ordinances \Property tax exemption for qualified multi - family housing 11- 4- 14.doc
DS:bjs
Page 12 of 12
56
04
A,414*
City of Tukwila
Multi-Family Property Tax Exemption
Residential Targeted Area
Figure A
57
58
qr
Department of Commerce
n n is in "u e r r ture.
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
Report to the Governor
Rogers Weed, Director
59
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Washington State Department of Commerce
Karen J. Larkin, Assistant Director, Local Government & Infrastructure Division
Leonard Bauer, Managing Director, Growth Management Services
Ike Nwankwo, Technical & Financial Assistance Manager, Growth Management Services
Linda Weyl, Administrative Assistant, Growth Management Services
Special thanks to the cities and counties who participated in this study.
Washington State Department of Commerce
Growth Management Services
1011 Plum Street SE
P.O. Box 42525
Olympia, WA 98504
www.commerce.wa.gov/growth
To obtain a copy of this report in an alternate format, please call (360) 725 -3066
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
60
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 4
BACKGROUND INFORMATION 4
ESSHB 1910 (2007) 4
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE ROLE: ANNUAL REPORT 6
ANNUAL REPORT SUMMARY 6
ANALYSIS / EVALUATION 8
RECOMMENDATIONS/CONCLUSIONS 14
LIST OF REPORTS
2007 Multi Family Tax Exemption Report 7
2008 Multi Family Tax Exemption Report 7
2009 Multi Family Tax Exemption Report 8
2010 Multi Family Tax Exemption Report 8
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1: Comparison of New Housing Units in Cities Using Property Tax Exemptions 2007 - 2010. 10
Table 2: Percentage of Total Housing Units Built Using Property Tax Exemptions 2007 - 2010 11
Table 3: Comparison of Affordable and Market Rate Housing Units 12
Table 4: Percentage of Affordable vs. Market Rate Housing Units 13
Multi-Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007-2010
3
61
Introduction
The purpose of this report is to evaluate the uses and the effects of the multi -unit housing tax
incentives approved by the 2007 Legislature as Engrossed Second Substitute House Bill 1910
(ESSHB 1910). It later was codified as RCW 84.14. This report was requested by the Governor
in her partial veto of the legislation.
Background Information
The Washington Growth Management Act (GMA) was passed by the Washington State
Legislature in 1990. The GMA sets out 14 goals to guide planning in Washington State. Among
the top goals are reduction of urban sprawl, concentrated urban growth, economic development and
affordable housing (RCW 36.70A.020).
In 1995 the Legislature found that planning solutions to solve the problems of urban sprawl often
lack incentive and implementation techniques needed to encourage residential redevelopment in
urban centers. Subsequently, they authorized a 10 -year property -tax exemption (RCW 84.14).
The tax incentive created by this legislation intends to help stimulate new or enhanced residential
opportunities in urban centers and achieve the housing goal mandated by the GMA.
In 2007 the Legislature modified the law to allow the tax break to run for eight years, or twelve
years if the development contains twenty percent affordable housing'. The Legislature also
lowered the population requirement for cities to be eligible for the program from 30,000 to
15,000. They added a reporting requirement. The changes were intended to become effective
immediately.
When the legislation reached the Governor's desk, she expressed concerns that the program was
expanded to include more cities without any evidence of its effectiveness in increasing
affordable housing and was done without including counties in the decision making She signed
the bill but vetoed Section 12 which would have made the legislation effective immediately. She
also asked the Department of Commerce to analyze the required annual reports from cities to
evaluate its use and effects and assess the need for legislation to alter the exemption program.
(Appendix #1)
ESSHB 1910 (2007)
This tax incentive program adopted by the 2007 Legislature was titled "AN ACT relating to tax
incentives for certain multiple -unit dwellings in urban centers that provide affordable housing."
It became effective on July 22, 2007 following the Governor's signature and partial veto.
The following is a summary of the changes made by the Legislature and their stipulations:
• Cities eligible to offer the multi -unit housing property tax exemption are those with a
population of at least 15,000 people. If there is no city with a population of at least
15,000 in a county planning under the GMA, then the largest city or town located in that
1 "Affordable Housing" is defined in the legislation as residential housing that is rented by a person or household whose monthly
housing costs, including utilities other than telephone, do not exceed thirty percent of the household's monthly income. For the
purposes of housing intended for owner occupancy, "affordable housing" means residential housing that is within the means of low
or moderate - income households.
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
62
county is eligible. The legislation also allows cities with populations of at least 5,000 to
participate, if they are located within "buildable lands" counties (King, Pierce,
Snohomish, Kitsap, Thurston and Clark).
• Participating cities may offer a 12 -year tax exemption if the developer chooses to build,
develop, or rehabilitate at least 20 percent of the units as affordable housing. Developers
choosing not to include affordable housing receive only 8 years of tax exemption.
• New, rehabilitated or converted multifamily housing projects in targeted residential areas
are eligible for the property tax exemption. The property tax exemption may be applied to
new housing construction and the increased value of a building due to rehabilitation. The
exemption does not apply to the land or the non - housing related improvements.
• If the property changes use before the end of the exemption period, or no longer complies
with guidelines established by the city for participation in the tax exemption program,
then back taxes are recovered based on the difference between the taxes paid and taxes
that would have been paid without the tax exemption program.
• All projects receiving tax exemption must be multiple -unit housing of four or more units
that is located in a residential targeted area as designated by the city. The housing must
meet the guidelines as adopted by the city which may include density, size, parking, low -
income occupancy and other adopted requirements. At least fifty percent of the space
must be for permanent residential occupancy. New construction must be completed
within three years of the application's approval unless an extension of up to two years has
been authorized by the local jurisdiction. The property to be rehabilitated must be vacant
at least 12 months prior to application. The applicant must enter into a contract with the
city to agree to terms and conditions.
Beginning in 2007, all cities issuing tax exemptions must report annually to the Department of
Commerce regarding tax exempt properties. The annual report must include the following:
1. Total number of tax exemptions granted and the total value of those exemptions;
2. Total number of units produced and the total development cost of each unit;
3. Total monthly rent of each unit or the total sale price of each unit;
4. Income of each renter at occupancy of a rental unit, and the income of each initial
purchaser of a homeownership unit if the project is using the 12 -year exemption with at
least 20 percent of its units rented or sold to income - eligible tenants.
