Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOW 2014-11-24 Item 4B - Ordinance - Multi-Family Property Tax Exemption (Washington Place Development)COUNCIL AGENDA SYNOPSIS f utials Meeting Date Prepared by Mayor's review Omni/ review 11/24/14 DCS et— C 12/01/14 _ DCS /1 Ordinance ❑ Bid Award d fig Date Z Public Hearing Mig Dale 11/24/14 ❑ Other Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 11/3/14 Mi Date 12/1/14 SPONSOR ❑ Coma 12 Mayor II HR ❑ DCD ❑ Finame ❑ Fne • IT ❑ P &R ❑ Poitt•e ❑ Pli,. SPONSOR'S At the November 3 Council meeting, the Council adopted a resolution setting the public SUMMARY hearing date of 11/24/14 for this issue. Staff is proposing for the City to adopt a multi- family property tax exemption incentive program to encourage new multi - family residential development in a portion of the Transit Oriented Development District (Southcenter area). The Council is being asked to conduct the public hearing on 11/24/14 and consider adoption of the ordinance at the Regular meeting on 12/1/14. REVIEWED BY ❑ COW Mtg. ❑ Utilities DATE: 11/12/14 ITEM INFORMATION ITEM No. STAFF SPONS[)R: DEREK SPECK ORIGINAL. AGENDADA'I'I:: 11/24/14 AGENDA IT MTITLE An ordinance adopting a Multi - Family Residential Development Incentive Property Tax Exemption CA'T'EGORY 1Xl Disaission 11/24/14 ❑ Motion Mis Date 21 Resolution /1 Ordinance ❑ Bid Award d fig Date Z Public Hearing Mig Dale 11/24/14 ❑ Other Mtg Date Mtg Date Mtg Date 11/3/14 Mi Date 12/1/14 SPONSOR ❑ Coma 12 Mayor II HR ❑ DCD ❑ Finame ❑ Fne • IT ❑ P &R ❑ Poitt•e ❑ Pli,. SPONSOR'S At the November 3 Council meeting, the Council adopted a resolution setting the public SUMMARY hearing date of 11/24/14 for this issue. Staff is proposing for the City to adopt a multi- family property tax exemption incentive program to encourage new multi - family residential development in a portion of the Transit Oriented Development District (Southcenter area). The Council is being asked to conduct the public hearing on 11/24/14 and consider adoption of the ordinance at the Regular meeting on 12/1/14. REVIEWED BY ❑ COW Mtg. ❑ Utilities DATE: 11/12/14 11 CA &P Cmte ❑ F &S Cmte [] Parks Comm. COMMITTEE CHAIR: DUFFIE • Transportation Cmte Cmte ❑ Arts Comm. ❑ Planning Comm. RECOMMENDATIONS: S15c:NSOR COMMITFEI /ADMIT;. Mayor's Office Unanimous Approval; Forward to Regular Meeting COST IMPACT! FUND SOURCE EXPENDITURE REQUIRED A I0( N I' BUDGETED APPROPRIATION REQUIRED $ $ $_ Fund Source: Comments: MTG. DATE RECORD OF COUNCIL ACTION 11/24/14 MTG. DATE ATTACHMENTS 11/24/14 Informational Memorandum dated 11/5/14 Ordinance in draft form with Figure A (map of proposed residential targeted area) Reports by WA State Dept of Commerce and Puget Sound Regional Council Tables of cities that have adopted and projects currently receiving MFPT exemptions Property tax levies by taxing district within the residential targeted area Example annual value to property owner Property Value Estimate for Washington Place <REQLIESTED BY FS COMMITTEE> Minutes from the Community Affairs and Parks Committee meeting of 11/12/14 12/1/14 49 City of Tukwila Jirr3 Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: 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 project meets the criteria, the qualified residential units would be exempt from ad valorem property taxes for eight years. If the project 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 rolls based on their original new construction valuation. In addition to being located within a residential targeted area, the projects must meet other State eligibility criteria such as having four or more units, meeting all city building codes, and being completed within three years of conditional 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 2407 -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 projects. Within King County, five cities have projects that are currently receiving exemptions under this program. The cities are: Burien. Kirkland, Renton, Seattle, and Shoreline. Attached is a table showing the number of multi - family projects 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 51 52 INFORMATIONAL MEMO Page 2 thousands. The table 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. Staff 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 staff 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 rented, we may Team 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 lead 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 place 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 Planning 