When this tax exemption program was initially adopted in 1995 (RCW 84.14), only three cities
were eligible; those with populations of 150,000 or more (Seattle, Tacoma and Spokane) Three
subsequent amendments reduced the minimum city size, thus increasing the number of cities
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
5
63
eligible to utilize the tax exemption program. After the program was amended again in 2007
(ESSHB 1910), reducing the population threshold to 15,000, more cities became eligible and by
2010, more than 90 cities were eligible to participate.
Department of Commerce Role: Annual Report
After signing the legislation, the Governor directed Commerce to analyze the required reports
from cities and evaluate the tax exemption's use and effects and to assess the need for legislation
to alter the program.
After the legislation's effective date of July 22, 2007, Commerce convened an advisory group
comprised of staff from the cities of Seattle, Tacoma, Spokane, Lakewood and King County
Suburban Cities (represented by ARCH - A Regional Coalition for Housing) to help develop the
reporting process. It should be noted that Tacoma has had the tax abatement program in place
since it was approved in 1995 and Seattle since 1998. After several meetings and discussions, the
"Department of Commerce, Multi -Unit Housing Tax Exemption Annual Report Form"
(Appendix #2) was developed and approved by the committee. Commerce received the first set
of annual reports required under this program in December 2007.
Also, during the four -year period 2007 -10, cities participating and /or interested in the tax
exemption program sought and received assistance from Commerce staff on several issues
related to the program. Most of the assistance requests involved clarification or interpretation of
the legislation. Commerce consulted with the appropriate Assistant Attorney General to provide
needed assistance. (Appendix #3).
Commerce sent out reminder notices to participating jurisdictions each year about the December
31 deadline for required annual reports . (Appendix #4).
In addition, a survey went to the larger participating cities asking for key information and
suggestions that would enhance the review, evaluation and analysis of the program and the
resulting recommendations. (Appendix #5)
Annual Report Summary
Many of the eligible cities either chose not to participate or did not file the required annual
report. Commerce received 19 reports in 2007, 13 in 2008, 20 in 2009, and 19 in 2010. Most of
the reports showed no activity had taken place. A few jurisdictions filed the annual report in one
of the four years and some reported in three of the four years. The majority of reporting
jurisdictions (mostly larger ones) submitted annual reports in all four years.
The Governor's directive was to analyze and evaluate this tax exemption program for its uses
and effects. To accomplish that, Commerce had to focus only on annual reports that included
development activities such as approvals or final tax exemption certificate(s) issued under the
program. During the Reporting Period 2007 -10, 10 jurisdictions submitted such reports: the
cities of Seattle, Tacoma, Spokane, Everett, Renton, Shoreline, Wenatchee and Moses Lake,
Burien and Kirkland.
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
64
The Annual Report Summaries for 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010 from these jurisdictions are
shown here.
2007 Multi Family Tax Exemption Report
2008 Multi Family Tax Exemption Report
Tax Exemption Information
Development Cost Information
Affordability Requirements
Cities that
Provided
Data as
Required by
84R14u100
Multi Family
Tax
Exemption
Certificates
issued
Total Value of
the Tax
Exemptions
Issued
Development
Cost/Unit
Total
Units
Total
Development
Costs
Number of
Affordable/Workforce Rental
Units
Number of
Units Sold or
Rented at
Market Rate
Prices
Renton
2
1,957,342
159,370
260
41436,292
0
260
Seattle
4
8,870,011
140,743
484
68,119,612
319
165
Shoreline
1
1,394277
132,000
88
11,616,000
0
88
Spokane
45
16,368,800
137,197
168
23,049,074
29
139
Tacoma
8
4440410
200,211
139
27,829,342
0
139
Wenatchee
1
40,737
19,783
23
455,009
0
23
Moses Lake
0
0
0
0
$
-
0
0
Everett
0
0
0
0
$
-
0
0
Totals
61
33,071,577
1162
172,505,329
348
814
2008 Multi Family Tax Exemption Report
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
7
65
Tax Exemption Information
Development Cost Information
Affordability Requirements
Cities that
Provided
Data as
Required by
84R14u100
Multi Family
Tax
Exemption
Certificates
issued
Total Value of
the Tax
Exemptions
Issued
Development
Cost/Unit
Total
Units
Total
Development
Costs
Number of
Affordable /Workforce Rental
Units
Number of
Units Sold or
Rented at
Market Rate
Prices
Renton
2
4,310,638
199,735
245
48,935,075
0
245
Seattle
3
22,651,870
240,908
156
37,581,648
109
47
Shoreline
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
Spokane
11
20,839,100
213,066
222
15,844,884
43
169
Tacoma
16
13,616,830
149,835.00
616
92,298,360
0
616
Wenatchee
0
0
0
0
$
-
0
0
Moses Lake
0
0
0
0
$
-
0
0
Everett
0
0
0
0
$
-
0
0
Totals
32
61,418,438
1239
194,650,967
152
1077
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
7
65
2009 Multi Family Tax Exemption Report
2010 Multi Family Tax Exemption Report
Tax Exemption Information
Development Cost Information
Affordability Requirements
Cities that
Provided
Data as
Required by
84R14u100
Multi Family
Tax
Exemption
Certificates
issued
Total Value of
the Tax
Exemptions
Issued
Development
Cost /Unit
Total
Units
Total
Development
Costs
Number of
AffordableANorkforce Rental
Units
Number of
Units Sold or
Rented at
Market Rate
Prices
Renton
2
6,666549
175,086
532
93,145,648
92
440
Seattle
6
22488521
167,392
1510
166,314580
657
653
Shoreline
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
Spokane
44
11576500
288,702
44
12,702507
0
44
Tacoma
16
6,224244
205,470
205
42,121550
0
205
Wenatchee
0
0
0
0
-
0
0
Moses Lake
1
768228
2?
96
2?
96
0
Everett
2
329561
289,000
31
8,959500
0
31
Totals
71
48,153,603
230,760
2218
323,243,885
845
1373
2010 Multi Family Tax Exemption Report
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
66
8
Tax Exemption Information
Development Cost Information
Affordability Requirements
Cities That
Provided
Data as
Required by
84R14u100
Multi Family
Tax
Exemption
Certificates
Issued
Total Value of
the Tax
Exemptions
Issued
Development
Cost/Unit
Total
Units
Total
Development
Costs
Number of
Affordable /Workforce
Rental Units
Number of
Units Sold or
Rented at
Market Rate
Prices
Renton
1
45530,100
194,518
440
85587520
0
440
Seattle
7
17586,163
211478
1,023
216,341594
261
762
Shoreline
0
-
-
0
-
0
0
Spokane
17
4,001550
364,914
19
6533566
6
13
Tacoma
1
14536,200
180,000
8
1440500
0
8
Wenatchee
0
-
-
0
-
0
0
Moses Lake
0
-
-
0
-
0
0
Everett
1
447, 965.62
350505
40
14536200
8
32
Kirkland
1
402,538
230,760
52
11599,520
5
47
Burien
1
31555,903
192,976
124
23529,024
0
124
Totals
29
113,560,720
1582
360,268,024
280
1426
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
66
8
These Annual Report Summaries show that these 10 cities issued 193 tax exemption certificates
during the reporting period. The projected value of the exemptions over the 8, 10 or 12 -year
term is more than $255 million. They produced 6,326 housing units, of which 1,625 are
considered affordable housing.
ANALYSIS /EVALUATION
The Governor requested a report on the effectiveness of property tax exemptions in general and
the effect of changes provided in ESSHB 1910 in particular. The response to her request focuses
on four questions:
1. Do property tax exemptions generate new housing?
2. Do property tax exemptions generate affordable housing?
3. Did ESSHB1910 increase the number of cities that provide property tax exemptions?
4. Is consultation with counties necessary in tax exemption decision making?
1. Do property tax exemptions generate new housing?
This question focuses on the general effectiveness of property tax exemptions as an incentive to
generate housing, particularly in high -cost areas and within the downtown of relatively large
cities. One way to answer the question is by comparing the number of housing units created
using tax exemptions to the total number of new housing units in each of the participating cities.
Table 1 below compares the number of housing units generated using property tax exemptions to
the total number of new housing units produced from 2007 to 2010 in the participating cities.
The numbers of tax exemption housing units are provided in the annual reports from
participating cities. The number of total new housing units was derived from the State of
Washington's Office of Financial Management (OFM). Each year, OFM updates the population
estimate of Washington cities. Their estimate is based on the number of housing units in each
city. The data is available online at http: / /www.ofin.wa.gov /pop /aprill /default. asp.
2 Some of the total new housing units derived from the OFM website were adjusted by the reporting cities
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
9
67
Table 1
Comparison of New Housing Units in Cities Using Property Tax Exemptions 2007 to 2010
Total New Housing Housing Without Tax Housing With % Housing Without % Housing With Tax
Exemptions Tax Exemptions Tax Exemptions Exemptions
Renton 3,775 2,298 1477.00 61% 39%
Seattle 16,549 13,576 2,973.00 82% 18%
Shoreline 738 650 88 88% 12%
Spokane 1,712 1,259 453 74% 26%
Tacoma 2426 1458 968 60% 40%
Everett 1,161 1,090 71 94% 6%
Wenatchee 310 287 23 93% 7%
Kirkland 1,123 1,071 52 95% 5%
Burien 529 405 124 77% 23%
Total 28,323 22,094 6229 78% 22%
It should be noted that Moses Lake did not report additional data; therefore, only data from the
other nine jurisdictions were used in the following evaluation.
Between 2007 and 2010, nine cities provided property tax exempt certificates. These certificates
include over 6,000 housing units. During that same period, these cities added more than 28,000
housing units. The number of housing units created using property -tax exemptions represents 22
percent of the total new housing units generated in the nine participating cities from 2007 to
2010.
Between 2007 and 2010 approximately 100,978 housing units were added in Washington
overall, according to OFM's estimate. Approximately 28 percent of all these new housing units
were built in the nine participating cities. The number of units produced using property tax
exemptions represents more than 6 percent of the total new housing units produced in the state of
Washington during the same four -year period.
Table 2 below illustrates the percentage of new housing units built using property tax
exemptions. The gray portion of each column is the percentage of the total new housing units
built using property tax exemptions. The black portion represents the percentage of new housing
units built without exemptions. Large portions of the new housing units built in Renton and
Tacoma from 2007 to 2010 were built using property tax exemptions.
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
68
10
Table 2
Percentage of Total Housing Units Built Using Property Tax Exemptions 2007 -2010
120
100%
80%
60%
40
20
0%
0111110% Housing Without Tax Exemptions IN % Housing With Tax Exemptions
�e����e o`e\`�e o a�e •
ova
,ek��� agree �F-�'b
�
fie, �
Property tax exemptions appear to have some impact on the generation of new housing units. At
least in the participating cities, about one in five housing units built between 2007 and 2010
relied upon property tax exemptions.
On average, new housing units exempt from property taxes represent 22 percent of the total new
housing units in the participating cities. The impact is particularly noticeable in Renton and
Tacoma, where housing with tax exemptions account for nearly 40 percent of the total housing
units constructed from 2007 to 2010. In Spokane and Burien, it accounts for 26 percent and 23
percent, respectively. In Seattle it accounts for 18 percent and in Everett and Kirkland it accounts
for less than 10 percent of the total new housing units.
2. Do property tax exemptions generate new affordable housing?
Property tax exemptions appear to generate affordable housing units only when municipal
ordinances require that they do and with additional incentives added. Seattle requires affordable
housing to be provided in both the 8 -year and the 12 -year programs (the 8 -year exemption only
applies to homeownership projects with less than 20 percent affordable units, but they still must
be sold to an income - qualified buyer). The other jurisdictions do not have those requirements.
As a result, 26 percent of the housing units built in Seattle using property tax exemptions were
affordable. In Spokane and Everett, the numbers of affordable units were lower - 17 percent and
11 percent, respectively. Kirkland reported that 10 percent of the units were affordable, and in
Renton only 6 percent. The other cities did not report any affordable units during the 2007 -10
period. Table 3 below compares the number of affordable and market rate housing units. The
information was derived from the annual reports submitted by each of the participating cities.