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 residential and office development in walking 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 next question is then whether the City should 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 project 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 C.laocuments and Settings\derek•s \Desktop\ Ordinance MFPTE memo.doc 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 cost to the City and taxing districts depends on whether the project would occur on its own without the incentive. If the project would happen on its own, then the property tax exemption is an opportunity cost to the City and other taxing districts, If the project would not happen without the incentive. then the exemption is not an opportunity cost since there would have been no new construction. It is difficult to answer that question with certainty but staff believes the exemption is a necessary incentive for the first one or two projects to be built. Following 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, especially for an urban product. Without rent comparables, proposed projects appear risky and are hard to finance. • 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 expectations of market based investors or lenders." [It should be noted 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 Development 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 development. Because the Washington Place project 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. C: \Docurnenls and Settings ■derek•s'Desktop1Ordinance MFPTE memo.doc 53 54 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 Areal 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 C: \Documents and Settings lderek- s \Desktop\Ordinance MFPTE memo.doc 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 55 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 mufti-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 56 Page 2 of 12 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 57 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 multi - 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 58 Page 4 of 12 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 59 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 60 Page 6 of 12 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 61 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 62 Page 8 of 12 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 63 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 64 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 65 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 66 Page 12 of 12 P- m • Baker AAA /A '0;4 ran+er '1,'#;"f" r lel i- 9 ism FA r ;\ e",.,.,40 zAi 'ASa Fir;') irr 111- %-17/ r 442 ,r0444, VII 41 - i V, 7 7 / . #A rA/ 4, . r/d14 �f City of Tukwila � S Multi-Family Property Tax Exemption � Resitlen[ial Targeted Area Target Parcels ZoningCode TUC -TOD Zone Figure6 Department of Commerce Innovation is in our nature. Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010 Report to the Governor Rogers Weed, Director 69 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 70 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 71 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 Govemor 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 housing1. 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 Govemor'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 households 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 72 4 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 73 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 74 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 RC 84.14V100 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 41,436,292 0 260 Seattle 4 8,870,011 140,743 484 68,119,612 319 165 Shoreline 1 1,394,277 132,000 88 11,616,000 0 88 Spokane 45 16,368,800 137,197 168 23,049,074 29 139 Tacoma 8 4,440,410 200,211 139 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 75 Tax Exemption Information Development Cost Information Affordability Requirements Cities that Provided Data as Required by RCW 84.14.100 Multi Family Tax Exemption Certcates issued Total Value of the Tax Exemptions Issued Development Cost/Unit e ostlUne 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 75 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 RCW 84.14.100 Multi Family Tax Exemption Certificates issued Total Value of the Tax Exemptions Issued Development Cost/Unit Total Units Total Development Costs Number of AffordablelWorkforce Rental Units Number of Units Sold or Rented at Market Rate Prices Renton 2 6,666,649 175,086 532 93,145,648 92 440 Seattle 6 22,488,921 167,392 1,310 166,314,980 657 653 Shoreline 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 Spokane 44 11,676,500 288,702 44 12,702,907 0 44 Tacoma 16 6,224,244 205,470 205 42,121,350 0 205 Wenatchee 0 0 0 0 - 0 0 Moses Lake 1 768,228 ?? 