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
11
69
Table 3
Comparison of Affordable and Market Rate Housing Units 2007 - 2010
Total Units Affordable Market Rate % Affordable % Market Rate
Renton 1477 92 1385 6% 96%
Seattle 2,973 1346 1627 26% 74%
Shoreline 88 0 88 0 100%
Spokane 453 78 375 17% 83%
Tacoma 968 0 968 0% 100%
Everett 71 8 63 11% 89%
Wenatchee 23 0 23 0 100%
Kirkland 52 5 47 10% 90%
Burien 124 0 124 0% 100%
Totals 6,118 1524 4589 25% 75%
Seattle 2,973 1346 1627 45% 55%
Remainder 3,145 178 2962 6% 94%
Table 4 below illustrates the percentage of affordable housing units to market rate housing units
in each of the participating cities. The gray portion of each column represents the percentage of
housing units that were rented or sold at market rate prices. The black portion represents the
percentage rented or sold that was affordable to lower - income households.
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
70
12
Table 4
Percentage of Affordable vs. Market Rate Housing Units 2007 -2010
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
11111111 % Affordable % Market Rate
Approximately 87 percent of the total affordable housing units are located within the city of
Seattle. In the other cities, only 6 percent of the housing units were affordable. This fact
underscores the point that property tax exemptions generate affordable housing units only when
municipal ordinances require that they do — Seattle requires affordable housing for both the 8-
year and the 12 -year.
3. Did ESSHB 1910 increase the number of cities that provide property tax exemptions?
ESSHB 1910 decreased the population threshold for cities to qualify for property tax exemptions
from 30,000 people to 15,000 people. The reduction made 19 cities eligible to participate in the
incentive program, only two of which provided property tax exemptions during the first three
years: Wenatchee and Moses Lake. During the fourth year, none of the 19 cities provided
exemptions.
Based on the annual reports, reducing the population threshold to 15,000 did not have a
significant impact on the number of cities participating in the property tax incentive program. A
variety of factors may have impeded the participation of smaller cities. For instance, the changes
took effect amidst a national housing crisis. This undoubtedly had an impact on the number of
property tax exemptions that were issued. Additionally, it has only been four years since the new
law was passed and some of these smaller jurisdictions may not have had time and resources to
review, design and approve the tax exemption program for use in their jurisdictions.
4. Is consultation with counties necessary in tax exemption decision making?
The tax exemption program affects tax revenues of the state, county, and districts such as library,
park, and school districts. Involving all governmental entities affected by the exemption
program would help ensure full consideration of their perspectives. This issue of consultation
with counties was discussed by the Advisory Group convened by Commerce to develop the
process for annual report. The need to involve counties was vital, the group concluded.
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
13
71
However, it was pointed out that informal coordination was happening at staff level and it is the
county assessor that processes the tax exemptions.
Survey responses from key cities indicate that some informal consultation with counties took
place. Everett reported that they did consult Snohomish County when the program was initially
established. The county supported the program, because they agreed that it would lead to
construction of housing that eventually would be paying property taxes, and without it, the
housing would not be built. Everett also pointed out that since the city would be providing
services to the housing, there was very little impact on the county from the program.
Seattle similarly reported good coordination with King County and Renton informally consulted
with the King County Department of Assessments when the Multi - Family Housing Property Tax
Exemption program was established there in 2003.
RECOMMENDATIONS /CONCLUSIONS
Establish a formal process in statute for early notification regarding this tax exemption.
A formal early notification process should be established and added to the legislation even
though an informal process was undertaken by participating jurisdictions. This would require
any jurisdiction participating in the tax exemption program to officially notify their county of
their intention to offer property tax exemption as authorized under RCW 84.14. This early
notification should include the projected amount of the tax exemption and the sunset date.
Is the property tax exemption effective?
fa) Housing as Economic Development Tool - The Case for Market Rate Housing:
Housing (especially multi -unit) - affordable or not - provides a broad range of benefits to the
communities in which it is located. It can enrich these communities, fill diverse and significant
market needs and most importantly, provide economic benefits through its construction.
Jurisdictions benefit from the construction of new housing units or rehabilitation of existing
properties through the jobs created to produce or rehabilitate them. Economic benefits also
result from the creation of the products that go into these buildings and the jobs related to the
design, finance and management of the projects.
In addition to the job creation and tax revenue benefits at the local level, new multi -unit
construction also produces "ripple effects" as the construction wages generated by the project are
spent on local goods and services and as the new residents begin spending in the local economy.
According to the National Association of Homebuilders, a typical 100 -unit housing development
project generates, over 10 years, 445 jobs, $15.5 million in local income, and $2.6 million in
local taxes. Once the project is completed, ongoing economic benefits are generated in the form
of property taxes, employment for people who work to manage and maintain the units, and
consumer spending by the occupants.
Benefits are also generated by the more efficient delivery of services from both the public and
private sectors because of the greater densities associated with multi -unit developments. The
multi -unit housing authorized under this legislation is required to be located in designated
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
72
14
centers within the Urban Growth Areas (UGAs). If these UGAs are appropriately sized and
designated, and services and facilities provided effectively and efficiently, additional benefits
and efficiencies would be realized depending on the scale of the development. These include
sprawl reduction, more efficient land uses resulting in greater densities, more efficient multi -
modal traffic /transportation (transit, light rail, pedestrian), lower carbon footprint, more efficient
infrastructure and utilities (cost effective sewer, roads, water, gas) and other services such as
parks, schools, library, police and fire.
In a mixed -use project in a town center as authorized in this legislation, new businesses, retail,
restaurants and professional services attracted to these new mixed used buildings would generate
significant revenues for the community in the form of sales tax and business and occupation
licenses and fees. This is in addition to the benefits from construction activities.
In Everett, the downtown is the only center in which the multi -unit property tax exemption is
allowed, unlike some other cities where the exemption is much more broadly available across
their communities. Everett purposely kept the area narrow to encourage market rate housing in
their downtown. The downtown had experienced very little housing development over the
preceding 20 years, most of which was subsidized low income housing. The city had been
successful in getting low income housing without the tax exemption program, and really needed
market -rate housing to create more balance in the downtown center. This program successfully
attracted developers to the area. Each of the developers who has used the program, either with or
without the affordable housing option, indicated they could not have developed their projects
without the benefit of the tax exemption.
According to the City of Everett, the program as amended in 2007 is producing both market rate
and affordable housing: "We believe this is one of the best innovations ever to cone out of the
legislature in support of GMA. The intent was to stimulate housing development in centers. The
8/12 year compromise bill was a win for both the cities that need more affordable housing, and
the cities that need housing of all types in their urban centers. Our recommendation is to leave
the program alone with respect to the affordable housing issue. It has worked well in Everett to
encourage both affordable and market rate housing that would never have been built without the
property tax exemption. The program has tipped the balance so that housing can be viable as
part of the redevelopment of our downtown "3.
Seattle has noticed significantly more program interest by private developers due to the
economic downturn. The program helps projects reach financial feasibility in the current
economic climate.
fb) Workforce Housing — The Case for Affordable Housing:
In her veto message and directives to Commerce, the Governor emphasized the need for
"evidence of the effectiveness of the tax exemption program in increasing affordable housing ".
The 2007 — 2010 Multi Family Tax Exemption Tables on pages 7 -8 show that a total of 6,201
housing units were produced under the program and 1,625 of these were affordable housing.
Most of these affordable units are located in Seattle, Renton and Spokane
3 Information contained in a report submitted by Allan Giffen, Director of Planning and Community Development, City of Everrett.
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
15
73
All eight cities that issued tax exemption certificates adopted ordinances providing for the 8 -year
and the 12 -year tax exemption program. ESSHB 1910 requires 20 percent affordable housing
set -aside for the 12 -year exemption but not for the 8 -year. Seattle, however, requires affordable
housing be provided in both the 8 -year and the 12 -year programs.
It is important to point out that Seattle, Renton, Spokane, Everett and Kirkland produced
affordable housing during this reporting period and the other jurisdictions did not. In Seattle, the
explanation is that only projects with affordable housing are eligible to participate in either the 8
or 12 year program. Additionally, a number of Seattle non - profit housing developers have used
the tax exemption along with other public funds, and these funding sources require greater
affordability than the tax exemption program. Finally, Seattle granted a tax exemption certificate
to the Linden 143, a for - profit project financed with low income housing tax credits. This
project has 476 units, all of which are affordable to households at or below 60% of median
income.
Since July 22, 2007 (the effective date of the 8 -year and 12 -year exemptions under RCW 84.14),
Renton has received two exemption applications. One (Second & Main Apartments) was for the
8 -year exemption and the other (Liberty Square Apartments) was for the 12 -year exemption.
The city noted that Liberty Square would not have been possible without other public funds such
as equity tax credit investors and below - market rate financing (including federal low - income
housing tax credits, tax - exempt bond financing, Washington State Housing Trust Fund, King
County housing development funds and City of Renton CDBG funds).
According to the City of Renton, no developer has expressed an interest in using the 12 -year
exemption by itself without other significant public subsidies. The primary reason is that the
value of the additional 4 -year exemption does not adequately offset the projected lost revenue
associated. For example, meeting the affordable housing requirements for at least 20 percent of
the units for 12 years, the exemption benefit is too "shallow" to facilitate affordable housing by
itself. There is also the obvious reality that development in general is significantly lower due to
the national housing crisis and economic recession.
It should be noted, however, that jurisdictions such as Burien and possibly others in which no
affordable housing was produced during this reporting period may have projects with affordable
units in the pipeline. These units will be reported when the projects are completed and tax
exemption certificates issued. Everett did not produce any affordable housing until this reporting
period.
Based on the information reported to Commerce by the participating cities, the tax exemption
program is producing housing in a few, mostly larger jurisdictions (see Table 3 above). Both
market rate and affordable housing are being produced but market rate housing production
outpaces affordable housing during this reporting period (see Table 4). This could change next
reporting period if the affordable units now in the pipeline are completed and included in the
next annual report to Commerce.
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
74
16
It is our conclusion that the tax exemption program is working for these local governments and
they are using it as needed to achieve different objectives. Some, including Renton, Tacoma and
Burien, are developing market rate housing in targeted areas and others, like Seattle, are
producing affordable housing. The program is achieving both policy goals included in the 2007
legislation (ESSHB 1910).
ACTION OPTIONS:
1. To continue providing for both policy goals, no change to the legislation is currently
needed. Leave the tax exemption program as amended, which allows participating
jurisdictions the option to use the 8 year program for market rate housing, the 12 year
program that requires some affordable housing, or both for a mix of housing.
2. If the policy goal of achieving affordable housing units is considered a higher priority, the
legislation could be amended to require that to receive the 8 -year tax exemption, a minimum
percentage of the housing units within a development (perhaps 10 or 15 percent) be affordable
units. However, it should be noted that this approach could have an adverse impact on achieving
market rate housing in some areas.
Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010
17
75
76
Puget Sound Regional Council
Housin Innovations
) iii g or a iiiin
01000000000000000
Featured Tool: Multifamily Tax Exemption*
A state law (RCW 84.14) helps cities attract residential development. Cities may exempt multifamily housing from
property taxes in urban centers with insufficient residential opportunities. The city defines a residential target area
or areas within an urban center; approved project sites are exempt from ad valorem property taxation on the
residential improvement value for a period of eight or 12 years. The 12 -year exemption requires a minimum level
of affordable housing to be included in the development (at least 20% of the units or 100% if the building is solely
owner - occupied). The eight -year exemption leaves the public benefit requirement —in both type and size —to the
jurisdiction's discretion. The eight -year exemption carries no affordable housing requirement. Cities must pass an
enabling ordinance to enact the MFTE and to allow applications for the exemption.
What issue does a multifamily tax exemption address?
This tool encourages multifamily development and redevelopment in
compact mixed -use districts (urban centers) where housing and affordable
housing options are deficient. Through the multifamily tax exemption, a
jurisdiction can incentivize dense and diverse housing options in urban
centers lacking in housing choices or affordable units. MFTE can also apply
to rehabilitating existing properties and redeveloping vacant or underused
properties.
Where is the multifamily tax exemption most applicable?
Cities planning under the Growth Management Act (RCW 36.70a) that have
designated urban centers with a deficiency of housing opportunities are
eligible to implement this tool. In King, Pierce, Snohomish and Kitsap
counties, cities must have at least 5,000 in population. Cities must
designate eligible areas that contain urban centers. Urban centers —in the
context of the MFTE - enabling legislation —have a particular meaning:
"...a compact identifiable district where urban residents may obtain a
variety of products and services. An urban center must contain:
(a) Several existing or previous, or both, business establishments
that may include but are not limited to shops, offices, banks,
restaurants, governmental agencies;
(b) Adequate public facilities including streets, sidewalks, lighting,
transit, domestic water, and sanitary sewer systems; and
(c) A mixture of uses and activities that may include housing,
recreation, and cultural activities in association with either
commercial or office, or both, use." (RCW 84.14.010)
Based on the state law, designated districts are commercial or business districts with some mix of uses. Such areas
may exist in downtowns, commercial corridors, or other intensively developed neighborhoods. Examples of
designated districts throughout the central Puget Sound region are listed in the model policies, regulations and
other information section below.