96 ?? 96 0 Everett 2 329,061 289,000 31 8,959,000 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 76 8 Tax Exemption Information Development Cost Information Affordability Requirements Cities That Provided Data as Required by RCW 84.14.100 Multi Family Mu Tax Exemption Certificates Issued Total Value of the Tax Exemptions Issued Development CostlUnit 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 194518 440 85,587,920 0 440 Seattle 7 17,586,163 211,478 1,023 216,341,994 261 762 Shoreline 0 - - 0 - 0 0 Spokane 17 4,001,850 364,914 19 6,933,366 6 13 Tacoma 1 14,036,200 180,000 8 1,440,000 0 8 Wenatchee 0 - - 0 - 0 0 Moses Lake 0 - - 0 - 0 0 Everett 1 447, 965.62 350,905 40 14,036,200 8 32 Kirkland 1 402,538 230,760 52 11,999,520 5 47 Burien 1 31,555,903 192,976 124 23,929,024 0 124 Totals 29 113,560,720 1582 360,268,024 280 1426 Multi -Unit Housing Tax Incentives 2007 -2010 76 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 units2 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.ofn.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 77 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 1,477.00 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 2,426 1,458 968 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 6,229 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 78 10 Table 2 Percentage of Total Housing Units Built Using Property Tax Exemptions 2007 -2010 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% • % Housing Without Tax Exemptions % Housing With Tax Exemptions oc ea 5' o 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 79 Table 3 Comparison of Affordable and Market Rate Housing Units 2007 - 2010 Total knits 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 °A 89% Wenatchee 23 0 23 0 100% Kirkland 52 5 47 10% 90% Buricn 124 0 l24 0% 100% Totals 6,118 1524 4589 25% 75% Seattle 2,973 1346 1627 45% 55% Remainder 3,145 I78 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 80 12 Table 4 Percentage of Affordable vs. Market Rate Housing Units 2007 -2010 120% 100% 80% 50% • %Affordable % Market Rate SAO �ti .<e. ce �� % t eLt ee v^• Z 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 81 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? (a) 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 82 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 come 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 downtowns3. 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. (b) 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. s 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 83 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 84 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 85 Puget Sound Regional Council Housing. Innovations program 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. Tool 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 Studies • 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 87 developments. Dense development is also economically efficient in expensive housing markets, and can reduce housing costs. What do / 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 Tools: • Density Bonuses • Transit Oriented Development Overlays • Parking Reductions Other Tools: • 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 Residential Target Areas. Cities will need to consider the state law's "urban center" definition which addresses existing commercial businesses, mixed uses and infrastructure. Analysis. 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 88 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 Public Outreach. 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. Determine Standards. 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 Tess 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. Implementation. 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. Monitoring. 