Too0 Profile
Focus Areas
• Urban Centers
• Transit Oriented Development
• Expensive Housing Markets
Housing Types
• Multifamily
• Ownership
• Rental
• Market Rate
• Subsidized
Affordability Level
• 80 to 120% AMI
• Less than 80% AMI
Goal
• Affordability
* Tool considered very effective for producing
units at less than 80% AMI.
Case Stu o
• Burien Multifamily Tax Exemption
• Lynnwood Multifamily Tax
Exemption
• Tacoma Multifamily Tax Exemption
MFTEs have been effective in producing multifamily units in the region's larger cities. Since its inception, the MFTE
law has been expanded to include smaller cities. The effectiveness of this tool in larger jurisdictions could make it
an attractive tool for smaller and moderate -sized cities that meet the population threshold.
Multifamily tax exemptions can encourage relatively dense attached flats or townhomes, in mixed -use projects or
residential complexes, which means this tool is particularly useful in urban centers and transit - oriented
Puget Sound Regional Council
1
77
developments. Dense development is also economically efficient in expensive housing markets, and can reduce
housing costs.
What do 1 need to know about using or developing a multifamily tax exemption?
The MFTE implementation process is guided by state law in RCW 84.14. In general, the process includes preparing
a resolution of intent to adopt a designated area, holding a public hearing and adopting and implementing
standards and guidelines to be utilized in considering applications for the MFTE. Among other criteria, the
designated area must lack "sufficient available, desirable, and convenient residential housing, including affordable
housing, to meet the needs of the public who would be likely to live in the urban center, if the affordable,
desirable, attractive, and livable places to live were available" (RCW 84.14.040). A property owner applying for an
MFTE must meet the criteria (per RCW 84.14.030) summarized here:
• The new or rehabilitated multiple -unit housing must be located in city- designated residential target areas
within the urban center.
• The project must meet local government requirements for height, density, public benefit features, number
and size of proposed development, parking, income limits for occupancy, limits on rents or sale prices, and
other adopted requirements.
• At least 50% of the space in the new, converted or rehabilitated multiple -unit housing must be for permanent
residential occupancy. Existing occupied multifamily developments must also provide a minimum of four
additional multifamily units.
• New construction multifamily housing and rehabilitation improvements must be completed within three years
from approval.
• The applicant must enter into a contract with the city containing terms and conditions satisfactory to the local
government.
The exemption is recorded with the County Assessor. Developments that violate the terms of the exemption are
required to pay back the exempted tax amounts, plus interest, and a penalty fee.
Cities considering the program need to weigh the temporary (8 -12 years) loss of tax revenue against the potential
attraction of new investment to targeted areas. MFTE projects could be catalysts for other private investment if
they help prove an area is desirable. Pairing the MFTE with other tools that affect density and cost reductions may
help the city achieve higher density and affordable housing in designated mixed -use and commercial areas. These
tools include:
Featured Too
• Density Bonuses
• Transit Oriented Development Overlays
• Parking Reductions
lseum "' "'oohs:
• Mixed -Use Development
• No Maximum Densities
• Planned Action EIS (see in particular the SEPA residential and mixed -use exemption option)
Creating a Multifamily Tax Exemption Program
A typical planning process (gathering information, conducting public outreach and considering ordinances),
together with the specific requirements of state law, will guide the development of an MFTE program:
Determine IResidentoall Target Areas. Cities will need to consider the state law's "urban center" definition which
addresses existing commercial businesses, mixed uses and infrastructure.
Airmallysiis. To support the urban center and residential target area designations, a jurisdiction should map or collect
data on current uses, services and capital facilities. The data and analysis should demonstrate that the area lacks
Puget Sound Regional Council
78
sufficient residential housing, including affordable housing. Estimating the tax revenue and other cost - benefit
implications of the MFTE program can help to determine whether the program would help achieve housing goals.
For example, prior to adopting an MFTE ordinance, the City of Lynnwood prepared an analysis of tax revenue that
would be foregone should the ordinance be adopted. In terms of other cost - benefits, jurisdictions can calculate the
short -term construction and sales tax revenues and employment gains that stem from the development. (See case
studies below.)
Conduct IPuulblliic uuutu each. The MFTE statute suggests that a jurisdiction considering an MFTE program issue a
resolution of intention to designate an urban center and residential target area(s). The resolution should also
identify the time and place of a hearing. Cities must hold a public hearing on the proposed MFTE ordinance and
follow notification schedules listed in the statute. While crafting the ordinance, cities will also want to involve
stakeholders, including developers of multifamily and condominium housing, affordable housing developers and
advocacy groups, and major land owners and businesses in the residential target areas. See Citizen Education and
Outreach for strategies to involve the public and stakeholders.
C�ouc u u u�uumc Stanndan!mds. The state affords jurisdictions wide latitude to design their MFTE laws to meet local
planning goals. Proposals must meet local zoning and development standards and any affordability and occupancy
criteria the jurisdiction sets. Based on the intent of the MFTE, key decisions to shape the ordinance include:
• Encouraging more versus less participation from developers. The threshold number of units to qualify for
the exemption and public benefit requirements could influence the level of participation by developers. A
low threshold and limited public benefit requirements, for example, might make the program more
accessible to developers, but yield a smaller return in public benefit for foregone revenue. A high
threshold and demanding public benefit requirement, however, might make the program unattractive to
developers. Striking a balance between requirements, goals and attractiveness is essential to a successful
MFTE program.
• Encouraging affordable housing versus market -rate housing. RCW 84.14 allows cities to provide a bonus
for affordable housing provision by allowing 12 years of tax exemption, versus the eight years offered for
market -rate developments. Cities could further encourage developers to opt for the 12 -year exemption
by setting a threshold number of units or public benefit to attract development. Offering other incentives
(e.g., density bonuses, flexible single family development regulations) along with the MFTE can strengthen
interest in affordable development in the city.
• Encouraging more rental or ownership housing. The law provides incentives for affordable multifamily
rental housing where the whole development is eligible for the tax exemption if at least 20% of the units
are affordable to low- and moderate - income households. To receive the 12 -year exemption, buildings
intended to be entirely owner - occupied must price all of their units affordably for moderate - income
households. Setting a threshold number of rental versus ownership units could influence the type of tax
exemption applications received in favor of a particular tenure.
• Ensuring that affordability endures. Affordable units may be at risk of losing their affordable status both
at the end of the MFTE time period and during its existence if a developer decides to opt out of the
program. Requiring affordability covenants for these units is one method for preserving affordability.
i111riplleonenotdtiono. State law requires an application process and procedures. Cities will need to allocate staff and
resources to reviewing applications. A fee may be charged for the request. The agency has 90 days to approve or
deny the application.
IMoinatorint. The law requires regular reporting by applicants and by cities. Upon construction and annually
thereafter, the property owner must file reports containing information such as occupancy, vacancy, and other
items required by the city. Cities will also want to make sure that these requirements are not too onerous. In some
Puget Sound Regionol Council 3
79
cases, partnerships between non - profits and for - profits to ensure secure income certifications and monitoring may
be helpful.
Cities must report to the State of Washington Department of Commerce annually by December 31 regarding
certificates granted, unit types, monthly rent and sales costs, and other information. Cities could use these regular
reports to monitor the success of the program and build supporting data for future program goals. Some cities
establish a sunset clause by which time the city may re -adopt or let expire the tax exemption program.
Model Policies, Model Regulations, Other Information
State of Washington: RCW 84.14
See adopted ordinances of the following cities at: http: / /www.mrsc.org /codes.aspx
• Bremerton: Downtown Core and Multiple Residential Zones
• Burien: Downtown Commercial Zone
• Everett: Downtown and vicinity
• Kirkland: Central Kirkland /Houghton; Totem Lake and North Rose Hill; Juanita; and NE 85th Street
• Lynwood: City Center
• Puyallup: central business district (CBD) and certain areas south of the CBD
• SeaTac: 154th Street and SeaTac /Airport Station Areas
• Seattle: 39 neighborhoods or districts
• Shoreline: Ridgecrest District
• Tacoma: 17 mixed -use centers designated on the Generalized Land Use Plan and in the Comprehensive Plan
Puget Sound Regionol Council 4
80
Cities That Have Adopted Multi - Family Property Tax Exemption Programs
• Auburn Municipal Code Ch. 3.94 - Multifamily Property Tax Exemption -
http : / /www. codepublishing. com/wa/ auburn /html/auburn03 /auburn0394.html #3.94
• Bellingham Municipal Code Ch. 17.82.030 - Tax Exemptions for Multi - Family Housing
in Targeted Residential
Areas http: / /www. cob.org/ web / bmcode. nsf/ f6281a531e9ead4588257384007b2367 /a4131
7c553ccbb848825680f00835eac !OpenDocument
• Bremerton Municipal Code Ch. 3.78 - Multifamily Property Tax
Exemption http: // www. codepublishing. com /wa/Bremerton/html/Bremerton03 /Bremerton
0378.html #3.78
• Burien Municipal Code § 19.45.030 — Tax exemptions for multi - family housing in
residential target areas http: // www. burienwa .gov /DocumentView.aspx ?DID =364
• Des Moines Municipal Code Ch. 3.96 - Multifamily Tax
Exemption http: // www. codepublishing. com/ wa/ desmoines /html/DesMoines03 /DesMoine
s0396.html
• Everett Municipal Code Ch. 3.78 Multifamily Housing Property Tax
Exemption http: // www. mrsc. org /mc/ everett /everet03 /everet0378.html
• Federal Way Municipal Code Ch. 3.30 Multifamily Dwelling Unit Limited Property Tax
Exemption http: // www. codepublishing. com/ WA/FederalWay /html/FederalWay03 /Feder
alWay0330.html #3.30
• Kenmore Municipal Code Ch 3.65 - Multifamily Housing Property Tax
Exemption http: // www. codepublishing. com /wa/ Kenmore /html/Kenmore03 /Kenmore036
5.html
• Kent Municipal Code Ch. 3.25 Multifamily Dwelling Tax
Exemptions http: // www. codepublishing. com /WA /Kent /html/Kent03 /Kent0325.html #3.25
• Kirkland Municipal Code Ch. 5.88 Multifamily Housing Property Tax
Exemption http: / /kirklandcode.ecitygov .net /kirk htm /Kirk05.html #5.88
• Lakewood Municipal Code Ch. 3.64 - Tax Incentive Urban Use Center
Development http: / /www.municode.cityoflakewood.us /show- chapter.php ?chap =232
• Longview Municipal Code Chapter 16.60 PROPERTY TAX INCENTIVES IN
RESIDENTIAL TARGETED
AREAS http: // www. codepublishing. com /wa/ longview /html/Longview16 /Longview1660.
html
• Lynnwood Municipal Code Ch. 3.82 - Multiple -Unit Housing Property Tax
Exemption http: / /www.mrsc. org/ mc/ lnnwood /Lynnwood03 /Lynnwood0382.html
• Marysville Municipal Code Chapter 3.103 MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY
TAX
EXEMPTION http: // www. codepublishing. com /wa/ marysville /html/Marysville03 /Marysv
ille03103.html
• Mercer Island Municipal Code Chapter 4.50 MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY
TAX
EXEMPTION http: // www. codepublishing. com/ WA/ Mercerlsland /html/Mercerlsland04/
Mercerlsland0450.html
• Moses Lake Municipal Code Ch. 18.23- Multi - family Housing Tax Exemption —
http: / /ci.moses- lake.wa.us /files /documents /municipal code /CHAP1823.pdf
81
• Mountlake Terrace Chapter 3.95 PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT PROGRAM FOR
QUALIFIED MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT -
http: / /www. codepublishing. com/WA/ MountlakeTerrace /html/MountlakeTerrace03 /Mou
ntlakeTerrace0395.html
• Newcastle Municipal Code Chapter 3.60 URBAN CENTER DEVELOPMENT -
http: / /www. codepublishing.com/WA/ Newcastle / html /Newcastle03/Newcastle0360.html
#3.60
• Olympia Municipal Code Ch. 5.86 - Multi - family Dwelling Tax
Exemptions http: // www. codepublishing. com/ wa/ olympia /html/Olympia05 /Olympia0586.