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 Regional Council 3 89 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 Regional Council 4 90 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 /f6281 a531 e9ead4588257384007b2367 /a41317c553 ccbb848825680f00835eac ! OpenDocument • Bremerton Municipal Code Ch. 3.78 - Multifamily Property Tax Exemption http : / /www.codepublishing.com /wa/ Bremerton / html /Bremerton03 /Bremerton0378.html# 3.78 • Burien Municipal Code § 19.45.030 — Tax exemptions for multi - family housing in residential target areas http: // www. burienwa.gov /DocuinentView.aspx ?DID =364 • Des Moines Municipal Code Ch. 3.96 - Multifamily Tax Exemption http: / /www.codepublishing. com /wa/desmoines/ html/ DesMoines03 /DesMoines0396.htinl • 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/Kenm. ore /html /Kenmore03 /Kenmore036 5.htm1 • Kent Municipal Code Ch. 3.25 Multifamily Dwelling Tax Exemptions http: / /www.codepubli shing. com /W A /Kent/html /Kent03 /Kent0325.html #3.25 • Kirkland Municipal Code Ch. 5.88 Multifamily Housing Property Tax Exemption http://kirklandcode.ecitygov.net/kirk htm/K.irk05.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. /Longview 1.6/Longview 1.660.html • Lynnwood Municipal Code Ch. 3.82 - Multiple -Unit Housing Property Tax Exemption http: / /www.mrsc. org/ mc/ lynnwood /Lynnwood03 /Lynnwood0382.html • Marysville Municipal Code Chapter 3.103 MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION http: // www. codepublishing.com /wa/marysv ille / html / Marysv ille03 /Marysville03103.html. • Mercer Island Municipal Code Chapter 4.50 MULTIFAMILY HOUSING PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION http: / /www.codepub.l ishing.com/WA/Mercerlsl an d/ html /Mercerlsland04 /MercerIsland04 50.html 91 • Moses Lake Municipal Code Ch. 18.23- Multi - family Housing Tax Exemption — http: / /ci.moses- lake.wa.us /files /documents /rnun.icipal code /CHAP 1823.pdf • Mountlake Terrace Chapter 3.95 PROPERTY TAX ABATEMENT PROGRAM FOR QUALIFIED MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT - http: / /www.codepubli shing.com/WA/ MountlakeTerrace /html /MountlakeTerrace03 /Moun tlakeTerrace0395.html • Newcastle Municipal Code Chapter 3.60 URBAN CENTER DEVELOPMENT - http: / /www.codepublishin g.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 /Puyal1up0370.ht ml #3.70 • Renton Municipal Code, section 4 -1 -220 PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR MULTI - FAMILY HOUSING IN RESIDENTIAL TARGETED AREAS: http : / /ww w.codepublish ing.com/WA/ Renton / html /Renton04/Renton040.1 /Renton040122 0.html • SeaTac Municipal Code Ch. 3.85 Multi - Family Property Tax Exemption http: / /www.codepublishing. corn /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&S 3= &Sect4 =AND &1= 20 &Sect3= PLURON &Sects =CODE 1 &d= CODE &p =1 &u = %2F %7Epublic %2Fcode l .htm &r= 0 &Sect6 =HITOFF &f =S • Shoreline Municipal Code Chapter 3.27 PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION - http : / /www.codepublishing.com/wa/ shoreline / html /Shoreline03 /Shoreline0327.html #3.27 • Spokane Municipal Code Ch. 8.15- Multiple - family Housing Property Tax Exemption http: / /www.spokanecity.org/ services /docu.ments /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 &submenulD =10478 &title =title 3 &chapter= 22 &VMC= index.html • Walla Walla Municipal Code Ch.2.28 — Multi- Family Housing Tax Incentives http: // www. codepublishing. comIWA/ WallaWalla/ WallaWalla02 /WallaWalla0228.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 /Wenatchee0588.htm. 1 #5.88 and Multi- family Housing Tax Incentive - http: / /www.wenatcheew a. gov /In dex. aspx ?page =347 • Yakima Municipal Code Ch. 11.63 — Downtown Redevelopment Tax Incentive Program — http:// www. codepublishing. com /WA/Yakira/Yakimal . l/Yakimal 163.html #11.63 92 Projects Currently Receiving Multi - Family Property Tax Exemptions in King County As of November 2014 AUTHORIZING ENTITY (CITY) NTITY ( ) 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 93 2014 Property Tax Levies By Taxing District Levy Code Area Consolidated levy State school fund $ County $ Port $ Subtotal $ City $ Renton School District $ Tukwila School District $ Hospital $ Library $ EMS $ Flood Control Zone $ Ferry $ Tukwila Pool Metropolitan Park District $ 2340 2380 2390 2.47044 1.51605 0.21533 4.20182 2.97799 5.40495 0.50000 0.56175 0.33500 0.15369 0.00349 0.14944 14.28813 2.47044 1.51605 0.21533 4.20182 2.97799 5.89098 0.56175 0.33500 0.15369 0.00349 0.14944 14.27416 2.47044 1.51605 0.21533 4.20182 2.97799 5.89098 0.50000 0.56175 0.33500 0.15369 0.00349 0.14944 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 94 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 95 96 City of Tukwila Jim Haggerton, Mayor INFORMATIONAL MEMORANDUM TO: Mayor City Council FROM: Economic Development Administrator DATE: November 19, 2014 SUBJECT: Property Value