html #5.86
• Puyallup Municipal Code Ch. 3.70 - Property Tax Incentives in Residential Targeted
Areas http: / /www. codepublishing.com/WA/ Puyallup/ html/Puyallup03 /Puyallup0370.ht
ml #3.70
• Renton Municipal Code, section 4 -1 -220 PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR
MULTI - FAMILY HOUSING IN RESIDENTIAL TARGETED
AREAS: http : / /www. codepublishing. com/WA/ Renton /html/Renton04 /Renton0401 /Rento
n0401220.html
• SeaTac Municipal Code Ch. 3.85 Multi - Family Property Tax
Exemption http: // www. codepublishing. com /wa/ seatac /html/Seatac03 /Seatac0385.html
• Seattle Municipal Code Chapter 5.72 MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY TAX
EXEMPTION http: / /clerk.ci.seattle.wa.us /scripts /nph-
brs. exe ?s 1=&s2= tax +exemption +multi -
family&S3=&Sect4= AND& 1= 20 &Sect3= PLURON &Sects= CODEl &d= CODE &p =l &u
= %2F %7Epublic %2Fcode l .htm &r= 0 &Sect6= HITOFF &S
• Shoreline Municipal Code Chapter 3.27 PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION -
http: / /www. codepublishing. com/wa/ shoreline / html/ Shoreline03 /Shoreline0327.html #3.2
7
• Spokane Municipal Code Ch. 8.15- Multiple- family Housing Property Tax
Exemption http: / /www.spokanecity.org /services /documents /smc / ?Chapter =08.15
• Tacoma Municipal Code §13.17.030 - Tax Exemption for Multi - family Housing in
Target Areas - http:/ /www.mrsc.org /ords /t3c13- 17.pdf and Economic Evaluation of
Property Tax Exemption Program - http:// www .cityoftacoma.org /Page.aspx ?nid =456
• Vancouver Municipal Code Ch. 3.22 - Multifamily Housing Tax
Exemption http: // www. cityofvancouver .us /MunicipalCode .asp ?menuid = 10462 &submen
uID =10478 &title= title3 &chapter= 22 &VMC= index. html
• Walla Walla Municipal Code Ch.2.28 — Multi - Family Housing Tax
Incentives http: // www. codepublishing. com /WA/ WallaWalla /WallaWalla02 /WallaWallaO
228.html #2.28
• Wenatchee Municipal Code Ch. 5.88 — Property Tax Exemptions for Eligible
Improvements in Residentially Deficient Urban
Centers http: / /www. codepublishing. com/WA/ Wenatchee /html/Wenatchee05 /Wenatchee0
588.html #5.88 and Multi - family Housing Tax Incentive -
http:/ /www.wenatcheewa.gov /Index.aspx ?page =347
• Yakima Municipal Code Ch. 11.63 — Downtown Redevelopment Tax Incentive Program
— http: / /www.codepublishing.com/ WA/Yakima/Yakimal l /Yakima1163.html #11.63
82
Projects Currently Receiving Multi- Family Property Tax Exemptions in King County
As of November 2014
AUTHORIZING
ENTITY (CITY)
TOTAL
PROJECTS
TYPE OF PROJECT(S)
EXEMPTION TERM
Residential
Rental
Residential
For -Sale
Mixed Use
8 -yr
10 -yr
12 -yr
BURIEN
1
0
0
1
0
1
0
KIRKLAND
3
1
0
2
2
0
1
RENTON
8
3
1
4
0
7
1
SEATTLE
82
28
3
51
0
10
72
SHORELINE
1
1
0
0
0
1
0
Data provided by King County Assessor's Office 11/5/14
83
2014 Property Tax Levies By Taxing District
Levy Code Area
2340 2380 2390
Consolidated levy
State school fund $ 2.47044
County $ 1.51605
Port $ 0.21533
Subtotal $ 4.20182
City $ 2.97799
Renton School District $ 5.40495
Tukwila School District $ -
Hospital $ 0.50000
Library $ 0.56175
EMS $ 0.33500
Flood Control Zone $ 0.15369
Ferry $ 0.00349
Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District $ 0.14944
$ 14.28813
2.47044 $ 2.47044
1.51605 $ 1.51605
0.21533 $ 0.21533
4.20182 $ 4.20182
2.97799 $ 2.97799
$
5.89098 $ 5.89098
$ 0.50000
0.56175 $ 0.56175
0.33500 $ 0.33500
0.15369 $ 0.15369
0.00349 $ 0.00349
0.14944 $ 0.14944
14.27416 $ 14.77416
Number of parcels in target area 11 6 25
(1) Levy rate is shown in dollars per thousand of valuation
(2) The three levy code areas within the proposed multi - family property tax
exemption residential targeted area are #s 2340, 2380, and 2390.
(3) Code area 2340 is south of Strander Blvd.
(4) Code area 2380 is north of Blacks Road.
(5) Code area 2390 is south of Blacks Road and north of Strander.
(6) Updated by Office of Economic Development 11/5/14
84
Multi - Family Property Tax Exemption
Example of Annual Value to Property Owner
Levy Rate
Assessed Value of Qualifying
Residential Portion
$1 Million $100 Million
Consolidated levy
State school fund $ 2.47044 $ 2,470 $ 247,044
County $ 1.51605 $ 1,516 $ 151,605
Port $ 0.21533 $ 215 $ 21,533
Subtotal $ 4.20182 $ 4,202 $ 420,182
City $ 2.97799 $ 2,978 $ 297,799
Renton School District
Tukwila School District $ 5.89098 $ 5,891 $ 589,098
Hospital $ 0.50000 $ 500 $ 50,000
Library $ 0.56175 $ 562 $ 56,175
EMS $ 0.33500 $ 335 $ 33,500
Flood Control Zone $ 0.15369 $ 154 $ 15,369
Ferry $ 0.00349 $ 3 $ 349
Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District $ 0.14944 $ 149 $ 14,944
$ 14.77416 $ 14,774 $ 1,477,416
Savings to property owner: $ 14,774 $ 1,477,416
(1) Levy rate is shown in dollars per thousand of valuation and reflect 2014 rates.
(2) This table shows the annual value (or savings) received by a property owner
who is approved for a property tax exemption on the value of multi - family
(3) residential development. This table shows two examples: a development
(4) valued at $1 million and a development valued at $100 million.
(5) Per Office of Economic Development 11/5/14
85
86