Estimate for Washington Place At the Community Affairs and Parks Committee (CAP) meeting on November 12, the Committee discussed the proposed Multi - Family Property Tax Exemption Incentive program and forwarded the item to the City Council meeting on November 24 for a public hearing and discussion. The CAP requested an estimate of the property taxes agencies would receive without the program as compared to with the program. The actual effects of the exemption are challenging to predict with certainty because they hinge on a variety of subjective assumptions such as what development would occur without the exemption, when the developments would occur, and whether the exempt development stimulates additional non - exempt development. As such, we have attached an exhibit that tries to help answer that question by using the future Washington Place development as an example. In the Washington Place example, the site is currently a vacant, former Circuit City retail building. If the building were renovated to be a retail establishment the improvements would likely add approximately $8.3 million to the property tax roll. If the property were instead redeveloped with 370 apartments and a 189 room hotel, the improvements would be at least $75 million. The hotel portion would be approximately $25 million, or three times the value of the retail building. Under these assumptions, even during the eight year exemption period the property tax exemption program would generate nearly three times the property taxes as the base case. It is important to note that these results are specific to that site and would likely be different for other properties. Please contact me at Derek,soeck@tukwilawa.gov or 206 -433 -1832 if you would like to discuss this or have any questions. Comparison of Effects on Property Tax Roll With and Without Multi- Family Property Tax Exemption Incentive Washington Place Example Year Value of Taxable Improvements of Scenario 1: Scenario 2: Mixed -Use High Rise Development Year Exemption Retail Store Retail Residential Hotel Total 2015 $ 1,300,000 $ 1,300,000 $ - $ - $ 1,300,000 2016 $ 1,313,000 $ 1,313,000 $ - $ - 5 1,313,000 2017 1 $ 8,300,000 $ - $ - $ 25,000,000 $ 25,000,000 2018 2 $ 8,383,000 $ $ - $ 25,250,000 $ 25,250,000 2019 3 $ 8,465,830 $ $ $ 25,502,500 $ 25,502,500 2020 4 $ 8,551,498 $ - $ - $ 25,757,525 $ 25,757,525 2021 5 $ 8,637,013 $ $ $ 26,015,100 $ 26,015,100 2022 6 $ 8,723,383 $ $ - 5 26,275,251 $ 26,275,251 2023 7 $ 8,810,617 $ $ - $ 26,538,004 $ 26,538,004 2024 8 $ 8,898,723 $ $ - $ 26,803,384 $ 26,803,384 2025 $ 8,987,711 $ - $ 50,000,000 $ 27,071,418 $ 77,071,418 2026 $ 9,077,588 $ - $ 50,500,000 $ 27,342,132 $ 77,842,132 Notes and Assumptions (1) This table displays the estimated effects on the property tax roll for the Washington Place project under two different development scenarios. (2) Scenario 1 assumes the property continues to be used for a single story retail store, similar to the former Circuit City. The 2015 assessed value of the currently vacant 41,500 square foot building is 51.3 million. The estimate assumes the building is renovated at a cost of 5200 per square foot and opens in 2017. (3) Scenario 2 assumes the property is redeveloped with 370 apartments and 189 hotel rooms with the taxable residential portion valued at $50 million and the taxable hotel portion valued at 525 million. (4) Scenario 2 assumes the City approves an eight year exemption an the value of the multi- family portion of the new construction. (5) The values would continue beyond 2026. (6) The estimates do not include and value since that would be assessed the same in both scenarios. The 2015 assessed value of the land is nearly $3 million. (7) The table reflects taxable value, not property taxes. The amount of property tax for a particular taxing district would be the taxable value multipled by the district's levy rate. It is possible the likely development under Scenario 1 would not be a retail store but some other use such as a hotel (smaller than in Scenario 2). This example may not apply to other properties within the multi - family property tax exemption program's targeted area. 97 Community Affairs & Parks Committee Minutes November 12, 2014 - Page 2 C. Ordinance: Development Agreement for Proposed Hotel at 90 Andover Park East Staff is seeking Council approval of an ordinance to approve a development agreement with Tukwila TSD, LLC for the use of parking in a public right -of -way in exchange for the construction of a public pocket park. Tukwila TSD LLC proposes to build a new five -story hotel at 90 Andover Park East with approximately 90 guest rooms. A site plan demonstrates that the 90 required parking stalls cannot be accommodated, so the developer proposes a shared parking and drive aisle area in the right -of -way of Christenson Road in exchange for developing a public pocket park in the cul -de -sac area nearby. The proposed pocket park will be built and maintained by the developer who will also provide public access through the property and construct a pedestrian connection to the park and the trail. The initial term of the agreement is for 50 years with an option to extend for an additional 30. The agreement includes several termination clauses that protect the City in the event of failure to obtain permits or complete construction, failure to maintain the park and /or parking areas, property redevelopment or use change, and WSDOT actions to widen 1 -405. Councilmember Robertson noted that the proposed pocket park is in an isolated area that is already close to an existing natural amenity - the river and trail. He proposed an alternative that would allocate the funds specified in the development agreement for the pocket park to go toward a tree planting project in the area of the river bank across Christensen Road. Tables and benches could be added as well. Planting trees is a key component of regional efforts to restore aquatic ecosystems and salmon habitat in the Green - Duwamish watershed. In this proposal, the developer would provide the money and the City could assume responsibility for the project, either alone or in concert with a group already doing this kind of restoration work. Committee members and staff discussed the original and the alternative proposals. The Committee agreed they do not want to delay the agreement or add costs for the developer. They support the alternative if those conditions are met, and if they are not, they will support the original pocket park. Staff suggested that if there is majority Council direction, then staff could further review the alternative proposed by Councilmember Robertson to include Public Works and Parks. The Committee agreed to forward the item for Committee of the Whole discussion to include the original proposal and additional analysis relating to the alternative proposal. The Committee of the Whole will select the preferred option. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 24, 2014 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE WITH ADDITIONAL OPTION AS DISCUSSED. D. Ordinance: Multi- family Property Tax Exemption in Tukwila Urban Center. Staff is seeking Council approval of an ordinance to designate a portion of Tukwila's Transit Oriented Development (TOD) District as a "residential targeted area" and approve a multi - family property tax exemption program to incentivize new housing in that area. The proposed area is that portion of the TOD District that lies west of the Green River, comprising 42 parcels and three property tax levy code areas. Qualifying projects would be exempt from ad valorem property taxes for eight years, or for twelve is specific affordable housing criteria are also met. Staff is proposing a sunset clause under which applications will only be accepted through the end of 2016. To address concerns about condominium owners renting out their units the proposed ordinance includes criteria that the exemption can only be used on units used for permanent residential occupancy. 99 Community Affairs & Parks Committee Minutes November 12, 2014 - Pape 3 Staff recommends the provision of this incentive on the grounds that multi - family housing developers are hesitant to build in this area because the price of rents is an unknown factor, making it difficult to attract financing. An incentive can be a useful tool for the City to attract these projects, as is the case in Burien with the Burien Town Square Development. Councilmembers and staff discussed the proposal. All committee members expressed support for development incentives but requested additional analysis on revenue impacts for Committee of the Whole discussion. Staff also offered to include a market analysis on the probability of school -aged children living in the proposed Washington Place development. Washington Place representatives have indicated that they will apply for this program if it is approved. NO RECOMMENDATION. FORWARD TO NOVEMBER 24, 2014 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION. III. MISCELLANEOUS Meeting adjourned at 7:27 p.m Nex :'. eeting: Tuesday, November 25, 2014, 5:30 p.m. Committee Chair Approval Minutes by LH 100